California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 108 — Education: Child care: individualized county child care subsidy plans: the Every Kid Counts (EKC) Act.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 7, Statutes of 2018.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2017. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 4 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act has a purpose of providing a comprehensive, coordinated, and cost-effective system of child care and development services for children from infancy to 13 years of age and their parents, including a full range of supervision, health, and support services through full- and part-time programs. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop standards for the implementation of quality child care programs. Existing law authorizes the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Marin, Monterey, San Benito, San Diego, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma, as individual pilot projects, to develop an individualized county child care subsidy plan, as provided. Existing law repeals each of these pilot programs on specified dates. This bill would repeal, recast, and revise the law relating to the above-specified counties' individualized subsidy plans and make related conforming changes, as provided. The bill would extend the operative dates of the individualized pilot programs by 6 months. (2) Existing law authorizes the City and County of San Francisco and the City of San Mateo to develop and implement individualized county child care subsidy plans that include specified elements. Existing law authorizes the plans to supersede state law concerning child care subsidy programs with regard to specified factors, including eligibility criteria, as provided. This bill would, among other things, make changes to the eligibility criteria and would allow the plans to supersede state law on ratios of four-year-old children in state preschool programs. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Marin, Monterey, San Benito, San Diego, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma. (4) Existing law establishes the Every Kid Counts (EKC) Act, which requires the Scholarshare Investment Board to implement and administer a college savings program that incentivizes families to participate in a qualified tuition program established under the Golden State Scholarshare Trust Act or other college savings programs. Before implementing the program, existing law requires the board to make specified considerations, including how best to incentivize low-income families to participate in these college savings programs and whether and how proposed actions allow for rigorous evaluation of the effects of the EKC Act. Existing law requires the board and the Franchise Tax Board to exchange prescribed information in order to verify financial eligibility under these college savings programs. This bill would revise and recast the act to instead, among other things, require the Student Aid Commission to distribute grants to local governments and other entities that sponsor one or more comprehensive citywide or regional children's savings account programs to help families establish and maintain college savings accounts. The bill would make the amount of each grant $100,000, at a minimum, and would require each participating entity to meet certain requirements in order to receive the grant. (5) Existing law, the Budget Act of 2017, appropriates $3,000,000 for purposes of the Golden State Scholarshare Trust Program. This bill would repeal that appropriation and would appropriate that amount to the Student Aid Commission for purposes of the EKC College Savings Program. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 7, Statutes of 2018.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 71. Noes 0. Page 4196.).

  5. Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Page 4192.)

  6. Assembly Rule 77(a) suspended.

  7. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after March 10 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  8. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 3433.).

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (March 1).

  11. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  12. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  13. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  14. Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Mitchell.

  15. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  16. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (June 13).

  17. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  18. Referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  19. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  20. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 45. Noes 25. Page 1597.)

  21. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  22. Ordered to second reading.

  23. Withdrawn from committee.

  24. Assembly Rule 96 suspended. (Ayes 52. Noes 25. Page 1511.)

  25. Referred to Com. on BUDGET.

  26. From printer. May be heard in committee February 10.

  27. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Committee on Budget · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Committee on Budget

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

3rd Reading AB108 BUDGET (Ting) By Mitchell

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 32002
Democratic 4001
Total 36003
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Pan — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Dodd — Yea
De León — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Allen — Yea
Hernandez — Not Voting
Atkins — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Bates — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Monning — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Newman — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Not Voting
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

AB 108 BUDGET Concurrence in Senate Amendments By TING

Passed 71 Yea · 0 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 15000
Unaffiliated 50006
Republican 6000
Total 71006
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (77)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Yea
Holden — Yea
Levine — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Burke — Yea
Gray — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chu — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Medina — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Yea
Salas — Yea
Acosta — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Harper — Not Voting
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Kiley — Not Voting
Maienschein — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Melendez — Not Voting
Mullin — Not Voting
Baker — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Nazarian — Not Voting
O'Donnell — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Daly — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13001
Democratic 2000
Total 15001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Not Voting
Nielsen — Yea
Roth — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Monning — Yea
Pan — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 12 Yea · 5 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 10500
Democratic 2000
Total 12500
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Nay
Beall — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Moorlach — Nay
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wilk — Nay
Glazer — Yea
Mark Stone — Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

labor education
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 108 do?
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act has a purpose of providing a comprehensive, coordinated, and cost-effective system of child care and development services for children from infancy to 13 years of age and their parents, including a full range of supervision, health, and support services through full- and part-time programs. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop standards for the implementation of quality child care programs. Existing law authorizes the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Marin, Monterey, San Benito, San Diego, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma, as individual pilot projects, to develop an individualized county child care subsidy plan, as provided. Existing law repeals each of these pilot programs on specified dates. This bill would repeal, recast, and revise the law relating to the above-specified counties' individualized subsidy plans and make related conforming changes, as provided. The bill would extend the operative dates of the individualized pilot programs by 6 months. (2) Existing law authorizes the City and County of San Francisco and the City of San Mateo to develop and implement individualized county child care subsidy plans that include specified elements. Existing law authorizes the plans to supersede state law concerning child care subsidy programs with regard to specified factors, including eligibility criteria, as provided. This bill would, among other things, make changes to the eligibility criteria and would allow the plans to supersede state law on ratios of four-year-old children in state preschool programs. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Marin, Monterey, San Benito, San Diego, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma. (4) Existing law establishes the Every Kid Counts (EKC) Act, which requires the Scholarshare Investment Board to implement and administer a college savings program that incentivizes families to participate in a qualified tuition program established under the Golden State Scholarshare Trust Act or other college savings programs. Before implementing the program, existing law requires the board to make specified considerations, including how best to incentivize low-income families to participate in these college savings programs and whether and how proposed actions allow for rigorous evaluation of the effects of the EKC Act. Existing law requires the board and the Franchise Tax Board to exchange prescribed information in order to verify financial eligibility under these college savings programs. This bill would revise and recast the act to instead, among other things, require the Student Aid Commission to distribute grants to local governments and other entities that sponsor one or more comprehensive citywide or regional children's savings account programs to help families establish and maintain college savings accounts. The bill would make the amount of each grant $100,000, at a minimum, and would require each participating entity to meet certain requirements in order to receive the grant. (5) Existing law, the Budget Act of 2017, appropriates $3,000,000 for purposes of the Golden State Scholarshare Trust Program. This bill would repeal that appropriation and would appropriate that amount to the Student Aid Commission for purposes of the EKC College Savings Program. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Who sponsors AB 108?
AB 108 is sponsored by Committee on Budget.
What is the current status of AB 108?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2017. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 108?
Track AB 108 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 108

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 108

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →