GOOD MORNING. WE'RE GOING TO
CALL THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE HEARING TO ORDER. UH
TODAY WE ARE HEARING SB 1 50 FOR
LET ME JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE
PUBLIC KNOWS HOW TO REACH THE
COMMITTEE ROOM. COLIN NUMBER IS
87769. THE ACCESS CODE AND
HOPEFULLY THEY'LL PUT THE RIGHT
ACCESS CODE UP. IT'S 131 51. 27
I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN
THE ACCESS CODE WE HAD BEFORE
AGAIN, 13151. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY
ISSUES, GETTING AH INTO THE
CONFERENCE LINE. PLEASE CALL OUR
OFFICE AT 916. 31920. LET ME LET
ME JUST THANK EVERYBODY WHO'S
BEEN INVOLVED OVER THE LAST
NUMBER OF MONTHS AND HELPING
CRAFT THIS, UH, THIS BUDGET THIS
BUDGET AGAIN HAS BEEN CRAFTED AT
A TIME WHEN WE CONTINUE TO HAVE
COVID. WE HAD 68 HEARINGS THIS
YEAR. VERY EXHAUSTIVE PROCESS A
LITTLE BIT SHORT OF NORMALLY AT
THE 100 THAT WE WOULD DO BUT
STILL PLENTY OPPORTUNITIES AND I
FEEL THAT, UM BY BEING BY HAVING
THE CONFERENCE LINES BY HAVING
VIRTUAL OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK TO
PEOPLE. WE'VE HOPED THAT WE'VE
BEEN ABLE TO ENGAGE EVEN MORE
CALIFORNIANS THAN EVER BEFORE.
THIS IS AGAIN ANOTHER RECORD
BUDGET. THE GENERAL FUND
REVENUES IS ANTICIPATED TO BE
ABOUT 243 BILLION, WITH
EXPENDITURES OF 236 BILLION THIS
RESULTS IN RECORD FUNDING FOR
EDUCATION $110 BILLION FOR PROP
98, WHICH MEANS IT'S A 16 WE'RE
PROPOSING A 16% INCREASE FOR THE
LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA.
AS WELL AS $1.8 BILLION IN
HIGHER RATES FOR OUR CHILDCARE
PROVIDERS, MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE
ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL TO ENSURE
THAT PEOPLE CAN GET BACK TO
WORK. YOU CAN'T GET BACK TO WORK
IF YOU DON'T HAVE CHILD CARE. UH
$10 BILLION IN RELIEF FOR
FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES, AND WE
WILL GO THROUGH THAT AND OUTLINE
AND ALSO VERY IMPORTANTLY, TO
HIGHLIGHT OVER $40 BILLION IN
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THAT'S IN
TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING
MONEY FOR HOMELESSNESS, UH, FOR
DEFERRED MAINTENANCE FOR K
THROUGH 12 SCHOOLS, AS WELL AS
OUR HIGHER EDUCATION FACILITIES.
SO I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER
OF PRESENTERS. WE HAVE CHRISTIAN
GRIFFITH, WHO'S OUR CHIEF
CONSULTANT FOR OUR BUDGET
COMMITTEE. HE'S GOING TO BE
PRESENTING THE BUDGET. WE HAVE
GAY PADDOCK. WHO IS OUR? UM
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S ANALYST.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, MISS ERIKA
LEE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE TO
PROVIDE THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PERSPECTIVE. SO, UM YOU DON'T.
NO OPENING FOR MR FONG. WE'RE
JUST GOING TO GO STRAIGHT INTO,
UH, MR GRIFFITHS PRESENTATION
AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE.
WE'LL GO BACK TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS AFTER THAT.
NOT WORKING. CAN YOU HEAR ME? HI
SORRY ABOUT THAT. CHRISTIAN
GRIFFITH WITH THE ASSEMBLY
BUDGET COMMITTEE. THANK YOU, MR
KING OF STILL NOT WORKING. I'LL
TRY TO SPEAK LOUDER. THERE YOU
GO. THERE YOU GO. SORRY. OKAY.
OKAY, THERE WE GO. SORRY FOR THE
TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. MR TING
, UH, YOU DID A GOOD JOB
OUTLINING SOME OF THE MAJOR
THEMES OF THE BUDGET BEFORE YOU
AND ASK THE 1 54. THIS IS A
BUDGET THAT IS RESPONSIBLY
BALANCED OVER THE FORECAST
PERIOD OVER 90% OF THE
INVESTMENTS IN THIS BUDGET. OR
ONE TIME WITH NEWT WITH THE
SURPLUS. IT HAS RECORD RESERVES
OF $37.8 BILLION, WHICH IS UP
$12.6 BILLION OVER THE PREVIOUS
YEAR. AND IT'S NEARLY DOUBLE THE
PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC. THE ONE
OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGS WE'VE
DONE WITH THE ONE TIME MONEY IS
$10 BILLION IN RELIEF FOR
FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES, AS YOU
MENTIONED EARLIER THAT'S
ACHIEVED THROUGH A PAYMENTS TO
TAX FILERS MAKING UNDER $250,000
A YEAR. THAT'S A $200 PER PER
FILER DEPENDENT PAYMENT, WHICH
IS SIMILAR TO THE GOLDEN STATE
STIMULUS, WHICH WAS A SUCCESSFUL
PROGRAM WE DID OR IN ADDITION,
WE HAVE PAYMENTS FOR WORKS AND
SSE RECIPIENTS AND NON FILERS TO
TRY TO COVER THOSE POPULATIONS,
WHICH WERE NOT PARTIALLY COVERED
IN GOLDEN STATE. SIMILAR BUT ONE
DO A BETTER JOB THIS TIME. IT
IS. ADDING TO THAT WE HAVE
PAYMENTS TO COVER BUSINESSES
WITH OUR UNEMPLOYMENT TAXES TO
COVER THE 1ST 250 EMPLOYEES,
WHICH WILL HELP PROVIDE RELIEF
TO THEM OVER THE NEXT THREE
YEARS. BUDGET ALSO ADDS TO THE
GOVERNORS, MAYOR VISION
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS WE
HAVE OVER $40 BILLION
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS TO
REBUILD CALIFORNIA, TWO MAJOR
PREMISE OF THE OF THE ASSEMBLY
PRIORITIES THIS YEAR, INCLUDING
HOUSING, HOMELESSNESS. STUDENT
HOUSING AT THE HIGHER ED
FACILITIES OR FACILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION. IN TERMS OF
SCHOOL FUNDING, WHICH, OF
COURSE, IS A BIG PARTY. THIS
BUDGET INCLUDES A 16% ONGOING
INCREASE TO LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA WHICH PROVIDE
DISTRICTS STABLE, PREDICTABLE
FUNDING, SO THEY KNOW THEIR
BUDGET SITUATION MOVING FORWARD.
IN TERMS OF OTHER ONGOING THINGS
. YOU MENTIONED THE CHILDCARE
RATES, WHICH IS OUR BIGGEST
ONGOING INVESTMENT, BUT THERE'S
ALSO A SIZABLE INVESTMENT AND
FINANCIAL AID AND HIGHER
EDUCATION TO CONTINUE TO EXPAND.
THOSE PROGRAMS AND TO COVER
ANOTHER 152,000 PEOPLE WITH CAL
GRANTS WHO ARE NOT COVERED RIGHT
NOW. AH! WITH THAT? I WILL. UM,
WE I'M HERE WITH MY TEAM TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS. UH, I'LL TURN
IT OVER TO LEO. MR PADDOCK. SO
MR CHAIR. THANK YOU. MR VICE
CHAIR MEMBERS GAVE PETTITTE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE. WE
ARE HERE MOSTLY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. I'M HERE WITH A
COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES AND WE
HAVE SOME OTHERS ON AVAILABLE
ONLINE. AH HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE WE
PROVIDED A SHORT HANDOUT,
SUMMARIZING SOME OF THE
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BUDGET IN THIS
STATE IN THE GENERAL FUND
CONDITION THAT WE'VE HAD THAT
FOR YOUR INFORMATION. AND WE'RE
JUST HERE AND HAPPY TO ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS. YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'RE
GONNA MISS LEE. GOOD MORNING.
SHIRTING MEISTER FONG AND
MEMBERS OF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
ERIKA LEE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION TO COMMENT ON SP
1 54 THE LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET
PROPOSAL. LET ME JUST START OFF
BY SAYING THAT THERE ARE MANY
SHARED PRINCIPLES BETWEEN THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL, AS
WELL AS THE LEGISLATURE'S
PROPOSAL, INCLUDING A COMMITMENT
TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO MILLIONS OF
CALIFORNIANS. WHO HAVE BEEN
IMPACTED BY THE RISING PRICES OF
GAS AND FOOD, AS WELL AS THE
SHARED COMMITMENT TO INVEST IN,
UM, HEALTH CARE FOR ALL
CALIFORNIANS IN OUR PRESCHOOLERS
IN OUR K THROUGH 12 STUDENTS AND
IN OUR PREMIER HIGHER EDUCATION
SEGMENTS, UM, AS WELL AS
BUILDING MORE HOUSING AND
ADDRESSING THE HOMELESSNESS
CRISIS HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS WELL AS INVESTING
IN THE STATE'S INFRASTRUCTURE,
INCLUDING IN TRANSPORTATION.
HOWEVER I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS SOME
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS REGARDING
THE LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET
FRAMEWORK, GIVEN RECENT ECONOMIC
CONDITIONS, INDICATING THERE MAY
BE CHALLENGING TIMES AHEAD.
FISCALLY SINCE THE MAY REVISION
, THE RISKS TO THE ECONOMIC
OUTLOOK HAVE WORSENED. STOCK
PRICES HAVE DROPPED BY 5 TO 10%
FORECASTS ARE GENERALLY NOW
PROJECTING. UM LOWER U S REAL
GDP GROWTH IN 2022 2023 RISING
INFLATION WHEN COMPARED TO THE
MAY REVISION FORECAST, AND THIS
IS MAINLY DUE TO CONTINUED
SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS. AS
WELL AS A SUSTAINED CRISIS FROM
THE RUSSIAN INVASION IN UKRAINE
. UM WHICH IS, UH RAISING,
pPRICES. SO WHILE THE
LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET INCLUDES A
VERY IMPORTANT RELIEF PROPOSAL
TO ADDRESS THESE RISING COSTS,
AS IT'S CURRENTLY STRUCTURED, IT
WILL TAKE LONGER TO IMPLEMENT IS
SMALLER AT $8 BILLION AND WILL
NOT REACH AS MANY CALIFORNIANS
WHEN COMPARED TO THE GOVERNOR'S
$11.5 BILLION REFUND PROPOSAL.
GIVEN THE RISING COST OF GAS AND
FOOD AND OTHER DAILY NECESSITIES
. OUR PRIORITY IS TO HAVE A
RELIEF PACKAGE THAT MOVES WITH
SPEED AND BENEFITS AS MANY
CALIFORNIANS AS POSSIBLE.
ADDITIONALLY THE LEGISLATURE'S
BUDGET FRAMEWORK COMMITS AN
UNSUSTAINABLE AMOUNT TO ONGOING
EXPENDITURES. THE BUDGET
PROPOSAL AS IT STANDS COMMITS
2.4 BILLION ON TOP OF THE MAY
REVISION LEVELS IN THE BUDGET
YEAR AND THAT GROWS TO 5.6
BILLION BY 25 26. DEDICATING
SUCH A LARGE AMOUNT OF ONGOING
EXPENSES. UM COULD BE CONCERNED
IS CONCERNING BECAUSE SHOULD
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS WORSEN OVER
TIME. THERE MAY BE A NEED TO
SCALE BACK OR CUT VITAL
PROGRAMS. AT THIS POINT, THE
ADMINISTRATION LOOKS FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH THE ASSEMBLY AND
THE SENATE TOOK COME TO A FINAL
BUDGET AGREEMENT THAT PROVIDES
MEDIA AND SIGNIFICANT RELIEF TO
CALIFORNIANS IN THE FACE OF
RISING COSTS NOW. UM, IS
STRUCTURALLY BALANCED, MAINTAINS
FACE OF ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY, UM
, AND MAKES INVESTMENTS THAT
ENSURE ENERGY RELIABILITY THAT
BUILD CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO
ADDRESS THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE
CHANGE. UM NOW AND THAT SUPPORT
OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL CALIFORNIANS
. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY AGAIN TO ADDRESS THE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU MY
TURNOVER. DOUG VICE CHAIR FONG
TO START UP THE QUESTIONS AND
THEN WE'LL GO FROM BACK FROM
THERE BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. AND FIRST I
WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CHAIR
AND THE STAFF FOR, UH VERY
CHALLENGING BUDGET YEAR, EVEN
THOUGH UH, EVEN THOUGH WITH THE
REVENUE NUMBERS, I THINK IT HAD
A VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS THAT
WE STILL NEED TO, UM ADDRESS. UM
IF I COULD ASK THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE THAT WILL START OFF
HERE, UM, YOU OUTLINED IN YOUR
IN YOUR OPENING THAT WHEN IT
COMES TO TAX RELIEF. AND
PROVIDING, UM, RELIEF FOR RISING
COSTS. THE CALIFORNIANS ARE
CURRENTLY FACED THAT CURRENTLY
FACING THERE IS SIGNIFICANT
DISAGREEMENT. UM WITHIN A NUMBER
OF PROPOSALS. YOU OUTLINED SPEED
AND ASSISTING THE MOST
CALIFORNIANS AS POSSIBLE. IS
THOSE THAT ARE THOSE THE TWO
PRIMARY CRITERIA YOU'RE USING TO
EVALUATE TAX RELIEF. YES UM OUR
PROPOSAL AS CURRENTLY ENVISIONED
COULD BE IMPLEMENTED MORE
QUICKLY SO CALIFORNIANS COULD BE
RECEIVING FUNDS MORE QUICKLY
UNDER THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
PROPOSALS. UM ENVISIONED BY THE
LIGHT, JUST LIKE SO? SO I WOULD.
I WOULD ARGUE THAT PROVIDING A
GAS TAX SUSPENSION HELPS THE
MOST PEOPLE AND IS FASTER THAN
ALL THE PROPOSALS BEING
PRESENTED. WHAT IS YOUR? WHAT IS
YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON THAT? I
THINK INITIALLY HEN, WHEN THAT
PROPOSAL FIRST CAME OUT THE
CONCERN WAS THAT THOSE COSTS
WOULD NOT BE OR THE SAVINGS
WOULD NOT BE PASSED ON TO
CONSUMERS, AND WE CONTINUE TO
HAVE THAT CONCERN. BUT NOW LET
ME JUST ADD THIS. THE BIPARTISAN
PROPOSAL THAT WAS PRESENTED DOES
REQUIRE ALL THOSE ALL THOSE
SAVINGS TO BE PASSED ONTO THE
CONSUMER. DOESN'T THAT ADDRESS
YOUR CONCERN THERE? UM AND
AGAIN, I WOULD JUST HIGHLIGHT
THE THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL TO GO
THROUGH THE D. M V DATA SYSTEM
AND TO PROVIDE AS MUCH RELIEF TO
AS MANY CALIFORNIANS AS
POSSIBLE. BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR
YOUR TWO CRITERIA IS SPEED AND
ASSISTING THE MOST CALIFORNIANS
AS POSSIBLE AND AGAIN. I DON'T
KNOW IF IT IS TRUE THAT THE
REPUBLICANS ABLE TO PROVIDE IT
WAS THAT THE REPUBLICAN PROPOSAL
WAS ACTUALLY THE MISLEAD. YOU
COULD SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MICRO.
MAYBE TURN THE VOLUME UP EITHER
ONE. THANK YOU. AGAIN I JUST
THERE. THERE ISN'T THE SAME
CERTAINTY. I, UM IN REGARDS TO
THE SPEED AT WHICH, UH,
CALIFORNIANS WOULD WOULD BE, UM
, RECEIVING THAT SAVINGS ARE
THAT RELIEF? IF I COULD ASK YOU,
THEN THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL.
WHO WOULD WHO WOULD PROVIDE THE
RELIEF IS THAT THROUGH THE DMV?
UM THE PROPOSAL HAS ENVISIONED
WOULD BE FOR ALL REGISTERED
VEHICLE OWNERS, AND THAT WOULD
THAT DATA WOULD BE PROVIDED BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
AND THEY DON'T PERFORM. THE UH,
THE MONETARY LET'S SAY, UH,
IMPLEMENTATION, BUT IT WOULD BE
THROUGH A THIRD PARTY VENDOR. SO
THE DEMS WOULD PROVIDE THEM
INFORMATION TO A THIRD PARTY
VENDOR, WHICH WOULD THEN PROVIDE
THE RELIEF WHO WOULD THEN SEND
DEBIT CARDS TO STRAIGHT TO
CALIFORNIA. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR
YOUR CONCERN WITH THE PROPOSAL
pIN THIS FRAMEWORK IS THAT IT'S
NOT FAST ENOUGH. CORRECT. OKAY,
ALRIGHT. UM IF I MAY ASK THE L A
. YOU'VE DONE AN ANALYSIS ON THE
DIFFERENT PROPOSALS. DO YOU
AGREE WITH THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED
BY DEPARTMENT FINANCE? WHAT DO
YOU OR DO YOU? CAN YOU PROVIDE
SOME BACKGROUND? IT, BUT.
DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S
OFFICE. AND I THINK, UM, OUR
VIEW IS PLEASE SPEAK. OKAY UP TO
THE MIKE. THIS IS A NEW
COMMITTEE. RIGHT EVERYONE,
PLEASE SPEAK CLOSER TO THEM,
ESPECIALLY FOR US OLDER FOLKS
WHO HAVE A HARDER TIME HEARING.
SORRY OR TURN THE VOLUME UP.
MAKE SURE THAT WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE WE CAN HEAR. WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE EVERYBODY CAN HEAR AS
WELL AS THE PUBLIC CAN HERE SO
OKAY. OKAY. I GOT YOU. I GOT YOU
KNOW VERY GOOD. UH I THINK FOR
THE WHAT WE WOULD SAY ABOUT THIS
IS THAT IT REALLY DEPENDS ON AH
, THE WHO YOU WANT THE BENEFITS
TO GO TO AND UNDER THE PACKAGE
THAT YOU REFERENCED MR FONG,
YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO BE MORE
MORE OF THE BENEFITS ARE GOING
TO GO TO DRIVERS, PEOPLE THAT
DRIVE MORE MILES. AND AH, THE
PACKAGE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE
PACKAGE HAS THE BENEFITS GOING
MORE TO ALL TAXPAYERS AND EVEN
PEOPLE THE WAY IT'S STRUCTURED
THAT ARE NOT TAXPAYERS. AND SO
IT'S REALLY FROM OUR STANDPOINT
, A QUESTION OF WHO WE WANT THE
MOST BENEFITS TO ACCRUE TO. I
DON'T KNOW IF CAROLINE OR I GOT
YOU. SO NOW THAT'S THAT DEALS
WITH THE SECOND CRITERIA, WHICH
IS WHO BENEFITS BUT IN TERMS OF
SPEED I WOULD. IT WOULD BE YOUR
ANALYSIS THAT YOU PROVIDED. I
WOULD. I WOULD ARGUE THAT IF
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW TO
PROVIDE RELIEF AS FAST AS
POSSIBLE, WITH THE FASTEST WAY
TO PROVIDE RELIEF BE THROUGH
SOME TYPE OF GAS SEX SUSPENSION
WHEN IT COMES TO GAS PRICES, NOT
ON HOUSING OR ANYTHING ELSE, BUT
JUST ON. YES IF MY COLLEAGUE
BRIAN MUELLER IS ON. I THINK HE
MIGHT HAVE THE BEST HANDLE ON
THAT. THAT ASPECT OF THE
QUESTION. NOT YET. CAN YOU? CAN
YOU ALL HEAR ME? BRIAN YOU? YES
VúI. I THINK THE TIMING ON UH,
THE THREE IDEAS THAT ARE BEING
DISCUSSED HERE, UM, WOULD BE
RELATIVELY SIMILAR, THERE WOULD
BE SOME AMOUNT OF
IMPLEMENTATION. UH LAG WITH ALL
THREE PROPOSALS. UM SO THEY'RE
PROBABLY ABOUT SIMILAR IN THAT
IN THAT REGARD. OKAY SO JUST TO
BE CLEAR AS ONE TO OUTLINE THE
THREE PROPOSALS YOU GOT A GAS
TAX SUSPENSION FOR A YEAR. A.
PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE RELIEF
THROUGH UH, THE I GUESS THE TAX
FRANCHISE TAX BOARD AND THEN
YOU'VE GOT A PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE
RELIEF THROUGH THE THIRD PARTY
VENDOR WITH INFORMATION PROVIDED
BY THE DMV. AND YOU'RE TELLING
ME THAT ALL OF THEM HAVE EQUALLY
LAG TIMES. UH THEY ALL I THINK
IT'S HARD TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT
THE IMPLEMENTATION LAG WILL BE
FOR ALL OF THEM. ALL OF THEM
WOULD INVOLVED SOME PERIOD OF
IMPLEMENTATION LAG. UM. SOME OF
THESE OPTIONS. YOU KNOW, WHAT
CAN BE SAID IS THINKING ABOUT
THE FTP OPTION. THIS IS, UH, A
METHOD THAT THE STATE HAS
PURSUED FOR. RELIEF RECENTLY. SO
IT'S ONE THAT WE, UH, KIND OF
HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE WITH. UH
THE D M V PROMOTE PROPOSAL FROM
THE ADMINISTRATION IS A LITTLE
BIT MORE UNTESTED. UM AS WOULD
KIND OF A FULL SCALE GAS TAX.
RELIEVE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE
WE'VE DONE RECENTLY, EITHER. SO
THERE'S SOME A BIT OF
UNCERTAINTY ABOUT EXACTLY HOW
QUICKLY EACH OF THESE THINGS
COULD BE IMPLEMENTED. I
APPRECIATE THAT. I WOULD SAY
THAT FOR THE RECORD, OTHER
STATES HAVE DONE IT. SO I HAVE
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE THAT SAYS
THAT IT ACTUALLY DOES WORK. UM
IN TERMS OF WILDFIRES. IF I
COULD GO TO CHRISTIAN REAL QUICK
, CAN YOU GIVE US A KIND OF A
LAY OF THE LAND IN TERMS OF, UM
YOU KNOW WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED
WHEN IT COMES TO WILDFIRES. I
THINK THE L A INDICATED THAT
THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC
ALLOCATIONS JUST YET. SO CAN YOU
JUST KIND OF GIVE US A BROAD
UNDERSTANDING OF KIND OF WHAT
THE MOVING PARTS ARE RIGHT NOW.
SO THERE'S A HYBRID HERE BECAUSE
THERE'S SOME PIECES OF THE
WILDFIRE CONVERSATION THAT ARE
PART OF OUR BASE BUDGET. BUT
THEN, OF COURSE, THERE'S THIS
CLIMATE PACKAGE IS STILL BEING
CUT DISCUSSED. I WILL, UM AS SHY
FORBES TO COME AND MAYBE, SURE,
ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY. THAT IS,
OF COURSE, THAT'S STILL IN FLUX
, AND THE INTENT WAS ON THAT TO
REVISIT THAT AFTER AH, THE
SUMMER RECESS AND TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION SO THAT PART OF
THAT, BUT SHE MIGHT BE MORE OF
AN UPDATE. GOOD MORNING. MORNING
AS CHRISTIAN SAID, SO A LOT OF
IT IS IN THE BASE BUDGET. WE
ALSO APPROVED MANY PROPOSALS
FROM CAL FIRE FOR FIRE
SUPPRESSION. THERE'S 100 AND $52
MILLION FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION AND
THAT WE APPROVE, BUT WE HAVE
NOT. SIDED ON THE DETAILS YET
THAT WILL LIKELY BE PART OF
AUGUST DISCUSSIONS. AND THEN
THERE WAS THE TWO YEAR IT WAS
$1.2 BILLION FOR WILDFIRE
PREVENTION. THAT IS ALSO WE'RE
STILL ESTIMATING WHAT THE BEST
INVESTMENTS ARE BASED ON DATA
THAT WE GOT FROM LAST YEAR'S
INVESTMENTS FOR THOSE WE PLAN TO
DO IN AUGUST AS WELL. OKAY SO
JUST SO THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE
SAME AGE. THERE THERE. THAT
DISCUSSION IS ONGOING AND WE
WON'T SEE PROBABLY SPECIFICS
UNTIL AFTER, UH AFTER THE
SUMMER. PERIOD. CORRECT. UM. IN
TERMS OF COULD I COULD ASK THE
ELIO YOU'VE BEEN VERY UPFRONT
ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO RESERVES
YOU HAD INDICATED AND AN
ANALYSIS I THINK A COUPLE OF
YEARS AGO. CALLING OR
HIGHLIGHTING THE FACT THAT THE
GOVERNOR MAY WANT TO RETHINK OR
THINK ABOUT REPAYING THE 7.2
BILLION OF RESERVES THAT WERE
BORROWED AND THERE WAS NEVER
PAID BACK. IF YOU COULD JUST
CLARIFY FOR ME, WAS THAT EVER
DONE? OR WAS THAT 7.2 BILLION?
THAT WAS UM, THAT WAS PULLED OUT
OF RESERVES. UM WHEN WE WENT
INTO THE PANDEMIC WAS THAT EVER
PUT BACK INTO THE RESERVES? A
PETTICOAT LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S
OFFICE, MR FANG THAT PARTICULAR
AND DISCRETIONARY DEPOSIT WAS
NOT PUT BACK. BUT I MEAN, AS MR
GRIFFITH POINTED OUT, THE
INCREASE IN RESERVES THIS THE
STATUS CONTINUED TO FOLLOW THE
DEPOSITS THAT ARE REQUIRED
BINDER. PROPOSITION TWO IN THE
RESERVES HAVE INCREASED
SUBSTANTIALLY. SO, UM YOU KNOW,
THAT'S GOTCHA. SO THE FORMULA
HAS BEEN HAS BEEN MET. BUT THE
7.2 BILLION THAT WAS, UM, THAT
WAS PULLED OUT RESERVES AND
BORROWED THAT WAS NOT PUT PAID
BACK, OKAY. I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY THAT JUST JUST TO BE
CLEAR WITH THE BUDGET
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT SUPPOSED
TO BE 10% AND WE DO REACH THAT
ANNUAL FORECAST PERIOD, THAT SO
THE QUESTION IS WHAT? HOW FAST
YOU GET THERE AND UNDER OUR
PLANET DOES GET THERE. RIGHT I
MEAN, I JUST WANT I JUST WANTED
TO CLARIFY THAT SPECIFIC POINT.
SO I THANK YOU, CHRISTIAN FOR
THAT, UM THERE IS I THINK WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT THIS IN IN IN THE
PAST AND IN OUR BRIEFINGS, BUT,
UM THERE SEEMS TO BE, UH, A
DIFFERING OF OPINION OF HOW TO
DEAL WITH THE UNEMPLOYMENT
INSURANCE DEBT. AND SO CHRISTIAN
. COULD YOU OUTLINE SPECIFICALLY
HOW THE U I ISSUE WOULD BE
ADDRESSED. UM, NOW WE'RE MOVING
FORWARD. SO THAT THE
LEGISLATURE'S PLAN HERE IS TO
TAKE, UH FUNDING AND USE IT TO
OFFSET TAX INCREMENT INCREASES
FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND FOR THE
1ST 250 EMPLOYEES SO THAT THE
IMPACT OF THE HIGHER UI DEBT ON
EMPLOYERS IS MITIGATED BY THIS
TAX RELIEF. AND SO THAT THAT'S
ESSENTIALLY INSTEAD OF SORT OF
DEALING WITH THE UNDERLYING
TRUST FUND LEVEL IS REALLY TO
TRY TO MITIGATE THE DIFFICULTIES
THAT THE BUSINESS IS FACED WITH
THAT. AND IF I GUESS THE
DEPARTMENT FINANCE YOU GUYS HAD
YOUR PROPOSAL WAS TO PAY DOWN
THE UI DEBT, AT LEAST BY THREE
BILLION. IF THAT IS THAT CORRECT
, CORRECT. OUR PROPOSAL WAS ONE
BILLION IN THE BUDGET YEAR WITH
AN ADDITIONAL TWO BILLION IN THE
FOLLOWING YEAR. SO WHAT IS YOUR
PERSPECTIVE ON THIS? THIS
PROPOSAL WHEN IT COMES TO YOU, I
DAD. SURE SO THE IDEA WAS TO PAY
DOWN SOME OF THE LARGE DEBT THAT
HAD BEEN ACCUMULATED OVER THE
PANDEMIC. SO THAT IN THE LONG
RUN, WE ARE DEALING WITH LONG
TERM LIABILITIES. UM OR ABOUT
THE STATE AND EMPLOYERS
UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S A
DIFFERENT PROPOSAL THAN WHATTHE
LEGISLATURE HAS IN FRONT AND HAS
IN FRONT OF YOUR RIGHT NOW. THIS
WAS FOR THE UI DEBT ITSELF TO
DECREASE THAT OVERTIME. GOTCHA.
INTO THE LAYOUT. DO YOU HAVE AN
OPINION ON THIS? I WOULD DEFER
TO HEROIN. GOOD MORNING, CAROLYN
. TRUE FROM LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE, ONE OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WE RAISED RAISED
WITH THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PROPOSAL WAS THAT THE BENEFITS
OF PREPAID OR PAYING DOWN THE
DEBT AT THIS TIME. LIKELY WOULD
NOT ACCRUE UNTIL THE END OF THE
LOAN. SO SEVERAL YEARS IN THE
FUTURE AND THE ABILITY OF
EMPLOYERS TO GAIN ANY BENEFIT.
FROM THE REPAYMENT WAS NOT
CERTAIN. BUT WOULD YOU. WOULD
YOU HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PAYING
DOWN THE PRINCIPAL? OR YOU JUST
SAYING THAT FROM THE TIMING
ISSUE? WELL INTERN NO, NOT
CONCERNS, SORT OF ON THE FACE OF
PAINT ON THE PRINCIPLE BUT
RATHER IF THE INTENT IS TO
BENEFIT BUSINESSES, UM, WHO
WOULD BE PAYING HIGHER TAXES AS
A RESULT OF THE UNEMPLOYMENT
DURING THE PANDEMIC, THAT
BENEFIT WOULD NOT ACCRUE TO
EMPLOYERS IN THE NEAR TERM. AND
MAY NOT ACCRUE IN LARGE AMOUNTS
, EVEN AT THE END OF THE LOAN,
BUT IF THE GOAL IS TO PAY DOWN
THE DEBT THEN THEY WOULD HAVE IT
WOULD ACCOMPLISH. YES. OKAY,
ALRIGHT. UM AND I CANNOT
BROADCAST DEPARTMENT FINANCES
THAT IS THE GOAL TO PAY DOWN THE
PRINCIPAL AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE
. YES, WE SEE THIS AS A LONG
TERM LIABILITY AND PAYING FOR
SOME OF THAT NOW. WE BELIEVE
MAKES SENSE SOMEWHAT LIKE PAYING
A MORTGAGE, PAYING MORE UPFRONT
TO REDUCE THE TOTAL EX, UH, TIME
IN WHICH THAT EXTRA DATA
SPEAKING OKAY? THANK YOU, UM. ON
THE ON TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S
THE ONE ITEM I THINK THAT IS
MISSING FROM AH, THE HELIOS
HIGHLIGHTS AND SO GOOD QUESTION
. CAN YOU GIVE ME A STATE OF
PLAY AND IN TERMS OF THE
TRANSPORTATION DISCUSSION? YES
WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO HAVE MADE
TRANSPORTATION OF PRIORITY FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS YEAR,
THERE'S OVER $10 BILLION IN
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING, WHICH
WAS ACTUALLY A GOAL OF THE
BUDGET BLUEPRINT EARLIER THIS
YEAR. WE'VE WE'VE PUT THAT IN
THIS PLAN. WE ARE STILL WORKING
WITH THE ADMINISRATION ON HOW
THAT WOULD BE DISTRIBUTED AND
HOW IT WOULD MOVE FORWARD AND IN
TERMS OF THE DIFFERENT REGIONS,
BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF PROGRAMS
LIKE THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM, WHICH IS ALSO SOMETHING
CREATED ACTUALLY IN THE BUDGET
PROCESS BY THE ASSEMBLY. SO
WE'RE, UM STILL WORKINGON IT,
AND I THINK THAT YOU KNOW THAT'S
THAT'S A CONVERSATION THAT IS
REALLY NEEDS THE INPUT OF
ADMINISTRATION TO REALLY LAND A
GOOD PLAN MOVING FORWARD, BUT
BUT I THINK IT'S VERY SIZABLE
INVESTMENT. I'LL JUST RECALL THE
FACT THAT WE HAVEN'T REALLY DONE
A TRANSPORTATION BOND AND A
NUMBER OF YEARS. SO THERE'S A
LOT OF REALLY GOOD PROJECTS OUT
THERE THAT ARE THERE READY FOR
FUNDING AND JUST EXCITING TO
THINK THAT WE CAN I'M GUESSING
US $10 BILLION IS THAT, UM HOW
IS THAT? HOW IS THAT BROKEN DOWN
? I MEAN, HOW MUCH GOES TO ROADS
AND HIGHWAYS? HOW MUCH GOES? I
MEAN, THERE? IS THERE A
BREAKDOWN THERE. DO YOU HAVE
THAT? OR IS THAT CAN YOU PROVIDE
THAT? I'LL ASK GENEVIEVE IF SHE
COULD COME UP AND QUICKLY DO
THAT, BECAUSE I CAN'T DO THAT.
NO WORRIES. YES, BEGINNING,
MIKE. SORRY. THERE WE GO.
GENEVIEVE MORALS ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THAT
PART OF 10 BILLION JUST HELD FOR
FUTURE DISCUSSIONS, SO IT'S NOT
DIVIDED. IT'S JUST A BIG POT OF
FUNDING UNTIL WE GET A DEAL ON
THE OTHER PIECE. AND DO YOU HAVE
A DO YOU HAVE A TIMELINE? I
MEAN, I KNOW THAT WILDFIRES IS
PLANNING TO BE SOMETIME SOMETIME
IN IN THE SUMMER. DO YOU? DO YOU
ANTICIPATE THE SAME TIMELINE? WE
ARE WORKING AS FAST AS WE CAN
AND HOPING TO GET THAT DEAL
LANDED BEFORE? HANDS BEFORE THE
BEGINNING OF JULY. OKAY 10
BILLION DOESN'T INCLUDE THE 4.2.
BILLION PROP ONE A APPROPRIATION
FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL. OKAY, SO
OUT OF THE 10,000,000,004 10.2
IS HIGH SPEED RAIL. NOT
ADDITION. IN ADDITION TO OKAY,
SO THE 10 BILLION IS SPECIFIC TO
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
OUTSIDE OF HIGH SPEED RAIL. YES,
THAT'S CORRECT, OK? UM.
CHRISTIAN ANSWER ON SUPPLY CHAIN
. IS THERE ANYTHING IN REGARDS
TO LIKE INLAND PORTS? OR I KNOW
THAT YOU HAVE BROAD NUMBERS, BUT
I MEAN, IS THERE ARE THERE
SPECIFIC DETAILS OF HOW THOSE OF
THAT THOSE RESOURCES ARE
ALLOCATED IN TERMS OF LIKE THE
PORTS OR HARDENING THE SUPPLY
CHAIN. THAT'S UM THAT THE SPLIT
IS STILL THE 70 30 SPLIT THAT
WAS INTRODUCED EARLIER THIS YEAR
THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN TALKING
ABOUT SO WE HAVEN'T CHANGED
ANYTHING YET. ANY DETAILS ON THE
PORCH? SEVEN THIRTY'S WE CAN
EXPLAIN THE SEVEN THREES BUT TO
ME AGAIN. THE 70 30. I BELIEVE
IT GOES TO THE 70 IS FOR L, A
LONG BEACH AND THEN PERCENT IS
IT'S THE 70 30 SPLIT OF WHAT'S
THE TOTAL PIE 1.2 BILLION OVER
TWO YEARS. SO IT'S 600 MILLION
IN THIS CURRENT YEAR BUDGET AND
THEN 600 MILLION FOR NEXT YEAR.
OKAY AND AS THAT 1.2 BILLION
APPROPRIATE THIS YEAR AND SPREAD
OVER TWO YEARS, OR IS IT THE ONE
YOU SEE THE 600 MILLION IN FOR
THIS CURRENT YEAR BUDGET, AND
THEN IT'S IN THE BUDGET BILL,
BUT THE 600 MILLION FOR NEXT
YEAR WOULD BE IN NEXT YEAR'S
BUDGET BILL. OKAY SO THE SO
THERE'S 600 MILLION FOR SURE.
AND THEN THE PLAN TO PUT 600
MILLION NEXT YEAR. OKAY SO IN
REALITY 600 MILLION FOR THIS
YEAR? YES. OKAY THIS 1.2 SCORED
AT 1.2 BASELINE BUDGET NEXT YEAR
WHEN YOU GOT THE BUDGET
INTRODUCED BY THE GOVERNOR,
OKAY? THE BOAT. IS THERE A
REASON WHY WE WOULDN'T MOVE IT
BOTH AND APPROPRIATED THIS YEAR
1.2 BILLION AND THEN JUST SOLD
IT OUT OVER THE TWO YEARS. THIS
IS JUST AN ACCOUNTING THING WITH
OUR INFRASTRUCTURE THINGS. WE
LOOKED AT IT OVER A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT YEARS IN TERMS OF WHEN
TO SCORE IT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T
WANT TO HAVE MONEY JUST SITTING
AROUND FOR PROJECTS THAT WEREN'T
READY AND THEN HAVE OTHER
PROJECTS WAITING ON THE SHELF
THAT WE'RE READY TO GO THROUGH.
TRIED THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO
THE TIMING OF THAT TO REALLY BE
SHOVEL READY AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE. OKAY, I SHOULD HAVE
ASKED THIS WHEN SHE WAS HERE.
I'M JUMPING BACK INTO WATER
STORAGE. I REMEMBER IN SUB
SITTING IN HIS STEP THREE THAT
SECRETARY KO FOOT HAD MENTIONED,
UM, THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS
EMPHASIZED THE NEED TO FAST
TRACK. UM SOME WATER SOURCE
PROJECTS SPECIFICALLY CITES
RESERVOIR. IS THERE ANYTHING IN
THIS FRAMEWORK THAT THAT
EXPEDITES OR STREAMLINES? UM
THOSE PROJECTS. THE
ADMINISTRATION MAY BE ABLE TO
ENTER THIS BETTER THAN I AM
HAPPY TO THROW IT TO THE
DEPARTMENT FINANCE SUE, BUT I
BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS KEY FOR
2025 TO 2020. IT TOOK A PLACE
SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MIC.
EVERYBODY HI, ERICA WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I'M GOING
TO TURN TO ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES
WHO IS ON THE LINE TO HELP WITH
THAT QUESTION, OKAY? YEAH THIRD
DRIVE WATER DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. SO IN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL THAT
WAS $5,000,500 MILLION CAPTURED
IN THE OUT YEARS. UM, UH, BUT
THAT'S IN TERMS OF TWO PARTY
AGREEMENT. I THINK THAT'S PART
OF THE KIND OF LARGER CLIMATE
SET ASIDE THAT THAT WAS INCLUDED
THERE. OKAY SO YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT THEM? I GUESS YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT THE 500 MILLION.
THAT'S IN 2025, WHICH IS THAT
WE'RE NOT EVEN. I MEAN, THAT'S
NOT EVEN IN THE REMOTE
POSSIBILITY OF THE IMMEDIACY OF
THE OF THE NEED RIGHT NOW, BUT
SECRETARY CROW. FOOTE
SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT THEY WERE
EFFORT TO GOVERNOR HAS CALLED
FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO X BY
THAT EXPEDITE AND STREAMLINE
WATER STORAGE PROJECTS
SPECIFICALLY CITES RESERVOIR SO
I'M ASKING. WHAT ARE THOSE?
EFFORTS. YEAH THE DIFFERENCE
SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIVE EFFORTS
WITHIN THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS
THAT HAVE TO APPROVE THE
PERMITTING WITH THE KIND OF
WATER COMMISSION ARTIFICIAL
WILDLIFE OTHER THAN THE OTHER
THING, THE WATERBOARD PART OF
THAT, TOO, SO THERE'S DEFINITELY
AN INTERNAL, UM, KIND OF
ACCELERATION THERE WHERE WE'RE
WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION AT THE LEVEL OF
RESOURCES THAT NEEDS TO KIND OF
VALLAPUDUA DIFFERENT WATER
PROJECT THAT THE EXPEDITE AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE, SO THAT'S NOT
BUDGETARILY. THAT'S JUST
INTERNAL KIND OF ADMINISTRATIVE,
UM, FUNCTION. OKAY, SO THE ONLY
MONEY THAT IS THERE FOR WATER
STORAGE IS IN 2025. AS PART OF
THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL.
IT WAS IN 25 26 25 26. OKAY SO
WHILE WE'RE IN DROUGHT NOW,
YOU'VE GOT WATER STORAGE FUNDING
IN 2025 26. AND THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL
INCLUDED OVER $2 BILLION THIS
YEAR AMBITION TO THE 5.2 BILLION
LAST YEAR, BUT THROUGH THE TWO
PARTY AGREEMENT, WHICH I THINK
IS A BILL THAT IS BEING
DISCUSSED NOW THERE WAS JUST A
LARGER SET ASIDE, BUT NO NO
DOLLARS COMMITTED TO ANY
SPECIFIC KIND OF CLIMATE
PROJECT, OKAY? UH IN TERMS OF
OKAY NOW, IF I CAN ASK ELLA
ABOUT ABOUT SOUTH, THERE SEEMS
TO BE, UH, AN EFFORT, UM BY THE
SPEAKING PROGRAM AND THE AND THE
GOVERNORTO DISCUSS CHANGING THE
STATE'S, UH, APPROPRIATION
LIMIT. UM IN TERMS OF THAT
DISCUSSION, I MEAN, WHAT WHAT
PRINCIPLES DO YOU THINK NEED TO
BE PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT
WE'RE EVALUATING THESE
PROPOSALS. OKAY GAY PADDOCK,
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE SO
WITH REGARD TO THIS DATE
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT OUR
ANALYSIS THAT INDICATED THAT THE
STATE WAS OUT, OF COURSE, TO BE
OVER THE LIMIT. THE GOVERNORS
MAY REVISION WOULD HAVE LEFT 3.5
BILLION OF UNADDRESSED SELL
REQUIREMENTS. THE TWO PARTY
AGREEMENT HAS SOME ACTIONS IN IT
. THAT WOULD TAKE US
SUBSTANTIALLY BELOW THE LIMIT.
MOST MOST NOTABLY A CHANGE IN
THE DEFINITION OF ABSORB
MENTIONS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
SO THOSE ACTIONS MAKE IT SO THAT
THERE'S ADDITIONAL TIME BUT THE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE REMAINS, WE
THINK, OVER THE LONGER TERM FROM
KIND OF A STRUCTURAL STANDPOINT
, WHEN YOU COMPARE STATE
REVENUES TO THE GROWTH OF THE
LIMIT ITSELF. STATE REVENUES ARE
LIKELY TO CONTINUE TO OUTPACE
THE LIMIT. AND IN THAT, GIVEN
THAT. OVER THE KIND OF LONGER
TERM THERE'S THIS FUNDAMENTAL
CHOICE REALLY, OF WHETHER THE
STATE NEEDS TO ADJUST ITS
REVENUE COLLECTIONS TO FIT
WITHIN THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY
VOTERS IN 1979. WHICH WOULD
REQUIRE SOME CORRESPONDING
ADJUSTMENT ON THE BUDGET. YOUR
BUDGET EXPENDITURE SIDE OR THE
ALTERNATIVE TO THAT WOULD BE TO
GO BACK TO THE VOTERS AND, YOU
KNOW, SEEK A CHANGE IN AH, THE
CURRENT WAY THAT THE STATE
APPROPRIATIONS LIMITED
CALCULATED OR WHAT? WHAT'S
INCLUDED OR NOT, SO THOSE ARE
AND THAT'S THAT'S HOW WE LOOK AT
THIS SITUATION. AND MY LAST
QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE THE
CHAIRS PATIENTS IN TERMS OF
RETAIL THEFT. I WAS GONNA ASK,
UM AH. MY UNDERSTANDING IS A
QUESTION THAT THE MONEY OR THE
TASK FORCE THAT'S ONE TIME FOR
THEM, BUT FOR THE TIME BEING
HAVE TO LOOK TO JENNIFER FOR
THAT, OKAY, QUESTION THERE. GOOD
MORNING, SO THE $85 MILLION
GRANT PROGRAM FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IS $85
MILLION EACH YEAR FOR THREE
YEARS. UM THE DOJ TASK FORCE
FUNDING IS FOR THREE YEARS. AND
THEN THERE'S SEPARATE TASK FORCE
FUNDING FOR DOJ THAT'S
PERMANENT. OKAY AND IN TERMS OF
THE 85 MILLION FOR EACH FOR THE
GRANTS. WHAT IS THE CRITERIA?
THE GRANTS LIKE WHAT WOULD THEY?
WHAT WOULD SO WE, UM REACHED OUT
TO SEVERAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO
GET FEEDBACK ON HOW TO BEST
DESIGN THE GRANT PROGRAM, UM,
THEY WOULD NEED TO SUBMIT
INFORMATION RELATED TO WHATEVER
DATA THEY HAVE AROUND RETAIL
THEFT. UM WE ALSO INCLUDE AUTO
THEFT AND CARGO THEFT AS
PERMISSIBLE USES BASED ON
FEEDBACK WE GOT FROM MEMBERS OF
THE LEGISLATURE. OKAY, SO THOSE
THOSE THAT CRITERIA IS STILL
BEING DEVELOPED IN I MEAN, IT'S
BROAD ENOUGH TO WHERE IT COULD.
IT COULD DEAL WITH THOSE THREE
AREAS, BUT IS THERE BUT BESIDES
THAT, IS THERE ANY ANY ANY, UH,
ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
WHETHER IT'S A POLICE DEPARTMENT
OR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. THEY
CAN APPLY FOR PROBATION OR WITH
GROUPS WITH THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS WELL.
PERFECT UM AND THEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. UM AS
THERE. HAVE YOU GUYS DONE ANY
ANALYSIS ON ON THE WHAT THE TASK
FOR THAT. WHAT THE DEAL THE TASK
FORCE HAS ALREADY DONE. IS THERE
ANY DATA THAT HAS INDICATED THE
NUMBER OF PROSECUTIONS THAT HAVE
OCCURRED? HOW EFFECTIVE IT'S
BEEN WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. I WILL TURN THAT
QUESTION OVER TO ONE OF MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE LINE. GOOD
MORNING. THIS IS JUSTIN EDELMAN
WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE.
WE DO HAVE SOME DATA FROM
PREVIOUS CHP TASK FORCES THAT
EXIST AND WHEN WE CAN FOLLOW UP
AND GIVE YOU THOSE SPECIFICS.
CAN YOU GIVE ME A PREVIEW? I
BELIEVE THEY HAD A NUMBER OF
PROSECUTIONS IN THE RANGE OF
SEVERAL 100 OVER THE LAST FEW
YEARS THAT THEY'VE BEEN
OPERATING, OKAY. UM AND HAS THAT
TREND BEEN INCREASING OVER TIME?
HAS IT BEEN PRETTY STAGNANT?
IT'S A RELATIVELY NEW PROGRAMS.
SO IT HAS BEEN INCREASING OVER
THE LAST FEW YEARS. YES, OKAY.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION ON
HOMELESSNESS IF I COULD JUMP TO
THAT, UM FOR THE ENCAMPMENT,
RESOLUTION GRANTS. UM BUT THOSE
FUNDS GO DIRECTLY TO THE
HOMELESS SERVICE PROVIDERS.
WOULD THEY GO TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS? HOW DOES THAT WORK?
UM YES. UH, MR FONG. I WERE
INCLUDED IN THE ADMINISTRATION'S
500 MILLION FOR ENCAMPMENT THAT
HAS BEEN REDUCED IN THE TWO
PARTY PLAN, BUT WE CAN SPEAK TO
A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THE CURRENT
PROGRAM LOOKS ABSOLUTELY
ACTUALLY WILL TURN THAT OVER TO
ONE. MY COLLEAGUES WHO'S ON THE
LINE WHO DEALS WITH
HOMELESSNESS. GOOD MORNING,
CHRIS COOK WITH DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. SO THE CURRENT
ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION GRANTS ARE
GRANTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR
ENCAMPMENT CLEANUP. SO IT'D BE.
IT'D BE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND NOT TO THE NOT
TO HOMELESSNESS, THE HOMELESS
SERVICE PROVIDERS. THAT'S THE
LOCAL PROVIDERS WULD THEN APPLY
TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CORRECT
TO GET THAT FUNDING. OKAY? AH! I
THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN
QUESTIONSSTILL, BUT I
APPRECIATE THE CHAIRS.
DILIGENCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, MR VICE CHAIR. OTHER
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
TROY. YES SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT I HAVE A QUESTION HAD BEEN
ADDRESSED ABOUT THE I WOULD LIKE
TO KNOW. UH EXACT, UH,
ANTICIPATED A SURPLUS NEXT YEAR
BUDGET. WHAT I READ WAS, UH, IS
IT WHEN I BE NEARLY. $200
BILLION. IS IT TRUE? WHAT IS THE
EXACT FIGURE? YES DOCTOR TOY, OR
KELLY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE THE BUDGET SURPLUS IN
THE MAY REVISION AGAIN. THIS IS
OUR THE ADMINISTRATION'S NOT NOT
THE TWO PARTY PLAN, BUT IT DID
INCLUDE A TOTAL FROM THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, AS WELL AS
THE MAY REVISION OF 97.5 BILLION
THAT IS FOR THE BUDGET YEAR.
NEARLY 100,000. THAT'S RIGHT,
AND THAT INCLUDES THEM DONE 98
AS WELL AS PROPOSITION 98. SO
THERE ARE THERE ARE SEVERAL
PIECES THAT MAKE UP THAT NUMBER
FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR. YEAH, UH, I
HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ARE
RELATED TO THAT. UH ONE OF THE
CONCERNS WAS THAT MY MYSELF,
ALSO AS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN, AND
THEN ALSO TODAY'S ORANGE COUNTY
BUSINESS COUNCIL. OUR NEWSLETTER
COMMENTED ON THE ANTICIPATED.
UH, THE BUSINESS ON. AH
INSURANCE PREMIUMS WILL GO UP
BECAUSE OF THE INTEREST THAT YOU
WILL HAVE TO PAY THAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THE ONE OF MY
BEER, SO WAS SO I PROPOSE, UH, I
THINK THAT WAS A MONTH WAS LIKE
$190 BILLION SINCE YOU HAVE SUCH
SUCH A HUGE AMOUNT OF SURPLUS
LEFT, YOU KNOW TO, UH, PAID IT
OFF SO THAT CONSUMERS WOULD NOT
SUFFER FROM CONTINUOUS, UH TAX
INCREASE FROM THE PAYROLLS AND,
UH, UNFORTUNATELY, MY BILL DIED
IN THE COMMITTEE, AND THEY'RE
ALSO SIMILAR BEALL. ABOUT ONE
THIRD OF THAT AMOUNT WAS
PROPOSED BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TON
DAILY, AND I THOUGHT THEY'D
PASSED IS GONNA BE PAID DOWN
THAT AMOUNT OF I BELIEVE THAT
AMOUNTED TO MY MEMORY WAS OF $43
BILLION ABOUT THAT. DON'T HEAR
THAT. YEAH JUST A COUPLE OF
POINTS ON THAT. UM UH, DR CHOI
FOR ANY BUDGET SURPLUS, THERE'S
A PROPORTION OF THAT THAT IS
AUTOMATICALLY GOES TO
PROPOSITION 98 SO EVEN THOUGH
IT'S $100 BILLION OF THAT 35.7
BILLION IS DEDICATED TO TOWARDS
EDUCATION AND THEN OVER 10
BILLION IS FOR PROPOSITION TO
DEBT PAYMENTS, SO A LARGE CHUNK
OF THAT SURPLUS WILL ALWAYS OF
ANY SURPLUS. ALWAYS GO GO
TOWARDS CONSTITUTIONAL
REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED PAYMENTS.
I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT
THERE. UM, IN REGARDS TO TELL ME
EXACTLY THE AMOUNT ANNUALLY YOU
NEED TO MAINTAIN AS A SURPLUS OF
THE, UH, FOR THE RAINY DAY
PURPOSES. HOW MUCH MONEY IS
IDEALLY, YOU TRY TO SET UP AS A
KEEP IT AS A RESERVE FUND.
CURRENTLY WE HAVE 37 BILLION
PROPOSED $37 BILLION AND FOR THE
REST OF THE DAY DOLLARS ABOVE
AND BEYOND THAT $37 BILLION, OR
DO WE HAVE A PLAN FOR THAT? HOW
ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE THAT
EXTRA SURPLUS MONEY THAT YOU
HAVE SURE AGAIN THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS OUR BUDGET
PROPOSAL. IT'S PART OF THE MAY
REVISION. IT INCLUDES HOW WE
WOULD BE SPENDING HOW WE PROPOSE
TO BE SPENDING THAT SURPLUS, BUT
I ALSO WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR
QUESTION AND ON UNEMPLOYMENT
INSURANCE AGAIN. OUR PROPOSAL
WAS $3 BILLION TOWARDS THE DUTCH
TOWARDS UI DOT THOMAS WITH THE
GOAL OF HELPING CREATE HEALTHY,
OBVIOUSLY ADDRESSING THAT THE
DEBT ISSUE THERE AND SO I CAN'T
REALLY SPEAK TO, UM, THE TWO
PARTYDEAL AT THIS POINT, BUT
THAT IS WHERE THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL IS.
YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU GUYS
UP, YOU KNOW, FINEST DEPARTMENT
OR ANALYSTS DEPARTMENTS WILL
WILL PROVIDE THE MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION. WHAT TO DO HOW
TO DO YOU KNOW, WITH THAT
REMAINING IN TO ME AS A COMMON
PERSON. COMMON SENSE TELLS ME
ANY THAT EXTRA MONEY IF MY DAD
COLLAPSE I AND INTEREST I HAVE
TO PAY BACK THEN WHY NOT WHEN
YOU HAVE THE EXTRA AMOUNT OF
MONEY TO PAY THE TOWN RATHER
THAN CREATING ANY NEW NEW
PROGRAMS. AND THE PROPORTION OF
OUR PROPOSAL DOES. GO TOWARDS
THE UI DEBT. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR
O'DONNELL. I JUST WANT TO JUST
THANK THE STAFF FOR THEIR WORK
ON THIS BECAUSE I KNOW MANY
HOURS GO INTO THIS MANY MEETINGS
AND ALSO BOTH CHAIRS. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR EFFORTS. AND UM, JUST,
YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE BEST
VERSION OF PROBABLY ANY BUDGET
WE'VE SEEN. FOR CALIFORNIA'S
EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM. THIS IS HUGE
, SO THIS IS A GREAT MOMENT FOR
U. UM I APPRECIATE THAT. WE
PUSH BACK ON CREATING YET
ANOTHER RESERVE. THERE'S
PROBABLY TWO RESERVES AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL DEDICATED RESERVED
AND THEN LOCAL DISTRICTS ALSO
PUT MONEY IN OTHER SPOTS, WHICH
IS ACTUALLY ENDS UP BEING
RESERVED AT THE STATE. WE HAVE
AT LEAST TWO RESERVES ALREADY,
SO WE REALLY DON'T NEED ANOTHER
RESERVE. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. WE
NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR A
DOWNTURN. I BELIEVE WE ARE
PREPARED FOR THAT DOWNTURN, BUT
WE NEED TO PUSH MONEY INTO THE
CLASSROOM, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS
BUDGET DOES. IT SENDS MONEY TO
THE CLASSROOM, WHICH IS
IMPERATIVE. I KNOW THAT WE'RE
STILL WORKING ON THE
TRANSPORTATION ISSUE. THAT'S THE
HOME TO SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION
ISSUE. I HOPE WE CAN FIND A
PLACE TO LAND THERE TO MAKE
DISTRICTS HOLE. FOR THEIR
EFFORTS TO GET KIDS TO SCHOOL ON
THE SCHOOL FACILITIES ISSUE. I
HOPE THAT CERTAINLY YES, WE CAN
GET A BIT MORE MONEY FOR THAT,
BUT ALSO WE CAN WE CAN CONTRACT
THE TIMELINE. UH FOR THOSE
MONIES THAT HAVE BEEN DEDICATED,
WE CAN PULL IT BACK A YEAR OR
TWO. SO IT'S NOT SUCH A LONG
PERIOD. BUT AGAIN, IT'S A
SHORTER PERIOD. UH FUNDING FOR
THE SCHOOL FACILITIES. MORE
MONEY? YES, BUT ALSO A SHORTER
TIMELINE BECAUSE JUST HAVING NOT
HAVING LEVEL THREE FEES IS THAT
IMPACT ULTIMATELY, HOUSING
PRICES, TOO. IS A GOOD THING,
BUT WE NEED TO HAVE MONEY THERE,
WHICH WOULD PROBABLY MEAN
ANOTHER BOND IN THE OUT YEARS.
