CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1504

Author:(Medina)

As Amended Ver:June 11, 2019

Majority vote

SUMMARY:

Requires a California Community College (CCC) campus to collect at the time of registration a student representation fee (SRF) of $2 per semester or per quarter, if the CCC has a student body association (SBA). It requires $1 of the fee be used to establish and support the operation of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC), a statewide community college student organization. Students can opt out of paying the fee.

The Senate Amendments:

Make changes to the opt out clause (which is existing law):

• 1. A student may refuse to pay the SRF without a reason, and;
  2. Require a community college to provide the student a means to refuse to pay the fee on the same form that is used for the collection of the fees.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to authorize the students of a college to organize a student body association (Education Code (EC) Section 76060).
2. Authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a SRF of $2 per semester. Specifies that the affirmative vote of a majority of the CCC students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections. Requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the CCC Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. Specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to SRFs adopted on or after January 1, 2014. Specifies students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial, or moral reasons. Specifies that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than 7% (EC Section 76060.5).

COMMENTS:

Background. As each of the 115 campuses of the CCC have their own elections and procedures and requirements for items to be placed on the ballot, it has become extremely difficult for most campuses to implement the SRF (as described in the "Existing Law" section of this analysis). The current fee implementation method leaves the SSCCC unable to effectively function as an organization.

According to information provided by the author, the SSCCC works with less than $0.03 per student, compared to the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) student organizations who operate with $3.12 and $3.38 respectively, per student.

Additionally, unlike the UC and CSU student organizations, the SSCCC has very limited presence in the Legislature. Committee Staff notes that in some years, SSCCC had no presence in the Legislature; thus leaving the voices of the over 2.1 million students who attend a CCC, voiceless; or with little to no ability to advocate for legislation that directly affect CCC students.

To note, SSCCC is a completely student-run organization, with virtually no professional support. Due to the structure of the SSCCC and inadequate funding (as aforementioned), the SSCCC has become increasingly reliant and dependent on the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to advocate for their needs.

Previous legislation. AB 1358 (Fong), Chapter 714, Statutes of 2013, in part, authorized organized CCC student body associations to hold campus-wide elections in order to potentially increase the SRF from $1 per semester to $2 to fund governmental affairs representatives for the CCC students and changed the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the students voting in the election to establish the SRF to a majority of students voting.

AB 2576 (Hayden), Chapter 1238, Statutes of 1987, established the original SRF.

According to the Author:

According to the author, "The voice of CCC students should not be held by the CCCCO but by the statewide student organization". The author contends that, "Student leaders need more administrative support both at the statewide level and at the regional level."

Arguments in Support:

According to the SSCCC, co-sponsors of this measure, "Inadequate funding has resulted in the SSCCC becoming increasingly dependent on the CCCCO. The voice of CCC students should not be held by the CCCCO but by the statewide student organization."Further, SSCCC contends that, "The solution to these issues is the implementation of AB1504. This would provide the SSCCC with a stable funding source that will enable the SSCCC to be the effective voice our students need in the state capitol, and put an end to the SSCCC being a drain on Chancellor's Office resources."

Arguments in Opposition:

There is no opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. While there could be minor costs for community college campuses to collect the student representation fee, these revenues would be sufficient to support the operation of the SSCCC.
2. The Chancellor's Office indicates that if the bill were to pass, it would generate about $3.5 million in revenue each year for the SSCCC. For the 2017-18 fiscal year, the Student Senate received about $121,000 from student representation fee collections.
3. This bill would also result in General Fund savings of about $60,000 to the CCCCO since it would no longer need to contribute to the organization because student fee revenue would exceed $1 million.

VOTES:

ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 8-0-4

YES: Medina, Choi, Jones-Sawyer, Bloom, Gabriel, Irwin, Santiago, Weber

ABS, ABST OR NV: Kiley, Levine, Low, Patterson

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-2-3

YES: Gonzalez, Bloom, Bonta, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Eggman, Gabriel, Jones-Sawyer, Maienschein, Petrie-Norris, Quirk, Robert Rivas

NO: Bigelow, Obernolte

ABS, ABST OR NV: Brough, Diep, Fong

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 58-12-10

YES: Aguiar-Curry, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bloom, Bonta, Burke, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Daly, Eggman, Frazier, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Smith, Mark Stone, Ting, Voepel, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon

NO: Bigelow, Brough, Cunningham, Dahle, Fong, Gallagher, Kiley, Mathis, Melendez, Obernolte, Patterson, Waldron

