Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education

Sorry, I didn't have the microphone on. Welcome everyone to the Assembly Higher Education Committee. The Committee is called to order. Welcome to the Bill hearing of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. Whether here in person or watching virtually, it's good to have you join us here today and thank you so much for your patience here today as well. We're going to start as a Subcommitee first. Thank you so much to Vice Chair Ta for being here and our Committee Member summer Erwin as well.

And until we have a quorum, we'll start as a Subcommitee. I will go over some key elements of the structure of today's hearing. Please note that while this meeting hearing will not have phone testimony, we are accepting written testimony through the position portal on the Committee's website at www. Dot ahed.

Assembly CA gov bills will be taken up in sign in order Members of the Committee will present their bills last in numerical order, and noncommittee authors, please be sure to sign in at the sergeant's desk in room 127. Additionally, please note that the guideline for bills heard in this Committee is to allow testimony from two lead witnesses in support and two lead witnesses in opposition to speak for no more than two minutes each.

Stakeholder groups and entities that are neither in support nor in opposition will be allowed to give testimony for no more than two minutes when I call for tweeners, if a measure has more than two entities in the tweener category, only two will be allowed to speak for two minutes each.

And for Members of the Committee Members, if you'd like to respond to a roll call, ask a question, or provide a comment, please be sure you activate your mic and speak into your microphone for authors of bills of today. Authors, please note each Member presenting today will provide an opening statement and a closing statement. As previously stated, your two lead witnesses will each have up to two minutes to provide testimony as well. And until we have a quorum, then we'll take the consent calendar.

And just for FYI, we do have three bills on consent today. File item number nine, AB 1151, authored by Assembly or Tina Mckinnon file item number 16, AB 1541, authored by myself, Mike Fong, and file item number 17, Assembly Bill 1542, authored by myself, Mike Fong. So we'll take the consent calendar web quorum, and with that we're going to take up our items in Bill order. So first up, we have a summer Lowenthal. Welcome Assembly. Lowenthal. We're presenting item number 14, Assembly Bill 1524.

Welcome Assembly Lowenthal

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Members, I am pleased to present AB 1524, which will provide college students with access to free drug testing devices such as test strips, that can detect the presence of controlled substances that are commonly used to spike or lace an individual's drink. The underreported epidemic of drink spiking, commonly known by all as roofying, continues to plague California and the world. While drink spiking, drugging, or roofying can be perpetrated at almost any setting, a common location for this activity take place on college campuses.

In settings such as parties and other events, instances of sexual assault and rape are far too common on college campuses, and drink spiking is used as a means to subdue or to incapacitate a victim in order to facilitate the Commission of these crimes. Over the last two years, a number of articles and news stories around the country have indicated an uptick in drink spiking, or are at least bringing our attention back to a serious crime that often goes unreported and overlooked.

Drink spiking is an elusive crime, can be difficult to catch perpetrators in the act. Additionally, victims who have already been drugged may be disoriented, incapacitated, appear to be inebriated, unable to identify or communicate who the perpetrator may be, or may not even know who spiked their drink in the first place. Once someone has had their drink spiked, it is frequently too late to prevent the drugged individual from falling victim to another crime, such as sexual assault or rape.

Furthermore, once someone has been drugged, the controlled substances usually pass through their system overnight, and the presence of these substances is undetectable after the individual first urinates in the morning and would not be detectable without laboratory testing of hair follicles approximately 30 days after ingested after ingestion. Effectively, we need to prevent this before it happens. And the way that I like to look at this, Mr. Chair, is the same way that we looked at drunk driving 30 years ago.

Once somebody today is drunk and gets behind the wheel, it's too late. And collectively, we had to enact policy, change the culture, create accountability, and have a community approach to this. And I think that's precisely how we're going to have to approach the roofing epidemic. This is a start. It is not considered to be conclusive. We're going to have to be coming after this, year after year after year, until we create a dent in this problem.

While anyone can have their drink spiked, the victims of these crimes are often too often women and LGBTQ individuals. In fact, I would argue that we have allowed this problem to go so far and so long because it is women and LGBTQ plus individuals that are being impacted. And if it was men that were being targeted, we would have a completely different approach to this.

Due to the challenges of addressing and prosecuting this crime after it's taken place, preventative measures are common sense way to curb instances of drugging drug testing devices like the ones I have with me today. These are coasters. You have a drink, you simply put a few drops of your drink on these coasters, and you will easily be able to tell the presence of GHB or ketamine in your drink.

These devices are readily available and currently being distributed now sold at bars and nightclubs, as well as a number of colleges and universities throughout the United States and the UK. Also the US military. Using this en masse, ensuring that college students in California have access to free testing devices is a sensible way to help reduce the instances of drink spiking, hopefully prevent the more serious crimes that drink spiking is often used to facilitate, such as sexual assault and rape.

I'm very pleased to be joined by Dr. Kimberly Buss, Member of the California Academy of Family Physicians and a long standing family medicine physician from Sutter Health, who is now studying health policy at UCSF and UC law, San Francisco, here to testify in support of this Bill.

Thank you very much. As I was introduced, I am Dr. Kimberly Buss. I'm a Member of the California Academy of Family physician, and thank you very much for letting me speak to this Bill. I'm a graduate of the University of California, Davis School of Medicine and the family Medicine residency here in Sacramento. And I've been practicing in Sacramento for 24 years. I'm testifying for this Bill on behalf of the CAFP.

As you know, this Bill would require the California State universities and the community colleges to offer these tests free to college students in a central location. And for me, this is incredibly important. As family physicians, we offer care for patients from birth to end of life. And during my training and career, where I have practiced in almost every hospital, during my training here in Sacramento and in most of the health systems, I have seen many victims of assault.

I remember one young woman who I treated who was so confused and disoriented, her life was never the same afterwards. Rape and sexual assault harm physical health, mental health, and they affect well being. They increase the risk of anxiety and depression and you know, we have an epidemic of anxiety, depression in our young adults. As a family physician, I see this impact last an entire lifetime. Many of us know that.

We've seen it happen in our own communities, in our own families, in our own circle of friends, and for many of us, even for ourselves, our young adults need the resources and the tools to keep themselves safe. They need the kind of ability to empower themselves, as he said, to kind of change their culture, to begin talking about this topic and to really prevent unintentional drugging.

And that's the best way that they can prevent sexual assault and other crimes of violence, especially in situations such as college areas where use of alcohol and drinks are so common. So I respectfully ask you to support this Bill, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate the author for this issue and even come up with a really good. I really, really appreciate that. I think that we all aware that issue like that being happened in school and in campuses. I think that this is a time, long time overdue. And I really appreciate that had the courage to come up with the Bill. So I would like to be the co author of the Bill, if you don't mind.

Thank you.

Enthusiastically. Would love to have you as co author of this Bill, Mr. Todd.

Thank you so much, colleagues. Any further questions or comments? Seeing none. All right. We have a motion by Vice Chair Todd. Do we have a second? I'm sorry, we don't have a. Sorry, we don't you. Thank you so much, Mr. Vice Chair. Arthur, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your. I vote, and I just want to leave with one quick note. I spent this past weekend with family friends. It's my kids spring break and with another family and one of the kids, the other family is a student at old Miss, not in California. And he is the social chair of his fraternity. And at his fraternity, they made a decision to no longer serve open containers. In other words, no cups, no kegs, no mixed drinks.

That they will only serve closed containers. And overnight. Once they changed that policy in their fraternity, they became the most popular social place on the entire campus. Young people want safe environment to be able to go out and enjoy their lives and is incumbent upon us to do everything that we can to help provide that safe environment. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. Lowenthal and really appreciate you for bringing this measure forward. So thank you so much Lowenthal, for increasing protections for students by providing an access point to date rape drug testing kits. We know that sexual assaults occur too often, especially in a college environment, to our college students, and measures such as AB 1524 will help mitigate the risk by preventing accidental ingestion of date rape drugs. And I look forward to supporting this measure today. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we'll have item number five, authored by Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes, presenting Assembly Bill 603. Welcome, Assemblymember Cervantes. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, for the opportunity to present Assembly Bill 603 today. This bill would require the California Community College Board of Governors and the California State University Board of Trustees and request the University of California Board of Regents to provide the Legislature with an annual report on the diversity of its governing board and how it compares to the diversity of the student bodies that they serve.

These governing boards are responsible for appointing college and University chancellors and presidents, and set policies on academic admissions, finances, faculty, campus planning, and Title IX implementation. California's public higher education system is the largest and amongst the most diverse in the nation. Given the demographic trends, the majority of California's future college age population will come from demographic groups that have been historically underrepresented in higher education, including Latinos, African Americans, individuals coming from working class families, immigrants, students who are the first in their families to attend college.

When the membership of the governing boards of our public institutions of higher learning are inclusive of women, people of color, and our LGBTQ+ community, we allow students to see themselves reflected in the leaders of their colleges and universities. In addition, more diverse governing boards can also be more likely to promote diversity and inclusive policies at our public institutions of higher learning.

I want to be clear that this bill will not take any concrete steps to change the makeup of these governing boards or impose appointment requirements by the Governor. AB 603 would simply provide the public and the Legislature with more transparency on the diversity of each of the governing boards of each segment of California's public education system and its student bodies. Respectfully asked for your aye vote on AB 603.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Cervantes and- Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? I believe somebody's coming in from outside. Come on in. Welcome.

Hi. Thank you. Is this public comment or witnesses in support?

Witnesses in support, please.

Okay. Joshua Hagen with the Campaign for College Opportunity, in support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there 'tweeners in the hearing room? Committee Members, questions or comments?

I really appreciate the author and this is a really good Bill.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any further comments from colleagues? Seeing none, Assemblymember Cervantes, would you like to close please?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote when the time comes. Thank you Chair.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Cervantes, for bringing this important measure forward to provide data on whether our public higher education governing boards are reflective of the students that they serve. Also encourage you to think of the Committee's comment on the analysis to expand the reporting to also include faculty and staff as well as the governing board represents entire campus. I really appreciate you bringing this measure forward and I look forward to supporting this measure today. Thank you, Assemblymember.

Thank you Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much. Next item is item number, authored by Assemblymember Petrie-Norris. I'm not sure if she's in the hallway. We'll do a quick check. Or Mr. Berman? All right. Assemblymember Holden. Welcome. Assembly Bill 299, authored by Assemblymember Holden, item number 3. Welcome, Assemblymember, the floor is yours.

I'm sorry. Mr. Holden, are you presenting 252 as well, or 299 at this time? I just want to clarify.

299 and then 252.

Okay, perfect. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee staff, for your work on AB 299. I would like to start by saying that I have heard the concerns that relate--they relate to K-12 provisions of the bill. I am committed to accepting the proposed amendments that remove them at the next available opportunity. With that said, I'm here to present 299 as a legislator proud to be in a state that has always taken hazing seriously.

As you may know, California codified laws in 2006 that make engaging in hazing unlawful. Despite this, we continue to see hazing incidents occur around educational institutions, oftentimes proving to be fatal. It is clear that we fall short in addressing a key player: the educational institution itself. Institutions stand to benefit from students' participation in extracurricular activities, whether it's Greek life, collegiate athletics or even school band. How is it that these institutions can profit from students' participation, but not share the responsibility when a tragedy occurs?

AB 299 will address this by incentivizing educational institutions to be more proactive in addressing hazing incidents before they happen. This bill allows for civil action to be brought against an educational institution that knew or should have known of the hazing practice of an affiliate organization. It is time we hold all parties involved responsible, in the hope that we can prevent these tragedies in the future. Okay, here with me to testify in support of AB 299-

-Go ahead and proceed. I know we have a lot of people outside.

Then we'll just consider that an echo--is Krista Raimi on behalf of the Consumer Attorneys of California. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you about the importance of AB 299. My name is Krista Raimi. I am a Los Angeles trial attorney. My practice involves exclusively representing students who've been the victims of school bullying, sex abuse, hazing, and other violence, sexual violence as well. All of my cases involve either K-12 or college students.

And so this legislation strikes home with me. And when I was preparing for my testimony, I came across a recent lawsuit that was just filed from San Diego State involving a young man who drank six times his legal limit, as being required to by his fraternity brothers, and he was left unconscious and dumped at a hospital. There was other stories involving--a year earlier at that same institution, a young man by the name of Dylan Hernandez, who was also made to drink an incredible amount of alcohol during hazing, was unconscious, dumped on his bed, fell off his bunk and cracked his skull and later died. The stories like this are not new. They happen far too regularly.

And this law will help bring all of the parties to the table in the civil arena to make sure that all who are responsible are held accountable for the harm that they cause by requiring higher learning institutions to the same legal standard that everyone else is required to be held to. That if you know or should have known these hazing practices were occurring on your college campus, then you have a duty to intervene. You have to do something to make sure these practices do not persist.

And this is not requiring any kind of new standard or making any unrealistic foreseeability on the part of universities. Universities know what is going on. Coaches know when their football players are being hazed or their basketball players are being hazed. They turn a blind eye to it because maybe it builds brotherhood or sisterhood when these things are occurring. So I am very excited about this legislation, because I think that it is important to make sure that everyone is at the table.

In the civil jury system, no one is going to be getting duplicate damages. Everyone who is responsible will be at the table and the damages can be allocated by a jury. The fact finder who hears all of the evidence and can make sure everyone is held their proper apportionment of accountability. Thank you for the opportunity. I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room?

Good afternoon. Leilani Aguinaldo on behalf of the Schools Excess Liability Fund. I'm sorry I have to ask this. You announced amendments in the beginning, but I couldn't hear because the door was opening and closing. So I was hoping you could summarize again. Okay. In light of that, we look forward to seeing the proposed amendments and working with your staff. Our concerns were all because--our concerns with the bill were because of the application of AB 299 to K-12 public institutions. So we look forward to seeing those amendments and continuing to work with the author. Thank you.

Faith Borges on behalf of the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities, we'd align our comments with those of SELF. Thank you very much.

Good afternoon. Dorothy Johnson with the Association of California School Administrators also pleased for the amendments and look forward to working with the author. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Alex Graves, the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities. We had been waiting to see the amendments in print. We will unfortunately, with those amendments, need to move to oppose moving forward, as I've shared with the author's staff, but we look forward to those continued discussions.

Priscilla Quiroz here on behalf of the Public Risk Innovation, Solutions and Management. Originally had an opposed position, but listening to the amendments, we will go ahead and connect back with you. Thank you.

