TO ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY WE HAVE A
COUPLE OF BILLS. FORCE TODAY I
DO APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE.
TOO MANY BURNING ISSUES LAST
WEEK OF SESSION. BUT OH WELL.
ALL RIGHT CENTER BRADFORD SO WE
DO HAVE. TWO BILLS BEFORE US
TODAY. ENDS. SORRY LET ME GET
MY SYSTEM UP. RIGHT FIRST WE
HAVE IS SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE
SENATOR BRADFORD PLEASE COME
FORWARD L. IN ME TIME I THINK
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM SO. IF YOU
CALL THE ROLL PLEASE ESTABLISH.
FOR SO HERE HERE GALLAGHER HERE
CALIFORNIA HAPPIER HEALTHIER.
YEAH GONZALEZ OTHER. KALRA YEAH
OUR PRESENCE RIGHT HERE
PROBABLY. MAIENSCHEIN OVER
FEDERAL YOUR PARENTS. RIGHT
YEAH YEAH. AND OKAY GOOD SO WE
DO HAVE A QUORUM THAT'S PERFECT
ALLOWS US TO TAKE ACTION CENTER
BRADFORD WELCOME. THE STATEMENT.
SORRY. YES WE ARE IN STRANGE
TIMES ART WAY ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU WELCOME TO THE ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY AND
WE ARE HOLDING THIS HEARING
DURING TIMES OF CODED PANDEMIC
AND DUE TO THE STATE HOME ORDER
WE'RE PRACTICING PHYSICAL
DISTANCING IN THE HEARING ROOM
AND THROUGHOUT THE CAPITOL
BUILDING. WE ARE ONLY ABLE TO
HAVE A LIMITED NUMBER OF PEOPLE
ACTUALLY HEREIN THE HEARING
ROOM. BUT WE DO HAVE ALTERNATE
FACILITIES AND TELEPHONIC
WITNESSES WHO WILL BE CALLING
IN WE REQUIRE THAT MASKS BE
WORN IN PHYSICAL DISTANCING BE
MAINTAINED BY ALL MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC. AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WHILE TESTIFYING AND
HERE IN THE ROOM OR EVEN AT THE
VIDEO CONFERENCING SIDE IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A MASK. WHEN CAN BE
PROVIDED FOR YOU. MASUR
CONSIDER PROPER ATTIRE FOR ALL
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND MEMBERS
WILL NOT BE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK
WITHOUT UNLESS YOU'RE WEARING A
MASK SO WE DO HAVE A FEW
DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR WITNESS
TESTIMONY TODAY. HERE FOR THE
PUBLIC IN THE ROOM HERE IN
FORTY TWO OH TWO. AGAIN WE CAN
ONLY ACCOMMODATE A LIMITED
NUMBER OF STAFF IN A LIMITED
NUMBER OF THE PUBLIC IN THE
MEDIA SO WE CAN MAINTAIN SIXTY
OF SPACING. THEY'RE ALSO STRICT
PHYSICAL DISTANCING PROTOCOLS
FOR THE PUBLIC TO ENTER THE
CAPITAL AND LEAVE IN HERE IN
THE ROOM IF ANY MEMBER THE
PUBLIC IN THE ROOM WOULD LIKE
TO TESTIFY PLEASE RAISE YOUR
HAND AS WE GET TO THE
APPROPRIATE ITEM. AND I WILL
APPROACH YOU TO ASK YOU TO
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME WE'RE ASKING
THE PUBLIC NOT TOUCH THE
MICROPHONE. AS WE'RE TRYING TO
KEEP EVERYTHING AS CLEAN AS WE
POSSIBLY CAN. YOU CAN EXIT THE
HEARING ROOM ONCE YOU'RE DONE
TESTIFYING OR RETURN YOUR SEATS
THE OTHER SIDE OF PLEASE BE
SURE TO OBSERVE PHYSICAL
DISTANCING. AT THIS AT ALL
TIMES. SO FOR THE WITNESS VIDEO
CONFERENCING ROOM. AND REMOTE
TESTIMONY STATIONS WHICH EXIST
WE DO HAVE A SEPARATE ROOM AND
A SEPARATE STATION. PEOPLE CAN
TESTIFY ON THE ITEMS WE HAVE
BEFORE US TODAY BUT WE HAVE
SOME WITNESSES IF WE HAVE
WITNESSES MAKING USE OF THE
THOSE ROOMS WE WILL BE CALLING
ON THEM SPECIFICALLY
SEPARATELY. AND ALLOWING THEIR
TESTIMONY. THOSE WITNESSES WILL
APPEAR ON THE SCREEN SO MEMBERS
CAN WATCH THE TESTIMONY. LIVE
FROM OUTSIDE AND THERE WE CAN
WATCH THE TEST WE LIVE FROM
OUTSIDE THE HEARING ROOM AND
ALSO ASK QUESTIONS. ANYONE WHO
WOULD LIKE TO CALL IN USING THE
TELEPHONIC SERVICES. IS WELCOME
TO DO SO. THE CALL IN NUMBER
FOR THIS HEARING IS EIGHT SEVEN
SEVEN. SIX NINE TWO EIGHT NINE
FIVE SEVEN. AND THE PUBLIC
ACCESS CODE IS ONE THREE ONE.
FIVE FOUR TWO OH TWO. YOU CAN
FIND THESE NUMBERS ON THE
ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
WEBSITE AS WELL AS ON YOUR TV
SCREEN. IF YOU'RE CALLING IN
PLEASE PLAN TO DO SO IS THE
AUTHOR OF THE BILL YOU'RE
TESTIFYING ON IS BEGINNING
THEIR PRESENTATION. WE WILL BE
TAKING SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS
IN DIFFERENT SEGMENTS OF IT SO
PLEASE PAY ATTENTION AND MAKE
SURE YOU'RE CALLING IT AT THAT
TIME. THE OPERATOR ON THE LINE
WILL GIVE YOU INSTRUCTIONS AS
TO HOW TO BE PLACED IN THE
QUEUE. ON DEPEND WHEN YOU
WHETHER YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE
THE BILL. IF YOU'RE CALLING IN
PLEASE DO ELIMINATE BACKGROUND
NOISE. THIS INCLUDES MUTING
YOUR LIVESTREAM BROADCAST WE
WERE SMART DEVICES TO REDUCE
THE SOUND DISTORTION. PLEASE
ALSO BE ADVISED THAT IF YOU'RE
A MAIN WITNESS PROVIDING
TESTIMONY FOR THE BILL. YOU
REMAIN ON THE LIVE LINE AND
WILL NEED TO MUTE YOURSELF
UNTIL YOU'RE CALLED UPON TO
SPEAK. IF YOU'RE HAVING ANY
PROBLEMS WITH THE MODERATE
TELEPHONE SERVICE YOU CAN CALL
THE COMMITTEE AT NINE ONE SIX.
THREE ONE NINE. TWO THREE THREE
FOUR. AND MYSELF WILL BE THERE
TO TRY TO HELP AND MAKE SURE
YOU. CAN GIVE THE TESTIMONY
WOULD LIKE TO GIVE. I ALSO WANT
TO NOTE THAT WE ARE ACCEPTING
WRITTEN TESTIMONY THROUGH THE
POSITION LETTER PORTAL ON THE
COMMITTEE'S WEBSITE. THAT IS
ALWAYS UP AN ACTIVE IN ANY. TO
SOMEONE YOU'D LIKE TO GIVE TO
THAT MECHANISM IS ALWAYS
WELCOME. THANK YOU FOR BEARING
WITH US AS WE IMPLEMENT. MATHIS
TO CONTINUE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE
CALIFORNIA BUT ALSO BEING
MINDFUL IN RESPECT TO.
RESPECTFUL OF THE PUBLIC
HEALTH. CONCERNS THAT WE ALL
FACE. SO AGAIN THE CALL IN
NUMBER EIGHT SEVEN SEVEN. SIX
NINE TWO EIGHT NINE FIVE SEVEN.
THE ACCESS CODE IS WHAT IS. ONE
THREE ONE FIVE FOUR TWO OH TWO.
THE FIRST BILL THAT WE'RE GOING
TO BE TALKING ABOUT HE SAID%
BILL SO THIRTY ONE SO IF YOU
ARE. WANTING TO GIVE TESTIMONY
ON SENATE BILL SEVEN THIRTY ONE
THIS WOULD DEFINITELY BE THE
TIME TO CALL IN GET THE
INSTRUCTIONS IF YOU'RE ON. THE
PHONE AND BE READY TO. GIVE
TEST OF. WHEN CALLED UPON DO SO
WE WILL BE TAKING SUPPORTERS.
AN OPPOSITION IN DIFFERENT
SEGMENTS OF THE HEARING TODAY
THAT MAKES IT EASIER FOR US TO
TRACK. ALL OF THOSE. OF
TESTIFYING SO WOULD ASK THAT
YOU DO THAT. ALL RIGHT THERE I
THINK HAVING COVERED THE
LOGISTICAL GROUND LET'S MOVE ON
TO SENATE BILL SEVEN THIRTY
ONE. SENATOR BRADFORD WELCOME
INTERNET SECURITY THAT ONE I
BILLS CONSIDERING FOR A MEASURE
CALLED POLICE IN MANY WAYS
PROJECTS GOT OFFERS FROM ABOUT
ALL SB THREE ONE SEVEN FOUR OFF.
POLICE TO SURVEY ARE GOING. ONE
OF THEM FOR MANY CURRENT YEAR
AND ALL THE MEN FOR ALL THEIR
HARD WORK IN GETTING THIS BILL.
TO IT IS THE DAY IN ORDER TO
PROTECT FOR THIS FOR MANY.
IMAGE WAYS THIS BILL IS THE
FIRST. I LIVE IN ARGENTINA FOR.
FIFTY ONE YEARS OF MY- HELLO
AROUND THE CORNER FROM WALLY
PUT. WHAT COLLEGE SPORTS SIXTY
YEARS WHERE I PLAY SPORTS. AND
LYFT A ANNUAL JEFF FESTIVAL
LAST SUNDAY PROCESS WOULD HAVE
BEEN MY EIGHTEEN YEAR OLD THE
GUARDIAN JOBS FOR AFTER PARK.
ROWLEY PARK IS TO SAY PART WERE
KENNETH ROTH JUNE WE SHOT AND
KILLED BY GUARDIAN PLAY OFFICER.
AND TWENTY EIGHTEEN. MISTRUST
IS A TWENTY ZERO WHO ON ALL.
WHO IS THE- MENTAL. ANNE WAS
SHOT IN THE BACK AND KILLED IN
BROAD DAYLIGHT. MISTER ROSS WAS
OF WIDELY KNOWN AND FAMILIAR
WITH PARK STAFF HERE BECAUSE HE
WAS A REGULAR IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE NEW WE HAD IT'S CHALLENGES
BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY KNEW
HE WAS HARMLESS. AND THEY ALL
NEWMAN THEY MAY KNOW HOW TO
DEAL WITH THE ONLINE SITUATIONS
ARISE IN MANY TIMES HE WOULD
ACT UP AND THEN QUICKLY
DISAPPEAR. SO ANYWAY AND I AM
VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE GARDENA
POLICE DEPARTMENT AS I STATED I
HAVE MANY FRIENDS OVER THE LAST
THIRTY YEARS AND I'M A FIRST
NAME BASIS WHAT OFFICERS WITH
THE GARDENA POLICE DEPARTMENT
I'VE KNOWN THE FOR OUR POLICE
CHIEF PASSED POLICE CHIEF
PERSONALLY STARTING WITH ROB
LINES THE FIRST AND ONLY
AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICE CHIEF
AND OUR DENNIS HASTERT. ED
MEDRANO WHO I KNEW AS A ROOKIE
OFFICER WHO LEFT IN NINETEEN
NINETY EIGHT BECAUSE GUARDINO
WAS IN THE BRINK OF BANKRUPTCY
AND HE SAW NO FUTURE IN THE
LEFT GUARDINO ENJOYING THE
WEATHER POLICE DEPARTMENT AND A
NIGHT HE TOLD ME HE WAS LEAVING
WE BOTH STOOD THERE WERE TEARS
IN OUR EYES AND I SAID DON'T
LEAVE WE'RE GOING TO TURN THE
CITY AROUND BUT HE SAW NO
FUTURE IN GARDENA. ONLY FORM TO
RETURN BACK A FEW YEARS LATER
AND SERVE NOT ONLY AS A POLICE
CHIEF BUT AS OUR CITY MANAGERS
WILL ANY IS NOW THE CHIEF OF
DOJ'S HERE IN SACRAMENTO.
WORKING FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL.
IN OUR PREVIOUS CHIEF THOMAS. I
JOKE ME ALMOST I NEED YOU.
STRIPES ALONE. STARS INBAR. AND
NOW CURRENT POLICE CHIEF MIKE
SAID. SO WHEN I ABOUT SHOOTING
I KNEW OUT OF CARE. FOR GARDENA
POLICE O. AND SOON AS I THE
NAME OF THE OFFICER I KNEW I
DID ALONG BECAUSE I STAY. I
DON'T KNOW FIRST NAME BASIS
WITH GARDENA POLICE OFFICERS
FROM. THREE YEARS. AND.ONLY TO
FIND OUT THE OFFICER WHO HAD
COMMITTED THE CRIME I TRY. FROM
ORANGE. AND HE HAD BEEN. IN
THREE PREVIOUS SHOOTINGS BEFORE
COMING TO THE GARDENA POLICE
DEPARTMENT. WHERE STATE OF ONLY
ONE OF ONLY FIVE STATES IN THE
NATION THAT DOESN'T HAVE A
POLICE TO CERTIFICATION PROGRAM.
WE DON'T REQUIRE ANY FOLLOW UP
AFTER THE INITIALLY RECEIVED
THEIR CERTIFICATION ON LIKE
OTHER PROFESSIONS WE DON'T EVEN
HAVE A PROCESS REQUIRING
DEPARTMENTS TO COMPLETE AN
INVESTIGATION AFTER AN OFFICER
HAVE RESIGNED OR BEEN FIRED DUE
TO MISCONDUCT. IN FACT OUR
CLIMATE SYSTEM INCENTIVIZES
OPTIONS TO LEAVE A DEPARTMENT
BEFORE THEY'RE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE. FOR THEIR ACTIONS
AND MOVED TO A DIFFERENT
COMMUNITY WE SEE THIS EVERY
DAY. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE IN
CALIFORNIA A STATE TO PROVIDE
PRIDES ITSELF ON BEING THE
FIRST IN A LEADER IN SO MANY
AREAS THAT WE ARE SO FAR BEHIND
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CRIMINAL
JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY. THE
BILL CREATES A STATEWIDE
PROCESS TO REVOKE CERTIFICATION
OF OFFICER AFTER A CONVICTION
OF A SERIOUS CRIME OR
TERMINATION FROM EMPLOYMENT DUE
TO MISCONDUCT. AGAIN AFTER A
SERIOUS CRIME OR TERMINATION
FOR MISCONDUCT THIS AROUND IN
CASE THE BAD OFFICERS THAT
EVERY POLICE CHIEF DELIVERY
OFFICER I KNOW THEY STATED THEY.
WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO GET
READY. ADDITIONALLY THIS BILL
ALLOW. COMMISSION UP OFFICER
STAND AND TRAINING BETTER KNOWN
AS POLLS TO INVESTIGATE.
GROUNDS FOR MISCONDUCT. WE
SHOULD ALSO BE CREATING AN
ADVISORY BOARD. WITH THE
IMPULSE THAT WOULD MAKE INITIAL
RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHETHER POLL
SHOULD BE CERTIFIED AN OFFICER.
THIS FOR WOULD BE MADE UP OF
PRIMARILY OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS
INDIVIDUALS APPOINTED BY THE
GOVERNOR THE SPEAKER THE SENATE
RULES OR EXPERIENCE ON ISSUES
RELATED TO POLICE MISCONDUCT.
THERE'S CONCERN THAT THIS IS A
BIAS TOWARD OFFICERS AND THAT
THE PROPOSITION IS NOT SIMILAR
TO COMPARE SIMILAR COMPARED TO
BOARDS OF OTHER LICENSED
PROFESSIONS. THE TRUTH IS THAT
THE PUBLIC DOES NOT TRUST LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO POLICE
THEMSELVES WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY
EXAMPLES. FROM MILLIONS OF
PROTESTERS ACROSS THIS COUNTRY.
WHO HAVE RALLIED BEHIND THE.
MOTOR EXECUTION OF GEORGE FLOYD
TO THIS PAST SUNDAY SHOOTING-
MR BLIGHT. IN WISCONSIN PEOPLE
DO NOT TRUST THE POLICE TO DO
THIS JOB. THE BOARD DOES NOT
HAVE THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF
THE CERTIFYING AN OFFICER AND A
BILL DOES NOT REMOVE DUE
PROCESS FOR AN OFFICER. TO
APPEAL THE BOARD'S
RECOMMENDATION SOME OTHER LIFE
FOR THIS WOULD STOP THE LIE FEE
TO THE BE DETERMINED BY THE
COMMISSION SHALL NOT X. THE- TO
ADMINISTER THIS PROGRAM. THIS
BILL ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO
THE FINE BY REGULATION THE
SPECIFIC GROUNDS OF SERIOUS
MISCONDUCT THAT WOULD BE
CONSIDERED FOR DECERTIFICATION.
THERE'S THERE IS CONCERN THAT
THE GROUNDS OF THE
CERTIFICATION ARE TOO BROAD AND
WE WOULD TO CERTIFY OFFICERS
WHO HAVE COMMITTED A TRY
VIOLATION. THIS IS NOT MY
INTENT OR THE INTENT OF THIS
BILL AT ALL. AND I DO NOT
EXPECT COMMISSION COMPOSED
MAINLY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
ACCESS ENACT SUCH A DEFINITION.
THIS BILL ALSO MAKES CHANGES TO
THE TOM BAIN CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
IT CLARIFIES THE GENERAL INTENT
TO INTERFERE WITH A PERSON'S
CIVIL RIGHTS INSTINET. IS OF
SUFFICIENT TO BRING A SUIT
UNDER THE BANNER. IT ENSURES
THAT A FAMILY MEMBER OF A
PERSON KILLED BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT ALSO HAS. ALSO ALSO
IS ALSO ABLE TO ASSERT A CALLS
OF ACTION. AND FINALLY IT
CLARIFIES THAT THREE IMMUNITIES.
CALLING ASSERTED BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT ARE NOT COMPARABLE
TO CLAIMS BROUGHT UNDER THE BAN
ACT. THIS IS A VITAL IN TO
INCREASE LONG FOR ACCOUNT. AND
RESTORE COMMUNITY TRUST IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT IT GIVES THEM SOME
SKIN IN THE GAME AND I THINK IT
MAKES OFFICE WANT TO PER FORM A
LITTLE BIT MORE RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THOSE BAD ACTORS NOT THE
ONES THAT PERFORM AN HONORABLE
WAY ON A DAILY BASIS. LASTLY I
WANT TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS
THAT WE HAVE NOT ENGAGE WITH
LAW ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS
COMPLETELY UNTRUE. THE BEST WAY
I CAN DESCRIBE IT IS FAKE NEWS.
OUR OFFICE IS MADE OURSELVES
AVAILABLE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.
AND HAS NEVER REFUSED ANY
MEETING. AND I SIT HERE TODAY
BEFORE YOU AS A MEMBER OF THIS
LEGISLATURE BODY OF ALMOST TEN
YEARS. AND I'VE NEVER MISSED A
DAY OF WORK I'M ALWAYS
AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO'S EVER
WANTED TO MEET WITH ME.
LAFORTUNE HAS BEEN THROUGHOUT
THIS PROCESS AND HAVE ENGAGE
DIRECTLY WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE ON THE BILL'S LANGUAGE.
THIS BILL LARGELY REPRESENTS
THE STRUCTURE OF THE GOLDEN
FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
WHICH I THINK IS BEEN THANKFUL
FOR THEIR INVOLVEMENT FROM
BEGINNING. BUT PUSHES FURTHER
ON PROVISIONS THAT WE BELIEVE
CREATE MORE EFFECTIVENESS WE
I'VE ALSO HAD EXTENSIVE
CONVERSATIONS WITH. ALL OF YOUR
BOOKS HERE ARE TURNING GENERAL
WHO SHARED SOME OF HIS CONCERNS
AND WAYS TO IMPROVE THIS AS
WELL. NOT AGREEING WITH LAW
ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT MEAN THAT
WE HAVE NOT BEEN ENGAGED WITH
THEM. I IT IT'S THAT'S JUST THE
POLICY OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY
LAW ENFORCEMENT. PASSED PROS
ARE ONLY GOES TO ADDRESS SOME
OF THEIR CONCERNS. THE PROPOSAL
LEAVES ALL INVESTIGATIONS THE
LOCAL AGENCIES. IT ONLY ALLOWS
THE CERTIFICATION IF AN OFFICER
HAS LEFT THE DEPARTMENT. OR
HAVE COMMITTED THREE ACTS OF
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT IT REMOVED
THE CHANGES TO THE BRAIN ACT
AND IT MAKES THE ADVISORY BOARD
BE COMPOSED OF MOSTLY LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND IT REMOVES A
LICENSING FEE. L. WAY OF PAYING
FOR THIS PROCESS. IT EVEN
REMOVES THE ABILITY TO DO NOT
TO DECERTIFY OFFICERS WHO WERE
FIRED FOR PARTICIPATING IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT GAINES MANY OF
WHERE WHERE WHILE WE'RE ON AND-
KELLY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OF. THAT
COME THE JUST RIGHT THERE IN
THE TOP IN DEPARTMENT OR I
REPRESENT. THREE OF WHOM THERE
WERE FAR BY ONLY COUNTY.
SHERIFF THE JUST LAST WEEK.
MARTIN ONE FOURTEEN SAYS THEY
WANTED. THE CERTIFICATION. BUT
THEY WANT TO BE LEFT
ACCOUNTABLE TO THEMSELVES THIS
BILL IS NOT PERFECT BUT IT
CREATES A SYSTEM OF AB DE
CERTIFICATION A CALIFORNIA'S
CAN TRUST. THAT WILL HOLD BACK
OFFICES ACCOUNTABLE AGAIN THIS
IS ABOUT BAD OFFICERS NOT THE
99% OF THE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN
WHO GO TO WORK EVERY DAY AND DO
THEIR JOB RESPONSIBILITIES IT'S
THE BAD APPLES WHICH WE ALL SHE
WANNA GET A WHAT TO READ OUT WE
WANT TO GET RID OF BAD
POLITICIANS WE DO THAT WOULD
RECALL IF WE GET RID OF BAD
DOCTORS WE GET RID OF BAD
TEACHERS. WE GET RID OF BAD
LAWYERS BUT YOU CAN'T GET RID
OF BACK OFFICE THIS BILL IS
SUPPORTED BY LEGISLATIVE BLOCK
OFF THE CAUCUS DOESN'T THE
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS HUNDRED
OF ARTISTS AND ENTERTAINERS.
WELL ROBERT DENIRO BILLY I. TO
NAME A FEW KENDRICK LAMAR. I'LL
BE. AND THOUSANDS OF
CALIFORNIANS REAP REALIZED TIME
IS NOW TO PASS A COMPREHENSIVE
AND EFFECTIVE. POLICE REFORM
BILL IF NOT NOW THEN WHEN IT'S
NOT US DIDN'T. ON THE LINE
TODAY TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY A
SISTER FOR USER MORE MODERN THE
MOTHER OF KIND OF LOS JUNIOR
WHO WILL SPEAK ABOUT HER SON
WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THANKFUL FOR
HER STRENGTH AND HER ADDICTS
CAN ADVOCACY IN THIS DIFFICULT
IMPORTANT ISSUE WE ALSO HAVE
PETER. BE BRING AND JULIE YOU
AVAILABLE ONLINE TO PROVIDE ANY
TECHNICAL EXPERTISE AND
ASSISTANCE IF QUESTIONS ARE
PRESENTED AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK RIVAL THANK YOU THANK YOU
SENATOR SO WE DO HAVE MS FILES
HERE I'M A ROOF. ON THE
TELEPHONE AS WELL AS PETER BE
BRING. THE ACLU AND THEN JULIE
YOU OF THE NATIONAL POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT AND I
UNDERSTAND. THIS TO BE BRING
HIS YOU ARE HERE FOR TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS SO THE FIRST WITNESS
HIS- RO ARE YOU ON THE LINE
PLEASE. YEP I AM AND- GOOD
MORNING TO EVERYONE GOOD
MORNING WELCOME. THANK YOU I AM
THE MOTHER MY NAME IS MR THE
ALL ON THE MOTHER CANNOT LOG
JUNIOR. ARE YOU MY ELBOW SON
HOW TO FIX. AND ON APRIL. TWO
THOUSAND EIGHTEEN- CANNOT WORK
IN A SITUATION WHERE HE WAS ONE
FOR LIFE TWO THIRTY IN THE
AFTERNOON- AT WILEY PARK IN THE
CITY OF GARDENA CALIFORNIA. AND
GOT YOU WITH AROUND A BUNCH OF
OTHER OFFICERS DID NOT. SHOOT
OUT HERE BUT ONE PARTICULAR
OFFICER BY THE NAME OF MICHAEL
ROBBINS- SHOT MY PHONE WITHOUT
BOND. MARKET MILITARY BOUGHT
WEAPONS BACK. AND SHOT TWO MORE
TIMES THAN MY TIME. WHAT DOES
WOULD PUT OUT THE ON THE MIGHT
WITH ARM. HE WOULD NOT YOU KNOW
IN DANGER BECAUSE YOU KNOW NO
ONE. AND THE TOOK AMONG FELLOW.
YOU CAN AND ON THE BIG DEAL YOU
SAID. IT'S NOT FAR BECAUSE A
LOT OF PEOPLE OUT HERE GETTING
MURDERED HELLO WE EXPCT BLOOD
MAN AND IT SOUNDED BECAUSE OF
THE IN. YOU KNOW THEY'RE GONNA
START TO ME I'M VERY AND TODAY
I'M VERY. AND OUR NEVER EVER
SEE MY FUNDING. GOD BECAUSE OF
THE BALL THAT. SO DURING CORD.
BUT NEED FOR TO BE ON THE PHONE
BECAUSE BECAUSE THEY TOOK
MICHAEL LAW. WHERE THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY JACKIE LACEY ALMOST
NEVER PROSECUTE ANYONE. SO BUT
OUT IN THE BILL. FORGET DON'T
LEAVE IT UP TO OUR CAN AT LEAST
GET THE KILLER COP UP THE
STREET AUTHORS LIKE LOBBYING
VIEW BLACK MEN LIKE MY SON NOT
THAT BOTHERS. SONS AND BROTHERS
BUT IT'S HARD FOR MURDER AND
ALSO I WANT TO YOU KNOW THANK
CENTER TO SEE BRADFORD BUT
HAVING A VISION FOR THE BILL MY
SON WAS A VERY LOVING CALL
YOUNG MAN VERY CLOSE TO HIS
FAMILY. VERY CLOSELY MYSELF WE
GREW UP TOGETHER- JANET YOU
KNOW TAKING- VERY PROTECTIVE
AND HE ALSO LEAVE BEHIND ONE
YOUNG SON. THE DISPATCHERS ALL.
SO IN IS THE AUTHOR TO MYSLF
IN MY CAR HAPPY WE CAN NAME IT
VERY CORE BILL TO PASS OUT OF
IT COULD NOT HAPPEN AGAIN ELSE
OR ANY ELSE THE STAFF. THANK
YOU THANK YOU N. THANK YOU FOR.
BEING BRAVE AND US THAT STORE
IT'S REALLY VERY. ALL RIGHT
THANK YOU OKAY. THANK YOU TO
UNDERSTAND THE OTHER TO
WITNESSES ARE HERE FOR.
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS SO WE'RE
NOW GOING TO MOVE TO THE
WITNESS VIDEO ROOM IS THERE
ANYONE IN THE WITNESS VIDEO
ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO. GIVE
TESTIMONY ON THIS BILL. ALL
RIGHT WHAT ABOUT THE REMOTE
TESTIMONY STATION. RIGHT SEEING
NONE OERATE TO OPEN THE PHONE
LINE AND WE WILL TAKE
TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY ON THIS
BILL I'M SORRY IS THERE ANYONE
IN THIS ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY. ON THIS BILL SENATE
BILL SEVEN THIRTY ONE ALL RIGHT
SEE NONE WILL OPERATE COULD YOU
OPEN THE PHONE LINES AND AT
THIS POINT WE WILL BE TAKING
PEOPLE'S NAME THEIR AFFILIATION
AND THAT THEY SUPPORT THIS BILL.
PLEASE OPEN THE PHONE LINES.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR MISTER
CHAIR WE NOW HAVE THIRTY PEOPLE
IN Q. WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT AGAIN- NAME AFFILIATION
AND SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. WILL FIRST GO TO LINE UP
FORTY FOUR. FINE FOUR PLEASE GO
AHEAD. PARDON ME LINE FORTY
FOUR IS NOT AVAILABLE.
LITTLETON LINE THIRTY SIX. GOOD
MORNING THIS IS MARCO GEORGE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION WERE IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN
THIRTY ONE. THANK YOU THANK YOU.
LINE. FIFTY ONE. ONE FIFTY ONE
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HELLO THIS
IS ROCKY AND THE NUMBER OF
BLACK LIVES MATTER ORGANIZATION
AND I AM ALSO IN SUPPORT OF SB
SEVEN THIRTY ONE TILL. THANK
YOU BYE. SIXTY SEVEN. HI MY
NAME IS YES WE CAN WHAT AND THE
NUMBER OF BLACK LIVES MATTER
LOS ANGELES AND IN THE NAME OF
TEN O'CLOCK JUNIOR I PUT THE
WORK ITSELF. LINE SEVEN SEVEN.
GOODMORNING MY NAME IS ALABAMA
DO YOU JUSTICE COALITION AND
THE CALIFORNIA FIVE COALITION-
IN STRONG SUPPORT AND PARTICLE
FUND JUST OF THIS BILL. LINE.
EIGHTY TWO. MORNING TURN
MEMBERS ANDREA RIVERA ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT
POLICY CENTER AND STRONG
SUPPORT THANKS. LINE. FIFTY
NINE. ONE FIFTY NINE YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. THE LOOP MOVE ON THE
LINE. EIGHTY THREE. GOOD
MORNING CHEN MEMBERS BENJAMIN
TREND WITH THE CALIFORNIA PAN
ETHNIC CAT HEALTH NETWORK AND
ON BEHALF OF THE HAVING OUR SAY
COALITION IN SUPPORT. LINE.
FIFTY THREE. HI CAN YOU HEAR ME
YESWE CAN. OKAY HI THIS IS DAN
WILLIAMS ON THE BLACK LIVES
MATTER LOS ANGELES DON'T BE
HAPPY CAN DROP YOU NEAR IT SO
MANY HUNDREDS OF OTHER PEOPLE
WHO'VE BEEN KILLED BY POLICE. I
IN IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE
BILL IS NOT ABOUT YET OUR THE
BILL YET THANK THANK YOU. LINE.
SIXTY SAN MARTIN ON THE OF THE
HEALTH IN COURT. LINE. NINETY
THREE. GOOD MORNING THIS IS
LUPITA WHAT THE YOUTH JUSTICE
COALITION UP. WELL CALLED
BONDED AND I STRONGLY SUPPORT.
LINE ONE OH THREE. GOOD MORNING
MR CHAIRMAN BRISKER IS ONE OF
THE CALIFORNIA NURSES
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. LINE.
NINETY EIGHT. GOOD THAT IS CARS
HERE WHERE UTILIZED IN OAKLAND
AND STRONG SUPPORTER SB SEVEN
POINT THANK YOU. LINE. NINETY
NINE. GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS
ERICA I'M WITH A YOUTH JUSTICE
COALITION AND WE'RE PROUD OF SB
SEVENTY THREE AND ONE STRONG.
THANK YOU. LINE. ONE OH FIVE.
IN ONE HUNDRED AND FIVE YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. BUYING. ONE OH
SIX. GOOD MORNING THIS IS JIM
WEINBERG ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE- LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA IN STRONG SUPPORT
OF SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE THANK
YOU. LINE EIGHTY SIX. YEAH HI
CENTER ON BEHALF OF MARK AT THE
CALIFORNIA IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE. LINE FIFTY
FIVE. GOOD MORNING THIS IS
JENNIFER ROCCA WITH THE ACLU UP
IN CALIFORNIA PLEASE SUPPORT SB
SEVEN THREE ONE. LINE. ONE
FOURTEEN. GOOD MORNING THIS IS
CAITLYN ON BEHALF OF BOTH THE A
LINE FOR CLINTON MINUTE COLOR
AND POLICY LINK PROUD CO
SPONSORS AND SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. NINE ONE OH TWO. HEY
ISSUE TATE A LOOK AT WHAT OF
MATTER ABOUT THE AND LONG BEACH
AND I AM CALLING IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL SEVEN
THIRTY ONE AND I URGE ALL OF
YOU TO VOTE YES. IN THE NAME OF
CRITICAL AT IN THE NAME OF
KENNETH ROCK JUNIOR AND MANY
OTHER. LINE FIFTY FOUR. GOOD
MORNING MR CHAIRMAN THIS IS
CARL LONDON OF LONDON GONZALEZ
ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE
RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
OF AMERICA WE ARE PART OF THE
UNITED MUSIC COMMUNITY
COALITION IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE WE
APPRECIATE CENTER BRADFORD'S
LEADERSHIP ON THIS IMPORTANT
ISSUE. LINE. ONE OH FOUR. HELLO
THIS IS KAREN BOUNDARY WITH
BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS ANGELES
AND LONG BEACH ISLAND STRONG
SUPPORT- SB. SEVEN THIRTY ONE.
Y. AND ONE OH SEVEN. HELLO CAN
YOU HEAR ME YES WE CAN. HI THIS
IS MEGAN- AND THE NUMBER OF
BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS ANGELES
NINE INCH CONTEMPLATED AT SEVEN
THIRTY ONE I KNOW YOU CAN TRUST
YOU. BY. NINETY ONE. GOOD
MORNING THIS IS REBECCA
GONZALEZOF THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN STRONG
SUPPORT. LINE. FIFTY SEVEN. THE
HARD ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. LINE.
EIGHTY NINE. THE CURRENT
MEMBERS WILL BE AT THE SHOP ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
FACULTY ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. LINE. SIXTY ONE. HI
VALERIE WITH THAT STOCKHOLDERS
CAN. FONG THIRD AND INSTRUCTED
PORT AT THE BILL THANK YOU.
LINE FORTY SEVEN. THE MORNING
CARE MEMBERS BEGAN WORKING ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIANS FOR
SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND VERY
STRONG SUPPORT OF SB SEVENTY
ONE. LINE FORTY EIGHT. GOOD
MORNING JERRY MEMBERS LEINSTER
WITH CHANGE FORGET THIS COLLEGE
EXPRESS OUR STRONG SUPPORT. BY
TWENTY THREE. GOOD MORNING ME
OF USING YOUR FROM THE LEGAL
BOOK WELL IT IS A CALIFORNIA
CALLING INSTRUCTORS WORK THANK
YOU. LINE TWENTY SEVEN. THE
MORNING AT EIGHT O'CLOCK ARE
WITH EMERGING CALIFORNIA AND
JOHN REPORT THANK YOU. LINE.
NINETY TWO. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR
ME YES WE CAN. HI THERE MY
NAME'S CORRINA KERBER I AM A
MEMBER OF BLACK LIVES MATTER
LOS ANGELES- AND THE NAME
KENNETH ROSS JUNIOR EKSTROM TO
POOR SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE AND I
JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK
TESTAMENT THAT IT GOES WITHOUT
SAYING THAT WHEN OFFICERS
ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC IT'S-
UNACCEPTABLE THAT WE DON'T KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT- THEREFORE FIFTY
FOUR LIVES. OREGON STATE SO
PLEASE DO- I STRONGLY SUPPORT
SB SEVEN THANK YOU AND I
APPRECIATE THAT AND I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO REMIND CALLERS
THAT THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY. BUT
WE'RE JUST. GETTING INDICATIONS
OF SUPPORT THANK YOU. NEXT
PLEASE. ONE NINETY FIVE.
QUITELY LINE NINETY FIVE IS NOT
AVAILABLE WE'RE GOING TO GO TO
LINE EIGHTY FIVE. HI TERRY
MEMBERS ACTIVITIES HAPPEN THERE
BECAUSE ON BEHALF OF THE AT THE
RECIDIVISM COALITION CALLING.
ON SUPPORTERS. TO SEVEN THIRTY
ONE THANK YOU. LINE. FORTY ONE
FORTY YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
MORNING CHECK ON THAT GO FROM
THE USER THE COALITION WERE
CAUGHT OUT TO BE. AND OF THIS
BILL I'M ALSO HERE FOR JONATHAN
QUICK WITH HIS FAMILY DETECTIVE
JOE FROM THE SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT NOT ONLY KILL
JONATHAN THANK YOU THANK YOU
FOR. NUMBER FIVE I'M SORRY I'M
SORRY WE CAN'T TAKE ADDITIONAL
TESTIMONY. BUT JUST INDICATE
YOUR SUPPORT THANK YOU. ONE
TWENTY TELL. HI MY NAME IS
VIRGINIA JACKSON REPORT BLACK
LIVES MATTER LOS ANGELES I'M
CALLING IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
ACTUALLY SEVEN THIRTY ONE IN
THE NAME TEN O'CLOCK JUNIOR AND
I URGE A YES VOTE. LINE.
SEVENTY EIGHT. SEVENTY EIGHT
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. CAN YOU HEAR
ME YES WE CAN. THE MOTHER OF
RAIN FEEL BEARING. HE WAS
UNARMED HIT BY A CAR ON THE I.
FIVE FREEWAY SHOT KILLED BY THE
PHD OPTED. PROJECT TWO THOUSAND
SIXTEEN STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS
BILL THANK YOU THANK YOU. FIND
ONE TWENTY THREE. THE MORNING
CARE AND MEMBERS MIKE MATIX ON
BEHALF OF CONSUMER WATCHDOG IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN
THIRTY ONE ENERGEN I THOUGHT
THANK YOU. LINE SIXTY BILL.
MORNING LEAGUE BYNUM I'M HAPPY
WE W. ACTUALLY THREE PARTY
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL
THANK YOU. LINE ONE THING. HI
THIS IS KIMBERLY DIRE FROM-
ATLS LOS ANGELES AND I'M STRONG
SUPPORT AYE AYE BURKE I URGE A-
AND I VOTE ON THIS BILL THANK
YOU. LINE. ONE TWENTY NINE.
RESIDENTS SACRAMENTO CALLING ON
BEHALF OF MYSELF IN STRONG
SUPPORT. FIND ONE NO WAY.
MORNING THIS IS CARLA BEHRENS
MR MODY SEAL BEARING KILLED BY
PHD OFFICER- MEMBER OF INITIATE
JONES JUSTICE AND LOCKED AND I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL. BY.
ONE THIRTY FOUR. GOOD MORNING
MY NAME'S ANDRE PERRY I'M A
SACRAMENTO RECOMMEND CALLING ON
BEHALF OF MYSELF IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN THREE ONE
THANK YOU. I'M THIRTY FIVE.
DANIEL GUTIERREZ ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN SUPPORT.
LINE. ONE TWENTY FIVE. GOOD
MORNING THE POLITICAL AT THE
ACLU IN STRONG SUPPORT. BY. ONE
THIRTY SEVEN. GOOD MORNING DESK
ABOUT SOME MARROW IF THEY FEEL
YOU CALIFORNIA POT CO SPONSORED
THE BILL THANK YOU. FIND. ONE
FORTY. HE DID SHARE WITH ASIAN
AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE
CALIFORNIA INSTRUCTOR FOR. LINE.
EIGHTY FOUR. THANK YOU JENNIFER
TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF
ALAMEDA IN SUPPORT. LINE SIX
EXPECT. HI THIS IS A GOOD WORD
FOR IN OAKLAND ABOUT YOU CAN BE
HAPPY FOR EVERYONE IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU. I'M. ONE
FORTY FIVE. HE CAN JUST OUR ON
BEHALF OF INSURANCE
COMMISSIONER RICARDO LARA AND
DEPARTMENT INSURANCE IN SUPPORT.
LINE ONE FORTY THREE. HELLO
THIS IS JENNIFER RECEIVE I AM
AN ORGANIZER WAS SHOWING UP FOR
RACIAL JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO
AND CALLING IN STRONG SUPPORT.
BY ONE FORTY SEVEN. I'LL BE
HAPPY OAKLAND MAYOR AND THE
OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL IN STRONG
SUPPORT. LINE.NINETY FIVE.
NINETY FIVE YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
ACCESS TO MOVE ON THE LINE. ONE
FIFTY TWO. I'M TO YOUR ONE IS
OPEN. OKAY WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON
THE GUIDELINE. ONE FIFTY THREE.
THIS IS CHRISTOPHER FROM THE
APPLE YOUR LAST CALIFORNIA
YOU'RE LESS LIKELY MENTAL MIND
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL
PLEASE VOTE YES. LINE. FIFTY
ONE. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME YES
WE CAN. HI THIS IS NOT I CAN'T
ANSWER GET CALLING ON BEHALF AS
A MEMBER OF BOTH THE- BLACK
RIGHT NOT A LOS ANGELES AND
EACH EUROPEAN COMMUNITY OF LOS
ANGELES. STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL THANK YOU. THE CHAIR THERE
IS NO ONE ELSE THINKS YOU TO
COMMENT IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL.
OKAY WELL I'M GONNA ASK JUST
ONE MORE TIME IF THERE'S ANYONE
ON THE PHONE WHO WOULD. LIKE TO
COMMENT. IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL GIVING US YOUR NAME YOUR
AFFILIATION PLEASE PRESS ONE
ZERO NOW. EACH YEAR WE DO HAVE
A FEW MORE PEOPLE JOIN UP NOW
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE LINE.
NINETY FIVE. BY NINETY FIVE
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. AND AGAIN I
APOLOGIZE WE'RE GOING TO MOVE
ON TO LINE. ONE OH FIVE. BUT
COULD I DO A LITTLE BIT. WHAT
DO YOU JUST COALITION PUBLIC
FUNDS TO. I BY NO ONE OPEN. FOR
HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME YES WE
CAN. THIS IS KAREN BATTERY WITH
BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS ANGELES
AND LONG BEAH I AM IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF BILLS. SEVEN THIRTY
ONE AND I URGE A YES VOTE. LINE.
ONE EIGHT THREE. HI MY THE CAN
YOU HEAR ME YES WE CAN. HI I'M
WITH BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS
ANGELES AND I'M CALLING IN
SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE
ON BEHALF OF KENNETH RAFI
JUNIOR. AS CHAIR WE APOLOGIZE
THAT WE CAN JUST PAUSE HERE FOR
A MOMENT OUR OPERATORS ARE
COLLECTING ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION FROM THE-
COMMENTERS JUST A MOMENT PLEASE
THANK YOU. HELLO AND I. TO
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO LINE ONE
FORTY KILL. MY NAME IS KATHLEEN
BACKER I'M A REALLY YEAH BUT IN
OF LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA AND I
STRONGLY URGE THE ON THESE THAT
THIRTY ONE THING YOU. BUT YOU
CHAIR AGAIN WE APOLOGIZE FOR
THE OTHER SHOE FLIGHT DELAY
HERE WE'RE GOING TO JUST PAUSE
FOR ANOTHER MOMENT- TO LET MY
OPERATORS CATCH UP. JUST A
MOMENT THANK YOU THAT'S FINE.
THERE NOW GOING TO GO TO MINE
ONE. SIXTY ONE YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI I'M A MOTHER AND A
VICTIM OF POLICE BRUTALITY AND
BENEFITS THAT CALIFORNIA- THAT
OF IF THERE HAD PREVIOUSLY
MURDERED IN SOUTH AFRICA STUDY
FORMULA TIRED BY THAT POLICE
DEPARTMENT. AND I'M SORRY WE
WERE NOT ABLE TO TAKE
ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY. WE'RE
JUST TAKING INDICATIONS OF
SUPPORT. OKAY WELL PLEASE
SUPPORT THIS BILL PERFECT THANK
YOU LINE. ONE THIRTY SIX. BY
ONE THIRTY ONE IS OPEN. MORNING.
HELLO GOOD MORNING I GUESS WE
CAN. BY AARON JAMES CALLING TO
SUPPORT CALIFORNIA AT THE SEVEN
THIRTY ONE ON IN BEHALF OF
SOUTH OF BLACK LIVES MATTER AND
SOUTH PASADENA. RGS FELT THANK
YOU. WHAT LINE. ONE THIRTY
NINE. STE HI MY NAME IS AMY MET
WITH BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS
ANGELES IN STRONG SUPPORT. LINE.
ONE FORTY FOUR. GOOD MORNING OF
THE MILLIONS TOP YEN YOU'D
JUSTICE COALITION PROP
COSPONSORED URGING A YES VOTE.
WE'RE NOT GONNA GO TO LINE ONE
FIFTY FIVE PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO THIS IS MICHAEL HAD DATA
ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU. WE
WILL NOW GO TO LINE ONE FIFTY
EIGHT PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI MY
NAME TO TREAT THE BLACK ANOTHER
FUTURE CREWS WAS KILLED HERE IN
ANAHEIM IN TWO THOUSAND AND
NINE AND YES I SUPPORT THIS
BILL. LINE. ONE FIFTY FOUR. I
WON FIFTY FOR YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HELLO BONTA LINE. FORTY THREE.
HI THIS IS PETER PAN OF STAYING
ON BEHALF OF THE ALAMEDA COUNTY
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE WE ARE
IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
LINE EIGHTY SEVEN. GOOD MORNING
JERRY VASQUEZ ON BEHALF OF
COMMUNITIES UNITED FOR
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE WE STRONG
SUPPORT SENATE BILL SEVENTY
ONE. LINE. ONE SIXTY SIX. ONCE
YOU GET YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES
HI CAN YOU HEAR ME YES WE CAN.
RIGHT MY NAME IS NICOLE AND I
WAS CALLING AT THE PORT SENATE
BILL SEVEN THIRTY ONE IT IS
HIGH TIME BACK CALIFORNIA JOIN
FORTY FIVE OTHER STATES IN A
DECERTIFICATION PROCESS AND
ALLOW. THANK YOU. GLENN CATON-
I'M A LAWYER IN OAKLAND
CALIFORNIA AND I STRONGLY
SUPPORT SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE
THANK YOU. LINE. NNETY FIVE.
HI MARK HI MY NAME IS POONAM
ARE MERCURY ON BEHALF OF THE
POLITICIANS- LEADER FOR MORE
GROUP STRONG SUPPORT. LINE. ONE
TWENTY EIGHT. HELLO MY NAME IS
JIM LANDOWNER I MEAN I AT THE
UNION MEMBER AND A RESIDENT IN
AND THEN THE TRANSPORT SB SEVEN
THIRTY ONE. LINE ONE TWENTY
SEVEN. HELLO HELLO. YES SIR HI
MY NAME IS GERRY TOLBERT I'M
WITH BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS
ANGELES CA NINE INTO FOUR OF
FIVE SENATE BILL CLINTON THIRTY
ONE IN THE NAME OF CANISTERS
JUNIOR. FIND. ONE SEVENTY FIVE.
HI MY NAME IS SHERRY HOMES AND
I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF SB.
SEVEN THIRTY ONE. LINE ONE
SEVENTY SEVEN. GOOD MORNING
CANACCORD ARE NON BEHALF OF THE
SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE IN STRONG SUPPORT. YOUR
CHAIR THERE'S NO ONE ELSE IN Q.
TO. SPEAK IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT
THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH
OPERATOR. WE'RE NOW GOING TO
MOVE TO OPPOSITION I HAVE ONE
LISTED MAIN OPPOSITION AND THAT
IS MISTER DAVID THE STOCK ME I
THINK OF THE STUDY LAW FIRM ON
BEHALF OF THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY
DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION SIR
ARE YOU ON THE LINE. THANK YOU
YES PLEASE. MY NAME'S DAVID
MISTAKE ME I AM A LABOR
ATTORNEY WHO SPECIALIZES IN
REPRESENTING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.
I'M APPEARING TODAY ON BEHALF
OF MY CLIENT SACRAMENTO COUNTY
DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION. MY
CLIENT AND I THINK I CAN SPEAK
FOR THE GREATER LAW ENFORCEMENT
COMMUNITY. I UNDERSTAND THE
NEED FOR POLICE REFORM
PARTICULARLY AT THIS MOMENT IN
OUR NATION'S HISTORY. I ALSO
WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT MY CLIENT
SUPPORTS A LICENSE REVOKED
CATION PROCESS AND TO THAT END
WE WORK TIRELESSLY. WITH THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS. TO ESTABLISH A
FAIR AND WORKABLE LICENSING
SYSTEM. THAT ASSIST IN STRIKING
THE PROPER BALANCE THAT
ADDRESSES LEGITIMATE CONCERNS
OVER BAD OFFICERS AVOIDING
ACCOUNTABILITY WHILE
MAINTAINING FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLES OF DUE PROCESS AND
FAIRNESS AND PROTECTING THE
INNOCENT OFFICERS. OUR GOAL IS
TO ESTABLISH A SYSTEM WHERE
POSTED REVIEWS CASES OF SERIOUS
MISCONDUCT. WITH THE POWER TO
REVOKE. AND WE BELIEVE THEY
SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO ALSO
SUSPEND CERTIFICATION OF BAD
OFFICERS. WELL AGAIN PROTECTING
THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF THOSE
OFFICERS THAT ARE INNOCENT OF
ALLEGATIONS. MADE AGAINST THEM
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND THAT. IN THIS
PROFESSION THERE ARE INHERENT
INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE
FALSE COMPLAINTS AGAINST
OFFICERS AND THAT'S NOT TO SAY
THAT EVERY COMPLAINT OF
MISCONDUCT. IS FALSE BUT IF YOU
ARE SUBJECT TO A CRIMINAL
PROCEEDING OR YOU HAVE A CIVIL
PROCEEDING THERE ARE INHERITING
SAYS AND THOSE INCENTIVES
AREN'T NECESSARILY IN PLACE
WITH OTHER PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND
THAT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED IN MY
VIEW. OUR GOAL WAS. TO HAVE A
SYSTEM WHERE AGENCIES ARE
REQUIRED TO COMPLETE
INVESTIGATIONS OF SERIOUS
MISCONDUCT REGARDLESS OF
WHETHER AN OFFICER RESIGNED
BEFORE ITS CONCLUSION WE
BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT OFFICERS ARE NOT
ABLE TO LEAVE AN AGENCY AND GO
TO ANOTHER AGENCY TO AVOID THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS
WE BELIEVE THAT. BY HAVING A
SYSTEM WHERE THE INVESTIGATION
MUST BE COMPLETED THAT WOULD
ALLOW POST A MORE COMPLETE
RECORD IN ORDER TO EVALUATE
WHETHER OR NOT THAT OFFICER
CERTIFICATION SHOULD BE REVOKED
OR SUSPENDED THEY RESIGN AND
THERE'S NO INVESTIGATION ON
THERE'S NOTHING FOR. POST TO
REVIEW AND MAKE THAT
DETERMINATION ON WE ALSO
BELIEVE THAT AS A MATTER OF DUE
PROCESS AND THOROUGHNESS. POST
SHOULD DEFER ITS DECISION UNTIL
AFTER ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE
APPEALS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND
UNDER OUR PROPOSAL. POST WOULD
GET AN IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION
UPON. THE AGENCY SUSTAINING
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT. BUT YOU
WOULDN'T HAVE COLLATERAL
CONCURRENT PROCEEDINGS GOING
YOU WOULD ALLOW THEM TO GO
SEQUENTIALLY AND IN THAT
SITUATION THERE'S NO RISK TO
THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THE OFFICERS
ALREADY BEING TERMINATED BY
OTHER AGENCIES THAT THEY'RE NOT
IN A POSITION WHERE THEY CAN
OPERATE AND POST HAS THE
NOTIFICATION. AND THEN AT THE
END OF THAT PROCESS POST WOULD
COMPLETE ITS REVIEW IN ITS
DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR
NOT CERTIFICATION SHOULD BE
REVOKED OR SUSPENDED OBVIOUSLY
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
OVERLAPPING LEGAL ISSUES AND-
SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT DOUBLE
JEOPARDY AND- W. TO CASE IN
THAT REACHED INCOMPATIBLE
VISIONS THERE'S ALSO. IN MY
VIEW DIFFERENT DETERMINATIONS
THAT CAN BE MADE BETWEEN AN
EMPLOYING AGENCY AND A
LICENSING BODY AND WE SEE THAT
IN OTHER PROFESSIONS LIKE
LAWYERS WITH THE STATE BAR
MEDICAL LICENSING BOARDS NURSES
WHERE SOMEBODY MAY ENGAGE IN
MISCONDUCT THAT BRINGS
SUFFICIENT DISCREDITED THAT
AGENCY THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER
BE EMPLOYED THERE FOR EXAMPLE
AN ATTORNEY WHO MALPRACTICE IS
A CASE ON A BIG CLIENT. THAT
MAY OR MAY NOT WARRANT
RELOCATION OF THEIR ABILITY TO
WORK AS AN ATTORNEY AND ENGAGE
IN THEIR CHOSEN PROFESSION IF
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS AREAS
SUCH AS GOING FROM A QUIET THEN
PRESUMABLY THE STATE BAR WOULD
PROVOKE THE LICENSE IF IT'S A
MISTAKE IT MAY BE SOME LESSER.
