Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education

Like to call the meeting of the Assembly Higher Education to order. Thank you so much to all the Members and to everyone for being here and really appreciate the opportunity to join all of you here today. So welcome to the Bill hearing of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. Whether you're here in person or watching virtually, we're glad that you have joined us. I'm going to go over some key elements of today's hearing structure.

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 [website] and bills will be taken up in sign in order Members of this Committee will present their bills last in numerical order. Noncommittee authors, you can sign in at the sergeant's desk in room 437.

Additionally, please note that the guidelines 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 a 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 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. Authors each Member presenting today will have an opening and closing argument. Your two lead witnesses will each have two minutes to provide testimony as well.

And also, in terms of file number nine, authored by assembly member Laurie Wilson, senate Bill of 760 that would be presented today by Dr. Aquila Weber, and also the following measures have been put over by the Committee until the hearing the next week. File item 10, authored by Slam Berman, AB 789, and file item 14, authored by Dr. Rambla, AB 1275. And now we'll proceed with the items in order by author submission.

So first we have item number one, Assembly Bill 226, authored by Assembly Member Ramos. Mr. Ramos, come on up. And we're going to start today as a Subcommitee, and then once we have quorum, we'll establish quorum. Mr. Ramos, the floor is yours. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee Members. Today I present AB 226. Current law requires that the UC work in good faith to repatriate the remains and cultural items back to California Native American tribes.

However, there have been significant delays, leaving many tribes unable to recover remains of their ancestors. Since NAGPRA and Cal NAGPRA's enactment, which was over 20 years ago, 20 years ago, we are still having issues when it comes to repatriations. AB 226 urges the University of California to report annually on the progress towards repatriation so that we can continue to hold the institutions accountable as well as return remains and cultural items to California Native American tribes.

This bill also urges the UC to prohibit the use of Native American remains as cultural items for the purposes of teaching in the classrooms or research. The fact that in 2023, human remains and cultural items that were stolen are still being used without proper repatriation is upsetting. AB 226 is aimed at holding the UCs accountable and allowing for California Native American tribes to finally have peace and closure on an issue that has been around for generations.

With me to testify in support of this bill is Frank Molina, on behalf of the San Ynez Band of Chumash Indians and Andrew Govenar, on behalf of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians.

Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. Good afternoon. I am Frank Molina, testifying on behalf of the San Diego's band of Chumash Indians, one of the sponsors of AB 226. It took the Chumash 10 years from 2008 to 2018, to convince UC Berkeley to return almost 2000 Chumash human remains and the Chumash remained passionate that all human remains and NAGPRA objects be returned to all affiliated California tribes.

AB 2836 by Todd Gloria required the University of California to adopt a policy for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, often abbreviated as NAGPRA. It took almost three years to create such NAGPRA policy, which became effective January 1, 2022. The Gloria Bill also required the Bureau of State Audits to do a University of California NAGPRA compliance audit twice, first in 2020, and second in 2022. In 2022, the audits found historic noncompliance with Berkeley, Riverside and new noncompliance from UC Santa Barbara.

Few UC schools had dedicated NAGPRA staff and most were deliberately underfunded. Some UC schools claim it will take them 10 years to repatriate Native American human remains and funerary objects to tribes. Other UC schools claim all NAGPRA objects are culturally unidentifiable despite having been discovered in clearly defined tribal territories. Please help California tribes by continuing these biannual audits and forcing UC schools to staff and fund their NAGPRA repatriation programs.

Please also demand that UC President make UC schools follow their NAGPRA policies in a timely and consistent manner. No tribe should have to wait 10 years or more to rebury their ancestors. Thank you.

Andrew Govenar, Governmental Advocates on behalf of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians in support of AB 226. As the Assembly Member said, it's been since 2001, since the original bill was passed, and that we have to be here 21 years later to still get UC to comply. It's not right.

And we believe this bill actually starts to put annual benchmarks in place to ensure that we can start getting actually an accountable of what the remains are in funerary objects that are still in place at UC, because without knowing actually what's in their collection and what they still have, it's difficult to move forward. So with that, we ask for your support. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Ramos, for that presentation, and we don't have quorum yet, so we won't be able to take any action at this time. But really appreciate you and the presentation here today. We can't take a motion yet, I don't think. I'm sorry. Is there any support? Yes, for support. Sorry about that. Yeah. Do we have witnesses in support, please? Seeing none. Are there witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none.

Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. We'll take a motion once we have the established quorum. So thank you so much. We'll note that for the record. Assembly Member Addis.

Thank you, Assembly Member Ramos, for bringing this forward, and thank you to your witnesses for coming. I very much appreciate this bill and just would love to be a co-author. Thank you taking co-authors on the bill and want to wholeheartedly agree that it's far past time for the repatriation of these artifacts as well as human remains.

Thank you for that. And thank you for offering to be a co-author. We are accepting co-authors, if any others so wish to add on. Thank you so much. Thank you, Arambula. Assembly Member Member Ta. I like to co-author as well. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Fong. Thank you.

All right. I'm sorry? Thank you to all our Committee Members.

Thank you so much. Respectfully ask for your aye vote when the time is appropriate.

Perfect. Thank you so much, Mr. Ramos. All right. Thank you, Committee Members. Next up is Item Number Two, authored by Assembly Member Buffy Wicks, and that is Assembly Bill 472, Item Number Six on our agenda. Mr. Wicks, welcome. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair and Members. First, I want to thank the Committee for their time and consideration of this bill. Under current law, classified employees can be placed on involuntary leave during the period an employee is charged with a crime or is under investigation. When the proceedings that required the involuntary leave conclude in the employee's favor and the employee returns to work, they're not always fully compensated for their missed time.

Merit districts, which have an established personnel commission, must pay a classified employee their total compensation for a period of involuntary leave. Nonmerit districts, however, do not have this same right. In addition, classified employees are often not compensated for time missed due to administrative delays that prevent them from having the required certification or paperwork to perform their duties. This can include, for example, an employee waiting for the DMV to renew their bus driver's license or for the Department of Human Services to reverify their employment authorization documents.

AB 472 clarifies that, regardless of merit or nonmerit district status, districts must fully compensate employees who return to service after being placed on involuntary leave. The bill also requires school districts to compensate classified employees who miss time due to administrative delays for necessary job-related administrative determinations. I want to thank our sponsors, the California State Employees Association and AFSCME. Testifying in support today are Jessica Hay from CSEA, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman and Committee Members. Thank you so much for allowing me the opportunity to testify on this bill. My name is Jessica Hay, and I'm here on behalf of the California School Employees Association, and we are proud cosponsors of AB 472. First, I want to thank Assembly Member Wicks and her staff for all their hard work on this bill and the Committee staff for their really thoughtful analysis.

So CSEA represents over 250,000 classified school employees, many of whom are women and people of color. Classified employees are the folks that get kids to and from school safely, make sure kids have a welcoming, safe, and clean learning environment. They support teachers in the classroom, and they make sure that students get the academic assistance they need and so much more.

AB 472 would provide full compensation for all classified employees placed on involuntary leave during the time an employee is charged with a criminal offense, is under investigation, or is waiting due to those administrative delays that Assembly Member Wicks mentioned. Upon the conclusion of those proceedings in favor of the employee, the school district shall pay the employees full compensation for that period of involuntary leave. This is also a parity bill, so certificated employees already have these protections.

Even the probationary certificated employees are protected, so classified folks deserve the same rights. Under current law, merit school districts must pay a classified employee their full compensation for that involuntary leave, but nonmerit districts are not allowed to due to a 1968 court case. So it's unconstitutional for them to pay for that involuntary leave. This really is a fairness issue. Classified employees should be compensated for time missed in cases where charges are not brought, they're dismissed, or that employee is acquitted of them.

