Postsecondary education: sexual assault: audits.
Summary
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California's public and independent segments of higher education and their respective institutions of higher education. Provisions of the act apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California, by appropriate resolution, act to make a provision applicable. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act known as the Equity in Higher Education Act requires each postsecondary institution in the state, prior to receipt of any state financial assistance or student financial aid, to provide assurance that each program or activity conducted by the institution will be conducted in compliance with state laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex. Title IX of the federal Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) prohibits discrimination based on sex, including sexual harassment, rape, and sexual assault, in an educational institution's programs or activities. This bill would require the California State Auditor, beginning January 1, 2015, and every 3 years thereafter, until January 1, 2025, to audit 2 institutions selected by the California State Auditor from each segment of public postsecondary education, including the University of California, to determine if their practices are consistent with Title IX, its implementing regulations, and federal guidance on Title IX related to sexual harassment and assault. The bill would require a public institution, including a campus of the University of California, found to have practices that are inconsistent with those federal requirements and guidance to transfer funds from that institution's administrative budget to the institution's Title IX compliance office to provide additional resources to that office, in an amount determined by the governing board of the institution, and would require the California State Auditor, within one year of the audit, to report to the Legislature on those transfers of funds.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2014
Committee Review
Aug 2014
Assembly Passage
Apr 2014
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Jan 27, 2014
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes · Assembly Apr 24, 2014
How they voted
66–0
Passed · 4 other
Total votes 70
Apr 24, 2014
D
Democratic50
96% Yea
R
Republican20
90% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
20
Key actions
7
Committee
9
Aug 11, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).
upper
Aug 4, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to consent calendar.
upper
Jun 25, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 2, 2014
Upper · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
May 8, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
upper
Apr 24, 2014
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (66-0-4)
assembly
Apr 9, 2014
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (April 9).
lower
Mar 19, 2014
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (March 18). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Feb 6, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.
lower
Jan 28, 2014
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee February 27.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Anthony Rendon
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1549
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1549. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline