AB 2407: Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2024-09-28
Current Status:
Passed
(2024-09-28: Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 830, Statutes of 2024.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
Existing federal law, known as Title IX, prohibits a person, on the basis of sex, from being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subject to discrimination, which includes sexual harassment, under, any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, known as the Equity in Higher Education Act, requires, among other things, each postsecondary educational institution in the state to have a written policy on sexual harassment, including information on the complaint process and the timeline for the complaint process, as provided.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, until January 1, 2036, to report the results of an audit of the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2028, and every 5 years thereafter, until January 1, 2044, to report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than 3 community college districts, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
Existing federal law, known as Title IX, prohibits a person, on the basis of sex, from being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subject to discrimination, which includes sexual harassment, under, any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, known as the Equity in Higher Education Act, requires, among other things, each postsecondary educational institution in the state to have a written policy on sexual harassment, including information on the complaint process and the timeline for the complaint process, as provided.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, until January 1, 2036, to report the results of an audit of the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2028, and every 5 years thereafter, until January 1, 2044, to report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than 3 community college districts, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
Existing federal law, known as Title IX, prohibits a person, on the basis of sex, from being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subject to discrimination, which includes sexual harassment, under, any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, known as the Equity in Higher Education Act, requires, among other things, each postsecondary educational institution in the state to have a written policy on sexual harassment, including information on the complaint process and the timeline for the complaint process, as provided.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, until January 1, 2036, to report the results of an audit of the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
This bill would require the California State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2028, and every 5 years thereafter, until January 1, 2044, to report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than 3 community college districts, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
Existing federal law, known as Title IX, prohibits a person, on the basis of sex, from being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subject to discrimination, which includes sexual harassment, under, any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, known as the Equity in Higher Education Act, requires, among other things, each postsecondary educational institution in the state to have a written policy on sexual harassment, including information on the complaint process and the timeline for the complaint process, as provided.
This bill would require the California State Auditor to, Auditor, on or before January September 1, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, conduct until January 1, 2036, to report the results of an audit of the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California regarding their respective handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints, to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate each institutions compliance with applicable federal and state law in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member and determine if each institutions policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment, as defined, are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment. the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
Existing federal law, known as Title IX, prohibits a person, on the basis of sex, from being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subject to discrimination, which includes sexual harassment, under, any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, known as the Equity in Higher Education Act, requires, among other things, each postsecondary educational institution in the state to have a written policy on sexual harassment, including information on the complaint process and the timeline for the complaint process, as provided.
This bill would require the California State Auditor to, on or before January 1, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, conduct an audit of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California regarding their respective handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints, and would require the findings of those audits to be reported to specified legislative committees, as provided. The bill would require the audits to, among other things, evaluate each institutions compliance with applicable federal and state law in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member and determine if each institutions policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment, as defined, are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment.
(a)On or before September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. The audit for each institution shall do all of the following:
(1)Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(2)Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Evaluate two campuses from the California State University and two campuses from the University of California on all of the following:
(A)Whether existing campus policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(B)Whether existing campus policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(C)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(D)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(4)Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Sexual harassment has the same definition as in Section 66262.5.
(2)Systemwide office means the office of the Chancellor of the California State University or the office of the President of the University of California.
(d)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.Section 67382.2 is added to the Education Code, to read:67382.2.(a)On or before September 1, 2028, and every five years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts. The audit shall evaluate all of the following:
(1)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(2)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(4)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2044, and as of that date is repealed.
(a)On or before September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. The audit for each institution shall do all of the following:
(1)Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(2)Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Evaluate two campuses from the California State University and two campuses from the University of California on all of the following:
(A)Whether existing campus policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(B)Whether existing campus policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(C)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(D)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(4)Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the California State University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Sexual harassment has the same definition as in Section 66262.5.
(2)Systemwide office means the office of the Chancellor of the California State University or the office of the President of the University of California.
(d)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.Section 67382.2 is added to the Education Code, to read:67382.2.(a)On or before September 1, 2028, and every five years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts. The audit shall evaluate all of the following:
(1)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(2)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(4)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2044, and as of that date is repealed.
(a)On or before September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. The audit for each institution shall do all of the following:
(1)Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(2)Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Evaluate whether existing campus practices are adequate in preventing, detecting, and addressing sexual harassment and whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.(4)Review the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved.(5)(A)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent.(B)To the extent possible, the complaints analyzed pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall include complaints where the respondent was a student and the complainant was a student, complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was a student, and complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was an employee.(3)Evaluate two campuses from the California State University and two campuses from the University of California on all of the following:
(A)Whether existing campus policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(B)Whether existing campus policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(C)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(D)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(6)(4)Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, University and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Sexual harassment has the same definition as in Section 66262.5.
(2)Systemwide office means the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the office of the Chancellor of the California State University, University or the office of the President of the University of California.
(d)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.Section 67382.2 is added to the Education Code, to read:67382.2.(a)On or before September 1, 2028, and every five years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts. The audit shall evaluate all of the following:
(1)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
(2)Whether each community college districts policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
(4)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2044, and as of that date is repealed.
(a)On or before January September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall conduct report the results of an audit of the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California regarding their respective handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints. to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. The audit for each institution shall do all of the following:
(1)Evaluate compliance with applicable federal and state law in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member.(1)Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(2)Evaluate the efforts to coordinate and of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight in the institutions response to of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment complaints and determine if those the efforts of the systemwide office are in compliance with applicable adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Review the investigatory process of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved.(4)Determine if policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment.(5)(A)For allegations of sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze the consistency, reasonableness, and timeliness of discipline administered by the institution.(B)To the extent possible, assess if the discipline administered by the institution was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent with applicable federal and state law, the institutions policies and procedures, and best practices.(3)Evaluate whether existing campus practices are adequate in preventing, detecting, and addressing sexual harassment and whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
(4)Review the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved.
(5)(A)For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audits initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent.
(B)To the extent possible, the complaints analyzed pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall include complaints where the respondent was a student and the complainant was a student, complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was a student, and complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was an employee.
(6)Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Dating violence means violence committed by a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim.(2)Domestic violence has the same meaning as defined in Section 12291(a)(12) of Title 34 of the United States Code.(3)Sexual assault includes sexual violence, sexual battery, and any offense classified as a sex offense under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.(4)Sexual battery means the intentional touching of another persons intimate parts without affirmative consent, intentionally causing a person to touch the intimate parts of another without affirmative consent, or using a persons own intimate part to intentionally touch another persons body without affirmative consent. Intimate parts include sexual organs, anus, groin, breast, or buttocks of a person.(5)Sexual exploitation means a person taking sexual advantage of another person for the benefit of anyone other than that person without that persons consent, including, but not limited to, any of the following acts:(A)The prostituting of another person.(B)The trafficking of another person, defined as the inducement of a person to perform a commercial sex act, or labor or services, through force, fraud, or coercion.(C)The recording of images, including video or photograph, or audio of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, without that persons affirmative consent.(D)The distribution of images, including video or photograph, or audio of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, if the individual distributing the images or audio knows or should have known that the person depicted in the images or audio did not affirmative consent to the disclosure.(E)The viewing of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, in a place where that other person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, without that persons affirmative consent, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire.(6)(A)Sexual harassment means unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, made by someone from or in the work or educational setting, under any of the following conditions:(i)Submission to the conduct is explicitly or implicitly made a term or a condition of an individuals employment, academic status, or progress.(ii)Submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by the individual is used as the basis of employment or academic decisions affecting the individual.(iii)The conduct has the purpose or effect of having a negative impact upon the individuals work or academic performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work or educational environment.(iv)Submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by the individual is used as the basis for any decision affecting the individual regarding benefits and services, honors, programs, or activities available at or through the educational institution.(B)Sexual harassment includes sexual battery, sexual violence, sexual exploitation, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking.(7)Sexual violence means physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person without the persons affirmative consent. Physical sexual acts include both of the following:(A)Rape, defined as penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any part or object, or oral copulation of a sex organ by another person, without the consent of the victim.(B)Sexual battery, as defined in paragraph (4).(8)Stalking means engaging in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their own safety or the safety of others or suffer substantial emotional distress, or both.(1)Sexual harassment has the same definition as in Section 66262.5.
(2)Systemwide office means the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the office of the Chancellor of the California State University, or the office of the President of the University of California.
(d)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.
(a)On or before January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor shall conduct an audit of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California regarding their respective handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints. The audit for each institution shall do all of the following:
(1)Evaluate compliance with applicable federal and state law in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member.
(2)Evaluate efforts to coordinate and provide consistency and oversight in the institutions response to sexual harassment complaints and determine if those efforts are in compliance with applicable federal and state law and best practices.
(3)Review the investigatory process of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved.
(4)Determine if policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment.
(5)(A)For allegations of sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze the consistency, reasonableness, and timeliness of discipline administered by the institution.
(B)To the extent possible, assess if the discipline administered by the institution was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent with applicable federal and state law, the institutions policies and procedures, and best practices.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the California State Auditor shall report the findings of each audit conducted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, consistent with the requirements of Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(c)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Dating violence means violence committed by a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim.
(2)Domestic violence has the same meaning as defined in Section 12291(a)(12) of Title 34 of the United States Code.
(3)Sexual assault includes sexual violence, sexual battery, and any offense classified as a sex offense under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(4)Sexual battery means the intentional touching of another persons intimate parts without affirmative consent, intentionally causing a person to touch the intimate parts of another without affirmative consent, or using a persons own intimate part to intentionally touch another persons body without affirmative consent. Intimate parts include sexual organs, anus, groin, breast, or buttocks of a person.
(5)Sexual exploitation means a person taking sexual advantage of another person for the benefit of anyone other than that person without that persons consent, including, but not limited to, any of the following acts:
(A)The prostituting of another person.
(B)The trafficking of another person, defined as the inducement of a person to perform a commercial sex act, or labor or services, through force, fraud, or coercion.
