BILL ANALYSIS Ó Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary Senator Kevin de León, Chair SB 967 (de León) - Student Safety: Sexual Assault Amended: March 27, 2014 Policy Vote: Education 6-0 Urgency: No Mandate: Yes Hearing Date: April 7, 2014 Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-Hernandez This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Bill Summary: SB 967 requires the governing board of each community college district (CCD), the Trustees of the California State University (CSU), the Regents of the University of California (UC), and the governing board of independent postsecondary institutions in California to each adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking that includes specified components and standards. Fiscal Impact: This bill may result in significant additional costs to each named entity, to the extent that its requirements exceed the scope of an institution's current policies and procedures. To the extent that many of the new requirements mirror new federal regulations likely to be adopted in the near future, those costs would still be incurred absent this bill. Mandate: CCDs - Potentially substantial reimbursable mandate on CCDs to comply with the policy and educational requirements. See staff comments. Background: Federal statutes addressing sexual assault on or around institutions of higher education include Title IX and the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act). The Clery Act requires public and private postsecondary educational institutions that receive federal financial aid to disclose information about crimes on and around campuses as well as establish certain rights for victims of sexual assault. Those rights include notification to victims of the right to file criminal charges, available counseling services, the results of disciplinary proceedings, and the option for victims to change their academic schedule or living arrangements. SB 967 (de León) Page 1 The federal Campus Sexual Violence Elimination (Campus SaVE) Act amended the Clery Act to, among other things, require postsecondary institutions to offer prevention and awareness programs to new students and employees regarding rape, domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Programs must include a definition of those offenses and consent with reference to sexual offenses. Institutions are also required to compile statistics of incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. Campus SaVE also requires the Annual Security Report to contain additional information on prevention programs, procedures once incidents are reported, and possible sanctions following an institutional disciplinary procedure. Federal regulations implementing Campus SaVE are currently in the adoption process. Existing state law requires the governing board of each CCD, the Trustees of the CSU, and the UC Regents to each adopt, and implement at each campus or other facilities, a written procedure or protocols to ensure, to the fullest extent possible, that students, faculty and staff who are victims of sexual assault committed on grounds maintained by the institution or affiliated student organizations, receive treatment and information. The written procedures or protocols must contain at least the following information: 1) The college policy regarding sexual assault on campus. 2) Personnel on campus who should be notified, and procedures for notification, with the consent of the victim. 3) Legal reporting requirements and procedures for fulfilling them. 4) Services available to victims and personnel responsible for providing these services. 5) A description of campus resources available to victims, as well as appropriate off-campus services. 6) Procedures for ongoing case management, including keeping the victim informed of the status of any student disciplinary proceedings and helping the victim deal with SB 967 (de León) Page 2 academic difficulties that may arise because of the victimization. 7) Procedures for guaranteeing confidentiality and appropriately handling requests for information from the press, concerned students and parents. 8) Each victim of sexual assault should receive information about the existence of at least the following options: a) Criminal prosecutions; b) civil prosecutions; c) the disciplinary process through the college; d) the availability of mediation; e) alternative housing assignments; and, f) academic assistance alternatives. (Education Code § 67385) Existing state law further requires that the segments, in collaboration with campus and community-based victim advocacy organizations, provide as part of campus orientations, educational and preventive information about sexual violence. Each campus is required to post sexual violence prevention and education information on its campus website, including how to file a complaint, and the availability and contact information for resources for victims. Each campus is also required to develop policies to encourage students to report any campus crimes involving sexual violence. (EC § 67385.7) Proposed Law: This bill requires each CCD governing board, the CSU Trustees and the UC Regents, and any independent postsecondary institution receiving public funds for student financial aid, to adopt a policy concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking that includes all of the following: 1) an "affirmative consent" standard in the determination of whether consent was given by a complainant, as specified; 2) a provision specifying that a claim by the accused that he or she believed that the complainant consented to the sexual activity shall not be considered under specified circumstances; 3) a "preponderance of the evidence" standard in the determination of disciplinary action; and, 4) in the evaluation of complaints in the disciplinary process, specified conditions under which an individual is deemed unable to consent. This bill further requires those entities to adopt detailed and SB 967 (de León) Page 3 victim-centered sexual assault policies and protocols which, at a minimum, cover all of the following: 1) A policy statement on how the institution will protect the confidentiality of individuals involved. 