MR GLORIA.
WELCOME I MEAN. SOMEBODY AND WE
LOOKS LIKE WE DO HAVE A QUORUM
SO IF WE COULD CALL THE ROLL TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. STONE HERE.
GALLAGHER CHAO. TO GONZALEZ
HOLDEN. KALRA KILEY MAIENSCHEIN
OBERNOLTE REYES. BUT WE DO HAVE
A QUORUM FABULOUS. MR GLORIA SO
WE'LL START WITH ITEM NUMBER
THREE WHICH IS AB TWO OH NINE
THREE WELCOME THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT AB
TWENTY NINETY THREE THIS
MORNING A FOR MANY OF YOU THIS
BILL LOOKS EXTREMELY FAMILIAR
THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S A REDUCTION
OF A BILL FROM LAST YEAR THAT
WILL ACQUIRE PUBLIC AGENCIES TO
RETAIN PUBLIC RECORDS
TRANSMITTED BY EMAIL FOR AT
LEAST TWO YEARS. I DECIDE TO
REDUCE THIS WELL A BECAUSE I
TRULY BELIEVE IN THE PRINCIPLE
OF TRANSPARENCY THAT ARE TRYING
TO OUR STATE CONSTITUTION AND
OUR PUBLIC EXISTING PUBLIC
RECORD RETENTION LAWS NEED TO
CONFORM WITH THE REALITIES OF
TWENTY FIRST CENTURY WORK THE
ONLY EMAILS THAT MY BILL IS
INTERESTED IN OUR THOSE
CONTAINING INFORMATION RELATED
TO THE CONDUCT OF THE PUBLIC'S
BUSINESS PREPARED OWNED USED OR
RETAINED BY ANY PUBLIC AGENCY.
EMAIL THAT ARE CRITICAL TO
CONDUCTING THE PUBLIC'S
BUSINESS TRANSPARENCY
REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
IT NEEDS TO BE PROPERLY- APPLY
TO THEM WITHOUT THIS TYPE OF
LEGISLATION THERE ARE STILL
ENTITIES THAT CONTINUE TO MASS
DELETE EMAILS AFTER AS FEW AS
THIRTY DAYS THIS DIRECTLY
IMPLICATES PENDING AND FUTURE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST AS
IT'S IMPOSSIBLE DISCLOSE WHAT
HAS ALREADY BEEN DESTROYED. ON
THE OTHER HAND WE HAVE SEEN
CITIES LIKE SAN DIEGO THAT HAVE
RETAIN THEIR EMAILS IS
DEFINITELY SINCE TWENTY
THOUSAND EIGHT THIS IS A GREAT
EXPENSE TO TAXPAYERS PRESENTS
DAHLE JUST TO SEE TO BELIEVE
ACTUALLY COMPLY APPROPRIATELY
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST.
FIND AND IN INSTANCE. TENSION
FOR EMAILS WOULD THE GOING OF
FOR. SPAWNING TO THESE RICH. IN
TWENTY TWENTY. IBM SAYING THIS
EMAILS ARE EQUAL RELEVANCE TO
PARA PUBLIC TO PAPER RECORDS
LET ME. I KNOW THAT SET THE
BALL CLAIM EARLY IN THE MORNING
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL
ACTUALLY- IN STRIDES AB TWENTY
NINETY THREE ENSURES THAT
PUBLIC RECORD RETENTION.
REQUIREMENTS ARE PROPERLY
APPLIED TO EMAILS GIVEN THEIR
IMPORTANCE AND HOW THE PUBLIC
AGENCIES CONDUCT THEIR WORK WE
WENT WITH ME THIS MORNING IS
IT- BRITNEY. BY SAUDI NOW WITH
THE CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPER
PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION. THANK
YOU FIRST WITNESS PLEASE. MARIE
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE MY NAME IS BRITNEY
BAR SAUDI I'M REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA NEWS PUBLISHERS
ASSOCIATION. AND SUPPORT OF
TWENTY NINETY THREE. I WAS.
ASSEMBLYMAN STATED WE ARE SEEN
INSTANCES WHERE- AGENCIES AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE REGULARLY
DELETING EMAILS. AUTOMATICALLY
AND- SOME CASES AS CLOSE AS
THIRTY DAYS. THESE RECORDS ARE
IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE
ABLE TO UNDERSTAND. HOW LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS ARE KHAM.
CONDUCTING THEIR BUSINESS
ESPECIALLY IN AN ERA AND TWENTY
TWENTY WHERE EMAILS ARE SO
REGULARLY YOU STE. AS YOU KNOW
THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT-
INSURERS THE ACCESS TO
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC IN
THEIR PEOPLE'S BUSINESS AND IS
OF THE FUNDAMENTAL BRIGHT AND
NECESSARY RIGHT OF EVERY PERSON
IN THIS STATE. SORRY DRY MOUTH-
THE- THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT AND.
OF HEY THIS IS ALSO WHY THE
LEGISLATURE IN TWO THOUSAND
FOUR RECOGNIZE THAT. PUBLIC IS
THAT AMENDED THE CPR RATE TO
INCLUDE EMAILS AS RATINGS AND
WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT YOU-
MAKE THAT THEY CONSISTENT WITH
PAPER RECORDS THAT. THEY BE
RETAINED FOR TWO YEARS- I
RESPECTFULLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME AND I RESPECTFULLY URGE
AND I VOTE ON THAT BEHALF OF AB
TWENTY NINETY THREE. THANK YOU
WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT. SEEING NONE IS
THERE OPPOSITION.
MORNING ONE-
CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
DILLON GIVENS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS UP
ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION TO AB
TWENTY NINETY THREE. I'D LIKE
TO START BY SAYING THAT. OUR
ASSOCIATION AND THE OTHER
ORGANIZATIONS OPPOSING THIS
LEGISLATION ALL SUPPORT
TRANSPARENCY AND OPEN
GOVERNMENT UNFORTUNATELY THIS
BILL COULD LEAD TO THE
OPPOSITE. AB TWENTY NINETY
THREE DOESN'T CREATE ANY NEW
RECORD. POLICIES OR DISCLOSURE
REQUIREMENTS IT SIMPLY REQUIRES
PUBLIC AGENCIES TO MAINTAIN
EMAILS EMAIL SENT OR RECEIVED.
FOR TWO YEARS THE RESULT OF
THIS- PUBLIC AGENCIES WILL HAVE
THOUSANDS TO POTENTIALLY
MILLIONS OF ADDITIONAL EMAIL TO
SORT THROUGH WHEN RESPONDING TO
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST THE
DEPARTMENT O FINANCE ANALYSIS
LAST YEAR THE SAME BILL
LANGUAGE- STATED THE RETENTION
OF NON PERTINENT EMAILS AND THE
NEED TO SEARCH THROUGH THOSE
EMAILS PARTICULARLY FOR LESS
SPECIFIC CPR A REQUEST.
INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF TIME
NEEDED TO COMPLETE CPR A
REQUEST THIS MAKES COMPLIANCE
WITH THE CPR A MORE DIFFICULT
IN THESE INSTANCES AND PRODUCES
WORST OUTCOMES FOR PERSONS AND
ENTITIES SUBMITTING THOSE
REQUESTS. AND THEY WERE RIGHT.
THIS BILL IS MODELED AFTER THE
POLICIES OF THE CITY SAN DIEGO
BUDGETS THIS LAST DECEMBER THE
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE ABOUT AN
INTERNAL CITY AUDIT. LOOKING
INTO THE NUMEROUS STRUGGLE TO
CITIES HAVING WITH MEETING
THEIR OBLIGATIONS AND
RESPONDING TO CPR A REQUEST- IN
THE ARTICLE THE CITY OF
ATTORNEY SUGGESTS THE CITY MAY
WANT TO STOP STORING EMAILS
LONGER THAN REQUIRED BY.
RECORDS RETENTION POLICIES
WHICH COULD RID STORAGE AND
SEARCH COST AND MAKE IT YOUR
TOO QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY
SEARCH FOR SPECIFIC DOCUMENTS
DUE TO THE MASSIVE VOLUME OF
DOCTOR RESPONSIVE EMAILS. THE
OBAMAS THROUGH WHEN RESPONDING
TO REQUESTS. THIS BILL TO TAKE
A THING LOW. BY STATE BY.
NOTHING IS CHANGING THIS BILLS
IT WAS BE BY THE GUY JUST FOR
MONTHS A THE OPPOSITE WAS NOT
CAN ON THIS ISSUE SINCE IT WAS
VETOED AND TELL WE RECEIVED IN
THE MAIL LETTING US KNOW THAT
THE BILL WAS REINTRODUCED. MOST
OF YOU OF THE SUPPORTED THIS
BILL LAST YEAR- IN SINCE THAT
TIME. THE GOVERNOR VETOED THE
BILL. WE'VE LEARNED THAT THE
COST OF THE BILL WILL BE IN THE
MILLIONS TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND EVEN MORE TO
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. WE LEARNED
THAT IT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT
THE ABILITY FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES
TO EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY
RESPOND TO CPR A REQUEST. THE
POLICIES FAILING WHERE IT IS
CURRENTLY. BEING IMPLEMENTED.
AND OVER ONE HUNDRED PUBLIC
AGENCIES FROM ACROSS THE STATE
HAVE SUBMITTED LETTERS OF
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL AND
TWENTY TWENTY. I'M HOPING WITH
THIS NEW INFORMATION THAT YOU
WILL RECONSIDER YOUR POSITION
ON THE BILL. THANK YOU AND ASK
FOR YOU KNOW VOTE ON AB TWENTY
NINETY THREE. THANK YOU LEXUS
WITH SAID MORNING SERRA BUT
JUST ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
SCHOOL BUSINESS OFFICIALS ALSO
IN OPPOSITION TO AB TWENTY
NINETY THREE. DUE TO THE NUMBER
OF FACTORS THAT DRIVE COSTS
RELATING TO THE SPELLS SUCH AS
IT INFRASTRUCTURE THE NUMBER OF
P. R. EIGHT REQUIRE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS RECEIVE ON AN ANNUAL
BASIS. AND STAFFING BECAUSE WE
BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL WOULD RE
DIRECTLY EMITTED STAFF TIME AND
SCHOOL RESOURCES AWAY FROM OUR
STUDENTS. AND CREATE A BACKLOG
TO ME PR A REQUEST IN A TIMELY
MANNER. THE BILL IS TO BROADEN
ITS EMAIL RETENTION
REQUIREMENTS WHICH WOULD
FURTHER EXASPERATED SCHOOL
DISTRICTS CURRENT FINANCIAL.
BURDENS AS WE CURRENTLY RANKED
THIRTY NINTH IN THE NATION IN
PER PEOPLE SPENDING AND FORTY
SEVENTH IN THE NATION IN THE
NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATORS. ABOUT
20% OF OUR SCHOOLS ARE IN RURAL
REGIONS AND MANY DEPEND ON YOUR
RATE AND THE CALIFORNIA TO HELP
TELECOM CONNECT FUND PROGRAMS
TO PROVIDE DISCOUNTS TO SCHOOLS
AND LIBRARIES. TO ACCESS
BROADBAND AND IT SERVICES. WE
HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER GLORIA CONSIDER
REQUIRING ALL PUBLIC AGENCIES A
POLICY ON EMAIL RETENTION WITH
GUIDANCE AND TRAINING TO STOP
ON THE PROTOCOLS TO RETAIN OUR
CONTACT AND DISPOSE OF EMAILS.
WHICH PROVIDES EACH PUBLIC
AGENCY'S BOARD AND IT'S-
CONSTITUENTS. AND PERTINENT TO
DISCUSS THE APPROPRIATE LENGTH
OF TIME BEYOND CURRENT LAW AND
REGULATIONS TO MAINTAIN EAGLES
ACOSTA ASSOCIATED FOR PUBLIC
TRANSPARENCY. ALL THE CLEAR.
REGARDLESS THAT PRETEND TO
REQUIRE. AND OTHER ELECTRONIC
AND- PERTAIN TO LEAVE. OUR
AUDITS ARC THAT ARE EXPECTED TO
MORE HERE UP FROM ALL TAKE YOUR
MUST RETAIN BE ON THE
LITIGATION OR AUDIT UNTIL IT IS
COMPLETED MANY OF OUR SCHOOL
DISTRICTS HAVE SUCH POLICIES IN
PLACE WE CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE
TYPE OF RECORD AND DURATION OF
RETENTION POLICIES BASED ON
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE FIVE SUB CHAPTER TWO
BEGINNING WITH SECTION SIXTEEN-
TWENTY HOWEVER AB TWENTY NINE
NINETY THREE WOULD CREATE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN THAT AT
THIS TIME WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD
WITH OUR CURRENT FINANCE
SYSTEM. FOR THESE REASONS WE
OPPOSE AB TWENTY NINETY THREE
THANK YOU WOULD ANYONE ELSE
LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION. TO
COME FOR THE MICROPHONE GIVE US
YOUR NAME AND YOUR AFFILIATION
GOOD MORNING- JASON BRIGHT ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION WERE
OPPOSED THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING AT THREE MILLION
ON BEHALF MESA WATER DISTRICT
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING BATH A LOSS ON THE OF
VALLEY DISTRICT IN OPPOSITION
THANK YOU. JEFF NEAL ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES AND THE
URBAN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
ALSO IN OPPOSITION. IN WORKING
WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICTS
ALSO IN OPPOSITION. MORNING MR
TURN MEMBERS CHORUS ALSO ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION.
CHRIS ANDERSON ON BEHALF
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING BE CHEN MERRY ON BEHALF
THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
ALSO IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING TURN MEMBERS ENJOY
RIVERA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY
CENTER IT NOT IN OPPOSITION IN
SUPPORT JUST WANTED TO MAKE
SURE THAT MISS THE OPPORTUNITY
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANYONE
ELSE IN OPPOSITION. ALL RIGHT
SEE NONE OF BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
COMMENTS MR OBERNOLTE. A THANK
YOU MISTER CHAIR OF MR GLORIA I
KNOW YOU HAVE- EXPERIENCE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AS MOST OF US DO.
YOU HAD MENTIONED IN YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT- THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO ALREADY ENFORCESA POLICY
SIMILAR TO THIS ONE AND THAT
THE TIME AND EXPENSE THAT WAS-
INVOLVED IN THAT AND I KNOW
THAT THE- OPPOSITION ALSO RAISE
THAT POINT WITH THIS MAKE
THINGS LESS EXPENSIVE FOR SAN
DIEGO- NO I'M NOT. I'M NOT
FAMILIAR WITH EXACTLY WHAT THE
POLICY IS. WELL IT MEETS
POSSIBLE RIGHT IN THE CITY HAS
AN INDEFINITE DETENTION POLICY
CURRENTLY THIS. PAUL THE BILL
BEFORE YOU SET IT AT TWO YEARS.
OF WHERE WOULD ACTUALLY
PROBABLY SAVE MONEY IT WOULD BE
A BETTER LOCAL EXAMPLE WOULD BE
A SANTA UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT- THEY'RE LOOSE
RETENTION POLICY ACTUAL RESULT
IN SIGNIFICANT A COSTLY
LITIGATION- THAT. SUBSEQUENTLY
TOOK MONEY FROM OUR CLASSROOMS-
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE
SAVINGS IS ACTUALLY PROVIDING
CLEAR GUIDANCE THE RETENTION OF
THESE EMAILS. REDUCING THE NEED
FOR LITIGATION BY THOSE SEEKING
THEIR RIGHT THE CONSTITUTION TO
INFORMATION. TO THE GENERAL
THIS WOULD BE LESS EXPENSIVE
FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT RATHER
THAN MORE EXPENSIVE. WHAT FOR
SOME I MEAN FOR SOME THAT TO
HAVE AND INDEFINITE POLICIES
ANY THAT'S PUT IT PLATE.
PROBABLY PRETTY OBVIOUS. I
THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT
PROVIDING IT'S CLEAR THAT A
DIRECTION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
A COULD MITIGATE LITIGATION-
STORAGE COSTS YOU KNOW AT THAT
COMES UP OFTEN- OF THERE IS THE
ARGUMENT ALREADY THAT THESE ARE
OF ATTAINABLE UNDER THE PUBLIC
RECORDS ACT. LAW HOWEVER A MOST
MANY OF THEM ARE BEING DELETED
AFTER THIRTY DAYS- SO. YOU
KNOW. I WILL LET YOU WAY FOR
YOURSELF- THE MATHEMATICS OF
THIS- BUT I THINK THE COSTS-
THE CONCERNS ABOUT COSTS ARE
OFTEN OVER EXAGGERATED. ON YOU
CAN SEE THAT I KNOW YOU KNOW
TECHNOLOGY QUITE WELL. THE COST
OF THE DATA STORAGE HAS GONE
DOWN DRAMATICALLY IN RECENT
YEARS. I AGREE WITH YOU I MEAN
THE- DATA STORAGE IS NOT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HERE THE COST IS
STORED TO SENSUALLY ZERO. BUT
YOU KNOW AND I THINK WE'RE
UNIFIED IN OUR DESIRE TO BE- OR
TRANCE. WITH A POP AT ALL. GOV
BUT- THE PROBLEM I THINK IS
THAT THE IF YOU ARE A IS BROKEN.
WITH HER. TO DO RECORDS AND
MORE AND OF OUR RED ARE DID YOU
INCLUDING. EMAIL FOR. SO HERE
IT'S NOT TO. EXPAND ON THIS
IT'S BROKE I MEAN IF THAT WILL
A CITIZEN SOME A UNDER THE CPR
A FOR RECORDS THE FACT THAT A
HUMAN IS COMBING THROUGH
DIGITAL RECORDS LOOKING FOR
SOMETHING THAT'S RELEVANT TO
THAT REQUEST IS RIDICULOUS
THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT OUGHT TO
BE DONE- SOMEHOW WE NEED TO AS
A SOCIETY GET TO A POINT WHERE.
ALL OF THAT INFORMATION THAT'S
TAG IS A PUBLIC RECORD IS
AUTOMATICALLY EXPOSED TO THE
PUBLIC ND THEN ANYONE ANY
INTERESTED PARTY THE PUBLIC CAN
GO COMB THROUGH THOSE RECORDS
TO THEIR HEART'S CONTENT AND
FIGURE OUT WHAT'S RELEVANT TO
WHAT THEY'RE INVESTIGATING
WHAT'S NOT- YOU KNOW THAT THAT
SHOULD BE SOMETHING THE
GOVERNMENT DOES IT SHOULD BE
SOMETHING THAT THE ALL OF THOSE
RECORDS ARE EXPOSED TO THE
PUBLIC IN THE PUBLIC DOES SO I
MEAN WE'RE WE'RE IN THE STRANGE
IN BETWEEN PLACE. WITH RESPECT
TO EMAIL UNFORTUNATELY THE THIS
BILL AND THE COUPLE THAT HAVE
BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD IN YEARS
BEFORE THIS YOU KNOW TAKE THAT
ARE TRYING TO A STEP TOWARDS
GREATER TRANSPARENCY WITHOUT
FIXING THE GREATER UNDERLYING
PROBLEM WHICH IS THAT WE STILL
HAVE PEOPLE COMING THROUGH ALL
THESE RECORDS SO UNFORTUNATELY
I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THIS AGAIN I DID NOT
SUPPORT LAST YEAR YEAH. IT AND
OUT OF THE OF RELUCTANCE TO BE
MORE TRANSPARENT THE PUBLIC BUT
AT A DOLLARS MEANT THAT WE NEED
TO HOLISTICALLY FIX THE CPR A
AS RESPECT DIGITAL RECORDS
RETENTION- AND THEN THIS
PROBLEM WILL JUST GO AWAY SAW-
BUT I WANT TO THANK YOU I KNOW
YOU'RE YOU'RE COMMITTED AS I AM
FOR GREATER TRANSPARENCY I WE
JUST DISAGREE ON HOW TO GET
THERE. THANK YOU MISTER KILEY.
CREDIT AS THE OPPOSITION ABOUT
THAT POINT SO IT IS THAT YOUR
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MAIN
COST BURDEN IS NOT IN DATA
STORAGE COSTS BUT IN THE SEARCH
COSTS FOR TRIPLE. IS IT YET UGH
THERE THERE WILL BE STORAGE
COSTS THOUGH IT IN COMPARISON
TO WHAT THE OVERALL COST OF THE
BILL IT'S GOING TO BE- MORE FOR
THE ALL THE ATTORNEYS THAT ARE
GOING TO NEED TO BE HIRED. TO
COME THROUGH THE TWO YEARS
WORTH OF EMAILS FOR EACH AND
EVERY REQUESTS WE RECEIVE. WE
RECEIVED A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER
OF REQUESTS RIGHT NOW ASKING
FOR- INFORMATION WE GO THROUGH
YOU KNOW THE RECORDS THAT WE
HAVE- WHAT WE'RE GOING TO
RECEIVE IS PR A REQUEST ASKING
FOR. ALL THE INFORMATION FROM
EMAILS FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE
SOMEBODY GO THROUGH EACH AND
EVERYONE OF THOSE EMAILS TO
ENSURE. THAT THE INFORMATION OF
ABOUT PRIVATE CITIZENS IS
REMOVED REDACTED THESE ARE
SIGNIFICANT COSTS AND IT IS
GOING TO HAVE WHETHER THIS IS A
SMALL- AGENCY SMALL DISTRICT OR
IT'S A EXTREMELY LARGE ONE THE
LARGER THEY ARE THE MORE EMAILS
ARE GOING TO HAVE. THE WAR
CHINESE ARE GOING TO BE NEEDED
TO GO THROUGH IN EACH EACH ONE
TO ENSURE THE WHAT WE'RE
RELEASING. IS SAFE. THE IS IT
DOESN'T. PUT CITIZENS OR
EMPLOYEES AT RISK. AND SO THERE
IS SIGNIFICANT COST WITH JUST
GOING THROUGH THOSE EMAILS. AND
FOR US WE HAVE STUDENT AS WELL
AS EMPLOYER RECORDS THAT WE
MUST ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT
VIOLATING. ABOUT WERE FOR PAUL
LOSS SAID THAT'S THE PROBLEM
WITH US THAT HALF OF OUR SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ARE SMALLS- HALF OF
OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE LESS
THAN TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED
STUDENTS AND THEN THAT MEANS.
THAT'S THE SCOPE HOW MANY STAFF
WE GOT A WE HAVE WITH THEM. IN
TRYING TO ASSESS HOW DO WE
DETERMINED AND HOW DO WE MEET
THE REQUIRED THE REQUEST THAT
COME IN WE'VE SEEN AN INCREASE
IN REQUESTS COMING IN BECAUSE
OF THE CHANGES UNDER LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA. PEOPLE
ARE INTRIGUED AWARE SCHOOLS ARE
NOW. RE DIRECTING RESOURCES SO
WE'VE SEEN THE NUMBER OF PR
RABOR CLASS. INCREASE IN THE
LAST FIVE YEARS AND YET OUR
TECHNOLOGY HASN'T KEPT UP.
BECAUSE MANY OF OUR RULES SITES
DON'T HAVE STRONG CONNECTIVITY
SO WE'RE STILL BUILDING OUT
WE'RE STILL UNFORTUNATELY
LIVING IN THE TWENTIETH
CENTURY. IN TERMS OF THE WAY WE
ADMINISTERED EDUCATION IN THE
STATE. SO IT WOULD SEEM TO ME
THAT SOME VERSION THAT ANALYSIS
HAS TO BE DONE EVEN WITHOUT
THIS BILL IT'S JUST. LIKE WHO
MAKES THE DECISION WHETHER OR
NOT RETAIN RIGHT NOW IS THAT
DONE BY THE INDIVIDUAL. I
EMPLOYEE OR IS IT DONE MORE
HOLISTICALLY. IT'S DUE WITH SO
WE'RE PROVIDING GUIDANCE ON
WHAT IS A- A RECORD WHAT IS A
DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO
KEEP SO. USUALLY WHAT IT IS THE
ATTACHMENT THIS IS ASSOCIATED
WITH AN EMAIL. THAT IS THE
DOCUMENT THAT IS THE RECORD
THAT IT THAT IS CAPPED- THE-
THINGS LIKE OUT OF OFFICE
EMAILS THERE'S- CAKE IN THE
BREAK ROOM THOSE KIND OF THINGS
ARE ARE TYPICALLY DELETED.
UNDER THIS LEGISLATION WHERE
WE'RE GOING TO BE KEEPING.
EVERYTHING WITH IN DISCUSSING
THE SORRY NOT GENERAL BUT AS WE
SAID THEY ARE DELETED WHO
DELETES THEM LIKE WHERE IS THAT
ARE THE INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE
BUT- OFTENTIMES WHAT THOSE DUES
THE QUOTE DOES GO BACK ON TWO
SEPARATE SERVERS SO THEY'RE NOT
REALLY. GONE THEY THE- SO
EXAMPLE FOR DISTRICT. I'M HERE
THE- IF ONE OF YOUR- WERE. ANY
IN THE- IT'S- ON THE LEAD.
SERVER AND THE LEGISLATURE. GO
THROUGH IN THE LEADS THOSE
THINGS SO THEY'RE NOT. REALLY
GONNA IN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES
TO LEADING THEM BUT THEY'RE
PROVIDED CERTAIN GUIDANCE ON.
THESE RECORDS THESE DOCUMENTS
THAT WERE PROVIDING TO THE
PUBLIC THAT HAVE. A POLICY THAT
HAVE A- AN ACT THAT WE ARE
WORKING ON OR PROVIDE GUIDANCE
TO THE PUBLIC THOSE ARE
DOCUMENTS THAT ARE ALL CAP. BUT
INSIGNIFICANT EMAILS AND THAT
THAT WOULD NOT BE DISCLOSED
ABLE UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT. THOSE KIND OF THINGS ARE
DELETED. AFTER AFTER WHATEVER
THAT IS THE POLICY THAT THAT-
AGENCY HAS ESTABLISHED. AND OUR
SCHOOLS AS I MENTIONED WE HAD
WE FOLLOW REGULATIONS THAT WE
HAVE FOUR CLASSIFICATIONS ON
HOW WE RETAIN INFORMATION SO WE
TRAIN OUR STAFF. IN TERMS OF
ITS PERMANENT RECORDS. EXAMPLES
ARE PERSONAL RECORDS PAYROLL
AND SCHOOL BOARD MINUTES IS A
CLASSIFIED AS OPTIONAL RECORDS
THESE CAN BE SOMETHING THAT
OCCURS. IN TERMS OF A TIME LINE
OF- AT DEAD DISCUSSION YOU KNOW
THAT'S WORTH THE OF TEMPORARY
PERSPIRATION BETWEEN THE
SUPERINTENDENT AND IT DOES IT
MEAN. AND SO WE WERE TAKING
THEM FOR AN- FOR A SPECIFIC
TIME FRAME BEFORE THEY'RE JUST
STORY AND THEN WE HAVE THE
DISPOSABLE RECORDS WITH WHICH
WE HAVE DETERMINED. THAT THERE
OPTIONAL THAT THE CAMPUS
DESTROYED WITHIN A- AFTER THE
THIRD. JULY ONE PERSON US
EXCEEDING THE COMPLETION OF ALL
LEGAL REQUIREMENT WE'RE NOT
ASKING THAT EMAIL TO YOUR
SECOND. EMAIL PANOPLY OF I
DON'T KNOW THAT I GOT MY
QUESTION PRESS WE HAVE I'M
CLASSIFIED UNDER SCHOOLS BY
CATEGORIES SO I THINK THE
PROBLEM IS THAT NOT ALL PUBLIC
AGENCIES HAVE THE SPECIFIC
PROTOCOLS IN PLACE RIGHT. POINT
POINT AS THE I GUESS IS MY
QUESTION IS IF YOU'RE HAVING TO
DO THAT ANALYSIS RIGHT NOW AND
CITING WHAT TO. DELETE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR EXISTING
POLICIES. WHY IS THAT PROCESS
NECESSARILY LESS BURDENSOME AND
THE PROCESS YOU FEAR WOULD TAKE
PLACE IN A MISTER GLORIA'S
BELLER HAVING TO DO THAT
ANALYSIS IN RESPONSE. ALRIGHT
REQUESTS WE THINK IT JUST
EXPANDS THE SCOPE BECAUSE IT'S
SUCH A BROAD BILL AT THIS
POINT. WOULD MEAN WHEN WE'RE
WEBER AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO BE
KEEPING EVERY EMAIL IT'S ABOUT
THE RESPONSE. TO THE C. P. R.
A. RICK US IT'S- IN THE STORE
IS A- LOW THE COST RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST
WILL BE IN THE FUTURE WE CAN'T
PREDICT WHAT MICROSOFT- IS
GOING TO CHARGE US AND- PERHAPS
ONCE THEY SEE THAT WE HAVE BY
LAW. TO RETAIN AND MAINTAIN A
CERTAIN AMOUNT OF STORAGE THEY
MAY CHANGE THEIR PRICING. OF
THE AND THAT THAT WAS
HIGHLIGHTED IN THE DEPARTMENT
OF ANALYSIS- DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE WE'LL SEE OF THIS BILL
LAST THE WHILE COSTS. FOR
STORAGE MAY BE LOW NOW WE CAN'T
PREDICT. WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO
BE IN THE FUTURE. I THANK YOU
MENTION. THANK YOU ARE AM THIS
WAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
YOU KNOW. I THINK THAT. A LOT
OF OUR BILLS ON A LOT OF THE
CURRENT LAN TRANSPARENCY
RELATES TO WHEN WE WERE
STRICTLY A PAPER. SOCIETY AND
WHEN WE RECEIVE LETTERS FROM
CONSTITUENTS- AND WHEN A MEMOS
WENT BACK AND FORTH IN INTER
OFFICE MAIL WENT BACK AND FORTH
IN THOSE FOLDERS THAT YOU BUT
HERE THAT'S NOT THE CASE NOW
AND SO YOU'RE LEGISLATION
ATTEMPTING TO DEAL WITH THIS
TRANSFORMATION AND HOW
GOVERNMENT DEALS WITH THE
PUBLIC I THINK IS IMPORTANT-
ALSO TO IN TERMS OF STORAGE
CROSS EYED. I DO THINK THAT
THIS COULD LEAD TO- PUT IN A
POTENTIALLY LEAD TO MORE COSTS
FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT I THINK BY
AND LARGE IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT
STORAGE COSTS ARE ON. A
MICROSOFT AGO EVEN IPHONE OF
THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT FOR
EXAMPLE USED APPLE THIS ABLE TO
STORE FOR NINETY NINE CENTS A
MONTH FOR INDIVIDUALS FOR
EXAMPLE. YOU KNOW THE COST IS
PROBABLY AN EQUITABLE IN
ADDITION- IN TERMS OF WHAT IT
IS THIS NOTION OF THAT THERE IS
SOME CONFUSION THERE COULD BE
SOME CONFUSION AS WHAT. WHAT IS
TO BE SAFE OR NOT THAT'S THAT
COULD HAPPEN NOW I MEAN THAT
YOUR BILL DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT.
IS BUT- WHAT IS DISCOVERABLE ON
UNDER A PUBLIC RECORDS. REQUEST
IF SOMEBODY'S TALKING ABOUT
GOING TO LUNCH THAT WAS NEVER
DISCOVERABLE THAT'S NOT
RELEVANT TO THE PUBLIC
BUSINESS- SPAM EMAILS SOME OF
THESE THINGS THAT ARE BEING
BROUGHT UP WEREN'T RELEVANT
BEFORE THEY'RE NOT RELEVANT
NOW- IT IT. AND JUST A
CURIOSITY ACTUALLY ONE THING
ABOUT IT TOO WE'RE DISCUSSING
IT. WITH ME BECAUSE ON A WHY TO
WHAT AT WHAT CAME THE TWO YEAR
ISSUE HOW DO YOU DECIDE ON THAT
WHAT WAS WE WERE. YOU TRYING TO
ESTABLISH YOU KNOW DOT THAT
THAT THAT THE TO MINIMUM OF
THIRTY DAYS TO THIS INDEFINITE.
YOU KNOW IT'S FAIRLY ARBITRARY
I'D BE WILLING TO WORK WITH
FOLKS IF THEY FEEL LIKE THAT'S
TOO MUCH- THERE WAS A TIME IN
MY LIFE I PROPOSE ONE YEAR AND
THAT WAS NOT WELL RECEIVED- BY
MANY TRANSPARENCY EXPERTS SO WE
LANDED IT TO- IF FOLKS HAVE A
GENIUS IDEA MISTRAL NOT HE'S
GOT NEVADA AND HIS MIND OF
WHAT. OF OPEN GOVERNMENT LOOKS
LIKE IN THE FUTURE EIGHT A
MAULERS BUT A BUT HONESTLY THAT
WAS WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS A HAPPY
MEDIUM OF GOLDILOCKS OPTION IF
YOU WILL BETWEEN THE TWO THE
TWO SHORT AND THE TOO LONG. AN
EXTRA THANK YOU FOR THAT AND I
THINK TOO THAT THIS THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT. THIS IS IMPORTANT
BECAUSE IT GOES TO THE PUBLIC'S
ABILITY TO DETERMINE WHAT IS
HAPPENING WITHIN THE
GOVERNMENT. AND SO EVEN IF
THERE ARE SOME INCIDENTAL COSTS
THAT GO WITH THAT I THINK THESE
ARE IMPORTANT COSTS THAT THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD TAKE
TO. KEEP THESE DOCUMENTS AT A
TIME WHEN- BUT THE WAY THE
PUBLIC INTERACTS WITH
GOVERNMENT HAS CHANGED OR IS
CHANGING. SO I AM HAPPY TO
SUPPORT YOUR BILL TODAY
MYSTICAL I AM PLEASED THAT YOU
BROUGHT THIS I THINK THIS IS
IMPORTANT NOT JUST FOR SAN
DIEGO IN TERMS OF. PARENTS FOR
THE STATE AS A WHOLE. THANK YOU
MISTER HOLDEN. YOU MISTER.
MISTER GLORIA I'D- SIT. YOUR
BILL LAST TIME AND I WILL FOR
AGAIN. BUT I WILL SAY THAT.
IT'S ALWAYS A CHALLENGE WHEN
YOU BRING A BILL BACK THE
SECOND TIME AND THE GOVERNOR'S
REALLY WAIT AND NOW AND KNOWS.
YOU HAVE YOU HAVE CLARITY IN
TERMS OF WHAT HE'S TRYING TO
SEE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH THIS
LEGISLATION SO. UNDERSTANDING
THAT THIS BILL IS ON ITS WAY
WOULD BE ASSUMING IT HAS THE
VOTES TO APPROPRIATIONS IT
PROBABLY WOULD BE A GOOD
OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO
RECONVENE WITH THE OPPOSITION
AND ALSO. TRY TO GET SOME
ADDITIONAL INSIGHT ON WHAT.
MIGHT BE DONE TO YOUR BILL- IT
IT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH
THANK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE IN
TERMS OF WHAT YOU'RE HOW YOU'RE
TRYING TO DO IT. BUT I THINK IT
IS GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE. THE
HOLD ON A SECOND FOR ABOUT THE.
THE GOVERNOR'S AGREEING WITH IT
OFF FOR YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH DID YOU KNOW THAT IS SEVEN
YEARS THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED
I'M NOT SURE WHERE TODAY- BUT
ALL ARE REALLY SAYING IS THAT I
DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT
TO YOU KNOW KIND OF GET A FIX
ON WHAT WILL BE REQUIRED IN
ORDER TO YOUR BILL SUCCESSFULLY
FORCE ADDRESS THIS TIME AROUND
SO. COST SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE
TO SOME DEGREE I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT HONE IN ON HOW YOU
CAN. YOU KNOW SPLIT THE
DIFFERENCE A LITTLE BIT BETTER
AND- I THINK THAT- YOU HAVE MY
SUPPORT. A TO MOVE OUT MOVE
ALONG TO ALLOW YOU THE
OPPORTUNITY TO GET THERE SO.
ALTHOUGH THE BILL. FIGURES FOR
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
IS THERE A SECOND THERE'S A
SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.
THANK YOU. AT AT I THINK OKAY
SORRY THE US. I'M SO FIRST OF
ALL I SEE YOU RE ENTRY WE I
KNOW WE MADE CHANGES LAST YEAR
AND APPROPRIATIONS AND I
APPRECIATE YOU INTRODUCING IT
AS SUCH. I WANT TO ASK AGAIN I
MEAN NOT A FLIP THAT WAY ABOUT
THE TWO YEARS. I AND I
UNDERSTAND HAVING. YOU PROPOSAL.
OF CLIPS. BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN A
REAL DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT AN
APPROPRIATE TIME. WOULD OR
SHOULD LOOK LIKE. AND I'M SORRY
FOR MY IGNORANCE BUT WHEN IT
WAS PAPER WHAT IS THE
REQUIREMENT FOR. TWO YEARS TWO
YEARS OKAY SO THAT'S- WHAT THE
THAT'S THE MORNING. THIS IS
EXACTLY THE ISSUE OF GETTING TO
BUY IS THAT YOU HAVE THIS
REQUIREMENT FOR EXISTING IT
WILL HIS STARK DOCUMENTS-
EQUALIZING THAT- WITH THIS
AGAIN IS A DIFFERENT FROM
WHAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING WITH
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE
FAR FAR LOWER OR IN SOME CASES
FAR HIGHER REQUIREMENTS OF
PROVIDING THIS GUIDANCE IN THE
STATE. OF WHAT THIS COULD BE
FINDING IT AS SUCH AS MR MAJOR
TALK ABOUT WITH HOW WE
COMMUNICATE TODAY AS WE'VE DONE
IN THE PAST THAT'S WERE COMING
FROM. AGAIN IF CALL IS TRULY
THE CONCERN THAT WE COULD
POTENTIALLY TALK ABOUT THAT
FURTHER- BUT I THINK THAT WE
NEED TO HAVE THE DIGITAL
CONVERSATION OF THE GOVERNOR ON
WHAT'S NECESSARY AND I THINK
THE OPPONENT TO HEAR TODAY NEED
TO RECOGNIZE THE ELECTRNIC
COMMUNICATION IS HOW WE
COMMUNICATE TODAY AND SO A BILL
WILL PASS. QUESTION IS WHAT CAN
WE DO TO MAKE THIS EASIER ON
THEM RIGHT- SO ON THE TEARS I'M
SORRY JUST YEAH I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU KNOW THE HISTORICAL WHAT.
WHITE YOU DON'T KNOW WHY THAT
WAY BETTER THAN THE COMPETITION
IS HAVE HIT A ROOM. LIKE THIS
AND- YEAH I AM. YOU KNOW WE- I
THINK WE BOUNCE HISTORY. A LOT
IN A PRESS. LAST YEAR BECAUSE
OF THE RELATION TO COST AND- OF
COURSE. AS THINGS CHANGE
WRITTEN DOCUMENTS THAT WE KEPT
WERE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN.
