The Brief

Here’s the scenario: L.A. has to handle a really tricky issue. Maybe it’s homelessness, rebuilding after wildfires, or community relations with police — but you are responsible for helping come up with policy solutions to address it.

You’re not a City Council member or government official of any kind. You’re just an ordinary resident, working with a group of other randomly selected residents to hammer out workable ideas for the government to adopt.

This is the idea behind a civic assembly, a process designed to bring communities closer to the public decision-making that affects their lives. Over the past decade, cities across the world — primarily in Europe but also in Brazil, Colombia, Canada and a small number of places in the United States — have increasingly experimented with civic assemblies to address questions like how to improve air quality, what to do with a city-owned piece of land, how to tackle youth homelessness, and more.

They’re not used in L.A. — yet. But some groups have tried to build momentum to make civic assemblies a reality here.

Part of that effort means letting Angelenos try the experience out for themselves.

On a recent Saturday afternoon, a group of around 30 residents gathered in a room at the Veterans Memorial Building in Culver City.

Their job was to tackle one big local question the way a real civic assembly would. The session was co-hosted by Public Democracy L.A., an advocacy group championing more inclusivity and representation in L.A.’s democratic systems, and Braver Angels, a national organization dedicated to bridging political divides.

“I’ve been dying to do this with other people,” said Joan Jaeckel, a resident from Studio City. She said the idea of civic assemblies appealed to her because it was a way to start a discussion from a point of curiosity and learning, rather than fighting from opposing political sides.

“I’m tired of yelling at the TV and writing on Facebook. But to do this with other people is exhilarating,” she said.

How a civic assembly works

A civic assembly (also called a citizens’ assembly) is sort of a cross between a city council meeting and jury duty. The idea: Gather a group of residents — chosen randomly, but also selected for demographic factors like age, race or socioeconomic status to make sure the group is representative of the broader community — and give them a big question to address.

The group then holds a series of meetings to learn about it, deliberate, and come up with a set of policy solutions. In the end, it produces a list of recommended policies that the government can turn into real legislation.

A protestor drapes a banner from scaffolding in London.

(

Carl Court

/

Getty Images Europe

)

Civic assemblies are usually formed when there’s an especially complicated or divisive problem to solve. In some cities like Brussels and Paris, they’re a permanent staple of government decision-making and are formed every year.

The idea isn’t a far stretch from some of the ways local governments in Southern California already try to get residents involved. For example: K-12 schools have school site councils, made up of parents, students, staff and community members. And there are citizens’ advisory groups, which recruit residents to provide policy recommendations and feedback for city governments (like South Gate or Long Beach) or individual agencies (like L.A. Metro). However, elected officials appoint these members.

What makes civic assemblies different is their accessibility. They’re intended for as many people as possible to have a chance to participate and designed to reflect the diverse backgrounds and perspectives of the wider community — including those traditionally left out of government decision-making. Participants are paid stipends to cover the costs of transportation, child care, food and other needs so they can attend.

This inclusive selection process is one reason Culver City Councilmember Bubba Fish has been interested in the idea. The city, like many others, has struggled to get input on important local issues from residents who don’t regularly participate in city government or civic life, he said. A civic assembly was a way to hear from a wide range of residents who also had time to become fully educated about the topic at hand.

He attended the mock civic assembly to see if it could be a good fit for an upcoming task: redesigning the public input process for Culver City’s annual budget.

“I went through our budget process when I first got elected and I could not believe how few people we heard from,” Fish said. Culver City lawmakers recently agreed to set aside $250,000 to improve the budget process. They have yet to decide how to spend that money, but creating a civic assembly to help design a new budget process is one option on the table.

Alex Levy, an organizer with Public Democracy L.A., said she hoped the experience would inspire people to imagine other scenarios where a civic assembly could be useful in their communities.

“We think that these little model assemblies can provide a good avenue for smaller problems within communities that can be solved,” Levy said. “So like for a neighborhood council that’s just trying to just figure out where a streetlight goes, or bike lanes — there's all these questions that are facing these communities, and maybe an assembly could be useful for that.”

The mock civic assembly

The randomized, demographically representative selection process wasn’t part of the mock civic assembly. The group overall was older and whiter than one that would have been picked for a real assembly. But that day’s goal wasn’t to fully mimic the real thing. Instead, it was to help participants get a feel for the experience. Could people who had little to no background knowledge about the topic feel confident weighing in on policy? How would it feel to craft solutions with people of different backgrounds or opinions?

