ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
TODAY'S TUESDAY JULY NINTH TWO
THOUSAND AND NINETEEN WE DO NOT
YET HAVE A QUORUM BUT WE WILL.
START AS A SUB COMMITTEE WE
START WITH SENATOR JACKSON.
THANK YOU TAKE UP ITEM TO SB ONE
SEVENTY SIX THANK YOU AND I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY 2%.
OF WITH THE THE SENATE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE ABOUT TO START I
APPRECIATE THE EXTENSION THAT
COURTESY AND SO WHAT.
WE WILL EMPATHIZE WITH YOUR LONG
DAY.
NO YOU DON'T HAVE.
OF I AM PLEASED THOUGH TWO
PRESENTS SENATE BILL ONE SEVENTY
SIX THIS IS THE ANNUAL BILL TO
AUTHORIZE FEES.
OF THE STATE BAR CAN CHARGE AN
ATTORNEY IN ORDER TO BE LICENSED
TO PRACTICE LAW IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
ATTORNEYS FEES SO HAVE NOT BEEN
INCREASED IN TWENTY YEARS.
AND LAST YEAR WE INSTRUCTED THE
STATE AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE STATE
BAR TO DETERMINE IF THERE SHOULD
BE A FEE INCREASE AND IF SO WHAT
THAT AMOUNT SHOULD BE.
THE BILL IN PRINT REFLECTS THE
FEE INCREASE SUGGESTED BY THE
STATE AUDITOR.
THE AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY THIS
COMMITTEE A JUDGE THIS AMOUNT
PURSUANT TO THE RIVER RESULTS OF
THE RECENTLY RELEASED STUDY.
BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S
OFFICE EFFECTIVELY REDUCING THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE FEE INCREASE.
BY TWENTY TWO DOLLARS.
PURSUANT TO THIS BILL THEN THE
LICENSING FEE IN TWENTY TWENTY
WILL INCREASE BY A HUNDRED AND
TWENTY THREE DOLLARS.
FROM THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN
DOLLARS TO FOUR HUNDRED AND
THIRTY EIGHT DOLLARS.
THE BILL ALSO INCLUDES A
PROVISION TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT
OF INCOME AN ATTORNEY CAN MAKE
IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR A 25%
FEE DISCOUNT.
REFLECTING ADJUSTMENTS FOR COST
OF LIVING IT'S SECTOR.
ANOTHER SUBSTANTIVE PROVISION OF
THE BILL ALLOWS FOR THE
DISTRIBUTION OF AFFINITY FUNDING --
PROGRAMS -- BY SHOULD TAKE
AFFINITY PROGRAM FUNDING. TO
QUALIFIED LEGAL SERVICE PROJECTS
THE CALIFORNIA CHANGE LAWYERS.
HOW WHICH IS THE NEW NAME FOR
THE FILE THE CALIFORNIA BAR
FOUNDATION?
AND THE CALIFORNIA LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION AMENDMENTS I AM
ACCEPTING TODAY ENSURE AN
EQUITABLE SPLIT BETWEEN THESE
ORGANIZATIONS.
AND THAT FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS
THE FIRST ONE HUNDRED FIFTY
THOUSAND DOLLARS BE DISTRIBUTED
TO THE CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON
ACCESS TO JUSTICE AGAIN AN
INDEPENDENT AGENCY THAT IS.
BEING SPUN OFF FROM.
THE BAR IN ALL OF ITS
MACHINATIONS AS IT EXISTED TO
AND AS WE ADJUSTED IT A COUPLE
YEARS AGO.
ADDITIONALLY THE BILL AS
PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED EXPRESSES
THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE
THAT THE STATE BAR BE INCLUDED
AS PART OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET
PROCESS FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
BEGINNING.
WITH THE TWENTY ONE TWENTY TWO
FISCAL YEAR.
THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LA
OWES RECOMMENDATION AND THE
LEGISLATURE EXERCISING
ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT OF THE
STATE BAR.
THE BILL INCLUDES OTHER NON
CONTROVERSIAL PROVISIONS FOR
EXAMPLE THE BAR WILL BE REQUIRED
TO REPORT TO THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE'S.
EACH YEAR REGARDING THE FORTY
DOLLAR LEGAL SERVICES OPT OUT
LICENSING FEE AND THE VOLUNTARY
JUSTICE GAP OPT IN FEE.
IT'S MY HOPE THAT.
A MEMBERS OF THE BAR WILL
RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE
SERVICES TO TRY TO ASSURE
JUSTICE IS AVAILABLE TO ALL
PEOPLE -- AND REPORTING BACK TO
THESE TO OUR RESPECTIVE
COMMITTEES I THINK WILL BE
HELPFUL AS WE TRY TO DETERMINE
WHAT IF ANY NEXT STEPS WE SHOULD
TAKE TO ENSURE THAT.
THIS DOES BECOME.
THE STANDARD FOR THE BAR.
AND WITH THAT I WOULD ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU SENATOR.
FIRST WITNESS PLEASE.
THE MORNING CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS MY NAME IS JASON LEE
AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE STATE
BAR OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF
TRUSTEES.
HAVING BEEN APPOINTED BY THE
SUPREME COURT TO SERVE IN THIS
ROLE SINCE SEPTEMBER OF LAST
YEAR.
I AM PROUD AND HONORED TO BE
HERE TODAY TO TALK WITH YOU ON
BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
ABOUT THE NEW STATE BAR.
THE NATION'S BUSIEST AND LARGEST
STATE BAR.
SINCE MY TENURE ON THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES FOR YEARS AGO.
WE HAVE BEEN STEADFAST IN WHAT
HAS BEEN A LONG AN AT TIMES
DIFFICULT ROAD TO GET TO WHERE
WE ARE TODAY.
I WANT TO THANK THE STATE
AUDITOR IN LA L. BOTH OF WHOM
SPENT CONSIDERABLE TIME AND
EFFORT.
THESE PAST FEW MONTHS IN THEIR
RESPECTIVE REVIEWS OF OUR AGENCY
AT THE LEGISLATURE'S REQUEST.
I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE.
THAT THE GOOD WORK OF THIS
COMMITTEE.
ALONGSIDE THE WORK OF SENATOR
JACKSON AND HER COMMITTEE.
WAS AND CONTINUES TO BE
ABSOLUTELY INSTRUMENTAL FOR THIS
AGENCY TO EMBRACE TRUE REFORM.
THESE REFORMS INCLUDE.
WE HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STATE BAR
SCORE REGULATORY FUNCTION OF
DISCIPLINE.
THIS INCLUDES A COMPLETE
RESTRUCTURE OF THE OFFICE OF THE
CHIEF TRIAL COUNSEL.
AND PRIORITIZING CASES THAT POSE
THE MOST HARM TO THE PUBLIC.
THIS RESTRUCTURING HAS REDUCED
OUR BACKLOG FOR THE HIGHEST
PRIORITY CASES BY ONE THIRD.
WE HAVE STEPPED UP OUR EFFORTS
TO STOP THE UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE OF LAW.
INCLUDING ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL
TEAM FOCUSED ON IMMIGRATION
FRAUD.
WE HAVE INCREASED LAW
ENFORCEMENT REFERRALS OF THIS
MONTH MISCONDUCT BY OVER 50%.
WE HAVE TRIMS MORE THAN FIVE
POINT TWO MILLION. FOR MY BUDGET.
RESTRUCTURED AN AUTOMATED
PROCESS SEES.
AND EXECUTED OTHER SIGNIFICANT
COST SAVING MEASURES.
WE HAVE RENEWED OUR FOCUS ON
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION LEGAL
SYSTEM IN AIM TO COLLECT
EVIDENCE.
GAUGE OUTCOMES AND BE
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE THOSE
OUTCOMES IN LAW SCHOOL AND
PROFESSIONAL RETENTION AMONG
OTHER AREAS.
BUT AFTER TWENTY YEARS WITHOUT A
FEE INCREASE OUR
RESPONSIBILITIES AND COST OF
DOING BUSINESS OF GROUND.
GET A FUNDING HAS NOT.
HAD NORMALLY FOR INFLATIONARY
JUST ESTIMATE OUR LICENSING FEE
WOULD BE NEAR FIVE HUNDRED AND
FIFTY DOLLARS.
I PRECHED I APPRECIATE THE
DIFFICULTY IN PROVING IF THE
INCREASE IN LIGHT OF THE BAR
BARS PASSED.
I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT THE
PAST WILL REMAIN THERE.
WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT OUR
REFORMS ARE PREPARED OR AGENCY
TO MOVE FORWARD AND FILL OUR
MISSION OF PUBLIC PROTECTION.
WE CANNOT HOWEVER DO SO WITHOUT
ADEQUATE FUNDING. FOR THESE
REASONS I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR I FELT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
THE SERVICE WITH.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
MY NAME IS.
MY NAME IS PATRICE WILL THEIR
GLASS I'M AN ATTORNEY IN THE
STATE BAR'S OFFICE OF CHIEF
TRIAL COUNSEL IN LOS ANGELES.
I ALSO SERVE AS THE LOS ANGELES
CHAPTER PRESIDENT OF THE STATE
BAR'S SEIU LOCAL ONE THOUSAND
CHAPTER.
I'M HERE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF SB
ONE SEVENTY SIX BY SENATOR
JACKSON'S.
I'M FIRST STATE PARKS EMPLOYEES
WOULD LIKE TO THANK SENATOR
JACKSON FOR HER LEADERSHIP.
WITH RESPECT TO THE STATE BAR.
SENATOR JACKSON'S LEADERSHIP HAS
FACILITATED MUCH NEEDED CHANGE
AT THE STATE BAR AND THE PUBLIC
IS TRULY BENEFITTED FROM THOSE
CHANGES AS HAVE THE EMPLOYEES.
WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK
CHAIR SO IN THE COMMITTEE AND
STAFF FOR THEIR SUPPORT IN
PASSING SB ONE SEVENTY SIX WHICH
WILL ENSURE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY
AND TRANSPARENCY CONTINUE. TO
DRIVE THE STATE BAR.
STATE BARS NOT HAD A LICENSING
FEE INCREASE IN TWENTY YEARS
EVEN THOUGH COSTS HAVE CONTINUED
TO RISE.
AS A RESULT OF A GOOD CONTRACT
AND NEW LEADERSHIP WORKING
CONDITIONS FOR STATE BAR
EMPLOYEES CONTINUE TO IMPROVE.
FOR EXAMPLE THE STATE BAR
KNOWLEDGE THAT EMPLOYEE HEALTH
BENEFITS NEEDED TO BE ALIGNED
WITH OTHER STATE EMPLOYEES.
IN ADDITION THE STATE BAR
RECENTLY LAUNCHED TO CASE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS USED BY
EMPLOYEES IN OFFICE OF
ADMISSIONS OFFICE OF CHIEF TRIAL
COUNSEL OFFICE OF PROBATION AND
THE STATE PARK COURT.
AS WE BECOME PROFICIENT WITH THE
SYSTEMS WE ANTICIPATE INCREASE
PRODUCTIVITY [inaudible]
AN EFFICIENCY.
NEW CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS HAVE
ALSO FACILITATED THE ABILITY FOR
MANY EMPLOYEES TO PARTICIPATE
THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS.
RECENTLY THE CALIFORNIA STATE
AUDITOR RELEASED THE AUDIT AS
REQUIRED BY THE LEGISLATION
ENACTED LAST YEAR AT THE REQUEST
OF THIS COMMITTEE.
THE RESULTS OF THAT AUDIT
INCLUDE A FEE INCREASE TO
SUPPORT THE STATE BAR STAFFING
NEEDS AS WELL AS FUNDING FOR
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.
WE SUPPORT THE IN THE FEE
INCREASE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
AUDITOR WE BELIEVE THAT THE
RECOMMENDED FUNDING STRUCTURE
PROVIDES TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE STATE BAR
EXACTLY WHAT THE LEGISLATURE
INTENDED LAST YEAR.
AND PROTECTING THE PUBLIC THE
STATE BAR HAS A DUTY TO REVIEW
AND MAKE A DETERMINATION
REGARDING EVERY COMPLAINT OF
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT AND THE ARE
NOT AUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.
IT'S TWO THOUSAND EIGHTEEN WE
RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY SIXTEEN
THOUSAND COMPLAINTS.
IN ADDITION AS A REASON AS A
RESULT OF THE RECENT LAUNCH OF
OUR ONLINE COMPLAINT FORM MANY
EMPLOYEES IN THE OFFICE OF CHIEF
TRIAL COUNSEL.
HAVE EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT
INCREASES IN THEIR WORKLOAD.
INCREASED WORKLOADS AN
INEFFICIENT BERMAN PLOYS IT'S
EXCUSE ME INSUFFICIENT NUMBER OF
EMPLOYEES CREATES A NATURAL
BACKLOG WE BELIEVE THE NINETEEN
NEW HIRES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
AUDITOR WILL HELP ALLEVIATE SOME
OF THE BACKLOG IN ENABLE US TO
PROCESS CASES WITHIN THE ONE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAY TIME FRAME.
WE ARE SUPPORT ALSO SUPPORT THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE HIS
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE STATE
BAR UNDERGO THE SAME BUDGET
PRICE ASKED PROCESS AS OTHER
STATE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES.
THE INCREASE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY THAT THE BUDGET
PROCESS WILL BRING IS
INSTRUMENTAL IN ENSURING THAT
THE BAR CONTINUES TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THE PROGRESS THAT
HAS BEEN MADE.
LASTLY ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT IN THE
BILL THIS YEAR WE VERY MUCH
SUPPORT THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATION OF A MULTI YEAR
FEE BILL.
WHICH WOULD ASSIST THE STATE
BARNES FISCAL PLANNING AND WE
HOPE TO CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION NEXT YEAR -- THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THE
STATE BAR EMPLOYEES AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO YOUR AYE VOTE ON THIS
BILL.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING MY NAME'S JAKE YOU
TIME I'M INVESTIGATOR AT THAT
STATE PARK CALIFORNIANS CENSUS
GO OFFICE.
I'M ALSO THE VICE PRESIDENT OF
THE STATE PARKS EMPLOYEES UNION
TO SAN TO SKETCH AFTER.
I'M HERE TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR
ITS SENATE BILL ONE SEVENTY SIX
I THESE RESOURCES ARE THANK YOU
AT THIS POINT WILL TAKE NAME AND
AFFILIATION AND YOUR SUPPORT
THANK YOU KNOW FOR THE TESTIMONY
THANK YOU.
A COUPLE OF LEGAL AID
ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT OF MANY OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL.
GOOD MORNING CATHERINE BLAKE FOR
DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA IN
THE VICE CHAIR OF THE ACCESS
COMMISSION IN SUPPORT OF THE
AMENDMENTS AND THANK YOU FOR
YOUR ON GOING SUPPORT OF LEGAL
SERVICES PROGRAMS.
REBECCA MARKETS REPRESENTING THE
CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LAW
IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION.
SIGNAL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS COMMENTS --
MISTER CHAIRMAN NUMBER OF
QUESTIONS IS THAT ALRIGHT PLEASE
OKAY.
SO US PROBABLY MORE FOR THE BAR
THEN FOR THE AUTHOR ALTHOUGH.
IT'S ALL RIGHT I'M HAPPY TO SIT
HERE AND LISTEN I'M SORRY.
I DON'T JUST QUESTIONS THAT AT I
WANT TO MAKE SURE ON THE RECORD --
FIRST I WANT TO KNOW -- THE
CURRENT STATUS OF BARS
COLLECTION OF SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBERS AND PRIVACY RISK THAT'S
CREATED BY THAT WHAT.
AT WHERE ARE WE ON THE SOCIAL
SECURITY QUESTION AND WHAT IS
BEING DONE WITH THE CURRENT.
NUMBER SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS.
SO THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS THAT THE
ISSUE HAS BEEN FIXED I KNOW HAS
UNDERGONE REVIEW BY OUR OFFICE
OF GENERAL COUNSEL. TO ENSURE
THAT WERE COMPLIANCE WITH THE
LAW IN THAT AREA.
THANK YOU FOR THAT FOLLOW UP.
OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN ADDITION
TO THAT IS WE'VE TAKEN A SECOND
REVIEW OF THE OVERALL
APPLICATION TO ENSURE THAT THERE
ISN'T ANYTHING.
IMPLIED IN THE QUESTIONS THAT
WE'RE ASKING THAT WOULD.
OTHERWISE ACT AS A DETERRENT TO
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS -- THAT
WOULD CAUSE THEM TO PAUSE IN
FILLING OUT THE APPLICATION.
I THINK THE TENSION -- WITH THE
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER HAS BEEN
CONFLICTING BUT COMPETING
STATUTES -- ONE REQUIRING THE
COLLECTION OF SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBERS -- FOR CHILD SUPPORT AND
THEN YOURYOUR AUTHORED FILLED
RELATING TO ENSURING THAT
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS HAVE
ACCESS TO A LICENSE.
AB SO WE HAVE BEEN STRUGGLE BUT
WE THINK WE WILL I KNOW WE HAVE
NOW COMPLY WITH THE LAW.
AND WE JUST TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP
TO ENSURE THAT THERE ISN'T ANY
OTHER TRIP WIRES THERE.
OKAY A PAYCHECK AT OUR I'M
WONDERING IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN
PLACE FOR LEGAL SERVICES FUNDING
OPTIONS -- ANY PROTECTIONS TO
ENSURE THAT THE MONEY WE'RE
GIVING -- VOLUNTARILY ARE
SERVING ALL CALIFORNIANS
REGARDLESS OF IMMIGRATION STATUS.
BUT THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
INHIBITING THE GRANTING LEGAL
SERVICES MONEY TO UNDOCUMENTED.
IMMIGRANTS -- AND THOSE GRANTS
GOING -- TO BUT THE SERVICES
THAT WE HAVE NOTHING IN PLACE TO
ENSURE THAT THOSE GRANTS ARE
ACTUALLY BE GIVING TO
ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE A HAVE
CREATED.
A WAY TO SERVE UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANTS SO WE ARE STILL ARE
WE STILL GIVING MONEY TO FOLKS
WHO REFUSED TO SERVE.
SO I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO
THAT QUESTION OTHER THAN.
MOST IF NOT ALL OF THE STATE
BAR'S FINDING IS DRIVEN BY THE
ABLE TO FUNDING -- SO IT'S VERY
FORMULAIC IN IN THE SENSE OF THE
GRANTS THAT ARE GIVEN.
UP BUT WE SOON THEY'RE OPEN TO
WORKING WITH YOU AND THIS
COMMITTEE -- IN EXPLORING
ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO ENSURE
THAT THAT FUNDING CAN GO TO
THOSE CALIFORNIA'S THAT NEED IT
MOST.
YEAH I THINK MY CONCERN IS THAT
WE ARE NOT ALLOWING THEM AND AN
EASY.
AN EXCUSE OF SOME OF THESE
PROVIDERS TO NOT SERVE ALL
CALIFORNIANS -- JUST BECAUSE THE
FEDERAL LAW IS WHAT IT IS THERE
ARE PLENTY OF WAYS -- TO AS WE
HAVE LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDERS
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA WHO HAVE
FIGURED OUT WAYS. TO CONTINUE TO
RECEIVE FUNDING AND SERVE
UNDOCUMENTED -- CALIFORNIANS
ABSOLUTELY -- MY NEXT QUESTION
YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER TO
BUT IT'S ONE I'VE ASKED.
AND IT MAY TAKE.
A LOT TO GET IT BUT DO WE HAVE
ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THE GENDER
MAKEUP OF INACTIVE.
ATTORNEYS.
AB WE BELIEVE WE DO -- BASED ON
THE RECENT SURVEYS THAT WE SENT
OUT TO OUR LICENSEES WE DON'T
HAVE THE INFORMATION READILY
AVAILABLE.
NOW BUT WE ARE AWARE OF THE
REQUEST AND WILL START GOING
THROUGH SOME OF THAT INFORMATION
TO PROVIDE YOUR STAFF AND YOU
WITH THE DATA.
MY CONCERN IS THAT SIGN AND
WHERE I'VE I'VE ASKED OBVIOUSLY --
WHAT OTHER PROFESSIONS WHEN YOU --
DON'T PRACTICE REQUIRE YOU AFTER
COURSE LAW SCHOOL AND THAT AND
PASSING THE BAR TO ACTUALLY --
PAY A FEE TO IN ORDER TO ONE DAY.
COME BACK IN PRACTICE -- I DON'T
KNOW THE NUMBERS WE'VE ASKED ONE
BECAUSE I WOULD GUESS THAT WOMEN
OVERWHELMINGLY GO IN ACTIVE MORE
THAN MEN -- BECAUSE OF CHILDREN
AND OTHER REASONS -- AND
INCREASING THAT FEE.
IT IS SOMETHING I'M REALLY
CONCERNED ABOUT I I THINK THE
FACT THAT WE CHARGE PEOPLE IS --
LUDICROUS BUT THE FACT T
ACTUALLY INCREASING AND THIS
MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE AND I AM
CONCERNED WITH -- THE
DISPARITIES THAT WE'RE
CONTINUING TO PLACE ON FOLKS WHO.
HAVE.
TO FOR OFTEN FAMILY REASONS THE
WOMAN IS ONE WHO.
MAY LEAVE THE PROFESSION FOR A
WHILE.
SO YOU WILL GET UP FOR ME.
THIS GOES TO APPROPRIATE WILL WE
GET AN ANSWER BEFORE
PREPARATIONS.
WE SO WE GOT A REQUEST LAST
NIGHT.
WE ARE MOVING TO ONE IDENTIFIED
WHETHER WE HAVE THE INFORMATION
I THINK WE WE BELIEVE WE DO --
AND WILL.
MARSHALL THAT RESOURCES TO GET
YOU THAT INFORMATION AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE OKAY AND I KNOW -- WHEN
WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT OBVIOUSLY
BUT I I'M REALLY CONCERNED OF OF
WHY WE CAN'T SCALE -- FOR LEGAL
SERVICES PROVIDERS WHO DON'T
MAKE A LOT OF MONEY OR FOR FOLKS
WHO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND
THE STATE DOESN'T ALWAYS PAY
YOUR BAR DUES.
IN SOME.
JOBS THEY DO FOR EXAMPLE AN
ATTORNEY IN THE SENATE -- GETS
THEIR PARTICIPATE FOR AN
ATTORNEY IN ASSEMBLY DOES NOT
ACCEPT I THINK.
YOUR STAFF -- SO.
AN ATTORNEY AND APPROPRIATIONS
IN THE ASSEMBLY DOES NOT GET THE
BAR DUES PAID.
IN TALK ABOUT STAFF NOT MEMBERS --
IN SO THERE'S THIS DISPARITY
THAT I THINK AT GIVE AND WE KNOW
THAT THIS HAS VERY LITTLE AFFECT
ON HIGH INCOME EARNERS WHERE
THEIR LAW FIRM PAYS THEIR FEES.
AND HAS A DISPROPORTIONATE FACT
ON PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY USING
THEIR LOT AGREES TO SERVE THE
PUBLIC -- I KNOWWE HAD ASKED
FOR SCALENE AND FOR A NUMBER OF
REASONS I WAS TOLD THAT WAS A
TAX SIR ANY OTHER WAY WE CAN --
RELIEVE THE BURDEN THAT THIS
PLACES ON WHAT I WOULD ARGUE IS
WHAT WE WANT A LOT OF ATTORNEYS
TO DO IS USE THEIR LAW DEGREE.
TO SERVE POOR PEOPLE.
PUBLIC DEFENDERS YEAH I'D LIKE
TO IT JUST JUMP IN HERE I I
THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD
BE LOOKING AT GOING FORWARD I
KEEP READING ABOUT HOW LAW FIRMS
ARE MAKING RECORD PROFITS.
ARE AND HOW.
WE DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE
TO STEP UP AND TO TO PERFORM
LEGAL SERVICES TO TO USE THEIR
LAW DEGREES FOR THE PUBLIC
INTEREST AS WELL.
AND THAT THIS -- THIS BILL IS IS --
SILENT TO AS TO THAT IN PART OF
IT IS AS YOU MENTIONED THERE'S A
CONCERN ABOUT A TAX -- BUT I BUT
I DO THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT
WE SHOULD LOOK AT GOING FORWARD
BECAUSE AGAIN IT'S LIKE THAT THE
INCOME INEQUALITY WERE SEEN
THROUGHOUT OUR SOCIETY.
THE THE LAW THE SUCCESSFUL
WELFARE LAW FIRMS ARE GETTING
WEALTHIER.
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE SCRAMBLING
TO BE ABLE TO MEET THEIR
OBLIGATIONS AS A PRACTICING
ATTORNEYS I MIGHT SAY THAT THAT
MIGHT BE AN INCENTIVE TO THINK
ABOUT RUNNING FOR THE SENATE.
THAT WE DO GET OUR BAR DUES PAID
THEIR BUT I JUST THROW THAT OUT
IS TO A PARENTHETICAL
OBSERVATION AND NOT NECESSARILY
WANT TO PAINT MAYBE DON'T TELL
MY SENATOR THAT.
WELL.
THAT'S ALSO A POINT WELL TAKEN
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE TO
CERTAINLY NEED TO LOOK AT ADD TO
THE SOME.
BETTER WAY TO RECOGNIZE THE
DISPARITIES BUT AT THIS POINT IN
TIME THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS BILL
DOES BUT IT'S CERTAINLY
CONVERSATION I WOULD BE VERY
INTERESTED IN IN HAVING WOULD
YOU BE WILLING AND AND JUST TO
THINK ABOUT AND I ASK YOU TO
TAKE IT NOW BUT I I WOULD.
BE -- I I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN
DO IT IN THIS BILL BUT I WOULD
LIKE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AT
LEAST TO BE ON THE HOOK -- FOR
PAIN ARGUES FOR ATTORNEYS -- WHO
WORK FOR THE STATE?
AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PLACE
IN A SPELL BUT THAT'S OUTSIDE
THE SCOPE OF THAT'S WHAT I THINK
ARE THE MARVELOUS THAT WOULD BE
A BUDGET.
I WANT IT NOW.
TOUGH TALK BUT I I MEAN I IN ALL
HONESTY I'M I'M PAYING MY BARGES
AND I HAVE DESPITE.
MAKING VERY LITTLE MONEY AS AN
ATTORNEY MY ENTIRE LIFE RIGHT.
I'M.
I THINK WHAT.
IT THAT'S FINE I I'VE CHOSEN TO
TO REMAIN ACTIVE AND DO THAT BUT
OUR STAFF AND PEOPLE WHO -- YOU
KNOW HAVE HAVE GIVEN LEAVE THEIR
LEGAL.
SERVICE TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA I THINK IT'S WHOLLY
UNFAIR ON THAT WE CONTINUE TO
RAISE ARGUES ON ON FOLKS WHO ARE.
DOING A PUBLIC SERVICE WITH
THEIR LAW DEGREE -- I'M
EXTREMELY CONCERNED ON THIS BILL
I'M GONNA VOTE FOR TODAY BUT I
AM STILL CONCERNED THAT YOU KNOW
IF YOU'RE MAKING -- UNDER SIX
FIGURES AS DOING LEGAL AID
SERVICES THAT YOU'RE YOU KNOW
WE'RE RAISING THE COST OF DOING
YOUR JOB -- AND MEANWHILE.
THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD IT THE MOST
DON'T PAY THEIR OWN PARTY WAS SO --
THERE'S JUST A OF A VERY.
BIG DISPARITY I THINK AND AND
THE EFFECT THAT THIS HAS ON WHAT
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE LAWYER
STILL ANNOUNCED GOING TO PUBLIC
SERVICE -- AGAIN THE THE
QUESTION ON ON WHY WERE RAISING --
FEES FOR PEOPLE WHO CHOOSE TO BE
AN ACTIVE I IT IT JUST IS BEYOND
ME THEY'RE LITERALLY ACOSTA OF
OF HAVING AND REMAINING AN
ATTORNEY.
WHAT OTHER PROFESSION HAS TO PAY
TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS A YEAR JUST?
TO REMAINING YOUR PROFESSION
EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT PRACTICING.
IF YOU'RE STAYING HOME WITH YOUR
KIDS.
I DIDN'T I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER
TO THAT BUT I THINK THAT THE IT
AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
AS WE LOOKED AT THIS BAR DUES
BILL WE HAVE TRIED TO REVAMP THE
BAR WE TRY TO MAKE IT MORE
RESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF THE
PUBLIC -- WE'VE.
NARROWED ITS FOCUS WE HAVE CUT
THEM OFF AT THE KNEES IN SOME
RESPECTS APPROPRIATELY SO I
THINK AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING TO
MAKE SURE WE CAN IMPLEMENT OUR
EXPECTATIONS OF THEM.
AND THIS IS THE MECHANISM FOR
DUES HAVE HAVE CONSISTENTLY BEEN
THE MECHANISM.
AS FAR AS TOURING THIS I THINK
THE POINT'S WELL TAKEN BUT
THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP THE BAR.
BE ABLE TO DO WHAT WE EXPECT AND
DEMAND THAT IT TOO AND SO RIGHT
WELL I APPRECIATE THOSE CONCERNS
I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANY OF
THEM -- I AT THIS POINT TIME
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW
TO GIVE THE BARK.
OF THE MONEY IT NEEDS TO DO THE
THINGS THAT WERE TELLING IT IT
NEEDS TO DO AND I I WILL SAY I
THANK YOU TO THE BAR FOR BEING
RESPONSIVE I KNOW TO A LOT OF
OUR QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT THE
LAST.
LONG AS WE'VE BEEN HERE -- AND
AND WE HAVE BEEN REALLY TOUGH ON
THE BAR.
AM AND THE BAR HAS.
STEPPED UP AND I DO I IN I MET
WITH US YEAH YOU FOLKS I THINK
THEY DESERVE.
YOU KNOW.
THIS MONEY -- MY MY PROBLEM IS --
THE REGRESSIVE NATURE BY WHICH
WE ARE A SIGN IT TO ATTORNEYS
AND SO I WOULD.
BE MORE WILLING TO INCREASE
ARGUES MORE FOR THOSE WHO AT ARE
MAKING MORE.
AND ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT.
PROVIDING A DESCENDANT OF TO
ACTUALLY DO PUBLIC SERVICE SO
THAT'S MY CONCERNS AS WE MOVE
FORWARD BUT I DO WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'VE
DONE ON THIS AND I KNOW WE SHARE
THE SAME CONCERNS WHEN IT COMES
TO THESE ISSUES -- I WOULD LIKE
TO SEE SOMETHING DONE -- THIS
YEAR I NOW I CAN'T GET A BUDGET
ITEM DONE -- THAT.
SOMETHING DONE IN IN TERMS OF
AND EVEN THE SAME CALIFORNIA
DOESN'T RESOLVE THE LEGAL AID
ISSUE -- PEOPLE WHO YOU KNOW
IMMIGRATION.
SPECIALISTS ARE ATTORNEYS WHO
WHO ARE WORKING FOR NONPROFITS
ME WE HAVE A WHOLE HOST OF FOLKS
ARE NOT MAKING SIX FIGURES AND
THIS IS A REAL BURDEN.
EVERY TIME WE INCREASE.
THE PARTY WAS SO THAT'S MY
CONCERN MILLION FORWARD TO THE
NEXT COMMITTEE [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THE QUESTIONS PRESS.
I WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE THE
THE COMMENTS FROM FROM MY
COLLEAGUE FROM SAN DIEGO -- THE
THE DISPROPORTIONATE -- AMOUNT
OF A BAR DUES THAT ARE BEING
REQUESTED THE INACTIVE I THINK.
IS SOMETHING THAT PERHAPS IT'S
NOT GOING TO BE IN THIS BILL BUT
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO
CONTINUE TO GIVE VOICE.
TO BECAUSE IT IS AN INEQUITY IF
WE HAVE AND I THINK THAT THE THE
NUMBERS OF STATISTICS WILL BEAR
OUT THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE
INACTIVE.
ARE WOMEN.
WHO DO PLAN TO RETURN TO TO
ACTIVE PRACTICE?
BUT I THINK AT SOME POINT WE DO
NEED TO ADDRESS I I KNOW IT'S
BEEN BROUGHT UP -- DURING OTHER
HEARINGS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT --
BAR DUES AND INCREASING BAR DUES --
THE THE OTHER ISSUE HAS TO DO
WITH IT -- THE MONEY THAT GOES
TO THROUGH I'LL TO TO OUR LEGAL
AIDS.
IN MAKING SURE THAT.
THERE ARE MANY COMMUNITIES THAT
SERVE THE UNDOCUMENTED MANY
COMMITTEES TO SERVE.
OUR PRIMARILY SPANISH SPEAKING
AND WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT
THE RECRUITMENT OF ATTORNEYS FOR
MANY OF THOSE LEGAL AIDS.
IS MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE NOW
YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPANISH
SPEAKERS.
AND YET IT'S THE SAME AMOUNT
THAT'S GIVEN -- TO THE TWO EIGHT
COMMUNITY THAT SERVES ONLY
ENGLISH SPEAKERS VERSUS THOSE
WHO SERVE SPANISH SPEAKERS.
AND I THINK MORE NEEDS TO BE.
DONE TO EVALUATE HOW THAT IS
DONE I I'VE BEEN A VOLUNTEER
WITH OUR LEGAL AID FOR THIRTY
YEARS FOR THIRTY PLUS YEARS I'VE
SERVED ON THE BOARD. FOR ALMOST
AS LONG AND I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT
IT IS TO TO GET MONEY FOR LEGAL
SERVICES THAT WE'RE PROVIDING IN
THE COMMUNITY.
AND WHEN YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR
NUMBERS TOGETHER TO HOW MANY
PEOPLE YOU'RE SERVING -- OUR
NUMBERS.
NOT JUST OUR NUMBERS BUT THE
NUMBERS FOR MANY OF THOSE
COMMUNITIES.
OFTENTIMES ARE LOWER BECAUSE IT
WILL TAKE LONGER TO SERVE
SOMEONE WHO'S SPANISH SPEAKING
AND HAVING TO TRANSLATE ALL THE
DOCUMENTS.
SO I DO ASK THAT WE CONSIDER
THAT.
MAKING SURE THAT THAT WE SERVE.
EVERYONE WHO LIVES IN CALIFORNIA
WHO NEEDS THE SERVICES OF AN
ATTORNEY AND CANNOT AFFORD IT I
THINK IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT --
I I WILL BE VOTING FOR THIS --
SENATOR -- BECAUSE SOMETHING
THAT THAT THE STATE BAR NEEDS WE
NEED TO TO DEAL WITH THIS BUT
THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT I THINK
THAT.
DO NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
SOME DAY SOON.
I I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE I
DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE
CALIFORNIA BAR -- LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION RATHER OR THE OTHER --
ASPECT TO THIS WHERE THERE IS A
REAL PUSH TO TRY TO GET
ADDITIONAL SERVICES SO IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY COMING THROUGH THE
BAR BUT THERE THERE ARE TWO
OTHER ENTITIES I THINK ONE IS
THE CHANGE.
CHANGE GROUP CHANCELLOR'S CHANGE
LAWYERS THAT ARE FOCUSED ON
THEIR VERY ISSUE SO THERE IS
DISCUSSION THERE IS EFFORT GOING
FORWARD IN THAT.
IN THAT SPACE TO TRY TO DO WITH
THE NEEDS OF OUR PARK EVERYONE
WHO NEEDS LEGAL SERVICES SO THAT
THAT IS BEING ADDRESSED PERHAPS
NOT.
AS A SATISFACTORILY BUT THAT
DISCUSSION IS CLEARLY TAKING
PLACE OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL BAR
IT'S ITS OWN SEPARATE ENTITY
WITH THAT FOCUS BECAUSE WE'VE WE
TOLD THE BAR WE WANT TO NARAL
WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
AND WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.
SO THAT'S AYE BUT THERE IS THAT
CHANGE.
LAWYERS THAT IS -- THE ENTITY
THAT IS LOOKING AT THESE ISSUES
VERY SPECIFICALLY [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR.
OF THE QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
RIGHT [inaudible]
SORRY -- BUT A POSITIVE STYLISH
A QUORUM CALL THE ROLL PLEASE
STONE HERE GALLAGHER CHAU CHIU
GONZALEZ [inaudible]
HOLDEN KALRA [inaudible]
KILEY.
IN CHINA OBERNOLTE PETRIE-NORRIS
[inaudible]
REYES.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM THANK YOU.
WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND
THANK YOU.
SO WE'VE.
BUT ON A LONG JOURNEY WILL
CONTINUE TO BE A LONG JOURNEY.
I THINK WITH THE BAR AND A
NUMBER OF ASPECTS.
ARE CHANGING AT ALTHOUGH IT IS
FRUSTRATING.
DO RECOGNIZE A LOT OF CHANGES
THAT HAVE HAPPENED WITH THE BAR
OF THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS AND
YET THE AUDIT REPORT AND THE LA --
BOTH POINT OUT TO A SIGNIFICANT
LACK OF PHYSICAL CONTROLS AT THE
BAR.
SO ONE OF THE REASONS THAT.
THERE'S SUCH A DISPARITY BETWEEN
WHAT THE BAR ASKED FOR AND WHAT
BOTH ALEJO AND THE AUDITOR'S
SAID WERE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO
INCREASE THE FEES.
A LOT HAD TO DO WITH LACK OF
INTERNAL CONTROLS IS ASTONISHING
DIEM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT
THE BAR RECENTLY ASKED FOR AND
WHAT WE'RE ULTIMATELY ENDING UP
WITH HERE WHICH I THINK
UNDERSCORES AT THE BAR.
NEED SOME WORK WITH RESPECT TO
MANAGING ITS OWN FINANCES AND
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CATEGORIES
THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT AND IF
YOU LOOK AT THE ANNOUNCES.
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT SO THE
REAL ESTATE DECISIONS HAD BEEN
MADE.
AND AS THOSE BARS TELLING US
THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE FIXING
SOME OF THE THE LEASING REVENUES
AND SOME OF THE THEY ASPECTS OF
OF MANAGING THEIR PROPERTY AND
AS THEY DO.
THAT SHOULD RESULT IN.
A REDUCTION IN FEES OR IN THE
LEAST A MITIGATION OF HAVING TO
INCREASE FEES AND IN THE FUTURE.
SO THEIR NUMBER CATEGORIES THAT
WE'VE BEEN TRACKING AND THAT I
THINK WE NEED. TO TO TO HOLD
ONTO.
AS A COMMITTEE AND YES.
THERE IS THIS A THOUGHT OF DOING
THE BAR DUES BILL EVERY COUPLE
OF YEARS I AM.
PERSONALLY AND I'M NOW I'VE
TALKED TO A NUMBER OF MEMBERS
NOT READY FOR THAT BECAUSE OF
THE CHALLENGE THAT WE WE HAVE
HAD AND I THINK THE BAR STILL
NEEDS TO BUILD BACK SOME TRUST.
AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
LEGISLATURE ON BEING ABLE TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR FINANCIAL
SITUATION IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING
WHAT YOUR NEEDS ARE I THINK IT
IS INCUMBENT ON US TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE ARE FUNDING YOU
APPROPRIATELY FOR THE MISSION WE
HAVE SET YOU ON AND MAKING SURE
THAT WE'RE THE BARS.
HELPING FACILITATE A LOT OF
DIFFERENT CATEGORIES FACT WEEK
ASK THIS OF THE LEGISLATURE.
HAS PUT LEGAL SERVICES MONEY ON
THE TABLE THROUGH THE JUDICIARY
BUDGET EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WE
KNOW THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
GAPS AND LACK OF LEGAL SERVICES
FUNDING COMING FROM.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH A
LOT OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT
RELIED ON IN THE PAST SO WE DO
NEED TO BE LOOKING EVERYWHERE WE
CAN FOR LEGAL SERVICES MONEY AND
TO BE ABLE. TO TO GET PEOPLE
THAT LEGAL HELP THAT THEY NEED
ULTIMATELY.
WITH RESPECT TO THE SCALE AND WE
COULD DO THE SCALING BUT WE
COULD DO WITH A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
AND I THINK THIS HOUSE THIS
COMMITTEES PROBABLY READY FOR
THAT.