MASSIVE THE EMAILS IT'S EIGHTY
ONE GOT A LAUNCHER YOU KNOW THE
CHAIN OF EMAILS THAT. COULD OR
COULD NOT BE. RELATED TO THE
ACTUAL. DISCOVERABLE DOCUMENT-
IF YOU. BY CHANCE IN AND MOVING
TO APPROPRIATIONS COULD. A
NURSE ANY OF THAT I MEAN WE CAN
DO THAT WORK I'M JUST VERY
CURIOUS I ON HOW WE GOT TO TWO.
IS THAT THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER-
ESPECIALLY. IN AN EMAIL FORM
WHERE SO MUCH MORE IS BEING
RETAINED OF THEM WOULD HAVE
BEEN RETAINED RENT DOCUMENTS I.
AND I'M I'M- FOR TRANSPARENCY
YOU KNOW I THINK IT'S GOOD I.
YOU KNOW ALMOST WAS CONVINCED
MAYBE SHOULD BE LONGER THAN TWO
YEARS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T COST A
LOT TO STORE BUT WE WANTED TO
BE MANAGEABLE AS WELL AND WE'VE
ALL SEEN THOSE. REYES FOR
POLITICAL REASONS THAT THAT ARE
MASSIVE AND YOU KNOW REALLY
HAVE NO. DESIRE BUT TO FIND
SOME GOTCHA DOCUMENT- OBVIOUSLY
THAT THAT IS EVERYBODY'S RIGHT
TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT BUT I'D
LOVE TO REALLY NOBLE STAND MORE
HOW WE GOT TO TWO YEARS WHY
THAT'S IN A PART NUMBER AND IF
THAT SHOULD BE A APPROPRIATE.
ARE MOVING FORWARD SCRIPTED
THAT THANK YOU. NO ONE ELSE.
ALL RIGHT THANK YOU MISTER
GLORIA ARE IT AND ACTUALLY
THINK THIS DISCUSSION POINTS
OUT WHY SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY THE TWO
YEARS I'M NOT SURE IN THE
HISTORY OF THE TWO YEARS AROUND
DOCUMENT RETENTION. PROBABLY
WASN'T CHASING AT SOME POINT.
THAT RECORDS ARE HELD LONG
ENOUGH FOR AN ISSUE TO BE
DISCOVERED AND THEN. AND THEN
B. B. SOCK DOCUMENTS GET
SOUGHT. BUT SOME OF THE
COMMENTS WILL FIRST OF ALL THE
STORAGE COSTS QUESTION TO ME
IS. SPEECHES I MEAN THAT'S
RIDICULOUS IT'S NOT GOING TO GO
UP IT'S DOING NOTHING BUT GOING
DOWN YOU CAN BY. NOW BY FOR
PRETTY DARN CHEAP. BUT THE FACT
THAT SOMEBODY CAN SIT HERE
GLIBLY SAY WELL WE'RE GONNA
HAVE TO STORE ALL OF THESE
USELESS EMAILS. HOW DO WE KNOW
THEY'RE USELESS BUT WE HAVEN'T
SET A STANDARD AND YES
ATTACHMENTS CAN BE VERY
IMPORTANT. MAYBE WEEK WE CAN
DRAW SOME DISTINCTION THERE BUT
OFTEN TIMES THERE IS
INFORMATION THERE ARE
ADMISSIONS THERE ARE THINGS IN
THE BODY OF AN EMAIL THAT CAN
BE VERY SIGNIFICANT TO LINE OF
INQUIRY AND VERY DIFFICULT FOR
US TO SAY. THAT'S NOT PROBATIVE
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S
GOING TO BE SOUGHT- FRANKLY
SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
PUBLIC AGENCIES. IF PEOPLE ARE
USING THEIR PUBLIC AGENCY EMAIL
TO SET UP LUNCH STATES ROBERT
WE NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF A
STATE RESOURCE. I KNOW THAT
HAPPENS. BUT THESE. THERE
PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE SOME.
DISCIPLINE AROUND HOW EMAILS
GET USE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS
THAT IS THE MEANS OF
COMMUNICATION THAT I DO
UNDERSTAND I HAVE BEEN BEAT UP
LOCALLY OVER THIS BILL LAST
YEAR. THAT POTENTIAL COST. THEY
ARE THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY
BEING HELD ON AN INDIVIDUAL'S
COMPUTER BECAUSE THAT
INDIVIDUAL MIGHT BE CALLING
THROUGH THOSE DEPENDING ON WHAT
THE AGENCY'S STANDARDS ARE BUT
THEY DO EXIST EITHER IN AN
ARCHIVE OR ON AND AGENCIES
SERVER THE FACT THAT IT'S ON A
SERVER ALSO MAKES IT MORE
INHERENTLY SEARCHABLE NOW I
DON'T KNOW MISERABLE NOLTE FOR
RIGHT. FOR THE DAY WHEN
EVERYTHING THAT WE GENERATE BUT
BY EMAIL ALL THESE
COMMUNICATIONS ARE
AUTOMATICALLY THEN SENT UP AND
SEARCHABLE BY EVERYONE- WE YOU
CAN YEAH- THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT
THIS BILL IS ABOUT THAT'S A
THAT'S A SEPARATE DISCUSSION
ABOUT. THAT REALLY THAT THE
OPENNESS AT SOME POINTS. I
DON'T DISAGREE WE MAY BE THERE
OR SOMEWHERE LIKE IT BUT I
THINK WE AS A SOCIETY ARE STILL
STRUGGLING WITH WHAT. THE
DIGITAL WORLD LOOKS LIKE AND
MEANS AND IN THE MEANTIME. FOR
US TO HAVE SUCH A VARIETY OF
POLICIES AT DIFFERENT AGENCIES
SOME SECIFICS I'M NOT SOME AND
KNOWING SOME KIND OF A KNOWING.
THEN SORT OF OBVIOUS GETS THE
REAL VALUE OF WHAT SOME OF
THESE DOCUMENTS ARE AND IDO
UNDERSTAND THE COST INFORMATION
AND MISS GONZALEZ I THINK
YOU'RE RIGHT TO BE WORRYING
ABOUT THAT BUT IF THE REASON
FOR US TO SAY WE ARE NOT. GOING
TO BE TRANSPARENT IS BECAUSE OF
COSTS WILL THAT SHIP SAILED.
DECADES AGO AS SOON AS WE
STARTED DOWN THAT THE PATH OF
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PUBLIC DISCO
DISCLOSURES. SO I'M NOT SURE
HOW WE SOLVE THAT. OR IF IT'S
REALLY SOLVABLE BUT THE FACT OF
THE MATTER IS THERE'S A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF
INFORMATION YES THERE'S A LOT
OF CHAFF. BUT THERE'S ALSO
INFORMATION THAT IS VALUABLE TO
WHATEVER PUBLIC INQUIRIES COULD
BE THAT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD
SHY. AWAY FROM THAT SIDE I
THINK THAT FROM THIS COMMITTEE
STANDPOINT THE FACT OF THE-
GOVERNOR VETOED IT. MISTER
GLORIA GOOD LUCK WITH THE
GOVERNOR ON THAT THAT'S BEYOND
WHAT THIS COMMITTEE IS GOING TO
LOOK AT. WE'RE LOOKING AT THE
POLICY WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE I
AM VERY SENSITIVE THE COST
ISSUES HERE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT
ELSE WE CAN DO. IN THIS-SITUATION OTHER THAN TRIED SET
SOME CLEAR STANDARDS AND MOVE
FORWARD. AND THIS OBERNOLTE
MAYBE WHEN YOU'RE IN CONGRESS
YOU CAN PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT
OPENS UP. ALL PUBLIC.
INTERACTIONS TO BE
AUTOMATICALLY PUBLIC BUT I
THINK THERE'S SOME BOOKS ON.
THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN WITH
THAT IN MIND. ANYWAY SO I THINK
THIS MEETS OUR STANDARD IS FOR
SOMETHING THAT SHOULD MOVE
FORWARD AS IT DID LAST YEAR.
SHE IS WITH THE GOVERNOR AND
OTHERS AND IF THERE IS A BETTER
WAY TO DEFINE OR TO MANAGE
COSTS I WOULD HOPE THAT WE LOOK
AT THAT BECAUSE I THINK FOR ALL
OF US. THAT SHOULD ALWAYS BE A
SERIOUS ISSUE BUT UNDERLYING.
THIS IS THE OBLIGATION TO MAKE.
SEND PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE
TO THE PUBLIC IS REALLY WHAT
THIS IS ABOUT SO GLORIA MAY
CLOSE. THE CHAIRMAN AS USUAL
YOUR SPOT ON I JUST WANT TO
MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS FOR THE
RECORD. I'LL BE CLEAR THAT I
WILL WORK WITH ANY THE
STAKEHOLDERS AFFECTED TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE END UP WITH A
REASONABLE RESPONSIBLE POLICY.
LIKE YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN I'D
JERRY CONCERNED ABOUT COST ANY
OF YOU KNOW ME KNOWING I'D
CHEAP AS ALL GET OUT SO LISTEN.
I WILL WORK WITH PEOPLE TO TRY
TO MAKE SURE COSTS ARE
CONTAINED. BUT I WANT TO MAKE
pWERE TALKING TO THE TRUE COSTS.
WHETHER THAT IS THE UNLIMITED
ATTENTION BY CERTAIN
JURISDICTIONS FOR WHICH PEOPLE
DON'T SEEM TO HAVE A CONCERN
ABOUT THOSE COSTS OR THE REAL
COST OF LITIGATION ASSOCIATED
WITH THE LEADING RECORDS- BY
JURISDICTIONS AND BETTER LATER.
SOMEHOW DISCOVERED WE KNOW THAT
THEIR ACOSTA SO DO SUCCEED WITH
OUR CURRENT APPROACH THIS BILL
IS ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS THAT-
AND- LASTLY I WANT TO SAY IS
SOMEONE WHO CARES DEEPLY ABOUT
IT ABOUT PRIVACY ISSUES. IN NO
WAY WILL BE DISCLOSING PEOPLES-
ALREADY- PROHIBITED A PERSONAL
INFORMATION THEY'RE ALREADY
PROTECTED UNDER THE LAW THIS
BILL NO WAY EXPANDS THE SCOPE
OF WHAT'S DISCOVERABLE UNDER.
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT WHAT IT
EXPANDS THE OPPORTUNITY THAT A
RECORD THAT IS DISCOVERABLE BY
THE PUBLIC ENTITLED TO THEM BY
OUR STATE CONSTITUTION. IS NOT
THE LEAD ON THE THIRTY FIRST
DAY SIMPLY BECAUSE SOME OF OUR
ALGORITHM TO DID AUTOMATICALLY
AND NO ONE NO HUMAN BEING
BOTHERED TO LOOK AT IT TO KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS DONE.
SO THIS IS A VOTE FOR
TRANSPARENCY AND I RECOGNIZE WE
HAVE SOME WORK TO DO WITH THE
GOVERNOR. FOR DOING NETWORK
BECAUSE AGAIN IT'S TWENTY
TWENTY ALL. THE PAYMENTS RETAIN.
BEERS IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE
AMOUNT OF TIME WE MADE UP WITH
A DIFFERENT NUMBER AND MISSED
CHAIR THE CHAMBER
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE I WILL
DO THAT HOMEWORK TO MAKE SURE
WE SHOP AT YOUR COMMITTEE
APPROPRIATELY. A RESOURCE BUT
AGAIN THE DOORS OPEN WILL WORK
WITH THE GOVERNOR AND THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIRMAN FOR THOSE KIND
WORDS YOU ARE AGAIN AS USUAL
SPOT ON I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR
OUTLOOK. THANK YOU WE DO HAVEA
MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION IS
DUE PASSED TO APPROPRIATIONS.
CALDERON PLEASE. STONE HI.
STONE AYE CAL. GALLAGHER I CHAO.
CHAU AYE TO CHU I GONZALEZ
CONSOLES I HOLDEN HOLDEN AYE
KALRA. CAR AYE KILEY AYE KILEY
AYE MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN HI
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE NOW REYES.
IS THAT BILLS OUT THE
CONSTRICTING VERY MUCH ALL
RIGHT MISTER RODRIGUEZ TAKES US
TO AB TWO OH FIVE THREE ON HIS
WAY UP I'LL TAKE A MOTION ON
THE CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS
SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE
ANY ITEMS. I DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A ECOND ON THE CONSENT
AGENDA CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
STONE BY STONE I GALLAGHER CHOW
CHOW I'D CHU CHU AYE GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ I HOLDEN AYE HOLDEN
AYE AYE KALRA. KALRA AYE KILEY
KILEY AYE MAIENSCHEIN.
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE OVER I
AGREE AS- RIGHT THOSE ITEMS ARE
OUT THAT IS A. B. NINETEEN
EIGHTY FOUR MAIENSCHEIN A. B.
