Senate Education2 — 2026-04-08

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to begin with SB 1154. SB 1154 will allow community college districts to use a best value procurement method for public works projects exceeding $1 million. Best value procurement allows contracts to be awarded based on a combination of price, objective qualitative criteria, and not simply the lowest bid. In doing so, it provides community colleges with the same flexibility already provided to K-12 school districts, the University of California, and the California State Universities. Unfortunately, when it comes to delivering major construction projects, community colleges are held to a procurement standard that requires a selection based on the lowest bid, which limits their ability to select contractors based on overall quality and long-term value. Best value procurement helps ensure that projects are completed on time, built to high standards, and designed to support long-term functionality. SB 1154 allows districts to evaluate contractor experience, safety records, technical expertise, and life cycle costs. These projects are essential to preparing students for transfer, career pathways, and participation in California's evolving workforce and will ensure we are setting up our infrastructure for long-term success. Here to testify and support are Dr. Diana Rodriguez, Chancellor of the San Bernardino Community College District, and Jose Torres, Chief Business Officer for the San Bernardino Community College District.

If you could start wrapping up, you're over.

Very good. All right. So we'll now have anybody come up who'd like to add their me too. Please state your name position on the bill and organization. Thank you.

Jack Werson on behalf of Citrus College in support.

also in support. Thank you. Do you have any other support witnesses? We'll now hear from those witnesses in opposition.

Great. And you may begin when you're ready.

Good morning, Senators. Richard Markson, on behalf of the Western Electrical Contractors Association, we provide electrical and low-voltage contracting services throughout the state of California and in the West. Like AGC, WICA is opposed to the measure. In particular, we're particularly pleased that a couple of the witnesses mentioned safety in their testimony. We believe that the bill has very flawed safety language. It creates a two-tiered standard. Some contractors may be deemed safe even with very high experience modifiers if they have an alternative dispute resolution system for workers' compensation claims. This has nothing to do with the safety on a worksite. It has nothing to do with the safety of the contractor, but creates a carve-out for a handful of contractors to avoid being evaluated on their safety standards. The second provision that we object to is the two-tiered enforcement of the skilled and trained workforce mandate that Mr. Fuentes discussed. Under one scenario, a contractor is subject to tiered penalties, including up to $20,000 per month in financial penalties and debarment for violating the skilled and trained workforce mandate. Another set of contractors is subject to arbitration. There is no disclosure of what penalties they may have paid, what kind of mitigation activities they may have pursued. The DLSE is not involved in any of those enforcement activities. We suggested to the author that the safety language be modernized and be used, use the equivalent language that is available to the University of California system, and that the skilled and trained workforce mandate be universally applied, either allow every contractor the alternative of arbitration or subject every contractor to enforcement by DLSE and the financial penalties associated with that. For that reason, we are opposed and thank you.

Thank you, Chair and Senator Reyes. Thank you for your presentation. I understand your points at the same time. It's also very troubling to hear the witnesses from the opposition side. I wonder if either you or your proponents may answer the points that the opponent witnesses have brought up. I think that if we're looking at lowest bid, the issues are going to be very similar. And that is what we have had, is lowest bid. I absolutely take into account the opposition's statements, and I look forward to continuing our conversation with them. I know the price is very important, but the experiences the Chancellor described, that delays and the problems and eventually costing more than anticipated that is the I guess ultimate objection for choosing the lowest bidders. However from my experience as a mayor of the city of Irvine we sent out our RPs only pre-screened, qualified, and previously dealt with trustable companies. And then we know they are all, any of them could qualify and do the job, but eventually looking for lowest bidder and highest quality. And we had very low problem rate for doing that kind of a procedure, choosing the qualified, pre-qualified people through the public bidding. and that qualifies the public agencies to do our piece and use the best value for the lowest cost. But here is, there will be no matter what process you may choose, the best value contractors you may choose, but sometimes things may happen. And so therefore, I wonder, that's one point, cost saving, and through the mechanisms that you can pre-qualify them. Second concern that I have is that subjectivity. Best value means to whose eyes that you can determine that. and we have multiple trustees For them to do their job through their experience and the building experience is not new to them and they will know whom to avoid. So using very possible concern on the favoritism for the name of best value and highest quality, but they eventually may end up millions of dollars more. How do you encounter that?

Yeah, and follow-up question is that you are authorizing the trustees for them to exercise this right for the best value, or they can use public bidding when lowest bidder may be contracted. That's an option to them, right?

The other one is that your disability is requiring best value entities to use skilled and trained workforce. Isn't that, again, limiting the criteria? How do you define the skilled and trained workforce? I'm sure they are all already trained once they are hired by deconstruction companies. Is this limiting to union members?

Yeah, typically under this kind of a restriction for skilled and trained union member skills only, workforces only, will end up minimum 15% higher than market rate building cost. So this bill is requiring and the objections raise that point as well. Again, this is an option. No, this one says it requires.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Choi. Senator Chobok? MS Sorry I missed the opposition comments and their objections to their opposition to the bill but I was reading your letter of opposition Sorry, I had a press conference this morning, so we've got a lot going on today. So I, yes, you're right, the state legislature has passed and allowed for the best procurement

And I have objected to every single one of them. And I will be objecting as well. I get emotional every time this spell is produced. And breath forward. I will be a hard no with the utmost respect, and I think you understand why we've had conversations about this. I believe that it's absolutely fundamentally wrong to put in statute who has the ability to work in this state and who doesn't. We talk endlessly in this legislature, in this body, in this committee about opportunity for all. opportunity to get an education, opportunity to work. We are currently having lots of conversations about AI and ensuring that AI doesn't take away jobs and opportunity for work, for humans to be able to work. We protect people's ability to provide for themselves. This bill, and every bill that has to be for it with regards to risk procurement, has a requirement that states that it has to have skilled and trained workforce. Code words for they have to belong to a certain union, a labor group. they talked about local hire well let me give you an example of local hire and who this bill discriminates against as you know my family name is Ochoa Bo Bo is my married name Grandpa Bo came to the Inland Empire the early 40s. He himself was a general contractor. Has a plaque at the local library in our city, Yucaipa, that says, mentions his name, Shirley S. Bogue. Our family, he was a general contractor. His son, my father-in-law, eventually went into construction, started his own company, construction. KCB Towers, actually. KCB Towers, my father-in-law started his own company probably around the early 80s. Has been in business for over 40 years. Started with two partners. Started as a tower company. Grew up in San Bernardino. Educated. Graduated from Pacific High School. Went to a local elementary school. has had his company for over 40 years His son my husband Greg Vogt works for his father graduated from local schools attended San Bernardino Valley College and graduated for San Bernardino Valley College He's now VP of his dad's company. Under your requirement here of skilled in trade, they don't qualify to participate in bid and work on these projects. local company who employs local boats, who have been educated at local schools, live locally, family members open businesses locally. But because they're not part of these required unions, they get discriminated against. You talk about skilled labor and workforce, Many of your community, San Bruno Valley Community College buildings, have been retrofitted or built by the hands, including my husband's hands. How are those buildings working out for you? Under this bill, you discriminate against them. You take away their opportunity to work locally. You talk about skilled and trained. It is to the best interest of every company to ensure that their employees, that their workforce is trained. Because the standards in which they are working on, the construction code, building codes, they are standard, same for everyone. whether they have a label union or not. The inspectors at that job site will be looking to ensure that every bolt is screwed, welded, cut, assembled by the same standards. And for every company that does not qualify under your skilled and trade, it falls upon them to ensure that they're doing it right because if they don't, guess who pays for it? the very own company, taking away from their own profit at the end because they have to do the job twice, three times if they don't do it correctly. So there is an incentive in there to ensure that they're doing the job right, that their workers are doing it correctly. Labor standard construction code is the same whether you're skilled or trained or not. it is the same and no company is going to willfully or negligently send untrained people to do that job because it falls upon them to fix it so I am tired of hearing every single time a bill is introduced of this sort that you have to be skilled and trained to be able to do work when the state already has a requirement to fulfill certain training to get license to work in the state. The state gives you your license to work in California. And to have the audacity to say, sorry, you don't have it because you don't have this particular union in your job you can work You not qualified to work in the state of California And we making it code we codifying it in the state there is a disconnect between what the state requires you to work and be licensed under and what you qualify as skilled and trained I'm going to ask and I'm not sure sir you've oh through the chair I'm sorry madam chair I have a question for the opposition I'm sorry, you're representing?

And AGC is who?

Okay. Okay. In the training, the facility that I attended that does the training for different construction companies in Riverside County is AGC. Is that AGC or who is that?

Okay. And for those apprenticeship programs in that facility that's being trained, I've had the opportunity to visit that facility. Could you, for the record, state which trades are actually trained in that facility?

And then the other question I have for you, do you happen to know whether or not there's steel that's being trained on there?

Steel construction workers.

