Skip to content
Printer-friendly version

2001 Vetoed K-12 Education Legislation


 

Bill Number Author                                          

Subject
Summary

Governor's Veto Message

AB 49 Washington                                     Date Vetoed: 10/07/01

Libraries
Existing law requires the State Librarian to employ a consultant to provide technical assistance to public libraries in the development and enhancement of library services to children and youth. This bill would establish the Youth Mentoring and Safe Communities Grant Program and would require the State Librarian to award grants on a competitive basis to qualified public libraries, as specified, for the purposes of implementing the program in the public libraries. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 49 without my signature.

This bill would establish the Youth Mentoring and Safe Communities Grant Program, which would provide grants to local public libraries for specified youth programs during non-school hours. I support mentoring, after-school, conflict resolution, and other programs dedicated to improving the lives of youth in California.

For this reason, I have provided substantial state funding in the 2001 Budget Act for various programs in these areas.  For example, the 2001 Budget Act includes $23.9 million for mentoring programs designed to assist at-risk youth to become productive members society and reduce juvenile crime, teenage pregnancy, gang association, and the high school dropout rate.  In addition, the Budget increased funding for the Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention Act from $71 million to more than $82 million. Moreover, the Budget contains nearly $53 million for the Public Library Foundation, which provides funding for local libraries to use in a wide variety of areas.

Consequently, based on the level of funding already available to other programs that provide a wide range of services to California youth, and because the state has experienced a $1.1 billion revenue shortfall in the first three months of this fiscal year, we unfortunately cannot afford to create a new program with $400,000 of additional costs no matter how worthy.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 50 Hertzberg                                    Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

Curriculum/Standards
Existing law, known as the Schiff-Bustamante Standards-Based Instructional Materials Program (program), until June 30, 2002, requires that the State Department of Education apportion funds to school districts on the basis of an equal amount per pupil enrolled in public elementary schools and high schools for the purpose of purchasing instructional materials for pupils in kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, that meet prescribed requirements. The program appropriates $250,000,000 to the Superintendent of Public Instruction for allocation to school districts for the purchase of standards-based instructional materials in each of the fiscal years from 1999-2000 to 2001-02, inclusive. This bill would appropriate $250,000,000 in each fiscal year after the 2001-02 fiscal year and make conforming changes. The bill would extend until June 30, 2006, the date until which the program would be operative and, as of January 1, 2007, would repeal the program, unless a later enacted statute deletes or extends those dates. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 50 without my signature.

This bill would extend the Schiff-Bustamante Standards-Based Instructional Materials Program (SBIM), thereby requiring an appropriation of $250 million annually (from 2002-03 through 2005-06) for the purchase of instructional materials in the following core areas: mathematics, language arts, history/social science, and science.  The original program provided $1 billion over four years in the four core areas, as specified.

Ensuring that students are provided the appropriate instructional materials is one of my highest priorities.  My administration has allocated $2.3 billion for books and instructional materials.  A good portion of that money has not yet been spent by school districts, in part because instructional materials for reading will not be approved by the State Board until next January.

Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Finally, I am committing to review the overall need for instructional materials and work on crafting a thoughtful process for providing funds that is more in line with the scheduled adoptions for the four core academic areas to meet the needs of school districts.  For these reasons, I cannot support this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 122 Leslie                                    Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

School Finance
Existing law makes a school district eligible to receive a supplemental apportionment for transportation if, among other things, the total cost per mile for the prior fiscal year for home-to-school transportation does not exceed the statewide average cost per mile, or if the total cost per mile for the prior fiscal year for home-to-school transportation exceeds the statewide average cost per mile, the school district demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Superintendent of Public Instruction that the increased cost per mile is due to either weather-related or terrain-related conditions. Under existing law, the Superintendent of Public Instruction is required to determine that the increased cost per mile is due to weather-related or terrain-related conditions if snow and ice create roadway and safety problems, 50% or more of publicly maintained roads in the school district are considered to be curves, or there are changes in elevation of 2,000 feet or more on publicly maintained roads in the school district. This bill would make a qualified school district, as defined, eligible to receive a supplemental apportionment from the State Department of Education, to the extent that funds are provided in the annual Budget Act, in an amount equal to 50% of the district's direct costs for snow removal, as defined, that is in excess of $10 per unit of average daily attendance, as reported on the second principal apportionment, on snow removal.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 122 without my signature.

This bill would provide a supplemental apportionment to qualifying school districts for snow removal costs and the costs to maintain snow removal equipment.  The supplemental funding would equal 50 percent of the districts costs in excess of $10 per unit of average daily attendance.

The 2001 Budget Act already provides funding to school districts for costs associated with removal activities.  In addition, a considerable portion of the funding provided to school districts each year is provided without strings attached and can be expended on any purpose deemed important by local officials.  The 2001 Budget Act provided over $26.6 billion to K-12 districts for discretionary purposes.  Moreover, our economy is rapidly declining with a revenue shortfall of $1.1 billion in the first three months of the fiscal year alone.  Therefore, I do not believe that the supplemental funding provided in this measure is warranted, and I must return this bill without my signature.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 148 Zettel                                   Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Ed Tech
Existing law, the Digital High School Education Technology Grant Act of 1977, provides one-time installation, and ongoing support and staff training, grants to school districts and county offices of education for projects at high schools. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to conduct a study and report to the Legislature regarding the most cost-effective means of providing Internet access in every middle or junior high school internet wiring. The bill would appropriate $145,000 to the superintendent for these purposes. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 148 without my signature.

This bill would have required a study to determine the cost and the most cost-effective means of providing Internet access to every middle and junior high school.  While I am most supportive of technology in schools, AB 148's study is duplicative of existing and very current information.

Last year, I authorized $2 million in the budget for the California Technology Assistance Project to conduct the 2001 School Technology Survey.  This very detailed survey was just completed in August and contains much of the information requested in the AB 148 study.

Further, the California Technology Assistance Project is currently examining how to connect schools to the Digital California Project as well as developing a Digital California Project instruction manual for schools.  These two it ems, alone or in concert, should be able to provide the information the author of AB 148 would like.

Moreover, we cannot afford anymore new General Fund spending since our economy is rapidly declining and revenues are running $1.1 billion below budget predictions in the first three months alone.

I applaud Assemblywoman Zettlel's intentions and am pleased that she shares my vision for bringing technology to our schools and to our students.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 177 Liu                                   Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
Under existing law, the principal of the school, the principal's designee, or the superintendent of schools may suspend a pupil from school for any of certain enumerated reasons. Existing law authorizes, in a case where expulsion from any school or suspension for the balance of the semester from continuation school is being processed by the governing board, the school district superintendent or other person designated by the superintendent to extend the suspension until the governing board has rendered a decision in the action. The bill would specifically authorize the school district superintendent or the superintendent's designee, if he or she chooses to extend the suspension, to address the academic needs of the pupil by transferring the pupil to an appropriate alternative school placement for remedial instruction or, to the extent feasible, providing access to instructional materials, assignments, and tests in classes in which the pupil is enrolled, and providing parental notification, as specified. The bill would, in addition to any other immunity that may exist, expressly deem any testimony provided by a pupil witness in an expulsion hearing conducted pursuant to those provisions to be a communication protected under specified provisions of law relating to official proceedings.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 177 without my signature.

This bill would authorize a school district superintendent or designee to address the academic needs of pupils suspended for more than five days.  In addition, the bill would require the superintendent or designee to inform the parent or guardian of the pupil's right to have his/her academic needs addressed along with options available to meet those needs.  Lastly, the bill would deem any testimony provided in an expulsion hearing to be privileged information pursuant to Civil Code provisions.

While the bill permits school districts to choose to address the academic needs of a student on extended suspension, it requires school districts to inform the parent of the pupil's right to have academic needs addressed.  This parental notification requirement, though laudatory, creates a state mandate of several million dollars.  Additionally, it is not clear to me that the vast majority of the school districts are not currently providing suspended students with academic material and course work when requested.  Further, I strongly support the provisions of the bill that modify the rights of witnesses in expulsion hearings that enhance the ability of expulsion proceedings witnesses to come forward without risk of retaliatory civil suits, and I would consider a bill accomplishing this purpose.

However, because AB 177 will result in several million dollars of mandated costs, I cannot support this measure.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 189 Migden                              Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

STRS/PERS
The Public Employees' Retirement Law prescribes a 2% at age 55, with a maximum of 2.5% at age 63, retirement formula for state miscellaneous and state industrial members employed by the state on or after January 1, 2000, and a 2% at age 60 retirement formula for all other state miscellaneous and state industrial members. This bill would instead prescribe a 2% at age 55, with a maximum of 2.7% at age 65, retirement formula for state miscellaneous and state industrial members who retire on or after January 1, 2002.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 189 without my signature.

This bill would provide an enhanced 2 percent at age 55 retirement benefit formula, with a maximum benefit factor of 2.7 percent at age 65, for active and inactive State miscellaneous and State industrial members of the California Public Employees' Retirement System.

This bill would result in annual costs of $119 million ($59.5 million General Fund) commencing in 2003-04. Moreover, retirement benefits for State employees are subject to collective bargaining and should be considered together with other compensation items in the collective bargaining process.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 230 Goldberg                         Date Vetoed: 07/30/01

School District Management Issues
Existing law requires the governing board of any school district or community college district that has not adopted the merit system for its classified employees to prescribe rules and regulations governing the personnel management of the classified service. This bill, instead, would provide that the governing board's determination of the sufficiency of the cause for disciplinary action is final. The bill would provide that nothing in these provisions is to be construed to prohibit the governing board, pursuant to the terms of an agreement with an employee organization reached pursuant to specified provisions of current law governing school employer-employee relations, from delegating its authority to determine whether there is sufficient cause for disciplinary action against classified employees, except peace officers, as defined, to binding or nonbinding arbitration. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 230 without my signature.