SO WITH THAT, I JUST WANT TO
AGAIN. THANK THE BOTH CHAIRS.
BOTH OF THEM. HONESTLY BOTH OF
THEM WORKED HARD ON THIS. UH MR
FONG. SOMETIMES YOUR PARTY ISN'T
ALWAYS BEHIND ME ON ME THE
EDUCATION ISSUES. BUT ON THIS
ONE, YOU YOU CERTAINLY WERE ON
MAKING SURE THAT WE DRIVE MONEY
TO THE CLASSROOM. SO I THINK
THIS IS A GOOD MOMENT FOR
CALIFORNIA IS, UH, EDUCATIONAL
SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA'S FUTURE.
AND AGAIN. I JUST THANK YOU.
BOTH CHAIRS AGAIN. AND THE STAFF
STAFF THE STAFF. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS. MISS
KOREA. SUCH CHECK. OH THANK YOU
. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THIS
MAIKON, OKAY? UM AGAIN. I WANT
TO ECHO THE SOME OF THE COMMENTS
THAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE MADE AND
THANKING BOTH OUR CHAIR, MR TING
AND HER VICE CHAIR AS WELL AND
THE INCREDIBLE WORK OF THE AH
BUDGET COMMITTEE AND REALLY ALL
OF ALL OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN
DONE WITH RESEARCHING ALL OF THE
VARIOUS DIFFERENT PROPOSALS, AS
WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE AND ELLA AS WELL
FOLLOWED ALL OF YOUR DILIGENT,
HARD WORK. IT'S BEEN A LOT.
THERE'S BEEN MOMENTS IN
COMMITTEE WHERE I'VE HAD TO AND
JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THIS INCREDIBLE
SPACE THAT WE'RE IN, PERHAPS IN
IN THE TIME THAT I WILL SERVE
HERE IN THE LEGISLATURE, WE MAY
NOT EVER SEE ANOTHER BUDGET
QUITE LIKE THIS. AND THEN
SPEAKING TO PREVIOUS MEMBERS
THAT HAVE BEEN PART OF THIS
INCREDIBLE BODY WHERE THEY'VE
HAD TO MAKE MASSIVE CUTS. TO
SEVERAL PROGRAMS THAT ULTIMATELY
IMPACT THE 40 MILLION PEOPLE
THAT CALL CALIFORNIA HOME. THIS
IS AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY. UM
AND I'M GRATEFUL TO HAVE, UM
INPUT. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT EQUITY IN MANY OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT ARE BEING
DISCUSSED AND HOW WE ULTIMATELY
HELP THE MOST VULNERABLE THE
MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE THERE. AND
THERE ARE SEVERAL SEVERAL ISSUES
THAT I HAVE HIGH PRIORITY. BUT
REALLY WHAT WE SEE BACK HOME, UH
, AS OUR OWN HOUSE RESIDENTS ARE
HOMELESS POPULATION ARE NEED FOR
HOUSING. THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT
JUST CONTINUES TO BE FRONT AND
CENTER OF EVERY CONVERSATION.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE FUNDS
THAT ARE GOING BACK TO OUR
COMMUNITIES WHERE THE
ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD LIE, THE
LEGISLATURE DOES THE WORK
APPEAR. AND THEN THAT MONEY GOES
TO THE COUNTIES THAT GOES TO THE
CITIES. HE GOES THROUGH VARIOUS
DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND ALL OF
US WANT TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY TO KNOW WHICH
PROGRAMS WORK LET'S FUND THOSE.
LET'S FUND THE PROGRAMS THAT
WORK. AND YOU KNOW, CREATE
DIFFERENT KINDS OF SOLUTIONS IN
TERMS OF ULTIMATELY, HOW DO WE
GET PEOPLE THE MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES THAT THEY NEED? HOW DO
WE ENSURE THAT WENT IN THE
VARIOUS DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
HOMELESSNESS, WHETHER IT'S
CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS, WHETHER
IT'S MENTAL HEALTH CHALLENGE,
WHETHER IT'S SOMEONE LIVING
PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, WHETHER
IT'S SOMEONE THAT'S BEING
DISPLACED BECAUSE OF MASSIVE
GENTRIFICATION AND THE INCREASE
OF RENTS. IN VARIOUS COMMUNITIES
ACROSS THE STATE THAT WE'RE
PROVIDING THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF ASSISTANCE AND HELP
THAT IS NEEDED BUT THAT
ULTIMATELY THE COUNTIES ARE ALSO
RESPONSIBLE AND PROVIDING THE
DATA BACK TO THE STATE TO ENSURE
THAT WE HAVE INFORMATION
NECESSARY FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO
MAKE ACCURATE DECISIONS BASED ON
DATA, SO I THINK THAT'S JUST
IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL FOR US TO
ACKNOWLEDGE. I WANT TO MAYBE
ASK, UH CHRISTIAN. IF YOU'RE
ABLE TO EXPAND ON THIS IDEA
REGARDING THE GAS TAX, WHETHER
CUTTING IT WHETHER NOT EXPANDING
IT LIKE THERE'S JUST A LOT OF
CONVERSATION AROUND IT, AND I'M
WONDERING AND AGAIN COMING FROM
A SPACE OF DATA DRIVEN
INFORMATION FOR THE LEGISLATURE
TO MAKE DECISIONS AND YOU EXPAND
ON THAT, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MISS
CARILLO. UM SO WE WE'VE LOOKED A
LOT AT THE GAS TAX OF LEVEL AND
WHAT'S GOING ON WITH GAS PRICES?
AND I THINK WHAT IS TROUBLING IS
CALIFORNIA HAS A SPECIAL FORMULA
GAS CALLED CAR BOB, WHICH WE USE
, AND IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS
WHY CALIFORNIA GASOLINE MORE
EXPENSIVE THAN OTHER STATES AND
HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN OVER THE
LAST 20 YEARS. ON AVERAGE, IT'S
THE REFINERS HAVE CHARGED ABOUT
58. CENTS OF THE GAS PRICE HAS
BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THAT OF THE
LAST 20 YEARS. BUT RECENTLY
SINCE THE GAS, THE CRISIS AND
THE SUPPLY CHAIN THE PERCENTAGE
OF THE GAS PRICE THAT GOES TO
THE FINANCES INCREASE AND THE
ENERGY COMMISSIONED REPORT FROM
LAST WEEK SHOWED THAT $2 A
BRANDED GASOLINE $2.04 OF EVERY
GALLON WAS ACCRUING TO REFINERY
COSTS AND PROFITS. WHICH IS
ROUGHLY SO THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN THE HISTORIC AVERAGE AND
THAT IS LIKE FOR AN AVERAGE
TANK. $16 OF THE PAYMENT IS FOR
JUST THAT, AND SO GIVEN THAT IT
SUGGESTS THAT WHAT COULD BE
HAPPENING IS BECAUSE THERE'S A
SMALL NUMBER OF PRODUCERS WHO
HAD REFINED REFINED FUEL. THEY
COULD BE ESSENTIALLY CAPTURING
THE MARKET AND ACTING AS AN
OLIGOPOLY, WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO
SORT OF CONTROL PRICE. SO IF YOU
TRY TO REDUCE THE GASOLINE PRICE
IN THE LONG RUN, BECAUSE THERE'S
THIS MARKET CONTROL AT THE TOP,
IT COULD CAPTURE ALL OF THAT
SAVINGS. AND SO INSTEAD OF IT
BEING PASSED ON THE MOTORIST, IT
WAS JUST A CREW TO ADDITIONAL
PROFITS TO REFINERIES WHICH HAVE
THIS MARKET POWER. SO THAT'S THE
CONCERN WITH THAT PARTICULAR
APPROACH IS THAT INTENSE STEAD
OF THE MOMENT MOTORISTS GETTING
MORE MONEY. IT WOULD JUST
ESSENTIALLY MAKE THEIR FINERY IS
HAVE ADDITIONAL PROFITS BEYOND
THE LEVELS THAT THEY'VE
HISTORICALLY HAD. AND SO THAT
THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES
WITH THIS IS THAT EVEN THOUGH IT
IS AN EFFICIENT WAY TO GO,
THERE'S NO WAY IT'S VERY HARD TO
ENFORCE IT BECAUSE THE MARKET IS
NOT CONTROLLED BY THE STATE OF
HEALTH. SO JUST JUST TO BE CLEAR
AND REEMPHASIZE THE POINT, MR
GRIFFIN. THEM. FEEL ULTIMATELY,
CONSUMERS IN CALIFORNIA WILL NOT
SEE A BENEFIT. THE BENEFIT WOULD
GO TO THE CORPORATIONS. IT'S
UNCLEAR, BUT THERE'S A VERY GOOD
BUT AT LEAST THE DATA SUGGESTS
THAT THE REFINERIES IN
PARTICULAR WOULD HAVE THE
ABILITY TO RECAPTURE A LOT OF
THAT SAVINGS BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY
THERE ABLE TO SORT OF INCREASED
THEIR PRICE WITHOUT REALLY ANY
COST DRIVER REASONS TO DO IT
THERE, SAID THE PRICE. THE PRICE
LOOKS LIKE IT'S SET BASED ON
CONSUMER DEMAND ON THE DEMAND
SIDE, AS OPPOSED TO ON THE
SUPPLY SIDE, SO IF WE REDUCE THE
PRICE TO MAKE GASOLINE ARE SORT
OF THE COMPONENTS OF IT. IT
DOESN'T NECESSARILY TRANSLATE
INTO A ONE FOR ONE REDUCTION TO
THE MOTORIST. SO THAT'S THE
CONCERN AND SO PROBABLY WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN IS YOU WOULD SEE AN
IMMEDIATE REDUCTION IN GASOLINE
, BUT OVER TIME IT WOULD WHITTLE
DOWN AND THAT REFINERY PIECE
WOULD PROBABLY GET BIGGER AND
ESSENTIALLY THE GAS PRICES. IT
BACK UP. MR JONES, LAWYER. AND I
ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU AND STAFF
FOR THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE,
ESPECIALLY, UM, A BUDGET CHAIR
AND A BUDGET VICE CHAIR. UM I'M
ONE PERSON WHO SERVED AS CHAIR
FOR BOTH POLICY. AND BUDGET
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. UM THIS
IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST, UM
BUDGET WE'VE WE'VE EVER HAD, AND
I WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA, WHO
CHAIRS SUB FIVE AND JENNIFER
KIM, WHO HAS DONE EXTRAORDINARY
WORK TO ENSURE THAT WE STAYED ON
TRACK. WITH ENSURING THAT THE
PUBLIC IS SAFE. UM THERE'S TWO
THINGS THAT I JUST WANT TO JUST
KIND OF COMMENT ON AND MENTIONED
WHERE THE GOVERNOR AND THE
LEGISLATURE ARE WORKING WELL
TOGETHER. TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE
AN EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SAFETY
SYSTEM. ONE IS THE CLOSURE OF
PRISONS, WHICH STORE ECCLESIA
NEVER BEEN DONE. AND WERE
CONTINUALLY TRYING TO INSIST
THAT CDCR, UM AS THE POPULATION. REDUCES BECAUSE OF
REHABILITATION, EFFECTIVE
REHABILITATION PROGRAMS AS THOSE
NUMBERS GO DOWN AND DOWN AND
DOWN. AND WE START TO HAVE YOU
WERE IN FEWER PRISONS THAT ARE
FULL AND WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE
WE PROBABLY NEED TO CLOSE SOME
PRISON SO WE CAN SAVE MONEY TO
TAXPAYERS AND THEN REVERT THAT
MONEY. BACK INTO MORE
REHABILITATION PROGRAMS. SO WE
CONTINUE THIS DOWNWARD TREND
THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. NOT JUST
NOW, BUT IN THE FUTURE. WHAT
THAT WILL LOOK LIKE AND SO I
COMMEND THE CHAIR FOR STAYING ON
CDCR TO ENSURE THAT WE GET, UM
WITH FACILITIES MAKE THE MOST
SENSE TO CLOSE ITS BEEN ARDUOUS.
UM PROCESS. UM BUT THE COMMITTEE
HAS BEEN VERY STEADFAST IN THAT
. THEY ALSO WANT TO MENTION ONLY
BECAUSE MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE
OTHER I'LL MENTIONED, UM, ABOUT
ORGANIZED RETAIL STAFF. WHEN THE
BILL WAS DONE. UM SEVERAL YEARS
AGO WITH JERRY BROWN. AND IT WAS
MY BILL, SO FULL DISCLOSURE. AH!
THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL.
UM WHAT PASSED WITH DOING THAT?
THEY'VE DONE A SUPERB JOB AT NOT
ONLY, UM. GOING AFTER ORGANIZED
RETAIL DEATH LEADERS BUT ALSO
WORKING WITH DIVERSION PROGRAMS
. UM I COMMEND THEM BECAUSE IT
WAS SOMETHING OUT OF THE BOX AND
NEVER BEEN DONE THAT HAD BOTH
FELONIES. MISDEMEANOR AND
DIVERSION PROGRAMS ALL TOGETHER
TO CREATE THE MOST EFFECTIVE
SYSTEM. UM, THAT HAD NEVER BEEN
DONE BEFORE. UM IN FACT, THE
GOVERNOR THEN DECIDED TO PUT
MORE MONEY IN IT. AS I WAS TOLD,
UM, TUNE OF OVER $200 MILLION TO
EFFECTIVELY BROADEN THIS PROGRAM
BECAUSE IT WAS JUST A, UM IN
CERTAIN AREAS THAT IT WAS DONE.
NOW WE CAN START TO SEE FROM THE
SUCCESS OF THAT PROGRAM. WE'RE
NOT GOING TO EXPAND ITS
STATEWIDE SO THAT WE CAN GET RID
OF THE SCOURGE OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL DEATH ONCE AND FOR ALL.
AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD, NOT
ONLY TO THE TO THE UPWARD TREND
OF US, THE MORE AND MORE
SUCCESSFUL BUT NOW WE GET TO SEE
IT ON A STATEWIDE LEVEL. AND SO
THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THOSE
PROGRAMS WHERE, UM I'VE BEEN
BEATEN UP BY THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE FOLKS BECAUSE WE HAD
FELONIES IN IT, AND I'VE BEEN
BEATEN UP BY LAW ENFORCEMENT
SAID THERE'S TOO MANY DIVERSION
PROGRAMS THAT JUST TELLS ME IT'S
PROBABLY THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF
WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO BRING IT
ALL TOGETHER. THEY HAD THE MOST
EFFECTIVE PROGRAM AND SO I
COMMEND THAT WE CONTINUE TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS AND I'M
LOOKING FORWARD. TO THOSE
NUMBERS COMING OUT MOVING
FORWARD AS WE START TO LOOK AT
THE KIND ABILITY ABOUT THOSE
MEASURES, AND SO AGAIN, I WANTED
TO THANK THE PUBLIC SAFETY.
BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR STEADFASTLY
WORKING THROUGH THIS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR FUN, KIND OF QUICK
FAULT. I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON
ON SPECIFICALLY THE ISSUE OF THE
CLOSURES OF PRISONS AND
CORRECTIONAL. UH FACILITIES. IS
THERE ANYTHING IN THIS FRAMEWORK
AND THIS IS BOTH THE CHRISTIAN
AND THE POWER OF FINANCE AND THE
GOVERNMENT PROPOSAL THAT
OUTLINES THAT CRITERIA THAT
WOULD BE USED IN THE FUTURE OR
OUTLINES ANY SPECIFIC FACILITIES
THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED FOR
CLOSURE. DIRECTLY WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I JUST
ECHO THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE
THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
IS REALLY LOOKING INTO THAT. AS
TO THE CRITERIA I WILL TURN TO
SOMEBODY WHO IS ON THE LINE. AND
PERHAPS AMY JARVIS, WHO CAN
SPEAK TO ANY ANY DETAIL. I'M NOT
SURE UM, AT THE MOMENT, THANKS.
I'M GOING TO SEE IF JENNIFER KIM
MAY HAVE MORE INFORMATION THAT
WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL
IS RIGHT HERE. SO. SORRY THIS IS
JUST MEETING WITH THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE THAT THE EXISTING
PENAL CODES THAT INCLUDE SOME
CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATIONS FOR
CLOSURE INCLUDE YOU KNOW, CODE
SECTION 5003.7 AND 2067. WE DO
NOT HAVE ANY NAMED ADDITIONAL
CLOSURES AT THIS TIME, ALTHOUGH
WE DO ANTICIPATE OF POPULATION
TRENDS, CONTINUE WE IT MAY BE
POSSIBLE TO CLOSE ADDITIONAL
PRESENCE. AND JUST A QUICK
FOLLOW UP ON THAT TIMELINE OF
THAT. WHEN WOULD YOU WOULD YOU?
WHEN WOULD YOU THINK THAT WOULD
THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY. IT'S
DIFFICULT TO SAY, I THINK THERE
ARE SIGNIFICANT AND CONSIDERABLE
FACTORS. UM CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW,
WE'RE YOU KNOW, FACING A LAWSUIT
, AND I THINK IT'S HARD TO
DETERMINE YOU KNOW NOW WHAT
THOSE FUTURE CLOSURES MIGHT LOOK
LIKE, AS FAR AS THE TIMELINE.
OKAY THANK YOU. AND I DON'T KNOW
IF THEY'VE IF YOU HAD ANYTHING
TO ADD. REGISTERED? NO, OKAY.
JUST COME BACK TO FINANCE ON
THAT SAME QUESTION, SINCE I
DON'T HAVE THAT PENAL CODE
COMMITTED TO MEMORY, PERHAPS YOU
COULD TELL US WHAT'S IN THERE.
ABSOLUTELY I ONE MOMENT. THANK
YOU.
AGAIN THIS IS JUST NEED THEM IN
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE THE
CRITERIA INCLUDED IN PENAL CODE
2067 INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF
THE COST TO OPERATE THE FACILITY
OF WORKFORCE IMPACTS. POPULATION
AND GENDER SPECIFIC HOUSING
NEEDS FOR THE INCARCERATED
POPULATION, LONG TERM
INVESTMENTS THAT ARE PREVIOUSLY
BEEN MADE IN THOSE FACILITIES
FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC
SAFETY AND REHABILITATION
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROGRAMS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT. AND JUST
OVERALL DURABILITY FOR THE STATE
SOLUTION TO KIND OF MITIGATE
OVERCROWDING IS AS REQUIRED BY
VARIOUS FEDERAL LAWSUITS. THANK
YOU, MR MCCARTNEY. YEAH. THANKYOU. UM MR TING, AND I DON'T
WANT TO GO ON TOO LONG BECAUSE
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS
ON THE FLOOR IN A COUPLE OF
DAYS, BUT JUST WANTED TO NOTE
WHAT MR O'DONNELL ALREADY SAID.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT LAST
YEAR WOULD BE THE BEST BUDGET WE
EVER HAD FOR OUR SCHOOLS. AND
YOU KNOW THIS YEAR IS RIGHT
THERE, AND I DID WANT TO NOTE
THAT ARE BIG DIFFERENCE WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, AS THE
LAO NOTED. ISN'T THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY IN 98, BUT THIS ONE TIME
VERSUS ONGOING AND I THINK
THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THIS
FOR TWO REASONS. ONE UM WE DON'T
WANT TO DO ANY MORE OF THESE
MINI CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS WE GOT
RID OF THIS YEARS AGO WITH L C F
F WE'VE ALL EMBRACED IT. AND WE
HEAR FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS
UP AND DOWN CALIFORNIA THAT
THOSE DON'T WORK BECAUSE EVERY
SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS DIFFERENT
NEEDS. AND SO I KNOW THAT THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WAS LOOKING TO
APPROPRIATELY SPEND PROPER 98
MONEY. BUT BY DOING SO, YOU PUT
THEM IN THESE KIND OF MINI MINI
ONE TIME CATEGORICAL. THEY DON'T
ALL WORK. WE DID THAT LAST YEAR
DURING COVID. WE SET SO MUCH
MONEY FOR ONE TIME, BUT THE
DISTRICTS THEY'RE NOT SPENDING
IT HERE IN MY OWN DISTRICT. THEY
HAVE A FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, UH,
STRUCTURAL IMBALANCE NOT GOING
TO BE THAT WAY AFTER THIS BUDGET
, BUT IN LARGE PART BECAUSE THEY
COULDN'T USE THE ONE TIME MONEY
TO DEAL WITH THEIR NEEDS. AND UM
, BECAUSE IT'S A PEOPLE PROBLEM.
YOU CAN'T HIRE PEOPLE. FOR
ONGOING NEEDS, WHETHER WHATEVER
PROGRAMS THEY ARE WITH ONE TIME
MONEY, AND SO I THINK THAT, UM
THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE PRUDENT WAY
TO GO. WE'VE WE'VE HEARD IT LOUD
AND CLEAR. THE MONEY, WHILE
SIGNIFICANT IN THE MAY REVISE
WASN'T ENOUGH, AS AS WE ALWAYS
HEAR, IN ARE SUBJECT TO
COMMITTEES DEAL WITH REAL
INFLATIONARY COSTS, RETIREMENT
COSTS, PERSON STIRS SO THIS IS
WHAT SCHOOL DISTRICTS NEED. AND
THEN LASTLY JUST JUST HIT THE
POINT AGAIN, WHICH MR O'DONNELL
NOTED. WE HAVE RECORD RESERVES
THE LOCAL LEVEL EVER SPEND THEM
DOWN BECAUSE THEY'RE SO HIGH. WE
HAVE OUR REGULAR RESERVE. WE
HAVE THE PROP. UHTO PROP 98
RESERVE AND THAT'S WHAT THE
NUMBER BUT WE HAVE THE PROP 98
RESERVE. WE HAVE ADEQUATE MONEY
. SO WE BUILT REBUILDING THIS,
UM, SAFETY NET FOR US TO LEAD
OUR TRUE LIVES AND FUNDING OUR
PUBLIC EDUCATION. THAT'S WHY
WE'RE THAT'S WHY WE DID ALL THIS
PRUDENT BUDGETING LAST 10 YEARS
WE COULD PROPERLY FUND OUR
PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THIS WOULD BE
THE FIRST TIME IN 40 YEARS THAT
WE THAT WE GET TO. I BELIEVE THE
TOP 15 OR SO PER PUPIL FUNDING.
SO THIS IS THE ERA. WE DO HAVE
MONEY SET ASIDE. FOR POTENTIAL
DOWNFALL IN THE ECONOMY. SO
WE'RE DOING THAT AND AGAIN.
LASTLY THIS ONE TIME MONEY STUFF
, IT JUST DOESN'T WORK. IT
DOESN'T WORK. IT'S NOT A GOOD
WAY TO GIVE MONEY TO OUR SCHOOL
DISTRICT. SO THIS IS WHAT WE
HEAR A LOUD AND CLEAR AND I
THINK THAT YOU KNOW WHERE WE
FOUND THAT THE PROPER PLACE TO
FUND OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION.
ONGOING WITH L C F F, UM, TO
ALLOW MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY WITH
OUR DIVERSE, YOU KNOW, 10,000
SCHOOLS THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA.
SO THAT'S FOR K. 12 TO MAKE OUR
POINT THERE FOR OUR YOUNGEST
LEARNERS AND EARLY AD. WE KNOW
THAT EARLY EDUCATION AND
CHILDCARE IS THE ISSUE THAT YOU
KNOW BECAME FRONT AND CENTER
DURING COVID AND, UM. THE
PANDEMIC, AND WE INCREASED SLOTS
WE FUNDED ARE UNIVERSAL TK
PROGRAM, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW,
GOING TO BE A GAME CHANGER FOR
GENERATIONS FOR FAMILIES AND OUR
YOUNGEST LEARNERS, BUT THE ONE
THING THAT WE DIDN'T DO IS
PROPERLY. PAY OUR PROVIDERS AND
CHILDCARE PROFESSIONALS TO ALLOW
THOSE PROGRAMS TO WORK. SO BY
FINISHING RATE REFORM WILL ALLOW
THOSE OTHER PIECES TO ACTUALLY
WORK. BECAUSE WE DID ALL THIS
OTHER STUFF, BUT IT'S NOT QUITE
WORKING BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PAYING
THE RIGHT REIMBURSEMENT
STRUCTURE LEVEL, OR E C. E SO
THAT IS A KEY PIECE OF THE
PUZZLE. AND THEN UM, LASTLY TO
THE FINAL END OF OUR HIGHER
EDUCATION OF OUR EDUCATION
SYSTEM AND HIGHER BID, WHICH MR
MEDINA AND I ARE WORKING IN IS
THE CHAIR OF THE HIRING
COMMITTEE. AND BEING ON SUB TWO
IS, UM YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE WE
PROPERLY FUND THE UC AND CSU
WITH THESE COPS WITH THIS
COMPACT AGREEMENT, WHICH IS KEY
BUT ISN'T PROPERLY GET US TO
WHERE WE NEED TO GO. FOR EXAMPLE
AT CSU. THEY CAN'T ADEQUATELY
PAY THEIR COMPENSATION. UM
CONTRACTS AND MAKE SURE THE
OTHER BARGAINING UNITS ARE ABLE
TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE CARE
ADEQUATELY OF THEIR WORKFORCE
NEEDS. AND THEN FOR C AS WELL
TO DEAL WITH OUR ENROLLMENT
NEEDS AS ELL FOR THE RECORD
NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE
APPLYING. FRANKLY UNFORTUNATELY
, NOT GETTING INTO OUR AMAZING
PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITY WITH
NINE UNDERGRADUATE UC CAMPUSES
SO THESE TWO THINGS ARE A PIECE
OF THAT PIECE OF THAT FOR
ONGOING C MONEY IN THE LAST
THING IS OUR FINANCIAL AID
PACKAGE. WE DO KNOW THAT YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE THIS AMAZING
CALDERON PROGRAM THAT DOESN'T
COVER THE TRUE COST OF
ATTENDANCE. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING
TO REVAMP THE FINANCIAL AID WITH
THE MIDDLE CLASS SCHOLARSHIP AND
INCREASING GRANT ACCESS. UM. AND
I KNOW THAT THE YOU NEVER THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA VIA THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, HAS SAID
THAT THEY'RE EXCITED ABOUT
HAVING DEBT FREE COLLEGE ONE DAY
AT THE U. C WHICH WE'RE VERY
EXCITED ABOUT THAT AS WELL. BUT
I'LL NOTE THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE
DEBT FREE COLLEGE IN THE FUTURE
UNLESS YOU FUND FINANCIAL AID
EXPANSION THROUGH THE MIDDLE
CLASS SCHOLARSHIP, AND CAL
GRANT. REFORM WHICH WE'RE
PUSHING THROUGH THIS YEAR. SO
THOSE ARE A PIECE OF YOUR PUZZLE
THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE
THINK THAT WE TIE THESE
ALTOGETHER CERTAINLY NICELY. AND
LOOK FORWARD TO VOTING ON THIS
IN A COUPLE OF DAYS AND HOPE
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION UM WILL
BE IN ACCORD WITH US AND THE
NUMBER OF COMING DAYS AS WELL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR LEE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
INTERESTS AND I THINK THE HARD
WORK OF THE BUDGET STAFF AS WELL
AND I JUST WANTED TO EQUIP
BRIEFLY ALIGNED MY COMMENTS WITH
SLR CARILLO, WHO TALKED BRIEFLY
ABOUT FOSSIL FUEL CORPORATIONS
REALLY REAPING IN PROFITS RIGHT
NOW OFF THE BACKS OF WORKING
CLASS CALIFORNIANS. YOU KNOW,
WHILE WE CANNOT CONTROL THE
PRICE OF GASOLINE RIGHT NOW,
UNLESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRICE
CONTROLS WE GOT WE CAN'T CONTROL
RIGHT NOW IS EVIDENT IN THIS
BUDGET IS DIRECT ECONOMIC
STIMULUS TO WORKING CLASS
CALIFORNIANS, AND I THINK THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT MUST SOCIAL.
MY CONSTITUENTS ARE APPRECIATIVE
AND WANT TO SEE AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE. THIS IS MUCH MORE
EQUITABLE PROPOSAL THAN WITH THE
MEASURE SHIP WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED, WHICH
WAS FRANKLY BASED ON CAR
OWNERSHIP NUMBER OF CARS OWNED,
YOU'D GET MORE MONEY OUT WHICH
IS VERY INEQUITABLE. BUT NOW WE
CAN BE PROVIDING FOR A FAMILY OF
FOUR COULD POTENTIALLY BE $800
PLUS. FOR FOLKS TO SPEND ON
GUESTS ON GROCERIES ON BUS ON
THE METRO. WHATEVER IT IS THEY
NEED AND HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY.
IS WILLIAM REALLY PRACTICAL
RIGHT NOW AND ESPECIALLY GIVEN
THE PRESIDENT? WE SEND THESE
LAST TWO YEARS WHERE WE HAVE
DIRECT ECONOMIC RELIEF FOR
FAMILIES IN CALIFORNIA. THIS IS
REALLY IN LINE WITH THAT. I
REALLY WANT TO COMMEND THIS
PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE HAVING, AND
I THINK IT WILL MAKE A BIG
IMPACT ON WORLD CLASS
CALIFORNIANS AND WILL CONTINUE
TO OBVIOUSLY KEEP PROVIDING
DIRECT RELIEF. AND, UH, YEAH, I
JUST WANNA SAY THAT. THANK YOU.
OTHER COMMENTS. QUESTIONS. OKAY
I WANT TO GO BACK TO L A ON THE
WHOLE, UM, JUST REGARDING THE
UNEMPLOYMENT. UM UH, TAX
PROPOSALS. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
DIRECTED ACQUITTED GABE OR
WHETHER I THINK I THINK WE HAVE
A NUMBER OF, UH JUST A NUMBER OF
QUESTIONS. WHAT WHAT IS? UM IF
WE DID THE $3 BILLION
ADMINISTRATION PROPOSAL, WHERE
YOU PUT MONEY INTO THE FUND WHAT
TYPE OF IMMEDIATE RELIEF FOR
BUSINESSES WOULD BE GIVEN. YES
MR TING GAY PADDOCK LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST. THE UH THAT'S THE ISSUE
THAT WE POINTED OUT THAT IT
WOULD PAY DOWN THE IT WOULD
LOWER THE PRINCIPAL OUTSTANDING.
BUT THE TAX RATE ON THE
EMPLOYERS WOULD STILL GO UP AT
THE AT THE END, BECAUSE WE STILL
OWE THE DEBT TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. SO IN THE IMMEDIATE
TERM, THERE WOULD NOT BE AH,
SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT TO THE
EMPLOYERS. IT MAY SHORTEN THE
TIME OVER WHICH THE YEARS OVER
WHICH IT TAKES US TO PAY DOWN
THAT DEBT, SO THERE MIGHT BE
SOME BENEFIT AT THE END OF THE
AH, TIME PERIOD OVER WHICH WE'RE
PAYING THE DEBT, BUT IN THE NEAR
TERM IF THE CONCERN IS TRYING TO
PROVIDE RELIEF IN THE NEAR TERM
THAT THAT APPROACH, UH, WOULD
NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN
IMMEDIATE BENEFITS IS NO, I
DON'T THINK THAT'S THE REASON. I
THINK THE REASON WAS TO ENSURE
THAT THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN
THE STATE MAY, UM GET SOME
WINDFALL RELIEF. I DON'T THINK
THERE WAS ABOUT HELPING
IMMEDIATE SO. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE
BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IN
FACT, IF WE DID PUT MONEY INTO
THAT FUND IT WOULD. ACTUALLY
THERE WOULD BE NO RELIEF AND ON
TOP OF IT. THIS IS IT WOULD SEE
THEIR TAX RATES GO UP. IN THE
IMMEDIATE TERM IN THE IMMEDIATE
TERM OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THE BUDGET HERE. I DON'T HAVE MY
CRYSTAL BALL. JUST TALK ABOUT
THREE YEARS FROM NOW, BUT THAT'S
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. UM AND
THEN REGARDING THE LEGISLATURES
PROPOSAL. COULD YOU TALK ABOUT
THE IMMEDIATE RELIEF GOING INTO
THIS BUDGET YEAR FOR BUSINESSES
THAT WOULD BE FACING ANY
PARTICULAR INCREASE. YES IN OUR
OUR VIEWS THAT THAT IS A
DIFFERENT APPROACH. IT'S
DESIGNED AROUND PROVIDING A TAX
CREDIT TO THE BENEFIT TO THE
BUSINESSES AD EMPLOYERS IN THE
RIGHT AWAY. AS YOU SAY. I WOULD
LIKE TO OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY IF
MY COLLEAGUE BRIAN EULER WOULD
LIKE TO EXPAND ON THAT PERFECT.
YEAH I MEAN, I THINK YOU COVERED
WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE
DETAIL. AS WE UNDERSTAND IT IS
THE PLAN WOULD PROVE WOULD
ESSENTIALLY COVER ALL OF THE
INCREASED, UH, FEDERAL TAXES, UM
FOR THE 1ST 250 EMPLOYEES FOR
ALL BUSINESSES IN THE STATE, SO
IT'S YOU KNOW, MAYBE A LITTLE
MORE TARGETED TO PROVIDING UH,
PROPORTIONATELY LARGER BENEFIT
TO SMALLER EMPLOYERS. JUST SO
JUST SO I UNDERSTAND MY
UNDERSTANDING IS WITH THE BUDGET
PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE
, THERE WILL BE RELIEF OR EVERY
EMPLOYER FOR UP TO THE 1ST 250
EMPLOYEES. IS THAT CORRECT?
THAT'S RIGHT VERSUS IF WE PUT
THREE BILLION OR FIVE BILLION,
OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER WAS INTO
THE UNEMPLOYMENT. TAX FUND. IF
I'M AN EMPLOYER AND I HAVE 250
EMPLOYEES, WHAT WOULD I EXPECT?
TO HAPPEN WITH MY UNEMPLOYMENT
TEXT. THEY'RE MAKING THE $3
BILLION DEPOSIT INTO THE FUND
WOULDN'T HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
TAX RATES AS GAY MENTIONED FOR
AT LEAST SEVERAL YEARS. UM WE
CAN'T EVEN REALLY ACTUALLY SAVED
FOR SURE WHEN, WHEN AND IF.
EMPLOYERS WOULD SEE ANY SORT OF
TAX RELIEF FROM PUTTING THAT
3,000,000,003 BILLION INTO THE
FUND. GOT US IF I'M IF I'M A
BUSINESS AND I'M LOOKING FOR, UM
ASSISTANCE, IN FACT, THAT
PUTTING THAT MONEY INTO THAT
FUND UH I WOULD JUST MY WOULD
HAVE NO WAY. I WOULDN'T SEE ANY
DIFFERENCE FROM THAT. THAT'S
THAT'S CORRECT. UH AND THEN IN
TERMS OF LIABILITY, WHAT IS OUR
LIABILITY WITH THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT'S BECAUSE
THAT'S THAT'S WHO WE OWE THE
MONEY, TOO, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT
. I THINK IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S
CURRENTLY ABOUT $17 BILLION, AND
IS THERE AN INTEREST THAT WE GET
CHARGED OR IS THERE A FEE? YES,
WE'RE CHARGED ANNUAL INTERESTS,
UM, WHICH IS PAID OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND. INDEED. YOU KNOW
WHAT THAT INTEREST IS, OR UH,
ROUGHLY THE INTEREST RATE MOVES
AROUND. UM I'M SORRY. I DON'T
HAVE THE NUMBER FINANCE. MAYBE.
WELL, MAYBE ABLE TO YES, WE YES
. UH, MR CHAIR WE'VE INCLUDED
ABOUT 400 MILLION IN BUDGET HERE
. I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT FIGURES
ABOUT 400 MILLION FOR BUDGET
YEAR. FOREIGN INTERESTS IN THE
UI FUND. THANK YOU. AND THIS IS
JUST VERY TYPICAL FOR HOW THE U.
S U I FUND WORKS WHEN THE LAST
GREAT RECESSION THIS IS WHAT WE
DO AS WELL. SO THIS IS THIS IS
PAR FOR THE COURSE. IN TERMS OF
WHEN WE HAVE A RECESSION, AND WE
HAVE TO PAY THIS OUT. THIS IS
HOW THE FUNDING STRUCTURE THAT
IS CORRECT. IT IS JUST OBVIOUSLY
THIS HAS BEEN SO SIGNIFICANT
THAT THE NUMBER OF PRETENDING
THAT IS MUCH HIGHER. YEAH, WELL,
I THINK WE EVERY RECESSION WITH
THE LAST RECESSION WE HAD WAS
THE BIGGEST RECESSION SINCE THE
GREAT DEPRESSION. SO I THINK
THEY'RE ALL SIGNIFICANT, UH,
GOING BACK TO MR MUELLER. UM D
CAN YOU TELL ME HAS HAS DMV. NOT
THAT I'M AWARE OF. NO AND THEN,
UM, DO YOU KNOW? IS THERE A
DEBIT CARD VENDOR THE STATE GOES
TO THAT IS SORT OF READY TO.
READY TO GO OR WILL WE HAVE TO
DO AN RFP AND QUALIFICATIONS AND
FIND A VENDOR? UH, YOU KNOW, I
DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT OFTEN. I
THINK I MIGHT DIFFER THAT ONE TO
THE ADMINISTRATION TO SEE IF
THEY CAN PROVIDE SOME DETAILS ON
THEIR PROPOSAL. SOUNDS GOOD.
WE'RE GONNA MISS LEE. GAS AIR
KELLY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE, AND AS WE WERE
RESEARCHING FOR THAT PROPOSAL,
UM WE LOOKED BACK TO SOME OF THE
RELATIONSHIPS WE'VE HAD DURING
THE PANDEMIC IN REGARDS TO DEBIT
CARD COMPANIES AND HAVE BEEN, UM
, REACHING OUT TO VARIOUS DEBIT
CARD CARD COMPANIES THAT DO THIS
TYPE OF WORK. THERE ARE ACTUALLY
VERY FEW, BUT THE IDEA IS TO
YOUR RAPID PROCUREMENT IN
REGARDS TO, UM, SENDING OUT THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE NEEDS
FOR THIS PROGRAM TO HAVE THOSE
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE VENDORS SO
THAT WE CAN MORE QUICKLY. UM UH
COME UP WITH A CONTRACT SO THAT
WE CAN START WORK IMMEDIATELY.