And they're not provided, so companies such as our family, an example, and we're just one of few, would not qualify to have and participate in an apprenticeship program because the state doesn't allow it. Being discriminated against over time. so I didn't finish the statement with regards to KCB Towers as an example because the black contractors association by the way are also discriminated against bills such as these and it's important to have this conversation put it on record because we're discriminating against people who can actually qualify to apply to work on this but on that end most of the work that our companies have done and fellow companies have done as well, they build schools. They have built, as a matter of case, Towers has been part of building the steel structures for many of the elementary schools within the Inland Empire the past 40 years. Many, many of them. My husband was one of the ones that were directing steel in many other schools. And did it for most of his life and still does it, but had to change to an indoor job because of skin cancer. Which is prevalent in the bow construction family. But this is where I went a hard no and I speak against bills such as these every single time. because you talk about educating locally, hiring locally, and yet you're advocating for bills that discriminate against your very own students and graduates and family members. Many of our family members that work for KCB have gone to local schools, stay in the area. We have families now, three generations, working at KCB Towers. You don't have to be a particular union to care for your workers and to give them what they need. And many of you have taught and walked in buildings that KCB Tower has actually built and still stand today. So I just want you to think very clearly about what you're moving forward. And up until 2024, I represented San Bernardino Valley College. And actually, it's just San Bernardino Valley College from there. I still have Crafton Hills College. And this hurts. This really, really hurts. On that end, I will be opposing this bill. and any bill that comes before this that limits opportunities for people who have done this a lifetime and are able to do the job. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Cho Bogue. Senator Cobaltin, did you have any questions or comments? Okay. Senator Gomez-Reyes, would you like to close?

Thank you, Senator Gomez-Reyes. Do we have a motion for the bill for SB 1154? Senator Cabaldon has moved the bill and the motion is due pass. Can you call the roll? Senators Perez?

Perez, aye. Ochoa Bug?

Ochoa Bug, no. Cabaldon? Choi? No. Choi, no. Cortese? Gonzalez? Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Great, and we will put that bill on call. Senator Reyes, I know you have SB 1255 next, if you'd like to present that. Okay, so we will actually turn it back over to Senator Nilo, who I see is here in the audience. Senator Nilo is presenting SB 1347 and you can begin when you're ready.

Good morning. Thank you, Senator Nilo, Chair and members. My name is Travis Miller. I appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of SB 1347 related to stock of albuterol in schools. As the Senator said, I've been licensed in the state of California for 26 years. I practice allergy immunology here in the greater Sacramento area. I've held board certifications in pediatrics, internal medicine, and allergy immunology. I've also been the past Chairman of Advocacy Council for the American College of Allergy, which represents 6,000 allergists in Northern America, and I can say I speak on their behalf. I'm the father of three children who've gone to public schools in California, and I can tell you I've witnessed firsthand how terrifying unexpected medical emergencies on campus can be, and particularly to our communities. As Senator Nilo said, asthma is incredibly prevalent in our schools. Albuterol is a safe and easy to administer medication that children need. Some children don't have it at school because they lack resources or access to appropriate medical care or prescription coverage. This helps in those situations. Ensuring schools, including preschool programs, have access to these medications is critical to protecting children at risk of severe medical reactions. Last year, I testified for SB 568 for Senator Nilo, which created a similar policy with the extension of stock epinephrine in schools eligible for preschool students. Thankfully, the legislature passed that and the governor signed it into law. SB 1347 is a simple measure that allows stock albuterol, another safe medication in schools. This would be an extension of the incredible platform of public health safety, which we've built in the last 20 years in California to be sure our children have access the safe medications. I strongly encourage you to move the bill forward for further consideration. I can answer any technical or scientific questions about the medication if you have them. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. LeAngela Reed on behalf of the California School Nurses Organization in strong support.

Great. Anybody else? Alrighty. Do we have any opposition witnesses here in the room today that would like to offer their testimony? If so, priests come forward. Seeing nobody getting up, are there any other opposition witnesses that would like to offer me twos?

LeAngela Reed. Thank you.

I respectfully ask an aye vote.

And thank you so much for allowing me to go in the sequence that I did. Appreciate it very much.

Good morning, community members and the chair. And I'm so happy today that I would like to present Senate Bill 1222, which would designate the experienced lead agency to assist the regions struggling with the career technical education implementation and provide tools and best practices to better serve all student populations. and expanding career tech education has been a priority of this legislature, especially for students who have been historically underserved. However, the reality is that too many young people are still falling through the cracks. Today, according to a report released in 2024, new ways to work youth workforce development in California. Excuse me. More than half a million youth in California are disconnected from both the school and the workforce. Among those who are working nearly one in two earn low wages with the limited opportunities for advancement. At the same time, 61% of the high school students are socioeconomically disadvantaged, with the additional barriers faced by students experiencing homelessness or in foster care. Despite the significant state investment, access to high quality career tech education programs remain uneven across regions and districts. In fact, over the past five years, nearly $120 million in state-approved career tech education funding has gone unallocated. allocated. This is not due to a lack of commitment or demand, but a lack of regional capacity. More local education agencies do not have the staffing, technical experience, or coordination needed to fully implement and sustain strong CTE programs and because CTE programs must continuously align with the developing local labor markets that the capacity gap only grows over time. When done well, CTE provides students with the direct pathway into workforce. It allows them to graduate high school with the skills needed to step into high wage careers and helps address workforce shortages while also breaking cycles of generational poverty. SB 1222 offers a targeted and practical solution. The bill would require the superintendent of public instruction to designate a state-lead agency and establish a pilot program in two regions. The lead agency would support the local education agencies by developing inclusive career tech education pathway models and strengthen industry and workforce partnerships while expanding work-based learning opportunities, including apprenticeships. The goal is to build sustainable regional capacity so that more students, especially those underserved, can access high quality career pathway To support this effort I have submitted a modest million one budget request for a three pilot program and the lead agency would also provide annual reports to ensure accountability and measurable outcomes. Representing the sponsor of this bill with me, I have Kathy Boyd, Executive Director of Career Education and Workforce Development Educational Services Division at the Orange County Department of Education. Kathy, thank you for being here.

You may begin when you're ready.