They should also be fully compensated when they're on involuntary leave due to administrative delays that are really no fault of their own. And this prevents them from having their requisite certification and paperwork to do their duties, but that's not their fault. So they should get compensated for that time. This issue came up through our membership.

So we heard from a member who was facing criminal charges and was placed on that involuntary leave of absence because he was not certificated in working in a nonmerit district. He was not entitled to his full compensation for that involuntary leave once he was returned to duty at the district after the charges were dismissed.

Over half of CSEA members earn less than 30,000 dollars a year, and they really cannot afford to be on leave with no possibility of receiving their lost wages, even when they're falsely accused or unable to perform their duties through no fault of their own. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 472, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you so much.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Seth Bramble here, speaking on behalf of the California Teachers Association. We are in strong support.

Afternoon, Chair Fong and Members. James Michael Agpalo with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFSCME, and we are also proud cosponsors of the bill. Thanks.

Thank you.

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

Good afternoon. Wendy Brill-Wynkoop, Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges, 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? Seeing none, Assembly Member Wicks, would you like to close?

When you all have quorum, would love to have an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Wicks, for bringing this measure forward. Classified workers we know live very much on the margins and most making under 30,000 dollars annually, and so this is an important measure and definitely really appreciate you bringing this forward. Look forward to supporting this legislation today. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next up is Assembly Blanca Rubio, presenting item number seven. Assembly Bill 680. Welcome, Assembly review.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, today I present AB 680, which will streamline transfer pathways for undocumented students and prepare California for tomorrow's workforce. As California's population reaches retirement age, our state must further increase access to a college degree so that we have enough workers to fill the jobs of tomorrow. This is why Governor Newsom recently described a bold new vision for California's higher education system to achieve 70% postsecondary degree and certificate attainment among working aged Californians by 2030.

As the largest provider of workforce training in the nation, California's community colleges are the backbone of the state's workforce, with the largest and most diverse student body among California's postsecondary systems and the primary entry point for the University of California are the UCS and California State universities or the CSU's transfer students.

Community college play a critical role to supporting the state's goals approximately 30% of UC and 50% of CSU bachelor's degrees degree earners transferred from a California community college, further underscoring the need for California to establish shared expectations and accountability across higher education institutions. AB 680 is an opportunity to reinforce the state's commitment towards strengthening and streamlining the transfer process and reduce student time to degree, especially for underrepresented students that make up the majority of the community college population.

As AB 680 is a critical piece of legislation that will allow undocumented students attending a California community college to pursue their higher education goals more efficiently and affordably by clarifying existing pathways under AB 540 from 2001, by creating a process to become exempt from nonresidential tuition, AB 540 turned college from just a dream to reality for thousands of undocumented students.

Despite historical policies intended to expand access to higher education, undocumented students cannot afford AB 540, the number of AB 540 students attending a California community college has declined 40% since 2017. As California's demographics have evolved over the past 20 years, community college students have also become more diverse, including first generation students, Low income students, and students of color. Today, an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 undocumented students attend a public college or University in California.

A full time student who qualifies for AB 540 will save an average of 9150 in tuition per year at a community college, 11,880 at a CSU, and 31,026 at the UC. Removing barriers for our undocumented students is an investment in our conveyor belt for talent, the finest system of higher education in the world, our community colleges. As Governor Newsom stated in his 2022 State of the state, nonresident students who start directly at a community college and enroll in a three year of credit.

Courses must pay approximately an average of 21,960 to achieve AB 540 status. AB 680 corrects these unintended consequences. That leaves out undocumented community college students who cannot access in state tuition benefits despite the intent of prior legislation to expand college access. I have two witnesses in support here today, Maria Gutierrez, with Dream center coordinator for Shabbat College and Jocelyn Pacheco Hernandez, student President elect and students trustee elect from Sierra College.

And additionally, we have Linda Vasquez, the assistant vice chancellor of government relations from the California Community College Chancellor's office. She's here to answer technical questions. Thank you.

Hi, everybody. Hello chair Fong and Members of the Assembly of Higher Education Committee. My name is Maria Gutierrez and I'm an undocumented educator at Chabot College's Dream center where I serve as coordinator and counselor. In my role, I have seen how expansions of AB 540 have benefited many undocumented students, especially at the California Community College level, via AB 2000, SB 68 and more recently, SB 141.

AB 680 would help students like Sergio, a. Pasadium named for a student I have assisted in the past who allowed me to share their journey. Studio as a computer science major was awarded an as in computer science with 64 units completed and although they met minimum requirements to apply to transfer for fall 2022 admissions, they decided to wait for fall 2023 admissions and take adult school classes in order to be extended from the nonresident tuition and gain their third year.

This month, they shared they were accepted to four csus and four ucs and is excited to be transferring. They shared that although they are happy to finally be moving forward with his goals, they lost a paid internship since they had to take adult school courses instead of being at the four year level, I could share many more student scenarios that end similarly. And unfortunately, others that do not have a happy ending, referred to as dreams, lost.

Many immigrants, after talking to them about their options of higher education, have shared that they don't have the luxury of the time to persist through community college and decide to surrender their dreams of higher education. You may be aware many undocumented students start their higher education journey at a California community college before transferring to a UC or CSU. Yet part time and immigrant students and adults are faced with barriers instead of access points when pursuing their goals of transferring.

AB 680 would allow community college students who complete certain graduation requirements to qualify for insta tuition, saving them time and money as they move on to complete their four year degree. Let's be access points and support students academic and career goals. Thank you for your support and I urge you to vote yes on AB 680.

Thank you. Welcome.

Hello, Chair Fong and Members of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. My name is Jocelyn. I'm a student at Sierra College, currently in my third semester. Once I completed my associate degree in economics, I hope to transfer to UCLA to get my bachelor's degree and pursue a career in investment banking. My goal is to work in the White House where I can contribute to shape policies and making a positive impact as a first generation.

An undocumented student transferred to a University is a very important step in achieving my educational and professional goals, even through many students like myself were told times and again we could not attend college due to our status. Undocumented students with AB 540 are disproportionately affected by having to pay out of state tuition and fees. Many of us work full time jobs just to make ends meet, support our basic needs, and pay for school.

Undocumented students are non-eligible for financial aid, state funding, scholarships or loans, which makes it a challenge to afford tuition fee and other educational expenses. I work cleaning houses to pay for my school. If I didn't already have AB 540, I would have to pay $50,000 just to attend UCLA. Cleaning houses wouldn't be able to pay my college tuition. Resident students only have to pay 18,000 and can qualify for school and grants without access to financial assistance.

Many undocumented students struggle to balance work and school and some are forced to drop out of college, although it seems to take long to qualify for AB 540. Students are applying for AB 540 but being denied because they do not have enough credits. They must either pay for college out of pocket or give up their dream of earning a college degree.

AB 680 will ineligible students like myself to be able to complete an associate's degree, to transfer without having to take unnecessary coursework and pay thousands of additional dollars to be able to apply for AB 540 status before transferring. With AB 540, undocumented students will be able to qualify for state financial aid and afford the total cost of college. I want to thank the Assembly Committee on Higher Education for their decision to support inequitable policies for undocumented students. I urge to vote yes on AB 680.

Thank you so much. Appreciate the testimony at this time. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Thank.

Good afternoon. Nune Garipan, on behalf of the Community College League of California in support. Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon. Carol Gonzalez on behalf of Long Beach Community College District in support.

Thank you, Chair, Members. Austin Webster with W Strategies on behalf of the California Community Colleges Association for Occupational Education, in support.

Rosa Deanda with the California Student Aid Commission in support of AB 680. We think it'll create many opportunities for undocumented students to complete their college education. Thank you.

