Senate Standing Committee on Education

Okay. Good morning. The Senate Committee on Education will now come to order. Morning, everybody. There are 28 bills on today's agenda. However, item number 20, AB 2845 by Speaker Rivas has been pulled by the author. Additionally, the Committee has pulled two items for hearing next week.

Items number six, AB 1971, by assemblymember Addis, and item number 24, AB 2925 by Assemblymember Friedman. We have 13 bills on consent today. They are as item number one, AB 1790. Item number two, AB 1851. Item number four, AB 1884. Item number five, AB 1905. Item number eight, AB 2458. Item number 11, AB 2134.

Item number 12, AB 2229. Item number 13, AB 2349. Item number 14, AB 2326. Item number 16, AB 2407. Item number 18, AB 2608. Item number 22, AB 2887 and item number 25, AB 2987. Additionally, Assembly Member Wendy Carrillo has pulled her AB 2865 which is item number 21 from the consent calendar to present this morning. All witnesses this morning are asked to limit their testimony to three minutes each to ensure the Committee is able to complete today's agenda in a timely fashion.

We do not yet have a quorum, but I'm grateful for the two Members who are here. And we will begin as a Subcommitee with the first Bill as a prerogative of the chair. We are going to go slightly out of order out of respect for the Treasurer, who's taking time out of her busy day to be here to testify. And we will be hearing Assembly Member Aguiar Curry's Bill. It's number. Item number 23, AB 2901. Yes, well.

Oh, and we have a quorum because we have a special guest star today. Senator Limon is filling in for Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. Grateful for you being here, Madam, please call the roll to establish a quorum.

[Roll Call]

Assembly Member Aguiar Curry. Welcome. You not only have a quorum, you have a guest star.

I know. I love my guest stars. So please proceed.

All of them.

Good morning, Senators. Under current state law, educators cannot earn any paid pregnancy leave. Only after they have used all their sick leave are educators able to receive differential pay when they cannot work due to pregnancy-related disabilities.

And in case you're not familiar with differential pay, after exhausting all of your sick leave, which is part of your compensation you receive for your job as an educator, you get to pay for your substitute out of your normal paycheck.

Educators are left with the decision to either schedule pregnancies based on the school calendar or to try to get by with less pay. For any of you who are parents, I'm sure you know how well scheduling pregnancies work in real life.

This standard is unacceptable in a world where we are trying to evolve in our treatment of our workers. But since this legislation was last proposed, we now have proof that the real-world implication is inequity for women in their retirement. Data from CalSTRS shows that women will receive almost $100,000 less in retirement benefits than their male counterparts.

In a profession where 70% are women, that is shocking and unacceptable. It is systematic sexism, and it's about time we fix it. Speaking in support with me today is California State Treasurer Fiona Ma and Erika Jones, the secretary-treasurer from the California Teachers Association.

Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Treasurer, Miss Jones, welcome. Love to have you at the table here. Please proceed.

Okay, thank you. Thank you very much, Members. Thank you, Assemblywoman, for carrying this very important bill. My mother was a public-school art teacher for 20 years, and we know that we have a teacher shortage, as well as the fact that teachers get paid significantly less.

And as we are working on this bill, we have many young women who want to have a family, but for their concern about taking sick leave or not getting paid, having to pay for substitutes out of their own pocket, and then other women who have had babies and trying to schedule them so that they can have it during the summer months, and it just is never easy.

I'm also a member of CalSTRS, and when an educator retires, CalSTRS converts unused sick leave to additional service credit. However, for these unfortunate women who have to use all of their sick leave, they actually get penalized when they retire.

So, this important bill will keep retain more teachers, encourage them to not only stay in the profession, but also start their own families without having to be penalized. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. Miss Jones, welcome.

Good morning. My name is Erika Jones. I am a kindergarten teacher, and I serve as the secretary-treasurer for the California Teachers Association, representing 310,000 educators across the state. And we are pleased to sponsor this bill. For me, AB 2901 is deeply personal.

In August, I gave birth to my first child, Josephine, who's actually in the back right now. And it's been an amazing time just watching her grow and learning with her and, you know, all the things from learning to crawl to now she's almost trying to walk. And it's just really disheartening that teachers have absolutely zero paid pregnancy leave.

This means moms like me have had to use up all of our sick leave and then we can't even take time off if we get sick or if our children get sick after birth. The decision to have children is really not an illness. Our membership has been energized by the Assembly Majority Leader leadership.

More than 15,000 have signed our online petition to finally establish paid pregnancy leave for our educators, and many have shared with me that they feel like they're part of something that is historic and making a real difference.

I've been in lunchrooms up and down the state where basically my colleagues are trying to figure out one either timing births, which that didn't really work out for me. I timed it for 10 years ago and it happened this past August. Or really trying to judge can we actually afford not to have pay and build our family?

So, it's really important right now that we kind of show that the state cares about the struggles of teachers that we're facing in the classroom and that they're thinking creatively about how to help us.

Our state is trying to figure out how to recruit and retain teachers in midst of a shortage, and 70% of our teacher workforce is women. The time is now to provide teachers with the dignity to be able to build their families without the added stress of sacrificing sick days and lower pay.

I urge you to support Assembly Bill 2901. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Are there others present who'd like to testify in support of the bill? Please come forward with your name, your organization and your position. Welcome.

Good morning. Jennifer Baker, representing the California Retired Teachers Association in proud support.

Thank you. Next, please.

Jessica Marquez, on behalf of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond in proud support, and also as a co-sponsor. Thank you.

Thank you. Next please.

Annie Chou with the California Teachers Association, proud co-sponsors or sponsors.

Thank you. Next, please.

Sara Bachez with Children Now, Food Empowerment Project, Friends Committee of the Legislation of California, Human Impact Partners, LA Alliance for a New Economy, LA Best Babies Network, National Council of Jewish Women for Los Angeles, Orange County Equality Coalition, Our Family Coalition, Parent Voices, San Diego County Breastfeeding Coalition, and Worksafe in support.

You're a very busy person. Thank you. Next please.

Martha Zaragoza Diaz, representing the Delta Kappa Gamma California, and we're in strong support.

Thank you.

Ivan Fernandez, California Labor Federation, in support.

Thank you.

Priscilla Quiroz, here on behalf of the California Faculty Association, in support.

Thank you.

Bella Kern, here on behalf of San Francisco Unified School District, in support.

Thank you.

Peter Elliott, California State Teachers Retirement System in support.

Thank you.

Chris Myers with the California School Employees Association in strong support.

Thank you.

Anna Matthews on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges in strong support.

Thank you.

Jennifer Robles with Health Access California in support.

Thank you.

Sarah Diaz with the California WIC Association in support and also in support are the California Work and Family Coalition, the Asian Law Alliance, Breastfeed LA, the California Breastfeeding Coalition, Caring Across Generations, Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, Center for Worker's Rights, Childcare Law Centers, Citizens for Choice, Electric Universe, and Equal Rights Advocates.

Second busiest person here. Thank you. Sir, please identify yourself.

Tony Thurmond, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, on behalf of 6 million students, hundreds of thousands of educators proud to be a sponsor and in support. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Superintendent. Good to see you. Okay, let's now move on to opposition. Does anybody here like to speak in opposition to the measure? Please come forward for the lead witnesses and you may come to the table. Please come to the table. We'll duke it out. Do we have two? We have two lead witnesses. Please come up.

Jeremiah is here to keep the peace. Welcome.

Elizabeth Escovel with the California Association of School Business Officials. We have the utmost respect for the intent of this piece of legislation and have had conversations with the author's office since the introduction of this bill. So, we greatly appreciate those conversations with you in your office on this.

Our opposition, our concerns really arise around the multiple existing laws that we have in place. And I think the committee analysis did a great job with outlining the six different policies that individuals can take when it comes to pregnancy disability leave.

When it comes to what's existing law right now, should someone take advantage of the California pregnancy disability leave that provides about 17 weeks and that will concurrently run with the FMLA.

When you add that, the teacher can pretty much take September to December off. With 2901, that adds up to an additional 14 weeks paid leave or would add up to 14 weeks of leave. And that could mean that a teacher would be able to take between September and June off.

And so while we understand that this is an appropriate time and space for teachers to be able to take leave and provide baby bond, we also know that this can exacerbate the teacher shortage that was previously mentioned by one of the witnesses.

And so being able to get credentialing teachers for that time length would be very difficult and another challenge that we see. Because CASBO does represent school business officers, we have to acknowledge that this is also an unmandated, this is an unmandated cost.

We want to just acknowledge that this is tagged at tens of millions of dollars and without some funding being provided for those purposes. We have a great fiscal concern with that. Thank you.

Appreciate that. Welcome.

Good morning, Mister Chair and Members. Dorothy Johnson, on behalf of ACSA, the Association of California School Administrators, I'll align most of my comments with my colleague from CASBO. It is really the fiscal concern we have with this bill as well as the multiple layers of existing leave.

And I want to note that this is the only type of leave that's being proposed that does not require use of sick leave, is fully paid, there's no limit on how many times it may be taken in addition to no service date are required before this leave may be taken.

So, while we fully acknowledge and appreciate the intent of this measure, we want to make sure employees, both classified and teaching positions, have supports in place when they bring a new family member into their family, whether it's through adoption, birth, or there's other disability for pregnancy-related issues.

Unfortunately, again, this fiscal impact, which I believe was tagged in the Assembly Appropriations of hundreds of millions of dollars, is still a remaining concern we have yet to address. So, for these reasons, ACSA is respectfully opposed.

I appreciate that. Are there others here who'd like to register their opposition to the measure? I've seen none so far. Let us come back. Oh, I'm sorry. Please.

Can I just do a support?

Sure.

Tiffany Mok with CFT in support. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Miss Mok. Again, anybody here in opposition who would like to get on the record? No. Let's come back to the dais. Committee Members, questions or comments? Senator Limon.

The new Member. You know, I just want to appreciate the Assembly Member for bringing this bill forward. I'm going to take a wild guess that I may be the one on the dais that has most recently had a child. I could be wrong.

That we know of. Yes. That's how I always joke. It's I'm kidding.

So, you know, I think there is something to be said about the policy discussion that this bill brings forward and who bear it. You know, who bears the tax on this particular issue. I think up until now it has been women who serve as educators in our school systems.

I hear the opposition's concerns, and I do think that there are different leave policies, but I also think that there needs to be a policy conversation about this in terms of how to fix it.

I think in 2024 we have to have an understanding that for the woman who has the child to be the one that has to take, you know, her sick leave, I think is there's just an, it's a tax. It is a tax on an individual. And so, we're trying to understand where that is placed.

And so, I am supportive of the bill, I think it's a needed conversation. Thank you to our Treasurer, to our Superintendent of Public Instruction for also being champions for this. But nonetheless, I think that for decades, the costs that we are talking about have been shifted to the individual woman and to women as a whole.

So, the fact that now we're having a conversation about shifting those costs to a broader system is a needed conversation. But I want to acknowledge it's a hard one. And certainly, having served on a school board, I know it will be a hard one. And I know that there are different policies, but it is needed.