School district governing boards are given the responsibility to determine discipline for their classified employees and are held accountable for their actions.  Districts need to retain a wide range of authority in order to fully implement the state's accountability objectives.  Responsibilities should not be delegated to an outside arbitrator the local voters can not hold accountable. For these reasons, I am returning AB 230 without my signature.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 231 Nakano                                   Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Class-size Reduction
Existing law establishes the Class Size Reduction Program to provide funding to school districts to reduce class size in kindergarten and grades 1 to 3, inclusive, to not more than 20 pupils per certificated teacher. Existing law also establishes the Program to Reduce Class Size in Two Courses in Grade 9. This bill would, on a pilot project basis and until July 1, 2007, authorize the Torrance Unified School District and the Poway Unified School District to implement an alternative class size reduction program to reduce class size in kindergarten and grades 1 to 5, inclusive, to 23 pupils, with the exception that grades 4 and 5 in a participating school would be eligible if the total average enrollment in grades 4 and 5 in a participating school is not higher than 23.4, subject to an agreement with the exclusive representative for collective bargaining. The bill would appropriate $202,500 for the purposes of this bill: $200,000 to the Superintendent of Public Instruction to evaluate the pilot project and would require the evaluation to be submitted to the Legislature by July 1, 2006; and $2,500 to the State Department of Education for administrative costs appropriated with this bill. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 231 without my signature.

This bill would allow the Torrance Unified School District and the Poway Unified School District to enter into a 5-year pilot project to implement a class size reduction (CSR) program to reduce class size in kindergarten and grades 1-5, inclusive. It would also allow the average student to teacher ratio for the pilot project program participants to increase from 20:1 to 23:1.

The additional CSR program flexibility provided in this bill allowing the student teacher ratio for the pilot project to increase from 20:1 to 23:1 would conflict with my goal to ensure that classes in participating grades do not exceed 20:1.  All evidence to date showsthat class size reduction (20:1) is resulting in higher student achievement.

Also, given that some districts have not implemented, or fully implemented, the existing CSR program, I believe it would be more appropriate to continue to focus resources and efforts on the existing program. For these reasons, I am unable to sign the bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 272 Pavley                                   Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Teachers/Teacher Credentialing
Existing law authorizes the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to issue a multiple or single subject teaching credential to applicants who complete the requirements for that credential. Under existing law, a clear multiple or single subject teaching credential issued on or after September 1, 1985, is valid for the life of the holder if the holder completes, at 5-year intervals, a 150-hour individual program of professional growth. This bill would make certain clear multiple or single subject teaching credentials valid for the life of the holder if the holder renders successful service as a classroom teacher in the California public schools for 10 years, completes, after receiving a clear credential, 300 hours of professional growth, and certification by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 272 without my signature.

Teachers who earn certification by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards are among the most highly skilled members of their profession and we have compensated them with bonuses of at least $10,000 each.  However, I am unwilling to support legislation exempting them from completing 150 hours of professional development activities for the rest of their career.

Many Board-certified teachers will likely be called upon to serve as mentors to beginning teachers.  So they may properly discharge this important duty, I believe it is important that they annually participate in professional development activities that are aligned to state instructional standards.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 292 Strom-Martin                             Date Vetoed: 10/07/01

Teachers/Teacher Credentialing
Existing law requests the University of California, in partnership with the California State University and with private, independent universities in the state, to develop the California Professional Development Institutes, which include the California Reading Professional Development Institutes, the High School English Professional Development Institutes, the High School Mathematics Professional Development Institutes, the Algebra Academics Professional Development Institutes, the Algebra Professional Development Institutes, and the Elementary Mathematics Professional Development Institutes. Existing law requires the institutes to be offered on multiple university and college campuses widely distributed throughout the state or, with the exception of the Algebra Academics Professional Development Institutes, in a regionally accredited program offered through instructor-led interactive online courses. Existing law requires instruction at the California Professional Development Institutes to be supplemented, during the following school year, with additional hours of instruction and schoolsite meetings. This bill would require these institutes, with the exception of the Algebra Academics Professional Development Institutes, to be offered at sites that are widely distributed throughout the state, and thus would no longer require the institutes to be offered on university and college campuses. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 292 without my signature.

This bill requires that all Professional Development Institutes (PDI), with the exception of the Algebra Academies PDIs, be offered on sites that are widely distributed throughout the state, and are thus not offered solely on university and college campuses.  This bill appropriates $130,000 from the General Fund to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to reimburse school districts for the travel costs of the PDI participants.  This bill authorizes school districts to apply to the SPI for the reimbursement of the costs of reimbursing the PDI participants.  This bill authorizes the PDI participants to apply to their school districts of employment for the reimbursement of accommodation costs if their schools are at least 70 miles from and require over 1 ½ hours travel time to an institute site.

While I support widely distributing PDIs across the state, I cannot support an additional $800,000 in General Fund spending at this time. Our economy is rapidly declining and revenues have fallen $1.1 billion below expectation during the first three months of this fiscal year. Moreover, I signed SB 573 last year, which created opportunities for teachers who live far away from institute sites to receive training through on-line courses.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 295 Strom-Martin                             Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Accountability
Under existing law, the Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, is required to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), with prescribed elements, to be used to measure performance of schools, especially the academic performance of pupils, and to demonstrate comparable improvement in academic achievement of all numerically significant ethnic and socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroups within the schools. Existing law requires the API to incorporate pupil scores from certain tests, when available and when found to be valid and reliable for the purpose of measuring performance. This bill would also require the API to include scores on the English language development test. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 295 without my signature.

I am dedicated to the goal of improving pupil achievement in California.  Our current system of accountability, which is based on the API, is a powerful tool to achieve that goal.  I am pleased that test scores have risen three years in a row.  I am concerned that the changes to the API, as proposed in this bill, would hinder the ability to use the API score as a measure of academic performance and would therefore hinder the entire system of accountability.

Equally important, the bill includes state mandates conservatively in the hundreds of millions of dollars.  Given our rapidly declining economy and a budget shortfall of at least $1.1 billion in the first three months alone, we cannot afford additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 316 Salinas                                   Date Vetoed: 10/02/01

Parental Involvement
Existing law establishes various programs to encourage the participation of parents and guardians in their child's or children's schools. This bill would, until January 1, 2004, require the State Department of Education to provide grants to school districts for schools selected by the department, according to specified criteria, for the purpose of holding one parental involvement event, as defined, on a day during the weekend. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 316 without my signature.

This bill would create a pilot grant program through January 2004 to fund one weekend parental involvement activity in each participating elementary school, subject to funds being appropriated in the Annual Budget Act or other measure, and would require the participating school to submit a self-evaluation to the Department of Education (CDE) by May 1, 2003. This bill would also limit the grant amount to be appropriated for this purpose to $150,000 in any fiscal year and would require the CDE to  compile the information and provide it to the Legislature by July 1, 2003. This bill would create a new pilot program, for which no funding is appropriated in the Budget Act of 2001.  I am a great proponent of greater parental involvement in educational activities and have signed three bills that provide $15 million to support more parental involvement programs.  These funds are in the 2001 Budget.  If this pilot program, worthy though it may be, was extended statewide it would require an additional $132 million.  Given our rapidly declining economy there are no resou rces to support this program. For these reasons, I cannot support the bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 348 Wright                                   Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Career/TechEd
Existing law sets forth the required course of study for schools maintaining grades 7 to 12, inclusive, including, but not limited to, courses in vocational-technical education. This bill would provide that the term 'vocational-technical education' shall have the same meaning as 'career technical education' and provide that the vocational-technical education course requirements shall be fulfilled by career technical education courses. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 348 without my signature.

This bill would make various changes regarding curriculum, model academicstandards, and the attributes of career technical education courses within grades 7 through 12.  These changes include revising the process by which the Superintendent of Public Instruction develops and the State Board of Education adopts curriculum standards, requiring development of model curriculum standards by May 1, 2003 for career technical education courses, and requiring CSU, as well as requesting UC, to develop model academic standards and a high school accreditation process related to recognizing career technical education as university preparation.  The bill states it is the intent of the Legislature to appropriate funds for this purpose in the 2001-02 Budget Act.

I am supportive of improving career technical education, as evidenced by the $5.5 million included in the 2001-02 budget for this purpose.  I am also supportive of the concept of having a role for employers and stakeholders in developing the model curriculum standards.  However, the funds appropriated in the 2001-02 Budget Act could not be used by the Department of Education to develop the model curriculum because they are only available for allocation to local education agencies.  As a consequence, this bill would impose new General Fund costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars on the Department of Education.  I am also concerned that this bill may have the potential for significant local assistance cost pressures by compelling districts to change curriculum to meet new requirements of the postsecondary institutions.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 million through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 367 Migden                                   Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

Physical Education
(1) Under existing law, the State Department of Education is required to exercise general supervision over the courses of physical education in elementary and secondary schools of the state, and to perform other duties related to physical education in the schools. Under existing law, those provisions remain in effect until January 1, 2002, and as of that date would be repealed. This bill would impose new duties on the department regarding physical education, including, among others, that the department would be required to issue a notice of noncompliance to each school district that fails to comply with certain requirements, including among others, requirements regarding the number of hours of physical instruction offered to pupils in grades 1 to 12, inclusive. The bill would also extend the operation of those provisions until January 1, 2007. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 367 without my signature.

This bill would require school district governing boards to submit physical performance test results in writing to the parent or guardian of a student in grades 5, 7, and 9; require K-8 schools to double the physical education requirement for 7th and 8th grade students; require the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop curriculum content standards for school district physical education and ensure that districts are in compliance with statutory physical education requirements; and extend the sunset date for CDE's oversight of physical education from January 1, 2002 to January 1, 2007.

This bill would impose significant state-mandated costs upon school district governing boards by requiring school districts to report school physical fitness test results, in writing, to each pupil's parent or guardian.  This bill's mandated reporting requirement would be reimbursable, resulting in General Fund costs in the millions of dollars.  More significantly, the requirement to increase by 50% physical education time would result in additional costs of approximately $300 million annually. Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

I agree with the intent of this legislation to encourage a higher level of physical fitness in our state's youth and I support the extension of CDE's oversight of physical education until January 1, 2007.  However, I do not believe that increasing reporting requirements of local school districts is the proper way to improve student fitness.  I would consider legislation that meets the goal of increasing students' physical fitness without mandating additional requirements on school districts.

For these reasons,I cannot support AB 367.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 504 Havice                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

School Facilities
Existing law sets forth certain requirements for the construction and siting of school facilities, including, but not limited to, the requirement that plans and specifications for any school building, as defined, be submitted to the Department of General Services for approval. This bill would require, in the development and approval of the plans, that consideration be given to pupil and faculty safety regarding the placement, design, or adequacy of school building features, components, fixtures, and accessories.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 504 without my signature.

This bill requires that when local school districts and the State Allocation Board develop and approve plans for "cookie cutter" schools that consideration be given to pupil and faculty safety.  This consideration would include the placement, design or adequacy of school features, as it pertains to the siting of schools, traffic patterns, ingress and egress of pupils, and security devices, including alarms and other electronic safety devices.

