| ADVOCACY
AND INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS
Karen
Y. Zamarippa, Assistant Vice Chancellor
Governor
to Determine Fate of AB 2951
The
CSU is part of a broad coalition of state and public educational
agencies that have fought vigorously to defeat Assembly Bill
2951 (Goldberg) through the legislative process. Unfortunately,
both the Senate and Assembly approved it; and now AB 2951 is
on the Governor’s desk awaiting his veto or signature.
On the last day of session, the Senate took it up in the early
evening; the Floor vote was 26-9 with Senators: Ackerman, Denham,
Ducheny, Florez, Maldonado, Migden, Romero, Scott and Speier
voting “no”; and Senator Alquist, Lowenthal Ortiz,
Perata and Soto not voting. The Assembly took it up late in
the evening just prior to midnight; the Floor vote was 46-18
with Assembly Members: Baca, Benoit, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla,
Daucher, Garcia, Haynes, Shirley Horton, Huff, La Suer, Liu,
Maze, McCarthy, Mountjoy, Walters, Wolk and Yee voting “no”;
and Assembly Members: Bass, Berg, Cohn, Dymally, Frommer, Karnette,
Koretz, Leslie, Lieber, Lieu, Oropeza, Pavley, Ridley-Thomas,
Ruskin and Umberg not voting.
As it is currently drafted, AB 2951 allows municipal utilities
providing electricity and gas the unfettered right to charge
the CSU and other higher education segments, school districts
and other public agencies more than the cost to serve them.
AB 2951 exempts electricity and gas utilities from requirements
applicable to water and sewer utilities and creates two separate
standards that will lead to discriminatory treatment and confusion
for public agency customers. The last-minute amendments of August
28, 2006 removed the ability of public schools to seek a reimbursement
for State-mandated costs.
AB 2951 is a complete departure from the fundamental industry
standard that governs public utilities and is embodied in California
Public Utilities Code Section 451, which requires that all investor-owned
utilities charge “just and reasonable” rates. Specifically,
the eleventh-hour amendments to Government Code Section 54999.7(a)
exempt electricity and gas utilities from charging fees that
do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing service. Furthermore,
any protection provided under Government Code Section 54999.35
is destroyed by the limitation of the term “capital facilities
fee” to “connection fees” and “capacity
charges.” The CSU argued that it should not receive any
less protection than other customers simply because it receives
electricity or gas from a municipal utility.
In addition, AB 2951 requires an unaudited, utility-prepared
cost of service study for public educational entities such as
the CSU and other public schools. However, it does not require
that the utility provide any cost information for ten years
after the study is completed, during which time rate increases
could be passed Once utilities have prepared a comprehensive
cost of service study, aside from the issue of the infrequency
of the study, this amendment is of little value as it does not
require the mandated study to be performed by an independent
third party, does not require the study’s results to be
disseminated to all interested parties, and does not require
the rates charged by the utilities to be consistent with the
costs identified in these studies. In summary, the amendment
does nothing to ensure accountability and transparency in the
rates charged by the public utilities.
Again, AB 2951 is a significant departure from the industry
standard required of investor-owned utilities under the California
Public Utilities Code Section 463(b) which requires electrical
or gas utilities to maintain sufficient records to ensure the
“reasonableness and prudence” of any utility cost.
A similar standard should be required of municipal utilities.
AB 2951 will lead to higher utility bills as municipal utilities
pass on previously impermissible fees for excess capital costs
and costs unrelated to serving schools including, but not limited
to, excess utility capital reserves or city transfers. , The
recent amendments to AB 2951 further hurt public education by
restricting the ability of schools to seek reimbursement for
the added burden of higher utility costs.
AB 2951 removes any checks and balances for ensuring fair and
proportionate electricity and gas rates. The CSU will vigorously
seek a Governor’s veto!
End
of Session Report on CSU Tracked Legislation: The Office
of Advocacy and Institutional Relations has been following numerous
measures this year. Below is a list of measures sorted by the
following Business and Finance divisions: Budget, Information
Technology, Capital Planning, Design and Construction, and Financing
and Treasury.
Budget:
AB 1072(Liu) Public postsecondary
education: student fee policy: This
measure would establish a policy on setting student fees at
the CSU and the UC in order to ensure that students are receiving
an affordable undergraduate education. It also requests CPEC
to report to the legislature annually on the affordability of
undergraduate education at the CSU and the UC.
Status:
Held by the Senate Appropriations Committee. Dead bill.
