Assembly Standing Committee on Human Services

Good afternoon. I call this hearing of the Assembly Committee on Human Services to order. I would like to start today's hearing by welcoming Assemblymember Solache, who will be filling in for Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, and Assemblymember Gibson, who will be filling in for Assemblymember Calderon. Once we have established a quorum, we have 14 measures on the agenda, four of which are on consent. Please note that we limit testimony to two witnesses in support and two witnesses in opposition.

Each witness has two minutes to testify. All additional witnesses will be limited to starting their stating their name, organization, if they represent one, and their position on the bill. I also want to note that we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the committee's website. And lastly, I'd like to address disruptions during a hearing. Conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited.

If disruptive behavior occurs today, you will be removed from the hearing room by the Assembly's sergeants. Madam Secretary, if you could please call the roll to establish quorum.

Lee?

Yes.

Castillo?

Here.

Elhawary?

Here.

Gibson? Jackson? Solache?

Present.

Tongipa?

Here

Fantastic. Quorum is present. We'll start with file number one, AB 1655 by Assemblymember Isaac Brian, and he can, come take to the desk whenever he's ready to begin. You may begin whenever you're ready, Assemblymember.

Thank you, Mister Chair and colleagues. I'm proud to be here to present AB 1655. The CalWORKs program is designed to protect children's basic needs when families are struggling financially. The program provides modest monthly cash assistance to help pay for food, rent, clothing, and other essentials. However, when a child is temporarily absent from the home for longer than thirty days, that support can be reduced or eliminated.

There are some exceptions for this, of course. For example, if the child is in the hospital. However, for families who have their children kidnapped by ICE and held in a detention facility for longer than thirty days, they can lose the critical safety net that they need and deserve. This bill AB 1655 protects struggling families when their children are kidnapped by ICE.

I think often about the five year old Liam Ramos in Minnesota who was shipped to a facility down in Texas became sick at that facility and a court ordered that he be returned home.

Had he been gone for more than thirty days in California, his family would have suffered during his absence. It's shameful that we have to think of these kinds of policies in this moment, but it's important that we do. With me to testify is Yesenia Robancho with Grace, End Child Poverty, but she won't be testifying on her own behalf.

So we're testifying on our key witness's behalf who couldn't show up today or chose bravely not to show up today because ICE is terrorizing folks in our airports and instead submitted a written testimony. We also have Eddard Edgar Guerra with SEIU State Council.

Go ahead. Two minutes each, please.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. As Assemblymember of Bryan shared, I will be reading the testimony of Janice Chavez. Due for due to her own security, in ensuring the protection of her children, she decided not to, come to the committee today. My name is Janice Chavez. I am a student parent at UCLA, a board member of the Bruin Parent Scholar Organization at UCLA, and a CalWORKs Association board member, and a proud mother of three beautiful children.

I want to apologize for submitting my testimony in writing rather than appearing in person. I had originally planned to fly in and deliver the testimony in person, but due to the uncertainty surrounding ICE presence at airports, I made the difficult decision to prioritize the safety and well-being of myself and my family by remaining in Los Angeles. Nevertheless, thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of, of you today. About a month ago, my family received the call that changed everything.

A loved one had been taken by immigration agents.

There was no warning, no explanation, just chaos. In a desperate attempt to be recognized, my family member tossed his belongings to the ground and shouted for strangers to tell his family what had happened. By the time we understood where he was, he had already been transferred to the Adelanto at the detention facility. When he finally called, he didn't even say his name. He didn't want to burden us with the cost of the collect call.

Instead, he simply said he had been detained and told us where to find his belongings he had left behind. That moment of not knowing, of piecing together what have been through fragments is something no family should have to experience. But the fear doesn't stop there. Under current CalWORKs rules, families have a short time period to report changes in their households like a family member being removed or added.

When a parent or family member is suddenly detained, that loss is treated as a change that can reduce the already already minimal support a family receives or lose the benefits altogether.

AB 1655 offers a simple but crucial fix. It recognizes that when a child or family member is detained in immigration custody, especially under circumstances circumstances involved being misconduct, they should be treated as a temporarily absence just like a child in a hospital. Right now, families are being torn apart. Some are forced into impossible decisions like leaving the country altogether, just to say together. Children are being pushed into instability, into poverty, and into futures they do not choose.

We ask you to please hear our voices, to recognize the human impact behind these policies, and to support AB 1655. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next witness please, two minutes.

Thank you, Chair Lee and Members. Thank you as well to committee staff for their thoughtful analysis on AB 1655. My name is Edgar Guerra, here on behalf of SEIU California, cosponsor of AB 1655 representing more than 750,000 workers across the state, including county eligibility workers who administer the CalWORKs program every day. AB 1655 is a simple but important bill.

When a child or a family member is unlawfully detained in federal immigration custody, current law can reduce the family's CalWORKs grant because that person is no longer counted in the assistance unit. This bill clarifies that unlawful detention is treated as a temporary absence so families do not lose the support they rely on to pay rent, buy food, and keep their household stable. From the perspective of the workers who run this program, this change makes sense.

County eligibility staff are often the ones sitting across the table from the families in crisis. When a parent or child is suddenly detained, the last thing a worker should have to do is explain that the family's cash aid will also be cut.

AB 1655 gives counties clear direction and allows workers to do their jobs in a way that protects children instead of pushing them deeper into poverty. This bill is also about stability for California families. Reach research shows that immigration arrests can result in tens of thousands of dollars in financial loss for a household, and losing CalWORKs on top of that only makes the situation worse.

On behalf of SEIU California, including county workers who administer these programs and the working families who depend on them, we respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Now, moving on to, members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill. If you are a member of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill, please come up to the microphone. Give me one second. Okay.

There you go.

Oh, Good afternoon. Rebecca Gonzales with the Western Center on Law and Poverty in strong support of this bill.

Clacey Turn with the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization, proud cosponsor in strong support.

Darby Kernan, on behalf of End Child Poverty California, Courage California, and the California Partnership End Domestic Violence. Thank you.

Josh Wright, on behalf of the California Association of Food Banks, in support.

Mister Chair and Members, Adam Keigwin on behalf of California LULAC and the California Charter Schools Association in support.

My name is Nubia Ramirez. I am a childcare provider from Santa Clara County and CCPU member, and I support the AB 1655. Thank you.

My name is Fernando Hernandez. I'm from Santa Clara County. I'm childcare provider too. I support the AB 1655.

Hello. I'm Day Augustine. I am a family childcare provider for eighteen years in San Jose. I support this bill.

Hello. I'm Rosie Ibarra from Santa Clara County, CCPU member, and I support this bill as well. Thanks.

Thank you. Now do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Do we have any members of the public in the room who wish to fight against the in opposition to the bill? Please come up to the microphone.

Seeing none, I'm gonna bring it back to committee. First, I wanna thank the author for bringing this important bill forward and also thank all the CCPU members from my home county of Santa Clara County for showing up here. And I'd also like to thank Yesenia for reading the, statement from our witness who, I think, bravely, strategically did not go to the mess that the Federal Government is bringing in our airports. Just to clarify, Assemblymember Bryan, are you accepting the committee amendments?

Absolutely.

Alright. Great. Thank you. I'll turn it back to the committee members for questions and comments, if there are any. Assemblymember Solache.

