California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 385 — Community colleges: funding.

Last action — From Senate committee without further action.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law authorizes the establishment of community college districts under the administration of community college governing boards, and authorizes these districts to provide instruction at community college campuses throughout the state. Existing law requires the board of governors to develop criteria and standards, in accordance with specified statewide minimum requirements, for the purposes of making the annual budget request for the California Community Colleges to the Governor and the Legislature and allocating state general apportionment revenues. Those statewide minimum requirements include, among other things, a requirement that the calculations of each community college district's revenue level for each fiscal year shall be based on specified criteria, with revenue adjustments being made for increases or decreases in full time equivalent students (FTES) for specified purposes. These requirements also include a requirement that the statewide requested increase in budgeted workload FTES be based on the sum of specified computations, including the positive difference between the California unemployment rate and a rate of 5%. For purposes of this computation, existing law prohibits that positive difference from exceeding 2%. This bill would delete that limit on the positive difference between the California unemployment rate and a rate of 5% for purposes of calculating the statewide requested increase in budgeted workload FTES.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

1 line(s) added, 1 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Add To My Favorites | Version:
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. From Senate committee without further action.

  2. Referred to Com. on ED.

  3. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  4. Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 1. Page 1838.)

  5. Read second time. To third reading.

  6. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 4.) (May 28).

  7. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  8. From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. Re-referred. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (March 31).

  9. Referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.

  10. From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.

  11. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Block · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Block

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 385 BLOCK Assembly Third Reading

Passed 88 Yea · 1 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 82103
Democratic 3000
Republican 3000
Total 88103
% of votes cast 96%1%0%3%
How each member voted (92)
Member Party Vote
A. — Yea
Carter — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cook — Yea
Bill — Yea
Tom — Yea
Eng — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Charles — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Gilmore — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
John — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Beall — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Coto — Yea
Duvall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huber — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Knight — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Logue — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nava — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Saldana — Yea
Audra — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Bass — Yea
Davis — Not Voting
Miller — Not Voting
Price — Yea
Ruskin — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Tran — Yea
Adams — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Block — Not Voting
Blumenfield — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Ma — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Silva — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torres — Yea
Villines — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Evans — Yea
DeVore — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 18 Yea · 4 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 16400
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 18400
% of votes cast 82%18%0%0%
How each member voted (22)
Member Party Vote
Charles — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Audra — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Nay
Krekorian — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Duvall — Nay
Miller — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Price — Yea
Davis — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

education
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 385 do?
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law authorizes the establishment of community college districts under the administration of community college governing boards, and authorizes these districts to provide instruction at community college campuses throughout the state. Existing law requires the board of governors to develop criteria and standards, in accordance with specified statewide minimum requirements, for the purposes of making the annual budget request for the California Community Colleges to the Governor and the Legislature and allocating state general apportionment revenues. Those statewide minimum requirements include, among other things, a requirement that the calculations of each community college district's revenue level for each fiscal year shall be based on specified criteria, with revenue adjustments being made for increases or decreases in full time equivalent students (FTES) for specified purposes. These requirements also include a requirement that the statewide requested increase in budgeted workload FTES be based on the sum of specified computations, including the positive difference between the California unemployment rate and a rate of 5%. For purposes of this computation, existing law prohibits that positive difference from exceeding 2%. This bill would delete that limit on the positive difference between the California unemployment rate and a rate of 5% for purposes of calculating the statewide requested increase in budgeted workload FTES.
Who sponsors AB 385?
AB 385 is sponsored by Block.
What is the current status of AB 385?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 385?
Track AB 385 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 385

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 385

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →