Antioch Unified to receive $522.5K directly, more from $1.775 million grant to CCC Office of Ed Consortium

By Emma Gallegos, EdSource.org

California has made good on a promise in the 2022 budget to invest in programs that simultaneously prepare students for both college and career. 

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office announced Friday that the state has released $470 million to 302 school districts, charters and county offices of education to fund the Golden State Pathways program.

The program allows students to “advance seamlessly from high school to college and career and provides the workforce needed for economic growth.”

“It’s an incredibly historic investment for the state,” said Anne Stanton, president of the Linked Learning Alliance, a nonprofit that advocates giving youth opportunities to learn about careers.

Both the state and federal governments previously made big investments in preparing students for college or career at the K-12 level, but the Golden State Pathways program is different in that it challenges school districts, colleges, employers and other community groups to create “pathways” — or a focused series of courses — that prepare K-12 students for college and career at the same time. These pathways aim to prepare students for well-paying careers in fields such as health care, education and technology, while also ensuring that they take 12 college credits through dual enrollment courses and the A-G classes needed to apply to public four-year universities.

“By establishing career technical pathways that are also college preparatory, the Golden State Pathways Program provides a game-changing opportunity for California’s young people,” State Superintendent of Public Instruction Thurmond said in a statement.

The Golden State Pathways are an important part of the new master plan for education — Newsom’s vision to transform career education in California — which is expected by the year’s end.

The state is distributing the vast majority of the funding — $422 million — to enable schools to implement their plans in partnership with higher education and other community partners. The remaining $48 million will assist those who still need grants for planning.

All sorts of schools throughout the state — rural and urban, large and small — benefited from the funding.

Schools in the rural Northern California counties of Tehama and Humboldt — whose K-12 enrollment is under 30,000 students — jointly received about $30 million to implement and plan pathways to help students stay on track for college and careers with livable wages.

“That’s a big deal to have that kind of influx going to that many small schools,” said Jim Southwick, assistant superintendent of the Tehama County Office of Education, which plans to expand career pathways in education, health care, construction, manufacturing and agriculture.

Schools in Tehama had previously begun to implement career pathways at the high school level in concert with local employers and Shasta College. However, many students struggled to complete the pathways because they were ill-prepared in middle school, Southwick said. 

But one middle school pilot program did successfully introduce students to career education, he added, leading to an influx of funding through the Golden State Pathways that will expand the program to other middle schools. 

Long Beach Unified, the fourth-largest district in the state, received about $12 million through the Golden State Pathways program. District spokesperson Elvia Cano said the funding will provide counseling and extra support for students navigating dual enrollment, Advanced Placement courses, college aid, externships and other work-based learning opportunities.

The district also plans to increase access to dual enrollment through partner Long Beach Community College and to create a new pathway in arts, media and entertainment at select high schools.

Advocates are celebrating the governor’s commitment to the program despite the uncertainty surrounding the budget this year.

Linda Collins, founder and executive director of Career Ladders Project, which supports redesigning community colleges to support students, said, “It’s an impressive commitment at a time that it’s desperately needed.” 

Newsom said in a statement that this funding will help students even if they don’t go to college , saying it “will be a game-changer for thousands of students as the state invests in pathways to good-paying, high-need careers — including those that don’t require college degrees.”

UPDATE:

A total of almost $7.7 million in Implementation and Planning Grants were awarded to schools in Contra Costa County.

Antioch Unified Awarded Funding

Asked if the Antioch Unified School District has or will be receiving any of the funding, Acting Superintendent Dr. Rob Martinez shared, “While the District has not received formal notification as of yet from the California Department of Education, the information below has been listed on the CDE websites as reports of funding allocations. 

The first link is for fund to districts as direct funding, which shows Antioch Unified School District receiving $522,500” for an Implementation Grant.

“There will also be an award to the Contra Costa County Consortium Grant which we opted to be part of which is listed at $1,775,000 (We anticipate that we will see a portion of those funds, to be determined by the consortium),” he added.