Thank you, Mister Lee, and thank you for letting me, sub today. And on behalf of, as a member of Celeste Rodriguez, I thank the author for this bill, my district has been very impacted by this issue. And so I just wanna thank the author and, those folks that are and, of course, the end users are connected today, and, obviously, these are real issues that are impacting our families. So, anything we can help with this situation, I'm I'm very supportive and and my district.

Again, this is a very prevalent issue.

So and thank you for bringing this to to to the legislature.

Alright. Any questions, comments? Seeing none, I'm gonna invite the author to close.

I wanna thank my colleague, and I and I wanna thank, everybody here in this this hearing room. When families have their children kidnapped by ICE and shipped off to a detention facility miles and miles away, it is the most terrifying experience they could have. The fact that you could lose your basic assistance at the same time because the child is no longer in the home is unconscionable. Here in California, we've got to do everything we can to protect struggling families and struggling communities.

And in this moment, that means passing this bill.

I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Move the item.

I will second it. Thank you so much for bringing this bill forward. I do think it's imperative that we do all we can for our California families, especially those who are facing the all the inhumanities and cruelties of a carceral system. But in the ICE attention facility machine, it is all that at lightning speed and even worse. So it's vastly destabilizing, and this is one of those small steps.

Small but important steps we need to take to stabilize our families. I'm recommending an aye vote on this measure, and it has been properly moved and seconded. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.

File item one, AB 1655. The motion is do passed as amended to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Lee? Lee, aye.

Castillo?

Not voting.

Castillo not voting. Gibson? Elhawary? Jackson? Solache?

Aye.

Solache, aye. Tangipa? Tangipa, not voting.

We'll leave that mem, that measure open for absent Members. Next, we'll go to file item number two, AB 1746 by Senator Davies. And, Senator Davies, you may, begin when you're ready. Alright. Whenever you're ready.

Thank you. Thank you, Mister Chair. Members, today, I'm here to present AB 1746. I first want to thank committee staff for working with my staff and stakeholders on this bill. I'm proud to accept the committee's amendments.

Members AB seventeen forty six is a common sense measure to require counties to provide CalWORKs applicants and recipients with more information and opportunities to request child care support. The bill includes a ten day deadline for county welfare departments to approve, deny, or seek more information once the child care request form is submitted. This prevents administrative delays that could otherwise keep a parent from starting a job or attending a training program.

This bill ensures parents aren't just told that eight x exits, but are also actively given the tools to find and choose a provider that fits their family deeds. Without reliability, affordable care, talented and motivated parents are forced to choose between the well-being of their parent sorry, their children and the stability of their careers.

A choice that no California should have to make. By investing in our childcare, we aren't just supporting families, We are fueling the workforce that drives our state's economy forward. With that, mister Chair, respectfully ask for your aye vote. And with me here today to talk about the issue is Koi Sautern on behalf of the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization.

Alright. Two minutes, please, to witness.

Sorry. God. This is oh, good afternoon. My name is Koissy Tern. I'm on here on behalf of the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization, a proud sponsor of AB 1746. I want to share something that I think gets at exactly why this still matters. When I was a student at UCC Santa Cruz, I I was a CalWORKs recipient.

I was handed a written notice telling me that paid childcare was available to me, but I never requested it. Not because I didn't need it, but because the notice told me a resource existed without giving me the means to actually get it. I was a student parent navigating CalWORKs requirements, coursework, and childcare at the same time. I didn't fully understand that I could fill out a form and actually request the help. I don't think my experience was unusual.

I think that's what happens to a lot of families. That gap between being told help exists and actually knowing how to ask for it is where families fall through. And it falls hardest on the families already carrying the most. Like family whose primary language is in English who received a notice they partially understood but didn't know they could request a form. And families unfamiliar with government bureaucracy who didn't know a specific form existed.

Under current law, handing a family a written notice will fill the county's obligation. AB 1746 changes that. It requires counties to provide the actual CCP seven childcare request form. That distinction matters because a form notice informs a family that childcare exists. The actual form gives them the means to actually request it.

So AB 1746 closes that gap with a clear county level obligation and a defined response timeline. So I hope you'll support AB 1746. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you very much. Did you also have another witness with you? Oh, okay. Alright.

If there are any members of the public who should testify in support of this bill, please come forward to the microphone, your name, and organization.

Good afternoon. Alia Griffin with the American Federation of State County Municipal Employees in support.

Great. Thank you. Now, do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Let's go forward. Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill?

Please come on to the microphone. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the committee for any questions or comments. Second. Alright. Just to clarify, Selena Davies, you're accepting the committee's amendments.

Correct?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Great. Well, I'll invite the author to close. Thank you.

I wanna say thank you so much to the members and the chair. This is so important. We have really great programs in California, but not everybody is aware of them. And especially when we're trying to help out families that need to work. We don't want them to have to take that choice of taking care of their child or putting food on the table.

So I greatly appreciate your support. I asked for an aye vote, and I'd be honored if anyone would like to co-author.

Alright. Thank you so much, Davies. I appreciate your work to constantly uplift working families and support our safety net programs even though the Federal Government continues to erode them. And I appreciate you try to simplify the process here. There's a lot of paperwork issues paperwork issues that we just want to simplify and, you know, make it irrelevant.

The bill has been properly moved by Assembly Ratanghi Pods, second by Assembly Solache. I'm recommending an aye vote. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.

File item two, ab 1746. The motion is to pass as amended to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. [Roll call]

That's four votes. We will keep it open for APSA members. Thank you. Alright. I see Assemblymember Sharp-Collins has joined us.

File number 3AB7255. You may present when you are ready. Assemblymember Sharp-Collins.

Hello.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Today, I'm here to present a b seventeen fifty five, which is a bill that aims to eliminate the one hundred hour rule penalty and which is an outdated policy from the nineteen fifties that has no place in a state that claims to value work, dignity, and economic justice. So let us be clear about what this policy will actually correct.

So currently, right now, to put it simple, if if a family works over one hundred hours in a month, they are automatically disqualified for CalWORKs. It punishes working people.

It is rooted in the false and harmful idea that the low income families should be able to survive on part time work. And if they try to do more, then they should be cut off from, from that support. That logic of working a hundred hours was wrong then and it's, of course, wrong now, especially in a state with with one of the highest cost of living within this nation.

Currently, California is one of the only four states still enforcing this type of rule alongside Kentucky, Mississippi, and South Dakota. So we pride ourselves on leading, but on this issue, we are way behind.

So we took a step towards addressing this issue last year through my bill, Assembly Bill 1324. But while that effort was ultimately vetoed due to the cost concerns, the need for the reform still hasn't changed. Therefore, I decided to break that bill down to what we have today. If anything, it has become even more and more urgent. This bill reflects a more targeted approach, but it also carries the same core principle that our policy should support work and not punish it.

In practice, this policy forces families into the impossible choices. And so basically saying that when you work more hours and lose the assistance, that actually keeps a roof over your head or work less and remain trapped in poverty. That is not a pathway to self sufficiency. That is a policy failure. So let's think about the message that we are we are currently sending.

So when we think about the federal government and how it's demanding, eighty hours work requirement in this program, but the 100 rule punishes you for working too much. So when families lose CalWORK support abruptly, they are more likely to face housing instability, rely on emergency services, and also cycle through more costly systems like homelessness services, child welfare, and also crisis health crisis health care.

So, just to kinda wrap wrap this up a little bit here, I just want you to know that if we are serious about equity and about supporting working families and about being, and having a responsible government, then we need to start acting now. And so this bill is about choosing people over outdated policies. It is about rewarding work and not punishing it.