NINETEEN EIGHTY SEVEN GONZALEZ
AB TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
CUNNINGHAM AB TWENTY FORTY SIX
VOEPEL AND AB TWENTY ONE OH
EIGHT. OBERNOLTE THIS RODRIGUEZ
WELCOME. THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN BURRS I'M HERE TO
PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL TWENTY
FIFTY THREE. THIS BILL WILL
REQUIRE BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED
AFTER TWENTY TWENTY ONE TO
INSTALL FIRST AID KITS THAT
WILL GROW TOURNIQUETS. A
COMPRESS OF DEVICE THAT STOPS
THE FLOW OF BLOOD THROUGH A
VEIN ARTERY OR LAMB. SOMEWHERE
TO HOW AUTOMATED EXTERNAL
DEFIBRILLATORS WERE INTRODUCED
TO PUBLIC SETTINGS. THESE FIRST
AID KITS WILL BE A SUPPLEMENTAL
TOOL FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. A
PERSON BEING CONDUCT FROM BLOOD
LOSS WITHIN FIVE MINUTES OR
LESS IT IS IMPERATIVE TO THAT
THOSE NEAREST TO SOMEONE WITH
LIFE THREATENING INJURIES OUR
BEST POSITION TO PROVIDE FOR
STATE CARE. WITH MASS SHOOTINGS
OCCURRING MORE FREQUENTLY
PUBLIC SETTING SUCH AS SCHOOLS
CHURCHES AND LARGE GO PUBLIC
EVENTS. IT IS VITAL FOR PUBLIC
SAFETY THAT OFFER ST KITTS
BUTTE WITH THE QUICK WIT
TOURNIQUETS. I'M COMMITTED TO
WORK WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDERS TO ADDRESS
CONCERNS SO THAT WE MAY PROVIDE
THE PUBLIC WITH. ACCESS TO EASY
USE OF LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENT
WITH ME TO THAT'S FIGHT TODAY
IS CHRISTY WAS FROM THE
AMERICAN RED CROSS. THANK YOU
FIRST WITNESS PLEASE- SO WHEN
SOMEONE'S BLEEDING EVERY SECOND
COUNTS AND A TOURNIQUET CAN
EMPOWER. THE LAY PERSON. TO
TREAT AN INJURY UNTIL A
PROFESSIONAL HELP ARRIVES. SO
AS- THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER SAID WE
ARE SEEING INCREASED- GUNSHOT
WOUNDS AND OTHER THINGS. BUT
REALLY YOU'RE MORE THAN LIKELY
TO ENCOUNTER SOMEONE WITH THE
EVERYDAY INJURY SOMETHING LIKE
A CAR ACCIDENT A DEEP CUT.
ACROSS BLOOM- OR SOME OTHER
EVERYDAY OCCURRENCE AND AS HE
SAID SOMEONE WHO'S WHO IS
SEVERELY BLEEDING. COMPLETE TO
DEATH IN AS LITTLE AS FIVE
MINUTES- SO EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS LIKE THIS- TURNED
EVERY DAY CITIZENS OF THE FIRST
RESPONDERS. AND A TOURNIQUET
CAN SAFELY LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF
BLOOD THE VICTIM. WILL LOSE
BEFORE RECEIVING HOSPITAL
TREATMENT- BYSTANDERS ARE OFTEN
THE- ON THE SCENE OF A TRAFFIC
INJURY BEFORE PROFESSIONAL
RESCUERS. IN SOME CASES A
BYSTANDER CARE CAN MEAN THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHETHER THE
PATIENT SURVIVES OR NOT. SO
EXPERIENCED WITH CPR IN AT T.
SAYS THEY HAVE DEMONSTRATED
THAT BYSTANDERS WILL ATTEMPT TO
INTERVENE ESPECIALLY WHEN
ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT. A STUDY
PUBLISHED IN THE OF PRE
HOSPITAL EMERGENCY CARE BITES
THAT LAY RESPOND HERS ARE
WILLING. TO APPLY SPECIALIZED
DRESSINGS DESIGNED TO STOP
SEVERE BLEEDING. WITH CIVILIANS
PERFORM OF PRE HOSPITAL
TOURNIQUET APPLICATION. THE
RISK FOR DEATH WAS SIX TIMES
LESS IN PATIENTS WITH BLUNT
TRAUMA TO THE EXTREMITIES.
SEVERAL STATES IN THE US ARE
ALREADY EXACT- ENACTED
LEGISLATION THAT CONSIDERS. THE
CORE PRINCIPLES OF THE STOP THE
BILLY PROGRAM. AND TWO THOUSAND
NINETEEN AT LEAST TWELVE STATES
INTRODUCED OR PASSED
LEGISLATION TO INFORM EDUCATE.
AND EMPOWER THEIR CITIZENS TO
BECOME A- IMMEDIATE RESPOND WHO
CAN SAVE THE LIFE. IN THE OF
THE- OF A BILLY NUMBER SAY.
IT'S A POOR TO RECOGNIZE THAT
THE IN ACTION IS TAKEN BY
MEMBERS THE PUBLIC BEFORE FIRST
RESPONDERS ARRIVE ON THE SCENE
GIVE VICTIMS A BETTER CHANCE AT
RECOVERING FROM LIKE
THREATENING. AND SERIOUS
INJURIES FOR THIS REASON THE
RED CROSS IS PROUD TO CO
SPONSOR AB TWENTY FIFTY THREE
AND WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND
SAVING LIVES. THANK YOU WOULD
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT. MORE MATURE MEMBERS
RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION- ANY HELP
WE CAN GET IN- SAVING PEOPLE'S
LIVES- WE APPRECIATE IT AND WE
THINK THE AUTHOR FOR THIS
MEASURE. OR SUPPORT THANK YOU
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE IN
SUPPORT. RIGHT SEE NONE AS
THEIR OPPOSITION. I'D SAY NONE
OF BRING BACK TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS COMMENTS MISTER BURN
OFF THE- I THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR SO- MISTER RODRIGUEZ SIDE
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING BILL
FORWARD I HI. THE GOOD
SAMARITAN LIABILITY PROTECTIONS
CHIU PROPOSED IN THIS BILL I'M
COMPLETELY SUPPORTIVE OF I
THINK THOSE ARE LONG OVERDUE- I
STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT WITH THE
REQUIREMENT FOR TRAUMA KITS AND
THE REASON IS NOT. MY BELIEF
THAT TRAUMA KIT SHOULDN'T BE
AVAILABLE IN THESE LOCATIONS
IT'S THE MANDATE YOU KNOW
ADDING TO THE MANDATE THAT WE
THAT THESE BE AVAILABLE IN ALL
OF THESE BUILDINGS THAT THAT
MEET THE CRITERIA THAT YOU'VE
OUTLINED- I JUST WANNA MAKE
SURE THAT WHEN WE MAKE THESE
DECISIONS WERE DOING IT ON THE
BASIS OF STATISTICS AND
SCIENTIFIC FACT RATHER THAN.
YOU KNOW SOMETHING THAT SOUNDS
GOOD AND THE- PROBLEM THAT I
HAVE WITH IT IS IF YOU LOOK AT
THE STATISTICS ON YOUR
LIKELIHOOD OF EXPERIENCING ONE
OF THESE TRAUMA RELATED
INJURIES IN ONE OF THESE
BUILDINGS IT'S INCREDIBLY LOW I
MEAN LOWER DOWN YOUR ODDS OF
GETTING OUT BY PUTTING. AND
JUSTICE I'VE SEEN SO WHAT I
PROPOSING THAT. YOU KNOW
LIGHTNING KITS BE AVAILABLE IN
ALL OF THESE BUILDINGS RIGHT
AND YET THE DATA WOULD SUGGEST
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE MORE OF
A SOCIETAL BENEFIT THAN WHAT'S
IN YOUR BILL SO WHAT. WE HAVE
HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THAT
BECAUSE THE STATISTICS SAY.
THAT PUTTING THIS REQUIREMENT
ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS
IS NOT REASONABLE. WELL I CAN
LOOK AT IT AS WHAT WE DO EIGHTY
TEACH RIGHT THERE PRETTY MUCH
WATCHWORD EVERYWHERE THERE
ACTUALLY IN THE CAPITAL. SO I'M
LOOKING AT FROM THAT
PERSPECTIVE. THE CHALLENGES
THAT WE GOT A E. DIS TO BE
INSTALLED IN BUILDINGS. SUCH AS
OURS. THAT THE SUGGEST A
SUPPLEMENTAL- SAFETY DEVICE TO
HELP FOLKS AS WE DO A DIS. I
THINK IT'S VERY CHALLENGING
BACK THEN AND I THINK THIS
WOULD PROBABLY CALL SOME
CONCERN WITH FOLKS LIKE
YOURSELF AND OTHERS. THAT IT
MAY NOT BE NEEDED BUT I THINK
AS TIME. MOVES FORWARD AND JUST
TYPES INSTANCE RECEIVED
FREQUENT MARK DURING. THAT IS
SOMETHING AS A JUST AN
ADDITIONAL TOOL AND I DON'T
THINK THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT A
COST AS BEING OR MANDATE
BECAUSE- VERY COSTS IS VERY
MINIMAL I THINK OF YOU BY THESE
ITS LARGE SCALE THAT. WE'RE
DOING IS TRYING TO SAVE
SOMEBODY'S LIFE IF WE TRYING
TO. BOB POLITICIZED EVENT OR
MAKE IT SEEM LIKE IT'S NOT
USEFUL THAN YOU KNOW WHAT ARE
WE SAYING TO FOLKS OUT THERE
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO. HAVE
SOMETHING AVAILABLE TO SAVE
SOMEONE'S LIFE AND IN THIS CASE
IT'S A TOURNIQUET- I THINK I
HELPS WHEN THEY'RE OUT THE- THE
DIE START. WITH THE CHAIR FOR
ANYONE TO LOOK AT IT IT'S VERY.
VERY SMALL MINIMAL AND IF WE
CAN PUT. HI FIRST AID KIT WITH
THE TOURNIQUET SUCH AS THOSE
THEIR NEXT TO AN A E. D. AS- WE
DO ALREADY I MEAN AS SOME AREAS
DO ALREADY. HAVE THAT I THINK.
THE SHOULDN'T BE SOMETHING THAT
WE SHOULD- BECAUSE TO CONCERN
BECAUSE OF COST OR OTHER THINGS
OF THAT NATURE. RIGHT NOW IT'S
MORE THE MANDATE. BECAUSE AS I
SAID BEFORE GONNA PUT A MANDATE
ON PEOPLE LET'S MAKE SURE THE
MANDATE MAKES SENSE. AND TO
YOUR POINT ABOUT EIGHTY D. IS.
THE ODDS OF. SOMEONE NEEDING
ACCESS TO DEVELOP GREATER. IN A
COMMERCIAL BUILDING. YOU KNOW
OUR- UP SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER
THAN ANYTHING WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT AND- SO. YOU KNOW IT'S- I
THINK WHEN YOU'RE MORE LIKELY
TO GET STRUCK BY LIGHTNING
THEN. TO NEED A TRAUMA KIT YOU
KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S
COMPELLING SO BEING RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION AS I WAS LAST YEAR
BUT- I RECOGNIZE THE GOOD
INTENTIONS BY THE BILL AND AS I
SAID. I WISH THAT THE STOOD
SOMERTON PIECE OF IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN SEPARATED OUT BECAUSE I'M
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. AMOUNT
THANK YOU. THE QUESTIONS
COMMENTS. MR HOLDEN. I JUST
WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHEN AS
WERE JUST DESCRIBING YOU DON'T
NEED AN INTO YOU NEEDED SO IT'S
GOOD TO HAVE IT ACCESSIBLE. I
GUESS MY QUESTION IS WITH THE
FIGURE LATER THERE'S
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO USE IT.
THERE'S ITS CLARITY IN TERMS OF
HOW OF TO ACTIVATE AND TO
APPLY. IN THE CASE OF THE TURN
TOURNIQUET ARE THERE
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW A PERSON
WOULD BECAUSE I WOULD ASSUME IF
YOU DON'T DO IT RIGHT THAT
COULD ACTUALLY BE WORSE THAN.
THE NOT DOING IT AT ALL. YES
SOME OF THEM ALREADY HAVE THAT
THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THERE BUT
YOU KNOW A LOT OF THE LATE
PERSONS IT'S A ARE THE ONES
THAT WILL BE USING IT I MEAN.
IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THESE
AND SISTERS ALWAYS SOMEBODY
THAT'S OFF DUTY WHETHER IT'S A
PEACE OFFICER FIREFIGHTER MEDIC
THAT SEEMS TO BE THE FIRST ONES
OUT THERE TO HELP- IN WHICH IN
MANY CASES WERE. PEOPLE HAVE
USED BELTS OR SHIRTS. AS IN
PLACE OF A TOURNIQUET BECAUSE-
YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO STOP
BLOOD I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE
MORE OF A SAFETY ISSUE MORE
THAN. SOMETHING TO MAKE
SOMEBODY WORSE- AS YOU SEE
THOSE I THINK THEY THEY MAY
HAVE A SMALL- DESTRUCTION
MANUAL WITH THAT THEY'RE
THEY'RE VERY EASY SIMPLE TO
USE. AND I'M NOT MANDATING
EVERYBODY KNOW HOW TO USE THEM
RIGHT AS YOU DO A EDIE'S BUT-
AT THE VERY SIMPLE TOOL. AND I
BELIEVE INSTRUCTIONS ARE
REQUIRED ON ALL OF THEM THAT
YOU PURCHASED NOWADAYS. HI
OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS. SING
DONE MISTER RODRIGUEZ YOU MAY
CLOSE I RESPECT AS FOR A VOTE.
