GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE WE'RE
GOING TO START OUR COMMITTEE. AS
A SUB. WE HAVE OUR FIRST AUTHOR
IF YOU'RE GONNA START WITH ITEM
NUMBER THREE BE FIFTEEN NINETY
SIX.
MR GLORIA YOU MAY OPEN THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR CONGRATULATIONS ON
YOUR APPOINTMENT.
AYE GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AB
SIXTEEN I SUCKED FIFTEEN NINETY
SIX IS A MODEST BUT PARTICULARLY
MEANINGFUL BILL TO HELP FAMILIES
WITH DISABLED CHILDREN FIND
APPROPRIATE LIVING
ACCOMMODATIONS.
CURRENTLY MOST HOMEOWNERS WHO
ARE HAVE SEVERELY TO SAY WHO ARE
SEVERELY DISABLED ARE ABLE TO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A ONCE IN A
LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TRANSFER
THE BASED YOUR VALUE OF HIS OR
HER PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE.
TO PURCHASE A NEW DRAWING THAT
IS BETTER SUITED TO HIS OR HER
DISABILITY. ABORTION THAT LAW
DOES NOT ALLOW HOMEOWNERS ISN'T
NEARLY WHO HAVE SEVERELY
DISABLED CHILDREN TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF A SOMEWHAT
PROVISION.
THIS OVERSIGHT MARC CAME TO
LIGHT WHEN A WOUNDED VETERAN
RETURNED HOME TO TO TO SAN DIEGO
AS PARENTS ATTEMPTED TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THIS ONE SOMEWHAT
AT ONCE ONE TIME BASE YOU
TRANSFER.
THE FAMILY WAS FORCED TO ENDURE
A LENGTHY AND COMPLICATED LEGAL
PROCESS TO ESTABLISH AN
IRREVOCABLE TRUST. A FOR THE
CHILD AND THEN TRANSFER ALL A
PART OF THAT PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
TO THE CHILD.
THIS BILL IN ITS COMPANION
MEASURE A CA TWELVE WOULD
AUTHORIZE THIS IMPORTANT
PROPERTY TAX BENEFIT TO FAMILIES
MOST IN NEED PARTICULARLY OUR
BRAVE AND WHAT MEN AND WOMEN WHO
ARE WOUNDED IN COMBAT. IN NEED A
NEW HOME THAT SUITS HIS OR HER
DISABILITY. I HAVE SOME
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO ADDRESS A
SOME OF THE RECENT OPPOSITION
THAT WE SEE THAT BELIEVES ARE
BASED ON SOME FACTUAL
MISINFORMATION HAPPY ADDRESS
THOSE IN IF YOU ASK QUESTIONS
ABOUT IT.
BUT I.
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU AYE VOTE
TO HAVE A WITNESS HERE ON BEHALF
THE COMPANIES SUCH ASSOCIATION
OF WOULD NOT SPEAK ITS REPORT.
GO AHEAD COULD NOT GET TO MADAM
CHAIR ROB GROSS BECAUSE OF THE
CALIFORNIA SAYS THERE'S THIS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT AND AS
YOU SOME M. ARTICULATED THE
SONORA CAME UP IN SAN DIEGO.
THAT BROUGHT THIS ISSUE TO LIFE
FOR US.
WE BELIEVE THAT.
HOMEOWNERS COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE
IS ONE TIME I BASE YOUR TRANSFER
IF THEY WERE TO GET THE LEGAL
PROCESS WHICH IS FAIRLY COMPLEX.
SO WITH THAT WE ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT AND HERE TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS YEAR THE COMMITTEE MAY
HAVE THANK YOU.
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
CHRISTOPHER CARLISLE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION REALTORS IN SUPPORT.
ALL THE NURSES IN OPPOSITION.
SEEING THERE ARE NONE.
WE DIDN'T.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
ARTWORK.
DON'T YOU WHERE YOU GOT SEVENTY
EIGHT VOTES FOR THIS LAST YEAR
I'M PRETTY SURE IT'LL GET
THROUGH AND. AS SOON AS SOON AS
WE HAVE A QUORUM I'LL MAKE A
MOTION.
I JUST.
AS DOCTOR QUIRK THAT WE DON'T
HAVE A QUORUM VILLAGE LIKE TO
CLOSE
SUSPECT FASTER I'VE OF.
WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IN
THE COMMITTEE IS.
APPLE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU I'M SURE.
I THINK YOU.
ANYONE WATCHING WE NEED AUTHORS.
IT'S CALLED FOR.
THEN WE NEED.
ANYONE WATCHING WE NEED
COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR REVENUE
TAX ALSO ITEMS NUMBER TWO AB
ELEVEN FORTY HAS BEEN PULLED BY
THE AUTHOR ITEMS NUMBER FIVE S.
B. FIVE FIFTY EIGHT AND NUMBER
SIX AS CA NINE HAVE BEEN PULLED
BY THE COMMITTEE
ROTH.
BURKE.
YEAH.
BRO HERE. ALAN BONTA. CHIU GREY
THERE MCCARTY MELINDA'S.
MULLIN QUIRK HERE.
HE WON'T TAKE.
THREE WE NEED TO.
ALRIGHT ON. ITEM NUMBER THREE AB
FIFTEEN NINETY SIX WE NEED A
MOTION AND A SECOND AS WELL SO
MOVED.
SO YOU NEVER.
MELENDEZ.
YEAH GOT MOVES HARD TO CORK
SECONDS.
.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS OUT TO
APPROPRIATIONS.
BURKE AYE BURKE AYE WORLD. BRILL
AYE ALLEN BONTA. BONTA AYE TO
GRAY.
AYE GRAY AYE MCCARTY MELINDA'S.
MELINDA'S AYE MULLIN QUIRK AYE
QUIRK AYE.
ZERO THE BILL IS PASSED.
SIX ZERO THE BILL IS PASSED.
AND WELCOME NEW MEMBERS BUT ONLY
ONE OF THEM'S HERE.
TO OF THEM BONTA AYE YEAH.
WELCOME ASSEMBLYMEMBER GRAY AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BONTA. LOVE
TO WELCOME ASSEMBLYMEMBER GARCIA
DOWN HERE TO PRESENT BILL
A LITTLE MR MULLIN WOULD YOU
LIKE TO ADD
ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE.
MULLIN AYE ITEM NUMBER THREE.
