In order to further the lively discussion of funding of the California College and University system I have posted the exact text of Senate Bill 969 which was INTRODUCED by California State Senator Dean Florez on February 5, 2010. <\/b><\/i><\/p>\n
The bill is to be known as: The California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010
\n
<\/b>
\n
Florez, a former UCLA Student Body President and Candidate for California Lt. Governor<\/i><\/b>, by introduction of this bill, provides for the stabilization of fees and allows those paying for an eduction in the CA College and University system some reasonable idea of what the tuition\/fees for a four year degree will cost<\/i><\/b>–The Cost The First Year Remains The Same Through Ones Senior Year.<\/p>\n
It should be pointed out to those reading the text of this bill, or any bill, proposed legislation goes through a process in which modifications are proposed and\/or made to a bill, and in a prefect world, make the proposed law “better.” Senator Florez, by introducing the bill has started the process in which interested\/effected parties provide input to CA State Legislators to, as necessary, strengthen the bill and let them know of YOUR SUPPORT of the goal of the Legislation introduced. It is more common than not that a bill of any size or significance does not becomes law with the exact language and provisions that are present when a bill is introduced.<\/p>\n
Another way of saying this is: Former UCLA Student Body President Florez<\/i> has “opened the door for the public to provide input and support<\/b>.” Just getting a bill introduced is often the biggest hurdle to new laws!<\/i> Senator Florez has “thrown the ball” and it is up to the public to “catch the ball and run with it.” The introduction of the California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 is OUR TIME, OUR OPPORTUNITY. We have the opportunity to, to paraphrase President Obama: BE THE CHANGE WE ARE LOOKING FOR WHEN IT COMES TO HIGHER EDUCATION COSTS.<\/p>\n BILL NUMBER: SB 969\tINTRODUCED INTRODUCED BY Senator Florez FEBRUARY 5, 2010<\/p>\n An act to add Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 66150) to Part \tLEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST<\/p>\n SB 969, as introduced, Florez. Public postsecondary education: The bill would provide that the act does not apply to the THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:<\/p>\n SECTION 1. Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 66150) is added to 66150. This chapter shall be known, and may be cited, as the — Note<\/i>: I am a private, totally disabled, retired citizen with an interest in the betterment of California. In order to further the lively discussion of funding of the California College and University system I have posted the exact text of Senate Bill 969 which was INTRODUCED by California State Senator Dean Florez on February 5, 2010. <\/b><\/i><\/p>\n The bill is to be known as: The California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 It should be pointed out to those reading the text of this bill, or any bill, proposed legislation goes through a process in which modifications are proposed and\/or made to a bill, and in a prefect world, make the proposed law “better.” Senator Florez, by introducing the bill has started the process in which interested\/effected parties provide input to CA State Legislators to, as necessary, strengthen the bill and let them know of YOUR SUPPORT of the goal of the Legislation introduced. It is more common than not that a bill of any size or significance does not becomes law with the exact language and provisions that are present when a bill is introduced.<\/p>\n Another way of saying this is: Former UCLA Student Body President Florez<\/i> has “opened the door for the public to provide input and support<\/b>.” Just getting a bill introduced is often the biggest hurdle to new laws!<\/i> Senator Florez has “thrown the ball” and it is up to the public to “catch the ball and run with it.” The introduction of the California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 is OUR TIME, OUR OPPORTUNITY. We have the opportunity to, to paraphrase President Obama: BE THE CHANGE WE ARE LOOKING FOR WHEN IT COMES TO HIGHER EDUCATION COSTS.<\/p>\n BILL NUMBER: SB 969\tINTRODUCED INTRODUCED BY Senator Florez FEBRUARY 5, 2010<\/p>\n An act to add Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 66150) to Part \tLEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST<\/p>\n SB 969, as introduced, Florez. Public postsecondary education: The bill would provide that the act does not apply to the
\n
\tBILL TEXT<\/p>\n
\n
(Principal coauthor: Senator Price)<\/p>\n
\n
40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, relating to public
\n
postsecondary education.<\/p>\n
\n
California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010.
