Senate Standing Committee on Education

The Senate Education Committee will come to order. Good morning again, everybody. The Senate continues to welcome the public in person via the teleconference service for individuals wishing to provide public comment. Today's participant number is 877-226-8216 again, that's 877-226-8216 and the access code is 621-7161 again, that's 621-7161. We are holding our Committee hearings here in the O Street building. I ask all Members of the Committee to be present in room 2100. Welcome, Senators. So we can establish our quorum and begin our hearing.

Due to the length of today's agenda, I ask the testimony of main witnesses, in support or opposition, be limited to two people per side and with two minutes per each witness, all others may add on as a metoo and simply state your name, your organization, and your position on the belt. We have 12 bills on today's agenda. Item number 10, SB 645, has been pulled by the author. One Bill is on consent. That Bill is item number 12, SB 549, by Senator Newman.

And we do not yet have a quorum. We will start the hearing as a Subcommittee. And I see we do have an author. So welcome. Senator Skinner, good to see you. This morning you'll be presenting SB two. 74. Really? Don't leave home without it. I have, too many times. And please proceed.

Thank you so much. Mr. Chair Members, I'm pleased to present SB 274. It's a policy area. The Legislature is not new to us, as we know. One of our commitments to having public schools is in order to have an opportunity for all children to thrive and to get the education that they need. And the premise is very simple. This Bill. Kids need to be in school. We have seen, in our different school districts, improvements made in how we discipline kids.

We used to have a tendency of using suspensions quite liberally. Suspensions pull a kid out of school. And, of course, those kids who might be acting in such a way that causes a suspension are often the very kids that really we need to keep in school, and that sending them the message that, okay, we're just not going to let you go to school is kind of a message to encourage failure.

And what we've seen is that kids with a lot of suspensions tend to not tend to. They have the highest dropout rates, they have the highest rate of failure in terms of success at school scores, the whole bit. So this Bill focuses on a particular form of suspensions called willful defiance. That's a very subjective, and the data shows that kids have been suspended under this category because they wore their hat.

They were wearing a hat in class and they didn't take it off or they smirked at the teacher. Look, all of us could have a bad day. So I completely appreciate a teacher could have a particularly bad day. This kid sets them off. But we have other alternatives. We don't need to kick the kid out of school. And so we currently have prohibited willful Defiance Suspensions in grades TK-5.

And we also have an in policy for grades six to eight, but that is sunsetted in 2025. This Bill would eliminate that sunset, but also extend the willful Defiance suspensions to a broader array of our classes. And I'd like to have my witnesses in support. Kimora Morley, who's a student from the black parallel school board, and Devona Robertson, who's the parent of an impacted student.

Welcome, and please proceed when ready over here in front of this plexiglass. It's weird. I know. My bad guys, but we're working on changing it. Welcome.

Yeah, very safe. Okay. Good morning, everyone. My name is Kimora Morley, and I'm a 16-year-old student in the Sacramento City Unified School District. I have seen how suspensions in the name of discipline push students out of school and negatively impact their mental health. The organization I'm a part of, black parallel school board, has been working to protect students from being suspended for Defiance because we have seen how it harms young people. Black students in particular, and usually are targeted as defiant.

Parents and students have shared that youth are being suspended for Defiance for things such as wearing a hoodie, utilizing a phone in class, or being tardy. California needs to ban suspensions for defiance because it does more harm than good. When students are suspended, there are a lot of negative impacts, such as mental health, getting behind in classes, or coming back less engaged. Last year, one of my friends was suspended for truancy. There was a Covid outbreak at school and she was staying home, protect herself.

She was suspended for truancy for two days. It made her feel like she did not matter and that the school only cared about funding. She was already behind in her classwork, but when our school suspended her, she was farther behind. And when she came back, she stated she did not want to attend school at all. If a student is struggling to come to school, the adults should try and understand what is going on with us and support the students, not punish us and push us away.

My mother works nights in the psychiatric population of UC Davis Hospital, and if there is an incident at her job sometimes she is late to get my sister and I in the morning. It can be 831 just 1 minute late and they will mark you as tardy and start antagonizing you. They will tell you do not take your education serious and make you feel like you're doing a terrible thing first thing in the morning.

Students should not be suspended for being tardy because oftentimes it's not their fault the bus is late or they can be dependent on someone else to give them a ride. Instead of suspending students for Defiance, truancy, or tardiness, schools should have a conversation with the young person and find out what is going on. The school should have someone on campus that the student trusts and can talk to, such as his favorite teacher, an aide, or just a caring adult.

When schools don't try to talk to you about what's going on, it feels like they don't care about you and are simply giving up on you. A lot of my peers are really struggling with mental health right now, and suspending students for being late, missing school, or being defiant is not going to help. It's only going to make their mental health worse. Please vote support SB 274 and keep students in school. Don't push this away. Thank you.

Thank you Ms. Morley and I will say you've done better than most in keeping your comments to two minutes. Thank you. Thank you. Most adults don't do that here, so appreciate your testimony.

Well, good morning and I hope to be one of the adults that sticks to the two minutes.

No pressure.

My name is Devona Robertson and I'm a parent from the City of San Bernardino, the Inland Empire region, and I am here in support of SB 274. So SB 274 will help keep students like Kamora and my own children in school. Succeeding increases their graduation rates. Research shows that being suspended even once in the 9th grade is associated with a dramatic increase in the likelihood of dropping out.

