Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by, the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault as defined by the institutions adopted sexual assault policies.

The bill would additionally require, until December 31, 2021, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, on or before October 1, 2017, and on an annual basis thereafter, specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. The bill would require that report to be posted on the respective institutions Internet Web site in a manner easily accessible to students.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by, the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault. assault as defined by the institutions adopted sexual assault policies.

The bill would additionally require, until December 31, 2021, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, on or before April October 1, 2017, and on an annual basis thereafter, specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. The bill would require that report to be posted on the respective institutions Internet Web site in a manner easily accessible to students.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by, the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault.

The bill would additionally require, until December 31, 2021, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, on an annual basis, on or before April 1, 2017, and on an annual basis thereafter, specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by by, the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault, as defined. assault.

The bill would additionally require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, on an annual basis, specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault. assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault, as defined.

The bill would additionally require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, on an annual basis, specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as the segments of postsecondary education in this state.

Existing law requires the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, if they adopt a specified resolution, and the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law to adopt, and implement at each of their respective campuses or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty, and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed at or upon the grounds of, or upon off-campus grounds or facilities maintained by the institution, receive treatment and information.

This bill would require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution, for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault, as defined.

The bill would additionally require, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report specified data relating to cases of alleged sexual assault.

The bill would also require that the information reported pursuant to these provisions to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 967

Author:(Williams)

As Enrolled Ver:September 11, 2015

2/3 vote

Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.

SUMMARY: Requires the establishment of consistent disciplinary standards and reporting for sexual assault complaints received by California Community College districts (CCD), California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC) and independent postsecondary educational institutions.

The Senate amendments remove provisions that would have established minimum disciplinary standards of suspension and expulsion for specified sexual assault and instead require the establishment of consistent disciplinary standards, and make other clarifying changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, under the Kristen Smart Campus Safety Act, UC Regents, CSU Trustees, CCD governing boards, and independent colleges that meet specified conditions to enter into specific written agreements with local law enforcement agencies regarding the coordination and responsibilities for investigating Part 1 violent crimes which occur on campus. (Education Code (EDC) Section 67381)

2. Requires public and independent postsecondary institutions, as a condition of receipt of student aid funds, to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking that includes specified components and standards, including an "affirmative consent" standard for determining whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. Establishes a preponderance of evidence as the evidentiary standard for determining if sexual violence/harassment occurred. (EDC Section 67386)

3. Requires, under the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses. (20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1092(f))

4. Requires, under federal Title IX (20 U.S.C. Sections 1681 to 1688), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, assuming average costs of around $3,000 per community college district, statewide potential reimbursable state mandated costs would be $216,000 (General Fund-Proposition 98 (1988)) annually. Any costs to UC and CSU will be absorbable.

COMMENTS: According to the author, "the state of California has an obligation to provide a safe and secure learning environment at our college and university campuses. Students, families, and the general public need assurance that colleges and universities take campus sexual assault seriously. The Washington Post obtained data from approximately 100 institutions surveyed in 2012 and 2013; in regards to campus sanctions in sexual assault cases they discovered that out of 478 sanctions for sexual assault, only 12% resulted in expulsion and 28% resulted in suspensions."

The author believes that in order to address rape culture on college campuses, there needs to be meaningful sanctions that truly serve as a deterrent. This bill is intended to provide clear and consistent direction to colleges and universities on imposing sanctions for sexual assault, and will require reporting of adjudication outcome data to ensure compliance with these standards.

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

This bill would require public and independent postsecondary institutions that receive student financial aid from the state to adopt and implement uniform disciplinary processes for sexual assault and to apply consistent standards for expulsion, suspension, loss of institutional aid or scholarship, loss of privileges and removal from student housing. Additionally, this bill would require annual reporting of data and recommend a minimum period of suspension, or expulsion, for the most egregious violations of sexual assault policies.

College campuses must deal with sexual assault fairly and with clear standards of process. It is eminently reasonable to expect that discipline shall not vary based on a student's status as an athlete or a declared area of study. This bill, however, could deprive professionals from using their better judgment to discipline according to relevant circumstances. Moreover, it creates an expectation that the state should recommend minimum penalties for violations of specific campus policies.

Last year, I signed Senate Bill 967, making California the first state in the country to define the terms of sexual consent for college students, so that our higher education institutions could better prevent sexual violence on campuses. This year, I signed AB 913 to ensure that existing jurisdictional agreements between postsecondary institutions and local law enforcement include responsibility for investigating sexual assaults and hate crimes.

Given these actions, I don't think it is necessary at this point for the state to directly insert itself into the disciplinary and governing processes of all private nonprofit and public colleges in California.

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0002525

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 967

Author:(Williams)

As Amended Ver:July 14, 2015

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.

SUMMARY: Requires the establishment of consistent disciplinary standards and reporting for sexual assault complaints received by California Community College districts (CCD), California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC) and independent postsecondary educational institutions. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus, for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault.

2. Requires the policies to conform to the following:

   1. The institution shall not carry out a different disciplinary process on the same campus for a matter of sexual violence, or alter the uniform process based on the status or characteristics of a student who will be involved in that disciplinary proceeding, including characteristics such as a student's membership on an athletic team, a student's academic major, or any other characteristic or status of a student.

   2. The institution shall develop and implement consistent standard of discipline for students found responsible for sexual assault.

   3. Establishes Legislative intent that the standards of discipline developed and implemented by institutions be fair, objective, and consistent, and, for the most egregious violations of the institution's sexual assault policies, provide for a minimum suspension of at least two years up to, and including, expulsion.

3. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, by October 1, 2017, and each year thereafter, all of the following from the prior calendar year:

   1. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were received by the institution.