And it is about making a smarter investment that saves the state money over time. And with that, I do respectfully ask for your aye vote, but to provide witness testimony as well. In support today, I have miss Rebecca Gonzales, policy advocate for Western Center on Law and Poverty, but also, Andrew Shane, which is the managing director for County Workflow Directors Association of California. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Two minutes each to your voice, please.

Good afternoon. My name is Rebecca Gonzales, and I'm a policy advocate with the Western Center on Law and Poverty. We're a cosponsor of this bill as part of the Reimagine CalWORKs Coalition, which also includes SEIU, County Welfare Directors Association, and Child Poverty California, Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, Parent Voices, and the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence. It's time we stop punishing CalWORKs working families.

This bill would strike current law, which provides that a primary wage earning parent in a two parent family must work less than a hundred hours per month for the family to be eligible for CalWORKs.

Even if otherwise, they are needy and income eligible for the program. The hundred hour rule policy assumes that working an average of twenty five hours a week can generate enough income for a parent to provide for that family and further assumes the family's income is above the eligibility threshold in CalWORKs known as the minimum basic standard of adequate care. The old welfare rule known as the work penalty was adopted after the welfare reform era of the nineteen nineties.

It was based on assumptions about sufficiency of income from hours works, which can be incorrect and which has served no good purpose but to punish hardworking families, to discourage work, and harm children who are poor. As stated by the author, California is an outlier by still having this policy.

It is inhumane to subject impoverished families to this bureaucratic rule when good government dictates that we treat them fairly, give them the services and supports they need, and judge them based on facts about their economic sufficiency. More importantly, policies like these put families at risk of homelessness. It is for these reasons, the Western Center on Law and Poverty is pleased to cosponsor this bill, and I'm also expressing support for the from the Lutheran Office of Public Policy and the Women's Foundation.

We respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Alright. Next one.

And members, thank you to Dr. Sharp-Collins for your leadership with this legislation that simplifies and streamlines access to CalWORKs, our bedrock safety net for children and families. Counties see the impact of this policy and practice and the revolving door it causes for families. We know that a substantial numb substantial number of families are denied assistance because of this rule. And the situation which happens is very clear.

Families have been working, they lose their job, they're experiencing crisis, and yet are denied because of this outdated policy, pushing them only deeper into crisis.

So not only does that not make sense, as doctor Sharp Collins laid out, it actually contradicts the efforts that are being put in place, that would then punish families for actually working too much, yet making so little and denying them from assistance. So we we also urge you your I vote, and thank you so much for this legislation.

Alright. Thank you very much. Now do I have members of the public who just wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone.

Mister chair

and members, Tiffany Whiten with SEIU California cosponsor and in proud support. Thank you.

Koissy Tern with the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization pro cosponsor and support.

Yesenia Robancho with End Child Poverty in California, cosponsor and strong support. Thank you.

Bindu Mukhamala, policy manager with the National Association of Social Workers California chapter in strong support.

Josh Wright with the California Association of Food Banks in support.

Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses primary witnesses in opposition to the bill, please come forward? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward to the microphone. Seeing and hearing none, I will bring back to the committee for questions or comments. Similar for Taghi Paj.

Yes. You're recognized.

Thank you. I just wanted to first and foremost say thank you to the author of this bill. You know, some of you may know that I was raised on a lot of these, programs, and I often share with friends, colleagues of mine that I was caught by the social safety net, and I have lived a life that I could never imagine, you know, especially being here in the state legislature from ten years ago being homeless.

And, you know, my family living in low income housing and the house getting red tagged and then having the opportunity to help them purchase a home. But this is something that we've talked about often where sometimes the systems that we have in place here in California almost perpetuate poverty because we are incentivizing people not to do more to help pull yourselves out.

I think about the situation with a family member of mine, got pregnant when they they were she was a teenager, and she would tell me that I can't get married because I will lose my benefits. He works too much, and we would make it would be too hard for us. And I think about that often because I told him no. You will get married. We're gonna work as a family.

We're all gonna make sure that we could take care of our family, and we're gonna be better for it. But it was a struggle, and it was a hard period for a lot of people who went through that because once they simply worked too much, they immediately cut off and dropped. And it feels very lonely, if you don't have a village with you. Those two individuals now are married and make a joint income of over $300,000 and take care of theirs.

But there are certain things that we can do, like support this bill, to help those families that want to leave abject extreme poverty, and do better for them.

And I think that's what we are supposed to do. If we're a state like California where we are the richest state in the richest country in the history of the world, we can do better. And I just wanted to thank the author for this bill. If she's looking for any bipartisan co authorship, I would love to join on. Absolutely.

And I've moved the bill.

Thank you.

Alright. Any other questions or comments? Well, I couldn't put it better than as I was talking about, but it is true. We do live in the richest state and the richest country in the world, in the history of the world, and yet more people are working longer hours than they ever have. In fact, productivity has been never been higher than it is in the history of mankind, and yet the wages and income of workers has gone down in comparison.

So it is no surprise that people work longer hours and more jobs just to survive. Right? But, really, we wanna make sure that people are incentivized and have the right systems in place to climb up in the socioeconomic ladder, and this is an important bill. I would love to join as a joint author again with you, as I did in the last bill last year, and hopefully this time we'll get all the way and get the signature. So, I will invite the author to close now.

No. Thank you. I'll just keep it short and also simple and just thank everyone for the opportunity to be here to present. Thank you to my witnesses, and this is the opportunity today for us to actually correct this. And so with with that, I would like to respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. The bill was moved by someone Antoni Bus, seconded by someone Solache. I'm recommending an an aye vote. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

File item three, AB 1755. The motion is do passed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Lee?

Aye.

Lee, aye. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, aye. Gibson, Elhawary, Jackson, Solace?

Aye. Solace, aye. Tangipa? Tangipa, aye.

Thank you.

Four to zero. We'll that bill's out, but we will leave the role open for absent members. Alright. See if there are any authors here. If not, assembly member Solace, you are permitted to a to present your bill if you are ready.

Since we are still waiting for authors, so if you're an author that wants to present at human services, we'll be looking for more authors after file item number nine, which is AB 2072 by Assemblymember Solache. And you may begin when you're ready.

Thank you, mister chair members. I am here to present AB 2072 which would create an, CalFresh and WIC, contingency fund. A state level contingency fund would allow California to provide emergency funding in the event of federal shutdown that disrupts CalFresh and WIC, supplemental nutrition program. Last November, we saw how dangerous a federal shutdown could be for Californians who rely on these programs. CalFresh benefits were interrupted for five days, and WIP funding came dangerously close to running out.

Those five days took a real toll on our communities. AB 2072 ensures that vulnerable Californians do not lose access to critical nutrition assistance during a Federal Government shutdown. A contingency fund provides stability for California households, a proactive solution for the state to protect against uncertainty and hardship. With me today testifying, support, and answering any type of questions to Leticia Garcia, director of government relations for the California Retailers Association.

Alright. Two minutes. Your witness, please.

Oh, thank you. Thank you, chair members. Leticia Garcia with the California Retailers Association representing grocery stores all throughout the state. We're here as proud, sponsors of AB 2072 and thank you to Assemblymember Solache for championing this issue. Like the assembly member said, AB 2072 creates a contingency fund for WIC and SNAP in the event of another federal shutdown where benefits are interrupted to for these participants.

