1. LEGISLATURE ADOPTS 2022-23 BUDGET AGREEEMENT, SENDS IT TO GOVERNOR: LIBRARY PROGRAMS FUNDED

June 30, 2022

TO:                 CLA MEMBERS/ SYSTEMS/ NETWORK CONTACTS

FROM:           Mike Dillon and Christina DiCaro, CLA Lobbyists

RE:                 News From the Capitol

1. LEGISLATURE ADOPTS 2022-23 BUDGET AGREEEMENT, SENDS IT TO GOVERNOR:LIBRARY PROGRAMS FUNDED

    

   Last night the State Assembly and Senate worked late into the evening to adopt the 2022-23 State Budget bill and numerous corresponding Budget “trailer bills.”  You may have read that two weeks ago, the legislature sent Governor Newsom a Budget bill (SB 154-Skinner), in order to meet the Constitutional deadline of passing the Budget by June 15^th - or legislators would forfeit their pay.  However, at the time of the bill’s passage there was no formal agreement between the Democrat leaders in each house and the Governor. The Governor let the bill sit on his desk until additional details could be hammered out between his office and the Leadership relative to K-12 funding, energy, wildfire resilience, infrastructure, gas tax relief, and many other critical subject areas. 

   Last night on the Senate Floor, Senate President pro Tem Toni Atkins called the final Budget deal that was crafted between the Governor and the legislature: “remarkable,” and “one of the very best” she has worked on and helped to create in her time as pro Tem and formerly as Assembly Speaker.  AB 178-Ting (“Budget bill Jr.”) was ultimately sent to the Governor last night for his signature.

   For public libraries, there is good news contained in the Budget bills, SB 154-Skinner (signed on June 27) and AB 178-Ting, which is pending signature by the Governor:

   Note: We anticipate that the Governor will likely sign AB 178-Ting today so that it is in effect for the start of the new fiscal year, July 1.

2. “CHILDREN’S CAMP” BILL IS AMENDED TO ADDRESS CLA OPPOSITION

• $5 million in ongoing funding for Lunch at the Library. Funding was increased this year from $1 million to $5 million and the fact that the funding will now be “ongoing” in nature (rather than a one-time appropriation) allows public libraries to be able to plan their programs year-to-year.
• $50 million (one-time funding) in public library infrastructure grants for Budget year 2022-23.This funding is on the heels of last year’s Budget, which provided $439 million for library infrastructure grants.The $50 million will have a $10 million grant cap per project, and will require a local match.The Budget also includes language indicating legislative intent to provide an additional $100 million in library infrastructure grants in Budget year 2023-24 as well.
• $10 million (one-time funding) for online job training and workforce development resources at public libraries.The $10 million would continue to fund popular online programs, such as Coursera, LinkedIn Learning, VetNow, JobNow, etc.
• $68 million to create the “Statewide Imagination Library, a California iteration of Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library under the administration of the State Librarian.”This program registers children ages 0-5 to receive free books, which are sent to their home via the Dolly Parton Imagination Library.Libraries and others would partner with non-profits to provide the service.A corresponding bill, SB 1183 (which will implement the program), is making its way through the legislature with strong, bi-partisan support.The bill is authored by former Republican Leader Senator Shannon Grove, and her co-author, the Senate President pro Tem Toni Atkins.

AB 1737 by Assemblymember Holden has been of great concern to the California Library Association since its introduction earlier this year.  As introduced, the bill sought to identify and register “children’s camps” in California and create standards by which they must operate, which would have included the presence of at least two mandated reporters during the duration of the camp, background checks, health and safety protocols, inspections, etc.  Unfortunately, the definition of “children’s camps” was drawn so broadly in the bill that it included any conceivable “camp” that a public library might operate during the year for children ages 3 to 17 and lasting 5 days or more.  (e.g. STEM camp, computer coding camp, literacy camp, etc.)  Adding additional confusion, there is also a definition in the bill of “organized camps” which may include an “outdoor group living experience.”   The bill also spoke of camps where high-risk activities were included such as archery, ziplining, motorsports, and others.

In the bill’s first policy committee in the Assembly Health Committee, we asked the author to consider exempting public libraries completely from the bill, as CLA felt that public library programs were completely different than a sleep-over camp with ziplining activities and camp counselors.  However, we were unable to secure an exemption as the bill moved through the Assembly side, as the bill’s sponsor did not want to include a series of exemptions in the bill.  Meanwhile, our office maintained conversations with the author’s office on a regular basis.  When the bill reached the Senate side, the two policy committees – Senate Human Services and Senate Public Safety were very helpful in listening to the concerns of CLA and trying to help us forge a path forward. 

In the Senate Human Services Committee hearing on June 20^th, the committee recommended stripping out a good portion of the language in the bill and creating a Stakeholder/Working Group to develop a Master Plan on children’s camp safety.  (Recommendations from the working group would be brought back to the legislature by January 2024 to inform next steps.)  However, what remained in the bill was onerous language that would have: made public library directors and staff mandated child reporters and would have required library staff to be background checked and take abuse and neglect identification training.  We testified on behalf of CLA at the hearing and indicated our continued opposition to any language that would require public library directors and staff to become mandated child reporters.  Senator Richard Pan who is a member of the committee and a pediatrician, spoke in support of CLA’s concerns and indicated his own concerns that there is a significant liability that comes with serving as a mandated child reporter.  Dr. Pan argued that he would prefer to see public libraries left out of that requirement.  He also noted that there can be a tendency to over-report abuse and neglect cases due to liability concerns – such reporting, he said, may fall disproportionately on low-income children or children of color.  CLA is grateful to Senator Richard Pan for his remarks in committee.  The bill passed out of committee and headed to its next policy committee. 

In the Senate Public Safety Committee on Tuesday of this week, the Committee Chair, Senator Steve Bradford recommended that the onerous provision pertaining to mandated reporters be stricken from the bill. The Committee’s Chief Consultant who analyzed the bill had noted in her analysis that the penalty for a mandated reporter to fail to report suspected child abuse or neglect is a misdemeanor.  The consultant questioned, “The bill would add a person who is over the age of 18 who is a camp operator, camp director, staff member, or counselor at a children’s camp to the list of mandated reporters.  Should anyone over 18 be a mandated reporter?”  The consultant also featured CLA’s entire opposition letter in the text of the analysis.  In our letters to the various policy committees, we have consistently noted that “without an exemption for public libraries or the elimination of [Section] 60003.5, public libraries will simply elect to shut down their summer programs because of this costly and administrative burden.” 

At the hearing, we confirmed that the section in question (60003.5 in previous versions of the bill, and 60000 in the most current version of the bill) will be stricken, per the committee’s insistence.  During the hearing we thanked the committee and the author for continuing to work with CLA throughout the process.  CLA will review those amendments when the bill is in print and the CLA Legislative Committee will determine if they can officially move to a “neutral” position on the bill.  The bill now heads to the fiscal committee, where it will receive a hearing in August.   A special “thank you” to the members of the CLA Legislative Committee who provided examples to use with legislators of how the bill would affect their “summer camp” programs, as well as Ann Grabowski at San Jose Public Library, Derek Wolfgram at Redwood City Library, and lobbyists for the California Special District’s Association and the League of Cities.