The L.A. participants received their big question to tackle for the day: “What should happen to land in areas damaged by fire to balance resiliency, safety and housing needs?”

It required a steep learning curve. Many participants said they knew little or nothing about the complicated issues involved — fire resilience, municipal finance, housing policy and more. But in a civic assembly, you don’t have to be an expert on any of the issues. The learning is built into the process.

Experts from local government, advocacy groups and other stakeholders are usually part of the civic assembly meetings, citing data, giving additional context and sharing their organizations’ stances. For this session, representatives came from Abundant Housing LA, a group that champions greater housing density; Altadena Green, which works to preserve Altadena’s tree canopy; and the office of State Sen. Ben Allen, whose district includes the Pacific Palisades. Each gave a 10-minute presentation at the start of the session to outline their organization’s perspective on post-wildfire rebuilding.

Participants split up into groups of four or five, each probing one policy idea. Among them: low-interest loans for those looking to rebuild in fire zones, forested buffer zones around residential neighborhoods, and ensuring that all new development and utilities in burn zones are gas-free.

One group's policy evaluation sheet and final votes.

(

Brianna Lee

/

LAist

)

Facilitators helped each group organize their thoughts and make sure everyone had a chance to speak. What were the benefits or negatives of each proposal in terms of logistics, finances or social effects? What questions remained?

Participants scribbled on sticky notes, peppered the experts with questions and bounced thoughts off each other, at times tweaking the wording of a proposal or adding qualifiers. A proposal about giving low-interest loans to homeowners or multi-family projects in burn zones got an added caveat that those loans could be interest-free or forgivable if they provided low-income rents for the loan term. Another group changed their proposal’s language from “Plan for community-level greenbelt buffers” to “Activate the local workforce to build community-level and neighborhood scale greenbelts” instead.

There was little, if any, heated debate. Most were simply trying to better understand the full impact of the proposals before them: Are developers disproportionately benefiting from this idea? Would going gas-free for all new construction mean added strain on the power grid? Where does insurance fit into all of this? Who’s responsible for footing the bill?

At the end of the session, participants stuck colored dots on each proposal to indicate whether they loved it, would support it with some changes, still weren’t sure about it, or rejected it. In a real civic assembly, proposals with the strongest support would pass through to the official recommendation list.

How well does this work in real life?

A group's policy evaluation from the Culver City mock assembly, with a slight alteration to the original premise.

(

Brianna Lee

/

LAist

)

Major legislation has come out of civic assemblies in other countries. Famously, Ireland’s citizens’ assemblies led to the repeal of a nationwide abortion ban and the legalization of same-sex marriage.

It’s hardly a slam dunk for getting new laws passed, though. For instance, when France convened a citizens’ assembly on climate in 2019, President Emmanuel Macron pledged to advance or sign their proposals “without filter.” In the end, only 10% of the group’s 149 proposals made it into the government’s climate bill unchanged, while 37% were modified or watered down. More than half were rejected outright.

But even if the actual power of civic assemblies hold to make change is a mixed bag, there’s another, more consistent effect: studies show civic assemblies are a really worthwhile experience for the people who participate in them.

For instance, an analysis of Petaluma’s 2022 civic assembly on what to do with a hotly contested fairgrounds land found that more than 90% of participants felt a growing sense of community with other members of the group and felt their input was meaningful in local decision-making. Nearly 40% reported that they were more politically active since their civic assembly experience.

In another pilot assembly to come up with solutions for child care access in Montrose, Colorado, more than 90% of participants said after the fact that their thoughts were heard, they were exposed to opinions and perspectives they hadn’t considered before, and that they supported using the same process to address community problems in the future.

Those who attended L.A.’s mock assembly seemed to share many of these feelings too.

“I was surprised at just how nuanced our discussion could get,” said Patrick Traynor, an Irvine resident. Traynor said he came because he had been fascinated by the idea of civic assemblies, but knew very little about fire safety or the finances of land ownership and renting, the issues his group was assigned to discuss. He wound up learning a lot about both topics, with help from the experts available.

A real civic assembly, he said, could help residents learn the ins and outs of complex issues in a way that they would never have time for just by filling out a ballot.

“I’m even more excited about this idea now that I’ve done this mock assembly,” he said.