Oh, thank you so much. And I just want a further clarification. The Assembly Education Committee requested that K-12 be removed from the provisions of this legislation as they have previously held other bills that require campuses to develop and implement such policy. And Mr. Holden has agreed to take these amendments and will do so following bill passage. Thank you. Are there tweeners in the hearing room?

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Tyler Aguilar, on behalf of the University of California. We appreciate the author's interest in this issue. Continue to work with your staff and hopefully address our concerns as we move forward. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Michelle ... representing the University of Southern California. Still looking at the bill, but have some concerns.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Nune Garipian with the Community College League of California. We agree with the author's intent of the bill, but are concerned that this bill would push Prop 98: dollars away from providing necessary resources to our students and instead spent to defend costly lawsuits. And we appreciate the author's office and staff willing to work with us. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Satinder Malhi here on behalf of the California State University's Chancellor's Office. We do not have a formal position just yet on the bill. We do have concerns similar to those that were expressed earlier, but we have engaged with the author's office and look forward to continuing to work with them in good faith as this measure continues to move forward. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kyle Hyland on behalf of the Association of California Community College Administrators. We actually, sorry, we have an opposed position on the bill. Haven't had a chance to look at the amendments, but we look forward to working with the author in the future. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Thank you sergeants for checking in the hallway as well. Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Assemblymember Holden, would you like to close, please?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. And I appreciate, as I said at the beginning: you're working with us, and we're certainly working with you. And should the bill move out today, we will continue to work on this bill and with the opposition to find a pathway, if possible, to address their concerns as we move forward to Appropriations. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Holden. I'd like to thank you for bringing this important legislation forward. We know the hazing is always appalling, and we need to do everything possible to make sure that our students have recourse should hazing occur. I appreciate your willingness to take amendments removing K-12 from provisions of your bill, and I look forward to supporting this bill when we have quorum. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We are still awaiting one more Member for quorum, so just for everyone's application, thank you so much, and thank you, Members, for being here. Next up, we will have item number 1, Assembly Bill 252, authored by Assemblymember Chris Holden. Welcome, Assemblymember Holden.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon. Throughout the history of human race, no other activity has brought people of all socioeconomic walks of life together like sports. While we enjoy the many benefits of watching a competitive competition, we often forget about the physical, mental, and emotional toll that these events have on the actual players themselves.

When the final whistle blows and the crowds disperse or we turn off the television or radio, it is the college athlete who has to undergo the process of physical, mental, and emotional rejuvenation. It is no secret that college sports generate billions of dollars in revenue, which is similar to our professional leagues. However, when serious injuries occur, many of our professional players have substantial contracts and contacts that could sustain them in the event that participation in professional sports is no longer an option.

That is not the case when it comes to our college athletes. Oftentimes, the only income that keeps the students in college is his or her scholarship, and that income is not guaranteed because in the event of a serious injury, the scholarship may be in jeopardy and medical treatment may be needed beyond the player's school years. If the injury involves depreciation in brain activity or motor functions, the student may not be able to obtain a college degree at all.

In our state, we have led the nation in ensuring that California college athletes are able to benefit from their name, image, and likeness, but I believe that we can and should be doing more. That is why I've introduced AB 252, the College Athlete Protection act of 2023.

In July of last year, my office and our sponsor produced the language of this Bill and began having discussions with a number of Assembly and Senate Committee consultants, including the consultant for this Committee, and I thank you for that early engagement. I want to thank the consultant of this Committee for his thoughtful feedback to my staff. As a result of those discussions, we made clarifying amendments to this Bill. In late 2022.

I met with USC to walk them through the language and earlier this year my office had meeting with the UCS, CSUs and community colleges and other colleges and universities. During that time, we answered their questions and concerns both verbally and in writing. We continue to request an opportunity to engage with them. While there are some outstanding issues that will need to be considered should the Committee allow this Bill to move forward, I commit to the Committee to continue working with the opposition.

As you can see, this is an extremely comprehensive Bill that I believe will provide the fair income and health services that our college athletes deserve.

This Bill creates a state program paid by college athletic revenue to identify and enforce safety standards certify college athlete agents, ensure transparency in recruiting and enforce the act provides whistleblower protection and mandatory reporting of suspected safety violations establishes nc two, a division one athlete compensation that incentivizes degree completion mitigates academic suffering from high athletic time demands with a six year scholarship protects funding for all sports suspends the athletic Director for cutting a sport if any coach is paid over 500,000 a year requires title nine compliance transparency ensures college athletes at schools with over 20 million in athletic revenue and are stuck with sports related medical expenses.

I'm going to give every Member of this Committee 100% guarantee. I don't know how often you get that, but I'm giving you one today that nothing in my Bill would put our colleges in a position to violate title nine. This is extremely important to make clear, so I'm going to read the portion of the Bill that guarantees this.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if an institution of higher education Deems it necessary, the institution may adjust the amounts of degree completion Fund payments designation only to comply with title ix financial aid proportionality comparisons. This means the colleges have full discretion and freedom to ensure that they comply with title ix just as they do currently.

For instance, they could choose to pay a woman's basketball player more than men's basketball players, even if men's basketball players generate more money, and it would not violate AB 252. Also, there seems to be some incorrect information making its way around AB 252 would not force colleges to cut any sport or take any funding at all away from any sport. Again, I'll read the text from the Bill. In making annual degree completion Fund payment designations.

Pursuant to this section, an institution of higher education may opt may opt to only use all revenue reported for an academic year that exceeds its revenue reported for the 20212022 academic year. This leaves all existing funding for all sports completely untouched. If a college does not generate any new athletic revenue, the college wouldn't be required to pay anything at all into the degree completion Fund.

In closing, before we hear from Ramogi Huma, Executive Director of the National College Players Association, I just want to say that I had the privilege of watching my former college basketball team, the San Diego State Aztecs, play in the two 10th, two a finals. And while we did not take home the trophy, the Aztecs made history as the first California State University to make it to the finals. That's why this Bill is personal to me.

The remarkable performances that we all witnessed from these players calls for not only celebration, but also compensation. I hope that you will join me when we recognize the San Diego State Aztecs in the coming weeks with my resolution ACR 60 now to testify in support of this Bill. Ramogi Huma, Executive Director of the National College Players Association and you also have written testimony from Amy LeClaire, former San Jose State gymnast who experienced a health emergency this morning and could not be here with us today.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Mr. Holden. And go Aztecs. Hope everyone. That was an amazing run. But before we take up the comments from the expert witness, we're going to establish Quorum. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much, colleagues. Quorum has been established. Now I'd like to pass it over to your expert winners. Thank you, leader winners.

Good afternoon. My name is Ramo Gihuma. I'm a former UCLA football player and Executive Director of the NCPA, the National College Players Association. The NCPA asked this Committee to vote yes on AB 252. The current collegiate model is a predatory model that exploits athletes physically, academically, financially, and racially. NCAA colleges have collectively decided not to enforce safety standards and that sexually assaulting an athlete or killing an athlete in a hazardous workout is not against NCAA rules.

The NCAA's official position is that it has no duty to protect college athletes and no duty to educate college athletes. As a result, graduation rates among California's black football and men's basketball players was 64% and 43%, respectively. At colleges, black men's basketball players graduation rates were 0%. California's black athletes generate the lion's share of athletic revenue, yet suffer the worst graduation rates. In 2021, the US Supreme Court unanimously found the NCAA's athlete compensation limits deny athletes fair market value and violate federal antitrust law.

This is the exploitative and illegal collegiate model that California colleges are asking this Committee to preserve. Contrary to the college's false claims that AB 252 would require colleges to cut sports, AB 252 only requires degree completion Fund payments if a division one college generates new athletic revenue, where the new revenue is used as the exclusive source of the payments. This allows colleges to maintain existing funding levels to preserve all sports. If a college doesn't generate new athletic revenue, it won't have to pay athletes one penny.

And as a catchall, to prevent any title nine violation, AB 252 explicitly allows colleges to modify payments as they see fit to ensure title nine compliance. AB 252 is a carefully crafted Bill that will bring forth a collegiate model that is safe and fair for everyone. The NCPA asked for a Us vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Thank you. Sergeants, please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members. Mitch Steiger with the California Labor Federation in sport. Are there any additional witnesses in support? All right.

Seeing none, are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Please. Please. Proceeding.

Good afternoon. Chair Fong. Members of the Committee, my name is Kendall Spencer. And I'm here with the utmost gratitude for the opportunity to work alongside each and every one of you to carefully craft a better world for our student athletes here in the State of California. Members of the Committee, I'm not just here as an Olympic hopeful. I'm not just here as a national champion. And I'm not just here as the co author for the NCAA's constitution, signed last year.

I'm here as a true native son of the State of California who has benefited tremendously from Olympic sports programming. As we discuss the merits of this irreversible action, forever altering the lives of the student athletes here in the State of California, I want to caution each and every one of us from confusing movement with progress. Remember, Ortega, the purpose of intercollegiate athletics is to provide student athletes with education.

Education that will serve them well throughout their lives, while also having the opportunity to train and compete at the highest of levels. They teach character while bringing diverse students to campus who may not have had the opportunity to obtain these types of opportunities without these types of pathways. Under this Bill, the ability for schools to support Olympic and non revenue generating sports will be crushed in order to maintain revenue generating sports.

And title nine compliance, which in the State of California, 90% of our student athletes participate in Olympic sports. Track and field, for example, is one of the most diverse collegiate Olympic sports in our country. More than half of the 2020 US Olympic team are women, 47% of the 2020 us track and field team and olympians are persons of color. Members of the Committee there is no better feeling than putting on the Team USA jersey and hearing our nation's anthem in the stadium.

And as a Member of a variety of USOPC and NCAA working groups, I'm here because we all want opportunities that occupy the hearts and minds of our families, of our teammates, and of course, of our children. We all want to get something done to help these communities. But when it comes to the welfare of our student athletes, it's not just about getting something done. It's about getting it right.

AB 252 is drafted will put immense amounts of pressure on athletic departments to redirect critical resources away from Olympic sports. Mr. Huma earlier mentioned the balancing effect of not having to put these types of pressures on athletic departments to cut sports because of the revenue model.

But one of the critical issues with the revenue model is there is no distinction between the types of revenue coming into the University, and this is one of the many reasons why I am vehemently opposed to AB 252. I want to thank you all for allowing me the floor to be able to speak about this today, and I look forward to working with each and every one of you to create a better Bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members. My name is Sam Adams and I'm the deputy Chief of Staff in athletics at the University of Southern California and a former student athlete at Diver and Diver at USC. And I'm here in opposition of AB 252 on behalf of the University of Southern California. Though we are a private, nonprofit University, the system of financing our athletic Department resembles that of our colleagues at public institutions.

Virtually all of the department's revenue comes from football and men's basketball, through meteorites, ticket sales, donations, sponsorship and licensing. The reality is, the majority of athletic programs across the country operate at a deficit year after year, in a large part as a result of sponsoring women's sports, Olympic sports, and non revenue generating sports. Many view college athletics only through the lens of major football and men's basketball players, and want to selectively apply the professional model to those two sports and the amateur model to the rest.

But the opportunity that I had to compete in the sport I love at the highest level while pursuing a world class education was afforded to me at USC. That experience was possible because of the revenue from football and men's basketball, the true lifeblood of all of college athletics. Additionally, AB 252 skews to almost certainly benefit only male student athletes due to the definition of the fair market value compensation contained in the Bill.

We've just celebrated the 50th anniversary of title nine, which promotes and protects gender equity in higher education. And we are here today talking about a Bill that violates everything title nine represents. Finally, AB 252 would directly upset youth sports, the ecosystem that fuels athletics at the collegiate, professional, and Olympic level. The Mission Viejo Nadadors Youth Diving Club and the USC swimming and diving team changed my life.

The gift of sport transcends the level that you compete at, and my hope is that gift continues to be accessible to young aspiring athletes. I am proud to call California home, and I commend this body for enacting legislation for student athletes to monetize their name, image and likeness. Nil is the item that deserves our immediate attention, and the existing framework championed here can be the foundation to achieve many of the objectives outlined in this Bill.

The key difference is that while Nil is additive to the resources and opportunities that we provide student athletes, revenue sharing deducts and destructs. AB 252 is not the answer, and we respectfully urge you to vote no on this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in opposition in the hearing state? Quickly.

Mr. Chair. Tyler Aguilar, on behalf of the University Of California, we're in opposition, and we're. Here to help answer any technical questions that you or any of the Committee Members have today. Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Alex Graves, the Association of Independent California Colleges and universities, representing over 80 private, nonprofit colleges in the state. We are in opposition. Thank you.

Eric Baku with the CSU chancellor's office. Also here in opposition.

Michelle Roll Gava, representing the University of Southern California, in strong opposition.

Ryan McLahnie with the community College League of California, representing California's 73 community college districts. In opposition.

Veronica Vialobos Cruz, on behalf of Stanford University, in opposition.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Are there tweeners in the hearing room?

Good afternoon, chair Fong and Committee Members. My name is Liam Anderson. I'm a student athlete at Stanford University. I'm captain of the track and field and cross country teams and a Member co President of our student athlete Advisory Committee. I'm also a Member of the PAC 12 student athlete leadership team, and I'm here to ask Assemblyman Holden to be willing to engage directly with student athletes on this Bill. We have a lot to say. We have a lot of input and we'd love the opportunity. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any additional tweener, sergeant? Seeing none, bring it back to the Committee. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments? Yes, Assembly Member Ortega I want to thank.

The author for bringing this forward. I think this is a critically important step in making sure that athletes are, student. Athletes aren't just seen as student athletes, but also workers. This Bill will give them rights, benefits and protections for all college athletes, which is why I think it's such an important Bill and appreciate you bringing it forward today. This isn't just about playing a sport. It's about making sure that our youth are taken care of. And it's our responsibility to do that. So thank you.

Thank you. Any further comments?

Irwin, want to make a quick comment. I really want to thank the author for listening to my concerns. I was a college athlete in a minor sport and my three children were college athletes, non revenue generating sports. And it was an incredible experience for them. It set them up for future growth in the rest of their life. I can't support this right now.

I think you're going down the right path, but I am really concerned that freezing the revenue at 2021 levels is going to hurt these non revenue generating sports in the future. So I really hope that by the time it gets to the floor, I'm able to support it. But today I will not be. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any further comments from colleagues? Cnon, summer Holden, would you like to close, please?

Excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me just say that as a former athlete, college athlete, student athlete, and one as others can testify, when you're traveling and you're doing your study work on an airplane after a game, you're up late studying. You get back home after a two game road trip, and you've missed a good deal of school, and you still have to keep up.