It is 2024, and we need to figure out how we move from the woman being the one who bears that cost to understanding that this is part of our system. And so, we need to move forward. So, at the appropriate time, I will move the Bill.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions, comments, Members? For the author at least to start to that point, about overlapping policies and ambiguity around it, there's clearly some need to simplify or render clear, how to think about that as this bill moves forward.

Well, I think there's truth to that. I mean, there are some overlapping, but there's some things, for instance, when you talk about FMLA, that leaves unpaid. So, you might have FMLA, but it's unpaid. And so, it just, I think there are policies that kind of cross over.

But I think we're on the track to do the right thing. We've taken amendments to move this Bill forward. We continue to do that because there was questions about clarifying if the paid pregnancy leave for part-time educators and faculty will match their part-time status.

So, there's things that are so important to us to get women back on track, and it's just been so unfair.

And as you can see, is that we have plenty of women and educators here in the room that have been there, done that, and don't want this to go back onto some of our younger teachers and make sure we keep people teaching in our schools.

I mean, they're leaving because they're going to have their family, and then if they do come back, they could be up to $100,000 of lost retirement. And I think Miss Ma made it perfectly clear that the data that they've collected. How fair is this?

Sorry, I mean, you know, point is well taken. So, to Miss Johnson's point and Miss Escovel. I mean, this is, there's a substantial fiscal impact here. Right? So, that's obviously, that's a matter for another committee, probably Appropriations. I sense a little bit of, I guess, reticence on both your parts.

I mean, I think you'd agree there is a workforce challenge, and we do need to make sure that we are not only sort of honoring the profession and making it an attractive profession, but also not penalizing those who are already in it.

So, I mean, assuming that the state would make good on its obligation to fund these sorts of mandates, what other problems might you have with the measure, or would that address your concerns?

Well, our concern is largely fiscal. I think it's also, yes, that vacancy. Some of our educators have shared. It's not about student learning loss. It's about behavioral issues. When you, every 30 days, even you substitute teacher coming into the classroom for classified positions, it's often hard to backfill those. And then, of course, there's right of return.

We want to make sure those positions are available. So, then you have vacancies, and then those hours, those shifts are shared on a smaller set of shoulders to bear that burden.

So, we want to make sure that the current workforce who does remain in their positions and they're not out on leave, they're not also burnt out and wanting to leave the profession because there simply aren't enough hands to go around to carry the workload.

I appreciate that. Any other comments from the witnesses?

I think we also recognize that there was a task force that was being forced. And I think, again, the committee analysis did a great job with outlining that and not sure whether any additional conversations or any recommendations from that task force on just paid leave were or are being considered.

And so we think that this is an opportunity to have a conversation on a broader scale, not just within people that are in education or women that are in education, but California.

I wouldn't disagree with it all, but I think to Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry's point. There's an urgency here that needs addressing. Correct?

You're absolutely right.

Yeah. Fair enough. Anything else from my colleagues? Yes, Treasurer.

Add that we know around the state there are many school districts that are declining, declining enrollment. And so, our next generation, right, our next generation is not having kids, some of them, but the ones that want to, are getting penalized or they have to think twice about having their own family.

So, this is like on so many levels. I know we're talking about cost here, but look at the school districts that are having difficulties balancing. Many of the schools are facing decisions on whether to shut down, which means that more teachers are going to get laid off.

And so, on top of that, now you're also penalizing the teachers that want to stay. So, I just want to point out that, you know, it's not only one or the other, but as we're facing the issue about declining enrollment, we should be incentivizing. And maybe everything is going to balance out eventually.

I appreciate that. Last chance for colleagues. Seeing none. Assembly Member if you'd like to close.

Thank you very much, Mister Chair and Members. AB 2901 will finally end the discriminatory practice of giving educators and community college faculty who are pregnant no choice but to deplete their sick leave, a benefit that directly affects their compensation now and their retirement leave.

At a time when teachers are so stressed that they're leaving the profession and the young people are choosing different careers. We must do everything possible to help recruit and retain educators. It is the time we stop charging women $100,000 a year to care for their child until they return to care for ours. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Looking for a motion? A motion from Senator Limon. Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

File item 23, AB 2901. Aguiar-Curry. The motion is do pass to Senate Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement Committee. [Roll call]

The measure currently has four votes. We'll leave it open for absent Members. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Treasurer Ma. Thank you to the witnesses. Now returning to the agenda, back to the original order. First up, and grateful for your patience is AB 1855 Assembly Member Arambula.

Mister Chair, would you mind doing the consent calendar while we're switching out?

Don't mind at all, Mister Shadow Chair. So, Madam Consultant, please do we have a motion on the consent calendar?

Wilk moves.

Wilk moves the consent calendar if we could please call the roll Madam Consultant.

On the consent calendar. [Roll call]

All right, consent counter currently has four votes. We will leave it open for absent Members. Now we will proceed to agenda item number three, AB 1855. Assembly Member Arambula, welcome. Please proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Senators. Students should be able to participate in their student body associations without threat to safety, privacy, or accessibility. AB 1855 will modernize the Brown Act for community college student body associations.

During the Covid-19 public health emergency, audio and video teleconferencing was successfully used to increase participation and to protect the health and safety of civil servants and the public.

However, current provisions of the Brown Act require members of a legislative body to participate in meetings of the legislative body by teleconferencing for no more than 20% of the regular meetings. This is a barrier for students who are disabled, who have limited access to transportation, or are otherwise unable to participate in the meetings in person.

AB 1855 protects public access and allows an eligible legislative body of a student organization to use alternate teleconferencing provisions. If approved by the board of trustees and adopted by the eligible body, it is time for us to update the act to reflect modern times and new challenges faced by our students.

Testifying in support of AB 1855 is Michaela Hutchinson, a student parent and recent graduate of Miracosta College, and Lisa Baker, a student parent at Mendocino College.

Ms. Hutchinson, Ms. Baker, welcome. Either of you may proceed. Three minutes.

Thank you. Good morning. My name is Lisa Baker. I am a student parent at Mendocino College and a regional affairs director with the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, where I represent the seven northernmost community colleges in the state.

I also just completed my second term as the associated student president at my school, where I rebooted our student government post-pandemic and sat on multiple college committees virtually.

I am proud to have spent the past few years earning three degrees and getting deeply immersed in student representation, but it has been exponentially difficult because I have also been raising a family. My kids are here with me today as an example. As a student parent, attending meetings in person is particularly challenging.

According to research from UC Davis, nearly one out of 10 students in community colleges who applied for financial aid are student parents. We face unique challenges and have specific needs that other students don't necessarily face, and we must ensure we are in all rooms where decisions are being made.

As a representative from a rural area, I make sacrifices to get to the places where voices like mine can be heard. Considering it an installment on a brighter future, I sometimes give up time with my family, with my schoolwork, I lose sleep. I expend resources beyond what can be reimbursed. My house is 45 minutes from my campus.

My efforts to reach student senate meetings and other advocacy events are usually bookended by two hour drives to and from Sacramento. Sometimes my family needs me at home, though, and campus isn't always a viable meeting spot.

In these scenarios, like when Covid went through my house over the winter, I rely on Brown Act accommodations to ensure my vote, but that comes at an uncomfortable price. I have to disclose the address where my minor children can be found. Most parents are unwilling to take risks regarding their children's safety.

Even some student representatives I work with are minors who have to deal with this risk. While we want to participate in local student body organizations, excuse me, while we want to participate in a local student body organization and appreciate that we can do that from home, having to post our address publicly is frankly terrifying. AB 1855 would increase participation in local student government. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Hutchinson, welcome.

Good morning, Chair and Committee. My name is Michaela Hutchinson. I am a full time remote student at MiraCosta College in San Diego, a student parent and a military spouse.

Before I share my story with you today, I would like to share a part of Sacramento City College student leadership advisor Deborah Knowles's testimony, which has inspired me to share my own story today. Sacramento City College has approximately 17,000 students. It fluctuates yearly, but between 40 and 60% of students are 100% online.

Online students do not come on campus. This situation is similar for most California community colleges. The current Brown Act means that online students are often excluded from participation and student leadership. They must attend in person or participate remotely with their remote address posted publicly.

This means the public could come in their home, join the meeting, and use their Internet access. We currently have rules that prevent us from giving out our student information to the public. During the pandemic, student leadership was engaged and vibrant. It was inclusive across all social, economic, and cultural areas.

Student leadership is a part of student engagement, and research shows that engaged students are the most successful students. Now that the pandemic has resolved, the Brown Act waivers have been lifted, and students are struggling to be included. Now here's a part of my own experience.

In 2021, I decided to return to college full time despite having two very young children, ages 3 and 1 at the time, and receiving little support since our family lives very far away and my husband is an active duty marine. I chose to study fully online because attending on campus classes was not feasible due to my children's unexpected illnesses, my husband's field operations, and many other life challenges. Balancing full time parenthood with full time studies, often on my own, was incredibly difficult.

I frequently felt depressed and sought connection with others. My involvement in the student body, especially after being appointed as the VP of our continuing education program, became a crucial source of solace and purpose for me. I thrive on advocacy, and I felt I was making a significant impact on my campus. However, I soon faced a major obstacle.

I was required to provide my personal address for public record, which conflicted with the security principles instilled in me as a military spouse. Disclosing personal information poses a risk to my husband, his fellow service members, and us as family members, as we never know who is watching nor their intent.

The requirement made it clear that continuing my role in student body was neither accessible nor feasible for someone in my position as a military spouse and remote student. I urge legislators to consider the unique challenges faced by service members and their families when voting on this legislation.

AB 1855 will expand the necessary voices and advocacy and local student bodies while protecting the most vulnerable individuals from having to disclose personal details. Thank you for your time today.

Thank you for your testimony. Are there others present who would like to testify in support of this measure? So please come to the microphone and state your name, your organization, your position. Ms. Mok, welcome.

Thank you. Tiffany Mok, CFT, in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Stephanie Goldman on behalf of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, proud to sponsor this bill.

Thank you.

Daniella Santiago on behalf of Calbright College, in strong support.

Thank you.

Anna Matthews on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, in strong support of this bill.

Thank you. Let's now turn to opposition. Are there any here who'd like to speak in lead opposition of the measure? Seeing none. Anybody would like to speak in opposition to the measure? Also seeing none. Let's come back to the dais. Colleagues, any questions or comments for the author?

So I will say I'm glad to support the bill today. There's clearly a need to address the Brown Act on a more kind of holistic basis at some point moving forward. That's something the Legislature truly needs to do, especially given changes in technology, but also changes in relationships and how best to coordinate these sorts of open meetings.

And technology exists, but our statutes haven't caught up. So in this particular instance, I think this makes sense. I'm glad to support it. Senator Limon, would you like to make a motion? And so would you like to close?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to echo the testimony of our witnesses here today who said that accessing and participating in those legislative bodies is important. We oftentimes think of the Brown Act as the public's way of accessing the legislative bodies, but we oftentimes don't think about how the public can participate in those said bodies as well.

