GOOD MORNING. WELL FROM THE
WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE TO
ENSURE MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA AND
THE PUBLIC HAVE ACCESS TO
PROCEEDINGS. TODAY THIS HEARING
WILL BE STREAMED ON THE
ASSEMBLY'S WEBSITE AND MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC CAN PROVIDE
TESTIMONY IN PERSON HERE IN ROOM
444 IN THE CAPITAL. OR VIA OUR
PHONE LINES. FOR ANY MEMBER OF
THE PUBLIC. THERE WILL BE
PROVIDING COMMENT VIA TELEPHONE
. WE'RE USING A MODERATED
TELEPHONE SERVICE. THE COLIN
NUMBER FOR THE HEARING IS 877692. AND THE PUBLIC ACCESS CODE IS
131544 JUST LIKE THE ROOM
NUMBER. PLEASE CALL IN WHEN THE
AUTHOR OF THE BILL YOU WOULD
LIKE TO COMMENT ON BEGINS THEIR
PRESENTATION. THE OPERATOR ON
THE LINE WILL GIVE YOU
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO BE PLACED
IN THE QUEUE. IF YOU'RE CALLING
IN, PLEASE ELIMINATE ALL
BACKGROUND NOISE, WHICH INCLUDES
MUTING YOUR LIVESTREAM BROADCAST
, SO YOU DON'T ECHO AND YOUR
DEVICES TO REDUCE SOUND ISSUES.
THE FOLLOWING BILLS WILL BE ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR TODAY.
AGENDA ITEM SIX. SB 8 80 LAIRD.
AGENDA ITEM. SEVEN SB 901 PAN
AGENDA ITEM 13 SP 12 24 BAITS
AND AGENDA ITEM 14 SP 12 53.
MELINDA'S. YEAH. I WOULD NOW
LIKE TO CALL THE HEARING OF
WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE TO
ORDER DON'T THINK WE HAVE A
QUERY IT SO WE'LL START AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE AND CALL THE ROLE
AND WE HAVE A QUORUM. BUT A
SIMILAR ARE SENATOR DOLLY STILL
CALLING YOU ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S.
IT'S BEEN YEARS. COME ON. GOOD
MORNING MEMBERS, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS HERE TO PRESENT. 84 63.
LET ME FIRST SAY THAT I WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS ON NOTWITHSTANDING
ANY OTHER LAW. SP 4 63 WILL HELP
ADDRESS THE WATER LOSS ISSUES IN
THE MIDST OF A SEVERE DROUGHT
AND INCREASED WATER USAGE. THIS
BILL ALLOWS WATER RIGHT HOLDERS
TO IMPROVE THE FLOW OF THEIR
WATER, EITHER THROUGH A LINING
FINDING A DITCH OR THROUGH A
CONDUIT THAT IS WITHOUT NEGATIVE
, IMPACTING THE ACCESS OF THE
OTHER WATER. RIGHT HOLDERS SP 4
63 WOULD REQUIRE THE WATER RIGHT
HOLDER WHO MAKES THE CHANGES TO
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INDY
INCREASED OPERATION, MAINTENANCE
OR EXPENSES INVOLVED IN THE
MODIFICATIONS OF THE CONDUIT. IN
MANY CASES ACROSS CALIFORNIA
WATER LOST TO AGRICULTURE AND
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IS A RESULT
OF POOR DELIVERY SYSTEMS. OPEN
AIR EARTHEN DITCHES CAN BE THE
SUBJECT TO CONTENT CONTAMINATION
, EVAPORATION AND LEAKAGE,
RESULTING IN WATER WASTE TO THE
LANDOWNER. WHO USES OR POSSESSES
THE WATER, RIGHT? PIPING CAN
HELP TO SOLVE THESE ISSUES FOR
THE CONSUMER AND OFTEN REDUCED
WATER WASTE BY UP TO 50. THIS
BILL CREATES MORE FLEXIBILITY
WHEN DEALING WITH WATER PIPES
AND CONDUITS THAT NEED REPAIRS
IN THE EFFICIENT AND SECURE
TRANSFER OF MOVING WATER
FORWARD. EXISTING LAW PROHIBITS
THE LAND ORDER FROM
FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGING THE
MATERIAL. A DITCH. IS CALM,
COMPRISED OF THE AND PROVIDES
FOR THE CON CONTRIBUTIONS
TOWARDS MAINTENANCE OF A JOINTLY
USED WATER CONDUIT, DROUGHT AND
INCREASED WATER USAGE AND
NECESSITIES. AND UPDATED
APPROACH TO THE STATES
DESPERATELY NEEDED WATER
CONSERVATION SOLUTIONS. SP 4 63.
IS THE START OF A NARROW
MODIFICATION OF EASEMENT LAWS TO
FACILITATE WATER EFFICIENCY
PROJECTS. THIS BILL WOULD NOT BE
THE BEGINNING OF IMPROVING WATER
EFFICIENCIES IN MANY DIFFERENT
CAPACITIES AND WOULD BRING WATER
DELIVERY SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA,
NEW MODERN AGE. I JUST WANT TO
LAY OUT WHY I'M RUNNING THIS
BILL AND IN SISKIYOU COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA WE HAVE ABOUT 100 AND
OVER 100 YEAR OLD DITCH AND IT
WAS LIKE 90 MILES LONG. IT'S NOW
LIKE 16 MILES. THE OWNERS OF THE
WATER THAT OWNED THIS WATER ARE
TRYING TO DIVERT THE WATER AND
IT'S AND WE HAVE POT GROWERS AND
WE HAVE PEOPLE GOING ALONG
HIGHWAYS STICKING THEIR UH,
WATER TRUCKS AND STEALING THE
WATER. WE ALSO HAVE, UH, THE
LINING OF THE DITCH IS
EVAPORATION AND LEAKAGE. SO
WE'RE TRYING SO THE LANDOWNERS
ARE GIVING 30% OF THEIR PRIVATE
PROPERTY, WATER RIGHTS TO FISH
AND GAME TO KEEP WATER IN THE
MAIN RIVER FOR SALMON. BUT
THEY'RE LOSING THE OTHER 60 OR
70% OF THEIR WATER BEFORE IT
GETS TO THE END OF THE DITCH AND
EVAPORATION AND PEOPLE STEALING
THEIR WATER, SO WE'RE JUST
SIMPLY TRYING TO PUT THE WATER
IN A CONDUIT. SO THAT WE CAN
SECURE THAT 70% OF THAT WATER TO
THE FARMERS. THAT WAS THE GOAL
INTENT OF THIS BILL ORIGINALLY,
OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HAD SOME PUSH
BACK, UM ABOUT EASEMENTS AND HOW
YOU GET THERE. THIS BILL WILL
WILL WILL ONLY ALLOW YOU TO BE
ABLE TO IF YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO
GO ACROSS THAT PROPERTY. TO PUT
THAT CONDUIT IN. THAT'S WHAT
THIS BILL DOES. THAT'S WHY DID
NOT ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT THAT I
HAVE TO NOTIFY. A LANDOWNER WHEN
I DON'T HAVE TO IN THE CURRENT
STATE TO PREPARE MY DITCH. I
DON'T HAVE TO NOTIFY THE
LANDOWNER. THAT'S WHY I DID NOT
ACCEPT THAT. THE SECOND
AMENDMENT, SO I JUST WANT TO
MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR THE MEMBERS
TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE GOAL THIS
BILL IS TO DO SO I WOULD
APPRECIATE AN AYE VOTE. I HAVE
NO WITNESSES, BY THE WAY THAT I
AM AWARE OF. OKAY, WELL, WE'LL
SEE IF ANYONE IS HERE IN SUPPORT
SENATOR TELLING IF WE HAVE
ANYONE IN THE ROOM IN SUPPORT OF
SB 4 63. YOU COULD APPROACH THE
MIC. SEEING NONE WILL GO TO THE
PHONE LINES. MODERATOR DO WE
HAVE ANYONE IN CALLING IN
SUPPORT OF SB? 4 63. YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF 4 63, PLEASE PRESS
ONE THAN ZERO. AND AT THIS TIME
THERE IS NO ONE IN. Q THANK YOU.
OPERATOR WITH THAT WILL GO TO
OUR MAIN OPPOSITION WITNESSES.
WE HAVE ANTHONY HILTON ON THE
TELEPHONE AND SUSAN LITTLE HERE
IN PERSON. UM SUSAN, WHY DON'T
WE LET YOU GO FIRST? SINCE
YOU'RE JOINING US HERE IN THE
ROOM? MM HMM. WE'LL HAVE TWO
MINUTES FOUR MINUTES TOTAL TWO
MINUTES PER WITNESS. THANK YOU
GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
SUSAN LITTLE. I'M HERE ON BEHALF
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING
GROUP TO EXPRESS OUR RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO SB 4 63. I'VE ALSO
BEEN ASKED TO EXPRESS THE
OPPOSITION OF COMMUNITY WATER
CENTER, CLEAN WATER ACTION AND
NONTOXIC NEIGHBORHOODS. WE
pATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS AN ISSUE
THAT'S OCCURRED IN A RURAL AREA.
THAT'S JUST DISTRICT. BUT WE'RE
CONCERNED THAT THE BILL WOULD
AFFECT HOMEOWNERS AND RENTERS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE IN URBAN
AREAS AS WELL AS IN LESS
POPULATED ONES. SB 4 63 IS
CURRENTLY CURRENTLY WRITTEN,
WOULD GIVE WATER DISTRICTS AND
OTHER WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS THE
UNBOUNDED AUTHORITY TO MODIFY OR
REPLACE PRIVATELY OWNED LEAD
SERVICE LINES LED COMPONENTS.
AND GALVANIZED LINES. THEY COULD
ALSO REMOVE OR DISRUPT THE
HOMEOWNER OWNED AND MANAGED SIDE
OF THE LINE. AND WHEN
UNDERTAKING THIS ACTIVITY, THE
WATER DISTRICTS OR OTHER WATER
RIGHTS HOLDERS WOULD NOT HAVE TO
COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER LAW. OVER
THE LAST FIVE OR SIX YEARS,
WATER UTILITIES HAVE BEEN
REMOVING LEAD SERVICE LINES AND
LED COMPONENTS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. ON ONE HAND, WE WELCOME
THE EFFORTS TO GET LEAD PARTS
OUT OF THE DRINKING WATER
SYSTEM. HOWEVER THE UTILITIES
HAVE BEEN DOING THIS WORK
WITHOUT REGULATORY SAFEGUARDS IN
PLACE THAT WOULD ENSURE THAT
LEAD ISN'T RELEASED INTO
CUSTOMERS WATER DURING OR AFTER
THE DISRUPTIONS, PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT. DATA INDICATES THAT
NUMEROUS UTILITIES SUCH AS THE
CITY OF SACRAMENTO'S HAVE
REMOVED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
LEAD PIPES AND LED FITTINGS
WITHOUT PROVIDING RESIDENTS
NOTIFICATION FILTERS OR TESTING
THEIR DRINKING WATER.
PROTECTIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED IN
OTHER STATES AND ARE NOW
REQUIRED BY THE LEAD AND COPPER
WILL REVISIONS. LED, OF COURSE,
IS A VERY TOXIC METAL AND EVEN
SMALL AMOUNTS OF LEAD EXPOSURE
CAN CAUSE HARM. CHILDREN ARE
ESPECIALLY SENSITIVE TO LET'S
HARMFUL EFFECTS. UNFORTUNATELY
THERE'S NO CURE FOR THE DAMAGE
THAT LEAD EXPOSURE DOES TO
CHILDREN. BECAUSE OF LEADS TOXIC
EFFECTS. EVEN IN VERY LOW DOSES.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING TO TRY TO
ENSURE THAT WATER SYSTEMS ADHERE
TO STRONG PUBLIC HEALTH
PROTECTIONS WHEN REMOVING LEAD
LINES COMPONENTS ARE GALVANIZED
LINES. DOWNSTREAM OF THOSE
COMPONENTS. IN MARCH OF THIS
YEAR, THE DIVISION OF DRINKING
WATER ISSUED A HANDFUL OF PERMIT
ORDERS DIRECTING SOME WATER
SYSTEMS TO COMPLY WITH MINIMAL
NOTIFICATION AND HEALTH
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS WHEN
REMOVING LEAD PIPES AND LED
FITTINGS. ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION
MAY BE ENACTED TO IMPOSE FURTHER
RESTRICTIONS ON THE LEAD LINE
REMOVAL ACTIVITY. AS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN. SB 4 63 WOULD ALLOW
WATER SYSTEMS TOIGNORE THESE
PERMIT ORDERS AND ANY OTHER
REGULATION ESTABLISHED BY ANY
STATE OR LOCAL AGENCY REGARDING
THESE REPLACEMENTS. ALSO THE
BILL WOULD PREEMPT ANY OTHER
STATE OR LOCAL LAW IMPOSING A
SAFEGUARDS. THAT MAY BE ENACTED
IN THE FUTURE. I WOULD ASK THAT
THE COMMITTEE VOTE NO ON SB 4 63
AND NOT GRANT WATER SYSTMS AND
WATER RIGHT HOLDERS THE
UNBOUNDED UNMITIGATED AUTHORITY
TO DISRUPT LEADED UTILITY AND
PRIVATELY OWNED PIPES IN ANY
WAY. REGARDLESS OF THE
DISRUPTIONS EFFECTS ON
CUSTOMERS' HEALTH, AND I HAVE
NOT SEEN THE AMENDMENTS OF THE
SENATORS PROPOSING, BUT I WOULD
SAY EVEN JUST REMOVING THE
NOTWITHSTANDING LANGUAGE STILL
DOES NOT SATISFY OUR CONCERNS IN
THIS REGARD. THANK YOU, MISS
LITTLE. WE'LL GO TO MR HILTON ON
THE PHONE LINES. MR. HILTON, ARE
YOU AVAILABLE? MODERATE.
MODERATOR. DO YOU HAVE AN
ANTHONY HILTON ON THE PHONE
LINES? MM. ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. I DO NOT SEE ANTHONY
HILTON? NO OKAY. WELL THEN WHY
DON'T WE JUST WE'LL TAKE SUPPORT
HERE IN THE ROOM. I MEAN
OPPOSITION READY TO SUPPORT
OPPOSITION HERE IN THE ROOM. IF
ANYONE HERE IS AN OPPOSITION,
NOT SEEING ANYONE, GO TO THE
PHONE LINES. MODERATOR. CAN YOU
OPEN THE PHONE LINES IN ANTHONY?
IF YOU APPEARED DURING
OPPOSITION FEEL FREE TO TAKE
YOUR MONEY. AND IF YOU HAVE OUR
I'M SORRY FOR AN OPPOSITION OF 4
63, PLEASE PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO.
AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE ANTHONY
HELPED IN HERE ONE MOMENT, I'LL
OPEN YOUR LINE AHEAD, ANTHONY.
THANK YOU. APOLOGIES, MADAME
TERRY HAD AS SHE WAS GETTING IN
ON THE MAIN LINE. UM, THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS, ANTHONY
HILTON WITH THE CALIFORNIA LAND
TITLE ASSOCIATION. THAT WE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHORS EFFORTS
ON THIS ISSUE. WE ARE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSEDTO S REPORT
63 ITS CURRENT FORM, GIVEN THAT
IT WOULD ACHIEVE ITS GOALS AT
THE EXPENSE OF CALIFORNIANS
PROPERTY RIGHTS. SPECIFICALLY SB
4. 63 DOES NOT REQUIRE
INDIVIDUALS SEEKING TO REPAIR
REPLACE MODIFY WATER CONDUIT TO
FIRST OBTAIN PERMISSION. OR EVEN
PROVIDE NOTICE. FOR ACCESSING
ANOTHER LANDOWNER'S PROPERTY FOR
THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THOSE
REPAIRS AND MODIFICATIONS. THIS
COULD HAVE PROFOUNDLY NEGATIVE
IMPLICATIONS. OR ANY HOMEOWNER
WITH WATER CONDUIT RUNNING
THROUGH THEIR LAND AS IT WOULD
LEAVE THEM UNABLE TO CONTROL.
POWER OR WHETHER WORK IS
PERFORMED ON THEIR PROPERTY,
EVEN IF THAT WORK NECESSITATED
DAMAGE TO DRIVEWAYS, LANDSCAPING
OR OTHER PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT.
FURTHERMORE THE BUILDING THAT
REQUIRE ANY COMPENSATION TO A
PRIVATE LANDOWNER SHOULD SUCH
DAMAGE OCCURRED. IN ADDITION TO
THE DIRECT ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OF
POTENTIALLY DISRUPTIVE WORK ON
THEIR PROPERTY, OWNERS OF
EFFECTIVE PROPERTIES BECAUSE
ALSO FACED DEPRESSED REAL ESTATE
VALUATION WITH HOMES THAT ARE
DIFFICULT TO SELL, GIVEN THE
TITLE RISK. ASSOCIATED WITH
OWNING THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
THIS PROBLEM WILL NOT BE LIMITED
TO AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY IS IT
IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT A
SUBSTANTIALNUMBER OF CALIFORNIA
HOMES ARE BUILT ON CONVERTED A
GLAND CONTAINING WATER CONDUIT.
FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF OUR MEMBERS
RECENTLY BECAME INVOLVED IN A
DISPUTE INVOLVING WATER CONDUIT
AND AN IMPROPERLY MARKED
EASEMENT ON A RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTY IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
WE SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS
PROPOSED BY THIS COMMITTEE,
WHICH WOULD REQUIRE PERMISSION
AND NOTICE PRIOR TO ACCESSING
PROPERTY IN ORDER TO PERFORM
WATER CONDUIT, WORK AND STRIKE A
BALANCE BETWEEN PROTECTING
INDIVIDUALS. PROPERTY RIGHTS.
AND FURTHERING THE GOALS OF THE
LEGISLATION. I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE
AUTHORS OFFICE FOR PROVIDING US
WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A
DIALOGUE ON THIS BILL, BUT GIVEN%
THAT IT DOES NOT ADDRESS
PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUES AT THIS
TIME, WE REMAIN OPPOSED AND
RESPECTFULLY OUT SCREAMING. NO
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
ON THE PHONE LINES. WE HAVE LINE
34. YOUR LINE IS OPEN LINE 34.
SANTIAGO RODRIGUEZ WITH
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS
IN OPPOSITION. LINE 28. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN LINE 28. GOOD
MORNING, ANNA BUCK ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS. WE'D LIKE TO ALIGN OUR
COMMENTS WITH THOSE OF THE LAND
AND TITLE ASSOCIATION AND ALSO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR
WORK ON THE VERY REASONABLE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU.
AND AT THIS TIME, THERE'S NO ONE
LEFT IN. Q THANK YOU, MODERATOR
. I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE FOR ANY QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS. SEEING NONE ALL ASK
QUESTIONS YOU CAN PIPE UP AFTER
IF YOU HAVE SOME SO FIRST I WANT
TO THANK, UM, COMMITTEE FOR
WORKING HARD ON WHAT I THINK ARE
REASONABLE AMENDMENTS. I
APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE FIRST
ONE, BUT YOU ARE NOT TAKING THE
REMAINDER. OF THE AMENDMENTS AND
WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT. IT
SOUNDS LIKE YOUR POSITION IS YOU
DON'T NEED TO TAKE THESE
AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE
EASEMENTS ON THIS LAND IS THAT I
HEAR YOU, RIGHT? I WANNA MAKE
SURE SO IF I TAKE YOUR AMENDMENT
, AND I HAVE TO GIVE A 60 DAY
NOTICE ON AN E ON THE RIGHT I
ALREADY HAVE TO GO ON TO MY
DITCH. AYE. THEN I WOULD HAVE TO
COMPLY. THE PERSON WHO'S
STEALING MY WATER. I'D HAVE TO
GET PERMISSION. TO GO FOR 60
DAYS. THAT'S WHY I WON'T. THAT'S
WHY I CAN'T ACTUALLY MAKES THE
BILL WORSE OR THE LAW. WORSE IF
YOU HAVE THE QUESTION HERE IS
EASEMENTS. THAT'S THE QUESTION
IF I HAVE A RIGHT IF I HAVE A
CONDUIT OR A DITCH AND I HAVE A
RIGHT. I DON'T NEED TO ASK
PERMISSION. I ALREADY HAVE A
RIGHT. SO THAT THAT'S WHY I'VE
BEEN MY CONTENTION WITH THE
AMENDMENTS. YOU'RE ASKING ME TO
TAKE EVERYBODY IN THE STATE THAT
HAS CONDUITS AROUND HAVE HAVETO
HAVE AN EASEMENT TO PUT THAT
CONDUIT IN ORIGINALLY. OR OR
THERE'S A THERE'S A CONFLICT
THERE. IN MY CASE, THERE IS NO
CONFLICT. I OWN THE RIGHT. I
JUST WANT TO PUT IT INTO A PIPES
OF SOMEBODY CAN'T STEAL IT. SO
IF THEY BREACH MY DITCH, I WOULD
HAVE TO GET A 60 DAY NOTICE. AND
TO GET ONTO THE LAND TO FIX
WOULD ALREADY HAVE A RIGHT TO.
THAT'S THE QUESTION ABOUT YOUR
AMENDMENT THAT I DON'T WANT TO
TAKE BECAUSE ALREADY HAVE THAT
RIGHT? NOTWITHSTANDING INTO LAW
MEANS THAT LAWS ALREADY IN THE
FACT FOR LEAD. IF YOU'RE
REMOVING PIPES, YOU HAVE TO
REPLACE THEM WITH NON LEAD
PIPES. THAT'S LAW NUMBER ONE
NUMBER TWO. THE LAW SAYS THAT IF
I DON'T HAVE AN EASEMENT, I MUST
RECORD I MUST GET AN EASEMENT. I
CANNOT I'M A PRIVATE. I'M A
LANDOWNER. TRUST ME. I LOVE
PRIVATE PROGRESS. I'M NOT
ALLOWING SOMEBODY TO GO ON YOUR
PROPERTY WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION
. IF THEY DON'T HAVE PERMISSION,
THEY CAN'T GO. THAT'S
NOTWITHSTANDING THE LAW. YOU
HAVE TO HAVE AN EASEMENT TO GO
ON SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY. YOU
CAN'T GO ON THEIR PROPERTY. SO
THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE ASKING
ME TO TAKE TIES MY HANDS SO THAT
I CAN'T GO WHERE I WANT TO GO.
I'M SIMPLY TRYING TO EITHER IF
THERE IS A CONDUIT LEAKING I
WANT TO REPAIR THAT CONDUIT. IF
THERE'S A DITCH. I WANT TO PUT A
CONDUIT IN. THAT'S MY GOAL
ALREADY HAVE THE EASEMENT. THIS
BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
THESE MYTHS, AND THAT'S WHERE I
THINK EVERYBODY'S CONFUSED. IF
YOU DON'T HAVE A RIGHT, YOU
CAN'T GO THERE. YOU MUST OBTAIN
A RIGHT. I'M SAYING I ALREADY
HAVE THE RIGHT. JUST WANT TO PUT
IT IN A CONDUIT THIS YOUR
AMENDMENT WITH WOULD FORCE ME TO
AS PER PERMISSIONS PERCENTAGE. I
DON'T NEED TO ASK FOR TO SENATOR
BE CLEAR. I'M NOT CONFUSED. IF
YOU HAVE AN EASEMENT, THEN YOU
HAVE A RIGHT TO 100% RIGHT? AND
THEN THIS BILL BECOMES
UNNECESSARY. SO THAT'S WHERE YOU
I THINK ARE FINISHED. PLEASE. I
HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING THAT YOU
WANT TO SPEAK TO RESPOND,
THOUGH. AND SO FOR THOSE THAT
HAVE AN EASEMENT THAT EASEMENT
CONTAINS RIGHTS, RIGHT AND
EASEMENTS ARE DIFFERENT. RIGHT?