When grocery stores operators learned that benefits were not going to be distributed last November, they scrambled to figure out how they can still serve their customers, so they wouldn't leave their stores empty handed. It was a really big emergency for all of them. I got all those phone calls. And, you know, they also increase their donations to the food banks to help them meet the increased demands.

So it was not only our grocery stores, our CalFresh recipients, our WIC recipients, but also the food banks and all other food access folks who also took on the brunt of this.

Those five days of an- that- those five days of interrupted benefits had a dramatic impact on the retail grocery industry and even changed the shopping patterns of CalFresh recipients. When benefits were reinstated, retail grocer saw an increase in shelf stable items rather than fresh food options. This was because CalFresh recipients weren't sure if they were gonna have their benefits the following month. The retail industry is proud to be members of the community that they feed.

The last thing they wanna see is their most vulnerable community suffer the consequences of something that's out of their control.

For these reasons, the California Retailer Association is a proud sponsor of this legislation to ensure that when the Federal Government shuts down and withholds food funds from Californians, the state is prepared to fill that gap.

Alright. Thank you. Now do we have members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone.

AB 2429 whenever you're ready.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Thank you for allowing me to present AB twenty four twenty nine today. I wanna start by accepting the committee's amendments, and I wanna thank the committee staff for working with my office on this measure. AB twenty four twenty nine strengthens and modernizes the early childhood mental health consultation model in California's early learning programs.

Early childhood mental health consultation or e m I'm sorry, ECMHC is one of the most effective tools we have available to support children's social emotional development and reduce preschool expulsions.

It works by pairing trained cons consultants with educators to build healthier classrooms, environments, and respond proactively to behavioral challenges. Research continues to show that the best outcomes happen when consultation is consistent, relationship based, and tailored to the needs of each classroom. However, feedback from providers and consultants across the state indicate that some of these requirements are creating barriers and disincentivizing child care programs from implementing the model. These requirements can create unnecessary administrative burdens, limit flexibility, and ultimately discourage programs from participating.

When programs opt out, children and educators lose access to critical support.

AB 2429 makes targeted updates to improve access and effectiveness while maintaining accountability. Specifically, the bill, one, makes the ACEs screener for every child in a classroom receiving consultation optional instead of required. This preserves access to the tool for programs who have the capacity to administer administer it while maintaining flexibility for those that do not. Reduces required classroom observation from two times per year to once per year, allowing consultants and educators to determine what is most appropriate for the study.

And most importantly, this bill allows consultants and educators to co develop flexible, customized plans that reflect the unique needs of each classroom.

AB 2429 ensures that a proven evidence based model can reach more children and families in a way that is flexible, effective, and sustainable. Thank you.

Thank you. Answer witnesses, two minutes each, please.

Yes. Good afternoon, chair and committee members. My name is Maéva Renaud. I'm a former preschool and special education teacher and VP of advocacy and policy with Kidango. As a child care and preschool program, we proudly sponsor and strongly urge an aye vote for ab 2429.

This critical legislation strengthens access to early childhood mental health consultation services across California state preschool, general child care, and family child care home education networks. Early childhood mental health consultation, as mentioned, is is a prevention, and relationship based approach that supports the adults in fostering children's healthy and social emotional development and effectively responds to their needs.

It's an evidence based service to reduce expulsions in preschool and child care, and previous legislation has established an adjustment factor where programs can utilize to fund its implementation and associated requirements to adhere to its quality. Now we know that research tells us that a child's brain develops rapidly from zero to five, and exposure to trauma, chronic stress, or unaddressed behavioral issues during this period can have lifelong consequences affecting their ability to learn from form relationships and thrive.

Early childhood mental health consultation gives adults the support and tools they need to create an optimal environment for children to grow.

AB twenty four twenty nine responds to important feedback from the field and makes two adjustments to their requirements. As mentioned, it changes the, mandate of utilizing the adverse childhood experiences screener for adults from required to optional. And second, it reduces the required classroom observations from twice per program year to once per program year. With these changes, more state preschool general childcare and family childcare home education networks will be able to utilize the adjustment factor to implement early childhood mental health consultation.

This is a common sense evidence based solution prioritizing children's mental wellness and supporting their caregivers. We respectfully request an aye vote so more teachers, children, and families benefit from early childhood mental health consultation. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Next one is, please.

Good afternoon, chair and esteemed members of the committee. My name is Celeste Farmer, and I'm the director of mental health at Kidango. I've been a licensed marriage and family therapist in California since 2015, and I've been both a mental health consultant as well as a supervisor and leader of mental health consultation programs. Increasing providers' ability to access and utilize mental health consultation services has the potential to make a huge difference in the lives of so many children.

In my experience, early childhood mental health consultation builds adults' confidence and competence to meet social emotional needs of children and create a positive social emotional climate for entire preschools and early learning centers and home education networks.

In order to have this impact, what I have found most critical to have in place is attunement to the individualized needs of child care programs, teachers, and children and families.

The changes that AB twenty four twenty nine, proposes supports high quality early learning early childhood mental health consultation by supporting that attunement and individualized focus by allowing consultants who work with many classrooms and face many time constraints to have more flexibility in the activities that they implement for each classroom based on the expressed needs of that age group, of children, teachers, and families.

Additionally, by making the adverse childhood experiences screener optional, consultants can choose whether can choose when it makes sense to utilize the tool based on the consultant and parent bandwidth, whether the screener is already conducted in other settings, like well child pediatric visits, as well as how conducive it is in a situation, to relationally build a positive strengths based relationship with families. This critical piece of legislation, this is a critical piece of legislation that will strengthen access to

early childhood mental health consultation, access to early childhood mental health consultation services in California, state preschool, general childcare, and family childcare home network home education networks. Thank you so much for your time, and I strongly encourage you to vote aye on AB 2429 for healthy children, teachers, families. Thank you.

Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who should testify in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone now. Just to testify insupport of the bill.

Bindu Macamala, on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California chapter, here in support.

Thank you. And do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come up to the microphone. Seeing none, I'll be right back to the committee for questions and comments. Alright.

I'll invite the sorry. Oh, okay. I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you. Just respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Alright. Thank you for bringing this bill forward and supporting our childcare network. The bill has been properly moved by Assemblymember Solache, seconded by Assemblymember Castillo. Madam secretary, please call the roll on AB 2429.

[Roll Call]

Thank you.

And I see that Assembly Member Bonta has joined us. Assembly member Bonta has two bills on the file, and I will leave it up to her to decide which one she wants to do first.

I will, begin with, AB 1969.

Alright. We'll begin with file item number six, AB 1969. ..., begin whenever you're ready.

Thank you. Thank you, chair and members. I would like to begin by accepting the committee amendments and thanking committee staff for their thoughtful and thorough analysis. I'm pleased to present AB 1969 the It Takes a Village Act of 2026. We often say it takes a village to raise a child, but too often, our systems are not structured to function like one.

If we are serious about improving outcomes for children and families, especially in economically disadvantaged communities, we must ensure access to coordinated supports from before birth through college and career. This work is deeply personal to me. It has been my life's work, in fact. I've seen firsthand how a place based cradle to career approach can change the trajectory of a child's life.

From my own life, for sure, but certainly as early as '21 and, as recently as being able to serve as the CEO of Oakland Promise, where we work to improve educational and economic outcomes for students experiencing poverty.

