|Date||Bill||Author||ASCCC Position||Summary||Position Letter|
|SB 462||Stern||Oppose unless amended||The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is writing to express its reluctant opposition to SB462 unless the bill is amended to address specific concerns. SB462 would require the Chancellor’s Office of the California Community Colleges, working in collaboration with the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, to establish a model curriculum for a forestland restoration workforce program that could be offered at campuses of the California Community Colleges.||SB462 Community Colleges Forestland Restoration Workforce Program|
|Revising the “Student Centered Funding Formula” to Incentivize Student-Focused Outcomes||If the state wishes to continue performance-based funding, the ASCCC has three requests to improve the formula:
1. Level the point system for associate degree awards so that all educational goals and achievements of comparable unit values are counted equally.
2. Award colleges only once per year per student for the highest award achieved as a means of prioritizing per-student success, as opposed to incentivizing maximizing awards more generally.
3. Keep the performance metric portion set at 10% of the total allocation to ensure funding stability and to support college exploration of how best to serve students.
|Revising the Student Centered Funding Formula|
|Expansion of Cal Grants||Support||The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges wishes to express our support for the expansion of Cal Grant eligibility to more low-income students and an increase to award amounts based on the total cost of attendance.||Cal Grant Letter of Support|
|Community College Budget Proposal 6870-101-0001||Opposed||Establishment of a fully online community college:
While some of the changes are proposed to clarify portions of the online college proposal, the underlying basis for establishing a separate fully online college remains problematic. As such, the Academic Senate remains opposed.
Change to Funding Formula:
The Academic Senate remains opposed to the change in the community college formula despite the changes in the May Revise. Performance based funding, even at 20 percent, represents a misdirected approach which is likely to harm students and magnify regional achievement gaps and equity gaps. Moreover, the point system presented by the May Revise is likely to disincentivize important Career Technical Education in favor of traditional transfer courses.
|May Revise 2018 Letter.pdf|
|AB 2621||Medina||Support||The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges wishes to express our support for AB 2621 (Medina, as of April 10, 2018), which would require the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) to conduct a study on the feasibility of creating an exclusively online California community college and report its findings to the Legislature on or before July 1, 2019.||AB 2621 Suport Letter|
|SB 1009||Wilk||Support||SB 1009 (Wilk, as of April 3, 2018) would allow districts to claim apportionment for tutoring in all subjects and would expand tutoring services for students in need of academic support. The bill also allows students to self-refer for tutoring, in addition to teacher referral, which would remove a significant barrier to obtaining access to tutoring. Numerous studies demonstrated the positive effects of expanded tutoring on student success - the more academic support students receive, the more likely they are to pass their courses and stay enrolled. The value of learning support and tutoring services to student success cannot be overestimated given the various levels of preparation our students bring to the classroom.||SB 1009 Support Letter|
|AB 2767||Medina||Support||The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges wishes to express our support for AB 2767 (Medina, as of April 4, 2018), which calls for the Legislative Analyst’s Office to conduct a study of the funding formula used by the California Community Colleges for the 2017–18 fiscal year, submit a report to the Legislature containing its findings from the study, and provide recommendations as to various funding formula models the Legislature may wish to adopt for use by the California Community Colleges.||AB 2767 Support Letter|
|Community College Budget Proposal CAFYES Expansion||Support||While the passage of SB 12 (Beall, 2017) allowed for the doubling of participating community college districts from the original 10 to 20, additional funds were not allocated in the current year budget to support the expansion. EOPS professionals are working diligently with the California Community College Chancellor’s Office and others to develop a funding mechanism that allows for this expansion without taking funds from existing programs. Unfortunately, this has proven to be challenging.||CAFYES Expantion Letter|
|Community College Budget Proposal||Oppose||The online community college proposal includes $120 million from Proposition 98 dollars ($100 million one time, $20 million ongoing). The Academic Senate fully supports the goal of expanding access to working adults, particularly those individuals not currently well-served by the state’s higher education offerings, and we are committed to serving all student populations in California by exploring the feasibility of developing non-traditional online programs. However, the Academic Senate does not believe that the establishment of a separate, fully online college is a viable paradigm. Our primary concerns include the following.||Community College Budget Proposal|
|AB 705||Irwin||Oppose||The current language of AB 705 seriously limits the ability of the colleges to recognize and respond to the needs of the diverse student populations we serve. The selection of appropriate multiple measures is dependent on the circumstance and life experience of each student. AB 705 limits the ability of colleges to select the most appropriate measures to best reflect the needs of the individual student by subjecting all students to the same measures.||AB 705 Letter.pdf , Governor Brown AB705.pdf|