Thank you for your presentation. Do we have any other support witnesses in the room? Please state your name, org, and position on the bill. Sure. Tiffany Mock, CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals. We want to thank the author for this important bill and also for the testifying witness for both her work and her day-to-day job and also for making the important statements here today. Thank you so much. McLean Rozanski with the Alameda County Office of Education in support Hi there Genevieve Koenigshofer with GenUp a student educational advocacy organization in support. Xavier Maltese with the California Charter Schools Association in support. Great, seeing as we have no other support witnesses. We'll see if you have any opposition witnesses that would like to register their testimony. Are there any opposition witnesses that would like to offer Me Too? Seeing no one getting up, we'll turn it back to the committee for questions or comments. Senator Cobaldin. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I want to applaud the author for leading on the issue. This is we it's very well established, the importance of career technical education, particularly when it's well integrated with other options that young people need to have. And so we need to continue to the space a little over a decade ago. So the entire California State Senate, the only time in its history, left this building and traveled to Long Beach for the sole purpose of learning more about link learning, career technical education, college and career pathways. And I was the facilitator of that session, trying to focus on examples of what works, the powerful impact, especially when CT is linked with college preparation as well. and it followed and resulted in further dramatic policy changes and investments. And the CT Pathways Program at that time was created essentially as the same concept, but statewide, operated by CDE, with a billion dollars, a substantial investment, the most substantial investment of any state in the country ever in these pathways. A couple years later, the state created another CTE pilot program, this time with a couple hundred million dollars. Then, as the analysis points out, Mr. Johnson is a little younger than me, so the analysis starts a little earlier in history. Then we ended up with an additional couple of programs, Golden State Pathways, the Strong Workforce Program, CTE, the Innovation Grant Program. I've been the chair of the National Workforce Development Council and the Mayor's Education Workforce Committee and we've done a lot of work in this space and the one thing I'm convinced we don't need in this space is additional bespoke pilot programs we we there's none of the counties in my district are looking to for more technical assistance they need they need some assistance with training and liability issues for work-based learning. They need actual money to pay for the equipment that many of these programs demand so that students are being trained on the equipment that they need in the workforce. They need help with curriculum alignment. They need public-private partnerships. But what they don't need is more assistance from either CDE or from another county office. And so, you know, having been around this for enough time, every couple of years, we pass another pilot and then we come back a couple years later and say, hey, anybody ever hear about CTE? It's really great. We should do something about it. And so I appreciate the intent here very very much but I don think we need yet another program And particularly in this case sort of assigning a single county to do that We haven done a competitive bid process We don even know from the rest of the state that there demand for this service And so I can't support it today. But again, I appreciate the intention here. But what we what we really need to do is is is to make the further investments in the lessons from the pilots that we've already been doing for the last 20 years and make some of the legal changes so that the workforce, direct workforce and work based learning opportunities in particular can be accomplished. and then really focus our resources on CTE teachers and equipment and business partnerships that will make the promise of all these pilots a reality for even more California young people. Thanks. Thanks, Madam Chair. Thank you for your comments. However, I would be happy to make this one as just a statewide program rather than making it the pilot program. The reason we are starting with a pilot program is that as I stated in my opening statement is that we, the need is there and everybody recognizes that but there are a lot of gaps in implementing. in the program implementation is not followed up. So therefore Board of Education in Orange County would like to partner with another district to pilot programs will demonstrate how it can be carried out and other counties can look up to the model and they can provide the necessary skills and the program implementation experiences from their successes. So I would like to invite Kathy if you can add more concerns that Senator Cobaldon is expressing. Yeah, thank you very much, by the way, for that comment. I'm unique in the Orange County area because I sit on the board for the Orange County Workforce Development Board, and we've forged very strong ties between the three workforce development boards in our region. And when I did that, I think it's been about five years I've been a commissioner on that board. And it took me a couple years to learn, by the way, what that board was and how it had possible ties to the work we did in the Office of Education, County Office of Education. And since then, we've actually forged very close connections. We have a contract with our local workforce board now doing similar services as a contract provider, service provider with the local Orange County Workforce Development Board. Additionally, we were the lead agency for the K-16 in our region, which came out in 2021. And when we became the lead agency and started working a lot more with the businesses and the private for-profit, nonprofit businesses, and then obviously the Cal State and the UC system, as well as the community colleges in a very purposeful way, We actually sent funding out to every agency through the 18 million-ish that we received in our region. And that really set a new tone for what a county office of education could be. And we just realized that along the last three years. I think the final step, there's a lot of other little details, but not to bore you with details too much. One of them was getting that data sharing agreement between our community colleges. That has allowed us to collect dual enrollment data at the completion of every term. And with that, we've been able to actually put together a quantitative data report of all the dual enrollment that is happening across any college in Orange County, and then analyzing that data and sending it back to our school district so they can report it for college and career indicator purposes at the end of every year. That data sharing agreement has also led to us being included in our regional, it's called the 2026 Orange County Economic Opportunity Report. And they left a whole subsection just for K-12, 7 through 12 data, because we're measuring work-based learning at the very kernel, like anybody who's going through a job shadow, anybody who's going through an internship or a non-traditional youth apprenticeship. So details like that are just successes that we almost stumbled upon very humbly. And I just felt as we go out to conferences across the state in CTE, we often get other people asking us, does somebody like you exist in our region too? And so it just it leads to the spirit of why we thought we'd at least promote this, because we'd be happy to share this. The things that we are doing are kind of out of the box for a county office, but they're also just yielding these amazing results and opportunities for kids are growing. And so we have that measurable result and we'd love to see if we could spread that across the state. Great. Are there any other comments or questions? All righty. Seeing as we don't, Senator Choi, would you like to close? Thank you. At this core, SB 1222 is about making sure that the opportunities are not determined by geography. It is about ensuring that every student, regardless of a background or zip code, has access to a pathway that leads to a stable, well-paying career. This bill will help connect thousands of students to real opportunities and the strongest future. I respectfully ask for your eye vote. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Choi. Do we have a motion for SB 1222? We have a motion by Senator Ochoa Bogue, and the motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogue? Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Cabaldon? Choi? Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese, Gonzalez, Reyes. Thank you. Thank you, and we will put that bill on call. Next up, looks like we don't have any other authors just yet. So Senator Chobo, would you like to present on SB 1378? Is Genevieve here? Do I have my witnesses here? Are they here? Okay. And Senator Chobo, you may begin when you're ready. Thank you. Just making sure my witnesses are here. The witnesses, can they sit in the dais or are they right here? Okay. Good morning, Madam Chair and members. First, I'd like to accept the committee's amendments and thank the staff for their collaboration with my team. I know this has been a really work in progress to get it done And I also want to thank my Senate fellow for working on this bill as well Miles Senate Bill 1378 establishes the California Excellence in Service Learning designation program to recognize local education agencies and individual schools that demonstrate excellence in service learning. Service learning is an educational approach that integrates classroom lessons with real community work helping students build civic and leadership skills. California has already made significant investments in student civic engagement through programs like the State Seal of Civic Engagement and the California Service Grant Program. The CDE already recognizes schools for excellence in other priority areas, such as the Green Ribbon Schools Award. However, the state currently lacks a formal recognition program that highlights schools leading the way in service learning. SB 1378 fills this gap by creating a statewide designation that will elevate successful programs and incentivize more schools to expand service learning opportunities. Joining me today is Genevieve with Generation Up and Andy from Menlo Atherton High. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Genevieve Koenigshofer. I'm a Masters of Public Policy student at UC Berkeley and the Executive Director of GenUp, which is a student-led educational advocacy organization. Starting in 2020, GenUp was involved in implementing the state seal of civic engagement and activated students statewide to bring the state seal to their districts. We strongly support service learning as a means of encouraging students' civic engagement. In fact, I'm living proof of it. In high school, I earned an international baccalaureate diploma of which community activity service requirement is a core tenet. In my hometown, which has a strong military and veteran community, I organized a student benefit concert for Wounded Warriors. I coordinated over a dozen acts, from singing to stand-up comedy, and raised $800 for the Wounded Warriors Foundation. Throughout the process, I worked with a teacher mentor and completed regular reflections on learning outcomes I had selected myself. This experience defined my high school career. It taught me how to organize large-scale events, how to coordinate a team with many skills, and how to bring people together. Most importantly, I caught the bug for public service. Today, schools are struggling to help students engage in the classroom. Chronic absenteeism is a pervasive challenge, and AI and a changing job market make students feel unprepared for life after school. But through GenUp's Student Vision for California Education Survey, we've heard from hundreds of California students on what makes learning meaningful to them. The response has been overwhelming. Students want hands-on, interactive learning opportunities that help them build skills and explore future careers. Service learning does this and more, integrating students into their community. But these opportunities are currently few and far between. At my high school, only 20 out of over 700 in my class had the opportunity to participate in IB. Expanding service learning to all students would reach those who are feeling disengaged at school or who otherwise wouldn't have time outside of class with work or other responsibilities. In other words, it would reach the students who need it most. We strongly support SB 1378. Thank you. Good morning Chair and members My name is Andy Stewart and I represent Menlo High School in our service learning center I been teaching for 28 years and my belief in this work started early After college, my father joined the Peace Corps in Liberia, and that experience shaped his path. He showed me that service can guide a meaningful and impactful future. I now see that same realization taking hold in our students. As they prepare to enter the world, they are learning that serving others helps make it a better place. Our program was built from the ground up and has grown into a thriving student-led service learning center, grounded in purpose, reflection, and real community impact. Students lead service days and initiatives across campus and the community. They organize Alzheimer's days, visiting care homes with art, music, and conversation that bring joy to residents while deeply impacting the students themselves. Sports teams serve at food banks and reflect on those experiences, building empathy, resilience, and purpose. And this is not just feel-good language. The impact is real and measurable. Service helps students manage stress and anxiety, builds confidence, gives them real-world experience communicating with adults and navigating professional spaces. The research is clear. Service addresses many of the challenges young people are facing today, including disconnection and lack of purpose. Early on, students took the lead. They called a meeting with staff at the Stanford Haas Center for Public Service, where they learned what makes this work meaningful, ethical, and impactful. From that experience, they built a strong framework that now guides everything they do. We see it every day. Students grow into leaders, community partners gain consistent, thoughtful support, and schools become places where students feel connected to something bigger than themselves. After 28 years in education, what stands out most is this. When the students are trusted with real responsibility, they rise to it. Young people do not have to wait to become leaders through service learning. They can lead now. I ask you to please vote to pass SB 1378. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you both. We'll now move on to hearing from any other support witnesses that are here in room 2100. And please use the microphone outside the railing and only state your name, organization, and position on the bill. Welcome. Jeff Wiener. I'm representing Jewish Family and Children's Services in San Francisco. We strongly support the bill. All right, we'll now move on to lead witnesses in opposition, if there are any. Seeing none, are there any witnesses that would like to come to the microphone to state their opposition? I would support I apologize you don't have to apologize for supporting a bill it's fine Xavier with the charter schools in support all right okay so thank you to the support and opposition witnesses will bring the discussion back to me apparently ah yes Senator the committee amendments in the analysis are yes yes yes yes yeah I did mention that in my my first comment accepting the committee amendments yes okay all right I don have a question I support the both the intent of the bill and the and the reasons for it that have been mentioned and I going to support this today Maybe it because I the one member of the Appropriations Committee on this committee I always want to know what do we need another program Do we need another thing? How much money is it going to cost as on the prior bill? And I have I do I am a bit concerned in general terms about our you know each year we're adding more designations, more state SEALs, just on and on and on and on and on, as though schools are not already overwhelmed with their core mission and the basics of what they have to do, because we're not sending any additional resources to schools in order to accomplish this. And we will sometimes say, well, it's voluntary for them to do that, but that creates pretty substantial equity implications if only schools that have slack resources participate in these programs. That being said, I think this aligns with our existing state seal, and it's not a massive new program. It's a set of mostly one-time activities that schools have to demonstrate that they're doing if they choose to do so. So it doesn't implicate curriculum changes or classroom practices as some of the other proposals do. So I'm prepared to support it today. Thank the author for bringing it forward and also asking the university to not send us weekly state seal and designation. I know we'll hear one in just a moment. It's not about that one either. But that these activities are not free for every single school district and for the Department of Education. This is a worthwhile one, but let's be judicious in how we proceed. So with that, Senator Chobo, would you like to close? Yeah, I think with that, Senator Kamala, and you know I have the highest respect for you and your institutional knowledge that you bring to the dais. I'm very, very grateful to sit here with you, and I take wholeheartedly your counsel every single time we speak. With that, I think the only thing that I would add or kind of mentioned is the fact that, you know, if anything, and you mentioned none of this adds any additional burdens to the schools moving forward. But I think it gives an opportunity to validate the schools that are already moving forward with such programs. And I think that's what we're looking at. We're not putting pressure on any school districts to or schools to implement new programs when it comes to the SEALs, but at least give them the validation for the work that they're already currently doing. And I think that's the way that I would see it right now is just an opportunity to validate the work that has been doing and recognizing and having these students who have successfully gone through those programs, the ability to say, hey, my school is X, Y, and Z, and they've accomplished, you know, one, two, and three. And I think that's the way that I see this particular program and the SEALs and whether or not we support them moving forward. With that, SB 1378 is a simple but meaningful step in recognizing the excellent service, learning our programs that benefit students and their communities, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote. All right. Thank you, Senator. Senator Choi? Okay, I'll be happy to support this bill. and the excellence in service learning designation will encourage many students to get into and what is it. And now I get also that designation. This is a service-oriented program is very needed for the students. And in fact, people, high school students especially, look for such an opportunity and get the recognition. for their good college admission purposes as well, so I'll be happy to make a motion. All right. I apologize. I thought I was closing. I didn't realize Senator Choy was going to speak, so I apologize. No, that's not on you. You were closing. All right. Thank you, Senator Choy, for the motion. Please call the roll, and the motion is due pass as amended to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Bog. Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Cabalden. Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi. Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese. Gonzalez. Reyes. All right. That bill is on call. We're now going to proceed to item one on our calendar, SB 1048. Senator Becker, welcome. All right. Well, it's fun to present after that because I'm a big fan of service learning. So, excellent. Good morning. Pleased to present SB 1048. I want to thank the committee and staff for working on this bill with me. This bill established the seal of climate literacy. a high school diploma distinction, awarded students to demonstrate a strong understanding of climate science and its real-world impacts through both coursework and hands-on learning. This voluntary program for local education agencies gives schools the flexibility to implement this diploma distinction in a way that works best for their communities while maintaining consistent statewide recognition. In cooperation with supporters in this committee, I've taken amendments to ensure that all schools that choose to participate are equipped with resources and partnerships to implement this program. And I'll mention here, because I'm sure there'll be, you know, concerns around the resources and such, that partly this bill is modeled after a successful bill in Colorado. And in Colorado, they did work and partner with nonprofits, as we plan to do with this bill, to provide implementation support and resources, including engaging philanthropic organizations to provide small grants raising from $1,000 to $10,000 to help under-resourced schools or rural schools participate. And again, in Colorado, that's been a successful strategy to help rural and low-wealth communities. Again, the amendments that we've taken, I appreciate these amendments. Also, just the timelines and clarify the guidelines for criteria development because we want the State Board of Education to have flexibility here and oversight in terms of which courses would qualify for this seal. Climate change remains one of the defining issues and challenges of our generation. We must prepare future generations to meet it. And I'll mention, you know, I have so many young people that I run into my area who are deeply concerned about that issue and the future of the planet, that they'll live on much longer than we will. But leadership in climate policy, I believe, must go hand in hand with climate education. Students are increasingly interested in climate careers but many lack structured opportunities to kind of deeply engage in that while in school This bill creates a clear and accessible pathway for students to build that knowledge SB 1048 also encourages connections to workforce and higher education pathways by allowing students to earn distinctions in green industry skills or college-level coursework. This helps align our education system with California's growing a clean energy economy. This bill is about helping students prepare for the future. It equips them with the knowledge, skills, and experience needed to succeed in a changing climate and a changing economy. It's sponsored by 10 Strands, Undone K12, the California State PTA, the Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action, and a large coalition of education and climate advocates, including our state superintendent. of Public Instruction, Tony Thurman. With me to testify today and support is Jonathan Klein of Undaunted K-12 and Ingrid Roberson, the Chief Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction. Thank you both. All right. Chair, members of the committee, good morning. I'm Dr. Ingrid Roberson. I'm the Chief Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, testifying in strong support of SB 1048 on behalf of the State Superintendent Tony Thurman and the California Department of Education. And two things I would ask you to keep in mind, rigor and relevance. And relevance is best determined by the students themselves. At a recent State Board meeting, we heard from student leaders, finalists for our U.S. Senate Youth Program. And what I heard, student after student, from different parts of the state, different backgrounds, different grade levels, speaking about the same thing. Their concern about the climate, sustainability. It is affecting their decisions, such as what to major in, environmental engineering, because they, our youth, want to be part of the solution. Meanwhile, a nonpartisan report from Economy Environment last fall found that clean energy jobs are growing more than three times faster in the state of California. It is our responsibility to ensure we are preparing our students for the economies of today and tomorrow. SB 1048 answers these calls, and that is why the State Superintendent of Public Instruction is proud to support SB 1048. The State Seal of Climate Literacy gives students a meaningful, voluntary framework to build the knowledge and hands-on skills they're demanding through coursework and hands-on, project-based learning connected to their own communities. From CDE's perspective, this seal aligns directly with the state board priorities around high school redesign. Again, rigor and relevance. Particularly the portrait of a graduate learner framework, which calls for every student to graduate with the competencies, skills, and real-world experiences needed to thrive in a rapidly changing economy. For us, a voluntary diploma endorsement signals workforce readiness. in one of California's fastest-growing sectors that offers a natural complement to the internship, apprenticeship, and career pathway measures already under consideration. The CDE is committed to supporting equitable implementation of the SEAL and partnering with nonprofits to provide guidance and resources focused on districts with Title I schools, small and rural districts, and district-serving English learners. every sector from agriculture to technology to healthcare to manufacturing to tourism must contend with a changing climate and transition to a resilient and sustainable future I respectfully urge you to vote yes on SB 1048 Thank you So just as a reminder courtesy we have two minutes allotted for each witness So that was two and a half, 2.40 seconds, two minutes and 40 seconds. So I was like, she's going to be finished. She's going to be finished. I was really hopeful. But we do have a maximum time limit of two minutes. Good morning. Thank you, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Jonathan Klein, and I'm the co-founder of Undaunted K-12. I'm also a fifth-grade teacher, a former fifth-grade teacher, and current California parent of two teenagers. We are honored to co-sponsor this bill with our friends and partners at TenStrands, the California State PTA, and Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action. We thank you, Senator Becker, for authoring this important bill to increase relevant, career-oriented, hands-on learning experiences that prepare young people for the future they are inheriting from us. With 10 strands, Undaunted has been running the California Youth Climate Policy Leadership Program for high school students for the last three years. We've worked with about 150 students from 41 school districts across the state's rural and urban communities. And what we see are students who are hungry for learning that connects to their communities and their futures. Fieldwork, research, internships, apprenticeships, projects that put their skills to work alongside local employers, nonprofits, and public agencies. They want to get their hands dirty and learn by doing. And this seal is built around that kind of community-connected, hands-on learning. A student in the Antelope Valley might partner with their local water district. A student in Humboldt might do research with a local forestry program. A student in San Jose might complete a solar installation internship. Every one of those experiences builds credentials, builds confidence, and builds a bridge to diverse jobs in the green economy that are available to both high school graduates entering a career and those who will ultimately graduate with four-year degrees. The SEAL meets many needs, including those of employers in the green economy, where there is a documented struggle to hire high school graduates who are otherwise qualified for high-paying entry-level roles because it is challenging for them to demonstrate their prior experience. The SEAL can help address that. Colorado launched the seal of climate literacy model in 2024. Maine launched their seal last month. California can be next, and we're excited to show what this looks like for every kind of learner in every kind of community. The seal is not a mandate. It gives districts flexibility and students a formal way to demonstrate that they have valuable knowledge and skills, that they have relevant experience working in their communities on hard problems that don't always have clear answers. Let's increase access to these kinds of educational experiences for young people across the state. I respectfully ask you to please vote yes on SB 1048. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. I'm going to thank the witnesses. We're going to continue with any witnesses in support of the measure. Please come up to the microphone. It's a Me Too movement. So just as a Me Too, yeah, movement, Me Too testimonies. I'm sorry, movement. Testimonies. So if you please state your name, the organization that you represent, and your position on the bill. Thank you. Clifton Wilson on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco in support. Thank you. Good morning, Vice Chair and Members. Sam and Asher on behalf of the Los Angeles County Office of Education in support. Thank you. Good morning. Isha Ayur on behalf of City of Mountain View in support. Good morning. Mackenzie Weiser CEO of Sacramento Splash a local environmental education nonprofit In support Good morning My name is Ziva Anzel I from Lincoln California and I support this bill Good morning. Jamie Goh on behalf of Tree People. In support. My name is Joe Klein. I'm in 10th grade, and I support. Genevieve Koenigshofer, Genop. In support. Good morning. Emily Abraham with the California Academy of Sciences in support. Mark Landgraf, Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority in strong support. Tan Tran representing HED, an architectural and design firm. Thank you. In support. Tiffany Mock on behalf of CFD in support. okay all right we'll continue with any witnesses in opposition do you have any lead witnesses in opposition seeing none do we have any general opposition here look at that you did a phenomenal job in making your case so in that case we'll bring it back to the dais comments or questions Senator Cabaldon Sure. Well, first, let me give my 45-second every one of these issue comments, which is, you know, this committee and the Assembly Committee have both had uniquely, as far as I can tell, in the Capitol policies to contain ourselves from passing unlimited bills on curriculum. because in the absence of that, every single member of the legislature has a great idea for what the curriculum should look like. And schools cannot handle that. We need a coherent curriculum. So we have a policy here that says, please don't bring us bills that change curriculum. Instead, leave that to Instructional Quality Commission. So what happens, then we have a bunch of bills directing the Instructional Quality Commission to look at curriculum changes to match that up. Or we have bills that try to find other ways to influence what is happening in the school curriculum. And this is only our third state seal or fourth state seal. But I worry that this will be the latest. And so I'm supportive of the bill and also mind a second. But I hope nobody else is watching us do this and thinking, hey, we need a state seal on my idea as well. in part because it does create work at the department and in schools, and it raises some of the issues that are in the analysis around equity, and they're not just the traditional equity issues, so just focusing on Title I schools and what have you doesn't accomplish that because it really is around, in this particular case, it's around what does the opportunity landscape look like in the region that you're in, and that may or may not be related to poverty. It's like where are their green job industries that are emerging? Where are their climate advocacy, civic infrastructure that exists? So that's not a reason not to do it, but it is important. Like somebody has to pay attention to this work. And so we simply can't keep telling schools or trying to change their curriculum by creating more seals that nudge. and this bill does do that in the sense that you know it it recognizes the the curriculum that we've all that the state board and in the legislature's framework has already adopted in science and other things but then it adds this language about but only the science classes that have a climate you know a climate lens or a climate focus to them um and at least my purpose here is not to try to try to force every school district to say we want we we want our kids to be able to have access to this New State Seal, in part because they and parents are demanding it because they want to be competitive with kids in other districts. And the only way for us to do that is to tell our science teachers they need to change the way that they're teaching science. I think they should be incorporating climate, but that's exactly why we have a curriculum policy here, that the legislature should not be trying to manage the classroom curriculum and pedagogy practices of teachers on a bill-by-bill basis. So I just want to encourage you, you know, as this is going forward, you know, just to be approaching with some humility and respect for the fact that each individual school is going to need to approach this in different ways. And that it shouldn't be a backdoor on change on kind of by incentivizing to the point where school districts have no choice other than to change their career piece. But the other piece where I think some humility is necessary is in this connection to the workforce piece. And I really appreciated CD's emphasis on rigor and relevance because it is important here because coming from the world of education myself, we always do this. We'll do these 200 things, and they will all make students better for the workforce in some way. And then we wring our hands. What do employers really want? We go to a Chamber of Commerce breakfast and somebody and their public affairs person tells us it's not actually what their HR people are hiring for. But the challenge in the design here, which I mean, you've got to keep navigating. It's clear that you're doing that in the bill is simultaneously the educators in us in our in our in that mindset is we want as much. We want as much flexibility as possible. So it could be an experience in the workplace, but it also could be technical skills demonstrated by a paper in one of your classes. It could be related to solar, but it could also be related. In the end, if you're an employer or if you're a bachelor's degree program in one of these sectors, it's not actually telling you anything other than that this is a student who has demonstrated interest and commitment to the field. but it's not actually telling you anything about skills or competencies. That may not be achievable, but in terms of pitching it as this will provide a pathway into the workforce, not really because that's not how employers – they are looking for demonstrated skills and competencies, which may be here, but it's not automatic. So the fact that a student is spending year after year committed to this thing, The grit and the determination around climate is a signal in and of itself. So I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but only that I wouldn't suggest employers are going to be able to say we're going to be able to hire a student right out of high school because we know from the seal that they have any particular set of skills that are relevant in the workplace. That will also be incumbent then on the state board and the superintendent as they're figuring out how to define all of this to emphasize – if the goal here is to prepare students for green jobs and for the climate economy, then the rigor of this and the specificity of it has to be turned way up. If the goal rather is more on climate mindset, for example, then the knob goes the other way. So I'm not suggesting to have the answer there, but that's the kind of choices that the bill should either answer or be clear with the with the state board and the superintendent about how to get to those into the into the future. So I think it well constructed It well designed The issue is definitely necessary You know we seen the it is we will only solve our climate challenges if if each successive generation is more capable of executing on their on their commitment to the issue And so this is very important, especially in today's climate, political climate. This is an extremely important effort to move forward. Really appreciate the authors and the sponsors care and careful design choices in trying to make this work. I think there's an incredible potential and happy to support it today as well. Do we have any other questions or comments? All righty. Senator Becker, would you like to close?