Other Contra Costa Districts, One School Also Awarded Grants

According to the CA Department of Education’s Implementation Grant Funding chart posted last month, the West Contra Costa Unified School District received the greatest amounts in the county with two grants for $2,680,000 and $2,050,000, respectively for a total of $4,730,000.  John Swett Unified School District also in West County was awarded $465,100.

In addition, the Aspire Richmond California College Preparatory Academy qualified for $199,955 in funding for a Planning Grant,

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Proposed $20 billion regional November bond measure seen as way to close the gap

By Kate Hartley, BAHFA & Justine Marcus, Enterprise Community Partners

Enterprise Community Partners (Enterprise) and the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) released the Bay Area Affordable Housing Pipeline 2024 Report, last month, which analyzes affordable housing projects in various stages of predevelopment and identifies solutions for moving them toward completion. The updated research reveals there are now 433 projects in various stages of predevelopment that would create more than 40,896 affordable homes across the nine-county Bay Area. These would account for nearly a quarter of the 180,000 affordable homes the state’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan determined are needed in the Bay Area by 2031. (See related articles here and here)

Affordable housing developments typically are supported by a capital “stack” investment that includes a commercial mortgage; Low-Income Housing Tax Credits; tax-exempt bonds; and additional local, regional and state dollars that fill the gap between the cost of the development and the financing secured through debt and equity. The new report calculates that the hundreds of Bay Area projects now in the predevelopment pipeline need $9.7 billion in public funds to move forward, and that a $20 billion regional bond measure proposed for the ballot in Bay Area counties this fall would help close this gap.

“We’ve been stuck in an affordable housing crisis that has overwhelmed the region. The November ballot presents an opportunity to unlock thousands of affordable homes for Bay Area residents,” said Heather Hood, VP and Northern California Market Leader at Enterprise. “We expect voters to have a chance to end our housing crisis and deliver the dignified, healthy homes the Bay Area community needs and deserves.”

The predevelopment pipeline includes projects in all nine Bay Area counties. These include more than 10,000 units in both Alameda and Santa Clara counties, with another 8,400 affordable homes pending development in San Francisco and more than 3,000 units in both San Mateo and Sonoma counties. Project pipelines in other Bay Area counties range from over 300 affordable homes in Solano County to 1,173 units in Marin County; nearly 1,500 homes in Napa County; and over 2,500 units in Contra Costa County. Each Bay Area city, town or county currently is working on its own to meet the challenges of housing affordability and homelessness.

“The need for affordable housing transcends jurisdictional boundaries. BAHFA’s proposed bond measure would finally allow our Bay Area to take a regional approach to a regional problem,” said BAHFA Director Kate Hartley. “With significant new resources for every county, we can build at scale, deliver equitable solutions, and create a better way to deliver the affordable homes Bay Area residents need.

The updated Bay Area Housing Pipeline research brief was presented at today’s regularly scheduled meeting of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Bay Area Housing Finance Authority Oversight Committee.

About Enterprise Community Partners 

Enterprise is a national nonprofit that exists to make a good home possible for the millions of families without one. We support community development organizations on the ground, aggregate and invest capital for impact, advance housing policy at every level of government, and build and manage communities ourselves. Since 1982, we have invested $54 billion and created 873,000 homes across all 50 states – all to make home and community places of pride, power and belonging.

About the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority

Established by the state legislature in 2019, BAHFA’s mandate is to create regional solutions that meet the Bay Area’s affordable housing needs. It is the first regional housing finance authority in California. BAHFA works together with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

Senator Glazer’s request leads to findings of workers cheated out of $63.9 million in past wages

Calls it a failure to act on behalf of workers

Report claims inadequate staffing, poor oversight have weakened protections for workers

SACRAMENTO – California Labor Commissioners have stood idly by as a massive backlog in wage theft cases piled up worth $63.9 million in lost wages to workers as its enforcement unit failed to enforce and collect wages in 76 percent of cases in which employers were found to owe wages, according to a report released Wednesday by Grant Parks, the California State Auditor.

The scathing audit came as a result of a March 2023 request through the Joint Legislative Audit Committee by Senator Steve Glazer, D-Contra Costa, and Assemblyman David Alvarez, D-San Diego. It was based on news reports about the lack of wage theft enforcement.