WE'VE.
JUST A JOKE.
ROBERT KENNEDY.
SHE'S HERE.
I GENERALLY ACCEPTED.
THEY WERE.
SALES.
I AM
.
SO I CAN IS
THERE
GARY.
WELCOME ASSEMBLYMEMBER CURRY CO.
WILL DO ITEM NUMBER ONE AB TWO
SEVENTY FOUR.
THANK YOU ANNUAL TO RECLAIM
SUSTAIN ONE PRESENTATION ON
BOTH.
WELL ABSOLUTELY AND SO IT'S.
AB TWO SEVENTY FIVE AND.
OKAY A TWO SEVENTY FOUR AND ITEM
NUMBER FOR A CA.
YES.
.
I APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGENCE
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE I
WAS.
AND READ OF A NATURAL RESOURCES
MYSELF GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM
CHAIR.
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS I'M HERE
TODAY TO PERCENT ACA TO. IN AB
TWO SEVENTY FOUR.
TWO BILLS UPON VOTER APPROVAL
WHICH WOULD REINSTATE SALES AND
USE TAX ON CANDY AND PROCESSED
LACKED FOOD.
THE FUNDS GENERATED ESTIMATED AT
NEAR A BILLION DOLLARS.
WILL BE EARMARKED FOR PROGRAMS
THAT PROVIDE AND PROMOTE HEALTH
CARE SERVICES AND HEALTHY
LIFESTYLE FRESHLY AMONG THE
MILLIONS OF FAMILIES WHO LIVE IN
POVERTY IN CALIFORNIA.
IN THE NINETIES THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE PASSED IN THE
GOVERNOR SIGNED A BILL WHICH TAX
CANDY END OF THE PROCESS THAT
THE ITEMS.
IN ONE YEAR TWO HUNDRED MILLION
REVENUE IS GENERATED IMMEDIATELY
THE SNACK FOOD INDUSTRY ORGANIZE
A SUCCESSFUL REPEAL EFFORT. AND
FUND THAT A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR
CAMPAIGN TO PLACE A PERMANENT
BAN ON TAXING SNACKS AND CANDY.
TWENTY FOUR YEARS LEADERS THE
PENDULUM HAS SWUNG IN
CALIFORNIA.
ALONG WITH THE THE CONSIDER
SUGARY AND FATTY SNACKS AND
ESSENTIAL TO OUR DIETS
MORE ALARMINGLY ESOS ARGUED IN
NINETEEN NINETY TWO. TO THE
DIETS OF FAMILIES IN POVERTY.
WE'VE SEEN THE RESULT OF THE
EXPLOSION A SNACK FOOD
CONSUMPTION HONOR SOCIETY AND
THE NEGATIVE HEALTH
REPERCUSSIONS.
ACCORDING TO A RECENT UCLA STUDY
FIFTY FIVE PERCENT UPPER STATES
ADULT POPULATION IS AFFECTED BY
DIABETES.
THIRTY THREE PERCENT OF I YOUNG
ADULTS ARE NOW PRE DIABETIC.
WE AS A STATE OUR PAIN FOR THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THESE HIGH FAT
HIGH SUGAR FOODS.
TO OUR ALREADY BURDENED
HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.
IT HEALTHCARE SYSTEM WITH
FEATURE IS THE THIRD AND UNDER
OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT.
ALL I'M ASKING FOR.
I SEE SOLELY SIMPLE IS IS THIS
AN ESSENTIAL AS WELL AS THE
BAITED IN NINETEEN NINETY TWO
YOUR SET A LUXURY.
DO I EXPECT THIS WILL CURVE
BEHAVIOR.
NOW I'M A PARAMEDIC I'M
REALISTIC BY ALAN ATTACKS SO
THAT REFLECTS OUR VALUES THAT
REFLECTS REALITY. IN OUR CURRENT
TAX IT DOES NOT DO THAT. BY
PROTECTING SUGAR AND CANDY IN
OUR CONSTITUTION. IT IS IN OUR
CONSTITUTION ARE I THINK WE ARE
SENDING THE WRONG MESSAGE AND
ALLEN ASKING IS THAT WE ASK THE
VOTERS TO RECONSIDER THAT
DECISION.
THAT AND THE TWO THOUSAND
EIGHTEEN ELECTION. WITH THAT I
RESPECTFULLY ASK WITH AN AYE
VOTE.
AND WITH ME TESTIFY.
I HAVE.
FEW JAMES.
COFFERED WITH THE PUBLIC HEALTH
ADVOCATES.
WITNESSES AND SPLIT.
THANK YOU GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS DOCTOR
FLOWS ON CO FOR AND I AM THE
DIRECTOR OF STATE POLICY AND
RESEARCH WITH PUBLIC HEALTH
ADVOCATES.
I'M HERE DAY IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL WHICH WILL ALLOW SALES AND
USE TAX TO APPLY TO PROCESS AND
SMACKED.
SNACK FOODS AND CANDY.
THERE ARE NEGATIVE HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH
WHAT WE EAT AND IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT ARE HEALTHIEST
FOODS ARE ALSO THE FOODS THAT
ARE EASIEST TO ACCESS. BY
ALLOWING A TAX ON THESE FOODS WE
BOTH SEND THE MESSAGE THAT THEY
ARE A LUXURY WE ALSO.
ARE IN A POSITION WHERE WE ARE
LOWERING THE COST DIFFERENTIAL
BETWEEN THE HEALTHIER FOODS IN
THE UNHEALTHY FOODS OVER THE
LAST THIRTY YEARS AS WE SEEM THE
DIABETES EPIDEMIC EXPLODE WE
HAVE ALSO SEEN MORE PEOPLE
CONSUMING MORE PROCESSED FOODS.
PART OF BACK HAVE COMES FROM THE
FACT THAT WE'VE EXTENDED OUR
WORK DAYS.
WITHOUT INCLUDE IT WITHOUT
INCREASING OUR WAGES AND SO WE
MADE IT HARDER FOR FAMILIES TO
BE ABLE TO.
COOK AND TO ACCESS HEALTHY
FOODS AND SO BY INCREASING
ATTACKS ON THE PROCESS FOODS
REBEL TO BALANCE THAT COST
DIFFERENTIAL.