   2. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were investigated by the institution.

   3. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were not investigated by the institution.

   4. The number of investigations conducted pursuant to 2) above, in which the respondents were found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

   5. The number of investigations conducted pursuant to 2) above, in which the respondents were not found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

   6. The number of disciplinary sanctions imposed on respondents who were found responsible, disaggregated by the type of discipline imposed in, at minimum, the categories of expulsion, suspension of at least two years, suspension of fewer than two years, and probation.

   7. The number of cases that were closed for other reasons.

4. Requires the aforementioned report to be posted on the institution's Internet Web site in a manner easily accessible to students.

5. Requires the information to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of those involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator; and, sunsets the aforementioned reporting requirements on December 31, 2021.

The Senate amendments remove provisions that would have established minimum disciplinary standards of suspension and expulsion for specified sexual assault and instead require the establishment of consistent disciplinary standards, and make other clarifying changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, under the Kristen Smart Campus Safety Act, UC Regents, CSU Trustees, CCD governing boards, and independent colleges that meet specified conditions to enter into specific written agreements with local law enforcement agencies regarding the coordination and responsibilities for investigating Part 1 violent crimes which occur on campus. (Education Code (EDC) Section 67381)

2. Requires public and independent postsecondary institutions, as a condition of receipt of student aid funds, to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking that includes specified components and standards, including an "affirmative consent" standard for determining whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. Establishes a preponderance of evidence as the evidentiary standard for determining if sexual violence/harassment occurred. (EDC Section 67386)

3. Requires, under the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses. (20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1092(f))

4. Requires, under federal Title IX (20 U.S.C. Sections 1681 to 1688), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, anticipating average costs of around $3,000 per community college district, statewide potential reimbursable state mandated costs would be $216,000 (General Fund-Proposition 98 (1988)) annually. The CSU anticipates costs of around $100,000 attributable to the reporting requirements. (General Fund). Any costs to UC will be minor and absorbable.

COMMENTS: According to the author, "the state of California has an obligation to provide a safe and secure learning environment at our college and university campuses. Students, families, and the general public need assurance that colleges and universities take campus sexual assault seriously. The Washington Post obtained data from approximately 100 institutions surveyed in 2012 and 2013; in regards to campus sanctions in sexual assault cases they discovered that out of 478 sanctions for sexual assault, only 12% resulted in expulsion and 28% resulted in suspensions."

The author believes that in order to address rape culture on college campuses, there needs to be meaningful sanctions that truly serve as a deterrent. This bill is intended to provide clear and consistent direction to colleges and universities on imposing sanctions for sexual assault, and will require reporting of adjudication outcome data to ensure compliance with these standards.

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0001862

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 967

Author: Williams (D), et al.

Amended: 7/14/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 8-0, 7/8/15

AYES: Liu, Runner, Block, Hancock, Leyva, Monning, Pan, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mendoza

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-4, 6/3/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Postsecondary education: sexual assault cases

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires, as a condition of receiving state funds for student financial assistance, that the governing boards of each community college district, the California State University (CSU) Trustees, the University of California (UC) Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution adopt and carry out a uniform process for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault, as specified, and that they annually report specified information relative to sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking complaints, investigations, and outcomes, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law:

1. Establishes the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act) which requires public and private postsecondary educational institutions that receive federal financial aid to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses as well as establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

2. Requires institutions, under the Clery Act to collect, classify and count crime statistics, publish an Annual Security Report with crime statistics and security policies, and report crime statistics to the United States Department of Education. The Clery Act requires reporting of crimes in seven major categories, some with significant sub-categories and conditions, including crimes involving forcible and non-forcible sex offenses.

3. Amends the Clery Act (with the 2013 reauthorization of the federal Violence Against Women Act, which includes the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act) to, among other things, require institutions to compile statistics of incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking.  This Act also requires the Annual Security Report to contain additional information such as prevention programs, procedures once incidents are reported, and possible sanctions following an institutional disciplinary procedure.  The final rule implementing changes to the Clery Act was issued in October 2014, and is effective July 1, 2015.

Existing state law:

1. Requires the governing board of each community college district, the CSU Trustees, the UC Regents, and the governing board of independent postsecondary institutions to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking that includes specified components, including the affirmative consent standard. (Education Code § 67386)
   
   

2. Requires the governing board of each community college district, the CSU Trustees, the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, and the UC Regents to each adopt and implement at each campus or other facilities, a written procedure or protocol to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed on grounds maintained by the institution or affiliated student organizations receive treatment and information. (EC § 67385)
   
   

3. Requires each campus of the California Community Colleges (CCC) and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to post sexual violence prevention and education information on its campus website. The information must include specific components including dating violence, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence and stalking crimes, how to file a complaint, and the availability and contact information for resources for victims. (EC § 67385.7)
   
   

4. Requires each campus of the CCC and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to develop policies to encourage students to report any campus crimes involving sexual violence. (EC § 67385.7)

This bill:

1. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing boards of each community college district, the CSU Trustees, the UC Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to:

1. Adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault.

2. Report by April 1, 2017, and annually thereafter until December 31, 2021:

1. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated, and not investigated by the institution.

2. The number of investigations conducted in which respondents were found responsible, and not responsible, at institutional disciplinary proceedings.

3. The number of disciplinary sanctions imposed on respondents disaggregated by type of discipline in, at minimum, the categories of expulsion, suspension of at least two years, suspension of fewer than two years, and probation.

2. Requires the uniform process policies adopted, at minimum:

1. Refrain from carrying out different disciplinary processes on the same campus, or alter the uniform process based on student characteristics or status, or membership on an athletic team, or the student’s academic major.

