Legislative Updates

1. Introduction

The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is the voice of the faculty of California’s 113 Community Colleges regarding academic and professional matters.  In fulfilling this role, one of the ASCCC’s important functions is to represent faculty positions to the governor, the legislature, and other government agencies regarding potential, proposed, or chaptered legislation.  The ASCCC accomplishes this function through legislative visits, written communication, cooperation with system partners, and other methods.

The intent of this page is to keep faculty statewide informed regarding the ASCCC’s positions and activities regarding legislation and legislative actions.  Here you will find copies of communications sent by the ASCCC President to legislators, the governor, and others as well as other updates on legislative activity.  We hope that this information will help to enable local senates in fulfilling their own roles in representing faculty in their districts and on their campuses.

2. Resources

Legislative Tracker:

To follow current legislation, the ASCCC recommends using the tracker on the FACCC web site.  It can be found here.

Additional useful information regarding legislative activity can be found on the governmental relations tab of the website of the Community College League of California, which can be found here.

3. What We Do To Represent You

The ASCCC represents the faculty of California’s Community Colleges regarding legislation and legislative issues in various ways. 

Several times each year, Academic Senate representatives take part in “legislative days” on which they hold a series of meetings with various legislators or their aids to express faculty perspectives and positions on pending or potential legislation.  These activities are typically conducted as joint ventures with the Senate’s academic partners, including representatives of the CSU and UC faculty leadership, the Chancellor’s Office, the Board of Governors, The Student Senate for California Community Colleges, and other statewide organizations.

A similar activity in which the ASCCC participates may involve advocacy regarding a specific piece of legislation.  In this case, ASCCC representatives may form part of a panel with system partners such as the Community College League of California (CCLC), the faculty unions, and others.  The panel holds a series of interviews with legislators and legislative aids over the course of a day, delivering a common and consistent message on the bill in question in an attempt to sway the votes in the legislature.

The ASCCC also frequently sends written statements of support or opposition for specific bills to members of the legislature, legislative committees, and the governor.  These letters may be the sole work of the ASCCC or may be composed jointly with our university colleagues or with other organizations.

The ASCCC also testifies before bodies such as the Education Committees of the legislature, the Little Hoover Commission, and others.   In this role, ASCCC representatives deliver formal statements and answer questions regarding faculty positions and makes arguments in favor of or against specific bills or policy directions. 

Finally, ASCCC representatives may work less formally to communicate faculty positions and views to the legislature.  In Sacramento, numerous opportunities arise in which faculty leaders may speak individually to legislators or legislative staff at various types of events and meetings.  ASCCC representatives take advantage of any opportunity to express faculty views and present faculty positions.

4. How ASCCC Differs from Local Academic Senates

In terms of legislative advocacy and lobbying, the rules governing the ASCCC and local academic senates differ.  For the purpose of understanding these rules, lobbying is essentially a subset of advocacy.  Advocacy involves active support for a cause, idea or policy and is a general term involving a broad set of activities.  Lobbying is an attempt to influence specific legislation and is defined by the IRS as well as various states and localities, often because of the limitations on the ways in which funds can be used for lobbying purposes. 

The restrictions and guidelines for local academic senate activities are defined by California Education Code sections 7050-7068.   The following excerpt from “Advocacy at the Local Level:  What Your Senate Can Do to Stay Informed and Active,” published in the November 2103 Senate Rostrum, explains the activities in which local academic senate can and cannot engage:

Ed Code section 7054 (a) states that “No school district or community college district funds, services, supplies, or equipment shall be used for the purpose of urging the support or defeat of any ballot measure or candidate, including, but not limited to, any candidate for election to the governing board of the district.”  In short, academic senates cannot use any district resources to support or oppose any candidate or ballot measure.  This restriction applies not only to district funds but also to materials, email, and even employee time when the employee is scheduled to work.  Any discussion of ballot measures or elections among senators therefore should not take place on campus or during academic senate meetings.

