Under the Dome: First half of 2-year session wraps up
Analysis from CSBA’s Governmental Relations Department
Published: October 1, 2011
The first year of the current two-year legislative session ended on Sept. 9, but not before sending hundreds of bills to the governor’s desk in the last few days of session. Gov. Jerry Brown warned legislators to be prepared for vetoes, telling reporters, “I have to say to some, ‘Fasten your seat belt, ’cause this is going to be a rough ride.’ They’ve given me 600 bills and there’s not 600 problems that we need those solutions for.”
Among the bills still on the governor’s desk as of this writing is SB 547 (Steinberg), which would sunset the Academic Performance Index on July 1, 2014, and replace it with a more broadly based Education Quality Index. The EQI would be developed by the state superintendent of public instruction in consultation with a Public School Accountability Committee and would use multiple measures to evaluate school performance. After Sen. Darrell Steinberg agreed to amendments to address some of our concerns with earlier drafts, CSBA took a support position.
CSBA’s sponsored bill on charter school conflict of interest—SB 360 (Brownley)—became part of a three-bill charter package with AB 440 (Brownley) and SB 645 (Simitian) during negotiations over the summer. Very late in the session, the governor’s staff began expressing concerns about these bills. Indications were very strong that he would veto them if they reached his desk, so the bills have been held in the Legislature to provide time for further negotiations with the governor next year.
AB 5 (Fuentes), another measure introduced this year that has now become a two-year bill, would mandate a very elaborate system for the evaluation of teachers. CSBA has major concerns about this bill. While we agree that having a rigorous teacher evaluation system is important, we question the wisdom of mandating a new and untested “Cadillac” system at this time. The author rejected our suggestion to instead provide competitive grant funding to test the proposed system’s cost-effectiveness and effect on student outcomes. Our current position is to oppose the bill unless it’s amended to postpone its implementation until existing mandates are fully paid and the revenue limit deficit is eliminated.
AB 165 (Lara) would codify in statute the constitutional prohibitions on student fees and establish notice requirements and an administrative complaint procedure to resolve alleged violations of the law. CSBA successfully narrowed the scope of the original bill to ensure that it would not change current law with regard to which fees are permissible and which are not. This bill was sent to the governor. He had not acted at press time, but we expect him to sign it. If he does, CSBA will update its sample policies to reflect new requirements regarding notices and the complaint procedure. An archived copy of a CSBA webinar on student fees with attorney Howard Friedman and CSBA Legislative Advocate Debra Brown is available to view online anytime.
A major piece of legislation that was signed by the governor over the summer is AB 114, the education budget trailer bill. This bill contains the Proposition 98 violations that are the subject of a legal challenge by CSBA’s Education Legal Alliance and the Association of California School Administrators (see related story on page 1). AB 114 also: required school districts to adopt their 2011-12 budget based on 2010-11 revenues—despite the likelihood of a midyear cut if the budget “trigger” is pulled; prohibited districts from using the Aug. 15 teacher layoff option; and prohibits county office of education superintendents from considering multiyear financial solvency in the budget review and approval process.
After AB 114 was signed into law, the Legislature went on its four-week summer recess. By the time the session resumed, local budgeting and staffing decisions had already been made. Therefore, we now are focusing on addressing the problems expected in the event that state revenue shortfalls trigger massive additional cuts to K-12 schools. CSBA has signed a joint letter to the governor that says, in part, that “pulling the budget trigger would create a fiscal emergency in California’s public schools. Accordingly (and regretfully) we urgently ask that you and the Legislature enact legislation giving districts emergency authority to take steps necessary to avoid insolvency, including the one-time ability to either lay off teachers and increase class sizes or impose mandatory furloughs if the budget trigger is pulled. If this authority is not provided, then it would be imperative that the trigger not be pulled and that additional deferrals not be levied, even if revenues fall short of budget projections.” A copy of the complete letter is available under the Spotlight section of CSBA’s website.
Revenue estimates provided by the Legislative Analyst’s Office in November and the Department of Finance in December will determine whether the AB 114 cuts get triggered. If neither estimate shows that revenues will meet the budget assumptions by specified amounts, then the trigger will be pulled automatically. For K-12 schools, that would mean a reduction of $248 million (a half-year of funding) for home-to-school transportation and a 4 percent reduction (an estimated $1.5 billion) from revenue limit funding. Read CSBA’s California School News Weekly Update emails and check our website to get the latest news on this and other issues.
Easy link
Information on all bills CSBA is tracking