LEADERSHIP HAS INDICATED THAT
THIS IS PROBABLY NOT THAT THE
TIME THEY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
MOVING FORWARD ON A TWO THIRDS
VOTE BUT WE COULD DO THAT
BECAUSE EFFECTIVELY.
THOSE HIGHER PAID ATTORNEYS
WOULD BE IN A WAY SUBSIDIZE THE
LOWER PAID ATTORNEYS.
THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO BE A TWO
THIRDS VOTE UNLESS WE CAN BE
CLEVER ABOUT STRUCTURING IT SOME
OTHER WAY WE HAVE.
YET TO LOOK AT THAT AND AND MAKE
AND THAT'S THAT'S BUILT INTO
THIS IS THAT WE ARE CONSTANTLY
LOOKING WORKING WITH THE BAR. TO
SEE HOW WE CAN EFFECTIVELY SCALE
IT IT IS FRUSTRATING TO PUT A
PROGRESSIVE FEE IN PLACE
REQUIRES A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
AND WE'RE STUCK WITH WHAT IS IN
FACT A VERY REGRESSIVE FEE AND A
REGRESSIVE STRUCTURE THAT HURTS
ATTORNEYS AT THE LOWEST AND
WHERE WE DO NEED MORE HELP.
THIS COMMITTEES ALSO BEEN
WORKING ON ENSURING THAT WE GET
MORE TOURNEY'S INTO THE PRACTICE
WHICH WOULD.
HELP WITH RAISING MORE FEES ARE
MITIGATING.
THE FEES BY ENSURING THAT WE
HAVE DIVERSITY ACROSS THE THE
BREADTH OF THE BAR AND THE BENCH
AS WELL AS I THINK WE SHOULD.
WE'RE LONG PAST TO HAVE THE
CONVERSATION ABOUT OPENING UP
RECIPROCITY WITH OTHER STATES SO
WE GET HIGH QUALITY ATTORNEYS IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
THAT THAT LEAVES IT TO THE BAR
TO DO THE ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE
THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE
DOING.
THE OTHER ASPECT THAT CAME OUT
OF THE LA REPORT.
DAILY -- REPORT IS.
TO I WHAT THIS BILL CONTEMPLATES
A SETTING UP THE PROCESS TO
BRING THE BAR INTO OUR NORMAL
BUDGETING PROCESS.
WE HAVE A VIEW OF WHAT THE FEES
ARE AND WE GET SOME SENSE OF
WHAT THE HOW THAT THE BAR DOES
SOME BUDGETING BUT IF THEY WERE
PART OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS.
THEN THE BUDGET EXPERTS WOULD
HAVE INSIGHT INTO THE DECISIONS
THAT GET MADE BY THE BAR ON AN
ANNUAL BASIS WE WOULD HAVE A
MUCH BETTER SENSE OF HOW THEY'RE
SPENDING THE MONEY THAT WE'RE
ALLOWING THEM TO COLLECT AND AS
A PUBLIC AGENCY I THINK THAT'S
VERY APPROPRIATE.
THAT'S GONNA BE WORKING WITH THE
BUDGET STAFF AND MAKE SURE THAT
THAT THEY'RE ABLE AND WILLING TO
DO THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
SETTING UP IN THIS BILL I THINK
THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT
COMPONENT OF IT.
IF WE HAVE THOSE MECHANISMS IN
PLACE THEN IF WE DO A MULTI YEAR
FEE STRUCTURE IF WE DO A LOT OF
THE THE THINGS THAT THE BARS
ASKING FOR THAT THE OTTER THE LA --
WE'RE STARTING TO RECOMMEND.
I THINK WE'RE IN A MUCH BETTER
PLACE THAN TO HAVE THE CONTROLS
IN PLACE THE OVERSIGHT THAT IS
OUR OBLIGATION OF PLACE AND OUR
ABILITY TO MANAGE WHAT HOW THAT.
PUBLIC AGENCIES BOTH DOING ITS
JOB WITH RESPECT. TO PUBLIC
PROTECTION BUT ALSO MANAGING ITS
FINANCES SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S
HERE IN CENTER.
YOU TAKE ANY AMENDMENTS AND
WORKING WITH US AS WE MOVE
TOWARDS THIS GOAL SAID IT'S BEEN
QUITE A JOURNEY OVER THE LAST
FEW YEARS.
GETTING US TO THIS PLACE THEN
AND STRUCTURING.
THE STATE BAR.
AS A A MODERN.
ORGANIZATION THAT HAS
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC
PROTECTION AND IS FULFILLING
THAT OBLIGATION OF PUBLIC
PROTECTION. TO THOSE KIND OF
ISSUES THAT ARE POINTED OUT IN
THAT THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE
DEALING WITH SO WE WILL CONTINUE
THE CONVERSATION I KNOW A LOT OF
YOU HAVE WAITED WITH ME OVER THE
THE LAST WELL SEVERAL YEARS AS
WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS THIS
JOURNEY.
AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.
SENATOR YOU KNOW VERY BRIEFLY
THE ONE COMPONENT THAT THAT
CREATES AN ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE
THIS AFFECT THE STATE BAR'S
UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE
SUPREME COURT.
I AND THAT THAT ABSOLUTE TWIST
IN OUR DISCUSSIONS -- THE CORD
TO I THINK IS VERY OF SUPPORTIVE
FOR CERTAINLY HASN'T INDICATED A
LACK OF SUPPORT FOR THE THE
FOCUS ON THE COMMITMENT THE
LEGISLATURE'S MAKING BUT I THINK
WE DO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT
GOING FOR WHEN WE ASK WHAT OTHER
AGENCIES DO X. Y. IN SEE --
THEY'RE VERY FEW OTHER AGENCIES
THAT AREIN FACT -- UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF A CO EQUAL
BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT TO AND SO.
THIS MAKES IT ALL A LOT MORE
INTERESTING -- AS WE TRY TO DO
WHAT WE FEEL IS THE RIGHT THING
IN THE APPROPRIATE THING TO DO
TO GIVE DIRECTION TO THE BAR.
IN IN ITS.
RESPONSIBILITIES TO SERVE THE
PUBLIC SO WITH THAT -- I WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE AND THANK
THE ROBUST DISCUSSION AGREE WITH
EVERY PART OF IT.
THE FOCUS HERE IS LET'S GET THAT
BAR BACK ON TRACK -- I'M TRYING
TO THINK OF WHAT WHAT LIFE WAS
LIKE TWENTY YEARS AGO THE COST
OF LIVING WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS
LAWYER FEES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY
LESS -- BACK THEN THIS IS A AN
APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENT OF THE
NOTION THAT WE GOT SIXTEEN
THOUSAND COMPLAINTS BECAUSE
WE'VE OPENED UP AND MADE THE
PROCESS MORE TRANSPARENT.
SAYS WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO
ACCOMMODATE THOSE COMPLAINTS --
AND TO WITH THAT I YEAH LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING THIS VERY
INTERESTING JOURNEY BUT AT THIS
POINT TIME WOULD RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS CALL THE ROLL
PLEASE STONE BY STONE AYE
GALLAGHER CHAU.
CHIU GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
MAIENSCHEIN OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE I PETRIE-NORRIS HI
PETRIE-NORRIS I REYES.
REYES I NEEDS ONE MORE TO A
PLACE TO BELONG CALL THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR.
AND THEN YOU HAVE ONE MORE BILL
WITH US TODAY AND THAT IS OUR
ITEM NUMBER TEN SB[inaudible]
FOR FOUR NINETY THREE YEAH.
BUT NOT MY NUMBER THAT WE YEAH.
AWARE.
OF COLOR JUST.
AS WE NEED [inaudible]
GREAT.
SENATOR THANK YOU VERY MUCH
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS MANY OF US
WATCH WITH INCREDIBLE JOY AND
PRIDE AS HE AMERICAN WOMEN'S
SOCCER TEAM WON THE WORLD CUP.
IT WAS A GREAT EVENT I THINK FOR
THE WHOLE COUNTRY FOR MEN AND
WOMEN ALIKE FOR BOYS AND GIRLS.
TO WATCH ARE WOMEN A CONQUERED
THE WORLD AND DO CHAU IN
EXTRAORDINARY FASHION.
I SAY THANK YOU TITLE.
NINE BECAUSE IT REALLY WAS TITLE
NINE THE FACT THAT.
OF YEAH I THINK WAS IN --
NINETEEN SEVENTY TWO WHEN TITLE
NINE PASSED DID OPEN THE DOORS
FOR WOMEN IN SPORTS BUT WOMEN IN
EDUCATION IN GENERAL TO BE
TREATED EQUALLY AND FAIRLY.
AND SO I AM HERE TODAY -- TO ASK
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS MEASURE
THAT -- HAS BEEN A FEDERAL.
LAW WANT TO BRING IT TO THE
STATE PARTICULARLY REFERENCING
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING SURE
THAT.
WOMEN ARE ABLE TO HAVE EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY FOR SUCCESS IN
ACADEMICS AND ATHLETICS AND
PURSUE AN EDUCATION IN AN
ENVIRONMENT THAT IS SAFE FROM
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND VIOLENCE.
SO FIRST I'D LIKE TO ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEES PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
AND TO THANK YOUR STAFF FOR
THEIR WORK ON THIS BILL THANK
YOU -- AGAIN TITLE NINE THE
FEDERAL CHECKS EQUITY IN
EDUCATION LAW HAS BEEN VITAL TO
ENSURING THAT ALL STUDENTS WOMEN
MEN.
GIRLS AND BOYS AT EVERY GRADE
LEVEL.
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY FOR SUCCESS IN
ACADEMICS AND ATHLETICS.
AGAIN PURSUING AN EDUCATION IN
AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS SAFE FROM
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND VIOLENCE
AS WELL AS THE REQUIREMENTS OF
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN EDUCATION
AND SPORTS SADLY THOUGH.
AND SOMEONE SHOCKINGLY SEXUAL
ASSAULT AND VIOLENCE IN HIGHER
EDUCATION IS PERVASIVE ACCORDING
TO THE TWENTY SIXTEEN CAMPUS
CLIMATE SURVEY VALIDATION STUDY.
OF TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND COLLEGE
AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AN
ESTIMATED 62% OF WOMEN.
AND 61% OF MEN.
EXPERIENCE SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
ONE IN FIVE WOMEN AND ONE IN
FIVE EIGHT ONE IN FOURTEEN MEN
EXPERIENCE SEXUAL ASSAULT.
IN COLLEGE HOWEVER DUE TO THE
UNDER REPORTING OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND VIOLENCE IT'S
LIKELY THE RATES.
ARE MUCH HIGHER.
CALIFORNIA HAS LOOKED TO AND
RELIED UPON TITLE NINE FOR
DECADES.
BUT WE ARE INCREASINGLY
CONCERNED BY THE DISMANTLING OF
TITLE NINE'S PROTECTIONS BY A
FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION THAT HAS
EXPRESSED OPEN HOSTILITY TO THE
SAFEGUARDS TO PROVIDES.
AND TO ADDRESSING GENDER BASED
VIOLENCE IT HAS IN FACT ALREADY
PROPOSED FEDERAL REGULATIONS
THAT GOT TITLE NINE'S CRITICAL
PROTECTIONS.
THIS MEASURE SB FOUR NINETY
THREE CODIFIES ADDITIONAL
PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
SCHOOLS TO FOLLOW TO ENSURE THAT
EXISTING FEDERAL AND STATE LAW
IS IN FOR THE IS EFFECTUATE.
INCLUDING ADDING SEXUAL VIOLENCE
TO THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IN THE EDUCATION CODE.
SOMETHING THAT'S HARD TO BELIEVE
IT ISN'T THERE BUT THIS WILL
ADDED IT DIRECTION ALL POST
SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS TO IMPLEMENT
FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES AND
REQUIREMENTS REGARDING SEXUAL
ARASSMENT AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE
PREVENTION.
INCLUDING ADOPTING AND
PUBLISHING GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES
AND PROVIDING FOR PROMPT.
AND EQUITABLE RESOLUTION OF
COMPLAINT AND IT REQUIRES AN
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION TO TAKE
IMMEDIATE ACTION WHEN IT FINDS
ITS SEXUAL HARASSMENT HAS
CREATED A HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT.
TO ELIMINATE THAT HOSTILE
ENVIRONMENT PREVENT ITS
REOCCURRENCE AND ADDRESS ITS
EFFECTS I WITH THAT THE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE AND WANT TO MENTION THAT.
WE HEAR IN OUR JUDICIARY
COMMITTEES ARE COMMITTED TO DUE
PROCESS THAT IS A PROCESS THAT
WE HAVE PUT INTO THIS BILL --
I'M REMINDED THAT EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS HAVE NOT
HISTORICALLY REALLY PURSUED THIS
AREA AND ARE NOT EXPERTS IN --
IN THIS.
THE PRECEDING PROCESS WE HELP --
PLACED IN SOME VERY SPECIFIC AND
STRINGENT DUE PROCESS
REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO MEET
THOSE EQUITY THRESHOLD THAT ARE
IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US WHILE AT
THE SAME TIME PROTECTING.
AGAINST THIS BEHAVIOR ON COLLEGE
CAMPUSES AND DOING SOMETHING
SIGNIFICANT AND PROTECTIVE ABOUT
IT WHEN IT DOES OCCUR.
I AM JOINED TODAY BY JESSICA
STANDARD WITH EQUAL RIGHTS
ADVOCATES THE CO SPONSOR OF THIS
BILL.
THANK YOU FIRST WITH US PLEASE
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE MY NAME IS
JESSICA STENDER AND I'M WITH
EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES WERE
PROUD CO SPONSOR OF US BEFORE.
NINE THREE FOR OVER FORTY FIVE
YEARS WE PRACTICE UNDER TIGHT
ONLINE AND RELATED CALIFORNIA
LAW AROUND CIVIL RIGHTS ANTI
DISCRIMINATION IN EDUCATION
EQUITY.
WE'VE SEEN NUMEROUS WOMEN AND
MEN WHO HAVE BEEN VICTIMS OF SEX
HARASSMENT ASSAULT IN SCHOOL AND
HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE PROPER
PROCEDURE RESPONSE FROM THEIR
SCHOOLS. TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE
TO EDUCATION.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT INCLUDING
SEXUAL VIOLENCE NOT ONLY CAUSES
PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM
BUT IMPEDES THE IMPACT OF A BILL
IMPACTS ABILITY OF STUDENTS TO
ACCESS THEIR EDUCATION AS
REQUIRED UNDER LAW.
AMPLE EVIDENCE SHOWS THE
MAJORITY OF VICTIMS COME OUR
WOMEN OR PEOPLE OF COLOR AND
OTHER DISENFRANCHISED GROUPS.
EXISTING STATE AND FEDERAL LAW
PROHIBITS DISCRIMINATION IN
EDUCATION AND REQUIRES SCHOOLS
TO TAKE PRACTICE TAKES STEPS TO
RESPOND TO SEXUAL HUSBAND SEXUAL
VIOLENCE.
AS YOU HEARD FROM SENATOR
JACKSON THERE'S INSUFFICIENT
GUIDANCE IN THE LAW FOR HOUSE
SCHOOL SHOULD RESPOND TO THESE
INCIDENTS AND WE'VE SEEN
FIRSTHAND THE HARM THAT THAT CAN
CAUSE TO THE STUDENTS.
THIS BILL IS CRITICAL BECAUSE IT
DELINEATES TRANSPARENT EQUITABLE
PROCESS SEES THAT SCHOOLS MUST
FOLLOW TO ENSURE A FAIR AND
EQUITABLE PROCESS FOR ALL
PARTIES BY REQUIRING IMPART.
TRAINING FOR SCHOOL OFFICIALS
INVOLVED IN SCHOOL MISCONDUCT
INVESTIGATIONS AN IMPARTIAL
HEARING WERE BOTH PARTIES ARE
GIVEN THE CHANCE RESENT EVIDENCE
WITNESSES AND ALLOW AN
INDEPENDENT FACT FINDER TO FIND
FACTS AND MAKE CREDIBILITY
DETERMINATIONS.
IN THIS PROCESS I PROVIDE
STUDENTS WITH THE RIGHT TO
ATTEND -- ALIVE HEARING --
CONDUCTED BY AN IMPARTIAL
INVESTIGATOR -- WHO WHO PRESENT
QUESTIONS TO BOTH SIDES THAT
HERE THE PARTY ONCE AND FINALLY
I KNOW THAT THE BILL PROVISIONS
ARE IN LINE WITH?
FORMER GOVERNOR BROWN'S -- TASK
FORCE REPORT THAT HE CONVENED --
TO TO WORK TOO BRIGHT
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS ISSUE.
SB FOUR NINE THREE OUTLINES
PROCESS HE'S FOR INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER EDUCATION TO RESPOND TO
INVESTIGATE ALLEGED HARASSMENT
ASSAULT THROUGH A NEUTRAL
PROCESS THAT IS FAIR TO BOTH
COMPLAIN AND RESPONDED.
IN THIS BAY THE BILL AND THE WAY
THE BILL ENSURE THAT CIVIL
RIGHTS -- SAFETY AND WELL BEING
OF ALL STUDENTS ARE MAINTAINING
CALIFORNIA AND FOR THAT REASON
WE RESPECTFULLY REST REQUEST
RIVAL.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU COULD GO FORWARD TO GIVE
US YOUR NAME AND YOUR
AFFILIATION PLEASE.
VALVING WITH ASIAN AMERICANS
ADVANCING JUSTICE CALIFORNIA WE
SUPPORT THIS BILL.
AND A KELLY WITH THE ALAMEDA
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE IN SUPPORT.
MARIO GUERRERO ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION
STRONG SUPPORT.
OBLIVIOUS MID WITH THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA STUDENT
ESTATE ASSOCIATION IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
CRIMINALITY CHIRLA IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
I KNOW YOUR FIRST CALL WHICH
RAELYNN STRONG SUPPORT.
MEGHAN I'M STRONG A STUDENT AT
UC HASTINGS IN STRONG SUPPORT
THIS BILL.
I'M A FULLER A LAW STUDENT UC
HASTINGS IN STRONG SUPPORT. TO
COULD AFFORD LAW STUDENT AT
STANFORD LAW SCHOOL IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
STEPHANIE IS A WITH THE
COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF
WOMEN AND GIRLS IN SUPPORT.
AMELIA BOKE UC SANTA CRUZ
STUDENT INSTRUCTABLE.
DO IT A RISEN COLVIN STUDENT AT
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
KRISTEN I'M SICK ON BEHALF OF
PEACE OVER VIOLENCE THE IS IN
PACIFIC ISLANDER INSTITUTE ON
GENDER BASED VIOLENCE AND THE
CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP TEN
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON STRONG
SUPPORT.
HI JULIE MCCORMICK -- ON BEHALF
OF THE WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF
CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S POLICY
INSTITUTE A PROUD CO SPONSOR
THIS BILL AS WELL AS IMPAIR
EMPOWERING PACIFIC ISLANDERS
COMMUNITIES -- BOTH IN VERY
STRONG SUPPORT.
MINDY GARDEN WITH THE LA
BLOODWORK A SEDAN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE AND
SUPPORTS.
CNN IS THEIR OPPOSITION.
I'LL TAKE THREE WITNESSES AT THE
TABLES.
MY NAME IS CYNTHIA GARRETT I'M A
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY AND PROFIT.
THAT SEEKS -- DUE PROCESS AND
FAIR PROCEDURES IN TITLE NINE
PROCEEDINGS.
I'M GOING TO BECAUSE WE DON'T
HAVE ANYBODY HERE TODAY ANY
PARENTS WHO NORMALLY SPEAK WITH
US.
I'M GOING TO JUST READ SOME OF
THEIR COMMENTS THAT THEY'VE SENT
TO ME.
MY SON'S PHYSICIAN ASKED HIM HOW
OFTEN HE THINKS OF KILLING
HIMSELF MY SON REPLIED NEARLY
EVERY DAY.
DURING THE CAR RIDE HOME MY SON
TOLD ME HE FELT EVERYTHING HAD
BEEN RIPPED FROM HIM ALL HIS
HOPES AND DREAMS WERE SHATTERED
THE MOMENT HIS COLLEGE EXPELLED
HIM FOR A SEXUAL ASSAULT HE DID
NOT COMMIT.
WHILE IT WAS CLEAR IN THE END
THAT SHE COMPLETELY FABRICATED
HER CLAIMS OF MY SON WAS LEFT
SUICIDAL WITH SEVERE MENTAL
ILLNESS. TO EXTENSIVE
HOSPITALIZATIONS THREE LOS
SEMESTERS AT SCHOOL NINETY
THOUSAND DOLLARS AN OUT OF
POCKET LOSSES AND A COMPLETE
LOSS OF HIS HOPES.
DREAMS AND POSSIBILITIES A
TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE.
AS A PARENT WHO LIVE THIS
PROCESS I SAW MY INNOCENCE SON
LOSE EVERYTHING HAS HOPES DREAMS
ANY TRUST.
WE PICKED HIM UP OFF THE CAMPUS
LAWN AND A CRUMBLE IN VOMITING
AFTER MEETING WITH THE D..
I DIDN'T SLEEP FOR MONTHS
WORRIED HE TAKE HIS OWN LIFE
PULLING HIM FROM THE DEPTHS OF
DESPAIR.
THIS IS REALITY IT'S REAL AND IN
OUR CASE THERE WAS NO SEX HE
SAID NO WHEN A GIRL CAME ON TO
HIM.
THE NIGHTMARE OF THE CAMPUS
PROCESS ROCKED OUR FAMILIES
BROUGHT US TO OUR KNEES I PRAY
FOR THE DAY I COULD TELL MY
STORY TO SENATORS.
IN HEARING ONLY THEN WILL I FEEL
HER.
I REMEMBER THE PAIN I REMEMBER
CRYING WHEN I BACK TO VACUUM THE
LIVING I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN MOURNING
THE LOSS OF MY SON'S DREAMS.
I DIDN'T SLEEP BECAUSE I WAS
WORRIED I'D FIND HIM DEAD IN THE
MORNING WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM WAS
A NIGHTMARE AND IT AFFECTED OUR
ENTIRE FAMILY.
IT STILL HURTS I FELT LIKE I
COULDN'T KEEP MY CHILDREN SAFE.
WHAT I REMEMBER MOST IS A SMILE
THE PRIDE BEAMING FROM HIS FACE
THAT FIRST DAY AT HIS DREAM
COLLEGE HE HAD WORKED SO HARD TO
GET THERE WHAT COMES FROM TITLE?
NINE SUICIDE WATCH ANXIETY
DEPRESSION PTSD WHO CAN YOU
TRUST.
TRYING TO PICK HIMSELF UP FIGURE
OUT HOW TO LIVE AGAIN TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COULD HAVE
BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.
HIS LIFE MATTERS OR IT SHOULD.
ACCUSED OR TREATED AS WE ALL
KNOW VERY DIFFERENTLY IN THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS AND ACCUSED
ACTING DEFENSIVE IS ATTITUDE MY
SON'S ADJUDICATOR BULLY CAM AND
USED INTIMIDATION TACTICS HE
CAME OVER STOOD WAY TOO CLOSE
HOVERING OVER HIM AND
AGGRESSIVELY QUESTIONING HIM.
ABOUT EVERYTHING A Q. STUDENTS
ARE NOT SUBJECTED ACCUSING
STUDENTS ARE NOT SUBJECTED THAT
TREATMENT.
THIS WAS A SCHOOL HE LOVED AND
BELIEVED WOULD BE FAIR HE WAS
TREATED LIKE A CRIMINAL.
THE ADMINISTRATOR TOLD HIM THAT
A FEMALE STUDENT CAN CHANGE HER
MIND ABOUT WHETHER SHE REALLY
MEANT TO HAVE SEX MONTHS LATER
REGARDLESS OF HEALTH THINGS HAD
APPEARED AT THE TIME.
I ALMOST FELL OUT OF MY CHAIR.
THIS ADMINITRATOR RECOMMENDED
OUR SON BE EXPELLED BASED SOLELY
ON THE ACCUSER'S VERSION OF
EVENTS DID NO INVESTIGATION
COLLECTED NO EVIDENCE.
OUR SON APPEALED AND HIRED AN
ATTORNEY AND WAS THAT EVENTUALLY
FOUND NOT RESPONSIBLE.
EVEN SO LONG TERM HIS PSYCHE
SPIRIT AND REPUTATION HAVE BEEN
DAMAGED WE PRAY TIME WILL HEAL.
THE ACCUSER HAD NO REPLICA
QUESTIONS FOR MAKING A FALSE
CLAIM MA'AM I NEED TO WRAP UP
PLEASE SEND THEM [inaudible]
EVERYONE MARK.
SOMETHING ROB PLEASE SOMETHING
DEEP INSIDE WE TOLD ME TO GO
HOME I PACKED UP MY WORK HEADED
OUT THE DOOR AS I DROVE I FELT
PANIC WELL UP INSIDE OF ME.
I KNEW SOMETHING WAS WRONG I
TRIED TO TALK MYSELF OUT OF IT
ONCE WENT HOME I WENT STRAIGHT
TO THE GARAGE OPENING THE DOOR
GAZING UP.
I SEE FINGERS FUMBLING AROUND A
ROPE WHAT KIND OF ROPE FORTY GET
THAT I GLANCE DOWN TENNIS SHOES
TEETERING ON A LARGE BUCKET.
MY FACE MEETS HIS TEAM TEARS
STREAMING DOWN HIS FACE HE HAS
BROKEN HIS LOSS I START TO SHAKE
MY VOICE CRACKS THROUGH MY TEARS.
HONEY THIS ISN'T THE WAY STOP TO
HELP HIM DOWN TAKE THE ROPE FROM
HIS NECK HOLDING TIGHT.
I WON'T LET GO I WILL FIGHT FOR
ALL OF US AND THAT STUDENT ALSO
WAS FOUND NOT RESPONSIBLE
EVENTUALLY [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU GOOD MORNING MY NAME'S
MARK HALF WAY I'M AN ATTORNEY --
IN LOS ANGELES AND I HEAR THIS
MORNING THAT MY PARTIES ARE
GOING UP.
THANK HEAVEN FOR TWENTY YEARS
WELL I THEN THEN THAT COVERS
MOST HERE HAVE LIMITED TIME YOU
CAN SPEAK ON THE SUBJECT YOU CAN
SPEAK ON ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT
IN MY POWER DIRT STAY RIGHT.
PLEASE -- MY PARTNERED JENNA
PARKER AND I'VE REPRESENTED OVER
A HUNDRED AND FIFTY STUDENTS IN
CALIFORNIA AND ELSEWHERE
INCLUDING SOME FORTY COURT CASES
AGAINST PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES THE
CASCADE SYSTEM THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA SYSTEM.
INCLUDING THE RECENT DECISION OR
JANUARY OF DOUGH FOR SICILY
WHICH IS CHANGE THE ENTIRE
STRUCTURE.
OF HOW THESE CASES IS SUPPOSED
TO BE DETERMINED AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SYSTEM
AND ELSEWHERE.
THAT HELP TO FIND THAT THE
PRESENT SYSTEM WAS LACKING IN
TWO FOUR PROCESS IN
FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.
I ALSO AM THE FATHER OF THREE
DAUGHTERS TWO OF WHOM ARE STILL
IN COLLEGE THE BENEFITTED FROM
TITLE NINE AND WE'RE STUDENT
ATHLETES.
AND I'M CERTAINLY STRONGLY IN
FAVOR OF EVERY EFFORT THAT CAN
BE DONE TO ADDRESS SEXUAL
VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES BUT HE CAN'T
COME AT THE COST.
OF DUE PROCESS AND FUNDAMENTAL
FAIRNESS.
AND AND PROCEDURES AND RIGHTS
THAT ARE FAMILIAR TO ALL OF US
IN GUARANTEED BY THE
CONSTITUTION AND HAVE BEEN HARD --
WON RECENT COURT CASES HAVE
SHOWN THE CROSS EXAMINATION IS
IS UTTERLY VITAL BEFORE NEUTRAL
FACT FINDERS IN ORDER TO REACH
THE TRUTH AND A FAIR DEFENSE.
THIS BILL GOT EIGHTY EFFORT.
ANY ABILITY FOR AN ACTUAL CROSS
EXAMINATION THE BACK AND FORTH
QUESTION AND ANSWER THE DEBATE
THAT'S GOING ON NOW.
IT MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO HAPPEN
AT THE HEARING LEVEL IF YOU TAKE
OUT SUBSECTION TWO THEN THE BILL
FIND IT ALLOWS FOR CROSS
EXAMINATION.
AND ALLOWS FOR THE PROTECTION OF
OF VICTIMS BY APPEARING.
IN A BY VIDEO CONFERENCE -- FOR
ELSE.
OR SOME OTHER MEANS THAT
PROTECTS THEM TRAUMA INFORMED AS
A PROBLEM ONLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT
DEFINED IN THE LAW.
TRUST NO ONE CAN OBJECT TO
VICTIMS BEING TREATED WITH
RESPECT.
AND WITH -- WITH CARE AND GREAT
COMPASSION.
BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE AN IMPARTIAL
INVESTIGATOR START OUT BY
BELIEVING THAT THE ACCUSED IS
GUILTY WHICH IS OFTEN WHAT
TRAUMA INFORMED TO MEANS.
THE INVESTIGATOR HAS TO START
OUT BY BELIEVING THE VICTIM
THERE.
FOR THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS NOW
ON THE ON THE ACCUSED TO PROVE
THEMSELVES INNOCENT.
THAT SHIFTS THE BURDEN OF PROOF
WHICH ALSO IS NOT MENTIONED IN
THIS IN THIS BILL AND IT ALSO
DOES NOT MENTION THE PRESUMPTION
OF INNOCENCE FOR THE ACCUSED.
SO IT IMPROPERLY TRANSFERS THOSE --
BURDENS TO AN ACCUSED AND
ACCUSER NOT SIMPLY MALE STUDENTS
I THINK OF A DRIVE BUT I I CITED
SEVERAL EXAMPLES -- I'VE GOT
MANY OTHER CASES THAT INVOLVE --
EITHER SAME SEX OR A FEMALE --
PERPETRATOR AND IT'S WHOEVER
GETS TO THE TITLE NINE OFFICE
FIRST IS THE ONE THAT WINS
BECAUSE OF THE PRESUMPTIONS.
AND IF THERE'S NO PROTECTIONS
FOR THE ACCUSED THEN WHAT
HAPPENS IS IF YOU'RE ACCUSED YOU
LOSE.
AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING
AND THAT'S WHY SO MANY COURT
CASES HAVE GONE AGAINST THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA THIRTY
AND IT ROUTES STATE SYSTEM -- I
WOULD URGE THAT THE BILL BE
AMENDED FURTHER I HAVEN'T SEEN
THE NEW AMENDMENTS PERHAPS MY
POSITION WOULD CHANGE.
BUT I SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE OF
DOZENS AND DOZENS OF HEARINGS.
WITH BOTH VICTIMS AND
PERPETRATORS IN CAMPUS HEARINGS
AND ALSO DEALING WITH IT IN
COURT AND WITH THE CALIFORNIA
COURT OF APPEAL.
THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO
BE FIXED BUT THIS BILL DOES NOT
TO IT [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THAT'S WITH US PLEASE I UP MY
NAME A GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS
STEPHEN SO OVER I'M AN ATTORNEY
IN THE CALIFORNIA STATE
UNIVERSITY'S OFFICE OF GENERAL
COUNSEL -- WE SUPPORT STRONGLY
THE CONCEPT OF THE BILL IN THE
VAST MAJORITY WITH PROVISIONS
HOWEVER IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED OUR
POSITION IS OPPOSED LESS AMENDED --
THE CSU STRONGLY EMBRACES THE
IDEA AT THE HEART OF AS BEFORE
NINETY THREE THAT ALL STUDENTS
HAVE A RIGHT TO AN EDUCATION
FREE FROM SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND
THAT UNIVERSITIES HAVE A VITAL
ROLE IN KEEPING THEIR STUDENTS
SAFE.
BUT WE DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT
CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE BILL AS
CURRENTLY PROPOSED I KNOW OUR
TIME IS LIMITED SO I'D LIKE TO
FOCUS ON ONE OUR BIGGEST CONCERN
THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
AS THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS IN
PROFITS TO THE BILL AND CENTER
JACKSON POINTED OUT SEXUAL
VIOLENCE REMAINS A SERIOUS
PROBLEM.
ON CAMPUSES BUT WHAT DOESN'T GET
AS MUCH ATTENTION IS THE WORK OF
CAMPUS TITLE NINE COORDINATORS
AND OTHER EMPLOYEES WHO ARE
INVOLVED IN RESPONDING TO
INVESTIGATING AND REMEDIATING
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
AND WHO ARE COMMITTED TO
ENSURING A FAIR PROCESS FOR ALL
STUDENTS.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR OTHER
INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
BUT HAVING MET THE TITLE NINE
TEAMS AT OUR TWENTY THREE
CAMPUSES -- WHICH WERE CREATED
WITHOUT ANY EXTERNAL FUNDING
VIRTUALLY FROM SCRATCH OVER THE
PAST SEVERAL YEARS I CAN TELL
YOU THAT THESE ARE CONSCIENTIOUS
PEOPLE WHO FOLLOW THE LAW AND
THE POLICIES IMPLEMENTING IT.
WHEN THEY GO TO WORK THEY KNOW
THERE'S A CHANCE THAT DESPITE
THEIR BEST EFFORTS IT WILL BE
PART OF A LAWSUIT FILED BY AN
ATTORNEY FOR A COMPLAINANT FOR
RESPONDENT WERE BOTH?
THIS WOULD NOT SEEM TO BE IN THE
BEST INTERESTS OF OUR STUDENTS.
IT IS A FACT OF LIFE OF COURSE
IN TITLE NINE PROVIDES A RIGHT
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AS TO
THE CALIFORNIA EQUITY AND HIGHER
EDUCATION ACT.
BOTH OF THESE STATUTES EVER
FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION AND
ENSURING EQUAL ACCESS TO
EDUCATION.
BY CONTRAST SB FOUR NINETY
THREES PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
ENSURES THAT IT IS MORE
ANALOGOUS TO A SET OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS TO
TIE IN A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
TO A BILL OF SUCH BREATH -- NO
OFFENSE MISTER HATHAWAY -- I
SHOULD ADD THAT LITIGATION IS
COSTLY ON THE STUDENTS.
FINANCIALLY AND EMOTIONALLY AND
FAVORS THOSE WITH GREATER
RESOURCES.
OUT ONE LAST POINT IF I COULD --
THE MOST RECENT MOCK UP OF THE
BILL PROPOSES THAT LITIGANTS BE
REQUIRED TO SHOW INJURY WHILE WE
APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS IN THE
CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.
THE CHANGES RESPECTFULLY DO NOT
ADEQUATELY ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS
TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE SECTION --
SIX SIX TO EIGHT ONE POINT EIGHT
B. THREE L. LITTLE AYE AYE
STATES AT UNIVERSITY SHALL QUOTE
CREATE REASONABLE PROCEDURES FOR
THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS
INCLUDING.
ELLIPSIS REASONABLE AND
EQUITABLE EVIDENTIARY GUIDELINES
DEADLINES AND PAGE OR WORD
LIMITATIONS QUOTE.
BUT WHAT EVIDENTIARY RULES
DEADLINES AND WERE LIMITATIONS
ARE QUOTE REASONABLE.
IT IS SUBJECTIVE AND A PARTY WHO
EXPERIENCES AN UNFAVORABLE
RESULT COULD EASILY CLAIM THAT
IT RESULTED FROM THOSE QUOTE
UNFAIR RULES. TO PREVENT THIS
RESULT WE HAVE PROPOSED AT THE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR
DETERMINING WHEN AN EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTION IS VIOLATED THE LAW.
UNLESS SUCH A CHANGE IS MADE WE
RESPECTFULLY TAKING OPPOSE
UNLESS AMENDED POSITION.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
Q..
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION IF YOU
COULD JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND
YOUR AFFILIATION PLEASE MY NAME
IS LINDA WHO SIGNED THE CSU
SYSTEM WIDE TITLE NINE
COORDINATOR -- AND WE ARE TAKING
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED STANCE
THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING ALEX GRAVES OF THE
ICC WE REPRESENT A PRIVATE
NONPROFIT COLLEGES UNIVERSITIES
WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPOSE MUST
AMENDED POSITION THANK THE
AUTHOR AND HER STAFF FOR ALL THE
WORK AROUND SOME OTHER ISSUES
OUTLINED BY CSU WE ARE CURRENTLY
IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS SUZANNE
TAYLOR AND THE SYSTEM I.
TIMELINE DIRECTOR FOR THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA'S ALSO
TAKING OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED FOR
REASONS SIMILAR TO ON THOSE
OUTLINED A CSU.
WE ARE ON THE RECORD WITH OUR
POSITION THANK YOU.
MY NAME'S AMANDA I'M WITH
CALIFORNIA MOM'S EMPOWERING MEN
AND BOYS AND WE STRONGLY OPPOSE
THIS BILL.
THANK YOU.
JOHN ACCUSED STATE FALSELY KEYS
STUDENT PARENT STRONGLY OPPOSED.
NICHOLS HALFWAY STUDENT OPPOSE.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
RIGHT SIGNAL BRING IT TO THE
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS COMMENTS
[inaudible]
THE STRESS. TO THE WITNESS I
EIGHT I OFFER MY CONDOLENCES TO
THE MOTHER WHOSE SON WAS FALSELY
ACCUSED AND HAD TO GO THROUGH
ALL OF THAT -- AS YOU KNOW THERE
ARE ALSO MANY WOMEN WHO SUFFERS
THROUGH THIS.
AND DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE
THROUGH THE PROCESS EITHER
BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING ALTHOUGH
THEY ARE THE WITH THE WITH THE
VICTIM THEY ARE PUT ON THE STAND
AS IF THEY WERE -- THEY WERE
GUILTY.
SO IT IT'S AN IMPERFECT PROCESS
I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE TO THE
SENATORS EFFORTS.
IN THIS SHE HAS BEEN A CHAMPION
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO
ADDRESS.
VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES -- THAT
AFFECT SO MANY OF OUR STUDENTS --
BUT I DID WANT TO COMMENT
REGARDING THE STUDENT THE CHIP
THE CHIU REFER.
TO THANK YOU OTHER QUESTIONS
COMMENTS THIS GALLAGHER.
YEAH THANK YOU SENATOR AND I YOU
KNOW I I STRUGGLE.
WITH THIS BILL.
AS I DID WITH YOUR PREVIOUS
LEGISLATION -- BECAUSE YOU KNOW
I THINK WE ALL AGREE WITH WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WHICH IS.
FOR FAR TOO LONG -- VICTIMS
HAVEN'T FELT COMFORTABLE COMING
FORWARD.
BECAUSE OF THE BURDENSOME.
SAYS BECAUSE OF STIGMA AND OTHER
THINGS THAT ARE ARE PRESENT --
ONCOLOGY CAN'T BUT NOT JUST ON
COLLEGE CAMPUSES AND IN A LOT OF
DIFFERENT ASPECTS RIGHT -- THE
YOU KNOW THE PUBLICITY AND
EVERYTHING THAT COMES WITH THAT
THE PRESSURES -- AND SO I THINK
EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THE
MOTIVATION OBVIOUSLY BEHIND
WANTING TO ENSURE THAT VICTIMS
DO FEEL COMFORTABLE.
COMING FORWARD -- IN THIS CASE
ON OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES.
BUT AB AT THE SAME TIME I THINK
WE HAVE A COUPLE DIFFERENT
THINGS GOING ON ONE WE STILL
DON'T REALLY HAVE.
CLEAR DIRECTION ON TITLE NINE
REGULATIONS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
SO THAT'S STILL A SHIFTING
LANDSCAPE AS IT IS.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO
KNOW WHAT ARE THOSE FINAL
REGULATIONS BEFORE.
MAY WE DELVE INTO THIS SPACE.
AND ARE THEY GONNA BE LOOPHOLES
CREATED BY US CREATING SOME SORT
OF STANDARD.
AND OUR UNIVERSITIES ARE THEY
GONNA HAVE TO BE FORCED TO WHAT
STANDARD THEY COMPLY WITH -- OR
DO THEY GET SUED.
