GOOD. WELCOME TO THE ASSEMBLY
BUDGET COMMITTEE. UH WE ARE
HONORED TO HAVE OUR FIRST
MEETING OF THE YEAR. WE'RE GOING
TO BE HEARING FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE FROM MR
ERIC LI WILL BE PRESENTING THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL THAT
WE HAVE MR PEDAL CAR LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST WHO WILL BE OFFERING HIS
PERSPECTIVE. UM. AFTER THAT,
WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS
FROM THE DAIS AND AS MANY
MEMBERS ASK ANY QUESTIONS.
REGARDING THE PRESENTATION OR
ANYTHING IN THE BUDGET
PRESENTATION. AFTER THAT, WE
WILL BE TAKING PUBLIC COMMENT
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE CALLING
IN JUST REMINDER. THE CALL IN
NUMBER IS 877. 692895. AND THE
ACCESS CODE IS 185. OH, 11008776
. 8957 ACCESS CODE IS 8185. OH
1100. HAVE ANY PROBLEMS. PLEASE
CALL THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE AT 916319. Tð Ó. 99
JUST TO SET A LITTLE BIT OF
PERSPECTIVE ON THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL, PLUS E SITUATION. UM,
HERE. WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE L. E
O S ANALYSIS OF OUR FISCAL
SITUATION. WE HAVE THE
GOVERNOR'S JANUARY BUDGET
PROPOSAL. UH, I THINK THEY BOTH
TELL US THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN
UNCERTAIN TIMES. WE HAVE A
FISCAL SITUATION THAT WE HAVEN'T
FACED IN IN QUITE A WHILE WHERE
WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE EXACTLY
THE DIRECTION OF THE ECONOMY
EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE GOING,
WHETHER WE ARE FACING A SLOWDOWN
OR OR WHETHER WE WILL BE
HOPEFULLY HAVING A REBOUND. UM
HAVING SAID THAT, OBVIOUSLY,
ONLY TIME WILL TELL, UH, ONE OF
THE TRICKIER SITUATIONS WITH
OBVIOUSLY THE, UM EMERGENCY
EXTENSION OF ALLOWING TAXPAYERS
TO FILE BY MAY, 15TH WILL CREATE
EVEN GREATER UNCERTAINTY AS WE
GO INTO THE BUDGET THAT WE PASS
ON JUNE 15TH BECAUSE IT WILL
MEAN IT MAY REVISE THAT WILL NOT
BE FULLY INFORMED BY OUR TAX
COLLECTIONS. UM HAVING SAID THAT
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROBLEM
WAS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT 22 A
HALF BILLION AND 23 24 HAVING
SAID THAT CURRENT REVENUE
CURRENT REVENUES REFLECT
SOMETHING LOWER TO ABOUT 29 A
HALF BILLION. UH, WELL, SORRY
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET REFLECTS
POINTING AT 29 A HALF BILLION
LOWER THAN THE BUDGET ACT.
HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK WE'RE
IN A VERY STRONG FISCAL
SITUATION. WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY
$35 BILLION IN RESERVES AND THAT
WE'VE BEEN PLANNING FOR QUITE A
WHILE. WE HAVE BEEN VERY FOCUSED
ON ANY SURPLUSES USING MOST OF
THE SURPLUS IS ON ONE TIME
EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES THAT
WE CAN TURN OFF OR ON BEING VERY
CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT WE COMMIT TO
IN ONGOING EXPENDITURES. WITH
THE IDEA THAT WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT EVEN IF WE WERE INTO A
DOWNTURN, EVEN WHEN, WHEN A
SITUATION OR REVENUES WERE GOING
DOWN, THAT WE CAN, UM TO COMMIT
TO THOSE, WHETHER THAT'S AN
EDUCATION, WHETHER THAT'S IN
HEALTH CARE WHETHER THAT IS IN
HUMAN SERVICES, ANY VARIETY OF
ONGOING COMMITMENTS. I THINK
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT WE SAW WHAT
HAPPENED DURING THE 2008
RECESSION. WE HAD A DOWNTURN AND
WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE, UM UH
, WHERE WE HAD A DOWNTURN AND
OBVIOUSLY THAT LED TO SOME VERY,
VERY DEVASTATING CUTS IN OUR
SOCIAL SAFETY NET. WE OBVIOUSLY
DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.
