Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Banking Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly committee advances CalAccount bill to create state-sponsored no-fee banking option after lengthened debate
Summary
AB 13 65, introduced by Assemblymember Garcia, would establish 'CalAccount,' a state-administered, zero-fee, no‑minimum checking option for unbanked and underbanked Californians. The committee advanced the bill after witness testimony on need, cost, implementation and alternatives such as Bank On.
Assemblymember Garcia presented AB 13 65 to establish CalAccount, a state-administered, zero‑fee banking account the bill describes as "0 fee, 0 penalty and no minimum account." Garcia said the program is modeled on other California public–private initiatives and aimed at unbanked and underbanked households.
Sandra (surname not specified), who said she works at Jack in the Box in Sacramento, described paying repeated overdraft fees for routine purchases and urged lawmakers to create safer options. "Working families like mine deserve a banking option that doesn't charge us just so we can access our own hard earned money," she testified.
Cynthia Amezqua, described in testimony as a state policy and advocacy manager at FreeFrom, a survivor‑support nonprofit, said CalAccount would address barriers faced by survivors of gender‑based violence and other vulnerable groups and described the program as an "on‑ramp" to broader financial services.
Opposition and concerns came from the California Community Banking Network, the California Credit Union League and the California Bankers Association. Lindsey Gollhorn of the California Community Banking Network said many banks and credit unions now participate in Bank On, a national program that offers low‑cost accounts, and argued the CalAccount feasibility study overstated the unmet need. Emily Udell of the California Credit Union League said credit unions increasingly offer low‑ or no‑fee accounts and highlighted mobile-branch and outreach efforts.
Committee members questioned the program's cost and practical implementation, including where deposit and withdrawal services would be offered. The committee heard that the CalAccount feasibility study estimated start‑up costs and that implementation would rely on contracting with private financial institutions to provide retail access and to serve as deposit holders under a public–private partnership model.
Assemblymember Crowframe (transcript shows Assemblymember Crow) and others who work with survivors urged the committee to support the bill, citing the needs of vulnerable Californians. Assemblymember Krill (transcript: Krill/Krell) moved the bill and Assemblymember Soria seconded; Assemblymember Garcia accepted committee amendments intended to refine feasibility and public participation requirements.
The committee voted to pass and refer AB 13 65 to the Committee on Labor and Employment. The roll call recorded six "aye" votes and multiple members absent or recorded as "no" on the roll call; the committee left the roll open for members absent at the start of the hearing.
Why it matters: Supporters said CalAccount would reduce overdraft and service‑fee burdens and expand safe banking access for low‑income Californians, survivors of domestic violence, and other underserved groups. Opponents urged the state to strengthen and promote existing private options such as Bank On and to avoid displacing community institutions.
Next steps: The bill was advanced to the Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment for further consideration; members asked staff to refine implementation details and to address questions about cost, partner incentives, and physical access in underserved communities.