Parks reported his findings to the Governor, President pro Tempore of the Senate and Speaker of the Assembly about the “Department of Industrial Relations’ Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, also known as the Labor Commissioner’s Office (LCO).” Lilia García-Brower is the current state Labor Commissioner and was appointed to the position by Governor Newsom in July 2019. Neither her name or photo appears on the website for the Labor Commissioner’s Office. Ironically, according to the agency’s website, “The mission of the LCO is to ensure a just day’s pay in every workplace in the State and to promote economic justice through robust enforcement of labor laws. By combating wage theft, protecting workers from retaliation, and educating the public, we put earned wages into workers’ pockets and help level the playing field for law-abiding employers.”

The audit “reviewed the backlog of wage claims submitted by workers from fiscal years 2017–18 through 2022–23, and determined that the LCO is not providing timely adjudication of wage claims for workers primarily because of insufficient staffing to process those claims.”

Furthermore, the state Auditor reported, “In addition to its delays in processing wage claims, the LCO has not been successful in collecting judgments from employers. A possible factor contributing to its low collection rate is that the Enforcement Unit does not consistently use all of the methods available to it for collecting payments owed to workers.”

Senator Glazer released this statement on the audit’s findings:

“The California State Auditor’s report makes clear that our State Labor Commissioner is a toothless enforcer of our wage theft laws. This deeply troubling assessment exposes a system that has fundamentally failed the workers it is supposed to protect. According to the auditor, there is a backlog of 47,000 claims registered on June 30, 2023. This is a state embarrassment and a stain on the department that workers depend on for justice.

The report also highlights an alarming increase in the average number of days to resolve claims, which has skyrocketed from 420 days in 2017/18 to an astounding 890 days in 2022/23. This drastic decline in efficiency is not just a statistic; it represents thousands of workers enduring prolonged injustice and financial hardship.

This lack of enforcement emboldens companies to exploit workers, knowing they can likely escape any real consequences, thus perpetuating and increasing further abuse. These findings paint a grim picture of an agency overwhelmed and ineffective, leaving workers vulnerable and without recourse. Immediate and decisive action to restore integrity and effectiveness to the Labor Commissioner’s office is needed. The workers of California deserve nothing less than a robust system that ensures timely and fair resolution of wage theft claims.”

The report can be found here: www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/the-california-labor-commissioners-office/

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Nearly $2 billion in statewide investments to improve, protect state’s infrastructure

By Edward Barrera, Division Chief of Public Affairs, California Department of Transportation 

SACRAMENTO — Earlier this month, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) allocated $1.9 billion to support transportation infrastructure projects that play a starring role in powering the world’s fifth largest economy. The approved funding provides significant investments for bridges, roadways, transit and improved facilities for people who walk and bike.

The latest allocations also include nearly $430 million from the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 (IIJA) and $740 million via Senate Bill (SB) 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. 

A total of $10.183 million was allocated for improvements in Contra Costa County with most of it for 20 miles of BART track and $3.6 million for I-680 in San Ramon and Danville. 

Among the efforts spurred by the $1.9 billion commitment include several projects prioritizing the state’s vital bridge network, highlighted more than $4 million to repair bridge damage along Interstate 80 in Alameda County.

Also included are projects that will build or renovate shoreline embankments, bus, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and railroad overcrossings. 

“California’s transportation infrastructure is critical to the economic and cultural lifeblood of our state, and this funding provides key support in our mission to provide a safe, equitable and sustainable transportation system for all users,” said Tony Tavares, Caltrans Director.

Contra Costa County Projects

• $6 million allocation for BART Expansion and Contraction of Steel Rail in Contra Costa County which will destress twenty miles of rail track within the BART operating corridor that has been identified as being affected by such conditions in Contra Costa County. (Funding description and source: Locally-Administered Local Transportation Climate Adaptation Program Project off the State Highway System – Resolution LTCAP-A-2324-04)
• $3.6 million allocation for I-680 in San Ramon and Danville, from Alcosta Boulevard to north of Diablo Road. Rehabilitate pavement, upgrade guardrail, and upgrade facilities to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards.
• $500,000 allocation for the Pavement Resurfacing Project, which will focus on applying pavement rehabilitation treatments in various streets located in the southeast area of the City of Martinez to improve the City’s overall pavement condition index and reduce on-going maintenance. Project will also include ADA curb ramp improvements, restoration of vehicle detection sensors at signalized intersections, striping restoration, and green infrastructure improvements. (Funding description and source: Locally-Administered SB 1 Local Partnership Program (LPP) (Formulaic) Projects Off the State Highway System – Resolution LPP-A-2324-38)
• $83,000 allocation for the Morello Avenue sidewalk gap closure in Martinez will address gaps of concrete sidewalk on the east side of Morello Avenue, south of Village Oaks Drive; and the east side of Morello Avenue, north of Arnold Drive. Improvements will also new curb and gutter, and a new ADA curb ramp at the southeast corner of Morello Avenue/Village Oaks Drive. (Funding description and source: Locally-Administered SB 1 LPP (Formulaic) Projects Off the State Highway System – Resolution LPP-A-2324-38)

The Contra Costa projects funded are among multiple approved projects in District 4 – Bay Area / Oakland which includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties.

IIJA, known as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” is a once-in-a-generation investment in our nation’s infrastructure to improve the sustainability and resiliency of our energy, water, broadband and transportation systems. Since 2021, California has received more than $42 billion in IIJA funds, including more than $29 billion for transportation-related projects.

In addition, SB 1 provides $5 billion in transportation funding each year that is shared between state and local agencies. Road projects progress through construction phases more quickly based on the availability of SB 1 funds, including those partially funded by SB 1. 

See the complete list of the latest CTC-approved projects in each of the other nine Caltrans Districts in the state:

District 1 – Eureka (Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake and Mendocino counties)

District 2 – Redding (Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehama and Trinity counties)

District 3 – Marysville / Sacramento (Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Sierra, Sutter, Yolo and Yuba counties)

District 5 – San Luis Obispo / Santa Barbara (Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz counties)

District 6 – Fresno / Bakersfield (Kings, Tulare, Fresno, Madera and Kern counties)

District 7 – Los Angeles (Los Angeles and Ventura counties)

District 8 – Riverside and San Bernardino counties

District 9 – Bishop (Inyo, Kern and Mono counties)

District 10 – Stockton (Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Tuolumne counties)

District 11 – San Diego (San Diego and Imperial counties)

District 12 – Orange County

For more information about California transportation projects funded by IIJA and SB-1, visit RebuildingCA.ca.gov and www.build.ca.gov.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

“…contains challenging financial choices for the Governor and the Legislature…”- Malia Cohen

Fiscal year-to-date revenues still trend below expectations

SACRAMENTO — California State Controller Malia M. Cohen today, Friday, May 10, 2024, issued the following statement in response to Governor Gavin Newsom’s May budget revision:

“This morning, Governor Newsom released the May Revision to his proposed 2024-25 State Budget. The blueprint to address the remaining shortfall contains challenging financial choices for the Governor and the Legislature to maintain the state’s commitment to protecting essential programs and services and continuing critical investments in the state’s future.”

“As the state’s chief fiscal officer, it is my job to ensure the state has sufficient cash to pay our bills and to make certain that expenditures are transparent, accountable, and align with their intended purpose and expected outcomes. My office stands ready to assist both the Governor and the Legislature as they make their final push to finalize and approve the 2024-25 budget.”

In addition, Cohen today released her monthly cash report covering the state’s General Fund revenues, disbursements and actual cash balance for the fiscal year through April 30, 2024. The state ended April with $95.8 billion in unused borrowable resources, while fiscal year-to-date receipts continue below estimates contained in the 2024-25 Governor’s proposed budget.

The Governor’s Budget estimated that the state would collect nearly $16.3 billion in personal income taxes in April. As shown on the State Controller’s Office April 2024 Personal Income Tax Tracker webpage, the state exceeded the revenue target by approximately $150 million.