AS I'M ASSEMBLYMEMBER GARCIA
MENTIONED FIFTY FIVE PERCENT OF
CALIFORNIANS HAVE EITHER
DIABETES OR PREDIABETES AND ONE
THIRD OF ADULTS AGES EIGHTEEN TO
THIRTY NINE HAVE PRE DIABETES.
A THIRD OF THEM WILL GO ON TO
HAVE DIABETES WITHIN FIVE YEARS
THESE ARE ALL LIFESTYLE AND
BEHAVIOR TAPES OF OF DISEASES
AND SO WE THINK ABOUT DIABETES
AND WE THINK ABOUT HEART DISEASE
GET TO THINK ABOUT THE FACT ALSO
THAT. THEY ARE
DISPROPORTIONATELY CONCENTRATED
IN LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES AND
THAT THE DIFFERENTIAL AND
DIABETES BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE
IN THE LOWEST ON INCOME BRACKET
AND THOSE ABOVE SEVENTY FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS IS A FOUR TIMES
DIFFERENCE.
AND SO THE BURDEN OF THIS IS
FALLING TO OUR STATE MEDI CAL
SYSTEM TO PAY THE EXTRA EIGHT
THOUSAND DOLLARS PER YEAR TO
CARE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE
DIABETES. THIS IS A CRITICAL
ISSUE IN OUR CITY AND IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE SEND
THE MESSAGE THAT WE WE DO
BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE FOODS
THAT ARE HEALTH PROMOTING AND
THAT WE DON'T WANT FAMILIES HAVE
TO MAKE A DECISION. IN TERMS OF
RATIONAL ECONOMIC DECISIONS
BETWEEN THEIR CURRENT NEEDS TO
BE ABLE TO EAT AND THEIR FUTURE
HEALTH THOSE SHOULD NOT BE
SHOULD HAVE TO MAKE A SOPHIE'S
CHOICE IN THAT WAY AND SO BEING
ABLE TO TAX THESE FOODS ALLOWS.
FOR THAT COST DIFFERENTIAL AS
I'VE MENTIONED TO CHANGE IT ALSO
CREATES A FUND TO BE ABLE TO
FIND MANY OF THE THINGS THAT
WILL ALLOW FOR FAMILIES TO BE
ABLE TO CONSUME HEALTHIER FOODS.
SO I STRONGLY REQUEST YOUR AYE
VOTE.
AN EXPERT WITNESS IN A SUPPORT.
GLAD WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON COOL ACCOUNTING
WITH THE AMERICAN HEART
ASSOCIATION AMERICAN STROKE
ASSOCIATION ON WHERE HERE IN
SUPPORT AND CONCEPT ON WE DO
UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME.
ISSUES THAT WE HAVE REGARDING
THE DEFINITIONS OF WHAT'S
HEALTHY WHAT'S NOT AS REFLECTED
IN THE ANALYSIS I'M WE DO
SUPPORT THE BILL AND LOOK
FORWARD TO I'M WORKING WITH THE
AUTHORS THE BILL MOVES FORWARD
THINK YOU.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS TROSZYN BROWN OF
CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
TEACHERS HERE IN SUPPORT.
HI GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS CASEY O'CONNOR HERE ON
BEHALF OF BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
MEMBER FIONA Mú AND SUPPORT
THIS MEASURE AND THANK YOU TO
THE AUTHOR FOR BRING IT FORWARD.
SMITH THE CORPORATE ON BEHALF OF
BOTH THE CALIFORNIA TAX REFORM
ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS COMMON
SENSE KIDS ACTION IN SUPPORT OF
THE MEASURE THANK YOU.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS FRED MAIN ON
BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL
CONFECTIONERS. ASSOCIATION THE.
PRIDE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTING THE CONFECTION IN
CANDY. A INDUSTRY A NATIONALLY
I'D THE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTS
FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND A JOBS A
DIRECTLY IN ANOTHER FOUR HUNDRED
THOUSAND IN. AGRICULTURE RETAIL
AND TRANSPORTATION. HOPE WE'RE
ONE OF THE LAW ARMED MEMBERS ARE
ONE OF THE. LARGEST STOP
PURCHASERS OF.
NUTS AND MILK AND.
BOTH NATIONALLY AND IN
CALIFORNIA.
THE SEE IN A IS STRONGLY OPPOSED
TO A CA ARE TO AB TWO SEVENTY
FOUR AND THEN. THAT COMPANION.
ACA A.
THAT WOULD MAKE IT ALL. OF FIRST
A WE BELIEVE IT'S A TAX INCREASE
ON A PARTICULAR A TYPE OF FOOD.
CANDY AND CONFECTIONS BUT THEN
AS.
WE BELIEVE.
HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE
ANALYSIS OF THE DEFINITIONS ARE.
VERY UNCLEAR AT BEST AT TIMES
AND MAKE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN A
PARTICULAR TYPES OF FOOD.
THAT DATA CAN BE REALLY THE
SAME.
AS AN EXAMPLE A WE BELIEVE THAT
UNDER THE CURRENT DEFINITIONS IN
THE THE BILL. A A CANDY BAR THAT
IS EATEN.
AT ROOM TEMPERATURE SOLD AT
ROOM TEMPERATURE.
IF SEE A TWO WORD UP PASSIN AB
TWO SEVENTY FOURS ENACTED OF
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE. HIGHER
TAX BUT POTENTIALLY IF THAT'S A
FROZEN.
ITEM.
THAT IT WOULD NOT. A GRANOLA IF
I HAVE.
PIECES OF CHOCOLATE IN THE
GRANOLA A POTENTIALLY TAXABLE IF
NO CHOCOLATE.
ON TAXABLE. WE THINK THAT THAT
IS.
BAD TAX POLICY FROM.
DISCRIMINATION OF PARTICULAR
TYPES
A OF FOOD EVEN WITHIN THE OUR
CONTEXT OF THE CANDY IN
CONFECTION. R. I. ISSUES.
BUT WE DO THINK THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX ITSELF
I WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR A
SMALLER. A BUSINESSES TO A DON'T
HAVE ACCESS TO AS MANY
SOPHISTICATED.
PROGRAMS FOR PRICING.
AYE IN KEEPING TRACK OF WHAT IS
A CANDY AND IS TAXABLE AND WHAT
IS NOT. CANDY AND IS A NON
TAXABLE.
AS THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER POINTED
OUT THE MEASURE IS CONTINGENT
ON.