(C)The recording of images, including video or photograph, or audio of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, without that persons affirmative consent.
(D)The distribution of images, including video or photograph, or audio of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, if the individual distributing the images or audio knows or should have known that the person depicted in the images or audio did not affirmative consent to the disclosure.
(E)The viewing of another persons sexual activity or intimate parts, in a place where that other person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, without that persons affirmative consent, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire.
(6)(A)Sexual harassment means unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, made by someone from or in the work or educational setting, under any of the following conditions:
(i)Submission to the conduct is explicitly or implicitly made a term or a condition of an individuals employment, academic status, or progress.
(ii)Submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by the individual is used as the basis of employment or academic decisions affecting the individual.
(iii)The conduct has the purpose or effect of having a negative impact upon the individuals work or academic performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work or educational environment.
(iv)Submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by the individual is used as the basis for any decision affecting the individual regarding benefits and services, honors, programs, or activities available at or through the educational institution.
(B)Sexual harassment includes sexual battery, sexual violence, sexual exploitation, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking.
(7)Sexual violence means physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person without the persons affirmative consent. Physical sexual acts include both of the following:
(A)Rape, defined as penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any part or object, or oral copulation of a sex organ by another person, without the consent of the victim.
(B)Sexual battery, as defined in paragraph (4).
(8)Stalking means engaging in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their own safety or the safety of others or suffer substantial emotional distress, or both.
REVISIONS: HeadingLine 1.|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2024 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 830, Statutes of 2024. |
| Sep 28, 2024 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Sep 11, 2024 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m. |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 76. Noes 0.). |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Assembly Rule 77 suspended. |
| Aug 28, 2024 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 30 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Aug 28, 2024 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.). |
| Aug 23, 2024 | Ordered to special consent calendar. |
| Aug 19, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Aug 15, 2024 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 15). |
| Jun 24, 2024 | In committee: Referred to suspense file. |
| Jun 18, 2024 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jun 12, 2024 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 12). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| May 29, 2024 | Referred to Com. on ED. |
| May 22, 2024 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| May 21, 2024 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 73. Noes 0. Page 5372.) |
| May 20, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 16, 2024 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| May 16, 2024 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (May 16). |
| May 16, 2024 | Assembly Rule 63 suspended. |
| May 1, 2024 | In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file. |
| Apr 17, 2024 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 16). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 17, 2024 | Coauthors revised. |
| Feb 26, 2024 | Referred to Com. on HIGHER ED. |
| Feb 13, 2024 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 14. |
| Feb 12, 2024 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2024 | AB 2407 Hart Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Aug 28, 2024 | Special Consent AB2407 Hart et al. | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Aug 15, 2024 | Do pass | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jun 24, 2024 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jun 12, 2024 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar | Senate Standing Committee on Education |
Passed |
|
| May 21, 2024 | AB 2407 Hart Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 16, 2024 | Do pass as amended. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 16, 2024 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| Cal State Student Association | ** Support | |
| California Faculty Association | ** Support | |
| California State University Employees Union | ** Support | |
| California State University, Office Of The Chancellor | ** Support | |
| CFT- a Union of Educators & Classified Professionals, Aft, Afl-cio | ** Support | |
| faculty association of california's community colleges | ** Support | |
| Generation Up | ** Support | |
| Ignite | ** Support | |
| Kern County Board of Supervisors | * Against | Jun 24, 2024 |
| Lutheran Office of Public Policy | * Support | Jun 24, 2024 |
| Office of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis | ** Support | |
| SAFE Campuses Coalition | ** Support | |
| University Of California Student Association | ** Support | |
| Youth Power Project | ** Support |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2407
Author:(Hart and Mike Fong)
As Amended Ver:June 18, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Authorizes the State Auditor, to periodically audit the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) on the institutions' ability to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus and to report the findings to the Legislature.
Senate Amendments
- Requires every three years, beginning on September 1, 2026, for the California State Auditor to audit the CSU and UC systemwide office, the CSU and UC systemwide policies and practices, and two campuses of the CSU and two campuses of the UC to determine if they are addressing and preventing sexual harassment on campus;
- Requires the California State Auditor to audit at least three community college districts every five years, beginning on September 1, 2028, to determine if the districts are adequately detecting, addressing, and preventing sexual harassment on community college campuses; and,
- Repeals the CCC audit requirement on January 1, 2044.
COMMENTS
Past State Audits and outcomes. One of the audits listed above was a joint audit between the CSU and the UC. In addition to the above audits, the Education Code does require the California State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)).
In 2013, Speaker-Emeritus Anthony Rendon requested the first audit after nine women from UC Berkeley filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. The women alleged the University was violating their rights under Title IX. The letter specifically asked the State Auditor to examine key areas such as reporting, training, and adjudication of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the campuses of UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, Chico State University, and San Diego State University were fulfilling their obligation to provide educational programs free from discrimination and restore educational equity when sexual harassment was reported. The State Auditor made 73 recommendations for the CSU and UC systems, for the campuses, and to the Legislature. The recommendations made to the CSU and UC were implemented according to the State Auditor.
In 2017, then Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian asked for an audit of the UC as it had been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle that the UC experienced 113 cases of sexual harassment between 2013 and 2016. Of those 113 cases, 57 involved physical contact and only 25 of the perpetrators had been fired. Released in 2018, the audit had 32 recommendations, all of which were implemented, according to the State Auditor.
In response to the audit in 2017, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate, held multiple hearings throughout the State on how hold the CSU and UC accountable and how to better protect students by doing more to prevent, respond to, and resolve incidents of sexual harassment.
According to former Senator Hannah Beth Jackson, this audit in 2017, was the impetus for her work on providing additional protections for students on postsecondary education institutions. Her recommendation to the California State Legislature, when interviewed by Committee Staff, was to continually audit the institutions because audits help inform the Legislature of areas where policy can be strengthened.
The final and most recent audit was requested by then Assemblymember Rudy Salas in 2022 and was seen as a bipartisan response to an investigative report from USA Today, that then-Chancellor Castro had mishandled sexual harassment cases when he was the president of Fresno State University. The letter asked for an audit to be conducted to determine if the CSU was appropriately addressing allegations of sexual harassment. The audit investigated the Chancellor's Office, Fresno State University, San José State University, and Sonoma State University. The audit made 16 multi-faceted recommendations to the CSU with varying time frames for implementation between July 2024, January 2025, and July 2026.
As of March 2024, the CSU has completed one of the 16 recommendations with rest pending implementation by their due date.
This measure will provide ongoing audits for the CCC, CSU, and UC systems and provide transparency and if necessary an avenue of accountability by which the Legislature could adopt laws based on the recommendations provided by the State Auditor to help improve the public higher education institution's response to sexual harassment on campuses.
According to the Author
"AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State's colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale. AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct audits of discrimination policies at the CSU, UC and CCC every three years. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California's higher education institutions."
Arguments in Support
The California State Employees Union, representing 36,000 non faculty staff across the 23 State University campuses, dictate the need for AB 2407, as "Despite the existence of these protections, sexual harassment and assault remain disturbingly pervasive across higher education institutions. In 2023, the State Auditor reviewed 40 cases of Title IX violations at CSU campuses. The audit revealed mishandling of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Requiring the State Auditor to conduct regular audits of discrimination policies and assess the application and enforcement of these policies will help foster much needed transparency and accountability across our state campuses. Students, faculty, and staff deserve to live, work, and learn in a safe environment and the ongoing audits will serve as a foundation upon which the State and our educational institutions can partner to address the epidemic of sexual harassment and assault across our higher education campuses."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Senate Committee on Appropriations:
- The State Auditor estimates General Fund costs of approximately $800,000 to conduct each of eight audits for a total of $6.4 million over a 20 year period. This estimate assumes that the audits required by this bill would be similar in scope to the most recent CSU audit on sexual harassment practices that took approximately nine months and over 5,000 hours of work with a full audit team. However, the State Auditor indicates that it would not request additional funds from the Legislature to complete them, but they would likely take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates.
- This bill could result in additional, unknown General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs each year, until January 1, 2044, for the UC, CSU, the Chancellor's Office, and community college campuses to the extent the audits require these institutions to respond to requests from the State Auditor.
VOTES:
ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 11-0-0
YES: Mike Fong, Ta, Arambula, Boerner, Chen, Alanis, Irwin, Jackson, Addis, Muratsuchi, Quirk-Silva
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0-7
YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas
ABS, ABST OR NV: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas
SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1
YES: Allen, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk
ABS, ABST OR NV: Alvarado-Gil
UPDATED
VERSION: June 18, 2024
CONSULTANT: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0004595
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2407
Author:(Hart and Mike Fong)
As Amended Ver:June 18, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Authorizes the State Auditor, to periodically audit the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) on the institutions' ability to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus and to report the findings to the Legislature.
Senate Amendments
- Requires every three years, beginning on September 1, 2026, for the California State Auditor to audit the CSU and UC systemwide office, the CSU and UC systemwide policies and practices, and two campuses of the CSU and two campuses of the UC to determine if they are addressing and preventing sexual harassment on campus;
- Requires the California State Auditor to audit at least three community college districts every five years, beginning on September 1, 2028, to determine if the districts are adequately detecting, addressing, and preventing sexual harassment on community college campuses; and,
- Repeals the CCC audit requirement on January 1, 2044.
COMMENTS
Past State Audits and outcomes. One of the audits listed above was a joint audit between the CSU and the UC. In addition to the above audits, the Education Code does require the California State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)).
In 2013, Speaker-Emeritus Anthony Rendon requested the first audit after nine women from UC Berkeley filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. The women alleged the University was violating their rights under Title IX. The letter specifically asked the State Auditor to examine key areas such as reporting, training, and adjudication of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the campuses of UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, Chico State University, and San Diego State University were fulfilling their obligation to provide educational programs free from discrimination and restore educational equity when sexual harassment was reported. The State Auditor made 73 recommendations for the CSU and UC systems, for the campuses, and to the Legislature. The recommendations made to the CSU and UC were implemented according to the State Auditor.
In 2017, then Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian asked for an audit of the UC as it had been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle that the UC experienced 113 cases of sexual harassment between 2013 and 2016. Of those 113 cases, 57 involved physical contact and only 25 of the perpetrators had been fired. Released in 2018, the audit had 32 recommendations, all of which were implemented, according to the State Auditor.
In response to the audit in 2017, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate, held multiple hearings throughout the State on how hold the CSU and UC accountable and how to better protect students by doing more to prevent, respond to, and resolve incidents of sexual harassment.
According to former Senator Hannah Beth Jackson, this audit in 2017, was the impetus for her work on providing additional protections for students on postsecondary education institutions. Her recommendation to the California State Legislature, when interviewed by Committee Staff, was to continually audit the institutions because audits help inform the Legislature of areas where policy can be strengthened.
The final and most recent audit was requested by then Assemblymember Rudy Salas in 2022 and was seen as a bipartisan response to an investigative report from USA Today, that then-Chancellor Castro had mishandled sexual harassment cases when he was the president of Fresno State University. The letter asked for an audit to be conducted to determine if the CSU was appropriately addressing allegations of sexual harassment. The audit investigated the Chancellor's Office, Fresno State University, San José State University, and Sonoma State University. The audit made 16 multi-faceted recommendations to the CSU with varying time frames for implementation between July 2024, January 2025, and July 2026.
As of March 2024, the CSU has completed one of the 16 recommendations with rest pending implementation by their due date.
This measure will provide ongoing audits for the CCC, CSU, and UC systems and provide transparency and if necessary an avenue of accountability by which the Legislature could adopt laws based on the recommendations provided by the State Auditor to help improve the public higher education institution's response to sexual harassment on campuses.
According to the Author
"AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State's colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale. AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct audits of discrimination policies at the CSU, UC and CCC every three years. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California's higher education institutions."
Arguments in Support
The California State Employees Union, representing 36,000 non faculty staff across the 23 State University campuses, dictate the need for AB 2407, as "Despite the existence of these protections, sexual harassment and assault remain disturbingly pervasive across higher education institutions. In 2023, the State Auditor reviewed 40 cases of Title IX violations at CSU campuses. The audit revealed mishandling of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Requiring the State Auditor to conduct regular audits of discrimination policies and assess the application and enforcement of these policies will help foster much needed transparency and accountability across our state campuses. Students, faculty, and staff deserve to live, work, and learn in a safe environment and the ongoing audits will serve as a foundation upon which the State and our educational institutions can partner to address the epidemic of sexual harassment and assault across our higher education campuses."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Senate Committee on Appropriations:
- The State Auditor estimates General Fund costs of approximately $800,000 to conduct each of eight audits for a total of $6.4 million over a 20 year period. This estimate assumes that the audits required by this bill would be similar in scope to the most recent CSU audit on sexual harassment practices that took approximately nine months and over 5,000 hours of work with a full audit team. However, the State Auditor indicates that it would not request additional funds from the Legislature to complete them, but they would likely take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates.
- This bill could result in additional, unknown General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs each year, until January 1, 2044, for the UC, CSU, the Chancellor's Office, and community college campuses to the extent the audits require these institutions to respond to requests from the State Auditor.
VOTES:
ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 11-0-0
YES: Mike Fong, Ta, Arambula, Boerner, Chen, Alanis, Irwin, Jackson, Addis, Muratsuchi, Quirk-Silva
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0-7
YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas
ABS, ABST OR NV: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas
UPDATED
VERSION: June 18, 2024
CONSULTANT: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0004595
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 2407 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2407
Author: Hart (D) and Mike Fong (D), et al.
Amended: 6/18/24 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/12/24
AYES: Newman, Ochoa Bogh, Cortese, Glazer, Gonzalez, Limón, Wilk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/15/24
AYES: Caballero, Jones, Ashby, Becker, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits
SOURCE: Generation Up
DIGEST:
This bill requires the California State Auditor to report (1) by September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the results of an audit of the ability of the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus; and, (2) by September 1, 2028, and every five years thereafter, the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Provides that, in part, “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Enforcement of compliance is initiated upon the filing of a complaint alleging a violation of Title IX. (Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to the 1964 Civil Rights Act)
- Requires each educational institution in California (K-12 and postsecondary education) to have a written policy on sexual harassment, and requires schools to display the policy in a prominent location in the main administrative building or other area of the campus or schoolsite, be provided as part of any orientation program for new students, provided to each faculty member, administrative staff and support staff, and appear in any publication of the school that sets forth the rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct.
(Education Code (EC) § 231.5 and § 66281.5) - Requires the State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years of a sample of no less than six institutions of postsecondary education in California that receive federal student aid and to evaluate the institutions compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act.
(United States Code, Title 20, § 102 (f)(1) and (5), and EC § 67382) - States legislative intent that institutions of higher education that are subject to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act should adopt a policy that allows victims or witnesses to report crimes to the campus police department or to campus security on a voluntary, confidential, or anonymous basis. (EC § 67382)
This bill:
- Requires, by September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor to report the results of an audit of the ability of the CSU, and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
- Requires the audit for each segment to do all of the following:
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate two campuses from the California State University and two campuses from the University of California on all of the following:
- Whether existing campus policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
- Whether existing campus policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
- For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audit’s initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
- Whether existing campus policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
- Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the CSU, and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Sunsets the provisions relative to CSU and UC on January 1, 2036.
- Requires by September 1, 2028, and every five years thereafter, the California State Auditor to report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts.
- Requires the audit to evaluate all of the following:
- Whether each community college district’s policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
- Whether each community college district’s policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved.
- For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audit’s initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, effectively deterred future harassment, and was consistent.
- Whether each community college district’s policies and practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment.
- Sunsets the provisions relative to community colleges on January 1, 2044.
- Requires the State Auditor to report the findings of each audit to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
Comments
- Need for the bill. According to the author, “AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State’s colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale.
“AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct triennial audits of sexual harassment policies at California’s public higher education institutions. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California’s higher education system.” - Recent report on how postsecondary education institutions address sexual discrimination. Throughout 2023, staff from the Assembly Higher Education Committee and this committee hosted fact-finding briefings with representatives from the CCC, CSU, UC, and various California Independent Colleges and Universities to understand how higher education institutions are preventing and addressing sexual discrimination on campuses. The Assembly Higher Education Committee released a report that provides a synopsis of the information gleaned from the briefings and a compilation of legislative proposals for how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address discrimination in all its forms on college and university campuses throughout California. https://ahed.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-02/a-call-to-action-report-2024_0.pdf
As noted in this report, “… the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination.” The report further highlighted one of the tools available to the Legislature is to ask the California State Auditor to conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with existing laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the CSU and UC twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits completed prior to 2023. The CSU continues to work on implementing recommendations from the most recent audit, which was completed in 2023. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor (in 2014 and 2018).
The California State Auditor is not an enforcement or regulator agency, but rather an oversight agency. The Auditor conducts audits to answer questions posed by the Legislature, but the Auditor does not have enforcement power to force agencies to comply with the audit recommendations. However, as the state does not have a higher education coordinating body, the State Auditor is the only independent investigatory agency in California that could provide information as to how the segments of public postsecondary education are complying with state and federal laws regarding the prevention of sex discrimination on collegiate campuses.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill imposes the following costs:
- The State Auditor estimates General Fund costs of approximately $800,000 to conduct each of eight audits for a total of $6.4 million over a 20 year period. This estimate assumes that the audits required by this bill would be similar in scope to the most recent CSU audit on sexual harassment practices that took approximately 9 months and over 5,000 hours of work with a full audit team. However, the State Auditor indicates that it would not request additional funds from the Legislature to complete them, but they would likely take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates.
- This bill could result in additional, unknown General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs each year, until January 1, 2044, for the UC, CSU, the Chancellor’s Office, and community college campuses to the extent the audits require these institutions to respond to requests from the State Auditor.
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/15/24)
Generation Up (source)
Office of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis
Cal State Student Association
California Faculty Association
California State University Employees Union
California State University, Office of the Chancellor
CFT — A Union of Educators & Classified Professionals, AFT, AFL-CIO
Faculty Association of California's Community Colleges
Ignite
Safe Campuses Coalition
Youth Power Project
OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/15/24)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas
Prepared by: Lynn Lorber / ED. / (916) 651-4105
8/18/24 9:07:42
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Anna Caballero, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular Session
AB 2407 (Hart) - Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits
Version: June 18, 2024 | Policy Vote: ED. 7 - 0 |
Urgency: No | Mandate: No |
Hearing Date: June 24, 2024 | Consultant: Lenin Del Castillo |
Bill Summary:
This bill requires the California State Auditor to conduct audits of the California Community Colleges (CCCs), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) regarding their ability to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
Fiscal Impact:
- The State Auditor estimates General Fund costs of approximately $800,000 to conduct each of eight audits for a total of $6.4 million over a 20 year period. This estimate assumes that the audits required by this bill would be similar in scope to the most recent CSU audit on sexual harassment practices that took approximately 9 months and over 5,000 hours of work with a full audit team. However, the State Auditor indicates that it would not request additional funds from the Legislature to complete them, but they would likely take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates.
- This bill could result in additional, unknown General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs each year, until January 1, 2044, for the UC, CSU, the Chancellor’s Office, and community college campuses to the extent the audits require these institutions to respond to requests from the State Auditor.
Background:
Existing law provides that, in part, "no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program of activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Enforcement of compliance is initiated upon the filing of a complaint alleging a violation of Title IX. The law also requires each school district and county office of education, or a local public or private agency that receives funding from the state or federal government, to designate a person to serve as the Title IX compliance coordinator to enforce compliance at the local level, including coordinating any complaints of non-compliance.
Existing law requires each educational institution in California (K-12 and postsecondary education) to have a written policy on sexual harassment, and requires schools to display the policy in a prominent location in the main administrative building or other area of the campus or schoolsite, be provided as part of any orientation program for new students, provided to each faculty member, administrative staff and support staff, and appear in any publication of the school that sets forth the rules, regulations, procedures and standards of conduct.