When you can go out on the field or in the gym or a pool or wherever the sport may take you, and you get injured, and that injury happens to be catastrophic, which could essentially end your career, there is a lot of question marks to what happens next.

If you happen to be a gymnast and you are assaulted by your coach and you need to have some understanding of how you're taken care of in that situation, this Bill has provisions to cover you to give you an understanding of how to connect to the right resources and to be able to express yourself and to be able to get redress from the crime.

I can tell you that as the universities that I talked to and I described USC up front and there are a lot of universities that are doing exceptional work, and SC is right there at the top. But this is still a very important Bill to address some very basic needs that student athletes are really entitled to. And we're not talking about the ones that are going off to the pros. We're talking about also making sure that title nine is protected.

I gave you my insurance 100% guarantee on that. I talked about how it's important to make sure that all sports, all athletes have rights and are protected. And we believe this Bill goes a long way to ensure that I will continue to work on the Bill. Should the Bill move out of this Committee, it will probably more than likely be on suspense in appropriation. So there's ample time to continue to have conversations. I respectfully ask for your. I vote.

Thank you so much, Asilma Holden, for your continued passionate work on student athletics. And I know you've had many years of advocating for the rights of our student athletes, and that passion shines through. And thank you for your leadership there. We also know that AB 252 is extremely complex. It literally contains the provisions of three prior pieces of legislation, and many complex pieces of legislation are very much embedded within. And I'm also very sensitive to concerns raised by the opposition.

Appreciate everyone being here today as well. And there are many parts of legislation that still need that are a work in progress. But also trust that, as you've stated, you'll continue to work with stakeholders and refine the policy going forward and to really make sure that title nine is protected as well. And with that, I look forward to supporting 252 today, not because it's perfect, but trusting that you will continue to work with the opposition. And thank you for your working efforts on this.

With that, thank you so much, summer Holden, for your presentations on both bills.

Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. We have quorum now. Motion. Move the Bill moved by Summer Ortega, seconded by Summer Rambula. Roll call, please.

The motion is do passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

The Bill will be on call. Thank you so much. Thank you, colleagues. With that, we'll take the consent calendar at this time. We do have quorum moved by Assembly Rambala, second by Vice Chair Ta. We have three bills on consent today and they are as follows. File item number nine, Assembly Bill 1151, authored by someone or Tina Mckinnor. File item number 16, Assembly Bill 1541, authored by Mike Wong, myself, and file item number 17 AB 1542, authored by summer Mike Fong, myself.

With that, do we have any comments on the consent calendar? See, none. Roll call, please.

[Roll Call]

We have 7-0 right now and we'll keep the cassette calendar for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Thank you so much. Next up we have Assembly Member Reyes. Are you here?

Thank you so much. We will go to Irwin. Are you ready to present your bill? Thank you so much for being here. Assemblymember Irwin will be presenting item number 10, Assembly Bill 1190. Welcome, Assemblymer Irwin.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, Members. Office hours provide a valuable opportunity for students to connect with their professors and get one on one support. Students who attend office hours are more likely to feel supported, engage in class, and complete their degree. Data from the Chancellor's office reported to the State of California reveals that the majority of community college faculty are part-time. Many part-time faculty members teach at multiple campuses during the same semester to earn adequate compensation.

This means that they are less likely to be available to provide time for office hours. AB 1190 seeks to expand access to office hours to more students by directing future contract negotiations with part-time faculty to include office hour compensation. With me in support of this bill today is David Hawkins, representing California Community College Independents.

Thank you Assemblymember Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. David Hawkins with the California Community College Independents. We currently have 1.8 million students attending community colleges. A third of these students are first in their family to go to college. One third of 1.8 million students. Research, and I'm sure you're aware of it, has consistently shown that faculty engagement and support is essential to the student academic success. At community colleges, we have twice as many part-time faculty than we have full-time faculty.

And there are just too many part time faculty that aren't being compensated for office hours. As a result, we have tens of thousands of students that have no access at all to their instructors. Districts have had ample time to correct this, and they've had sufficient funds. You have allocated tens of millions of dollars for this purpose. As of today, $86 million remains unspent. $86 million. And yet, districts are willing not to provide access to students who need the academic assistance the most.

Community college students should not be penalized for enrolling in classes taught by part-time faculty, and they should not be inhibited from meeting with their instructors, regardless of whether their instructor is a full-time or part-time faculty member. AB 1190 will improve the academic outcomes for all students, and we ask for your aye vote.

Chair and Members. Austin Webster with W Strategies, on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges. I'll be brief in a line of comments with my colleague from Triple CI.

This is not the first time we've brought this issue before this Committee. Certainly we've had plenty of conversations about the struggles of part-timers when it comes to holding office hours. This really is about serving our students in the best efforts, and we urge an aye vote.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Sergeants, are there witnesses in the hallway? Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there 'tweeners in the hearing room?

For everyone listening, they're coming in from outside. One moment, please. Tweeners, please. Okay, we'll do the 'tweeners and then we'll come back to the support, please.

So, Ryan McElhinney with the Community College League of California, representing our 73 community college districts.

We had significant concerns with the original text of the bill, and I think we probably still will have concerns with the current text, but we do think it moves the bill forward, and we just wanted to thank the author, and we're happy to keep this conversation going. So thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kyle Hyland with the Association of California Community College Administrators. Similar to the league, we also had concerns with the bill.

The amendments moved the bill in a more positive direction, although I think our members will still have some concerns. We meet with them next week, so we'll see what they say. And we continue to want to work with the author on the bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And I understand there's additional support in the room. Supporter, please come up to the mic. If we can make room for the gentleman, please.

Eric Kaljumagi, President of the Community College Association. That's the representative body for faculty in the community colleges under the California Teachers Association. We are in support.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And thank you so much to Assemblymember Irwin for bringing this measured approach to highlighting the pay differences between part-time faculty and full-time faculty. And we know that recently in the EdSource article that was highlighted on part-time faculty, office hours often provided without compensation. And we know the hard work of our part-time faculty in our community colleges. AB 1190 is a step guaranteeing equal pay for equal work for our part-time faculty. And I look forward to supporting this measure today.

Thank you so much for bringing this forward. With that, roll call, please.

The motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll call]

The vote of count is 8-0 and we'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that would like to sign on. Thank you Assemblymember Irwin. Next up, we'll have Assemblymember Isaac Bryan presenting item number 13, AB 1400. Welcome Assemblymember Bryan.

Welcome.

Afternoon, Mr. Chair and colleagues. It's really good to be before you. I come today to present AB 1400. It's a bill that will support California's community college to HBCU back to California pipeline, by better utilizing the college access tax credit and concentrating the funds towards the smaller populations of students who are transferring to the HBCUs. Since its enactment, the college access tax credit's average annual revenue has fallen from $5.9 million to $412,000. Because of this, recipients of this grant only receive approximately $1.50 per year, which is 75 cents a semester.

In fact, that 75 cents to distribute it costs us more money to distribute than the students are actually getting at this point. It can't buy notebooks, it can't buy pens, it can't buy textbooks, it can't buy food. AB 1400 will redefine the CATC funds to provide meaningful support to community college students who are participating in the California Community College transfer guarantee pathways to the HBCUs. Over the last two years, an annual average of 145 students have transferred from the community college program to the HBCUs.

Unlike programs such as the Chafee Grant, which current or former foster youth can utilize at out-of-state institutions, there is no support for these California students transferring to HBCUs. CATC funds will provide a substantive $5,000, one-time award for these students. HBCUs boast higher graduations for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds with less college preparedness. Although they compromise only 3% of all colleges, they produce 17% of all black graduates with bachelor's degrees and 24% of those graduating in STEM fields.

AB 1400 would provide a valuable tool in strengthening the California-HBCU-California pipeline, further diversifying our graduate-level programs and related professions while providing greater choice to our community college transfer students. To give testimonies today, I'm joined by Alex Zucco, state and federal policy manager for the California Student Aid Commission, and Dr. Arynn Auzout Settle from Seattle, project director for the California Community College HBCU transfer program.

Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon Chair Fong and Members, I'm Alex Zucco from the Student Aid Commission. When the college access tax credit was established through SB 174 in 2014, the Commissioner administered close to $5 million a year for Cal Grant B students. That meant that each student got about $24 with their addition to their Cal Grant B. With the implementation of the Trump tax cuts from 2018 to 2019, that revenue dropped to $400,000--a number which remained consistent.

So we'll be getting about $400,000 here out. The $5 million is now gone. So that made that each award for Cal Grant students went from that $24 to $1 every year. Last year, when Assembly Member Bonta authored AB 2880 which extended the tax cut for five years, we began to look at the impact this could have on maybe a smaller group of students, so it would make administering such a big program go further.

With the California Community College's guaranteed transfer pathways to HBCUs, we found a great program that was an existing California program with MOUs, also a smaller population, and an area we do not serve California students wanting an HBCU college experience. Dr. Settle from community colleges will give you more details on that after me. But California is home to zero HBCUs and currently there is not an opportunity for California to support our students that want to attend these institutions.

Under 1400, we would provide students transferring from the community college transfer program to an HBCU with a one-time grant of $5,000--up to $5,000. After they apply, they would indicate their intent to return to California. This would be similar to how the Chafee Grant works in how they can pursue their higher education, as Assemblymember Bryan, out-of-state. AB 1400 California has the opportunity to make a real impact on supporting students attending HBCUs by refocusing this very small, finite amount of money in a more intentional and efficient way. On behalf of the Student Aid Commission, we thank Assembly Member Bryan and ask for your support.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Committee Members. I'm Dr. Arynn Auzout Settle, project director for the California community college's transfer guarantee agreement to HBCUs. The HBCU Transfer Guarantee Agreement offers any California community college student guaranteed admission to any of our 39 partner HBCUs. Our dedicated team provides support for students from interest to application, to and through graduation from their HBCU, as well as informing counselors and colleagues throughout the state about the HBCU transfer guarantee agreement as they work directly with those students. The first HBCUs were established in the 1800s prior to the Civil War, after which over 85 HBCUs were established along the East Coast and in the South.

Many of these institutions were created by abolitionists, church organizations, or as a result of the Morale Act of 1890. To date, there are 107 HBCUs, most of which are four-year institutions. California community college transfer students often transfer to an HBCU to experience unique and culturally rich academic environments. A campus where they see themselves reflected both inside and outside of the classroom. Institutions where they are seen, valued and success is the expectation, not the exception.

Students report that these campuses feel like family regardless of their ethnic background. The CATC grant is important to California community college transfer students because funding is often the most challenging obstacle that can prevent students from transferring to an HBCU. Over 80% of HBCU students served are Pell eligible. It directly impacts the current and future students we serve. These funds have the potential to close the gap for students to complete their degree. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? We have a motion by Dr. Arambula, second by Assemblymember Ortega. Supporters, please come on up.

Good afternoon. Nune Garipian, on behalf of the Community College League of California, in strong support, in honor of the late Ken Brown. Thank you.

Joshua Hagen, on behalf of the Campaign for College Opportunity, in strong support.

Melissa Bardo on behalf of the Education Trust West. We didn't have enough time to submit a support letter, but in strong support.

Good afternoon Members of the Committee. Jose Fierro, Cerritos College president and president of the CEO Board for the Community Colleges, and we are in strong support of the bill.

Good afternoon. Justin Selnick, on behalf of the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office in support.

My name is Andrea Dargo from uAspire Fellowship and we strongly support.

Angela Gonzalez, community member, and I strongly support.

Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Seeing none. Are there any tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues? Any questions or comments? Seeing none. I'm sorry. Assemblymember Low.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Assemblymember Bryan, for addressing a very important issue, especially with respect to students and increased access. I'm a little bit personally conflicted on this, given my past legislative history with respect to public-funded travel, as well as support of taxpayer-funded support for Cal Grant funding, for example, in some of the states that discriminate based on sexual orientation. Previous legislative proposals included withholding Cal Grant funding to some of the schools that discriminate based on sexual orientation, including here in the State of California and for example, in some of the lists that was provided in Committee.

For example, in the State of North Carolina, in which there are three HBCUs, that state allows for healthcare professionals to deny care to LGBT individuals, for example. And in Louisiana, a school employee may not discuss sexual orientation or gender identity with students K-12. And in Tennessee, certain performances cannot be seen with respect to the LGBT community unless you are an adult.

And gender affirming care in places like Texas are also not available in many of these other places that, with respect to historically black colleges located in those states. And I know that's not the intent, but again, the philosophical approach on legislative history and helping to ensure that we do not use California public taxpayer subsidies to discriminate based on sexual orientation. And I wonder if--I know I didn't get a chance to talk to you about this prior, and this was just flagged for me just now as well, too--but I wonder if you might be able to help address that concern. Again, with respect to public-funded travel, going to some of these institutions in which individuals from our community would be denied access and public accommodations.

Yeah, no, absolutely. First of all, the awarding of the grant wouldn't be solely for travel. It would be for all educational expenses, including tuition and other things. I wish the legacy of HBCUs and the legacy of discrimination, including some of the pillar states of slavery, did not coincide so directly. I think, in fact, if we stopped supporting states, for example, that had slavery still in their constitution for black students, black students couldn't go to school, even in California.

And so I think we balance these things, understanding that part of the black diaspora is also LGBTQ+ students who are struggling to find their education pursuits fully recognized, even in our home state. And HBCUs provide a safe haven for all black students across the diaspora of identities. And so I think by providing them with the resources needed for them to fulfill their education goals and dreams and aspirations, wherever they may be, whether they're here or at a historically black college or university, I think it's a smart way to use this current pot of money that is right now not only underutilized, but more expensive to administer than any students are getting for it.

Thank you to the Chair, if I might. Well, I know that, Senator Bryan, you have been a champion and an ally of the LGBT community, and that's not the intent, certainly, moving forward, but I hope that you'll keep that in mind and the challenge and the conflict that exists in helping to ensure that we reflect our values with respect to public-funded entities, with respect to California values as well. And I know that you share that very deeply. So I will be supporting this today, too. And I know that you'll also acknowledge this as the bill moves forward.

Absolutely. I appreciate you.

Thank you so much. Any further comments or questions from colleagues? Seeing none. Assemblymember Bryan, would you like to close, please?