I believe existing law places the highest priority on student safety and security starting with The Field Act of 1933.  All plans utilizing school bond funds must be approved by the State Architect for compliance with the Field Act along with fire, life and safety issues.  The Department of Education reviews school plans for siting issues, traffic patterns, and ingress and egress compliance.  The State and local Fire Marshals approve fire safety issues and emergency access issues.  The Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention Act provides funds for school communication systems and finally the Department of Toxics must review and approve schools plans relating to toxic and other environmental safety issues. This year, I signed Senate Bill 575 (O'Connell) an important safety measure that requires automatic fire sprinklers in public school classrooms.

In addition to laws that insure the safe construction and operation of our schools, California has numerous student safety measures in place such as the School Safety and Violence Prevention Act, the School Law Enforcement Partnership, the Safe School Plan Implementation Grants, the Safe and Drug Free Schools program and the Communities Act Safety Plans for New Schools as well as dozens of state regulations.

I am a longstanding advocate of safe design, construction and operation of schools and student security. However, given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I cannot support additional General Fund spending on a measure that is covered under existing law.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 508 Pavley                                   Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Categorical Programs
Existing law requires the Scholarshare Investment board to administer the Governor's Scholarship Programs. Existing law, within the Governor's Scholarship Programs, establishes the Governor's Scholars Program, under which a $1,000 scholarship is awarded to each public high school pupil who demonstrates high academic achievement on certain tests. Existing law, the Budget Act of 2001, appropriated $18,000,000 for local assistance of the Governor's Scholarship Programs. This bill would, notwithstanding any other provision, for purposes of providing the scholarship made available by those provisions, based on the spring 2000 administration of certain achievement tests, for public high school pupils who were in grade 11 for that test administration, require any pupil who was deemed not to be a Governor' s Scholar because the comprehensive high school that the pupil attended administered the nationally normed achievement test adopted by the State Board of Education, but did not administer the mathematics portion of the achievement test that was augmented and aligned with state academic content standards, as required by specified provisions, to be provided a scholarship of $1,000 pursuant to the Governor's Scholars Program. This bill would require funding to be allocated for purposes of the scholarships from the funding appropriated for the Governor's Scholarship Programs, as described.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 508 without my signature.

This bill would require that 11th grade high school students that met all requirements for receiving a Governor's Scholars Award based on the 2000 administration of the achievement test authorized by Education Code Section 60640, except for the requirement to take the standards-based math portion of the required achievement test, be provided an award from funds appropriated by Item 0954-101-0001 of the 2001 Budget Act.

While I am very sympathetic for students whose schools did not correctly administer the standards-based portion of the STAR exam, I do not believe that all taxpayers should be required to pay for the mistakes of a few school administrators.  I recommend that those schools that made mistakes make efforts to resolve them themselves rather than request that taxpayers pay for the cost of their errors.

In addition, this bill would create a precedent to provide additional exemptions for other students for other reasons.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 698 Wesson                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

General Government
Existing law establishes the Attorney General as the head of the Department of Justice and authorizes him or her, as the state's attorney, to take charge of all legal matters in which the State of California is interested and of those boards or officers as are authorized by law to employ attorneys, except as specified. This bill would create the Office of Immigrant Assistance in the office of the Attorney General to provide education and outreach services, as defined, to the resident immigrant community of the state. The bill would also require that the information developed for these purposes be printed or broadcast in any language deemed necessary to reach immigrant communities.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 698 without my signature.

This bill would create the Office of Immigrant Assistance (OIA) in the Office of the Attorney General.  The Attorney General has already created such an office.  Therefore, this bill is duplicative.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 745 Cox                                   Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

School Finance
(1) Existing law establishes the 7-member Commission on State Mandates. Under existing law, 2 of the 7 members appointed by the Governor are to be from 3 categories representing the governing entity of a city, county or city and county, or school district. Existing law provides that a commission member is to receive a per diem of $100 for each day actually spent, and be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred, in the discharge of official duties. This bill would provide for the appointment of an alternate member who would be required to attend all commission meetings as a nonvoting member and the alternate member would be required to vote as a member if either of the regular members representing local government is absent or does not vote or if the position of a regular member representing local government is vacant. The bill would extend the reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses and the per diem to an alternate commission member. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 745 without my signature.

This bill would (1) add an alternate public member to the Commission on State Mandates, (2) limit the Commission from representing itself in court actions, (3) extend the time period by which local government agencies and school districts can file a claim for reimbursement, (4) reduce the time period by which the State Controller's Office can audit a claim, (5) change the way claims are reimbursed through the State Mandates Claims Fund, and (6) change the way claims are removed from the State Mandates Apportionment System.

I believe that  the existing timeframes for filing reimbursement claims with the state are quite generous and provide sufficient opportunity for local entities to submit reimbursement claims, therefore the changes proposed by this bill are unnecessary.  In addition, by restricting the time period for the State Controller's Office to audit claims, this bill exposes the state to higher mandate claim costs.  Further, while the state is required to reimburse local entities for costs mandated by the state, it should not be the State's responsibility to monitor the submission of claims by local governments and school districts to ensure claims are filed by the statutory timeframes.  Accordingly, I am returning AB 745 without my signature.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 769 Goldberg                                   Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Career/TechEd
Existing law authorizes a local partnership that is designed to deliver specified school-to-career programs to apply for grants to be used to perform the critical functions of convening, connecting, measuring, and brokering specific services that serve to build a locally defined system that provides the connections between educators, employers, local government, and the community to improve public education for all pupils in a defined geographic area. Existing law authorizes the use of these grants to, in part, match pupils with work-based opportunities, provide technical assistance to help employers and educators design comprehensive school-to-career systems, provide technical assistance to help teachers integrate school- and work-based learning as well as academic and occupational subject matter, and encourage active business involvement in school- and work-based activities. Existing law requires the county superintendent of schools, the local community college districts, the local school districts that provide adult education, and the directors of other job training programs in the county to develop a plan by March 31, 1998, that provides for instructional and job training services to CalWORKS recipients within that county. This bill would establish the School-To-Career Technology Training Center Program to authorize eligible coalitions, as defined, to establish school-to-career technology training centers. The bill would authorize a participating coalition to determine the scope and purpose of its training center with input from local area industry groups, parents, and local community centers. The bill would require participating school districts with a high school or county office of education to authorize individuals participating in CalWORKs and welfare-to-work programs to utilize the school-to-career technology training centers on weekdays after normal school hours and would require the centers to provide instruction a minimum of 4 hours each workday. The bill would authorize participating high schools to work together in a prescribed manner that would enable a pupil to transfer to any of those high schools for a specific program. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 69 without my signature.

This bill would allow specific governmental entities in Los Angeles County, which are currently Southern California Edison customers, to enter into direct-access electricity contracts with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

Last June, approximately two percent of the customer load in the territory served by the three investor-owned utilities (IOUs) were receiving power from direct access providers. The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) recently suspended direct access, but the percentage of load subject to direct access transactions grew to as much as 13 percent or more prior to the suspension. That growth creates a significant and unfair cost burden for those customers who continue to receive power from the IOUs and the Department of Water Resources.

This rapid growth in direct access necessitates more concise cost-containment provisions for the remaining IOU customers than those contained in this bill, and those provisions should apply to all direct access contracts.

Moreover, this bill does not clearly authorize fees to cover costs that may result when direct access customers return to service with an IOU, which would create new and unanticipated procurement obligations for the IOU. Those new procurement obligations could come about solely because the direct access provider no longer chooses to provide service to its customers because of rising electricity costs, and instead passes that burden on to the IOU and its customers.

Any efforts to allow direct access must be equitable for all stakeholders.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 801 Salinas                                   Date Vetoed: 10/04/01

Child Nutrition
Under existing law, the Secretary of Food and Agriculture is authorized to foster the marketing and distribution of agricultural products. This bill, the Choose California Act, would require that all California state owned or state run institutions purchase agricultural products grown in California before those that are grown outside the state as long as specified criteria are met regarding the price of bids for in-state products. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 801 without my signature.

This bill requires that all state-owned or state-run institutions to purchase California grown fruit and produce before considering the purchase of produce grown outside of the state.  Unfortunately, the 5% preferential allowance contained in the bill could result in significant costs to state and local governments and may also invite retaliatory actions by our domestic trading partners.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three month s of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

I believe strongly in the goal of promoting California products. This year, I initiated a 'Buy California' program, agreed to by the Legislature, which appropriated $5 million to encourage consumer nutritional and food awareness and to foster purchases of high-quality California agricultural products.  California received an additional $12 million from the federal government to assist this program.  Coupled with in-kind contributions from the agricultural industry, I believe this approach is a  more effective means of encouraging Californians to increase their consumption and purchase of California produce.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 833 Steinberg                                   Date Vetoed: 10/05/01

Teachers/Teacher Credentialing
Existing law authorizes a teacher who is authorized for single subject instruction to be assigned, with his or her consent, to teach any subject in his or her authorized fields at any grade level. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, to develop a teacher qualification index for each public school, to measure the distribution of teachers within school districts across the state and to assign a rating that will demonstrate comparable improvement in the assignment of credentialed teachers and underqualified teachers in each public school. The teacher qualification index would consist of a variety of indicators currently reported to the State Department of Education on the California Basic Educational Data System and any other indicators collected from other widely accessible databases that are valid and reliable. The bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to publish annually, on the Internet, a report on the teacher qualification index. The bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish a broadly representative and diverse advisory committee, to develop the teacher qualification index and advise the Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of Education on matters relative to the creation of the teacher qualification index.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 833 without my signature.

Reducing the number of underqualified teachers in low-performing schools is a task upon which I place great importance, and I note that the 2001 Budget Act contains over $160 million for programs to address this issue.

Unfortunately, given our rapidly declining economy with a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion for the first three months if the fiscal year, we cannot afford new General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 852 Maldonado                                Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Transportation
(1) Existing law requires the State Board of Education to adopt regulations to require a passenger in a schoolbus equipped with passenger restraint systems, as specified, to use a passenger restraint system so that the passenger is properly restrained. This bill would apply these provisions to type 1 and type 2 school pupil activity buses. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 852 without my signature.

This bill would impose specific passenger restraint standards to school pupil activity buses (SPABs).  Similar standards are already required for school buses.  However, the school bus standards are intended to reflect the findings of a study being completed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).  This study focuses on the installation of restraint systems and the safety of school bus passengers, not SPABs.

