Assembly Standing Committee on Education

Good afternoon. I am calling this hearing of the Assembly Education Committee to order. Thank you all for being here. We do not have a quorum. So at this time, we will begin as a subcommittee, and we will establish quorum once one is present.

At this time, I would like to welcome committee members for being here and the public to today's hearing. We have 16 items on file today. Five of our bills are on consent, and they are a b 1590 a b 1694 a b 1763 a b 1766 and a b 19 o four. One of our bills, AB 1822 will be heard at the end of the hearing, and presentation will be waived through agreement with the author. Waiver of presentation is an option for our committee rules.

We will hear any support and opposition testimony and any public comment prior to taking a vote on that measure. As a reminder, for each bill, we will have up to two witnesses in support and opposition, each of whom may speak for up to two minutes. Members of the public in the hearing room will have an opportunity to state their position. Please state your name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Members of the public are also welcome to provide comment through the position letter portal on the committee's website.

Before we begin today, I do have a statement to read regarding conduct conduct at hearings. We seek to protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process so that we can have effective deliberation and decisions on the critical issues facing California. As we proceed with the witnesses and public comment, I want to make sure that everyone understands that the assembly has rules to ensure we maintain order and run an effective, efficient, and fair hearing. We apply these rules consistently to all people who participate in our proceedings regardless of the viewpoint that they express. In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within our limits of our time, we will not permit conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of legislative proceedings.

We will not accept disruptive behavior or behavior that incites or threatens violence. The rules for today's hearing include no talking or loud noises from the audience. Public comment may be provided only at the designated time and place as permitted by the chair. Public comment must relate to the subject being discussed today. No engaging in conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing.

Please be aware that violations of these rules may subject you to removal or other enforcement actions. Finally, as this is my first committee hearing as chair and we have had a midyear transition, I'd like to take a moment to express my gratitude for this opportunity and to briefly share my thoughts on this role. I'm looking forward to working with the members of this committee. We're gonna work together to shape policy for the millions of students who attend our public schools. My focus will always be on the students and their progress in school.

The committee is an important part of a governance system for California public education. And my view is that our job is to be thoughtful stewards of our public education system, carefully and responsibly guiding it to give our students the education that they deserve. With that in mind, I'm grateful for this opportunity and delighted to dig into this year's work. Thank you all for that little bit of indulgence. We will now begin with our first author in sign in order, and that is Assemblymember Ramos who has file item number one, and that's bill what is it?

Fifteen 81. And immediately after that, assembly member Ramos will present file item number 21586. You may proceed when you're ready, Assemblymember Ramos.

Of the Saboba tribal government who is a sponsor.

Good afternoon. Joy Williams.

I'm a California Indian from the Kern Valley Indian Community at the Village of Atachapi, one of the 190 autonomous tribes before contact in what is now called California. I represent a coalition of California state tribes, a coalition organizing for state and federal sovereignty and self determination and liberation. I've been an organizer for over twenty years fighting to end mass incarceration and for educational access for people of color, especially indigenous and native students. I was once a native student in the Bakersfield City School District, and back then when I had more hair under this hat,

was in the fourth grade and a teacher had asked for all the white students to get on one side of the class and for all the Mexican kids to get on the other side of the class. Not sure why she did that. But I remember sitting in the middle of the class because I knew that I was Indian. And it was clear to me that day, my homeboys had told me, hey. Come over here with us.

I

You know, the Mexicans, you're one of us. Technically, we're all from the same continent. But it was clear to me that day if I wanted to survive, I had to be something else. We're all indigenous from this continent. I say all of them to say this, there's an abyss a severe undercount of native students in the school system, especially in Southern California where I come from in the Los Angeles area.

As LAUSD reported only 242 native tribal students, LA County has the most Native Americans anywhere here in The US, 10,000,000 people in the county, 1,400,000 in California, and only 242 in LAUSD. I was clear from our work in the indigenous education now coalition, which I helped lead in LA, that there was a severe undercount. Undercount means erasure and misrepresentation because if you're counted as Mexican and indigenous or native, they only count you as Mexican. Or if you count as white and indigenous or native or tribal, they only count you as one. And erasure means lack of funds and resources for American Indian Alaska Native students.

AB 1581 by Assembly Member James Ramos seeks to remedy this and will require students to report the tribal data of students in California to the California Department of Education. By leveraging these revisions, the CDE can implement policies to standardize and enhance the collection of tribal data, ensuring that native students are accurately represented and receive the resources they need. CCST is one of the two native organizations in the building California dream alliance headed up by SCU California, part of 60 plus organizations that have put AB 1581 as a priority legislation for 2026. I urge this committee.

Can you wrap it up, please?

For strong support of AB 51 to right the wrongs and make good on promises made by the current governor and governor Brown for real truth and reconciliation. Thank you.

Thank you, madam chair and members. Good to see all of you. Chad Mayes, proudly representing the Suboba Band, Luzwena Indians, sponsor of AB 1581. I wanna thank, the author for his leadership in bringing bringing this forward. This bill is about something very simple, making sure Native American students in California are actually seen.

Right now, they are not. As the committee analysis points out, nearly nine out of 10 native students in California are not identified as native in our data systems. And when students are invisible in the data, they are underserved in the system. That means fewer resources, less targeted support, and fewer opportunities for culturally responsive programs that reflect who these students are. AB 1581 addresses this in a thoughtful and practical way.

It creates a more accurate and standardized approach to collecting tribal affiliation data through CALPADS so the state school districts and tribal communities have a clear picture of the students they are serving. For Seboba, this is about making sure their children are recognized for who they are and not lost in the system. Because when students are properly identified, they are far more likely to receive the support and opportunities they deserve. We respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. At this time, we'll take public comments and support. When you come to the mic, please state your name, affiliation, and position on the bill only.

Thank you. See if there's any question. Okay.

Hello. Cesar Gonzales Garcia with the California Rural Indian Health Board. We're in support of this bill.

Excuse me. Madam Chair and Members, Adam Capone on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association in support.

Catherine Squire on behalf of the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls in support.

Pam Lopez on behalf of the Tule River Tribe in the Santa Rosa Rancheri Atachi Yokuts Tribe in support.

Charles Ro Myers, Indigenous Justice.

Morning Star Galley, a member of the Pitt River Tribe. And on behalf of Indigenous Justice and the International Indian Treaty Council, we are in support of this bill.

Albert Tippman Junior. I am Banduwak Indians. I'm a original Wepulele people. Wrecked the citizens from this land right here, and I did this justice. I I strongly support this bill.

Alright. Seeing no other support, public comment at this time, any opposition witnesses? Seeing none. Any public comment in opposition? Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please. Alright. Seeing none, we will move on to member committee questions. But before we begin that

yeah. Is it okay if I go first?

Yes. Are there any questions from committee members at this time?

I want

to thank Assemblymember Ramos for bringing forward this legislation and for once again identifying ways that we can do better for the state of California, particularly for our first people and our Alaska natives and American Indian folks. We needed to have this piece of legislation in place many, many years ago. And and I'm thankful to be able to right a wrong with you in support of this, but always just wanna appreciate, your attention to making sure that we are not, taking actions and not erasing, our first people. So thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. I'm delighted to support this measure today. It's critical that our Native American students are accurately represented in our public school system. And under the current system, the current federal form, the vast majority of our students are not counted. I would encourage the members to look at page three of the analysis in particular.

It shows that nine out of 10 Native American students in California are not counted. We just heard that from our testimony today. But to put a fine point on it, that's over a 150,000 students who do not count for accountability purposes on our school dashboard and in our system of support for federal requirements for tribal consultation and many other purposes. That is why this measure is so important, and I thank you, assembly member Ramos, for bringing this forward. And I would like to be added as a joint author to your bill.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. We do have a quorum, and we would oh, we would like to establish a quorum. Can you call the roll? Patel. Hi. Here. Here. Hoover. Here.

Hoover here. Alvarez Bonta?

Here.

Bonta here. Castillo? Here. Castillo here. Garcia?

Present.

Garcia present. Lowenthal.

Say

it. We need a motion.

Do we have a motion? A second?

Seconded.

There's a motion and a second. Secretary, can you call the roll?

File item one, a b 1581. The motion is do passed as amended to appropriations. Patel. Aye. Patel, I, Hoover.

Aye.

I.

The bill has five votes. It is out, and we'll keep the roll open from out on votes.

Thank you, madam chair. I just wanna clarify. Assemblymember Bonta, you wanted to be added as a co

author? Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you. And now we can proceed to the second bill. Assembly member Ramos, file item number two, AB1586. And please proceed when you're ready.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Today I'm presenting AB 1586, and I would like to start off by accepting the committee amendments. AB 1586 would ensure that school resource officers have both the training and the tools needed to respond in the case of an overdose on school grounds.