Yeah. I want to thank the Committee for their support and help through this process. It's interesting to think that there's a pot of money that used to be $6 million a year that federal decision making has reduced to less than half a million dollars and is currently being wasted. It's also an interesting position to be a Member of the Black Caucus trying to move resources to struggling transfer students to historic black universities, looking at a Committee that does not have a single Black Member on it. But with the aye-reco of the Chair nonetheless, I'm incredibly optimistic for this body and for the students we are trying to help and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Bryan. And I'm prepared to support this measure today and really thank you for bringing this important measure forward and for the partnership between community colleges and HBCU and transfer programs, and really appreciate the comments of our colleagues and the witnesses here today. So with that, look forward to your conversations with our Committee going forward, as well as we address AB 1400 and thank you for your leadership and efforts on this. With that, roll call, please.

The motion is do pass to the Revenue and Taxation Committee. Fong. Aye. Ta. Aye. Addis. Aye. Arambula. Aye. Gabriel. Irwin. Aye. Low. Aye. Ortega. Aye. Sanchez. Aye. Santiago. Wallis. Aye. Weber.

Vote count is 9-0. Thank you Senator Bryan. And we'll hold the roll open for a Members add on. Thank you so much. Next up we'll have Assemblymember Petrie-Norris presenting Assembly Bill 1237.

Assemblymember Petrie Norris, welcome.

I'm being heckled by the audience. Boerner here is heckling me. Sorry. Hello. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. I am here today to present AB 1237, which will help to increase the number of veterinarians working here in our state. The student debt crisis is not just limited to undergraduate students. Veterinarians have the second highest monthly debt to income ratio among graduate degree holders. The average veterinary school graduate debt is nearly $200,000 and educational debt for vet graduates is growing by nearly $6,000 every year.

Unsurprisingly, this debt is unsustainable and drives graduating vets to private practice. Even though many graduating veterinarians would like to specialize in shelter medicine and provide care to underserved communities and to pets in need. All of this is combined to leave many animal shelters in our state in a real crisis. Fewer than half can consistently provide treatment for illness or injury. After hours, emergency care is extremely limited. The animal and human suffering that this all causes is real and heartbreaking.

AB 1237 establishes the Public Interest Veterinary Debt Relief Program administered by the Student Aid Commission to award funds to California vets who agree to work for an animal shelter or in a community of need for at least five years. The bill will help attract vets to do the vital work in our communities of helping to care for animals in need. Happy to be joined today by Julianna Tetlow of the San Diego Humane Society and Barbara Schmitz of the San Francisco SPCA. Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you so much. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. I am Julianna Tetlow, Director of Government Relations for San Diego Humane Society. As the author mentioned, California is experiencing a crisis level shortage of veterinarians, and care affordability is becoming further out of reach for pet owners. California has a veterinary care accessibility score of 47 out of 100, a failing grade in access to care, and in nearly 50% of California counties, access to care is categorized as nearly inaccessible or difficult to access.

Further, since 2000, the cost for care has increased at a rate far outpacing CPI. In addition to the burden, the lack of access to affordable care places on California pet owners, California public shelters and animal welfare agencies have seen an increase in relinquishments of pets with treatable medical conditions. Throughout the state, shelters are experiencing extreme overcrowding and pet owners can't get their beloved animals in to see a veterinarian.

Many veterinarians would like to specialize in shelter medicine, provide care to underserved communities and pet owners, and lend their expertise to affordable care clinics, but are restrained by personal finances. Veterinarians have the second highest monthly debt to income ratio among graduate degree holders with student loan debt.

AB 1237 will help attract existing veterinary professionals to practice where the need is the greatest by providing state funding to applied towards educational debt in exchange for their agreement to work for a California animal shelter or in communities in need for a minimum of five years, and will require services to be provided at affordable rates. By removing the greatest barrier to public service, this bill will impact thousands, if not hundreds, thousands of pet owning California's animal shelters and taxpayers throughout the state.

Thank you for your commitment to holding high standards for animal care in California, and I respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Barbara Schmitz. I'm here on behalf of the San Francisco SPCA. And today we actually are celebrating our 155th anniversary of serving the community. So it's my pleasure to be here. The need for AB 1237 is clear. California vets are carrying significant educational debt loads at the same time that there is this worsening shortage of veterinarians. This means poor or no access to care for animals and stress for the owners.

I've received emails from individuals who currently are driving 90 miles each way in order to access vet care. It's not sustainable. And as the Assembly Member indicated, the average debt load for veterinarians is significant. The average salaries for vets here in California, in this area, are less than half of some of the debt load that individuals are carrying. And for example, a veterinarian that I know, a shelter vet, currently has $150,000 in educational debt.

She is able to practice shelter medicine only because of her husband's salary. And they have had to really make hard decisions like where to live and whether or not they can afford to buy a home based on the amount of debt that she is carrying from veterinary school. This particular vet is not alone. About 25% of those entering vet school here in California want to do so because they want to be shelter veterinarians.

But because of the debt load that they come out of vet school with, they are either precluded or it's very difficult for them to actually do what they want to do for their careers. This crisis level shortage means that people and animals are hurting the San Francisco SPCA partners with shelters who have very acute needs for vets that are going unmet. That includes shelters in Tulare, Fresno, and other areas in the state.

And so the most recent two day event that we hosted as a clinic, we were able to spay or neuter 90 animals during that two day period of time. But the need exceeds what we're able to do right now. And so policies need to move forward. We believe that this bill is a great pathway forward. Thank you so much. We urge your aye vote.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? We have a motion by Senator Arambula and the second by Vice Chair Ta. I heard somebody on this side, but I'll get you next time. Thank you. Supporters please.

Hi, Lizzie Cootsona with Shaw Yoder Antwih Schmelzer & Lange in support with the main society of the United States and Cal Animals. Thank you.

Nickolaus Sackett, Social Compassion In Legislation, in support.

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Seeing none. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Seeing none. Assembly, would you like to close please?

Yes. As a very lucky shelter dog mama, I will just respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much Assemblymember Petrie-Norris, for bringing this important bill forward. And we know animals are a person's best friend. We also know that veterinarians help keep our best friends healthy. And really with this bill, we look forward to your leadership and working with our Student Aid Commission as well to continue working on the vision for this important program. And with that roll call, please.

The motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

With that we have 10 ayes and we'll keep the roll open for add ons. Thank you so much. Ms. Boerner, I see you. We're going to take some add ons at this point. We're going to start with the consent calendar and go through the items that we've gone through. Madam Secretary, please call the roll for add ons, please.

Consent calendar. [Roll Call]

The consent calendar now has 10 ayes and we'll keep the roll open for that. Thank you.

File item one, AB 252 do pass through appropriations.

[Rol Call]

That item has 6 and 3 no's and we're not voting. We'll keep the roll open on that. Thank you.

File item number 10, AB 1190.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. That item has 10 and we'll keep the roll open. Thank you.

Last one. File item 13, AB 1400.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. That item has 10 and we'll keep that roll open for that. Sure. Which item, please? 1400 Assembly Bill 1400 abstain. No, for record. Summer Sanchez abstains on AB 1400. Item number 13. Thank you.

With that we have. Assembly Berman, welcome presenting your bill number. Assembly Bill 789. Item number seven. Welcome, Assembly of Berman.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and colleagues. First, I want to begin by thanking committee staff for their work on this bill.

I will be accepting the committee's amendments described in the analysis. Despite the critical role played by financial aid in college achievement, data shows that sizable numbers of underrepresented students lose access to financial aid due to satisfactory academic progress standards.

It is these already marginalized students who are unlikely to return and achieve their higher education dreams, which we all want and need them to do.

Some higher education institutions do not take full advantage of federal flexibility, unnecessarily limiting students ability to keep their financial aid through the existing appeals process.

AB 789 would remove these barriers by establishing a common set of standards for satisfactory academic progress, including appeals to ensure that all California students, regardless of the higher education institution they attend, are provided with the flexibility allowed under federal law.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote and I am very excited to be joined today by Elizabeth Clues, a UC Santa Cruz student who will share her experiences with financial aid, and Manny Rodriguez, who is speaking on behalf of JBAY, John Burton Advocates for Youth.

Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Elizabeth Clues and I am an undergraduate student at UCSC majoring in history and education. Shortly after exiting foster care at the age of 18, I enrolled in community college.

That first year was exceptionally difficult as I navigated adulthood, becoming self sufficient, managing a full time job, and becoming a parent. I crumbled under that pressure and ended up losing my job.

Soon after losing my job, I also lost my housing, and by the middle of the first semester, my baby and I were living out of our car and I just couldn't keep up with my coursework. Failing these classes resulted in the loss of financial aid due to satisfactory academic progress.

I made the decision to drop out because I knew I couldn't afford the cost and I didn't know I had the option to file an appeal. Two years later, I decided to try again.

As I started to navigate the process of filing an appeal, I realized that to be eligible for reinstatement, I needed to have a verifiable injury or illness or I needed to have experienced the death of a loved one.

Not seeing my own circumstances reflected in the process made me feel like returning to college was not an option. I didn't have documentation to prove that I was living out of my car and routinely skipping meals to conserve what little money I did have.

Chagrined, I walked away again. Five years after this experience, I decided to try again and found that the criteria to prove a special circumstance still had not changed. However, I was determined to be successful.

I had to attend school for two years while paying tuition and fees out of pocket, and eventually I was able to transfer. I can't help but imagine that had it not been for SAP related barriers, I might have already graduated by now and be in a career.

AB 789 would remove barriers that limited my ability to keep financial aid, such as informing students about the appeals process and including a broader range of special circumstances, like homelessness. Students should not have to go through what I went through.

I pray that if one of my two children decide to pursue higher education, they won't meet the same barriers that I did. I urge you to vote yes on AB 789. Thank you.

We have a motion and a second. Thank you so much.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong, Members of the Committee. My name is Manny Rodriguez. I'm with the Institute for College Access and Success. But I am stepping in on behalf of our colleagues at JBAY, who had some southwest transportation issues to support AB 789.

We know from JBAY's work with foster and homeless students, as well as the research they conducted on SAP that it is a significant barrier to persistence amongst low income students and BIPOC students.

The findings from JBAY's report align with other researchers and contends that SAP reproduces inequities experienced by low income students, students of color. And while their research was focused on community college students, national research on Pell recipients attending four year universities shows similar SAP disqualifications.

This bill would create a common set of SAP standards across California's 2 and 4 year institutions and address the vast variance across institutions so more students can keep their financial aid. For these reasons, we respect an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room?

Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, faculty Association of California Community Colleges in support.

Hannah Bragstad with the Cal State Student Association, which represents the nearly half a million CSU students throughout the state. A proud co-sponsor of the student centered legislation. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Chair and members Kathy Van Austin, representing John Burton Advocates for Youth in support.

Good afternoon. Chair and members. Zachariah Wooden of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, proud co-sponsor.

Good afternoon. I'm Michaela Bryan. I'm a transfer student at UCLA. The Undergraduate Student Association and the UC Student Association are in profound support of Bill 789.

Good afternoon. Melissa Bardo with the Education Trust West proud to support. Thank you.

Joshua Hagen, on behalf of the Campaign for College Opportunity in proud support.

Spay Deviveros Walton with Public Advocates in support.

Hello, my name is Naja Christmas. I am from the associate students of UCI and AGS, and we're in support of this bill. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Eliana Stevie. I'm a social ecology Senator with ASUCI. As previously mentioned. I stand in support. Thank you.

Members, David Hawkins with Triple CI, the California Community College Independence in support.

Hi, my name is Allison Chan. I'm a student at UCLA and part of GenUp. On behalf of GenUp, I'm in support of AB 789. Thank you.

Hi. Good afternoon. David Ramirez, undergraduate at UCLA, Vice Chair of government relations for the UC Student Association, speaking in support.

Hi. Osiaz Garcia, first year transfer at UCLA, and I support the bill.

My name is Poorvivi Vinaigopon. I'm a third year transfer at UC Irvine and I support the bill.

Hi, my name is Natalia Wintermuro and I'm a fourth year transfer at UC Irvine and I support the bill.

Hello. Jason Vasquez, representing the Southern California College Attainment Network in support of this bill.

Hi, Kimberly Sanchez with Next Gen California proud co-sponsors and in support of AB 879.

That one. Thank you.

Alia sky, state government relations director for the UC Student Association. We are also proud co-sponsors of AB 789.

So, good afternoon. My name is Jose Chris Roll. I'm an undergraduate student at UC Davis and I am in support of the bill.

Patrick Acuna, UC Irvine in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Andrea Dargo, Cerritos College. I'm AU aspire fellow, and we are a proud co-sponsor and in strong support.

Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in opposition in hearing room? Are there any tweeners? I'm sorry? Any opposition or tweeners? You're getting up. Are there tweeners in the hearing room, please come on up.

Good afternoon again. Alex Gray with the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities. We don't have an official position on the bill. We've had one or two conversations with the author's staff, and I would just say we do believe the intent is a good one, and we do believe that there is a framework of this bill that in our view, would be helpful.

We think the Committee analysis accurately reflects the concerns that we have and would just say that that framework that we think is a good one, that we'd like to continue that conversation around, is something that provides a guarantee to an appeal at least once per academic year, setting the GPA for SAP at the federal minimum standard, consistency in the special circumstances criteria, and finally, ensuring that the appeals are responded to in a timely manner.

So we hope we can continue to discuss the concerns we do have as this discussion moves forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Tyler Raguar. On behalf of the University of California, I would simply align our perspective with my colleagues comments. I do appreciate working with the author and his staff, and we'll keep continuing to work with you all as the bill goes forward. Thank you, Mr. Berman.

Thank you so much. Bring it back to the committee. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Someone we'd like to close, please?

Appreciate the concerns that folks have. We'll definitely keep the conversation going with them and respectfully ask for your I vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Berman, for bringing this important bill forward to really look at how we continue to provide methods supporting our students around extenuating circumstances that cause them to fail to persist and to meet satisfactory academic progress.

Really appreciate your leadership here and thank you for working with the segments as well as this bill proceeds forward and look forward to supporting the bill today. And with that roll call, please.

The motion is do pass as amended, to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

Vote count is 9-0, and we'll keep the roll up for any Members that like to add on. Thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Appreciate you. Next up, we'll have item number 12, Assembly Bill 1275, authored by Assembly member Arambula. Welcome Assembly member Arambula.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I'll begin by thanking your Committee staff for their diligent work on this Bill. AB 1275 provides a narrowly tailored modification to the Brown act for statewide student run community college organizations to improve student safety, privacy, and accessibility. In an age where teleconferencing has become increasingly common, many aspects of our current laws need updating to adjust to the challenges that our students face. Current law poses a major accessibility concern for students who are disabled or who are unable to participate in the meetings in person.