Existing law requires the CSU to submit by December 1 an annual report to the Legislature that includes specified information including but not limited to:
- The number of sexual harassment reports filed disaggregated by each individual campus and the Chancellor’s Office.
- The number of formal sexual harassment complaints under investigation, the length of time taken to begin an official investigation after a formal sexual harassment complaint is filed, and the length of time taken from the beginning of an investigation to the completion of a final investigative report, disaggregated by each individual campus and the chancellor’s office, as specified.
- The number of hearings conducted for formal sexual harassment complaints and the outcomes of those hearings disaggregated by each individual campus and the chancellor’s office. The outcomes of those hearings are to be grouped in specified categories.
- The number and outcomes of appeals requested by either the complainant or respondent disaggregated by each individual campus and the chancellor’s office.
- The number of sexual harassment reports filed disaggregated by each individual campus and the Chancellor’s Office.
Proposed Law:
This bill requires, by September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter until January 1, 2036, the California State Auditor to report the results of an audit of the ability of the CSU and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. This bill requires the audit for each segment to do all of the following:
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate two campuses from the CSU and two campuses from the UC on: whether existing campus practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment; whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices; whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved; and for sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audit’s initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and was consistent.
- Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the CCCs, the CSU, and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
This bill requires the State Auditor, on or before September 1, 2028 and every five years thereafter, to report the results of an audit of a sample of no less than three community college districts. The audit shall evaluate all of the following: whether existing campus practices are adequate to detect, address, and prevent the reoccurrence of sexual harassment; whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices; whether the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints can be improved; and for sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audit’s initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and was consistent. This section would sunset on January 1, 2044.
This bill requires the State Auditor to report the findings of each audit to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
Related Legislation:
AB 1790 (Connelly, 2024) requires the CSU to implement the recommendations provided in a 2023 California State Auditor report related to CSU’s handling of allegations of sexual harassment. AB 1790 is pending in this Committee.
AB 2492 (Irwin, 2024) requires each public postsecondary education institution to establish specified positions and designate at least one person to fulfill each position, including a confidential student advocate, a confidential staff and faculty advocate, and a confidential respondent services coordinator. AB 2492 is pending in the Senate Education Committee.
AB 2326 (Alvarez, 2024) recasts and modifies statutes that specify which individual or office within each public higher education segment is responsible for ensuring campus programs are free from discrimination, and who has the authority to oversee and monitor compliance with state and federal laws related to anti-discrimination, specifically including sexual harassment. AB 2326 is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
AB 2047 (Mike Fong, 2024) requires the CSU and the UC to establish a systemwide Title IX office, a systemwide Office of Civil Rights, a position of civil rights officer, and establishes duties for the systemwide Office of Civil Rights, the civil rights coordinator, and Title IX coordinator. AB 2047 is pending in the Senate Education Committee.
SB 1166 (Dodd, 2024) expands the scope of a currently-required CSU report containing a summation of the activities undertaken by each campus and by the systemwide Title IX office to also include outcomes of appeals, a list of personnel who are exempt from being a “responsible employee,” and a yet-to-be-developed annual report that compiles campus-based evaluations of how sex discrimination is addressed on campuses. SB 1166 is pending in the Assembly Higher Education Committee.
Staff Comments:
The Assembly Higher Education Committee released a report that provides a synopsis of the information gleaned from the briefings and a compilation of legislative proposals for how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address discrimination in all its forms on college and university campuses throughout California. The report notes that “…the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination.” The report further highlighted one of the tools available to the Legislature is to ask the California State Auditor to conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with existing laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the CSU and UC twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits completed prior to 2023. The CSU continues to work on implementing recommendations from the most recent audit, which was completed in 2023. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor (in 2014 and 2018).
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Senator Josh Newman, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 2407 Hearing Date: June 12, 2024
Author: | |||
Version: | May 16, 2024 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | Yes |
Consultant: | Lynn Lorber | ||
Subject: Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits.
SUMMARY
This bill requires the California State Auditor to report, by September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the results of an audit of the ability of the California Community Colleges (CCCs), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
BACKGROUND
Existing law:
- Provides that, in part, “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Enforcement of compliance is initiated upon the filing of a complaint alleging a violation of Title IX. (Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to the 1964 Civil Rights Act)
- Requires each educational institution in California (K-12 and postsecondary education) to have a written policy on sexual harassment, and requires schools to display the policy in a prominent location in the main administrative building or other area of the campus or schoolsite, be provided as part of any orientation program for new students, provided to each faculty member, administrative staff and support staff, and appear in any publication of the school that sets forth the rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct.
(Education Code (EC) § 231.5 and § 66281.5) - Requires the State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years of a sample of no less than six institutions of postsecondary education in California that receive federal student aid and to evaluate the institutions compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act.
(United States Code, Title 20, § 102 (f)(1) and (5), and EC § 67382) - States legislative intent that institutions of higher education that are subject to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act should adopt a policy that allows victims or witnesses to report crimes to the campus police department or to campus security on a voluntary, confidential, or anonymous basis. (EC § 67382)
ANALYSIS
This bill:
- Requires, by September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor to report the results of an audit of the ability of the CCCs, the CSU, and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
- Requires the audit for each segment to do all of the following:
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in, and oversight of, how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Evaluate whether existing campus practices are adequate in preventing, detecting, and addressing sexual harassment and whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Review the investigatory process for sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved.
- For sexual harassment complaints that are substantiated following an investigation, analyze selected complaints within two years of the audit’s initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent.
- Requires, to the extent possible, the complaints analyzed pursuant to (e) to include complaints where the respondent was a student and the complainant was a student, complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was a student, and complaints where the respondent was an employee and the complainant was an employee.
- Review and assess any other issues that are significant to the audit, including identifying any changes that might result in improvements in the ability of the CCCs, the CSU, and the UC to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Requires the State Auditor to report the findings of each audit to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
- Sunsets the provisions of this bill on January 1, 2036.
STAFF COMMENTS
- Need for the bill. According to the author, “AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State’s colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale.
“AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct triennial audits of sexual harassment policies at California’s public higher education institutions. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California’s higher education system.” - Recent report on how postsecondary education institutions address sexual discrimination. Throughout 2023, staff from the Assembly Higher Education Committee and this committee hosted fact-finding briefings with representatives from the CCC, CSU, UC, and various California Independent Colleges and Universities to understand how higher education institutions are preventing and addressing sexual discrimination on campuses. The Assembly Higher Education Committee released a report that provides a synopsis of the information gleaned from the briefings and a compilation of legislative proposals for how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address discrimination in all its forms on college and university campuses throughout California. https://ahed.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-02/a-call-to-action-report-2024_0.pdf
As noted in this report, “… the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination.” The report further highlighted one of the tools available to the Legislature is to ask the California State Auditor to conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with existing laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the CSU and UC twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits completed prior to 2023. The CSU continues to work on implementing recommendations from the most recent audit, which was completed in 2023. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor (in 2014 and 2018).
The California State Auditor is not an enforcement or regulator agency, but rather an oversight agency. The Auditor conducts audits to answer questions posed by the Legislature, but the Auditor does not have enforcement power to force agencies to comply with the audit recommendations. However, as the state does not have a higher education coordinating body, the State Auditor is the only independent investigatory agency in California that could provide information as to how the segments of public postsecondary education are complying with state and federal laws regarding the prevention of sex discrimination on collegiate campuses. - Fiscal impact. According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this bill would have the following costs:
- General Fund cost pressures to the State Auditor of about $800,000 annually, until January 2036, to conduct an audit for each system every three years.
- According to the State Auditor, the Auditor likely would not request additional funding from the Legislature to complete the audits required by this bill. However, the audits required by this bill would take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates. In other words, the State Auditor would devote about $800,000 worth of staff time to these audits annually that could have otherwise been spent completing other audits.
- Potential ongoing General Fund cost pressures, of an unknown amount, until January 2036, to UC, CSU, and CCC systemwide offices to the extent the ongoing audits require the institutions to devote staff time to respond to requests from the State Auditor.
- Potential ongoing General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs, of an unknown amount, until January 2036, to UC, CSU, and CCC campuses to the extent the ongoing audits require campuses to devote staff time to respond to requests from the State Auditor or their systemwide offices.
- General Fund cost pressures to the State Auditor of about $800,000 annually, until January 2036, to conduct an audit for each system every three years.
- Related legislation.
AB 1790 (Connelly, 2024) requires the CSU to implement the recommendations provided in a 2023 California State Auditor report related to CSU’s handling of allegations of sexual harassment. AB 1790 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 12, 2024.
AB 2492 (Irwin, 2024) requires each public postsecondary education institution to establish specified positions and designate at least one person to fulfill each position, including a confidential student advocate, a confidential staff and faculty advocate, and a confidential respondent services coordinator. AB 2492 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 19, 2024.
AB 2326 (Alvarez, 2024) recasts and modifies statutes that specify which individual or office within each public higher education segment is responsible for ensuring campus programs are free from discrimination, and who has the authority to oversee and monitor compliance with state and federal laws related to anti-discrimination, specifically including sexual harassment. AB 2326 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 12, 2024.
AB 2047 (Mike Fong, 2024) requires the CSU and the UC to establish a systemwide Title IX office, a systemwide Office of Civil Rights, a position of civil rights officer, and establishes duties for the systemwide Office of Civil Rights, the civil rights coordinator, and Title IX coordinator. AB 2047 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 19, 2024.
SB 1491 (Eggman, 2024) (1) requires the CSU Trustees and the governing board of each community college district to designate an employee at each of their respective campuses as a point of contact for the needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, transgender, gender-nonconforming, intersex and two-spirit faculty, staff, and students at the respective campus; (2) requires the point of contact to be a confidential employee, as specified; (3) requires the CSU Trustees and the governing board of each community college district to adopt and publish policies on harassment, intimidation, and bullying and include these policies within the rules and regulations governing student behavior; and, (4) requires California Student Aid Commission, beginning with the 2026-27 school year, to provide written notice to students who receive state financial aid whether their college or university has a religious school exemption from Title IX.