Right now, state resource officers are not required to receive standardized training for opioid overdose. This bill would create a uniform process so that any campus with a state resource officer electing to serve as a volunteer can safely administer the different Naloxone.

Additionally, it would require SROs to undergo an opioid overdose response training every two years through the Peace Officer Standards and Training. Through this process, we hope this bill will encourage more SROs to carry Naloxone on the person when on campus.

Students deserve to feel safe at school and to know that someone is prepared to respond in a medical emergency during an overdose. AB 1586 is a practical and common sense measure that will help protect students and support our schools, especially in the areas of overdose.

With me here today to testify on this bill is a student from Vanden High School, Jadyn Voorwinden. She is a twelfth grader and president of her school's drug prevention group. Also to testify is Trent Murphy, an analyst at the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Thank you for having me. My name is Jadyn Voorwinden, and I'm a student at Vanden High School in Solano County. I'm currently serving as the President of my school's Friday Night Live Club and administrative head of our End Overdose Chapter. Friday Night Live is all about youth leadership and making sure our schools are safe, supportive places where students can grow and succeed.

Part of that work means being honest about the challenges young people are facing right now. And one of the biggest is the rise in opioid use and overdoses among youth. The reality is overdoses don't just happen to adults. They can happen in our schools, at our event, at school events, and in our communities.

And when they do, every second matters. That's why I'm here to support AB 1586. This bill helps make sure that school resource officers who are already on campus to protect students are trained and prepared to respond to an overdose using naloxone.

As students, we don't expect SROs to be doctors. But we do expect that if something life threatening happens, the adults around us are equipped to respond. Naloxone is safe, easy to use, and it saves lives. Giving trained SROs the ability to carry and administer it just adds another layer of protection for students.

From a student's perspective, this is about feeling safer on campus. It's about knowing that if something does go wrong, somebody nearby can help. And equally as important, it's about making sure that a mistake or a bad moment doesn't turn into a tragedy for our community. We talk a lot in Friday Night Live and End Overdose about prevention, and that work is really important.

But prevention also means being ready to act when students need help. AB 1586 is a practical, common sense step that can save young lives and support safer school environments. I respectfully ask for your aye vote, and I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Trent Murphy with the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives, or CAADPE for short. CAADPE represents substance use disorder providers across the state of California, serving thousands of Californians each year through a continuum of prevention, treatment, and recovery services.

We are proudly sponsoring AB 1586. From a provider perspective, we see the reality of overdose crises every day. We work with thousands of individuals and families every year, guiding them on their path to recovery from addiction. We know that in many cases, survival of an overdose comes down to whether someone was there in that critical moment and able to respond.

We have countless examples of overdoses being reversed because someone nearby had naloxone and knew how to use it. And just as often, we hear the opposite, situations where help came too late. That is the gap this bill is trying to address.

AB 1586 ensures that when an overdose happens on campus, someone nearby is prepared, trained, and ready to act. From our perspective, this is common sense step that aligns policy with what we already know saves lives. We respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll now take public comment in support. Please step up to the mic and state your name, affiliation, and position on the bill only.

Thank you. Leilani Aguinaldo on behalf of the Schools Excess Liability Fund in support.

Malik Bynum on behalf of the County Behavioral Health Directors Association, proud Vanden High School alumni as well, and proud to support this bill. Thank you.

My name is Joshua Amias, Indigenous Justice. My daughter had to drag a girl that was overdosed from the bathroom all the way to the office. And I fully support this bill.

Name and affiliation and position. Thank you.

Albert Titman, board member of San Juan Unified School District and Indigenous Justice. I support this bill.

Morning Star Gali. I'm in support of AB 1586 on behalf of Indigenous Justice and International Indian Treaty Council. Thank you.

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

Cesar Gonzalez-Garcia with the California Rural Indian Health Board. We support this bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. Tristan Brown of CFT, Union of Educators and Classified Professionals. Happy to support. Thank you.

There are no other witnesses in support. We'll now take public comment in opposition or opposition witnesses. Any opposition witnesses? Alright. We will now move on to public comment in opposition. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please.

Hi. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. Kat Brackmann on behalf of the California School Employees Association. We've not formally adopted an opposed position, but we just have concerns for this bill.

We appreciate the committee amendments to address most of our concerns, but we would like language to protect our school resource officers who fail to volunteer from retaliation. Thank you.

Just to clarify for the witness from CSEA, the bill does state that employees are protected from retaliation. Member, would you like to close? Oh, questions. Sorry. We'll have any questions from Members? Any questions?

I would like to thank Assembly Member Ramos for working with our committee staff on the amendments and for your acceptance of those amendments. Thank you so much for working with us.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And I believe the amendments start to address the concerns that were raised by those that haven't formally opposed the bill. But I believe it shows the workability of our office and our sponsors to be able to address those issues by accepting those amendments. With that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Members, is there a motion? With a motion and a second. Secretary, can you please call the roll?

File item two, AB 1586. The motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]

The bill has five votes. It is out, but we'll hold the roll open for add on votes. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We will now hear on file item number 16, Assembly Member Gipson, bill 1943. And if you have any witnesses, they can step up as well.

I'm sorry?

If you have any witnesses, they can step up as well. Great. Feel free to proceed when you're ready.

Good afternoon, madam chair and members. Realize this is your first committee hearing. You're doing a magnificent job. Just wanna go on the record and say that. Wanna start off by thanking the committee and the committee chair for working on this bill with my team, and I accept the committee amendments.

Thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 1943 which seeks to update and expand the way security, secure firearms storage information is shared by schools to maximize information, to shared by schools to maximize parents and guardians' attention and- and- and engagement. Guns are the number one killer, unfortunately, of children in the United States. In 2022, California became the first state in this- in the nation to require school districts and charter schools to distribute a notice regarding California children's access prevention law and law regulate- regulating to secure storage of fire- firearms. This notice requires to provide annuals- annually, parents and caregivers at the beginning of the first semester and quarter of a regular school year. Since 2022, several states have followed California's lead by adopting school based secure fire storage notice- notice- notification policies.

The underlying secure storage law have changed since the original law has passed in 2022, and its important implementation in sites are now clear more than ever. Secure firearm storage is essential for protecting lives and strengthening the safety of our community, but most of all, our children. Studies estimate that if half of our households with children's that contains at least one unlocked gun switch to locking all the guns, one third of our youth firearms that have suicides unattended are preventable, which means that if we have measures in place, young people that commit suicide, it would decrease. This would save an estimate of 200 and 51 lives in one single year if we just put measures in place at the home. I just want that to sink in for a moment because that's our reality.

AB 1943 makes secure fire home storage notifications easy to understand. So easy that a fourth grader can understand. Easy to find and and also to making sure that families can understand this information. This bill updates the contents of secure fire storage notifications and how the information is easily shared. If required, that the material focus on information and resources regarding secure storage written in a in a plain language, easy for parents and guardians to understand.

It encouraged school districts and charter schools to post notifications on their websites and encourage them to share on all digital platforms. All digital platforms. This bill also encourage schools to distribute the information to parents and the caregivers when disciplinary actions or in school supports is given to the students due to threats against other students, threats of self harm, and in advance of school shooting drills. Finally, AB 1943 requires the Department of Education to include secure fire storage notification on their website serving as an example for all schools in the state. It is imperative that we use every tool at our disposal to prevent children and teens from accessing firearms.

Schools can be the key factor in the solution of spreading life saving information about secure fire storage. With me, I have some incredible individuals. Individuals representing, the policy advocate from Every Town of Gun Safety who will self introduce, along with Moms Demand Actions who will also self introduce.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Krystal Lopilato, and I serve as policy advocacy director at Every Town for Gun Safety. Together with Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense and Students Demand Action, we're the nation's largest gun violence prevention organization, and we're proud sponsors of AB 1943. Very grateful to Assemblymember Gipson for bringing this bill forward. As assembly member Gipson just noted, in 2022, California became the first state in the country to pass a statewide requirement that schools send out information about secure firearm storage.

The current law requires a notice to go out once per year at the start of the school year. In practice, we have often seen this notice buried in the dozens of forms that parents are filling out for annual enrollment. Those annual notices are, of course, better than nothing. But with an issue as important as making sure kids and teens can't access guns in the home, we know California can do better. We've identified several key ways this law can be even more effective, and that's

what you see before you in AB 1943. The bill will make sure that, secure firearm storage information is easier to understand, easier to find, and more likely to go to families at times when the information can be most impactful. As the assemblymember mentioned, it will require that the notification's content focuses more on information about the risks of unsecured firearms, resources, actionable information, or secure firearm storage. Descriptions of state law will be written in plain language that parents and caregivers can understand. It will encourage school districts to share secure storage information on digital platforms, including social media accounts, modernizing our law passed just in 2022, but we see so much more digital information now.

