Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education

Good afternoon. The Assembly Higher Education Committee is now called to order. Want to welcome each and every one of you to the Assembly Higher Education Committee's first of several hearings for 2024 legislative measures. Whether you're here in person or watching virtually, I extend a warm welcome to each and every one of you. We're so grateful for you to join us here today. I will now go over some key elements of the structure of today's hearing.

Please note, while this hearing will not have phone testimony, we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the Committee's website at www.ahed.assembly.ca.gov, and bills will be taken up in sign-in order. Authors, you can sign in at the sergeant's desk in Room 437.

Additionally, please note that the guideline for bills heard in this Committee is to allow testimony from two lead witnesses in support and two lead witnesses in opposition to speak for no more than two minutes each. Stakeholder groups and entities that are neither in support nor in opposition will be allowed to give testimony for no more than two minutes when a call for tweeners. If a measure has more than two entities in the tweener category, only two will be allowed to speak for two minutes each.

For Members of the Committee, Members, if you would like to respond to a roll call, ask a question, and provide a comment, please be sure to activate your microphone and speak into your mic. For authors of bills up today, authors, each Member presenting today will provide an opening statement and a closing statement. As previously stated, your two lead witnesses will each have two minutes to provide testimony. And for today's actual hearing of bills, the following Member has been excused from today's Committee hearing: Assembly Member Jacqui Irwin has been replaced for today's hearing by Assembly Member Dawn Addis.

And please note that File Item Number Two: Assembly Bill 1818 by Assembly Member Dr. Corey Jackson, per the request of the author, has been pulled from today's hearing. And before--we're still momentarily--we'll establish a quorum, and with that, we'll start as an informational hearing. And we're so pleased that Dr. Weber is presenting two bills here today. Dr. Weber, welcome, and first up we'll be presenting Assembly Bill 1841 on student safety. Dr. Weber, welcome.

I am here to present AB 1841. AB 1841 would require the CSU and community colleges and request the UC to require that Residential Advisors be trained and have easy access to naloxone. In recent years, California has been going through an ongoing opioid crisis that has led to the development of Naloxone Distribution Project, meant to promote harm reduction throughout the State of California. It is most commonly referred to as Narcan, and it is life-saving overdose reversal drug that is administered nasally.

If you are not experiencing an overdose, it does not harm you and simply acts as a nasal spray. There's been an increase in opioid-related deaths in California, with reported opioid deaths skyrocketing to 6,800 in the year 2021. Specifically, one out of every five Californian youth aged 15 to 24 tragically pass away in 2021 due to fentanyl overdosage.

Currently, there is no legislation mandating California public universities and colleges train their residential life employees on how to administer naloxone, despite this legislation ensuring the safety of the general student body. While students can receive naloxone through this distribution program on campus, this doesn't mean that students know where the nearest dose of Narcan is located. In the event of an overdose, every second matters, and having a student know that a life-saving medication is right down the hall can save lives.

AB 1841 provides much-needed training requirements for on-campus university residential life staff as well as off-campus university-affiliate Greek Life for the overall wellness of the student population. I respectfully ask for your aye vote, and today with me I have representative from GENup, Durriya Ahmed. They are the sponsors and the primary witnesses along with Zeph Schnelbach.

We have a motion a second. I don't think we have a quorum yet though, so we're waiting one more Member for quorum, but I appreciate the Members there. Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chairman Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is Durriya Ahmed, and I'm currently a third year at UCLA, serving as Chief of Media and Director of Higher Education Policy for Generation Up. GENup is proud to be an entirely student-led and run youth advocacy organization focusing on advancing educational equity through community organizing and the legislative process, representing thousands of students nationally. As a proud writer and principal sponsor, GENup advocates for Assembly Bill 1841.

To foster safer campus communities through harm reduction awareness and aid, AB 1841 works to include naloxone training and accessibility on college campuses, specifically within university-affiliated student housing. As a current residential assistant at UCLA and someone who has been surrounded by drug use and addiction my whole life, I was beyond surprised when I learned that campuses are not mandated to offer naloxone training as UCLA does. At my previous community college, three students tragically lost their lives due to opioid overdose in one semester within university-affiliated student housing.

This legislation will not only honor them, but it will protect our future generation of students. Naloxone, more commonly known as Narcan, is a life-saving opioid reversal drug that has saved almost 200,000 lives since the establishment of the Naloxone Distribution Project in 2018. Overdose is a preventable cause of death with the usage of Narcan, and this piece of legislation ensures the safety of students statewide by providing resources and training to all students of different backgrounds.

GENup seeks your support in promoting harm reduction on California's public campuses rather than shaming students for addiction. By providing university-affiliated staff such as RAs and Greek Life House Managers access and training to life-saving medication, we would be able to make a difference. This is imperative to the safety of students as people holding these live-in positions are closer to this general student body population than campus health centers.

By expanding students' education and access to use university harm reduction resources as well as offering accessible aid and support, we at GENup urge you to support AB 1841 to ensure that students are able to grow in a community that values not only their life but also takes action for their safety. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members of the Assembly. My name is Zeph Schnelbach. I'm a third year political science major at UC Davis, and I am also the Basic Needs Officer for the UC Student Association. I come for you today with a plea to advocate for the passage of AB 1841, a bill that mandates all public universities and colleges in California to equip RAs with Narcan, otherwise known as naloxone and fentanyl testing strips. This measure isn't just about compliance.

It's about saving lives, promoting harm reduction, and improving student safety. During my first year, I bore witness to a harrowing incident on my floor in which a fellow student overdosed on opioids. It was a moment of sheer terror and helplessness. I remember scouring, knocking on every door, trying to find naloxone. However, I could not. We were left standing by, anxiously awaiting the arrivals of paramedics and our hands tied with the knowledge that we could only watch and hope for the best.

Thankfully enough, the paramedics did arrive in time and reversed it with the necessary medical attention. However, that moment left an indelible mark on me. It underscored the critical importance of having immediate access to Narcan on campus, particularly for resident assistants, often first responders in such emergencies. AB 1841 transcends mere reaction to overdoses. It's about proactive prevention. Fentanyl, which is a potent synthetic opioid, has permeated the illicit drug market, presenting an unprecedented threat to public health.

By providing fentanyl testing strips alongside Narcan, we can empower resident assistants to detect and mitigate the dangers posed by this lethal substance, thus promoting harm reduction strategies that can save lives and protect our students. Some may argue that this mandate imposes an undue burden on universities and colleges, and yet the cost of inaction far outweighs the investment required to implement this measure. The lives saved, the families spared from the anguish of loss, the sense of security instilled in our campus communities are invaluable returns on this investment.

Moreover, AB 1841 aligns with our moral imperative to prioritize the health and well-being of our students. As institutions of higher learning, California must educate and nurture students holistic development. Providing access to life-saving interventions like Narcan and fentanyl testing strips, it's not just a policy, but a testament to our commitment to the safety and welfare of every individual within our university and college campuses. I implore you to support AB 1841 and stand on the side of compassion, responsibility, and proactive intervention. Let us send a resounding message that in the face of this crisis, we refuse to remain idle bystanders. Thank you.

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

Chair and Members, good afternoon. Austin Webster with W Strategies, on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, in support.

Thank you.

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

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? I'm sorry, we have a--

Hi there. Sorry. I was a little slow to get up here. Good afternoon. Maggie White with the California State University. We do not yet have a position, but just want to thank the author and her excellent staff for their partnership and their attention to this issue. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Mario Guerrero with the UC Office of the President. Want to say as well, thank you for the introduction of the bill. UC Office of the President does not have a position on the bill at this time. We would just note that we do have--carry this medication in our students' health centers. Thank you.

Thank you so much. At this time, we'll take an opportunity to establish quorum. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call].

Thank you so much. We have a quorum. Six Members. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Or do we have a motion? I know we had a prior motion from--all right. Dr. Jackson, and then we have second from Assembly Member Addis. Any questions or comments? All right. Dr. Weber, would you like to close?

I would like to thank the Committee and Committee staff. Also thank my witnesses here today, and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Dr. Assembly Member Weber for working with Committee staff on the amendments to reduce duplication in the training requirements and to reduce the overall cost of this measure. As referred, fentanyl continues to plague our state and preventing overdoses on campus is a moral imperative. While I understand concerns have been raised regarding liability, I believe the amendments providing agency to the Residential Advisors will protect everyone on campus, and I look forward to supporting the measure here today. With that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File Item Number Four: AB 1841. The motion is 'do pass to the Appropriations Committee.' [Roll Call].

That item has seven votes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that would like to sign on. Thank you so much. Next up, we have Assembly Member Weber presenting item number six, Assembly Bill 1891. Welcome again, Dr. Weber.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. I am here again to present AB 1891. I will be accepting the Committee's amendments today. California's community colleges provide opportunities to 100% of Californians who seek them. These community college open admission processes presume that there is capacity to admit any qualified student who applies. However, due to increasing demand for our Allied Health Programs, there is limited capacity to admit all students that apply.

Since 2007, multi-criteria screening has provided these community college nursing programs with the tools to admit diverse and academically strong applicant pools amidst limited capacity. Multi-criteria screening is an equitable admissions process that utilizes various evaluative metrics to admit a diverse cohort of students with a likelihood of success. Today, 58 of our community college nursing programs use multi-criteria screening to grow diversity and academic success among nursing students and to address nursing workforce shortages.

As the largest educator of California's healthcare workforce, our community colleges play a major role in addressing healthcare workforce shortages. Though the demand for our community colleges' Allied Health Programs remain high, capacity limitations affect their ability to grow and therefore grow California's healthcare workforce. Multi-screening is a proven way to grow diversity and completion rates of our healthcare students.

This Bill will allow community college Allied Health Programs to utilize multi-criteria screening in their admission processes in order to equitably address capacity limitations while improving the success of admitted students. Currently, law only prevents, permits excuse me, Allied Health Programs use lottery or first come, first serve admission processes. AB 1891 would allow colleges to elect to use multi-criteria screening, a lottery system, or a combination of multi-criteria screening and lottery. This will allow colleges to adopt admission practices beneficial to the unique needs of their district.

As the name indicates, there are several aspects of an applicant's background that colleges consider when utilizing multi-criteria screening. These include the student's past academic record and work experience such as grade point averages and credentials along with life experiences or special circumstances of the applicant, including disability, low family income, first-generation status, refugee or veteran status, and other languages spoken, among others. By taking these criteria into consideration, Allied Health Programs would simultaneously improve the academic success and diversity of admitted students.

