Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to protect our providers.
• This bill does not protect patients. It protects providers from patients. Vote no.
• the parents fighting custody battles across state lines trying to protect their kids from what happened
• AB 2076 closes that gap and gives the Parents, Accountability, and Child Protection Act the enforcement
• We rely on it to enforce critical constitutional protections like due process and equal protection.

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• Not only do the hospitals not need to threaten and then report these parents to Child Protection, but
• </c> talking about highly engaged parents talking about highly engaged parents they<00:03:15.959><c>
• <c> but</c> these parents to Child Protection but these parents to Child Protection but clearly<00:03
• We hear from parents with active Child Protection investigation and involvement simply because they advocated
• transport protected transport protected transport protected transport was<01:08:08.520><c> added</c>

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• our to protect our to protect our children.
• And this bill gives parents the opportunity to help protect their opportunity to help protect their opportunity
• They protect our bills do. They protect our bills do. They protect our children.
• Parents are entrusted with their Parents are entrusted with their children to raise them, to protect
• regarding age verification, parental regarding age verification, parental notification, and data protection

Transcript Highlights:

• birth parents.
• and their families, not to protect birth parents.
• and their families, not to protect birth parents.
• California birth parents do not need protection from our children.
• It's we have to protect people.

Summary: The committee heard and acted on several bills. SB 479 by Senator Arreguín would allow Berkeley, Long Beach, and Pasadena, as local health jurisdictions, to use multidisciplinary homeless response teams and share specified information across departments; supporters said it would improve coordination and services for unsheltered residents, and the bill passed 9-0 to Appropriations. SB 46 by Senator Umberg would direct the Secretary of State to keep constitutionally ineligible presidential candidates off the California ballot, including anyone who has already served two terms; supporters argued it was a constitutional enforcement measure, while Senator Niello questioned whether it was needed, and it passed 6-1 to Appropriations. SB 99 by Senator Blakespear would improve coordination between military and civilian systems by requiring courts and law enforcement to account for military protective orders and notify military authorities of possible violations; the Department of Defense supported it, while the ACLU raised due process concerns, and it passed 6-0 to Appropriations. SB 719 by Senator Cabaldon would extend the sunset on state reporting about high-risk automated decision systems from 2029 to 2032, and it passed 6-0 to Appropriations. SB 300 by Senator Padilla would strengthen California’s new AI chatbot law by requiring operators to prevent minors from being exposed to sexually explicit material; supporters said the existing law was insufficient, while industry groups warned against expanding a brand-new regime before it had been tested, and it passed 9-0 to Appropriations. SB 381 by Senator Wahab would allow adult adoptees, and descendants of adoptees, to obtain original birth certificates and create a nonbinding contact preference form for birth parents; supporters described health, identity, and dignity concerns, while some members raised privacy concerns, and it passed 13-0 to the Senate Health Committee. SB 33 by Senator Cortese would eliminate the sunset on the public works contractor claim-resolution process, with supporters saying it reduces litigation and speeds payment, and it passed 10-0 to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• parenting plan to include in their filing.
• parents with tools to communicate effectively on parenting issues while removing children from potential
• Others in here—the parents, the parents who they're basically being taken away from—they get to be there
• To protect a child's privacy.
• The same with the parents, the same with the fictive kin, which I'm not... ...the same with the parents

Committee: House Judiciary, Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> action to protect children. action to protect children.
• </c> community to to protect the voiceless. community to to protect the voiceless.
• </c> cannot protect our children from. cannot protect our children from.
• Parents want transparency. sense bill." Parents want transparency.
• </c> to build the systems that protect them. to build the systems that protect them.

