Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education

I will now go over some key elements and structure of today's hearing. Please note that while this hearing will not have phone testimony, we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the committee's website at www.ahed.assembly.ca.gov. Bills will be taken up in sign-in order, and members of the committee will present their bills last in numerical order. Noncommittee members, noncommittee authors, please be sure to sign in at the sergeant's desk in room 437.

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 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 to activate your mic and speak into the mic for authors of bills up today. Each member presenting today will provide an opening and closing statement. Your two lead witnesses will each have two minutes each to provide testimony. And also to note the following measure has been pulled from today's agenda. File item 12 to become a two-year bill.

And that's file item 12, authored by someone Blanca Pacheco, AB 1160. And then, we'll take up the consent calendar when we have a quorum, and with that, we'll start our session as an informational hearing. I first like to welcome Mr. Muratsuchi with item number two, presenting Assembly Bill 247. Mr. Muratsuchi, the floor is yours. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to ask that my witnesses join me here. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on this bill. I am here to present, along with you and Assembly Member Lori Wilson, the Kindergarten Through Community College Public Education Facilities Bond Act. We all know that the need for this bond is overwhelming. The PPIC has estimated over $100 billion in backlog in terms of construction and modernization needs, not only for K-12, but, of course, for our community colleges.

And so it is high time that we pass a bond to place before California voters in the 2024 election. The last time that we passed a bond was in 2016, seven years ago. That provided $2 billion for community college facilities and $7 billion for K-12. We tried again in 2020, I believe, and that drew, as we all know, the unfortunate number of Proposition 13, and that narrowly failed despite that designation as Proposition 13.

And so I think the record is clear, and we have witnesses here to testify in support of the compelling need, especially for our community colleges in terms of our facilities. At this time, Mr. Chairman, I want to turn it over to you. I understand that--do you want to have a statement from the dais?

Yes. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair Muratsuchi and Assembly Member Lori Wilson. As a proud joint author of Assembly Bill 247, as a former trustee of the Los Angeles Community College District--I see our chancellor here as well today--facilities were always a big priority for myself and my colleagues, and before my election to the State Assembly, we worked hard to put a local bond on the ballot, $5 billion bond, last cycle.

And as our committee analysis and witnesses have expressed, community colleges face an over $20 billion in need over the next few years. And we know that there's a lot of work to be done to make sure that we continue to serve the most number of students here in our higher education system and our community colleges. And this bond will have a lot to offer to both K-12 and community colleges, including funds for both career technical education facilities and other workforce training programs.

And Assembly Bill 247 is not the same bond that voters failed to pass in 2020, also known as Prop 13, as you mentioned. And with this new bond, not number 13, I believe that voters will again show their support for bonds to support our schools' infrastructures so that students can focus on learning. And thank you so much to Assembly Member Muratsuchi and Assembly Member Wilson as we look forward to getting this bill to the finish line, along with my joint authors. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I also was trying to get Assembly Member Wilson to join us, but apparently she has another engagement. And so at this time, I would like to introduce our witnesses in support of this measure: David O'Brien, the vice chancellor for the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, and Rebekah Kalleen, the Community College Facilities Consortium.

Welcome.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is David O'Brien, I'm the vice chancellor of government relations for the California Community Colleges, proud to be here today to testify in support of Assembly Bill 247. If approved by the voters, as the chair and the assemblymember noted, AB 247 will provide critical funds for California community colleges to construct and modernize educational facilities.

With 115 physical college campuses and 81 educational centers located up and down the state, our system serves more than two-thirds of California's public postsecondary students. We educate over 1.8 million students with a range of needs, including career education, transfer preparation,and adult learning. As the largest provider of workforce training in the nation, California community colleges also prepare students for careers relative to state and local workforce needs.

Modern, up-to-date facilities play a critical role in helping meet the career and academic goals of our students, but our classrooms, labs and other buildings are in dire need of repair and maintenance. These renovations will require an investment of at least $30 billion over the next several years.

If community college facilities continue to age, we worry that we will lose students to private, for profit universities that do not provide the same value or quality education as public community colleges, but may have the funding to update and modernize their facilities. By proposing a new community college facilities bond, AB 247 can help address the significant infrastructure needs of our system and allow us to more adequately and equitably serve our students and the workforce of tomorrow. Thank you for your time and consideration, and we respectfully request an aye vote on this measure.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair and Members, Rebekah Kalleen on behalf of the Community College Facility Coalition. AB 247 would provide state bond funds for the successful community college capital outlay program. Proceeds from prior bonds have been fully committed, and so if you submit an application today, there is no funding source for that application. AB 247 continues the important partnership between the state and our local communities. Mr. Chair, you mentioned local bonds. We are able to leverage local dollars to access the state funds, maximizing the investment on both sides.

Facilities are an important component of providing a 21st century education and career training. They are critical to student success. They help to increase degree transfer and certificate rates. They also support student basic needs, providing spaces to access important services like food, healthcare, counseling and financial aid. AB 247 would fund the existing capital outlay program. This program prioritizes health and safety projects first, such as seismic retrofits and utility infrastructure upgrades. Then it targets dollars to modernize, renovate and upgrade existing facilities.

It also funds new facilities at colleges that have impacted programs. This program has served colleges well and provides access to a higher education for students all across the state. Mr. Chair, thank you for your leadership. And thank you very much, Assembly Member Muratsuchi, for your leadership as well. And we urge your aye vote. And thank you to Lori Wilson.

Thank you so much. And thank you, Chair Muratsuchi and Assembly Member Wilson for your leadership and efforts on this. At this time, we will now open this up to other witnesses in support in the hearing room. Welcome.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members, Chris Walker on behalf of the California Association of Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors, strong support of the bill. One of the big things that we've learned in all of this is that ventilation systems in our indoor air environment for our children and our students is compromised and we need a lot of maintenance. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Jeff Vaca, representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools from the 23 school district superintendents in Riverside County, in support.

Thank you Chair and Members. Mark McDonald, on behalf of the Antelope Valley, Kern, Contra Costa, Mt. San Jacinto, Peralta, San Bernardino and Yuba Community College districts, all in support.

Kimberly Rosenberger with SEIU in support.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Andrea Ball, on behalf of three organizations in support: the Central Valley Education Coalition, 128 LEAs, including some community colleges and K-12 districts in support, the California Association of Suburban School Districts and the Orange County Department of Education, Superintendent Al Mijares, and the 28 district superintendents of Orange County. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Navnit Puryear on behalf of the California School Employees Association, in support.

Elizabeth Esquivel with the California Association of School Business Officials in support.

Nancy Chaires Espinosa, on behalf of CASH, the Coalition for Adequate School Housing and School Energy Coalition in support.

Mr. Chair and Members, Ian Padilla with the County School Facilities Consortium, the Association of California Construction Managers and the School Facility Manufacturers Association in strong support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Patti Herrera on behalf of the Oakland Unified, San Diego Unified, Corona Norco Unified and Torrance Unified school districts in support.

Mr. Chair and Members, Andrew Langley on behalf of the Associated Builders and Contractors of California in support.

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members, Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Debra Duardo. Thank you very much for carrying the bill.

Good afternoon Chair and Members, Robert Gonzalez with Cruz Strategies on behalf of the California Building Industry Associations, in full support.

Good afternoon Chair and Members. Sasha Horwitz, Los Angeles Unified School District, in support.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Derick Lennox, on behalf of the 58 county superintendents of schools in support.

Good afternoon Mr. Fong, Honorable Members, specifically Muratsuchi, Francisco Rodriguez, Chancellor, Los Angeles Community College District in proud support.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee Members. Carlos Rojas with the Kern County Superintendent of School's Office and the 46 school districts in Kern County in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. David Neben on behalf of the South Orange County Community College District and Los Rios Community College District in support.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Lee Angela Reid, on behalf of the Small School Districts Association and the School Employers Association of California in strong support. Thank you for your leadership.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Chris Reef on behalf of California School Boards Association in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Andrew Martinez, Community College League of California in support.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? All right, seeing none. Mr. Muratsuchi, would you like to close please?

Thank you very much again, Mr. Chair Fong, for your leadership on this. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much Chair Muratsuchi and Assembly Member Wilson, a proud joint author of AB 247. I really appreciate everyone's comments here today and the need to modernize our school facilities. We'll take the vote when we have a quorum. So thank you so much. Appreciate you. Thank you. Next up we'll have item number 9, authored by Assembly Member Wendy Carrillo, AB 689. Welcome, Assembly Member Wendy Carrillo.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I too would like to register my support for Assemblymember such as bill...

Thank you, everyone in the room.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Thank you for the opportunity to present AB 689 today. Simply put, California is facing an unprecedented healthcare workforce crisis. Right now, we are facing a shortage of more than 40,000 registered nurses and 500,000 allied healthcare professionals. A crisis of this size requires creative solutions. That is why we are happy to be working alongside our co-sponsors, the California Hospital Association, and SCIU State Council. We can all come to the table. Isn't that amazing?

AB 689 does two things. First, it gives existing healthcare workers priority registration in selecting their classes. This ensures that healthcare workers are able to attend their classes around their work schedule. Second, AB 689 sets aside seats for existing healthcare workers and impacted classes to promote the training of existing healthcare workers in demand, higher-paid healthcare professions.

Healthcare workers, by the nature of their jobs, work long hours, and by providing priority registration, incumbent workers will be able to select classes that fit into their work and personal commitments, promoting retention and career development. Based on research from the employment training panel, we know that workforce training programs that focus on existing employees boost recruitment, retention, and earnings. These programs have a long track record of success in many industries. This bill has no opposition.

With me to testify in support, it's Matt Lege with SCIU State Council and Vanessa Gonzalez with the California Hospital Association.

Welcome. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Chair and Members. Matt Lege, on behalf of SEIU California, the proud co-sponsor of AB 689. First like to thank the author for bringing this bill forward. It's an important effort to try to address our healthcare workforce needs. Prior to the pandemic, there was a critical shortage of healthcare workers, with a projected shortage, as mentioned, of about 500,000 allied healthcare professionals.

Healthcare workers, just some quick demographics are 72% female, 68% people of color, and 60% of our workforce has some college degree. But to put that another way, that means 40% of healthcare workers could benefit from returning to community colleges to advance their careers. These are a diverse set of careers, not just nursing, although we are in critical need of nurses, but also radiologic technologists, respiratory therapists, and clinical lab scientists, among many other careers.

Fortunately, many of our healthcare workers serving the patients in California went through the community college pipeline, which are critical to ensure that we have enough healthcare workers to meet our care needs. Unfortunately for many healthcare workers, due to their schedule and personal commitments, they are unable to get into classes at the community colleges and articulate through healthcare programs expeditiously. By providing priority registration, it will help healthcare workers know that they have a dedicated avenue to advance their career.

For workers such as janitorial staff, dietary workers, and orderlies, becoming a licensed healthcare professional comes with significant economic gains. Unions fight for improving the socioeconomic status of our members, and one of the best ways we can do that is by supporting workers as they're moving through these programs, and this bill does just that. This bill brings together employers and workers on a strategy to meet California's healthcare workforce demand because we both recognize California's greatest resource is our incumbent healthcare workers.

For these reasons, we respectfully ask for aye vote.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members: Vanessa Gonzalez with the California Hospital Association and proud co-sponsor of AB 689. As we all know, California is in the midst of a healthcare workforce crisis. When we speak with our hospital members, the number one issue that keeps them up at night is workforce shortages. This is why CHA SCIU and Assemblymember Carrillo have come together on one specific solution and cumber worker training through the community college system.

In healthcare, this could include training a licensed vocational nurse to become a registered nurse or training an orderly to become a phlebotomist. This will enable the existing workforce to advance in their careers and earn a higher wage. Additionally, because incumbent workers already have experience in healthcare delivery, they are more likely to complete the training program and fill the in-demand positions.

Because many healthcare workers already have professional commitments as well as personal responsibilities, community colleges are the simplest and most affordable way to access academic prerequisites and training programs. By providing priority registration to incumbent healthcare workers and setting aside at least 15% of thoughts in their impacted courses, AB 689 eliminates some of the barriers to training and will result in a win-win situation. The community receives an additional trained healthcare worker, and the employee sees increased wages for an in-demand field.

For these reasons, CHA respectfully requests your aye vote. Thank you.

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

Kelly Brooks, on behalf of the California Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems here in support.

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

Thank you. The legislature has done a lot of work to ensure that vulnerable communities across California have adequate access to health care. What we also need to work on simultaneously is the workforce that allows for that care to be provided. Community colleges play an important role in that aspect.

I'm a proud graduate of East LA College, Mr. Chair in your district.

Go Huskies.

Go Huskies, and understand how important it really is to ensure that these courses are available to new students and current healthcare workers, and really ensure that we do something more than just talk about access to healthcare, but that we are providing the resources necessary for workers. And with that, I respectfully request and aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, for this amazing bill. And we know that the workforce shortage is in a crisis mode as we recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. So, thank you for looking at how we can provide incumbent healthcare workers the opportunity to climb the healthcare worker ladder with stackable credentials. It's so vital to making sure that we have a highly skilled and accessible workforce here in our healthcare industry. Look forward to supporting the bill today. With that, I believe we have quorum.

We'll call quorum at this time. We don't...we're close to quorum. I'm sorry, we do have quorum. And so, Madam Secretary, will you please call the role?

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. With quorum being established, we'll take the roll columns, madam. So we have a motion by Assemblymember Ortega, a second by Dr. Arambla. Roll call, please. Madam Secretary.

