BILL NUMBER: AB 1397	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  JULY 8, 2015
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  MAY 28, 2015
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  MAY 5, 2015
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 14, 2015

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly  Member   Ting
  Members   Ting   and Bonta 
   (Coauthors: Assembly Members Gipson,  Mullin,  Santiago,
and Wagner)
   (  Coauthor:   Senator  
Hall   Coauthors:   Senators   Beall,
  Hall,   and Nielsen  )

                        FEBRUARY 27, 2015

   An act to add Article 8 (commencing with Section 72800) to Chapter
6 of Part 45 of Division 7 of Title 3 of the Education Code,
relating to community colleges.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 1397, as amended, Ting. Community colleges: California
Community Colleges Fair Accreditation Act of 2015.
   Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under
the administration of the Board of Governors of the California
Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary
education in this state. Existing law specifies the duties of the
board of governors, including, among other duties, establishing
minimum standards for the formation of community colleges and
districts. Under existing regulatory authority, the board of
governors requires each community college to be accredited. Existing
law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to
report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the
Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the
accreditation status of a community college and to report, on a
biannual basis, any accreditation policy changes that affect the
accreditation process or status for a community college.
   This bill would enact the California Community Colleges Fair
Accreditation Act of 2015. The act would require that an appropriate
percentage of each visiting accreditation team from the accrediting
agency for the California Community Colleges be composed of
academics, as defined. The bill would prohibit persons with conflicts
of interest, as defined, from serving on a visiting accreditation
team.
   The bill would require the accrediting agency to conduct the
meetings of its decisionmaking body to ensure the ability of members
of the public to attend those meetings. The bill would require the
accrediting agency to preserve all documents generated during an
accreditation-related review, as specified. The bill would require
the agency's accreditation-related decisions to be based on written,
published standards in accordance with state and federal statutes and
regulations, as specified.
   The bill would authorize an institution to submit an appeal of a
decision by the accrediting agency to subject that institution to a
sanction of probation or a more serious sanction.  The bill would
require a member of a panel that would hear one of these appeals to
file a specified disclosure form under penalty of perjury. By
expanding the scope of the crime of per   jury, this bill
would impose a state-mandated local program.  
   The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.  
   This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason. 
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program:  no   yes  .


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Article 8 (commencing with Section 72800) is added to
Chapter 6 of Part 45 of Division 7 of Title 3 of the Education Code,
to read:

      Article 8.  Accreditation


   72800.  (a) This article shall be known, and may be cited, as the
California Community Colleges Fair Accreditation Act of 2015.
   (b) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
   (1) The goal of accreditation is to promote and ensure higher
education quality through peer evaluation and review.
   (2) The community college accrediting agency should be a
nonprofit, private educational association of regional scope,
responsible for developing evaluation criteria, conducting peer
evaluations, assessing whether criteria are met, and supporting
institutional development and improvement.
   (3) The community college accrediting agency should have a
comprehensive and nondiscriminatory accreditation process that is in
compliance with the requirements of applicable federal and state laws
and regulations.
   (c) This article shall apply only to accrediting procedures
regarding institutions located in California.
   72801.  (a) As used in this article:
   (1) "Academic" means a person who is currently, or has recently,
directly engaged in a significant manner in postsecondary teaching or
research.
   (2) "Agency" means the accrediting agency for the California
Community Colleges.
   (3) "Near relative" means a spouse, including a registered
domestic partner, child, parent, sibling, person in an in-law
relationship, or a step relative in one of the relationships
referenced in this subparagraph.
   (b) The agency shall operate only by policies that are in
compliance with the federal criteria for recognition of an
accrediting agency pursuant to Subpart 2 (commencing with Section
496) of Part H of Title IV of the federal Higher Education Act of
1965, as amended.
   (c) (1) Each visiting accreditation team sent out by the agency
shall be composed of an appropriate percentage of academics.
   (2) The agency shall establish and enforce procedures to ensure
that persons serving on visiting accreditation teams do not have
conflicts of interest. No person may serve on a visiting
accreditation team who has a conflict of interest. For the purposes
of this paragraph, a conflict of interest is determined by any
circumstance in which an individual's capacity to make an impartial
or unbiased accreditation recommendation may be affected, including,
but not necessarily limited to, any of the following:
   (A) Paid service in any capacity to the institution under review.
   (B) Serving as, or having a near relative serving as, a current
member, staff member, or consultant of the agency's decisionmaking
body.
   (C) Serving as, or having a near relative serving as, a current
member, staff member, or consultant of the institution's governing
body. 
   (D) Candidacy for employment at the institution being evaluated.
 
   (E) A written agreement with an institution that may create a
conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of interest with the
institution being evaluated.  
   (F) Having a personal or financial interest in the ownership or
operation of the institution being evaluated.  
   (G) Receipt of honoraria, honors, or awards from the institution
being evaluated.  
   (H) Other personal or professional connections that would create a
conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest.

