Assembly Standing Committee on Human Services

Good afternoon. I call this hearing of the Assembly Committee on Human Services to order today. Once we have established quorum, we have 22 bills on the agenda, seven of which are on consent. Please note that we limit testimony. Two witnesses in support and two witnesses in opposition. Each witness has two minutes to testify in.

Additional witnesses will be limited to stating their name, organization, and if they resent one, their position on the Bill. I also want to note that we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the Committee's website. Lastly, I would like to address disruptions during the hearing.

Conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited. If disruptive behavior occurs today, you will be removed from the hearing room by the Assembly sergeants. Since we do not yet have a quorum, we will be starting as a Subcommitee to hear bills.

Since today there are many overlapping committees, and I'm going to take the prerogative as chair to first hear my Bill, AB890, before I have to switch out. So I'm going to pass the gavel temporarily to Assemblymember Calderon, if that's all right.

Thank you, sir.

Swift with nameplates, too.

All right, Chairman Lee, whenever you're ready, please present your Bill. Thank you very much.

AB890 revises residency requirements for foster youth who are over 18 and wish to move to a different county. These foster youth, or non minor dependents, are adults between the ages of 18 and 21 who are participating in the extended foster care program.

The extended foster care program provides a range of services to foster to support foster youth as they transition to adulthood, including housing support, education, employment assistance, life skills training, and financial support, and case management.

Currently, if a non minor dependent moves to a new county, they're required to have had a continuous physical presence in the county for one year before the cases can be transferred. Additionally, housing programs in many counties prioritize local residents, leaving non minor dependents from other counties at disadvantage when seeking state stable housing options.

This Bill presents a simple solution to the current inflexibilities that prevent these foster youth from being able to access these services. These youth are at a critical stage in their lives, and it is incumbent upon the state to remove as many barriers as possible to youth who are asserting their Independence and starting their new lives. With me is Ed Howard with the Children's Advocacy Institute.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair. And I want to first thank the Committee staff and the chair for the work on this important Bill, and I'm pleased to answer any questions you might have. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Mr. Howard, do we have any Members of the public in the hearing room to testify in support? Okay. Seeing none. Do we have any lead opposition witnesses? Seeing none. Any public comment opposition in the room? Seeing none. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask your aye vote.

When time comes, we'll hold the roll open. Thank you.

Thank you for your patience. Assembly Errands I see you are here, so would you like to come and present item 3, AB461, if you are ready. All right. Assembly Member Ahrens. Whenever you are ready, you may begin to present file item 3.

Thank you Mr. Chair and Members. AB 461 ensures that families facing school attendance challenges receive the support they need rather than punishment. Under current law, parents or guardians of students in kindergarten through 8th grade who fail to ensure regular school attendance may face a misdemeanor charge punishable up to $2,000 in fines and up to one year in county jail.

Additionally, low income families participating in the CalWORKS program can face sanctions if their child is deemed chronically truant, further reducing already limited income and pushing families below the federal poverty line. AB 461 aims to eliminate punitive measures that exacerbate economic hardships and instead promotes supportive non criminal responses.

This Bill shifts the focus from punishment to partnership, ensuring families receive the assistance they need rather than facing penalties that already deepen their struggles. Joining me today are proud sponsors of the Bill. Yesenia Jimenez, senior policy associate with End Child Poverty California, and Rebecca Gonzales, policy advocate with the Western center on Law and Poverty.

All right, two minutes each please. Whenever you're ready.

Thank you. Dear Chair and Members, thank you for having me here. As the Member mentioned, my name is Yesenia Jimenez. I'm here with End Child Poverty in California, Powered by Grace, one of the sponsors of AB461. AB461 ensures that families navigating school attendance challenges are met with support, not punishment.

Under current law, parents of children six and older can face up to one year in jail, $2,000 in fines, and even lose CalWORKS benefits when their children are considered chronically absent.

These punitive policies are ineffective, outdated and disproportionately harm low income families, immigrants and LGBTQ youth rather than addressing root causes like bullying, trauma, fear of deportation or housing insecurity. Our current system compounds family hardship. Socioeconomically disadvantaged students are much more likely to have their absences labeled unexcused. Black students experience the largest disparity.

Recent changes to state law have eliminated the notification to parents or guardians about the fines or jail time due to unexcused absences. However, without removing the penalties, the law continues to criminalize families rather than empowering them with the resources and support needed to address attendance challenges.

A 2013 Attorney General Truancy report found most district attorneys rarely prosecuted these cases, as early intervention strategies proved highly effective. Since that 2013 report, there has been no updated statewide data on how many truancy cases result in parental criminal charges.

This Bill is especially urgent considering the current federal administration's removal of the Sensitive Locations policy, which previously protected schools from immigration enforcement. These actions have heightened fears of deportation among immigrant families, leading many parents to keep their children home and resulting in increased truancy because families are scared.

These are not signs of parental neglect, but parents protecting their kids the best way they can. These are calls for help. AB461 follows what we know works support over sanctioned works. The bright spot is that California school districts are adopting supportive approaches to addressing truancy and have become less likely to enforce punitive measures against parents.

AB461 reflects a better way forward, one rooted in dignity, equity, love, and love for our children.

We urge your aye vote on this measure. Thank you.

All right, thank you very much. Next witness please.

Hello Chair and Members. My name is Rebecca Gonzalez and I'm with the Western Center on Law and Poverty and we're proud co sponsors of AB461. This bill corrects a policy that does not work to keep kids in school and punishes some of our most vulnerable families.

As we have heard, under current law, education is mandatory for children between 6 and 18 years old. Our current system punishes CalWORKS families, some of the poorest families in the state, by partially withholding desperately needed aid in the cases where the child is 16 or older.

The current law does not take into account the extreme hardships faced by these families. Poverty comes with a variety of challenges that can result in a child becoming chronically truant, including mental health and substance use. Issues in the home can impact children and can make them more susceptible to behavioral health issues themselves.

Domestic violence in the home can also impact the child and their ability to successfully navigate school. Recent news reports makes clear that children face real fears of bullying and worse over threats of deportation and discrimination. LGBTQ students or a child perhaps may be hungry and not concentrate and embarrassed by their performance in school.

The current system is inequitable. Why should poor families be subject to extreme punishment such as having their cash aid, which is already inadequate, reduced?

The data is clear that revoking aid only pushes families into deep poverty, which leads to toxic stress and other lifelong consequences for children's brain development and destabilizes families to the point of interaction with the child welfare system and with deep trauma and significant fiscal costs.

This policy is overly harsh and discriminatory and there is a better way to support these families. By screening these families for the Family Stabilization Program, which this Bill will do, we can better support families with the services they need to be successful.

The Family stabilization Program assists CalWORKS families by providing support for housing, mental health and family stability. The program helps people find, hold and retain a job, helps children succeed in school, and helps the mental health of the family.

The Bill also allows a child 16 years of age or older to voluntarily participate in the Welfare to Work Program, which comes with a variety of services such as mental health services and vocational education to support these youth.

For these reasons, the Western center on Law and Poverty is proud to co sponsor this Bill and we ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Great. Thank you very much. Now, do we have any Members of the public in the hearing room who wish to testify in support of the Bill? If you're here to support the Bill, please come up to the microphone.

Good afternoon. Amanda Kirchner, on behalf of County Welfare directors in support.

Great, thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Tracee Michelle Porter, Solis Policy Institute fellow. And I'm hearing strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Maria Moreno, also with the Solis Policy Institute, in strong support.

Great, thank you. Now, do we have any Members of the public in the room who wish to testify in opposition to the Bill? In opposition to the Bill? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the Committee Members. Committee Members, do you have any questions? Assemblymember Calderon.

Thank you. Mr. Chair. Just a comment. I'd like to thank the author for bringing this measure forward. It's a good Bill and I'd love to be at it as a co author.

Thank you. Any other questions or comments for Assemblymember Aherns? If not, I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Put simply, the current law in this area simply doesn't address the root causes or fixes anything to compel students who are truant. I myself was truant. And again, the measures to address these problems do absolutely nothing. The data shows that. Anecdotal evidence shows that. Common sense shows that.

And this Bill seeks to remedy that and reestablish what actually works. And so I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. We don't yet have a quorum, but I agree with you. We'll move the Bill at appropriate time. I definitely agree with you at the Bill. You'll have a motion a second at the appropriate time. I just got to say.

I just got to say is that when a child doesn't go to school, school, it's obviously a symptom of a larger issue and we should definitely be treating it rather than punishing them for not showing up to school. So I'd also love to be added as a co author, if you'll have me be honored.

And we'll move the Bill at the appropriate time. Thank you. Thank you so much. Member, I think I saw Assmeblymember Garcia here. So whenever he is ready, he may come up to present Assembly Bill 753. File Item 7. Whenever he is ready. Whenever you're ready. You may begin.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to present AB 753. I would like to start by thanking the Committee staff for working with us on this bill. I will be accepting the Committee amendments. AB 753 proposes a temporary solution to the urgent staffing crisis within our child care field.

2 million children are currently awaiting care throughout the state, infants and toddlers are especially in need. Despite this demand, existing child care programs are struggling to keep classrooms open and some have shut down entirely since they are unable to meet staffing ratio requirements and experienced staff are leaving the field to find better wages and benefits elsewhere. There must be at least one teacher in the room for every eight children, and associate teachers are especially hard to come by.

It has been widely acknowledged that the current situation is not sustainable for providers and for families. So AB 753 helps address this staffing shortage by providing a pathway to associate teachers, ensuring that they have the time and training they need to deliver dedicated, quality care to our children while keeping classrooms fully staffed and open. With me to testify in support are Maéva Marc from Kidango and Juliet Terry from the Child Care Resource Center.

Thank you. Two minutes each witness, please.

Okay, great. Good afternoon, Committee Members. My name is Maéva Marc, VP of Advocacy and Policy with Kidango. Kidango provides 5,000 children and families across the Bay Area with high quality early learning services, and we are a proud co-sponsor of AB753.

And what we want to tell you is that the early care and learning workforce is experiencing a huge workforce shortage crisis. And AB 753 creates an equitable pathway and helps to mitigate barriers that hinder career progress and economic mobility.

