Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education

Good afternoon, everyone. Time is now 1:30 and the Assembly Higher Education Committee is called to order. We will start as a Subcommitee and welcome to the hearing of the Assembly Higher Education Committee.

I also want to extend a warm welcome to our 14 student leaders who are part of the young legislators program representing Assembly District 41 and Senator Chris Holden's district. These are our student leaders of today and tomorrow. Welcome. Please note that today is the first of two hearings for our Senate bills.

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. Dot ahed.Assembly.ca.Gov. Authors please sign in at the sergeant's desk in room 437.

Please note that the guideline for bills heard in this Committee is to allow for 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'd like to respond to a roll call, ask a question, or provide a comment, please be sure to activate your microphone and speak into your mic. For authors of bills up today, 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 for today's hearing. Summer Phil Chen has been excused from today's hearing, and there's no replacement for Assembly Chen today.

We have 14 measures on the agenda today, with one proposed for the consent calendar, and when we have quorum, we'll take up the consent calendar and the item that would be. zero, actually, let's. Madam Secretary, if you can call to establish quorum roll call, please.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much. Do we have one item on the consent calendar today? File item number eight, SB 1233, authored by Senator Wilkins. Is there a motion on the consent calendar? Awesome. We have a motion in a second. Thank you, colleagues. Any questions or comments on the consent calendar? See you none. Madam Secretary, roll call.

[Roll Call]

That measure has six ayes, and we'll keep the row open for additional Members to add on. Thank you so much. Now we'd like to start with item number 10, SB 1287, authored by Senator Glazer. Senator Glazer, welcome. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair and Members, appreciate the opportunity to present this bill to you today. First, let me just say that I'm accepting the committee amendments, and I want to thank the staff for working with my office and stakeholders on those amendments.

And I think a number of the issues that were raised in the analysis itself were resolved by the amendments that I have taken. With these amendments, SB 1287 will do four things.

First, it requires public post-secondary institutions to adopt and enforce policies in their student code of conducts that prohibit violence, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination that interferes with students' First Amendment rights or contributing to a hostile environment. Secondly, it requires them to develop enforceable, reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.

Third, it requires the development of mandatory training programs on how to engage respectfully. And finally, the bill asks each student to acknowledge that they'll comply with the student code of conduct.

By implementing these provisions, the bill affirms the role that California's public colleges and universities must take to ensure that all students are able to exercise their free speech rights and exchange views respectfully. In recent months and weeks, we've witnessed an alarming trend of escalating harassment, intimidation, and violence targeted at marginalized groups on our campuses.

This obviously threatens the safety and well-being of our students, faculty, and staff. Our colleges have a responsibility to promote free speech while preventing discrimination and harassment. And I know that a common question that you are thinking about and asking is one that I want to address straight up.

Where does free speech cross the line into speech that is not protected? The Supreme Court has affirmed that colleges need not tolerate speech that is inconsistent with their basic educational mission.

This bill aligns with this responsibility by requiring campuses to institute policies that explicitly prohibit actions that lead to a hostile environment on campus, environments which divide marginalized communities, preventing the free exchange of ideas that is so valued on our campuses.

Members, even when we're dealing with divisive issues and we know that there are all around us, all student voices have the right to be heard. None should be silenced. I believe this legislation will help restore an environment for civil discourse on our campuses.

I have a couple witnesses to provide testimony today with the support of the Chair, Gabriel Gaysnsky. A student at UC Davis and Cliff Berg.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Committee Members. My name is Gabriel Gaysinski, and I am an undergraduate student at UC Davis. I'm here to speak about my experience and the experience of other Jewish and Israeli college students. On the morning of October 7th, 2023, I woke up to horrific videos of the unfolding Hamas terrorist attack.

Before I had any time to process what was happening or check in on friends and loved ones, there were already social media posts circulating justifying the violence, with my classmates and former friends claiming that my people deserved anything that was coming their way.

As the war continued, things on campus became progressively worse and still are getting progressively worse. A professor at my University threatened to kill journalists and their families if they reported favorably on Israel. Another professor claimed that there is no such thing as an Israeli civilian and that all of us are valid military targets.

Every day I hear stories from friends about how they have been physically and verbally attacked, excluded from academic spaces, and made to feel unsafe because of their Jewish or Israeli identity.

I personally have been consistently harassed in person and on the Internet, even prior to October 7th, but especially afterward, I've been called slurs, had threats made against me, and been accused of various crimes simply because I am an outspoken and proud Israeli Jew. Now, this is not an issue of controversial speech.

I understand that in this country, people are allowed to say whatever they want, regardless of how disturbing others may find it. The authors of this bill understand that as well. This instead is an issue of consistent harassment, discrimination, and even physical violence that has amounted to a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli college students.

To those that claim that this legislation will have a chilling effect on free speech, I would like to pose a few questions. Is it free speech to set a police car and campus building on fire, as was done at UC Berkeley?

Is it free speech to hold administrators hostage for 8 hours, as was done at Cal State Los Angeles? Is it free speech to bar Jewish students from accessing campus resources based on their view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as was done at UCLA?

Is it simply an expression of free speech when a good friend of mine was stalked for weeks on campus, at her place of work, and within her dorm building to the point that police had to order her to stay away from the University she pays to attend?

It is a fundamental responsibility of any public institution to provide services equitably to all those who utilize it. In the case of our universities, that is the education that is paid for by my tuition and by California taxpayers.

Nobody, regardless of their gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, or religion should have to choose between expressing their identity and obtaining their degree. I'm not standing here today to better my own situation as I only have a year left of college.

I'm here to speak for the generations of students that will come after me, who deserve a college campus where they can freely pursue their passions and learn free from harassment and discrimination. This is something that many students like me have not been able to get.

Assembly Members, I urge you to pass this bill to protect not just Jewish and Israeli students, but anybody that has been affected by this hostile political climate. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Mister Chairman, Cliff Berg on behalf of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, the largest single-state coalition of Jewish organizations in the nation. I want to thank the author, Senator Glazer, for bringing forward this bill, SB 1287, which would require institutions of higher education to update and enforce provisions in their student codes to prevent instances of intimidation, harassment, and violence on college campuses.

The bill would also require each system of higher education to develop training programs to educate students on civil discourse and require students to acknowledge they will comply with student codes of conduct. JPAC is a coalition of over 30 leading Jewish community organizations across the state.

As the voice of California's Jewish community, the state capitol, we advocate in Sacramento on behalf of the Jewish community's concerns and broadly shared values. Our member organizations, including Jewish federations, Jewish community relations councils, Jewish Family Services, and others, collectively serve hundreds of thousands of Californians of all backgrounds and represent the interests of California's 1.2 million Jews.

The protections in SB 1287 are particularly urgent for our community, which has experienced a 2,000% increase in anti-Semitic incidents on college campuses in the five months since the Hamas attacks on October 7th. There is a broad consensus that stronger measures must be taken in this regard.

This bill protects not just Jewish students and the Jewish community, but students of all faiths and ethnicity from harassment and discrimination, and acts of violence. We urge your support.

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

Thank you, Mister Chair and Members. David Neben, on behalf of the Jewish Community Relations Council, in support.

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

Hi, my name is Janelle. Can I start? Yes. Hi. My name is Janelle Camarena. I'm a sovereign citizen from the Tule River Band of Yokutz. I am in my first year at UCLA majoring in American Indian studies.

My people have faced genocidal violence from this very Legislature, as it was in 1851, when the California Governor told State Legislature to expect war until the Indian race becomes extinct. I have known this capital to be a symbol of violence, oppression, and the genocide of my people.

My people have always told me knowledge is power, and it is with that that I made it my intent to study your language, your laws, and the absurdity of your order. I know a genocidal ideology when I see one. Hence my call for Palestinian liberation from the genocidal states of Israel and America.

Since the start of my enrollment at UCLA, I have been involved in pro-Palestinian protests on and off campus. I have been unapologetically supportive of Palestinian liberation and self-determination and firmly believe that in my lifetime, Palestine will be free from the river to the sea.

I am in opposition to SB 1287 as it is a dangerous bill that will subject the free speech and academic freedom of nearly 2.7 million students into the hands of less than 100 trustees, Board of Governors, and UC regents.

Allowing for these schools' officials across the UC, CSU, and college California college systems to dictate when and where and how me and my peers protest is unconstitutional and prepares our college campuses to become breeding grounds for state-sanctioned propaganda. To our school regents, trustees, and Board of Governors, you do not know the students nor the campuses.

You do not know our voices. I know it is hard to hear our demands when your immediate reactions to our calls for justice is to send riot cops onto our campus to militarize our thoughts and watch us get brutalized from the comfort of your complicity.

I was in Royce Hall, where I was lectured on state-sanctioned militias that would massacre my ancestors from the Sierra Nevadas to the Central Valley down to Los Angeles.

Nearly two centuries later, it was at Royce Hall that UCLA Chancellor Jean Block and LA Mayor Karen Bass watched me, and my peers get brutalized by these descendants of these militias that we now call the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department and their organized gangs. This bill attempts to protect me and my college education from harassment, intimidation and violence.

But to that I say, you are the threat. You are the violence and intimidation. I strongly encourage the State Assembly before me to act with integrity and realize that these select schools and their officials across California public colleges should not be able to control my thoughts, my body, or my action.

That power belongs within the hands of the people, and the people are calling for our schools to end this genocide by divesting from weapons manufacturing and the State of Israel. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee Members. My name is Cynthia Valencia. I am a Legislative Advocate with the ACLU California Action. We want to recognize the committee staff and the author for working on amendments to address the constitutional concerns that we have raised.

We also want to recognize that the most serious First Amendment issue that we flagged in our opposition has been removed. So, thank you, Senator and staff, for taking those concerns from community action advocates and members.

However, we do remain in opposition to SB 1287 as it calls for punishment and the chilling of speech in the name of civility. The bill still contains concerning language that requires a student to acknowledge a duty to comply with the code of conduct as a condition of enrollment.

Even if a student has a good faith belief that the code of conduct violates their constitutional rights, students must be able to receive a higher education in California without being required to waive their rights to free expression and peaceful protest.

We want to be clear that neither the First Amendment nor California law protects behavior on campus that crosses the line into targeted harassment or creates a pervasively hostile environment for vulnerable students. Existing law already authorizes educational institutions to prohibit and punish violence, vandalism, and acts that disrupt the free speech rights of others.

Existing law already authorizes institutions to adopt code of conduct that prohibit unlawful harassment and threats that impair students' right to fully participate in the educational process. These existing laws and policies intend to ensure a safe and inclusive educational environment without encroaching on vital constitutional freedoms.

These existing laws and policies are applicable to every one of the specific incidences that were identified in the authors and the speakers that spoke in support of the need for this legislation. Real social change comes from working to address underlying causes of inequality and bigotry, not from the censorship of discourse.

For these reasons, we ask the Committee to vote no on SB 1287.

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

Yes. My name is Porter Harrist. I'm a Member of UAW 4811 and I'm in opposition to this bill.

Thank you.

Hi, Sarah Harris. I'm a Member of UAW 4811 and I'm in opposition.

My name is Austin Powell. I'm an academic worker at UC Davis and a member of UC-AFT, and I'm in opposition.

My name is Grace Boone. I am a researcher at UC Davis, academic researcher, here with 4811 UAW in opposition.

My name is Jack Barnes. I'm a resident of California and I am in opposition to this bill.

Hi, Ben Cox, I am an academic worker at UC Davis and a member of UAW 4811. Speaking in opposition. Thank you.

Silvia Solis Shaw on behalf of the California Faculty Association in opposition.

Hi, my name is Willie Gibson. I'm an undergraduate worker at UC Davis with UAW 4811, and I'm in opposition to this bill.

Hello. My name is James Giller. I am a graduate student researcher at UC Davis, also a member of UAW 4811, in opposition.

Omar Altamimi, the Senior Policy and Advocacy Coordinator for CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, California Chapter, in opposition.

Good afternoon. My name is David Mandel, Human Rights Attorney, representing more than 100,000 Members and supporters of Jewish Voice for Peace around California. We are in strong opposition to this bill. The real agenda was clear from the speakers in favor of it.

