Senate Education Committee

Good morning, Senator and committee. I just want to thank you for when I heard that many committee bills you have today. I really understand, so I'll make this quick.

to answer any technical questions Good morning Chair Perez and committee members My name is Brittany Ward an elementary school teacher and president of Twin Rivers United Educators, speaking for the California Teachers Association as a co-sponsor of AB 65. I have seen far too many exceptional educators leave the profession due to the rising costs of health care and the financial challenges of starting a family. Assembly Bill 65 is a transformational solution to the persistent teacher shortage we think face year after year. No educator should have to plan their pregnancy around the academic calendar. Forcing teachers to exhaust their accumulated sick leave to welcome a child is stressful and inequitable. Sick leave should be reserved for illness and recovery. When unused, it directly contributes to retirement benefits through CalSTRS. Because of this, the current system creates a massive financial disparity. Educators who must drain their sick leave lose vital retirement credit, disproportionately impacting mothers and widening the gap between female educators and their male counterparts. As a union president, I regularly receive distress calls from members. They face the agonizing choice of prioritizing their newborn's care or prematurely returning to the classroom just to survive financially. One of our members experienced a serious pregnancy-related complication. After exhausting her FMLA leave, the district forced her to use her baby bonding leave before her child was even born. Consequently, she had no bonding leave left when the baby arrived and was forced into an unpaid leave of absence. Paid disability and parental leave should be a standard workplace benefit. If we are serious about recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers, we must support them in caring for their own families. For these reasons, I respectfully urge your aye vote on Assembly Bill 65. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the

Great. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from any Me Too's in support in the audience. Please use the mic at the railing.

Sarah Bacchus with Children Now in support.

Good morning Jessica Hay with AFSCME California in support.

Good morning Madam Chair and members Connor Gussman on behalf of Teamsters California and the Amalgamated Transit Union in proud support. Thank you.

first grade teacher proud support good morning sixth grade science teacher Tessa

teacher in support. Good morning Folsom Cordova, Unified School District, fourth

representing the Kern County Superintendent of the Schools Office. We currently have a support if amend position on the bill. AB 65 doesn't identify a funding source. We want to highlight the importance of a funding source. And in light of the governor's provision, proposal may revision to provide funding through the LCFF, we want to also highlight that lots of programs are staffing people who are not funded through the LCFF. So to ensure equitable access to this program, call for funding. I'm sorry, but this is me too's

Good morning, Madam Chair. Members, Dorothy Johnson, the Association of California School Administrators previously posed, now supportive, amended, aligning with Mr. Rojas' comments. Thank you.

Claire Sullivan, on behalf of the City of Glendale, in support. Thank you. Kylie Lindelli Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California in support. Peter Elliott California State Teachers Retirement System in support. Anybody else? Great. Seeing nobody else rising, we will turn it now to witnesses in opposition. Are there any witnesses in opposition here to speak? Seeing no one rising, we'll turn it back to the committee. the committee members oh and we also have a quorum so secretary if you could call the roll so we could establish quorum senators Perez here Perez here Ochoa Bog here Cabaldon Choi Yeah Choi here Cortese Here Cortese here Gonzalez Reyes Thank you And the Secretary Notes of Quorum has been established Do we have any comments or questions for the author on this bill Senator Ochoa Bogues? Thank you. So first of all, I am in support of the paid leave. I'm a huge advocate of families and trying to do what we can to in order to support our family structures in our communities. And we have a really harsh system in our society that is just incredibly hard on families overall. And quite frankly, the sad part is, and I've stated this over and over again in any of my town halls that I've held in my district, as well when I've had the opportunity in committee. And that's the fact that, you know, if many parents could choose if finances were not an obstacle, they would rather stay home during those first early years of their children's lives if finances were not an obstacle. I know that for a fact. And unfortunately, we've made it incredibly difficult in the state, in the country in general, to be able to do that. And many people that actually have, it's a privilege. It's a privilege to be able to stay home and be with their children during those first early years. So I've been supportive of policies that promote our family structure. Having said that, I do have some concerns the way that it's structured right now. And I actually commented on this on our sub one committee, which had to do with the way that it is currently funded and structured. It doesn't provide for some of our school districts that would not be qualified to receive some of this funding. Has there been any conversations about how to address those school districts that are not included in this type of funding for family leave? So thank you for the question. Obviously, we're looking for some trailer language that's still going to come in so that we can adjust to questions that have come up since we've got this bill out there. The bill ensures that the legislature will fully take the time to consider the policy through the legislative process. So we're not done. As you know, we did get some funding through the budget, but we also know we don't know what's going to happen between now and then. This is just to kind of put the glue around that and to make sure we can move forward with it. So I'm sure we'll be working with other districts as well. You know, the hardest part is that, you know, some districts don't pay for pregnancy leave disability and the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act, and that's also unpaid. So many districts rely on the use of the FMLA. So the federal policy that provides 12 weeks of job-protected leave for both personal health and family caregiving events but does not fix the disparities in pay and retirement benefits. So we're working through that, and I'm hoping we'll have an answer before we're completely done here. The fact of the matter is since 2020, I believe it was, we worked with the governor to make sure we could get family pay out there for 14 weeks, but he said, nope, we need to do a report. We came up with a report, and based upon the report is how we got to the paid pregnancy leave dollar amounts. So do you have a dollar amount for this program right now? Because it was my understanding that we didn't have a specific amount because how do you estimate an amount? I'm sorry? I'm sorry. I'm looking for, let me see where my, there he is, Seth, through the chair. Press it again. I'll scooch. Hello, Seth Bramble here for the California Teachers Association.

Okay, so going back to my periods, and maybe you have a little deeper understanding. What about the school districts that don't currently qualify for the paid leave, the 14 weeks?

I'm so concerned about this there's certain school districts that do not qualify currently under this this language it's my understanding I'm gonna lay off the bill today because I want to ensure that we have language that brings every single if you're going to implement this program and be able to do this program every single school district should be able to qualify and receive the funding necessary to be able to do that it'd be incredibly unfair that we we we have certain school districts that receive it and others that not. That is my biggest, biggest concern is that we have the right language to ensure that you're going to implement this, make sure that it's across the board. One of the things that I do want to mention, it's going to go through, the bill is going to, it's going to go through with no problems, which is why I feel it's imperatively important for me to express these concerns for those school districts that right now are not covered. And that means teachers and and stuff for those particular schools. But I do want to comment. I did have a question also. How is this different? First of all, how did you come up with 14 leaves versus the traditional 12-week leave that we currently have? Through our expert testimony working with doctors and pediatricians obstetricians and the outreach that we received from our many committee hearings that we had on the bill The fact is that a doctor can say only 12 weeks They can say 10 weeks. It's the maximum of 14 weeks. Got it. So it is up to the doctor to determine how long a person might be on leave. Just because you're having a pregnancy leave doesn't mean you get 14 weeks right out. They do have to have a medical note. Okay. Yeah. Perfect. And then how does this differ than the current program that we currently have? Well, currently people can go through what they do is they have their sick leave. And if they've used all their sick leave, then they have to use their differential pay. And the differential pay means that half of their pay goes to their substitute. And the teacher has to pay for the differential pay. So the substitute gets a portion of it, and it comes out of the pocket of the teacher itself. Okay, so that's the current system that we have where it can take up to 12 weeks. Is that the one where – I know I had a question between this program and the pregnancy leave that we have currently in place. So the basic difference is the number of weeks and then the pay structure. So the federal policy provides 12 weeks of job-protected leave for both personal health and family caregiving events, but does not fix on the disparity in pay and retirement benefits. So you have FMLA, and then you don't get any of that money goes towards your retirement. So what we found is that during the study that was done through CDE is that they found that people were not being able to use their sick leave as part of the retirement monies. And so technically they can lose up to $100,000 in the retirement benefits. How we came up with that as well is by we had two teachers come into our office. One was a man and a wife. They're married. The wife has been teaching longer than the husband. They went to go check out their STRS retirement, and they found out at that time she had less retirement benefits than he did because she took off time while she was pregnant and out of the office. So it's just disparity all the way around. Okay. Okay. The other question I had was with the current program that we have right now for for parents to take off the 12 weeks. Is this in addition to those current 12 weeks or is this in lieu of that program in lieu of. So as the author was describing, teachers get like 10 sick days a year, right? So you have to use those 10 days before you have access to differential leave. And we've seen the huge disparities, as was mentioned, in the lifetime retirement earnings that educators get based on whether they have been able to convert their sick leave to retirement service credit. So that's the first thing is using your 10 sick days. And we're going to now create a system where you don't have to use your sick leave for that. So if you get sick later, you'll have sick leave. Or if your child gets sick, you'll be able to take care of your child. So that's huge for our folks. Once you get through that, there's this period of differential pay that teachers have access to that, as the member described, is like what you would normally get paid minus the cost of your substitute teacher. So this 14 weeks first of all there isn currently pregnancy leave for teachers This is new She establishing it So you saying how does it come on top of what they currently have They don currently have pregnancy leave And so we establishing paid pregnancy so that you don have to burn through your sick leave And so you don't have that harm that occurs for you in retirement. So it is as you're directly asking in addition to, but it's not it's not on top of a current benefit. It's establishing a new benefit that that educators currently don't have. Okay, so theoretically speaking, you would have 14 weeks right now in addition to 12 weeks of sick leave that could potentially be changed or be used if the mother wanted to stay longer with their baby. They could be added on to the current 14 weeks plus the 12 weeks, theoretically speaking. Hey, I'm not exactly sure when you're referring to 12 weeks what you're referring to, but teachers get 10 sick days every year. So it is true that after you exhausted your paid pregnancy leave under this new provision, you could then choose to take sick leave. If, for example, you know, in different districts, usually you need a doctor's note after you take like two, three days. So if the doctor thinks you need to be out further than those 14 weeks, you would be able to use sick leave. Okay, so let me rephrase it because I'm probably not expressing it correctly. currently when a teacher has a baby they could potentially be with their baby for up to 12 weeks I was under the impression that they could stay home for about up to 12 weeks am I mistaken in understanding that again what the current system looks like for teachers is that you first use 10 days of sick leave, and then you have access to differential pay, which, as was mentioned, is basically minus the cost of your sub. You're getting that. And I get that. But currently, teachers could potentially use the system that is in place up to 12 weeks. Is that correct? I'm not sure what the 12 weeks you're referring to is. All right. So let me clarify that. So with the Family Medical Leave Act, he goes unpaid. They could potentially take off 12 weeks unpaid. Job protected unpaid leave. Unpaid. If they wanted to in addition to this program, right? But they couldn't use it. Yeah. So they could use it. They could use that after the 14 paid weeks if needed. Right. OK. They don't get paid. What's that? They don't get paid. They don't get paid. Yeah. And as I said, for those parents that are able to afford to have one parent stay home, it's a luxury. It's a privilege in this state, in this country to be able to do that. So I get that. So the reason I'm asking also is because I'm also thinking of the potential moving forward with legislation that has to do with our substitute teachers. Because if we're going to have a system that's going to be catering to our teachers be able to stay home with their babies, we have to ensure that there's consistency within. And I just want to make sure that we have clarity in the committee as we having these conversations that logistically speaking we also have to think about the students because potentially I want to make sure that we have 14 weeks potentially 12 weeks of unpaid and that a very long time for a student to be without a consistent teacher So as we're looking at bills moving on, and this is a whole cohort of bills that we're looking at that are going to be addressing this particular issue. So we need to have full conversations as to what that's going to look like in the educational context of classrooms. and our students' ability to have consistency in that classroom. So as we're working towards that end, we want to ensure that when we're looking at the ability for classroom substitute teachers to be able to do that and get paid, that they also have the ability to stay in the classroom long enough to cover a teacher's family leave, whether paid or unpaid, but has that. So I just want to make sure that we have that planted in our hearts and our minds as we move forward and we look to see, one, that we have parity for all school districts in our state if we're going to implement this. And number two, that the substitute teachers that are going to be taking over these classrooms have the ability to stay in those classrooms while these teachers are out for maternity leave because it makes it easier for the teachers as well as for the substitute teachers. And it's incredibly helpful for the students to be able to have consistent access to one substitute teacher during that time. So I just wanted to make those points on that end, and I look forward to having further conversations on that end and ensure that our system in California is conducive overall to the well-being of our teachers and our students, and most importantly, our families as a whole. So with that, oh, I guess we have a motion by Senator Cortese. Madam Secretary, oh, I apologize. No, that's absolutely. And right here, Corrie, would you like to close? You know, this is an incredible bill that when you run into teachers, they're so excited because they want to stay in the workforce. This is just one step of many. And as you brought up substitutes, there's other legislation that's running through. This is the first step that we have to get through. We have some budget money that's out there to move us forward. There's going to be plenty more discussions. But the fact of the matter is we need a workforce. You know, teachers are going to more attractive jobs, and we need to make sure that we can keep the vacancies down in the state of California. So with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. This is an ongoing conversation we will have. The fact of the matter is we are losing a workforce, and we need our teachers. The teachers are leaving left and right, and we need to make sure we have the workforce to support them. So with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Member Edgar-Hurray. Madam Secretary please call the roll. Okay motion is do pass to the Senate Labor Public Employment and Retirement Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Bogue, not voting, Cabaldon, Choi, Cortese, Cortese aye, Gonzalez, Reyes. All right, we have member Jackson. Oh, there we go. File item number two, AB673. Welcome, sir. Okay. I'll be quick. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Welcome. Committee members. First, I want to thank the committee and staff for their amendments, which I will be accepting today. This is AB 673 which establishes an unaccompanied youth support grant program. This program will provide assistance to 16 and 17 year old students experiencing homelessness and who are not in the physical custody of a parent or guardian as they continue their education. With me today is Eric Dunk on behalf of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to speak on the impact of this bill. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Eric Dunk, and I'm a legislative representative at CDE, testifying on behalf of State Superintendent Tony Thurman, who is proudly sponsoring AB 673. California is facing a growing crisis of student homelessness. In the 2023-24 school year, LEAs reported 287,000 pupils experiencing homelessness, and of those, approximately 9,000 were unaccompanied youth. Unaccompanied youth are a particularly vulnerable population. They are homeless, they are minors, and they are not accompanied by a parent or guardian. Exacerbating the problem, they do not have access to housing like minors in foster care, with only 130 beds statewide to provide temporary emergency shelter for unaccompanied minors. Because of their unstable living situation, these students are more likely to be chronically absent, less likely to be engaged academically, and less likely to graduate. While McKinney-Vento requires schools to identify and enroll these students, only about 10 percent of school districts receive dedicated McKinney-Vento funding. AB 673 closes that gap by establishing the Unaccompanied Youth Support Grant Program, a five-year pilot program that would fund eligible LEAs to connect unaccompanied youth ages 16 and 17 to housing navigation, basic needs, tutoring, employment readiness, and social services. Funding flows through a weighted formula, targeting LEAs with the greatest need, and the bill requires annual outcome reporting with a final evaluation to the legislature. In conclusion, this bill is a targeted accountable approach to stabilizing vulnerable students' lives so they can focus on learning and graduating. It is about connecting unaccompanied youth to services and strengthening community partnerships so these students can thrive academically. Thank you for your consideration and we respectfully ask for your iBoat. Thank you very much. We'll continue with any additional witnesses here in 2100 for AB 673. Please come to the microphone, state your name, your position, and the organization that you are representing. McLean Rozanski with the Alameda County Office of Education in support and on behalf of the Alameda County Office of Education Youth Advisory Board, also in support. Thank you. Michael Henning, California Alliance of Child and Family Services, in support. Thank you so much. Having no other witnesses in support, we'll continue with any lead opposition. Seeing none, do we have any members of the public who would like to express their opposition to this bill? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. Any comments, questions? We have a motion by Senator Cortese I do have some comments and questions for you on this bill Did you want to say it We have a motion We take the motion Okay. If you have to. Sorry, everybody is. Okay. We have, our members are all attending. We have multiple committee hearings going on right now. So it's no disrespect, no reflection on you or on our members this morning. I do have some comments and some questions along the line because I know that through our LCFF formula, we have additional funding for students who are impoverished or low economic, in the low economic demographic. We also have, and then my first question before I start with these particular funding systems that we currently have already, I was kind of curious, how are these unaccompanied minors not part of the foster system? How does that work? I didn't realize we could have students that were not within the system of the care of under, whether it's a foster person or within the social services. Yeah. Yeah, so I'm not an expert on foster care, but what I do know is that they have to be referred to the foster care system by some kind of social services expert. A lot of these unaccompanied youth are, the federal term sometimes you'll hear is runaway. So they're 16 and 17 year olds and they just run away from home and they were never connected to the foster care system to begin with. And then since they're 16 and 17, they just try to make it on their own. They couch surf at a friend's house, and they never actually get plugged into the system, which is part of what the bill is trying to do is connect them to the right. So, like, that's one of the things it does is connect it to the social services provider that could direct them into foster care. Do we need this particular bill to be able to connect them to the Department of Social Services? I thought that was automatic when we see a child, a minor, that is not under the purview of the state already. Yeah, so what I mentioned in my talking points is one of the ways that LEAs can do that is to identify these students as unaccompanied and that they need to go into foster care, for example. And the funding for McKinney-Vento from the federal level is inconsistent, and it's only provided to about 10% of LEAs right now. So the bill is trying to augment some of the things that McKinney-Vento would be trying to do as well, like connecting the students to the right services. So it's not the automatic responsibility of a school official when they see a child that is unaccompanied to report them and basically get them the assistance that they have? It is under McKinney-Vento, yes. It is one of their responsibilities if they identify them to try and connect them to the right place, but we've seen that the LEAs are under-resourced to do that. They're under-resourced to be able to do that. Yeah, they have to identify the student first and foremost, and a lot of times the McKinney-Vento Act requires them to have a homeless liaison. So every LEA has a homeless liaison, but a lot of times that's just one role that, for example, the vice principal or the principal would take up. And so they don't always have the resources to identify them and connect them to the right services in the community. Okay, so currently it's my understanding that there are several programs in place to help this population or students who fall within these parameters. Of course you mentioned the federal McKinney Homeless Assistance Act where all California it says here or all California school districts already receive federal funding and are required to identify and support homeless students That what I have here that is accessible to them It also states that every LEA is required to designate a homeless education liaison whose job is to identify homeless students and connect to services. It says here all required students. And that's number two. Number three, the California funds for the HETAC, the Homeless Education and Technical Assistance Center, provide statewide training and assistance to support schools serving homeless youth. That is also accessible right now. Is that correct? I'm not sure where the all came from because McKinney-Vento is a competitive grant that LEAs apply for. And it's my understanding that only 10% of them receive the actual funding in California. Is that because only 10% apply for it? I don't have that offhand. I'm not sure. Okay, because it's available. And it would be important to note that because we're allocating another designation when we have three here. We also have, number three, the California funds the – I'm sorry – the HETA – I just mentioned that – the Homeless Education Technical Assistance Center, which provides statewide training and assistance to support schools serving homeless youth. In the 2025-2026 budget, HETAC received $500,000 per recipient out of a $1.5 million pool. And number four, we have HIP, the Homeless Innovative Program grants that are given to LEAs to improve educational stability, access, and support serving homeless students. There was also a $9 million allocated with $450,000 per LEA that is currently available. So the state has done a pretty good job in trying to address this particular demographic quite a bit, very generously. So I'm just kind of curious as to why we need an additional one we already have. And the reason I'm asking is the state is in budget constraints. And so when I see any additional requirement for a new program, especially when I've seen similar demographics being already served with funding, I'm going to ask the questions, what are we not doing in order to already use the programs that we currently have in place that are supposed to be actually taking care of these students already in place? Yeah, thanks for the questions, Madam Vice Chair. I think, so you mentioned homeless students. The definitions can get a little tricky because in McKinney-Vento, it defines homeless students, but it also defines unaccompanied youth. So the bill particularly targets unaccompanied youth. So in theory, it's a subpopulation of the larger homeless student population. And a lot of these times, these students are invisible to the system because they're 16 and 17, like this bill mentions, and they're unaccompanied. So they may not appear homeless necessarily because they've run away from home, let's say. And McKinney-Vento defines homelessness in a number of ways. Like you could be couch surfing at a friend's house. You could be sleeping in your car. You could be staying in a motel. So homeless, we have this idea of what homelessness looks like, but not with unaccompanied youth who may be more invisible to the system. So the idea is to try to help LEAs identify that particular subpopulation. So under the current system what you stating is that these unaccompanied kids do not qualify for these particular programs No, it's not that they don't qualify. It's that they're a different type of subpopulation. So homeless is the broader overarching term, and then unaccompanied is a subpopulation of homelessness. And in McKinney-Vento, it's specifically defined as not in the presence of a parent or guardian. Which technically they're not, right? as unaccompanied youth there or not, yes. Okay. I won't be able to support the bill today because I believe I, just based on conversations that I've had, and these are just the four that were given to me as identifying additional funding on there, I think we already have programs and funding that can help these students. And we even have support system for our school districts to be able to have access and guide them through the process of being able to get money. So literally we have covered every single aspect of trying to get the funding forward as well as ensuring that they are being assisted with funding itself. So I have a hard time supporting an additional program right now, especially in light of where we are as a state financially. And I will not be able to support the bill today. on that. And if I didn't see this particular, and I think we can be very, we can be technical in the language that we're using, but I think those students could qualify and do fall within those parameters, both on the LCFF formula, where they are considered on the low socioeconomic demographic in addition to every single one of the four items that I mentioned here today. So with that, I won't be able to support the bill today. Dr. Jackson, do we have any other comments or questions? Yes. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. I just want to say, and I really respect my colleague and I understand what she's saying. I actually am going to support the bill. I actually think it's wonderful having gone through the homeless count every other year in my own city. Seeing so many unaccompanied minors out on our streets and needing the additional supports is certainly needed. And so I'm grateful. I know there's a lot of work to be done still, and I'm sure you'll address that in your close. But with that, I will certainly motion and thank you for bringing the bill forward. So we have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. Would you like to close Dr. Jackson? Sure. Again, this is a population that's really, in some cases, legal limbo. It is possible that a young person is still trying to get their education, but even a guardian cannot be found. This could be a situation where a parent could be in another country. A parent could have passed and for some reason they are not connected to some type of structure. Which means there's a whole other host of issues that we have to consider. Number one, does current funding streams allow for housing vouchers? does current funding structures allow for making sure that meals are being taken care of? Sometimes it's also what you can do with the funds that are equally as important as funds being available. And also, I think all of us can agree that there may be various pots of money, but the question is, does it fulfill all the needs of the populations? And I don't think a county would ever say we have enough money for housing vouchers. We have enough money for it, right? In any place. So I think the idea is that this is a unique population that's often forgotten. and in many cases some don't even know exist if they're not paying very close attention and so we want to make sure that there's dedicated funding specifically for this population because literally they are the most vulnerable and with no supports whatsoever and so this is a pilot program and so the idea is is that we want to see how this works how we can improve and maybe how can we realign even current funding structures to even be able to serve this population in the future as well. I just want to thank the state superintendent for identifying this population and trying to figure out how we can serve them and make it flexible enough to make sure that their multiple needs that they may have are fulfilled. So with that I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you Dr. Jackson. Madam Secretary please call the roll. Okay motion is do pass as amended to the Senate Human Services Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Bog, No. Ochobugno Cabaldon, Choi Cortese, Gonzalez, Gonzalez, Reyes. And we'll keep that bill on call for our absent members, Dr. Jackson. Thank you so much for coming today. One more. Oh, yeah, one more. Sorry. I apologize. I'm not looking at my agenda. All right. So we'll continue with AB 1552 by Member Jackson. Please proceed. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, committee members. This bill will require the public higher education segments to report recommendations to the legislature on how to foster a greater knowledge of American democracy and meaningful civic engagement opportunities to ensure our graduates are prepared to assume their roles, as Alexander Hamilton will describe in Fairless Paper No. 16, fulfilling their roles as the natural guardians of our democracy. Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Dr. Jackson. No support, no witness. My gift to you, no witnesses. All right, so we'll continue with any witnesses in support in the audience. For AB 1552, please proceed to the microphone. State your name, your organization, and your position, please. Good morning. Katrina Linden on behalf of Young Invincibles, co-sponsor on this bill. Thank you, Assemblymember Jackson. Also speaking in support of Alliance for a Better Community, UCSA, the UC Student Association, and several other partners in our community who support this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Jaden Villanueva. I'm a graduate student at Cal State Long Beach, and I am in support of this bill. Hi, my name is Jasmine Rodriguez. I'm from Zanana, and I support this bill. Hello, my name is Daniel Bosuano. I'm also a graduate student at Cal State LA, and I'm in support of this bill. Kylie Lindelli, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Southern California, in support. Thank you so much. Seeing no other witnesses in support, we'll continue with any lead witnesses in opposition. Seeing no lead witnesses, do we have any members of the public who would like to express their opposition? CNN will bring you back to the dais. Comments and questions? We have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. I am all about civic engagement and awareness so I completely appreciate this bill And this one I know we have had several bills that have to do with civic engagement throughout my time here and through our education whether it K or higher education So I am happy to support the bill today. And thank you for bringing this measure forward. I'm glad I get to say aye on your bill, Dr. Jackson. With that, would you like to close, Dr. Jackson? Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Dr. Jackson. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. The motion is due pass to Senate Appropriations Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Boggay, Cabaldon, Choi, Cortese, Gonzalez, Gonzalez, Reyes. Thank you so much. We'll place that on call for absent members. And Dr. Jackson, you know I appreciate the opportunities when we do get to collaborate and support your bill. Absolutely. You know that. Have a great day, sir. All right. Alright, we'll continue with file item number 5, AB 1572. Member Alaniz, welcome. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair. Every day, hundreds of thousands of students participate in school athletics. They place their trust in the adults responsible for making sure their games and competitions are safe and fair. AB 1572 aims to strengthen that trust by requiring the California Interscholastic Federation, or CIF, to conduct annual reviews to make sure that sports officials such as referees, umpires, and judges have met their highest safety training and qualification standards. Additionally, this bill requires that these qualifications are published and accessible to schools and athletic programs. AB 1572 establishes a clear and responsible implementation timeline beginning January 1st of 2027 to ensure a smooth rollout. It further enhances student safety by requiring, starting July 1, 2028, that officials hold an activity supervisor clearance certification from the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Yes. By improving transparency and accountability, schools will be better equipped to ensure that only properly qualified individuals are officiating students sporting events. And with me today, I have Michelle McKay-Underwood, who represents CIF, to testify and answer any technical questions. Thank you, ma'am, and welcome.

We'll now continue with any members of the public who would like to express their support for this particular bill. AB 1572. Seeing none, do we have any lead witnesses in opposition? Seeing none, with any members of the public wish to express their opposition? See you now. We'll bring it back to the dais. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm just grateful that you're bringing this forward. I have kids in sports and looking forward and ahead to college and seeing how important this is. So thank you so much for putting this forward. I'd like to be added as a co-author as well if I could, and I'd like to motion at the appropriate time. Thank you, Senator. Thank you very much. And we do have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. Member Leonis, thank you for bringing this measure forward. Would you like to close? Just respectfully ask your aye vote. Thank you. Thank you, and relines madam secretary. Please call the roll motion is do pass to the Senate Public Safety Committee senators Perez Ochoa book I Ochoa guy Cabaldon Troy Cortese Gonzalez Gonzalez I race and we'll call for our absent members. Thank you. Have a great day. Thank you We'll continue with file item number six a B 1586 by member Ramos Good morning, Member Ramos. Welcome. Good to see you. Good to see you. Looking great in that suit. Thank you. You may proceed when you're ready, sir.

and Vice Chair and members. My name is Stuart Selecta and I serve as the Program Operations supervisor at Tarzana Treatment Centers, a community-based substance use treatment provider in Los Angeles County, and I'm here in strong support of AB 1586. Every day, my team works on the front lines of the overdose crisis, implementing evidence-based, common-sense strategies to keep people alive. We train families, school personnel, and community partners to recognize the signs of an overdose and respond immediately. And I can tell you from that experience the window to act is incredibly short Often seconds matter Survival depends on whether someone nearby is prepared to recognize what happening and intervene without hesitation Unfortunately, our schools are not immune to this crisis. We have already seen overdoses occur on California campuses, some with devastating outcomes, where students never made it home. In those critical first moments, school resource officers are often the first adults on the scene. AB 1586 ensures that when that moment comes, the person standing there has the training and the tools to quickly save a life. The bill also addresses a critical gap in our response. Data. Currently, the state does not consistently capture overdose incidents occurring on school campuses. Without that visibility, we cannot accurately direct prevention resources or respond strategically. AB 1586 closes that gap, equipping providers like Tarzana Treatment Centers and policymakers like you with the tools and the information needed to target those interventions where they're needed most. This is a practical, evidence-based, and life-saving measure. It does not create new complexity. It simply ensures we are prepared to respond to what is already happening. On behalf of Tarzana Treatment Centers, I respectfully urge your aye vote, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Good morning, Madam Chair members. My name is Tom Renfray. I'm a policy consultant with CADPE. We represent substance use disorder treatment providers throughout the state. Youth overdose risk has increased dramatically in recent years due to the proliferation of fentanyl in counterfeit pills and other substances. Adolescents may unknowingly ingest fentanyl, leading to sudden overdose situations that require immediate intervention. School campuses are increasingly encountering these emergencies, and in many cases, school resource officers or other safety personnel have standardized training and access to naloxone. This is a common sense step to improve school safety and protect student health in everyday school environments, bathrooms, parking lots, athletic facilities, and before or after school activities, often in the presence of peers or adults. Reports indicate that many times bystanders are present in these overdose situations but are not able to intervene in time either because they don't have naloxone or they don't know how to use it. This bill will strengthen campus emergency preparedness at minimal cost since Department of Health Care Services provides naloxone as part of the naloxone distribution project to schools. And it won't disrupt current training structures, but it also brings school-based safety practices into alignment with California's existing emergency medication and public health standards. AB 1586 is a critical piece of legislation that increases emergency preparedness on school campuses and helps ensure that life-saving overdose reversal medication is available when it is needed. We strongly encourage your support and thank Assemblymember Ramos for introducing this bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam. Madam Chair and members, Tristan Brown with CFT here in support.

Thank you so much for your comments and testimony, and I ask for your aye vote.

Cordell Hampton with the Association of California School Administrators here in support of AB 1721. The comprehensive school safety plan is intended to ensure that every school has a clear locally developed plan to keep students and staff safe and be prepared for everyday risk as well as worst case scenarios State law establishes a framework requiring schools to plan for a range of emergencies at the local level This includes natural disasters such as earthquakes and wildfires emergency response procedures such as evacuations and shelter protocol and serious incidents such as active shooter situations. At the local level, these plans are developed through a collaborative process that bring together school leaders, staff, parents, classified employees, local law enforcement, and other first responders, a collaborative approach that is reflected in this bill. Over time, however, the requirements of the school safety plan has expanded significantly. While well-intentioned, these additions have resulted in plans that are longer, more complex, increasingly difficult to use in real-life situations, and as a result, some school communities have begun to question whether their plans remain an effective tool to use during these types of emergencies. supports AB 1721 because it creates an opportunity to thoughtfully review and improve school safety plans. This bill establishes a workgroup to evaluate both the required elements and identify opportunities for improvement. It requires a workgroup to report its findings back to legislature. For these reasons, we respectfully urge your aye vote on AB 1721. Thank you. And just so for the

On behalf of the California School Nurses Organization and the California Association of School Counselors, in strong support. Good morning. Harold Tallerup on behalf of San Francisco Unified School District, in support. Xavier Birchfield on behalf of California IT and Education, in support. Rachel Chacluna on behalf of the San Bernardino County District Advocates, in support. McLean Rosansky with the Alameda County Office of Education, in support. Sarah Petrowski on behalf of the California Association of School Business Officials, in support.

Thank you for your witnesses' report. I will now continue with any lead witnesses in opposition. Seeing none, do any members of the public would like to express their opposition? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. Any comments, questions? We have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. Thank you for bringing this measure forward. I think anything that we can do to streamline the process, ensure that there is effectiveness, I'm all for 100 percent. So thank you for bringing this measure forward. Would you like to close? Member Morisucci. Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, sir. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Bogue. Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Cabaldon, Choi, Cortese, Gonzalez. Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes. Wonderful. We'll place that bill on call for absent members. Thank you for being here today, sir. Thank you. And there we have another one. coming up, yeah. And we'll continue with Bill Item AB 2060 by Member Morisucci. Thank you. AB 2060 is a bill to strengthen California's teacher pipeline by supporting mentor teachers, experienced mentor teachers, to help prepare the next generation of educators. We know that strong mentorship is essential to improving teacher preparedness increasing teacher retention and ensuring new teachers are successful in the classroom AB 2060 would establish the Teacher Mentor Grant Program to create to require local LEAs to come up with standards on as well as providing in a stipend upon appropriation to ensure and support this practice of school districts providing mentor teachers to new classroom teachers With me to testify in support of the bill is Saret Kaminsky with AXA.

Thank you very much. We'll now continue with any witnesses from the public that would like to express their support. Please come to the microphone, your name, your organization, and your position on the bill. Good morning.

Seeing no other members in support, we'll continue with any lead witnesses in opposition. none. Any members of the public who would like to express their opposition? CNN will bring this back to the dais. Any comments or questions? We have a motion by Senator Gonzalez. Thank you so much for bringing this measure forward. Member Morizucci, it is incredibly difficult to find master teachers and especially recruit teachers in this profession. And I think I had an amazing mentor when I first began my teaching experience as a teacher and he's not passed away but I owe him a world of thanks for sharing all of his materials his insights and just really taking honors so I a huge believer in mentors in the teaching professor so thank you so much I'll be supporting the bill today would you like to close the respectfully ask for I vote thank you sir madam secretary please call the roll Motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senators Perez, Ochoa Bogues, aye. Ochoa Bogues, aye. Cabaldon, Choi, Cortese, Gonzalez, aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes. Okay, we'll place that on call for absent members. Yes, thank you, Vice Chair. AB 2440 is a bill to strengthen arts and music education in the state of California We know that for too long not all school districts not all communities have received the benefits of arts and music education Proposition 28 was a major breakthrough in providing ongoing, dedicated funding to help ensure that every community, every school district receives arts and music education. However, when I was still chairing the Assembly Education Committee, we conducted a hearing where we heard from arts and music educators as well as local educational agencies that, in fact, because of the ambiguity in how to implement Proposition 28, combined with a lot of the significant financial penalties that would be incurred if they didn't properly allocate funding, arts and music education funding, it became clear that we need to clarify the law so that we make sure that school districts have the necessary guidance to spend these available Proposition 28 arts and music education funding dollars. Specifically, one of the key tenets of Proposition 28 is to make sure that we're spending to supplement rather than supplant existing arts and music education funding. Also, another common sense proposal that this bill is proposing is to allow small school districts to be able to pool resources so that they can have roving arts and music education teachers that can help meet the needs of the smaller school districts and thereby ensure that all communities can benefit from arts and music education. with me to testify. In support of the bill is Nick Romo, representing Create California, and Derek Lennox, representing the California County Superintendents. Welcome. Good morning.

My name is Dr. Veronica Alvarez. I'm the executive director of CREATE California, the state's leading arts education advocacy organization. We are proud to support AB 2440 and deeply appreciate Assemblymember Martucci's leadership. Our North Star for Prop 28 is very simple. More art education for more kids. Every student, regardless of zip code, background, or income, deserves access to full promise of arts learning that voters overwhelmingly supported. AB 2440 moves us closer to that goal by strengthening implementation and supporting local education agencies as they expand arts programs. I want to highlight three core elements. Aligning the definition of arts education with California's adopted arts standards and arts education framework will help ensure high-quality instruction and prevent confusion about what counts as arts learning. Refining the supplement, not supplant definition will ensure that Prop 28 funds truly expand and increase arts programs rather than backfilling other obligations. Finally, narrowly tailoring reporting requirements that improve transparency for parents and advocates while avoiding unnecessary administrative burden for districts. We look forward to continuing to collaborate to ensure clarity, consistency, and strong implementation statewide. And thank you for your leadership, for your commitment to strengthening arts education for all of California's 6 million students.

Good morning, Chair and members. Derek Lennox on behalf of the California County Superintendents. Pleased to support the member's bill. Thank you, Assemblymember Moritzucci. I'm also pleased to introduce my colleague Kyle Holmes, who will be our subject matter expert and speak to some of the merits of the bill.

much. We'll now continue with any witnesses from the public who would like to express their support for AB 2440. Please come to the microphone. Name and organization and position.

Good morning. Carlos Rojas representing the Kern County Superintendent School's office in support.

Chad Zellinger, President for California Music Educators Association, in full support.

Thank you.

We actually worked with Assemblymember Fong last year on a bill that also would have extended some protections for students, undergraduate students and graduate students. And that bill ended up not advancing, unfortunately. Access to a quality education is, as you can imagine, a fundamental tenant for AAUW, university women. We care about all people having access to an affordable education. And while you can have, you know, a couple going to a university, I have a nephew and his wife going to Cal. you know they've got a child she obviously is extended the courtesy if you know as she is pregnant as she was pregnant you know he's a parent he needs time off as well so this really does apply to both both male and female all gender and we've done a pretty good job of protecting our graduate students and making sure that they do have accommodations when they are expecting or are going through pregnancy-related conditions. And in California, but we just haven't done that for our undergrads, and in California, you know, professors do. Instructors do have latitude, but it's very inconsistent. You may have a professor who is willing to accommodate an expectant mom,

Thank you so much for bringing this forward and, of course, to Kathy, your witness. This is just thinking about my time in college and, you know, not feeling like I couldn't go while I was pregnant and had a child and all of the things and how that can deter so many people from even going. But this is a great step in the right direction. I'm glad you stuck with it as well. I love to be added as a co Love to have you Thank you so much for continuing the work Thank you And we have a motion by Senator Gonzalez Any other comments or questions

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

So I'm pleased to present AB 2660 on behalf of my colleague, Assemblymember Alvarez. AB 2660 takes the critical first step in strengthening and diversifying California's STEM workforce by building a coordinated pipeline from high school through faculty positions and industry leadership. Specifically, this bill would codify two existing STEM programs, CalBridge and Enlace, to help students from underrepresented – oh, oh, oh, you got glasses. Oh, my gosh. Okay. Well, those are much better. Thank you. Specifically, this bill would codify two existing STEM programs, CalBridge and Enlace, to help students from underrepresented communities to achieve a Ph.D. and join the state's science and technology industry as leaders in their field. California's science and technology industries are a main economic driver of the state's economy. However, due to a lack of diversity in these industries, the state underutilizes its talent. Only 15% of the 1.5 million tech workers are Black or Latino, and only 26% are women despite each group comprising half of the state's population. One key factor leading students from these groups to exit STEM educational pathways is the lack of faculty who reflect their backgrounds. Only 4.5% of UC STEM faculty and only 9.2% of CSU STEM faculty are Latino, Black, or Native American. CalBridge creates a structured pathway for students from California Community Colleges and California State Universities to pursue STEM PhDs and careers in academia and in the tech industry. Through five sub-programs, students receive mentorship, financial aid, research opportunities, and professional development, supporting them from undergraduate studies through post-doctoral stages. In addition to CalBridge, the Enlace program operates independently but complements these efforts by supporting STEM pathways from high school through undergraduate education. Together, these initiatives would form a comprehensive approach addressing STEM education at every level. I now turn to my lead witness in support, Dr. Alex Rudolph, founder and executive director of the CalBridge program.

Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from MeToo's in support. use the mic at the railing. Chloe King with Political Solutions on behalf of the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls also in support. Thank you. Jason Henderson

McLean Rozanski with the Alameda County Office of Education in support. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition? If there are any witnesses in opposition please rise. Seeing no one rising, I'll now turn it back to the committee. Do we have any questions or comments from committee members? Yes, Senator Chobo. Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have some

You're speaking of the NLAC program, which is a separate but related program that is part of this bill, not part of the CalBridge program directly. So I'll try to answer on behalf of the director who's not here. But my understanding is that she has been running, a professor at UC San Diego has been running a summer research program for about 12 years in which she recruits high school students from Mexico and from the US brings them together for the summer at UC San Diego where they participate jointly in research projects I don know the details of how she selects the scholars or how she recruits them

My understanding is that up until this time, the money has been – the students have been paying to participate. I do believe that there is funding that's obtained to help students who are unable to pay, and I think there may be an appropriation in the current budget which would change that. But again, I'm not director of that program, so I'm trying to speak on behalf of – I don't know if you want to – I'm looking through my FAQs, and I have an answer to that. So the student participation fee is $7,500, which covers housing, food, field trips, and all program expenses, excluding flights and visa fees. However, many participants receive scholarships thanks to support from industry partners, including Illumina, Insulet, ASML, Hologic, Sempra, Energy, Viasat, and solar turbines, as well as UC San Diego itself.

