June 10, 2026 · Education · 25,975 words · 21 speakers · 59 segments
Welcome to the Senate Education Committee hearing. There are 20 bills on today's agenda. There are 10 bills on consent. Those bills are item number 3, AB 1569, item number 5, AB 1590, item number 6, AB 1626, Item number 7, AB 1653 Item number 9, AB 1694 Item number 13, AB 1698 Item number 14, AB 2466 Item number 16, AB 2191 Item number 2 minutes to ensure the committee is able to complete today's agenda in a timely fashion. Seeing as we do not have a quorum, we'll begin as a subcommittee with our I present AB 1159, the California Learner Personal Information Protection Act, or CALPIPA, that makes critical improvements to California student data. We've been in a lot of conversations and appreciate your work on this bill. I'll also say we're having very productive conversations with stakeholders. For example, we've had a lot of good conversations with LAUSD and are working to address concerns moving forward, as we are with every stakeholder that we've been working with. So just to lay out the problem, the Student Online Personal Information Protection Act, otherwise known as SOPIPA, which is now known as COPIPA, the K-12 Pupil Online Personal Information Protection Act was signed into law in 2014 to combat risk with the rising use of technology in the classroom. And I would say we all know that ed tech has evolved dramatically. I was a teacher for 21 years and have first students preschool through university. And we have almost a constant online presence across educational platforms. So we know now that ed tech platforms, and it's been in the news quite a bit, are collecting a lot of student data, much more student data than students or families realize, which can include audio-visual information like photos, videos, audio recordings, financial information, home addresses, family contact information, attendance patterns, as well as health-related searches and patterns. And so we've also seen recently the way the federal government is subpoenaing information. We've seen the way that data can be stolen. And we know the detriments of how this data is sold at times. So with all of that in mind, it is clear that we have weaknesses in our student data protection. We have uncertainty about who must comply with COPEPA. We need to have more certainty there. We also have new protections that were expanded to the early learning population. However, those same protections don't yet apply to California higher ed students. And then we know that with the advent of AI, as well as what is happening with our federal government, that we do need to modernize student data protections. So we have a solution which is AB 1159 our bill that would strengthen California student data privacy protections by doing three things first building on existing student data privacy laws as well as clarifying and expanding our protections and modify modernizing them also extending those same protections to higher ed students through what would be the higher education student information protector HESIPA and then also creating meaningful enforcement that would include a very limited private right of action that's modeled after the student borrower bill of rights. With me today we have two witnesses Mitch Steiger, a ledge advocate for CFT and then Becca Kramer representing Privacy Rights Clearing House and I'll turn it over to them to share more detail about why this is important and what it entails.
Becca Kramer, on behalf of Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, proud sponsors of AB 1159. California has long been a leader in protecting student privacy, passing the first law in the nation directly regulating the ed tech that was starting to proliferate in K-12 classrooms to ensure that educational privacy law kept pace with technology. Over a decade later, EdTech is deeply embedded in students' lives, but there are still no California or federal laws focused on the EdTech companies who collect personal and private information from college students, including high school students with dual enrollment in a college course. These college students are required to use technology in order to get their degrees. They must read the digital course book their instructor selects and answer its digital prompts and questions, such as these questions that one such ed tech company asks college students. Did the student have more than one sexual partner? Did the student use a latex condom or oil-based lubricant? Students and faculty are largely unaware of how their personal information on these digital services is collected, used, shared, and sold. Popular textbook providers, for example, reserve the right to use students' educational information for marketing and advertising, combining it with information purchased from data brokers, and sharing sensitive personal information with tech giants and social media platforms. No student should have to sacrifice their privacy in order to get an education. AB 1159 ensures all California students have the same privacy protections when it comes to edtech, as well as ensures that edtech does not collect students' immigration status, sexual orientation or gender identity, or reproductive or sexual health information, information that is invasive and not necessary for ed tech companies to know. For these reasons, we urge you to vote aye on AB 1159. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair, members and staff. Mitch Steiger with CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals, proud to support this bill for all the reasons stated by the author and previous witness, we would just add that from our members' perspective, of all the issues out there that they come to us about, this broader one of how to best protect students from the potential harms of ed tech is, at least for me, by far the one that I hear about the most from our members. And that includes both the ones who are very into using ed tech and the ones who are more skeptical of it. And everyone in between, what they all share is a very deep desire to make sure that the kids are safe and that they're protected in every way possible. And they know the law and they know that it's not good as it currently stands, that it's too weak. And so it puts them in an impossible place where whether they want to use this or they being forced to use this technology they know that there could be a fully identified profile of this student being sold off to the highest bidder Maybe so, maybe not. But it is something that really worries them and it puts them in a really hard place where they have to decide, do I want to use this technology that I think is helpful or do I have to just go without it with all the risks that may come from that? I have met teachers who have left the profession because of all of this technology, all of the AI. I know it's tracking the kids. I'm worried about it. I don't want anything to do with this. I'm out. So it is to one degree or another not helping with our recruitment and retention problem in education. And also from the individual student perspective, as mentioned, there are a lot of very vulnerable students out there. They may be LGBT. They may be undocumented. And we can't look them in the face and tell them that we know for sure that their data is being protected by current law. So this is one more reason for them to not only not use this technology, but maybe not even go to school entirely. So there are a lot of downstream problems that are worsened or even caused by the weakness of current law. This bill, as it stands, does a lot to really help with all those. And we think it's a strong step forward and we urge your support. Thanks.
Thank you for your presentation. Before I call up me to use, I'm going to go ahead and call the role since we now have a quorum. Secretary, if you could please call the roll. Senators Perez. Here. Perez here. Ochoa Boog. Cabaldon. Here. Cabaldon here. Choi. Here. Choi here. Cortese. Here. Cortese here. Menjavar. Reyes. Great. Thank you. We'll go ahead and hear Me Too's and support now. If you could please use the mic at the railing.
Thank you, Chair and members. Elmer Lizardo with the California Federation of Labor Unions in support.
Good morning Chair and members.
JP Hanna with the California Nurses Association in support. Thank you.
Good morning. Eric Paredes with the California Faculty Association in support.
Good morning. Kat Brackman with the California School Employees Association in support. Thanks.
Good morning. Natalie Postel on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Lenny Kunalakis in support. Thank you. Good morning. California Work and Family Coalition, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California, Courage California, Oakland Privacy, Tech Equity Action, Alliance for Californians for Community Empowerment Action, Californians Together, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of California, Kapora Center Advocacy, Secure Justice, and Tech Oversight California. Thank you. Anybody else? Alright, seeing nobody else rising. We'll now hear witnesses in opposition, if there are any. Los Angeles Unified School District. We're not in opposition. We're a tweener. I just want to say we've been working with the author and staff. We appreciate their effort to try to clarify some unintended consequences with the definition of de-identified student identification. I think we close to an agreement and we hope to have no position soon enough Thank you Lucy Salcido with the Alameda County Office of Education We generally support the bill, but have similar concerns to those raised by LAUSD. Anybody else in opposition? Any other Me Too's in opposition? Sarah Nocito, on behalf of the California Association of College Stores and the National Association of College Stores, we are opposed to the bill currently in print, but have been having really productive conversations with the author and the sponsors. Thank you. Anybody else? All righty. I'll turn it back now to the committee. Do we have any questions or comments from committee members? Yes, Senator Gomez Reyes. Thank you for bringing this forward. I do have a question of the opposition. Did she leave? What is the central issue for the objection? So basically what we're just trying to make sure here is that regular student communications are still allowed to continue. So being able to send book lists to college students, those type of conversations, reminders about rental returns. There's some affordability and access programs that we do need to be able to send directly to students, you know, based on the data that we have. but they are all for general education purposes and for attending the university. It wouldn't be for, you know, selling data to outside of the university or anything like that. Wonderful. An issue that clearly can be resolved. For sure, yeah. Having served with the assembly member, I know that's an issue. I thought it was a more serious issue. Yeah, no, mostly definitional just to make sure that there are some guardrails on the definition, and her staff and the sponsors have been great. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. thank you uh senator kaboulton uh sure thank you madam chair um i also appreciate what the author is trying to accomplish here i'm not going to support the bill today i'm not planning on voting against it either and it will be assuming that it passes through this committee will go next to the privacy digital technologies and consumer protection committee um uh it wasn't that long ago that folks including actually this committee I wasn't on it it was a decade ago or maybe 15 years ago were extremely anxious and we were considering lots and lots of legislation to bar things like online education plans in higher ed because this bill is mainly about the higher ed piece people like well you know we know students should change their courses in their curriculum without first meeting with a counselor and that was a well widely held opinion in this not this building and the other one across the street and going around to campuses and visiting them and talking with students who said I can't I can't get an appointment and online ed planning has been a very very important way in which students can have control of their systems and it uses it did not use AI then or now but it was a at the time in more advanced technology but our instant reaction and policy was to say it's new it's different it disrupts what we do let's not let's not do it and we are seeing this year in the other committee a lot of legislation in the AI space that is like we it's it's icky right we don't we don't want to do it We don't want it to happen. And we also have to examine the implications for equity, for student achievement, for student autonomy, especially at the higher ed level, because we're talking at this point, we're talking about almost with the exception of dual enrollment. And we're talking about all adults who have some who have some agency in the world, too. So there's I just want to be absolutely sure as we're going through this, you know, that we are getting that balance right and flexible that can continue to be adaptive going forward. So we don't do what we have always. We did the same thing with online instruction. and we're now getting our lunch eaten by ASU and other national providers. Our institutions are better, but we imposed a lot of rules at the beginning that made it impossible for us to compete for a lot of these same reasons that are all justified, by the way. But we kind of suffocated our own ability in California to adapt and to evolve and to innovate in ways that other states have done, and it's been to the deference to some extent to our students. So, like I said, I'm not opposed to the bill, but do want to reserve judgment on the details. And when it gets to the other committee, we're more focused on the technological and the data side, just to be absolutely sure that what we're doing here is the right level of protections without the sort of the icky, the ickiness reaction that we're seeing across sort of across the board in almost every topic area in the Capitol on the topic. And we owe it to students to make sure that we're giving them the path forward to find services and programs that work for them. The other piece of this, last night Anthropic released its near world ending model. that you know the the and so things that we do in the ed tech space that are specifically about the ed tech space ignore often ignore the fact that that students in particular have many other AI options that are not in the ed tech space and therefore not subject to a lot of the protections and other things that we do and so we say okay you can't use your FERPA protected data but I mean as everyone in this room, I know the author is quite aware, you know, the social media platforms and increasingly because people keep asking ChatGPT to tell me, make a picture about everything you know about me, consult out your memories, that yes, we are protecting them to make sure that they don't have your algebra grade from your junior year, but they know your precise location, what shampoo you use, your sexual orientation, everything else. So, you know, to the extent to which we don't have curated, purpose-built ed tech solutions and students find their way to sort of general purpose massive platforms by these like the giant AI labs and what have you. We haven't solved that. We haven't made them safer. We have just put them into we've taken that of this pond that we're worried about and we've dumped them into the ocean. And so we just we need to get that right. And I know the author is committed to that as well. So I look forward to the continuing work on it and appreciate that we do need to be tackling this issue. So hopefully we're able to get to exactly the place that Senator Ray has mentioned, where we've resolved the little issues, but also coming to these big questions around around equity, student achievement and adult student autonomy and choice in some of these issues. Thanks, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Cabaldon. Do we have any other questions or comments? So I'll go ahead and close one. I'm supportive of your bill. Assemblymember Addis and my recommendation is an aye vote. I can appreciate I think the concerns that Senator Cabaldon raised And there certainly a lot of work that been done in the higher education space to try to make data sharing more seamless even within systems and we not been very good at that historically When it comes to making sure we have the same common course numbering, for example, it seems like an impossible task for our community college system, and that's just to name one. but I think that there's a more important component for me of your bill that's getting at something that I have been really ringing the alarm on and that's the sharing of personal data related to sexual or reproductive health related to gender identity sexual orientation immigration status and I think for me that has been what's been deeply troubling about the direction that we've watched the federal government move in partnering with private entities to receive some of this information. And unfortunately, I continue to talk about this, and sometimes I feel like I'm wearing a little bit of a tinfoil hat, but the New York Times has done extensive reporting on this. The federal government has continued to slowly expand their definition of who is considered a domestic terrorist and two weeks before Pride made an announcement that transgender extremism falls into the category of domestic terrorism. That is incredibly disturbing and alarming, especially when we want our law enforcement resources to be being spent on actual domestic terror issues. And so when we see the federal government making moves to target people based off of their sexual orientation, their gender orientation, gender identity, or their views on immigration, I think that we have to act expeditiously. I also think that, you know, we need to pass laws to protect our students and our young people right now, especially because of the way we've seen them targeted already for expressing their views on campus and expressing themselves on campus. And we're going to also have to revisit some of the policies that we're passing when we get past this administration. But we have watched data be weaponized in a very, very scary and disturbing way over this past year. And whether that be from social media companies or from other companies and be put into applications owned by Palantir, for example, we need to have real conversations about it. So my recommendation is an iVote. I appreciate the work that you've done in this space. It's incredibly important. And I'll turn it over to you to close. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. And I just want to say thank you to the committee. The Senate always has robust and deeply thoughtful discussions, I think, particularly in education. You have a lot of experts on the committee that spent decades in education. And, you know, I bring my background as a K-12 teacher, also a lecturer at the university level, and I have just seen how this has really transformed and metamorphosed our use of tech in the classroom. And I think there are very important aspects of it. And then there's also the idea that any data we collect on students can be sold, stolen, or subpoenaed. And so we want to be really thoughtful and get to the right place where we don you know we don put handcuffs on innovation but we also are keeping our students safe and protected And you know the targeting of specific student populations resonates i represent one of the five cif athletes who has been outed as a trans athlete and who she one of my constituents and you know as it's really been life-altering and horrible the way that people have come after her and the way that sometime you know we haven't been used to really the way the federal government could start to weaponize data or the way that private companies or the, you know, I think about the Canvas leak. I was with a number of college-age students in their 20s who, you know, their entire education was disrupted around the Canvas leak, which I don't want to be clear. This bill isn't about the Canvas leak. However, the amount of data that was shared out there about students was very disturbing. So I just want to appreciate the committee and the expertise in this room and the thoughtful questions and conversations, and we certainly look forward to continuing to work to get this balance right between innovation and data protections. I think it's in there somewhere, and we're going to continue to work until we get it right. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Addis. And do we have a motion for this item? We have a motion by Senator Gomez Reyes, and the motion is due pass to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protections Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog? Not voting. Cabaldon? Choi? Not voting. Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjivar? Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Great. And we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Addis. You're welcome. Next up we will move on to Assemblymember Patel, who I believe is in the audience, and she will be presenting AB 1171, and you may begin when you're ready.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to present AB 1171 today. The part-time community college faculty health insurance program was established to expand access to health coverage for part-time and multi-district part-time community college faculty. Since 2022, it has received an annual appropriation of $200 million because it is recognized that our part-time faculty are the foundation of our community college system. Yet, we're doing crucial work without health care insurance from their employer. Districts that offer qualifying coverage to their part-time faculty receive 50% reimbursement of the premium costs, and the district can receive 100% of their premium reimbursement if they provide part-time faculty with the coverage that equals in quality the cost of their full-time faculty. The larger appropriation ensures that there are sufficient funds for all districts to participate. The tiered nature of this program, with 50 and 100 percent reimbursement rates, seeks to reduce barriers to provide health care and incentivize high-quality coverage. I am very pleased to see that participation has grown since 2022. But even the most successful year on record, only $69.6 million of the available $200 million was utilized. Two main barriers are often cited by those who are not participating in the program First there is a concern about the program long solvency making it difficult to commit to an ongoing benefit when the continuity of state funding is uncertain Second, some don't have enough capital under a reimbursement model to cover the initial costs of healthcare and wait for funding later. The consequences of this low participation directly impact part-time faculty. These faculty members teach the majority of courses and are critical to meeting the enrollment and curriculum demands in the community college system. When CCDs don't participate and part-time faculty don't have employer-sponsored health insurance, they must buy private health insurance that has increased in cost by 58% following the expiration of federal premium tax credits, or they are forced onto Medi-Cal. In Assembly Higher Ed, a part-time faculty member with cancer shared the struggles of working yet still not getting the coverage she needed. Her story epitomizes what happens when districts don't participate. So in all, part-time faculty teach the majority of courses, yet more than a third of districts still offer them no health insurance at all, let alone quality coverage, and the key barriers to participation are solvable with funding. And the funding exists. And every year, we sweep it away. With me today is Jason Henderson on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges.