Stephanie Goldman on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, in support.

Hi. Kimberly Wu on behalf of GENup or Generation Up in strong support of this bill. Thank you.

Jaskirat Kaur on behalf of Folsom College in the Equity Center, in support.

Nancy Vasquez on behalf of Folsom Lake College Student Services, I support.

Angelica Perez Martinez on behalf of Folsom Lake Colleges and Undocu-Falcons Center, and I support.

Thank you, Chair, Members. Mark McDonald on behalf of the Antelope Valley, Contra Costa, and San Bernardino Community College districts, as well as the Los Angeles College Faculty Guild, in support of the bill.

Guadalupe Mendez on behalf of Folsom Lake College Undocumented Center, I support.

Marianne Portillo on behalf of the Undocumented Student Center at Sierra College, in support.

Migdalia Samora in Sierra College, on behalf of Student Services, I support.

Luis Antonio Carron, Undocumented Students of Sierra College and I strongly support this bill.

Hello. Zenaido Ramos-Bustos, Spanish Professor at Sierra College, and I support this bill.

Hello. Stefaney de Genova, on behalf of Sierra College and the Student Engagement Centers, I support.

Hello. Marwa Harps, on behalf of Sierra College and Student Engagement Centers, I support.

Hello, I'm Brittany Anderson on behalf of Folsom Lake College Student Services, I support.

Libby Cook on behalf of the EOP Association, we will be in support.

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

Hi, Valerie Johnson with the Campaign for College Opportunity, in support.

Good afternoon. Helen Torres, Executive Director of HOPE in strong support.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Seeing none. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none. Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Assembly Member Addis followed by Assembly Member Ortega.

Yeah, I want to thank Assembly Member Rubio and your witnesses that came today for sharing your story. And just from my own personal experience working with English learner families in the K-12 system, one of the barriers we often faced was helping students transition into the secondary atmosphere, post secondary atmosphere. And so very much we'll be supporting this and just want to say thank you for taking the time to bring the bill forward, to doing the work that it takes to come to Sacramento and testify. That's huge. And clearly, you have a lot of support in the room. So I'll be supporting this when we get time to make a motion.

Thank you so much. Assembly Member Ortega.

I also wanted to thank the author for bringing this bill forward and to comment on what a beautiful sight it is to see such powerful women speaking on behalf of the undocumented community who comes here, just like I did when I was three years old, when my parents brought me to this country looking for the American dream. And as I sit here today, as your Assembly Member, I'm here to say, Jocelyn, you're going to go to the White House, work in the White House. So I will be supporting.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Rubio, for bringing this important measure forward. We know that we need to continue to reduce barriers for our undocumented students when they're faced in earning a college degree. So really appreciate the testimony here today. And this is an important measure. Would you like to close, Assembly Member?

Thank you. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much. And once we have quorum, we'll take the vote. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up is Item Number 13, authored by Assembly Member Kevin McCarty. Welcome.

Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm presenting this bill which would expand community college tuition waivers, essentially free community college for individuals in the child care ECE Workforce. We know the issue of early education is a critical one in California, even more so after the pandemic. Part of the problem is the workforce. We don't have enough people entering the workforce.

And when we do have people there who are looking to move up, let's say, and do our universal transitional kindergarten program, they need more education, and many times they can get more money working in fast food than they can working in an ECE site. So more higher education for them is a way to advance their career opportunities and help child care in general in California. You may ask, 'don't we already have free community college in California?' We passed the bill a couple years ago, my bill, along with Mr. Santiago.

Last year, we expanded it to not just all first time full time to all full time community colleges, and we have people who can get free for the waiver if they're part time. But the issue, there's people in the middle here who, let's say they're a child care worker and they can only afford to go because they're part time. Let's say they want to take six units or nine units and they make 18 bucks an hour.

So they're too poor to pay all of the time for this extra to go take more units, and they don't necessarily get the free because they're not full time. So they're kind of in this quandary. So this enables us to reach the population who doesn't have access to free community college who were in the early education workforce, and ask for your aye vote today. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair, Committee. Stephanie Goldman, on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, the official voice of the 1.8 million California community college students. As many of you know, California community colleges are the largest provider of workforce training in the world and the primary educator of child care providers in California. While California Promise or the BOG Waiver does waive tuition for qualifying students based on income and other factors, many child care providers don't actually qualify for that or for other professional development grants.

So we have kind of this space where we'd like to see more of our child care providers actually going back to college. Supporting child care programs and incentivizing students to pursue or further this career path is a priority for the Student Senate. California is facing a shortage of child care professionals, and I can speak to that personally. It's incredibly difficult to find child care, making it difficult for student parents to attend college. College educated child care professionals tend to make a higher income than those who don't get further in their education.

And AB 1245's community college tuition waiver, which would apply to all active child care professionals at enrollment, regardless of income level, would help alleviate this shortage. We appreciate your continued support of our community college students and would request an aye vote.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Thank you so much, Assembly Member McCarthy, for bringing this important measure forward to continue to improve access to quality child care and to expand educational opportunities for our child care workers.

This is an important measure, and as the state continues to look at additional opportunities for our child care workers as a prudent step in securing workforce pipeline for our child care workers, and look forward to supporting this bill today. Would you like to close?

I'll let that be my close. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member McCarty, and with that, we'll take a vote when we have established a quorum. Thank you so much. Next up is Assembly Member Chris Holden with--presenting Item Number Four: Assembly Bill 368.

Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee for this opportunity to present Assembly Bill 368. This bill would require the governing board of a community college district participating in the College and Career Access Pathways or CCAP partnership, to enroll high school pupils in any course that is part of the CCAP partnership offered at a community college campus and will expressly authorize courses to be offered at the community college campus or the participating high school campus.

AB 368 would also require community college district to assign priority enrollment and course registration to students seeking to enroll in a community college course required for the student CCAP partnership program, while also exempting CCAP students from specified fee requirements. It has come to my attention that there could be some unintended consequences of the priority placement language in this bill. Specifically, it is the notion that giving a guaranteed slot for a high school student could potentially displace college students from enrollment.

While I understand the concern, there is no data to my knowledge that indicates community college students have been displaced by CCAP students in the past. However, should the Committee allow this bill to move forward, and there is evidence of past illustrations of this, I will commit to working with all stakeholders to find an adequate solution.

In closing, I would simply say that for high school students, access to community college Career Technical Education or degree transfer credit can make a difference in their endeavor to support themselves, their families, and attain the California Dream. Now it is time to act because AB 368 is a win for our students, our schools, and our communities. With me to testify are Helen Torres from HOPE, and Melissa from the Education Trust West. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mike Fong and Higher Education Committee Members and dear friends. My name is Helen Iris Torres, CEO and Executive Director of HOPE, Hispanas Organized for Political Equality. HOPE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization committed to ensuring political and economic parity for Latinas through leadership, advocacy, and education to benefit all communities and the status of women. HOPE is proud to be a cosponsor of AB 368 and is grateful to the work with the dual enrollment champion, Assembly Member Holden, on this vital topic.

AB 368 seeks to define students of underrepresented in higher education and statue, ensure high school students enroll in community colleges without paying fees, and ensure students can enroll in any course that is part of CCAP partnerships offered at the community college campuses, while also collecting the necessary data for annual reporting. CCAP partnerships represent a streamlined pathway for students to engage with college courses. This program yields public savings by reducing the time it takes to earn a college degree and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of higher education.

Ample research has demonstrated enabling high school students to take college level courses is a proven mechanism for improving education attainment. However, Latino and Black students are disproportionately underrepresented in these programs. This bill aims to ensure that students from groups who have been historically underserved, such as students of color and first-generation students, do not have a fiscal or access barriers to participating in the program.