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

Thank you, colleagues. Measure has seven votes. It's out. And we'll hold the measure open for any additional Members that would like to add on.

Thank you so much. Yes. Next up, I'd like to welcome Assemblymember Gipson, presenting item number 17. Assembly Bill 1695. Move the Bill. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Thank you, colleagues. Welcome, Mr. Gipson.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mr. Chair and Members, thank you for moving the bill in the second. I will be brief. I want to thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 1695, which seeks to create a nursing pathway program, a pilot program that will benefit aspiring nurses and help deal with the nursing shortage in California. This program starts from ages nine to 12, and this is, I think it hinges upon what the previous bill brought by Ms. Carrillo talking about the nursing shortage.

We are recruiting nurses outside of the United States of America and also we are bringing in nurses from out of the state of California. There is a nursing shortage in the state of California, and we must address it now. We cannot wait for another pandemic. We have nurses who are leaving, retiring, who's traumatized, who's overworked, and they're leaving this particular industry, this career choice. And it's our responsibility to look at how do we create a new cadre of nurses in California.

I cannot think of a better way than to look at ages nine through 12 and also as they transition to community college that they can continue on, and this helps speed up that process. And so, with me to support, with supporting testimony, is a UNAC. She is the... I don't think she is here. Ms. Hawkins, Elizabeth Hawkins, representing the United Nurses Association California, and a former community college student as well.

Welcome.

Thank you. I bolted from one to the other, so I'm catching my breath still.

Take your time.

So, good afternoon. On behalf of the United Nurses Association of California, Union of Healthcare Professionals, I want to thank Chairman Fong and the committee for consideration of AB 1695. I also want to thank Assemblymen Gibson for his strong support of the nursing profession and commitment to students. My name is Elizabeth Hawkins, and I've been a nurse for over 35 years.

I knew in high school that I wanted to be a nurse, and in high school, I took the certified nurse's aid class, first aid, CPR, and college preparatory classes, many transferring to my college curriculum. If AB 1695 existed back then, I would have benefited from this bill's potential outcome. Having more of a direct pipeline into the nursing program, graduating and entering the workforce sooner.

The bill would have saved me time, money, and frustration of waiting lists and unnecessary classes in order not to lose my priority registration, which was important so that when I registered, the classes were not full. After completing my prerequisites for the ADN program, it took me almost a year and a half to be accepted into the program itself, a two-year degree taking almost five years. Now that wait time is even longer and the nursing shortage is much worse now than when it was back then.

Today's applicants are on a waiting list from two to five years just to get into the program, and even then, some schools have gone to a lotto program, and students are passed up year after year, forcing them to leave the communities they grew up in and or our state to pursue their nursing degrees, sometimes changing career paths entirely.

Once this happens, they take jobs in hospitals where they did their clinical rotations, leaving the communities that they grew up in, some communities underserved in a state that needs them. I know this because, after years of nursing and preceptoring, and mentoring a lot of these students, I hear their frustrations.

AB 1695 works to address the barrier into nursing schools by creating a nursing 101 that can count towards credit in the nursing program at the community college level and provide automatic placement into the program, thus avoiding the two to five-year waiting period and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on unnecessary classes in order to keep your registration up to date so you don't get locked out of being able to take classes.

With the current nursing shortage only projected to get worse, we need to elevate and recognize the early commitment of high school students to the nursing profession, and AB 1695 will provide that opportunity. Thank you for your consideration, and I respectfully ask that you support this bill.

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

Good afternoon, James Michael Apollo with the American Federation of State County Municipal Employees, AFSCME, in strong support of the Bill. Thanks.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues? Any questions or comments? We do just ask if anybody has any questions or comments. Assemblymember would you like to close, please?

Thank you very much. Just want to piggyback on what my witness said: two to five years waiting list. And when you put someone on a waiting list that long, they get discouraged. They define another career path. And again, this is a small piece to solve the bigger problem in terms of the nursing shortage we have in California. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Gibson, for bring this important measure forward. I believe it's a critical and creative way to address the nursing shortages here faced by our state. And we also know that this is a bill that is a pilot program that will also look at having high school students advance in a nursing profession.

And as we move forward, we'd love to just continue to work with our committee and the chancellor's office, and the statewide academic senate to see how we can make sure that we're not harming any community college students that are in the system already. But really appreciate you bringing this forward, and thank you so much. And I look forward to supporting the bill today.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Thank you.

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

The bill has seven votes. It's out. And we'll keep the roll open for any Members that would like to add on. Thank you so much, Assembly Member. At this time, we will take up the consent calendar. Thank you. Colleagues, we have a motion and a second. We have four bills on consent, and they are as follows. File item four, AB 377 authored by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi. File item seven, AB 569, authored by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia.

File item 13, AB 1173, authored by our Vice Chair, Assemblymember Tri Ta. File item 14, Assembly Bill 1311, authored by Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria. We have a motion a second on the consent calendar. Any comments or questions? Seeing none, Madam Secretary. Roll call, please.

[Roll Call]

The measures out 7-0 will keep the item open for any Members that like to add on. Thank you for everyone's efforts on the consent calendar. Next up, do we have any authors in the audience? Thank you, colleagues. Now, we'll take the prerogative to introduce; we'll do our bills right now, so I'll come up. Mr. Vice Chair, would you be able to. Thank you.

It's my honor to do so.

Thank you.

All right, so the next bill is AB 1096. Oh, 506. I'm sorry.

Thank you, colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. Good afternoon, Assembly Bill 506. Thank you so much. Assembly Bill 1460, authored by our former colleague Assembly Shirley Weber, requires all CSU students, beginning with the graduating class of 24, 25 to complete a course in ethics studies as a requirement for graduation.

As a general education course, community college students who wish to transfer must first complete the course at a community college in the fall of 2020, after the adoption of core competencies as required by AB 1460, the CSU chancellor's office began the process of reviewing and approving community college courses that are transferable to the CSU. And I have heard from community college professors in my district who have experienced high rejection rates of the courses that they have submitted.

They also express frustration with the criteria for approval, which seemed to change over time. Assembly Bill 506 is a vehicle to help address the process for approving community college courses and moves the required date back by one year to give us more time to determine what clarifications are needed to ensure that students are able to complete this course and avoid any delay in transferring to a California State University.

Here to testify and support our Los Angeles Community College District chancellor, Dr. Francisco Rodriguez, who've had an amazing opportunity to work with over the past decade, and Dr. Thekima Mayasa, the chair of the Black Studies Department at San Diego Mesa College and co-chair of the California Community College Ethnic Studies Faculty Council. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Fong. Pardon me. And good afternoon, Chair Fong, honorable members of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. For the record, I'm Dr. Francisco Rodriguez, chancellor of the Los Angeles Community College District. I'm honored to join you and Assemblymember Fong, representing the district and as a proud sponsor of AB 506. As Assemblymember Fong mentioned in his opening statement, this bill addresses the critical issue of ethnic studies at California community colleges. The timing for the implementation of ethnic studies could not be better.

The racial strife that we have experienced throughout the country and the demands for racial equity and social justice has placed ethnic studies as an essential curriculum for all 21st-century learners. Ethnic studies provides a critical view and understanding of our society's history of race, ethnicity, and class. It provides a framework to help our students build a more informed, racially just, and inclusive future, a future that they will inherit, lead, and benefit from.

The Legislature's passage and the governor's signature of AB 1460 in the 2020 legislative session established a landmark ethnic studies graduation requirement for a bachelor's degree at the CSU. This essentially requires community colleges to offer lower-division ethnic studies courses for all students who plan to transfer to the CSU. However, as been noted by the 22, 23 academic year, more than 53% of community college ethnic studies courses submitted for approval under area F category have been denied by the CSU.

At LACCD alone, only 38 courses have been approved under area F out of the 119 courses that we submitted for approval. Further, the approval process has resulted in various community college ethnic studies courses getting approval, even though they are outside the scope of the four autonomous disciplines of ethnic studies called for in AB 1460. Some courses have met the approval process requirements by containing course descriptors similar to area F ethnic studies courses but do not meet the standards of the four disciplines.

AB 506 will provide for an additional academic year, as been mentioned by Mr. Fong, to make the necessary improvements to the course approval process, something we are all interested in. It would also bring together a consultation group of California Community College and CSU subject matter experts to establish a comprehensive approval process. This bill ensures that graduates of the California State University and transfer students from the California Community colleges fulfill the intent of AB 1460. We firmly believe that we can establish a process that honors the intent of AB 1460, and for these reasons, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 506. Thank you.

Greetings, Chairman and Committee Members. My name is Dr. Thekima Mayasa. I am the current chair of the black studies Department at San Diego Mesa College. I am also the co-chair of the California Community College Ethnic Studies Faculty Council. I believe what's already been said is important, but I think what I have to offer here are some examples of the abuses that have occurred. My campus has offered five sessions. We have submitted five times for courses.

The first time, 22 courses, and from that we've only had one that's been approved. My program is the oldest or one of the oldest in the state, and so we have programs like mine that are not being approved because of the inconsistencies in the process itself. The problems that we're having with the chancellor's office that are taking and not providing accurate information when it comes to the criterion, it's inconsistent information.

The system is flawed for a variety of reasons, of which I'd like to take and share a couple of things. So in the evaluation of courses based upon the CORs that we are required to take and bring forward, lots of the information that the chancellor's office is giving us is inaccurate and it's misrepresentative. You have to excuse me. I'm a little bit nervous right now. I'm not going to look at my notes right here.

I think what's really important for you to know about all of this is that if we don't change the process, there are courses, non ethnic studies courses, that are being approved in traditional disciplines by inserting information by the core competencies that were outlined by the CSU representatives of the California community college ethnic studies faculty councils there.

And what's happening is you have traditional history English classes that are presenting themselves as ethnic studies classes by inserting the core competency, and then those courses are being approved because of the competencies, not the content of the courses. And as such, you're going to have students who will have none ethnic studies classes and get credit for an ethnic studies requirement that is unacceptable. And so we're here to ask for help because our articulations officers, this is not a one district problem.

This is happening all throughout the state, and our organization gets complaints all throughout the state. We have a meeting on Thursday with articulation officers to explain to them how to take and deal with these inconsistencies. So I urge all of you to vote yay on this bill, please. Thank you.

I really want to thank Assemblymember Mike Fong for bringing this Bill up to the committee. I think that ethnic study really important for us, especially at the college level, and this bill really highlights that the collaboration between the CSU and the committee college system. I think that's a really good bill. I really appreciate that. And thank you so much for that. So right now, it's a time for the public comment. Are there any room in support for this bill in the hearing room? So you may need to step up.

David Neben, on behalf of the Hispanas Organized for Political Equality, in support.

Hi. Good afternoon, Chair and members. Juliette Parker on behalf of the California Community College Ethnic Studies Faculty Council. We strongly support this bill. Thank you.

Are there any groups in opposition? I see none. Are there any tweeners?

Stephanie Goldman, on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, and our board just voted to support.

Thank you, Chair and Vice Chair. Christine Isakson on behalf of the Academic Senate of California State University, we oppose unless amended. We have concerns with regards to the inclusion of the community college chancellor's office in this bill. We agree with the spirit of the bill, and we look forward to continuing our conversations and working with the authors of the bill. Thank you.

Mary Moyle with CSU. CSU we have been in touch with the author's office on this bill, and we've been working with your staff. We have been working very hard to approve more community college ethnic studies court courses which follow the law as set out in AB 1460. Since AB 1460 has been signed, we've approved over 630 community college courses. This includes online courses which are available to any student no matter where they live. So we have been working very hard on this. We've been working with the colleges. The number of course approvals have been going up, and they will continue to go up as we're able to find staff and faculty to assist us with this. So we're happy to continue to work with the community colleges and to continue to work with the author's office. Thank you.

Thank you so much for that. And now is for the committee member. Are there any question or concerns from the committee member? Yes, please.

This isn't a concern. It's more of a compliment and acknowledgment one for bringing it forward, Assemblymember but I think what I hear, what your witness saying is that we really need to focus on the quality of these courses, that some of them are being approved. They're not necessarily the quality we want in ethnic studies.

And having started that process at the K-12 level in a district, really saw the challenges in making sure that we have high-quality content, because if we don't, we can end up doing harm to students, we can end up doing widespread harm to cultures. So I just wanted to applaud that and thank you for bringing that concern forward. And that's why I moved the bill.

Thank you so much. And Assemblyman Fong, any closing statement?

Thank you so much, Chair and members, I appreciate the consideration of today's bill, and you heard from our witnesses, appreciate the work and efforts on how we increase the transferability of these coursework to the CSU system, and thank you to the CSU system as well, for their work and efforts. We know that we're working in progress and collaboration, and there's more work to be done. And so appreciate that in the spirit of collaboration going forward with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much. And now I believe that we already have a motion. A second applause. So, Madame Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

All right, I think that we have seven votes. Yes? The item is out.

Thank you so much.

The bill is out.

Thank you so much.

Thank you so much colleagues. Next up, we have Assembly Member Kevin McCarty presenting Assembly Bill 25, item number one. Welcome, Mr. McCarty.

Yes, thank you. I should be here for the next 90 minutes.

All right, we'll slot 90 minutes for your next five bills here, but I believe we have a motion and a second to you.

Thank you. This, of course, is the Higher Education Committee, and nothing more important in higher education than the cost of college. Let's face it, there's great debate about student debt and whether or not we should wipe out student debt at the federal level. But the real issue is, why do students acquire so much debt in the first place? And can California step up and help students graduate without accumulating $20,000, $30,000 in debt?