2. Develop and implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years of suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for specified acts.

3. Provide for specific forms of discipline to include expulsion, suspension, loss of financial aid or scholarships, loss of activity privileges and removal from student housing.

3. Clarifies that sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking refer to all categories of misconduct in the institution’s sexual assault policies adopted pursuant to specified state law.

4. Requires that reporting required by this bill occur in a manner that provides appropriate privacy protections for the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator.
   
   

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, there need to be severe outcomes to

truly act as a deterrent and address rape culture on a campus. The author opines that universities must at least consider suspension for a minimum of two years if an individual is found guilty of sexual assault. In addition, the author is concerned that there is very little accountability for the outcome of adjudication proceedings for campus sexual assault cases.

This bill provides clear and consistent direction to universities on handling rulings on campus sexual assault cases through the campus adjudication system by requiring a two-year suspension for students found responsible for rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, and rape by a foreign object. It also provides for specified reporting on the number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated, and not investigated by the institution, and the outcomes of disciplinary proceedings and investigations.

2. National Guidelines. The Association of Student Conduct Administrators (ASCA) is a national membership association that, among other things, facilitates best practices of student conduct administration and conflict resolution on college and university campuses. ASCA notes that, given the spectrum of sexual misconduct, there must also be a spectrum of sanctions available, and recommends that sanctioning guidelines rather than absolute sanctions be used for two main reasons:

1) the circumstances of every case are unique and 2) mandatory sanctions may deter reporting of incidents and/or lead decision-makers to reach an inappropriate decision about responsibility in order to avoid a certain sanction. ACSA also suggests that sanctions should be relative and appropriate for the violation.

In its "2014 White Paper: Student Conduct Administration & Title IX: Gold Standard Practices for Resolution of Allegations of Sexual Misconduct on College Campuses" ASCA acknowledges that while the “one size fits all” concept is challenging for campuses, there are guiding principles that should underlie all student conduct policies and procedures and recommended practices required of universities in responding to allegations of sexual misconduct.

ASCA notes that the goals, restrictions, and outcomes of law enforcement investigations and campus conduct investigations are different, and notes in its white paper that, unlike the courts which use a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard to determine if someone committed a crime, the student adjudication process uses a “preponderance of evidence” standard, to determine if a student “more likely than not” violated institutional policies. Law enforcement investigates to determine whether or not a crime occurred. Campus conduct officials investigate to determine whether or not a policy was violated including whether a hostile environment was created by such conduct. ASCA notes that finding a student “guilty” of “rape” or any other criminal offense through a campus conduct process, could result in an appeal in the courts for failing to meet legal standards and/or due process rights of the accused, potentially jeopardizing the ability for colleges to respond promptly to separate a student from the campus community when needed. ASCA cites a specific example in which an appellate court reversed an institution’s finding of assault and battery because the university’s violation was predicated on the behavior being unlawful. That case was remanded back to the university to vacate the violation and remove the penalties that were imposed.

3. Related UC activity. In June 2014, President Napolitano formed the President’s Task Force on Preventing and Responding to Sexual Violence and Sexual Assault (Task Force). Thus far, the Task Force has produced two reports, the first in September 2014 outlined recommendations accepted by President Napolitano and reported to the Board of Regents, and the second in January 2015, provided an update on the recommendations that were implemented and discussed the next steps to implement the remaining recommendations during 2015. Two of the four remaining recommendations that the Task Force is working to implement are consistent with the provisions of this bill. These include the following:

1. Recommendation 2: Adopt systemwide, standard investigation and adjudication standards.

2. Recommendation 7: Initiate/develop a systemwide standard data collection system.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the CCC Chancellor’s Office anticipates a cost of $3,000 per community college district ($216,000 statewide costs) to establish new policies and report required data. If determined to be a reimbursable state mandate, these costs could create pressure to increase the community college mandate block grant. The CSU anticipates costs of around $100,000 attributable to the reporting requirements and the UC indicates costs to be minor and absorbable.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/28/15)

California Coalition Against Sexual Assault

California Federation of Teachers

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/28/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-4, 6/3/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Ting, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NOES: Beth Gaines, Grove, Jones, Wagner

NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Gallagher, Harper, Mathis, Thurmond

Prepared by: Kathleen Chavira / ED. / (916) 651-4105

8/31/15 11:43:33

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 967 (Williams) - Postsecondary education: sexual assault cases.

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

This bill requires, as a condition of receiving state funds for student financial assistance that the governing boards of each community college district, the California State University (CSU) Trustees, the University of California (UC) Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution adopt and carry out a uniform process for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault, and report specified information regarding sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking complaints.

Fiscal Impact:

• The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office anticipates a cost of $3,000 per community college district ($216,000 statewide costs) to establish new policies and report required data. These costs may be determined by the Commission on State Mandates to be reimbursable. If determined to be a mandate, this could create pressure to increase the community college mandate block grant. See staff comments. (Proposition 98)

• The CSU anticipates costs of around $100,000 attributable to the reporting requirements. (General Fund)

• The UC indicates costs to be minor and absorbable.

Background:

Existing federal law:

1. Establishes the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act) which requires public and private postsecondary educational institutions that receive federal financial aid to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses as well as establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

2. Requires institutions, under the Clery Act to collect, classify and count crime statistics, publish an Annual Security Report with crime statistics and security policies, and report crime statistics to the United States Department of Education.

3. With the 2013 reauthorization of the federal Violence Against Women Act, which includes the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act, amended the Clery Act to, among other things, require institutions to compile statistics of incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. This Act also requires the Annual Security Report to contain additional information such as prevention programs, procedures once incidents are reported, and possible sanctions following an institutional disciplinary procedure. The final rule implementing changes to the Clery Act was issued in October 2014, and is effective July 1, 2015.
   
   

Existing state law requires:

1. The governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University (CSU), the Regents of the University of California (UC), and the governing board of independent postsecondary institutions to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking that includes specified components, including the affirmative consent standard. (Education Code § 67386)
   
   

2. The governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the CSU, the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, and the Regents of the UC to each adopt and implement at each campus or other facilities, a written procedure or protocol to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed on grounds maintained by the institution or affiliated student organizations receive treatment and information.

(EC § 67385)

3. Each campus of the California Community Colleges (CCC) and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to post sexual violence prevention and education information on its campus website. The information must include specific components including dating violence, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence and stalking crimes, how to file a complaint, and the availability and contact information for resources for victims. (EC § 67385.7)
   
   

4. Each campus of the CCC and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to develop policies to encourage students to report any campus crimes involving sexual violence. (EC § 67385.7)

Proposed Law:

This bill requires, as a condition of receiving state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the CSU Trustees, the UC Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to:

1. Adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault. The policies included in the uniform process must prohibit carrying out a different disciplinary process on the same campus, or altering the uniform process based on the status or characteristics of a student, including a student’s membership on an athletic team, or a student’s academic major. The institution is required to develop and implement consistent standards of discipline and must provide for specific forms of punishment. It is the Legislature’s intent that the standards be fair, objective, consistent, and for the most egregious violations, provide at least two years of suspension and up to, and including expulsion.

2. Report by April 1, 2017, and annually thereafter until December 31, 2021 information including the number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated by, and not investigated by the institution. The report must also include the number of investigations in which the respondents were found responsible, and not found responsible, at institutional disciplinary proceedings and the number of disciplinary sanctions imposed on respondents who were found responsible. Finally the report must include the number of cases that were closed for other reasons. Reports are required to be posted on the institution’s website.

Staff Comments:

This bill makes it a condition of receiving state financial aid funding that governing boards of each community college district, the CSU, the UC, and each independent postsecondary institution adopt and carry out a uniform process for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault and report specified information regarding sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking complaints. Typically the Commission on State Mandates does not determine activities imposed by the state to be a reimbursable mandate if the decision to participate in the activity is discretionary. This bill gives each community college district the choice to implement the requirements of this bill or forgo state funds for student financial assistance.

If a community college district submits a claim for reimbursement, the Commission on State Mandates could possibly determine activities related this requirement to be a reimbursable based on practical compulsion – that there is no reasonable alternative but to comply with adopting required policies or that the failure to comply with this activity will result in certain and severe penalties. The determination of whether these activities would be reimbursable by the state could depend on whether the Commission on State Mandates believes the loss of state funding for financial aid is a certain and severe penalty.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 967

Subject: Postsecondary education: sexual assault cases

SUMMARY

This bill requires, as a condition of receiving state funds for student financial assistance, that the governing boards of each community college district, the California State University (CSU) Trustees, the University of California (UC) Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution adopt and carry out a uniform process for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault, as specified, and that they annually report specified information relative to sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking complaints, investigations, and outcomes, as specified.

BACKGROUND

Existing federal law:

1. Establishes the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act) which requires public and private postsecondary educational institutions that receive federal financial aid to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses as well as establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

2. Requires institutions, under the Clery Act to collect, classify and count crime statistics, publish an Annual Security Report with crime statistics and security policies, and report crime statistics to the United States Department of Education. The Clery Act requires reporting of crimes in seven major categories, some with significant sub-categories and conditions, including crimes involving forcible and non-forcible sex offenses.

3. With the 2013 reauthorization of the federal Violence Against Women Act, which includes the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act, amended the Clery Act to, among other things, require institutions to compile statistics of incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. This Act also requires the Annual Security Report to contain additional information such as prevention programs, procedures once incidents are reported, and possible sanctions following an institutional disciplinary procedure. The final rule implementing changes to the Clery Act was issued in October 2014, and is effective July 1, 2015.

Existing state law requires:

1. The governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University (CSU), the Regents of the University of California (UC), and the governing board of independent postsecondary institutions to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking that includes specified components, including the affirmative consent standard. (Education Code § 67386)
   
   

2. The governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the CSU, the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, and the Regents of the UC to each adopt and implement at each campus or other facilities, a written procedure or protocol to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed on grounds maintained by the institution or affiliated student organizations receive treatment and information.

(EC § 67385)

3. Each campus of the California Community Colleges (CCC) and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to post sexual violence prevention and education information on its campus website. The information must include specific components including dating violence, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence and stalking crimes, how to file a complaint, and the availability and contact information for resources for victims. (EC § 67385.7)
   
   

4. Each campus of the CCC and the CSU, and requests each campus of the UC, to develop policies to encourage students to report any campus crimes involving sexual violence. (EC § 67385.7)

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing boards of each community college district, the CSU Trustees, the UC Regents, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to:

1. Adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus of the institution for disciplinary proceedings relating to any claims of sexual assault.

2. Report by April 1, 2017, and annually thereafter until December 31, 2021:

1. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated, and not investigated by the institution.

2. The number of investigations conducted in which respondents were found responsible, and not responsible, at institutional disciplinary proceedings.

3. The number of disciplinary sanctions imposed on respondents disaggregated by type of discipline in, at minimum, the categories of expulsion, suspension of at least 2 years, suspension of fewer than two years, and probation.

2. Requires the uniform process policies adopted, at minimum:

1. Refrain from carrying out different disciplinary processes on the same campus, or alter the uniform process based on student characteristics or status, or membership on an athletic team, or the student’s academic major.