ONE EASEMENT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE
THE NEXT AND SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO
THESE MEANT THAT THE GIVEN
PROPERTY OWNERS IN YOUR DISTRICT
HAVE VERSUS THE EASEMENT.
GARBAGE COMPANY HAS IN MIND,
RIGHT EXAMPLE. UM, BUT THOSE
EASEMENTS CONTAIN RIGHTS. AND
YOU ARE TRYING TO EXPAND THOSE
RIGHTS. BY THIS LAW. NOBODY IS
TOUCHING THE RIGHTS UNDER THE
EASEMENTS, WHICH ARE PRIVATE
PROPERTY RIGHTS GRANTED SOLD,
BUT THERE'S USUALLY INTEREST
EXCHANGED IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE
EASEMENTS, AND THOSE ARE
STANDING. THIS BILL CHANGES THAT
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S
I FIND IT KIND OF FUNNY THAT I
THINK I BELIEVE I'M STANDING ON
THE SIDE OF PROPERTY, PRIVATE
PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THAT I THINK
THEY'RE BEING ATTACKED IN THIS
BILL BECAUSE I THINK YOU ARE
EXPANDING. THE ABILITY TO GO ON
SOMEONE'S LAND WITHOUT NOTICE,
AND YOU'RE REFUSING TO TAKE
AMENDMENT FIVE BETWEEN INDEMNIFY
THE PROPERTY RIGHT OWNER THAT
YOU ARE GOING ON TO THE LAND OF
WHICH MEANS IF SOMETHING HAPPENS
WHILE YOU'RE DOING THIS NOW IT
IS ON THE LANDOWNER WHO YOU HAVE
NOW WALKED ON WITHOUT NOTICE OR
PERMISSION AGAIN. YOU MAY HAVE
AN EASEMENT TO WALK ON. YOU MAY
HAVE NEEDED IT. YOU CAN DO
WHATEVER IS IN THAT EASEMENT,
BUT WE ARE NOW EXPANDING OUT
THOSE RIGHTS DENYING PERMISSION,
DENYING INDEMNIFICATION, AND I
BELIEVE IT IS AN COMPLETE ATTACK
ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS
THAT ARE THERE AGAIN. WHATEVER
EASEMENT IS BOUGHT AND SOLD,
REMAINS IN EXISTENCE. WITHOUT
THIS LAW, BUT THE EXPANSION IN
THIS LAW IS AH! INTENSE AND I
THINK A COMPLETE ATTACK ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, NOT TO
MENTION PUTTING SIGNIFICANT
LIABILITY IN THOSE LANDOWNERS
THAT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING WE
SHOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT BE DOING
SO UM, AS YOU KNOW, I WON'T BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY, AND I
THINK THAT YOU KNOW, I DO WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
DOING THIS WORK BECAUSE I DO
THINK THE AMENDMENTS WERE
REASONABLE AND WE'RE TRYING TO
GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I THINK
ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE
NOT TAKING IS ALSO YOU KNOW, THE
PRETENSE OF THIS BILL IS TO PUT
IT INTO A CONDUIT TO SAVE WATER
TO STOP IT, WHICH I THINK IS
IMPORTANT AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN
GET TO A PLACE WHERE THAT'S
WHAT'S HAPPENING. BUT THERE'S
ALSO NOTHING IN THE BILL TO
REQUIRE THAT THE REST OF THE
LINE IS ALSO IN A CONDUIT AND
THAT LITTLE WATER. YOU WOULD BE
SAVING BY DOING IT. JUST ON ONE
PROPERTY DOESN'T MAKE A TON OF
SENSE. AND SO THAT AMENDMENT, I
THINK WAS ALSO WELL THOUGHT OUT.
AND SO I WOULD URGE YOU TO THINK
ABOUT GETTING THIS BILL TO A
BETTER PLACE. BUT AT THIS POINT,
I DON'T THINK IT IS ONE. AND I
DON'T THINK MR YOU PUT ONE QUICK
QUESTION. UH, SENATOR PECAN.
JUST GO BACK. YOU WERE
MENTIONING THAT THERE IS A, UH,
WATER LOSS. RIGHT I MEAN, AND
YOU SAID 16 MILES OF IT, OR
WELL, THE DITCHES APPROXIMATELY
16 MILES RIGHT NOW, IT WAS 80
MILES, BUT THERE ARE THERE ARE
WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS ALONG THAT
DITCH. SOME HAVE WATER RIGHT?
SOME DON'T DITCH MAN HAS BEEN IN
EXISTENCE FOR OVER 100 YEARS.
THE QUESTION. I'M THE I DON'T
HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUT IT IN A
CONDUIT IS WHAT IS WHAT I'M
TRYING TO SOLVE. AND THIS IS THE
ONLY THERE'S MANY OTHER STATES%
THAT ALLOW YOU TO IT CAN BE
LINED WITH CONCRETE. IT CAN BE
LINED WITH ALL THINGS, BUT BUT
I'M TRYING TO PUT IT IN A PIPE
SO THAT WE HAVE ZERO LOSS WHEN
WE WHEN WE MOVE THE WATER, WE'RE
GONNA GIVE 30% OF OUR WATERWAY
FOR THE FISH AT THE FRONT OF THE
DITCH ON THE RIVER. AND WE'RE
GOING TO DIVERT THAT WATER, SO I
WANT TO PUT IT IN A PIPE. THAT'S
THE GOAL OF THIS BILL WAS TO PUT
IT IN A PIPE. WE DON'T HAVE THE
RIGHT. WELL WE ALREADY WE CAN
CAPTURE AT THE FRONT BUT WE LOSE
IT. THE GUY ON THE END OF THE
DITCH WHO I'M ACTUALLY COME TO
ME ABOUT THE BILL BECAUSE HE
WANTS TO LINE THE WHOLE DITCH IN
THE CONDO, SO HE ACTUALLY GETS
HIS WATER. HE DOESN'T GET HIS
WATER BECAUSE BY THE TIME IT
GETS HERE, IT'S LEAKAGE OR
PEOPLE ARE STEALING IT. AND HE
HAS A RIGHT TO GO DOWN AND FIX
THAT DITCH AND WHAT IN THE IN
THE STATE IS IN THE GOAL OF THIS
BILL IS TO PUT IN A CONDUIT
THAT'S REALLY WHERE, BUT THIS
STATE DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO PUT
IT IN A CONDUIT IF IT'S IN A
DITCH, MANY OTHER STATES DO
THAT. FOR CONSERVATION OF WATER.
THAT'S THE GOAL OF THIS BILL. IT
TURNED INTO THIS EASEMENT
PROBLEM. HE WE, MY PROPERTY
OWNERS HAVE A RIGHT TO GO DOWN
THE DITCH AND DO ALL THOSE
THINGS EXCEPT FOR PUT IT IN A
CONDUIT. IT'S THEIR WATER. WATER
IS A PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHT IN
CALIFORNIA, SO ALONG THE WAY
PEOPLE ARE STEALING THEIR WATER.
LOSS FOR MANY OTHER REASONS.
WE'RE JUST BASICALLY TRYING TO
PUT IT IN A PIPE. THAT WAS THE
GOAL OF THE BILL. WE GOT CAUGHT
UP WITH REALTORS AND LAD AND ALL
THESE OTHER THINGS THAT DON'T
PERTAIN TO WHAT I'M TRYING TO
PROVIDE. BUT THERE ARE MANY, NOT
JUST SISKIYOU COUNTY OR I COME
FROM UP NORTH. THERE ARE MANY
DITCHES IN NEVADA COUNTY WHERE I
REPRESENT THEY WERE THE MINERS
BUILT THE DITCHES AND THERE'S
THEY SELL IT IN. MINOR INCHES
THERE'S BUT THEY GET LOST AND
ALL THOSE SAME THINGS TO. WE'RE
TRYING TO CONSERVE WATER IN
CALIFORNIA FOR THE PROPER
PRIVATE PRIVATE RIGHT OF THE
OWNER. THAT'S THE GOAL. SO IN
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS MIGHT THE
PERSON THAT I'M REPRESENTING AND
THE DISTRICT I'M REPRESENTING?
WHAT HAVE TO ASK PERMISSION AND
IT WILL ACTUALLY GOING IN
REVERSE. HE DOESN'T HAVE TO ASK
PERMISSION NOW TO GO FIX THE
DITCH. I'M TRYING TO PUT IN A
CONDUIT. SO TO BE CLEAR THE BILL
DOESN'T JUST APPLY TO YOUR DITCH
RIGHT STATEWIDE APPLICATION,
WHICH IS THE CONCERN OF THE
OPPOSITION. UM WITH THAT? I
DON'T I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE A
FORUM. NO NOT YET. OKAY SO WE
DON'T HAVE A QUORUM YET, SENATOR
, SO I CAN'T ENTERTAIN A MOTION
AT THIS TIME, BUT WILL WHEN WE
GET CLOSE. I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.
AND WE WILL. WE'VE BEEN WORKING
ON THIS FOR TWO YEARS. THIS IS
HAS NOT BEEN AN EASY BILL. UM I
WILL COME BACK IF I IF I DON'T
GET THIS BILL OUT AND TRY TO,
BUT BUT I DON'T WANT TO GO AND I
DON'T WANT TO GO BACKWARDS FOR
THE PEOPLE. I'M TRYING TO HELP
AND MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE JUST
NARROWED IT DOWN TO YOU KNOW A
DISTRICT DITCH BILL, BUT IN
CALIFORNIA WE REALLY NEED TO
LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THIS
AREA BECAUSE THERE'S A MANY
THOUSANDS OF MILES OF DITCH THAT
NEED TO BE PUT INTO A PIE OR
LINED IN A DIFFERENT WAY TO
ACTUALLY CONSERVE WATER NUMBER
ONE, AND THERE'S ISSUES WITH
LEAD PIPES AND THEN THERE,
THAT'S ANOTHER AREA OF LAW THAT
NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT AS WELL.
SO I RESPECTFULLY IF I CAN GET
EMOTION, I'M ASSUMING I WILL AT
THE TIME I WOULD RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AND I VOTE THIS BILL, I
THINK MOVES IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION TO ACTUALLY CONSERVE
WATER AND HELP WILDLIFE. IN OUR
IN OUR CITY SITUATION. IT'S
ACTUALLY GOING TO HELP SAM AND
THAT ARE SPAWNING NATE. NATURAL
NATIVE SALMON RESPONDING, BUT
THE FARMERS ARE NOT GOING TO
GIVE THIS WATER UP IF THEY CAN'T
GET THEIR REST OF WATER TO THEIR
CROPS. THANK YOU, SENATOR. WE DO
HAVE A QUORUM NOW, SO I'M GOING
TO CALL THE ROLL BAUER-KAHAN
HERE. DOLLY BENNETT, BIGELOW
FRIEDMAN. GARCIA. CHOLERA.
LEVINE MURATSUCHI AND WHEN RUBIO
SALAS. SMITH VALLAPUDUA WARD.
FORMS PRESENT. SORRY REMEMBER,
SMITH MOVES THE BILL AND THE
DALAI SECONDS AT CALDERON. PARA
QUE HAN NO BAUER-KAHAN NO DOLLY.
DOLLY BENNETT. SENATE, NOT
VOTING, BIGELOW. FRIEDMAN
GARCIA. GARCIA, NOT VOTING
CHOLERA. LEVIN. MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI NOT VOTING WHEN
RUBIO. RUBIO, NOT VOTING SALAS.
SMITH SMITH, I BE VALLAPUDUA
WATCH I AWARD. WE HAD, MADAM.
MAKE SURE IF I COULD JUST MAKE A
COMMENT TO THE AUTHOR, AND THAT
IS JUST WALKED IN, AND I KNOW
THIS. THIS WAS PULLED, AND THEN
IT WAS BACK ON AND LOTS OF
AMENDMENTS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT
AMENDMENTS ETCETERA. SO THERE'S
SOME ASPECTS ABOUT THIS. BUT
ANYWAY, IT'S JUST WITHOUT
WITHOUT HAVING FURTHER
INFORMATION. THAT'S WHY I'M IN
THAT. NOT VOTING SPOT, BUT
CERTAINLY WILLING TO TALK.
THANKS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THAT BILL HAS THREE
VOTES, BUT WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN
FOR SOME MEMBERS. DR PAN IS HERE
FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LAIRD ON SB
FOUR OR SENATOR LARRY, I KEEP
CALLING HIM A FAILURE. SENATOR
LAIRD S BEFORE 89 WHEN YOU'RE
READY, DOCTOR, PAM. THANK YOU,
MADAM. CHAIR MEMBERS. PLEASED TO
PRESENT SP 4 89 BY SENATOR LAIRD
TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES ADVANCED FUNDING
FOR THE PAJERO RIVER FLOOD RISK.
RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT TO
ENSURE THAT THE INITIAL STAGES
OF THIS ESSENTIAL PROJECT GET
UNDERWAY. LAST YEAR, THIS
COMMITTEE PASSED SB 4 96 BY
SENATOR LAIRD, WHICH AUTHORIZED
THE PAY THE STATE TO PAY UP 100%
OF THE NON FEDERAL COSTS OF THE
PAJERO PROJECT FROM THE FLOOD
CONTROL SUB MENTIONS PROGRAM.
GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE OF THE
PROJECT AND PROTECTING THE
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES AND DUE
TO THE LACK OF FINANCIAL
CAPACITY OF THESE COMMUNITIES TO
PAY FOR THE PROJECT. HOWEVER
THAT STATUTORY LAW DID NOT
PROVIDE FOR ADVANCED FUNDING
FROM THE FLOOD CONTROLS
INVENTIONS PROGRAM AND THE
COMMUNITIES OF PAJERO AND WATSON
VILLE DO NOT HAVE THE FINANCIAL
CAPACITY TO PAY THE UPFRONT COST
OF THE PROJECT WHILE WAITING FOR
REIMBURSEMENT. PER CAPITA INCOME
IN THE AREA IMPACTED BY THE
PROJECT. THAT'S LESS THAN HALF
THE STATE AND NATIONAL AVERAGE
AND NIGERIA CENSUS DESIGNATED
PLACE WHICH IS DEFINED AS THE
SEVERELY DISADVANTAGED HAS A
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME. 55% OF
THE CALIFORNIA MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD
INCOME, THERE IS NEED TO ADVANCE
FUNDING IN ORDER FOR THE FLOOD
CONTROL PROJECT TO BE COMPLETED.
THEREFORE SB 4 89 WOULD PROVIDE
CLEAR DIRECTION TO DWR THAT
THEY'RE AUTHORIZED TO ADVANCE
FUNDS FROM THE FLOOD CONTROLS
INVENTIONS PROGRAM TO THE PAJERO
PROJECT FOR PLANNING,
ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION. OF THE PROJECT AND
ACQUISITION REQUIRED LANDS.
EASEMENTS RIGHT OF WAY. UTILITY
RELOCATIONS, DISPOSAL SITES AND
BURROW AREAS FOR IN MITIGATION
OF THE PROJECT, AND I HAVE
TESTIFYING DR MARK STRADLEY,
FLOOD CONTROL PROGRAM MANAGER OF
THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION
DISTRICT ZONE. SEVEN THANK YOU,
DOCTOR PEN, AND WE HAVE DOCTOR
STUDLY ON THE PHONE MODERATOR.
YOU COULD OPEN THE LINE. YES.
HELLO? DR MARX. RUBLEY. WE CAN
HEAR YOU. PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING. GREAT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS DR
MARK STRUGGLING. I AM THE FLOOD
CONTROL DIVISION MANAGER OF
SENATORS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
, AS WELL AS THE INTERIM
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE POWER
REGIONAL FLOOD MANAGEMENT
AGENCY. WHICH IS A JOINT POWERS
AGENCY OVERSEEING IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE POWER OF RIVER FLOOD RISK
MANAGEMENT PROJECT JOINTLY WITH
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THE
AGENCY IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR
LONG TERM OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE OF THE LEVEE SYSTEM
ON THE RIVER. THE AGENCY ISN'T
STRONG SUPPORT FOR THAT BEFORE
89 BECAUSE THE CASH REQUIREMENTS
TO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT, WHICH
WILL BE REIMBURSED UNDER THE
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY
FC 4 96. PARK SEEMS TO CAST
POSITION AND FINANCIAL CAPACITY
OF DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
SERVED BY THE PROJECT. THE CITY
OF WASHINGTON IN THE TOWN OF
PONTURO, WITH ULTIMATELY FUNDED
AGENCY. SB 4. 89 ACKNOWLEDGES
THE POLICY PATH ESTABLISHED BY
THE ENACTMENT OF SP 4 96 LAST
YEAR, WHICH RECOGNIZES THE
WIDESPREAD AND ACCENTUATED SOCIO
ECONOMIC CHALLENGES FACED
THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT AREA
BENEFIT SB 49 WOULD ADVANCE THE
STATE STAIRS. IMPLEMENTATION
COSTS WOULD MAKE THIS IMPORTANT
AND LONG AWAITED PROJECT A
REALITY. WITHOUT THE ADVANCEMENT
OF THE STATE'S SHARE THE PROJECT
WILL SOLVE LEAVING AN
ECONOMICALLY DEPRESSED AREAS
SUBJECT TO KEEP BLOOD THREAT,
WHICH HAS PERSISTED FOR DECADES
AND DECADES. WITH THE RECENT
PASSAGE OF A PROP TO 18
COMPLIANT ASSESSMENT THAT WILL
ANNUALLY RAISE THE REQUIRED
FUNDS FOR OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE. THE COMMUNITY HAS
POSTED ALL IT CAN OFFER AND
COMMITTED ITSELF TO SUPPORTING
LONG TERM FLOOD SAFETY. THE 4 89
SUPPORTED BY LOCAL COMMUNITY AND
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, THE LOCAL
AND STATE FARM BUREAUS THE CITY
OF WATSONVILLE, SANTA CRUZ AND
MONTEREY COUNTY, LOCAL WATER
AGENCIES IN THE SIERRA CLUB,
AMONG OTHERS. WE APPRECIATE THE
COMMITTEE'S CAREFUL
CONSIDERATION OF S. P 49 URGES
POSITIVE MOVEMENT THROUGH THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. OKAY THANK YOU, DR
SHREWDLY. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT HERE IN THE
ROOM? SEEING NONE WILL GO TO THE
PHONE LINES, AND HE'S ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT ON THE PHONE LINES.
MODERATOR. IF YOU ARE IN
SUPPORT, PLEASE PRESS 10. GONNA
BE JUST A MOMENT WHILE WE OPEN
THE LINES JUST A MOMENT.
IN LINE 16 YEAR LINE IS OPEN
LINE 16. YES THIS IS DANNY
MERKLEY WITH THE CALIFORNIA FARM
BUREAU IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. IN
LINE 38 YOUR LINE IS OPEN LINE
NUMBER 38. LARA JOHNSON ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY AND WATSON
VILLE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND
THERE'S NO ONE ELSE IN CUBA AT
THIS TIME. THANK YOU. AND WE
HAVE NO OPPOSITION ON RECORD. IS
THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM AND
OPPOSITION? SEEING NON MODERATOR
. CAN YOU OPEN THE PHONE LINES
FOR ANY OPPOSITION ON SB 4 89.
IF YOU'RE AN OPPOSITION OF SB 4
89, PLEASE PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO.
AND AT THIS TIME THERE IS NO ONE
IN Q GREAT. BRING IT BACK TO THE
DIASPORA QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS,
COMMENTS, SEEING NONE. NOT
SIMILAR. ARROWSMITH MOVES THE
BILL. IT IS A VERY, VERY SUKI
SECONDS THE BILL AND WE WILL
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PAST TWO APPROPRIATIONS
BARRICADE. HAN BAUER-KAHAN. AYE,
DOLLY DOLLY, I BENNETT BIGELOW.
FRIEDMAN. GARCIA. GARCIA I
CHOLERA. LEVINE LEVINE. I
MURATSUCHI MURATSUCHI I WHEN
RUBIO RUBIO, SALAS SMITH SMITH.
I VE VALLAPUDUA WARD. HAS SEVEN
VOTES NEEDS ONE MORE, BUT WE'LL
HOLD IT ON CALL FOR NEGATIVE
FAN. YOUR BILL IS ON CONSENT. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE. AH! SENATOR WILK IS HERE.
YEAH. WE WILL BE HEARING SB 5 20
BY SENATOR WOLF WHEN YOU'RE
READY, SENATOR. GOOD MORNING. I
WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND THE
MEMBERS FOR HEARING THIS BILL
TODAY. SO BEFORE YOU AS SB 5 20
, WHICH PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR REGULATORY DUE PROCESS TO
THE RESIDENTS OF NORTHERN L, A
COUNTY. WHO HAVE BEEN SILENCED
FOR THREE DECADES AND WOULD
ESTABLISH SOUNDS STATEWIDE
PUBLIC POLICY MOVING FORWARD.
THIS BILL WOULD ALLOW THE
COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN A
PUBLIC HEARING AT THE STATE
WATER BOARD IN REGARDS TO
APPLICATIONS TO APPROPRIATE
WATER FOR MINING PROJECTS WHEN A
DECISION HAS NOT BEEN MADE
WITHIN 30 YEARS FROM THE
ORIGINAL FILING DATE. I WANT TO
MAKE CLEAR WHAT THIS BILL DOES
BECAUSE THE OPPONENTS HAVE BEEN
SHARING INFORMATION ABOUT THIS
BILL THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE
PROJECT NOT MOVING FORWARD OR
BEING DELAYED FOR A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF TIME. AND THAT'S
SIMPLY NOT TRUE. DOES. BILL
INCLUDES AN EXEMPTION TO NOT
REOPEN THE PUBLIC PROTEST
PROCESS IF THE BOARD HEARS IT,
HEARING OR OR CONDUCT
PROCEEDINGS AFTER 45 DAY WRITTEN
NOTICE. THIS WILL ALLOW
COMMUNITY MEMBERS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO FORMALLY WAY IN
AND PRESENT NEW EVIDENCE BEFORE
THE BOARD TAKES FINAL ACTION.
MAJOR ISSUE AFFECTING OUR REGION
IS THE 56.1. MILLION TONS,
PROPOSED MX MEGA MINE IN SOLID
ED CANYON BORDERING THE CITY OF
SANTA PRETA AND STATE ROUTE 14.
AND IT WOULD BE THE SECOND
LARGEST AGGREGATE MINE IN THE
COUNTRY. THE WATER APPLICATION
WAS ORIGINALLY FILED IN 1991 TO
THE BOARD REQUESTING TO TAKE
WATER FROM THE SANTA CLARA
RIVER, WHICH IS THE LAST
REMAINING WILD RIVER IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA. NO PUBLIC HEARING
HAS TAKEN PLACE DURING THAT 30
PLUS YEAR APPLICATION PROCESS.
AND WHILE THE WATER BOARD CAN
CONDUCT A HEARING, SHOULD THEY
DECIDE TO THIS BILL WOULD COMPEL
THEM TO OTHER. THE MEGA MINES.