OKAY SO THERE IS NO SET VENDOR
WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A
PROCESS RFP FUND FIND SOMEONE
THAT IS CORRECT. AND AT AT THIS
POINT, THE PROPOSAL OF THE
ADMINISTRATION WAS TO DO SOME OF
THE FRONT WORK NOW. AND SO THAT
WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HIT THE
GROUND RUNNING LATER AND
POTENTIALLY WITH NOT AN NCB.
HMM. WHO'S ISSUING OUR DEPUTY
CARDS FOR EDDIE NOW? UM I WOULD
HAVE TO TURN TO SOMEONE. MY
COLLEAGUES FOR CONFIRMATION ON
WHO IS WORKING WITH THE D D AT
THIS POINT, UM, CHRIS COOK. ARE
YOU AWARE OF WHO THE VENDOR IS
FOR A D? D. YES CHRIS COOK WITH
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I BELIEVE
IT'S B OF A WHO IS THE VENDOR
FOR THE DEBIT CARDS, SO BE A
VERY WHO I KNOW HAS, UM HIGHLY
PUBLICIZED, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S
VERY IT'S VERY WELL PUBLICIZED
OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, ALL THE
VARIOUS ISSUES THAT WE HAD WITH-DEBIT CARDS. MY UNDERSTANDING
WAS THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET
OUT OF DOING THAT THE DEBIT
CARDS FOR ED. SO I GUESS HOW HOW
EASY WOULD IT BE TO FIND?
SOMEONE WHO WOULD DO THE DEPUTY
CARDS BUT THEN ALSO BE ABLE TO
EXECUTE THE DEVIL. WITHOUT
PUBLICIZED ISSUES THAT WE HAD
WITH YES, AND WE WOULD NOT WANT
TO ENTER INTO A RELATIONSHIP
WHERE THERE WERE QUESTIONABLE.
UM UH OR WHERE THE VENDOR WOULD
WOULD NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN
IN A CONTRACT WITH THE STATE. WE
PARTICIPATED IN A CONTRACT WITH
BLACKHAWK FOR OUR BACKS FOR THE
WIN, UM, AND THEY ALSO ISSUED
DEBIT CARDS AGAIN. AS I SAID,
THERE'S A HANDFUL OF VENDORS
THAT DO THIS WORK. WE HAVE BEEN
SPEAKING WITH ALL OF THEM.
FISERV IS ONE OF THEM. IF I IS
ANOTHER UM, AND JUST AS A AS
EXAMPLES WE HAVE BEEN TALKING
WITH MULTIPLE, UM, TO FIND THE
BEST POTENTIAL, UM,
RELATIONSHIP. NO THANK YOU. I
GUESS I GUESS GET GIVEN THE
URGENCY AND I THINK YOU'VE HEARD
FROM THE COMMITTEE. WE'RE ALL
FEELING THE URGENCY TO GET THE
MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO REALLY NEED
HELP. UH IS THERE A REASON WHY
WE WANT TO TRY? WOW NEW VENDOR
TRY A NEW PROCESS RATHER THAN UM
, GO WITH A PROCESS THAT WE'VE
DONE BEFORE. SUCH AS F T B. I
BELIEVE WE ALL F DB KNOWS HOW TO
ISSUE CHECKS AND REFUNDS. AND
FOR THE MOST PART THAT SEEMS
LIKE IT GOES RATHER SMOOTHLY.
SURE TWO POINTS THERE. ONE I
THINK THE PROPOSAL FOR THE GMV
IS REALLY THE GOAL IS TO GET TO
AS MANY CALIFORNIANS AS POSSIBLE
, AND HENCE THE PROPOSAL TO USE
OUR REGISTERED CAR. OWNERS
AGREED THAT THIS IS THE ORDER OF
MAGNITUDE LARGER THAN WHAT WE'VE
DONE BEFORE, BUT WE HAVE DONE WE
HAVE HAD CONTRACTS SIMILAR. AS I
SAID, THE FACTS TO WIN. UM ONE
THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THE
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR UM, THE
FT GOING THROUGH F T B AND THE
TAX SYSTEM, AS IT CURRENTLY
STANDS WOULD TAKE LONGER THAN
THE GOLDEN STATE STIMULUS
BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE
PER DEPENDENT THAT ADDITIONAL
$200 PER DEPENDENT. WOOD IS
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS
REQUIRED IN THE GSS ONE OR THE
GSS TWO, WHICH WAS A SET AMOUNT
FOR ANY ANY NUMBER OF
DEPENDENTS, REGARDLESS OF 123 OR
FOUR. THERE WAS A SET AMOUNT, SO
THIS DIFFERENCE WOULD CREATE
PROGRAMMING. UM ISSUES THAT WILL
TAKE AT LEAST TWO MONTHS. OUR
UNDERSTANDING TO REPROGRAM AND
SO THAT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE AS
IT IS, WOULD TAKE LONGER FOR, UM
F T B TO BASICALLY CUT THE
CHECK. SO THAT THAT IS JUST 11
POINT IN REGARDS TO THE CURRENT
STRUCTURE. OKAY. I GUESS I'VE.
I'M SKEPTICAL THAT YOU COULD
EVEN CHOOSE A RELIABLE VENDOR
FOR DEBIT CARDS AND UNDER TWO
MONTHS, BUT THAT'S FORGIVE ME
FOR BEING SKEPTICAL. UM. SO I
THINK FOR US, UH, I THINK OUR
PROPOSAL WAS REALLY RELYING ON
YOU KNOW, AGENCY AND GOVERNMENT
THAT HAS A TRACK RECORD OF BEING
ABLE TO ISSUE CHECKS HAS A
DIRECT FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP
ALREADY WITH EVERY TAXPAYER HERE
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND
WE I THINK WE AGREE THAT WE
DEFINITELY WANT TO BE ABLE TO
GET THE MONEY OUT AS FAST AS
POSSIBLE, BUT ALSO WANT TO DO IT
IN A WAY THAT'S SAFE. IN
RELIABLE, AND I THINK A NUMBER
OF US HAVING SAT THROUGH A
NUMBER OF VERY PAINFUL. OF FOUR
HEARINGS AND SEEING OUR CHAIR OR
SUB CHAIR NOD, UM WITH, UM YOU
KNOW, BANCAMERICA. I THINK WE
ARE VERY RETICENT TO NOT HAVE
LEARNED FROM THE PAST TWO YEARS
AND WALK DOWN THAT PATH. I'M
JUST LOOKING FOR OTHER COMMITTEE
MET WITH MR MISS KOREA. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO
ECHO THOSE COMMENTS AND REALLY
JUST FLAG AND HIGH ALERT. UM,
ISSUES OF FRAUD. SO WITH THE D D
AND WOULD BE AVAI AND WITH THE
DEBIT CARDS, WE SAW A LOT OF
FRAUD. UH IF THERE'S YOU KNOW,
THERE'S NO THERE'S NOTHING THAT
STOPS ANYBODY FROM GOING INTO
SOMEONE'S MAILBOX AND YOU KNOW,
TAKING THOSE DEBIT CARDS AND YOU
KNOW, WE SAW THAT HAPPEN
THROUGHOUT THE PAST TWO YEARS,
SO I JUST WANT TO RAISE THAT
CONCERN. IN ADDITION, UH,
WHOEVER THE VENDOR AND SABINE, I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S
TRANSPARENCY AND HOW THAT VENDOR
IS SELECTED WHETHER IT WOULD BE
A BIDDING PROCESS WHETHER IT'S
JUST SOMEONE MAKING A DECISION
AS TO WHOM IT'S GOING TO BE, SO
THAT WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES IN
THIS SITUATION. YOU KNOW, A YEAR
FROM NOW, WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING,
YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT HAPPENED OR
HOW DID IT HAPPEN? THAT'S
HAPPENED FAR TOO OFTEN IN THE
LAST TWO YEARS, AND SO I JUST MY
CONCERN IS THAT THE LEGISLATURE
ULTIMATELY IS HELD RESPONSIBLE
IN HAVING HEARINGS AS TO WHAT
HAPPENS WHAT HAPPENED TO FUNDS
OR WHAT HAPPENED TO A PARTICULAR
CONTRACT WITH VERY LITTLE
DETAILS AFFORDED TO THE
LEGISLATURE, AND I THINK THAT'S
AN IMPORTANT UM POINT TO MAKE SO
THAT WE DON'T MAKE MISTAKES OF
THE PAST. YES, AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CRILLO JUST
WANT TO ECHO THAT. THE
ADMINISTRATION. UM IT'S HARDLY
AGREES IN REGARDS TO WANTING TO
STOP FRAUD AT THE BEGINNING, AND
JUST TO POINT OUT THAT THE FROM
A LOT OF THE FRAUD FROM THE
PROGRAM. WAS IN THE P U A
PROGRAM WHICH WAS A FEDERAL
PROGRAM THAT ALLOWED FOR, UM AH
, LESS UPFRONT CHECKS AND IN
ORDER TO GET THINGS OUT QUICKLY
, WE MOVED QUICKLY, AND
OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF LESSONS
LEARNED. A LOT OF LESSONS
LEARNED THAT WE WANT TO
IMPLEMENT IN ANY NEW PROGRAM
GOING FORWARD. THAT INCLUDES
DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THE
VENDORS. THERE'S A LOT OF FRAUD
DETECTION, UM UP APPLICATION
THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THE FRONT
NOW VERSUS DEALING WITH THINGS
ON THE BACK END, AND WE WILL DO
OUR DUE DILIGENCE IN REGARDS TO
ANY VENDOR WE BRING ON BOARD AND
TO ENSURE THAT THE DETECTION THE
CHIPS THE SECURITY THAT IS
REQUIRED TO GET THESE CARDS OUT,
UM SAFELY INTO THE RIGHT PERSONS
HAPPEN. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
I'M NOT SINGING IN. WE'RE GOING
TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYBODY
WISHING TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT
AND WELCOME TO STEP UP TO THE
POLL TO MICROPHONE? UH, YOU WILL
HAVE ONE MINUTE. OF SORRY ABOUT
THAT.
MR IS IT ON? OKAY SORRY. YOU
HAVE TO TALK CLOSER. THAT'S WHY
PEOPLE HAD A HARD TIME HEARING.
SORRY MR CHAIR CHRISTMAS HALEY
ON BEHALF OF THE HOLLYWOOD
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. FIRST WE
SUPPORT THE GRANTS FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES FOR BOTH. UM COVID
RELIEF AS WELL AS PAID SICK
LEAVE, HOWEVER, ON THE PROPOSAL
WHICH WE DO SUPPORT IN TERMS OF
THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, THE
SP 1 54 PROVIDES RELIEF FOR THE
JANUARY 2023 TAX INCREASE UNDER
FEDERAL LAW TO PAY BACK WHICH
THE EMPLOYER IS OBLIGATED. THE
STATE OF COURSE, PIG IS THE
INTEREST. I THOUGHT IT WAS
AROUND $475 MILLION GIVE OR TAKE
IN THIS FIRST YEAR. WE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE THIS PROPOSAL,
MARRIED WITH THAT WHICH THE
GOVERNOR PROPOSES, WHICH IS THE
THREE BILLION TO PAY THE
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND DEBT
TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THAT
NOW STANDS AT 17 BILLION PLUS,
WHILE IT DOESN'T PROVIDE
IMMEDIATE RELIEF IT DOES IN THE
LONG TERM, BOASTED BOTH IN
REDUCED INTEREST PAYMENTS FOR
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BUT
ALSO FOR THE EMPLOYER COMMUNITY.
WHILE THEFIRST TAX INCREASES
WILL COST ABOUT $350 MILLION TO
THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IN THE 8
TO 10 YEAR RANGE, IT WILL BE IN
THE 2.5 OR $3 BILLION RANGE, SO
WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE THOSE TWO
PROPOSALS MARRIED, MR CHAIR.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON.
SHARON MEMBERS REBECCA MARCUS ON
BEHALF OF LEADING AGE CALIFORNIA
AND LIFE STEPS AND STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE $12.5 MILLION
CONTAINED IN SP 1 54 TO FUND THE
RN COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE WORKER
PILOT. AND SENIOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
AGING ON BEHALF OF THE BRADY
CAMPAIGN AND SUPPORT OF THE $40
MILLION IN SP 1 54 TO SUPPORT
COURT ORDERED FIREARM WOULD LINK
RELINQUISHMENT EFFORTS AND
FINALLY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CERTIFIED ORGANIC
FARMERS. AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST
CALIFORNIA CLIMATE AND
AGRICULTURE NETWORK AND CARBON
CYCLE INSTITUTE AND STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE $5 MILLION FOR
THE ORGANIC TRANSITION PROGRAM
PROPOSED TO BE AT CBS A THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DEBORAH
BAUTISTA ZAVALA ON BEHALF OF LOS
ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
. WHILE WE SUPPORT THE
LEGISLATURE'S PROPOSAL THAT
INCREASES THE L. C FF BASED BY
16% WE URGE THAT YOU DO NOT
CHANGE THE FUNDING FORMULA BY
MODIFYING THE POVERTY LEVEL. AND
LASTLY, WE'RE THE LEGISLATURE TO
KEEP THE ONE TIME COVID 80, A
RELIEF THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE
GOVERNOR'S MAY REVISE. THANK
YOU. QUÊ FOR THOSE OF YOU. THAT
ALREADY HURT ME. MY NAME IS
BECKY DUFFY I'M, THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR FOR THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION FOR ADULT DAY
SERVICES AGAIN. I WANT TO THANK
EMPHATICALLY EVERYBODY ON THE
COMMITTEE AND MR TING WE'RE
SUPPORTING OUR BRIDGE TO
RECOVERY. ONE TIME ASKED FOR
$61.4 MILLION FOR COVID RELIEF.
THE PROPOSAL MIRRORS THE MASTER
PLAN FOR AGING. AND AS YOU KNOW
, THE FUNDING IS IMPERATIVE FOR
THESE FRAIL ADULTS AND DISABLED
CLIENTS TO RETURN TO THE SAFE
TRANSITION BACK TO CENTER. IT IS
HELPFUL TO KEEP CALIFORNIA'S
MOST VULNERABLE PER POPULATION
SAFE AND OUT OF NURSING HOMES.
IF THIS FUNDING IS NOT APPROVED
, OBVIOUSLY, CENTERS WON'T HAVE
THE RESOURCES THEY NEED TO STAY
OPEN. SO AGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE
OVER $40,000 40,000 CALIFORNIANS
RELYING ON THESE SERVICES. THANK
YOU. AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
JANICE O'MALLEY WITH THE
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE
COUNTY MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES.
CALIFORNIA WANTED TO EXPRESS OUR
APPRECIATION FOR THE COMMITTEE,
UM AND ALSO FOR THE COMMITTEE
STAFF ON DEVELOPING THIS BUDGET.
WE APPRECIATE THE INCLUSION IN
THE BUDGET FUNDING FOR THE
WORKER TAX FAIRNESS CREDIT A TAX
CREDIT, WHICH WILL TURN UNION
DUES FROM TAX DEDUCTIONS TO TAX
CREDITS. UM AND WE ALSO LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
LEGISLATURE ON UPDATING LANGUAGE
REQUIRING AH PUBLIC EMPLOYERS TO
HOLD IN PERSON ORIENTATIONS TO
NEW EMPLOYEES, ALL UBLIC SECTOR
WORKERS, INCLUDING IN HOME
SUPPORT SERVICE PROVIDERS.
ANOTHER NOTE OF THINGS TO OUR
BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR THE
INCLUSION OF THE $933 MILLION
INVESTMENT IN THE RETENTION OF
THE HOSPITAL. A NURSING HOME
WORKFORCE. WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE
THE TOLL THAT THE PANDEMIC HAS
HAD ON THIS WORKFORCE, AND THIS
IS ONE OF MANY STEPS WE CAN TAKE
TO HELP THEM. YET I WANTED TO
DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO ANOTHER
WORKFORCE NOT COVERED UNDER THE
HEALTH CARE WORKER RETENTION PAY
, WHICH ARE THE MEDICAL
PROFESSIONALS AT THE DEPARTMENT
OF STATE HOSPITALS AND THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS. WITH A 50% VACANCY
RATE, WE ARE IN A STATE OF
CRISIS. THESE PUBLIC SERVANTS
CARE PROVIDE CARE TO THOSE WITH
THE GREATEST NEED FOR MENTAL
HEALTH CARE SERVICES. WE URGE
YOU TO PROVIDE A $16 MILLION.01
TIME RETENTION BONUS, THE STATE
CIVIL SERVICE PSYCHIATRISTS AND
BARGAINING UNITS 16 AND 19.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR MEMBERS. MEGAN SUPERS
ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA HEALTH
PLUS ADVOCATES, THE COMMUNITY
CLINICS AND HEALTH CENTERS ARE
VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE
LEGISLATURE, INCLUDING THE $51
MILLION TO EXISTING H CHI
WORKFORCE PROGRAMS, INCLUDING
SCHOLARSHIP AND LOAN REPAYMENT
AND RESIDENCY SLOTS FOR TEACHING
HEALTH CENTERS. WE WOULD URGE
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
ADMINISTRATION TO INCLUDE
THEY'RE $50 MILLION AUGMENTATION
TO THE 3 40 B NON HOSPITAL BASED
CLINICS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT
THAT THE PHARMACY TRANSITION HAS
HAD ON COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS
AS OF JANUARY ONE OF THIS YEAR.
WE APPRECIATE THE LEGISLATURE
PUSHING ON THIS. AND WHAT? UM,
URGED THE INCLUSION IN THE FINAL
BUDGET ACT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT WE DO
HAVE A HARD STOP AT ONE PM, SO
IF EVERYONE COULD BE AS FAST AS
POSSIBLE, ALSO, WE HAVE A LOT OF
PEOPLE ON THE PHONE. SO IF
ANYBODY IS ON THE PHONE, AND
THEY'VE HEARD THEIR COMMENTS
MADE OF THEY COULD JUST PERHAPS
EMAIL THE COMMUNITY OF MAKING
THEIR COMMENT. WE DO HAVE TO
STOP AT ONE. THANK YOU.
WONDERFUL. NO PRESSURE ANDREAS
AND MIGUEL ON BEHALF OF PLANNED
PARENT AFFILIATES OF CALIFORNIA.
WE ARE ONE OF THE MEMBERS AND
DRIVING THE AGENDA WITH THE
CALIFORNIA FAB COUNCIL WANT TO
JUST EXPRESS APPRECIATION TO THE
COMMITTEE? MEMBERS CHAIR STAFF
AND ALL INVOLVED FOR THE
ADDITIONS THAT WERE PLACED INTO
THE LEGISLATURE'S VERSION OF THE
BUDGET. AND THEREFORE THESE BILL
BUT BUDGET BILL VEHICLES
SPECIFICALLY THE FIVE ITEMS THAT
HAVE BEEN ADDED THAT ARE
CRITICAL FOR CALIFORNIA'S
PREPARING OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN
IN LIGHT OF THE ELIMINATION OF
REVIEW AID IN THIS CONTEXT THAT
WE'RE LIVING WITH TODAY. AND SO
THOSE ITEMS ARE THE CREATION OF
THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND EQUITY
PAYMENT. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICE
CORPS, TREATING AN ABORTION
PRACTICAL SUPPORT FUND
SUPPORTING THE L, A COUNTY SAFE
HAVEN PILOT AND REALLOCATING ONE
MILLION FOR CERTIFIED NURSE
MIDWIFE TRAINING. AND SO WE LOOK
FORWARD TO FOLLOWING UP ON SOME
OF THE DETAILS AND LANGUAGE AND,
UM, REALLY URGE THE
ADMINISTRATION'S COOPERATION
WITH, UM, SUPPORTING THESE ITEMS
AS WELL. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.