In that role, I saw both the gaps in our system and the transformative impact of aligning services across sectors to meet families where they are. California invests billions of dollars annually in children, families, and economic development programs, yet these investments remain fragmented, siloed, and unevenly targeted, particularly in neighborhoods with the highest concentrations of child poverty.

We have made significant progress launching Cal Kids children's savings accounts, investing in community schools, implementing Cal AIM community supports to address upstream health and social needs, expanding the expanded learning opportunities program, advancing a career technical education master plan, and making historic investments in early learning. Each of these efforts is critical, but they are more and most powerful when they are aligned and coordinated around the needs of children and families and can transition seamlessly throughout a changing administration. This is exactly why AB 1969 is has been presented and is designed to do.

This bill establishes a grant program to support place based partnerships that coordinate services from early childhood through college and career. Over the past decade, Promise Neighborhoods and similar cradle to career initiatives have shown that this approach works. These partnerships align education, health, housing, and economic supports, and the results are clear, improved access to care, stronger literacy outcomes, and increased college and career readiness. AB nineteen sixty nine builds on that success by expanding and sustaining these efforts statewide.

By investing in coordinated community development driven solutions, this bill strengthens California's ability to reduce poverty, close opportunity gaps, and support children and families at every stage in their life.

Because when we invest in the systems that surround a child, we invest in their future and the future of our state. With me today to testify is Tony Amancica, executive director of Bright Futures Educational Partnership serving Monterey County, and Jillian Spindle, chief strategy and advancement officer at the Mission Economic Development Agency in San Francisco.

Alright. Thank you. Join us as two minutes each, please. Who whoever wants to start.

I could start. Good afternoon, chair and members. My name is Tony Amezcua, and I proudly serve as the executive director for Bright Futures Educational Partnership anchored at Hartnell Community College in Monterey County. I'm here today in strong support of AB 1969. Bright Futures serves as a backbone for our county's cradle to career system.

We bring together k 12 education, higher education, community organizations, local partners to ensure that every young person has a pathway to success. Monterey County is home to one of the highest percentage of students entering schools as English learners in California, if not the nation. Our students are not are incredibly capable, multilingual, and resilient too often but too often, they must navigate systems that were not designed with them in mind. That's where Bright Future steps in. We don't work in isolation.

We align partners, elevate community voice, and turn collaboration into action. One example of of this is our work with Cal Kids. Through coordination coordinated outreach and deep community trust building, Monterey County now ranks second in the state for the percentage of Cal Kids accounts claimed with over 11,700,000 secured in over 21,000 accounts. That didn't happen by chance. It happened because of intentional partnerships, local leadership, and consistent engagement with families.

And yet despite these outcomes, Bright Futures currently operates without dedicated state or federal funding. We have sustained this work through private donations, grants, because we believe that what's possible for our students and what is needed for our community. But to scale and sustain this impact, we need investment. AB nineteen sixty nine represents an opportunity to support models like Bright Futures, models that are already demonstrating results, already building trust, and already changing outcomes for young people.

With the right support, we can deepen this work, reach more families, and ensure that every student, especially those historically underserved, has access to these opportunities.

I respectfully urge your support for AB 1969. Thank you for what you do for our children here in California.

Thank you very much. Exactly. The two minute mark too. Great job. Alright. Next one is, please.

Good afternoon, chair and members. I'm Jillian Spindle, the chief strategy and advancement officer at the Mission Economic Development Agency in San Francisco's Mission District. AB 1969 recognizes that no single school, nonprofit, or city can end poverty alone. Since 2012, MEDA has acted as the backbone for the Mission Promise neighborhood, coordinating a network of nonprofits, the San Francisco Unified School District, and city agencies. We move beyond education to provide holistic wraparound support that addresses immediate needs and puts families on a path to economic mobility.

By aligning sectors under a single data driven approach, we ensure every family has the stability they need to thrive from prenatal to career. This coordination creates results that go far beyond the classroom. For example, when we realized that displacement was the primary threat to our student success, we integrated a housing and financial continuum into our school sites. Our coaches work in schools to help parents with rental relief, tax preparation, housing, and job placement.

Because of this coordination, we increased Latino representation in affordable housing applications from three to 30%.

In the past decade, we've helped 2,100 households secure stable homes. We're closing the gap on early learning, adding 200 slots and increasing K readiness by 10%. And we're connecting college readiness with financial education, tax, and FAFSA prep to steadily increase the number of students enrolling in college. We are trusted community networks for the state's most vulnerable families. During the pandemic, the city relied on our existing infrastructure to reach families with emergency relief.

Today, as we face economic and political uncertainty, these networks are a lifeline. We can both respond to today's emergency while building community conditions for the next generation. Last year in partnership with RTI International, we completed an evaluation showing that California Promise neighborhoods are a good investment with a $4 return for every $1 invested. We have the data, we have the trust, and we have the model. For this reason, I respectfully request your support of AB 1969.

Alright. Thank you very much. Now do we have any members of the public who should find support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone, name, and organization, please.

Hello. I'm Michael Williams representing the Child Abuse Prevention Center in Sacramento as well as the California Family Resource Association, and both organizations support.

Yesenia Rabancho with End Child Poverty in California. Proud sponsors, also including in support Eden Area Regional Occupational Program, Marin Promise Partnership, Hayward Promise Neighborhood, and Strive Together.

Hello, Jessica Rubio Rincon. I'm here on behalf of Mission Promise neighbor neighborhood and, all of the children that we serve there, and then also on the California Promise Neighborhood Coalition. Thank you.

Hello. Bindu Mukhamala with the National Association of Social Workers, California chapter here in strong support.

Good afternoon. Darby Kernan on behalf of 4Cs of Alameda County, First Five of Alameda County, Eden Area Communities Collaborative, and the Mission Economic Development Agency. Thank you.

Salvador Rodriguez with LA's Best in strong support.

Josh Wright with the California Association of Food Banks in support.

Thank you. Now do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? . Do we have any members of the public who wish to find testify in opposition to the bill? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the committee for questions or comments or motions. I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you so much, Chair. This is actually the sixth time this legislation has been proposed, earliest in 2014. I think, what we have right now is a California that doesn't wanna be a California of two tails. We wanna be able to ensure that every single child from wherever they are, in whatever capacity that they need, our community, our supports, our agencies, federal, state, county, and city to be fully aligned to be able to support their growth and development. This has been, life's passion of mine.

I know that when we wrap our arms around children fully, it ends up that they are able to be invested in fully and to know that we can take care of them, which is all that we wanna be able to do in this beautiful state we call California. With that, I respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you, Assemblymember Bonta, for bringing this bill forward. It certainly does take a village to raise our children, and, hopefully, the sixth time, we will finally build that village that promised village. I'm recommending an aye vote on this matter. It's been probably moved by Assemblyman Solache and seconded by Assemblyman Elhawary. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.

[Roll Call]

Alright. That that bill is on call. You may present file item number 10, AB 2092 when you are ready. Somewhat, Ramonta.

Thank you. Good afternoon again, committee members. I'm and chair. I am wanna start by thanking the chair and committee for working with my office on this piece of legislation. AB 2092 establishes the California Department of Social Services, CDDSS, as the lead agency with the statutory authority to manage the early childhood integrated data system or ECIDS.

This bill also creates an interagency task force to oversee data governance ensuring that California can integrate siloed information from various state agencies serving children from birth to age five. California has built the foundation to begin implementing a state ECIDS. The CDSS and California Department of Education, both of which collect considerable zero to five data, identified ECIDS as a priority and planned it's an implementation. The state has been able to do a few things. First, produce a knowledge brief.