PASSAGE OF A CA A TO OF THE
VOTERS BY A TWO THIRDS VOTE
MAJORITY.
IN.
NINETEEN.
AT NINETY TWO PROVED.
THE OUR CURRENT A EXEMPTION NOW
WE THINK THAT THAT'S A VERY
STRONG. A STATEMENT IN FAVOR OF.
THE EXEMPTIONREMAININGAND AS
A RESULT HOW WERE STRONGLY
OPPOSED TO BOTH A CA TO AND AB
TWO SEVENTY FOUR. THERE ARE
NUMBER OF OTHER MEMBERS OF
SIGNED ON TO THE LETTER THAT
HER.
I'M GOING TO TESTIFY AS WELL ON
SOME OF THE PARTICULAR
ADMINISTRATIVE CONCERNS WITH THE
BILL.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
KATE FOUND BEHALF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAIL ASSOCIATION ON BEHALF OF
SEVEN ELEVEN AND THE CALIFORNIA
AUTOMATIC VENDORS COUNCIL.
WE ALSO ARE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED MISSPELLED THE BOTTOM
LINE FOR US IS THAT THERE
CONTINUES TO BE CONFUSION AROUND
THE DEFINITION.
FOR BOTH THE RETAILERS
MANUFACTURERS AND EVEN THE
CONSUMER'S PERSPECTIVE.
AND CONSUMERS WHO ARE BEING
ALREADY PAID WITH ADDITIONAL
TAXES CURRENTLY ARE GOING TO BE
HIT WITH ANOTHER TAX ON FOOD
ITEMS
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE VOTERS
DECIDED TO REPEAL BACK IN
NINETEEN NINETY TWO. AND.
BECAUSE FOOD TAXES ARE
REGRESSIVE AND THE DEFINITIONS
IN THE BILL ARE STILL CONFUSING
WE MUST RESPECTFULLY ASK FEAR NO
VOTE.
THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
MADAM CHAIR.
ITEMS.
MADAM CHAIR COMMITTEE MEMBERS
JOHN HEWITT ON BEHALF GROSZ
MANUFACTURES ASSOCIATION.
ALSO OPPOSE FOR THE REASONS
PREVIOUSLY STATED YOU KNOW WE
BELIEVE AB TWO SEVENTY FOURS
PROBLEMS BEGIN WITH THIS
DEFINITIONS.
COUPLE OTHER POINTS THAT WE
WON'T OF THE LABOR THAT ARE IN
OUR COMMENT LETTER.
BUT MOST NOTABLY.
IT AS WE LOOK AT KIND THE SELF
DETERMINE SOLUTIONS.
THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN. PLACE BY
FOOD MANUFACTURERS AYE WE LOOK
AT FACTS UP FRONT LABELING
DELIVERING INFORMATION TO THE
CONSUMER TO MAKE BETTER CHOICES.
AND CHANGES TO THE NUTRITION
FACTS PANEL UNDER THE PREVIOUS
ADMINISTRATION THAT WE WORKED
WITH AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. AND A
VARIETY OF OTHER OF THE SELF
DETERMINE SOLUTIONS WE BELIEVE
TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS IS ABOUT
WHICH WE DON'T BELIEVE IN IS
ABOUT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS.
ABOUT NUTRITION WE ARE ARE YOU
WORKING. ON THOSE AND IN THOSE
AREAS.
WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT A
REGRESSIVE TAX THAT WAS DE MAKE
KNOWLEDGE THAT DOESN'T BELIEVE
IT'LL CHANGE BEHAVIORS IS THE
CORRECT WAY.
TO.
HEAD. FOR THIS ISSUE SO
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR NOBLE.
THEN SLOW PARAGRAPH CALIFORNIA'S
DISTRIBUTORS ASSOCIATION WE
STAND AND OUR PROPOSITION WE
WERE THE SPONSORS OF THE
INITIATIVE. OR CONSTITUTIONAL
MEMBER NINETEEN EIGHT. TWENTY
TWO AND OF WE DID SPEND. TWO AND
A HALF MILLION DOLLARS TO. TO.
QUALIFYING INITIATIVE THAT'S
ALL THE MONEY SPENT.
BUT WE DO OPPOSE ABOUT HOW THIS
BALLOT MEASURE AND THE BILL
THANK YOU.
DENNIS ALBION AB HEVESI'S
CANDIES IN OUR FIFTY FOUR
HUNDRED EMPLOYEES I HEAR BASED
IN CALIFORNIA HOW WE OPPOSE
THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS TERRY THOMAS
ON BEHALF OF A NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF THEATER OWNERS OF
CALIFORNIA IN OPPOSITION TO BOTH
THE MAJORS THINKING.
TO USE OF THE CALIFORNIA LEAGUE
FOOD PRODUCERS IN OPPOSITION TO
BOTH MAJOR THANK YOU.
KEVIN MCKINLEY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU.
HI RUSSEL NO ACT ON BEHALF TO
SEE OMA.
IN OUR HUNDREDS OF CONVENIENCE
STORES IN OPPOSITION
THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS.
I DON'T WORK.
SO THERE'S NO DOUBT THERE
TRIGGERING AN FATTY FOOD YOU NOT
GOOD FOR YOU AND I CERTAINLY
AVOID THEM.
BUT EVEN MORE SO.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCIENCE.
IT MAY BE THAT THIS.
DIABETES EPIDEMIC ISN'T CAUSED
BY SUGAR BUT BY ARTIFICIAL
SWEETENERS.
THE DIFFICULTY WITH ARTIFICIAL
SWEETENERS
IS THAT IT COMES INTO THE BODY.
YOUR STOMACH SENSES THAT YOU'VE
GOT SOMETHING SWEET. YOU HAVE
TASTE BUDS DOWN THERE.
AND THEN RELEASES INSULIN.
THIS MAY BE WHAT IN FACT CAUSES
THE RISE IN TYPE TWO DIABETES.
SHE LOOKED AT THE FIFTIES AND
SIXTIES WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS
PROBLEM WITH DIABETES WE DIDN'T
HAVE THE ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS.
SO I AM CONCERNED AND THERE'S
ALSO NOT.
THERE'S NOT A GREAT CORRELATION
BETWEEN SUGAR IMPACT INTAKE AND
TYPE TWO DIABETES IT'S GOING
DOWN RECENTLY BUT THE TYPE TO
BITE.