Black and brown students are more likely than their peers to be targeted with exclusionary discipline practices like Defiance suspensions. Black students experience nearly four times more suspensions than white students for disruption and defiance. In 2021-22 school year, black students were only 5% of California students, but 14% of the defiant suspensions. Passing SB 274 will advance racial, economic, and educational justice in California. Research suggests that disparities in discipline for students of color are due to conscious and unconscious biases.

In 21-22 school year, low-income students made up just 62% of the California student population. But 80% of students who were suspended for Defiance and disruption. School districts across the state have already shown that California can eliminate Defiance. Suspensions for all grades. Many school districts, such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Azusa, Oakland, Pasadena, and Washington unified districts have done this and seen success. And so as a mother of children in the public school system in the State of California, I have. My children have been.

My neighbors, my friends, my nieces, my nephews, community Members have been impacted by this. Just last night at 10:00 I was on the phone with a parent who was experiencing the push out of her black student. And so we implore you to be in support of this. And although I stand here not at a podium, I don't know what this is. A plexiglass. We don't either. Although I stand here as one, I promise you, I represent many throughout the State of California. Thank you for your time and thank you for your support.

Two minutes. Nicely done. So I appreciate your testimony. And next, I'd like to hear from all witnesses in the hearing room in support of the Bill, your name, your organization, your position, please.

Mr. Chairman, I'm Brian Rivas. On behalf of the Education Trust West in support.

Thank you, Mr. Rivas, welcome.

Good morning, Chair, Members. Sam Nasher with the Los Angeles County Office of Education in support.

Thank you, sir.

Good morning. My name is Jose Cruzrol. I'm representing UC Student Association, and I am in support of this Bill.

Good morning Chair, Committee Members. Blake Johnson, on behalf of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, who's a prior co-sponsor, in support.

Good morning. Adanay Mack with Children Now also in support.

Good morning. Lindsay Tornatore, on behalf of the California County Superintendents in support

Good morning. Sarah Lillis, Executive Director of Peak Plus California in support.

Good morning. Anna Ioakimedes with Los Angeles Unified School District in support.

Thank you. Good morning. Eric Morrison Smith, Executive Director of the Alliance of Boys and Men of Color, co-sponsors and strong support.

Thank you. Are there any witnesses here in the Committee hearing would like testify in opposition to the measure? Seeing none, let us now go to the teleconference line. Ms. Moderator, if you could please cue anyone on the teleconference line who'd like to testify either in support of or in opposition to SB 274. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If you are in support or opposition to SB 274 please press 10 at this time. One filed by zero. Line 25. Please go ahead. Line 25.

Yes. Deb Ross with Disability Rights California in support.

We'll go to line 24.

Good morning. Chair Newman and Members of the Committee. Patty Herrera, on behalf of the Oakland Unified School District in support.

Thank you. Line 14, you are open.

Strong support of SB 274.

We didn't get your name. If you could say your name again.

Yes. It's Erin Apte, Senior Legislative Counsel with Public Advocates.

Thank you, Ms. Apte. Next, we'll go to line 11. You are open.

Hi. Mary Carici. On behalf of the Children's Partnership in support.

Thank you. Line 22, please go ahead.

Hello. Manuel Enriquez, San Diego in strong support.

Thank you. Line 19, you are open.

Carlos Marquez. On behalf of ACLU, California Action proud co-sponsor in support.

Thank you. Please go ahead. Line seven.

Megan Wills, parent from Orange County, California, and I oppose this Bill.

Thank you. Line 29, you're open.

Yes Quanisha Coleman. On behalf of the Legal Aid Foundation in support.

Thank you. Give a final reminder. Please press 10 if you are in support or opposition. And line 13, please go ahead.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. Committee Members. Karen Martinez Chung, Staff Attorney with Public Counsel. We are proud co-sponsors and in strong support of SB 274.

Thank you. And Mr. Chair, that does exhaust our queue. All right, we're going to come back to the Committee hearing room. We do now have what appears to be a quorum. Madam Consultant, if you could please call the roll?

Newman here. Ochoa Bogh here. Cortese. Glazer here. McGuire. Smallwood-Cuevas here. Wilk here.

Excellent. Thank you. So we've established a quorum. Let's come back to the deus. Any questions or comments for the author or the witnesses? Got a motion from Senator Glazer. Senator Skinner, would you like to close?

Thanks so much. I did not mention, but I think it's important to point out that the Bill does preserve the right for teachers to remove students from the classroom for the disruption or Defiance, but not suspend them from school. And with that, I appreciate the conversation and our witnesses and aye ask for your vote.

Thank you. We have a motion from Senator Glazer.

In making my motion, and I didn't know if you were going to do this in your close, but I want to at least put on the record that there are all kinds of other categories in which to take disciplinary action against a student, any kind of violence, any kind of threat, physical injury, damage to property. So there's a whole list of categories. It's this classification that has potentially been abused that we're trying to deal with in your Bill. That's a fair observation?

Yes, that is a fair observation. And when I and other legislators first started bringing this issue to the attention of the Legislature. And my first Bill on this was back when I was in the Assembly. But over time, we didn't have good data. We had some school districts where it was apparent that this was occurring, this particular category was occurring, a much higher likelihood amongst Black boys, also Latino boys, and disabled kids, but we didn't have it statewide.