WATER APPROPRIATION. WHAT EFFECT
THE SANTA CLARA RIVER VALLEY
WATERSHED, WHICH GOES FROM
AWKWARD DOLCE TO THE PACIFIC, SO
ITS IMPACT THE CITIES OF SANTA
CLARITA IN L. A COUNTY AND
VENTURA COUNTY. IT WOULD AFFECT
THE CITIES OF FILLMORE, SANTA
PAULA AND VENTURA, AND IT HAS
THE POTENTIAL TO NEGATIVE
NEGATIVELY IMPACT VENTURA COUNTY
AGRICULTURE, INCLUDING CITRUSY,
AVOCADO AND NURSERY PLANTS.
ADDITIONALLY A 2017 STUDY ON
GROUNDWATER PUMPING BY THIS
PROJECT CONCLUDED THAT IT WOULD
ELIMINATE MOST DRY SEASON FLOW
AND WOULD AFFECT IN THE
ENDANGERED AND ARMORED AND
ARMORED THREE SPINES GO BACK
FINISH POPULATION WHICH IS
INDIGENOUS TO THIS PARTICULAR
REGION. SINCE 1991. THE REGION'S
POPULATION IS MORE THAN DOUBLED
IN CLIMATE CHANGE HAS
ACCELERATED AND WE'RE NOW
ENDURING WORSENING DROP
CONDITIONS. SB 5 20 SIMPLY
ENSURES THAT REGULATORS HAVEAN
OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR UPDATED DATA
SO THAT THE PUBLIC HAS
CONFIDENCE IN ITS OWN GOVERNMENT
INSTITUTIONS. THIS PROPOSAL IS
NARROW IN SCOPE. BUT THE
OPPOSITION'S LETTER NEVER REALLY
ADDRESSES THE MERITS OF THE
BILL, BUT AS ITS PIVOTED TO AN
EQUITY ISSUE THAT ACTUALLY WORKS
IN FAVOR OF SB 5 20 NOT AGAINST
FIRST, THE CITY CENTER CREATOR
IS NOT 70% WHITE AS STATED IN
THEIR LETTER, ACCORDING TO THE
LATEST CENSUS, WHITE RESIDENTS
MAKE UP 46.7% OF THE POPULATION.
FOLLOWED BY HISPANIC AND LATINO
AT 34% A P I AT 10.8% AND BLACK
RESIDENTS MAKING UP 4.4. IN THE
LETTER OF OPPOSITION CLAIMS THE
BILL WOULD QUOTE RESULTS IN
LOWER INCOME COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR AND PALMDALE ENDURING
ADDITIONAL TRUCK TRAFFIC AND
MINING ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD BE
AVOIDED IF THE SALT YET SOLID
DEAD CANYONS PROJECT IS
COMPLETED IN QUOTE AND ASHES
PATENTLY FALSE, SOLID AT CANYON
PROJECT WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE
IMPACTS EVEN WORSE FOR THE
RESIDENTS OF THE ANTELOPE VALLEY
. PEOPLE HAVE MOVED FROM LOS
ANGELES TO PALMDALE TO BUY AN
AFFORDABLE HOME. AND TO BUILD A
BETTER LIFE FOR THEIR FAMILIES.
ACCORDING TO THE NORTHERN L. A
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COALITION
, NEARLY 100,000 OF THESE
RESIDENTS MAKE THE DAILY COMMUTE
DOWN THE 14 FREEWAY TO LOS
ANGELES. THEY CALL IT GOING DOWN
BELOW. THE CITY UPON JILL IS A
MINORITY COMMUNITY MADE UP OF
43% HISPANIC AND LATINO, 28%
WHITE AND 21% BLACK RESIDENTS.
DATA FROM THE U. S CENSUS BUREAU
FROM 2019 FOUND THAT THE
RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF
PALMDALE HAD THE LONGEST COMMUTE
IN THE NATION. WHILE RESIDENTS
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CORITA RANK
CLOSELY AT NUMBER SIX. THAT'S
FOR THE ENTIRE NATION. THESE ARE
SUPER COMMUTERS WHO DRIVE THESE
DRIVE THIS CONGESTED FREEWAY AND
LONG COMMUTES TO PROVIDE FOR
THEIR FAMILIES. THIS PROJECT AT
ITS APEX WOULD ADD TO THEIR
ALREADY LONG COMMUTE BY PLACING
1164 TRUCKS A DAY ON STATE ROUTE
14. FURTHER IMPACTING THE I 5 14
INTERCHANGE, AND I'M SURE IF YOU
EVER DRIVEN BY FIVE, YOU KNOW
THAT IT'S THE CHOKE POINT IN THE
ENTIRE STATE FOR THE I FIVE. UM
THIS EQUATES TO ONE INBOUND OR
OUTBOUND TRUCK EVERY ONE MINUTE
AND 14 SECONDS MEMBERS WITH ME
THIS MORNING TO PROVIDE WITNESS
TESTIMONY. ON THE CONFERENCE
LINE SHOULD BE ANDREW G. FREED
PRESIDENT OF SAFE ACTION FOR THE
ENVIRONMENT AND SANDRA HOTEL
SANTA PRETA GROUP CHAIR OF THE
SIERRA CLUB. BOTH CONSTITUENTS
OF MINE WHO ARE WELL VERSED ON
THE PROJECT'S IMPACT OUR
COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. OPERATOR,
CAN WE MOVE TO THE LINES AND
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT AND IF YOU
ARE IN SUPPORT OF 5 20 PLEASE
PRESS ONE OF THEM ZERO. TO BE
JUST A MOMENT. FOR THE PRIMARY
WITNESSES. ANDREW FREED FIRST,
PLEASE. YES GOOD MORNING, GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND HONORABLE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. THIS IS ANDREW
. SHE'S PRETTY, REPRESENTING
SAFE ACTIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENT
AND PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT OUR
ORGANIZATION SAVE REPRESENT
HUSING SUPPORTS THIS IMPORTANT
LEGISLATION REALIZING THAT SP 5
20 WAS NOT DESIGNED TO STOP THE
CENEX PROJECT. GOVERNOR NEWSOM'S
EMERGENCY DROUGHT PROCLAMATIONS
AUTHORIZES THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD TO QUOTE
BAN. WASTEFUL WATER USE IS
THEREFORE BOOSTING CONSERVATION
EFFORTS. CLOSED QUOTE SP 5 20
PROVIDES AN INTEGRAL INSTRUMENTS
FOR PROVIDING IMPORTANT DATA
REGARDING THE DELIVERY OF
DRINKING WATER. AND WATER FOR
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. S
FACTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT IN
AGREES WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS, LOCAL AGENCIES
AND LEGAL JURISDICTIONS THAT
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES HAVE
OCCURRED IN THE AREA. OVER THE
PAST 30 YEARS THAT NECESSITATE A
NEED FOR THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD TO FULLY
CONSIDER PRESENT DAY DYNAMICS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES. RATHER THAN
RELYING ON INFORMATION THAT IS
SIGNIFICANTLY OUT OF DATE AND
MAKING DECISIONS WITH LONG TERM
IMPACT. ASKING 5 20 WOULD
REQUIRE THE WATERBOARD THE ISSUE
A YOU NOTICE AND PROVIDE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
BEFORE RENDERING A FINAL
DETERMINATION. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU AND MOVE TO THE
NEXT WITNESS, PLEASE. I'M SORRY,
TALKING ON THE PHONE LINES. YES.
HOTEL STANDARD COULD TELL SHOULD
BE THIS IS SANDRA. CATTLE. CAN
YOU HEAR ME? YES, YES, GOOD.
SANDRA COULD TELL SIERRA CLUB
THE SIERRA CLUB SUPPORTS THIS
BILL. WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD
CONCERNS ABOUT WATER
AVAILABILITY FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND THESE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN
EXACERBATED OVER THE YEARS. AS
THE DROUGHT LI ARE IN HAS
PERSISTED. THE MINE SITE IS
ADJACENT TO THE SANTA CLARA
RIVER AND THE SAN GABRIEL
MOUNTAINS NATIONAL MONUMENT.
SEPARATED BY ONLY A TWO LANE
ROAD. THE WATERSHED OF THE STAND
DEBRIS. ALS, ALSO KNOWN AS THE
ANGELES NATIONAL FOREST. THE
RIVER AND FILLS OUR AQUIFER. WE
ARE IN A SEVERE DROUGHT. THE
AREA IS MUCH MORE ARID THAN IT
HAS EVER BEEN. THE MIGHTY SANTA
CLARA RIVER IS NOW MOSTLY DRY,
EXCEPT DURING RAIN EVENTS AND
IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARDS. LOCAL
GIRL WEALTH DOWNSTREAM ARE
RUNNING DRY, AS ARE THE WATER
AGENCY. WELL, APPROXIMATELY HALF
OF OUR DRINKING WATER
TRADITIONALLY COMES FROM THE
STATE WATER PROJECT. AND THE
OTHER HALF IS GROUNDWATER. RIGHT
NOW, OUR STATE WATER ALLOCATION
HAS BEEN CUT TO JUST 5. AND
WATER SAVING MANDATES ARE IN
EFFECT. WHILE THE WATER AGENCY
DOES HAVE BANKED WATER, THE LONG
TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF THAT IS
UNCERTAIN. GROUNDWATER HAS
BECOME INCREASINGLY MORE
IMPORTANT. WE'VE HAD MANY YEARS.
OF A LONG CLEANUP OF CHLORINE
POLLUTION, AND NOW WE ARE
WORKING ON PCS POLLUTION. THIS
IS NOT AN N B REQUEST. THE
COMMUNITY HAS CHANGED THE
ENVIRONMENT TEST CHANGE
ECOSYSTEMS HAVE CHANGED AND THE
WATER SUPPLY HAS CHANGED,
CHALLENGING BOTH HUMANS. AND THE
NATIVE INCLUDING ENDANGERED
WILDLIFE. BY LAW OF WATER RIGHT
APPLICATION MUST BE IN THE
PUBLIC INTEREST. SP 5 20
PROVIDING ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY
FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO BE
HEARD BEFORE THE WATER BOARD
MAKES A DETERMINATION ON A 30
YEAR OLD WATER RIGHT
APPLICATION. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. MM HMM. OKAY SO IT LOOKS
LIKE WE'VE CONCLUDED OUR TWO
PRIMARY WITNESSES AND SUPPORT.
WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE
HERE IN THE ROOM AND SUPPORT.
HOPE WATER RIGHT APPLICATION
MUST BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
I'M SORRY. DIGITAL RIVERS ON THE
D FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
BE HEARD BEFORE. SORRY SPEAKING
ON THE PHONE ON A 30 YEAR OLD
WONDERFUL RIGHT NOW. IS THAT A
REPORTING THAT'S A RECORDING.
THAT WAS OH, I WAS LIKE I
THOUGHT WE HEARD THIS TESTIMONY.
YOU WANT TO DRIVE FROM THE POINT
? THANK YOU, MODERATOR. OKAY GO
AHEAD. MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS,
ANTHONY MOLINA, ON BEHALF OF
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER AGENCY
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. SEEING OTHER WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT HERE ON THE PHONE. WE
WILL GO TO OR HEARING THE PERSON
WILL GO TO THE PHONE LINES FOR
SUPPORT MODERATOR. ANYONE IN
SUPPORT OF SB 5 20. IF YOU ARE
IN SUPPORT OF SB 5 20, PLEASE
PRESS ONE THAN ZERO. WE HAVE
LINED 19 9 19. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS
AND CHAIR OF MEMBERS. THIS IS
ERIC HARNISCH WITH COLLEGE OF
THE CANYONS AND WE'RE IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL. THANK YOU. 14 YEAR
LINE IS OPEN MIND 14. GOOD
MORNING, SHERIFF, FABRIC CON AND
THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEE AND WATER PARKS AND
WILDLIFE. MY NAME IS LAURIE IN
WEST AND I AM THE MAYOR OF THE
CITY OF SENTURK, RITA ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY. I WOULD LIKE TO
EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR SENATE
BILL 5 20 RESPECTFULLY URGE YOUR
EYES VOTE. THANK YOU, MADAM
MAYOR. THAT'S A BRIEF ISSUES
EVER SINCE 21 YEAR LINE IS GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS JOHN. YOU,
STELLA. I REPRESENT THE SANTA
CRATER VALLEY CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE ARE DIVERSE. 65,000
MEMBER WORKFORCE. I WANT TO ECHO
OUR FRIENDS. ANDY FREED SANDRA
CATTLE, MR CREDENCE CHAMBERS OF
FULL SUPPORT. BUT THAT'S THE 5
20 ENERGY, GOVERNMENTAL
PROTECTIONS. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK
THE COMMITTEE TO SUPPORT THIS
ITEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND
THERE'S NO ONE LEFT IN. Q THANK
YOU, AND WE HAVE NO PRIMARY
WITNESSES, OPPOSITION, BUT DO WE
HAVE ANYONE HERE IN THE ROOM IN
OPPOSITION? WE DO OKAY. MY
FORMER FRIEND. WE CAN STILL BE
FRIENDS, EVEN IF WE DISAGREE,
SENATOR, EXACTLY MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE SCOTT
UNDER GOVERNOR ON BEHALF OF CMAX
, UM, FIRST WE QUESTION THE
PRUDENCE AND LEGALITY OF
PURSUING LEGISLATION. THAT
IMPACTS A SINGLE PROJECT IN THE
STATE. REST ASSURED, THIS BILL
WILL ONLY IMPACT THE CENEX
PROJECT IN SANTA CLARITA AND NO
OTHERS. WE QUESTION THE LEGALITY
OF THAT IN TERMS OF THE DELAY.
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA HAS
CREATED ITS OWN NARRATIVE FILED
LEGAL CHALLENGE AFTER LEGAL
CHALLENGE. UH CONGRESSMAN
MCCARTHY HAS INTERVENED AND WITH
EVERY CHALLENGE, THE STATE WATER
BOARD STOPS THE PROCESS. SO
THEY'RE HERE TODAY, SAYING,
WELL, THIS HAS GONE ON FOR 30
YEARS WELL, THE DELAY WAS IN
LARGE PART CAUSED BY SANTA
CORITA ITSELF IN TERMS OF THE
HEARING NOW WE HAVEN'T EVEN MADE
IT THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS
YET. SO THIS NOTION. I MEAN,
THIS PROJECT HASN'T BEEN
APPROVED. IT HASN'T EVEN HAD THE
PUBLIC HEARING YET. SO WHAT THE
BILL DOES. IT DOESN'T CREATE
SIMPLY A PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE
BILL DOES IS REOPENS THE PROCESS
RIGHT IT GIVES STANDING TO
EVERYONE ANYWHERE TO KIND OF RE
ENTER THE DEBATE REENTER THE
DISCUSSION. FOR SOMETHING THAT'S
NEVER OCCURRED. WE'RE FINE.
PURSUING THE EXISTING HEARING
PROCESS. AS REQUIRED BY THE
STATE WATER RESOURCE CONTROL
BOARD FOR WHAT IS CONSIDERED A
MINOR PROJECT BY THE WAY, BUT
NOT REOPENING THE ENTIRE PROCESS
. THERE ARE A LOT OF BIG WATER
PROJECTS COMING DOWN THE ROAD IN
THIS STATE. AND TO ESTABLISH THE
PRECEDENT WHERE YOU CAN REOPEN
THEM IS A PRETTY DANGEROUS
PRECEDENT. NOW IN TERMS OF SOME
OF THE STATISTICS MENTIONED BY
THE SENATOR, WELL, WE UNDERSTAND
THIS ISN'T HIS INTENT. IN FACT,
IT WAS THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSERVATION AND I DISTRIBUTED A
LETTER TO MOST EVERYONE IN THIS
COMMITTEE IN THEIR PRIOR LETTER
OF SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT.
WHICH TALKED ABOUT THE AGGREGATE
NEEDS, AND REALLY, IT'S KIND OF
THE COLLECTIVE GOOD WITH THE
STATE STATE HAS DETERMINED IS
THAT THE REGION IS RUNNING OUT
OF AGGREGATES, RIGHT? THEY HAVE
TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE. THE
PEOPLE IN SANTA CLARITA. DON'T
WANT IT. SO WHAT THE STATE HAS
SAID TO GET NOT CMX THAT THEY'RE
GOING TO COME FROM PALMDALE,
WHICH, AS THE SENATOR MENTIONED
IS A CONSIDERABLY LESS AFFLUENT
COMMUNITY. THIS IS ALL FROM THE
STATE, NOT SIMEX. SO THEY'RE
GOING TO BEAR THE BURDEN OF
PROVIDING THIS MATERIAL, WHILE
SANTA CLARITA DOES NOT. THE
LEGISLATURE HAS DONE A LOT OF EJ
BILLS OVER THE YEARS, AND THIS
SEEMS TO RUN THE OPPOSITE
DIRECTION AND THEN LET'S TALK
ABOUT GHD. THE STATE HAS ALSO
SAID THIS IS THE STATE'S WORDS
MOVING THE PRODUCTS FROM SANTA
FROM PALMDALE TO THE SAN
FERNANDO VALLEY REGION WILL
RESULT IN £242 OF CO. TWO INTO
THE ATMOSPHERE. MOVING THAT SAME
PRODUCT. FROM SOLID AT CANYON TO
SAN FERNANDO VALLEY WOULD BE 2
56 £57 OF CO. TWO. SO AGAIN AS
WE LOOK AT OUR GHD GOALS,
REQUIRING A LONGER DISTANCE HALL
INCREASES THE UH PER TRIP. 02 OF
£185 THAT IS COUNTER TO WHERE
THE STATE HAS BEEN HEADING. WE
THINK THIS PROJECT SHOULD MOVE
THROUGH THE PROCESS AS IT HAS
BEEN. YOU KNOW. RECENTLY CENEX
PREVAILED IN THE LAWSUIT, BUT
TWO MONTHS AGO WE WANT TO
PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. STAFF
CAN REVIEW IT. STAFF CAN REJECT
IT. THERE WAS STILL A PUBLIC
HEARING THAT WILL TAKE PLACE. UM
WITHOUT STARTING THE PROCESS ALL
OVER AGAIN, WHICH IS WHAT THIS
BILL DOES. SO FOR THESE REASONS
, WE ASK THAT YOU REJECT THIS
BILL AS BEING CONTRARY TO KIND
OF THE STATE'S POLICIES OF
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, GHD
REDUCTION AND SIMPLY ENSURING
THAT WE GET THE AGGREGATE
MATERIALS THAT ARE NECESSARY.
FOR THE STATE MOVING FORWARD. SO
FOR THESE REASONS WE ARE
OPPOSED. THANK YOU, MR GOVERNOR
. ANYBODY ELSE IN THE ROOM AND
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? SEEING
THEN WE'LL GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. MODERATOR ANY OPPOSITION
TO SB 5 20. FEWER IN OPPOSITION
SP 5 20 PLEASE TRUST ONE THAN
ZERO. LIVE LINE. 18 9 18 YEAR
LINE IS OPEN. HI THIS IS
KATHERINE SOLOMON. I'VE NOT IN
OPPOSITION. I GOT GIFT IS
SUPPORT SECTION SO I APOLOGIZE.
I TRIED FOUR TIMES, ESPECIALLY
10. NO WORRIES. GO AHEAD FULL
SUPPORT. SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT
I'M A 42 YEAR LONG, LIFELONG
RESIDENT, SANTA CLARITA AND
FULLY SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER. THERE'S NO ONE
LEFT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
MR SMITH QUESTION. AND FOR THE
WITNESS YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING
ABOUT THE LAWSUIT. CAN YOU
LEVERAGE? TRUE WHAT? WHAT
TRANSPIRED OF THAT LAWSUIT. THE
BLM HAD CANCELED THE CONTRACT
FOR THE PROJECT. SAVING A LONGER
AERATION. THE PROJECT WAS UNDER
REVIEW. UM. CENEX SUED, THEY
PREVAILED. THAT CASE WAS THAT
RESULTS WERE TOSSED OUT. IN
FAVOR OF SOME, IT'S CORRECT, AND
THAT IS ONE OF MANY LAWSUITS.
OVER THE YEARS THAT CENEX HAS
PREVAILED, INCLUDING THE SEQUEL
LAWSUIT, WHICH THEY PREVAILED.
THANK YOU LOOKS LIKE MR SMITH
HAS CONCLUDED ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. OKAY? NO
QUESTION, MR MURATSUCHI. SO
CENTER. WELL, KAI. CAN
APPRECIATE YOU FIGHTING FOR YOUR
DISTRICT. UH ON ISSUE THAT,
APPARENTLY. IS VERY IMPORTANT
FOR THE UM SANTA CLARITA
COMMUNITY. UM AS A LAWYER, I AM
CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ARGUMENT OF
CREATING A PRECEDENT. UH UM, IN
TERMS OF AH, ADDITIONAL. WHAT IS
THIS, ACTUALLY, IF THEY HOLD A
PUBLIC HEARING, THEY DO NOT HAVE
TO REOPEN THE PROCESS. THAT'S
NOT TRUE. THEY IF THEY JUST HOLD
A PUBLIC HEARING, WE'RE DONE
WITH IT. AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S A
FEDERAL LAND FEDERAL PROJECT
FEDERAL PREEMPTION, REALLY THE
ONLY ROLE THE STATE HAS IN THIS
WHOLE THING. IS TO TAKE A LOOK
AT THE WATER. AND OBVIOUSLY OVER
THE LAST 30 YEARS, THINGS HAVE
CHANGED GREATLY, WHICH WE'VE
ALREADY ARTICULATED. SO I DON'T
KNOW. WASTE THE COMMITTEES,
COMMITTEES TIME ON THAT, AND ALL
THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO DO IS
HAVE AN ABILITY TO WEIGH IN WITH
THE NEW WITH THE NEW DATA, WHICH
I THINK IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE
THIS IS A MINE. AGAINST 2020
YEARS THAT IT'S 2 10 YEAR
CONTRACTS. SO THAT'S THAT'S
THAT'S A LONG TIME IF WE GET IT
WRONG MR GOVERNOR, WAIT. DO YOU
AGREE THAT THIS IS JUST A MATTER
OF HOLDING A NEW PUBLIC HEARING?
UNFORTUNATELY NO, SIR, AND I
APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T BRING THE
BILL. WHAT THE BILL SAYS IS, UM
, THEY MUST HOLD A HEARING AND
EVERYONE MAY NOW BE A PARTY TO
THE ACTION, SO THEY'RE NOT. IT'S
NOT JUST IF THERE WAS
EFFECTIVELY A PERIOD AFTER
HEARING THAT WOULD BE ONE THING,
BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S CREATING A
PARTY. UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE NOT
HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW WHAT HE'S
SAYING. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT
WHAT THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL
DOES. IT CREATES A WHOLE NEW
STANDARD. THANK YOU. HMM. MR
BENNETT. I WALKED IN AND. MISS
PART OF YOUR COMMENTS BECAUSE
I'M IN THE PRIVACY COMMITTEE
ALSO, AND IT HELPED THIS. THIS,
UH, THIS ALL MOVED, UM SO. I
THINK THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE IS
THE ONE THAT MR WILKES, THE
SENATOR WILKES IS BRINGING UP
RIGHT NOW. UM SO YOUR ISSUE IS
NOT THAT THERE'S A HEARING. IT'S
THAT THERE'S THIS ABILITY TO
HAVE ALL THE PRIVATE ACTION
AFTERWARDS. UM SO IT'S BASICALLY
I'M ASKING YOU TO REPEAT YOUR
COMMENTS THAT YOU MADE AN
OPPOSITION. CERTAINLY SIR. UM SO
THE HEARING HAS NEVER TAKEN
PLACE RIGHT ONCE THESE LAWSUITS
HAVE BEEN GOING ON THE STATE
WATER RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD
JUST STOPS EVERY TIME THAT
HAPPENS. SO NOW THAT IT CAN
START AGAIN, THERE STILL WILL BE
A PUBLIC HEARING. THE QUESTION
WITH THE BILL IS WELL. THEY
REOPEN THE PROCESS TO MAKE
EVERYONE PARTY SO BASICALLY,
THEY'RE TURNING THE HEARING
PROCESS DOWN BACK TO DAY ONE. SO
EVERYONE CAN FILE NEW ARGUMENTS
NEW COMPLAINTS AS OPPOSED TO
CONTINUING THE PROCESS THAT HAS
ALREADY BEGUN, AND THAT'S THE
ISSUE WE HAVE, AND THAT'S THE
DANGEROUS PRECEDENT AND WHEN YOU
SAY CONTINUE THE PROCESS AS IT'S
GONE, SO YOU BASICALLY THE
COMMENTS THAT PEOPLE SUBMITTED
30 YEARS AGO. WOULD BE THE ONLY
COMMENTS THAT WOULD BE THE STATE
WATER. THE CITY OF SANTA CORRIDA
STILL HAS RIGHTS TO FILE
ADDITIONAL PROTESTS THAT HASN'T
GONE AWAY. THIS HEARING PROCESS
CORRECT IS GERMANE TO THE
ORIGINAL COMMENTS WHICH SANTA
CLARITA AT THE TIME. THIS IS NOT
A GREENFIELD SITE. SO THEY DID
NOT OPPOSE THE PROJECT. CORRECT
SO THAT HEARING CAN STILL TAKE
PLACE AND THE WATER RESOURCE
CONTROL BOARD CAN STILL REJECT
THE PROJECT. BUT THE. THE
COMMENTS FROM SANTA CLARA TO CAN
BE UPDATED. THEY CAN. WELL. THEY
NEVER FILED COMMENTS. SO THEY
DID NOT OPPOSE THE PROJECT.
COULD THEY COULD THEY NOW FILE
COMMENTS? NO THAT ORIGINAL
COMMENT PERIOD HAS CLOSED THEY
CAN FILE THERE ARE OTHER AVENUES
TO PROTEST THE PROJECT WITH THE
WATER RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD.
THE FORMAL COMMENT IS NOT HOW DO
YOU RESPOND TO THE ARGUMENT THAT
COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE 30 YEARS
AGO, MAYBE OUTDATED. CITY CAN
STILL FILE OTHER FORMS OF
PROTEST TO THE PROJECT. THEY
CAN'T ENTER THE FORMAL COMMENT
PERIOD AND KEEP IN MIND. THIS
DOESN'T COMMENTS ARE NOT
SPECIFIC TO THE CITY, RIGHT?
ANYONE LITERALLY ANYWHERE CAN
FILE COMMENTS UNDER THIS BILL.
IT'S NOT LIMITED TO THE CITY OF
SOUTH KOREA, SO SOMEONE IN
SACRAMENTO CAN FILE COMMENTS ON
THE PROJECT AND THEY HAVE TO BE
RESPONDED TO DURING THE PROCESS.
THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES.
NOW THEY CAN HOLD THE HEARING.
THE CITY CAN STILL PROTEST IN
OTHER AVENUES. BUT THEY CANNOT
GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL HEARING
PROCESS. AND REOPEN THAT
APPLICATION, WHICH IS WHAT THIS
ESSENTIALLY DOES. BECAUSE
RESPONDING TO ALL OF THOSE
COMMENTS WOULD TAKE YEARS. WOULD
TAKE YEARS. IT WOULD TAKE YEARS
AND THIS IS A CONSIDERED A MINOR
PROJECT. IT IS NOT A HEAVY WATER
USER. OKAY, AND THIS AND THESE
RESPONSES WOULD BE, UH, AT
SECRET RESPONSES PROJECT ALREADY
GONE THROUGH SEQUA RIVER, SO
IT'S JUST COMMENTS. COMMENTS
AREN'T RESPONDED TO BECAUSE I
CAN'T GO FORWARD. BUT THEY HAVE
TO RESPOND. IT WOULD JUST TAKE
YEARS FOR THEM TO RESPOND. THE
STATE WATER RESOURCE CONTROL
BOARD IS NOT THE MOST EXPEDIENT
AGENCY IN THE STATE, SO THEY'RE
THE ONES THAT WOULD HAVE TO
RESPOND TO IT. THANK YOU. AND
THAT'S WHY THESE PROJECTS GO ON
20 YEAR HERE HERE. HERE'S WHY
THIS HERE'S WHY THIS ONE SECOND
SENSE, SO IT'S A STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD THAT HAS
TO RESPOND. NOT THE COMPANY.
CORRECT YOUR CONCERN IS THAT
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD WOULD TAKE OF EXCEEDINGLY
LONG TIME TO DO. THAT'S BEEN
THEIR RECORD AND THAT THE VICE
CHAIR AND THE EXPERIENCES I
MEAN, IT'S GREAT. THANK YOU
BELIEVE THIS IS A NARROW BILL
THAT JUST ALLOWS FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING, BUT TO GIVE YOU GREATER
CONTEXT, AND I THINK YOU GUYS
CAN ALL RELATE TO THIS BEING
ELECTED OFFICIALS BACK IN 1991
SANTA CREDO WAS VERY SMALL. WE
WERE ACTUALLY DIVVIED UP FROM
THE PRIOR REDISTRICTING PROCESS
WHERE WE HAD FOUR CONGRESSMEN.
WE HAD BILL THOMAS FROM
BAKERSFIELD. WHERE ELLEN
GALLAGHER, WHOSE OFFICE WAS ALL
THE WAY IN OXNARD'S, WE HAD CARL
CARLOS MOREHEAD FROM PASADENA.
AND THEN WE HAD DAVID DREIER,
WHOSE OFFICE WAS ALL THE WAY IN
WEST COVINA THAT HAD PARTS OF
SANTA CREE TO I'M SURE BLM
INFORMED ALL THESE OFFICES THAT
THIS WAS GOING ON BECAUSE I'VE
WORKED FOR TWO CONGRESSMEN. I
THINK FEDERAL AGENCIES DO A GOOD
JOB IN TERMS OF INFORMING NO ONE
HAD THEIR EYE ON THE BALL CITY
OF SANTA KOREA WAS BRAND NEW. NO
ONE KNEW ABOUT THIS UNTIL I YOU
KNOW, 1999. WHEN WE STARTED
FIGHTING IT SOME X IS ACTUALLY
THE THIRD OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY
AND WHEN THEY BOUGHT THIS
PROPERTY, THEY KNEW WHAT WAS
GOING ON. AND THEY KNEW THAT
THIS PROJECT THIS PROJECT WAS
PROBLEMATIC. AND I THINK THEY
MADE A BAD BUSINESS DECISION.
NOW THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO
THEIR SHAREHOLDERS, WHICH I
THAT'S FINE. BUT I HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO MY CONSTITUENTS
UNTIL TO THE PROCESS. WE'VE
NEVER HAD A HEARING ALL I'M
ASKING FOR ONE HEARING BECAUSE
THERE'S NEW DATA, OBVIOUSLY ON
WADA WATER, AND IT MAY AFFECT
THAT THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT.
BLM CANCELED THE CONTRACT AT THE
URGING OF SENATOR FEINSTEIN AND
SENATOR BOXTER. THEY WERE THE
DRIVING FORCE IN ENCOURAGING THE
AGENCY TO DO THAT. IT'S GONE
THROUGH LITIGATION PROCESS, SOME
EXCESS PREVAILED. SO NOW I GUESS
WE'RE STARTING OUT ALL OVER. BUT
THIS IS NOT A LITTLE DINKY.
PIDDLY PROJECT IN TERMS OF THE
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE. IT'S
CONTINUING TO BE LESS IMPORTANT
, OBVIOUSLY WERE MADE A BIGGER
COMMITMENT TO RECYCLABLES. I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE DONE ANY
TOURING IN EUROPE, BUT THEY'VE
MOVED FROM CONCRETE TO HEMP
CREEK. WHICH IS CHEAPER, LIGHTER
, STRONGER AND CAPTURES CARBON,
SO THIS COULD BE SOMETHING
THAT'S REALLY ENDS UP BEING
OUTDATED. AND THEN WE'RE STUCK
WITH THIS PROJECT. UM AND AGAIN.
THEY CAN APPROVE THE PROJECT
THAT I THINK THE PUBLIC HAS A
RIGHT TO WEIGH IN. THAT'S ALL
THAT'S ALL. I'M ASKING FOR. IF I
MAY AND I WANT TO COME BACK TO
YOU ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BECAUSE I'M
HEARING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS
FROM THEM AS I THINK MAYBE YOU
ARE AS WELL RIGHT, SENATOR.
WELCOME HEARING, YOU SAY, AND I
THINK IT'S THE COMMITTEE'S
READING THAT THIS WILL OPEN A
HEARING. AND THAT BE THREE
INSURERS THAT WITH NOTICE AND A
HEARING IT DOESN'T REOPEN THE
PROCESS AND I'M HEARING MR
GOVERNOR SAY THAT IS NOT THEIR
READING. THEY THINK IT OPENS
FROM THE BEGINNING. AND THEN I
HEARD THE SENATOR SAY, LET'S
AMEND IT RIGHT NOW. SO I THINK
I'M JUST LOOKING. LOOK AT THIS.
A FEDERAL PROJECT. WE JUST HAVE
A SLICE OF THE PIE. MY
CONSTITUENTS HAVE NEVER BEEN
ALLOWED TO WEIGH IN. IF THIS CAN
HAPPEN TO MY COMMUNITY, IT CAN
HAPPEN TO YOUR COMMUNITY I'M
LOOKING FOR IS AN OPPORTUNITY
WHEN APPROPRIATE THAT A HEARING
IS HELD. TO LOOK, LOOK, TAKE A
FRESH LOOK AT THE AT THE DATA. I
DON'T AS A STATE. WE CAN'T WE
CAN'T EVEN STOP IT. IT'S A
FEDERAL PROJECT FEDERAL
PREEMPTION. SO I THINK I MEAN, I
JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT I'M
REASON
STARTING BACK TODAY, ONE THE
SENATOR IS WILLING TO ADVOCATE
MODIFIED AND NOT WHAT I MEANT. I
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT BECAUSE
HE SORT OF SAID IT ABOUT
DEFENDANT DIDN'T IT GOT SO BACK
TO HIS COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED.
BUT THERE WAS NO HEARING. WE
BECAUSE OF STAFF REVIEW HASN'T
BEEN COMPLETED YET THAT WATER
RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD AFTER
DECADES. SO THERE WILL THERE
WILL BE A HERO WILL BE. IT'S
JUST A QUESTION OF WHETHER
THEY'RE GOING TO USE THE
COMMENTS FROM 30 YEARS AGO AND
WHAT THEY RELY UPON, OF COURSE,
OR WHETHER THEY WILL USE IT WILL
BE A HEARING. THERE'LL BE A
HEARING. IT'S JUST WHO'S GOT
WHAT WHAT COMMENTS WILL BE THE
FOUNDATION OF THAT HEARING.
WHICH IS WHY MAKING PEOPLE
PARTY, WHICH IS WHAT THE
LANGUAGE DOES. THAT'S WHERE THE
PROBLEM COMES IN, BECAUSE YOU
ARE REOPENING THAT PROCESS. AS
OPPOSED TO AGAIN JUST SAYING YOU
MUST HOLD THE HEARING FINE. HOLD
THE HEARING. BUT WHEN YOU MAKE
EVERYONE A PARTY, YOU ARE AGAIN%
REOPENING THE COMMENT PERIOD AND
THAT'S THE ISSUE. CURIOUS WHAT
THE CHAIR AND STAFF ANALYSIS IS
OF THE SUGGESTION TO PUT A
PERIOD BEHIND. THAT AND I KNOW
THE OPPOSITION WASN'T READY TO
SAY, HEY, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH
THAT. BUT SENATOR OFFERED THE
ISSUE OF PUTTING A PERIOD BEHIND
THAT. FRIENDS, TOMATO. WE'RE NOT
GOING TO DIE. I DON'T THINK WE
CAN DO THAT RIGHT NOW. BUT UM, I
THINK THAT IF THAT IS SOMETHING
SOUNDS LIKE THE SENATOR IS OPEN
TO IT. YEAH I'M DEFINITELY
OPENING TOO, BECAUSE THAT THAT
THAT'S THAT'S ABSOLUTELY THE
INTENTION OF THE BILL. SO WE
CAN'T DO IT HERE. WE CAN MOVE IT
FORWARD. AND IF WE GET THAT
WORKED OUT TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE.
GREAT AND IF WE DON'T THEN NOT
THE FIRST TIME I'VE LOST A BILL
. SO YOU KNOW I'LL GET OVER IT.
BUT THE OTHER ISSUES REMAIN, I
WOULD JUST KEEP OTHER IS MINE.
WELL, THE OTHER ISSUES THAT YOU
ARE STILL CRAFTING. A BILL FOR A
SINGLE PROJECT, WHICH MAY OR MAY
NOT BE A BILL OF ATTAINDER. IT
DOESN'T HAVE TO SAY IT BY NAME,
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES,
AND IT DOES ESTABLISH A
PRECEDENT WHEREBY PROJECTS THAT
HAVE BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR QUITE
SOME TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A
THIS. YOU'RE NOT CREATING A
MANDATORY HEARING FOR EVERYONE.
YOU'RE CREATING IT FOR ONE
PROJECT. SO ARE YOU WILLING TO
DO THE PRESIDENT TO DO IT FOR
EVERYONE GIVEN THE WATER
RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD IS QUITE
SLOW. SO I'M TAKING A CHANCE FOR
THAT. UM SO THE ORIGINAL SCOPE
OF THE BILL WAS THAT IT WAS
GOING TO APPLY TO ALL PRIVATE
PROJECTS. OUR 30 YEARS OR MORE.
I THINK IT IT. THERE WAS 32 IN
TOTAL. AND WE TOOK AMENDMENT
FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. I
DIDN'T REALIZE UNTIL WE GOT TO
THE NEXT COMMITTEE WHEN I'M
READING THE ANALYSIS THAT IT
APPLIES RIGHT NOW. IT APPLIES TO
JUST THIS PROJECT AND OTHER
PROJECTS GOING FORWARD. SO JUST
DOESN'T TARGET THIS PROJECT. IT
WOULD BE NEW STATE POLICY, WHICH
I THINK IS GOOD MOVING FORWARD,
SO IT'S NOT ONE. IT MIGHT BE ONE
PROJECT TODAY, BUT IT WILL APPLY
TO FUTURE PROJECTS.
A LOT OF GOOD QUESTION. I THINK
WE HAVE MR WARD. THANK YOU.
FIRST I WANT TO THANK THE
SENATOR FOR TAKING THE TIME TO
WALK ME THROUGH THE BILL AND
HAVING A MEETING. I THINK WE
DID. YOU KNOW, SEVERAL WEEKS
AGO, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE
WORK THAT YOU AND YOUR LOCAL
COMMUNITY HAVE PUT INTO THIS
BILL AS WELL. UM YOU KNOW, AND
AS I THOUGHT ABOUT IT, AND YOU
KNOW, YOU KNOW, KIND OF GIVE IT
A SECOND FRESH READ. UM I DO
REMAIN DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT
THE AGGREGATE MATERIAL AND WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO DO RIGHT FOR ALL
THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WE NEED IN
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGION,
ESPECIALLY REPRESENTING SAN
DIEGO COUNTY. UM AND THAT SAID,
I WANT TO BE SENSITIVE THAT
WE'RE GETTING ENVIRONMENTAL
CONCERNS RIGHT AND CERTAINLY ANY
IMPACTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
USING ALL OF OUR AGENCIES
RESPONSIBLY TO BE ABLE TO
ADDRESS IS AS WELL I GUESS WHAT
I'M WONDERING HERE AND GETTING,
YOU KNOW, SORT OF NOT NOT NOT
GOING DOWN THE ISSUE ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS JUST A
YOU KNOW, KIND OF NEATLY
DESIGNED BILL THAT SOMEHOW IS
GOING TO SINGULARLY AFFECT YOU
KNOW, ONE AREA COULD AFFECT
FUTURE AREAS IN, UM INTO THE
FUTURE. UM YOU KNOW, IN THIS
PERSPECTIVE PARTICULAR INSTANCE
IN NEAR SANTA SANTA CLARITA, YOU
HAVE HAD A LOT OF LOCAL
OPPOSITION. THAT HAS
SUFFICIENTLY BEEN THEN BEN.
SOMEONE SAY DELAY, BUT OTHERWISE
, YOU KNOW, TAKING MORE TIME TO
REVIEW THIS PROJECT TO BE ABLE
TO GET THIS PROJECT, RIGHT? UM
YOU'RE YOU'RE SUCCEEDING LOCALLY
TO SOME EXTENT RIGHT NOW IN
GETTING WHAT THEY WANT, AND THIS
KIND OF AN OUTCOME, WHETHER
RIGHTFULLY OR WRONGFULLY ABOUT
PROCEEDING WITH THE OPERATIONS.
I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING IS UM
, HAVING THIS KIND OF A BROADER
REVIEW, WHICH WOULD ULTIMATELY
SEND ANYBODY BACK TO YEAR ONE
HAVE TO HAVE TO SORT OF REDO ALL
THE REVIEW AGAIN THROUGH THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES BOARD. UM
WHY? WHY WOULD THAT WHY WOULD
THAT BE A NECESSARY STEP IF
YOU'VE ALREADY RECEIVED THOSE
APPROVALS AND OPPOSITION OR
DISAGREEABLE VOICES ARE
CONTINUING TO EXERCISE. THEIR
RIGHTS TO DO SO THROUGH LOCAL
GOVERNMENT. WHY WOULD WE NEED
THIS AGAIN? THERE THERE? THERE'S
NEVER THERE'S NEVER BEEN A
HEARING ON THIS, AND THE DATA IS
CHANGED OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO DO THIS
NARROW LITTLE PIECE. SO THERE'S
A VERY COMPLICATED ISSUE, AND
IT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE. SO
THERE'S BEEN NEGOTIATIONS IN THE
PAST BETWEEN THE BLM AND CEMEX
AND THE CITY CENTER CORITA,
WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY THERE'S
MINING IN THE AREA NOW, AND
THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED TO MINING.
THEY'RE JUST OPPOSED TO PROJECT
OF THIS SCOPE BECAUSE OF THE
IMPACT ON WATER. AIR TRY. I
MEAN, WE DIDN'T GET INTO A AIR,
BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S A MOBILE
HOME PARK LESS THAN A MILE AWAY
IN AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND AS
YOU KNOW, EVEYBODY HAS THE BEST
THEY CAN TO PUSH DOWN THE P P. M
TWO FIVES, BUT THEY'RE HARD. AND
SO THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW,
INVITE SO I'M JUST MY LITTLE
SLICE OF THE WORLD IS JUST ALLOW
THE PUBLIC TO HAVE A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE ASPECTS OF WATER
ON I'M ASSUMING AT SOME POINT
SAMMY'S GOING TO NEGOTIATE HOW
TO DEAL BECAUSE THERE IS MINING
THERE. WE DO NEED AGGREGATE. I
KNOW TITANIUM IS, UH, IS MINE
THERE AS WELL AS JUST PUTTING A
PROJECT OF THIS SIZE. ON THAT
PARTICULAR CORRIDOR WITH AGAIN
100,000 TRAVELERS A DAY. UH YOU
HAVE A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, DEFENSE
AND AEROSPACE UP NANA VALLEY
THAT HAS TO GET DOWN TO EL
SEGUNDO IN THE AIR FORCE BASE IN
ALL THAT. IT. JUST THE PROJECT
OF THIS SIZE DOESN'T WORK AND
ALL THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE
RENEGOTIATED. I KNOW THEY'VE
TRIED TO DO THAT IN THE PAST
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, CEMEX HAS AN
OBLIGATION TO THEIR SHAREHOLDERS
AND WANT SOME RE NUMERATOR IN
FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
THAT'S BEEN ONGOING FOR YEARS.
I'M NOT A PARTY TO THAT. THIS IS
THIS. THE ONLY PART THAT I CAN
IMPACT IS THIS AND THAT'S ALL
I'M TRYING TO DO. AND I'M
ASSUMING AT SOME POINT THIS ALL
GETS WORKED OUT. I HOPE OKAY. IT
JUST IT JUST SEEMS THAT YOU KNOW
THE AGAIN LOCAL OPPOSITION IS
ALREADY EVALUATING THAT THROUGH
OTHER OTHER MEANS OF OR OTHER
ENTITIES THAT CAN HAVE A HEARING
OR OPPOSING THIS. UM AND I'M
JUST NOT SURE REVISITING THE
PERMIT TO APPROPRIATE IF THAT'S
ALREADY BEEN CONFERRED. UM I'M
MY CORRECTING THAT THEY'VE NEVER
HAD THE WATER RESOURCE OF BOYS
NEVER HAD A PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY
THAT'S ALL. I'M ASKING FOR WHEN
THE TIME'S APPROPRIATE PUBLIC
AND THEY ACTUALLY WITHOUT THIS,
THEY CAN DO THAT. BUT I'M NOT
SURE BUT THIS WOULD COMPEL THEM
TO DO THAT. WHICH IS ALL I'M
LOOKING FOR. ONE PUB, ONE PUBLIC
HEARING TO TAKE A FRESH LOOK AT
AT THE DATA AS IT PERTAINS TO
WATER. OKAY, THANK YOU. MR
BIGELOW. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
AND I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK
LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM. I MAY
BE THE ONLY ONE THAT'S ACTUALLY
VOTED ON THIS BILL PREVIOUSLY IN
A PREVIOUS ITERATION. HERE SO
I'M GONNA HAVE YOU DONE IT TIMES
. HAVE YOU DONE IT, MARK? I'M
NOT SURE I COULDN'T REMEMBER
WHAT AGAINST BUT I REMEMBER THE
AH I ACTUALLY MIGHT KNOW WHICH
WAY I VOTED. UH BUT I DON'T WANT
TO PREJUDICE ANYBODY'S MIND
RIGHT? AND I DON'T WANT TO
PURCHASE ANYBODY'S MIND. UM
BECAUSE OF A GREAT DEAL OF
RESPECT, AND I KNOW THAT THE
AUTHOR IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE
SOMETHING FOR HIS LOCAL
COMMUNITY. THE COMPLEXITY OF THE
BILL GETS INTO THE RATIONALE.
AND THE RATIONALE REALLY IS MORE
THAN JUST A SIMPLE PERIOD. AFTER
THE WORD PARTICIPATE. IT REALLY
COMES DOWN TO THE ADDED
LANGUAGE. WHERE YOU ADD THE PART
WITH AS A PARTY. SO THAT. THAT
MAKES IT INCLUSIVE OF EVERYONE,
AND IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT IF YOU
JUST PUT A COMMA AFTER
PARTICIPATE. IN THE HEARING. YOU
COULD PROBABLY GET AWAY WITH
LANGUAGE LIKE THAT. BUT IT'S THE
WORD PARTY. THAT'S REALLY GOING
TO TRIP EVERYONE UP, AND IT'S
GONNA OPEN UP PANDORA'S BOX. IN
MY OPINION, SO I'M NOT TRYING TO
SIDE WHERE THEY WANT TO. I'M
JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THE
LOGIC. OF THE BILL AND HOW WE
CAN SOLVE THE PROBLEM HERE
TODAY. WITH AN AMENDMENT THAT
WOULD BE PRESENTED AND IT
DOESN'T APPEAR THAT YOU CAN DO
THAT WITHOUT SOME REAL LEGAL
TECHNICAL ADVICE ON THIS AND I
APOLOGIZE TO THE AUTHOR ON THAT,
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT. IT'S EASY
FOR US TO FIND A DECISION ON
THIS BECAUSE OPENING IT UP. I
THINK KIND OF UNRAVELS. A LOT OF. PERMITTED PROCESSES THAT HAVE
ALREADY OCCURRED AND I THINK
THAT'S WHERE WE TRIP TODAY. AND
THAT'S WHERE THIS HAS BEEN
TRIPPING THE BILL. I AND I WILL
SUPPORT THAT AND RECOGNIZE
BECAUSE I BELIEVE YOU WHEN YOU
SAY THAT ANYWAY, I HOPE THOSE
WORDS ARE HELPFUL TO OTHERS AS
THEY PONDERED THROUGH THIS.
THANK YOU, MR BIGELOW AND I WILL
SAY THAT, UM, SHE CONSULTANT HAS
POINTED OUT THAT BE THREE IS NOT
MANDATORY. SO IF THE IF THE.
BOARD WERE TO FAIL TO HOLD THE
HEARING THAT IT DOES A WOULD
APPLY AND IT WOULD REOPEN. SO I
GUESS I WILL SAY THAT AS WELL TO
WHAT MR BENNETT WAS ASKING
ABOUT. UM. ANYBODY ELSE? YEAH.
GIVE ME A SECOND. WILL GIVE
SENATOR WELCOME MOMENT AND THEN
WE'LL GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO
CLOSE. YES. DO WE HAVE COPIES
FOR EVERYBODY? ARE YOU FAMILIAR
WITH THE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS?
ALRIGHT I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HERE IS YOUR CHIEF
CONSULTANT. ARE YOU FAMILIAR?
WHICH POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS? I'M
JUST GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE,
OKAY? MEMBERS OF THIS HAS
HAPPENED TO MY CONSTITUENTS CAN
ALSO HAPPENED TWO YEARS IS
PUBLIC POLICY MAKERS. IT'S
INCUMBENT UPON US TO ENSURE THAT
THE PUBLIC CAN ACTUALLY PETITION
THEIR GOVERNMENT. UNFORTUNATELY
THIS CASE THIS IS NOT BEEN THE
CASE FOR MY CONSTITUENTS FOR
OVER 30 YEARS NOW WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO RIGHT OR WRONG.
TAKE A STEP. IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION TO ALLOWING PEOPLE TO
HAVE INPUT AND ONCE AGAIN TRUST
THEIR GOVERNMENT, SO I HOPE
YOU'LL JOIN ME AND PROTECTING
THE ENVIRONMENT AND ENSURING
THAT LONGSTANDING MINING
APPLICANTS APPLICANTS WATER
APPROPRIATIONS ARE INDEED IN THE
PUBLIC INTEREST, WHICH IS WHAT
THE LAW SAYS. AND WITH THAT I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
YOU'RE INTERESTED IN YOUR
QUESTIONS AND RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR MY VOTE. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION ON THE BILL? HERE. WE
HAVE EMOTION. OKAY, WELL, OKAY?
DO IT A SECOND. I'LL SECOND THE
BILL CAN GET A VOTE. AND WE WILL
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PAST TWO APPROPRIATIONS
BAUER-KAHAN BAUER-KAHAN. AYE,
DOLLY. DONE IT. BIG BENNETT. I
BIGELOW. BIGELOW NOT VOTING.
FRIEDMAN GARCIA. GARCIA, NOT
VOTING. CHOLERA. LEVIN. LEVIN
NOT VOTING MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI, AYE. NGUYEN. RUBIO.
RUBIO, NOT VOTING. SALAS. SMITH
SMITH, NOT VOTING VVALLAPUDUA.
AWARD. WARD. NO. THAT HAS THREE
VOTES WILL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. ROBUST
DISCUSSION ON CODE. OH, MR DOT
IS HERE. SENATOR. WHOLE HEARING.
I WOULD AGREE.
SENATOR DODD. YOU HAVE TWO BILLS
UP. SPF 56 SB 8 65, WHICH WOULD
YOU LIKE TO GO FIRST? HOW ABOUT
8 56 SOUNDS GREAT PIGS. OKAY
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE FIRST I WANT TO I WILL
BE TAKING THE AMENDMENTS
SUGGESTED THE ANALYSIS AND THANK
THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE
GREAT WORK ON THIS BILL.
APPRECIATE IT. WHILE PIGS ARE
THINK WILD PIGS ARE NOT NATIVE
TO CALIFORNIA. THEY WERE
INTRODUCED BY THE EUROPEAN
SETTLERS IN THE EARLY 17
HUNDREDS. THE GOAL OF THIS BILL
IS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO TAKE
PIGS TO REDUCE THEIR POPULATION.
AND THE DESTRUCTION. AH! THAT
THEY CAUSE AH! I THINK I'M GOING
TO RESPECT THE MOVING OF THE
BILL AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOU, RIGHT? THANK YOU, SENATOR.
UM YOUR FIRST WITNESS AND
SUPPORT IS ERIC'S CLAR AND CLIFF
MORIYAMA BOTH HERE IN PERSON.
YOU WANT TO JOIN US UP HERE?
GOOD TO SEE IT. AND THEN WHEN
YOU'RE READY TO MINUTES EACH
GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS ERIC CLAIRE. I'M ON
THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME
COMMISSION. AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR HEARING THIS BILL TODAY.
I WANT TO THANK SENATOR DODD FOR
HIS DILIGENT WORK ON THIS BILL.
AS HE SAID. WILD PIGS ARE
INCREDIBLY DESTRUCTIVE. THEY'RE
NOT WILD AND IN. NATURALLY
THEY'RE FERAL PIGS HAVE BEEN
RELEASED ACCIDENTALLY OR
INTENTIONALLY OVER HUNDREDS OF
YEARS. THEY DAMAGE THE
ENVIRONMENT. THEY DAMAGED
FARMLAND. THEY DAMAGED PRIVATE
PROPERTY. THEY RIP UP LAWNS, AND
THEY ARE DANGEROUS AS WELL. AND
WE HAD THEY'RE THEY'RE I THINK
THEY'RE NOW IN ALL BUT TWO
COUNTIES IN THE STATE. THEY
REALLY EXPANDED DRAMATICALLY
BECAUSE THEY'RE SO PROLIFIC.
THERE'S BEEN A LONG HISTORY OF
THIS. WE'RE WORKING ON A BILL
LIKE THIS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME
AND REALLY UNDER SENATOR DODD.
IT'S MOVED QUICKLY AND WELL, AND
THIS FINAL AMENDMENT IS A
TERRIFIC COMPROMISE, BUT ON A
SPECIFIC, NARROW ISSUE RELATED
TO THEM, SO IT'S A GREAT FIRST
STEP IN TRYING TO REDUCE THIS
DAMAGING POPULATION OF PIGS. AND
I HEARD YOUR VOTE. YES. VOTE ON
8 56. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU. MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS CLIFF
MORIYAMA HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF WINE,
GRAPE GROWERS, AND WITH
EVERYTHING THAT THAT
COMMISSIONERS, CLARK SAID, WE DO
REALLY APPRECIATE THE FANTASTIC
WORK THAT THE SENATOR HAS DONE.
EVEN TO REACH OUT TO OUR
COMMUNITY TO LISTEN TO OUR
CONCERNS, ADDRESS A FEW ISSUES
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAPPY TO
SAY THAT WE ARE IN A GREAT SPOT
SUPPORTING THIS MEASURE AND OR
DRIVE OUT. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES HERE IN PERSON IN
SUPPORT? I SEE ONE. EXT. HI
THERE, MADAM. CHAIR MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE MARK HENLEY WITH
CALIFORNIA WATERFALL. I JUST
WANTED TO SAY THANKS AND HER DOG
FOR SOME AMENDMENTS HE TOOK
EARLIER IN THE SESSION THAT
WOULD HELP TO MAINTAIN FUNDING
LEVELS FOR THE BIG GAME
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT. AND SOME OF
THE OTHER CHANGES. SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN
THE ROOM. WE WILL GO TO THE
PHONE LINES IN SUPPORT OF SB 8
56 MODERATOR. YOU'RE IN SUPPORT
OF SB 8 56, PLEASE PRESS ONE
THAN ZERO. THIS LINE. 41 41 YEAR
LINE IS OPEN. GOOD MORNING,
NATALIE MAX ON BEHALF OF MIDTERM
, INSULAR REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GONNA BE JUST A MOMENT. WE HAVE
A FEW MORE. LINE 31. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN 31. YES. GOOD MORNING,
KIRK WILBUR, WITH THE CALIFORNIA
CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION IN LIGHT
OF RECENT AMENDMENTS. WE ARE
HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IN LINE
NUMBER 17 YOUR LINE IS OPEN 17.
GOOD MORNING. THIS IS JENNY BERG
, CALIFORNIA STATE DIRECTOR FOR
THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED
STATES. A SENATOR DODD IS AWARE
WITH THE PROPOSED COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. WE WILL REMOVE OUR
OPPOSITION. WE HOPE TO WORK WITH
THE AUTHOR OVER THIS SUMMER ON A
REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE,
CAPTURING THE SIZE AND SCOPE OF
CONTAINED HUNT OPERATIONS IN
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. IN LINE 44 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN 44. K LITTLE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND THERE'S
NO ONE LEFT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. AND WE HAVE NO UH, THANKS
TO THE INCREDIBLE WORK OF
COMMITTEE AND THE AUTHOR. WE
HAVE NO ONE REGISTERED IS UP AND
WE DO HAVE A REGISTRAR POSITION.
I DON'T BELIEVE REGISTERED. YOU
DIDN'T REGISTER REGISTERED. IT'S
NOT REGISTERED GENEROUS, TWO
MINUTES, GREG EARNER ON BEHALF
OF THE SAFARI CLUB, CALIFORNIA
COALITION. WE ARE NOT REGISTERED
IN OPPOSITION. WE HAD BEEN IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL AND MOVED
TO A NEUTRAL COMMUNICATED TO THE
CENTER OF THIS MORNING BASED ON
SOME LATE DISCUSSIONS AND STUFF
THAT MY CLIENT HAS DECIDED TO
MOVE BACK INTO AN OPPOSED
POSITION ON THE BILL, AS WE DO
NOT HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO PROVIDE
A LETTER DETAILING OUR CONCERNS
. I DON'T WANT TO BRING THOSE UP
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE TODAY. BUT
UM, THE SENATOR HAS COMMITTED TO
HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH ME
ABOUT THOSE CONCERNS, MOVING
FORWARD. SO THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE YOU NOT HIGHLIGHTING
CONCERNS. THE SENATOR HASN'T HAD
A CHANCE TO ADDRESS SINCE HE'S
WORKED SO HARD. ANY OTHER
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM. SEEING
NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE LINES.
ANY OPPOSITION ON SB 8 56.
YOU'RE AN OPPOSITION OF SP 8 56
, PLEASE PRESS ONE THAN ZERO.
AND THERE IS NO ONE IN CUBA AT
THIS TIME. OKAY NO OPPOSITION ON
THE LINE. WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE. YES, MR BIGELOW.
UM THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I
JUST LIKE TO START UP BY
CONGRATULATING THE AUTHOR ON
WORKING SO HARD WITH SO MANY
DIFFERENT UH, CONVERSE PARTIES
WHO ARE AFFECTED HAVING BEEN THE
PERSON WHO CARRIED THIS BILL FOR
FIVE YEARS IN A ROW AND GOTTEN
IT TO THE GOVERNOR THREE TIMES
AND ONLY TO MEET WITH FATAL
MOMENTS. UM IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT
, BUT I'M I'M GLAD THAT THIS
YEAR YOU'RE ABLE TO TAKE THIS
BILL INTO THE FORD BECAUSE IT'S
IMPORTANT AND I HOPE THAT
EVERYONE HERE WILL VOTE AYE ON
THIS BILL BECAUSE OF YOUR
DILIGENCE TO THIS AND I WOULD
HOPEFULLY, IF YOU'RE SO WILLING
TO HAVE A CO AUTHOR. I'D BE
WILLING TO CO AUTHOR ON THIS
BILL. BUT IF IT CREATES ANY
PROBLEM FOR YOU I'M HAPPY TO
YIELD. BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO SEE
THIS BILL, GET THROUGH HEALTH.
ABSOLUTELY SO, MADAM CHAIR.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
BIGELOW. ANYONE ELSE? ALMOST
RENT IT JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF
THE AUTHOR AND THE COMMITTEE. UM
I WAS VERY AWARE OF AND
INVOLVED. IN THE REMOVAL OF ALL
THE PIGS OFF OF CHANNEL ISLANDS
NATIONAL PARK. WHAT AN
INCREDIBLE EFFORT THAT WAS, BUT
YOU THE CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN SO
THAT THE PRICE OF THE LAST PIG.
YOU GOT A LOT OF MONEY WHEN YOU
KILLED THE LAST PIG. YOU DIDN'T
GET MUCH WHEN YOU KILLED THE 1ST
1000, RIGHT? UM AND SO I VERY
VERY AWARE AND THE AND THE
AMAZING CHANGE. TO THE FAUNA OF
THE CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL
PARK ONCE THEY GOT RID OF THOSE
PIGS, SO IT IS VERY APPROPRIATE
THAT THESE PIGS NOT BE TREATED
LIKE THE OTHER WILDLIFE THAT IS
NATIVE TO THE ENVIRONMENT HERE,
AND SO CONGRATULATIONS. I THINK
YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB MOVING
THIS BILL AND THE SENSITIVITY
THAT SOUTH THERE AMONGST THE
ANIMAL RIGHTS COMMUNITIES ON
THIS IS EXTREMELY HIGH, AND IT
WAS VERY DIFFICULT, EVEN THOUGH
THERE WERE TREMENDOUS BENEFITS,
SO I APPLAUD YOU FOR BEING ABLE
TO NAVIGATE THROUGH ALL OF THIS
FAIRLY TREACHEROUS MINEFIELD.
THANK YOU. MR LEVINE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR AND THANK
YOU TO THE AUTHOR. AND YOU KNOW,
I THINK WE COMMENTED ON ANOTHER
BILL BEFORE THIS ABOUT HOW MANY
TIMES WE VOTED ON VERSIONS OF
THIS AT SOME POINT IN TIME, AND
I HOPE THAT THIS DOES CROSS THE
FINISH LINE SUCCESSFULLY. THIS
IS GOING TO BECOME A BIGGER
PROBLEM. BUT I THINK THAT WE'VE
SEEN IN THIS COMMITTEE, UM,
WHETHER IT'S NUTRIA OR WILD PIGS
LIKE WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE
HAVING ISSUES LIKE THIS FOR ANY
NUMBER OF REASONS. AND WHEN I
LOOK AT A BILL LIKE THIS, AND I
SEE THAT IT'S A RECLASSIFICATION
ABOUT, UM, EXOTIC GAME MAMMALS.
IT DOESN'T I THINK, SPEAK TO
WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO
ATTEMPT AT ALL. AND I WOULD HOPE
THAT THAT THIS FISH AND GAME
COMMISSION WOULD WORK TOWARDS
SOME OTHER SYSTEM WHERE WE COULD
MORE RIGHTFULLY NAME WHAT THIS
PROBLEM IS AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO TO PROTECT BOTH PROPERTY
CROPS AND ALSO WILDLIFE THAT
HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY THESE.
THESE ISSUES OF WILD ANIMALS
THAT ARE RUNNING FREE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR LEVINE.
ANYBODY ELSE SEEING NONE? MR DOT
I THINK I'M GOING TO SEND YOU TO
WASHINGTON TO BRING EVERYONE
TOGETHER. YOU'VE DONE SUCH A
GOOD JOB AND THIS BILL. UM BUT
THANK YOU. I KNOW THAT MY
COMMUNITY HAS STRUGGLED WITH
THIS PROBLEM AND THE DAMAGE THAT
IS DONE BY THESE ANIMALS, SO I
APPRECIATE YOU WORKING SO
DILIGENTLY ON THIS ISSUE WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? YOU KNOW,
THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLETHAT
HAD TO, UH COMPROMISE, AND I
JUST REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE
GROUPS THAT CAME TO THE TABLE
AND COMPROMISED. NOT EVERYBODY.
YOU KNOW, GOT WHAT THEY WANTED,
BUT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
HOPEFULLY HERE AND I APPRECIATE
AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU, SENATOR TO HAVE
MOTION. WE DO WE HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND AND WE'LL CALL THEM OUT.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS
BAUER-KAHAN BAUER-KAHAN I DALI
BENNETT. BENNETT I, BIGELOW
BIGELOW. I FRIEDMAN FRIEDMAN I
GARCIA GARCIA, I CHOLERA. LEVINE
LEVINE EIMER SOUCI MURATSUCHI. I
KNOW WHEN RUBIO. RUBIO I SALAS
SMITH. SMITH I VE VALLAPUDUA
VALLAPUDUA I WARD WARD. AYE.
THAT PHYLLIS OUT, BUT WE'LL
LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS, AND WE WILL MOVE TO SB
8 65 THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS 8 65 SIMPLY
CHANGES THE ELIGIBILITY AGE FOR
A JUNIOR HUNTING LICENSE FROM
FROM 15 AND UNDER THE 17 AND
UNDER RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU, MR DODD WITH
YOU HERE IN PERSON OR BILL
GAINES AND MARK KENNEALLY. IN
SUPPORT. WHEN YOU'RE READY,
GENTLEMEN. TO MANY PEACH JUST AS
A REMINDER. GO AHEAD CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS BILL GAINES, SPEAKING ON
BEHALF OF THE SPONSORS OF THIS
BILL TODAY, THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN
ELK FOUNDATION, THE CALIFORNIA
DEAR ASSOCIATION, THE WILD SHEEP
FOUNDATION IN THE CALIFORNIA
HOUSEMAN FOR CONSERVATION. THIS
LEGISLATION, AS THE SENATOR
SAID, WOULD INCREASE THE
ELIGIBILITY AGE FOR JEAN HUNTING
LICENSE FROM 1517 AND UNDER SAIL
OF HUNTING LICENSES, STAMPS AND
RELATED PERMITS GENERATES A
SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF THE ANNUAL
REVENUES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE NEEDS TO
MANAGE OUR GAME AND NON GAME
SPECIES HERE IN CALIFORNIA, BUT
FOR 40 YEARS THE SALE OF HUNTING
LICENSES, AND THE RELATED STAMPS
AND PERMITS HAS BEEN DROPPING.
IN RESPONSE TO CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
IS WORKING WITH STAKEHOLDERS ON
WHAT WE CALL THE R THREE
PROGRAM, WHICH IS A MEASURE TO
RECRUIT, RETAIN AND REACTIVATE
MORE PEOPLE INTO CALIFORNIA'S
HUNTING COMMUNITY. INCLUDING
THOSE OF POOR AND DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. THERE'S THREE
BARRIERS THAT HAVE BEEN
IDENTIFIED AS BARRIERS TO
PARTICIPATING IN HUNTING. FIRST
ONE IS COST. ANOTHER ONE IS
OPPORTUNITY, AND THE LAST ONE IS
SOMEONE TO MENTOR YOU OUT IN THE
FIELD. HUNTING ISN'T LIKE
BOWLING WHERE YOU CAN JUST PICK
UP AND GO. YOU REALLY DO NEED A
MENTOR OUT THERE TO SCHOOL YOU
ON HOW TO BE A SUCCESSFUL
HUNTER. FIRST ON THE TOPIC OF
COST, AND THEY DON'T HUNTING
LICENSE IN CALIFORNIA IS ABOUT
$52 CURRENTLY GOES UP EVERY YEAR
DID IN THE INDUSTRY INDUSTRY
INDEX. I SHOULD SAY SECOND ONE
IS OPPORTUNITY. THE OPPORTUNITY
. THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
WILDLIFE IS WORKING, AS ARE MANY
NGOS ON GETTING MORE AND MORE
PEOPLE OUT IN THE FIELD WITH
WHAT THEY CALL APPRENTICE HUNTS,
WHICH ARE HUNTS THAT JUNIOR
HUNTING LICENSE HOLDERS CAN TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF. AND LASTLY,
MENTORING THOSE APPRENTICE HUNTS
THAT ARE OFFERED BY THE
DEPARTMENT AND THE NGOS FROM THE
CONSERVATION WORLD ARE MENTORED
HUNTS WHERE THEY ACTUALLY SINCE
AND EXPERIENCE CENTER OUT IN THE
FIELD. WITH THE JUNIOR HUNTING
LICENSE HOLDER TO SHOW HIM OR
HER EXACTLY WHAT IT TAKES TO BE
SUCCESSFUL. LASTLY SUITABILITY.
65 IS CONSISTENT WITH BOTH
CALIFORNIA LAWS, WHICH DEEM
ADULTS AS 18 AND OLDER AGAIN.
CURRENTLY A JUNIOR HUNTING
LICENSES FOR 15 AND UNDER AND SO
16 AND 17 YEAR OLDS ARE NOT
GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE LESS EXPENSIVE
JUNIOR HUNTING LICENSE, NOR ARE
THEY ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE
CURRENTLY OF THE YOUTH
APPRENTICE SINCE THAT ARE BEING
OFFERED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND
VARIOUS NGOS OUT THERE. THIS
BILL WOULD CHANGE THAT, AND IT
WOULD GIVE PEOPLE AT 16 AND 17
THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET OUT IN
THE FIELD AND EXPERIENCING
SUCCESSFUL HUNT, WHEREAS THEY
CAN'T DO THAT RIGHT NOW, SO WE
APPRECIATE SENATOR DODD'S
WILLINGNESS TO AUTHOR THIS
LEGISLATION AND WE URGE YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE MARK
HENLEY WITH CALIFORNIA
WATERFOWL. UM AS BILL MENTIONED
, THIS BILL WILL DEFINITELY HELP
TO SUPPORT THE DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE ARE THREE
EFFORTS. BUT IT ALSO SUPPORTS BY
THE WAY. THE GOVERNOR'S 30 BY 30
INITIATIVE, WHICH SEEKS TO
INCREASE PUBLIC ACCESS AND
ENJOYMENT OF CALIFORNIA'S
NATURAL RESOURCES FOR ALL
CALIFORNIANS, SO WE SEE THIS IS
HAVING SOME BROAD PUBLIC
BENEFITS ARE ASSOCIATION. WE
ADMINISTER YOUTH HUNTING
EDUCATION CAMPS ACROSS THE
STATE, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT
COST AH FINANCIAL COST PLAYS A
MAJOR ROLE IN HOW MANY
PARTICIPANTS WE GET WHEN WE
OFFER SCHOLARSHIPS OR OTHER
DISCOUNTS FOR AS LITTLE AS $100
OFF THOSE CAMPS. CAN'T
PARTICIPATION AND INTERESTS
TYPICALLY INCREASES. A B R S P 8
65. IT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY
REDUCE COSTS FOR 16 AND 17 YEAR
OLDS, MANY OF WHOM YOU KNOW I
DON'T HAVE A JOB AND ARE NOT
WORKING. THUS DON'T HAVE THE
FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO PAY FOR
THIS. UM JUST ON THE END OF THE
GAME, BIRD HUNTING, WHICH WE
DEAL WITH WITH OUR ASSOCIATION,
THE COST FOR THAT ARE ESPECIALLY
HIGH, INCLUDING THOSE WHO HAVE
TO PURSUE GAME BIRDS ON PUBLIC
LANDS. AS BILL MENTIONED EARLIER
IN ADULT LICENSE COSTS. $54
ADULTS ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO
PURCHASE BOTH AN UPLAND AND A
DUCK STAMP, WHICH IS AN
ADDITIONAL $56. THEN THE ANNUAL
PASS TO HUNT ON THE DEPARTMENT
OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PUBLIC
LANDS WHICH HAVE SOME OF THE
BEST GAME, BIRD HUNTING
OPPORTUNITY IS AN ADDITIONAL
$183. SO WE'RE TALKING JUST FOR
LICENSING A TOTAL OF ABOUT $293.