The bill directly supports childcare and preschool programs to grow their capacity and increase their ability to serve their local communities and reach more children during the most important time of their brain development. As a provider, we've received expansion funding and we've experienced firsthand how difficult it is to hire teachers.

Kidango employs well over 800 quality teachers and we have, and we have had 466 vacancies between July 2023 and 2025. Since 2023, we've had 143 associate teacher vacancies. And on average it takes 86 days to start a new person, 61 days to fill the position, and 25 days to onboard them for them to start in the classroom to supervise children. Families can no longer wait to access care. There is a huge demand. In San Jose, we have over 200 children on our wait list.

In Alameda County, there's a 91% unmet need for infant and toddler care and 63% unmet need for preschool. This isn't just happening in the Bay Area, it's across the state. And we need to be able to hire teachers to, to keep our classrooms open. And AB 753 is one part of the solution to this teacher shortage crisis. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I think a witness highlighting the two counties I represent is very interesting tactic, Mr. Garcia. Next witness, please. Two minutes.

Well, good afternoon, Chair Lee and Members. My name is Juliet Terry. I am a Senior Government Relations Specialist for the Child Care Resource Center, or CCRC. We are a large family service agency based in San Bernardino County and Northern Los Angeles Counties, and we serve over 65,000 children, families, and child care providers. We also serve over 750 children in our center based programs and we employ well over 100 permitted ECE professionals in these programs.

As my colleague from Kidango mentioned, we are in a dire staffing crisis to meet child care demand. As of this week, CCRC's waitlist for child care services has grown to nearly 19,000 children, and we need qualified staff to meet this need. AB 753 provides the solution to alleviate the burdens of the staffing crisis created by creating supported professional pathways for ECE professionals to advance up the credentialing ladder while also being employed during their advancement.

Specifically, the bill allows for individuals who have at least six units of ECE or CD courses to be employed in an interim associate teacher role. This allows them to work in this position for up to two years while they work to meet the 12 unit requirement for the associate teacher permit.

Associate teachers are the first in the permit matrix level qualify to supervise children alone. Therefore they are extremely crucial in a position in the classroom for keeping classrooms operational. Under the bill provision, only one interim associate teacher would be allowed per classroom.

This bill currently aligns with recent CTC recommendations and updates to the Child Development Permit Matrix, where there's where the desired level of permitting requires 12 units as the entry level. And this would create a provisional license for six unit holders to allow them to work in programs while working towards that associate teacher permit.

It is projected for these changes to take place, it will take three to five years to implement. Therefore, this bill offers a more immediate solution so that programs can sooner meet the urgent need of keeping classrooms open for the thousands of children who are waiting for access to care.

To close, AB 753 reduces workforce barriers and keeps passionate early career professionals working in the field and receiving ongoing income, professional supports, and training while working towards their associate teacher permit. It's a low cost approach. It eases workforce burdens, keeps our classrooms accessible, and increases access for those 2 million children who are eligible to receive care. With this, I thank you for your time and aye vote.

Thank you very much. Now, do we have members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone. Name and organization, please.

Hi. Megan Baier on behalf of Early Edge California, proud co-sponsor of the bill. Thank you.

Hello. Jeannette Carpenter on behalf of Child Action Incorporated. We are a proud co-sponsor of the bill, and thank you.

Cristina Salazar, Californians Together in strong support.

Hello. I'm Alice Tao. I'm with California Childcare Center Alliance. On behalf of our members for private centers, we support this bill. But we also want to voice our concerns for we want to be included in this bill as so we can have the flexibility to provide the quality care for the children. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Now, do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward, any witnesses in opposition. Any members of the public wish to oppose the bill? All right, seeing none. I'm going to invite, if there's any questions or comments from Committee Members. Seeing none, I will ask the... I'm going to invite the author to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I think I'm honored and privileged to be in this new role. And so I'm only about four and a half months removed from the classroom, and I know how difficult it is to staff these classrooms. I was at a preschool through fifth grade school, and so I know that this bill would really help alleviate that. And so I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

All right, thank you very much. Aligning the permit matrix with some of the recommendations from the permit matrix workgroup is a positive step towards addressing the child care workforce shortage. I appreciate you working with the Committee on the amendments, and I thank you for bringing the bill forward.

I am recommending an aye as amended vote when the time comes. So thank you very much, and we'll take up the vote when we have quorum. Thank you. All right, Assembly Member Gipson, I see you're here. Whenever you're ready, you may come up, present file item 10, AB 926.

Mr. Chairman and Members, thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 926, creating a rebuttable presumption that visitation between a parent and their, and their child in foster care are unsupervised unless it is determined that a child's safety is in fact in danger.

Current law does not specify when supervision visits are necessary, the duration of the visits, and who and where it should take place. As a result, most parents' contact with their child is unsupervised. Is supervised. Excuse me, is supervised even when the monitors are necessary.

A child may be removed from their parents because of the home environment or their parents' inability to access appropriate resource of care. Unfortunately, children living in poverty are more likely to be reported to the Child Welfare Services. 47% of families who have children placed in the systems are living below the federal poverty line.

AB 926 addresses the gaps in California's law to streamline families' times and increase the likelihood of of family reunification. We are engaged in ongoing discussions with oppositions, with the CWDA, and will continue those conversations until hopefully we reach some kind of compromise.

With me to provide supporting testimonies is a representative from the Mentor Parents Program Management and Dependency Advocates in Santa Clarita County and also the Children Law Center, who will self introduced.

All right, whoever wants to go first, two minutes. Two minutes each please. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Lee and Members. I'm Julie McCormick on behalf of the Children's Law Center of California, proud co-sponsor of AB 926. CLC, Children's Law Center, represents tens of thousands of children in foster care each year in Los Angeles, Placer, and Sacramento Counties, and we know that meaningful family time is one of the most critical tools we have to support healing and promote safe reunification.

Unfortunately, current practice too often defaults to supervised visits even when supervision is not necessary for the child's safety. This results in delays, scheduling conflicts, and limited access, ultimately reducing the amount and quality of time children spend with their parents. AB 926 shifts that presumption, requiring that visits be monitored unless supervision is clearly needed to protect the child. This common sense change centers safety and child well being. It aligns with existing law that already mandates visitation unless it's unsafe and with the Court of Appeals repeated recognition that family contact is essential to reunification.

The bill also requires courts to set clear standards for visit frequency and duration when supervision is necessary and directs that visits occur in the least restrictive, most family friendly setting. By reducing unnecessary barriers and deepening family connections, AB 926 will lessen the trauma of family separation, support timely reunification, and promote better long term outcomes for children. We respectfully urge your aye vote. Thank you.

Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Dave Schuster. I'm a former parent involved in the dependency system. Today I want to share my personal experience with visitation and its impact on my family, which highlights the importance of voting aye on AB 926. My daughter was in the system.

When my daughter was in the system, we were informed that her visits had to be supervised. They were for seven months. This requirement was completely unwarranted and left a lasting trauma on my daughter. Our visits took place in an old office building filled with broken toys and books with missing pages.

We felt we couldn't voice our complaints, as we were just grateful to be able to hold our child and didn't want to jeopardize that. Some of the offices had windows serving as a constant reminder of the family life that we had and we were feared we would never have again.

I visited my seven year old daughter twice a week for two hours each visit, and the mother did the same, but separately. This just was despite us being an intact couple and no history of domestic violence. Keeping an active child entertained for two hours in limited space with zero activities was an unreasonable challenge for any parent.

My daughter felt uncomfortable with the monitors at the visits. They would sit in the doorway typing every word spoken between us, only to make her withdraw further. She would whisper to me, daddy, why are they here? Only to be told, you can't whisper, you need to speak up. As a result, she just didn't talk.

I have never felt so powerless and ashamed and riddled with guilt as we were there because of my addiction. But unfortunately, my child suffered the consequences. Despite being clean and complying with our case plans, supervised visits continued for over seven months. While my experience occurred a few years ago, these issues persist, and in fact, now the visits are being canceled because the department is understaffed.

The children have gone months without seeing their parents. And who's harmed in these situations? Who feels the effect of not being able to hug or hold their parent? AB 926 would help ensure that what happened to me in my case and has happened to many others does not continue to affect other families. I urge your vote aye on AB 926 to protect children's right to family time.

Great. Thank you so much for sharing your story. I'm going to ask if there are members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill. Please come up to the microphone.

Yeah. Good afternoon, my name is Kevin Aslanian. I'm with the Coalition California Welfare Rights Organizations, and we strongly support AB 2926 because it will save money because supervised visits cost money and unsupervised doesn't cost money, and we have a budget crisis. Thank you.

Zachariah Oquenda, Alliance for Children's Rights, in support.

Julia Hanagan, Dependency Legal Services, proud co-sponsor.

Now, if we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill, please come forward.

Good afternoon. Amanda Kirchner on behalf of County Welfare Directors Association. We are in a concerns position and have been working with the author's office and the co-sponsors. We actually have a meeting next week to discuss further amendments, where I am really hopeful that we'll be able to resolve our differences. Just appreciate the continued engagement from Mr. Gipson and, of course, the work of the Committee. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Do we have any other members of the public who wish to testify in opposition? See none. I'm going to turn it back to Committee. But first, Committee Secretary, please call the roll for establishing a quorum.

[Roll Call]

All right, quorum established. Committee Members, any questions or comments for this bill? AB 926. All right. Mr. Gipson, would you like to close?

Thank you very much and really appreciate the Committee. My comments will be aligned of what I met a family three years ago, foster kid and why reunification is so important. This young man had an identical twin brother, and they were separated not knowing that he attended the same school that his twin brother attended.

Not to mention that he also lived like 10 blocks away from each other, but they didn't know it. And the social worker broke whatever rules that was in place. The brother said, I want to see my brother. I want to see my brother. And two weeks before he got a chance to see his brother, his brother was killed in a drive by shooting. The very first time and the last time he saw his brother lying in a casket. And so I just give that story about why reunification is important.

Why reunification is, it's not only a bonding mechanism but also trying to keep families together when it is necessary and when there's no immediate danger or risk to either the parents or the children, most of all, then we should do everything we can to making sure that we reunify these families together. Supporting support is healing. Also reunification makes sense and it's right and also common sense. That's what this bill is, 926. I respectfully asked when aye vote. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much for bringing this bill forward. I think ensuring families involved in the child welfare system is important to the state's commitment to keeping families together whenever possible. The bill has been probably moved and seconded by Assembly Member Calderon and Jackson. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. And I have an aye recommendation.

File item 10, AB 926. The motion is do pass to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Four to zero that Bill is out. Congratulations. Since we are still waiting for authors, let's do the Consent calendar real quick. I'm looking at one right now. Let's see the consent. Let's do the consent calendar real quick. First, do I have a motion on a second of the consent calendar moved by Assembly Calderon. Seconded by Assembly Member Rodriguez on the consent calendar.

[Roll Call]

4 to 0. The consent calendar is out. And now that since we have two Committee Members who are present as authors, file item wise. Similar to Jackson is first, but okay. All right. I was gonna say. I was about to say if you had any preference, but all right. Similar. Jackson first. Which Bill of yours first?

Mr. Jackson. I have too much experience than to concede a spot when I can. Which Bill do you want to start with? We'll do 563 to start off with and then 601.

File item 5, AB563. You may get started whenever you're ready.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Committee Members, I want to express my gratitude to the chair and Committee staff on for their amendments to AB563, in which I am happy to accept.

With these amendments, 563 aims to provide actionable recommendations to strengthen California's early childhood and care system and allow for smoother transitions into the educational K12 system by adding requirements for the Early Childhood Education Planning Council's annual report.

Specifically, this Bill would require the Early Childhood Education Planning Council to report to the Legislature, Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the Assembly and Senate Human services committees on the successes, challenges and gaps in the state's childhood education systems and provide recommendations to advance the state's vision for children, families and communities.

Additionally, the Bill would require the council to develop policy proposals and budget requests for the Legislature to consider related to facility needs, workforce needs and family access. We know the importance of high quality early care and education and the many positive effects that it has.

Unfortunately, we still have a diverse system that is operating in silos and we need to get in a better position to not just understand how many slots we need in California and particular regions in our state, but also what kind of slots do we need? Do we need more half day? Do we need more full day?

Do we need more after hours? Right. The idea is that we need a diverse system. Delivery. System of delivery, but we are not in a place yet where we can do it successfully. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Dr. Jackson. Do you have any witnesses? No. Okay. Any Members of the public wish to testify in support of the Bill, please come with the microphone.

Hi, Juliet Terry with Child Care Resource Center. Just want to thank Assemblymember Jackson for Kim considering the amendments and the voices of the field. And we would like to voice support for the Bill as amendmend.

Great. Thank you.

Hello. Darlene Dupree with the Association of Regional Center Agencies here to voice support for the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Now, do we have any Members of the public wish to testify in opposition to the Bill? In opposition, seeing none. I'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions? Comments for the author for this Bill? I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Child care is one of those issues where if the Legislature doesn't lead and continue to move forward, we're never going to get where we need to be. We know how important child care is.

We knew it in an extreme level when it came to the pandemic and how critical it is for community resilience, let alone unlocking the economic strength of parents who are simply not able to be in the workforce. At the end of the day, we have to break down silos.

We have to break down fiefdoms, if you will, in order to get where we need to go. Adult issues need to stop being in the way of making sure that children have what they need. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Very well said, Dr. Jackson. I agree with you. I'm recommending an aye as amended vote. Do I have a second and a motion? A second for this Bill? The Bill has been probably moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB563.

[Roll Call]

Five to zero. That Bill is out. File item six whenever you're ready. Assemblymember. Jackson. This is AB601. Yes, that's right.

AB 601. I'm used to flying solo, so I need to slow down a little bit. I don't have very many supporters of my Bill, so when I have an opportunity, you know, I want to. I want to take a picture of this moment. Okay, I'm ready. It is your time, Dr. Jackson.

You can relish the moment as you choose. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Committee Members, I would like to start by thanking the Committee once again for their work on this Bill and also will be accepting. We are proposing these amendments. We're not accepting amendments, are we? Okay.

We are accepting amendments AB 601, which seeks to ensure that all mandate reporters receive consistent standardized training to better recognize and respond to child abuse and neglect. Current training practices vary widely across employers and professions, creating confusion and inconsistency in reporting standards.

In California, we have one of the most extensive networks of mandated reporters, with over 49 categories of professionals required to report suspected child abuse or neglect. Almost half of all cases from mandated reporters fall under the category of General neglect. Out of these cases, nearly 80% are not substantiated by CPS.

This means that resources are being expended and families are being traumatized. Because many mandated reporters do not know how to separate structural racism, system failures and human biases from actual child neglect and abuse, this Bill would move the mandated reporting system in the right direction.

The Bill would require the State Department of Social Services to develop a standardized training no later than July 1, 2027. This training will be available online to ensure accessible, flexible learning for report and all mandated reporters across California.

All newly employed mandated reporters must complete their training within the first three months of employment unless their profession mandates training earlier than three months. This early requirement promotes better informed, responsive decision making for the outset of a mandated reporter's role. And finally, AB 601 would establish mandated reporter advisory committees under the California child welfare system.

This Committee would be charged with assuring long term reform, monitoring disparities and supporting the transformation of mandated reporting in a more equitable system. With me today to testify in support of this Bill is Amanda Kirchner with the County Welfare Directors Association. Thank you very much. Two minutes please.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Jackson. Amanda Kirchner on behalf of County Welfare Directors Association, we believe AB 601 is an important first step in addressing mandated reporting reforms and building prevention services capacity to support vulnerable children and their families.

Our child welfare system has evolved over the last decade and more, including crucial recent changes to the definition of neglect in AB 2085 which changed the definition of General abuse.

We also see the need to evolve mandated reporter training to build a better understanding of what constitutes abuse and neglect under the law and its important impacts on families of color.

AB 601 requires standardized training, something that California has never had, as well as a requirement for all mandated reporters to receive the new training so that there is a baseline understanding of how to recognize abuse or neglect and when to make a report.

There are currently 40,000 children in foster care, which is a historic all time low and the number is trending downwards.

This is a reflection in part by county child welfare program's efforts to connect families to prevention services through local partnerships with community based agencies AB 601 provides help to build prevention services capacity which will be needed in order to fulfill the Child Welfare Council's goals on mandated reporter reform.

This includes assessing prevention services capacity statewide and ensuring counties have the guidance they need from the state to plan with community based agencies to build services through the Family First Prevention Services Program.

We are hopeful that we'll be able to additionally draw down the title IV E Funds from FFPSA Part 1 Prevention Services Once a claiming mechanism has been approved by CDSS to be able to further build out our capacity for prevention services at the county level.

We believe this is an important first step in implementing many of the recommendations from the Child Welfare Council and we ask for your support today.

Thank you very much. Now do we have members of the public who wish testify and support a Bill? Please come up to the microphone. Name and organization please.

Hello, Maria Roma with Child Care Resource Center. We would like to thank Assembly Member Corey Jackson for authoring this Bill and we would ask the chair and Committee Members to vote I for this Bill Thank you.

Mr. Chair and Members. Tiffany Whiten with SEIU California. Happy to be here. Sincerely appreciate the author for bringing this Bill forward and would ask for your support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Ethan Lares-Salinas on behalf of ACLU California Action in support. Thank you.

Zachariah Oquenda, alliance for Children's Rights and Support and Assembly Member for the record, so much support on your bills. So much.

Good afternoon. Luciana Svidler with Children's Law center of California in support.

Good afternoon. Jenny Pearlman with Safe and Sound in the Family Services alliance in San Francisco in support. Thank you Dr. Jackson.

Thank you. Dawn Koepke on behalf of the Child Abuse Prevention center and California Family Resource Association both in strong support.

Andrew Shane Grace Poverty California and support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the Bill? Any Members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments for the author in this Bill? All right. Seeing none, I'll invite the author to close.

Mr. Chair, let me just say how grateful I am to Committee staff and the many, the many, the many people who've been participating in this Corey Jackson style build process and we have had many sessions together and we're in a working group format to try to figure out what is the grant the place that we can create some synergy around this.

And I have been assured as you know I tend to lead more on the aggressive side of things.

But I've been assured that this is a big deal because as a trained social worker myself, and as a former mandated reporter myself who actually supervised other mandated reporters, people are shocked to not even understand that there is no uniform curriculum or mandated reporters that everyone has to go through on a population.

And an issue this important, the fact that we can begin to standardize this, begin to offer best practices around this, the goal is to make sure that we are making better decisions so that the current system does not hurt people too. With that, I respectfully asked for an aye vote.

Thank you, Dr. Jackson. Thank you for bringing the Bill forward. And I appreciate your constant tenacity to reform the mandate reporting system to make sure it's better situated to actually support the people that we're supposed to be looking out for.

So I really appreciate all your work on this and working with my Committee, I am recommending I, as amended, vote today. Do I have a motion and a second on this Bill? Moved by Assembly Member Celeste Rodriguez. Seconded by Assembly El Hawari. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 601.

[Roll Call]

Five to zero. That Bill is out. Congratulations. All right, I see that Assembly Member Patel is here, which if she is ready, she can come present file 15 AB 1074. Since we're going by the.

We can share. Mike, you can sit here.

Whenever you're ready. You may begin.

Thank you, Chair and Members. Today I present Assembly Bill 1074. It's a critical step towards strengthening California's commitment to keeping families together. The California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids program, also known as CalWORKs, provides cash aid, helps finding work, and other key services to very low income parents with children.

The CalWORKs reunification program allows this aid to continue to the parents even if the children are removed from their home so that the family can work towards reunification. Without the aid, reunification is nearly impossible. Unfortunately, unintended barriers currently stand between the struggling parents and the assistance designed to help them rebuild their families.

Right now, families who urgently need reunification support can lose it when even one child remains at home and another was removed. Parents can lose aid based on an immunization requirement, which is no longer in their hands once they are no longer in custody of their child.

And families must often navigate duplicative and occasionally conflicting reintegration and welfare to work requirements that provide extra burdens for already strained families. These bureaucratic hurdles don't just impede reunification, they increase costs for the state too.

We spend up to three times more money placing a child in foster care than we would by providing stable, consistent CalWORKs support to reunite those families. AB 1074 removes these counterproductive barriers. And while this bill simply addresses the unforeseen and unintended consequences of previous legislation around CalWORKs reunification program, the impact it can have on families and the state are immense. With that, I respectfully ask an aye vote today. Thank you.

