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