UNDER THIS BILL, THE COST TO THE
JUNIOR LICENSE HOLDER THAT 16 OR
17, FOR ALL THAT WOULD ONLY BE
$14. AND SO THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT
SAVINGS FOR THEM. ALSO UH, IT'S
INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT
WATERFOWL HUNTERS, UM WHO HUNT
ON FEDERAL LANDS. THERE'S A
FEDERAL DEFINITION FOR YOUTH
WATERFOWL HUNTERS, AND THAT IS
ACTUALLY 17 AND UNDER BY PASSING
THIS BILL, YOU WOULD MAKE THE
STATE AND THE FEDERAL
DEFINITIONS CONSISTENT AND
THEREFORE REALLY REDUCE
CONFUSION WITH A LOT OF THE KIDS
OUT THERE. LASTLY, I'D LIKE TO
SAY, UM JUNIOR LICENSE ON IS
BILL HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, TOO.
THEY ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE
IN SPECIAL HUNTS THAT ARE
PARTICULARLY DESIGNED FOR
FAMILIES AND KIDS. AND ON A
PERSONAL NOTE. I HAD BOTH MY TWO
DAUGHTERS WHEN THE ORIGINAL
LEGISLATION WAS IN PLACE,
ALLOWING FOR 16 AND 17 YEAR OLDS
TO HUNT. TO UTILIZE THOSE HUNTS
, AND I WILL SAY TODAY, YEARS
LATER, THEY ARE BOTH AVID
HUNTERS AND REALLY ENJOYED
GETTING OUT IN THE FIELD. SO AT
LEAST FOR ME PERSONALLY WITH MY
FAMILY, THIS LEGISLATION WORKED.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES
HERE IN SUPPORT, PLEASE. THE
MONEY AGAIN. ERIC'S CLAIRE WITH
THE FISHING GAME COMMISSION
ENTHUSIASTICALLY URGE, AND I
VOTE ON THIS. THANK YOU. GREG
TURNER ON BEHALF OF THIS SAFARI
CLUB, CALIFORNIA COALITION
REGISTERED IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL, THANK YOU ANY OTHER
SUPPORT ON THE PHONE FOR SB? 8
65 MODERATOR.
MODERATOR DO WE HAVE ANY SUPPORT
FOR SB 8 65 ON THE PHONE? SORRY
I WAS MUTED 1010 QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. AND ONE MOMENT,
PLEASE. AND ALLOWING A FEW
MOMENTS. I'M SHOWING NO
RESPONSES AT THIS TIME.
MODERATOR, ARE THEY COMING? AND
I'M SORRY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE
CAN HEAR YOU. YEAH DO YOU HAVE
ANYONE ON THE FRONT LINES? AND
I'M SORRY? I WAS SAYING THERE'S
NO RESPONSES. OKAY GREAT.
PERFECT THANK YOU. WE DIDN'T
HEAR YOU SAY THAT. DO YOU HAVE
ANY OPPOSITION? SORRY IN THE
ROOM. SEEING NONE WE'VE KNOWN ON
FILE. CAN WE GO TO THE PHONE
LINES FOR ANY OPPOSITION ON SB 8
65 MODERATOR. AND WE'RE NOT
HEARING YOU AGAIN. MODERATOR. IF
YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING AND ONCE
AGAIN, YOU WOULD PRESS ONE AND
THEN 01 AND THEN ZERO FOR YOUR
RESPONSES. AND ALLOWING A FEW
MOMENTS. I'M SHOWING NONE AT
THIS TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH
MODERATOR WITH THAT I'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
WELCOME, BILL. SEEING NO
DISCUSSION OR DEBATE, SENATOR
DODD. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
EXPECT FULLY ASK YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU AND HAVE MOTION. WE DO
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, SO
WILL CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION
IS DUE PAST TWO APPROPRIATIONS
BARRICADE. HAN BAUER-KAHAN AYE,
DOLLY! BENNETT. BENNETT. I
BIGELOW BIGELOW. I FRIEDMAN
FRIEDMAN. I GARCIA. CHOLERA.
LEVIN. MURATSUCHI WHEN. RUBIO
RUBIO, I SALAS SMITH SMITH, IVY
VALLAPUDUA BE VALLAPUDUA I WARD
WARD. AYE. WE HAVE EIGHT VOTES
BILL IS OUTPUT, WE'LL LEAVE IT
ON CALL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
AND YOU ARE PRESENTING FOR MR
LAIRD. SB 9 45 WHEN YOU'RE READY
OKAY. CHAIR AND MEMBERS. SB 9 45
ALLOWS A CALIFORNIA LICENSED
FALCONER TO CAPTURE POSSESSED
AND TRAINING AMERICAN PEREGRINE
FALCON IN THE PRACTICE OF
FALCONRY. THE HUNTING OF WILD
ANIMALS IN THEIR NATURAL STATE
IN HABITAT BY NATURAL MEANS OF A
TRAINED BIRD OF PREY. AH! I
THINK WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS LET
ME JUST SAY TODAY THE AMERICAN
PEREGRINE FALCON IS CONSIDERED
TO BE FULLY RECOVERED SPECIES IT
HAS BEEN REMOVED. THE LISTING OF
SEQUA. IT'S SISA. EXCUSE ME, NOT
SEQUEL THAT SAID THE AMERICAN
PEREGRINE FALCON REMAINS LISTED
UNDER THE FULLY PROTECTED
STATUTE, AND THERE IS NO
EXISTING PROCESS FOR REMOVING
THOSE SPECIES. LISTED OTHER THAN
LEGISLATIVE ACTION REGARDS TO
THE HELP OF THOSE SPECIES TODAY
WITH ME TO TESTIFY AS GLEN
STEWART, A LICENSED FALCONER
WITH THE U. C. SANTA CRUZ
PREDATORY BIRD RESEARCH GROUP.
THINK. GOOD MORNING, STUART.
VERY MUCH. YOU HAVE A WITNESS
SYSTEM IMPORT, MR GLEN STEWART
ON THE TELEPHONE. GO AHEAD, MR
STEWART. THANK YOU, MRS STEWART
. I'M ACTUALLY THE RETIRED
DIRECTOR OF THE U. C. SANTA
CRUZ, PREDATORY BIRD RESEARCH
GROUP AND PAST PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA HAWKING CLUB. SENATE
BILL 9 45 CREATES AN EXEMPTION
TO ACTUALLY SECTION 35 11 AND
EFFICIENT GAME CODE. AND I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO SAY UPFRONT
THAT 2ND 35 11. KNOWN AS A FULLY
PROTECTED ROLE WAS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN IN
THE 19 SIXTIES. IT IS A CASE OF
THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO
ITS CREDIT, BEING OUT FRONT IN
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. HIS
PAST BEFORE DDT WAS BANNED
BEFORE THE CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. AND
BEFORE CALIFORNIA'S AND
DANGEROUS SPECIES ACT AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 35 11
DID WHAT IT NEEDED TO DO AT THE
TIME ABSOLUTELY PROTECTED 13
BIRDS AND THE HANDFUL OF OTHER
SPECIES. THAT WE'RE IN SERIOUS
TROUBLE NOW. AT THAT TIME. NO
ONE WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENS WHEN THESE BIRDS NO
LONGER NEED PROTECTION. IN THE
CASE OF THE PEREGRINE FALCON. WE
HAVE VERY CLEAR EXAMPLE OF A
BIRD THAT WAS NEAR EXTINCTION IN
1970. AND YET IT'S THE DAY
ABUNDANT NEAR EXTINCTION TO
ABUNDANCE AND 50 YEARS
REMARKABLE ACHIEVEMENTS. TO GET
THERE WITH UC SANTA CRUZ. RAISED
AND RELEASED OVER 1000 PEREGRINE
FALCONS OVER TWO DECADES. DDT
WAS BANNED, AND STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES MADE THE BIRDS
RECOVERY A PRIORITY. TODAY YOU
CAN SEE ANY NUMBER OF PARAGON
FALCON NEST CAMERAS ON BUILDING.
INCLUDING ONE ON SACRAMENTO'S U.
C. DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER, BECAUSE
ALL OF THE GOOD PLACES FOR THEM
TO NOW ASK LIKE MORE ROCK,
CAPITAN, THE MARINE COAST AND
FOR OTHER OTHER 400 OTHER
COLLAPSE. HAVE ALREADY BEEN
TAKEN BY PEREGRINE FALCONS,
FALCONERS PARTNERED WITH
PEREGRINE FALCONS, KENYA, KENYA
START TO CLOSE ON YOUR COMMENTS
THERE. CAN YOU HEAR ME? RIGHT
NOW? WE CAN HEAR YOU. I'M JUST
ASKING YOU AS THE CHAIR IF YOU
CAN WRAP UP YOUR COMMENTS UM
SURE. UH, THE POSSESSION OF
RAPTORS FOR FALCON IS ALREADY
CODIFIED WELL REGULATED BY THE
STATE. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
HERE IS THE INCLUSION AGAIN. OF
PEREGRINE FALCON AS ONE OF THE
BIRDS THAT WE CAN USE AND
FALCONRY AND I HEARD THE
ADOPTION OF SENATE BILL 9 45.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THOSE
COMMENTS. I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE
ONLY WITNESS WE HAVE REGISTERED
IN SUPPORT WILL GO TO THE ROOM
HERE AND ASK FOR THOSE THAT ARE
HERE TO REGISTER THEIR SUPPORT.
MR VICE CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS BILL
GAINES, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF
THE BACK PLANK GROUP, THE
CALIFORNIA BOWMAN HUNTER STATE
ARCHERY ASSOCIATION, THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSMAN FOR
CONSERVATION, SAN FRANCISCO BAY
AREA SEPHARDIC LIBBY
INTERNATIONAL, THE SAN DIEGO
COUNTY WILDLIFE FEDERATION AND
THE SALARY BASIN WETLANDS
ASSOCIATION, ALL IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF SB 9 45. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THERE ARE MS CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE MARK
HENLEY, WITH CALIFORNIA
WATERFOWL ALSO ON BEHALF OF THE
SAFARI SAFARI CLUB.
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. SEEING NO OTHERS HERE WILL
GO TO THE PHONES, MODERATOR. CAN
YOU SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ON THE
PHONES THAT ARE IN SUPPORT? ONCE
AGAIN. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT
AND SUPPORT YOU, PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. ONCE AGAIN ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AND ALLOWING A FEW
MOMENTS. I'M SHOWING NO ONE IN Q
AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL BRING IT
BACK. AH! FOR THE OPPOSITION. IS
THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE ROOM
WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
TO SB 945? SEEING NO ONE RALLIED
TO THE CALL WILL GO TO THE
PHONES. IS THERE ANYONE MADAM
OPERATOR IN OPPOSITION? AND AN
OPPOSITION GO AHEAD AND PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO. ONE END IN
ZERO. IN A LOT OF FEW MOMENTS.
I'M SHOWING NO ONE IN Q AT THIS
TIME. THANK YOU. WE'LL OPEN THE
FOR QUESTIONS HERE AT THE
DIOCESE. DOES ANYONE HAVE A
QUESTION OF THE AUTHOR ON HIS
BILL? SEEING NO ONE RALLIED TO
THE CALL. MADAM. WE HAD EMOTION,
I BELIEVE DIDN'T WE NEED A
SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND OVER
HERE BY MISS DOLLY. UM WOULD YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? THE MOTION
IS DUE PAST TWO APPROPRIATIONS.
BARRICADED MAN. DOLLY! DOLLY! I
BENNETT. BIGELOW. I OH, I
FRIEDMAN. GARCIA. CHOLERA.
LEVIN. MURATSUCHI AND WHEN.
WE'RE ON SP 945 CARD BILL. WHEN
I RUBIO RUBIO EYES SALAS SMITH
SMITH, IVY VALLAPUDUA, Væ
VALLAPUDUA I, WARD WARD. AYE.
THANK YOU. YOUR YOUR BILL HAS
SEVEN VOTES WILL KEEP THE ROLL
OPEN, AND, UH WE'LL GET YOU
MEMBERS. THANKS ON BEHALF OF
SENATOR LAIRD. WELL, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE. IF STAFF ARE
LISTENING OUT AND ABOUT IF YOU
COULD START HAVING YOUR MEMBERS
MAKE THEIR WAY. TO THE COMMITTEE
FOR WATER PARKS ENTERTAIN A
MOTION CONSENT. SO AGAIN IF
STAFF COULD TALK TO THEIR
MEMBERS. I KNOW EVERYONE'S BUSY
AND DIFFERENT COMMITTEES. BUT IF
YOU CAN MAKE IT HERE, THAT WOULD
BE GREAT. IN THE MEANTIME, THAT
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR,
WOULD YOU PLEASE? DO YOU WANT TO
READ THE CONTENT CALENDAR? THE
CONSENT CALENDARS. SB 8 80
LAYERED SP 901 PAN S B 12 24
BAITS. AND S. B 12 53, MELINDA'S
, AND I BELIEVE I HEARD EMOTION
FROM MS DALIA. IS THERE A SECOND
AND WE HAVE A SECOND. BARRICADE
HAN DOLLY DOLLY I BENNETT
BIGELOW BIGELOW I FRIEDMAN
GARCIA. CHOLERA. LEVINE
MURATSUCHI. WHEN I RUBIO. RUBIO
I SALUS SMITH SMITH, IVY
VALLAPUDUA BE VALLAPUDUA I WARD
WARD. AYE. AND WE HAVE SEVEN.
WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR MEMBERS.
AH FOR AROUND HERE, BUT WE'RE
ALL TASK TODAY WITH MANY
COMMITTEES. SO WE'LL WAIT. UNTIL
WE HAVE A PRESENTER. DON'T THINK
WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. ON THE
OTHER. WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT,
UM. YOU WANT TO START AT THE TOP
ON? YEAH. SP 4 63 DOLLY! MR
AUTHOR, SENATOR DARLING, YOU
ALREADY SAID IT WAS LIKE UM,
ABSENT MEMBERS, BIGELOW. AYE.
BIGELOW. AYE. FRIEDMAN. CHOLERA
SB 463. CHOLERA. LEVINE. WHEN I. SALAS. AWARD. WARD NOW. SB 4
89 PENCE, LAYERED. ABSENT
MEMBERS, BENNETT BIGELOW, A
LITTLE I. FRIEDMAN CHOLERA. AND
WHEN, WHEN I SALAS. THE
VALLAPUDUA VALLAPUDUA II WARD.
WARD. I. SB 5 20 WILK. ABSENT
MEMBERS, DOLLY DOLLY, NOT
VOTING. FRIEDMAN. CHOLERA. N
NO, I'M NOT VOTING. SALAS. TO BE
A POOL GUY. VVALLAPUDUA NOT
VOTING. SB 8 56 DODD ABSENT
MEMBERS, DOLLY! BY DOLLY AYE.
CHOLERA. WHEN I SALAS. SB 865
DODD ABSENT MEMBERS. DALI DALI?
AYE. GARCIA. CHOLERA. LEVIN.
MURATSUCHI WHEN I SALAS. SB 9 45
LAYERED. ABSENT MEMBERS
BARRICADE KH. BENNETT.
FRIEDMAN. SP 9 45 LAYERED
FRIEDMAN AYE. GARCIA. CHOLERA.
LEVIN. MURATSUCHI SALAS.
SO DO YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER NOW?
YOUR ADVICE CHAIR. JUST LIKE
HIS.THIS. MOVING TO FILE ITEM
NINE. SP 977. GO AHEAD. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE SENATE BILL 9 77 WILL NOW
ESTABLISH THE CALIFORNIA
CONSERVATION RANCHING INCENTIVE
PROGRAM UNDER THE WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION BOARD THAT A
SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE MANAGING
SIMILAR PROGRAMS IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND
PRIVATE LANDOWNERS. THE PROGRAM
WILL AWARD BLOCK GRANTS TO
ELIGIBLE ENTITIES TO ADMINISTER
PLAN AND IMPLEMENT LOCAL
PROGRAMS THAT ENHANCE OR RESTORE
CALIFORNIANS. NONPUBLIC RANCH
LANDS, GRAZING LANDS AND
GRASSLANDS. BY CONTRACTING WITH
LANDOWNERS. ORLY SEIZED
IMPLEMENT CONSERVATION RANCHING
PRACTICES. THESE CONTRACTS WILL
OFFER AN OWNER ALICIA INCENTIVE
PAYMENTS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT
FOR THEIR ENHANCEMENT OF
GRASSLAND HABITAT, ACCORDING TO
AN APPROVED MANAGEMENT PLAN. THE
PROGRAM WILL SUPPORT OUR
GRASSLANDS BY PROVIDING HEALTHY
HABITAT FOR BIRDS, POLLINATORS
AND OTHER WILDLIFE THROUGH
TRADITIONAL AND SUSTAINABLE
MEANS. FOR RANCHERS,
CALIFORNIA'S GRASSLANDS ARE
RAPIDLY DETERIORATING AS 20,000
ACRES OF CALIFORNIA RANCH LANDS
ARE LOST EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION IS
CRITICAL AS RANGELANDS, THOUGH
MORE COMMONLY KNOWN FOR
LIVESTOCK RAISING, PROVIDE
MULTIPLE BENEFITS, INCLUDING
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SURFACE AND
SUBSURFACE WATER COLLECTION AND
STORAGE. BY WORKING
COLLABORATIVELY WITH CALIFORNIA
LANDOWNERS AND RANCHERS. UM SP 9
77 WILL BOLSTER EFFORTS TO
ENHANCE AIR QUALITY AS WELL AS
IMPROVE GRASSLAND HABITAT FOR
POLLINATORS, BIRDS, SPECIES AND
OTHER CRITICAL WILDLIFE. THIS
BILL ENJOYS WELL WIDESPREAD
SUPPORT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVOCATES AND RANCHERS, AND IT'S
RECEIVED NO NO VOTES AND HAS NO
OPPOSITION. SENATOR LAIRD LOOKS
FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
CALIFORNIA CLIMATE AND
AGRICULTURAL NETWORK AND THE
CALIFORNIA PACIFIC SECTION. OF
THE SOCIETY FOR RANGE MANAGEMENT
WITH ME TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
IS PILO ALVAREZ ON BEHALF OF
AUDUBON, CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU
MOVE TO THE SUPPORT WITNESS ON
THE PHONES. MY NAME IS AND THE
CALIFORNIA DIRECTOR OF AUDUBON'S
CONSERVATION RENTING PROGRAM.
SINCE 1970. WE HAVE LOST ONE IN
EVERY FOUR BIRDS. THAT'S THREE
BILLION BIRDS. POPULATION OF
GRASSLAND BIRDS HAVE BEEN
DECLINING, THE MOST MORE THAN
50, DUE MOSTLY TO HABITAT LOSS
AND CLIMATE CHANGE. GRASSLANDS
IN CALIFORNIA RAPIDLY
DISAPPEARING AND HIS GRASSLANDS
ARE MOSTLY PRIVATELY OWNED AND
MANAGED BY RANCHERS. THE FREEDOM
THAT BIRTH IS TIED TO THE FATE
OF THE RANCHERS. GROUND
GRASSLANDS DO NOT ONLY PROVIDE
BIRD HABITATS THEY PROVIDE US
WITH FOOD, CLEAN WATER AND THE
ABILITY TO MITIGATE CLIMATE
CHANGE. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
TO CURB THIS DECLINE BY
PROVIDING INCENTIVES CAN KEEP
RANCHING AND MANAGED GRASSLANDS
FOR BIRD HABITAT AND ALL THE
OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
THAT THEY PROVIDE. THIS BILL
WILL ALLOW ORGANIZATIONS LIKE
AUDUBON TO CONTINUE PARTNERING
WITH BRANCHES BY PROVIDING
FINANCIAL AND MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
SO THEY CAN MANAGE THEIR LAND TO
MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE BIRD
HABITAT. IN BRUSSEL HEALTH,
CAPTURE CARBON AND WATER AND
KEEP IT REAL COMMUNITIES ALIVE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO ANY
OTHER WITNESSES AND SUPPORT IN
THE ROOM. SEEN ON MOVING TO THE
PHONES OR ANY OTHER SUPPORT ON
THE PHONES. AND ONCE AGAIN IT'S
ONE AND THEN ZERO. WE WILL GO TO
LINE 29. YOUR LINE IS I'M SORRY.
LYING 27 YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THANK YOU, JERRY. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. THIS IS ALEX BLOOMER
ON BEHALF OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFENSE FUND, DEFENDERS OF
WILDLIFE AND THE CALIFORNIA
NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. WE WOULD GO
TO LINE 41. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
GOOD MORNING, NATALIE MAX ON
BEHALF OF THE MID PENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. WE WILL GO TO
LINE 48. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THANK YOU. CHAIR NUMBERS. THIS
IS BRIAN SHOVE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CLIMATE, AGRICULTURE
NETWORK AND THE CALIFORNIA
PACIFIC SECTION OF SOCIETY.
ARRANGE MANAGEMENT. AS NOTED IN
THE ANALYSIS, WE EARN A
SUPPORTIVE MEN IN POSITION AND
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE
SENATOR'S COMMITMENT. WORKING
WITH US TO ADDRESS THEIR
FEEDBACK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 31. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. ONCE AGAIN LINE
31. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES KIRK
WITH THE CALIFORNIA CATTLEMEN'S
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT OF SB 9
77. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, AND
I'M NOT SHOWING ANY OTHER
RESPONSES AT THIS TIME. THANK
YOU MOVING INTO ANY OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE NO REGISTERED
OPPOSITION. MANY IN THE ROOM.
MOVING TO THE PHONE LINES FOR
ANY OPPOSITION. ONCE AGAIN ON
THE PHONE LINES ONE AND THEN
ZERO IN OPPOSITION. IN ALLOWING
A FEW MOMENTS. I'M SHOWING THE
RESPONSES AT THIS TIME. THANK
YOU BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. IS THERE ANY COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS? SEE NOW WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE CONVINCED? LET'S
SPOKE THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE PAST TWO
APPROPRIATIONS BAUER-KAHAN DOLLY
DOLLY I BENNETT. BIGELOW
BIGELOW. I FRIEDMAN FRIEDMAN. I
GARCIA. CHOLERA. LEVIN
MURATSUCHI WHEN AND I REALLY
RUBIO RUBIO. I SALAS. SMITH.
SMITH IVY VALLAPUDUA VALLAPUDUA
I, WARD WARD? AYE.
CONSENT CALENDAR. ABSENT MEMBER
FRIEDMAN FRIEDMAN. AYE. SP 4 $63. FRIEDMAN NOT VOTING. S BEFORE
89 LAIRD. FRIEDMAN. AYE. SB 5 20
WILK. FREEDOM WHEN FRIEDMAN NOT
VOTING.
SEND IT AWAY. SO WOULD YOU LIKE
TO PRESENT HERE OR SB 10 28.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
PROUD TO PRESENT SB 10 28.
THERE'S A BILL CONCERNING THE
VILLA MONTEZUMA PROPERTY IN THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO, AND COURSE
THIS, UH ARCHITECTURAL JEWEL IS
ONE OF SAN DIEGO'S MOST ICONIC
BUILDINGS, AND IT'S AH IT'S A
BILL THAT REALLY DESERVES. NOT
ONLY PRESERVATION. BUT
RESTORATION AND IT'S A
NEIGHBORHOOD AND A PART OF SAN
DIEGO THAT IS, DOESN'T HAVE A
LOT OF ACCESS TO STATE PARKS.
BRINGING RESOURCES TO THESE
UNDERSERVED NEIGHBORHOODS. IS AH
SHOULD BE VERY MUCH WITHIN
CALIFORNIA'S MISSION. TO BRING
PARKS AND CULTURE. TO ALL PARTS
OF THE STATE S B 10 28 WOULD
HELP PROTECT THIS GREAT
HISTORICAL RESOURCE OF
CALIFORNIA BY AUTHORIZING THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND
RECREATION TO ENTER INTO A
LEASE. AGREEMENT. WITH THE CITY
OF SAN DIEGO FOR PURPOSES OF
LEASING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
PHILIP MONTEZUMA FROM THE CITY.
DEVELOPMENT TOOK TOO MUCH IS THE
HISTORIC HOME OF JESSE SHEPHERD
IN HIS DAY, HE WAS PROBABLY ONE
OF THE MOST FAMOUS PEOPLE IN THE
WORLD AND HIS, UH, THIS HOUSE
WAS BUILT SPECIFICALLY FOR HIM
TO PROMOTE. THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO IN THIS SPECIFIC
NEIGHBORHOOD OF SHERMAN HEIGHTS
. IT WAS BUILT IN 18 87. AND IT
WAS USED TO ATTRACT PEOPLE AS I
MENTIONED. BECAUSE HE WAS SO
FAMOUS PEOPLE WANTED TO EITHER
BE EITHER ONE OR MEET HIM OR
LIVE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD
AND CITY AS HIM, AND IT WAS VERY
EFFECTIVE TOOL AT THE TIME. EVER
SINCE THE CONSTRUCTION ITS
CONSTRUCTION, THE BILL HAS
SERVED AS A LANDMARK AND A
CULTURAL RESOURCE IN THE
HISTORIC SHERMAN HEIGHTS
NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN IT WAS
RESTORED IN THE SEVENTIES. IT
WAS A PLACE THAT I WENT AS A AS
A AS A YOUNG BOY TO LEARN. NOT
ONLY ABOUT, UH, CALIFORNIA
HISTORY, BUT IT WAS ALSO A PLACE
THAT OFFERED ARTS AND CRAFTS.
THEY ACTUALLY HAD A VERY OLD
PIANO, THE AN EXACT RECORD
REPLICA. OF THE PIANO THAT JESSE
SHEPHERD USED TO PLAY. AND FOR
ME, IT WAS A WONDERFUL
EXPERIENCE TO BE ABLE TO PLAY
THAT PIANO SO YOUNG AS A YOUNG
BOY. TO DO TO LOCAL BUDGET
CONSTRAINTS AND DEFICIENT
RESTORATION EFFORTS. THE
PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY FACING
MAJOR RESTORATION NEEDS. IN
ORDER TO CONTINUE ITS CURRENT
OPERATION AS A MUSEUM. IT'S BEEN
CLOSED. AND THE LAST OPERATOR
ACTUALLY WENT INTO. AH YOU HAD
IN THEIR LAST, UH WHEN THEY WERE
LESS OPERATING. THE RESOURCE.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDS. SO,
UH, SADLY. THEY SOLD THE PIANO.
THEY SOLD ALL THE FURNITURE.
THAT WAS AN EXACT REPLICA
REPLICA. OF THE FURNITURE THAT
HE HAD. EVERYTHING WAS CLEARED
AWAY FROM THE HOME. AND THAT WAS
A VERY SAD MOMENT FOR EVERYONE
IN THE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT GOT
TO SEE SUCH AN IMPORTANT,
IMPORTANT AND ICONIC RESOURCE.
AH PRACTICALLY BE BE STRIPPED
AWAY OF SOME OF ITS MOST
IMPORTANT CULTURAL ARTIFACTS. UM
SO IT'S THIS HOME HAS BEEN
CLOSED ITS, UH IN A STATE OF
THIS REPORT PAIR THAT NEEDS SOME
INVESTMENT. I'M WORKING HARD
WITH THE CITY AND WITH THE LOCAL
GROUP FRIENDS OF THE VILLA
MONTEZUMA. TO RESTORE THE
STRUCTURE, PUT IT BACK INTO
OPERATION AND MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE
ONCE AGAIN TO NOT ONLY THE
COMMUNITY OF SHERMAN HEIGHTS IN
THE COMMUNITY SAN DIEGO BUT ALL
THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA THIS
HOME ATTRACTED PEOPLE FROM ALL
OVER THE COUNTRY. AND
FORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT MUCH. OF
AN ATTRACTION IN ITS CURRENT
STATE RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF IT
REMAINS A VERY BEAUTIFUL HOME,
SO 10 28 WILL GUARANTEE IF
INCORPORATION OF THE PROPERTY
INTO THE CALIFORNIA STATES STATE
PARKS UNIT SYSTEM IS
IMPLEMENTED. THAT DEVELOP
MONTEZUMA'S VALUABLE HISTORICAL
LEGACY WILL BE PROTECTED AND
WILL CONTINUE AND WILL BE
ACCESSIBLE TO THE BENEFIT OF
FUTURE GENERATIONS OF
CALIFORNIA. I'M I WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT I'M CURRENTLY
WORKING WITH THE WITH AN
ACCOMPANYING BUDGET ASK OF $5
MILLION FOR THE NEEDED
RESTORATIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS A BILL WOULD WOULD
AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECS TO INTERNET LEASE
AGREEMENT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT.
BUT SHOULD THEY SHOULD THE
DEPARTMENT I SEE IT AS AN
IMPORTANT CALIFORNIA RESOURCE.
IT ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD
AND DO THAT, AND IF WE PROVIDE
THE FUNDING FOR THE RESTORATION
, IT WILL ALLOW THIS STATE PARK
THIS TO EXPAND OUR STATE PARK
SYSTEM. INTO A VERY, UH,
COMMUNITIES ARE VERY DEPRIVED OF
STATE PARK RESOURCES.
RESPECTFUL. ASK FOR YOUR VOTE
TODAY. THANK YOU. GOING TO MOVE
TO YOUR SUPPORT WITNESS. I
BELIEVE WE HAVE ONE ON THE
PHONE. WE HAVE LOU EAST OREO
WITH FRIENDS. UH VILLA
MONTEZUMA? SORRY, PERFECT
OPERATOR. AND IS THAT BUYING 51?
YOUR LINE IS OPEN FOR RESPONSE.
NOT LEWIS. BUT THIS IS MOIRA TAP
ON HALF OF THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO, AND WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF
THE MEASURE. THANK YOU. AND IF
YOU ARE LOOKING FOR THE
INDIVIDUAL, LOUISE YES. ONE AND
THEN ZERO. LUIZ IF YOU'RE ON THE
LINE. AND I'M NOT GETTING A
RESPONSE AT THIS TIME. ONCE
AGAIN, LOUISE, IF YOU'RE ON THE
LINE, PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AND I'M NOT GETTING A RESPONSE
FROM ANYONE ON THE PHONE. THANK
YOU. OPERATOR. ANYONE IN THE
ROOM AND SUPPORT AND WE'LL GIVE
ONE WORD OPPORTUNITY IN THE ONE
ON THE LINE AND SUPPORT TO CALL
IN FOR SP 10 28. AND ONCE AGAIN
FOR SUPPORT. YOU MAY PRESS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. AND ALLOWING A
FEW MOMENTS. I'M SHOWING NO ONE
IN CUBA AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION IN THE
ROOM? MOVING TO THE PHONE LINES
THAT BERNIE OPPOSITION. ONCE
AGAIN WELL AND THEN 04
OPPOSITION IF YOU WISH TO
RESPOND. ALLOWING A FEW MOMENTS
. I'M THROWING A RESPONSES AT
THIS TIME. THANK YOU BRINGING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE, MR WARD.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WANT
TO THANK SENATOR HUESO FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AS WELL. I
KNOW THE BUILDING. I KNOW THE
PROPERTY. WELL I WANT TO. OF
COURSE, YOU'VE BEEN JUST AN
AMAZING STEWARD FOR THE SHERMAN
HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD, THE
SURROUNDING COMMUNITY TIMELINE,
CITY COUNCIL AND, OF COURSE HERE
IN THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL. THIS
IS A TREASURED RESOURCE, OF
COURSE, WITH ITS STORIED HISTORY
AND JUST VERY STRONG VALUE THAT
WE HAVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I
WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT BUT
ALSO GENTLY PUSH BACK ON. YOU
KNOW, ONE OBSERVATION IN THE
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS. I
UNDERSTAND WE HAVE OUR SELECTION
PROCESS WITHIN THE STATE PARK
SYSTEMS, AND THEN WE THINK ABOUT
EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS, BUT YOU
COULD NOT PROBABLY HAVE A BETTER
CHOICE FOR INVESTMENT. AH IN THE
VEIN OF EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS,
THEN A PROPERTY AND INVESTMENT
LIKE HERE IN THE SHERMAN HEIGHTS
NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I JUST WANT TO
PUT IT EASE THAT THAT IF THIS AS
THIS IS MOVING FORWARD, AND
PERHAPS THE GOVERNOR'S
CONSIDERING SIGNING THIS BILL,
THAT SHOULD SATISFY THAT AS WELL
. UM BUT I DID WANT TO JUST, YOU
KNOW, KIND OF BEGS THE QUESTION.
THANK YOU AGAIN, BY THE WAY FOR
THE LEADERSHIP. I KNOW YOU HAD A
HAND IN AND COORDINATING WITH
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO SECURE
$5 MILLION AND I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE GET THIS RIGHT. UM,
WHILE THIS IS PERMISSIVE, AND IF
THIS IS GOING FORWARD TO BECOME
A PART OF THE STATE PARK SYSTEM,
MY PREFERENCE NOW IS A STATE
OFFICIAL WOULD BE THAT WE
ACTUALLY ACQUIRE IT INTO THE
STATE PARK SYSTEM. UM SO WE HAVE
THE CITY. SO WE'RE THIS TO MOVE
FORWARD. THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO
WOULD STILL OWN THE LAND. WE'RE
GIVING THEM $5 MILLION, ASSUMING
THE BUDGET IS SIGNED RIGHT TO BE
ABLE TO DO THE RENOVATIONS, BUT
THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THE
ONGOING MAINTENANCE AND
OBLIGATIONS AS A STATE THROUGH
STATE PARKS. AND UH, IS THERE IS
THERE A POTENTIAL COME JANUARY
1ST THAT WE'VE GIVEN THE MONEY
OVER HERE FOR THE CITY TO
ACTUALLY DO THE RENOVATIONS, BUT
NOW IT'S A STATE PARKS RESOURCE.
I JUST DON'T WANT CONFUSION OF
JURISDICTION. HOW DO YOU HOPE
THIS IS ALL RESOLVED? SO THERE
THERE IS A PROCESS BY WHICH
STATE COULD ACQUIRE AND THAT IS
AVAILABLE. AND I HOPE AND IT IS
ALSO MY HOPE. THAT THE STATE
WOULD ACQUIRE AND MAKING A STATE
PARK SYSTEM PUT THE INVENTORY
BECAUSE NOT ONLY WOULD IT UM, UM
HELP THE RESOURCE, BUT IT WOULD
ALSO GIVE GIVE MORE EXPOSURE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT
PEOPLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE
RESOURCES THAT ARE WITHIN THE
STATE PARKS TO PROMOTE. THESE
RESOURCES TO GET PEOPLE TO VISIT
THEM, SO THAT'S PART OF OUR WHAT
WE WANT. BUT WE HAVE WORKED WITH
THE STATE ON THIS BILL. AND THE
CITY AND IT'S BEEN THIS, YOU
KNOW, JUST LIKE ANYTHING THAT
HAPPENS HERE THERE ARE THERE ARE
PREFERENCES BETWEEN THE STATE
AND PREFERENCES BETWEEN THE CITY
AND WE KIND OF AGREED THAT THIS
BILL WAS WOULD BE THE MOST
PRACTICABLE, GIVEN THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE RESOURCE
ANDWHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH. YOU KNOW, THERE'S
ALWAYS PUSHBACK FROM THE STATE
THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO ASSUME
MORE RESPONSIBILITIES BECAUSE IT
HAS COST PRESSURES ON THE
BUDGET. AND BUT SHOULD THIS
RESOURCE PUT IN? I MEAN, SOME OF
THESE STATE PARKS ARE VERY
PRODUCTIVE AND THERE AND THEY
PROVIDE A LOT OF FUNDING AND THE
MOST PROFITABLE OF THE STATE
RESOURCES TEND TO BE OLDER
ATTRACTIONS LIKE THE HEARST
CASTLE PROVIDES 75% OF ALL THE
FUNDING TO STATE PARKS BECAUSE
IT HAS SO MANY VISITORS AND
PEOPLE TEND TO WANT TO VISIT
THOSE THOSE RESOURCES THAT HAVE
SOME ANTIQUITY AND SOME HISTORY
AND A STORY IS ASSOCIATED WITH
THEM. AND WE THINK THIS PARK CAN
BE THAT ONE DAY I COULD BE A
GENERATOR OF REVENUE. AND ALSO
BE A PLACE WHERE PROGRAMS COULD
BE ESTABLISHED FOR A
NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S GREATLY
LACKING IN THOSE PROGRAMS AND
OPPORTUNITIES, SO WE DEVISE A
BILL THAT WE BELIEVE CAN CAN, UH
, GO FROM EITHER, UH, INITIATED
RELEASE. INITIATED AS A
RESTORATION PROJECT AND
EVENTUALLY GAINED ADMITTANCE AS
A STATE PARK AND EVEN UNDER A
LEASE. BECOME, UH. A RESOURCE
UNDER THE STATE PARK SYSTEM THAT
WOULD BE FEATURED IN THE WEB
PAGE AND SAY THIS IS KIND OF A
STATE PARK. WE WOULD LOVE TO
WORK WITH YOU ON IF THERE IS A
NEED FOR ANY TIGHTENING UP AS
THIS IS HEADING TO THE FLOOR AS
WELL SO THAT WE CAN GET THE MOST
OUT OF IT AS A STATE PARKS
RESOURCE, THE MOST IMPORTANT
THING AND I WANT TO COMMEND AND
THANK THE FRIENDS OF VILLA
MONTEZUMA FOR THE HARD WORK THAT
THEY DO ON THE GROUND AND
PRESERVE THIS RESOURCE, KEEP IT
OPEN AND PRESERVED FOR COMMUNITY
ENJOYMENT AS WELL. THAT SHOULD
NEVER BE LOST AS WELL. AND THEN,
AS FAR AS WHO'S JURISDICTION IT
IS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT IS, UM, PROTECTED AND YOUR
ANTEED, YOU KNOW, FOR FUTURE
GENERATIONS AS WELL. AND IF THIS
IS THE VEHICLE IN THE MOMENT TO
MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE I'S ARE
DOTTED YOU KNOW, WOULD LOVE TO
MAKE SURE I THINK WE'RE ON THE
SAME PAGE AND WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT EXACTLY THE SAME THING. SO
I'D LOVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE THAT PROTECTION AS WELL. SO
VERY EXCITED FOR THIS. THANK
YOU. FOR ALL THAT HARD WORK. I'M
HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE BILL. THANK
YOU. WE DO HAVE EMOTION A
SECOND. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. OR DO YOU WANT TO
CLOSE? JUST SIMPLY RUN IT.THANK
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD FOR THOSE
WONDERFUL COMMENTS AND FOR YOUR
SUPPORT, AND I THINK YOU YOU.
YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ISSUE VERY,
VERY WELL. AND I APPRECIATE THAT
BECAUSE IT REALLY HELPS US TO,
UH PUSH, MOVE FORWARD AND
ACHIEVE WHAT WE'RE BOTH TRYING
TO ACHIEVE. I THINK WE'RE HEADED
IN THAT DIRECTION. I JUST WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR
INDULGENCE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR AN I VOTE. THE MOTION IS DUE
PAST TWO APPROPRIATIONS
BAUER-KAHAN. DOLLY DOLLY! I,
BENNETT BENNETT. I BIGELOW
BIGELOW I FRIEDMAN GARCIA.
CHOLERA LEVIN MURATSUCHI. AND
WHEN, WHEN RUBIO RUBIO I SALAS
SMITH SMITH, IVY VALLAPUDUA BE
VALLAPUDUA I WARD WARD. AYE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HAVE A
WONDERFUL DAY. THANK.
WHAT.
IT'S GOOD, SENATOR MCGUIRE.
PRESENTING SP 13 92 WHENEVER
YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
MADAM CHAIR. I TOOK THE STAIRS,
SO GOOD TIMES. HEY, I JUST WANT
TO SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR AND OF COURSE, HURRICANE
FOR ALL THE WORK ON THIS BILL.
SO IT'S P 13 92 IS SUPER SIMPLE
IN A REALLY MEAN IT. UM IT IS A
ONE YEAR EXTENSION ALCOHOL
TROPHY PROGRAM. THE REASON WHY
THERE'S ONE YEAR JUST BEING VERY
BLUNT ABOUT IT. THE DEPARTMENT
OF FISH AND GAME WAS SUPPOSED TO
FINISH THE REPORT THAT CULTURE
REPORT. IT'S NOT FINISHED, SO
WE'RE GOING TO DO A ONE YEAR
EXTENSION ON THE FEES. THIS IS
SUPPORTED BY INDUSTRY. UH AND IT
ALL BENEFITS THE FISHING GAME
PRESERVATION FUND, BUT
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
YOU HAVE SUPPORT WITNESSES ON
THE PHONE? YES, WE DO. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. MADAM CHAIR YOU'RE
GOING TO HEAR FROM TONY VOTE
PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA
AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION, ALONG
WITH THE LEGENDARY ROB ROSS,
PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
FISHERIES AND SEAFOOD INSTITUTE.
THANK YOU. OPERATOR. CAN WE MOVE
TO THE SUPPORT WITNESSES,
PLEASE? AND ONCE AGAIN FOR
SUPPORT. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. ONE AND THEN ZERO FOR
SUPPORT FOR SUPPORT WITNESSES,
TONY OMNI AND ROB. TONY AND ROB,
PLEASE. AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY
ARE HITTING 10. LINE 27. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN IS THAT TONY OR
ROB? 27 COMMENTS. ONE MOMENT.
THIS IS TONY VADAS. JUST LINE
27. KNOW YOUR LINE IS OPEN AHEAD
. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM THIS
IS TONY BOTTOM PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE
ASSOCIATION, AND I'M ALSO CO
CHAIR OF THE AQUACULTURE.
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
COMMITTEE AND ALSO BENEFICIAL
FARMER FOR 43 YEARS. UM WE ARE
IN THE CALIFORNIA CULTURE
ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL. AND WE'RE LOOKING
FORWARD TO A DISCUSSION WITH THE
DEPARTMENT ON THE DEPARTMENT'S
ROLE IN AQUACULTURE GOING
FORWARD TO PRODUCE. HEALTHY
CLEAN PROTEIN IN THE WAY OF
SEAFOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU MOVING ON TO THE NEXT
WITNESS, ROB ROSS. THERE WE GO.
EXACTLY TOTALLY. HERE WE GO.
OPERATOR TO THE SECOND WITNESS,
PLEASE. ROB ROSS. ONE MOMENT.
I'M SORRY. THERE IS NO ROB ROCK.
I'M ON THE LINE. OKAY WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON ANYONE ON THE
LINE. COULD YOU PLEASE MUTE YOUR
PHONES? YOU'RE TONY WATT. THERE
WE GO. CAN MOVE ON TO ANY
SUPPORT IN THE ROOM. MORE
SUPPORT ON THE PHONES OPERATOR.
IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT, PLEASE
PRESS ONE THAN ZERO. AND AT THIS
TIME, THERE'S NO ONE IN QUÊ.
THANK YOU. WE DON'T HAVE ANY
REGISTERED OPPOSITION WITNESSES
AND THE OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM.
OPPOSITION ON THE PHONES.
OPERATOR IF YOU ARE, IF YOU ARE
AN OPPOSITION, PLEASE PRESS ONE
THAN ZERO. AND THERE'S NO ONE IN
QUÊ. THANK YOU. WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THANK
YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
BACK IN FRONT OF YOU FOR A
LAUNDRY LONGER EXTENSION IN 2023
GRATEFUL FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR
EFFORT AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN I VOTE. THANK YOU. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS
BAUER-KAHAN DOLLY DOLLY I
BENNETT. BIGELOW. BIGELOW. I
FRIEDMAN GARCIA. CHOLERA. LEVIN
MURATSUCHI NGUYEN. WHEN NOT
VOTING. RUBIO RUBIO? AYE. SALUS
SMITH. SMITH NOT VOTING THE
VALLAPUDUA VALLAPUDUA I, WARD
WARD. AYE. LEAVE THE ROLL UP IN
FOR ABSENT. THANK YOU. GOOD TO
SEE YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. A SIMILAR MEMBER ITEM
. 10. SB 10 12. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF FOR
ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT SENATE
BILL 10 12 TODAY ON BEHALF OF
SENATOR GLACIER. THE MEASURES IN
FRONT OF YOU TODAY COULD HELP
PREVENT THE NEXT DEADLY AND
DESTRUCTIVE CALIFORNIA WILDFIRE
AS YOU MAY KNOW OUR LOCAL FIRE
DISTRICTS IN WILDFIRE, WILDFIRE
PRONE AREAS HAVE STRICT RULES
ABOUT OPEN FIRES. DURING FIRE
SEASON, RESIDENTS ARE NOT
ALLOWED TO HAVE OPEN FIRES IN
THEIR YARDS ARE USED CHARCOAL OR
WOOD BARBECUES. THE REASON IS
THAT NO MATTER HOW CAREFUL
PEOPLE ARE A GUST OF WIND DURING
FIRE SEASON CAN CARRY IN MEMBER
INTO THE FOREST AND START A FIRE
THAT COULD DESTROY MILLION.
ACRES OF FOREST AND BURNED DOWN
THOUSANDS OF HOMES. BUT
CURRENTLY, STATE PARK
CAMPGROUNDS DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW
THE SAME RULES AS WE 10 12 OR
SIMPLY REQUIRE STATE PARK
CAMPGROUNDS TO FOLLOW AND
ENFORCE RULES RELATED TO OPEN
FIRES. THAT ARE AT LEAST AS
RESTRICTIVE AS THOSE OF THE FIRE
DEPARTMENTS OR FIRE DISTRICT
WITHIN THOSE BOUNDARIES BY
BOUNDARIES. THE PARK IS LOCATED
TODAY HAVE JOSH UH, GOOD BOAT,
JIMBO. PRESIDENT OF THE LAKE
TAHOE REGIONAL FIRE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION, AND DAVID WHITAKER
, FIRE CHIEF OF THE MORE MORAGA
OR ORINDA FIRE DISTRICT HERE TO
TESTIFY BOTH BY PHONE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. OPERATOR CAN WE
MOVE TO THE SUPPORT WITNESSES ON
THE PHONE, PLEASE? AND WE'LL
START WITH JASON. IF YOU ARE IN
SUPPORT PLEASE PRESS 10. HI GOOD
MORNING, MADAM CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
JASON JIMBO. NOT JOSH BROUGH.
JASON ROBARDS SERVICE THE CHAIR
FOR LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL FIRE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION. MORE
COMPRISED OF OVER 30 MEMBERS
FIRE CHIEFS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF
THE ASSOCIATION. OUR LOCAL AS
WELL STATE AND FEDERAL UNITS
WITHIN THE LITTLE BASIN AND
SIMPLY, WE ARE TRYING TO WANT TO
INITIATE FIRE RESTRICTIONS AT
THE SAME TIME WITHIN OUR REGION
AND TWO AND FORCE THE SAME. FIRE
RESTRICTIONS. UM AND BY OFFERING
THIS CONSISTENCY IN OUR REGION,
WE SEEK TO ONE REDUCE THE
CONFUSION NO MATTER WHERE YOU
ARE WITHIN THE APPROXIMATE 200
MILE RADIUS OF THE LAKE TAHOE
BASIN. EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.
THAT THE ENTIRE AREA HAS FIRE
RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE IN SUCH
FIRE RESTRICTIONS ARE THE SAME,
THUS REDUCING THE CONFUSION. UM
AND THEN TO REDUCE THE FIRE
HAZARDS. IF EVERYONE WITHIN LAKE
TAHOE BASIN IS INITIATING AND
LIFTING AND ENFORCING
RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE THE SAME.
WE WILL UNDOUBTEDLY REDUCE THE
THREAT OF A WILD LAND FIRE FROM
STARTING WITH IN OUR AREA. AND
SO FOR ALL AGENCIES AND
DEPARTMENTS AND UNITS TO
COLLECTIVELY COME TO AN
AGREEMENT ON FIRE RESTRICTIONS
AND CLOSURES IS EXTREMELY
BENEFICIAL FOR THE SAFETY AND
THE WELFARE OF THE LAKE TAHOE.
SPACE AND HENCE THE REASON FOR
WHY THE LAKE TITLE REGIONAL FIRE
CHIEFS IS EXPRESSING THEIR
SUPPORT FOR SB 10 12. FOR THE
LOCAL FIRE CHIEFS WITHIN THE
LIFESTYLE BASIN TO COME TO AN
AGREEMENT ALONG WITH THE
CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS.
FOLLOWING IN LOCKSTEP DUE TO
THIS BILL. SB 10 12 WE ARE THEN
THAT MUCH CLOSER TO HAVING
EVERYONE ON BOARD IN THIS
PURSUIT. AND AS ALL OF YOU KNOW
, AND WE ARE AN UNPRECEDENTED
TIMES AS IT PERTAINS TO WILDLAND
FIRES WITHIN CALIFORNIA, WE HAVE
EXPERIENCED SIX OR SEVEN OF THE
LARGEST FIRES IN THE HISTORY OF
OUR STATE WITHIN LAST THREE
YEARS. 10 OF THE MOST
DESTRUCTIVE FIRES IN THE LAST
DECADE MILLIONS OF ACRES BURN
MOSTLY CAUSED BY HUMANS, AND
LAST YEAR, SOUTH LAKE TAHOE WAS
IMPACTED BY AWILD LAND FIRE
THAT STARTED OVER 100 MILES
AWAY. AND RAN ITS COURSE DOWN IN
THE BASEMENT. AND SOUNDS LIKE
TOTO SPIRIT INST THE ANGORA FIRE
BACK IN 2013, AND SHORTLY AFTER
THAT FIRE RAVAGED THE TOWN OF
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE. THEN GOVERNOR
SANDOVAL AND BROWN SIGNED A
PROCLAMATION DECLARING QUOTE,
WHEREAS LAKE TAHOE IS A UNIQUE
NATIONAL TREASURE THAT MUST BE
PRESERVED AS OUR GIFT TO FUTURE
GENERATIONS THAT THEY AGREED
BOTH STATES. NEEDED TO COOPERATE
ON WILDFIRE PROTECTION AND
PREPAREDNESS EFFORTS. IN THE
LAKE TAHOE BASIN. AND SO I'D
LIKE TO JUST SAY INCONTINENCE
WITH SUCH A PROGRAM PROCLAMATION
IN AGREEMENT. THE LAKE TODDLE
REGIONAL FIRE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. UM IS DEFINITELY IN
FAVOR OF SB 10 12, WHICH
REQUIRES ONCE AGAIN THAT THE
STATE PARKS TO FOLLOW AND FORCE
RULES RELATED TO OPEN FIRES THAT
ARE AT LEAST AS RESTRICTIVE. AS
THOSE OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS.
WE THEN ARE TRULY SEEKING AND
FORCING WHAT IS NECESSARY TO
PROTECT THIS JEWEL LIKE TYLER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
OPERATOR. PLEASE MOVE TO THE
SECOND WITNESS. DAVID WINNICK
WHEN NECKER. GOOD MORNING.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SHARE TESTIMONY AND SUPPORT AS
THE LEGISLATORS MAKE CLEAR
THROUGH PLAIN LANGUAGE FIRE IS
NOT A MUNICIPAL AFFAIR IN THE
MEDITERRANEAN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
90% OF WILDFIRES OR
ANTHROPOGENIC IN ORIGIN, MEANING
THEY'RE STARTED BY HUMAN
REDUCING PLANT IGNITIONS IN THE
FORM OF A BURN BAN IS A LONG
STANDING AND WELL UNDERSTOOD
METHOD OF FIRE DISTRICT MAY USE
TO PREVENT UNCONTROLLED
WILDFIRE. THE STATE IS ALREADY
THUMBING ITS NOSE AT FIRE
SCIENCE BY EXEMPTING PUBLICLY
OWNED BUILDINGS AND PROPANE
TANKS FROM DEFENSIBLE SPACE
REQUIREMENTS INTO THE ABSENCE OF
THE STATE STANDARD FOR FUEL
MITIGATION MINIMUMS ON
UNDEVELOPED LAND. SINCE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE THE
ABILITY TO REQUIRE MITIGATION ON
THESE PUBLICLY OWNED LANDS AND
BUILDINGS GIVE US THE ABILITY TO
LIMIT IGNITIONS FIRE DISTRICT IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING OUT
FIRES, AND WE SHOULD BE GIVEN
THE TOOLS TO PREVENT THEM AS
WELL. THANK YOU. MHM THANK YOU
MOVING TO THE ROOM AND THE OTHER
SUPPORT IN THE ROOM. GOOD
MORNING, STEVE. WELCOME HALF THE
CALIFORNIA TOWER ALLIANCE AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OPERATOR
WILL MOVE TO THE PHONES FOR ANY
MORE IN SUPPORT. IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF SB 10 12, PLEASE
PRESS ONE THAN ZERO. FIND 56.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN LINE 56. GOOD
MORNING, STACEY HEATING WITH THE
RURAL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES OF
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. AND THERE
ARE NO OTHER WITNESSES. THANK
YOU. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? WE
DON'T HAVE ANY REGISTERED
OPPOSITION FOR WITNESSES. ANY
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM? MOVING
TO THE PHONE LINES OPERATOR, ANY
OPPOSITION? DURING OPPOSITION
FOR SB 10 12, PLEASE PRESS ONE
THAN ZERO. THEN THERE IS NO ONE
IN Q AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS?
MR BIG WELL, MAYBE TO THE PEOPLE
WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THIS, UM
MAYBE YOU COULD ADDRESS A
QUESTION WITH RESPECT TO DOES
THIS MEAN THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT
BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A WARMING
FIRE.
JASON JASON, ARE YOU STILL
ONLINE? JASON OR BOWEL OR DAVID.
I REFER TO THE AUTHOR ON WITH
REGARD TO EXEMPTIONS AS A
GENERAL STATEMENT, HOWEVER,
PARTICULARLY IN THE BAY AREA,
WARMING FIRES HAVE A HISTORY OF
STARTING UNCONTROLLED WILDFIRE
AND IN ANY IGNITION IS
PROBLEMATIC. OBVIOUSLY SHOULD
HAVE. SHOULD A PERSON BE IN A
LIFE OR DEATH CIRCUMSTANCE
THERE. THERE'S A POSSIBILITY FOR
EXEMPTIONS, BUT THE TIMES WHEN
BURNED BANDS ARE IN EFFECT ARE
VERY INFREQUENTLY AND ALIGNMENT
WHEN TIME WHEN TEMPERATURES FALL
TO THE DEGREE THAT WARMING FIRE
WOULD BE NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN
LIFE. THINKING. I JUST WANTED
THAT CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILL
BE ABLE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? YES THANK YOU. THIS BILL
COULD HELP PREVENT ANOTHER
DEADLY CALIFORNIA WILDFIRE BY
REQUIRING STATE PARKS TO FOLLOW
AND ENFORCE RULES RELATED TO
OPEN FIRES THAT ARE AT LEAST AS
RESTRICTIVE OR THOSE OF THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT WITHIN WHOSE
BOUNDARIES THE PARK IS LOCATED.
AND WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY
ASK HER AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
WE DO HAVE EMOTION IN A SECOND.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION
IS DUE PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS
BAUER-KAHAN. DELI DELI. I
BENNETT BIGELOW. Hí
FRIEDMAN. I GARCIA. GARCIA I
CHOLERA. LEVINE LEVINE MASUCCI
WHEN? WHEN I RUBIO RUBIO I SALAS
SMITH. SMITH IVY VALLAPUDUA
VALLAPUDUA I WORD. WOULD I?
BENNETT? AYE. DON'T.
GONNA TAKE UP AN OPPORTUNITY TO
DO ADD ON VOTES NOW. WE HAVE THE
CONSENT CALENDAR ABSENT MEMBERS.
BAUER-KAHAN BENNETT BENNETT?
AYE. GARCIA. THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. GARCIA I CHOLERA.
LEVINE LEVINE. I MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI. AYE, SALAS. SB 463.
DOLLY! UM ABSENT MEMBERS,
CHOLERA. LEVIN. HI. VNOT
VOTING. AND SALIS. SB 489
LAYERED ABSENT MEMBERS, BENNETT. BENNETT I CHOLERA SALAS.
SB 865 DODD ABSENT MEMBERS,
GARCIA. GARCIA I CHOLERA. LEVINE
LEVINE. I MARRY SOUCI MURATSUCHI
. AYE, SALAS. SP 945 LAYERED.
ABSENT MEMBERS BY BAUER-KAHAN
BENNETT BENNETT. I GARCIA.
GARCIA I CHOLERA. LEVINE LEVINE
. I MURATSUCHI MURATSUCHI. AYE,
SALUS. SB 977 LAIRD. ABSENT
MEMBERS BY BAUER-KAHAN BENNETT.
BENNETT I, GARCIA GARCIA, I
CHOLERA. LEVINE LEVINE. I
MURATSUCHI MURATSUCHI EYES
SALAS. CHOLERA? AYE. SB 10 12
ABSENT MEMBERS BAUER-KAHAN
CHOLERA, CHOLERA. I MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI. AYE SALAS. SB 13 92.
MCGUIRE ABSENT MEMBERS
BAUER-KAHAN. BENNETT. BENNETT I
, FRIEDMAN FRIEDMAN I GARCIA
GARCIA, I CHOLERA. CHOLERA I
LEVINE LEVINE. I MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI. AYE. SALAS. SB 10 28
HUESO. ABSENT MEMBERS BARRICADE
HAN FRIEDMAN. FRIEDMAN. AYE.
GARCIA. GARCIA I CHOLERA.
CHOLERA I LEVINE LEVINE. I'M
MURATSUCHI MURATSUCHI. AYE,
SALAS. YES.
MHM. CONSENT CALENDAR ABSENT
MEMBER CHOLERA. CHOLERA AYE. SB
463 DELI. ABSENT MEMBER CHOLERA.
CHOLERA NÓ. LIVING FROM NOT
VOTING TO KNOW. S BEFORE 89
LAYERED ABSENT MEMBER CHOLERA.
CHOLERA? AYE. SB 5 20 WILK.
ABSENT MEMBER CHOLERA. CHOLERA
NÓ. SB 856 DODD ABSENT MEMBER
CHOLERA. CHOLERA, NOT VOTING. SB
865 DODD ABSENT MEMBER CHOLERA.
CHOLERA, NOT VOTING. SB 945
DODD. ABSENT MEMBER CHOLERA.
FINE. CALL HER. I.
IT'S NO, IT'S A MARKER, SENATOR
ALLEN SP 12 FRONT. 12 OR FIVE
WHEN WHENEVER YOU'RE READY,
REMEMBER? THANK YOU APPRECIATE
YOUR PATIENCE. UM LET ME START
BY THANKING THE COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR THEIR VERY THOUGHTFUL WORK
ON THIS MEASURE TO HELP ENSURE
THAT THE BILL REALIZES OUR
POLICY GOALS. MEMBERS THAT I
KNOW IT'S A CONSTANT TOPIC OF
CONVERSATION, BUT CLIMATE CHANGE
IS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY
AFFECTING MOST ASPECTS OF LIFE.
WHAT IS IT ANYHOW? HAPPY TO TALK
MORE ABOUT THE BILL, BUT IT WAS
A 34 TO 0 VOTE IN THE SENATE. I
THINK THE FOLKS WHO WEREN'T
FOLKS WERE AT FOR COVID. UM
WE'VE GOT MATT BAKER HERE FROM
THE PLANNING CONSERVATION LEAGUE
ON THE LINE TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT. BUT I DO I DO WANT TO
DO. I DID WANT TO MAKE A POINT
OF JUST SEEING HOW MUCH I
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT THE
COMMITTEE STAFF HAS DONE WITH US
TO GET THIS BILL AT THIS STAGE.
IT'S ALL MOVED TO YOUR SUPPORT
WITNESS ON THE PHONE. MATT BAKER
OPERATOR. YOU CAN HEAR? YES.
OKAY? THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON
. MY NAME IS MATTHEW BAKER, UM,
POLICY DIRECTOR OF CLEANING
CONSERVATION LEAGUE SPONSOR OF
THIS BILL. FIRST I'M GONNA SAY
I'M HERE TODAY IN PLACE OF OUR
LATE, GREAT IN YOUR WATER POLICY
ADVISOR JANICE MITTEN PASSED
AWAY SUDDENLY JUST LAST WEEK
THROUGH THEIR HEART CONDITION.
SO CAME ABOUT LARGELY BECAUSE
WE'RE CONCERNED. THIS WEIGHS
HEAVILY ON MY STOCKS. THESE
COMMENTS, AND I'M GONNA THANK
SENATOR ALLEN FOR CARRYING THIS
IMPORTANT BILL. SECONDLY I WANT
TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT WE
DO NOT AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT AS BRITAIN
AS IT IS, ADDITION, MODIFICATION
THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THE
COMMITTEE AND THE AUTHOR. WE
WILL CONTINUE OUR STRONG SUPPORT
FOR SB. 25 THE PURPOSE OF THIS
PROPOSED ILLUSTRATE FORWARD
SIMPLE AND NEEDED TO GIVE THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD THE EXPLOSIVE ABILITY TO
CONSIDER THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE
CHANGE, INCLUDING DROUGHTS,
EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS, LAND USE
CHANGES IN GROUNDWATER. SURFACE
WATER INTERACTIONS IN
DETERMINING WATERVILLE MELODY
WHEN ISSUING WATER RIGHT PERMITS
AND LICENSES. STANDARD PRACTICE
TODAY IS TO EVALUATE ALL
HUNDREDS OF YEARS OF HISTORICAL
HYDROLOGICAL DATA AND EVALUATING
WATER, VET AVAILABILITY, BUT
HYDROLOGICAL DATA OF THE LAST 20
YEARS DIFFERENCE. SIGNIFICAN
150 YEAR AVERAGES. AND IT SHOWS
THAT CONSIDERING HISTORICAL DATA
ALONE IS SIMPLY INADEQUATE,
ENGAGING FUTURE WATER
AVAILABILITY. THIS BILL WOULD
GIVE STATUTORY DIRECTION THAT WE
MUST ALSO USE THE BEST DATA WE
HAVE. FOR HOW CLIMATE CHANGE AND
CHANGING WEATHER PATTERNS THAT
AFFECT THE STATE'S HYDROLOGY,
ENGAGING FUTURE WATER
AVAILABILITY, WHATEVER
INCREASING WATER SCARCITY IN
CALIFORNIA, WE CAN'T AFFORD NOT
TO DO THIS. THIS IS COMMON SENSE
AND OVERDUE, AND WE RESPECTFULLY
URGED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, SENATOR ALLEN. I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE ARE YOU
ACCEPTING THE COMMISSION? I AM.
YES, I AM, YOU KNOW. YEAH.
THERE'S SOME CONCERNS,
OBVIOUSLY, BUT WE ARE WE ARE
ACCEPTING. OKAY THANK YOU. I
JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. IS THERE
ANY OTHER SUPPORT WITNESSES IN
THE ROOM? GOOD MORNING MEMBERS.
CHRIS ANDERSON ON BEHALF OF THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A
SUPPORT IF AMENDED POSITION. I
DO WANT TO THANK THE WORK OF THE
AUTHOR STAFF. UM, THE COMMITTEE
STAFF. THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
DO ADDRESS THE BIGGEST CONCERN
FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WITH THE
BILL. UM THERE ARE A COUPLE MORE
THINGS THAT WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT
WE CAN WORK OUT WITH THE AUTHOR.
UM AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH US
OVER THE RECESS. SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. BRENDA BASS,
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
WE ARE SUPPORT IF AMENDED ALONG
THE SAME OR SIMILAR LINES AS
AQUA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AARON EVANS ON BEHALF OF THE
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT VALUE. WATER ALSO HAS
THE SUPPORT OF AMENDED POSITION
AND WE ALIGN OUR COMMENTS WITH
CWA'S THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
SERENY OPPOSITION. HOW MANY
REGISTERED OPPOSITION BUT THE
OPPOSITION ON THE PHONE LINES.
IF YOU'RE AN OPPOSITION OF 12 05
, PLEASE PRESS 10. AND THERE'S
NO ONE IN QUÊ. THANK YOU ANY
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM? BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
MR GREEN. THANK YOU, SENATOR FOR
THIS BOOK YOU JUST LIKE WALK US
THROUGH EXACTLY HOW THIS WOULD
CHANGE THE CURRENT PROCESS IN
THIS NEW PROCESS, SINCE IT'S FOR
NEW WATER PERMITS. WELL SO OKAY
, SO RIGHT NOW, UM, YOU KNOW
WHEN THE BOARD IS ASKED TO ISSUE
A NEW PERMIT THE BOARD'S
PRACTICE HAS BEEN TO, UM TO
BASICALLY ESTIMATE THE STREAM
FLOW FROM EITHER HISTORICAL DATA
. THE STEAM GAUGE RECORDS UM,
YOU KNOW, OR FROM WATER
AVAILABILITY MODELS THAT SO
THEY'RE BASICALLY BASING THINGS
ON HISTORY. WE KNOW THAT HISTORY
IS NOT AS GOOD A GUIDE ANYMORE
BECAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE. SO
UM, THAT'S REALLY, YOU KNOW. TWO
NEW PERMITS WILL BE THEY MAY
CONTINUE TO DO THEM, BUT THEY'RE
GOING TO USE THIS METHODOLOGY
BASED ON THE MODEL THAT TAKES
INTO THE WHAT WE'RE SEEING. THE
PROJECTIONS ARE JUST OFF. THEY
GOT TO EXPAND OUT THE MODEL,
BASICALLY, SO THEY'VE GOT TO
DEVELOP RAGS THAT ESTABLISHED
THIS NEW METHODOLOGY THAT WILL
ACCOUNT FOR CLIMATE CANGE, AND
THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE
WILL HAVE ON WATERSHED.
RESOURCES SO THAT'S I MEAN, IT'S
JUST ABOUT TRYING TO GET MORE
ACCURACY. IT WAS FINE TO BASE
EVERYTHING ON HISTORIC ON
HISTORY. UM, BEFORE BUT WE
THOUGHT RIGHT, BUT BUT NOW IT'S
JUST NOT PROVING ACCURATE OR
EFFECTIVE. OKAY, THANK YOU. IT'S
THAT'S THE SIMPLE CONCEPT.
HERRION. I JUST HAVE A I HAVE A
QUESTION AND, UM SO WHAT HAPPENS
TO THE PENDING PERMITS RIGHT
NOW? LIKE WATER PERMITS ARE
BEING THAT ARE IN THE PROCESS SO
WELL. MY BEST UNDERSTANDING IS
THAT THEY BE YOU KNOW, IN AND
UNDER THE OLD RULES, BUT BECAUSE
YOU KNOW IT'S GOING TO TAKE A
LITTLE WHILE FOR THEM TO GET
THESE NEW RAGS PROMULGATED AND
BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING,
RIGHT? YEAH. THANK YOU. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, MR
BENNETT JUST TO COMMENT. I MEAN,
I THINK IT'S VERY PRUDENT. THAT
WAS ALL OF THE CHANGES GOING ON.
FROM A CLIMATE STANDPOINT, WE
HAVE TO STAY NIMBLE WITH WATER
AND NOT STAY FIXED WITH WATER.
SO APPRECIATE. THIS IS ONE OF
MANY UPDATES. WE SHOULD PROBABLY
BE MAKING WITH THIS. THANK YOU.
AND I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING
ON THIS ISSUE AS WELL SELLING
MEMBER AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
WORK. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? I APPRECIATE THE GOOD
QUESTIONS AND CONSIDERATION AND
CERTAINLY WANT TO CONTINUE
WORKING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS.
UH YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST
ULTIMATELY ABOUT MAKING SURE
THAT WE'RE NOT LYING TO
OURSELVES THAT WE'RE USING, JUST
USING ACCURATE INFORMATION
BUILDING OUT THE MODEL TO BE
MORE REFLECTIVE OF BASIC
HYDROLOGICAL REALITIES. AND WITH
THAT I RESPECT FOR ASTRONAUT,
BUT THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION
A SECOND. THANK YOU, PLEASE. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS BAUER-KAHAN DOLLY
DOLLY, NOT VOTING. BENNETT
BENNETT. AYE. BIGELOW FRIEDMAN
FRIEDMAN, I, GARCIA GARCIA, I
CHOLERA. LEVINE LEVINE EIMER
SOUCI MURATSUCHI. I KNOW WHEN
RUBIO. RUBIO. I SALAS. SMITH
SMITH, NOT VOTING V VALLAPUDUA
VALLAPUDUA WARD. WOULD I? THANK
YOU. WE'LL LEAVE THAT OPEN FOR
ABSOLUTELY THANK YOU MEMBERS. I
APPRECIATE YEAH.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE?
SB 12 05. ALAN ABSENT MEMBER.
CHOLERA. CHOLERA, AYE.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE ROLE FOR
MYSELF. CALENDAR ABSENT MEMBER
THANK YOU. THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
ABSENT MEMBER ABOUT BAUER-KAHAN
BAUER-KAHAN, AYE. BAUER-KAHAN.
SB 9 45 LAYERED BAUER-KAHAN.
BARRICADE AND I. SP 977 LAIRD,
BARRICADE HAND AND I. SB 10 12
GLACIER, BAUER-KAHAN
BAUER-KAHAN, AYE. SB 13 92
MCGUIRE BAUER-KAHAN BAUER-KAHAN,
AYE. DID YOU DO, ALAN? SB 10 28
HUESO BARRICADE HAN BAUER-KAHAN,
AYE. SB 12 05 ALLEN BAUER-KAHAN
BAUER-KAHAN, AYE. RIGHT? THIS
HEARING IS ADJOURNED.