YEAH WILL BE NEEDED. GOOD
AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY AND WELCOME
TO THIS. TODAY'S HEARING OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON REV AND
TAX. I WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY
THAT FOR THIS AND FUTURE
HEARINGS, TESTIMONY MUST BE IN
PERSON AS WE ARE NO LONGER USING
A MODERATED PHONE SERVICE FOR
THE BILLS BEING TAKEN UP TODAY
WE WILL TAKE NO MORE THAN TWO
PRIMARY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT AND
TWO PRIMARY WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. OR WITH CONCERNS
THESE WITNESSES WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES EACH TO PROVIDE THEIR
TESTIMONY. ALL SUBSEQUENT
WITNESSES SHOULD STATE THEIR
NAME, THEIR ORGANIZATION AND
THEIR POSITION ON THE BILL. ONLY
SO THAT WAS THE INTRODUCTION. WE
ARE WAITING FOR A SENATOR. FOUR.
FORUM.
WE ARE READY AND WE ARE GOING TO
BE STARTING AS A SUBCOMMITTEE.
WELCOME UM, SENATOR HERZBERG.
THANK YOU. WE ARE LOOKING FOR A
PRESENTATION ON SB. 444 THANK
YOU VERY MUCH MEMBERS. THE
AMERICORPS. IS AN EXTRAORDINARY
ORGANIZATION, BOTH IN TERMS OF
ITS ABILITY TO PROVIDE
CONTRIBUTIONS TO SOCIETY AND
ALSO IN THE EXPERIENCE THAT
PROVIDES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE. AND
SO EACH ONE OF THESE STUDENTS
WHO COME IN IN THE PROCESS OF
AMERICA OR GET A SMALL STIPEND.
BUT THERE'S A QUIRK IN THE LAW.
THAT'S THE REASON THE
LEGISLATURE EXISTS IS TO FIX
THESE THINGS. AND SO WHAT
HAPPENS IS UNLIKE WHEN YOU GET A
GRANT OR SOME OTHER SCHOLARSHIP
IN THE LIKE WHICH NOT TAX
DEDUCTIBLE. YOU HAVE SITUATIONS
, EDUCATION GRANTS OR TAX
TAXABLE INCOME TAX TO THESE
AMERICORPS STUDENTS WHO WANT TO
HELP AND PARTICIPATING. SO WHAT
WE'RE ASKING FOR IN THIS MEASURE
IS TO CONFORM THE LAW. WITH
RESPECT TO OTHER SITUATIONS TO
MAKE SURE THAT THESE FOLKS WITH
THEIR VERY SMALL STIPEND AREN'T
SUBJECT TO INCOME TAX AS
PERSONAL INCOME TAXES AND STTE
OF CALIFORNIA. AND IN THE FIX
THAT CORRECT FIX THAT LAW, I
THINK TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH
WHAT THE PURPOSE AND SPIRIT OF
WHAT WE TRY TO DO WITH
AMERICORPS WITHOUT MUCH COST TO
THE STATE. I WOULD SUSPECT THAT
IF YOU DID A DIAGNOSTIC, WHICH I
HAVEN'T DONE LOOK AT THE STATE
AND WHERE THE INCOME COMES FROM
THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A VERY
SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY. I DIDN'T
LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, BUT WITH
THAT I HAVE A WITNESS. I KNOW WE
HAVE YOU HAVE A RULE HERE. I'M
TOLD ONLY FOR WITNESSES IN
PERSON. NOBODY ONLINE SO PLEASE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MADAM
CHAIR REMEMBERS DON KEPT KIÞM
ACCU CAPTAIN ASSOCIATES HERE
TODAY ON BEHALF THE CHILD ABUSE
PREVENTION, ZINNER, CALIFORNIA
FAMILY RESOURCE ASSOCIATION AND
PREVENT CHILD ABUSE CALIFORNIA
ALL IN VERY STRONG SUPPORT.
PLEASED TO BE WORKING WITH THE
SENATOR AS SPONSORS OF THE BILL
, AS THE SENATOR MENTIONED, THIS
BILL IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO
THOSE AMERICORPS MEMBERS WHO
COMMIT TO SERVICE A TERM OF
SERVICE THAT IS AT LEAST TWO AND
POTENTIALLY UP TO FOUR YEARS.
WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO ACCESS
THESE EDUCATION AWARDS, NOT ONLY
THE SINGLE EDUCATION AWARD
THAT'S COVERED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT UNDER THE AMERICAN
PROGRAM, THE CALIFORNIA UNDER
GOVERNOR NEWSOM MIDDLE HAS ALSO
SUPPLEMENTED THAT WITH A
CALIFORNIA FOR ALL ADDITIONAL
SUPPLEMENT, WHICH IS A GREAT
OPPORTUNITY, GIVEN THEIR TERM OF
SERVICE. AND RETURN ON
INVESTMENT HAS BEEN EVALUATED
ACROSS THE NATION AND ITS
INCREDIBLE IN TERMS OF THE
INVESTMENT THAT THESE AMERICORPS
MEMBERS MAKE, WHO ARE OFTEN FROM
THE COMMUNITIES THEY'RE SERVING
IN REFLECT THE ETHNIC LINGUISTIC
DIVERSITY, WHICH IS REALLY
IMPORTANT AS THEY ALSO OFTEN
TAKE THAT TERM OF SERVICE AND GO
ON TO USE THOSE EDUCATION
AWARDS, WHICH ARE PLACED IN A
TRUST. TO PAY FOR EVEN YOU KNOW
WHETHER IT'S STUDENT LOANS,
TRADE SCHOOLS OR FURTHERING
THEIR EDUCATION. SO FROM MY
CLIENTS THAT WORK WITH CHILDREN
AND FAMILIES, MANY OF THE
AMERICAN MEMBERS USE THOSE
EDUCATION AWARDS TO GO ON TO DO
ADDITIONAL WORK AND SOCIAL WORK.
