Assembly Standing Committee on Public Employment and Retirement

Good morning, and welcome to the public, to the public and Members in the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement. Before we begin, I have several announcements. The following bills are proposed for consent. File item one, SB 1024, Menjivar. File item four, SB 127, Laird.

And file item five, SB 1444, Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement. For this hearing, we're limiting substantive testimony to two primary witnesses on each side of the bill, and each will have two minutes. All others will be able to come up and state their name, organization, and position.

As a reminder, primary witnesses in support must be those accompanying the author or who have otherwise have registered a support position with the committee. Primary witnesses in opposition must have their opposition registered with the committee. All other support and opposition can be stated at the standing mic and when called upon to simply state your name, organization, and position.

For Committee Members, because our hearings are public and some travel far to be heard, In respect of them and the author, please wait until the debate has concluded before making your motion. For authors, you'll note that our hearing is publicly noticed as file order. Your staff should be monitoring this hearing to assist you with coming at the appropriate time. And so Senator Perez, we'll be waiting for you.

We have one more after Senator Arreguín. Finally, the Assembly has experienced a number of disruptions on the committee and in committee and on the floor proceedings in the last few years. Because we seek to protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process and can effectively deliberate on critical issues faced in California, so everyone is absolutely clear. Conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited.

We will not accept such behavior or behavior that incites or threatened violence. To address any such conduct, I will direct the individual to stop and warn them if they continue, they will be removed from participating in the hearing or from the capitol and will temporarily recess the hearing if necessary so that the sergeants who are sworn officers can restore order. Hopefully, that won't happen. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. In the absence of a quorum, we'll start as a subcommittee. So, we'll start with...

It's in. We'll start with item number three. No. SB 1166, Senator Arreguin. Good morning.

Madam Chair, may I begin?

Yes.

Well, thank you very much, madam Chair, members of the committee. I'm pleased to present today Senate Bill 1166. A bill that would authorize the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District or AC Transit and its employees to access the Public Employment Relations Board or PERB for adjudicating unfair labor practice charges. PERB oversees labor management relations for the vast majority of California's public sector employees, ensuring that claims of unfair labor practices and disputes are resolved. It enforces collective bargaining laws and provides appropriate remedies.

In recent years, this legislature has authorized employees of numerous transit agencies to access PERB, such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit District, a Sacramento Regional Transit District, and most recently, the Valley Transportation Authority. AC Transit remains one of the few transit districts under a separate framework requiring labor disputes to be resolved through the courts rather than PERB. This change is needed resolving labor disputes through the courts is often slower, more costly, expertise that PERB's allows. And Rover doesn't provide the same level of fairness to workers in navigating that process.

By moving these disputes to PERB, SB 1166 creates a fair and streamlined process for both workers and employers, giving AC Transit employees the same and just treatment as other transit and public sector employees currently enjoy.

With me to testify in support of SB 1166 is Chris Williams, transportation supervisor from ASKMI local thirty nine sixteen, representing the workers at AC Transit, and Janice O'Malley as well from ASPE California is here to answer any technical questions.

Thank you, Senator. We'll take a second to to have a to get a establish a quorum. Thank you.

[Roll Call]

You you may proceed.

Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, Chair members and, the committee. My name is Kristie Williams, and I'm a transportation supervisor with AC Transit and a proud member of Local 3916 with AFSCME. I'm here today to respectfully urge your support for SB 1166, which would place AC Transit under jurisdiction of PERBs.

PERB provides specialized expertise in public sector labor law and offers a fair, consistent, and trusted process for resolving disputes. It helps both labor and management to address issues more efficiently, strengthen accountability, and encourage good faith collective bargaining. While AFSCME Local 3916, the AC Transit often work together to resolve workplace issues. Our current press our current process under public utilities code is outdated, costly, and time consuming.

When disputes arise, they take longer to resolve and often often require unnecessary litigation and arbitration consuming valuable time and resources that could be better served used serving the public.

Most recently, AC Transit attempted to oppose unilateral changes to health care benefits, co pays, and coverage without bargaining with the union. Action like these under undermine the collective bargaining process and create unnecessary conflict. Under PERB, there is a well established framework for addressing unfair labor practices and ensures both parties meet their legal obligations. Our paratransit agencies, including BART, VTA, Sacramento Regional Transit, and Santa Cruz Metro have already modernized by moving to PERB. It's time for AC Transit to do the same.

Our members deserve the same rights and protections as other transit public agencies across California. The AFSCME Bargaining Unit at AC Transit is simply asking for equal treatment under the law. I respectfully urge your aye vote on SB 1166. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Janice O'Malley, AFSCME in California. We are proud cosponsors, and I'm here to just answer any technical questions you may have.