And it will encourage schools to provide secure firearm storage information in key moments, like when a school counselor is meeting with parents because a student has indicated suicidal intent or when a student has been involved in an incident of bullying or threats of violence or when schools are giving now required advanced notification of active shooter drills, a time when--

You're at time. Can you please wrap it up?

Absolutely. Maybe particularly attuned to the risks of guns in the home getting to school. Thank you for your time, and we ask your aye vote.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Committee Members. My name is Heather Jennings, and I'm a parent and Moms Demand Action volunteer. In 2022, I had the opportunity to present information to the Petaluma City School Board about AB 452 the law that requires school districts to notify parents and guardians about California's child access prevention laws and the importance of securely storing firearms. Through that presentation and subsequent discussions, PCS took an important step toward improving student safety by adopting a secure storage resolution and proactively incorporating secure storage information into the Aeries data confirmation process that parents complete at the beginning of each school year. This was a commendable first step.

However, the secure storage notification is currently included among many other required annual notices. As a result, it gets lost in a long list of documents that many parents sign without fully reading. Parents and caregivers play a crucial role in preventing firearm incidents involving children and teens. Roughly three quarters of school shooters obtain their firearms from their home or from the home of a relative or caregiver fueled by unsecured weapons. Additionally, thirty percent of child gun deaths are suicides, and the vast majority of those tragedies take place in or around the home and involve guns belonging to a family member.

For this reason, the way we communicate about secure storage matters. Instead of focusing on the legal consequences for failing to safely store firearms, messaging that clearly explains why secure storage prevents injuries and deaths will be far more effective. AB 4- AB 1943 would help make secure--

You are at time. Can you wrap it up?

at information visible through dedicated messaging to families and easily accessible school sites.

At this time, we'll take public comment in support. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Rebecca Marcus representing the Brady Campaign and Brady California in support. Thank you.

Madam chair, Tony Triero on behalf of California Teachers Association. We have a recommended support. We go to state council at the end of this month. We hope to transition a letter as soon as we get back. Thank you.

Cassandra Whetstone, a volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention in support.

Kimberly Manfredi, a volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention in support.

Good afternoon. Jillian King, a volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention in support.

Julie Chapman, a volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention in support.

Amy Seropian, volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention in support.

Mary Duplaw with volunteer with NorCal Gun Violence Prevention and a gun violence survivor in support.

Thank you. Diana Honick, volunteer with Moms Demand Action in strong support.

Sarah Berger, volunteer with Moms Demand Action and public school parent in support.

Linda Gayle, volunteer with Moms Demand Action in support.

Thank you. Hello. My name is Diego Castro Curry. I'm a volunteer of Students Demand Action in support of this bill.

Good afternoon. Natalia Resendiz, volunteer with Students Demand Action in support.

My name is Gabriela Geffner. I'm a volunteer with Students Demand Action, and I'm in support of this bill.

Amy McCray, a volunteer with Students Demand Action, in support.

Linda Peacock, a volunteer with Mom's Demand Action, in support.

Christina Kendari, educator and volunteer with Mom's Demand Action, in support.

Jarrah Jiral, volunteer with Mom's Demand Action, in support.

Thank you. Chiamako Aguevo with Alameda County Office of Education, and we're in strong support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Mitch Steiger with CFT, a Union of Educators and Classified Professionals, also in support.

Thank you. We'll now have opposition witnesses to testify. Seeing no opposition witnesses, we'll take public comment in opposition, name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Thank you.

David Bullock as of the alliance in opposition.

Alright. We'll turn it to committee member questions. Do we have any questions from the committee members on the bill?

I don't have a question. I just wanna say thank you to the assemblymember for such a thoughtful proposal. I do think as some of the points made in the witness testimony that keeping our schools safe requires all hands on deck. Right? It requires teachers, administrators, parents, and students, and appreciate your thoughtfulness with this proposal. Look forward to support it today. Thanks.

Thank you.

I just wanna align my comments to assembly member Hoover. Thank you so much Assemblymember Gipson for bringing for this bill and quite frankly for your years of championing and leadership, all issues related to gun safety and- and protecting our children, especially in the work that you have done on behalf of this- this legislature. Very thankful for your work.

Thank you.

And I would like to express deep gratitude for you working with our committee staff with the amendments, and I'm excited to support your bill today.

Thank you.

So with that, you may close.

Thank you. Wanna say thank you very much. Thank you to all those who lined up to express support to Every Town, Moms Demand Action, to NorCal, to Brady Campaign, and to the other organizations who expressed support for Assembly Bill 1943. California leads in this space. I'm very grateful to be a resident and also a a member of this legislative body and leading in this space.

I just want very briefly to talk about a story. Many of you know that I was a member of the Carson City Council, and somewhere, it- it- it- I vaguely remember, but the story I'm not lost on the story. Most council members, when something tragic happens to our- in our community, we get notified by the sheriff department. And this summer months, we were notified as council members of a tragic that happened in our community. And so I received a phone call from the sheriff department letting us know there had been a tragic shooting that took place directly across the street from a park that I was going to attend that summer afternoon.

Two cousins living next door to each other. The oldest cousin was nine years of age. The younger cousin was eight years of age. Playing next door, the nine year old- the eight year old- nine year old found the, cousin's father's gun. You can see where the story is going.

The nine year old was playing with the gun, accidentally shot the eight year old cousin in the face with the gun. Tragic for the entire community. Just tragic. Everyone was torn up as a result of that tragic accident that took place. And the- this- the- the numbers that I cited, the 251 lives that we can save every year, we can do this if we have safe storage, if we could put it disseminate information.

Assembly Bill 1943 can be a catalyst for that in our school system, but also providing information to our parents who is the first line of defense. And if we can start at home, we can win this battle. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Do you have a motion? Thank you. The motion and a second. Secretary, can you please call the roll?

Thank you.

File item 16, AB 1943. The motion is do passed as amended to appropriations. [roll call].

The bill has five votes. It is out, and we will hold the roll open for add on votes. Thank you. We will now go to file item 11. That's, Assemblymember Rodriguez with Assembly Bill 1792. If you have any witnesses, they can come forward as well. Thank you. And please proceed when you're ready.

Thank you madam chair and members of the committee. As a mother of four children and now a proud grandmother to three young boys, I've seen firsthand how rapidly the world of our children grow up in is changing. Technology and now artificial intelligence is no longer just a tool. It is a constant presence in our children's daily lives. While it brings opportunity, it also introduces risk that many parents are still trying to understand and navigate.

For example, recently, the use of sexually exploitive AI images hit the news when Elon Musk social media platform x, formerly Twitter, was flooding the platform with sexualized photos of individuals and minors. According to the center of countering digital hate, 3,000,000 sexualized images were created on the platform, and of those approximately 23,000 appear to depict children. As a parent and grandparent, I believe we have a responsibility not only to protect our children, but to prepare them. We cannot shield them away. We cannot shield them from every danger, but we can equip them with the knowledge, awareness, and confidence to recognize harm and seek help.

This is exactly what a b 1792 aims to do. It ensures our education system keeps pace with the realities students are facing outside the classroom. A b 1792 takes a thoughtful and measured approach. It does not impose new mandates on schools. Instead, it works through California's existing process by asking the instructional quality commission during its next curriculum revision cycle to consider updating the health education framework to reflect modern digital threats, such as deep fakes, sextortion, online grooming, and AI generate AI generated exploitation.

By doing so, this bill ensures that instruction remains age appropriate, expert driven, and responsive to the evolving challenges facing students today. It gives educators the tools they need and students the knowledge they deserve to safely navigate and increase the digital world. And today, we have Jose Torres as a witness from TechNet.

Thank you, Assemblymember. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Jose Torres with TechNet, and I am here in strong support of a b 1792. Today's students are growing up in a world where technology is a part of their daily lives, and such technologies have created just unprecedented opportunities for how young people learn, communicate, and build relationships. For students, in particular, digital tools and platforms can offer meaningful benefits in their education, making connections and accessing information.

As these technologies continue to evolve, it is important that our education system evolves alongside them. The bill this bill reflects that reality by ensuring that California's health education framework remains current and responsive to how students interact in both physical and digital environments. A b 1792 takes a thoughtful education first approach by directing the Instructional Quality Commission to consider incorporating age appropriate guidance on digital safety and dating violence into future curriculum updates. Such curriculum updates would help students with the knowledge and skills to navigate online spaces responsibly, understand digital consent, and recognize when to seek help or support. Such lessons would help students so that they are able to engage appropriately with technology safely, confidently, and responsibly.