And we should be working on making sure that student parents and dual enrolled students and those from rural communities are able to participate, as when we have more people participating in our democracy, we all are winning. And so I'd like to respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. And we have a motion from Senator Limon. Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

File item three, AB 1855, Arambula. The motion is do pass. [Roll Call]

The measure currently has two votes. We will leave it open for absent Members. Thank you to both the witnesses. Thank you, Assemblymember. Next, I think we have Assemblymember Berman. Assemblymember Carrillo. Sorry, I thought you. I'm sure you thought you had the inside track. Mr. Berman, welcome. You will be presenting AB 2097. And you may proceed when you're ready.

My apologies to Assemblymember Carrillo, but we will be quick. Mr. Chair and Members, from Silicon Valley to Biotech Beach, California is the undisputed cradle of innovation.

However, far too many students grow up in the shadows of tech companies that do not have the opportunity to learn the skills they need to one day work there. The reality is, every year, California is falling further and further behind other states in providing equitable access to computer science in our schools.

Last year, California was behind 27 states that have already required every high school to at least offer a computer science course. This year, we're behind 31 other states who have implemented this policy.

AB 2097 would require school districts and charter schools to adopt a plan to ensure all high schools offer at least one computer science course by the 2028 to 2029 school year. The bill provides a thoughtful, phased in approach with additional flexibility measures to ensure schools have both the time and flexibility to implement successfully. California must do better.

It's time to restore California as a leader and take this step to ensure computer science for all. I'm grateful to the Superintendent of Public Instruction who was here earlier, but maybe had to get back for meetings for partnering with me on this important effort. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And I'm joined today by Mary Nicely, the Chief Deputy Superintendent at the Department of Education, and Amy Pizzoni, a high school computer science teacher.

Okay. Welcome, Ms. Nicely, Ms. Pizzoni. Whoever would like to go first, please proceed.

Great. I'll go first. Was that on? Was that on or off? Is that on?

You are on.

Hear me? Great. Good morning, Mary Nicely, Chief Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, representing State Superintendent Tony Thurmond, and we are proud sponsors of AB 2097. And thank you, Assemblymember Berman, for your leadership on this bill. As the assemblymember stated, 55% of high schools in California do not offer any computer science courses, lagging behind 31 other states.

Yet we have the highest number of computing jobs in the nation with salaries averaging over $150,000. We are not giving California students the opportunity and access to these jobs in the state they live in, the birthplace of the high tech industry. This needs to change. Computer science is more than coding.

Technology permeates our lives, and computer science is valuable even for those not planning on entering the tech industry. We see technology growing across every industry in agriculture, construction, health, entertainment, fashion, banking, elections, arts, and more.

The rise of AI makes it even more critical that we address digital literacy and that computer science is at the core, at that of digital literacy for our students and our community in general.

In 2018, California adopted computer science standards with introductory standards for grades nine to 12 designed to be accessible to all students in California. Access should not be based on zip code, race, or gender. Currently, the majority of California students do not receive computer science instruction, and this is even more true for particular populations.

In California, black and Latinx students are four times less likely than their white and Asian peers to have APCS courses, and only 31% of APCS test takers are female. So California has made great investments in professional learning for our educators.

Over $20 million in the last two years, and there's an additional $50 million in math and computer science courses to address the shortage of computer science teachers. So we have an opportunity now to move forward to level the playing field and catch up to the 31 other states that are far ahead of us. And I am proud to represent CDE and urge and aye vote on AB 2097. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Ms. Pizzoni, welcome.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair and Members, for allowing me to present on this important measure today. My name is Amy Pizzoni and I've been a teacher in the Central Valley for over 10 years.

My hope is to give you insight into my classroom and into the importance that computer science can offer California students, insights like my parents made me take this class. I don't know how I got in this class. I didn't ballot for it. I'm only here until my counselor can switch me. These are the few of the answers that I get to the start of the year interview question like, why did you take this class?

These students, who have no intention of taking a computer science elective course, are some of my favorite students. In the interview activity, students light up when they are talking about the things that they are passionate about. They talk about what they've done, they talk about what they're working on, and they talk about what they hope to accomplish.

As I introduce each topic in computer science, I weave these passions into our class. I offer fun facts about computer science. Did you know that modern cars have over 100 million lines of code? I encourage them to apply the skills they are learning to their area of interest.

For the HTML project, what about an homage to your cats? I frame concepts in their area of interest. What is a recipe but a structured algorithm? And I help them find connections between what they are most interested in and the technology that supports, enhances and aids it. I love that you want to go into medicine.

See what you can find out about surgical robots that doctors use. As my students discover how much more of their chosen world opens up to them, they become some of my most enthusiastic students. And these are the students that introductory computer science most helps. Because right now they think computer science isn't for them.

They think they're not smart enough, that they won't see students that look like them in their classes and then it doesn't connect to their interests. AB 2097 shows none of that is true. Thank you very much for your time, for being here, and for choosing education in your legislative careers.

Thank you. Are there others members who'd like to come forward and support this measure? Please do.

Emily Pappas, Niemela Pappas and Associates in support for Salesforce as well as PayPal. Thank you.

Thank you. Next please.

Nick Brokaw from Sacramento Advocates on behalf of Microsoft, in support.

Thank you.

Good morning, Chair and Members. Jose Torres Casillas on behalf of Technet, Amazon, Getaround, Salesforce, Snap Inc. Zillow, PayPal and Zoox all in strong support.

Thank you.

Caitlin Zhang on behalf of Project Lead the Way in support.

Thank you.

Kate Connelly with Weideman Group on behalf of Care Learning, proud co-sponsor.

Thank you.

Courtney Jensen on behalf of Code.org in support.

Thank you.

Max Perry on behalf of College Board, also in support.

Thank you.

John Sweeney on behalf of the Santa Clara County Office of Education in support.

Thank you. Let's move to any opposition. Is there anybody here in the room would like to speak in opposition on the measure? Seeing none. Back to the dais, Ms. Pizzoni, I wish you'd been my teacher. I might have amounted to something. And I would say glad to support the bill.

And so your testimony is supports the broader argument for having computer science as a required part of the California curriculum. And I know that's something that Sam and Bern has been working on. I know that Code.org has been fully behind us. Glad to support this measure today. Glad to support that larger effort. Senator Wilk.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I'm a California native, but 25 years ago moved to the Midwest to do a startup company. The state that we were in, computer science required. This is in 1999, and so we are so far behind, and us being the hub of technology, it just blows my mind.

We commit all these resources to things that don't matter, and then we don't focus on what is what does matter. So appreciate your leadership throughout your time in the Legislature on these issues, and happy to support you today. And I will move the bill.

Appreciate that.

Glad to support it as well. Would you like to close, sir?

I just appreciate the comments from everybody and agree. And this is something that I've been working on my entire eight years in the Assembly. And I'll be honest, I'm disappointed at the lack of progress I've made, but the work keeps going, and this is an important effort. Really appreciate y'all support.

We are equally disappointed in you, but we're rooting for you.

I'm voting on your bill in Elections.

I am glad to support this. Madam Consultant, please call.

File item seven, AB 2097, Berman. Motion is do pass to the Senate Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure now has two votes. We will leave it open for all of our absent Members. For those who may be wondering why the day is so empty, we have multiple committees that meet concurrently, and Members of this Committee are actually chairing other committees right now. So apologies to everybody who's made the time to be here, and unfortunately, now I have to go and present a bill in Assembly Elections.

I'll do this quick and race over there.

Okay. Let's do it. Okay.

I mean, you can go. I'll make sure that I'm there in time by the time you're.

Your other bill's on consent.

Oh, is it?

Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, you're presenting on behalf of somebody?

I see. I missed this, so I'm staying here with you. AB 2876 please proceed.

AB 2876 will ensure that all K-12 students in California are prepared with the AI literacy skills necessary to comprehend basic AI principles and applications, recognize when AI is employed, and understand AI's implications, limitations, and ethical considerations.

Specifically, this bill directs the Instructional Quality Commission to consider incorporating AI literacy content into the math, science, and history social science curriculum frameworks. When those frameworks are next revised.

As AI grows in popularity and gets integrated into more and more elements of society, children growing up in today's digital world, need to be better equipped than any generation before to understand these principles. This is sort of tangentially related to the last bill I presented. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And with me today is Ronak Daylami, Policy Advocate for the California Chamber of Commerce.

Ms. Daylami, welcome.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair Members. Ronak Delamey with Cal Chamber, the proud sponsor of AB 2876. I'll keep it brief because I noted the analysis doesn't reflect any opposition, but we do want to start by thanking Assemblymember Berman for authoring this critical legislation.

We all know that AI is an undeniably transformative technology that will have widespread impact on virtually all aspects of society and our economy, perhaps more so than anything since the Internet. It presents a significant amount of opportunities and promise, from life saving advancements in medicine to addressing any number of societal challenges.

But it can also be applied in ways that are less desirable, such as spreading disinformation. Unfortunately, we don't have enough understanding of the technology in our communities, our workplaces, or government, which creates issues of mistrust of the technology, undermining its potential benefits and making it harder to combat its challenges.

Our members strongly believe that AI literacy and media literacy encompass fundamental skills that children need if they are to succeed as consumers, voters, and workers in the modern world. AB 2876 takes the first steps to ensuring that, and we are very proud to sponsor the bill. Again, thank the Committee and the author.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Are there others here like to testify and support the bill? Welcome.

Good morning. Chairman Sam Nasher, on behalf of the Los Angeles County Office of Education, in support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Chair Members Jose Torres Casillas with TechNet in support.

Thank you.

Good morning, Chair and Members Naomi Padron, on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, please do support the bill.

Thank you. Is there any opposition here to the measure? Seeing none, back to the dais. Welcome, Senator Ochoa Bogh. I am equally glad to support the bill. This is part of a larger conversation about literacy and the impact of technology on our lives and our education.

Thank you again for the work that you've been doing in this space. Any other comments, questions from the Members?

I'll move the bill.

Okay. Senator Wilk moves the bill. Madam consultant, please, would you like to close, please?

Respectfully, ask for you aye vote.

Appreciate that, Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

File item nine, AB 2876. Berman. Motion is do pass the Senate Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure now has three votes. We'll leave it open for absent Members. Thank you, Assemblymember Berman. And again, I unfortunately have to go present in Assembly elections. Hopefully, it will be relatively brief. Senator Ochoa Bogh, I'm going to turn the Kevlar over to you.

And again, apologies to all the members of the public make their way here and don't have enough of us on the dais at any given time. I'll be back.

Good morning and welcome Member Carrillo. Glad to have you here. When you're ready, you will be presenting AB 2071.

Good morning Madam Vice Chair and Committee Members. Thank you for allowing me to be here presenting Assembly Bill 2071. As some of you might know, I am an immigrant, bilingual speaker, and a lifelong English learner. I know the struggle of learning a new language while trying to seek an education.

For a long time in California, native or home languages were seen as barriers to academic and professional success. In 2017, the state took a transmutitive step for English learners when the Board of Education unanimously adopted the California English Learner Roadmap policy. The roadmap set forth new learning principles which view students native languages as an asset.

But despite this policy, there remain gaps in achievement for English learners. While the first five years of roadmap policy implementation produced some bright spots due to the effectiveness of the educator workforce investment grants, the program was not enough to move the needle for systematic and broad change across the state.

AB 2071 will subject to appropriations, provide no more than 12 separate one-time grants to LEAs to implement the English Learner Roadmap program over three years.