It says that university students accepted as chaperones receive a full scholarship. So the chaperones receive, the chaperones for these students receive full scholarship, meaning that they will probably be housed food. through those partners that are doing the fundraising for the program is what I'm reading.

That's my understanding.

So I can't really answer the question because it's not a program that I'm involved with directly.

It's not tax dollars that's being primarily spent on this program. According to the answer, it's industry partners, yes.

Sounds fair to me.

I feel like I'm on a game show.

We are not funding Mexican students.

Okay. Perfect. Just wanted to have that for the director.

Okay. We don't accept international students. Okay.

I think it's important in light of where we are right now.

I appreciate that. Thank you. Seeing no other questions or comments, I support the bill. My recommendation is an aye vote. I'll turn it over to you to close Assemblymember.

Excellent. And that motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Do we have a motion? We have a motion from Senator Gonzalez Secretary can you call the roll The motion is due pass to Senate Appropriations Committee Senator Perez Aye Perez aye Ochoa Bogg Aye Ochoa Bogg aye Cabalden Cabalden, aye. Choi? Cortese? Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Reyes? Great. And we will put that bill back on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember. I see we have Assemblymember Krell in the audience to present AB 1845. Assemblywoman, you can get started whenever you're ready. Apologies, I did not realize. Assemblymember Stefani, the schedule, is that okay? Okay. Alrighty, let's go ahead and get started. Thanks so much, and thanks to Assemblymember

Good morning, Chair Perez and members of the committee. My name is Hillary Evans. I'm the Director of Social Impact at Three Strands Global Foundation and a survivor of child human trafficking. I'm here to respectfully urge your support for AB 1845. When I was a child, no one taught me what grooming looked like. No one explained healthy relationships or tactics that traffickers use to exploit young people. If I had received that education, I may have recognized the warning sign sooner and asked for help. I also wonder how different my life could have been if the adults around me, the teachers, the counselors, the coaches, and the professors, had been trained to ask what happened instead of what's wrong with her. AB 1845 provides that training so that when young people signal for help, the trusted adults around them have the tools to recognize it and to act. With a training like this, I could have been connected to resources and help sooner. I work at Three Strands Global Foundation because I want other children and young adults to have what I didn't. Through prevention education, we've seen firsthand how giving young people the language to identify exploitation helps them protect themselves and their peers. Education creates awareness awareness leads to action and action can save lives AB 1845 extends that culture of awareness into our colleges and into our universities We recognize that campuses already prioritize safety through Title IX and existing programs. This bill doesn't duplicate these efforts. It closes a critical gap by clearly defining human trafficking and requiring specific annual training transforming awareness into standardized campus-wide safety practices. We cannot undo the past, but we can give the next generation the knowledge that I wish I had. On behalf of Three Strands Global Foundation and as a survivor, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1845. Thank you.

Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear me too's in the audience. Please use the mic at the railing. Madam Chair and members, Cathy Van Austin on behalf of the American Association of University of Women California co-sponsor and strong support. Good morning Samantha Ariza here on behalf of Three Strands Global Foundation in strong support. Good morning, Genesis Gonzalez on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Lenny Kunulakis in support. Thank you. Atoria Foley on behalf of the California Survivor Coalition and Three Strands Global Foundation Survivor Advisory Council in strong support. Thank you. I'm loving the co-coordinated outfit. I know. You have to show support too. Aww. Christina Kavanagh, UC San Francisco Children's Hospital and UC Berkeley, alumna, retiree, and volunteer in wholehearted support. And thank you, everyone. Excellent. Now we hear from any witnesses in opposition. If there are any witnesses in opposition, please rise. Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have committee questions or comments? Senator Gonzalez?

Thanks so much for your support and great point. But since the universities are already required to have Title IX training that covers gender discrimination and sexual harassment, the bill really envisions continuing that framework and just expanding it to include human trafficking. And then in terms of what materials specifically would be used, that would be within the discretion of the schools, but certainly there's several community-based organizations that I've worked with that I know have been active on college campuses on a voluntary basis to make sure that the right information is communicated to the right people.

forward to supporting. Thank you. Senator Cabaldon. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am one of this committee's biggest skeptics of all the new programs and reports that we do. I come from the world of higher ed and having been vice chancellor there, I often want, can we just let people implement the stuff that we passed over the last five years? We're drowning in new requirements and what have you. So generally, I'm skeptical of bills that add more training requirements and more and more of the more exclamation points behind programs that we already have. That said, I think this bill is very important and necessary and in part it's for the reason that you described about why it wouldn't be that as much work as you might imagine, that it is all kind of captured in Title IX, but you know, having done work on this with local campuses and I helped negotiate the Christian Smart Campus Safety Act that you're amending here from when I was at the community colleges The Title 9 these topics are all together And so you supposed to do work on sexual harassment and on sexual violence and on hate crimes and maybe human trafficking too And it's a lot. and if you're in at the campus and you're making a judgment about how how to design your materials where to focus your attention the you know the chances that a student is going to have to grapple that day with with with date rape or sexual assault or sexual harassment are high are high higher than they are for human trafficking and so you might you might rationally say I want I'm going to just like even subconsciously I'm going to focus on these areas and human trafficking often gets left behind or it's just like added on and also you should we've worried about human trafficking in the training or here's two minutes on it and so this bill I think is important in in both highlighting and creating the framework that human trafficking is it can be related but it is essential that students be aware of and others on the in the campus community about what the risks the warning signs the resources the tools on the accountability all of that is necessarily to be uplifted. And so I am supportive of the bill. I think this is a very important step forward to assure that we're not treating it as just sort of the end of a sentence, but that human trafficking gets the attention and the focus that it needs to sort of wake up a freshman and say, hey, you may have not thought about this in your small town in Solano County or whatever. You need to pay attention to it. And here are the resources and the tools and the ways to recognize what's happening so that so that you can you and the campus are here to can protect against human trafficking. So thanks to the other. I also intend to support it. Appreciate it. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you so much. Thanks so much for the comments. Just to your point, a study was conducted among college students on 12 Southern California campuses, and it found that 42% of students reported having known someone who was sold for sex or who was trafficked as a college student. So, you know, I do think it's prevalent enough that every student should hear about it. And as everybody knows, it's devastating. You know, one student is one too many. So I appreciate everyone's support on this bill. I think this is really important. I think this will prevent human trafficking. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Today I'm presenting AB 1734 called the Count Hunger Act, which responds to the federal government decision to scale back hunger data collection by strengthening California own food insecurity research that currently being done by UCLA California has one of the highest costs of living in our nation yet our current surveys do not fully reflect that reality And without accurate data, we lose sight of who is struggling to put food on the table, where the gaps exist, and how policy changes are affecting families across our state. But we know that hunger doesn't disappear when we stop looking for it. What disappears really is our ability to respond to that hunger, and we cannot solve a problem that we can't see. The Count Hunger Act recognizes the importance of food insecurity research and the need to raise the federal poverty level to 400% so that we can capture the realities of California's high cost of living. When we did a press conference at the San Francisco Food Bank, we had someone testify to the fact that she's a single mom. She's way above 200% of the federal poverty line, but she wasn't qualifying for assistance. She has a child with disabilities and struggles to maintain work while at the same time has high medical costs for her child. And yet she's not seen in our current hunger data because she's above 200% of the federal poverty line. So that's one of the reasons why we are urging the California State Legislature to direct that we must measure that food insecurity at 400% of the federal poverty line. This bill is really about making sure struggling Californians are seen, counted, and not left behind. And with me today in support is Josh from the California Association of Food Banks and Maxwell from the San Francisco Marin Food Bank.

CHIS is even more essential now as a supplement to the recently canceled, decades-old USDA Household Food Security Report. High-quality food insecurity data like CHIS ensures that we are informed of the impacts of policy decisions and increasing cost of living pressures that are impacting Californians. AB 1734 recognizes the importance of the CHIS survey as a critical measure of food insecurity in our state and encourages UCLA to expand the food insecurity provisions in the survey to include households with incomes at or below 400% of the federal poverty line. That's approximately $128,000 for a family of four, which is roughly the cost of living in California. The expansion would provide us with a sustainable source of data on the prevalence of food insecurity in our state. CAFB is proud to co-sponsor AB 1734 along with the San Francisco Marin Food Bank. And I'll turn it over to Maxwell. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Maxwell Titsworth. As Chief Data and Technology Officer at the San Francisco Marin Food Bank, I can tell you that we're at risk of losing visibility into hunger. As you heard, the USDA Hunger Survey has been suspended. Its most recent data shows that food insecurity is reaching record highs nationally. And the California Health Interview Survey, Food Insecurity Screener, our best remaining state tool, is at risk. AB 1734, the Count Hunger Act, recognizes this. Retaining existing food insecurity measurement is really critical. It also important to expand screening from 200 to 400 of the federal poverty line because research shows that a third of food insecure households nationally earn above that 200 line The California Health Interview Survey is a unique California asset Respondents in every county surveyed in six languages with data collection running for more than 20 years. No existing survey matches that reach. AB 1734 recognizes the importance of the California Health Interview Survey. It's targeted, it's evidence-based, and ensures that California doesn't leave struggling families invisible simply because they earn a few dollars above an outdated cutoff. Thank you. Thank you for your presentations. We'll now hear from MeToo's in support. If you could use the mic at the railing. Clifton Wilson on behalf of Alameda Stop Waste, as well as the City and County of San Francisco, as well as the Board of Supervisors for the City and County of San Francisco, Napa, and Marin, all in support. Thank you. Josh Goger on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in support. Kashif Kumar with Lighthouse Public Affairs on behalf of the California Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics in support. Thank you. Good morning Madam Chair and members Jonathan Munoz on behalf of First Life of Los Angeles in strong support and we thank the author. Madam Chair and Senators Adam Caglin on behalf of No Kid Hungry in support. All right. Thank you. Now, do we have any witnesses in opposition? Any witnesses in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have any committee comments or questions? Okay. We have a motion. Assembly member, I support your bill. My recommendation is an aye vote. Would you like to close? Thank you, Madam Chair. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. And we have a motion by Senator Ochoa Bogue, and that 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? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Cortese? Gonzalez? Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. And we will put that bill on call. Thank you. Thank you. Do you want me to consent? So we'll go ahead and we'll do the consent bills now, seeing as we have no authors. Secretary, can you call the roll? We have a motion by Senator Gomez Reyes. Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochobog. Aye. Ochobog, aye. Cabaldon. Choi. Cortese. Gonzalez. Reyes. Aye. Ray is aye. Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Great. And we will put consent on call. I know we're currently waiting on some members to head down here. We'll go ahead and lift the call so we can do some add-ons briefly. Secretary, can you lift the call? File Item 1, AB 65, Aguirre-Curray. Motions do pass to the Senate Labor Public Employment Retirement Committee. Current vote is 1-A and no-nos. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogg. Cabalden? Aye. Cabalden, aye. Choi. Gonzalez. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Back on call. We will put that bill back on call. File Item 2, AB 673, Jackson. Motions do pass as amended to the Senate Human Services Committee. front vote is one I and one no with the vice chair voting no senators press I press I Cabaldon Troy Cortese Reyes Reyes, aye. And we will put that bill back on call. Do you want to pause? Do you want to keep going? Let's just keep going. Okay. File item 3, AB 1552, Jackson. Motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Cabaldon. Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi. Cortese. Reyes. Aye. Reyes, aye. Okay. File Item 5, AB 1572, Alanese, motion is due passed to the Senate Public Safety Committee. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Cabaldon? Cabaldon, aye. Choi, Cortese, Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. File Item 6, AB 1586, Ramos, motion is due passed as amended to the Senate Public Safety Committee. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi, Cortese, Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. file item seven ab 1721 um murr suchi motions do pass to senate appropriations committee senators perez i press i cabalden cabalden i toy cortese reyes reyes i file item eight a b 2060 murr suchi motions do pass to senate appropriations committee senators perez i press aye Cabaldon Cabaldon aye Choi Cortese Reyes aye Reyes aye file item 9 AB 2440 Amarasuchi motions do pass to Senate Appropriations Committee senators Perez I press I Cabaldon Choi Cortese Reyes Reyes I okay file item 12 a b 1784 Pilgrim motions do pass as amended to the Senate Judiciary Committee senators Perez I press I Choi Cortese Reyes Reyes I And we will put all those bills back on call. I see you have Assemblymember Fong with us. Assemblymember Fong, I know you're presenting a couple of bills so you can get started whenever you're ready.