WHAT HAPPENED IN 89 4020 10? SO
TODAY, I THINK WE BEGIN THE
BEGINNING OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS
AS A REMINDER. THIS IS THE
BEGINNING, NOT THE END. WE HAVE
MANY, MANY SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS
PLANNED BETWEEN NOW AND MID MAY
AT THAT POINT, OBVIOUSLY, THIS
IS NOT THE LAST TIME THE PUBLIC
WILL HAVE TO COMMENT ON THE
BUDGET. THIS IS MERELY THE FIRST
TIME OBVIOUSLY, THEY WILL HAVE
NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN
EACH OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
HEARINGS IN EACH OF THE ITEMS
THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AT THE
BUDGET LEVEL. SO UH, WITH THAT,
LET ME TURN IT OVER. AND START
WITH THIS, ERIKA LEE. UH DO OUR
VICE CHAIR IS ON HIS WAY. AND
OBVIOUSLY, WHEN HE COMES, HE IS
ALLOWED TO MAKE ANY KIND OF
OPENING COMMENTS. I DO WANT TO
SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS FROM THE DAY S BEFORE
WE GO TO MISLEAD. OKAY SEE, NO
COMMENTS WERE GOING TO MISLEAD.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHARTING MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE ERIKA LEE WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, AND I'M
HERE TO PRESENT THE GOVERNOR'S
2023 BUDGET. UM CALIFORNIA
ENTERS 2023 A VERY DIFFERENT
FISCAL POSITION WHEN COMPARED TO
THE LAST TWO BUDGETS AS A CHAIR
WAS SAYING. AT THE TOP OF THE
HEARING. THE LAST TWO BUDGETS
INCLUDED SIGNIFICANT GENERAL
FUND SURPLUSES EACH ABOUT $100
BILLION THIS YEAR. THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, WHICH
INCLUDES 297 BILLION IN
EXPENDITURES, FORECAST REVENUE
REVENUE DECLINES OF 29.5 BILLION
OVER THREE YEAR BUDGET WINDOW
AND THAT'S THE PRIOR YEAR OF THE
CURRENT YEAR. AND THE BUDGET
YEAR. AFTER TRANSFERS AND
ADJUSTMENTS. WE ARE FACING A
$22.5 BILLION BUDGET DEFICIT.
NOW CALIFORNIA IS USED TO THE
UPS AND DOWNS CAUSED BY OUR VERY
PROGRESSIVE TAX STRUCTURE WITH A
RELIANCE ON PERSONAL INCOME
TAXES. VERY HIGH INCOME EARNERS
, UM, AS WELL AS CAPITAL GAINS
REVENUES, NOT SURPRISINGLY, MOST
OF THE DOWNWARD PROVISIONS WE
ARE FORECASTING IN THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET WHEN COMPARED
TO THE BUDGET ACT IS DUE TO A
$25 BILLION. I APOLOGIZE FOR
ONCE I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU
FOR ONE SECOND BECAUSE AH, I'M
GONNA ASK OUR SECRETARY TO TAKE
ROLL SO WE CAN ESTABLISH QUORUM
AND THEN WE CAN DISPENSE WITH
ONE ITEM AND THEN WE'LL GO ON
WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. SORRY
ABOUT THAT. MADAM SECRETARY.
COULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE?
TING. BEN FONG. COLONIES.
ALVAREZ. ARAMBULA. BENNETT. WANT
TO HEAR. KOREA. CERVANTES.
CONNELLY. DOLLY! THE SALLY HERE.
MIKE FONG. FRIEDMAN. GARCIA.
HEART. JACKSON. JOAN SAWYER.
BLACKIE HERE. LEE. MCCARTY.
MURATSUCHI JIM PATTERSON. JOE
PATTERSON. RAMOS. REYES.
THREE OF US RUBIO. SANCHEZ.
WICKS. WOULD. CORN IS PRESENT.
THANK YOU, MADAM SECRETARY SO
GIVEN THAT THE ONLY THE ONLY
VOTE FOR TODAY IS TO DISPENSE
WITH WITH RICHARDS THE ADOPTION
OF OUR RULES THE RULES HAVE
BEEN, UH THE RULES ARE ALL IN
YOUR PACKETS THEY'VE ALSO THERE
ARE ALSO IDENTICAL TO THE RULES
THAT WERE UNANIMOUSLY PASSED
LAST SESSION. CAN I GET A MOTION
TO ADOPT THE RULES? SECOND I GOT
EMOTIONAL SECOND SECRETARY CAN
WE TAKE THE WHOLE PLACE TO ADOPT
THE RULES? CHING. VINCE VAUGHN.
COLONIES. ALVAREZ. ARAMBULA.
