Assembly Education Committee advances charter oversight, literacy, college-prep alignment, de‑escalation training, ed‑tech review and TK funding fixes

The Assembly Education Committee on Tuesday advanced several education bills to the Appropriations Committee, including AB 84, a comprehensive charter school audit and oversight bill, and AB 1454, a measure to strengthen early literacy instruction and professional development for teachers.

The package of bills moved after several hours of testimony and public comment. Committee members emphasized accountability for public dollars, the need to improve reading outcomes for young students, and concerns about local capacity and unintended consequences for small or basic‑aid districts.

AB 84: Charter audit, authorizer and funding reforms

Assembly Bill 84, authored by the committee chair, would apply strengthened audit rules and new oversight requirements to charter schools and change the non‑classroom‑based (NCB) charter funding determination process. The bill was presented as a direct response to the criminal A3 charter fraud case and the February 2024 Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO)–FCMAT review. Mike Fine, CEO of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), told the committee that AB 84 “provides comprehensive reforms … to explicitly apply [audit statutes] to charter schools” and to strengthen auditor training and oversight.

Supporters framed the bill as a way to stop documented fraud and protect taxpayer dollars. Cassie Mancini of the California School Employees Association said AB 84 “is the expert‑backed solution to prevent another A3.” Opponents including Myrna Castrejon, president and CEO of the California Charter Schools Association, and Dr. Christina De Jesus of Green Dot Public Schools argued the bill is overly broad, would divert classroom funding to new oversight fees and bureaucracy, and could harm many high‑performing charter schools. Castrejon said AB 84 would “trip­le oversight fees, drawing them away from classrooms,” and De Jesus warned it could “have a devastating impact on all charter schools.”

After extended testimony and member questions, the committee voted to pass AB 84 as amended to Appropriations. Motion: Assemblymember Bonta; second: Assemblymember Patel. The roll call recorded five ayes and one no (Hoover). The committee chair announced the bill passed the committee (vote reported as 5–1).

AB 1454: Early literacy professional development and materials adoption

AB 1454 (sometimes cited in committee as AB 14 54) drew broad bipartisan support and drew one of the largest public witness turnouts. The bill would (1) require the California Department of Education to publish a list of professional development programs that support evidence‑based early literacy instruction (TK–5); (2) direct the State Board of Education to consider updated ELA/ELD instructional materials that align with evidence‑based literacy approaches; and (3) require the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to update administrator preparation standards to include training for supporting effective literacy instruction.

Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice, urged passage and described literacy as a civil‑rights issue: “reading is the gateway to all future knowledge and opportunity.” Patricia Rucker of the California Teachers Association described the measure as a negotiated compromise meant to align teacher professional learning and locally selected materials with evidence‑based practices. Dozens of parents, reading specialists and community groups testified in support.

The committee voted AB 1454 out to Appropriations as amended. Motion: Assemblymember Bonta; second: Assemblymember Lowenthal. Recorded vote: 6–0.

AB 1217: Aligning UC/CSU A–G evaluations with K–12 standards and calendar

AB 1217 would ask the University of California to use K–12 content standards, frameworks and model curricula when evaluating whether a high‑school course satisfies the UC/CSU A–G admission requirements and to align the course approval schedule with the K–12 academic calendar so districts have time to adjust schedules. The bill was prompted by district and practitioner concerns after UC removed a data‑science/statistics course as an algebra‑equivalent for A–G.

Supporters including LAUSD said the measure would improve coordination across K–12 and higher education. An academic opponent — a computer science professor who said his remarks were personal — urged withdrawal and defended UC’s actions as protecting student preparation for college. The committee recorded a motion to pass the bill to Appropriations; the clerk noted the bill will remain on call while members continue review.

AB 1163: School staff de‑escalation training

AB 1163 would require the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop de‑escalation‑focused training for TK–12 staff and allow that training to be delivered virtually or incorporated into existing workplace‑violence trainings (Senate Bill 553 established a workplace violence framework). The bill’s sponsor, the California Federation of Teachers, said the intent is to reduce on‑campus staff injuries and to give school employees non‑physical techniques for preventing or defusing violence.

Supporters urged caution and care to avoid framing students with disabilities as workplace hazards; the Association of California School Administrators said committee amendments improved the measure. The committee passed AB 1163 as amended to Appropriations and left it on call.

AB 1053: Teacher and para participation in ed‑tech selection

AB 1053 would require local educational agencies to provide for substantial teacher and paraprofessional involvement, and to promote parent/community input, in the evaluation and selection of educational technology used with students. Sponsors said the measure would reduce disruptive adoptions of software and ensure classroom practitioners have a voice.

Opponents including county superintendents, school business officers and chief technology officers said the bill’s current definition of “educational technology” is overly broad and could elevate routine software purchases to the same level of public engagement as formal instructional material adoptions, imposing significant unfunded costs and new governance burdens. Authors said they will continue negotiations to narrow the scope. The committee moved AB 1053 to Appropriations and left it on call.

AB 1391: Transitional Kindergarten funding access for basic‑aid/necessary small schools

AB 1391 was presented as a targeted fix to ensure basic‑aid and certain small or community‑funded districts — which currently fall outside the LCFF funding distribution — can access funds for universal TK when state allocations are distributed via the LCFF mechanism. Early‑childhood teachers and local superintendents told personal stories of children identified for services only because TK was available; supporters argued that when TK funding is calculated statewide but distributed through LCFF, some districts are left without the revenue to run TK.

Witnesses from small and basic‑aid districts and TK teachers urged the committee to support the bill so TK access would not depend on a district’s funding classification. Members acknowledged competing fiscal equity concerns and asked authors to continue work with budget and finance committees.

Why these measures matter

Committee testimony repeatedly returned to two themes: protecting public education dollars and strengthening instruction for students who are behind in foundational skills. AB 84 is aimed at reducing documented fraud and improving audit parity across local education agencies. AB 1454 targets teacher supports, instructional materials and administrator preparation to improve early literacy outcomes. Several other bills address specific operational problems raised by districts, teachers and parents — from how K–12 courses are judged for UC admissions to how staff are trained to respond to crises and how districts select educational software.

What’s next

All bills the committee voted to pass were referred to the Appropriations Committee for fiscal review. Several items were left “on call” by the committee pending further consideration of fiscal or technical amendments. Members and stakeholders signaled continued negotiations on costs, scope and implementation details, particularly for AB 84 (charter oversight fees and authorizer accountability), AB 1053 (narrowing ed‑tech definitions) and AB 1391 (funding distribution mechanics for TK). The committee also advanced a consent calendar of 11 bills to Appropriations (AB 542; AB 563; AB 731 as amended; AB 753; AB 784; AB 964; AB 988 as amended; AB 1034; AB 1233 as amended; AB 1255 as amended; AB 1381 as amended).

Ending note

Committee members and witnesses emphasized continued negotiation and amendments as the measures proceed. Supporters of the literacy bill praised the rare coalition of teacher unions and reform advocates that produced AB 1454; advocates for charter oversight and for charter‑sector groups signaled continued contention as AB 84 moves toward fiscal review.