Joining me today is Rebecca Gonzales, a policy advocate from Western Center on Law and Poverty, who is the sponsor of this bill. And also joining me is Kevin Aslanian from Coalition for California Welfare Rights Organizations to support. Thank you.

Thank you. Two minutes each, please.

Hello, Chair and Committee Members. My name is Rebecca Gonzales, and I'm a policy advocate with the Western Center on Law and Poverty, and we are sponsors of AB 1074. For over 55 years, the Western Center has advocated on behalf of Californians experiencing poverty in every branch of government, from the courts to the Legislature.

Through the lens of economic and racial justice, we litigate, educate, and advocate around health care, housing, and public benefits policies and administration. The goal of this bill is to update the CalWORKs Family Reunification Program, which was included in AB 135 of 2021, to remove barriers that prevent parents from continuing to receive cash aid and services while their children are temporarily placed outside the home in foster care or the home of a relative.

This allows the state to better achieve its goal of family reunification by promoting family stabilization. The 2020 law allowed the California Department of Social Services to issue guidance to the counties to implement the program. In doing so, the agency restricted when a family can continue to receive assistance in ways which are inconsistent with the intent of the statute. The Western Center engaged in administrative advocacy, and the Department resolved several concerns. Ultimately, the areas addressed in AB 1074 were identified as needing statutory clarification.

Briefly, the bill clarifies that not all children in the family need to be removed from the home before the family can receive reunification cash aid and child care when needed. Two, reunification aid can be continued when an eligible child joins the family, such as the birth of another child, or in cases of partial reunification where some but not all children are reunified and the parents are still meeting conditions to have their other children returned.

Three, for families who have the adult removed from the grant for failure to show proof of immunization, the bill would lift the sanction and restore the parent's aid once the child for whom verification was missing is removed. At that point, the family does not have physical or legal custody of the child and cannot meet this immunization requirement.

Four, clarifies that families remain eligible for their current CalWORKs benefit level even if the parent is not personally receiving aid. Families such as those with parents receiving Supplemental Security Income Disability benefits are currently barred from receiving CalWORKs family reunification cash aid or services. This also includes parents who have been timed out on aid or have been sanctioned.

Five, implements a policy stating that parents must navigate only one set of requirements that covers both reunification and welfare to work requirements in a unified plan rather than two separate plans. About 30 counties do this already. Current policy allows counties to have two plans with potentially conflicting requirements that could result in a reduction of the CalWORKs aid as well as making it more difficult to meet the court reunification requirements.

We are grateful to Assembly Member Patel for introducing this bill and know that AB 1074 helps to fulfill the state's goal of reunifying CalWORKs families by removing unnecessary barriers. These changes are necessary to fulfill the intent of the original law and will help to support these vulnerable families. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Yeah. Good afternoon. Kevin Aslanian, Coalition California Welfare Rights Organization. AB 135 had a provision, has a provision that says that when they remove the child, they should get six months for six more months of CalWORKs so they could maintain a place for the kid to come back.

And when we looked at, took them about three years. Was supposed to be effective January 1, 2023 and it became effective January 1 of this year allegedly because of CalSTRS. And it turned out that they didn't need CalSTRS to do that anyhow. It just went into effect.

But we have found some barriers, and this will remove the barriers. And it should be known that to keep one child on CalWORKs, it only costs 300 a month. To keep the same child in foster care is $2,500 a month. And often the average family is 2-3 children. So you're really talking about $7,500. So I urge an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Now do we have any members of the public who wish to testify and supported bill? Please come into the microphone. Members of the public which testify in support of the bill.

Thank you. Dawn Koepke on behalf of the Child Abuse Prevention Center and California Family Resource Association in support.

Zachariah Oquenda, Alliance for Children's Rights, also in support.

Amanda Kirchner, County Welfare Directors, in support.

Thank you. Now do we have any... Oh, one more.

Andrew Cheyne, End Child Poverty, in support. Sorry.

All right, thank you. Do we have any members of the public wish to testify in opposition to the bill? In opposition to the bill. Seeing none. I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions, comments from Committee Members? All right, Dr. Patel, I'll invite you to close then.

Thank you, Committee, for your support on this bill. And let's try to get our families back together. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much for bringing this bill forward. I'm recommending an aye vote. And this bill was moved by Assembly Member Jackson. I think seconded by everyone else. So, Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 1074.

The motion is do pass to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

5-0. That bill is out. Congratulations. All right, seeing as we have no other authors in the room at the moment, we only have Committee Members. So if we go by Committee file order, that would be Assembly Member Elhawary going first, if that's what... Would she like to go? So, Assembly Member Elhawary, do you want to go AB 822? And actually, since I'm going to step out for a second, I'm going to give the mic, not mic, the gavel over to Assembly Member Rodriguez. You can chair this one.

Yeah. And then we'll switch when it's your turn.

Please present your Bill.

Good afternoon. Sorry, this is clearly not one. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. I'm proud to present AV 822, which would extend the sunset date for the Commission on the State of hate to January 1, 2031. This Commission was created in 2021 in response to hate crimes against Asian Americans that were exacerbated by the COVID pandemic.

But its work reaches far beyond one moment or one community. While some hate crimes are declining, attacks against LGBTQ people, especially Trans and non binary folks, are still rising. These acts of hate aren't far away. They're happening in our districts, in our schools, in our streets.

AB 822 ensures California continues to respond with care, urgency and long term solutions, not just reactive headlines. The fight against hate doesn't start somewhere else. It starts with us. I'm asking you to stand with me and be a part of that fight. Thank you.

Thank you. Assembly member. The author has no primary witnesses. Do we have any Members of the public in the hearing room to testify in support? Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any Members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition?

We're doing a me too for support. Is that all right? I didn't want to do a full testimony, but Annie Chow with the California Teachers Association in support and also on behalf of Equality California. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any questions from Committee Members?

Thank you. We have a motion by Jackson and a second by Assembly Member Calderon. I invite you to close, Assembly Member Elhawary,

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Madam Secretary, could you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Thank you for bringing this Bill forward. The vote is 4 to 0, that Bill is out. Congratulations. File item 12 is the next item. We will hear From Assembly Member McKinner. Please feel free to begin when you're ready.

Thank you.

Ms. Chair and Members, AB 970 will create a pilot program in Los Angeles County, to ensure that mandated reporters are adequately trained and supported, to make accurate decisions about providing supportive services to families, and reporting known or suspected child abuse or neglect.

AB 970 would not change current law requiring mandated reporters to report to child welfare or law enforcement, when abuse or neglect is known or suspected. Current penalties for failing to report will remain intact, under the pilot.

Mandated reporters are legally required to report any suspicious or knowledgeable—or knowledge—of abuse or neglect to a county child protected hotline in law enforcement, or law enforcement. However, these reporters often lack proper training and support, which leads to poor decision making when determining whether a report is necessary.

The results, in both, are over-reporting, disproportionately impacting Black and Brown families, in some cases, underreporting, which puts the safety of the child at risk. Conscious or unconscious bias and other non-safety concerns often influence these decisions, leading to well-intentioned reporters to make unnecessary reports.

This can cause trauma for families and erode trust in the system meant to help them, making families hesitant to seek assistance in the future. Over-reporting disproportionately impacts Black and Native American children, with studies showing these groups are investigated by CPS at higher rates than white children.

In California, 50% of Black and Native American children are investigated by CPS by age 18, compared to only 25% of White children. Lastly, the current reporting model is reactive, rather than proactive, missing the opportunity to offer preventive resources to families before abuse or neglect occurs.

To address these challenges, AB 970 aims to create a more proactive and supportive approach to mandated reporting, focusing on better training for reporters, reducing bias, and providing families with early intervention and resources.

By shifting from a purely reactive model to one that emphasize prevention and support, we can improve child welfare outcomes, reduce trauma, and build stronger, more trusting relationships between families and systems meant to support them. Today, my witnesses are Dr. Tamara Hunter, Executive Director of the Los Angeles County Commission for Children and Families, and Dr. Laurel Bear, Educational Consultant with the Los Angeles County of Education. Thank you.

All right, thanks so much. Two minutes please.

Good afternoon, Honorable Chairman and Members. I am Dr. Tamara Hunter, representing LA County Board of Supervisors, co-sponsor of AB 970. I am the Executive Director of LA County's Commission for Children and Families, and I have more than 20 years of experience and expertise in public child welfare, having begun my career on the front lines with LA County's Department of Children and Family Services.

I have spent the last three and a half years focusing on maltreatment prevention initiatives and leading the county's cross sector effort to reform mandated reporting.

The decision to report, or not report, suspected child abuse and neglect is one of the most consequential decisions that one can make, and despite this significance, we have failed to adequately equip mandated reporters with the tools they need to carry out this responsibility effectively.

This results in over-reporting of families who do not require child welfare interventions, which we talk about often, but it also results in underreporting of children who may be unsafe.

Further, the current system of mandated reporting is reactive by design, and mandated reporters have been conditioned to believe that they have just two options, report or do not report, and as such, we miss critical opportunities to help families who are in need, but who do not need CPS upstream.

AB 970 aims to address these deficiencies by authorizing a two-year pilot project with a small cohort of organizations in LA County. Organizations would opt into participating in the pilot, which includes improved mandated reporter training, to provide them with the clear and concrete guidance that they want and need, a tested decision support tool to help mandated reporters make more accurate decisions about when a report is required by law, and when—and when to link a family in need to supportive resources.

And finally, AB 970 includes an evaluation of the pilot program. AB 970 aligns with broader statewide efforts to reform mandated reporting and is a critical step forward.

For these reasons, I respectfully urge your "Aye" vote.

Thank you very much. Next witness please.

Good afternoon, esteemed Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Dr. Laurel Bear and I'm a retired Assistant Superintendent in Los Angeles County, for over 40 years in public education.

I asked today to share with you some information including the over-reporting of our children, including leading student—I led the Student Employee Welfare Initiative in developing the Gateway to Success, a nationally recognized school-based mental health program.

Since retirement, I have trained hundreds of Clinicians, Educators, and parents in school mental health, as well as mandated reporting across Los Angeles, San Diego, Sacramento Counties. I'm here today to strongly support AB 970. Over the past three years, I've worked closely with Los Angeles County as an educational advisor on the efforts that inform this Bill.

