Editors’ note: This story was originally published by EdSource. Sign up for their daily newsletter here.
Legislators returned to the State House this week for the four-week dash to decide which bills that haven’t already been passed, killed, or held back should be sent to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature. They’ll have until Aug. 29 to get an up or down vote in either the Senate or House Appropriations Committees and then until Friday, Sept. 12, to send legislation to Newsom’s desk.
Most bills that get this far stand a good chance of passage. But you may waste your dollars wagering on several contentious education bills still being negotiated. One would define antisemitism and set restrictions on its content in schools; two others, which may merge into one, would add oversight and tighten rules on preventing fraud in hybrid and online charter schools.
Assembly Bill 715
Authors: Assemblymembers Rick Chavez Zbur, D-Los Angeles; Dawn Addis, San Luis Obispo
What will it do: The bill aims to reduce antisemitism and discrimination in schools by placing restrictions on curricula and providing training and resources to help teachers identify, prevent, and track any instances of antisemitism in the classroom. It also establishes and ensures the appointment of an Office of the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator, which would reside under the State Board of Education.
Why is it important: California has been home to increased rates of antisemitism, including on school grounds.
What’s next: The bill has passed through the Assembly and will next be heard by the Senate’s Education Committee.
The upshot: Much of the contention is over the definition of antisemitism, which opponents argue would suppress classroom discussion of Israel’s occupation of Gaza. Authors Zbur and Addis are optimistic about support for the bill and are confident it will pass, even though its hearing has been stalled, and the measure has been met with resistance from the California Teachers Association and teachers of ethnic studies.
— Mallika Seshadri
Assembly Bill 84, Senate Bill 414
Authors: Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance; Senator Angelique Ashby, D-Sacramento
What will it do: AB 84 would revise requirements for authorizing charter schools, especially non-classroom-based charters. SB 414, a response to AB 84 by charter advocates, would expand the training requirements and oversight of district auditors, expand the scope of audits on charter schools and school districts, require chartering authorities report suspicion of financial crimes, and require districts to vet educational enrichment vendors and perform background checks.
Why is it important: The bills follow several studies, big scandals and four years of moratoriums on non-classroom charters.
What’s next: Both bills are being revised simultaneously with the goal of merging the legislation into one bill.
Upshot: There are sticking points that are making it difficult for supporters of the bills to come to a consensus.
— Diana Lambert
Assembly Bill 49
Authors: Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance; Liz Ortega, D-Hayward; Celeste Rodriguez, D-Arleta; Sen. Lena Gonzalez, D-Long Beach
What will it do: The bill would prohibit schools from allowing immigration enforcement officers to enter a school campus or question a student unless they have a judicial warrant or court order. It would also prohibit schools from sharing information about a student, family or employee with immigration officials, unless the officials present a judicial warrant or court order.
Why is it important: All children living in the U.S. have a right to attend public schools, regardless of immigration status, as determined by the Supreme Court. The Trump administration ended a longstanding policy not to conduct immigration enforcement at schools or churches, raising concerns that some families will avoid school.
What’s next: The bill passed the Assembly and is currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Upshot: The bill has had widespread support in both houses. It is likely to pass the Appropriations Committee. It is estimated that it could cost hundreds of thousands to a few million dollars statewide for training and materials for districts.
— Zaidee Stavely
Senate Bill 98
Author: Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, D-Pasadena
What it will do: The bill would require school districts, California State University, each California Community College District and each Cal Grant qualifying institution of higher education, as well as request the University of California, to issue a notification to all students, faculty and other campus community members when the presence of federal immigration enforcement is confirmed on campus. These notifications must include the date, time and location of enforcement on campus, as well as a link to additional resources for students and campus community members.
Why is it important: While most schools provide guidelines to students, faculty and staff about how to engage with federal immigration enforcement officers if encountered on campus, there is no legal requirement to notify the community. With ongoing raids and continued fears of detention and deportation in immigrant communities, the bill aims to bolster a sense of security and maintain school campuses as “safe spaces” for students.
What’s next: The bill passed the Senate in June. The Education and Higher Education Committees passed it in July, and it is currently under review by the Assembly Appropriations Committee with a hearing scheduled for Aug. 20.
Upshot: The bill is likely to pass the Assembly Appropriations Committee, as it is not expected to have major cost burdens. It is also likely to take immediate effect after Newsom signs it into law.
— Vani Sanganeria
Senate Bill 323
Author: Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, D-Pasadena
What it will do: The bill would revise the California Dream Act application, clarifying that the form is open to any student who is eligible for state aid, regardless of their eligibility for federal financial aid.
Why is it important: The bill aims to address concerns that U.S. citizens from mixed-status families — such as students with undocumented parents or spouses — may not apply for federal student aid due to technical barriers and worries about data privacy. Heightened immigration enforcement has raised fears that the data students submit to access federal aid could be used to target undocumented family members. Though the California Dream Act application is open to mixed-status families, the California Student Aid Commission says the lack of a defined and uniform state policy has created uncertainty for students trying to understand their financial aid options.
What’s next: The bill awaits an Aug. 20 appropriations hearing.
Upshot: The bill is sponsored by the California Student Aid Commission, which administers financial aid programs for students attending school in California. It’s backed by dozens of other groups and has no registered opposition.
— Amy DiPierro
Assembly Bill 477
Authors: Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay
What does it do: The bill would increase California teacher and classified school employee salaries by 50% over the next decade. It would also increase statewide school funding incrementally through the 2036-37 school year, allowing school districts to increase staff pay.
Why is it important: Teachers earn 23.5% less than other college graduates with comparable degrees, which keeps many graduates from entering the teaching profession, according to a legislative analysis of the bill.
What’s next: The bill passed the Assembly Education Committee unanimously on April 10 but was referred to the suspense file and could be heard next year.
Upshot: Getting the bill through the Appropriations Committee could be difficult, as it requires the state to fully fund the raises, which are expected to cost tens of billions of dollars between now and the 2036-37 fiscal year.
— Diana Lambert