I signed SB 568 (Morrow) which delays implementation of A 15 (Gallegos) pending completion of the NHTSA study.  Thus, this legislation is also premature. 

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 855 Dutra                                    Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Special Education
Existing law establishes the California School for the Deaf and the California School for the Blind, known as the state special schools. Existing law also authorizes the Director of Corrections to establish and maintain classes for inmates by utilizing personnel of the Department of Corrections, or by entering into an agreement with the governing board of a school district or private school or the governing boards of school districts under which the district maintains classes, for those inmates. Existing law establishes, within the Department of the Youth Authority, a correctional education authority for the purpose of carrying out the education and training of wards committed to the youth authority, and prescribes the course of study for those wards. This bill would require salaries paid to teachers, teacher specialists, and administrators, as defined, employed by state special schools, the State Department of Mental Health, the State Department of Developmental Services, the Department of Rehabilitation, a school district to teach in certain diagnostic centers, the Director of Corrections to teach those classes, or by the correctional education authority within the Department of the Youth Authority, to be no less than the salaries of other public school teachers, teacher specialists, and administrators employed by school districts, as specified. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 855 without my signature.

This bill would require that State teacher salaries be established based upon local school district teacher salaries. By mandating that State salaries be based upon salaries established by local school districts, the fiscal controls currently exercised by the Legislature and the Governor would be removed.

I have instructed DPA to make an offer to increase the salaries of teachers at the schools for the deaf and blind and to any others DPA may deem appropriate.

Thus, this legislation is not necessary.  Moreover, the matter of determining State teacher pay is best determined through the normal collective bargaining process.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 916 Keeley                                    Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Pregnant/Parenting Teens
Existing law requires every school district to ensure that all pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, or the equivalent thereof, receive AIDS prevention instruction, including instruction regarding the human immunodeficiency virus, unless the parent or guardian of the child requests otherwise. This bill would expand this requirement to include instruction in the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To the Members of the California Legislature:

I am returning Assembly Bill 916 without my signature.

This bill would expand the scope of currently mandated AIDS prevention instruction to include instruction in the prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), thereby increasing the cost of an existing state-mandated program.

On the merits, I agree with greater inclusion of STI prevention information in the course curriculum.  However, the vast majority of voluntary sex education instruction offered by school districts in the state already includes information on STIs.   Imposing specific requirements for instruction would create a state-mandated program of $3.1 million General Fund and require the state to pay even if a school district is already voluntarily providing such instruction.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 932 Migden                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
Existing law provides training and treatment toward the correction and rehabilitation of young persons who have committed public offenses. This bill would establish the Youth Leadership Through Education and Crime Prevention Pilot Program. The purpose of this program would be to provide greater opportunities for young people from disadvantaged circumstances to realize their full potential as productive, responsible citizens and to help maintain safe neighborhoods. The program would serve applicants from nonprofit youth serving agencies in 3 specified counties that, among other things, would work in collaboration with law enforcement to help reduce youth crime, violence, and drug use. The bill would require applicants to meet specified criteria and would require the Department of Justice to select applicants to participate in the program based on those criteria. The bill would appropriate $1,500,000 from the General Fund to the Department of Justice for the program. This bill would also require agencies receiving funds appropriated for this program to match the funds as specified. This bill would also limit local administrative costs associated with this program. The bill would require the Attorney General to evaluate programs funded under its provisions, and to report his or her findings to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2003, and annually thereafter. This bill contains other existing laws.

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill No. 932 without my signature.

This bill would establish the Youth Leadership Through Education and Crime Prevention Pilot Program.  The program would provide greater opportunities for young people from disadvantaged circumstances to meet their potential while working in collaboration with law enforcement to reduce youth crime, violence, and drug use.

Although I fully support the goals of this program, given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.  I believe this program can be implemented through the use of federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funds.

Therefore, I am returning this bill without my signature and directing the Employment Development Department to work with the author to use the Governor's Workforce Investment Act Discretionary funds to develop proposals to address the purpose of this measure.  Additionally, I have also provided $121 million in the 2001 Budget Act for juvenile crime prevention programs that can be used for future funding of these programs.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1030 Pacheco, Rod                     Date Vetoed: 09/24/01

Child Health
Existing law requires the State Department of Education to encourage and assist school districts to improve and monitor the health of their pupils. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, in consultation with the State Department of Health Services, to conduct a study of school districts throughout the state to examine the lack of pupil locker space on school campuses, the weight of hardcover textbooks, and any correlation between school pupils carrying heavy instructional materials in backpacks and spinal damage. The bill would require the results of the study with recommendations to be reported to the Legislature by January 1, 2003. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1030 without my signature.

This bill would appropriate $140,000 and require the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in consultation with the Department of Health Services, to contract with a non-profit organization to onduct a study that would examine the lack of pupil school locker pace, the weight of students' textbooks, and possible alternatives o students carrying heavy backpacks.  The study would also examine ce correlation between students' use of heavy backpacks and spinal amage, and the SPI would be required to report the study's findings o the Legislature by January 1, 2003.

While I am concerned with potential student health problems, there does not appear to be any documentation of long term problems caused by the use of backpacks.  Medical experts advise that the incidence of any back, neck and shoulder pain can be minimized through use of a well padded, adjustable back pack worn correctly to distribute the weight evenly.   It is more appropriate that parents and local communities determine whether this is an issue of concern and work with local school districts for solutions.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1061 Dickerson                                Date Vetoed: 10/02/01

Child Health
Existing law provides that any pupil who is required to take, during the regular schoolday, medication prescribed by a physician, may be assisted by the school nurse or other designated school personnel if the school district receives certain written statements from the physician and the parent or guardian of the pupil. This bill would authorize designated school personnel, during the regular schoolday, to assist a pupil to take or apply medication for which a prescription is not required if the school district receives a written statement from the parent or guardian of the pupil indicating the desire of the parent or guardian that the pupil be allowed to take or apply the medication. The bill would provide that the medication may only be taken or applied in accordance with the original package instructions. The bill would provide that the school personnel contact the pupil's parent or guardian and the school nurse if they decide not to assist the pupil with the medication. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1061 without my signature.

This bill authorizes school personnel to assist students with non-prescription medication, provided written permission from the student's parent or guardian is on file.

The language in this bill, however, could be interpreted to impose reimbursable state-mandated requirements on schools which could reach $40 million annually.  I would consider signing a similar bill if its provisions were clearly permissive in nature rather than mandatory.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1073 Wesson                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Adult Education
This bill would permit increases in funding for classes in domestic violence prevention and substance abuse prevention for adults in correctional facilities offered by school districts and county boards of education to increase at a rate of 5% per fiscal year for fiscal years 2002-03 to 2005-06, inclusive, unless the Legislature requires a lesser increase for a fiscal year in the annual Budget Act thereby making an appropriation by removing a restriction on an expenditure of money under an existing appropriation. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1073 without my signature.

This bill would allow Adult Education in Correctional Facilities programs to increase their Average Daily Attendance (ADA) by up to 5.0 percent above the current statutory increase of 2.5 percent from 2002-03 to 2005-06, inclusive, if the increase is a result of an increase in the number of courses in the prevention of domestic violence and substance abuse.  Programs that receive this proposed increase would be required to maintain, for three years, records on inmate enrollment in these courses and completion rates.

I support the Adult Education in Correctional Facilities Program and the services they provide to help reduce recidivism.  This bill would triple the statutory growth in funding from 2.5 to 7.5 percent.  Given our declining economy and the loss of $1.1 billion in revenues in the first 3 months of the fiscal year alone, we cannot commit to such an increase.  In fact, I recently asked all of my departments outside of law enforcement to prepare budget cuts of 15 percent.  Finally, if these classes have demonstrated their effectiveness in reducing recidivism, I would expect correctional facilities to provide these classes on a priority basis from within existing resources.

For these reasons, I cannot support this measure.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1110 Pescetti                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Employment Issues
Existing law, known as the State Civil Service Act, provides that absence without leave for 5 consecutive working days is an automatic resignation from state service, as of the last date on which the employee worked. The act provides a procedure for a permanent or probationary state employee to seek reinstatement and the employing department to grant reinstatement. The act further provides that an employee who is reinstated shall not be paid salary for the period of his or her absence or separation or any portion thereof. The bill would extend from 15 days to 30 days the time by which an employee who is separated from state service pursuant to this provision and is so notified by his or her appointing power may file for reinstatement. The bill would also provide that an employee who is absent without leave, but who is reinstated pursuant to existing law would be paid salary and have his or her benefits restored for the period of time between the date the employee has filed a written request for reinstatement and the date of reinstatement. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1110 without my signature.

This bill would extend the time period from 15 to 30 days during which a State employee absent without approved leave (AWOL) can file a request for reinstatement, provide that an AWOL State employee subsequently reinstated would receive back pay and benefits from the date of appeal to the date of reinstatement, and expand the authority of the Department of Personnel Administration to set aside an AWOL separation based on fraud, discrimination, or bad faith.

This bill would result in interminable costs to the State as result of awarding a reinstated employee back pay and benefits from the date of appeal to the date of reinstatement.  Additionally, this bill would encourage appeals by separated employees and extend to them benefits not provided employees, who report to work, absent an excused period leave.  Finally, this bill is unnecessary since the existing 15 day period affords AWOL State employees sufficient opportunity to request reinstatement.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1132 Canciamilla                            Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Charter Schools
(1) Existing law authorizes the revenue limit of any county superintendent of schools or elementary, high, or unified school district to be annually adjusted by an amount sufficient to provide additional revenue needed for unemployment insurance. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to annually compute the statewide average amount of general-purpose funding for school districts. Existing law requires the superintendent to calculate the general-purpose entitlement funds of a charter school, which is funded pursuant to a charter school block grant, based on that computation. This bill would provide that expenditures for school employees of charter schools that are funded pursuant to a charter school block grant are excluded from the adjustment calculations pertaining to unemployment insurance. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1132 without my signature.

This bill would clarify the conditions under which a charter school can claim supplemental instruction funding and make other changes relative to charter school funding.  This bill would also codify elimination of the deficit factor for revenue limits.