Jamal Thomas from Bell Gardens said that hearing from others not only allowed him to think of solutions from a wider range of perspectives, but also made him feel like solutions were more attainable.

“Honestly, just listening to people’s experiences and what people want and need about different options and opportunities really helped me believe that there’s hope in getting some of this done,” he said.

Fish, the Culver City council member, said the experience was “incredibly eye-opening” for him.

"I was so floored by how it encourages collaboration and deep respect between people,” he said. “I went in thinking about the budget and I came out thinking, ‘How do I make this a part of our regular decision-making process as a city?'"

What would it take to bring more civic assemblies to L.A.?

Culver City’s subcommittee on governance is scheduled to hold its next meeting on Tuesday, July 8 at 3 p.m. It will hear a presentation on civic assemblies from Public Democracy L.A., and from there the subcommittee will consider whether to move forward with putting its first civic assembly together on the budget process.

If you want to give public comment on the issue, the meeting agenda has instructions on how to do so.

If you’re interested in exploring the idea of civic assemblies elsewhere — maybe in your local school, or another city government — you can get in touch with this event’s organizers, Public Democracy L.A. and Braver Angels, to see what upcoming events they may be putting together. Public Democracy L.A. also holds regular meetings where civic assembly advocates can strategize ways to bring them closer to reality.

The number of Californians without health insurance could double from 2 million today to 4 million by 2030, according to a report from the state Legislative Analyst's Office. It’s the state budget office’s preliminary attempt to quantify how federal legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill” will reshape healthcare access statewide.

The One Big Beautiful Bill is driving nearly 90% of the projected coverage loss, according to the LAO report. It's mostly Medi-Cal enrollees who are expected to be dropped when new work requirements take effect in 2027. The remaining 10% are largely people leaving the state's health insurance marketplace, Covered California, after enhanced federal premium subsidies expired last year.

What's the impact to coverage?

L.A. County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents and cost the health departments about $800 million a year. A UC Berkeley Labor Center analysis projected more than 1 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage by 2028.

The LAO report also warns that county indigent health programs for uninsured residents will soon face a surge in demand they’re not prepared to meet. Those county programs had enrolled about 850,000 people statewide before the federal government expanded Medicaid coverage in 2014. Total enrollment is currently 10,000 statewide, but the trend is going to reverse, according to the report.

What's the impact to health-care providers?

More uninsured people means hospitals and clinics provide more services without getting paid. The LAO projects that uncompensated care costs at hospitals could grow by several billion dollars statewide by 2030. Clinics face steeper losses because they run on smaller budgets and depend more heavily on Medi-Cal revenue.

The LAO also projects premiums on the individual health insurance market will rise as healthier people drop coverage.

What are proposals to help?

The LAO itself doesn’t recommend new spending and instead urges lawmakers to track what happens to hospitals, clinics and county programs before taking action. But both L.A. County and state officials are pushing tax efforts to combat federal cuts.

L.A. County voters will decide June 2 on Measure ER, a half-cent sales tax that would generate about $1 billion a year for hospitals and clinics. ANovember statewide ballot initiative would impose a one-time 5% tax on Californians worth over $1 billion and direct 90% of proceeds to Medi-Cal.

California regulators say State Farm has illegally delayed, underpaid and denied claims from policyholders affected by the 2025 L.A. fires — something fire survivors have said for months.

The California Department of Insurance announced Monday that it has taken the first step in the process to bring the allegations to a public hearing before an administrative judge. That could result in the state’s largest home insurer paying up to about $4 million in penalties, and suspension of its license for up to a year, meaning it could not write new policies in California during that time.

“Our investigation found that State Farm delayed, underpaid, and buried policyholders in red tape at the worst moment of their lives,” state Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara said in a statement.

The state analyzed 220 randomly selected claims — out of more than 11,000 filed with State Farm in response to last year’s fires — and found hundreds of violations in more than half them. Attorneys for the state called it a “troubling pattern” in their filing.

State Farm denied the allegations and called the state’s move “politically motivated” in a lengthy statement posted to its website.

Every Fire Survivors Network, a coalition representing thousands of L.A. fire survivors, pressured the state for months to investigate State Farm’s handling of wildfire claims.

Joy Chen, who co-founded the group after her home was damaged in the Eaton Fire, said the state’s action is far from enough.

“It’s just very disappointing to see our regulator issue a report that shows his own failures over the last 16 months,” she told LAist.

Only a few dozen homes have been rebuilt so far in both Altadena and Pacific Palisades since the fires destroyed more than 16,000 buildings, mostly homes, in those communities and nearby areas.

A survey by the nonprofit Department of Angels last year found that nearly three-quarters of L.A. fire survivors reported delays, denials and low payouts of their claims across all insurers.

“What we need is for all State Farm contracts to be enforced so that Los Angeles families can have the money that we need to move forward with getting back home,” Chen said.

The state’s alleged violations carry a fine of up to $5,000, and up to $10,000 if the violations are found to be willful. The case will be heard by a state administrative law judge, who will provide a recommendation to Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara on a possible penalty.

The Insurance Department said people with homeowners policies from any insurer can report problems with their claims at insurance.ca.gov or by calling (800) 927-4357.

Yes, you could put a screen in your backyard and call up your friends to watch a particularly compelling World Cup game after the tournament begins June 12.

But FIFA is turning each game into a public celebration, sponsoring 10 outdoor Fan Zone watch parties with large viewing screens across L.A. County through the final on July 19.

Details were released on Monday, including locations, dates and prices.

The Fan Zones open in a staggered schedule from one day to four days each, starting with the Original Farmers Market on June 18 - 21, and then popping up across the region until the glorious end on July 19 in downtown Burbank.

Ticket prices range from free (City of Downey, Union Station L.A., “Magic” Johnson Park, Whittier Narrows) to over $300 for a VIP experience with a viewing lounge and a concert at the downtown Burbank Fan Zone on the day of the World Cup final match on July 19.

Fan Zone kick off

At the first Fan Zone, at The Original Farmers Market from June 18 for four days, entry will cost you $5 per day or $17 for all four days. Kids age 3 and under are free. (FIFA says the zones are family friendly).

You’ll be able to see four matches there each of the four days, including Mexico vs. South Korea on June 18 at 6 p.m. and USA vs. Australia on June 19 at noon.

FIFA World Cup 2026 scarves are displayed during the ribbon cutting for the LAX/Metro Transit Center rail and bus public transportation station at LAX on June 6, 2025.

(

Patrick T. Fallon

/

Getty Images

)

You won’t have to squint to find your favorite player or catch the goals. The Farmer’s Market will include a 30-foot viewing screen as well as a 15-foot secondary screen to watch the games. There will be beer gardens, and you can purchase food from the Market's dozens of establishments.

Other Fan Zones

The West Harbor L.A. Fan Zone will give people an opportunity to experience the newest major development along the San Pedro waterfront, a 42-acre waterfront district that’s been years in the making.

The Union Station L.A. Fan Zone on June 25 is free and includes match viewing, music, food, and immersive fan experiences, featuring live DJs.

The final Fan Zone opens July 18 and 19 in downtown Burbank for the World Cup’s last two matches. FIFA says it’ll include “an adjacent international street fair filled with global flavors and cultural experiences.” Tickets range from $25 to over $300

The full list of the Fan Zones is here.

This of course, isn’t the only opportunity to watch World Cup matches with groups of people in SoCal. The city of L.A. will host its own watch parties.

Up against a massive court backlog that can drag their cases for years, asylum seekers face steep costs when pursuing their dreams of college in California.

Asylum-seeking students in California often face a double blow: they are charged higher tuition for nonresidents and excluded from most financial aid. For students and their families, this can mean thousands of dollars paid out of pocket and years of financial stress as their immigration cases remain unresolved.

Before establishing residency, asylum-seeking students are charged non-resident rates, which are about three times what state residents pay for public universities and roughly eight to 13 times more for community colleges, depending on the district.

All asylum seekers are disqualified from federal financial aid. The few who qualify for California’s state aid may never know their options, or face hurdles in obtaining it due to a patchwork of financial aid processes.

The state’s higher education systems are not mandated to track asylum seekers, making state budget impacts nearly unquantifiable during legislative attempts to expand financial aid eligibility.

“I only see them struggling,” said Eric Cline, social services program director at OASIS Legal Services, which supports LGBTQ+ asylum seekers across the Bay Area and Central Valley. “I’m always surprised (when) a few clients tell me 'I just graduated from college.’ I think, ‘Wow, how did that happen?’”

Policy changes stoke uncertainty for asylum seekers

Asylum seeking is one of the least-protected immigration statuses in the U.S. Asylum seekers, who’ve fled their home countries fearing persecution and are asking the U.S. for protection, differ from refugees, whose status is granted before they enter the country. Asylum seekers apply upon arriving in the U.S.

