BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 969
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Jose Medina, Chair
AB 969
(Williams) - As Introduced February 26, 2015
SUBJECT: Community college districts: removal, suspension, or
expulsion
SUMMARY: Authorizes a California Community College District
(CCD) to take specified action to remove, suspend, expel, or
deny access to a student found responsible for specified
activities. Specifically, this bill:
1)Allows a CCD to remove, suspend, or expel a student for
conduct that threatens the safety of students and the public,
whether that conduct occurs on or off campus.
2)Expands the circumstances under which the governing board of a
CCD can deny or permit conditional admission to an individual
to include an individual who has been suspended for sexual
assault or sexual battery from another CCD within the
AB 969
Page 2
preceding five years.
3)Authorizes a CCD to require a student seeking admission who
has been previously suspended from a CCD in this state for
rape, sexual assault, or sexual battery to inform the district
of his or her prior suspension. Provides that failure to do so
may be considered by the CCD in determining whether to grant
admission, and a written record of the fact may be maintained
by the CCD with the applicant's file.
4)Provides for reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that this act contains state mandated local costs.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires the public higher education segments to adopt
specific rules governing student behavior with applicable
penalties for violations of the rules, and procedures by which
students are informed of rules. (Education Code Section 66300)
2)Requires public and independent postsecondary institutions, as
a condition of receipt of student aid funds, to adopt a policy
concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating
violence, and stalking that includes specified components and
standards, including an "affirmative consent" standard for
determining whether consent was given by both parties to
sexual activity. Establishes a preponderance of evidence as
the evidentiary standard for determining if sexual
violence/harassment occurred. (EDC Section 67386)
AB 969
Page 3
3)Authorizes a CCC, the president of a CCC, or the president's
designee, or an instructor to suspend a student for good
cause; authorizes the governing board to expel a student for
good cause when other means of correction fail to bring about
proper conduct, or when the presence of the student causes a
continuing danger to the physical safety of the student or
others; requires the suspension or expulsion of a student to
be accompanied by a hearing as provided; and, authorizes a CCD
to require a student whom the district has a protective order
against to apply for reinstatement. (Education Code Section
76030)
4)Prohibits the removal suspension or expulsion of a community
college student unless the conduct resulting in the
disciplinary action is related to college activity or college
attendance. (Education Code Section 76034)
5)Authorizes a governing board of a CCD to deny enrollment,
permit enrollment, or permit conditional enrollment to a
student who has been expelled or is being considered for
expulsion from another CCD within the preceding five years for
specified offenses, following a hearing and appeal process.
(Education Code Section 76038)
6)Requires, under federal Title IX (20 U.S.C. sections
1681-1688), public and private postsecondary educational
institutions that participate in the federal financial aid
program to establish certain rights for victims of sexual
assault, including:
a) Institutions are responsible for immediately and
effectively responding to any sexual harassment or violence
that creates a hostile environment. The institution must
eliminate the harassment or violence, prevent its
recurrence, and address its effects. Regardless of whether
a student chooses to file a complaint with the institution,
AB 969
Page 4
the institution is responsible for investigating and taking
appropriate steps to resolve the situation. A criminal
investigation does not relieve the school of its duty under
Title IX.
b) Institutions must have and distribute policies against
sex discrimination; the policy must state that inquiries
concerning Title IX may be referred to the institution's
Title IX coordinator or to the Office of Civil Rights
(OCR).
c) Institutions must have a designated Title IX coordinator
and notify students and employees of the name and contact
information for the Title IX coordinator. The coordinator
is responsible for overseeing all complaints of sex
discrimination, which include harassment and assault, and
identifying and addressing patterns or systemic problems.
d) Institutions are required to have and make known the
procedures for students to file complaints of sex
discrimination, and procedures must provide for prompt and
equitable resolution of sex discrimination complaints. All
complainants must have the right to present his or her
case, including the right to a full investigation, to
present witnesses and evidence, and to an appeal process
(available to both parties).
e) Establishes a preponderance of the evidence standard
(more likely than not) when determining if sexual
harassment or violence occurred.
f) Provides complainants the right to be notified of the
outcome of the complaint, including the sanction.