AB 1275 would allow for students to participate in their student run legislative bodies via teleconferencing when they may not be able to participate otherwise. Additionally, provisions of the Brown act require individuals who teleconference from their homes in these meetings to publicly release their private addresses. We must protect the safety of the students who are disabled, to parents, to undocumented students, to survivors of domestic violence, or a Member of any other underserved community who are particularly vulnerable to having their home locations publicly disclosed.

The Brown act has been a landmark policy that ensured open access to government participation, but it is time to update the law to reflect modern times and new challenges faced by our vulnerable students. AB 1275 will restore student safety, privacy, and accessibility for students participating in student run community college organizations. Testifying in support of AB 1275 are Heather Brandt, a community college student and a mother, and Zechariah Wooden, excuse me, Vice President of the legislative affairs at the student Senate for California Community Colleges.

Thank you. Welcome.

Sorry, am I going first? Okay. Good afternoon, chair and Committee. My name is Heather Brandt. I am the student chancellor for City College of San Francisco. I am choosing to speak today in support of AB 1275 for a few different reasons. Prior to the pandemic in 2020, as a working student, parent, and mother of three, caregiver for my mother who has Alzheimer's, dementia, and someone who has little outside support, I could not participate in student governance.

While Covid shut down much of the world, it opened up a host of opportunities for students like me. The governor's Covid State of emergency provisions through the Brown act allowed me to participate in meetings without needing to find and pay for care. I went from never being able to engage in the decision making process to becoming the first student parent President of our district's largest campus, and subsequently the first student parent to serve as a student chancellor on behalf of my college.

Since the State of emergency was lifted, I, like many other California community college students, have struggled to participate in person. Even getting to this hearing today was incredibly difficult. As someone who does not drive and relies solely on public transit, I needed to coordinate the time of everything just right to ensure I am back across the bay in time to pick up my kids from their aftercare program.

Additionally, even when I can participate in meetings from my home, I am extremely uncomfortable posting my address publicly for various safety reasons. This is also the case for many community college students, particularly our unhoused students, students with disabilities, and student parents like myself who do not have the financial means to take public transportation on an ongoing basis to attend meetings.

The Brown act is about transparency as leaders, transparency is important to us, but the ways in which this law are being enforced make student leadership roles inaccessible, exclusive and inequitable, as they are currently more exclusionary than transparent. Colleges and student organizations are most effective when they are diverse, equitable, inclusive and accessible, thus reflecting the entire student body, not just housed, able bodied students who are child or caretaker, free or financially well resourced.

I urge you to support AB 1275 so that our California community college students can have equal access to student leadership roles at both the local and in the statewide representation. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon. Chair and Committee again, my name is Zachariah Wooden. I'm the Vice President of legislative affairs with the Student Senate for California Community colleges, representing 1.8 million community college students across the state. We deeply support and believe in the spirit of the Brown Act. Greater transparency and public participation keeps organizations not only accountable, but also engaged with their communities and allows public engagement. We, as a statewide organization, also have to abide by the Brown Act.

We represent our region on a statewide level and also on a regional level. We have 10 regions going from upstate California all the way down to San Diego, one through 10 students. It's important to recognize, however, that we do not have the same resources that those who serve on local bodies that do have to abide by Brown act as well have.

For example, one in five of California community college students report being housing insecure at any point in time, and over 60% of California community college students work in addition to going to school. One of the few benefits of the COVID pandemic, as was mentioned, was the increase in participation that we saw from students who were otherwise unable to engage in our organization because they were either unable to physically attend meetings.

Whether it was due to family caretaking, lack of transportation, conflicting class or work schedules, disabilities, or other issues, student run organizations should represent all students. The emergency provisions of the Brown act opened up our meetings to a more public transparency and participation, and the student Senate became a better and more representative organization during the COVID emergency provisions.

We still abide by the Brown act, and we're still keeping with transparency and allowing public comment and having our students engage and even student Members or people who aren't students engage with the student organization that represents the student body as a whole.

But we want to make sure that just as with the law that passed into law earlier last year or earlier this year, expanding ability for students or non accredited students or disabled students to participate in their student body associations, we would like the Legislature to recognize that this is also a step forward in increasing the equitability and accessibility of student governance and for student run legislative bodies to be able to participate in their business without having to post their location publicly.

For example, dual enrolled students, many of whom are minors, many of whom are participating in the California community college system, if they want to serve in a position of student leadership, they will have to post their address publicly. They will have to make their home, which is usually where they take the virtual meetings, from a publicly accessible place, which is another concern of ours.

There are so many students affected with how the law currently is, and we ask for the support of this Committee for AB 1275 in order to amend that fact.

Thank you so much. And thank you so much, Arambula, for that presentation. And just for our clarification, are you willing to take the amendments, pages 4 and 5 of the analysis, please?

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much. We have a motion. Do we have a second? 2nd we have a motion and a second. Are there any witnesses in support in the hearing room, please?

Chair Fong Members David Hawkins with the California Community College Independence, with the amendments, we are in support of the Bill. Thank you.

Good morning or good afternoon. Committee Members Alex Walker Griffin, former Member of the California Community College Board of Governors, proud alumni of the Student Center for California Community Colleges, and current mayor of the City of Hercules, in support.

Thank you. Are there any Member, any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room?

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Brittany Barsati. I am with the California News Publishers Association. I serve as our General counsel. We represent over 800 publications throughout the State of California. We have a coalition that remains in opposition to the Bill. We do respect that the author is willing to take out amendments that address the quorum issue, which has been a key issue for our folks. But I just wanted to address a few points, if you don't mind.

Other Members of our coalition include the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, First Amendment Coalition, Californians Aware, and also the Journalism Association of Community Colleges. And I wanted to recognize that the Journalism Association of Community Colleges has never taken a position on legislation before, but their board did vote unanimously to oppose this Bill in its draft or current form.

To be fair, we've seen a number of Brown act bills over the previous years, and I also want to address the Members of our coalition feel very strongly about inclusion and diversity and working to make sure that boards are more diverse and inclusive. Our concern isn't that we are mindful of those obstacles. Right. I was a community college student. I worked two jobs. I took 30 units my last semester to transfer to SS state. I fully hear and respect those concerns.

But we disagree with the premise that you should be taking the meeting from your home location. We don't believe that you should be forced to disclose your home location. Right. For safety reasons. We fully respect that. And there's been a lot of work done over the last couple of years, and particularly last year with AB 2449, which reached a moderate compromise. So, under the Brown act, there are four requirements which this Bill seeks to remove.

For teleconferencing, 2449 allowed bodies to participate and Members to participate without having to disclose their location if certain requirements were met for just cause. And so that Bill has only been in effect for a little over four months. And we'd respectfully like to see that play out, as there are several bills before the Legislature this year which would amend the Brown act. But I'd also, again, just want to acknowledge Mr. Arambula's willingness or Dr. Arambula. Sorry. Willingness to work with us and respectfully ask your no vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there tweeners in the hearing room seeing none. Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Yes, Assembly member Addis, a brief comment.

Dr. Arambula can you confirm this, that you're all for open access and you want to make sure the public has a right to access public meetings.

But I really mostly want to compliment your witness for her fortitude, for her... and staying engaged and moving into a situation that clearly was very difficult and now moving out of that situation and that I think, as we're approaching these issues, especially when it comes to the Brown act, that we need to be sensitive to the kinds of populations that want to serve and that we need to be opening government in this way.

But I'll just ask you one more time that you're committed to the public access.

We're committed to public access, and the amendments help to narrow it and require a singular meeting place which will be open to the public for them to participate. What we are doing is listening to the students who are saying it's inaccessible and that it's inequitable and that it's exclusive. And we're creating more spaces to make sure that all of us can participate in student government.

And as an educator, that's very important to me. So clearly, I made the motion and I'm in support. So thank you.

Thank you so much. Any further comments or questions, seeing none, Assembly member would you like to close, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Arambula, for bringing this Bill forward, and thank you for accepting the amendments on pages 4 and 5 of the analysis that your office proposed goes a long way to striking a balance between teleconferencing flexibility and the need for public bodies to have open and accessible meetings to the public and look forward to supporting the Bill today with that roll call, please.

The motion is do pass to the local government Committee. [Roll call].

The vote count is currently six, with two not voting, and we'll keep the roll open for any members that would like to add on. Thank so much. Assuming Arambula, at this time, we're going to take up Assembly Bill 811. I'm going to pass the gavel to Vice Chair Ta, and thank you, everyone, for your patience.

I apologize. We have a witness that needs to leave in a few minutes, so we're going to do 811 at this moment. Thank you.

All right, so right now we are going to hear AB 811 from a sentiment. My phone.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members, and thank you, colleagues, for a robust meeting, thus far. AB 811 expands the number of times a community college student may repeat a course. Current regulations limit the number of times a student may retake a course.

Three currently, if the student has failed to complete the course or receive the substandard grade, and one if a student has passed a course.

While the state Legislature has worked to ensure that students are able to pass a course for the first time, there are times when students are unable to complete a course, perhaps due to illness or having to work. After three times, the student is prohibited from retaking the course.

This could result in a student not being able to move forward with their education or even to drop out.

AB 811 will bring students back to college by allowing them two more opportunities to retake a course, but also requires the community college to first refer students to academic support and options for financial assistance.

We want to make sure there's continued supports for our students right now, opposition will also note that they will say this is a rollback of efforts to help students to successfully complete transfer level math and English the first year. That's not what this bill is about.

This bill does not alter the requirements of Assembly Bill 1705 or 705. And thank you to Assembly Irwin for her leadership and efforts on that regarding transfer level placements or providing support.

In fact, this bill builds upon existing efforts by requiring a community college to offer referrals to academic and financial support in response to concerns as well.

I am the provision to a five year pilot program with a requirement for a community college to submit data to the chancellor's office so that we can continue to evaluate the number of students who retake a course and the type of courses that they are repeating.

This bill also expands the number of times a student who passes certain type of courses may retake a course for enrichment or for skill building purposes, or for lifelong learning.

From one to three there is no reason to prohibit an individual who enjoys an art class or a dance class from being able to participate in it more than once.

And very honored to be joined by Dr. Belinda Lum of Los Rios Community College District and Heather Brandt, the student chancellor for the Associated Students of the City College of San Francisco. Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Dr. Belinda Lum and I'm a professor of sociology at Sacramento City College and I also serve as the chief negotiator and SEC campus President for the Los Rios College Federation of Teachers.

And on behalf of the 147 union locals of the California Federations of Teachers, I'm here to voice our strong support of AB 811. As faculty at the front lines, we witness the way that legislative policy can impact our students.

Those who are truly committed to equity understand that the 1.8 million students who walk through the doors of the 116 California community colleges bring diverse life experiences, educational experiences and needs with them.

Our job, as affirmed by the California Master Plan, is to educate any student capable of benefiting from our instruction. Equity minded educators like me and the thousands of faculty across the state know that the purposes of community college is more than just preparing students to transfer to a four year college.

Our institutions are about serving our communities, whether that's the newly arrived immigrant that want to learn English, underresourced communities who care about their well being by enrolling in low cost, no cost kinesiology classes, the student who suffered educational trauma in K 12 and wants to improve their skills in math and English, or the student who works three jobs to make ends meet for their family and has had to sacrifice their education to make that happen.

Success cannot simply be measured by whether a student receives a grade of C or better. True commitment to equity is not shutting off avenues to degrees, personal development, and well being. Under the current law, many students are not allowed to repeat courses that support matriculation to next level courses and or support skill acquisition needed for success in transferring careers.

Current data makes clear that the repeatability restrictions that went into effect in 2013 essentially represented a system level abandonment of the arts world, languages, kinesiology, and ESL, as well as it had a severe detrimental effect on the community culture on all of our campuses.

Restrictions disenfranchised many learners in the community and had disproportionate impacts on students who may not have had access to skill based courses in high school. The policy changes have undermined community college investment in classrooms and disenfranchised too many students account.

We need to be clear, though, that this bill is not about reinstating the pretransfer level classes eliminated by earlier legislation. This bill is about putting the community back in community colleges and that AB 811 provides greater access to opportunity for our communities and our students.

It provides a pathway whereby students can continue to have access to the classes they need for the purposes of skill building and life development, is for lifelong enrichment for members of the community to make more than one, to take more than one art class or practice a sport in a low cost environment or build foreign language skills for their lifelong traveling dreams.

It is a bill that provides adequate opportunity for students to pass classes and overcome an under resourced K-12 education that created barriers instead of bridges to higher education. This lets students have more chances to navigate the external struggles of life and when their family gets sick or their job hours change or childcare became an issue.

I've had too many students drop after the drop deadline, whereas an instructor, I have no choice but to fail them because of their jobs, because of the job schedule switch, or because they have to take care of family first.

Repealing these restrictions will restore access to higher education and expanded opportunities for all Californians, including first generation college students, immigrants, second language learners, and all students seeking to become better educated. Thank you for giving me the time to speak with all of you today.

Thank you. Good afternoon Chair and committee. My name is Heather Brandt. I'm a system impacted working student, parent, and mother of three. I am a Latina Muslim and the first in my family to be able to attend college.

I am also a recent graduate serving as a student chancellor on behalf of City College of San Francisco. I began my community college education in 2001 at the age of 17, full of hope.

There were two things that contributed to my extended stay in the California Community College system, life circumstances, which are beyond anyone's control, and the current inequitable course repeatability policy. In fact, the current course repeatability policy came into effect while I was at CCSF. Over the course of my educational journey.

Some of the things that I have in fronted are a past abusive relationship, being the primary caregiver for my grandmother as well as my mother, who were both diagnosed with Alzheimer's dementia, a miscarriage, and the incarceration of my spouse, who became part of the opioid epidemic in this country after having been prescribed narcotic painkillers.

I have dealt with a lot during my educational journey. Life does not happen in a vacuum and does not coincide with academic deadlines and timelines.

Some of the most earth shattering events in my life have happened around midterms or thereafter, when it was too late to even withdraw from courses. Despite life circumstances, as a responsible adult, when possible, I withdrew from courses as necessary.

But at times, due to the passing of deadlines, I was left with no choice but to fail for the courses I had paid for. Like many California Community College students, I didn't realize until it was too late that withdrawals count towards course attempts.

But what other recourse do we have? Due to the existing limitations on course repeatability and life, I ended up staying in community college significantly longer as I was prevented from repeating the two courses that I needed in order to graduate.