Committee: House Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• protective custody.
• and parents' attorneys, for parents who are represented.
• And so, yes, it protects the parents in a certain way, but it also requires the state to have to say,
• And so, yes, it protects the parents in a certain way, but it also requires the state to have to say,
• capable of caring for that child, or no parent capable of protecting the child.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Summary: The Senate Human Services Committee held a work session focused on child welfare dependency, reviewing implementation of 2021’s Keeping Families Together Act (1227) and 2023’s Child and Family Fentanyl Response law (6109), along with related data, lived-experience testimony, and emerging issues. DCYF first outlined the dependency process, explaining the intake, shelter care, fact-finding, disposition, review, and permanency stages, and clarified that children may be in-home or out-of-home at different points. The department emphasized that 1227 raised the removal threshold to imminent physical harm and strengthened kin placement, with nearly 60% of children now placed with kin or suitable relatives. DCYF also said 6109 directed courts to give great weight to fentanyl’s lethality and added regional legal liaisons, though some contracted supports were not implemented due to budget constraints. Data presented by DCYF showed entries into care fell after 1227 but rose again after 6109, returning close to pre-1227 levels; the department linked rising critical incidents to the fentanyl epidemic, parental stress, and system complexity, and described responses such as statewide Safe Child Council staffing and hotspot monitoring. Committee members asked for more detail on age breakdowns and geographic patterns of incidents. Advocates and lived-experience speakers from Legal Counsel for Youth and Children and a medical-legal partnership described 1227 as a necessary reform to reduce unnecessary removals and racial disproportionality, while saying they have not seen courts fail to remove children when safety concerns are clearly presented. They explained that 6109 was intended to help courts account for fentanyl’s lethality at shelter care hearings. A parent ally testified that family-centered, peer-supported services, treatment access, housing, transportation, CPR and safe-sleep education, and third-party safety plan participants can help families stay together and reduce harm. She said suitable-other placements under 1227 were a major improvement, but more inpatient beds, family treatment options, and community supports are still needed. Speakers also said application of DCYF policy varies by county, creating “justice by geography.” The committee then heard an update on Senate Bill 6068 from the Administrative Office of the Courts and K Implementation and Evaluation. The report identified 15 dimensions of relational permanency and child well-being, using input from more than 80 professional and lived experts, and recommended a phased data strategy: use existing data where possible, improve partially available measures, and develop new collection where needed. AOC said a prior data-sharing agreement with DCYF expired in June 2025, leaving a gap in statewide dependency reporting, and urged a new agreement, a standing cross-agency work group, and better integration with DCYF’s new child welfare information system. The committee also received a brief update on the Supreme Court Commission on Children in Foster Care, which is redesigning its mission and work groups to better center lived experience and cross-system collaboration. In emerging issues, Jim Theophilus described bridge housing for young adults exiting inpatient behavioral health treatment, noting that many youth leave treatment to homelessness or shelters and that two bridge housing programs have now opened, one on each side of the state. He said the model is based on voluntary, community-based support and a “return to community” plan shaped by youth input. The committee then moved to juvenile rehabilitation capacity issues, with DCYF’s new assistant secretary for Juvenile Rehabilitation scheduled to provide an update, following a recent visit by committee members to Green Hill School.

Transcript Highlights:

• If the parents fail to remove photographs of the child or fail to do the parents' part of the trust,
• Natural life and that life be protected.
• Is it typically one parent versus another, or a grandparent versus a parent, or is it that parent versus
• One, if the original parent is capable of them being kept from their original parent, or if they're not
• caused by their parents.

Committee: House Children and Families

Summary: The Committee on Children and Families met with a quorum and first took up several bills in executive session. House Bill 1818, dealing with protections for children involved in content creation and related financial arrangements, was amended and converted into a House Committee substitute. Members discussed that the bill is aimed at children creating content for financial gain and clarifies that platforms must comply with federal law without being drawn into disputes between children and parents. The substitute was then voted do pass by a 17-0 roll call. House Bill 1948 was also amended and substituted; the amendment changed references from the Family Support Division to the Department of Social Services, and members briefly joked about the wording of “fatherhood” versus “fathership.” The committee then voted the substitute do pass 17-0. The committee next debated House Bill 2688, which drew sharp disagreement. Opponents argued the bill’s due process language for unborn children was too vague, could create legal uncertainty, and might have consequences for IVF, miscarriage investigations, and criminal liability for women and medical providers. Supporters said the bill was about protecting pre-born life and that due process should apply. The bill was voted do pass by a 12-5 roll call. The committee then moved into public hearings. In public hearing, House Bill 1772 was presented as an adoption-fee bill intended to raise state-paid attorney fees for adoptions, increase fees for contested adoptions, and separate guardian fees so more children could be adopted from foster care. The sponsor said the goal was to reduce costs and speed adoptions; Foster Adopt Connect testified in support, while members raised questions about contested adoptions, subsidy timing, and whether the bill would affect access to attorneys. House Bill 1696 proposed clarifying who has the right of sepulcher for minors with court-appointed guardians, giving the guardian priority unless the guardian is under criminal investigation for the child’s death, and adding religious-belief protections regarding cremation. Testimony from family members described painful experiences where legal authority reverted to abusive parents after a child’s death, and committee members generally supported clarifying the law. Finally, House Bill 2505 was heard, a grandparent custody bill giving grandparents priority when both parents are found unfit, unsuitable, or unable to serve as custodians and the child’s welfare requires placement. Supporters, including Foster Adopt Connect and a grandmother who testified emotionally, said grandparents often provide the most stable care and should be recognized in statute. An opponent argued the current law already allows courts to place children with grandparents when appropriate and warned that statutory priority could override the child’s best interests in some cases. The committee adjourned after concluding public testimony on HB 2505.