GOOD AFTERNOON. AFTERNOON CHAIR
FONG THE CHURCH TEAM, EXCUSE ME,
VICE CHAIR FONG AND MEMBERS
DANIEL CHERYL ON BEHALF OF S E I
U LOCAL 1000 JUST WANTED TO ECHO
SOME OF THE COMMENTS MADE
EARLIER. BY AFTERNOON,
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT OF THE TAX
WORKERS TAX FAIRNESS CREDIT WITH
THE 200 MILLION IN SUPPORT OF
UPDATING NEW EMPLOYEE
ORIENTATION LANGUAGE THROUGH THE
TRAILER BILL AND FINALLY JUST RE
EMPHASIZE THE NEED FOR STATE
WORKERS THAT CDCR AND STATE
HOSPITALS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE
RETENTION BONUS PAY PROGRAM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR TING LORRI
CAMERA WITH THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN, BUSINESS
OWNERS, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER AND
SMALL BUSINESS. CALIFORNIA THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU
HAVE DONE FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTERS IN THE
WOMEN'S WOMEN'S BUSINESS CENTERS
. WE GREATLY APPRECIATE A SMALL
BUSINESSES, THE ASSISTANCE THAT
THEY OFFER FOR THE STARTUP
COMPANIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY
NAME IS CODY VAN FELDON. I AM A
FORMER FOSTER YOUTH ADVOCATE FOR
JOHN BURTON. ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH
. I'M IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
PROPOSAL TO KEEP MOMENTUM ON
ENDING CHILD POVERTY AND
EXPANDING TAX CREDITS FOR LOW
INCOME CALIFORNIANS. YOU CLAIM
THOSE CREDITS AND FOUR I WANT TO
THANK THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE FOR INCLUDING THE
FOLLOWING ITEMS IN THE BUDGET IN
$1000 FOSTER YOUTH TAX CREDIT
INVESTING IN HOPE TRUST FUNDS
ACCOUNTS FOR LOW INCOME
CHILDREN. WHO HAVE LOST PARENTS
OR CAREGIVERS TO COVID 19 AND
LONG TERM FOSTER CARE. EXTENDING
THE CHILD YOUTH. EXTENDING THE
YOUNG CHILD TAX CREDIT TO
INCLUDE CALIFORNIANS WAS ZERO
INCOME AND ELIGIBLE CHILDREN
ADOPTING PROTECTIONS TO PREVENT
INTERCEPTS FOR LOW INCOME
TAXPAYERS, INCLUDING A BETTER
FOR FAMILIES. REBATES TO GIVE
$200 PER TAXPAYER INDEPENDENT TO
ADDRESS INCREASING COSTS AND
BASIC NEEDS LIKE FOOD AND GAS,
INCREASING THE MINIMUM
CALIFORNIA EARNED INCOME TAX
CREDIT FROM $1 TO 250 BUCKS. $5.
FOR ANY ELIGIBLE TAX FILER AND
LASTLY, FOR INCREASING COW WORKS
, GRANT LEVELS SO NO CHILD LIVES
IN DEEP CHILD POVERTY IN
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
WORK. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
ELIZABETH CLUES AND I CURRENTLY
RESIDE IN LOS ANGELES. I'M A
RECENTLY ADMITTED STUDENT. DO
YOU SEE SANTA CRUZ OF FOSTER
YOUTH ADVOCATE WITH THE JOHN
BURTON ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH AND A
PROUD MOM OF TWO CHILDREN, AGES
FOUR AND EIGHT. I'M HERE TODAY
IN SUPPORT OF ESTABLISHING A
FOSTER A TAX CREDIT EXPANDING
THE $1000 YOUNG CHILD TAX CREDIT
FOR CHILDREN UNDER SIX TO
INCLUDE FAMILIES WITHOUT EARNED
INCOME AND INVESTING IN HOPE
TRUST FUND ACCOUNTS. FOR LOW
INCOME CHILDREN WHO HAVE LOST
PARENTS OR CAREGIVERS TO COVID
19. AND LONG TERM FOSTER CARE. I
BECAME PREGNANT WITH MY FIRST
CHILD WITHIN MONTHS OF LEAVING
CARE, AND I WAS TERRIFIED THAT I
WAS DESTINED TO REPEAT THE SAME
MISTAKES OF MY PARENTS. I WAS SO
DETERMINED TO ENSURE THAT MY
CHILD HAD EVERYTHING THAT HE
NEEDED. UM AND I OFTEN COMMITTED
MYSELF TO AS MANY AS THREE
MINIMUM WAGE JOBS AT ANY GIVEN
TIME TO ENSURE THAT WE COULD
KEEP OUR HEADS ABOVE WATER.
THROUGH TIRELESS WORK. I DID
GIVE HIM EVERYTHING THAT HE
NEEDED, BUT WHAT HE LOST IN THE
PROCESS WAS ME. BECAUSE I GAVE
SO MUCH OF MYSELF TO WORK. I
MISSED OUT ON HIS FIRST STEPS.
HIS FIRST LAUGHS AND HIS FIRST
WORDS AND THOSE ARE MOMENTS I
CAN NEVER GET BACK. THESE BOTH
PROPOSALS WILL ENSURE PARENTS
LIKE ME DO NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN WORKING, PURSUING THEIR
EDUCATION OR SIMPLY BEING THERE
FOR THEIR CHILDREN. I THINK THE
LEGISLATOR FOR INCLUDING THIS IN
THE BUDGET AND URGE YOUR
SUPPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS YESENIA
JIMENEZ. POLICY ASSOCIATE FOR
GRACE AND CHILD POVERTY,
CALIFORNIA ALSO INTO COLLEGE AND
SUPPORT FOR THE CALI EITC
COALITION. AT THE START OF THE
YEAR, OUR COALITION CAME
TOGETHER TO ADOPT A BOLD $10
BILLION BUDGET CAMPAIGN TO FIGHT
POVERTY. BECAUSE IN THE STATE AS
RICH AS AN ABUNDANT AS
CALIFORNIA, EVERY CHILD SHOULD
BE HEALTHY, HOUSED AND FED. UM
WE WANT TO THANK THE LEGISLATURE
FOR ONE HAPPINESS AS THIS BUDGET
BOLDLY INVESTS OVER $11 BILLION
THAT WE HAVE TRACKED TO DELIVER
PROSPERITY AND PUT CALIFORNIA'S
WELL TO WORK TO LIFT FAMILIES
OUT OF POVERTY. WE ESPECIALLY
THANK THE LEGISLATURE, AS MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE SHARED IN
SUPPORT OF INCREASING GRANT CAL
GRANTS GRANT LEVELS ABOVE. UM
UH, LEVELS. TWO ND CHILD
POVERTY. INVESTING IN HOPE
ACCOUNTS, UM, CREATING AN
ADDITIONAL REBATE FOR COW WORKS,
FAMILIES, INCREASING CHILDCARE
REIMBURSEMENT RATES, ADDITIONAL
CHILDCARE FACILITIES, WAVING
FAMILIES. PEACE FOR CHILDCARE,
IMPLEMENTING A FULL PASTOR OF
CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS FOR
FAMILIES CURRENTLY AND FORMERLY
RECEIVING PUBLIC ASSISTANCE
PROVIDING 12 MILLION AS
ASSISTANTS WERE PROMISED
NEIGHBORHOODS PROVIDING EIGHT
BILLION FOR THE BETTER FOR
FAMILIES REBATE INCREASING THE
MINIMUM. CALIFORNIA EARNED
INCOME TAX CREDIT FROM $1 TO
2225 $255. INCREASING THE CALI
AT OUTREACH FREE TAX PREP, UH,
TO A TOTAL OF 20 MILLION, UM AND
SO MANY OTHER INCREDIBLE WORLD
PROPOSALS, AND WE THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON
THIS. OKAY OH, THERE WE GO.
ADRIAN MOHAMMED WITH LIGHTHOUSE
PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON BEHALF OF THE
BLACK LEADERSHIP COUNCIL AND THE
BAY AREA REGIONAL HEALTH
INEQUITIES INITIATIVE. WE THINK
THE. COMMITTEE AND THE MEMBERS
FOR ALL OF THEIR WORK, BUT WE
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, THE
BUDGET ASKED BEING CHAMPIONED BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LORIWILSON, IT
WAS MADE A BLACK CAUCUS AND BAY
AREA CAUCUS PRIORITY. THE 500
MILLION BLACK HOUSING AND ANTI
DISPLACEMENT ASK WE UNDERSTAND
IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THIS
BUDGET. WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU
KNOW, THERE ARE MANY COMPETING
ASKED. BUT GIVEN THE IMPERATIVE
NATURE OF THE ASK AND THE
REPARATION TASK FORCE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE COME
OUT, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN
INCREDIBLY TIMELY AND INCREDIBLY
NECESSARY AS WE ASK THAT YOU
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH US. TO GET
THIS TO COME TO FRUITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN.
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
MAKE A QUICK COMMENT, UM, WE
SUPPORT I'M SORRY, TOM SHEEHY ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS
ASSOCIATION, AND WE APPRECIATE
THE TWO PARTY AGREEMENT ON THE
U. I, UH FUNDING TO REDUCE THE
TAX BURDEN ON EMPLOYERS. BUT WE
ALSO SUPPORT THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY
WOULD PAY DOWN THE LONG TERM
LIABILITY OF THAT FUND BY A
BILLION DOLLARS THIS YEAR AND
TWO BILLION NEXT YEAR. UM AS MR
MCKAY, LI SAID BEFORE ME IF WE
COULD MARRY BOTH. THAT WOULD BE
THE BEST OF ALL WORLDS. BUT IT
IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE PAY DOWN
THE LIABILITY BECAUSE THAT WILL
SAVE GENERAL FUND INTEREST COSTS
IN THE FUTURE, AND IT WILL SAVE
EMPLOYERS FROM HAVING TO PAY
HIGHER TAXES MANY YEARS INTO THE
FUTURE. SO WE REALLY URGE YOU TO
PAY DOWN THAT LIABILITY AND WE
APPRECIATE YOUR OFFER TO HELP
COVER SOME OF THE TAX INCREASES.
THIS COMING YEAR. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M DEBBIE
ORACLE WITH HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY. CALIFORNIA
REPRESENTING THE VIEWS OF OUR
HABITAT AFFILIATES STATEWIDE,
INCLUDING URBAN AND RURAL AREAS.
I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR PRIORITIZING THE INVESTMENT
OF 350 MILLION IN CAL HOME TO
PRODUCE NEW, AFFORDABLE
HOMEOWNERSHIP PRODUCTION AND 50
MILLION FOR DOWN PAYMENT
ASSISTANCE. WE SINCERELY
APPRECIATE. THE LEADERSHIP
RECOGNIZING THE BENEFITS TO
EQUITABLY INCREASING ACCESS TO
OWNERSHIP. HOUSING FOR MORE
CALIFORNIANS PROUDLY SUPPORT THE
LEGISLATURE'S PROPOSED BUDGET ON
HOUSING EXPLICITLY THE INCLUSION
OF CAL HOME BECAUSE IT IS THE
ONLY PROGRAM THAT INCREASES THE
DESPERATELY NEEDED SUPPLY OF
AFFORDABLE HOME UNITS TO OWN
MULTI FAMILY OWNERSHIP AND
SINGLE FAMILY OWNERSHIP. THIS
PROGRAM IS OVERSUBSCRIBED YEAR
AFTER YEAR, AND THIS YEAR, THE
FUNDING RUNS OUT. I SINCERELY
APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP TO
INCREASE AFFORDABLE OWNERSHIP
HOUSING. THANK YOU. HOLLY FOR
MANY DEJESUS WITH LIGHTHOUSE
PUBLIC AFFAIRS HERE TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF THE HOMEOWNERSHIP
PACKAGE ON BEHALF OF SPUR THE
BLACK LEADERSHIP COUNCIL, THE L.
A COALITION FOR ECONOMY AND JOBS
AND TE HOUSING ACTION COALITION
. WE JOIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
AND BEING EXTREMELY GRATEFUL TO
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE JOINT
PROPOSAL. TO INCLUDE 350 MILLION
FOR CAL HOME 50 MILLION FOR THE
DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE 50
MILLION FOR A D U CONSTRUCTION
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NEW
CALIFORNIA DREAM FOR ALL THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS JENNIFER, FEARING
FIRST ON BEHALF OF COUNT ON
PROFITS, MEALS ON WHEELS,
CALIFORNIA AND LEADERSHIP
COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY THANK YOU FOR
INCLUDING THE SICK LEAVE RELIEF
GRANT PROGRAM AND ENSURING
NONPROFIT ELIGIBILITY. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ALL
ON TRAILER BILL LANGUAGE TO
ENSURE EQUITABLE ACCESS FOR AS
MANY NONPROFITS AS POSSIBLE.
MEALS ON WHEELS, CALIFORNIA ALSO
THANKS YOU FOR THE ADDITIONAL
AUGMENTATIONS TO SENIOR
NUTRITION, FUNDING, GAS AND FOOD
PRICE. INFLATION ARE HAVING A
TREMENDOUS AND URGENT IMPACT ON
OUR ABILITY TO MEET OUR
VULNERABLE CLIENTS NEEDS. AND
LASTLY, THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF MUSEUMS URGES YOU
TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL TO
APPROPRIATE 100 AND $25 MILLION
TO THE CALIFORNIA CULTURAL AND
HISTORICAL ENDOWMENT IN THE
MUSEUM GRANT PROGRAM. AND I WANT
TO THANK ESPECIALLY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS BENNETT, FRIEDMAN, RIVAS
AND STONE AND THE 15 OTHER
LEGISLATORS WHO HAVE JOINED IN
MAKING THIS REQUEST. THANK YOU.
AND REALLY ROSENBERG, ER WITH S
E I U WE DO REPRESENT 700,000
MEMBERS AND 17 LOCALS. SO WE
SPLIT IT INTO OUR TWO LARGEST
SECTOR. SO I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF
OUR PUBLIC SECTOR, AND I'M GOING
TO PRE ALIGN MY COMMENTS. UH
WITH THE W ON BEHALF OF C C P U
C F A AND C S U EW! UM WE'RE
ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE FOLLOWING
PROPOSALS. THE WORKERS TAX
CREDIT 30 MILLION TO EXPAND MSW
SLOTS APPRECIATE THE FULL
FUNDING FOR RESOURCE FAMILY
APPROVAL. 50 MILLION ADDED TO
THE PROPOSED 1 50 MILLION FOR
FAMILY ENGAGEMENT, AND WE'RE
THANKFUL FOR THE INCLUSION OF
CWS LAYOFF PREVENTION FUNDING%
AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RELATED
TRAILER BILL LANGUAGE. IN TERMS
OF EDUCATION. UH WE ARE
APPRECIATIVE OF THE ADOPTION OF
THE MAJOR REVISIONS INVESTMENT
IN THE SUMMER BRIDGE TO DO
ONGOING FUNDING FOR BOTH K
THROUGH 12 BUT EXPLAINING IT
ALSO TO THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES.
THIS IS A SERIOUS LIFELINE FOR
ARE CLASSIFIED. AS WELL AS THE
INVESTMENT IN ONGOING FUNDS OR
NUTRITION, TRANSPORTATION AND
ULTIMATELY WORKFORCE AND THAT'S
WHERE WE SEE CONSISTENTLY THE
LEGISLATURE STEPPING UP AT THE
BUDGET BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE
INVESTING NOT JUST ONE TIME BUT
ONGOING DOLLARS TOWARDS
WORKFORCE IN PERSONNEL. WE ARE
APPRECIATIVE ALSO OF THAT
INVESTMENT AT THE CSU
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PENDING CF.
A YEAH, AND THOSE TO COME FROM
THE FACULTY REPRESENTATIVES AND
COMMITMENT FOR NEXT YEAR YEAR
TWO. TO FUND THE SALARY STUDY.
WE DO ASK FOR MORE MONEY SO THAT
WE CAN FULLY FUND THE STUDY AND
ADDRESS THE EQUITY INEQUITY THAT
IS AT THE CSU, ESPECIALLY FOR
PEOPLE OF COLOR. BUT WE'RE GLAD
THAT YOU GUYS TOOK THE FIRST
STEP TO CONSIDERING THAT ISSUE,
AND FINALLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO
CONCLUDE WITH THINKING YOU FOR
INVESTING IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, ESPECIALLY THE IMAGE P AND
ACCELERATOR FUND. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. TIFFANY WRITING
WITH US? YEAH YOU CALIFORNIA.
TESTIFYING ON THE OTHER HALF ARE
HEALTHCARE. LOCALS FIRST WERE
EXTREMELY THANKFUL FOR THE
INCLUSION OF $10 MILLION FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SNIFF
QUALITY STANDARDS BOARD.
APPRECIATE THE LEGISLATURE'S
INCLUSION OF $50 MILLION ON
GOING TO RAISE EIGHT FQ HC
WORKERS WAGES, SUPPORT THE
PUBLIC HEALTH INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE.
INVESTMENTS SUPPORT THE $30
MILLION COMMITMENT FOR PRIMARY
CARE RESIDENTS, BUT ENCOURAGE A
DEEPER INVESTMENT. THAT MIRRORS
ARE $120 MILLION REQUESTS FOR I
H S S. WE SUPPORT 3.4 MILLION
FOR CAL SAVERS AUTOMATION
DEDUCTIONS. FOR PROVIDERS, AS
WELL AS FUNDING FOR THE DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS REGARDING
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES.
WE'RE SO THANKFUL FOR THE 340
MILLION TO ACCELERATE THE RATES
AND 100 AND 86 MILLION TO
PROMOTE WORKFORCE, STABILITY AND
ADDRESS CHALLENGES AND
RECRUITING AND RETAINING
REGIONAL CENTER SERVICE
COORDINATORS AND DIRECT SUPPORT
PROFESSIONALS. WE SUPPORT THE
290 MILLION FOR YOUTH BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH. PLUS MAJOR INVESTMENTS
IN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH WORKFORCE
FOR PHYSICIANS TO L. C S, W S
AND M. F T S AND THEN FINALLY
FOR HOSPITAL AND NURSING
FACILITY WORKER RETENTION
PAYMENTS. WE URGED THE INCLUSION
AND ENCOURAGE ADDITIONAL FUNDING
TO INCLUDE STATE AND OTHER
HEALTH CARE WORKERS. WHO HELPED
IN THESE SETTINGS DURING THE
PANDEMIC AND FIND AND ALSO
ENCOURAGE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
HEALTH. H R T P PROGRAMMING.
THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH. GOOD
MORNING. I'M CLAUDIA VEHK AND I
REPRESENT THE CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S
BUSINESS CENTER NETWORK NOW
REPRESENTING 18 WOMEN'S BUSINESS
CENTERS. WE HAVE A BRAND NEW ONE
IN FRESNO AND A BRAND NEW ONE IN
ORANGE COUNTY. WE'RE REALLY
THRILLED TO HAVE OUR $8 MILLION
REQUEST INCLUDED AND JUST WANT
TO REMIND YOU THAT THAT'S GOING
TO CREATE ANOTHER 25,000.