WHAT HAVE YOU, WHICH IS
INCREDIBLY VALUABLE BENEFIT.
HOWEVER MANY AMERICAN MEMBERS
ARE OFTEN YOU KNOW, KIND OF
CHALLENGED BY THAT INCOME TAX
ISSUE WHEN THAT DOES COME DUE AS
THOSE EDUCATION AWARDS ARE PAID
OUT. THEY THEN HAVE TO INTERN
COVER THAT ATTACKS AFTERWARDS,
SO I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT
RETURN ON INVESTMENT FAR
OUTWEIGHS THAT TAX HIT TO THE
STATE AND REALLY WOULD JUST
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE'S
SUPPORT. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT IN THE ROOM? ANY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WORK. SO
THERE'S A QUESTION HERE. FLOOD
GREATS PRINCIPLE. I ALWAYS READ
THE ANALYSIS. AND THE ANSWER
ISSUED. THE COMMITTEE ALSO
EXCLUDES SCHOLARSHIPS SUCH AS
THE MARSHALL SCHOLARSHIP OR THE
FULBRIGHT GRANT FROM A
TAXPAYER'S GROSS INCOME. MY
ANSWER IS, OF COURSE. UM I DON'T
THINK WE SHOULD BE. WE YOU KNOW?
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SCHOOL.
DON'T MAKE MUCH MONEY, WHICH IS
WHY YOUR BILL THE BEST ESTIMATE
, ACCORDING TO THE ANALYSIS IS
ABOUT 400,000 YEAR. THAT'S REAL
BUDGET DUST, BUT IT WILL MAKE A
DIFFERENCE TO THE FEW PEOPLE
WOULD HAVE PAID IT. UM
ORDINARILY, I DON'T LIKE TAX
DEDUCTIONS, BUT IN THIS CASE.
FOR FULL TIME STUDENTS FOR
FULBRIGHT OR MARSHALL. OR THIS?
I JUST THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF
SENSE. SO PLEASE ADD ME AS A CO
AUTHOR. THANK YOU, CONNIE. THANK
YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. GRACIOUS.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON
HOW HOW WOULD THIS BE DIFFERENT
THAN THESE OTHER TAXABLE? BUT AS
AS ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S QUIRK
MENTIONED, UM MARSHALL
SCHOLARSHIP OR THE FULL BREAK
GROUND. YES, I'M. FOR THE
SENATOR. THANK YOU. SO WE DO
BELIEVE THAT THIS IS DIFFERENT
IN THAT AGAIN. THESE AMERICAN
MEMBERS ARE COMMITTING
THEMSELVES TO A TERM OF SERVICE
IS GOING BACK TO BENEFIT THEIR
COMMUNIT. AND SO WHILE THEY DO,
THEY ARE PROVIDED A VERY MODEST
STIPEND JUST FOR SOME MINIMAL
LIVING EXPENSES. IT'S NOT
COVERING KIND OF THEIR YOU KNOW,
FULL, YOU KNOW, DAILY EXPENSES,
YOU KNOW, RENT. WHAT HAVE YOU SO
THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE
COMMITTED THEMSELVES TO THAT
TERM OF SERVICE? THIS IS THAT
BENEFIT THAT COMES WITH THAT,
AND SO FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE FROM
MY CLIENT'S PERSPECTIVE. THAT IS
KIND OF ONE OF THE
DIFFERENTIATING FACTORS THERE.
YOU KNOW, WHILE CERTAINLY I
THINK MY CLIENTS WOULD BE
SUPPORTIVE OF EXEMPTING THOSE AS
WELL. I THINK THAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE IN AND OF ITSELF IS
THAT TERM OF SERVICE THAT GOES
BACK TO THAT COMMUNITY AND THIS
BEING KIND OF THE BENEFIT FOR
THAT? VERSUS JUST HAVING THEM GO
ON TO, YOU KNOW, COLLEGE TRADE
SCHOOL AND THEN JUST GOING INTO
A CAREER, THEY'RE GETTING BACK
TO THOSE COMMUNITIES, WHETHER
IT'S SERVING CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES THROUGH VARIOUS LOCAL
PROGRAMS, CLIMATE RELATED
ACTIVITIES. THERE ARE ALSO A FEW
PROGRAMS IN THE STATE THAT ARE
WORKING WITH MEN AND BOYS OF
COLOR IN TERMS OF MENTORSHIPS,
AS WELL AS LITERACY PROGRAMS AS
WELL AND THAT RETURN ON
INVESTMENT BY FAR AGAIN. IS THE
KEY FACTOR IN THIS. CAN I ADD
SOMETHING TO THAT MANAGER? I
HAVE IN MY INEVITABLE STYLE, AS
YOU KNOW, FROM OUR TRAVELS
TOGETHER HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A
NUMBER OF ISSUES, AND ONE OF
THEM HAS TO DO WITH STUDENT
DEBT. AND THE TEST, ALONG WITH
THE LINES. THAT WAS JUST
SUGGESTED, WAS THE QUESTION
ABOUT CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIETY,
RIGHT IF YOU GO TO THE MILITARY
OR WHATEVER IT'S A PUBLIC
SERVICE AT SOME LEVEL. AND I'VE
BEEN ANALYZING THIS FOR ABOUT A
YEAR AND A HALF BEEN WORKING ON
A PLAN TO PAY OFF STUDENT DEBT
FOR STUDENTS. AND IF YOU GIVE
THEM MONEY IS THAT TAXABLE
INCOME AND WE FIGURED OUT A WAY
ALONG THE SAME LINES, AS WAS
EXPRESSED. THAT THIS REALLY
SHOULDN'T BE TAXABLE BECAUSE IT
HAS A WHOLE LARGER SOCIETAL
BENEFIT. UNLIKE OTHER TYPES OF
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, RIGHT. THANK
YOU. AND WITH THAT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE DOWN A POINT OF
PERSONAL PRIVILEGE? YOU WANT TO
TELL YOU WHAT A GREAT COMMITTEE
SECRETARY YOU HAVE WORKED WITH
FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, AND SHE'S
TOP PERSON AND I WOULD ASK FOR
MY VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND THAT IS FOR HEARING ONLY SO
WE WILL CONSIDER LATER. BUT
THANK YOU VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
ALL RIGHT, SENATOR LIMÓN NICE TO
SEE YOU. AND YOU ARE UP WITH SB
542 OR LEVIN COMES. THANK YOU.
CHAIR AND COLLEAGUES. SP FIVE
FOR TWO CREATES A FIVE YEARS
STATE ONLY SALES TAX EXEMPTION
TO HELP ME CALIFORNIA'S GOAL OF
100% 0 EMISSION. MEDIUM AND
HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS BY 2045.