ABS, ABST OR NV: Arambula, Boerner Horvath, Cervantes, Chen, Diep, Flora, Kamlager‑Dove, Mayes, Petrie-Norris, Salas

SENATE FLOOR: 28-10-2

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Atkins, Beall, Bradford, Caballero, Dodd, Durazo, Galgiani, Glazer, Lena Gonzalez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Leyva, McGuire, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Stern, Umberg, Wieckowski, Wiener

NO: Bates, Borgeas, Chang, Dahle, Grove, Moorlach, Morrell, Nielsen, Stone, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Hurtado, Jones

UPDATED:

VERSION: June 11, 2019

CONSULTANT: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0001471

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1504

Author: Medina (D)

Amended: 6/11/19 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/5/19

AYES: Leyva, Durazo, Glazer, McGuire, Pan

NO VOTE RECORDED: Wilk, Chang

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 6/24/19

AYES: Portantino, Bradford, Durazo, Hill, Wieckowski

NOES: Bates, Jones

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 58-12, 5/6/19 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Community colleges: student representation fee: statewide community college student organization: goals

SOURCE: Student Senate for California Community Colleges

DIGEST:

This bill modifies the process for adopting the student representation fee at a community college. Specifically, this bill eliminates the authorization to hold a campus election to establish the fee or terminate the fee assessed on students and instead requires direct collection of that fee for purposes prescribed by current law.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to authorize the students of a college to organize a student body association (Education Code (EC) § 76060).
2. Authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester. Specifies, that the affirmative vote of a majority of the California community college (CCC) students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections. Requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the CCC Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. Specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to student representation fees adopted on or after January 1, 2014. Specifies students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial or moral reasons. Specifies that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than seven percent (EC § 76060.5).

This bill modifies the manner in which a student representation is adopted. Specifically, it:

1. Eliminates the authorization for the governing body of the local student association at a community college to order an election for the purposes of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester and removes the requirement that an affirmative vote of a majority of the student electorate be sufficient to establish the fee, as specified.
2. Deletes provisions that authorize the termination or revision of the representation fee by a majority vote of the students voting in an election, as specified.
3. Requires the officials at a community college, if a student body association has been established at the college, to collect a student representation fee of $2 at the time of registration.
4. Modifies provisions that designate $1 of every $2 to operation costs for the statewide community college student organization for fees adopted after 2014 and instead makes the designation applicable to student representation fees regardless of date of adoption.
5. Adds, supporting student participation and engagement in statewide higher education policy and advocacy activities, to current law requirements relative the underlying goals included for a statewide community college student organization.
6. Modifies provision regarding a student’s right to refuse to pay the student representation fee based on certain conditions by removing those conditions thereby allowing a student to opt-out of the fee for any reason.
7. Makes other various technical and conforming changes.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “the Student Representation Fee by statute is to be the primary source of income for the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC). However, only 11 of 114 campuses have implemented the fee. The current method of implementation requires each one of the 114 community colleges to hold an election to collect the $2 fee. This election must have at least the average of the number of participants that voted in the previous three elections for the results to count.

“As each of the 114 community college campuses have their own burdensome elections procedures and requirements to get items placed on the ballot, it is extremely difficult to get the $2 fee implemented. The current fee implementation method unfortunately leaves the SSCCC unable to function effectively as an organization. The SSCCC works with less than $0.03 per student, compared to the California State University and University of California which operate with $3.12 and $3.38 respectively.”

1. Is this the appropriate solution? Current law allows a $2 representation fee to be levied on CCC students that is subject to an affirmative majority vote of community colleges’ students. In addition, current law permits a portion of the fee revenue to be used to support a statewide community college student organization. This bill seeks to streamline collection of the fee from the general student body at each CCC to support representatives of local or statewide student organizations’ advocacy activities and operations. However, in so doing it eliminates the student electorate’s ability to adopt the fee by a majority vote.

The Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC), the recognized statewide student organization for the CCC system, contend that without staff the current requirements are overly burdensome with over 114 community colleges having varying elections procedures and requirements for items to be placed on a campus ballot the task is unmanageable. Unlike the SSCCC, both organizations representing the University of California (UC) students and California State University (CSU) students respectively, UC Student Association (UCSA) and California State Student Association (CSSA), employ professional staff. UCSA is funded in part by membership dues assessed on each campus and similar to the community college student association, CSSA draws its revenue from the student involvement and representation fee implemented in 2015.