FOR FOLLOWING ONE STANDARD BUT
NOT FALL IN THE OTHER -- AND
THEN I THINK MAYBE MORE
FUNDAMENTALLY IN AND FOR US IN
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
IS THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING DUE
PROCESS.
BECAUSE ON THE RESPONDENTS SIDE.
THESE ARE.
JUST AS THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS
ALLEGATION THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN
VERY SERIOUSLY -- FOR THE
VICTIMS IT ALSO HAS TO BE TAKEN
VERY SERIOUSLY THAT WE PROVIDE
FULL DUE PROCESS FOR THE PERSON
THAT'S BEING ACCUSED
[inaudible]
AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT UNDER
THESE RULES.
YOU KNOW WE'RE CHANGING THE
STANDARD OF EVIDENCE.
WERE CHANGING IN THE ABILITY TO
GET AN APPEAL.
AND MAYBE MORE FUNDAMENTALLY
WERE TAKEN AWAY THE RIGHT TO
DIRECTLY CROSS EXAMINE.
WITNESSES -- AND THE VICTIM AS
MUCH AS I KNOW THAT HAVING TO
TESTIFY AND BE CROSS EXAMINED.
I COULD IMAGINE HAVING TO BE IN
THAT SITUATION RIGHT.
BUT NONE THE LESS ONE OF OUR
FUNDAMENTAL.
YOU KNOW PRINCIPLES -- IN THIS
COUNTRY AND UNDER OUR RULE OF
LAW.
IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE ACCUSED OF
CRIME YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO
CONFRONT THOSE WHO ARE WITNESSES
AGAINST YOU -- IN THAT YOU HAVE
THOSE DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS IN
PLACE -- TO HELP INSURE THAT
THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF
INNOCENCE AND THAT YOU'RE.
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN.
GUILTY -- AND SO THAT I THINK
THOSE ARE THE CONCERNS THAT I
HAVE IS.
IS OVER YOU KNOW HOW WE ENSURING.
THAT WE HAVE THAT DO PRESS
RECOGNIZES IN A CRIMINAL
PROCEEDING I RECOGNIZE THAT
HOWEVER.
YOU KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES OF
THIS ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT -- WE
ALL LOVE THE ABILITY TO GET A
GOOD EDUCATION AND HOW WE WANT
PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THIS.
STATE TO HAVE ACCESS TO HIGH
QUALITY EDUCATION.
SO THE TAKING OF THAT AWAY IS
OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT'S VERY
SERIOUS AND NOT TO MENTION.
IF YOU ARE FOUND GUILTY BY THIS
BODY.
ALL OF EVERYTHING THAT COMES
WITH THAT RIGHT -- AND IF YOU
WERE TRULY INNOCENT AND FELT
LIKE YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE FULL
OPPORTUNITY. TO PUT ON YOUR CASE
TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE --
THAT'S SIGNIFICAN I THINK THAT'S
WHERE THE GOVERNOR WAS GOVERNOR
BROWN -- WHEN HE VETOED
LEGISLATION LAST YEAR?
IS THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE ENOUGH
TO REALLY ENSURE THAT DUE
PROCESS PROTECTION.
IS IS PART OF THIS.
WHILE ALSO TAKING CARE OF THE
THE UNDERLYING MOTIVATION WHICH
IS A VICTIMS.
HAVE TO FEEL COMFORTABLE COMING
FOR BUT THEIR CLAIM SO MAYBE YOU
CAN JUST SPEAK TO SOME OF THOSE
CHARITIES -- CERTAINLY AND THIS
BILL IS ALL ABOUT TO PROCESS.
AS I MENTIONED IN MY OPENING
COMMENTS EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS ARE EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS THEY'RE NOT COURTS
OF LAW.
OF THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN WOEFULLY
LACKING WHEN IT COMES TO THE TO
THE PROTECTIONS OF TITLE NINE
AND SO AT IN THE PAST COUPLE
YEARS -- THIS HAS BECOME A FOCAL
POINT IN TWENTY FIFTEEN THE
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION -- AFTER
TWO YEARS OF ROBUST RESEARCH
CAME OUT WITH A WHAT THEY CALL
THE DEAR COLLEAGUE LETTER.
WHICH WAS A DESIGNED TO GIVE THE
PARAMETERS TO CREATE THE
PARAMETERS OF WHAT DUE PROCESS
WAS TO BE AND HOW TITLE NINE WAS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED.
IT WAS A GUN WITH WHAT WAS THAT
ME BECAUSE I STILL AM AND
CONFUSED BY THE DEAR COLLEAGUES
IS THAT ACTUALLY A REGULATION.
IT WAS IT SEEMED LIKE A REALLY
HALF MEASURE FROM YOU KNOW IT
WAS A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT TO THE
UNIVERSITIES AND IT WAS DESIGNED
TO CREATE A DUE PROCESS --
CONSTRUCT.
OSAP BUT EXCUSE ME YOU'RE NOT.
THANK YOU.
I IT WAS A IT WAS A GUIDANCE IT
WAS A DOCUMENT TO GUIDE OUR
UNIVERSITIES BECAUSE AS WE ALL
KNOW UP UNTIL.
OF WELL EVEN EXISTING NOW
THERE'S REALLY BEEN NO DIRECTION
AS TO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT SO THIS WAS
A DOCUMENT. TO GUIDE
UNIVERSITIES WHAT HAPPENED IS
DURING THE RAID DURING THE
CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
MR TRUMP.
HAS PULLED THIS BACK HIS CURRENT
SECRETARY OF EDUCATION IS MADE
IT CLEAR THAT SHE THINKS MOST OF
THESE CLAIMS ARE FALSE.
AND HAS INDICATED HER INTENTION
TO PULL THE PLUG IF YOU WILL ON
THIS GUIDANCE PROCESS AND CREATE
HER OWN VERSION OF WHAT DUE
PROCESS SHOULD BE.
SO WHEN THE GOVERNOR VETOED THIS
BILL HE SAID YOU KNOW I'D LIKE
TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO
CREATING A SYSTEM THAT WILL
PROVIDE THIS TO PROCESS.
THAT'S WHAT HE DID AND MOST OF
THE BILL THAT YOU SEE HERE TODAY
IS BASEDUPON THE DIRECTIVES
THAT WERE GIVEN BY THE
GOVERNOR'S THREE PERSON PANEL OF
EXPERTS ALL EXTRAORDINARILY.
QUALIFIED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE
AND THAT WE'VE INCORPORATED IN
THIS BILL BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR
THAT THE TITLE -- NINE
REDEFINITION DAD IS BEEN
PROPOSED ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL IS
INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT I BELIEVE
THE POLICY IN CALIFORNIA IS AND
SHOULD BE.
DEALING WITH A TRYING TO ADDRESS
THIS SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM THAT WE
HAVE ON OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES AND
AGAIN I THINK IT'S CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT IN YOU YOU MENTIONED
IT YOURSELF.
THIS IS NOT A CRIMINAL
PROCEEDING.
AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY
CRITICAL IT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDING BUT IT'S AN IMPORTANT.
ONE AND I AS A SOMEONE WHO
PRACTICED LAW FOR OVER TWENTY
YEARS APPRECIATE AND I'M
COMMITTED TO THE CONCEPT OF
FAIRNESS AND DUE PROCESS AND
THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL IS.
IT REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE AN
INDEPENDENT WE HAVE IMPARTIAL
HEARINGS WE HAVE.
AN INDEPENDENT FACT FINDER WHO
MAKES A DETERMINATION BASED UPON
ALL THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN
PRESENTED BY BOTH SIDES.
NOW SOME OF THE STORIES THAT
HAPPENED FEW YEARS AGO WERE
THAT BECAUSE UNIVERSITIES DIDN'T
HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE THEY
WOULD JUST ASSUME WELL SOMEONE'S
MADE A CLAIM AND YOU'RE OUT OF
SCHOOL -- AND THAT ISN'T THE
SYSTEM THAT WE ARE DEVELOPING
HERE THE SYSTEM WE'RE DEVELOPING
HERE IS THAT THEIR ALLEGATIONS
MADE THAT WHEN A VICTIM COMES
FORWARD SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES OR
HAS BEEN.
A SEXUALLY.
ASSAULTED OR RAPED THAT THEY ARE
GIVEN THE KIND OF CARE THAT WE
KNOW VICTIMS HAVE NOW WE DIDN'T
BRING.
TODAY TO TESTIFY SOME OF THE
HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO
WHO STORIES WOULD TEAR AT YOUR
HEART STRINGS TO AND THE
EMOTIONAL TRAUMA THEY'VE BEEN
THROUGH THE NUMBER OF VICTIMS OF
THESE CRIMES.
WHO LEAVE COLLEGE?
THEY LEAVE BECAUSE THEY ARE SO
DISTRAUGHT AT HAVING TO CONFRONT
THERE ARE THERE THE RAPIST THEIR
ABUSER.
SO THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE
WE'RE NOW I MEAN WE'RE TRYING TO
DO THINGS TO STOP THIS WE'VE GOT
YES MEANS YES ON OUR COLLEGE
CAMPUSES SO THAT WE'RE TEACHING
ABOUT.
INFORMED CONSENT TRYING TO
CHANGE THE CULTURE OF RAPE ON
CAMPUS BUT IN THE MEAN TIME WHEN
WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES
THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THE VICTIM
OF SEXUAL ASSAULT ON CAMPUS.
THERE WERE IS NOW A PROCESS THAT
HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED TO THE
UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA FOR
EXAMPLE IS DONEI THINK A VERY
SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECTED JOB
DEALING WITH THIS TO PROVIDE
THAT TO PROCESS.
LET ME JUST THROW OUT THE NOTION
THAT.
PLAGIARISM IS ENDED IT IS AN
OFFENCE ON COLLEGE THAT CAN GET
YOU BOOTED OUT.
BUT WE AND WE HAVE IN PLACE
CERTAIN SYSTEMS FOR THAT WHICH
AREN'T ANYWHERE NEAR AS
PROTECTIVE AS WHAT WE'RE DOING
HERE BUT THAT'S AN
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING.
THAT'S A PROCEEDING WHERE
SOMEONE CAN BE -- FORCED OUT OF
THEIR COLLEGE EXPERIENCE SO
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS WE'RE
NOT TALKING ABOUT A CRIMINAL
PROCEEDING WHERE YOU HAVE PROOF
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THAT'S IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GO TO
A COURT.
AND MOST OF THESE VICTIMS
IRONICALLY DO NOT.
THEY TRUST WANT TO BE FREE OF
THEIR ACCUSER THEY WANT TO BE
VINDICATED FROM THIS MOST OF
THESE FOLKS DON'T NECESSARILY
EVEN WANT THEM TO BE THROWN OUT
OF SCHOOL.
BUT THERE BUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO NOW IS GET A HANDLE ON
WHAT THE NEEDS ARE OF THE VICTIM
WHAT THE ALLEGATIONS ARE AND HOW
WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS FAIR
TO EVERYONE.
THE ACCUSED AND THE ACCUSERS
THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES AND
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO CONTINUE
A WORKING ON CONCERNS THAT WE'VE
HAD HERE TODAY WE'VE GOT
AMENDMENTS THAT -- EQUAL RIGHTS
ADVOCATES HAS BEEN WORKING ON
WITH MY A STAFF -- THAT WILL
CONTINUE TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME
OF THOSE ISSUES TO GET TO THAT
SWEET SPOT I THINK WE ARE.
VERY CLOSE IF NOT THERE I THINK
NOW WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A
PHILOSOPHICAL DISAGREEMENT BUT
THIS IS A MEASURE THAT WE NEED
TO PUT IN PLACE FOR THOSE WHO
ARE WHO.
CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE BEEN
FALSELY ACCUSED AS WELL AS
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN VICTIMS OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT ON OUR COLLEGE
CAMPUSES IN WITH THAT STUFF.
I HOPE THAT THAT RESPONSE YOUR
QUESTION NOW IS IS VERY
SPONSORED BUT JUST REALLY
QUICKLY TO TO SUMMARIZE I HEAR
YOU SAYING.
I FULLY SUPPORT MAKING THIS
PROTECTING DUE PROCESS IN THESE
[inaudible]
CDNS SO.
I THINK A LOT OF THESE CASES ARE
GONNA INVOLVE PRIMARILY WITNESS
TESTIMONY.
FROM THE VICTIM AND THE
RESPONDENT -- AND THEN ANY
WITNESSES THAT CAN TESTIFIED
OTHER THING SO HAVING IN PLACE
THE ABILITY TO CROSS EXAMINE
WITNESSES.
WOULD SEEM TO ME TO BE A PRETTY
IMPORTANT WELL WELL TO HAVE A
SYSTEM -- AND ALL THAT -- IT'S
UNDER THE VETERAN LANGUAGE AS I
UNDERSTAND IT YOU.
DON'T ALLOW FOR DIRECT CROSS
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES IS THAT
CORRECT.
YEAH I CAN RESPOND TO THAT --
THE THE BILL PROVIDES -- FOR
LIVE CROSS EXAMINATION AND
THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE
CASE THAT MR GALLAGHER MENTIONED --
SO THE BILL ALLOWS THE NEUTRAL
JUDICATA DECISION MAKER TO
PRESENT QUESTIONS TO BOTH
PARTIES -- THAT THE OTHER PARTY
REQUESTS AND THAT CAN BE DONE IN
A LIVE SETTING IT'S NOT DIRECT
WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED BY ALL THE
OTHERS THE REASON FOR THAT
PROVISION IS INCONSISTENT WITH
THE CASE LAW AND WITH GOVERNOR
BROWN SOUTH FORCE.
IS THAT WE'VE SEEN THAT --
SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE
HAVE BEEN SEVERELY ABUSE WHEN
THEY ARE BEING QUESTIONED
DIRECTLY BY EITHER THE PERSON
WHO IS THEY ARE ACCUSING OF
RAPING THEM OR THAT PERSON'S
ADVISER OR OR LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVE.
A SERVICE PROVIDES THE OF
RESPONDED TO QUESTIONS THE
PERSON MAKING THE ALLEGATION
ABOUT WHATEVER THEY WANT TO ASK
ABOUT ANOTHER ARBITRATOR THROUGH
QUESTIONS IMAGES THE NEUTRAL --
INVESTIGATOR HA.
AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH CASE
THE CASE LAW THAT.
ON TO THAT.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S EVER BEEN
A CASE IN CALIFORNIA AT LEAST IN
THE LAST FIVE OR SIX YEARS WHERE
SOMEONE HAS BEEN DIRECTLY CROSS
EXAMINED.
IN A AND A SETTING OTHER THAN
STAND WILL STAND FOR DOESN'T
EVEN HAVE IT -- SO THERE IS
THERE IT REQUIRES DIRECT CROSS
EXAMINATION THIS BILL REFERS TO
LIVE CROSS EXAMINATION BUT IT'S
NOT LIFE IT COULDN'T BE BETTER
IT'S HAVING TO WRITE DOWN A
QUESTION HAVING IT SUBMITTED TO
ANOTHER PERSON WHO CAN RULE ON
IT SUBMITTED TO THE WITNESS.
WHO CAN ALSO DECIDE NOT TO
ANSWER IT NOT ONLY NOT DECIDE
NOT TO ENTRANCE AT REFUSED TO
ANSWER BUT OBJECT TO IT ON SOME
TYPE OF GROUNDS?
IT IS NOT THE TYPE OF BACK AND
FORTH IS IF HIS KERING HERE
WHERE IDEAS ARE EXPRESSED IN THE
IN THE TRUTH COULD COME OUT IT'S
THE REACTION TO SOMEBODY'S
QUESTION WHY IS IT THAT YOU
CHANGE YOUR TESTIMONY.
HOW COME YOU TOLD THIS PERSON
THAT AND THEY TOLD THIS PERSON
SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
AND IT'S THAT INFORMATION THAT
CAN ONLY COME OUT THROUGH LIFE?
BACK AND FORTH DIALOGUE ANY CAN
BE DONE BY VIDEO BUT I ALSO
WANTED TO MENTION QUICKLY THE
PLAGIARISM ISSUE.
AND I DOUBT ARE GONNA THAT YEAH
THANK.
YOU AND IF I GO TO INDICATE
UNDER THE DOE CASE WHICH WAS
REFERRED.
TO SETS FORTH THE ROAD THE
REQUIREMENT OF EXAMINATION THAT
THAT IS IN THIS BILL.
SO WE'RE FOLLOWING THE CASE LAW
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO
HERE AGAIN THIS IS NOT A
CRIMINAL PROCEEDING.
THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDING AND FOLLOWING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF DOUGH THE
ACCUSED MAY CROSS EXAMINE.
THOSE WITNESSES DIRECTLY OR
INDIRECTLY AT A HEARING WHICH
THE IT WITNESSES APPEAR IN
PERSON OR BY OTHER MEANS VIDEO
CONFERENCING.
BEFORE A NEUTRAL ADJUDICATOR
WITH THE POWER INDEPENDENTLY TO
FIND FACTS TO MAKE CREDIBILITY
ASSESSMENTS THAT'S THE LAW.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL FALLS.
RIGHT BUT IF IF IF YOU CAN'T ASK
THE QUESTION.
YEAH BECAUSE IT SAYS AT THE
HEARING IN WHICH THE WITNESSES
APPEAR IN PERSON UNDER DUB
VERSES ALI AND I WOULD ALSO
POINT OUT THAT DOUGH.
MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT EVEN
THOUGH THIS IS A CIVIL
PROCEEDING.
THIS HAS LIKE SEMI CRIMINAL
IMPLICATIONS AND AND THE AND THE
READ AND THE WHOLE REASONING.
BEHIND DOES IT MAYBE YOU DO IS
ESSENTIALLY THAT YOU DO HAVE TO
HAVE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER
STANDARD. TO PROTECT DUE PROCESS
RIGHT THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE
THAT'S WHY WE PUT THOSE
STANDARDS IN THERE I DON'T KNOW
AND IF YOU'RE RIGHT AND I DO.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WOULD HAVE TO
GIVE THE QUESTION TO THE
ARBITRATOR -- NOT ARBITRATOR BUT
THE ADJUDICATOR.
THEY WOULD RULE ON WHETHER NOT
THAT QUESTION IS ALLOWED TO BE
ASKED WHICH THAT WOULD NEVER BE
THE CASE IN A CROSS EXAM
NORMALLY.
WELL IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN
OBJECT TO A QUESTION IF YOU
COULD NOW THAT THE LORD OUR GOD
JIM THE JUDGE CAN SAY YOUR
OBJECTION IS SUSTAINEDBUT NOT
SEPARATELY FROM.
WHERE THE LIVE WITNESSES BE ABLE
TO ANSWER THE QUESTION DO YOU
UNDERSTAND LIKE YOU WOULD ASK
THE QUESTION?
AND SOMEONE COULD OBJECT THE OF
THE ATTORNEY COULD OBJECT TO THE
QUESTION -- AND IF THE OBJECTION
AS OF HELD IN THE QUESTIONS
WITHDRAWN RIGHT BUT ASSUMING
THAT THERE IS NO OBJECTION THEN
IT'S NOT UP TO THE THE
ADJUDICATOR TO ANSWER ASK THE
QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE
QUESTION IS PROPER OR NOT.
THE PERSON GETS TO ASK THE
QUESTION HAVE A RESPONSE WEATHER
COULD BE BY VIDEO.
CONFERENCE SEEN.
AT THE HEARING RIGHT AND WHAT
I'M HEARING HERE IS THAT THAT
WOULD NOT BE THE CASE YOU HAVE
TO GIVE THESE QUESTIONS IN
ADVANCE. TO THE ADJUDICATOR
WHICH MAKES IT TO ME SOUND LIKE
IT'S NOT.
THE SAME TYPE OF PROCEEDING DOES
THAT MAKE SENSE.
WELL AGAIN IT'S A PROCEEDING
THAT TRIES TO RECOGNIZE THE
FREQUENTLY A VICTIM IS BADGERED
BY A GOOD DEFENSE ATTORNEY.
AND THAT THIS IT HAS.
LEAD TO VICTIMS BEING UNWILLING
TO STEP FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S A
FURTHER.
HARASSMENT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO FIND HERE IS AN
APPROPRIATE HAPPY MEDIUM SO THAT
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED.
CAN FEEL COMFORTABLE ENOUGH TO
STEP FORWARD WITHOUT SUFFERING A
YET AGAIN THE HARASSMENT THE THE
ASSAULT.
THAT TOOK A GOOD CROSS EXAMINER
GOOD DEFENSE ATTORNEY -- IS
LIKELY TO BE ABLE TO PROPOSE AND
THAT IT YOU KNOW IF THEY GO TO A
CRIMINAL COURT.
THEN ALL BETS ARE OFF BUT THIS
IS NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING AND
WHAT WE'VE DONE IS FOLLOW THE
DIRECTIVES -- I GUESS YOU COULD
ARGUE WITH THAT UP THE YOU THE
KAZOO BUT WE HAVE TAKEN THE
PROPOSED A OF PROOF OF
PROVISIONS OF DOLE VERSUS ALLEY
WHICH WAS MENTIONED BY.
THIS GENTLEMAN HERE AND WE'VE
INCORPORATED THEM INTO THIS BILL
BUT THERE HAS TO BE AGAIN
THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT ARBITER
WHO PROBABLY CAN DECIDE WHETHER
OR NOT THAT THAT QUESTION.
IS TOO PROVOCATIVE IS TO COME --
INTIMIDATING.
OF FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE TO ANSWER
I MEAN.
L. AS A AS A PROSECUTOR I WAS IN
COURT WHEN A DEFENSE ATTORNEY
WAS ASKING A RAPE VICTIM HOW DID
SHE KNOW SHE WAS RAPED -- AND
AND ATTEMPT TO RELIVE THAT
EXPERIENCE.
IS ABSOLUTELY HORRIFYING AND
THAT'S IN A CRIMINAL CASE THESE
THESE ARE NOT CRIMINAL CASES WE
HAVE AN INDEPENDENT ARBITRATOR
ADJUDICATOR WHO IS GOING TO
DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT.
BY THE FAX BY THE QUESTIONING BY
THE DEMEANOR OF THE WITNESSES
THE VALIDITY OF THE CLAIM OR NOT
FOR PURPOSES OF SUBSEQUENT
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION WHETHER
IT'S FORCING SOMEONE OUGHT TO
SCHOOL FOR A SEMESTER FORCING
THEY MOVING INTO ANOTHER DORM.
WHATEVER WHATEVER IT IS IT IS
DEEMED APPROPRIATE THESE ARE NOT
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT LIFE ON A COLLEGE
CAMPUS.
I THINK I WOULD IS JUST AND BY
SAYING AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING I THINK THAT.
WE SHOULD TRY TO PUT SOME MORE
WORK INTO ENSURING.
THAT DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS
THERE AND I I THINK WE ALL AGREE
LIKE I CERTAINLY WANT TO CREATE.
AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE PEOPLE ARE
GOING TO BE WILLING TO COME
FORWARD.
WITH THEIR CLAIMS AND AND WE CAN
BACK ON DEFENSE ATTORNEYS WE ALL
HAVE I THINK WE CAN ALL DO. TO
OF A JUDGE WHO WAS A DEFENSE
ATTORNEY WHEN YOUR LONG TIME
WHEN YOU'RE ACCUSED OF A SERIOUS
CRIME OR A SERIOUS OFFENSE SUCH
AS THIS AND DOE DOE DOES SAY HEY
YOU NEED STRONGER PROTECTIONS IN
THESE CASES -- YOU WANT A GOOD
DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND YOU WANT
SOMEONE TO ASK TOUGH QUESTIONS
TO HELP.
INSURE THAT YOUR YOUR CASES IS
FULLY HEARD AND SO I THINK THAT
IS ONE ISSUE THAT WE THAT WE MAY
NEED TO WORK THROUGH AND THEN I
WOULD ALSO SAY THE STANDARD OF
EVIDENCE IN THE WORST PUTTING
THAT PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE.
YEAH THAT'S SORT OF LIKE A
THAT'S CORRECT YEAH VERY YEAH.
AND WHEN YOU'RE ACCUSED OF A
VERY SERIOUS.
FRAN IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDING WE'RE NOT PUTTING
ANYBODY IN JAIL OR PRISON FOR
THIS THIS ANY OTHER INTEREST
CONSEQUENCES I THINK THEY'RE
ALWAYS SERIES CONSEQUENCES AS
THERE ARE TO PLAGIARISM AS I
MENTIONED AS AN EXAMPLE.
I THINK WHICH IS GOING TO HAVE
TO DISAGREE PHILOSOPHICALLY
THANK YOU THIS IS AWFUL I THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD --
AND IT'S DEVASTATING TO HEAR
ABOUT ANYBODY WHO IS FALSELY
ACCUSED IN ANY SITUATION I TAKE
THAT VERY SERIOUSLY.
BUT IF WE HAD THIS MUCH
CONVERSATION FOR DECADES ABOUT
WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN -- VIOLATED
AND GREAT AND ASSAULTED ON
CAMPUS.
AT AS WE'RE GIVING DEFENDANTS --
UP I GUESS YOU'RE NOT DEFENDANTS
NOT CRIMINAL RIGHT NOW THEN WE
WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE.
THE TRUTH IS THAT THAT FOR
GENERATIONS WOMEN IN PARTICULAR
I I KNOW CAN GO BOTH WAYS BUT
WOMEN HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO
SEXUAL ASSAULT ON CAMPUS WITH
VERY LITTLE -- NOTICE EVEN AT
AND IT HASN'T BEEN TAKEN
SERIOUSLY AND I'M SORRY THE
NUMBERS ARE CORRECT ANY OF US
WHO WENT TO COLLEGE CAN TELL YOU
HOW MANY OF OUR FRIENDS -- WHERE
WERE GIVEN DRINKS TO GET DRUNK
TO TAKE BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF
TO BEING PRESSURED TO IN THIS
HAS HAPPENED AND IT AFFECTS
THEIR ENTIRE LIFE?
IN OVERWHELMINGLY THE NUMBERS
WILL SAY FALSE ALLEGATIONS ARE
VERY SMALL BY COMPARISON SO.
IF THERE ARE SUGGESTIONS.
TWEAKS YOU KNOW I KNOW THAT THIS
AUTHOR WORKS WITH THOSE BUT THIS
IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND I I GET
THE FEAR OF THE PEOPLE BEING
FALSE ACCUSED I HAVE FIVE KIDS
FORMER VOICE.
RIGHT THERE THE ALL INNER IN
COLLEGE I I GOT OR HOPEFULLY
MAYBE NOT.
BE REALLY EXPENSIVE -- BUT I'M A
DAUGHTER WHO WHO WENT TO COLLEGE.
EN EN I'M SORRY I WANT THINGS TO
CHANGE IT'S TIME FOR THINGS TO
CHANGE AND IT IS IT WHAT WHAT WE
HAVE PUT UP WITH.
WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CROSS
EXAMINATION OF A BRIEF VICTIM?
WE'VE ALL SEEN WHAT HAPPENS
THERE THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDING BY WHICH WE CAN HAVE
A FAIR DISCOVERY A FAX.
AND AND NOT PUT RE VICTIMIZE
VICTIMS BECAUSE A VAST MAJORITY
OF THESE WOMEN WHO COME THROUGH
OUR ACTUAL REAL VICTIMS A VERY
SMALL MINORITY WE ALWAYS HAVE TO
PROTECT.
THE MINORITY OF FALSE
ALLEGATIONS I I'M THERE I
UNDERSTAND I BELIEVE IN DUE
PROCESS OR THEIR THEIR LITTLE
THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADD FINE
BUT THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORD I MOVE THIS BILL AND I'M.
YOU KNOW SOMEBODY'S GOT TO SPEAK
FOR THE VICTIMS AT SOME POINT.
THE REAL VICTIM HAVE A MOTION IS
THE AND THE SECOND THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
SENATOR YOU MAY CLOSE
[inaudible] OH SORRY.
YOU GOT IT GIVE ME A BETTER
SIGNED THEN SORRY.
TO BOTHER KALRA AND AND I YOU
KNOW.
SOMEONE UPS THAT MARKED AS A
PUBLIC DEFENDER I I CERTAINLY.
UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN OF OF DUE
PROCESS I DO THINK THAT WITH THE
AMENDMENTS AND WITH THE WORK OF
THE AUTHOR.
AND AND THE CHAIR AND HIS STAFF
THAT -- WE'RE EITHER THEY'RE
VERY CLOSE AS INDICATED BY THE
AUTHOR -- AND AND THERE'S
DIPPING OF FACT FINDING FOR THE
PURPOSE OF MISTER HEARING IS
DIFFERENT THAN THE PURPOSE OF
CROSS EXAMINATION A COMMA
PROCEEDING.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S THE
THAT'S THE CRITICAL DIFFERENCE
HERE -- AND ANYONE -- I THINK
THAT.
THE THE THE PURPOSE OF A OF
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING IN
THIS CONTEXT IS NOT ONLY TO GET
THE FACTS ABOUT -- BUT MAY OR
MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED BUT
THERE'S OVER OVER ARCHING
CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY ON THE
CAMPUS AS WELL THAT THAT THAT
GOES.
TO THE PURPOSE OF THESE KINDS OF
HEARINGS AS WELL ALSO I DO HAVE
ONE QUESTION FOR EITHER THE THE
CHAIR OR THE AUTHOR REGARDING.
THE USE OF PROXIMATE CAUSE --
I'VE HAD A BILL TOTALLY ON A
DIFFERENT ISSUE WHERE -- WE'VE
WE CHOSE TO MOVE WITH A
SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR STANDARD
RATHER THAN PROXIMATE CAUSE
SIMPLY BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE
COURTS ARE MOVING AWAY FROM THE
PROXIMATE CAUSE STANDARD.
FOR A SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR AND
GIVE DON'T NEED AN ANSWER RIGHT
NOW BUT SOMETHING TO CONSIDER --
BUT AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WAS
SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED BY
EITHER.
THE COMMITTEE STAFF OR OR CHAIR
OR BY THE AUTHOR AS DO YOU
SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR RATHER THAN --
PROXIMATE CAUSE WHICH SEEMS TO
BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN
OUTDATED STANDARD.
WELL WE'LL BE HAPPY TO LOOK AT
THAT APPRECIATED AND CHESTER TO
TO CLOSE -- WE'RE COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING TO WORK ON THIS BILL --
THERE IS A SWEET SPOT THERE I
THINK WE'RE THERE -- BUT
CERTAINLY WILLING TO CONTINUE
WORKING ON IT AND TO APPRECIATE
THE DISCUSSION -- IT'S AN
IMPORTANT ONE I'VE GOT -- THREE
GRANDSONS.
AND I APPRECIATE THOSE ISSUES
TOO BUT I DO THINK THAT -- WE'RE
AT A POINT NOW WHERE -- WE CAN
START IMPLEMENTING THIS IT'LL
SEND OUT A NOTICE TO TO EVERYONE
THAT -- THIS IS A BEHAVIOR THAT
IT WILL BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY WITH
SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES OF
PEOPLE.
CONTINUE TO BEHAVE. ONE OUT OF
FIVE WOMEN ON A COLLEGE CAMPUS
SAYS THAT SHE'S BEEN SEXUALLY
ASSAULTED OR RAPED THAT JUST.
THAT JUST NOT ACCEPTABLE IN
TODAY'S WORLD WITH THAT I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR IPHONE
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS KALRA PLEASE
STONE BY STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
CHAU.
CHIU.
CHU AYE GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
HOLDEN.
KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN AYE OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
RAMOS.
REYES I THE NEED FOR MORE WILL
PLACE AT ALL COST.
THANK YOU SENATOR MONEY TEXAS TO
ITEM NUMBER THIRTEEN SB
[inaudible]
SIX EIGHTY EIGHT LATER WHEN.
MORNING GOOD MORNING MISTER
CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
I HAVE AN SIMPLE BILL WITH NO
OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU YOU HAVE A MOTION AND
A SECOND THANK YOU.
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR AYE VOTE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
THERE MAY BE NONE NONE THAT ARE
SCHEDULED TO IMPAIR ANYONE LIKE.
TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT.
CHUCK I WOULD REALLY ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL
LIBERTIES ADVOCACY AND STRONG
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN WITH
MANY JEREMY SMITH YOUR BEHALF OF
THE STATE BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL ALSO
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE.
ALRIGHT SING THAT IS THEIR
OPPOSITION.
SEE NONE OF SORRY OF MICHAEL
YOUNG ABOUT THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION ALSO YOUR SUPPORT.
ALL RIGHTS ANYONE ELSE.
BRING BACK THE COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
CENTER YOU MAY CLOSE.
PARTICULAR.
A COUPLE SENTENCES TO CLOSE AND
SAY.
NONE OF YOUR TIME WITH MY
OPENING.
I WILL JUST POINT OUT THE
CHAMBER ANOTHER SHOULD MOVE
THEIR OPPOSITION THIS BILL DOES
I THINK STREAMLINING CONSOLIDATE
REMEDIES NOT ONLY FOR WORKERS
AROUND WAGE THEFT CASES IT ALSO
I THINK MAKES IT EASIER.
FOR DEFENDANTS TO CONSOLIDATE
PROCEEDINGS -- AND HAVE A
SPEEDIER PATH TO JUSTICE I URGE
YOUR AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND.
THAT MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED.
THE AMENDMENTS DO PASS. TO
APPROPRIATIONS THANK YOU CALL
THE ROLL PLEASE STONE.
HI STONE I GALLAGHER.
CHAU CHIU.
CHU AYE GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
YES.
THAT NEEDS TO MORE SO PLACE A
BLOG THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK
YOU MEMBERS.
SENATOR NEAL SAID.
OUR ITEM NUMBER THREE SB.
ONE SEVENTY NINE THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION IS
THERE A SECOND.
THE ANNUAL SECOND THANK YOU.
WE'RE TRYING.
TO ADDRESS THE ALL I THINK A
DISADVANTAGED.
THE CLASS OF GOOD EMPLOYEES IN
THE STATE.
HAVE HAD TO SUFFER THE EXCLUDED
EMPLOYEES [inaudible]
WHEN THEY?
FILE A GRIEVANCE THEY'RE ALMOST
ALWAYS DENIED.
SPEAKS SENT TO THE KIND OF
FORGOTTEN CLASS.
BUT THESE INDIVIDUALS.
ARE KIND OF WHAT I WOULD CALL
OUR BENCH IN GOVERNMENT.
RISING LEADERSHIP.
WITHIN THE AGENCIES.
WHO?
WITH THEIR EXPERIENCE AND
ABILITIES QUALIFY [inaudible]
FOR PROMOTIONS.
AND THEY HAVE A SITUATION THAT
DISCOURAGES THAT NOW.
THIS CREATES EXCLUDED EMPLOY
ARBITRATION ACT IN ARBITRATION
IS THE KEY TO WHAT THE BILL
TRIES TO ACCOMPLISH.
IN THE GRANT THAT A TITLE TO
GRIEVANCES BEEN FILED WITH CAL
HR.
AND IT HASN'T BEEN RESOLVED
SATISFACTORY IN THE MULTI REVIEW
PROCESS NOW EXTANT [inaudible]
THAT THE EMPLOYEE.
AND THE EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION
AND CAL HR CAN AGREE.
ON ONE ARBITRATOR.
THE ARBITRATOR WOULD.
PINE A LEGALLY BINDING DECISION
WITHIN FORTY FIVE DAYS.
AND THE NON PREVAILING PARTY
[inaudible]
WOULD PAY.
THIS IS KIND OF A LOSER PAY.
DISCIPLINE. TO ENSURE THE JOB
GETS DONE.
THE SECTION TWO DIFFERENT
SECTIONS OF TITLE TO DEFINE.
WHAT ACTIONS ARE GRIEBEL
[inaudible]
AND IT WOULD TAKE THAT LIST.
AND ALLOW AN EXCLUDED EMPLOYEE
TO REQUEST ARBITRATION.
IN THOSE AREAS.
AFTER EXHAUSTING.
THE NORMAL GRIEVANCE PROCESS.
IT'S VERY SIMPLE.
I DON'T THINK AN ONEROUS BURDEN
TO AND ADMINISTRATION.
BUT CERTAINLY I THINK IT WOULD
BE.
NORMATIVELY HELPFUL TO THE
VITALITY AND THE OPPORTUNITIES
WITHIN.
OUR ORGANIZATIONS.
GIVING HOPE.
AN OPPORTUNITY TO VERY TALENTED
PEOPLE I DO HAVE WITNESSES
MISTER CHAIRMAN.
THANK YOU FIRST WITH US PLEASE.
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS PARKER AT
BEHALF TO CORRECTIONAL
SUPERVISORS ORGANIZATION
CALIFORNIA WEREN'T STRONG
SUPPORT I WILL POINT OUT THAT
THIS MEASURE WOULD STE --
PREVENT WHAT JUST RECENTLY
HAPPENED AFTER TWELVE YEAR LEGAL
BATTLE -- THE SPEECH CALIFORNIA
STATE SUPREME COURT RULED --
THAT.
A CORRECTION SUPERVISORS WERE OF
ENTITLED TO A A REMEDY -- OTHER
THA WHAT THE STATE THOUGHT THIS.
LAWSUIT COULD HAVE BEEN OVER IN
FORTY FIVE DAYS WOULD HAVE SAVED
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LEGAL
FEES.
AND EXT.
A PROBABLY ABOUT A HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS IN
BACK PAY THAT THESE OFFICERS OR
GOING TO BE LOOKING AT GOING
FORWARD SO WE STRONG SUPPORT THE
BILL AND I THINK THAT -- THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP THE
SYSTEM AND IS.
I HAVE -- FORD CANNOT FROM THE
CORRECTIONS SUPERVISORS
ORGANIZATIONS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU THAT'S WHAT THIS
PLEASE.
THE MORNING -- MISTER CHAIRMAN
AND COMMITTEE -- MY NAME'S FOR
COULD NOT -- ADMINISTRATIVE
LIAISON.
FOR THE CALIFORNIA CREDENTIALS
SUPERVISORS ORGANIZATION.
AND WE REPRESENT SUPERVISORS AND
MANAGERS IN CORRECTIONS AND ITS
PARTNERS STATE HOSPITALS.
I'VE BEEN WORKING -- WOODS
GRIEVANCES FOR ABOUT TWENTY
YEARS AND UGH THIS OF JUST
HAVING OF THE ARBITRATION AS A
FIFTH STEP WOULD IMPROVE OUR
GRIEVANCE SYSTEM.
THIS THE OTHER STATE AGENCIES --
OF COLLEGE ARE WOULD.
WOULDN'T EVER TO OF RESOLVE
ISSUES AT A LOWER LEVEL RATHER
THAN WHAT THEY'RE DOING NOW IS
IS JUST DENYING ALL GRIEVANCES
AND CAUSING US TO GO.
TO A SUPERIOR COURT WHICH TAKES
YEARS.
AND COSTS WAY MORE THAN THAN --
THE FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT --
ARBITRATION WHAT CAUSED AND IT
ALSO -- LOSER PAYS IS -- GOOD
IDEA THAT WAY -- SUPERVISORY
ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS MINING
WOULD -- NOT OF BRING UP OF
FRIVOLOUS -- OF ISSUES BECAUSE
WE WOULD END UP HAVING TO PAY
FOR THE ARBITRATION.
SEOUL -- IT IT WOULD -- CAUSE US --
TO COME TOGETHER RESOLVE ISSUES
AT A LOWER LEVEL JUST JUST
HAVING.
THAT ARBITRATION OF THE SITTING
THERE TO BE READY TO BE USED IF
WE HAVE TO I DOUBT THAT WILL
EVER HAVE.
TO USE IT BUT MAYBE ONCE OR
TWICE ON SOMETHING THAT WE BOTH.
THE STATE AND SUPERVISORS OF
FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT ME AT THAT
THEY WERE BOTH RIGHT BUT I DOUBT
THAT -- THAT WOULD EVER COME TO
FRUITION WE PROBABLY WILL
RESOLVE MADE A LOWER LEVEL.
I DRIVE VOTE.
THANK YOU I AM READY FOR ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT GRIEVANCES I'VE.