you for your presentation Assemblymember. Do we have any Me Too's who would like

Thank you. Do we have any Me Too's or witnesses in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have any committee comments or questions? Senator Cabolden.

Thank you so much, Senator, for that question. In terms of the cap, it doesn't affect the cap of the number of bachelor degree programs that are able to be offered by our community colleges. What this bill does is it allows the opportunity to run a pilot program for up to seven years for up to 40 community college bachelor degree programs so it's separate from the bachelor career approval process okay so it so it is it's outside of the cap that is the caps not existing well there is an existing all cap but it's proposed I think in both this committee and in the distinguished chair of the assembly higher education committee both committees have have added language to pending legislation to tighten that cap but so these 40 bachelor degree programs would be in addition to that cap? Sorry if I was clear. This would just offer the teacher credential programs for up to 40 programs but programs are already offered at our community colleges so it would not affect the current cap that's

There is an actual workforce need in that region that is unmet.

Thank you for that question, Senator. In terms of the actual occupation, there still have to be the demonstrated workforce need for that type of program they offered at the community college and if that community college does offer that bachelor degree program, then what this bill will do was allow them to in the future in the pilot program offer the bachelor degree teaching credential program to match that field.

Do we have any other questions or comments? Okay, seeing none, my recommendation is an aye vote. I support your bill, Assemblymember, so I'll turn it over to you to close.

Thank you. So do we have a motion on this bill? We have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes and that motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochobog? Aye. Ochobog, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi, Cortese, Gonzalez, Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Great, and we will put that bill on call. Next up, you have another bill you're presenting, Assemblymember. You can get started when you're ready.

Great and you'll have two minutes each. Oh are we on? Okay. Good morning Chair Perez and committee members. My name is Andrea Terry and I'm a professor of Communication Studies at Sacramento State University. I'm also a proud member of the California Faculty Association. As a faculty member who's worked in the CSU system for 10 years, I can speak to some of the barriers that exist when attempting to contact a member of the Board of Trustees for the CSU. The CSU Board of Trustees meets bimonthly, meaning every other month, and if a member of the public wishes to express a concern on an issue during one of those meetings were limited to only one minute of public comment. If we wish to contact a member of the Board of Trustees, we are unable to. The only way we have to reach them is a general phone number, a general email address, and a general mailing address that goes through a liaison listed on the CSU's website. And to be honest, we're not even sure if those messages get passed along consistently. I have a number of colleagues who've used these methods and receive no response. The CSU is the largest public higher education system in the country that's funded through our tax dollars. Trustees vote on important decisions that impact the future of higher education, and we should have the ability to contact them directly. As the decision makers in the largest public university system in the nation, trustees have a responsibility to receive, listen to, and read input from the public. As a member of the Faculty Senate at Sac State, I have gotten to interact very briefly with a couple of trustees when they visited our campus. They have said that they're open to our feedback. They've said that they want to hear from us, but members from our campuses have no real way to contact them. AB 2523 would bring the CSU's policy for contact information for its governing body to be more in line with other California governing bodies. City and county websites often list official contact information for each member of a legislative body. I want to be clear, this bill in no way would require the higher education institutions to post trustee members' personal contact information, only their business contact information that's provided to them by the institution, in my case, the CSU system. I urge you to please support AB 2523. Thank you.

you. Thank you for your presentation. We'll hear from any other Me Too's in support. Seeing no one rising, do we have any witnesses in opposition or Me Too's in opposition? Seeing no one rising, we'll turn it back to the committee. Yes, Senator Gomez Reyes.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Gomez-Reyes and Senator Cabaldon.

Thanks, Madam Chair.

Or morning. It's not afternoon yet, but morning. Thank you, Senator Chobog, and apologies. We have budget going on right now, and every single member that's here right now is currently on budget, so we're just doing a little bit of musical chairs. So a couple of things. One, Assemblymember, I appreciate you bringing this bill forward. Me and Senator Cabaldon tend to agree a lot. We've worked with each other for many years in the higher ed space. This is a moment where we do disagree on this bill because I do think it's actually very important that we have access to the information to be able to contact trustees, regents, and for folks to reach out as somebody that was a student advocate, as somebody that used to work at the Campaign for College Opportunity. it makes all the difference in the world and you shouldn't have to be an insider in order to have access to that information Now whether or not a trustee or a regent chooses to respond when you reach out to them is entirely up to them And while the staffing issue is a very real issue these are volunteer roles. I used to serve on the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority where I was appointed. I had no staff. There was no pay. But I was still an appointed board member representing members of the public. And I had a responsibility to respond if I wanted to respond. But that is also part of the role that I had, is being there as a representative. And the same goes for our trustees and our regents and our board of government BOG members, is for them to be good stewards and to work in partnership with our education leaders and stakeholders, and to choose how they would like to manage those relationships, even if they are appointees of the system. So my recommendation is an aye vote. I support your bill, and I'll turn it over to you