1. Can a student opt-out from paying the fee? Current law provides each student with an option to “refuse to pay,” or opt out. It provides that a student may refuse to pay for religious, political, financial or moral reasons refuse to pay and that refusal be submitted in writing. This bill modifies these provision to simplify opt-out procedures.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, while there could be minor costs for community college campuses to collect the student representation fee, these revenues would be sufficient to support the operation of the SSCCC. The Chancellor’s Office indicates that if the bill were to pass, it would generate about $3.5 million in revenue each year for the Student Senate. For the 2017-18 fiscal year, the Student Senate received about $121,000 from student representation fee collections.

This bill will also result in General Fund savings of about $60,000 to the Chancellor’s Office since it would no longer need to contribute to the organization because student fee revenue would exceed $1 million.

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/24/19)

Student Senate for California Community Colleges (source)

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

California State Student Association

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

Public Advocates Inc.

The Education Trust - West

The Institute for College Access & Success

University of California Student Association

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/24/19)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 58-12, 5/6/19

AYES: Aguiar-Curry, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bloom, Bonta, Burke, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Daly, Eggman, Frazier, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Smith, Mark Stone, Ting, Voepel, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon

NOES: Bigelow, Brough, Cunningham, Dahle, Fong, Gallagher, Kiley, Mathis, Melendez, Obernolte, Patterson, Waldron

NO VOTE RECORDED: Arambula, Boerner Horvath, Cervantes, Chen, Diep, Flora, Kamlager-Dove, Mayes, Petrie-Norris, Salas

Prepared by: Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. /

6/26/19 15:41:20

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular Session

AB 1504 (Medina) - Community colleges: student representation fee: statewide community college student organization: goals

Bill Summary:

This bill requires a community college campus to collect a student representation fee of $2 (per semester or quarter) at the time of registration if the campus has a student body association; $1 of the fee shall be used to establish and support the operation of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges. The bill provides a means for students to opt out of paying the fee.

Fiscal Impact:

While there could be minor costs for community college campuses to collect the student representation fee, these revenues would be sufficient to support the operation of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges. The Chancellor’s Office indicates that if the bill were to pass, it would generate about $3.5 million in revenue each year for the Student Senate. For the 2017-18 fiscal year, the Student Senate received about $121,000 from student representation fee collections.

This bill would also result in General Fund savings of about $60,000 to the Chancellor’s Office since it would no longer need to contribute to the organization because student fee revenue would exceed $1 million.

Background:

Existing law authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester. The law specifies that the affirmative vote of a majority of the California community college students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections.

Existing law requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. The law specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to student representation fees adopted on or after January 1, 2014. The law also specifies that students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial or moral reasons, and that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than 7 percent.

Proposed Law:

This bill eliminates the authorization for the governing body of the local student association at a community college to order an election for the purposes of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester and removes the requirement that an affirmative vote of a majority of the student electorate be sufficient to establish the fee, as specified. It also deletes provisions that authorize the termination or revision of the representation fee by a majority vote of the students voting in an election, as specified.

This bill requires the officials at a community college, if a student body association has been established at the college, to collect a student representation fee of $2 at the time of registration. The bill also modifies provisions that designate $1 of every $2 to operation costs for the statewide community college student organization for fees adopted after 2014 and instead makes the designation applicable to student representation fees regardless of date of adoption.

This bill also provides that student may refuse to pay the student representation fee without a reason, and that a community college shall provide the student a means to refuse to pay the fee on the same form that is used for the collection of the fees.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Connie Leyva, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: AB 1504 Hearing Date: June 5, 2019

Subject: Community colleges: student representation fee: statewide community college student organization: goals.

SUMMARY

This bill modifies the process for adopting the student representation fee at a community college. Specifically, the bill eliminates the authorization to hold a campus election to establish the fee or terminate the fee assessed on students and instead requires direct collection of that fee for purposes prescribed by current law.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to authorize the students of a college to organize a student body association (Education Code (EC) § 76060).
2. Authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester. Specifies, that the affirmative vote of a majority of the California community college (CCC) students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections. Requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the CCC Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. Specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to student representation fees adopted on or after January 1, 2014. Specifies students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial or moral reasons. Specifies that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than 7 percent (EC § 76060.5).