This bill's provisions concerning supplemental instruction funding for charter schools are an abrupt change from the current system of funding.  These provisions lack accountability and present a real opportunity for fraud or abuse.  Other provisions of this bill, while desirable, do not outweigh these risks.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1191 Longville                                  Date Vetoed: 10/09/01

Special Education
Under existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the State Department of Developmental Services is authorized to contract with regional centers to provide support and services to individuals with developmental disabilities. The regional centers purchase needed services for individuals with developmental disabilities through approved service providers or arrange for their provision through other publicly funded agencies. This bill, until January 1, 2005, would establish procedures for the resolution of disputes between a regional center and any publicly funded agency, as defined, over provision of, or payment for, services that are contained in an individualized family service plan or individualized program plan for any child under 6 years of age.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1191 without my signature.

While this bill would provide for a process to resolve disputes between agencies regarding responsibility for payment of required services for developmentally disabled children ages 0-6, it would indirectly create new costs for greater participation by publicly funded agencies in the service planning process.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General F und spending of at least $7 million annually.

However, I am directing the Health and Human Services Agency to bring the affected State agencies together to prepare a dispute resolution proposal that will not create pressure on the General Fund.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1213 Liu                                    Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Transportation
Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to apportion funds for transportation services based on prescribed formulas. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish the Pupil Transportation Task Force to, in part, review the strengths and limitations of the present pupil transportation system, assess the availability and accessibility of the data needed to create and implement a new pupil transportation funding formula, develop a comprehensive work plan that describes the specific steps required to design, review, and test a new pupil transportation funding formula, and create and submit a report on its findings and recommendations by January 1, 2003, to the Governor and the Legislature. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1213 without my signature.

This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish a Pupil Transportation Task Force to define requirements for a new pupil transportation funding formula that would optimize the distribution and use of funds for pupil transportation services by school districts.

This bill would also divert funding from the Home-to-School Transportation program to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, thus reducing the amount of funding available for local districts to spend on local transportation needs.  Additionally, the diversion of the $140,000 violates the intent of Proposition 98 since it would use local assistance funds to pay for a state operations program that is not instructional in nature.  For these reasons, I am unable to support this measure.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1341 Wiggins                                   Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Career/TechEd
Existing law provides authorized classes and courses of study for high school. This bill would require the State Department of Education to collect specified information from all public high schools on existing academic and career-related curriculum for the purposes of establishing a clearinghouse of information on academic and career-related curriculum. The bill would require the department to send an announcement to all school districts and post a message on its Internet website by September 30, 2002, stating that the information is available upon request. The bill would require the department to make the information available on the department's Internet website to interested school districts, schools, regional occupational centers and programs, and local school-to-career partnerships to assist in the development of career technical education or vocational education courses, career pathways, and career academies.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1341 without my signature.

This bill would require the State Department of Education (SDE) to collect information regarding academic or career-related curricula from all high schools in California and make that information available on the Department of Education website.

While I am supportive of the idea of a website describing the best Practices for integrated career-related curricula, schools could work voluntarily with the SDE to host such information.  The data collection requirements established this bill would result in a significant State-reimbursable mandate of over $20 million Proposition 98 General Fund.  Additionally, existing law requires schools to make available to parents, every year, a prospectus including the curriculum, title, description, and instructional aim of every course offered by the school.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year along, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1431 Horton                                    Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

Teachers/Teacher Credentialing
Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from initially hiring on a permanent, temporary, or substitute basis a certificated person seeking employment in the capacity designated in his or her credential unless that person has demonstrated basic skills proficiency or unless the person is exempted from this requirement. Existing law establishes the Marian Bergeson Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment System to provide an effective transition into the teacher career for first-year and second-year teachers and to ensure that a support provider provides intensive individualized support and assistance to each participating beginning teacher. Existing law provides various opportunities for a teacher to receive staff development or in-service training, including the Instructional Time and Staff Development Reform Program which provides an eligible school district with a staff development allowance of $270 for up to 3 days for each certificated classroom teacher who participates in staff development instructional methods.  This bill would, commencing with the 2002-03 school year, require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to award, on a competitive basis, a minimum of 3 grants for the purpose of establishing a new substitute teacher training pilot project whereby each new substitute teacher, who will provide services in low-performing schools, would be provided with a minimum of 3 days of training before the teacher begins to provide services as a substitute teacher. The bill would impose a state-mandated local program by requiring the Los Angeles Unified School District to be one of the districts selected for participation in the pilot project. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1431 without my signature.

This bill would appropriate $305,000 General Fund to establish a minimum of three district-based programs to provide professional development services to substitute teachers assigned to low-performing schools.

The role of substitute teachers in public education is important. However, I believe it is essential that State resources be concentrated on providing professional development services to permanent instructional staff, many of whom have not yet had an opportunity to participate in existing professional development programs. Until this goal is achieved, I do not believe it would be prudent to implement new professional development programs that are geared only toward substitute teachers.

Additionally, by requiring the Los Angeles Unified School District to participate in this program, this bill would create a reimbursable State mandate, resulting in significant General Fund costs of another one million.  Finally, given our rapidly declining economy with state revenues falling $1.1 billion below expectations in the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I am unable to sign this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1536 Cardenas                               Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
Existing law provides for making habitually truant minors a ward of the juvenile court. This bill would provide that, as a pilot project, one division of the juvenile court in Los Angeles County selected by the Judicial Council shall be devoted solely to issues involving truancy, to be known as the 'truancy court,' which would have jurisdiction over the parents or guardians of a truant, as well as the truant, but shall exercise such jurisdiction only upon referral by specified agencies. The bill would also specify the staff of the truancy court, provide that hearings of the truancy court be conducted throughout Los Angeles County, provide for the coordination of the pilot project by the Los Angeles Countywide Justice Coordinating Council, and provide for the repeal of the pilot project on January 1, 2004. The bill would require the Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles Superior Court to prepare and submit a specified evaluation of the pilot project to the Legislature by April 15, 2004. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1536 without my signature.

This bill would appropriate $750,000 from the General Fund to create a truancy court pilot project in Los Angeles County.  Also, the Judicial Council estimates fifteen new positions and another $1.5 million to administer the programs.

Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.  It is possible however this program could be funded in part from the $121 million in Juvenile Justice Prevention funds.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1554 Hertzberg                                 Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Employment Issues
Existing law provides that the state's contribution for employee health benefits is determined by the Department of Personnel Administration, with respect to excluded employees, as defined, or through the collective bargaining process, with respect to represented state employees, subject to the appropriation of funds by the Legislature in the Budget Act. This bill would repeal that provision and, as a result, the state' s contribution for health benefits with respect to state employees would be adjusted by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act according to the formula contained in existing law that is currently applicable to annuitants and survivors. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1554 without my signature.

This bill, an urgency measure, would provide State employees with an employer-paid health benefits contribution establishment by the 100/90 Formula, which uses a weighted average of the four health plans with the highest enrollment to determine the employer's maximum monthly contribution for health benefits.

This bill would result in increased costs to the State of $66.2 million ($33.1 million General Fund) for State employees in 2001-02 and ($98.4 million General Fund) for State employees in 2002-03 and annually thereafter.  This bill would circumvent the collective bargaining process for represented employees and would supersede the Department of Personnel Administration's authority to determine the State's maximum monthly contribution for health benefits for State employees excluded from the collective bargaining process.

All compensation issues should be resolved through the collective bargaining process, not through piecemeal legislation.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1617 Washington                             Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

Counseling /Guidance
Existing law requires the governing board of each school district maintaining high schools and accepting certain funds to establish and maintain a program that ensures that each pupil upon reaching the age of 16 or prior to the end of the 10th grade, whichever is first, has received a systematic review of his or her academic progress and counseling regarding the educational options available to the pupil during the final 2 years of high school. Existing law requires the program to be adopted at a public meeting of the governing board and to include specified provisions. Existing law requires, out of funds appropriated for the program, the Superintendent of Public Instruction to apportion $20 per prior year's enrollment in grade 10 to the district. This bill would also authorize a county office of education maintaining high schools to accept funds and maintain this program. The bill would require the program to ensure that each pupil receive his or her systematic review and counseling no later than the end of the 10th grade. The bill would require additional provisions to be included in the program. The bill would increase the apportionment of appropriated funds to $50 per prior year's enrollment in grade 10 to the districts and county offices of education.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1617 without my signature.

This bill would expand the Tenth Grade Counseling Program to include County Offices of Education, would increase the program's per-student reimbursements, and would require that the program's counseling sessions include discussions of the High School Exit Exam.

While I support the provision of information and academic counseling to high school students as they work towards graduation, I am concerned that this bill would more than double the ongoing General Fund cost of the Tenth Grade Counseling Program and result in increased costs of $11 million annually.

Given our rapidly declining economy, with state revenues falling $1.1 billion below expectations in the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I cannot support this measure.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1626 Pescetti                                  Date Vetoed: 10/03/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
Existing law establishes the School Violence Prevention and Response Task Force and requires the task force to perform various duties, including, among others, analyzing and evaluating current statutes and programs in the area of school-based crisis prevention and response and making appropriate policy recommendations on how to enhance state and local programs and training to adequately prepare school districts and county offices of education to meet the challenges stemming from disruptive and violent acts, or both, on or near school campuses. This bill would establish the California Safe Alternatives and Violence Education (SAVE) Program to provide nonpunitive intervention for adolescent first-time offenders, ages 10 to 17, inclusive, who have been involved in violence or weapons possession on or near a school campus. The bill would require that the program be administered by the Attorney General, subject to funding being appropriated for its purpose. The bill would require the Attorney General to establish 2 programs in Sacramento County and the City of San Jose. The bill would require the program to be a voluntary collaborative effort between probation departments, other local law enforcement agencies, and local education entities. The bill would require the programs to offer specified services and would require that program participants be referred to the program by schools, probation departments, courts, and law enforcement agencies according to specified criteria. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1626 without my signature.

This bill would appropriate $400,000 from the General Fund to the Office of Attorney General to fund two existing sites for the 'California Safe Alternatives and Violence Education Pilot Program' (Project S.A.V.E.).

This is an excellent program.  In ordinary times, I would sign it in a New York minute.  Given the rapid decline of our economy, and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending, even for a program as meritorious as this one.

I would note, however, that the Budget contains $121 million for Juvenile Justice programs, including $4 million which was allocated to Sacramento, alone.

For these reasons, I cannot support AB 1626.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

AB 1635 Vargas                                    Date Vetoed: 08/20/01

CDE Admin/Governance
Existing law provides that every employee has the right to inspect the personnel records that the employer maintains relating to the employee's performance or to any grievance concerning the employee. This bill would further provide that the employee has the right to obtain a copy of those personnel records. The bill would allow the employer to charge the employee copying costs in the amount specified in any applicable collective bargaining agreement or, if there is no collective bargaining agreement, or, if the agreement does not specify an amount, the employer may charge the actual copying costs incurred, not to exceed 10 per page.