This provides more equitable approach to managing capacity limitations while increasing the output of Allied Health graduates to join California's healthcare workforce. I respectfully ask for your Aye vote and today I have the California Community College Chancellor's Office as a sponsor and in support. We have LaCandis Ochoa and Imran Majid.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is LaCandice Ochoa and I serve as a dean within the Chancellor's Office, Workforce and Economic Development Division. I am here today asking you to support AB 1891, a Bill that allows California community colleges to use multi-criteria screening when selecting students for admission into Allied Health Programs. Allied Health Programs are consistently among our most popular offerings with over 11,000 students earning certificates or degrees from one of our 562 programs at 114 colleges.

Many of these programs have limited capacity due to the need for specialized equipment, clinical training requirements, or the availability of clinically trained faculty. To choose between applicants for limited spots, colleges use a lottery system or similar methods. Multi-criteria screening allows colleges to give additional weight to students with prior academic accomplishments who have lived experiences such as first-generation or low-income, and who speak multiple languages.

By allowing, but not mandating the use of multi-criteria screening, AB 1891 provides our colleges the flexibility to decide on the best admission procedure based on their student population. In 2007, the Legislature authorized the use of multi-criteria screening during admission for community college and nursing programs. Today, 58 of 77 nursing programs use multi-criteria screening and the data consistently shows better and more equitable student outcomes.

Students from colleges utilizing multi-criteria screening pass the licensure exam at a rate of 91.5% and are more diverse in ethnicity and age compared to students from colleges not utilizing multi-criteria screening. Allowing multi-criteria screening in Allied Health will also allow those colleges that already use multi-criteria screening for nursing to standardize admissions processes across their health sciences programs. Allowing multi-criteria screening in Allied Health will improve both the overall success rate of students and ensure a more culturally competent representation in the workforce.

For these reasons, I encourage you to support AB 1891. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Imran Majid and I am a senior legislative advocate also with the Chancellor's Office. I'm here today to read a statement from Nancy James, who oversees healthcare admissions at Sierra College. Chair Fong, and Members of the Assembly of Higher Education Committee. I respectfully request your support for AB 1891, which would align the admissions processes for our nursing and allied health programs.

As the current Dean of Nursing and Allied Health Sciences at Sierra College, I am very familiar with the use of multi-criteria screening for nursing program enrollment. We receive between 200 and 300 applications for our nursing program each year for the 40 open spots. In 2017, we began using the multi-criteria program after many years of student attrition where students had successfully guided into our program but couldn't complete the rigorous curriculum once enrolled.

We also couldn't give additional credit to students with special life experiences and support the much-needed bilingual student that will work in healthcare. By using multi-criteria screening for the past seven years, we have reduced our attrition and chosen a tool that helps to close equity gaps for the Allied Health Programs that receive more applications than spots available. This tool will allow for additional opportunities for enrollment and will help students be more successful once fully inconsensed in healthcare.

By granting points for life experiences, work experience, veteran status, and multiple languages spoken, this tool provides additional ways to enter a healthcare program when grade point averages may not exceed expectations. I oversee multiple Allied Health Programs at Sierra College and feel this will be a wonderful addition to our Allied Health onboarding practices. Having multi-criteria screening for both nursing and Allied Health programs would make our application process more consistent for faculty and counselors.

With the fillable form for each part of the multi-criteria form, nursing students can input current requirements to see if they meet the minimum score. This would be the same for allied health programs under AB 1891. I appreciate your time and urge your support. Thank you.

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

Mr. Chairman, Members, Committee. Manny Diaz, representing San Jose Evergreen Community College District, who's very much in support.

Thank you.

Thank you, chair, members, Mark MacDonald, MGI advocacy on behalf of the Contra Costa, Palo Verde, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Southwestern Community College districts, all in support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi chair and members, Ashley Walker with Nossaman on behalf of Citrus Community College and Mount San Antonio Community College District. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Yes, Assemblymember Muratsuchi.

Thank you for the presentation. This multi-criteria screening process is new to me. I'm not familiar with this. I heard some of the criteria, life experiences, veteran status, language skills. Is there any formal or informal policy objective to get the cohort to be more representative of the local population that it's intended to serve?

So thank you for that question. I think that is always one of the desired outcomes, and this is why there's a lot of flexibility within this bill. A community college can choose to continue with the lottery. They can use a combination of both or switch over to something like this if they feel like it would best serve that need and the community's need.

But again, say, with the California community colleges or any of the member community college districts, is there any kind of formal policy that the MCS is to be used to try to develop.

Are you trying to ask, is there a mandate that if you use this policy? Okay. So I think that is not necessarily a stated or written goal. And I think every community college is different, but I would say that probably the majority of them, that would be a part of their goals, but it's not stated or implied or required.

So there's no formal or official policies?

Not that I'm aware. And you all have been using it I'm sure.

So again, the policy is really intended to be flexible for community colleges to adopt to whatever their student population is, right. If a community college is particularly located in an area that's low income, the chances office would expect that low income status is considered as part of the multi-criteria screening. So, you know, as Dr. Weber had shared, there's a lot of flexibility.

The statute is really only intended to provide broad expectations in terms of the different criteria that colleges can use, but it's really up to each individual institution to tailor it to their student population. Also, colleges do have to conduct validation studies to make sure that it's not disproportionately impacting certain groups as well.