Such approach is flexible and forward looking and would allow experts and educators to develop guidance that can adapt over time as the technology changes. The bill is about modernization. California has been a leader in both technology and in education policy. The bill ensures that our education system keeps pace with innovation by preparing students for not just the opportunities of the digital world, but for the challenges as well. As such, TechNet is proud to support the bill, and we respectfully urge an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair and Members. Fernandez Fratto's legislative aide for the assemblywoman. Just here to answer any technical questions. Thank you.

Thank you. We will now take public comment in support. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please.

Thank you, madam chair. Members, Tristan Brown of CFT. Happy to support.

Catherine Squire on behalf of the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls in support.

Saludges Suresh, Alameda County Office of Education in support.

We will now have opposition witnesses step up to testify. We will now have opposition witnesses step up to testify.

You have two minutes.

Thank you, madam chair and committee. I I thank the author for bringing forth this legislation. We my name is David Bullock. I'm with the SFV Alliance. We do feel that the gist of this of this framework is very important, and violence in the dating world should be addressed, and students should have the ability to defend themselves.

What we do have issue with is specifically b three, which is inclusive responses to the experience of LGBTQIA plus gender diverse people. That is specializing one person. It's actually making this class of people extraordinary. It's making them as what I'm seeing in this legislation is being privileged. They should be treated like everybody else's. They're teenagers going into adulthood. They're and every child could benefit from this, excluding that one class of person, I feel is harmful to all students. With that, we oppose this legislation unless amended.

Thank you for that. We'll now take committee sorry. Public comment in opposition, name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please. Seeing none, that brings us to committee member questions. Committee members, do you have any questions?

Just comment. I wanted to thank the author for bringing forward this measure. This is certainly something I think that all of us can relate to, particularly for our young people. We need to make sure that they are protected in this way. And I wanna appreciate that part of your legislation also ensures that young people have the resources to be able to seek help when they need to. I think that's the the scariest thing that we can have our children in our schools, not, have the resources that they need to know how to get help when they are confronted with these, very, very, terrible situations that make them incredibly vulnerable.

And I wanted to ask the author if I might be able to join as a coauthor if that's appropriate.

Thank you. Absolutely.

Any other member comments? Questions? Right. You may close.

Thank you. And I just respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Do we have a motion? I will. Second? There's a motion and a second. Secretary, would you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

The bill has four votes, and we will keep it on call.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. We will now move on to file item five. That's Assemblymember Lackey. We have a b 1653 and we'll also follow that with your second bill. Please feel free to begin when you're ready.

Well, thank you, chair members, for allowing me to present this bill. But before I do that, let me congratulate you for being appointed chair of this very powerful and important committee. I'd like to formally acknowledge the committee's amendments. I'm happy to accept all of them. This bill seeks to address education surrounding heat illness, and that is becoming a real and preventable danger for our students, especially out where I live in the desert.

Students deserve safe learning environments, whether in the classroom, or on the playground, or on an athletic field. This bill takes a simple, common sense step. It asks that when the state updates the health framework for California public schools, they should be required to include the guidance on recognizing and responding to the signs of heat illness. That means helping students understand the warning signs like dizziness, nausea, muscle cramps, and knowing to stop activity to seek seek shade, hydrate, cool down, and alert a responsible adult when you're feeling these symptoms. This bill creates no mandates.

It simply promotes awareness and prevention. Because sometimes the most powerful way to protect our students is by giving them the knowledge to protect themselves. And I'd now like to introduce Natalie. She's a Sacramento local girl scout for championing this legislation. I should add, she is the reason we have this legislation.

Please proceed.

Thank you. Hello, members of the committee and chair. My name is Natalie Rubio, and I'm a 12 year old girl scout from Sacramento. I developed the idea of AB 1653 as my girl scout silver award project. In 2022, when I went to nine years old, Sacramento had a record breaking 116 degree heat wave, and the air conditioner in my school's cafeteria broke, so we had to eat lunch outside for multiple days.

Later, I gave a class presentation on the heat wave, and about a third of my class told me that they felt sick while eating outside, but they didn't realize that they were showing signs of heat illness. Every year, kids across California are hospitalized from heat illness. Some have even died. Most of the time, kids are just told to drink water and stay in shade, but we aren't taught what the heat illness actually feels like. And kids are even more susceptible to heat illness than adults because we can't regulate our core temperature as well.

Kids often feel the symptoms before adults can see them. That means that kids need to know the signs in their own bodies and not just rely on adults to notice. By the time that a child physically looks sick, it might already be too late to prevent an emergency. AB 1653 would add guidance to the health framework to help schools teach students across California the signs and symptoms of heat illness and how to respond in a memorable way that they'll use. If kids know that feeling dizzy, nauseous, or having a really bad headache means that they need to stop playing and get help, they'll be able to protect themselves from worsening symptoms.

Kids can't protect themselves from what they don't know. Heat illness is preventable. And with this simple education, we can save lives. I respectfully ask the committee to vote in favor of AB 1653. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony today. We'll now take public comment in support. Please step up to the mic. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Thank you.

Thank you. Mitch Steiger with CFT, Union of Educators Classified Professionals in support.

Madam chair, members, Nick Romley here on behalf the California School Nurses Organization. Happy to support.

David Bullock of the SFV as in Valley Alliance and strong support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Angelina Cournoyer on behalf of the Los Angeles County Office of Education in support.

Seeing no further public comment and support, opposition witnesses, please step up. I do not see any here today. Public comment and opposition. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please? Seeing none, we'll move on to committee member questions. Mister Lowenthal.

I think this is a wonderful bill. Assemblymember, do you mind if I ask question of your witness? PWould it be possible for you to come and testify on all of my bills?

Depends on what they are and when the testifying is.

Thank you, madam chair.

You were part of an inside joke. Sorry. Any other questions or comments for our author witness? Alright. Would you like to close?

I'll let Natalie's remarks be my close. Thank you. Ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. May I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. So motion and a second. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Six. The bill has six votes. It is out. We'll he'll he keep the roll open for add ons. Thank you. Congratulations. Yes.

Thank you very much.

We're now on item four file item 14. Assembly member Lackey will be presenting a b 1861. Please proceed when you're ready.

Alright. Thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me to present AB 1861. I'd like to take this moment to thank the committee for their work on this bill as well, and I also formally accept those amendments as suggested. And AB 1861 is a transparency and accountability measure for special education in California.

Under current law, when families believe those rights have been violated, they can file a formal complaint with the California Department of Education, or otherwise known as CDE. The department is then required to investigate and issue a written decision within sixty days.

While these decisions are technically public, they're only available through a Public Records Act request, otherwise known as a PRA request, and they're not maintained in a centralized searchable database. In practice, this means the information exists, but it's extremely difficult for families to access or analyze.

This bill, AB 1861, addresses this gap by requiring the California Department of Education to create and maintain a publicly accessible online database of special education complaints, while ensuring that all the personal student information will be redacted to maintain personal privacy. With me today to testify is Vivian Wong with the Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law and Policy and Waunette Cullors with the Cancel the Contract organization. You may proceed.

Good afternoon, Chair Patel and Assembly Education Committee Members. My name is Vivian Wong, professor and Director of the Youth Justice Education Clinic at Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law and Policy and a proud co-sponsor of AB 1861.

I teach education law and policy, and I've been advocating for low income students with disabilities for over ten years. I'm honored to be here as a disabled woman of color because many legal protections that students with disabilities enjoy were hard fought in rooms like this.

With the dismantling of the federal office of civil rights, however, many families are left without legal recourse to address disability discrimination, so they turn to the California Department of Education. Now more than ever, our community needs to trust our state to enforce the education rights of students with disabilities.

AB 1861 advances transparency by creating a public database of investigation reports issued by CDE related to procedural special education violations. AB 1861 will allow families to opt in to have their investigation report fully redacted of all identifiable information added to the database so that other families can have more information about how their district serves students with disabilities.

Special education was specifically designed for parent involvement, such that parents are entitled to meaningful participation and education decisions under the IDEA. To ensure meaningful participation, parents need to have information. This database will help parents weigh the utility of filing a state complaint and help promote dialogue with their district to resolve issues early on. These options are less costly than pursuing due process litigation.

In fact, California is already required to publish due process decisions issued by the Office of Administrative Hearings. So the state complaint decision database will close the existing gap and give both families and policymakers a better picture of our education system. Ultimately, AB 1861 can help us identify systemic reforms to improve education access for students with disabilities.

You are at the time.

I respectfully request your aye vote on AB 1861.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Waunette Cullors. I'm a resident of the Antelope Valley community for over thirty years, founder of Cancel the Contract and WOW Flower Project, organizations and coalitions that focus on health, wellness, agriculture, and education for children with special needs.

I'm speaking as a mom and grandmom of three and a PTA president, Girl Scout, advocate, activist, and USDA farmer and master gardener, teacher, and was an elected school board of trustee. I've seen firsthand how difficult it is to access this information and how necessary it is for real accountability.

