The Governor`s Proposal - California Association of School Business

Proposition 39:
Investments in
Energy Efficiency for
Kevin Gordon, President – Capitol Advisors
Brad Chapman, Climatec, Inc.
Bill McGuire, Superintendent
St. Helena Unified School District
Capitol Advisors Group, LLC
CASBO Annual Conference
Prop 39 on the Ballot – What Voters Approved
The Governor’s Proposal
The Legislative Analyst’s Perspective
SB 39 – Senator Kevin DeLeon
AB 39 – Assembly Member Nancy Skinner
The Education Community Response
Outlook for the May Revision & Beyond
Passed by voters last November
Raises more than $1 billion annually in Corporate income tax
revenue by moving to single sales tax factor for most
For first five years, half the revenue required to fund Clean
Energy Job Creation Fund
An estimated $450 the first year and $550 for each of the
next four years is dedicated for this purpose.
Improve energy efficiency and expand alt energy.
K-14 Public Schools, CSU and UC and other “public buildings”
Public-Private partnerships and workforce raining related to energy
Appropriate only to agencies with expertise in managing energy
projects and programs
Coordinated with CEC and CPUC to avoid duplication and
leverage existing energy efficiency and alternative energy
More than a dozen existing programs
managed by multiple agencies including
CEC, CPUC, and by public and Investorowned utilities.
California has spent almost $15 billion
over the past 10-15 years on these efforts.
Significantly departs from ballot measure in
implementation approach
Counts all revenue from Prop 39 toward Prop
98 minimum guarantee, including funds
spent on energy projects
Focus energy funding exclusively on K-14
◦ $400.5 Million for K-12 schools
◦ $49.5 Million for Community Colleges
Funding administered through CDE for K-12 and
Chancellor’s Office for CCs.
◦ These agencies would issue guidelines for prioritizing
the use of funds by LEAs.
◦ CDE and Chancellor’s Office required to “consult” with
CEC and CPUC on guidelines.
Budget provides a permanent full time position at
CDE for coordination.
Allocates funding on an ADA basis
◦ $67 for K-12
◦ $45 for Community Colleges
◦ Report due to CDE and Chancellor on expenditures.
Funds may be used for uses consistent with
the state’s loading order policies, including:
◦ Construction or modernization of buildings in a
manner that uses less energy
◦ Purchasing energy efficient equipment
◦ Undertaking renewable energy projects such as
installation of solar panels and geothermal heat
Questions Treatment of Proposition 39 Revenues
◦ Varies from LAOs longstanding view of Proposition 98.
◦ Assert potential for greater manipulation of the
minimum guarantee.
Questions Allocation Method - Limited Benefit
Excludes many eligible projects.
Fails to account for energy consumption differences.
Allocates funding inefficiently.
May not guarantee return on investment.
Does not account for significant past investments in K–
14 facilities.
◦ Fails to sufficiently leverage existing programs and
Senator Kevin DeLeon & Senate President ProTem Darrell Steinberg
“Clean Energy Employment and Student
Advancement Act”
Follows emphasis on education but allows funds
for both K-12 and higher ed. institutions
Vests the Office of Public School Construction
and State Allocation Board with administrative
They shall “consult” with Energy Commission and
Competitive grant-based, and need-based
Assembly Member Skinner and Assembly
Speaker John Perez
“California Clean Energy Jobs Act”
K-12, Higher Ed, “Other public buildings,”
Public-Private Partnerships, Job creation and
workforce development agencies
Vests the Energy Commission with
administrative authority
“In consultation with Superintendent of Public
Grant, loan based approaches
Governor’s approach preferable
Per ADA funding with fewest strings possible
Grant writing expertise not required
As little bureaucracy as possible
Keeps Energy Commission and PUC in consultative
roles only.
Job related provisions should be linked to the
energy work directly, not a fund to simply be
directed to workforce development generally.
All proposals have end of project reporting
and bill language related to Citizens
Oversight Board.
Governor’s influence never stronger
Education focus is politically defensible
Per ADA approach is unfortunately vulnerable
◦ Both bills & LAO reject this approach
◦ Small school districts argument is double edged
◦ Almost every district can use these funds for some
form of energy efficiency.
◦ Local control versus biggest possible projects
Reducing overall energy load first
◦ Real state-of-the-art energy efficient infrastructure
◦ Education on efficiency measures everyone can take
Renewable focus comes next
◦ Solar projects – What helps and what doesn’t
Leveraging every resource
◦ Public Utilities
◦ Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs)
◦ Bond Augmentation
Data proven results for accountability process

similar documents