THANK YOU LOOKING FOR A MOTION
EMOTIONAL BE DO PASSED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. THANK YOU WE DO
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND CALL
THE ROLL PLEASE. STONE BY STONE
I GALLAGHER CHOW CHOW I H. U.
CHIU AYE GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
HOLDEN HOLDEN AYE KALRA. KALRA
AYE KILEY KILEY NO MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE NOW REYES. THAT BILLS
OUT THANK YOU MISTER DAVIS.
EXIST TO ITEM NUMBER TWO A. B.
TWENTY FIFTY NINE THIS COLOR.
MORNING MR CHAIR. I MEMBERS. I
AM HERE TO ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE ON AB TWENTY FIFTY NINE
THAT PROTECT AUG FROM
UNNECESSARY TESTING ACT I WAS
SHOCKED TO LEARN THAT IN TWENTY
TWENTY DOGS ARE STILL BEING
TESTED ON IN LABORATORIES
ACROSS CALIFORNIA AND COMPELLED
TO INTRODUCE THIS BILL WHICH
WOULD END TOXICITY TESTING OF
CERTAIN PRODUCTS ON DOGS. THE
BILL DOES HAVE CERTAIN
EXEMPTIONS WHICH I WANT TO
STATE INCLUDING FOR TOXICITY
TESTS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY
FEDERAL LAW. THIS BILL DOES NOT
IMPACT MEDICAL RESEARCH FOR
DRUGS VACCINES OR OTHER
PRODUCTS MEANT FOR DOGS OR
OTHER NON HUMAN ANIMALS AND IT
DOES NOT IMPACT PESTICIDE TESTS
CURRENTLY REQUIRED BY THE EPA.
IT DOES NOT IMPACT MEDICAL
DEVICE TESTING YET SOME
COMPANIES CONDUCT TOXICITY
TESTS ON DOGS THAT ARE NOT LET
ME REPEAT NOT REQUIRED BY
FEDERAL LAW. EXAMPLES OF
PRODUCTS AND SPECIFIC TESTS
IMPACTED INCLUDE SOME PESTICIDE
TESTS FOOD ADDITIVES CHEMICALS
AND DRUGS INTENDED FOR HUMANS.
THIS TESTING IS CONDUCTED
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS IN PRIVATE
LABS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO
REPORT WHAT TESTS THEY ARE
CONDUCTING ON ANIMALS AND WHY.
WHILE THIS BILL IS NARROW IN
SCOPE IT WILL MATTER TO EVERY
DOG SPARED FROM A LIFE ALONE IN
A CAGE SUFFERING FROM NAUSEA
VOMITING SEIZURES AND DEATH.
DOG SUBJECTED TO TOXICITY TESTS
ARE FORCED TO INGEST OR INHALE
HIGH DOSES OF THE SUBSTANCE
SOME ARE EVEN GIVEN
INTRAVENOUSLY AND THEY ARE
NEARLY ALWAYS KILLED AT THE END
OF THE STUDY. THE EPA
ELIMINATED THE ONE YEAR DOG
TASK MORE THAN A DECADE AGO
BECAUSE THE AGENCY TO TERM THAT
THE TASK WAS NOT SCIENTIFICALLY
NECESSARY YET COMPANIES STILL
CARRY THESE TESTS OUT AND SEND
RESULTS TO THE EPA FOR APPROVAL
IN THIS SHOULD BE A NO NO. YOU
ASKED WHAT ABOUT HUMAN SAFETY.
I SAY THERE ARE SCIENTIFIC
FLAWS IN TESTING ON DOGS FOR
HUMANS MANY TESTS HAVE RESULTED
IN FALSE NEGATIVES. THE FAILURE
RATE FOR TOXICITY TESTING OF
DOGS ON ANIMALS IT'S MORE THAN
90% WHEN THE SAME DRUG TESTED
ON HUMANS PUTS THE HUMANS AT
RISK. SO WHAT DOES THIS TELL
YOU. IT SAYS THAT THESE
TOXICITY TESTS DO NOT INSURE
HUMAN SAFETY AND THEY TOTALLY
DISREGARD CANINE LIFE.
CALIFORNIA IS PROUD TO BE A
LEADER IN INNOVATION AND
TECHNOLOGY AND THE WORK OF
COMPANIES HERE IN THE STATE ARE
TO WHO ARE DEVELOPING
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING
IS REALLY IMPRESSIVE. ORGAN ON
A CHIP TECHNOLOGIES FOR EXAMPLE
USE HUMAN CELLS AND STIMULATE
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE HUMAN
BODY. WE CAN ALSO USE COMPUTER
MODELING TO ASSESS HISTORICAL
DATA TO PREDICT THE IMPACT OF A
PRODUCT. THESE ALTERNATIVES ARE
AVAILABLE AND CONTINUE TO
BECOME MORE SOPHISTICATED THE
EPA HAS EMBRACED THIS APPROACH
AS A WAY FORWARD AND ACTUALLY
PLANS TO ELIMINATE ALL TESTING
ON MAMMALS FOR PESTICIDES AND
CHEMICALS BY TWENTY THIRTY
FIVE. THE FDA IS ALSO WORKING
ON A PREDICTIVE TOXICOLOGY ROAD
MAP SEEKS TO REDUCE ANIMAL
TESTING. NOW THESE APPROACHES
IMPACT ALL ANIMALS BUT AB
TWENTY FIFTY NINE IS JUST ABOUT
THE DOGS. BUT WHAT IT SAYS IS
THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN HUMAN LIFE AND DOG LIFE
PASSING AB TWENTY FIFTY NINE
MEANS WE CAN SAVE CANINE LIVES
AND PROTECT HUMAN SAFETY BY
CARRYING OUT RELEVANT AND
REQUIRED REQUIRED TOXICITY
TESTING IN NEW WAYS. THAT ARE
MORE RELIABLE AND SAFE FOR. NOW
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT ALTHOUGH
THIS BILL HAS BEEN PRINT IN
PRINT FOR OVER A MONTH.
CONCERNED PARTIES DID NOT SEND
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS UNTIL LAST
THURSDAY AT FOUR PM. I HAVE
ACCEPTED CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS
AND I'M OPEN TO CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATION. THAT PROTECT THE
INTEGRITY OF THE BILL. HEY WITH
ME TO TESTIFY TODAY IS VERY
KIPPERMAN WITH THE HUMANE
SOCIETY VETERINARY MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION AND KATHLEEN CALMLY
WITH THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE
UNITED STATES. THANK YOU SEE
YOU'RE TAKING THE AMENDMENTS
LISTED IN THE ANALYSIS AS
OTHERS YES MISTER CHAIR THANK
YOU VERY MUCH ALRIGHT FIRST
WITNESS PLEASE. THANK YOU SO
MUCH CHAIRMAN STERN VICE CHAIR
GALLAGHER AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF AB
TWENTY FIFTY NINE TO PROTECT
DOGS FROM UNNECESSARY TESTING
ACT. MY NAME IS KATHLEEN CONLEY
I AM VICE PRESIDENT OF ANIMAL
RESEARCH ISSUES FOR THE HUMANE
SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES. I
ACTUALLY WORKED FOR SEVERAL
YEARS AT A PRIMATE BREEDING AND
RESEARCH FACILITY BECAUSE I
CARED ABOUT HUMAN HEALTH AND
ANIMALS I LEFT THE LABORATORY
FOR THOSE VERY SAME REASONS.
FOR HUMAN HEALTH AND ANIMAL
WELFARE CONCERNS I NOW ADVOCATE
FOR TESTING AND RESEARCH THAT
IS MORE HUMAN RELEVANT COST
EFFECTIVE EFFICIENT AND SPARES
ANIMALS FROM SUFFERING. YOU'VE
HEARD HOW NARROW THIS BILL IS
IT IS ABOUT TOXICITY TESTING
ONLY THERE ARE MANY KINDS OF
TESTING THIS IS ONLY ABOUT
TOXICITY TESTING NOT REQUIRED
BY FEDERAL LAW. CARRIED OUT ON
DOGS IN FRONT PRODUCTS MEANT
FOR HUMANS NOT DOGS. EXAMPLES
OF DRUG TESTING THOSE IMPACTED
BY THIS BILL ARE CERTAIN TESTS
ON PESTICIDES FOOD IN COLOR IT
IS HUMAN DRUGS AND OTHERS. MOST
PEOPLE AS YOU HEARD ARE SHOCKED
TO HEAR THIS IS STILL HAPPENING
AND TWENTY TWENTY. DOGS ARE
USED TO THESE CHECKS BECAUSE
THEY ALWAYS HAVE BEEN THEY'RE
COMPLIANT INTERESTING ANIMALS.
AND THAT MAKES IT EASY TO
pINCENTIVE TO STOP. DRUG TESTING
DOESN'T ENSURE HUMAN SAFETY AS
YOU HEARD AND IT'S ACTUALLY
HARM TO MEN'S JUST TO GIVE AN
EXAMPLE. VIOXX WHICH WAS
REMOVED FROM THE GLOBAL MARKET
WAS LINKED TO A HUNDRED AND
FORTY THOUSAND HEART ATTACKS IN
HUMANS SIXTY THOUSAND OF THOSE
FATAL. THIS WAS AFTER SIX
DIFFERENT ANIMAL STUDIES ON
FOUR SPECIES INCLUDING DOGS
WHICH SHOWED THAT
VIDAK: WAS ACTUALLY PROTECTIVE
AGAINST HEART ATTACKS WHEN
ACTUALLY CAUSE HARM IN HUMANS.
BILL GATES GAY RECENT REMARKS
OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR
THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE
MEANING POINTING OUT THAT THIS
IS TECHNOLOGY. HAS THE
POTENTIAL THE NON ANIMAL
METHODS HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO
SAVE YEARS OF THE TIME. IT
TAKES TO EVALUATE SAFETY OF
DRUGS OF THE PRACTICE AND SAY
UNDER THE- DOLLARS. BE THE
RESURGENT CLINICAL TRIALS SO
WHAT IS IT GONNA TAKE TO MOVE
AWAY FROM FAILED TESTING ON
DOGS. A DEMAND FOR CHANGE
INCLUDING BY YOU IF YOU VOTE
FOR AB TWENTY FIFTY NINE YOUR
PROTECT DOGS INCREASE HUMAN
SAFETY AND SPUR INNOVATION. I
HOPE YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO THANK
YOU. THANK YOU THAT'S WITH US
WITH. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRED
COMMITTEE. I'M DOCTOR BERRY
KIPPERMAN A CALIFORNIA LICENSED
VETERINARIAN. BEEN PRACTICING
FOR THIRTY THREE YEARS. I AM A
BOARD CERTIFIED SPECIALIST AND
SMALL ANIMAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
AND ANIMAL WELFARE. I ALSO
TEACH THE VETERINARY ETHICS
COURSE AT UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF
VETERINARY MEDICINE. I'M
REPRESENTING THE HUMANE SOCIETY
VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.
ORGANIZATION WITH ABOUT NINE
THOUSAND VETERINARY
PROFESSIONALS NATIONWIDE.
INCLUDING ABOUT A THOUSAND
CALIFORNIA VETERINARY
PROFESSIONALS WITH A FOCUS ON
THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF ALL
ANIMALS. I SUPPORT AB TWENTY
FIFTEEN NINE TO PROTECT DOGS
FROM UNNECESSARY TESTING ACT.
WHICH WOULD BRENT CRUEL AND
UNNECESSARY TOXICITY TESTING ON
DOGS IN CALIFORNIA. IN TWENTY
EIGHTEEN THE USDA ESTIMATED
THAT FIVE THOUSAND DOGS IN
CALIFORNIA WAS SUBJECTED TO
RESEARCH FOR PRODUCT TESTING.
THESE DOGS ARE EXPOSED TO DRUGS
PESTICIDES AND OTHER CHEMICALS.
THAT ARE OBSERVER HARMFUL
EFFECTS SUCH AS NAUSEA DIARRHEA
HEART FAILURE DIFFICULTY
BREATHING OR EVEN DEATH. THE
DOGS ARE OFTEN KILLED AFTER
STUDIES THAT THEIR TISSUES AND
ORGANS CAN BE EXAMINED. WINDOWS
HAS BEEN STATED THAT THERE'S
OFTEN POOR CORRELATION BETWEEN
OUTCOMES ON ANIMALS AND OUT
COMES ON HUMANS. THIS
LEGISLATION PROVIDES EXEMPTIONS
FOR SUCH FOR TOXICITY TESTED
AFFAIR WE WERE. USING TWO BOXES
WELL AS MEDICAL RE USING DRUGS
WE THE STATE. ENCOURAGE THE
CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF NON
ANIMAL TESTING METHODS. THE
FEDERAL FOOD DRUG AND COSMETIC
ACT DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY
REQUIRE THE USE OF ANIMALS IN
TESTING PRODUCTS FOR SAFETY.