So, in other words, I think I saw in the staff analysis that there is a prohibition on merit-based criteria in response to equity concerns. But basically, the admission of students to these impacted programs would be at the discretion and control of the local school community college district.

That's correct.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any further questions or comments, colleagues? Seeing none, Dr. Weber would you like to close please?

Yes, I want to again thank the Committee staff and the chair. I also thank my witnesses for coming today and I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1891.

Thank you so much, Assemblymember, for bringing this measure forward today and for agreeing to the amendments. As we know, the multi-criteria screening process is a proven, effective way of handling impaction, while also preserving diversity of program applicants. As the measure move forwards, I hope you will consider amending the bill to include additional data points so the Legislature can know which adline health programs are truly impacted. And I look forward to supporting the measure here today. With that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File item number six. AB 1891. The motion is do pass as amended to appropriations. Fong? Fong aye. Ta? Ta aye. Arambula? Boener? Boener aye. Chen? Chen aye. Essayli? Addis? Addis, aye. Jackson? Jackson, aye. Low? Muratsuchi? Muratsuchi, aye. Quirk-Silva?

Thank you so much. That manager has seven votes. And we'll keep the roll open for any Members I'd like to add on. Thank you, Dr. Weber. Next up, we're going to do the consent calendar. We have one item on the consent calendar. Assembly Bill 1793 by Vice Chair Ta on student financial aid. We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a second. Roll call. Any comments or questions? Seeing none. Calendar roll call. please.

Roll Call.

That item has seven votes. And we'll keep the roll open for any Members I'd like to add on. Thank you, Vice Chair Ta. Next up, we'll have item number seven, Assembly Bill 1914 authored by Assembly member Grayson. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Committee Members. I am presenting AB 1914, which directs the California Community College's College Chancellor's Office to develop a model curriculum for the certification of providers that care for individuals with development disabilities. California is really grappling with the crisis and access to care for individuals with development disabilities due to a substantial shortage of service providers that are dedicated to serving those with development disabilities.

And unfortunately, staff providing direct care are paid at or just above the minimum wage and do not compete or complete a robust prescribed course for training. So as a result, the staff turnover rate is very high. So we, as the State of California, as you all know, have a legal obligation to support people with development disabilities to be able to live in the community settings and also to be able to pursue their individual goals.

So in order to do so, we must first uplift and support this essential workforce that our state's most vulnerable population truly relies on. So by developing a model curriculum that grants certification to individuals seeking to work with those with development disabilities, AB 1914 will empower this crucial workforce to demand higher wages as a result of their professional training.

And with that and through the chair, I would like to introduce my witness, former Assembly Member Jim Frazier, who is governmental advocate for the ARC, and it's good to be sitting by my friend once again.

Thank you so much. Welcome, honorable Assembly Member.

Thank you, Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. My name is Jim Fraser and I'm the Director of public policy for the ARC of California and United Cerebral Palsy Collaborative. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to share with you the ARC of California's sponsored Bill AB 1914. There is the need to create a pathway to a sustainable, educated, trained and a workforce that will be paid a living wage.

There is a direct support provider's workforce crisis and we'll call them DSP's from this point forward. It's easier for all of us and the crisis is they're not paid a living wage. There is a direct support provider's means to support and we are. That means the complexity of support and the care of the developmentally disabled population is enormous. All of these necessary duties performed for the ID population is vast and so very important. And all of these essential are quality of life issues.

We all have promised by the Lanterman Act that DSP's would be prudent, substantial and also well equipped. Historically, the DSP workforce has paid at a minimum wage, which is now $16 an hour. Historically, the DSP workforce has paid a minimum wage of $2,560 a month before taxes. A single individual is likely to clear less than $2,000 a month for 160 hours of work a month, less than $24,000 a year.

Many DSPs are on some sort of state aid and or work two or three jobs to make ends meet. There has never been a yearly cost of living increase given to this workforce. As I mentioned earlier, this workforce, the crisis and shortage of DSPs to take care of the 458,000 plus vulnerable community. Many of the IDD community are on waiting list for services due to this workforce shortage.

The IDD population continues to grow at a rate of 25% per decade, and we need to be able to keep pace with this growth. Providers are having an ongoing problem attracting potential DSP's due to this low wage. Retention of these employees has always been a problem because there is a very limited path for advancement and also, again, a very low wage.

Now, with the additional minimum wage pressures from other industries in our workforce, they are likely to seek employment in those higher paying jobs, creating even a larger gap. As Mr. Grayson has mentioned, there is no robust training program in place.

There is the critical need for AB 1914 to start this certification program in the community college system to provide additional education and training for the DSP workforce, to provide not only career advancement, but the necessary services and high quality of care the IDD community and their families need and deserve. This will also provide the DSP workforce a path to a deserving living wage and career.

I want to thank Mr. Assemblymember Grayson for always being there and caring for our IDD community and all of you who also care for the IDD community. Mr. Chairman, Members, I respectfully ask for your Aye vote and support for AB 1914.

Thank you so much. Before we have Member comments, we'll do the witnesses. We have a motion by Assemblyman Boerner. Do we have a second 2nd by assemblyman Chen? Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room?

Thank you. Melissa Cortez, on behalf of Autism Speaks here in support, one in 36 children are diagnosed with autism today. This is a very important measure to ensure that these children have the direct support services that they need. Thank you.

Thank you, colleagues. Any questions? Assembly Member Boerner?