Just name and organization and position. Thank you.

Thank you.

Larry Handel, also from Jewish Voice for Peace, strongly in opposition to this bill.

Cyn Macias-Gomez, Member of the Berkeley Student Cooperative. And from the Bay Area to Palestine, the BSC aligns ourselves with solidarity for the global struggle for liberation of all oppressed people.

My name is Aaron Sin John. I'm a graduate student researcher at UC Davis with UAW 4811, speaking in opposition to this bill.

Good afternoon. My name is Marshall Nakatani. And on behalf of UAW 4811, representing 48,000 academic workers across the State of California, we are in strong opposition to SB 1287. Thank you.

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT - A Union of Educators and Classified Professionals, we want to thank the author for his hard work to ensure the safety of all students on campus. At this time, we are still opposed with the June 12th letter. We are in the process of reviewing the amendments and cannot thank the author, Chair and staff for all their hard work. So, thank you.

Thank you. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? I'm sorry. Thank you. Please come up the mic. Name, organization and.

Hi, my name is Max Green. I'm a Member of UAW 4811 at UC Berkeley, and I am strongly opposed to this bill. I think its purpose is to stifle free speech on campus.

Hi, my name is Christian Rhodes. I'm a Member of UAW 4811 at UC Berkeley, and I am strongly opposed to this bill.

Hello, I'm Jenny Guarino, also a Member of UAW 4811 at UC Berkeley. Strongly opposed to this bill. I believe that it lends itself to a rise in right wing and fascist ideology.

Hello, my name is Hundry Hundoyo, and I'm part of the UC Berkeley Goldman Public Policy School, and I'm strongly opposed to the bill.

Thank you. Are there any tweeners in the hearing room? Seeing none. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Assembly Member Jackson followed by Assembly Member Essayli.

Thank you very much, Mister Chair. Just a few questions. Would this bill prohibit? How would this bill, and I think my question is for ACLU right now, how would this bill be stifled or impede people from their free, from free speech and peaceful protest?

We have concerns that this bill could, because it still has language that students, as a condition of enrollment, would require students that even if they have a good faith belief that it might infringe on their constitutional rights. So, this would encourage each California community college and CSU to start implementing new policies.

We have concerns about how they would implement these new policies. We have concerns about how they're implementing their policies right now with existing law, as we have seen with existing policies and how they're addressing it right now.

Right now, with this bill, the language in the amendments that we have seen, it would be forcing, or it would be creating new guidelines for the public schools or public institutions about how to create new policies and the students to sign a waiver or sign a condition for their enrollment.

And if they don't, if they don't, if they don't agree with it or if they don't comply, they could get faced serious academic consequences with it. And that's what we're concerned about, that they would be punished for their activities.

Right now, it seems to me that it just depends on what kind of activities. Correct? Because I don't see anything in this bill that says that people can't freely express what they believe in. I don't see anything that prohibits someone from peacefully engaging in protest. Would this prohibit students and maybe, Senator, this is a question from you. Would this prohibit students from doing sit ins?

Through the Chair? First of all, there's nothing. Thank you, Assembly Member. There's nothing in this bill and nothing would even be appropriate that would ever have a student waive their First Amendment rights.

There's nothing we could ever do here in the Legislature in this bill or otherwise, that would ever require a student, through some sort of waiver, to waive their constitutional rights, the First Amendment. The answer is that no, a sit-in is not, if it's a form of speech.

There's nothing in this bill that would prohibit a sit-in. Now if it was considered a time, place, and manner violation by the campus, that's another issue, which, by the way, is in place today. In fact, testimony from the ACLU in opposition to the bill seems to say all these requirements are in place today.

So, that'd be my short answer to your question.

My just concern. And I can see a concern that if by signing this code of conduct, they begin to weaponize the code of conduct to try to silence people that they don't agree with. Is that your argument?

Okay, so that's your argument. And so, I think my idea is, and the reason why is we just have to discern what is acceptable and not acceptable. What's not acceptable is for you to put your hands on somebody. What's not acceptable is when you are threatening someone.

Correct.

What's not acceptable is when you're following someone to their home or following someone to class in an intimidating manner. What's not acceptable is when you do things that dehumanize other people, even when you claim on fighting for someone else's humanity. And I think that is the thing that we all have to think of.

Now, I'm a master protester. I'll shut down something in a second. Okay? But I also know that there's consequences to that. And a core principle of nonviolence protest, is. I know I might get a consequence for it, but because it's a moral imperative, I'm willing to accept the consequence for it.

So, I think we have to make sure that we realign ourselves in terms of what the core principles of protest is, which is get in the way, make things uncomfortable. Not all things uncomfortable are a bad thing. Right?

But what we've been seeing, and what I've been seeing, even some of my own friends back at home on the streets, is that we have begun to lose our own humanity as we claim that we're fighting for others. And we've got to restore that expectation.

We've got to restore and reteach people how to protest and how to make sure that people's voices are not heard. But right now, I think we are adopting a lot of things. Well, I'm not going to say that right now.

I just think we're in the wrong direction and we're going the wrong direction in terms of our history and what we're trying to do.

And so, I'll be supporting this bill, but I think we need to keep a close eye on it because we do know that there's always someone in some office at some university that might have their own ideas in terms of what the intent is. But at the same time, the status quo is just not acceptable.

Just not acceptable. And we've got to start balancing our humanity again. I appreciate it, Mister Chair.

Thank you so much, Assembly Member Jackson. Assembly Member Essayli.

Thank you, Mister Chair. Senator, I appreciate you saying that your intent here is not to stifle free speech, because I think that's really important concern of mine. I hope every Member of this body is preserving our constitutional rights. Do you agree that hate speech is protected by the First Amendment?

Yes.

Okay. I agree as well. Even though I may hate it, hate hate speech, I condemn it. It's deplorable, but it's protected. And the reason it's protected is because in our free society, we cannot have the government involved in content-based speech regulations deciding what's acceptable, what's not. So, let me ask you this.

I don't really see much of an issue with your bill, except one part that gives me pause, and it says that the universities are to adopt a code of conduct that would prohibit harassing, intimidating, or discriminatory conduct that creates a hostile environment. And the definition of hostile is unwelcome conduct.

So, do you ever see speech on campus by protesters or students ever rising to the level of meeting that definition?

If it's pervasive, I think it has the potential to.

What does that, what does pervasive mean? They say it too many times.

I think we'd have to have some lawyers come in and provide that definition for you to be. To make sure it would be said correctly. But you standing up in the quad and saying whatever hateful things you wanted to say would not necessarily rise to a prohibition under this bill.

That doesn't necessarily create a hostile environment for students, but it could. The circumstances were multiplied in different ways.

It seems like a potential loophole. I mean, if you were to. If you were to agree that speech, to exclude speech from the definition of conduct, I would support the bill. But if there's still a window here where speech could be interpreted to rise to the level of hostile conduct, I can't support it.

Let me just ask you a specific question. What would this bill do, in your opinion, that is not currently illegal now because universities can regulate time, use, and place right now. Threats are illegal. Burning police cars are illegal. Holding people hostage is illegal. Stalking is illegal. Building encampments on public property is illegal.

So, what are we trying to do here that's not already covered by existing law?

Well, there was a. There was a question that was posed at a congressional hearing many months ago to a couple university presidents, and that question was, would a call for genocide violate the codes of conduct, the student codes of conduct on your campus? Those presidents had trouble answering that.

As you may recall in reading the analysis we had in the bill, that a call for genocide would be considered a form of free speech, that, if intended by the person speaking and interpreted by the person who heard it, would be a violation of the bill as proposed.

The analysis points out that we took an amendment in this Committee today that defines that, takes out that call for genocide, and replaces it with a hostile environment as a replacement to deal with that question in a different way that they felt was more appropriate and defenseful under the First Amendment.

And that's the change that we made in the bill that I accepted the committee amendments to do. So, that goes back to your question that you posed to me, and I understand if you don't like the answer to it, but that would be my answer to it.

I appreciate. I mean, this is a very messy area of law when you're dealing with speech. I just want to be very careful, though, that we do not inhibit First Amendment rights because they're very, very, very important.

And today you may feel comfortable that the laws are being used fairly or justly against one group that could be turned around and used against you or another group later. So, very, very careful of protecting that.

And I hope this goes without saying, but I do feel the need to say this, you know, to our Jewish brothers and sisters. I just want to say I understand the frustration. I understand the concern and the alarm and the rhetoric that's going on. I do hear it.

And I will tell you, as a Muslim, and as the first Muslim in this body, I absolutely condemn any antisemitic rhetoric that's hearing. I don't believe in it. I think as a Muslim, we absolutely condemn all forms of terrorism, including what Hamas did.

And I can tell you, based on what I know and my belief, that the people that committed those acts against civilians will go to hell. And that's under my book, not just the other books. So, you know, I don't want this to devolve over a foreign issue.

I really, really, you know, do care about the well-being of everyone and denounce all forms of hate. But just because we don't like how people express it doesn't mean that it should necessarily be illegal. So, I appreciate you answering my questions. Senator. Thank you.

Thank you, Assembly Member Essayli. Colleagues, any further? Assembly Member Muratsuchi.

Thank you, Senator Glazer, for bringing this important discussion to this body. I want to first start by acknowledging that, like many, I have been frustrated with seeing what has been happening on our college campuses across the country, especially in college campuses, failing to protect students and their ability to be able to attend class safely.

I think that's a core mission of any educational institution, that they should be able to ensure that every student feels safe in going to class and to be able to pursue the educational purpose of the institution.

At the same time, you know, I'm a proud Cal Bear, as our chancellor, Carol Christ, recently stated, you know, protest is in our DNA, and I am very concerned with the ACLU's analysis.

And I'm actually finding myself in agreement with a lot of what my colleague was just stating about an extreme concern of a political body like the Legislature weighing in on such sensitive balancing acts that are required in First Amendment free speech analysis.

And so, I guess my first question, I mean, it does, I haven't had a chance to talk with you about this bill or with any other Legislator, but my first question is that given that there is existing constitutional, federal and state law that is designed to address, to strike those delicate balancing acts regarding campus free speech, why is your bill necessary?

Well, first, thank you, Assembly Member. First, let me say that this bill does reiterate existing rules and regulations regarding free speech. It doesn't interfere with the First Amendment rights of this country in any way, shape, or form. So, that should give you some comfort and assurances that this bill is not in some ways, an overreach.

Secondly, if you look at the elements of the bill, it goes beyond that. And where does it go beyond that? Goes beyond that in terms of a training program, mandatory training for students to understand what's in the code of conduct and how they can participate in that campus environment in a civil and positive way.

Secondly, and it requires an acknowledgment of that student code of conduct by those students, which is not in place today. And finally, it requires a reporting back to the Legislature. So, we have some data and information.

So, if there's a decision to or examination of what could be done more to keep our students safe, that you'd be in a position as a policymaker to look at that and see what that might provide or guide you.

So, on the substance of free speech, I think you can be comforted that nothing in here is proposed that would go in violation of any of those rules of our state and nation, and secondly, that it provides an enhancement, as I've described.

So, I'm looking at what I assume is the latest amended version of your bill and on the copy that we received on page seven, where you specify what shall be in the codes of conduct. Your first provision is prohibit violent, harassing, intimidating, or discriminatory conduct that creates a hostile environment on campus.

And my concern is particularly with the intimidating conduct and the hostile environment. I don't see a definition of intimidating the bill, but hostile environment is defined, and it indicates hostile environment means unwelcome conduct based on protective status.

That, based on the totality of circumstances, is subjectively and objectively offensive and is so severe and pervasive that it limits or denies a person's ability to participate or benefit from an institution's education program.

My concern, I mean, we had a student use the phrase that I know is very offensive to many in the Jewish community, from the river to the sea.

I understand that term in the ears of many, especially those in the Jewish community, that that is calling for the elimination of the Jewish state and that it is antisemitic.

On the other hand, there are what I believe to be legitimate political speech in terms of those calling for the creation of a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. You know, putting aside the antisemitic or the perception of anti-Semitism among many, especially, but not limited to the Jewish community.