EMISSIONS FROM THESE TRUCKS.
MAKEUP SIGNIFICANT, A
SIGNIFICANT PROPORTION OF
HARMFUL AIR POLLUTION IN
CALIFORNIA DESPITE MAKING UP
JUST 7% OF VEHICLES ON THE ROAD,
FOR EXAMPLE, HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ABOUT 35% OF
TOTAL STATEWIDE. NOX EMISSIONS.
ZERO EMISSION TRUCKS ARE
SUBSTANTIALLY MORE EXPENSIVE
THAN CONVENTIONAL DIESEL TRUCKS
. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PURCHASER OF
AN ELECTRIC CLASS EIGHT TRUCKS
COULD PAY AS MUCH AS $18,000.
MORE IN TAXES AND FEES WHEN
COMPARED WITH DIESEL EQUIVALENT.
ACCORDING TO THE STUDY CITED IN
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS, PARITY
BETWEEN ZERO EMISSION TRUCKS AND
TRADITIONAL VEHICLES WON'T BE
ACHIEVED UNTIL 2035. WE WANT TO
DO SOMETHING SOONER AND DON'T
WANT TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER DECADE
TO ACT. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT SINCE THIS BILL RUNS
UNTIL 2027 IT PROVIDES AN
IMPORTANT JUMPSTART TO ACHIEVING
OUR GOALS WHILE CONTROLLING
COSTS AS MORE VEHICLES ARE
ADOPTED IN THE COMING YEARS. SB
542 IS AN IMPORTANT STEP TO
ENSURE CALIFORNIA MEETS ITS
CLIMATE, AIR QUALITY AND ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE GOALS. I WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTIONS. I
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO
WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE AS THE
BILL IS CONSIDERED. WITH US
TODAY WE HAVE CHRISTIAN MOTA
FROM THE CALIFORNIA TRUCKING
ASSOCIATION AND JULIE MALINOWSKI
BALL WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRIC TRANSPORTATION
COALITION. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS. I'M JULIE
MALINOWSKI BALL ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ELECTRIC
TRANSPORTATION COALITION. KELLY
TC IS THE SPONSOR OF THIS
MEASURE. WE DECIDED TO SPONSOR
THE MEASURE BY ASKING OURSELVES.
ONE SIMPLE QUESTION. IS THE
STATE DOING ENOUGH TO ENSURE
THAT WE ARE PUTTING ZERO
EMISSION TRUCKS ON THE ROAD AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. IN THE
SIMPLE ANSWER WAS NO. DESPITE
THE LEGISLATURE, YOU KNOW,
PUTTING RECORD AMOUNTS OF MONEY
INTO ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
PROGRAMS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
PROGRAMS ARE GOALS, AS OUTLINED
BY SENATOR LAMONTAGNE ARE SO
AGGRESSIVE WE SHOULD BE THROWING
ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING WE CAN ADD
IT. SO WHEN YOU GO OUT, AND YOU
WANT TO BUY A NEW TRUCK, YOU'RE
A FLEET OWNER. YOU GO AND YOU
BUY THE RIGHT TRUCK YOU BY THE
ZERO EMISSION TRUCK BECAUSE IT
WORKS FOR YOU, AND IT SUPPORTS
OUR CLIMATE AND CLEAN AIR GOALS.
WHEN YOU DO THAT THIS BILL WILL
ALLOW YOU TO SAY OKAY, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA FOR MAKING THE RIGHT
DECISION. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE
YOU A SMALL BREAK ON YOUR SALES
TAX. FOR THAT SIMPLE REASON. WE
SUPPORT THE BILL AND ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. BIG CHAIR OR WHEN THE
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
CHRISTIAN MOTOR WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION
, WE'RE PROUD TO JOIN A BROAD
COALITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND
BUSINESS INTERESTS AND
SUPPORTING SB 5 42. SB 5 42
ADDRESSES THE SIGNIFICANT TAX
PENALTIES. TRUCKERS FACE WHEN
PURCHASING MORE EXPENSIVE ZERO
MISSION TRUCKS INSTEAD OF
TRADITIONAL DIESEL OR GASOLINE
VEHICLES, WHEREAS THE COST OF A
NEW DIESEL CLASS EIGHT TRUCKS
TYPICALLY RUNS ABOUT 120 TO
$150,000. ZERO MISSION TRUCKS
CAN EASILY BE 2 TO 3 TIMES MORE
EXPENSIVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE
NEEDED TO CHARGE THESE TRUCKS
CAN EQUAL THE PRICE OF THE TRUCK
ITSELF. SP 5 42 INSURERS THE
TRUCKERS STEPPING UP TO THE
SUPPORT ZERO EMISSION
TECHNOLOGIES DO NOT FACE UP TO 8
TO $10,000 IN ADDITIONAL TAXES.