HOPE is thankful for the inclusion of data reporting to ensure that as this program moves along, we have accurate and timely data on students who are participating so that we can ensure that CCAP partnerships remain accessible to the students we intend to target. Lastly, we'd like to highlight that in addition to the academic benefits, K-12 and community colleges also benefit from dual enrollment.

As a result, community colleges can strengthen relationships with their future student participate population, and high schools can increase the availability of advanced academic courses without additional fiscal constraints. For these reasons, HOPE respectfully asks for your aye vote today. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members of the Assembly Higher Education Committee. My name is Melissa Bardo, Associate Director of Policy and Government Relations for the Education Trust West.

Ed Trust West is proud to cosponsor Assembly Bill 368, and we would like to thank Assembly Member Holden for being a long-standing champion of dual enrollment and working tirelessly to improve access for underrepresented students. Dual enrollment, which allows high school students to take college courses for credit, has the potential to be a powerful lever for the success of California's high school and postsecondary students.

College and Career Access Pathways or CCAP, in particular, aims to provide early exposure to college courses for students who may not be college bound or who were underrepresented in higher education. CCAP provides a seamless pathway from high school to community college, which sets students on a trajectory to both attend and be successful in college.

Despite the major disruption the pandemic has caused for students, education leaders have the opportunity to reimagine how strategies like dual enrollment can transform our systems and students' lives. Our landmark report, JumpStart, which analyzes dual enrollment data at California's community colleges, found that many LEAs and community colleges are not yet equitably serving Black, Native, and Latinx students through dual enrollment, and we at Ed Trust West remain committed to increasing dual enrollment access and participation for these students.

Last year, we saw a historic 200,000,000 dollar investment in dual enrollment expansion, but more work remained to ensure dual enrollment and CCAP partnerships specifically are equitably serving underrepresented students. Eliminating outdated barriers and streamlining access to dual enrollment is an important first step towards improving access. AB 368 would make several technical and clarifying changes to the CCAP program that will ensure students have the opportunity to pursue college level coursework, either at their high school or local community college. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? Actually, before we do that, I'm going to establish quorum. Roll call, please.

[Roll Call].

Thank you so much. And now witnesses in support, please.

Hi. Carol Gonzalez with Long Beach Community College District, in support.

Chair and Members, Austin Webster, on behalf of the California Community Colleges Association for Occupational Education, in support.

Stephanie Goldman, on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, in support.

Hi. Valerie Johnson with the Campaign for College Opportunity, in support.

Mr. Chairman and Members, Duncan Mc Fetridge, representing 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? We have a motion by Assembly Member Low; second by Assembly Member Arambula. This bill is amazing, and so, author, would you like to close?

Well, thank you for your leadership and efforts on dual enrollment programs and for being a champion with AB 288. I remember when I was a community college trustee. With your leadership there, we were able to implement that in LACC and known many community colleges throughout the state. So now when we look at more data-informed decisions, this is looking at the future and really appreciate your leadership. Look forward to supporting this bill today. Would you like to close with something more?

Thank you. I appreciate that and, you know, it takes all of us working together on initiatives like this and certainly just paying attention to the boots on the ground, the administrators, the teachers, parents who over the years talked about the expansion of opportunities to get young people on a path to college, and this is a program that really took collaboration from the community college level as well as the school districts.

And by having these CCAP agreements, it really is tailored for communities to make it fit for whether you're in Central Valley, Northern California, Southern California; you can fit it to where your school district needs are, where the young people needs are, and at the end of the day, it is really hopefully doing what it's intended to do, and that's knocking down barriers for young people, not just in terms of physical, but in their minds, so they can see themselves as college graduates and doing this work. And so thank you for all of your work. Thank you for this Committee and your tireless leadership and education initiatives, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.

[Roll Call].

Thank you so much, colleagues. That's a 7-0. We'll keep the roll open. Thank you. The motion is out. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Assembly Villapudua with item number five on Assembly build 3716. Thank you. Welcome. The floor is yours.

Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members. First, I would like to start by thanking you and staff and working with my office to accept all the Committee amendments. AB376 extends the Cal grant C eligibility to students enrolling in entry level driving training program. Currently, the average cost of a driver training program is about 2500. But since this program are typically less than four months in length, they do not qualify for Cal grant C awards. The Bill seeks to address the trucker driver shortage impacting the nation's supply chain by extending the financial aid in the form of a Cal Grant C to eligible students enroll at an entry level driving training program.

With me today to testify and answer any questions is Bernice Creager, Director of the California Truckers Association, and I'm not sure if we have Chris here. No, Chris is not here. Okay. Welcome.

Thank you. Chair and Members Bernice Jimenez Creager or Carringer with the California Trucking Association, we are proud to sponsor AB 376 and thank the Assembly Member for his leadership on this issue. For the past five years, driver shortage has been ranked as a top issue affecting the trucking industry, even as companies struggle to recruit and retain qualified drivers, despite even historic pay increases. According to the American Trucking Associations, the trucking industry is short roughly 78,000 drivers, a number that is expected to surpass 160,000 by 2030.

As the Member said, AB 376 seeks to address the truck driver shortage by expanding Cal Grant C to additional students. As he indicated, this is going to provide additional financial aid in the Fund of Cal Grant C to Low and middle income students and remove an access of barrier of access into these training programs. As he said, the issue is in its current form. Cal grant seas are not offered for vocational programs of less than four months.

So we're removing this arbitrary provision for this particular Bill. AB 376 extends the eligibility to driver training programs that again typically last around eight weeks. AB 376 will ensure that more financial aid funds get into the hands of Low and middle income Californians, providing them an entry into well paid middle class jobs while also serving a critical workforce need that will help communities throughout the state. So again, we thank the Member. We thank you folks, and we respectfully ask for an aye vote.

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

Good afternoon. Brenda Bass on behalf of California Chamber of Commerce, in support.

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Committee Members, any questions or comments? Moved by a similar Evan Lowe, seconded by Mr. Wallace. Any further comments? Author. Would you like to close? Yeah. First, I just want to thank Mr. Craeger for being here today. I really appreciate this. That's what happens when you get brand new pair of glasses that are too strong, right? I really like this field a lot.

I mean, next time you guys drive like I five or 99, whatever freeway, just look at a truck and look what it's advertising. I tell a lot of folks that they're really trying to figure out their pathway in life. Day one that I've gotten here, I talk about vocational, and most people think about the trucking industry, that, hey, it's long haul. I got to go to Missouri or Missouri or whatever, right? You could be home every day. And these are great paying jobs.

In my district alone, a class A license, you're making about 80,000 start off. These are great paying jobs. And there's a lot of folks trying to figure out in life where to go. And I've been around like Southern California, Central Valley, the Bay Area. It is a most needed position, a most needed job. Literally in 30 days, you can be driving this $250,000 rig.

And I started a side story is that I started a pilot project before I got here, and there were folks that were coming out of prison, three of them now homeowners. Okay? That was like five years ago. Now they're homeowners. And I stand behind this industry. And thank you guys for listening to me. And I respectfully ask for an Ivo. Thank you so much. Similar viewput for bringing this important measure forward.

We know that there's very much a trucker workforce shortage, and so this important Bill will help look at additional career ct opportunities for truck driving opportunities. Really appreciate the opportunity that you're bringing before us today to really build our skilled and trained workforce here. So with that, I recommend look forward to supporting this measure today. Roll call, please.

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

Thank you so much, colleagues. The motion has out seven votes right now. We'll keep the role open for any additional Members. I'd like to sign on. Thank you. We've gone through our author sign-in letter at the moment. So, summer Addis, would you like to present your bills, please? Welcome. We're going to do it in file order. So first one up we'll have by Assembly Addis AB 358. Item number three. I'm sorry, it's on consent. We will do item number 11.