SB 1491 is pending in the Assembly Higher Education Committee.
SB 1166 (Dodd, 2024) (1) expands the scope of a currently-required CSU report containing a summation of the activities undertaken by each campus and by the systemwide Title IX office to also include outcomes of appeals, a list of personnel who are exempt from being a “responsible employee,” and a yet-to-be-developed annual report that compiles campus-based evaluations of how sex discrimination is addressed on campuses; and, (2) requests the UC and requires each community college district to also submit this report. SB 1166 is pending in the Assembly Higher Education Committee.
AB 810 (Friedman, 2024) (1) requests the governing board or body of an independent institution of higher education that receives state financial assistance, as part of the hiring process for specified positions, to require an applicant to disclose any final administrative decision or final judicial decision issued within the last seven years determining that the applicant committed sexual harassment; (2) requires the governing board of community college districts and the Trustees of the CSU (and requests the Regents of the UC), to require an applicant for an academic, athletic, or administrative position to sign a release form that authorizes the release of information by previous employers concerning any substantiated allegations of misconduct and, (3) requires the UC, CSU, CCC, independent institutions of higher education, and private postsecondary educational institutions, during the process to authorize a volunteer in an athletic department, to contact the current or former employer to determine if the applicant violated any employment policies. AB 810 is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
AB 2608 (Gabriel, 2024) expands currently required annual training for students on sexual violence and sexual harassment to also include topics related to alcohol- and drug-facilitated sexual assault and confidential support and care resources for situations that arise as a result of an act of sexual violence and/or sexual harassment. AB 2608 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on
June 12, 2024.
AB 2925 (Friedman, 2024) creates a requirement for specific anti-discrimination training or diversity, equity, and inclusion training offered by postsecondary education institutions to include training on how to combat and address discrimination against the five most targeted groups in the state. AB 2925 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 12, 2024.
AB 1575 (Irwin, 2024) authorizes students who receive a disciplinary notification the right to have an adviser of their choosing and requires postsecondary education institutions to provide training for the aforementioned adviser. AB 1575 is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
AB 1905 (Addis, 2024) prohibits an employee of a public postsecondary educational institution from being eligible for retreat rights and from receiving a letter of recommendation if the employee is the respondent in a sexual harassment complaint where a final determination has been made, the employee resigned, or the employee enters into a settlement with the institution. AB 1905 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 12, 2024.
AB 2048 (Mike Fong, 2024) requires the Chancellor of the CCCs to convene a community college sexual harassment and Title IX working group to review policies and procedures, determine if existing district policies and procedures are adequate, determine to what extent a systemwide model of compliance would best assist community colleges, and review and determine if the CCC Chancellor’s Office is effective in its duty to monitor community colleges for their compliance with state and federal laws pertaining to sexual harassment.
AB 2048 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 19, 2024.
AB 2987 (Ortega, 2024) requires each campus of the CSU and the CCC, and requests each campus of the UC, provide updates on the status of complaints of sexual discrimination to complainants and respondents. AB 2987 is scheduled to be heard in this committee on June 12, 2024.
SUPPORT
Office of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis
California Faculty Association
California Federation of Teachers
California State Student Association
California State University Employees Union
California State University, Office of the Chancellor
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
Generation Up
Ignite
Safe Campuses Coalition
Youth Power Project
OPPOSITION
None received
-- END --
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 2407
Author:(Hart and Mike Fong)
As Amended Ver:May 16, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) on the institutions' ability to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus and to report the findings to the Legislature.
Major Provisions
- Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on September 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the CCC, the CSU, and the UC on the institutions' ability to address and prevent sexual harassment on campus. The audit will do the following:
- Evaluate the systemwide policies and practices on sexual harassment and determine whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices;
- Evaluate the efforts of the systemwide office to provide consistency in and oversight in how campuses within the respective system respond to complaints of sexual harassment and determine if the efforts of the systemwide office are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment and are consistent with federal and state law and best practice;
- Evaluate whether existing campus practices are adequate in preventing, detecting, and addressing sexual harassment and whether the policies and practices are consistent with federal and state law and best practices.
- Review the investigatory process of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved;
- Analyze selected complaints, where the allegation of sexual harassment was substantiated, within two years of the audit's initial date to assess whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, adequate to deter future harassment, and consistent. The complaints selected should include complaints where the respondent is an employee and those where the respondent is a student. The complaints selected should also include examples where the complainant is a student and where the respondent is an employee.
- Permits the Auditor to examine and review other issues deemed significant for improving how the institutions address and prevent sexual harassment on campus.
- Requires the Auditor to report the findings of each audit conducted to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
- Sunsets the requirement or the audits on January 1, 2036.
COMMENTS
A Call to Action. In February 2024, the Assembly Higher Education Committee released a report entitled, "A Call to Action" which provided a synopsis of how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address sex discrimination in all its forms on campuses throughout California.
The "A Call to Action" report attempted to answer, "what tools are available to the Legislature to hold postsecondary education institutions accountable in fulfilling their obligation to provide campuses that are free from sex discrimination?" The report concluded the following:
"Unlike [the State's] Federal counterpart the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination."
"The report further highlighted one of the tools "available to the Legislature is to have the California State Auditor conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with state laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the California State University (CSU) and the University of California (UC) twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits before 2023. Committee Staff note the CSU is still working on implementing recommendations from the most recent 2023 audit. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor. The California State Auditor is not an enforcement agency, but rather an oversight agency. The Auditor conducts audits to answer questions posed by the Legislature, but the Auditor does not have enforcement power to force agencies' to comply with the audit recommendations."
The need for an outside agency to regulate compliance was mentioned by the "A Call to Action" report, specifically: "In conversations with faculty, staff, and students from the three public postsecondary institutions, Committee Staff asked if the State should consider establishing an office where complaints could be evaluated by a neutral third party. With the exception of the UC Academic Senate, every group resoundingly agreed on the need for additional oversight and regulation due to the mistrust in the higher education institutions' ability to address sex discrimination."
This measure works in tandem with other bills in the "A Call to Action" bill package by providing students, faculty, and staff their requested "independent agency" who will review compliance of the system with state and federal laws.
Past State Audits and outcomes. The below figure demonstrates the number of times in the last 10 years the public postsecondary education institutions have been audited on their handling of sexual harassment cases by the California State Auditor:
California Community Colleges | California State University | University of California | ||
0 | 2 | 2 | ||
Source: California State Auditor
One of the audits listed above was a joint audit between the CSU and the UC. In addition to the above audits, the Education Code does require the California State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)).
In 2013, Speaker-Emeritus Anthony Rendon requested the first audit after nine women from UC Berkeley filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. The women alleged the University was violating their rights under Title IX. The letter specifically asked the State Auditor to examine key areas such as reporting, training, and adjudication of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the campuses of UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, Chico State University, and San Diego State University were fulfilling their obligation to provide educational programs free from discrimination and restore educational equity when sexual harassment was reported. The State Auditor made 73 recommendations for the CSU and UC systems, for the campuses, and to the Legislature. The recommendations made to the CSU and UC were implemented according to the State Auditor.
In 2017, then Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian asked for an audit of the UC as it had been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle that the UC experienced 113 cases of sexual harassment between 2013 and 2016. Of those 113 cases, 57 involved physical contact and only 25 of the perpetrators had been fired. Released in 2018, the audit had 32 recommendations, all of which were implemented, according to the State Auditor.
In response to the audit in 2017, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate, held multiple hearings throughout the State on how hold the CSU and UC accountable and how to better protect students by doing more to prevent, respond to, and resolve incidents of sexual harassment.
According to former Senator Hannah Beth Jackson, this audit in 2017, was the impetus for her work on providing additional protections for students on postsecondary education institutions. Her recommendation to the California State Legislature, when interviewed by Committee Staff, was to continually audit the institutions because audits help inform the Legislature of areas where policy can be strengthened.
The final and most recent audit was requested by then Assemblymember Rudy Salas in 2022 and was seen as a bipartisan response to an investigative report from USA Today, that then-Chancellor Castro had mishandled sexual harassment cases when he was the president of Fresno State University. The letter asked for an audit to be conducted to determine if the CSU was appropriately addressing allegations of sexual harassment. The audit investigated the Chancellor's Office, Fresno State University, San José State University, and Sonoma State University. The audit made 16 multi-faceted recommendations to the CSU with varying time frames for implementation between July 2024, January 2025, and July 2026.
As of March 2024, the CSU has completed one of the 16 recommendations with rest pending implementation by their due date.
AB 2407 (Hart) will provide ongoing audits for the CCC, CSU, and UC systems and provide transparency and if necessary an avenue of accountability by which the Legislature could adopt laws based on the recommendations provided by the State Auditor to help improve the public higher education institution's response to sexual harassment on campuses.
According to the Author
"AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State's colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale. AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct audits of discrimination policies at the CSU, UC and CCC every three years. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California's higher education institutions."
Arguments in Support
The California State Employees Union, representing 36,000 non faculty staff across the 23 State University campuses, dictate the need for AB 2407, as "Despite the existence of these protections, sexual harassment and assault remain disturbingly pervasive across higher education institutions. In 2023, the State Auditor reviewed 40 cases of Title IX violations at CSU campuses. The audit revealed mishandling of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Requiring the State Auditor to conduct regular audits of discrimination policies and assess the application and enforcement of these policies will help foster much needed transparency and accountability across our state campuses. Students, faculty, and staff deserve to live, work, and learn in a safe environment and the ongoing audits will serve as a foundation upon which the State and our educational institutions can partner to address the epidemic of sexual harassment and assault across our higher education campuses."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations:
- General Fund cost pressures to CSA of about $800,000 annually, until January 2036, to conduct an audit for each system every three years.