THE FDA IS CONSISTENTLY ADVISED
MANUFACTURERS TO EMPLOY
WHATEVER TESTING IS APPROPRIATE
TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SAFETY OF
THEIR PRODUCTS. OUR
RELATIONSHIP WITH DOGS IS MAN'S
BEST FRIEND SHOULD PRECLUDE
DOGS FROM BEING A HARM FOR THE
SAKE OF PROTECTING THE
LIABILITY OF MANUFACTURERS OF
CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES. AS
HAS BEEN STATED LAST YEAR THE
EPA DECLARE PLANS TO AND
TOXICITY TESTING FOR CHEMICALS
AND PESTICIDES ON MAMMALS BY
TWENTY THIRTY FIVE. CALIFORNIA
IS A LEADER IN ANIMAL WELFARE
HAVING BANNED THE SALE OF CAUSE
MEDICS BEING TESTED ON ANIMALS
AND TWENTY EIGHTEEN. I URGE
YOUR SUPPORT OF AB TWENTY FIFTY
NINE THAT HONORS OUR BOND WITH
DOGS AND ENCOURAGES THE
DEVELOPMENT OF NON ANIMAL
ALTERNATIVES TO PROTECT HUMAN
HEALTH AND SAFETY THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT. IF YOU GIVE
US YOUR NAME AND YOUR
AFFILIATION PLACE. MONICA ANGER
BIRTH MOM BEHALF OF CRUELTY
FREE INTERNATIONAL IN SUPPORT.
WHEN YOU MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS SAYS A MAN NOT LIGHT
HAS PUBLIC AFFAIRS HERE ON
BEHALF OF ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE
FUND IN SUPPORT ABOUT THANK YOU.
MATT ROBINSON WE SHUDDER INTO
SMELTER LYING I WAS ASKED TO
CONVEY THE SUPPORT OF SOCIAL
COMPASSION AND LEGISLATION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANYONE
ELSE IN SUPPORT. ALRIGHT SING
NONE IS THEIR OPPOSITION. I
THINK. MORNING JENNIFER SNYDER
ON BEHALF THE CALIFORNIA LIFE
SCIENCES ASSOCIATION I'M IN AN
EFFORT TO AVOID A FORMAL-
OPPOSITION ON THIS BILL WE DID
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY JUST LAST
WEEK TO MAKE WITH THE AUTHOR-
AND WE WANT TO FIRST- EXPRESS
OUR GRATITUDE FOR HER-
WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US
AND- AND TAKE SOME OF THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE REQUESTED ON
THE WHEN WE TALKED TO HER JUST
LATE LAST WEEK- I THINK. WE ARE
AT A POINT WHERE WE JUST WE
ACTUALLY JUST SAW THE
AMENDMENTS YESTERDAY ABOUT FOUR
O'CLOCK- AND AGAIN AS WE DO
APPRECIATE WHAT THE AUTHOR HAS
DONE AND WE THINK IT'S A VERY
GOOD STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION AND WE ARE STILL
TAKING THE TIME TO ACTUALLY
REVIEW THOSE AMENDMENTS- I'D WE
CERTAINLY DO NOT WANT TO HINDER
THE AUTHOR'S INTENT HERE WITH
THIS BILL AT ALL- AND WE DON'T
WE DON'T CONDONE AND THE CERES
INTO PRO. I'M A USE OF DRUGS
FOR SALAS TEST I THINK I'M FOR
US IT'S ABOUT THE TWO THAT ARE
USED IN THE BILL IN MAKING SURE
THAT THEY'RE PROBABLY COVER I
DO DEVELOP FROM BIOLOGICAL
SEARCH MEDICAL RESEARCH FROM
START TO FINISH- AND IT'S NOT
JUST ON THE ACTUAL DRUG
DEVELOPMENT SELF BUT IT'S NOW
WHAT GOOD INTO IT BEFORE
CLINICAL TRIALS AND THEN-
AFRICA'S SKIN SICK DETECTING
THAT HAPPENS ONCE- THAT DRUGS
ON THE MARKET SO FOR US IT'S
JUST MORE ABOUT THE TERMS DETER
AND WE SO. WE CAN'T CAN'T WORK
WITH THIRD SHE'S MINUTES DO
THAT I'M WE WILL BE ALL CIRCUIT
TURNED THIS IS THE ONLY POLICY
ON THE BILL SO WE MAYBE THE WE
HAVE THE T WERE WITH HER AND-
AS THIS BILL MOVES ON I'M IN
THE PROCESS SO- PRITCHETT YOUR
TIME THANK YOU. THANK YOU
THAT'S WHAT THIS GOOD MORNING
YOU FOR OPPORTUNITY TO TALK
WITH THE- I'M DOCTOR AMANDA UP
BANKS FOR THE CALIFORNIA BY
MEDICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION.
NOW LIKE TO TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY THIS MORNING TO.
CORRECT A FEW MISCONCEPTIONS
AND PROVIDE SOME FACTS ABOUT BY
MEDICAL RESEARCH THE NEEDS
ANIMAL MODELS ONE OF THE COMMON
BELIEF THAT ALTERNATIVES EXIST
THAT CAN REPLACE THE WILL OF
ANIMALS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH.
THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE WHAT
ALTERNATIVES A WIDELY USED
WHENEVER POSSIBLE. FEDERAL LAW
EXPECTS ANIMAL MODELS THERE'S
NOTHING CAN WEEKS PLACE THE USE
OF A WHOLE LIVING SYSTEM WHEN
DEVELOPING DRUGS ENGAGING DRUG
SAFETY AND EFFICACY. 95% OF ALL
ANIMAL WORK NECESSARY IS
CONDUCTED IN RODENTS AND LESS
THAN ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT.
OF SUCH WORK TAKES PLACE AND
DOGS. OF THE DOGS NECESSARY
PERFECT RESEARCH AND TEACHING
CALIFORNIA 97% OR ADOPTED OUT
TO FOREVER HOMES WHEN THE
RESEARCH PROTOCOLS HAVE BEEN
CONCLUDED. THE FDA EXPECTS SUCH
WORK TO BE SHOWN EFFECTIVE IN
TWO ANIMALMODELS TYPICALLY
ROTOR MODEL IN A LARGE ANIMAL
WE MUST PROVE BOTH SEPARATE
SAFETY EPICS THE ANIMAL MODELS.
BEFORE WILL ALLOW US TO PROCEED
TO TESTING IN HUMANS. WHAT THE
AUTHOR AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL
HAS TAKEN A NUMBER OF THE
AMENDMENTS WE STILL NEED A FEW
MORE TO ENSURE WE DON'T LIMIT
MEDICAL RESEARCH FOR DRUG
DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES. A NUMBER
OF CALIFORNIA COMPANIES IN THE
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO COPE
WITH THE NINETEEN VACCINES AND
TREATMENTS AND WILL NEED CANINE
TO TEST BEFORE. ALLOWING
TESTING IN HUMANS DURING THIS
TIME OF THE WORLDWIDE EPIDEMIC
HALTING MEDICAL RESEARCH IS
WEARING. WE WILL REMAIN
CONCERNED ABOUT AB TWENTY FIFTY
NINE UNTIL WE ARE SURE THE BILL
DOES NOT ADVERSELY IN MY-
IMPACT MEDICAL RESEARCH FOR
HUMANE. AND FOR ANIMAL HEALTH
THANK YOU. THANK YOU WOULD
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO REGISTER
OPPOSITION. GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND YOUR AFFILIATION EMILY
PAPPAS NAMELY PAPPAS ASSOCIATES
ON BEHALF OF ANIMAL HALTH
INSTITUTE WHERE BURKE PRESENT
THE DRUG MANUFACTURERS TO MAKE
MEDICINES FOR ANIMALS. THANK
YOU. JOHN WINGER ON BEHALF OF
BIO COMMON ADMIT RICHEST
EXPRESSED THE SAME CONCERNS AND
THANK THE OFFER FOR AUTHOR FOR
HER WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US
THANKS. THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE
IN OPPOSITION. RIGHT SIGNAL
BRING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
QUESTIONS COMMENTS MISTER KILEY.
NEWS THAT PROGRAM DO YOU THINK
THAT IF WE CAN LAST- TESTING ON
ON DOGS THAT THAT MIGHT BE
SOMETHING TO FIX OR OTHER NON
ROAD MAMMALS FOR THE STATE. IS
THE YES IS THE SHORT ANSWER-
YOU KNOW THERE'S- WE THE E. U.
USES AND SEX- BUT A NUMBER OF
COMPANIES HAVE BEGUN TO USE
THREE D. MODELING. THERE WAS A
TIME WHEN WE USE CHIMPANZEES
FOR TESTING AND WE MOVED AWAY
FROM THAT AND WE ARE STILL ABLE
TO DEVELOP. AND TEST DRUGS-
THAT ARE LIFESAVING SO THIS IS
A CONVERSATION ABOUT CHANGING A
BUSINESS MODEL TO SAVE CANINE
LIFE IT IS NOT A CONVERSATION
ABOUT STOPPING SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH- SOMETIMES YOU NEED A
PUSH. YEAH I. AND I RECOGNIZE
THAT AND I THINK THAT. YOU KNOW
WE'RE LOOKING AT ANIMAL TESTING
THERE'S A COMPLEX BOUNCING
ABOUT THE CALL OF THE
SCIENTIFIC INVISIBLE
CONSIDERATIONS SPENDING I
RECOGNIZE THERE'S A SPECIAL
SORT OF NINE HUMAN CANINE
RELATIONSHIP I'M JUST TRYING I
KIND OF PROBLEM WITH FROM THE
ANIMAL WELFARE YOU OUT WHAT
WHAT'S THE IMPLICATIONS ABOUT A
PART OF THE QUESTION CASTING
FROM- CANINES. TO SOME OTHER
NON ROAD. WELL I WOULD
CERTAINLY OPEN TO HAVING AN
ETHICAL CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW
ALL SEVENTEENTH BEINGS ARE
TREATED- ON THIS PLANET- BUT I
THINK AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
DOGS LOOKING AT THE DATA THAT
HAS SHOWN THAT FALSE NEGATIVES
HAVE COME AS A RESULT OF SOME
OF THE TESTING SUGGESTS THAT
MAYBE THE THAT'S NOT THE BEST
OR MOST APPROPRIATE SPECIES I
ALSO WANT TO REITERATE AND-
THAT THIS DOES NOT IMPACT
MEDICAL RESEARCH THIS IS NOT
ABOUT THE TESTING FOR THE
EFFICACY OF A DRUG IT'S ABOUT
TOXICITY LEVELS. AND WE'D HAVE
THAT CONVERSATION YEARS AGO
AROUND LEAD PAINT- RIGHT SO
IT'S- NOT ABOUT IF THE PAINT
WORKS IT'S ABOUT HOW MUCH
TOXICITY IS IN THE PAIN AND IS
THAT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO
SORT OF CONTINUE TO KEEP OR TO
MOVE AWAY FROM. WE MOVED AWAY
FROM IT- SO YOU CAN YOU CAN
STILL TEST IT ALSO DOES NOT
IMPACT TESTING ON- DRUGS THAT
ARE USED ON ANIMALS IN ON DOGS.
SO I KNOW THAT THAT WAS STATED
AND SOME OF THE OPPOSITION.
OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS THE-
DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S OTHER
REGULATORY AGENCIES THAT
REQUIRE TESTING ON A NON RODENT
SPECIES BESIDES I KNOW YOUR-
MA'AM IN SETTING DEAL WITH THE
USDA BUT ARE THERE OTHER.
FEDERAL AGENCIES THAT REQUIRED.
THERE ARE SOME- EPA REGULATIONS
THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN DRUG TEST
WHICH WOULD BE EXEMPT BY THIS
BILL AND THEN FTA DOES NOT ALL
EDC CDC DOESN'T DO ANY MANDATE
ANY TESTING THEY DO LOOK AT-
DRUGS FOR EXAMPLE A MAN
APPROVED BY FDA AND AN ADVOCATE
FOR THIS TO BE. IF THERE WERE
OTHER. FEDERAL AGENCIES THAT
REQUIRE THIS ON EARTH BETWEEN
NOW AND APPROPRIATIONS YOU'D BE
WILLING TO YES- SO THIS DOES
SAY THAT THIS EXEMPTS ALL- THAT
ARE REQUIRED BY LAW BY FEDERAL
LAW I ANY FEDERALLY RIGHT. OKAY
TO FILL FEDERAL AGENCY SAYS
DOGS SPECIFICALLY YEAH. THAT'S
WHAT WOULD BE EXEMPT. IF IT
REQUIRES. TESTING ON A NON
RODENT SPECIES. PACIFIC WE DOCK.