I helped shape a recent training enhancement and decision tree designed to help mandated reporters make accurate, legal—legally aligned—and equitable decisions about suspected general neglect. As an Educator, I've seen how outdated reporting laws, unchanged for over 45 years, create confusion, fear, and harm.

Mandated reporters are told to report at the first sign of concern, yet are rarely trained to differentiate a true risk for a family in need of support.

Too often, we report simply because we do not have anywhere else to go, not because we suspect child abuse. That breaks trust between families and schools and can harm the very children we aim to protect. AB 970 transforms mandated reporting into mandated supporting.

It does not remove legal obligations, it enhances them, by training educators and other mandated reporters to think critically, address implicit bias, and consider when community-based support is a more appropriate path. This Bill is about child safety, equity, and modernizing our response system. It gives us a third option to offer help, not harm, when no report is required by law.

I urge you to vote "Yay" on AB 970 and bring California's mandated reporting practices into the 21st century, for our educators, for our families, and most importantly, for our children.

All right, thank you very much. Now, we're going to ask if there are members of the public. Wish to testify in support of the Bill, please come with the microphone. Name and organization, please.

Kevin Aslanian, Coalition California Welfare Rights Organization, in strong support. Thank you.

Hello. Maria Roma with the Child Care Resource Center. We are co-sponsors of this Bill and are in strong support. Our mandate reporting laws haven't changed meaningfully in the past 45 years. This Bill would...

Thank you. Just name and organization, please. Thank you.

Amanda Kirchner, County Welfare Directors Association, co-sponsor on the Measure, in support.

Thank you.

Kristin Power, Alliance for Children's Rights, in support.

Luciana Svidler, Children's Law Center of California, in support.

Elle Grant, California Alliance of Child and Family Services, in support.

Dawn Koepke, on behalf of the Child Abuse Prevention Center and California Family Resource Association, in support.

Thank you very much. Now, do we have any witnesses in opposition to this Bill? Any witnesses in opposition? All right, seeing none. I'll bring it back to Committee. But just to confirm, since I was out outside of the room, Assemblymember Mckinnor, were you—did you accept the Committee amendments?

Yes.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Okay, let's move to Committee comments. Dr. Jackson?

Thank you very much. Once again, LA County needs to lead the way. This is so important so that we can start having receipts about what is the right thing to do and whether it can work well.

Many of us know what is the right thing to do, but so many times, we get so afraid to change the current status quo, even though the current status quo is doing harm, but because it's the status quo, we're more comfortable with that, when we should be more uncomfortable with the status quo.

And so, I want to thank you for continuing to lead LA County and representing LA County to do and lead the way, like you've done in so many other issues, whether, whether it's guaranteed income and other things that you all are putting significant investments in.

But hopefully, after you collect your data and be able to publicize—and you let me know, because I'll be running around with every—to everybody—and saying, did you read this? Right? Because it's gonna be helpful to get to where we've always known we needed to go. So, well done.

Any other questions or comments? All right. Seeing None. I'll invite the Author to close.

Yes, I was a mandated reporter in one of my careers. I had several. I worked for Department of Social Services, and so, I was a mandated reporter, early on in my career, and it was very difficult. Our training was not really thorough. And so, those were the decisions—do you turn it in, or do you not?

There's nothing in between. There's no services to offer.

I also did a hearing last year on restorative justice, and I heard from tons of gentle—young gentlemen—well, they were older now, that had been previously incarcerated and they talked about when they were in high school and that if they could have had a chance to go into the schools and talk about their problems and maybe seek therapy for them and their parents, it would have been so much better for them.

Instead, they were afraid to do that, because they were afraid of being taken away from their—from their parent. And so, I think this is a much needed pilot. And so, with that, I ask for your "Aye" vote.

Well, thank you so much, Senator Mckinnor, for working with my Committee Staff on this Bill.

I think it's a big, significant change that LA—that LA County is going to be piloting for the next two years, to figure out how do we change the system to be truly about supporting the needs of children and instead of punishing them. So, it is very big, big change.

And just like I said—as Dr. Jackson said—that, I think, the reports will be very telling, or the end results will be telling in two years. And we're here to continue to watch how the program evolves in the next two years for LA County, which is a big pilot, of course, one of the, you know, our biggest county to pilot test this on.

I am recommending an "Aye," as amended. Can I get a motion and a second for this Bill? Bill has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 970.

[Roll Call]

That Bill is out. Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right, going by the file item order, I believe Assemblymember Harabedian is here for AB 1161, file item 17. So whenever he is ready, he may come up.

Thank you Mr. Chair and Members and proud to present AB 1161 here to you today. And thank you to the Committee staff and the Chair for the amendments. I will be accepting the amendments, I think it makes it a lot stronger and it's a better Bill.

So thank you for all your work on that. We will be limiting this to only the Governor-declared state of emergencies. 1161 is a very simple Bill. It would make sure that anyone going through a publicly declared disaster emergency is not kicked off of a public benefit program for the mere fact that they forgot to reapply.

As we saw in the Eaton Palisades fires, when folks lives are upended, one of the last things they may think about when they're moving from rental to rental or hotel is whether they have the proper documentation and the ability to re enroll in programs like CalWORKS, CalFresh, IHSS, or MediCal.

And this Bill really just provides some grace and humanity in situations where folks are trying to survive. What the Bill would do is really three simple things. Make sure that up to 90 days after the public declaration of the disaster, folks are automatically re-enrolled in the public benefit programs.

It would reinstate benefits if folks were unfortunately terminated within that period, folks would be automatically reinstated. And then it would require that the IT systems that run the programs would effectuate this program with the automatic renewal and re-renewal during the Polk disasters.

I think it's really a Bill that will make sure that future victims, unfortunately that will happen in future disasters, are not faced with life altering moments when they are kicked off of the very benefit programs that help them survive on a day-to-day basis. I appreciate the Committee's consideration and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Here with me are witnesses Linda Nguy from the Western Center on Law and Poverty and Sarah Baches from Children Now.

All right, thank you. Two minutes each please.

Good afternoon. Sarah Bachez with Children Now. We're a nonpartisan whole child research, policy and advocacy organization dedicated to promoting children's health, education, and well-being in our state. And we're pleased to support AB 1161.

Unfortunately, our children and their families continue to face the impacts of traumatic events resulting from public health emergencies such as COVID-19, environmental disasters such as wildfires and severe power outages that have disrupted both their educational learning environments and their home lives, placing an immense strain on their physical, emotional and financial well-being.

In these times of crisis, families are focused on securing shelter, food, and health care. Basic needs that are often at risk during a disaster. We believe that these urgent and uncertain times require us to ensure that we are not denying access to benefits when these programs can be the lifeline to our most vulnerable families and children.

Children Now fully supports the proactive steps proposed in AB 1161 to ensure that services and programs that provide health care access, financial support, and social services are protected and provided when they're most needed, especially during a state of emergency.

Every year, roughly 10% of children and youth are dropped off out of their MediCal coverage due to paperwork issues and are subsequently re-enrolled, costing families and the state time and money.

This Bill would ensure that our children don't lose these critical services such as medical coverage during a temporary move or when they can't submit information because of the declared state of emergency. For these reasons, we ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. All right, next witness please. Two minutes.

Good afternoon. Linda Nguy with Western Center on Law and Poverty. Proud sponsors of AB 1161, which would ensure low-income Californians impacted by disasters would remain eligible for public benefits for at least 90 days or the duration of the state of emergency.

Public benefit programs provide life-saving health care services, supportive services that keep older adults and people with disabilities within the community, prevent hunger through food nutrition programs, and help families meet basic needs. Currently, California's public benefit programs are set to automatically terminate people if they don't submit timely documentation within typically within 30 days.

During ordinary times, people can check their mail and submit this. But during times of disasters, these rules penalize low income Californians at their most vulnerable. And so unfortunately, the devastating wildfires earlier this year will not be our last disaster. So to prepare for the next one, we urge your support. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Now, do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of the Bill? Please come to the microphone. Name and organization.

Andrew Shane on behalf of End Child Poverty California, including our Boss Shamika in support.

Jennifer Robles with Health Access California in support.

Kim Lewis with the Cal, representing the California Coalition for Youth in support.

Dawn Koepke on behalf of the Child Abuse Prevention Center and California Family Resource Association in support.

Kevin Aslanian, California Welfare Rights Organization. Strong support. Thank you.

All right, do we have any members of the public wish to testify in opposition to the Bill? Opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any Committee questions or comments, Assemblymember Calderon.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just want to commend the author. Thank you for bringing this Bill forward. You know it's one thing to go through such a tragedy and a loss and a disaster, but to be able to have families continue to benefit from these much-needed programs is key.

So I want to thank you for bringing this forward. I'd love to be a co-author.

Thank you. Absolutely.

All right. Any other questions, comments? If not, I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you Mr. Chair, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much for working on Committee on the amendments. And thank you for making sure that people impacted by disasters continue to receive their benefits. I am recommending an aye as amended vote. The Bill's removed and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 1161.

The motion is do pass as amended to the Assembly Health Committee. [Roll Call]

Five to zero. That Bill is out. Congratulations. All right, the next item on the agenda should be file item 18. Assembler wins AB 1172. So whenever she is ready she can come forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that we will be accepting the Committee amendments. I'm here to present on AB 1172 which will allow trained voluntary staff at Community Care License Day programs in adult residential facilities to administer emergency inhalable anti seizure medication to individuals who experience seizures.

These day programs and adult facilities basically provide basic care and assistance to adults with developmental disabilities. These individuals are at high risk of experiencing experiencing seizures 20 times more likely to suffer from epilepsy than the general public. Therefore, the medication. It's highly important that the medication is given to them as soon as possible.

Regardless, the CCL day programs and adult facility staffs are currently prohibited from administering emergency anti seizure medication forcing them to wait for emergency medical response response personnel or transportation. This can be a life changing experience for these individuals which would then force to be placed in more restrictive care settings if they don't receive the medications right away.

AB 1172 ensures that individuals with developmental disabilities receive quick life saving support from the date programs and adults facilities from staff Members here to speak in support of the Bill are Dr. Iris Richard, a clinical with the Regional Center of Orange County and Lucy Ravello, an RN and clinical Director of the Regional Center of East Bay.