And when Governor Brown was Governor, this is why one of the bills had only a certain number of years and not there was like, well, we want to be able to prove this. We now have the data which one of our witnesses spoke to, which demonstrates. Now we have the data that shows this particular category of suspensions is used predominantly on black boys, but also black and brown kids and disabled kids.

So I think it is an important, when we see that kind of thing, that it's important to remove something that would appear to be very subjective. And thank you for bringing that out.

Yeah. So we don't want to. Having good data is of great value. Happy to move the Bill.

Right. And so I would agree, and I think your witnesses certainly testified that as a subjective category, this is in need of clarification, and this is a very valid measure, so I'm happy to support it. I have a motion for Senator Glazer. Madam Secretary, please call the role SB 274.

SB 274 Skinner motion is do pass. Newman aye. Ochoa Bogh aye. Cortese. Glazer aye. McGuire aye. Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Wilk aye.

Thank you. That measure has five votes. We'll leave it open.

Excellent. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next up, we have Senator Grove. Welcome. With SB 292. Good morning, Senator, and welcome. Please proceed whenever you're ready.

Thank you. So thank you, Mr. Chair. Today, I'm here to present SB 292, which should establish a California Savings Account Act of 2024. California used to be one of the top-performing states in the country for K-12 education. Now, California's school system is in crisis. At the baseline, public schools should be able to educate children on the fundamentals of reading, writing, English, and proficiency in math and science.

Despite spending $1,000 more per student than the national average, California has consistently ranked below the national academic achievement among fourth through 8th graders for several years now. In the most recent national assessment of educational progress test, two of three California students didn't meet the state math standards, and one and more than half did not meet the English proficiency standards. The numbers were worse with students of color: 84% of black students and 79% of Latino students didn't meet the standards in 2022.

Let that sink in for just a minute. Eight out of 10 Latino and Black children can't meet the basic math standards that colleagues. That is a failure of our public education system. Any company that failed that many of its customers would be run out of business in the state of California. But we reward our failing schools with even more funding.

The legislature introduces thousands of bills every session to create new or fix policies that don't work because we see that there's a problem, and we want to make sure that we fix it. Too many of our children are failing to meet the minimal educational standards here in California. This is a problem that impacts every child for the rest of his or her life.

But no one is putting forward a solution that will disrupt the status quo, which is why I'm here today to give students and parents options in education. Too many so-called solutions are focused on keeping students in poor-performing schools because of their zip code instead of focusing on every child and giving them the best academic opportunity they could possibly get. And we know that parental choice in education works.

Thirty-two states have some form of parental choice in choice programs, and it allows parents to identify the gaps in their children's education that can be filled with alternative options. We know that school choice works because studies have shown that black and brown students in charter schools have outpaced their peers in traditional public schools. The data is out there if you guys would look at it. There's a problem in our education system, but thankfully, there is a way to fix it.

Senate Bill 292, the Senate Constitutional Amendment SC five, which is a companion measure that together allows and establishes the Constitutional California Education Savings Act of 2024. This legislation would create an individualized approach to K-12 education by allowing parents to choose an accredited school that best suits their child's needs. We have the students that the students share the Proposition 98 funding; it's set at $17,000 to allow them to pay for that school. Think about that for just a second.

Poor, underserved students would no longer be in institutional or low-performing public schools because of their zip codes. Parents could use that money to get them a great education that suits their learning style. Just think about for a moment the opportunities this would create for the 84% Black students and the 76% of Latino students that are not meeting our standards currently today. Upon graduation from high school, any unused funds will be rolled over and would go toward paying for college.

This bill creates a solution for those who can't afford a college education, which will allow them to roll this money over for a higher education so that our students have the ability to excel in anything that they choose to do upon graduation from high school. Like I said, the unused funds could be used for college. This bill will empower parents to enroll their children in schools that are better suited for their individual educational needs.

During the first two years of 24 and 25, a newly created education savings account, a trust, would provide financial support to lower-income families. The money again would follow the student. Students would no longer be trapped in their low-performing school zip codes if the parents chose to use these resources to send their children across town. Transportation is covered so that the child could get there. If the parent chose a hybrid model, there would be resources available for laptops and things for educational purposes -

-for each one of these children. The tiered approach continues. In 2026, a child whose parent or guardian that makes less than $100,000 would be eligible for starting in 2028 and would be, and in 2028, there'd be no income limitation on eligibility. Our children have suffered enough the last several years with the educational disruption of COVID shutdowns, remote learnings, and strikes. California should begin to fund students and not systems that don't work for every student.

If the system we had in place now worked for every student, then we wouldn't have 84% of our black students and 74% of our Latino students failing in this system. Let's provide funding to programs that are putting students first and providing additional educational opportunities for school children up and down our state. Our future and the future of our children depends on it.

With me today to testify in support is Lance Christensen from the California Policy Center and Christina Laster, a mother who's putting her children's education above all else, and that this would benefit her and her family, along with many other families in our state. Our children's future is on the line, and it's time for California to put the needs of our students first and stop consistently funding failed systems, and give our parents an option for a higher quality education for all of our students.

Lance?

Welcome, Mr. Christensen.

Thank you. Chair members of the committee could be with you today. We at the California Policy Center write in proud support and sponsors of SB 292, which will create an education savings account for any child in the public school system to allow for General Fund dollars to go for a private school education in their neighborhood or across the state. Public education in the United States has been failing our children for a long time, and California is no different. Recent statistics show that California is 50th in literacy.

That's a stunning statistic. The problem is more pronounced with our NAEP tests, where we are consistently ranking below the other state's students in the bottom tiers of almost every academic metric. Parents need more options. In the Governor's proposed budget this year, it shows that in K-12 per pupil funding totals $17,519 for the General Fund. In the Proposition 98 Fund category, it's the highest ever, and the total amount is $23,723 per pupil.

When accounting for all sources, the average private school tuition in California is $14,000. Yet these public funds are segregated from nongovernment schools that are public facing towards parents and allow for a public education as guaranteed in Article Nine of the state constitution.

And recent United States Supreme Court rulings have removed any roadblocks states have faced in the past on these kinds of giving, and we have now seven states just this last year that have unlimited education savings accounts, including West Virginia, Arizona, Utah, Iowa, Arkansas, and others. We believe that SB 292 is an opportunity to fund these children in their education, to give flexibility, and to promote their academic achievement, and we appreciate your support. Thank you very much.

Welcome.

Hi, I'm Christina Laster, a mom and a grandmother in the state of California, and I still have school-age children. I'm going to read off of this, so I'll stay within my two minutes. I am here today to speak in support of SB 292, a bill that will give parents the right to choose the best education for their children. As a member of the Black community, I believe that this bill is critical for the future success of our children and families.

Far too long, our children have been trapped in failing schools that do not provide them with the education they need to succeed in life. California schools have proven over 21 years to lack the resources or ability necessary to provide a quality education to Black children. Most recently, available from the data from California Department of Education shows that black students continue to be the lowest-performing subgroup, with 70% not meeting English language arts standards and 84% not meeting math standards.

As a result, many Black children are left behind, unable to access comprehensive, rigorous academic opportunities, and they do desperately need them to ensure their future success. But SB 292 offers a glimmer of hope. It recognizes that we, as parents, are the best advocates and most credible source of information for our children and that we should have the right to choose the education that is best for our children.

By giving parents the ability to choose the best type of educational environment for their children, we ensure that our children have access to a quality education that they deserve. The type of education that California has proven it cannot be trusted to provide Black children who are disproportionately affected. Without access to quality education, many Black children are unable in these environments to develop the skills and knowledge necessary and are subject to graduating from the academic achievement gap until the racial wealth gap.

The fact no progress has been made in California after decades of alluding to closing achievement gaps means Black students have been consistently failed by schools in ways that other students have not experienced. This systemic failure poses a threat to our upward mobility and community livelihood, making it one of the most important civil rights issues of today.

I ask that you consider our freedom to choose the best and appropriate education for our children, an educational opportunity and experience that does not stifle, hinder, or limit their academic potential and future career prospects but gives them hope for the type of future you'd want for your children. Furthermore, I ask you to consider passing SB 292 to end the failure California schools have perpetuated onto us.

Failure leads to social woes that have plagued the black community for far too long, and for generations, children who are unable to receive a quality education are more likely to drop out of school, experience unemployment, and have lower incomes as adults. This not only affects the individual but also.

Ms. Laster, ask you to wrap up, please.

As a civil rights issue, access to quality education is essential for the advancement and empowerment of the black community. Education is a fundamental human right, and our children should have access to a quality education. Failing schools represent a significant barrier to achieving this goal, and it is our responsibility to address this issue and provide black children with the best opportunities to move forward.

Thank you for your testimony. Are there others in the committee hearing room who would like to testify in support of the measure, SB 292? If so, please proceed to the microphone.

Hi, thank you for the opportunity. My name is Greg Abdosh. I'm with Not On Our Watch, and I'm in support. Thanks, sir.

Good morning, Chair and committee members. I'm Darlene Alquiza with Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids, and we're in support.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you, committee chair. I'm Nicolle Young, Placer County Moms for Liberty, and in strong support.

Thank you. Let's now go to opposition. Is there anyone here in the hearing would like testify in opposition to the measure? Welcome. I've got Carlos Machado and Katie Hardeman. In any order you choose. Good morning, Ms. Hardeman.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, committee members, Senator Grove: Katie Hardeman with the California Teachers Association. CTA is in strong opposition to SB 292 and the corresponding SCA, as these measures would allow for Prop 98 funding intended for public education to be used for private school vouchers, including religious schools. CTA poses this effort for a number of reasons, but I'll highlight a few. First, these measures simply undermine public schools by diverting desperately needed resources away from our public school system.

Private school vouchers are particularly detrimental to our most vulnerable student populations, such as students with disabilities, English learners, low-income students, LGBT students, and others, as these students are less likely to be accepted or be able to afford private school even with a voucher. Therefore, this proposal does not offer a real choice for students and families. Also, as noted in the analysis, this bill and SCA will have a significant impact on the state budget.

The LAO estimated the cost of a similar initiative to be about four to $6 billion just to fund existing private school students, who are likely higher income. This would either come from within the existing Prop 98 or from the non-Prop 98 side of the budget, depending on the Prop 98 formula. Additionally, this proposal would divert Prop 98 funding to higher education institutions, including religious institutions, which would reduce our per-student funding level for K-12 and community colleges.

CTA believes the state should fully fund our public schools and opposes a system that would allocate public tax dollars to either individuals or non public agencies. So for these reasons, we oppose the bill.

Thanks.

Thank you. Welcome, sir.

Good morning, Chairman Newman and Members and Senator Grove: Carlos Machado with the California School Board Association. Like the previous speaker, CSBA is opposed to this measure. The program that the two measures create is essentially a voucher system that would significantly siphon essential public dollars away from the state's public education system and place it in the hands of unelected, privately funded private schools with little to no adherence to public accountability.

In many cases, a private school will not be able be an option viable option for families that rely upon school-provided transportation, meals, and other critical support that public schools provide. For example, there's more than 3 million students that are eligible for free and reduced lunch right now under our current system, and California school's transportation system supports 3 million passenger rides a day. So, it's a pretty significant group of students that might not be able to access private schools.

Also, by shifting funds away from the General Fund, the non-Prop 98 General Fund, this will lead to budget cuts and programs such as childcare, homelessness, health care, family services, and other safety net services that many of the very families that public schools are relying upon will experience cuts on that side as well. And for these reasons, CSBA, as opposed to both SB 292 and SCA 5. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Opportunity to respond, sir? Mr. Chair.

Let us do the Me-toos first. And glad to do that.

I'm sorry, hard of hearing. My name is Mike Blacey, and I support these measures. And I won't be long. But I did submit a letter, so I hope you look at it.

I appreciate. Mr. Blacey, sorry we missed you.

We got another one here, too.

In support, please. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.

Good morning. Doug Dunkley. In support of the measure. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Now, let's go back to opposition. Anybody here in person in opposition of the measure? If you'd like to come forward and state your name, your organization, and your position.

Good morning. Cassie Mancini. On behalf of the California School Employees Association, in opposition.

As the chair indicated, please press 1-0 if you are in support or opposition to SB 2921. One followed by zero at this time. And one moment, Mr. Chair. We do have a few dialing in right now. And we will go to line seven, please go ahead. Line seven. You are -

Thank you. Anyone else? All right, let's go to the teleconference line. Ms. Moderator, if you could, please prompt anybody on the line who'd like to testify either in support of or in opposition to the measure, SB 292.

Hi, Megan Melissa, in support of this bill.

Thank you. Line 34, please go ahead.

Wendy Beal, Moms for Liberty, in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Line 18, you are open.

Rachel Catan with Nicholas, USC for Freedom, in support of SB 292 and SBA 5.

Thank you. Line 21, please go ahead.

Thank you.

Good morning. Morning. Mary Little, school board member. I'm in strong support of this.

Thank you very much. Next, please.

As a final reminder, 1-0. If you are in support or opposition to SB 292. Line 21, please go ahead. Anybody else? Go ahead and hit 1-0. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Let's come back to the Committee room. So, Senator Grove, you wanted to respond to one of the witnesses. Please.

Absolutely. No one knows a number of students that will take advantage or a role at a program like this. It's not going to be 100 percent because it won't be. A lot of people have found that public education system is good for their kids, but there is a huge proportionate number of our children that don't do well, specifically, Black and brown children don't do well in the public school system, and this gives parents an opportunity.

The bill simply allows parents to have the resources to provide the education that works best for their students. The last witness in opposition said that there's three million kids that are bused or transported. This bill allows you to use those resources for transportation whether you want your child to get out of your low performing zip code school and go across town to the other school or you want them to go to a private or Christian or Catholic or whatever school. It's whatever school.

Maybe it's a technical school. Whatever school works best for your child. And it's not like the money goes--just hands over to the school. It goes into a savings account. And let's just say that a parent uses the 17,000 dollars wisely. They use it for transportation, after-school care, tutoring, if the student needs tutoring, whatever model works best for their student to get them into a better living of society and breaks that generational gap that you have where there's economic disparities.

And so it gives them an opportunity for a different education. The other person in opposition said that these vouchers would destroy--it's not a voucher--but that would destroy the public school system. Well, that's not true, too. They would be getting more resources for fewer students.

They get 23 or 24,000 dollars per student. Now it'd only cost about 7,000 dollars is what we're allowing these parents to have. So I just think the opposition remarks were not very truthful because it does provide for transportation. It does provide for the things that our students need. And I'd have to defer to Lance, but would it provide also for meals at schools if they were...it's a necessity.

So again, it's not a voucher.

It's not.

The analysis and other letters have misstated the case. It's an account, and these schools can then decide how to appropriate that money as necessary.

So it's not a voucher program. And that's what both members of the opposition said. It's a savings account that parents have the opportunity to use, and it does roll over if they don't use it all and they use it more wisely, and our children have the opportunity to go to college. It helps them pay for their college education. It's a great solution to the problem that we have.

And so, looking to the Committee, any other questions, comments? Let me ask one. Senator Wilk. Okay, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. While not perfect, I think most of the world views the United States higher education university and college system as the paragon of what we need in terms of educating people at that level. I think one of the reasons for that is we actually have free market forces in place because you have a Pell Grant, so you can take that Pell Grant and you can spend it wherever you want. What we have here at the K12 system, it's a monopoly.

And in many cases it's a one-size-fits-all, which does not--everybody learns differently. I had one child who was an AP student and another child's special needs. So as you said, everybody's different. And I know people don't like to compete, but the fact of the matter is, if our public schools actually had to compete, I think they would get better as well. And I do take issue with the second opposition speaker who said there'll be a lack of accountability if we have these scholarships.

They actually bring more accountability because it's the parent that's going to decide where those funds are spent. So there's going to be greater accountability with this system as opposed to no accountability, which we have now because we have a monopoly that controls all the funding, controls public policy up here, and doesn't really want to be beholden to parents and to students. So I'm very excited about this proposal. I support it. When it's appropriate time, I'd like to make the motion to move the bill.

And also Senator Wilk, or through the Chair, Senator Wilk and Members of the dais, the Superintendent of Public Instruction has accountability over this process as well, which is Tony Thurmond now. I know that's an elected position and it could change in the future, but the Superintendent of Public Instruction that the people of the State of California elect have the authority to audit review and see where this money is done. So it's not just the parent. There is an accountability process as well.

Okay. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you very much. So let me just begin my comments with the understanding that the California Constitution, as I've learned, requires us as a state to have a public school system. So in other words, it behooves us as a Legislature to make sure that we have the funding and make our public schools whole, to have the ability to address the needs of our students.

Having said that, I think the mom, Christina Laster, you have a powerful voice and I am assuming one day soon we'll see you running for office because you will be a powerful advocate on that. Did a beautiful job today in expressing, conveying your concerns and your passion as a parent. So kudos on that. And if you haven't thought about it, I would encourage you to look for and seek office, public office.

But having said that, so our role as a California and the State Constitution says we have to provide a public school system for our students. That is our responsibility. Having said that, it is compelling to note that these past couple of years, our students have not been very successful in achieving minimum reading and math scores. And there's something to be said about even more so about the--by the way, I'm Mexican origin, born in America, patriotic, and love my heritage.

I've also taught in public schools, taught first, second, and third English language learners. I also sat on the local school board. So public schools for me are very important to make sure that we have teachers who are passionate about their subject matter, passionate of our children learning, and I think there's many, many to be said that are within our area.

But there's something to be said about one: our students failing, even pre-pandemic times, the amount of money that we're spending on here, and understanding from being in school, speaking to our teachers and being on the school board, that not every school has the resources, meaning the expertise, not necessarily money, but the expertise, the skill sets that are needed to be able to meet every child's need.

We all know that. When we're honest and have honest conversations, we can agree that not every school has that ability. And it would be incredibly empowering to our families and to the students to have the ability to have the funds move with them to a school that would meet that child's needs because a particular school may have that ability.

I've also heard that there are certain schools within certain geographical areas, or zip codes, as you called it, that there's a culture where children of color do not feel safe pursuing academic endeavors or being academically challenged because they're bullied. They're bullied because they want to be academically-driven, and then they're in an environment where they don't feel safe or they are literally physically attacked because of that. And it saddens me that we have those opportunities.

But I do agree that when we do have the ability to choose educational environments that are safe and meet the needs of our children, it does allow us to compete. And I came from a school district that we had a public charter school, we had a private charter school, and we have public schools.

And being on the board, I can tell you that my Superintendent, my fellow school board members and Assad, they worked wholeheartedly in making sure and ensuring that we had competitive programs to compete with those charter schools. And it made us better. It made us better as a public school system. So I don't fear competition. I don't fear different modalities. I think it brings out the best in research. It brings out the best in practice. You know, this measure is not going to pass the Committee.

And I hate to say this, but Senator Grove knows that. I know that it's not going to pass the Committee. It won't pass the Legislature, quite frankly. It's more of a statement, and it's a statement that I think our public school system needs to hear because there are parents such as Ms. Laster here, who feel disenfranchised, who feels that the system has failed her child or her grandchildren. There are many, many who feel that way.

This should be taken to heart in the way that we move forward. This bill should be, as some of my colleagues have said, this bill should be a source of conversation and a challenge. I know it's not going to go anywhere. I'm going to support this bill because I do want to represent the voice of many parents who feel disenfranchised, who feel their childs have been failed. I know it won't go anywhere.

But by the same token, I understand that our public school system is our responsibility, and as such, we have to make sure and ensure that they have the resources and the opportunities to make sure that our teachers are trained, that they have the support that they need in the classroom as we move forward, so that every child in the State of California receives the support and the resources to be successful. Black, brown, white, yellow; whatever the color be, it's children, and that is our responsibility.

And with that, I will be happy to support this bill and let it be a message to the rest of our educational institutions to make sure that we're doing the best for the child and make sure that no child is left behind. Thank you.

And thank you, Senator Ochoa Bogh. And appreciate your comments. Any other Members of the Committee? Senator Glazer?

Well, I just want to say, look, I appreciate the conversation that your bill has generated. I think that you're right. We have a lot of failing schools in our state, and we need to be paying a lot more attention to it in this Committee and in the Legislature. And it's a point of great frustration for me, and I know for many others. Unfortunately, today, I cannot support this bill. I believe that the medicine that it provides would actually kill the patient, the public schools, unfortunately.

So with that, I want to just reiterate that I wish that our leadership here in this Committee and in the Legislature would pay a lot more attention to failing schools. It's terrible, and it reflects an incredible breakdown of support for so many in our state that depend upon education to give themselves a good shot in life. So, with that, thank you.

And so I appreciate that. For my part, I share your frustration. I agree with the sentiment that is the work before us as a Committee. I'm obviously relatively new in this role, but that is my goal is to systematically and fundamentally address exactly what the witnesses described, but in so doing, make California schools all the way across the board better. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, go ahead.

I just want to agree with the comments, Mr. Chair and Senator Glazer. I understand the frustration, and as a mother of two teenage children, it is frustrating to see our schools not having the resources that they need to be able to provide the education that our children deserves. I have to say that I lived through the process and went to school at a time where California dropped from fifth in terms of student success to 47th.

And it was at the time that we cut our tax base to fund our public schools properly through Proposition 13. I agree we need to invest more, and every day we sit here making those really hard decisions to try to figure out how do we build ourselves back to a point where our schools can be as competitive as they can be. And so I think we work toward that every day.

That's my goal as a Legislator, to make sure that the Legislature is investing in our students and dealing with the disparities. And I don't see taking billions of dollars out of the school system as a solution to that, so I won't be able to support the bill today.

Thank you, ma'am. In response to that, through the Chair, the public education system in the State of California has doubled over the last two years. Doubled over the last two years, and we've got nothing for it. Our test scores are evident. It proves 84 percent of Black children do not meet the standards. This is just an option. Right now, California spends more than a 1,000 dollars above the national average for every student that we have in our system. So the funding is there.

We're just not getting what we need from the system itself and the way the system is set up. We allow charter schools, we allow Christian schools, faith-based schools, Catholic schools, we just don't provide the resources to underserved families to pay for those schools. It might be well for any of you on the dais, including myself, some people in this room, to write a check for 14,000 dollars a year to take care of your child's private education where they excel, just like the data has shown that when Black students are able to go to their charter schools, they outperform their counterparts and their peers in the public school system.

This is just another avenue to give parents a choice and let the resources follow the child because the resources that we're investing right now in our public school system at 1,000 dollars more per average than the national average, and it's doubled again--like we have doubled the spending that we put in our schools over the last two years, and our performance, the performance for our students, particularly Black and brown students, has exceedingly and abundantly increased in the failure rate.

And it's just sad. And this is an option, and I really do wish that--and nothing offensive in this in any way--that you had the courage to say, 'let's try it.' Maybe we just do the first tier. I'd be willing to take an amendment. Let the poorest of the poor in our system get these resources and use this.

Maybe we take an amendment, and I'd be willing to work with you on that because it's a tier thing. It doesn't mean every student gets it. It just means those in those failing school systems that are here, like in the center of Los Angeles, the center of Kern County, the center of a lot of our systems where the poorest--it's like a revolving door where bad teachers just go to these low performing schools and there's no way out for these kids.

So I would take an amendment and not continue the tier system. Let's try it with our lowest performing areas of schools, the lowest income earners in the State of California. Give them this access to the 17,000 dollars. Let those parents use that money to just send their kid across town to the school that works best in that area, but they're not allowed to go to because there's two streets over from where they live. Just have the courage to do that.

I'll take the amendment, and we'll see how it works. It would be like a similar, like a pilot program to where we only do the first tier, just have the courage to do it so we can at least address the lowest performing schools that we have, where the poorest of our kids are in these neighborhoods.

I appreciate that. So from my part--and any other comments from the--so, Senator Grove, I truly do appreciate where you are coming from. I think it's important to point out we do have an alternative system in California. That's the charter school system, the publicly-funded charter school system. And it is something of a work in progress, but I think we've seen some really promising work done by charter schools and some replication of those efforts then deployed into the public school system.

So I remain committed to that and to public education overall. And so for that reason, I will not be supporting your measure today. We do have a motion, I think it was from Senator Wilk. If you'd like to close.

Absolutely, sir. Thank you very much. I do know there is an option, and if you look at that option, and the CTA and public education system came up and opposed us allowing charter schools, and now, if you look at the charter school performance of Black and brown students, it has excelled. They've exceeded their Black and brown counterparts in the traditional public school system. This, again, is just another option.

It allows parents to have a choice for their educational needs for their student that works best for them. And if the parents don't use all of the resources, it is not a voucher program. That is completely misstated in the analysis. And if the parents don't use all the resources, then these poor families that are working two jobs and their kids are mostly--I was a latchkey kid. My parents were divorced. There was no money for me to go to college.

If this system was in place, there would be resources available to help fund college education as to--and like my colleague Mr. Wilk, who brought--Senator Wilk--who brought up the Pell Grant program, it's dollars that are just used at the choice of somebody's best educational decision. And I would just respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. We have a motion from Senator Wilk, and that is, I think, do pass to Appropriations? 'Do pass to Governance and Finance.' And Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

SB 292: Grove, motion is 'do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on Governance and Finance.' [Roll Call].

All right, we will leave that measure open. And so the next up, Senator Grove, you now have SB 293.

Can we dispense with SCA 5, which is the bill I just respectfully asked for an aye vote as a companion measure?

That's fair. That's your presentation?

That's it.

I move the bill.