Great. Thank you so much. And we have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes. And the motion for that bill is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochobog. Aye. Ochobog, aye. Cabaldon. Choi. Cortese. Gonzalez. Reyes. Reyes, aye. Great. Alrighty, so I see we have Assemblymember Erwin in the audience to present to Furbills. Assemblywoman, you may get started whenever you're ready. Good morning, Madam Chair. I would like to begin by accepting the committee's amendments. I'm proud to present AB 1985 today, which will require athletic coaches at colleges and universities to complete a training on mental health awareness. This bill is named in honor of Sarah Schultz, a Division I student-athlete from my district, who tragically died by suicide while enrolled at University of Wisconsin. College students across California are experiencing an acute mental health crisis. A national survey of over 84,000 students in 2025 found that 37% of students reported moderate to severe symptoms for depression. Nearly one of students reported having moderate to severe anxiety and one in ten reported thoughts of suicide The stressors college athletes face are compounded by student athletes who face increased pressures relating to balancing their sport and studies. While nearly all colleges and universities in California provide access to mental health services, more must be done to connect student athletes with these resources. Collegiate coaches can play a crucial role in the lives of students as mentors and role models, often spending extended periods of time with students outside the traditional academic environment. However, there is no requirement for collegiate coaches in California to be trained in mental health awareness. Experiences on and off the field provide various opportunities for appropriate mental health interventions, where coaches can provide mental health first aid and handoff care to parents and mental health professionals. Equipped with the right tools, coaches can make a tremendous impact. AB 1985 will support coaches with the training they need to help our student-athletes reduce mental health stigma and guide athletes toward help before problems escalate. With me in support is Sarah's mom, Bridget Schultz, co-founder of the Shara Schultz Foundation. Thank you. Chair and members of the Senate Education Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of AB 1985, also known as Sarah Schultz's Law. My name is Bridget Schultz, and my husband Scott and I are the parents of Sarah Schultz. Sarah grew up in Ventura County, California, where she attended Oak Park High School, before competing in Division I cross-country and track at the University of Wisconsin. More importantly, she was a daughter, a sister, and a friend who was deeply loved by her family. Sarah was loved beyond measure by us, her parents, and her two sisters, Abby and Ella. When we lost Sarah to suicide in April 2022 at the age of 21, our family was completely shocked. Like so many young people, Sarah appeared to have everything going for her. She was successful academically, socially, and athletically. We saw no apparent signs that she was struggling to the extent that she was. Yet after her death, we learned that Sarah had shared with her coach that she had experienced suicidal thoughts, and that realization has stayed with us every day since. In response, we created the Sarah Schultz Foundation to improve mental mental health awareness, suicide prevention, and support for student athletes. Through our work, we have heard a consistent message from coaches. They want to help, but often do not feel prepared. Research shows that only 18% of coaches feel highly confident connecting athletes to mental health resources, while 67% want additional mental health and suicide prevention training. When student athletes leave home for college, parents must trust that the adults surrounding their children will recognize when they need help. Coaches may be the only adults interacting with athletes every day and are often the first to hear when an athlete is struggling. AB 1985 is a practical solution. It gives coaches the tools to recognize warning signs, respond appropriately, and connect athletes with professional help. It does not ask coaches to become therapists. It simply helps them know what to do when an athlete reach out. Our hope is simple. that no other family experiences the heartbreak ours has endured. If this training helps even one coach recognize an athlete in crisis and connect them with help before it is too late, it will make a difference. We respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1985. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone wish to register support the bill? So please come forward and give your name and affiliation, if any, and your position on the bill. Leah Barrows on behalf of California Hospital Association in support. Good morning. Tyler Aguilar on behalf of the University of California in support. Clifton Wilson on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists in support. Thank you. Chloe King with Political Solutions on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics California in support and the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists in support. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Are there any lead witnesses in opposition? Does anyone wish to register their opposition? Seeing none, we'll return it to me. Assemblymember, when would you like to close? Yeah, I, you know, there is nothing worse that I can imagine than losing a child. And when Bridget came to us and was trying to find some way to make sure that she turned her pain into making sure to help others, we thought for a few years about what exactly that would look like. and came to the agreement that coaches having this type of knowledge would really be appropriate to work with athletes and help on these mental health issues. Because if we can prevent one athlete from taking their life, this is all worth it. And I just have to applaud you. I would not be able to come up here and testify, but I'm so grateful that you're willing to support this bill all the way through and support – really very honored to have your partnership in this. So with that, I respectfully ask for your iVote. All right. Thank you. And on behalf of the committee, thank you also for taking the time and the courage and the stamina to be able to be with us today. we don't have another member other than me here at the moment when we when we do we will play to place a motion before the committee and that motion will be to pass as amended to the appropriations committee which we should have any moment now the budget committee as I think that you already noted the budget committee's meeting right now and most members of this committee serve concurrently but we look forward to taking the bill up with a do pass recommendation when we return. Thank you so much. All right, next up we have AB 2298, also by Assemblymember Erwin. As our students become more reliant on technology every day, cybersecurity has become a basic life skill. Unfortunately, cyber threats that target our children in schools continue to grow. Identity theft, phishing scams, and other online attacks attacks have serious lasting consequences for our students and families In 2022 alone cybercriminals launched more than 7 million attacks on children through exploiting popular video games predominantly through phishing attempts Schools themselves have also become the common target of cyberattacks disrupting instruction even forcing schools to temporarily suspend their operations AB 2298 addresses this issue proactively by requiring the Instructional Quality Commission to consider adding cybersecurity skills to their next revision of standards. This bill would also require the IQC to consider including cybersecurity skills in its criteria for evaluating instructional materials. By teaching students to recognize cyber threats, we can feel secure that we are preparing the next generation to navigate an increasingly digital world safely and responsibly. With me to testify in support of the bill today is Becca Kramer on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Welcome. You'll have two minutes. Thank you. Becca Kramer on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation in strong support. AB 2298 supports young people by adding key cybersecurity fundamentals to California's recommended curriculum. This bill will help students stay safe online by teaching them how to protect their sensitive personal data from modern security threats and cyber attacks. For young people, the Internet is not just a source of entertainment. It is a space to explore identity, whether by creating and sharing art, practicing religion, building community, or learning everyday life skills. It is also an on-ramp for young people's civic engagement and understanding of the world, with the majority of them reading the news online. For many young folks, and particularly those who lack support in their offline environments, the Internet is a critical lifeline to resources, community, and belonging. However, just like real life, the Internet is not without risks. Like all of us, young people are subject to identity theft, phishing scams, data breaches, and all sorts of other bad actors when they use the Internet. To counter these risks, many lawmakers around the world are seeking ways to ensure that kids are safe online, and young people are asking for education to help them navigate the digital space safely. Research consistently shows that equipping young people with digital literacy tools and open lines of communication is one of the most effective methods for ensuring the long-term safety of youth online. Additionally, by learning how cyber attacks work and how to protect against them through privacy measures and other tools, students will learn how to protect themselves from the effects of the surveillance economy, the very business model that social media companies lean on that incentivizes them to keep young people online as much as possible. And that's where this bill comes in. AB 2298 supports our youth by giving them the knowledge they need to stay safe online as they explore online spaces, something that we all need to understand, whether we're youth or adults. That's why we strongly support AB 2298. Thank you. All right, does anyone wish to register their support of AB 2298? Good morning. Ronak Delami on behalf of Cal Chamber. We're also in support. Really want to thank the Assemblymember for her longstanding leadership on cybersecurity issues. Thank you. Good morning. Naomi Padron on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association. We're pleased to support the bill. Thank you. George Kovint on behalf of MasterGard in support. McLean Rozanski with the Alameda County Office of Education in support. Isabel Megan with the Silicon Valley Leadership Group in support Chloe King with Political Solutions on behalf of the Business Software Alliance in support Thank you All right Are there any lead witnesses in opposition to AB 2298 Does anyone wish to register their opposition to the bill? Seeing none, we'll return it to the committee. Are there any questions or comments? Oh, Madam Vice Chair. I think I'm good. Sorry. I'm catching up. I'm good. Okay. All right. I'm going to support the – I'm generally a skeptic of all of our IQC recommendations. We have a lot of them. I think even in this code section, we've added one every other year. And IQC has limited bandwidth. More importantly, teachers and kids have limited bandwidth. So we can only add so much to the day. We can't make any more time out of it. And so one of the key this this committee is focused a lot on ensuring that we don't over we don't over prescribe and be the big school board in the sky here in in the in the greater capital. and also that we understand that simple exposure of content for kids rarely produces the outcomes that we think it does. Most of society is like, hey, if only every kid did this thing in school, then that problem would go away. This is a common trope in our curriculum reviews here. If we just if we just expose them to this thing, it would then civic literacy, financial illiteracy, you know, cyber, they would all just disappear. And of course, that's not that that's not the case. Education is not it's not a placing of the hand on the forehead. And then suddenly young people at every age are suddenly immunized from every other challenge in society. This bill, honestly, if it were just based on the testimony, I don't know if I would be supportive of it. we are affirmatively not trying to generate a sense of policy and consumer behaviors by young people in this in a proposal here. The bill is very careful. I was going to say it's careful, but it's just simple. It's just a cybersecurity period. It doesn't cover all the other issues of the digital space and the digital economy. It's not intended to upend the corporate power, defeat the tech giants, all of which needs to be tackled too. But that's not the point of this bill. The point of this bill is cybersecurity is an important literacy skill that we should be teaching how, and the process of critical thinking in cybersecurity, it's not about the specific, it's not about just cookies, it's not just about this, it's the way in which we think about security. I guess in some sense the only thing that I wish that we were doing here was that it wasn't only embedded in the computer science curriculum. That is the right place in some ways, but obviously students who are choosing to study computer science aren't the only ones and maybe they're the ones that need it the least compared to the broader student population. But yeah, for the narrow question of, yes, cybersecurity added to the same code section that includes AI and media literacy. This is a simple, sensible approach, and I'm going to supported today as well, and I know that the chair also has an eye recommendation on it. Any other questions or comments? Assemblymember Erwin, would you like to close? You know, I do agree with you that we're trying to really feed the students a lot of information, whether it is, as you mentioned, financial literacy or cybersecurity. But I have to say that over the years we really focused on cybersecurity in my district I done probably 30 seminars for seniors to make sure they don get scammed And I know they're not going to pick up all of it, but if at least one of those seniors or one of those students understands that I shouldn't click on this link, it could make all the difference. So I think some exposure and hopefully a few things will resonate. and it could help avoid cyber attacks. But you're right, it's a simple bill, but we just think it's important to do everything we can to expose young people to the dangers online. I often hear young people say, well, why should I worry about clicking on links or I have no money in the bank, and they don't realize that later on these attacks become much more sophisticated, and if they're just aware that people are trying to scam you all the time, I think that it could make a big difference. So I certainly appreciate your perspective. We're hoping that schools develop a robust program on this, but if just a few ideas come across and absorb, I think that it could make a difference. So with that, I respectfully ask for your ideas. Thank you. And we're going to be depending on some of these eighth graders to help to solve, in addition to today's challenges, autonomous AI agents breaking through all of our cybersecurity defenses, quantum computing. So we need – you're absolutely right. We need to develop the critical thinking and the skills even more deeply than we've thought about in the past. So with that, we have – do we have a motion? Okay, moved by Senator Cortese. Cortese, and the motion is due passed to the Appropriations Committee. Would you please call the roll? Senators Perez, Ochoa Bog, Ochoa Bog, Cabaldon, Cabaldon, I, Choi, Cortese, Cortese, I, Gonzales, Reyes. Thank you very much. If we can return to Senator Irwin's first bill, we did not have anyone other than a presiding officer at the moment of AB 1985, which is item 21 on our calendar. Is there a motion on AB 1985? Absolutely. All right. It's been moved, and the motion is due pass as amended to the Appropriations Committee, which please call the roll. Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog. Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Cabalden. Aye. Cabalden, aye. Choi. Cortese. Aye. Cortese, aye. Gonzalez. Reyes. Okay. Thank you, Senators. and we will put that bill on call. Excellent. Thank you, Assemblymember Irwin. Next, I see we have Assemblymember Patel in the audience. You may begin whenever you're ready. There certainly are a lot of paperclips stacked up here. Everyone seems to leave their paperclips in a nice little pile. Thank you. Good afternoon, or is it afternoon yet? Good morning, good afternoon as we're at the cusp of the hour. Madam Chair and committee members, I am here to present AB 2008, and I want to begin by stating that I do fully accept the committee amendments. California's local education agencies face a growing number of planning and reporting requirements from both the state and federal government. While transparency and accountability are important, these requirements come with significant opportunity cost. Recent research from getting down the to the facts three estimates that compliance activities consume between 2.73 and 3.56 billion dollars annually in California public schools. Every hour spent on unnecessary or duplicative reporting is time that cannot be spent educating students, supporting teachers, or school communities. Small and rural school districts particularly are affected because they must comply with the same requirements as large districts despite having fewer administrative resources. AB 2008 takes a balanced approach that maintains transparency while reducing unnecessary administrative burden. The bill ensures that future planning reporting requirements do not remain in statute indefinitely unless policymakers intentionally decide that it should. It also establishes a standard grant reporting template that captures key information in a consistent format across programs. This standard template will make it easier for local educational agency staff to know what to expect when reporting, allow lawmakers to more easily compare outcomes between state grants, and notably, this bill does not include grants for LEAs to serve as technical assistance providers or LEAs, as this type of grant may require more specialized reporting. Importantly, the bill preserves the legislature's ability to review and extend reporting requirements when warranted. This ensures that sunset provisions do not eliminate accountability, but rather create a deliberate, ongoing check on whether each requirement continues to serve its intended purpose. The bill does not eliminate accountability. It makes accountability more efficient and more effective. AB 2008 is a common sense modernization effort that balances accountability with practicality. The bill preserves transparency, improves efficiency, and helps ensure that educators can focus on student support and strategy planning rather than unnecessary compliance activities. This is a good government measure that respects both taxpayer accountability and the limited capacity of our schools. I respectfully ask your aye vote today, and with me today as witnesses to testify are the Superintendent Diego Ochoa from San Mateo Foster City School District and Superintendent Principal, Ani Larsen of Dunham Elementary School. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Diego Ochoa. I'm Superintendent of the San Mateo Foster City School District. We serve 22 schools and over 12,000 students in our district. I'm also Vice President of the Association of California School Administrators, and I'm here to support Assembly Bill 2008. The current burdens that our school leaders face are significant, fragmented, and pull administrators from supporting students, teachers, and the schools that they serve. Our school leaders understand accountability, and frankly, we support it. And we view it as a tool to achieve equity and excellence in our schools. And we think that Californians deserve to know how their public dollars are being spent and what kind of results are being produced for students. The challenge is that at present, reporting requirements are inconsistent, redundant, and tremendously time-consuming. In my district alone this year as one example one of my school principals spent two days completing multiple redundant duplicative reports And those were two days that she was unable to visit classrooms where the incredible and important work of increasing achievement for our multilingual learner students was at risk. She also missed meetings with instructional coaches and classroom teachers that would have been important for the development of our students. And the problem is that she wasn't alone. There were literally thousands of principals throughout the state having the same amount of time lost. So what we're asking in AB2008 is for a practical and common sense solution that works for students. This bill will require CDE to develop a single and streamlined template for grant reporting, and we want it because we want smart and efficient accountability in our schools. This template is going to help our school districts manage our competitive grants and report on those grants, and it will save valuable time allowing you all, policymakers, to more easily compare information across these grant programs. Most importantly, our educators are going to be free to give better support to students, and the resources we have are going to have greater impact. So at a time when schools all the way down in Chula Vista, up through San Bernardino, even in West Sacramento, all the way up to Chico, are figuring out how to better serve students, we ask for your support. Thank you. Hi, Madam Chair and members of the committee. My name is Ani Larson, and I am the superintendent principal, and I always like to add Bobcat Chaser of Dunham School District and small rural TK6 District in Sonoma County. I'm also the small school districts association region one representative for Humboldt, Mendocino, and Sonoma County. It's important to note that nearly two-thirds of our school districts here in California are small, which means that there's 2,500 or less students. I would like to thank Assemblymember Patel for her leadership in authoring AB2008, and I'd also like to underscore the comments of my colleague, Superintendent Ochoa, regarding the template. As a superintendent principal, my time is already incredibly constricted, and when you consider I'm often just inserting the same information over and over, you can see how frustrating that can be. I think we all would agree that time would be better spent with my students and families. I'd like to cover the second important piece of 2008, the requirement that beginning in 2028, any bill requiring a plan or report, including language repealing and planning or reporting requirement, four years after that operative date. Right now, we can be tied to these reports, what seems like forever. For example, I received funds through the Educator Effectiveness Grant in 2021, and I want to thank you so much. Every dollar in our small school districts is spent going towards our students. I believe that I completely expended our funds in the year 22-23, and I had to report annually since then until the funds were expended, as well as maintain expenditure plans. My final report is due September 2026. This let me repeat, those funds have long been utilized, but despite them being gone, I still have to do a report five years later and didn't spend any EGG funds because we no longer have any to spend I have no problem with accountability In fact I embrace it Let just make it appropriate accountability AB2008 will create a more streamlined effective process and align reporting requirements and safeguards with those already existing in other parts of state government We'll be able to focus more on what really is important, our students, our staff, and our families. Please help us to do that. Thank you. Thank you for your presentations. We'll hear from MeToo's in support. If you could use the mic at the railing. Thank you, Madam Chair, members, and staff. Mitch Steiger with CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals, also in support. Xavier Birchfield on behalf of California IT and Education, in support. Good morning. Harold Tolerop on behalf of the San Francisco Unified School District and the Santa Clara County Office of Education, in support. Sarah Petrowski on behalf of the California Association of School Business Officials, proud co-sponsors in support. Dan Merwin on behalf of the California School Boards Association, proud co-sponsors in support. Rachel Schicklin on behalf of the San Bernardino County District Advocates for Better Schools in support. LeAngela Reid on behalf of the School Employers Association of California in support. Thanks. Ana, IOC and meadies on behalf of Los Angeles Unified School District in support. Grisina Sarasara with the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools in strong support and also on behalf of San Diego Unified. Good afternoon. Carlos Rojas representing the current County Superintendent of Schools in support. Thank you. Great. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have any committee questions or comments? Senator Cabaldon? Thank you, Madam Chair. So my questions are – I understand the policy, what's happening here, but my questions are around the constitutional prohibition against legislatures controlling their successors. And so the language that originally came from a 2010 piece of legislation that says that every bill that has, in this case, has a report in it of this type has to include this particular provision. and that is it's not unprecedented because there was this bill in 2010 that did that with respect to state agency reports but it's largely unprecedented for the legislature by statute not by joint rule of the legislature which is completely subject to us and not the governor to be declared to making a statutory requirement that a bill must include something or cannot include something so that's a that's a it's a that's a pretty big deal to for the for the law that only the governor we can only change what the governor's consent to do something that we could do in the joint rules for example and so I'm trying to understand the the way the bills crafted it says and also like that same bill from 2010 did the same thing to let's counsel and this bill does that as well it says let's counsel when they're drafting a bill or amendments must include this particular provision which is also a pretty for the statute to get into the guts of ledge counsel to say what they can and cannot draft should be a very very high standard I'm saying that these are in all instances but that's a fairly high standard on the ledge counsel provision your bill includes an unless the the requester directs otherwise so there is a there an out there so that if senator if senator Ochoa Bogues submits a request and it has a study and a report in it and the legislature says well your draft includes this mandated language, she can say, no, thank you. I want to press forward anyway. And then when she gets to the Assembly Education Committee, the chair of that committee can say, what are you doing here we don't want that so but the bill also then says that a bill that's introduced has to have that provision in it so so the flexibility that is there for a legislator or the legislature to have leg council draft a provision is then essentially overridden by saying that the bill the bill can't be introduced or amended unless it has that and there's no out there there's no there's no except if the rules committee says okay or anything and so i'm just i'm going to support the bill today, but I want to understand better why. Because to me, this is an important issue. It doesn't rise. I'm not willing to give up my constitutional prerogative as a legislator to a statute that can only be changed with the governor's consent. Over this issue, though, I probably wouldn't have voted for the 2010 legislation either. I recognize this is a novel question. It probably hasn't come up in the process so far. So I'm going to support the bill today, but I think before I would be able to vote for it on the floor, I need to understand why that's so essential that it rise to that constitutional kind of status and to see if there are other ways to accomplish the same objective that may not pose those same kind of separation of powers problems. Thanks, Madam Chair. Did you want to respond to Assemblymember Patel? Yes, Madam Chair, to Senator Cabaldon. I haven't heard this piece of feedback before at this time, so I will certainly take that under advisement and work with our sponsors to see whether there's a path forward that can accommodate and ensure that the legislature retains its authority as a legislature. Thank you for bringing that. Okay. Anyone else? I think to speak just a little bit to Senator Kabaldon's point and also to kind of understand Assemblymember Patel what you're trying to do with this bill. I think part of the reason why you even have the language referring to Ledge Council in there is because of the 2010 bill. So this is already kind of existing in statute that makes this requirement around Ledge Council, but your bill is seeking to kind of clean up that language. I can understand Senator Cabaldon's point and the concern and kind of restricting what Ledge Council can do, but I also see that you're just trying to amend what is existing law and existing statute to clean it up and create clarifying language for our folks as they're working through these things. So I think that there's something to be worked out there, but we'll leave that to you to figure out my recommendations. And I vote. I support your bill. And I'll turn it over to you to close. Thank you. With those comments, I do appreciate the robust feedback and communication from the Senate. really appreciate staff's work and your work, Madam Chair, on amendments with this process and getting our bill this prepared for a presentation here today.