\n
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, provides
\n
for a public postsecondary education system in this state. The 3
\n
segments of the public postsecondary education system are the
\n
University of California, which is administered by the Regents of the
\n
University of California, the California State University, which is
\n
administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and
\n
the California Community Colleges, which are administered by the
\n
Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and the
\n
community college district governing boards. The provisions of the
\n
Donahoe Higher Education Act apply to the University of California
\n
only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California
\n
act by resolution to make them applicable.
\n
Existing law authorizes the Trustees of the California State
\n
University to require that fees, among other charges, be paid by
\n
students at that institution. Existing law requires the governing
\n
board of each community college district to charge each student a fee
\n
of $26 per unit per semester, effective with the fall term of the
\n
2009-10 academic year. Existing provisions of the California
\n
Constitution require the Regents of the University of California to
\n
have all powers necessary or convenient for the effective
\n
administration of the university.
\n
This bill would enact the California College and University Fee
\n
Stabilization Act of 2010, which would place limits on increases in
\n
mandatory systemwide fees, as defined, charged to students enrolled
\n
in the 3 segments of public postsecondary education. The bill would
\n
limit mandatory systemwide fees that are charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in the University of California, the
\n
California State University, or the California Community Colleges to
\n
a specified amount, based on the average total cost of education, as
\n
defined, at the respective segment. The bill would prohibit each of
\n
the 3 segments from charging a resident undergraduate student who
\n
commences enrollment in an undergraduate degree program at that
\n
segment for the fall term of the 2011-12 academic year, or any
\n
academic term thereafter, mandatory systemwide fees in an amount that
\n
is greater than the amount of the fees in effect at the time the
\n
student commenced enrollment in the undergraduate degree program. The
\n
bill would prohibit mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in the University of California and
\n
the California State University from being increased, in any academic
\n
year, by an amount exceeding 5% of the fees charged for the
\n
immediately preceding academic year. With respect to the per unit per
\n
semester fees that community college districts are required to
\n
charge to students enrolled in the California Community Colleges, the
\n
bill would declare legislative intent that those fees not be
\n
increased by an amount exceeding 5% of the fees charged for the
\n
immediately preceding academic year. The bill would prohibit an
\n
increase in mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in any of the 3 segments that is
\n
adopted on or after January 1, 2011, from becoming effective before 6
\n
months have elapsed after the date on which fee increase is adopted.<\/p>\n
\n
University of California, except to the extent that the Regents of
\n
the University of California adopt a resolution making it applicable.
\n
The bill would request the regents to adopt policies that are
\n
consistent with the act.
\n
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
\n
State-mandated local program: no.
\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
Part 40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, to read:
\n
CHAPTER 3.5. STUDENT FEES<\/p>\n
\n
California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010.
\n
66151. As used in this chapter, the following terms have the
\n
following meanings:
\n
(a) (1) “Average total cost of education” means the amount
\n
calculated by dividing the total cost of education for the University
\n
of California, the California State University, or the California
\n
Community Colleges, whichever is applicable, by the total number of
\n
full-time equivalent students enrolled at that segment.
\n
(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), “total cost of education” means
\n
the following with respect to each of the following segments of
\n
public postsecondary education:
\n
(A) For the University of California and the California State
\n
University, the sum of appropriations and projected revenues from all
\n
of the following:
\n
(i) The General Fund.
\n
(ii) Higher education fees and income.
\n
(iii) The California State Lottery Education Fund.
\n
(iv) Reimbursements.
\n
(B) For the California Community Colleges, the sum of
\n
appropriations and projected revenues from all of the following:
\n
(i) The General Fund, including appropriations pursuant to Section
\n
8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution.
\n
(ii) The State School Fund.
\n
(iii) The California Lottery Education Fund.
\n
(iv) Reimbursements.
\n
(b) “Mandatory systemwide fees” means the fees that all students
\n
enrolled in the California State University or the University of
\n
California are required to pay in order to enroll in courses for the
\n
academic term pursuant to any law or any policy adopted by its
\n
governing board. With respect to the California Community Colleges,
\n
“mandatory systemwide fees” means the fees specified in paragraph (1)
\n
of subdivision (b) of Section 76300.
\n
(c) “Regents” means the Regents of the University of California.
\n
(d) “Resident” means a student who is exempt from paying
\n
nonresident tuition pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
\n
68000) of Part 41.
\n
(e) “Trustees” means the Trustees of the California State
\n
University.