SO IF THERE'S A IF A FEDERAL ID
OTHER I'M SORRY I'M JUST NOW
NOW I'M GETTING CONCERNED THAT
WE'RE PICKING LIKE. ONE ANIMAL
UHHUH WENT I MEAN AS A RABBIT
WELL I WOULD CERTAINLY LOVE TO
HAVE OF A BILL THAT SAYS WE
STOP TESTING ON ALL ANIMALS-
AND I'M SURE THESE NICE PEOPLE
WOULD. NOT LOVE TO HAVE THAT
AND SO WE ARE CERTAINLY
INTERESTED IN A GLOBAL STEP
FORWARD- BUT- SOMETIMES IT'S
IMPORTANT TO TAKE INCREMENTAL
STEPS SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS CONVERSATION
BUT I WOULD LOVE IT- IF WE
COULD SEE THE DAY WERE WERE NOT
TESTING ON ANY ANIMALS AT ALL.
DO YOU KNOW BESIDES DOG WHAT
OTHER- ANIMALS ARE BEING TESTED
THEN WHEN THEY'RE REQUIRED TO
TEST NON RODENT SPECIES.
VARIOUS OTHER SPECIES NO I NOW
IRIS VERY VERIFY MAY I MEAN
LIKE I'M OKAY WITH FERRIS BUT
JUST JOKING JUST JOKING PLEASE
DON'T EMAIL ME ABOUT THE
PARENTS. WE'VE ALL BEEN DOWN
THAT HOLE. I'M I'M JOKING. NOT
JOKING THAT WE'VE ALL BEEN DOWN
THAT HOLE- YES I OULD LOVE AN
ANSWER I'M JUST I DON'T KNOW
ENOUGH ABOUT THIS THAT'S WHY
I'M ASKING BECAUSE I'M TRYING
TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE WHAT
WE'RE PUSHING IN THE TESTING
TOWARDS HERE OF COURSE NOT YES
WE ARE THERE'S REQUIRE WE ARE
ADVOCATING FOR NON ANIMAL
METHODS TO BE WHAT IT'S
WHATEVER RIGHT OFF THE WALL-
OTHER SPECIES ARE FAIR IT'S
PRIMATES OTHER CURRENT VIRUS
ARE FAIR AT SOME PRIMATES BEING
USED RIGHT NOW. IT IS. ONE OF
THE REASON THE ANIMAL YOU. AND
WE USE NUMBERS FOR DOGS IS SO
LOW IS THAT THERE ARE SO MANY
OTHER MODELS THAT ARE SO
SPECIFICALLY. DESIGNED FOR EACH
DISEASE THAT WE RESEARCH FOR
INSTANCE IF YOU'RE STUDYING A
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS ELECTRIC
EELS OF THE MODEL OF CHOICE OF
YOUR STUDYING. FOR INSTANCE
LEPROSY ARMADILLOS AND MODEL
CHOICE AND SO. CANINES OF THE
MODEL OF CHOICE FOR VERY
SPECIFIC PORTION OF DISEASE
RESEARCH AND DRUG DEVELOPMENT
WE MIGHT NEED TO DO. CERTAINLY
WE'RE NOT GOING TO. DEVELOP A
DRUG FOR I DON'T KNOW BREAST
CANCER AND USE IT AND DODD
RESEARCH A MAN AND YOU STOCKS
OF THE MODEL JUST. NOT THE
CORRECT MODEL TO DO THAT. AND I
DO WHAT THE FLICK TO SNEAK IN
THIS OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT
THE NUMBER THAT. OF THE AUTHOR
MENTION THAT FIVE THOUSAND DOGS
WERE USED IN BIOMEDICAL
RESEARCH IN CALIFORNIA I'M
SORRY THIS IS NOT THE
OPPORTUNITY TO VEER OFF OF THE
QUESTIONS ASKED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. OKAY OTHER QUESTIONS
COMMENTS GALLAGHER. YES SO I
THINK I'M I'M INCLINED TO
SUPPORT THE BILL TODAY- I THINK
THE- YOU KNOW IT SEEMS LIKE
THERE'S A PRACTICALITY ARGUMENT
HERE AND THEN AND THEN THERE'S
KIND OF A MORAL ARGUMENT IN THE
PRACTICALITY IS IT APPEARS FROM
SOME OF THE RESEARCH THAT DOGS
AREN'T ALWAYS A VERY GOOD
INDICATOR OF. WHAT IS TOXIC
TOWARDS HUMANS SAID OR AT LEAST
THAT THERE'S A LOT OF VERY
ABILITY AND SO WE'RE KINDA
SAYING LOOK WHY USE AN ANIMAL
THAT'S NOT VERY INDICATIVE OF
TOXICITY RIGHT- AND I THINK
THAT'S KIND OF. A BIG REASON
FOR MY SPORT BUT I THINK WHAT
WE'VE BEEN GETTING THAT. IN
SOME OF THIS DISCUSSION. IT
SEEMS LIKE WE ARE SAYING WE'RE
OKAY WITH DOING TESTING. AND
BECAUSE WHAT'S BECAUSE THE
IMPLICATION HERE IS THAT WE'RE
TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DON'T HAVE TOXICITY IN HUMANS
WHEN WE USE DIFFERENT DRUGS OR
WHEN WE'RE USING DIFFERENT. AND
THE IDEA IS TO PROTECT. YOUR
HUMAN LIFE AND- IN ORDER TO DO
THAT YOU HAVE TO DO SOME KIND
OF TESTING TO SEE IF THERE'S-
GONNA BE TOXICITY AND IT'S
GOING TO BE HARMFUL TO HUMANS
RIGHT SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE
WERE AS SOCIETY EXCEPT IN SOME
LEVEL OF TESTING. BUT THEN WE
GET INTO LIKE WILL WHICH
ANIMALS ARE OKAY TO TEST ON
RAY. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE.
YEAH I GUESS THERE IS A LITTLE
BIT OF A STRUGGLE THERE LIKE
ARE A RODENT SOMEHOW LESSER
ANIMALS AND OTHERS- I THINK. A
LOT OF US WOULD SAY YES WE LOVE
OUR DOGS AND WE'RE NOT REALLY
TOO THRILLED ABOUT RATS AND YOU
KNOW. BUT YOU KNOW. BUT AT THE
SAME TIME LIKE YOU SAID I MEAN
THESE ARE ALL LIVING THINGS.
AND I THINK YOU KNOW THAT'S
WHAT WE HAVE TO KIND OF WHERE
DO WE DRAW THE LINE YEAH WELL
YOU KNOW- IT'S AN EXISTENTIAL
CONVERSATION. AND THE QUESTION
ULTIMATELY IS WHAT'S THE
APPETITE OF THIS BODY OR EVEN
OUR CULTURE TO SAY CAN WE
CONTINUE SCIENTIFIC TESTING
WITHOUT DOING IT ON. ANIMALS ON
CREATURES AT ALL I WOULD ARGUE
THAT IF YOU CAN FIND A WAY TO.
MAKE AN DEVELOP A CAR THAT CAN
DRIVE ITSELF. YOU CAN PROBABLY
FIND A SCIENTIFIC METHOD THAT
WILL ALLOW YOU TO TEST TOXICITY
LEVELS AND THE EFFICACY OF A
DRUG WITHOUT USING A LIVING
BREATHING CREATURE- BUT THAT.
IS CERTAINLY UP FOR DEBATE. WE
I THINK MANY PEOPLE WOULD SAY
THEY WANT TO MOVE TOWARDS NON
ANIMAL METHODS- YOU KNOW AND
ONCE AGAIN I THINK. THAT'S A
QUESTION THAT SPEAKS TO YOU
KNOW THE COURAGE OF A COMMUNITY
TO SAY HOW DO WE MAKE THIS
HAPPEN THIS IS ABOUT CHANGING A
BUSINESS MODEL IS IT IS ABOUT
AS YOU. ALSO STATED LOOKING AT-
YOU KNOW HOW PRACTICAL IT IS TO
DO SO YOU KNOW IF YOU'RE
TESTING FOR EXAMPLE THE TAXES
THE LEVELS OF ROUNDUP AND
YOU'RE NOT YOU KNOW BE KILLING
THE DOG BUT YOU KNOW THAT IT'S
LEGAL TO HUMANS CHANCES ARE
MAYBE YOU SHOULD STOP DOING
THAT KIND OF TEST ON THAT KIND
OF CREATURE- SO I CERTAINLY
DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THE TIME
TO GET INTO THOSE KINDS OF.
EXISTENTIALIST SHINS BUT I
CERTAINLY WOULD HOPE THAT THERE
WOULD BE AN APPETITE AT SOME
POINT TO SAY HOW DO WE
ENCOURAGE THIS KIND OF
SCIENTIFIC DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW
US TO DO THESE KINDS OF STUDIES
WITHOUT HARMING ANIMALS. ANY
KIND OF. YOU KNOW AND HOW COME
THERE ISN'T LIKE FULL
DISCLOSURE ON ALL OF THE KINDS
OF ANIMALS THAT ARE BEING
TESTED HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE
HOW MANY OF THEM DO GET ADOPTED
AND HOW MANY OF THEM STAY ALIVE
ONCE THEY ARE ADOPTED IN WHAT
THEY LOOK LIKE- YOU KNOW BUT
THOSE ARE SOME VERY REAL
QUESTIONS. WHERE THE ANSWERS
ARE ARE CLOAKED- I ALSO WANT TO
JUST REITERATE THAT THIS BILL
IS NOT ABOUT. TOP TEXTING ON
THE EFFICACY OF. DRUGS AND SO I
WOULD HATE FOR US ESPECIALLY IN
THIS CLIMATE TO CONFLATE
MEDICAL TESTING ON YOU KNOW HOW
TO CURE VIRUSES. WITH TOXICITY
LEVELS OF- YOU KNOW PESTICIDES
AND OTHER CHEMICALS. IN AYE CAN
I HAVE ONE POINT TO THAT
UNLESS. YEP AND THAT WAS JUST
GONNA FALL JOBS YOU YOU WERE
MENTIONING SOMETHING ABOUT THE
FIVE THOUSAND NUMBER IS THAT
NOT CORRECT HERE. NO ACTUALLY
THE USDA REQUIRES REGISTRATION
OF DOGS IN ANY SPECIES ABOVE A
HAMSTER WITH THE USDA AND THEY
DO AN ANNUAL CENSUS AND
CALIFORNIA LAST YOU HAD FIVE
THOUSAND DOGS THAT WERE
CONSIDERED USED. AND MEDICAL
RESEARCH OR TEACHING UNDER THE
USDA- EIGHT MORE THAN 80% OF
THOSE WERE ACTUALLY CONSTIPATED
COMMUNITY COLLEGES WITH THAT
NAY TECHNICIAN TRAINING
PROGRAMS WITH A TEACH PET EXAMS
OR SPAY NEUTER CLINIC
ASSISTANCE. ONLY 20% OF THE
DOGS OF THE OF THE- A FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLAR THOUSAND WERE
INVOLVED BY MEDICAL RESEARCH
AND RESEARCH AS A PERSON AS WE
ARE DISCUSSING HERE TODAY- AND
97% OF THOSE ARE ADOPTED OUT
AFTER RESEARCH PROTOCOL IS
CONCLUDED. TO FOREVER HOMES IT
WENT QUITE SUCCESSFULLY THEIR
pWHICH AND THEY MAKE REALLY GOOD
PETS. OTHER SO WE DO HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND OTHER
QUESTIONS COMMON. SEEING NONE
THIS COMMA REMAKE CLOSE I WOULD
JUST ASK RESPECTFULLY THAT YOU
VOTE I ON AB TWO ZERO FIVE NINE
AND LET THE DOGS OUT. BUT FOR
THAT. SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND MOST IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS CALL
THE ROLL PLEASE. STONE HEY
STONE AYE GALLAGHER. GALLAGHER
I'D SHALL. TO OKAY. TO BUY
GONZALEZ HI GONZALEZ I HOLDEN.
HOLDEN AYE KALRA KALRA AYE
KILEY HIGHLY NO MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I OBERNOLTE
OBERNOLTE II REYES. HI. APPLES
APPLES THANK YOU THANK YOU I
THANK YOU SO LET'S GO BACK
THROUGH I'M NOT SURE EVERYBODY
IS ON EACH OF THE BILLS. OKAY
SO. ON CONSENTS THE CALL THE UP
TO MEMBERS PLEASE. GALLAGHER
WHICH ONE IS THIS AFTER CONSENT
BY. GALLAGHER I REYES REYES I.
I REMEMBER ONE AB TWENTY FIFTY
THREE RODRIGUEZ CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS GALLAGHER GALLAGHER NOW
RADIUS REYES AYE. ITEM NUMBER
TWO WE JUST DID ITEM NUMBER
THREE IS. TO HAVE. YEAH I KNOW
THE FINAL SO ITEM NUMBER THREE
AB TWENTY NINETY THREE GLORIA
CALL THE UPS MEMBERS REYES RIAS
I. THANK YOU. THANK SO WE'RE
JUST MISSING MISTER CHILD HE'S
GONNA COME BACK. OKAY PERFECT
WE WILL WAIT OF IT.
MR CHAU. SO
WE'RE LOOKING FOR I REMEMBER TO
AB TWO ZERO FIVE NINE. SHALL I.
SENATE OKAY GREAT THAT WE HAVE
EVERYBODY THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION WE ARE ADJOURNED.