BUT TYPE TWO DIABETES IS NOT.
SO AYE FEAR YOU'RE GOING AFTER
THE WRONG TARGET HERE.
.
I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT WE COULD
ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS WORSE WITH
THIS SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING
EITHER BELL.
COMMENT ON THAT
A.
TO BE CLEAR THIS IS OUR TAX CODE
IS BASED ON WHAT IS A LUXURY AND
WHAT IS AN ESSENTIAL AND WE
DON'T ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT HAVE
BEEN TRYING TO GO TO THE TAX ON
US OUR PRODUCTS.
FIRST THIS MAY THIRTY ARE NOW.
AND THE DISCUSSION OF WHETHER
THAT'S A LUXURY AND RIGHT NOW
IT'S THE IN THE LUXURY SO IT'S
TAXED
AND NONESSENTIAL. AND SO IT
EXTRA VALUES.
WE DON'T WE DON'T IS DELAYED
DAY BT'S WE DEAL WITH OBESITY
AND UP UNTIL THE HEALTH ACTORS
AND I THINK.
SAYING THAT ONE OR THE OTHER
THING THERE ALL A FACTOR BOTH
ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS AND THE
RAIDERS SINGERS AND THE AMOUNT
OF. CONSULT HOW MUCH WE CONSUME
OF AND IN MODERATION ITSELF I.
IT'S BUT I WILL SAY THIS IS
ABOUT AGAIN WITH AN ESSENTIAL
AND WHAT'S NOT. ARE OUT THERE
AND SO. I THINK SAYING THAT IF
ALTERS ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS ARE
JUSTIFIED ABOUT DIABETES IS
UNFAIR.
ALTHOUGH THE REVENUE THAT'S
COLLECTIVE CLOSE TO A BILLION
DOLLARS CAN BE USED ON EFFORTS
TO HELP FIGHT DIABETES. AND
OTHER WAYS OBESITY ARE THE
HEALTH ISSUES ARE JUST EVEN
STARTED PAPER MAYBE CHIP FOR
EXAMPLE WE ARE NOT SURE THAT'S
GONNA BE FUNDED.
AFTER THE NINETEENTH OF JANUARY.
I THAT I ON ON THAT PIECE.
BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOUR A
PENNY AND.
AND. AND WHERE YOU'RE AT TODAY
THINKING.
MR GRAY.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
I THINK I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS
TO WHAT THE.
GOAL IS MY I UNDERSTOOD IN THE
TESTIMONY.
SOME FOODS EXPENSIVE THAT'S GOOD
FOR US SO WE'RE GONNA TRY MAKE
ALL FOOD EXPENSIVE SO THAT
EVERYBODY'S BROKEN GET EAT.
A IT IS THE UNDERMINE KIND OF
POLICY GOAL.
BUT.
THE PART THAT IS MORE CONFUSING
IS JUST THE LOGIC THAT. USED TO
ARRIVE AT WHAT FOODS INCLUDE NOT
COULD BECAUSE I'M READING THIS
RIGHT AND CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG.
IF I HAD CARE AND PEACHES AND
SYRUP. WE'RE TREAT THAT ONE WAY
IF I BUY A PACKAGED
FORMER TREATED A DIFFERENT WAY.
EVEN IF IT'S THE SAME.
THANK THANK YOU KNOW THE GRASS
SO IT WAS A WHAT'S THE WHAT WAS
THE LOGIC WALK ME THROUGH HOW
YOU ARRIVED ACTUALLY THINK US
AGREE ON THE DEFINITION BECAUSE
THAT'S ALSO PART OF THE
OPPOSITION.
I WILL SAY THAT I WORKED WITH
THE OPPOSITION FOR A LONG TIME
AND WE HAVE A DEFINITION THAT
WAS NOT PUT ACROSS THE. UPPER
AMENDMENTS.
DEFINITION I'M GOING TO PUT
ACROSS OF MEMBERS ARE INTERESTED
IN AT A DEFINITION THAT YOU
THOUGHT SCHOOLS ALREADY WE
ALREADY HAVE THE PHOENICIAN OF.
HEALTHY SNACKS AND NINE SUPPORT
THAT THE SAME IT FACTORS ARE
WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ON. AND TO MAKE
AVAILABLE AND SO.
I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU THAT
THAT THE CURRENT DEFINITION AND
THE BILL AT THE FAN IS IS NOT.
THE BEST DEFINITION I THINK
THIS ALTERNATIVE THINGS BUT WHEN
THE OPPOSITION THAT WAS WORKING
WITH ME MADE IT CLEAR THAT IT
DIDN'T MATTER WHAT. I PUT
ACROSS.
AND THEY WERE NOT GOING TO
REMOVE.
I THE OPPOSITION IT YOU KNOW
THAT THAT THAT'S WHERE THAT FELL
APART I HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT IF
COMMITTEE MEMBERS IF THAT'S HIGH
AG COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO ALLOW
THIS TO CONTINUE. MORE THAN
WILLING TO INTRODUCE EITHER THE
DEFINITION THAT'S TIED TO WHAT
WE KEEP THE SCHOOLS OR SOMETHING
DIFFERENT AND ENTERTAIN
SOMETHING DIFFERENT SO. I DO
THINK YOUR CRITICISM IS VERY
FAIR THEIR. EYES JUST A MATTER
WHERE WE'RE AT IN THIS PROCESS
AND WE'RE FORKS I HAVE BEEN
ABOUT I ALSO WANT TO CLARIFY.
NOT ALL OPPOSITION WAS TALKING
TO ME OF OPPOSITION MADE IT VERY
CLEAR THAT THERE IS NOTHING I
CAN DO AND WE'RE GONNA BE IN
OPPOSITION SIDE A LOT I DON'T
UNDERSTAND THIS AND JENNY LIFE.
BUT EITHER.