Complainants cannot be required to abide by a nondisclosure
agreement.
g) Authorizes grievance procedures to include voluntary
informal methods (such as mediation) for resolving some
types of sexual harassment complaints. However, mediation
AB 969
Page 5
is not appropriate in cases involving allegations of sexual
assault.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Background. On November 12, 2014, the author
organized a committee roundtable 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 (EDC 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.
CCC Chancellor's Office opinion. In 2007, the CCC Chancellor's
Office issued Legal Opinion L 07-07 to provide guidance to CCDs
regarding the authority to discipline a student. The opinion
notes that EDC Section 76034 imposes a significant limitation on
the ability of a CCD to impose discipline for conduct even if
that conduct is criminal in nature. However, it goes on to state
that in 1966 the Attorney General indicated that this language
in a predecessor statute "should not be interpreted to mean that
school districts could only impose discipline for conduct that
actually occurred at school and during school hours. Instead,
the Attorney General determined that if a district could
identify a link between the conduct and school activities or
attendance, then conduct that occurred away from school could be
considered for disciplinary purposes." The opinion notes that
if a student commits a crime that has nothing to do with a
college activity or with college attendance, the college will be
hard-pressed to suspend or expel for that conduct.
AB 969
Page 6
Purpose of this bill. 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 makes three important changes
to current law: (1) it clarifies current law to ensure that
CCDs can take appropriate action to suspend or expel students
who pose a threat to the campus community; (2) it would require
a transfer student to disclose whether they were dismissed
previously from an institution for sexual assault; and, (3) it
would direct a local CCD governing board to hold a hearing to
determine whether to enroll a student who has been suspended or
expelled from another CCD for sexual assault.
UC and CSU Policies. There is no similar statutory restriction
on the University of California (UC) extension of its
jurisdiction over issues of student conduct beyond the campus.
The UC reports that its campuses have exercised this discretion
in the interpretation and application of student conduct code
expectations and discipline when it determines that the conduct
endangers the campus community. According to the California
State University (CSU), Title V regulations specifically state
that conduct that threatens the safety or security of the campus
community, or substantially disrupts the functions or operation
of the University is within this jurisdiction whether it occurs
on or off campus.
Denying enrollment. This bill would permit a CCD to deny or
AB 969
Page 7
permit conditional admission to an individual who has been
suspended for sexual assault or sexual battery from another CCD
within the preceding five years. The author and Committee may
wish to consider amendments to coincide the length of time to
the term of the suspension and the terms of the suspension or
expulsion to the institution's sexual misconduct policy required
under current law:
76038. (a) If the governing board of a community
college district receives an application for admission
from an individual who has been expelled from another
community college district within the preceding five
years pursuant to this article or for a violation of
the institution's policy adopted pursuant to 67386, or
is currently suspended for a violation of the
institution's policy adopted pursuant to section 67386
a sexual assault or sexual battery offense from
another community college district pursuant to this
article within the preceding five years , or who is
undergoing expulsion procedures in another district,
for any of the offenses listed in subdivision (b),
before taking action to deny enrollment or permit
conditional enrollment as authorized by subdivision
(f), the governing board or delegate pursuant to
subdivision (g) shall hold a hearing, conducted in
accordance with this section and the applicable rules
and regulations governing enrollment hearings
authorized by this section and adopted in accordance
with Section 66300, to determine whether that
individual poses a continuing danger to the physical
safety of the students and employees of the district.
76038. (e) A community college district may require a
student seeking admission who has been previously
expelled or is currently suspended from a community
AB 969
Page 8
college in the state for rape, sexual assault, or
sexual battery a violation of the institution's policy
adopted pursuant to section 67386 to inform the
district of his or her prior expulsion or current
suspension. Failure to do so may be considered by the
district in determining whether to grant admission,
and a written record of the fact may be maintained by
the community college district with the applicant's
file.
Related legislation. SB 186 (Jackson), which is pending in the
Senate, expands the definition of "good cause" for purposes of
removal, suspension or expulsion from a community college to
include sexual assault or sexual battery and, for this conduct
exclusively, makes an exception to the prohibition against
removal, suspension, or expulsion unless the conduct is related
to college activity or attendance.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Coalition Against Sexual Assault
Opposition
AB 969
Page 9
None on File
Analysis Prepared by:Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960