Those LEAs with the highest number of English learners will be prioritized along with those with the lowest numbers of ELs to ensure no one is left out with regard to recipients, the Bill ensures there is a balance for urban and rural schools served.

As a parent, I also recognize the value of playing an active role in my children's education, especially when it comes to bringing parents into the fall of their child's unique English learning journey. ABby 2071 will require the State Board of Education to create and adopt a California English learner roadmap parent toolkit.

This toolkit would include questions for parents to ask their schools, including user-friendly descriptors of each principle of the English Learner roadmap. The information and resources given to parents will be in their primary language.

Equipped with incentive grants and with the help of parent toolkit, LEAs and English learners in California will be better able to engage and build generational skills. Joining me to testify and support and answer questions is Doctor Elena Esquer, caviar Vice President, Assistant Superintendent of education services for the Palmer School District, and Marta Hernandez, Executive Director for Californians Together.

Thank you and welcome, when you're ready.

Thank you Members of the Senate Education Committee for the opportunity to share with you my enthusiastic support of AB 2071. My name is Elena Esquer, the proud Assistant Superintendent of educational services for the Palmdale School District. I am also the Vice President of Cabe, who I am representing today.

While California has had the English learner roadmap policy since 2017, which was approved by the State Board of Education, we have yet to ensure its full implementation statewide. This important policy became lost in the complexity of dealing with the pandemic for so many of our schools across the state, my district included.

As a result, we do not have a complete picture of how many districts have either fully or partially implemented the English Learner roadmap. My district began implementing the roadmap in the fall of 2020. We developed our EL roadmap by collaborating with various educational partners and focus groups representing our district.

Although we are working toward full implementation, our progress has been slow due to the pandemic and the lack of resources such as funding and substitutes for staff training. We have provided an overview to all partners, including parents and staff, but more in-depth training is still needed.

CABE believes few districts have been able to ensure this comprehensive policy is able to get fully implemented or may have abandoned implementation during the pandemic and may not have gotten back on course.

The current fiscal climate is also making it difficult for schools to make progress as resources to support our English learners at the level that they need to succeed has become scarce. Many districts need more comprehensive support to implement the English Learner roadmap by providing dedicated resources as they are constantly being pulled in numerous directions.

AB 2071 will ensure California is actively implementing the English Learner roadmap by providing no more than 8 one-time grants of up to 1.5 million per grant, as well as no more than 4 one-time grants of up to $750,000 per grant subject to appropriation.

In addition, it would task the State Board of Education with the creation of a parent toolkit to allow both parents and community leaders to better understand what the English learner roadmap is and what it means to their children's success. Parents have to be a part of this process.

Please support the success of California English learners by voting aye on AB 2071. Thank you for the opportunity to allow me to advocate on behalf of California's English learners.

And thank you for being here.

Vice Chair and Member Wilk, thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'm Martha Hernandez.

I am the Executive Director of Californians, together with 42 years of experience in TK-12 education as a bilingual and special education teacher, and a county district and site administrator, concluding my education career as assistant Superintendent of Educational Services for the Fillmore Unified School District in Ventura County.

I am excited to see AB 2071 moving forward and grateful for Assemblymember Carrillo's leadership. This Bill comes from the field and addresses the vast need to serve our 1.1 million English learners and support our educators along the way.

California's English Learner policy, the English Learner Roadmap, is a comprehensive, visionary, research-based policy that by design, touches almost all aspects of schooling and requires the involvement and alignment of multiple roles of teachers, of administrators, counselors, and paraeducators, as well as parents and all departments within a local district in taking a shared responsibility for English learner education.

When implemented, the EL roadmap is powerful and can have a real impact.

But because the policy calls for a paradigm shift from a deficit orientation to an assets orientation, because it calls for the building of systems and infrastructure to support effective practices, because it requires deep understanding and capacity about English learners and what they need to thrive, it is a big lift to implement.

This means that districts are faced with a policy to understand, a comprehensive policy to implement, and a new responsibility and accountability at the local level to make it happen. So this is where the grants proposed by AB 2071 are crucial. Schools and educators that need assistance to develop implementation plans that effectively serve their English learners and communities.

They need guidance, professional development, and the additional funding that AB 2071 will provide. I want to thank you for your time and I hope that you will support this very critical, important Bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much for being here. We'll now continue to witness this in support here in room 2100.

Sam Nasher with the Los Angeles County Office of Education in Support. Thank you.

Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals in support. Thank you.

Carlson Eads on behalf of the California Charter Schools Association in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Debrae Sanders on behalf of Catalyst California, strong support. Thank you.

Hi, good morning. Carol Gonzalez here on behalf of Hispanas Organized for Political Equality in support. Thank you.

Sara Bachez, Children Now in support.

Raquel Morales on behalf of E Trust West in support.

Martha Zaragoza-Diaz on behalf of Delta Kappa Gama California in support.

Rachel Bahgwa with ACLU California action in support.

Thank you. Seeing no other witnesses in support will now continue with any lead witnesses in opposition to AB 2071. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais.

Move the Bill.

Thank you very much. I have some questions. I'm very excited about this program. I'm sad that it's been very difficult to implement. I'm grateful for the districts that have. I have a question with regards to the English language learners supplemental funding that we receive, that the schools receive on behalf of our English language learners.

What is that normally, based on your professional experience, what is that being allocated? What kind of services is that currently being provided in the State of California? What are schools using that funding for? Because I would assume that that would be.

That would be used for programs such as these to help our students that are English language learners.

Well, I think that you're on the right track, and I think that districts need a district implementation plan to target those funds in order to implement the EL roadmap.

And so those funds, yes, are perhaps spent on some instructional materials, perhaps it's spent on some services for English learners, but it's not done in a systematic, kind of comprehensive, targeted way by aligning to the four principles of the EL roadmap.

And so what this bill would do is to help districts develop that plan and involve all stakeholders, involve all those who are developing, for example, the LCAP and their, you know, their school site plans, and target it to the implementation of this policy in alignment with the four principles of the roadmap.

So, basically, we haven't been very effective in using that extra funding for ELs in the past. I think it's been about 10 years the state has been allocating this funding for English language learners in the state.

So what you're saying is that we haven't been very effective in utilizing that in programs that have been database, research-based, oriented as a state?

I mean, we have been engaged, I believe, three or four times in analyzing EL caps of districts with the highest percentage and the highest numbers of English learners. And I hate to say that the majority of EL caps sometimes do, do not have any goals related to English learners.

And if they do, they're very general and not specific to the typologies of English learners. In other words, it's just General English learners without concern for the needs of newcomers, the needs of long-term English learners, the needs of, you know, refugees, etcetera.

And so by assisting districts to develop these implementation plans, these districts will become the model so that in the future, other districts can say, you know, where is it happening? You know, where is a district that's truly implementing the EL road map? And we will have bright spots for them.

The intention is that these districts will, you know, become models for other districts in the state.

It's actually kind of disappointing for the State of California that our kids have not been targeted in the way that it's been intended for the past 10 years. And I believe we have another witness that would like to testify.

Yes. Good morning, Jennifer. Baker with the California Association for Bilingual Education, one of the co sponsors of the measure. Appreciate the question and concern that you're raising. AB 2071 is really meant to be a catalyst to help us to move forward and be creative in ways that we're providing that support to districts.

We have seen some districts that have been able to implement the English Learner roadmap, but we have had so many additional challenges and diversions that have happened with the pandemic and other issues in the state that has created a challenge.

So we see that providing these incentive grants to help districts to move forward is going to be a tool, and our hope is that it is then going to promote others to be able to have the skills that they need to move forward.

So sometimes we have to give our friends a little bit of help, and that's what this measure is intended to do.

Yeah. Well, just for the record, 10 years is a very long time for us not to have a plan in place for the state that caters to both data research-based practices as well as accountability on that end. So I will be grateful to support the Bill moving forward. And with that, Member Carillo, would you like to close?

I'll simply close by requesting your aye vote on this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, would you call the rule.

File item 10, AB 2071 Juan Carrillo. The motion is do pass to Senate Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Thank you.

And we'll leave that on call for our absent Members. Do we have any other authors? Okay, we'll wait.

Madam Secretary, would you open the roll for AB 1855 Arambala, please?

Okay, file item three, AB 1855 Arambula. Motion is do pass. Current vote is two ayes and no no's, with the Chair voting aye. [Roll Call]

Member Valencia has arrived. We welcome you to the podium and you will be presenting AB 2447. Welcome.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and buenos dias to the members. I'd like to start by thanking the Chair and the Committee team for diligently working on this Bill. In collaboration with our team, I'll be accepting also the Committee amendments to address some of the concerns voiced by the CSUs.

AB 2447 will require the California State University system to disclose specific data for their contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders and investments. Data collected will identify recipients, items purchased, transaction types, and a description of the need for the expenditure. The accepted amendments clarify that individual names of recipients will not be published.

While the CSU currently publishes a General expenditure plan on their website, the data does not provide sufficient details on those expenditures and only provides the total amount expended for each category. Collecting this data will increase transparency and provide a better understanding of how their spending compares to the reserves, surpluses and operating budget.

With me today to provide testimony is my good friend, Mister Bryan Ha, the Director of government relations for the California Faculty Association.

Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, Committee members. Bryan Ha, with the California Faculty Association. We are proud sponsor of this Bill. We want to applaud the author for carrying this very important Bill. For us, the Bill is very simple.

We are asking the CSU to produce on an external website to post their spending so that we can actually have information that are timely and accurate as we head into a very difficult budget years ahead.

There are two campuses that have used services like OpenGov, opengov.org that has really shown and field is some very positive research and findings for us campuses such as CSU Dominguez Hills and CSU San Luis Obispo. We just want to facilitate the public's ability to educate themselves about what CSU does with their resources.

We're trying to address their reporting information are accurate and timely. So we urge your aye vote thank you.

Okay, well, thank you. Do we have any other witnesses in support of 2447 here in room 2100? Seeing none, we'll now continue with witnesses in opposition of 2447.

Good morning, Chair and members. I'm Adriana Gomez, legislative advocate with the CSU office of the chancellor, here to speak in respectful opposition to AB 2447 which would require the CSU to publish all expenditures and transfers of state funds, including investments above 10,000, on a public website.

I want to start off by acknowledging the author, his staff, and the Committee for their Engagement with CSU and their work to minimize some of our concerns.

The CSU shares the author's goal of transparency, and that is evident by our existing transparency and accountability website where the public can track all expenditures, over 50,000 annual financial statements, external financial audit reports and utilize an interactive portal that allows you to customize finance searches by University and Fund and this is the open gov feature referenced by the sponsors.

With that being said, the CSU remains opposed to this measure as it maintains a number of provisions that present implementation challenges and would provide little to no additional public benefit.

These include the expense threshold of $10,000, which would result in over 30,000 data points, and the provision allowing Department of Finance and the governor's office to request any information they choose to be included and published with the expenditures.

This provision is vague and subject to change, which prevents the CSU from knowing what information needs to be captured to satisfy the provisions of the Bill. The measure also treats investments as expenditures which is not appropriate or feasible. CSU is required by law to invest in mutual funds from which transactions are made constantly by a Fund manager.

