YEAH. GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE IN THE PUBLIC
WELCOME TO THE ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
AND RETIREMENT BEFORE WE BEGIN
TO TAKE SEVERAL MINUTES TO MAKE
SOME ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR THIS
HEARING TODAY. WELL THE STATE
CAPITAL IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
AND WEARING A MASK IS NO LONGER
REQUIRED. WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE
THAT MASKS BE WORN AND ALL
COMMON AREAS AND SHARED SPACES
IN THE CAPITAL, INCLUDING IN
THIS HEARING ROOM. WE ALSO STILL
ENCOURAGE INDIVIDUALS TO
CONTINUE PRACTICING SOCIAL
DISTANCING. FOR THIS COMMITTEE
WERE ONLY PERMITTING IN PERSON
PARTICIPATION, SO THERE'S NO
PHONE OR ANY OTHER REMOTE
OPTION. IF ANYONE IN THIS ROOM
MUST TESTIFY ON A BILL, I'LL ASK
YOU TO COME BEFORE WORD OF THE
APPROPRIATE TIME TO PROVIDE YOUR
TESTIMONY. BUT PLEASE DO NOT
TOUCH THE MICROPHONE. FOR ALL
TESTIMONY WERE LIMITING
SUBSTANTIVE TESTIMONY TO TWO
WITNESSES O EACH SIDE OF THE
BILL AND EACH HAVING 2 TO 3
MINUTES NEXT TO SPEAK. EVERYONE
ELSE AFTER THOSE TWO ON EACH
SIDE CAN ONLY STATE THEIR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL. AFTER YOU'RE DONE SPEAKING
, YOU CONNECT TO THIS ROOM OR
RETURN TO YOUR SEAT. IF YOU
LEAVE THE ROOM, PLEASE LET THE
ELEVATOR USED TO WHAT IS
DESCRIBED ON THE SIGNS NEAR THE
ELEVATORS. IT SIMPLY HAS
EXPERIENCED A NUMBER OF
DISRUPTIONS TO THE COMMITTEE AND
FOUR PROCEEDINGS IN THE LAST FEW
YEARS, SO EVERYONE IS CRYSTAL
CLEAR. CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS
DISTURBS OR IMPEDES THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT. THIS HEARING IS
PROHIBITED. TO ADDRESS IN YOUR
DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT I WOULD
RECOGNIZE STOP WARNED THE
INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY CONTINUE.
THEY MAY BE REMOVED FROM
PARTICIPATING IN THIS HEARING.
IT MAY TEMPORARILY RECESS THE
HEARING. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE
FOR YOUR COOPERATION. FOR THIS
HEARING. WE HAVE 14 ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA AND SIX OF AMERICANS SENT
AND WILL WORK TO THE AGENDA IN
FILE ORDER, NOT CONSENT OR
FALLOUT OF NUMBER ONE SB 835.
NUMBER TWO SB 8 50. ITEM THREE
SB EIGHT SP 90 FOR ITEM NUMBER
FOUR SB 11 68. AT NUMBER FIVE SB
14 02 AN ITEM NUMBER 6 14 OH,
SIX. SINGLE WOMAN, BLANCA RUBIO
WILL BE FILLING THE VACANCY FOR
THE HEARING DAY. WELCOME
ASSEMBLY. RUBE NUMBER RUBIO AND
THANK YOU IN THE ABSENCE OF
SIMILAR MACLAY TODAY, REMEMBER,
RODRIGUEZ IS JOINING ONCE AGAIN.
AND HE'S NOT HERE YET, BUT WE'RE
HERE SHORTLY. SENATOR CORTE Z IS
UNAVAILABLE TO PRESENT BILLS. SB
868 AND 874. WE RECEIVED A
LETTER FROM THE AUTHOR
IDENTIFYING AN AUTHORIZING A
SIMILAR MENTAL DONALD TO PRESENT
THOSE BILLS. ON HIS BEHALF.
THANK YOU FOR FINALLY STEPPING
UP. MOVEMENT-O'DONNELL. IT'S
ABOUT TIME. I APPRECIATE YOU.
FINALLY I ALSO WANT TO TAKE A
MOMENT TO ADDRESS PULLING THE
TWO DIVESTMENT BILLS FROM THIS
HEARING REGARDING RUSSIA AND
FOSSIL FUELS SO THAT EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS WHY IT WAS DONE AND
WHAT IS NECESSARY. IT IS NO
SECRET THAT INFLATION AND THE
COST OF LIVING ARE SEVERELY
HITTING THE POCKETBOOKS OF ALL
CALIFORNIANS. BUT WORKING
FAMILIES AND THOSE ARE FIXED
INCOMES, LIKE OUR PUBLIC
EMPLOYEE RETIREES. ARE FEELING
THE PINCH EVEN MUCH MORE. WITH A
LOOMING RECESSION. LEGISLATURES
SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WAYS TO
PROTECT THE SOLVENCY OF OUR
PENSION SYSTEMS AND SHOULD NOT
BE CONSIDERING ANY PROPOSALS
THAT NEGATIVELY AFFECT THEM.
THROUGHOUT MY TIME AS CHAIR OF
THE ASSEMBLY PERSON COMMITTEE
HAVE STRONGLY OPPOSED ANY
PROPOSALS THAT REQUIRE CALPERS
FORECASTERS TO DIVEST FROM
PARTICULAR ENTITY OR INDUSTRY.
THIS INCLUDES REALLY CALIFORNIA
85 DIFFERENT RETIREMENT SYSTEMS.
PREVIOUS LEGISLATIVE INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENTS HAVE RESULTED IN
LONG TERM NEGATIVE FINANCIAL
EFFECTS ON CALIFORNIA'S PENSION
SYSTEMS, RESULTING IN HIGHER
EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR
CALIFORNIA'S NEARLY 3.5 MILLION
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AT 1.5 MILLION
RETIREES. MORE IMPORTANTLY,
POLITICAL DIVESTMENT DECISIONS
JEOPARDIZE THE OVERALL FINANCIAL
SOLVENCY OF THEIR PENSION
SYSTEMS. ANY DECISIONS RELATING
TO PENSION SYSTEM. INVESTMENT
STRATEGIES SHOULD BE BASED. A
SOUND FINANCIAL DECISIONS, NOT
POLITICAL ONES. ARE HARDWORKING
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND RETIREES.
FINANCIAL FUTURE SHOULD NOT BE
USED AS A POLITICAL FOOTBALL. AT
A TIME WHEN THERE IS SO MUCH
FINANCIAL UNCERTAINTY AND PEOPLE
ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET
. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO
CONSIDER POLITICAL DIVESTMENT
PROPOSALS THAT HURT THE
FINANCIAL SECURITY. OF
CALIFORNIA'S PENSION SYSTEMS.
THIS IS WHY TODAY I MADE
DECISIONS TO HOLD BOTH SB 11 73
AND SB 13 28. IF YOU GO BACK TO
2015 OR 2016, CALPERS, UM AS FAR
AS THEIR INVESTMENTS, BUT THE
MONEY THEY HAD ON HAND WAS ONLY
65. IN 15 OR 16. UM, IT GOT UP
TO 80. THIS YEAR. OF FUNDING.
AND RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE
ECONOMY IS BACK DOWN TO 75. AND
THAT'S REALLY A BIG ISSUE I'VE
GOT. THE MOST STATE EMPLOYEES
ARE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, SO YOU
CAN T STATE IN MY DISTRICT. AND
A LARGE NUMBER OF RETIREES. I
LOOK AROUND THE FOLKS THAT WORK
HERE IN THIS BUILDING. THIS IS
EVERY TIME IT'S THAT PEOPLE ARE
MONKEYING AROUND WITH. FOR THE
EMPLOYEES OUT THERE IN THE
STAFFERS IN THE BUILDING IN THE
LEGISLATURE AND STATE EMPLOYEES
, COUNTY EMPLOYEES CITY
EMPLOYEES, IT'S YOUR RETIREMENT
. WE HEAR ALL THE TIME FROM
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. ABOUT
UNFUNDED LIABILITIES. THE
LEGISLATURE IS GIVEN 900
BILLION. I'M SORRY. $9 BILLION
FOR UNFUNDED PENSION COSTS. $9
BILLION IN THE PAST THREE OR
FOUR YEARS, ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF
MONEY. PENSION OBLIGATIONS ARE
VERY EXPENSIVE. AND TO MAKE IT I
MEAN, REALLY, IF YOU THINK ABOUT
IT, AND SOME OF THESE BILLS THAT
HAVE COME THROUGH THESE PAST FEW
YEARS IT'S JUST GRANDSTANDING,
NOT BY EVERYBODY, BUT BY SOME
FOLKS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS GOOD. SO
FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE RETIRED,
YOU WORKED HARD EARNED YOUR
PENSION, IT SHOULD NOT BE
AFFECTED. FOR THE FOLKS WHO ARE
STILL WORKING RIGHT NOW, UM,
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE DEFINED
BENEFIT. THAT'S THE WHOLE ISSUE
. AND UM CALPERS AND CAL STARS
HAS A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY
TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THE BEST
RETURNS ON THEIR INVESTMENT. AND
THAT THAT'S CRITICAL RIGHT NOW.
THIS TIME WE'RE HEADED INTO A
RECESSION. 100% AND WHO KNOWS
HOW LONG IT'S GONNA LAST? SO YOU
KNOW FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND PUSH
THESE BILLS. A SHORTSIGHTED UM
SOMEONE HAD TO BE THE ADULT IN
THE ROOM. AND I WAS THE ADULT IN
THE ROOM. AND THAT'S OKAY IF
PEOPLE WANT TO HIT ME AND GET ON
TWITTER AND TALK SMACK, I DON'T
CARE. I SPENT 30 YEARS IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT. NO ONE IS DYING IN
THIS BUILDING. THIS LEGISLATURE.
SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU ALL FOR
BEING HERE. AND BEFORE WE BEGIN
TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM, MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL ROLL.
COOPER. PRESENT. PRESIDENT
VOEPEL CALDERON. O'DONNELL.
RIGHT? SO LET'S START WITH
CONSENT CALENDAR. IS THERE ANY
MEMBER WHO WISHES TO REMOVE ANY
ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR?
A SECOND. WE'VE GOT EMOTION A
SECOND. MADAM SECRETARY. PLEASE
CALL ROLL ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ITEM NUMBER ONE. YES,
AND WE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS. CONSENT
CALENDARS, REMEMBER TO PASS AND
RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATION WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CONSENT.
I DON'T NUMBER THREE DO PASS AND
REVERTED. RIGHT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ITEM NUMBER FOUR DO
PASS AND WE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ITEM NUMBER FIVE DO
PASS AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ITEM NUMBER SIX DO
PASS AND WE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATE. EXCUSE
ME ON JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WITH
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. COOPER I VOEPEL
CALDERON. RODRIGUEZ. O'DONNELL.
O'DONNELL I BLANCA RUBIO BLANCA
RUBIO. I CR TO CR TÔI. THAT THAT
MOTIONS ON CALL UM, WE'RE GOING
TO MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE
FILE. AND SINCE WE DON'T HAVE
AUTHORS HERE, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD
AND GO TO, UH, SB 11 68
COURTESIES MR O'DONNELL'S
PRESENTING THOSE BILLS. YES. I'M
SORRY. I'M SORRY. 868 68. THAT'S
28 68. IS THAT CORRECT? YES,
SIR.
SERGEANT, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT, UH, MEMBERS COME TO
PRESENT THEIR BILLS, PLEASE.
PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I AM
PLEASED TO PRINT SB 868 ON
BEHALF OF SENATOR CORTEZ E WHO
COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. SB 868
WILL ENSURE EQUITY INSTABILITY.
FOR OUR OLDER RETIREES IN THE IN
THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM.
KALLSTROM'S MEMBERS WHO RETIRED
BEFORE 1999 RECEIVED
COMPARATIVELY LOWER BENEFITS
THAN THEIR PEERS, WHO RETIRED AT
A LATER DATE. CASTOR HAS
MAINTAINED A SPECIAL ACCOUNT FOR
THE DEDICATED PURPOSE OF
PROTECTING RETIREES FROM
INFLATION, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS
VERY IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW. THIS
ACCOUNT HOLDS NEARLY $12 BILLION
IN FUNDS. THIS BILL WOULD
DISTRIBUTE A TINY FRACTION OF
THE FUNDS TO BOOST THE MONTHLY
PENSION FOR THESE RETIRED
TEACHERS. IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT
FOR THE FUN, BUT IT WILL MAKE A
BIG DIFFERENCE FOR OUR OLDEST
RETIRED TEACHERS. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR MY VOTE AND WE HAVE A
COUPLE OF WITNESSES HERE TODAY.
FIRST ED FOLIO SCT MEMBER MEMBER
OF THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION, AND PAT BOYD WITH A
CALIFORNIA RETIRED TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION. MR CHAIR. PLEASE
PROCEED. MY NAME IS ED FOYER
EMERGING YOUR SUPPORT. TODAY FOR
SB 8 68. 8 68 CARRIES OUT STATE
LAW THAT PROVIDES THAT A PORTION
OF THE EXCESS RESOURCES IN THE
SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS
MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT BE USED TO
ENSURE THOSE WHO RETIRED PRIOR
TO 1999 RECEIVED A FISCAL
SUPPORT. THEY NEED IN TODAY'S
ECONOMY. I'M A RETIRED MIDDLE
SCHOOL TEACHER. WHO BEGAN MY
TEACHING CAREER IN 1957. WITH A
STARTING SALARY OF $4200 A YEAR.
I RETIRED IN 1994 WITH 35 YEARS
OF EXPERIENCE, A MASTER'S DEGREE
AND A SALARY OF $46,400. PLENTY,
WHO RETIRED IN THE SEVENTIES AND
EIGHTIES NO LONGER HAVE ENOUGH
FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CARE FOR
THEIR BASIC NEEDS. WITHOUT THE
SPM, A BENEFIT BECAUSE OF THEIR
LOSS OF PURCHASING POWER. IN
SOME CASES, THIS BENEFIT IS MORE
THAN THEIR BASIC PENSION.
CASTERS. RETIREES LIVE LONGER
THAN ANY OTHER GROUP OF RETIRED
AMERICANS. 427 RETIREES ARE 100
YEARS OR OLDER. 8 68 WILL HELP
55,400. FOR RETIREES KEEP UP
WITH THE RISING COST OF LIVING.
I AM PROUD THAT SITA IS A
SPONSOR OF LEGISLATION
SUPPORTING RETIRED TEACHERS WHO
HAVE MADE IT THEIR LIFE'S WORK
TO CARE FOR CHILDREN AND PREPARE
THEM FOR THE FUTURE AND NOW NEED
THAT EXTRA FINANCIAL HELP. I
URGE YOUR I VOTE ON SB 868.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING ASSEMBLY. COOPER. AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. HIGH IMPACT.
BOYD I'M, A RETIRED TEACHER WITH
THE CALIFORNIA RETIRED TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION. I RETIRED FROM THE
REAL INDIA UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT. IN 1991. ENJOYING THE
CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS
RETIREMENT SYSTEM. AFTER A TOTAL
OF 38 YEARS OF WORKING WITH
CHILDREN IN KINDERGARTEN AND
FIRST GRADE. SPENDING TIME
TEACHING OUR YOUNGEST LEARNERS
WAS SO FULFILLING AND GAVE ME A
GREAT SENSE OF PURPOSE. I
CHERISHED EVERY MINUTE. AS A
RETIRED TEACHER. I ENJOY WORKING
WITH OTHER RETIREES IN
VOLUNTEERING IN MY COMMUNITY
THROUGH CAL R T. A AS I GROW
OLDER. I'VE SEEN MANY CHANGES.
MY COMMUNITY IS CHANGING.
CALIFORNIA IT'S CHANGING. THE
WORLD IS CHANGING. THESE CHANGES
HAVE IMPACTED THE FUTURE THAT I
HAVE PLANNED FOR. PARTICULARLY.
THE IMPACT THAT MY RETIREMENT
ALLOWANCE WILL PROVIDE ME BOTH
NOW AND INTO THE UNCERTAIN
FUTURE. AS A RETIRED TEACHER. I
CERTAINLY DIDN'T ENTER THIS
PROFESSION TO BECOME WEALTHY.
BUT THE FACT THAT I HAVE A
LITTLE CERTAINTY OF PURCHASING
POWER THROUGH THE COWL STIRS
SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFIT MAINTENANCE
ACCOUNT GIVES ME A SENSE OF
SECURITY. THAT I'LL BE PROTECTED
FROM INFLATION, WHICH IS TAKING
MORE AND MORE OF MY INCOME. SB 8
68 WILL PROVIDE RETIREES LIKE
ME. WITH A LITTLE MORE
RETIREMENT SECURITY. BY
INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF
PURCHASING POWER THAT WE RECEIVE
BASED ON WHEN WE RETIRED. FOR
THE OLDEST OF US. 80% OF WHOM
ARE WOMEN. WE COULD RECEIVE UP
TO 100% PURCHASING POWER. WHICH
COULD MEAN WE WON'T HAVE TO
STRUGGLE IS MUCH TO DECIDE
WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO SPEND OUR
INCOME ON MEDICATION. RENT OR
OTHER ESSENTIALS. JUST THIS YEAR
, MY MEDICARE COSTS WENT UP BY
14.9% HOW AM I FIXED INCOME
COUPLED WITH HAVING HARD EARNED
SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS
ELIMINATED? BY THE SOCIAL
SECURITY OFFICE AT SUPPOSED TO
BE ABLE TO AFFORD THESE COSTS.
SB 8 68. WILL HELP RETIREES LIKE
ME. HAVE A LITTLE PEACE OF MIND
AND MORE FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE
, SO WE WON'T HAVE TO REPLY AND
RELY ON OUR FAMILIES TO GET BY.
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION. I URGE YOU
TO SUPPORT CALIFORNIA RETIRED
TEACHERS BY SUPPORTING SB 8 68.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. EVERYONE
ELSE IS IN SUPPORT IN THE
AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE.
PLEASE COME FORWARD. PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
SUPPORT FOR THE BILL. MY NAME IS
DONALD HAUSER. REMEMBER OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETIRED TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION AND I SUPPORT ABC.
ABSOLUTELY SB 868. TIFFANY MARK
ON BEHALF OF CFT UNION OF
EDUCATORS AND CLASSIFIED
PROFESSIONALS IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, DOROTHY JOHNSON BEHALF
OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, PLEASED
TO SUPPORT THIS MEASURE.
JOYCELYN MARTINEZ WEIGHED WITH
THE CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS
RETIREMENT SYSTEM IN SUPPORT.
MARTHA ZERO GOES IDEAS
REPRESENTING THE DELTA KAPPA
GAMMA, CALIFORNIA IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU.
HELLO MY NAME IS GEORGIA MORE
I'M, A RETIRED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
TEACHER FROM THE CENTRUM OAN
VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
AND I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
JENNIFER BAKER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA RETIRED TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT ALONG
WITH PAT BOYD. GOOD MORNING,
SETH BRAMBLE HERE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
SPONSOR PROUD. PLEASE SUPPORT
THE BILL. THANK YOU. ANY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. OKAY,
SEEING NONE. FIRST OF ALL. WANNA
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. UM
AND THEN ALSO BE HERE WITHOUT
EDUCATORS. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
O'DONNELL AND RUBIO ARE BOTH
EDUCATORS THEMSELVES. SO I
TALKED WITH HIM FREQUENTLY ON
BILLS AND GET THEIR INPUT IS
VALUABLE. UM THE PENSION FOR A
TEACHER IS NOT VERY HIGH. THEY
DON'T GET SOCIAL SECURITY. AND
THAT'S REALLY A BIG ISSUE TO
MAKE SURE YOU TAUGHT OUR KIDS.
FOR SO MANY YEARS. YOU SHOULD BE
TAKEN CARE OF IN YOUR RETIREMENT
. AND THAT JUST MAKES ME ANGRY.
ONE THAT'S WHAT I'M PASSIONATE
ABOUT. INVESTMENT. OTHER THINGS
WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO MONKEY
AROUND WITH YOUR RETIREMENT. AND
THAT'S WHERE THE BIGGEST THING
UM SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SERVICE. I APPRECIATE IT, MR
O'DONNELL. YOU DID A GREAT JOB
FOR MR CORTEZ. I'M SURE HE'S
PROUD OF YOU. REPRESENTATIVE
BILL IF I COULD JUST CORRECT ONE
THING YOU STATED, YOU STATED
MYSELF IN ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RUBIO
ARE EDUCATORS WERE ACTUALLY
TEACHERS. UM A TEACHER IS
SOMEONE WHO GOES IN THE
CLASSROOM EVERY DAY, AND
TEACHERS AND EDUCATORS SOMEONE
RUNNING FOR OFFICE THAT WANTS TO
SOUND LIKE A TEACHER. I DON'T
KNOW, BECAUSE SOMETIMES PEOPLE
SAY THAT EDUCATORS I DON'T KNOW
I DON'T WANT TO. DON'T WANNA BE
DISRESPECTFUL. SO I WAS TRYING
TO I WAS TRYING TO TAKE THE HIGH
ROAD, BUT I WILL USE TEACHER
FROM NOW ON. TEACHER. OKAY. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. I LOVE ALL THE
TEACHERS. UM LET'S BRING BACK
THE COMMITTEE FOR QUESTIONS. MR
SARDO, YOUR COMMENT, SO YOU
KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST
FOR THIS, UM, IN COMPARISON TO
WHAT THE CHAIR COOPER WAS
TALKING ABOUT A LITTLE BIT
EARLIER GO YOU KNOW, WHERE IS
OUR BEST INVESTMENT? IT'S IN
THIS NOT IN POLITICAL DIVESTMENT
TYPE DECISIONS. THOSE COSTS MORE
FOR THE THING THAN THAN A
PROGRAM LIKE THIS DOES, UM, MY
WIFE IS A TAX PERSON, AND SHE
HAS A LOT OF TEACHERS THAT RELY
ON HER AND I SEE I SEE THE
STRUGGLES THAT THEY HAVE. AND SO
IT'S I'M I'M HAPPY TO BUILD
SUPPORT THIS TODAY. SO THANK
YOU. IS THAT A MOTION? MR
SEYARTO? SECOND. WE HAVE EMOTION
IN A SECOND. UM THERE'S NO
FURTHER DISCUSSION. UM MR
O'DONNELL WAS ACTUALLY CLOSING
YOUR BILL. I JUST THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR ASKED FOR AN I VOTE AND
THANK YOU TO THE TWO WITNESSES
WHO DID A FINE JOB TODAY, AND
I'M SURE IN THE CLASSROOM FOR
MANY YEARS AS WELL, I'M SURE.
UM, THANK YOU TO ALL THE
TEACHERS IN THE ROOM. TEACHERS
NOT EDUCATORS. UM WE'VE GOT A
1ST AND 2ND. MADAM SECRETARY
PAUL WROTE PAUL, PLEASE. THE
MOTION IS TO PASS AND WE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. COOPER COOPER. I
VOEPEL NOT VOTING, NOT VOTING.
CALDERON. RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL?
AYE. BLANCA RUBIO, BLANCA RUBIO
, I CR TO CR T. IT WAS ON
CALL, AND THAT'S WHERE WE MOVE
TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. SB 8 74.
MR OH, DONALD. THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR. ARE YOU READY? YES OKAY
WITH THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
AGAIN, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I
AM PLEASED TO PRESIDENT SB 874%
AGAIN ON BEHALF OF SENATOR
FORTESE WHO COULD NOT BE HERE
TODAY. IT'S STILL ONE COULD
ENCOURAGE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT HAVE
ADOPTED A MERIT SYSTEM TO SEEK
PROMOTIONS WITHOUT THE FEAR OF
LOSING THEIR JOBS. THIS BILL
WILL GIVE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR
PRIOR CLASSIFICATION IF THEY ARE
PROMOTED BUT FAILED TO COMPLETE
THE PROBATION PERIOD FOR THE NEW
POSITION. SB 874 WILL ENCOURAGE
QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES TO SEEK
PROMOTIONS. THIS IS IMPORTANT
BECAUSE SCHOOLS ARE FACING
SEVERE STAFFING SHORTAGES,
SOMETHING I WITNESSED BACK IN
THE FALL WHEN I WENT BACK INTO
THE CLASSROOM. THIS BILL IS
SPONSORED BY THE CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
WITH THE SPORT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA LEVER FOR LABOR
FEDERATION, AND S E I. U
CALIFORNIA I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. AND WITH ME IS
MATT BROUGHT A REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION. MR CHAIR, MR. CHAIR
MEMBERS. MATT BROUGHT HERE ON
BEHALF OF CSKA WHO ARE PROUD
SPONSORS OF SB 8 A
KNOW, I'LL KEEP MY COMMENTS
PRETTY BRIEF HERE. CURRENTLY NON
MERIT STATUS MAKES CLEAR THAT IF
AN EMPLOYEE DOES NOT PASS
PROBATION FOR PROMOTIONAL
POSITION, THE EMPLOYER RETURNS
TO THE PREVIOUS CLASSIFY
CLASSIFICATION. WITH THE RIGHTS
OF A PERMANENT EMPLOYEE THAT
INCLUDES DISCIPLINARY DUE
PROCESS AND THE REQUIREMENT OF
JUST CAUSE FOR ANY ADVERSE
ACTION. UM, THE BILL JUST
CLARIFIES THAT THOSE SAME
PRACTICES APPLYING MERIT
DISTRICTS. IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE
AND NON CONTROVERSIAL AND
RECEIVED 33 VOTES IN THE SENATE
. I URGE YOUR I VOTE AND HAPPY
TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU WITNESSES SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL IN THE ROOM. JULIA
GRIFFIN WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. SEEING OTHER
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT ANY
WITNESSES. AN OPPOSITION I'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
FOR ANY COMMENTS. IS THERE A
MOTION? I'LL MOVE THE ITEM
SECOND. BUT THE 1ST AND 2ND MR
DONALD REJECTED CLOSE. ASK FOR
MY VOTE, MR CHAIR. MADAM
SECRETARY. CAN WE HAVE ROLL
CALL, PLEASE? THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS. COOPER COOPER. I'VE OPAL
GATHERED ON RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL
, DONALD I BLANCA RUBIO BLANCA
RUBIO, I SAY ARE, TOO, SO I THAT
BUILDS ON CALL. WE NEED AUTHORS
. SO IF SENATE STAFF IS WATCHING
, GET YOUR MEMBER DOWN HERE WE
HAVE NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE AND
COME IN AND GO RIGHT UP SO I
NEED YOU HERE, PLEASE, AUTHORS,
PLEASE HERTZBERG'S HERZBERG
CENTER, LAIRD AND SENATOR LEYVA
CENTER SKINNER.
SENATOR LAIRD TO SEE YOU. AH! NO
NO, NO, THANK YOU FOR COMING. UM
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER 11. SB 6 47, SENATOR
LAIRD, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO
PRESENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR
CHAIR AND LET ME ALSO JUST
BRIEFLY SAY THAT THERE IS AN
ITEM ON CONSENT. ON SPECIAL
DEATH BENEFITS FOR FALLEN
OFFICERS, AND WE HAD A SITUATION
WHERE SHERIFF SERGEANT WAS
KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY AND
IN HIS CHILD WAS BORN FIVE DAYS
LATER, AND HE WAS THAT CHILD GOT
INFERIOR BENEFITS THAT BILL
FIXES IT FOR THAT AND ANOTHER
FALLEN POLICE OFFICER AND
FIREFIGHTER. IT'S ON CONSENT, SO
I'M REALLY THANKS TO ALL OF YOU
FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THAT. BRING
IT FORWARD, BUT I AM HERE. ABOUT
TWO BILLS IN THE FIRST ONE IS
SENATE BILL 6 47, AND IT
CLARIFIES THE EFFECTIVE DATE. OF
THE EMPLOYMENT AND CIVIL
SERVICES. THE DATE THE EMPLOYEE
POINT REPORTS TO WORK AND BEGINS
PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF THE
JOB. THIS YEAR SINCE THE BILL
INTRODUCTION DEADLINE THE COURTS
AND ISSUED A NARROW DECISION.
THAT FOUND THAT THE APPOINTMENT
OCCURS ON THE DATE, THE EMPLOYEE
ACCEPTS THE OFFER. WHILE THE
COURT'S HOLDING WAS LIMITED TO A
TIMELY AVOIDING OF GOOD FAITH.
UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENT IN THAT
QUESTION. THE DECISION RAISED
QUESTIONS OF WHETHER THE COURT'S
REASONING EXTENDS TO OTHER
PERSONNEL ISSUES SUCH AS PAY
BENEFITS, PROBATIONARY PERIOD
SENIORITY AND SERVICE CREDITS.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO
CLARIFY THAT THE EFFECTIVE DATE
OF APPOINTMENT IN CIVIL SERVICE
APPOINTMENT IS TO DATE THE
EMPLOYEE REPORTS TO WORK AND
BEGINS PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF
JOB. WHICH IS THE COMMON
PRACTICE OF THE SOLUTION WILL
NOT IMPACT CURRENT STATE
EMPLOYEES PAY BENEFITS OR
SERVICE CREDITS. THE INTENT OF
THIS PROPOSAL SIMPLY CODIFY
EXISTING PRACTICE INTO LAW. AND
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE
CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS TO ADDRESS ANY
ISSUES AND TO REINFORCE THAT THE
INTENT OF THE BILL IS NOT TO
CHANGE ANY PREVIOUS PRACTICE OR
POLICY, BUT REINFORCE HOW THE
STATE UM, WELL, FAIRLY IMPLEMENT
THIS AND IT AFFECTS A NUMBER OF
THINGS. BUT NOT THERE ARE
CERTAIN ISSUES, PERS. IS REALLY
CLEAR. THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE
PERSON'S DEFINITION OF WHEN AN
EMPLOYEE STARTS TO GET SERVICE,
A SERVICE CREDIT. AND. AND THERE
IS ANOTHER ISSUE ABOUT IF
SOMEBODY REPORTS TO WORK AND HIS
MOVES TO AN EMERGENCY. THIS WILL
ALLOW THEM TO REPORT TO THE
EMERGENCY AND NOT HAVE TO START
THE JOB WHEN THAT HAPPENS. WE'RE
STILL WORKING WITH THE
CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS TO ADDRESS ANY
ISSUES AND RE ENFORCE THE INTENT
FOR SUPPORT. THE INTENT THAT
THIS BILL IS NOT TO CHANGE ANY
PREVIOUS OUR PRACTICE. IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM TO ANSWER ANY
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, OR JOSEPH
RUGGIERO, THE STAFF SERVICES
MANAGER WITH THE STATE PERSONNEL
BOARD. MARIO GUERRERO, THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATION
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES IN THE STATE PERSONNEL
BOARD, AND LAURIE GILL HAND THE
POLICY DIVISION CHIEF OF THE
STATE. OF PERSONNEL BOARD. I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE. THANK YOU, SENATOR. ANYONE
THIS IS SUPPORTED THIS BILL IN
THE ROOM. SEEING NONE. ANYONE?
THIS IS AN OPPOSITION.
HELLO MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. ERIN
REED, REPRESENTING CAL FIRE
LOCAL TO 881. SENATOR LARRY IS
ONE OF OUR BEST FRIENDS. HE
KNOWS CAL FIRE AS MUCH AS
ANYBODY IN THIS BUILDING.
BECAUSE HE WAS AGENCY SECRETARY
FOR NATURAL RESOURCES. SO UH AND
HE'S WORKING WITH CPF. BUT HE'S
ALSO WORKING WITH CAL FIRE WHERE
THE LARGEST LOCAL AND CPF, SO
THE CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN WITH
CPF, BUT THEY NEED TO BE WITH
CAL FIRE. WE'RE A LITTLE BIT
CONCERNED. I'M NOT OFFICIALLY
GOING TO SAY WE WANT TO SEE THIS
BILL STOPPED. WE WANT TO WORK
WITH THE SENATOR. AND WITH
CALLIE CHAR. BUT WE HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT SENIORITY. FOR
EXAMPLE, YOU CAN BE APPOINTED TO
A JOB AND THEN THERE'S A DELAY
BETWEEN THAT APPOINTMENT DATE
AND THE DATE YOU ACTUALLY TAKE
THE JOB AND THEY THEY'RE HIRING
DOZENS OF PEOPLE, SOMETIMES
SEVERAL DOZEN PEOPLE AT A TIME,
PARTICULARLY IN FIRE SEASON. AND
WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS IT IMPACTS
YOUR SENIORITY IF THERE'S A
DELAY, AND YOU'RE ACTUALLY
TAKING YOUR JOB AND STARTING
YOUR JOB, BUT YOU WERE HIRED A
WEEK AGO OR EVEN A MONTH AGO. UH
THEN THE START DATE BECOMES THE
DATE FOR PURPOSES OF SENIORITY
AND SENIORITY MATTERS A LOT AS
AS SENATOR KNOWS IN THE FIRE
SERVICE SENIORITY, WHETHER IT'S
FOR OVER TIME, WHETHER IT'S FOR
DAYS OFF VACATION. A NUMBER OF
THINGS ARE TRIGGERED BY
SENIORITY, SO WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE EXTRA SURE BE EXTRA
CAUTIOUS THAT THIS HAS NO
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THAT. SO
WE'LL BE WILLING TO WORK WITH
THE SENATOR ON THAT. HE KNOWS AS
EVERYBODY. CAL FIRE HAS ONE OF
THE MOST RUGGED SCHEDULES THEIR
TRAINING HIRING. IN SCHEDULING
IS PROBABLY THE MOST COMPLICATED
OF ANY DEPARTMENT IN ALL OF
STATE GOVERNMENT. UH IT'S TAKEN
ME 40 YEARS TO REALLY UNDERSTAND
IT, AND I'M SURE AS AGENCY
SECRETARY YEAH, HE KNOWS A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE
COMPLEXITIES OF CAL FIRE AND THE
UNUSUAL WORK WEEK THAT THEY
WORK. 72 HOUR WORK WEEK. UM SO
WE HAVE TO JUST BE REALLY
CAUTIOUS. SO I JUST WANTED TO
COME UP AND SAY THAT WE WILL
WORK WITH HIM. IF IN THE END WE
CAN'T REACH AGREEMENT, WE WILL
ASK TO BE REMOVED FROM THE BILL,
AND SO WE CAN WORK ON IT OVER A
LONGER PERIOD OF TIME IS GONNA
BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO GET
CAL FIRE FIREFIGHTERS TO SIT
DOWN AT THE TABLE BECAUSE
THEY'RE ALL OUT ON VIRUS EVEN
RIGHT NOW. SO I'M HAVING
DIFFICULTY TALKING TO THEM
BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING CRAZY.
THEY WORK ON A FIRE A MONTH AT A
TIME WITHOUT A SINGLE DAY OFF,
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INDULGENCE. THANK YOU. WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION. I'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
QUESTIONS? DISCUSSION. MR SARTO
. I'VE GOT EMOTION IN A SECOND,
SO AND KIND OF IN LINE WITH
VIDEOS TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE
THERE ARE A LOT OF THE SENIORITY
BASED STAFF. UM HAVE HAVE YOUR
DISCUSSIONS WITH ANYBODY BEEN.
ARE YOU DISCUSSING THESE ISSUES
BECAUSE THEY BECOME REAL WHEN
THE BILL IF THE BILL PASSES IT
WILL CREATE SOME PROBLEMS WITH
REGARD TO THAT. AND ALSO, UM YOU
KNOW, ACADEMY START DATES IS ARE
THEY CONSIDERING THAT AN
OFFICIAL START OF YOUR FIRST DAY
AT WORK? BECAUSE GOING INTO THE
ACADEMY IS KIND OF THE PRECURSOR
TO ACTUALLY GOING ON THE JOB. IF
YOU'RE PAID TO GO TO THE ACADEMY
, AND THAT HAPPENS TO AND THAT
IS TO START DAY AND WHAT WE'RE
REALLY TRYING TO DO IS JUST
CLARIFY EXISTING PRACTICE, SO WE
DON'T BRACE THESE OTHER ISSUES.
HAVING SAID THAT AH, WE ARE
WORKING WITH FIREFIGHTERS, BOTH
CAL FIRE AND PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS TO MAKE SURE THERE
ARE NOT ANY UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES AND WE INTEND TO
STILL WORK AND EXACTLY AS MR
REID SAID PART OF THE ISSUE HAS
BEEN THAT EVERYBODY'S OUT IN THE
FIELD AND WE CAN'T GET THE
ADEQUATE FEEDBACK SO RATHER THAN
JUST CARVED THEM OUT, OR DO
SOMETHING DRAMATIC, WE WANT TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM AND
SEE IF WE CAN GET TO SOLUTION
THAT JUST IS THE ACTUAL PRACTICE
ASSURANCES. I'M PRETTY
COMFORTABLE WITH THE BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SENATOR LAIRD. WE'D LIKE TO
CLOSE ON YOUR BILL. JUST I THINK
THIS HAS BEEN A GOOD DISCUSSION.
IT'S MADE IT CLEAR AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN IPHONE.
WE GOT EMOTION. SECOND, MADAME
SECRETARY. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
THE MOTION IS DO PASS AND RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. COOPER COOPER.
I'VE OPAL CALDERON. GATHERED ON
I. RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL. WELL,
DONALD I BLANCA RUBIO. BLANCA
RUBIO, I SAY ARE TWO SEYARTO I
THAT BUILDS ON CALL. NEXT UP IS
ITEM NUMBER 12. SB 9 57. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. MR CHAIR. I WOULD
LIKE TO START BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND THANK
THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
COLLABORATION ON THIS BILL. THIS
WOULD PLACE THE SANTA CRUZ
METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DISTRICT
UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS
SUPPORT TO ADJUDICATE ALLEGED
COMPLAINTS OF LABOR VIOLATIONS.
CURRENT LAW GOES TO THE COURT.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHO HAS
THE DEEP POCKETS TO DO IT IN THE
COURT. THIS IS SUPPORTED BY
VARIOUS UNIONS, S E I U AND
SMART LOCAL 23, WHICH
SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT'S BOTH
THE UNIONS THAT ARE AT THE
TRANSIT DISTRICT, SO THEY'RE IN
AGREEMENT. AND ALSO ENJOYS THE
SUPPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION. TEAMSTERS HANDFUL OF
OTHER LABOR ORGANIZATIONS.
THERE'S NO REGISTERED OPPOSITION
. I HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH
SANTA CRUZ METRO MANAGEMENT
ABOUT THIS AND THEY WILL
CONSIDER THEIR OFFICIAL POSITION
LATER PASSED OUT OF THE SENATE
LABOR COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY ON A
50 VOTE, WITH BIPARTISAN SUPPORT
, TESTIFYING AND SUPPORT TODAY
ARE TERRY BRENNAN. OF C YOU AND
JAMES SANDOVAL, THE ORGANIZER
AND GENERAL CHAIRPERSON OF SMART
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION LOCAL 23
, WHICH IS IN SANTA CRUZ. SO
THANK YOU AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN IPHONE. THANK YOU,
SENATOR. ANYONE THIS IS
SUPPORTING THIS BILL. GOOD
MORNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS JAMES SANDOVAL. I'M A
BUS DRIVER FROM SANTA CRUZ,
CALIFORNIA AND I'M ALSO THE
GENERAL CHAIR FOR THE BUS
DRIVERS AND PARATRANSIT DRIVERS
AT SANTA CRUZ METRO. I JUST WANT
TO THANK JOHN LAIRD STAFF. AND
JOHN LAIRD HIMSELF FOR PROPOSING
THIS VERY MUCH NEEDED
LEGISLATION. THIS IS GOING TO BE
SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NEEDED A
COUPLE OF TIMES THROUGHOUT THE
YEARS AS YOU'D IMAGINE ANY
EMPLOYER IN PLAY RELATIONSHIP.
THERE'S QUITE A FEW BUMPS THAT
HAPPENED ON THE ROAD, AND WE
HAVEN'T HAD ACCESS TO THIS TYPE
OF TOLD BEFORE, AND IT IS A VERY
EFFECTIVE TOOL BECAUSE IT'S AN
AGENCY THAT'S DESIGNED FOR
CONFLICT RESOLUTION. AND IT
WOULD HELP PUSH US THROUGH THESE
BUMPS ON THE ROADS OF THE
INEVITABLE BUMPS ON THE ROAD
BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES
, SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE
THIS SAME TOOL THAT OTHER UNIONS
HAVE, UM AND, UM IT'S A WAY OF
KEEPING BOTH THE UNION AND
EMPLOYER ACCOUNTABLE TO MAKING
SURE WE'RE ALWAYS BARGAINING.
GOOD FAITH, SO I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE AND THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS MONICA SANDOVAL. I AM MARRIED
TO A SENECAS TRANSIT DRIVER AND
I SUPPORT SB 957. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR,
EDWARDO MARTINEZ WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION AND
SUPPORT. JULIA GRIFFIN WITH THE
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE
COUNTY MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MR CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE MEMBERS LOUIS COST A
WITH THE STATE LEGISLATIVE BOARD
OF THE SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL
AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS.