DONE FOR TWENTY YEARS.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR MEMBER STEVE BAKER
WITH THEIR NECESSITIES FOR THE
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS IN
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT AND
SUPPORT AND JUST WANT TO THANK
SENATOR NAY NIELSEN FOR HIS.
PERSEVERANCE IN THIS MATTER
THANK YOU THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE
IN SUPPORT.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION.
SEEING NONE BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SENIOR CENTER YOU MAY CLOSE.
I WOULD REQUEST AN AYE VOTE
MISTER CHAIRMAN THANK YOU WE DO
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND THE
MOTION IS DUE PASSED TO
APPROPRIATIONS CALL THE ROLL
PLEASE STONE BY STONE AYE
GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER I CHAU CHIU.
CHU AYE GONZALEZ CONSOLES I
HOLDEN KALRA.
KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS REYES.
THAT NEEDS ONE MORSEL PLACE
ABOVE CALL THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN THANK YOU MEMBERS
[inaudible]
SENATOR HERTZBERG [inaudible]
TEXAS.
TO I WAS NUMBER.
ONE ALL RIGHT CENTER WIECKOWSKI.
WE WILL DO SB THREE TWENTY THREE
I HAVE A SHORT HEARING AND
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAYS
ALL RIGHT -- THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR MEMBERS FIRST OFF I ACCEPT
THE MEMON SOME PAGE NINE OF THE
ANALYSIS AND THINK THE COMMITTEE
FOR ITS CONCISE YET THOROUGH
ANALYSIS -- UNFORTUNATELY THERE
ARE SOME CORRUPT AND
DYSFUNCTIONAL.
H. AWAY PORTS THAT EXCLUDING
DISENFRANCHISES OTHER H. AWAY
MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY THE
SEEK TO CHALLENGE THEIR EXISTING
REGIME.
H. WAY PORTS CONFINED HOMEOWNERS
TAKE THEM TO THE COURT EVEN FOR
CLOSE ON THEIR HOMES SO THESE H.
WE BOARD ELECTIONS -- NO SMALL
MATTER.
I WANT TO NOTE THAT THIS BILL IS
MUCH NARROWER THAN LAST YEAR'S
BILL WHICH PASSED OUT OF THE
COMMITTEE AND IN THE HOUSE.
TALK ABOUT THE VETO MESSAGE FOR
INSTANCE I'VE AGREED TO ADD IN
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IS GROUNDS
FOR DISQUALIFICATION.
SECONDLY I'VE REMOVE SOME
PRIVACY CONCERNS.
THIRDLY I'VE DELETED THE
REQUIREMENT THAT THE VOTE
COUNTING LOCATION BE ACCESSIBLE
IN NEAR THE H. AWAY PROPERTY AND
FINALLY HAVE ALLEVIATED ALL
CONCERNS WITH THE BUILDING --
INDUSTRY.
SO A RICHER AYE VOTE IN WITH ME
I HAVE -- JUDGE TOM SIR WITH THE
CENTER OF CALIFORNIA H. AWAY LAW
AND SHELLY -- THE STAFF.
NO H. AWAY RESIDENT AND FORMER
BOARD MEMBER.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE
THANK YOU SENATOR -- MISTER
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE I'M TOM SIR -- THE
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE THE CENTER
FOR CALIFORNIA HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION LAW THE CENTER IS
DEDICATED TO ADVOCATE FOR THE
RIGHTS.
OF INDIVIDUAL.
OF HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVE IN H.
AWAY GOVERN.
DEVELOPMENTS -- THE CENTER WAS A
KEY PARTICIPANT IN THE WRITING
OF THE EXISTING LEGISLATION.
THAT SEEKS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS
OF THE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS TO
HAVE FAIR ELECTIONS.
THE OUR FOUNDING PRESIDENT
MARJORIE MARIE WAS VERY DEEPLY
INVOLVED IN THE WRITING OF THAT
LEGISLATION.
AND IN THE INTERVENING YEARS
SINCE ITS PASSAGE IN ABOUT --
TWO THOUSAND FIVE WE HAVE
RECEIVED REPORTS FROM ALL AROUND
THE STATE.
OF MANY.
INGENIOUS AND DEVIOUS PRACTICES
THAT HAVE EMERGED OVER THE YEARS.
TO GET AROUND THE VARIOUS
PROTECTIONS AND SO.
WE NOW PRESENT THIS BILL THAT
I'D NOTED EVERY.
PROVISION IN.
SB THREE TWO THREE IS BASED ON
SIGNIFICANT ABUSES THAT HAVE
BEEN.
REPORTED TO THE CENTER FROM ALL
AROUND THE STATE.
YOU WILL HEAR IT IN DETAIL SOME
OF THE SOME EXAMPLES OF THESE
ABUSES IN JUST A MOMENT.
I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO
TALK ABOUT THE ENFORCEMENT
PROVISIONS AT THE END OF THE
BILL.
WHICH CHANGES THE WAY THAT SMALL
CLAIMS COURTS -- HANDLE THESE
CASES ONCE THERE'S A CHALLENGE
TO AN ELECTION -- THE CURRENT.
WORDING.
GIVES THE COURT.
DISCRETION TO GRANT --
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IN THAT IS TO
CANCEL THE ELECTION [inaudible]
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT GOT
PUT INTO THE LEGISLATION EDITED
OUT SAID.
THIS WAS A SUGGESTION -- AN IDEA
FROM THE CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION
COMMISSION AND THAT IS TO ALLOW
HOMEOWNERS ACCESS TO SMALL
CLAIMS COURT. TO RESOLVE THEIR
ISSUES.
NOW ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS THAT
IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT NIGHT
SPEAK AS A FORMER.
US SMALL CLAIMS JUDGE I HEARD
MANY MANY CASES AND I CONTINUE
TO DO SO ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS
SOLANO COUNTY -- I WAS ON THE
BENCH AND ALAMEDA COUNTY SO I
GOT SOME EXPERIENCE IN.
TWO VENUES.
AND I BELIEVE THE REASON THAT WE
GET COMPLAINTS ABOUT SMALL
CLAIMS COURTS NOT.
ADMINISTERING JUSTICE -- IS THAT.
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IS A RATHER
UNUSUAL REMEDY.
IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT.
BY AND LARGE.
SMALL THINGS GO TO NOT HAVE.
INJECTIVE AUTHORITY AND SO TO
GRANTED IN THIS STATUTE IS AN
EXCEPTION.
A RARE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE AND
YOU HAVE MANY.
SMALL CLAIMS CALENDARS ARE HEARD
BY -- PRO TEM JUDGES SEES A
VOLUNTEER JUDGES AND AND THAT'S
HOW I WORK NOW IN FACT IN SOLANO
COUNTY IS IS A VOLUNTEER.
PRO TEM JUDGE BUT MOST OF THE MY
COLLEAGUES.
PRO TEM JUDGES.
ARE PRACTICING LAWYERS WHO MAY
NOT BE VERY FAMILIAR AT ALL WITH
THIS AREA OF THE LAW CENTER
THEY'RE NOT A WE TO WRAP UP
PLEASE THANK YOU -- SO THAT'S
WHY WE HAVE.
PUT SOME.
FIRM GUIDANCE INTO THE BILL -- I
WOULD JUST INDICATE THEN THAT IN
CLOSING THAT.
THE FAIR ELECTIONS ARE REALLY
ONLY PROTECTION AVAILABLE TO
HOMEOWNERS TO ENSURE EFFECTIVE.
SELF GOVERNANCE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS MY NAME IS
SHELLY DISTEFANO -- ABOUT SIX
YEARS AGO.
ABOUT A YEAR AFTER MOVING INTO
MY H. AWAY IT BECAME OBVIOUS TO
ME THAT THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY
WAS ROUTINELY COORDINATING WITH
BOARD.
THE BOARD ON ACTIONS THAT
VIOLATED STATE STATUTE IN
GOVERNING DOCUMENTS THEY'RE
ENGAGING IMPROPER RELATIONSHIPS
WITH VENDORS AND CONTRACTORS.
AND THEY USE THEIR POWER TO BALI
INTIMIDATE AND SILENCE
HOMEOWNERS WHO PUSHED BACK.
AND AND IT'S EFFECTIVE I
EXPERIENCED THIS FIRST HAND IN
COORDINATION WITH THE PROPERTY
MANAGER THAT YOU SPECIFIC
STRATEGIES TO MANIPULATE THAT
I'M GOING TO DESCRIBE --
ELECTIONS AND REMOVE BOARD
MEMBERS TO PUSH BACK AGAINST
BOARD MANAGEMENT BEHAVIOR THAT
IS UNETHICAL ILLEGAL OR CONTRARY
TO BEST PRACTICES MY FIRST BIG
PUSH BACK WAS.
A RECORD REQUEST AFTER I FIRST
MOVED IN I DISCOVERED ALL KINDS
OF BIDDING AND CONTRACTING YOUR
REGULARITIES INCLUDING A PRIMA
FACIE CASE.
OF COLLUSION BETWEEN THE
MANAGEMENT COMPANY BOARDING
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND A
BITTER IT'S ON ON A HALF MILLION
DOLLAR PROJECT I STOP THIS
CONTRACT WITH WHAT YOU TO GO TO
THE PRESS.
SINCE THEN ALL MY RECORD REQUEST
AND I HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF THEM
HAVE BEEN DENIED -- I QUICKLY
DISCOVERED THE ST AT THE SAME
SMALL CLIQUE OF HOMEOWNERS HAVE
BEEN ROTATING ON THE BOARD
INCLUDING WITH THE SAME
MANAGEMENT COMPANY FOR OVER TEN
YEARS AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THAT THAT MANAGEMENT.
COMPANY IS THE COMMON
DENOMINATOR AND BOARD
MALFEASANCE OF THE INCIDENTS I'M
GOING TO DESCRIBE.
IN IT AS IS TYPICAL BOARD
MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE TRAINING
AND EXPERTISE IN HEAVILY RELY ON
THE PROPERTY MANAGER FOR
DIRECTION.
WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE WELL A
REVIEW OF RECORDS SHOW THAT OUR
MANAGEMENT COMPANY MAKES A LOT
MORE MONEY ON OUR H. AWAY THAN
THE MERE FOUR THOUSAND DOLLAR
MONTHLY.
MAJESTY THE CHARGES ARE BOARD
INVOICES THE PROPERTY MANAGER
COMPANIES FOR IN HOUSE H. AWAY
SERVICES -- FOR MULTIPLE
SERVICES AT A AT A PREMIUM COST
FOR EXAMPLE THE CHART FOR
SERVING IT AS ELECTION SPECTER
AND AND THE COST THAT WE PAY THE
ELECTIONS PICKED WE COULD HIRE.
AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY --
USING THEIR CONFERENCE FACILITY
WHICH IS THIRTY MINUTES AWAY
EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A FACILITY
USE RIGHT IN IN OUR CESSATION --
WE STRIPING PARKING PLACE AS
THEY MAKE A LOT OF MONEY ON THE
STATE CHARGED US OVER A THOUSAND
DOLLARS TO RESTART BE ONE
PARKING PLACE -- IT A MINIMUM
CHARGE WOULD HAVE BEEN -- THREE
THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS TO FIVE
HUNDRED DOLLARS JUST TO COME OUT
FOR ONE WHEN BASS SO WE'VE TRIED
DURING THE LAST FOUR ELECTION
CYCLE TO CHANGE THE BOARD MAKE
UP -- AND THEN THERE'S BEEN
MULTIPLE STRATEGIES THAT THEY'VE
USED TO DISQUALIFY -- INTERESTED
OR DISCOURAGE INTERESTED
HOMEOWNERS FROM RUNNING TO
REMOVE NON COMPLIANT MORE
MEMBERS FOR EXAMPLE ANOTHER
PERSON WAS TOLD THEY WEREN'T
ELIGIBLE -- BECAUSE THE LIGHT
WAS OUT OVER THERE GARAGE.
A VICIOUS DOOR TO DOOR SMEAR
CAMPAIGN RESULT IN REMOVAL OF
ANOTHER NEWLY ELECTED BOARD
MEMBER.
WHO WANTED IT A THIRD PARTY
ELECTION SPECTER AND HE WANTED
TO GO OUT TO BID ON A NEW
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY
SOMETHING THAT ALL OF US HAVE
WHO HAVE BEEN REMOVED HAVE IN
COMMON?
THE ACCUSED HIM OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AT BOARD MEETINGS I
WAS THAT EACH OF THE MEETINGS HE
NEVER HARASS ANYBODY.
YEAH THE PROBLEM WAS HE HAS DARK
SKIN AND OF THE PEOPLE ON THE
BOARD DO NOT AND THEY MADE UP
SOME TRUMPED UP THING THAT OTHER
PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT RUINED THAT
MAN.
HE'S A FAMILY MAN HE HAS A
DAUGHTER IT IT'S IT'S STILL
HEART BREAKING INTO OVERSEAS.
EXCUSE ME I NEED TO WRAP UP
PLEASE OKAY YES -- IT'S SOMEWHAT
SO THEY RETALIATED AGAINST ME --
THEY THEY HAVE -- CITED ME FOR
I'D. SIX DIFFERENT VIOLATIONS
WITHOUT EVIDENCE BEHIND AN
ATTORNEY -- IT SAYING THAT THEY
DON'T HAVE TO SHARE THE THE
EVIDENCE WITH ME WHICH IS
IMPROPER.
THEY HAVE MOST RECENTLY -- IS
SENT.
TELLING COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT I
HAVE A DRUG DEPENDENCY AND THAT
I HAD HAD A A PSYCH.
PSYCHIATRIC BREAKDOWN OVER THE
LAST TWO YEARS NONE OF WHICH IS
TRUE I'VE GOT A DOCTOR'S NOTE --
CONFIRMING THAT IT'S NOT TRUE
THEY WENT SO FAR AS TO ACTUALLY --
SEND THE LETTER TO A COLLEAGUE
OF MINE THAT I'M WORKING WITH AT
THE STATE LEVEL SO THEY WILL GO
TO KNOW THEY'VE BEEN AT ANOTHER
NUMBER BUT EXAMPLES OF WHICH
THEY HAVE LIED IN ORDER TO GET.
TO CHILL TO TO CREATE A CHILLING
EFFECT TO THE PEOPLE LIKE ME AND
OTHERS WHO AREN'T QUITE WHO.
WHO WHO ARE MORE AFRAID IT SO
BASICALLY SAID WE DON'T?
CHALLENGE THEM AND THANK YOU
IT'S A PROBLEM THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE US YOUR
NAME AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLEASE.
THANK YOU JOE RIGHT OUT CONSUMER
ACTION.
THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
RIGHT SEEING NONE IS THERE ANY
OPPOSITION
.
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE LOUIS BROWN TODAY ON
BEHALF THE COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION'S INSTITUTE
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE ACTION
COMMITTEE.
HOW WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE BILL?
WE DO BELIEVE THAT MOST
ELECTIONS WITHIN THE FIFTY
THOUSAND PLUS ASSOCIATIONS IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- ARE
HANDLED FAIRLY AND ARE OPEN --
AS WAS STATED BY THE AUTHOR THE
BILL WE HAVE -- ONE OF THE MOST
COMPLEX AND COMPREHENSIVE SET OF
RULES IN THE NATION WHEN IT
COMES TO ELECTIONS -- THERE ARE
OVER FIFTY THOUSAND ASSOCIATIONS --
IN THE STATE 70% OF THEM ARE
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS MAKE
AN EXTREMELY COMPREHENSIVE IN
COMPLEX SET OF RULES EVEN MORE
SO WHICH COULD LIKELY END UP IN
MORE MISTAKES.
MORE LITIGATION. ONE NEW ISSUE
THAT WE HAVE WITH THE BILL.
IS RATE IN THE ANALYSIS HAS THE
A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT AND THAT
WOULD BE TO ELIMINATE THE OR OR
DELETE THE ONE SECTION OF THE
THE BILL THAT SAYS THAT AN
INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS HAD A PAST
CONVICTION IN THE LAST TWENTY
YEARS FOR EMBEZZLEMENT FORGERY
ETCETERA.
CANNOT SIT ON THE BOARD -- TO US
THAT RAISES SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
WON THE ELECTION CODE SECTION
TWENTY A PROHIBITS ANYONE WITH A
PAST CONVICTION OF EMBEZZLEMENT
FORGERY OR OTHER FRAUDULENT
ACTIVITIES FROM SERVING IN LOCAL
OR STATE OFFICE -- BUT WE WON'T
ANNA OF A P. AND WE WANTED HERE
TO THE SAME ROLE FOR AN
ASSOCIATION WHOSE BOARD MEMBERS
HAVE ACCESS.
TO ALL INFORMATION OF MEMBERS
FINANCIAL PERSONAL EXCEPT TRUCK.
WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL
CREATE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES FOR
ASSOCIATIONS IN THEIR ABILITY TO
OBTAIN FROM FIDELITY BOND
INSURANCE WHICH IS NOW A
REQUIRED BY LAW IN OTHER
INSURANCE MATTER SO.
WE THINK THAT THIS -- AMENDMENT.
CHARACTERIZE THIS TECHNICAL
ANALYSIS ACTUALLY CREATE
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES FOR
ASSOCIATIONS ARE ALL AROUND THE
STATE.
WE DO HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE
PEACE THE BILL THAT SHIFTS THE
BURDEN -- WHEN IT COMES TO THE
CHALLENGE OF AN ELECTION?
THE MAY FIRST VERSION OF THIS
BILL.
TOOK IT BACK TO A MORE BALANCED
APPROACH LEAVING THAT DISCRETION
TO THE JUDGE THE VERSION OF THE
BILL IN FRONT OF YOU NOW SHIPS
THAT BURDEN SO THAT A COURT MUST
THROUGHOUT THE ELECTION.
IF.
THE ASSOCIATION CANNOT PROVE
THAT THE MISTAKE I DID NOT HAVE
AN IMPACT SO NOW THESE
ASSOCIATIONS ARE IN THE POSITION
OF ADDITIONAL LITIGATION WHEN
THEY ARE UNABLE TO PROVE A
NEGATIVE SO -- WE DO BELIEVE
THAT THERE IS A AN EASY WAY TO
ADDRESS THIS MORE ELEGANT A WAY
TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF RULES
CHANGING FOR THE ELECTIONS.
AND THAT IS TO REQUIRE ELECTION
QUALIFICATIONS ELECTION A
RECOMMENDATION SIMPLY TO BE PART
OF THE BY LAWS INSTEAD OF PART
OF THE RULE PROCESS THAT'S
OUTLINED IN DAVIS STERLING.
SO IT'S FOR THOSE REASONS --
THAT WE OPPOSE THE BILL AND WILL
BE ASKING FOR NO VOTE TODAY
THANK YOU THANK YOU EXODUS PLACE
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS JENNIFER
WHAT ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY
MANAGERS.
ALSO OPPOSE FOR THE REASONS THAT
WERE JUST UP PREVIOUSLY LAID OUT
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT ALL COSTS AND ASSOCIATION
ARE BORED BY ALL THE HOMEOWNERS
WITHIN THE ASSOCIATION.
SO WE DO HAVE CONCERN TO THE
EXTENT THAT YOU.
MAKE THESE THESE ROLES ARE THE
LAWS MORE COMPLEX AND IT
INCREASES COST -- FOR THE
ASSOCIATION IT IS THE OTHER
HOMEOWNERS THAT WILL ULTIMATELY
BEAR THE BRUNT OF THATCOSTS SO
WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR NO VOTE.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SIGNAL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE [inaudible]
QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SIGNAL SATURDAY MAY CLOSE I
REGION I VOTE AND I WILL
CONTINUE TO TALK WITH THE
DEPARTMENT REAL IT STATE AND THE
OBJECTORS AS I HAVE FOR THE LAST
THREE YEARS ON THIS ISSUE
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
I NEED A MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND AND THE SECOND
THANK YOU THAT MOTION IS TO PASS
AS AMENDED -- PLEASE STONE BY
STONE I GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER NO CHOW.
CHOW I CHOOSE.
CHIU AYE GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE KALRA.
KILEY.
KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS REYES.
THAT'S THE BILL CALLS TO THE
CITIES WERE MORE ABOUT THANK YOU
SIR THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT NOW SAID HERTZBERG.
SB [inaudible]
THREE FORTY TWO YES [inaudible]
EVERYBODY -- IN THE OLD DAYS.
THE RIVER GONZALEZ THE OLD DAYS.
TICKET SCALPERS PREDOMINATED.
FRAUDULENT TICKET SALES RED AT
SPORTING EVENTS TODAY WE'VE GOT
THIS NEW FANGLED THING CALLED
THE INTERNET [inaudible]
AND ALL.
AT SO I JUST IT'S A ED ED.
WE WE THERE'S NEW WAYS AS YOU
KNOW MISTER CHAIRMAN FIRST OF
ALL EXCEPT THE AMENDMENTS THAT
YOU SUGGESTED AND SECONDLY I
CARE I APPRECIATE YOUR YOU'RE
FREE LEGAL WORK ON THIS BILL --
YOU GUYS EAT YOU MADE SOME GOOD
CHANGES I THOUGHT IN THE FIRST
PART OF IT THE SECOND TRUNCHEON
IS CAUSING SOME HEARTBURN FOR
THE FOLKS AT A E. G. AND AND
LIVE NATION I THINK -- SO WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT WE'LL
HEAR FROM THEM AND SEE IF WE CAN
DO THAT BUT BUT LOOK THE BOTTOM
LINE IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO
IS TO CREATE A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION.
IN THE SMALL CASES WHERE WE
BECAUSE OF BOB WAS A PROP SIXTY
FOR THE LIKE WITH SOME
LIMITATION A LAW THE FEDERAL LAW
THE LIKE IT'S WE'RE TRYING TO
PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE TEETH --
AND AND THIS INCENTIVIZE IS
FRAUDULENT BEHAVIOR WHERE PEOPLE
ARE -- BASICALLY YOU KNOW USE
THESE THESE WEBSITES THAT PEOPLE
BELIEVE THAT ARE ROB.
THAT ARE STOKER'S SPORTING
EVENTS IN THE REALLY I MEAN IS
THE BELONG TO THE THE THE
COMPANY THAT THE FRANCHISE AND
THEY'RE REALLY NOT.
AND SO THIS IS JUST AN EFFORT TO
TRY.
TO THE TRY TO BETTER MANAGE THAT
GIVEN WHAT BILLS YOU KNOW
SEVENTY TWO HUNDRED AT SAC IN
THE FAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES IN
THE LIKE IN DEALING WITH SOME OF
THE NUANCES AS A RESULT OF THAT
IS YOUR KEENLY AWARE BECAUSE OF
YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THAT --
PUBLIC EPHESTO TURNED OVER.
TO MY WITNESS THANK YOU FIRST
WITNESS PLEASE.
THE MORNING CHAIRMAN -- MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE MY NAME IS
BRIAN HAS I AM THE EXECUTIVE
RECTOR OF SPORTS FANS COALITION
WHICH IS THE NATION'S LEADING
FAN ADVOCACY GROUP.
AND TODAY ON BEHALF CALIFORNIA
SPORTS FANS I'M HERE TO EXPRESS
MY SUPPORT FOR SB. THREE FORTY
TWO FOR THE LAST DECADE SPORTS
FANS COALITION HAS FOUGHT FOR
FANS WE TACKLE ISSUES SUCH AS
THE PUBLIC FINANCING SPORTS
STADIUMS SPORTS BETTING CONSUMER
PROTECTIONS MEDIA ACCESS FOR LOW
INCOME FANS PASSING SB THREE
FORTY TWO IN A RICH SPORTS
CULTURE THAT CALIFORNIA'S WOULD
BE A MASSIVE BLOW. TO THE
FRAUDSTERS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
FANS.
ESPECIALLY LESS TECH SAVVY FANS
BY USING MISLEADING MARKETING
TACTICS.
WHITE LABEL TICKET SITES TO SEE
FANS WHO THINK THEY'RE BUYING
DIRECTLY FROM VENUE BOX OFFICE
AT FACE VALUE.
BUT IN REALITY ARE BUYING FROM A
THIRD PARTY PRETENDING TO BE THE
OFFICIAL SITE. ONE HERE ADVOCATE
TO PROTECT SPORTS FANS THIS
FRAUD IMPACTS ALL FANS OF LIVE
EVENTS INCLUDING CONCERTS AND
THEATER.
WHITE LABEL FRAUD WORKS LIKE
THIS A CONSUMER USES GOGLE OR
ANOTHER SEARCH ENGINE TO TO
SEARCH FOR TICKETS TO AN EVENT
OR VENUE MANY SITES WHICH HAVE
TICKETS FOR SALE DISPLAYED.
BUT DESPITE NOT BEING LICENSED
OR OFFICIAL THE SITES MAY USE
WORDS LIKE OFFICIAL OR BOX
OFFICE IN RELATION TO THE VENUE
OR EVENT.
UNDER THE BELIEF THAT THE
CONSUMER IS ON THE REAL TICKET
SITE THEY'LL PURCHASE A TICKET
AFTER COMPLETING SEVERAL STEPS
IN THE CHECKOUT PROCESS THE
CONSUMERS HIT WITH SEVERAL
ADDITIONAL FEES WHICH
SIGNIFICANTLY RAISE THE COST.
IN JULY OF TWO THOUSAND
SEVENTEEN SPORTS FANS COALITION
BEGAN INVESTIGATING THIS
PRACTICE WHAT WE DISCOVERED WAS
MORE RAMPANT FRAUD THAN WE HAD
INITIALLY BELIEVES.
WE RECENTLY REPLICATED THE STUDY
AND DESPITE ATTEMPTS BY INDUSTRY
THE DECEPTIVE WEBSITES CONTINUE
TO PLAGUE SEARCH ENGINES AND TO
FRAUD FANS.
THE DANGERS OF THIS PRACTICE GO
BEYOND JUST FOOLING FANS IN THE
CLICKING ON THEIR SITE.
THERE ARE MAJOR FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS FOR SPORTS FANS FOR
EXAMPLE RESELLERS USING VIVID OR
TICKET NETWORKS WHITE LABEL
PLATFORMS FOR THE DECEMBER
SIXTEENTH RAMS VERSE EAGLES GAME.
DECEIVE FANS IN THE PURCHASING
TICKETS FOR HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS
MORE THAN FACE VALUE.
IN SOME CASES BY CHARGING
SERVICE FEES EQUAL TO ONE THIRD
THE DISPLAYED PRICE.
SPORTS FANS COALITION BELIEVE
THAT THE USE OF THE SEPT OF YOU
YOUR AL SHOULD BE BANNED.
ON THE COST OF CALIFORNIA'S TWO
THOUSAND NINETEEN FOOTBALL
SEASON WITH THE RAMS TICKETS
BEING A HOT COMMODITY AFTER
THEIR AMAZING SUPERBOWL RUN LAST
YEAR.
AND THE RAIDERS PLAYING WHAT IS
POTENTIALLY THEIR LAST SEASON IN
OAKLAND THE POTENTIAL FOR WHITE
LABEL FRAUD IS GREATER THAN EVER.
AS SUCH SPORTS FANS COALITION
CALLS ON THE SENATE CALVET IN
THE ASSEMBLY HERE TO PROTECT THE
STATE'S FANS FROM BEING DECEIVED
BY THE WHITE LABEL TICKET SITES
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION YES JOE
RIGHT OUT WITH CONSUMER ACTION
IN SUPPORT.
JAMIE MINOR ON BEHALF OF STUBHUB
ALSO IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE SENATOR
HERTZBERG -- MY NAME IS MARK A
PRAYER WITH THE FIRM OF THE PREY
AND THE CAYLEE.
AND ON BEHALF OF OUR CLIENT A E.
G. AN ACCESS.
WE WISH TO EXPRESS OUR STRONG
OPPOSITION TO SB THIRTY FOUR AS
A THREE FORTY TWO THIS PROPOSED
TO BE AMENDED.
EIJI IS THE WORLD'S LARGEST
OWNER OF SPORTS TEAMS AND SPORTS
EVENTS AND IS ALSO THE WORLD'S
SECOND LARGEST PRESENTER.
OF LIVE MUSIC AND ENTERTAINMENT
EVENTS.
ACCESS PARTIALLY OWNED BY AG IS
A DIGITAL MARKETPLACE PLATFORM
FOR PURCHASING TICKETS FOR
SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT EVENTS IN
THE US AND AND AND OVERSEAS.
AS COMPANIES WHO PARTNER WITH
THOSE WHO ARE INVESTING BILLIONS
OF DOLLARS INTO LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT.
WE SPEND TIME AND ENERGY
FIGHTING THE DECEPTIVE TICKET
PRACTICES OF OTHERS. TO ENSURE
THAT FANS RECEIVE LEGITIMATE
TICKETS FROM THE PARTIES WHO
HAVE INTEREST INVESTED IN THE
EVENT.
WE ARE CLIENTS WANT OUR FANS TO
BE ABLE TO BUY A REAL AND
AUTHENTIC TICKET.
THROUGH A SECURE AND TRUSTED
SYSTEM WITHOUT RISK OF BEING
CONFUSED OR MISLED BY ROGUE
THIRD PARTY WEBSITES WHO DO NOT
SHARE THE SAME CONCERNS FOR
EITHER CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS.
ARE THOSE MAKING REAL
INVESTMENTS.
THE SPONSORS OF THIS MEASURE
STUBHUB EARLIER THIS YEAR
APPROACHED US ABOUT SUPPORTING
THE VERSION OF THE BILL THAT WAS
INTRODUCED ON FEBRUARY. NINETEEN
EIGHTY G. ACCESS EXPRESSED ITS
SUPPORT FOR SB THREE FORTY TWO
IN THE SENATE.
AND BEFORE THE ASSEMBLY PRIVACY
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
COMMITTEE AS IT WAS AMENDED IN
THE SENATE ON MAY SEVENTEEN AND
IN PRIOR VERSIONS.
WE SUPPORTED THE BILL BECAUSE
THAT VERSION WE BELIEVE -- WOULD
REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF
DISHONEST MARKETING PRACTICES --
IMMUNITY LEADING INTERNET
SEARCHES USING THE VENUE OR
ARTIST NAME TO BAIT CUSTOMERS
INTO BELIEVING THEY ARE
PURCHASING THE TICKETS DIRECTLY
FROM A VENUE.
THEREBY LEADING TO A BETTER
CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE.
WE RECEIVED A SET OF PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS ON WEDNESDAY OF LAST
WEEK.
AND ACCESS AND LIVE NATION
ENTERTAINMENT YESTERDAY
SUBMITTED A JOINT LETTER THAT
YOU HAVE IN OPPOSITION.
IN OUR LETTER WE STATED WE DO
NOT BELIEVE THREE FORTY TWO IS
PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED OFFERS
PROTECTIONS THAT ARE BETTER.
GREATER OR CLEARER THAN EXISTING
LAW SPECIFICALLY THE PROTECTIONS
OFFERED UNDER BUSINESS
PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION.
FOURTEEN TO FORTY FIVE REGARDING
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND
SECTION SEVENTEEN FIVE HUNDRED
MISLEADING ADVERTISING.
IN FACT.
SB THREE FORTY TWO DOES NOT STOP
DECEPTIVE PRACTICES.
THAT BAD BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE SEVENTEEN FIVE
HUNDRED ALREADY ADDRESSES.
IN AN EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH THE
COMMITTEE'S CHIEF CONSULTANT SHE
REPLIED I DON'T NECESSARILY
DISAGREE WITH ACCESS AND LIVE
NATION'S GENERAL ARGUMENT.
THAT NO ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION
IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STATUTES
ALREADY ADDRESS FALSE AND
MISLEADING ADVERTISING AND
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT.
AND WE CONCUR.
THEREFORE IF THE CHOICE IS SB
THREE FORTY TWO OR NO CHANGE IN
LAW WE SIDE WITH NO CHANGE IN
LAW.
CONSUMERS ARTISTS VENUES AND
THOSE WHOSE JOB IT IS TO PROTECT
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND
TRADEMARK RIGHTS WE BELIEVE ARE
BETTER SERVED BY EXISTING LAW
THEN THE PROVISIONS IN THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN SB.
THREE FORTY TWO AND WE THEREFORE
MUST RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE THREE
FORTY TWO AND JOURNAL VOTE.
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS PLEASE.
GOOD MORNING MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
GREG HER ON BEHALF OF LIVE
NATION ENTERTAINMENT TICKET
MASTER.
LIVE NATION IS THE WORLD'S Là
LEADING LIVE ENTERTAINMENT
COMPANY AND ANNUALLY IS INVOLVED
WITH OVER THIRTY THOUSAND SHOWS
AND SELLS OVER FIVE HUNDRED
MILLION TICKETS.
ON BEHALF OF ARTISTS BROADWAY
SHOWS SPORTS TEAMS UNIVERSITIES
STADIUMS AMPHITHEATERS AND OTHER
VENUES.
THIS INCLUDES ARE OVER SEVEN
THOUSAND CALIFORNIA BASED
EMPLOYEES THAT WORK OR SUPPORT A
TOYOTA AMPHITHEATRE SLEEP TRAIN
AMPHITHEATRE AND CRICKETS
CRICKET WIRELESS AMPHITHEATER
THE ROSE BOWL. FIVE POINT TAMPA
FEEDER NOSSA VENT CENTER THE
MASONIC THE FILLMORE AN ORACLE
PARK TO JUST NAME A FEW.
ELENI WORKS CLOSELY VERY CLOSELY
WITH ARTISTS AND VENUES AND THE
FOUNDATION OF THE BUSINESSES TO
PROTECT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
FAN ACCESS AND QUALITY OF THE
EXPERIENCE. TO THAT END WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT EFFORTS AT
ALLOW ARTISTS VENUE OWNERS.
AND THE FANS THE ABILITY TO
PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM
FRAUDULENT AND DECEPTIVE
OPERATORS.
THE VERSION OF THE BILL THAT
PASSED WITH NO OPPOSITION AND
RECEIVE NO NO VOTES IN ANY
COMMITTEE AS LATE AS JUNE TWENTY
FIFTH.
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION PROVIDED
SOME ADDITIONAL ABILITY TO
ADDRESS IMPACTS OF FRAUD AND
DECEPTION.
WE WOULD CONTINUE TO SUPPORT
THAT VERSION OF THE BILL.
HOWEVER WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO
CONSIDER A COMPLETELY NEW
VERSION OF BILL IN THE SECOND
POLICY COMMITTEE.
WE REVIEWED BOTH VERSION OF THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PROPOSED TO
US THE MOST RECENT VERSION AS A
FOUR PM LAST NIGHT.
OUR CONCLUSION IS THE AMENDMENTS
ACCEPTED BY THE AUTHOR WILL
PROVIDE NO BENEFITS TO THOSE IT
IS INTENDED TO ASSIST.
AND ONE COMPARED TO EXISTING LAW.
IT WILL UNINTENTIONALLY A ROAD
THE CURRENT PROTECTIONS PROVIDED
UNDER STATUTES AND CASE LAW.
AS THE WORLD'S LEADING LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY THAT
SUPPORTS HUNDREDS OF VENUES
THOUSAND THOUSANDS OF ATHLETES
AND ARTISTS THE MILLIONS OF FANS
IN CALIFORNIA OUR GOAL MUST BE
FIRST TO DO NO HARM. FOR THESE
REASONS AND THOSE STATED BY
MISTER PRATT LIVE NATION MUST
OPPOSE SB FOR THE EIGHT THREE
FORTY TWO AS A PROPOSED TO BE
AMENDED.
WE WOULD REQUEST THAT THE BILL
BE HELD IN COMMITTEES OF THE
PRESIDENT AND MAY CAN BE A
PROPERLY VENTED TO ALL ASPECTS
OF THE INDUSTRY AND CONSUMERS
THAT WILL IMPACT.
WE SHARED THE AMENDMENTS
ASSEMBLY DENTISTRY LAST NIGHT
AND HOW HAVE ALREADY BEEN ASKED
TO RELAY THE OPPOSITION OF FELD
ENTERTAINMENT TO THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
HE WAS YOUR NAME AND YOUR
AFFILIATION ASHLEY WALKER WITH
NASA MEN ON BEHALF OF FELD
ENTERTAINMENT AS WELL OPPOSED TO
THE RECENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
SCENERY BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS COMMENTS [inaudible]
SCULLY.
THANK YOU SO I SUPPORT OF THE
BILL AND THE PRIVACY COMMITTEE
AND IN TRYING.
TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THE
AMENDMENTS -- CAN YOU JUST HAVE
TO THE OPPOSITION EXPAND ON WHY
YOU THINK THESE AMENDMENTS WOULD.
A ROAD THE PROTECTIONS OF
EXISTING LAW TODAY IT SOMEHOW
SUPERSEDE.
EXISTING LAW -- AND THEN IF THE
AUTHOR WANTS TO COMMENT ON THAT
AS WELL I'M HAPPY -- TO SO THE
NEW LAW WILL LANGUAGE HAS A
PROVISION THAT INDICATES THAT
HAVE IT ARTIST NAME IS USED IN
THE CONTEXT.
OF A MUSICAL WORK OF ART OR
OTHER SIMILAR ARTISTIC
REFERENCES IT WON'T VIOLATE THE
LAW THIS IS NOT ONLY CONFUSING.
IN RELATIONSHIP TO WHAT THE GOAL
OF THE LEGISLATION IS.
WE THINK IT'S IRRELEVANT.
THAT RELATES TO SOME COPYRIGHT
DEFENSE THAT WOULD BE WHOLLY IN
APPLICABLE TO ANY COMMERCIAL
WEBSITE I NOTE THAT.
IN ANY OTHER STATE WHERE WE HAVE
WORKED ON LEGISLATION THAT
PROHIBITS DECEPTIVE U. R. L.
PRACTICES.
THAT SORT OF CUMBERSOME CARVE
OUT HAS NOT BEEN INCLUDED AND SO
I AGAIN I COULD GO ON AND ON
ABOUT THIS.
I AM HAPPY TO RECITE FURTHER
EXAMPLES OF WHAT'S IN THIS
ELECTION THE STATUTE.
AS AN EXAMPLE IN OTHER WORDS WE
WOULD HAVE TO ALSO PROVE BAD
FAITH ON THE PART OF THE
PERPETRATOR SIMPLY BY THEY'RE
PUTTING UP A FALSE WEBSITE.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH
AND SO FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE --
AGAIN WITH IN ON NO PREJUDICE TO
THE AUTHOR'S INTENT OR THE
SPONSORS INTENT.
THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE BILL
BEFORE YOU AS PROPOSED TO BE AN
AMENDED WE THINK REDUCE CONSUMER
PROTECTIONS.
REDUCE THE RIGHTS OF TRADEMARK
AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
HOLDERS AND MAKE IT MORE
CONFUSING AND DIFFICULT TO
ASSERT THOSE RIGHTS AND FOR
THOSE REASONS WERE OPPOSING THE
MEASURE.
VISIT YOU CAN ASK FOR A LITTLE
BIT OF ELABORATION ON THIS AT
FIRST ME JUST SAY APPRECIATE THE
THE AUTHOR.
OF FOR FOR MOVING FORWARD IN
THIS AREA I FOR ONE HAVE.
BEEN VERY CONFUSED AND I TRY TO
BUY TICKETS ONLINE AND I
ABSOLUTELY THANK YOU ARE TRYING
TO ADDRESS A REAL PROBLEM HERE --
AND I DEFINITELY THINK THAT --
THE VERSIONS OF THE BILL UNTIL
IT CAME TO THIS COMMITTEE --
WERE WERE CLEAR I HAVE TO MISS I
AM A LITTLE -- I AM ALSO A BIT --
A PROBABLY CONFUSED ABOUT SOME
OF THE DIRECTION OF WHERE THE
BILL AS I KNOW THAT THERE'S NEW
LANGUAGE THAT INCREASES.
AROUND BAD FAITH AND AND THAT TO
ME I'M I'M I'M CONCERNED ABOUT
WHETHER -- YOU KNOW WE ARE
MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT TO
PROVE WITHOUT INTENT -- I KNOW
THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTION
AROUND.
THE NEW LANGUAGE LIMITING IT TO
CERTAIN TYPES OF MARKS AND
QUESTIONS AROUND THE FIRST
MEMBER BUT I ALSO WORRY THAT
THERE MIGHT BE A AND NARROWING
OF THAT.