But my point is that when that is interpreted as intimidating or a hostile environment to some students, what I'm afraid of is that it is going to have a chilling effect on legitimate political speech.

In response, first, I would, if you want to make that outrageous statement, you can. I don't think that goes in violation of anything that's proposed in the bill. And you've read the definition on the record, and I think that that explains how one might interpret those types of free speech activities.

But it speaks to denying another person's ability to participate or benefit from an institution's educational program or activity. That is a key part of it. You get to say whatever you want to say, and there's nothing in the bill that would say you can't. So, once again, the issue is free speech is not only my speech.

Free speech is not only my speech. It's the ability of everyone else to speak and participate. And that goes to the essence of what we would like to see and expect on our college campuses.

I understand that, but, you know, in the committee analysis, they quote the OCR in stating that the conduct is to be evaluated in terms of whether it's harassing, not from the perspective of the student who is allegedly being harassed, but from the perspective of a reasonable person in the student's position, considering all the circumstances.

And yet the bill, as amended, has subjectively as well as objectively offensive. And.

I think it also has the word pervasive.

Well, but on page five.

So severe and pervasive.

But under the.

Severe and, that's not a one-time thing.

But under the definition of hostile environment, it says that based on the totality of circumstances is subjectively and objectively offensive. I've never seen that subjective language in any First Amendment analysis. I'm concerned that that's unconstitutional.

Again, you know, I started my comments by saying that absolutely we should not condone conduct that is so severe or pervasive that it limits a person's ability to participate or benefit from the educational purpose of the institution.

But I'm concerned that this is getting into dangerous ground where we are going to have a chilling effect on First Amendment speech. Wanted to give you the last word.

I would just say that if you felt that there was a constitutional vulnerability, then this should cut you comfort in supporting this bill, because that will be the challenge that will be made, and that will be the determination that a court would rule upon.

And that should give you comfort that this bill is on the right track and is going to help create a more civil, respectful environment on the campuses. And if it goes too far, it will be found to be in violation of our United States Constitution, which I don't think it does. I don't think it does.

I think this is about trying to protect all students on a campus. Content neutral, by the way.

But, yeah, I mean, you know, I try to remind myself that I'm not in a court of law, that I'm in a political body at this time. But at the same time, you know, I mean, I'm really struggling. I'm not doing this for any political performance. Senator Glazer, I hope you take my word for that.

You know, I really do want to stand in solidarity with the Jewish community and all those that have expressed their concerns about not feeling safe on their college campuses. But I also absolutely take it seriously that, you know, that we. I don't want to chill free speech on our college campuses. And that's what I'm struggling with. Thank you.

Thank you, Assembly Member Muratsuchi. Assembly Member Quirk-Silva.

Thank you. And thank you, Senator, for bringing this bill forward and for engaging on this. I think one of the things that makes this such a critical conversation for today is it represents two very different point of views. And this is not unique just to this topic.

I mean, we are a very, very polarized nation under many topics. This is the time that since October, this has been elevated, and yet we've stood our ground on so many issues throughout the United States, whether it's on gun violence, whether it's on LGBTQ issues, and we have very different opinions.

So, one of the thoughts I had as a former classroom elementary teacher is take the higher ed out of it and think about sports teams or think about elementary classrooms, junior high, is we all have to live by a code of conduct. If we don't, our society erodes.

Then we have no rules, and we have no ways that we can think of ourselves to be safe. So, one of the things in the language is how to exchange views in an atmosphere of mutual respect and civility. I'll say that again. How to exchange views in an atmosphere of mutual respect and civility.

And that is the question of our time. That is the question of America today, because we have lost that ability. We have lost that ability to work in the gray area. The gray area means that maybe I don't agree with you, but I might be able to listen to you.

The gray area, which is, well, I know that you're hurt and you're coming from pain, and I want to hurt you, or I understand your pain. I understand that what you are enduring, whether it's deaths or violence, is unconscionable on either side. And this is something that we have lost. We have stopped listening.

And when we stop listening, what we want to do is be right. We want to be victorious. We want to say that we are right, and they are wrong. And so, when there are rules placed on us, whether it's on sports teams or in classrooms, it is to allow people to work together.

We have rules of conduct as Assembly Members or Senators. We have ways that protocols that we are supposed to engage in. That doesn't mean it always happens that way. But we get into a breakdown of society where we are threatening, whether we are harassing, whether we are vandalizing.

This is the line that we go past. Doesn't mean that even in our own homes, that we don't sometimes lose our temper or get angry or decide that these relationships are broken. But in places of business of worship in our society, we have to have rules. And some of these rules are basic.

Respect property, don't threaten somebody, don't harass, don't bully. These are the type of things that we teach our children when they're young.

And now when we get to the college campus, one of the things we have to say is these are young adults, and on either side that you're on, whichever side you are on, what is the basic, the basic fundamental rules that we can follow.

And believe me, this is the conversation of our lifetime, maybe for some of us. But we have to be able to find ways to respect one another, if we don't agree with one another, figure out how to resolve those conflicts, and if we can't do those basic things, and we are in a breakdown of society.

And I support this bill because the idea of we have to have basic fundamental rules to live by, not because I take one side or the other, but because we simply have to understand how to proceed with business.

And if you're on a campus, that business is going to your classes in a safe manner, faculty being safe, so forth. But both sides need to be safe. And there has to be a place where we say that both sides have to be acknowledged, because until we can do that, we will continue to stand on the sidelines.

We will continue to throw insults and throw all kinds of accusations. And to be honest, we will live in a place of hate, and we have seen what that does in our history. Thank you.

Thank you, Assembly Member Quirk-Silva. Any further comments or questions? Seeing none. Senator, would you like to close, please?

Well, thank you, Chair and Members of the Committee for the thoughtful comments. I particularly appreciated the comments from Assembly Member Jackson, who I can see has wrestled with this issue in practice and in policy.

And I think I appreciate this special perspective that you bring to this about standards and rules and behavior and a willingness to take consequences when one wants to break the rules.

But understanding the rules are there for a reason, which I think is one of the points that Assembly Member Quirk-Silva made in terms of how we all need to get along. Chair I guess I want to say something as I close. It's important.

The first witness's comments today I found to be outrageous and factually false on so many levels. But she had every right to say them here in this hearing room and on our campuses. She has every right to say them as much as I find them to be repulsive and dangerous.

The goal of this bill is to support peaceful protest and speech for everybody on the campuses from every perspective that they bring that a pervasive, hostile environment on our campuses is not conducive to what we want our higher education institutions to be about. It's a special place, these educational institutions. Free speech is not just my speech.

Free speech is everyone's speech. If you think that what's happening today is okay, all right, I got a different perspective. I don't think it's working. I don't think we should have blindness and deafness to all that is going on on these college campuses. So, the question is, how can we make things better and safer?

That's really the goal of this bill. And is there a restatement, as one of the opposition witnesses has testified to, of existing law and practices? Yes, there is. There is a restatement. There's a reason. It brings value to restates and to underscore that free speech is about everyone's speech, not just one person's speech.

But the bill does more than that as I mentioned earlier. It engages students directly in what's in this conversation, as has been said, so that we all understand how we all can get along, work together, think together, fight together, argue together, fight what I mean verbally disagree.

So, that's the goal of the bill, to support our First Amendment in every way, shape, or form without exception. And I think the bill does that. It's certainly a content-neutral bill. It's a priority of the Legislative Jewish Caucus. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote today.

Thank you, Senator Glazer, for comments and for to agreeing to take the amendments here today in Committee, and for having your staff work collaboratively with our committee staff.

While the amendments alleviate many of the policy concerns raised on the Senate Floor and by the opposition today, there continue to be concerns about how the institutions will interpret and use the student code of conduct in terms of punishment for students who are exercising their right to protest.

However, I also remain optimistic that this bill, along with other bills being championed by the Jewish Caucus, will continue to protect students' freedom of speech and to protect students from all forms of discrimination. And with that, I will be supporting the bill today. Do we have a motion. Do we have a second? A motion and a second.

Any further comments? Seeing none. Roll call, please.

File item number 10, SB 1287. The motion is do pass as amended, to the Judiciary Committee. [Roll call]

That measure has four ayes, and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on. Thank you, Senator.

Thank you.

Next up is Senator Portantino. Welcome. Thank you for your patience, Senator.

Thank you, Mister. Thank you, Mister chair. I'll be quite brief. This bill was.

Excuse me, apologize. If you're going to have any conversations, please take the conversations outside. Thank you so much. Senator Portantino, welcome.

Thank you, Mister chair. I'll be brief. This Bill had its inspiration from students on Glendale Community College who were doing fundraising to offset the cost of going to college for student refugees from Artsakh, who. Who were displaced. As you know, 100,000 people were driven out of their homes in Artsakh.

And I was so taken by the students in their wonderfulness of doing a fundraiser to help students that many of them didn't know who were coming to California to escape the war, but also get a higher education. And so Glendale College, then, in talking to them, they've decided to sponsor this Bill.

Basically, it's a three college pilot program. In essence, one college in SoCal, which would be Glendale Community College, one college in the Central Valley, and one college in Norcal community college, would allow student refugees, as defined and determined by the chancellor's office, to attend community college as if they were California students.

We think this is a good thing to do. California has a record of welcoming people. Certainly we have refugees from many, many conflicts around the globe, and if they're determined to be refugees, they should have this opportunity. And again, it had its genesis with students.

With me today, I have Anna Matthews from the Faculty Association of Community College to testify and support, and appropriately, at the right time, would ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Anna Matthews, Advocacy Manager of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges and a proud supporter of this Bill. California prides itself on providing sanctuary to immigrants, and our state has been greatly enriched as a result.

With the current global political climate full of unrest and violence, it is no surprise that people take refuge in California, seeking safety and the chance at a brighter future. The California community colleges bridge the gap for many immigrants, providing access to socioeconomic mobility and giving them access to a wealth of opportunities to uplift themselves.

SB 971 would allow up to 150 Low income, full time students from war torn countries or regions of unrestricted to attend California community colleges at in state tuition rates instead of the higher non resident tuition rates.

I'd like to share the story of a friend who immigrated to California from a war torn region shortly after graduating high school. They immigrated from a region of conflict in the Middle East to California, they took a leap of faith and left everything they knew for the chance to pursue the American dream.

After immigrating to the United States, they decided to kickstart their higher education journey at the California community colleges. After talking to a college counselor, they found out that they did not qualify for in state tuition and could not afford the non resident tuition.

As a result, they had to postpone their education for two academic years until they could qualify as a resident and pay in state tuition rates. As a student with a passion for learning, they were greatly disheartened to have to put their educational dreams on hold, but they persisted, working two jobs to make ends meet.

Once they qualified as a resident, they started at Community College, became a student leader both on and off campus, and and were even accepted to prestigious universities like Berkeley and UCLA. SB 971 would ease barriers to access for students like this and expedite their path to achieving their goals. Extending affordable higher education access is a powerful way to uplift those who have suffered unimaginable hardships through no fault of their own. I humbly request your aye vote.

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

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals, in support. Thank you.

Thank you, Mister chair Members. David Hawkins with the California Community College Independent Faculty Union, strong support. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in a hearing room. Are there tweeners in a hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? We have a motion in a second. Senator, would you like to close, please?

I should have gone first. Respectfully, ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator, for your patience. Thank you, Senator, for bringing this legislation forward. And as mentioned, we need to continue to look at our non resident fee exemptions at our community colleges. With that said, I have great empathy for the population that you're seeking to serve and assess it on.

These provisions will allow us to evaluate if this policy is having the desired impact and make future decisions accordingly. With that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call.

[Roll Call]

That measure's five ayes. We'll keep the roll open for additional members to add on. Thank you so much. Next up--thank you for your patience--is Senator Newman, presenting Item 1449, followed by--I'm sorry--it's Bill 1449, followed by Senate Bill 1244.

We're doing it in that order, Mr. Chair? That's fine.

Yes.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members, I thank you for the opportunity to present SB 1449, which will provide Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles with temporary regulatory relief as it undergoes the process of WASC accreditation.