BENNETT. BONTA. CARILLO.
CERVANTES. CONNELLY. SALLY
SALLY. MIKE FONG. FRIEDMAN.
GARCIA. HEART JACKSON. JOAN
SAWYER. LACKEY. AYE. LEAVE.
MCCARTY. MURATSUCHI JIM
PATTERSON. JOE PATTERSON, RAMOS.
REYES. THREE OF US RUBIO.
SANCHEZ. WICKS. I WOULD.
22 THANK YOU MIS MISLEAD. YOU
MAY CONTINUE. THANK YOU. SORRY
ABOUT THAT. UM SO CALIFORNIA IS
USED TO THE UPS AND DOWNS CAUSED
BY THE PROGRESSIVE NATURE OF OUR
TAX STRUCTURE, WITH ITS RELIANCE
ON THE PERSONAL INCOME TAXES OF
HIGH INCOME EARNERS, AS WELL AS
CAPITAL GAIN CAPITAL GAINS
REVENUES AND NOT SURPRISINGLY,
MOST OF THE DOWNWARD PROVISIONS
THAT WE ARE FORECASTING DOES
COME FROM $25 BILLION REDUCTION
IN THE FORECAST FOR PERSONAL
INCOME TAXES. SO WHILE WE ARE,
WE ARE UP AGAINST DECLINING
REVENUES. IT REALLY IS MORE OF A
MODERATION WHEN COMPARED TO THE
SIGNIFICANT GROWTH WE'VE SEEN
RECENTLY, ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT
SEEM LIKE THAT MAY NOT FEEL LIKE
THAT. DESPITE THE REVENUE
DECREASES. WE ARE ACTUALLY NOW
IN A BETTER POSITION THAN WE
EVER HAVE BEEN TO ADDRESS THIS
SLOWDOWN, UM THROUGH PROPOSITION
TO WHICH THE VOTERS PASSED IN
2014, CALIFORNIA NOW ANNUALLY
SETS ASIDE 1.5% OF GENERAL FUND
REVENUES AND TRANSFERS AS WELL
AS ALL CAPITAL GAIN REVENUES IN
EXCESS OF 8% OF GENERAL FUND TAX
PROCEEDS. ADDITIONALLY OVER THE
LAST TWO BUDGETS WE HAVE BUILT
IN BUDGET RESILIENCE MEASURES.
UM AS MENTIONED BY MR TING, WE
BUILD STRONG RESERVES. WE MADE
SUPPLEMENTAL DEPOSITS TO THE
RAINY DAY FUND AS WELL AS A
SAFETY NET RESERVE FUND. WE
INCLUDED INFLATIONARY
ADJUSTMENTS TO DEAL WITH FUTURE
PRICE INCREASES. WE PAID CASH TO
REDUCE LONG TERM BOND LIABILITY.
AND AGAIN, VERY IMPORTANTLY, UM
, MUCH OF THE ONE TIME
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THAT WE SAW
IN OUR SURPLUS WE USED ON ONE
TIME PROGRAMMING RATHER THAN ON
ONGOING COMMITMENTS. UM AND ALL
OF THESE MEASURES ARE IMPORTANT
BECAUSE THEY DO HELP TO MITIGATE
THE NEED FOR MAJOR CUTS,
PARTICULARLY TO OUR SAFETY NET
PROGRAMS, WHICH WE WERE WHICH
WERE DEEPLY CUT DURING THE GREAT
RECESSION, AND THEY ALSO HELP TO
PROTECT THE PRIORITIES THAT
WE'VE INVESTED IN OVER THE LAST
TWO BUDGETS. SO SOLVING FOR THE
BUDGET PROBLEM. THE GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET FALLS FOR THE $22.5
BILLION BUDGET PROBLEM THROUGH A
BALANCED MIX OF APPROACHES AND
I'LL START WITH THE FIRST BUCKET
IS FUNDING DELAYS ABOUT 7.4
BILLION OF FUNDING DELAYS ARE IN
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. AND WHAT
THIS DOES IS IT DOES NOT CUT OR
REDUCE THE TOTAL AMOUNT PER
PROGRAM. IT DOES SPREAD IT OUT
ACROSS THE MULTI YEAR AND SO IN
SOME CASES, PROGRAMS WILL BEGIN
LATER THAN THEY WERE ORIGINALLY
INTENDED TO. OR MAY TAKE LONGER
TO IMPLEMENT UM ANOTHER BUCKET
IS REDUCTIONS OR PULLBACKS,
WHICH IS ABOUT 5.7 BILLION AND
AGAIN, JUST REFERENCING THE
BUDGET RESILIENCE THAT WE BUILT
IN THE LAST TWO BUDGETS WHERE WE
DID SPEND THE SURPLUS ON ONE
TIME EXPENDITURES. WE ARE
PULLING BACK 35.7 BILLION, THE
