Sacramento Update June 2011 Sacramento Update June 2011 Glendale Community College District

Budget Update Legislative Update Activities & Accomplishments

 Brief Review.  Where We Are.  Where Do We Go?

 Governor Proposed Budget in January that would have solved a $26 billion budget gap with half cuts and half additional revenues.  CCC Proposal included: $400 million cut offset partially by $10/unit fee increase for net cut of $290 million. $129 million additional deferral ($961 million total)  Revenue spike enables Governor to reverse proposed deferral, plus unwind some past deferrals. (total deferral would have been reduced to $611 million)

 Governor’s May Revise funding level was still contingent on extension of the current tax rates.  Bad News and Good News: Bad News: Republicans do not agree to tax extension. Good News: Budget still similar to May Revise.  Governor vetoes legislative budget plan calling some of its provisions “legally questionable.”

Budget Scenario System Cut Glendale CCD Share Deferral Likely Student Impact Fee Level Governor’s Jan. Proposal (tax extension) $400 million$4.2 million$129 million2,050$36/unit All-Cuts Budget (Worst Case Scenario) $1.3 billion$11.9 millionUnknown5,600$66/unit June Legislative Budget (No tax extension) $400 million$4.2 million$129 million2.050$36/unit

 Budget Rules and Republicans Republicans refuse to put up vote to extend tax rates. Republicans also refuse to put up vote to suspend 98.  Therefore, budget needs to be solved through “gimmicks” or by additional cuts to UC and CSU and on the health and human services side of the budget.  Where are the votes for additional cuts to CCCs? Need suspension of Proposition 98. Additional revenues would require additional funding to Prop 98.

Possible Outcomes  Best Case: No suspension and Governor’s Budget.  Worst Case: Suspension of Proposition 98 and additional $150 million cut to CCCs.

 Overview  Current Projects  Other Bills of Interest

 Thousands of bills introduced so far this session  Hundreds of bills that would impact community colleges analyzed by McCallum Group.  Glendale has directly influenced over 30 pieces of legislation plus the budget act this year.  Bills cover a wide variety of issues, including: Funding Financial Aid Contracting Accountability Retirement Programs

Current Projects Glendale has sponsored amendments to two bills that are currently moving through the legislative process and has been closely involved in amendments to a third bill. Sponsored Amendments AB 844 (Lara) – would remove the requirement that a student trustee be a California resident. AB 795 (Block) – would authorize a community college district to issue fines for violation of campus smoking policy. SB 760 (Alquist) – would amend budget bill language requiring additional reporting to CSAC in order to participate in the Cal Grant program

Other Projects Glendale has also had direct input in a number of bills and community college projects that are occurring at the state level. AB 160 (Portantino) – would have increased opportunities for community colleges to expand concurrent enrollment. The bill has been amended to reduce its scope to require districts to enter into agreements with local K- 12 districts and incorporates changes requested by Dr. Mirch. Student Success Task Force – a proposal has gone to the Student Success Task Force for consideration. Michael Ritterbrown provided information on Glendale programs that were included as a part of the proposal. Financial Aid Budget – McCallum Group worked with Patricia Hurley to ensure that language in the budget on default rates did not impact community colleges.

Other Bills of Interest AB 85 (Mendoza) School facilities: security locks AB 91 (Portantino) Community Colleges: student financial aid pilot program AB 130 & AB 131 (Cedillo) California Dream Act AB 515 (Brownley) Community colleges: extension programs AB 743 (Block) Community college common assessment AB 1029 (Lara) Stand alone course approval AB 1342 (Dickinson) Roofing projects

Budget Issues  January budget proposal to alter census date and require districts to “grow” while having budgets reduced.  Successfully amended proposal to net cut with workload reduction.  Proposed fee increase to $60/unit by LAO.  Proposed limit on overall unit accumulation by LAO.  Proposed limit to funding of PE courses and “enrichment” courses.  Proposed priority on course offerings at the state level. Past Bills of Interest  AB 827 (De La Torre) contracting provisions of local entity executives  AB 2523 (Eng) electrician certification programs  AB 2682 (Block) community college student assessment  SB 1143 (Liu) community college census date amended to creating the Student Success Task Force  SB 1440 (Padilla) community college transfer degree

Other Activities  Development of White Paper with input and sign off from President Lindsay  League Legislative Advocacy Day Ten meetings for Glendale included meetings with Chair of the Assembly Budget Committee and Senate Education Committee Provided talking points and materials  Briefing and preparation for two student lobby days in Sacramento.  Briefing and talking points for President Lindsay for meeting with Senator Liu after she suggested shifting basic skills to K-12.  Briefing and budget talking points for meetings with legislators.  Policy development in coordination with President Lindsay and Legislative Task Force.  Lunch time presentation on budget for administration, staff, faculty and students.

How We Differ From the League and Other Organizations  McCallum Group makes the districts proactive in advancing statewide policies that support Glendale College. Proposing and advancing amendments to the budget and legislation.  McCallum Group provides district-specific talking points, information and briefings for legislative visits and meetings.  McCallum Group provides district-specific legislative and budget analysis and most importantly, district-specific advocacy.  McCallum Group provides for a weekly legislative call that includes Government Relations staff from other districts, the Chancellor’s Office and the League.  Having a state lobbyist assists the district in better working with the League, the Chancellor’s Office and statewide faculty groups.

We appreciate Glendale College’s business and are proud of what we have accomplished together and the work that we continue to do as a team. Thank you