THAT'LL BE ANOTHER 25,000
CLIENTS OF LOW MODERN INCOME
WOMEN AND WOMEN OF COLOR. THAT
WILL BE SERVED, UM 15,600 NEW
BUSINESSES AND AMONG THOSE WILL
BE OVER 3000 CHILDCARE SLOTS
BECAUSE OF THE BUSINESS
ASSISTANCE THAT WE PROVIDE
CHILDCARE PROVIDERS AND THAT'S
CAPITAL AS WELL AS TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. MANY MEMBERS
GONZALEZ ON BEHALF OF CONTROL,
THEY'RE MORE RESOURCES. WE ARE A
GEOTHERMAL AND LITHIUM RECOVERY
PLATFORM OUT OF THE IMPERIAL
VALLEY. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT
THE GOVERNOR'S PER 10 PROPOSED
TAX ON LITHIUM IS GOING TO
CREATE A HUGE DISADVANTAGE FOR
LITHIUM THAT IS SOURCED FROM
CALIFORNIA. AS PROPOSED, THE TAX
WILL ONLY APPLY TO LITHIUM
THAT'S COMING FROM CALIFORNIA,
MEANING THAT LITHIUM THAT'S
IMPORTANT FROM OTHER STATES OR
COUNTRIES WHICH ALREADY LIKE
CHINA, WHICH ALREADY ACCOUNTS
FOR ABOUT 80% OF THE LITHIUM
THAT COMES INTO THE UNITED
STATES WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO
THIS TAX, UM, CREATING AN UNFAIR
ADVANTAGE FOR THOSE CMPANIES OR
THOSE IMPORTS OVER LITHIUM THAT
A SOURCE FROM THE LITHIUM VALLEY
WE WOULD URGE THE COMMITTEE AS
ITS NEGOTIATING THE FINAL BUDGET
TO REALLY CONSIDER HOW IPOSING
A CALIFORNIA ONLY TAX WILL
AFFECT THE COMPETITIVENESS OF
THE LITHIUM VALLEY. THANK YOU.
ALLOWS CAN I REGISTER THE OTHER
FOLKS ON THE LINE THAT MAY NOT
BE ABLE TO PROVIDE COMMENTS
PREVIOUS, OKAY, TNCS VERY
QUICKLY. I M C A F SAN DIEGO
COUNTY SHIELDS FOR FAMILIES
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FOOD
BANKS. LEGAL SERVICES FOR
BRITISH PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN
FIRST FIVE ALAMEDA ECHO RIGHTS
ADVOCATES FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON
LEGISLATION GLIDE CHILDREN'S
DEFENSE FUND, CALIFORNIA YOUNG
INVISIBLES, CALLIE IMMIGRANT
POLICY CENTER, SAN DIEGO
IMMIGRANTS RIGHTS CONSORTIUM.
AND ECONOMIC SECURITY PROJECT
ACTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. I APOLOGIZE FOR EVERYBODY
ELSE WHOSE HOLDINGS I KNOW
THERE'S QUITE A FEW COLLEGE BUT
WE ARE ONLY GOING TO GO TO ONE
P.M. OPERATOR IF YOU COULD JUST
START THANK YOU, AND IT IS ONE
AND THEN ZERO WILL GO FIRST TO
LINE 32. PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS MARTIN. I'M CALLING ON
BEHALF OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE WOULD
LIKE TO THANK THE LAST FUTURE
FOR ITS LEADERSHIP AND INCLUDING
THE COMMUNITY ANTI DISPLACEMENT
AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM OR
CAPPED IN THE LEGISLATIVE BUDGET
AGREEMENT. IT'S CREDIBLE
INVESTMENT WILL KEEP FAMLIES
HOUSE INCREASED OUR SHOTS OF FOR
THE HOUSING AND EMPOWER LOCAL
COMMUNITIES. GIVEN THE URGENCY
OF OUR HEALTHY CRISIS, THE POOP
IMPROVEMENT IMPACT OF
ACQUISITION PRESERVATION. WE
RESPECTFULLY URGE GOVERNMENT
MUSEUM AND DELICIOUS USER TO
INCLUDE THE FULL QUESTION. 500
MILLION FOR CAPTAIN THE SPITE OF
BUDGET. AGAIN THANK YOU FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP. WE APPRECIATE THE
SHIRT, MAKING THIS CRITICAL
INVESTMENT AND LOOKING FORWARD
TO SEEING CAPS INCLUSION IN THE
FINAL BUDGET. THANKS FOR FLYING
24. ALICE IS JUSTIN GARRETT, THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES COMMENTING ON SEVERAL
ITEMS FIRST, WE APPRECIATE THE
LEGISLATURE'S DEFERRED ACTION ON
THE ADMINISTRATION'S CARE CORE
PROPOSAL SO THAT THE INVESTMENTS
MATCH THE FINAL POLICY. WE MUST
ALSO NOTE THE NEED FOR START UP
AND ONGOING FUNDING TO COVER ALL
THE RESPONSIBILITIES ACROSS ALL
IMPACTED COUNTY DEPARTMENT. IN
REGARDS TO TRANSPORTATION WERE
THE FINAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES
LOCAL FUNDING FOR A GREAT
PREPARE SAFETY, ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION IN CLIMATE AND
ACCUSATIONS. IN REGARDS TO D. J
J REALIGNMENT. WE APPRECIATE THE
FUNDING FOR JUVENILE FACILITY
MODERNIZATION. HOWEVER WE MUST
SMOOT THAT COSTS WILL EXCEED 100
MILLION AND MORE IMPORTANTLY,
WANT TO EXPRESS THE NEED TO
EXPEDITE. FUNDING TO PROBATION
DEPARTMENT TO ALREADY HAVE
REALIGNED USE IN THEIR CARE AND
FINALLY ON HOMELESSNESS. WE
APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL
FUNDING THAT'S PROVIDED TO
ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS. THANK YOU.
FACTORY OF LINE. 20, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. YES HI. GOOD AFTERNOON
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. THIS IS EDWIN
BARBONE ON BEHALF OF ORANGE
COUNTY AND SUPPORT AND
APPRECIATIVE OF A NUMBER OF
ELEMENTS CONTAINING THE
LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET, MANY OF
WHICH WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S BUDGET
PROPOSALS. 300 MILLION ANNUALLY
FOR LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH
JURISDICTIONS WILL BE CRITICAL
TO REBUILDING OUR DECIMATED
PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM. THE PROP.
ONE E EXTENSION LANGUAGE
INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET WILL
ASSIST THE COUNTY AND MOVING
PROJECTS. ADDITIONALLY THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS SUPPORTS THE $60
MILLION INCLUDED HEALTH BRUSH
ADMINISTRATION 4.6 MILLION FOR
ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES
TRAINING. 290 MILLION FOR THE
CHILDREN AND YOUTH BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH INITIATIVE, 50 MILLION TO
ADDRESS VETERANS SUICIDE AND
ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO PREVENT
AND REDUCE HOMELESSNESS AMONG
MANY OTHER INVESTMENTS AIMED AT
IMPROVING THE LIFE OF ALL
CALIFORNIANS AND EXISTING LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS IN OUR WORK. FINALLY
WE DO URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO
CONSIDER THE REPAYMENT OF LOCAL
MANDATES AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR
SPECIAL ELECTIONS IN YOUR
DELIBERATIONS. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 45.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS, MICHELE
GIBBONS AT THE COUNTY HEALTH
EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA WANT TO EXPRESS OUR
SUPPORT AND APPRECIATION FOR THE
INCLUSION OF THE 300 MILLION FOR
PUBLIC HEALTH INFRASTRUCTURE,
WHICH DEDICATES 200 MILLION
ONGOING TO LOCAL HEALTH
DEPARTMENT. ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS
OUR SUPPORT FOR THE 195.5
MILLION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
AGUIAR-CURRY WOULDN'T MEDINA FOR
BEING A VOICE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
AND A CHAMPION FOR THESE
INVESTMENTS? AND THANK YOU TO
THE FULL BUDGET COMMITTEE AND
ASSEMBLY FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
SUPPORTING OUR PUBLIC HEALTH
DEPARTMENTS AND WORKFORCE. THANK
YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 22. I'M
SORRY. DID YOU SAY 22? CORRECT.
YOU'RE YOU'RE ON. OKAY SORRY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS CONNIE DELGADO ON BEHALF
OF THE DISTRICT HOSPITAL
LEADERSHIP FORUM, BUT 33
DISTRICT HOSPITALS WISH TO THANK
THE MEMBERS OF THE LEISLATURE
AND OUR CHAMPION DOCTOR WOULD
FOR INCLUDING THE $40 MILLION
BRIDGE LOAN PROPOSAL TO COVER
DELAYED REIMBURSEMENT AS A
HOSPITAL TRANSFER TRANSITION
BETWEEN TWO QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS. AND WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK THAT THIS PROPOSAL BE
INCLUDED IN THE FINAL BUDGET.
THANK YOU. NEXUS LINE, 17. THAT
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JANINE
COLBURN, REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT
PROGRAM ASSOCIATION. WE GREATLY
APPRECIATE THE INVESTMENTS
PROPOSED TO INCREASE THE CHILD
CARE REIMBURSEMENT RATES TO THE
85% TILE OF THE RMR. AND APPLY.
THIS CAME 0.55 COST OF LIVING
INCREASE THE COUNTY ARE MARKED
FOR ALL PROVIDER RATE. THE
EXTENSION OF THE FAMILY, THE
WAIVER AND REIMBURSING FAMILY.
CHILDCARE PROVIDERS CENTERS
BASED ON ENROLLMENT NOT
ATTENDED. F Y I AND CRUNCHING
THE 85TH PERCENTILE ALONE. WE
CONTINUE TO SEE MANY EXISTING
HIGH QUALITY CENTER TO RACE FOR
ONCE AGAIN, NOT INCREASE,
UNDERSCORING THE NEED OF THE
15.55 COLA. WE ARE APPRECIATIVE
TO THE INCORPORATION OF THE 20
MILLION TO SUPPORT CAPACITY
BUILDING A COMMUNITY BASED
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE STAYED OPEN
DURING THE COVID CRISIS AND
CONTINUES TO BE ON THE FRONT
LINE SUPPORTING THE NEEDS. OUR
MOST FRAGILE WORKING FAMILIES.
WE ASK THAT THERE STILL BE
CONSIDERATION TO CORRECT IT.
2009 10 RECESSION BUDGET ACTION
WHEREIN THE SPLIT SUBSIDIZED
CHILDCARE VOUCHER WAS CREATED AS
A WAY TO SAVE THE STATE MONEY.
MR KONY IN AND UNFAIR POLICY
TIPS, POOR FAMILIES AGAINST POOR
FAMILIES. WITH THE INEQUITY
OUTCOME BEING TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF BABIES AND CHILDREN FROM THE
VERY POOREST FAMILIES WE PROFESS
TO WANT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT.
UNABLE TO ACCESS HIGHER QUALITY
CARE ONCE THE FAMILY BECOMES
INCOME ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A
CHILD CARE SUBSIDY THAN THEIR
CHILDREN ARE ABLE TO BE SERVED.
12 MONTHS IN STABLE CARE, THE
SPLIT VOUCHER CREATED IN 2009 10
IS PENALIZED SUBSIDIZED FAMILIES
THAT ARE DOING EVERYTHING WE ASK
OF THEM. FINALLY WE'D LIKE TO
ALIGN OUR INPUT TO WITH THE
PRIORITIES OF THE EAST EQUAL
ISHAN AND THAT IN CHILD POVERTY
THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE HAVE LINE
53. 53 GOOD AFTERNOON GOOD
AFTERNOON SHARING MEMBERS. JOSE
TORRES WITH HEALTH AQUA,
CALIFORNIA WE APPRECIATE THE
LEGISLATURE'S SUPPORT FOR THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED $304 MILLION
TO INVEST IN COVERED CALIFORNIA
AFFORDABILITY AND ESPECIALLY
APPRECIATE THE LEGISLATURE GOING
A STEP FURTHER TO ENSURE THOSE
FINES. CAN BE TARGETED TOWARDS
MUCH NEEDED COST SHARING
ASSISTANCE. FEDERAL PREMIUM IS
EXTENDED. WE ALSO APPRECIATE THE
LEGISLATURE'S CONTINUE
LEADERSHIP, ESPECIALLY DR
ROBBINS LEADERSHIP TO REMOVE
IMMIGRATION STATUS AS A BARRIER
TO ELIGIBILITY IN MEDICAL. WE
HAVE MADE GREAT PROGRESS IN
MAKING MEDICAL HAVE UNIVERSAL
ACCESS, BUT HEALTH ACCESS, ALONG
WITH COMMUNITY GROUPS ARE
CONCERNED THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF
THAN JANUARY, 2024 AS PEOPLE
NEED CARE NOW AND THAT WE FIND A
WAY TO PREVENT ANY YOUNG ADULTS
FROM LOSING COVERAGE DURING THIS
TIME. UNTIL THE FULL EXTENSION
WILL BEGIN. THANK YOU. NEXT. WE
HAVE LINE 54. 54. MAYBE A MUTE.
WE GOTTA LINES 56. GOOD
AFTERNOON SHARING MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS BECKY SILVA ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
FOOD BANKS, CALLING IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE MANY PROPOSALS
OUTLINED IN THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET IN PARTICULAR
, WE'RE SO APPRECIATIVE OF THE
ONE TIME AND ONGOING INVESTMENT
FOR THE CAL FOOD PROGRAMS. WHICH
WILL HELP TO BEING TO KEEP
SERVING THEIR COMMUNITIES AT
ELEVATED LEVELS IN MR HUGE SURGE
IN THE PRICE OF FOOD AND
DECREASING FEDERAL SUPPORT,
WE'RE ALSO GRATEFUL FOR THE
INVESTMENT INTO CLIMATE AND
CAPACITY RESILIENCE FOR FOOD
BANKS. THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE CAN
BE RESPONSIVE IN TIMES OF
DISASTERS, AND SO THAT THEY CAN
BE CLIMATE SMART. THERE ARE MANY
OTHER PROPOSALS IN THE BUDGET
THAT WE'RE ALSO IN STRONG,
SUPPORTIVE, SUCH AS FOR SCHOOL
MEALS, THE EXPANSION OF THE TOP
PROGRAMS INCREASING HOW WORKS
GRANTS INCREASING CALLIE HTC.
ESTABLISHMENT OF HOPE ACCOUNT
SUPPORT FOR SSC RECIPIENTS THE
BETTER FOR FAMILY THREE BASED ON
THE CAMERAS, DATA DASHBOARD FOR
COLLEGE STUDENTS AND
ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDING FOR
COUNTIES TO DO, CAL THRUSH
ENROLLMENT WORK. THANK YOU FOR
CENTERING THE BUDGET ON
CALIFORNIA'S MOST VULNERABLE
RESIDENTS AND THANKS FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT TODAY.
EXCELLENT. GO TO LINE 49. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S ANDREW
CHAVEZ ON BEHALF OF THE WORD
PROMISED NEIGHBORHOODS IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE $12 MILLION FOR
ASSISTANCE FOR PROMISE.
NEIGHBORHOODS WERE APPRECIATIVE
TO SEE THIS PROPOSAL IN THE
BUDGET ACT OF 2022. AN URGENT
LEGISLATURE TO ENSURE THAT THE
INCLUSION OF THIS IN THE FINAL
BUDGET DEAL INVESTMENT
SUPPORTING FRAMEWORK FOR WHOLE
CHILDHOOD FAMILY COORDINATED
SERVICES. NEEDED TO ENSURE LOWER
INCOME FAMILIES ARE CENTERED IN
AN EQUITABLE RECOVERY WHILE
MAKING OUR INSTITUTIONS MORE
EFFICIENT TO COMMUNITY BASED
INFRASTRUCTURE. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. NEXT TO HIS LINE
58. GOOD MORNING. SHARON MEMBERS
MARCUS, EAGER REPRESENTING THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS, AND STRONG SUPPORT
OF FOUR ITEMS. FIRST OF $50
MILLION FOR THE ADAPTIVE REUSE
OF THE COUNTY GENERAL HOSPITAL
AT THE L. A. C. USC MEDICAL
CENTER CAMPUS. THE $100 MILLION
IN GENERAL FUNDS FOR THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY TO ACQUIRE AND
FUND CAPITOL RENOVATIONS FOR THE
MODERATELY AND SEVERELY MENTALLY
ILL JUSTICE INVOLVED POPULATION.
IN THE $18.6 MILLION FOR THE
COMPLETION OF L. A. RICK WHICH
IS A VITAL STATE OF THE ART
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEM. AND LASTLY, WE THANK YOU
FOR FINDING CHILD WELFARE
SERVICES FOR COUNTY SOCIAL WORK
THE WAY OFF PREVENTION
ASSISTANCE AND LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU ON THE TRAILING
BILL LANGUAGE. THANK YOU. NEXT
WE HAVE LINING. UH THIS WILL BE
THE LAST COMMENT. I APOLOGIZE
FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. WHO'S ON THE
PHONE, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO
HAVE TO ASK YOU TO EMAIL YOUR
COMMENTS INTO THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE. YOU CAN FIND THE
EMAIL THAT'S AVAILABLE IS ON THE
ASSEMBLY BUDGET COMMITTEE
WEBSITE. THE LAST COMMENT. IN
37. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THIS IS STEPHEN JONES
WITH THE TRANSIT IN OAKLAND, AND
WE'RE JOINING OTHER PUBLIC
TRANSIT AGENCIES AND
APPRECIATING AND SUPPORTING THE
$10.9 BILLION PROPOSED. FOR
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE,
AND WE'RE URGING THE LEGISLATURE
TO STRIKE A DEAL WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION THAT PROVIDES THE
HIGHEST LEVELS OF FUNDING
POSSIBLE BOTH TRENDED AND RAIL
CAPITAL PROJECTS AND THE NEED IS
GREAT. IT WILL COST A C TRANSIT
MORE THAN $2.3 BILLION TO REACH
100% 0 EMISSIONS AS REQUIRED BY
THE STATE. IMPROVE KEY TRANSIT
CORRIDORS AND MODERNIZE OUR
AGING FACILITIES. I ALSO WANT TO
STRESS THE ONGOING NEED FOR
TRANSIT OPERATIONS. FUNDING
TRANSIT REVENUES ARE DOWN.
FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDING IS
LARGELY DEPLETED AND COSTS
CONTINUE TO INCREASE ADDITIONAL
OPERATIONS FUNDING WILL HELP
TRANSIT RECOVER FROM THE
PANDEMIC. AVOID LAYOFFS AND MEET
THE STATE'S CLINICAL. THANKS SO
MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.
AND AGAIN, THE EMAIL TO THE
COMMITTEE IS A SM BUDGET AT A SM
DOT CA.GOV HOPING THAT POSTED
ONLINE SM BUDGET AT A S M DOT C
A .COM WE APOLOGIZE FOR NOT
GETTING, UH TO EVERYONE, BUT WE
DO HAVE FOUR SESSION AT ONE PM
WITH THAT WE WILL BE A JOURNEY.
THANK YOU.