Thank you. Are there anyone else in the audience audience would like to support the bill? Please come up. Give your name, organization, and your position.

Good morning, madam Chair and members. Martin Vindiola on behalf of the California State Association of Electrical Workers, the California State Pipe Trades Council, and the Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers in support. Thank you.

Good morning, everybody. My name is Nicole Fraser. I'm here with the IBEW Local 1245 Sacramento County, and, we are in strong position. We have strong support.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. Good morning. Kayla Jones with IBEW 1245. We are in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Alvin Deone with, local IBEW Local 1245 in strong support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Al Austin with AFSCME Council 57 in full support. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none, are there any witnesses that would like to come in and and give opposition at the mic? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the members. Are there any questions or the bill was moved in second.

Senator, thank you so much for bringing this bill. I think it's a fair it's a fair bill. I think PERB would be the right place to go settle these types of disputes. And with that, I'll give the support. Madam secretary, will you please call the roll?

Oh, I'm sorry. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. Quit while you're ahead.

Yes. Item number three SB 1166. The motion is do passed and we refer to the committee on appropriations. [Roll Call]. We have sufficient votes. We'll place it on hold for absenteeism.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam Chair.

We'd like to take up the items on consent. May the secretary please call the roll?

Item number one, SB 1024. The motion is do pass and re-refer to the committee on Labor, Employment, and Employment. Recommendation to consent. Item number four, SB 1207. The motion is do pass and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations with recommendation to consent. Item number five, SB 1444. The motion is do pass and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations with recommendation to consent. [Roll Call]

We have a motion and a second. And we're moving too fast. Let's call the roll again, Madam Secretary. We have time.

[Roll Call] We have sufficient votes. We'll place it on hold.

Thank you. Call Ms. Perez.

Open the roll for add ons, Madam Secretary.

Item number 3, SB 1166. [Roll Call] Arreguín, SB 1166. [Roll Call]

Not yet. Hold on.

[Roll Call] We'll place that bill back on call for absent Members. Items number one, 1024, SB 1207, item number four, item number five, SB 1444 for consent items. [Roll Call]. We'll place those consent items back on the call for absent Members.

Good morning.

Good morning.

What do we have? We have item number item number two, SB 1083 Perez. Good morning, Senator.

Thank you, madam Chair, for being patient. Alrighty. Good morning, madam Chair and members. SB 1083 built on the Safe Learning Environments Act, SB 848, which is enacted last year and established a statewide data system to track egregious misconduct by school employees. That law was an important step forward in improving transparency, allegations cannot quietly move between school sites without scrutiny.

But as implementation has moved forward, additional refinements are needed to ensure the system operates with consistency, fairness, and fully protects students. First, classified employees do not currently have a clearly defined impartial review process comparable to what is provided to certificated employees. Office of administrative hearings. Without equivalent due process protections, investigations against them involving egregious misconduct can result in professional and personal consequences.

SB 1083 addresses this by requiring an administrative law judge to determine whether a classified employee should be added to the statewide data system to ensure that only appropriate cases are included.

The bill also requires the statewide system to immediately notify a current employer when an employee leaves a local education agency or private school before or during an investigation. This notification alerts the employer that a preliminary report has been filed and that an investigation is pending to help prevent unresolved concerns from going unnoticed by future employers. SB 1083 further enhances hiring safeguards by requiring schools to obtain and review substantiated misconduct records and the supporting evidence from prior employers before making hiring decisions.

At the same time, it protects privacy and the integrity of investigations by limiting access to the statewide data system. Statewide data system.

The bill also clarifies the commission on teacher credentialing's authority to review substantiated misconduct reports, access relevant records, and take appropriate action when necessary. In addition, SB 1083 extends critical protections to contracted employees who interact with students. These individuals may have regular unsupervised access to children, but are not always held to the same standards as school employees. The bill ensures they are subject to fingerprint based background checks, disclosure requirements, and appropriate vetting measures to safeguard student safety.

Together, these reforms strengthen the statewide system, promote fairness, and ensure that all individuals working with students are held to consistent rigorous standards because student safety remains our highest priority.

Joining me to testify in support of the bill is Navneet Puryear with the California School Employees Association and Tristan Brown with the California Federation of Teachers.

Thank you.

Good morning sorry. Good morning, madam Chair, members of the committee. My name is Navneet Puryear, and I'm here on behalf of the California School Employees Association, a union representing nearly 300,000 classified school employees across the state. We're proud cosponsors of SB 1083. At its core, this bill is about fairness.