\n
66152. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
\n
(a) Fees at California’s public postsecondary educational
\n
institutions, including the University of California, the California
\n
State University, and the California Community Colleges, have
\n
undergone steep increases in recent years.
\n
(b) Over time, fee levels have been erratic and unpredictable, and
\n
have left families unable to realistically plan for the future.
\n
(c) Recent fee increases demonstrate a trend toward the state
\n
shifting a greater share of the costs of attaining higher education
\n
onto students and families.
\n
(d) Students and families face the increased challenge of paying
\n
higher fees and an increased share of educational costs at a time
\n
when state unemployment rates continue to soar and as families
\n
continue to struggle to make ends meet.
\n
(e) Barriers to attaining higher education posed by skyrocketing,
\n
erratic, and unpredictable fee levels come at a time when experts
\n
warn that California needs to produce more college graduates to meet
\n
the state’s workforce and economic needs.
\n
(f) If the state does not take action to ensure that more
\n
individuals attain a college university education, California will
\n
have one million fewer college graduates than it needs in 2025.
\n
(g) As of 2025, only 35 percent of working-age adults will have a
\n
college degree in an economy that would otherwise require 41 percent
\n
of workers to have a college degree.
\n
(h) Failure to address this shortage by, in part, ensuring that
\n
skyrocketing, erratic, and unpredictable fees do not continue to
\n
serve as a barrier to attaining higher education will hamper the
\n
state’s economic recovery and threaten California’s ability to remain
\n
competitive in the increasingly global economy.
\n
66154. By enacting this chapter, it is the intent of the
\n
Legislature to do all of the following:
\n
(a) Limit the increases in student fees at the state’s public
\n
postsecondary educational institutions and help students and families
\n
plan for the future by bringing predictability and consistency to
\n
fee levels over time.
\n
(b) Enact a rational, moderate, and predictable fee policy that
\n
recognizes the partnership between students, families, and the state
\n
in preparing California’s future workforce.
\n
(c) Ensure that the share of costs that students and families pay
\n
at the state’s public postsecondary educational institutions remains
\n
below the national average and reflects a reasonable contribution to
\n
expect from students and families.
\n
66156. (a) For each of the following segments of public
\n
postsecondary education, the mandatory systemwide fees charged to
\n
resident undergraduate students for any academic year shall not
\n
exceed the following amounts:
\n
(1) For the University of California, 40 percent of the average
\n
total cost of education for that academic year.
\n
(2) For the California State University, 30 percent of the average
\n
total cost of education for that academic year.
\n
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that, for any academic
\n
year, the mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident students
\n
enrolled in the California Community Colleges, pursuant to paragraph
\n
(1) of subdivision (b) of Section 76300, should not exceed 10 percent
\n
of the average total cost of education for that academic year.
\n
66158. Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of
\n
Section 76300 or any other law, a community college district, the
\n
trustees, and the regents shall not charge mandatory systemwide fees
\n
to a resident undergraduate student who commences enrollment in an
\n
undergraduate degree program at the respective segment during the
\n
fall term of the 2011-12 academic year, or any academic term
\n
thereafter, in an amount that is greater than the amount of the
\n
mandatory systemwide fees that are in effect for the academic term at
\n
the time he or she commenced enrollment in the undergraduate degree
\n
program.
\n
66160. (a) In any academic year, the trustees and the regents
\n
shall not increase the mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in the respective institutions by an
\n
amount exceeding 5 percent of the mandatory systemwide fees charged
\n
to those students for the immediately preceding academic year. The
\n
total amount of mandatory systemwide fees, as increased, shall not
\n
exceed the limits in subdivision (a) of Section 66156.
\n
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the fees charged to
\n
students enrolled in the California Community Colleges, as set forth
\n
in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 76300, should not be
\n
increased by an amount exceeding 5 percent of the fees charged to
\n
those students for the immediately preceding academic year and, as
\n
increased, should not exceed the limit in subdivision (b) of Section
\n
66156.
\n
66162. (a) Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of
\n
Section 76300 or any other law, any increase in the mandatory
\n
systemwide fees charged to a resident undergraduate student enrolled
\n
in the University of California, California State University, or a
\n
community college district that is adopted on or after January 1,
\n
2011, shall not become effective before six months have elapsed after
\n
the date on which the fee increase is adopted.