- According to CSA, CSA likely would not request additional funding from the Legislature to complete the audits required by this bill. However, the audits required by this bill would take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don't have statutorily required completion dates. In other words, CSA would devote about $800,000 worth of staff time to these audits annually that could have otherwise been spent completing other audits.
- Potential ongoing General Fund cost pressures, of an unknown amount, until January 2036, to UC, CSU, and CCC systemwide offices to the extent the ongoing audits require the institutions to devote staff time to respond to requests from CSA.
- Potential ongoing General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs, of an unknown amount, until January 2036, to UC, CSU, and CCC campuses to the extent the ongoing audits require campuses to devote staff time to respond to requests from CSA or their systemwide offices.
VOTES
ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 11-0-0
YES: Mike Fong, Ta, Arambula, Boerner, Chen, Alanis, Irwin, Jackson, Addis, Muratsuchi, Quirk-Silva
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta
UPDATED
VERSION: May 16, 2024
CONSULTANT: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0003403
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Buffy Wicks, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2407
Author:(Hart) – As Introduced Ver:February 12, 2024
Policy Committee: | Higher Education | Vote: | 11 - 0 |
|
| ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill requires, beginning January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, the California State Auditor (CSA) to conduct an audit of California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) regarding their handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints.
FISCAL EFFECT:
- General Fund cost pressures to CSA of about $800,000 annually to conduct an audit for each system every three years.
According to CSA, CSA likely would not request additional funding from the Legislature to complete the audits required by this bill. However, the audits required by this bill would take priority over other Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved audits that don’t have statutorily required completion dates. In other words, CSA would devote about $800,000 worth of staff time to these audits annually that could have otherwise been spent completing other audits.
- Potential ongoing General Fund cost pressures, of an unknown amount, to UC, CSU, and CCC systemwide offices to the extent the ongoing audits require the institutions to devote staff time to respond to requests from CSA.
- Potential ongoing General Fund and Proposition 98 General Fund costs, of an unknown amount, to UC, CSU, and CCC campuses to the extent the ongoing audits require campuses to devote staff time to respond to requests from CSA or their systemwide offices.
According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years.
COMMENTS:
- Purpose. According to the author:
AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State’s colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale... This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California’s higher education institutions.
- Background. Current law requires CSA to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act, a federal act requiring colleges and universities to record specific crime statistics, including sexual assault.
In addition, in response to reports of sexual discrimination on university campuses, the Legislature has required CSA to conduct several audits of UC and CSU in the last ten years. The most recent audit of CSU, released in 2023, revealed mishandling by CSU of sexual discrimination allegations. In addition, the audit found that while CSU had implemented a recommendation from a 2014 CSA audit related to sexual discrimination compliance, CSU had stopped ongoing compliance monitoring due to budget constraints and lack of personnel.
This bill requires ongoing audits of CCC, CSU, and UC regarding their handling and investigation of sexual harassment complaints.
- Related Legislation. This bill is part of the Assembly’s “Call to Action” bill package. The bill package includes several bills related to addressing sexual discrimination on college and university campuses.
Analysis Prepared by: Natasha Collins / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: April 16, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Mike Fong, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2407 (
Author:Hart) – As Introduced Ver:February 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits
SUMMARY: Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) regarding their handlings and investigations of sexual harassment complaints and to report the findings to the Legislature. Specifically, this bill:
- Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the CCC, the CSU, and the UC regarding their handlings and investigations of sexual harassment complaints. The audit will do the following:
- Evaluate compliance with applicable federal and state laws in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member;
- Evaluate efforts to coordinate and provide consistency and oversight in the institution’s response to sexual harassment complaints and determine if those efforts are in compliance with state and federal laws;
- Review the investigatory process of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved;
- Determine if policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment complaints are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment;
- Analyze the consistency, reasonableness, and timeliness of discipline administered by the institution; and when possible, whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, fulfilled its intent to deter future harassment, and was aligned with state and federal laws, the system’s policies, and best practices.
- Requires the Auditor to report the findings of each audit conducted to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
- Defines the sexual harassment and the terms contained within the definition of sexual harassment for purposes of the audit and the State Auditor.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires the State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years of a sample of no less than six institutions of postsecondary education in California that receive federal student aid and to evaluate the institutions compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)). Declares it is the intent of the Legislature for institutions of higher education that are subject to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act should adopt a policy that allows victims or witnesses to report crimes to the campus police department or to campus security on a voluntary, confidential, or anonymous basis (Education Code (EDC) Section 67382).
- Establishes the CCC under the administration of the BOG of the CCC, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in California. The CCC shall be comprised of community college districts (EDC Section 70900).
- Trustees, through the BOT, the power, duties, and functions with respect to the management, administration, and control of the CSU system (Education Code (EDC) Sections 66606 and 89000 et. Seq.).
- Establishes the UC as a public trust to be administered by the Regents and grants the Regents full powers of organization and governance subject only to legislative control as necessary to ensure the security of funds, compliance with terms of its endowments, and the statutory requirements around competitive bidding and contracts, sales of property, and the purchase of materials, goods, and services (Article IX, Section (9) (a) of the California Constitution).
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Need for the measure. As illustrated by the author, “AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State’s colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale.”
Furthermore, “AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct audits of discrimination policies at the CSU, UC and CCC every three years. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California’s higher education institutions.”
A Call to Action. To understand how higher education institutions are preventing and addressing sex discrimination on campuses, staff from the Assembly Committee on Higher Education hosted fact-finding briefings with representatives from the CCC, the CSU, the UC, and various California Independent Colleges and Universities. The “A Call to Action” report is a synopsis of the information gleaned from the briefings and over 400 hours of research as to how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address sex discrimination in all its forms on campuses throughout California.
The “A Call to Action” report attempted to answer, “what tools are available to the Legislature to hold postsecondary education institutions accountable in fulfilling their obligation to provide campuses that are free from sex discrimination?” The report concluded the following:
“Unlike [the State’s] Federal counterpart the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination.”
“The report further highlighted one of the tools “available to the Legislature is to have the California State Auditor conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with state laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the California State University (CSU) and the University of California (UC) twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits before 2023. Committee Staff note the CSU is still working on implementing recommendations from the most recent 2023 audit. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor. The California State Auditor is not an enforcement agency, but rather an oversight agency. The Auditor conducts audits to answer questions posed by the Legislature, but the Auditor does not have enforcement power to force agencies’ to comply with the audit recommendations.”[1]
The State Auditor is not a regulatory agency nor can the State Auditor compel an agency they audit to implement their recommendations, however it is the only independent investigatory agency in California that could provide information as to how the California public postsecondary education institutions are complying with state and federal laws regarding the prevention of sex discrimination on collegiate campuses.
In addition to this measure, there are four bills in the “A Call to Action” bill package that contain a report mechanism from the public higher education institutions; however, AB 2407 (Hart) is uniquely different as it requires an independent agency to review whether the CCC, CSU, and UC are in compliance with state and federal laws pertaining to the prevention of sex discrimination.
The need for an outside agency to regulate compliance was mentioned by the “A Call to Action” report, specifically: “In conversations with faculty, staff, and students from the three public postsecondary institutions, Committee Staff asked if the State should consider establishing an office where complaints could be evaluated by a neutral third party. With the exception of the UC Academic Senate, every group resoundingly agreed on the need for additional oversight and regulation due to the mistrust in the higher education institutions' ability to address sex discrimination.”
AB 2407 (Hart) works in tandem with other bills in the “A Call to Action” bill package by providing students, faculty, and staff their requested “independent agency” who will review compliance of the system with state and federal laws.
Past State Audits and outcomes. The below figure demonstrates the number of times in the last 10 years the public postsecondary education institutions have been audited on their handling of sexual harassment cases by the California State Auditor:
California Community Colleges | California State University | University of California |
0 | 2 | 2 |
Source: California State Auditor
One of the audits listed above was a joint audit between the CSU and the UC. In addition to the above audits, the Education Code does require the California State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)).
In 2013, Speaker-Emeritus Anthony Rendon requested the first audit after nine women from UC Berkeley filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. The women alleged the University was violating their rights under Title IX. The letter specifically asked the State Auditor to examine key areas such as reporting, training, and adjudication of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the campuses of UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, Chico State University, and San Diego State University were fulfilling their obligation to provide educational programs free from discrimination and restore educational equity when sexual harassment was reported. The State Auditor made 73 recommendations for the CSU and UC systems, for the campuses, and to the Legislature. The recommendations made to the CSU and UC were implemented according to the State Auditor.[2]
In 2017, then Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian asked for an audit of the UC as it had been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle that the UC experienced 113 cases of sexual harassment between 2013 and 2016. Of those 113 cases, 57 involved physical contact and only 25 of the perpetrators had been fired. Released in 2018, the audit had 32 recommendations, all of which were implemented, according to the State Auditor[3].
In response to the audit in 2017, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate, held multiple hearings throughout the State on how hold the CSU and UC accountable and how to better protect students by doing more to prevent, respond to, and resolve incidents of sexual harassment.
According to former Senator Hannah Beth Jackson, this audit in 2017, was the impetus for her work on providing additional protections for students on postsecondary education institutions. Her recommendation to the California State Legislature, when interviewed by Committee Staff, was to audit the institutions because audits help inform the Legislature of areas where policy can be strengthened.
The final and most recent audit was requested by then Assemblymember Rudy Salas in 2022 and was seen as a bipartisan response to an investigative report from USA Today, that then-Chancellor Castro had mishandled sexual harassment cases when he was the president of Fresno State University. The letter asked for an audit to be conducted to determine if the CSU was appropriately addressing allegations of sexual harassment. The audit investigated the Chancellor’s Office, Fresno State University, San José State University, and Sonoma State University. The audit made 16 multi-faceted recommendations to the CSU with varying time frames for implementation between July 2024, January 2025, and July 2026.
As of March 2024, the CSU has completed one of the 16 recommendations with rest pending implementation by their due date.
While the “A Call to Action” report was critical of audits, due to the lack of enforcement, each recommendation from the previous audits have been, according to the State Auditor, conclusively implemented. Yet, in the State Auditor’s 2023 audit of the CSU a finding was made that the CSU had implemented a recommendation from the State Auditor from a 2014 audit, but stopped the ongoing compliance measure due to budget constraints and lack of personnel.
AB 2407 (Hart) will provide ongoing audits for the CCC, CSU, and UC systems and provide transparency and if necessary an avenue of accountability by which the Legislature could adopt laws based on the recommendations provided by the State Auditor to help improve the public higher education institution’s response to sexual harassment on campuses.
Arguments in support. The California State Employees Union, representing 36,000 non faculty staff across the 23 State University campuses, dictate the need for AB 2407, as “Despite the existence of these protections, sexual harassment and assault remain disturbingly pervasive across higher education institutions. In 2023, the State Auditor reviewed 40 cases of Title IX violations at CSU campuses. The audit revealed mishandling of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Requiring the State Auditor to conduct regular audits of discrimination policies and assess the application and enforcement of these policies will help foster much needed transparency and accountability across our state campuses. Students, faculty, and staff deserve to live, work, and learn in a safe environment and the ongoing audits will serve as a foundation upon which the State and our educational institutions can partner to address the epidemic of sexual harassment and assault across our higher education campuses.”
The Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges, states the need for AB 2407, stating that “the audits will evaluate compliance with laws, policies, and best practices, and the findings will be reported to specified legislative committees. FACCC has provided focused representation for community college professors to promote funding, academic freedom, faculty rights, professional development, student services, retirement benefits, and more since 1953. Our organization strives to create an educational environment that is equitable, accessible, appropriately funded, and led by a diverse and empowered faculty. FACCC strongly supports AB 2407 because it will help ensure that sexual harassment complaints are handled appropriately and consistently across the state's public higher education institutions. By requiring regular audits, this bill will hold colleges and universities accountable for adhering to best practices and complying with state and federal sexual harassment laws. This increased oversight and transparency will make it safer for students, faculty, and staff, which is essential for fostering a positive learning and working environment.”
Committee comments. AB 2407 (Hart) is the final bill of the “A Call to Action” bill package as it provides independent audits to help the Legislature understand where the institutions may need additional assistance in their compliance with state and federal laws pertaining to the prevention of sex discrimination. The below diagram illustrates how AB 2407 (Hart) will work with the other “A Call to Action” bills on reporting:
The Committee and Author’s office are engaged in continuing negotiations with CSU, UC, and the California State Auditor to address the scope of the measure to ensure the recommendations as provided are detailed and attainable by the systems.
Related legislation. In response to the recommendations put forth by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, 12 bills by 11 different authors were introduced. In addition to AB 2407 (Hart), the bills included in the bill package are as follows:
- AB 810 (Friedman) of 2024, currently pending referral in the Senate Rules Committee, would require the CCC, the CSU, and requests both the UC and private postsecondary education institutions, to implement a policy of requiring potential employees for academic, athletic, and administrative positions to disclose whether they have been the subject of a finding of sexual harassment and to permit the institution to contact past employers to inquire whether the applicant had any substantiated allegations of misconduct.
- SB 1166 (Dodd) of 2024, currently pending a hearing in the Senate Committee on Appropriations, would require the CCC, the CSU, and requests the UC to provide annual reports to the Legislature on the timelines and outcomes of sexual harassment complaints adjudicated by campuses within the system.
- SB 1491 (Eggman) of 2024, currently pending a hearing in the Senate Committee on Judiciary, provides an array of additional supports and protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, transgender, gender-nonconforming, intersex and two-spirit faculty, staff, and students at postsecondary education institutions throughout the State.
- AB 1790 (Connolly) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and requires the CSU to implement the California State Auditor’s findings by January 1, 2026, and to provide two reports to the Legislature on the implementation of the recommendations, as described.
- AB 1905 (Addis) of 2024, places conditions upon the use of settlements, informal resolutions, retreat rights, and letters of recommendations for public postsecondary education institutions of the state for employees who are the respondent in a sexual harassment complaint, as defined. AB 1905 (Addis) passed out of this Committee with a 11 - 0, and is currently pending a hearing in the Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee.
- AB 2047 (Mike Fong) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. This measure would the CCC, CSU, and the UC to establish a systemwide Office of Civil Rights and requires the system to hire a systemwide Title IX coordinator.
- AB 2048 (Mike Fong) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. The measure would require each campus of the CSU and UC, and each community college district, to establish a Title IX office in a private space for students and employees to disclose complaints of sex discrimination and establishes the responsibilities of the Title IX office in addressing and preventing sex discrimination on college campuses.
- AB 2326 (Alvarez) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, delineates which entities with the public higher education institutions are responsible for ensuring campus programs are free from discrimination and who has the authority to oversee and monitor compliance with state and federal laws; and, requires the leadership of all three public higher education institutions to present to the Legislature their efforts in addressing and preventing discrimination on campus.
- AB 2492 (Irwin) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and would require each public postsecondary education institution to establish the positions of a confidential student advocate, a confidential staff and faculty advocate, and a confidential respondent services coordinator.
- AB 2608 (Gabriel) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and would expand the requirements for annual training for students on sexual violence and sexual harassment to include information on drug-facilitated sexual assault and information related to confidential support and care resources.
- AB 2987 (Ortega) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. The measure would require each campus of the CSU and CCCs, and requests each campus of the UC, to provide status updates on the outcomes of complaints of sex discrimination to complainants and respondent; and, requires/requests that notice of a disciplinary action to the respondent be provided to the respondent within three schooldays of a decision.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California State Student Association
California State University Employees Union (CSUEU)
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
Safe Campuses Coalition
University of California Student Association
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960
Date of Hearing: April 16, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Mike Fong, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2407 (
Author:Hart) – As Introduced Ver:February 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Public postsecondary educational institutions: sexual harassment complaints: state audits
SUMMARY: Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of California (UC) regarding their handlings and investigations of sexual harassment complaints and to report the findings to the Legislature. Specifically, this bill:
- Authorizes the State Auditor, beginning on January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter, to conduct an audit of the CCC, the CSU, and the UC regarding their handlings and investigations of sexual harassment complaints. The audit will do the following:
- Evaluate compliance with applicable federal and state laws in cases where the respondent of a sexual harassment complaint is a student, faculty member, or staff member;
- Evaluate efforts to coordinate and provide consistency and oversight in the institution’s response to sexual harassment complaints and determine if those efforts are in compliance with state and federal laws;
- Review the investigatory process of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the process can be improved;
- Determine if policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment complaints are adequate to prevent, detect, and address sexual harassment;
- Analyze the consistency, reasonableness, and timeliness of discipline administered by the institution; and when possible, whether the discipline administered was proportional to the conduct, fulfilled its intent to deter future harassment, and was aligned with state and federal laws, the system’s policies, and best practices.
- Requires the Auditor to report the findings of each audit conducted to the respective chairs of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education, the Senate Committee on Education, and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
- Defines the sexual harassment and the terms contained within the definition of sexual harassment for purposes of the audit and the State Auditor.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires the State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years of a sample of no less than six institutions of postsecondary education in California that receive federal student aid and to evaluate the institutions compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)). Declares it is the intent of the Legislature for institutions of higher education that are subject to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act should adopt a policy that allows victims or witnesses to report crimes to the campus police department or to campus security on a voluntary, confidential, or anonymous basis (Education Code (EDC) Section 67382).
- Establishes the CCC under the administration of the BOG of the CCC, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in California. The CCC shall be comprised of community college districts (EDC Section 70900).
- Trustees, through the BOT, the power, duties, and functions with respect to the management, administration, and control of the CSU system (Education Code (EDC) Sections 66606 and 89000 et. Seq.).
- Establishes the UC as a public trust to be administered by the Regents and grants the Regents full powers of organization and governance subject only to legislative control as necessary to ensure the security of funds, compliance with terms of its endowments, and the statutory requirements around competitive bidding and contracts, sales of property, and the purchase of materials, goods, and services (Article IX, Section (9) (a) of the California Constitution).
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Need for the measure. As illustrated by the author, “AB 2407 will foster transparency, accountability, and safer learning environments within the State’s colleges and universities. In 2023, an audit of the CSU revealed that they mishandled of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Eleven of these cases were deemed unsubstantiated and closed at intake without proper documentation or rationale.”
Furthermore, “AB 2407 will require the State Auditor to conduct audits of discrimination policies at the CSU, UC and CCC every three years. The State Auditor will assess harassment prevention and investigation policies, potential process delays, appropriate disciplinary actions, and proper documentation of the investigations. This bill reinforces the State's commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of students and staff within California’s higher education institutions.”
A Call to Action. To understand how higher education institutions are preventing and addressing sex discrimination on campuses, staff from the Assembly Committee on Higher Education hosted fact-finding briefings with representatives from the CCC, the CSU, the UC, and various California Independent Colleges and Universities. The “A Call to Action” report is a synopsis of the information gleaned from the briefings and over 400 hours of research as to how the State can partner with higher education institutions to prevent and address sex discrimination in all its forms on campuses throughout California.
The “A Call to Action” report attempted to answer, “what tools are available to the Legislature to hold postsecondary education institutions accountable in fulfilling their obligation to provide campuses that are free from sex discrimination?” The report concluded the following:
“Unlike [the State’s] Federal counterpart the State does not have a regulatory body to provide an additional layer of transparency and protection for students, faculty, and staff who may wish to provide evidence of continual sexual harassment and discrimination.”