ANALYSIS

This bill modifies the manner in which a student representation is adopted. Specifically, it:

1. Eliminates the authorization for the governing body of the local student association at a community college to order an election for the purposes of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester and removes the requirement that an affirmative vote of a majority of the student electorate be sufficient to establish the fee, as specified.
2. Deletes provisions that authorize the termination or revision of the representation fee by a majority vote of the students voting in an election, as specified.
3. Requires the officials at a community college, if a student body association has been established at the college, to collect a student representation fee of $2 at the time of registration.
4. Modifies provisions that designate $1 of every $2 to operation costs for the statewide community college student organization for fees adopted after 2014 and instead makes the designation applicable to student representation fees regardless of date of adoption.
5. Adds, supporting student participation and engagement in statewide higher education policy and advocacy activities, to current law requirements relative the underlying goals included for a statewide community college student organization.
6. Makes other various technical and conforming changes.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “the Student Representation Fee by statute is to be the primary source of income for the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC). However, only 11 of 114 campuses have implemented the fee. The current method of implementation requires each one of the 114 community colleges to hold an election to collect the $2 fee. This election must have at least the average of the number of participants that voted in the previous three elections for the results to count.

As each of the 114 community college campuses have their own burdensome elections procedures and requirements to get items placed on the ballot, it is extremely difficult to get the $2 fee implemented. The current fee implementation method unfortunately leaves the SSCCC unable to function effectively as an organization. The SSCCC works with less than $0.03 per student, compared to the California State University and University of California which operate with $3.12 and $3.38 respectively.”

1. Is this the appropriate solution? Current law allows a $2 representation fee to be levied on CCC students that is subject to an affirmative majority vote of community colleges’ students. In addition, current law permits a portion of the fee revenue to be used to support a statewide community college student organization. This bill seeks to streamline collection of the fee from the general student body at each CCC to support representatives of local or statewide student organizations’ advocacy activities and operations. However, in so doing it eliminates the student electorate’s ability to adopt the fee by a majority vote. Greater statewide student advocacy and uniform representation continues to be a reasonable goal however; the committee may wish to consider whether elimination of the local decision making process is the appropriate solution.

The Student Senate for California Community colleges (SSCCC), the recognized statewide student organization for the CCC system, contend that without staff the current requirements are overly burdensome with over 114 community colleges having varying elections procedures and requirements for items to be placed on a campus ballot the task is unmanageable. Unlike the SSCCC, both organizations representing the University of California (UC) students and California State University (CSU) students respectively, UC Student Association (UCSA) and California State Student Association (CSSA), employ professional staff. UCSA is funded in part by membership dues assessed on each campus and similar to the community college student association, CSSA draws its revenue from the student involvement and representation fee implemented in 2015.

1. Can a student opt-out from paying the fee? Current law provides each student with an option to “refuse to pay,” or opt out. It provides that a student may refuse to pay for religious, political, financial or moral reasons refuse to pay and that refusal be submitted in writing. This process appears burdensome particularly when the ability to cast a vote to affirm the fee is no longer an option. Staff recommends that the bill be amended to simplify opt-out procedures for students as follows:

76060.5 (f) A student may, for religious, political, financial, or moral reasons, refuse to pay the student representation fee established under this section. The refusal shall be submitted in writing to the community college officials at the time the student pays other fees collected by the community college officials. A student shall be provided a means to refuse to pay The refusal shall be submitted on the same form that is used for collection of fees as provided by the community college, which, as determined by the community college, shall be as nearly as practical in the same form as a model form prescribed by regulations of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.

SUPPORT

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

California State Student Association

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

Public Advocates Inc.

Student Senate for California Community Colleges (Sponsors)

The Education Trust - West

The Institute for College Access & Success

University Of California Student Association

OPPOSITION

None received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 1504

Author:(Medina)

As Amended Ver:March 19, 2019

Majority vote

SUMMARY:

Requires a California Community College (CCC) campus to collect at the time of registration a student representation fee (SRF) of $2 per semester or per quarter, if the CCC has a student body association (SBA). It requires $1 of the fee be used to establish and support the operation of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC), a statewide community college student organization. Students can opt out of paying the fee for religious, political, financial, or moral reasons.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to authorize the students of a college to organize a student body association (Education Code (EC) Section 76060).
2. Authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a SRF of $2 per semester. Specifies that the affirmative vote of a majority of the CCC students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections. Requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the CCC Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. Specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to SRFs adopted on or after January 1, 2014. Specifies students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial, or moral reasons. Specifies that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than 7% (EC Section 76060.5).

Major Provisions

This measure seeks to ensure that the $2 SRF is implemented at all CCCs by collecting the SRF from all students upon payment of registration fees and without the need for a campus wide election.