I can tell you that my life experiences are not the exception. In my time at CCSF, as a student leader, I have seen firsthand how the current course repeatability policy disproportionately impacts our most vulnerable populations, our low income students, justice impacted students, and students of color.

Community colleges should be accessible to everyone regardless of what happens in life and how often a student needs to retake a course. I want to highlight that talent is everywhere, but access and opportunity are not. I urge you to support AB 811. Thank you.

Thank you so much gentlemen. My fault for this bill. I really appreciate the measure abroad to ensuring students have access and agency in rather to repeat the course.

The intervention and introduction of the pilot to collect data before permanently changing the decade of policy lie of the intention of this committee and the legislature to employ every measure to improve the economic success of a student. So right now, are there any witness in support in the hearing room?

Hi. Hello Chair and committee, this is Zachariah Wooden, Vice President of legit affairs of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges. The SSC is in support.

Thank you.

Jessica Hay with the California School Employees Association in support.

Corayma Martinez, student at East Los Angeles College, former LACCD student trustee for the over a quarter of a million students within the largest community college district in the nation and I support AB 811.

Members. David Hawkins with the California Community College Independence and we are in support. We think this is critical for our students. We think this sunset date is a good compromise. Thank you.

Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, faculty Association California Community Colleges, in support.

Hi, hello. My name is Kenny Chow and I'm an ELAC student. And can I go and do a student? And I'm in favor of AB 811.

My name is Kristen Yuguan. I'm a student at Los Angeles Valley College majoring in psychology and behavioral sciences, and I support AB 811. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Walter Marukin. I'm with La City College and I'm in support of AB 811. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Perla. I come from East Los Angeles. My major is psych and I'm in support of AB 811. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Christian Lopez. I'm a student veteran at East Los. Angeles College and I support AB 811.

Hi, my name is Natasha Sarpong. I go to L.A. Trade Tech and I'm in support of Bill AB 811.

Hi, my name is Tana Madongo. I go to Los Angeles Trade Technical College and I'm in support of AB 811.

Hi, my name is Tadia Madongo and I'm a student at Los Angeles Trade Technical College and I'm in support of AB 811.

Hi, I'm Ashley Jordan and I go to L.A. Trade Tech and I am in support of AB 811.

Yes, 811. Yeah

Hello, everyone. I am Zebri De Jesus, a sociology and philosophy major at Los Angeles Pierce College and I am in support of AB 811. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Fong and Members. Mark MacDonald, MGI Advocacy on behalf of the Antelope Valley, Contra Costa, Palo Verde, Peralta, and San Diego Community College districts, as well as the Los Angeles College Faculty Guild, in support of the Bill.

Good afternoon, I'm Alexander Schnitzer. I attend Los Angeles Pierce College and I'm here in support of AB 811.

Hello, I'm Alejandro Cabrera. I'm a poli-sci major at L.A. Pierce College and I support AB 811.

Good afternoon. My name is Carissa Escaraga and I am a student at Los Angeles Pierce College, and today I'm here in support of AB 811.

Hello, Mr. Malhi. I'm here for USC. Jordan Lopez Ergos from Los Angeles Pierce College in support of AB 811. Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Losha Bautista. I am from Los Angeles Southwest College and I am in support of AB 811.

Good afternoon. My name is Verenisa Castro and I am from Los Angeles Southwest Community College and I am in support of AB 811.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Abrego. I am from East Los Angeles College and I support AB 811. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. So now, at this time, are there any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room?

Good afternoon, Vice Chair Ta and Members of the Assembly Higher Education Committee, Melissa Bardo with the Education Trust-West. While we understand it is not the intent of AB 811 to impact historical remedial education reforms in California, we have significant concerns about the unintended consequences that will negatively impact student success and reverse progress we have made towards educational equity. Opportunities already exist within Title V regulations for students to repeat courses, including exceptions for extenuating circumstances, and the options for student to petition to repeat.

The key difference between existing regulations and this Bill is whether colleges can draw down apportionment for these course repeats. This Bill goes further by creating a financial incentive for colleges to prioritize repetition as a solution to students who are struggling rather than providing intensive academic support or wraparound services upfront. Extensive research has demonstrated that when students are provided with co-requisite supports, colleges benefit from improved course completion, increased graduation rates, and most importantly, students are more likely to persist and achieve their academic goals.

With approximately 80% of community college students indicating their desire to obtain a bachelor's degree or higher, it is critical to maintain a focus on high-impact strategies that support student success. Allowing students to repeat and colleges to draw down apportionment without appropriate guardrails in place will have a significant impact on those college aspirations.

It is important to take into account that a student attempting to take a course up to five times amounts to two and a half years of a student's academic career spent on one course. This has significant impacts on time to degree and college affordability. This is why the California community colleges adopted the vision for success, which, among many goals, strives to reduce excess unit accumulation, improve degree attainment, and eliminate equity gaps, all by pairing high expectations with high support.

Data tells us that low-income students, especially those who are Black and Latinx, are disproportionately impacted by policies requiring the remediation or repetition of courses, and we are concerned that this policy will lead to these students either repeating credit courses they do not need or not receiving the necessary academic supports to succeed on their first try. Instead of broadening course repetition policies, we must focus our limited resources on ensuring that all colleges are fully implementing equitable placement and completion policies.

It is for these reasons we must respectfully oppose and ask for a No vote. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong, and Vice Chair Ta, and members of the Higher Education Committee. I'm Sbeydeh Viveros-Walton and I serve as the Director of Higher Education at Public Advocates. We are a nonprofit civil rights law firm and advocacy organization committed to removing barriers to access and success in higher education.

On a personal note, I'm also a community college transfer student, and because, of course, repetition without support, I had to add years to my community college trajectory in order for me to transfer. So this is not just a policy issue for me, it's actually quite personal. We believe that AB 811 will negatively impact student success in the community colleges and go against evidence-based policies, and we respectfully urge the Committee to vote No on AB 811.

We have reviewed the amendments that attempted to narrow the bill's provisions specifically on enrichment courses that were brought up by one of the witnesses. Despite these amendments, our concerns remain on the repetition provisions. This Bill would require colleges to refer students and support services after their third attempt at a course. Extensive data provided by the colleges to the Chancellor's Office has proven that students are successful the first time they take the course if concurrent supports are provided on that first try and if a student should need it.

AB 811 can impact student retention and success by increasing their time to achieve their degree or their desired goals at community college. The third goal for the vision for success, adopted in 2017 by the Board of Governors, is to, quote, reduce the average number of units to degree to help more students reach their educational goals sooner and at less cost to them.

This frees up taxpayer dollars that can be put towards serving more students. We are also concerned that AB 811 would incentivize colleges to spend finite resources on the repetition of classes for failing students instead of investing services upfront on the very first try, and this has been proven to increase student success. The policy proposed in AB 811 lacks current data that supports the need or benefit to students, and we believe it will harm them by diverting resources away from early academic supports.

And it also reverses decades worth of evidence-based policies that have improved student outcomes. We respectfully urge you to consider our concerns and ask you to vote No on AB 811. My colleague and I will stay on to answer any questions on the data and the progress we have made, and we'll be here to answer any technical questions. Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much. So right now, are there any tweeners in the hearing room? If so, please come up.

Thank you so much. Joshua Hagen on behalf of the Campaign for College Opportunity. First, we appreciate the author's office for hearing our concerns and for the recent amendments to the Bill. However, we remain concerned that this Bill could unintentionally undermine significant efforts to reduce time to degree and improve student success over the last few years, such as the guided pathways program and policies to ensure more students are enrolled and supported in transfer-level math and English.

We are also concerned that this Bill will result in higher college costs for students, both through increased time to degree and misalignment to federal aid eligibility, potentially causing students to lose access to their federal Pell Grants. We look forward to continued conversations with the author and the sponsor on this.

Hi, my name is Oseas Garcia. I'm a transfer student at UCLA. As a community college student, I have strong concerns regarding the Bill and I urge the author to work directly with the UC Student Association on possible amendments to the Bill.

Good afternoon. David O'Brien with the California Community College's Chancellor's Office. For the reasons stated by other witnesses, we do have concerns, not an official position. We hope we can work with the author's office to address those. Thank you.

Good afternoon. David Ramirez, undergraduate UCLA, also Vice Chair of Government Relations for the UC Student Association. I also served as Student Trustee for the Pasadena Area Community College District for two years. We have strong concerns with the Bill, and we hope that the author is willing to work on amendments.

Good afternoon. I'm Michaela Bryan with the Undergraduate Student Association at UCLA. We have strong concerns about Bill AB 811. We should be focusing on resources on our students passing the class the first time, and we hope that the author will work on revising the Bill.

Hi. Aliyah Sky, State Government Relations Director for UC Student Association. We appreciate your amendments, but we still hold some concerns over the Bill, despite we understand its well-intentioned efforts. We do think it may have unintended consequences for community college, and especially UC transfer students.

And we do look forward to speaking with your office about potential amendments to make sure that the Bill does not unintentionally allow community colleges to encourage students to repeat courses that may actually harm them with the repetition. And it doesn't undo the effects of AB 705 and 175 which still have not undergone full implementation, which we'd love to see. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair Members Parshan with uAspire, California Policy Director with uAspire. We do not have an official position, but we do have a number of concerns laid out by many of our friends here today, and we look forward to working with the member and the sponsor on addressing these concerns as well. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Manny Rodriguez on behalf of The Institute for College Access and Success, also known as TICAS. Echo a lot of the concerns, questions, no official position as of now.

Our biggest concern right now is how this will conflict with federal regulations on financial aid eligibility, the impact this will have on students' lifetime eligibility for financial aid on their back-end years, as well as what this notification will include and how it will be disseminated to students on the impact towards financial aid when they repeat courses. So thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. Now is the time for any Committee Member have either common concerns or question, please.

Thank you. And I want to thank the author. I know this is a very well intentioned Bill, and I appreciate the amendments. Unfortunately, I cannot support the Bill today. A student failing a course once is unfortunate, but not unheard of. A student failing a course twice or even three times is not only unfortunate, but a failure of the education system that is charged with that student's, supporting that student's success. And as was mentioned by the speaker, if there are life circumstances, there is an appeals process.

I don't believe that removing the cap will help students, and my concern, as was voiced by many folks today, is that we will potentially be undoing years of success on improving student outcomes. We in the Legislature are charged with making informed decisions, and without any data to show why removing the cap is needed, this Bill only gives additional opportunities for our students to fail or further delay their time to degree.

I'm certainly empathetic to the academic and personal struggles that our students face and believe it is the responsibility of the educational system and the Legislature to uplift our students. But what we really need to do, as we did last year with our $64 million for community colleges to increase academic support services, is support students at the beginning of progress, not make sure that they spend 5, 10, 12 years in community college.

I know, like I mentioned, that this is very well intentioned, look forward to working with you, but there has been a lot of work done in this area, and I'm afraid this unintentionally will undermine it. Thank you.

Motion to move the Bill.

All right, so we have the motion. And second, as recommended.

I want to compliment the Assembly Member. I know that you care deeply about education and that you've spent a lot of time on this issue. I share the concern, and I think the simplest way for me to say it is that more time is not an intervention. I don't want to close the door on students, whether it's three classes, five classes. I hear real concerns about the financial barriers, but I have to say again that more time is not an intervention.

And so I just want to ask the question around what will be in place if you're going to extend this to five years, if this does pass out of Committee, what else would be in place for students? And I will say this with a caveat, that more time is not an intervention when it comes to academics, clearly, there are life situations, and I think the Assembly Member Irwin, addressed that.

When life situations happen, there's things that can be done, but what else is there for students that can help them so that they don't have to repeat five times? I think that's my biggest concern.

Absolutely. Thank you so much, Assembly Member Addis, for that question. And thank you, Assembly Member Irwin, for your comments as well. In terms of interventions, we want to continue to make sure that students continue the progress in their educational journey. And in terms of financial aid, looking at emergency financial assistance to help students overcome any unforeseen financial challenges that would directly impact a student's ability to persist in their study. We want to make sure that we maximize our resources to help students' basic needs as well.

And I know the Legislature has done a lot of work around these efforts in partnership with our 73 community college districts. And when we look at support services, we want to continue to make sure we have individual counseling, advising, technology-based strategies, and to enhance the supports also for transfer-level math and English, as I've heard here today, and to make sure students continue their path in their coursework.

And when we look at lifelong learning in the arts and the humanities, that's critical to provide those opportunities as well. And this will be a pilot program and to ensure that AB 811 gets out of Committee will have a sunset of five years to really make sure that we're fulfilling its purpose, to look at student success, and to reduce barriers to certificate accumulation and completion.

But also looking at, as you heard from our student speaker, the issues that Ms. Brandt and students who may have to take a course, again, there is an exception for that one time, but there's an opportunity to make sure that we continue to provide those resources to allow students to complete their coursework, to continue in their educational journey. And when we look at supports, this is something that our Legislature, our Committee, and community college districts have been very focused on.

I know our advocates in the community college world, we really want to make sure on the front end, when it's at orientation, assessment, counseling, that we're providing those resources to make sure that we're getting folks into the guided pathways, the career pathways that are in alignment that has been passed by this body.

And so this would just provide an opportunity for students who, if they weren't able to pass it the first time due to some life obligation, that there would be an opportunity to take that so they can continue in their journey. But I would want to make sure that there's supports at their front end and then at the back end. This is more, we want to make sure there's supports along the way in their educational journey. So that's something I'm very keen on.

And I appreciate the comments from folks in the audience here at the table and folks that provided comments at the microphone. So thank you, Assembly Member Addis, for that question.

And you'll continue to work with opposition to see if you can address some of these other issues that have been brought up?

Yes, we'll continue to work with the folks that brought up concerns here today. So thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. If we don't have any other concerns or comments from Committee Member, I'd like to ask for a roll call vote. So, Madam Secretary?

The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll call].

Can you announce. Okay, so can you announce the vote?

Six. Yes, one. No one. Not voting will hold.

Thank you so much. As a Senator Fong, would you like to present another bill, if you don't mind?

Thank you so much, colleagues. I think Mr. McCarty's here. Yes, we'll do, Mr. McCarty, and then we'll come up. Thank you so much, Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you, colleagues. Thank you so much, Mr. McCarty, for your patience. Now we'll go proceed to item number six, Assembly Bill 638, presented by Assemblymember McCarty. Welcome. Thank you, Mr.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know this is the Higher Education Committee, and this is kind of a hybrid bill, probably a little bit more K-12, but higher ed as well. This is related to financial aid for our teachers throughout California and dealing with the teacher shortage. First of all, I'd like to thank the committee staff for working with us on the bill, and we will be taking the committee amendments.