I'm here in strong support and a co-sponsor of AB 1861. Right now, there is no centralized system to access or search for special education complaints, hearing decisions, or investigation reports. That leaves parents, advocates, and policymakers without reliable data and without a clear understanding of what happens across our schools.

And in the reality, it's parents who are already doing this work. Between 2023 and 2025, about 73% of complaints were filed directly by parents and legal guardians without attorneys and advocates. These are the families navigating compliance complicated systems on their own, often with the least resources.

At Cancel the Contract, we work directly with families, helping them guide them through these processes. What we see over and over again is parents are not lacking the effort, they're lacking the asset. The bill changes, this bill changes that. It gives families the tools to better advocate for their children.

AB 1861 also strikes the right balance in promoting transparency and consistency while still remaining privacy reports. It'll be redacted and families have the option to opt out. At the end of the day, this is about accountability, access, and equality. It isn't about parents versus schools. Whether we are elected officials or people of the community, we are here...

You are at time. Please wrap up.

Oh, I'm sorry. Well, we urge you to support AB 1861. Thank you.

We will now take public comments in support. Please step up to the mic. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please.

Hello again. David Bolog with the SFV Alliance in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Members. Conrad Crump with Disability Rights California in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Starre Williams, clinical law student with the Youth Justice Education Clinic, also a parent of a student or daughter with disabilities, in support.

Raquel Derfler, special education advocate, in support.

Thank you. Seeing no other witnesses, we will have opposition witness come up to testify.

You have two minutes.

Hi. My name is Ryan Delpstand from Irvine, California. I'm in support of this bill. Thank you.

Are there still more in support?

Hello. My name is Amber Shee. I'm also from Irvine Unified School District. I'm a student with disabilities, and I also support.

Thank you. Okay. Witness in opposition, you have two minutes.

Good afternoon. My name is Olivia Rangel, and I currently serve as the Executive Director of Special Education Innovation at Alameda County Office of Education, or ACOE.

I have worked in special education for the past 23 years in a variety of rules, always guided by the goal of putting students with disabilities first and their families. I decided to work for the County of Office of Education because the agency's mission of accompanying the most vulnerable students and those who serve them with the tools to thrive matches my—also the work I've done throughout my career. My current role was created to address common special education related challenges identified by the 18 school districts in Alameda County. The number one concern raised amongst all district leaders is the ongoing staffing shortage and the ability to serve their students. In response, ACOA is working to strengthen the special education workforce through support of paraeducators to become teachers and through initiatives to reduce financial barriers for candidates pursuing credentials.

While we agree the system's transparency and accountability are vital components that families should have the right to file complaints when concerns arrive, we believe AB 1861, as written, may have unintended negative consequences. A public website with all complaints issued against districts can include unfounded allegations and/or heavily redacted content and can lead to the misunderstanding and misuse of the information. It could lead to unwarranted liability by districts and increased legal costs to respond to those claims. It could instigate unfounded complaints that take staff time to address, time that would be better spent supporting students. We also have equity concerns with regard to this bill.

Districts are differently able to respond to special education vacancies just depending on their fiscal resources. A database like this one would result in disproportionate representation of the districts with the fewest resources available to them to respond. Policies to increase accountability must consider the practical realities facing districts and should be solution-based to address those realities. Although we have appreciated the conversation with the bill author's staff and the bill sponsors, we remain opposed to the approach the bill proposes. For these reasons, we ask you to vote no on this bill today.

Thank you.

I think you will now take public comment in opposition. Please step up to the mic. Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Seeing none. We will move on to committee member questions. Are there any questions from the committee?

I just wanna clarify with the author, and I wanna thank Assemblymember Lackey for bringing this forward. But to kind of address some of the questions from the opposition, I don't see that this is a database that is readily available and viewable. Can you give us a sense of what the intent of the bill is?

I think the the intent was was very clear, and I'll have Ms. Wong try to put your your thoughts at ease there.

Sure. This would be a public database available to the public, but it would not include complaints, per the committee's amendments that we agreed—we've agreed to. It would just include the investigation reports issued by the Department of Education.

So, that would make some of the opposition that was just registered not really an accurate depiction of what is going to happen in terms of implementation.

Do I respond?

I can't speak for the opposition. So.

We did work and some changes have been made. We still believe that having a list of investigative could be what I call the Facebook response of, like, limited information and then automatic feelings that come about that may lead to, like, misrepresentation of what actually occurred and additional complaints that take time that still will not address the staffing shortages that occur. Does that make sense?

Oh, I wanna thank you, Assemblymember Lackey, for bringing forward this bill. Having served on a school board, I know how, basically, at the end of one's rope, parents, is when they file a claim around kind of a special education related violation. And, and I do believe that it's important for school districts to be held accountable for the level of, of, of violations or, or complaints that they have to be responsive to and, and believe that that is a part of what is needed in the public record to be able to support that. And I think with the committee's amendments that make sure to shield obviously personally identifiable information and, and anything that would cause there to be that concern, this is a very appropriate bill, and I'm thankful to be able to support it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other member questions? Thank you, Mr. Lackey, for presenting this bill. I want to note that issues related to privacy of student information will be considered more thoroughly when the bill is heard in the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection. And I do wanna thank the author for working with our committee staff to, on those amendments that you have now accepted. Appreciate you wanting to protect students while making sure that those students who are having issues or the families that are having issues addressing their needs in school get those issues addressed.

Thank you. And with that, you may close.

I just wanna remind the committee and the opposition that we are being double referred, go into privacy. So, we'll clearly be addressing that issue more thoroughly. And we believe that the special ed families deserve the support, and we hope we can get your aye support.

Thank you.

May I have a motion? The motion and the second. Secretary, will you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Your bill has six votes. It is out. We will hold the roll open for add on votes. Next, we will hear file item four, Assemblymember Muratsuchi, AB 1631. And you may proceed when ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and congratulations on your first hearing. I have two bills.

If you wanna wait a second till the noise dies down. Sorry. We wanna be sure to hear you.

Yeah. Okay. If I may, I'd like to first present AB 1721.

You may first present AB 18, 1721. Thank you.

Thank you.

For the record, that's file item eight.

Thank you, Members of the Committee. This is the second time that I'm presenting this bill. The last time last year, this was on consent, which may be the reason why this may not sound familiar. But, basically, this is a bill to ensure that school safety plans remain effective, accessible, and practical.

We're talking about school safety plans that are dealing, they're basically emergency response plans, natural disaster response plans, as well as dealing with criminal incidents. And, you know, while current law already requires comprehensive school safety plans to be updated annually and developed in collaboration with school staff, parents, and local first responders.

As we often do in the legislature, we have introduced many bills since 2013. 14 bills have have amended the school safety plan requirements, which with each bill adds a new requirement, making many of these school safety plans that are supposed to be, you know, useful, practical documents to provide guidance to our students and staff in emergency circumstances to become too lengthy and unwieldy.

So AB 1721 is trying to address this challenge, make these school safety plans more workable by directing the Department of Education to convene a stakeholder work group to identify what are the core elements that should be in every school safety plan.

That, again, you know, it goes to the core of, you know, emergency preparedness, while at the same time not becoming too cumbersome that they do not become useful. With me to testify in support of this measure is representatives from the School Administrators as well as a representative from the California Federation of Teachers.

Well, good afternoon, Chair Members. My name is Kordell Hampton with the Association of California School Administrators, here to support AB 1721. The conference of school safety plan is intended to ensure every school has a clear, locally developed plan to keep students and staff safe.

It is designed to be preventative, responsive, and adaptable, reflecting legislature's intent for schools to plan ahead to be prepared for both everyday risk and worst case scenarios. State law establishes a minimum requiring schools to plan for a range of scenarios.

At local level, these natural disasters include earthquakes, wildfires, emergency response procedures such as evacuations and shelter in place and serious incidents including active shooter situations. At local level, these plans are developed through a collaborative process that brings together school leaders, staff, parents, classified employees, local law enforcement, and other first responders in a process reflected in this bill.

And as these plans are developed, they allow local districts to balance strong safety protocols with also maintaining positive school climate, which may include mental health supports and restorative practices. Over time, however, the requirements of the comprehensive school safety plan have expanded significantly in recent years.

While well intended, this is, this has resulted in longer, more complex, and harder to use safety plans that could be used in real life situations, calling the effectiveness of school safety plans into question by school, by school communities.

ACSA supports AB 1721 because it creates a space to thoughtfully review and improve the comprehensive school safety plan, establishes a work group to review existing plans, evaluate both the required elements and development of them. This work group will also submit its findings to the legislature. For those reasons, we urge your support on AB 1721.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. Tristan Brown of the CFT. May I also extend my congratulations on your gavel? And in today's topic of safety, and the news in the cycle, viva Dolores Huerta, we do also agree with our friends in the administration groups that the school safety plan can become a bit unwieldy at times.