SOMEONE PUNISHMENT AND THAT IS
THE FRAMEWORK. THAT WE HAVE
BEEN WORKING TOWARDS AND
FRANKLY WERE DISAPPOINTED THAT
THE LATEST ITERATION OF THIS
BILL SEEM TO MOVE FARTHER APART
FROM THAT COMMONALITY IN THOSE
PRINCIPLES OF FUNDAMENTAL RULE
OF LAW DUE PROCESS AND FAIRNESS.
I WANT TO HIT ON SOME OF THE
MAJOR CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE
WITH THE BILL SIR AS BRITAIN
HELLO SIR YES NORMALLY ALLOW
THREE MINUTES YOU'RE AT FIVE SO
I DO NEED TO ASK YOU TO WRAP UP
PLEASE. IF I COULD JUST IT IS
REAL QUICK. FOR ONE IS THE
COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD THAT
MAKES THE THEY RE VOCATION
DETERMINATIONS. THEY LACK
IMPARTIALITY. AND THEY ALSO
LACK ALL BUT THREE OF THE NINE
MEMBERS SUBJECT MATTER
EXPERTISE IN THESE AREAS
GENERALLY WHEN YOU WHEN YOU
LOOK AT IMPARTIALITY. I WANT
I'M SORRY I REALLY CANNOTLET
YOU GO ON IT'S UNFAIR I GIVE
PEOPLE THREE MINUTES YOU'RE NOW
APPROACHING. SIX I NEED YOU TO
WRAP UP A WANNA CUT YOU OFF BUT
YOUR EXPLANATION OF EACH OF
THESE STEPS IF YOU CAN LIST
THEM OKAY BUT AN EXPLANATION IS
NOT GOING TO BE WARRANTED AT
THIS TIME. OKAY SO WITH REGARDS
TO THE BOARD MEMBERS THERE ARE
INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE MEMBERS OF
ORGANIZATIONS OR THE PEOPLE WHO
BELIEVE THEY ARE THE VICTIM OF
POLICE VIOLENCE THAT HAVE
INHERENT ISSUES WITH LACK OF
IMPARTIALITY WITH RESPECT TO
THE PROCESS- HAVING TO WILL
DETERMINATION THE THIS BILL AS
WRITTEN STATE THAT THE BOARD IS
NOT EVEN REQUIRED TO FOLLOW
DETERMINATIONS OF A COURT OF
LAW OR THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS
TO ISSUES AND SO YOU CAN HAVE
DOUBLE JEOPARDY. AND
INCONSISTENT RULINGS THERE IS-
VERY LIMITED DISCRETION IS
ACTUALLY GIVEN TO THE POST
COMMISSION BECAUSE THIS SUB
BOARDS DETERMINATION HAVE TO BE
ADOPTED IF THEY'RE SUPPORTED
ESSENTIALLY BY ANY EVIDENCE AND
SO THERE'S NOT AN INDEPENDENT
DETERMINATION BY THE POST
COMMISSION IS THE MORE LIKELY
THAN NOT AND SO WITH HAVING AN
UNFAIR PANEL THERE'S AN UNFAIR
APPEAL PROCESS THAT WOULD NOT
MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS OF DUE
PROCESS IN ANY COURT IN AMERICA
THAT THAT PANEL MEMBERS OF THE
BOARD WOULD NOT MEET THE
IMPARTIALITY REQUIREMENTS OF
ANY JURY IN AMERICA. AND IN
CLOSING WE JUST ASK THE
COMMITTEE TO VOTE NO ON THIS SO
THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION AND CONTINUE
WORKING TOWARDS A LICENSING
REGIME THAT ALL PARTIES CAN
SUPPORT AND IS IN THE BEST
INTEREST OF CALIFORNIA. THANK
YOU THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT IS
THERE ANYONEIN THE CHAMBERS
WHO WOULD LIKE TO. INDICATE
OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL. RIGHT
SEEING NONE WE WILL GO TO THE
WITNESS VIDEO ROOM IS ANYONE IN
THE WOMEN'S VIDEO. SEEING NONE
ABOUT THE REMOTE TESTIMONY
STATION. ALL RIGHT SEEING NONE
WILL NOW GO TO THE TELEPHONES
OPERATOR PLEASE OPEN THE LINE
FOR OPPOSITION AND AGAIN IN
THIS SECTION WE'RE TAKING AME
AFFILIATION AND THAT YOU'RE
OPPOSED TO SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE
WE'LL GO TO THE PHONES PLEASE.
THANK YOU MISTER CARE AND AGAIN
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WE WOULD
LIKE TO STRESS THAT THE
OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW IS FOR
THOSE THAT WISH TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION WE UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE
THAT MAY WISH TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT. AT THIS TIME WE'RE
ONLY TAKING THOSE WHO WISH TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION. WE HAVE
GOING ON THE LINE ONE THIRTY
THREE YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THE
MORNING AFTER KAREN MEMBERS WHO
SHALL MUCH LOWER ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION RESPECTIVELY IN
OPPOSITION THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
LINE. SEVENTY FOUR. MISTER
CHAIRMAN BIRDS PLANTED UP ON
BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S SUPPORTIVE OF
THE IDEA BUT OPPOSED TO AT
SEVEN THIRTY THANK YOU THANK
YOU. LINE. ONE TWENTY SIX.
THANK YOU KAREN MEMBERS JOHN
CALVIN ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION WHICH SUPPORTED
CERTIFICATION BUT UNFORTUNATELY
CALLED SEVEN THIRTY ONE THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NINE SIXTY
EIGHT. RICHARD SHERMAN MEMBERS
RANDY PERRY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION HIGHLAND
TROLLING AND PORAC AGAIN
SUPPORT- THIS TYPE OF PROGRAM
BUT NOT THIS LEGISLATION THANK
YOU. LINE. NINETY SIX. MARWARI
WAKEFIELD. YES THANK YOU MARK
MARC PRESIDENT OF BASKETBALL
FIFTEEN SEVEN REPRESENTING
PEACE OFFICERS IDENTICAL COUNTY
OPPOSING THE BILL AS WE WRITTEN
BUT THE PARTY- OVER GOAL THANK
YOU. LINE. SEVENTY SIX. WELL
FELT I THOUGHT OFFICERS. WE
WOULDN'T BY THEIR OF MISTER AT
THE MALL WE CLOSE THE BILL THIS
BILL IN THE CURRENT FORM AND
MORE THAT LAW I THANK THANK YOU
THANK YOU THANK YOU. LINE
SEVENTY NINE. MISTER CHAIRMAN
NOT I REALLY ON BEHALF OF
THIRTY FOR A LOT ANGELES DEPUTY
CHAIR A LOT ANGELES POLICE
LEAGUE AND ALSO BE OF THE SAN
POLICE OFF AT THE AND THEN DE
SHERIFF THIRTY ALL IN OPPOSITE
THANK. LINE EIGHTY ONE. MISTER
CHAIR MAPMUSE WITH THE CAL
CORRECTION PEACE OFFICER BOTH
IN OPPOSITION S. B. SEVEN
THIRTY ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY
CRAFTING. LINE ONE SEVENTY. YES
HELLO THANK FORGET HOW THEY
HAPPEN THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF JOINT POWERS
AUTHORITIES RESPECTFULLY ABOUT.
AND AGAIN AS A REMINDER RIGHT%
NOW THE OPPORTUNITY IS TO SPEAK
THEN OPPOSITION. TO SEVEN
THIRTY ONE. WE'RE GOING TO GO
TO LINE. FIFTY NINE. THIS CHEN
NUMBERS RANGE SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SPEECH AND OPPOSITION
TO THIRTY ONE OF OR. OF THE
THIRTY AT SOME POP THANK YOU.
IN A MOMENT WE'RE GOING TO GO.
TO ALIGNED WITH AN OPERATOR.
MISTER WE HAVE NO ONE OUT IN
QUEUE AT THE MOMENT THE SPEAK
IN OPPOSITION. OKAY I'M GONNA
ASK ONE MORE TIME IF ANYONE ON
THE PHONES IS IN OPPOSITION
PLEASE PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
OPERATORS HERE JUST A MOMENT
THANK YOU THANK YOU.
WE'RE
GONNA GO TO LINE TWO OH SIX.
IT'S PRETTY RARE CALLING ON
BEHALF OF MYSELF INTO
OPPOSITION SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE.
THE CHAIR WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE-
ONLINE RIGHT NOW TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION. MISTER SHARE. I YES
WE JUST ADDRESSED THE CHAIR. HI
MISTER CHAIR- MEMBER SHANE
LEVINE GOOD MORNING ALL AGES-
CRITICAL DIFFICULTIES ARCHING
LEVINE ON BEHALF OF THE LONG
BEACH POLICE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION YOUR TOTAL ORDER
PLEASE CALIFORNIA OBSERVATION
ORANGE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFFS
IN THE SHAREPOINT BENEFIT
ASSOCIATION SAMPOERNA DINO ALL
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. OPERATOR IS THERE ANYONE
ELSE ON THE LINE. TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION CHAIR I BELIEVE WE
MAY HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL COMMENT
AT THIS POINT. OKAY JUST A
MOMENT PLEASE THANK YOU.
JERRY
APOLOGIZE IT DOES APPEAR THAT
WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE
ATTEMPTING TO QUEUE UP AND
SUPPORT. AGAIN LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN THIS RIGHT NOW IS THE
OPPORTUNITY SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
TO SEVEN THIRTY ONE. OPERATOR
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE WE HAVE NO
ONE ELSE. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO
YOU HAVE IN THE QUEUE. MISTER
CHAIR WE HAVE- AT LEAST SEVEN
WISHING TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT I
KNOW ONE OF THE SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION. OKAY WE'LL TAKE
THOSE FIRST SEVEN. AND WE'RE
GOING TO GO TO LINE ONE NINETY
THREE IN SUPPORT. IN MY MIND I
FEEL THE- CAN YOU HEAR ME YES
WE CAN. HI I WANTED TO EXPRESS
MY SUPPORT IN THE NEED TO HOLD
BAD ACTORS ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THEIR ACTIONS THANK YOU. LINE.
ONE NINETY FOUR. OKAY BY ONE
NINETY FOR YOUR IS. HIGHER CAN
YOU HEAR ME YES WE CAN. GREAT
MANY IS MARIANNA CALL IN STRONG
SUPPORT SENATE BILL THIRTY ZERO
FIVE EIGHT THAT OUT LOUD THANK
THAT LINE. ONE NINE FIVE. I WON
NINETY WON'T. MY NAME IS KEREN
PULLING INTO PORT OF THAT SEVEN
ONE HUNDRED THANK YOU IN THAT
KIND AND WE CAN NOW. HELLO MY
NAME RICK CAL WALLACE NINE FOR
OF A SEVEN THIRTY ONE COM.
BUILD SHOULD BE PASSED BY
EIGHT. EACH HI MY NAME IS THE-
AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF SEVEN ONE
THANK YOU THANK YOU. LINE.
THIRTEEN I NAME IS MELINA WITH
BLACK LIVES MATTER AND THAT
CALLING IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THIRTY ONE AND THE NAME YOUR-
BLIND ONE NINETEEN. MY NAME IS
THANK YOU THANK YOU BLIND YOU.
ELEVEN QUARRELSOME EIGHT
O'CLOCK DANIEL IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN THIRTY ONE
THANK YOU. LINE. ONE EIGHTY
NINE. YEAH I'M IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN THIRTY ON.
FIND ONE EIGHTY NINE. HELLO HI
FIRST OFF CAMPUS IS GOING AND
IF SUPPORTERS THIS BILL. APRIL
BE COOL. SIXTY CHAIR WE HAVE TO
ADDITIONAL PEOPLE QUEUING UP
RIGHT NOW OUR OPERATORS ARE
PROCESSING THEM JUST A MOMENT
PLEASE. KEEP YOUR PATIENTS ARE
GOING TO GO TO LINE ONE SEVENTY
NINE. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME YES
WE CAN. HI MY NAME IS CAROLINE
IN STRONG SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN
NINETY ONE THANK YOU THANK YOU.
LINE. ONE OH FOUR. HELLO CAN
YOU HEAR ME YES WE CAN. HI AND
HELEN I'M IN STRONG SUPPORT SB.
SEVEN THIRTY ONE. LYING TO
SEVENTEEN. CAN YOU HEAR ME YES
WE CAN. OKAY I'M JOHNSON UNCLE
OF OSCAR GRANT OKAY ONE OF THE
COSPONSORED OF SEVEN THIRTY ONE
STRONG AGAINST THE PART OF
SEVEN THIRTY ONE. THANK YOU
LINE TO IN HI NATALIE WHEN AND
I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT. GO TO
LINE ONE EIGHTY FIVE. I MEAN
YES WE CAN. HI MY NAME IS LEE
AND I'M CALLING IN FROM SUPPORT.
YOU CAN FIND ONE EIGHTY SEVEN.
ONE EIGHTY SEVEN YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. NUMBER. ONE ONE. PLEASE
GO AHEAD. SORRY TECHNICAL
DIFFICULTIES SERVE OUR SANTA
MONICA WHITE PEOPLE FOR BLACK
LIVES. PART OF THAT BE. SEVEN
THIRTY ONE. LINE ONE EIGHTY.
THERE MAY YES WE CAN. I'M IN MY
NAME IS TAMERA K. I AM IN
SUPPORT OF SB SEVEN THREE ONE
IN HONOR KENNETH ROCK YUNIOR
ANY OTHER SIX HUNDRED TWENTY
HILL BY LAPD YOU KNOW IF YOUR
APARTMENT LOS ANGELES COUNTY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BUT YOU
CARE WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE THANK
YOU AT THIS TIME THANK YOU
OPERATOR YOU CAN CLOSE THE
LINES NOW FOR SB SEVEN THIRTY
ONE. AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE. QUESTIONS
COMMENTS MR OBERNOLTE. THANK
YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN I CENTER.
IN YOUR OPEN YOU SAID THAT IT
WAS NOT YOUR INTENTION THAT-
THIS COMMISSION BE USED AS A
TOOL TO DECERTIFY OFFICERS FOR
ANYTHING LESS THAN SERIOUS OR
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY- THERE'S A
SECTION OF THE BILL HOWEVER
THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AND-
IF IT'S IN THE SECTION THAT
LISTS THE AXE FOR WHICH A
POLICE OFFICER COULD BE
DECERTIFIED IT SAYS. IT
INCLUDES ACTS THAT VIOLATE THE
LAW IN ARE INCONSISTENT WITH
THE OFFICER'S OBLIGATION TO
UPHOLD THE LAW OR RESPECT THE
RIGHTS OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
SO YOU MENTIONED TRAFFIC
TICKETS IS SOMETHING YOU KNOW
RIDICULOUS EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING
THAT WOULDN'T BE USED. TO
DECERTIFY AN OFFICER BUT IT
SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE
INCLUDED IN THE SECTION THAT
SAYS ACTS THAT VIOLATE THE LAW
TO THAT CAN YOU- TELL US ABOUT
WHAT YOU'RE THINKING WAS WHEN
YOU PUT THAT. I WE WANT A BROAD
NET BUT WE'RE GOING TO TRUST.
THE BOARD PLUS THIS A POST-
REVIEW BOARD TO. DISCERN AND
CAN MAKE THAT DECISION THAT.
THE BULLS ARE EXAMPLES THAT WE
WOULDN'T WANT TO OFFICER TO
LOSE HIS HIS OR HER BACK FOR.
BY YES BREAKING THE LAW IS A
CLEAR VIOLATION OF WHY YOU
SHOULD LOSE. THE BE THE
CERTIFIED BUT EGREGIOUS ACTS
AND THAT'S WHAT THE REVIEW
BOARD ALL ABOUT THE HAVE THAT
LEVEL OF. EXPERTISE TO COME TO
THAT REASONABLE CONCLUSION THAT
THIS LAUNCH DECERTIFICATION
VERSUS THIS LARGE SUSPENSION
THIS WARMS EIGHT RIGHT UP IT.
YOU KNOW WHATEVER THE CASE MAY
BE A LEAVE WITHOUT PAY. BY IT'S.
EIGHT WE WERE TO SPY THE BABY
IN A SO WAYS BUT I THANK WE
TRIED TO GET THE EXAMPLES OF
BOTH VIOLATIONS THAT WOULD NOT
ONLY LEAD TO OF BEING TO
CERTIFIED IN A TRAFFIC
VIOLATION IF YOU FALSIFIED
SOMEONE DOING SIXTY FIVE WHEN
THEY WERE REALLY DOING FORTY
FIVE SHOULD COST YOU YOUR
CERTIFICATION OKAY SO I MEAN IF
I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU-
SOMETHING LIKE A PARKING TICKET
WHICH IS AN INFRACTION. WOULD
QUALIFY TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE
THE BOARD FOR DECERTIFICATION
BUT YOU WOULD RELY ON THE BOARD
TO SAY NO THAT'S A MINOR
VIOLATION AND DOESN'T WARRANTY
CERTIFICATION. THE LOCAL AGENCY
HAS THE FIRST BITE AT THE APPLE
SOLD VERY WOULD DETERMINE IF IN
FACT IT REALLY ROSE TO THE
LEVEL OF THE CERTIFICATION.
THAT'S SOME OF THE THINGS WE
WENT BACK AND FORTH ABOUT SO.
THE LOCAL AGENCY HAS THE FIRST
CALL THROUGH YOUR LOCAL AGENCY
IS BRINGING YOU BEFORE. THE
CIRCUIT BOARS OFF THE DATE THE
TERM IN THAT. IT WAS EGREGIOUS
ACTS. BUT WE'RE WE'RE JUST.
THOUSAND CAN COME. THAT THAT
CAN RESULT IN DECERTIFICATION
I'M SORRY WE'RE- IN THIS BILL
WE'RE LISTING. THE ACTIVITIES
THAT CAN RESULT IN
DECERTIFICATION. SO THE WORD
COLLUDING IN A FRACTION LIKE A
PARKING TICKET NO. WE'RE NOT
NO. OKAY SO WHEN IT SAYS ACTS
THAT VIOLATE THE LAW WHICH IS
EXACTLY DOES THAT MEAN. I MEAN
YOU GOT BROWN. I. DEGREES OF
VIOLATING THE LAW SO TO
CONTINUE TO TRY TO WOULD WOULD
DOWN TO SPECIFIC ACTION WE CAN
DO THAT WE CAN COME WITH. COME
TO AGREEMENT ON JUST THE- WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MOST
EGREGIOUS ACTS FALSIFYING
EVIDENCE. ALL EXCESSIVE USES OF
FORCE. KILLING EIGHT
INDIVIDUALS SEXUAL ASSAULT ALL
THOSE EXAMPLES THAT WE'VE SEEN
ON A REGULAR BASIS THAT HAS LED
TO SOMEONE BEING FIRED OR
RESIGNING AND TRANSFERRING TO
ANOTHER APARTMENT FALSIFYING A
SPEEDING TICKET OR A PARKING
TICKET HAS NEVER LED TO ANYONE.
BEING FIRED A BRAVE AND
SUSPENDED OKAY I DON'T WANT TO
GET INTO COLLEGE WE SENATOR
BUT- BUT- I'M NOT I'M SORRY I'M
SORRY I'M SORRY FOR THOSE ON
THE PHONE. YOU'RE YOU'RE THERE
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF CALLED
UPON. ZERO ONE TO GO AHEAD
PLEASE SO. THE FRUSTRATION HERE
IS- THAT WE HAVE OTHER SECTIONS
OF THE BILL THAT REFER TO
SERIOUS CRIMES FELONIES THAT
WOULD RESULT IN DECERTIFICATION
AND THIS IS JUST KIND OF
ANOTHER SECTION THAT SAYS- ANY
VIOLATION OF THE LAW AND IN IT
I'M ALSO CONCERNED BECAUSE IT
SAYS LAW IT DOES NOT SAY. A
CRIME COMMISSION OF A CRIME
IT'S A VIOLATION OF THE LAW
WHICH COULD BE EXTENDED TO
SOMETHING STATUTORY. I MEAN A
UNIFORM VIOLATION THAT'S A
VIOLATION OF SOMETHING THAT'S
IN STATE STATUTE THAT THAT
COULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE LAW
AND SO ON IS THAT THESE THIS IS
A SERIOUS. THE SERVICE TOPIC
AND I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO.
TOTAL DOWN ON THE SPECIFICITY
OF EXACTLY WHAT WHAT ARE THE
ACTS THAT. WE'RE GOING TO HOLD
POLICE OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR
I AND IF I IF I COULD IF THE
OPPOSITION'S ONLINE- MAYBE THEY
CAN OPINE ON WHETHER OR NOT.
THIS PARTICULAR SECTION I IS
PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE I FEEL IT
IS. MISERABLE IF YOU HAVE A
SPECIFIC QUESTION FOR A WITNESS
PLEASE. ASK THAT'S RIGHT BUT
I'M NOT GONNA OPEN IT UP FOR
ADDITIONAL TESTS SO HERE'S MY
QUESTION. TO THE OPPOSITION
WITNESS- IS THAT PARTICULAR
SECTION I'M CITED THAT SAYS I
ACTUALLY VIOLATE THE LAW COULD
DO THAT- LEAD TO SOMETHING LIKE
A PARKING TICKET BEING USED. TO
CERTIFY DECERTIFY OFFICERS.
THIS IS DAVID MISTAKE NAY OUT
TO. THAT WILL. ONE OF THE
CONCERNS. J. WILL THE RATE IF I
HAD MORE TIME. GET YOU APTLY
POINTED OUT THERE'S ALREADY A
REQUIREMENT FOR DECERTIFICATION
IF AN OFFICER COMMITS A FELONY
SO IF WE'RE EXPANDING THAT
OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW
NECESSARILY IS TALKING ABOUT
MORE MINOR VIOLATIONS ALL THE
WAY DWN TO INFRACTIONS OR AS
YOU POINTED OUT. VIOLATIONS OF
NON CRIMINAL STATUTES OKAY.
SENATOR AYE AYE I THINK THAT
YOUR- YOU'RE DOING GOOD WORK IN
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD AND
I AM EXTREMELY FRUSTRATED I
APOLOGIZE WHAT WHAT THAT
PROSTRATION CHAU I'M FRUSTRATED
BECAUSE I PERSONALLY AGREE WITH
YOU. THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE
CERTIFICATION PROCESS IN
CALIFORNIA I AGREE WITH YOU
THAT POLICE OFFICER SHOULD BE
HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR
ACTIONS AND I THINK MOST POLICE
OFFICERS WOULD AGREE. THAT IT
HELPS THEM IF WE ESTABLISH LAWS
THAT PREVENT BAD OFFICERS FROM
MOVING FROM DEPARTMENT TO
DEPARTMENT TO DEPARTMENT BUT
UNFORTUNATELY THE WAY THIS BILL
IS WRITTEN. IT'S WRITTEN IN
SUCH A WAY THAT IT'S VERY
DIFFICULT FOR ANYONE THAT CARES
ABOUT POLICE OFFICERS TO VOTE
FOR IT AND THAT'S WHY I'M SO
FRUSTRATED I FIND IT HARD
BREAKING IT AND SO I WOULD
ENCOURAGE YOU SHOULD JUST GO
MOVE FORWARD TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT SECTION WHICH IS THE
PARTICULARLY PROBLEMATIC
SECTION. OF THE BILL AND
PERHAPS FIVE DEFINE WAS MORE
SPECIFICITY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT AND I DON'T EVEN
THINK THAT THAT PARTICULAR-
SENTENCE NEEDS TO BE IN THERE
BECAUSE ELSEWHERE IN THE BILL
WE'RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT
WHAT CRIMES APPLY. COOLEY NOTE.
THANK YOU BECAUSE I. SAN RECORD.
I HAVE THE CHAIR WILL ALLOW ME
SOME LETTERS OF A NUMBER OF
QUESTION. I AM WE HAVE NO PLANS
TO IF THEY SHOULD PASS TODAY TO
PAY INTO PRO. SO I DO WANT TO
START WITH LETTING YOU KNOW
THAT WE ARE DOING A FISCAL AND
ALSO ON IT THAT WILL BE
ATTACHED TO FOR SESSION. THE
FLOOR DOCUMENTARY SUPPOSE-
BECAUSE IT IS A VERY EXPENSIVE
BILL AND I THINK WE'RE TRYING
TO GET THROUGH EXACTLY HOW
MUCH. OF START WITH THAT. THE
BEAN ACT SECTION- SOME QUESTION
JUST SOME SIMPLE QUESTIONS I'M
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE-
THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS THAT
YOUR- AMENDING SECTIONS EIGHTY
TWO POINT SIX AND A HALF. ****
OUT EIGHTY FOUR EIGHT EIGHT TWO
ONE POINT SIX EIGHT FOUR FOUR
POINT SIX EIGHT FOUR FIVE POINT
SIX. THEY DON'T GET TO. THE
CALL FOR IT IF THEY DON'T GET
TO EXCESSIVE FORCE QUESTION WAS
TOLD BY THE ACLU THAT WE DON'T
NEED TO BECAUSE THAT'S ALREADY
THE LAW THAT WONDERING WHY
THOSE THEN. ARE BEING PLACED
INTO THIS BILL. I THINK MISTER
BLUEPRINT WAS GONNA ANSWER THE
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS AS IT
RELATES TO THE SPECIFIC
SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE BRAIN ACT
IF I'M NOT CORRECT IS THAT OKAY
MISTER CHAIRMAN. YES THAT'S
OKAY THIS B. RING CONSIDER THAT
QUESTION ASKED OF YOU. ARE YOU
ALIVE. APOLOGIES APOLLO YES THE
POLITICIANS EFFECT THE-
COMMITTEE WHO MAY NOT OKAY MISS
YOU. ARE YOU ON THE LINE. YES
GOOD MORNING I WANTED TO IT
THAT QUESTION ABOUT THE
IMMEDIATE WHY THREE AND NOT ANY
ME BE COVERING DOCTORS OUT THE
SPENDING ABOUT THE J. AND THAT
BECAUSE THE CALIFORNIA LAW I'VE
NEVER GRANTED IMMUNITY
GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY A POLICE
OFFICER YOU THINK EXCEPT THE
PORK OUTSIDE THE JAIL PENDING.
THEREFORE THERE WOULD NO NEED
TO THAT IN THE NOT BE THEY
DIDN'T. GET EXTRA BIT DEGREE IN
THE THAT WE ARE. ADDRESS THAT
THE WE I'D BE OF WOULD THREE
IMMUNITY IN PARTICULAR CAR GET
AND DID. IN PEOPLE OF COLOR AND
ARE MORE BOMB MEN OF THE
INCLUDING WITH WITH MENTAL R
LIMITING. SO I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU WANT ME TO GO OVER EACH OF
THE BILL WITH AND SEPARATE
IMMUNITY THAT THE MOMENT OR
WAIT FOR A SEPARATE QUESTION NO
THAT'S THE WAY FOR SEPARATE BUT
MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL- MISTER
BRADFORD IF GIVEN THE ASSERTION
THAT THOSE DISPROPORTIONATELY
AFFECT PEOPLE OF COLOR TO HAVE
SOME- FACTUAL BACKGROUND
WITHOUT SOME STATISTICS OF SOME
SORT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY. THE
PROBABLY THINGS WERE NOT
INCLUDING THAT AND THAT
PROPORTIONALLY AFFECT PEOPLE OF
COLOR- YOU KNOW PUTTING PEOPLE.
IN JAIL. AND THE ITSELF. FACT
PEOPLE COLOR BUT IT J. IT I
SPENT A LONG TIME ON THIS
SECTION AND IT SEEM TO FIT WITH
EVERYTHING I WE'RE DOING AND I
HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ON WHY
WE CHOSE THESE THREE AND WHAT
WE'RE DOING MOVING FORWARD.
WITH THAT TO THE D. CERTIFICATE
THIS CERTIFICATION
DECERTIFICATION A COUPLE
QUESTIONS THAT I JUST WISH WE
HAVE THE TIME TO KIND. I I'M
NOT SURE I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND
FOR PEACE OFFICER ELIGIBLE
THERE'S A P. ABOUT. ABOUT
FELONIES. CRIMES COMMITTED THE
MILITARY WHO WHO'S GOING TO
DETERMINE WHETHER CRIME
COMMITTED THE MILITARY
CONSTITUTES A FELONY. IN
CALIFORNIA WOULD BE POST WILL
HAVE ACCESS TO THE APPLICANT'S
MILITARY FILE HOW THE WILL THAT
BE DETERMINED BECAUSE IT'S NOT
AS IF IT'S- EQUITABLE TO WHAT I
CALIFORNIA FELONY. I'M SORRY.
THIS IS FOR PEACE OFFICER
ELIGIBILITY OKAY AND WHO
CONDUCTS INVESTIGATION WILL BE
POST IT WILL BE UP POLLS WOULD.
MAKE THOSE DETERMINATIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS ON. SO SOMEBODY
COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE
MILITARY OF ANY SORT AND TO
DETERMINE WHETHER IT WOULD BE A
FELONY UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW.
POST WOULD MAKE IT WOULD REVIEW
THEIR MILITARY FILE I REALLY AM
CONFUSED AS TO WHY WE WOULD BE
LOOKING AT SOMEONE'S MILITARY
CONTACT ONCE THEY WERE ALREADY
HIRED BY POLICE DEPARTMENT
THAT'S THE PROBLEM I I'M I'M
CONFUSED AS WELL SO. I THINK
BECAUSE SCHEME THE ELIGIBILITY
TO BECOME A POLICE OFFICER THE
INITIAL ELIGIBILITY TO BE
CERTIFIED INCOME POLICE OFFICER
NOW DOESN'T ALLOW. YOU TO DO SO
IF YOU'VE COMMITTED A
CALIFORNIA FELONY AND YET IT
ALSO SAYSIN THE MILITARY SO I
THINK THAT'S AN UNANSWERED
QUESTION THESE ARE THINGS WE'RE
JUST GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE
TO LOOK AT. ONE THAT. JUST BUT-
AGAIN THEN YOU'RE SPEAKING OF
CONTACT THAT I WOULD SAY WAS
UNBECOMING OF OFFICERS SO THAT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN. VETTED OUT
BEFORE BEING HIRED SO TO CUT
LOOK BACK RETROSPECTIVELY
WITHOUT THIS CONDUCT. I THINK
THAT'S THE BILL THAT MISS BURKE
IS CARRYING RIGHT NOW THAT.
DOES. A YEAR- BEFORE BEING
HIRED BY OFFICERS BUT YOUR BILL
DEALS WITH. IN THE FUTURE AND
ELIGIBILITY FOR SOMEBODY TO
BECOME TO BE CERTIFIED AS AN
OFFICER IN CALIFORNIA AND SO IN
THE FUTURE. HOW WILL THEY DEAL
WITH CRIMES. THAT AN INDIVIDUAL
MAY HAVE COMMITTED IN THE
MILITARY BECAUSE IT REFERENCES
THAT AND YET IT DOESN'T. THERE
HAS TO BE SOME DETERMINATION
WHETHER THAT CRIME IS A
CALIFORNIA FELONY PREVENTING
THEM FROM BECOMING ELIGIBLE TO
BECOME A PEACE OFFICER. OR IF
IT WAS NOT IT'S JUST IT'S JUST.
IN A IN A IN A WOULD BE EIGHT
WE WOULD USE THE LANDS OF
CALIFORNIA AND DETERMINING IF
THAT WOULD DISQUALIFY
INDIVIDUALS THERE WAS
SOMETHING. IN THE MILITARY AND
IT IS NOT A FALLING IN
CALIFORNIA THAT WOULD PROVE. TO
PREVENT THAT PERSON FROM
BECOMING SUBSEQUENTLY IS GONNA
BE THE POST THE- POSTER AFTER
THE POST THIS BOARD IS WHO'S
GONNA. INTERNET PUT MAKE THAT
DETERMINATION. POST A POST OKAY.
OKAY I JUST QUESTIONS I HAVE
ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT I WORRY
AREN'T LINING UP- FOR MY
READING OF THE BILL IT SEEMS AS
IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAN
FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE
DIVISION FOR INVESTIGATION IS
THAT CORRECT YES OKAY SO. BASED
ON THE PUBLIC COMPLAINT THE
PEACE OFFICER COULD BE TO
CERTIFIED IF THE BOARD IMPOSED
AGREE. RIGHT THE THAT MEANS THE
PEACE OFFICER DOESN'T HAVE TO
BE TERMINATED FROM THEIR AGENCY
IN ORDER BE DECERTIFIED. BY THE
COMMISSION. AGENCY CRACKED
BECAUSE A PLAY IF THEY IF
EITHER THEIR AGENCY HAS NOT
TERMINATED THEM OR SOMEBODY
WENT DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD-
THEY COULD STILL ACTUALLY BE.
NOT TERMINATED BY THEIR AGENCY
CORRECT. SO THEN THE OFFICER
STATUTORY PULL OUR RIGHTS WHAT
HAPPENS TO THOSE OF THIS
HAPPENS. IT'S YEAH I THINK IT'S
A BLIND STILL TODAY WHETHER
THIS BILL EXISTED EVOKES SYSTEM
FOLLOW THE COMPLAINT ABOUT
SOME. EGREGIOUS ACT BY A LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN ITS
INVESTIGATIVE PRIOR TO THEM
BEING DETERMINATIVE OF TERM
TERMINATED OR DISCIPLINED IN
ANY KIND OF WHITE. DOT PROCESS
STEEL EXIST TODAY SO. IF AFTER
DETERMINING THAT THAT OFFICER
WAS BEING FIRED THE SAME
PROCESS WOULD FOLLOW THAT
PERSON WOULD BE DE CERTIFIED
STATE OF BEING FIRED THEY'RE
THEY'RE THEY'RE ENTITLED TO BE
DECERTIFIED. AS A POLICE
OFFICER IF THEY VIOLATED BOWLS
LAWS AND THEY WERE FOUND GUILTY
BY THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD
IF THEY WANT TO MANY BY THEIR
AGENCY THEY STILL MAINTAIN
THEIR POSTCARDS. THE RIGHT YES
IF THEY HAVEN'T BEEN A FIRE
CHEN JUST THINGS MIGHT BE
INCLINED AND I'M SUGGEST THAT
THESE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK
WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON
IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BECAUSE WE
HAVE EXISTING. THAT THAT
OFFICER HAS EXISTING RIGHTS AND
IF THEY HAVE BEEN TERMINATED
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BRIDGE
THOSE EXISTING RIGHT. NOW AND I
IN I APPRECIATE THAT I DON'T
HAVE MUCH BIGGER BILL BUT THESE
ARE STILL NOT CONFLICTS THAT
WILL EXIST. IF YOUR BILL PASSES
THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO. DEAL
WITH BECAUSE- YES THEY STILL
HAVEN'T THIS RIGHT IF THEY'RE
NOT TERMINATED THE REGION. SO
WE THAT. THAT DURING THIS OF
THIS GAME THROUGH MY IN THE GO
POLICE A BILL OF RIGHTS ONE OF
THOSE THAT PEOPLE TO EXPAND
BARBIE WHAT WE HAVE HERE AND WE
WILL BE DOWN BECAUSE OF JUST
SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND
CONCERNS THAT WE'RE HAVING
RIGHT HERE AND WE WANT TO
RESPECT AND MAINTAIN. AS MUCH
INTEGRITY TO THE PROCESS OF
PROTECTING BILLS GOOD OFFICERS
THIS IS NOT ABOUT A DOCTOR
ABOUT ALL POLICE ALSO THIS IS
DRILLING DOWN AND GETTING THOSE
BACK OFFS IS THAT WE ALL KNOW
WE EXIST I TOTALLY AGREE I'M
JUST SUGGESTING THAT IF YOU
HAVE AN AGENCY THAT DOESN'T
THINK THAT THE VIOLATION- THE
PRICES TO LEVEL OF TERMINATION.
THE NOT OFFICER STILL UNDER
CALIFORNIA LAW RETAIN IT AND
UNLESS I'M READING THIS WRONG
RETAINS ARE POLARIZED AND YET
WE JUST CERTIFY THEM SO THERE'S
GONNA BE CONFLICT IN LABOR LAW-
THAT NEEDS TO SOMEHOW WE NEED
TO FIX I'M SORRY FOR THE
FUTURE. I'M ANOTHER QUESTION
THAT WASN'T ANSWERED THIS WHO
WHO PAYS THE COST FOR
CERTIFICATION AND CONTINUED
ELIGIBILITY SO IT'S GOING TO BE
WHAT TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS IF WE
HAVE THE TERMINOLOGY I MEAN OF
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE HAD A FEE
THE AG'S OFFICE HAD A FEATURE
WE'RE SEEN WILL ASSESS WHEN THE
OFFICER RENEWS EVERY YEAR
WHATEVER THAT AMOUNT IS TO.
COVER THE COST AT FIRST THE
GOVERNOR TO JUST AS THEY HAD-
ON THE MONEY TO STAND THIS
THING UP INITIALLY BUT WE MOVED
AWAY FROM THAT SO YOU KNOW WE
SETTLED ON THE FATE. SO BUT
ACTUALLY THAT THE BOSSES
THEMSELVES THEY'RE GONNA PAY
THAT WHEN. THEY REGISTER. OKAY
SO THE OFFICER. OKAY WHEN THEY
SURVIVE I'M SURE THIS WILL GIVE
SUBJECT OF FUTURE. NEGOTIATIONS
WITH. YEAH OKAY SO THE OFFICER
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INITIAL
SORT OF A- COSTS IN EACH EVERY
TWO YEARS. ANOTHER REASON.
THINGS THAT WE CAN ASSIST. HELP
STANNIS SURE WELL I JUST I WANT
TO KNOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK I.
LOOK I MIGHT WELL SAY MY NOW I
THIS SOUNDS I'M VOTE FOR THIS
UNDER YOU KNOW I THINK WE NEED
TO DO SOME I THINK IT'S
DESPERATE I DON'T LIE. HAVING
ONE COMMITTEE HOW THESE. NOT
BEING ABLE TO PASS THE DEADLINE
TO BE ABLE TO. CHANGE ANYTHING
TO GET THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED
I WOULD REALLY SUGGEST YOU
START THINKING OF A VERY
THOROUGH LETTER TO THE JOURNAL
OF THE SHOULD PASS SO THESE
QUESTIONS AT LEAST OUR ANSWER
ON TEMPORARY BASIS TO YOU CAN
COME BACK AND FIX THEM I JUST
THINK THERE'S A LOT HERE
THAT'S- IT MAYBE I'M- BEING
GENETIC BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT I
WOULD DO. TO YOU IF IT WAS AN
APPROPRIATIONS RIGHT NOW WE
HAVE THIS CONVERSATION
APARTMENTS I'M SORRY- DOES IT.
REALLY DOES THE BILL REQUIRE
POSTED TRAIN OFFICERS. ABOUT
THE DECERTIFICATION PROCESS ARE
WE CRAZY ARE ARE WE ALSO GOING
TO HAVE IMPOSED THAT WHEN. WHEN
OFFICERS DO THE POSTING THEY'RE
GONNA LEARN ABOUT
DECERTIFICATION. WE HAVEN'T
DRILLED DOWN THAT FAR BUT I
THINK THAT WOULD BE. A
SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD WANT
TO LEARN ABOUT WHILE YOU'RE IN
IT. ACADEMY THOSE VIOLATIONS
THAT WOULD LEAD TO
DECERTIFICATION SO I THINK IF.
AGENCIES ARE REALLY CONCERNED
ABOUT DOING THE RIGHT THING
THEY WOULD HAVE SOME SECTION
IN. TRAINING THAT WOULD PROVIDE
THAT. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION
HAS TO DO IT IT'S IT IN I
ACTUALLY THINK. I HOPE THE
ANSWER IS WE'LL FIGURE THIS OUT
BUT IF. IT IS GOING TO GO TO
THE COSTS OF IT. THE INITIAL
CERTIFICATION- WELL FOR CURRENT
PEACE OFFICERS RIGHT I WILL
POST REVIEW ALL CURRENT
DISCIPLINARY RECORDS TO
DETERMINE- A DECERTIFICATION
FOR EXISTING PEACE OFFICERS
LIKE IF A PEACE OFFICERS
PREVIOUSLY TERMINATES HIRED BY
ANOTHER AGENCY TWO YEARS AGO
THEORETICALLY THAT PIECE
OFFICER COULD NOW BE FACED WITH
DECERTIFICATION. ULTIMATELY
UNEMPLOYMENT IT. ARE THEY BEING
GRANT IN ON WELL THERE AND I
NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S LIKE
THAT MAY WHAT WE TO IN FACT
SERVICE A RECORD. WELL THEY GO
THROUGH THAT SORT. PROCESS IS
POSTPONED TO REACH BACK AND-
POSSIBLY DECERTIFY SOME
EXISTING. POLICE OFFICERS WE
HAVEN'T DRILLED DOWN THAT FAR
SO WE CAN. OKAY I'M OF THE BILL
LIKE I SAID I'M VOTING FOR THIS
BILL I JUST THINK WE HAVE- FEEL
CONCERNED. FOR CONCERNED THANK
YOU THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A
MOTION THAT WAS JUST MADE IS
THEIR SECOND. WE DO HAVE A
SECOND RESURGENT HERE WHAT IS
THE MOTION IS IT DO PASSED
MOTIONS TO PASS SHOULD TO
APPROPRIATIONS NESS THE MOTION
IS TO PASS. WHICH IS WHY WOULD
I WOULD JUST POINT OF ORDER I
WOULD. TO THE CHAIR- AS
APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR JUST SAID
THIS IS A VERY EXPENSIVE
ABILITY EXCEEDS THE THRESHOLD.
AND IS REQUIRED TO GO TO
APPROPRIATIONS SOLIDS POSTED
THAT THE MOTION IS NOT PROPER.
IT HAS TO THE MOST THE MOTION
HAS TO BE. FOR THE BILL TO GO
TO APPROPRIATIONS THE MOTION
WAS WE HAVE TO SUSPEND THE
RULES MOTION JUST MADE IS TO
PASS. WHICH YOU KNOW IS THERE A
SUSPENSION OF THE RULES THERE'S
NO NEED FOR THERE'S NO NEED FOR
ASSISTANCE. BUT I WOULD ASK
STUDENTS NEEDS TO BE SOME
PARLIAMENT PRESENT THE
PARLIAMENTARIAN OR SOMEONE
NEEDS TO CLARIFY THIS BECAUSE I
THINK THAT IS A PROBLEM. WITH
YOUR YOU'RE WELCOME TO AND I.
BUT WELL IT COULD SO IS THERE.
CAN WE GET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN
INCOME THEN THE RULES THAT
YOU'VE CLERK BECAUSE MOTIONS TO
PASS THERE'S BEEN A MOTION TO
THE MAID. AN EMOTION TO THE
SECOND AND I'M MAKING A POINT
OF ORDER SAYING IT IS NOT
CONSISTENT WITH OUR RULES AND
I'M MAKING. A RULING THAT IT IS.
AND THEN I APPEALED RULING.
OKAY THERE'S A APPEAL OF MY-
RULING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A
VOTE. ON THAT- ARE AND- THE
RULING OF THE MOTION OF THE
CHAIR THAT THIS IS AN
APPROPRIATE. MOTION FOR US AT
THIS POINT. CALL THE ROLL ON
THAT I'M ASKING FOR. WE'RE
WE'RE VOTING ON THE POINT OF
ORDER ON THE RULING OF THE
CHAIR THAT THIS IS AN
APPROPRIATE MOTION. SO I'M- I'M
ASKING FOR SUPPORT SO AND I
VOTE IS SUPPORTING THE RULING
OF THE CHAIR AND NO VOTE IS
OPPOSING THE RULING OF THE
CHAIR KALRA PLEASE STAND AYE
STONE AYE GALLAGHER. GALLAGHER
NO CHILD SHALL I. TWO IVE TWO
FIVE THE DALLAS FIVE DOLLARS
HOLDEN HOLDEN I KALRA ALL RIGHT
I KILEY NO NO MAIENSCHEIN.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE NO REYES
REYES AYE. THANK YOU SO THE
RULING OF THE CHAIR HOW BEEN
OPPOSE WE WILL CONTINUE MISTER
CHIP I CAN CHAIRMAN FOR THING
THE AUTHOR FOR ON SUCH AND TOP
AND I KNOW THIS IS PUBLIC HAVE
TO I'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH THE
ANALYSIS HADN'T HAD MEETINGS
WITH BALSA ON THIS AND TRYING
TO GET TO A LONG JUST A COUPLE
CLARIFY QUESTIONS OR CALL FROM
BEAR. WANTED THE LANGUAGE THAT
SUGGESTS IS TO THINK THE OP.
THAT TRAFFIC FILE. OR MORE
MONEY VIOLENCE COULD. IN THE-
LOOKING AT THIS- UP SIX
LANGUAGE. BUT I JUST WANNA. AS
I READ THIS STATUTE IS PUTTING
IN CONTEXT. IT SEEMS TO ME- THE
BEGINNING OF THAT SECTION SAYS
THAT ITS POSTED HAS. THE TASK
OF PASSING THESE REGULATIONS SO
THEY'RE THE ONES WHO DECIDE
RIGHT. AND POST IS MADE UP OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT. SO WE'RE
LEAVING IT UP TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO DECIDE EXACTLY
WHICH OF THESE. VIOLATIONS
WOULD COUNT WHAT I DID.OKAY
THAT OBVIOUSLY GIVES ME I THINK
MUCH MORE SALAS IF IT WERE. NOT
FOR SOME FOLKS I THINK IT WOULD
BE A CREDIBLE. DISCUSSION BUT
IN THIS PART IN THIS CASE IT'S-
IT'S A BIT DIFFERENT- I KNOW WE
RECEIVED OF OFFICES LETTERS
DESCRIBE THIS BILL I A CO ON.
ATTACK AND ACTUALLY WOULD BE TO
HEAR FROM. THE OPPOSITION GIVEN
OUR STATE. IS NOW ONE OF ONLY
FIVE STATES THAT DOESN'T HAVE A
SYSTEM FOR OFFICER
DECERTIFICATION. SO THIS BILL
IS BASICALLY ASK US TO DO FORTY
FIVE OTHER STATES. OPEN SOME
CAN ARTICULATE HOW THIS BILL IS
MAJORLY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER
BILLS BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING
IS. IN A LOT OF OTHERS YOU KNOW
THEIR THEIR NUMBER. IN HAVE
BILLS. THAT ARE JUST AS STRONG
AS WE WE'RE DOING HERE. SILO TO
JUST HEAR THAN UNDERSTAND FROM
HAPPY TO HEAR FROM. THE OFF AS
WELL FROM OPPOSITION MISTER
YOUR YOU ON THE LINE STILL
THOSE REQUESTS DIRECTED AT.
THANK YOU I. NOT A TERM THAT I.
BUT I COULDN'T. WHAT THE
CONCERNS ARE. GOING BACK TO
MEMBER GONZALEZ'S CONCERNS
ABOUT PEEL B. R. FOR LINE.
HE'LL BE OUR DOESN'T APPLY TO
POST IT APPLIES TO THE
EMPLOYING AGENCY SO IS IT IN
THE SENSE THAT QUESTION WAS THE
QUESTION WAS WHAT'S DIFFERENT
ABOUT THIS BILL VERSUS THE
OTHER STATES THAT HAVE SIMILAR.
SIMILAR BILLS TORRANCE. WHEN I
WAS TRYING TO GET IT ALL GET
THERE FASTER IS THAT THERE IS
NOT DUE PROCESS THAT SUPPLIED
THAT THE POPE ARE DUE PROCESS
AND THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
DUE PROCESS UNDER SKELLY IS
APPLIED AGAINST THE EMPLOYMENT
AGENCY THERE'S REALLY NINE
UNDER HERE JUST FOR ONE THIS
BOARD IS THE SUBCOMMITTEE
OPPOSE. THE OFFICER- ONLY GETS
WITH TIME TO REVIEW IT'S NOT
DEFINED IN THERE BUT IT SEEMS
TO BE BASICALLY AN OPPORTUNITY
TO RESPOND. AND JACK BUT NOT TO
CALL WITNESSES OR PRESENT
EVIDENCE OR HAVE A
DETERMINATION THE POST BOARD IS
THEN BOUND BY THE DETERMINATION
I MEAN SHE'S IN THE POST
COMMISSION. IS DOWN BY THE
DETERMINATION OF THIS SUB BOARD
AND UNDER THE STATUTE SAID THE
SHALL ADOPT THE BOARD'S
RECOMMENDED IN ELECTED IS
WITHOUT A REASONABLE BASIS.
ORDINARILY WHEN A LICENSE
REVOKED CATION OR CERTIFICATION
REVOCATION HEARING IS HELD IT
HELD AT A HIGHER STANDARD
BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST THE
PERSON LOSING A JOB IT'S THE
MAN OR WOMAN LOSING THEIR
ABILITY TO EARN. A LIVING IN
THEIR CHOSEN OCCUPATION SO IT'S
USUALLY A CLEAR AND CONVINCING
STANDARD THIS IS. STANDARD
WHEREBY BASICALLY THIS
SUBCOMMITTEE AND IF YOU LOOK AT
THE DEFINITIONS- SPOKES ON
THERE THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE
CLEAR BIASES AND LACK OF
IMPARTIALITY. THEY MAKE A
DETERMINATION THERE IS A DE
MINIMUS REVIEW IT'S ONLY UNDER
THE STATUTES NOT UNDER PO BR.
AND THEN THE POST COMMISSION IS
BOUND TO UPHOLD IT. ELECTED IS
DOESN'T SATISFY RATIONAL REVIEW
STANDARD WHICH IS A VERY HIGH.