Chair Members Austin Webster with W Strategies on behalf of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. We don't have an official position on the Bill, and we're working with the author to address some concerns around how curriculum is developed within the community college system. So we look forward to continuing those conversations.

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

Well, it's not a question. I want to thank both Assembly Member Grayson and former Assembly Member Fraiser. Assembly Member Fraiser, you were a champion on this when you were in the Legislature, and I remember attending in 20, I think it was 2019, your Select Committee in San Diego. And this was brought up as an issue, so I'd be happy. I moved the Bill already, but I'd also like to be added as co author.

Would be honored. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Assembly Member Chen.

I just want to say to Mr. Grayson, thank you so much for the opportunity to support your incredible Bill. I think in the era of development disabilities, you've been a leader. I'm just so glad to see my good friend Assembly Member Jim Frazier back again here in the Legislature.

I know that, though, that you're no longer formerly part of Legislature, that your advocacy has always continued, and that my support of the Bill is a mixture of my tremendous respect for you and a little bit of fear for you, as well as you're known as the main bodyguard here on the floor. So it is with distinct pleasure to support your tremendous Bill. Thank you so much for being here.

Thank you. Any further questions or Muratsuchi?

I can't resist the opportunity to say, good to see you back, Mr. Frazier. I expected you to be lobbying for high speed rail, but instead, you're lobbying for disability rights. So it's good to see that you're staying with the cause. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any further questions or comments? Seeing none. Mr. Grayson, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Grayson, for bringing this important measure forward. We know that individuals with developmental disabilities deserve the best support we can give them. The transition from state run care to community level care requires new levels of training and education for our providers. Moving forward, I know that your staff will continue to collaborate with the Community College Chancellor's Office and the Community College Academic center to identify the best way forward to develop the program.

And with that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Thank you, Madam Secretary. The motion before us is do passed to the Appropriations Committee. Please call the roll.

Roll Call

And we'll keep the roll open for additional Members. Add on. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next up, we'll have Assembly Member Alanis with file item number three. Assembly Bill, 1839. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Which one do we want to start on?

1St 1839. Item number three. Welcome the law enforcement Officer grant program.

Okay.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members. Mr. Chair, I appreciate your Committee staff, staff's time. Thank you, staff, on the Bill, and thank you for allowing me to present AB 1839 today. This measure, as it's accompanying a budget request that was submitted to the Budget Committee last week, will comprehensively support California's goal in recruiting better-trained and educated peace officers in our local law enforcement agencies.

On the front end, AB 1839 will provide education grants to students who complete a modern policing associate's degree and commit to serving four years as a California peace officer or a deputy sheriff. On the back end, it will authorize law enforcement agencies to offer hiring incentives for new officers and understaffed departments with an emphasis on new recruits. Members, it comes as no surprise that California continues to face a peace officer's recruitment crisis.

Between 2000 and 2022, the California Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training, or better known as POST, reported a significant drop in regular basic certificates from 4,551 to 2,761. In Los Angeles, the LAPD and the Sheriff's Department reported substantial net losses of 749 and 315, respectively highlighting this problem on a regional stage. The shortage of peace officers impacts all communities in our state. These problems have led to staffing shortages and service reductions, further impacting our law enforcement's ability to keep our communities safe.

Members, this Bill, along with the accompanying budget request, gives our state a fighting chance to inject a generation of highly qualified, well-educated, and better-trained peace officers into our communities to help support and dedicate law enforcement agencies' recruitment programs. I respectfully ask for an Aye vote on this, measure, and thank you guys for your time.

Thank you so much. We have a motion by Assembly Member Boerner, a second by Assembly Member Muratsuchi. Are there witnesses in support in the hearing room?

Mr. Chair Members Pat Moran with Aaron Read and Associates representing the California Association of Highway Patrolmen and the Peace Officers Research Association of California in strong support. The Highway Patrol, they're down about a thousand officers and we're down thousands more in local communities statewide, and we think this Bill will help alleviate that. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Assembly Member Vice Chair Ta.

Yes, I don't have a question, but I really appreciate the author for bringing up this Bill. I really, really like this Bill. So I would like to ask permission to allow me to be a co-author of the Bill. Really appreciate that. I strongly support the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Ta.

Thank you so much. Assembly Member Muratsuchi.

Thank you, Mr. Alanis, for your Bill. I was wondering if you had any data or any surveys that indicate why we're having so many. What are the biggest drivers of the law enforcement workforce shortage?

How much time do I get for this one?

As much time as you like sir.

As far as the hard numbers, I don't have all those as per se as what you're asking in that question. But as you guys already all know, for the most part, law enforcement, for most people, it's a calling. And things are different now. Most don't feel that well, I just kind of had public safety today, and that came up today with having the government basically supporting or backing law enforcement officers when they're attacked or injured.

They just don't feel like the protection is there and then the respect level also is not there. I know our ever-changing ways going on. At one point, I remember, as you guys may know, I'm a retired law enforcement officer. We were praised for everything we were doing, first responders and stuff like that. And then a certain incident happened where even law enforcement officers were upset with it. But then the one incident could change everything, and that happens with society as well.

And so our youth are growing up where they used to learn things from, like CHiPs. And if you guys don't remember CHiPs, California Highway Patrol. Ponch and Jon. Yeah, you wake up with those kind of programs, it really incentivizes them to want to become part of that. And I think we kind of lost that. And with that, we lost the numbers as far as that goes for law enforcement.