Assembly Bill 1123. Assembly Member Addis. Welcome.

I don't know if our witnesses are here. We have two witnesses.

Okay. Welcome.

Thank you. Well, thank you, Chair and Members. Thank you, Committee staff, as well as my own staff, who's worked very hard on this. Today, I'm here to ask for your Aye vote on AB 1123, which I consider to be an incredibly important Bill that would require the California State University system, or CSU system, to grant employees a leave of absence with pay for one semester of an academic year following the birth of a child or the adoption or foster care of the child of the employee.

And this is important because it does take the human body 40 weeks to birth a full-term baby. And research shows that paid parental leave policies significantly improve both maternal physical and mental health by allowing parents time to recover from childbirth, as well as adjust to new caregiving responsibilities. About half of childbearing parents report experiencing pain within the first two months following childbirth, and many experience more serious, potentially life-threatening postpartum complications.

Paid parental leave, which enables workers to take time away from work to recover from childbirth and care for a new baby, is associated with decreased low birth weight births and decreased infant mortality, as well as increased breastfeeding and improved maternal mental health. According to the National Partnership for Women and Families, providing 12 weeks of paid parental leave on a national scale would lead to 600 fewer infant deaths per year. And paid leave benefits employers because it improves retention, productivity, and labor force participation.

So trying to find the right moment to start a family is an unnecessary but very common struggle for Californians. It's especially challenging for faculty and staff at our institutions of higher education. Right now, CSU's parental policy, parental leave policy, is 30 working days, and that definitely needs to be updated to reflect today's realities which face the system's 29,000 coach, counseling, librarian, and instructional faculty who are starting or expanding their families.

Typically, these kinds of issues are addressed via the collective bargaining agreements, and so we want to be clear about that. As stipulated by California's Higher Education Employee Employer Relations Act. However, and this is the important piece, despite many years of good faith negotiations, there have been no changes to the existing parental leave policy at CSU. So even after years, there has not been an increase to paid parental leave even to match comparable institutions.

We feel, I feel definitely, that this policy is inadequate, inequitable, and uncompetitive for today's workplace. It doesn't allow enough time for parent-child bonding, and it's definitely not enough time for the body to heal following childbirth. So for faculty and staff specifically, there's the additional burden of adjusting schedules to compensate for time off, which adds to the stress that soon-to-be parents are already facing or new parents already face. And this Bill can address that.

So AB 1123 creates fair working conditions for employees who are parents rather than penalizing them for their decisions to start a family. It grants employees a leave of absence with pay for one semester of an academic year, or the equivalent duration in a one-year period following the birth of the child. So we want to remind the Committee of the overwhelming challenges that parents already face and that this can be an antidote to some of those challenges.

California is a pro-choice state that supports families, and we want to begin to support their choice by granting the fundamental right to paid parental leave. And I've got two witnesses with me here today. Dr. Anne Luna-Gordinier. I hope I said that right. Associate Professor of Sociology at Sacramento State University, and then Dr. Frances Mercer, Associate Professor of Biology from Cal Poly Pomona.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members, my name is Anne Luna-Gordinier. I'm an associate Professor at Sacramento State, and I'm speaking in strong support of AB 1123, and I'd really like to thank Assembly Member Addis for introducing this Bill. Providing for adequate paid parental leave with AB 1123 will create greater equity for birthing and caregiving faculty. This is a social justice issue which affects birthing parents and particularly members of Black, Indigenous, and communities of color. In most cases, it is the birthing parent who takes parental leave.

As the current policy doesn't cover a whole semester, faculty are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They must either get coverage for a portion of their classes during their leave, which could disrupt their class and negatively impact their course evaluations, or the alternative is to take off the semester and use accrued sick leave and likely have to go without pay for a part of the semester. This is absolutely an issue of fairness.

When faculty retire, their accrued sick leave gets counted as days of service and raises the final pay scale upon retirement. When parents use paid sick leave to help cover a semester of parental leave, they're lowering their retirement pay. When I decided to have my baby, I had been stressing about it since I found out about our leave policy. I was basically trying to time my delivery so as to maximize my time off to spend with my baby.

I had undergone acupuncture treatment for half a year when I experienced a miscarriage in the middle of the semester. I didn't take off any time afterward. At that point, my doctor suggested I might need to take medical leave or even look for a new job if I wanted to have a baby. I continued with the treatments and five months later, during the shelter-in-place order, I was able to sustain a pregnancy.

I was still very stressed because there was no way I could take the semester off without having to go without pay. Thankfully, Emirates's birth in December of 2020 didn't require any medical intervention. Unfortunately, the timing of the birth was such that I wasn't able to use paid sick leave to cover the entire spring semester. There were also major challenges for our family. Once Emirates was born, Emmy had poor oxygen uptake and a floppy esophagus, which caused reflux.

Emmy dropped a ton of weight, which left me in a panic about their weight thereafter. My partner had to return to work a week later after I gave birth because otherwise I wouldn't be able to afford taking off the semester. That left me alone at home struggling with feeding our newborn because not only could they not drink much at each feeding, but also I couldn't produce enough milk.

The lactation consultants and doctors told me repeatedly that if I wanted to produce more milk, I needed to reduce my stress, get more sleep, and simultaneously pump around the clock. It felt like an insurmountable challenge. Those first three months were absolutely the hardest time of my life. I was depressed, isolated, and facing economic hardship. I was plagued by racing thoughts about how we could make ends meet.

I was never able to produce enough milk, but if I had been provided adequate paid leave, this would have made it a much less anxious time for our family. Who knows how that would have affected our feeding journey? And I don't want anyone else at the CSU to ever have to make the choices I had to make. And that's why I'm asking you to strongly support 1123 and respectfully request your Aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members, and thank you, Assembly Member Addis, for your support. I'm Frances Mercer. I'm an Associate Professor of Biology at Cal Poly Pomona, where I teach and do biomedical research with students. A career at the CSU pays less than at other universities, but I chose it because of our diverse working-class student body and the CSU values of equity and social mobility. I'm committed to our students and this mission.

However, I'm in my late 30s and want children, and I've learned in the past few years about how inadequate CSU's parental leave policy is. Particularly for women at my age, 30 days is simply not enough to recover from delivery or, alternatively, not enough time to establish attachment parenting with an adopted child. To take longer leave, our current policy requires it to be unpaid.

I'm at a loss for how to plan my family while affording the mortgage payment that my partner and I pay on the small house that we just bought in California. So I was really disappointed that my union's demand to correct our parental leave policy was rejected by the CSU management in our last round of bargaining. Instead, our new contract established a working group between our union and the CSU management to discuss parental support at CSU and other comparator institutions and come up with some recommendations.

I eagerly joined this working group and was excited about it, but I've become disillusioned in the process and the group did not come to a consensus. I have collectively spent 22 hours in these meetings, and rather than a good faith effort to come up with recommendations, this is what I have encountered.

On the Chancellor's Office side, the meetings are led by a corporate lawyer and a labor negotiator who use union-busting tactics like stalling, obfuscating, trying to pit different groups against one another, scapegoating, coming to meetings unprepared, and taking up large chunks of the meeting by reading from documents that could have been sent to the Committee in advance.

But through this working group, I've also learned that, by their own admission, the Chancellor's Office does not have accurate data on usage of our parental leave benefit, and therefore their cost calculation for expanding the benefit is off by approximately twofold. I've also learned that our parental leave benefit is the second shortest in duration, by a substantial margin of any of the comparator institutions. In fact, graduate students at UC currently have longer paid parental leave than faculty do at the CSU.