BAR IN THE POLE BARN IS NOT
INCORPORATED INTO THIS BILL
ALSO THERE'S NO POPEIL BE OUR
STYLE RIGHT TO THE MINISTRY OF
APPEAL HEARING. OF THAT
DETERMINATION WHERE YOU HAVE
FAIR STANDARDS IN A FAIR
HEARING BOARD- I MEAN THERE'S A
NUMBER OF OTHER ISSUES BUT THAT
IS ONE OF THAT THAT MAJOR
CONCERNS AND I PRESUME IS- WHAT
ELICITED THOSE COMMENTS. SILVA
CANNOT EVEN RESTATE THE
QUESTION TO THE AUTHOR SO MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AGAIN
THERE FORTY FIVE OTHER STATES
THAT HAVE LAWS ON THE BOOKS.
MANY OF THEM HAVE ACTUALLY VERY
STRONG LAWS SO I'VE BEEN TOLD
GEORGIA FLORIDA HAVE SOME OF
THE STRONGEST DECERTIFICATION
RULES AND COUNTRY- I'M REALLY
JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW
WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING HERE
COMPARES TO THAT BECAUSE I
THINK WE CAN. WE CAN ARGUE ALL
DAY ABOUT. WHAT IS IN THIS VIS
A VIS CAL A LOT BUT I'M TRYING
TO GET US OF HOW COMPARED TO
OTHER STATES AND- I HAVE TO
ADMIT I WAS SHOCKED WHEN. I
LEARNED THAT WERE ONE OF FIVE
THAT NOT HAVE SO ON WE NEED TO
DO SOMETHING. YES THE OTHER
STATES TO DO. HAVE THE
CERTIFICATION OR WHY
MASSACHUSETTS NEW JERSEY AND
RHODE ISLAND WE'RE THE FIFTH
THAT DOESN'T HAVE IT. AND WE
MODEL. OUR BUILT AFTER GEORGIA
AND- GEORGIA IN FLORIDA
PROBABLY HAS THE STRICTEST- THE
CERTIFICATION GUIDELINES THEY
HAVE DECERTIFIED- 40% OF ALL
THOSE OFFICERS WHO HAVE BEEN
DECERTIFIED- ACROSS THE
COUNTRY. FLORIDA HAS. A MAJOR
JUST DONE THE MAJORITY OF THAT.
AND BUT AGAIN. IT'S A- PROCESS
THAT HAS NOT CREATED ANY KIND
OF PEOPLE. IN GEORGIA OR IN
FLORIDA IT IS WORKING WELL THE
SHEET TO SCROLL. UP AROUND
CREATING THOSE BAD OFFICERS AND
SUSTAINING AND MAINTAINING. THE
GOOD OFFICERS AND- BIT. THE
POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT WE ALL
KNOW WE NEED IN OUR
COMMUNITIES. SO THAT'S THE
GUIDELINES THAT WE WE'VE- TRIED
TO. MODELED AFTER A- AND SERVE.
CAN BE RIVER WITHOUT REGARD TO.
OF SPENCER CRIME SHOWED A PEACE
OFFICER CASE COULD BE RESOLVED
WITHOUT. RUTAN'S A CONVICTION
OF CERTAIN CRIMES THAT'S WHAT
WAS IN THE GEORGIA LAW AND
THAT'S WHAT WE PUT IN OURS AS
WELL SO. GREAT THANK YOU JUST
MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS ON MY
PERSPECTIVE HERE AND I WANT TO
IMPART RESPOND TO OUR COLLEAGUE
FROM BIG BEAR SUGGESTION THAT.
ANYONE WHO CARES ABOUT POLICE
OFFICERS CAN'T SUPPORT THIS
BILL BECAUSE I WOULD SUSPECT.
THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THIS
COMMITTEE WANTS TO SEE. THE
RESPECT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
IMPROVE. AND AS SOMEONE WHO
USED TO BE PART OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT AS A FORMER
PROSECUTOR THAT'S CERTAINLY MY
PERSPECTIVE AND- I WOULD SAY
THE REALLY SORT OF TWO REASONS
WHY I'M ON I WILL BE VOTING FOR
THIS BILL TODAY. FIRST HAS TO
DO WITH THE FACT THAT WE ARE
ONE OF FIVE STATES THAT HAS NOT
SET UP A PROCESS AND- I THINK
THAT'S FRANKLY EMBARRASSING
MISTAKEN ALSO ON TO DO THAT.
AND WE'RE HEARING FROM OUR
CONSTITUENTS. LOUDLY AND
CLEARLY THAT. JUSTICE CAN'T
WAIT THIS AREA CAN. CAN WAIT WE
TO DO SO AND THEN I WOULD ALSO
SUGGEST THAT. YOU KNOW. AS
SOMEONE WHO SERVES ON THE
BUSINESS OF PROFESSIONS
COMMITTEE WITH A NUMBER OF YOU.
WILL NEED TO SET PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT STANDARDS. THIS IS WHAT
WE DO AND A WIDE VARIETY OF
INSTANCES. I'M ACTUALLY AT THIS
MOMENT READING A BOOK ABOUT THE
NINETEEN EIGHTEEN FLU. AND
FOLKS MAY NOT KNOW THAT- YEARS
AGO. THE MEDICAL PROFESSION
DIDN'T HAVE ANY REGULATION AND
IT WAS VIEWED. AS A
PROFESSIONAL CHARLATANS OF THE
FOLKS WHO WHO LITERALLY
PRACTICING. MEDICINE AND IT WAS
THE STANDARDS THAT WERE
ESTABLISHED IN THAT FIELD IN
THE TEACHING FIELD AND THE
DENTIST REVEALED THE NURSING
FIELD. THAT HAVE RAISED UP.
PEOPLE'S RESPECT FOR- THOSE
ENTITIES. THIS IS A COMMITTEE.
THAT ADDRESSES THE PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES
TO LAWYERS. AND AS A LAWYER I
THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING AND-
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE I THINK
IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT.
PARTICULARLY OF A PROFESSION
THAT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO USE
FORCE. AGAINST OUR CONSTITUENTS
THAT WE ARE HOLDING. OUR
OFFICERS TO THE HIGHEST
STANDARD OF PROFESSIONALISM SO.
I WOULD SUBMIT. THAT SUPPORTING
THIS BILL OR THAT THE CONCEPT
OF THIS BILL. IS REALLY. ABOUT
SUPPORTING. PROFESSIONAL
CONTEXT IN. MY HOPE IS THAT THE
AUTHOR OBVIOUSLY IS TO CONTINUE
WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS ON THIS
BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.
ABOUT THIS AND- AND WITH THAT
I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS BILL
THANK YOU. THANK YOU OTHER MR
HOLDEN. YES THANK YOU SIR
BRADFORD AYE I THINK THAT IT I
WANTED TO ALSO POINT OUT THAT-
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING JUST
HAVING HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO
WORK WITH YOU- FOR AN EXTENDED
NUMBER OF MONTHS BECAUSE WE
HAD- COMPARE BOWLING COMPATIBLE
BILLS- THAT WERE MOVING THROUGH
THE PROCESS- INTO RECENTLY BUT
IT RECOGNIZING THAT YOUR
COMMITMENT. AND WORKING WITH
STAKEHOLDERS HAS CERTAINLY BEEN
ESTABLISHED AND I KNOW THAT AS
WE'VE TALKED OF YOU HAVE
REFERENCED THOSE CONVERSATIONS
AS WE TRY TO UNDERSTAND-
ELEMENTS OF ARBIL SO I JUST
WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ON
THE RECORD ALSO WANTED TO.
THANK YOU FOR. PURSUING THIS
TYPE OF LEGISLATION I KNOW IT'S
NOT EASY- AND I THINK THAT AS
WAS POINTED OUT THAT
RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE
OTHER STATES THAN THIS SPACE
WHO'VE ALREADY VENTRO. WERE
TRYING TO CATCH UP WE'RE TRYING
TO RECOGNIZE THE SOCIAL JUSTICE
CHANGES NEED TO HAPPEN- AND NOT
JUST DURING HIGH PROFILE- ON
OFFICER INVOLVED- SHOOTINGS.
MISCONDUCT I DON'T WANT TO SAY
THE I THINK IT'S A FOR THE
RECORD. THAT ARE PROPER
PREPARATIONS CHAIR HAS SORT OF
LAID OUT SORT OF A PROCESS OF
HOW THIS BILL WILL BE EVALUATED
ON THE FISCAL FROM A FISCAL
STANDPOINT I THINK THAT HELPS
THE BILL. THAT THERE WILL BE
THAT TYPE OF. ANALYSIS THERE
WILL BE GIVEN TO IT OR TAKE IT.
CREATES I THINK A STRONG.
UNDERPINNING AS IT GOES
FORWARD. AND SO I JUST THINK
THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT AT A DEN.
IF THERE'S A NEED FOR ANY
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION. OF
INTENT. THAT MAY NOT BE CLEAR
AS THE BILL AS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN. THAT THE LETTER TO THE
JOURNAL WOULD CERTAINLY
HOPEFULLY ALLEVIATE THAT- BUT I
THINK JUST. FUNDAMENTALLY THIS
BILLS LIKE THIS WHEN COMMUNITY
LOOKS AT IT. IT'S ABOUT TRYING
TO REBUILD TRUST IT'S TRYING TO
ESTABLISH A CLEAR A LEVEL OF
COMMUNICATION THAT EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS AND APPRECIATES THE
ROLE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE
NECESSITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
OTHER MAY CHANGE AS TIME GOES
ON IN TERMS OF RESPONSIBILITIES
OVER CERTAIN ELEMENTS I THINK
THAT THERE'S- CERTAINLY OPEN
CONVERSATION AND PROBABLY A
PLACE OF COMMONALITY. ON
CERTAIN FUNCTIONS THAT MAY NOT
BE A PART OF A POLICE WORK
GOING FORWARD. BUT I ALSO LIKE
TO THINK. THAT THE MINIMUM
WOMEN WHO GO OUT AND POLICE AND
PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE.
THEY WANT THERE TO BE CLEARED.
THREE THEY WANT THERE TO BE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR TRUST TO BE
DEVELOPED WHY WOULD THEY WANT
TO GO OUT INTO A COMMUNITY AND
HAVE A US VERSUS THEM.
CONFRONTATIONAL THE TIME. THERE
HAS TO BE SORT OF THIS
UNDERSTANDING THAT. WE'RE
COLLECTIVE WE ARE ALL IN THIS
TOGETHER. AS A SOCIETY OF A
HEALTHY SOCIETY. AND SO YOU
CANNOT EVERY. OTHER DAY TURN ON
THE TELEVISION AND SEE SOME
TYPE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE THAT
LEADS TO GREAT BODILY HARM AND
DEATH TO MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.
I THINK THAT THAT'S OKAY AND
NOT TO SUGGEST THAT ANYONE IN
LAW ENFORCEMENT BELIEVES THAT
BUT- LEVEL OF TRAINING. KNOWING
WHEN AND HOW TO ENGAGE HOW TO
DE ESCALATE THESE ARE ALL VERY
IMPORTANT. COMPONENTS AND SO
TRUST AND LEGISLATION LIKE THIS
THAT HELPS CREATE CLARITY. SO
THE COMMUNITY KNOWS WHERE THE
LINE IN THE SAND IS. BUT LAW
ENFORCEMENT KNOWS WITH A LINE
IN THE SAND IS. AND THAT
THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO START
WORKING IN A MORE COLLABORATIVE
WAY. BASED ON OF THESE TYPE OF
LEGISLATIONS THAT WILL CREATE
THAT THE CLARITY SO. I'M HAPPY
TO SUPPORT YOUR BILL I'M A CO
AUTHOR ON THE BILL. THE CAUCUS
HAS ENDORSED YOUR BILL AS YOU
ALREADY KNOW TO. AND I THINK
YOUR BILL AS YOU'VE ALSO NOTED
MAY NOT BE PERFECT. BUT IT'S
DESIGNED TO SORT OF MOVE THE
BALL DOWN THE FIELD. I'M TRYING
TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE LARGER
ISSUES THAT ARE IN OUR FACE.
EVERY DAY- DEALING WITH THE
CONCERNS THAT. FULL OF COLOR
ESPECIALLY ARE FEELING EVERY
DAY. AND YOU KNOW JUST A QUICK
POINT I WAS A CHILD MY MOM
ALWAYS SAID WE WERE LITTLE THE
NEW ONE COULD EVER BELIEVE THAT
I WAS A LITTLE MORE THAT IF YOU
EVER GET LOST FROM. YOU SEEK
OUT THE POLICE OFFICER. YOU GO
TO THAT OFFICER BECAUSE YOU'LL
YOU'LL BE SAFE THAT'S HOW I WAS
RAISED. AND NOW YOU HAVE YOUNG
PEOPLE WHO WERE SEEN RELATIVES.
FOR MISHANDLED BY THE POLICE
THAT COULD LEAD TO DEATH. IT
CAN'T BE THAT WAY. SO WHATEVER
HAPPENED ALONG THE WAY. WE'VE
GOT TO GET IT BACK ON TRACK AND
I THINK THIS BILL HELPS SO I'M
HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT TODAY THANK
YOU. THIS CAR THANK YOU MR SURE
THANK YOU SENATOR FOR BRING
THIS IMPORTANT AND DIFFICULT OF
THE BILL FORWARD DURING THAT
TIME- AND WHICH WERE A QUESTION
A LOT ABOUT OUR SOCIETY HERE IN
THE STATE AROUND THE STATION
AND YOU KIND OF HAD A BECAUSE I
JUDICIARY AND APPROVES-
COMMITTEE QUESTION WHICH IS A
GOOD THING BECAUSE I THINK
THAT. THAT THERE ARE LAWS IN
OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY MOVE
FORWARD- EVEN IN THE YEARS I
MEAN LOOK NO AS MUCH AS WE ALL
LIKE TO THINK THINK IT NONE OF
US- BUT FOR BILLS ARE PERFECT-
BUT BUT THE INTENT IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AND THE
ABILITY. AND AT THE END OF THE
BUILDING TO REMAIN OPEN AND
HAVE THAT DIALOGUE AND I'LL
TELL YOU LIKE YOU KNOW IT'S
INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU LOOK AT
BILLS- IF YOU'RE ABLE TO AT
SOME POINT COME TO A COMPLETE
AGREEMENT WITH OPPOSITION THEN
IS THERE A FEW SAID ONLY THAT
IT WAS WONDERFUL. IF YOU CAN'T
COME TO UNDERSTAND AGREEMENT IS
LIKE ALL THAT I WANT TO TALK TO
US AT THE BILL AUTHORS NOT SO I
TAKE ALTHOUGH THE GREEN A
SUBSET SEVENTY RIGHT NOW UNTIL
WERE NOT. EVEN NOT TAKING PAGES
ARE BECAUSE FUNDING WAT I WAS
ONCE A CALL IS NOT TALKING TO
US SO YOU KNOW I KNOW YOU BUT I
KNOW HOW YOU OPERATE AND UP I
AND I. TRUST AND BELIEVE IN YOU.
I HAD SO. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT
MORE WERE SUCH AS- EITHER.
KNOWS TO THIS. LEGISLATIVE
CYCLE I THINK THAT THE NEW. IS
GREAT. I OR ONE OF THE HAND OF
STATES. OF THAT DOES NOT HAVE
THIS PROCESS AND- YOU KNOW AS
YOU SEE IN. THE ANTI BLACK
RACISM AND VIOLENCE IS SYSTEMIC
IN PLEASE SEND. THAT'S WHERE
WE'RE RECOGNIZE NATIONALLY IT
DOESN'T MEAN THAT. INDIVIDUAL
POLICE OFFICERS ARE BAD IT'S A
SYSTEM THAT'S A SYSTEMIC ISSUES
MEANS THAT WE CAN'T. SEPARATE
OURSELVES FROM THAT JUST
BECAUSE WE'RE A GOOD OR BAD
PERSON- BUT OFTEN TIMES IN A
LONG FOR SUPPORT TICKET IS A
FEW BAD APPLES. WHICH IS ALSO
TRUE THERE ARE SOME FEW BAD
APPLES THAT THAT IF YOU EXCRETE
FROM THE INDUSTRY- IS GOOD FOR
EVERYONE INCLUDING. UP OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND SO
NOBODY EVERYBODY WOULD PREFER I
DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE A LAWYER A
DOCTOR PLEASE ALSO I WILL
PREFER TO PLEASE THEMSELVES.
NOBODY WANTS SOMEONE ELSE
LOOKING AT THEIR CONTACT AND
SAYING YOU'RE A SPECIAL
INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. YOU
KNOW THAT YOU'RE DOING IT RIGHT
OR SHOULD THE SOLUTION TO THAT
WAY BUT THE REALITY IS
NECESSARY. AND IT'S NECESSARY
AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME HAS BEEN
NECESSARY FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
AND EVEN OVER THE PAST FEW
YEARS HAS BEEN PLENTY OF
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO STEP OF STEP
FORWARD WITH THAT. SOCIAL
JUSTICE ADVOCATES A BIGGER A
PATH AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME OUR
COMMUNITY IS DEMANDING THAT WE
NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS
BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY. AND SO-
I TRULY BELIEVE THAT THIS
FOCUSES ON- IN ACCOUNTABILITY
CENTER THAT CALIFORNIA CANNOT
WAIT TO PAST WEEK WE NEED TO
MOVE THIS FORWARD AND- AND BE
OPENED- AS IT GOES FORWARD- THE
TWO SUGGESTIONS OF HOW CAN BE
IMPROVED WHETHER IT'S NOW OR
NEXT YEAR THE YEAR AFTER. WE
ALWAYS HAVE TO DO THAT WE DO
THAT MUCH FOR ALL OF OUR GREAT
DEALS OF SIGNIFICANCE. AND YOU
KNOW TO THE POINT THAT YOU KNOW
POST DURING A JUST BE
ADMINISTRATIVELY DONE OR- THEY
PULL CHOIR THE TOSTRING OBVIOUS
ALSO SHOULD KNOW THAT WOULD BE
SERVED PROCESS AND THESE ARE
BASICS THAT ANY YOU TAKE AN
JUDGE KNOW WHAT THE RULES OF.
THE GAME OUR BUT YOUR RIGHTS
ARE AS EMPLOYEE. OF WHAT THOSE
ARE THOSE ARE THAT THAT. NEED
TO BE IT WILL BE DONE
UNCONSCIOUS WILL BE DONE
BECAUSE- WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT EVERY THAT GOES. FOR OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH THE RIGHT
AND- ARE. BUT THAT BEING SAID
WE GET WE- CAN NOT WE CAN NO
LONGER. HAVE OFFICERS THAT DO
COMMIT EGREGIOUS ACTS. OF NOT
BE ABLE JUST TO HOP AROUND FROM
DEPARTMENT TO DEPARTMENT I
THINK THAT. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE
YOU JUST OPERATE ACTUALLY EVEN
HEARING THAT FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND THEY AGREE. SO
I THINK IT'S GREAT A UNIQUE
PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE ARE
GETTING AGREEMENT FROM LONG
FORCE OF THIS IS NECESSARY.
THEY MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT
VERSION OF WHAT WHAT IT MIGHT
LOOK LIKE FOR THEM. BUT THE
FACT THAT WERE ON THE SAME
PAGE. IS IN ITSELF HISTORICAL.
AND SIGNIFICANT AND SO FOR THAT
I COMMEND YOU I COMMEND THE
OPPOSITION FOR RECOGNIZING THE
NEED THAT WE NEED TO DO
SOMETHING. THAT I I'M A CO
AUTHOR OF THIS BILL ACTUALLY
SUPPORTED AND WILL SUPPORT
SUBSEQUENT. OF LEGISLATION IF
NECESSARY TO CONTINUE TO
IMPROVE UPON IT. THANK YOU SIR.
THANK YOU MUST GO. THANK YOU
MISTER LET ME JUST SAY AT THE
OUTSET OF THE QUICK I WANT TO
SEE DESIRE BILL PASSED- IT'S-
IT IS TIME AND WE SHOULD HAVE
DONE AND OTHER STATES HAVE DONE
IT AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT.
REPUBLICAN SUPPORT A
DECERTIFICATION BILL THE HOPE
THAT HOLDS PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE
BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY. AND
THAT THOSE WERE GIVEN POWER.
AND THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN YOU
KNOW MANY RESPONSIBILITIES THAT
THEY THAT THEY ARE GOOD
STEWARDS OF THAT. AND SO I'VE I
THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT I AGREE
WITH MY COLLEAGUE FROM PASADENA
THAT THIS IS ABOUT TRUST. RIGHT
IS ABOUT ESTABLISHING TRUST AND
PEACE WHEN PEOPLE ARE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE. THAT HOPE THAT
HELPS PEOPLE TO TRUST THAT
THERE IS A PROCESS THAT THERE
IS- THERE IS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
THOSE WHO DO WRONG FOR THOSE
WHO VIOLATE. PEOPLE'S RIGHTS
BUT NOW IT COMES TO US WE GOT
TO DO THE WORK. AND THIS IS MY
PROBLEM IS WE HAVE A PROCESS.
END OF THE PROCESS YES NO BILL
IS PERFECT OF COURSE. BUT WE
HAVE A PROCESS THAT WE GO
THROUGH COMMITTEES. LEVELS OF
COMMITTEES THAT A BILL SHOULD
GO THROUGH THAT ALLOWS
STAKEHOLDER INPUT THAT WE
REALLY HAVEN'T HAD. DURING THIS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND I DO
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR BECAUSE
HE IS SOMEONE WHO I KNOW WHO I
KNOW VERY WELL HAS A GREAT
REPUTATION FOR WORKING WITH ALL
SIDES AND FORGETTING THE
STAKEHOLDERS TOGETHER- I THINK
THE PROBLEM WITH THE BILL
LANGUAGE THAT IS RIGHT NOW
BEFORE US IS IT DOESN'T REFLECT.
ALL THOSE STAKEHOLDER
INTERESTS. AND I DON'T THINK
THAT'S ANYTHING AGAINST THE
AUTHOR HIMSELF IS JUST THAT WE
ARE IN THE SHORT. TIME FRAME.
AND THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE. A LOT OF
THE VETTING THAT WOULD
NATURALLY HAPPEN IN THIS
COMMITTEE AND APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE- IN HAVING MORE
NEGOTIATIONS AND MAKING SURE
THAT WE DON'T MISS. CRITICAL
PIECES OF THIS WE HAVE TO DO
THIS RIGHT. AND SO. TO MY
COLLEAGUE FROM SAN FRANCISCO
WHO AYE AYE WHO I KNOW CARES
VERY DEEPLY ABOUT DUE PROCESS.
AND WHO IN TRUTH AND THAT THAT
WE ENSURE THAT. THEPROCESS
THAT GOES ON HERE IS IT IS A
FAIR ONE. THE CLEAR LANGUAGE IN
THIS BILL DOES NOT GIVE POST
DISCRETION. IT DOES NOT GIVE US
DISCRETION IF YOU LOOK AT THE
LANGUAGE AND- THIRTEEN FIVE TEN
POINT EIGHT B. THE COMMISSION
SHALL ADOPT A REGULATION. BY
REGULATION A DEFINITION OF
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT THAT SHALL
SERVE AS THE CRITERIA TO BE
CONSIDERED FOR INELIGIBILITY OR
REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATION
THIS DEFINITION SHALL. WITHOUT
LIMITATION INCLUDE ALL THE
FOLLOWING. WE ARE SAYING THAT
IT SHALL INCLUDE THE LANGUAGE
THAT. MY COLLEAGUE FROM BIG
BEAR POINTED OUT. THAT ACTS
THAT VIOLATE THE LAW. IT'S A
VERY BROAD STANDARD MUST BE
INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION.
THAT DOESN'T GET POST
DISCRETION. IT SAYS YOU SHALL
HAVE THIS IN YOUR DEFINITION
THAT'S A VERY BROAD WAY TO
DESCRIBE IT AND SO I THINK AT A
VERY MINIMUM. EACH WE NEED TO
ELIMINATE THAT SECTION. BECAUSE
THE OTHER SECTIONS VERY CLEARLY
POINTED OUT THAT THE GETS OUT
EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT. AND I'LL JUST GO THROUGH
THE REALLY QUICKLY ACTS OF
DISHONESTY MISREPORTING ACTION
ABUSE OF POWER.ACTS OF
PHYSICAL ABUSE SEXUAL ASSAULT.
BIAS THOUGH THOSE ARE ALL IN
THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE WANT TO
ENSURE THAT THIS PERSON. AT
THIS OFFICER WHO WHO HAS BEEN
FOUND TO HAVE VIOLATED THESE
THINGS IS NOT ALLOWED TO GO ON
TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT BUT THEN
WHEN YOU ADD THIS SECTION SAYS.
ANY ACTS OF VIOLENCE ALONG WITH
THAT THAT INCLUDES A WHOLE HOST
OF THINGS MANY THINGS ARE
VIOLATIONS OF LAW BUT DO THEY
RISE TO THE LEVEL OF AN ABUSE
OF POWER. MISCONDUCT THAT
WARRANTS TAKING SOMEONE'S
LIVELIHOOD AWAY BECAUSE THAT'S
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE
TALKING ABOUT SAYING THAT THIS
PERSON COULD NEVER WORK IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGAIN. SO THAT'S A
PROBLEM WE NEED TO FIX THAT AND
WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.
IT'S NOT TO THE LETTER TO THE
JOURNAL IT'S DO AMEND IN THE
BILL AND MAKING SURE THAT THAT
LANGUAGE IS VERY CLEAR. AND WE
DON'T HAVE THIS. YOU KNOW BROAD
DEFINITION AND THE LANGUAGE SO
I THINK IT A VERY MINIMAL NEED
TO CHANGE THAT TO MAKE THIS A
BETTER BILL. TO ENSURE THAT IT
HAS THE PROTECTIONS THAT WE
TALKED ABOUT THE OTHER STATES
THAT HAVE PASSED.