ON TOP OF THESE OTHER COSTS. AS
YOU KNOW, 96% OF TRUCKING
COMPANIES OPERATE 20 OR FEWER
TRUCKS AND OUR DRIVER WORKFORCE
WHO MAKE UP THE BACKBONE OF
CALIFORNIA'S BLUE COLLAR MIDDLE
CLASS HAS MAJORITY MINORITY TO
MEET CALIFORNIA'S AMBITIOUS
CLIMATE GOALS WHILE ALSO
SUPPORTING ESSENTIAL BLUE COLLAR
INDUSTRIES. IN WORKERS, THE
STATE MUST USE EVERY TOOL AT ITS
DISPOSAL TO ENSURE ZERO MISSION
TRUCKS MAKE SENSE ECONOMICALLY
IN THE PREDOMINANTLY SMALL
BUSINESS TRUCKERS WHO PURCHASED
THEM CAN COMPETE. SB 5 42 IS AN
IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE STATE'S
OVERALL CLIMATE STRATEGY. AND WE
THANK SENATOR LIMÓN FOR HER
LEADERSHIP ON THIS BILL AND
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR ITS
TIME. WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, STEVE POLLOCK ON
BEHALF OF THE CENTER FOR
TRANSPORTATION, THE ENVIRONMENT
IN SUPPORT. MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
. BO BILLER FOR BRUCE DOUBLE D.
MACRAE ON BEHALF OF UPS AND
SUPPORT. I'M SHARING MEMBERS.
ORVILLE THOMAS ON BEHALF OF CAL
START IN SUPPORT. SOFIA AFRICA
WOULD THE COALITION FOR CLEAN
AIR AND SUPPORT DO WE HAVE ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? ANY
QUESTIONS? ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
QUIRK, OF COURSE. SO THE REAL
QUESTION HERE IN THE ANALYSIS IS
THIS INCENTIVE NEW BEHAVIOR OR
SUBSIDIZING COMPLIANCE AND LET
ME SAY THERE CAN BE VALUE AND
SUBSIDIZING COMPLIANCE WERE
PUTTING A THE STRESS ON
INDUSTRY. UM BUT THEN AGAIN
THERE. MONEY COMES OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND. SO. WHAT DO YOU
THINK? DO YOU THINK IT WILL
INCENT NEW BEHAVIOR BECAUSE
ALREADY, THERE'S UH, A MANDATE
TO SELL MORE OF THESE
VEGETABLES. SEB TRUCKS. THE
QUESTION IS. YOU KNOW, I DON'T
THINK WE'RE GOING TO. WE'RE
GOING TO SELL MORE BECAUSE OF
THIS, BUT WE WOULD BE REWARDING
THEIR BEHAVIOR. WHAT DO YOU
THINK? SO I WILL SAY THAT I
THINK IT'S GOING TO DO BOTH. AND
I THINK DOING BOTH IS A GOOD
THING. BUT I WOULD LIKE THE
TREKKERS ASSOCIATION WHO
ACTUALLY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF
TRANSITIONING TO THESE VEHICLES
TO ANSWER. OKAY, GOOD. IT'S A
GREAT GREAT QUESTION. SOMEONE
REMEMBER CORK AND THE MANDATES
FOR FLEETS HAVE YET TO BE
ADOPTED. THEY ARE BEING
DISCUSSED AT THE MOMENT, AND THE
AIR RESOURCES BOARD EXPECTS TO
ADOPT THEM IN OCTOBER.
POTENTIALLY AND WITHIN THAT
ADVANCED CLEAN FLEET REGULATION,
AS IT'S CALLED, UM, THERE ARE
OPTIONS TO PHASING COMPLIANCE
OVER TIME. THERE ARE FLEETS,
WHICH ARE ACTUALLY NOT SUBJECT
TO THE MANDATE. IF YOU ARE A
FLEET OF 50 OR FEWER TRUCKS.
YOU'RE ACTUALLY OUT OF THE RULE
. UM AND FOR THE LARGER CLASSES
OF VEHICLES, THERE'S UM PHASE
INS, WHICH ACTUALLY COME INTO
PLAY POST 2030. UM SO THE
INCENTIVE HAS CALLED FOR AN SP 5
42 WOULD ACT AS A POSITIVE
ECONOMIC INDICATOR FOR FOUR
FLEETS AT AMENDMENT MINIMUM TO
SAY UM, YOU WON'T BE PAYING MORE
AND SALES TAX THAN YOU WOULD IF
YOU WERE TO CHOOSE THE DIESEL
COUNTERPART VEHICLE. ALL RIGHT,
SO I'LL JUST POINT OUT THAT IF
YOU'RE NOT UNDER THIS RULE. THE
FACT THAT YOU'RE SPENDING AN
EXTRA 100,000. IN THE FACT THAT
YOU'RE SPENDING MORE. THE SALES
TAX IS AT MOST AROUND 10% SO IF
YOU'RE SPENDING 100,000 MORE AH!
YOU KNOW, GETTING 10,000 BACK? I
DON'T THINK AS MUCH OF AN
INCENTIVE OH, DOES IT? IS IT?
FORGIVENESS OF SELF TAX TOTAL OR
THE AMOUNT ABOVE? I MEAN, SOME
IN MANY CASES, THEY'RE TALKING
ABOUT SOMETHING ALMOST TWICE AS
MUCH IS IT ON THE WHOLE PURCHASE
PRICE? SO THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN
IN THE SENATE, UM PLACE THE
RELIEF AT THREE A LITTLE BIT
OVER 3.9% SO THE TOTAL PRICE OF
THE TOTAL PRICE. CORRECT, OKAY?