And we have a motion from Senator Cortese, and the motion is do pass as amended to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez?

Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogue?

Ochoa Bogue, aye. Cabaldon?

Choi?

Choi, aye. Cortese?

Cortese, aye. Gonzalez?

Gonzalez, aye. Reyes? Great. And we'll put that bill back on call. Thank you so much.

Assemblymember Bauer-Kahn, you are up next with our final bill for the day AB 2212.

Yeah, you can get started whenever you're ready.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee members. My name is Selena Mendez and I'm an incoming senior at the University of California here on behalf of Survivors and Allies, the sponsor of AB 2212. As a newly elected External Affairs Vice President elected to advocate for student safety and equity, it is incredibly disheartening to say that I personally know so many friends and students in my immediate circle who have experienced sexual harassment and sexual violence. The reality on our campus is clear. Marginalized students are disproportionately prone to experiencing these harms. With the vast majority of student harassment now taking place online, the rapid rise and implementation of generative AI has dangerously expanded the boundaries of where and how sexual harassment occurs. Nowadays, so many people are forced to endure toxic, non-consensual digital spaces. Students are targeted behind a screen, receiving invasive messages like, send me more nudes or do you sell pictures, along with horrific threats against their families, if they do not do what their perpetrator wants. Survivors and Allies Research study found that nearly a fifth of California student survivors experience online harm, but that most of them never reached out to their institution for support because they didn't realize they could access resources. I know students who have felt so helpless that they ultimately deleted their social media, stopped talking to most of their friends, and completely isolated themselves. They never reached out for support because they were first-generation college students who felt incredibly lucky just to be in college in the first place, leaving them with the crushing fear of, who would even believe me? I care deeply about the well-being of our students, and it is my duty to advocate for an environment where all people, regardless of their background, are safe from psychological and systemic harms of AI-facilitated abuse. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Carol Gonzalez on behalf of the Cal State Student Association in support. Thank you.

Chloe King with Political Solutions on behalf of the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls, in support. Thank you.

We have a motion by Senator Choi. I support your bill, Assemblymember Bauer-Keyan, and my recommendation is an aye vote. I'll turn it over to you to close.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

And we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.