I LIKE TO US THE AUTHOR -- WHAT
YOUR THOUGHTS ARE IN SOME OF
THESE QUESTIONS AT THE
OPPOSITION IS RAISED DO YOU
THINK THERE'S A PATH HERE TO
RESOLVING THESE ISSUES -- BOTH
YOU KNOW OBVIOUSLY WANTED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE LAW IS IS
CLEAR -- THAT DOESN'T CREATE
FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES BUT ALSO.
NOT INADVERTENTLY MAKE IT MORE
DIFFICULT TO WHAT TO DO WHAT YOU
ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.
WELL.
SIR YOU'RE WELCOME TO BUT A LOT
OF THESE CHANGES COME FOR ME
THAT I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ASSIST
YOU IN OUT I WAS GONNA ASK CHAU
JUST GONNA SAY IF IF.
IT SO WHAT WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH
AND HAPPY TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION AND CENTER I
APPRECIATE YOU.
BEING WILLING TO WORK WITH US ON
THIS IS IS GOES BACK TO THE
FORMATION OF DOMAIN NAMES AND
HOW THAT IS PUT TOGETHER.
TRADE.
IN DOMAIN NAMES ARE TWO VERY
DIFFERENT THINGS AND WHEN TO MAY
NAMES WERE NEW TWENTY PEOPLE
WERE STARTING TO GET TO MAY
NAMES AND STARTED TO BE.
SUED BY OR OR GONE AFTER BY
TRADEMARK OWNERS WHO WANTED TO
TO CLAIM THAT DOMAIN NAME AS
THEIR TRADEMARK WHEN THEY WERE
PLENTY OF APPROPRIATE USES OF
THOSE DOMAIN NAMES.
SO WHAT I DID NOT WANT TO DO
HERE IS TO TO FACILITATE.
THE TRAY TRADEMARK OWNER IN
THESE CASES BEING ABLE TO GO
AFTER SOMEONE WHO HAS A DOMAIN
NAME.
LEGITIMATELY. FOR THEIR OWN
PURPOSE OR FOR A PARITY PURPOSE
OR ANY OTHER FIRST AMENDMENT
PURPOSE.
AND HAVE SOMEONE JUST BECAUSE
THEY ARE A TRADEMARK THEN GO
AFTER AND SHUT DOWN IN CHANGE A
DOMAIN NAME.
SO THAT CREATES A LITTLE BIT OF
CONFUSION I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY
THE THE OPPOSITION BECAUSE THEY
WANT TO VERY TIGHTLY CONTROL
THEIR TRADEMARK.
BY CONTROLLING DOMAIN NAMES AND
THOSE AGAIN ARE TWO VERY
DIFFERENT THINGS SO IF THERE IS
A SPORTS STAR OR ENTERTAINMENT
STORE SOMEBODY ELSE.
WHO AND SOMEONE HAD IT HAS SOME
CRITICISM OF THEM AND CREATES A
PARITY ACCOUNTS?
LEGITIMATELY THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT WE WOULD NOT WANT TO BE
SHUT DOWN UNDER THE RULES THAT
ARE BEING CREATED HERE.
I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WE
ARE TRYING TO FACILITATE THE
FRAUDULENT.
SELLING OF TICKETS AND OTHER
ASPECTS WHERE WE AGREE WE DO NOT
WANT THAT BEHAVIOR BUT WHAT I
ALSO DON'T WANT TO DO IS MAKE IS
GIVE TOOLS. TO TRADEMARK OWNERS
ADDITIONAL TOOLS A TRADEMARK
OWNERS TO BE ABLE TO GO AFTER TO
THEM INCONVENIENT DOMAINS AND
DOMAIN NAMES.
IN WAYS THAT ARE NOT.
COMBATING FRAUD NOT COMBATING
INAPPROPRIATE USES BUT ARE
LEGITIMATE USES SO THAT'S THE
SENSITIVITY WERE REALLY TRYING
TO SOLVE HERE.
IT IS STILL GO AFTER THE
FRAUDULENT USES OF NAMES THE
MISDIRECTION OF A FAN WHO WANTS
TO GO TO A CONCERT WAS BECAUSE
THAT WE WANT THEM TO GO TO THE
CORRECT SITES.
BY SOMEONE WHO PUTS UP
LEGITIMATELY USES IT A DOMAIN
NAME CREATES A WEBSITE.
THAT HAS NO CONNECTION TO WHAT'S
HAPPENING HERE.
THEN THEY SHOULD NOT BE BEING
PROSECUTED UNDER THIS AND THAT
WAS MY CONCERN THAT THIS WAS
BROADLY ENOUGH WRITTEN.
THAT NOW A TRADEMARK OWNER IS
GOING TO GO AFTER A DOMAIN NAME
EIGHT A DOMAIN.
THAT IS OUT ON THE INTERNET
WHOSE PURPOSE IS UNRELATED TO
THE FRAUD THAT'S BEING
PERPETRATED.
IF I COULD JUST ASK ONE FALL
QUESTIONS I THINK I UNDERSTAND
WHY YOU'D WANT.
TO LIMIT THIS TO CERTAIN TYPES
OF MARKS I GUESS.
THE THE BURDEN OF PROOF WITH
REGARDS TO BAD FAITH -- I'M
WONDERING HOW YOU BALANCE ADDED
NOT BUT WHAT I'M CONCERNED BUT
AS I JUST READ IT IT SEEMS IF
YOU ARE IT IT WILL MAKE IT MORE
DIFFICULT TO PROSECUTE THESE
CASES.
WONDER IF YOU THOUGHT OF THE GAP.
POTENTIALLY BUT AGAIN THE THE
BALANCE BETWEEN PROSECUTING
THESE CASES OF FRAUD.
AND ABUSE OF A A TRADEMARK VIS A
VIS A DOMAIN NAME IS WHAT.
TRYING TO TO THREAD SO IN CASES
WHERE.
SOMEBODY'S USING A DOMAIN NAME
WITH THE INTENT TO DECEIVE A
CONSUMER AND GO GET THAT
CONSUMERS BUSINESS AS AND
REDIRECT THEM FROM.
A LEGITIMATE SITE IS SOMETHING I
HAVE NO SYMPATHY FOR AND THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE
GOING AFTER.
BUT TO THEN AND UNDER THE UNDER
THE BILL AS WRITTEN.
ORIGINALLY I WAS WORRIED THAT
THAT STARTS TO GIVE TOOLS TO
SOMEONE WHO HAS A NAME WHO AS A
TRADEMARK WHO IS DOING BUSINESS
UNDER A NAME AND GIVE THEM THE
ABILITY TO GO AFTER.
A SITE THAT IS INCONVENIENT TO
THEM AS OPPOSED TO SOMEONE WHO
IS PERPETRATING A FRAUD.
IT CASH OUT ON THAT IT THIS
INJECTION ASIAN BECAUSE THEY ARE
YOUR AMENDMENTS AND IS RESULT OF
YOUR EXPERIENCE IN YOUR PRIOR
LAW IT LIFE IS A LAWYER.
AREN'T YOU KNOW WE THINK ABOUT
THE PRACTICAL HERE RIGHT.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IN OUR BUSINESS
IN THE LAW WHERE EVERYBODY LOOKS
AT THESE THINGS IN A CERTAIN WAY.
YOU HAVE SOMEBODY WHO'S CLEARLY
A RAT FINK WHO'S OUT THERE
TRYING TO GET BUSINESS USING
SOMEBODY ELSE'S NAME SPORTS TEAM.
SAY THE DODGERS FOR EXAMPLE
RIGHT IN ORDER TO GET TICKETS
BECAUSE THAT'S OKAY WITH ME
OPPLER TEAM.
AND SO.
AND SO YOU KNOW [inaudible]
IT'S ALWAYS.
THAT'S A WIN LOSE THE BILL WITH
ALL YOU GUYS NORTH BUT IN ANY
EVENT WHAT I'VE A LOYAL FAN I'LL
GO DOWN TO THE DEATH.
BUT IN ANY EVENT -- THE POINT IS
THE USE THAT WE KNOW WHAT'S
ABOUT FRANK SITE WE KNOW THAT'S
THE CASE WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
TO GIVE THIS PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION.
INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PEOPLE GO
TO CLASS ACTION STATUS DETERRENT
IF YOU HAVE THIS SITUATION WHERE
YOU HAVE THESE YOU ARE LOW CODES
THAT WAS ARTICULATED IN THE
ANALYSIS.
AND SOMEBODY GOES THERE WILL
YOU'RE NOT GOING.
TO GET A JUDGE LOOK AT THAT THAT
ISN'T ABOUT TO FROM FRIDAY SO I
DO THINK ACTUALLY THAT IS YOU DO
THIS I KNOW HOW THE OTHER SIDE
CAN ARGUE BECAUSE EVERYBODY
WANTS.
BELTS AND SUSPENDERS IT SAYS MY
COMPANIES EXEMPTED OR THIS BILLS
ONLY FOR MY COMPANY AND THAT
THEY CAN READ THINGS THE WAY
THEY WANT TO READ IT IS LAWYERS
BUT THE REALITY IN PRACTICAL
APPLICATION WHAT YOU'VE DONE
EXACTLY I THINK.
ADDRESSES THIS THIS TENSION THAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS.
IF I COULD JUST SAID I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE THE TENSION HERE --
BECAUSE HE'S A MAN IT'S A
RELATIVELY NEW WERE TRYING TO
ABSORB THEM -- I HAVE GATHERED
THAT THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE
SPENT A LOT OF TIME REALLY
THINKING THIS THROUGH.
I WILL.
VOTE FOR TO MOVE THIS FOR TODAY
BUT I WILL JUST SAY MY HOPE IS
THAT THE PARTIES CAN CONTINUE TO
WORK ON THIS -- AS IT GOES TO
THE NEXT STOP IN AND I WILL
CERTAINLY RESERVE MY RIGHT TO
TAKE A LOOK AT THIS -- AT THE
NEXT STOP IN AND I HOPE WE GET
TO A CLOSE RESOLUTION THANK YOU
AND I DO HOPE WE PASSED THIS BUT
AND MY COMMITMENT TO THE SENATOR
IS. TO TRY AND RESOLVE THIS
BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO A
POINT WHERE THE OPPOSITION.
COMES OFTEN UNDERSTANDS IS
BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING IS
IS GOING AFTER.
FRAUDULENT USES THAT ARE
UNDERMINING A SPORTS SIDE OF
CELEBRITY SIDE.
ENTERTAINMENT SITES ABILITY TO
DO THEIR BUSINESS ACTUALLY THAT
IS NOT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
INTERRUPT HERE BUT AS I READ
THIS AND HAVING BEEN INVOLVED
EARLY ON WITH SO MANY NAMES AND
VARIOUS.
ACTIONS AROUND TRADEMARK OWNERS
TRYING TO GO AFTER PEOPLE WHO
HAS LEGITIMATELY REGISTER DOMAIN
NAMES I AM SENSITIVE TO THIS
BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF THERE
WERE A LOT OF ABUSES AT THAT
TIME.
AND IN FACT INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE
FORCED TO GIVE UP DOMAIN NAMES
THAT THEY LEGITIMATE HAVE.
UNDER THE PRESSURE OF THE COURTS
THAT LAW HAD SINCE BEEN CHANGED.
IN WAYS THAT GIVE SOME
PREFERENCES TO SOMEONE WHO HAS
LEGITIMATELY REGISTERED TO A
DOMAIN NAME.
THAT THAT WAS BENEFICIAL.
I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO A
SITUATION NOW WHERE A TRADEMARK
OWNER CAN UNNECESSARILY
INTERFERE WITH SOMEONE WHO IS
LEGITIMATE PUTTING OUT A DEMAND
IT.
AND SO IF IF.
YOU WANT TO PUT UP A A DOMAIN
THAT SAYS DODGERS STOCK.
AS A GUIDE FOR AS A SORRY WERE
WERE.
I THEY OWN THAT ACTUALLY SAID IF
THIS SENATOR BROUGHT THAT UP
RIGHT THAT SHOULD NOT BE
SOMETHING THAT THE OFFICIAL.
THE THAT DE THE OFFICIAL.
TEAM SHOULD BE GOING AFTER
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ABOUT.
COLLECTING AND DIVERTING SOMEONE
AWAY FROM TICKETS IT'S ABOUT A
VALUE STATEMENT THAT SOMEBODY
WOULD WANT TODAY.
SO THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT
THAT IS WHERE THE FIRST A MEMBER
COMES AND WE DON'T WANT TO
PREVENT THAT [inaudible]
THAT'S A POLITICAL STATEMENT A
RIVAL RESTATEMENT BUT NOT
NECESSARILY INTERVIEW.
INTERFERING WITH THE DODGERS
ABILITY TO STIR SELL TICKETS OR
THEIR AUTHORIZED AGENTS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
DO AND IF WE HAVEN'T DONE THIS.
PERFECTLY WERE HAPPY TO CONTINUE
TO TALK ABOUT THAT BUT THAT'S
WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO THREAD
AND ENSURE THAT WE'RE STOPPING
THE OFFENSES INTENDED.
BUT NOT GOING ON BEYOND WHERE
WE'RE GONNA NOW SEE THE THAT
THIS LAW BE ABLE TO BE USED TO
SHUT DOWN DEMANDS THAT HAVE
REALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE
FRAUD.
THAT IS CONCERNED ABOUT IT AND I
AND I SEE WHY THIS IS SO
DIFFICULT TO THREAD BECAUSE THE
OPPOSITE CASE IF IF SOMEONE.
PERHAPS THE SENATE AUTHOR -- HAD
PURCHASED GO DODGERS AND THAT
BECAME A WAY TO SELL TICKETS
FRAUDULENTLY CORRECT THOSE ARE
THE TWO SCENARIOS THAT WERE
TRYING TO DISTINGUISH.
YES YES AND SO IF THAT GO
DODGERS EURO IS BEING USED
FRAUDULENTLY WE WE WANT TO BE
ABLE TO GO AND STOP THAT.
BUT IF THAT'S BEING USED IN A
WAY THAT IS.
AS I SAY AND RELY AMPLE IN.
YEAH EXAMPLE LIKE TO GO IN ALL
THE GIANTS GAMES AND BASICALLY.
PROTESTERS THE TEAM.
NOW YOU LAWSUIT I'D WHAT WOULD
BE THE JANITOR PURPOSE
[inaudible]
YEAH.
BUT NOT SELL TICKETS AT YOU KNOW
AT INFLATED PATE RIGHT ENOUGH
THAT AMOUNTS THAT'S A
DISTINCTION WE'RE TRYING TO
CREATE HERE.
AND ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH WHAT
THAT.
OPPOSITION AS PROPOSED HERE YOU
KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH SO WE DO NOT ONE
UNDER MY THAT BUT THAT'S TO ME
THE SENSITIVITY.
THANK YOU AND AND AND I I AM
COMMITTED TO TO CONTINUE TO WORK
I I GET THE ISSUE YOU YOU
COMMITTEE PUT THESE AMENDMENTS
AND I HAVE THIS ALL ALONG I
THINK THAT YOUR EXPERTISE AS
INFORM THE PROCESS.
CAPITA WORK WITH YOU GUYS -- ED
TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HOW
TO DEAL WITH THE SENSITIVITIES
YOU'RE WORKING WITH I HAVE NO
OBJECTION TO IT BUT I THINK YOUR
POINTS WELL TAKEN IN.
AS PART OF MY CLOTHES GIVEN MY
AUDIENCE TO MY LEFT I JUST WANNA
MAKE SURE WE INCLUDE THE PADRES
IN ANY DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE
HERE.
ALL RIGHT QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
WE WILL YES THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND WE
WILL CERTAINLY WORK THAT.
CENTER.
I ALWAYS GIVE THE OFFICE A LAST
WORD YOU HAVE YET LAST WORD IF
YOU LIKE THANK YOU.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND THAT MOTIONS TO
PASS AS AMENDED.
CALL THE ROLL PLEASE STONE BY
STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER I CHAU CHIU.
CHU AYE GONZALEZ CONSULT AYE
HOLDEN KALRA.
KILEY.
MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
HI PETRIE-NORRIS I THANK YOU
SENATOR IT THE SB FOUR TWENTY
FIVE REQUIRES HOSPITALS CLINICS
AND OTHER HEALTH FACILITIES TO
REPORT ALLEGATIONS OF PATIENTS
SEXUAL ABUSE ANOTHER MISSED.
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY MEDICAL
PROFESSIONALS TO THE APPROPRIATE
STATE LICENSING AUTHORITIES
WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS I HAVE
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR THE MOTIONS BEFORE.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS CENTER
FOR SOME OF THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA THE POOR BELIEVE THIS
BILL WILL FURTHER THE BOARDS
MISSION A CONSUMER PROTECTION.
AND ENSURE THAT THE BOARD IS
AWARE OF ALLEGATIONS OF THE
BOARD CAN LOOK INTO INCIDENTS AS
A POTENTIAL SEXUAL ABUSE MAKES
CONTACT.
THE BOARD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
TRY VOTE THANK YOU THANK YOU
ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
MICHAEL BUT ART ON BEHALF OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU ANYONE
ELSE IN SUPPORT.
BACK IN MARKETS REPRESENTING THE
CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LINES
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
ALL RIGHT SEE NONE IS THEIR
OPPOSITION.
ALRIGHT SING NONE QUESTIONS
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
SCOUTER -- I JUST WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR OF BRING IN THIS FOR
I THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT
ISSUE THAT YES.
WE WERE TALKING EARLIER.
ON THE SAME LINE THERE'S MEN
MANY COMPLAINTS THAT HAVE GONE A
TOTALLY UNNOTICED TOTALLY
UNADDRESSED -- AND I THINK THIS
BILL.
WILL HELP ENSURE THAT THOSE
THOSE THINGS ARE TAKEN VERY
SERIOUSLY AND THEY GET TO THE
APPROPRIATE -- DISCIPLINARY
REVIEW SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
AFFORDABLE.
PROUD TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY IF
YOU VERY MUCH REMEMBER GALLAGHER
GIVE OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SEEING NONE SENATOR YOU MAKE
LIKE YOU MISTER CHAIR THANK YOU
COLLEAGUES APPRECIATE THAT THE
SUPPORT TODAY AND I JUST WANT TO
THANK THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION FOR WORKING SO
CLOSELY WITH US AND COMING TO A
RESOLUTION SOLUTION ON THIS THEY
DID THEY DID GOOD WORK AND THANK
YOU TO THE TO THE MEDICAL.
BOARD AS WELL.
YOUR AYE VOTE THANK YOU THANK
YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION A SECOND
THAT MOTION IS DUE PASSED TO
APPROPRIATIONS CALL THE ROLL
PLEASE STONE.
BY STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER I CHAU CHIU. TO AYE
GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN KALRA
[inaudible]
KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
MENTION I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS IRACING.
THE BILL IS OUT THANK YOU VERY
MUCH KELLY THANK YOU GET ANOTHER.
ALRIGHT WE SEEM TO BE MISSING
OTHER SENATORS THE AUTHORS I'LL
TAKE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND
CALL THE ROLL.
STONE BY STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER I CHAO CHIU.
YOU AYE GONZALEZ.
HOLDEN KALRA KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
MENTION I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
I PETRIE-NORRIS I REYES.
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS ON CALL WE
STILL NEED ONE MORE ON CONSENT
WAS SB -- THREE SEVENTY BURKE SP
FOUR SEVENTY NINE ATKINS AND SB
SEVEN EIGHTY EIGHT FROM THE
SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
COMMITTEE.
SO WE HAVE.
SENATORS ATKINS BRADFORD ALLEN.
CABALLERO AND MITCHELL.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME AND
PRESENT WE WOULD BE HAPPY
.
CENTER BRADFORD WELCOME.
GOOD OUR ITEM NUMBER FOR SB TO
EIGHTEEN THANK YOU [inaudible]
THREE PAYMENTS.
THANK YOU AS CHAIR.
I'M HERE TO PRESENT -- AS THREE
TO EIGHTEEN EIGHTEEN AND I WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR ALL
THE WORKING EXCEPT COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU AS IT RELATES TO THIS
BILL SB TWO EIGHTEEN ALLOWS
LOCAL JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE
STATE LAW PROHIBITING EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION.
AND ENACT THEIR OWN ANTI
DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE
RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT.
CURRENTLY THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING IT'S THE
ONLY BODY IN THE STATE
AUTHORIZED TO ENFORCE THE
STATE'S ANTI DISCRIMINATION LAWS.
DEPARTMENT RECEIVED OVER.
TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND OUR
DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS EVERY YEAR
BUT VERY FEW OF THEM ARE
ACTUALLY -- I FULLY INVESTIGATED.
AS WE KNOW EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION IS ON THE UP RISE
IN CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS THIS
NATION SPECIALS RELATES AFRICAN
AMERICANS AND LATINOS.
ARE SB TWO EIGHTEEN FEELS TO
CRITICAL ENFORCEMENT GAP AND
SURE PEOPLE RETURN TO WORK
FASTER RECOVER LOST WAGES
CONTRIBUTE TO LOCAL ECONOMY AND
PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES --
OUT WITH ME TODAY IN TESTIMONY
IS LINDA JONES FROM LA BLOCK OR
WORKERS CENTER.
AND MY CARILLO -- FROM THE
WESTERN CENTER LONG POVERTY IN A
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR AYE VOTE
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE.
HI COMMITTEE MY NAME IS.
LINDA JONES AND I HAVE WORKED AS
A REGISTERED NURSE FOR MORETHAN
THIRTY FIVE YEARS SINCE.
NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR I HAVEN'T
HAD MANY ON STAFF NURSING
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES -- SO
MOST OF MY WORK HAS BEEN
ASSIGNED BY THE NURSING REGISTRY.
REGISTRY NURSES CAN AT ANY TIME
BE WRITTEN UP AND PLACED ON A DO
NOT RETURNED WITH.
A DO NOT RETURN OR DNR MEANS
THAT YOU CANNOT RETURN TO THAT
MEDICAL FACILITY DUE TO WHATEVER
NURSING SUPERVISOR RECEIVE
THAT'S ONE THING COMPETENCE
PERFORMANCE.
OR TROUBLESOME BEHAVIOR.
I KNOW THE JOB I KNOW HOW TO BE
A NURSING PROFESSIONAL.
BEFORE I BECAME AN RN I WAS A
CNA FOR FIFTEEN YEARS.
SO I KNOW THE D. N. R. S. WERE
NEVER RELATED TO MY JOB
PERFORMANCE. TO DATE I HAVE
RECEIVED SEVERAL DISCRIMINATORY
THE IN OURS RIGHT UPS THROUGHOUT
MY CAREER.
NONE OF THEM WILL WARRANTED OR
EVEN EXPLAINING.
YET AND STILL I CAN NO LONGER
WORK AT THESE FACILITIES. ONE
STORY THAT REALLY STANDS OUT TO
ME WAS BEING THE IN OUR AFTER
WORKING FOR HOURS ON A TWELVE
HOUR SHIFT.
I WAS ONLY A THE ONLY BLACK ARE
IN ON THE UNIT AT THAT FACILITY.
I REMEMBER WAKING UP WAKING UP
EXTRA EARLY THAT MORNING SO I
COULD GET MY GRAND KIDS READY
FOR SCHOOL BEFORE I HAD TO LEAVE.
I DROVE OVER NOW FROM POMONA TO
PANORAMA CITY -- THROUGH REST
OUT WHAT TRAFFIC ARRIVED ON TIME
IMPROPERLY BEGAN MAKING MY
ROUNDS.
BY NOON I WAS DISMISSED -- THEIR
REASON I LEFT MY MEDICAL REPORTS
FACED UP ON THE COMPUTER DEATH.
THERE ARE NO ALLIES FOR REGISTRY
NURSES.
THERE IS NO WHERE WE CAN GO TO
DISPUTE.
THESE CLAIMS.
NOT EVEN THE REGISTRIES WE'RE
CONTRACTED WITH.
CAT TO DEFEND OUR RIGHTS TO WORK --
WITH TRANSPARENCY I'VE FOUGHT
THESE DE IN NORTH BY FILE IN
WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR
HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT.
A MATTER OF FACT I FILED SEVERAL
COMPLAINTS.
A TO FIND SOME JUSTICE AND EVEN
FULL INVESTIGATION INTO THE
CLAIMS. FOR ME THE FOLLOWING
PROCESS WAS NEVER CLEAR EASY BY
THE TIME.
I WOULD HEAR BACK FROM.
MY CLAIMS IT WOULD BE TOO LATE
TO PURSUE.
A MEANS OF DEATH THIS EVEN WITH
A RIGHT TO SUE LETTERS.
LAWYERS WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE
WRONGS BUT WOULD NEVER AGREE TO
TAKE THE CASE.
THE WAY OUT THIS PROCESS THAT
BECAME VERY ANGRY AT THE SYSTEM
ANGRY BECAUSE HERE I GO AGAIN.
I HAVE TO RE EVALUATE MY LIFE
I'M GOING TO FEED MY FAMILY.
PAY MY BILLS THAT ARE ALREADY AT
THE TURN OFF STATUS.
I HAVE SEEN MANY BLACK BAR ENDS.
BECOME BLACKLIST DUE TO THE DNR
WRITE UPS.
BY MEDICAL FACILITIES THAT
EMPLOY A FEW.
IF ANY BLACK NURSES.
AS A RESULT SOMEONE LATER FOR US
TO LEAVE THEIR PROFESSION
STRUGGLING TO SUPPORT THEIR
FAMILIES I PERSONALLY KNOW A FEW
WHO LEFT THE STATE.
IN SEARCH OF FAIR UNBIASED
EMPLOYMENT.
BLACK NURSING PROFESSIONALS IN
THE STRONG PROTECTION AGAINST AN
UNJUST DISCRIMINATORY SYSTEM
THAT FORCED THEM TO BE
VULNERABLE.
THAT IS WHY I AM HERE TODAY TO
SUPPORT THE SENATE BILL.
TWO EIGHTEEN BLACK NURSES IN
HONESTLY ALL WORKERS.
DESPERATELY NEED BETTER SILVER
RIGHTS PROTECTION IN ORDER LEAD
2% OF SUCCESSFULLY REMAIN AN
IMPERFECTION.
THANK YOU THANK YOU THAT'S WITH
US PLEASE.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS MY
CAROL WITH THE WESTERN CENTER ON
LAW AND POVERTY AND I HAVE TO
SAY AT THE OUTSET THERE'S NO WAY
I'M GOING TO TOP THAT.
AND I JUST SAW WHAT I WANT TO
SAY THOUGH -- YOU KNOW AS MANY
OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS KNOW
OUR OUR BRAD AND BUTTER ISSUES
UP HERE ARE PUBLIC BENEFITS AND
WE WORK ON THEM ALL THE TIME.
AND THOSE PUBLIC BENEFITS ARE
THERE FOR GOOD REASON THAT WHEN
SOMEONE HAS TROUBLE.
LOSE THEIR JOB THEY THEY LACK
EMPLOYMENT -- THOSE ARE THERE TO
BE A SAFETY NET FOR OUR
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES AND AND
THERE AND WE HAVE A GOOD SYSTEM
IN THERE AND IT WORKS REASONABLY
EFFECTIVELY.
BUT TOO OFTEN WHAT WE SEE IS
THAT PEOPLE END UP HAVING TO USE
THOSE PUBLIC BENEFITS SYSTEMS
BECAUSE OF SITUATIONS LIKE YOU
JUST HEARD.
PEOPLE ARE BEING TREATED
UNFAIRLY AND WORK THEY'RE BEING
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST AND
BECAUSE OF THAT THEY'RE BEING
FORCED THEM TO OUR PUBLIC
BENEFIT PROGRAMS.
WHEN THINGS LIKE THIS HAPPEN TO
PEOPLE?
THERE SHOULD BE A LEGAL RECOURSE --
UNFORTUNATELY OUR STATE SYSTEM
OVER THE LAST SEVERAL THE LAST
DECADE OR SO HAS.
NOT BEEN ABLE TO PERFORM THE JOB
THAT IT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE
DOING TO PROTECT WORKERS LIKE MS
JONES WHEN WITH THE LACK OF
THOSE RESOURCES AND AND THE
FAILURE OF MANY INVESTIGATIONS
BY DE OF THE H..
WE ARE SEEING WORKERS FALL
THROUGH THE CRACK AND THEN
HAVING TO RELY ON PUBLIC
ASSISTANCE ALL THE TIME -- I
WOULD JUST NOTE THAT REALLY WHAT
THIS IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE IS THE
SAME BALLOTS THAT WE'VE HAD IN
FAIR HOUSING FOR MANY YEARS.
MANY LOCAL JURISDICTIONS HAVE
LOCAL FAIR HOUSING COMMISSIONS
THAT BACK UP AND WORK WITH THE
STATE SYSTEM TO ENSURE THAT MORE
PEOPLE GET THE KIND OF
PROTECTIONS THEY NEED WHEN
THEY'RE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.
IN THE HOUSING WORLD AND WE'RE
NOW SUGGESTING THAT THAT OUGHT
TO BE EXTENDED OUT TO EMPLOYMENT
CASES AND FOR THAT REASON WE
BELIEVE THAT.
SB TWO EIGHTEEN IS REALLY JUST
KIND OF A MODICUM OF BASIC
DECENCY THAT WE OUGHT TO HAVE AT
THE STATE LEVEL TO ENSURE THAT
THAT EMPLOYMENT GETS THE SAME
PROTECTION THAT HOUSING DOES.
AND WE ALLOW LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
TO BE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THOSE
KIND OF AGENCIES ALSO.
WORDS SUPPORT OF THE BILL
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THAT'S WHAT THIS.
HI GOOD MORNING -- MY NAME IS
MINDY GIRL AND I AND OUR WORK
WITH THE LA BLACK WORKERS CENTER
WE ARE PROUD SPONSOR OF THE BILL
IN SUPPORT AND I'M AVAILABLE TO
TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU ON MY HALF THANK YOU ANYONE
ELSE IN SUPPORT IF YOU COULD
COME FORWARD GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLEASE.
THANK YOU RENE BAYARDO ESSAY YOU
SEE ARE YOU CALIFORNIA.
MICHAEL YOUNG WITH CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION HERE SUPPORT.
CAME IN DEAN WITH THE ALLIANCE
FOR BOYS AND MEN OF COLOR AT
POLICY LINK PROUD CO SPONSORS.
AND ONE MATHIS WITH UT W. ASKED
ME LOCAL. THIRTY NINE THIRTY AND
PRATT'S PART.
CHUCK I'M REALLY.
WITH THE FORTY THREE THREE LA
AND FROM SUPPORT OF AS BETWEEN.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE --
JENNIFER BROWN BEHALF THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND WE ARE.
CLOSED SB -- TWO EIGHTEEN WE
FULLY AGREE -- THAT ANYBODY WHO
HAS SUFFERED DISCRIMINATION
SHOULD HAVE A AT FISH AND AND
EASIER UP PROCESS TO GO THROUGH
TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S
INVESTIGATED IMPROPERLY
ADDRESSED HOWEVER WE DO HAVE
CONCERNS THAT SB TWO EIGHTEEN
WON'T NECESSARILY PROVIDE.
THAT -- PROCESS DUE TO SOME OF
THE CONCERNS WE HAVE WITH
REGARDS TO SUBSTANTIVE
INCONSISTENCY IN PROCEDURAL
INCONSISTENCY THAT WE CAN SEE
MAY ARISE FROM -- THIS PROPOSAL
OF MEMBERS OF OUR OF OUR MEMBERS
ARE DEFINITELY CONCERNED WITH
REGARDS TO THE SUBSTANTIVE
INCONSISTENCY IN WHAT THIS BILL
PROVIDES IS THAT THESE LOCAL
AGENCIES.
MAY INTERPRET THE FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT WHICH
WE ARE CONCERNED MAY LEAD TO
INCONSISTENCIES WITH REGARDS TO
THE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT
QUALIFIES AND CONSTITUTES
DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT.
I WAS -- A PART OF THE US BEFORE
NINETY FIVE FOUR NINETY ONE
ADVISORY GROUP THAT -- THAT
DRAFTED THE REPORT THAT WAS
ISSUED -- AND IS THE BASIS FOR
THIS PROPOSAL AND ONE OF THOSE --
IT ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THE
REPORT THAT IS RAISED IS THE
TRAINING THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY
TO BE CONDUCTED FOR A LOT OF
THESE LOCAL AGENCIES AND THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE GOING TO BE
INVESTIGATING A PROCESSING
COMPLAINTS THE LOCAL LEVEL. TO
MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS
CONSISTENCY WITH REGARDS THE
INTERPRETATION OF THE FOR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT --
AND THAT'S NOT A PART OF THIS
PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW AS WE HAVE
CONCERNS WITH THAT WE ALSO HAVE
CONCERNS WITH THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR THE LOCALS -- TO ADOPT THEIR
OWN DISCRIMINATION LAWS ON WHICH
WOULD CREATE INCONSISTENCIES
FROM JURISDICTION TO
JURISDICTION AS TO WHAT
QUALIFIES FOR A DISCRIMINATION.
AND COULD HAVE A CHALLENGES FOR
AN EMPLOYER WHO OPERATES IN
MULTIPLE LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT
HAS CONSISTENT POLICIES THAT
PROTECT ALL OF THEIR EMPLOYEES
WHEN YOU HAVE.
DIFFERENT -- ORDINANCES WITH
REGARDS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES
DISCRIMINATION SO WE HAVE
CONCERNS FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE
AS WELL.
PROCEDURALLY WERE ALSO CONCERNED
AS HIGHLIGHTED BY SOME OF THE
POINTS REASONING ANALYSIS ABOUT
MAKING SURE THAT IT IS A SMOOTH
PROCESS AND THAT ALL THE
AGENCIES ARE WORK TOGETHER --
AND THAT IT IS RESOLVED IN A WAY --
THAT DOESN'T.
OBVIOUSLY AT THAT PROTECTS THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS PURSUING A
DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT BUT
ALSO PROVIDES NOTICE AN
OPPORTUNITY.
AND RIGHTS FOR THE EMPLOYER WHO
IS IT WHO IS CHALLENGING -- THE
CLAIM -- WHICH WE ALSO CAN ARE
CONCERNED THAT THE BILL THAT'S
IMPROPER WE HAVE THOSE PROCESSES
IN PLACE AND OTHER CONCERNED IS
ALSO WITH REGARDS TO VENUE AND
WHERE THESE CLAIMS REFILED
OBVIOUSLY.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY
WHERE DISCRIMINATION NECESSARILY
OCCURS AND TO HAVE.
SOME LOCATION.
IT COULD CREATE A VENUE
CHALLENGE WITH REGARDS TO VENUE
SHOPPING INFORM SHOPPING WITH
REGARDS TO WHERE THE CLAIMS ARE
BEING PROCESSED AND CLARA.
AND AND FILED AND SO WE HAVE --
CONCERNS FROM THAT PROCEDURAL
PROCESS AS WELL SO WE ARE
CONCERNED -- AND MY FINAL POINT
IS -- IF TO THE EXTENT THAT THE
EXISTING AGENCY THE DEPARTMENT
OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
IS NOT INVESTIGATING THESE IN A
AND FISHING MANNER -- WE HAVE A
HUGE SURPLUS IN THE STATE RIGHT
NOW BUDGETARY A SURPLUS AND SO I
HAVEN'T FOUND A REASON AS TO WHY
WE CAN'T JUST DEVOTE MORE
RESOURCES TO THE EXISTING AGENCY
AND AVOID A LOT OF THESE
PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE
INCONSISTENCIES THAT WE'VE
RAISED AS CONCERNS.
I'M AND HAVE THAT BEING A WAY TO
ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF MORE
EFFICIENT -- RESOLUTION OF
INVESTIGATIONS AND COMPLAINTS
FILED WITH THE DMV H. SO FOR
THOSE REASONS WE ARE OPPOSED.
THANK YOU THAT'S WHAT THIS KIM
STONE STONE ADVOCACY ON BEHALF
OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE ASSOCIATION
OF CALIFORNIA ALSO IN OPPOSITION --
OF COURSE THAT ENFORCEMENT
AGGRESSIVE AN APPROPRIATE
ENFORCEMENT UNFAIR AND POINTED
IN HOUSING ACT IS IMPORTANT BUT
BUSINESSES AND POTENTIAL
DEFENDANTS DO NEED CONSISTENCY
SO THEY'RE AWARE OF CLEAR RULES
AND CAN FOLLOW THEM -- THIS BILL
IF ENACTED COULD LEAD TO A
SITUATION WHERE THERE ARE
DIFFERENT RULES -- IN DIFFERENT
JURISDICTIONS FOR EXAMPLE YOUR
DISTRICT STAFF MIGHT HAVE ONE
SET OF DISCRIMINATION RULES
WHEREAS YOUR CAPITAL STAFF MIGHT
HAVE ANOTHER ONE WELL THAT WOULD
BE DIFFICULT TO COMPLY WITH FOR
LEGISLATORS BUSINESSES WHO OF
DIFFERENT.
LOCATIONS WOULD HAVE THE SAME
PROBLEM LOCAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD
POTENTIALLY LEAD TO A PATCH WORK --
A VERY RULES MAKING IT HARDER
FOR DEFENDANTS TO COMPLY WHICH
WE WANT THEM TO DO FOR THOSE
REASONS WE MUST RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE THE BILL.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
RIGHT SIGNALED BRING BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE.
QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
THIS FEATURE NORTH.
SENATOR I'M JUST PICKING UP I
THINK ON A QUESTION THAT THE
OPPOSITION RAISED I AM.
SO.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY THE PRIMARY
MOTIVATION FOR FOR THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION IS THAT T. F. EACH
DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUISITE
CAPACITY TO PROCESS CLAIMS.
YOU'RE IN A EXPEDITIOUS MANNER
SO WHY WOULD WE CREATE AN OF A
PARALLEL PROCESS RATHER THAN
JUST INVESTING MORE RESOURCES
INDIA V. H. R. IN ORDER TO SERVE
OUR EMPLOYEES BETTER I AND TO BE
ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT WERE IT
OCCURRED.
PROVIDES A A MORE COMPREHENSIVE
I FEEL RESOLUTION AND THE
INVESTIGATION VERSUS GIVEN IT TO
THE STATE THAT'S CUMBERSOME WE
ALL YEAR EVERY IN EVERY
DEPARTMENT OF OCT.
HOW THE STATE IS OVER BURDEN HOW
WE'RE SLOW HOW WE'RE SPENDING
TOO MUCH MONEY NOW WE WANT TO
DIRECT MORE MONEY TO A
DEPARTMENT THAT IS NOT?
DOING THE JOB IT DIDN'T HAVE THE
CAPACITY LET THE LOCAL LEVEL DO
IT WORK THE DISCRIMINATION
HAPPENED WORTH THE VIOLATION
HAPPEN I THINK.
IT'S NOT CREATING ANY NEW LAWS
IT'S FOLLOWING WHAT'S ON THE
BOOKS SINCE NINETEEN FIFTY NINE
AND JUST LIGHTEN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT INTERPRET THOSE SAME
LAWS THE SAME WAY ARBITRATOR FOR
THE STATE WOULD DO IT.
SO THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO BE THE
ARBITRATOR VERSUS THE STATE.
SEC IT'S GIVING MORE LOCAL
CONTROL.
BUT NOT CREATING A NEW PROCESS
THE PROCESS IS WHAT'S ON THE
BOOKS UNDER FIAT.
AND FOLLOWING THOSE RULES AND
GUIDELINES FOR DISCRIMINATION
THAT HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE
NINETEEN FIFTY NINE NOT.
CREATING A NEW SET OF GUIDELINES
TO SAY THIS IS DISCRIMINATION
THIS IS NOT IT'S CLEARLY DEFINE
WHAT WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION AS
WE'RE JUST ASKING THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT TO INTERPRET THAT.
AND SO DO YOU HAVE A DO YOU
SHARE ANY OF THE CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION RAISED IN TERMS OF
THE RISK THAT THERE'S GOING TO
BE INCONSISTENT AND
INTERPRETATION AND AT WHAT CAN
WE DO TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS.
