Assembly Higher Education Committee advances repatriation, dual‑enrollment and campus housing bills; dozens of measures moved to policy committees

The Assembly Higher Education Committee on Feb. 26 heard hours of testimony and moved a slate of bills to policy committees, advancing measures on Native American repatriation, international student exchanges, community college baccalaureates and dual‑enrollment access while taking up several oversight and technical bills involving the University of California and the California State University systems.

Assemblymember Asomer Ramos, author of AB 977, told the committee the bill is intended "to ensure the repatriation of Native American remains from higher education institutions," noting past audits that uncovered large collections of ancestral remains in California university archives. "We are committed to working with the Cal State University system to identify how we can best move forward," Ramos said, asking the committee to pass the bill to Appropriations. Santa Rosa Rancheria leaders and representatives of tribal coalitions told the panel they view the measure as a step toward permanent reburial sites for unclaimed remains.

Why it matters: Several bills heard affect students directly (dual‑enrollment access, fee waivers, exchange opportunities) and others seek to change institutional practice or transparency (UC admissions policy, BPPE regulation of commercial driving schools). The committee advanced many measures to the next stop for fiscal review or further policy debate, while speakers across the hearing urged changes to implementation details and consultation with impacted stakeholders.

What the committee did and debate highlights

AB 977 (Ramos) — Native American repatriation: Ramos said the bill would require the California State University system to audit surplus land and consult with California tribes to identify three burial or reburial sites (northern, central and southern regions) to facilitate respectful reburial where tribal descendants cannot be identified or remains are unclaimed. Tribal leaders including Leo Sisco of the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi‑Yokut spoke in support, calling repatriation "an opportunity to make things right." The CSU’s representative, Adriana Gomez, said the system "does not have a formal position" yet but acknowledged the audit work and apologized for harm, and noted the CSU’s own December report showing remaining ancestral remains and cultural items. The committee moved AB 977 to the Appropriations Committee.

AB 1093 (Salatje) — California‑Mexico higher education exchange: Assemblymember Summer Salatje described AB 1093 as a pilot program to formalize and expand student exchange partnerships with Mexican universities, proposing a one‑to‑one exchange model (initially for 400 students total across UC, CSU and California Community Colleges) and a regional matching fund to support fees. Supporters argued the program would strengthen cross‑border ties, workforce preparation and bi‑national economic connections; some members pressed for clarity on funding sources and whether the cited $20 million would come from Mexican universities or governments. The committee moved the bill to the Appropriations Committee.

AB 1035 (Gonzalez) — Expand California College Promise to community college baccalaureates: Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez's AB 1035 would let California College Promise fee waivers apply to students pursuing community college baccalaureate programs (pilot baccalaureate degrees at community colleges in fields such as respiratory therapy, dental hygiene, biomanufacturing and aviation maintenance). District presidents and baccalaureate program leaders described the degrees as workforce‑driven and said they produce higher wages for graduates; supporters argued the change would make higher‑cost, workforce baccalaureates more affordable. Some committee members raised budget concerns about reallocating Prop 98 funding; proponents said the funding uses already exist within the Promise program and colleges would opt in. The measure was moved to Appropriations.

Dual‑enrollment and CCAP packages (AB 11 22, AB 731, AB 988 and related proposals): The committee heard several bills aimed at expanding and smoothing access to dual‑enrollment courses. AB 11 22 (author: Senator Brian — presented in Assembly) seeks statewide expectation and support for dual‑enrollment access; AB 7 31 and AB 9 88 seek technical changes to the CCAP (College and Career Access Pathways) and creation of an advisory board to develop a statewide dual‑enrollment framework. Students and community college representatives testified that dual enrollment raises college attendance and completion rates, particularly for low‑income and first‑generation students. The bills were referred to the Education Committee for further work.