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION. SMART
TD AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MATT
BROAD FOR THE TEAMSTERS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANY WITNESSES, AN OPPOSITION.
LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMUNITY. ANY QUESTIONS? IS
THERE A MOTION? A SECOND THAT
THE 1ST AND 2ND SENATOR LAIRD,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A CLOSE?
I JUST I APPRECIATE ALL THE
TESTIMONY AND IN THE PREVIOUS
HEARING, MRS SANDOVAL
REPRESENTED HERSELF AS A WRITER
, SO I APPRECIATE THE DIFFERENT.
UH, OCCUPATION SHE HAS USED IN
TESTIFYING. THANK YOU REDIRECT.
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST TONIGHT.
THANK YOU, MADAME. SECRETARY.
ROLL CALL, PLEASE. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED. AND WE WILL
BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. COOPER COOPER. I
VOEPEL CALDERON. GATHERED ON I.
RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL. OH DONALD,
I BLANCA RUBIO. BLANCA RUBIO. I
SEYARTO SEE HER TO NOT VOTING
BILLS ON CALLED THE ITEM NUMBER
10. SB 13 13, SENATOR HERTZBERG.
GOOD MORNING AND. PLEASE FEEL
FREE TO PROCEED. THANK YOU,
SHERIFF. UM YOU KNOW? LIKE THE
EASIEST. WAY TO EXPLAIN THIS
BILL IS BY READING THE FIRST
SENTENCE. IT SAYS. THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES SHALL NOT
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANY
EMPLOYEES, A MEMBER OF A
RECOGNIZED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION
DOING THE FOLLOWING AND LIST
THAT WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING THIS
FIGHT SINCE 1999. UNIONS HAD TO
ORGANIZE GOTTEN THE BEEF WITH
THE COUNTY, THEN
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GILBERT STUDIO
AND 2000 AND TWO MY ROOMMATE AT
THE TIME. PASSED LEGISLATION
SAID THEY CAN'T DISCRIMINATE AND
THEY'RE STILL DOING IT. THEY'RE
STILL DOING IT. IT IS A DISPUTE
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE
HAVE TENSIONS BETWEEN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT COUNTY GOVERNMENT.
AND STATE GOVERNMENT IN TERMS OF
THESE KINDS OF ISSUES THAT IT
HAS TO SOME 20 YEARS LATER COME
BACK, BUT WE'RE STILL IN A
SITUATION WHERE THERE'S OFFERING
NON UNIONIZED EMPLOYEES, ONE
BENEFIT AND NOT OFFERING THOSE
BENEFITS TO OTHER UNIONIZED
EMPLOYEES. AND WE JUST WANT A
FAIR DEAL WITH THAT. I WILL TURN
OVER TO MY WONDERFUL WITNESS AND
TAKE IT FROM THERE. I HOPE I CAN
LIVE UP TO THAT. GOOD MORNING,
MR CHAIR GEORGE OSBORNE FOR THE
UNION OF AMERICAN PHYSICIANS IN
DENTIST ASKED ME LOCAL 206.
WHERE THE SPONSOR OF SB 13, 13,
AND, OF COURSE, RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE FOR THIS
MEASURE. UM THANK YOU, SENATOR
HERZBERG FOR CARRYING THIS BILL.
IN SUPPORT OF A LEVEL PLAYING
FIELD. FOR ORGANIZED WORKING
PEOPLE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY.
THIS BILL WOULD PROHIBIT THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FROM
DISCRIMINATING AGAINST AN
EMPLOYEE WHO IS A MEMBER OF A
RECOGNIZED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION
BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, LIMITING
THE EMPLOYEE'S HEALTH BENEFIT
PLAN. IN ROBIN OPTIONS OR
ELIGIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN
HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS. THE BILL
WOULD STATE THAT THE ADDITION OF
THIS PROVISION DOES NOT
CONSTITUTE A CHANGE. IN THE LAW.
BUT IT'S MERELY DECLARATORY OF
EXISTING LAW. AND I BELIEVE THAT
OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS, THAT S
E I U RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A
RESTATEMENT OF EXISTING LAW. SB
13 13 DOES NOT REQUIRE THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES PROVIDES
ENHANCED HEALTH BENEFITS AT AN
INCREASED COST TO UNIONIZED
EMPLOYEES. THAT WOULD NOT BE
AVAILABLE TO THEM ABSENT TO BILL
INSTEAD, IT WOULD REQUIRE PARODY
AMONGST COUNTY EMPLOYEES. MM
BARGAINING WITH THE COUNTY OF L
A U A. P D IS REQUESTED TO HAVE
ALL UNION MEMBERS PUT INTO THEIR
MEGA FLEX PLAN AND EVERY
BARGAINING SESSION AND WE'VE
BEEN STONEWALLED. IN EVERY
BARGAINING SESSION AND TOLD THAT
THE COURT DECISION THAT THE
COUNTY DECIDES SOCIETY AND THAT
THE COUNTY DID NOT HAVE TO STOP
DISCRIMINATING AGAINST UNION
REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES. IN THE
COUNTY HAS CONSISTENTLY REJECTED
THAT PROPOSAL. BRITT PARITY AND
FAIRNESS IS ALL THE BILL
REQUIRES. AND THAT IS WHAT YOU A
PD ASKED ME IS REQUESTING WITH
SP 13 13, AND WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. HANK YOU
ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? JULIA
GRIFFIN WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND SUPPORT
ANYONE. THIS IS AN OPPOSITION.
SAYING THAT I'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS,
MR SEYARTO? SO THE
DISCRIMINATION IS HAPPENING.
BETWEEN. ESSENTIALLY THE LABOR
AND THE MANAGEMENT. IS THAT
WHERE THIS DISCRIMINATION IS
TAKING PLACE? WELL THAT'S WHERE
WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE IN BENEFITS
WHEN YOU GO FROM BEING ON THE
LABOR SIDE, WHICH I WAS AND WHEN
YOU GO ON TO THE MANAGEMENT
SIDE. WHEN YOU GO TO THE
MANAGEMENT SIDE. THEY DON'T HAVE
THE BENEFIT OF. THE COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING THAT THE LABOR HAD SO
THE LABOR SIDE BEEN A DOES
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR HEIR
THEIR BENEFITS, WHICH INCLUDE
HEALTH BENEFITS. AND THEN THE
MANAGEMENT SIDE HAS A PROCESS
THAT THEY GO THROUGH. SO IT
SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE SAYING THAT
SOMEHOW THE MANAGEMENT SIDE THAT
DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO
BARGAIN AS DOES THE UNION. IS
BEING THE UNIONS BEING
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ON THE
MANAGEMENT SIDE. THE ACTUAL
SITUATION. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
SEYARTO IS THAT CERTAIN MEMBERS
OF PPD. HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED
INTO THE MEGA FLEX PLAN MANY
YEARS AGO. HOWEVER, NEW. MEMBERS
COME IN BEING HIRED BY THE
COUNTY ARE NOT OFFERED THOSE
SAME BENEFITS BECAUSE THEY'RE
MEMBERS OF THE UNION. SO THERE
IS DISCRIMINATION REPRESENTED
GROUP. PARDON ME THERE
REPRESENTED GROUP AND THEY ARE
WITHIN WITHIN THE UNION, BUT
THEY'RE BEING DISCRIMINATED
AGAINST, UH WHEN COMPARED TO THE
OLDER MEMBERS, IF YOU WILL. BY
THE COUNTY RULES. AND THAT'S
WHAT WE'RE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
HERE TALKING ABOUT. TODAY IT'S
NOT A LABOR MANAGEMENT
DISTINCTION IS EXACTLY RIGHT FOR
LABOR. WELL IT THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES IN THE LABOR
MANAGEMENT IN HOW THEY
MANAGEMENT IS NOT UNIONIZED. I
CONTINUE TO PAY DUES AS A
MANAGEMENT SIDE. BUT I WAS NOT
REPRESENTED BY THE UNION. SO I'M
NOT QUITE SURE WHY WE'RE JUST
WE'RE NOT USING THE COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING PROCESS, TOO. IF YOU
WANT THE BENEFITS BECAUSE ONE OF
THE THINGS IS ON THE ON THE
MANAGEMENT SIDE, YOU HAVE OLDER
SET OF EMPLOYEES. AND THERE WERE
DIFFERENT BENEFITS THAT ARE
IMPORTANT TO THAT OLDER SET THAT
IF YOU WERE GIVING TO THE OTHER
SIDE THEY MIGHT NOT BE AS
IMPORTANT TO THEM BECAUSE THEY
DON'T USE THEM AS MUCH. UM I IN
ANOTHER WORDS, 22 YEAR OLDS
DON'T USUALLY NEED CATARACT
SURGERY WERE OLDER ONES DO SO
THEY MIGHT WANT COVERAGE THAT
COVERS THAT. AND SO BY BY SAYING
NO, NO, YOU ALL HAVE TO HAVE
EXACTLY WHAT THEY HAVE. UM THAT
IT RAISES THE EXPENSES FOR OTHER
THINGS THAT MIGHT BE LEFT OUT.
FOR THE UNION SIDE. THE UNION
REPRESENTED SIDE. FOR BECAUSE
IT'S JUST TOO EXPENSIVE FOR
EVERYBODY. AND THERE AND IT'S A
BENEFIT. A LOT OF PEOPLE WON'T
EVEN BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE
OF, SO I I'M JUST CONCERNED
ABOUT THIS WORD DISCRIMINATION
BETWEEN THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO
BE DIFFERENCES WHEN YOU HAVE A
REPRESENTED GROUP VERSUS A NON
REPRESENTED GROUP, AND USUALLY
THE NON REPRESENTED GROUP IS THE
ONE THAT LOSES. BUT I UNDERSTAND
THIS INTRICATELY BECAUSE I
PERSONALLY HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL
THOSE. YES, SIR. I'M SURE YOU
DO. BUT FLAGS SITUATION EXISTS
TODAY WHERE WE HAVE A MEMBER
THAT'S IN MEGA FLEX WORKING SIDE
BY SIDE. WITH A MEMBER WHO IS
NOT ALLOWED TO BE IN MEGA FLEX
BECAUSE OF THE COUNTY RULE, AND
THAT'S WHERE THE DISCRIMINATION
LIES WE BELIEVE, AND THAT'S WHAT
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL WILL
HELP US. CORRECT ALRIGHT, WELL,
I APPRECIATE THANK YOU, SIR.
EXPLANATIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY WE
HAVE MOTION ON THIS. EMOTION. A
SECOND, UM VERY CLOSE PUBLIC
COMMENT. I'M HERE TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS. SORRY. OKAY
PRESENTING IN ANOTHER COMMITTEE
FEED WITH L. A COUNTY IN
OPPOSITION, STILL TOTALLY
UNDERSTANDABLE. OKAY? OF COURSE
, PUBLIC COMMENT IS THE DAY
TODAY, UM TAKE IT BACK. SENATOR
HERTZBERG WAS THAT CLOSE?
RESPECTFULLY AS WHEN I VOTE.
OKAY? UM, MADAM SECRETARY WILL
CALL, PLEASE. THE MOTION IS DO
PASS, AND WE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
COOPER COOPER. IVO PELL,
CALDERON CALDERON, AYE,
RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL O'DONNELL I,
BLANCA RUBIO. BLANCA RUBIO. I CR
22 NOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT UP. WE HAVE
NUMBER 13. SB 9 31, SENATOR
LEYVA. GOOD MORNING. HOW ARE
YOU? HOW ARE YOU, SIR? EXCELLENT
THANK YOU. VERY GOOD. WELL, GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR. GOOD MORNING
MEMBERS. I AM EXCITED TO PRESENT
TO USB 9 31 THIS MORNING. SENATE
BILL 9, 31 AND CLOSE IT IMPOSES
PENALTIES ON PUBLIC EMPLOYERS
FOR UNLAWFULLY ATTEMPTING TO
DETER OR DISCOURAGE EMPLOYEES
FROM JOINING OR PARTICIPATING IN
A UNION. AS A LEGISLATURE. WE
HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT
PUBLIC EMPLOYERS ARE PROHIBITED
FROM DETERRING UNION MEMBERSHIP
BY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND
APPLICANTS FOR THE PUBLIC FOR
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT. PUBLIC
EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS ARE ALSO
ALREADY AUTHORIZED TO BRING
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES CHARGES
YOU LPS, UM, AT THE PUBLIC
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS BOARD, PERP.
FOR PRECISELY THIS TYPE OF
BEHAVIOR IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
, THOUGH SOMETIMES PUBLIC
EMPLOYERS HAVE SENT OUT AND ANTI
UNION COMMUNICATIONS REPEATEDLY
TO EXISTING BARGAINING UNITS OR
WORKERS ATTEMPTING TO
COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN
UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN AN EMPLOYEE
ORGANIZATIONS SUCCEEDS IN
PETITIONING PERV TO GRANT AN
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE, PERP CAN
ONLY ISSUE A CEASE AND DESIST
REQUIRING THE EMPLOYER TO POST
IN THOSE VIOLATION. SADLY BY
THAT POINT, THE DAMAGE IS
ALREADY DONE. IT IS CLEAR THAT
SOME PUBLIC EMPLOYERS WHO ARE
STILL WILLING TO BREAK THE LAW
AND WILL CONTINUE TO VIOLATE
THEIR EMPLOYEES RIGHTS TO
ORGANIZE UNLESS THE LEGISLATURE
ACTS. BY PROVIDING MEANINGFUL
CONSEQUENCES. SP 9 31 WILL
IMPOSE A $1000 PENALTY PER
VIOLATION PER AFFECTED EMPLOYEE
NOT TO EXCEED $100,000. BY
CREATING THIS FINANCIAL PENALTY
. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WILL
HOPEFULLY THINK TWICE BEFORE
PURPOSELY DISCOURAGING UNION
ACTIVITY IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR.