Transcript Highlights:

• more than ever upon parental authority and parental rights.
• So I think this is a great step back to, once again, protecting our children is contingent on parental
• And if your parents are divorced, I'm going to need the other parent.
• Parent is not defined.
• As to the parent versus parents, a single parent is in here intentionally so the school doesn't have

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> this statute that those protections this statute that those protections follow<00:10:40.640><c>
• If age instead protect our youth.
• Either a parent or legal guardian can give verifiable parental consent.
• just be better parents and limit parents just be better parents and limit the<00:57:36.000><c> amount
• Our members have invested heavily in parental controls, privacy protections, and tools that allow families

Bills: HF3479 , HF4205 , HF3782 , HF4081 , HF4138

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Keywords: foreclosure, mortgage, redemption period, homestead, Minnesota Statutes, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate recognition, vehicle surveillance, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, data privacy, government data practices, law enforcement data, surveillance technology, location data, vehicle tracking, warrant requirement, probable cause, exigent circumstances

Transcript Highlights:

• Parental controls aren't working.
• This bill does not protect children. It actually sidelines parents.
• That's not child protection. That's government replacing parents.
• They keep parents part of the solution.
• still protects minors, and it avoids the issue of age determination.

Bills: HB1170 , HB1570 , HB1834

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: artificial intelligence, AI, generative AI, AI-generated content, deepfake, synthetic media, content provenance, provenance data, metadata, watermarking, disclosure, transparency, consumer protection, unfair or deceptive acts, unfair competition, Washington RCW, Title 19 RCW, platform regulation, AI detection tool, media authenticity

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, HIPAA protected, HIPAA compliant.
• Get a library card without parental permission.
• As a parent, I understand that.
• This bill circumvents all protective factors for children, including their own parents.
• The very communities it claims to protect.

Bills: HB45 , HB45 , HB755 , HB 1232 , HB1555 , HB2460 , HB2702 , HB2973 , HB3120 , HB3225 , HB3314 , HB3356 , HB3371 , HB3634 , HB3638 , HB4247 , HB4283 , HB4290 , HB4302 , HB4503 , HB4511 , HB4565 , HB4581 , HB4627 , HB4632 , HB4660 , HB4668 , HB4960 , HB5042

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: flooding, disaster response, emergency preparedness, state guidance, public safety, housing, affordable housing, rent control, landlord-tenant laws, housing rights, lobbying, public entities, expenditures, government code, transparency, Texas Ethics Commission, government regulation, lobbying restrictions, government accountability, taxpayer money

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:22:39.960><c> parental</c><01:22:40.320><c> choice</c><01:22:41.000><c> and</c> input protects
• parental choice and input protects parental choice and carefully<01:22:41.639><c> allows</c><01:22:42.000
• Uh, parents are encouraged to vaccinate their newborns from hepatitis B to protect nurses.
• </c><02:06:22.280><c> full</c> parent parents would have a full parent parents would have a full spectrum
• Parents are used to forms.

Committee: House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• , changing it to one parent represented by a statewide organization that supports a parent organization
• And Parent Professional Advocacy League.
• The presence of a parent or some interested adult does not protect against these problems, and this situation
• When we strengthen policies that protect people's access to shelter and stable housing, we protect the
• It feels assaultive and abusive to the parent.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities heard testimony on a wide range of bills affecting foster youth, child welfare oversight, homelessness services, juvenile justice, social work licensure, and human services workforce supports. Committee co-chairs Senator Robyn Kennedy and Representative Jay Livingstone opened the hybrid hearing by outlining testimony procedures and accessibility measures. Several members and legislators participated throughout the day, and many witnesses were invited to submit additional written testimony after speaking. A major portion of the hearing focused on House 227/Senate 105, which would protect federal benefits owed to children in foster care. Supporters, including advocates from Hopewell, the Disability Law Center, CPCS, the Children’s Law Center, More Than Words, Friends of Children, and youth witness Onyx Rosario, said DCF had already ended the practice of taking most Social Security and SSI benefits and now conserves them in accounts for youth, but argued the policy should be codified to prevent future reversals. Witnesses described how conserved benefits help with basic needs, housing, education, transportation, and transition to adulthood, and several noted the bill also adds financial literacy and transparency requirements. Senator Joan Comerford and others said the change would protect vulnerable youth, especially children of color, LGBTQ youth, and youth with disabilities. The committee also heard testimony on House 225, which would expand the grandparents-raising-grandchildren commission by adding appointments and helping with quorum and representation. The committee also took testimony on Senate 136, which would improve emergency housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness by easing documentation requirements, allowing use of existing state data to verify eligibility, requiring notice before benefit reductions, and creating an ombudsperson. Senator Adam Gomez and other supporters said the bill would reduce barriers for families in crisis. On House 262/Senate 148, an omnibus child welfare bill, witnesses supported provisions on data reporting, education coordination, and Office of the Child Advocate reforms, while CPCS raised concerns about expanded access to sensitive records and the OCA’s role in certain proceedings. The Office of the Child Advocate supported codifying current practices and also backed child fatality review changes in House 234/Senate 133. The committee additionally heard support for Senate 108, which would require attorneys and audio/video recording during juvenile custodial interrogations, and for House 247/Senate 116, which would update the Juvenile Justice Policy and Data Board to add supported lived-experience seats. Finally, the committee heard competing testimony on Senate 135, a bill to ensure parity in social work licensure. SEIU Local 509 and supporters argued the current exam requirement disproportionately harms Black, Latino, multilingual, and multicultural applicants and worsens workforce shortages, while the Association of Social Work Boards opposed the bill, saying the exam is a necessary public-protection measure and that removing it would conflict with interstate compact efforts. The hearing also included testimony in support of a loan repayment program for human service workers, with providers and workers describing low wages, high student debt, and the need to retain staff in essential services. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• This isn't just a parenting issue.
• We all can feel that as parents.
• And, you know, protecting taxpayers and protecting industry. I'm a small...
• And, you know, protecting taxpayers and protecting industry. I'm a small.
• tools and parental consent.

Committee: House Privacy and Consumer Protection

Summary: The committee first took up AB 56, a bill by Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan to require social media platforms to display a warning about potential mental health harms from sustained use, especially for minors. The author and supporters, including a bereaved parent and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and isolation, and that a warning label would help families make informed choices. Opponents from TechNet, CCIA, and privacy groups said the bill would be ineffective, could be ignored, and raised First Amendment and implementation concerns. Members discussed emergency access during disasters, multilingual warnings, and whether the warning should be more action-oriented. The committee accepted amendments, then voted 9-0 to pass AB 56 to the Judiciary Committee, with several members noting support and some requesting to be added as coauthors. The committee then heard AB 358, which would let law enforcement inspect certain tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home or vehicle without first obtaining a warrant, if the victim consents. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is meant to help stalking and domestic violence survivors quickly examine devices like AirTags or hidden cameras before evidence is lost, and they emphasized the bill was narrowed to devices used solely for surveillance. Opponents from the EFF and ACLU argued the bill would weaken CalECPA and create a warrantless-search loophole, while some members raised Fourth Amendment, transparency, and ICE-sharing concerns. Others supported the bill as a narrow, common-sense tool for victim safety. The committee passed AB 358 on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard AB 1137, which would strengthen California’s reporting system for child sexual abuse material on social media platforms. The author said the bill expands who can report CSAM, requires clearer reporting mechanisms, adds human review in some cases, and creates public audit and enforcement provisions to improve compliance with the existing framework enacted last year. Supporters, including survivors and advocacy organizations, said the bill would reduce the burden on victims and help remove abusive images more effectively. TechNet, CalChamber, and CCIA opposed unless amended, saying the human-review, audit, and public-reporting requirements could be costly, burdensome, and potentially harmful to safety and security. Members generally supported the goal but raised concerns about the frequency and public release of audits and the role of human review; the bill was left open for further action after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill does not protect patients. It protects providers from patients. Vote no.
• the parents fighting custody battles across state lines trying to protect their kids from what happened
• free speech, parental rights, and the free... ...public interest legal organization that fights to protect
• AB 2076 closes that gap and gives the Parents, Accountability, and Child Protection Act the enforcement
• We rely on it to enforce critical constitutional protections like due process and equal protection.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with testimony largely focused on transparency, public health, labor enforcement, health privacy, high-speed rail oversight, and antitrust policy. AB 1544, by Assemblymember Crowell, would strengthen transparency and access to courthouses; the author said it was aimed at protecting press and public access, and the bill was pulled pending quorum. AB 1604, by Assemblymember Stephanie, would ban BPA and other bisphenols in thermal receipt paper by 2027-2028; supporters from Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, Californians Against Waste, and a broad coalition argued receipts are a major source of toxic exposure and recycling contamination, while the author said she would continue working with opposition. AB 1859, by Assemblymember Jackson, would let Joint Labor Management Committees visit public works sites to help identify wage and safety violations; labor groups supported it as a low-cost enforcement tool amid a large wage-theft backlog, while contractors and local government groups opposed it as creating private enforcement, liability, and safety concerns. The committee later took up AB 1930, by Assemblymember Burr and sponsored by Attorney General Bonta and Equality California, which would require notice to the Attorney General before certain entities respond to subpoenas or inquiries involving legally protected reproductive or gender-affirming care; supporters framed it as a patient privacy and anti-intimidation measure, while opponents said it would shield providers from scrutiny and interfere with lawful investigations. The bill was approved on a 6-2 vote and placed on call. The consent calendar, including several unrelated bills, was also approved. The committee also heard AB 1584, by Assemblymember Jackson, which would create an Office of Civil Rights within the California Air Resources Board to provide training, language access, and compliance oversight. Supporters said CARB needs a stronger legal framework and dedicated office to enforce civil rights commitments, while an opponent argued CARB already has a civil rights office and should expand existing structures instead of creating a new one. The bill was moved to Appropriations after a roll call vote. AB 1608, by Assemblymember Wilson, would expand the powers and staffing tools of the High-Speed Rail Office of the Inspector General, including public reporting requirements and authority over classifications and purchasing; supporters said stronger independent oversight is needed for the costly project, while opponents criticized the project itself and raised concerns about confidentiality and who should receive reports. The bill was also passed to Appropriations after extended discussion. Finally, AB 1776, by Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry, would revise California antitrust law to address single-firm conduct under the Cartwright Act. Supporters, including small business and labor advocates, argued dominant firms can harm competition and that the bill would protect small businesses and workers; opponents from business, biotech, retail, housing, and other sectors warned it would create legal uncertainty, expand litigation, and chill investment. The transcript ended during that bill’s testimony and debate, before a final vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• This isn't just a parenting issue.
• This isn't just a parenting issue.
• We all can feel that as parents.
• And, you know, protecting taxpayers and protecting industry. I'm a small.
• tools and parental consent.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it leaves parents feeling helpless.
• Protecting children is...
• through impact assessments, default protections, and parental controls.
• through impact assessments, default protections, and parental controls.
• I'm not a parent, and I've been sitting with the two Assembly members and parent and grandparents and

Committee: Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• But when students feel respected and protected, they thrive.
• The state should be focused on protecting all students.
• Some of us are parents here too.
• And as a parent myself, I am the parent of the kindergartner who received, to my knowledge, an authorization
• And as a parent myself, I am the parent of the kindergartner who received, to my knowledge, an authorization