In 2010, in response to a series of scandals involving for-profit schools, the U.S. Department of Education issued new rules requiring all institutions of higher education to maintain a process for receiving and processing consumer complaints. SB 81, passed in 2015, authorized the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary Education to contract with WASC accredited colleges and universities to fulfill this purpose.

That authorization did not, however, extend the same privilege to nonprofit law schools accredited by the American Bar Association, which, like WASC, is recognized under federal law as an institutional accreditor and whose standards require ABA accredited law schools to meet rigorous academic accounting and performance thresholds.

As a consequence of this omission, the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary Education recently notified Southwestern Law School and ABA accredited school that in the absence of WASC accreditation, it would need to become bureau-licensed in order to stay in compliance with federal law.

The Bureau's licensing requirements, while generally well-intended in the service of the eminently admirable goal of protecting students interests are, in many cases, unfortunately, in direct conflict with the more tailored and nuanced requirements of the ABA.

These conflicts can create duplicative reporting requirements that train school resources and, in a worst-case scenario, could have the unintended effect of misrepresenting the school's overall performance and thereby causing harm to the same students that the requirements were originally created to protect.

Take, for example, the Bureau's treatment of Southwestern's various law degree pathways, which deliberately allows students to switch between full or part time study or between in-person and fully remote attendance.

While these are all deemed by the ABA to be interchangeable pathways within a single JD degree program, the Bureau instead treats each as their own individual degree program, and as a result, if a Southwestern Law student at some point switches between full and part time, the Bureau then considers them as having dropped out of the full time program and then re-enrolled as a new student in the part time program.

This seemingly innocuous change, which could be the result of any number of factors in a student's life and for which Southwestern deserves credit for accommodating, actually could have the problematic effect of inaccurately skewing Southwestern's graduation rates. Such a false metric, absent context, can deter prospective students as well as adversely affect the reputations of current and graduated students.

Another example is the Bureau's requirement for student transcripts to include information not otherwise required by the ABA. This includes the mandatory disclosure of courses a student may have dropped. This is actually something that other law schools do not require, and the inclusion of those drop courses on a transcript can carry a punitive effect as Southwestern graduates pursue postgraduate employment, thereby putting them at a competitive disadvantage to graduates of other ABA law schools for whom no such information would be either available or required.

Southwestern Law School has a well-earned reputation, having provided Californians from all walks of life with affordable and high-quality legal instruction for more than a century. Its roster of distinguished alumni includes numerous members of the Legislature, statewide constitutional officers, justices of the California Supreme Court, members of Congress, and even California's first African American and first Latina judges.

Passage of SB 1449 will provide Southwestern Law School with a temporary exemption as it completes the process of WASC accreditation over the next few years. With me to testify is George Miller, on behalf of Southwestern Law School. I am respectfully asking for your aye vote this afternoon.

Thank you. Welcome.

Mr. Chair and Members, unlike Senator Newman, I did not go to the Evelyn Wood School of Speed Reading.

If I spoke too fast, I'll do it again.

Anything you gaps in there you want me to fill in, I'd be happy to fill them in, but I'm here and happy to represent Southwestern Law School, as you may have heard in passing. They're a 112-year-old not-for-profit institution that has been in continual existence and operation for all those 112 years. They've been accredited by the ABA since I believe it was 1952.

That was when the U.S. government recognized them as the official accreditor of law schools or the highest accrediting body for law schools. In 2015, shortly after we passed legislation in this House to make sure that schools did not lose their Title IV eligibility, in which I actually worked on the 2009 version of the Bureau with Senator Portantino back then when he was over here, within a day, we received an email from the Bureau letting us know that we were eligible to contract with them for claims handling purposes because we were an exempt institution.

Three days later, we got a hard copy of the same letter, along with a contract to return with a check for complaint handling. It wasn't until last year, after we had gone through three renewals of that process, that they informed us that they had made a mistake.

This bill is clearly is just a simple work through while we go through the process of the WASC accreditation, which we would have completed probably four or five years ago had we not initially had this--I'm just going to call again a mistake--and so it gives us the ability to get our accreditation and if the bill will sunset thereafter, we are the only freestanding ABA accredited law school in the state. There's similar ones, but there's somewhat affiliated. You have McGeorge and Hastings, but in any event, here are happy to support this bill.

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

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members, Senator Newman. David Neben, on behalf of the Institute for College Access and Success, better known as TICAS. While we understand where Southwestern College is coming from and how they're attempting to remedy the situation that they're currently in, TICAS does believe that from the consumer protection perspective, the Bureau establishes a baseline of standards, licensee quality, and competency and corresponding enforcement provisions for institutions to follow.

And any bills or exemptions which attempt to further erode those baseline standards for consumer protections may not benefit the public and does not necessarily provide accountability for public monies utilized at these institutions.

As we understand it, under current statute, this institution could remedy this without this exemption by voluntarily seeking approval from the Bureau. At a moment when the Bureau is operating in a structural deficit, any exemption by which a registered institution will be required to pay less or completely skirt bureau oversight will only worsen this deficit at the Bureau.

This exemption strongly relies on accreditation during a time when federal rules are still being developed to conduct a comprehensive regulatory review of accreditation, and since the bill would precede these federal rules, any deviation could cause California to be out of line with federal standards in the future.

Lastly, while we do appreciate recent amendments to help narrow this exemption for a certain time, we'd like to avoid setting a precedent for future legislation to follow suit and extending this privilege to other colleges to access public funds and labeling this process as, quote, 'providing the appropriate level of state oversight because we believe that exemptions may serve as an artificial measure of quality.' Therefore, we do ask this committee to vote no and allow Southwestern College to remedy this by voluntarily seeking approval from the Bureau. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Seeing none, Senator, would you like to close?

Yeah. I appreciate the opportunity to present this. So, you know, to be clear, this is a deliberately narrow exemption prompted not by any effort by Southwestern to avoid adhering to state law; it's simply in response to the omission, the original mission, and what the exemption would do on a limited basis is give Southwest time to continue providing its ABA provided curriculum until such time as they achieve their WASC accreditation. So for that reason, I'm respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Do we have a motion? A second? We have a motion by Dr. Jackson; second by Vice Chair Ta. Seeing no further comments, thank you so much, Senator Newman, for bringing this bill forward. We know that BPPE plays a critical role in the oversight of many of our California institutions of higher education, not just for-profit private schools. As mentioned, this bill narrowly expands an existing exemption for certain law schools in a way that I feel is reasonable and time-limited.

We will continue to exercise oversight institutions to ensure that these kinds of exemptions make sense and then provide gaps and critical protections for our students. With that, I look forward to supporting the bill today. Madam Secretary, roll call please.

File Item Number 13: SB 1449, the motion is: do pass to the Business and Professions Committee. [Roll Call].

That measure has seven ayes. We'll keep the roll open for any additional Members to add on. Thank you. Next up is item number nine by Senator Newman, SB 1244. Welcome, Senator Newman.

Thank you. My witness is coming to the table. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Second bill, pleased to present SB 1244, which will expand dual enrollment opportunities for California high school students by enhancing the ability of school districts to enter into college and career access pathway programs with other community college districts in situations where the community college district in which that school is located is either unable or unwilling to enter into such an agreement.

First, some background and context. Dual enrollment programs allow high school students to take college courses and earn college credits while still in high school. These programs, also known as College and Career Access Pathway, or CCAP programs, were designed to expand access to college level learning and to help students accelerate the time it takes to complete college upon graduation from high school.

Giving high school students opportunities to participate in college level courses helps them simultaneously prepare for the academic rigors of college while also giving them a head start on obtaining college credits. Dual enrollment programs have been found to have a positive impact on not only students graduation rates, but their high school academics and their college completion rates as well.

SB 1244 would authorize a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership and provide access to dual enrollment courses to a school district within the service area of another community college district if the community college in whose district that school is located has either declined a similar request or has failed to take action within 60 days of such a request to enter into such a partnership. Under current statute, community colleges districts are prohibited from entering into CCAP partnerships with any school located in another community college's service area unless there is an existing agreement in place between the two community college districts.

This circumstance where a local community college district fails to take action on a request or arbitrarily denies a request but where that district has no agreement currently placed with another community college district has resulted in situations across the state where high schools seeking dual enrollment partnerships have been prevented from doing so to the detriment of their students who would otherwise reap the benefits of such programs.

SB 1244 will ensure that students are not denied quality dual enrollment opportunities due to provisions in current law which effectively afford local community college districts veto power over an area school district's ability to offer their students access to this very valuable educational model.

Here to testify and support of SB 1244 is Peter Birdsall, Legislative Advocate for the California High School Coalition, and Sara Bachez, Director of Education Policy and Advocacy for the nonprofit Children Now. I am respectfully asking for your aye vote today.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you. Peter Birdsall representing the California High School Coalition. It's a coalition of 55 school districts around the state focusing, as you can imagine, on high school issues, the issues of high school students. Dual enrollment is a very high priority for us. It's a great opportunity for students. Senator described the bill exactly and the problem we've been facing. This will expand the opportunity for students to participate in dual enrollment programs. So we urge your aye vote.

Good afternoon. Sara Bachez with Children Now, a nonpartisan policy development and advocacy organization dedicated to promoting children's health, education, and well being in the state. We're pleased to co-sponsor SB 1244. Over the past few years, California has made significant investments to address the barriers to access higher education by improving the high school to college transition for more students, particularly our students of color and from low income families taking on college level courses earlier through these initiatives like dual enrollment.

And since the inception of the program, we have seen demonstrated success in pathways for these students to attain and earn college credit. However, we do recognize that there's still room for improvement for these programs, as they're still not readily available in economically disadvantaged communities. Specifically, reducing barriers to entering into partnership agreements and ensuring students have as much access to available opportunities as possible.

With that state goal in mind of increasing dual enrollment participation by 15% from 2022 to 2027 and improving access to programs, we believe SB 1244 will facilitate the current process of ensuring k-12 school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools can enter CCAP partnerships with community college districts within or outside of the LEA service area to ensure that as many students can access college level courses and make college attendance a possibility. Thank you so much for your support.

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

Chair and Members, Carson Eades on behalf of California Charter Schools Association in support of this bill. Thank you.

Hello. Valerie Johnson with the Campaign for College Opportunity in support.

Good afternoon. Carlos Machado with the California School Board Association. CSBA is a proud co-sponsor on the bill and would ask that you support the bill today. Thank you.

Sasha Horwitz, Los Angeles Unified School District, in support.

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

Diana Vu on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators in support. Thank you.

Hi. Justin Salenik from the California Community College Chancellor's Office. We don't have an official position, but supportive of the intent and want to thank the author for bringing it forward. Thank you.

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

Tiffany Mok with CFT. We just wanted to say we look forward to discussing the issue to ensure that the quality of level that everybody wants and expects for this bill will continue. Apologize for not reaching out earlier, but given this time of the year, I just thought I would say it now instead of have it surprised later. So thank you so much for all your work, and we strongly support dual enrollment CCAPs.

Thank you.

Kristal Padilla on behalf of the Community College League of California. We don't have a formal position yet, but we thank the author in his office for working through our concerns with us. And thank you very much.

Thank you. I think you just gave our tweener category, but are there any tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Yes. Assembly Member Quirk-Silva, followed by Assembly Member Muratsuchi.

This is a great bill. It is about access, access, access. It's about looking towards reimagining how we're going to get not only high school students, but moving them through the programs that they either want or need that may not be available. I happen to be in a unique place where we have Fullerton High School, and directly across the street is Fullerton Community College. And we know there's many opportunities there, and this would just enhance those opportunities. So support the bill. Move the bill.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Assembly Member Muratsuchi. Oh, you don't have any... I'm sorry, I thought you. Okay, any colleagues, I mean, any additional comments or questions, colleagues? Seeing none, Senator, would you like to close, please?

Yeah. Appreciate my witnesses being here today. I want to make clear, in many cases, it's not intentional that a community college district fails to act promptly on a request. But the impacts are meaningful. And among the barriers, especially for first generation students from disadvantaged communities, as Ms. Baches mentioned, is belief.