So I know, I hear that anecdotally from my local law enforcement, but I guess I'm going to support your Bill. But I was a little concerned that it doesn't seem like the need for financial aid is necessarily the solution to address the law enforcement workforce shortage. I understand that it's a good gesture of support to get more people into law enforcement, but I just wanted to say that I support your Bill, but I'm not sure if this is, well.

If I could add also just in my experience, a lot of the values that are brought upon with law enforcement come from those that they listen to, that they are considered mentors or supervise them. Our profession, as other professions are getting younger. So I have young deputies who have maybe three years on now are teaching a person who just got out of the academy, whereas back in my day, you had like 10 or 15 years on before you even became a person who was training.

Well, now our workforce is much younger, and we need to find ways to fix that, just like we do in the education world with, like, say, CTE. Well, you guys be hearing about other things like that. Trying to get those that are in the industry to come back and help support the industry and bring them back that way. And it's not just law enforcement that does that, but I think that will be a big part of it.

I know growing up, when I was at junior college and in high school, I had older cops that were teaching us of what they had learned. And we're talking 20, 30 years on the job. And like I mentioned earlier, when they only had three years on and they're trying to teach them the ropes, it's a little different.

So it makes it a little harder for guys like me when I was a sergeant or lieutenants or captains to kind of step in a little bit more and do something that usually wasn't our role but become part of it now. Thank you.

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

Just ask for your Aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much for bringing this Bill forward. As really appreciate your leadership and efforts here in law enforcement. And as a retired law enforcement officer, I know this issue is very important to you. We know the positive impact that education has on our law enforcement officers, and this was a driving belief in passing. Mr. Jones Sawyer's AB 89.

I believe that the grant program you're proposing complements the modern policing degree program and will help to remove the financial barriers that might otherwise prevent someone from joining the law enforcement profession. And I look forward to supporting the measure here today. With that, the motion is do pass to the Public Safety Committee. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File item number three, AB 1839, the motion is do passed to the Public Safety Committee. [Roll call].

Thank you so much, colleagues. That item has seven votes, and we'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that would like to add on.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have item number eight, Assembly Bill 1927 by Assembly Member Alanis. Welcome.

Well, thank you. We'll continuing on with our conversation. CTE is what this one's about.

We have a motion in a second. Thank you.

So again, good afternoon again, everyone, and glad to be back. AB 1927 would expand the eligibility of the Golden State Teacher Grant program that has helped thousands of students earn their teaching credentials and minimize the statewide teaching shortage. This Bill would expand the program to students earning their teaching credentials and a career technical education, also known as CTE.

The program allows the California Student Aid Commission to award grants up to $20,000 to students who commit to at least four years of work in some of our most underserved communities. With the rising cost of living, college education seems to be less and less affordable. Members, I'm urging your aye vote for two reasons. First, the Bill addresses teacher shortage by taking students who are already working towards their credentials and giving them extra incentives to commit to a career in CTE.

And second, this Bill helps our youth across the state by promoting the placement of highly educated, long term teachers in schools and further supporting youth seeking CTE paths. AB 1927 supports California local school District CTE programs by incentivizing highly qualified candidates to seek further education and teaching credentials in CTE.

And as we mentioned in the last Bill, this is another having those in the industry, or at least those that are seeking the industry, that have some experience that can help our youth better get into the program and maybe, hopefully discover something that will be a lifelong tradition for their families as well. So with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

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

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

Mr. Chair and Members Mike West, on behalf of the State Building and Construction Trades Council, in support.

Sure.

Mr. Chairman and Members, I'm Brian Rivas. I'm speaking on behalf of the Education Trust West. We're opposed to this measure. And it's not because we oppose career technical education. It's because we opposed the change that would say you could serve either in career technical education or a priority school. And remember, if I can just remind the Committee, priority schools are schools where 55% or more are English learners, low income, or foster youth.

This program was designed with that requirement in mind because the state recognized that we have a statewide teacher shortage, but the shortage varies by community and by school, and it touches communities and schools differently. On top of that, we have a maldistribution of the teachers that we already have. And those two factors come together to make one of our biggest equity challenges in public education, access to a fully prepared and properly assigned teacher.

So we're opposed because when you award someone an incentive grant without this requirement, you're reinforcing workforce trends that are working against low income students of color. So we're asking that this requirement be maintained. We have no problem with career tech. We just think that incentive funding should be used to address one of our biggest needs. And for those reasons, we're opposed to the Bill.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon Chair Fong and Committee Members. My name is Heather Calomese. I am representing Ed Voice. As my colleague Brian Rivas mentioned earlier, AB 1927 would expand the Golden State Teacher Grant program to grant award students who commit to working four years as a CTE teacher, but would eliminate the requirement to serve in a high priority school. As with most issues facing our public schools, the difficulty of staffing qualified educators is felt most acutely by schools serving children in marginalized communities.

School districts and low income communities across California that serve predominantly students of color are less likely to have experience in certified teachers in the classroom. Diverse and effective teachers and strong staff personnel have a major impact on the learning and overall success of students. A recent analysis of California schools found that 40% more teachers in low income schools lack the necessary qualifications than do teachers at higher income schools.

We strongly encourage your Committee to maintain the program's focus on addressing the inequitable impact of the statewide teacher shortage has on high need schools. We are strong supporters of expanding career technical education and appreciate in California and also appreciate the focus on college and career through the master plan.