MEMBERS PERP WILL HAVE TO MAKE
THE DETERMINATION THAT A
VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED BEFORE
THE PENALTY CAN BE ASSESSED ONCE
A PUBLIC EMPLOYER HAS BEEN
DETERMINED BY PERP TO HAVE
VIOLATED THE LAW. IT MAKES SENSE
THAT A PENALTY SHOULD THEN BE
ASSESSED. SINCE THE EMPLOYER HAS
CLEARLY SHOWN ITS UNWILLINGNESS
TO DO THE RIGHT THING BY ITS
EMPLOYEES AS MUCH AS WE WOULD
LOVE FOR A CARROT TO MOTIVATE
PUBLIC EMPLOYERS TO FOLLOW. THE
LAW THAT DOES NOT ALWAYS HAPPEN,
AND WHEN IT DOESN'T A PENALTY
MAY BE MORE LIKELY TO
INCENTIVIZE THEM TO DO THE RIGHT
THING AND FOLLOW THE LAW HERE
WITH ME TODAY AND SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. IS EDUARDO MARTINEZ FROM
THE CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION
, AND THAT BROAD WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC
COUNCIL THE APPROPRIATE TIME. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, EDUARDO
MARTINEZ, WITH THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION, PROUD TO BE
HERE AS A CO SPONSOR OF SB 9 31.
THE BALANCE OF POWER AT THE
WORKPLACE IS HEAVILY TILTED IN
FAVOR OF EMPLOYERS. WORKERS
INDIVIDUALLY HAVE LITTLE POWER
OR CONTROL OVER ISSUES AFFECTING
WAGES, WORKING CONDITIONS AND
BENEFITS. THE ABILITY TO HAVE A
VOICE IN THESE MATTERS IS A KEY
REASON WHY WORKERS CHOOSE TO
JOIN A UNION UNIONS REPRESENT
WORKERS TENDING TOGETHER TO TRY
AND CREATE A BALANCE IN A SYSTEM
THAT IS CURRENTLY UNBALANCED. AS
A SENATOR MENTIONED A FEW YEARS
AGO, THE LEGISLATURE PASSED, UH
, LAWS ESSENTIALLY REQUIRING
LABOR NEUTRALITY FOR PUBLIC
EMPLOYERS. UNFORTUNATELY SOME
EMPLOYERS HAVE CHOSEN TO
DISREGARD THE LAW. AND SO SP 9
30 WAS. IT'S INTENDED TO BE THAT
INCENTIVE TO ENCOURAGE PUBLIC
EMPLOYERS TO COMPLY BY IMPOSING
A $1 PENALTY. $1000 PENALTY ON
PUBLIC EMPLOYERS PERFECTED
EMPLOYEE FROM FOR VIOLATIONS OF
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 35 50.
BY CREATING THIS FINANCIAL
PENALTY FOR DISCRIMINATION OF
THE DISSEMINATION OF ANTI UNION
COMMUNICATIONS. EMPLOYERS WILL
HAVE ADDED INCENTIVE TO END THIS
ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR. WORKERS SHOULD
HAVE THE FREEDOM TO EXERCISE
THEIR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
RIGHTS IF THEY SO CHOOSE WITHOUT
NEGATIVE OR ANTI UNION
SENTIMENTS FROM THEIR EMPLOYER.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR EYE
BOAT. MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS, MATT
BROAD HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS. WE ARE
ALSO A CO SPONSOR OF SB 9 31.
I'M GONNA DO MY BEST TO TRY TO
SORT OF ANTICIPATE. THE CHIEF
CONCERNS OF THE POSE AND LESS
SEMANTIC COALITION. I THINK ONE
THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A RIGHT TO
CURE IN THIS BILL. UM YOU KNOW,
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VIOLATIONS
HERE WHERE OUR RIGHT TO CURE.
WOULDN'T REALLY ADDRESSED THAT
THE ROOT OF THE VIOLATION, WHICH
IS THE EMPLOYER HAS PUT OUT A
ANTI UNION COMMUNICATION, AND
ONCE THEY DO THAT THE DAMAGE IS
DONE. I CAN THINK YOU KNOW WE'VE
WON IT PER FOR THE TEAMSTERS.
VIOLATION AT U C L A WHERE, UM,
BASICALLY U C L A HEALTH PUT OUT
A COMMUNICATION THAT WAS MYTH
AND MISSING FACTS ABOUT THE
TEAMSTERS UNION. OBVIOUSLY THERE
IS NO ABILITY TO CURE THAT. ONCE
YOU PUT THAT COMMUNICATION OUT.
THE DAMAGE IS DONE. SECOND
THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A PENALTY
THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE SIZE
OF THE EMPLOYER WERE WE SORT OF
FEEL LIKE WE'VE SOLVED FOR THAT.
WE HAVE $1000 PER AFFECTED
EMPLOYEE THAT DOESN'T EXCEED
100,000. SO IF YOU'RE A SMALL
EMPLOYER, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO
PAY THE PERFECTED EMPLOYEE. AND
SO WE'RE TRYING TO KIND OF
THREAD THE NEEDLE OF CREATING A
PENALTY BUT CREATING A PENALTY.
UM THAT THAT DOES TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE SIZE OF THE EMPLOYER
. FINALLY I JUST CONCLUDE BY
SAYING, WE'RE NOT ASKING THE
WORLD OF EMPLOYERS WERE ASKING
THEM TO COMPLY WITH EXISTING
LAW, WHICH THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THEM DO, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR
TRUE NEUTRALITY. SO WITH THAT I
WOULD URGE YOUR EYE BOAT AND I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. OOPS THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. ALEXANDRA
DURAN DYNASTY YOU CALIFORNIA,
PROUD OF CO SPONSORS URGING YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR MEMBERS LOUIS COSTA
WITH THE STATE LEGISLATIVE BOARD
OF THE SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL
AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION, SMART
TD AND SUPPORT. REALLY GRIPPING
WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
STATE COUNTY MUNICIPAL
EMPLOYEES, ALSO A CO SPONSOR AND
SUPPORT. MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
PAT RAN WITH AARON READING
ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING THE
ORANGE COUNTY EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT THANK
YOU. MR CHAIR MEMBERS, MIKE
MONEGAN ON BEHALF OF THE STATE
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES
COUNCIL AND SUPPORT THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR MEMBERS, DOUG SUPERS ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS AND
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING, JAMES
SANDOVAL ON BEHALF OF SMART
LOCAL 23 SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANY WITNESSES, AN
OPPOSITION?
GOOD MORNING, MR CHERRY MEMBERS
. DOROTHY JOHNSON BEHALF THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED. WE WANT
TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE DIALOGUE
WE'VE HAD WITH THE SPONSOR AND
THE AUTHORS OFFICE AND THE
SPONSOR HAS MOST OF OUR
AMENDMENTS CORRECT, BUT I DO
WANT TO CLARIFY. THAT WE ARE NOT
TRYING TO CHANGE EXISTING LAW
UNDER SECTION 3.50 THAT WOULD
PROHIBIT EMPLOYERS FROM
DISSUADING OR DISCOURAGING
PARTICIPATION. GROSS AND NOT
TRYING TO BLOCK THE PROPOSED
PENALTY. WE UNDERSTAND THE
INTENT THAT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO
PAY THE FINE, DON'T BREAK THE
LAW, AND WE DO APPRECIATE THE
AMENDMENTS TO STEM FRIVOLOUS OR
UNREASONABLE CLAIMS THAT ARE
BROUGHT AGAINST EMPLOYERS. BUT
WE ARE STILL DEEPLY CONCERNED
ABOUT THE APPROACH ON ATTORNEY
FEES UNDER THE LAW OR UNDER THIS
BILL IS WRITTEN. ONLY THE UNION
REPRESENTATIVES WOULD BE ABLE TO
COLLECT ATTORNEY'S FEES WHEN
THEY ARE THE PREVAILING PARTY.
AND WE APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS STATING THAT WHAT'S
GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR
THE GANDER. WE STRONGLY BELIEVE
THAT PREVAILING PARTY REGARDLESS
OF WHO IT IS. BE AT THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT. THE LOCAL AGENCY
SHOULD ALSO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE
ATTORNEY'S FEES, WHICH CAN BE AN
ESTIMATED 35 TO $50,000 IN THESE
INSTANCES. FURTHERMORE WE
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS IN THE
ANALYSIS, UH, STATING OUR
CONCERNS ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE
PENALTY. WE BELIEVE JUST THE
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DOESN'T
NECESSARILY INDICATE THE NUMBER
OR THE SIZE OF THEIR TOTAL
BUDGET. AND ALSO THE NUMBER OF
PRIOR OFFENSES. UH AND SO ON.
FOR THESE REASONS, WE REMAIN
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED, AND I HAVE
COLLEAGUES FROM THE RIVERSIDE
COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION,
URBAN COUNTIES IN CALIFORNIA AND
THE RURAL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES
OF CALIFORNIA WHO CAN BE HERE
TODAY? I'M SHARING THIS
POSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS MICHEL BEDARD HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED
TO CENTERVILLE 9 31. UNLESS THE
BILL AS AMENDED. WE UM I WOULD
JUST LIKE SOME AMENDMENTS THAT
CLARIFY WHEN THE PENALTIES FOR
DETERRING AND DISCOURAGING APPLY
WITHOUT SUCH CLARIFICATION, AND
WE'VE MADE ONE SUGGESTION THAT'S
HIGHLIGHTED IN THE ANALYSIS, BUT
WITHOUT CLARIFYING, WE'RE
CONCERNED ABOUT AN OVERLY
EXPENSIVE INTERPRETATION OF
DETERMINED DISCOURAGED. SO THAT
EVEN REASONABLE DISAGREEMENTS
BETWEEN LABOR AND MANAGEMENT,
WHICH IS A NATURAL ATTENTION. UM
COULD SUDDENLY BE SUBJECT TO
THESE PENALTIES, AND SO UNTIL
THERE'S SOME CLARIFICATION OF
WHAT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF
DETERMINED DISCOURAGE, WE REMAIN
OPPOSED. THANK THANK YOU, BUT
THIS IS AN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING, RYAN SUZANNE BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES, THE CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION
AND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES IN OPPOSITION UNLESS
AMENDED, CONSISTENT WITH THE
OPPOSITION WITNESS TESTIMONY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JOHN CHASE
FROM CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
, ALSO IN A POST UNLESS AMENDED
, APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE WITH
WITH SENATOR LABOR AND HER
SPONSORS. THANK YOU. MORNING
CHAIR MEMBERS, ELIZABETH
ESQUIVEL WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BUSINESS
OFFICIALS ALSO OPPOSE UNLESS
AMENDED POSITION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I'LL BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE A MOTION MR SEYARTO?
I'M SORRY. SO BASICALLY IF WE
WIND UP FINDING FINDING THE
PUBLIC AGENCY, THEY'RE MOVING
THE PUBLIC DOLLARS THAT ARE USED
FOR PAYING PEOPLE AND GIVING
THEM BENEFITS FROM ONE AGENCY TO
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AGENCY
ONLY IF THEY VIOLATE THE LAW.
RIGHT VIOLATE THE LAW. NO
PENALTY, RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND
THAT PART, BUT THEN IT BECOMES
WHAT VIOLATES THE LAW AND THEN
AND HOW IS THAT, UM, WITH WITH
WITHOUT THESE AMENDMENTS THAT I
READ THROUGH, AND I DON'T KNOW
THAT THEY'RE BAD AMENDMENTS. UM
UH, IT BECAUSE I CAN SEE IT
BECOMING AN INCENTIVE TO GO OUT
AND FIND STUFF SO THAT YOU CAN
HAVE HAVE THIS TRANSFER OF FUNDS
FROM ONE AGENCY TO ANOTHER. HOW
DO WE STOP THAT? SO LET ME TRY
TO TAKE A STAB AT THAT. AND THEN
I WILL ASK MR BROAD, SO IT'S
PRETTY EASY TO SHOW ITS AS
SOMEONE WHO WAS A UNION MEMBER
FOR 29 YEARS AND 11 MONTHS AND
WHO WORKED REPRESENTING? YEAH I
HAD TO QUIT JUST BEFORE I GOT
ELECTED SO ONLY 11 MONTHS. UM
AND AS SOMEONE WHO WORKED IN A
LOCAL UNION FOR 20 YEARS,
HELPING ORGANIZE WORKERS, I MADE
A LIST AND ANTICIPATION OF
QUESTIONS LIKE THIS. IT'S PRETTY
EASY TO PROVE WHEN AN EMPLOYER
HAS INTERFERED FEARED IN UNION
ORGANIZING ACTIVITY. THE
ATTACHED FLYERS TWO PAYCHECKS,
SO THAT WOULD BE EASY TO PROVE.