We would not be able to produce the same required content per this Bill for expenditures monthly as for investments via mutual funds. Transparency is top of mind for CSU and that is why the investment Advisory Committee was established. This Committee meets quarterly to review investment activities in a public hearing.

The CSU also meets state law requirements to provide the Legislature with annual financial reports. And finally, investments are also audited by an external third party that reviews our financial statements. Those are shared publicly on the same site mentioned earlier, and they include information on total investments. With a breakdown by investment type and fair value.

The CSU shares the author's motivations for transparency. We're just at disagreement on what this Bill provides beyond what we're already doing and with our accountability site and our investment Advisory Committee. So for those reasons, we respectfully request a no vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Do we have any other witnesses in opposition to AB 2447? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. Member Wilk thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I got three committees going on right now, so I apologize that I missed your presentation. I sat on a community college board of trustees for six and a half years when I was reading this. The 10,000 seem way too low, just from my experience, so I missed. So what's the backstory?

Where do you think these issues are failing?

This isn't a measure to place blame on failure of an institution. This is more a transparency measure. I come from a city where we've had unfortunate recent challenges when it comes to disclosure of public dollars. I think moving in this direction, considering the fiscal dynamic that we're in now as a state, is necessary.

The public then can decide whether or not those dollars are being used appropriately. But I don't see anything wrong with disclosing whatever public dollar is being spent on.

I don't either. What about the challenge in terms of their investment package? If you require in this Bill monthly, they meet quarterly. Is that something where that could be adjusted when it comes to investments that's done quarterly? I mean, are you still talking to the opposition?

Oh, absolutely. In communication with the opposition. They also mentioned a component with the Administration. We've reached out to the Administration last week. We're waiting to hear back from them as well. So this is a collaborative effort in my mind and will continue to be so moving forward.

Okay.

Thank you. I also had a question with how did you decide upon the $10,000 threshold? Because when it comes to public funds, that's very, very minimal amount of funds. What issues are you trying to, besides the transparency, what issues prompted you to come forward and request a $10,000?

Thanks for that question, Senator. Earlier this year we went on a strike, and by and large, because there was strong dispute amongst numbers, they claim that they had so much in their reserves. Based on our count, based on our count, we recognize their reserves are so much higher than what they were disclosing.

So we're also trying to every step that we can pursue to ensure transparency, we understand that they already have that. They claim that there's already an internal site that they post $50,000, any expenditures over $50,000 or more, they have to post it, but it's not really giving us any accurate information.

So that's why we came up with the number $10,000. We want to see if we can start comparing apples to apples versus apples to oranges.

Okay. So the other question I have for you is, when it comes to the annual financial audit reports that they provide, do those reports actually have the more minute expenditures by the universities?

I have not. I have not seen the report in details. But by and large, I think the issues that we're facing right now is that we are trying to pursue transparency. We don't understand a lot of the mechanisms that they currently use. They say they have an external auditors that helps them with this reporting.

Again, a lot of their reportings are flawed, in our opinion. So we are trying to accomplish some steps and measures where we can get some real detailed, accurate information.

So two comments. When it comes to the flawed. Could you expand a little bit as to what you mean by flawed? And number two, when it comes to the audits, I believe the audit reports are done by a third external entity. And those cannot be flawed. Those have to be pretty accurate.

So in the past, when you folks are analyzing the financial reports of the universities, has your group actually utilized these audit reports that are more, much more specific in detail because those are also publicly disclosed?

Yeah, our members have utilized them and did, and did compare those numbers to the numbers that we come up with. And that is why we feel strongly that number, $50,000, just does not work for us. So we wanted to see if we can lower that threshold so that we can get some more up to date information.

So what I'm hearing from you is that you're looking at the audit reports and seeing a discrepancy between the audit reports figures and the actual documents are being publicly disclosed on a quarterly basis.

No, we would consider any numbers that whatever they want to disclose, but we also believe that the numbers that they disclose on those, whatever they want to share with their auditors, they pick and choose what they want to share.

We are trying to narrow down as many information as we possibly can get right now so that moving forward in a very difficult budget years ahead, so that we can actually have the information needed for us to enter into bargaining agreement with them.

So, with the audit report, are you stating that on the record that they only selectively choose what to report on these audit reports?

This is coming from a membership. I strongly believe that there's a lot of discrepancies in terms of numbers. We want to try to address that, address those situations where I'm using the word flaws, because these are the words that are coming from my membership when it comes to numbering.

So we are trying to address that at the same time.

So let me go back. Are you stating that the audit reports are flawed?

I can't. No, I'm not saying that they're flawed, but these are comments that I've heard from coming from the field, and we believe that this Bill is the right step for us to address some inconsistencies coming from the. Coming from the CSU.

Okay, I'm going to give the CSU an opportunity to comment, if you have any comments.

Yeah. So the agent, the third party entity that we hire for our audits, our third party audits, is KPMG, which I'm unfortunately blanking on the acronym. I'm sorry about that, but I can follow up with you. They're a reputable financial auditor. And I can tell you that we do not pick and choose what we decide.

It's a third party auditor that's conducting this audit. And if you don't want to take CSU's word for also, this is a very reputable auditing source. So in it appears there has been discrepancies between who the sponsors have hired to audit versus us. But I can't speak to who they've hired, hired to conduct their own audits.

We did suggest an amendment to move the Bill to $50,000 expense reporting to minimize the amount of data, because we don't want to overwhelm people. And so I just wanted to note that that was something that we suggested.

And I'm happy to share the audits with everyone on the Committee, and we've also shared them with the author's office.

So I have a follow up question on your audit report. Do they expand and disclose expenditures that are at the level of $10,000?

So since it is the report that is published on our website, it doesn't get into like line items of all of our expenses, because that would be extremely long. But we have on our financial transparency website, there is very visibly, right when you get on that website, a link that leads you to all of our expenses over $50,000. And you can do it by Kristen

there's nothing $50,000, but not. There's nothing publicly available that shows a $10,000 threshold.

Not at $10,000. But we do have our, the open gov portal that was referenced does have expenditures and revenues, and then it'll say sources of each expenditure or the sources of the revenue, and then where the expenditure goes. And then from there you can click and get as granular as you would like. More line detail is that.

Yeah, but it doesn't have, it doesn't say $10,000 went to this. It says the overall number that went to like financial aid or something.

If I may add. If I may add. So our team took a look at some of these audits, and they are very high level, at least in our opinion. They're not comprehensive. They're not evaluating every single dollar spent in the CSU system.

And because of that, we think a more accurate accounting on a monthly basis at this threshold is necessary. Again, the auditing is welcomed and appreciated, but again, it's not the detail that we're looking for when it comes to the information.

Senator Wilk.

So question. So I sat on community college board and we changed auditing firms every three years because you don't want to get too cozy of a relationship. Does the CSU operate under the same principle?

The top of my head. I'm not sure how long we've been working with KPMG. I'd have to start back with you, but I'm happy to do so.

One more. So, last audit, were there any findings that needed to be addressed by the system?

The beginning. They do include suggestions that are easy for everyone to look through. Off the top of my head, I don't recall the specific suggestions at this moment, but I will say on our financial transparency website that has all of this expenditure information, there is an icon for members of the public to make suggestions as well.

Well, I wasn't talking about suggestions. I'm talking about findings. So when they do the audit, if they find things that are wrong or need to be tweaked or corrected,

I don't recall any major questions at the moment.

There may not be times there's.

You love it when there's none.

Yeah, they're not sticking out to me at the moment.

Alright very good.

And to reiterate a point that I made earlier, this is not to point the finger at the CSUs. We're not going on a mission to find fault at the CSU system. Again, this is more of a transparency measure.

And I appreciate the data point that was brought up, the 30,000 number of listings that this could potentially bring. And I also appreciate the fact that they're willing and open to do the $50,000 in my analysis.

If you're willing and open to meet us at $50,000, I think it's fair for us to ask the public to ask for the $10,000 threshold, especially when it's only 30,000 bullet points for the entire system.

Did you say only 30,000?

Only 30,000.

Only 30,000. So within your Bill, is there an allocation of funding for the universities who have the capacity to be able to meet this need?

There is not. There is not. But when we're dealing with transparency and the opportunity to actually yield savings long term, based on these findings, I think it's a merited approach.

Okay. So. All right. Wonderful. Would you like to close respectfully?

Respectfully as for a yes vote. Thank you for your vote.

Thank you. Oh, we need a motion.

Yeah. So here's what I'm going to do. I am going to move the Bill and I am going to vote for it today. I'm going to. I need to delve in a little.

I know you're a good author, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt today, but reserve my right to change it if I'm not comfortable moving forward. So I moved the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Accepted the amendments that were proposed by the.

I opened with that comment. Some concerns that there.

Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Member Valencia I'm going to abstain at this moment and want to see the Bill come back to see whether or not there's been any accommodations to address some of the concerns that we have, because I do believe in full transparency.

I'm all about transparency, but I do want to make sure that we are at a point where it's reasonable as far as be able to do the work, and that means having the capacity to have the ability to implement this Bill, both with the workforce required as well as the funding, because otherwise we can require.

But if they don't have the workforce or the funding to be able to do it, then we're at a loss. We achieve nothing.

So with that, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Thank you.

Thank you, Member. We'll keep that on call for our absent Members. Member McKinnor, welcome. All right, Member McKinnor, you will be presenting AB 2998. Yes, welcome. You may proceed when you're ready.

Good morning. Chair and Members of the Committee, I am here to present AB 2998 a crucial measure designed to authorize minors to possess and administer naloxone hydrochloride, such as Narcan, in schools and other public settings, as a means to swiftly respond to opioid overdoses.

AB 2998 also ensures that minors acting in good faith to assist someone experiencing an opioid overdose are protected from legal consequences. This provision not only encourages proactive intervention, but also promotes a culture of compassion and support for those in need. AB 2998 represents a significant step forward in addressing substance abuse among minors.

By recognizing the importance of harm reduction strategies and providing access to life saving medication. We are taking proactive measures to safeguard the well-being of our youth and communities. Let us move forward with resolve and determination to pass this crucial measure for the betterment of California.

Joining me today is Martha Averez, representing the Los Angeles Unified School District, and Amanda Dickey, representing the Santa Clara Office of Education. Thank you.

Thank you and welcome.

Good morning, Vice Chairwoman Ochoa Bogh and Committee Members and staff. My name is Marta Alvarez. And I'm the Chief of Government Relations for the LA Unified School District. I am here today as a proud sponsor of Assembly Bill 2998 by Assemblymember McKinnor and urge your support for this bill.

In response to the devastating epidemic of opioid overdoses in Los Angeles, LA Unified implemented numerous initiatives, including our Opioid Task Force launched this school year in fall of 2023, which expands partnerships with community based organizations and agencies throughout Los Angeles to align efforts and keep our school community safe.

In addition to fully engaging families in conversations about substance abuse and identifying signs for parents, caretakers and youth, we have also launched courses on the Los Angeles Unified Family Academy to provide information on locations for direct support, as well as information on increasing awareness on fentanyl and substance abuse prevention efforts.