2. Develop and implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years of suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for specified acts.

3. Provide for specific forms of discipline to include expulsion, suspension, loss of financial aid or scholarships, loss of activity privileges and removal from student housing.

3. Clarifies that sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking refer to all categories of misconduct in the institution’s sexual assault policies adopted pursuant to specified state law.

4. Requires that reporting required by the bill occur in a manner that provides appropriate privacy protections for the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, there need to be severe outcomes to

truly act as a deterrent and address rape culture on a campus. The author opines that universities must at least consider suspension for a minimum of two years if an individual is found guilty of sexual assault. In addition, the author is concerned that there is very little accountability for the outcome of adjudication proceedings for campus sexual assault cases.

This bill provides clear and consistent direction to universities on handling rulings on campus sexual assault cases through the campus adjudication system by requiring a two year suspension for students found responsible for rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, and rape by a foreign object. It also provides for specified reporting on the number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated, and not investigated by the institution, and the outcomes of disciplinary proceedings and investigations.

2. National Guidelines. The Association of Student Conduct Administrators (ASCA) is a national membership association that, among other things, facilitates best practices of student conduct administration and conflict resolution on college and university campuses. ASCA notes that, given the spectrum of sexual misconduct, there must also be a spectrum of sanctions available, and recommends that sanctioning guidelines rather than absolute sanctions be used for two main reasons:

1) the circumstances of every case are unique and 2) mandatory sanctions may deter reporting of incidents and/or lead decision-makers to reach an inappropriate decision about responsibility in order to avoid a certain sanction. ACSA also suggests that sanctions should be relative and appropriate for the violation.

In its "2014 White Paper: Student Conduct Administration & Title IX: Gold Standard Practices for Resolution of Allegations of Sexual Misconduct on College Campuses" ASCA acknowledges that while the “one size fits all” concept is challenging for campuses, there are guiding principles that should underlie all student conduct policies and procedures and recommended practices required of universities in responding to allegations of sexual misconduct.

Association of Student Conduct Administrators (ASCA) notes that the goals, restrictions, and outcomes of law enforcement investigations and campus conduct investigations are different, and notes in its white paper that, unlike the courts which use a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard to determine if someone committed a crime, the student adjudication process uses a “preponderance of evidence” standard, to determine if a student “more likely than not” violated institutional policies. Law enforcement investigates to determine whether or not a crime occurred. Campus conduct officials investigate to determine whether or not a policy was violated including whether a hostile environment was created by such conduct. ASCA notes that finding a student “guilty” of “rape” or any other criminal offense through a campus conduct process, could result in an appeal in the courts for failing to meet legal standards and/or due process rights of the accused, potentially jeopardizing the ability for colleges to respond promptly to separate a student from the campus community when needed. ASCA cites a specific example in which an appellate court reversed an institution’s finding of assault and battery because the university’s violation was predicated on the behavior being unlawful. That case was remanded back to the university to vacate the violation and remove the penalties that were imposed.

3. Uniform disciplinary process versus uniform disciplinary sanctions. This bill removes the discretion to apply sanctions/discipline on a case by case basis and instead requires that an institution develop and implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, and rape by a foreign object. The committee may wish to consider the following questions:

1. In light of the less rigorous standard, of “preponderance of evidence,” should the institution’s adjudication proceedings be making findings that the student is “responsible” for criminal acts such as rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, or rape by a foreign object rape?

2. Will disciplinary panels be more hesitant to find a student in violation of sexual assault policies based on “preponderance” given a statutorily required minimum sanction?

3. Could “findings” of responsibility for acts that are criminal, versus acts that are violations of an institution’s adopted policies, and the subsequent discipline, be subject to challenge as exceeding the campus’ authority?

4. Will the mandatory minimum 2 year suspension result in victims choosing not to come forward, and have the unintended consequence of resulting in fewer attackers being held accountable?

5. While consistent process makes sense, shouldn’t the institution retain the discretion to consider the evidence and circumstance surrounding the alleged assault and determine the appropriate sanction?

Staff recommends the bill be amended to delete the 2 year suspension requirement and instead require the development and implementation of consistent standards for the imposition of discipline for students found responsible for sexual assault as these acts are defined by an institution’s policies in compliance with Education Code 67386.

Staff further recommends the bill be amended to insert: “It is the intent of the Legislature that the standards of discipline adopted and implemented by institutions be fair, objective and consistent, and severe enough to act as a deterrent to sexual misconduct.”

4. Related UC activity. In June 2014, President Napolitano formed the President’s Task Force on Preventing and Responding to Sexual Violence and Sexual Assault (Task Force). Thus far, the Task Force has produced two reports, the first in September 2014 outlined recommendations accepted by President Napolitano and reported to the Board of Regents, and the second in January 2015, provided an update on the recommendations that were implemented and discussed the next steps to implement the remaining recommendations during 2015. Two of the four remaining recommendations that the Task Force is working to implement are consistent with the provisions of this bill. These include the following:

1. Recommendation 2: Adopt systemwide, standard investigation and adjudication standards.

2. Recommendation 7: Initiate/develop a systemwide standard data collection system.

5. Loss of financial aid. This bill requires that the minimum standards provide for specific forms of discipline, including the loss of financial aid or scholarships. While some concerns have been raised that loss of financial aid may differentially affect low-income students, the provisions of this bill provide for its loss as one of several options, and would still appear to allow for some discretion on the part of the institution to determine the appropriate sanction. Staff notes, however, that the institution may not have control over eligibility for state and federal financial aid programs. The institution does likely have control over campus-based financial aid and scholarships. Staff recommends the bill be amended to clarify on page 3 line 3 that forms of discipline shall include loss of institutional financial aid or scholarships.

6. Need for clarity and consistency. This bill uses the terms “sexual assault” and “sexual violence.”

Staff recommends the bill be amended for consistency in the use of the term within subdivision (a) by replacing these terms with “sexual assault, as these acts are defined by an institution’s policies in compliance with Education Code 67386. In addition staff recommends the bill be amended on page 2 line 10 to clarify that its provisions apply to “registered students” as the institution’s jurisdiction over disciplinary proceedings and actions could only be applicable to students registered at the institution.

7. Clarify reporting requirements. Federal law requires postsecondary educational institutions to compile general statistics of incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. Each institution’s Annual Security Report must also contain information such as prevention programs, procedures once incidents are reported, and possible sanctions following an institutional disciplinary procedure.
   
   Federal legislation proposes the Campus Accountability and Safety Act, which includes reporting requirements that are similar to those proposed by this bill, such as the number of incidents reported to the Title IX coordinator, the number of cases processed through the student disciplinary process, and a description of the final sanction, if any was imposed.

This bill requires that the specified information be reported by April 1, 2017 and annually thereafter. Staff recommends the bill be amended to change the reporting date to October 1, consistent with federal reporting requirements. Staff further recommends the bill be amended to clarify that the report is to be posted on an institution’s website in a manner easily accessible to students.

Staff also recommends the bill be amended to add an additional category of reporting, “G) The number of cases that were closed for other reasons.”

8. Privacy and confidentiality. This bill requires that information be reported in a manner that protects the confidentiality of alleged victims and alleged perpetrators. Staff recommends the bill be amended in subdivision (d) line 28 to insert at the end of the sentence, “consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).”

SUPPORT

California Coalition Against Sexual Assault

California Federation of Teachers

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 967

Author:(Williams)

As Amended Ver:June 1, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Establishes minimum disciplinary standards and reporting requirements for sexual assault complaints received by California Community College districts (CCD), California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC) and independent postsecondary educational institutions. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus, for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault.

2. Requires the policies to conform to the following:

   1. The institution shall not carry out a different disciplinary process on the same campus for a matter of sexual violence, or alter the uniform process based on the status or characteristics of a student who will be involved in that disciplinary proceeding, including characteristics such as a student's membership on an athletic team, a student's academic major, or any other characteristic or status of a student.

   2. The institution shall develop and implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, or rape by a foreign object.

   3. Requires minimum standards to provide for specific forms of discipline, to include expulsion, suspension, loss of financial aid or scholarships, loss of activity privileges, and removal from student housing.

3. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report, by April 1, 2017, and each year thereafter, all of the following from the prior calendar year:

   1. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were received by the institution.

   2. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were investigated by the institution.

   3. The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints that were not investigated by the institution.

   4. The number of investigations conducted pursuant to 2) above, in which the respondents were found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

   5. The number of investigations conducted pursuant to 2) above, in which the respondents were not found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

   6. The number of disciplinary sanctions imposed on respondents who were found responsible, disaggregated by the type of discipline imposed in, at minimum, the categories of expulsion, suspension of at least two years, suspension of fewer than two years, and probation.

4. Requires the information to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of those involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator; and, sunsets the aforementioned reporting requirements on December 31, 2021.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, under the Kristen Smart Campus Safety Act, UC Regents, CSU Trustees, CCD governing boards, and independent colleges that meet specified conditions to enter into specific written agreements with local law enforcement agencies regarding the coordination and responsibilities for investigating Part 1 violent crimes which occur on campus. (Education Code (EDC) Section 67381)

2. Requires public and independent postsecondary institutions, as a condition of receipt of student aid funds, to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking that includes specified components and standards, including an "affirmative consent" standard for determining whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. Establishes a preponderance of evidence as the evidentiary standard for determining if sexual violence/harassment occurred. (EDC Section 67386)

3. Requires, under the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses. (20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1092(f))

4. Requires, under federal Title IX (20 U.S.C. Sections 1681 to 1688), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, assuming average costs of around $3,000 per community college district, statewide potential reimbursable state mandated costs would be $216,000 (General Fund-Proposition 98 (1988)) annually. Any costs to UC and CSU will be absorbable.

COMMENTS: According to the author, "the state of California has an obligation to provide a safe and secure learning environment at our college and university campuses. Students, families, and the general public need assurance that colleges and universities take campus sexual assault seriously. The Washington Post obtained data from approximately 100 institutions surveyed in 2012 and 2013; in regards to campus sanctions in sexual assault cases they discovered that out of 478 sanctions for sexual assault, only 12% resulted in expulsion and 28% resulted in suspensions."

The author believes that in order to address rape culture on college campuses, there needs to be meaningful sanctions that truly serve as a deterrent. This bill is intended to provide clear and consistent direction to colleges and universities on imposing sanctions for sexual assault, and will require reporting of adjudication outcome data to ensure compliance with these standards.

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0000736

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 967

Author:(Williams) – As Amended Ver:April 23, 2015

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill establishes minimum student disciplinary standards and reporting requirements for sexual assault complaints received by California Community College (CCC) districts, the California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC) and independent postsecondary educational institutions. Specifically, this bill requires all of the above entities, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, to:

1. Adopt and implement a uniform process for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault, including policies that, at a minimum, conform to both of the following:

   1. Not to provide a different disciplinary process on the same campus based on the status of characteristic of any student involved in a proceeding.

   2. Implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years suspension, and up to expulsion, for students found guilty of rape, forced sodomy, force oral copulation, or rape.