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1635 without my signature. Under current law, employees have the right to inspect their own personnel records. This bill would permit employees to obtain a copy of those records, and would authorize employers to charge either a maximum copying fee of ten cents per page or an amount specified in an applicable collective bargaining agreement. While it would modify existing law governing personnel records, this bill contains no provisions to protect the privacy of other individuals who may be identified in the personnel records.  Without measures that ensure the privacy of those individuals and the confidentiality of a company's legitimate proprietary information, the potential for harm of this measure outweighs the possible benefits.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 25 Alarcon                                   Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

Career/TechEd
(1) Existing law does not provide for the establishment of a Labor and Civil Rights Agency in state government. This bill would create a Labor and Civil Rights Agency in state government consisting of the Department of Industrial Relations, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Employment Development Department, the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the Public Employment Relations Board, and the Fair Employment and Housing Commission. The agency would be under the supervision of the Secretary of Labor and Civil Rights who would be appointed by the Governor, subject to confirmation by the Senate. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 25 without my signature.

The working men and women of California and our economy would benefit from a more coordinated effort by the various state departments charged with ensuring a well-trained, healthy, safe and prosperous workforce. I believe that the Department of Industrial Relations and the Employment Development Department could provide better service by being combined within a single entity.  More review, however is necessary to determine what other components of the state, if any, should be organized in this fashion.

I have asked my Director of the Department of Industrial Relations to work with the appropriate people and to make a recommendation to me by the end of the year.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 30 Chesbro                                    Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

Special Education
Existing law establishes various programs providing mental health services administered by counties and funded through several state and local revenue sources. This bill would require the California Health and Human Services Agency to establish a Realignment Review Task Force, composed of specified members, for purposes of examining the relationship between the state and counties as it relates to the delivery of mental health services, health services, and social services and related programs, with a goal of improving the ability of counties to provide these services. It would require the task force to present these options to the Governor and the Legislature on or before April 1, 2003. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 30 without my signature.

This bill would require the Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) to establish a Realignment Review Task Force (RRTF) to examine the relationship between the State and counties in the delivery of mental health, health, social services and related programs. The RRTF would be required to submit a report, outlining options for improving the ability of counties to improve these services, and potential funding sources, to the Legislature before April 1, 2003.

This bill, while well-intentioned, is largely duplicative of a study completed by the Office of the Legislative Analyst earlier this year. Realignment, for all its complexities, has provided a stable and fairly predictable funding source for public health and indigent health programs at the local level.  I have also just signed Assembly Bill 328 (Salinas) which requires the Department of Mental Health to collect data on the current structure and status of community mental health financing.  I will use both reports to consider any future changes to realignment.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 71 Burton                                    Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Employment Issues
(1) Existing law provides for an annual assessment of employers by the Department of Industrial Relations for the purpose of funding increased investigation and prosecution of workers' compensation fraud by the Bureau of Fraudulent Claims of the Department of Insurance and by district attorneys. Existing law provides for the assessment of civil penalties for acts constituting workers' compensation fraud. This bill would also authorize use of these funds for investigation and prosecution of an employer's willful failure to secure payment of workers' compensation. This bill would require the Bureau of State Audits to evaluate the effectiveness of the efforts of the Fraud Assessment Commission, the Bureau of Fraudulent Claims, the Department of Industrial Relations, and local law enforcement agencies in identifying, investigating, and prosecuting workers' compensation fraud and the willful failure to secure payment of workers' compensation. The bill would increase the civil penalty amounts that could be imposed for workers' compensation fraud. These funds would be deposited in the Workers' Compensation Fraud Account in the Insurance Fund. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 71 without my signature.

I believe strongly that it is time to increase the level of compensation benefits offered to injured workers.  It is also time to make significant improvements to the system so it better serves both the injured workers and all Californians.  A comprehensive bill to improve the system should have four goals:

1) Providing a significant benefit increase for injured workers;

2) Promoting early and sustained return to work within the person's medical and work restrictions;

3) Implementing effective medical cost containment measures while assuring the quality of care provided; and

4) Targeting benefit dollars to achieve the best outcomes for injured workers.

I am concerned about the net economic impact of SB 71 and AB 1176 in these shaky economic times since I do not believe the two bills taken together adequately address the final three goals listed above.

Since there is a general agreement about the need to increase benefits for injured workers, I believe that if we work together, the legislature, my staff and the interested parties can craft a comprehensive bill reaching all four goals before the 2002 legislative session begins.  For the above reasons, I must veto this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 101 Brulte                                    Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

Pregnant/Parenting Teens
Existing law provides that no parent or other person having lawful custody of a minor child 72 hours old or younger may be prosecuted for a violation of specified crimes if he or she voluntarily surrenders physical custody of the child to any employee on duty at a public or private hospital emergency room, or any additional location designated by the board of supervisors. This bill would appropriate $1,000,000 from the General Fund to the State Department of Social Services and would require the department, in consultation with the State Department of Health Services, the State Department of Education, and the office of the Attorney General, to use these funds to develop and implement a social marketing campaign to determine that population likely to abandon their newborn infants, and to determine what options, including the options available under specified provisions of law, are available to them. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 101 without my signature.

This bill would appropriate $1 million from the General Fund to the California Department of Social Services to implement a media campaign that would inform persons, likely to abandon their newborn infants, about other options available to them under recently enacted  legislation known as 'Safe Arms for Newborns'.  While I am highly supportive of the intent of this bill, it would result in the expenditure of General Fund dollars that were not included in the Budget Act of 2001.

Since the enactment of 'Safe Arms' the Department of Social Services (CDSS) has been working with local agencies, as well with State agency partners, to increase public awareness about the provisions of the law.  I am directing the Department of Social Services to pursue further collaborative efforts with the Department of Health Services, the Department of Education, and the Office of the Attorney General to develop an outreach plan that would address this issue in a cost-effective manner.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 132 Burton                                     Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

STRS/PERS
Under existing law, specified retired members of the Public Employees' Retirement System whose retirement allowances would be less than $1,200 per year are entitled to have their allowances increased to that amount. This bill would, as of July 1, 2002, establish minimum allowance amounts payable to certain retired state members and their survivors and beneficiaries, as specified, which amounts would vary according to the member's age at retirement, credited state service, and type of benefit, as specified.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 132 without my signature.

This bill would increase the minimum monthly retirement allowance provided to State members of the California Public Employee Retirement System and their optional settlement beneficiaries and survivors, effective July 1, 2002.  The benefit would go to members retired prior to January 1, 2001, at age 50 or older, with at least sixteen years of credited State service.

I am sympathetic to providing equitable treatment to retired State employees who had a long career in State government, they deserve to be protected from inflation.  Last year I stated that I would consider twenty years of service credit to match the criteria for members of the State Teacher's Retirement System.  This bill would benefit people who retire after only sixteen years of service and as young as age 50.  Further the cost is more than we can justify under the current budget.

Finally, it is not wise to take on substantial new spending since our economy is rapidly declining and state revenues have dropped $1.1 billion in the first three months alone.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 147 Bowen                                    Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

Employment Issues
(1) Existing law does not prohibit an employer from monitoring the electronic mail or other computer records generated by an employee.  This bill would prohibit an employer from secretly monitoring the electronic mail or other computer records generated by an employee. The bill would provide that an employer who intends to inspect, review, or retain any electronic mail or any other computer records generated by an employee shall prepare and distribute to all employees the employer's workplace privacy and electronic monitoring policies and practices. The bill would provide that, upon distribution, the employer shall require every affected employee to sign or electronically verify that he or she read, understands, and acknowledges, receipt of the policies and practices. The bill would apply to specified public entities. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 147 without my signature.

This bill would require employers, by March 1, 2002, to execute signed or electronically verifiable agreements between an employer and employees regarding the right of the employer to monitor the e-mail traffic and computer files of employees.  If such agreements are not provided, the bill prohibits employers from monitoring business computers by employees to guard against inappropriate business or personal uses.

As I previously have, when considering this issue, I start from the common-sense presumption that employees in today's wired economy understand that computers provided for business purposes are company property and that their use may be monitored and controlled.

Under current law, employers are potentially liable if the employer's agents or employees use the employer's computers for improper purposes, such as sexual harassment, defamation and the like.  It therefore follows that any employer has a legitimate need to monitor, either on a spot basis or at regular intervals, such company property, including e-mail traffic and computer files stored on either employer-owned hard drives, diskettes or CD ROMs. This bill places unnecessary and complicating obligations on employers and may likely to lead to litigation by affected employees over  whether the required notice was provided and whether it was read and understood by the employee.  I support reasonable privacy protections for employees in the workplace and my Administration proposed amendments which would carry out the intent of the bill without imposing undue regulatory burdens and potential legal exposure to businesses for doing what any emp loyee should assume is the employer's right when they accept employment. Senator Bowen rejected the proposed amendments.  Thus, I must veto the bill a third time.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 193 Soto                                    Date Vetoed: 10/13/01

STRS/PERS
The Public Employees' Retirement Law prescribes the benefits provided under the Public Employees' Retirement System to state employees and employees of local agencies that have contracted with the system. This bill would establish the Deferred Retirement Option Program as a voluntary program in the Public Employees' Retirement System for those local safety members whose employing agency elects to be subject to the program, as specified. The program would provide eligible members access, upon retirement, to a lump sum in addition to a monthly retirement allowance, as specified. The bill would require the board of administration of the system to be prepared to implement the program no later than January 1, 2003, except as specified. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 193 without my signature.

This bill would provide a Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) to local safety members of CalPERS covered employers as well as law enforcement members of county retirement systems subject to the County Employees' Retirement Law of 1937.  This bill would create a DROP having significant costs to local government retirement programs.

I would be open to considering a truly cost neutral program for local government.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 194 Soto                                    Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

STRS/PERS
Under the existing Public Employees' Retirement Law, upon the death prior to retirement of a state or school member, among others, a basic death benefit, as defined, or, in certain circumstances, a specified monthly allowance is payable to the member's surviving spouse, children, or beneficiary. Existing law also provides alternative death benefits for the surviving spouse or eligible children, or both, of state members who meet specified conditions, which benefits are equal to the amount the state member would have received if he or she had been retired for service at minimum retirement age on the date of death and had elected optional settlement 2, as defined. This bill would make those alternative death benefits available to the surviving spouse or eligible children, or both, of school members who die on or after January 1, 2002, and who meet those specified conditions.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 194 without my signature.

