School facilities funding: high performance schools.
Summary
Existing law, the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 (the Greene Act) , requires the State Allocation Board to allocate to applicant school districts prescribed per-unhoused-pupil state funding for construction and modernization of school facilities, including hardship funding and supplemental funding for site development and acquisition and requires the board to adopt rules and regulations for the administration of the Greene Act. The Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006 (2006 bond act) sets aside $100,000,000 of the proceeds of the bonds sold under that act for incentive grants under the Greene Act to promote the use of design and materials in new construction and modernization projects that include the attributes of high performance schools. Existing law authorizes a grant for new construction to be used for the costs of design and materials that promote the efficient use of energy and water, the maximum use of natural lighting and indoor air quality, the use of recycled materials and materials that emit a minimum of toxic substances, the use of acoustics conducive to teaching and learning, and other characteristics of high performance schools. A school district is required to certify, as part of its application for funding under the Greene Act, that it has considered the feasibility of using these characteristics of high performance schools. This bill would increase the amount of a modernization grant by $250,000 per schoolsite and the amount of a new construction grant by $150,000 per schoolsite if a school district incorporates the use of high performance design and materials, and if the project is able to achieve one of 2 specified objectives. This increase would be provided from the $100,000,000 set aside for this purpose in the 2006 bond act. The bill would require the State Allocation Board to adopt, and the Office of Administrative Law to process, emergency regulations to implement these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Aug 2010
Senate Passage
Jun 2010
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 18, 2010
Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Jun 3, 2010
How they voted
27–4
Passed · 7 other
Total votes 38
Jun 3, 2010
D
Democratic25
96% Yea
R
Republican13
30% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
32
Key actions
8
Committee
6
Amendments
4
Aug 13, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee August 12.)
lower
Aug 13, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.)
lower
Aug 5, 2010
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Aug 2, 2010
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jul 6, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 30.)
lower
Jul 6, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 1.)
lower
Jun 3, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (27-4-7)
senate
May 28, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 3. Page 3673.)
upper
Apr 22, 2010
Upper · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Apr 20, 2010
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 19, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 3183.)
upper
Feb 18, 2010
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
0 primary · 2 co-sponsors
Sponsors
No sponsor information available.
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1193
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1193. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline