Assembly Standing Committee on Education

All right, good afternoon. I think we will get started. Although, I'd like to call all the members of the Assembly Education Committee to please come to the state Capitol. Good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to call this hearing to order. We do not have a quorum, and so we'll hold off on a roll call.

I want to thank Mr. Carrillo for being on time. And we will be hearing bills and sign in order today. We have 16, 16 bills on file. There are five measures on the consent calendar. That means you're not going to be hearing the following bills being discussed. They are SB 223, SB 291 with amendments, SB 413 with amendments, SB 531 with amendments, and SB 671.

So if you're here for any one of those five bills, you're not going to hear any discussion other than a vote for the consent calendar. For each bill that's going to be presented, we're going to have up to two witnesses in support, two witnesses in opposition, each of whom may speak for up to two minutes. For each bill presented, members of the public in the hearing room will have an opportunity to state your position.

Please only state your name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Members of the public are also welcome to provide comment through the Position Letter Portal on the Assembly Education Committee website. I see no further need to continue with the rest of the script.

And so I would like to start with Senator Portantino, file item number 7, SB 323. We are starting for the record as a Subcommittee, and again, we're waiting for a quorum of the committee in order to be able to vote. Senator Portantino, you have two bills that you're presenting.

Do you have a preference? Okay, this is file item seven, SB 323. Welcome, Senator. Okay. Ready to go. All right, I have the red button on.

Hello. Now I'm on.

There we go.

I was getting PTSD from the prior chair.

A little inside joke there. Yes.

You got it, though. You like that?

That was a pretty loud laughter, right?

That was good. I like you anyway.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is good to be here to present SB 323. As we all know, student safety is a top priority, and I'd like to begin by accepting the committee amendment. So thank you for working with my staff on those.

Due to complications that arise when a person is disabled, some individuals are not able to file an evacuation plan, earthquake, or lockdown protocols in the same manner as the General public. SB 323 requires schools to establish a Safety, Access and Equity Committee, and requires that committee to review the school's comprehensive safety plans, to consider whether it is inclusive of the student population at that school, and to make recommendations to the school site council. The Bill also requires that the committee determines any student, that if there's a student that cannot be reasonably assured of safety by the plan, it convene an individual safety plan team to develop protocols for those students.

It is universally accepted that careful planning and practice drills improve our outcomes and safety during a natural disaster or, sadly, violence on a campus. This Bill is a proactive measure that tries to protect all students by creating a comprehensive safety plan. And I have here to testify and support Andrea Chrisman, a constituent who actually brought this issue to my attention. So I'm happy to steal other people's good ideas like this one. And Andrea is here to share her.

Thank you, Senator. My son Daniel has autism, intellectual disabilities, cerebral palsy, and can't walk or stand. When Daniel was the only student in a wheelchair at elementary school, I asked about emergency evacuation plans. I got the feeling the administrator was caught off guard by my question, but he said they had it covered. So I asked to see what the plan was.

He said I'd have to wait because it was under review and I never got to see it. In order to get a kid in a wheelchair down from the second floor without the elevator, it would help to have an evacuation slinger chair and training on how to use it. Once you're downstairs, what next? Well, my son's manual wheelchair could be carried, but some students have power chairs, which are too heavy.

So you'd want to keep a collapsible wheelchair on the ground floor. Another time, a special education teacher told me a firefighter had a suggestion for during an earthquake: tip the wheelchair onto its side to triangulate a safe space in case the ceiling falls in. They thought that was a good idea, but I think someone might get hurt.

Wheelchairs are not made to tip over. Safe to say, advanced planning and training are really important so that staff know what to do. Some students can't or shouldn't follow the same emergency procedures as everyone else. The reason could be orthopedic, neurological, cognitive, medical, behavioral, or something else. Educators really want to protect all students, but sometimes the kids who are the exception to the rule get overlooked. SB 323 adds a layer of scrutiny. School disaster plans need to be viewed through multiple lenses to make sure they'll work for all students and that no child is forgotten. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any further witnesses in support of the Bill? Seeing no one coming forward, any public comments in support of the Bill, please come to the microphone.

...National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter in support.

Annie Chou with the California Teachers Association. We have a tweener position. Can we speak on that? We appreciate the committee's analysis and their suggested amendments. We're going to review that and take a second look at the Bill, but really appreciate the work of Andrea and Mr. Portantino and his staff.

Thank you okay. Apparently because the room is full, the sergeant is making sure that there's no one in the audience and looks like there's no one else.

I'm at the table already for the next Bill. So I'll say support on behalf of the California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies. Thank you.

Wonderful. Any further witnesses in support of the Bill? Seeing none. Any witnesses in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. Okay, looks like we're clear in the hallway. No. Any public comments in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. Okay, bringing it back to the committee. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none. Like to entertain a motion? Oh, we don't have a quorum yet.

Okay. So we were operating as a Subcommittee. Senator Portantino. Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Lee. Senator Portantino, we appreciate...I understand you are a constituent of Senator Portantino's?

Yes.

Yes, I am.

Okay.

All right. Well, you have a real champion for all students. Make sure that we are constantly striving to make the promise of free and accessible public education for all a reality, including making sure that school safety and access are planned for. Thank you for making a difference. Senator Portantino, would you like to close?

No, thank you, Mr. Chair. And I appreciate the know every kid should go to school and feel safe, and every parent should send their kid off to school and know they are safe and know they're going to come home safe. And so I appreciate the conversation, the opportunity, and the Chair support and when appropriate, hope to get a motion from Mr. Lee and have the Bill get out.

Yeah. So we will wait for the quorum to be established. Senator, would you like to move on to file item 12, SB 509.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, committee. I'd like to begin by accepting the amendments outlined in the analysis and thank committee staff for working with mine and the sponsors to get us to where we are today.

As you all know, this has been a journey and I appreciate the opportunity to present the Bill today. As a parent, as a legislator, as a neighbor, we know our kids are in a crisis, and again, we want to make sure they go off to school and get an education and also are in good health when they come home and when they're there because it makes a difference. In the midst of this crisis and was exacerbated by the COVID-19 Pandemic, we know our youth are increasingly isolated, disengaged, and many of them are depressed.

And it's sad to see. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, nearly one in three California high school students surveyed reported to feeling sad or hopeless almost every single day for two or more weeks in a row.

Nearly one in five reported that they have seriously considered attempting suicide. And we know those numbers are even greater for LGBTQ plus students as well. Research shows that the sooner people get help for mental health and substance abuse concerns, the more likely they are to have a positive outcome.

This Bill is more important than ever because, as we know, teachers are encountering student behavioral health issues resulting from emotional impact with the pandemic, gun violence, social media, and other socioeconomic factors. The reality is that when students go to school, their trauma and depression goes with them. If we don't train teachers and other folks on a campus students, they'll be left without the tools they need to identify a crisis and help those students in need.

A lack of training doesn't keep the students' depression or substance use disorder at home. It just doesn't. While existing law calls upon California Department of Education to identify an evidence-based mental health training program, it does not mandate that schools establish the training program for their staff.

SB 509 helps address this problem by requiring California's Department of Education to ensure that with the committee amends, 40% of classified and 100% of certified employees on school campuses complete an evidence-based training. Mandating this training will provide essential instruction on how students, teachers, and school staff can provide referrals to mental health services. And I think that's important.

Some folks think we're trying to make them the providers. We're not. We're trying to help them identify who has a problem so we can steer folks to the appropriate provider.

And it's not an attempt to turn anybody into a mental health professional. In fact, it's just essential, just as CPR is. We teach people CPR, so is a first aid to help with a behavioral health issue.

So taking these courses is important and will make a difference and will save a life. And so kids need our help to be safe at school, and that should include behavioral health as well as physical health. SB 509 also expands on the accomplishments of SB 224.

And with the accepted committee amendments would add mental health to the health curriculum, course of study for grades one through six. And again, when somebody has a cut knee, we give them a Band Aid, right? When they're hurting inside, we should help them find the Band Aid they need to help their hurt inside.

And so with me today, I have Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey, who's the CEO of California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies, and my good friend Harry, who is the greatest human being I've ever met in my life and CEO of PathPoint. So when you have a quorum, I'll respectfully ask for an aye vote, but I will defer to these two people.

Actually, on that note, it looks like we have a quorum now, so, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Muratsuchi? Muratsuchi present. Dahle? Juan Carrillo? Juan Carrillo present. Hoover? Hoover present? Lee? Lee present. McCarty? Quirk-Silva?

We have a quorum. Please proceed.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey, a psychologist and the CEO of CBHA.

Our organization represents mental health and substance use disorder agencies across the state that collectively serve over a million clients each year. Youth and their families. Suicide is the second leading cause of death for youth 15 to 24 years old, and the third leading cause of death among youth aged ten to 14.

We definitely have a problem, and we know that this pandemic has taken a toll and it's created isolation and it's had an impact on youth, and it's manifesting in the form of poor coping skills, including eating disorders, self harming behaviors.The list goes on and on. Our coalition strongly believes that we need to better equip teachers and school staff on the front lines of this crisis by increasing access to mental health trainings for all adults, all adults that interact with youth. We don't want school personnel to be mental health experts, as the Senator expounded, but we need them to know what to look for: how to deescalate a student in crisis, and how to make a referral to care.

Schools are captive places for students. I've always said that I did my best work as a psychologist. When I was able to collaborate with others who were working with students I served.

Their school counselors, psychologists, teachers, others in those settings. It's when a community of adults comes together that are aligned that the best outcomes can happen for students' well being and no one can testify to this better than our next witness, who I will pass the mic to: Harry Bruell.

Hi, thanks for the opportunity to testify. My name is Harry Bruell. I'm the CEO of PathPoint, a behavioral health agency in Santa Barbara.

I'm also the father of Taya, an amazing young woman who died of suicide when she was 14 years old. After she died, I found this notebook in her room. And this was something that was an assignment for class that she had to do entries, and the teacher read it and graded her. Let's just highlight a couple of them.

Here she wrote, "I wonder if I'm a regret, if your life would have been easier and more fulfilling without me." And on this page, she had to do an exercise or she had to write a picture of her body. And I don't know if you can see it from there, but she put cuts and scars on her torso and her legs and her arms.

And in the corner here is a razor blade with blood dripping off of it. And the teacher read it. She wrote excellent.

Right here. She graded her, "Taya very thorough journal. I loved reading the entries, A plus."

But she never told anyone. She never contacted us, she never told the school counselor, she never told the school principal. And Taya died six weeks later.

I come from a family of teachers. My mother is a high school teacher. My father was a college professor.

My sister taught fifth grade. I know Taya's teacher wanted the best for her students. She wanted to do what was right.

She didn't have the training to know what to do when she read this journal and when she saw what seemed like now very obvious signs in here. This Bill, as Senator Portantino said, is not trying to turn the teachers into therapists. It's trying to give them the tools so they know what to do when they find something like this.

It's to support teachers so they can identify these signs and symptoms of mental health challenges and be able to do something. This Bill will support teachers. This Bill will save lives.

It might have saved the life of my daughter. And I urge you to support it.

Thank you, sir. Any public comments in support of the Bill, please come forward.

Rebecca Gonzalez, National Association of Social Workers, California chapter in support.

Izzy Silner on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists and the California Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists in strong support. Thank you.

Hi. Shade Nari, a youth mental health activist, in support.

Bella Kern on behalf of California Association of School Counselors in support.

Corey Hashida on behalf of the Steinberg Institute in support.

Good afternoon, Assembly Members, Mr. Chair. Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education. Proud to support the Bill.

Josefina Ramirez Notsinneh with Children Now in support.

Any further witnesses or testimony public testimony in support of the Bill? Seeing none ,witnesses in opposition of the Bill, please proceed.

Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Erin Friday.

I'm a licensed attorney. I am a co-lead of Our Duty, a group of international parents, nonpartisan, non religious, and we oppose this Bill.

We oppose this Bill because once again, the parents are cut out of the discussion. I'm really sorry for what happened to your daughter, but I imagine that you wished that the teacher would have informed you. There is nothing in this Bill that requires parents to be informed about the mental health issues going on with their children at school.

Absolutely nothing. And what this Bill is doing is not addressing the crux of the problem. Why are children so depressed? It's not because of COVID. The children's mental health has been disintegrating for the last decade.

Ever since the bills have been passing to pull parents out of the equation, suicide for ten to twelve year olds in the last ten years has increased by 40%. That's with parents being removed.

If you can see this graph. This graph shows the effect of social media on girls. This is cutting, suicide, depression, self harm.

We need to address the issue, which is social media and indoctrination of kids and confusing them while they are at school. This Bill has first graders learning about mental health. Please get out of your silo and go onto TikTok and see that these young girls are competing against each other to have mental health issues.

You win if you have a DID or multiple personality. You win if you have Tourette's, if you get schizophrenia. They are competing against each other.

So now you're going to teach six year olds that they could have a mental health issue, or maybe second graders that cutting is an issue, or that anorexia is a disease. These are all social contagions.

Ma'am, I'm going to ask you to wrap up.

Including suicide. This Bill is misplaced. Please address the crux of the issue.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair Members of the committee. Toni Trigueiro, on behalf of the California Teachers Association. The employment of credentialed healthcare providers in schools is a priority of California Teachers Association because of the highly specialized training they receive to work with students at all levels of healthcare.

That includes school nurses, credentialed social workers, psychologists, and counselors. Additionally, the Committee Chair, along with Assembly Health Committee Chair, are co-authors of AB 483 to maximize the number of local educational agencies participating in the LEA Billing Option program, currently hovering around 50% participation rate of LEAs. To draw down the maximum amount of federal dollars California is eligible to receive and to deliver to students both the physical and behavioral health services they are entitled to. We believe this approach provides a greater opportunity to better serve students.

The increased participation of LEAs in the Billing Option program, along with billing for more eligible services, will result in increased funding available to staff student support service employees. As the analysis for SB 509 points out, CTA is opposed to the training mandate and suggests it be replaced with a grant program administered by the CDE. Funded by an appropriation to CDE.

LEAs, in consultation with their collective bargaining representatives, could apply to CDE for funding to conduct youth behavioral health training, based on the models that were referenced in Senator Portantino's remarks. On page 13 of your analysis, CTA has identified a couple of other issues around liability: consistency regarding training from district to district, including the length of time to train, such as a one-time 90 minutes program versus a multiday training, and the consequences of a trained school employee fails to identify a student with behavioral health issues. Acknowledging the education workforce shortages and the ongoing issues around teacher recruitment and retention, a mandate of behavioral health training for school employees could dissuade some from considering teaching as a profession.

For these reasons, CTA is requesting a no vote on SB 509.

Thank you. Any public comments in opposition to the Bill, please come forward.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair Members. Chris Reefe on behalf of the California School Boards Association, we have an opposing unless amended and out of due respect to the Senator's leadership on the issue, ours are predominantly around funding. On the issue of the lack of funding in the budget, that continues to be a major concern in regards to the continued increases in the number of unfunded state mandates that our districts are facing. So very much appreciate the Senator, again his leadership on issues of mental health issues. Unfortunately, the issue of lack of funding is a big challenge for us. Thank you.

Thank you. And reminder, just to be fair to everyone, for public comments, name, affiliation, position on the Bill only. Thank you.

Hi. David Bolog from Take A Stand and California Nurses United in opposition of this Bill unless amended.

Thank you.

Thanks, sir. Any further public comments in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none, let me bring it back to the committee. Mr. Lee.

I just want to thank the author, Senator Portantino, for bringing this Bill forward. I know you've been very persistent in bringing this Bill forward to take care of our young people. And I really do believe that this is a great step to make sure that our educators are equipped to recognize the signs and steer people in the right places for right help.

And it's slightly controversial and you really fought for this Bill. I've always wanted to stand with you on this one. So I would love to be a co-author, if possible, for this Bill as well.

But this Bill, to some of the opposition point too, is very similar to the conversation we had about AB 5, which is training our school employees to recognize and support our LGBTQ youth. This is a similar way and not for coincidence. The LGBTQ youth population also has a strong Venn diagram oversection with mental health disorders and issues as well.

So having those trainings together is going to be really impactful for our youth who are experiencing so many things. Young people today, even younger than me, are growing up so much faster because they're going through so much, just as the author talked about in his opening statement. They have mass violence, social media, pressures of sight, everything that is happening all at once.

And it always helps that the adult that they see almost every day in their life and spend a lot of time with, if they notice something's going on, at least to steer them right direction and to give them some guidance. That's all we're asking for. And I'm happy to support this Bill today and I'll move the Bill. Thank you.

Motion has been made and seconded. Any other comments from the committee?

Senator Portantino, before I give you the last word, first of all, sir, I'm also a father of a 14 year-old and I follow all the news, never ending news, about the teenage mental health crisis that we are seeing in the entire country. I agree that social media appears to be driving much of this teenage mental health crisis.

In fact, a couple years ago, based on the book written by Dr. Jean Twenge from San Diego State, I introduced a Bill to try to address smartphones in schools. That's another Bill, I won't go into it, but I just wanted to say that, as a parent, my condolences.

Obviously, a parent's worst nightmare, especially for teenage girls. The Centers for Disease Control, it talks about two out of five kids, two out of five teenage girls. Whether it's out of social media or whatever, I mean, we have a true crisis here.

And I believe that when we have a true crisis, we need to make sure that our school employees are properly trained to be able to deal with this crisis. To the teachers, I know that our teachers are overwhelmed with so many mandates requirements, like my colleague from the Silicon Valley. I would compare this to the crisis that we're seeing now in terms of the attacks on our LGBTQ plus youth.

I know that this committee, with the teacher support, passed a training requirement for teachers to address that crisis. And so it becomes difficult for this committee. We try to be very judicious in terms of imposing new training mandates on teachers, along with all the other liability and other concerns that you properly raise.

But for me, the bottom line and the reason why I wanted to bring this Bill to a hearing, Senator, is because I share with you your deep concern and recognition that we do, in fact, have a teenage mental health crisis. And so I'm proud to support this Bill. Senator, thank you for bringing this forward.

I'd like to give you the last word.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members and Harry and Dr. Harvey, for being with all of us through these last several years. I don't think any of us wants to read in the paper another, I just--can you hear me? I don't want to read another article about a kid somewhere.

And if we can help one kid, everything we do here today is worth it if we save one life. And I think we're going to save more than one with this. Teachers are mandatory reporters already.

And so the idea that parents would be left out of the conversation is just false. I don't know what else I can say to false, but it's false. And our kids need help.

And so, Mr. Chair, thank you for working with my office to get us in this position. And thank you for the rest of you who are going to vote for this. And I don't know how anybody can look Harry in the eye and not vote aye.

And so with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item 12, SB 509. The motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations. Muratsuchi? Muratsuchi aye. Dahle? Juan Carrillo? Juan Carrillo aye. Hoover? Hoover aye. Lee? Lee aye. McCarty? Quirk-Silva?

The Bill is out.

Thank you.

Thank you. Oh, Senator, while you're here, we can have... now a motion has been made. Is there a second for... this is for file item number 7, SB 323.

Second by Mr. Carrillo. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item 7, SB 323. The motion is due pass as amended to Appropriations. Muratsuchi? Aye. Muratsuchi, aye. Dalhe? Juan Carrillo? Aye. Juan Carrillo, aye. Hoover? Hoover, aye. Lee? Lee, aye. McCarty? Quirk-Silva?

Four votes. The bill is out. Who's next? Senator Laird.

File item 16, SB 857. Welcome, Senator. File item 16.

Thank you. Is this on? There we go. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to present Senate Bill 857, which will require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to convene an LGBTQ Plus advisory task force to identify statewide needs and make recommendations to create a safe and supportive learning environment for LGBT students. I'm really glad that you mentioned it in the earlier bill and the commitment. There was a rather horrific incident in my district just over a year ago that is too graphic to describe here. But it was something bad, and it was posted on social media, and the Administration didn't do anything, and the school board didn't do anything.

This is at Paso Robles High. So the students themselves called the town hall meeting. 375 people came. It led to a town hall meeting by the Mayor, front page stories in the daily paper in the county, editorials, and wider news coverage. And as a result of the students organizing, the school board and the Administration reversed their position and engaged and really tried to protect the students that were involved. And it really shouldn't be up to the students after an event happens for this to happen.

And that is the nature of this bill. We took amendments that make clarifying language and incorporate feedback from the California Superintendent of Public Instruction, and as a result, he is now in support. The bill has received bipartisan support in the Senate, no registered opposition, and it's had no "no" votes thus far.

Here to speak. In support is Max Rodriguez, a student from El Camino Fundamental High School, and Craig Pulsipher, the Legislative Director from Equality California. At the appropriate time, I would request an aye vote.

Go ahead.

Good afternoon, esteemed Members. My name is Max Rodriguez. I am with the California Association of Student Councils. I also attend El Camino Fundamental High School right here in Sacramento. Today, I stand before you to urge your support on SB 857. It holds the power to transform the lives of millions of students in California. This bill will be a large step forward in acknowledging the unique challenges LGBTQ Plus students continue to face within our schools.

By passing this legislation, our students will have a more accurate representation of the diversity society we live in. It will also send a powerful message to all students that they have the right to be who they are, free from any fear or prejudice that might complicate their studies. As a student who identifies within the LGBTQ Plus community, I strongly believe that this bill will be inclusive of all students.

It will also improve the academic outcomes and improve safety for LGBTQ Plus students. And it will also set an example for other states to follow. For those reasons, I urge every single one of you standing before me to support SB 857. Thank you again.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Craig Pulsipher, on behalf of Equality California, a proud cosponsor. I want to first express our appreciation to the Senator for bringing this forward at a time when LGBTQ students are under attack across the country and even here in California. As you all know well, California has passed numerous laws aimed at protecting LGBTQ students.

But we're now witnessing a growing number of districts consider and pass policies contrary to existing law and attempting to roll back the progress we've made. In 2021, Chino Valley Unified considered a proposal to restrict the use of restrooms and athletic programs to students based on their biological gender in clear violation of existing law. And just this year, Temecula Valley Unified rejected a social studies program, in part to erase contributions of respected gay rights leader Harvey Milk, again in violation of existing law.

Certainly grateful to all the legislators working to address these issues and create a more safe and supportive environment for LGBTQ students. But it's important for students to also have a seat at the table and be active partners in these discussions. It's important to emphasize that this is a student-designed and student-led bill.

This bill came directly from the California Association of Student Councils, and the proposed task force will be student-led, with 8 of the 15 members being California high school students. We believe the creation of this task force is an important step to ensure that authentic community voices have a seat at the table and be active partners with the Department to create a safer climate for LGBTQ students. And we look forward to their recommendations and respectfully urge your aye vote.

Thank you. Public comments in support of the bill, please come forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Alice Kessler on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association, in support.

Anna Ayoka. Meedes with Los Angeles Unified School District in support. Good afternoon.

Dorothy Johnson with the association of California School Administrators. Pleased to support.

Akshaya Allah from Whitney High School in support.

Good afternoon. Garrett Xu in support. From Sacramento Country Day.

Good hello. Rachel Bhagwat. ACLU California action in support.

Seth Bramble, speaking on behalf of the California Teachers Association in strong support.

Goodmorning chair of Members Tristan Brown and CFT union of Educators and Classified Professionals here in support.

Michelle Warshaw. On behalf of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurmand. In support.

Thank you. Any further public comments in support of the Bill? Seeing none witnesses in opposition. Please proceed.

Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Erin Friday, licensed attorney, co lead of our duty in the international group of nonpartisan parents.

SB 857 seeks to create an advisory task force that will spend two years convening to make recommendations to help support LGBTQ youth. And there's already so many. The Los Angeles Unified, the second largest school district in the county, rolled out a program in 2023 called Queer All Year that literally never stops celebrating all things LGBTQ.

The impetus for this Bill is the denigration of an LGBTQ flag. We don't condone any student denigrating a flag, regardless of their disdain for it. But we need to ask the question, why would a student do that? Well, maybe because kids are tired of all the LGBTQ all the time, everywhere at school, kids are tired of the pronoun questions, the assignments, forcing them to either lie about their beliefs about transgenderism or fail.

A kid in Mountain View High School failed a paper because he said that gender identity isn't real. Students are tired of being asked about their sexuality in those invasive Healthy Kids surveys. This winter, we held a peaceful rally at Davis High School, protesting the talk from a gender spectrum rep who was to discuss puberty blockers, wrong sex hormones, and surgeries to students aged twelve and older without parental consent.

A couple of kids stopped and thanked us. The first was a young man who said, most of the kids on this campus can't even do math, let alone make medical decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Another student, a young lady, said, thank you so much for standing up for us.

You have no idea about the pressure they're putting on us. Where is the Bill to create the task force to highlight the mental health and feelings of the Muslim and Christian students? Or the parents who just ma'am, your.

Two minutes are up. Please.

Just want to be educated. We're 50th in the nation.

Thank you. Any further witnesses in opposition? Any public comments? Oh, I'm sorry.

My name is Leila. I already testified my name is Leila. I already testified that I used to believe I was a boy, that I could change sex, and that all of my problems would disappear if I transition like thousands of other kids.

I was wrong about all 310 D transitioners and I were here in March on the Capitol steps for a rally on Detransition Awareness Day. Not one Democrat, lawmaker or staff was there no recognition of our day. No Detrans flag flying, no proclamation, no celebrations, no red carpet. We get no insurance coverage for Detransitioning. We get attacked on social media and you pretend that we don't exist. Just google Detransitioner or get on Detrans reddit and read our pain.

The patterns are clear. Many Detransitioners are just gay kids. Boys that are being told if they are feminine, they are girls. Butch lesbians are being asked if they are boys and are encouraged to alter their bodies. Many are bipolar, have ADHD, or have suffered sexual trauma. Schools are placing the LGBTQ agenda above all else.

Posters, flags coming out, celebrations, secret trans closet where kids can change their clothes behind their parents back. Schools, because of your laws, are actually creating gender confused kids. So no don't have a task force to see how you can further influence kids to believe their bodies are wrong.

Schools are the pipeline to the billion dollar medical industry. I was a child twelve. And everyone, including those with eight years of post college education, listened to me, followed my lead. A kid with a long history of medical issues. I bet you a million dollars each trans kid is worth that. If you remove the LGBTQ agenda from schools, the number of gender confused kids will drop substantially.

Thank you. Any public comments in opposition to the Bill, please come forward.

David Bullock in opposition from take a Stand Stanislaw and California Nurses United thank you.

Any further public comments in opposition? Seeing none bringing it back to the committee. Any further questions or comments? Thank you. Senator, we know that this has become part of the national culture wars, but I believe, along with you, want to thank you for your leadership to address the need to make sure that we are being properly in touch.

Well, I think that was a very good close. And there were really questions of kids feeling safe and kids feeling included. And as somebody that was one of the first three openly gay mayors in the United States 40 years ago this November and got death threats for it and the fact that people still struggled, that has changed, but we're not done. And I think one of the places is exactly at the heart of what this Bill addresses. And I really appreciate the testimony of the people that came today. And I respectfully ask for an Aye vote. Thank you.

With the needs and concerns of LGBTQ plus students in our California public schools, that this task force will go a long ways to empower the students. Want to thank the students for bringing this forward. Would you like to close?

Motion has been made and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll file.

Item 16 SB 857 the motion is due passed to Appropriations. Muratsuchi, Aye. Dahle, Aye. Juan Carrillo, Aye. Hoover, Not Voting. Lee, Aye. McCarty. Quirk Silva.

The Bill is on call. Thank you. I see Senator Skinner has arrived.

We have two bills, Senator. Which would you like to?

88?

We will start with file item number 2, SB 88. Senator Skinner.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Members. I want to start, first, with thanking the Chair and the committee. We worked very long hours to come up with a substantial number of amendments that I think make the bill better. And that I hope, as we hear in the testimony, has removed much of the opposition. Those amendments, I don't know if you'd like me to go through them. What is your preference, Mr. Chair?

As long as you accept the amendments on the record.

I absolutely accept them. And there is a whole variety of them that deal with the social service agencies, for example, that transport our foster children and our children with special needs. Lots of exemptions for our school employees, whether it is for field trips and such and other purposes, exemptions for parents and other relatives even if they are compensated for driving a student, and a whole variety of things like that. So I just want to make sure again they're in the analysis. And rather than my going through all of them we'll...

So what is the purpose of this bill? California, unfortunately, was... We did not provide good funding for our schools for a long time. We were in the bottom of per pupil funding. Thank goodness, this year we're going to be at the highest we've ever been. Again, we can still do better. But anyway, for the longest time we really were not providing adequate funding to our schools.

And so over time, they began to eliminate transportation, bus service, because of course, you would expect that, to keep their focus on the classroom. So California became, over time, dead last in the US in terms of the amount of students who got home to school transportation.

Now, it is not completely corollary, but we have a much higher rate of absenteeism in our lowest grades, in our K through 3 grades, than many other states. And there's been a lot of studies that indicate a good deal of that is because the kids can't get to school. And of course, we know when kids miss school, they don't do as well in school.

So as we've increased the funding to our schools, we have also... Last year we passed a bill and budget where we asked schools to increase. We didn't mandate, we did not require them to provide home to school for every single student, but we said we got to get those numbers up. We're going to fund you for that.

Not, again, for 100%, but we want to get those numbers up. And so as we increase the school districts and the school site's provision of home to school. Thus that means we're going to be paying more drivers to be driving kids. And they won't all be bus drivers. By no means, because we have a shortage of bus drivers. We have a shortage of buses. So we wanted to make sure that whoever we hired, we made sure that there was a level of safety for their vehicles and for the drivers.

And that's really the purpose of the bill. So with that, I would like to have our witnesses in support. And again, thank you very much to the committee. So we have Anna Borges, who is the Supervising Transportation Programs Consultant at the California Department of Education, and Emily Keeran, who is Lead Bus Instructor at West County Transportation Agency in Santa Rosa.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the committee. My name is Anna Borges. I am the Supervising Transportation Programs Consultant for the Office of School Transportation at the California Department of Education.

On behalf of our state Superintendent of Public Instruction, we are here in support of Senate Bill 88. This bill would place various important safety requirements upon a driver who provides transportation services for pupils, including training in multiple subjects like proper loading and unloading procedures, to be clear of tuberculosis, to complete a medical examination, to be trained in first aid in case of emergencies. This bill would not only strengthen public confidence, but most importantly, it will help ensure that our students will continue to be transported safely to and from school. We respectfully request an aye vote on this bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Emily Keeran, and I'm the Lead School Bus Instructor at West County Transportation Agency in Santa Rosa. I started my career as a school bus driver in 2006.

I became a school bus instructor in January 2019 and now lead our Training Department. Since becoming an instructor, I've trained a total of 40 school bus drivers. Like many school districts, my agency is also in a bind with the workforce crisis, which necessitates the use of different options to get kids to school and back home, including foster youth, homeless students, and students with special needs.

My agency employs fully certified school bus drivers and drivers who drive passenger vehicles, which we call van drivers, who are not school bus drivers, and we contract with private companies to supplement our transportation services. SB 88 does not eliminate any option for my agency. It is purely about the safety of the students and our community.

My job is all about safety, teaching drivers both in classroom and behind the wheel on rules and regulations, including defensive driving and pupil management. I teach the same thing to both my bus drivers and my van drivers. They may be driving a different vehicle, but the underlying goal is to safely transport students. And it's important because they are essentially doing the same work.

I am a familiar face to my students and parents. My students know me because I drive a regular route every single day. I am able to build relationships with my students and their families. I fully understand the school districts need creative solutions to transport students, especially our most vulnerable students, who we have been transporting for many years, even before the existence of other options. I have been in this field for 17 years. The pay is little, the hours are long, but I really care about ensuring that our students are transported safely.

I firmly believe that the best and safest option is to always have a student riding in a yellow school bus. But if we are to allow students to be transported in passenger vehicles, we should make sure the drivers and the vehicles are safe. For these reasons, I urge you to support SB 88. Thank you.

Thank you. We heard you loud and clear. Thank you. Public comments in support of the bill. Please come forward.

Anyone in support?

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Thank you, Mr. Chair and your committee staff for working with us on this bill. Sorry. My name is Xong Lor, on behalf of the California School Employees Association. We're the proud sponsors of this bill. I just want to note quickly that EdSource just came out with the article earlier today and talked about a preschool teacher who was a HopSkipDriver.

And she had mentioned that she was not properly trained. And so one of the students that she was driving kept on trying to open the doors. And that was such a scary experience for her. And so she was no longer doing that. And so this is to reiterate that training is very important for every driver. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm sorry, you caught me daydreaming. Please name, affiliation, position on the bill only. Thank you.

Xong Lor with the California School Employees Association.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Scott Brent with the SMART Transportation Division State Legislative Board. We are proud cosponsors of SB 88, and we are in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Meghann Adams. I am the President of SMART Local 1741, representing school buses and noncommercial drivers in San Francisco. In support.

Alia Griffing with AFSCME. Proud cosponsor and support.

Tiffany Mok with CFT. Proud cosponsor, in support.

Thank you. Any further public comments in support? Seeing none. Witnesses in opposition, please come forward.

Thank you. My name is Joanna McFarland. I'm the co founder and CEO of HopSkipDrive. I founded HopSkipDrive nine years ago with two other mothers. We work with school districts and child welfare agencies to provide services to unhoused youth, youth in foster care, and those with special needs who are unable to access traditional bus routes. Last year, the Appropriations Committee saw this bill, but decided that a study was first required to determine if there is a safety problem in student transportation and how to best address that problem.

That study was never done. This bill contains a number of inaccuracies. The first is that the bill falsely claims that we are unregulated. HopSkipDrive is a licensed TNC regulated by the Public Utilities Commission. As confirmed in the bill analysis for both public safety and education committees. The Charter Party Carriers Act lists various exemptions. However, the PUC has interpreted the student transportation exemption to apply explicitly to school buses.

Rachelle Chong, former PUC Commissioner, wrote a letter asserting this interpretation. PUC regulations for TNCs that carry kids include fingerprint based background checks, motor vehicle record history search and enrollment in the Pull Notice program, 19 point vehicle inspections, requirements for insurance and driver training, compliance with a zero tolerance policy for intoxicating substances, and robust annual data reporting to the PUC, including accidents, incidents, zero tolerance policy violations, law enforcement citations, and more. TNCs are heavily regulated.

This bill falsely claims that we need to improve safety. No school district or county is asking for this bill or has stated any safety concerns. Data in our Annual Safety Report confirms that we have never had a critical safety incident in our operating history. There is no evidence of any sort of unique weakness in HopSkipDrive's approach or the existing PUC regulations. NHTSA data cites school buses are the safest mode of transport, but it only looks at fatalities. There is more to safety than just that.

CHP reports on school bus safety only list crashes and crash related injuries, nothing on driving under the influence, harassment, assault, crash or non-crash related injuries, or any of the metrics that we report to the PUC under our regulatory authority. This bill falsely claims that schools are using TNCs due to funding issues. We operate in twelve states, all of which have more per pupil transportation funding than California, and districts are still utilizing services like HopSkipDrive. Districts need tools in their toolkit, and it makes no sense to send a large diesel bus to pick up one foster student. This bill applies the rules for drivers...

I'm going to ask you to wrap up.

I will wrap up. Yes. It's applying these rules to drivers of sedans. It is comparing apples to oranges without improving safety at all, but leaving thousands of students at risk. That same EdSource article cited multiple caregivers who rely on HopSkipDrive for their foster youth and would be devastated without it. That EdSource article also cites Riverside attendance. Speaking of chronic...

Thank you, ma'am. That's three minutes. Next witness, please.

...percent to 80%...

Next witness, please.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee Members. My name is Ana Sosa. I'm an 18 year old, non-minor dependent in extended foster care, and a proud member of California Youth Connection. Today, I'm here on behalf of youth impacted by California's foster care system and a broad coalition opposing Senate Bill 88, unless amended, which can have a harmful impact on school stability for foster youth. I grew up in and out of foster care since the age of eight months old, and abrupt changes were a constant theme in my life. I was placed in multiple homes and institutions. Wait, sorry.

I was placed in multiple homes and institutions that separated me from my family, my loved ones, and also my community. Placement instability is an unfortunate reality for many youth in foster care and has an impact on every aspect of a youth's life, including their education. The state legislature recognized the benefit of school stability when it passed Assembly Bill 490 in 2003, a law that gave youth in foster care the right to remain in their school of origin even when placed out of the school district.

The importance of school stability was also recognized by Congress with the passage of the Fostering Connections to Success Act in 2008 and the Every Student Succeed Act in 2015, which created a federal right for all children in foster care to remain in their school of origin. For the first half of my high school experience, I attended Da Vinci Rise High in South Central Los Angeles, a charter school built specifically to educate youth in foster care and juvenile justice system. Although I was moving through multiple foster care placements, I was able to attend school through transportation services like HopSkipDrive, which allowed me to keep the same school, educational relationships, and friends while I was in care.

More than half of my peers used HopSkipDrive to get to and from school, and what would have been a one to two hour bus drive, created, was a 20 minute car drive with HopSkipDrive. However, the pandemic hit, and everyone was forced to attend school virtually. I had the opportunity to be placed with my older brother in Sacramento County and finish my high school experience here.

Senate Bill 88 will not only impact organizations that provide transportation services for specialized populations in school districts, but this bill would negatively impact caregivers and adults in a young person's life that provide transportation services for foster youth. We all know the negative outcomes in education for youth in the foster care system. I was told many times that I wouldn't graduate, be a productive member of society, and I would just end up being another foster care statistic.

But here I am in front of you. I graduated from CK McClatchy High School, which is just down the street from here. The system wasn't designed for me to be here, but with the support of accessing my school of origin and being able to stay with my lifelong connections, I was able to make my own destiny and break the status quo that has put on foster youth. With that, we urge your no vote on Senate Bill 88 unless amended. Thank you.

Thank you for sharing. Public comments in opposition to the bill, please come forward.

Hi, Megan Baier with the Association of California School Administrators, and I'm also speaking on behalf of the California School Business Officials and the County Superintendents. We are grateful to the author, the sponsor, and the staff for the amendments that are being taken today. And with those amendments, we'll be moving to a neutral position. Thank you.

Annie Thomas on behalf of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services, here to remove our opposition based on the amendments brought forth. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Melissa Schoonmaker and I'm a Project Director of Student Support Services for the Los Angeles County Office of Education. And I'm here on behalf of our Superintendent. We appreciate the amendments taken into the bill and look forward to moving to a neutral position once we have a chance to read them in print.

Good afternoon. Barrett Snider of the Small School Districts Association. With amendments we anticipate moving to neutral. Thank you.

Bella Kern with Fullerton Joint Union High School District in opposition. However, with the amendments, we anticipate a removal of that opposition.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members. Jeff Vaca, representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools and the 23 school district superintendents in Riverside County. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, the author. Thank you to Ms. Reese for all the work on the bill. And with the amendments, we anticipate removing our opposition.

Sierra Cook with the San Diego Unified School District. Look forward to anticipating removing our opposition once we review the amendments. Thank you.

Jordan Sosa, on behalf of California Youth Connection, a youth led-membership organization of current and former foster youth, we appreciate the authors addressing our concerns on this bill and look forward to reviewing the amendments once they're in print.

Mr. Chair, Members. John Wenger on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association. Appreciate the amendments. Unfortunately, we must stay opposed on the bill. Charter schools continue to be zeroed out in the transportation budget and so taking on any additional costs is just not absorbable for us. Thank you.

Mr. Chair and Members. Chris Reefe on behalf of the California School Boards Association. Similar to what was previously testified by many of my colleagues, do need to look at what the amendments say. But I do want to commend both the Senator, Senator staff, committee staff, and you for all the hard work. We know it hasn't been an easy road. So definitely look forward to seeing the amendments in print. And that was not meant as a pun. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kyle Hyland on behalf of the Coalition for Adequate Funding for Special Education. We were opposed unless amended, but we anticipate the accepted amendments will move our position to neutral. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I want to echo many of the comments and thank the Senator, the senator's staff, this committee's staff, and the Chair. This has been a long road, but we're really thankful for all the work that's been done. Sorry, I think I didn't say my name. Julie McCormick from the Children's Law Center of California. We represent over 30,000 youth in foster care, children and youth in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Placer counties. We were opposed unless amended. We are removing that and moving to neutral. I am also speaking on behalf of All Saints Church Foster Care Project, Casa of Los Angeles, the County Welfare Directors Association, and Youth Law Center. They are all also moving to neutral. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Lucy Salcido Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education. We have been in an opposed position. But also will be removing our opposition position pending the amendments.

All right. Seeing no further public testimony in opposition or any tweeners, bring it back to the committee. Mr. Carrillo.

Senator, you worked hard on this bill. Based on the testimony here today, I have two questions. One of them having to do with the argument that foster kids and ADA students will be affected by this bill. Listening to the comments and those that have removed their opposition, they'll need to see the amendments that you mentioned. But just want to be clear on the record that this is not going to affect in any way the transportation for those foster students and those with ADA.

It is certainly, the work that was done. And again, thanking the committee staff and Chair, as well as many other stakeholders involved and my staff. The agencies that serve foster youth and the County Superintendents, whose responsibility is to the education of foster youth, as you've heard, are all withdrawing their opposition and their concern was exactly in that area. So I think we have addressed the right concerns.

Yeah, just wanted to have that on the record. The other thing is on small daycares. I believe, that you mentioned, they're going to be exempted from transporting their students to school or picking them up. Are they going to be affected in any way?

This does not affect daycare programs.

I had someone mention that, and I just wanted to make sure that that's on the record, that it's not going to affect those. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Hoover.

Thank you. So, a few questions. I think, if it's all right, I'm going to start with a couple questions for the opposition. Specifically as it relates to the PUC issue, and what the PUC kind of already requires you to do, and how this bill is duplicative. Can you kind of clarify that for me?

I mean, we meet the safety intent of everything in this bill. We just do it under PUC authority, and we do it in a way that makes sense for our particular model. There is also an ongoing open rule-making at the PUC for unaccompanied minors. So if there are any safety issues, the committee could amend the bill to have this be addressed at the PUC with specific items that they would like the PUC to take a look at. But we do fingerprint-based background checks. We are in the Pull notice program.

So we have ongoing motor vehicle record checks. We are required by the PUC to do training on safe vehicles to do training on sexual harassment and assault. We are required to do annual data reporting that is above and beyond even what is in the scope of this bill.

And we publish that report publicly. And while not required to do by the Public Utilities Commission, we have telematics in our vehicle that tracks every ride live in real time and tracks the driving behavior, the six riskiest driving behaviors. Telematics have been shown to be 98% effective in detecting impairment, and a much better use. Because it's every ride, every day, every single time, versus being subject to random drug testing and the 0.3% likelihood of being subject to a test on any given day.

Okay, thank you. Thanks for clarifying that. One more question. You talked about the data. This EdSource article that was brought up. I remember in reading that article, there was also a lot of conversation about the amount of foster youth that your organization currently, or organizations like yours, currently get to school. And I think this is probably one of my bigger concerns with this legislation. So I was kind of curious if you could speak to the current statistics on how many foster youth actually are transported using these services.

Yes, it's a great question, and I think it also goes to Assembly Member Carrillo's question. Because, while the bill removes exemptions for social welfare agencies and social workers, they are not staffed to provide this kind of transportation. HopSkipDrive is probably providing almost 90% of the transportation for foster youth. And if we can't operate under these rules, those kids aren't getting to school.

There's a great report in 2019 that LA County Department of Children and Family Services, Bobby Cagle is the Executive Director, published about our pilot. During that pilot period, they looked at how many foster youth could be transported using caregiver reimbursements. And caregivers are exempted in this bill. How many could be transported using LAUSD busing, and how many could be transported using a service like HopSkipDrive.

35 caregivers provided transportation. 25 students were using an LAUSD bus, and over 1000 foster youth got to school using HopSkipDrive. So taking this service away or putting these onerous requirements on us that we don't know that we can operate on or not, we haven't seen any of these amendments or the language in these amendments, really does hurt foster youth. And there is no solution in place or proposed to address that. There's no need for this bill, and the author and the sponsors haven't been able to prove that there's a need. But it will hurt.

Okay.

Thank you. So I guess for the Senator. Before this, I was on a school board, and one of the big challenges that we faced as school board members was we had a major driver shortage for transportation. We were constantly struggling to find and hire and meet the existing needs even prior to this legislation. So I guess I would just love to get your feedback on how you think we're going to address that and still find enough drivers. And also kind of maybe these comments on the PUC, if you could.

Thank you. We are hearing from one company, one TNC that provides the service. There are many more. And we have been in many committee hearings. And if you look closely at both the PUCs, both the mandate for them and their own regulations. First off, their open rule-making on unaccompanied minors is to all TNCs. So in other words, Uber, Lyft, and not specific to those who are compensated by LEAs to drive students. So that's one issue.

Second issue is that the PUC's current regulation for TNCs who are compensated by LEAs, defers to LEA safety standards and to Public Education Code. Our Public Education Code has no specification for safety standards for these types of companies and these drivers, which is the need for the bill. Now, as we know, in every hearing that we have around any type of bill that puts a new expectation on a private sector that... Look, none of us, we prefer not to be, to get new regulations. We prefer not to have the way we operate change.

And I cannot speak for an operator as to... that this would make them cease doing business here. But in all the previous interactions with trying to see where we could get at a meeting of the minds, the bottom line for the TNC operators for such companies like our witness is describing, was they did not want to be forced to have, to have their drivers be employees. That is now removed from the bill. That is no longer a requirement of the bill. And when we offered various other things while we were still in the Senate, we got nowhere.

And bottom line was only if that was removed. So that is removed, as is mandated reporter, and as a variety of other things, are now removed from the bill with the amendments we are taking. And yet we're still hearing. But we'll let that aside. As you heard from the various county superintendents of schools and the social service agencies. They feel that the amendments are not going to put them in a position of, where our foster youth, who are the state's responsibility, would be left abandoned.

Okay, thank you. I didn't know if you had any thought or any of the proponents have any thoughts on the driver shortage issue because I think that is an ongoing problem. I don't think it's...

When I opened was a total acknowledgment of this shortage. And the fact that I am completely both, not only aware, but just that our districts and our LEAs will be utilizing contracted services. They will be, and there's any number of them. TNCs are not the only contracted service that various of our schools use.

But, of course, there's no limitation in the bill. The school district still can use contracted services. Absolutely.

Sure.

Last question would be for ACSA or CSBA or the county superintendents. I guess whoever wants to answer it. But I guess my question is that, while I understand, well, maybe with the exception of CSBA, but while I understand ACSA and county sups are removing their mean, is there an expectation that this is still in its current form or its amended form going to increase costs on school districts in any way? I'm just curious if there's any definitive answer on that.

I see Ms. Baier with ACSA approaching the mic.

Hi. Sorry. I was in the hallway. It may increase costs. We think the bill strikes a good balance between safety and access, and we're comfortable with the compromise. But, yes, I mean, anytime you create new requirements, there may be a cost to that, but we think it strikes a fair balance.

Okay. Thank you so much. So I appreciate the conversation and the responses. I think one of the comments made is that our bus drivers, and this is accurate, right. Are developing really great relationships with our students. I think that's fantastic. I think relationships are fantastic. But I think what families and districts are really looking for is affordable and reliable ways to get their kids to school and transportation. And so I do worry that this is going to hamper that in some way. I really do appreciate you working with ACSA on this and helping address some of their concerns.

I have reached out to my local districts, and while they're thankful for the work that has been done, they still do have a number of concerns just with the potential cost increases and potential for not being able to get as many kids to school on time. And so I think for those reasons, I won't be able to support it today. But I do appreciate the extensive work you've done on it. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no further requests from the Committee, I get my two bids. Senator, I know that your staff, and my staff, specifically Margaret Reese here, worked very long hours over the 4th of July weekend in particular, to try to accomplish what we set forth at the beginning of our negotiations. Which was to support increasing the safety standards to make sure that all students are protected, while at the same time making sure that we're not leaving any student without a ride. And, in particular, there was a lot of discussion about the private transportation companies.

The original bill had language in it that would have required that LEAs only contract with companies that have direct control over the manner and means of employment. And, Senator, you agreed to take that out so that districts can continue to contract with private transportation companies. Now, is it going to be more expensive? I suspect that it may. But I'm looking primarily to our school administrators, our superintendents. As well as, I really appreciated the comment from, I believe it's the Children's Law Center, advocates for foster youth.

We wanted to make sure, in particular... And, Senator, I know that you feel as strongly about this as anyone in the legislature. That we wanted to make sure that we don't leave any student with a disability, homeless kids, foster kids. We didn't want to leave anyone without a ride. And so I looked to the administrators to make sure. They're the ones that run the transportation programs.

And I was looking to them to make sure that we were not leaving any child behind without a ride. That is why I want to thank you, Senator, for taking the amendments and working with us to make this a better bill. So, proud to support it. Senator, would you like to close?

Ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the vote. Oh, we need a motion and a second. Motion by Mr. Carrillo. Second by Mr. Lee.

File item 2, SB 88. The motion is due pass as amended to Appropriations. Muratsuchi? Aye. Muratsuchi, aye. Dahle? Juan Carrillo? Juan Carrillo, aye. Hoover? Hoover, no. Lee? Lee, aye. McCarty?

Quirk-Silva.

Bill is on call. Next, we have file item number four, SB 274. Okay.

Do we have a lot of people? Maybe not. Okay, while folks are clearing out of the room, I'd like to give a special welcome to the summer interns with the office of the Legislative Council. Welcome.

All right, Senator, the floor is yours.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Members. This bill, and I will get to the amendments in just a moment. There's been a lot of, well, I think first and foremost, all of us want to make sure that our students thrive.

The purpose of our providing public education is to have students successful in that public education. And there has been a lot of research as to what are appropriate discipline measures and what works, what doesn't, and what things what practices we may have now that have a particular harm, and specifically a particular harm on our black students, our students with disabilities, our LGBTQ students, and other students of colors. But the first three categories I mentioned are where the data is most clear, and particularly that is in the category of what is called willful defiant suspension.

And while I appreciate that we clearly want to make sure that our teachers can teach and our students in a classroom can learn and they're not disrupted the nature of all of us humans is that one attitude I may display that might be viewed by one person as willful defiance might be viewed by another person as just my particular self and not necessarily trying to be acting in a way that is, say, defiant or would use any other term. And so what the research has shown is that it was a very subjective category. And so over the years, the Legislature has limited it.

Most of the large- all of the large school districts in the state have eliminated. But what we have before us today was a bill that would be good if somebody close-

Excuse me. We might have some willful defiance going in the back there.

Maybe I wait just a moment.

Thank you. Please proceed.

Thank you. So the bill that I introduced in the Senate and was passed in the Senate would have eliminated willful defiance. We already under statute, have no willful defiance suspensions for up to grade five.

And current statute does not allow willful defiance suspensions for grades six through eight, but with a sunset in a few years, and high schools were not included yet. And so what? The original bill would have added this elimination of willful defiance for high schools and lifted the sunset on the middle school, but within lots of very productive conversations with the chair, we have agreed, because we have not had the experiment statewide of eliminating willful defiance in high school, that we would have a sunset on that. And so, in other words, it would be the bill that I've introduced that came out of the Senate, but with an extension of the sunset on the middle grades and the same sunset on our high school students.

And of course, I could speak longer on it, but I will leave that, and I will go to my witnesses in support, and I will thank the committee staff and the chair. But first, I will but I just do want to mention before I have my witnesses in support on the record, which I know the chair understands very well, this bill does not prevent a teacher from a classroom suspension. So, in other words, if a student is disrupting that class, a teacher can suspend that student from that class.

And already in Ed code, it spells out the procedures for that, and those are not touched in the bill. And there are specific procedures for that. And even with this action, it would still preserve that.

And so with that, I would like to have my witnesses. Jamari Crawford, who's a black parallel school board student, and Dolores Huerta from the Dolores Huerta Foundation.

Hello.

My name is Jamari Crawford. I'm an 18 year old student.

The organization I'm part of, Black Parallel School Board, has been working to protect students from being suspended for Defiance because we have seen how it affects and harms young people of all ages. But black students in particular are often targeted and labeled as defiance. Parents and students have shared that youth are being suspended for Defiance for things such as wearing a hoodie, utilizing phones in class, tardiness, and etc. California needs to ban suspensions for Defiance because there is no real benefit to it. It results in mental health, getting behind in classes, and more.

At my school, I am part of the policy debate team, and we are known for getting passionate during debate rounds. In February, I went to a debate tournament at UC Berkeley, and my debate partner, a black girl, and I lost one of our rounds, not for any logical reasons, but because we were too aggressive according to the judge, when the opposing team, two white kids, were just as aggressive as we were.

But because we are two black kids who are passionate about a very specific topic, we are labeled and targeted as aggressive. One individual I know would often become suspended for a behavior, usually anger towards teachers and peers, which would lead to fights. As a result, the principals and teachers would suspend him, hoping that it would calm him.

It did the opposite. They did not look into his home life, which was a place he did not need to be, and because their only solution was suspension, this led to him not having faith within the system and led to him dropping out as a result.

He tells people to this day, why would I stick around when so many teachers and staff members never stuck around for me? Instead of suspending students for things like sleeping in class and defiance, we should have someone on campus that they trust talk to them, find the root problem, find a solution, because if not, it'll seem like they don't care. I'm a black and Latino student, which suspension for defiance affects heavily and affects people like me. What's disheartening is knowing that people who don't understand what my people feel and experience will cast votes and make decisions without considering the impact it'll have on the communities which they cast votes around.

Vote yes to support SB 247. Keep students in school, reduce the negative ramification, be part of the solution, and don't push students further away.

Thank you, and sí se puede

Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, My name is Dolores Huerta with the Dolores Huerta Foundation, and several years ago, we got involved in the education issues in the Central Valley of California, which is, by the way, the Central Valley. They have 40% more suspensions and expulsions of students than they do in the other parts of California.

And we had to actually sue our Kern High School District because they had expelled 2500 students in one year. Black and brown students were the majority of those students. We won the lawsuit with the California Rural Legal Assistance Equal Justice Society, and the number of suspensions and expulsions dropped from 2500 to 21.

So we were successful in that. We got involved in California City because there eight out of ten black students were being expelled and suspended. Eight out of ten.

That number has also dropped. So we want to thank the committee and Senator Skinner for working on this willful defiance issue for so many years, because we know that black and brown students are 40% more likely to be suspended and expelled. And having the in school suspension, so to speak, and not putting the kids out on the street, we know, has really, really helped.

And there are some very positive outcomes that have become of this. California administrators have reported that there are 60% more reduction in negative behavior from students. 37.1% of schools have reported increased attendance in ADA funding.

82% reported that strengthened student connectedness to their peers and their staff, 48% reported increased achievement in again, academic performance. So we know that this does work, I think. We know that it works and we know it has to be continued.

And to make sure that we have if there are suspensions that they're on the campus, the kids are not put out on the street, where you have low income parents that work two jobs and cannot be there for the students themselves. And since this is working, then I think and I know that the bill is already drafted this way, but we should not have the sunset provisions because we have the facts, we have the statistics, and we know that this is working right now. If we have the, again, on the campus suspension of the students so they're not out on the street.

So we want to thank you very much, everybody, for working on this. And thank you, Senator Skinner. We know that education right now, and God knows that we need more funding.

And by the way, I see this as a teacher. I was a teacher myself, so I know what teachers go through. I have three members of my family that are currently teachers.

And we know the teachers need so much more support in the classrooms themselves. We know that we are working to that. And education, by the way, with everything that our society is going through right now, we have to say education is the savior of democracy, the savior of our society.

Thank you very much for hearing me.

Thank you. Any public comments in support of the bill, please come forward.

As the public comments come forward, I just want to mention we do have Dr. Brian Huff as a technical support. That in case we have questions, and he's the policy Director for the Center for Transformation of Schools at UCLA.

Thank you.

Rebecca Gonzalez, National Association of Social Workers, California chapter and support.

Laura Baeza with the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color. We are co sponsors in support, and also here to represent other co sponsors Cadre, Cope, Generation Up, Mid City Can, Public Council, Youth Alliance. They're all in support as well. And other supporters are California PTA and Cancel the Contract.

Leilani Aguinaldo on behalf of Oakland Unified School District in support.

Kimberly Sanchez with Mexican California in support. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Wendy Galvan with the Youth Justice Education Clinic in support. And we are co sponsors. Thank you.

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT. We want to thank the author for all the amendments. We are in support.

Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education, in support.

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

Atasi Uppal from the East Bay Community Law Center.

We provide free legal aid primarily to students of color with disabilities in Alameda County. Proud co sponsors and in support

Hi there. Rachel Bhagwat, ACLU California Action. Proud co sponsors of this bill.

Good afternoon Chair, Committee Members, Blake Johnson on behalf of State Two and Ten of public instruction, Tony Thurmond, a proud co sponsor here in strong support. Thank you.

Idaio Comedes with Los Angeles Unified School District in support.

Hello. Ashley De La Rosa, education policy director with the Dolores Huerta Foundation organizing current Fresno and the Antelope Valley, proud co sponsor and in support.

Hi. Lizzie Kutzona here on behalf of the city and county of San Francisco, in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Gregory Kramer, on behalf of Disability Rights California, we're co sponsoring.

Ines Rosales on behalf of Public Advocates, in strong support of the bill. Thank you. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Sarah Lillis, Executive Director of Teach Plus California, a teacher leadership organization and support.

Lucy Salcido Carter, with the Alameda County Office of Ed, in support.

Nicole Wartelman, on behalf of the Children's Partnership, in support.

Julie McCormick, on behalf of Children's Law Center of California, in support.

Jordan Sosa, on behalf of California Youth Connection, in support.

Ada Naymack with Children Now also in support.

Megan Baier with the Association of California School Administrators, in support.

Twainers.

Good afternoon. Thank you. Mr. Chair, Members. Chris Reef, on behalf of California School Boards Association. Certainly for a long period of time, CSBA has long supported efforts to address the disparity and disproportionality in the use of willful defiance penalties and consequences for students.

Certainly agree with the direction of the bill and appreciate the staff on both sides in terms of working on the amendments. Unfortunately, again, the issue is funding, right? When we're talking about the implementation of these types of practices, be able to provide professional development and be able to tools in place so that we can make sure that it's properly applied. Not all school districts can afford to institute type of programs that really are effective in helping to avert the type of consequences that come with willful defiance, positive behavioral interventions, peer support programs and so forth.

So thank you very much.

All right. Like to ask one of the support witnesses to give-- yeah. So, witnesses in opposition.

Skinner? Yeah.

Okay.

And while the opposing witnesses are getting set up, Senator Skinner, you accept all amendments?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. All right.

Witnesses in opposition, please proceed.

Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Erin Friday. Our duty in an international group of nonpartisan parents with no religious affiliation. I voted for same sex marriage, I'm a licensed attorney and I'm a Democrat of 37 years. My daughter used to believe that she was a boy. When we addressed her mental health issues, she returned back to reality. We oppose this bill unless amended.

We wholeheartedly agree with Senator Skinner's declaration, and I paraphrase the Supreme Court and supported neuroscience research has recognized that young people are different and they have the hallmarks of youth, such as immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risk and consequences. In California, a minor cannot vape, cannot buy spray paint, cannot get a tattoo. And we have gone so far as to ban kid flavored tobacco.

A parent cannot even consent to permitting a minor to go into a tanning bed. In California, none of these things are guaranteed to cause cancer, and they are only semi permanent. A tattoo can be removed, but California promotes the medical transition of minors, which is permanent. Once your organs are removed, they are gone. It's guaranteed.

Ma'am, this bill is about willful defiance.

Oh, I understand. Why is car insurance so high? Why can't children rent VRBO until they're 25? Because the actuaries have crunched the numbers. They understand that kids, like Senator Skinner has said, are immature, impulsive, and make bad decisions.

SB 274 is granting kids a second chance before being expelled from school. You are doing this because kids are immature and they change their minds. There are countless studies showing this.

We oppose this bill unless it's amended to repeal all education codes that require kids to be taught transgenderism in all forms.

Ma'am, this is not the subject matter of this bill.

But a bill can be amended to appeal other--

Repeal other that is not the subject matter of this bill. And your two minutes are up. Next witness.

Should not have even let her be there. With the chair's permission, I think it is on the same line of so usually--

I don't want to predetermine the content of her speech here.

Okay. She's not comfortable. Thank you. Thank you for making her not comfortable.

Alright. Any public comments in opposition to the oh, gentlemen coming forward? Hello.

My name is Jerald Pierucci. I'm actually here for something else, but I am a high school teacher. Please don't pass this bill. Our classrooms are already a mess.

Thank you. Thank you. Any further public comments in opposition to the bill? Seeing none.

Bring it back to the committee. Questions from the committee. Motions made by Mr. Lee, Vice Chair Dahle.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator. I know we've had extensive conversations about this, and I did reach out to my local school districts, who I'm in direct contact with, my superintendents, and they got back to me quickly.

And it's about a 50 50 split, which is interesting because most of them said, we moved away from using this for our suspensions, and we're trying to do interventions more and for more of my rural schools. That's where the opposition came in, because they don't have as many tools and opportunities for intervention. I think we've had this discussion quite a bit, so I'm not going to be able to support it today.

I do know where you're going, and I appreciate that. And I do know that it's challenging right now in our classrooms, and we've talked about that, some of my personal stories with my children as well. So thank you so much.

I know that you've worked really hard on this, but I won't be able to support it today. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Hoover. Then, Ms. Quirk-Silva

Thank you. I appreciate the sunset. I think that the amendments have a sunset.

Is that correct? Okay, so I do appreciate that. I think that's an important amendment to make sure that we can see how this goes. But I do have some concerns, and likewise, I've heard some concerns from my locals about this taking tools away from administrators and teachers.

I guess my only question is, is there any reason why this can't already be done at the local level? Can local school districts or school boards determine on their own to move away from willful defiance? And I guess, why is that not enough? Like, why do we need to step in? I guess that would be my only question.

And I will answer that. As I opened, I think it's every large district in the state has already eliminated willful defiance throughout the entire spectrum grades, so all the way through high school. But as our witness Dolores Huerta pointed out, so backing up for a minute.

So it's probably more than the majority of students in California already not subjected to this. So then obviously, you could say, as you are asking, why are we then requiring it statewide? Because it is fair to the student. If we put our students first, then none of our California students should be subjected to something that the data shows is harmful to the student and is disproportionately used.

And as we heard from our witness Dolores Huerta, was it eight out of ten black students in certain of the districts in Central California, the central valley were literally expelled. So not only was this suspension used, but even further, and the number they had to go to court. So if we take, for example, AXA, and they should articulate this themselves.

But in the many conversations I had with them, they said their board struggled long and hard with this. But they concluded because they do have districts and superintendents who want to continue to use the tool. But they felt we needed their job was to put the students needs and the students interest first and protect students.

And so on balance, they felt that there was more harm from this particular category of suspension than help. And I just want to note, and you probably are aware, but every other category of suspension is still in the books. This bill does not cover any other category.

And those categories include such things as harm or threat of harm, vulgarity, bullying, obscenity, language. So there's really a very extensive array of additional suspensions that are available to the school and are not affected by this bill. But it also still allows for the classroom teacher.

And if we're talking high school, we know that usually they have multiple different teachers, multiple classes, and it is possible that you could have the problem in only one class and not in all the classes. So it's sort of that thing. Why would you be removing from the entire all of the classes if the problem is in one classroom, so this allows for that use of it where it is unique or specific to that one classroom.

Thank you. That's really helpful. I appreciate that response.

I would say I kind of share the concerns of the Vice Chair. I'm sure you could find people in my district that are supportive of this and that are not supportive of this. So it certainly is a difficult issue.

I absolutely appreciate your desire and your goal to reduce suspensions. I think we have to do more on that. I think the evidence is pretty clear that sending a student home is not while it may address the disruption, it certainly is not necessarily addressing that child's needs.

And so to the extent that this committee and this Legislature can work to do that and maybe work to expand onsite suspensions or other interventions, I think is really good. But I think for me to take away these tools for some of my local administrators and kind of take away their local control on this for high school students, I just don't know if I'm going to be able to get there today. But I do appreciate the work that you've done on it and the addition of the sunset.

Appreciate that. And through, if I may, through the chair, we obviously designated certain witnesses, and we followed the protocols of the committee. But Dr. Huff, who is here from UCLA, has been studying, not only studying the suspension itself and its impacts and who it's utilized on, but has also been engaged in studying and providing schools resources for alternatives.

And our state budget just this year, in the past, we have funded some of this research, and again, in this state budget, we're providing another additional 1 million to this research, which is at UCLA and UC Berkeley. It's a collaborative program to basically not only study the impacts, but also to really do that work to help teachers provide schools and teachers lots of alternatives so that student success is our number one.

And I'd be happy to hear briefly from the doctor if that's okay, but yes on some of that work. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for that question as well. I think that over the past five years at UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools, we have been the research partner and the California Sums Initiative of scaling up multi tiered systems of essentially.

And that is a big investment from the state already. And what we've found from that, we've had the privilege of interviewing administrators and collecting qualitative and quantitative data every year. And from our administrators in both rural and more urban districts, we do hear that these problems facing these children at home, our students at home, are of the utmost importance, and that we hear administrators not wanting to use willful defiance as a tool.

So it is a tool that they don't really want on the table. And we have spoken to many administrators who say it is harmful. They understand the impact of the harm, and they understand the impact of the harm even more so after the return to in person learning.

And they believe that those traumas that our students have faced during COVID-19 have put them in a particular situation where learning must expand beyond just academics. They must be able to learn from their mistakes. They must be able to learn from their social, emotional supports.

And that is a place in schools that would allow them to do that safely, to learn those lessons. And so I think that would be mostly the most important piece of information I'd like to add to that.

Ms. Quirk-Silva.

I want to thank the author for bringing this forward. And some of you might mention it usually every time I speak that I'm a 30 year classroom teacher. And so this bill coming to me required me to do quite a bit of conversations, not only with the Chair, but also with the author and others.

Because one of the concerns I have or was concerned about was the teacher in a class, and I'm talking mostly with younger kids, but also olders is, would they still have that opportunity to remove a student if needed to be? As you know, most elementary, even through junior high, students have between 30 and 35 students. If there is a student that's really causing quite a bit of difficulty, if they don't have that opportunity, then all of the focus and attention goes on those one or two students, sometimes more. But it was clarified to me that this would not change that opportunity.

The other thing that really compelled me to look deeper on this bill was to really understand the data, which we know that when we look at the data, it is many times students of color that are suspended or expelled at much higher rates than other students, sometimes for the same exact infraction. Over the years, much more work has come out on student trauma, adult trauma, with the Aces testing. And it doesn't take too long to find out that when students are acting out, there's usually a problem that's following them.

I know that. I'll just give a personal example. My husband is what they call a mentor coach in the junior high right now in his assignment.

He's on summer break right now. But last year and numerous times was working with students in the classroom, aside with teachers. And as the author just stated, that same student could have an interaction in period one that might have been fine, no problem.

Period two, everything escalated and the student was being asked to being sent out and then removed from all their classes. But every time these interactions happened and he pulled them out, he would find a story that many of us would understand the behavior, sometimes everything from leaving their homes at five in the morning and not returning back till 09:00 because of the transportation issues and trying to figure out navigating new jobs, new homes, divorces, these types of things.

So with that, I will be supporting the bill. But I do understand the concerns of the split, if you want to say, as was noted with CTA, and why there are concerns about making sure the teacher still has autonomy in the classroom to make those decisions. But I will be supporting it today.

Thank you. Any other comments from the committee? Then it's my turn. Skinner, first of all, I completely want to acknowledge and agree with your witnesses in support of your bill that obviously we don't want any kind of law or policy that is being applied in a discriminatory way, whether it's against young black kids or whether it's against Latinos in the Central Valley or anywhere.

Or so the data appears to be clear that there is at least a disparate impact against black and Latino students. At the same time, as you know, Senator, I was very concerned with I don't know if you brought UCLA here specifically because of the survey that they conducted in 2022 of teachers where the CTA UCLA Center for Transformation of Schools survey in 2022 on the state of our teachers, especially in terms of trying to address all the burnout that teachers suffered during the pandemic and how many are leaving the profession.

How they cited that the top two priorities for teachers who indicate that they will be leaving the profession. Number one was better pay, but right behind it, number two was their desire to strengthen discipline for students with disruptive behavior. And I been hearing this a lot from teachers that I've been talking to, teachers who are currently serving in the Legislature, as well as those that I've spoken throughout the state, that they all talk about how there's been a real surge in behavior issues in the classroom at schools throughout the state.

I think it's no surprise to anyone who has an inkling of understanding of all the trauma that students went through during the pandemic. And so I shared, along with some of my colleagues on this dais, taking away that tool from teachers and school administrators to be able to make sure that the rest of the kids who are not causing trouble have that orderly learning environment and that the teacher is not having to spend all of their time and attention on the student and causing disruptive behavior, taking their attention away from the rest of the classroom that they're trying to learn and trying to get the best education that they can get. And so, as you know, Sandra, we spent a lot of time talking and of course, you had to bring Dolores Huerta into the you know, she comes to my office yesterday.

We talked for about an hour not only about the challenges of students in the Central Valley, but I heard from the disability rights advocate talking about how a disproportionate number of disabled students were. Teachers may not have the training to recognize students on the autism spectrum and so that if they act up, that they can be disproportionately disciplined, identified as exhibiting willful defiance. But the bottom line for me, what made me come around to support your bill with the sunset is my deference to the folks who are actually in the classrooms at the school sites.

I mean, the fact that the Association of California School Administrators is not only they are in support of your bill and the fact that the teachers or the Federation of Teachers are in support of your bill and that there is no opposition to your bill. I mean, to me, that was very important, because if the teachers are not going to oppose your bill, then it's hard for me to oppose your bill. And so I share a lot of the concerns that Ms. Quirk-Silva, as the classroom teacher on this committee, has raised. Want to see how this plays out in the next five years, but I am here to support your bill.

Thank you.

So any further comments from the committee seeing? None, madam. Senator Skinner, would you like to close?

Thank you, Chair and Members. And the study that you referenced was done by the center that Dr. Huff represents or is director of. And certainly we don't necessarily need to take the time now, but I know that they've done subsequent studies and there's some different interpretations, but at some point, Chair, if you'd like to speak to him or ask him, certainly what you read is accurate from what those aspects you read.

But there's much more data that he could provide. So I just want to put that on the record, and I think it's been a good debate. I would, of course, love it if we were just lifting it off the middle schools, but that's all right.

We'll extend a sunset, and I hope that we have good people as time goes on who can review and work with our teachers and make sure this is working so that we could potentially eliminate it statewide in the very near future. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

All right. I believe a motion was made by Mr. Lee. Is there a second? By Ms. Quirk-Silva. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item four, SB 274. The motion is do pass as amended to appropriation. Muratsuchi? Muratsuchi aye. Dahle? Dahle not voting. Juan Carrillo? Hoover? Hoover not voting. Lee? Lee aye. McCarty? McCarty aye. Quirk-Silva? Quirk-Silva aye.

4 votes. Bill is out. Actually, Ms. Quirk-Silva, if you can stick around, I know that Mr. McCarty has to leave, and so why don't we lift the call for some of the-- okay, so if you can, why don't we first entertain a motion for the consent calendar?

Moved and seconded, this is a vote for the consent calendar. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

Consent file item three, SB 223, the motion is due. Pass to appropriations. File item six, SB 291, the motion is due, passes amended to Appropriations. File item nine, SB 413, the motion is due. Passes amended to the Assembly floor File item 13, SB 531, the motion is due. Passes amended to appropriations. File item 14, SB 671, the motion is due. Pass to appropriations.

Muratsuchi, Aye. Dahle, Aye. Juan Carrillo. Hoover, Aye. Lee, Aye. McCarty, Aye. Quirk Silva.

Consent calendar.

Quirk Silva, Aye. six votes.

Six votes. The consent calendar is out.

Consent clarifying. File item nine, SB 413, the motion is due, passes amended to the Assembly Floor.

All right. Now I will give an opportunity for committee Members to add on or to vote. Lifting the call.

File item two, SB 88, the motion is due. Pass is amended to Appropriations with the Chair. Voting aye. Dahle, No. McCarty, AYe. Quirk Silva, Aye.

Five to two, the Bill is out.

File item 16, SB 857, the motion is due. Pass to Appropriations with the Chair voting aye. Dahle, Not voting. McCarty, Aye. Quirk Silva, Aye.

Five votes, the Bill is out.

Thank you, chair and Members. Childcare is essential to a functional economy. Without affordable and available to childcare, parents cannot work. According to the center for American Progress, the childcare workforce has lost 88,000 jobs nationally since February of 2020. Childcare workers are some of the lowest paid workers across the country. There are currently empty early childhood classrooms because providers cannot hire teachers to staff them.

This Bill will help early learning and childcare providers and families by transitioning providers to a single cost based reimbursement rate and suspending family fees until an equitable family fee schedule can be established. With me today is Julia Terry from the Childcare Resource Center to speak in support of the Bill.

Good afternoon, chair and Members. Thank you, Senator Limon, for authoring this very important Bill. I'm Julia Terry with the Childcare Resource Center.

We proudly serve over 50,000 children and families, both in northern Los Angeles County and San Bernardino County. The issues affecting California's childcare system have been discussed at length. This legislative session, SB 380 targets a core issue within our system by requiring the state to develop a new rate system based on the true cost of providing care.

Today, we respectfully ask for your aye vote on SB 380 because it works to target central issues within our childcare system. First, it targets the need to access and sustain a high quality ECE workforce. There have been decades of research conducted both nationally and right here in California that provide an overwhelming consensus that reimbursement rate reform is the most critical issue needing to be addressed in order to sustain the early care and learning workforce.

This workforce is comprised of virtually all women, the majority of whom are women of color, who are highly skilled, competent and educated, and they deserve a livable wage. Without livable wages, childcare workers will continue to leave the field, leaving our system without access to high quality and a skilled workforce. Second, this Bill addresses long overdue racial and gender pay inequities.

In 2021, the US. Bureau of Statistics found that the national average medium pay for a childcare worker was just $13.22 an hour, not nearly enough to cognitive the cost of rent or one's basic needs. In fact, in California, at least a quarter of all childcare workers live in poverty and have to rely on state assistance such as CalFresh to make ends meet.

As a result, ECE programs have an extremely difficult time hiring staff. And as the Senator mentioned, some programs have classrooms sitting dark due to understaffing. Our subsidized childcare system, which only serves Low income children and has a workforce compromised of primarily Low income women of color, is simply unjust because it's currently constructed in a way that deepens inequities right now, current rates only cover about half the cost of providing care.

Finally, this Bill addresses the need to sustain an essential industry that supports all other workforce sectors. By strengthening the childcare workforce and addressing this antiquated rate system, we are going to be strengthening opportunities to provide support to our children's development during their most critical stages of brain development. This is the workforce that supports all other workforce's children. For these reasons, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Any public comments in support of the Bill, please come forward.

Josefina Ramirez Notsinneh, with children now in support.

Jonathan Munoz, on behalf of First 5 Los Angeles, in support.

Raquel Yafi, on behalf of thriving families, California, formerly known as Kappa, in support.

Jeff Baka, representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools, in support.

Jenny Trice, on behalf of the county of Santa Clara, in support.

Andrew Langley, on behalf of the county of San Diego, in support.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members, rosanna Caraco Elliott, here on behalf of the Early Care and Education Consortium, in support.

Thank you.

Chair and Members. Michelle. Taran Wolfwork with the California Commission on the Status. Women and Girls, in strong support. Thank you. Senator Limon.

Lizzie Kutzona, here on behalf of the city and county of San Francisco and the City of Goletta, in support. Thank you.

Elani Aguinaldo, on behalf of the Santa Clara County Office of Education, in support.

Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education In support.

Lucy Salcito Carter with the Alameda County Office of Ed in Support.

Annie Thomas, on behalf of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services. In support.

Any further witnesses or public testimony in support of the Bill? Seeing none. Any witnesses in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. Bring it back to the committee.

Any questions or comments from the committee, Senator, I seeing no one raising their hands. We know that you, along with Assemblymember Rayes, has been a champion. And I know that Senator McCarty I mean, Assembly Member McCarthy, has been working very hard on the budget side, and so I was looking to see if he had any comments, but I didn't see him raising his hand.

And so we want to thank you for your leadership. We know that childcare is critical for the state of California, for Californians in our economy, and so proud to support it. Would you like to close?

I just want to say thank you. All this is a priority for the Women's Caucus, but so many here have been supportive of childcare initiatives, and I look forward to getting this through the finish line with the support of the budget. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Has a motion been made? Motion is made and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll file.

Item 8, SB 380. The motion is due pass to Appropriations. Muratsuchi, Aye. Dahle, Aye. Juan Carrillo, Aye. Hoover, Aye. Lee, Aye. McCarty, Aye. Quirk Silva, Aye.

Seven votes. The Bill is out.

Thank you. Okay, I understand Senator Menjivar has a witness issue. Senator Ochoa Bogh has been waiting patiently, but you're letting Senator Menjivar okay. And actually he was just called to utilities and energy so that I need to add on for the votes. And so I will be back. I'd like to turn the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahle.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator. I really appreciate it. Mr. Chair, as you walk out committee madam Chair, now Assembly Members, first and foremost, I want to say that I appreciate the dialogue, the recent dialogue I've had with the Chair, my staff has had with the consultants on finding a way to move the issue in addressing climate change forward. Two weeks ago, I sat here to present Senator Henry Stearn's Bill on school shade structure. So today I'm here to present a complementary Bill. SB 499, The cool schools act.

We're looking to address the hot surfaces on our school campuses. The impact, health and safety of students. Just yesterday, the Governor announced his heat ready California campaign.

Because this is a huge priority and it's an emergency we're seeing right now in this campaign, he's calling for action across the state to address this issue in SB Four Nine Nine. It's one of those tools in the toolbox. Specifically, it's looking to require schools to do two things create an extreme Heat Action plan stating by the earliest time or next time schools will surface or resurface, they will opt for a cooler solution and move schools to start having the conversations about implementing tree canopy on their schools and upon appropriation of funds.

It's an amendment we took throughout this process. Being mindful of the lack of money for this, schools will act on this Extreme Action Plan that will move schools to install green barriers that have been shown to mitigate the impacts of extreme healing population. This Bill also requires the Department of Education in consultation with the Department of Social Services, to develop a template for Extreme Action Plan that would help guide schools along with child daycare facilities that are located on school campuses.

It also requires Department of Social Services to identify a liaison that is trained in extreme heat mitigation. Members, we all know that climate change has led to average temperatures rising in the United States. Just on July 4, I believe, or that weekend we had the world's most hottest day in the last 100,000 something years.

And it's only going to get worse. In my community, the San Fernando Valley, on a day it was recorded on a day that was 93 degrees, the asphalt got to 145 degrees. These are communities I'm looking at impact directly that look like my communities, your communities.

And we're mindful this is not a one size fits all. Every single school is located in a very unique geographic area of the state of California. With that in mind, we're asking schools to take that into consideration to work within the parameters of their local ordinance to ensure that they're not violating any of the local ordinance requirements.

For example, certain schools, like in Riverside County, have the Max amount of trees they can plant. We don't want them to supersede that number, but to work within that in their surrounding areas. On top of the Governor's call to action, we also recently saw another report out of UCLA.

It's a coalition of nearly 50 airports that are calling for action, and their first and third recommendation for policy is actually embedded in this Bill. Specifically, I want our students to be able to thrive in school by removing these harmful surfaces and adding green spaces. Current legislation, both in your house in my House is going through the process right now to find some funding, like Assembly Member Lisa Calderon's Bill to codify the grants out of Cal Fire.

Previously, $150,000,000 were put aside for this specifically competitive grants. Cal Fire, along with Green Yard schools, have put together best practices for our school sites to look at to be able to pull down. And we hope that on top of the federal money that recently was made available, the grant just actually closed about two months ago, more avenues will be made available for our schools statewide to be able to Fund these best practices.

With me to testify further is our two witnesses. First, Fatima Iqbal-Zubair I might have I apologize. I've known you for a while. I should know that better. With calmbar Voters, followed by Will Parrish, founder and President of 10th Strands.

Thank you. Hello, committee Members. Fatima Iqbal-Zubairr from California environmental voters, and our organization is in strong support of SP 499.

I'm speaking today also as someone who's a current youth mentor from South Central LA and a former public school teacher. A school with 100% Low income students of color with severe environmental justice concerns, one of which are extreme health risks that come with extreme heat, where students have suffered heat exhaustion, dehydration, difficulty concentrating. I'm also a mother of a son with special needs that goes to a public school in South LA.

Who struggles with these same issues. I have seen firsthand the health impacts that come with schools that aren't built to be resilient to heat and other consequences of the climate crisis. Just last week, as the Senator mentioned, for four days in a row, the planet reached its hottest days as a planet endured dangerous heat.

Each year, extreme heat kills more Americans than any other climate fueled hazard, including hurricanes, floods, wildfires, but it gets far less attention. Between 2010 and 2019, the estimated total of deaths is 3900 deaths from heat. Black Californians are more likely than any of those of any other race to die from heat.

Furthermore, children are more vulnerable to the effects of heat than adults. Physiologically, their bodies are less able to self regulate in extreme temperatures. Children also face a heightened risk of some health conditions, like asthma, when they experience extremely high temperatures.

We need urgent action for implementation of extreme heat mitigation at schools where children spend most of their time with a reasonable but urgent timeline, which this Bill sets. To change these outcomes, we know to create change that will truly save lives across our state, especially in our most vulnerable communities. We have to set the standard for school districts to meet SB Four Nine nine will require schools to create an extreme heat Action Plan to opt for essentially cooler schools.

California's building standards do not currently require schools to mitigate heat exposure on school grounds. The health impacts show that the change towards climate resilient schools that can respond to extreme heat and other climate impacts is simply not happening fast enough. Even though some districts are doing it, not all districts are doing it.

It's up to our state to set the precedent for implementations that youth across California protected. Right now, other states are moving with greater urgency to confront this public health challenge that disproportionately imperils the most vulnerable. It's time we step up with a Bill that mandates not just a plan, but implementation so we see real action on the issue of extreme heat at schools.

It is for these reasons we urge all committee Members to vote aye on SB 499. Thank you.

Thank you. Did you have a chance? Okay.

Yeah. No, right? Yeah. Good afternoon.

My name is Will Parrish. Thank you, Chairman. I'm the founder of Ten Strands, a California nonprofit focused on whole school sustainability, which includes environmental literacy, ecologically resilient, school grounds, and school building decarbonization efforts.

And I'm here to express our strong support for Senate Bill 499. As part of our work with Green Schoolyards America, we know that 10% of California's public schools have less than 2% tree canopy, and the majority of schools have less than 10% tree canopy. Also, there is a disproportionate burden on communities with the lowest income and on communities of color because they have the fewest shade trees and the least green space.

Unshaded asphalt and rubber surfaces on school grounds reach high temperatures that are hazardous to students health. Unshaded asphalt can reach 140 degrees on a sunny day when the air temperatures are above 90 degrees, and rubber safety surfaces can reach above 165 degrees. Even on a mild day, asphalt and rubber are hot.

I've seen areas where schools have had to put cautionary tape around the playground to keep kids off of it. Yes, we are children's. Smaller body size makes them more vulnerable to heat than adults, so this is a problem that affects all schools.

Schoolyard forests and Green Schoolyards address the climate crisis in a way that directly protects children from heat, and school grounds are public lands that are efficient and strategic places to invest in California's scarce water resources. Since the shade produced by schoolyard trees has the potential to cool millions of students every day. Last year, ten strands, in partnership with Green Schoolyards America, Cal, Fire and Cde, launched the California Schoolyard Forest System with a mission to shade and protect students from rising temperatures and to help bring equitable access to schoolyard forests to scale.

We commend the Legislature on the investments California is making to address climate change, environmental justice and public education. And we strongly support Senate Bill 499 as another critical step toward the goal of preparing our schools for a new climate reality. The Data Initiative supports research, policy and advocacy efforts as it provides patterns and trends of school actions around climate aware action and inaction in regions with those who are most marginalized or experiencing the highest levels of environmental injustice.

Without data, it's difficult.

Can I ask you to wrap up, please?

Yeah. How widespread dangerous heat exposure is in our school districts. And this district's analysis will produce maps and data that combine information from Ed data, cal and viral screen and will pair it with metrics of LCF data.

You're at three minutes now.

Okay? To provide a deep understanding where equity and need for K Twelve schools is the greatest. It will helpfully encourage districts to learn from each other's practices.

Thank you. Any public testimony in support of the Bill, please come forward.

Hi. David Bolog on behalf of the San Fernando Valley parents and San Fernando Valley Alliance. Even though at times we are at odds with our great Senator, we are happy to support this and are very, very thankful for this solution based legislation that she brought forth to you today. I hope you vote for it.

Thank you. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and Members sorry, I'm a little short. Good afternoon, chair and Members. On behalf of Stand Up California and Educate Advocate, we support this Bill.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Erin Friday, our duty. We support this Bill. Good afternoon, committee chair and Members.

My name is Leah Jones on behalf of a Voice for Choice advocacy, and we strongly support and sponsor this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further comments in support of the Bill? Seeing none. Any witnesses in opposition to the Bill, please come forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chair Members. Jeff Vaca, representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools and the 23 school district superintendents in Riverside County. I want to assure the author and the committee that our opposition to that Bill, and I think this is true of the other organizations in opposition, does not reflect a feeling on our part climate change is not an important issue. We're seeing the impacts. In Riverside County, we have four school districts that are located entirely within a desert and at least one of them, Desert Sands Unified, has taken great strides to create individual heat mitigation plans at each of their campuses. I think our concern with the Bill as it is before you today really goes back to a comment that is in the analysis that is before you, which is that the diversity of size, condition and location of California's LEAs creates significant challenges for unilaterally requiring specific methods to reduce the impact of heat on students and schools. And I also want to make the point that again, all of the organizations that are currently in opposition have been working with your staff as a work group on Assembly Bill 247 to place the statewide education bond on the ballot in 2024. I am, as well as some others are part of a climate work group Subcommittee as part of that work group. And we are working with your staff to ensure that the language and the bond does provide either an incentive or some other method within the structure of the school facilities program to provide the ability to make expenditures for exactly all the type of great things that Senator Menjivar and her sponsors have talked about today. But as is today, we do remain opposed to the Bill.

Thank you. Any further witnesses in opposition, please come forward.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair Members. Chris Reefe on behalf of the California School Boards Association, for many of the same reasons stated by my colleague from Riverside County Office of Education, we are respectfully opposed.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee Members Mishaal Gill on behalf of California Association of School Business Officials and our colleagues at associate of California School Administrator in opposition.

All right, any further public comments in opposition to the Bill seeing? None. Let me bring it back to the committee. Mr. Lee.

I want to thank Senator for bringing the Bill know I'm going to be supporting the Bill today. But I know the committee analysis just had a couple of amendments to consider and we had a brief conversation about moving forward. There's some things you want to consider. I wanted to clarify, would you be considering about changing it from making a school site plan to an LEA based plan? And the second part about what's the opposition guy talked about to also think about some nuance in it. The Bill right now has a lot of very specific prescriptions, like even shading windows, very specific windows. But of course in California we have very different biomes in different areas. Like my school districts are quite different than perhaps even the ones in your district. So perhaps the interventions of the plants might be a little different if you give some of that nuance. I do want to say I do appreciate a lot of when you're talking about specific heat on surfaces, that's a huge problem. Of course, we see with asphalt or with rubber. So those kind of principles which are based on the scientific input, much less than a specific type of plant next to a type of window kind of thing. So I just wanted to give you some room to address if you're going to be taking sort of men's about LEAs and also about specific construction interventions too.

Thank you, AssemblyMember, for that question. The intent of this Bill, and this was brought up in the first House, was to not make it prescriptive to work within the confines of the local ordinances. Not everything. This is not going to be unilateral across the entire schools in the state of California. With that in mind, Assembly Members should this will make it out, you have my commitment to ensure that there is clear language in here that states that specifically that local ordinances should be considered when moving forward with this. Additionally, Mr. Assemblymember, after a conversation went back, been putting a lot of work, as you shared with all your bills, right? It goes without saying. And I also commit to moving the accountability from specific school sites to LEAs to ensure better programming across the school districts, accountability and so forth. And I would like to also add embedded into the response that in terms of the funding, I'm very excited to see the bonds in both houses to put the facilities bond on the ballot to bring funding to this, which is why I amended my Bill to do upon appropriation should the schools implement this. Additionally, on Green, if I'm saying it correctly, the Green schools yards, there's already a template that LEAs could pull down to start Riverside, the school that was referenced, the Sands District in Riverside. If they have their plans already this Bill great. They could bypass it because they already did their plans specific to their school district. This isn't asking for anything extra because they already have their plans. All that to say, Assembly Member I do commit to take these amendments in, approves should it get out of this committee, to move it to LEAs and also to put very specific language that is not prescriptive and binds school district or now LEAs to one uniform template.

Yeah, and I appreciate those commitments, Senator. I think I really agree with the premise of the Bill and it's very important to protect our kids from devastating effects of climate change. I just think there's some details to be ironed out to make the Bill stronger and achieve the goals you want to do. I also don't see this necessarily in conflict with all the other bills we're doing. I think it's in alignment with a lot of things we're doing, especially with trying to move forward with the school facilities bond. And I'm thankful you put in the part about contingent appropriation, because I'm sure we will get the bond through, and I think it's in alignment with a lot of things. So I'm happy to support your Bill today, and thanks for those commitments.

Thank you Assembly Member

Ms. Dahle Vice Chair.

Thank you. I just want to have a couple of clarifying questions. So it's upon appropriation for all projects, because right here it requires that when you resurface, you go to Natural Grass.

And that's only when they have funding for it. So nothing can be implemented unless there's funding available. There's no mandate. There's also no enforcement component within this Bill.

Okay, so I wanted to clarify that because I underline Natural Grass, which you've been to my district, so most of my district already has natural grass, a lot of it right now. But I think for some school districts across the state, if they convert back to natural grass when there's water and there's expenses that go along with that, all of us agree our children should be playing on I believe they should be playing on natural grass. But there is those expenses that come along with that for maintenance, mowing, water, all those things come with those transitioning, those surfaces probably back to natural grass. So I just want to make sure that we're not putting an undue burden on our school sites, not just for one time expenses, but ongoing as well, because there is also that whoever's resurfacing or redoing the heat, they have to be trained on extreme heat. So I think maybe clarifying who that is, is that a classified?

So we've been working with the, sorry Assembly Member

I just think there's some clarifying language that would be helpful.

We've been working with departments on getting some technical assistance. We are asking departments to assign a liaison who will be trained in this. So this would be placed upon the burden of the Department to put that person in place to help guide now the LEAs versus the school sites. And in regarding the natural grass, you're absolutely right. I have visited your area, pretty green, but you also have to take air pollution into consideration in those areas, and perhaps the burden of the price is too much. So switching over to shade greenifying, the areas, maybe the asphalt is in something they can do at that moment. It's what's specific to that area. I want our school sites, our LEAs, to be as successful as possible. Any kind of mitigation moving forward would bring relief to our students. So any steps forward are going to be a win for the state of California.

Thank you.

Ms. Quirk-Silva.

Again, thank the author, and I support this fully. I would actually like to be added. As an author on our side. I do concur with my colleagues comments up here, but if you look at it, it's a template for an extreme heat action plan. The reason it's important that we not only move forward with this now, but we really should have done this ten years ago, 15 years ago. Many of the recommendations take a very long time to institute. Any of us who love green space and gardens know that if you plant a tree, it's going to take a decade or longer to really see that full growth and to really provide the shade we're talking about. And sadly, we do have some full grown trees on campuses. And all too often before we hit this climate change discussion, those trees were cut down for many reasons. Sometimes, as we know, in our cities, there could be a sidewalk that looked like it was coming up. And because of potential litigation, we'd see 100 year trees just be cut down. So we need to do things like preserve and protect the little bit of shade trees we do have on campuses, but we can also learn. I know that I was on City Council over 15 years ago when we moved from taking a green lawn area and moving changed that to synthetic turf. At that time, it was very popular. And what have we learned since? That those turf fields are extremely hot and can actually be very dangerous for the young athletes playing on them. So as we go through making decisions, whether it's at the local level, at the school level, we learn things, but certainly planning, being aggressive about a plan and looking for opportunities. I actually think it'd be a great way to get students invested by going out and asking them how would they change their spaces. Because it's not just about lawn or about trees. It's about walkways. It's about pathways. It's about where are places that kids can congregate on campuses that are cool but also provide opportunities for learning. I know I started, believe it or not, everybody, I was never into politics, but 25 years ago, I started a school garden, and as a first grade teacher, just a little school garden. And that was in some ways, how I ended up getting on the Parks and Recreation Commission. It was just about a garden. So there's lots of ways to create spaces on campuses that can really elevate not only education, but protect our kids.

Thank you as a Member, given your background as a teacher in education, thank you so much for that support.

Okay. Any further comments from the committee seeing? None. Senator Menjivar, thank you very much for your leadership on addressing this very important issue of extreme heat. I know you represent you know, we've all seen the news of how the heat has been especially extreme heat has been especially pronounced at the LA USD schools in the San Fernando Valley. And so I think we all recognize that it is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, I will not be able to support your Bill today because of the concerns being raised by the administrators, the school board organizations, the superintendents, because I'm 110% in support of the intent of your Bill. We need to make sure that we can make it workable for our schools. There's, like, putting requirements on, what is it, 1000 school districts, 10,000 school sites in our state is very complicated. I would have preferred that we could have worked together more on this Bill with a two year Bill, as I had suggested. But I understand you want to move forward with the Bill, but I just wanted to make sure that I made it clear that I support the intent and the goals of your Bill. But I want to get it right. It's my responsibility as the chair of the Education Committee to get it right or try my best to get it right. And so, for that reason, I'm going to be laying off today, give you the last word.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we had some recent conversations on this, and also two weeks ago, I sat here and also presented my SB 541, which is a mandate for condoms in all schools. And that mandate did make it out of this committee with support from the chair. We've been talking about this issue for a long time. You've stated the state of my district giving the extreme heat, and I've committed to take amendments right before approves to make this digestible for our school systems, and we'll continue to work on this issue moving forward. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

All right, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item eleven, SB 499. The motion is due pass to Appropriations. Murarsuchi not voting. Mersuchi not voting. Dahle no. Dahle no. Juan Carrillo? Juan Carillo? Aye. Hoover. Aye. Hoover aye. Lee. Lee aye. McCarty. Quirk-Silva. Quirk-Silva? Aye.

Court votes, the Bill is out.

Thank you so much.

Next, we have file item number ten, SB 486, by Senator Hurtado. I'm sorry. Yeah. Patiently waiting has been Senator Ochoa Bogh file item number five, SB 283. And we're going to check on the room temperature. Aloha. Senator, the floor is yours.

Aloha. Mr. Chair, it's a pleasure to be here. I believe this is my first bill in this committee this year.

Is it?

I believe it is.

Okay.

It's a pleasure to be here. I'd like to begin by accepting the committee's amendments. As I begin my prepared statement. I want to first thank Edith Sepulveda, a wonderfully kind and brave woman for sharing her story of her daughter, Adeline Carrasco, with the Legislature. As a matter of fact, I had the pleasure to meet her on that night that her daughter was admitted to the hospital. I was a recently appointed board member to the school district. And so I remember going to the hospital at Loma Linda on that night.

So this bill is actually very close to home, and I'm grateful to be here presenting it. On October 31, 2019, Adeline alerted a nearby adult at school that she was having issues breathing. Over the course of the school day, Adeline walked from the athletic field to her classroom several times without adult supervision. This was the length of several football fields. When her condition worsened to the point she was unable to stand or speak, she was transported to the nurse's office by a golf cart. Nine days later, Adeline passed away. She was only 13 years old. Unfortunately, Adeline's case is not unique. Asthma is a leading chronic illness among school aged children and one of the most common causes of school absenteeism.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, it is likely that one in ten students suffer from asthma. In the United States, asthma kills more than 300 children and young adults under the age, under 24, each year. However, according to the Rutgers Medical School, the number may be much higher because the official cause of death may not reflect an asthma-incited event of an individual with a cardiac arrest upon arrival at the emergency department. It is critical that we do everything in our power to protect our most vulnerable students.

As amended, SB 283 would require LEAs to develop individualized asthma action plans for a student when parents or guardians notify the LEA that their child has asthma. The bill will also encourage LEAs to provide employees with professional development related to asthma. Will encourage, not mandate. Joining me in support is Robert Glassman, who represents Adeline's family, and Pamela Gibbs, Executive Director of Government Relations for the Los Angeles County Office of Education.

Thank you, Senator. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Halloween, October 2019. A 13-year-old 8th-grade student, Adeline Carrasco, lost her life due to a fatal asthma attack at school in San Bernardino. The circumstances of her death are horrific, but the fact that her death was completely preventable makes this case even that much more tragic. During her last period of school on Halloween, Adeline and her science class went from their class down to the lower athletic field at Mesa View Middle School to participate in a Halloween-themed science experiment.

When she got down there, she alerted her science teacher that she was having difficulty breathing. The teacher then sent Adeline back up to the classroom to get her inhaler, and then she came back down to the field. She told her teacher that the inhaler was not helping her. The teacher then sent Adeline back up the hill to the nurse's office, and that is when she collapsed and went into cardiac arrest. As the Senator pointed out, at that point in time, Adeline had already traveled approximately eleven football fields, going back and forth from the class to the field to the nurse. She did all that without adult supervision.

By the time she was found and the paramedics were called, it was already too late. They couldn't bring her back to life. She was taken off life support nine days later at Loma Linda Children's Hospital. We later found out that Adeline's acute asthmatic condition was worsened or made exacerbated by the extreme physical exertion that was put on her body by going back and forth. In the case, a school safety expert hired by the district itself testified that the science teacher did the exact opposite thing that she should have done in that situation. Adeline's case, however, as the Senator pointed out, is not unique.

This is a chronic illness. It affects more kids than any other disease. It keeps more kids away from school and sends more kids to the emergency room than anything else. SB 283 will help save the lives of students who have asthma in school districts by having the school districts develop asthma action plans that will help the teachers and staff know what to do if they're ever faced with a student experiencing an asthma attack at school.

Can I ask you to wrap up?

Absolutely, Mr. Chair. So on behalf of Adeline's family, this is made in her honor, this is made in her loving memory. We thank the Senator and her staff for putting together this common-sense bill, and we thank the committee and Mr. Chair for your consideration. Thank you very much.

Thank you and good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members. Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education, and proud to speak in support of SB 283 today. We know that many school districts still lack a comprehensive asthma management plan, despite the California School Board's Association's recommendation almost 15 years ago. And unfortunately, asthma is still on the rise.

I will never forget a startling childhood memory that involved an elementary school classmate who suffered an asthma attack on the blacktop during recess. The child passed out while the yard duty teachers tried to assist. Emergency personnel arrived to help revive the child, but having a plan and identifying this child in advance of such an event would have saved the child, school personnel, and child onlookers from the trauma of witnessing such a scary event in the first place. This event in this case could have been tragic, but the child did survive. As we know, as already mentioned, many children die and many youth die from asthma.

SB 283 can provide important guidance and tools to schools to dramatically reduce the numbers by requiring local education agencies to adopt a comprehensive asthma management plan when they are informed of students who have asthma. The asthma management plan would include, but is not limited to, information about symptoms, common triggers of asthma, ways to reduce acute symptoms, et cetera, and emergency response procedures and other relevant topics. The CSBA Asthma Management Sample Administrative Regulation, AR 5141.23 published in March of 2008 and the CSBA Policy Brief on the Asthma Management Plan is very helpful and are excellent tools to help schools.

The management plan approach aligns with current LACOE, Los Angeles County Office of Education, practice within the division of pupil services, and students, and supports students diagnosed with asthma. For these reasons and those previously stated, we urge your support, and aye vote for SB 283 at the appropriate time.

Thank you. Public comments in support of this bill. Please come forward.

Hello again. David Bullock from the San Fernando Valley Alliance and the California Nurses United, in support of this bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Erin Friday. We support this bill.

Leilani Aguinaldo, Fresno Unified School District, in support.

Bill has been moved by Vice Chair Dahle, seconded by Ms. Quirk-Silva. Any witnesses in opposition to the bill please come forward. Seeing none. Any public testimony in opposition to the bill? Seeing none. Let me bring it back to the committee. Any questions, comments? Seeing none. Senator Ochoa Bogh, I had a bad case of asthma when I was a kid. I was actually hospitalized twice for asthma. I have some traumatic memories of childhood asthma. And so, needless to say, I fully appreciate your bill. Happy to support it. Would you like to close?

Thank you. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

All right. Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item five, SB 283. The motion is do pass as amended to appropriations. Muratsuchi. Aye. Muratsuchi, aye. Dahle. Aye. Dahle, aye. Juan Carrillo. Aye. Juan Carrillo, aye. Hoover. Aye. Hoover, aye. Lee. McCarty. Quirk-Silva. Aye. Quirk-Silva, aye.

Five votes. The bill is out. Okay, I know that Ms., well, in sign-in order. Right? Sign-in order. Senator Newman, your next file, item 15, SB 760.

Afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members.

I'm pleased to present SB 760, which will create a safe and inclusive environment not only for nonbinary students, but also for all students by requiring each public school to establish at least one all gender restroom. Before I go further, I'd like to make clear that I'm accepting the committee's proposed amendments. And now to the Bill.

SB 760 endeavors to create a safe and inclusive environment, not only for Non Binary students, but for all students by requiring each public school to establish at least one all gender restroom within their facility. The initial impetus for the Bill arose in 2021, when a Member of the Chino Valley Unified School District offered a resolution at a school board meeting that would have banned nonbinary and transgender students across their district from using the restroom corresponding with their gender identity. In response to this proposal, as well as to the instability and concern it generated, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurman warned that the Chino Valley Unified School District's proposed resolution to exclude nonbinary students likely represented a violation of state law.

Although the proposed measure ultimately failed, the Superintendent and I believe there was an opportunity, in fact, an imperative to ensure the safest and most inclusive environment for all students in California schools. In order to foster discussion and develop a framework for prospective relevant legislation, the Superintendent convened an ad hoc committee for safe school bathrooms that was comprised primarily of students with direct experience with this challenging issue and who wanted to contribute to creating a safe and inclusive environment for everyone. Over the past year, I've had the privilege of working alongside the Members of the ad hoc committee, and I'm proud to say that the measure before you today is in large part the product of the hard work of those brave, creative, and principled students.

With the committee amendments, this Bill requires each California public school to establish at least one all gender restroom to be made available to all students regardless of gender expression, and if a school currently has two or more restrooms to remain accessible to students by July 1, 2026. In a case where a school has two or fewer restrooms currently available, which can often be the case in small schools in rural districts, that school would instead be required to incorporate an all gender restroom as part of its next modernization project. Alternatively, if a school site with two or fewer restrooms identifies an existing restroom that can be converted for student use, there's nothing in the Bill that would prevent that school site from making that restroom available to students, thereby avoiding the prospective costs and complications of new construction.

To ensure that limits are not placed on school restrooms unnecessarily or arbitrarily, this Bill requires a documented concern for pupil safety, absent, and immediate threat. Under the provisions of the Bill, the California Department of education will be required to conduct compliance reviews and produce appropriate guidance to help schools in establishing all gender restrooms. This measure also aligns with California's Menstrual Equity Act of 2021 and ensures accessibility to menstrual products per the provisions of that act.

Here with me to testify today is Olivia Sutter, one of the students who participated in the ad hoc committee on behalf of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and who is, as I mentioned, a co sponsor, and also Craig Pulsipher on behalf of Equality California, which is also a co sponsor. I am respectfully asking for your aye vote today.

Good afternoon. My name is Olivia. I am a rising junior in the Palo Alto Unified School District and a representative on the Superintendent's Safe School Bathrooms ad hoc committee.

I have spent the last four years working with my district to increase student access to all gender facilities and have seen firsthand the positive effect it has on my peers' lives. I am gender non-conforming and am one of many LGBTQ plus students who do not feel comfortable using sex segregated bathrooms at school. For a long time, I countered this discomfort by not drinking anything until I returned home at the end of the day.

And I am not the only one who has made that choice. Additionally, I am prone to headaches, which are worsened by dehydration. They can make focusing in class incredible, incredibly difficult and take away from my education.

I have attended schools that have all gender restrooms and ones that do not, and the difference is staggering. When students are able to relieve themselves safely and comfortably, they are able to focus in class and be active in school events and the larger community. Single stall all gender restrooms help decrease bathroom harassment and bullying faced by trans and nonbinary students, as well as decrease the risk of urinary tract infections and other health issues.

Single cell restrooms are also an indispensable asset to all students. Bathrooms are inherently awkward and uncomfortable for everyone, but for some, they become unsafe. Bullying is not an LGBTQ plus only event, and all gender restrooms provide a safe alternative for everyone.

Access to all gender facilities, especially ones that are accessible and well maintained, make the world of difference, and play a significant role in improving student health across the board. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair Members. Craig Pulser on behalf of Equality, California proud cosponsor.

I think we can all agree that every student deserves to feel safe when performing one of the most basic bodily functions at school. And sadly, this is not the reality for many students, especially transgender and gender nonconforming young people. GLSEN's 2021 National School Climate Survey found that about 45% of LGBTQ students actually avoid using restrooms at school because they feel unsafe or uncomfortable.

And of course, as has been noted, students can suffer significant health and academic consequences by not using the restroom during an eight hour school day. SB 760 is intended to address this problem and just want to highlight again that this Bill was designed and came from students themselves. And so always very happy to be working with students on legislation that they recommend the Bill.

We believe this is landmark legislation, the first of its kind in the nation, and an important and timely demonstration of the state's commitment to improving school climate for LGBTQ students. And as you all know, it stands in stark contrast to the over 500 anti LGBTQ bills that have been introduced across the country, many of which target trans students and their ability to use the restroom. So very grateful to both Senator Newman and the Superintendent for championing this Bill and respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you. Public comments in support of the Bill. Please come forward.

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

Barrett Snider on behalf of the San Francisco Unified School District in support and with the amendments that are being taken, the Small School Districts Associations are moving the opposition. So thank you. Good afternoon.

Ross Buckley, on behalf of the City of Sacramento, in support.

Good afternoon. Lizzie Cootsona, here on behalf of the California Faculty Association and the City of West Hollywood in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Rebecca Gonzalez with the National Association of Social Workers California Chapter in support.

Hi again. Rachel Bhagwat with ACLU California Action in support and registering the support of Disability Rights California. Thank you.

Michelle Warshaw on behalf of State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurman, proud cosponsor in support.

I'm Scott Suiter, a parent in strong support.

All right, any witnesses in opposition to the Bill, please come forward. Two minutes each.

Girls bodies are in danger when changing, sleeping, showering and using bathrooms when male bodies are present, regardless of how they identify. How the term safe morphed into meaning, placing female bodies in danger is unbelievable. Shame on the females voting to sacrifice girls in the name of gender equity. In Wisconsin public school, an 18 year old transidentified man exposed his penis to a bunch of 14 year old girls showering in the locker room.

Are you guys tired of me yet? Good afternoon. My name is Erin Friday. Our Duty, an international group of nonpartisan parents with no religious affiliation.

I voted for same sex marriage. I'm a licensed attorney and a Democrat of 37 years. In 2012, California passed the Fair Act and opened bathrooms, overnight accommodations, dressing rooms in our public schools to anyone, regardless of biological sex.

Now, SB 760 wants to create gender neutral bathrooms at each public school campuses. Our Duty opposes SB 760 unless amended to require that the gender neutral bathrooms be single person complete bathrooms, and Ed Code 221.5 is amended. Repeal Ed Code 221.5 to return our state back to reality.

Is that school safe? In California, young girls were beaten up in Riverside by a trans identified male student. Do you think those girls want that trans identified man in their bathroom, changing room or hotel room? In Virginia, a trans identified male sexually assaulted two different girls in a free for all bathroom at school. Did those girls feel safe? In Florida, a trans identified male groped one girl and sexually assaulted another.

In New Mexico, a twelve year old girl was raped by a trans identified male in her middle school bathroom. I could go on, but I ask you, how many more rapes need to happen before you are willing to return to reality? I have the utmost empathy for gender confused children. I had one myself. This distress is real, but we can protect gender confused kids without inviting male bodies into female spaces. Vote no unless SB 6760 is amended. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Leila. I am one of many detransitioners who was harmed by gender affirming care. My childhood was filled with depression, mood swings, violent outbursts, suicidality and self harm. At eleven, I discovered transgender influences online. I was hooked and convinced the reason for my pain was that I was trans.

I had a long history of mental health issues in my medical chart. None of that mattered. When I made my announcement to my doctors, I was affirmed by adults like your laws say to. My mother was desperate to give me some relief and fell for the lies that I would improve if I transitioned kaiser doctors agreed to put me on puberty blockers. My body reacted with hot flashes. I was even moodier.

My doctor, after a 75 minutes appointment with no mental health assessment, prescribed testosterone and cleared me for a radical double mastectomy. I was twelve. Let that sink in. Twelve. There are no trans kids, just kids who get confused. Kids that hate their bodies, or kids like me with mental health issues.

Schools should not be encouraging gender dysphoria. They should be spending money on teaching children biological reality and love of self. Schools pretending that boys can be girls and vice versa only solidifies delusion that one can change sex. Biology matters. When I was a trans identified kid, I did not use the bathrooms at school, boys or girls. I just held it all day.

I knew that I made the girls uncomfortable, but I knew that I would be in danger in the boys bathroom. Having a gender neutral bathroom at school, unless a solo bathroom, is not going to help gender confused kids. Having a multistall gender neutral bathroom only puts all kids in danger.

If you want to support gender confused children, stop teaching kids that they could be born in the wrong body. If you want to be inclusive, stop affirming kids they are transgender when they are likely gay, autistic or in need of nonaffirming mental health care. Vote no on SB 760 unless amended.

Thank you. Any public comments in opposition to the Bill, please come forward.

David [Unknown]. Even though I am a Member in good standing of the Josh Newman Fan Club, on behalf of the San Fernando Valley Alliance and the Take a Stand Stanislaus, we are in opposition unless opposed. Thank you.

Hi, Ethan Lee. On behalf of the California family council, we oppose, unless amended to exclude multi stall all gender restrooms.

Any further public testimony in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. Bring it back to the committee. Any questions or comments?

I'd just like to thank Senator Newman for bringing this Bill forward. It's LGBTQ caucus priority Bill, and I would like to be a co-author.

Mr. Hoover.

Senator, just a question about your do. It does concern me for the safety know, of kids, particularly kids that this Bill is trying to help about a multistall all gender restroom and kind of the safety aspects of that. Is there a reason why it's kind of open ended in the Bill? Are you open know narrowing it to a single stall for safety? I just wanted to get your thoughts.

I think it's a fair question. So now I'm open to it. I think that would be ideal. I think, as Olivia would say, the challenge is if you make that the prescription, then we necessitate a bunch of really expensive construction. Right? And so we're leaving some level of discretion to LEAs to avoid that. Right. So the last thing I wanted to do in this Bill, I want to make clear this Bill and I'd be happy to have olivia speak to it is not really about gender affirmation. It's about safety for people who are uncomfortable in school, as Mr. Pulser mentioned, doing what we all take for granted using the bathroom. This is very narrow, right? This isn't about curriculum. This isn't about anything other than affording these young people, for the obvious reasons, a place to go use the restroom without stigmatization, without bullying, without anxiety. If we made the legislation prescriptive, we would actually be shouldering school districts with massive fiscal liabilities. And so I would like nothing more. And I'm glad to make it add intent language that says, to the extent possible, identify a single stall restroom in that facility. That would be ideal. But it's fairly obvious when you consider our obligation to Fund the legislation that we create problematic across a state as large as us with as much variety across schools and school districts to mandate single stall bathrooms. But that is the aspiration, and if you wouldn't mind, I'd like Olivia to speak to this.

Yeah. I think when it comes to multi stall versus single stall, I don't know my peers opinions on this as just a community, so I can't speak to that. But I think personally, I would prefer multi stall. It's a more private space.

I think you mean single stall?

Yes. Sorry. Single stall. It's a more private space. It's oftentimes bigger as well. So if you're claustrophobic or if you have mobility issues, there's more space for you to be able to exist and well, yeah, multistall. I have no problem with multistall. Many of my friends who I know don't have a problem with multistall. It's all just a matter of personal preference and the General climate of the district and the area of the state that that school resides in.

I think we would all prefer single stall bathrooms wherever we go. And again, if I could, that would be the mandate, but that would be immensely expensive, and I think that should be a consideration for us as policymakers.

I think. Thank you for that, and I appreciate your comments. I think considering maybe some intent language on that, at least to the greatest extent possible, we urge that I think would be helpful to add maybe in a future committee. Probably won't be able to support the Bill without something like that in there. But I really appreciate your testimony.

Thank you. Like I said, glad to commit to that intent. Just I don't know that I could commit to the actual Bill. Appreciate that.

Ms. Quirk-Silva, then, Ms. Dahle.

I want to thank the author for bringing this forward. This is not an easy Bill, because what the Bill does versus what will be said that the Bill does is two very different things. This is simply about providing all-gender restrooms. It is not about transgendering kids. It is not about all the other things that will be said. I'm one of the Members, along with Assembly Member Muratsuchi, who have been here for quite a while. And when some of the legislation came down in, I believe it was 2014, regarding bathrooms for transgender, there were many, many hysteria comments made that football players will now be peeking in on girls in restrooms in Orange County, where I represent. It was massive hysteria. And we made it a point to count, to call superintendents, to call principals of high schools to find out exactly what they were seeing on the ground and guess how many complaints that they had and have had related. To this idea that somebody is going to become transgender and then try to go into the locker room to peek in on women, young girls, at least in Orange County.

Do you want me to guess? I'm guessing zero.

You don't have to answer it for you because we did the research, and it was zero. And this continues to be said. It continues to cause harm to individuals, and it's a way of taking what is actually the intent of this Bill and making it something else. So I do support this. Again. We've had contentious hearings under multiple issues related to sexuality of students and this insistent fear that public school teachers I've even heard that we have transgender closets, which means that students go into a closet at a public school, change their gender for the day, come out at the end of the day, and change their gender back. So these type of things I have heard at coffees, at public venues, and it's simply not happening. The other issue is that there are many venues that are taking seriously this non gender restroom. If you go to the airports now, you go to restaurants now, they have adapted, and they usually will have one non gender restroom. If they have space, many times, they may have a male restroom, a female. But if they only have one restroom, they're making it into a non gender. So we can adapt, we can change. And there have been many places where they do this. Other countries have male female restrooms for decades, and this is how they learn to live amongst each other without these types of almost hysterical comments. And I've seen it. It's been used against many of us as elected officials that we're trying to transgender children and students, and it's absolutely not true. And I think that we need to confront that. But this Bill, in fact, is about building non gender bathrooms. And where possible, I'm sure some schools will find that they can find a single stall one. There may be others that can't, but at least it starts moving towards that. With that, I support your Bill. Thank you.

Vice Chair Dahle.

I just have a couple clarifying questions. So for the small schools to remove your opposition with the amendment specifically that you took for that, so two or less bathrooms until their modernization comes?

That's correct.

So those two or less bathrooms so I'm thinking of our boys. Their elementary school had two bathrooms at one hallway, and then they had kindergarten TK bathrooms on the other. Do those bathrooms or those don't count?

They do not count.

Okay.

Assembly Member if a small school has two or fewer bathrooms total, you've described a situation where there's more than two. If there's two, they'll still be allocated for each gender, but the obligation will then apply that in the next modernization, that school will add a bathroom. That same bathroom might have, for instance, a faculty bathroom. Right? That's a single stall bathroom or multiple faculty bathrooms. Nothing stopping that school from then reallocating one of those bathrooms. If they do that, then they're out from under that obligation to do the modification as part of their next modernization, if that makes sense.

So if they have a faculty bathroom. Currently that they could choose, it's their option.

It's their option. And the option is given to save a school district money right, in future construction. But it's an option, but they're not compelled to do it.

Okay. Any other comments? So, Senator, myself and the education committee staff, we spent a lot of time talking about bathrooms, especially the parents, and I had to be reminded that the bathrooms here in the state Capitol are all gender bathrooms. And I remembered when someone reminded me that I had a recent experience where I walked in the bathroom and there were two persons who appeared to identify as a female. Seemed startled that I walked in, and I had to say, hey, it's all gender bathroom.

Was it a single cell bathroom? Because that would be a problem.

No. And my point is that we're all adapting, right? But we want to accommodate people who are exploring gender identity issues, people who do not identify with non binary individuals. And I want to make it clear for the committee that, as part of our discussions, that we came up with the amendment to make sure that you only have to have an all gender bathroom if there is one bathroom designated for a single male gender bathroom and one for a single female gender bathroom. So that those that felt we wanted to not only accommodate non binary students, but also we wanted to accommodate girls that wanted to use a girl's bathroom and a boys that want to use a boy's bathroom with that. I feel very comfortable in supporting and proud to support this Bill moving forward. Senator Newman, would you like to close?