In October of 2022, Los Angeles unified began receiving over the counter Narcan, one brand of Naloxone, through California's Naloxone distribution project. These doses are available at all K-12 campuses, adult education centers and early education centers. They're also provided to school nurses and other trained personnel and have proven to be critical in the fight against overdose.

However, staff that can access the medication are not always available in the immediate moments of an overdose and first responders may be minutes away. In February 2023, LA unified created a policy supporting by Los Angeles County Department of Public Health to not issue formal discipline if a student carries naloxone on campus, as an extra layer of protection against the fentanyl crisis.

AB 2998 is necessary to clarify this authorization and statute and create an additional statewide tool in the fight against fentanyl. The bottom line is that this bill will increase the chances of immediate life saving countermeasures in case of a fentanyl overdose.

For these reasons, Los Angeles Unified is a proud sponsor of AB 2998. We thank you for your commitment to support student health and wellbeing and ask for your support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Alvarez.

Thank you Vice Chair and Members of the Committee, my name is Amanda Dickey. I am the Executive Director of Government Relations for the Santa Clara County Office of Education and I'm here today in support of this bill because fentanyl is now responsible for one in five deaths among California youth aged 15 to 24.

In Santa Clara alone, fentanyl related deaths increased by 1000% between 2018 and 2021, from 11 deaths to 154.

Like LAUSD, our County Office of Education has partnered with the county to establish the Santa Clara County Opioid Overdose Prevention Project, which is a multi-pronged approach that educates students about the dangers of fentanyl while also providing naloxone at schools. This program was launched just two years ago and has already been used to save several lives.

While this project has been successful, it still isn't enough because we're still losing kids, which is why we need AB 2998. This bill would allow students to carry naloxone on campus, which has been FDA approved since 1970 and has no known risks, so that if they or another student experiences an overdose, they can save a life.

So everyone who has children or who has been a child knows that kids can make bad choices and that it's not uncommon for one bad choice, like experimenting with drugs, to be followed by another bad choice, like being so afraid of the consequences that they ask their friends not to tell anyone that they're feeling sick.

It's not rational, but it is the reality, and it is how kids think sometimes. And we know that youth have died because they were too afraid to ask for help. So while we at Santa Clara County office obviously do not condone students' bad choices, we will always, always support policies that keep children alive.

AB 2998 is one such policy. By allowing students themselves to carry naloxone, it increases the likelihood that a life will be saved. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today, and I welcome any questions at the appropriate time.

Thank you very much. And now we'll proceed with any witnesses in support of AB 2998 here in room 2100.

Thank you. Tom Renfree, on behalf of the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives in support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Serette Kaminski, on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators in support.

Thank you.

Leticia Garcia with the Riverside County superintendents of school in support.

Thank you. All right. Now we'll continue with any witnesses in opposition to AB 2998, seeing none. We'll bring it back to the dais.

Just want to thank the author for the bill. This is an epidemic, and it doesn't only hit young people. We recently had a retired Legislator who was 60 years old who passed, which was shocking to me. And whatever we can do to be proactive to save kids is a good thing.

So thank you for the bill, and I move it.

Thank you, Senator Wilk. I also have been working in this space, fentanyl, also on the medical side, trying to ensure that we have systems in place that can help us ensure that we don't lose another life to fentanyl. I'm grateful for the bill. Thank you very much for bringing this forward.

I am happy to support the bill today. And Madam Secretary, would you call? Oh, sorry. Member McKinnor, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

Madam secretary.

File item 26, AB 2998. McKenna. The motion is do pass to Senate Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call]

[Roll Call].

Thank you. So we have Member Schiavo here. Would you like to proceed next? Perfect. You will be presenting AB 3074 when you're ready.

I was just in another committee and they do it differently.

We like to be more--

Welcoming. Very welcoming. Appreciate that. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair and Senators. I'm grateful for the opportunity to present AB 3074 to you today. As a student athlete, I know how much pride and team spirit comes from mascots.

Yet for far too long, some mascots have instead been a source of shame and cultural appropriation. AB 3074 would prohibit all public K through 12 schools in the State of California from using culturally insensitive Native American terms for school or athletic names, mascots, and nicknames. Mascots are a huge part of school events and they are what draw people to dress up for their team or by memorabilia. However, they can have a really big negative effect on communities whose likeness is used for mascots.

Several studies have shown that these Native American mascots have detrimental effects on indigenous peoples from the individual and community level. In 1968, the National Congress of American Indians began campaigns to address stereotypes of Native American people in pop culture, media, and sports.

Much progress has been made in pursuit of ending in the area of unsanctioned Native theme mascots, but we continue to support the campaign through this bill, following in the footsteps of some schools and professional sports teams that have already taken the initiative to change their name.

Hart High School in my district just went through a name change process. They have changed their name from 'Indians' to the 'Hawks' and the new mascot being voted on by the student body. However, there's still over 2,000 schools nationwide that have Native American themed mascots.

AB 3074 will help create a safe space in schools to make certain groups--to make certain groups schools experience better, for they will no longer have to deal with bullying, mockery, or isolation due to a mascot. Joining me today is current treasurer Danielle Cirelli of the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, and also Julia Estrada, who is an Assembly Fellow with Assembly Member David Alvarez's office to speak on the bill because of her involvement in school mascot change in my community.

Good morning. My name is Danielle Ikai Cirelli. I am currently the Executive Council Treasurer for the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, and as of three days ago, was elected by my general membership as Chairperson and will be sworn in next month.

Thank you to the Committee Members for allowing me to testify on behalf of Assembly Member Schiavo and Ramos's AB 3074, the California Racial Mascot Act. This legislation prohibits public schools from using derogatory Native American terms for schools or athletic team names, mascots, or nicknames.

Some examples of these derogatory terms include: Apaches, Big Reds, Braves, Chiefs, Chieftains, Indians, Savages, Squaw, and Tribe. And just to give you some context, in our culture, many indigenous people will not use the term 'squaw.' We refer to it as the 's-word.'

That's how offensive many of my people find that word, and under existing law, currently only the term 'Redskins' is prohibited. As I mentioned, the Habematolel Pomo Tribe of Upper Lake, where the Pomo people have resided since time immemorial, the tribes in that area, including ours, where we have seven federally recognized tribes, have suffered centuries of federal policies which subjected us to unspeakable cruelties and tragedies throughout our history, including an attempted genocide in 1850 known as the Bloody Island Massacre, which was led by Captain Andrew Kelsey.

Kelseyville, ironically, is now the name of a town just south of Upper Lake where our reservation and tribal offices are located. This has been an ongoing local dispute between tribes and the Kelseyville community, with unsuccessful attempts to change the names for years.

Many non-tribal people might not understand the impacts that a name or a mascot can have on a group of people who have been historically and consistently threatened, forgotten, and mistreated, which all of this leads to generational trauma, especially for our youths, and we believe schools should be a safe place for all youth and indigenous youth students should not have to attend a school that is mocking their culture.

California is home to 109 federally recognized tribes, and our state has the greatest number of indigenous people. This legislation is a step in the right directions toward taking actions to rectify the historic mistreatment towards tribes and recognizing by the California Legislature that tribal culture is something to be celebrated and appreciated rather than mocked and appropriated. In conclusion, the Habematolel of Upper Lake supports AB 3074 and are grateful to the sponsors for bringing it forward and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Hello, Chair and Members. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak today. To briefly introduce myself, my name is Julia Estrada, and I am a Native American former alumni of Hart High School in the City of Santa Clarita, Assembly Member Schiavo's district, and I was the student that led the initiative to retire the Indian mascot back in 2020 after my graduation.

It was a year-long effort, and if anybody is familiar with the Hart District School Board, there were a lot of swing votes that I had to get, but it was a process that was, that incorporated tribal voices as well as student advocates, and ultimately, we made the right decision to retire the mascot and have gone forth with approving the Hawks and implementing that new mascot as of March 19th of this year. And I think for my testimony, I want to speak to the student perspective.

As one of the only Native Americans at Hart High School at the time, I was also a student athlete. I was on track, I did tennis, I was Chief of the--Tomahawk at the time--Yearbook, and was really involved in my school, but would constantly attend tennis matches where my peers would do whopping noises by putting their hands over their mouths or tribal ASB members, what we call 'tribe leaders,' would emerge from a tepee during pep rallies and things that are just blatantly disrespectful if you know any Native Americans and are also just misrepresentative of our culture.

And when we think of Native American mascots, we often think of a Plains Indian with a big, feathery headdress, and that's ultimately not what California looks like, and it's just proof that we are characterizing Native Americans in our educational spaces as one image and almost like making them a mythological creature similar to that of things that don't exist anymore, like Vikings, et cetera.

And so I think it's very important to recognize that we want to create spaces in high schools, middle schools, elementary schools in California that are inclusive of all people, and although we may be far and few, like I was at Hart High School, we matter, and when we are drafting legislation that is advocating for better protections for Native students that have high suicide and depression rates, we also have to consider the implications that mascots like this place on our Native students. Just this year, the yearbook printed a going-away kind of memorial to the Indian.

And it was almost kind of a slap in the face after a very long process, and a Native, current Native American student at Hart High School sent me this photo that just shows, from 1949 to 1994, all of the different iterations of the Indian that we had at our high school, and in a lot of these board meetings I attended, it was 'no, it was never that bad.' It was never--sorry, I'm getting emotional--it was never that insensitive.

But after a year of work, this is how Native voices are being represented in our current yearbook, and it just shows that there's a lot of work to do to educate, and in cities in particular, like Santa Clarita, where there aren't a lot of Native people, this is the place for that advocacy, and we've been working really hard, and Native Americans have been working consistently since 1968 to ask for these changes.

And so it's our duty to just follow through and commit to changing this--thank you-- at the state level, because it's long overdue and many other states have done it already, and there's research to prove that it genuinely changes how non-Native people perceive Native Americans. So thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 3074.

Thank you very much for your testimony today. While we continue with our witnesses in support of AB 3074, I would like to take a closer look at what you have on hand. I don't think I received it. No, we didn't receive it, so if you wouldn't mind, I'm sure our members would like to see what you're referring to. Now we'll continue with any witnesses here in support of AB 3074.

Hi. Tiffany Mok, CFT, a Union of Educators and Classified Professionals. We just wanted to thank the author for this bill and commend the courage of those supporters. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Vice Chair and Members. Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education, the Superintendent, and Board of Education, in strong support of this bill. Thank you, and thank you to the witnesses.

Annie Chou with the California Teachers Association, in support.

Rachel Bhagwat, with ACLU California Action, in strong support.

Pamela Lopez, on behalf of the Tachi Tribe and the Tule River Tribe, in support.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Tony Thurmond, State Superintendent of Public Instruction. On behalf of six million students in this state, I urge your aye vote on this bill. As you think--I'd like to thank the Assembly Member for your authorship of this.

As you heard from the witnesses' testimony, there are deep, inflicted painful wounds from this practice of racism and cultural appropriation. After all this nation and this state has done to the first people of the state, this is the least that we can do is to change this practice once and for all.

I have the honor of chairing the Governor's task force on allowing Native American students who wear tribal regalia, making sure that we teach the right things about the Native American people's history, and I think what we can do as a start is make sure that we pass AB 3074 and end this tradition forever. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Superintendent. Okay, we'll now continue with any witnesses in opposition. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais.