Great. Thank you, Senator Becker. So do we have a motion on SB 1048? We have a motion. We have a motion by Senator Choi. and that motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Can you please call the roll? Senators Perez?

Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogue?

Ochoa Bogue, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese, Gonzalez, Reyes. Great, and we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Senator Becker. Thank you. I don't think we have one. Thank you. Welcome Senator Perez. You may proceed when ready, ma'am.

Good morning honorable state senators and madam chair My name is Dr Julie Fun a first student and now an educator at Cal State LA I hail from San Gabriel Valley or 626 as we affectionately call it I come here today on behalf of the California Faculty Association to ask you all to support Senate Bill 1101 and to protect our students and educators, sadly, from the very institutions where we teach, learn, and are meant to be safe. The federal government is distorting and weaponizing the legal system. It is also not safeguarding us against hate. They are politicizing it. I do not want to mince my words here. This is not about justice, but about political revenge and racism. Never in the history of the United States has turning in the names of people of color resulted in positive outcomes. In living memory within my own community, when my elders had their names on a roster, it was to put them in holding cells at the Santa Anita racetrack and send them into concentration camps during World War II. Their names were culled from neighbors, employers, and schools and recorded by the U.S. government. I, along with other activists, educators, union members, and students were placed on rosters and given up to the federal government. There has been no inquiry about hate speech, but deliberate attempts to intimidate educators and defund higher education. This is about silencing words from those that condemn state violence and squashing questions about whether or not our basic civil rights have been achieved. And in these times, have we been living up to our democratic dreams? While I've heard that this is unprecedented, the truth of the matter is, in my community, being turned into the federal government is a well-rehearsed pattern. My elders have fought so hard so that the next generation, like me, would not have to experience the violence, the surveillance, and the racism that they endured. But here we are. So I urge you to pass this bill because the minimum we can do is to require the university systems to inform their employees that they are about to share their personal information with the federal government. Thank you.

Thank you very much to both of you. We'll now continue with any witnesses in support for SB 1101. Please come to the microphone and name, organization, and position, please.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. but not continue to any witnesses in opposition to SB 1101? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. Any questions, comments? Okay. So I will facilitate some conversation on the bill. Thank you for bringing this measure forward. So a couple of questions and just your thoughts on how and whether or not there's been conversations on this matter. within this particular subject. Do we know whether or not it's appropriate or wise to notify parties involved in an investigative compliance or enforcement action prior to OCR contacting that individual? And why should institutions of higher education get involved?

Thank you, Madam Chair. The other question I have for you is, so why is alerting someone that they are under investigation being prioritized over ensuring that an individual who is subject to a complaint is properly investigated?

The third question that I have is is it legal to disclose information during active investigations Yes I mean that absolutely something that we can request and have done

is that information that's being requested or required through a subpoena

And I want to speak to that really quick because… See, this is why I'm facilitating conversation.

Okay, and for the record, I think it's important to also note publicly, do you have, in order for the federal government to issue a subpoena, what are the requirements for a subpoena to be issued?

Okay. And then the last comment that we have here is, so the bill includes a severability clause. Yes.

I'm not a legal expert, so bear with me. which means that if any provision or its application towards this bill is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. So by including this language, are you anticipating legal challenges to this bill?