THEY HAVE VIDEOS RUNNING ON A
LOOP IN THE BREAK ROOM ABOUT
ANTI UNION WITH ANTI UNION
RHETORIC. THEY DO CAPTIVE
AUDIENCE MEETINGS. THEY HAVE ONE
ON ONE MEETINGS WITH MANAGEMENT
, AND THE MANAGEMENT ALSO MAKES
OFFHANDED REMARKS WALKING BY
EMPLOYEES ABOUT WHY THEY
SHOULDN'T JOIN A UNION OR WHY
THEY SHOULDN'T ORGANIZE. THAT
ONE I WILL GIVE YOU COULD BE A
LITTLE HARDER TO PROVE. BUT MOST
OF WHAT MANAGEMENT DOES IN AN
ANTI UNION ORGANIZATION
ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN IS PRETTY
EASY TO PROVE. SO I DON'T THINK
THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT AND I
DID WANT TO RESPOND TO THE
OPPOSITION. REASONABLE
DISAGREEMENTS ARE NOT PART OF AN
ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN, SO I'M NOT,
YOU KNOW, YOU AND I CAN DISAGREE
AS AN EMPLOYEE AND AN EMPLOYER,
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS
ABOUT. IT'S ABOUT AN ORGANIZING
CAMPAIGN. DID YOU WANT TO ADD
ANYTHING? YEAH I WOULD JUST ADD
REALLY QUICKLY THAT THE WAY 35
50 VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN ENFORCED
PERV AS IT'S BEEN INTERPRETED
VERY NARROWLY TO APPLY TO
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. THERE'S
ONLY BEEN A HANDFUL OF THESE
LAWSUITS, PERIOD BECAUSE, LIKE I
SAID, MY TESTIMONY 99.9% OF
PUBLIC EMPLOYERS DON'T HAVE A
PROBLEM VIOLATING EXISTING LAW,
WHICH IS WHY WE WANT TO COME UP
WITH THE PENALTY. UM AND SO YOU
KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY
SMALL NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS TO
BEGIN WITH. BUT WHEN WE DO GO TO
PERM, UM YOU KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE
TO LITIGATE. SO THIS IS BY NO
MEANS KIND OF A GET RICH, YOU
KNOW, QUICK SCHEME FOR THE
UNION. THE LIKE YOU NOTICED, I
NOTED, THE PENALTY IS
RECOVERABLE TO THE GENERAL FUND.
UM AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST
TRYING TO TAKE ACCOUNT THAT THIS
SOMETIMES TAKES YEARS TO RESOLVE
. IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE FOR THE
UNION AND YOU KNOW THE DAMAGE IS
DONE. EXISTING REMEDIES MIGHT BE
POSTING A CEASE AND DESIST
NOTICE. BUT THAT OBVIOUSLY
DOESN'T STOP THE EMPLOYER FROM
SORT OF VIOLATING EXISTING LAW.
ISN'T THERE A REMEDY FOR THE
PERSONS T FILE THAT IN COURT.
WITH THEIR EXACT IF THEY'RE
VIOLATING EXISTING LAW, IN OTHER
WORDS, IF THEY TRIED TO DO THIS
WHEN I WAS IN THE FIRE SERVICE
THE ASSOCIATION OR UNION WOULD
FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST THEM.
YOU GO THROUGH PERP FIRST, AND
IF YOU GET A FINDING PERV, THEN
YOU CAN GO TO COURT TO ENFORCE
IT, BUT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
START AT PERP FOR 35 50
VIOLATION. AND THE AND THE
DAMAGE IS DONE. SO YOU'RE TRYING
TO ORGANIZE FACILITY WORKERS
WANT TO EXERCISE THEIR FEDERAL
RIGHT TO ORGANIZE. SO IF YOUR
ONLY REMEDY IS TO GO TO PERV,
AND THEY HAVE TO POST A CEASE
AND DESIST, AS I SAID IN MY
STATEMENT THEN IT'S THE DAMAGE
IS ALREADY DONE. IF YOUR ONLY
REMEDY IS TO GO TO COURT, MOST
OF THESE ARE AVERAGE WORKERS
THAT DON'T MAKE A LOT OF MONEY.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE
MONEY TO DO THAT THE UNION MAY
OR MAY NOT DO THAT TAKE THEIR
CASE TO COURT. THIS IS A MUCH
EASIER THING TO SAY. SAY JUST
DON'T VIOLATE THE LAW, AND THEN
YOU WON'T HAVE TO PAY THE
PENALTY. IT'S JUST IT'S MEANT TO
BE SOMETHING THAT IS A DETERRENT
TO THE EMPLOYER, RIGHT. SO JUST
FOR JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WAS
NEVER CONVINCED BY I DON'T
REMEMBER GETTING ANYBODY WOULD
NEVER BE CONVINCED BY BY THE
LETTER IN A ATTACHED MY PAYCHECK
THAT SAID, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PART
OF THE UNION BECAUSE I'D BE
LOOKING AT MY PAYCHECK AND GOING
WELL. I DON'T KNOW, BUT ANYWAY,
SO THERE'S NOTHING. I APPRECIATE
THAT. BUT I CAN TELL YOU
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF
WORKERS ARE DETERRED BY THAT.
ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATIONS.
TAKE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. THEIR MOTION. FIRST.
SECOND SENATE-TV WITH DR CLOSE.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU, MADAME. SECRETARY.
ROLL CALL, PLEASE. THE MOTION IS
DO PASS, AND WE REFERRED TO THE
pCOMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
COOPER COOPER I VOEPEL CALDERON.
GATHERED ON RODRIGUEZ O'DONNELL.
O'DONNELL I BLANCA RUBIO. BLANCA
RUBIO. I SEYARTO SEYARTO NÓ CALL
. THANK YOU, UM, IN OUR LAST
ITEM NUMBER 14 SB 13 43 CENTRAL
EVA. HELLO AGAIN, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS SP 13 43 SEEKS TO ENSURE
THAT EVERY TEACHER HAS THE
RETRACTOR RETIREMENT SECURITY
AFFORDED TO THEM. FIRE STATE
PENSION SYSTEM. SPECIFICALLY
THIS BILL REQUIRES ALL NEWLY
CREATED CHARTER SCHOOLS TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE CALIFORNIA
STATE TEACHERS, RETIREMENT
SYSTEM ULCERS AND THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
SYSTEM. CALPERS ACCORDING TO CAL
STIRS BETWEEN 20 TO 40% OF NEWLY
CREATED CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE
OPTING FOR ALTERNATIVE
RETIREMENT SYSTEMS, WHICH IS
USUALLY A FOUR OH ONE K BY NOT
ALLOWING TEACHERS TO ACCESS THE
DEFINED BENEFIT TO THE SYSTEM.
TEACHERS ARE LEFT WITH
RETIREMENT OPTIONS THAT ARE
HEAVILY DEPENDENT ON MARKET
FLUCTUATIONS. CHARTER SCHOOLS
FUNDED WITH PUBLIC DOLLARS
SHOULD ENSURE THAT THEIR
EMPLOYEES ARE AFFORDED THE SAME
RETIREMENT OPPORTUNITIES AS ALL
OTHER PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. EVERY
TEACHER SHOULD HAVE THE SAME
OPTIONS, NO MATTER WHICH PUBLIC
SCHOOLS THEY DECIDED TO TEACH
AT. TEACHERS ALREADY DO NOT HAVE
ACCESS TO SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS. THEY SHOULD NOT BE
ADDITIONALLY, FINANCIALLY
HAMPERED. BY NOT HAVING TO
ACCESS BUT NOT HAVING ACCESS TO
CAL STIRS OR CALPERS TEACHER
SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE. SP 13 43
PUT SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE FOR
RETIREMENT PAYMENTS WHEN A
CHARTER SCHOOL FALLS BEHIND OR
SHUTS ITS DOORS COMPLETELY. WHEN
THIS OCCURS, THE COUNTY OFFICE
OF EDUCATION IN WHICH THE
CHARTER SCHOOL WAS LOCATED, HAS
BEEN REQUIRED TO PAY THE BILL.
THIS CAN LEAVE THE COUNTY OFFICE
OF EDUCATION WITH TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. IN
UNEXPECTED AND UNWARRANTED
RETIREMENT PAPER OBLIGATIONS. 13
43 CORRECTS THIS BY REQUIRING
COUNTY OFFICES OF EDUCATION TO
WITHHOLD A REASONABLE PORTION OF
A CHARTER SCHOOLS FUNDING
DISBURSEMENT. AND PAY AND PAY
THE RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS TO
EACH SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY BE 13
43 IS ABOUT PROVIDING ALL PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES WITH THE RETIREMENT
SECURITY THEY DESERVE AND ARE
AFFORDED. WITH ME TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT AND ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS IS TRISTAN BROWN WITH
THE CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
TEACHERS. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN I VOTE. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS,
TRISTAN BROWN WAS CF TO UNION
EDUCATORS AND CLASSIFIED
PROFESSIONALS. HERE IS THE
SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. WE SEE IT
AS A NET BENEFIT ON BOTH MICRO
AND MACRO LEVEL. ON THE MACRO
LEVEL. WE'VE NOTICED THAT CAL
STORIES ITSELF HAS PUT IN ITS
OWN REPORTS THAT WE CONSIDER
THIS A LEEK IN THE BOAT AS MORE
CHARTER SCHOOLS PROLIFERATE
WITHOUT PARTICIPATING IN STIRS.
THOSE ARE FEWER EDUCATORS THAT
STIRS WAS COUNTING ON BEING A
PART OF OUR TRADITIONAL PUBLIC
EDUCATION SYSTEM TO INCREASE
THEIR BUYING POWER, AND THUS THE
RETURNS ON A IN THEIR LATEST
REPORT FROM LAST YEAR, SAYING
THAT THERE'S PROBABLY 1%
INCREASED COSTS ALL OTHER ELIA'S
TO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE. ON
THE MICRO LEVEL FOR EDUCATORS,
RETIREMENT SECURITY, IT IS
CRUCIAL THAT THEY BE ABLE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THEIR PUBLIC
PENSION SYSTEM. MANY EDUCATORS
COME WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT
WHEN THEY ARE A PUBLIC EDUCATION
, THE PUBLIC EDUCATOR IN
CALIFORNIA WORKING AT A PUBLIC
SCHOOL, WHICH CHARTER SCHOOLS
ARE THAT THEY ARE MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC PENSION SYSTEM. ONLY TO
FIND PERHAPS 10 20 YEARS LATER,
THEY MIGHT NOT BE IS A RUDE
AWAKENING FOR ANYBODY IN THE
RETIREMENT SECURITY AND SO
PLUGGING THESE HOLES IN THE
BOAT. WE ARE SPONSORING THIS
BILL, SO THAT ALL FUTURE CHARTER
SCHOOLS AND CHARTER EDUCATORS
HOW THE RETIREMENT SECURITY THEY
DESERVE AND BE A PART OF THE
STIRS SYSTEM AS WELL AS OUR
CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES IN THE PER
SYSTEM. SO WITH THAT I'M HERE TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? CURRICULUM MARTINEZ
WEIGHED WITH THE CALIFORNIA
STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
AND SUPPORT. JULIA GRIFFIN WITH
THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE
COUNTY MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND
SUPPORT IT FOLLOWS YOU
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT. MATT BROAD FOR CSKA
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU
WITNESSES, AN OPPOSITION. VERY
WELL. THANK YOU. AND JUST PAUSE
. ONE SECOND SERGEANT, CAN YOU
PLEASE CALL SENATOR SKINNER'S
OFFICE? LET HER KNOW WE'VE GOT
ONE DOORMAN UNITS, HERS. YES MR
CHAIR MEMBERS DOMINIC TOMORROW
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
CHARTER SCHOOL ASSOCIATION, WITH
SOME RATHER NARROW OPPOSITION IN
THAT WE'RE NOT PHILOSOPHICALLY
OPPOSED TO THE CONCEPT OF
TEACHERS JOINING. SPURS OR STIRS
HAPPENS ALL THE TIME AND ART
STATISTICS SHOW THAT 90% OF
CHARTER SCHOOLS ALREADY
PARTICIPATE IN THAT, AND I KNOW
FROM MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
AS A MEMBER OF A BOARD THAT
OPERATED A CHARTER SCHOOL. I
THINK OUR SCHOOL WAS ONE OF THE
SCHOOLS THAT ACTUALLY PIONEERED
GETTING OUR TEACHERS INTO STIRS,
WHICH HERETOFORE HAD OR WHICH
BEFORE HADN'T UM, ACCEPTED
CHARTER SCHOOL TEACHERS AND WE
HAD SOMEBODY FROM STAIRS ON OUR
BOARD AND HE HELPED FACILITATE
THAT FOR OUR SCHOOL, AND I THINK
FOR A LOT OF OTHER SCHOOLS, SO,
UM, NOT OPPOSED TO JOINING
STIRS, IT'S JUST SOME OF THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE BILL, TIE
THE HANDS OF THOSE CERTAIN
SCHOOLS THAT MAY HAVE STARTED
THEIR RETIREMENT PROGRAMS PRIOR
TO STIRS ACCEPTING CHARTER
SCHOOL TEACHERS, AND WE'RE
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. WE'RE
CONCERNED THAT THERE ARE
OPERATIONAL ISSUES. YOU KNOW,
SOMETIMES YOU HAVE A RELATIVELY
LOW NUMBER OF CLASSIFIED STAFF
OR EMPLOYEES THAT DESIRE TO HAVE
MORE CONTROL OVER THE RETIREMENT
PLAN. HE'S THESE FACTORS FACTOR
INTO THAT, BUT, UM, I THINK OUR
OPPOSITION IS BASED ON JUST
TYING THE HANDS OF THOSE SCHOOLS
THAT HAD THOSE LIMITED NUMBER OF
SCHOOLS THAT EITHER DIDN'T
QUALIFY. IN OUR CONTINUING TO
OPERATE WITHOUT THEIR TEACHERS
BEING IN STIRS, AND IF YOU HAVE
A NEW SCHOOL OPERATING UP INSIDE
AN EXISTING SYSTEM, UM YOU WOULD
HAVE TO CREATE A SEPARATE
RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR THEM. SO
THESE ARE THE CONCERNS THAT WE
HAVE WITH THE BILL AND THEREFORE
ASK FOR YOUR NO VOTE, WHICH I
DON'T FEEL AS FORTHCOMING FROM A
LOT OF YOU. BUT THAT REQUEST
ANYWAY. YOU CAN ALWAYS ASK. YES,
ALWAYS ASKED. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL? CASE OF EMOTION. MR
MCDONALD WILL MOVE THE BILL, BUT
I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT
HERE. WHAT I SEE FROM EVERYONE I
HEAR FROM THE CHARTER SCHOOLS
TODAY IS THAT THEY WANT TO BE
PUBLIC WHEN THEY WANT TO BE
PUBLICLY, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO
BE PUBLIC WHEN THEY DON'T WANT
TO BE PUBLIC IF THEY WANT TO BE
PUBLIC SCHOOLS HEY, I'M ALL IN,
BUT THEY HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN
PUBLIC STATUTE WHEN I ACTUALLY
THINK THIS IS NOT NEW LAW, BUT I
THINK THAT CLARIFICATION OF
EXISTING LAW AND I DON'T KNOW IF
THIS HAS BEEN TESTED IN COURT. I
THINK IT SHOULD BE QUITE
FRANKLY. BUT IT'S MY OPINION
THAT ALL CHARGES SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES BECAUSE THEIR PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES RIGHT UH, SHOULD BE
MEMBERS OF EITHER STIRS OR
PERSONS. SO AGAIN, I THINK THIS
IS JUST CLARIFICATION OF WHAT
SHOULD BE EXISTING PRACTICE AND
EXISTING LAW. UM AND I GET THAT
THERE'S SOME ISSUES WITH SOME
WHO HAVEN'T BEEN IN THERE AND
THAT I THINK WILL WORK OUT. BUT
AGAIN, I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS
WHEN WE WANT TO BE PUBLIC IN ONE
MOMENT, NOT NOT PUBLIC. ANOTHER
MORE. APPRECIATE THE COMMENT
SOMEBODY MEMBER O'DONNELL AND
JUST YOU KNOW, I WOULD REMIND
YOU THAT FOR MANY YEARS UM OUR
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, TEACHERS WERE
NOT ACCEPTED INTO THE STIRS
PROGRAM. ANDSO THERE'S A LEGACY
THAT COMES WITH THAT, AND I'M
NOT SAYING IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG.