Last year, the governor signed SB 848 authored by Senator Perez, which among other things created a permanent statewide database to track allegations and convictions of egregious misconduct by classified school employees. While SB 848 is an important step towards guaranteeing our schools are safe spaces for children, it lacked important safeguards for innocent employees. It allows classified school employees to be placed into a permanent database based on an allegation of misconduct without any due process.

Not only can this ruin the professional and personal lives of innocent classified school employees, it's inconsistent with the rights provided to teachers. SB 1083 would require an administrative law judge through the office of administrative hearings to determine if a classified school employee and a take t k through 12 school district should be placed into the egregious misconduct database.

The bill would provide parity because classified school employees should not be denied due process rights provided to teachers. This measure reflects continued collaboration with the author to ensure that the implementation of last year's legislation both protects students and upholds fundamental due process rights for school employees. So for these reasons and many more, we respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam Chair and members. Tristan Brown with CFT. We are a union of educators and classified professionals. And happy to be here today to build on the amazing work that the Senator brought to you last year with SB 848 and building more protections and more transparency and oversight into the workforce at our public education worksites and now also our private schools as well.

This is a very important measure to help close any gaps that might exist for us to keep track of folks who have no business working on a on a on a campus.

What we're proud to present to you today is a bill that requires investigations to be completed so that, those who are falsely accused can be exonerated. Those who have substantiated findings are gonna be tracked and that we can no longer so called pass the trash of individuals that go from campus to campus and may commit further harm to students.

We're also making sure that the due process rights are enshrined as we believe is consistent with current law, especially in cases as I'm sure you're all well aware of the Skelly case that provides for a due process hearing for individuals to clear their name and have all of the evidence presented against them so that they can better ensure that the truth is found.

And I think at the root of what we're doing here in this bill is make sure that we have the actual accounting of what may or may not happen on campus and be able to track these, incidents with greater accuracy and working with the CTC to keep a database where we can cut through some of the inefficiencies that exist currently, that are also being highlighted in news reports lately.

This is gonna make sure that schools are able to have faster access to data as well. And thus, at the end of the day, child safety is priority number one. So we're happy to be here as a cosponsor and happy to answer any questions and ask your aye vote.

Thank you. Are there any more witnesses in support? Please come forward and give your name, your organization, and your position.

Good morning, Chair members. Elmer Lazarda with the California Federation of Labor Unions in support.

Madam Chair members, Janice O'Malley with AFSCME California. We are proud cosponsors, and also just to register a support position on behalf of the California Teachers Association.

Good morning, madam Chair and member. Sandra Borrero on behalf of SEIU California in support.

Thank you. Are there any witnesses in opposition? Please come forward. Thank you. You'll have two minutes each.

Thank you.

Good morning, madam Chair members. Dorothy Johnson on behalf of the Association for California School Administrators, respectfully opposed to Senate Bill 1083 because of the potential risk created for student safety as well as liability exposure for the, the, potential to create a risk of, childhood sexual assault by a school employee. We have a shared responsibility to stop these incidents from happening once and for all, and we believe a statewide database could make strides in preventing abuse in school settings.

We our classified positions are essential, and they serve in trusted positions with students. And we understand the intent to create additional rules around when records are created and maintained.

And while we truly appreciate the author's efforts and the legislature to pass SB 848 last year, we believe ten eighty three is the move in the wrong direction and runs counter to the goals of SB 848. It will limit disclosure of egregious misconduct to prospective school employers. It creates gaps in employment records that are otherwise fully available through different means.

It allows a third party ALG to wipe out a record of substantiated investigations for misconduct, and it creates a higher evidence standard to place a substantiated report into the database than it takes to make a claim of assault against a public agency's employee. SB 1083 would also make new standards for the investigation process by requiring the noticing of an employee for specific allegations before an investigation can start, limiting the amount of time that can be taken to complete this investigation.

And, frankly, this does not create parity with teaching positions. To be clear, classified employees do have due process for discipline expressly expressly when misconduct is the basis for that discipline. Teaching positions are also not subject to a binding decision by the ALJ. It is a nonbinding decision. So there, again, we do not see how this bill creates parity.

What it does is adds up to making it harder for schools to place those trusted adults in, school settings. It also exposes us to extensive liability for creating the risk of childhood sexual assault. Regrettably, thiS Bill would not offer a resource or tool that we need to weed out bad actors, and therefore, ACCESS is respectfully posed to SB 1083. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Leilani Akinado on behalf of the school's excess liability fund. Last year, we were very pleased to work with Senator Perez on, for the passage of last year's SB 48. So we definitely have hated the process this year of having to be on opposite sides for SB 1083. School agencies have been paying billions of dollars to resolve claims that alleged that they have failed to address the risk of harm and protect students.