This measure would extend the Golden State teacher Grant Program created several years ago in the legislature and funded the budget to include eligibility to help teachers working in designated shortage areas such as math and special education, providing them with financial resources. This program is a loan forgiveness program of up to $20,000. It primarily focuses on teachers who work in priority schools, income based schools. This has been funded in the past budget years. We've had kind of a give and take as far as who's applying.

So this is a concurrent discussion from the gate from the budget committee and the legislation. We're working with partners to try to make sure that we get our biggest bang for our buck with these dollars that we put in the state budget, but also chip away at our teacher shortage. We know this is a teacher shortage crisis across California. Hard to staff subject areas like math, science and special education are the hardest to fill.

By including eligibility for non public schools, this will also ensure that we focus on expanding access and helping our most vulnerable students. Teacher preparation programs, as we know, can be costly. It sometimes has a disincentive for people to enter the profession. With the cost of education plus the pay for being a teacher, this can be particularly impactful as we try to diversify the teacher workforce. This would also have CSAC reports on demographic information to help better understand who exactly utilizes this program.

With that, respectfully ask for your aye vote. And committed to working with the committee and through the budget process to address these outstanding issues. Thank you.

Thank you so much. We have a motion by Vice Chair Ta seconded by Assemblymember Wallis, do you have a witness? I'm sorry. Cool. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing? Yes. Are there any witnesses in opposition in hearing room?

Still on the support side. Sasha Horowitz, Los Angeles Unified School District, in support.

In support. Thank you so much. Next, we'll have. Are you in support? Opposition? Okay. Are there witnesses in opposition in hearing.

Here Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Members. Brendan Towhig, on behalf of Ed Voice, we were in support of the previous version of the bill, but the recent amendments significantly changed the bill and were now opposed. Unfortunately, the difficulty of staffing qualified educators is felt most acutely by our schools serving children from low income homes, and current grant programs help address this inequity by requiring grant recipients to commit to working for four years in a school with high concentration of pupils from low income homes, English learners and foster youth AB 638. The current version now eliminates that requirement and instead allows recipients to teach in any school with a subject area shortage, in essence, opening up the program to higher income schools.

This fundamentally alters the goals of the program because without the requirement to serve in high need schools, many recipients would likely behave no differently than the overall teacher workforce and does right now and pursue roles in non high need schools. So far, the program is actually a bright spot in our effort to address equity issues at our highest need schools, there's robust participation.

The California Student Aid Commission anticipates awarding the entire 500 million that was approved in the 21-22 budget sometime in the 24-25 academic year. And then in commenting on a similar budget proposal from the Governor, which the Legislative Analyst Office recommends rejecting, the LAO confirms that demand likely is sufficient under the current program structure to fully spend grant funds by the expenditure deadline and possibly sooner.

Members, by all accounts, the program is doing what it was intended to do, which is to get more qualified educators in our highest need schools, which are the most difficult to staff. So there's 18 groups in opposition to the bill based on the latest amendments, not all reflected in the analysis just yet, but who have all signed a coalition letter. And we respectfully urge your no vote on the measure.

Thank you. Welcome.

Mr. Chairman and members. I'm Brian Rivas, speaking on behalf of the Education Trust West. Sorry to be here opposing Mr. McCarty. He's been a great partner to us in many other areas. Unfortunately, we disagree on this one.

And as my colleague from Ed Voice explained, this bill makes an important, or it's important for you all to see that this Bill would make a change to eligibility requirements for the Golden State Teacher Incentive Grant so that you would no longer have to serve in a high need, which is defined as a concentration of low income or English learners or foster youth in order to get the $20,000. We have a lot of problems in public education. The teacher shortage is one of them.

But also we have a severe maldistribution of highly qualified, prepared teachers. This bill would exacerbate that by saying you could take the 20,000 and go anywhere. We think that you should oppose or vote against this bill because this is an incentive program that was designed to really prevent or address opportunity gaps that are born when students are in schools where they don't have access or they're not taught by someone who's prepared in the subject and effective.

So most of us in the equity community are opposed, and we would ask for you to please vote against this.

Thank you so much. Are there any other additional witnesses in opposition? Welcome.

Alex Walker Griffin, on behalf of Government for California, in opposition.

Ines Rosales with Public Advocates in opposition of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there any tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments? We have a motion to second. Thank you so much. If there's no further comments, someone would like to close, please.

Yeah. Thank you. And I do respect the advocates who are working with this and continue to work with the individuals and the groups both through the budget process that you and I, Mr. Fong, are part of, but also through the legislation.

And just like to note that we have a teacher shortage in all schools. I think all things being equal, we'd like to potentially focus this, but we have a shortage in all schools and we know these are the cute subjects. And so this allows us to make sure that we address California's overall needs with that ask your vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much Assemblymember for bringing us forward, and thank you for accepting the committee's technical amendments.

We know that we have a teacher workforce here in California and shortage here in California. So with the work and budgets up to you and the hearings, thank you for convening those hearings, as well as we continue to look at how we continue to embrace the hopes and aspirations of our students here in our schools in California. So please continue to work with the Committee on this and look forward to supporting the bill today. And thank you for the comments with opposition as well.

I know you'll be working with them as well. So thank you. With that roll call, please.

The motion is do pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Right now, the vote count is 8-0 and we'll keep the roll open for any members that like to add on. Thank you so much. Next up, we have Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes. Thank you so much for your patience and welcome. You'll be presenting item number four, I believe. Assembly Bill 395. Welcome Assemblymember Reyes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I present to you AB 395, the Community College Completion act. This bill requires California community colleges to take concrete action to ensure students can complete their degrees or transfer to a four year University within two years. While many students enter community college with the expectation of completing their degree or transferring in two years, two year completion rates are low. A report found that only 13% of community college students, community college freshmen earned their associate degree within two years.

These rates are especially low for students of color, our Latino and black students. Many students cite difficulties with planning their course schedules and accessing the courses they need within a two year time frame. These students must often choose between many courses offered at inconsistent times and intervals. This makes it especially difficult for students with obligations outside of school, such as work or family, to plan for and complete their degree.

AB 395 will address these issues by requiring community colleges to annually publish on their website an educational plan detailing a sequence of courses for each associate's degree or certificate offered by the college. To ensure students have the opportunity to complete their degrees, AB 395 will also require community colleges to make the classes within the sequence available for students to complete their degrees within two years. Here to testify in support are Jose Fierro, President of Cerritos Community College, and Hector Ledesma, Community College student at Cerritos.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is Dr. Jose Fierro, and I'm the current President of the California Association of Latino Community College Trustees and Administrators and the President, Superintendent of Cerritos College. Nine out of 10 individuals that attend Cerritos College are students of colors. We're a minority urban institution. We have students that cover and represent to the T our local communities. Only two in every 100 Latinx students complete their associate degrees in two years.

Yes, two out of every 100 do complete in two years. And even after eight years, 61% of Latino students statewide are still working towards finishing their community college degree goals. A barrier that our students face is the cafeteria model of selecting courses where students are free to choose from a to choose from a complicated menu of offerings that are randomly placed in a calendar. We have about 950 courses in our catalog.

AB 395 makes available an optional prebuilt list of classes broken down by term that provides resolved momentum for completion. This is done by utilizing Program Mapper, a system that is currently in place at all California community colleges.

If we want to remain the fifth largest economy in the world, we must educate the largest growing demographic in the state without delay. If our community college system improved from awarding two to four degrees to Latinx students in two years, we will have an additional 12,245 Latino students graduated every year. AB 395 shows students exactly how they can complete their goals promptly. There is a rumor going around that AB 395 will cost a very large amount of money to implement. This is not factual.

For the contrary, it will decrease the cost of completion for associate degree seekers. AB 395 will not require hiring additional faculty to implement. It will require colleges to build schedules, focus on guided pathways, and prioritize course completion before a specialized course elective. If appropriately implemented, AB 395 will decrease the time to completion for California community college students. It will decrease the accumulation of excess units by California community college students and ultimately will reduce the cost of an associate degree for the students and for the institutions.

I urge you to vote yes on AB 395 and to help level the playing field for all students of color across California.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon Chair Fong and Members of the Committee on Higher Education. My name is Hector Ledesma, student trustee of Cerritos College, first generation college student and proud son of Mexican immigrants. I want to share with you a little bit of my experience at community college. I'm eager to pursue my college education. I enrolled at Cerritos Community College the day right after receiving my high school diploma. My original plan, just as so many other students, was to graduate and transfer from community college in two years.

Get in and get out. Unfortunately, over the course of time, two years at Cerritos turned into three, which then turned into four, and now five. I have spent five years at the community college level and if we look at the data, there are countless students in this same boat. I can partially attribute this to my desire to explore and attempt classes in new subject areas.

I mean, after all, the idea around exploring and taking your time to find a passion is celebrated at the community college level. And although exploring is great, there are better, more effective approaches for students to achieve their educational goals. I heard it through high school. I heard it at community college. Everyone knows that you can graduate, transfer, complete a certificate within two years at the community college level. But even as a community college student, I still didn't know how to do it.

I didn't know that what I needed was to have my math, chemistry, physics series, and all my other prerequisite courses scheduled for the next four to six semesters in the most time efficient manner in order to minimize my time at Cerritos. And although I don't need to be an expert at counseling, really, I mean, I didn't know that all I needed was just a clear path to achieve my goals. You see, students don't know what they don't know.

As I reflect on my college experience, it would have been nice to access a map, a clear cut outline of an educational pathway detailing a sequence of courses for each associate's degree or certificate offered by the college as soon as I touched campus grounds. I mean, by not providing this as a default is a huge disservice and barrier for students like me.

We all know that the longer it takes for a student to graduate and transfer, the greater the likelihood of students dropping out and not completing. Community colleges serve the most vulnerable students in California. The longer it takes for a student to graduate and land a high paying job, the longer we are postponing upward social mobility. It's essential for all students. It's essential for all colleges, by default, to provide clear educational pathways for all of its students. I'm here to express my support for Assembly Bill 395.

I believe that this would benefit all 1.8 million community college students, especially first generation students who are unfamiliar with navigating higher education. I am honored to have the opportunity to speak on my experience and advocate on behalf of countless students who experience similar barriers. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in support in the hearing room? Are there any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there any 'tweeners in the hearing room? Bring it back to the Committee. Colleagues, any questions or comments? We have a motion by Assemblymember Wallis, second by Assemblymember Ortega. Any comments? Seeing none. Assemblymember, would you like to close, please.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Reyes, for bringing this important measure forward. And thank you for your leadership and pushing for additional provisions around guided pathways to make sure that our students have access to the courses that they need to graduate. And thank you for working on addressing these issues to make sure that we prevent students from matriculating, I mean, prevent students from additional barriers, from matriculating to a degree. So really appreciate all your leadership here. And with that, I look forward to supporting this measure.

Roll call, please.

The motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll call]

We have four ayes and we'll keep the roll open for Members to add on. Thank you so much.

Thank you. At this time, I'm going to pass the gavel to Assembly Member Ortega, and I'm going to take the opportunity to present Assembly Bill 1543. 1543. Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you. I apologize. If we can do in bill order 1540. If we can do 1540, please, Madam Chair?

Thank you.

All right. Assembly Member Mike Fong, please present AB 1540.

Thank you so much, Chair and Members, and good afternoon. Thank you, everyone, for a robust meeting. Assembly Bill 1540 streamlines the process for undocumented students to apply for financial aid. Currently, undocumented students apply for state financial aid through the California Dream Act application submitted to the California Student Aid Commission. In order to receive in-state tuition, an undocumented student must complete the AB 540 affidavit submitted to the institution of higher education where the student plans to enroll.

This process creates confusion and limits students' ability to access the full amount of aid available to them. Students may submit one of the forms, assuming that one form covers all aid. According to a report by the California Student Aid Commission, only 14 percent of eligible undocumented students receive state financial aid, and we recently did a webinar with the California Student Aid Commission to make sure that we're getting this information out there on how students can apply for financial aid.

AB 1540 creates a seamless process by allowing the California Student Aid Commission to collect both the California Dream Act application and the AB 540 affidavit. The California Student Aid Commission will share the AB 540 affidavit with the higher education institution, which will be allowed to verify information as they deem necessary. The goal of this bill is to assist eligible students in accessing both in-state tuition and financial aid, such as Cal Grants. Here to testify in support are Jake Brymner with the California Student Aid Commission, and Leonardo Rodriguez, currently a student at UC Berkeley. Welcome.

Thank you, Chair Fong, and good afternoon, Committee Members. I'm Jake Brymner. I'm the Deputy Director for Policy and Public Affairs at the California Student Aid Commission. And as Chair Fong spoke to, AB 1540 aims to streamline the financial aid process for undocumented students.

It integrates the Nonresident Tuition Exemption Form, what we commonly refer to as the AB 540 affidavit, into the California Dream Act application. This Dream Act application is, of course, our state-based financial aid application that mirrors the free application for Federal Student Aid, the FAFSA. Currently, our undocumented students are completing the California Dream Act application to determine the amount of state aid they receive.

They then go through, as Chair Fong described, the second step of submitting their AB 540 affidavit to their campus to ensure that they're going to receive the exemption from nonresident tuition rates. This second step, this AB 540 affidavit, can vary across all of our institutions. Last year, as Chair Fong again spoke to, the Student Aid Commission convened a workgroup to identify the various barriers that undocumented students face as they navigate higher education. AB 1540 is a direct policy recommendation that was identified by students and practitioners in that process.

Our students spoke clearly that many of their peers continue to be unaware of the multiple forms that they need to submit, causing them to potentially have their financial aid delayed or to not be considered for all the aid for which they may qualify. In the 21-22 academic year, out of about 21,000 California Dream Act filers that were eligible and offered an award, only one--only 13,000 were paid.

This means that nearly four out of every ten of our California Dream Act students who are offered state financial aid for which they're eligible ultimately didn't receive it due to administrative barriers and this confusing process. Our goal with AB 1540 is to centralize this process so that students can claim their financial aid awards and be able to continue their journey towards a higher education.