The belief, the knowledge that in a college level environment that they can succeed. That is actually the most precious attribute of the CCAP programs. It gives students an opportunity for the first time to be on campus, to participate in campus life, to take college level courses, and to know that they can do this.

And it's unfortunate any barriers that would get in the way, especially simply time and inertia that might prevent that from happening. This bill solves that problem by providing an additional opportunity pathway to establish those partnerships. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Newman, for bringing this very important measure forward. And agree with you also that if the community college district in the area is not meeting the needs of our k-12 schools, then those k-12 school districts reserve the right to find a community college district who can.

And as a former trustee for the community colleges, it was a great opportunity to connect and partner up with multiple k-12 school districts within the area to provide and expand higher education opportunities. And we know that every student should have access to dual enrollment and should not be limited by the zip code in which they reside.

I look forward to voting for this bill today, and thank you in advance for your continued work and efforts in collaboration with Assembly Member Holden's office on his bill, Assembly Bill 359, so that both measures can move forward together. With that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File item number nine, SB 1244. The motion is do pass to the Education Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure have six ayes, and it is out. We'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Members.

Thank you, Senator. Next up, we have Senator Dodd presenting SB 1166. Senator Dodd, welcome. Thank you for your patience.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. I would like to begin by accepting the committee amendments described in the analysis. These amendments remove reporting requirements no longer required by related bill in a Call to Action Bill Package. They align reporting requirements with changes in new Title IX regulations for processing complaints and require the reports to be presented to the appropriate governing boards.

SB 1166 built upon legislation this committee approved last year, putting in place critical data collection relative to discrimination and Title IX violations of the California State University system. SB 1166 also takes important steps in extending these reporting requirements to community colleges and the UC system.

Students, faculty, and staff on these campuses are no less deserving of protections against discrimination. While discrimination and harassment are unfortunately nothing new to college campuses, investigative journalism, independent reports, and a state audit revealed systemic mishandling of these cases across the CSU system.

The current gap in data on how colleges handle discrimination in Title IX cases means less transparency, accountability, or opportunity to address deficiencies on how colleges carry out their responsibilities. Thank you to the good work by you, Mr. Chair, and your staff.

SB 1166 will advance an important piece of the legislative package implementing recommendations for Title IX reforms contained in this committee's Call to Action report. I have, I think, one or two witnesses today? Is there somebody else maybe here? Well, I had two, and I may be down to one. I don't think anybody's gonna complain about that, so with that--

They're coming right now. Here we go. Thank you, Senator. Welcome.

Apologies. Good afternoon. My name is Tanzaib Rahanu. I am a second-year at UC Berkeley, and I serve as the Director of Policy for Generation Up. GENup is a student-led organization that represents over 4,000 students across the state advocating for educational equity through policy reform like SB 1166.

Co-sponsored by GENup, SB 1166 establishes a critical system of oversight of the UC, CSU, and community college Title IX practices. By requiring the campuses to report to Legislator annually, this bill takes a big step in the right direction towards ensuring that gender equity is a priority.

SB 1166 will help transform their promises of safe and equitable campuses into a reality in California. It is paramount that we hold California colleges and universities accountable through transparency and collaborative efforts with both students and administrations.

I am hopeful that we can see the results we have been demanding for far too long through the passage of legislation like SB 1166, and I want all of us to remember that Title IX promised students to end discrimination and expand opportunities, regardless of sex.

In order to keep this promise, we have to ensure that institutions are held accountable for the unsafe environments that students have been subjected to for decades. SB 1166 will allow the Legislator to identify problems within California's Title IX systems and institute policies that create campus cultures that welcome all students and shut down discrimination. On behalf of Generation Up, I respectfully request your aye vote on SB 1166 today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there any witnesses in support in the hearing room? Oh, one more? Come on up.

Tiff--

I'm sorry. Go ahead. All right. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Thank you. My name is Terry Wilson. I'm the Vice President for Finance for the CSU Employees Union, which represents 35,000 non-faculty staff and student assistants at the CSU. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of SB 1166 today.

I would also like to thank the committee for your work on the Call to Action Bill Package and Senator Dodd for authorizing this important bill. In addition to my role with CSUEU, I have worked at Fresno State since 2007, and I have personal experience with the Title IX system there.

I was a student affairs analyst at Fresno State and had a supervisor who began harassing me in my very first week on the job. He made inappropriate comments towards me, bullied me, threatened me both physically and verbally. Despite my continuous reports about his behavior, he was never formally investigated, and I eventually had to accept the demotion to escape his abuses. The CSU's failure to address my supervisor's behavior derailed my career at Fresno State, and I truly believe that would have been prevented if stronger policies had been in place back then.

Last year, CSUEU was a proud sponsor of SB 808 with Senator Dodd, which established desperately needed Title IX reporting requirements at the CSU. While recent media has highlighted the failings of the Title IX system, specifically at the CSU, SB 1166 now provides us with the opportunity to ensure robust Title IX transparencies across our public education segments.

The expansion of the reporting requirements through SB 1166 serves to create much-needed accountability in our Title IX systems and will ensure that students, faculty, staff across all of our public education institutions are safer and better supported when it comes to handling cases of sexual misconduct.

Everyone who steps foot on a state campus deserves to live, work, and learn in a safe environment, and we believe that this bill is an important step towards achieving that. For these reasons, we respectfully ask your aye. Thank you.

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

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT for the reasons that the brave witnesses have noted. We are in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anna Mathews with the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, in strong support of this bill.

Thank you.

Chair Fong and Members, David Hawkins with the Community College Independence Faculty Union, in strong support. Thank you.

Karl Larson, on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis, in strong support.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? See none, Senator, would like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Dodd, for being a proud author of the Call to Action Bill Package and for your collaboration and leadership to continue to be an instrumental voice in securing data from higher education institutions on how they are handling sexual harassment cases.

In order for us, as policymakers, to make data-informed decisions, we must first have accurate data, and your bill provides an avenue for the Legislature to receive accurate data from the segments. And thank you to our witnesses here today. Thank you, Senator, again, for your leadership and efforts on this. I look forward to supporting the measure today. With that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File Item Number Six: SB 1166, the motion is: do pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call].

That measure has five ayes, and we'll keep the roll open for additional members to add on. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Members.

Thank you. Next up is Senator Eggman presenting item number SB 1411. Welcome, Senator.

Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody.

Good afternoon.

It's nice to see everybody here. I am here today to present SB 1491, having to do with our institutions of higher education and their campuses. Years ago, we did a survey on campus climate, and so this bill is based on some of the recommendations that came out of there.

We know that going to school should be an exciting, enriching experience for a lot of folks, and we know sometimes that doesn't always happen. So this bill seeks to remedy some of that. And we know, especially for women and LGBTQ, the climate sometimes can be even more toxic.

So SB 1491 is a piece of the package for the LGBTQ Caucus this year to prevent and address discrimination on our campuses. So this bill does three things, and it addresses both public and private universities. The first one is, if students are enrolled in a private or religious university that is not covered under Title IX, they need to be able to say that out loud. So students should be provided information that they are not... The school they are attending is exempt from Equity in the Higher Education Act or Title IX, just to inform them that for harassment and things like that, protections they may think are protecting them do not.

And it also requires, 13 years ago, we asked the CSUs and the UCs and the community colleges to have a liaison for LGBT students to be able to go someplace safe. The CSU, or the UCs have done pretty well at that. The CSUs have failed horribly, as have the community colleges.

So, you know, when we say if there's just a suggestion, it sometimes just advice, and so it hasn't been followed. So we're going to say that it should be followed now and that that person should also be a confidential person, not just the person who happened to be assigned to the front desk on that day. So with me today here is Craig Pulsipher with Equality California and Esperanza Booher, Director and organizing of GENup.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Craig Pulsipher on behalf of Equality California, proud co-sponsor of SB 1491. First, just want to thank this committee for its Call to Action Report that provided a number of recommendations on how the Legislature can better address discrimination. As noted in the analysis, one of those recommendations is encapsulated in this bill.

SB 1491 builds on legislation that Equality California sponsored in 2016, which required colleges and universities to disclose if they permit discrimination against LGBTQ students. Specifically, the legislation required schools that claim an exemption under either Title IX or California's Equity in Higher Education Act to disclose this information to the Student Aid Commission, as well as to both current and prospective students and staff.

Today, at least nine institutions in California are exempt from Title IX, and at least 20 are exempt from the Equity in Higher Education Act. Unfortunately, many students continue to be unaware of these exemptions and what the potential consequences might be if their sexual orientation or gender identity does not align with the college or university's policies. Students may also not be aware of their ability to report claims of discrimination to the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights so the OCR can investigate and determine whether the student was discriminated against.

SB 1491 will build on existing law by requiring the Student Aid Commission to notify students of their rights to to file a complaint with OCR, even if the institution has denied the claim due to a religious exemption. The bill is an important measure to improve transparency and ensure that LGBTQ and all students can make informed decisions and protect themselves against discriminatory policies. And I respectfully urge your aye vote.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Hello. My name is Esperanza Booher, and I'm a second year student at American River College and a Director of Organizing for Generation Up. GENup is an entirely student led organization that advocates for educational equity through the legislative process. I am honored to be here today to represent GENup and testify on behalf of Senate Bill 1491.

As proud co-sponsors of SB 1491, GENup seeks your support today in standing with LGBTQ students across California. One in every five LGBTQ students will experience bullying or harassment during their time in college, but of those, only a fifth said their college had clear procedures for reporting gender or sexuality based discriminatory acts.

Today, you have the opportunity to ensure all queer students receive vital support. SB 1491 would ensure that providing a confidential point person to be there for queer students is not a recommendation but a requirement. The well being of students can no longer be an afterthought.

LGBTQ plus students also have a right to be informed when their higher education students are not required to grant them Title IX protections. By helping students understand what resources are available to them as well as providing necessary avenues of support for queer students who are facing discrimination, SB 1491 is one step in making California schools safer.

All students deserve a learning environment in which they are recognized and heard. All students deserve a learning environment in which they are safe and supported, and all students deserve a learning environment in which they are informed and accounted for. Please take this opportunity to stand with us as we fight for more inclusive campuses for all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. On behalf of Generation Up, I respectfully request your aye vote on SB 1491 today. Thank you.

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

Chair Fong, Members, David Hawkins, Community College Faculty Independent Faculty Unions, strong support. Thank you.

Anna Mathews with the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges in strong support.

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

Karlton Larson on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis in support.

Thank you so much. We have a motion and a second. Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in a hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Assembly Member Essayli.

Hi, Senator. I think it's always a good thing when people have more information than less, so I fully support that. I just want to understand the. The role of this liaison a little better. Is there currently a general liaison and, like, this would be a specific one for LGBT students, or you're saying the CSUs have not done a good job, meaning they don't have anyone there to help students navigate the complaint process?

They don't have anybody there specifically for LGBTQ or women.

What about just in general? Like, do they have... I'm just trying to understand, is there no one there at all, or is there just no one there that's just specializes in LGBT issues?

To my knowledge, there's no, like. I mean, you go to the authorities or you go to a complaint department.

Okay.

As far as something being confidential.

I just think it would be a good idea for all students, not just...

That sounds like a great bill for you next year, sir.

Well, I'm just trying to understand why we just want to narrow it or limit it to a class of students. So I don't have...

Because a student faces more discrimination oftentimes. And especially for women as well. Women are much more likely to be the victim of rape or sexual harassment, and so to have a confidential place to go and report, that seems, like, appropriate.

Yeah, I mean, I'd say women in general, minorities have the same issues, so. Okay. Thank you.

You're very welcome.

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

Thank you very much. I think it was an opportunity that we actually collect data and then try to put policy in place based on that is always a good way to go. I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Newman, I mean, Senator Eggman, for your authoring this measure and for your leadership and efforts on the Call to Action Report.

I've heard Caballero before, but Newman's a new one.

No, no. Thank you, Senator Eggman, for your leadership and efforts, and protecting the rights of our LGBTQ students is critical and imperative, more than ever. New federal regulations taking additional steps to provide protections, but we know that there's impending injunction from multiple states that can undermine this effort.