SO SO IT'S ABOUT 4% IT'S HARD TO
SEE HOW THAT REALLY WOULDN'T
SENSE SOMEONE NOW IF YOU LOOK AT
IT AS A REWARD, AND IT'S ONLY
FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS. I THINK
THAT'S WORTHWHILE, BUT I DON'T
SEE HOW IT CAN BE AN INCENTIVE
WHEN THE COST IN THE NEXT FIVE
YEARS IS LIKELY TO BE TWICE AS
HIGH DOESN'T MEAN I WON'T VOTE
FOR THE BILL. BECAUSE I DO THINK
REWARDING THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO
DO THIS IN SOME SMALL WAY IS
WORTHWHILE. THANK YOU. AND UM,
JUST TO FOLLOW UP THERE. WE SEE
THAT THE COST I THINK IN THE
FIRST YEAR SEEMS TO BE RELATIVE
. I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A
LOT OF MONEY BUT RELATIVELY LOW
IS THERE SOME ESTIMATE HOW MUCH
THIS COULD IMPACT THE GENERAL
FUND IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS?
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU'RE
DOING A GRANT PROGRAM, YOU ARE
YOU ARE LIVING AND I AM JUST, UH
WE ARE GOING TO STOP FOR A
MOMENT BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. SO SORRY,
RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF A
SENTENCE. IRWIN. HERE. WHEN GRAY
GRAYSON. GREEN. MAY'S MULLEN
PETRIE-NORRIS. QUIRK GUARDO
QUORUM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. CORN IS ESTABLISHED.
SO I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, THIS IS
SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS GOING
FORWARD, BUT WE CERTAINLY WOULD.
THE INTERESTED IN HOW WE LIMIT
THE POTENTIAL TOTAL COST TO THE
GENERAL FUND. ROUGHLY GIVE OR
TAKE $40 MILLION IS WHAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF THE COST.
SO FOR THE FIRST YEAR AND THEN
BUT THIS GOES TILL FOR FIVE
YEARS. OKAY? ALL RIGHT. WELL. UH
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES JUST A
VERY QUICK COMMENT, UM AND
PICKING UP ON THAT MR CORKSCREW
MARKS. MAYBE THAT THIS IS NOT IN
AND OF ITSELF A SUFFICIENT
INCENTIVE, BUT I REALLY DO THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT UH, AS THE
LEGISLATURE AS WE SET THESE
GOALS, AND WE SET THESE TARGETS
WE'VE ALSO GOT TO CREATE, UH,
PACKAGE OF INCENTIVES. AND UM,
YOU KNOW, A PACKAGE OF PROPOSALS
THAT MAKE ACHIEVING THOSE
REALISTIC, RIGHT? WE CAN'T JUST
KIND OF SET THESE PIE IN THE SKY
IDEALS AND THEN, LIKE HOPE THAT
WE ACHIEVE THEM, AND SO I THINK
IT IS REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT
FOR US TO BE DOING THAT WORK OF
THINKING THROUGH. WHAT ARE THE
RIGHT BUILDING BLOCKS THAT
ACTUALLY GET US THERE. SO THANKS
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND
HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. YEAH AND I
THINK ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS
IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM,
THAT OR INCENTIVIZING OWNERS TO
TRADE IN THEIR TRUCKS EARLIER
BECAUSE REMOVING ONE TRUCK FROM
THE ROAD WOULD MAKE A
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE, AND UM,
ESTABLISHING OR MOVING TOWARD
OUR CLIMATE GOALS. SO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION,
AND WE WILL BE VOTING AT A LATER
DATE. THANK YOU. AND OUR LAST
ITEM. WE HAVE, UH, SENATOR.
WHICH HE ABO. ONE OF THOSE. I
THINK THAT PRONUNCIATION WAS
SLIGHTLY OFF. I APOLOGIZE. I
MISPRONOUNCED ABOUT HALF THE
NAME. SO WHENEVER YOU ARE READY
, NICE TO SEE YOU. THANK YOU.
HERE. MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS SP
SIX. SO ONE IS A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION TOWARDS LEVELING
THE PLAYING FIELD FOR FIRST TIME
HOMEBUYERS. IT WOULD DO SO BY
ALLOWING HOMEOWNERS WHO SELL
THEIR HOMES TO A FIRST TIME
HOMEBUYER TO EXCLUDE CAPITAL
GAINS OF $300,000. FOR SINGLE
FILERS INSTEAD OF THE CURRENT
250,000. MAXIMUM AND 600,000 FOR
JOINT FILERS INSTEAD OF THE
CURRENT 500,000 MAXIMUM FROM
THEIR GROSS INCOME. IT IS WORTH
NOTING THAT THESE VALUES HAVE
NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE THEY WERE
PUT IN PLACE BY THE TAX RELIEF
ACT OF 1997, AT WHICH TIME THE
AVERAGE HOME VALUE IN CALIFORNIA
WERE AROUND $150,000. THE MEDIUM
PRICE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN
CALIFORNIA IN APRIL OF 2022 WAS
OVER $884,000. WHICH IS MORE
THAN TWICE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE
AND REPRESENT JUST UNDER A 500
INCREASE SINCE THESE INCLUSIONS
WERE LAST UPDATED. 500% AN
ANALYSIS DONE BY THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS SHOWED
THAT ONLY 28% OF HOUSEHOLDS
COULD AFFORD A HOME AT THIS
PRICE. CARS OF THESE HIGH PRICES
IS MOSTLY DUE TO A SEVERE LACK
OF HOUSING SUPPLY TO MEET
INCREASED DEMAND.ONE OF THE
MANY CONSEQUENCES OF THIS SUPPLY
SHORTAGE IS AN EXTREMELY
COMPETITIVE MARKET FOR POTENTIAL
HOMEBUYERS, ESPECIALLY BUYERS
LOOKING TO PURCHASE THEIR FIRST
HOME. THIS IS SOMETHING I SAW
FIRSTHAND IN MY LONGTIME CAREER
AS A REAL TOUR. IN FACT,
CALIFORNIA RENT AS THE TOUGHEST
STATE IN THE NATION FOR FIRST
TIME HOMEBUYERS, ACCORDING TO A
REPORT DONE BY BANKRATE .COM.