We're actually right now in the process of updating the California Dream Act application to align with some forthcoming changes that are being implemented for the FAFSA. This makes it the perfect time for us to also look at how we can further streamline the process for our California Dream Act students. So on behalf of the California Student Aid Commission, very much like to express our gratitude to Assembly Member Fong for authoring this bill and his leadership here, and we respectfully ask for the Committee's support today. Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon, Members. My name is Leo Rodriguez. I am a student at the University of California, Berkeley. I'm an undocumented student and a transfer student, as well as a low-income student, so all of the checklists. I transferred from Mendocino College up north all the way down to Berkeley. When I first graduated high school, I was reached out to by our community college.

They had a close relationship with our high school to get as many students to be enrolled at community college, and so we had a dream liaison, which is a liaison to undocumented students who helped me throughout that entire process to be enrolled in that fall. I was so thankful to have had the support to have gone through that process as a first-year student. To my surprise, even though I thought I had done everything correct, I had filled everything out, I received a charge of about 6,000 dollars.

And this was around the time where the community colleges were promoting a free first year, so it was more than surprising. And so, if it weren't for that same liaison walking me through filling out the AB 540 affidavit, I would not have known that a simple answer on a self-identification question while I was enrolling had put me in this path of being charged 6,000 dollars. So I had identified as a DACA recipient and not an AB 540 recipient.

So the community college did not have the tools to identify me as having in-state tuition. But they quickly helped me fill out the affidavit, and the issue was resolved. And such a small error on my application process almost led me to drop out before I had even started. And throughout my time at community college and through experience in leadership roles, I was able to learn how to self-advocate.

So when I got my decision letter from UC Berkeley, I was sure I'd have the tools and information to overcome any barrier to access throughout my enrollment process. On May 26th, I submitted my proof of residence and knew at some point I would be asked to submit my AB 540 affidavit. On June 17th, I was asked to submit through the registrar's office to submit more documentation. These documentations included bank statements, addresses, and even voter registration, proof of voter registration, which is kind of very surprising.

How am I supposed to be vote? I was surprised, and on July 1st, I sent an email asking them why I needed to submit anything more than just an affidavit. On July 22nd, 21 days later, they responded, informing me that all additional documents were not needed and that my residency for tuition-related purposes had been approved. I was willfully unprepared to have gone through such a bureaucratic process with many barriers at almost every point. It was hard and it made me consider another school, really.

So my story is unfortunately not unique. Far too many undocumented students are facing barriers to accessing in-state tuition through discrepancies in the AB 540 process. I kindly ask you all to support AB 1540 because this simple change will have a transformative impact on students like me. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Are there other witnesses in support?

Manny Rodriguez, on behalf of TICAS, in support.

Hi. Jason Vazquez. I'm actually a resident of Chair Fong's district--just wanted to mention that--but I'm here representing the Southern California College Attainment Network, in support of AB 1540.

Melissa Bardo, on behalf of the Education Trust-West, in support. Thank you.

David O'Brien with the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, in support.

Alia Sky, on behalf of UC Student Association, in support. Thank you, Chair Fong.

Hello. Daniel Sanchez with CHIRLA, in support.

Joshua Hagen, on behalf of the California Undocumented Higher Education Coalition, in support.

Hello. Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, in support.

Hi. Kimberly Sanchez with NextGen California, in support.

Witnesses in opposition? Any tweeners? All right. Does the author wish to close?

Thank you so much, Madam Chair and Members. I appreciate the support here from the California Student Aid Commission in collaboration on this very important bill, AB 1540. And this legislative body in the state has done tremendous work around Dream Resource Centers at our community colleges and LA community colleges of Southern California and throughout the state, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote as we continue to embrace the hopes and aspirations of our undocumented students in a California's higher education system. Thank you so much.

Second. We have a motion to move. Second. Any other questions or comments from the Committee? Okay.

The motion is 'do pass to the Appropriations Committee.' [Roll Call]. Four yes, one no. We'll leave it open for add ons.

Thank you so much. Thank you.

We will now move to item number 18, AB 1543 by Assemblymember Fong. Chair's recommendation is due pass to the Appropriations Committee.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair, Members. We are now very honored to present Assembly Bill 1543. Assembly Bill 1543 allows community college students to opt out of a portion of their $2 student representation fee, providing students greater choice and more transparency as to how their dollars are spent. Local and statewide student associations are an integral part of community colleges and assure that students voices are being heard by state and local governments. These associations are funded by a $2 student representation fee.

$1 of the fee supports the student's local body or student body organization, and the other dollar represents and funds the statewide student organization. Under current law, students may only opt out of the total student representation fee. This means that students who prefer not to support one organization must opt out of supporting both organizations. Students should have the opportunity to choose which organizations they want their fee dollars to support.

AB 1543 will increase transparency around the student representation fee structure and provide students more choice about which organizations their fee dollars support by allowing students to opt out of a portion of the fee. I'm very grateful to be joined by Marco Martinez, Vice President of the Student Senate for California's Community Colleges, and Zachariah Wooden, Vice President of Legislative Affairs. Thank you.

Good afternoon, esteemed Members of the Committee. My name is Marco Martinez. I'm the Executive Vice President of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges.

We represent all 1.8 million students to the Chancellor's office and the Board of Governors. In terms of AB 1543, this bill would allow the student representation fee to allow transparency when students are making informed decisions on whether or not to pay the full representation fee. As Assemblymember Fong stated, $1 goes to the local student government. The other dollar goes to us, the Student Center for California Community Colleges. As a result, this bill came with unintended consequences.

A lot of student governments at the local level have expressed that their finances have declined as some students have opted out of the entire student representation fee. Under current law, the student representation fee, you're only allowed to pay the entirety of the fee or opt out of the entirety of the fee as well.

What this law would allow is that the student would be allowed to make the decision of whether or not they want to pay the $1 to the local student government or the $1 to the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, some local urban or rural, actually, community colleges, which have less than 10,000 students. While the Student Center for California Community Colleges receives annually around $2 million, some colleges only receive about $6,600. One community college actually reported that they declined from $6,000 to $600,000.

This is seen a lot with rural colleges on the local level. And so this bill would just allow the student to fund their local student government instead of us, which that would be okay with us. And so I will pass it on with the Vice President of Legislative Affairs, Zachariah Wooden.

Thank you, VP Martinez. So I'm going to mention three important years, the SSCCC, the Student Senate. Well, for those of you who know me, I'm Zachariah Wooden. I'm the Vice President of Legislative Affairs.

For those who don't, that's my name and my position with the Student Senate. The Student Senate in its current form was created in 2006. There wasn't a funding mechanism for the Student Senate implemented until 2013. But when that funding mechanism was implemented, it wasn't until 2019, when the student representation fee started funding the Student Senate for California Community Colleges.

One unforeseen consequence, of course, is that when you bundle together those $2 when a student opts out of that fee waiver, they're not entirely aware of the difference between opting out of the fee waiver for their local student body association, which may use that fee, may use that dollar in combination with the other dollars that it may receive from the student representation fee to send their students creative events for their students, make the community college more like a community college, send their student leaders into professional development events.

As a whole, there's a whole list of things that a student body association at a local college can utilize the student representation fee for in order for the benefit of its student population at its colleges. Like VP Martinez mentioned, the Student Senate is adequately funded on the statewide level, we receive around approximately $2 million annually.

We're not significantly impacted by the choice of a student to opt out of the student representation fee for the statewide organization, but there is no difference between opting out of the SSCCC fee and the local student body association fee, which is of course what this bill aims to amend to fix.

So of course, what we're looking for here is to give back that dollar to the student body associations so that those students can be most locally represented by those student body associations and those dollars can go to where it would most impact them on the local level. We did sample survey the colleges with the student body associations within the Student Senate for California Community Colleges.

We found that 36.4% of 116 colleges did see a decrease of their student body association revenue from before the student representation fee was implemented in terms of the opt out waiver and then in comparison to their revenue after the student representation fee opt out was implemented.

So of course, we're asking for your support for this bill because we do want to see that local student body associations are not as negatively impacted and that the student representation fees go to where the student chooses it to go or chooses for it to go. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there other witnesses in support?

David O'Brien with the California Community Colleges Chancellor's office in support.

Okay, Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, Faculty Association of the California Community College is in support and a little tired, I guess.

David Hawkins with CCCI California Community College Independence in support.

Anyone has is in opposition? Any tweeners? Seeing none. Turning it over to the Committee Members for any questions or comments. Second motion on the floor, do pass to appropriations secretary, can you call the roll?

The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

10 to 0. We'll hold it open for add on.

Thank you so much. Thank you, colleagues. It's been a robust meeting. We have one final bill, Assembly Bill 260 presented by Assemblymember Miguel Santiago. Item number two. Welcome, Assembly Member Santiago.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very much appreciate the opportunity to present. Today I'm presenting on behalf of myself and my joint author, Assemblymember Sanchez. And today we're presenting AB 260, which would create a pay parity for part time faculty at community colleges. This is really just about, just about paying people for what they're doing.

And having been on the Community College Board for some time, and I know you and I shared the same experience in the same district, part time faculty worked just as hard, had to grade the same amount of papers per student, had to do, still office hours, had to do the consulting, had to do everything that it takes to make a student successful, yet they're not paid on parity.

I am limiting my comments to allow for our witness to expand on that in the interest of time and hand it over to Ms. Patricia Rucker from CTA.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, Members of the panel. My name is Patricia Rucker. I represent the California Teachers Association, where an affiliate of our organization is the Community College Association.

We're here and very happy to co-sponsor AB 260, and I do want to thank Assemblymember Santiago for working with us on this bill. I want to begin by reading a statement on a bill that was signed back in 2020 by Governor Newsom.

I'm proud to have developed this piece of legislation collaboratively with both management and labor partners to provide adjunct faculty the same level of professional flexibility as their full time counterparts by establishing a minimum compensation floor.

This bill also represents a substantial pay increase for many faculty members and will ensure that they can continue benefiting students with their professional experience.

That was the signing statement by your colleague, Assemblymember Jackie Irwin back in 2020 when Governor Newsom signed AB 736. That Bill created pay parity for adjunct faculty working in private colleges and universities.

What we're proposing on AB 260 is not a novel or new policy, and it is something the State of California has already endorsed. Over the years, California community college districts have increasingly turned to part time adjunct faculty to meet their mission of educating students.

Adjunct faculty teach up to 75% of all community college classes, in some districts. Adjunct faculty are required to hold the same minimum qualifications as full-time faculty, and they are deemed temporary and have little job security.

Community colleges generally compensate adjunct faculty at a much lower rate than full time faculty, sometimes even failing to pay adjunct faculty for the many hours of essential work that they do outside of the classroom on behalf of their employers.

As a result of these widespread and unfair compensation practices, adjunct faculty across the state desperately struggle financially to make ends meet despite their advanced degrees, professional duties, and many years of teaching experience.

These compensation practices are not only a form of economic exploitation, but they may also violate California's minimum wage laws. For these reasons, we are asking you to vet and approve AB 260 today.

We are asking you to do to implement the same policy that is already in place for adjunct faculty who work at private colleges and universities at this state. And to show adjunct faculty across the state that you value the work and the contributions they make to training and developing California's education workforce. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room?

Marco Martinez, the Executive Vice President of the Student Center for California Community Colleges, is in support of this bill.

Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges proud co-sponsor and in strong support.

Mr. Chair Members. David Hawkins, CCCI California Community College Independence this is long overdue. Ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in a hearing room? Are there tweeners in a hearing room? Colleagues, are there any questions or comments?

Sincere apologies. I'm sorry. Witness in opposition Ryan McLaney with the Community College League of California. We agree with the goal of this bill. Our part time faculty members are undercompensated.

The problem, though, is that the California community colleges have the lowest per pupil funding rate in the state for the higher education system, and that makes our institutions make very hard choices. This bill would make those choices harder by mandating this increase in pay for our part time faculty members.

Without the commiserate budget increase to pay for it, we would have to make hard choices on wraparound services, financial aid for students, COLA and healthcare for current staffing. For those reasons, we are opposed to the bill and thank you.

Thank you so much. Any tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Do we have a motion? We have a motion. A second. Thank you so much, colleagues.

Senator, we'd like to close. Please respectfully would ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, thank you so much, Miguel Santiago, for your continuous efforts to work on providing pay parity. And as former colleagues on the Community College Board and work that we did there, we know that part time faculty is so critical and it's critical to the academic workforce of our community colleges and they deserve to be recognized and compensated at the same rate as their full time colleagues.

Equal pay for equal works extend to part time faculty as well and look forward to supporting this measure today with that. Roll call, please.

The motion is do passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

With that, seven yes. Two not voting. And we'll keep the roll open for authors I'd like to add on. Thank you so much. At this time now we've gone through all the bills. Thank you, for a robust meeting.

We're going to do add ons at this time. I'll pass it on to Kirsten. Okay, we're going to do the motion second on a few items, but also add ons on the rest of the items so we can go through.

We'll go through the ones first here. I apologize. Thank you so much. Item number 14. We'll start with bill by Assemblymember Lowenthal and Assembly Bill 1524. Can we get a motion on second that, please? Moved by Mr. Wallis, second by Ms. Addis. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call please.

Motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

10 votes in affirmation. We'll keep the roll open for any Members that would like to add on. Thank you so much, colleagues. Now we'll do item Assembly Bill 603, authored by Senator Cervantes. Item number five. Can we get a motion and second? Moved by Mr. Wallis. Do we have a second? Second by Ms. Addis. Any comments or questions?

603? Correct. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

The motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. That has 10 ayes. We'll keep the rope in for any Members that would like to add on. Now we'll go to item number three, authored by Assemblymember Chris Holden. Assembly Bill 299 and this one is on the hazing. Any questions or comments? Can we get a motion and second on this, please? Moved by Mr. Santiago, second by Ms. Addis. No questions or comments. I see. So roll call, please. Thank you.

The motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

We have eight ayes and two not voting. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that would like to add on. Thank you so much. Now we'll go through add ons at this time. We'll lift the call on those items or any Members I'd like to add on on our additional items and I'll pass it to Kirsten who'll go through them at this time.

Consent calendar. [Roll Call]

Consent calendar passes 12-0. Thank you call ons. Next up.

File item 11, AB 1237, the motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That's AB 1237, passes 12-0. Thank you, colleagues.

File item 13, AB 1400, the motion is due passed to the Revenue and Taxation Committee. [Roll Call]

That item passes 11 with 11 votes. Thank you so much, colleagues.

File item number 10, AB 1190, the motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That item passes 12-0. Thank you so much, colleagues.

File item one, AB 252 the motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Thank you so much, colleagues. Said motion is out, eight ayes, three no's and one not voting. Thank you.