UC admissions and open‑meetings/consultation package (AB 500, AB 684, AB 1217): Several related bills addressed recent UC decisions about which high‑school courses qualify for A–G admissions credit, public notice and stakeholder consultation. AB 500 would require more transparent coordination and consultation when UC changes undergraduate admissions criteria; AB 684 would make UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools meetings subject to the Bagley‑Keene Open Meetings Act; AB 1217 would ask UC to use K‑12 content standards, frameworks and model curriculum when evaluating whether a high‑school course meets A–G requirements and to align the A–G approval timeline with the K‑12 calendar. Supporters said those measures would reduce surprises for students and counselors; some UC faculty and commenters urged caution, noting UC academic standards and campus curricular review processes. The committee moved these measures to the Education or Governmental Organization committees, as appropriate.

AB 922 (Hoover) — UC background checks: AB 922 would give statutory authority for the University of California to maintain access to federal criminal history information for campus background checks (FBI/DOJ criminal justice information) so the UC can continue to run hiring background checks directly rather than relying on third‑party vendors. UC legislative staff said access is at risk without statutory authority and losing it would delay hiring and increase costs. The committee sent the bill to the Public Safety Committee.

AB 1212 (Patel) — UC use of Low‑Income Housing Tax Credits for faculty/staff housing: The bill would allow UC campuses and auxiliaries to use low‑income housing tax credits to develop affordable workforce housing on UC land, with a preference for UC employees but available to the public if units remain. Supporters argued this would expand housing in resource‑rich areas; some members raised concerns about whether public funds and tax credits should favor university employees versus the broader public. The measure was moved to Housing and Community Development committee.

AB 1433 (Sharp Collins) — Noncredit community college funding: AB 1433 would expand eligibility for categorical student‑support funding to noncredit community college centers and standalone noncredit colleges to provide wraparound services (advising, mental health, disability services) to adult learners and workforce students. Noncredit leaders and students testified to workforce and equity impacts; the bill was referred to Military and Veterans Affairs for concurrence (committee processing) and then to other committees.

AB 714 (Fong) — Commercial driving training: AB 714 would remove commercial driving instruction from a BPPE exemption that currently bypasses Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education oversight when a program costs under $2,500. Supporters, including driving school operators and public‑safety organizations, argued short low‑hour programs (e.g., 40 hours) create safety risks; the bill was moved to Business and Professions.

Votes at a glance (committee actions taken Feb. 26) - AB 977 (Ramos) — passed out of committee (to Appropriations) for further fiscal review (roll call recorded on the transcript; committee reported the motion as passed). - AB 1093 (Salatje) — passed to Appropriations (motion carried). - AB 1035 (Gonzalez) — passed to Appropriations (motion carried). - AB 922 (Hoover) — passed to Public Safety (motion carried). - AB 500 (Quirk Silva) — passed to Education (motion carried). - AB 684 (Patel) — passed to Governmental Organization (motion carried). - AB 1217 (Fong) — passed to Education (motion carried). - AB 11 22 / AB 7 31 / AB 9 88 (dual‑enrollment bills) — referred to Education (motions carried as noted in transcript). - AB 1212 (Patel) — passed to Housing and Community Development (motion carried). - AB 1433 (Sharp Collins) — passed to Military & Veterans Affairs (motion carried). - AB 714 (Fong) — passed to Business & Professions (motion carried).

(Transcript records multiple roll calls; counts for several bills were recorded as partial or "kept roll open" in this hearing transcript. Where specific vote tallies were not read aloud at the time a measure was moved, the transcript marks the committee action as "motion passed to [committee]"; the committee is keeping rolls open on several items for additional members to add on.)

What to watch next - Appropriations and fiscal committees will review budget implications for bills that affect Prop 98‑funded programs and new institutional obligations (notably AB 1035 and AB 1093). - Education and intersegmental coordination: the UC admissions and dual‑enrollment packages will likely require additional stakeholder negotiation and technical fixes before final floor votes. - Implementation details: authors and agencies were repeatedly asked on the record to return with clearer budgets, implementation timelines and consultation plans, particularly on AB 1093 (funding sources), AB 1212 (public access and preferences) and AB 714 (training hours and curriculum standards).

Meeting context: The committee heard extended testimony from tribal leaders, campus officials and student representatives; multiple bills prompted cross‑system questions about coordination among K‑12, community colleges, UC and CSU. The hearing produced a large package of measures that will now move through appropriations and policy gates for further review.