Assembly Standing Committee on Health

Up here, but we have to... We're going to do it in room 2100.

We've been in that room before.

Yeah. So I'll see you there in a while, okay? So maybe you might want to head over there now.

Inside joke.

Begin until we have more than just me up here. I'd like to make a statement on providing testimony at this hearing. We seek to protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process so that we can have effective deliberation on the critical issues facing California. All witnesses will be testifying in person. We allow two main witnesses for a maximum of three minutes each. Additional testimony will also be in person and limited to name, position, and organization if you represent one.

All testimony comments are limited to the bill at hand. We have five bills proposed for consent for today's hearing. Any Member of the Committee may remove a bill from consent. The consent calendar consists of the following, item number one, SB 911, by Senator Eggman. Item number two, by SB 363, by Senator Eggman. Item number three, SB 421, by Senator Limon. Item number four, SB 639, by Senator Limon, with amendments, and item number six, ACR 67, Ms. Waldron, with amendments.

And now, seeing that we have. Oh, I'm sorry, the very first one, apparently I misspoke. Item number one, SB 311 by Senator Eggman. So those are the five that are proposed for consent. That leaves us with one bill to hear today. The author is here. We do have a couple of other folks. So, Mr. Portantino, would you like to present SB 551?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. I would like to begin by accepting the committee amendments outlined in the committee analysis and thank the committee staff for working with my staff to get us to where we are today. I'm presenting SB 551, which would enhance collaboration between counties and local education agencies by ensuring that mental health boards include representation of youth and education leaders.

With the amendments in the analysis, SB 551 would require that county mental health boards with a membership of five to eight include one member employed by a local education agency and at least one member 25 years of age or younger. For those boards with a membership of nine to 15, SB 551 would require two members from a local education agency and at least two members be 25 years of age or younger.

For our largest boards with 16 or more members, SB 551 would require at least two members from each of these categories. This bill will also require that for those 25 years of age or younger, counties give strong preference to those who represent underserved or marginalized communities. Lastly, 551 requires that no more than 49% of members own or operate an organization or business with a financial interest, and so that's important to note.

We want to cut down on any potential real or perceived conflicts. This bill will help address a dire state of our children and youth mental health crisis by increasing representation and help foster strategic partnerships with behavioral health schools. With me today, I have Toni Trigueiro with the California Teachers Association and Amanda Dickey from the Santa Clara County Office of Education to speak in support, and obviously at the appropriate time, would respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Please go ahead.

Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee, My name is Toni Trigueiro with the California Teachers Association, and we're one of the co-sponsors of SB 551. SB 551 contains two notable components that the author has just referenced, including the representation on local mental health boards, as well as a representative percentage of mental health board members who are prohibited from financial benefit from a proposed or adopted Mental Health Services Act plan.

This measure is extremely important because we've been able to document, while most counties report approximately half of the participants served by the mental health boards are children and youth, in reality, prevention and early intervention programs currently receive little funding and they primarily focus on adults. It also appears that counties participating in the Mental Health Services Act plans allocate significantly less than the 51% prevention and early intervention funds towards services for children and youth.

Despite a state requirement that counties dictate dedicate at least 51% of their funds for programs serving children and youth. The goal of SB 551 is to remove one of the many existing barriers that exist between county health programs and LEAs by adding both an education representative and a youth under 25 to the mental health boards we believe will result in broader funding opportunities for children and youth.

Given that schools continue to be underfunded in meeting the physical and emotional health needs of our students, any occasion to increase opportunities for additional funding will benefit children and youth who are in need of critical behavioral health services. We want to acknowledge the work of Senator Portantino in this arena and thank him for his ongoing interests as well as the other bill co-sponsors and supporters. We urge an aye vote. I can answer any questions after Ms. Dickey testifies.

And before we hear witness testimony again, we have a quorum, and so we want to take advantage of this important moment. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Wood? Here. Wood, present. Waldron? Aguiar-Curry? Arambula? Arambula, present. Boerner? Boerner, present. Wendy Carrillo? Flora? Flora, present. Vince Fong? Vince Fong, present. Maienschein? Maienschein, present. McCarty? Joe Patterson? Joe Patterson, present. Rodriguez? Rodriguez, present. Santiago? Villapudua? Weber? Weber, present. Waldron? Waldron, present. McCarty? McCarty, present.

Great. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon. Chair and Members of the Committee, my name is Amanda Dickey, and I'm here today on behalf of the Santa Clara County Superintendent of Schools and our County Office of Education Student Wellness Advisory Group, also known as SWAG, which is an ethnically, racially, and linguistically diverse group of 20 students between the ages of 12 and 22 who attend schools in Santa Clara County.

We're a very proud co-sponsor of this bill and very thankful to Senator Portantino for being such a consistent champion of student mental health and student voice. I want to spend my time today actually sharing my firsthand experience, which demonstrates the importance of including youth voice when making decisions about how to invest mental health services and funding in a way that youth actually want to access in their communities.

A few years ago, the Santa Clara County Superintendent began an effort to create student wellness centers at districts throughout the county utilizing MHSSA and community schools funding. I was part of the adult group who was in charge of standing up the wellness centers and making decisions about where they would be located, what staff they would have, what services they would provide, the hours that they would be open, and on and on.

As someone who has education and experience in psychology and therapy, I had a lot of preconceived ideas about what the wellness centers should look like and what the services should be that we provided. I thought that they should look like a typical counselor's office, that we should employ only licensed clinicians, and that most of the services provided should be one on one with a counselor and focused on cognitive behavioral therapy.

But luckily, before the adults made a bunch of decisions about how to use funding to set up the wellness centers, our Superintendent felt that it was very important to have a student advisory group to actually ask youth what they wanted to get out of the wellness centers, and I'm really glad that she did because I was completely off base, quite frankly. If we had built the wellness centers in the way that I had envisioned, students would not be using them today, quite frankly. Our student wellness group basically tore down every notion I had of what a wellness center should look like. They told us that they wanted a nonclinical setting that was much more about creating a safe space than about delivery of one to one services.

They wanted it to be inclusive and centered around schoolwide group activities, in order to decrease stigma associated with accessing the wellness center services. They wanted staff who were young and looked like them, who had similar experiences as first or second generation immigrants, we have a very large immigrant population, and were less concerned about whether the staff were licensed therapists, but more concerned about whether staff could listen and relate to their experience.

As a result of ignoring me, frankly, and instead listening to students, our wellness centers have been extremely well received by youth. We had more than 7000 visits to the wellness centers in just the first couple of months, and nearly 90% of students who visited said that they felt better leaving after the activity than they did when they came in. This is just one example of the importance of centering youth voice when making decisions about how to spend mental health funding.

When youth are not given a seat at the table, adults like me often choose locations or providers or modalities that discourage youth from accessing services, which is why SB 551 is so important. Youth are 20% of the population, and yet most mental health boards don't have any youth members or maybe have one member out of 15. I want to thank the Committee for your time today and for the work of staff on the amendments and thank Senator Portantino for his leadership on this bill, and I want to urge an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Others in support of the bill, please come forward and just your name and organization, if you represent one.

Priscilla Quiroz, here on behalf of the California Faculty Association, in support.

Thank you

Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee, Brandon Marchy with the California Medical Association, in support.

Thank you.

Michelle Warshaw on behalf of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, proud co-sponsor in support.

Thank you.

Brian Ricks with the Los Angeles Unified School District in support.

Thank you.

Jessica Hay with the California School Employees Association in support.

Thank you.

Ashley Lugo on behalf of the California County Superintendents and Riverside County Office of Ed, in support.

Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no one. Is there opposition to the bill? Please come forward.

Good afternoon. Lisa Gardiner with the County Behavioral Health Directors Association. We represent the leaders of the public behavioral health safety net in 58 counties in two cities. We have a support, if amended, position on the legislation, and we certainly thank the author and appreciate recent amendments which removes the diversion of MHSA funds away from community driven priorities.

We absolutely recognize the value of having youth and educator voices on these mental health boards, but we remain concerned about the prescriptiveness of these boards makeup that could prove challenging to communities that are already struggling to fulfill multiple membership requirements. This includes requirements and statutes that 50% of the board include consumers or family members of consumers, one Board of Supervisor member, one veteran or veteran advocate, individuals with knowledge of the mental health system.

We are recommending instead that in counties with populations of 100,000 or more, that at least one member of the board be employed by an LEA and at least one individual who is 25 years of younger also be included. And that in addition, additional flexibility be built in so that an education advocate can be substituted for either both of these members. That education advocate could be a retired educator or administrator, a parent of a student, or a representative of a youth mental health organization.

In addition, we believe that a provision in the bill guarding against conflicts of interests on mental health boards for organizations and businesses that benefit from proposed or adopted Mental Health Services Act plan funds should apply to LEAs as well. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Jolie Onadera with the California State Association of Counties, also with a support if amended position. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? No one. We'll bring it back to the committee for questions or comments. Any questions or comments? Mr. Patterson?

Thank you. I just wanted to say that during the pandemic, one of my children experienced a difficult time at that situation. And I feel like mental health services and the expertise that is out there to help kids is limited. And it's been something that we need to bring this expertise and this experience to various mental health boards. And I do think teachers or educators or somebody appointed by LEAs is the appropriate situation.

I mean, I wish I could keep my kids with me at all times, but the teachers and administrators spend more time with my kids when they're awake. So I think this is a great suggestion. I mean, we've just seen kids, unfortunately, their mental health situation really plummet in the last couple of years, and we have to get them back to where they need to be to be healthy. So I think this is a great approach, and I'm definitely sympathetic towards the supporters if amended, but I'm happy with the bill as is, and I look forward to supporting it. So thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else? Seeing no one. Would you like to close, Senator Portantino?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much, Senator. The bill has a motion by Dr. Arambula, a second by Mr. Fong. The motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Wood? Aye. Wood, aye. Waldron? Waldron, aye. Aguiar-Curry? Aguiar-Curry, aye. Arambula? Arambula, aye. Boerner? Boerner, aye. Wendy Carrillo? Wendy Carrillo, aye. Flora? Flora, aye. Vince Fong? Vince Fong, aye. Maienschein? Maienschein, aye. McCarty? McCarty, aye. Joe Patterson? Joe Patterson, aye. Rodriguez? Rodriguez, aye. Santiago? Santiago, aye. Villapudua? Villapudua, aye. Weber? Weber, aye.

That bill is out 15 to zero. Thank you very much to witnesses. So that bill is out. That was the only bill that we were going to hear. Except we do have a consent calendar. A motion by Mr. Fong, a second by Dr. Arambula for consent calendar. Includes item number one, 234 and six. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on the consent calendar.

Wood? Wood, aye. Waldron? Waldron, aye. Aguiar-Curry? Aguiar-Curry, aye. Arambula? Arambula, aye. Boerner? Boerner, aye. Wendy Carrillo? Wendy Carrillo, aye. Flora? Flora, aye. Vince Fong? Vince Fong, aye. Maienschein? Maienschein, aye. McCarty? McCarty, aye. Joe Patterson? Joe Patterson, aye. Rodriguez? Rodriguez, aye. Santiago? Santiago, aye. Villapudua? Villapudua, aye. Weber? Weber, aye. 15-0.

That bill's out 15-0. That will conclude the business of the Health Committee today. Pardon? We're done. Meeting is over. Thank you.