Second, conduct a pilot program led by the Santa Clara Office of Education to share learnings and best practices at the local level, and finally, to establish an IT infrastructure for ECIDS. However, many agencies collect early childhood data, including the CDSS, CDE, and the California Health and Human Services Agency. Although the IT infrastructure for ECIDS exists, no one agency has the legal authority to access and integrate early childhood data across all agencies serving children ages zero to five.

As such, critical early childhood data often lives within only one state agency's data system. And if the same data point is collected across agencies, it might be defined differently.

This means that information regarding child participation in early learning and care is currently siloed or incomplete, making it impossible to track important outcomes for children across various early childhood programs. Without integrated data, the state cannot identify child care deserts or understand outcomes for children ages zero to five, particularly when disaggregated by race and income. AB 2092 addresses this by giving the CDSS statutory authority to integrate early childhood data from early childhood agencies.

AB 2092 also takes proactive measures to protect that data that is collected. The bill includes recommendations with the assembly privacy committee to protect children's data, and we will be working with privacy committee to further strengthen this piece of the bill.

Here to testify and support are two early childhood experts, Missy Coffey, who is executive director of the EC Data Lab and a leading national and state specialist on early childhood data systems, and Mario Snow, who is senior policy associate on early childhood education at Californians Together.

Alright. Good afternoon, members. I am Dr. Missy Coffey, and I am fortunate to be one of the nation's leading experts on integrating early childhood data to support program and policy decisions. I've supported more than 40 states and territories in implementing this and working to actually integrate data across agencies. And I'm currently the executive director of an organization called ECDataLab.

California is fortunate to be one of the most comprehensive systems of care in this country. You guys are serving birth through five in a way that unlike other states. But with that, data are still fragmented across your agencies. Decision making across programs and services for children and their families is limited when data are this fragmented.

A fully implemented ECIDS allows the state to really use de identified and accurate data to understand whether program services are responsive to the community needs that they're serving, identify gaps in access, efficacy of your targeted investments that you are making, improve coherence and collaboration between programs and services supporting children and families, understand how early experiences are connecting to TK and 12 outcomes, supporting workforce planning and quality improvements that you all are making.

And while this bill establishes a data system, it is important to note that the goal is not the data system itself. It's allowing state administrators and policy makers to use the integrated data to make program policy decisions that are impacting children and families in California. The state has already laid important groundwork through philanthropic and federal grants.

California has worked across agencies to complete landscape analysis on the data systems themselves, identify key decisions where integrated data will be relevant, build the internal infrastructure as mentioned before, pilot and learn from the local integration efforts already happening in the state, and align with broader state efforts. However, progress is stalled due to inconsistent funding and absence of sustained cross agency governance structures.

AB 2092 is critical step because it's gonna establish formal interagency governing bodies, require data sharing agreements across agencies, and create accountability through the annual reporting. As the state moves forward, there are a few things that are critical for implementation. First, the state needs to make sure that there are clear use cases tied to program and policy decisions, not just data collection. There should be a plan for ongoing stakeholder engagement, including families and providers.

A comprehensive resource plan should be included that actually leverages current state resources going towards these efforts, including staff capacity and addresses any gaps in necessary funding.

And finally, it ensures strong privacy protections. Thank you for the opportunity to share my perspective. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Good afternoon, chair and committee members. My name is Mario Snow. I'm the senior policy associate for Californians Together, focusing on ECE. Thank you to assembly member Bonta for authoring this bill. It's vital to our data driven planning.

I began working in the ECE data system space back in 2002 as a subcontractor to First Life California charged with developing a system to collect identifiable and aggregate data from each of the California's 58 counties. Having a statewide early childhood integrated data system or ESIDS for early learning and care is long overdue.

Over the last couple decades, entities in California have spent many millions of dollars creating band aid data systems that get them from point a from point a to point b for a particular initiative while statewide systems have not advanced. These efforts are labor intensive and expensive. Since California has separate systems housing these data in order to have a robust dataset, linkages need to be made between disparate data systems that collect and define data differently.

Then after the initiative is over, often the system and its data just fade away. But within ECIDS, those data would continue to be available for others to use and build upon. Having a statewide system that tracks and reports key metrics can reduce costly local can reduce cost locally and shift those funds direct services. Policymakers, some questions this data system could answer are, what is the correlation between third grade test scores and high quality preschool attendance?

Did English learners who attended two years of dual language immersion preschool reclassified an earlier age than those students that did not attend this type of program?

How much sooner? Is there a difference in high school graduation rates between children who attend preschool compared to children who do not attend preschool? To what extent does early learning participation accel accelerate LP growth in the early grades? And then what disparities exist in access to high quality early learning programs across regions, income levels, and language groups? Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify and support?

Sara Bachez with children now in support.

Maclean Rozansky with the Alameda County Office of Education in support.

Raquel Morales with Ed Trust West and sponsor of the bill in support.

Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition? And are there any questions from committee members? Thank you for bringing this bill forward.

I recommend an aye vote, well the chair does, and we'd like to invite the author to close.

Well, thank you. California should be able to create positive outcomes for our children using evidence based practices. To do that, we need to have ECIDS in place to answer questions that affect our children. By establishing a clear legal framework for data sharing, AB 2092 strengthens California's ability to expand equitable access to high quality early learning and care programs for the state's youngest children. With that, I respectfully request an aye vote.

Do I have a motion and a second on AB 2092? Madam secretary, please call the roll.

File item 10 AB 2092. The motion is do passed to the assembly privacy and consumer protection committee. Lee? Castillo? Gipson?

Aye.

Gipson, aye. Elhawary?

Aye.

Elhawary, aye. Jackson? Solache?

Aye.

Solache, aye. Tangipa?

Thank you.

That bill is on call.

We'll leave the roll open for absent members. Next, we're on file number 11, AB 2278. Avila Farias. Assembly member, please present your bill.

Thank you, chair. Oh, is that on? Yeah. Thank you, madam chair and members, for, allowing me to present AB 2278. First, I would like to start by accepting the chair's amendments. AB 2278 establishes a pilot program in Contra Costa County, in support of services, program.

Recent changes to last year's human, services trailer bill shift the cost of Community First Choice options. Late penalties to counties combined with the federal cuts to HR one and ongoing unfolded the mandates. Counties like Contra Costa County face growing challenges in delivering timely services. AB twenty two seventy eight creates a five year pilot program to test innovative technologies and can accelerate IHSS eligibility and enrollment process.

The goal is simple, to improve the experience for both recipients, workers, reduce administrative burdens, and to create long term cost savings.

Importantly, all most importantly, all eligible eligibility decisions will continue to be made by trained workers, and any tools used will be required to be informed consent with individuals. I will now turn over to our partners from Contra Costa County to provide additional detail.

Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Tracy Murray, and I am the Contra Costa County director of Aging and Adult Services. Thank you for your consideration of AB 2278 which provides support for counties administering the in home supportive services IHSS program. The IHSS program provides in home care to eligible aged, blind, or disabled community residents who need assistance in order to stay safely in their homes.

Regulations require that every IHSS recipient initial application for services be determined within ninety days. Recipient must receive an annual reassessment. In Contra Costa County, we have 17,000 for the 17,841 IHSS recipients and only 50 social workers, which equates to a caseload of three fifty six recipients per social worker. Effective 07/01/2025, counties are assessed a penalty for each IHSS Community First Choice option or CIVCO case that is late on its annual reassessment.