DECERTIFICATION THE OTHER KEY
THING. IT'S NOT IN HERE IS
POPOLARE POPOLARE IS COMPLETELY
MISSING. FROM THE COMMISSION
REVIEW IT'S NOT IN THERE. YOU
WOULD HAVE THAT AT THE AGENCY
LEVEL AT THE LOCAL AGENCY LEVEL
YES BUT UNDER THE CLEAR TERMS
OF THIS LANGUAGE. UNDER THE
COMMISSION REVIEW ALL IT TAKES
IS SOMEONE TO MAKE A COMPLAINT
AND THE COMMISSION GOES THROUGH
A MAKES A FINDING. OF OUR
PROTECTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN
HERE. AND EVERY OTHER STATE
THOSE DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS
ARE THERE. SO WHY SHOULDN'T WE
ENSURE THAT THAT IS IN THIS.
SAME THING AS MY COLLEAGUE FROM
SAN DIEGO POINTED OUT AS IT IS
I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. TO
HAVE THAT IN THE LANGUAGE AND
IT'S SOMETHING I THINK WOULD
GET CAUGHT IF WE WERE GOING TO.
OUR NORMAL PROCESS- AND
ENSURING THAT AN APPEALS
PROCESS IS A FAIR AND UNBIASED
I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT WE
NEED TO ENSURE THAT WHEN
SOMEONE IS. SUBJECT TO A REVIEW.
THAT WE ENSURE THAT'S A FIR
AND UNBIASED PROCESS AND I
THINK THE WAY THAT THIS THE
BOARD IS COMPOSED- AND THE LACK
OF DUE PROCESS MEANS THAT THIS
WILL PROBABLY NOT BE A VERY
FAIR PROCESS FOR PEOPLE TO GO
THROUGH I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE
VERY MINIMAL ENSURE THAT THAT
IS THE CASE. YOU KNOW THERE'S
OTHER ISSUES THAT I THINK WE
GET INTO BUT YOU KNOW AS A
CHAIR OF A PROBE SADISTIC IT IS
EXPENSIVE WE SHOULD BE IS
ASSERTING MAKE IT WHAT IS THE
COST. WE HAVEN'T EVEN SET THE
FIA. I MEAN SO THAT'S WE GOT
FOUR DAYS HERE AND I KNOW
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THINGS
THAT HAPPEN THIS YEAR. BUT
MAYBE THAT'S JUST ANOTHER
REASON FOR US TO LIKE. REALLY
DELVE INTO THIS AND MAKE SURE
WE GET IT RIGHT. OR DON'T JUST
PASS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T
HAVE. ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'VE
SEEN B. AND OTHER PARTS AND
OTHER STATES WHERE THEY'VE DONE
SIMILAR THINGS RIGHT. YOU KNOW
JUST PASS SOMETHING AND SAY
OKAY WE'LL TRY AND FIX IT LATER
WILL PUT A LETTER IN THE
JOURNAL IF YOU KNOW THAT
THERE'S A PROBLEM. LET'S FIX IT
NOW. AND ENSURE THAT WE HAVE
THE BEST CALL. PRODUCT IT
ENSURES JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS.
FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE SUBJECT OF
ABUSE AND WE DON'T HAVE.
OFFICERS AS YOU SAID AND WE
DON'T HAVE THIS IS BETTER FOR
EVERYONE IS BETTER FOR A LONG
FORCES BETTER FOR THE PUBLIC
THAT WE DON'T HAVE LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO ARE
ALLOWED TO GO TO OTHER AGENCIES
WHEN THEY HAVE COMMITTED GROSS
ACTS OF ABUSE AND MISCONDUCT.
AND IT ALSO PROTECTS AS YOU
SAID. LAW ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE
NEWS NEWS THEY WANT TO BE
ASSOCIATED WITH. THOSE WHO ARE
COMMITTING SUCH ACTS. BUT WE
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET
THIS RIGHT AND BUT YOU KNOW
RUSSIAN HEARING RUSSIAN
WITNESSES NOT FOLLOWING OUR
RULES AND TRYING TO PUSH THIS
THING THROUGH IN THE LAST DAYS
OF THE LEGISLATURE. TO ME IS
NOT A VERY GOOD PROCESS I THINK
WE CAN SAY THAT. THANK YOU TO
OF THE BILL THAT WE CAN ALL
SUPPORT AND TO BE VERY
BIPARTISAN AND IT WOULD BE IS.
A BILL THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR
ALL CALIFORNIANS. BUT IT'S NOT
IN THE CURRENT LANGUAGE THAT WE
GOT THE FORCE AND SO WHAT I
WOULD REALLY ASK IS IT CAN WE-
CAN WE ENSURE THAT AT LEAST
THOSE TWO THINGS GET TAKEN CARE
OF. I MEAN WITH THE AUTHOR
MAYBE COMMIT TO CHANGING THOSE
THINGS THE PROBAR ISSUE. AND
THE BROAD DEFINITION OF ACTS
THAT VIOLATE THE LAW. I THINK
THOSE WOULD BE TWO IS THAT
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK ON
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF
TIME. AND WHAT ABOUT THOSE
CHANGES BEFORE THIS THING COMES
TO A VOTE BEFORE THE FULL BODY.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT BUT.
IN MY IDEAL WORLD WE WOULD GO
THROUGH THE NATURAL POCESS AND
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND
COMMITTEE PROCESS THAT WE
NORMALLY GO THROUGH. SO TO THE
AUTHOR I MEAN COULD YOU MAYBE
ADDRESS. THOSE TWO ISSUES AS-
AS THIS GOES FORWARD I MEAN
WE'VE ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES TO
GET TO THIS POINT TODAY IT'S
NOT LIKE A FULL BAR HASN'T BEEN
DISCUSSED IT IS NOT LIKE THE
EXPANSION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A
VIOLATION OR DECERTIFICATION
HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED AND WE
SPLIT THE BABY AND THE HAIR AS
MANY WAYS AS WE CAN AND EVERY
TIME WE WENT TO THE EXTREME
LEFT WE GOT PUSHBACK FROM ONCE
I WANT TO STREAM RIGHT WE GOT
PUSHED BACK TO THAT. THIS IS
THE WHAT WE FELT WAS UP THE
METAL BACK PANEL LIKE DREADED
THIRTY TO BEST TO BRING. MOST
PEOPLE TOGETHER IS THIS A
PERFECT BILL BY NO STRETCH OF
IMAGINATION. BUT IS A GOOD BILL
IT'S A GOOD BILL AND IT'S MORE
THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN CALIFORNIA
AND IT'S- WORTH FIGHTING FOR
RIGHT NOW. ALL THOSE
DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU'VE RAISED
BOTH IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION
WILL CONTINUE TO GO ON ALL OVER
THE NEXT FOUR FIVE DAYS WITHOUT
A DOUBT- TO MAKE A COMMITMENT
TO RIGHT HERE I CAN'T DO THAT
BUT I. PROMISE TO MAKE THE HAVE
TO CONTINUE DIALOGUE AND
CONTINUE WORK IT'S A WORK IN
PROGRESS AND AS YOU KNOW. MY
REPUTATION I I'M WILLING TO
ENGAGE WITH. ALL PARTIES ALL
SIDES ALL OPINIONS- THAT'S WHAT
I PRIDE MYSELF ON AND THAT'S
WHAT'S GOT US HERE TODAY AND SO
I WILL MAKE THAT COMMITMENT I
WILL CONTINUE THE DIALOGUE AND
I THINK. WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK.
WELL AN AVERAGE. THAT BUT IT IS
NOT IN THIS LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW
PROBAR NOT IN THIS LANGUAGE.
THE DEFINITION VERY CLEARLY
DOESN'T GIVE POST DISCRETION
AND HAS IS VERY BROAD
DEFINITION. THAT'S IN THE
LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW AND THAT'S
THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO VOTE. SO
UNLESS THAT IS ACTUALLY
CHANGING THE LANGUAGE I CAN'T
GET TO A PLACE WHERE I CAN
SUPPORT IT AND HERE'S THE THING
I WANT TO READ I WANT TO BE
SUPPORTIVE OF A GOOD FOR
DECERTIFICATION BILL THAT
ACCOMPLISHES THE OBJECTIVES
THAT I THINK WE ALL AGREE ON.
BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CHANGE
WE NEED TO DO OUR JOB OF
LEGISLATING BY MAKING SURE THAT
LANGUAGE IS CLEAR AND SO. I
KNOW THAT YOU ARE SOME OF THE
BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER AND I
JUST ENCOURAGE THAT TO HAPPEN.
IN THE VERY FEW DAYS WE HAVE
LEFT. HERE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT
SEEMS LIKE THIS LANGUAGE IS
REALLY MORE ONE SIDES LANGUAGE.
I WOULD SAY IT'S MORE ACLU
LANGUAGE. THEN IT IS THE RESULT
OF A PROCESS WHERE ALL THE
STAKEHOLDERS ARE TALKING ABOUT
THIS AND MAKING IT THE BEST
BILL POSSIBLE. OKAY. OTHER
BECAUSE THIS RACE. THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR. CENTER BRADFORD.
I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT WITH MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE ALREADY SHARED
WITH YOU- IT'S CLEAR AND EVEN
IN THE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION
THAT WE RECEIVED- IT'S CLEAR
THAT WE NEED A DECERTIFICATION
PROCESS. THERE'S NO OTHER BILL
BEFORE US THAT WILL ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE AND THE ISSUE IS
JUST TOO IMPORTANT AT THIS
TIME. I DO RECOGNIZE FROM THE
OPPOSITION THE THEIR CONCERNS
AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU SPENT
THE TIME WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS
TO TRY TO REACH A NUMBER REACH
THE LANGUAGE THAT'S GOING TO
GET THIS THROUGH THE FINISH
LINE. I FROM FROM THE LETTERS
FROM MY LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.
IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE WILL BE
SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU IN FUTURE LEGISLATION
TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE THINGS-
BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT. THE
THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN THE GOOD
COPS TO SUFFER BECAUSE OF THE
BAD COPS BECAUSE THEY THEY ARE
ALSO ON THE SIDE OF WANTING
THIS DECERTIFICATION PROCESS UP
FROM THE- CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF HIGHWAY
PATROLMEN. I APPRECIATED
SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY WROTE.
THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO
SUPPORT A MEANS OF REVOKING
CERTIFICATES CURRENTLY ISSUED
BY THE EXISTING PEACE OFFICER
STANDARDS TRUST AND TRAINING
POST ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES
TO FELONIES AND OTHER TYPES OF
SERVICEMEN'S CONDUCT. ALL SIDES
AGREE WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING
YOURS IS THE ONLY BILL THAT'S
GOING TO PROVIDE THAT. YOU'VE
USED DAVE THIS AT THE VERY
BEGINNING IT'S NOT A PERFECT
BILL BUT THIS IS THE BILL WE
HAVE. AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE
TO VOTE ON. THE I AM I'VE
ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED WITH THIS
US AND THEM. WHEN IT COMES TO
LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND IT
SHOULDN'T BE AND I WAS UNAWARE
OF MY COLLEAGUE FROM SAN
FRANCISCO. THANK YOU FOR THE
HISTORY LESSON AND I THINK
THAT. WE WILL BEGIN THE PROCESS
NOW OF THE SETTING THE
STANDARDS SO THAT WE ELEVATE
OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO THAT
POSITION WHERE THEY WERE WHEN I
WAS A CHILD JUST AS MY
COLLEAGUE FROM. PASADENA
EVERYBODY ASPIRED TO BE A
POLICE OFFICER- IF AT I WANT
THOSE DAYS TO COME BACK. I WANT
OUR PEOPLE TO FEEL SAFE. I WANT
TO AYE AYE I'M LOOKING FORWARD
TO THAT DAY. DECERTIFICATION
HAVING PROCESS FOR
DECERTIFICATION IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT. YOURS IS OUR BILL
BEFORE US. AND BECAUSE OF THAT
I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT THANK
YOU. THANK YOU OTHER. COMMENTS
CENTER THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD AND I AM GLAD YOU
ARE THE AUTHOR OF THIS IS
BECAUSE ABSOLUTE WE WORKED WELL
TOGETHER OVER THE YEARS AND I
AND I TRUST YOUR INSTINCTS AND
YOUR ABILITY TO DRIVE THIS I
WOULD NEVER EXPECT THIS IS
GOING TO BE A BILL WITH
EVERYBODY IN AGREEMENT THAT
IT'S JUST NOT WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN HERE. AND BUT I DO
APPRECIATE THE STRUCTURE THAT
YOU HAVE CREATED HERE ABOUT.
SETTING A STANDARD INSTANCE
STATUTE AND THAT ALLOWING POST
TO CREATE THE RULES. AND I WILL
TELL YOU I DO NOT WANT YOU TO
NARROW WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. AND
A GOOD EXAMPLE WE TALKED ABOUT
TICKETS I DON'T THINK ANYONE UP
HERE WOULD SUPPORT THE NOTION
THAT IF AN OFFICER. GETS A
MOVING VIOLATION AND THAT
THAT'S GOING TO RISE TO THE
REVIEW AND I POST IS NOT GOING
TO DO THAT HOWEVER. A AT SOME
POINT I COULD SEE. ANOTHER
TRAFFIC VIOLATION BEING
EVIDENCE OF A BLATANT DISREGARD
FOR THE LAW THE POST MIGHT WANT
TO LOOK AT. SO IF WE'RE NOT
CAREFUL AND IF WE'RE AND IF WE
EXEMPT THIS EXEMPT THAT FROM
POST ABILITY TO LOOK. WE
POTENTIALLY ALLOW SOMEONE WITH
A BLATANT DISREGARD OF THE LAW
TO CONTINUE TO BE CERTIFIED AS
A POLICE OFFICER. I DON'T WANT
I DON'T WANT TO SET UP A
SITUATION WHERE WE ARE CREATING
THAT. AND YOUR BILL DOESN'T DO
THAT YOUR BILL ALLOWS POST TO
CREATE ADEQUATE REGULATIONS IF
THEY DON'T THEN THAT'S UP TO US
TO GO BACK IN IN. THE
SEPARATION OF POWERS AND FIX
WHAT WE THINK THEY DID WRONG.
SO THAT IS WHY I THINK THIS IS
A GOOD BILL IT ABSOLUTELY MEETS
OUR STANDARDS THIS IS NOT
NECESSARILY A BILL THAT WOULD
HAVE COME TO US AND UNDER OTHER
CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT IT'S BEFORE
US AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OF
ANALYZE IT WHICH WE HAVE DONE
AND THE TOM CLARK DID AN
EXCELLENT JOB OF TRYING TO WORK
WITH AND I REALLY APPRECIATE
YOU AT A LATER DATE. WORKING
WITH OUR COMMITTEE TO MAKE
SURE. THAT BUT OUR QUESTIONS
ANSWERED AND- AND THIS IS A OF
I WAS I'M A CO AUTHOR WHICH I
DON'T NORMALLY DO WITH THOSE
THAT COME TO THE COMMITTEE BUT
THIS IS SO IMPORTANT. FOR
CALIFORNIA TO BE DOING RIGHT
NOW. THAT I WAS HAPPY TO BE A
CO AUTHOR AND I AM. REALLY
PROUD OF THE STATE THIS BILL IS
IN. AS IT MOVES OUT OF
COMMITTEE AND PROUD OF THE WORK
THAT YOU'VE DONE I KNOW IT'S
BEEN A LONG ROAD AND
FRUSTRATING ROAD. BUT I THINK
IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO
MOVE THIS THIS BILL ALONG AT
THIS POINT AND OF COURSE WE
WILL STAY ENGAGED AS NECESSARY.
BECAUSE THESE LAWS DO HAVE I
NEED TO BE. TO HAVE OVERSIGHT
AND HAVE. THE LEGISLATURE
MAKING SURE THAT AS IT GETS
IMPLEMENTED IT GETS IMPLEMENTED
AS WE WOULD EXPECT AND TO FIX
ISSUES AS THEY AS THEY WROTE TO
OFTEN IN THIS LEGISLATURE WE
PASS A BIT A POLICY AND WE WASH
OUR HANDS OF IT AND NOBODY
CARES ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION
THAT'S NOT WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN HERE NOR SHOULD IT THIS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING
TO BE ITERATIVE OVERTIME AND
THAT THAT DYNAMIC POLICY IS WE
SHOULD BE DOING MORE OF THAT
AND THAT IS I KNOW WHAT YOUR
COMMITMENT IS AND WHAT THIS
BILL REPRESENTS A I APPRECIATE
YOU APPRECIATE YOUR TALENTS
WITH OUR COMMITTEE KIND OF
WORKING THROUGH THE ISSUES. AND
I THANK YOU FOR A VERY VERY
SOLID BILL THAT WE DEFINITELY
NEED TO MOVE SO WITHOUT SENATOR
ASK YOU TO CLOSE. AS FAR AS
TOMORROW JUST TAKE ALL THAT
WITH SAID IN. A LET THE MICHAEL
BUT I JUST QUICKLY ADD. FOR
SOMEONE. THE DIALOGUE ON BOTH
SIDES BECAUSE I THINK IF IT TO
TAKE A HERE. WE ALL WANT.
POLICE TO CERTIFICATION. WE CAN
CONTINUE TO. SQUABBLE GRINS
WHILE ABOUT WHAT'S THE PROPER
METHOD BUT- WE ALL KNOW THE
TIME IS COME TO HAVE A WAY TO
RAINY AND BACK PROBLEMS NOT GO
ONCE BUT BALANCE AND THAT'S
WHAT THIS BILL IS TRYING TO
TARGET THOSE CLEAR VIOLATORS
THAT WE ALL KNOW EXIST- JUST
LIKE YOUHAVE BAD LEGISLATORS
YOU HAVE BAD TEACHERS GOT BAD
DOCTORS TO BELIEVE ONE READ MEN
AND WE DO NOT HAVE THAT POPS IN
NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. WE'RE
LIVING IN A FANTASY WORLD SO I
APPRECIATE THAT AND I TAKE THIS
PERSONALLY AS I STATED IN MY
OPENING BUT I SHOULD HEAR THE
GUY WHO'S CLOSE TO BEING A
POLICE OFFICER. I WAS THIS
CLOSE TO BECOMING A POLICE
OFFICER. I WAS RECRUITED BY A
GOOD FRIEND OF MINE WHO JUST
RETIRED FROM THIRTY FIVE YEARS
VALLEY PD. HE SAT BY MY SIDE
AND HE'S HOLD MY HAND ON EVERY
BIT OF THIS BILL. THE MAKE SURE
WE GOT IT RIGHT. BECAUSE HE IS
PROUD OF THIS THIRTY FIVE YEARS
OF A POLICE OFFICER. IN AT
THIRTY FIVE YEARS HE HAS NEVER
ONCE FIRED HIS WEAPON. AND HE
MALES OF ALL THE MANY. GOOD
COPS THIRTY IN THE DEPARTMENT
BUT HE COULD CLEARLY IDENTIFY
THOSE BAD APPLES THOSE BAD
APPLES THAT CONTINUE TO CYCLE
THEIR WAY TO THE PARK HAD NEVER
TO BE FAR. A BAD APPLE WHO
RAPED MY GIRLFRIEND IN COLLEGE
LAPD OFFICER WHO RAPED MY
GIRLFRIEND CAUGHT AND SHE WAS
TOO ASHAMED TO REPORT IT
BECAUSE SHE THOUGHT NO ONE
WOULD EVER BELIEVE. SO THE TIME
IS RIGHT SO I TAKE THE WORDS
OF. DR KING OF THE URGENCY OF
NOW. AND THIS IS WHERE WE FIND
OURSELVES RIGHT NOW IN
CALIFORNIA URGENCY OF NOW. AND
IF NOT NOW THEN WHEN. IT IS UP
TO US TO RAINY AND CREATE A
MECHANISM AGAIN THIS IS NOT A
PERFECT BILL. BUT IT'S BETTER
THAN WHAT WE HAVE. AND WE
SHOULDN'T LET THE PERFECT BE
THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD. I DO YOU
HAVE MY COMMITMENT THAT I'M
GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK AND
LISTEN AS I'VE DONE AND
EVERYTHING THAT I'VE DONE SINCE
BEEN ELECTED OFFICIALS I GUESS
I HAVE PLENTY OF FRIENDS WHO
ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT I'VE UNCLE
WHO DID THIRTY YEARS. IN THE
MILITARY POLICE. I HAVE FAMILY
WHO PUT ON THE- BADGE AND
UNIFORM SO. I'M NOT A STRANGER
TO THE CHALLENGES THAT LAW
ENFORCEMENT FACE AND AS I
STATED. MANY OF THE MEN AND
WOMEN ON THE GARDENA POLICE
DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN MY FRIEND
FOR THIRTY PLUS YEARS. YOU
KNOW. RUSS TEMPEL WHO'S NO
LONGER WITH US WE CLOSE
TOGETHER FOR MEMBERS YEARS AT
RALEIGH PARK. I GUARDINO POLICE
OFFICER. WHO SUCCUMBED TO
CANCER A FEW YEARS AGO ONE OF
MY CLOSEST FRIENDS. SO I HAVE
PLENTY OF FRIENDS IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT SO. I SAT THERE AND
I'VE SOUGHT COUNSEL FROM MANY
OF THEM BECAUSE I DIDN'T DO THE
TOP. LIKE I SAID. CAN WE GET
EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM IN THE
GREEN NOW. BUT I WHAT WE HAVE
IS A GOOD START. AND I THINK
AGAIN WE NEED TO MOVE FOR. TO
CONTINUE TO SAY IMPARTIALITY.
IF IT'S ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT
THEN. JOHN Q. PUBLIC THE
CITIZEN FEELS WORST
IMPARTIALITY AND THAT WE'VE
TRIED TO COME UP WITH A BLAND
OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
CIVILIANS TO MAKE UP THAT.
REVIEW BOARD SO WE'RE TRYING TO
REMOVE THOSE BIASES THERE AND
ALLOW ALL VOICES TO BE HEARD
SO. ON THAT NOTE I THANK YOU
FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY PRESENT
THIS BILL BEFORE EACH AND
EVERYONE OF YOU I. YOUR
DIALOGUE IN YOUR QUESTIONS AND
YOUR COMMITMENT TO
DECERTIFICATION. AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK RIVAL. THANK
YOU SENATOR WE DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND MOTION IS TO PASS
ALL THE WORLD PLEASE. STONE HI
STERN AYE GALLAGHER GALLAGHER
GNOME SHELL. JOE NOT VOTING TO.
TWO FIVE GONZALEZ I'VE BEEN
GOES AYE HOLDEN. I KALRA. KALRA
KILEY YEAH HIGHLY NO
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
OVERALL OBERNOLTE NO REYES
REYES AYE. THAT HAS A THAT
THANK YOU THE BILLS OUT THANK
YOU MISTER MEMBER RIGHT WE HAVE
ONE MORE ITEM BEFORE US ITEM
NUMBER TWO WHICH IS H. R. ONE
OH THREE I'M GOING TO GO DOWN
10% THIS DEVICE HERE WITH YOU.
THE MEETING. FOR THE- BILL. THE
BILL MOVED INSIDE THERE MISSED
MISTER YOU HAVE H. R. OF THREE.
THANK YOU GO AHEAD AND- YES IT
AND THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING
I WOULD HOPE WE WOULD NEED TO
DO AS YOU ALL. THAT CALIFORNIA
RESERVE TO THE SUPREME THE TO
DETERMINE QUALIFICATIONS FOR
THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND WE
HAVE SUCCESSFULLY. WE HAVE
PUSHED FOR A LONG TIME FOR THEM
TO LOOK AT THE STANDARDS BY
WHICH THE MEASURE ATTORNEY
APPLICANTS AND PRECOR RECENTLY
REDUCED THE CUT SCORE. TO A IS
SOMETHING THAT WE HAD BEEN
ASKING FOR IN QUITE SOME TIME
BECAUSE THE CUT SCORE AND THAT
PROCESS TURNS OUT TO HAVE. A
VERY DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON
ATTORNEY APPLICANTS ESPECIALLY
FROM COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND
THIS COMMITTEES HELD HEARINGS
AGAIN AND GET AND REALLY ASK
THAT QUESTION AGAIN HOW WE
DIVERSIFY. THE BENCH THE BAR
AND THOSE WHO WOULD SEEK TO
BECOME MEMBERS OF THE BAR. WE
HAD TRIED TO AS AS UNDER THE
CURRENT SITUATION. WHERE IT'S
DIFFICULT TO PULL BAR EXAMS
WHERE IT'S DIFFICULT WHOLE
CLASSES THERE ARE A LOT OF
POTENTIAL ATTORNEYS OUT THERE
WHO HAVE DONE THE WORK AT LAW
SCHOOLS. AND MAY OR MAY NOT BE
ABLE TO TAKE THE BAR THERE'S A
SKETCH OF OUR SCHEDULE FOR
OCTOBER BUT IT MAY NOT HAPPEN A
LOT OF THE ONLINE BAR
EXAMINATIONS HAVE BEEN
CONTROVERSIAL ACROSS THIS
COUNTRY SO WE'RE NOT SURE
THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. SO THIS
I HAVE PASSED AND THE NUMBER OF
CONVERSATIONS HAVE ASKED THE
SUPREME COURT. TO NOT ONLY HAVE
REDUCED TO CUT SCHOOL. BUT ALSO
RETROACTIVELY APPLY THAT BACK
FIVE YEARS AND THE REASON FOR
THE FIVE YEARS THAT'S AS LONG.