“With April personal income tax revenues just tracking with the most recent budget estimates, fiscal year-to-date revenues continue at lower-than-expected levels,” said Controller Cohen. “The high level of borrowable resources is due in large part to the $26 billion the state has prudently built up and reserved for rainy days and economic uncertainties. Maintaining enough cash to cushion against economic downturns has been one of California’s strengths in its credit ratings, and ensures the state will continue to meet its payment obligations.”

Fiscal year-to-date receipts through April were $169.8 billion, nearly $4.8 billion below the Governor’s Budget estimates, or 2.7 percent. The state’s cash position is $7.6 billion better than expected with disbursements of $184.9 billion for the fiscal year nearly $12.4 billion, or 6.3 percent, less than proposed budget projections.

As the chief fiscal officer of California, Controller Cohen is responsible for accountability and disbursement of the state’s financial resources. The Controller has independent auditing authority over government agencies that spend state funds. She is a member of numerous financing authorities, and fiscal and financial oversight entities including the Franchise Tax Board. She also serves on the boards for the nation’s two largest public pension funds. Follow the Controller on Twitter at @CAController and on Facebook at California State Controller’s Office.

Information on 2.7 million public employees from 2,518 agencies and 54 pension plans

Shows 15 police officers in Contra Costa County were paid more than $500,000 in 2022, including the highest to El Cerrito Police Chief at over $850,000 plus, 10 others from his dep’t

Also, shows highest paid in Antioch PD was a Captain at $476,018.55

Highest paid in the state was Vallejo Police Chief at $953,396.61

Transparent California, the state’s largest database of public pay and pension data, has completed data collection efforts for records detailing 2022 employee compensation and pension payments made by almost all public agencies in our state!

In the last year we’ve added data on 2.7 million public employees obtained from 2,518 agencies, and 1.4 million pension records from 54 pension plans to our database.  Added to our existing data from the last decade results in a total of 42 million records available on the site.  All obtained from the agency’s own pay data using requests made under the California Public Records Act, all are available online for free to anyone with an interest at http://transparentcalifornia.com.

Pay and benefit costs are the single largest expense in our government. Transparent California’s site provides members of the public with unprecedented visibility into that spending.  Knowing how government employees are personally benefiting from state and local spending is critical to ensuring true accountability in our government.

In 2022 over a million public employees, and over 125,000 pension recipients, enjoyed compensation packages totaling over $100,000 per year.  Using the data available we can see the City Manager in Norco was provided total compensation of $539,705, the school superintendent in Ontario-Montclair was paid $643,796, and a police lieutenant in Vallejo made $839,798.   

(Editor’s Note: According to an April 2021 ABC7 News report, Vallejo Police Lieutenant Herman Robinson, a 47-year employee with the department was fired. According to an April 2022 Vallejo Sun report, an arbitrator ordered Robinson be reinstated with back pay and be paid an additional 10% interest on his back pay. He “was one of the most highly paid city of Vallejo employees and received $179,590 in base pay and $196,941 in overtime pay for calendar year 2020, according to Transparent California, a website that tracks California government worker salaries. With benefits included, Robinson earned $547,403.68.”

Thus, the $839,798 Robinson was paid in 2022 included two years of compensation and the 10% interest on the back pay.)

UPDATE: That information was shared with Transparent California’s Director of Research, Todd Maddison. In response he wrote, “Thanks, appreciate the background.  We are rarely if ever given the ‘story’ behind any particular pay data, and with over 4 million records a year to collect we usually don’t investigate unless someone feels the number is erroneous. We do offer agencies the ability to make a note if they want so site users don’t think an outlier is ‘normal pay’, but we’re rarely taken up on that.

Meanwhile, in 2022 there were 67 police employees who made total pay only (excluding benefits) of over $400,000. I’ve attached a spreadsheet of police employees in case you’re interested.”

That spreadsheet shows the highest paid police officer in Contra Costa County in 2022 was Richmond Police Sergeant Florencio Rivera, whose total compensation was $512,432. A total of 15 officers in the county were paid more than $500,000 each, with 11 of them from the El Cerrito PD.

The Transparent California website gives ordinary taxpayers access to such data, illuminating the spending that drive state and local government deficits, including the $73 billion in red ink being projected by the state.