2) Initial response by the institution's personnel to a report of sexual assault, as specified. 3) Response to stranger and non-stranger sexual assault. 4) The preliminary victim interview, including the development of a victim interview protocol, and a comprehensive follow-up victim interview. 5) Contacting and interviewing the accused. 6) Providing written notification to the victim about resources and services, as specified, and coordination with law enforcement, as appropriate. 7) Participation of victim advocates. 8) Investigating allegations that alcohol or drugs were involved in the incident. 9) The role of the institutional staff supervision. 10) Procedures for anonymous reporting of sexual assault. This bill requires those institutions to implement comprehensive prevention programs addressing sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking; and, to the extent feasible, to enter into memoranda of understanding (MOUs) or other partnerships with existing on-campus and community-based organizations to refer victims for assistance or make services available to victims. Related Legislation: AB 1433 (Gatto) requires governing boards of each public and private postsecondary educational institution to adopt and implement policies and procedures to ensure that any report of a "Part 1" violent crime, sexual assault, or hate crime is immediately forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency. AB 1433 is currently in the Assembly Public SB 967 (de León) Page 4 Safety Committee. SB 991 (Jackson) creates a new category of "second degree rape," which includes specified sexual activity that occurs without affirmative and freely given consent. SB 991 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Public Safety Committee on April 22, 2014. Staff Comments: The requirements of this bill necessitate that all 72 CCD governing boards, the CSU Trustees and the UC Regents, and any independent postsecondary institution receiving public funds for student financial aid complete numerous activities relative to establishing and implementing policies and programs to address sexual assault incidents involving their students. While the requirements of this bill are more extensive than those in existing state law, the degree to which they are more extensive than the forthcoming federal Campus SaVE implementation regulations is unclear. Those regulations are not expected to be final until later this year, though draft regulations substantially overlap with the requirements of this bill. The higher education institutions affected by this bill will have to comply with the Campus SaVE federal regulations, whatever they ultimately are, in order to continue to receive federal financial aid for their students; campuses also have to comply with federal Title IX requirements. To the extent that this bill goes beyond federal law and future regulations, and beyond what individual campuses are currently doing, it will likely result in significant costs to all affected institutions to meet the new programmatic and policy requirements. As an entity, CCDs are eligible to seek reimbursement for the cost of state mandates imposed upon them. If a state law is similar to a federal law, the Commission on State Mandates generally deems only the parts of state law that go beyond the federal requirements to be reimbursable. This bill, however, is likely to result in a reimbursable state mandate on CCDs for all requirements that go beyond existing state law (e.g. more specific and extensive protocols, prevention programs, MOUs, etc.). Unlike the Clery Act (and Campus SaVE amendments), which makes federal financial aid eligibility contingent on adherence, this bill simply mandates that the governing boards of each CCD comply with the bill. While impractical, CCDs can technically opt not to comply with the federal requirements, and choose to SB 967 (de León) Page 5 forego federal financial aid participation; they cannot opt out of SB 967. Thus, regardless of the degree of overlap between (current and future) federal requirements and state law, only state law imposes an unavoidable mandate on CCDs meet the new policy and programmatic requirements. All of the CCDs will implement any needed changes and activities to meet the federal requirements, and some already do meet them, but this bill would allow all CCDs to seek state reimbursement for those activities if they are also required by the state to comply, which will likely cost the state millions of dollars annually. The other institutions of higher education will incur differing levels of cost, depending both on the degree to which their policies and procedures already comply with the bill and the degree to which they would have had to make the same changes to comply with federal requirements.