BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 969 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Jimmy Gomez, Chair AB 969 (Williams) - As Amended April 23, 2015 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Policy |Higher Education |Vote:|12 - 0 | |Committee: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable: No SUMMARY: This bill expands the circumstances under which a community college district (CCD) may suspend or expel a student for specified offenses or deny admission to a student for such AB 969 Page 2 offenses. Specifically, this bill: 1)Stipulates that a community college student may be removed, suspended or expelled if conduct for which the student is being disciplined is conduct whether on or off campus, that threatens the safety of students and the public. 2)Expands the circumstances under which the governing board of a CCD, following a hearing, may deny enrollment or permit conditional enrollment, to an applicant expelled from another CCD for specified offenses, to include an applicant currently suspended from the other district, and expands the offenses for which this procedure applies to include violation of district policies regarding the offenses of sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence or stalking. 3)Authorizes a CCD to require a student previously expelled or suspended from another CCD for the offenses of sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence or stalking to inform the district of such, and provides that failure to do so may be considered by the district in determining whether to grant admission. FISCAL EFFECT: Minor nonreimbursable costs for legal services to districts who, in electing to consider whether to deny enrollment or permit conditional enrollment to an individual, conduct the required hearings and establish the required appeals process and conduct appeals upon request. Assuming up to $5,000 per hearing, annual AB 969 Page 3 costs statewide would probably not exceed $50,000 to $100,000. COMMENTS: 1)Purpose. On November 12, 2014, the author organized a roundtable of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education at UC Santa Barbara (UCSB) to review the university's handling of sexual assault complaints. Roundtable attendees included representatives of UCSB and Santa Barbara Community College (SBCC). According to testimony provided by SBCC representatives, current law (Education Code Section 76034) has been interpreted to prohibit a CCD from taking action to suspend or expel a student found to have violated a campus misconduct policy, even in cases of rape, unless the misconduct occurred on the college campus. According to the author, about 70% of rape and sexual assault victimizations occur either at the victim's home or the home of another known person, meaning that most sexual assault cases do not occur on campus or during campus related events. This bill clarifies a district's ability to impose discipline for misconduct occurring off-campus that the district determines represents a threat to the campus community and expands the circumstances under which a student may be denied admission to a CCD based on disciplinary action taken against that student by another CCD. 2)Prior Legislation. AB 2171 (Fong), Chapter 702, Statutes of 2012, established the conditions for denying enrollment, following a hearing process, which are being expanded by this bill. Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081 AB 969 Page 4