All right, thank you. Two minutes each, please. Whenever you're ready.

Good afternoon and thank you Mr. Chairman. Members for the opportunity to speak with you today may. My name is Dr. Iris Richard. I'm a physician consultant at the Regional Center of Orange County serving people with developmental disabilities for more than 13 years.

Current regulations mandate that only licensed healthcare providers can administer inhalable emergency anti seizure medications, A restriction that severely limits access to these restrictive environments. This restriction means that individuals prescribed with these medications cannot attend day programs and group homes without a licensed provider being present at all times the number for such facilities and providers are very limited.

Many children adults with epilepsy are prescribed inhalable rescue medications like Valtoca and Nasalam to manage breakthrough seizures. These medications act rapidly and are highly effective in terminating seizures, reducing the risk of significant complications and even death.

Numerous studies and clinical experiences have shown that these medications can be safely administered by non medical personnel in including family Members and laypeople. Despite this evidence, CCL regulations have not been updated to reflect current medical practices. This situation is particularly frustrating for families.

I have seen many young adults needing to stay home because they're unable to attend a day program. For some families, the only option is to place their loved ones in more intensive residential settings. With the passage of AB 1810, trained school employees are now allowed to provide critical emergency assistance to students with epilepsy.

This approach has been well received by the public. AB 1172 provides the same safe framework. There is no medical justification to limit the Administration of these rescue medications to licensed healthcare providers. We all want to try to improve people's lives and make a difference. Here's one great opportunity for all of us to do just that.

I urge you to pass AB 1172 to extend the same protections and opportunities you provided with the school. Thank you for your time and for your consideration.

All right, thank you very much. Next witness, please.

Thank you.

If you could speak into the microphone, please.

I'm soft spoken. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and Assembly Committee. My name is Lucy Ravello. Is this even on? I am a registered nurse and a clinical Director at Regional Center of the East Bay.

I've worked at the Regional Center for 25 years and supported individuals with developmental disabilities and their families to achieve lives of quality and satisfaction during those years. I'm here to speak about my strong support of AB 1172.

As Dr. Richards mentioned, currently, adults with seizure disorders who are prescribed medications to manage their seizures are only able to attend, program or live in a residential facility if a licensed nurse is on duty. Because community care licensing requires that rescue seizure medications, regardless of the route of Administration, be given by a licensed nurse.

Finding nurses to work with individuals in community care licensed settings is very challenging due to the limited reimbursement rates from the state as an alternative to providing rescue seizure medications, staff who are unable to give the medications call 911 for emergency medical treatment for persons in need of this treatment.

As we all know, response times can vary widely depending on the location of the program and their proximity to emergency responders. If seizures are prolonged and an individual is not able to access rescue medication to shorten the duration or lessen the severity of their seizure. Individuals can suffer from oxygen deprivation leading to brain damage or even death.

Recently, one of our clients who had completed high school was looking forward to attending a program but was not able to for over one year as the program he wanted to attend did not have licensed staff on duty as required by community care licensing to administer his emergency seizure medications.

Ultimately, his parent had to request that the seizure action plan be modified by his Doctor for day program staff to be able to call 911 when he had seizures despite the medication working for him at home when his parent gave it to him.

The Bill has the potential to make a meaningful difference allowing individuals with developmental disabilities to access their communities safely. This Bill aligns with AB 1810 which allows similar training of school staff to allow them to be able to provide emergency seizure medications to children school when needed.

AB 1172 specifies that staff will need to follow Title 22 Medication Administration guidelines to ensure that trained staff are providing medication following an individual's prescription. A nurse or a Doctor will be part of the team to support the individual, providing training plans, oversight for persons being trained to administer the medication.

We do need to do better for these individuals and their families. They deserve a right to participate in community life without fear of what could happen during a seizure. Thank you for your time and considering passing this final legislation.

All right. Thank you very much. Now, do we have members of the public which sets fine support of the Bill? Please come with the microphone.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Dawn Koepke on behalf of the Epilepsy foundation of Los Angeles in strong support.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair. Members of the Committee and distinguished staff. Rick Rollins representing the Autism Business Association and Applied Behavioral Analysis to the ABC Schools in strong support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. Darlene Dupree with the Association of Regional Center Agency, proud sponsor of the Bill, want to thank Assembly member Nguyen for her leadership, support. Thank you.

All right. Do we have any Members of the public wish to testify in opposition to the Bill in opposition to the Bill? Please come with a microphone. Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments from Committee Members.

Bill has been probably moved and seconded, but I'm going to ask invite the author to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you all know, I am a big advocate for individuals with developmental disability as it relates to AB 1172. Developmental disabilities. Need your vote too. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate your work. On this issue. And the Bill has been moved by Lisa Calderon, seconded by Assembly or Jackson. I am recommending aye as amended. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 1172.

[Roll Call]

3 to 0. That Bill is on call. Thank you. All right. And it seems our next author is someone O'Brien has just walked in in time. That's file item two, AB363. Whenever you are ready. Welcome.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and colleagues. I'm here to present AB 363, a Bill that will increase access to critical education support for poor and struggling students by strengthening their financial support and increasing access to off campus work study opportunities. There's an incredible program that already exists, the CalWORKS Recipient Education Program.

What's important about the program is that it provides a number of key services for students, including case management, support, childcare, small amounts of direct aid, and work study opportunities. The problem with the program is there's too much red tape. It makes it difficult for our most struggling students to utilize the program.

The reason it's being underutilized right now to some degree, although there are 17,000 students statewide who are using the program, is because a couple of conditions that we would like to change with this Bill. One, the current program requires a 25% employer match for work study.

This puts a burden on private industry that doesn't often allow students to attain these work study opportunities.

When we have at times excess funds, we should be allowed to subsidize 100% of a work study program and not require that match from private industry so that students can gain the valuable and necessary experience that they so badly need and deserve.

Secondly, we have two different funds that pay for this program, but only one of them can be used for direct financial aid. There's no reason why we can't provide direct aid with both. It's just inefficiency and limits our ability to help students in the ways that they desperately need it.

This program was designed to help students pick themselves up and to incentivize working while getting their education so that they can transition into our economy, an economy that's thriving and has a place for them. That's the purpose of education. That's the goal of economic opportunity and mobility.

We just need to loosen up some of the red tape and the guardrails that are currently in place that prevent this program from operating at its maximum efficiency or from providing the most amount of support for the students who need it.

With me to testify are Brianne Holland, Director of CalWORKS and EOPS at American River College, and Justin Selnick, Senior Legislative Analyst with the California Community College's Chancellor's Office.

All right, thank you very much. Two minutes each, please.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Members. Justin Selnick on behalf of the California Community College's Chancellor's Office, the sponsor of AB 363, I want to start by thanking the author for carrying this Bill and the Committee for their consideration.

Every year the CalWORKS Recipient Education Program, or REP, as it's known, directly and indirectly assists tens of thousands of our students and their dependents. The services provided are critical to help students reach economic self-sufficiency. But the rules and procedures of the program have not kept up with the needs of current students.

For example, AB 363 would extend REP services to students who have timed out of their CalWORKS cash aid. It is not uncommon for students starting with ESL courses to need more time to complete their certificate or degree. Under AB363, they would be allowed to stay in the REP and to continue receiving those support services.

AB 363 also expands the available funding that can be used for direct aid. This is another example of an outdated rule that does not account for the tremendous increase in non tuition costs that students have experienced. AB 363 would increase access to direct aid funds to be used for basic needs such as housing, food, clothing, and technology.

In closing, to borrow a phrase from Moreno Valley College CalWORKS student Andrea Larajara, AB 363 will strengthen CalWORKS REP as a bridge to economic security and will demonstrate California's commitment to economic mobility and educational equality. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Our next witness please.

Good afternoon Committee Members, Chairman Lee. I'm Brianne Holland, Director of the CalWORKS at American River College and longtime statewide CalWORKS Association Board Member. I have served, supported and worked with Community College CalWORKS parenting students for 17 years.

For the last 11 years, I have directed the CalWORKS program at American River College, including running one of the largest CalWORKS work study programs in the state. While I am here in overall support of AB 363 and to answer any technical questions related to the community college programs, I wanted to touch specifically on work study.

Over the years it has changed shape dramatically, particularly with amazing legislation like SB 1232, but it has always been an integral and incredibly important aspect of our programs. The majority of work study positions throughout the state are on campus jobs.

While these absolutely support advancement of many necessary skill sets including language building, clerical and technical office skills, interpersonal communication and more, there are beneficial opportunities beyond these. The additional income our parents get from participating in work study obviously helps support their family needs, but there are many other intangible benefits as well.

Eliminating the minimum 25% employer match will increase our ability to engage in off campus employment opportunities, which means more opportunities to find work in their chosen career path. Off campus employment provides a stronger foundation as well as long term networking and employment opportunities for our parenting students.

It also supports connection and success within the community and beyond just the student employed. I would have preferred to be here only as technical support and to have had you hear from work study participants past and present. I was unable to secure one for today.

Their experiences and where their work study positions have led them are insightful and inspiring. As an example, I have two former CalWORKS students currently working full time in my program. One primarily supports our work study program and the other is an academic and crisis counselor.

Both began their employment as work study students, moved on to complete bachelor's and master's degrees and returned out of a love of supporting this population and the work study program that we support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Exactly on two minute mark. Now, if there are members of the public which testify in support of the bill, please come to microphone. Name and organization please.

Yeah, Kevin Aslanian, Coalition California Welfare Rights Organization. Strong support. 363. Thank you.

Kasha Hunt with Nosman on behalf of two community colleges, Mount San Antonio College and North Orange County Community College District in support.

Sarah Bob IPSA on behalf of the Institute for College Access and Success in support.

Andrew Shane, GRACE End Child Poverty California in support.

Rebecca Gonzalez, Western Center on Law and Poverty and support.

Good afternoon. Carol Gonzalez on behalf of Long Beach City College in support. Thank you.

Nune Garipian on behalf of the Chief Executive Officers of California's Community Colleges in support. Thank you.

Kel O'hara with Equal Rights Advocates in support.

Thank you. Now, do we have any Members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the Bill? In opposition to the Bill? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions, comments? Dr. Jackson.

You had me at Moreno Valley College, so I move the Bill.