So we have the envy of the nation with our Cal Grant programs, the middle class scholarship programs. The last two years, we've reformed, modernized the Cal grant program. We're funding it in this year's budget. We've reformed the middle class scholarship to make it more broad, to cover more families, and finally cover the non tuition costs. And that's why we're here today with this Bill AB 25, which would put us on the path to have debt free college in California. What does that mean?

That's not free college. That means that families who qualify for either the middle class scholarship or the Cal grant families in all of our districts, low income families, usually in Cal grant under 100,000 middle class scholarship, sometimes up to 200,000 to help them pay for tuition, but non tuition costs as well, based upon their family income. The costs of college are, again, not just tuition; it's transportation, it's books, it's food, and most importantly, it's housing. And so this would set us on our way.

Because of our last couple of budgets, we're about 30% there. So for less than $2 billion, we can Fund debt free college in California, starting with fully funding the Cal Grant reform, which we prioritize in this Bill, and then waterfalling next to make sure we expand the middle class scholarship. This can be a transformational opportunity for California to focus on the workforce, the next generation, who we know need more education than just high school, as well as help students not be saddled with debt upon graduation.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote. With me today is our joint author, Assembly woman Cervantes.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee Members. I am honored to be here alongside my friend and colleague, Assembly member McCarty to lead in these efforts. Where California could be the first state in the nation for our students to have a debt free college experience. This is significant given how large California's public higher education system is, the largest in the nation. Looking at the barriers to education for students, we know that the financial aid that our students receive does not cover other materials like books, housing, food, transportation.

Data shows that students who report food insecurity, homelessness, or both also experience mental, physical consequences, which often lead to lower academic achievements and completely dropping out of school. Providing an affordable and accessible path to higher education is key to California's continued success as an economic and cultural powerhouse for both the United States and our entire world.

I am truly honored to be part of this historic effort, making the dream of higher education a reality for more students in California by ensuring a debt free college education at our state's public education universities. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. Just in time.

Welcome.

Thank you. We have two student witnesses.

Hi, good afternoon Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Alec and I'm a second year student and the incoming Vice President of University affairs from Sacramento State University. I'm here today to speak in support of AB 25 because this Bill is working to carve a debt free pathway to college students in California. Part of doing so is ensuring that the Cal Grant equity framework is fully funded and that the middle class scholarship program is funded after that.

We know that these investments will have a foundational, positive impact for students generational to come. Another way AB 25 promotes debt free pathway is by recognizing and addressing the basic needs insecurities that college students go through. College students are one crisis away from losing access to their basic needs, and I'm sure many of you who've spoken with students in your district will also feel the same way, just like students in Sacramento State also experience the same troubles.

Advocates such as myself and state leaders have invested in resources such as emergency aid funds that are meant to provide a lifeline for students that face these crisis. However, our financial aid programs have not caught up with these, and at the time of speaking, these programs will reduce a student's financial aid if a student is given an emergency basic needs support.

This is specifically, the case for a middle class scholarship program where thousands of students, many of them in my own campus at Sac State, have seen their middle class scholarship awards reduced because of receiving well needed basic needs emergency aid. AB 25 fixes the financial aid displacement and commits to fully funding the Cal Grant supports by middle class scholarship. This Bill is a solution that students are asking and we hope that you can support this AB 25 by voting aye. Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. I apologize. I ran in right after coming from class. I'm actually missing a class right now. But first, thank you. My name is Celene Aridin and I'm a student at UC Davis where I also serve as the external affairs Vice President of our student body. But more importantly, I'm here today because I'm a Cal Grant recipient and I'm able to attend University and have been granted life altering opportunities because of the Cal grant.

I wouldn't have my position now if I wasn't at Davis. But when I was a senior in high school, my parents had to sit me down to have a tough conversation. Finances, they could not afford to take out loans due to personal and religious reasons. This meant that even if I had been accepted into a University, I could not attend unless I had enough financial aid.

This conversation made me realize that all the time that I had spent throughout high school, from 06:00 a.m till midnight, extracurriculars in school may not even be worthwhile. Even if I was accepted into a top University or any University, I would have been grateful to enter. And at some point in the process, I had to accept the fact that I was probably going to enter community college, which wouldn't have been a bad thing.

Community college is amazing, but going through the four years of high school saying that I'm working hard because there is a goal, there is a University with a program that I would love to take a part of was what kept me going throughout all four years of my high school career.

And so what was depressing me was that money was the only barrier between myself and entering and gaining higher education, which has been a barrier for many people throughout the state, throughout the country for many years before that. And I remember when Davis emailed me, it was in the end of June. I had actually been waitlisted from Davis, but at that point I was just ready to accept going to CC. It was also the pandemic,

so all these depressing things all around me, and I remember I was sitting on the bed with my mother and I said, oh my God, I think Davis just took me off the waitlist. But her first reaction, because she had also been excited at the prospect of me entering college with a career know, being someone in our family to get the first four year degree education within my, know, family unit. But she had to tell me, Celene, slow down.

What's the financial aid that they gave you? Because this acceptance really means nothing, unless, she didn't want to dampen my mood, but she had to give me that reality check. So I held my breath and I checked financial aid. And when I saw that my entire tuition was covered between scholarships, Cal Grant, and so forth, I was ecstatic. When I told you, I started crying that day.

It meant so much to me that I had received appropriate financial aid to allow me to attend a four year institution. And now with Cal Grant, with this Bill that has been presented today, I ask that these Committee Members really choose to vote aye because this Cal Grant is not only for me. My story is not unique. There are students who have been unable to enter University because of financial barriers, and that should not be the reason why qualified and amazing students are being held back.

My brother, who's now a freshman himself and is going to go through the next four years, has to keep this on his mind as he approaches his high school career. And with that, I would like to ask you guys to vote aye. And thank you.

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

I just want to thank the authors and the witnesses here today. You are the reason that I chose to be on higher education, because I want to make sure that youth like yourself has access to quality education, and affordability shouldn't be the issue. So I thank you for being here, and it was worth the run. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any further questions or comments? Assembly Members McCarty and Assembly Members Cervantes, would you like to close, please?

Thank you. Appreciate the discussion. Both our Governor of California and our President University of California, have spoken about having a debt free future in California for college students, and this is a vehicle to get us there. And respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And on behalf of the students here today and the many of others across the State of California, we respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much to Celine, Members McCarty and Cervantes for bringing this important measure forward. And thank you to Alec and Celene for that amazing testimony as well. We need to continue to look at how we continue to seek ways to ensure our students are on a path to earning a degree and to look at how we continue on how we are going to reform and prepare to support this Bill today.

And authors, I look forward to encourage you to continue working with our Committee and other stakeholders to address the policy questions raised in pages 6 and 7. But with that, I really appreciate all of you and your leadership here and really as we try to continue to push forward to California towards a debt free path. And with that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

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

The measure is out with seven votes, and we'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that would like to sign on. Thank you, Assembly Mr. McCarty.

Yes, sir.

Thank you so much. We will go to now Assembly Bill. Item number eight. Thank you, students. Item number eight. Assembly Bill 656, authored by Assembly Kevin Mccarty. Welcome.

Thank you.

Motion in second. Thank you.

Please just wait one second. I know we had a fast motion here, but we had our president flew all the way up from San Diego State University, so make sure she joins us here today. We have great research universities in our system with the University of California and the CSU system. The CSU system is the workhorse, of course, having over 500,000 students every year, and they're also a research University, and we shouldn't have to pick winners and losers.

So a few years ago, we allowed CSU to do some doctoral programs, and this would expand upon that, allowing CSU to offer doctoral degrees in high demand professions without the lengthy legislative requirements that we currently have done in areas that do not duplicate existing University of California offerings. As we know, CSU educates the most ethnically diverse, both economically and just overall diverse student body in the nation.

And it is a system with 23 campuses that we have in all of our districts are certainly right next door. We know that in this knowledge based economy, we need more highly educated individuals, including individuals with doctorate degrees. This bill would allow universities like here in my backyard, Sacramento State and San Diego State, we're going to hear from a second, to advance these offerings. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and members. My name is Dr. Sylvia Alva. I'm the executive vice chancellor for academic and student affairs at the California State University. AB 656 will authorize the CSU to provide applied doctorate degrees in disciplines not offered by the University of California. The purpose of the bill is threefold. First, it will allow the CSU to address workforce gaps in California by providing increased training in both industry and health related fields.

Two, it will create more affordable access to postgraduate training for students seeking career advancement and social mobility. Three, it will provide pathways for increased faculty diversity as the CSU's diverse students are given opportunities to earn a terminal degree to qualify them for faculty positions at the CSU and other colleges and universities.

The first professional doctorate in the CSU was approved in 2005. Over the last 18 years, the CSU has worked positively with the Legislature and with the University of California on individual proposals for doctoral authority.

Disciplines which necessitated doctoral authority are accreditation needs or workforce gaps have included physical therapy, audiology, nursing practice, among others. AB 656 would enable the CSU to independently develop applied doctorate degrees that do not duplicate those offered by the University of California.

The bill would require evidence of workforce need, enrollment, demand, financial sustainability, and a structured consultation and agreement process with the University of California.

Any disagreement with the University of California must be resolved in writing and submitted to the legislature before a program may be approved by the board of trustees. This bill will allow the CSU to be nimble in addressing California's workforce demand in essential fields.

While we're awaiting a final report, preliminary information we have received from the Rand Corporation on workforce demands in California show strong evidence of workforce growth in several areas, including advanced manufacturing engineering, information systems, and counseling psychology.

I'd now like to ask President Delatore of San Diego State to speak from a University perspective.

Thank you, Dr. Alva. Good afternoon. I'm Adela de la Torre, President of San Diego State University. I and my fellow CSU President support AB 656 because this is an important and critical tool to help us prepare a highly skilled, highly diverse workforce to meet California's present future labor market needs and economic demands. Ultimately, we feel that we can help our state effectively serve Californians and remain competitive in the global market.

At SDSU, we are grateful that the Legislature gave us the authority to independently offer doctorate degrees in a handful of fields like physical therapy, audiology, educational leadership, and, most recently, public health. SDSU, as well as other CSU campuses, have been independently offering doctoral degrees in these applied fields for 20 years.

While we have successfully implemented these programs, a number of CSU leaders and presidents have discussed how we can continue to plan for and deliver on a skilled workforce for our state in a greater array of practical and applied fields and how we can best serve the CSU's ethnically and economically diverse student body who currently are limited by statuate from seeking higher level education within the system.

AB 656 would give CSU the authority to strategically and thoughtfully plan for degrees in growing and emerging disciplines such as counseling psychology, advanced manufacturing engineering, and business and administration, among others.

Workforce data shows that there is a great need for employees with doctoral degrees in these disciplines throughout our state. As our state faces a growing mental health crisis, for example, there's a significant shortage in the number of health professionals.

Allowing the largest educator of the state to help California increase the number of professionals in counseling psychology, for example, would allow us to work hand in hand with you to solve the significant problem statewide and in the future. As other innovative fields emerge which require expertise in areas like artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing engineering, CSU can help educate and prepare a greater number of students for California so that it can stay in the forefront of new fields and technologies.

But helping California fill specific workforce gaps and continue to lead in the widespread economy is not all. The bill would also expand opportunities for underrepresented students. CSU is the largest public University system in the country with over 480,000 students. Over 50% are both ethnically and economically diverse, and providing affordable doctorate degrees within the system would be a tremendous opportunity for them all.

So, in short, we were hoping to increase access to greater career earnings, higher level training and education, and in turn help to diversify California businesses not traditionally reflective of its residents. I also must emphasize that we will not duplicate doctoral degrees offered by the UC. We have thus put significant restrictions into language of the bill already above and beyond that we have seen in previous legislation.

We believe that it is most appropriate for us to focus on practical doctoral degrees and not doctoral programs offered by UC campuses which often focus heavily on theory. Thank you for your consideration of this important legislation.

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

Chair and members. My name is Gerald Shooty. I represent the academic senate of the California State University. In strong support.

Good afternoon, Chair, members. Trent Murphy of the Cal State Student Association, the official voice of nearly half a million students in the CSU here in support.

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

Good afternoon, Chair and members. Alex Graves with Association of Independent California Colleges Universities.

We don't have a position on the bill, but appreciate the conversations we've had with both the author's office and the sponsors. Given that this would be a pretty dramatic escalation of authority for the CSU from a case by case basis, through a view from the legislature, to, as it is now at least kind of an unlimited growth in this field, we believe it'd be appropriate to have a conversation as the bill moves forward about the appropriate cap on the number of new programs that come forward in a given year.

Given that once a program is approved by the board of trustees, it can then also be applicable to any of the other campuses in the CSU system. And also we would like to have a conversation about potential review of impact and efficacy of these programs and this new authority in the future. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much, colleagues. Any questions or comments? Vice Chair Ta

Yeah, I really appreciate that. Thank you so much. I really, really love this bill. And a few days ago, I believe that my office already sent a letter to request to be a co-author. I'm not sure that you received a letter, but I would love to be your co-author on this bill.

Thank you. The answer is yes. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Dr. Joaquin Arambula, Assemblymember.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to appreciate the assemblymember for bringing this bill forward. I do want to mention this is not the first time our state has done this. In 2017, we chaptered into law AB 422, which brought a doctor of nursing practice to our CSUs.

And having gone through the pandemic of the century recently, we've seen the importance of making sure that we have all of our higher education institutions working at full capacity to meet our workforce challenges and look forward to supporting this bill today.