We believe that SB 1083 is a step backward from important laws that were enacted last year aSBart of SB 848 to provide potential employers with better information to improve their decision making and hiring trusted adults who will be working with students in our care. For example, SB 848 required all potential employers to inquire with previous employers regarding potential employees for classified positions. Previous law already required this for certificated employees.

SB 1083 changes this requirement to provide for more limited information for classified positions. And in in doing so, it changes the information that is required to be exchanged, between certificated and classified applicants, which we believe is critical information in making making hiring decisions.

In addition, we believe that SB 1083 would expand potential liability because of the, ALJ process that the bill brings in, for substantiated investigations that are reported to the CTC for inclusion in the database. Because of the ALJ process that is instituted in SB 1083, we believe that any subsequent employer would have a gap in applicant's employment history when conducting the background checks for egregious misconduct via the database, making the database incomplete and therefore an unreliable tool to fulfill employers' duties.

For these reasons, SELF remains opposed to SB 1083. And if we could also just add for the record, Amitu in opposition also for the California County Superintendents as well as the CTE JPA Coalition. Thank you.

Thank you. Witnesses in opposition, please give your name, your organization, and your position.

Good morning. Faith Borges on behalf of the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities respectfully opposed for the liability concerns outlaid by AXA and TEL. Thank you.

Caitlin Zhang on behalf of the San Bernardino County District Advocates of Better Schools, the Small School District Association, and the School Employers Association of California, a respectful opposition.

Anna Cavitez on behalf of Los Angeles Unified School District in opposition.

Lucy Salcedo Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education in respectful opposition and also expressing opposition on behalf of Riverside County Office of Education.

Good morning. Sarah Petrowski on behalf of the California Association of School Business Officials in opposition.

Good morning. Marissa Vismer on behalf of the California School Boards Association. Respectfully in opposition.

Thank you. Seeing no more witnesses, I'd like to bring it back to the members. Does anyone have a question or a comment? Both the both. I know where the author's what the author's trying to do protect kids, make sure that we're set our kids are safe.

And so I'm just I will ask you to continue to work with the opposition To get it to make it just a solid bill so that we can make sure that our kids are okay

In schools. And would you like to close?

Yeah.

Yeah. Certainly. And have appreciated to the opposition in my office who have been having lots of conversation and have certainly been working through this not just with your committee and your committee staff, but also as we head into Assembly education amendments that we can take to resolve some of these challenges. This is an especially important issue to me. It's the reason why I moved forward SB 848 last year, which was really landmark legislation to create this database system.

Now what we're seeking to do here is to create an ALJ process that will allow for independent review when an employee feels like they have been unfairly accused, of egregious misconduct, that there can be an independent administrative law judge that can review the case. What we've done with the database system is we've created pending status.

This is a critical component of my bill from last year to make sure that when somebody is under investigation, by a, school district, that they are not able to leave to another school district and avoid accountability. It was very important to have that kind of oversight and to protect students. As I've shared before, I was a victim of child grooming when I was in high school, and so I understand just what a critical issue this is.

At the same time, what we're trying to do here is balance some of the needs, the due process needs, and due process rights that school employees should have access to. So we're gonna continue to work at this. It's something very important I expect to continue working on legislation in this space for years to come because it's an important one. I respectfully ask you all for your eye vote. Thank you.

We've had a motion and a second. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

Item number two, SB 1083. The motion is do passed and we refer to the committee on education. McKinner.

Aye.

McKinner, Aye. Lackey. Alanis.

Aye.

Alanis, Aye. Burner. Aye. Burner, Aye. Garcia.

Aye. Garcia, Aye. Win. Aye. Win, Aye.

Michelle Rodriguez. Aye. Michelle Rodriguez, Aye. We have sufficient votes. We'll place it on hold for absent members.

Thank you. Okay. We should go back through the roll for absent Members, Madam Secretary.

Item number three, SB 1166. The current vote is 5-0. [Roll Call] We'll place this bill back on hold for absent Members. The consent calendar. [Roll Call] We'll place this back on hold for absent Members.

No. I think everybody's... All bills have... With Assembly Member Lackey absent, all bills have passed. And Mr. Lackey is not here, and I think this is maybe our last committee. So if you're watching, Mr. Lackey, I enjoyed you as my Co-Chair. I've enjoyed working with you. You have just been a joy to this committee, and I'm gonna miss you. And so I hope you get to see this. We will be missing you, Mr. Lackey. This meeting is adjourned.