CAN I ADDRESS THE THE QUESTION
IN TERMS OF THE MAKING FOOD MAKE
ALL FOOD ALI AS I THINK YOU WE
CAN'T AFFORD IT ON THAT'S NOT
THE GOAL THE GOAL IS THOUGH THAT
WITH A LIMITED BUDGET. IF YOU
CAN PURCHASE MORE OF THE
UNHEALTHY FOODS THAT'S A
RATIONAL ECONOMIC DECISION AND
THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE WILL DO AND
SO OFTEN WE TALK ABOUT THE THESE
TAXES BEING REGRESSIVE THE
DISEASES ARE AGGRESSIVE DISEASES
DO NOT IMPACT EVERY COMMUNITY
SIMILARLY. AND SO WHEN WE MAKE
THE ARGUMENT THAT THE TAX IS
REGRESSIVE WE NOR THE FACT THAT
WE ALSO HAVE COMMUNITIES WHERE
PEOPLE ARE BEING MARKETED
CERTAIN FOODS.
AND ARE CONSUMING THEM IN
GREATER QUANTITY AND SO IF WE
CHANGE THAT THAT COST OF THOSE
ITEMS THAT STOPS BECOMING AN
INCENTIVE TO PURCHASE THEM AND
THEY CAN ACTUALLY PURCHASED THE
ITEMS THAT ARE BETTER FOR THEIR
HEALTH IN THE LONG RUN.
MAYBE WE CAN USE THE REVENUE TO
HELP. SUBSIDIZE THE HEALTHIER
FOOD PATRICIA CHU DRESS THAT
THE.
DEFAULT THAT WOULD BE. SHOULDN'T
WE THEN. TAKE SOME OF THE
REVENUE.
AND PUT THAT INTO EFFORTS TO.
ACHIEVE HEALTHIER DIETS IN ALL
COMMUNITIES AND I DON'T SEE THAT
HAPPENING IN THIS BILL LOOKS TO
MAKE IRAQ CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG THE TO REVENUES GOING THE
GENERAL FUND.
NO COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU A
NOW IT WOULD GO TO JANET.
GENERAL FUND AND TO MOVE IT
WOULD GO TO EDUCATION THREAT
THEY PUT MAYBE IT WORKED AND AND
AND AND THAT WE COULD USE YOU
SAID ELSEWHERE AGAIN IT'S BEEN
THE OFFER A MIND ALL ALONG THAT.
IF EITHER THE OPPOSITION OR THE
MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE
WANTS TO ENGAGE OF HOW WE USE OF
MONIES THAT MORE THAN OPEN. TO
TO TALK ABOUT THAT DISCUSSION SO
I THINK IT COMES DOWN TO.
IN ALL FAIRNESS WE HAVING YOU
MADAM CHAIR A LOT OF NEW MEMBERS
ON THE COMMITTEE AND AND AND SO
YOU GUYS WE HAVEN'T HAD. TIME TO
HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD
LIKE TWO DAYS WHICH IS NO TIME.
AND SO PART OF IT IS TIME HAS
AND THAT MY FRIEND AND. IN THIS
CURRENT WINDOW THAT WENT TODAY
BUT I THINK AGAIN COMPLETELY
AGREE WITH YOU THERE MR GRATING
KILLS ARE VERY VALID POINTS AND
WHAT LIKE THE MONEY PERSONALLY.
TO GO TOWARDS HEALTH AND HELP
YOUR CHOICES.
I DIDN'T PUT THAT IN THERE
BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO BE OPEN
TO.
A COMPROMISE WITH THE PEERS TO
TIED TO GET THIS ON THE BALLOT
AND WHAT WHAT THE BABY THE
PUBLIC WOULD WANT.
I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION
ON THIS ISSUES AND.
NO BASED ON.
YOUR ANSWERS IT SOUNDS TO ME
LIKE WE'RE NOT AT A PLACE TO
MOVE A BILL FORWARD.
APPRECIATE ISSUE APPRECIATE WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH BE
HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU NOW THAT
I DO SIT ON THE COMMITTEE BUT
I'M NOT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT
THE BILL. BY IN ITS CURRENT FORM
TODAY.
MISTER CURRY BEFORE EIGHT I
HAVE A QUESTION SO ARE YOU
SUGGESTING THAT THESE FOODS ARE
A LUXURY. YES.
AND I THINK A BUYER WHO MADE AND
MADE THEIR MADE US WHICH I ENJOY
OUR LUXURIES. AND NOT ESSENTIAL
TO POOR PEOPLE IF I ACTUALLY
WHAT THAT CAN I ANSWER WILL ADD
ONE MORE THING. SAYS WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT NINETEEN NINETY
TWO AND ONE OF THE SYSTEM BACK
THEN IT WAS MADE. NINETEEN
NINETY TWO AT THE SAME TIME WE
HAD PROP ONE EIGHTY SEVEN GOING
ON RIGHT AFTER FOLLOWED BY PROP
TWO NINE. PETE WILSON WAS A AND
OFFICE OF THAT THINGS HAVE
CHANGED THE CAMPAIGN BACK THEN
WAS MADE THAT THIS WAS ESSENTIAL
TO POOR PEOPLE DIET THAT'S OF
THE CAMPAIGN OF ABOUT.
IT'S NOT ESSENTIAL TO POOR
PEOPLE'S DIETS.
.
FLORA LA WE IT'S ALL OF ITS
ENJOY IT MORE THAN WE SHOULD
SOMETIMES BUT. I ALSO WANT TO BE
FAIR AND AGAIN WE'RE NOT MAKING
THE DECISION WHICH IS ASKING THE
VOTERS. IF THEY WANT EVERY
CONSIDER WHAT HAPPENED IN
NINETEEN NINETY TWO.
MR MCCARTY OUT OF QUESTION.
YES I DO.
QUESTION AND A COMMENT BUT AS
YOU SAID TO HAVE BEEN ON THE
COMMITTEE FOR. THREE DAYS NOW
SEVEN WILFULLY. DIGEST THIS
ISSUE LAST YEAR AS WELL.
AYE VERSE IS THE LOGISTICAL
QUESTION ASSEMBLYMEMBER SO CAN
YOU EXPLAIN THAT THE.
.
THIS BILL VERSUS THE ACA IN IS
THIS IS A COMPANION MEASURE AND
IS THIS BILL ACTUALLY NEEDED.
WHAT'S THE INTERPLAY HERE YES I
THAT THE BILL'S STEPHANIE BOTH
ARE NEEDED.
ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER THING
MAKE ANY SENSE IT'S TO ENSURE
THAT SMACKING CANDY AND.
WHATEVER THAT TO GET FLATLY LAND
ON THE DEFINITION AS IT'S TAX
AND.
OUR FOOT WE WOULD BEING OTHER
FOOD IS NOT TAXED
IF YOU NEED VOTE THAT THESE
TOGETHER I JUST DID THE REPEAL.
OF DID THE A CA TO WHICH REPEALS
PROJECT WHATEVER IT WAS.
TWO THAT THE WAY THAT WE AYE AYE
KNOW SOUL PROPOSITION WITH RED
AND.
THIS IS KIND OF THE BEST
PATHWAY TO TO TRY TO GET THERE
TO ENSURE THAT WE STILL PROTECT.
WHAT WE WOULD DEEM ESSENTIAL
FOODS
I AS UNTAXED
AND SO IT'S JUST IN THE SAME WAY
THAT THEY HAD A STRATEGY FOR THE
CAMPAIGN ACTUALLY IF WE GO BACK
ALL THE WAY TO NINETEEN EIGHTY
TWO? THE LUMP AWFULLY TOGETHER
AND SAID THAT.
THOSE FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
THAT WE KNOW WE SHOULD BE
HAVING.
SHE'D BE IN THE SAME CATEGORY
AS MY SNICKER BARS THAT MADE THE
RETOS.
AND THEY PUT A BALLOT
INITIATIVE ALL OF IT TOGETHER.
AND SO THE.
THEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH
COMMITTEE AND WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
THEY DECIDED THAT THIS IS THE
BEST.
AVENUE.
TRY TO GET TO WHERE WE HAVE THE
TWO TYPES OF FOOD TAX AND ON TAX
RATES BASED ON.
ESSENTIAL VERSUS A LUXURY.
OKAY FAIR ENOUGH IN AND THEN
SECONDLY AYE AYE AYE I'M SUPPORT
OF THIS OF THIS OVERALL POLICY
WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO AND.
UNITE MEN WITH DUE RESPECT IT
DOCTOR QUIRK ABOUT IT SCIENTISTS
WORKING ON THIS BUT I'VE BEEN.
WORKING ON THIS ISSUE FOR TEN
YEARS OR SO WHEN I WAS ON THE
CITY COUNCIL LIKE WORKED ON
SUGAR SWEETENED BEVERAGES AND IT
IS IT AN INSANE EPIDEMIC IN OUR
COUNTRY AND OUR STATE WITH. TYPE
TWO DIABETES.
TYPE TWO DIABETES AND JUST THE
OBESITY.
STATS AS AS A WHOLE AND ONE
THING THAT I JUST KIND
ADDRESSING THAT SOMETIMES IS THE
ARGUMENT THAT.
THESE UP TAXES IN THESE.
IMPACTS WILL BE REGRESSIVE TO
POOR PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR WELL IF YOU LOOK AT THE
STATS YOU KNOW IT'S REGRESSIVE.
TYPE TWO DIABETES.
AND OBESITY TO POOR PEOPLE AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR SO THAT
COMMITTEES THAT WOULD BENEFIT
FROM.
HEALTH CARE.
THE BETTER NUTRITION PROGRAMS
OUT THERE SERVICES TO HELP THESE
COMMUNITIES WOULD ACTUALLY
RECEIVE A TREMENDOUS BENEFIT NOT
NOT NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
AND I DO. KNOW THAT.
THE THE INCREASE UP OF SUGAR HAS
CORRESPONDED THAT TREMENDOUSLY
WITH THE INCREASE IN.
YOUTH WITH TYPE TWO DIABETES
WHICH IS TO BE SOMETHING THAT
YOU GOT LATER ON IN LIFE AND NOW
YOU KNOW KIDS ARE GETTING THAT
EARLY AGE AS WELL AS JUST OVER
OUR. OBESITY AS A WHOLE SO.
I THINK YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT
TRACK THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
MR BADA.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR I THINK
YOU COLLEAGUES FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION AND THANKS FOR
PRESENTING THIS BILL.
SUMMER GARCIA.
BUT OVERALL I THINK THE GOALS
ARE ARE LAUDABLE AND I THINK.
WHILE IMPERFECT IN ITS CURRENT
FORM.
I'M PREPARED TO SUPPORT IT
TODAY GIVEN YOUR GOALS AND SOME
OF THE CLAIMS YOU MADE FOR.
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS AND IN THE
FUTURE I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS
ABOUT THAT WHERE THE. NEARLY
BILLION DOLLARS WOULD GO AND
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT I
THINK IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO.
FOCUS IN SPECIFY SOME OF THAT
EXPENDITURE ON ON.
.
QUITTING GREATER HEALTH ABOUT
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND AS
YOU SAID IN THE SOME OF THE
DEFINITIONAL COMPONENTS YOU
KNOW.
I I'M CERTAINLY CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT SEEMS TO BE ARBITRARY AND
RANDOM DISTINCTIONS MADE AT
TIMES SOME SOME OF THE.
ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE OPPONENTS
THAT I THINK ARE REALLY WORTH
LOOKING AT.
YOU KNOW THAT THE THE FROZEN
VERSUS NON FROZEN FORM GOING ALL
THE WITH CHOCOLATE WITHOUT.
AYE TH AND AND HOPEFULLY THE
DEFINITIONS THE OPPOSING CAN IT
CAN ADDRESS THOSE. YOU KNOW I
WAS TALKING OVER THE WEEKEND
WITH ONE OF MY CLOSEST
CONFIDANTES. ABOUT THIS ISSUE MY
WIFE AND AND SHE MENTIONED THE
ISSUE OF OF OF OF ACCESS SO EVEN
IF THERE'S. A PRICE CHANGE AND.
FOR FOLKS ARE PRICE SENSITIVE
IN WHO MAY MAKE OUR DECISIONS
THAT ARE HEALTHIER FOR THEM TO
HAVE ACCESS TO A HEALTHIER
ALTERNATIVES AND WE CERTAINLY
KNOW THAT THEIR FOOD DESERT'S
THROUGHOUT MANY OF OUR
COMMUNITIES WHERE HEALTHIER FOOD
IS NEEDED AND NECESSARY.
AND I DON'T EXPECT THIS BILL TO
BE A PANACEA FOR EVERYTHING TO
CURE ALL THE ISSUES RELATED TO
ACCESS TO A HEALTHIER FOODS BUT
I THINK IT'S AN ISSUE ALSO.