And actually, in full disclosure, CFT is sponsoring a bill this year to add more to that list. Specifically, about how doors may be unintentionally left open and that those are actually significant deterrents to school shootings. It is little details like that that we think this bill is right to try and see where can the state have a 30,000 foot view of best practices to make things a little bit more streamlined and intelligible.

But also give space to have a local element to it where rural versus urban communities can also have their say. So we do think that in the era of addressing plandemics and other topics that are apropos to this committee, we also agree that this is the right step to try to take a second look and maybe come together and rebuild what these plans can be and make a better version. So with that, we ask for your aye vote today.

Thank you. At this time, can we take public comment in support? Name, affiliation, and position on the bill only, please.

Good afternoon. Thank you very much. I actually didn't expect to speak at all today until I ran into the Assemblyman. My name is Tom Steele. I'm from Campus Safety Group, which is a nonprofit. And I actually am the author, the writer of the current CSSP guide that every school in the state is supposed to follow, that's written in conjunction with CDE. This bill is beyond needed. Oh, I'm sorry. Tom Steele.

Thank you. Affiliation and position only.

Very much in support. Thank you very much. I apologize. Thank you for your time.

Sid Polston on behalf of the California Association of School Counselors in support.

Nick Romley on behalf of the California School Nurses Organization. Don't have a formal position yet, but pleased with the bill and looking forward to supporting soon.

On behalf of the Alameda County Office of Education, we support.

Thank you. Do we have any opposition witnesses today? Do we have any public comment in opposition? Name, affiliation, and position only, please, at the mic. Seeing none. That leads us to Member questions. Yes, Mr. Zbur.

Thank you for bringing this bill. I think it's an important one and plan on supporting it today. I did note that there was a comment letter from the California Public Defenders Association suggesting that the stakeholder work group be expanded to include representatives from communities disproportionately impacted by school policing, LGBTQ students, some other disability rights folks. I was wondering if you've considered that.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Zbur, for your question, which I probably should have addressed in my opening comments. But, you know, I think, and Ms. Lieberman with the committee knows better than I do of the specific differences between school plans versus, like, school climate or or student support type services.

Number one, we do require our proposed for the stakeholder work group to have a representation, 2 representatives of employees that have the pupil personnel services credential or a services credential with the specialization in health. That would include school counselors, school psychologists, school social workers.

And and so, you know, we do allow for that or we do call for that representation on the work group. But secondly, you know, this is, you know, the essence of these school safety plans is to prepare for emergencies. And, you know, whether we're talking about natural disasters or whether we're talking about, you know, active shooters or whether we're talking about any other criminal incidents.

And so, you know, I had a a great conversation with Mr. Steele that had participating in the writing of previous school safety plans. But the goal of this is to have, you know, a concise, practical working plan that, you know, focuses on the emergency preparedness.

And while recognizing that, you know, school climate issues, restorative justice issues, you know, can be extremely important in terms of the prevention of, say, school shooting situations or so forth. We think that is appropriate for a different plan or different work plans. I don't know if ACSA might have anything.

Yeah. I would say that the school safety plan is way into more built around the plan for emergencies like natural disasters or if that's school shooter situations. I would also add that already in statute districts already have the ability to work with or incorporate kind of restorative practices as part of their school safety plans as well.

That's helpful. Thank you.

Any other committee questions at this time? Please proceed.

Not a question. But I just would like to offer that, in addition to the plan, I think on a school site really important is practice implementing the plan, specifically kind of the emergency operations, incident command system. Because you got the best laid plan. But, if it hasn't been reviewed or practiced, you know, it's not gonna be as effective. So I would I would like to offer that.

Yes. Thank you. I also had that great conversation with Mr. Steele before the hearing where we know that sometimes the most important aspect of preparing for emergencies is to actually have the drill. And right now, it's my understanding that we only require drills for earthquakes and fires.

But not for many of these other potential circumstances that the school safety plans are designed for. And I know that you come from experience as a former school site administrator, you know, so you know as well as anyone the importance of requiring drills.

I know that we need to try to balance that with not placing, like, extraordinary costs or disruption to school operations. But I would like to continue to work with this committee to see if we should put requirements or to try to call out the importance of having drills as part of, you know, as a critical element of any essential school safety plan. Yeah. Thank you.

Alright. With that, you may close.

Alright. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have a motion? There's a motion and a second. Would you, Secretary, will you please... She had a second. Would you please call the roll, Secretary? Thank you.

Okay. File item eight, AB 1721. The motion is do pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call]

Thank you. Appreciate it.

And now we will move to file item four, Muratsuchi. Assembly Member Muratsuchi will be presenting AB 1631. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And I was just checking. I, I, I think the amendments will be adding you as a joint author. Yes. So, thank you, Madam Chair, for working together on this important initiative that may be familiar again to, to many of you on this committee because this is, again, my second time to try to make kindergarten mandatory.

First of all, let me thank your excellent committee staff for all their many years of work on this and, and accept the committee amendments. This bill, is attempting to make kindergarten mandatory. And, oftentimes, when I bring up the idea for this bill, the, the first response I get is, you know, isn't it already mandatory? And, and in fact, you know, for over 95% of California kids who are eligible for kindergarten, they already are attending kindergarten. But it's, you know, who, so who is not attending kindergarten?

Who is part of that 3% to 5% estimated according to the committee analysis that is, is not already attending kindergarten? They, they, those students tend to be the students where we see the achievement gaps and the opportunity gaps, mostly Latino students, many low-income students. And so, we know, you know, California has been a leader in early childhood education. You know, we've we've achieved universal access to transitional kindergarten, but let's not forget kindergarten. You know, we're, we're, we're focusing on the four-year-olds while we're missing the three to five percent of kids that are eligible to, for kindergarten, but who are not attending.

And, and, you know, we know we invest in early childhood education, early learning, because we know that the data is so clear that investing in early learning pays the biggest dividends in in terms of, of student outcomes, in terms of chronic absenteeism. On so many different metrics, we, we know that we can really move the needle in closing the opportunity and achievement gap by making kindergarten mandatory. I'm very happy to welcome our State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurmond, who is a cosponsor of this measure, along with Mr. Brown representing another cosponsor of the bill, the California Federation of Teachers. Perfect.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. I'm honored to be here today in support of AB 1631. I'm proud to be a sponsor and cosponsor and wanna thank Assemblymember Muratsuchi for his leadership. I think he's already told you all the reasons why this is important. We've gone part of the way in this state.

We have transitional kindergarten. Let's go the rest of the way and make sure that we create an opportunity for every single student to show up at first grade prepared. Right now, without a required kindergarten, there are many students who don't have that preparation, and they miss out on building the foundational skills and literacy, numeracy, and social emotional development that might shape their academic success for years to come. This is not an attempt to step on anyone's personal rights. We just think that it is a profound opportunity to make sure our students show up ready to learn.

You know, having kindergarten also allows us to face many of the challenges that we experience around chronic absenteeism to help our students become familiar with school and to develop a sense of belonging in the classroom with peers. And so, for all these reasons, we would encourage you to vote yes and just think about our journey to help students get to reading by third grade. The earlier they start, the better they will do. And if nothing else, if you remember nothing else, remember that sticker or that magnet that's on everyone's, or at least at one point was on your refrigerator door, that said everything I needed to learn, I learned in kindergarten.

People learn how to share, they learn not to hit others, and they learn to play fair. I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1631.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Tristan Brown of CFT. Again, now co—proud cosponsor—of this effort and have been a supporter of this effort for many years as we continue to try to push this boulder up the hill. The data is clear, and our practitioners in the classroom definitely can see a market difference between the students who did have the benefit of being prepared by going through kindergarten and those who did not have that luxury. What I think is also interesting now is the state has invested heavily in the extended learning opportunities program, which I think also addresses a concern where those working families who might not been able to have fit kindergarten as their schedule can utilize the ELOP program for after school care and summer programs and continue to support their efforts to have their children be provided the best start they can.

We know it provides a great leg up for folks to have this and have a great baseline when they make it to the rest of their academic career. So, we're happy to support and cosponsor this bill. We ask again for your aye vote.

Thank you. At this time, we'll take witness—sorry, public comment in support. Name, affiliation, and position only, please.

Thank you. Leilani Aguinaldo, on behalf of Fresno Unified School District, in support.

Michelle Underwood, on behalf of the Torrance Unified School District, in support.

Tony Tucaro, on behalf of the California Teachers Association, a cosponsor. Thank you.

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

Good afternoon. Jennifer Baker representing the California Retired Teachers Association and the California Association for Bilingual Education, in support.

Cassie Mancini, on behalf of the California School Employees Association, in support.

Sarah Cook with San Diego Unified School District, in support.