Thank you so much, assemblymember. Senator Evan Low.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And thank you to the author for bringing this for the context of the committee.

Committee Members may be reminded about the Higher Education Master Plan the author presented previously, a legislative proposal and addressing that of the costs. And we've gone far away from the Master Plan. The proposals that we have here leaves us a little bit in a bind. Mr. Chair, as well, too, which is to say that from the lens of the State of California, absent that of a coordinated entity.

We're now seeing proposals of the UC system and the CSUs and the community colleges, community colleges looking at bachelor's, CSUs, looking at PHDs, we recognize that the various segments are meeting and addressing the important needs, and so it's important that we help set up our institutions and segments for success. But part of the challenge that exists is that everyone is so siloed.

And I think it's important for this state to help, in absence of the coordinating entity, to help force conversations amongst the segments so that we are not talking in isolation of the challenges of the community colleges doing their own thing and focus on the bachelor's.

And then the CSU is now in phds and encroaching on others'territories. And that's what we hear regularly, which is when we're meeting individually with the different segments, hearing about the experiences. But again, you're meeting and addressing a need.

But the State of California really has abdicated its responsibility in the master plan and addressing these issues in a coordinated fashion. I just would urge us all to consider and factor in that and listing the engagement and support for those who are here representing the CSU system to help the State of California focus on the Master Plan so that we're not in isolation and that we're not in this fiftoms and doing the work that is necessary.

And I know that you're deeply committed to that, as I see some nodding heads as well. And I've spoken to my CSU President as well in San Jose about this, as well, as well as our chancellor. So just affirmation to encourage your engagement and support on that. I'm also supporting this bill here today, but I hope that we can look in the holistic approach for the State of California.

Thank you so much. Assemblymember Low. Any further questions or comments? Assemblymember McCarty, would you like to close, please.

Yeah, I appreciate the conversations, and I know the analysis raised a couple of these issues and making sure that we coordinate the systems or not siloed and potentially looking at a cap. This is not the first time we've done it.

There's been a half a dozen, including Mr. Arambula, in the last 15 years. But why should you have to do these one offs every few years of the legislature? And we're picking winners and losers.

And essentially, if you look at the University of California, our predominant research University in the state, and frankly, the nation around the globe, there is a massive supply and demand imbalance. As you know, Mr. Chair, your Alma mater, UCLA, have over 100,000 people that apply every year and they accept 15% of them. So there are people that are talented individuals in academia and research that they have no place to go.

Many times they leave California, and our economy and our workforce needs more individuals to be in these growing fields. And so I think this is an approach that allows us to do that with some appropriate parameters and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Mccarthy, for bringing this forward and introducing this bill. And thank you to my colleagues for your comments, as well as we look to make sure that we're continued in a spirit of partnership and collaboration to find the pathways and programs forward that leverage our existing resources and expertise between the different segments.

And so it's important that we continue to meet the needs of our students. And this bill will allow for the CSU to meet the needs of students for programs that the UCU is not currently offering.

But in that spirit of collaboration and partnership, as referenced by my colleagues, we definitely want to make sure we continue to look at that as well and how we continue to expand opportunities for students across California, but also in partnership with our segments. So really appreciate those comments with that, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the appropriations committee.

[Roll Call]

With that, the measure is out, has seven votes, and we'll keep the item open for members who would like to add on. And Madam President from San Diego State, congratulations on an amazing run by the Aztecs.

Thank you. Yes, it was wonderful. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, colleagues. We have a few more bills coming forward. We're going to do Assembly Bill 1749, item number 19, authored by Assemblymember Kevin Mccarty. Welcome. Assembly Member AB. We have a motion to second. This is AB 1749, item number 19. Welcome.

You're telling me I should speed these up, Mr. Chair.

Oh no, you're good. Come on.

Yeah. This builds upon the work that our Committee Member and our colleague from the Silicon Valley, Mr. Berman, has been focusing on.

And frankly, Mr. Chair, for 25 years, Higher Ed Chairs have tried to tackle this issue and how to simplify the process for individuals who want to transfer from a community college to UC. So we have current law signed into law by the governor, which has the segments work and talk and communicate and hope to come up with a plan. Well, maybe this is the year to finally do it.

And we had this issue come up in the budget a few weeks ago where there's a proposal to have the University of California, Los Angeles have their own transfer agreement, but that just further complicates the system. We'd have one transfer process for UCLA, one for the other eight undergraduate UCs, and one for the 23 CSUs.

So if you're a student going to community college, you may not know where you want to go, you may want to transfer one day to a four year college, and why should you have to go to your counselor and focus on all these different plans for where you should go? We should have a universal and simplified transfer process once and for all.

So at the CSU, we have that with the ADT process, the Associate Degrees for Transfer, and this would put us in line with most states in the nation. 35 of the 50 states have a guaranteed simplified transfer process for community college students.

I think this is the year we can finally check this issue off the board and move on. With me are the student leaders as well as the campaign for college opportunity, our sponsor, asking you to support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Leo Rodriguez, a transfer student at the University of California, Berkeley. I earned my associate's degree for transfer in political science from Mendocino College fall or spring of 2022 and transferred to UC Berkeley in the fall.

My community college experience and the ADT program were both vital to providing me with the foundation to be successful at Berkeley. However, the transfer process is far from simple and is extremely complicated for students to navigate. It requires not just hard work, but perseverance and luck to navigate the bureaucratic process of transferring itself.

I was fortunate enough to have access to a counselor who was able to help me navigate the transfer maze to the UC, including helping me find the ADT pathway in political science, mapping out the different UC admission requirements on top of the ADT program requirements to make sure I was taking all necessary courses, and helping me apply for the IGETC certification to help ensure that my path to transfer went as smoothly as possible.

As a student, I know all too well that not every student has access to a counselor who is as adept as mine was at navigating the transfer process. Too many students find themselves ineligible for transfer due to no fault of their own.

With so many different programs and pathways to transfer, something as small as being assigned a counselor with less familiar knowledge of the UC's multiple different transfer requirements, or one class being a requirement for UC admissions, but not for CSU admissions can mean the difference between being able to access a UC and having your transfer options drastically limited after graduating.

AB 1749 would remove luck from the equation for students and provide a clear pathway and set of requirements for students aiming to get into the UCs as a transfer student. By adopting the ADT as an admissions guarantee with a higher GPA, students can fulfill requirements to both the CSU and the UC and be provided with an easy navigated pathway to either system.

We need the UC to work with the legislature and students to enact a system wide admissions guarantee that provides students with more options for transfer after graduating from community college, not with less options. My transfer journey to the UC was anything but seamless.

I had to seek out additional certification for my general education courses, overlap multiple different program requirements to figure out which classes I needed to take, and have expert guidance along the way.

AB 1749 is an opportunity to ensure that future students won't need to navigate the same processes that I did and finally establish a transfer map to the UC that is centered around what is easiest for students to navigate rather than what is easiest for the UC to administer. Thank you and I strongly urge your aye vote.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Good morning Chair Fong and members. My name is Sarah Arce. I'm the Vice President of policy and advocacy with the Campaign for College Opportunity, a statewide policy, research and advocacy organization dedicated to ensuring all California students have an equal opportunity to attend and succeed in college.

I'm also a proud product of the University of California. As a graduate of UC Santa Barbara, California's community colleges represent the gateway to opportunity and improved economic outcomes.

They also serve a critical function in advancing racial equity for the large black and Latinx student populations they support. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, approximately 70% of California's community college students declare transfer as a goal when completing their initial education plan.

Latinx students represent half of the students who declare a transfer goal, yet only 35% transfer within four years. Black students declare transfer goals at a much lower rate. Only 7% and only 5% successfully transfer.

The work to transform California's transfer process into a student centered, streamlined process to both the CSU and UC has been underway for well over a decade. In 2010, SB 1440 created the Associate Degree for Transfer, or the ADT. It established a streamlined pathway for community college students to transfer to the CSU or UC, in turn reducing time and excess credit units for students along the way.

Since the inception of the ADT, the vision for a student centered transfer pathway was anchored in the CSU and UC both utilizing the ADT with a common lower division curriculum that would result in a systemwide admission guarantee to the UC. AB 1749 would reinforce and reignite this original vision for a system wide admission guarantee to the UC utilizing the ADT more than a decade later.

And the ADT pathway is working for students thanks to the hard work of the systems, it is a commonly used pathway to transfer. This year, California is expected to reach a total of over half a million ADTs awarded since the program's inception. With Latinx students as the largest beneficiaries of the program. Over 50% of Latinx students earning associate degrees at community colleges are earning an ADT.

Despite making significant progress to improve transfer through the ADT, California's transfer process to the UC remains overly complex. As a result of the UC's reliance on separate campus by campus transfer admission guaranteed via the Transfer Agreement Guarantee program, or even program by program transfer agreements via the Pathway program, community college students continue to be forced to navigate a complex maze to transfer.

As you heard from Leah's experience. AB 1749 provides a simple solution in alignment with the original vision for the ADT provides students with a streamlined path to transfer by utilizing the ADT as a systemwide admission guarantee to both the CSU and the UC with a higher GPA threshold for guaranteed admission to the UC system.

With the success of the ADT in the last decade, today you have before you an opportunity to set a clear standard for access and reinforce a proven transfer pathway for all students between two of the biggest and best higher education systems in the nation. Thank you.

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

Thank you. Nevneet Perrier. On behalf of the California School Employees Association in support.

Hi, Southern California College Attainment Network in support. Thank you.

Hi Alia sky with the UC Student Association. We're proud co-sponsors of this bill.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in a hearing room? Are there tweeners in a hearing room?

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Tyler Aguilar, on behalf of the University of California, we do not have an official position on this bill, but I just want to mention that we do, of course, share the important goal of improving the transfer process, but most importantly, transfer student success when they do come to UC. We'll continue to work with you, Mr. McCarty, in your office as we continue to move this bill forward. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Stephanie Goldman on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, our board has not yet voted on this bill, but this aligns with our values, and we anticipate supporting it.

Thank you so much, colleagues. Any questions or comments? Seeing none, someone would like to close, please.

Thank you. I was lucky. I went to a community college and then transferred to a four year degree and made it to the state capitol years later. My colleague, my witness here, maybe my colleague, one day, future colleague, went from Lake County, rural, low income, isolated area just north of here to Mendocino Community College and then made to UC Berkeley. But those are the rarities.

As we heard, less than 3% of people successfully navigate transfer within two years, and within four years, less than 40%. I also note, Mr. Chair, that during our Budget Committee a few weeks ago, we had testimony from the CSU, very concerned about too few people at CSU.

And the one thing they said, not enough transfer students. So why don't we connect the dots here, make it easier for people who are at community college to make a choice and navigate to either a UC or a CSU.

We have different systems for everybody. You have to have almost a degree in transfer to figure this stuff out. It just doesn't make sense for the future of California. Two thirds of UC students already have the ADT in their belt anyway. This is a proven kind of metric that shows success for people in the UC system. We think it's time that we have a simplified, universal transfer system for all of California students. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly McCarty, for bringing this forward. I, too, remain concerned about the complexities of the transfer process. We know that recent legislation, including Assembly Bill 928, authored by Mr. Berman, still, it's in its early stages of implementation and that seeks to alleviate much of the burden that transfer students face. But we know that there's more work to be done and look forward to having the UC participate in the ADT program.

And really, please continue to work with our committee, the UC, and other stakeholders as this bill moves forward throughout the legislative process. I look forward to supporting the bill here today. With that, I recommend an aye vote. And Madam Secretary, roll call please.

The motion is do passed to the appropriations committee.

[Roll Call]

The bill has five votes. We'll keep the roll open, and that's on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember McCarty, for presenting that bill. Next up, we will have item number 15, Assembly Bill 1390, authored by Assemblymember Kevin McCarty. Welcome.

I'm getting tired, Mr. Chair.

No, we're good. Good to see you.

Okay. Yes, thank you. This is our bill to expand and hopefully one day have a universal service learning system for college students in California.

Thank the committee staff for working with us to button this measure up. And we accept the committee amendments giving additional years for UC and CSU to implement this. So this is not a novel idea in the Monterey area, we've had this for roughly 20 years where CSU Monterey Bay has their students meet a service learning requirement upon graduation, helps with their curriculum, certainly helps the community as well, and we think creates a better California focused on these issues.

We are working with the governor's office on this, their office of volunteerism. They are not a sponsor of the building of a position, but this goes in line with kind of the governor's quest to have more service learning throughout California. This will be a multi year implementation at the UC and CSU, five years. And frankly, we're willing to go to six years because that aligns exactly what is in the budget compact.

The budget compact by 2030, as we know, sets guaranteed funding for the UC and CSU and focuses on establishing opportunities for career relevant knowledge and skills in the educational experiences, focusing on internships and or relevant on campus or community service by 2030. So we think these align perfectly, gives us an opportunity to expand student education opportunities beyond the classroom and help our communities as well.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote with me today is Jenny McReynolds, a former faculty member, college administrator, and advocate, and expert on service learning. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thanks so much. Thank you for having me and for allowing me to come and speak in support of AB 1390 today. My name is Jenny McReynolds, and I am recently retired from a nearly 40 year career as a teacher and administrator in the Los Rios Community College District.

I began my career teaching journalism and communications for six years at California State University, Sacramento. I was very happy to be asked to speak to you today about the value of service learning opportunities for college students.

In my experience, service learning engages and empowers students, bolsters business and social service enterprises in the region, and creates a powerful connection between institutions of higher learning and the broader communities that they serve. When I was teaching journalism, English, or small group communication, whenever I could build a service learning project into the semester, it made a better class for everyone. It brought students out of their shells.