I'm grateful that, here in California, we continue to expand protections and not curtail them. With that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Thank you so much again for your leadership and for your partnership on the Call to Action bill package. With that, Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File item number 14, SB 1491. The motion is do pass to the Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure has four ayes, and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Senator Eggman. Next up, we'd like to welcome Senator Seyarto presenting SB 916. Welcome, Senator.

Thank you very much and good afternoon, Committee. I'm here to present SB 916. Correct? All right. SB 916 is a clarifying Bill on the intent of the Legislature for the California Veteran Fee waiver program known as Cal Vet fee waiver. The calvet fee waiver is a California specific benefit for spouses and children of disabled veterans.

This unique benefit has gone through many changes and adjustments through the years and currently provides free tuition at public universities for these dependents with certain age requirements, as long as the veteran is 100% disabled due to service connected injuries.

Unfortunately, some of our public universities have dissected the law and the intent of the Cal Vet fee waiver program and used an unintended loophole to deny this benefit to our veterans families for specific degree programs.

This Bill came through to me, or came to me through one of my own veteran constituents who believed there was a mistake when their child was denied the calvet fee waiver while trying to attend a public University for a bachelor's of wildfire science degree because the son wanted to become a firefighter, which I encourage a lot.

In investigating this issue, my staff found that the loophole being used is the phrase mandatory system wide tuition and fees for determining that special extended education degree programs are not included in system wide tuition and fees.

These extended education programs are self funded and unique to individual campuses, hence the use of the loophole of system wide tuition and fees. Under the UC and community college systems, extended education is limited to certificate, certification and licensing classes largely used by adult populations shifting their careers.

It is uniquely under the CSU system, and these extended education programs are also full degree programs. Seeing that these programs can cover much more than degrees, I narrowly tailored the Bill to cover just undergraduate extended education degree programs. I did this to keep and clarify the original intent of the Legislator in creating the calvet fee waiver.

It's time that we close the loophole that is denying benefits that were intended to provide a free public education to this specific population. SB 916 will solidify the intent of the Legislature in the Cal Vet fee waiver program for the benefit of the families of our disabled vets. Members, I respectfully ask for your

aye vote when the time comes. As in keeping with the way I operate. I do not have a witness that has come with me so that we are not redundant in the delivery of the message. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote when time comes.

Thank you so much, Senator. Are there witnesses in support in a hearing room? Are there witnesses in opposition in a hearing room? Are there tweeners in a hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Questions? Motion? Do you have a second to Bill a motion? A second. Senator Essayli

Thank you. I just want to thank you for bringing it and ask if you would allow me to co author this awesome.

If that is possible. We'll do so. Thank you. This late hour.

No, you can't. It's up to the Senators. Thank you. We have a motion. A second, colleagues, any additional questions or comments? Seyarto? And, Senator, would you like to close?

No, I just respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator, for bringing this very important measure forward and for everything you've done on behalf of military families. We know that CSU is also in opposition, but the financial considerations will be considered in the Committee on appropriations, and I believe that Cal Vet fee waiver is intended to cover degree programs.

However, CSU is also elected to run some of these programs through their extension, sometimes for good and for understandable reasons. But we know that our duty to the families of these disabled veterans should not change. And with that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Roll call.

Please file item number three, SB 916. The motion is do passed to the military and Veterans Affairs Committee. [Roll Call]

That measures four ayes, and we'll keep the role open for additional members. Add on. Thank you. Thank you so much, colleagues, for your patience here today. We do have a few more bills up. Any potential authors? Our committee is now open, and please come on by. Thank you so much.

Something going on? They're not exceptional. I'm taking a muscle. Just hold all those 4471.

Thank you everyone, for your patience. Again, we're awaiting authors on a number of bills in the Assembly Higher Education Committee. If you're an author that has not yet presented, please join us in room 437. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I've been advised that one author is on his way, but other authors. Please feel free to join us. Room 437. Thank you.

Yes. Senator Hurtado, welcome. Are you ready? Perfect. Next up is Senator Hurtado presenting item number seven, Senate Bill 1183. Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm here to present SB 1183, a bill designed to expand access to registered nursing programs. SB 1183, which would allow community college using multi-criteria screening for nursing programs to also consider candidates from medically underserved areas. This is crucial for communities like the Central Valley, as it helps address healthcare shortages by increasing access to nursing education for local residents. The US Department of Health and Human Services anticipates a demand for over 3.6 million registered nurses by 2030.

California is already facing a nursing shortage, further exacerbated by community colleges in underserved areas lacking local recruitment resources. This highlights the urgent need for accessible training programs within these communities. By forging stronger connections between community colleges and local workforce areas, we can positively influence regional economic development.

Graduates who secure local employment are more likely to invest in their communities, contribute to the local economic growth as well. SB 1183 aims to broaden the admission criteria for registered nursing programs in community college districts, but specifically, it proposes to allow districts that have opted for multi-criteria screening measures to evaluate candidates for admission to include individuals from medically underserved areas.

By expanding admission criteria to include candidates from medically underserved areas, SB 1183 takes a significant step towards ensuring that nursing programs are more inclusive, addressing regional healthcare disparities, and cultivating a healthcare workforce that is better equipped to serve diverse and underserved communities.

It is crucial to focus on increasing the number of registered nurses in the workforce and ensuring access for individuals from the communities they will serve. And here to testify in support, I have Jonna... And I apologize already if I mispronounce your name... Schengel, Dean of Nursing and Allied Health at the College of the Sequoias, and Dr. Jennifer Vega La Serna, Assistant Superintendent, Academic Services at the College of Sequoias.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Yes, thank you. Jonna Schengel, Dean of Nursing and Allied Health at College of Sequoias. So thank you, Senator Hurtado, for sponsoring this bill and for the committee for hearing our perspective today from a boots on the ground local community college trying to and attempting to address the severe nursing shortage in our area.

The goal of this legislation is important to the mission of the college, which is to provide local workforce needs, and this is imperative in nursing. A few key points that warrant the passage of this bill. We have local healthcare partners that are educating nurses from out of the area. So many of our students come to the Central Valley. It's cheap to live. Our cost is only $8,000 for a two year program. The nursing partners do all the clinical training, and then they move out of the area. So we're not meeting our workforce needs.

And yet the hospitals are expected to bear the brunt of clinical education, which is very expensive. So without this bill, our most economically vulnerable students are not allowed into our local nursing programs. And therefore, for profit nursing programs come to our areas and put our students in great debt, anywhere from 80 to 140,000 for a nursing degree.

This bill allows us to invest in our local workforce. Right now, we cannot rank by a local zip code. We live in medically underserved areas, and yet we're educating people that are not from our area. So our local graduates would provide long term stability for our healthcare partners. We would be able to educate our local students with local faculty. And we also know that our faculty that come from our colleges stay and teach and become adjunct and become full time faculty, which is also a great need at the California Community College.

This bill also reduces substantially the training and recruitment costs for the local hospitals, which are under tremendous financial burden. Madera Community Hospital in our area has gone bankrupt because of the excessive payout for traveling nurses. And as a fiscal conservative, this is one way to address the nursing shortage at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. So I am begging for support of SB 1183. So I ask for your aye vote so that we can locally educate our own nursing students and provide improved medical health care in underserved areas.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you. Hi, Jennifer Vega La Serna. I am the Assistant Superintendent Vice President of Academic Services at College of the Sequoias. And I want to thank Senator Hurtado for supporting this bill and thank the committee for your time. I'm here to advocate for the support of SB 1183. This bill will enhance local healthcare workforce development and address community healthcare needs. At the core, this bill is about equity. It supports underrepresented groups who face barriers in access to education and employment.

As a Hispanic serving institution, this initiative will help College of the Sequoias ensure the nursing program is accessible to our local residents from diverse backgrounds who represent our community. We have a strong collaboration with our local school districts, and this bill will help strengthen the pipeline for our local students interested in nursing and enhance their preparedness and commitment to our community.

Local students provide better, culturally competent care as they understand the specific needs of our community that will lead to improved healthcare outcomes, a well staffed local healthcare system. And our data tells the story best. when up to 85% of College of the Sequoias students in the nursing program are from out of the area, it leads to three main issues.

Lack of access for local students, frustration from our healthcare partners, and a lack of adequate staffing when students return to their homes in the metropolitan areas. Our data also shows that our local students are just as successful in the nursing program with 95% test pass rates and 100% employment rates.

This bill provides supports for COS, our students, and our community. We are committed to improving community health, supporting local students, and addressing the nursing shortage. Support for this bill in providing extra points for our students from our medically underserved areas ultimately supports healthcare needs and economic stability of the community. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. And Senator, just for the committee, have you accepted the committee amendments?

Yes.

Thank you. Do we have witnesses in support in the hearing room?

Good afternoon. Imran Majid on behalf of the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office in support. Also, just want to thank the committee for all their work on this bill and on this issue. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there tweeners in the hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a second. Senator, would you like to close?

Colleagues, I respectfully ask for an aye vote on this measure.

Thank you so much, Senator Hurtado, for authoring this measure, and for addressing some of our most critical needs here in California with the nursing shortage. We know that most nursing programs at community colleges are definitely impacted. It's important to examine ways to prioritize students enrolled who will remain in medically underserved areas, and one way to do this is to prioritize homegrown nursing students. With that, I look forward to supporting the measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call, please.

File item number seven, SB 1183. The motion is do pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Four ayes and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on. Thank you so much. Next up we have Senator Padilla presenting item number five, SB 995. Welcome, welcome.

Thank you Mister Chairman and Members. I'm here to present SB 995 and I would like to begin by accepting the Committee's amendments and thanking the staff very much for working with our office on this measure. Across the nation, schools are confronting a dire teacher shortage. You don't need me to tell you that.

And the impacts are most deeply felt in some of our most vulnerable student populations and communities. It's obviously being driven by a couple of factors. One, we have a higher than average rate of departure and retirement, and we have a drop in enrollment and credentialing programs. Creating a scarcity earning a teaching credential often takes too long.

It's too expensive, it's far too complicated, and it is a critical, frontline profession that has no less than the future in their hands. SB 995 is the high Quality teacher Recruitment and Retention act and would require the creation of three pilot programs to recruit high quality teaching candidates at three CSU campuses in partnership with neighboring community colleges. These programs would allow students to acquire a bachelor's degree and teaching credential through a streamlined four year curriculum and would require outreach to local schools to recruit qualified candidates.

This would build off existing partnerships between community colleges and CSUs for a host of undergraduate degrees and create a more streamlined teaching training pathway by requiring community colleges and CSUs to jointly create the program and the amendments. As you are aware, Mister Chairman and others help provide a little more flexibility around that language.

It would make teaching and teacher training more accessible to students and also in particular from Low income and underserved communities. By requiring recruitment efforts, students in these communities, these pilot programs can help move towards a more diverse teaching pool which we know in other areas actually has an impact on the learning environment and the success of student learning. With me today to testify in support of the Bill is Tristan Brown from the California Federation of Teachers.

Thank you so much. Welcome. Thank you Mister chair and Members. Tristan Brown with CFT. No doubt you already know that we represent educators from the early childhood education sector all the way through community college and the UC sector.

So real cradle to career viewpoint of what we take and how our Members have been affected by recent years in the shortage. No doubt Covid was a huge gut punch to the industry. We all had to figure out how to close and reopen our public education system. It was not easy.

It was not buttery smooth, to put it in a poetic way, that I think has caused a number of our Members to take retirement, some even early.

And if you imagine being a student during this era thinking about a career in education, that's a significant stumbling block to have been tripping over yourself on Zoom for the last couple years of your education career.

We noticed that the report from the state showed 10,000 teacher vacancies during the 2122 school year, and we had a 16% decline from the previous year in applicants for credentials. So we know that there is a staffing crisis in this state. This Bill will pave a clear path for individuals who have a inkling within themselves to become an educator.

It really is a calling and to be able to go to a community college and start out your career in a Low cost option, figure out what your General requirements are going to be and continue on through a CSU into a smooth handoff. To then graduate within a reasonable number of years with a credential and come out back into the workforce and give back to your community as an educator is phenomenal. When we saw this Bill, we knew that this was an automatic support to help create an easier pathway.