This bill would provide the two pre-retirement death benefits to school members of the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) that mirror those provided to State employees.

I have supported and signed legislation providing classified school employees substantial benefit improvements in recent years. These include the 2% at age 55 retirement formula based on highest 12 months of earnings; increase of the death benefit to survivors of retired employees to $2000; and removal of the earnings offset used in computing the individual's retirement allowance. The long-term cost of these enhancements has been estimated to be $2.936 million. The cost of this bill adds an additional $157 million to this amount.

Although it was anticipated that most if not all, of the cost for these benefits would be funded by the excess retirement assets that had accrued in the CalPERS retirement fund, the downturn in the investment markets has reduced the value of the retirement system assets and will necessitate increased retirement contributions by school districts. Economic projections for the State for this and the next fiscal years, and the continued drop in investment value, are likely to result in the State having to increase funding for the schools to pay for the retirement benefits that have already been approved. I believe that it would be fiscally imprudent to add to financial burden to the State by adding this benefit.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 286 Soto                                    Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
Existing law requires the State Department of Education, in cooperation with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health within the Department of Industrial Relations, to formulate a listing of chemical compounds used in school programs that includes the potential hazards and estimated shelf life of each compound. Existing law also prohibits the order or purchase of any art or craft material that is deemed by the State Department of Health Services to contain a toxic substance by any school, school district, or governing authority of a private school for use by pupils in kindergarten and grades 1 to 6, inclusive. This bill would require the State Department of Education, in consultation with the State Department of Health Services, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health within the Department of Industrial Relations, and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, to study and report to the Legislature by May 1, 2002, on the use of substances as part of educational instruction that are listed in the California Science Safety Handbook for Public Schools as carcinogenic or mutagenic or that are identified as having chemical risks that outweigh educational benefits.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 286 without my signature.

This bill would require the State Department of Education, in consultation with the State Department of Health Services, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to conduct a study and report to the Legislature by May 1, 2002, on the use of hazardous substances as part of educational instruction.  This bill could result in $250,000 in General Fund costs to contract for the required study and report to the Legislature.

This bill is unnecessary, as existing law allows the governing board of any school district to request the consultation services from the California Occupational Safety and Health Consultation Service to ensure hazardous materials are properly being used and stored safely in school laboratories.  Existing law also prohibits K-6 school districts from purchasing any art or craft material with toxic substances causing chronic illness.  For school districts with students in grades 7-12, any part or  craft materials with toxic substances must meet specified labeling standards.  For these reasons, I am unable to sign this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 320 Alarcon                                   Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
(1) Existing law authorizes a teacher of any class from which a pupil is suspended to require the suspended pupil to complete any assignments and tests missed during the suspension. This bill would require, with a specified exception, if a pupil is suspended for more than 5 days and the parent or guardian of the pupil has requested to have the assignments, tests, or examinations made available after being notified of this availability, the principal or the principal's designee to make available to the pupil, or arrange for the pupil to receive, all assignments for each of the classes in which the pupil is enrolled and to arrange for the pupil to take, in a timely manner, during the period of suspension, any tests or examinations given in the classes in which the pupil is enrolled, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 320 without my signature.

This bill would require the school district superintendent or designee to make available or to arrange for a suspended pupil to receive all class assignments, tests and examinations for the classes in which the pupil is enrolled.  Further, this bill would also authorize a school district governing board to include disaggregated data for those students suspended and/or expelled in the accountability report card for each school in the district.

This bill, though well intentioned, removes a districts' authority to determine locally how to meet the academic needs of suspended students, thereby imposing a reimbursable state mandate of several million dollars.  School districts and boards currently have discretion over the suspension and expulsion process, and I believe, act in the best interests of these students and the broader school environment by returning them to the classroom when deemed appropriate.  Additionally, I would note that under current law, schools are already free to report student data concerning suspensions and expulsions in the school accountability report card if they so choose.

For these reasons, I cannot support this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 380 Murray                                    Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

CalWORKS
Existing federal law provides for allocation of federal funds through the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant program to eligible states. Existing law provides for the CalWORKs program for the allocation of federal funds received through the TANF program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. This bill would allow certain recipients under the program to apply one hour of study for each hour of classroom instruction, up to a maximum of 6 hours per week, toward the hourly requirement. By expanding the scope of responsibility for the administration of the CalWORKs program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 380 without my signature.

This bill would permit CalWORKs recipients in a self-initiated program to apply one hour of study for each hour of classroom instruction toward their CalWORKs work participation requirement, up to a maximum of six hours per week.

While well-intentioned, this bill reduces the work requirement for students who are already receiving CalWORKs services. For this reason, I cannot support this bill.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 404 Polanco                                    Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Adult Education
Existing law establishes the position of Superintendent of Correctional Education. This bill would repeal those provisions. The bill would establish the Robert E. Burton Correctional Education Board within the Department of Corrections. The board would be composed of 15 members, appointed as specified. The bill would require the board, among other duties and responsibilities, to approve education programs in correctional institutions and adopt rules and regulations for the admission of inmate students to these programs. This bill contains other related provisions.

To the Members of the California Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 404 without my signature.

This bill would establish within the Department of Corrections (CDC) a Correctional Educational Board (Board).  The Board would be required to adopt and enforce all rules and regulations for the management and operation of educational programs within CDC, including operating procedures and the goals of correctional education.

This measure, which is nearly identical to Senate Bill 1845 which I vetoed last year, would result in major General Fund costs that have not been included in the 2001 Budget Act.  Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Additionally, this bill would remove management control of educational programs at the institutions.  The bill also prohibits the redistribution of funds appropriated for correctional education programs for other purposes without the approval of two-thirds of the Board.  Effectively, this bill would impair CDC's ability to manage its resources.  Should there be a need to redirect the efforts of existing correctional education programs, the executive branch may implement such changes without legislation.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 420 Johnson                                    Date Vetoed: 08/20/01

Curriculum/Standards
There is in existing law, the State Board of Education with prescribed powers and duties regarding the public school system. This bill would require the State Board of Education to annually conduct a statewide competition on methods of penmanship including, but not limited to, the D'Nealian Method and the Palmer Method of penmanship for all pupils throughout the state.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 420 without my signature. This bill would require the State Board of Education (SBE) to conduct an annual statewide penmanship competition for all pupils, and encourage school districts to prepare pupils to enter the competition. While SB 420 would promote a meritorious goal, it would shift focus away from our primary goal of insuring that students meet the state's high academic content standards. This proposal would result in significant ongoing costs, which are not funded by this bill or the recently enacted 2001-02 budget.

Moreover, the measure lacks specific detail regarding the proposed competition, such as how participants would be grouped, judged and recognized.  Lastly, SB 420 may inadvertently result in the imposition of a state-mandated local program by directing the SBE to encourage school districts to prepare their pupils for the competition.  The increased service demands for instructors, class time, and instructional materials to teach pupils the penmanship styles being tested would result in undetermined costs to school districts.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 514 Machado                                    Date Vetoed: 10/04/01

School District Management Issues
(1) Existing law prescribes the procedure to reorganize school districts, including the filing of a petition with the county superintendent of schools by specified persons, including 25% of the registered voters residing in the territory proposed to be reorganized or a majority of the members of the governing boards of each district that would be affected by the proposed reorganization. Existing law authorizes a county committee for certain petitions to transfer territory to approve the petition, and if approved, to notify the county superintendent of schools who is required to call an election in the territory for the districts as determined by the county committee. This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, require that the election on these petitions to transfer territory include the entire territory of the school district from which the territory is to be transferred or otherwise withdrawn if the transfer or withdrawal of the territory would reduce the average daily attendance of the school district from which the territory is to be transferred or withdrawn by 25% or more. The bill would also prescribe related matters. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 514 without my signature.

This bill would require that in any proposed school district reorganization, which includes a transfer or withdrawal of 25 percent or more of the district's average daily attendance (ADA), the vote to approve the reorganization must occur in the entire school district, not just in the territory to be transferred or withdrawn.  Furthermore, the bill's application would extend retroactively to any reorganization initiated on or after January 1, 2001.

Current law provides for a series of reviews to ensure that the interests of education are best served in proposed district reorganizations.  As part of this review process, the State Board of Education (SBE) has discretion to determine the boundaries within which an election must be held for any reorganization.

This bill would also unnecessarily restrict the authority of the SBE despite a lack of evidence that the SBE has failed to define an entire district as the area of election when appropriate.  Moreover, this bill would modify the existing review process and impose unnecessary requirements on the SBE to emphasize ADA figures over other important factors in their review of proposed district reorganizations.  Given the complexity of proposed district reorganizations, the comprehensive review process currently provided for is the appropriate mechanism to determine their outcome.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 515 Alpert                                     Date Vetoed: 10/10/01

Child Health
Existing law provides various services for youth in the state. The bill would enact the Youth Development Act. It would establish, until January 1, 2004, the California Council on Youth Development, with specified membership, to advise the Governor, state agencies and departments, and the Legislature on the ways and means to establish programs, systems, and processes designed to meet the goals of the Legislature with respect to California's youth, and to develop a strategic plan to identify the roles, responsibilities, opportunities, and challenges in achieving the goals set forth in the bill. This bill contains other related provisions.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 515 without my signature.

This bill would establish the Youth Development Act and create the California Council on Youth Development, consisting the specified representatives of State officials and departments and youth members.  This Council would be required to perform specified activities related to youth in California.

While I support the general goals of coordinating services to youth in California, I am vetoing this bill because it would require specified State agencies to contribute funding from their base budgets to support implementation of this bill.  Such a redirection could result in the loss of funding to programs and purposes approved through the annual Budget Act at a time when the economy is rapidly declining and state revenues are down $1.1 billion in the first three months of this fiscal year.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 554 Vasconcellos                             Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Community Service/Service Learning
(1) Existing law establishes a statewide system of public postsecondary education consisting of the various campuses of the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges. Private postsecondary institutions also provide educational services to California students. This bill would establish a Statewide Service Learning Center within the Governor's Office on Service and Volunteerism to coordinate and develop service learning centers on the campuses of individual public and private colleges and universities. The bill would prescribe the duties of the Statewide Service Learning Center. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 554 without my signature.

This bill would require the California Postsecondary Education Commission to develop a Master Plan for Service Learning, and would establish a Statewide Service Learning Center within the proposed Governor's Office on Service and Volunteerism.  It would also expand the Student Academic Partnership Program from grades K-6 to K-12.