Seeing no further public comment in support, we will take opposition witnesses to testify. And you have two minutes.

Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Education Committee. My name is Mag Madden—Meg Madden. I am the mother of three, and I'm here today representing Moms for Liberty. We respectfully oppose AB 1631. We believe deeply in fundamental role of parents in raising, guiding, and making decisions for our children.

This bill continues a troubling trend of shifting authority away from parents and toward government systems that do not know or care for our children the way we do. AB 1631 makes attending kindergarten a requirement of going to public school. This means parents will either have to put their children into school an entire year earlier than previously required or delay their child's progress through school by having them go to kindergarten the year they are turning six rather than first grade as is currently permitted. The claim is the children do vastly better in life if they attend kindergarten. If that is the case, why must this be made mandatory?

Why can't parents be informed of the purported benefits of kindergarten and permitted to make their own decisions? Wouldn't the targeted information campaign with that message cost less than across the board effectively lowering the age at which school is mandatory by a year? The California legislature should not coerce parents into doing something the legislature has not managed to convince parents to do. If many California children are not attending kindergarten or not going to school before age six, we must ask why is that? And how could the state address this without forcing parents to do something that they currently do not want to do?

Parents are not obstacles to our children's well-being. We are their primary protectors, advocates, and teachers. Legislation that sidelines parents erodes trust between families and schools, and that is harmful for children. Moms for Liberty stands for limited government, parental rights, and accountability. We ask why is the California legislature continuing to pass laws that keep parents at arms length? For these reasons, we urge you to vote no on AB 1631. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair, assembly member, superintendent. My name is David Bullock representing SFV Alliance, "V" as in veto, which is, relevant to this bill and its history. And also, I'm, the chair, Legislative Chair, for LA County Moms for Liberty. I have to ask, why does the author keep on bringing this perennial bill back over and over again? He stated his reasons, but I would counter what his reasons to that there are variabilities in when children are ready to go into the education system.

And parents know that best. There's a lot of different reasons also that parents may not want to bring their children into the education system. They may feel that they're not emotionally ready to go there yet. So, with that being said, we do oppose this bill.

We do feel that I know the superintendent said that, he doesn't wanna step on anybody's rights, but that's exactly what this bill will do. It will step on those parents' rights to do make that decision when is best for the child to actually start school at that young age. So with that, I ask you to vote no. Thank you.

Thank you. At this time, we'll take public comment in opposition. Step up to the mic and state your name, affiliation, and position on the bill only. Seeing none, I will turn it to committee members for questions. Committee members, any questions from you? Mr. Lowenthal.

I just have a a logistical question. What what happens, Assemblymember, in the event of a student transferring in from out of state or out of the country, you know, who may not have that kindergarten education per se scenario?

That is a good question. I- I don't know. Do you know the answer? Okay.

You know, every district's a little different, but generally, districts don't limit a student's ability to join the school community when they move somewhere. I would just- I would just position that against what we hear time and time again from first grade teachers. They can tell the students who have had no experience in school and in kindergarten. And as they are trying to help students just get ready to meet that important third grade reading benchmark, they see those students who come to first grade who haven't been to kindergarten, flat out, they just struggle. And given what class sizes are, teachers are struggling to balance all the needs of all these students.

And so, with all due respect, nothing about this is about taking away anyone's rights. This is about helping students. They don't even have to do any academic work. Just having exposure to being in school makes a difference for our students.

Thank you, mister superintendent. And if I may just follow-up. So in that scenario, if a student were to move out of state into California and this bill were in effect, and it and the school determined that that student did not have the requisite educational foundation to go forward, would the requirement be regardless of their age that they would have to complete kindergarten?

Mister Lowenthal, you raised a good point. I do not have your answer. I- I will have your answer. But I- I think the intent of the bill is to- my intent of the bill is to allow for- not require people that move from a state that did not require kindergartens to still receive their high school diploma if if they come to California after kindergarten. And and so if it's not already reflected in the bill, we will make sure.

And so I very much appreciate your- your point. I- I also wanted to add to- to our superintendent the the concern raised by the opposition about- about, you know, the the the mandatory aspect of this. I- I- I would say the reason why we continue to do this is is because we have mandatory education from first grade through twelfth grade. And- And- And so, you know, the- the- the data is so overwhelming that, you know, we are- we are disadvantaging that last three to 5% of kids that are not attending kindergarten. And so why not we already have mandatory education from first through twelfth.

I- I don't know if the opposition has any objections to that. But this is, you know, simply trying to extend that to kindergarten. And second, we're- we're not requiring that they attend public schools. They can attend private schools. They can attend Catholic or, you know, religiously affiliated kindergarten programs, or they can homeschool and- and fulfill the- the requirement of of kindergarten.

But, again, you know, the- the- the evidence is just so strong that- that every year of of early learning pays back so many dividends, not only for the child, but for society overall. That- That is why we are continuing to push this bill.

Thank you. Assemblymember Muratsuchi, just to clarify, I believe that individual LEAs have some discretion for their transfer students and that they can make that decision, that determination between assessments and parents and various flexible options for them. Does that- Does that resonate with what you your understanding is?

It sounds like you're speaking from your experience as a school board member, and I just wanna verify that before I say yes.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other comments from committee members? Alright. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Excellent. Thank you. At this time, can we have a motion?

Move the bill.

Thank you. A second? The motion and a second, secretary, would you please call the roll?

File item four, AB 1631. The motion is do pass as amended to appropriations. [roll call].

Bill has four votes. It is on call. Thank you. We are now on file item 12. Assemblymember Fong presenting AB 1809. And you may proceed when ready. Thank you. If you have any witnesses, they can step up at this time.

Good afternoon, madam chair and members. First, I would like to accept the committee's amendment. Assembly bill 18 o nine removes the sunset, providing authorization for school districts and community college districts to use job order contracting and makes the clarification in the term of individual contracts. Job order contracting is one of several alternative methods for awarding construction related contracts. While most construction contracts are for construction or for major modernization of schools, job order contracts relate to repairs or maintenance work.

Contracts are awarded for specific jobs such as window repairs before any work is needed. When a school needs window repair work, the district can sign an individual contract for that work immediately since the bidding has already been completed. Job order contracting is an efficient way to screen and secure contractors who are ready to be deployed when repairs are needed. Job order contracting started as a pilot for the Los Angeles Unified School District in 2003 and hence has been since expanded to all school districts in California community colleges. The legislature has extended the sunset four times, which is a strong indication support.

AB 18 o nine removes the sunset and clarifies that the term of individual contracts is five years. Hitter to testify to support is Sasha Horowitz with the Los Angeles Unified School District and Pat Wallen with the Gordian Group.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Patel, Vice Chair Hoover, members. Sasha Horowitz on behalf of the Los Angeles Unified School District. As assembly member Fong shared, AB 18 o nine is a simple bill addressing a project delivery method for school construction and procurement. We'll remove the sunset on the job order contracting or jock statutes used by both school districts and community colleges along with some other technical cleanups.

JOC is an optional cost effective procedure for bidding public works projects known for accelerating completion and reducing costs and contracting complexity while following all competitive bidding laws. The original JOC law was enacted in 2004 as an LAUSD pilot. It was renewed in 22,006 and 2012 and was open to all school districts starting in 2016. The community college statute was first enacted in 2018, and both versions sunset on 01/01/2027. The drug law preserves a more efficient and cost effective process for addressing maintenance and construction needs by allowing the school district or community college to effectively bundle individual maintenance and construction contracts into a single master contract.

The service terms are negotiated in advance, ensuring the contractors are available and ready to start work as soon as services are needed. This bill maintains the requirement to have a project labor agreement and keeps the same dollar limit on contracts. Finally, these contracts are paid locally and do not have any state costs. For that, we respectfully ask your item. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. Thank you, and thank you to the author for carrying this bill. Pat Whalen, Ellison Wilson Advocacy here on behalf of Gordian, the inventor of job order contracting who's invented about four decades ago. It's currently in use all across the country at the federal state and local level where we work with the Smithsonian. We work with the city of Chicago and New York City.

And here in California, we we do work for probably 15 or 16 CSU campuses, the UC system, and relevant to this bill, school districts k 12 and the community colleges, and urge your support. And here to answer any technical questions about CHOC.

Thank you for that testimony. At this time, we'll take public comment in support. Step up to the mic. State your name, your affiliation, and your position on the bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Committee Chair and Committee Members. Michelle Gill on behalf of California Association of School Business Officials in support. Thank you.

Alright. Seeing no further public comment in support, we'll go to opposition witnesses. Are there any at this time? Please step forward. You have two minutes.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to appear before you our in our first hearing here. Congratulations. I'm Richard Markison and I'm representing the Western Electrical Contractors Association. We're here in opposition to AB eight to an L nine.