So I'm going to just end my comments with the fact that I completely hear the fear that you folks have. and the ability to express your opinions and your perspectives. I think the First Amendment is one of the most sacred amendments that we have. I mean, I cherish them and absolutely value them. And I want to just put it back because we kept referencing current administration and we keep referencing 16 months ago, which is the current administration and the fear that people have this. And as much as I respect and I appreciate you folks coming here and protecting that right, I want to also liken it to the fear that many parents had in the previous administration when speaking at school board meetings. Who felt that they were being prosecuted for expressing their opinion at school board meetings. Many were arrested, threatened because of how they felt and expressing their opinion. In the previous administration, we also had speakers at universities where we are, you know, we're supposed to have and facilitate conversation, facilitate the ideas, facilitate the communication of ideas. And yet we had canceled speakers. speakers at various universities because they did not align with the current at the time thought process. So you talk about, you know, unprecedented. It hasn't been unprecedented. It has happened in World War II. It has happened in the previous administration where parents felt completely, and there was a list that the government, the federal government had against these parents because they were considered threats to, I forget, there was a legal term that they had, but basically criminalizing them, considered threats. So I want to just liken it to what has been in the previous administration. We had conservative folks that failed, prosecuted. for expressing their opinions. And so I am a huge advocate of anyone and everyone speaking their mind, their opinion, right? As ugly as it may seem to me or to anyone, it is your right to express. Facilitating conversations of ideas, expressing yourself without violence is incredibly important, right? As these subpoenas are going through it, I just want to make sure that, you know, as you carry, I won't be supporting the bill today because I am kind of concerned about the concerns that you have, which you obviously also have about whether or not this is legal or not to be able to do that. So I'm going to be abstaining on the bill. But I do want to put on record that I believe that everyone, conservative, liberal, wherever it may be, you have a right. But as much as you're advocating for your own ability to express yourselves and protect yourselves now, everyone has the right to do that under any administration. Democrat, Republican, independent, across political spectrums, whoever it is, we have to ensure that we have systems that protect the ability for people to facilitate and not cancel someone because they believe differently. Not penalize someone because they believe differently than the current administration. Not to criminalize someone because they believe or express differently. that is different than bringing violence forward that I do not I mean I condone completely but expressing verbally the deliberation of ideas everyone has a right to be able to do that on campus so with that I just wanted to make sure because I truly truly respect the effort that you're putting forward here I'm just concerned about the potential legalities of it so I'm going to be abstaining on the bill, but I did want to put on record that both you and the previous, I mean, both you and other folks that are on the opposite side of the spectrum felt exactly the same way that you're feeling here today. And today I want to speak on their behalf because nobody carried a bill. And if they had carried a bill, it wouldn't probably have passed the legislature during the previous administration. That's how sad it is. And that's why I wanted, I thought it was important to express the opinion that we should all, in leadership, respect everyone's ability to express themselves without violence. So with that, Senator Kavalan.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Cabaldon. And we do sit together on that privacy, so we'll be reviewing. reviewing the bill once again. But I did want to just finalize. So I left my phone at home so I couldn't do my research. So I feel a little perturbed right now. But thank you to the consultant who's lent me her phone. But I just wanted to kind of finalize the last thought on just to plant the seeds on, especially for our youth leadership, to understand and put themselves in thinking about the others, the other side and how they were feeling in the previous administration. because I think it's important. So we had, under the previous administration, the Department of Justice shed light on behind-the-scenes discussions on controversial directives at the time with then Attorney General Merrick Garland. And there was a document that was in there that looked at these parents parents that were labeled domestic terrorists. So the previous administration labeled parents who were voicing strong opposition to their local school boards as domestic terrorists and had a list. And it was, and this list was created with, you know, local school boards and the federal government, identifying these people, labeling them, investigating them. So, you know, going back to your comment earlier, it's not unprecedented. It happens under different administrations when people are called out because they think differently than what is currently. So that's why I'm an advocate and that's why I can't oppose the bill today, because I truly believe that we need to ensure that we're protecting the First Amendment, regardless of who is speaking their their truth or the truth, as it may be learned. But I just wanted to make sure that we had that on record and that we have those discussions because I do look forward to seeing, you know, and looking at the legalities of the bill on how to move forward. But I do think it's important to understand that under any administration, it's not okay to go after any group because they think differently. Acting in violence is definitely not something that we should be accepting. But to speak, deliberate, we shouldn't cancel anyone, and everyone should be allowed to speak. So with that, Dr. Tori, any comments?

Okay. Senator Perez, would you like to close? Yeah, thank you. And I appreciate the robust discussion. discussion. You know, as I mentioned before, this has become a very important issue for me, as I've heard from students, faculty, staff from all across the state. And as I mentioned before, I think about my time as a student activist when I was at Cal State LA and what formative years those were for me to apply what I was learning in the classroom to the real world and how that influenced now my time here and my ability to be elected to this office. And so I think it's of utmost importance to ensure that our students, our faculty, our staff you know feel protected as they are exercising their viewpoints as they are engaging and educating students and they having difficult discussions in the classroom which is where this conversation should be happening. In addition to that, I totally hear Senator Kabaldon's point around all of the kind of challenges that our institutions are navigating right now, as it just feels like there's constantly just new things being thrown at them and them having to pivot every turn. I mean, we saw that so much last year. You know, my hope with passing this is to make it a little bit easier for them to say, this is what we have to do because it's state law, rather than somebody having to kind of stick out like a sore thumb for trying to do the right thing. And I worry that if we don't do something to make it more of a standard response issue, that that's what we do when we have good actors that are trying to do their best for their students, for their faculty. So I'd urge an aye vote. And thank you all. Thank you, Senator Perez. Would that, Madam Secretary, please call? Oh, sorry. That's right. We have a motion by Senator Cobaldin, and the motion is due pass to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogues? Not voting. Cobaldin? Aye. Cobaldin, aye.

Yeah, I'm steady. Cortese, Gonzalez, Reyes. And we'll leave that on call for our absent members. Thank you. Great, Senator Archuleta, I see that you are here to present SB 1262. You may begin when you are ready. Okay. Well, thank you, Madam Chair and committee members.

Great, Tiffany Mock with CFT, Union of Educators and Classified Professionals. I just want to be here today that we are so proud to sponsor 1262 and thank the offer for this extremely balanced approach. This allows districts to have over a six months operating reserve as long as they ensure community college students have access to office hours and access for educators to health insurance In this decade we know how important health insurance has been for everyone in our community Further CFT represents community college faculty They continuously note the importance of office hours for students. As a professor noted to me, the math, engineering, and physics concepts I teach can be explained in multiple ways. While I explain a concept that works for a majority of the students in class, an alternative explanation might be best done in office hours. These lessons and office hours are often critical to a student passing or failing a class, which is an essential foundation to their educational journey and goals. Full-time faculty currently receive compensation for student office hours, while part-time faculty often are not. Fortunately, the state has invested in a reimbursement program for part-time faculty office hours, which is fortunately popular but still undersubscribed. In other words, this bill provides a balanced approach allowing districts to keep over a six-month operating reserve unless they provide districts unless the districts participate in these undersubscribed state programs and follow the current law that provides 75 percent of all teaching hours must be done by full-time faculty before they keep their reserves over 50 percent. Additionally though the reality is that none of the colleges have met this low threshold and for more on that we'll turn to my

here to register support on behalf of AFSCME California. Great, thank you for your presentation. Do we have anybody else that is a support witness that would like to offer me to please use the mic at the railing? Seeing nobody else, do we have any opposition witnesses? If so, please come forward and use the mics here You may begin when you ready

Could you wrap up your comments?

Good morning. Andrew Martinez, on behalf of the Chief Executive Officers of the California Community Colleges, we respectfully must be opposed to the measure. We appreciate the conversations with the author office and the sponsors on this measure over the year We recognize that this is a different bill than what the author previously presented two years ago And we also acknowledge that there is a reserves audit coming forward this summer as well in this space. And I just want to echo that unrestricted reserves, unrestricted funds found in the 311 report do not necessarily reflect reserves. Again, it is cash on hand and is a one-time use. So if you use those dollars in one time, they are gone. You cannot pay for ongoing investments in that space. On the health care benefits, we are seeing that districts are negotiating in real time to participate in that program. That is a locally determined issue, and they're negotiating with their union groups in real time. So, for example, there was money available last year to buy down deferrals. The amount of money that was actually available in the end was less because more districts were participating in the program than what the chancellor's office acknowledged in that space. So I'm hearing more and more of the colleges looking to do that, but it does take time to do that in an effort. But I do want to acknowledge again that all of our districts, all 73 districts, are unique and have locally elected boards, and they're looking to address the specific needs of their communities, whether it be rural access, workforce demands, or facilities. This one-size-fit of SB 1262 hampers their abilities to manage their districts. And I want to give an example of one of our districts that does have significant unrestricted funds and why they shared with me why those funds are so high. About 60% of the unrestricted funds are being put aside to a local match for Proposition 2. the statewide school college facilities bond approved by the voters. They're looking to build three facilities on their campus in the next three to five years. And so they're looking to build a student success center, a career technical education facility, and a performing arts center over the next five to ten years, actually. This is long-term responsible planning that needs to be done in leveraging that voter-approved funding that could be significantly constrained because they cannot do a local bond in that district. This is how they're choosing to support those projects that are important to support their students in their community. I also want to highlight the realities of this as well, that this is a fund balance. There's two as well. Districts are managing cash flows, not just budgets. We've seen firsthand that there have been a number of deferrals put on us in the last six years. First of all, there's the $1.45 billion deferral in 2020. Last year in 2025, there's a $408 million deferral as well. Ultimately, those were resolved, but colleges still needed to operate in the meantime. They needed to meet payroll.

is open and serve students without those funds at hand. Maintaining those funds is critically important to make sure that they are successful in that endeavor. Thank you so much.