Happy to move the bill. Quick comment. One: I thought that we outlawed 'squaw,' or is that just for, like, state parks and state property? It was just that because when I learned what that meant, I was like--I was like, horrified. So I came in here because I believe in local control, like you advocated in your school, which is in my district as well and you did a great job--I like local control. I think we do too much stuff in Sacramento, telling people what to do, but your testimony was so compelling that I am going to vote aye on this and throw away my principle of local control because you move me. So I want to thank you for that.

And I want to make a comment with regards to--we talk about the mascots and so forth. Some take pride, and you may find it offensive, but overall, when it comes to the mascots, I know that you may think it be offensive sometimes, but I know that, like, for instance, in our city, we're the Thunderbirds. Our mascots are endeared. I have a daughter who is in Utah, and they have a tiger, kind of like a tiger, and they, you know, they love the tiger.

So just for planting a little bit of a healing seed in your heart, not everybody considers a mascot as a negative component or representation of whatever it is that they're utilizing. So I want you to know that sometimes it's a sense of pride for a lot of people to have the mascots in their schools. So it's not necessarily--and I saw what you showed on there, and, yeah, some of those were definitely very, very offensive, and I'm not going to justify people's--theirs, but, yes, absolutely offensive, and I can see how you would be offensive on that end.

And I can't apologize for their actions, but I can understand your sensitivity towards this subject matter. I commend you for the advocacy that you've done locally on that end, and will be happy to support this bill today, but know, know that for some, it was not necessarily in a negative light, but for some of these individuals, they're proud. They're proud of their mascots in their schools. So with that, Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Oh, I'm sorry. Member Schiavo, please. We welcome your closing.

Thank you. I want to thank my witnesses with their powerful testimony today. Thank the Senator for being open and willing to hear and listen and support today, and thank you for your support as well. I think, you know, I think to your point that this is why this is such an important bill to start this conversation because I think certainly there are people who--it's unintended, right? But there are people who are really being harmed by it, and that's why we have to have this conversation.

That's why we have to move forward and make sure that that education happens. I've had a grown, six-foot-three Native American man in my office crying when he was remembering about offensive Native American stereotypes in his school experience, right?

So these are, these are ongoing traumas, and we certainly, through our education system, don't want to be a part of perpetuating that, and I think that this is a really important step for us to make, to make sure that when respect is intended, that respect is also received, right? And respect is--and there's a joint understanding of what that respect looks like, and this is an opportunity to do that. So appreciate support and an aye vote for 3074 today. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

File Item 27: AB 3074: Schiavo: motion is do pass to Senate Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call].

Thank you very much. We'll place that bill on hold for our absent members, and thank you for being here today.

Thank you. And thank you to the Superintendent as well.

So out of courtesy, we're going to allow Member Jones present his bill, if you don't mind, unless you have a time sensitivity. Is that okay? He's been here for a while, waiting graciously. So, out of courtesy, so you'll be presenting AB 3142.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. AB 3142, which expands the California Climate Change Education Center at the West Los Angeles College by adding a mobile unit in order to improve the reach of the current center.

In 2022, Governor Newsom and community college leaders agreed to build a roadmap to help California community colleges prepare to meet future workforce needs in climate action. To further this effort, the Legislature invested $5 million for the Los Angeles Community College District, LACCD, to create the California Center for Climate Change Education at West Los Angeles College.

AB 3142 helps further the governor's plan and builds upon the work of the Center for Climate Change Education by creating a mobile unit to help reach students in the community with hands on learning and internship opportunities. AB 3142 also codifies the center to ensure its mission and purpose are anchored in state law.

The bill has received bipartisan support and has no registered opposition. With me to support of this bill is Maria Velos on behalf of the bill sponsored by the Los Angeles Community College.

Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair and honorable Members of the Committee. Maria Luisa Velos. I'm testifying on behalf of Chancellor Francisco Rodriguez who couldn't be here today. As the assemblymember mentioned, LACCD is the proud sponsor of AB 3142. And as he mentioned in his opening statement, this bill addresses a critical issue of climate change education.

To our knowledge, the West Los Angeles College is the only community college offering a climate change associate of arts degree in the State of California. Two years ago, as was mentioned, the state Legislature amplified this degree and allocated the $5 billion to establish the center at West LA College.

Since then, the center has received national recognition from prestigious colleges and universities nationwide, and AB 3142 will codify the Center for Climate Change Education at the Los Angeles Community College District and recognizes this critical and timely field of study. This will help facilitate future and public and private funding for the center.

In addition, AB 3142 will add the mobile unit, as was mentioned, to increase access to the center's climate change curriculum throughout the Southern California region. This mobile unit will travel to local high schools, elementary schools, and the community at large to provide hands on educational opportunities to learn about environmental stewardship and justice.

AB 3142 will further increase awareness, modify behaviors, and prepare our current and next generation of workers for green and blue sector jobs. These careers are essential to altering the impacts of global warming and climate change. For these reasons, the Los Angeles Community College District respectfully asked for your aye vote.

Thank you, ma'am. Do we have any other witnesses in support of AB 3142 here in room 2100? Seeing none, we'll move on to any witnesses in opposition. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. We have a motion by Senator Glazer. Member Jones-Sawyer, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, sir. Madam Secretary.

File item 28, AB 3142, Jones-Sawyer. Motion is do pass to the Senate on Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

Okay, we will place that on hold for absent Members. Thank you, sir. Welcome, Assemblymember Gipson. So happy to see you here today. Very glad to see your bright smile today. AB, you'll be presenting AB 2816?

That is correct. Thank you very much, Madam Vice Chair and Senators, thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 20816 which seeks to establish a school mapping technology for the first responders on K-12 campuses.

School mapping technology would allow emergency responders to have access, to have access to a school layout prior to entering the campus. This technology is necessary for balancing accessibility and security to ensure efficient communication for and with first responders, ultimately enhancing emergency response and outcomes.

In 2023 alone, there was a report of 346 school shooting incidents across the United States, injuring about 191 students. And from 2018 through 2023, 1,073 people were wounded or killed in school shooting incidents. In California alone, 96 school shootings right here at home, 96 school shooting incidents happened within five years, resulting in 82 people being wounded or killed.

These statistics have significantly affected the students' mental well being in schools, causing 58% of of our students, our babies, to worry about a school shooting happening on their campus, thus creating anxiety. Filled with an environment that should be a safe place for our children to focus on schoolwork.

But yet they're focused on whether or not they're going to come home alive. Our children deserve better and their lives, unfortunately, every day is on the line. Emergency response times are vital during an event of an emergency victim survival, survivor rates fall by, fell by seven to 10% for every minute without an emergency treatment, a tragic example of the effects of a delay response.

And I want to recall to this body what happened in Duvaldy, Texas, where the response time was inadequate and children's lives were lost as a result. Law enforcement officers didn't know which way to go because they didn't have a mapping plan. They could not find the children. They didn't know the layout of the school.

Three out of 19 victims died more than an hour later due to the injuries which could have been treated. It is vital that we supply our first responders with the most advanced security systems that will not only decrease emergency response times, but also give students the reassurance they need to emphasize their safety at school.

Assembly Bill 2816 has enjoyed a bipartisan support and have received no no votes in the Assembly and passed, of course, out of the Assembly floor. This bill, Assembly Bill 2816, is supported by a number of law enforcement, poor acts, and also CPCA. I respectfully ask for an aye vote at the appropriate time.

Thank you very much. I'm just coming back. I'm sorry. She gave me the gavel. I thought that was. You gave me the gavel. Thank you, Assemblymember Gipson. And so we do have a lead witness in support? Support? Please proceed. Welcome.

Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is Joe Hanson and I want to thank both yourselves and all Members of the Staff and Education Committee for meeting with us. The time and consideration given to us is much appreciated.

I currently live in Mammoth Lakes with my wife and two small children. Prior to that, I spent 11 years serving as a special operations officer in the Marines and completed four combat deployments. I now specialize in communicating during a critical incident with an emphasis on K-12 schools, more specifically, providing school mapping data for first responders.

The challenges facing first responders when they arrive at the 911 call for a school are many. It is time sensitive. It's dangerous. First responders often find themselves working with other departments they rarely have contact with.

First responders are expected to simply know how to get to the art room or to the cafeteria in the event of an emergency with ease. But that's simply not the case. School blueprints, or floor plans, as they exist today, are inaccurate and not designed for emergency response.

Additionally, they are inaccessible in the disparate software systems that first responders in schools use today. Due to these problems, they add confusion to an emergency scenario instead of providing actionable information just in the case of Uvalde, Texas. A direct quote from the after action report reads, the schematic maps of the campus used by law enforcement to identify potential points of entry were inaccurate.

Law enforcement officers testified, excuse me, testified to the Investigative Committee that they asked whether they could gain access to the classrooms through windows, but were deterred by the inaccurate floor plans. In the case of Sandy Hook, when officers conducted initial and subsequent searches of the school, neither floor plans nor schematics of the school were readily available for the tactical search units.

AB 2816 will allow companies in the industry to offer these mapping services to school districts and first responders, providing them with the necessary tools to navigate the campus in the event of an emergency, enhancing communication, saving time, and saving lives. Thank you again for your time.

Thank you. And thank you for your service. Are there any other members of the public in the audience who would like to testify in support of the measure? If so, please come forward. Is there anybody here who would like to testify in opposition to the measure? Seeing none, let me come back to the Committee. Committee Members, any questions, concerns for the author, for the witness? Please, Senator Wilk. Please, Madam Vice Chair.

I just want to thank the author for bringing this measure forward. I'm surprised, shocked, actually, that we don't already have this in place. It seems like we are literally overdue on ensuring that we have these safety measures in place at our school. So I'm grateful for bringing this to our attention, for bringing this forward, and I'm going to be happy to support the bill today and move it at the appropriate moment.

Appreciate that. Senator Wilk.

We're family, so I'm supporting the bill, and then sometimes these things are quick. So back on November 14, 2017 had a school shooting at the high school that my kids had attended. It was over in 16 seconds. The kid built a ghost gun, which is why I've been against ghost guns.

Killed two people, wounded two people, took his own life. And the first person on the scene was a friend of mine who's a detective who was dropping off his son, heard shots and came in, but the kid was already dead. And these things are going to happen more often, I think, than less.

So I am curious, though, if you know, great. If you don't, that's fine. So, Assemblymember Mathis, we heard a bill from him last week that was very similar, but there was some opposition to his bill, which I'm not sure why. Are you familiar with his bill? If you're not, then that's fine, because I'm just curious.

Sure. I've heard that Assemblymember Mathis has such a bill, but I'm not familiar with.

I can clarify just a little bit. There were concerns about how the information that might be used by an app or a web based approach might be exposed or otherwise shared. So there were some privacy concerns.

So how are first responders going to access the information on this?

Sure, I want to turn to my witness.

It's a great question. There's a myriad of systems that public safety systems use right now. Most of those systems are criminal justice information systems compliant or sieges compliance. So when the vendor gives the mapping data to the district or to public safety, I'd call that the second pillar of security.