So despite the unpaid time and effort that my colleagues and I spent in this working group, it did not come to a consensus. So I ask for your support of our parental leave Bill, AB 1123, which would address this urgent issue legislatively. I know that it's essential to attract and retain women faculty who are a majority of birthing parents, and also for us queer faculty who often choose adoption.

Giving all faculty the time they need to establish their families without undue stress is good for faculty, good for students at the CSU who deserve course continuity, and also look to us as role models for balancing work and family, and good for maternal and child health in California. In short, if we want to tout California values, the state's largest public education system needs to be in line with them. Thank you for your support and time, and I'd like to ask for your Aye vote on AB 1123.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room? I'm sorry, we have a motion by Dr. Arambula. Do we have a second? Second by Assembly Member Evan Low. Thank you. Witnesses in support, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Ron Rapp, Leg. Director for the California Faculty Association. We're proud sponsors of AB 1123 and respectfully request your Aye vote. Thank you.

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

Kimberly Rosenberger with SEIU, in support.

Alissa Yum, on behalf of the California State University Employees Union, in strong support. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Committee Members. I am in a difficult position here in the sense that I'm opposing this Bill on behalf of the CSU, but I also work with the Assembly Member on another Bill that she's sponsoring, so hopefully you'll let me sit next to you tomorrow. We agree with the author's intent on this Bill. Parental leave is important.

In fact, the CSU does not have a concern with the need to address parental leave in our health benefits policies, and we also recognize the importance that the paid parental leave does provide for our employees. As noted, the CSU currently provides parental leave for employees for up to six weeks. Employees are eligible for this fully paid parental leave benefit on the first day of employment.

Unlike the benefit the CSU provides, many of the comparative institutions that were referenced earlier do require that their employees have worked a minimum of 1250 hours before they become eligible, and or the employee must contribute to a disability insurance program like SDI. Again, the CSU employees receive this benefit on day one and at no cost to themselves. We believe that the CSU provides a very competitive benefit package to our employees, including recognizing the need and the value of paid parental leave.

As the Bill is currently proposed, it would require the CSU to provide up to one semester or effectively 16 weeks of paid parental leave, thus increasing the CSU benefit by an additional 10 weeks without the corresponding resources to pay for such a benefit. This increase would have a significant fiscal effect that would cost the CSU approximately $21 million annually based on the number of employees who have historically received this benefit at this current time.

The fiscal effect that this will have on the CSU should be negotiated through the collective bargaining process. It is for this reason that the CSU is opposed. The collective bargaining process allows for the CSU and our labor-represented employee groups to negotiate the changes to existing benefit levels and identify ways to pay for these changes.

This issue was addressed last year in our faculty labor partner CFA, and an MOU was agreed upon that called for the establishment of the parental support working group that was referenced earlier. That working group is still concluding their work and the finishing touches to the report are being worked out between the parties. The findings from the report can be used as the basis for proposals during this summer's CBA negotiations.

It's our preference that the system be allowed to complete the work that we've already initiated with CFA and allow the CSU and our employee groups to use the collective bargaining process to identify the resources necessary to pay for the increased cost impact. It's for these reasons the CSU respectfully asked for a No vote on AB 1123.

With me today is Stephanie Gusha, Senior Director of Collective Bargaining for the CSU Chancellor's Office, and she is available to answer any technical questions about our collective bargaining process or the working group. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments? Mr. Vice Chair.

Thank you so much. Mr. Chair. I have a question for the CSU. So, basically, right now, the CSU, you already have a benefit to pay for up to six weeks. Am I correct?

That is correct.

All right. Is there any like negotiation that increase more day to be paid in the process?

Would you like to answer that?

Is there room for negotiation?

Yeah.

Everything is subject to negotiation. It would depend on identifying resources. So we have contract reopeners for this summer, and this is one of the articles in which we are allowed to negotiate over.

Okay. So basically, there is a room for negotiation, probably in the next few months.

It is something we can discuss during negotiation. Yes.

Okay. I really appreciate that. Thank you.

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

I just would add that a substantial number of new mothers experience the baby blues. About one in five have postpartum depression. And so this is also addressing a piece of a mental health issue that can go along with pregnancy, but that by allowing leave, would support that. And with that information, I'll ask for your Aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And thank you for bringing this Bill forward. We know the parental leave is very important, and I really appreciate everyone's comments. With that, roll call, please.

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

Thank you so much. With that, we will hold the roll. We'll place this Bill on call. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next up is item number. I'm sorry, item number two, authored by Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer on Assembly Bill 263. Welcome.

Thank you. Mr. Chair Members. I present AB 263, which establishes a workgroup of higher education representatives, faculty, staff and students to develop a program to provide free college to California residents. This work group will focus on determining which campuses would best fit the developed model, program model, identify if any particular students would benefit from the program, and create a model that will work in tandem with existing financial programs, such as the Cal Grant.

Over 50 years ago, the higher education in California was perceived as a public good. Students were not charged tuition because the state sought to ensure that there were as few barriers as possible to a more educated California society. During that time and even before that, Governor Jerry Brown's father, Pat Brown made education affordable. During those '60s and '70s, we had the most educated workforce in the world. People came from all over the country to work here in California.

As a result of that, we went from an 8th largest economy down to the fourth largest economy because we had a strong educated workforce of higher education.

But most important, technology and aerospace, and other technologies that further not only the country, California, but the country. The state has moved, unfortunately in an entirely different direction considering CSU tuition and fees have risen 1360% and UC tuition and fees have increased 555% since 1979 when I graduated. During my first year as an undergraduate student, tuition was 2976 and in those later earlier time, back in the '60s UCLA was $250 a quarter.

This generation should not pay 19 times more than I was required for a comparable education. In spite of past investments, existing financial aid does not cover all students and many remain unable to afford attendance at the state's public universities. In recent years, a CSU student with low income would have to work 20 to 55 hours a week to cover the net cost of their education. College students often have to choose between studying or working to afford tuition and living expenses.

California should be in the business of student success and not student stress. Expanding access to higher education is a mutual beneficial investment for California. A bachelor's degree increases a person's earning potential by 65%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Statistics, which increases the overall tax contributions, tax contributions to the state in the long term. More personally, by providing free college to California students, we signal to communities like mine in South Los Angeles that income does not determine whether students deserve access to higher education.

Thank you Mr. Chair and Members, and respectfully ask for your Aye vote.

We have a motion by Assembly Member Low, seconded by Assembly Member Weber. Thank you so much. Do we have any witnesses in support in the hearing room? Do we have any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there any tweeners in the hearing room? Committee Members, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Thank you Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer, for bringing the support measure forward and really looking at this opportunity around financial aid opportunities here in this pilot program. Really appreciate that.

And in terms of Committee analysis, thank you for work with our Committee as well and our colleagues, especially around items in pages five to seven of the Committee analysis. With that, seeing no further comments. Roll call, please. The motion is do pass to Appropriations Committee.

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

The motion is vote count is seven to one is out and we're going to keep the roll open for any Members I'd like to add on. Thank you so much. Assembly Member Weber would like to present Assembly Bill 760 on behalf of Assembly Member Wilson. Welcome Assembly Member Weber.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I am happy to be presenting AB 760 on behalf of Assembly Member Wilson which would ensure students are afforded the rights and protections provided to them under the Equity and Higher Education Act of 2017.

Thank you. This Bill would.

Motion and a second. Thank you.

Specifically, allow students and faculty attending California State University or University of California to designate their firm name while at the institution per the individual's request. Currently, some colleges do not provide an option for transgender and non-binary students, faculty, and staff whose chosen name is different from their legal name to have their chosen name reflected on their school records.

By allowing internal records such as class rosters or campus identification cards to reflect an individual's affirmed name, the CSU and UC system can eliminate systemic dead naming of transgender and non-binary individuals. AB 760 will help to support current students, staff, or faculty members who wish to use an affirmed name and gender identification, an important step towards fostering a campus environment that is inclusive and supportive. With me here to testify, I have Craig Pulsipher, Legislative Director for Equality California.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Craig Pulsipher, on behalf of Equality California, very proud to support AB 760 as it builds on California's long history of working to create a safe and supportive environment for LGBTQ students, especially trans and non-binary students. I think it's important to emphasize that using someone's preferred name and gender is not simply a matter of comfort or preference, but also about safety and privacy.

Being dead named by incorrect student records can cause trans students to be outed against their will and could result in harassment, discrimination, and even violence. According to a survey of roughly 3,500 trans people in California, only 15% reported that all of their IDs had the name and gender they preferred, and a third of respondents who had shown an ID with a name and gender that did not match their gender presentation had been harassed, denied benefits, or even assaulted.

Just last year, Equality California was proud to co-sponsor AB 2315 with Assembly Member Arambula, which required community college campuses to update their system so that students and faculty could update their records with a preferred name and gender. AB 760 is a logical next step, seeking to ensure that both CSU and UC campuses also have this option.

I also just want to highlight that AB 760 stands in stark contrast to the now over 500 anti-LGBTQ bills that have been introduced across the country this year alone, the majority of which target trans and non-binary people. So very grateful to Assembly Member Wilson for bringing this Bill forward and seeking to enact policy that will create a safe and supportive environment for trans students. And thank you very much to Assembly Member Weber as well. I respectfully urge your Aye vote.

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

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

Afternoon, Chair and Members James Michael Agpaulo with the American Federation of State County Municipal Employees, AFSCME, in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Genesis Gonzalez, on behalf of Lieutenant Governor. Eleni Kunalakis, in support. Thank you.

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? Assembly Member Addis.

I want to thank Assembly Member Wilson for bringing this forward, Assembly Member Weber for presenting it, and your witness for being here and very much appreciate this and would love to co-author if Assemblymember Wilson is accepting co-authors and thank you for mentioning the hundreds of bills across the nation and that this again, is an antidote what's happening in our nation and from some Members in our own State Legislature.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Any further questions or comments? And thank you, Assembly Member Weber, for presenting this important Bill on behalf of Assembly Member Wilson. And we know that this legislation was simply extended to students in the CSU and UC system, and this process is covered in statute with our community college system as well. So I really appreciate this legislation, and with that, I'm proud to support this Bill today.

And the motion before us is to do pass to the Appropriations Committee. Seeing no further questions or comments. Roll call, please. I'm sorry, Assembly Weber, would you like to close, please?

Yes. On behalf of Assembly Member Wilson, she would like to give a special thank you to Assembly Member Arambula for highlighting this issue last year through AB 2315 which required all community colleges to make this option available. And now I respectfully ask for your Aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Assembly Member Weber. With that, roll call, please.

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

Right now, the vote count is six Ayes and two not voting. And so we're going to keep this Bill will be on call for any additional Members that would like to add on. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And, Dr. Weber, I believe you have a bill up as well. Since you're here, would you like to present at the desk Assembly Bill 1138, item number 12. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I want to thank the chair and committee for the conversation, and we'll be accepting the committee amendments. I'm here to present AB 1138, which would require higher education institutions to contract with local rape crisis centers or to provide students confidential transportation to and from local safe or SART exam centers to administer the safe kit. In the event of a sexual assault, the first form of care a patient typically receives is medical care.

Whenever possible, the patient should receive care from a licensed sexual assault examiner at a rape crisis center, hospital, or clinic. There, they can perform a forensic exam, address any physical injuries, perform testing for pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, and provide preventative care, such as emergency contraceptive pills. However, sometimes, these locations can be miles from the campus. For victims that may not have access to safe or reliable transportation, that distance can be insurmountable.

This bill would allow for students who have been victims of sexual assault to get the support and health care they need without having to worry about how they would get there. AB 1138, continuation of California's efforts to remove barriers to reporting sexual assault and increase access to resources to help survivors achieve justice. With me to speak today in support of 1138 is Kimberly Woo with GENup.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Kim. I'm currently the Director of GENup Collegiate. Today, I'll be speaking on behalf of Kate Rogers, who's currently studying at UCLA and couldn't make the trip up. So imagine I'm speaking as if I'm Kate. Well, good afternoon. My name is Kate Rogers. I'm currently a sophomore at UCLA, and I serve as a Collegiate Director of Policy for Generation Up. GENup is a student-led advocacy organization focused on advancing educational equity through the legislative process.

As the writer and principal sponsor of AB 1138, Jennifer is proud to advocate for student survivors of sexual assault and expand access to essential medical care and reporting resources. Sexual assault is a paralyzing experience. Simply getting out of bed can be difficult, and navigating resources without support can feel impossible. AB 1138 aims to alleviate some of the burden on student survivors and provide pathways to care in the aftermath of an assault. When I moved to college, my campus became my home.

Just as the excitement of new life became a reality, so did sexual violence. Beneath the friendships and personal growth I have found in college, there's a dark undercurrent, a constant threat. It is exhausting to never feel safe in your own home, and I wish I could say that my experience is unique, but I've met far too many students that share in my emotional distress. On college campuses, sexual violence is an invisible yet ever-present issue.

As undergraduates, 26% of female students and 7% of male students experience assault, but only one in five actually receive support from a victim services agency, and directly after an assault, it is crucial that survivors receive forensic care as soon as possible. Unfortunately, however, many college campuses do not directly connect students with resources and safe kit administrators, which thus places the responsibility of coordinated care on survivors in crisis when they are already experiencing heavy emotions of trauma and distress.

With the average distance to a SAFE, which stands for sexual assault forensic evidence safekit exam location being 10.2 miles for UCS and CSUs, as well as 22.7 miles for community colleges, services are often not accessible through public transportation at all, as many students do not have access to their own safe personal vehicles. Survivors are forced to sacrifice their own safety and thus limit their reporting options due to the inaccessibility of services.

AB 1138 will require that California colleges and universities provide their students with free, safe, and anonymous transportation to and from forensics exams. With this legislation, we can reduce the barriers to forensic exams and ensure that students have access to the medical care they need to succeed in both physical and emotional recovery. Representing students across the state, we at GENup urge you to stand with survivors of sexual assault and vote yes on AB 1138. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon. Alex Graves with the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities. We represent over 80 private, nonprofit colleges throughout the state fully support the goals and intentions of the bill. I've had a couple of productive conversations with the author's office and just really appreciate the committee analysis and committee amendments that ensure that we are improving access to these services in a manner that still recognizes some flexibility for different types of institutions and how they make those arrangements.

And as the bill moves forward, just really look forward to continuing conversations around remaining concerns, just around potential liability for institutions. When you have campus medical staff potentially providing this transportation off hours. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, colleagues. Are there any questions or comments? Assemblymember Addis.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember Weber, and thank you to your witness for coming. Super important issue. And if you're accepting co-authors, I would like to co-author this bill as well.

Thank you, colleagues. Any further questions or comments? Seeing none. Member Weber, would you like to close? Thank you so much for bringing this important measure forward. And we know this is critical to really ensuring the success of our students and for survivors of sexual assault. And so thank you for working with all our different segments of higher education on this very important issue. Thank you.

I'd like to thank the committee for working with my staff and as a former provider that did forensic exams in Texas, I really want to thank GENup for bringing this bill forward. It is extremely important that people who have been sexually assaulted get timely and accurate medical care by people who are trained. So thank you so much for doing this and for coming. And with that, I just respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And with that, the motion before us is do pass, as amended, to the Appropriations Committee. Roll call, please.

