Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Apprenticeship Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Employment Training Panel approves roughly $25.3 million for 88 apprenticeship proposals
Summary
At its September meeting the Employment Training Panel approved 88 apprenticeship proposals — grouped and voted in batches — that staff say would allocate about $25.3 million if all awards are executed; panelmembers asked staff to convene a policy discussion on how funds are distributed across large and small apprenticeship programs.
The Employment Training Panel voted on a slate of apprenticeship proposals at its September meeting, approving 88 projects that staff said would result in roughly $25.3 million in awards if all contracts are executed.
"If all of the proposals scheduled for today's panel meeting are approved, the panel will fund 88 projects for a total of $25,141,115," Chief Deputy Director Laura Campbell told the panel during the executive report.
Panel members approved the proposals in grouped votes throughout the meeting, taking motions on multiple ‘‘tabs’’ of applications at a time. Director Jessica Grimes and staff emphasized continuing demand: Laura Campbell said the panel is seeing 257 applications in demand totaling about $75 million, while Peter Cooper noted the agency’s work to support Governor Gavin Newsom’s target of 500,000 apprentices by 2029. Cooper said, "ETP continues to play a critical role in supporting Governor Newsom's goal of supporting 500,000 apprentices by 2029."
Why it matters: ETP funding supports registered apprenticeship and related training that panel staff and presenters said leads to higher wages, wage progression and benefits. Panel members repeatedly described apprenticeship as a primary workforce pathway and pressed staff to clarify how limited funds are allocated among large multi‑trade programs and smaller, trade‑specific cohorts.
How the meeting proceeded: Staff presented the proposals by occupation groups (labor, finishing trades, ironworkers, carpenters, electrical, plumbing, etc.). The panel voted on grouped motions to fund tabs 2, 4 and 5; tabs 1 and 3; tabs 6–15 and 79; tabs 16–17; tabs 18–23; tabs 24–45; tabs 46–53; tabs 54–68; tabs 69–73; tabs 74–77; tabs 78, 80 and 81; tabs 82–85; tab 86; tab 87; and tab 88. Staff and panelors confirmed that each proposal met the program’s eligibility requirements before votes were taken.
Panel concern about distribution method: Several members — most prominently Commissioner Gretchen Newsom — raised questions about perceived equity when large training trusts present multiple separate proposals across classifications. Newsom said she will ask the policy committee to examine whether the way requests are presented and calculated yields equitable outcomes across programs. "There’s a lot of demand and only so many dollars available," she said during the hearing, urging a working group and further policy discussion.
Legal and administrative context: Co‑counsel Mike Cable summarized recently concluded legislative deadlines: AB 765, a bill that would have barred use of Employment Training Fund monies to pay interest on federal loans, “did not pass the legislature.” He also identified SB 470, described in the packet as a bill to extend Bagley‑Keene teleconferencing provisions; Cable said that bill had been passed by the legislature and was with the governor as of Sept. 16 and that Oct. 12 is the governor’s deadline to sign or veto.
Staff numbers and demand: In his executive report, Director Grimes noted progress on the Social Entrepreneurs for Economic Development (SEED) fund — "the 7 and a half million for the Social Entrepreneurs for Economic Development Fund... is progressing along" — and program managers said the panel packet contained 93 proposals for review and five delegation orders. Panel staff reported that since July 2025 ETP closed 64 contracts yielding $16.7 million in paid training and that 13,607 trainees completed training and met retention wage requirements.
Ending: Panel members approved the grouped motions by roll call, and the chair adjourned the meeting after final housekeeping. Several members requested that staff and the policy committee return with workplan items to address allocation methodology and transparency before the next round of awards.
Votes at a glance - Approval of agenda — Outcome: approved (unanimous). - Approval of August minutes — Outcome: approved (unanimous). - Funding approvals (grouped motions) — Outcome: all grouped motions listed below approved by roll call votes during the meeting. Each grouped motion was described on the record as meeting eligibility requirements and carried by affirmative votes from the panel present at the time of the vote. (Detailed motion list below.)
Grouped funding motions (as recorded in meeting minutes): - Motion to approve tabs 2, 4 and 5 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 1 and 3 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 6–15 and tab 79 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 16 and 17 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 18–23 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 24–45 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 46–53 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 54–68 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 69–73 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 74–77 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 78, 80 and 81 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tabs 82–85 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tab 86 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tab 87 — Outcome: approved. - Motion to approve tab 88 — Outcome: approved.
(Each of the grouped approvals was recorded on the public transcript and carried by roll call; the panel chair closed the meeting after the final vote.)