I'm going to invite the author to close then.

Thank you Mr. Chair and want to thank the Member from Reno Valley. I promise we didn't. We absolutely did that on purpose. We have an existing resource for students. It's not being tapped into to its fullest potential because we have too much red tape that makes it hard for our struggling students to access it.

We can remove that and increase opportunities, increase the ability for struggling parents to attain their education. Increase the amount of direct aid that we can put directly in students pockets. Increase the work study opportunities. There is no downside to this Bill and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much for bringing the Bill forward. And you're right, we have to bring down barriers to make sure people have access to aid. The Bill has been properly moved and seconded and I'm recommending an aye vote, so Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 363.

The motion is do pass to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Rodriguez,. 3 to 0. We'll leave that Bill on call. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Since we don't have any authors here at the moment, Madam Secretary, can we make the appropriate motions on the bills that did not yet have a motion on them? All right, first is file item 3, Assembly Bill 461. Can I get a motion and second for this?

Second.

That Bill has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 461 Arhens.

[Roll Call]

3 to 0. That bill's on call. We have another Bill. It's File item number 7 AB 753 by Garcia. Can I get a motion in second for that one. Improperly moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on Item 7 AB 753 Garcia.

[Roll Call]

3 to 0. That Bill is on call. All right, the last one that we heard is Sub-committee is file item 9 AB 890 by Lee. Can I get a motion? Can I get a motion a second?

All right, I move. I move. I move. I'm sorry.

Bill has been reluctantly moved and seconded by Committee Members. Madam Secretary, please call the roll AB 890.

[Roll Call]

3 to 0. That is on call. All right, we still have a couple bills left. We're waiting for authors. Waiting for item 20, AB 1211 by Sharpe Collins. And we're waiting for several items by Assembly Member Celeste Rodriguez.

All right, Assembly Member Sharpe Collins, whenever you're ready, you can present AB 1211 file item 20.

Okay. I need some water. Bam. Thank you, Andrew. Okay. Thank you all so much for your. For your patience. All right. Good afternoon, chair and Members. AB 1211 protects CalFresh benefits against cuts from the federal Administration and requires the California Department of Social Services to conduct a feasibility study on both increasing benefits and expanding program eligibility.

Hunger has risen to a shocking level. Well, to shocking levels of 1 in 5 California households and 27% of households with children recently reported food insecurity. More than 5 million Californians rely on CalFresh to put food on their tables. The program delivers more than 1 billion in food assistance to hungry Californians every month and 12 billion annually.

The USDA said SNAP benefits amounts through through the Thrifty Food Plan. The lowest cost of their food to benefits amounts of just $6.20 per person per day. These benefit levels fall short of covering basic meals costs in all 58 California counties.

Now proposals in Congress threaten to undo these vital resources and restrict future updates to only inflation adjustments, which I have to take a deep breath on that because this is just not a good time at all for us to do that now.

And I say that because in what world is it moral, ethical or even remotely humane to inflict cuts to programs utilizing most of our most vulnerable populations and families that are struggling to pay bills or to put food on on the table?

And that's why I had to take a deep breath and a pause because this is unbelievable. At this current time, these cuts will have a devastating consequence, potentially forcing grocery stores in underserved areas to close, creating deeper food deserts and worsening unemployment in the world's fifth largest economy. No one should go hungry.

Californians have made it clear they need more assistance, not less, to afford groceries. The least that we can do is maintain the current benefit level. Every dollar in CalFresh generates up to a dollar and 80 cents in GDP as benefits are spent in our grocery stores.

Each $1.0 billion in benefits creates nearly 15,000 jobs from farm workers to truckers to retail staff across our food economy. This is a win win solution that prevents hunger while supporting our vital food and farming economy. AB 1211 is a common sense legislation ensuring the that we follow the science of what families need for basic nutrition.

By proactively protecting CalFresh benefits levels, AB 1211 creates a more inclusive and effective food assistance system that supports the well being of all Californians and prevent any backward steps in fighting hunger caused by poverty. The road ahead will be tough, as I've already stated, and hard decisions will have to be made.

But we cannot let this Administration undo all of the work that we have done to support our California families. So with me today to testifying and support today is Andrew, Andrew Shane, the managing Director of Public Policy within Child Poverty California. And Kevin Ashlane. Almost got it.

The Executive Director of the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations. At this time, I'll turn it over to my.

All right, thank you. Two minutes each, please.

Thank you, Chair Members. And thank you, Dr. Shrap-Collins, for bringing this Bill forward. You've already covered it so well. I'll just put a little perspective on what the thrifty food plan update looked like. It was the only science based Update since the 1970s, and the updates prior to that were what they call revenue neutral.

Meaning we're going to update the dietary guidelines on what constitutes a healthy diet, but we're not going to increase the SNAP benefit. You got to simply do this gymnastics to say, okay, well what can you buy and meet those guidelines?

So prior to this you had to buy a bushel of potatoes, gallons of orange juice and a sack of oranges and milk and other staples. Obviously for a lot of people those are considered healthy. But what if you're lactose intolerant? How many stores do you have to go to to buy in bulk?

What's the time tax, let alone what is your religious needs, what are your cultural needs? Right. And so it didn't take any of that into account. And even after that, then we get to the $6.22 a day that was already spoken to. Right. And then to think about going back from that is just really unconscionable.

Chair, you're obviously well familiar with the need to strengthen the benefit adequacy of the, of these, you know, CalFresh benefits. What this Bill would do is make sure that we establish that floor and have the Department look at ways to expand benefit adequacy for everyone. Thank you.

Good afternoon again. My name is Kevin Aslanian, Coalition California Welfare Rights Organizations. I've been working with people getting CalFresh or food stamps for decades. And it's not rare for families to run out of food stamps on the third week of the month and the last week of the month they go hungry.

And this, these cuts would just assess, make it worse. And we, we thank you for the Bill and we hope it passes and becomes law. Thank you.

All right, thank you very much. Now, do we have Members of the public which testify and support a Bill, please come to the microphone.

Mr. Chair. Members Tiffany Whiten with SEIU California, proud sponsor and in strong support of the Bill. Thank you.

Greg Herner on behalf of 211 San Diego in strong support of the Bill.

Amanda Kirchner, County Welfare Directors Association in support.

Rebecca Gonzalez, Western center on Law and Poverty in support.

Kel O'hara with Equal Rights Advocates in support.

Hi. Benyamin Chao with the California Immigrant Policy center in support.

Thank you very much. Now, do we have any witnesses in opposition to the Bill? Any Members of the public wish testify in opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments on this Bill? All right. Seeing none, I'm going to invite the author to close.

Once again, I would like to thank the chair and the Committee and our Committee staff for all of your hard work on this really important Bill at this current time. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. I appreciate all your work and your tenacity to preserve our CalFresh benefits especially in the face of so many federal threats to undermine the very basic food security for our Californians. Can I get a motion and a second for this Bill?

The Bill has been properly moved and seconded. I am recommending an aye vote and Madam Secretary, if you call the roll on AB 1211. Thank you.

[Roll Call]

Four to zero. That Bill is out. Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right. For our final set of bills, we're going to have Assembly Member Celeste Rodriguez. There was no one else to skip a line ahead of you this time. You have two bills, AB 1049 and AB 969, whichever you want to begin with. First 969. All right. So AB 969. File item 11. All right. Whenever you're ready.

Yes, of course. Thank you, Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm very grateful for your work on this Bill, and I want to begin by accepting the Committee's Amendments for AB 969.

This measure removes barriers for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, harassment, and stalking, ensuring that they can have access and the support they need to rebuild their lives. One in 16 Californians, nearly 2 million people, experienced domestic violence in 2023. Statistics prove that violence and economic insecurity are intricately linked.

Over 90% of domestic violence survivors experience financial abuse, meaning that their access to economic resources is controlled, or threatened, by the person harming them. Domestic violence is associated with increased risk of unemployment and homelessness, even in survivors who were not previously low income. 74% of survivors report staying with an abuser for economic reasons.

The CalWORKS Program, designed to help low-income families in moments of crisis, is oftentimes the only safety net available. In seeking the safety net, survivors are expected to meet program requirements, while in hiding, comply with deadlines, while recovering, or navigate complex systems, while still under the control of an abusive partner.

We must change rigid, outdated mandates to account for the realities of of living in domestic violence situations. The reality is that federal law allows more flexibility to keep domestic violence survivors safe. Our state is not fully using that flexibility.

Instead, we have created a bottleneck where domestic violence waivers are only limited to welfare to work requirements and not other requirements that may put a survivor at risk. AB 969 changes that, by requiring counties to grant waivers for any CalWORKS requirements that would endanger a survivor or create unnecessary hardships.

This measure ensures the state develops standardized materials, so survivors clearly understand their rights and options for requesting a waiver and extends the waiver reassessment period from three to six months, giving survivors more time and stability as they recover. Survivors should not have to choose between public safety and economic stability.

Let's have a system that is responsive to their lived experiences and meet their needs. At its heart, AB 969 is about keeping families together. When survivors can access support without fear, they're more likely to remain safely housed, maintain custody, and provide stability for their children.

Speaking in support of AB 969 is Celine Lopez from the Women's Foundation California Solis Policy Institute, and Tiffany Lee, representing herself, to share her story.

All right, thank you very much. Two minutes, each witness, please.

Hi, my name is Tiffany Lee and I'm a CalWORKS recipient. I've been receiving CalWORKS since about 2007. Since then, I've had to figure out how to survive while raising my kids, dealing with homelessness, and living through 12 years of domestic violence.

I moved around a lot due to it, and I've experienced how different the system can be, depending on where, or whether, your case is truly seen. The treatment I received from one county to another has been different, despite my abuse being the same, or sometimes worse. What I didn't know is, how CalWORKS could have helped me.

I didn't know domestic violence waivers existed, or that the time clock of my benefits could be stopped when I was experiencing abuse, or that I could have received specific resources to help me and my children, during those awful years. I didn't know agencies existed that could have helped us get out.

I didn't learn about the pausing of the clock on my CalWORKS, the waivers, or the referrals to domestic violence resources, until just last year. I wish someone had told me sooner. If there had been just a poster on the wall or something that said, "Are you experiencing domestic violence? You're not alone. We can help."