Data collection for 2023 compensation is now starting.  Those who want to monitor specific agencies can subscribe (free) or support the effort by sponsoring data collection from that agency.

Maddison noted, “2022 data collection was a great achievement.  We’re particularly proud our small donor funded team lapped the State Controller’s Office’s government-funded effort in K-12 education, collecting data from 1055 districts to their 424.  We’re focused on giving the people of California the data they deserve to see how their tax dollars are being spent.”

For more information go to http://transparentcalifornia.com.

Some have been exempt from paying out-of-state tuition since 2001

By Zaidee Stavely, EdSource – Republished with permission

More than 20 years ago, California passed a law allowing some undocumented immigrant students to attend college with in-state tuition, if they meet certain requirements.

But immigrant rights advocates say many students who should have been eligible have been wrongfully denied in-state tuition because of confusion over requirements, misinformation and different interpretations of the law at different college campuses.

“We lose that incredible brain power and colleges are losing enrollment,” said Nancy Jodaitis, director of higher education for Immigrants Rising, a nonprofit organization that advocates for undocumented people to achieve educational and career goals.

Immigrants Rising brought together officials from all three public college systems — California Community Colleges, California State University and University of California — to discuss and agree on answers to frequently-asked questions about the law.

The result is a document called the Systemwide AB 540 FAQ, which all three systems have now signed. The document includes answers to 59 questions, such as:

• What if a student graduated from a California high school (completing three years’ worth of high school credits), but did not attend three years at a California high school?
• Does a student have to take classes full time for their attendance to count?
• Does all their coursework have to be taken at the same school?

Spokespeople from UC, CSU and California Community Colleges all celebrated the document.

Paul Feist, vice chancellor of communications and marketing for the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, said the document is particularly important because there are several different laws regarding the nonresident tuition exemption.

The first bill exempting some undocumented immigrants from out-of-state tuition, Assembly Bill 540, was signed into law in 2001. Since then, three other bills have been passed to expand the law, in 2014, 2017 and 2022.

“While the intent was to expand access to AB 540 financial assistance, they had the unintended effect of making it more difficult to navigate,” Feist said. “This FAQ is designed to provide clearer explanations and provide additional resources in advising students.”

Under current California law, students who are undocumented or have temporary protection from deportation such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), or who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents, are eligible for in-state tuition and state financial aid, if they attended at least three years of high school, adult school or community college in California and obtained a high school diploma or equivalent, an associate degree or fulfilled the minimum requirements to transfer to a UC or CSU. 

Access to state financial aid and in-state tuition can be a critical factor for undocumented students, who are barred from receiving federal financial aid. Without the law in place, some of them would be charged tuition rates for international students, often much higher than in-state tuition.

“This is huge,” said Maria Gutierrez, a college counselor at Chabot College in Hayward and a doctoral student at San Francisco State University. “It helps us be aligned and have something in writing.”  Before the FAQ document, Gutierrez says college staff in charge of approving exemptions from out-of-state tuition were sometimes afraid to make decisions without written proof of how to interpret the law.

Gutierrez herself has benefited from AB 540. She came to the U.S. when she was 5 years old on a visa, which later expired. She attended elementary, middle and most of high school in California. She also graduated from high school in California. But when she applied to attend community college in California, different campuses disagreed on whether she was eligible for in-state tuition because she had spent two years of high school in Utah. At the time, a second law had recently been passed to allow colleges to consider years of attendance in elementary and middle school for AB 540 eligibility.

“One college that I went to in So Cal, I was approved for AB 540. When I had to go back to the Bay Area, I was not approved for AB 540. So then I was confused that there was this inconsistency,” Gutierrez said.

A few years later, when she applied to transfer to a four-year college, both UC and CSU campuses told her she was not eligible for in-state tuition, even though by then, a law had passed that clarified that attendance at community college could be counted toward the requirements. She spent a semester paying out-of-state tuition at San Jose State University, before the university finally acknowledged she was legally eligible for in-state tuition. 

As a college counselor, Gutierrez continues to meet students who have been incorrectly told they are not eligible for in-state tuition.