However, Ed Code section 7054 (b) adds that “Nothing in this section shall prohibit the use of any of the public resources described in subdivision (a) to provide information to the public about the possible effects of any bond issue or other ballot measure if both of the following conditions are met:  (1) The informational activities are otherwise authorized by the Constitution or laws of this state. (2) The information provided constitutes a fair and impartial presentation of relevant facts to aid the electorate in reaching an informed judgment regarding the bond issue or ballot measure.”  Academic senates may therefore publish information to educate the public regarding the impact of a given ballot measure as long as they do not advocate either for or against the measure.

Legislative Positions

Datesort ascending Bill Author ASCCC Position Summary Position Letter
May 4, 2020 Budget Request ICAS is requesting funding to support system-wide student transfer in California. The following chart indicates the budget request amounts; all are one-time funding requests. PDF icon One-time Budget Request
April 20, 2020 Request reconsideration The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) requests the legislature’s reconsideration of the allocation of resources to the online community college, Calbright, during this current health and economic crisis. The funding allocated to them could be better used to protect student access in the accredited colleges. PDF icon Online Community College and the California Community College Budget
April 17, 2020 SB 874 (Hill, Hueso, Wilk) Community College Districts: Statewide Baccalaureate Degree Pilot Program Hill, Hueso, and Wilk Support if Amended The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges wishes to express its support for SB 874 (Hill, as of 22 March 2020), if amended to remove the “nonduplication with California State University” provision within the bill. PDF icon SB 874 - Support if Amended
April 17, 2020 AB 3310 (Muratsuchi, as of 22 March 2020): Community Colleges: Ethnic Studies Muratsuchi Oppose The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is writing to express its reluctant opposition to AB 3310 (Muratsuchi, as of 22 March 2020). PDF icon AB 3310 - Oppose
February 27, 2020 Oppose Performance-Based Funding CoFO steadfastly opposes performance-based funding and would encourage the removal of this component from the current funding formula. We further recommend that, rather than take money away from the base allocation of some colleges to augment others, the state should maintain the “hold harmless” provision indefinitely and only fund supplemental allocations with additional funds. PDF icon CoFO Letter 2/27/2020
February 10, 2020 ASCCC Response to Nonduplication Analysis The Chancellor’s Office January 10, 2020 nonduplication analysis does not address the ASCCC’s primary assertion in our October 7, 2019 letter to the Legislature. PDF icon ASCCC Response to Nonduplication Analysis
January 16, 2020 AB 968 (Garcia): Naturalist Pathway Pilot Program Position (as of 01/06/2020) Garcia Oppose as Written The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is writing to express its reluctant opposition to AB 968 (Garcia, as of 01/06/2020) as written. PDF icon AB 968 Oppose as Written
November 26, 2019 CoFO supports the “Focus on Faculty and Staff” In order for the California Community Colleges System to best serve students and meet the educational and workforce needs of the state, existing funding must be refocused, and additional funding allocated, to provide students with greater access to and interaction with faculty. To this end, CoFO supports the “Focus on Faculty and Staff” components of the Chancellor’s Office 2020-21 Legislative and Budget Request for the California Community Colleges. PDF icon CoFO 2020-21 Budget Letter
October 7, 2019 Urge the legislature to clearly define the mission and scope of Calbright In light of the “Calbright Community College New Program Non-Duplication Notice” issued by the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office on September 30, 2019, the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is once again compelled to convey our deep concern with the trajectory that Calbright has taken. PDF icon Calbright Letter
PDF icon AAUP Support Letter
September 9, 2019 AB1658 (Carrillo) Teacher credentialing: adult education: workgroup (as of 09/09/19) Carrillo Oppose The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is writing to express its reluctant opposition to AB1658 (Carrillo, as of 09/09/19). AB 1658 would require the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to convene a workgroup to study issues relating to adult education teacher credentialing and to submit a report on its findings and recommendations to the legislature. PDF icon AB 1658 Oppose Letter (9/9/19)