Assembly committee advances bill to require at least one apprenticeship fair per school year

Assemblymember Davies introduced AB 296, a bill that would require each California school or district to host at least one apprenticeship fair per school year, allow districts to arrange participation across county lines where no local program exists, and permit schools to award one hour of community service credit to students who attend when community service is required for graduation. Davies said the measure is intentionally flexible so each district can decide how to hold an apprenticeship fair and stressed the need to connect students with apprenticeship opportunities as an alternative to four‑year college pathways.

Supporters told the committee the bill responds to widespread workforce shortages. Melanie Perrin of the Associated General Contractors of California said apprenticeship fairs give students exposure to construction careers that “do not require a college degree” and help fill persistent hiring gaps; Martin Bindiolo testified on behalf of several pipe trades and electrical worker organizations and Brett Barrow spoke for United Contractors and the National Electrical Contractors Association. The bill sponsor and witnesses pointed to employer and labor support including the California Chamber of Commerce and multiple building trades and contractors’ groups.

Srecko Nitsky, representing school administrators, opposed AB 296 as drafted. He said administrators support apprenticeships but objected to a mandatory requirement for every district and warned the bill would impose a separate apprenticeship fair mandate even where coordinated career and college fairs already exist. Nitsky noted the bill’s current text would apply to elementary districts, where students may be too young and families less likely to attend, and he said industry partners may be less inclined to participate when student age makes direct engagement impractical. The sponsor said she was willing to work with opposition and suggested an amendment limiting the requirement to grades 9–12.

The committee placed AB 296 on call and later proceeded with a roll call; the motion to pass the measure to the Education Committee was recorded as passed. No formal amendments were adopted on the floor at the hearing. The author requested follow‑up negotiations with school administrator groups to address scope and grade‑level concerns.

Votes at a glance: the committee moved AB 296 to the Education Committee (motion recorded as passed; individual roll call recorded in the hearing transcript).