Good morning Chair and members. Jason Henderson on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges. FAC is proud to sponsor AB 1171. Dr. Patel has laid out the core problem well in that while California has made a commitment to part-time faculty healthcare, much of that funding is not reaching the faculty it is intended to serve. From FAC's perspective, AB 1171 is about making that commitment more stable and usable at the local level. We hear from part-time faculty who are effectively working full-time loads across multiple districts, But because their assignments are split between campuses, they struggle to access reliable employer-sponsored health coverage. A faculty member can teach students in the morning, at one college, drive to another district to teach in the afternoon, grade and prepare for classes at night, and still be left to navigate health insurance on their own. That is the inequity AB 1171 is trying to address. For districts and bargaining representatives, health care is not something that can be built once per year. Students need confidence that state dollars will remain available, and faculty representatives need confidence that local negotiations can produce sustainable benefits. AB 1171 helps create the confidence by keeping part-time faculty healthcare dollars in that program, strengthening the reimbursement structure for districts, and recognizing the importance of multi-district faculty and eligible dependents. AB 1171 also respects local bargaining and does not impose a one-size-fits-all mandate. Instead, it sets a statewide expectation that every community college district should begin negotiations by 2030 so that part-time faculty and healthcare are no longer optional depending on where someone happens to teach. Part-time faculty are essential to our colleges and to our students, and AB 1171 is a practical and necessary step towards ensuring these state investments actually reaches them. Thank you for your consideration, and fact respectfully request your aye vote.
Thank you for your presentation. Do we have anyone else in support of the bill? Please use the mic at the railing.
Tiffany Mock on behalf of CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals. We want to thank the author for her extensive discussions and amendments in the bill we are a support if amended position only because we are asking for a budget ask to expand the program to dental and vision and we wanted to make the two ask consistent so thank you so much
and appreciate the committee's review of this good morning madam chair and members kathy van austen on behalf of the american association of university women of california and support
Thank you. We'll now hear from any witnesses in opposition. If you could please use the mic up here.
And you can begin when you're ready. Good morning. Andrew Martinez, Community College League of California. I am here in very respectful opposition. I really do appreciate the work that the authors have done to reach out and work with us with a number of series of amendments during during the process. I think fundamentally from the league, our position of opposition is just, is this bill premature? As you look at the data that's in the analysis, you'll see that the number of districts that are participating have increased significantly year to year to year. It is obviously a big significant investment from $490,000 for the initial proposal to where we're at right now. And you're seeing those increases go up by $20 to $30 million per year. Data for this year, because it is a reimbursement, is showing that it could be $70 to $80 million that's going out this year. It could go up to as high as $90 to $100 million because the reimbursement window closes in November. So we don't really know the full extent of the data. So because of that, we think it is trending that way. Districts are learning from each other, from their peers, about how it's working, whether 100% reimbursement does show up and will work. So we are concerned about that premature nature of it. We're also concerned about the fact that the money does stay within the community college space. The legislature and the administration decides how to use those dollars as they think best, and we think this bill would put an additional step on that process for you to manage those dollars. And then finally, we do acknowledge that it is intently, which we do think is a significant pressure on our districts to negotiate by 2030 as well. And we just don't know what kind of money will be available by 2030 if the program is succeeding and will continue to grow as well going forward. And we are seeing a number of districts that are negotiating in the process. It does take a while to do that as well. And for that, we have to be opposed.
Thank you for your presentation. Do we have any other Me Too's in opposition?
Hi, good morning, Madam Chair and members. Kyle Howland on behalf of the Association of California Community College Administrators. It's a respectful opposition.
Thank you. Thank you. Saying we have no one else, we'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have questions and comments from any of the committee members? Yes, Senator Gomez-Reyes. To the opposition, you said very respectful opposition. It just seems to me if our faculty, our part-time faculty, and there's no question that they really do teach the majority of the courses, at least at many of our community colleges, if they are working without medical coverage, and this is a reimbursement program, and it is not being utilized to its maximum potential, to keep the money in one place seems the most appropriate thing to do. Now, I heard your opposition about not being able to use it for other reasons, but if you use it for something else, then it's no longer available for the very reason it's intended for, which is to eventually get medical coverage for these part-time faculty.
What do you say? The language as it reads right now, it is obviously a decision that is on your plate to move those dollars from that pot to another purpose. It says the legislature and the administration the budget act are another purpose as well So you still have the ability to move those dollars It just creates another step for you to do that as well I think that if you think about Let me stop you for a moment Sure of course Why would we move it to some other
To another. Sure call. No, no, but why. What reason would there be. If the purpose is to provide medical coverage.
Of course.
Part time faculty have gone for many, many years. Without any medical coverage. And as was noted by the witness. Many of them are working. many part-time jobs and eventually really are working full-time but are traveling. We had one colleague who was traveling from San Bernardino to San Diego every day and eventually there was a full-time job but still no medical coverage. So if the purpose is to provide medical coverage, what would be the reason to take that money out? And I hear you. It doesn't matter who. It would have to be a three-party deal anyway.
As mentioned, the dollars last year were used to buy down the deferral for the community colleges last year. That was a decision made in the budget process to use those dollars for that purpose. So the dollars stay within our community college space. They allow us to backfill, it gives you a tool to backfill any challenges in the community college space that is in that space. And then obviously we did re-bench K-12 to be transitional kindergarten. That means we have less than $200 billion, less money for our colleges in that space as well. So it just makes it more challenging, especially if you're going to out years. Those dollars can have a purpose.
Obviously, the first demand is for this purpose. And so it just puts a challenge for you as policymakers about how to move those dollars around, unless you do it in the Budget Act, which you obviously have the authority to do.
All right, but I assume that if you're saying very respectful opposition, that you recognize the value of part-time faculty. I understand the situation, and I appreciate Dr. Patel's work on this issue, and it is very respectful opposition, but fundamentally, this is our position where we're at.
To recognize the value of the part-time faculty. To recognize that this is a commitment that is in place and that this is something that is a significant investment. I think that districts are ramping up in that space. It just takes time to get there. Not all districts are ready to jump into this pot, and I think they want to see their colleagues, how they are successful, or whether they're failing or not, and learn from them. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Gomez-Rez. Senator Ochobo? I think, so my personal opinion, I think some of the concerns that we've had in other aspects in the legislature when it comes to the budget process is the fact that sometimes when those funds are not being utilized, we do have a tendency to, as a legislature, we shuffle them around to meet other needs. And I understand why you would say that. However, in this case, I have to say if the legislature has made a commitment to allocate $200 million to provide health care to these part-time faculty members, it is something that the legislature should honor. And if this bill allows us as a legislature to protect those funds in order for them to be utilized at some point for this specific purpose, I think it is a good safety guard to ensure that we as a legislature who have committed these $200 million fulfill our promise to that commitment. so I'm in full support of this bill. I think it should be protected. This is what we have prioritized at some point and we don't want to jeopardize that funding by moving it somewhere else per se especially when we have budget crisis deficits that we need to mitigate So I in full support of this measure Thank you for bringing it forward It ensures that we as the legislature fulfill our commitment to those part times. Now, I do do have a question as to why would community colleges, if the money is there available, what are some of the reasons why they would not have negotiated this in place already and ensure that, you know, as adults, I always say, if something's broken, we have the ability to fix it. And that everything is fixable when there's a will. There will always be a way. With part-time faculty members who are traveling, commuting to different areas and districts, and with the modernization of technology that we have, the amazing technology that we have, I don't see why there would be an absolute excuse not to provide these folks with health insurance, especially when the money is available. That, to me, just shows a lack of a will, quite frankly. I think there should be a pathway to be able to do that. And I'm actually really surprised and shocked that if the money is there, why the community college system has not been able to accommodate fulfilling a duty that we should be, especially when the state is providing that funding. So that's just my personal humble thoughts on the issue. And it should be a concern that we have schools. And I would love to hear the reasons why we haven't fulfilled 100 percent of community college ensuring that they are able to do that. But I believe Senator Cobald is over there ready to give some feedback. Would love to hear what he has to say on this issue. But that's where I stand, and I'll be happy to support the bill today and make a motion when the time is appropriate, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Chobo. I'm going to turn it over to Senator Cobald.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So I walked into the hearing conflicted on this bill for all the reasons that have been outlined. both the author and the opposition and and also the notion that this this really is a budget issue and and we have for the Senate at least we have a quorum of the budget subcommittee here that could just do this in the budget without a whole bill and statute being necessary and and you know it hasn't amended trip it hasn't been a trivial issue it's quite common for us to say we're gonna try this thing we hope that will incentivize districts in this case or somebody else to do something and if they don't do it if our incentive is not powerful enough or the disincentives are too strong then of course no harm done we will put the money back in the general fund that's a commitment that we almost all make when we have pilot program ideas and what have you and this one was no exception try this try that put this one together it will move districts in this direction And don't worry, the money won't just sit there unspent if the districts don't do it all. It will go back into the Prop 98 general fund to support other community college budget priorities. So that makes sense, and that's a normal budget decision that should be made in the budget process, not by statute. Everybody would like their own program to be continuously appropriated, but if the entire budget is continuously appropriated, then we don't make a budget anymore. that's entirely on autopilot. So that's bad. At the same time I grew up as a I Gen X so I grew up as a latchkey kid except I grew up at Cal State State Amicus Hills because my mom was teaching economics there I also grew up at Cal State Northridge because she was also teaching economics there and I grew up at UCLA because she was also teaching economics there all at the same time And didn't have a tenure track slot in any of them, didn't have any benefits, and all that. So I and I sat in the department meetings and in the grievance meetings and everything else, because what else is what else is a 10 year old supposed to do? When when you once you've exhausted the vending machines on campus. And so I know very, very real what this looks like. And and I was vice chancellor of the community college system now 20, 24, 23 years ago. So a long time ago. And I think I might have been in your position on behalf of the chancellor. office saying hey you know this is a the districts are working on this and we just need time and we've had a quarter century to make more progress on this and so it's clear now which wasn't clear then that part-time faculty teaching the majority of the coursework at community colleges is almost certainly a permanent feature of our higher education system in California it's not a trend that happened because of tidal wave 2 and it's going to go back to normal whatever it's it This is where we're at, and it's not going to change. And so it is incumbent on districts to recognize that reality themselves. This isn't our obligation to pay for. Any right-thinking, well-managed community college district should have arrived at this on their own. It shouldn't be a state program that's paying for this. Districts should just budget for what the appropriate compensation and benefits are for their employees, and particularly the folks teaching most of their courses. this was supposed to simply be an incentive to get them get them moving and and and it's it's doing its job I think it's the opposition is correct it is getting there and that's great hopefully this bill will be completely meaningless in two years when all the community college districts are accessing this fund and it's oversubscribed you know that because this is not enough this is nowhere near enough money let's be honest to cover part-time to cover health insurance for every part-time faculty member in California 200 million dollars not anywhere near that so hopefully it will be oversubscribed and that in district should be moving in that direction so I yeah it was I think I pre pre notified the author I think I might probably will lay off on this one I'm gonna vote for it the the districts need to take this seriously we can still in the budget process the our chair and our vice chair can still in the budget subcommittee override all of this if they want to in in the annual budget so the flexibility that's been described by the opposition
it's a little it's an extra two steps but it's not we still have the discretion to unappropriate these funds if if they're if $199 million of $200 million is sitting in the account unspent we can still sweep it even even if the statute says otherwise with that's what trailer bills are for so I don't think it's quite the end of the world so appreciate the author's work on this obviously just as fiscally prudent and detail-oriented as I would hope on this issue and I look forward to supporting the bill today. Thanks Madam Chair. Thank You Senator Cobaldin and I think you can now see where Senator Cobaldin's passion for higher ed began sitting in on those faculty meetings as As a child with his mom, I love it. I'm very supportive of your bill. Assemblymember Patel recognized the concerns that the community college folks have brought up, accepted. especially as I know that we have more districts that are participating in the program each year. And, you know, as we're seeing that unfold, but also recognize, I think, you know, as we have more folks that are utilizing these funds, and that's what we want these dollars to go towards, right, is for part-time faculty and covering their health insurance costs. So we just need to do a better job, too, of informing people that this is available and it's there for them. I'm oftentimes surprised all the work we do up here, and then I talk to people on the ground, and they have no idea the amazing programs that we've worked on exist. So I'll turn it over to you to close. My recommendation is an aye vote. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members, for the robust discussion today and the thoughtful comments. This bill started with an idea in a backyard conversation with part-time faculty as we were discussing their quality of life and the high-quality education that they provide in a very flexible learning environment for so many of our students who are trying to access higher education, change careers, or just find an affordable path forward. And when I learned that there was actually a dedicated fund to this purpose that was being underutilized, I felt compelled to look into these faculty members, their issue. Because at the current time, back in 2023, 2024, they were saying they were being pushed to Medi-Cal to get their health insurance. And that was heartbreaking for me. And so the program fundamentally is an incentive program, as we've all talked about. But right now, the incentives run backwards. When funds get swept, they flow to other budget items and the district benefits from that, which means the district can decline to offer part-time faculty health insurance and still collect their share of that money left behind. AB 1171 simply ends that perverse incentive and keeps those health care funding dollars doing the job the legislature asked them to do. It's a key step towards making this program as strong as possible so that the faculty who teach the majority of our courses that keep our learning nimble and our economy strong can finally get the health insurance benefits that they deserve. I will continue, of course, to work with the opposition as I have been doing and with all relevant stakeholders, and my goal remains to find a pathway to provide health care coverage to part-time and multi-district part-time CCD faculty. I respectfully ask your aye vote today. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember. And the motion for this item is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee, and we do have a motion by Senator Ochoa Bogue. Secretary, if you can call the roll. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogue? Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Cortese? Aye. Great, and we will put that bill on call. Next up, we have Assemblymember Ramos who is here and has been patiently waiting, and he is presenting AB 1581. Assemblymember, you can present whenever you're ready. Well, thank you, Madam Chair and colleagues. AB 1581 is a bill aimed to ensure we have an accurate picture of the number of Native American students in our public schools The current way of collecting data has inadvertently led to many Native American students being misclassified or overlooked This misclassification makes it difficult to allocate resources effectively or trailer educational programs to specific cultural academic needs. Nationally, 70% of Native American students are misclassified. Several other states have acted to fix this problem, recognizing the need to collect more accurate, appropriate, and accountable data. In California, it is estimated that 90% of Native students are being misidentified. This much-needed legislation would implement policies aimed at bringing our state in line with others and ensure our Native students are no longer overlooked. In the state of California, the most population of Native Americans reside in this state, so we believe that this piece of legislation is needed. Native American students have long been overlooked, and I look forward to finding a way in which we can ensure we are reporting meaningful data to help those students succeed with needed resources. With me today to testify in support of the bill is Angelina Hinojosa, Youth Leader and member of the Pinotville Band of Pomo Indians, and Chad Mays, offering testimony on behalf of the Soboba tribal government. Good afternoon, Chair and members. My name is Angelina Hinojosa. I'm a citizen of Pinotville Pomo Nation, a student at Sacramento State University and youth advocate, I am here today in strong support of AB 1581. For far too long, Native students have been invisible in California's education data. Current reporting systems often classify Native students under broader categories, especially when they also identify as Hispanic or multiracial, resulting in a severe undercount of Native students. According to the bill analysis, Nearly 9 out of 10 Native students in California are not accurately counted. When Native students are not counted, they are not seen. Schools and policymakers cannot accurately identify our needs, allocate resources, develop culturally responsive programs, or measure student success. AB 1581 addresses this issue by requiring the collection of tribal affiliation data for students who identify as Native American or Alaska Native through CALPATS. As a Native student, I know firsthand how important representation and visibility are. Our cultures, languages, histories, and communities deserve to be recognized within California's education systems. Accurate data is not just about numbers. It is about ensuring Native students receive support, opportunities, and resources necessary to succeed. We should enter the system Native American and graduate Native American. AB 1581 is a meaningful step towards equity, accountability, and honoring California's first people. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you for your time and your consideration.
Thank you, Madam Chair and Senators. Chad Mays here on behalf of the Soboba Band of the Suenya Indians, proud sponsor of AB 1581. This bill is about something very simple, making sure Native American students in California are actually seen. Right now, they are not. As the committee analysis points out, the undercounting of Native students may be as high as 70% nationwide. And when students are invisible in the data they are underserved in the system That means fewer resources less targeted support and fewer opportunities for culturally responsive programs that reflect who these students are AB 1581 addresses this in a thoughtful and practical way It creates a more accurate and standardized approach to collecting tribal affiliation data through CALPADS so the state, school districts, and tribal communities have a clear picture of the students they are serving. For Soboba, this is about making sure their children are recognized for who they are and not lost in the system. because when students are properly identified, they are far more likely to receive the support and opportunities they deserve. We respectfully ask for your aye vote.
Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear any Me Too's in support, if you can use the mic at the railing.
Melissa Cortez on behalf of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians in support. Catherine Squire on behalf of the California Commission
on the Status of Women and Girls in Support. Hello, my name is
Coconut Kinney. I'm a Yurok tribal citizen and I'm here just and with my experience as an educator at Aniwal Comekak, I can state the immense importance of having every indigenous student in California schools accurately counted, resourced and represented. I I strongly urge support for this legislation. Thank you.
Good morning. Diego Zamaioa with Latina Advocate on behalf of Hispanics Organized for Political Equality. We support.
Hi, Jake Orta on behalf of the Yajapia Tom of Seminole Nation in support.
Xavier Maltese with the California Charter Schools Association in support.
Madam Chair, members of the committee, Frank Molina on behalf of the San Ynez Band of Shumish Indians in strong support.
Morning Star Galley with Indigenous Justice in strong support of AP 1581. And thank you to Angelina for her testimony.
Hey, I'm Kamiko Hossler, member of Hooper Valley Tribe on behalf of the Calvary Nation. I'm the executive director of Native Sister Circle out of Sacramento and also founder and advisor to the California Native leadership. I'm a Northern California community organizer with the California Native Vote Project, and we are in support. Thank you.
Now we will hear from any. Do we have any questions or comments from committee members? Senator Cobaltin?
Yeah, a couple of questions. First of all, thanks. This is very important to address both the undercount, but just to make sure there are the specific needs, the opportunities, the assets that students are bringing to the school and to the classroom as well. but I just had a couple of sort of process process related questions because in terms of how you how you're envisioning given just the number of tribal affiliations in both in California but naturally because it could be a California student who's a who's a enrolled member of a tribe in another state as well just that sheer number so it's much larger if I if you're filling out a paper form just an example if you're the school admitted the the counselor at the school or a teacher or the admin assistant at the front desk how how will this how do you imagine this this working that the student will be queried or the family will be queried and it will all be by computer where you have a drop-down or how are you imagining this would actually work in practice given the given both the number and the distinction between federally recognized and not recognized and how much school would grapple with that no Thank you for the question There already questions that are asked to students moving forward And the analysis did a good job at laying that out
One of the questions that is asked, are you Hispanic or Latino? And if asked yes, then what is your race and check all that apply? And we believe that that's where a lot of the misclassification is happening. So right there at the initial questioning like it's being asked here do you believe that you're Hispanic or Latino you could ask in that question also do you believe you're Native American? Are you Native American? And then it goes to the next question. So it's a the components are already there it's being asked to the student so putting that question also in there would actually start to help
with the misclassification. Yeah I totally get that. but it's it's what that next question is so when you when you went under the current framework when you when you say are you Hispanic or Latino and then after that it's race but the but the list of races is is is relative pretty small you know four or five or six depending on the on the form and and there may be other we deal with this in the API community as well right because we wanted we're trying to decide create as much of the data as possible we're grappling with exactly when it's you know for API ethnicity or nationalities and there's 100 of them, or for tribal affiliations, federally recognized ones, you know, 600 or more, like how, you know, do you just fill in a blank? Because the checkbox approach for the second part of the question that you're describing becomes harder when you're talking about more than five categories, for example.
Yeah, there would be the follow-up question. You believe you're Native American, or are you Native American? The next question would be tribal affiliation, and that would be filled in. centered on the cradle to career data system as well. And I ran the data system for the community college as well, just trying to make sure it's going to deliver on the promise. And so it's important that data be consistent across schools and what have you. And so I know it's in the bill that the CDE would be defining and collecting. So that provides at least an agency to take care of this. But but that so if everybody fills in a blank line by hand, then you may get a lot of different a lot of different answers that don't match up to a common rubric statewide. And if we want to use the data in order to make policies and to provide reports back to tribes and to CTE and to families, that's going to be important. So I'm supportive of the bill for sure, but I want to help figure out how we can make sure that it actually works in that way.
I think the other component to that element, and this is what I did my thesis on at university, was if you – in my district, there are plenty of folks that have traced their ancestry into two tribes or more. Right. And so this has been an ongoing debate in the census. And it's in and we do do this for race now where you can say two or more, but, you know, you don't necessarily name them. So these kinds of issues, I think, you know, I hope, you know, as it goes out of this committee, we'll get into just the guts of how this would actually work so that we're giving this. Not all of which has to be in the bill. But as we think some of those issues through, we'll be able to get better, better guidance if needed in the statute to CDE to make sure that they're getting it right. Because the other thing that I don't see in the bill that you might want to consider is it doesn't require CDE to engage in any tribal consultation, and CDE is – you're giving them a very big authority here for them to define how tribal affiliation is going to be classified, categorized, and then collected, and it seems to me… A, that tribal consultation is important in that, and I know you would likely share the same view, that CDE should be required to consult with the tribal communities in California as they're developing the guidelines for how the reporting is going to occur. Thank you for the questions and statements and through the chair.
Part of this is actually unwinding historical treatment towards California's first people and this nation's first people. That's why here in this area, the land that we're on, Miwak-Nisenan, would be the tribe from this area. Down where we live, Serrano-Kuia would be down in that area, two tribes. And so you start to see the misrepresentations at the state and policies that have been derived towards Native American people have missed the mark. And here in 2026, we're trying to correct that with overestimated 90 percent of Native American students in the state of California being misclassified, not bringing resources into them. So I think there has to be that broader educational component, right, of what truly the state, the nation, that history and what we're trying to unravel here. It wouldn't be uncommon to see someone associated with two tribes, myself, Serrano and Cahuilla from our area, here, Miwak, Nisenan, right, Pomos. So it changes. And if what we're trying to do is fit Native American into a box that says you're from this one tribe from California, that's not going to work. Each district, if they've done their work in third and fourth grade in their curriculum, they identify and they know which tribes are represented in their local districts. So I would encourage outreach to take place, which several bills that we've done prior call for a task force to be assembled to ensure that voices are being heard. But thank you for those those questions.
