Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

January Legislative Update

No description
by

Annaly Medrano

on 11 April 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of January Legislative Update

January 2015
Legislative Update

AB 42 Public postsecondary education: funding and mandatory fees
Watch
Introduced by Assembly Member Kim

Postsecondary Education: Financial Aid
Senator Block, De Leon, Liu
Support

Postsecondary Education: Financial Aid
Assembly Member Gipson
Watch
AB 42
The bill would freeze mandatory system wide fees or tuition charged to students in the California Community College (CCC), California State University (CSU) and University of California (UC) systems at the 2014-2015 rate up to and including the 2018-2019 fiscal year.



AB 42 would also prohibit the imposition of a “student success fee” at a CCC, CSU, or UC campus unless the student success fee is approved by a favorable vote of 2/3 of those students voting at an election of the student body held at that campus within the preceding 48 months.
The definition of “student success fee” as referred to in this bill is “a type of campus-based mandatory fee that must be paid by a student to enroll or attend a campus of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, or the University of California.

Determined by that campus or the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the Chancellor of the California State University, or the Regents of the University of California, respectively.”
Under the current system, the deciding organization for the UC tuition increase is the UC Board of Regents rather than the California legislature.

Senate Constitutional Amendment 1 (SCA 1),would change this policy so that the UC Regents are subject to legislative control.

In the event that SCA 1 fails to pass and AB 42 passes, the California legislature would be unable to require the Regents to freeze the UC tuition.
Pro & Con
Pro
This bill has the potential to make California public higher education more affordable for students over the next four years by freezing tuition at the 2014-2015 rate.

It would also require student approval for the creation of any new student success fees.
Con
This bill does not address currently existing student success fees in the CSU system that did not undergo student approval.

The bill does not specify a way to repeal student success fees.

This bill would legalize student success fees in the CCCs, creating a loophole that would allow individual campuses to bypass the statewide tuition freeze.

The tuition freeze would only last through the 2018-2019 fiscal year, but the legalization of student success fees would be permanant
SB 15
This bill would increase the total number of Competitive Cal Grant A and B awards granted annually to 30,000.

Also, it would increase the maximum tuition award amount for Cal Grant A and B for students at private nonprofit postsecondary schools to $9,084 for the 2015–16 award year and each award year thereafter.
This bill would establish, commencing with the 2015–16 academic year, the Competitive Incentive Grant Award to provide students with financial need attending a campus of the California State University with financial aid over a 3-year period.

One thousand dollars ($1,000) if students completes 60 units by the end of his or her first academic year.
One thousand five hundred ($1,500) if the student completes 60 units by the end of his or her second academic year.
Two thousands dollars ($2,000) if the student completes 90 units by end of his or her third academic.

SB 15
AB 25
Cal Grant Programs awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying institutions.


Existing law provides that an otherwise qualifying institution with a 3-year cohort default rate that is equal to or greater than 15.5% is ineligible for initial and renewal Cal Grant awards at the institution.

Existing law provides that an otherwise qualifying institution is ineligible for an initial or renewal Cal Grant award at the institution if the institution has a graduation rate of 30% or less for students taking 150% or less of the expected time to complete degree requirements, as specified, with certain exceptions.
Pro & Con
This bill would require the commission to establish an appeal process for an otherwise qualifying institution that fails to satisfy the 3-year cohort default rate and graduation rate requirements, and would make non-substantive and conforming
changes.
Pro
There currently is no statutory or regulatory guidance provided regarding such a process.

This has translated to 3 out of 9 institutions that have applied to actually be accepted.

This low rate of acceptance is because of calculation errors at the federal level which only consider raw graduation and loan default rates process.

With this bill the oversight for the appeals process will be done in California.
Con
The appeals process created by this bill creates a subjective arbitration power for the CSAC to determine the eligibility of institutions requesting to be reinstated.
Pro & Con
Pro
The bill offers some help to students attending private nonprofit universities which are facing a decrease of 10% in entitlement awards starting next year for incoming students.

The existing cap of 22,500 further constricts the limited outflow of financial aid resources.

increasing the competitive awards by 7,500 serves as a better course of action than doing nothing at all.
Con
We would be advocating selectively within our purview for the Cal Grant competitive awards

Competitive Cal Grant awards are earmarked for community college students and returning students but we should only expect the CSSA to support us.
Ab 25
Ab 27
Public postsecondary Education: Exemption
from nonresident tuition
Assemblymember
Chavez


AB 27
Existing law requires that CCC and CSU exempt from paying non resident tuition students who were members of the armed forces stationed in this state on active duty for over one year immediately prior to being discharged until the minimum time necessary to become a resident if they file an affidavit with the institution saying they intend to acquire residency
This bill would require the CSU and would request the UC to exempt from paying non-resident tuition a student )or prospective students) who is intending to use "GI Bill Education benefits" as defined while enrolled.
Pro & Con
Pro
- Makes it easier for those who've served our country get a better education
- Incentive for service people to live and study in California

Con
- Doesn't necessarily pertain to mission of advocating for the CCC system
Governor's Budget Proposal
2015-2016
 
$200 Million for student success –
These funds will be split evenly between and Support Program (SSSP) and Student Equity Plans.

 $125 Million to increase base allocation - funding –
This increase is intended to constrained discretionary funding environment colleges have experienced since the economic downturn.  These funds can help colleges address the scheduled increases in State Teachers Retired System (STRS) and Public Employee Retire System (PERS) contribution rates,

 $106.9 Million for Increased Access –
This funding would increase access 45,000 students

$92.4 Million for COLA –
This would fund the statutory cost-of-living-adjustment of 1.58%.

$48 Million for Career Technical Education –
These one-time funds of the SB 1070 Career Technical Education Pathways Program.

$94.5 Million to retire deferrals -
This funding would completely retire system deferrals, which had reached as high as $961 Million just prior to the passage of Proposition 30.

$500 Million Adult Education Block Grant - F
und courses in elementary and secondary basic skills, citizenship, ESL, programs for adults with disabilities, short-term CTE programs, and programs for apprentices.





        
Full transcript