In July 2025, Contra Costa County had three thousand two hundred and seventy three overdue cases.

In order to reduce the number of overdue cases and penalties, Contra Costa County has contracted with a temporary staffing agency to assist with reassessments. The county has spent $235,000 on temporary agency costs and 1,800,000.0 in penalties from July through February. Although Contra Costa County has made progress in reducing the number of overdue reassessments to a current count of eleven forty four, the consequence has been that new applications for services are not determined on a timely basis.

The percent of applications determined within ninety days has dropped from 87% in July 2025 to 44% in February 2026. The fiscal penalties are adversely impacting the county's ability to serve community members.

Therefore, we support legislation that provides an opportunity to test how innovative technologies will benefit counties and the vulnerable IHSS consumers that we serve.

Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify and support? Any primary witnesses in opposition? And any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition? Seeing none, are there any questions from committee members? Awesome. I will invite the author to close.

Thank you, madam chair and members. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Second. We have a motion by Solace, Assemblymember Solache, and a second by Assemblymember Gipson. Thank you so much for working with this amazing staff on amendments and for trying to reduce wait time for IHSS recipients. The chair recommends an aye with amendments vote. And madam secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

That bill is, that bill is on call. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members. We're gonna move to the consent calendar. Do I have a motion on the consent calendar? Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Items on the consent calendar: File item four, AB 1824, Ramos. File item five, AB 1846, Stefani. File item seven, AB 1981, Aguiar-Curry, with urgency amendments. File item eight, AB 2006, Michelle Rodriguez. [Roll Call]

We're gonna open the role to add on Member votes.

File item one, AB 1655. The current vote is two to zero. [Roll Call] Current vote four to zero. File item two, AB 1746. The current vote is four to zero. [Roll Call] Current vote is six to zero. File item three, AB 1755. The current vote is four to zero. [Roll Call] Current vote six to zero.

File item six, AB 1969. Current vote is three to one. [Roll Call] Current vote four to one. File item nine, AB 2072. Current vote is three to zero. [Roll Call] Current vote five to zero. File item 12, AB 2429. Current vote is four to zero. [Roll Call] Current vote six to zero.

Alright. Assembly Member Elhawary, thank you for subbing in. In addition to subbing in, you will be presenting file item 13, AB 2441. Correct?

Yes, sir.

Great. Whenever you're ready.

Oh, sorry. I said a different one.

You're doing file item 14, AB 2567. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

Okay. There you go.

Sorry about that.

Thank you, honorable chair and members. AB 22567 is a simple bill that helps families in crisis get emergency relief from CalWORKs faster. More than 650,000 families receive cash aid and services through CalWORKs, and California processes about 30 to 40,000 applications each month. For many of these families, a crisis means an eviction notice, no food in the house, a utility shutoff, or even homelessness. Emergency help in those moments should be quick and accessible.

CalWORKs has emergency support for these situations through immediate needs and temporary homeless assistance. But under current law, families may first be required to apply for other benefits, including unemployment, Social Security, veterans benefits, or state disability insurance before emergency aid can be issued. For families in crisis, that extra hurdle means finding Internet access, a phone or computer, work history, bank information, and identification before they're eligible for immediate assistance.

AB two five six seven removes that barrier so counties can determine apparent eligibility for emergency CalWORKs benefits without first requiring families to apply for all unconditionally available income. This bill does not eliminate existing safeguards.

Families must still be apparently eligible for CalWORKs, and they must still apply for and accept all available income before final approval and ongoing aid. In short, AB two five six seven will ensure that immediate needs and temporary homeless assistance serve as a safety net for people in crisis. I am pleased to have Andrew Shane with the County Welfare Directors Association here with me today to speak in support of the measure. And on behalf of assembly member Celeste Rodriguez, I'd like to accept the committee's amendments. Thank you, chair and member. Oh, just kidding.

Thank you. Your witness may begin. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Elhawary. And some our thanks to Senator Rodriguez. I'll I'll be I'll be brief. It was already outlined very well. As families are are coming into the the CalWORKs program, they are experiencing crisis.

When we're talking about apparent eligibility and these upfront programs, we're talking about immediate need of $200 or less and homeless assistance that's either in the form of a voucher if if the family is unhoused or critical, permanent housing supports if the family is at risk of eviction such as arrears on on their rents or deposits. Right? Trying to prevent family homelessness.

So as has been mentioned, AB 2567 removes that barrier while maintaining the unconditionally available income requirement as part of the full CalWORKs grant. So maintaining that program integrity for the the full grant, child care, and other permanent supports. So with that, urge your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Now do we have members of the public who should testify in support of the bill? Please come up to microphone now.

Rebecca Gonzales with the Western Center on Law and Poverty and Support.

On behalf of the National Association of Social Workers California chapter in support.

Kelly Brooks on behalf of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in support.

Thank you. Now do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who should testify in opposition to the bill? So you can have them bring it back to the committee. Alright. If not, I will invite the author to close.

On behalf of Assembly Member Celeste Rodriguez, my Assembly bestie, thank you, Chair, and members. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

The bills are properly moved and seconded. moved by ... Gipson, seconded by Assembly member Solace. Thank you for bringing this bill forward. Thank you for presenting this bill on behalf of your assembly bestie. And I'm recommending an ate vote. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

6-0. That bill is out. Alright. I think we still have our last bill, another assembly member Rodriguez bill presented by assembly member Jackson. It will be item 13, AB 2441.

So Dr. Jackson, you may begin when you are ready.

This is a mandated reporting bill. Wow. I got set up. What about something?

Okay. I see what's going on. Okay. Thank you, mister chair and committee members. It is my honor to present, AB 2441 on behalf of assembly member, Rodriguez.

This is, the community supporting innovation pilot program. AB 2441 is a critical evidence based step forward in providing prevention services for families in need of education, support, and basic needs. The facts are clear. Black and native American children account for 50% of child welfare investigations, and black and native American and Latino families are more likely to have reports substantiated and experience child removal. The California Child Welfare Council established the mandated reporting to community supporting task force.

The task force recommends the incorporation of a community pathway for mandated reporters. The community supporting innovation pilot program creates a prevention focused pathway to for families facing poverty or resources challenges, compcom complementing, not replacing the child welfare system. Specifically, AB 2441 directs the state office of child abuse prevention to administer and evaluate the effectiveness of the pilot program.

This innovative, initiative will demonstrate the effectiveness of community based organizations, including family resource centers and servicing, as resource and referral avenues for families with needs who are not at substantial risk of serious harm. Important safeguards are built into the bill to ensure the credibility of the community pathway.

These include requiring a statement of support from the county child welfare agency in each county in which the organization operates, securing the commitment of at least one partnering school district, hospital, clinic, or law enforcement agency that will refer potentially eligible families to the community based organization and ensuring all participating organizations comply with OCEAP's program requirements. Speaking in support of AB 2441 today is Janay Eustace Executive director of the Child Abuse Prevention Center, and Danielle Lawrence, executive director of the Mutual Assistance Network, a Sacramento based FRC.

Alright. Thank you. Two minutes each, please.

Thank you. Good afternoon, chair and members. My name is Janay Eustace. I'm the president and CEO of the Child Abuse Prevention Center and representing the California Family Resource Association. For me, this has never been just work.