It helped them see real people living real lives outside of academia, and it gave them the sense that they were contributing to the lives of the individuals in their communities. It made whatever they were studying more authentic and more hands on, and it let them see a future for themselves. Whether it was my college newspaper students helping the students on a nearby high school paper, or communication students organizing a fundraiser for a local charity, they were doing real work.

They were using the concepts and skills they were learning to give back in a substantive way. And they were going far beyond just reading about something in a book. They were practicing it in real time with people from their communities.

As a college administrator, I also saw the creation of these kinds of experiences help to reengage burnout faculty taking textbook research and examples outside the classroom to help students see their real life application often reenergized faculty and sparked their creativity in new ways.

Probably the greatest result of service learning opportunities has been the chance for students, faculty, and community members to work together and practice vital skills like interpersonal communication, problem solving, and leadership.

I can't count the number of times that even a small service learning project ended with new friendships, future career connections, and bigger and better ideas for the next activity. I applaud any effort that asks colleges to help students get out into the community, to share their skills, and to develop new ones.

Thank you for giving me the chance to speak with you today.

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

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Committee Members. My name is Trent Murphy and I'm a student at Stannis Law State University and also have the privilege of serving as Vice President of legislative affairs for the Cal State Student Association, which represents the nearly half a million students in the CSU. And I'm here today to express our opposition to AB 1390.

While we appreciate the intent of this bill and are supportive of all efforts to increase the number of opportunities our students have to give back to their communities and participate in service learning, making it a graduation requirement will only create another barrier for our students.

As you're well aware, there is an affordability crisis happening across our campuses, which in turn means that many of our students are having to work far more than 20 hours a week to make ends meet.

Most students I know have a full time job or multiple part time jobs. This past year, I've had two jobs myself while also serving in this role, working on average of 40 to 50 hours a week.

Working this much is a necessity for students like me who don't have parents who provide them money, who have no other way to pay their rent, insurance, and basic necessities like food. There are thousands and thousands of students like me, and the unfortunate reality is they must work full time hours to even have the opportunity to obtain their degrees.

And this window of opportunity is shrinking even faster for first generation students, students of color, and students of low socioeconomic background.

Adding additional hours that students must be working, though, in a community service type of environment means that students will lose those hours. They could have been paid to work and in turn, be able to meet their basic needs. Adding this barrier also goes against the state's priority to ensure that students can graduate in four years, as well as the goals of the CSU's graduation initiative 2025.

If a student can simply not afford to give up work hours in order to participate in service learning, they could then not be able to graduate. Additionally, while this bill states that the amount of units needed to graduate won't be increased, an additional course requirement will need and force programs to be restructured, especially for high unit majors like sciences and technologies. All 23 of the CSU campuses already offer service learning opportunities for students.

Stanislaus State's Service Learning and Academic Internships department hosts community service opportunities on campus, for example, like Science Day, which draws over 2000 Stanislaus State students as well as elementary students from across the community.

Fresno State's Jan and Bud Richter Center for Community Engagement and Service-Learning also has over 12,000 students who participate in their programming, which has resulted in over 1 million student community service hours just this past year.

These are just two examples, but showcase the perspective of CSU students that instead of mandating a new requirement, efforts should be made to bolster those programs that already exist and find ways to encourage participation.

We have appreciated all the conversations we've been able to have with Assemblymember McCarty and their staff on this issue and look forward to continued collaboration to ensure this is as student centered as possible. At this time, though, I respectfully urge you all to vote no. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I'm Bethe Stuffel, chair of the Academic Senate of the California State University. On behalf of the Academic Senate of the California State University, which represents more than 28,000 faculty of the California State University, on academic matters of systemwide concern, we are opposed to AB 1390.

While we support service learning and internships that provide students valuable experiences that benefit our state and provide valuable transferable skills, we remain in opposition to this bill. Adding an additional graduation requirement will create a barrier to graduation for students.

The cost of appropriately reviewing the risk assessment of service learning and approving service learning courses is not funded in AB 1390. Current research that suggests service learning as a very effective way of helping students learn is only with students who are self motivated and self select into service learning courses. The cost of providing service learning is on the order of tens of millions of dollars, and AB 1390 does not include funding to the CSU to cover these costs.

Without increasing funding directly to the CSU for faculty and staff time associated with service learning, faculty and staff will need to simply do less work on other issues that will increase student success, like providing access to underserved communities and the graduation initiative 2025.

The Academic Senate of the California State University is convinced that service learning is good, should be encouraged and funded, but should not be a degree requirement. We oppose AB 1390 and ask you to vote no. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Anybody else in opposition? Seeing none. Committee Members, any questions or comments? I'm sorry. Somebody's coming. Welcome.

Sorry, not really opposition. We're opposed unless amended. This is Alia sky with the UC Student Association. We agree with a lot of what was just said and we have a position of opposed unless amended to remove the requirement portion of this bill.

Thank you. Are there tweeners in the hearing room?

Good afternoon. Mary Meuel, CSU we have been in touch with the author's office on this bill. We have oppose unless amended, position. I believe our academic senate and our students provided an excellent overview of all of the issues which we have. We have been trying to work with the author's office to amend the bill to put more of the requirements onto our campuses in order to expand and, as our students said, bolster service learning opportunities and opportunities for community engagement there.

So we would like to keep working with the author's office on that. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Tyler Aguilar, excuse me, on behalf of the University of California, we do not have an official position on this bill, but we do really share the goal of trying to elevate all opportunities for service learning for all students. Unfortunately, implementing a new system-wide graduation requirement for all 220 plus thousand students could be challenging for us.

Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions or comments?

I'd also note that we're generally supportive of the direction that changes CSU has proposed in elevating service learning at our campuses and putting the onus on our campuses to really make sure those opportunities are available for the students that choose to take them. Thank you.

First, I want to thank the Assembly Member for bringing this forward and for bringing us so many positive bills today to help students through their post-secondary education. Service learning in my own family has been incredibly beneficial. My own son is about to graduate from college, volunteered during the COVID crisis, and got a lot out of that.

But I do share many of the concerns and was just hoping you could address some of them, many of which were brought up by the opposition, but also some that I've heard directly to our office, directly from CSUMB students. And this is not a knock on CSUMB at all, so much as just the experience of students who are required to do service learning. So I think first and foremost, the issue of affordability was brought up.

Students who are struggling with access to food, who are struggling with affordability of housing, who do have to work multiple jobs, and then on top of that are going to need to give away their time. I think in my own opinion, sometimes we require students to volunteer. This is the second issue. Sometimes we require students to show up and volunteer, and then the organization they go to may not be set up to give them a quality experience would be the second concern.

So I sort of would prefer an internship to a volunteer situation to make sure that the service learning is really pushing their academics, if that makes sense. And then the third thing that I'll echo is this piece around campus choice. I've heard from a number of campuses that say we've already got some sort of a program. We'd like to continue to invest in that program rather than having a blanket requirement.

And I will just end by saying, I appreciate you saying you're willing to go to six years, because this made me think about your initiative for debt free college, and if we could go to debt free college and take off some of the weight of affordability for students, I think there could be a wonderful dovetail with service learning and debt free college. But just wanted to see if there were pieces that you might be able to add to address some of those concerns.

Yes. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Addis. Would you like to respond?

Yeah, sure, maybe I'll address those, just kind of universal. What we heard is that I think this is a workable proposal, that this is our first committee, and we're continuing working with the segments and the students. First of all, I love our students. They were here for all my other three bills earlier today, so it's kind of awkward to have them opposing this one here. But, hey, that's democracy.

But I hear the students, and it's not easy being a college student. What are big points of the debt-free debate at Monterey Bay? They have a very diverse population, very low income, just like CSU overall. Students who have work requirements, a lot of them are Pell, and they're figuring it out, and they're doing 25 to 30 hours per semester. That's 240 or so plus hours through if you do a four-year program. So we're willing to have an hour threshold that's less.

That's not so burdensome. But to the point we made earlier that we're looking at doing this over, it's really seven years. And so I think we have time to have the campuses look what they're doing existing and bolster that. And someone say, well, you only want people to volunteer to do this. If you force someone to do community service, they're not going to. Well, it hasn't happened at Monterey. For 25 years, it's been a requirement, and it's been wildly successful.

We spoke to their director a few months ago on this, and as far as the money requirement, I'll vehemently disagree. We're giving the CSU a 5 percent increase in their budget this year. A lot of programs are getting 0 percent increase, and they would love to have 5 percent. And part of that 5 percent compact, which literally was a handshake between the Governor and the UC and the CSU, it doesn't bind the legislature per se. It's a recommendation to us.

Part of it was by 2030, having a community service element as far as the university. So we think this ties in exactly what we're kind of looking at anyway. And the clock would synchronize as well. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember McCarty, and thanks for bringing that forward. And budgets up, too, as well, when we look at the compact issues on CSU Compact 2030 and that 5 percent increase. Assemblymember Ortega, please.

I just have one question. When it comes to the requirements, knowing the UC system, as oftentimes when we try to require things, they're unconstitutional. So what's the process here?

Yes, I know you're very wise in how the UC works from your prior life. Well, fortunately, we have the power of the purse. And in the budget process, as we mentioned earlier, we dictate that a requirement of this 5 percent funding for the next five years is a community service element. So, granted, we cannot force UC to do anything because of the state constitution. We can work with them through the legislative process and the budget process.

Thank you.

Mr. Low.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I just want to be a broken record again about the master plan. This would help assist us with helping to ensure that we are focused on the comprehensive approach on what we hope to see in the vision for the state of California. And we will continue to see some of these implementation challenges should we not take the due diligence to really address this issue in totality.

But given that, we have a bill before us and this is the first committee, I was actually very excited about this Assembly McCarty, and was hoping that you could add me as a co-author of this. You referenced in the recognition about the implementation timeline, also some of the associated issues related to this and part of the letter and the conversation specifically that was flagged and highlighted from the California State University Office of the Chancellor's office.

References, for example, some of the curricular concerns about STEM and business students already having tightly scheduled coursework to complete the degree specifically. But I think it is also in the public interest to help ensure that we are focusing on civic engagement, voting participation. There's a correlation between that of the lack of voter participation that we see.

So much of the focus has been on the technical skill sets, but so much of it, and we've talked about this before in this body, about going away from home economics and other associated life skill sets that are also required to becoming active and productive citizens, active citizenry. So I am in support of this today, but I also would urge us to think about the implementation issues as well. And I would offer myself readily available to help and be a partner in that effort. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator Low, any further questions or comments? We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a motion and a second by Senator Low, seconded by Dr. Arambula. With that, Assemblymember, would like to close, please.

Thank you. I'm not sure, did I say I'd do the Committee amendment? I did? Thank you. I appreciate the dialogue. And yes, I'd love to have you as a co-author, Mr. Low. And I don't necessarily always see this as a burden on students.

It's an opportunity to enrich their education experience. We cannot overload them with hours and do this tomorrow. But I think we're working to make sure we implement this over a number of years and have a number threshold that should be workable for all students across California in higher education. Ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember McCarty, for bringing this forward. And thank you for your interest in service learning. And thank you to my colleagues for their comments as well.

I too was fortunate to participate in service learning at UCLA in the late 90s as a peer mentor, and I feel like I greatly benefited from that. Very fortunate to have that experience and to benefit from that experience and appreciate the comments here from our colleagues here as well, to really make sure that we look at this properly and we provide additional resources as well through the budget process.

And I believe that the proposed delay to implementation will give the CSU an opportunity to properly build the staff and resources necessary regarding this new graduation requirement if it moves forward. And so with that, I look forward to supporting this Bill here today. With that, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee. Fong aye. Fong aye Ta. Addis. Addis aye. Arambula. Arambula aye. Gabriel. Irwin. Low. Low aye. Ortega. Ortega aye. Sanchez. Sanchez aye. Santiago. Wallis. Weber.

Thank you so much. The measure has six votes. We'll keep the bill on call and for additional Members to add on. Thank you so much, Assembly Member McCarty. Next up, we have Assembly Bill 1699, Item Number 18, the fifth and final bill authored by Assembly Member McCarty in today's hearing. Welcome.

Thank you. I'm exhausted, Mr. Chair.

You're solid.

I'm exhausted, and more importantly, you are exhausted of me.

No, we're not exhausted. We appreciate you. Welcome.

Yeah, thank you. This is kind of a hybrid K12 and higher ed bill about classified employees, about our community colleges, and frankly, our K12 schools, giving them the right of first refusal for a new job postings. Let me give you a hypothetical. There is a bus driver that works for a school district. They drive the bus in the morning between seven and nine. Then they have their second pickup route between, let's say two and four.

So during those four hours in between, they could go home and come back or they could do more work, like maybe work at the cafeteria. And so too often they have to struggle to apply for that secondary job and all education established, all school districts, community college districts--right now we're having a people problem. We can't find people to fill these, in large part, because too often we pay these employees poverty wages.

And so this is frankly a win-win to fill those jobs and give people in those other jobs the opportunity of right of first refusal. We're not asking for any special treatment, any additional training for these individuals. So these individuals would have to just be like any other employee that applies for such a job opening, but they would have the first right of refusal. With me today are representative for the California School Employees Association as well as the California Federation of Teachers. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee. Navnit Puryear, on behalf of the California School Employees Association and we're proud cosponsors of AB 1699. AB 1699 requires districts to provide existing classified school employees with a right of first refusal to part time and full time job postings that they can reasonably perform. As you know, California's education workforce is in a crisis. The state has countless unfilled positions while jobs are split. Districts can't attract enough applicants willing to work part time without benefits.