This bill would appropriate $148,350 to comply with the service learning provisions.  It would also result in pressure to provide permanent funds for the Center.  This bill would also create pressure to provide at least $4 million Proposition 98 General Fund to backfill one-time federal funding under Goals 2000 currently provided for grades 7-12 under the Student Academic Partnership Program.

In 1999, I sent a written request to the U.C., C.S.U. and community colleges to encourage public service as part of their curricula.  In part because of my request, all segments of higher education operate programs that encourage community service and incorporate active learning opportunities, such as service learning, into student courses.  Therefore, this program is unnecessary.

For these reasons and given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 743 Murray                                    Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Teachers/Teacher Credentialing
Existing law authorizes the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to issue or renew emergency teaching or specialist permits if the applicant possesses a baccalaureate degree conferred by a regionally accredited institution of higher education, has fulfilled the subject matter requirements, and passes the state basic skills proficiency test and the commission approves the justification for the emergency permit submitted by the school district in which the applicant is to be employed. This bill would require the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, in consultation with a broadly representative and diverse advisory committee by June 30, 2002, to develop a plan for school districts to address the disproportionate number of teachers serving on emergency permits in certain schools. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 743 without my signature.

This bill would require, by June 30, 2002, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, in consultation with a broadly representative and diverse advisory committee, to develop a plan for school districts to address the disproportionate number of teachers serving on emergency permits in low-performing schools.

I am very concerned about the number of teachers serving on emergency permits, especially in low-performing schools.  However, current law provides a state plan to replace the emergency permit system through the Pre-internship Teaching Program.  Therefore, the requirement proposed by this bill to develop a state plan is redundant.

Furthermore, over the last three years I have initiated many incentives for teachers with emergency permits to obtain clear credentials and attract and retain qualified teachers to teach in low-performing schools.  The programs include:

  • Teaching as a Priority Block Grant which can be used for incentives such as signing bonuses, teacher compensation and housing subsidies;
  • Teacher Recruitment Incentive Program which has established 6 regional centers to provide information and assist districts in recruiting teachers, particularly those in low-performing schools;
  • Governor's Teaching Fellowships program to provide merit based grants to graduates students who receive a credential and agree to teach in a low-performing school;
  • Extra Credit Teacher Home Purchase Program to provide mortgage credit certificates and loans to teachers and administrators in low-performing schools;
  • National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Certification Bonuses of up to $30,000 for teachers who agree to teach in low-performing schools.

These incentives have not been in place long enough to adequately evaluate their impact on increasing the number of certified teachers.  Therefore, the proposal put forth by this bill is also premature. 

For these reasons, I am returning SB 743 without my signature.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 963 Vincent                                   Date Vetoed: 10/14/01

Safe Schools/Violence Prevention
(1) Existing law prohibits a school district from permitting access to pupil records to any person without written parental consent or under judicial order except under certain circumstances, including permitting access to a probation officer for the purpose of conducting a truancy mediation program for a pupil, or for purposes of presenting evidence in a truancy petition. Existing law requires the probation officer to certify in writing to the school district that the information will be used only for truancy purposes. Existing law requires a school district releasing pupil information to a probation officer to inform, or provide written notification to, the parent or guardian of the pupil within 24 hours of the release of the information. This bill would, until January 1, 2005, also authorize a school district to permit access to a probation officer for the purposes of casework planning and monitoring wards and probationers and to a social worker with respect to a dependent child, as specified. The bill would require a probation officer or social worker to certify in writing to the school that the information will only be used for these purposes. The bill would require the school district to determine the most cost-effective manner in which to send the information, or upon agreement with the probation officer or social worker, as the case may be, make the requested information available at the schoolsite within 5 working days, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 963 without my signature.

This bill would authorize social workers and probation officers to access student records for purpose of casework planning and monitoring wards and probationers.  This bill could cost the State up to $2.3 million annually in increased state-mandated reimbursable costs.  However, many counties already share relevant information with probation officers including student academic performance and disciplinary problems, if any.  I would encourage all counties to adopt this practice.

Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1. billion in the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 999 Torlakson                                   Date Vetoed: 10/12/01

Transportation
(1) Existing law requires each school district or any county office of education to receive a home-to-school transportation allowance equal to the transportation allowance received in the prior fiscal year, as specified. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, in the 2001-02 fiscal year, to calculate and make an apportionment, if funds are available, as described, of a home-to-school transportation allowance for all school districts that did not receive a home-to-school transportation allowance in the 2000-01 fiscal year, and that apply for the allowance on or before a date, and in a manner, to be determined by the superintendent. The bill would, subject to the appropriation of funds therefor, require school districts that receive this transportation allowance to receive a transportation allowance in the 2002-03 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter in an amount not exceeding the prior year's approved home-to-school transportation costs, increased by the amount provided in the annual Budget Act. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 999 without my signature.

This bill, an urgency measure, would allow all school districts that did not receive a home-to-school transportation allowance in the 2000-01 fiscal year, but were operating home-to-school transportation programs, and applied for the allowance, to receive an allowance for the 2001-02 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter.

By allowing any district not currently participating in Home-To-School Transportation the option to join and receive state funding based on criteria to be established by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, this bill could result in future General Fund Cost pressures in excess of $5 million annually, plus growth and cost-of-living increases. Further, Home-To-School Transportation is not a mandated program – districts choose to participate.  School districts are already provided discretionary funding which can be allocated to their Home-To-School Transportation programs. Finally, given our rapidly declining economy with state revenues falling $1.1 billion below expectations in the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I am unable to sign this bill to expand program participation.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 1016 Karnette                                   Date Vetoed: 10/16/01

Curriculum/Standards
Existing law refers to the study of a language other than English by pupils as the study of a foreign language. Various duties of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the State Board of Education, and the Commission on Teacher Credentialing are related to foreign language instruction. This bill would delete references in the Education Code to the term 'foreign language' and would instead substitute the term 'world language.'

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 1016 without my signature.

This bill would delete references in the Education Code to the term foreign language and instead, substitute the term world language.

While I appreciate the intent of the bill to eliminate any negative connotations, this bill is not necessary. The term foreign language is used and acknowledged throughout the nation. The term was never meant to be derogatory in nature.

I am also concerned about the additional cost to taxpayers for publishers to conform textbooks and local governments to change numerous laws to conform to this change in law.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 1041 Ortiz                                   Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Statewide Budget Issues
Existing law imposes various functions and duties on the State Department of Developmental Services with respect to the administration and oversight of developmental centers and programs relating to persons with developmental disabilities. The department has contracted for the provision of donated dental services for persons with developmental disabilities and the elderly who cannot afford treatment. This bill would establish the Donated Dental Services Program within the State Department of Developmental Services for purposes of increasing access to dental services for special populations by encouraging the delivery of volunteer dental services for the disabled and elderly by California's practicing dentists. It would appropriate $125,000 from the General Fund to the State Department of Developmental Services for purposes of implementing this program during the 2001-02 fiscal year. This bill contains other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 1041 without my signature.

This bill would establish, within the Department of Developmental Services, the Donated Dental Services Program (DDSP). The DDSP would increase access to dental services for the disabled and the elderly by facilitating the delivery of volunteer dental services.

Currently, the Medi-Cal program is spending over $752.8 million ($366.2 million General Fund) for dental services for over 5.8 million eligibles including those with disabilities and seniors. In addition, the 2001 Budget Act increased the Expanded Access to Primary Care clinic program by $10 million General Fund (47 percent) for total funding of $31.2 million. This increase was provided in recognition of the importance of providing health care services, including dental services, to vulnerabl e populations statewide. The 2001 Budget Act demonstrates my commitment to providing dental services to needy Californians. This bill, however, makes an additional General Fund appropriation to a program which has traditionally been supported by foundation grants and special funds. Given the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 1051 McPherson                             Date Vetoed: 10/15/01

Career/TechEd
(1) Existing law requires school districts maintaining any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to offer to all otherwise qualified pupils in those grades a course of study that provides an opportunity for those pupils to attain entry-level employment skills in business or industry upon graduation from high school. This bill would also require the governing board of any school district maintaining a high school to prescribe a course of study to provide skills and knowledge for adult life, to prepare pupils for graduation, career entry, and postsecondary education, and to offer pupils a curriculum that integrates academic and career skills, as specified. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 1051 without my signature.

This bill required the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to develop a career/technical education curriculum framework by June 1, 2004, and required local districts with high schools to provide a course of study that integrates academic and career skills in all disciplines that prepares students for graduation, career entry, college-level studies, and adult life.  The bill would also appropriate $5 million to expand the existing School-to-Career Initiative (Proposition 98) within the Office of the Secretary of Education (OSE),

This bill would result in General Fund costs of $600,000 to develop the prescribed curriculum and up to $400,000 for each additional curriculum framework.  Furthermore, this bill creates a reimbursable state mandated program with costs in the millions of dollars to require local governing boards of any school district with a high school to change courses of study to conform with the prescribed curriculum.

The bill also appropriates $5 million General Fund to the School-to-Career program.  Due to the rapid decline of our economy and a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion through the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I have no choice but to oppose additional General Fund spending.  However, as I am supportive of the School-to-Career program, I am directing the Health and Human Services Agency to look for alternative funding to expand the program.

For these reasons, I cannot support this measure.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

SB 1118 Margett                                   Date Vetoed: 10/12/01

Higher Education
Existing law requires, at the beginning of the first semester or quarter of the regular school term, the governing board of each school district to notify the parent or guardian of its minor pupils of certain matters, including the availability of individualized instruction and requirements for passing the high school exit examination. This bill would, until January 1, 2007, require the State Department of Education, in consultation with the California Postsecondary Education Commission, to develop a pamphlet that explains the requirements for high school graduation and admission to state colleges, the importance of college entrance exams, and the availability of financial aid programs. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 1118 without my signature.

By requiring school districts to include an informational pamphlet in the annual parent notification letter, this bill would create a reimbursable State mandate, which would result in significant State costs.  The information that would be included in the pamphlet currently is available from pamphlets disseminated by the state's universities and by the California Education Roundtable.  In addition, information is available via the Internet at a website administered by the segments of higher education or at the schoolsite.  I am supportive of efforts to provide parents with information about educational opportunities and requirements. However, given our rapidly declining economy with state revenues falling $1.1 billion below expectations in the first three months of this fiscal year alone, I cannot support this measure given its costs which could exceed $1 million.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

Questions: Legislative Affairs Division | BShotts@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0821 
Download Free Readers