And although AB 1927 would expand the University of Educators who commit to work for four years as a credentialed career technical education instructor the Bill as written would also upend the current focus of those grant dollars on serving a high percentage of students from low income homes. So, like my colleagues, we would again oppose this Bill as written, but would certainly support amendments that would require the candidate to be teaching in a priority school.

Questions for opposition actually.

Thank you so much. Are there tweeners in the hearing room, colleagues? Questions or comments? Dr. Jackson,

Articulated a high priority that California has had for decades. There's no doubt in terms of longitudinal data that if you're in a low income school, low performing school, you're most likely to have some of the most inexperienced teachers. No doubt about that. I guess my question to you is, have you been engaging with the author on this? Was he aware of your opposition and how has those discussions gone?

Am I saying it correctly? Alanis.

Mr. Alanis, apology. I haven't met with him. I apologize for that. But we have been in correspondence with his staff. I think he and he can speak for himself, is taking our issues under advisement and is considering something to address our concern. But we haven't been able to reach.

Alanis.

Agreement and also the same for Ed Voice as well. We have, I believe, communicated with his office, but not directly communicated with him as well.

Were you aware of the,

I believe you guys started communication a couple of days ago.

That is correct, yeah.

Obviously, as you know, Member, I'm big on communication, but I'll be supportive of this now to continue the discussion because I think it's worth having. However, it's important to making sure that we have some good, robust discussion so the Member can have all the information necessary to see. Now, of course, if it gets to the floor and not thoughtful discussion has been made, I think it behooves you to let many of us know so that we can be aware of that.

But please, you got to engage early, you got to engage in a way that makes sure that we can see if we can get some win wins here.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. I think I'm on the same page as Dr. Jackson. I see that the Bill has been double referred to the education Committee. And so I have not had any discussions about your Bill with the education Committee staff, but I would agree with Ed Trust West and Ed Voice, that the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, we actually just discussed it at budget sub three this morning. It is targeted to get more teachers to serve high needs communities.

And to the extent I'm just taking their representations and you're not contesting their representations, that this does in fact take out that provision that was the original intent of the Golden State Teacher Grant Program. And so to that extent, I will be abstaining from today's vote and looking forward to our conversation if and when it comes to the Education Committee.

Thank you. And, yes, as Member Jackson brought up, it was very timely matter of when we got this, it was not very much time to act on this. And so my office has been in communications with them, and potential future amendments that would remove their opposition is what we will work on with them. But again, we just found out, was it yesterday or the day before yesterday? So I haven't had much time to work on that.

Okay.

The Committee staff just informed me that contrary to what's indicated on the staff report, the Bill apparently was not double referred to Education Committee. And so I thank you. Hope that you will reach out to the Education Committee.

No, we definitely will. I can only do so much within 24 hours.

All right, thanks.

Thank you so much.

Assembly Member, Addis, I'm somewhat of a me too, in this situation. I used to be on Higher Ed. I came back to fill in today, so I wouldn't want to prevent you from getting this Bill out today, but I do share the concerns that were expressed and that my colleagues expressed and so still reserve judgment if this comes to the floor, but trust that you'll work on it.

I know you to be a person who sticks to your word, so trust that you're going to work on this and look forward to a positive resolution.

And thank you for that. Yes. We need some more time. The quick one day turnover doesn't work. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, any further comments or questions? Alanis, would you like to close?

Yes, thank you. So I just want to make sure everybody knows I understand the advantage of pouring money and resources into an underserved community, what it is like to pour it into an underserved community. We have a plethora of those as far as priority one schools in my district. And I hope with the intent of the original authors program, while expanding it and opening this, we want to make realistic pathways to CTE. And I think that's what this Bill will help do.

And so thank you guys for understanding. And obviously, yes, we will be working with them. I just need more than 24 hours, and with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Alanis, and thank you for bringing this measure forward. And thank you to the concerns from the opposition as well, of priority schools and to continue to working around these efforts here. And I want to echo those comments from my colleagues as well, and it's a very short timeframe, but really, we know that in good faith you'll be working with them on this. And with that, respectfully ask look forward to supporting the measure here today with that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

This measure is do passed to the Appropriations Committee.

Roll Call

That measure has seven eyes, one not voting. And we'll keep the measure open for any additional Members locked out on.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Assembly Member Alanis. Next up, we'll have item number five by Assembly Member Dawn Addis, Assembly Bill 1885. Welcome. Take your time. We have a motion by Assembly Member Boerner. Do we have a second? A second by Dr. Arambula. Thank you. This is item number five, Assembly Bill 1885 by Assembly Member Dawn Addis. Welcome.

Thank you, Chair, staff, and advocates. I'm here to present Assembly Bill 1885, the College Access for Students with Disabilities Act, and thank you for the motion and the second. The Student Success Completion Grant awards $1,298 per semester to community college students taking 12 to 14 units and $4,000 a semester to students taking 15 units or more.

Currently, in order to earn the grant, you must first earn the Cal Grant and be taking at least 12 units in a semester, which is the number required to be a full-time student. That being said, we've talked about students with disabilities here today, and there is a population of students in the disabled student programs and services who receive special education accommodations for their disability and are classified as full-time at nine units.

