BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 1955
AUTHOR: Block
INTRODUCED: February 23, 2012
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: June 13, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Kathleen Chavira
SUBJECT : Campus law enforcement and student liaison.
SUMMARY
This bill requires the California State University Trustees,
and requests the University of California Regents, to
designate an individual at each of its respective campuses to
serve as a liaison between campus law enforcement agencies
and students exercising constitutionally guaranteed rights.
BACKGROUND
Current law prohibits the Regents of the University of
California (UC), the Trustees of the California State
University (CSU), local community college governing boards,
or administrators of any campus of these institutions from
subjecting a student to disciplinary action solely on the
basis of speech or communication which, if it were engaged in
outside of campus, is protected from governmental restriction
by the First Amendment of the US Constitution or by specified
provisions of the California Constitution.
Current law also provides that these provisions do not
prohibit the imposition of discipline for harassment,
threats, or intimidation, unless constitutionally protected,
nor do they prohibit an institution from adopting rules and
regulations designed to prevent hate violence, as defined.
(Education Code § 66301)
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Requires the Trustees of the CSU to designate an
individual at each of its campuses to serve as a liaison
AB 1955
Page 2
between campus law enforcement agencies and students
exercising rights guaranteed by the United States and
California Constitutions.
2) Requests the Regents of the UC to comply with these same
requirements.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Source of the bill . According to the author, several
protests in the fall of 2011 highlighted the need for
effective communication between police, students, and
university administration. This bill is intended to
respond to recommendations from reports and reviews
which were initiated after protest incidents occurred at
UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and at a meeting of the
California State University Trustees in Long Beach, CA.
a) Reynoso Task Force Report. At the request of
the President of the UC, an independent review of
campus protest incidents at UC Davis was conducted
and completed in March 2012. Among its various
findings and recommendations, the Task Force
recommended that the leadership team at the UC
Davis campus engage in proactive communication and
consultation with various groups, including the
Graduate Student Association and the Associated
Students of UC Davis.
b) Response to Protests on UC Campuses: A Report
to President Mark G. Yudof, May 2012. As requested
by the President of the UC, the General Counsel for
the UC and the Dean of the law school at UC
Berkeley initiated a review of policies and
practices regarding the UC's response to
demonstrations and civil disobedience with the
intent to identify best practices to inform the
response to future demonstrations. The draft
report, issued in May 2012, includes
recommendations that campus officials communicate
AB 1955
Page 3
with protestors in advance of a planned
demonstration. Generally, the UC recommended
outreach occur by a member of the campus
administration, selected on a case-by-case basis
after considering skills and experience and
existing relationships with the specific
protestors.
2) Related informational hearings . In December 2011 and
March 2012, the Senate Education Committee and Assembly
Committee on Higher Education held joint informational
and oversight hearings related to campus protest
incidents on public university campuses. In December,
the committees held an informational hearing on UC and
CSU Policies, Procedures and Responses to Campus Police
and On-campus Demonstrations. In May the committees held
an oversight hearing, Follow-up on UC/CSU Reports and
Investigations: Policies, and Procedures and Responses
for On-campus Demonstrations. In addition to the
presentation of the reports outlined in staff comment
#1, the committee heard testimony from campus
leadership, faculty, and student groups. These entities
reported upon progress in implementing recommendations,
outlined additional steps being taken in response to the
report findings and highlighted additional concerns
needing to be addressed.
3) Technical and clarifying amendments . The bill's
provisions are intended to apply to students exercising
their constitutionally protected rights of speech and
communication. Staff recommends the following technical
and clarifying amendments:
a) On page 2 line 5, after "shall" insert
"require each of its campuses to"
b) Clarify that the rights guaranteed are those
outlined in the First amendment to the United
States Constitution and/or Section 2 of Article 1
of the California Constitution.
SUPPORT
AB 1955
Page 4
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
National Association of Social Workers
OPPOSITION
None received.