Yeah, very much appreciate it. I'm happy to spend time to work on this as well, because we have when I first started getting involved in these issues. as a college student trying just trying to get Filipinos to be seen because we were classified as Asian this before the PI was added to the thing and so all public policies and everything else treated us as though we were you know high-performing Chinese and Japanese students which which we weren't and we weren't represented and so the disaggregation of the data and seeing the differential experiences super important worse dr. Patel who was just here as she's a co-author co-author of this bill she's still working on the segregation thing now 45 years later so i'm just hoping we can we can learn from our extended experience to make this bill instantly effective and hitting exactly the mark that you're trying to get to and that i fully support so thank you so much any yes senator chobock thank you um so i also had a couple of concerns about
how do you identify as, you know, when you have a multi-cultural-ly identified person on the identification in the student enrollment. So funny, full disclosure here, when my kids were attending schools that they would ask us, you know, what race and, you know, how to identify. I never, I never answered them because I figured, you know, it's, it's, it's irrelevant. They're kids. They should be attended to and taken care of regardless of where they identify But I I I do have a question When the students are identifying themselves how do they decide how much and where they were going to identify themselves, especially if they're mixed students? How do you guide these students to decide, okay, do you identify as a Latino or Native American or Caucasian or Asian or Black? How do the students define and identify themselves when they're mixed on these identification as they're clicking everything down? That's my biggest concern is when these kids are, especially in California where many of our children are multi-ethnic, how do you how do they how are we going to guide these students to do to identify themselves as far as the rubric goes on that end I'm just curious how that's going to look like and then and then as a follow-up on that when we're looking at one of the biggest concerns that we have on this and what we're trying to address here is the inadequate allocation of resources to serve students with culturally responsive programs. Could you also, for the record, just kind of name what that looks like in practice in the real world? What is a culturally responsive program when we're looking at schools and ensuring that we have these resources available?
Well, thank you for that question. And to give a better understanding, growing up on the Samoa Indian Reservation, which I still reside on, going to the local schools in that area, San Bernardino City Unified Schools. This paper would come through and ask us what race or ethnicity we are. And if we said American Indian, there was nothing to fill in. So when they asked, well, what are you? We said Serrano and Cahuilla. It's not in that box. So then what they did was marked Caucasian. So we were marked as Caucasian growing up. misclassification started way back then and to answer your question on the individual as far as moving forward just like I said I'm surrounding Korea we know who we are as Indian people culturally growing up learning our songs and and knowing our culture the territory that you live in right Serrano territory we've went on many trips out there and educate the community on it so individuals truly know who they are and which tribes are from. And you're battling against a process that was built early on in the state of California and this nation of assimilation, of taking away that culture from California's first people and assimilating them into the mainstream of California through education and different laws that are out there. So the first question of how would people know, Indian people truly know who they are and what tribes they're from. That's why they're able to mark that down. As far as the resources moving forward, attainment rates, it's no disclaimer or misunderstanding here within this education board that Native Americans suffer at a higher rate of education attainment than anyone else in the state of California. So resources come in. Title VI programs come in with funding to help get those resources and move people to attain graduation. Title VI program, the state of California also has funding that moves forward based on the collection and data. If a school district in an area down in our area is misclassifying Native American students and shows a smaller percentage then that the lack of resources they going to get If it a true count and it national average 70 are misclassified estimating California 90%. And so then that pool, that resource gets larger that then would hopefully translate into higher education attainment within the Native American population.
Okay, so once again, my question had to do with if a student is multi-ethnic, right? How do they prioritize? Are we guiding them? It's not that they don't know. They're going to know who they are and what tribe they're from. My question is, how do they prioritize? How do we guide these students to prioritize their identity when they're multi-ethnic as far as, okay, if I'm, you know, which one do they prioritize based on their ethnic background? For instance, I'm, you know, I'm about, I think, 48% Mayan Indian, right? And then 52% everything else. So which one would I prioritize? I mean, that's just an example, but for students who are literally maybe 25, 25, 25, 25 of different ethnicities, how do we guide the students to prioritize which one they're going to identify on those blocks? Are we going to have them have click every single one that they identify as? I mean, that's what I'm trying to figure out, logistically speaking. What is that going to look like for the student?
So I think part of that, I mean, you started off saying that you didn't fill out those forms, but now you gave an example of mixed components of yourself. So what would that be marked down for yourself, right? So I'm not going to ask you to answer that, but I'm saying that you know. You know exactly who you are. And so in the regions, again, in our area, Serrano, Cahuilla would be areas there, Luceño. Here would be Miwak Nisanat. It's getting away from the whole colonizational view that Indians react, Indians look, Indians live in a certain area. Seventy percent Native Americans live outside of Indian reservations. So I think the question is a personal question, a question that have turned back around to the question would ask you, what would you identify as?
I don't think – we can talk. We're friends. Yeah. For the record, we're like brother and sister. The individual would actually know.
So we can talk about this.
I don't think either you're understanding where I'm trying to get at. My thing is more logistically for the students who are multi-ethnic like my children. How would they identify as far as prioritizing? Of course they know who they are. They're going to know we have genetic tests. We're going to know where we are. Not for the tribes. not for the for the identity but but what i'm saying is when these kids are multi-ethnic we're going to have a system that's going to prioritize you know who they identify as and when they're they're multi-ethnic how do they decide how do we guide them to decide which one they're going to prioritize when they're looking at and clicking at those boxes how many can they click and you know how do they the logistics of it is what i think is going to be a little difficult for some of our kids who are multi-ethnic. That's my concern that I have. I'm just going to be curious as to what that's going to look like in the practical part of it. And then on the modalities part of it is you know looking out to the programs I wanted some examples of the programs that you know these children would be missing out if they weren identifying That my thing But we can have further discussions one on one All right.
In the time, because we have a lot of bail we have to get through. Truly, Indian people know exactly who they are and the names of their tribes that would move forward. Title VI programs do offer resources to Native American students in the school system, and being misclassified, lacks resources coming in to help them promote an educational attainment. Madam Chair. Thank you. And I do just want to note for the Senator that one of the, and you can see this reflected in the analysis, that the question that's being proposed is, it's a two-part question. So, for example, you know, do you identify as Native American or American Indian? And then, you know, checking all that apply the same way that we do for Latino when I ask if you're Hispanic or Latino. So you do have the ability in these applications to select more than one race because we know that many of our students are multiracial and many of our of the individuals that are completing these these applications. I think this is a great bill, Assemblymember Ramos, and I just want to highlight, I think, the importance of making sure that we have adequate data on the student population and that we're disaggregating data. You know, before I came here to the legislature, I worked for the Campaign for College Opportunity, and we would actually do reports and research reports on Native American, American Indian students and the needs that they had. And oftentimes because of the very limited data available to us on the student population, it made our research very hard. But there are unique challenges that this community faces, and it's really important that we're collecting that data. And as we as researchers have continued to look more deeply into the needs of our diverse student populations, we have found, as Senator Kabaldon pointed out, that not all AAPI students are the same. Not all Native American students are the same. Not all Latino students are the same. There's nuances between a Chinese American student versus a Filipino American student versus a student whose ancestry is from El Salvador versus Mexico. All of those things have nuances. And for us as researchers, what I found most valuable about us having access to that information, it is about getting resources, but also about us measuring if our institutions are adequately serving our students. Are institutions graduating Native American and American Indian students in a timely manner? Are they providing them with the resources that they need? And those are the questions that we're better able to answer when we have this kind of data. So it's really important and critical. I recognize that we can override the federal guidelines in terms of how data is collected, which always creates a challenge for us. But it is important for us as a state, I think, to kind of push back and help lead the way for the federal government to say, you know, we want to see this disaggregated. I worked with the coalition last year to create an Armenian checkbox. I represent one of the largest Armenian communities. And it's important. It's so incredibly important for purposes of delivering resources, but also measuring success of our institutions, because one of the most fundamental things that we do within this committee is making sure that we're providing a strong and quality education to all students, regardless of their background and where they come from. And so with that, my recommendation is an aye vote. And, oh, Senator Gomez-Reyes has a comment that she would like to make.
I want to begin by saying that as the first Native American to serve in the state legislature, it's made a big difference. You have brought legislation before us that makes us have to think in a different way to take information in a different way. I think something that you mentioned about where are Native American students learning, and I think the question is why aren't we teaching them the way they need to be taught. and the best way to do that is to know first who they identify as so that we know then we provide the resources. Just as you've said, if you don't provide the resources and you're not taking that student where that student is, and we often say you take the student where the student is and that's how you teach them, that's where you teach them. I think that without a doubt representation matters and you have proven that since you were first elected, putting together the Native American caucus and inviting so many others to be part of that. Even if our Native American blood was just a little bit, you still invited all of us to be part of it. But I think that in the analysis on page four where it talks about are you Hispanic, Latino, and then under that yes, then no matter what you say, you're still Latino, Hispanic. But if you say, yes, I am, or no, I'm not, then you go, are you Native American? Are you API? And then the drop down from each of those. And if it's only Native American, then you're Native American, and you put your tribal affiliation. And I think that it's not going to be easy, as my colleague Senator Cabaldon has said. It may not be the easiest thing at first, But if we don't begin the process, we are never going to get there. And I think that you are in the best position to lead us to try to figure out the best way. How many drop-downs do we have? And is it written in? And try to find the best way to do that so that maybe it is just writing it in because the tribes in a particular region are going to generally be the same, and maybe that will be sufficient, but maybe it won't be. And I think that trying the first steps first and then figuring out what the next steps need to be. But until we do the first step and say we have to be counted, and that's what you're saying, my people and I want to be counted. And quite frankly, it's something we should have done a long time ago to begin to bring the resources that are appropriate. Just as Latino students for years were Caucasian. My mother is listed as Caucasian. She was born in Mexico. She's listed as Caucasian. My father was born in New Mexico, listed as Caucasian, although his whole family is from Mexico. So these are things that if we don't say we want to be counted, we will never be counted. And you're saying you want to be counted, and I'm all for it. Thank you so much, Senator Reyes.
Thank you Senator Reyes I turn it over to you Assemblymember Ramos to close I just want to thank you and thank you for the truly the discussions enlightening on where we going And certainly we have to start somewhere And we welcome the expertise, the guidance along the way to get us to where we need to be. And reaffirming others have been classified as Caucasian really drives home the point of why we need true data collection in individuals. in this case Native Americans that have been overlooked. I ask for your aye vote, Madam Chair. Thank you, Assemblymember Ramos. And that motion is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Do we have a motion? No. From Senator Gomez-Reyes, we have a motion. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochobog? Aye. Ochobog, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjavar? Reyes? Aye. Raise aye. Excellent. And we will put that bill on call. Next up, we have Assemblymember Pacheco presenting AB 1665. And you can begin when you're ready. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and members. I rise or I'm here to present. I keep saying that. I think I'm used to end of session or House of Origin deadline. But I'm here to present AB 1665, which requires student mental health training for coaches. Children and teenagers are facing a mental health crisis. More than 20% of children experience mental health issues, and three out of every 10 teenagers face serious psychological distress. At the same time, more young people than ever are participating in school sports programs intended to be fun, physical, and mental outlets. But increased competition and pressure to perform at high levels can also intensify stress for young athletes. At our schools, adults in positions of authority are expected to have the training and tools to provide students with resources and guidance for mental health struggles. We already require teachers to undergo youth mental health training to receive their teaching credentials. Coaches are also trusted adults in students' lives. They often see student athletes every day, notice changes in behavior, and may be among the first to recognize when a student is struggling. School coaches are required to complete training to support student athlete physical health, including education on concussions, cardiac arrest, and heat illness. Yet the safety courses do not include any instruction about how to support student athletes' mental health. Even though physical and mental well-being are closely connected AB 1665 requires school sports coach coaches to complete an approved mental health training course The course will equip coaches to recognize warning signs and connect student athletes with appropriate resources And with me here today to speak in support of this measure is the Dylan Elliott Legislative advocate for the California State Association of of psychiatrists. And I'll hand it over to my witness. Thank you Good morning Madam Chair members Again Dylan Elliott here today on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists Proud to be here in support of Assembly Bill 1665 I think the author has done an outstanding job in laying out the necessity for this bill and what it does and so I will try and keep my comments brief here. From the perspective of the California State Association of Psychiatrists, I think all of us can agree there is a burgeoning and increasing issue of student mental health needs that we're seeing amongst our young people. There's a lot of reasons for that that we could get into. I don't think that it's necessarily important today. what we would really like to emphasize is the fact that there are coaches that a lot of these students are seeing that are trusted adults that are in their communities that are immediately around them. And this is a really important step that we could be taking in further supporting those students. I think that this is something that is long overdue to the author's comments just now. We already have training in place for physical health needs that our students are experiencing in an effort at further destigmatizing our young people, getting access to behavioral health services. I really think that having those trusted adults adequately trained to support them is very important, and for that reason we're very proud to be here today in support of Assembly Bill 1665. I would ask for your support on the measure. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. We'll now hear witnesses or Me Too's if you want to use the mic at the railing. Leah Barrows on behalf of California Hospital Association in support. Good morning. Sarek Kaminsky on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators in support. Melissa Cortez on behalf of the MLB and the five California clubs, the A's, the Giants, the Angels, the Dodgers, and the Padres. Also here on behalf of the San Francisco 49ers, all in support. Good morning, Madam Chair. Malik Bynum with the County Behavioral Health Directors Association in proud support. Thank you. Great. Thank you. And we'll now hear from any witnesses in opposition. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Seeing nobody getting up and no me-toos, we'll go ahead and turn it back to the committee. Do we have any questions or comments from committee members? We have a motion by Senator Gomez-Reyes, seeing no other comments. My recommendation is an aye vote and I'm supporting your bill, Assemblymember Pacheco. And would you like to close? Yes, thank you, and thank you for the opportunity to allow me to present this bill for our student-athletes. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Excellent. And the motion for AB 1665 is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee, and the motion is by Senator Gomez Reyes. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog? Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjavar? Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Excellent. We will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Pacheco. Next up, I see that we have Assemblymember Krell in the audience. Assemblymember Krell, if you would like to present AB 1766, you can do so when you're ready. Hi, good morning, Senators. Thanks so much for having me today. I'm here to present Assembly Bill 1766. I'm here with Ashley Bryant from Three Strands Global Foundation and Ms. Emerald from the California Survivor Policy Coalition. AB 1766 is a really important bill that will prevent human trafficking by starting with students in schools. I actually had the honor of testifying for a bill about 10 years ago It was AB 1227 by Assemblymember Rob Bonta I was a supervising deputy attorney general at the time I prosecuted a lot of human trafficking cases and no matter how long I sent scumbags to prison, the survivors continued to suffer. We wanted to do more at the front end, and so we passed this bill to basically protect children in schools by giving them human trafficking prevention education. That was grade appropriate. Fast forward 10 years later, and we need an update. There's a lot of new things going on. The two most important things about this bill, I would say, is number one, it extends curriculum K through 12. Current law starts in seventh grade. Unfortunately, it's just not early enough. I prosecuted a case involving a fifth grader. The grooming process starts young, and we need to equip kids in age-appropriate ways at a young age. The other critical thing about this law is it incorporates a lot of the online abuse that we're seeing from exchanging of sexual images, which turns into sextortion, which turns into CSAM, which turns into sex trafficking. And so making sure that we're really equipping kids with the digital knowledge that they need to have of what's going on online. Virtually every case has some aspect of social media or online picture exchange. And so making sure that students are aware of that and can protect themselves and each other. This is a simple law, and the goal here is just to equip our kids as well as we can, give them the best tools we can to protect themselves from human trafficking. So I will turn it over to my expert witnesses now. Ms. Emerald? Good morning. My name is Emerald Merubio, representing California Survivor Coalition, a proud sponsor of AB 1766. I am a founder and licensed marriage and family therapist of Set Free Marriage and Family Therapy, where I facilitate healing circles for survivors, and I'm also a mother of two teenagers. I was six years old when I had my first experiences with sexual trauma, which began at the hands of my uncle, a trusted family member that lived with us. He groomed my sisters and I with happy meals at McDonald's, fun-filled days at the parks, zoos, and swim pools. At the time, I didn't understand that it was a tactic for him to gradually condition me to be a target object of his pedophilic fantasies. He preyed on the fact that I was terrified of my physically abusive parents, offered his room as a hiding place only for him to regularly take advantage of me. At the time, I... The one time I stood up for myself, he threatened, you're going to be the one in big trouble if you ever tell. From age 6 to 12, I endeared sexual advances, assaults, and rapes. I learned at an early age that love and sex was transactional. Starting at age 14, I became a runaway teen, jumping from one relationship to the next in hopes that someone would rescue me from a house that never felt safe for as long as I could remember. Every day, I feared being emotionally berated, physically beat, and sexually abused. I was in survival mode, trying to escape. I would go on dates with people I barely met, get into cars with strangers, sleep over people that I thought I could trust. Looking back, it was obvious that I had no concept of boundaries, safety, or trust. There's no word in the Filipino language for boundaries. I mean, sit with that. Throughout my teen years to college years, I regularly experienced sexual coercion, multiple substance abuse rapes, and eventually became a survivor, a victim of sex trafficking as a minor. As a runaway teen, I vividly remember asking for rides and places to stay for the night. It typically followed with the question, Who? What am I going to get out of this? I didn't know at the time that trading sex for car rides, food, or a place to stay was considered sex trafficking. My mindset at the time was just do what you have to do to survive. No child, teen, or anybody for that matter should trade their bodies for basic necessities. This is why I've dedicated my life's work to serving, protecting, advocating for children's survivors. I would have benefited from the education on the bill that is suggested in the bill, healthy touch. Bodily autonomy. Safe versus unsafe secrets. How to say no. How to seek help from trusted adults. I didn't even know that you could trust adults. I felt so alone and so unseen. The signs were there. My parents failed to look into why their own daughter's well-being when I was screaming with nightmares night after night and wetting the bed in fourth grade. The teachers failed to further investigate how or why I went from this extroverted star student to a silent girl with failing grades. I graduated high school with a 1.87 GPA, barely. The music teacher failed to ask questions why I had urinated myself and was shaking when he offered me a ride home. I was horrified by adults and authority figures. The school admin failed to ask why I became truant in high school with over 138 instances of cutting from school. I was delinquent from their eyes. The school counselors and social workers failed to even ask, who did I stay with? What happened during those long periods that you ran away from home? And how or why? How did you get your basic needs met? I urge you to support and pass AB 1766 as it would expand human trafficking prevention education to K through 12. It would help to build skills and detect them earlier on. It would recognize ways in which trafficking begins online. When my daughter was in middle school and was, you know, experienced digital abuse, the principal said, well, what's the big deal? I mean, everybody exchanges pictures. When my son experienced sextortion, they said, what is this, a fight between a girlfriend and a boyfriend? So more education is needed. They need to recognize in which how trafficking begins online, address not only sex trafficking, but also labor and intrafamilial trafficking, build safety skills, and recommend annual training for school staff. Thank you. Thank you. We do have a two-minute time period, so I'd let you go over, but if you could be brief in your comments, I would certainly appreciate it. Absolutely. Good morning, Chair Perez and members of the committee. My name is Ashley Bryant. I'm the CEO and co-founder of Three Strands Global Foundation. Actually, Assemblymember Krell spoke of AB 1227. We were the original sponsor of that bill with Assemblyman Bonta at the time, so it's been 10 years. And over the last 16 years, we've worked across California schools and communities to prevent human trafficking before it begins. Through their PROTECT program, which is CDC-designated as evidence-based, we have equipped over 850,000 students and 140,000 educators with tools to recognize grooming tactics, online risks, and build protective factors that reduce vulnerability to exploitation. What we've learned by working directly with young people ages 5 to 18 years old and from listening to survivors is simple. Prevention must start early and evolve as young people grow. Today's youth are navigating a digital landscape that is fundamentally different from the one that we grew up in Exploitation increasingly begins online through manipulation coercion and grooming that can occur long before a young person or the adults around them recognize the danger AB 1766 responds directly to this reality by encouraging developmentally appropriate, evidence-based education from kindergarten through 12th grade. This bill ensures students gain the knowledge and the skills they need at the right stages of development. The curriculum covers critical modern topics, including human trafficking, intrafamilial exploitation risks, labor exploitation, digital citizenship, and the emerging threats, like sexual exploitative materials and deep fakes. It also provides skills-based content that explicitly builds protective factors, such as understanding workers' rights and boundary setting. Education remains one of the most powerful tools that we have to keep our children safe, and understanding manipulation tactics, know their rights, and feeling safe into how to seek help is incredibly important. At Three Strands Global Foundation, we see the impact of this approach every single day in kindergarten through 12th grade students who recognize unsafe situations in their communities and how they can be better equipped to protect themselves. We recommend, we commend Assemblyman Krell for her leadership on this issue and I respectfully urge the committee to support AB 1766 and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from any Me Too's in support. If you could use the mic at the railing. Good morning. Kathy Van Austin on behalf of the American Association of University Women of California, co-sponsor and strong supporter of the bill. you Tiffany mock on behalf of CFTA Union of educators and classified professionals thank you so much to the brave women and thank you for this bill good morning Sasha Horowitz Los Angeles Unified School District and support Lucy Salcedo Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education in support good morning chair and members Naomi Pajoran on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association. We're pleased to support the bill and also my colleague at the California Chamber of Commerce asked me to convey their support as well. Thank you. Shivani Ramanathan on behalf of Poverty Patch-Up in support. Sara Galami on behalf of Let's Talk in support. Atoria Foley, Survivor Advisory Board Member with Three Strands Global Foundation in strong support. Thank you. Good morning. Samantha Ruiza on behalf of Three Strands Global Foundation Survivor Advocacy Board in full support. Good morning, Chair and members. Jose Torres with TechNet in support. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Patricia Rucker for the California Teachers Association in strong support. Hi, Sia Patel on behalf of the Three Trans Volunteer Team. I support. Thank you. We'll now hear from any witnesses in opposition. If there are any, are there any witnesses in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have questions or comments? Senator Gomez Reyes. This is an easy bill to support. First, having the author with the former prosecutor in human trafficking. Second, having CTA in support of this bill, because the teachers are the ones that are going to have to spend the time to teach this but most especially because of your testimony Having you experience what you experienced as a young girl and then using that expertise to serve and to help other students victims and survivors as a lifelong journey is absolutely commendable. And that's the sort of testimony that makes a difference in seeing the value in putting a bill like this before us. I do want to thank you for that to open yourself up to the rest of us and to hear your story thank you so much with that I would move the bill thank you Senator Gomez Reyes Senator Cabaldon thank you Madam Chair I'm going to support this bill based on the testimony and the work that the author has done and the importance of the issue and the need and also communications and outreach that's happening inside my own district. And so I look forward to the work on it. And also the teachers being here and others is extremely important. I just want to flag, and I know the chair has heard me talk about this many times before, more generally about this topic. This committee has a unique set of rules in the Capitol, which is we don't do curriculum bills directly. This bill is completely consistent and crafted with that in mind. But we have essentially barred ourselves. We've placed a little bit of a control on ourselves to say, hey, left to our own devices, each of us will be giving bills. Hey, there should be a class on this and a class on this and a class on this. And that's a societal phenomenon. You can't go to Thanksgiving or to the supermarket where people say, you know what? We could get rid of misinformation in society. If we just had a class that every kid had to take on it, financial literacy, whatever it is, it's very common outside of the school system for society to say education will solve everything. And if we just had a class on it or it was part of the curriculum, it would go away. The problem that we're trying to solve. We hear this about civics all the time. We've had no polarization in society if we just – everybody just took civics and they understood the Constitution. and there's really no evidence to support that in the history of curriculum that these that these kind of and we we never sunset these and we never go back and look back and say did they actually do what we thought they were gonna do so we have a committee rules that say we don't we're not going to do that we're not going to have every member be proposing it changes to curriculum and instead we have this other process which is superior which is a commission instructional quality commission composive educators mainly is supposed to weigh the whole the whole not one issue at a time but weigh the entire curriculum say oh my god there's 17 proposals on the health curriculum this year and we need to figure out what no what's the priority what how do we know and so we've limited ourselves to exactly this process which is the letter we will only hear bills here that that essentially tell the IQC look at this issue that's what this bill does and it's very appropriate to do so I'm only flagging this because we've we've we've seen we've seen many many many more of these bills, this bill I'm glad is not on consent, so we can actually have this discussion. Is this a priority enough that we say to schools and to teachers and to everybody else on the ground that, yes, you should, even though you feel swamped by all of our requirements and all of our rules and all of our mandates, this one is so important that you should be looking at it. But when we just automatically sort of without question just pass through every single proposal that folks have because we not actually doing it It going to IQC I think we doing it as we don do the service to students or to the schools that are like struggling to and teachers that are struggling to to rise above all of the sea of mandates that we've created so I'm glad we're hearing this bill for real this is a compelling case the testimony it's well crafted and hope that IQC will give this the serious consideration that it needs and but wanted to make it wanted to be clear because I know there have been some questions about about why not every single bill that isn't is curriculum is not on consent even though we're not actually doing it and it is because we owe it to the teachers and to the students that we actually are reviewing them here in that context to me and this bill I think very appropriately is quite specific it'll it will do it is proposing to do things that will allow us to see if it's working and to test it it's not a general abstract idea but but it's a set of very specific things that we are trying to assure are in the curriculum and that we're able to assess later. So I thank the author and the sponsors for their work to try to craft something that makes sense, but also to urge us to have some humility overall in our Sacramento-based curriculum decisions that have real consequences for teachers and students in the classroom when they're just trying to get through the curriculum that we've laid out. So with that, I do intend to vote for the bill and thank Madam Chair for the indulgence on the topic. Thank you, Senator Cabaldon, and appreciate you noting to the kind of rules of the committee that we have around curriculum bills. And Assemblymember Crowley, I'm very supportive of your bill. My recommendation is an aye vote, and I appreciate you creating a bill that kind of follows in line with that IQC process. I want to start off first by just acknowledging and thanking you for sharing your story today and just how powerful it is to hear directly from somebody that has experienced sexual violence. And the reason why Assemblymember Krell is bringing forward a bill like this is to try to prevent things like this from happening. And I think it's really important that we center stories like yours in these discussions. These are efforts that I think are incredibly important. And what I appreciate most about your bill, Assemblywoman, is that you're highlighting something that I've unfortunately seen grown really rapidly, which is online tools, social media being weaponized to target children. It's been incredibly scary. And how much that's changed, even from my time when I was a child in school. Last year, I did a bill to prevent school employees who have committed sexual harassment and sexual assault from being able to move around from district to district. But within that bill, we also had a component that advised for the superintendent to provide guidance to school districts and curricular matters so that we can begin talking with our young people about identifying grooming. I experienced child grooming when I was a student in high school. I was very fortunate to have gotten away. It was a very scary and shocking experience. But, you know, as a 17-year-old kid, I didn't understand that what had happened to me was an inappropriate thing that an adult had done. I had thought that I had done something wrong. and I think for a lot of children who are in that position the immediate reaction is for them to blame themselves because they don't understand power structures and how that kind of operates and so Having these discussions with children about exploitation, about grooming, is so critical so that they can understand when to tell somebody and when to warn someone else. Or if they see something happening to one of their friends, one of their other classmates, that they understand where they can go to get their fellow student help. And so it makes all the difference in the world. So I'm very supportive of this effort. appreciate you bringing this forward assemblywoman my recommendation is an I vote as they've shared and I'll turn it over to you to close thank you so much madam chair for your your your work in this space as well and appreciate the comments of the other senators today most of all just want to thank the survivor coalition and thank you Emerald for really pouring your heart out to help us better understand how to legislate around this difficult issue It's been such an honor to work with Three Strands and the Survivor Policy Coalition on this and other bills. So thank you. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. And we have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes. And the motion is due past the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, if you can call the roll. Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog. Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Cabaldon. Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi. Cortese. Menjivar. Reyes. Aye. Raise aye. Great, and we will put that bill on call. Thank you, Assemblywoman. We will now turn it over to Assemblymember Michelle Rodriguez, who has been patiently rating. And, Assemblymember, you can get started whenever you're ready. Thank you, Madam Chair and members. of the committee. As a mother of four children and now a grandmother to three young boys, I've seen firsthand how quickly the world our children are growing up in is changing. Technology and now artificial intelligence is part of an everyday life for many young people. While these tools can do a lot of good, they also can expose children to new risks that many parents are still learning how to navigate. We are already seeing these dangers. Recently, reports showed that AI tools on Elon Musk's social media platform X were being used to create sexually explicit images, including images that appear to involve minors. Technology is changing fast, and unfortunately so are the ways people can misuse it. As a parent and grandparent, I believe our job is not only to protect our children, but also to prepare them. We cannot prevent every danger they may face online, but we can give them the knowledge they need to recognize harmful situations, make safe choices, and know where to get help. That is what AB 1792 is about. AB 1792 takes a common sense approach. It does not create new mandates. Instead, it asks the Instructional Quality Commission to consider updating California's health education framework during its regular review to address modern online threats such as deepfakes, extortion, online grooming, cyberstalking, and AI-generated exploitation. By helping our education guidance keep up with new technology, AB 1792 gives students age-appropriate information about the online challenges they may face. It helps educators teach these issues responsibility and gives young people the tools they need to stay safe and in today's digital world. With me to testify is Jose Torres from TechNet. Good morning China members Jose Torres with TechNet We are proud to sponsor and support AB 1792 Students today build friendships communicate and navigate relationships both in person and online As digital tools have become a regular part of everyday life, the ways that students interact with one another have evolved as well. As such, our educational framework should be able to reflect these realities. AB 1792 takes a thoughtful and balanced approach by allowing the IQC to consider age-appropriate guidance related to digital safety and dating violence as part of future updates to the health education framework. Importantly, the bill does not mandate a specific curriculum. Instead, it creates an opportunity for educators, subject matter experts, and stakeholders to evaluate how best to provide students with information that is relevant to the environments in which they learn, communicate, and build relationships. Providing students with the tools to navigate digital interactions responsibly, understand healthy relationship behaviors, recognize appropriate boundaries, and know when to seek help or support are important skills that can benefit them both inside and outside of the classroom. AB 1792 is also intentionally flexible. Technology and communication platforms continue to evolve, and this approach allows educational guidance to evolve alongside them through the existing curriculum development process. By helping ensure that future health education discussions remain relevant and responsive to students' experiences, AB 1792 supports the goal of preparing young people to engage safely, responsibly, and confidently in today's digital world. For these reasons, TechNet respectfully urges an aye vote on the bill. And I thank you for your time. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from any Me Too's in support. You can use the mic at the railing. Patricia Rucker Good morning, Madam Chair and members. My name is Patricia Rucker. I'm here to support this bill. I was a classroom teacher when telephones were still nailed to the wall. And I just need to say that the times have changed, not just because of technology, but there's an urgency of now that requires us to pay attention to this subject matter and this needs for students. you very much for this bill good morning Catherine Squire on behalf of the California Commission on the status of women and girls and support good morning Sasha Horowitz Los Angeles Unified School District and support Lucy Salcedo Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education in support anybody else Alrighty, and 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 comments or questions from committee members? Yes, Senator Gomez Reyes. Excuse me. Call the next person. I'll make some comments and if you could pass it over to her I am very supportive of the bill assemblymember Rodriguez for the reasons that I stated before earlier you know assemblymember crawls bill is focused on you know sexual human trafficking years here is focused on dating violence and domestic violence which is just as important of an issue I used to work at Roosevelt High School in Boyle Heights running an after program and unfortunately, you know, have seen students go through these types of events. And the reality is, is that our young people need more information to be able to navigate these things and to understand where to get help. And so I remember being in high school and we phased out what was known as health and safety, which was our sexual ed requirement programs back in 2009. And, you know, it was it was it was not a good thing for students. They they need to have that kind of education in schools, because oftentimes it's not necessarily a conversation that students are having at home. So my recommendation is an I vote. I'll turn it over to Senator Gomez Reyes to to make her comments. Thank you. Thank you to the author. It's hard to believe you're a grandmother already, but to the author as the mother and grandmother. As in the prior bill, I also thank CTA because having them weigh in on bills that eventually are going to be taught by the teachers is extremely important. And it will go through the process, but eventually it's the teachers that will have to take on and teach this curriculum. So I sincerely appreciate that. Thank you to you also, TechNet. With that, I would move the bill. Thank you. And we now have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes, Assemblymember Rodriguez. Would you like to close? Yeah, thank you. And with that, my Jacob just graduated from high school last week, and the other one is going to high school. So thank you, Senator. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. And so the motion for Assemblymember Rodriguez's bill, AB 1792, is due past the Senate Appropriations Committee. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog. No. Ochoa Bog, no. Cabaldon. Cabaldon, aye. Choi. Cortese. Mandivar. Reyes. Aye. Reyes, aye. And we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember. Thank you. Let's go ahead and do consent because we do not have authors right now. We have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochobog? Aye. Ochobog, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi, Cortese, Mandjavar, Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. All righty, and we will put consent on call. So we are going to temporarily go on recess while we wait for authors to come here so we waiting for authors Please head to room 2100 but we will go on recess until we get an author Go ahead and get started. Madam Chair and members, Assembly Bill 1809 extends a sunset providing authorization for school districts and community college districts to use job order contracting and makes a few clarifications. Job order contracting is one of several alternative methods for awarding construction related contracts. While most construction contracts are for major modernization of schools, job order contracts relate to repairs or maintenance work. its work. Contracts are awarded for specific jobs such as window repairs before any work is needed. When a school needs window repair work, the district can sign an individual contract for that work immediately since the bidding has already been completed. Job border contracting is an efficient way to screen and secure contractors who are ready to be deployed when repairs are needed. Job border contracting started as a pilot for the Los Angeles Unified School District in 2003 and it has since been expanded to all school districts and California Community Colleges. The legislature has extended the sunset four times. Assembly Bill 1809 simply extends the sunset by 10 years and makes a few clarifications, including that the term of individual contracts is five years. And here to testify in support are Sasha Horowitz with the Los Angeles Unified School District and Pat Whalen with the Gordon Group. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members. Sasha Horowitz on behalf of the Los Angeles Unified School District. As Assemblymember Fong shared, AB 1809 is a simple bill addressing a project delivery method for school construction and procurement. It extends the sunset on the job order contracting, or JOC, statutes used by both school districts and community colleges, along with some other technical cleanups. JOC is an optional cost-effective procedure for bidding public works projects known for accelerating completion, reducing costs, and contracting complexity, while following all competitive bidding laws. The JOC law preserves a more efficient and cost-effective process for addressing maintenance and construction needs by allowing a school district or community college to effectively bundle individual maintenance and construction contracts into a single master contract. The service terms are negotiated in advance, ensuring that contractors are available and ready to start work as soon as services are needed. Finally, these contracts are paid locally and do not have any state costs. With that, we respectfully ask for your arrival. Good morning, Chair and members. Pat Whalen, Ellis and Wilson Advocacy here on behalf of Gordian. This is the company that invented job order contracting several decades ago. We're proudly in support of this bill. It's used nationwide, LA, Chicago, New York, several dozen public agencies throughout California and U.S. Postal Service. This is a positive bill to give school districts much-needed flexibility. Great. We'll do Me Too's now in support. If you could use the mic at the railing. I'm Chair and Members Mike West on behalf of the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California in support. Thank you Chair and Members Mark McDonald on behalf of the Los Angeles Community College District in support. Good morning, Dan Merwin on behalf of the California School Boards Association in support. Good morning, Michelle Gil on behalf of California Association of School Business Officials in support. Excellent. Any of those witnesses in opposition, if you could please rise. Good morning, Madam Chair. Richard Markison on behalf of the Western Electrical Contractors Association in opposition. Weka supports job order contracting. Jock is a valuable procurement tool because it allows school districts to complete routine projects, as the author described, more quickly with less administrative burden and sometimes at a lower cost. What we oppose is the condition that the legislature has attached to it. Under current law, a school district or a community college district cannot use job order contracting unless it first enters into a project labor agreement that applies not just to the JOC contracts, but to every district construction project. That means that before a school district can use this contracting method designed to save money and time, they must first negotiate a labor agreement with the construction unions. That's a fundamental contradiction. The purpose of JOC is to reduce complexity. The existing statute adds complexity. The purpose of JOC is to reduce costs. Yet the available research on project labor agreements raises serious questions about cost impacts. A RAND study of Los Angeles Measure HHH found that the PLA increased construction costs on affected projects by 15%. At the same time, PLAs reduced participation by many qualified merit shop contractors, including small businesses, DVBEs, and local contractors that may rely on shock contracts as an entry point into public works. And perhaps most importantly, you should be cautious about using the experience of a few large urban districts to dictate policy for every school and community college district in California. Los Angeles is not Lassen County. It's not Modoc County. It's not Solano County. Los Angeles is not the dozens of small and rural districts that depend on a limited pool of local contractors to maintain their schools. Telling every district in California that they must adopt a district-wide PLA to access JOC is paternalism at its worst. It assumes Sacramento knows better than local elected school boards how to manage their own construction projects. projects. If JOC truly delivers value, districts should be free to use it without first obtaining permission through a labor agreement. We can respectfully ask that the committee amend the bill to remove the PLA mandates and restore JOC as a procurement tool available to all school districts and all qualified contractors. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. Do we have anybody else here in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have any questions or comments? Alrighty. Assemblymember Fong, I'm supportive of your bill. My recommendation is an aye vote and I will turn it over to you to close. Thank you so much Madam Chair and thank you for the conversations here today. In terms of the project labor agreement provision that was added in 2015 with Assembly Bill 1431. So I really appreciate I really appreciate the context and really appreciate the conversation here today. And with that, I would certainly ask for an aye vote. And so the recommendation or the motion for AB 1809 is due pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee Do we have a motion Move the bill We have a motion by Senator Cabaldon Secretary if you can call the roll Senators Perez. Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog. Cabaldon. Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi. Cortese. Menjavar. Reyes. Great. All righty, and we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Fong. Thank you. I know Assemblymember Wallace was here, but Assemblymember Berman is next. I will let you determine who you would like to go first. All righty. I want to thank my colleague from Palm Springs. Palm Springs? Palm Springs. And you can get started whenever you're ready, Assemblymember Berman. Thank you, Chair and Senators. AB 2121 responds to the Trump administration's systematic dismantling of federal student success programs by removing barriers that prevent community colleges from backfilling this loss in federal funding. Specifically, this bill would provide local control to community colleges by allowing them to backfill the federal cuts to minority-serving institutions and TRIO programs. By temporarily excluding those backfill dollars from the 50% law that requires community college districts to spend at least half of their unrestricted funding on classroom instructors, community colleges can preserve these federally defunded student support programs. Importantly, this bill includes multiple safeguards for faculty, such as not reducing spending on classroom instructors. AB 2121 also adds transparency requirements through annual district certifications and includes a sunset after five years or upon restoration of federal funding, whichever occurs first. Finally, in order to prevent the immediate disruption of essential student support services that are critical for our most vulnerable and historically marginalized students, this bill would take effect immediately. and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. And I'm joined today by Chancellor Bradley Davis of the West Valley Mission Community College District and Leilani Huerta-Hernandez, President of the Associated Students of West Valley College. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. My name is Brad Davis, and I serve as the Chancellor of the West Valley Mission Community College District in Silicon Valley, and we are the proud sponsor of AB2121. Our two colleges are federally designated minority-serving institutions with robust TRIO student support programs and they are directly in the crosshairs of what has been a full-scale federal attack on student support programs nationwide. These grants are the backbone of how we serve our most vulnerable students. TRIO provides the one-on-one advising, tutoring, and mentoring that keep first-generation and low-income students enrolling and succeeding. TRIO participants are 48% more likely to earn a credential or transfer than their peers. MSI grants like HSI and ANAPISI fund the institutional infrastructure that benefits every student. Learning centers, transfer pipelines, dedicated counselors, STEM tutoring labs. When those grants disappear, the capacity they built erodes for all of our students. In response, our district has decided these programs are essential and we've We've identified dollars within our existing budgets to continue them running. But when any district replaces those dollars from a lost federal grant into its local budget, it violates the 50% law, even though not a single dollar of instructional spending has changed. The result? A well state law unintentionally prevents community colleges from stepping up to protect their students And while the Board of Governors exemption is a real tool for one and unexpected emergencies it is retrospective and discretionary A district must spend the money first and then pray that the Board grants relief 18 months after the budget is adopted. And when we're talking about salaried counselors and advisors, not one-time cost, no prudent budget administrator will take the very real risk of committing to these positions and these costs without knowing whether it is lawful. The exclusion in AB 2121 delivers that certainty before a district ever commits the dollars. Harming the very students we mean to protect while laying off the dedicated equity professionals who serve them would be catastrophic for California. AB 2121 prevents that outcome. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. My name is Leilani Huerta Hernandez and I am here today because this bill isn't just policy to me, it's personal. West Valley College is a Hispanic-serving institution, but that is more than just a designation. It reflects who we are. The majority of our students are Latino, Asian, American, Pacific Islander, and students of color. Many of us come from immigrant families and are first generation, navigating systems that were never built with us in mind. The federal programs at stake exist for students like us. They exist because someone recognized that getting into college is not the same thing as getting through it. I am a proud first generation Latina student. When I started college, I didn't know how to register for classes or apply for financial aid. doing it all on my own and at one point I almost didn't make it. I came very close to dropping out during my first year and without the support from programs like these I would not be here today. I work with students who need support every day, who balance school, work, and family. Students who want to succeed but cannot do it alone. When the federal program, when the federal government walked away from us, our district stepped up. They committed their own dollars to make sure students like me would not lose the support from the people and the services who help us continue. All we are asking is that the state not stand in the way of that commitment. This bill is not just a number and it's not just a piece of paper. It is supports for students who have been told their whole lives that they cannot make it. Your decision today is an investment in us, in our futures, and our ability to walk across that stage at graduation with pride and say we made it. And when we do, it will be because of people like you who believed in us enough to invest in our success. On behalf of the students of West Valley College, I respectfully ask for your support. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from other supporters. If you could use the mic at the railing. Thank you chair members. Mark McDonald on behalf of the Antelope Valley, Foothill De Anza, Kern, Lake Tahoe, Los Rios, San Bernardino, Southwestern, State Center, and Victor Valley Community College Districts all in support of the bill. Thank you. Good morning Andrew Martinez, Community College League of California in support. Good morning Kyle Highland on behalf of the Association of California Community College administrators in support Thanks Alrighty seeing no others in support will now take witnesses in opposition Good morning, Chair and members. Jason Henderson on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges. In respectful opposition to AB2121, FAC understands and shares the concerns about sudden federal funding disruptions to equity-serving student support programs. These programs matter and students shouldn't be caught in the middle of federal uncertainty. Our concern is with the mechanism within AB 2121. This bill is drafted as an exclusion, but in practice it creates a statutory carve out from the normal 50% law calculation by allowing districts to remove certain unrestricted general fund backfill expenditures from current expense of education. And so we recognize the bill includes safeguards, including the annual certification, the FON, a cap tied to prior federal grant amounts, as well as language stating that districts must maintain 50% law compliance. But those safeguards do not resolve our core concern. They regulate the use of the carve-out. They do not eliminate the carve-out. And so, in other words, when districts are allowed to take certain spending out of the calculation, they can remain technically compliant with the 50% law, even though less money is actually protected for instruction. Excuse me. So this is a concerning precedent set inside one of the few safeguards statewide. That is for classroom instruction, which includes faculty salaries, library services, counseling resources, anything tied directly to student supports. So if districts face genuine fiscal uncertainty because of sudden federal action, FACT believes that a narrow approach is a better case for this. not a five-year statutory exclusion from the 50% law. So for these reasons, FAC respectfully requests your no vote. Thank you. Tiffany Mock, on behalf of CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals, we also represent the faculty at West Valley Mission. We want to first thank the chancellor and also the student and the author for addressing this very serious issue of lost minority-serving institution funds. It is a real issue, and obviously the testimony of this student really illustrates the importance of supporting our students and the faculty and the classified individuals who support them. So we absolutely want to emphasize we appreciate the issue being raised. We just respectfully disagree with the mechanism that is being used. We believe that the current process through the chancellor's office provides robust input for the faculty and classified and the stakeholders because first they get notice when there is an exemption sought before it goes to the board of governors and the district, which allows them ample input for how they believe can best support the students. I think secondly, when it goes to the Board of Governors, it is a public hearing. There's different avenues for them to weigh in on that, and we believe that that provides the right balance and level of ability for the district to ensure that the funds can reach the students and that faculty is supported as well. It's just a different mechanism to address the same problem that we really appreciate being brought up in this really important time. So thank you so much and appreciate all the staff and the author for addressing this important issue. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from Me Too's in opposition. Tony Toguero, California Teachers Association, a trifecta of three teacher organizations, supposing the bill appreciative of the work done, but we want to associate our remarks with the two opposed witnesses. Thank you. All righty. We'll now turn it to the committee. Do we have questions or comments from committee members? One of my favorite topics. Hispanic Serving Institutions, Black Serving Institutions, AAPI, which will soon be brought before this committee by Assemblymember Fong designation as well. These are important designations, and Leilani, I really appreciate your testimony. I think when you talk about navigating systems that were never meant for students like us, that's exactly right. And many of us have experienced it years ago, and the fact that you are still experiencing it this many years later for me is a problem. We are in the crosshairs, as you mentioned, of the attacks by the federal government on our students, on our students of color primarily, and finding ways to try to make sure that these programs that have been so successful continue just while we wait two years or wait less maybe, we'll soon know. But this is what we have to do sometimes. The bill is a very important bill. I do want to acknowledge, though, the opposition. I think that finding ways, we do have to make sure that we are protecting our faculty, their salaries, their benefits. And I think that as your discussions continue, that is something that is extremely important. I've said on many bills before about, for me, how important it is to hear from CTA on these bills, to hear from faculty because in the end, they're the ones that are teaching our students. It's not the administrators. It is the faculty that are teaching our students. So I do ask that those conversations continue extremely important for us as we navigate these difficult times. But number one has to be our students, finding ways to protect our students and to provide the best benefits for them. So with that, at the appropriate time, I will move the bill. Thank you, Senator Gomez Reyes. Senator Cabaldon. The attacks on equity from the federal government are the point. This is not collateral damage. The federal administration has withdrawn these and billions of other dollars from higher education institutions with the express purpose of trying to erase not just these programs, but just the very notion that equity matters and that we need to invest in it. And that's why it's even more important. It is all the reason that Leilani mentioned, but also that if we don't fight back on that and we don't stand with presidents and chancellors and boards of trustees and others on campuses who are taking the time to come to Sacramento on an issue that they know is politically fraught, it always has been that we have to stand with them and give them the tools that they need to be able to respond and respond quickly respond definitively not do something and then hope that the Board of Governors will approve it the Board of Governors I think likely would in many of these cases but you can't as the Chancellor you cannot make those decisions on the hope that you will that you will get approval from the board later on and so we seen this in many other domains Last year the legislature passed and the governor signed a bill of mine that said look because of what the federal administration is doing to accreditation, you know, we're going to take the extraordinary step of saying if you lose your accreditation under certain circumstances, you can still operate in California. I love the 50% law, too, but that's even more important, like just the fundamentals, I was like, should you exist at all? Those are the kinds of steps that we have to be taking right now. And I just so I salute the chancellor and others who are when the moment matters, standing with students, standing standing with the with justice and equity as a concept as well as a program. And I think this is this is an appropriate way to handle it. If the board would have approved it in any way, then there's no harm, no foul here. Right. The carve out is the same as that. It just provides the certainty and the cover and the knowledge that if if there happens to be a president or a chancellor and a shared governance budget process and what have you, that says, no, we're we're making a stand here. We're going to stand up for these programs that they can do so knowing that that we have their back. And so I'm very glad to see this bill here. you know with UC and CSU we're experiencing similar challenges and we're grappling with how do we provide the grace and the flexibility to the institutions to be able to respond effectively and with the values that we want them to reflect to reinforce and to fight for nationally and so I certainly plan to support the bill thank the author for and the district for for leading this Thanks Leilani for being here. Thank you Senator Cabaldon. Anybody else? Alrighty. A couple of things. One, I appreciate you bringing this bill forward, Assemblymember Berman. I think we all recognize the catastrophic impact that the Trump administration has had on our ability for community college institutions to serve diverse students. And the attacks and the revoking of funding has really been detrimental to many of the programs that our systems have been providing to whether it's Latino students, black students, API students. And so that's been of huge concerns. I do want to acknowledge and I know that the opposition sent in some late opposition letters to the committee and have had a chance to read through some of them that I do think that they bring up fair points in terms of transparency and wanting to make sure that those documents are adequately accessible to be able to see how dollars are being spent to make some sort of process to ensure that, you know, money is actually being delivered towards student support services, right? I mean, that is why the 50% law is in place rather than those dollars going towards, you know, administrative cost or other sorts of costs. And so that system of checks and balances that exists there, I think, is a good one, right? And making sure that there's a transparent system is important. And so I think that there's a balance to be struck there. I'm hoping that you'll work with the opposition on resolving some of those concerns, because I do believe that there's a way to do that. And, you know, we've talked about a couple of other bills just today that are in response to some of what the Trump administration is doing. And I think that when we get past this administration, that we need to revisit some of the amendments that we made you know to our laws right and I think that this is one example where we going to need to come back and revisit this but I understand wanting to create flexibility for institutions to respond to some of these challenges and you know at the same time don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water so I would encourage you to continue to have those conversations with those that have expressed concerns today and for us to just strike the right balance. So my recommendation is an aye vote, and I'll turn it over to you to close. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Senators, for your comments. And thank you to the opposition for the concerns and issues that you've raised. Thank you to Chancellor Davis, who brought this issue to me a couple, maybe six months ago or so, and, you know, had this idea. I know I think some San Diego community colleges were talking about it as well. and it's with the whole goal of having everything we do be student-focused. And Leilani, who this is her second time testifying up in Sacramento, does such a great job of really helping us understand the impact that these programs have on her and her colleagues and her peers and how important they are and how we're really living in very trying times, and that calls for some creative measures, definitely temporary measures and absolutely measures that we need as much transparency as possible with ms mock and i have been having conversations for 35 years so i assure you that they will continue and we'll continue having conversations with the opposition the first thing we did when we came up with when we thought we were going to introduce this was reach out to any stakeholder that we thought might care to try to get feedback from them and so you know very much appreciate that engagement and we'll continue to have those conversations to tighten it up as much as we can. With that, respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Berman. And the recommendation or the motion for that is do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. And I believe we have a motion from Senator Gomez Reyes. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bog? Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Cabaldin? Aye. Cabaldin, aye. Choi? Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjivar? Reyes? Aye. Raise aye. Great. And we will put that bill on call. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Berman. And I know Assemblymember Wallace is here, so we will have him present. And Assemblymember Wallace, whenever you're ready. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. I'm here today with AB 2503, which builds on the critical youth sports heat guidelines we established a few years ago. As climate conditions continue to intensify across California, a regional one-size-fits-all heat threshold doesn't always work for the students, families, and coaches in our warmest regions. To give you an idea of what that looks like on the ground, for some high schools in my district, as many as half of all scheduled practices go late into the evening hours simply to comply with existing regulations. These long, strenuous nights take a measurable toll on our students' academic performance and accelerate athlete burnout. AB 2503 fixes this problem by requiring CIF to annually review and, if necessary, update these heat guidelines so they accurately reflect regional climate realities. With me today is Kendra Calderon, a certified athletic trainer from Rancho Mirage High School in my district, and she's here to provide testimony and answer any questions the committee may have. Hi. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. My name is Kendra Calderon. I am the certified athletic trainer at Rancho Mirage High School I am here before you today to explain the impact of our current wet bulb threshold guidelines on our desert population The first major impact that falls upon our student is the decline in their academic performance. To understand how this occurs, I'm going to walk you through a normal school day. School starts at 8.30, ends around 4 o'clock. Then they must wait around for practice to begin around 6 o'clock, which most of the student-athletes do not have the means to go home and come back to school. Practice then finishes around 8 and puts them home between 8, 30, and 9, depending on their means of transportation. Once they make it home, one would assume they shower, eat, start homework, study time, but often they are exhausted, therefore the first time to get cut is homework. If they do stay up to do their homework, this then cuts into their sleep time. Countless studies have shown the effects of sleep deprivation for student athletes, especially in those adolescent years. Another population that is impacted by our current policy are the coaches and their families. With later practice times, coaches are taken away from their daily lives, hence not spending time with their own children and their spouses. With these impacts, we often see coaches resigning and student athletes quitting sports due to the prolonged day. We would not stand here before you asking for change if we could not do it safely. Our safety of our athletes is always first. Every practice and competition, we have procedures put in place to prevent heat illness from occurring and also prepared for when it does happen. The bill expands on guidelines established a few years ago and gives our desert communities the same opportunity already available throughout the rest of the state. Last year alone, we had 15 practices that were either canceled or postponed. By reevaluating our threshold, we would have been able to get in half of those practices, thus keeping our student-athletes, coaches, and families engaged in our after-school programs. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from any Me Too's in the audience. if you can use the mic at the railing. Good morning, Harold Tallerup on behalf of the Small School Districts Association in support. Anybody else? All righty, seeing no one rising, do we have any witnesses in opposition? Any witnesses in opposition? All right, we will turn it back to the committee. Any comments? All right, we have a motion from Senator Choi. Senator Gomez-Reyes. Thank you for bringing this. In your district you have some of those areas that have such extreme heat and sometimes it's bringing bills that recognize what's happening in our own district. So for that I thank you for bringing it. Thank you Senator. Oh, Cortese. Senator Chobo. I just want to thank the author for bringing this measure forward. We share part of the district together. So I really appreciate your testimony and being here today. So I'll be supporting the bill today. Thank you, Senator. Yes. And then Senator Cortese. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to the author, just curious on the amendments. I don't know if they were author amendments or not, but the amendments taken before, it seemed like you were trying to put a little more detail into, in a good way from my perspective, into the bill in terms of what thresholds should specifically be met and so forth. Can you give us any insight into what happened there? Yeah, we were looking at increasing the wet bulb temperature to a degree higher because that would have allowed a lot more of these student athletes to move their practices earlier in discussion with the previous committee in the assembly. They determined that we didn't want to dictate that, that it would be better to allow CIF to just continue to review the best science and best guidelines available. And we agreed that that was probably the appropriate approach. So we took the amendments. Are you confident that CIF will actually make changes without the specific mandate in there? We're hopeful. In our discussions with CIF, they've indicated the willingness to work and collaborate with our athletic directors in the Coachella Valley and in unique, warmer climates across the state. Yeah, okay. Well, I wish you well, and I'll be supporting the bill. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Senator Cortese. And I'm supporting your bill, Assemblymember Wallace, and my recommendation is an aye vote. Would you like to close? Just respectfully request an aye vote. Excellent. All right. And the motion for AB 2503 is due pass. Do we have a motion by Senator Choi? Secretary, if you can call the roll. Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogues? Aye. Ochoa Bogues, aye. Cabaldon? Aye. Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Mandjavar? Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Great. Thank you. We'll put that on call. And we have our final bill from Assemblymember Ahrens. I think he's right outside. Okay. Assemblymember Aaron's you can get started whenever you're ready good morning madam chair and members I'm here to present AB 2766 which takes several key steps to enhance the ability of foster youth, former foster youth, and students experiencing homelessness to obtain stable housing at our California colleges and universities. First, it requires that the California Community Colleges grant priority housing to current and former foster youth and homeless students. This bill also requires the California Community Colleges and California State University campuses and requests the UC campuses because we all know we can't control the UCs to identify the foster youth and homeless students within housing applications and prominently display priority housing benefits on their websites. In addition, AB 2766 requires the California Community Colleges and CSUs and requests UC campuses to defer housing deposits and fees for foster youth and homeless students until financial aid is disbursed. Finally, this bill aligns priority registration with eligibility for the Next Step program, ensuring foster youth can access required courses at our California Community Colleges. As As someone who's experienced housing insecurity and homelessness, I understand firsthand the drastic difference that stable, secure housing can make. AB 2766 provides crucial support to vulnerable students that lack the support systems that many other students have. With me today is Jessica Petros, the Director of Education at the John Burton Advocates for Youth, and Cody Van Veldin, a Policy Associate at John Burton Advocates for Youth, who will be reading testimony on behalf of Isel Casillas, our first-year student at UC Davis. Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Jessica Petros, Director of Education at John Burton Advocates for Youth and proud sponsor of AB 2766. For far too long students with experience in foster care and with homelessness have faced significant barriers leading to just 12 and 15 respectively achieving a higher education compared with 49 of their peers While California has made meaningful progress in closing this gap, two key factors continue to drive this disparity, persistent housing instability and limited access to the college courses they need to graduate. Nearly half of foster youth attending community college and 25% enrolled in the CSUs experience homelessness and there is a clear connection between a lack of stable housing and failure to persist in and complete post-secondary education. While the CSU system is required and the UCs are requested to provide priority housing to students with experience in foster care homelessness, the California community colleges are not and as a result students at community colleges who make up the majority of these populations face unequal access to stable housing even as community college housing capacity has expanded. At At institutions where priority housing does exist, students are often unaware of this benefit and this, coupled with upfront housing deposits and fees that are required often months before a student receives their financial aid, can block access to campus housing and in some cases prevent enrollment altogether for students with little or no financial support. Lastly, there are approximately 900 students in NextUp, a community college foster youth support program, that are over the age of 25 and unable to access priority registration a critical benefit for student success. AB 2766 will address these challenges, ensuring that California's most vulnerable students have access to the resources they need to achieve the California dream through post-secondary education. It is for these reasons that I urge an aye vote in support of AB 2766. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Cody Van Felden. I am the Senior Project Associate with John Burnt Advocates for Youth. I'm here today to read testimony from Izal Kassilas, a student at UC Davis who was unable to attend today's hearing due to finals. My name is Izal Kassilas, and I am a first-year student at UC Davis majoring in environmental policy. My journey to get here wasn't always easy. I experienced homelessness as a child and entered the foster care system at 15. As a foster youth, I don't have a financial safety net to fall back on when emergencies happen, unlike many of my peers. Without stable housing, it's nearly impossible to build a future, let alone succeed in higher education. For me, accessing on-campus housing at UC Davis was critical to pursuing my goals. But no one told me that foster youth were eligible for priority housing. There was no clear information on the housing website. Luckily, I found out through a question on the application which connected me to that support. Having a question to identify eligible populations about priority housing was a game changer for me. Securing housing changed everything. It gave me stability, peace of mind, and the ability to focus on my education. It made me feel seen and supported by my university. I don't have a car, and I rely on being close to campus to get to class. Without on-campus housing, getting to school each day would be a barrier. While I was fortunate, many students aren't. Not all campuses offer or clearly communicate priority housing for foster youth. Students like me are working to overcome significant challenges that were never our choice. Policies like priority housing and registration help level the playing field and remove barriers so we can succeed and transform our lives through a college degree. That's why I respectfully urge an iVote on AB 2766. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from Me Too's in support if you can use the mic at the railing. Good morning Chair and members Kate Rogers on behalf of the Student Homes Coalition here as a proud sponsor and strong support Good morning Chair and members Cassandra Marr on behalf of the Student Homes Coalition here as a proud sponsor in strong support Good morning Chair and members Cassandra Mara on behalf of California Costa in strong support Thank you. Russell Manning for State Treasurer Fiona Ma in support. Bella Kern on behalf of Santa Clara County Office of Education in support. Jessica Dong with the University of California in support. Jason Henderson with the Faculty Association for California Community Colleges in support. Nicole Morales on behalf of Children Now in support. Sasha Horowitz with Los Angeles Unified School District in support. Good morning Josh Garger on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in support. Good morning Diego Zamayo with Latina advocate on behalf of Cal State Student Association support hello Priya on behalf of the California Community College's Chancellor's Office and support hi Sonya Brooks on behalf of I'm the student regent for the University of California on behalf of the Board of Regents Miguel Craven UC student regent designate admin support. Anybody else? All right, we'll move on to any witnesses in opposition. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Seeing no one rising, I'll turn it back to the committee. Do we have any questions or comments? Senator Gomez Reyes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for bringing the bill. I sincerely appreciate it. And testimony from our UC Davis student studying environmental policy boy we need you and I'm looking forward to having you graduate and coming back here perhaps as a consultant on one of our committees this is a very important policy area that you're studying so kudos to you and thank you for sharing the story because when we overcome things during life to then succeed you then are able to share those stories with not only with people who are making decisions on policy but with other students who are maybe struggling with the very same thing. So I'm glad to have you here. I chair the Select Committee on Community Colleges, the hub of the community, and we had a Select Committee hearing specifically on housing. And I am so proud that many of our community college districts who are doing their housing are implementing policies such as this, making sure that there is a priority for former foster youth. San Bernardino Community College District, who sent a letter of support, has their legacy village that they are building now, and that particular one is also including foster youth as one of the priorities. So it's good to have it in policy because not everybody is doing the right thing. So thank you for doing this. Great. And thank you. We also have a comment from Senator Cortese, and we have a motion from Senator Choi. I just want to thank the author for making good on his commitment to work in this area. It doesn't surprise me and those of us from Santa Clara County and that delegation. But it's great to see the legislation like this coming forward from you, and hopefully there's more to come. Thank you, Senator. Senator Chobok? Sorry I just had a clarification on the age so it says past the age of 25 if they were already enrolled is there an age cap at some point sorry for priority registration for right so it says here provide priority housing to current former foster youth and homeless youth past the age of 25? Yeah, so for eligibility for foster youth, there's not an age limit for priority housing if they were ever in care at any age. And for the homeless definition, it's a little more nuanced. So there is an age limit for homeless students at the age of 25 is the upper age limit for that. After the age of 25, I'm sorry. Correct. So if they're over the age of 25 and they had experience with homelessness and meet the definition, they wouldn't be eligible for priority housing. They wouldn't be. Correct. Okay. I just was trying to figure out at what point, for instance, a 50-year-old, you know, had experienced homelessness, would they be eligible for the priority? No. So the way that it's set up currently for priority housing for students with experience in homelessness is they either have to have experienced homelessness 24 months prior to admission. So that's usually looking a lot that experienced in K-12 education. I could also include transfer students, though, as well, and also current homeless students, but it is at an upper age cap of 25. It is a cap. Correct. Sorry, I was reading it wrong. It's written in a kind of confusing way. Because I thought it said past the age of 25, and I thought, wait a minute, so does that mean a 50-year-old, you know, experienced homelessness? or was in the foster youth program, would they be forever prioritized over, say, an 18-, 19-year-old who just graduated? No, they would not. Okay, thank you. Any other questions or comments? I support your bill. Assembly Member Ahrens, appreciate you bringing this forward. I know that you've done some work already in the space around addressing students that are facing homelessness, around creating supports for former foster youth and foster students. So I appreciate this added work that you're doing here. And I will turn it over to you to close. Well, thank you so much, Senator. And thank you to my colleagues. And I just want to uplift John Burton Advocates for Youth and so many others in this space who are doing the real work. And it's an honor to be supporting them in introducing this bill and respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. And so that motion is due pass to the Senate Human Services Committee. We have a motion from Senator Choi. Secretary, can you call the roll? Senators Perez? Aye. Perez, aye. Ochoa Bogues? Aye. Ochoa Bogues, aye. Cabaldon? Cabaldon, aye. Choi? Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjivar, aye. Reyes, aye. Reyes, aye. Thank you so much, Assemblymember Aaron. Thank you. I hope I can get all of your support on a bipartisan basis for all my bills moving forward. We'll go ahead and lift calls since we have all committee members present. Secretary, can you lift the call? Okay, starting with consent. Senator Choi. Aye. Choi, aye. Cortese. Aye. Cortese, aye. Menjivar. Aye. Menjivar, aye. Okay, consent sounds. Consent is out 7-0. File Item 1, AB 1159, Addis. Motion is due passed to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee. Current vote is 3 ayes and no no's with the chair voting aye. Ochelle Bogue. Abaldin, Choi, Menjivar? Aye. Menjivar, aye. That bill is out 4-0. File Item 2, AB 1171, Patel. The motion is due passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The current vote is 5 ayes and no noes with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Senators Choi. Aye. Choi, aye. Menjivar? Aye. Menjivar, aye. That bill is out 7-0. File Item 4, AB 1581, Ramos. Motions do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is 5 ayes and no no's with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Choi? Aye. Choi aye. Menjivar? Aye. Menjivar aye. That bill is out 7-0. File item 8, AB 1665 Pacheco. Motion is do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is 5 ayes and no no's with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Choi? Aye. Choi aye. Menjivar? Aye. Menjivar aye. that bill is out 7-0 file item 10 AB 1766 Crell motions do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee current vote is four eyes and no nose with the chair and vice chair voting aye Choi Choi I Cortese Cortese I am manager of our eye that bill is out 7-0 file item 11 AB 1792 Rodriguez motions do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee current vote is three ayes and one no with the chair voting aye Choi no Choi no Cortese Cortese Mandivar Aye Mandivar aye That bill is out 5 File Item 12 AB 1809 Fong. Motions do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Current vote is 2 ayes and no no's with the chair voting aye. Ochilbog. Which one is that? File Item 12 AB 1809. No. Ochilbog no. No, Troy Troy fine Cortese Cortese I am and Javar men Javar I raise raise I that bill is out six zero file item six one sorry file item 15 a B 2121 Berman motions do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee current vote is five eyes no nose with the chair and vice chair voting I Choi Mandivar? Aye. Mandivar, aye. That bill is out 6-0. File Item 18, AB 2503, Wallace. Motions do pass. Current vote is 6 ayes, no no's, with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Mandivar? Aye. Mandivar, aye. That bill is out 7-0. Alrighty, that concludes our agenda for today. This committee meeting is adjourned. Thank you for participating.