   (3) A prospective member of a visiting accreditation team shall
submit an appropriate disclosure form to the agency, declaring that
he or she does not violate the visiting team conflict-of-interest
criteria in paragraph (2). Copies of these forms shall be provided to
the institution under review.
   (d) (1) The agency shall conduct its meetings so as to ensure that
those members of the public who desire to appear at open sessions of
agency meetings have an opportunity to attend those portions of the
meetings.
   (2) A sufficient length of time shall be allowed for public
comment at agency meetings, and no agency action related to an
institution's accreditation shall be made prior to the decisionmaking
body's taking of public comment.
   (3) The agency shall make an accreditation decision by a vote of
its decisionmaking body. The outcome of the vote shall be recorded
and posted to the agency's Internet Web site. Minutes from all open
session portions of the meetings of the decisionmaking body of the
agency shall be recorded and posted to the agency's Internet Web
site.
   (4) Any  officer or employee   officer,
employee, representative, or consultant  of the agency with an
actual or appearance of a conflict of interest shall be disqualified
from participating in discussion and voting. For purposes of this
clause, a conflict of interest is defined as any circumstance in
which an individual's capacity to make an impartial or unbiased
recommendation or decision may be affected, including by 
either   any  of the following:
   (A) Paid service in any capacity to the institution under review.
   (B) Serving as, or having a near relative serving as, a current
member, staff member, or consultant of the institution's governing
body. 
   (C) Having served on the most recent evaluation team of an
institution being considered.  
   (D) Candidacy for employment at the institution being evaluated.
 
   (E) A written agreement with an institution that may create a
conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of interest with the
institution being evaluated.  
   (F) Having a personal or financial interest in the ownership or
operation of the institution being evaluated.  
   (G) Receipt of honoraria, honors, or awards from the institution
being evaluated.  
   (H) Other personal or professional connections that would create a
conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest.
 
   (I) Any other relationship that would impede an individual's
objectivity. 
   (e) The agency shall preserve all documents generated during an
accreditation-related review, including, but not necessarily limited
to, email correspondence, for no less than 36 months after the
completion of an accreditation-related review. All reports,
evaluations, recommendations, and decision documents generated during
an accreditation-related review shall be retained indefinitely.
   (f) The agency's accreditation-related decisions shall be based on
written, published standards, and shall be in accordance with, and
not be inconsistent with, state and federal statutes and regulations.

   (g) No revision shall be made by the agency to a proposed visiting
accreditation team report unless the revision is shared with the
members of the visiting accreditation team and with the institution
under review, and each is afforded an opportunity to comment on the
revision.
   (h) (1) A community college or a community college district shall
be given advance notice of proposed visiting accreditation team
reports, so that the college or district may respond to correct
factual errors or dissent from conclusions. The institution under
review shall be afforded adequate time to review the reports before a
meeting of the agency's decisionmaking body at which a decision
relating to the institution's accreditation is to be made, which
shall be no less than six weeks before the meeting. The institution
under review may respond to these reports in writing, orally at the
meeting, or in both of those ways.
   (2) Any visiting accrediting team recommendation for action shall
be shared with the institution under review at least six weeks before
a meeting of the agency's decisionmaking body, so that the
institution may decide whether and how to respond to the
recommendation. Any recommendation for action made to the agency's
decisionmaking body by a person employed by or representing the
agency, including its staff, agents, and employees, shall be shared
with the institution subject to the recommendation at least six weeks
before a meeting of the agency's decisionmaking body relating to the
recommendation.
   (i) (1) The agency shall have a written policy, consistent with
federal law, that does both of the following:
   (A) Identifies a period for an institution to correct any
deficiencies that have prevented the institution from receiving full
accreditation.
    (B) Provides criteria for altering that period.
   (2) The policy adopted under paragraph (1) shall be published, and
shall provide a process through which an institution may submit
applications for an extension, even if a decision has expressly
denied such an extension. An application for an extension, and the
decision of the agency as to the application, shall be made publicly
available.
   (j) (1) Whenever the agency's decisionmaking body issues a
sanction of probation or a more serious sanction, the institution
subject to the sanction shall be given written notice of the alleged
sanctionable offenses or deficiencies. The institution shall be
afforded an opportunity to submit an appeal of the decision to issue
the sanction.
   (2) A member of an appeal panel with an actual conflict of
interest, or the appearance of a conflict of interest, shall be
disqualified from participating in an appeal submitted pursuant to
paragraph (1). For purposes of this paragraph, a conflict of interest
shall be defined as any circumstance in which an individual's
capacity to make an impartial or unbiased recommendation or decision
may be affected, including by any of the following:
   (A) Paid service in any capacity to the institution under review.
   (B) Serving as, or having a near relative serving as, a current
member, staff member, or consultant of the institution's governing
body.
   (C) Having voted or had the opportunity to vote, as a member of
the agency's decisionmaking body, on the sanction being appealed.
   (D) Having served  as a member of the visiting
accreditation team which submitted the recommendation for the
sanction   on any team, review committee, or body on
behalf of the commission that was involved with the action of the
commission  being appealed. 
   (E) Current service on the commission. 
   (3) A prospective member of an appeal panel shall submit an
appropriate disclosure  form   form, signed
under penalty of perjury,  to the agency, declaring that he or
she does not violate the conflict-of-interest criteria listed in
subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, of paragraph (2). Copies of
these forms shall be provided to the institution that is making the
appeal.
   SEC. 2.    No reimbursement is required by this act
pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local
agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a
new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or
changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of
Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a
crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the
California Constitution.