AND WE JUST WANNA SEE IF YOU
HAD ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS YOU
WANT TO MAKE ON THE ISSUE OF
ACCESS TO HEALTHY ALTERNATIVES.
YOU'RE CORRECT I MEAN THEY
ISSUED WHAT PART OF RAP
DISCUSSION ITS AXIS AND AND HOW
DO WE USE THESE REVENUES TO HELP
IMPROVE ACCESS IN THESE
COMMUNITIES AND SON OF VICE THAT
AS WELL.
I DON'T I DON'T A BELIEVER THIS.
AND ALSO APOLOGIZE I MEAN TEXAN
ABOUT NATURAL RESOURCES NONSTOP.
.
I STOPPED WITH THE AMENDMENTS AS
A PUBLIC EALTH HAVING A
DISCUSSION WITH MYSELF.
AND A LOT OF THE THING QUESTIONS
I'VE BEEN DISCUSSING YOU KNOW
ABOUT THE GRANOLA BAR.
ABOUT.
BUT ABOUT WHERE THE MONEY GOES
BUT I THOUGHT I WAS HAVING A
DISCUSSION WITH MYSELF. AND SO.
I AM ONE THIS IS THE FIRST
COMMITTEE OF MANY TO COME UP IF
THEY GOT PASSES THROUGH.
ALONG THE WAY AND SO.
TIMES HAVE CHANGED AND I THINK
MOST PEOPLE ACTUALLY THINK THAT
THEY'RE BEING TAX ON CANDY AND
SNACKS AND WHEN THEY REALIZE
THEY DON'T ELECT OKAY MAYBE
THAT'S FINE IT IS IT IS A LUXURY
NOT AN ESSENTIAL.
AND I'M UST ASKING THAT WE HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH THE VOTERS.
AND THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS
I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO HAVE
THAT BE MY CLOSING COMMENTS.
KNOW OF ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS
PAINT I JUST I I KNOW YOU HAVE
TO GET BACK AND SO I DOES HAVE
SOME QUICK COMMENTS OBVIOUSLY
WITH THE DEATH WITHIN MY DAD HAS
DIABETES AYE AUNTS WATCH WHAT
THE STRUGGLE LOOKS LIKE I AM
VERY WELL AWARE OF HOW DIFFICULT
IT CAN. BE HOWEVER ALONG WITH
OTHERS I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR
THE POINT CLEARLY THE
DEFINITIONS ARE UNCLEAR AND I
THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY. TO
CALL ALL SH.
THE TO TAX EVERYTHING TO SAY
THAT IT'S.
ALL SUGARY SNACKS ARE A LUXURY
I THINK IS NOT REALISTIC I COME
FROM A DISTRICT WHERE. SOMETIMES
YOU CAN'T EVEN AFFORD A SUGARY
SNICKERS BAR AND THAT PRO THIS
DEFINITION YOU'RE NOT JUST
TALKING ABOUT A SNICKERS BAR.
MORE DORITOS YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT CERTAIN FRUITS AS WELL
PACKAGE FRUITS.
SO FOR ME THE DEFINITIONS
CONTINUE TO BE AN ISSUE I IT IS
AN ISSUE I DO FEEL LIKE THOSE
THAT TAXING EIGHT.
SUGARY SNACK WHILE NOT
PROVIDING IN ADVANCE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE TO BE
ABLE TO BUY A HEALTHIER OPTION
OR WHO LIVES IN A FOOD DESERT. I
JUST ONE OF MY DISTRICT JUST
ACTUALLY MOVED OUT OF THE FOOD
DESERT. AYE DEFINITION SO I'M
NOT SURE THAT I WANT TO TAX MY
FOLKS BEFORE I GIVE THEM A
SOLUTION AND I HAVE SERIOUS
ISSUES WITH THAT AND I HAVE
SERIOUS ISSUES FOR THAT REASON.
.
I'M GONNA BE A NO AND I AND I
HAVE ACTUALLY EVERYONE HERE CAN
VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE I AM NOT
MAKING A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION
ON THIS BILL ALTHOUGH I DO
CONTINUE TO HAVE SERIOUS
CONCERN.
OF THOSE ISSUES AND ABOUT HOW
THE MONEY IS.
WITH THAT WE CAN VOTE.
SO WE IN MOTION AND A SECOND
MOVE THE BILLS.
MR HOUGHTON IS A BILL MISTER
MCCARTY SECOND SO WITH THAT.
ITEM NUMBER ONE. START WITH ITEM
NUMBER ONE IS THAT.
AB TWO SEVENTY FOUR.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS WORK.
AND NO WORK NO BRO. BRUNO ALAN.
DELANO BONTA AYE BONTA AYE CHIU
GRAY NO GRAY NOW. MCCARTY.
MCCARTY AYE MELINDA'S.
MELINDA SNOW MULLIN.
QUIRK.
QUIRK NO.
THANK YOU.
WELL.
TWO SIX THE BILL.
THAT'S TWO TO SIXTY THE ITEM
FAILS.
ONCE.
WELL WITHOUT OBJECTION WITHOUT
OBJECTION WE CAN SUBSTITUTE THE
ROLE FOR IT AN ITEM NUMBER SIX
AS NO NO ITEM NUMBER FOR A CA
TO.
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
NO OBJECTION WITH US TO THROW.
NOW WE NEED ONE.
FEDERAL EXPRESS.
WE WILL HOLD THE ROLL OPEN FOR
FIVE MINUTES FOR ADD ONS.
AND TRY.
ALRIGHT. COUNTY PLANS.
AND.
I WAS TO GLORIA SPACE VALUE TO.
EXPAND YOUR.
THE MAN OF
MULLIN NO.
EIGHT BE.
TWO SEVEN FOUR AND A CA TO
ADD ONS FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE.
.
THE BILL HAS FAILED TO.
WHICH ROOMS OR AB TWO SEVEN FOR
NOT VOTING.
CHIU NOT VOTING.
.
THE WORLD HAS ALSO BEEN
SUBSTITUTED FOR ACA TOO SO YOU
EASIER NOT VOTING ON A CA TO
OUR.
DARK.
THEY NEED TO.
.
ITEM NUMBER THREE AB FIFTEEN
NINETY SIX THAT BILL HAS PASSED
TO APPROPRIATIONS ARE CHU CHU
AYE.
THANK YOU COMMITTEE IS
ADJOURNED.
BY HAVING.
WHICH ONE