Summary: The committee heard SB 998, which would define and expand the roles of discrimination prevention coordinators in the Office of Civil Rights, including a new disability-focused coordinator and a deputy coordinator on anti-AAPI discrimination. The authors and supporters, including representatives from LGBTQ, Black, Latino, and AAPI caucuses, argued the bill would help schools proactively address discrimination, improve student safety and belonging, and support learning. Opposition from the California Faculty Association and SEIU California focused on the appointment structure and preference for regular civil service hiring, while some members questioned whether the bill duplicated existing anti-discrimination law and whether it would add government bloat. The committee ultimately voted SB 998 out on a due pass basis to the Senate Judiciary Committee and placed it on call. SB 1082 was then presented as a measure to streamline inter-district transfer appeals by requiring more timely district action, allowing concurrent review, and clarifying that a district’s failure to respond is not treated as a denial. The sponsor, the Association of California County Boards of Education, and supporters from Families in Action for Quality Education said the bill would reduce delays, improve fairness, and help families make timely educational decisions without changing districts’ authority to approve or deny transfers. The California School Boards Association had previously been opposed unless amended and said it would re-evaluate after the committee changes. The committee supported the measure, and SB 1082 was voted out as amended to the Senate Appropriations Committee and placed on call. The committee also took up SB 960, which would revise the rules for community college baccalaureate degrees by tying authorization to local access gaps and impacted CSU programs rather than a blanket statewide prohibition. Supporters, including the Campaign for College Opportunity and several community college and education groups, argued the bill would expand access for place-bound and adult learners and better align programs with workforce needs. CSU representatives and the California Faculty Association opposed the bill, warning it could duplicate CSU offerings, worsen enrollment and funding pressures, and affect faculty jobs. Members debated the Master Plan for Higher Education, impaction, and whether the state should instead fully fund CSU capacity; the committee nevertheless recommended SB 960 for passage as amended to Appropriations and placed it on call. Finally, SB 965 was heard, a bill to make it easier for 16- and 17-year-olds to obtain public library cards without a parent or guardian physically present. The author and supporters said the bill would remove an unnecessary barrier to educational resources while preserving local library control over checkout policies and liability rules. The California Library Association expressed support for the goal but said details matter and urged language that preserves local discretion while encouraging reduced in-person requirements where feasible. The transcript ended during that testimony, before any committee vote on SB 965.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think, with that, you're protecting the school district, as well as making sure the parent—not just
• Just coming from a perspective of being an advocate with parents and being a parent advocate, one of
• And New Voices does protect that.
• protects journalism.
• protects journalism.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2710, which would revise school accountability report cards. The sponsor and members described a committee substitute that clarified the report card’s purpose, added an appeal process and changed deadlines, set the top decile of schools as the highest rating, addressed the 95% participation issue with an asterisk-style disclosure, shifted the Show Me Success funding language toward growth-based criteria, clarified growth-to-proficiency language, added agricultural industry reporting, and removed an anonymous survey section and a changing-target provision. After discussion about how letter-grade cutoffs would be set and whether the bill captured enough information about school quality, the committee adopted an amendment changing “growth to proficiency” to “growth relative to grade level” and exempting special school districts or state-operated schools serving only students with disabilities. The substitute was adopted and the committee voted the bill do pass by 16 ayes and 6 noes. The committee then considered House Bill 2872, a literacy bill. The sponsor explained that the substitute kept the four approved screeners, retained the commission, and softened the three-cueing language so science of reading remains the primary approach while allowing teachers some flexibility. Members discussed retention and possible future exceptions, including parental consent and reading plans, but those changes were not yet drafted. The substitute was adopted and the bill passed the committee 20-0, with two present. Next, the committee heard House Bill 2120 and House Bill 1698 together under a combined substitute addressing bullying and related reporting requirements. The substitute removed language on second-degree harassment, added a title reference to Sawyer’s Law, modified reporting procedures to require notice by the end of the school day or the next school day if the incident occurs on a weekend, and clarified investigation and liability protections for teachers. The substitute was adopted and the combined bill passed unanimously. The committee then moved out of executive session and heard House Bill 2335, which would let districts and administrators reduce repetitive annual teacher trainings by using a rotation after a teacher’s first three years. The sponsor and several witnesses from school administrator and teacher groups supported the bill as a time-saving retention measure, while a student witness raised concerns about ensuring continued training on mental health emergencies. Testimony then began on House Bill 2918, the Cronkite New Voices Act, which would expand student journalism rights at public schools and public colleges. The sponsor, a Hazelwood plaintiff, student journalists, an advisor, a law professor, and free-speech advocates testified in support, arguing the bill would protect student speech while preserving limits for libel, obscenity, privacy, and disruption; no opposing testimony was presented before the transcript ended.