AS CURRENTLY THE BAR EXAM. IS
REALLY VALID SO THEY COULD GO
BACK THOSE FIVE YEARS. AND
REVIEW THOSE APPLICANTS AND IF
THEY HAD MADE THAT CUT. WHICH
SEEMS TO BE ADEQUATE NOW FOR
MOVING FORWARD. WHY NOT FOR
THOSE ATTORNEYS AND THAT WOULD
BRING MORE TURNING INTO
CALIFORNIA AT A TIME WHERE WE
REALLY NEED THEM. TO MORE
TURKEYS WE'VE HAD CALIFORNIA
HAS HAD A LONG HISTORY OF NOT
ACCEPTING RECIPROCITY FROM
OTHER STATES OF HAVING. TOO
HIGH A STANDARD. ON THE NOTION
THAT THAT THAT THAT PROTECTS
THE PUBLIC BECAUSE IT MAKES A
HIGHER STAND FOR ATTORNEYS.
THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY TRUE. AND
THE BARS ROLE IS TO LOOK AT THE
PRACTICE OF TOURNEY'S ONCE THEY
BECOME ATTORNEYS AND WEED OUT
THE BAD ACTORS THAT'S WHAT
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO AND- AND
I SAID IT TOO HIGH OF A BAR
FOR. ENTRANCE INTO THE PRACTICE
OF LAW. THEN THEY'RE ACTUALLY
WEEDING OUT FOLKS WHO WOULD BE
GOOD ATTORNEYS NOT NECESSARILY
SUBJECT TO DISCIPLINE SOME OF
THE BAR DOES THEIR JOB. BUT
WOULD HOPEFULLY BE MORE
AVAILABLE TO GO INTO THE
COMMUNITIES. WHERE THERE AREN'T
A LOT OF LAWYERS PRACTICING. WE
WOULD HAVE MORE CHINESE
AVAILABLE FOR LEGAL SERVICES WE
WOULD HAVE MORE TOURNEY'S
AVAILABLE UP AND DOWN THE
SPECTRUM AND NOT JUST BEING THE
FOUR HUNDRED SIX HUNDRED DOLLAR
AN HOUR ATTORNEYS. BUT REALLY
BE IN OUR COMMUNITY SO THAT'S
WHAT THIS RESOLUTION IS ABOUT.
WE CANNOT PASS A LAW. THAT SAYS
YOU MUST. RETROACTIVELY APPLY
WE CANNOT PASS A LAW THAT SAYS
YOU MUST SET A. DIFFERENT
STANDARD. FOR THE. THE BAR PASS
THAT CUTS CORD THAT WE HAVE TO
BUT WE ARE TRYING TO IN THE
SUPREME COURT. IN BEING WILLING
TO TAKE A LOOK AT A POOL OF
APPLICANTS WHO ARE THERE NOW.
AND BY THAT CUT SCORE WE KNOW
WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE
APPLICANTS OF COLOR. INTO THE
PRACTICE OF LAW MEMBERS WE
DESPERATELY NEED THAT THAT'S
WHAT THIS RESOLUTION IS ABOUT
IS REALLY JUST ATKINS RECORD
TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT AND
WILL BE A STATEMENT OF. THE
THIS COMMITTEE AT A STATEMENT
OF THE ASSEMBLY AS A BODY.
SAYING WE ARE USING OUR
AUTHORITY AS A RANCHER
GOVERNMENT. TO PUT AS MUCH
PRESSURE ON THE BAR AND THE
SUPREME COURT AS POSSIBLE TO
MAKE WHAT WE FEEL IS A CORRECT
DECISION THAT'S WHAT THIS
RESOLUTION IS ABOUT AND I ASK
THE ARRIVAL. THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN- WE HAVE WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. DO YOU HAVE ANYONE. WE
HAVE PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT YEAH I BELIEVE KEVIN
BAKER AND JOHN CRITTENDEN. IN
SUPPORT WHO SHOULD BE BOTH ON
THE TELEPHONE LINE. MISTER
BAKER YOU ON. M. GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS CAN MAKE NOTE OF A
LITERACY CAL. BUT THE US WHO
ARE LONG. ECONOMIC TEN COMMIT
OUR- TO FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY.
I WOULD SPECIALLY THIS TO REPLY
ON THE WAY IN WHICH PROFESSION
HISTORICALLY ON CONTINUES TO
JUST COME AGAINST. IT TAKES
LAWS WE THE LEAST DIVERSE ALL
THE- IF THAT IS NOT FIVE TO AS
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TO BELIEVE. IT
IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING HAS BEEN.
TALLER FOR. STOP AND THAT CHEN
COME LOADED WITH PARKED ON. SO
SHOULD NOT ACCEPT THAT THE OF
ROAD SCREWS MOVIES AWAY ANYTIME
SOON. AT THIS WRESTLING TAKES
SMALL MORE DIRECTION BACK
REGION SUPREME COURT TO
COMMONSENSE APPROACH TO BE MORE.
OF THE NEW CAR. YOU KNOW WE IN
AFRICA OF THEIR WHICH REDUCE
RACIAL BY. IN THE. AND A MEMBER
OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
ADMITTED NINETEEN EIGHTY ONE A
RETIRED PARTNER ENCOURAGE
SENIOR COUNSEL COOLEY LLP AT
SAN FRANCISCO. ACT JUNK THE
SYSTEM PROFESSOR AT UCLA LAW
SCHOOL BUT I IN MY. PERSONAL
CAPACITY. CALIFORNIA CORRECT
FOR OVER THIRTY SEVEN AND
PROFESSION TWENTY FIFTEEN I
HAVE SEEN HOW HIGH CUTS TO MANY
WELL. APPLICANTS THE- TO
PRACTICE LAW IN OUR STATE.
CAPITOL THEREAFTER. AND IN SOME
CASES PROMPTED THEM TO LEAVE
CALIFORNIA PRACTICE ELSEWHERE.
ONE THE BEST STUDENTS IN MY
CLASS TWO YEARS AGO IS THE SON
OF IMMIGRANTS FROM LATIN
AMERICA AND A FIRST GEN COLLEGE
GRAD. SPITE YOUR SUCCESS ONE HE
NOT PASS ARE THAT WE CLOSE. HE
TOLD ME HE WOULD LET THIS IN
THE WAY IT IS TO BECOME A
LAWYER. BUT RATHER THAN CHANCE
CAN BAR HE TOOK A DEEP BAR
PERHAPS AND IS NOW A LAWYER WE
THE FEDERAL. HE THE PROPER HELP
FOR. WHO HAD NO DESIRE TO LEAVE.
ANYTHING THE KIND OF.
HARDWORKING WE SHOULD HAVE A
OUR STATE BAR. WHAT IS CLASS
DID NOT PASS OUR BAR SO HE THE
MALL. AND WAS IN ORDER. HE NOW
A DEPUTY H. BECAUSE- FELONY
CASES BEAR SHOULD CURRENT SCORE
BEEN IN TWENTY TOOK OUR YOU
ATTACK. BILLS WORKS WON'T LET
IT AGAIN. I THIS MAN THE WELL.
YOU MY SON. BOTH OF THESE IT
WHICH THEIR- AND LOG FROM.
CALIFORNIA THEM YES OTHER TO
GET THE OF THE EDGE THAT WE- AT
MY LARGE LAW I NO OTHER CAN'T
MAY FROM PLUNDER REP. GROUPS
WHOSE WERE UP IN BY HIGH CUTS.
EVEN WITH THE RECENT ARE SCORED
ONE OF THE HIGH IN THE- APPLY
IT RIGHT TO OUR WITH NOT HARM
THE PA. BUT IT WOULDN'T TO THE
TOWN AND DIVERSE OF CALIFORNIA.
I BIRDS TO ADVANCE HR OH THREE
THANK YOU. ON OUR- REMOTE
TESTIMONY STATIONS. SEEN NONE
OKAY WE WILL GO TO THE PHONES.
OPERATOR WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE
PHONES WANTED TO EXPRESS
SUPPORT FOR HR ONE OF THREE. TO
CHAIR IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT AT THIS TIME OF ONE OH
THREE. PLEASE PRESS ONE NINE
ZERO PRESS ONE ZERO IF YOU WISH
TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF ONE OF
OUR GREAT. FIFTY CHAIR JUST A
MOMENT PLACE. YEAH RIGHT. HI MY
NAME'S ALONZO WILL NOW GO TO
LINE UP. ONE FORTY TWO.
SWITCHER. GO AHEAD IS SOMEONE
GOING TO SOMEONE ON THE LINE
VERY GOOD THIRTY YES SIR JUST A
MOMENT. ONE ONE FORTY TWO. CAN
YOU HEAR ME YES. WELCOME BACK I
GRADUATED IN TWENTY NINETEEN
WITH HONORED IN PUBLIC INTEREST
AND SHOOTING THE WAR I TOWARD A
PORTANTINO WHAT IS ASKING FOR
THEIR SUPPORT AND I DO NOT TO
MEET THE STOCK BAR. EVEN THANK
YOU MA'AM. WHEN I GO TO LAW TWO
FIFTIES. GET AFTER MY NAME IS
JULIAN SO I GREW HER APPLIQUE
AGAINST GROUP AND FOR BUSINESS
BACK OF THE STATE PARK. THANK
THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR
EXAMINERS I'M CALL AGAIN FOR
THOSE ON THE PHONE THIS IS NOT
THE TIME FOR TESTIMONY JUST TO
EXPRESS YOUR SUPPORT OF THE HR
SO PLEASE JUST STATE YOUR NAME
AND THAT YOU SUPPORT HR ONE OF
THREE. THANK YOU. EACH YEAR
WE'RE GONNA GO TO LINE FIFTY
THREE YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI CAN
YOU HEAR ME. CAN YOU HEAR ME
YEAH OKAY YEAH WELL YES I WOULD
LIKE LIVES MATTER LOS ANGELES
NOT REPORT. RGS FOR BOTH. THANK
YOU. WE'RE TO GO TO LINE TWO
SIXTY FOUR PLEASE GO AHEAD. AND
THEN IN THE SALON OF GOING ON
STRONG SUPPORT OF HR ONE OF
THREE THANK YOU. NINE TO SIXTY
SEVEN. HELLO YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
OKAY MY NAME IS THANK YOU THAT
YOU SAID I'M A GRADUATE OF
LOYOLA UNIVERSITY WANTED
COLLEGE OF LAW AND I WOULD- I
WOULD HAVE PASSED THE FEBRUARY
TWENTY TWENTY FIVE PM UNDER THE
NEW CRAP GOING ON BOTH A PART
OF A TRUCK ONE OF THREE THANK
YOU. LINE PAY. HELLO THIS IS
CARL DOUGLAS COALITION OF BLACK
TRADE UNIONIST AND MINE IN FULL
SUPPORT. AGAIN LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN IF YOU DO WISH TO
EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR LINE FOR
ONE OH THREE. EACH PRESS ONE
THEN ZERO AT THIS TIME. THE
TEACHER WE HAVE ADDITIONAL
PEOPLE QUEUING UP AT THIS TIME
BY OPERATORS A WITH THEM JUST A
MOMENT WELL WHILE WE'RE WAITING
AND WE DID HAVE SOMEONE IN THE
AUDIENCE WHO DID WISH TO
EXPECTS PRESS SUPPORT PLEASE GO
AHEAD. I GRADUATED LAW SCHOOL
IN TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN FROM
WHAT YOUR LAW SCHOOL WHICH IS
AN ABA ACCREDITED LAW SCHOOL NO
LONGER EXISTED UNFORTUNATELY-
I'VE TAKEN THE BAR A COUPLE
TIMES AND WAS UNSUCCESSFUL.
THAT MAY BE DUE TO MY INABILITY
TO STUDY BECAUSE OF MY ECONOMIC
STATUS- I AM CONSIDERED
INDIGENT. I RECEIVED COUNTY
BENEFITS FROM SACRAMENTO BORN
AND RAISED HERE. AND
UNFORTUNATELY BECAUSE I LACKED
THE MEANS TO SUPPORT MYSELF. I
AM UNABLE TO STUDY AND I'M NOT
THE ONLY PERSON AND AS FAR AS-
THIS BILL IS CONCERNED PEOPLE
WHO HAVE GOTTEN FIFTY POINTS
LESS YOU KNOW YOU LOWER DISCORD
NATION THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO
PRACTICE LAW. HOWEVER I THINK
THE BAR EXAM IS SILLY ALL IN
ALL. I THINK THAT IS SILLY IS A
TEST OF MEMORY IT IS NOT A TEST
IF YOU CAN ARE TAKING OUT
GIVING YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE
WAY THAT WE'RE REALLY NOT DOING
TESTIMONY TO SUPPORT OKAY WELL
I SUPPORT HR ONE OF THREE BUT I
ALSO. SUPPORT DIPLOMA PRIVILEGE
OKAY. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK
YOU. I REALIZE YOU ALL THE WAY
DOWN TODAY AND I WANT TO AND-
TO GIVE YOU THAT OPPORTUNITY
YEAH OKAY ANY OTHER SOME OVER
THE. THE CHAIR WE'RE GOING TO
GO. TO ONE TWO SEVEN NINE. HI
MY NAME IS LIZ WILSON- I'M
SORRY AND NOW CAN YOU HEAR ME.
YES VOTER ONLY ASKING NAMES OUR
ENTITLEMENT AND SUPPORT. OKAY I
COOKED A VERY TWENTY TWENTY
PART AND DYING AND IN THE COURT
OF THE- THANK YOU LINE. TO
EIGHTY TWO. TWENTY ONE AND. THE
ON THE LINE TO SEVENTY ONE.
HELLO I AM YOU CAN HEAR ME YES
YES MY NAME IS MY NAME IS DAVID
HOW CAN I WOULD HAVE PASSED THE
FABRIC TWENTY NINETEEN MAR
NINETEEN FULL SUPPORT OF HR ONE
OF THREE THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR OFFERING. THANKS HALF BLIND
TWO SEVEN BILL. HELLO THIS IS
MY EVERYDAY JOLOKIA I GOD
FOURTEEN THIRTY IN JULY AND TWO
THOUSAND NINETEEN BAR EXAM I
PASSED THE BAR LIKE WITH TEN
POINTS OR FIVE POINT POINTS
MORE INTO PT AND I STRONGLY
ENCOURAGE. YOU TO URGE THIS
BILL HR ONE OF THANK YOU SO
MUCH THANK YOU LINE SEVEN BEING.
ONE TWO SEVENTY. HI CAN YOU
HEAR ME. YES WE ARE YOU. HI MY
NAME IS BIRD THE OUTLINE I AM A
LATINO BAR EXAMINEE I SCORED
OVER THIRTEEN NINETY ON THE
FEBRUARY TWENTY TWENTY PARK
FAMILY AND I FULLY. SUPPORT HR
ONE AT THREE THANK YOU. BY TWO
EIGHTY. HI MY NAME IS JULIE
PADGETT HAS FAR IN I WAS A
GRADUATE OF SOUTHWESTERN LAW
SCHOOL IN THE CLASS OF TWO
THOUSAND SEVENTEEN AND FULLY
FULLY FULLY IN SUPPORT OF HR
ONE OKAY THANK YOU SO MUCH. BY.
TWO SIXTY NINE. HI CAN YOU HEAR
ME YES HI MY NAME IS PAMELA
CADDY- I RECEIVED FOURTEEN
THIRTY SEVEN IN JULY TWO
THOUSAND NINETEEN ON THE U. S.
YOU LIKE GRADUATE AND THEN
WE'LL LOOK FOR A HR- I MEAN H.
ONE OH THREE THANK YOU SO MUCH.
NINE TO SEVENTY FOUR. HELLO MY
NAME IS MONTEREY WAS I AM AN
AFRICAN AMERICAN FEMALE BAR
OCCUPANT SANTA CLARA LAW SCHOOL
GRADUATE WHAT IT PASSED BOTH
JULY TWENTY NINTH PEAK AND
FEBRUARY TWENTY TWENTY UNDER
THE NEW SCORE AND I SUPPORT HR
ONE OH THREE. LYING TO EIGHTY
FIVE. HI MY NAME IS DEVIN
MILLER AND I'M ATTRACT
COMPETENT IN ON BEHALF OF THE
FIVE HUNDRED LAW GRADUATES
LAWYERS LAW PROFESSORS DEANS
WHO SIGNED MY LETTER TO THE
COURT QUESTING RETROACTIVITY
AND WE ARE IN FULL SUPPORT OF
HR. ONE OH THREE. BY TWO
SEVENTY FIVE. GOOD AFTERNOON MY
NAME IS FOR THE FEDERAL I AM A
FIRST TIME BUYER ADVOCATE FOR
GOPRO RECAP AND I BELIEVE
SUPPORT HR ONE OH THREE THANK
YOU. LINE. TO SIXTY FOUR. HI MY
NAME IS A GREAT FAVOR. AND I AM
TOLD THE COURT OF H. R. ONE OH
THREE. NINE TWO EIGHTY SEVEN.
HI MY NAME IS LOOKED AT
TORRANCE A SANTA CLARA LAW
GRADUATE I MAY NOT BE ENOUGH TO
COURT OVER FOURTEEN HUNDRED ON
THE FEBRUARY BY CAMP NINE FULL
SUPPORT OF HR ONE OH THREE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. BY. NINETY
TWO. HI MY NAME IS LAW BACK ON
THE TWENTY NINETEEN BACK RELAX
LIMIT PACKAGE TWENTY NINETEEN
ON FEBRUARY TWENTY TWENTY INFO
AT THE PARK ANY ONE OF. THREE
LINE. TWO NINE. HELLO CAN YOU
HEAR ME YES. HI MY NAME IS
TACKLE GODS ON MIDDLE EASTERN
STUDENT ARE GRADUATING ABA
ACCREDITED LAW SCHOOL IN SAN
DIEGO AND I WOULD HAVE HAPPENED
YOU COULD SCORE IN JULY TWO
THOUSAND NINETEEN AND I'M IN
FULL SUPPORT OF HR ONE THREE.
LINE. TO NINETY FIVE. GOOD
AFTERNOON MY NAME IS KELLY SAY
ACTUALLY I'M A GED GRADUATE
FROM TWO THOUSAND SIXTEEN I'M
IN A FULL SUPPORT OF H. R. ONE
OH THREE. NINETEEN NINETY SIX.
THANK YOU ME YES. HI MY NAME IS
BETTY CARTER I GRADUATED IN
TWENTY NINETEEN FROM AMERICAN
UNIVERSITY IN WASHINGTON DC BUT
NOW I LIVE IN SAN DIEGO AND
PLAN TO LIVE HERE THE REST OF
MY LIFE I WOULD HAVE PASSED
FEBRUARY TWENTY NINETEEN I'M
SORRY FEBRUARY TWENTY TWENTY
UNDER THE BARK THEM UNDER THE
NEW CUT CORE AND I'M IN FULL
COURT AT HR ONE OF THREE. THANK
YOU. BUYING. TO NINETY NINE.
TWO NINETY NINE YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME YES.
HI MY NAME IS JASMINE MARTIN I
AM A GRADUATE OF THE BERMAN LOT
ACROSS THE TWO THOUSAND AND
SEVENTEEN AND I WOULD HAVE%
PASSED THE FEBRUARY TWENTY
TWENTY FIVE DOWN WITH THE FORTY
THIRTY SEVEN UNDER THE NEW CUTS
GORE AND I AM IN FULL SUPPORT
OF H. R. ONE. OKAY BY TWO
NINETY ONE. OKAY HELLO CAN YOU
HEAR ME YES- HI MY NAME IS
RILEY IS THAT THE- OF SAN
FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA I
GRADUATED FROM TULANE LAW
TWENTY NINETEEN- DESPITE A
FOURTEEN FIFTY NINE AND THE
COURTS ALL OF THE POINTS SHORT-
BUT THAT THAT YOU ARE TWENTY
TWENTY BAR SO I'M ABLE TO COURT
EACH I WANT. THREE THANK YOU
ARE. BY. OH EMPLEO NOW YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. HI MY NAME ABOUT
PART TIME I'M A PRACTICING
ATTORNEY IN ORANGE COUNTY
CALIFORNIA I GET PASSED THE BAR
MY FIRST ATTEMPT AND THE ONLY
REASON WHY BUT I HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO AND I AM
IN FULL SUPPORT SO THAT OTHERS
MAY BE ABLE TO DO IT WHO DID
NOT HAVE SOMEBODY. PAY FOR A
SUMMER STIPEND THANK YOU AND I
APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT MARK
STONE IS DOING THANK YOU VERY
MUCH SIR. THANK YOU BYE. THREE
OH EIGHT. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME
YES. MY NAME IS EVELYN MINIS
I'M A FAN I CLARA LAW GRADUATE
TWENTY NINETEEN I WOULD HAVE
PASSED THE TWENTY TWENTY BAR
EXAM HAVE TO CUT CORBIN-
RETROACTIVELY GRANTED I GOT A
FOURTEEN SEVENTEEN- I'M
PLANNING TO TAKE THE UPCOMING
OCTOBER BAR EXAM I AM IN FULL
SUPPORT OF HR ONE OF THREE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. BY THREE TEN.
HI MY NAME IS JESSICA VALIDUS I
MET TWENTY NINETEEN YOU SEE
PASTING GRAD AND THEY WOULD
HAVE PASSED THE FEBRUARY TWENTY
TWENTY EXAM I SCORED A FOURTEEN
OH SIX. AND I AM AT- FIRST
GENERATION LATINO COLOR THANK
YOU I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. LINE THREE THIRTEEN. HI
MY NAME IS TAYLOR O'NEILL AND
I'M A GRADUATE OF THE
UNIVERSITY IS BEING DIEGO
SCHOOL OF LAW AND I WOULD HAVE
PASSED THE CALIFORNIA BAR
EXAMINATION IN JULY TWENTY
NINETEEN IN FEBRUARY TWENTY
TWENTY SO I AM IN FULL SUPPORT
OF EACH ARE ONE OF THREE. THANK
YOU. ONE THREE FOURTEEN.
HEARTMATE. THREE FOURTEEN
TWENTY FOURTEEN YOUR LINE IS
OPEN NOW. HEY GARY YES. HI MY
NAME IS AMANDA LAGI- I WAS
POSSIBLY BOBSLED WOULD DUMP THE
PROBLEM MIGHT BE BUT IF THE
CALL CALL WAS TO BE KEPT IN
MIND CANNOT CALDWELL WILL-
FOURTEEN HUNDRED ANTIMISSILE
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL THANK YOU
TO MIKE- TWO OPTIONS GOING ON
THE MEMBERS OF THIS. COMMITTEE
BY. THREE SIXTEEN. HI MY NAME
IS KIMBERLY AND I'M BOTH
SUPPORT OF HR ONE OF THREE
THANK YOU SO MUCH. BY THREE OH
THREE. APARTMENT. THREE OH
FOUR. HI I'M I AM A TWENTY
NINETEEN GRADUATE AND I WOULD
HAVE PASSED THE JULY TWENTY
NINETY AND FEBRUARY TWENTY
TWENTY BAR EXAM UNDER THE NEW
CONCORD I AM IN FULL SUPPORT OF
HR ONE OKAY THANK YOU. LINE TWO
FIFTY NINE. CAN YOU HEAR ME.
YES MY NAME IS A VETO BRAHIM I
WOULD HAVE PASSED THE FEBRUARY
TWENTY TWENTY BAR EXAM BUT WITH
THE NEW CUTS CORD AMPLE SUPPORT
OF HR ONE OF THREE THANK YOU.
LINE. THREE NINETEEN. THREE
NINETEEN YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THIS WILL BE. SURE THERE'S NO
ONE ELSE THANK YOU AT THIS TIME
OKAY THANK YOU- I DON'T SEE WE
HAVE ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES.
CERTAINLY MISTER CHAIR WE DO
HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO JUST
QUEUED UP AGAIN WOULD YOU LIKE
ME TO TAKE THEM- WELL LET ME GO
TO OPPOSITION WILL COME BACK IF
WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE TO BE
QUEUED UP SO THERE IS NO
REGISTERED OPPOSITION IS THERE
ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE. IN
OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE ANYONE IN
THE VIDEO CONFERENCING IN
OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE. ANY
REMOTE STATIONS. SEE NON- ANY
ANYONE ON THE PHONES WELL I
GUESS WE'LL GO TO ANYBODY
THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL SUPPORT.
QUICKLY AND I WOULD JUST SAY
JUST SAY YOUR NAME AND THAT YOU
SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION- I DON'T
NEED TO HEAR YOUR SCORE BUT-
YEAH IF. THAT WOULD. PLEASE.
WE'RE GONNA GO TO- IN SUPPORT
LINED THREE TWENTY SIX. HERE
ARE. BOB. OKAY OKAY BERMAN TO
GO TO LINE THREE SEVENTEEN.
HELLO IRAN HI GOOD AFTERNOON MY
NAME IS CAMILLE MOORE I'M A
BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN AND BAR
APPLICANT A PROUD AMERICAN
DESCENDED TO SLAVERY I'VE
SCORED ABOVE A FOURTEEN HUNDRED
ON THE FEBRUARY TWENTY TWENTY
BAR EXAM AND SO I AM IN FULL
SUPPORT OF HR ONE OH THREE.
BLACK LAWYERS MATTER. THANK YOU
FOR FLYING. IT HELLO. IRAN HI
MY NAME'S KATHERINE AND I'M IN
FULL SUPPORT OF IT THIS BILL
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT WAS A
PRETTY CHAIR AGAIN WE'VE
ARRIVED AT THE POINT WE HAVE NO
ONE ELSE THANK YOU. OKAY I WILL.
A BRING IT BACK TO YOU I DO DO
WE HAVE ANYONE IN OPPOSITION.
ON THE PHONE SO I JUST ASK THAT.
MR OPERATOR. AND GET SO IF YOU
WISH TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO
ONE OH THREE PLEASE PRESS ONE
ZERO AT THIS TIME PRESS ONE
ZERO. AT THE MOMENT MR CARE. HM.
