1. Glendale Community College District

2. McCallum Group Overview What we do Budget Legislation Issues for 2011 & Beyond

3. 2010 Goals Protected Base Funding Provided Augmentation and Low Fees Foundation for Post SB-361Funding Model and Refocus Student Success Discussion Guaranteed Transfer Path Create Single Assessment Tool

4. 2010 Success Of the 5 major goals, McCallum Group accomplished 3 and passed legislation setting the foundation for discussions on the other 2. Despite a $19 billion state budget, Glendale received a $2.8 million augmentation in the recent Budget Act.

5. MGIMGI McCallum Group is Glendale’s eyes, ears and voice in Sacramento. We spend hours developing and implementing budget and legislative strategy for Glendale.  We build a coalition that includes the Chancellor’s Office, the League, faculty groups and other districts.  Every two-year session there are about 5,000 bills introduced as well as hundreds of regulatory changes proposed and a number of competing budget proposals. We monitor every proposed change and analyze its impact on Glendale.

6. MGI - Overview Protected base funding – defeated proposed base cut to PE and enrichment offerings ($2 million to Glendale CCD) Successful in growth augmentation ($1.6 million to Glendale CCD) Successful in categorical augmentation ($804,000 to Glendale CCD) Defeated proposed $40/unit fee increase

7. 4 ItemDemocratsGovernorFinalGlendale CCD Enrollment Growth$126 million $1.68 million Categorical Funds$60 million*No augmentation$80 million**$1.07 million Negative COLANo negative COLA-$23 millionNo negative COLA$308,000 FeesNo increase MandateN/A $9.5 million$127,300 DeferralNo Deferral $189 million$2.5 million *$35 million to backfill ARRA funds and $25 million in Economic Development ** Backfill of ARRA funds, Economic Development, and additional $20 million in CTE

8. * Included Basic Skills and Financial Aid Language Defeated by McCallum Group Final budget deal provides: Funding for additional 26,000 FTES or 60,000 students Funding for additional 800 students at Glendale BUT, leaves $12 billion budget gap for 2011-12 - $5-6 billion from Proposition 98

9. LAO and DOF estimate $10-12 billion budget gap for 2011-12 $5-6 billion of that gap attributable to Proposition 98 Issue of fees, categorical flexibility and funding Issue of PE and enrichment courses Retirement/Pension issues – what type of reform? November Ballot: Majority-vote budget, Governor – who is benefited by a drawn out budget solution?

10. MGI - Overview SB 1440 (Padilla) – Guaranteed transfer to CSU SB 1143 (Liu) – Student success task force – foundation for post- SB 361 funding model - Refocused student success discussion from performance- based to a value-added discussion AB 2682 (Block) – Single Assessment tool (Vetoed by Governor, but Chancellor’s Office continues implementation)

11. Amended AB 635 (Del La Torre) – Alternative contracting for roof projects that would have added approximately $5,000 in additional costs per project. AB 2523 (Eng) – Amended out provisions that would have discontinued partial electrical training programs. Vetoed/Stopped AB 827 (De La Torre) – Would have limited contract provisions of local executives. AB 194 (Torrico) – Would have limited creditable compensation to 125% of the Governor’s salary. SB 1425 (Simitian) – Would have limited final compensation for PERS and STRS retirees.

12. Signed AB 2297 (Brownley) – Nonresident tuition AB 2385 (Perez) – Accelerated Nursing Pilot Project Vetoed AB 1413 (Fuentes) – Dream Act (without competitive grants) AB 2682 (Block) – Single Assessment SB 1460 (Cedillo) – Dream Act

13. Issues will be driven by Colleges, New Legislators and new Governor. Carol Liu likely Chair of Education or Education Budget Budget: At least 3 tough years maybe only growth High School Graduates Post-SB 361 discussions Fees/Financial aid Legislative: Student Success Accountability/Statewide Goals Technology/Efficiency Facilities/Procurement Dream Act