CONSISTENT INTERPRETATION AND
CONSISTENT I GUESS WE CAN EITHER
CONCERN ON ALMOST ANYTHING AND
WHEN YOU HAVE LOCAL
MUNICIPALITIES ARE COUNTY
GOVERNMENT TO INTERPRET THINGS
DIFFERENTLY.
BASED ON THE MIND SET OR THE
POPULATION THAT THE SERVER BUT
I'M NOT FEARFUL THAT IF THE
GUIDELINES ARE THERE WHETHER
IT'S A FEDERAL LAW STATE LAW OR
A LOCAL ORDINANCE I THINK I HAVE
ENOUGH CONFIDENCE THAT THEY CAN
INTERPRET IT APPROPRIATELY.
AND APPLY IT IN A JUST AND FAIR
MANNER AND SHOW WHETHER IT'S
BEING DONE ON A LOCAL LEVEL OR
STAY LOW WHY I'M CONFIDENT THAT.
THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT IF
THEY CHOOSE TO TAKE IT OFF AGAIN
IT DOESN'T PREVENT.
AN EMPLOYEE.
FROM FILING THIS WITH THE STATE
AND IF YOU DO SO THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT HAD -- NOEL INTO
INTERVENTION IN IT AT ALL STATE
CAN STILL DO IT BUT IT GIVES US
THAT EMPLOYEE WHO'S BEEN
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.
ANOTHER OPTION.
AT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU OTHER QUESTIONS
COMMENTS.
THIS MAIENSCHEIN.
JUST BRIEFLY KIND OF PICKING UP
THERE FOR A SECOND.
SO AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I
UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT
WHAT AND MAYBE A DEMERIT DUMP
BUT CURRENTLY THE STATE THE
STATE HAS A PROCESS THEY GO
THROUGH.
ON HEARING THESE SUIT.
AND I'M A TAKEN INTO PARTS MAY
TAKE IT THE THE INITIAL
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS AND THEN
AND THEN THE APPEALS PROCESS. TO
THE STATE HAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS THAT MAY FOLLOW ON THESE
CLAIMS [inaudible]
YES.
THIS YOU KNOW SAN DIEGO OR LA OR
SAN FRANCISCO TAKING KIND OF THE
BARE PARTS BUT EVEN.
MAYBE IN A MORE PROBLEMATIC WAY
MAYBE SOME OF THE SMALLER.
COUNTIES IN THE STATE.
COULD DO THAT DIFFERENTLY IS
THAT.
A FAIR STATEMENT.
I AM I MEAN YES I THINK THAT'S
FAIR TO SAY THAT SOMEONE MIGHT
INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY JUST
BASED ON WHAT WE ARE YEAH JUST
ARE THERE.
HONEST REVIEW OF THE FACTS LOOK
AT IT DIFFERENTLY AGAIN NOT NOT
TO SAY BETTER OR WORSE MAY GET
IT.
MAYBE DO A BETTER BY THE LIMITED
TORT.
AND THEN SAME WITH THE APPEALS
PROCESS IS THE IS THE APPEALS
PROPER BUT WELL OKAY HOUSE
SEPARATING IS THE APPEALS
PROCESS NOW CHANGE [inaudible]
NO.
EVERYTHING AGAIN IT JUST ALLOWS
LOCAL.
AGENCY TO DEAL WITH IT WERE THE
VIOLATION HAPPEN VERSUS SENATE
TO STATE AND IT MIGHT BE BOGGED
DOWN FOR MONTHS IF NOT A YEAR
BEFORE THEY EVEN LOOK AT IT THIS
I JUST THINK THIS GIVES IS A
QUICKER RESOLUTION TO A PROBLEM
WHETHER IT'S FAVORABLE. FOR THE
EMPLOYER OR NOT YOU GET IT
RESOLVED A LOT QUICKER
[inaudible]
I'M.
OKAY THANK YOU.
IS OUT.
WE WE HAVE THIS FOR CERTAIN.
VIOLATIONS CRAP LIKE WAGE THEFT
FOR EXAMPLE THERE CERTAIN
JURISDICTIONS THAT CURRENTLY CAN
ENFORCE THE STATE LAW.
THIS ISN'T A NEW IDEA
[inaudible]
OKAY.
ANYTHING ELSERIGHT SENATOR YOU
MAY CLOSE ALL RIGHT I THINK YOU
AND I THINK.
YOU THE COMMITTEE FOR THE
QUESTIONS AND AS WE'VE HEARD AND
I WANT TO THANK MS JONES FOR HER
TESTIMONY -- I WAS UNFAMILIAR
WITH HER TESTIMONY AND IT TOUCH
ME PERSONALLY BECAUSE MY MOTHER
IS A REGISTERED NURSE.
AND AS SHE WOUND DOWN HER CAREER
AS A COUNTY NURSE SHE TOOK GONE
REGISTRY JOBS IS TO STAY BUSY
JUST.
ON THE PART TIME BASIS AND SHE
QUICKLY LEFT THE REGISTRY
BECAUSE SHE FELT SHE WAS BEING
SENT OUT TO THESE REMOTE
FACILITIES.
OP POORLY STAFFED VERSUS HER
WHITE COUNTERPART TO ALWAYS HIT
SOMETHING CLOSER IN THE SOUTH
BAY WERE MY MOTHER LIVES SHE WAS
BEING SENT OUT.
AND SHE SHE QUICKLY SAW THAT
THERE WAS A DOUBLE STANDARD AND
HOW SHE WAS BEING ASSIGNED HIM.
HOW SHE YOU KNOW HER --
COUNTERPARTS WERE BEING SIGNED
CHAU.
I THINK A MISS JONES TESTIMONY
JUST IN THAT ONE AREA ALONE NO
THIS IS NOT A NURSING BILL BUT
IT.
TOUCH ME PERSONALLY AT THIS BILL
JUST SIMPLY EMPOWERS LOCAL
GOVERNMENT TO DO WHAT OUR STATE.
AGENCY SOMETIMES IN OUR
DEPARTMENT OR OVER BURDENING
CAN'T DO I THINK WE ALL AGREE
THAT DISCRIMINATION IN FAIR
WEATHER TO EMPLOYMENT OR HOUSING
Z. ISSUE THAT WE SHOULD NOT
DELAY IN ADDRESSING IT SHOULD BE
REQUIRES OUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION.
AND IT'S JUST FACILITATE THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN
WRONGED -- WRONGFULLY TERMINATED
ARE DISCRIMINATOR FILL TO GET
THE PROMOTION THAT THEY WERE
DESERVE BASED ON RACE GENDER
SACKED ARMY RACE GENDER RELAX
OUR RELIGION TO HAVE OPPORTUNITY
TO HAVE THEIR DAY IN COURT OR A
OUR HAVE THAT ISSUE ADJUDICATED.
BEFORE A LOCAL AGENCY LOOKING AT
THE FEE OP PROCESS ARE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU I AM LOOKING -- FOR
MOTION THAT MOTION WOULD BE TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS.
THANK YOU YOU HAVE A MOTION SIR
SECONDS.
AND A SECOND THANK YOU CALL THE
ROLL PLEASE STONE BY STONE AYE
GALLAGHER CHAO.
CHIU.
SALAS.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE NO PETRIE-NORRIS
[inaudible]
NORRIS IRIS.
IT'S TWO MORE VOTES WILL PUT THE
BILL ON CALL THANK YOU.
THANK YOU [inaudible]
CENTER MITCHELL.
SO WE GO TO SB
.
SIX THIRTY NINE WELCOME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH GOOD
AFTERNOON.
NOT QUITE YET AFTERNOON.
ALMA.
FEEL LIKE A NIGHT ACTIVELY BUT
OKAY THINK WE'LL GET THERE I
FELT LIKE SAYING GOOD EVENING
RIGHT.
BASED ON MY MORNING SO FAR AS
I'M SURE ALL OF YOU CAN
CERTAINLY.
SHARE THE SENTIMENT -- I'D LIKE
TO BEGIN BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS THANK YOU
BACK TO YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR
DEVELOPING THE LANGUAGE.
SENATE BILL SIX THREE NINE WILL
INCREASE IN STRENGTH AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION SURROUNDING
MEDICAL CREDIT CARDS THAT ARE
OFFERED TO PATIENTS BY MEDICAL
PROVIDERS.
WHILE CURRENT LAW REQUIRES
MEDICAL PROVIDERS PROVIDE
PATIENTS WITH BASIC INFORMATION
CAN STILL CONSUMERS OFTEN
STRUGGLE WITH UNDERSTANDING HOW
DEFERRED INTEREST PROVISIONS
WORK.
MANY OF THESE PRODUCTS ARE
MARKED WITH THE INTRODUCTORY
PERIOD OF 0% INTEREST WE'VE ALL
SEEN THAT BEFORE.
AND WHILE MOST CONSUMERS EXPECT
INTEREST TO RISE SIGNIFICANTLY
AFTER THE INTRODUCTORY PERIOD
FEW CONSUMERS UNDERSTAND THAT
MOST OF THESE PRODUCTS CONTAIN
THIS DEFERRED INTEREST PROVISION
WHICH CREATES A LITTLE DIFFERENT
SCENARIO CASE IN POINT FOR
EXAMPLE.
LET'S SAY YOU FINANCE ONE
THOUSAND DOLLARS YOU PAY OFF
NINE HUNDRED BY THE END OF THE
INTRODUCTORY PERIOD.
BUT UNDER DEFERRED INTEREST ARE
YOU CAN BE AT ALL AND ARE HIT
WITH INTEREST THAT HAS BEEN
ACCUMULATING EACH MONTH DURING
THE INTRODUCTORY PERIOD.
THAT IS THE CHALLENGE FOR TRYING
TO FIX HERE SO THE SOLUTION WE
BELIEVE IT'S SB SIX THREE NINE
WHICH ADDRESSES THESE ISSUES BY
DOING THE FOLLOWING.
IT WILL PROHIBIT MEDICAL
PROVIDERS FROM SIGNING PEOPLE UP
FOR PRODUCTS WITH DEFERRED
INTEREST PROVISIONS.
WILL PROHIBIT MEDICAL PROVIDERS
FROM CHARGING TO MEDICAL CREDIT
CARDS MORE THAN THIRTY DAYS
PRIOR TO THE SERVICES BEING
RENDERED.
YOU CAN STILL SIGN UP FOR A CAR
THAT INCLUDES DEFERRED INTEREST
BUT YOU HAVE TO DO IT ONLINE
SEPARATE.
FROM WHEN YOU'RE YOU KNOW IN THE
DENTIST'S CHAIR WITH IN PAIN IF
YOU FOLLOW ME.
IT PROHIBITS MEDICAL PROVIDERS
FROM PRE PHILLY NOT MEDICAL
CREDIT CARD APPLICATIONS AND
ONLY ALLOW FOR THAT IT'S SUCH
APPLICATIONS TO BE FEEL THAT IN
THE TREATMENT AREA WHEN THE
PATIENT AGREES.
IT REQUIRES PROVIDED THAT THAT
ACCEPT MEDICARE OUT TO ACTUALLY
EXPLAIN MEDIC TO MEDICARE
PATIENTS WHAT THEY'RE MEDI CAL
BENEFITS ACTUALLY COVERS AND
DOES NOT COVER.
AND IT RE WORDS OF THE
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR THE
SERVICES TO A LEVEL THAT IS MORE.
USER FRIENDLY AND READABLE.
ALL I MY MY OFFICE AND I ARE
AWARE OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE
OPPOSITION RELATING TO PROVIDING
CONSUMERS EQUAL ACCESS THAT
INFORMATION TO A VARIETY OF
FINANCING OPTIONS.
THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTED IN A
RANGE BY MEDICAL PROVIDERS IT IS
NOT MY INTENTION WITH THE
INTENTION OF THIS BILL TO
ELIMINATE MEDICAL CREDIT CARD
THAT IS NOT WE JUST WANNA MAKE
SURE.
THAT CONSUMERS HAVE A
APPROPRIATE IN FAIR SHOT AT
UNDERSTANDING WHAT THEY ARE
SIGNING UP.
FOR ALL AND UNDERSTANDING HOW
INTEREST WILL BE CHARGED I'M
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION COMMITTEE STAFF AND
SUPPORTERS TO THE SUMMER BREAK
TO FIND A PATH FORWARD.
WELL THIRD PARTY FINANCING MAY
BE BENEFICIAL IN PATIENTS NEED
SERVICES THAT THEY CAN AND
CANNOT IMMEDIATELY PAY FOR MORE
NEEDS TO BE DONE TO PROTECT
CONSUMERS.
TODAY I'VE GOT WITH ME JOY
DOCTOR WHO REPRESENTS CONSUMERS
WITH MEDICAL CREDIT CARDS AT
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA LEGAL
SERVICES.
AND CHEN FLORI OF THOSE WHO'VE
REPRESENTING THE WESTERN CENTER
ON LAW AND POVERTY WHO ARE ARE
BILL SPONSORS I ASK FOR YOUR
RIVAL.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE.
GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS TROY
DOCTOR AND I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA LEGAL
SERVICES.
EVERYDAY LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS
CONTACT OUR OFFICE ASKING FOR
HELP WITH MEDICAL BILLS THAT
CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY.
MORE AND MORE OFTEN THEY'RE
ASKING FOR HELP WITH DENTAL CARE
CHARGE TO MEDICAL CREDIT CARDS
I'D LIKE TO SHARE A FEW OF THEIR
STORIES.
LAST YEAR I MET AN EIGHTY FOUR
YEAR OLD MEDI CAL RECIPIENT WILL
CALL IRENE.
SHE WAS TOLD BY THE DENTIST THAT
SHE NEEDED MORE THAN TWELVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS WORTH OF
TREATMENT AND THAT MEDI CAL
WOULD COVER SOME OF THAT.
IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT SHE COULD
MAKE MONTHLY PAYMENTS ON THE
REST WHICH SHE AGREED TO DO.
BELIEVING THAT SHE WOULD BE
PAYING THE DENTAL OFFICE
DIRECTLY.
INSTEAD SHE WAS SIGNED UP FOR A
CREDIT CARD WITHOUT HER INFORMED
CONSENT CONSENT.
THE FIRST BILL SHE RECEIVED
REVEALED THAT EVEN THOUGH SHOULD
ONLY SO FAR HAD HER TEETH
CLEANED FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS
HAD BEEN CHARGED TO THE CARD.
THE CARD CAME WITH AN EIGHTEEN
MONTH DEFERRED INTEREST PLAN BUT
IN ORDER TO AVOID PAYING
INTEREST ON THE ENTIRE ORIGINAL
BALANCE.
I RAIN WOULD HAVE HAD TO MAKE
MONTHLY PAYMENTS OF MORE THAN
25% OF HER INCOME.
A MAN WILL CALL EDDIE WAS
SEVENTY FIVE YEARS OLD WHEN HE
WENT TO THE DENTIST WITH A
TOOTHACHE IN ONE OF HIS VERY FEW
REMAINING TEETH.
AS A MEDICARE RECIPIENT HE WOULD
HAVE ALL IT COULD HAVE HAD ALL
OF THE TEETH PULLED AND FULL
DENTURES PLACED AT NO COST TO
HIM.
A DIFFERENTPLAN WAS RECOMMENDED
AND SINCE EDDIE HAD MEDICARE.
MEDICAID NOW AND A FORTY DOLLAR
MONTH INSURANCE PLAN THROUGH THE
HE AGREED TO PROCEED.
AFTER HIS MOUTH WAS KNOWN TO
EDDIE WAS HANDED WHAT HE WAS
TOLD WERE INSURANCE PAPERS TO
SIGN.
A MONTH LATER HE RECEIVED A
DENTAL CREDIT CARD AND A BILL
FOR MORE THAN EIGHT THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
IT TURNED OUT HIS PRIMARY DENTAL
INSURER HAD REFUSED TO PAY
ANYTHING BECAUSE NO PRE APPROVED
TREATMENT PLAN WAS FILED.
AND NO CLAIM HAD BEEN SUBMITTED
TO MEDI CAL AT ALL.
AND IT'S NOT JUST SENIORS A
WOMAN WILL CALL LARA EARNED ONLY
SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS A MONTH
PROVIDING IN HOME DAYCARE.
AFTER SHE WAS TOLD SHE NEEDED
EXTENSIVE DENTAL WORK LARA TOLD
THE DENTIST SHE COULDN'T AFFORD
IT AND THEY'D HAVE TO BILL
MEDICARE.
WHEN THE DENTIST SAID THAT MEDI
CAL WOULDN'T COVER THE TREATMENT
SHE NEEDED LARA AGREED TO SIGN
UP FOR A MEDICAL CREDIT CARD?
THE FIRST BILL CAME WITH A
MONTHLY PAYMENT DEMAND OF ALMOST
60% OF HER MONTHLY INCOME.
THE CHECK SURELY REVEALED HER
VERY LOW INCOME BUT SHE WAS
APPROVED ANYWAY WITHOUT ANY
DISCLOSURE OF THE MATH INVOLVED.
IF SB SIX THIRTY NINE WERE LAW
IRENE WOULDN'T BE BILLED FOR
TREATMENT SHE HADN'T RECEIVED OR
HAVE TO PAY EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF
INTEREST ON THE ORIGINAL BALANCE
REGARDLESS OF WHAT WAS LEFT ON
THE CARD BY THEN.
EDDIE WOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD THE
DENTED CAL WOULD COVER ALL THE
TREATMENT HE NEEDED AND HE WOULD
NOT HAVE BEEN ASKED TO
UNKNOWINGLY SIGN UP FOR A CREDIT
CARD WELL HE WAS ALREADY IN THE
TREATMENT CHAIR.
LARA WOULD HAVE BEEN FULLY
INFORMED WHAT THE TERMS OF THE
CREDIT CARD WORK BEFORE SHE
SIGNED UP FOR IT.
ON A PERSONAL NOTE I KNOW THESE
CARS CAN BE USEFUL BECAUSE I
HAVE.
ONE BUT I KNOW WHAT MY DENTAL
INSURANCE COVERS I HAVE AN
INCOME THAT SUPPORTS FOR PAYING
THE BALANCE AS BEFORE DEFERRED
INTEREST BECOMES A PROBLEM.
AND I OPENED THE ACCOUNT FULLY
AWARE OF THE TERMS.
LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS DON'T
HAVE THESE ADVANTAGES AND WE
NEED TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO
KEEP THEM FROM FALLING INTO
TRAPS FROM WHICH THEY HAVE NO
ESCAPE.
THANK YOU THAT'S WITH US PLEASE.
GOOD MORNING CHEN FLOOR IN
BEHALF OF WESTERN CENTER ON LAW
AND POVERTY WE'RE PROUD SPONSORS
OF THIS BILL WHICH WE BRING
AFTER HEARING A NUMBER OF
STORIES FROM AROUND THE STATE
AND I'M REALLY JUST HERE FOR
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU COME FOR GIVE US YOUR
NAME AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLEASE.
REBEKAH GONZALEZ NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN SUPPORT.
RONALD COLMAN ON BEHALF OF
HEALTH ACCESS CALIFORNIA ALSO
HERE IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
OUR DISCUSS THE WHOLE THE
CALIFORNIA PAN ETHNIC HEALTH
NETWORK IN SUPPORT.
DANIEL **** CANTO KAISER ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA LOW
INCOME CONSUMER COALITION IN
SUPPORT.
A GOOD MORNING BRANDON SPENCER
WITH THE CALIFORNIA DENTAL
ASSOCIATION ACTUALLY HER WITH A
NEUTRAL POSITION JUST WANT TO
MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS WE I'M
REALLY APPRECIATE THE CENTERS
FOCUS ON CONSUMER PROTECTIONS.
AND WE'VE BEEN PLEASED TO BE
VERY ENGAGE ALTHOUGH WE ARE
CURRENTLY NEUTRAL I'M ON WORK ON
THIS BILL INCLUDING -- A LOT OF
THINGS IN THE BILL THEY'RE GOING
TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE REALLY
EGREGIOUS BEHAVIORS THAT ARE OUT
THERE.
THINK THAT TWO THINGS THAT I
WOULD COMMENT ON IS THAT A
NUMBER OF THE ISSUES THAT OF AN
REYES REALLY LEAD BACK TO THE
FACT THAT MEDI CAL.
DOESN'T REALLY COVER EVERYTHING
THAT IT SHOULD AND THAT THERE
ARE INSTANCES EVEN THOUGH ADULT
BENEFITS HAVE BEEN RECENTLY
RESTORED WE'RE DOESN'T REALLY
COVER WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT NEED UP
TO THE STANDARD OF CARE WHICH
WHICH INVOLVES SOME GAPS IN SO.
AND THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF
CONCERN WHERE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
MEDICAL DON'T ACTUALLY
UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ALSO HAVE
DONE A DENTAL COVERAGE.
THING THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS
THAT CAN BE DONE TO FIX THOSE
SITUATIONS OUTSIDE OF THE WORK
BEING DONE IN THIS BILL.
AND ON AROUND THE DEFERRED
INTEREST -- WELL THERE ARE SOME
REALLY GOOD THINGS IN THE BILL
INCLUDING THAT YOU KNOW SO.
NOT A LONG PROVIDERS TO SET
SOMEONE UP FOR DEFERRED INTEREST
WHICH I THINK IS THE RESULT OF A
LOT OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN -- AT THAT EXAMPLES THE
PROVIDED.
IT DOESN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING TO
IT IT EDUCATE CONSUMERS ON
DEFERRED INTEREST THEY CAN STILL
ACCESS IT IT'S THE MOST COMMON
FINANCING PRODUCT THAT'S OUT
THERE RIGHT NOW WITH CAN THINK
THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE OFFERED.
AND USED IN MEDICAL OFFICES SO
SHOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY
EITHER IN THIS BILL OUR FUTURE
LEGISLATION TO INCREASE THAT --
EXPLANATION OF THE TRANSPARENCY
CA WOULD APPRECIATE BEING
INVOLVED IN THAT AND LOOK FOR
WORKING ON THAT THANK YOU THANK
YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
RIGHT SEEN DENNIS ARE OPPOSITION.
AS THE OPPOSITION COMES FOR IF I
COULD JUST SAY WITH REGARD TO A
CD A BEAN -- MITCHELL.
I DON'T I COMPLETELY AGREED IT
WAS THIS BODY THAT VOTED NUMBER
OF YEARS AGO TO IN DENTAL CALLIN
SO WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY WORK
TO MAKE SURE THAT CONSUMERS ARE
AWARE.
THE FOCUS OF THE BILL OF MAKING
SURE THAT THE CONSUMERS DO KNOW
WHAT THEY'RE MEDI CAL COVERS WE
HEARD SOME EXAMPLES WHERE THAT
WAS NOT MAKE CLEAR. TO THE
DENTAL PATIENTS SO I DON'T
CHALLENGE WHAT WAS SAID -- IT.
HAD FROM A GOOD NUMBER OF YEARS
THE DENTAL CAL WAS NOT A COPY OF
THE SYSTEM A GOOD MANY OF YOUR
DENTAL CAL WENT AWAY BUT THE
POINT IS MAKING SURE.
THAT THE PATIENT VERTICALLY AT
THE POINT IN TIME OF A SERVICE
NEEDED TO BE DONE UNDERSTANDS
WHAT THEY'RE MEDI CAL DOES COVER
THANK YOU.
OPPOSITION GOOD MORNING MR.
MR I GUESS THE MORNING.
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS SENATOR --
ALEX FELONIES FELONIES GROUP --
REPRESENTING ALLIANCE DATA WHICH
IS AN ISSUER OF HEALTH CARE
CREDIT CARDS -- ALTHOUGH THE
BILL DOES MAKE IMPORTANT --
CONSUMER UP FIXES RESPECT AS
THEY WERE LAID OUT HERE SOME OF
THE ANECDOTES -- BY THE BY THE
SPONSORS IT'S STILL
DISCRIMINATES AGAINST DEFERRED
INTEREST -- DEFERRED INTEREST IS.
USED BY SO MANY PEOPLE FOR
DIFFERENT TYPES OF TRANSACTIONS
THAT PROBABLY ABOUT A MAJORITY
OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM PROP IF
USED IT. FOR PURCHASES FOR
THINGS WHETHER IT BE HEALTH CARE
OR OTHER RETAIL PURCHASES BUT
HAS 80% PAY BACK RATE AND IS A
QUITE A VERY POPULAR PRODUCT --
AND PAID BACK WITHIN THE
PROMOTIONAL PERIOD.
FORTUNE THE BILL TIPS THE SCALES.
AGAINST THIS PRODUCT BY MAKING
IT VERY DIFFICULT -- TO OBTAIN
AND USE IT FOR PAIN FOR HEALTH
HEALTH CARE SERVICES -- CAN A
BIT BREAKS THE EXISTING DOCTOR
PATIENT RELATIONSHIP WHEN IT
COMES TO PAYING.
FOR A HEALTH CARE PROCEDURES OF
CURRENTLY.
THE PROVIDER DOES HELP YOU
THROUGH THE PROCESS -- BUT HAVE
YOUR INFORMATION THEY'RE READY
SO IT KIND OF MAKES IT MORE OF A
SEAMLESS.
TYPE OF TRANSACTION THE WAY THE
BILL'S WRITTEN NOW IT'S ACTUALLY
JUST SAYS THAT -- WE WILL HELP
YOU WITH YOUR FINANCING BUT IF
YOU'RE GOING TO USE DEFERRED
INTEREST YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO
ON YOUR OWN.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO SIGN UP ON
YOUR OWN GET ALL THE INFORMATION
ON YOUR OWN.
AND THEN YOU CAN HAVE TO COME
BACK TO US AND THEN YOU'RE GONNA
HAVE TO THEM SEE IF WE CAN
ACTUALLY HELP PAY. FOR THE
PROCEDURE THAT YOU ACTUALLY NEED --
WILL BE THAT'S HELPFUL -- SUCH
WITH THE PRODUCT OF VERY POPULAR --
BUT THINK WHAT MAYBE MORE
NECESSARY AND WOULD BE HELPFUL
IS THAT IF THE INFORMATION IS
PROVIDED. TO THE CONSUMER THE
PATIENT AT THE TIME IN WHICH
THEY WANT TO RECEIVE.
AN EXTENSION OF CREDIT.
AND PROVIDE THEM A CHOICE.
CHOICE OF DEFERRED INTEREST OR
NON DEFERRED INTEREST.
AND MAYBE DO A SIDE BY SIDE TYPE
OF EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOUR COSTS
WOULD BE WHAT YOUR TOTAL CREDIT
WOULD BE SOMETHING A LINE.
ALONG THE LINES OF WHICH QUITE
UNDER THE TRUTH IN LENDING ACT
WERE WOULD SAY LOOK THIS THIS IS
AMOUNT OF CREDIT OR TAKEN OUT
THIS IS SUCH A WILL BE YOUR
MONTHLY PAYMENTS AND THAT'S
WHICH WOULD -- AT THE END OF THE
PERIOD SO LEAST THE PATIENT
WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE AN
INFORMED DECISION SAY.
I DON'T THINK THE DEFERRED
INTEREST WORKS IN MY BUDGET I'M
GOING TO GO WITH A NON DEFERRED
INTEREST PRODUCT OR VICE VERSA.
BELIEVE PROVIDE THEM THAT
INFORMATION GIVEN THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
SOME TO THAT'S VERY HELPFUL TO
THEM.
BUT DON'T.
SAY ONE IS GOING TO BE
ACCEPTABLE FROM US AS A PROVIDER
AND NO ONE WILL BE ACCEPTABLE
BUT YOU HAVE TO GO ON YOUR OWN
TO GET IT AND THEN COME BACK
LATER.
ON WE DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL WE DO THINK THOUGH THAT --
BUT THIS IMPORTANT JUST TO
PROVIDE THEM THAT INFORMATION --
AND SOLD BUT WE ARE LOOKING
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH SENATOR
MITCHELL STAFF WE HAVE BEEN IN
CONTACT WITH THE SPONSOR.
AND WITH HER STAFF AND WE'VE
BEEN COMMITTED TO WORK OVER THE
SUMMER BREAK TO SEE IF WE CAN
RID OF REACH SOME SORT OF
RESOLUTION.
ON THIS ISSUE BUT AT THIS POINT
WE STILL REMAIN OPPOSED THE LAST
THANK YOU THAT'S LAST WITNESS MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS GOT GOVERNOR
MAP CALIFORNIA FINANCIAL
SERVICES ASSOCIATION CERTAINLY
THOSE EGREGIOUS EXAMPLES.
DON'T SERVE OUR MEMBERS WELL
THOSE PEOPLE WHO ABUSE THE
PRODUCT THE PROCESS AND THE
PRODUCTS SHOULD BE STOPPED.
ON THIS IS ABOUT STRIKING A
BALANCE WE HAD A CONSTRUCTIVE
CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPONENTS.
WE HOPE WE CAN WORK IT OUT TO
ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT --
REMAINS AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE
TO CONSUMERS SO THEY CAN MAKE AN
INFORMED DECISION WE LOOK
FORWARD TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS
OVER THE BREAK IN AND HOPEFULLY
WE CAN REACH AN EQUITABLE
SOLUTION.
THANK YOU THANK YOU OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS
COMMINGLED WITH CALIFORNIA
BANKERS ASSOCIATION OPPOSED
UNLESS AMENDED AS WELL THANK YOU
ANYONE ELSE IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SEEN ENTERING A BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE WAS KILEY.
I JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR
THE OPPOSITION SO IN PRACTICE
WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS SOMEONE IS --
SEEKING TREATMENT THEY ARE
THEY'RE NOT COVERED ON A
FINANCING OPTION IT'S PRESENTED
TO THEM RIGHT THEN AND THERE AND
THEY HAVE TO SIGN IT HOW DOES IT
USUALLY WORK FROM IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING AND I DON'T WANT
TO SPEAK FOR THE PROVIDERS
BECAUSE OF REPRESENT THE THE
ISSUER OF THE CREDIT.
CARD FOR I UNDERSTAND THE WAY IT
WORKS IS THAT IF TOLD THIS IS
WHICH TREATMENTS GOING TO BE IN
THIS WITH THE COST GOING TO BE
AN ALL BY THE WAY.
IT BEEN A FEW COULD AFFORD IT
AND YOU NEED TO RECEIVE
FINANCING THEM VIA WE'RE
OFFERING YOU -- THIS PARTICULAR
FINANCINGPRODUCT WHICH DEFERRED
INTEREST -- AND THEN ACROSS THE
ABYSS PRESUMING THEY'RE OFFERING
THE TELLING YOU EXACTLY.
WHAT WHAT IT ENTAILS AND WHAT
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SO -- WITH
THAT PARTICULAR PART IS NOT
BEING EXPRESSED TO THE TO THE
PATIENT THE NOTHING THAT'S THE
PART WHERE THE BILL NEEDS TO
KIND OF FILL THAT GAP WELL YOU
SAID THAT THAT YOU'D BE OKAY IF
THEY'RE PRESENTED WITH THE
CHOICE BUT IN PRACTICE RIGHT NOW
ARE.
CONSUMERS USUALLY PRESENT WITH
THAT CHOICE OR IS A STANDARD TO
JUST HAVE THAT DEFERRED I THINK
I I THINK IT'S PROBABLY JUST.
ONE PARTICULAR PRODUCT THAT
THEY'RE OFFERING IT'S A WHY ARE
A WISE DEFERRED INTERESTS KIND
OF THE STANDARD WHY IS IT WHY IS
IT USED AT ALL WHAT'S THE
ADVANTAGE OF RESPECTIVELY
APPLIANCE I THINK IF IT'S WITHIN
PEOPLE'S BUDGETS AND AN EFFECT.
IF THEY THINK THEY CAN ACTUALLY
FIT WITHIN THEIR BUDGET THEY ARE
PRESENTED WITH A PRODUCT IN
WHICH THEY HAVE TO PAY NO
INTEREST.
AND SO IT'S IT'S A VERY --
APPEALING PRODUCT WHEN LIKE HECK
IF I IF I COULD PAY THIS BACK IN
TWELVE MONTHS OR EIGHTEEN MONTHS
I PAY NO INTEREST.
THE COULD DIVIDE WHATEVER THE
BALANCES OVER THAT PERIOD OF
TIME AND PAY IT ALL BACK.
SOUNDS LIKE A PRETTY OF TYSON
PRODUCT AND I SEE THE AD DID THE
AUTHOR ANY OTHER SCORES RESPOND.
TO POLICE.
AM I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT THAT IS
REALLY WHAT'S BEING OFFERED IS
ONE OPTION -- AND SO I WOULD SAY
YOU KNOW IF THE OPPONENTS ARE
INTERESTED IN OFFERING MORE THAN
ONE OPTION AND EXPLAINING THINGS
CLEARLY IN A WAY THAT PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND THEM THEN WE WOULDN'T
NECESSARILY BE HERE TODAY.
BUT WITH DEFERRED INTEREST WHAT
THE ISSUE IS SO FOR A MIDDLE OR
UPPER CLASS INCOME PERSON WHO
COULD REASONABLY PAY IT OFF
WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS.
IT IS A GREAT DEAL IT'S 0%
INTEREST BUT IF YOU KNOW AT THE
OUTSET THE PERSON'S NOT GONNA BE
ABLE TO PAY THAT OFF.
IT'S A WORSE DEAL BECAUSE YOU
ARE PAYING AND THESE ARE RANGE
BETWEEN TWENTY SIX AND 28%
INTEREST FOR THE ENTIRE TIME AND
THAT YOU KNOW ONCE YOU GO OVER
THE INTRODUCTORY PERIOD YOU'VE
BEEN GARNERING THAT INTEREST THE
ENTIRE TIME -- SO FOR PEOPLE WHO
CONCEIVABLY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
PAY IT OFF NOT ONLY ARE THEY NOT
TOLD CLEARLY HOW THE INTEREST IS
WORKING -- THERE ALSO IN A MUCH
WORSE POSITION THAN IF THEY HAD
TAKEN A LOWER FIXED RATE CARD.
AND I THINK I WOULD BE SAD -- I
DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANY OF YOU BUT
WHEN I GO TO THE DENTIST -- I'VE
NEVER HAD THE EXPERIENCE WITH MY
DENTIST OR ANYONE IN THIS OFFICE
WHO IGNORE SHOULD I THINK WE
SHOULD EXPECT THAT THEY WOULD BE
SKILLED.
AT WALKING THROUGH.
ALL OF THE ELEMENTS AS WAS
SUGGESTED IN ME APPLY FOR CREDIT
AND YOU KNOW.
WHILE WHEN THE DO FLOSS DAILY
AND GO TWICE A YEAR OUR DENTAL
EXPERIENCES CAN BE POSITIVE ONES
AND WHEN THEY AREN'T THAT'S THE
LEAST APPROPRIATE TIME TO BE IN
THE CHAIR IN PAIN.
TRYING TO NEGOTIATE AND FIGURE
THIS OUT AND SO PART OF WHAT
WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO DO IN EARLIER
VERSIONS OF THE BILL.
IS BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHEN AND
WHERE THAT CONVERSATION TAKES
PLACE DON'T TALK TO ME WHEN I'M
ALREADY INTO SEDATION IN THE
CHAIR HAVE RECEIVED BAD NEWS
ABOUT WHAT HAS TO BE DONE IN
PAIN.
AND NOW YOU EXPECT ME TO FULLY
COMPREHEND IN EXILE AND SIGN.
DOCUMENTATION ON THAT WILL
ENCUMBER ME FINANCIALLY IN THE
FUTURE AND SO IT REALLY IS
TRYING TO CREATE THIS BALANCE WE
WANT THE PRODUCT TO BE AVAILABLE
FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD. TEN
TWELVE TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
DENTAL BILLS BUT I ALSO DON'T
WANT THEM TO BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE
Là [inaudible]
THANK YOU [inaudible]
RIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SO THANK YOU SENATOR FOR WORKING
WITH US ON IS AN AND I
COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT.
WE WANT TO TRY AND MAKE SURE AT
THE END WITH THE OPPOSITION THAT
THAT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF
PRODUCTS AVAILABLE.
BUT LOOKING AT THE VALUE OF OUR
CLOTHING AROUND HERE I DON'T
KNOW THAT WE ALL REALLY
UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION OF
BEING.
IN A POSITION OF NOT NECESSARILY
BEING OF THE PAY SOMETHING OFF
WITHIN CERTAIN TIME LINES AND
THE THOUGHT OF BEING OFFERED A
FINANCIAL PRODUCT.
WHEN YOU'RE IN AN OFFICE
SURROUNDED BY VERY SHARP THINGS
THAT MAY END UP IN YOUR MOUTH?
IS CHEST ASTONISHING.
BUT ALSO.
THE THING THAT.
THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE
DRAWING A DISTINCTION HERE.
IS WHO PROVIDING THE PRODUCT AND
WHEN THE DENTAL OFFICE LOOKS TO
A AN UNSOPHISTICATED ANSWER CA
CONSUMER LIKE THEY'RE THE ONES
PROVIDING UP THE THE FINANCING.
THAT'S NOT A GOOD SITUATION
BECAUSE THAT THEY THINK THEIR
RELATIONSHIP FINANCIAL
RELATIONSHIP IS WITH THEIR
MEDICAL PROVIDER RATHER THAN THE
FINANCIAL PROVIDER.
SO WHEN THINGS THAT THIS BILL IS
TRYING TO DO A WE TRY TO DO WITH
THE AMENDMENTS IS SEPARATE THAT
TRANSACTION.
IN A WAY THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR
WHO'S PROVIDING THE THE
FINANCIAL SERVICES WHOSE
PROVIDING THE MEDICAL SERVICES.
AND NOT CONFLATING THOSE TWO I I
THINK PROBABLY ALL OF US WOULD
UNDERSTAND THAT GOING INTO A
DENTAL OFFICE.
BUT NOT ALL THE CONSUMERS DO.
SO I THINK THERE'S POTENTIALLY
SOME GROUND TO FIGURE THIS OUT
AND AS WE HAD WORK THROUGH THIS.
THE STAFF IN WITHOUT HIS OFFICE
PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS.
IT PROVIDING SO FOR ME PROVIDING
THAT CLARITY OF WHO'S PROVIDING
WHICH SERVICE.
GIVING THE CONSUMER ADEQUATE.
OPTIONS AND NOTICE OF THOSE
OPTIONS SO THAT THEY KNOW WHAT
THEIR ENTRY INTO AND CAN SEE
THAT IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY THINK
THEY'LL BE WILLING TO PAY.
THOSE OF THE SOME OF THE
PROTECTIONS THAT I THINK WE'RE
WORKING ON WE DO HAVE SOME TIME
FORTUNATELY TO TO SORT THROUGH
SOME OF THE THE DETAILS OF THIS
AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT.
AS THIS MOVES I'M HOPING IT GETS
OUT OF THE COMMITTEE TODAY.
BUT THAT WE ARE A PART OF THOSE
CONVERSATIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT
THAT WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT'S
HAPPENING.
WITH THE AMENDMENTS AND AND HOW
DOES BASIC.
AREAS COVERED SO.
SETTER I APPRECIATE THAT WE LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING THE
CONVERSATION I WOULD JUST ADD
THIS IN A LOT OF TIME TALKING
ABOUT IT DEFERRED INTEREST BUT
THERE ARE OTHER REALLY IMPORTANT
ELEMENTS OF THE BILL -- WE ARE
ASKING THAT MIDDLE SCHOOL
PROVIDERS CAN'T CHARGE MEDICAL
CREDIT CARDS MORE THAN THIRTY
DAYS PRIOR TO SERVICES BEING
RENDERED YOU GIVE ME AN ENTIRE
SERVICE.
YOU KNOW PLAN IT MAY TAKE YOU
KNOW MONTHS TO COMPLETE ALL THE
WORK DONE AND YET I'M BEING
CHARGED YOU KNOW UP FRONT OF THE
RIGHT THINGS MAY HAPPEN I MAY.
CHOOSE NOT TO CONTINUE THE
SERVICE WITH THAT PARTICULAR
PROVIDE WHATEVER THE CASE THIS
OF THIS FRONT CHARGING WE THINK
IT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR VARIETY OF
REASONS IN THIS BILL WILL
ADDRESS THAT.