This crisis has led to a revolving door of temporary and substitute workers creating constant instability in school sites. It has negatively impacted student learning and staff morale. Most classified school employees only work part time and over half of CSEA members earn less than $30,000 a year. They struggle financially because they aren't provided enough hours to make ends meet and don't qualify for benefits such as health insurance or a pension. Unfortunately, most classified school employees can make more money working at In-N-Out or at Starbucks.

This bill would address the crisis by helping districts fill open positions quickly and efficiently with existing staff and provide many classified school employees with full time income and benefits they deserve. Thank you. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you.

Hi. Chair and Members, Tiffany Mok. I'm proud to represent the Union of Educators and Classified Professionals, CFT. CFT supports this bill. Simply put, students will not thrive without adequate staffing on campuses to ensure their computers work, their lunches are served, their playgrounds are safe, and that they know there are adults they trust and will support their learning.

This bill helps ensure students to have a stable workforce of adults on campus because it allows these employees who currently have part time jobs to have a second part time job. This is an extension of a current practice where many districts already allow current part time employees to transfer into a position with longer hours or with a higher pay, but that would be a one-to-one job transfer.

This just allows an employee to have essentially two part time jobs, which compiled together as long as their schedule works and such makes sense. So this is a practical bill to ensure that our students don't have a revolving door of part time employees on campus. They deserve more than this from us to have a stable group of professionals who will be the first eyes and ears to their learning needs and to create a world and a campus for which they will thrive. Thank you, and I urge your aye vote.

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

Kimberly Rosenberger with SEIU, proud cosponsor.

Mitch Steiger with the California Labor Federation, also in support.

James Michael Agpalo with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFSCME, in support.

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

Thank you. Good afternoon. Michelle McKay Underwood, on behalf of the Association of California Community College Administrators, respectfully here in opposition to AB 1699. Although we appreciate the intent of the bill and the opportunities to meet with the author and the sponsors of the bill, we are fundamentally concerned that this will actually exacerbate shortages as opposed to sort of contrary to the intent of the bill. As we know, colleges are facing these shortages throughout the state.

We believe that the principle of local control is fundamental to establishing and operating sound programs for students and creating an infrastructure that supports all community college employees. As currently written, AB 1699 would encroach on the local autonomy of community college districts by mandating specific district hiring processes and protocols, which is an issue that we believe should be handled in conjunction with our partners locally and through the collective bargaining process.

In looking at the Committee analysis on page four, I think it does a really great job of raising some of the issues and concerns that we have around preserving the colleges' discretion to hire the best candidate--sometimes that's internal, sometimes it's not--and also the timeline for backfilling those vacant positions and how quickly we can get through that process. We also are concerned about significant cost implications.

I know that's not the purview here specifically, but an overhauling, the hiring process, and requiring that training for interested employees will create those cost pressures. As we know, we are getting towards an increasing tightening budget and going into a softening economy. So for all those reasons, ACCCA respectfully opposes AB 1699.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Leilani Aguinaldo, on behalf of the Schools Excess Liability Fund. Our organization includes K12 school district and community college district representatives from around the state.

SELF does support LEAs, local educational agencies having every suitable candidate for job vacancies, including and especially internal candidates that meet minimum qualifications. However, as currently written, as ACCCA just mentioned, we do believe that AB 1699 currently would further exacerbate acute staffing shortages, and for that reason, we must respectfully oppose the version of the bill that's before you today.

So, as mentioned in the analysis, AB 1699 is unclear, for example, on the time period for which internal candidates must have the first right of refusal, and then secondly, to build on the example that Assemblyman McCarty gave earlier in his opening for AB 1699, we believe that the inverse could be problematic.

So, for example, if there's a part time cafeteria worker who wanted to avail themselves of an opportunity for a vacancy as a bus driver, we believe that AB 1699, as currently written, would require us to provide paid on-the-job training so that that individual would be eligible to meet the minimum qualifications for a bus driver position, just as an example.

We have had productive conversations with the sponsors of the bill and we do recognize what their intent is, so that has been very helpful to understand. We do hope to work together with the sponsors and the author as the bill works through the process, but as currently written, we remain opposed to the bill until then. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Jeff Vaca, representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools, and also on behalf of the California School Boards Association, aligning myself with Ms. Aguinaldo's comments in opposition--in respectful opposition.

Good afternoon, Chair, Committee Members. Carlos Rojas with the Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office and representing the 46 school districts in Kern County, in opposition, and also here on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators, in opposition.

Elizabeth Esquivel with the California Association of School Business Officials, also regretfully in opposition. Look forward to continued conversations.

Thank you so much. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? See none, Assembly Member, would you like to close, please?

Yes, thank you. I know you're pleased. This is my last close until next year.

You're welcome anytime.

Yeah. I don't think this is that complicated a proposal. And all things being equal, I don't see why an employer wouldn't want to allow an employee who has time and opportunity to go after that part time job in the middle.

I understand that all things are not equal and that there's some, I think, lack of clarity as far as the timeline and any other additional paid on-the-job requirements. That's not what we're looking after--we're looking for. We're looking for the same rights anybody else would have if they showed up at the doorstep and applied for this job. But the person who's there anyway, let's give them the opportunity. They're already there. Many times--why are they working part time?

Because they don't get benefits and they have to go work at the fast food place sometimes to help with their requirements. And so we'll help people--morale, certainly for employees, but help fulfill the need to get more qualified individuals in the door. And so we'll keep working with the opposition and attempt to clarify these outstanding points that were brought up, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assembly McCarty, for bringing this bill forward, and as someone who has served on the Community College Board for a number of years prior to coming here, I saw firsthand the hard work and plight of many of our classified community college staff. And I believe this approach, this measured approach can assist in filling vacant jobs here in our higher ed system, but however, also hear the concerns of the opposition and glad to hear that you will continue those conversations and work with opposition on their concerns.

And please continue to work with our Committee and the opponents as we move forward. With that, I recommend an aye vote, and Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

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

That has five ayes, one no, and we'll keep the roll open. This bill is on call. Thank you so much, Assembly McCarty. Next up, we have Item Number Ten presented by Assembly Member Cervantes: AB 888. Welcome, Assembly Member.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee Members. Today I am presenting Assembly Bill AB 888. For individuals seeking asylum, they must undergo an extensive process before attaining asylum in the United States. This process is neither easy nor quick. In fact, in California, the average estimated wait time for the start of a court filing until an asylum hearing is scheduled in federal immigration courts is approximately four and a half years.

Among these asylum applicants are prospective and current college students wishing to attend a higher education institution in California, but who are unable to because of the costs associated. Under current law, Cal Grant aid is available to all students, including non citizens, who have attended California's educational institutions for at least three years through the California Dream Act.

Because of their unique immigration status, students who are pending asylumees are not eligible for Cal Grant or any other form of state financial aid if they have been in California for less than three years. AB 888 will extend the eligibility for the Cal Grant program to noncitizens who have filed the specific application for asylum.

Students who are seeking asylum would be eligible so long as they possess a valid employment authorization document, Social Security number, and if they meet the other applicable eligibility criteria for the Cal Grant program. With me to testify in support of the bill, we have two individuals who are joining us in just a moment. We have the University Affairs Chair for the University of California Student Association, Arianne Huffman, and CSU Long Beach alumni, Caroline Biche.

Thank you. Welcome. We have a motion, a second. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm Arianne Huffman, a student at the University of California Merced, and the University Affairs Vice Chair for the UC Student Association. Today, I'm here to express the support of UC students for AB 888, a bill that seeks to expand access to Cal Grant for asylum seekers. As students, we believe in the transformative power of education, and we know that access to higher education can be the key to unlocking a brighter future.

Unfortunately, for many asylum seekers in California, this opportunity is out of reach. Asylum seekers currently face a wait time of approximately 4.5 years just for their case to be heard. During this time, they are unable to access financial aid, whether state or federal, which makes it extremely difficult for them to afford the high cost of higher education. AB 888 provides a targeted solution to this issue by extending Cal Grant eligibility to asylum seekers.

This bill would allow dozens of asylum seeking students across California to access financial aid and pursue their dreams of higher education. The impact of this bill goes beyond just the individual students. It represents a step towards a more equitable society that values the potential and contributions of all its members. For these reasons, the UC Student Association is proud to support AB 888 and urges you to vote in favor of this bill. I would like to now introduce Caroline, an asylum seeking seeker whose story illustrates the urgent need for this legislation. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Caroline Biche. I recently graduated from CSULB and I'm an asylum seeker from Egypt. I came to the US when I was 17, and my case has been pending in the courts for over six years now with no real end in sight. Being an asylum seeker has left me with no financial aid during a time of extreme financial hardship for my family,

I've had to delay my educational journey several times, including going part time and even taking a semester off from school to work. I've experienced homelessness, couch surfing, and even sleeping on a mattress topper on hardwood floor because I could not afford an actual mattress. I've had to work multiple jobs at a time, skip meals, attend class without the required course materials.

I also faced immense psychological trauma, spending long nights crying myself to sleep and hating that I was a burden on my family, wondering if I even deserved an education. I faced anemia and almost fainted a few times due to a lack of access to medical care. As upsetting as my story may sound, four years ago, my brother, Ashraf Bishay, sat before the very body and shared his story, mimicking that of mine.

Had California taken action then, I wouldn't have had to face the harrowing experiences that I shared with you today. That is why I'm urging you to take action now, so no one else has to face the same struggles. As for me, I defied the odds and continued to center my own experiences as my cause and calling.

I am currently a case worker for the International Rescue Committee, helping resettle refugees and asylum seekers, and I intend to pursue my law degree to become an international human rights attorney. Your support of AB 888 could mean the next generation of asylum seeking students could successfully finish their education and give back to this country without many of the burdens that I've had to experience. Thank you for your time.

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

David Evan on behalf of Hispanas Organized for Political Equality in support.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Susan Reyes with the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities in support.

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

Yes. Thank you. I'm just reflecting on the many stories, one that you all heard today. And this bill would just simply expand the eligibility for financial aid to students who are seeking asylum. Let's provide these students with much needed support and resources so that they are not further struggling and experiencing trauma. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Cervantes, for bringing this important measure forward. We know that California is home to a large number of asylum seekers, and we need to continue to do everything possible to embrace the hopes and aspirations of our students, including the students here today, to continue their education at a more affordable price. So I look forward to supporting this bill today. I encourage an aye vote. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

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

That bill has five votes. And when not voting, and we'll keep the bill open on call. Thank you, Assembly Member. Thank you, everyone. Next up, we have item number three, AB 266. Presented by Assembly Member Tasha Boerner. Welcome.

My witnesses can now come into the room and come sit at the table with me. Mr. Chair, Members, this is a revised version of a bill that I've been working on since last year, and I'd like to thank the Chair and especially your staff for their work on this bill. AB 266, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would create an ongoing, paid legislative internship program for undergraduate students in the Assembly and Senate. For students who cannot afford to work for free in any field or industry, unpaid internships represent an insurmountable and inequitable barrier to the workforce.

In fact, I was somebody like that. I worked three jobs through college. I couldn't do an unpaid internship because I simply had to work the three jobs. And so it wasn't even an option for me. With the vast majority of our internships here in the Legislature offered as unpaid, we are disproportionately impacting historically underrepresented students, and we are cutting ourselves off from the potential pipeline of diverse talent at a time when we are in desperate need of more staff.

Though we do sometimes pay undergraduate internships in the Legislature, they're often limited and none are permanent. AB 266 would remedy this by creating a permanent, ongoing internship program administered by the California State University Center for California Studies, the same center that currently runs our successful Assembly and Senate fellowship programs. Every Assembly and Senate office would be eligible to host two interns per year for a maximum of six months each.

Eligible students just needed to be 18 years of age or older, a resident of the state, and enrolled in an accredited postsecondary institution in California. Each intern would receive $340 a week, stipend for up to 20 hours of work, and that work could happen in the district or in capital offices. I will be taking amendments in this Committee to increase the appropriation from 2 million to 3.6 million annually in order for the center to have the necessary staff and administration to run the program properly.

In short, AB 266 offers us a way, building on successful models from other programs, to create a more equitable and sustainable paid internship program for the Legislature. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And with me here today, I have Carlos Mark Vera, the co-founder, Executive Director of Pay Our Interns, a national advocacy group for paid internships located in Los Angeles and DC. I also have Aaron Gilbert O'Neill, an intern here in the Assembly, and I think with maybe one of your Committee Members.

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

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the Higher Ed Assembly Committee. My name is Carlos Margaret. It's a pleasure being here. I'm here standing with Assembly Woman Tasha Boerner in support of AB 266 unpaid internships in the Legislature, or at least the lack of dedicated, ongoing funding on this, has disproportionately impacted youth of color and those from working class backgrounds. I know this firsthand. As a native of Victorville, California, who is first generation and working class, I struggle to make end meets doing unpaid internships in public service.

Those experiences informed my work, and I'm proud to say that payer interns the last couple of years has worked with institutions like Congress to pay their own interns. And the solution that they came up with was have a fund outside of the Members' budgets, just dedicated specifically for interns. And that was done with broad support from both Democrats and Republicans. And just last year, we made history with paid internships in the White House.

This is a win-win issue because it provides interns to have funds to pay for clothing. Right. Needed to be here while ensuring that there's a talent pool for the Legislature to operate effectively.