Applicants can stay as their cases remain pending for years, though experts say the Trump administration is expediting deportations for numerous asylum seekers and ending cases before they can receive a full hearing.

As of February 2026, a little over 2.3 million immigrants are awaiting asylum hearings nationwide, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal activity. The most recent data shows California alone had about 169,000 pending asylum cases in its immigration courts by the end of 2023 — the second-largest backlog of any state. The average wait for an asylum hearing in California was 1,412 days at that time.

The Trump administration paused asylum cases in November, creating even further delays. The administration has now allowed cases to resume for applicants from all but 40 countries. In the San Francisco immigration court system, which is popular among asylum seekers due to higher acceptance rates, a combination of firings by the Trump administration, retirements and relocations whittled the 21 immigration judges to two, according to reporting in Mission Local. Left behind is a caseload of nearly 119,000 immigration cases, the highest of any immigration court in California.

President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” also established new fees for asylum seekers, placing additional pressure on an already low-income population. Applicants must now pay an initial $100 application fee plus $100 per year while their case is pending, $550 for a work permit, and $745 each year to renew the permit. In addition, a new rule proposed by the Department of Homeland Security would effectively end the ability of asylum seekers to obtain work permits at all.

Royce Hall on the UCLA campus

(

Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag

/

Los Angeles Times

)

As they await a decision, asylum seekers are excluded from federal aid and some state financial aid programs, including Cal Grants under California law.

For one asylum seeker, Carol, being ineligible for financial aid meant she had to take time off from school to work to make ends meet. CalMatters is not using her full name because she fears speaking publicly may jeopardize her asylum case.

Carol did speak before the Assembly Higher Education Committee in 2023 urging lawmakers to pass AB 888, which would have expanded Cal Grant eligibility to certain asylum seekers. The bill ultimately did not pass.

She said she arrived in the United States at 17 and had spent more than six years waiting for her case to move through immigration courts, a period during which she said she was ineligible for financial aid.

“I’ve had to delay my educational journey several times, including going part-time and even taking a semester off from school to work,” Carol told lawmakers.

Without access to aid, she said she experienced homelessness, couch surfing and at one point slept on a mattress topper on a hardwood floor because she could not afford a bed. She worked multiple jobs at a time, skipped meals and attended class without the required course materials.

Her story, she said, was not new. Carol told the committee that four years earlier her brother had testified with a nearly identical experience on behalf of a previous bill that was ultimately vetoed, a cycle she argued could have been prevented.

“Had California taken action then, I wouldn’t have had to face the harrowing experiences that I shared with you today,” she said.

Despite the barriers, Carol graduated from Cal State Long Beach and worked as a caseworker with the International Rescue Committee, helping resettle refugees and asylum seekers. She told lawmakers she hopes to pursue a law degree and become an international human rights attorney.

The narrow path to college aid for asylum-seeking students

Many asylum seekers arrive eager to continue studies they began abroad, but quickly run into what Cline calls “a brick wall."

“All of our clients are low-income … they’re almost never eligible for generalized financial aid,” he said. “When you take away the financial aid aspect, it makes (college) pretty inaccessible.”

For California residents, annual undergraduate tuition is $15,588 at the University of California, $6,838 at the California State University and about $1,380 for 30 units at a community college. Students classified as non-residents — including some asylum seekers before establishing residency — can pay $54,858 at a University of California, about $20,968 at a Cal State before campus-based fees, and roughly $10,140 to $13,560 for 30 units at a community college, depending on the district. These figures do not include campus-based fees, housing or living expenses.

Even when students do manage to establish residency, the cost is still steep. For the many asylum seekers who arrive in the United States as adults, they may not have attended a California school previously, barring them from qualifying for state financial aid.

AB 540, the 2001 law that exempts undocumented students from paying non-resident tuition, only applies if the student attended a California high school or community college for three years.

Those who qualify through AB 540 can fill out the California Dream Act Application for state financial aid, such as Cal Grants, university system-specific grants, state loans, and the state’s middle class scholarship.

The application process can still be confusing for asylum seekers whose status is not fully accounted for in the design of the application. For example, asylum seekers often have Social Security numbers for work authorization, but affirming so while answering the financial aid pre-screening questions leads to undetermined eligibility because the questions don’t take into account the nuances of applying as an asylum seeker.