ALSO THE PRE FILL IT OUT OF
MEDICAL CREDIT CARDS THAT GETS
INTO THE GRAY AREA IN TERMS OF
WHO ARE REALLY HAVE THIS
FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH MY
PROVIDER -- UP OR THIS THIRD
PARTY ENTITY -- AND SO I THINK
THAT.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT MORE WE
HOPE TO CONTINUE -- TO TO WORK
ON AGAIN WITH THE I. ON
PROTECTING THE CONSUMER.
BOTH BY MAKING SURE THE SERVICES
AVAILABLE WHEN THEY NEED IT AND
THAT IT'S A SERVICE THAT THEY
FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE
NOT TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF I ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU I NEED A MOTION MOTION
WOULD BE TO PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS.
THANK YOU IS THERE SECONDS.
CALL THE ROLL PLEASE STONE BY
STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER I CHAU CHIU GONZALEZ.
HOLDEN KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN OBERNOLTE
[inaudible]
PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS IRIS.
NEED TO MORE VOTES WILL PUT THAT
OUT OF CALL.
CHECK YOUR TIME THANK YOU.
I SAW SENATE CAREER ALL RIGHT.
SB.
FOUR SEVENTY TWO WE NEED AGAIN.
SEEMS LIKE WE JUST HEARD THIS
YES.
I'LL I'LL TRY TO SPICE IT UP A
LITTLE BIT.
GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN MEMBERS --
I AT FIRST LET ME THINK THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE FOR THE
INCREDIBLE WORK THAT WAS DONE ON
THIS PARTICULAR BILL -- IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE BANKING
COMMITTEE IT THE FACT THAT IT
WAS SCHEDULED BACK TO BACK ONE
DAY TO THE NEXT -- MEANT THAT WE
NEEDED TO COORDINATE AND WE'VE
ENGAGED ON IN A REALLY BROAD
BASED -- UP A GROUP OF
INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE INTERESTED
IN THIS SUBJECT WHETHER IT'S
CONSUMER.
GROUPS -- ITS THE INDUSTRY
ITSELF THE COMMITTEE STAFF HAVE
BEEN PART OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS
AND SO THEY'VE BEEN REALLY
ROBUST AND I REALLY APPRECIATE.
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT THIS
WAY SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
ALL OF THAT SO REFLECTING THE
STAKEHOLDER INPUT WE ACCEPTED
SEVERAL AMENDMENTS IN THE
BANKING COMMITTEE YESTERDAY
AFTERNOON WHICH INCLUDED.
D. B. O..
OVERSIGHT ON EARNED WAGE ACCESS
PROVIDERS INCLUDING REGISTRATION
AND DATA REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
EXAMINATION AND ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITY AND CONSUMER COMPLAINT
PROCESSES AND TRACKING.
RECREATED BETTER WORKER
PROTECTIONS INCLUDING STRONG
PRIVACY PROTECTIONS AND TOUGHER
IT NON RECOURSE PROVISIONS
STRENGTHENING THE BILL'S
EXISTING PROHIBITION ON DEBT
COLLECTION AND CREDIT REPORT.
INCLUDING A THREE YEAR SUNSET TO
ENSURE THAT THE STATUTE AND THE
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ACTUALLY
WORKS AND WE RESISTED EFFORTS TO
WEAKEN THE WORKER PROTECTIONS
AND THE AMENDMENTS RAISE THE CAP
ON THE FEE FROM FOURTEEN TO
FIFTEEN DOLLARS WHILE
MAINTAINING THE ESSENTIAL. 50%
CAP ON A CRUDE EARNINGS IT MAY
BE ACCESSED.
ACCESS DURING A PAY PERIOD.
IN ORDER TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
ABOUT CASH FLOW EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS THE AMENDMENTS WILL
RELAX THE 50% CAP BY ALLOWING IT
TO BE EXCEEDED UP TO TWICE EVERY
SIX MONTHS AND THAT WAS PART OF
THE DISCUSSION YESTERDAY THAT --
I COULDN'T FIND IT IN THE
LANGUAGE AND AND I FINALLY DID --
WE'RE ALSO TAKING AN AUTHOR'S
AMENDMENT TO PREVENT LOCATION
BASED ADVERTISING OF WAGE BASED
OR WORK BASS ADVANCE REFLECTED
ON PAGE NINE OF THE ANALYSIS.
SO WITH THAT SB FOUR SEVENTY TO
PROVIDE STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO
REGULATE EARNED INCOME ACCESS
PROGRAMS.
THE PROGRAM WILL ALOW CONSUMERS
TO ACCESS A PORTION OF THE WAGES
THEY HAVE ALREADY EARNED PRIOR
TO THEIR SCHEDULED PAYDAY AND
HOW THAT SIMPLE PROGRAM WORKS.
IS THAT A CONSUMER REQUIRES
IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO THEIR MONEY.
USING AN APP THAT CAN QUICKLY
ACCESS UP TO HALF OF THE AMOUNT
OF HIS OR HEARD.
EARNED UNPAID INCOME DURING A
GIVEN PAY PERIOD FOR A SINGLE
FIXED FEE.
THIS FEE IS A NONRECURRING FEE
AND ONLY PAID IF AND WHEN A
CONSUMER CHOOSES TO USE THE
PROGRAM.
AND THE FEE IS LESS THAN A
TEMPLE TYPICAL BANK OVERDRAFT
FEE OR LATE FEE.
WITH A FEW SCREEN TAPPED USER
USER'S HAVE INSTANT ACCESS TO
THEIR ALREADY AND EARNED.
ALREADY EARNED UNPAID WAGES.
WHETHER IT'S TO COVER AN
UNEXPECTED COST FOR JESS TO
AVOID A LATE -- OVERDRAFT FEE
SOMETIMES PEOPLE JUST NEED AND A
LITTLE EXTRA MONEY.
BY CREATING A STATUTORY
FRAMEWORK FOR EARNED INCOME
ACCESS PROGRAMS WE CAN PROVIDE A
SAFE WAY FOR CONSUMERS TO GET
THEIR MONEY.
WHEN THEY NEED IT?
IT IS A TOOL FOR PEOPLE TO USE
THAT COMES WITH CONSUMER
PROTECTIONS AND FLEXIBILITY.
THE PROTECTIONS IN SB FOUR
SEVENTY TO ENSURE THAT CONSUMERS
ARE HELD HARMLESS IT'S NOT A
LOAN AND USERS CANNOT DEFAULT
AND THERE IS NO COMPOUNDING
INTEREST THERE IS NO DEBT
CREATED FOR CONSUMER ACCESSING
THE EARNED ON PAID INCOME.
THERE IS NO INTEREST CHARGED.
THERE THESE.
THERE IS NO RECOURSE AND NO
LIABILITY IN THE EVENT OF A NON
PAYMENT AND THERE'S NO REPORTING
OF NON PAYMENT TO A CREDIT
BUREAU.
SO -- IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT
FINDING SAFE AND INEXPENSIVE
WAYS FOR FOLKS TO GET THE MONEY
THAT THEY NEED THEN WE MUST
CONTINUE TO HAVE THOUGHTFUL
DISCUSSIONS WHICH I AM COMMITTED
TO SELL -- I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE TODAY IN
SUPPORT IS DOWN QUAN WHO MOST
RECENTLY SERVED IN THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION AS SENIOR ADVISER
TO THE DIRECT TO DIRECTOR
RICHARD CORDRAY.
AT THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION BUREAU AND I JAZZ
ANWAR C. O. O. OF PAY ACTIVE.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU CHAIRMAN
STONE AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS DAN CALL.
I THE VICE DESTRUCTIVE INTO
COMPANIES INCLUDING PASSIVE I
MOST RECENTLY SERVED IN THE
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AS SENIOR
ADVISER TO DIRECTOR RICHARD
CORDRAY.
AND THE CFPB WHERE I LEVEES FINK
OFFICE ONE OF MY OR MY OFFICE IS
A KEY ACHIEVEMENTS WAS TO
FACILITATE EARNED INCOME ACCESS
OR EIA.
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY THAT
DISRUPTS SHORT TERM HI BECAUSE
CREDIT PRODUCTS.
SEE IF YOU BE CLOSELY EXAMINE
THE AYE PROGRAMS AND CONCLUDED
THAT YEAH A IS A CONSUMER
FRIENDLY INNOVATION.
AS A RESULT IN HIS THE FINAL PAY
THE RULE RELEASING LATE TWENTY
SEVENTEEN THE CFPB CREDIT
SPECIFIC EXEMPTIONS TO
ACCOMMODATE RESPONSIBLE III
MODELS.
THOSE EXEMPTIONS REQUIRE YEAH I
PROGRAMS TO INCLUDE MEANINGFUL
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS TO ENSURE
THE PROGRAMS WERE NOT PREDATORY.
AND THE SENATOR CABALLERO HAS
INCORPORATED A MENACE SUCH CAR
WHEELS IN HER BILL.
A FEW KEY POINTS ON WHAT YEAH I
IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT.
AT THIS BILL RECOGNIZES YEAH I A
IS NOT CREDIT.
AS EVIDENCED BY THE CFPB
DECISION TO EXEMPT EIA FROM THE
ABILITY TO REPAIR REQUIREMENTS
IN THE FINAL PAY THE RULE.
NO FUTURE WAGES ARE IMPLICATED
NOTE THAT OBLIGATION IS CREATED
NO INTEREST IS CHARGED NO
COLLATERAL OR SECURITY INTEREST
IS TAKEN FROM THE EMPLOYEE.
THE CONSUMER WHEN PLAYER NOW.
YEAH I IT IS A LOWER COST
ALTERNATIVE.
THE BILL IMPOSES A STRICT
FIFTEEN DOLLAR MONTHLY FEE CAP
WHICH MAKES THESE PROGRAMS FAR
LESS EXPENSIVE THAN PAYDAY LOANS.
LATE FEES OR BANK OVERDRAFT FEES.
YEAH A IS BY ITS VERY STRUCTURE
A FAR LESS RISKY ALTERNATIVE
FIRST BECAUSE NOTE THAT IS
CREATED.
THE CUSTOMER DOES NOT ALL WITHIN
A CREATED ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL
BURDENS FOR THEMSELVES SECOND.
THIS BILL REQUIRES THAT YOU GUYS
SHOULD BE COMPLETELY NON
RECOURSE.
IF THE CONSUMER DOES NOT
REIMBURSE THE PROVIDER THE
CONSUMER IS HELD COMPLETELY
HARMLESS.
THIRD THIS BILL PROVIDES
SENSIBLE GHARIALS BY CAPPING THE
AMOUNT THE CONSUMER CAN ACCESS
EACH PAY PERIOD.
THIS INSURED THE WORKERS WILL
ALWAYS HAVE FUNDS AVAILABLE ON
ACTUAL PAYDAY TO MEET OTHER
FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.
FINALLY THIS BILL AS AMENDED NOT
ONLY CONTAINS A PRIOR RIGHT
PRIVATE RIGHT ACTION TO ENSURE
THE EIA PROVIDERS.
HERE TO THE CONSUMER PROTECTIONS
AND COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIRED
SAFEGUARDS BUT ALSO PROVIDES
WITH DB O. REGISTRATION
OVERSIGHT AND ENFORCEMENT.
CALIFORNIA'S LEGISLATURE HAS A
HAS A RICH HISTORY OF CONSUMER
AND WORKER PROTECTION.
THE MAJORITY OF A WORKERS LIVE
PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK THEY
DESERVE TIMELY SAFE AND
AFFORDABLE SMALL DOLLAR
FINANCIAL OPTIONS.
IT IS IN THIS SPIRIT THAT WE
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
SUPPORT.
I EXTEND MY HEART MY HEARTFELT
THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK MS EAGLES I WANT CEO OF
ACTIVE AND I ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU THANK YOU BEST WITH US
PLEASE.
IT DOESN'T MORE PROUD SPONSOR OF
P. ACTIVE.
BE ACTIVE IN THE BOAT SPONSORED
OFFICE BEFORE SEVEN TWO AND
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT
HE LIKES BEACON SCORE COME
FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLACE.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS
CHRISTMAS OUR BEHALF OF EVEN
RESPONSIBLE FINANCE.
IN SUPPORT OF THE THE MEASURE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHORS STRONG
LEADERSHIP -- IN THIS ISSUE ALSO
APPRECIATE THE AMOUNT OF
ATTENTION AND AND WORK AND TIME
THAT YOU'RE COMMITTEES
CONSULTANT HAS SPENT ON THIS AS
WELL AS WELL AS ASSEMBLY BANKING
COMMITTEES CONSULTANT -- WE HAVE
A COUPLE ISSUES WITH REGARD TO
SOME OF THE MECHANICS OF THE
BILL THAT WE STILL LIKE TO WORK
THROUGH.
IN THE COMING WEEKS AND LOOK FOR
TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS THANK YOU
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
PRICING NONE AS THEIR OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS
MUCH TIGHTER WITH CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION WE DON'T HAVE A
POSITION ON THE BILL.
BUT DID WANT EXPRESS OUR
APPRECIATION FOR THE STRONG
WORKER PROTECTION LANGUAGE THAT
SENATE -- ESPECIALLY AS PROPOSED
TO BE AMENDED -- WE DO SEE THIS
AS A FAR LESS RISKY AND FAR MORE
RESPONSIBLE ALTERNATIVE TO
PAYDAY LENDING AND IS SOMETHING
THAT.
WE'RE VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN
WE'VE BEEN A PART OF SOME OF THE
STAKEHOLDER DISCUSSIONS THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE.
AND DO HAVE TWO REMAINING ISSUES
THAT -- WE'RE WATCHING BOTH
REVOLVE AROUND WORKER PRIVACY
GENERALLY SPECIFICALLY WE'D LIKE
TO MAKE SURE THAT WORKERS
PERSONAL DATA ESPECIALLY RELATED
TO THEIR FINANCES THEIR
GEOLOCATION AREN'T.
SOLD OFF TO THIRD PARTIES AND IT
APPEARS THAT THERE'S LANGUAGE
PROPOSED TO BE TAKEN IN THE BILL
THAT WOULD DEAL WITH THAT.
OR KIND OF NEW TO THE ISSUE AND
SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT
THE LANGUAGE DOES WHAT WE THINK
IT DOES AND WE'D ALSO LIKE TO TO
THE EXTENT POSSIBLE MAKE SURE
THAT.
EMPLOYERS AREN'T AWARE OF WHEN
WORKERS HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF
THIS PROGRAM HOW MUCH MONEY THEY
TOOK OUT THINGS LIKE THAT.
JUST THE SAME WAY THAT A WORKER
WOULDN'T WANT THEIR EMPLOYER TO
KNOW THAT THEY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF
A PAYDAY LOAN OR WERE OTHERWISE
FACING FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES
BUT OTHER THAN THAT AGAIN WE DO
THINK THIS CONCEPT MAKES SENSE
AND TO SEE IS FAR PREFERABLE TO
PAYDAY LENDING AND LOOK FORWARD.
TO REMAINING IN THE CONVERSATION
THANKS THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SIGNALED A BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
COMMENTS WAS KALRA.
THANK YOU -- MISS CHATTING WE'RE
ALL LEARNING A LOT ABOUT ABOUT
THIS ISSUE AND I REALLY WANT.
TO THANK THE AUTHOR -- AS WELL
AS THE THE CHAIR AND AS WELL AS
CHARLIE MONNING YOUR STAFF.
OPPORTUNITY MINUTES NOT A WORK
ON THIS IN A VERY SHORT ORDER --
AND OFTENTIMES SPECIALLY BEING
IN SILICON VALLEY I HEARD THE
WORD DESTRUCTIVE ALL THE TIME.
THE USUALLY -- IS IS -- ARE
SHORT OF THAT I THINK IN THIS
CASE.
WITH THIS COULD BEEN TECH
DESTRUCTION I THINK IT REALLY IS
A SELECTIVE IN A WAY THAT CAN
THAT IS VERY GOOD.
BUT IT'S UP TO US TO MAKE SURE
IT STAYS THAT WAY AND DOESN'T
BECOME A WHOLE NEW BE SO TO
SPEAK LIKE THE PREDATORY LENDING.
INDUSTRY BECAME IT DIDN'T.
THE THAT INITIALLY DIDN'T START
THAT WAY IT BECAME THAT WAY AND
SO I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT WE'RE
PUTTING IN REGULATIONS FROM DAY.
ONE SO THAT THIS PRACTICE COULD
BE MONITORED VERY CLOSELY A BY A
BY US AS IT SHOULD BE -- THAT
WORKERS ARE PROTECTED.
I THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO MONEY
THAT THEY'VE ALREADY EARNED.
AND IT'S DONE IN A WAY THAT'S
RESPONSIBLE THAT STILL ALLOWS
FOR COMPANIES -- MEANT TO BE
ABLE TO UP YOU'LL HAVE A
BUSINESS MODEL THAT WORKS FOR
THEM BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO
US PROTECT CONSUMERS AND THE
WORKERS.
AND YOU KNOW BUT EVEN AS YOU
KNOW OVER THE YEARS AS A AS I'VE
BEEN PERSONALLY OF A YOU KNOW A
WORKING IN A WAY. TO TELL LIMIT
PREDATORY LENDING AND NOW WE'RE
ON THE VERGE OF DOING SOMETHING
I THINK A MONUMENTAL -- IN IN
THE STATE TO TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN --
THERE DOES NEED TO BE
ALTERNATIVES AND I THE NASA BUT
EVERYONE IS AGREED WITH.
AND SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A
REAL OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE AN
ALTERNATIVE AND I THINK THE MANY
AMENDMENTS.
DO MAKE IT BETTER AND I
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR FOR REALLY
BEING ENGAGED WITH BOTH
COMMITTEES AGAIN IN VERY SHORT
ORDER.
I HAD TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN -- AND
AND I LOOK FORWARD -- TO THE THE
REPORT AS IT APPROACHES SUNSET
BECAUSE I THINK IT'LL BE REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE THE GOOD INTENTIONS ARE
MAINTAINED AND KEPT UP.
AND THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE NEED
TWEAKS OR CHANGES TO PROTECT THE
WORKERS AND CONSUMERS -- THAT
THAT COULD BE DONE AND SO THAT
THIS IS A GOOD AGAIN I THINK
THIS REALLY PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY.
OF A WITH THE WITH A THREE YEAR
A SUNSET BUT A REAL MEANINGFUL
SUNSET BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING
BRAND NEW -- THAT WERE DELVING
INTO AT THINGS AND REQUIRE A LOT
OF REALLY CLOSE STUDY AND SO
WITH THAT I APPRECIATE THE OTHER
IS OUR MOTION.
I LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL AND
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT SO
MANY HAVE DONE.
THANK YOU YOU HAVE A MOTION AND
A SECOND.
OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SO SAID I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH US AND WE HAVE ONE
OF THE CHALLENGES THERE COUPLE
DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODELS THAT
ARE OUT THERE ONE STRUCK TO
CONSUMER AND ONE IS THROUGH AN
EMPLOYER.
AND EACH REPRESENTS SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT ISSUES WERE REGULATING
OF IN THE SAME AND ONE THINGS WE
MAY FIND OUT IS.
THOSE TWO MODELS MAY HAVE
DIFFERENT IMPLICATIONS.
WHICH IS WHY WE NEED TO I THINK
REALLY LOOK AT HOW.
THIS INDUSTRY DEVELOPS HOW IT
GETS USE WHAT THE THE WHAT THE
IMPACTS ARE POTENTIALLY ON
CONSUMERS THROUGH THIS I I THINK
IT IS INTERESTING.
THIS IS MONEY THAT HAS ALREADY
BEEN EARNED AND IN THE
EMPLOYMENT CONTACTS WHERE THAT.
PROVIDERS WORKING WITH AN
EMPLOYER THINK THAT'S A LOT
EASIER TO SEE AND UNDERSTAND THE
DIRECT TO CONSUMER.
A LITTLE BIT LESS SO AND I THINK
THAT PRESENTS SOME RISK SO WERE
ON AN INTERESTING JOURNEY HERE
CENTER THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT US ON
BUT I THINK IT'S VERY PRODUCTIVE
AND AND SOMETHING THAT THAT WILL
BE.
BE ABLE TO TRACK PRETTY CLOSELY
TURNED IN THEIR POCKETS AND
THAT'S ALWAYS A GOOD THING.
I THINK IT ALSO RAISES THE
QUESTION AND TALKING WITH A
NUMBER MEMBERS ABOUT THIS.
THE WHOLE PACE SCENARIO THAT WE
GET PAID MONTHLY OR GET PAID
WEEKLY THAT MAY BE A THING OF
THE PAST AT AT SOME POINT.
IS WHY NOT BE ABLE TO BE PAID.
SORT OF AS AS WORK GETS DONE
THOSE WHO WITH MODERN TOOLS THAT
THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING
THAT'S VIABLE BUT IN THE
MEANTIME -- THIS IS A VERY.
INTERESTING PROCESS INTERESTING
BILL THANK YOU FOR BRINGING.
FOR ALL RIGHT WITHOUT YOU MAY
CLOSE THANK YOU VERY MUCH UP
MISTER CHAIR IN THE MEMBERS.
FOR A GOOD DISCUSSION -- I'M --
WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE
ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY
THE LABOR FEDERATION ARE ISSUES
WERE CONCERNED ABOUT AS WELL AND
IT'S IT'S VETS LANGUISHING
LANGUAGE ISSUES AND SO WE JUST
COULDN'T GET IT BACK FROM.
LEAD COUNSEL QUITE SO QUICKLY SO
WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT
MAKE SURE THAT -- THAT THIS
COMMITTEE IS PROUD OF WHAT WHAT
THEY PASSED IF IT PASSES TODAY
SO ME AND MY COMMITMENT IS TO
CONTINUE WORKING ON IT.
THANK YOU.
WE DO HAVE A MOTION A SECOND
THAT MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED CALL THE ROLL PLEASE
STONE BY STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
CHAU CHIU GONZALEZ HOLDEN KALRA
AYE KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN OBERNOLTE.
PETRIE-NORRIS.
NORRIS I REYES.
RESIDE.
NEEDS TO MORE VOTES WILL PUT ON
A CALL THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK
YOU.
IF WE COULD GET SENATORS STERN
AND ALLEN HERE I WOULD HATE TO
CLOSE DOWN COMMITTEE BEFORE.
THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT.
AS WE'RE WAITING LET'S ROLL
THROUGH.
MOST BILLS ARE ON CALL EVEN THE
CONSENT IS AN IS ON CALL SOMEONE
A LIFT THE CALLING CONSENT
AGENDA CALL THE AS A MEMBERS.
CHAO.
GONZALEZ HOLDEN.
KALRA.
ALL RIGHTS OBERNOLTE REYES.
REYES AYE.
THOSE ITEMS ARE OUT.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS ON CALL THIS
IS SB ONE SEVENTY SIX JACKSON
I'M GONNA LIFT THE CALL. TO HAVE
EVERYBODY HERE.
ALL RIGHT I'M GONNA REPLACE THE
CALL.
LET'S SEE WHO ELSE WE NEED.
ITEM NUMBER THREE SB ONE SEVENTY
NINE NIELSEN A MIDDLE OF THE
CALL.
CHAO HOLDEN KALRA [inaudible]
FIVE KALRA I OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS AYE RADIUS.
REYES AYE CHAU.
ITEM THREE ITEM THREE SB ONE
SEVENTY NINE NIELSEN.
CHAO I'D.
SO THAT BILL IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER FOR SB TO AN
EIGHTEEN BRADFORD I WANT TO LIFT
THE CALL.
GALLAGHER CHAU CHAU AYE CHIU
HOLDEN.
REYES.
REYES I THE BILL IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE SB THREE TWENTY
THREE WHITE HOUSE SKI MIDDLE IF
THE CALL KALRA.
KALRA I OBERNOLTE PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS NO REYES
[inaudible]
REYES AYE.
THAT BILL IS OUT ITEM NUMBER SIX
SB THREE FORTY TWO HERTZBERG IS
ON CALL IF THE CALL.
CHAO.
CHAO AYE HOLDEN KALRA.
KALRA I OBERNOLTE.
REYES [inaudible]
REYES I HOLDEN ON ITEM SIX SB
THREE FORTY TWO HERTZBERG
[inaudible]
HOLDEN AYE.
THAT BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU ITEM NUMBER. EIGHT IS
ALREADY OUT OF THE COMMITTEE BUT
CALL THE UP TO MEMBERS CHAO.
CHAO AYE HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE KALRA.
HOWEVER I OBERNOLTE REYES.
REYES AYE.
OKAY ITEM NUMBER NINE IS SB FOR
SONY TO COVER THE ERA WHEN A
LIFT THE CALL [inaudible]
GALLAGHER [inaudible]
CHAO.
CHAO I CHIU [inaudible]
GONZALEZ [inaudible]
HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
OBERNOLTE. SEVEN THE BILL IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER TEN SP FOUR NINETY
THREE JACKSON IS ON CALL OF AN
LIFT THE CALL.
CHAO.
CHAO AYE HOLDEN.
HOLDEN I OBERNOLTE PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS I THAT BILL IS OUT
ITEM NUMBER TWELVE SB.
SIX THIRTY NINE MITCHELL A
MIDDLE OF THE CALL.
CHOW.
CHOW I CHIU.
GONZALEZ.
HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
OBERNOLTE [inaudible]
REYES [inaudible]
REYES ACT.
THAT BILL IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER THIRTEEN SB SIX
EIGHTY EIGHT MON IN THE MIDDLE
OF THE CALL.
CHOW.
CHOW AYE HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE OBERNOLTE
PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS I REYES.
REYES AYE.
THAT BILL IS OUT GO BACK TO ITEM
NUMBER TWO SB.
ONE SEVENTY SIX IS ON CALL A
LIFT THE CALL COLLEAGUES MEMBERS
GALLAGHER.
CHOW CHOW I CHIU [inaudible]
HOLDEN.
HOLDEN I MAIENSCHEIN.
THAT BILL IS OUT THANK YOU.
WE STILL HAVE. TWO BILLS LEFT.
CENTER CHANNEL.
OKAY SO WILL CONSENT IS OUT BUT
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS CHOW.
CHAO AYE GONZALEZ HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE OBERNOLTE.
I REMEMBER WHEN WE STILL HAVE TO
HEAR.
AN ITEM NUMBER SEVEN SB THREE
NINETY TWO ALLEN WE ALSO HAVE TO
HEAR THOSE TWO ITEMS ARE STILL
OUTSTANDING.
ANOTHER BAD OVER -- ELEVEN NEVER
MADE IT TO US.
THAT WAS IN YEAH IT WAS PULLED
YESTERDAY AND FROM THAT
RESOURCES SO.
SB SIX TWENTY ONE GLAZER NEVER
CAME TO US [inaudible]
IS THERE.
OKAY YEAH LET'S GO.
SINCE MR HOLDER IS HERE CONSENT
[inaudible]
YEAH.
HAVE A CONSENT OKAY.
A RIVER.
TO MAIENSCHEIN [inaudible] THREE
SERVICE TO HOLD AN SP ONE
SEVENTY NINE NIELSEN
[inaudible]
HOLDEN.
THE NINE OBERNOLTE.
AND ITEM NUMBER.
FOUR SB.
TWO EIGHTEEN GALLAGHER CHIU
HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE.
THAT WITH THOSE AREA.
WE HAVE EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM ON
EVERYTHING THAT'S YET TO HAVE
BEEN HEARD [inaudible]
CHANGE [inaudible]
OKAY [inaudible]
WHICH
ONE OKAY ITEM NUMBER TWO
SB.
ONE SEVENTY SIX I TO NOT VERY.
THE NORTH I TO NOT VOTING
[inaudible]
GALLAGHER CHIU [inaudible]
OKAY
.
SO MR TO FREE ONE A CATCH UP
ITEM NUMBER FOR SB TO EIGHTEEN
BRADFORD GALLAGHER CHU.
CHU AYE -- ITEM NUMBER. NINE SO
THAT ALSO ITEM NINE SB FOUR
SEVENTY TWO CABALLERO
[inaudible]
GALLAGHER CHIU.
CHIU AYE GONZALEZ MAIENSCHEIN
OBERNOLTE [inaudible]
AT WELL OKAY MISTER CHIU ITEM
TWELVE WHICH IS SB SIX THIRTY
NINE MITCHELL.
CHU CHU AYE GONZALEZ MAIENSCHEIN
OBERNOLTE.
OKAY.
YOUR CAR.
WE'RE STILL WAITING.
FOR SENATOR STERN TO PRESENT SB
ONE AND SENATOR ALLEN TO PRESENT
SB.
THREE NINETY TWO DO WE HAVE.
ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE
AUTHORS TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT
THEY'RE COMING [inaudible]
YEAH.
THE TWO OF THEM [inaudible]
YEAH
.
MR LIVER I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT
SB.
ONE THANK YOU WE'RE GETTING
DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO SHUTTING
DOWN.
THE COMMITTEE SO I DON'T OVER
ONE SB ONE AUTHORED BY THE PRO
TEM SENATOR ACTIONS.
THANK YOU THERE'S A MOTION AND A
SECOND.
PLEASE MISTER CHAIRMAN -- LET ME
BEGIN -- KEPLER FOR ON BEHALF OF
SENATOR ATKINS.
LET ME BEGIN BY.
THANKING THE COMMITTEE AND ALSO --
YESTERDAY IN THE NATURAL
RESOURCES COMMITTEE THE CHAIRMAN
RAISE THE ISSUE OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT.
PROVISIONS AND CENTER ACTIONS
WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT YOU
WORK WITH YOU ON THAT ISSUE I
THINK THERE.
ARE SOME CONCERNS THAT ARE VALID
ABOUT THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE
REGULATORY PROCESS IN THE BILL.
AND THE SENATOR ASKED ME TO
CONVEY TO YOU THAT YOU WOULD
LIKE TO SIT WITH YOU AND YOUR
STAFF AND TRY TO WORK THROUGH
THOSE ISSUES AS A BILL.
WAS FORTUNATE COMMITTEE ADVANCE
THE BILL SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT
POINT -- FIRST OF ALL -- WITH
RESPECT TO THE BILL IN CHIEF --
THIS BILL OBVIOUSLY IS INTENDED --
TO INSURE THAT CALIFORNIA'S
CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER ENDANGERED
SPECIES AND WORKER SAFETY
STANDARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE AND
HAVE BEEN IN PLACE CONTINUE TO
STAY IN PLACE DESPITE ACTIONS AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO ROLL THOSE
BACK -- THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
ARE WELL AWARE OF ACTIONS IN
WASHINGTON DC THAT HAVE BEEN PUT
FORWARD -- TO WE CAN OUR CLEAN
AIR CLEAN WATER AND OTHER
STANDARDS AND THE PURPOSE OF
THIS BILL IS ESSENTIALLY TO MAKE
ENFORCEABLE AS A MATTER OF STATE
LAW THOSE FEDERAL BASELINE
STANDARDS THOSE BASIC STANDARDS
WHICH IN MOST CASES.
HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR MANY
DECADES AND BUSINESSES --
INDUSTRIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
AND OTHER IN CALIFORNIA HAVE
BEEN LIVING WITH. FOR MANY YEARS
SO THE BILL IS NOT INTENDED TO
CREATE NEW REGULATORY BURDENS
BUT RATHER TO KEEP IN PLACE.
THOSE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN
PLACE TODAY WITH RESPECT
CALIFORNIA'S -- AN ENVIRONMENTAL
AND WORKER SAFETY LAWS.
THE BILL HAS A LONG LIST OF
SUPPORTERS AND THE PRO TEM WOULD
REQUEST AN AYE VOTE [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THOSE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU GOOD AFTERNOON TO
CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
MY NAME IS KATE POLL I'M A
SENIOR ATTORNEY WITH THE NATURAL
RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL -- I
WOULD JUST LIKE TO REITERATE
THAT SB ONE CREATES A FRAMEWORK
FOR STATE AGENCIES TO REGULARLY
ASSESSED THE CHANGES THAT THE
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS MAKING
TO WEEKEND AIR.
WATER ENDANGERED SPECIES AND
WORKER SAFETY STANDARDS AND TO
DETERMINE WHETHER THOSE FEDERAL
ROLLBACKS REQUIRE ACTION AT THE
STATE LEVEL. TO ENSURE THAT OUR
STATE PROTECTIONS REMAIN JUST AS
STRONG AS THEY WERE BEFORE THIS
FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION TOOK
OFFICE.
IT DOES NOT CREATE NEW STANDARDS.
ABOUT MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO
STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN IN
PLACE BEFORE THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION TOOK OFFICE AND
ARE NOW BEING WEEKEND.
ENSURE STONE I ALSO WANTED TO
ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS WHICH I
ALSO HEARD YESTERDAY IT ASSEMBLY
NATURAL RESOURCES.
ABOUT THE USE OF OUR MERCHANTS
HE REGULATIONS IN THE BILL.
I'M OF COURSE ALONG WITH THE
AUTHOR WE'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS
THOSE AND I THINK TAKE --
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS HAS HAS
RAISED SOME INTERESTING WAYS TO
ADDRESS THOSE BUT I DO JUST
WANNA -- EXPLAIN THAT THE GOAL
OF AUTHORIZING THE USE OF
EMERGENCY REGULATIONS. TO ALLOW
STATE AGENCIES TO ACT QUICKLY.
SO THAT THERE'S NO GAP IN THE
PROTECTIONS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE
IN PLACE IF A FEDERAL ROLLBACK
OCCURS.
AS YOU KNOW REGULAR RULEMAKING
CAN TAKE A VERY LONG TIME FOR
EXAMPLE THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD JUST
COMPLETED.
A RULE MAKING FOR NEW WETLANDS
PROTECTIONS FOR THE STATE.
BUT IT TOOK THE MORE THAN TWELVE
YEARS TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
SO SB ONE WOULD AVOID THAT LINK
THE TIME PERIOD WHEN NO
PROTECTIONS ARE IN PLACE BY
ALLOWING AGENCIES FOR A LIMITED
TIME UNTIL TWENTY TWENTY FIVE
ONE THIS BILL SUNSETS. TO USE
EMERGENCY RULE MAKING AN ONLY
WHEN THE AGENCY ADOPTS THE
BASELINE FEDERAL STANDARDS.
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION.
IN OTHER WORDS IT'S ONLY
AVAILABLE WHEN THEY'RE
ESSENTIALLY MAINTAINING THE
STATUS QUO -- FINALLY I DO WANT
TO NOTE THAT THERE IS A THIRTY
DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON ANY
FEDERAL ROLLBACKS PUBLISHED BY
AN AGENCY BEFORE THEY CAN TAKE
EMERGENCY ACTION -- THAT SAID
AGAIN I WANT TO ASSURE THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT WE ARE --
CONTINUING TO TALK WITH THE
OPPOSITION AS WELL AS THE
ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE CAN -- ADDRESS THESE ISSUES
IN A WAY THAT IS -- THAT THAT
ADDRESSES ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS
AND WITH THAT I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU THAT'S WHAT THIS PLACE
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS MY NAME SEAN BOTTLE ON
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE COMPLIANCE.
I'M I JUST WANT TAKE A MINUTE
AND ADDRESS THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION -- BECAUSE I KNOW THAT
NGUYEN THIS BILLS PREDECESSORS
BE FORTY NINE CAME BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON IT WAS A BIG
CONTROVERSY AT THE TIME SO
WANTED -- TO DISCUSS WHAT WE'VE
BEEN WORKING ON OVER THE SESSION --
AT THE OUTSET I JUST WANNA POINT
OUT THAT IT WAS ALWAYS -- BOTH
AS BEFORE NINE AND SB ONE THE
INTENT TO ONLY -- PRESERVE THE
EXISTING PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
THAT IS IS CURRENTLY -- IN PLACE
IN LAW NEVER WAS IT ON ANYONE'S
INTENT TO EXPAND THAT PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION.
SO WHEN THIS BILL -- WAS FIRST
INTRODUCED THIS YEAR WE MET
REGULARLY WITH WITH THE
OPPOSITION -- NUMEROUS MEETINGS
TO TO TALK ABOUT -- WHAT MINUTES
WE COULD TAKE TO MAKE THAT MORE
CLEAR THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
EXPAND THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION IN ANY TYPE OF WAY --
THOSE THINGS DID RESULT IN --
SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION SECTIONS
WE ACTUALLY REMOVED -- THE PART
RIGHT ACTION IN THE LABOR
SECTION OF THE BILL AND WE
TIGHTENED UP THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PART RIGHT OF ACTION SECTIONS.
ON TO ENSURE THAT MINOR
MODIFICATIONS -- TO ANY TYPE OF
FEDERAL ON TO THE SUIT CITIZENS
SUPERVISION -- WHAT IT REALLY
TRIGGER BY THE PROVISIONS THAT
ARE IN SB?
ONE SO OUT THERE ON YOU KNOW
NUMEROUS BACK AND FORTH WITH
OPPOSITION.
GOING THROUGH VERY VERY
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS -- I'M
PLEASED TO SAY WE I THINK WE
CAME TO A PLACE.
WE'RE BOTH SIDES HAVE AGREED TO
TO THOSE SECTIONS WE FEEL LIKE
WE TIED ENDED UP -- SO THAT
THERE ISN'T ANY -- EXPANSION OF
A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION -- AND
AND MORE PARTLY THAT WE WERE
PRESERVING THE THE RIGHT OF
ACTION THAT CURRENTLY EXIST --
WITHIN THE LAW SO THAT I'LL ASK
FOR IDLE THANK YOU.
THANK YOU OTHERS IN SUPPORT IF
YOU COULD JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLATES.
BILL ALLEY -- ENVIRONMENTAL
WORKING GROUP.
I'LL HAVE ANOTHER NUMBER PER SE
NEXT ON CALIFORNIA'S SUPPORT.
SO ELEVEN SALAS WITH THE NATURE
CONSERVANCY IN SUPPORT.
EVEN HER WAS SOUTH COAST AIR
QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN
SUPPORT.
NIKITA CRIED WITH AN RTC BUT
REGISTERING SUPPORT FOR THE
GOLDEN GATE SAM ASSOCIATION
THREE FIFTY VERY ACTION
FALSIFIED FOSSEL FREE CALIFORNIA
THANK YOU. ONE OF THE MEAT ON A
WITHOUT AMONG CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT.
AND THE SEVERITY FUNDS OF
WILDLIFE IN SUPPORT.
CARE TO SO ON BEHALF OF HERE THE
BAND THE LOCAL ADMINISTRATORS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IN SUPPORT.
MELISSA ROMERO WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF
CONSERVATION VOTERS IN SUPPORT
AND I WAS ALSO ASKED TO PASS
ALONG THE SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENT
CALIFORNIA.
I FEATHER I DON'T KNOW ON BEHALF
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND AS
WELL AS CALIFORNIA RELIEF AND
SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON JAMIE GOING BE
HAVE LATINO OUTDOORS AS WELL AS
A SOUL AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN OF THE
COMMITTEE JEREMY SMITH YOUR
BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL ALSO
IN SUPPORT.
MICHAEL YOUNG WITH CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION ALSO YOUR
STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU I KNOW NELSON SUPPORTS.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION
.
CAPTION CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE ADAM RIGHTLY ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE I WANT TO CONCUR WITH
THAT PROPONENTS WE DID COME TO
RESOLUTION ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES
AFTER.
AN EXTENSIVE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
SO -- THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF
GOOD FAITH ON THIS BILL AND AND
WERE.
WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WE COME TO A
RESOLUTION THE REMAIN TWO ISSUES
AND ALL.
WE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THEM
YESTERDAY I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE --
TO THEM TODAY AND TO MR LIPPER'S.
TODAY I WANT TO EXPRESS THAT WE
WOULD BE -- HOPEFUL TO ENGAGE
ALSO THE PROCESS OF HOW TO CRAFT
MORE TRANSPARENT PROCESS FOR THE
ACTUAL PUBLICATION OF RULE
MAKING UNDER THIS BILL -- AGAIN
WE AS THE OPPOSITION OF NEVER
OPPOSE THE INTENT OF SB.
ONE OF NOR THE OVERALL OR
GENERAL FRAMEWORK.
BUT HOW WE FULL THESE COMPLEX
FEDERAL -- STANDARD IN THE
CALIFORNIA LAW AND WHERE WE PUT
THEM I DO BELIEVE REQUIRES.