So the gist of this Bill would be to allow students to still qualify for this grant taking nine units instead of taking the full 12 units. And I'm going to pause there since we have a motion and a second. Happy to answer questions.

Thank you so much. Assembly Member Addis. I see you have some lead witnesses.

We do have lead witnesses, and I'll turn it over to them.

Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Fong and Members of the Committee. I'm Dr. Tony Newman, the faculty coordinator for disability services, DSPS at Sacramento City College. In DSPS, we support students by providing accommodations. If a deaf student needs an interpreter, they get one. If a student's disability impedes them from taking a full load, a reduced course load, such as nine units, is an accommodation that allows them to persist.

In programs like EOPS and the Promise Grant, Disability Services, DSPS writes a letter explaining that reduced course load is an accommodation. These students then receive the benefits of those programs. The Student Success and Completion Grant should be no different. Today I talked to a student who missed classes because her car broke down. Yesterday I talked to a student who was $400 short on his rent because his unemployment check was stolen. He now received an eviction notice. Both of these students carry nine units. These additional funds would have made a difference.

Pell Grant and Cal Grant funds are reduced because students with disabilities are not full-time students. Students with disabilities have the same expenses, rent, food, and transportation as every other student and they are receiving fewer funds. As a State of California, we are responsible for all of our residents. You wouldn't give one of your children less because they had a disability. To be honest, you'd probably give them more. Certainly giving them less would not be an equitable practice.

They need more because they need more support and more financial resources. When we support students with disabilities in their educational process, we are truly supporting the State of California. As students graduate, they become taxpaying citizens. Doing this without the burden of loans is a boost. Being able to attend school and take 15 units is a privilege that many students with disabilities do not have. Please support AB 1885. It will make a difference for over 5,000 students across the state. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon Chair and Members. My name is Olivia Garcia Martinez. I'm a political science student at Sacramento City College, a regional affairs director for the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, a woman of color, and a disability advocate. I hope to one day transfer to UCLA and study disability studies and continue fighting for the rights of the disability community. I am a financial aid recipient. I am currently taking nine units and would likely qualify for the Student Success Completion Grant should this Bill pass.

Taking nine units will give me more time to focus on myself, which students with disabilities sometimes need. More classes would make it difficult for me to succeed in my existing classes. Students with disabilities have the same bills as everyone else and sometimes need additional support. This funding will help minimize having to take out student loans and will lead to greater student success among the DSPS population. Please support AB 1885. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon. Justin Selnick from the California Community College Chancellor's Office, the sponsor of AB 1885. We just want to quickly thank Assembly Member Addis for authoring this Bill and thank our co-sponsors, the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, as well as the other supporters of AB 1885. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair and Members Ashley Walker with Nossaman on behalf of Citrus College and Mount San Antonio College.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair and Members. Mark Mac Donald, MGI Advocacy, on behalf of Contra Costa, Palo Verde, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Southwestern Community College districts, all in support of the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Stephanie Goldman, on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, proud to co-sponsor.

Thank you.

Manny Diaz, representing the San Jose Evergreen Community College District in support. The letter is in the mailbox.

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Assembly Member Boerner.

This is a fantastic Bill. You're my seatmate, but that's not why I'm asking to co-author. And so at the next appropriate time, I'd be happy to co-author. Really fantastic to make sure that everybody has the funding they need to succeed. So great job.

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

No, I would like to thank both of our witnesses. My apologies for not introducing you, but very glad that both of you are here and thank you for your testimony, and respectfully ask the Committee for your Aye vote.

Thank you so much. Thank you Assembly Member Addis, for bringing this important measure forward, and we look forward to supporting a measure here today. I believe this measure provides parity for our disabled students attending the community colleges who are considered full-time students under these programs, but not able to benefit from a Student Success Completion Grant which could assist in their total cost of attendance.

I continue to encourage you to work with appropriate fiscal committees to ensure adequate funding is available with the expansion of the Student Success Completion Grant Program. And I look forward to supporting the measure here today. With that, the measure is do pass, I mean, the recommendation is do pass to the Appropriations Committee. Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File item number five, AB 1885. The motion is do passed to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll call].

That measure has nine Ayes. And we'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that'd like to add on. And it is out. Thank you, Assembly Member Addis. Thank you so much. With that, we'll open the roll for any Members that would like to add on to item number one, which is the consent calendar. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on item number one. Thank you.

Roll Call

Thank you so much, colleagues. That measure has 10 ayes. We'll keep the roll up for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Next up is item number three.

Roll Call

That measure has 10 ayes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Next up is item number four, file.

Roll Call

That measure has 11 ayes. That measure is out. Thank you. Next up is item number five.

Roll Call

That measure has 10 ayes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Thank you. Next up is item number six.

Roll Call

That measure has 10 ayes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members that like to add on. Next up is item number seven, file.

Roll Call

Thank you, colleagues. That has 10 ayes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Last item is item number eight, file.

Roll Call

That item has nine ayes one not voting, and we'll keep the measure open for any additional Members I'd like to add on. Thank you so much, colleagues, for a robust meeting. And thank you, everyone, for your participation here today. We'll keep the roll open for five more minutes for anybody who would like to add on. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, colleagues, again and team, for a wonderful meeting. I really appreciate everyone's work and efforts on this Committee meeting.

And thank you to all the authors and to Committee Staff and to everyone involved with today's hearing. And with that, today's Assembly Higher Education Committee meeting is adjourned.