FIVE IT. SHOULD BE. SHARE THE-
THE ONLY NEW PEOPLE WHO ARE
QUEUED UP ARE WISHING TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT IT DOES NOT APPEAR
THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN ONE ONE TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION ALL RIGHT
WELL I WILL I'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE I KNOW THERE'S
A MOTIONAND A SECOND MOTION BY
AND THEN I'LL GO TO. THE MISS
GONZALEZ. YEAH I JUST- THANK
YOU AND CHAIRMAN FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD I KNOW WE'VE OUR
OFFICES WORK CLOSELY IN A
NUMBER OF OFFICES ON HERE OVER
THE LAST FEW MONTHS THERE IS
SUCH UNFAIR AND CERTAINTY- WHAT
ARE LAW STUDENTS ARE LAW
GRADUATES. OVER THESE PAST FEW
MONTHS AND IT IS JUST NOT FAIR-
OBVIOUSLY I SUPPORT DIPLOMA
PRIVILEGE- WE DIDN'T GET THAT
AS WE CAN MAYBE BELIEVE THERE'S
GONNA BE AN ONLINE- BAR EXAM IN
OCTOBER WE'VE SEEN THE PROBLEMS
WITH THAT OTHER STATES THIS IS
JUST NOT FAIR THIS SEEMS TO BE
THE EASIEST AND MOST EQUITABLE
THING THAT THAT THE SUPREME
COURT COULD DEAL TO AT LEAST-
GRANDFATHER SOME OF THESE AT.
THE END OF THESE LAWYERS INTO
THE PRACTICE SINCE WE'VE
ALREADY DECIDED THE CUT SCORE
WAS INAPPROPRIATE IT SEEMS FAIR
AND EQUITABLE JUST THANK YOU
FOR PAYMENTS FOR IT I HAVE
HEARD FROM SO MANY- STUDENTS
WHO AND FOLKS WE'RE JUST IN
LIMBO AND SO THIS AT LEAST
HOPEFULLY IF WE CAN APPLY
ADDITIONAL PRESSURE CAN CAN
HELP RELIEVE SOME OF THAT. AND
IT'S THE MOST IDEAL EVERYTHING
WE COULD DO BUT IT'S A START
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MISTER
TO. MISTER CHAIR- MISTER
CHAIRMAN THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
MOVING THIS FORWARD I KNOW YOU
AND ARE CALLING FROM SAN DIEGO
AND OTHERS WE'VE REALLY BEEN
TRYING TO PUSH THIS AND I'M
SURE IF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
BAR IS LISTENING TO THIS BUT I
CERTAINLY OPE THEY SUPPORTED
I'D LIKE TO ASK THEM. WHERE
THEY ARE ON THIS ISSUE. LET ME
JUST CRIED I WASN'T GONNA SPEAK
BUT I WANT TO START A COUPLE OF
QUICK STATISTICS. 90% OF ALL
LAWYERS HELP THE 10% OF AMERICA.
AND THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT 10%
OF ALL LAWYERS HELP THE OTHER
NINETY PERCENT. SO MUCH OF WHAT
IS ON EQUAL ABOUT OUR SOCIETY
IS EXACERBATED. BY OUR-
PROFESSION. WHEN YET ANOTHER
90% 10% STATISTICS SO I'VE BEEN
WORKING VERY INTENSELY ON HOW
WE'RE GOING OVER. AN EVICTION
CRISIS A FIVE POINT FOUR
MILLION TENANTS ESTIMATED TO BE
FACING EVICTION AS OF SEPTEMBER
THE FIRST. 90% OF ALL LANDLORDS
REPRESENTED. ONLY 10% OF
TENANTS REPRESENTED AND WE HAVE
A FAIR FIGHT THE CHANCE OF A
TENANT WHEN IN THAT CASE.
DOUBLES AND TO ALL THE FOLKS
THAT TESTIFIED TODAY I JUST
WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR
TESTIFYING AND JUST FOR KICKS
AS I LOOK AT. WHO A FEW FOLKS
WHO FAILED THE BAR ONCE OR
TWICE OR THREE TIMES A COUPLE
OF INDIVIDUALS. THE FORMER
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
FDR. GOT A COUNTRY THROUGH WAR
TO. FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE.
HILLARY CLINTON. WHO FAIL THE
DC BAR. A FORMER- FIRST LADY
MICHELLE OBAMA FAILED ILLINOIS
BAR A SPEAKER OF THIS HOUSE AND
TONI VEHICLE ROSA FILL THE BAR
AND I LOVE THIS LAST ONE TWO
FORMER GOVERNORS RECENT
GOVERNOR'S. PETE WILSON WHO
FELL THREE TIMES AND I WANNA BE
BIPARTISAN. OUR MOST RECENT AND
GREAT GOVERNOR GOVERNOR JERRY
BROWN THE FORMER ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA THESE ARE ALL
INDIVIDUALS WHO FAILED THE BAR.
REDUCING A CUT SCORE SO THAT
WERE STILL ONE OF THE TOP IN
THE COUNTRY. WE NEED TO DO THIS.
WITH DATA RECORDER HONEST ON
THIS MEASURE IS- MR KILEY AND
THE MISTER KALRA. THANK YOU MR
STERN SO I THIS IS A YEAH I
THINK PRESENTS AN INTERESTING
ISSUE OF FAIRNESS AND- I THINK
WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING HERE
GOES AGAINST NOT ONLY WHAT OUR
SUPREME COURT HAS DECIDED THAT
ALSO WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED
FOR. ANY STATE IS CHANGED ITS
IT SCORE AND- I SORT OF I SEE I
SEE THE ARGUMENT THAT IT'S
SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY THAT IF YOU
TOOK THE BAR LAST YEAR THEN
YOU'RE HELD TO A MUCH HIGHER
STANDARD THAN IF YOU TOOK IT
THIS YEAR BUT- IT WOULD SEEM IS
EQUALLY ARBITRARY THAT. IF YOU
TOOK THE BAR SIX YEARS AGO THEN
YOU'RE SUBJECT TO A HIGHER CUTS
FOR THAT IF YOU TOOK A FIVE
YEARS AGO AND SO I GUESS MY
QUESTION IS. HOW DO YOU. WHAT
WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT. FOR
GUIDING WHAT'S FAIR HERE
BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME. WHAT
THE FAIREST THING MIGHT BE. IS
SIMPLY FOR FOLKS THAT. IS TO
RESPECT THE EXPECTATIONS OF
PEOPLE WHEN THEY MADE THE
DECISION TO TAKE THE BAR SO FOR
FOLKS WHO TOOK THE BAR WHEN IT
WAS THE OLD CUT SCORE THERE
SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT CUTS
ARE. GONNA MAKE THE DECISION TO
TAKE THE BAR NOW. WITH THE NEW
CUTS FOR THE SHOULD BE CUT
SUBJECT ABOUT WHY IS THAT. WHY
IS THERE A BETTER CRITERIA FOR
FAIRNESS THAN THAT. WELL THANK
YOU AND YEAH I WILL POINT OUT I
DID MISS. SPEAK THERE I HAVE
ASKED THAT SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE
ASKED FOR. REGIONALLY FOR THIS
RECORD. TO GO BACK FIVE YEARS
WITH THIS RESOLUTION ASKS IS.
UP TO FIVE YEARS BECAUSE I
WASN'T SURE. THAT IS WHAT I
WANT YOUR VOTES ON THIS END AND
I WASN'T SURE THAT WOULD BE
SATISFACTORY. THE REASON TO GO
BACK. FIVE YEARS IS THAT'S
ESSENTIALLY HOW LONG. THE REST
OF THAT BAR. EXAM ARE. OUR
VALUE GO BACK MUCH BEYOND THAT.
THERE MAY NOT BE THE RECORD.
AND THE SUPREME COURT COULD HE-
CAN'T DO THAT CAN GO BACK FIVE
YEARS IT TAKE THOSE. THOSE
APPLICANTS THAT THAT'S WHY. THE
FIVE YEARS. AND MY QUESTION
WHAT WHEN WE LOOK AT. AFFAIRS
QUESTION. IF THIRTEEN NINETY IS
VALID GOING FORWARD. WHY WASN'T
IT BALLOT FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN
SENSE THAT FOR UP TO FIVE
YEARS. IS A REASONABLE HORIZON
TO LOOK AT I AGREE WITH YOU.
SIX YEARS AGO. TEN YEARS AGO.
WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN VALID YES
BUT BUT AT SOME POINT WE HAVE
TO CUT OFF LOWER THAN THIRTEEN
NINETY I DON'T KNOW WE SAID ON
THIRTEEN NINETY BECAUSE OF WHAT
OTHER STATES HAVE DONE. AND
HOURS AT FOURTEEN FORTY WAS
JUST ARBITRARILY HIGH NEVER
JUSTIFIED. THE QUESTION CAME UP
ABOUT THE VALIDITY THE BAR EXAM
ITSELF IS THAT THE MOST
APPROPRIATE MEASURE. MY
PERSONAL OPINION NO I WOULD
RATHER THAT WE SEE MULTIPLE
MEASURES OF BRINGING PEOPLE
INTO THE PRACTICE OF LAW. SO
EVEN IF WE SAID NOW IT'S BEEN
SAID AT THIRTEEN NINETY WHAT IF
SOMEBODY DID THIRTEEN EIGHTY
NOT YOU CAN MAKE THAT ARGUMENT
FOR THAT. YES THAT'S TRUE BUT
IT NEEDS TO BE SET SOMEWHERE
SINCE THE SUPREME COURT HAS
TAKEN IT TO THIRTEEN NINETY NOW
WHICH IS GOOD WE- I SUPPORT
THAT AND- ASK FOR THAT NUMBER
WAS THE BEST FOR THAT. BUT IT'S
AGAIN ARBITRARY THAT IF YOU
TOOK IT IN FEBRUARY OF LAST
YEAR OR LAST YEAR OR THE
PREVIOUS YEAR OR DURING THAT
FIVE YEAR PERIOD. WHERE THE
RECORD SHOULD EXIST AND THIS
REPORT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO
WELCOME THOSE. APPLICANTS INTO
THE BAR I WOULDN'T ONLY.
BECAUSE THE NEED IS NOW. AND
THE CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED
SCRIPTORIA FACT OF THAT HIGH
CUT SCORE WE WOULD HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY OF WELCOMING MORE
TURKEYS INTO THE PRACTICE. AT A
TIME IS MR TWO POINTS OUT WE
NEED THEM WE NEED THEM NOW I
THINK WE'VE BEEN OVERLY.
CAUTIOUS ABOUT WELCOMING PEOPLE
IS WHAT WE HAVE AT OUR I WANT
THIS RECORD TO LOOK AT
RECIPROCITY. AS WELL. IF YOU
CAN IF YOU'RE PASSED THE BAR IN
ANOTHER STATE. WHY ARE WE SO
HIGH AND MIGHTY THAT YOU CAN'T
PRACTICE HERE. NOW MAYBE THERE
ARE OTHER STATES WITH TOO LOW
THE STANDARD I DON'T I DON'T
WANT TO GET INTO THAT BUT THERE
ARE PLENTY OF OTHER STATES WITH
A HIGH ENOUGH STANDARDS. THAT I
KNOW THEY WOULD BE COMPETENT
EFFECTIVE ATTORNEYS THAT AND
MOST OF PEOPLE CALLED IT. I
WOULD WELCOME THEM. INTO THE
BAR THOSE APPLICANTS. AT THIS
LEVEL WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE'RE CHANGING. THE
DEMOGRAPHIC OF WHO'S PRACTICING
LAW. AND MAKING MORE ATTORNEYS
AVAILABLE IN THOSE COMMUNITIES
WHO NEED THEM. THAT'S THE GOAL
WILL HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE
ADEQUACY OF THE BAR EXAM WE'RE
GOING TO CONTINUE THAT. WE'LL
HAVE DISCUSSIONS AROUND.
RECIPROCITY WILL CONTINUE
DISCUSSIONS ROUND EVERYTHING
OUT. BUT FOR ME FOR THIS RECORD
SAYING. WE'RE GONNA ALLOW
PEOPLE GOING FORWARD WITH THE
THIRTEEN NINETY. ONE NOT LAST
YEAR'S ONE AT THE YEARS BEFORE
AND THIS RESOLUTION JUST SAYS.
LOOK BACK UP TO FIVE YEARS.
BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT US TO
ARGUE BUT IS A FIVE YEARS IT
FOR YEARS. IS IT THREE YEARS I
HAD A I WANT THEM TO LOOK AT
THAT. AND THIS IS THE
LEGISLATURE SAYING WE'RE THE
LEGISLATURE WE CANNOT PASS A
LAW HERE. WHICH WE CANNOT DO
BECAUSE THIS THE CALIFORNIA
BECAUSE YOU TO LEASE IT. JUST
RECORD TO DO THAT BUT AS A
BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. THIS IS
THE ONE OF THE BEST STATEMENTS
WE CAN MAKE SING PLEASE LOOK AT
THIS BECAUSE YOU HAVE A POOL OF
HIGHLY QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS.
WHO COULD BE ATTORNEYS. AND
COULD BE HELPING. THE VAST NEED
UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE FIND
THAT THAT'S- THAT'S RUSSIAN.
YEAH YEAH NO I WON'T GO INTO
ANY MORE LIKE THERE BUT I DON'T
I DON'T THINK OF YOU AS A
REASONABLE- I GUESS I JUST
DISAGREE AS TO- THAT BEING THE
BEST. STANDARD OF FAIRNESS HERE
BUT ALSO JUST MENTION THAT I
THINK THAT- I AGREE WITH YOU ON
THE RECIPROCITY ISSUE I THINK
WE NEED TO DO A LOT MORE THERE
WITH THIS PROFESSION AND OTHERS
SO I'D BE. VERY HAPPY TO WORK
WITH YOU ON WE DO IT THANK YOU
AND THAT'S YOU KNOW THAT'S YET
ANOTHER STEP WHERE I THINK WE
COULD IN A- HAVE A STRONGER.
CORPS ATTORNEYS PRACTICING
CALIFORNIA. ON THANK YOU
MEMBERS MIND YOU ARE STILL
SESSION AT ONE O'CLOCK. IT'S TO
A THIRTY RIGHT NOW MR. GAP THIS
IS A LAWYER'S ISSUE. THANK FULL
LAWYERS. SIMILAR. THANK YOU.
THE YOU MISTER AND I AND I WILL
BE TO CALL I APPRECIATE WHAT
YOU'RE DOING HERE I THINK IT
ALL SPEAKS I THINK THAT WE'RE
JUST COMING MORE TO THE NORM
BEEN AT ONE EXTREME I THINK
COMING BACK TO THE NORMS
IMPORTANT ESPECIALLY
RECOGNIZING- WHEN I TOOK THE
BAR VERY LONG TIME AGO I HAD
THE LUXURY TO BE ABLE TO STUDY
FULL TIME A LOT WHO DON'T HAVE
THAT LUXURY BUT ALSO IMPACTS TO
SCORE DOESN'T ACTUALLY MEAN
THEY'RE GOING TO THEIR CORE ANY
MORE OR LESS QUALIFIED TO BE A
LAWYER AND I THINK THIS
RECOGNIZES. THAT THAT'S ACCOUNT
FOR THAT IS DURING THE CRAZY
TIMES TO YOUR POINT DOESN'T
MAKE MUCH SENSE OF WE'RE SAYING
THANK YOU THIRTEEN NINETY IS A
NOW BUT WAS OKAY SIX AGO OR A
YEAR BUT BUT I THE FACT THAT
YOU SAVE UP TO BUY YEARS TO GET%
THAT SPUR TO HAVE THAT KIND
WITH THE SUPREME. BUT CONTROLS
RESTRICTIONS THANK YOU. THANK
YOU AND- MISTER IS. THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR THANK YOU SO MUCH
MISTER CHAIR FOR BRING IN
FORWARD SO I'M OF SO MANY OF
THOSE STUDENTS THAT FINISHED
LAW SCHOOL THEY WENT THROUGH
THEIR THREE FOUR YEARS WHATEVER
TOOK THEM I'M JUST GLAD THAT WE
ARE STANDING UP FOR THEM THEY
HAVE DONE ALL THEIR STUDYING
THEY'VE TAKEN ALL THE CLASSES
THEY PASSED ALL THEIR CLASSES.
AND ARE READY TO TAKE THE BAR-
TO BE TO GIVE THEM THIS
OPPORTUNITY I THINK IS A GREAT
AND I WELCOME ALL THOSE NEW
ATTORNEYS IT WILL BE COMING IN
I'VE HEARD FROM MANY OF THEM
AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO
HAVING THEM PRACTISE LAW
HELPING OUR COMMUNITY. THANK
YOU. YES MR HOLDEN MISTER HAIR
I SUPPORT THIS BILL BUT FOR ALL
THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO NEVER
WENT TO LAW SCHOOL LIKE MYSELF
YOU TOO CAN SERVE ON THE
PURCHASER. IN YOUR WELCOME. ANY
OTHER LAWYERS WISHING TO SPEAK
ON THIS BILL. OKAY I DO
STRUGGLE WITH A LITTLE BIT I
FULLY SYMPATHIZE WITH- YOU KNOW
SOMEONE WHO TOOK THE BAR- WHAT
THIRTEEN YEARS AGO NOW- WHEN IT
WAS THREE DAYS BY THE WAY- BUT.
YOU KNOW IT IS A VERY TOUGH AND
CHALLENGING TESTS AND ALSO
SOMEONE WHO HAS CLOSE FRIENDS
AND FAMILY AND VERY CLOSE
FAMILY MEMBERS WHO TOOK THE BAR
MULTIPLE TIMES. BEFORE FINALLY
PASSING. THE TOUGH THING FOR ME
IS IT IS THAT REALLY FAIR WORK
I MEAN. I GET WHY KATE WHY YOU
SET THE FIVE YEARS BUT- YOU CAN
GO ALL THE WAY BACK AND MANY
PEOPLE TOOK IT SEVERAL TIMES
BUT PERSISTED AND PASS PASSED
THE BAR. I DON'T KNOW THAT
WE'RE BEING FAIR T THOSE FOLK
WHO. WHO BASICALLY DID HAVE TO
KEEP TAKING IT UNTIL THEY
PASSED WE SET OUT A YOU KNOW WE
SAID A PROFICIENCY IT AT SOME
LEVEL. WE JUST WE JUST TALKED
ABOUT A BILL ABOUT SETTING
STANDARDS AND SETTING
PROFICIENCIES AND- AND
ACCOUNTABILITY YOU HAVE TO DO
IT AT SOME LEVEL. WHY WOULD WE
CHANGE THAT KIND OF ARBITRARILY
AND RETROACTIVELY. IN ONE IN
ONE SECTOR THAT PROFESSION I. I
THINK THAT SENDS A MIXED
MESSAGE BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU
THAT YOU KNOW ESPECIALLY ON
RECIPROCITY WHERE WE DOING
STUFF FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE
ACTUALLY ALREADY DEMONSTRATED
THEIR PROFICIENCY. IN ANOTHER
STATE AND YET WE'RE NOT DOING
ANYTHING FOR THEM RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE TO TAKE THE BAR AGAIN
WHENEVER WHENEVER THEY HOLD IT.
AND SO PEOPLE WHO HAVE MOVED
HERE FROM OTHER STATES HAVE
PASSED BARS AND OTHER STATES.
ARE UNABLE TO PRACTICE LAW EVEN
THOUGH THEY'VE BEEN PRACTICING
LAW- MAYBE FOR YEARS IN ANOTHER
STATE. WE'RE SENDING A MIXED
MESSAGE TO THEM AS WELL I MEAN
THAT'S NOT VERY I DON'T SEE
THAT AS BEING FAIR UNLESS WE'RE
GOING TO DO THIS FOR EVERYONE.
ACROSS THE BOARD IT DOESN'T
STRIKE ME AS BEING A FAIR.
RESOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. BUT
I BUT AGAIN I DO SYMPATHIZE
WITH. YOU KNOW. MANY HAVE TAKEN
IT AND WE'RE NW WE'RE CHANGING
THE SCORE. IT DOES SEEM. YOU
KNOW. YOU KNOW FOR GONNA CHANGE
THE SCORE AND THEN AND THEN
TELL PEOPLE THAT. THE TEAM THAT
SCORED JUST AS RECENTLY AS
FEBRUARY THAT YOU YOU STILL
CAN'T PRACTICE. I SEE THAT BUT
IT'S A STRUGGLE IT'S GOT TO BE
A FAIR PROCESS I THINK FOR
EVERYBODY WHO SIMILARLY
SITUATED. AND THERE'S A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO ARE SIMILARLY
SITUATED. AND I HAVE A HARD
TIME JUST SAYING HEY WE'RE
GONNA DO THIS JUST FOR ONE
GROUP. AND NOT FOR OTHERS WHO
ARE ALSO IN THE SAME- BALLPARKS
SO- I WILL ALLOW YOU TO CLOSE
THE MISTER CHAIR- WELL WELL.
WELL THANK YOU EIGHT CAN'T. YOU
KNOW IF THAT'S YOUR WORRY. WHY
NOT THIS WE'VE WE'VE ASKED FOR
UP TO FIVE YEARS THAT IN FIVE
YEARS IS REALLY WHERE THE
RECORDS GO WHICH IS WHY WE'VE
GOT SOME TO LOOK AT THAT.
BECAUSE THIS REPORT CAN GO BACK
FIVE YEARS AND GRANT SOMEBODY
THE ABILITY TO ME THAT THAT'S
WHAT THEY DO NOW. ATTENTION LEE.
THE ABILITY TO PRACTICE LAW
GOING BACK BEYOND THAT. THEY
MAY NOT EVEN HAVE THE RECORDS
SO I WANT TO ASK THEMIN THIS.
THIS IS A COMPONENT ABOUT IT
RECIPROCITY IS A DIFFERENT
ISSUE. THIS WILL APPLY TO
EVERYBODY TAKING THE BAR. AND
ACROSS THE BOARD GOING BACK TO
A REASONABLE POINT WHERE THE
PARK SHOULD HAVE THOSE RECORDS
AND BE ABLE TO FACILITATE.
MAKING THIS HAPPEN IF YOU WANT
TO ADD YOUR VOICE WE'VE BEEN
ASKING THE BAR TO LOOK AT
RECIPROCITY AND ANY NUMBER OF
THINGS. TO BRING PEOPLE INTO
THE PRACTICE OF LAW WHO WE
DESPERATELY NEED TO BE HERE
NOW. AND SO THE CUT SCORE WAS
ARBITRARY. THE FIVE YEARS IS
NOT REALLY BECAUSE THAT'S A
RECORDS ISSUE AND I THINK ONE
OF THINGS WE MAY FIND OUT IS
THE BAR MAY NOT EVEN HAVE
ADEQUATE RECORDS. GOING BACK
THAT FIVE YEARS THAT MIGHT BE A
CHALLENGE FOR THEM AND I THINK
THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA
NEED TO LOOK AT IF THAT'S THE
CASE BUT THAT'S A REASONABLE
ASK OF THE BAR. GIVEN RECORD
LIMITATIONS GIVEN KIND OF HOW
THOSE PROCESSES WORK IS TO LOOK
AT WHAT THEY CAN DO WITHIN THAT
FIVE YEARS. OTHER CATEGORIES
YES WE NEED TO WORK ON IT
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE
ADDRESSING HERE THIS IS ONE
SIMPLE THING BECAUSE THE CUT
SCORES ARBITRARY AND THEY
DECIDED TO BE THE THIRTEEN
NINETY WE'VE BEEN PUSHING FOR
THAT BECAUSE OF. MAKING IT A
RELATIVE IN AND IS EQUITABLE
ACROSS WHAT OTHER STATES HAVE
DONE THAT'S HOW WE'VE ARRIVED
AT THOSE NUMBERS. ME BACK INTO
THINKING HE IMPARTED QUILL DAYS
WHEN I TOOK THE BAR WAS A THREE
DAY TWO BAR AND I HAVE ALWAYS
SAID IT'S JUST A THREE DAY
STRESS TEST. AND YOU KNOW WHEN
WE WITH THOSE LARGER STUDY FOR
THE BAR THEY TOLD US VERY
CLEARLY YOU LEARN. AS A LAWYER
YOU JEWELERS THREE VERY
DIFFERENT TYPES OF LAW THAT
HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO
WITH EACH OTHER. WHAT YOU
STUDYING LAW SCHOOL. WHAT YOU
STUDY TO TAKE THE BAR EXAM AND
THEN WHAT YOU DO IN ACTUAL
PRACTICE. THERE'S NOT REALLY
ANY RELATION BETWEEN ANY OF
THOSE THREE. THE WHOLE THING'S
ARMATURE. THE WHOLE THING IS
NOT NECESSARILY HOPEFULLY
MITIGATING WHO'S GOING TO BE A
GOOD PRACTITIONER OF LAW. OR
NOT. THAT DOES NEED TO BE
LOOKED AT BEYOND WHAT WE'RE
ASKING HERE. THIS IS A SIMPLE
STATEMENT OF SUPREME COURT
PLEASE TAKE A LOOK YOU HAVE AN
EASY RELIEF VALVE. TO
SIGNIFICANT SITUATION RIGHT
HERE WHY DON'T YOU TAKE IT
THAT'S ALL THIS RESOLUTION DOES
AND I ASK FOR YOUR I. BOATS.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN ALL
RIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION AND
SECOND- MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. STONE FIVE STONE AYE
GALLAGHER. GALLAGHER NOT VOTING
CHAU SO I CHOOSE RIGHT TO BUY
AND SALAS THOSE AYE HOLDEN
HOLDEN AYE KALRA. AYE KILEY.
KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN THE I
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE NO REYES HI
RES. FIVE THAT RESOLUTION IS
OUT. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT THAT
RESOLUTION IS OUT I BELIEVE WE
HAVE ALL ELEVEN MEMBERS ON BOTH
THE BILL AND THE RESOLUTION IS
THAT CORRECT YES PERFECT I'M
SORRY AS ASSEMBLY MEMBER
MAIENSCHEIN I DON'T BELIEVE HE
VOTED ON THE S. B. I THINK HE
WAS HERE. ONE OF YES YES YEAH
YEAH HE WAS HERE FOR THAT. YEAH
YEAH ALL RIGHT PERFECT THANK
YOU ALL VERY MUCH WE ARE
ADJOURNED.