We have a motion on item number four, SCA five, from Senator Wilk. Any comments from the dais, just to make sure that we're clear? And we do need to ask for support witnesses. Any witness in support of SCA five? We're now going out of order. I would assume we do. Mr. Christensen, anything? You don't have to, but I'm trying to do this procedurally.

It's in California Policy Center, and of course, we support it. This would make the changes to be consistent with what the United States Supreme Court ruled twice, both in 2020 with the Espinosa v. Montana case, and in 2022 with the Carson v. Macon case, which gets rid of the Blaine Amendments. So if we want California to be consistent with Federal Supreme Court jurisprudence, then this is essential to do this and to make SB 292 happen. And we appreciate your support. Thank you.

Thank you. And so this is the Senate Constitution Amendment that is conjoined to the earlier measure and says, anybody else here in the hearing room like to testify in support of SCA five?

I do. This smells like a liquor store glass.

I am very sorry I didn't build it. And I share your pain.

Darlene El Quiso with Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids, in support.

Nicole Young, Placer County Moms for Liberty, in support.

Greg Abdouch, Not On Our Watch, in support.

Mike Blakesley, former labor advocate. I support SCA five.

Thanks, sir. Anybody else in support? Is there anybody here in the hearing room would like to say in opposition to the measure, SCA five? Ms. Hardeman, welcome.

Katie Hardeman with the California Teachers Association, in opposition.

Thank you.

Carlos Machado with California School Boards Association, in opposition.

Thank you.

Cassie Mancini with the California School Employees Association, in opposition.

Thank you, Ms. Mancini. So now to the teleconference line. Ms. Moderator, if you could please queue anybody who'd like to testify either in support of or in opposition to Senate Constitutional Amendment number five.

Thank you. If you are in support or opposition to SCA five, please press one followed by zero, one followed by zero at this time. First, we'll go to line seven. You are open.

Megan Willis, Orange County. I support.

Thank you.

Line 33, please go ahead.

This is Gabrielle Ingram, Stand Up Sacramento County. We support.

Thank you.

Line 34, you are open.

Hi, this is Wendy Beal, Moms for Liberty, Placer County, in complete support of this bill.

Thank you. Next, please.

And we'll give another reminder: one followed by zero if you are in support or opposition. One moment, Mr. Chair, we have a couple queuing up. Mr. Chair, we do have a couple queuing up. Just give us one moment.

Thank you. Coffee is almost ready somewhere.

And line 40, please go ahead.

Hi, this is Rachel Catan with Natomas USD for Freedom, in support.

Thank you.

And line 42, please go ahead.

Yes. Danette Abbott-Wicker, Orange, California, incomplete. Not supporting at all. SCA five.

All right, that'll register as opposition. Thank you. Next, please.

Opposition, sorry.

Thank you. That's fine. Next.

Line 39, you are open.

Yes. Julia E. Inner City Public school teacher. I support.

Thank you. Next, please.

There are no other participants queued up at this time.

All right. And coming back to the Committee, any comments? Senator Ochoa Bogh, please.

So, reiterating my comments with regards to the first bill, this bill would not pass this Committee nor the Legislature. It really should be used as a statement for those parents who, once again, unfortunately feel disenfranchised and feel that the system is failing them. And as an advocate for public schools, because I do believe that's our responsibility, we swear to the constitution to make sure that that is the case.

I'm going to support this bill today because I want to be the voice for those parents that do not feel represented today. And I am voting for you, Ms. Lester, today. My aye vote today is for your children and your grandchildren that you feel not represented. So with that, I support the bill and happy to move it when the appropriate time comes.

Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none. Do we have a motion? I think the motion for Senator Wilk. All right, so we have a motion for Senator Wilk. Nothing for the Committee. Let us vote.

Can I close?

Please do. I'm sorry.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank you for the comments. This, like I said, was a companion bill for the other piece of legislation that were the savings accounts that would change the Constitution and align us with the Supreme Court decisions that came down under the previous administration.

I also want to make sure that we understand that the Constitution of California says that we are required to provide a public education that is free to all of our students, but it doesn't say it has to be in a government building.

So I do believe under the constitution, the bill that we have previously had, that this is a companion bill, too, does allow us to provide a free education to our students, no matter how the parents decide to spend that money, so respectfully ask for an aye vote on the companion bill for the previous bill.

Thank you. And with that, Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

Final item four, SCA five. Grove motion is be adopted, but first be re-referred to the Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments. [Roll Call]

We will leave that measure open as well. And now we'll proceed to the third of Senator Grove's bills, SB 293.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hopefully, this will be a little easier to digest. Before I begin, I'd like to thank the Committee and the staff for working with my staff to bring assistance to this bill, and we'll be taking the Committee amendments to change the date from October 1st to October 15th. So, Mr. Chair and Members, today I'm here to present SB 293, which would require the California Department of Education to make California assessment of student performance procedures results publicly available by October 15th of each year.

We need to know how our public school systems are performing, and that gives us the data we need to make good decisions on education. The CDE is required to administer the CAASPP, which includes standardized testing in English language and mathematics for grades three through eight and 11. And grade 11. The Department must develop a calendar, which includes a timeline for reporting agencies and releasing test scores to the public.

Typically, these results are open to the public as early as the last week in August through the first week of October. However, the CDE is not currently required to adhere to deadlines related to the release of the statewide results. This was a problem during--