2. Report the following information annually: numbers of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking complaints received, investigated, and not investigated; the number of investigations where respondents were found responsible and not responsible, respectively, at disciplinary proceedings; and the number of disciplinary sanctions imposed, by the type of sanction.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Assuming average costs of around $3,000 per community college district, statewide potential reimbursable state mandated costs would be $216,000 (GF-Prop 98) annually.

2. Any costs to UC and CSU will be absorbable.

COMMENTS:

Purpose. According to the author, "the state of California has an obligation to provide a safe and secure learning environment at our college and university campuses. Students, families, and the general public need assurance that colleges and universities take campus sexual assault seriously. The Washington Post obtained data from approximately 100 institutions surveyed in 2012 and 2013; in regards to campus sanctions in sexual assault cases they discovered that out of 478 sanctions for sexual assault, only 12% resulted in expulsion and 28% resulted in suspensions."

The author believes that in order to address rape culture on college campuses, there needs to be meaningful sanctions that truly serve as a deterrent. This bill is intended to provide clear and consistent direction to colleges and universities on imposing sanctions for sexual assault, and will require reporting of adjudication outcome data to ensure compliance with these standards.

Analysis Prepared by: Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 21, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

Jose Medina, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 967

Author:Williams – As Amended Ver:March 26, 2015

SUBJECT: Postsecondary education: sexual assault cases

SUMMARY: Establishes minimum disciplinary standards and reporting requirements for sexual assault complaints received by California Community College districts (CCD), California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC) and independent postsecondary educational institutions. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to adopt and carry out a uniform process, applicable to each campus, for disciplinary proceedings related to claims of sexual assault.

2. Requires the policies to conform to the following:

1. The institution shall not carry out a different disciplinary process on the same campus for a matter of sexual violence, or alter the uniform process based on the status or characteristics of a student who will be involved in that disciplinary proceeding, including characteristics such as a student’s membership on an athletic team, a student’s academic major, or any other characteristic or status of a student.

2. The institution shall develop and implement a minimum standard of discipline of at least two years suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for: rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, rape by a foreign object, sexual battery, threat of sexual assault, and any other forms of sexual assault.

3. Requires minimum standards to provide for specific forms of discipline, to include expulsion, suspension, loss of financial aid or scholarships, loss of activity privileges, and removal from student housing.

3. Requires, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of a CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, the Regents of the UC, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution to report all of the following on an annual basis:

1. The number of sexual assault cases that were investigated by the institution;

2. The number of sexual assault cases that were referred for a disciplinary proceeding at the institution;

3. The number of sexual assault cases that were referred to local or state law enforcement;

4. The number of alleged perpetrators who were found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution;

5. The number of alleged perpetrators who were found not responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution;

6. A description of and the number of final sanctions imposed by the institution for each offense perpetrated; and,

7. The number of disciplinary proceedings at the institution that closed without resolution.

4. Defines “sexual assault” to include, but not be limited to, rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, rape by a foreign object, sexual battery, or a threat of sexual assault involving a student, whether on or off campus.

5. Requires the information to be reported in a manner that provides appropriate protections for the privacy of those involved, including, but not necessarily limited to, protection of the confidentiality of the alleged victim and of the alleged perpetrator.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the governing board of public, private, and independent postsecondary educational institution that receives public funds for student financial assistance to compile records of crimes on campus, make crime records available upon request, and to disclose a reported Part 1 violent crime, sexual assault, or hate crime, to the local law enforcement agency where the campus is located. (Education Code Section 67380, 67383)

2. Requires, under the Kristen Smart Campus Safety Act, UC Regents, CSU Trustees, CCD governing boards, and independent colleges that meet specified conditions to enter into specific written agreements with local law enforcement agencies regarding the coordination and responsibilities for investigating Part 1 violent crimes which occur on campus. (EDC Section 67381)

3. Requires public postsecondary educational institutions to each adopt, and implement at each campus or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed on grounds maintained by the institution or affiliated student organizations, receive treatment and information. The written procedures or protocols must contain specified information. (EDC Section 67385.)

4. Requires public postsecondary educational institutions, and requests UC, in collaboration with campus- and community-based victim advocacy organizations, to provide as part of campus orientations, educational and preventive information about sexual violence and to develop policies to encourage students to report any campus crimes involving sexual violence. (EDC Section 67385.7.)

5. Requires public and independent postsecondary institutions, as a condition of receipt of student aid funds, to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking that includes specified components and standards, including an "affirmative consent" standard for determining whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. Establishes a preponderance of evidence as the evidentiary standard for determining if sexual violence/harassment occurred. (EDC Section 67386)

6. Requires, under the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses. (20 U.S.C. section 1092(f))

7. Requires, under federal Title IX (20 U.S.C. sections 1681-1688), public and private postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the federal financial aid program to establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault, including:

1. Institutions are responsible for immediately and effectively responding to any sexual harassment or violence that creates a hostile environment. The institution must eliminate the harassment or violence, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects. Regardless of whether a student chooses to file a complaint with the institution, the institution is responsible for investigating and taking appropriate steps to resolve the situation. A criminal investigation does not relieve the school of its duty under Title IX.

2. Institutions must have and distribute policies against sex discrimination; the policy must state that inquiries concerning Title IX may be referred to the institution's Title IX coordinator or to the Office of Civil Rights (OCR).

3. Institutions must have a designated Title IX coordinator and notify students and employees of the name and contact information for the Title IX coordinator. The coordinator is responsible for overseeing all complaints of sex discrimination, which include harassment and assault, and identifying and addressing patterns or systemic problems.

4. Institutions are required to have and make known the procedures for students to file complaints of sex discrimination, and procedures must provide for prompt and equitable resolution of sex discrimination complaints. All complainants must have the right to present his or her case, including the right to a full investigation, to present witnesses and evidence, and to an appeal process (available to both parties).

