BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 620 (Block)
Hearing Date: 08/25/2011 Amended: 08/15/2011
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Education 7-2,
Judiciary 3-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 620 establishes the Sexual Orientation and
Gender Identity Equity in Higher Education Act which:
Adds the attributes of sexual orientation, gender identity, and
gender expression to existing nondiscrimination laws
affecting postsecondary educational institutions, programs,
and requirements.
Requires the California State University (CSU) and requests the
University of California (UC) and California Community
Colleges (CCC) boards to take specified actions related to
data collection, campus services and policies.
Encourages the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) to undertake
specified related activities.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
CSU implementation Potentially significant
ongoing costs General
UC implementation* Likely minor, potentially
significant costs General
CCC implementation* Potentially significant
ongoing costs General
LAO assessments ---- Significant ongoing
costs ---- General
*UC and CCC are both requested, not required, to implement most
of the provisions.
_________________________________________________________________
AB 620 (Block)
Page 1
____
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.
This bill makes various substantive and clarifying changes to
the public postsecondary institutions' policies and practices
with regard to data collection of, and institutional interaction
with, specified attributes of students and faculty. The costs of
implementing this bill will depend upon how its various
provisions are implemented at the campus and system-wide levels,
as well as whether or not all institutions participate; most
provisions require only CSU participation, and request UC and
CCC compliance.
This bill would encourage the LAO to conduct an assessment of
the campuses of each of the segments of public postsecondary
education to develop recommendations to improve the quality of
life on those campuses for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender faculty, staff, and students, and to publish a
summary of those recommendations on its website. Particular
provisions of this bill rely on interactions and information
sharing between the campuses and the LAO. In order to do so, the
LAO would have to coordinate data gathering, the required
assessment, and related reporting. This would likely result in
significant additional workload for the LAO. While this bill
does not require these activities, encouraging them creates cost
pressure to complete them.
This bill adds the attributes of sexual orientation, gender
identity, and gender expression to existing nondiscrimination
laws affecting postsecondary educational institutions, programs,
and requirements, including the existing definition of "hate
violence" on campuses, prohibitions against discrimination in
awarding CalGrants, in state administration of federal student
loan programs, and in hiring CCC faculty. These provisions are
not expected to directly result in significant additional costs.
This bill requires the CSU and requests the UC and CCCs in
collecting demographic data, to allow students, faculty, and
staff to identify their sexual orientation, gender identity and
gender expression on data collection forms and requests that
this information be shared with the LAO. This bill does not
require forms to be updated immediately, but it does require
AB 620 (Block)
Page 2
changes to facilitate this data collection whenever existing
demographic data forms are updated or new forms are adopted. It
is unclear what constitutes an "update" for the purposes of
requiring CSU to add the new demographic data points at that
time.
Under this bill, CSU would be required (and the UC and CCCs
requested) to designate an employee at each campus as a point of
contact for the needs of LGBT students, staff, and faculty. To
the extent that campuses already have designated individuals, or
could designate existing individuals, this requirement would be
minor. It is unclear what, if any, additional workload might
come with this designation.
The CSU would further be required to adopt and publish policies
on harassment, intimidation, and bullying to govern student
behavior within their respective segments, as specified (and the
UC and CCC would be requested to do so). Costs for this
provision would depend on the process by which the CSU revises,
adopts, and publishes those policies.