I'M JUST SAYING IT IS THE FACTS
ARE THE FACTS SO I AGREE WITH
YOU. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO OUR
TEACHERS EVER BEING IN THE
STORES PROGRAM AND I PERSONALLY
AS A BOARD MEMBER OF THE SCHOOL
THAT WORKED HARD TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE HAD ACCESS TO STIRS FEEL
THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE IN ALL
INSTANCES OR MOST INSTANCES,
EXCEPT WHERE YOU WEREN'T ALLOWED
IN BEFORE, AND NOW YOU'VE GOT A
LEGACY PROGRAM THAT MAY YOU KNOW
BE DIFFICULT TO ADMINISTER IN IN
COORDINATION WITH A STIRS
PROGRAM, SO MY PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE AND I THINK THERE'S
ANOTHER ISSUE OUT THERE IN THE
PUBLIC ARENA, WHICH DOESN'T
NECESSARILY IF THAT DOESN'T ONLY
PERTAIN TO TWO CHARTER SCHOOLS
AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND THAT IS,
I THINK WE'VE GOT SITUATIONS
ACROSS THE STATE WHERE A CITY OF
PUBLIC ENTITY OF ANY TYPE. THEY
MIGHT NOT BE A PARTICIPANT, BUT
THEY MIGHT OFFER SOME TYPE OF
BENEFIT FOR ONE K 43 B ETCETERA
, BUT ALSO NOT PAYING THE SOCIAL
SECURITY AND THEN IF THAT
EMPLOYEE DOESN'T PARTICIPATE, IN
THAT IN THAT UNDEFINED BENEFIT
PROGRAM, THERE IS NOTHING LIKELY
A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW.
LIKELY VERY LIKELY. AH, BUT
AGAIN, UM UM, I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS, AND I GET THAT THERE
IS SOME SOME SOME SOME ISSUES
THERE WITH SOME OF THE LEGACY
FOLKS WHO WERE NOT LONG TIME
PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROGRAM AND
FOR THE RECORD TOURIST SCHOOL
ASSOCIATION NEVER SUPPORTS THE
VIOLATING FEDERAL OR STATE LAWS.
SO I KNOW THAT I'M NOT AND AGAIN
THIS. I WASN'T STATING THAT
ISSUE IS SPECIFIC TO ARTICLES
SPECIFIC TO THE PUBLIC ARENA
WOULD AGREE. YES, BUT NOT MR
SARDO. SO YOU SAID 90% OF THOSE
SCHOOLS ALREADY PARTICIPATE.
WHAT DID THE OTHER 10% DO? DID
THEY OFFER ANYTHING? WELL IN MY
EXPERIENCE, AND IN WHAT WHAT'S
BEEN REPORTED BACK IS THEY DO
OFFER MANY TIMES AS A FOUR OH
ONE K PROGRAM. THERE ARE
ALTERNATIVE RETIREMENT PRODUCTS
OUT THERE THAT PRIOR TO
ACCEPTANCE OF TEACHING. FIRST
WORD DEVELOPED FOR THAT PURPOSE
, SO THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES. BUT
BY FAR I THINK IN MY EXPERIENCE
AND WHAT THE DATA TELLS US IS
THAT STIRS IS THE PREFERRED
RETIREMENT VEHICLE FOR TEACHERS
IN THE CHARTER SCHOOL. YEAH I
WOULD. I WOULD IMAGINE THAT
WOULD BE THE CASE. BUT I CAN'T
IMAGINE, AS WITNESS SAID THAT
SOMEBODY WOULD GO 10 OR 20
YEARS, NOT REALIZING THAT THEY
DON'T HAVE A RETIREMENT PLAN.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE FIRST THING
THEY ASKED FOR WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY SIGN UP. ARE THEY APPLY FOR
A JOB? YOU KNOW, THEY LOOK AT
THE BENEFITS AND NUMBER TWO. YOU
GOT YOUR WAGE, AND THEN YOU GOT
YOUR WHAT'S YOUR RETIREMENT LOOK
LIKE AND SO ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE
THE INFORMATION TODAY. THANK YOU
. ACTUALLY, A LOT OF YOUNG
PEOPLE DON'T DO THAT ON THE
RETIREMENT PART THEY DON'T THEY
CARE ABOUT IS THEIR PAY. BUT AS
FAR AS LIKE THE BENEFITS AND
BECAUSE YOU'RE YOUNG. YOU'RE NOT
THINKING ABOUT THAT FAR DOWN THE
ROAD. I WAS. I WAS IMPRESSED ON
THAT. I'M SURE BETTER LASTED AS
LONG AS WHEN THEY TALK TO THE
NEXT EMPLOYEE WHEN THEY TALK TO
ONE OF THEIR COLLEAGUES. MR
CHAIRMAN, CLARIFY ONE POINT
THERE. SURE. I JUST WANT TO SEE
MY COMMENT WAS INTENDED TO SAY
THEY MIGHT NOT UNDERSTAND.
THEY'RE NOT A PART OF THE STIR
pSYSTEM. SO PERHAPS THEY WILL SEE
A FOUR OH ONE K DEDUCTION ON
THEIR PAY STUB BY THEY MIGHT
HAVE ALWAYS HEARD. THERE'S A
PUBLIC TEACHER PENSION, AS IS
WRITTEN IN THE NEWS CONSTANTLY
AND THINK THERE ARE MEMBERS BUT
AREN'T I BELIEVE WE HAVE A
MOTION. I MADE A MOTION THERE A
SECOND MOTION A SECOND. WE'LL
TAKE IT BACK TO CENTER LEVEL.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? JUST
QUICKLY. MR CHAIR COULDN'T AGREE
WITH YOU MORE. I TALKED TO HIGH
SCHOOL STUDENTS AND EVEN COLLEGE
STUDENTS WHO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT A
PENSION IS. UNFORTUNATELY THE
THOSE OF US WHO WERE RAISED IN A
UNION HOUSEHOLD KNEW TO LOOK FOR
A JOB WITH A GOOD PENSION. THOSE
WHO WERE NOT DID NOT KNOW. AND I
WOULD JUST SAY FOR THE RECORD
THE LARGEST GROUP OF PEOPLE
LIVING IN POVERTY ARE WOMEN OVER
65. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WOMEN WHO ARE THE MAJORITY OF
THE TEACHERS IN ALL OF OUR
SCHOOLS HAVE ACCESS TO A PENSION
SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF
THEMSELVES WHEN THEY RETIRE. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN EYE BOAT
OVER 80. I THINK IT IS OVER 80.
IT'S A LOT. IT'S A LOT THEY LIVE
LONGER. OKAY, SO AH AH! MADAM
SECRETARY WILL CALL, PLEASE. THE
MOTION IS DO PASS AND BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION. COOPER COOPER, I'VE
OPAL GATHER ON. OTHER ON I
RODRIGUEZ O DONNELL DONNELL I
BLANCA RUBIO BLANCA RUBIO, I SAY
ARE TWO CR TWO NÓ. THANK YOU
MEMBERS. SKINNER CENTER SKINNER
HAS ARRIVED. SO NOW WE'RE GONNA
HEAR ITEM NUMBER 16 S GR 11. AND
PLEASE FEEL PRETTY PROCEED WHEN
YOU'RE READY. CERTAINLY. THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS. UM.
PLEASED TO PRESENT SJ R 11.
SOCIAL SECURITY IS A KEY SOURCE
OF INCOME FOR SENIORS FOR
VETERANS FOR WOMEN FOR CHILDREN
AND THOSE LIVING WITH
DISABILITIES. IT ALSO PROVIDES
INCOME. FOR THOSE WHO HAVE LOST
SPOUSES AND FOR MANY CHILDREN
WHOSE PARENTS HAVE DIED, FOR
EXAMPLE, MOST RECENTLY FROM
COVID. BUT BY 2034 BENEFICIARIES
ARE PROJECTED TO RECEIVE ONLY
78% OF THEIR FULL BENEFITS.
THERE'S A BILL THAT'S NOW
INTRODUCING CONGRESS THAT WILL
HELP ADDRESS THE FISCAL HEALTH
OF SOCIAL SECURITY. BY UM IT
WOULD CUT THE FUTURE SOCIAL
SECURITY THAT PROJECTED FUTURE
SOCIAL SECURITY DEFICIT IN HALF.
AND IT DOES THAT BY REQUIRING
THE HIGHEST PAID EARNERS TO
CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIAL SECURITY.
SO RIGHT NOW, YOUR EARNINGS IF
YOU EARN YOU'RE SORT OF STOPPED
AT 400,000 AND ABOVE NO LONGER
CONTRIBUTES THE SAME LEVEL TO
SOCIAL SECURITY IF THEY SO ONLY
UP TO 142,800. DOLLAR INCOMES
ARE. CONTRIBUTING TO THE SOCIAL
SECURITY. BUT AS WE KNOW,
THERE'S A PERCENT OF AMERICANS
THAT ARE MAKING A FAR HIGHER, UM
, INCOMES ON W TWO FORMS AND
THAT COULD GREATLY BENEFIT THE
EVERYONE. FROM MAKING SOCIAL
SECURITY MORE FISCALLY SOLID. SO
LET ME ALLOW MY WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT TO SPEAK AND WE HAVE
DWAYNE CAMP JUNIOR WHO'S THE
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED
AMERICANS. WE HAVE KELLY, WHO IS
AN IMPACTED CALIFORNIA. WELL
THANK YOU, SENATOR. AND GOOD
MORNING, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS
DWAYNE CAMP JUNIOR, AND I AM
VERY PRIVILEGED TO SERVE THE
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED
AMERICANS. AS THEIR LEGISLATIVE
DIRECTOR, AND WE ARE SO HUMBLE
TO INTRODUCE THIS RESOLUTION
THIS MORNING. CAROL REPRESENTS
OVER ONE MILLION SENIORS IN
CALIFORNIA THROUGH OUR 300
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS, UH,
AND FINANCIAL SECURITY IS
UNQUESTIONABLY THE NUMBER ONE
ISSUE FOR OUR MEMBERS.
UNFORTUNATELY AS SENATOR SKINNER
HAS MENTIONED THE SOCIAL
SECURITY TRUST FUND IS PROJECTED
TO BE DEPLETED BY 2034, WHICH
WOULD TRIGGER SUBSTANTIAL
BENEFIT REDUCTIONS IN 2035. AH H
R 5723, THE SOCIAL SECURITY 2100
ACT INTRODUCED BY CONGRESSMAN
LARSON IS A PROACTIVE SOLUTION
TO THE TRUST FUNDS. INSOLVENCY
CRISIS. WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY
ENACTING THE SINGLE LARGEST
EQUITY ADVANCEMENT AND BENEFIT
EXPANSION IN THE PROGRAM'S
HISTORY. UH BY REQUIRING
LEARNERS OF 400,000 ANNUALLY OR
MORE SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE
TOP 0.4% OF EARNERS. TO
CONTRIBUTE AT THE SAME RATE AS
THOSE EARNING LESS THAN, UH, THE
TAXABLE MAXIMUM WAGE, WHICH IS
ABOUT 147,000. I BELIEVE IN 2022
. THE UTILIZATION OF THESE NEWLY
GENERATED REVENUES CAN CUT THE
FUNDS DEFICIT BY ONE HALF. AND
EXTEND THE SUSTAINABILITY FOR
ANOTHER 50 YEARS. ADDITIONALLY
THE 2100 ACT WILL ENACT THE
FOLLOWING 2% ACROSS THE BOARD
BENEFIT INCREASES, SETTING THE
MINIMUM BENEFIT AT 25% ABOVE.
THE FEDERAL POVERTY LINE AND NOT
BELOW THE FEDERAL POVERTY LINE.