Jason Henderson on behalf of the Faculty Association for California Community Colleges in respectful opposition to SB 1262. We've had an opportunity to speak with the sponsor, the author and author staff around our concerns, mainly that the 50% threshold is too high and it

Good morning. Kyle Highland on behalf of the Association of California Community College Administrators and respectful opposition. Thank you.

I do. Thank you, Madam Chair. So I think it's – I'm grateful for the opposition's explanation as far as the differentiating between unrestricted and – what was the other?

And reserved. So unrestricted versus the reserve funding that we have in our school. I do have a couple of questions with regards to how do community colleges usually determine the reserve amount. And I appreciate the fact that you noted that you have to have some funds that are aimed towards matching qualified funding that you're moving forward for. And there was another one that you mentioned. But let's begin with that one. How does a college determine the reserve amount that you should have in place because I thought it was interesting, just full disclosure, Dr. Ott here today is actually in my district with Mount San Jacinto and they have, according to the information that I have before me, they're, let's see, this is obtained by the California Community College Chancellor's Office website. It shows the community college districts with reserves of over 50% as a percent of expenditure for 24-25. And the reason I'm asking is I have two in my district. I have Mount San Jacinto and Copper Mountain. Mount San Jacinto is at 67.3. And I reached out to one of the school board trustees to kind of give an explanation on there. But once again, I forgot my phone. So the information is on my phone somewhere. And so I have Dr. Ott here that is also in my district at 50.3. And just so you all know, San Jacinto is the third highest reserve that we have in our district. So I'm trying to be fair here in collaborating or in having this conversation. And Copper Mountain is, I think, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. I think you're the 12th highest in the community college. So how do you folks determine the reserve amount? So, again, I just want to be very clear about the difference between district and board established reserves and unrestricted fund balance.

how many years now in a row would you say?

So when the state is not fully funding our community colleges, our CSUs, our UCs, they're in trouble. They have to be able to actually be able to meet that need. And one of the things that I've advocated for is that when we have this referrals happen and our school districts have to borrow the money to make ends meet when they don't have the reserves make sure that they actually have you know that when the state does repay them or fulfill their their obligations that it does include the interest for for those measures that are being borrowed on that end also because I've also said in in budget one for now my sixth year it's also important to note that it when you are not being fully funded for your your enrollment then the community college are picking up the tab and still enrolling students without actually being paid by the state and so and I was reading the you know the the the requirements for this bill that hey you can keep 50% in your reserves if you provide full health care coverage for the part-time faculty and so forth. So I'm not a financial advisor. I don't have, you know, I have basic financial literacy skills to manage my own budget, But it would be incredibly difficult to ask a community college with reserves looking forward and considering everything that they have to plan for to do ongoing expenses on something that is not actually on funding that is not actually that they can depend on every single year, especially when there's deferrals. and so it's especially when you have to meet matching funds for different projects moving forward that's why it's it's so incredibly important that we as a state prioritize prioritize education and meet with our local electors to see what it is that they need and right now unfortunately we have not been fully funding our community college which is really hard The other thing I want to make a point out is that there's currently a state audit that is happening with regards to the reserve fund for community colleges. That is the findings are supposed to be coming out this summer. And based on those findings, I am actually really and we knew that this was coming. We we've been I would I like audits. I'm not a financial, but when it comes to the state as a member of the legislature with the importance of being in oversight for many of our state agencies and so forth, audits help us be informed about the realities of what's going on in a non-partial or impartial perspective. And so to the author my question would be do you believe you might not believe or not I don know if you were aware or not of the audit happening but knowing that the audit is coming out that studying the reserves for our community colleges do you think that this might be a little premature to have this bill be

So thank you, Senator, for your passion.

If I may, remember the excess. We're talking about the excess. That is what's used at the bargaining table, not the mandated law that says the funds that we give the state are for the teachers, for the health insurance, and for that 75%. If there's an excess, then they can negotiate that for other services. So you're right. It's for that, but not for this. And that's why the chair and the committee and so on, we've negotiated to keep it at that 50 percent, but no greater, up to 50 percent. Because some of the colleges already adhere to 30 and 40 percent. And in L.A. County, we've got a lot of them that are at 50, 55, that they're going to make some adjustments to get right under the 50. So they're looking forward to this. because we didn't want to bring them all the way down. So we've listened to both the teachers and the students and everyone else.

And now we're at the threshold of actually taking care of everybody, working with the districts and with the faculties. So that's why this bill is so important. Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

It's the reserves. But remember, anything above, they can do what they want, and they'll negotiate it out. So we're not saying you can't use the excess for something else, but you have to maintain this.

hear what you have to say through the chair yeah the Faculty Association respects the authors intent on the reserves cap but 50% is a little too high it risks normalizing excessive reserves we ask that we look at the Chancellor's office guidance as well as the government officials of finance associations guidance and that's it. Thank you. I because I when you said you were opposed,

Correct.

Senator Choi? I wish you, Senator Solera, introduced this bill 25 years ago when I was a part-time adjunct faculty member among several community colleges, especially Coastline College. I was adjunct faculty for 17 years, one school alone. And you are right. Your bill is emphasizing to take care of adjunct faculty members. And we are just a miserable pay. I think that's $45 an hour at that time. You were a freer flyer then. I was. So I think this is among many other arguments, taking care of a good majority of the community colleges. I don't know exact number or percentage, but heavily to my understanding was about 60-70% of college operation is depending upon the part-time adjunct faculty members, and we need to take care of them. So even though my consultant says this is against the local control issue, college board members are there for them to manage their fiscal stability and excess funds, etc. But I think we gave that the right and still they are not taking care of the adjunct faculty members. So for that, I'm going to divide the recommendation and the support of the bill today. Thank you.

consent calendar so Senator Choi is motioning for the consent calendar

Thank you, Madam Chair, members, for the opportunity to present SB 1255. SB 1255 would establish a State-Level Hispanic Serving Institution, or HSI, designation to recognize institutions of higher education that excel in educating and serving Latino students. The HSI designation was first created under the Federal Higher Education Act of 1992 to provide support and improve access to higher quality education for Latino and other low-income students. In order to receive this designation, campuses must meet an eligibility requirement of enrolling at least 25% Hispanic undergraduate students, but let me be clear, this designation does not only benefit Hispanic students. The designation is for the institution. Once the institution receives the designation, all students, every single student, is eligible to apply for the benefits provided to that HSI. As one of the most diverse states in the nation, nearly 171 campuses in California hold this federal designation and leverage that funding to develop STEM curriculum, facility improvement, and other student support services, expanding educational opportunities to all students on each of those campuses. Despite the benefit of this designation, federal clawbacks of HSI funding threaten the program made enclosing educational equity gaps for all students on HSI campuses. Establishing an HSI designation in California serves as a first step toward strengthening accountability and encouraging sustained institutional commitment to serving our most vulnerable students. SB 1255 is similar to the framework used for Black Serving Institutions, or BSIs, which has been voted on by this body and implemented across our higher education institutions. I want to thank the Chair and the committee staff for their work on this bill and for the many institutions, sectors and students that have expressed their support for the legislation. The work on this bill continues and I appreciate the committee's flexibility in allowing me to continue exploring the eligibility requirements. I intend to amend this metric to ensure consistency with the successful BSI model and the HSI federal designation. Here to testify in support are Dr. Gina Garcia, professor at Berkeley School of Education and HSI expert, and Dr. Alberto Roman, chancellor at the Los Angeles Community College District.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Senators. I'm a scholar advocate who has spent my career researching what it means to be a Hispanic-serving institution and have advanced the idea of servingness, which is a multidimensional way to assess how well campuses are serving Latino students. With the state being home to 170 HSIs, it's time to establish an HSI designation in California. HSIs have received bipartisan support with a steady increase of federal appropriations over the years. To be clear, HSI funding is capacity building funding, so institutions have historically used funds to make the campus better for all students. While many HSIs enroll over 50% Latino students, including a majority of the Cal States and the California Community Colleges, Research shows that HSIs enroll AAPI, Native, and Black students at even higher rates than MSIs designated for these communities. HSIs have also done the hard work of educating some of the most marginalized populations, including first-generation, low-income, transfer, and formerly incarcerated students. Funding has been used to develop support programs such as tutoring mentoring and supplemental instruction and to launch academic success centers many of which have been STEM focused due to national priorities to develop a stronger pathway into STEM In recent years we have seen an increase in HSI grants being used to support California state initiatives including guided pathways and dual enrollment HSIs are being intentional and innovative, with some HSIs launching initiatives such as Sonoma State's Transforming Inclusion in Post-Secondary STEM, which is a faculty learning community, Pasadena City College's Student Equipo, which is a student-led initiative, and UC Santa Cruz's Multicultural Advising Conference, which is a campus-wide professional development program. We know HSI's work. Recent reports document that HSI's have slightly higher graduation rates than non-funded HSI's and greater levels of upward mobility for students. I've been part of the Intersegmental Coalition building to enhance HSI's and campus-based efforts. HSI's have become a movement in itself, allowing educators to improve our systems for serving, create pathways for talent development, strengthen our networks, advocate for student success, and conduct research that improves the experiences of communities across California. A state-based HSI bill would allow us to embrace the momentum and continue doing the important work to improve the lives of all California residents. And for this reason, I support the bill. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Diana Rodriguez, Chancellor of San Bernardino Community College District. Strong support for this bill.

