While the preferences of some may have been factors, there was a major disagreement regarding the allocation of the $9.1 billion K-12 portion of the bill. An allocation for high need urban districts was deemed by the Republicans as too generous for a relatively small portion of eligible school districts. Those supporting the urban districts refused to allow expansion of eligibility for this portion of the funds.

The bill was to be an $11.4 billion measure with $2.3 for higher education. Whether this level of funding for higher education can be sustained when negotiations begin anew in 2002 is problematic. While a March 2002 bill is possible, we are probably facing a November 2002 bond with a bill that will likely be enacted late in the 2002 Session of the Legislature.

SB 735 (Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee) IS LAST WORD ON COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR 2001 — The final reaction of the Legislature to the Governor’s veto of $98 million for Scheduled Maintenance and Library Materials and Equipment is expressed in SB 735. This measure was passed by the Senate by a vote of 38 to 1 on September 12^th, 2 days after passing the Assembly by a vote of 78 to 0.

The bill contains $98 million, half for Scheduled Maintenance and half for Library Materials and Equipment. The measure also contains $14,859,000 from the Proposition 1A funds for the planning phase of 33 capital outlay projects. These projects are the same ones rejected by the Department of Finance for inclusion in the 2001-02 Budget and also vetoed by the Governor when the Legislature included them in the Legislature’s Budget.

It was thought that both the $98 million and the 33 projects had a good chance for approval until the world changed on September 11^th. The economic outlook has changed significantly, and not for the better. Sustaining the 33 projects is important to keep the project pipeline from collapsing into a huge administrative mess, when the next bond is ultimately passed.

One other item of note in SB 735 is a statement of Legislative intent that the community colleges be allocated more than 1/3 of future higher education bond acts. This measure is necessary Budget Act cleanup bill. It is unlikely that Governor will veto the entire bill, but he might veto some appropriation items.

AB 484 (RUNNER) FIELD ACT MODIFICATION VETOED — We had previously noted the passage of AB 484 regarding an exception to the Field Act for community colleges in the case of facilities built for joint use with the University of California or California State University. This bill made it to the Governor, however, he vetoed the measure on September 18^th.

The Governor’s veto message indicated his strong support for the Field Act. The bill would have allowed the use of either the Field Act or the California Building Standards Code in the construction of joint use facilities.

Paul H. Holmes