“The report further highlighted one of the tools “available to the Legislature is to have the California State Auditor conduct an audit to determine whether a higher education institution complies with state laws. In the last 10 years, the State Auditor has audited the California State University (CSU) and the University of California (UC) twice to assess their handling of sex discrimination claims. Many recommendations were made in each of the audits and it was found that CSU has fully implemented most, but not all, of the recommendations made by the State Auditor in audits before 2023. Committee Staff note the CSU is still working on implementing recommendations from the most recent 2023 audit. The UC has fully implemented the recommendations made by the State Auditor. The California State Auditor is not an enforcement agency, but rather an oversight agency. The Auditor conducts audits to answer questions posed by the Legislature, but the Auditor does not have enforcement power to force agencies’ to comply with the audit recommendations.”[1]
The State Auditor is not a regulatory agency nor can the State Auditor compel an agency they audit to implement their recommendations, however it is the only independent investigatory agency in California that could provide information as to how the California public postsecondary education institutions are complying with state and federal laws regarding the prevention of sex discrimination on collegiate campuses.
In addition to this measure, there are four bills in the “A Call to Action” bill package that contain a report mechanism from the public higher education institutions; however, AB 2407 (Hart) is uniquely different as it requires an independent agency to review whether the CCC, CSU, and UC are in compliance with state and federal laws pertaining to the prevention of sex discrimination.
The need for an outside agency to regulate compliance was mentioned by the “A Call to Action” report, specifically: “In conversations with faculty, staff, and students from the three public postsecondary institutions, Committee Staff asked if the State should consider establishing an office where complaints could be evaluated by a neutral third party. With the exception of the UC Academic Senate, every group resoundingly agreed on the need for additional oversight and regulation due to the mistrust in the higher education institutions' ability to address sex discrimination.”
AB 2407 (Hart) works in tandem with other bills in the “A Call to Action” bill package by providing students, faculty, and staff their requested “independent agency” who will review compliance of the system with state and federal laws.
Past State Audits and outcomes. The below figure demonstrates the number of times in the last 10 years the public postsecondary education institutions have been audited on their handling of sexual harassment cases by the California State Auditor:
California Community Colleges | California State University | University of California |
0 | 2 | 2 |
Source: California State Auditor
One of the audits listed above was a joint audit between the CSU and the UC. In addition to the above audits, the Education Code does require the California State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years on whether postsecondary education institutions in California are complying with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Crime Statistics Act (20 U. S. C. Sec 102 (f)(1) and (5)).
In 2013, Speaker-Emeritus Anthony Rendon requested the first audit after nine women from UC Berkeley filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. The women alleged the University was violating their rights under Title IX. The letter specifically asked the State Auditor to examine key areas such as reporting, training, and adjudication of sexual harassment complaints to determine if the campuses of UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, Chico State University, and San Diego State University were fulfilling their obligation to provide educational programs free from discrimination and restore educational equity when sexual harassment was reported. The State Auditor made 73 recommendations for the CSU and UC systems, for the campuses, and to the Legislature. The recommendations made to the CSU and UC were implemented according to the State Auditor.[2]
In 2017, then Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian asked for an audit of the UC as it had been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle that the UC experienced 113 cases of sexual harassment between 2013 and 2016. Of those 113 cases, 57 involved physical contact and only 25 of the perpetrators had been fired. Released in 2018, the audit had 32 recommendations, all of which were implemented, according to the State Auditor[3].
In response to the audit in 2017, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate, held multiple hearings throughout the State on how hold the CSU and UC accountable and how to better protect students by doing more to prevent, respond to, and resolve incidents of sexual harassment.
According to former Senator Hannah Beth Jackson, this audit in 2017, was the impetus for her work on providing additional protections for students on postsecondary education institutions. Her recommendation to the California State Legislature, when interviewed by Committee Staff, was to audit the institutions because audits help inform the Legislature of areas where policy can be strengthened.
The final and most recent audit was requested by then Assemblymember Rudy Salas in 2022 and was seen as a bipartisan response to an investigative report from USA Today, that then-Chancellor Castro had mishandled sexual harassment cases when he was the president of Fresno State University. The letter asked for an audit to be conducted to determine if the CSU was appropriately addressing allegations of sexual harassment. The audit investigated the Chancellor’s Office, Fresno State University, San José State University, and Sonoma State University. The audit made 16 multi-faceted recommendations to the CSU with varying time frames for implementation between July 2024, January 2025, and July 2026.
As of March 2024, the CSU has completed one of the 16 recommendations with rest pending implementation by their due date.
While the “A Call to Action” report was critical of audits, due to the lack of enforcement, each recommendation from the previous audits have been, according to the State Auditor, conclusively implemented. Yet, in the State Auditor’s 2023 audit of the CSU a finding was made that the CSU had implemented a recommendation from the State Auditor from a 2014 audit, but stopped the ongoing compliance measure due to budget constraints and lack of personnel.
AB 2407 (Hart) will provide ongoing audits for the CCC, CSU, and UC systems and provide transparency and if necessary an avenue of accountability by which the Legislature could adopt laws based on the recommendations provided by the State Auditor to help improve the public higher education institution’s response to sexual harassment on campuses.
Arguments in support. The California State Employees Union, representing 36,000 non faculty staff across the 23 State University campuses, dictate the need for AB 2407, as “Despite the existence of these protections, sexual harassment and assault remain disturbingly pervasive across higher education institutions. In 2023, the State Auditor reviewed 40 cases of Title IX violations at CSU campuses. The audit revealed mishandling of sexual harassment allegations, including inadequate disciplinary measures, delays in investigations, and insufficient documentation of cases. Requiring the State Auditor to conduct regular audits of discrimination policies and assess the application and enforcement of these policies will help foster much needed transparency and accountability across our state campuses. Students, faculty, and staff deserve to live, work, and learn in a safe environment and the ongoing audits will serve as a foundation upon which the State and our educational institutions can partner to address the epidemic of sexual harassment and assault across our higher education campuses.”
The Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges, states the need for AB 2407, stating that “the audits will evaluate compliance with laws, policies, and best practices, and the findings will be reported to specified legislative committees. FACCC has provided focused representation for community college professors to promote funding, academic freedom, faculty rights, professional development, student services, retirement benefits, and more since 1953. Our organization strives to create an educational environment that is equitable, accessible, appropriately funded, and led by a diverse and empowered faculty. FACCC strongly supports AB 2407 because it will help ensure that sexual harassment complaints are handled appropriately and consistently across the state's public higher education institutions. By requiring regular audits, this bill will hold colleges and universities accountable for adhering to best practices and complying with state and federal sexual harassment laws. This increased oversight and transparency will make it safer for students, faculty, and staff, which is essential for fostering a positive learning and working environment.”
Committee comments. AB 2407 (Hart) is the final bill of the “A Call to Action” bill package as it provides independent audits to help the Legislature understand where the institutions may need additional assistance in their compliance with state and federal laws pertaining to the prevention of sex discrimination. The below diagram illustrates how AB 2407 (Hart) will work with the other “A Call to Action” bills on reporting:
The Committee and Author’s office are engaged in continuing negotiations with CSU, UC, and the California State Auditor to address the scope of the measure to ensure the recommendations as provided are detailed and attainable by the systems.
Related legislation. In response to the recommendations put forth by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, 12 bills by 11 different authors were introduced. In addition to AB 2407 (Hart), the bills included in the bill package are as follows:
- AB 810 (Friedman) of 2024, currently pending referral in the Senate Rules Committee, would require the CCC, the CSU, and requests both the UC and private postsecondary education institutions, to implement a policy of requiring potential employees for academic, athletic, and administrative positions to disclose whether they have been the subject of a finding of sexual harassment and to permit the institution to contact past employers to inquire whether the applicant had any substantiated allegations of misconduct.
- SB 1166 (Dodd) of 2024, currently pending a hearing in the Senate Committee on Appropriations, would require the CCC, the CSU, and requests the UC to provide annual reports to the Legislature on the timelines and outcomes of sexual harassment complaints adjudicated by campuses within the system.
- SB 1491 (Eggman) of 2024, currently pending a hearing in the Senate Committee on Judiciary, provides an array of additional supports and protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, transgender, gender-nonconforming, intersex and two-spirit faculty, staff, and students at postsecondary education institutions throughout the State.
- AB 1790 (Connolly) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and requires the CSU to implement the California State Auditor’s findings by January 1, 2026, and to provide two reports to the Legislature on the implementation of the recommendations, as described.
- AB 1905 (Addis) of 2024, places conditions upon the use of settlements, informal resolutions, retreat rights, and letters of recommendations for public postsecondary education institutions of the state for employees who are the respondent in a sexual harassment complaint, as defined. AB 1905 (Addis) passed out of this Committee with a 11 - 0, and is currently pending a hearing in the Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee.
- AB 2047 (Mike Fong) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. This measure would the CCC, CSU, and the UC to establish a systemwide Office of Civil Rights and requires the system to hire a systemwide Title IX coordinator.
- AB 2048 (Mike Fong) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. The measure would require each campus of the CSU and UC, and each community college district, to establish a Title IX office in a private space for students and employees to disclose complaints of sex discrimination and establishes the responsibilities of the Title IX office in addressing and preventing sex discrimination on college campuses.
- AB 2326 (Alvarez) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, delineates which entities with the public higher education institutions are responsible for ensuring campus programs are free from discrimination and who has the authority to oversee and monitor compliance with state and federal laws; and, requires the leadership of all three public higher education institutions to present to the Legislature their efforts in addressing and preventing discrimination on campus.
- AB 2492 (Irwin) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and would require each public postsecondary education institution to establish the positions of a confidential student advocate, a confidential staff and faculty advocate, and a confidential respondent services coordinator.
- AB 2608 (Gabriel) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024, and would expand the requirements for annual training for students on sexual violence and sexual harassment to include information on drug-facilitated sexual assault and information related to confidential support and care resources.
- AB 2987 (Ortega) of 2024, is scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 16, 2024. The measure would require each campus of the CSU and CCCs, and requests each campus of the UC, to provide status updates on the outcomes of complaints of sex discrimination to complainants and respondent; and, requires/requests that notice of a disciplinary action to the respondent be provided to the respondent within three schooldays of a decision.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California State Student Association
California State University Employees Union (CSUEU)
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
Safe Campuses Coalition
University of California Student Association
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960
Discussed in Hearing
1MIN
Assembly Floor
1MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
1MIN
Assembly Floor
6MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education
Bill Co-Author(s):