\n
(b) This section is subject to the restrictions on charging
\n
mandatory systemwide fees set forth in Section 66158. This section is
\n
not intended to permit an institution to charge fees in an amount
\n
greater than permitted pursuant to Section 66158.
\n
66165. (a) This chapter shall not apply to the University of
\n
California, except to the extent that the regents, by appropriate
\n
resolution, make this chapter applicable.
\n
(b) The regents are requested to adopt policies for increases in
\n
mandatory systemwide fees that are consistent with this chapter.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
I hope the introduction and exact text of this legislation is helpful.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n
\n
This post was made without consultation or approval of Senator\/Lt.Governor Candidate Florez, his Capitol staff nor Senator Florez for Lt. Governor<\/b> campaign staff.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\n
<\/b>
\n
Florez, a former UCLA Student Body President and Candidate for California Lt. Governor<\/i><\/b>, by introduction of this bill, provides for the stabilization of fees and allows those paying for an eduction in the CA College and University system some reasonable idea of what the tuition\/fees for a four year degree will cost<\/i><\/b>–The Cost The First Year Remains The Same Through Ones Senior Year.<\/p>\n
\n
\tBILL TEXT<\/p>\n
\n
(Principal coauthor: Senator Price)<\/p>\n
\n
40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, relating to public
\n
postsecondary education.<\/p>\n
\n
California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010.
\n
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, provides
\n
for a public postsecondary education system in this state. The 3
\n
segments of the public postsecondary education system are the
\n
University of California, which is administered by the Regents of the
\n
University of California, the California State University, which is
\n
administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and
\n
the California Community Colleges, which are administered by the
\n
Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and the
\n
community college district governing boards. The provisions of the
\n
Donahoe Higher Education Act apply to the University of California
\n
only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California
\n
act by resolution to make them applicable.
\n
Existing law authorizes the Trustees of the California State
\n
University to require that fees, among other charges, be paid by
\n
students at that institution. Existing law requires the governing
\n
board of each community college district to charge each student a fee
\n
of $26 per unit per semester, effective with the fall term of the
\n
2009-10 academic year. Existing provisions of the California
\n
Constitution require the Regents of the University of California to
\n
have all powers necessary or convenient for the effective
\n
administration of the university.
\n
This bill would enact the California College and University Fee
\n
Stabilization Act of 2010, which would place limits on increases in
\n
mandatory systemwide fees, as defined, charged to students enrolled
\n
in the 3 segments of public postsecondary education. The bill would
\n
limit mandatory systemwide fees that are charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in the University of California, the
\n
California State University, or the California Community Colleges to
\n
a specified amount, based on the average total cost of education, as
\n
defined, at the respective segment. The bill would prohibit each of
\n
the 3 segments from charging a resident undergraduate student who
\n
commences enrollment in an undergraduate degree program at that
\n
segment for the fall term of the 2011-12 academic year, or any
\n
academic term thereafter, mandatory systemwide fees in an amount that
\n
is greater than the amount of the fees in effect at the time the
\n
student commenced enrollment in the undergraduate degree program. The
\n
bill would prohibit mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in the University of California and
\n
the California State University from being increased, in any academic
\n
year, by an amount exceeding 5% of the fees charged for the
\n
immediately preceding academic year. With respect to the per unit per
\n
semester fees that community college districts are required to
\n
charge to students enrolled in the California Community Colleges, the
\n
bill would declare legislative intent that those fees not be
\n
increased by an amount exceeding 5% of the fees charged for the
\n
immediately preceding academic year. The bill would prohibit an
\n
increase in mandatory systemwide fees charged to resident
\n
undergraduate students enrolled in any of the 3 segments that is
\n
adopted on or after January 1, 2011, from becoming effective before 6
\n
months have elapsed after the date on which fee increase is adopted.<\/p>\n
\n
University of California, except to the extent that the Regents of
\n
the University of California adopt a resolution making it applicable.
\n
The bill would request the regents to adopt policies that are
\n
consistent with the act.
\n
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
\n
State-mandated local program: no.
\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"author":1529,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[87,21],"tags":[905,1889,8528,8082,2258],"class_list":["post-11228","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-87","category-21","tag-905","tag-1889","tag-8528","tag-8082","tag-2258"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pvhz-2V6","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1529"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11228"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11228\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}