That might have changed everything for me and my kids. When you're in that situation, you don't always have the words to say what's happening to you out loud. Sometimes you need someone to ask.

There were many times that my kids' father would do something to me, or I wouldn't be allowed to go to a certain place or leave. I would show up with bruises or, you know, crying. And I thought I had no other choice. I never thought I could tell my caseworker what was going on.

It just didn't occur to me. When you're in survival mode, you're not thinking, "Maybe I should tell my caseworker, I'm getting beat." You're thinking, how do I get out of this? What do I do? I believe the system can work for people like me, but we need to know how and understand what is available to us and how to navigate it.

We need to make sure that every survivor knows they can get help without being punished, needing to be so loud about it, or risking everything.

I believe this Bill is trying to make changes that could save lives and would have made the biggest difference in mine. Please support AB 969.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Assembly Members. My name is Celine Lopez and I am an Economic Security Fellow from the Solis Policy Institute, co-sponsor of AB 969. Across the state, survivors on CalWORKS overwhelmingly confirm that current policy acts more as a barrier than a support system.

Although our statute requires counties to waive a program requirement that would harm a survivor or their children, the outdated structure for assessing and granting those waivers makes it nearly impossible for survivors to access the accommodations they are entitled to. Almost 46,000 families on CalWORKS experience domestic violence, yet only around 100 receive DV waivers each month.

That's 2/100 of 1% of all CalWORKS families. This puts us far behind other states, and if we were granting at the national average, we would be granting 2,500 waivers each month.

Current practice also leaves survivors almost entirely unable to get a DV waiver for anything other than work requirements, such as mandatory child support cooperation, which can place a survivor who has experienced financial abuse in a more vulnerable position. AB 969 ensures that survivors are not further harmed by the very system meant to support them.

Instead, this Bill creates a more consistent and efficient process, by implementing easy fixes, like a simple standard waiver request form. AB 969 ensures that survivors can better access the support they need to rebuild stability for their families. No survivor should have to choose between safety and financial security, especially when it comes to their children.

I urge this Committee to support AB 969 and stand with survivors. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in support?

Kelli O'Hara, with the Solis Policy Institute, proud co-sponsor of AB 969, and with Equal Rights Advocates, in strong support. I'm also here to speak, in support, on behalf of Stronger California Members, Golden State Opportunity, and the National Council of Jewish Women. Thank you.

Maria Moreno, with the Solis Policy Institute, and I'm here to share a couple of "Me too's," as well, for Parent Voices, La Difensa, Justice to Jobs, and Valor US.

Tracy Michelle Porter, Solis Policy Institute Fellow. I am here in strong support and a former violence survivor. See, I can't even talk about it no more.

Tiffany Whiten, with SEIU California, in support. Thank you.

Andrew Shane, Grace Henchel, End Poverty, in support. Thank you.

Rebecca Gonzales, Western Center on Law and Poverty, in support.

Mike Harrell, retired Policy Director of the Western Center on Law and Poverty and the proud Mentor of the Solis Policy Institute Team. In support.

Kevin Aslanian, Coalition California Welfare Rights Organization. In full transparency, that was rehearsed.

Do we have any—anyone—in opposition to this Bill? Okay, seeing none. I'll bring it back to the Committee for questions. Mr. Jackson?

First, I want to thank the witness for telling your story. I know it seems a little uncomfortable up here, but you're in the right place. This is your place, and your story is very powerful.

And just like many who have sat in that seat before you to get some great things done, this is how you turn pain into power. So, thank you for being here and thank you for supporting this Bill. I move the Bill.

Assembleywoman Rodriguez, before you close, will you be accepting the Committee Amendments?

Okay, you may close.

Yes.

AB 969 will expand access to CalWORKS domestic violence waivers, ensuring survivors safely access an existing benefit, at a crucial time for them and their children. This Bill is sponsored by the Women's Foundation California - Solis Policy Institute, California Partnership End Domestic Violence, Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, and Western Center on Law and Poverty.

You heard from them today. You heard from the amazing Solis Policy Institute who's preparing our advocates of tomorrow. And I just want to thank you again, because this is why we do the work we do, so we can make a real impact on people's lives and support their families. So, I respectfully ask for your "Aye" vote.

Thank you so much for bringing this Bill forward, and I want to thank your witness, Tiffany, again, for truly bringing your pain and turning into power. And I'm recommending an "Aye," as amended. And the Bill has been properly moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on AB 969.

[Roll Call]

All right. File Item 14, AB 1049. Whenever you're ready.

All right, thank you. Chair and Members of the Committee, I am next proud to present AB 1049, a measure that would remove a complicated rule called the Sponsor deeming from the eligibility determination process in the California Food Assistance Program, commonly referred to as CFAP.

CFAP is the state funded counterpart of CalFresh and provides benefits to thousands of Californians who are unable to access essential food benefits solely due to their immigration status. When determining eligibility for benefits through cfap, Sponsor Deeming adds the income and resources of an immigrant sponsor.

Because of this process, low income immigrant households fear that their household or sponsor will experience negative consequences. As a result, this fear can cause families to miss out on essential food benefits. Sponsor Deeming stigmatizes eligible immigrant families use of public benefits.

A research report produced by the Urban Institute found that in 2022, 1 in 6 adults and immigrant families with children avoided public programs because of green card concerns. Our families in need should not have to fear accessing resources. AB 1049 removes barriers for struggling families to gain access to the food they deserve and need to thrive.

Speaking in support of AB 1049 is Alexandra Gay, attorney at the Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles, and Melissa Arvizu, Director of Nutrition and Food Security Programs at National Health Foundation.

All right, two minutes each, please. Thank you.

Hello, Chair and Members. Sorry, my name is Melissa Arvizu representing National Health Foundation and the Food for All Coalition serving the communities of Los Angeles County. Today I'm here to speak on behalf of Elena, a resident of El Monte who could not participate here today due to fear of appearing in person.

Elena has been in the US for many years and received her green card in 2019 with her sister Acting as her sponsor. Tragically, in that same year, Elena lost her sister unexpectedly.

Despite this hardship, Elena has continued to work hard, and at 61 years old, she applied for CalFresh benefits in May 2024 to help secure access to food as her income had not been enough to make ends meet.

Elena lives with her niece, her only family Member, here in the United States, as she left her children and relatives behind in El Salvador after applying for CalFresh, Elena waited for months to receive a response and was eventually informed that she did not qualify and told to provide her sponsor's income and documentation.

Even though her sister had passed away five years ago, Elena was still required to provide her late sister's documentation in order to access those benefits she so desperately needed. Elena sought help and met with her caseworker, who denied her request to provide proof of her sponsor's death.

Elena made multiple attempts to show that she could not provide her sponsor's income, but each time was met with more obstacles. Eventually, Elena became discouraged and gave. Up to this day, one year after applying for assistance, she has not received the support she desperately needs.

Each month, she continues to face food insecurity, running out of money, and going hungry. Elena asked me to share her story today with the hope that no one continue to face the same unnecessary barriers that Sponsor Deeming has placed in the way of accessing vital benefits. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Next one is please.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Alexandra Gay and I'm an attorney with Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, a legal aid organization that serves low income residents of la. My focus is improving access to safety net programs for eligible immigrants.

And through that work, I regularly see cases in which permanent residents are denied access to CFAP because they're unable to comply with the Sponsor Deeming rules.

For some, the requirement to provide information about their sponsor's whereabouts prevents them from completing an application, though they may be eligible because they've lost contact with their sponsor or or they may fear that providing this information will get their sponsor in trouble with the government.

For others, even if they're exempt from providing their sponsor's information because they're indigent, or they're a survivor of violence, or they have sufficient work history, they are prevented from enrolling in CFAP because county eligibility workers often do not apply the exemptions properly, streamlining the application rules for CFAP by eliminating sponsor deeming during the first three years of admission would benefit people like our client, Mr.

Lynch. Mr. L is a 70 year old monolingual Mandarin speaker. He has no income and he has very serious health issues, including diabetes.

He received his green card last year and was sponsored by an acquaintance who's no longer in the US and by his son who's now unhoused and experiencing a financial and mental health crisis of his own.

When Mr. L applied for CFAP earlier this year, he was denied because he could not provide sufficient information about his sponsors and the county worker did not assess him for the indigence exception. He has been left without any money to buy food.

If the provisions of AB1049 had been in place, Mr. L would have been permitted to complete the CFAP application and would likely already be receiving vital food assistance. It is our understanding that a separate CFAP application would not be needed if AB 1049 were implemented.

Rather, instructions on the current application could be updated and county workers trained about how to assess CFAP eligibility without requesting information about sponsors, which is so onerous. Thank you so much for the opportunity to comment.

Thank you very much. Exactly on two minutes. Now, if other Members of the public would testify in support of the Bill. Please comment to microphone in support of the Bill.

Kevin Aslanian New Coalition California Welfare Rights Organization strong support for AB 1049.

Hi. Jackie Mendelson, policy advocate at Nourish California. Proud co sponsor of AB 1049. Thank you so much. In strong support.

Ethan Lares-Salinas on behalf of ACLU California Action and support. Thank you.

Oscar Sandoval with the Children's Partnership in strong support of the Bill.

Hi. Benyamin Chao with the California Immigrant Policy Center. Proud co sponsor in support. Also sharing support on behalf of ACLU California Action.

Good afternoon. Chair and Members Alejandro Solis for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. Chila and support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Andrew Cheyne, GRACE & End Child Poverty, in support.

Rebecca Gonzalez, Western center on Law and Poverty and support.

All right, thank you. Now, are there any witnesses in opposition to the Bill? Opposition? Any Members of public wish to speak in opposition to the Bill saying none. I'm going to bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments from Committee Members? All right, I'm going to invite the author to close.

Thank you. I am so grateful to be on this Committee with all of you. I know we all know no one should go hungry and our immigrant community shouldn't live in fear. AB 1049 is an opportunity to reduce food insecurity in California and bring equity to our food safety net.

And I just want to thank you, chair and Members for hearing this Bill today. And I request your aye vote.

All right, thank you. So much for bringing this Bill forward. It is a common sense Bill to reduce barriers and modernize this program to make sure that every Californian does not go hungry, especially programs that are available to them. And I would love to be added as a co author too, if you'll have me.

Happy to have you.