To note, this measure retains a provision in existing law, whereby a CCC student can opt out of paying the SRF for religious, political, financial, or moral reasons.

COMMENTS:

Background. As each of the 115 campuses of the CCC have their own elections and procedures and requirements for items to be placed on the ballot, it has become extremely difficult for most campuses to implement the SRF (as described in the "Existing Law" section of this analysis). The current fee implementation method leaves the SSCCC unable to effectively function as an organization.

According to information provided by the author, the SSCCC works with less than $0.03 per student, compared to the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) student organizations who operate with $3.12 and $3.38 respectively, per student.

Additionally, unlike the UC and CSU student organizations, the SSCCC has very limited presence in the Legislature. Committee Staff notes that in some years, SSCCC had no presence in the Legislature; thus leaving the voices of the over 2.1 million students who attend a CCC, voiceless; or with little to no ability to advocate for legislation that directly affect CCC students.

To note, SSCCC is a completely student-run organization, with virtually no professional support. Due to the structure of the SSCCC and inadequate funding (as aforementioned), the SSCCC has become increasingly reliant and dependent on the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to advocate for their needs.

Previous legislation. AB 1358 (Fong), Chapter 714, Statutes of 2013, in part, authorized organized CCC student body associations to hold campus-wide elections in order to potentially increase the SRF from $1 per semester to $2 to fund governmental affairs representatives for the CCC students and changed the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the students voting in the election to establish the SRF to a majority of students voting.

AB 2576 (Hayden), Chapter 1238, Statutes of 1987, established the original SRF.

According to the Author:

According to the author, "The voice of CCC students should not be held by the CCCCO but by the statewide student organization". The author contends that, "Student leaders need more administrative support both at the statewide level and at the regional level".

Arguments in Support:

According to the SSCCC, co-sponsors of this measure, "Inadequate funding has resulted in the SSCCC becoming increasingly dependent on the CCCCO. The voice of CCC students should not be held by the CCCCO but by the statewide student organization". Further, SSCCC contends that, "The solution to these issues is the implementation of AB1504. This would provide the SSCCC with a stable funding source that will enable the SSCCC to be the effective voice our students need in the state capitol, and put an end to the SSCCC being a drain on Chancellor's Office resources".

Arguments in Opposition:

There is no opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. General Fund cost savings of $60,000 to the CCCCO to no longer provide financial support the SSCCC.
2. Proposition 98 General Fund costs to CCCs to collect a student representation fee at each campus. The state would need to reimburse these costs to CCC, if the Commission on State Mandates determines the bill's requirements to be a reimbursable state mandate.

VOTES:

ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 8-0-4

YES: Medina, Choi, Jones-Sawyer, Bloom, Gabriel, Irwin, Santiago, Weber

ABS, ABST OR NV: Kiley, Levine, Low, Patterson

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-2-3

YES: Gonzalez, Bloom, Bonta, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Eggman, Gabriel, Jones-Sawyer, Maienschein, Petrie-Norris, Quirk, Robert Rivas

NO: Bigelow, Obernolte

ABS, ABST OR NV: Brough, Diep, Fong

UPDATED:

VERSION: March 19, 2019

CONSULTANT: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0000268

Date of Hearing: April 24, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1504

Author:(Medina) – As Amended Ver:March 19, 2019

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill requires a California Community College (CCC) campus to collect at the time of registration a student representation fee of $2 per semester or per quarter, if the CCC has a student body association. It requires $1 of the fee be used to establish and support the operation of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC), a statewide community college student organization. Students can opt out of paying the fee for religious, political, financial or moral reasons.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. General Fund cost savings of $60,000 to the CCC chancellor’s office to no longer provide financial support the SSCCC, as described in more detail below.
2. Proposition 98 General Fund costs to CCCs to collect a student representation fee at each campus. The state would need to reimburse these costs to CCC, if the Commission on State Mandates determines the bill’s requirements to be a reimbursable state mandate.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The author indicates it has been difficult for most campuses to establish a student representation fee, which has resulted in the SSCCC unable to effectively function as an organization representing community college students at the statewide level. Additional funding generated by this measure would allow the co-sponsors of this bill, the SSCCC, to increase their presence at the Capitol and advocate for legislation affecting CCC students. Currently, the SSCCC is completely student run with minimal professional support. This bill would provide the organization more support.
2. Background. Current law allows each of the state’s 114 CCC campuses to establish a student body association and allows each association to hold an election for the purposes of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester, with $1 going towards supporting a statewide community college organization, the SSCCC. The fee can be passed by a majority vote, but the number of students who vote must be at least as great as the average number of student who voted in the previous three elections. Currently, all campuses have a student body association and 11 campuses have voted to collect the fee. According to the CCC chancellor’s office, the SSCCC will receive about $120,000 for the 2017-18 fiscal year from student representation fee collections.