WECA is not opposed to job order contracting. We agree it's intended to simplify procurement, reduce administrative burden, and deliver projects more quickly and cost effectively. But existing law and this bill that would extend it indefinitely actually does somewhat the opposite. It requires a school district as was stated earlier to adopt a project labor agreement. This is a collective bargaining agreement that binds all of the contractors who are being employed including their workers to a union collective bargaining agreement.

Typically, it limits the contractors ability to use their own core workforce and requires the contractor to pay into a union trust fund for benefits even if their employees would not receive any benefits from those contributions.

So it takes that project labor agreement and not just for the job order contracting projects, but they have to adopt the project labor agreement for all district contracting regardless of the method to even use to experiment with job order contracting. This is a fundamental contradiction.

You're taking a tool specifically designed to streamline contracting and reduce costs and conditioning it on a requirement that increases complexity, limits better participation and raises cost. National University, completed a study about fifteen years ago on the effect of project labor

agreements on school construction and concluded that it raised school construction cost by 15 to 18%. So we have a system that's designed to access streamline contracting method.

It's conditioned on both reduced competition and that's not sound public policy. Finally, from our perspective, the structure is particularly problematic

You are at time, sir.

For small and rural districts who will find it difficult to execute a project labor agreement in order to use this authority.

Please wrap up your

We are opposed.

Thank you. At this time, we'll take public comment in opposition. Step up to the mic, name, affiliation, and position.

Thank you. There's a motion. Is there a second? I will second. Any discussion on the bill at this time? None. Secretary, will you please call the roll? Oh, mister Fong. Assemblymember Fong, will you please close?

Thank you so much, madam chair, and thank you to everyone for their comments. This bill only has applies to districts that currently have project labor agreements, and that was something that was done in 2015. But I really appreciate the comments, and this will be asked for an Aye vote.

Thank you. Now madam secretary, will you please call the roll?

File item 12, a b 18 o nine. The motion is do pass as amended to higher education. [Roll Call]

The bill has two votes, and it is on call.

Thank you.

Thank you. We will now move on to file item six. That is, assembly member Ransom presenting AB1659. Please step forward. And if you have any witnesses, they may come up at this time as well.

So good afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm here today to present Assembly Bill 1659 which is an important bill that will ensure that court school students receive adequate support when transitioning into court schools during detention and then back to their home school districts upon release. This bill builds upon California's long standing commitment to protecting vulnerable youth by bridging the gap in transition and supporting the process. Currently, law requires county offices of education to have designated transition personnel that assist the students as they enter and leave court school, yet there is no requirement for corresponding personnel at the receiving school district. The process of youth transitioning from court school back into their home school district is a crucial step in their reintegration into their communities.

Without strong transitional support, our youth are subject to delays and even failure to successfully reenroll. This bill will support the transition between court schools and home school districts by requiring the receiving district to designate an existing staff member to support the student when reenrolling. Additionally, this bill will clarify existing law that requires the assignment of course credits to be completed within two days for all highly mobile youth, including migratory children, newcomer students, and that would, of course, include foster students. Further clarifying this timeline would support these students in continuing their education without academic disruption and potential delays that can sometimes lead to student- lead to students dropping out or failing to properly matriculate back into school. AB 1659 centers the most vulnerable students in our education system and provides the necessary support for these students during these high risk transition periods.

With me today in support of this bill, I have Lucia Moritz, who is a deputy chief of student programs at the Alameda County Office of Education, Xochitl Larios, who is a youth justice coordinator for the Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, and lastly, I have Lucy Salcedo Carter, director of policy and governance at the Alameda County Office of Education, who can also answer additional technical questions. And, of course, I will pass it on now to Lucia Moritz. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I am doctor Lucia Moritz, the deputy chief of student programs for Alameda County Office of Education. I have over twenty years of leader experience- leadership experience in education, supporting system involved youth from both the district and county office perspectives. I currently support the academic progress of youth in the juvenile court school. And at the district level, I supported youth transitioning back to their home district school.

Through all these roles, I have learned that county office district partnerships are key to successful transitions for our youth. When I first began my current role- current role, reenrollment rates for youth leaving court school was only sixty percent. Through case studies of the instances when reenrollment didn't happen, I found a lack of consistent communication among county office and district staff causing our youth to fall the cracks. Through deepening our county office district partnerships and getting clear on our joint protocols, our reenrollment rates rose to 93 percent. What I've seen is that when the districts have a designated person responsible for court school transitions, they ensure all the components of a successful warm handoff are done.

AB 1659 will help make sure that there's always a district point person who will assist the youth in navigating these transitions. Our court school students have bounced around a lot from school to school, but when we support them to reengage in their academics, their life opportunities expand exponentially. These same students are now in college at UC Berkeley, and other higher education institutions have completed professional certifications and even have started their own nonprofit. They tell me that having county office and district staff that care about them made all the difference. For these reasons, I ask you to support this bill, and I will pass to Xochitl Larios, one of our former court school students.

Good afternoon, chair and members of the committee. My name is Xochitl Larios. I wanna talk from a young person's perspective about my experiences as a formerly incarcerated person and why this bill is important to me. I want- I want you to understand how hard it is when you're uncertain of the outcome of your case and your school's- your school transcript is pending, and you don't know how many credits you'll get when you're incarcerated for your schoolwork. And you're waking up in a JJC on a Monday morning, and you aren't sure about, if you're doing this right schoolwork.

So you're in, like, in this limbo. Then I was in limbo again when I was released from the juvenile justice center because my school district didn't want me back. They stigmatized me because I was formally incarcerated and on probation instead of welcoming me back to my home school. There was no one in my district to coordinate my return or my reentry. So I had to figure everything out by myself, including reenrolling.

I was out of school for two weeks in between, because I'm fully incarcerated from 12 all the way to my seventeenth birthday. And when I did reenroll, I didn't get the right classes based on the classwork I had done in the court school while I was incarcerated. I was advocating that I had already taken algebra, but they didn't listen. They didn't seem to understand that I had been in school in juvenile hall. I was in and out of the court school in my school district.

If I had gotten support when I first came to the district, I might have not ended back in the juvenile justice center. These challenges is why students don't go back to school when they leave court schools. The stigma, the lack of transition, and the lack of integration between both, your school district and the court schools. I ask you to please support a AB 1659. Thank you for listening to my story.

Thank you for your testimony today. We'll now have public comment in support. Please step up to the mic. Name, affiliation, and position only. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Sara Bachez with Children Now in support.

Good afternoon. It's [inaudible] on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators in support.

Good afternoon. Derek Lenox on behalf of the California County Superintendents, pleased to support.

Christina Salazar on behalf of the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools in support.

Good afternoon. Conrad Crump with Disability Rights California in support.

Good afternoon. Angelina Cournoyer on behalf of the Los Angeles County Office of Education in support.

Thank you. Seeing no other public comment in support, we'll now take opposition witness. Anyone here? Alright. Public comment in opposition, step up to the mic. Seeing none, we will move on to committee questions. Miss Castillo?

I just want to thank the witness for sharing her personal story.

Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have a motion?

Motion.

Thank you. Is there a second? With a motion and a second? Will you please close?

Sorry.

Yes.

Yes, madam chair. Thank you again. I wanna thank our our witnesses for coming forward, especially wanna thank Xochitl Larios who has moved on and become a youth justice coordinator for sharing her story with us today. Some of you know that part of my career included working with system involved youth, and it's so important that we are able to help our students so that they are not falling through the systems and becoming even more deeply involved in our justice system.

So with that being said, we know that this is the right way to go to show dignity, support to our students, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam secretary with a motion and a second, would you please call the roll?

File item six a b 1659. The motion is do passed to appropriations. Patel. I. Patel, I. Hoover, Alvarez, Fuentes, Castillo. I. Castillo, I. Garcia Lowenthal.

We will now take up the consent calendar, and I have a motion on the consent calendar. The motion and a second. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

The consent calendar is now on call. And if we wanna run through and see if oh, yes.

We will now do file item 13, which was a waiver of presentation. Muratsuchi, AB 1822. Do we have support witnesses? Please step forward. And you will have two minutes.

I'm not testifying. I'm just in support.

Thank you. Any other public comment in support? Name, affiliation, and position. Thank you.

Sid Polston, on behalf of the Small School District Association, in support.

Good afternoon. Bella Tang with American Council of Engineering Companies, in support.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? Any public comment in opposition? Alright. Seeing none. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none. Is there a motion? Thank you. Second? Thank you. Mr. Lowenthal, you were beat. Madam secretary, will you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

The bill has four votes. It is on call. We have several bills on call. If members can please come back to add on votes, that would be much appreciated. Madam secretary, on file item one, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

The vote is 8-0. That bill is out. Alright. And that concludes our Assembly Education Committee hearing. We are adjourned.