It is very confusing for an individual who does not understand the lingo of the CTC and the CDE, as I use an Alphabet soup in this testimony to understand what kind of credential there are and what is the right one for you and having to know where you want to teach in primary grades and secondary grades, this is a lot to take in.

To have a pathway that allows you to learn your craft and also earn your ba throughout this is going to simplify the matter and make it a lot easier for individuals to enter the workforce, which we desperately need. There are many reasons for the shortage, but this is a great way to help us streamline applicants into the profession. So with that, we do ask for your aye vote today.

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

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

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

Good afternoon. Imran Majid on behalf of the California Community Colleges chancellor's office. As noted in the Committee analysis, we were supportive of SB 995 because it sort of utilized our existing ADT teacher preparation infrastructure at the community colleges.

We do have some concerns that the Bill sort of removes those provisions, but we look forward to continuing working with the author's office on the language and looking forward to engaging further conversations and dialogue. Thank you.

Thank you so much, colleagues. Any questions or comments? Followed by Senator Essayli sorry, just a quick question.

What are the three partnering community colleges?

That is Mister Chairman, Member left to the development of the program, but it does require one rural area focus of CSU with a compatible community college.

Thank you so much, Senator Essayli.

My question is, my understanding is that there already is an integrated program for students to get both in either a four or five year program. Is this different from what's existing?

Mister Chairman? Assemblymember, there's not such an integrated program with a requirement for collaboration around this particular path.

To be candid and respectful to all parties involved, there is some tension between the systems about what structure is the most valuable and what would have more opportunity for scaling up, but fundamentally building off some of that structure, whether it is to transfer from an associate completion or through an agreed upon undergraduate preparatory curriculum.

The fundamental goal of the Bill is to require that there's a collaboration, which we hope would continue and we can end up with some future changes potentially, and I appreciate the comments of the chancellor's office, but to ultimately end up in a place where we can harmonize more pathways for potential credential personnel to get their credential in a more time effective and still quality way.

So the goal is to get the who to work better, the CSUs and the community colleges.

The language in the Bill requires that collaboration, but it doesn't overly prescribe the contents of what they must come up with, the goal is pretty clear.

What about the UC's?

I'm sorry? The UC's. This is about. Well, as you well know, in the law there are some jurisdictional and other regulatory constraints when it comes to the University of California that are unique in our world and in our state. You know, I hear that a lot for most of them. I know you do.

I hear that a lot here. But you know, what's also, you know, not required is for us to Fund them. So I just don't know why we just don't attach our mandates to make our funding conditional. So I support the Bill. I don't like this idea that the UC's feel like they're a government to themselves. They're not.

They don't need our money. Let them govern on their own. So with that, I have no further comments.

Thank you so much. Senators, any further comments? Seeing none, Senator would like to close, please.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, Members, and for the questions and conversation. I think fundamentally, this is a good place to start with the right focus. We do have a shortage, we have a crisis. And the end goal should really be focused on how do we create more credentialed teachers available to educate our future generations.

And with that, I respectfully ask for aye vote.

Thank you so much. Do we have a motion? Do you have a second motion? A second. Thank you, colleagues. Thank you, Senator, for bringing this measure forward, a very important measure to continue to address the ever growing teacher shortage in our state.

I believe this is a modest pilot that can continue to expedite the required time for students to earn a degree and teaching credential in order to be equipped and prepare to enter the classroom to teach. Please continue to work with my Committee on the policy comments on page six of the analysis.

And thank you for accepting the Committee amendments as well. With that, I look forward to supporting measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call.

Please file item number five, SB 995. The motion is do pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That measures for eyes and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members. Add on. Thank you, Mister Chairman and Members. Thank you, Senator. Next up, we have Senator Skinner presenting items number 1 and 2. First up, item number one, SB 56. Welcome, Senator Skinner.

Thank you, assemblymember Fong, chair. We'll start with SB 906. I think that's the one I heard you say. We can start with item number one. We don't have to. You want to do 56? That's fine. Okay, great. Perfect. I just. I heard the six, but they're both.

SB 56 allows for the University of California to transfer ownership of a housing property called Rochdale Commons I Roadshell apartments. I think they pronounce it differently, but since I was a Member of the student co ops, we used to call it Rochdale, but whatever. All right, so the Berkeley Student Cooperative Association is a.

I don't know if you're 100 years old now, but it's a very longstanding entity that has provided housing for students at UC Berkeley for, as I said, years. And these units of housing are much more affordable than dorms. And many of the other housing units in the, you know, that students have access to.

And this property was property that was owned by the University of California, but the units have been managed by the Student Cooperative Association from the day that these apartments were opened. And what this transfer allows.

This building needs a lot of work, and the cooperative Association cannot get the financing to do the work unless they have the ownership. So by allowing the ownership to be transferred, which is what you, Berkeley would also like, it gives the ability for it to stay student housing and to get fixed up.

So now allow me to have Mario Guerrero, the Legislative Director of our University Office of the President, to speak to the Bill.

Thank you so much. Welcome. Good afternoon. Chair Fong, Members of the Committee, Mario Guerrero here on behalf of the University of California. We are here in support of SB 56, and we extend our thank you to, to Senator Skinner for authoring this Bill. As you know, the University has significant demand for on campus student housing.

SB 56 would allow the University to transfer 2424 Hay street to the Berkeley student cooperative to continue providing that housing to students and others. The transfer would additionally allow the BSc to obtain the financing needed for housing improvements.

Language in the Bill ensures that the property is continue to use for affordable housing by the BSc or any successor. We urge your vote. I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you very much. Thank you so much.

Other witnesses and support in the hearing room.

Hi, everyone. My name is Cyn Macias Gomez. I'm the President of the Berkeley Student Cooperative in strong support, and we are a proud co sponsor of SB 56. And apologies to chair Fong and the Committee Members. We weren't able to get our letter of support in time, but we did want to express our full support of the Bill. Thank you.

Hello, Committee. Christian Zumaar, Vice President of external affairs for the Berkeley Student Cooperative, and I also strongly urge your support for this Bill and the BSC's mission to provide affordable housing to the entire Bay Area. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Miguel Martinez. I'm here on behalf of UC Berkeley Chancellor Carol Kreis in support of this measure. I want to thank Senator Nancy Skinner for bringing this measure forward. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello, everyone. David Ramirez, on behalf of the University of California Student Association, in support.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in a hearing room? Are there tweeners in a hearing room? Colleagues, any questions or comments? Assemblymember Quirk-Silva,

this looks like a win win as far as Berkeley and the students agree, but this does go way back as far as a concept. And I know when I was attending UCLA in the 1980s, they had their version of this. And we do need more of these types of housing opportunities and alternatives as far as affordability. So I appreciate it. And move the Bill.

Motion. And a second. Thank you so much. Any further comments, colleagues? See now, Senator, would you like to close?

Thank you. I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Skinner, for bringing this very important measure forward. I believe it's necessary to continue to amend existing law to allow the UC to sell the Rockdale apartments to the BSC. And thank you to the witnesses here today. I appreciate the commitment that BSC has will continue to maintain a property for affordable housing for students and other affiliates of UC Berkeley. With that, I look forward to supporting a measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call.

[Roll Call]

That measures five ayes, and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Senator Skinner presenting item number two, SB 906.

Great. Thank you. I think most of us are aware that California was the groundbreaker in giving our student athletes the right to earn money from their name, image and likeness. And for those of you who may not have been here when we passed that law, the irony is that every person, whether student or not student, has under law the right to their name, image and likeness. Someone else can't make money off of your name, image and likeness unless you forfeit it.

You give it up to that another entity. Well, that was the circumstance with student athletes. So they had to sign a contract with the NCAA, that basically they forfeited their name, image and likeness rights, and we, California, gave it back to them, which then many, many other states followed, and the whole thing.

Now, every student athlete across the country, and this includes high school athletes, because high school athletes were also prohibited under the NIL rules. Now, why am I bringing this to you now? Well, part of the purpose of giving student athletes the ability to make money off their name, image and likeness was to have some equity in, you know, they were the labor for which we - this multi billion dollar industry of college sports. Who's the labor? The students. What were they getting? Some got scholarships. Not all.

And, you know, kind of an imbalance there. So now we see that a lot of students are doing well, we also see that the campuses themselves realize, oh, they better be attractive when it comes to NIL. If their athletes aren't getting good deals on name, image and likeness, then maybe they won't come to that school.

So what's happened is a lot of sports boosters of colleges have formed these things called collectives. That's just one example. We'll give you that example. Where they are organizing the deals. So there's nothing per se against the law on that. There's, however, if all these deals are going to male athletes and not to female athletes, then we have to wonder, all right, is there an issue around Title IX? So far, we don't have, per se, evidence of whether Title IX is - whether this is complying or not complying with Title IX.

So the purpose of SB 906 is to give us some information. Let's create some transparency. Let's have our colleges make publicly available the information on what athletes are getting NIL deals, and it does not have to reveal who. So it would be anonymous. But the breakdown by sport and by gender. So that's the purpose of it, because, of course, our intent would be to have some equity. So with that, I will have my witness in support. Brittney Barsotti of the California News Publisher Association.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mister Chair and Members of the Committee. Brittany Barsotti, General Counsel at the California News Publishers Association, here in support of SB 906. The California Broadcasters Association and Media Alliance also join in support of this important Bill. As the Senator laid out very well, this is important transparency necessary to understand the societal impacts that our reporters need to be able to report on name, image and likeness. And are there disparities.

So it's the role of the news organizations I represent to let the public know whether as a whole, the world of NLI being tilted towards men or women athletes. This Bill is essential because it would bring transparency to the world of name, image and likeness on the aggregate level. And that aggregate data is critical to understanding how this is playing out systemically. And so with that, I will respectfully urge your aye vote.

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

What is the problem that we're trying to fix? Because I don't think we're all going to. None of us will be shocked that more money is going to the men's football team on these high schools. I don't know if there's

Not high schools, but college. Yeah.

So, I mean, I don't think there's any question that there's more of a demand, if you will, for some sports or a certain gender. So if we get that, then what do we do with that? What are we gonna do?

So, this wouldn't give us the information - we already have the information of what - how much sponsorship, meaning, like media deals a college has for its football versus its softball and male football versus, say, female softball. We already have that. This is only about the individual athletes, or the, rather, the athletes own deals, which in many cases now we see the campuses facilitating. Now, you said we. You know, it wouldn't be surprising that, you know, the male athletes, you get more. Well, what was the most watched college sports event in the last eight years?

I don't know.

It was the women's March Madness finals. The women's. And yet how many, and we don't know yet, how many of these boosters have put together great deals for those women who have more eyes on them than the male March Madness. So this is where this information and why it's useful.

But it seeks to regulate the private entities right now.

Not regulate. Nope. Purely transparency. That's all it is right now. Purely transparency.

This is how it starts. But it's not putting it onerous on the universities to disclose. It would be. These private boosters would have to disclose.

Well, through the University, would collect the information from them and just. Yeah, it would be available.

Any concern of a chilling effect? Like, maybe some of these groups don't want to be known or.

Well, we wouldn't know.

There's no opposition.

Right. We wouldn't know necessarily that. But it's. I don't.

Why would they not want this?

Well, maybe. Maybe I don't want to speak for them. Why they're not here in opposition, but so far, again, we don't have opposition, so.

Okay.

Yeah.

All right, well, thank you for answering my questions.

Okay.

Thank you so much. Any further questions, colleagues? Seeing none. Do we have a motion? We have a motion and a second. Senator, would you like to close.

Thank you, but I think the questions are legitimate. But I did want to clarify that we are creating, trying to establish that transparency. And, yes, one of my interests is whether this would trigger anything about Title IX. I hope it does not. And maybe this is the other thing interesting about transparency. Sunshine sometimes causes people to act a little differently. So maybe we would see more equity as a result of sunshine. We shall see. Anyway, with that, I will ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator, for bringing this measure forward and for your leadership and efforts on student athlete pay. For this one, we know transparency is important, especially in emerging markets. 10 years ago, the financial landscape for student athletes was completely different than it is today. Moving forward, it's critical to we have high levels of transparency to make sure that we understand how this space is evolving and how to best protect our student athletes. With that, I look forward to supporting a measure here today. Madam Secretary, roll call please.

