Why turf war over community college bachelor’s degrees remains unresolved despite legislation

A legislative attempt to settle a long-simmering turf war between California’s community colleges and the California State University has instead ignited a new dispute.

For much of this year’s legislative session, it seemed lawmakers were on course to send legislation to Gov. Gavin Newsom making it easier for community colleges to offer bachelor’s degrees, satisfying community college leaders who say existing law is too restrictive.

But last-minute amendments significantly altered the bills, Assembly Bill 2694 and Senate Bill 960, drawing widespread backlash from community college presidents and chancellors. The amended versions now awaiting Newsom’s signature, they argued, would make it harder for campuses to create new programs. 

The changes set up the possibility that the contentious issue will again resurface at the Capitol next legislative session, regardless of whether Newsom signs or vetoes the bills, as community college leaders are vowing to push for further legislation in 2027. 

The legislation would create a five-tiered system determining how many bachelor’s degree programs each community college district could offer.  Districts would be placed into tiers based on the share of students who complete a degree or certificate or transfer to a four-year university. Districts with higher graduation and transfer rates would be in higher tiers and allowed to offer more bachelor’s degrees — up to a maximum of 12. 

The amendments were enough for CSU to drop its opposition to the bills. The 22-campus system has advocated for limits on community college bachelor’s programs, arguing that the colleges should focus more on transferring students.

Community college officials say the tiers would pit colleges across the state against each other and force them to compete for a limited number of degrees, which they argue runs counter to one of the primary purposes of community college bachelor’s degrees: filling local workforce needs. 

“When the amendments came in, we were shocked, frankly. They are extraneous and irrelevant to the purpose of the community college baccalaureate,” said Constance Carroll, former chancellor of the San Diego Community College District and president of the California Community College Baccalaureate Association.

AB 2694 and SB 960 passed the Legislature on Aug. 31, the last day of the session. The bills would each only take effect if the other one is signed by the governor.

Newsom has previously vetoed legislation to expand community college bachelor’s degrees, but his administration was involved in crafting the latest amendments. Lawmakers believe he is open to signing the bills. 

The changes wouldn’t take effect until 2028, theoretically giving the Legislature another year to make further amendments. Community college presidents are holding out hope that lawmakers will reconsider the tiered system, but the authors of the two bills, Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-San Diego, and Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Davis, said significant changes are unlikely.

“It’s totally set in stone,” Cabaldon said of the tiered system. 

While community colleges primarily offer two-year associate degrees and certificates, state law also permits them to offer bachelor’s degrees, provided the programs fill a local workforce need and don’t duplicate what’s offered at the state’s four-year universities.

Statewide, more than 60 degrees have been created in majors including biomanufacturing, cybersecurity and respiratory care.

Related Reading

Community college bachelor’s degrees stall for years amid Cal State objections

January 17, 2025

However, some programs have taken years to be approved amid opposition from CSU campuses, which have claimed duplication of their own programs. For the community colleges, a major point of frustration has been that, in some cases, objections have come from CSU campuses located hundreds of miles away from the community college proposing a degree. 

AB 2694 and SB 960 address that concern by limiting objections to CSU campuses within a community college district’s local service area. But the bills would simultaneously create a set of new problems, Sonya Christian, chancellor of the community college system, said in opposition letters to both authors. She pointed to the eligibility tiers, the caps on the number of degrees each district can create and limits on online programs. 

“Our preliminary analysis, based on the limited data that has been provided, suggests that these new requirements and restrictions could leave California with a community college baccalaureate framework that creates more barriers than the one we have today,” Christian wrote. 

Under the tiered system, districts in tier 1 would be allowed to offer between 10 and 12 degrees. Tier 2 districts could offer eight to 10 programs, while Tier 3 districts could offer up to six. Tier 4 could offer up to four degrees and Tier 5 would be limited to two.  

Those caps don’t make sense to Greg Smith, chancellor of the San Diego Community College District, who noted that community college bachelor’s degrees are supposed to be responsive to local workforce needs. 

“If our workforce or our industry is telling us we have these evolving needs, why would we want to limit our ability to respond to it? Is there a rationale to that?” he said. 

Alvarez, the author of AB 2694, said the amendments followed conversations with Newsom’s administration. Legislation that didn’t place some kind of cap on the number of degrees that could be created by each district was a “nonstarter” for the administration, according to Alvarez.

Cabaldon, the author of SB 960, said the tiered system will incentivize the colleges to focus on their primary mission of awarding associate degrees and certificates and transferring students to four-year colleges.

He said that, among colleges in the lowest tier, on average only 5% of students earn a degree, complete a certificate or transfer to a four-year university within three years. 

“If that’s the situation your college is in, you need to focus on your core mission. We’re going to allow for a degree or two if there’s a particular industry sector where there might be a real need, but you are not in a position to be dropping everything and starting a whole bunch of new bachelor’s degrees,” Cabaldon said. 

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the legislation. If he signs it, there will be a “slew of bills” next year that try to address the tiered system, predicted Carole Goldsmith, chancellor of the State Center Community College District in the Fresno area.

“It creates winners and losers,” she said. “My district will probably be fine, but many other districts won’t be. And what does every legislator have in their service area? A community college.”

Prior to the Assembly passing his bill, Alvarez said on the Assembly floor that he and Cabaldon were committed to addressing “technical issues” surrounding the tiered system.

He clarified in an interview that he is open to changing the terminology and calling them something other than tiers. He said the current language is problematic because it gives the perception of a “ranking system,” which he said it was “never meant to be.”

He added, however, that he’s less likely to be willing to reconsider the current structure of the tiers and the caps associated with each one. 

“I’m not sure that that’s something we’d look at,” he said. “I’m comfortable with the numbers that are being allowed in this legislation.”

This story was originally published by EdSource.