It resides within those software solutions that are pretty safe. And then I guess I would expound upon that. The third part would be accessibility and security. There's nothing top secret in this information. It's not a web based application. It's mapping data. And so it's far more important that the district staff and the public safety can access that in the systems that they're already comfortable using.

Okay, great. Thank you. Happy to support today.

Thank you very much.

Any other questions, comments? I too am glad to support it. Thank you to the witness. You're welcome to close.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Vice Chair and Committee. Assembly Bill 2816 ensures safety for our children K-12 schools to provide them with first responders, with the technology, with the updated technology to making sure that our children are safe on campus.

And it's absolutely imperative that our first responders, if called upon during such a time where there's an active shooting shooter, understand the layout or is able to one identify and deploy officers at the appropriate locations. So it doesn't. So we know who's on first and who's on second. And this, what this technology allows that to happen. I respectfully ask an aye vote for our children in California.

Thank you. We have a motion from Senator Ochoa Bogh. Thank you. Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

File item 19, AB 2816, Gipson. Motion is do pass to Senate Governmental Organization Committee. [Roll Call]

Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hanson. Thank you, Assemblymember. Next up I believe we have my neighbor and colleague, Assemblymember Quirk-Silva. No colleague. Not my neighbor in college. She went to UCLA. I couldn't get into UCLA. Welcome.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Senators. Today I am presenting Assembly Bill 2395. This bill provides a California State University system increased flexibility for how it can use continuing education funds and includes annual reporting requirements. California has the privilege of being home to the nation's largest and most diverse four year public university system.

The CSU operates 23 universities, seven off campus centers, and serves nearly 460,000 students each year, including Cal State Fullerton, home of the Titans, my hometown. In 1971, the Legislature established the Continuing Education Reserve Fund to help adult learners meet workforce needs not met by traditional state supported offerings.

Over the years, the self support programs funded by revenues deposited and the Continuing Education Revenue Fund have expanded. They now include degree and non degree programs, certificates, credentials, and other innovative workforce related professional development opportunities. Unlike the University of California system, revenues deposited in the CSU's Continuing Education Fund are constrained by dated requirements to narrow purposes.

Technological advancements and higher education strategies have changed since the early 1970s. An existing law prevents these funds from being utilized for broader campus and academic uses that support workforce preparation. During the challenges of this budget year, it is important to note that the additional funds are not being requested from the CSU in this bill.

Rather, my bill would provide increased fiscal flexibility for the CSU to use Continuing Education Reserve Fund more effectively so it can better serve the students and deliver on its education and institutional mission.

With me today to provide testimony and answer any questions, we have Cal State University Long Beach President Jane Conoley and Dr. Mandara Savage, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Professional and Continuing Education program.

Welcome to both of you. President Conoley, notwithstanding the fact that you post my best employee, you're more than welcome here. Please proceed.

Thank you, Chair Newman and Members of the Committee. I am Jane Conoley, President of Cal State Long Beach, and I also serve as the chair of our CSU Commission on Professional and Continuing Education, which we call PACE.

Many adults are returning to school seeking a certificate or credential so they can remain in or progress in or re enter the workforce, and industries are eager to partner with the CSU to tell us what the latest skills and dispositions and knowledge are vital in their industry segments.

The CSU enables continuous education by building on the unique aspects of our university and embraces our dual mission of serving our initial degree seekers along with career and lifelong learners and degree completers. At this point, we need to expand our CSU mission.

The future of work which is already here demands continuous upskilling and reskilling, and we see this demand in survey data, excuse me, survey data from our alumni base, and I know you have all read about this, the shakeups in the tech industry.

It is critical for us to consider the importance of a completed degree or additional credentials for career advancement. We see the student population changing while we continue to expand access to traditional age students.

We see increasing demand among adult learners needing to complete degrees, a population now of over 6.6 million Californians, or to gain new skills as they navigate an ever changing and increasingly complex job market. Degree completion programs and other post secondary credentials are more necessary than ever to address state workforce demands.

Our educational programs must adapt to meet learners where they are, and this means we need more online hybrid programs for a workforce that needs flexibility to maintain work-life balance and PACE can provide this flexibility. I'll give you a local perspective from my own campus.

CSULB holds true to its purpose to support the needs of all learners in our region, particularly as our enrollment grows via mid career and lifelong learners. The flexibility this bill provides will allow us to increase access to more work for all of our faculty as we open up more funding access to our faculty to design new and relevant and in demand programs and adapt them to an ever changing nature of work and the job market. Our brand depends on our faculty.

We want them to design programs that they may or may not be teaching to ensure a seamless and supportive beach experience for all learners. We plan to integrate currently duplicated student support services, including strategic enrollment management planning, integrated enrollment services which include outreach or marketing, recruitment and admission, academic and career advising, and the basic needs program critical to so many of our students success.

At the moment, this is impossible under the constraints. A key example of how this bill will help us expand our impact in our region starts with the global logistics and supply chain industry. This one out of eight jobs in Long Beach are connected to this. Partnerships between CSULB, Long Beach City College, Long Beach Unified School District, the Port of Long Beach, and other industry partners have created a talent pipeline that opens access to careers in logistics.

Early access to career exploration in high school brings these partners together to introduce youths to opportunities in the logistics industry who often matriculate to Long Beach City College and then transfer to CSULB or matriculate directly to the Beach to continue their education.

Many of these students then enter our local workforce, ensuring that we retain talent in our region and continue to serve the dynamic needs of an industry undergoing continuous change. The flexibility in funds will strengthen our ability to expand talent pipelines like this, for example, to hospitality management, healthcare, and education.

It will include more of our faculty in the program's growth and continuous improvement and ensure the positive outcomes increase the ability of CSULB to respond rapidly to the needs of our community and industry partners. I'd like to now turn this over to our CSU Associate Vice Chancellor, Mandara Savage, to discuss a system wide perspective.

Dr. Savage, welcome. Thank you very much.

Good morning again. I am Mandara Savage, the Assistant Vice Chancellor of Professional and Continuing Education. In my role, I provide system level leadership and overarching vision and strategy. The current code restricts the use of continuing education funds solely to activities directly linked with self support instruction programs.

However, academic units, despite benefiting from revenue shares, are constrained by expenditure limits and cannot allocate resources to support broader academic operations such as student services and academic support. This limitation has limited or hindered the development and launch of new programs.

There is increased competition to serve California's educational needs with the emergence of out of state entities who are aggressively marketing their programs in California. Expanding and developing degrees and certificate programs through PACE with a focus on programs that meet the students where they are is essential.

Recent amendments to the bill taken in the Assembly Appropriations Committee strengthens transparency by requiring annual reporting to the Legislature and the Department of Finance on all revenues and expenditures.

We urge your support of this bill so that PACE, a vital component of California's educational ecosystem, can continue providing lifelong learning experiences that promote economic prosperity and personal growth for all Californians.

Thank you very much. Do we have any other members of the public who would like to testify in support of the measure? So please come forward. Seeing none, do we have anybody in opposition to the measure today? Seeing none. Any comments or questions from my colleagues? Senator Glazer moves the bill.

I will say I'm glad to support the bill, and I think Senator Glazer has done some terrific work on student success, and I appreciate that that is part of the goal, the ability to leverage funds for student retention and reengaging former students. And I think we both agree that's important. So I am equally happy to support the bill. Any other questions? Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Just one question with regards to safety guards, that these fundings, this fund actually is limited to the goals that you have stated on?

Yes, this approach is supported by all 23 presidents of the CSU. I'm in constant communication with them. We all realize that we are building a new enterprise or an expanded enterprise to meet the needs of Californians. We will be reporting as we always do. I mean, we have a report right now that lists every expenditure.

We'll add a column. But the idea is not to, for example, fulfill some short term budget problem, but in fact, to build on the enterprise. So the guardrail is that it'll be public information. We can get feedback from our academic senate, we can get feedback from our state auditors, and certainly from our internal chancellor's office auditors. But there's no, we're trying to build something. We're not trying to take something away.

You know, with emergencies, financial emergencies, we always have to ask those questions, especially now that we're moving forward, we have to ensure that we have those security guardrails in place for accountability, just ensure that it is spent the way it's intended. As we've seen in many other entities, that's not the case. So we have to ensure that we have that in place.

I understand we have a workgroup right now that we jointly and joined to develop that framework with the presidents, with the chief financial officers, with the deans of the PACE programs in our campuses. So it's certainly a work in progress, as we anticipate.

We hope to anticipate your aye vote and application, but there will certainly be a framework document once we understand what the wishes of the Legislature are.

And, of course, talking about the cost of tuition and the cost of education. The other comment, I'm just going to plant the seed here, is, have we looked and reassessed whether or not maybe we're overcharging our students for the educational experiences they're trying to.

No, we're the cheapest. We're the cheapest high quality product on the block. Our costs are constrained. We are in a very competitive environment. Western governors, Arizona State University, other entities have entered California, so we can't charge more than they do. And, you know, my University charges $7,000 a year for regular tuition. So certainly we want those costs to be equivalent. You know, our job is to provide access, not to make money.

To be clear, I mean, this is about continuing education, which by statute has to be self funded. Right? So part of the goal here, actually is with an eye on the fiscal challenge, making sure that you have the flexibility to support these programs on a continuing basis, despite the fiscal challenge.

That's why I'm actually quite excited about this. I'm a huge believer in continuing education, but unfortunately, there's always that tension, especially in a challenging fiscal environment, to prioritize. And so I give the author credit. I appreciate your testimony, and I'm glad to support the bill.

And we've been working on this for five years, long before the current budget situation kind of came on our horizon.

Appreciate that. We have a motion from Senator Glazer. Assemblymember, would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Madam Consultant, please call the roll.

File item 15, AB 2395, Quirk-Silva. The motion is do pass to Senate Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call]

That measure has four votes. We'll leave it open for absent Members. Thank you to the witnesses. Thank you, Assemblymember Quirk-Silva. Thank you to those who traveled up with the witnesses. Good to see you. And Assemblymember Carrillo, welcome. Thank you for your patience. You are last but not least on our agenda. You may proceed when ready. Totally fine. Do you have witnesses? Okay. Welcome. Please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Senators. I'm proud to present AB 2865 which will ensure that students learn and understand the effects alcohol can have on their bodies long term. Current law requires that school instruction of alcohol, narcotics, and dangerous drugs, and how it can make an impact on our bodies.

But when it comes to alcohol consumption, current education falls just a bit short on excessive use, on short term and long term health risks related to alcohol and its connection to depression, mental health challenges, memory loss, blackouts and other chronic diseases, and ultimately substance abuse and addiction.

We can say that it's bad, but we also need to say why. This policy is important and personal to me. In November of 2023, I was involved in an accident while driving under the influence. I'm grateful to God every day that no one was hurt and that I am alive.

It was a moment that absolutely changed my life. I was taken into custody. I spent the night in jail, faced the consequences, and I owned my responsibilities.

Aside from a very public fall, I had to take a very hard look in the mirror about my behavior, my coping mechanisms, my mental health, and ways in which I managed my stress and my work. How I wasn't taking care of myself because of the demands of everyday things that we do.

And what I believed up until that point was what I needed to do to succeed. I started a program in therapy, and I realized that I knew very little about the effects of alcohol and what it was doing to my body.