A WHAT WE'VE BEEN PROPOSING
WHICH IS EMERGING ROLE MAKING
SUBJECT TO THE APA YOU'LL SEE
EMERGENCY RULE MAKING LANGUAGE
IN SB ONE BUT IT WAVES -- L.
REVIEW AND IT DOES NOT CREATE AN
EXHAUSTION REQUIREMENT WHICH
WE'VE FOUND TO BE A PROBLEM
GIVEN THAT AGAIN ANY ANY ENTITY
CAN SUE AT ANY TIME ON THESE
ISSUES.
WE WOULD LIKE FINALITY IN THE
REGULATIONS AND SO I THINK
THAT'S JUST BASIC GOOD PUBLIC
POLICY WOULD BE.
HAPPY TO WORK WITH THE OFFICE OF
THIS BILL AND AND CERTAINLY THE
CHAIR -- ON A RESOLUTION ON THAT
ISSUE.
A SECOND BIG ISSUE THAT IS IN
THE PURVIEW OF THIS JURISDICTION
AND I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE
COMMITTEE NOW THIS IS A REALLY
GOOD JOB OF HIGHLIGHTING THIS --
IS REALLY WITH REGARD TO SECTION
G. OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
SECTION.
RELATING THE CALIFORNIA
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT TO THE
FEDERAL BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
ACT OF NINETEEN OH TWO
SPECIFICALLY SECTION.
EIGHT IN OUR VIEW.
AND WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM
OPPONENTS AS THIS BILL DOES NOT
CREATE ANY NEW STANDARDS IT'S
PRESERVING EXISTING STANDARDS
IT'S NO EXPANSION OF CALIFORNIA
LAW.
WE HAVE YET TO SEE ANY CASE LAW
OR ANY PRESIDENT TO SHOW THAT
THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE SPECIES
ACT IS APPLICABLES TO THE
FEDERAL BUREAU OF RECLAMATION A
FEDERAL AGENCY.
SPECIFICALLY WHEN ITS PRE EMPTED
BY THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED
SPECIES ACT AND WE BELIEVE THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS DOES A REALLY
GOOD JOB OF GOING INTO THE CASE
LAW ON THIS.
AT BEST IT'S AN UNSETTLED AREA
OF LAW AT BEST IF THIS BILL IS
NOT ABOUT EXTENT EXPANDING AND
ABOUT PRESERVING EXISTING
CALIFORNIA LAW.
PROVISION G. SHOULD BE STRICKEN
AND THAT IS OUR POSITION FROM
DAY ONE ON THAT.
WE HAVE NOT GOT IT THIS BILL OF
OUR MEMBERS HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR
ABOUT WOOD PRESERVING THE STATED
INTENT WHICH IS PRESERVING
CALIFORNIA'S EXISTING STANDARDS
FROM FEDERAL ROLE BOX.
THANKS THANK YOU.
HI GOOD AFTERNOON THANK YOU -- I
AM JENNIFER APPEAR IN THE
GENERAL MANAGER FOR THE STATE
WATER CONTRACTORS WHICH
REPRESENTS TWENTY SEVEN PUBLIC
WATER AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THE
STATE.
ALSO DOES NOT THAT I HAVE A
DEGREE IN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA DAVIS I'M A SCIENTIST
AT HEART IT'S SCIENCE THAT WE
ARE TRYING TO PROMOTE.
UNFORTUNATELY -- SB ONE
AMENDMENTS HAVE NOT GONE AS FAR
AS ACTUALLY ALLOW FOR CONTINUING
SCIENCE ACTUALLY -- IMPROVE ON
INFORM OUR PERMITS IT SAYS THAT
THE PROTECTIONS WILL REMAIN IN
PLACE FROM BIOLOGICAL OPINIONS
THAT ARE ESTABLISHED OF THE
FIFTH FEDERAL BASELINE FROM TEN
YEARS AGO.
WE'VE BEEN INVESTING TENS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SCIENCE
SENSE THEN WE HAVE MORE
INFORMATION AND THIS BILL WOULD
NOT ALLOW FOR THE FEDERAL OR FOR
THE STATE WATER PROJECT TO BE
SUBJECT TO THAT SCIENCE IN THEIR
NEW PERMITS.
THIS THIS PORTION OF THE BILL'S
VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE REST OF
THE BILL WITH THE REST THE BILL
THAT A REGULATION LEVEL AS
WRITTEN THE ESSAY SECTION IS
DOWN INTO THE PERMIT LEVEL
TALKING ABOUT THE ACTUAL WAY IN
WHICH YOU CALCULATE TAKE OF
INDIVIDUAL SPECIES.
AT THE STATE WATER PROJECT
FACILITIES WE HAVE A LOT OF
CONCERNS REMAINING WITH THE
ESSAY SECTION OF THE BILL.
WE ARE ALSO CONCERNED THAT IF
IT'S NOT AMENDED THAT IT ALL
DOES NOT ALLOW THE FLEXIBILITY
FOR THE STATE WATER PROJECT TO
PARTICIPATE.
IN THE VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT
PROCESS BECAUSE IT ESSENTIALLY
LOCKS IN THE STATE WATER PROJECT
TO TEN YEAR OLD PERMIT TERMS.
AND SO WE'RE VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT THE THE FUTURE OF THE
VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT FOR THAT
NATURE AND THAT'S THE SAME
CONCERN WE HAVE ON SECTION G.
WHICH IS -- CREATING UNCERTAINTY
IN THAT MANNER FOR THE CENTRAL
VALLEY PROJECT WHICH IS ALSO A
MAJOR PARTICIPANT IN THE
VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT WOULD NOT
ALLOW THEIR CONTINUED
PARTICIPATION.
INVOLUNTARY AGREEMENT AND IT
WOULD CREATE MASSIVE CHAOS
WITHIN THE WATER COMMUNITY WHERE
I THINK WE'RE FINALLY ON A
TRAJECTORY. FOR SOMETHING THAT'S
RELATIVELY STABLE SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION PLEASE.
DENNIS HOBBY ON AND WE HAVE THE
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY M. W. D. THE
SANTA CLARITA VALLEY WATER
ALLMAN LANTIS MOTHER AG
ORGANIZATIONS WE DO COMPLEMENT
THE PRO TEM OR STAFF. FOR
WORKING VERY HARD ON THIS AND
WELL AT THIS TIME WE STILL POSE
WITH A FOUR TO WORK WITH THERE
IS A FUTURE THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE AND TWENTY ALL
FOR WHAT THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT OUR BOARD HAS AN
OPPOSING THIS AMENDED POSITION
BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL
NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF THE USA
PROVISIONS.
ON THE SPECIES IN THE DELTA
THANK YOU AND WE'RE NOT GONNA
TAKE MORE TESTIMONY IF YOU COULD
JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR
AFFILIATION PLACE BODY MUNSON ON
BEHALF OF THE AG ENERGY
CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA
POULTRY FEDERATION AND WHEN
IMPAIR UTILITIES AGENCY.
AND THE CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON MISTER CHAIRMAN
BIRDS OF THE COMMITTEE LARA
KNOWING HE CHECK ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA CITRUS MUTUAL
CALIFORNIA FRESH FRUIT
ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA CONGENERS
AND GROWERS ASSOCIATION.
AMERICAN PISTACHIO GROWERS
WESTERNER PROCESSORS ASSOCIATION
AND WESTERN PLAN HEALTH
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION.
CHRIS ANDERSON ON BEHALF OF
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES WE HAVE A POSITION OF
OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON TEARS DOWN IN
MEMBERS TRICIA GERINGER WITH
AGRICULTURAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON CATHY CO THE
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND
OPPOSITION THE ESSAY PROVISIONS
THANK YOU.
CHRIS MY OUR BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION.
ROBIN BLACK ON BEHALF OF UNITED
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT HIM
BY AND BETHANY IRRIGATION
DISTRICT IN ABOUT IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON CAROLYN JOHNSON
WITH KP PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON BEHALF
THE MOJAVE WATER AGENCY MUSCLES
WATER DISTRICT AND OF WESTERN
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT IN
OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON NO -- CREAMERS AT
THE CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU
FEDERATION OPPOSITION.
TOM JACOB ON BEHALF OF THE
CHEMICAL INDUSTRY COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA IN OPPOSITION THANK
YOU.
SPENCER SACKS THE WELCOME GROUP
AGENCY SAN MARINO VALLEY MINUTES
WATER DISTRICT KINGS RIVER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT KINGS
RIVER WATER ASSOCIATION BUT SO
IRRIGATION DISTRICT AND SEED IN
OPPOSITION THANK YOU.
REX W. HIME WITH CALIFORNIA'S
PROPERTIES ASSOCIATION ALSO IN
OPPOSITION.
KILL DEL HAT WITH WESTERN
GROWERS ASSOCIATION WE DO HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THE IS A
PROVISION STILL THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION. FOR ITS SIGNAL BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS COMMENTS [inaudible]
SO [inaudible]
THIS AGO.
I'M.
SO SORRY I HAD TO STEP OUT THERE
AND I MISSED A LOT OF THE
EARLIER TESTIMONY -- I KNOW ONE
OF THE ISSUES THAT WAS BROUGHT
UP IS.
THE ISSUE OF THE LISTING AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL OF OF SPECIES AND
FOR EXAMPLE I KNOW WE'VE WE'VE
DEALT WITH THIS WHEN IT COMES.
TO THE ELDER BERRY -- BEETLE
YEAR IN CALIFORNIA THAT.
IS A HUGE COST DRIVER OF A LOT
OF LEVY PROJECTS AND WATER
RESOURCES PROJECTS THAT.
THAT WE OUGHT I THINK AGREED
NEED TO GET DONE -- AND AT ONE
POINT THERE WAS PROPOSAL TO DE
LISTED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL IS
ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED TO BE DE
LISTED -- BY THE RELEVANT AGENCY
AND YOU KNOW THROUGH ALL THE
BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS WAS
ULTIMATELY STOCKTON IN THAT.
DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN AND SO.
THERE THERE'S SO MUCH THAT GOES
INTO THOSE DECISIONS AS AS
SHOULD BE.
BUT YOU KNOW TO ADD KIND OF AN
EXTRA LAYER THEIR WHERE MAYBE
HERE AT THE STATE IF.
YOU KNOW IF THAT WERE TO BE DE
LISTED IT WOULD HELP SOME OF OUR
WATER PROJECTS.
I KNOW THAT'S A BIG CONCERN SO
IT MAY BE IF BOTH OF YOU YOU
KNOW THE PROPONENT.
MR LIPPER AND AND OTHERS COULD.
OF OPPOSITION TO KIND OF SPEAK
TO THAT ISSUE -- IN IN AND WHAT
IF ANY.
MAYBE AS OR SOMETHING WE COULD
DO MAYBE AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON
THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
THANK YOU MISTER GALLAGHER -- A
COUPLE THINGS FIRST OF ALL THIS
IS A COMPLICATED AREA OF LAW TO
BE SURE AND I REPORT I THINK
SENATOR ATKINS RECOGNIZES THAT --
THE COMMITTEES IN THE ASSEMBLY
THAT HERE THESE ISSUES OFTEN ARE
THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEES
ENOUGH TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SO
I REALIZE THIS IS A CHALLENGING.
SUBJECT AREA TO BE REVIEWING --
I DO WANT TO POINT OUT TWO
THINGS ONE IS WITH RESPECT TO
DELISTING AND THE CONCERN THE
OPPONENTS OF RACE AND AND I
AGAIN EMPHASIZE WE HAVE WORKED
CLOSELY WITH THE OPPONENTS AND
CONSTRUCTIVELY TO TRY TO ADDRESS
THESE ISSUES.
AND I BELIEVE CENTER ATKINS
WANTS TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE
THE OPPONENTS -- WITHDRAW THEIR
OPPOSITION BUT I WOULD SAY TO
YOU -- IN.
RESPONSE TO THE CONCERN THAT THE
SOMEHOW FREEZES THE SCIENCE AND
DOESN'T PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT -- THAT THE
THE CONCERN IS.
THAT THE OPPONENTS HAVE.
PLEASE LOOK AT PAGE FIFTEEN OF
THE BILL LINES TWELVE THROUGH.
EIGHTEEN AND I DON'T WANT TO
READ THEM TO THE COMMITTEE BUT
IT VERY CLEARLY SAYS THE
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
THIS IS THE AGENCY THAT OVERSEES
THE LISTING IN THE LISTING OF
SPECIES.
SHALL ENSURE THAT THE
PROTECTIONS ARE AT LEAST AS
PROTECTIVE AS FEDERAL LAW NUMBER.
ONE AND NUMBER TWO ACCORDING TO
THE BEST AVAILABLE SILENT
SCIENCE SO THAT IS AN EXPLICIT
DIRECTIVE.
TO OUR STATE AGENCY THAT
OVERSEES ENDANGERED SPECIES TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE SCIENCE THAT
THEY USE TO MAKE THE
DETERMINATIONS HERE.
ARE IS THE BEST AVAILABLE
SCIENCE OF WE WOULD ARGUE THAT
THAT DOESN'T FREEZE ANYTHING IN
PLACE OF BACK TO GIVES DIRECTION
TO THE AGENCY.
THE OTHER POINT I WANT TO MAKE
ON THIS ISSUE IS.
AGAIN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN
THIS CONTEXT -- WATER AND
ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THAT
WORLD RIGHT NOW IS IN FLUX AS
FOR THE THOSE PARTIES TO FOLLOW
THESE ISSUES.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS MOVING
FAIRLY AGGRESSIVELY TO REDUCE
THE US STANDARDS AND
REQUIREMENTS ON THE CENTRAL
VALLEY PROJECT AND ON A ON OTHER
WATER SUPPLIES IN CALIFORNIA.
SO THEY'RE IN THEIR CHANGING AND
THE IDEA HERE IT IS AGAIN NOT TO
INCREASE THE REQUIREMENTS BUT
RATHER TO KEEP IN PLACE WHAT HAS
BEEN IN PLACE AND HAS BEEN
ACCEPTED -- REQUIREMENTS OF
CURRENT FEDERAL AND STATE LAW
FOR MANY YEARS AND SO I WOULD
JUST SAY CENTER ACTIONS WANTS TO
ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED HERE.
AND IS LOOKING CAREFULLY AT THE
OPPONENTS CONCERNS BUT I THINK
HER RESPONSES IF IT CROSSES THAT
LINE INTO ALLOWING A WEAKENING
OF THE EXISTING FEDERAL BASELINE
STANDARDS I THINK SHE HAS
CONCERNS ABOUT THE IMPACTS.
ON ENDANGERED AND THREATENED
SPECIES I'D ALSO LIKE TO LET
KATE A POOL RESPOND TO THIS
ISSUE.
SURE.
I'M THE LISTING FOR UP.
QUESTION IN PARTICULAR
[inaudible]
I'D -- POINT THE COMMITTEE TO
SECTION ONE TWO ZERO ZERO SIX
ONE BE OF THE BILL.
THERE'S NO AUTOMATIC LISTING SO
IF SOMETHING HAPPENS AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL TO DO YOU LAST.
WHATEVER SPECIES WHAT HAPPENS
UNDER THIS BILL IS THAT THE
FISHING GAME COMMISSION THEN.
IT TRIGGERS A PROCESS WHERE THEY
TAKE A SORT OF EXPEDITED LOOK AT
THAT THE LISTING.
AND BASED ON THE DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE'S INPUT THEY
EITHER SORT OF LISTED
IMMEDIATELY THEY DETERMINE --
THAT LISTING IS NOT WARRANTED OR
THEY DETERMINE THAT IT SHOULD GO
THROUGH THE REGULAR LISTING
PROCESS SO.
IT ALL IS STILL -- THIS TRIGGERS
A PROCESS BY WHICH THE EXPERT
AGENCIES CAN REVIEW THE UP.
OKAY AND JUST OPPOSITION YOU
HAVE CAN YOU RESPOND TO THAT AND
IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A
WILLINGNESS.
TO MAKE SOME ADDITIONAL
AMENDMENTS ARE THERE CERTAIN
THINGS THAT YOU GUYS WOULD
REQUEST GOING FOR THAT WOULD
HELP.
WITH THE SITUATION.
WELL I WANT TO RESPOND TO THE
OTHER VERY BEETLE I THINK IT'S A
GOOD EXAMPLE THAT ACTUALLY WAS
PROPOSED FOR DELISTING. SIX
SEVEN YEARS AGO SO NOT EVEN
UNDER THIS ADMINISTRATION AND
REALLY QUESTION COULD YOU JUST
ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE
AMENDMENTS ABOUT YES.
I WAS I WAS ASKING RESPOND TO
THIS ISSUE INCLUDING THE
DELISTING BUT WHAT COULD BE
CHANGED ALSO IN THE BILL TO HELP
WITH THAT SITUATION.
BUT I COULD BE BRIEF ABOUT THAT
THESE ARE REALLY MORE ISSUES FOR
OTHER JURORS ARE THERE
COMMITTEES JURISDICTION.
WHAT THE THE PROBLEM WAS IT
DIDN'T GO TO PARKS AND WILDLIFE
TO THIS ISSUE HASN'T BEEN
DAYLIGHT DANNY IS THE LAST
POLICY COMMITTEES THAT TO THE?
HOW TO RESPECT I CAN ANSWER THE
QUESTION ALL ALL THOSE AS A
QUESTION?
JUST ANSWER QUESTIONS FAIR
ENOUGH. TO TO RESPOND YES IT
SAYS BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE
HOWEVER THE BUILDING CONSISTENT
INTERNALLY IF YOU LOOK ON LINES
TWENTY THREE THROUGH TWENTY NINE
OF PAGE FOURTEEN OF THE BILL.
IT'S AT THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH
AND WILDLIFE SHALL ENSURE THAT
THE PROTECTIONS REMAIN IN PLACE.
WE AS ATTORNEYS READ THAT ADDS
BASICALLY FREEZING IN PLACE IT
AND USE THE WORD FREEZE BUT
SHALL ENSURE THE PROTECTION
REMAIN IN PLACE.
IS SYNONYMOUS WITH THE
BIOLOGICAL PINIONS THE INTERNAL
TAKE PERMITS BASICALLY THE
PERMIT LEVELS ARE BEING FROZEN
IN TIME YOU CAN THROW AT THE END
OF THE SENTENCE BEST AVAILABLE
SCIENCE IT DOESN'T.
CHANGE THAT THEY SHALL ENSURE
THE PROTECTIONS REMAIN IN PLACE
SO IT'S VERY LEAST IT'S
INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT.
JUST SO EVERYONE ELSE'S AWARE
WE'VE OFFERED AMENDMENTS THAT
DEAL WITH THE DOWN LISTING AND
THE LISTING ISSUE TO THE EXTENT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOWN
LISTS OR D. LIST A FEDERALLY
LISTED SPECIES.
WE HAVE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT
ALLOWS THE FISH AND GAME
COMMISSION TO STEP IN AND REVIEW
WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE TO
LISTED UNDER THE ENDANGERED
SPECIES ACT CALIFORNIA'S VERSION
OF THAT.
AND WE PROPOSED TO MEMBERS THAT
DURING THAT INTERIM REVIEW
PROCESS THE PROTECTIONS UNDER
THE BIOPSY AND THAT'LL TAKE
PERMITS AND INTEL TAKE
STATEMENTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
REMAIN IN PLACE DURING THAT
PERIOD SO THAT THERE IS NO GAP
THAT'S THURMOND PROPOSED.
WE'VE ALSO. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE
THAT.
THE FISH AND GAME COMMISSION.
ON PAGE THIRTEEN OF THE BILL
LINES FOURTEEN THROUGH EIGHTEEN
BASICALLY SAYS.
THEY'RE DOING THE REVIEW WITHOUT
THE REGULAR LISTING PROCESS SET
FORTH UNDER THE FISHING GAME
CODE SO WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE
FISH AND GAME COMMISSION WILL BE
ANALYZING THE SPECIES.
IT'S INACCURATE TO SAY THAT THIS
IS GOING TO BE DONE HOW THEY
NORMALLY DO IT.
THEY'RE DOING UNDER A VERY
EXPEDITED TIMELINE WITHOUT
FOLLOWING THE REGULAR LISTING
PROCESS SO AGAIN THAT IS NOT
CONSISTENT WITH INTENT TO
PRESERVING EXISTING STANDARDS WE
HAVE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT
ALLOW THEM TO LOOK AT THE LIST
AT DALLAS THAT SPECIES.
PLACE THEM ON SEATS IF IT'S
APPROPRIATE BUT THEY SHOULD DO
SO UNDER EXISTING SEES A
FRAMEWORK.
AND THEY GET THE PROTECTIONS IN
PLACE WHILE THAT PERIODS IN
ORDER TO ADD TO SEE SAID YES
THEY HONOR TO ALL GO RIGHT TO
YOU MISS PEER -- SO THOSE WERE
TWO THINGS THAT I THINK ARE
REALLY GOOD POINT SIR ARE THE IS
THAT SOMETHING WE COULD INSERT
IN THE LANGUAGE SO FOR EXAMPLE
ON THE SHALL KEEP PROTECTIONS IN
PLACE.
YOU'RE UNLESS BEST AVAILABLE
SCIENCE.
REQUIRES OTHERWISE OR YOU KNOW
SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT IS THAT
SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO AND
THEN AND THEN IN CODING IN THERE
THAT IT HAS TO BE THE REGULAR
SEAS.
PROCESS IS THAT CORRECT THAT YOU
WERE BRINGING UP YES I MEAN AT
THAT THE ISSUE IS THIS BILL
POTENTIALLY CREATES A TON OF
LITIGATION WITH HOW IT'S
STRUCTURED WE PROPOSE AMENDMENTS
THAT STILL PROTECT THE SPECIES
FROM DALLAS IN DELISTING.
WITHOUT CREATING A NEW WHAT'S A
LESS PROTECTIVE STANDARD UNDER
EXISTING SEES A WHAT WE'VE A
JEOPARDY STANDARD THERE'S A FIVE
RECOGNIZE LAW NOT DIRECTED.
RIGHT SO I MEAN ARE YOU HAVING
RIGHT I MEAN HE DO YOU THINK
THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME ROOM ON
THAT THROUGH THE CHAIR MISTER
GALLAGHER SENATOR ATKINS IS VERY
OPEN TO ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES PROPOSED I
WANNA MAKE SURE THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS UNDERSTAND.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE
REGULAR LISTING PROCESS WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT ACTIONS AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL THAT ARE WEAKENING
THE EXISTING PROCESS AND ALL
WE'RE SAYING IS KEEP THOSE
STANDARDS IN PLACE.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT THING THAN
LISTING A NEW SPECIES OR DE
LISTING A SPECIES IT'S SAYING
WHAT EXISTS TODAY THAT IS BEING
ROLLED BACK AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
SHOULD BE KEPT IN PLACE.
WITH RESPECT TO MISTER REGULARS
CONCERN ABOUT THE BEST AVAILABLE
SCIENCE.
THIS IS THE FIRST THAT WE'RE
HEARING THAT BECAUSE THE PRO TEM
ADDED THAT LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY
TO SAY WE'RE NOT FREEZING
ANYTHING IN PLACE WHAT WERE
FREEZING IN PLACES.
THE PROTECTIONS BASED ON THE
BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE AND
THAT'S HOW THAT SENTENCE READS.
I'M NOT I HAVE TO GO BACK AND
DUST OFF MY ENGLISH BOOKS FROM
HIGH SCHOOL BUT IF THERE'S A
BETTER WAY TO WRITE IT TO MAKE
IT MORE CLEAR WERE.
MORE I KNOW THE PART TIME WOULD
BE MORE THAN OPEN TO DOING THAT
OKAY.
AND YES MISS HIGHER I COULD
SPEAK THERE'S A THERE'S A
CONCERN ABOUT WHAT BLESSED
PROTECTED MEANS ARE EQUAL
PROTECTED ESA FEDERAL USA AND
THE CALIFORNIA DINNERS BECAUSE
ACT ARE VERY DIFFERENT THEY HAVE
DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR TAKE.
THEY COVER DIFFERENT TYPES OF
THINGS THEY COVER DIFFERENT
SPECIES SO IT'S VERY UNCLEAR
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT REMAIN IN
PLACE DOES THAT MEAN THAT
DEPARTMENT OF FISH WILDLIFE IS
NOW.
ESSENTIALLY ADOPTING FEDERAL ESA
STANDARDS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IT'S VERY
UNCLEAR WHAT THIS ACTUALLY MEANS
AND AND HOW THIS ACTUALLY PLAYS
OUT WHAT STANDARDS DFW EVEN USES.
TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS NOT
THE LISTING PROCESS BUT THIS
REMAIN IN PLACE IN THE
BIOLOGICAL OPINIONS.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT I
MEAN THEY ARE THEY ARE DIFFERENT.
AND SO HOW IT MAYBE MAYBE
CLARIFY THAT IN LAW WHAT I WAS
THE HELP.
AND I THINK ESPECIALLY WHEN IT
COMES TO A LOT OF OUR WATER
RESOURCES PROJECTS THAT WE'RE
WORKING ON HER IN PROGRESS RIGHT
NOW.
HOW THAT GETS?
INTERPRETED.
RAY IS GONNA MAKE IS A BIG
DIFFERENCE RIGHT AND SO.
I THINK IF WE COULD WORK ON
THOSE THOSE ISSUES IT WOULD BE
REALLY HELPFUL GOING FORWARD I
CAN PUTS YOU MISTER GALLAGHER
THAT THE PRO TEM AND AND FRANKLY
THE OPPONENTS HAVE BEEN VERY
GOOD AND CONSTRUCTIVE ON THIS
BILL THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO
WORK TOGETHER TO TRY TO FIND.
SOLUTION ON THIS ALONG WITH THE
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT
QUESTION THAT THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE AS WE HAVE RAISED.
I THINK LESSONS.
COMMENTS THIS PETRIE-NORRIS
[inaudible]
SO I QUESTION IT'S ALSO ABOUT AT
THE ESA SECTIONS SO WHAT I
UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY A COUPLE
TIMES IS THAT THE INTENT IS TO
PRESERVE AND PROTECT OUR
EXISTING LEVEL STANDARDS NOT.
TO YOU OFFER ANYTHING MORE
EXPENSIVE IT SO IS THAT IS THAT
A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING THAT'S
CORRECT OKAY.
SO THE COMMITTEE ANNOUNCES MISS
BETWEEN OURS I DO WANNA MAKE A
CLARIFICATION I DO THINK AND AND
FAIRNESS TO BOTH THE PROPONENTS
AND OPPONENTS.
I THINK PROTECTING THE EXISTING
STANDARDS IS A QUESTION THE
QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THE
EXISTING STANDARDS THEY'RE BEING
CHANGED RIGHT NOW UNDER THE
CURRENT ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON DC.
THERE HAVE BEEN LONG STANDING
DISPUTES AMONG PARTIES ABOUT
WHAT THE STANDARD SHOULD BE
WHETHER THE STATE ENDANGERED
SPECIES ACTION CONTROL OF THE
FEDERAL ACT.
AND SOME OF THAT IS PLAYING OUT
HERE SO I DO WANT TO BE CLEAR
WITH YOU BUT THE PURPOSE OF THE
BILL FROM SENATOR ACHEN
STANDPOINT.
IS STATED SIMPLY TO PROTECT AND
pNOT TO ADD MORE BUT ALSO NOT.
TO EITHER ALLOW OPPORTUNITIES TO
DELAY WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE
TODAY THROUGH LITIGATION OR
CHALLENGES SO IN THAT RESPECT WE
AGREE WITH THE OPPONENTS WE
DON'T WANT.
CUMBERSOME PROCESS SEES WHERE
THE STANDARDS ALREADY PRETTY
CLEAR BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE
NOT TRYING TO RAISE THE
STANDARDS OF OF WHAT THE CURRENT
STANDARDS ARE OKAY GOT IT SO.
THAT'S INTENT THAT THERE'S YOU
KNOW PERHAPS SOME DISAGREEMENT
ON THE EDGES ABOUT WHAT THE
CURRENT STANDARD ACTUALLY IT'S
OKAY GOT THAT. TO THE COMMITTEES
ANALYSIS DOES SAY.
I UNLIKE THE PROVISIONS OF THIS
BILL RELATED TO AIR WATER AND
LABOR LAW STANDARDS THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL RELATED
TO THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
SPECIES.
GO BEYOND SIMPLY THE STATUTE AND
IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SO IS
THIS COMMITTEES ANALYSIS AGAIN
YOU FROM THE LEGAL INTERPRETED
INTERPRETATION SIDE SO.
GIVEN WHAT YOU SAID IS IS THE
PRETENDS INTENSE.
ARE YOU OPEN ISSUE OPEN TO
LOOKING AT THAT YES A SECTION.
YES MA'AM ABSOLUTELY CASHIERS I
WILL SAY AND I THIS IS A POINT
OF CONTENTION AND I'VE I'VE VERY
HESITANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT.
COMMITTEE STAFF BECAUSE I WAS A
COMMITTEE STAFFER TWENTY FOUR
YEARS MYSELF -- I DO THINK IF
YOU READ THE PROVISIONS OF THE
BILL THAT THE NOTION THAT
SOMEHOW THE ESA PROVISIONS.
ARE.
MORE GRANULAR THAN THE ERROR
WATER PROVISIONS -- IS NOT
ACCURATE AND THE REASON I SAY
THAT IS BECAUSE THE AIR WATER
PROVISIONS.
DEVOLVED TO THE WE TALK ABOUT
AFFLUENT STANDARDS FOR EXAMPLE
IN THIS BILL FOR WATER QUALITY
WHICH THE OPPONENTS.
HAVE AGREED TO THEIR OKAY ON
THAT PROVISION AFFLUENT
STANDARDS ARE PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS JUST AT THE PARK AT
A BASIC LEVEL JUST AS BIOLOGICAL
OPINIONS AND OTHER TOOLS ARE
USED IN THE INTEREST SPECIES ACT
WORLD.
OUR PERMIT CONDITIONS SO I THINK
THERE'S A BIT OF A DISAGREEMENT
THERE -- IN TERMS OF HOW
GRANULAR THE ANALYSIS AND
REQUIREMENTS ARE WITH RESPECT TO
THE ESSAY PROVISIONS AS COMPARED
TO THE OUR WATER PROVISIONS.
OKAY.
SEP BUT HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY AND I'M ENCOURAGED TO
HEAR THAT.
YOUR CONTINUE TO TALK WITH THE
OPPOSITION IT WOULD BE HELPFUL
THAT WE CAN RESOLVE CONDITION
MEANING ISSUES AND I THINK FLUSH
OUT SOME OF THE ISSUES AROUND
INTERPRETATION BECAUSE IT'S
ALWAYS EASIER TO THAT NOW BEFORE
IT'S IN TRYING TO INS MA'AM Là
HIDE I THINK THAT.
THE FACT THAT THE OPPONENTS
AGREE THAT THE UNDERLYING
PURPOSE THE BILL.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY AGREE
WITH IS A GOOD SIGN AND IT'S
SOMETHING THAT OUGHT TO AND I
THINK THE POTENTIALS VERY
STRONGLY.
THAT IF WE AGREE ON THAT
FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT NOW WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HOW THE WORDS ON
THE PAGE ARE WRITTEN AND WHAT
THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE GOING AND I
THINK THAT'S A LOT OF THE
TENSION THAT YOU'RE HEARING IN
THE OPPOSITION TODAY.
HI THANK YOU THANK YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
ALL RIGHT THANK YOU AND
APPRECIATE YOU WILLING TO WORK
WITH US BECAUSE IT.
THROUGHOUT THIS ALL THIS NOTION
OF MAINTAINING STANDARDS.
GETS DIFFICULT BECAUSE
MAINTAINING FEDERAL STANDARDS
VERSUS MAINTAINING STATE
STANDARDS ARE NOT THE SAME. TO
PUSH THINGS TO AN EMERGENCY
REGULATION.
REGULATORY PROCESS WHEN THERE'S
NOT NECESSARILY AN EMERGENCY WE
MAY THINK POLITICALLY THERE'S
EMERGENCY THERE MIGHT ACTUALLY
BE AN EMERGENCY.
BUT FOR US THE LEVERAGE
EMERGENCY PROVISIONS BYPASS
SAYING EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS
GOING FORWARD WILL BE AN
EMERGENCY.
THROWS QUESTION INTO THOSE
ASSUMPTIONS THAT'S WHAT WE NEED
TO BE WORKING OUT AND WE'RE
GONNA HAVE AN EXPEDITED PROCESS.
I'M FINE WITH THAT IN FACT IF.
WE END UP EXPANDING [inaudible]
CALIFORNIA'S ENVIRONMENTALISTS.
SPECIES ACT AND AND LISTING MORE
ULTIMATELY.
I AM FINE WITH THAT BUT USING
THESE MECHANISMS IS WHERE WE
HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL THAT'S
WHY I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WERE VERY CLEAR.
THAT WERE NOT.
UNNECESSARILY TAKING THE PUBLIC
OR ANY OTHER PROCESSES.
OUT OF CONTENTION AS WE MOVE
THROUGH THESE AND FOR US TO
SIMPLY ADOPT A FEDERAL STANDARD.
ISN'T QUITE AS SIMPLE AS THAT
BECAUSE THAT IS INCREASING A
CALIFORNIA STANDRD.
AS OPPOSED TO JUST TAKING
SOMETHING THAT WAS FEDERAL
THAT'S WHERE WE GET INTO SOME OF
THE DISTINCTIONS THAT I THINK
ARE NOT THAT SIMPLE -- TO MAY
AND AND BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA BE
RELYING ON THESE AND CHANGE
CALIFORNIA LAW.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS
SUCCESSFUL AND THAT WE ARE
SUCCESSFUL IN.
EITHER.
CHANGING PRESERVING OR
INCREASING CALIFORNIA STANDARD
TO THE FEDERAL STANDARD WHERE
NECESSARY AND THAT'S WHERE MY
CONCERTS COMMIT THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN WE LOOK TO YOUR
COMMITTEE AND YOUR STAFF FOR
EXPERTISE IN THAT AREA AND THE
PRO TEM WANTS TO WORK WITH YOU.
AND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO
MAKE SURE WE CAN ADDRESS THAT
ISSUE AS WELL THANK YOU.
AND WITH THAT YOU MAY CLOSE.
AS FOR AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
SECOND MOTION IS DUE PASSED TO
APPROPRIATIONS CALL THE ROLL
STONE BY STONE AYE GALLAGHER.
CHOW.
CHOW I CHU.
CHU AYE GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN [inaudible]
KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN.
IN CHINA I OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE NO PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS I REYES.
RESIDE.
THE BILL IS OUT.
RIGHT SENATOR ALAN.
SB.
THREE NINETY TWO WE'RE GONNA BE
KICKED OUT OF THIS ROOM IN A
FAIRLY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
THANK YOU THIS IS SUPPORT
SUPPORT WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND
A SECOND.
THERE ARE NO MOMENTS THAT MOTION
IS DUE PASSED TO APPROPRIATIONS.
IF YOU HAVE A LONG SPEECH WE S.
RESEARCHER I DO I WOULD HIGHLY
RECOMMEND AND I AM AGAIN.
YES I JUST I'M I GOTTA SAY I'M
REALLY THRILLED THAT -- AFTER
EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
REGULATED INDUSTRIES IN
DEPARTMENT WE'VE NO REGISTERED
OPPOSITION YEAH WHILE STILL
MAKING REAL.
SERIOUS IMPROVEMENTS EXISTING
PROGRAM THIS IS A AN EFFORT TO
REALLY MAKE OUR GREEN CAN SEE
PROGRAM WORK FOR CONSUMERS AND
FOR THE PEOPLE THAT CALIFORNIA
AND I JUST WANNA THANK ERIC AND
AND AND IS A REALLY GREAT
EXAMPLE OF THE POWER OF THE
SCIENCE FELLOWSHIP HERE IN THE
LEGISLATURE.
THESE TO REALLY DONE INCREDIBLE
WORK IN HELPING TO BRING THIS
VERY IMPORTANT BILL ACROSS THE
LINE SO I PROFESSOR NAY VOTE AND
WE FOUND A BILL -- YOU'LL HEAR.
FROM THE ENVIRONMENT WORKING
GROUP AND AND THE KID AT HIGHS
FROM ENERGY SEE THEY'RE GONNA
SPEAK IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE
BILL ALLEY -- ENVIRONMENTAL
WORKING GROUP THE ANALYSIS LAYS
OUT THE WHAT THE BILL IS TRYING
TO DO WE LIKE THE PROGRAM WAS
THINK IT WORKS TO SLOWLY THIS'LL
HELP SPEEDED UP THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
GET MY SPEECH AT NIKITA WITH AT
THAT RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL
HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL
REALLY APPRECIATE THE CENTERS
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE AND
INDUSTRIES WILLINGNESS TO WORK
WITH US WE BELIEVE THE DATA
CALLING PROVISION OF THE BILL'S
EX EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND WE
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENT THAT
CLARIFIES.
LIABILITY IN ENFORCEMENT THANK
YOU THANK YOU OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
MELISSA ROMERO WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF
CONSERVATION VOTERS IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
DâN HOUSE CALIFORNIA STATE
DIRECTOR FOR CLEAN WATER ACTION
WE ARE CO SPONSORED BILL AND
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT.
SEEING NONE IS THERE OPPOSITION.
SEEING NONE BRING BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE [inaudible]
QUESTIONS COMMENTS MR GALLAGHER
I JUST APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR AND
YOU'RE WORKING WITH -- THE
INDUSTRY.
AND FIND IN THAT.
THAT'S THAT PERFECT SPOT THAT
APPARENTLY IS YOU KNOW
NEUTRALIZE THAT OPPOSITION --
YOU KNOW SO APPRECIATE THAT WORK
ON THIS AND I'M ON THE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY THANK
YOU.
OTHERS SEEING NONE THIRTY MAY
CLOSE.
A DISTRICT RESTAURANT THANK YOU
THANK YOU AND YOU HAVE A MOTION
A SECOND THAT MOTION IS TO PASS
TO APPROPRIATIONS CALL THE ROLL
PLEASE STONE.
BY STONE I GALLAGHER.
GALLAGHER AYE CHAU.
CHAU AYE CHU. TWO I GONZALEZ
[inaudible]
HOLDEN [inaudible]
KALRA.
KALRA AYE KILEY.
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE I PETRIE-NORRIS.
PETRIE-NORRIS I REYES.
RESIDE OKAY.
GONZALEZ BY THOSE I ALL RIGHT
LET'S GO THROUGH.
THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY WILL GO
THROUGH THIS LIST ONCE.
OKAY IS MISTER HOLDING COMING
BACK.
CONTENT.
OKAY CONSENT CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS IN DALLAS.
GONZALEZ I OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE I
THINK.
ITEM NUMBER ONE SB ONE ACTIONS.
COULD WE GET MISTER HOLDEN.
BACK.
ITEM.
TWO SB ONE SEVENTY SIX JACKSON
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
GALLAGHER [inaudible]
MAIENSCHEIN.
ITEM NUMBER THREE SB ONE SEVENTY
NINE NIELSEN.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE AYE.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS THE TWO
EIGHTEEN BRADFORD.
GALLAGHER [inaudible]
GALLAGHER NO.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE SB THREE TWENTY
THREE WHITE HOUSE SKI.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE NO.
I DON'T NUMBER SIX A. B. I'M
SORRY SB THREE FORTY TWO
HERTZBERG OBERNOLTE [inaudible]
OBERNOLTE AYE.
I NEVER SEVEN SB THREE NINETY
TWO ALLEN THE WE'VE GOT THAT ALL
DONE AS I DID OVER EIGHT SB FOUR
TWENTY FIVE HILL.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE I ITEM
NUMBER NINE IS BEFORE SEVENTY
TWO COVER EURO.
GALLAGHER.
GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I AM MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE I BY [inaudible]
GALLAGHER AYE.
ITEM NUMBER TEN SP FOUR NINETY
THREE JACKSON.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE NO.
ITEM NUMBER TWELVE SB SIX THIRTY
NINE MITCHELL.
GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE AYE I REMEMBER
THIRTEEN SB SIX EIGHTY EIGHT
MONEY.
OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE NO [inaudible]
CHRIS
[inaudible]
BILLS BETTER [inaudible]
ALL RIGHT