Position: OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
AB
1782(Mullin) Lottery Act: multi-state lottery: distribution
of revenues: This proposal would allow the voters of
California to authorize the state of California to participate
in the multi-state lottery, MegaMillions. This measure was amended
and no longer redirects funds derived from a multi-state lottery
away from the CSU and towards certain K-12 programs.
Status:
This measure failed passage out of Senate Education. Dead bill.
Position: NO OFFICIAL POSITION
AB
1835 (Lieber) Minimum wage: This bill would set the
minimum wage at $7.50 on January 1, 2007 and subsequently raise
it to $8.00 per hour on January 1, 2008.
Status:
This measure was passed by both houses and now goes to the Governor
who has indicated that he will sign the measure.
Position: No Official Position
AB
1923(Nation) Military and veterans: educational benefits:
This measure would require the three public segments of California’s
higher education system to waive all fees for up to 60 units
of courses for those members of the California National Guard
who recommit for a period of three years, with a maximum of
120 units to be allowed. The CSU estimates that as drafted AB
1923 would cost the CSU $3,164 for a full time student; for
every 1,000 eligible applicants this could cost the CSU $3,164,000.
Status:
This measure was held by the Senate Education Committee due
to costs. Dead bill.
Position: OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
AB
2355(Negrete McLeod) Public employees' retirement: service credit:
California State University academic employees: This
measure which is sponsored by CFA, would allow an academic employee
to buy back service time at the cost of the employer. For the
Academic Year 2005/2006, the CSU estimates that these costs
could be $670,000 annually.
Status:
This measure was passed by the legislature on a strictly party
vote and now goes to the Governor.
Position: OPPOSE
AB
2666(Goldberg) Public postsecondary education: resident classification:
members of recognized tribes: This measure would have
provided that a student who is a member of a federally recognized
tribe is entitled to resident classification status for fee
purposes.
Status:
Held by the Senate Education Committee due to costs. Dead bill.
Position: NO OFFICIAL POSITION
SB
160(Cedillo) Student financial aid: eligibility: California
Dream Act: This proposal requests the University of
California and requires the California State University, and
the California Community Colleges to establish procedures and
forms to enable students who are exempt from paying non-resident
tuition to participate in all applicable student aid programs
administered.
Status:
This measure was passed by the Senate and will go to the Governor
for his final action.
Position: FAVOR
SB
845(Scott) Postsecondary education: College Opportunity Act
of 2006: This bill would enact the College Opportunity
Act of 2006, which seeks to develop a long-term enrollment plan,
expand outreach and academic preparation efforts, and encourage
the increase in funding for enrollment.
Status:
This measure was held by Assembly Rules. Dead Bill.
Position: FAVOR
SB
1181(Maldonado) Public postsecondary education: administrative
salaries and compensation: This bill requests the University
of California (UC) and requires the California State University
(CSU) and Community College (system-wide level only) to report
annually on the total compensation of specified executive and
senior level administrative positions.
Status:
This measure was held by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Dead Bill.
Position: OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
SB
1709(Scott) Postsecondary education: College Opportunity Act
of 2006: This bill would have enacted the College Opportunity
Act of 2006, which would have sought to develop a long-term
enrollment plan, expand outreach and academic preparation efforts,
and encourage the increase in funding for enrollment.
Status:
Held by the Senate Appropriations Committee. Dead bill.
Position: FAVOR
Chancellor’s
Office Information and Technology
AB
546(Garcia) State computers: prohibited use: obscene matter:
This bill amends the Government Code to clarify that
the use of a state computer to view obscene materials is a misuse
of state resources punishable with a $1,000 civil penalty. Assembly
Member Garcia has amended AB 546 to allow for legitimate academic
and legislative purposes.
Status:
Enrolled and with the Governor awaiting his action.
Position: FAVOR
Capital
Planning Design and Construction:
SB 682(Migden) Postsecondary education facilities:
This measure was amended to provide an additional $21 million
for the completion of the Joint Library Project at San Francisco
State, combining its J. Paul Leonard University Library and
the State of California’s Sutro Library. This adjustment
is necessary given the estimated 12% rise in construction costs
since work began.
Status:
This measure was passed out of the Senate and will
now go to the Governor.
Position: FAVOR
AB
1986(De La Torre) Public contracts: California State University:
auxiliary organizations: This measure would place the
CSU’s current policy requiring auxiliaries to use the
CSU Contract Law for projects involving public funds into statute.