Stickers and flyers on a table in the Undocumented Community Center at the College of San Mateo in San Mateo, on Nov. 28, 2023. At this center, undocumented students can access financial and legal aid as well as guidance in navigating grant applications.

(

Amaya Edwards

/

CalMatters

)

Asylum seekers often require extra help from financial aid counselors, but even counselors may not know how to help navigate eligibility rules. Students often wind up seeking help from undocumented student resource centers on public campuses, which are designed to help students who lack legal residency and those from mixed-status families find aid and academic support.

Kaveena Singh, the director of immigration legal services at the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, which provides legal services to low-income immigrants, noted that she herself has written letters to financial aid offices to help explain the in-between nature of the few asylum-seeking students she has served.

As an asylum-seeking student in his mid-20s, L. ended up qualifying for state financial aid through AB 540. However, he misunderstood for six years exactly what aid he qualified for. L. wished to withhold his name and the names of the institutions he’s attended for fear of negative impacts on his pending asylum case.

Initially, community college didn’t cost him anything — but when he transferred to a large four-year university, the cost of college soared. He went to his university's financial aid office for help so often that all the staff there knew his name. It was a "big relief” when he was finally able to successfully fill out the California Dream Act Application, and obtain financial aid for his summer and fall quarters.

L.'s asylum case has been pending for nine years. He, his dad, mom and younger brother arrived in the United States in the winter of 2016, claiming asylum under fear of political retribution. His father organized political assemblies in China, and his mother was forced to have an abortion under the one-child policy.

“I just wish I could go home and visit family and friends and catch up for a good few weeks in the summer here and there to reconnect with my past,” L. said. “It's like there's two separate lives, like two entities being artificially cut.”

L. worked throughout high school and college, and worried about affording school.

Most days, the combination of family trauma and the limbo of waiting for his case means L. survives through “constant compartmentalization.”

In the meantime, he tries to carry on — he studies politics, and is interested in international relations and human rights.

"As rough as all that's happened, the silver lining is that one day hopefully I get a passport and a green card," L. said. "To help other people avoid such a hassle will be just as fulfilling for me."

Previous legislative efforts have failed

Legislative bills to extend state financial aid eligibility to asylum-seeking students have been introduced at least twice in recent years but have failed.

One attempt came in 2019, when Sen. Ben Allen, a Democrat from El Segundo, introduced SB 296, a bill that would have extended Cal Grant eligibility to students with pending asylum applications. The measure passed the Legislature with some bipartisan support, but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said that it would "impose costs on the General Fund that must be weighed in the annual budget process."

“That was frustrating, but I understood it,” Allen told CalMatters. “The real issue is that we don’t have good data. Our schools don’t track asylum seekers, so we can’t easily calculate the cost.”

UC data on asylum-seeking students is protected due to privacy policies, according to Stett Holbrook, a UC spokesperson. The Cal State system reports it has less than 500 students with "asylum status," which includes both those who have an asylum granted and asylum seekers, according to Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith. The numbers are self-reported during the admissions process.

In spring 2025, 13,507 students self-identified as “refugee/asylee” across the California Community Colleges — up from 11,537 the prior semester — per the CCC DataMart. The data does not include a category for just asylum seekers. Students can self-identify their immigration status while applying, but asylum seekers are not specifically tracked, according to the college system’s spokesperson Melissa Villarin.

Four years after SB 296 failed, Democrat Sabrina Cervantes — then representing Riverside in the Assembly and now as a state senator — revived the proposal through AB 888, introduced in 2023. Like Allen’s earlier bill, AB 888 sought to make Cal Grants accessible to students with pending asylum applications by creating a direct eligibility pathway outside the AB 540 residency requirements. The bill passed the Assembly unanimously but was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee last September, effectively ending its chances for the year.

Cervantes declined an interview with CalMatters. “My Assembly Bill 888 would have created a new pathway for pending asylum seekers in California to apply for Cal Grant financial aid in pursuit of their higher education,” Cervantes wrote in a statement.

Newsom’s office declined to say whether he would support a future version of the proposal, pointing instead to his brief 2019 veto message.

“There’s nervousness around anything that involves new expenses," Allen said. “... We’re going to have to spend some time seeing what information we can get with regards to better data to get better estimated costs. I think that will help to better inform the conversation."

Andrea Baltodano and Chrissa Olson are contributors with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.