THE REPORT NAMES A NUMBER OF
REASONS FOR THIS RANKING THE
RELATIVELY HIGH COST OF HOUSING
THE TYPE MARKET FOR AVAILABILITY
, ENTRY LEVEL HOMES AND THE
STRUGGLE THAT MILLENNIALS FACE
IN SAVING FOR A DOWN PAYMENT.
HOME OWNERSHIP IS THE BEDROCK OF
THE AMERICAN DREAM. TOO MANY
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE SEEING THE
DREAM MOVED FURTHER AND FURTHER
OUT OF THEIR REACH DUE TO THE
HIGH COST OF HOUSING AND THE
LACK OF OPPORTUNITY IN
CALIFORNIA. SB 601 IS ONE SMALL
STEP WE CAN TAKE TOWARDS MAKING
THE DREAM MORE ATTAINABLE FOR
THESE HARD WORKING CALIFORNIANS.
JOIN ME TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
IS VANESSA CHAVEZ WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REAL
TOURS. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND
MEMBERS VANESSA CHAVEZ WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REAL
TOURISM SUPPORT OF SB 601,
CALIFORNIA CONTINUES TO
EXPERIENCE A HOUSING CRISIS
WHERE WE ARE SEEING THE MEDIAN
HOME PRICE REACHING ESTIMATED
$884,000. MANY FIRST TIME BUYERS
ARE DEALING WITH A COMPETITIVE
MARKET, WHERE THEY FIND
THEMSELVES BEING OUTBID BY MORE
COMPETITIVE OFFERS. IN RESPONSE
TO THIS ISSUE, SB 601 SEEKS TO
PUT FIRST TIME HOMEBUYERS. ANY
MORE ADVANTAGEOUS SITUATION THAN
THEY ARE CURRENTLY IN. WE HAVE
HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN
CONCERNS OVER THE PRESSURES
FIRST TIME BUYERS FACING THIS
MARKET. FURTHERMORE IN RESPONSE
TO THOSE CONCERNS, THIS BILL
OFFERS FIRST TIME BUYERS A
CHANCE TO ACHIEVING
HOMEOWNERSHIP. BY PROVIDING AN
INCENTIVE TO HOME SELLERS. SP
601 SEEKS TO PROVIDE A MODEST
INCREASE TO THE CAPITAL GAINS
EXCLUSION FOR THOSE WHO SELL
THEIR HOMES TO FIRST TIME BUYERS
BY INCREASING THE EXCLUSION. FOR
SINGLE FILERS TO 300,000 OR
600,000. FOR JOINT FILERS IF
THEY SELL THEIR HOME TO A FIRST
TIME HOMEBUYER. ALTHOUGH SP 601
IS NO SILVER BULLET TO SOLVING
THE HOUSING CRISIS, IT IS, IN
FACT, ONE MORE TOOL IN THE
TOOLBOX, WHICH MAY HELP ADDRESS
THE ISSUE FIRST TIME HOMEBUYERS.
SPACE WHEN BIDDING ON HOMES IN A
COMPETITIVE MARKET. IT IS FOR
THESE REASONS. CR RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTS YOUR IVO ON SB 601.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
QUESTIONS. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CORK
. OKAY SO MOST PEOPLE WHO SELL A
HOME TAKE THAT MONEY AND
INVESTED IN A NEW HOME SO THEY
DON'T PAY A TAX AT ALL. HOW
WOULD THE SYSTEM HOW WOULD YOUR
BILL WORK UNDER THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE TYPICALLY
WELL, THE OTHER THING IS THE
PRICES GO UP OVER TIME. SO I
HOLD SOLD THREE HOMES EACH ABOUT
20 YEARS APART. AND YOU KNOW?
THE GAIN ON MY LAST TIME WAS
MUCH LARGER THAN THE ONE ON THE
FIRST HOME. LOTS OF PEOPLE DON'T
EVEN EVENTUALLY PAY THE TAX AT
ALL BECAUSE THEY DIE WHILE
THEY'RE IN THE HOUSE. SO I'M NOT
QUITE SURE THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WILL ACTUALLY
WELL, WHY DON'T YOU ADDRESS
THAT? HOW WILL IT AFFECT IT? IF
YOU YOU KNOW, DIE IN YOUR HOUSE
OR SIMPLY REINVEST IN ANOTHER
HOUSE. CURRENTLY SO I THINK THE
ANGLE IN WHICH WE'RE LOOKING AT
IS THE ADVANTAGEOUS POINT FROM
THE BUYER'S SIDE. SO WHEN YOU
HAVE MULTIPLE OFFERS I'M GOING
TO SPEAK AS A REALTOR RIGHT NOW
, WHEN YOU HAVE MULTIPLE OFFERS
ON THE TABLE, SAY I AM WORKING
ON BEHALF OF THE BUYERS. UM SO
WE HAVE MULTIPLE OFFERS THAT
WE'RE COMPETING AGAINST.
NORMALLY WHEN WE HAVE CASH
OFFERS VERSUS SOMEONE THAT IS
ENTRY LEVEL, WHICH IS NORMALLY A
FINANCED OFFER, UM F H A OR
CALVET BUILT LOANS. WELL NO, NO,
I UNDERSTAND THAT. MY QUESTION
IS WHAT HAPPENS TO SOMEBODY DO
THEY GET ANY BENEFIT? IF THEY
THEN JUST HOW WAS YOUR BELL
WRITTEN? DO YOU GET ANY BENEFIT?
IF YOU JUST RE INVESTED IN A NEW
HOME, WHICH ORDINARILY MEANS YOU
DON'T PAY TAX. AT LEAST AT THAT
TIME IN GENERAL, YOU DON'T PAY
TAX UNTIL YOU EITHER SELL A
HOUSE AND DON'T MOVE INTO A YOUR
OWN OWNED. OH, IN GENERAL.
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS. YOU DON'T
PAY A TAX AT ALL. SO HOW CAN
THIS MATTER UNLESS YOU'RE
ACTUALLY SELLING THE HOUSE AND
NOT PLANNING AND PLANNING TO
JUST GET OUT OF THE HOUSING
MARKET? THEY'RE BEING AN IMPACT.