Status:
This measure was enrolled and is awaiting action with the Governor.
Position: NO OFFICIAL POSITION
AB
2578(Frommer) State property: California Hope Endowment and
California Hope Public Trust: This measure would require
the Department of General Services (DGS) to transfer certain
state lands to the California Hope Public Trust, this bill was
created for the purpose of managing state properties for the
benefit of public colleges and universities.
Status:
Senate amendments concurred in and to enrollment for
final action with the Governor.
Position: NO OFFICIAL POSITION
AB
2748(Jones) Public postsecondary education: student housing
reports: This measure would request the regents, and
require the trustees, to each prepare a report on campus student
housing due to the Legislature on or before March 31, 2007.
Status:
This measure was passed out of the Senate, and concurred in
the Assembly. Will now go to the Governor.
Position: NEUTRAL
AB
2756(Levine) Energy: efficiency retrofits: State Energy Conservation
Assistance Account for Public Schools: This measure
would provide that the monies derived from the Williams Energy
settlement agreement ($22.3 million) be used to benefit K-12
low performing schools, but could be conducted by UC and CSU
students.
Status:
This measure was concurred by the Senate and is now
to enrollment and will then go to the Governor.
Position: NEUTRAL
AB 2951(Goldberg) Capital facilities
fees: This measure expands the scope of capital facilities
fees that may be assessed by publicly owned utilities to public
entities. The bill also limits the scope of relief available
to those challenging illegal increases to capital facilities
fees. The CSU estimates that this measure would increase its
costs by $4 million annually.
Status:
This measure passed out of the legislature and now goes to enrollment.
Position: OPPOSE
AB
2992(Evans) California State University: This measure
would single out the CSU by requiring the system to pre-qualify
mechanical subcontractors for every public works project at
the CSU that exceeds the value of a minor capital outlay project.
Status:
This measure is now headed to the Governor.
Position: OPPOSE
SB
1604(Margett) Public contracts: bids and disputes: This
measure was amended to remove the most onerous provision of
the bill, which would have required the CSU to require bidders
on public works contracts to submit proposed substitutions of
products or materials called for in the bid prior to the award
of a contract, the bill now only makes various technical changes.
Status:
This measure was placed on the inactive file at the request
of Senator Hollingsworth. Dead bill.
Position: NEUTRAL
Financing
and Treasury:
AB 2597(Pavley) California State University:
State University Revenue Bond Act of 1947: This Board of Trustee
sponsored proposal would enhance the CSU’s ability to
use its system-wide bonds for future projects, and potentially
lower its interest costs.
Status:
This measure was amended to add back a provision related
to the CSU’s Dormitory Revenue Fund Act that was removed
in Senate Appropriations. It was subsequently sent back to Senate
Rules where it is currently being held.
Position: Favor
SB
1724(Runner) California State University: This Board
of Trustees sponsored proposal would improve efficiency and
reduce costs to the CSU by exempting the CSU from the statutory
requirement to collect California retailer’s seller’s
permits in order to contract for purchases.
Status:
This measure was passed out of the Assembly and the Senate and
now
is awaiting final action from the Governor.
Position: FAVOR
Pilots
Get Under Way in eAdvocacy Program
The
Office of Advocacy and Institutional Relations (AIR) has been
working closely with Kintera, Inc. to have all CSU campuses
online with an eAdvocacy Program that will greatly enhance the
campuses’ ability to advocate on behalf of the system.
In
the past three months, with the help of an Implementation Team
consisting of both campus and system representatives, AIR aided
by IT staff at the CO level, has been working to get three pilot
campuses (Fullerton, Sacramento and San Marcos) online to test
the system. As of the release date of this publication, the
three pilot sites are in the process of being launched.
Once
the pilot programs have been activated, campuses, in collaboration
with the system, will be using them for two or three action
messages to recipients (primarily alumni) asking for their participation
and assistance. The pilots are expected to run through the end
of the year with an assessment taking place in December to determine
what worked and what didn’t during the entire process,
including the set-up, use, and response back from the advocacy
program.
Following
the assessment, the intent is to make necessary changes to enhance
the system for both the users and the campuses. This will be
done in time for the planned spring 2007 rollout to the remaining
20 campuses and a system wide component within the Chancellor’s
Office.
Many
other educational institutions throughout the nation as well
as many advocacy associations within California have used this
type of system. AIR is optimistic that it will become another
successful tool for disseminating messages on issues of importance
to the CSU. |