It's my lived experience. As a former foster youth and as a former foster youth, I come from the communities we're talking about. I've seen what happens when systems don't see families fully, when systems see families who are in survival and label them as, with neglect as neglect. I've also seen what happens when our system sees families and shows up for them and wraps around them with trust, without judgment. We are here in strong support because this bill doesn't create something new.

It strengthens and aligns what communities across California are already doing every day. This work already exists. Across California, family resource centers are already serving as the front door for families long before child welfare involvement. Families are walking into FRCs with complex needs with from communities who are responding with prevention, stabilization, and connections. What's missing is not the work.

It's the consistency, the infrastructure, and shared expectations across our counties. This pilot creates an opportunity to establish consistent standards statewide, build shared data and evaluation, align community based pathways with prevention goals. And right now, access depends on where families live. But with this pilot, we'll ensure equity on how prevention shows up across California. The CAP Center and CFRA already serve as a statewide backbone, supporting hundreds of FRCs with training, technical assistance, and implementation support.

We are not starting from scratch. We are establishing networks, We're proving models, and we're proving community trust. This palette allows the state to leverage existing infrastructures instead of rebuilding them. This is about shifting from a system that reacts to harm to one that invests in families before crisis. Community based organizations, especially FRCs, are trusted in the community with historic and historically have been over surveilled and underrepresented.

This is how we operationalize equity and prevention. Family resource centers are already the through line of prevention in California. This pilot doesn't test whether this works. It gives us the opportunity to prove it at scale with consistency and with accountability. This is how California turns prevention from a concept into a cons into a consistent state reality.

We respectfully ask for your support. And now you'll hear from Danielle Lawrence, the executive director of Mutual Assistance Network here in Sacramento County.

Good afternoon, chair and committee members. My name is Danielle Lawrence, and I am their proud leader of two family resource centers here in Sacramento County. Every day, we serve families who are doing everything they can to stay stable, but they need support navigating systems that were not designed for them. Families don't come to us with a child welfare label often. Sometimes they do.

However, most of our families come in to our doors because they need rent, because they need food, childcare, someone to trust to help them navigate the systems they're struggling with within schools or all of the many systems such as CPS, Department of Human Assistance, anything that is coming for services and provision. Our families are getting lost in the navigation, and we lean in as family resource centers to ensure that they do not get lost in the systems and or get yeah.

We are, why this is important, what we do at the family resource center is deescalate crises. They come to us during crisis. First thing we do is before we make a report, we take a establish, like, a picture of where they are and we deescalate.

We're meeting them where they are. We could help them coordinate. Family resource centers coordinate across systems. Family resource centers provide concrete supports. We do that very well.

And it was evidenced during the pandemic when everything else shut down, but everything else shut down, but family resource centers remained open and served. This is daily and this is consistent. It's trusted, and we are already in community, and we are already established as a system of care across California. There is a gap though. Without this pilot, there's no consistent funding or structure across the counties.

There's no shared way to track our outcomes and the data. It matters. There's no sustainable funding for the level of coordination required, so start stops is never sustainable for the success in the of our neighborhoods that we serve. So the work depends on local capacity instead of statewide commitment, and that's why we are here. So this pilot matters.

This pilot allows us to do the work we're already doing, but with alignment and sustainability across California. It allows us to participate in a shared system of learning and accountability, and then it allows us to ensure families receive the same level of support no matter where they live. This is about catching families before they fall deeper into crisis, and it's about trusting community based organizations like us to do what we've already proven we can do well.

So in closing, we don't need to create a new system. We do need to invest in the one that families are already using and trust.

This pilot helps us do that better together and across California. Families are already coming to us. This pilot ensures we can meet them with the consistency they deserve. We urge your support by giving your aye vote.

Alright. Thank you. Now are there members of the public who just testified in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone now.

Binu Mukhamala with the National Association of Social Workers California chap chapter in support of this bill.

Good afternoon. Rebecca Gonzales with the Western Center on Law and Poverty in strong support.

Flin Oshun with Mutual Assistance Network and a licensed clinical social worker, and I'm in support of this bill.

Good afternoon. Adrienne Shilton on behalf of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services in proud support.

Sara Bachez with children now in support.

Kula Koenig with Safe and Sound. We are the backbone organization of the Family Services Alliance, 44 community based organizations, and 26 FRCs in strong support.

McKenzie Richardson with Thriving Families California Foundation in support.

Jeanette Carpenter on behalf of Child Action in strong support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. LaTanya Mosley with Mutual Assistance Network in strong support.

Andrew Shane, County welfare director is in support. Thank you.

Adam Keigwin on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association in support.

Alright. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come up to the microphone now. Alright. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the committee.

Any questions or comments from committee members and motions? Yeah. Alright. I'll invite the author to close.

Thank you very much, assemblyman. As, the assembly representative to the California Child Welfare's Council, this is one of the, top priorities of the council. The idea being is that we have too many Black and Native American families being caught up in the system only after a traumatizing investigation being found that there was nothing that existed in the first place. And the best way to do that, is to create a proof of concept. I had a bill two years ago? A year ago?

I don't know. I don't wanna remember it, that process. I got some scars from that process. But one thing was for sure, we know through research that the best thing to do is to push vulnerable families away from the system and into the support of community based organizations. High quality, consistent, community based organization to provide them with whatever their real needs are.

And many times, it's poverty issues. Others, it could be mental health issues, so they need more supports. But depending on what part of the state you're from, depends on your level of trust that the community has the infrastructure necessary to be able to provide consistent, predictable, and high quality services to really meet their needs so that when someone calls, we we know that that family is gonna be served as opposed to, them just being lost in, in the cracks.

And so it's time for us to really develop the proof of concept, the the best practice that now we can build off of so that we can and be more assured, and our colleagues here in the legislature can be more assured that what we're doing is the best thing to be done in a healthy way so that they can be on a pathway to thrive. It's my honor to present this bill on be on behalf of Assemblywoman Rodriguez.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Alright. Thank you so much for presenting the bill for her. And the bill was moved by Assembly Solache, second by Assembly Castillo. I have an aye recommendation on this bill. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.

Aye.

Castillo, aye. Gipson?

Final item 13, AB 2441. The motion is do passed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Lee?

Aye.

Lee, aye. Castillo?

Gipson, aye. Elhawary?

Aye.

Aye.

Elhawary, aye. Jackson?

Aye.

Jackson, aye. Solache?

Aye.

Aye.

Tangipa, aye.

Solache, aye. Tangipa?

Seven to zero. That bill is out. Alright, members. That wraps up the bills we have, but we will go back in the file for items that, members missed. So, whenever a man's secretary is ready, we'll go back in the file, and we'll, capture the EPSA members.

On the consent calendar, current vote is three to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote on the consent calendar, seven to zero. Okay. File item one, AB 1655. Current vote is four to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, five to zero. File item two, AB 1746. Current vote is six to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, seven to zero.

File item three, AB 1755. Current vote is six to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, seven to zero. File item six, AB 1969. Current vote is four to one. [Roll Call] Final vote, five to two. File item nine, AB 2072. Current vote is five to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, six to zero.

File item 10, AB 2092. Current vote, three to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, seven to zero. File item 11, AB 2278. Current vote is three to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, five to zero. File item 12, AB 2429, current vote six to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, seven to zero. File item 14, AB 2567, current vote is six to zero. [Roll Call] Final vote, six to one.

I adjourn this meeting of the Assembly Human Service Committee.