5. Establishes a preponderance of the evidence standard (more likely than not) when determining if sexual harassment or violence occurred.

6. Provides complainants the right to be notified of the outcome of the complaint, including the sanction. Complainants cannot be required to abide by a nondisclosure agreement.

7. Authorizes grievance procedures to include voluntary informal methods (such as mediation) for resolving some types of sexual harassment complaints. However, mediation is not appropriate in cases involving allegations of sexual assault.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS: Background. College students who are victims of sexual assault are entitled to the protections and services provided to victims of the general population (law enforcement investigations, rape crisis center services, district attorney criminal prosecutions, etc.) and to the protections and services required to be provided by colleges and universities under state and federal laws (see: Existing Law). In recent years, there has been an increasing public awareness of sexual violence occurring on and near college campuses. State and federal governments have responded through laws and regulations that seek to strengthen partnerships between colleges and local law enforcement agencies (criminal investigations) and to improve campus handling of sexual assault complaints (Title IX responsibilities).

Committee oversight. On June 30, 2014, the Assembly Higher Education Committee held a joint oversight hearing to review compliance with federal sexual harassment laws at California's public universities. There was overwhelming consensus that campuses can and should do more to protect and respond to sexual assault. At that time, the author (and former-committee chair) committed to monitor campus progress and, if necessary, introduce follow-up legislation. This past fall, the author organized three roundtable discussions: in September at UC Berkeley, in October at UC Santa Barbara, and in December at UCLA. Among the comments presented by roundtable participants and the public was a strong sentiment that campuses were not doing enough to ensure meaningful penalties for students found in violation of sexual misconduct policies. In addition, when data regarding disciplinary outcomes was presented by the institutions to the author and committee members, many members noted that data showed very few sanctions being imposed on students found in violation of sexual misconduct.

Purpose of this bill. According to the author, "the state of California has an obligation to provide a safe and secure learning environment at our college and university campuses. Students, families, and the general public need assurance that colleges and universities take campus sexual assault seriously. The Washington Post obtained data from approximately 100 institutions surveyed in 2012 and 2013; in regards to campus sanctions in sexual assault cases they discovered that out of 478 sanctions for sexual assault, only 12% resulted in expulsion and 28% resulted in suspensions."

The author believes that in order to address rape culture on college campuses, there needs to be meaningful sanctions that truly serve as a deterrent. This bill is intended to provide clear and consistent direction to colleges and universities on imposing sanctions for sexual assault, and will require reporting of adjudication outcome data to ensure compliance with these standards.

Issues to consider.

1. Minimum sanctions. This bill requires institutions to impose minimum standards of discipline of at least two years suspension, up to expulsion, for students found responsible for any of the following:

1. Rape

2. Forced sodomy

3. Forced oral copulation

4. Rape by a foreign object

5. Sexual battery

6. Threat of sexual assault, and

7. Any other forms of sexual assault.

In the past year, a handful of institutions, including Amherst College, Duke University and Vassar College, have put more emphasis on expulsion as a penalty. Most institutional policies stop short of making expulsion mandatory. Duke’s policy refers to expulsion in cases of sexual misconduct as the “preferred sanction.” In 2014, Dartmouth College announced a policy making expulsion the mandatory punishment for students who commit certain kinds of sexual assault (rape).

The author and committee may wish to consider narrowing the violations under which an assailant would face these minimum disciplinary standards. Specifically, the author and committee may wish to consider removing "sexual battery, threat of sexual assault, and any other form of sexual assault" from this list. Removing these violations from this list would not preclude a campus from imposing a suspension or expulsion, but would provide a campus with flexibility in issuing discipline based on the circumstances of the violation.

2. Reporting requirements. To ensure disciplinary reporting requirements are consistent with other laws governing campus handling of sexual assault cases, the author and committee may wish to consider the following amendments:

(b) Notwithstanding Section 67400, in order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each independent postsecondary institution shall report all of the following on an annual basis:

(1) The number of sexual assault cases that were investigated by the institution.

(2) The number of sexual assault cases that were referred for a disciplinary proceeding at the institution.

(3) The number of sexual assault cases that were referred to local or state law enforcement.

(4) The number of alleged perpetrators who were found responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

(5) The number of alleged perpetrators who were found not responsible at the disciplinary proceedings of the institution.

(6) A description of and the number of final sanctions imposed by the institution for each offense perpetrated.

(7) The number of disciplinary proceedings at the institution that closed without resolution.

(1) The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking complaints received by the institution;

(2) The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking complaints investigated by the institution;

(3) The number of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking complaints that were not investigated by the institution;

(4) The number of investigations, conducted pursuant to (2), in which the respondent was held responsible;

(5) The number of investigations, conducted pursuant to (2), in which the evidence was found insufficient to hold the respondent responsible;

(6) The number of cases pursuant to (3) in which discipline was imposed, disaggregated by the type of discipline imposed in, at minimum, the following categories:

(i) Expulsion

(ii) Suspension of two years or longer

(iii) Suspension of fewer than two years

(iv) Probation

3. Definition of sexual assault. In conforming to the aforementioned reporting requirements, the definition of "sexual assault" as contained in this bill is no longer necessary. The author and committee may wish to consider the following amendment:

(c) For purposes of this section, “sexual assault” includes, but is not limited to, rape, forced sodomy, forced oral copulation, rape by a foreign object, sexual battery, or a threat of sexual assault involving a student, whether on or off campus. "sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking" includes all categories of misconduct in the institution's policy adopted pursuant to section 67386.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Federation of Teachers

National Association of Social Workers – California Chapter

California Coalition Against Sexual Assault

Opposition

None on File

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960