THERE'S AN IMPACT IF SOMEONE'S
GETTING OUT OF THE HOUSING
MARKET AND THEREFORE WOULD HAVE
TO PAY A TAX, BUT ASIDE FROM
THAT MOST PEOPLE WILL BE
INVESTING IN NEW HOMES. A LOT OF
THOSE WILL NEVER GET OUT OF THE
HOUSING MARKET. THIS SHOULDN'T
HAVE MUCH OF AN IMPACT ON MOST
HOME SALES. SO TO ADDRESS THAT
QUESTION, I WOULD SAY THAT THE
BILL IN THE SENSE WHERE YOU ARE
A HOME SELLER ELLING TO SOMEONE
WHO IS A HOMEBUYER, AND IT'S A
FIRST TIME BUYER. THEN YOU WOULD
GET THE BENEFIT. OTHER THAN
THAT. WE DON'T SEE THE BENEFIT
EXTENDING TO SOMEONE, UM FURTHER
THAN THAT. CAN'T SO THE POINT IS
MOST HOME SALES OR NOT. YOU. YOU
DON'T PAY THE TAX SO IT DOESN'T
HAVE AN IMPACT. SECONDLY I'VE
SOLD THREE HOMES AND I'VE NEVER
HAD MULTIPLE BIDS. MAYBE IN YEAH
. IF YOU'RE LUCKY, AND YOU, YOU
KNOW YOU HIT IT RIGHT AT THE
PEAK. YOU MAY HAVE MULTIPLE BIDS
, BUT MOST OF THE TIME THERE'S
ONE PERSON UM AND YOU KNOW IF
YOU'RE LUCKY, AND IT'S FIRST
TIME HOME BUYER YOU'LL GET UM. A
BENEFIT, BUT UNLESS IT'S UNDER
THESE RARE CIRCUMSTANCES,
USUALLY IT JUST LASTS FOR A FEW
MONTHS, OR PERHAPS A YEAR WHERE
THEY'RE MULTIPLE OFFERS. MOST OF
THE TIME. IF IT'S A NEW TIME
HOMEBUYER, THIS IS SIMPLY
CHANCE. AND SO YOU KNOW, YOU GET
ONE OFFER IF IT'S THE FIRST TIME
HOME BUYER, AND YOU HAPPEN TO BE
GETTING OUT OF THE HOUSING
MARKET AGAIN, ALL OF THESE ARE
PROBABLY PRETTY RARE
CIRCUMSTANCES. IT'S JUST NOT
CLEAR THAT THIS WILL REALLY
INCENT PEOPLE SORT OF A GRANT
PROGRAM FOR FULTON TO FIRST TIME
HOMEBUYERS. THAT COULD BE VERY
EFFECTIVE. I'M JUST NOT SURE
THAT THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE
HELPFUL. I THINK THE WAY THAT I
SEE IT FROM A REALTORS.
PERSPECTIVE IS THAT WHEN YOU
HAVE MULTIPLE OFFERS, WHICH, IN
MY 18 YEARS THE MAJORITY OF THE
MARKET DURING MY 18 YEARS
WORKING PRIOR TO COMING TO THE
SENATE WE'RE DEALING WITH
MULTIPLE OFFERS, AT LEAST IN THE
INLAND EMPIRE. WE DID. WHEN
YOU'RE DEALING WITH MULTIPLE
OFFERS, IF YOU HAVE A CASH BUYER
VERSUS A FIRST TIME HOMEBUYER
EVEN THAT, THAT SLIGHT INCENTIVE
OF SAYING OKAY IF I'M GOING TO
SELL THIS HOUSE TO THIS
PARTICULAR FIRST TIME HOME BUYER
ALSO, WELL, LET ME JUST FINISH
THAT PROCESS. GO AHEAD. SO IF
YOU HAVE THIS, THIS ABILITY TO
INCENTIVIZE AND SAY OKAY, IF YOU
SELL IT TO THIS FIRST TIME,
HOMEBUYER VERSUS THE CASH BUYER
WILL SAVE SOMEWHAT OF MONEY, NOT
JUST IN THE COST. UM AFFILIATED
WITH MY OR SELLING IT TO A FIRST
TIME HOMEBUYER, BUT YOU ALSO
HAVE TRANSFER OVER THE SAVINGS
AND THE TAX PART OF IT THAT YOU
CAN, UM I THINK YOU STILL EVEN
THOUGH YOU'RE YOU'RE
TRANSFERRING IT OVER. YOU STILL
HAVE THAT. UH THAT BRIDGE FROM 2
50 TO 300 OR 300, OR 2 52 6 HAD
I'M SORRY 50 TO 300 OR 500 TO
600. YOU STILL HAVE THAT TAX AND
SAID, EVEN IF YOU IF YOU
TRANSFER IT OVER, IT'S STILL
PUTS YOU UP A BIT. WELL, YOU'RE
WITNESS JUST SAID IT WOULDN'T
TRANSFER. TO THE NEXT. I THINK.
IT'S HARD TO ALWAYS TELL WHEN
THE FIRST TIME BUYER IT WOULD
WAIT. A SECOND BREAK IS FOR THE
PERSON WHO'S SELLING RIGHT TIME
BUYER A FIRST TIME BUYER. THE
POINT IS MOST PEOPLE WHO SELL
JUST REINVEST THE MONEY IN THE
NEW HOME SO IT DOESN'T IMPACT
THEM. BECAUSE THIS BREAK AT
LEAST ACCORDING TO WHAT YOUR
WITNESS SAYS DOESN'T GO? YOU
DON'T KEEP IT OVER TIME. IF YOU
INVEST IN A NEW MAYBE YOU WANT
TO CHANGE THE BILL, BUT UM AS
YOU GO INTO A NEW HOME. YOU
INVEST IN A NEW HOME? YOU DON'T
PAY THE TAX. IF YOU WOULD REVISE
YOUR YOUR BILL, SO THAT SOMEHOW
OR ANOTHER, A TAX BREAK
CONTINUED OVER TIME. AH IT COULD
MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT YOU KNOW,
AND MAYBE IN THE INLAND EMPIRE,
BUT AGAIN, I'VE SOLD HOMES THREE
TIMES TWICE IN HAYWARD. AND I'VE
NEVER HAD THAT. YEAH, I'VE NEVER
HAD MORE THAN ONE BID. YES I
WOULD JUST SAY THAT IN OUR AREA
AND MOST OF THE AREAS IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS
VERY DIFFICULT AND COMPETITIVE
TO PURCHASE A HOME. THIS WOULD
BE A BENEFIT FOR ANY FIRST TIME
HOME BUYER, AND IT WOULD JUST
INCENTIVIZE JUST THE SELLERS TO
CONSIDER. EVEN ON A FINANCIAL
BASIS, NOT AN EMOTIONAL AND
FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR THE FOR
THE FIRST TIME HOME BUYER. OKAY,
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, FOR MOST
SALES, THIS WOULDN'T MATTER
BECAUSE THEY'RE INVESTING IN NEW
AND SECOND FINE IF YOU HAVE
MULTIPLE AUTHORS, BUT SINCE MOST
WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT
STATISTICALLY IT IS, BUT IT
WOULD IF YOU'RE ONLY GETTING ONE
OFFER. IT'S JUST AN ACCIDENT
THAT HAPPENS TO BE A FIRST TIME
HOMEBUYER. AND SO I DON'T SEE IT
AS REALLY BEEN INCENTIVE TO SELL
TO HER FIRST TIME HOMEBUYER
AGAIN. I CAN'T TELL YOU WITHIN
THE STATE HOW OFTEN THEY'RE
MULTIPLE OFFERS VERSUS NOT IT'S
JUST I DON'T KNOW. I'VE HOLD
SOLD TWO HOMES IN THE BAY AREA,
AND THAT JUST NEVER HAPPENED.
ACTUALLY I HAD THREE SALES, ONE
OF WHICH FELL THROUGH, BUT THEY
WERE ALWAYS SINGLE PEOPLE SINGLE
OFFERS, BUT WHATEVER. I THINK
WE'VE COVERED THIS. WE DON'T
NEED TO DISCUSS IT ANYMORE.
THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. YOU COULD
THINK ABOUT WAYS TO UM. CHANGED
THE BILL TO MAYBE AH! I THINK IN
ORDER FOR THIS TO BE EFFECTIVE,
THEY SOMEHOW ANOTHER GOTTA CARRY
THIS TAX BREAK ON. OTHERWISE
IT'S PRESENTS. A VAST MAJORITY
OF PEOPLE ARE JUST REINVESTING.
IN A NEW HOME. IT'S JUST NOT
GOING TO HELP THEM VERY MUCH TO
MAKE THAT DECISION. SO YOU'VE
HAD PEOPLE WHO HAVE MULTIPLE
HOMEOWNERS. MULTIPLE SOLD
MULTIPLE HOMES. UM EXCUSE ME GOT
MULTIPLE OFFERS. IT ISN'T GOING
TO HELP THEM IF THEY'RE JUST
REINVESTING THE MONEY, WHICH IS
WHAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE
TO UNLESS YOU ALLOW THAT BREAK
TO SOMEHOW ANOTHER GO FORWARD.
AND THAT'S HARD TO SEE HOW YOU
DO THAT, SINCE IT'S CHANGING THE
LIMIT. ON WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO
BE TAXED ON. SO ANYWAY. WE'VE
DISCUSSED IT ENOUGH. THANK YOU
WOULD BE HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO
WORK AND HAVE THE ONE ON ONE
CONVERSATIONS AND I CAN ACTUALLY
BEING A TAX EXPERT. I'M NOT A
TAX EXPERT, BUT I WOULD BE HAPPY
TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATIONS
WITH SOMEONE THAT ACTUALLY DEALS
IN THIS SPACE AND CONTINUE
CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU ALONG TO
FIGURE OUT AND ANSWER YOUR
QUESTIONS A LITTLE FURTHER,
BECAUSE I THINK I THINK WE'RE
GOING LIKE THIS. WELL LET ME
JUST SAY I'M NOT AN EXPERT, BUT
I HAVE A SOLDER HOME AND GOTTEN
OUT OF THE MARKET. THAT'S WHEN
YOU PAY THE TAX. YOU DON'T PAY
IT AS YOU GO FROM ONE HOME TO
ANOTHER, SO THAT THAT'S MY
CONCERN. THANKS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, AND I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS. SO SENATOR, IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE? ABSOLUTELY
SO I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT AS A
FORMER REALTOR, DAUGHTER OF
IMMIGRANT PARENTS, HOMEOWNERSHIP
. IT'S A DREAM THE AMERICAN
DREAM AND MANY PEOPLE ARE OUT OF
IT. UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS MARKET
, SO I JUST WANT TO SHARE REALLY
QUICK WHEN I WHEN I BOUGHT MY
FIRST HOME, I REMEMBER MY DAD
LOOKING OUT AND JUST CAME OVER
AND HAD TEARS IN HIS EYES. 30
YEARS AND I STILL GET MOVED.
BUT, UM. WE NEED TO DO BETTER TO
HELP OUR FIRST TIME HOMEBUYERS
IN CALIFORNIA. PLEASE JOIN ME IN
ENSURING THAT WE CAN SURE THE
AMERICAN DREAM IS AVAILABLE TO
ALL OUR FIRST TIME, PREACHER
GENERATIONS RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
A NIGHT BOAT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, AND
WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS AT A
LATER DATE. ALL RIGHT. AND WITH
THAT WE WILL ADJOURN OUR REVENUE
TAX COMMITTEE.