“It’s crazy because in reality it hasn’t changed much,” she said. However, she said, the financial burden is harder now, because most students graduating from high school cannot apply for work permits under DACA, because the government has not accepted new applications since 2017. 

“I see my students now and I see the struggles they’re going through. If I didn’t have DACA, I honestly don’t think I would be where I am now,” Gutierrez said. “There’s no way that I would’ve been able to pay nonresident fees or wait for whoever it is that is determining that to learn what they need to do for me to be able to go to college.”

Advocates say they hope the document will help colleges give correct information and avoid students having to research on their own for information.

California also recently streamlined the process for undocumented students to apply for financial aid and exemption from in-state tuition on the same application when they fill out the California Dream Act application. In the past, students had to both fill out a California Dream Act application and an AB 540 affidavit form for each college. Now, the AB 540 form will be part of the same application.

Diana Aguilar-Cruz said that change is significant. Aguilar-Cruz is currently pursuing a master’s degree in public health at Cal State Fullerton. When she first began her undergraduate education at Cal Poly Pomona, she was charged nonresident tuition, which was almost double the in-state tuition. She had immigrated to the U.S. from Mexico City in 2015, when she was 14 years old, and lived with her grandmother in Baldwin Park while attending high school. 

She had completed a California Dream Act application, but no one told her she also had to complete a separate form. After researching it herself online, she found the form and completed it, at which point the university finally changed her tuition to in-state.

“If I didn’t find it in my Google search, would I be paying in-state tuition for my four years of college?” Aguilar-Cruz said. “I always think to myself, what would have happened if I was a more fearful student or a student who did not have a strong support system at home?”

According to the Renewing the Dream page on the California Student Aid Commission’s website, “In 2021-22,  only 29% to 30% of undocumented college students who applied for financial aid through the California Dream Act Application (CADAA) ultimately enrolled in school. Moreover, only 14% of California’s estimated undocumented student population in postsecondary education ultimately received state financial aid.”

Allen D Payton contributed to this report.

Sacramento, CA – March 28, 2024 – After immense pressure from California Senate Republicans, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has finally listened and is scrapping the income-based utility bill scheme proposed by California’s largest utilities, which came to fruition as a result of Assembly Bill 205 (2022). The non-elective commission released a flat fixed rate proposal, with reduced charges for low-income customers, and is expected to vote on it on May 9, 2024. (See related article)

“I’m cautiously optimistic to see that CPUC’s preliminary decision on a new fixed-rate plan for electrical billing includes a flat rate rather than one of the ludicrous income-based charges that had been proposed,” said Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego). “I’m looking deeper into the proposal and studying how it will affect my constituents and ratepayers across the state. Still, I hope this may be a compromise Californians can live with. At the same time, I anticipate that electricity rates will continue to be a huge affordability issue in California, even under this new flat rate proposal.”

“As vice chair of the Senate Energy, Utility and Communications Committee, l have strongly advocated for affordable and reliable energy for Californians, but the majority party’s misguided approach has been driving up the rates for years,” said Senator Brian Dahle (R-Bieber). “This income-based utility scheme was another disastrous measure. I appreciate the CPUC heeding Republicans’ advice to pause this nonsensical bill, and I will continue to work tirelessly with my colleagues to make energy reform a reality in our state.”

The CPUC’s fixed rate proposal has a 20-day comment period and is eligible for a vote at the next CPUC public meeting on May 9, 2024. 

California Senate Republicans have been leading the fight against the income-based electricity charge after Capitol Democrats rammed it through budget trailer bill AB 205 in 2022. In 2023, and as recent as January 2024, Senate Democrats thwarted Senate Republicans’ efforts to provide Californians a lifeline by repealing AB 205. Additionally, this year, Senate Minority Leader Jones and the entire Senate Republican Caucus introduced SB 1326 to repeal the income-based fixed charge mandated by AB 205. Click here to learn more about the caucus’ efforts.  

After immense pressure from California Senate Republicans, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has finally listened and is scrapping the income-based utility bill scheme, which came to fruition as a result of Assembly Bill 205 (2022). The non-elective commission released a flat fixed rate proposal and is expected to vote on it on May 9, 2024.