Mark McDonald on behalf of the Los Rios State Center, San Diego, Kern, Mount San Jacinto, Southwestern, Antelope Valley, Victor Valley, Contra Costa, Lake Tahoe, and Foothill de Anza, Community College Districts in support, and behalf of National University.

We'd love to add you on as a co-author. Great.

Well, thank you. Okay, so I think I have a history here in the Senate in trying to be as race neutral as possible in many of my decisions, trying to be color neutral and trying to advocate for students that are more so low social economic demographic in focusing on the economic rather than on the race. I think we do a disservice when we want to be, you know, colorblind, and yet we use race to have designations, to have programs, to have things that literally differentiate based on race, things that we don't have control over. And so that's why I struggle with bills such as these or anything that has to be race, because we can't be and call ourselves wanting to be race neutral and without biases when we are creating systems that highlight the very essence that we're trying to defeat. that's where I have a struggle with I believe that you know especially a state institution like I would like to see this program with a neutral name that addresses maybe or references economics rather than race because we have students of all of all races and colors that could and you mentioned it on one on one area you're you want this highlighted as the Hispanic designation. And on the other one, you're saying you're supporting and want to help students of all backgrounds. So why not have a neutral name that addresses specifically, perhaps economic or something that's neutral, that doesn't highlight a raise so that every student feels welcome at that university? Because as Latinos, we are, we will be the majority in this state. And imagine how intimidating it may feel for someone coming from a different country that, you know, we have a designation that, you know, appears or the optic of catering towards someone that is Latino and not whatever race they may be from. We will be the majority in this state. We will definitely be the majority And so we really need to make sure that we are creating an environment that we been trying to avoid in the past where we felt discriminated again that we don create any more systems that may have the optics of being discriminatory for other races especially when they state funded And so that's why I can't support the measure today. I will not. I just can't. But bring something that embraces everyone in our community that needs help. And as a state institutions, we are supposed to be educating and creating opportunities and services for all of our students. They're all incredibly important, and we shouldn't be doing preferential services for someone. Someone needs help tutoring in reading, give them those services. They need economic help, let's help that child or that student get those resources. But the whole notion of race-based, I think it's wrong. It's a wrong focus to have, and we should be focused on general needs rather than something that kids do not have or students do not have helpful. So because of that, I won't be able to support this measure today.

I do want to respond to that, if I may, through. Yeah, please.

Perhaps we weren't clear. This is a designation because the registration is, or we're basing it on graduation rate, whatever we base it on, it's 25% or more are registered as Hispanic. But once the designation is there, the services, and I hope you heard it from everybody who has talked about it, because that's the most important part. Senator Gonzalez talked about it. Our chancellor talked about it. Our witness, Dr. Garcia, talked about it. These services are for every single student. Why is she being neutral? Well, that is a personal opinion. There is a black-serving institution designation. You will soon be hearing, and you will soon be hearing an APZ designation as well. I think there is, but I wanted to be sure that you were aware, Senator, that the services do go to every single student who requests it. And in order to receive the funding, it is for the disadvantaged students. But anyway.

She just finished her comments. What's up? There's the Q&A. All righty. Any other comments? All right. I wanted to take a moment, Senator Reyes, just to recognize and appreciate you for introducing this bill. I think it's something that's incredibly important. We know that the HSI designation, as well as other designations, have been removed and done away with by the federal government. And we know that these things are important, that they make a difference. I recognize that for many of our institutions, the grant funding that was provided to them to be able to better serve our students, to be able to ensure that we have cultural centers available on campus, to give students a sense of belonging, have had such a tremendous impact on institutions like the one that I attended, Cal State LA. as well as other institutions all across the state of California. And the loss of those dollars has been tremendous. And so making sure that we're able to invest those dollars back into our students is critical. I recognize, Senator Ochoa Bogue, the concern that you mentioned about the race-neutral comment that you had made. And I do want to underscore, you know, Prop 209 affirmative action has been in effect here in the state of California for many years now. I believe it's now been almost 20 years that we've had Prop 209 in effect. We have had to follow affirmative action here in the state of California for many years before the Supreme Court had ultimately made their decision. And as somebody that's worked in the higher education policy space, have watched our institutions have to navigate that policy, while also prioritizing and figuring out how to provide services to students. And we've done that. We figured out a way to do that. We know that there's a very clear intersection, unfortunately, between low-income students and black and brown students. There is a direct correlation there, and data has proven that time and time again. But we also know, based off of research and data, that there are very specific supports that Latino students, that black students benefit from. And it's very important that our institutions be mindful of that. There are a number of nonprofit partners that I have worked with over the years, A number of reports that I've worked on and produced in partnership when I was employed at the Campaign for College Opportunity, looking at the specific needs of our Latino students, Native American students, API students, because while there are real issues related to income, to finances, to those types of issues, there are also other issues and real sense of belonging issues, cultural issues that I think are really important. for us to address as well. So I'm very supportive of this bill. I know that there's also another measure being worked on by Assemblymember Fong that also seeks to address this particularly for our API communities as well and protecting their designation. And like I said, that funding is critical. And we will continue to implement this bill. also following Prop 209 just as we have here in the state for the last 20 years So would be happy to be added as a co and also be happy to support this bill I'll turn it over now. Senator Gomez-Reyes, for you to close.

Great. And we have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. and that motion is due pass to the Senate Government Organizations Committee. Secretary, can you please call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog? No. Ochoa Bogno. Cabaldon? Choi? Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Excellent. So we will put that bill on call. And Secretary, if you could lift the call for some of the other bills. Okay, file item 1, SB 1048 Becker. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is four ayes and no nos with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes?

Reyes, aye. That bill is out 7-0. File Item 4, SB 1262, Archuleta. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is 5 ayes and no nos, with the chair voting aye. Ochoa Bogue, Cabaldon. He's not here. Moving on to File Item 5, SB 1347. Motion is due passed. Current vote is 4 ayes, no nos, with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes, aye. Reyes, aye. That bill is out 7-0. File item 6, SB 1154, Reyes. Motion is due passed. Current vote is 2-2 with the chair voting aye. Cabaldon, Cortese, aye. Cortese, aye. Gonzalez, aye. That bill is out 422. Oh, he doesn't. Oh, he. Okay. So we'll put that back on call. Okay, so we will leave that bill on call. File item 7. We'll skip on to file item 8, SB 1222 by Senator Troy. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee Current vote is 3 ayes no no with the chair and vice chair voting aye Cabaldon Cortese Cortese I Gonzalez Gonzalez I Reyes Reyes I File item 9 SB 1378 Senator O'Toole Boat motions do pass as amended to the Senate Appropriations Committee current vote is three eyes and no no's Senators Perez I press I Cortese Cortese I Gonzalez Gonzalez I raise raise I that bill is out 7-0 file item 10 SB 1101 by Senator Perez motion is due pass to the Senate privacy digital technologies and consumer protection committee current vote is two eyes and no nose with the chair voting I Ochoa bug Choi Cortese? Cortese, aye. Gonzalez? Gonzalez, aye. Reyes? Reyes, aye. That bill is out 5-0. Great. All right, we'll put those back on call and wait for other members. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Secretary, can you please lift calls? On the consent calendar, Senator Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Consent is out 7-0. File item 4, SB 1262, Archuleta. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is 5 ayes, no no's. With the chair voting aye, Ochoa Boog, Cabaldon. That bill is out 5-0. File item 6, SB 1154, Reyes. Motion is due passed. Current vote is four ayes and two no's with the chair voting aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. That bill is out 5-2. SB 1255, a raise. Motion is due passed to Senate Governmental Organizations Committee. Current vote is four ayes and no no's. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. That bill is out 5-1. That's it. Okay, file item 8, SB 1255-Troy, motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Excuse me, SB 1222. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is six ayes and no no. Senator Cabaldon. That bill is out 6-0. And that concludes our hearing for today. And we are adjourned. Thank you so much.