In addition to revenue through the fee, the CCC chancellor’s office has a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with SSCCC to allocate $60,000 to the organization annually. However, the MOU specifies that if the student representation fee revenue is over $1 million, the chancellor’s office would no longer allocate funds to the SSCCC.

The SSCCC estimates this measure would likely generate about $3.5 million annually for their organization.

1. Previous Legislation. AB 1358 (Fong), Chapter 714, Statutes of 2013, authorized CCC student body associations to hold campus-wide elections to determine whether to increase the student representation fee from $1 per semester to $2 to fund governmental affairs representatives for the CCC students and changed the vote threshold from two-thirds of the students voting to a majority of students voting.

Analysis Prepared by: Natasha Collins / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 2, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

Jose Medina, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1504 (

Author:Medina) – As Amended Ver:March 19, 2019

SUBJECT: Community colleges: student representation fee: statewide community college student organization: goals.

SUMMARY: Requires the California Community College (CCC), to collect, if a student body association (SBA) has been established, a student representation fee (SRF) of $2 at the time of registration per semester or quarter; requires that $1 of the fee be expended to establish and support the operation of a statewide community college organization for all SRFs collected, rather than just for SRFs adopted on or after January 1, 2014; and, makes clarifying and technical changes to existing law.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to authorize the students of a college to organize a student body association (Education Code (EC) Section 76060).
2. Authorizes the governing body of an established student association to hold an election for the purpose of establishing a student representation fee of $2 per semester. Specifies that the affirmative vote of a majority of the CCC students voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the fee, but the number of students who vote must equal or exceed the average number of students who voted in the previous three student body elections. Requires that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be expended to establish and support the operations of a statewide community college student organization, recognized by the CCC Board of Governors, with effective student representation and participation in state-level community college shared governance and with governmental affairs representatives to advocate before the Legislature and other state and local governmental entities. Specifies that the additional fees collected, as aforementioned, only apply to SRFs adopted on or after January 1, 2014. Specifies students may refuse to pay the fee for religious, political, financial or moral reasons. Specifies that the community college district may retain a portion of the fees collected and deposited, that is equal to the actual cost of administering the fees up to, but not more than 7% (EC Section 76060.5).

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS: Background. As each of the 115 campuses of the CCC have their own elections and procedures and requirements for items to be placed on the ballot, it has become extremely difficult for most campuses to implement the SRF (as described in the “Existing Law” section of this analysis). The current fee implementation method leaves the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC) unable to effectively function as an organization.

According to information provided by the author, the SSCCC works with less than $0.03 per student, compared to the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) student organizations who operate with $3.12 and $3.38 respectively, per student.

Additionally, unlike the UC and CSU student organizations, the SSCCC has very limited presence in the Legislature. Committee Staff notes that in some years, SSCCC had no presence in the Legislature; thus leaving the voices of the over 2.1 million students who attend a CCC, voiceless; or with little to no ability to advocate for legislation that directly affect CCC students.

To note, SSCCC is a completely student-run organization, with virtually no professional support. Due to the structure of the SSCCC and inadequate funding (as aforementioned), the SSCCC has become increasingly reliant and dependent on the CCC Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to advocate for their needs.

Need for the measure. According to the author, “The voice of CCC students should not be held by the CCCCO but by the statewide student organization”. The author contends that, “Student leaders need more administrative support both at the statewide level and at the regional level”.

This measure seeks to ensure that the $2 SRF is implemented at all CCCs by collecting the SRF from all students upon payment of registration fees and without the need for a campus wide election.

To note, this measure retains a provision in existing law, whereby a CCC student can opt out of the paying the SRF for religious, political, financial or moral reasons.

Previous legislation. AB 1358 (Fong), Chapter 714, Statutes of 2013, in part, authorized organized CCC student body associations to hold campus-wide elections in order to potentially increase the SRF from $1 per semester to $2 to fund governmental affairs representatives for the CCC students and changed the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the students voting in the election to establish the SRF to a majority of students voting.

AB 2756 (Hayden), Chapter 1238, Statutes of 1987, established the original SRF.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
Student Senate for California Community Colleges (Co-Sponsor)
Public Advocates

1 Individual

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960