File item number two, SB 906. The motion is due passed to the Arts, Entertainment, Sports and Tourism Committee. [Roll Call].

That measure has five ayes, and we'll keep the roll open for additional Members to add on.

Great.

Thank you. Next up, we have Senator Rubio presenting item number 12. Senate Bell 1391. Welcome, Senator. Review.

Hello.

Hello. Hello. Let me know when you're ready.

We're ready. Welcome.

Thank you so much. Chair and Members of this Committee. It's an honor to be here before you. Presenting SB 1391, the Equity and Education act, this Bill that would strengthen the education workforce by requiring credo to career dashboard to provide critical data on teacher grant programs to help foster a more diverse and equitable teacher workforce in California.

Drawing from my own personal experience, as, you know, 20 year veteran teacher, and, you know, what I know to be true, and that is that we need to figure out a way to retain teachers that are qualify, but are also diverse. And I think that's sometimes what we're lacking according to some of the data that we have.

You know, we need to make sure that we have teacher preparation data, teacher retention, but demographic data also, which I think is critically important if we really want, like I said, our students to be successful. Over the years, California's leadership has demonstrated a strong commitment to addressing this vital issue through various initiatives.

And so what we wanted to do is make sure that we have the data set that we need and require in order to make sure that we have that critical workforce in place. From a teacher residencies to classified employee credentialing programs, the Golden State Teacher grant Program and the National Board Certification Incentive Grant program.

So, again, we need to assess the effectiveness of these programs we're investing, and so we wanna make sure that the return is worth our investment. And however, again, we see that some of the data shows that we still have some major gaps in the information that we're receiving and clearly is going to only affect our students.

So in 2019, the C2C was created to integrate data from various agencies to analyze the education, the economics, and the health outcomes for individuals, families and our communities. And unfortunately, research during the interim. Last fall, we found again that these gaps continue to exist.

And so collecting data is critically important to make sure that we provide the quality education that our students here in California deserve.

Joining me here today is Sarah Lillis, Executive Director of Teach Plus California, and Eric Lewis, second dairy science content specialist in the Science Department of Curriculum and Instruction in San Francisco, unified, that can share a few words. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon, chair Fong and Members, I am Sarah Lillis, Executive Director of Teach Plus California, and I'm pleased to be here as a proud co sponsor of SB 1391.

As the Senator mentioned, SB 1391 seeks to strengthen our educator workforce by requiring the C2C to provide this critical data on teacher grant programs, along with teacher training pipelines to help foster a more sustainable and diverse educator workforce. As you know, school districts across California have been experiencing serious shortages of qualified teachers.

And at the same time, the proportion of teachers of color and multilingual teachers in the workforce continues to lag far behind the share of students in our schools.

You all have made incredible commitments over the last several years in investing in our teacher workforce, as the Senator mentioned, with many grant programs, and we hope they've shown a lot of promise, but we don't really know what the impact has been.

And I think there's a great opportunity with SB 1391 to provide this critical information for you all to make more informed decisions and to ensure that we really are investing in the workforce. We want to see with the cradle to career data system.

So once the cradle to career data system was established in 2019, we could finally be able to answer these key questions.

But we're sponsoring this Bill to ensure that the c two C teacher dashboard can answer those questions, particularly those that we see as most critical, and including providing data for all of you to inform and improve these programs.

SB 1391 codifies the work that the c two C is already planning to do, and it builds on it to make sure that it's providing data to state agencies on the demographic makeup of the teacher workforce and the implications of these key programs.

We believe it's a good governance Bill that also makes it clear that having a sustainable and diverse educator workforce remains a priority for the Legislature and the state. Teach plus thanks Senator Rubio for her ongoing leadership and ensuring we have a sustainable and diverse educator workforce. And we respectfully ask for your support for 1391.

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon chair and Members my name is Eric Lewis. I'm a nationally board certified teacher in San Francisco Unified School District and I've been teaching for 2026 years. I'm also an adjunct Professor at San Francisco State University where I am teaching our future science educators.

I'm also a 2023 - 24 California Teach plus policy fellow and I'm really proud to be here to support SB 1391 in San Francisco. Unified. While the majority of our nearly 50,000 students are students of color, only a small but growing percentage of our educators are teachers of color.

Research tells us that there are clear benefits to our students when they see themselves represented among their teachers and our state through things like the Golden State teacher Grant has clearly tried to align efforts to make this happen.

At SF State, I've been encouraged to see our teacher support programs overwhelmingly populated by enthusiastic and aspiring educators of color, but as I support them, I wonder how we can ensure that they reach their full potential. The job of teaching keeps changing.

When I was a new teacher, I prioritized knowing my content really well and being an entertaining teacher so I could keep my students eyes off their pagers. Today, smartphones are way more distracting than pagers, making our connections and our relationships to students that much more important.

In my work preparing teachers at SF state and coaching them for success in San Francisco, unified, I recognize not only how challenging teaching is, but how much love and joy can be fostered in the classroom. SB 1391 is an essential step to ensure that the state is supporting our teachers throughout the entire teaching journey.

We need a dashboard that provides all of the data about who is entering the profession, how they're being trained, and how our efforts to retain them are actually working. By passing SB 1391, the Legislature will ensure that the cradle to career teacher dashboard can better inform future decisions about what programs work best.

I know that at SF state we are seeing the benefits of these programs that support folks to enter the profession, but I also see from my vantage at San Francisco Unified that we have a long road yet to go in attracting and maintaining a diverse teacher workforce.

Let's ensure that our state does everything in its power to support our diverse and exceptional students by supporting their teachers as best we can. For all these reasons, I ask that you support Senate Bill 1391. Thank you for your time and attention.

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

Chair and Members Commission aids on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association in support of this Bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon chair and Members. My name is Sarek Kaminsky, representing the Association of California School Administrators and support. Thank you.

Lucy Salcedo Carter with the Alameda County office of Ed and support.

Support hi, good afternoon. Carol Gonzalez on behalf of Hope Espanas, organized for political equality and support, thank you.

Raquel Morales on behalf of Ed, trust West and support, thank you.

Thank you so much. Are there witnesses in opposition in a hair groom? Are there tweeners in a hairgroom? Colleagues? Any questions or comments? Seeing none, I'm sorry.

Senator Quirk Silva, well, I'm happy to be a co-author on this Bill. And again, as a former educator teacher myself, you know, this is a Bill that's not only about data and a dashboard, which is essential, and that's the focus of the Bill, but it's about a bigger conversation.

And the conversation is why do we have teachers leaving the profession and why do we have a recruitment problem? Those two are central questions, and we can pinpoint many reasons, the pandemic being a big factor. Not only is my husband a teacher, but all my friends are as a former teacher.

And some of the scenarios that they have been put in has in many ways pushed many of the older teachers out of the profession, teachers that might have had an extra five or 10 years of teaching left during the pandemic and retired early. Some of those same stories also can be attributed to our younger teachers.

If you are a student of color going through a CSU, a UC, you're getting a bachelor's degree and you are bilingual, you are highly recruited by many businesses and other professions that are going to pay you a very good salary to go into business, to do international work, to do other things just because you're bilingual.

In our education system, we don't always value that. We don't always. Sometimes we've had a stipend depending on the districts, but most districts don't give a stipend for knowing a language. But then you think of the specialty skills. Teachers need to come in because they're not just doing academics anymore. They're not just doing reading, writing and math.

They need to know where a child is living. They need to know if a child is moved. We say, we lost students. We didn't lose students during the pandemic. Their neighbors know where they are, their friends and relatives. But we have to get out to those doors to understand what's happened.

And this is such a macro conversation of who is in the classroom and what is their values as far as working with families, families that are working two jobs, families that are angry, families that feel like the system is not working for them, these are all come into being a teacher, and like never before, teachers have been under attack.

Never before where a teacher suggests something in a conference, parents can get very hostile. Are they being supported by their administrators? Are administrators continuing to pile on?

I'll just end with, I have a sister in law, fully bilingual, masters in education, dual immersion, and after this year, is leaving the profession, and she's leaving because she just felt simply not supported.

So, bottom line, I support this Bill, but we have to do more to support teachers, to keep them in the classroom, because we need that more than ever. And I move the Bill.

Thank you so much, Senator Cork Sova, for the motion, and thank you, Doctor Rambler, for the second. Any further questions or comments? Sina Senator, would you like to close, please?

Yeah. Thank you, and I appreciate it. I know some remember Kirk Sabbath and I talk about our days in the classroom.

I'm still a teacher, by the way, on leave, and so a lot of my colleagues are also leaving because of the stress and just overwhelming, you know, responsibility that we put on them, and we don't support them by, you know, this data just alone, it's so important, and I have to share.

My first five years, I was not only just teaching, but I got interrupted every five minutes because I was only the only bilingual teacher in the classroom. So the front office would client say, I don't know what they're saying. Can you tell me? And, yeah, so we become translators and parents and counselors and everything else.

So I know that data is power, and I hope that we can, you know, understand that it's vital in order to ensure that we have the right workforce to fit the needs of our community. So with that, I would ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator Ruby, for authoring this measure here today. This measure contemplates a role the Legislature will play in determining how data is displayed by the CTC, by creating a pathway for the Legislature to add operational tools outside the authorization structure and code.

The measure is aligned with the purpose of the CTC to foster evidence based decision making to help the state build a more equitable future. And I look forward to supporting a measure here today with that. Madam Secretary, roll call.

Please file item number 12, SB 1391. The motion is do passed to the education Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure has seven eyes, and we'll keep the rope and for additional Members, add on.

Thank you, Mister Chicle.

Thank you so much. Next up is Senator Wahab presenting item number 11, Senate Bill 1322. Welcome, Senator Wahab.

Thank you, chair colleagues and Members of the public. SB 1322 aims to improve support for foster youth by lowering the age of eligibility to the California for the California Chafee Educational and Training Voucher Program from 16 to 15.

Currently, foster youth in California can only access the Chafee voucher at age 16, missing out on crucial financial support during their formative years. Research from the Urban Institute shows that foster youth who receive the voucher assistance have significantly higher completion rates in higher education compared to those without assistance.

By lowering the age of eligibility, SB 1322 removes obstacles for foster youth to receive assistance and ensures that more foster youth have access to vital support services. This Bill also helps with legal permanency by extending support to foster youth, which contributes to their stability and well being as they transition into adulthood.

SB 1322 reflects a commitment to equity and opportunity for foster youth, recognizing their potential and providing them with the necessary resources to achieve their educational and career goals. With me, I'd like to introduce Cathy Senderling Mcdonald with Alameda County.

Thank you so much. Welcome.

Great. Thank you, Mister chair Members Cathy Senderling Mcdonald, representing the County of Alameda. We're very pleased to sponsor this legislation and many thanks to the Senator for bringing it. Students struggle with so much about higher education.

We know that, in fact, we've heard that today from other testifiers, and it can be confusing, the processes, the acronyms, and that's for people who have the support of family, friends, and are not in foster care. Add that layer of being in foster care for some number of years, and it becomes even more difficult.

There are so many efforts underway on a bipartisan basis to ensure that foster youth are able to get into school and move forward toward that degree. But gaps remain. There are significant gaps in support for them, and even small things can become very difficult for them to overcome, and as a result, they're not able to get that degree.

SB 1322 would just make that step towards the federal flexibility that was added a couple of years ago, recognizing there's really no magic in being 15 or 16 when you leave foster care.

The Federal Government recognized that, and we appreciate the ability to help California take a step toward that 15 and ultimately, ideally to 14, which is as far as the federal goes, when the funds are available, of course, recognizing that urge your ayevote and happy to answer any questions.

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

Good afternoon, Mister Chair. And Members. Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education and Strong support.

Good afternoon. Danielle Bradley, on behalf of the California State Association of Counties in Strong Support.

Lucy Salcido Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education in Support.