Our work is powered by intern stories, and one that really resonated with me was an intern who was in a district office at the start of the pandemic, who was in charge of EDD cases and had to deal with rightfully angry, upset constituents, and that was their job, and they were not getting paid for that. While there's been progress on this issue and we are seeing more offices pay some interns from their own budgets, it is not consistent or expansive due to institutional constraints.

In fact, in a 2021 SAC B article, an assemblywoman mentioned that she was only able to pay an intern from her budget because her staffer was on maternity leave. AB 266 meets a need that the Legislature has. It does not duplicate any program. In fact, it complements the fellow's program and it would still allow offices to offer unpaid internships should they want it.

Given the state economic outlook, I know there is rightfully cautious of funding new programs, but I don't think this should be seen as something new, but in fact a way of doing something that should have been done 5, 10 years ago. We strongly urge the support of AB 266 and the Legislature really has opportunity to rectify a long standing inequity. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm so happy to be here today. My name is Aaron Gilbert O'Neill and I am a second year political science student at Sacramento State trying to pursue a career in public policy. I am currently an unpaid intern in the capital today, and I have had two other unpaid internships, following yours as well. I joined today with the assembly woman in support of AB 266 as an unpaid intern. There are times when I pay just to show up to work.

Everything from paying for parking to paying to make sure I have business attire like this today is a cost that I pay up front as an intern. But even with those challenges I might face as an unpaid intern, it's not the most important reason to pay interns. The most important reason is for those who can't even afford to become an intern at all.

Too many young people, particularly from underserved communities and communities of color, are unable to even become interns because they just don't have the resources to do so. Our state government is meant to represent all communities across California. But when we do not pay our interns, it is these communities which also go unrepresented. And if we don't pay interns to increase our diversity, then our communities lose that representation every time they make a phone call to any Senate or Assembly office.

Interns are an integral part of our state government. An investment in them is an investment in our future and the future of the state. So I do urge the Committee today to support AB 266. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Ivan Garcia. I'm an undergraduate at UC Davis and I'm also here repping the East Bay. I've always been passionate about engaging in politics and within my local community. I've interned for local campaigns for folks in office. But as I evolved through this work, like so many others, I am presented with one clear barrier, which is money, financial compensation, and unpaid internships. A few years ago, I was a lead organizer for an assembly race.

I knocked on doors, engaged volunteers, and did all of the campaign things you all are very familiar with. After our candidate won, the thought of possibly interning within the California State Assembly was exciting. And yet I was faced with the reality that there was no budget to pay interns and that most assembly interns are and remain unpaid.

You see, this is more than just unpaid internships for me and like many others, as so many have said, it's about choosing to intern unpaid or being able to make rent at the end of the month, interning or being able to afford groceries this week, interning or being able to afford transportation and working extra jobs as a first generation college student trying to engage in our government and those who represent us.

This issue is very much about those who have the ability to intern and those who don't. Those who have the financial means and are able to intern, and those like me, who quite simply don't have that same privilege and are forced to supplement unpaid internships in other extraneous ways.

Members, I respectfully ask you to support AB 266, invest in our young people and give students like me, my peers within the CSU system, the chance to intern within the State Assembly without financial means and compensation being a barrier to that opportunity. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon. Mary Moyle with CSU. We don't have an official position on this bill. We would just like to ensure that there's adequate funding and would like to continue to work with the author's office. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Seeing none. Assembly Member, would you like to close, please?

Yes, so we will be taking amendments in the next Committee that address the funding issue that was mentioned, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Boerner, for working with our Committee staff in the fall on a solution to provide paid internships for college students throughout our capital. And thank you to the testimony here provided here today as we continue to look for ways to reduce the cost of attending college. Paid internships are an excellent tool to help students not only pay for college, but also to learn employable skills.

I look forward to not only supporting this bill, but hopefully one day hosting an intern in our office students program. And with that, I encourage an aye vote. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

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

The bill has five ayes and when not voting, it will keep the roll open for Members. The bill's on hold. We'll keep it open for Members to add on. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your patience. Next up is Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer. According to sign-in order, item number item number five, Assembly Bill 458. We have a motion and a second. Thank you, colleagues. Welcome, Assembly Jones-Sawyer.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present AB 458, a legislative vehicle which will incorporate the modern policing degree task force report due to Legislature this June. In 2021, my bill, AB 89, the Peace Act, was signed into law with bipartisan support to enhance peace officer entry standards. As a requirement of the Peace Act, an advisory task force of higher education experts, community advocates, and law enforcement was convened to develop the framework for a modern policing degree and financial aid program.

In anticipation of the task force report, it is imperative to begin conversations with my colleagues and inform you of the work that has been accomplished. The Peace Act task force work was the modern policing degree will equip officers with the education and training necessary to meet the present day responsibilities of the force, while their developed financial aid program will support students of low income and underrepresented backgrounds who wish to enter the modern policing profession.

AB 458 helps realize the Peace Act's goal, and as we move AB 458 forward, you have my commitment that I will include the task force final report recommendations into the final version of this bill. As proof of this commitment, I am proud to be joined here by Sandra Sanchez, Vice Chancellor of the Workforce and Economic Development Division, so she can speak to the work of the modern policing degree task force. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Welcome. Thank you.

So good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is Sandra Sanchez and I'm the Interim Vice Chancellor for the Workforce and Economic Development Division for the Chancellor's Office. I was asked to share with you today some of the early discussions and themes coming out of the AB 89 task force meetings, but before I get to those, I'd like to provide you with a bit of context.

As background, AB 89, sponsored by Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer, was signed into law on September 30 of 2021. It requires the Chancellor's Office to do two things, develop a modern policing degree with the Commission on police officer standards and training and other key stakeholders serving as advisors, and by June 1 to submit a report on the recommendations to the Legislature on the plan to implement the program.

Further, the bill requires the post commission to adopt the recommended criteria within two years of the chancellor's office submitting the report to the Legislature Under AB 89, the task force recommendations are to include a focus on courses pertinent to law enforcement, allowances for prior experience, law enforcement or other appropriate work, postsecondary education, or military to satisfy some of the employment eligibility requirements, both a modern policing degree and a bachelor's degree as a minimum education requirements for employment, recommendations to adopt financial assistance for students of historically underserved and disadvantaged communities with barriers to access to higher education.

We established the task force, which includes representatives from the statewide academic Senate, the Post Commission, CSU faculty and administrators, law enforcement representatives, and related community organizations.

The task force is co-chaired by Cheryl Aschenbach, Vice President of the Statewide Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, and Manny Alvarez, the Executive Director of the Commission on Police Officer Standards and Training. The task force has met six times and heard presentations on a variety of topics to help inform their work, including associate degrees for transfers and transfer-model curriculum.

Evidence based policing incorporating diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility into the Administration of Justice programs, the California Apprenticeship Program, faculty minimum qualifications for teaching student financial aid, and financial aid assistance credit for prior learning.

Along with considering the applicability of each of these topics, the task force has had to wrestle with several competing demands, for example, balancing the desire to add additional education requirements as preparation for being a peace officer with the concern that adding any requirements will exacerbate the current recruitment crisis, particularly for smaller agencies that struggle to compete with larger agencies.

Balancing an interest in wanting to be more prescriptive in terms of specific courses required in a modern policing degree with the desire to honor what students bring to the table and then, of course, balancing flexibility as to when and how a person meets the new education requirements, particularly for those where law enforcement is a second career.

With the desire for peace officers to have completed the modern policing degree prior to beginning the job, some additional discussions have included debates about the competencies and values that a graduate of the modern policing degree should have, such as resilience, ethics, leadership, the ability to think critically, effective communication skills, and being culturally competent and emotionally intelligent.

They've also discussed how to make the greatest use of existing courses structures in the development of a modern policing degree, particularly when it comes to awarding credit for prior learning and work experience. Sorting out whether the modern policing degree should be a more general degree or one specific to the preparation of a future peace officer, as well as what is the impact of these requirements will be on nonaffiliated or self sponsored students.

I hope this information about the efforts to the AB 89 will be helpful to you and your work for AB 458. I would be happy to take any questions. I will note that since the task force work is not yet complete, I'm unable to speak to the recommendations at this time. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. Do we have any witnesses in support in the hearing room? Any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Any tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Yes, Assembly Member Evan Low.

Thank you very much. Just a question of clarification. You mentioned in your statement about, I heard the word "and" about the modern policing degree program and bachelor's degree is the current existing law.

That's correct.

The proposal that I'm seeing help to rectify the summary of the bill that we have before us here, which is that this requires an officer to obtain either of the following: the modern policing degree or a bachelor's degree. Can I get some clarification, perhaps, Mr. Chair, as to the existing law says "and" but the proposal says "or."

Absolutely. Thank you so much, Mr. Low. Assembly Member, would you like to address that?

I think it's one and the same. Maybe we should change the wording to be both, because the modern policing degree is within the baccalaureate, the undergraduate, not the baccalaureate, community college degree, to make sure that all those principles within that. If an officer wants to go forward and do another two years, we're trying to try to work out for them to have the financial funding and backing so they're able to do that if they so desire to do that.

Maybe just again, just get clarification. The existing law requires a bachelor's degree as well as modern policing degree, as noted in the analysis on page two. Is that accurate from your understanding?

Yes, that's correct.

But the proposal says "or" on page one. The proposal references that it's "or" not "and."

So if they don't want to do the bachelor four-year degree, they can do the two-year.

Okay, so the proposal would allow for flexibility.

Oh, definitely. Because obviously we want to get people on board as soon as possible.

Yes.

Right now, we're waiting until 2026, 2028. We can't wait any longer than that.

Yes. Thank you. Verify for the clarification. Just for legislative history, I do not support the previous proposal that required a bachelor's degree. I may have shared with the author that my own brother is a police officer in the City of San Jose Police Department. He has an associate's degree. And in the spirit of helping to ensure that we have persons of color and diverse members of the force to help support the communities that they represent, too.

And try not to put additional barriers, as I understand, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, is this helps to ensure the type of integrity of those in policing, to ensure that they have the skill sets, as reflected in an analysis, to best equip them for policing for the current climate and times. But again, the proposal allows for greater flexibility on the modernization of the requirements within the community college system of the policing degree or the bachelor's degree.

Yes.

Thank you very much. I'll be supporting that measure and thank the author for that clarification.

Thank you, Assembly Member Evan Low, for that clarification on the flexibility. Thank you, Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer, for that clarification as well. Yes, Assembly Member Dr. Weber, welcome.

Good afternoon. Sorry a little late. I was coming from another Committee, so I have a question. So there is a report coming out on June 1 from the Chancellor's Office?

Correct.

And how is that information going to impact how this bill moves forward, or what is stated in this bill?

Well, the recommendations will be provided by the task force, and our understanding is that the recommendations are intended to provide the guidance needed for the colleges to actually develop the modern policing degree. In terms of this new bill, my understanding is that the new bill is connected to the recommendations or will be a part of that. But what the task force will do is provide those recommendations to develop the degree.

This will be very similar to what we're doing with reparations. There will be recommendations from this task force, and then this bill will be the vehicle in which we will be codifying what that will ultimately be. And obviously, it's our bill, the Assembly's bill, and we'll decide where we need to move next from there.

So I guess kind of piggybacking off of Assembly Member Low's question, sort of, what would happen if the Chancellor or the report determines that the degree should actually be a bachelor's degree?

We don't anticipate that because the original bill, as I stated, earlier is either or, and so we'll wait to see what comes. But that is not what was originally asked for. It's supposed to comport with what I originally stated.

Okay.

Thank you so much. Any further questions or comments? Assembly Member, would you like to close, please?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Mr. Jones-Sawyer, who are bringing this bill forward and for your years of work in this area, I'm going to support your bill today. I know that you're going to be working closely with the work and recommendations of the AB 89 task force and improvising. I mean, having that recommendations be provided into the bill upon publication.

And so thank you for your work and efforts with the AB 89 task force, and thank you to the Chancellor's Office for that working efforts as well. With that, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do pass to the Assembly Floor. [Roll Call]

Thank you so much. That bill has seven votes. We'll hold the bill open for any additional Members who'd like to add this on, but the bill is out. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee Members.

Thank you, Assembly Member. Next up, we'll have Assembly Member Calderon with Item Number 16: AB 1393. Thank you so much for your patience, and we have a motion and a second. Welcome Assembly Member Calderon, presenting Item Number 16: AB 1393.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Assembly Bill 1393 tasks the California Student Aid Commission with establishing a pilot program to provide food benefits to students who submit the California Dream Act application and demonstrate need. A recent report found that 59 percent of undocumented students experience food insecurity, leading to lower academic performance and poor mental health. Currently, the CalFresh program administers federal funds given through SNAP, which excludes undocumented students.

With several federal restrictions on existing food safety net programs and a lack of state assistance, undocumented students disproportionately grapple with the high cost of college and living in California. Considering California's need for 1.1 million college educated workers by 2030, investing in the success of 94,000 undocumented students is investing in California's future workforce. AB 1393 will not only provide food assistance to undocumented students at the height of a food insecurity crisis, but it will also help students complete their degrees without going hungry.

With me in support of AB 1393 is Marcos Montes from Southern California College Attainment Network, and Denise Nepomuceno, also from SoCal CAN, as a student advocacy fellow attending UC Riverside.

Thank you, Assembly Member Calderon. Chair Fong and Members of the Committee, my name is Marcos Montes. I'm here representing a network of 118 college access organizations in Southern California who recognize the need for our state to be inclusive of people from all backgrounds. SoCal CAN collectively represents more than 200,000 families and students in the region and is a proud sponsor of AB 1393.

As Assembly Member Calderon talked about, it is estimated that 59 percent of undocumented students at the CSU and UC are food insecure, leading to lower academic performance and poor mental health. We believe we need to provide assistance to undocumented students, but we do not want to replicate the problems and shortcomings of CalFresh. The truth is that CalFresh is a highly restrictive program for college students. As highlighted in the bill analysis, students have to meet an array of requirements and also meet one of 12 exemptions.

The complexity of the program has led to only one in three students who qualify for it to use it. AB 1393 provides much-needed food assistance to students who submit the California Dream Act and streamlines the benefits directly into their financial aid award. This program would be administered by the California Student Aid Commission, which supports AB 1393.

DACA and Dream Act have allowed undocumented students to not only get by, but flourish and truly have a better chance at a postsecondary degree and reap all the benefits that come along with it. We need to also consider that the majority of undocumented students enrolled in California's postsecondary institutions are no longer beneficiaries of DACA and are not allowed to generate income by employments. Their families also generally fall under poverty lines and cannot contribute much to the education of their children.

There is a gap AB 1393 allows us to fill. The research mechanism included in the bill would allow us to learn valuable lessons about how we can streamline public benefits to college students and see if providing targeted support for food expenses can help students with timely postsecondary completion. We know this food pilot program can demonstrate to our state and our nation that public benefits can be more streamlined for students.

With this piece of legislation, California can continue to lead in serving the largest population of undocumented students in higher ed and create a State of California for all. We respectfully request your aye vote on AB 1393.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Denise Nepomuceno, and I am a fourth year student at the University of California, Riverside studying biology and ethnic studies. For the last two years, I have been working with the Basic Needs Department on campus as a CalFresh intern where I assist students in applying to the CalFresh program. Among the many students that have sought application assistance from our department, there have been many that have been turned away because they are undocumented.

It is disappointing to be the one that tells a student that they are ineligible for this form of support that helps fight food insecurity and it is even more frustrating to know that you need the assistance but cannot access it due to your immigration status. I can personally testify to this feeling because I myself am a DACA recipient and therefore am not eligible to receive CalFresh.

Coming from a low-income background and being the first one in my family to attend college has been challenging, as I have had to learn how to manage my academics while also fulfilling my basic needs with the very few resources that are available to me. Although there are pantries within the area that provide food items, I, like many other students, cannot access them due to limited transportation and time to attend distribution dates.

Furthermore, many of the items that are offered lack nutritional value and contain ingredients and preservatives that trigger many common allergic reactions. To allow students to purchase foods that align with any dietary restrictions they may have, UCR's Basic Needs Center offers students, regardless of their immigration status, a monthly $50 gift card to Stater Brothers. Although it is a great resource, availability is limited, and students have to wait 30 days after receiving a gift card to apply again.

Many of the undocumented students at UCR, including myself, rely on this monthly resource, but the amount is not sufficient to sustain us for an entire month. Another factor to take into consideration is the current status of DACA since it is not currently accepting new applications. Students who seek resources from the Basic Needs Center have expressed their concern about not having funds to buy food because they do not have employment or authorization to work legally in the country.

These are some of the barriers that bar us undocumented students in higher education from having access to nutritious and accessible food sources, and which is why I am here to encourage you to vote aye on AB 1393 to create a food program that will benefit some students who have submitted the California Dream Act application and will ultimately help tackle food insecurity among this group of college students. Thank you for listening to my testimony. I appreciate your time.

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

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

Kimberly Sanchez with NextGen California, in support.

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

Daniela Rodriguez with the California Student Aid Commission, also in strong support.

Susan Reyes with the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, in strong support, and we want to thank the author and the author's staff for the amendment to include students at ICCUs. Thank you.

Jack Yanos, on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association, in support.

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

Yes. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Calderon, for continuing to push this issue forward before our Committee. We know that all students deserve access to food benefits, regardless of their immigration status. I look forward to supporting this measure today and working collaboratively to find pathways to help our DACA and AB 540 students continue to meet their basic needs and to continue their education. And with that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

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

Thank you so much, colleagues. That vote has nine ayes and one no. I will keep the roll open for any Members that'd like to add on. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And Members, we're on our final bill. Vice Chair Ta, if you can help us with item 11. Thank you.

It's my honor to do so. So the last bill would be, last bill is 1096 by Assembly Member Mike Fong.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. AB 1096 clarifies that a community college district may offer courses in a language other than English without requiring the student to concurrently enroll in an English as a second language course. According to the 2020 United States Census, 26% of California residents were born outside of the United States. There are many benefits to allowing students to take classes in their respective native languages. Monolingual students would be able to earn credits necessary for employment or to maintain employment.

English speakers would be able to learn a second language for jobs requiring seeking bilingual speakers. This bill would result in better trained individuals serving their local communities and also look at an increased enrollment at our community colleges, which we know have experienced an 18% decline since 2019. Here to testify in support of this Bill 1096 is Los Angeles Community College District Chancellor Dr. Francisco Rodriguez. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Good afternoon, Chair Ta, Mr. Fong, Honorable Members of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. Francisco Rodriguez, as mentioned, Chancellor of the Los Angeles Community College District. Mr. Fong, I'm proud to stand with you as a proud sponsor of AB 1096. In 2017, the California Community College Chancellor's Office adopted a vision for success.

This vision states that it is our system's collective goal to ensure that students from all backgrounds succeed in reaching their educational and career goals by eliminating achievement gaps. At LACCD, we believe that AB 1096 gets California community colleges closer to achieving that vision for all students by addressing language justice in our community college system. The bill reaffirms the notion that language should not be a barrier to accessing higher education or essential services, resources, or indeed, opportunities.

Since 2006, our California community colleges have been able to offer courses taught in languages other than English, but under these conditions, that students participating in those courses were also enrolled in a basic English corequisite course, or that these students are part of a cohort of students required to concurrently enroll in another course designed to help them achieve English proficiency.

Requiring non-English speaking students to enroll in two classes instead of the only course they really desire to take, places an additional barrier for this population, which is underserved and who wish to receive high quality educational services that can improve their livelihood. AB 1096 clarifies this, removes these barriers for students who wish to enroll in courses taught in their native language who may not otherwise have enough time or resources to concurrently enroll. Well, we tested this concept.

The LACCD recently surveyed thousands of students and results indicated that two thirds of the respondents said they were interested in taking a course taught in a language other than English. A majority of these students expressed interest in these courses related to education, child development, family services, and business and finance. One in three students responded that a new, better, or higher paying job was the motivation, the reason that they would take these courses.

So, based on what we heard, the district launched a pilot program in the winter 2023 intercession. It's about five weeks, that offered 15 in-person and online courses at six of our colleges. And we saw interest grow. So we expanded this the spring 2023 term. This term, right now, we expanded to 60 course offerings at seven colleges and our experience has continued to be extremely positive.

Through this pilot program, more than 1,500 students are enrolled in the available in language courses, of which nearly 450 were new first-time community college students. It attracted them in language to these particular disciplines. AB 1096 provides access and opportunity for prospective students at all levels, at all ages, at our community colleges statewide, to enroll in higher education, to re-skill or to up-skill their mastery in the workforce and contribute to the economy, or learn something new.

I commend Assembly Member Fong for authoring this bill that recognizes and values the rich and very diversity of languages and cultures that make up our California community college system and indeed this beautiful state we call California. This bill ensures that education is accessible to all individuals, regardless of their linguistic background. It views language as value added. AB 1096 advocates for educational policies, policy that is sound and that supports linguistic diversity and indeed inclusion. So for these reasons, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Yeah, I really appreciate Assembly Member Mike Fong for this bill. This is a really good bill. This provide educational opportunity for more students and I really appreciate that.

Thank you.

So are there any group in support for this bill? So please come up. Are there any group in opposition? So we see none. And then Committee Member, any questions or concerns, please?

Okay, well, thank you for bringing this bill forward. There was one question that was brought up about the transferability of these classes to Cal State or UC. So how has that been addressed? Or how is that being addressed?

At this point, most of the courses have been non-credit and we're looking to move into the credit side. Ultimately, we've tried this pilot. So ultimately the credit courses if indeed there are credit bearing and transfer degree bearing, they would transfer to the CSU as they normally would. This current pilot is the majority of courses in non-credit, and it's really expanding an opportunity to teach folks in their native language. It's been a variety of languages. You know, Los Angeles is home to so many beautiful languages, so we've tried to reach new audiences through language.

All right. Thank you.

Please.

Thank you. So are these classes that would be offered in non-English, would they be new courses or in lieu of what you have now?

They're new courses. In some cases, they're existing courses taught only in that native language. In many cases, we teach these courses through ESL bilingually. But these would be both new courses as well as courses that we have in our curriculum already because they're workforce-degree types of courses.

Right. So, Assembly Member Fong, specifically in your bill, does it state that these would be new courses, not in lieu of what we currently have?

Thank you so much, Senator Weber. Some of these can be new courses going forward, as we heard from the Chancellor. We want to see if this is an opportunity to expand it to credit bearing courses as well.

The reason why I ask is we already know that there are challenges with students getting into classes and courses and being able to graduate or move on on time. And I don't want to limit the number of courses that English-speaking students would have access to because let's just say, I don't know, let's just say science, chemistry, basic chemistry or something like that.

I'm just pulling out of the air that you have two courses now that are both in English, and now we're going to say one of those is in a different language. So now that those students that only speak English would have half of a chance of getting into that course. So that's why I'm asking specifically, because I want to be able to expand. And if people want to take courses in their native language or in a new language, that's fine.

But I also don't want to have those students that only speak English be delayed further because the number of classes that they are able to take are reduced. So does it specifically spell that out in the bill?

Thank you so much. We will definitely want to expand those opportunities for students to take classes in their native language, and we wouldn't want to displace any students who are taking classes. Mr. Chancellor.

Yes. Thank you, Assembly Woman Weber. It's not intended to supplant existing courses, but to expand opportunity in both non-credit and credit courses in languages other than English. That'd be a wonderful problem to have when we have students who need the same course in two different languages. Currently, with your wonderful support over the last several years, we have resources in which we could do that. So this is intended to reach people where they are at linguistically.

Okay. I will support it today. And before it hits the floor, just make sure that it's spelled out in the bill, because I don't want to have any unintended consequences. Thank you.

Absolutely. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. So, if there is no other concerns or comments from our community Members, Assembly Member Fong, you may close.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, Members, and thank you for the conversation here today to really look at opportunities to expand opportunities for students to take classes in their native languages. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. So, Madam Secretary, so please call the roll. And is there any motion and second? So who would like to make a motion? Okay, I'm sorry. Okay, so we have the motion and second on the floor. Okay, thank you.

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

Thank you so much, colleagues. Been a robust meeting. First, we'd like to do Assembly Bill 247, which was item number two. If we can get a motion, a second on item number two, AB 247, please. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please, Madam Secretary.

The motion is do passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. That passes with 10 ayes, one not voting. We'll keep the roll open for any members that would like to add on. At this time, members, we will go through the consent calendar. Madam Secretary, for anybody who would like to add on to the consent calendar. Roll call, please, Madam Secretary.

[Roll Call]

That is 12-0. Thank you, colleagues. Next up, we'll have Madam Secretary call the roll for members to add on for bills on call. Madam Secretary.

File item number nine, AB 689. The motion is do passed to appropriations.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much, colleagues. That measures out 11 ayes, one not voting. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Next one, please.

File item number 17, AB 1695. Do pass to appropriations.

[Roll Call]

Thanks so much, colleagues. That is out 12-0, Madam Secretary. Next one, please.

File item number 6, AB 506. The motion is do pass to Appropriations.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, colleagues. That is out 12-0, Madam Secretary. Next one, please.

File item number one, AB 225. The motion is do passed to Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much, colleagues. That is out 12-0. Next one, please, Madam Secretary.

File item number 8, AB 656. The motion is do passed to Appropriations.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much, colleagues. That is out 12-0. Next one. Madam Secretary.

File item number 19, AB 1749. The motion is do passed to Appropriations.

[Roll Call]

That is out 11-0. We'll hold the item open if anybody would like to add on. I think Ortega voted on it. Yes. Thank you so much. Next one, Madam Secretary.

File item 15, AB 1390. The motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

That measure has nine ayes, one no and one not voting. We'll keep the item open for anybody who like to add on. Thank you. Next one, Madam Secretary.

File item 18, AB 1699. The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

That item has nine ayes, one no and one not voting. We'll keep the item open for anybody who like to add on. Thank you. Next one, Madam Secretary.

File item number 10, AB 888. The motion is do passed to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

We have 10 ayes and one not voting. We'll keep that item open for anybody would like to add on. Thank you. Next one, Madam Secretary.

File item number 3, AB 266. The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

That has 10 ayes, one not voting. We'll keep the item open for anybody who would like to add on. Thank you. Next one, Madam Secretary.

File item number 5, AB 458. The motion is do pass to the Assembly Floor.

[Roll Call]

That has 11 ayes and we'll keep the item open for any member who would like to add on. Thank you.

Thank you, colleagues, for your patience. We're just going through a couple more.

Item number 10. Madam Secretary.

The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

That is out with 11 votes. And one not voting. Thank you. Next one, please.

File item number 3, AB 266. The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. That has 11 ayes, one not voting. That measure is out. Thank you. All right, and item number 16, Madam Secretary.

File item number 16, AB 1393. The motion is do pass to the Appropriations Committee.