UH REPEALS WINDFALL ELIMINATION
PROVISION AND GOVERNMENT PENSION
OFFSET AS IN ADDITION TO
NUMEROUS OTHER BENEFIT
ENHANCEMENTS. AH AS WEALTH
INEQUALITY WORSENS AMID THE
BURGEONING ECONOMIC VOLATILITY
AND RISING INFLATION, WHICH
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS WOMEN
PEOPLE OF COLOR. UH AND BY PARK
COMMUNITIES, THE URGENCY TO
DELIVER THESE BENEFITS IS
PARAMOUNT, ESPECIALLY AS THE
CHAIR MENTIONED AT THE OPENING
OF THIS COMMITTEE HEARING THAT
SENIORS ARE FACING UNPRECEDENTED
RETIREMENT CRISIS. SO WITH THAT
BEING SAID, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
JUST ADD SOME CONTEXTUAL
INFORMATION IN CALIFORNIA. WE
ARE ON THE PRECIPICE OF THE
LARGEST DEMOCRAT DEMOGRAPHIC
SHIFT. IN OUR STATE'S HISTORY BY
2030. ALMOST 25% OF OUR STATE'S
POPULATION ARE GOING TO BE
SENIORS, SO WE HUMBLY ASK FOR
THIS COMMITTEE. TO TAKE THE LEAD
AND TO URGE THE STATE
LEGISLATURE TO LEAD ON THIS
ISSUE. HAVE CALIFORNIA LEAD ON
THIS ISSUE AND CALL FOR A VOTE
FOR HR. 5, 73 AND AFFIRM.
CALIFORNIA SUPPORT FOR THE
EXPANSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
HI THERE. MY NAME IS HENNY KELLY
AND I AM A SENIOR WHO IS RETIRED
. I'M 80 YEARS OLD. I AM
REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS BECAUSE
I'M ON THEIR POLICY BOARD. UH
AND I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU
SOMETHING THAT YOU WON'T GET
FROM ANYBODY ELSE. WE HAVE A
SHORTAGE OF TEACHERS, YOU KNOW
THAT WE ARE HAVING A TERRIBLE
SHORTAGE OF TEACHERS. THERE IS
ONE THING THAT I HAVE NOTICED
OVER THE LAST 50 YEARS. THERE
ARE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN IN
PUBLIC. POSITIONS OUTSIDE.
THEY'RE NOT TEACHERS. THEY GET
SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT IT IS
CERTAIN AGE AROUND 40. THEY WANT
TO COME BACK AND GIVE BACK AND
TEACH WHAT THEY DO. SCIENCE
MEDICINE, ETCETERA. BUT YOU KNOW
WHAT? THEY WILL LOSE HALF OF
THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY. THEY WILL
ONLY BE WORKING FOR THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS. IT
WILL RUIN THEIR RETIREMENT. THEY
CAN'T DO IT, SO WE'LL HAVE
ANOTHER REAL PROBLEM. SOCIAL
SECURITY IS A FAMILY PLAN. MY
FATHER PUT IN MONEY TO SOCIAL
SECURITY WAS A RABBI DIDN'T MAKE
A LOT OF MONEY AND WHEN, WHEN HE
RETIRED. HE DIDN'T HAVE TO COME
LIVE WITH ME. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW
HAPPY THAT MADE HIM. AND IT MADE
ME HAPPY TOO, BECAUSE HE COULD
LIVE WITH DIGNITY. WHAT SOCIAL
SECURITY DOES IS. IT HELPS YOUNG
CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS HAVE DIED
. IT HELPS PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITY. IT DOES ALL THOSE
THINGS THAT THIS WONDERFUL WOMAN
WHO PUT THIS UP SAYS. BUT. WHAT
IT DOES IS, IT GIVES PEOPLE
FREEDOM. IT GIVES THEM THE
FREEDOM TO BE ABLE TO RETIRE. IT
GIVES THEM THE FREEDOM TO HAVE
DIGNITY IN RETIREMENT. IT GIVES
THEM THE FREEDOM TO LIVE IN
THEIR HOUSE AND NOT ON THE
STREET. THERE'S A UNION SONG.
THAT I HAVE NO AND I ABIDE BY
AND IT GOES THIS WAY. FREEDOM
DOESN'T COME LIKE THE EARLY
SPRING. A BIRD ON THE WING
FREEDOM DOESN'T COME LIKE THE
EARLY SPRING FREEDOM. FREEDOM IS
A HARD ONE THING. YOU HAVE TO
WORK FOR IT. DIæN. OVER AND
OVER. SO YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR IT
. FIGHT FOR IT LIVE AND DIE FOR
IT, AND EVERY GENERATION HAS TO
WIN IT AGAIN. MY GRAND GREAT
GRANDMOTHER. AND MY GRANDMOTHER
FOUGHT FOR SOCIAL SECURITY. MY
FATHER FOUGHT FOR SOCIAL
SECURITY SO THAT MY SISTER GOT
IT. MY OTHER. COUSINS ETCETERA.
GOT IT. IT IS YOUR GENERATION
THAT HAS TO FIGHT FOR IT NOW.
YOU HAVE TO HELP US GET THIS
BILL PASSED IN CONGRESS. AND
THEN. YOU'RE DOING IT, NOT JUST
FOR YOU, BUT YOU'RE DOING IT FOR
YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR
GRANDCHILDREN AND GUESS WHAT?
THEY'LL HAVE TO FIGHT FOR IT
LATER. IT'S WORTH FIGHTING FOR.
PLEASE VOTE YES. ON THIS. THANK
YOU. THIS IS THE SUPPORT. MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS, PAT MORAN WITH
AARON READING ASSOCIATES,
REPRESENTING THE RETIRED PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND FOR YOU. ANY A BOARD OF
DIRECTORS MEMBER. ALSO
CALIFORNIA. UH. TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION PAST PRESIDENT I
STRONGLY URGE THAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT THE TEACHERS IN CALIFORNIA
THAT DO NOT ARE NOT COVERED. BY
SOCIAL SECURITY. THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT IS BADLY NEEDED.
THIS BOOST. I KNOW WE CAN'T PASS
THE LAW HERE. BUT THE STRENGTH
OF YOUR RESOLUTION WILL BE HEARD
IN WASHINGTON. BELIEVE ME, THIS
IS THE YEAR TO GET. UH THE, UH,
THIS BILL THROUGH CONGRESS.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR
25 YEARS. NOW IS THE TIME. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. GPO HAS REALLY
HER TEACHERS. IT HAS HURT
GOVERNMENT WORKERS. WE CAN PUT A
STOP TO IT NOW. WE WILL OFFER
SIMILAR RESOLUTIONS IN THE PAST
LIST ON THE SAME TOPIC. UM,
ANYWAY, THIS IS OPPOSITION. I'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
AND THE QUESTIONS AND BY THE WAY
WE DO HAVE TO EDUCATORS ON OUR
COMMITTEE. TEACHERS SHOOT
TEACHERS, BAD WORD EDUCATORS.
I'M SORRY. AH TEACHERS? YES. I
GOT TO GET THAT OUT OF MY BRAIN.
YES, CHIEF. A NEAR TESTIMONY.
YOU STATED IT WAS OVER 400,000.
I THOUGHT IT WAS UP TO THE NEW
CAP WOULD BE 400,000 FOR
BEGINNING AT 400,000 AND ABOVE.
SO BETWEEN 100 AND WHATEVER IT
IS 60,000 AND 400,000. THOSE
PEOPLE WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY
UNTIL THEY ARE 400,000. THANK
YOU. YOU GOT THAT? AND THOSE MR
CHAIR IF I IF I MAY JUST JUST
CLARIFY, SO CLARIFY THAT,
PLEASE. YEAH SO THE WAY THE
CONTRIBUTION RATE WORKS RIGHT
NOW FOR AND EMPLOYEES SUCH AS
MYSELF, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS ABOUT THE YOUNGER
GENERATION NEEDING TO PREPARE
FOR RETIREMENT, ALTHOUGH I DON'T
KNOW IF I'M PART OF THAT GROUP
ANYMORE. UM BUT, UH WE ALL
CONTRIBUTE 6.2% THOSE OF US
RIGHT NOW UP TO THE TAXABLE
MAXIMUM WAGE RATE, WHICH IS I
BELIEVE $147,000 ANNUALLY THIS
YEAR. WHAT HR 57 TO 3 WILL DO IS
THAT FOR THOSE EARNING 400,000
OR MORE, THEY THEN WILL
GRADUALLY BEGIN TO PAY THAT 6.2.
LIKE THE REST OF US DO SO IF
YOU'RE BETWEEN THE TAXABLE
MAXIMUM AND 399, WHATEVER THAT,
YOU KNOW, RIGHT BEFORE 400,000,
YOU'RE GONNA BE PAYING
ESSENTIALLY 6.2% OF WHATEVER THE
TAXABLE MAXIMUM WAGE RATE IS,
WHICH IS WHAT EARNERS RIGHT NOW.
WHO ARE MAKING OVER THE TAXABLE
MAXIMUM ARE PAYING. IN OTHER
WORDS, YOU'RE PAYING THE SAME AS
SOMEBODY WHO ONLY MAKES 142
CORRECT. SO EVERYONE IS LEFT AT
THE TAXABLE AMOUNT OF 142,000
MAX. INCOME UNTIL YOU REACH
ABOVE 400,000 INCOME. CORRECT,
CORRECT. THINK ABOUT THIS, IF
YOU IF YOU'RE POST PEPPER YOU'RE
PAYING MORE IN AND GETTING LESS
OUT TO 2014 SO TEACHER HAS EVER
EVER GOTTEN TWO OR THREE MONTHS
WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY SOCIAL
SECURITY. I'M ABOUT TO WRAP UP
AND. GIVE ME A SECOND. UM SO,
SENATOR WITH DR RAPPAPORT. THANK
YOU. I ASKED FOR I VOTE. THANK
YOU, UH, MADAME SECRETARY. ROLL
CALL, PLEASE. THE MOTION IS
ADOPTED. COOPER COOPER, I PROPEL
EPSTEIN CALDERON CALDERON I
ROBERT RODRIGUEZ. RODRIGUEZ
O'DONNELL. WELL, DONALD I BLANCA
RUBIO. BLANCA RUBIO. I SAY OUR
TWO HEARTS ARE NOT VOTING. I
STILL HAS THAT BUILDS ON CALL.
WITH FIVE. BOTH THAT BOOK ITSELF
, SENATOR, IT'S OUT. THANK YOU.
OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE GONNA TAKE A
BALL OF BILLS ON CALL. AND FIRST
WE'LL START WITH THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ITEM NUMBERS ONE
THROUGH SIX. CURRENT VOTERS FOR
20 VOEPEL. I GATHER ON.
RODRIGUEZ. CALDERON RODRIGUEZ.
AYE. GATHER ON AYE. THE
CONCEPTION CALENDAR IS OUT. 70
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT SB 8 74. WE'RE
GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN
SB 868 CURRENT VOTERS FOR 20.
CALDERON AYE, RODRIGUEZ.
RODRIGUEZ? AYE. ESSEX. SIX
MONTHS. IT'S OUT. BILL GETS THAT
BUILDS OUT. NO WAY. OF OPEL,
WHICH ONE SO, FELLAS, NOT
VOTING. SB 868 ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN. NOT VOTING. THE BILL IS
OUT, 60. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT SP
874 CURRENT VOTERS FOR 20 VOEPEL
CALDERON CALDERON I, RODRIGUEZ
RODRIGUEZ THAT BUILDS OUT 70.
ITEM NUMBER 10 SB 13 13. THE
CURRENT VOTE IS 4 TO 1 FOR
PEOPLE KNOW COOLEY. ASSUMING I'M
SORRY, RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ I
THAT BILL IS OUT 5 TO 2. ITEM
NUMBER 11 SB 647 THE CURRENT
VOTERS 5 TO 0 VOEPEL, AYE,
RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ. I THAT
BUILDS OUT 7 TO 0. ITEM NUMBER
12 SP 957 CURRENT VOTERS FOR 20.
WITH SEYARTO NOT VOTING VOEPEL.
WELL, NO. FREDERICK SAYS.
GRADUATE AS I THAT BILL IS OUT
62. 5 TO 1. I DON'T WEAR 13. SB
931 THE CURRENT VOTERS 4 TO 1.
VOEPEL NO, NO, RODRIGUEZ.
RODRIGUEZ? AYE. THAT BILL IS OUT
5 TO 2. ITEM NUMBER 14 SB FOR 13
43. THE CURRENT VOTE IS 4 TO 1
VOEPEL. VOEPEL NO RODRIGUEZ.
GRADUATE AS I THOUGHT BILL IS
OUT 5 TO 2. PARTY. OKAY, I WILL.
ALL THE BILLS ARE OUT. UM LET'S
BE ABLE CONCURRENCE HEARING IN A
COUPLE OF MONTHS. THIS IS
PROBABLY MY FINAL HEARING IS A
CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE. I WANT
TO TAKE THIS TIME. I KNOW I'M
SAD, TOO, AND PERSONALLY
RECOGNIZE AND THANK ALL OF YOU
AND SHARE WITH YOU THAT I'VE
ACTUALLY APPRECIATED, RESPECTED.
ENJOYED MY TIME AS CHAIR. UM I
REALLY WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFFER. YOU'RE
AMAZING AND DEDICATED WORK ETHIC
AND PROFESSIONALISM ON BEHALF OF
THE COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC,
MICHELLE IRENE AND LAUREN.
MICHAEL MICHELLE. WHAT? IT CAN
BE BOTH FRIENDSHIP FRENCH THAT'S
FRENCH, AND I WAS BORN IN
FRANCE, AND SHE HAD DONE
ABSOLUTELY AMAZING JOB. IT'S A
LOT OF WORK AND TOUGH WORK.
HUMIDITIES LOOK EASY FUN AND
MAKE US AND MAKING US LOOK GOOD.
UNDER DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES
FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES, AND
WE CAN'T DO THIS WITHOUT YOU. SO
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS AND
THANK YOU. THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. IT'S BEEN A GOOD RIDE
AND I WILL BE AROUND THE CORNER.
THANK YOU, SIR. TICKET THIS
COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.