An act to amend Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to amend Sections 37220.7, 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code, and to amend Sections 6700, 19853, and 19853.1 of the Government Code, relating to state holidays.
AB 2017 would add Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha to California’s list of state holidays and then conform multiple parts of state law to recognize those observances. The bill amends the Code of Civil Procedure, Government Code, and Education Code to treat the two Eid holidays as state holidays for many purposes, while expressly excluding them from judicial holidays. It also updates school and community college holiday provisions so local governing boards may close on those days through collective bargaining or memorandum of understanding processes.
The bill also expands school attendance rules by making absences for observing Eid al-Fitr or Eid al-Adha specifically excused absences. For state employees and certain school and community college employees, it authorizes holiday credit, paid holiday treatment, or use of leave on the Eid dates, and in some cases allows employees to use the holiday credit on dates designated by their cultural or religious group. The measure includes a state-mandated local program finding for any added duties on school officials and provides for reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates determines costs are mandated.
In practical terms, AB 2017 would affect state holiday calendars, public school attendance policies, community college scheduling, and employee leave/holiday pay rules across state government and education systems. It would amend Government Code Section 6700 to list Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha among California holidays, while leaving court operations unchanged by excluding them from judicial holidays. It would also create optional closure authority for schools and community colleges and align classified and state employee holiday benefits with the new observances.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available vote history appears strongly favorable. The bill passed its recorded committee votes unanimously or nearly unanimously, including a 19-0 vote and a 7-0 vote, and later advanced from committee with a 5-1 vote before being re-referred to Appropriations. That pattern suggests broad support for recognizing the holidays, especially as an inclusion and accommodation measure for Muslim Californians and related religious observances.
The main point of contention appears to be fiscal and administrative rather than whether the holidays should be recognized. The bill was sent to Appropriations and flagged as a fiscal committee measure, indicating concern about potential costs from school closures, employee leave, and mandated local program obligations. Another likely issue is implementation complexity, since the bill layers new holiday rules onto multiple existing statutes and collective bargaining frameworks, including optional alternative dates tied to cultural or religious group observance.
AB 2017 would amend California’s holiday statutes to add Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha to the state holiday list in Government Code Section 6700, while expressly excluding those days from judicial holidays under the Code of Civil Procedure. It would also revise Education Code provisions governing public schools, community colleges, classified school employees, and community college employees to allow closures, excused absences, and paid holiday or leave treatment for the Eid observances, subject in many cases to collective bargaining or memorandum of understanding agreements. The bill would create a state-mandated local program to the extent school officials incur new duties, with potential reimbursement if mandated costs are found.
The bill appears to have received generally positive and bipartisan-leaning support in committee, as reflected by unanimous or near-unanimous votes and advancement to Appropriations. The available record suggests the measure was viewed favorably as a holiday-recognition and religious-accommodation bill. No committee transcript is provided, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote margins indicate limited opposition at the committee stage.
The likely areas of contention are fiscal impact, administrative implementation, and labor-relations effects rather than the underlying policy of recognizing Eid. Because the bill can require school closures, excused absences, employee holiday credit, and possible reimbursement for mandated local costs, it was referred to Appropriations and labeled a fiscal committee bill. The bill also relies on MOUs and bargaining-unit-specific rules, which may raise concerns among school districts, community colleges, and state personnel administrators about scheduling, staffing, and contract coordination.