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

[Roll Call]

The vote count is 8-0. The measure is out, and we'll keep the roll open for additional authors to add on. Thank you. I mean, Members, to add on. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. At this time, we'll take up the consent calendar. We have four. I'm sorry. Okay, we can go to... Okay. All right. Item number eight. Assembly Sanchez, welcome. Assembly Bill 746. Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I very much appreciate the work of our Committee and caucus staff on this Bill. I'd also like to mention that I'm fully committed to continue working on this Bill with stakeholders and with the Committee staff to remove any concerns. AB 746 would help our higher education institutions fully utilize the funding allocated for the learning alignment employment program LAEP, which was intended to expand student access to meaningful career development programs in 2021 to 2022.

Budget act the Learning Alignment Employment program was established with an investment of 500 million over two years. The LAEP investment was meant to Fund career development for UC, CSU and CCC students. However, as currently drafted, the eligibility requirements for LAEP are too strict, resulting in too few students qualifying and therefore applying for the program. The program is also unnecessarily restrictive as it limits the type of career development and employment opportunities students can access.

AB 746 seeks to resolve these issues by expanding eligibility for the program while still preserving the priority requirements for the underrepresented students as defined by the California Student Aid Commission. The Bill also expands the definition of an improved employment opportunities to include more jobs on college campuses. These changes will ensure more Low income students are able to participate in this program that will give them real world knowledge and valuable job skills.

The LAEP is an investment in our students that we cannot afford to waste. AB 746 helps to preserve this investment by making the program work better for our public higher ed institutions.

We have a motion a second. Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in support in the hearing room? Are there any witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there any tweeners in the hearing room?

Chair and Members Austin Webster, on behalf of the California Community Colleges Association for Occupational Education, representing the career, technical education and workforce staff throughout the community college system. We don't have a formal position yet, but we are very supportive of the learning aligned employment program and appreciate the author's work on this matter.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Maggie White with the California State University. We don't yet have a position on the Bill, but we are very excited to see an expansion of opportunities for students in all majors. We understand how important major related employment is for our students prior to graduation. Thank you for your work on this.

Thank you, colleagues. Any questions or comments? Thank you so much. To summer Sanchez to bring this important measure forward and looking at expanded opportunities for students to get learning opportunities and employment opportunities on campuses. And thank you for working Committee staff on this measure going forward as well. It's a very important measure, providing opportunities for students. With that, would you like to close?

I would. I respectfully ask for an aye vote on this measure.

Thank you so much. We have a motion and second. And the motion before us is do passed to the Appropriations Committee. Roll call, please.

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

The motion is out 10 to zero, and we'll keep the roll open for any Members that like to add on. Thank you so much. All right, we have a motion on the consent calendar by Dr. Ambless, seconded by Vice Chair Ta. Any questions or comments on the consent calendar? Seeing none. Roll call. I'm sorry. I'll read the bills out. We have four bills on consent. They are as follows. Thank you. File number three, AB358 authored by a summer Addis.

File number 15, AB 1342, authored by Assembly Member Megan Dahle. File item number 16, AB 1370, authored by our Vice Chair Tri Ta. File item number 17, AB 1745, authored by Assembly Member Esmeralda Soria. With that, colleagues, do we have any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. Consent calendars out, 10 to zero, and we'll keep the roll open for any Members that I like to add on. Thank you so much, colleagues at this time. Now we'll go through the items for anybody who like to add on. And there was a couple few items that we didn't get a chance to vote on earlier. So we'll do the items I didn't get a chance to vote earlier. And then opportunities to add on. First one is Assembly Member Ramos' bill. File item number one, AB 226 moved by Mr. Ta. Do we have 2nd, 2nd by Dr. Arambula. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

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

The motion is out, 10 to zero. We'll keep the item open for any members that'd like to add on. Thank you so much. Next up is item number six, authored by Assembly Member Buffy Wicks, AB 472. And the motion. I'm sorry, do we have a motion to second on this? Moved by Assemblymember Ortega. Second by Assembly Member Addis. Any questions or comments, colleagues. Seeing none, the motion before us is due, passed to the Appropriations Committee. Roll call, please.

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

The vote count is eight ayes, one no, and one not voting. The motion is out, and we'll keep the roll open for any members that'd like to add on. Thank you, colleagues. Next up is item number seven, authored by Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, AB 680. Do we have a motion to second on this? Moved by Dr. Arambula, seconded by Assembly Member Addis. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

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

The motion is out eight to one with two not voting, and we'll keep the roll open for any members that'd like to add on. Thank you so much. Next up is item number 13, authored by Assembly Member Kevin McCarty, Assembly Bill 1245. Do we have a motion a second on AB 1245, moved by Mr. Vice Chair Tri Ta, second by a Assembly Member Addis. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

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

The motion is out, 12-0. Thank you so much, colleagues. Now we'll have any members that like to add on. We'll go through the items at this time. Thank you so much, colleagues, for a robust meeting. We'll go to item number thank you so much, and thank you so much, colleagues. Thank you. We'll go to item number two, AB 263 authored by Assembly Member Jones Sawyer. Item number two, AB263. For any members that would like to add on. Roll call, please.

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

The vote is 10 to one. It's out. Thank you so much, colleagues. Next up, we'll have item number four, authored by Assembly Member Chris Holden, Assembly Bill 368 for members to add on, roll call please.

The motion is do passed to the education Committee. [Roll call]

Thank you so much. The item is out, 12 to zero. Thank you so much, colleagues. Next up is item number five, AB 376 authored by Assembly Member Carlos Villapudua, for members to add on. Roll call, please.

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

The motion is out, 11 to zero. Thank you so much, colleagues. I'm sorry. 12 to zero. No problem. Next up is item number eight, AB 746 authored by Assembly Member Sanchez, for any members to add on roll call, please.

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

The items out, 12 to zero. Thank you so much, colleagues. The next item is item number nine, Assembly Bill 760 authored by Assembly Member Wilson. The motion is, I mean, for any members to add on roll call, please.

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

The motion is out. 10 ayes and two not voting. Thank you so much, colleagues. The next one is item number 11, Assembly Bill 1123, authored by Assembly Member Addis. Item number 11, authored by Assembly Member Addis 1123. Roll call, please.

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

Thank you so much. The motion is out. Nine ayes, two no's and one not voting. Thank you so much, colleagues. And the next up is item number 12, Assembly Bill 1138, authored by Assembly Member Weber. Roll call, please.

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

That motion is out, 12 to zero. Thank you so much, colleagues, for a robust meeting. I think we've covered. Oh, consent calendar. Yes. Let's do the consent calendar to add on for consent calendar, please. I'm sorry. Okay, we'll do the consent calendar, and then we'll do file item number one for members add on. So, consent calendar at this time for any members that'd like to add on. Roll call, please.

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

Consent calendar is out 12-0. Thank you so much, colleagues. Now we'll do item number one, Assembly Bill, Assembly Bill 226 authored by Assembly Member Ramos. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, so we just did the consent calendar. Now we're going to do item number one, Assembly Bill 226 authored by Assembly Member Ramos, please.

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

That is out 12-0. Thank you so much, colleagues. Are there any other member? And then one more item, consent calendar. We just did that already, I believe. We're going to do two more items, items number 6 and 7. We'll do item number six first. Thank you so much, colleagues. Assembly Bill 472, authored by Assembly Member Wicks. Roll call, please.

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

Thank you so much, colleagues. That is out with 10 ayes, one no and one not voting. Thank you. And I believe our final one is Assembly Bill 680, item number seven, authored by Assembly Member Blanca Rubio. Roll call, please.

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

That is nine eyes, one no and two not voting. Thank you so much, colleagues, for a robust meeting. Appreciate everyone's testimony here today and all the presentations. Have a great day. With that, our meeting is adjourned.