LARGEST OF THAT BEING THREE
BILLION IN OUR INFLATIONARY
ADJUSTMENT. SET ASIDE. THAT WAS
PLANNED FOR THE BUDGET YEAR. A
SECOND ONE IS A 750 MILLION
UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND PAYMENT
THAT WAS ALSO A STUDENT. ALSO
SUPPOSED TO GO OUT IN 23 24. UM
THE THIRD BUCKET IS FUN SHIFTS
ABOUT 4.3 BILLION. UM SOME
EXAMPLES OF THE FUND SHIPS ARE
THE CSU CAPITAL OUTLAY PROJECTS
THAT WE ARE MOVING FROM CASH TO
CSU ISSUED DEBT AND SO THAT THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET INCLUDES 27
MILLION ON GOING TO PAY THAT
DEBT VERSUS PAYING CASH FOR
THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS. WE ARE
ALSO REVERTING CERTAIN BONDS TO
CASH PROJECTS FROM THE 2022
BUDGET ACT BACK TO BONDS. UM AND
THEN WE ARE SHIFTING CERTAIN
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
COMMITMENTS FROM THE GENERAL
FUND TO THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND. THE FOURTH
BUCKET IS OUR TRIGGER REDUCTIONS
, WHICH TOTALS ABOUT 3.9 BILLION
. UM, THE BUDGET REDUCES FUNDING
FOR CERTAIN ITEMS IN THE 2021
THROUGH THE 23 24 FISCAL YEARS
AND PLACES THEM IN THIS TRIGGER,
AND THE TRIGGER WOULD BE
RESTORED IN ONE YEAR. THE
DETERMINATION WOULD TAKE PLACE
IN A YEAR. THE NEXT GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET IF REVENUE SHOULD COME IN
TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE BASIC
OF OUR BASIC PROGRAMMING, AS
WELL AS TO FUND THESE PROPOSALS
, THEN THE TRIGGER WOULD BE
TURNED OFF. UM THE, UM WHAT
MAKES UP THE 3.9 BILLION IS
LARGELY CLIMATE AND
TRANSPORTATION. WE HAVE 3.1
BILLION IN THAT BUCKET HOUSING
IS ANOTHER 600 MILLION PARKS
ABOUT 100 MILLION AND WORKFORCE
TRAINING ABOUT 50 MILLION. OUR
FIFTH AND FINAL BUCKET IS
LIMITED BORROWING AND REVENUE
GENERATION. THE MAJORITY OF THE
FUNDS IN THIS CATEGORY ARE
DERIVED FROM LOANS FROM SPECIAL
FUNDS TO THE GENERAL FUND, AND,
UM, THE PROPOSAL TO RENEW THE
MANAGED CARE ORGANIZATION TAX,
ALSO KNOWN AS THE ATTACKS. WHILE
WE HAVE USED MANY OF THE BUDGET
RESILIENCE MEASURES THAT I JUST
MENTIONED TO REDUCE THE OVERALL
NEED FOR REDUCTIONS IN THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. UM WE ARE
ACTUALLY NOT PROPOSING
WITHDRAWAL FROM THE RESERVES AT
THIS TIME, AND THIS IS IMPORTANT
BECAUSE IT DOES GIVE US MORE
FLEXIBILITY IN THE SPRING SHOULD
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS CONTINUE TO
WORSEN? UM AND AS MENTIONED
EARLIER. WE HAVE TOTAL RESERVES
OF $35.6 BILLION IN THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. 22.4 IS IN
OUR BUDGET STABILIZATION ACCOUNT
, AND WE HAVE 8.5 BILLION IN THE
PUBLIC SCHOOL STABILIZATION
ACCOUNT. UM 900 MILLION IN THE
SAFETY NET RESERVE AND 3.8
BILLION IN WHAT WE CALL THE
STATES OPERATING RESERVE OR OR
OR CHECKING ACCOUNT. SO WE HAVE
NOT TOUCHED ANY OF THE 35.6
BILLION IN THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
AGAIN, GIVING US FLEXIBILITY TO
MOVE FORWARD IN THE SPRING. UM
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET ALSO DOES
NOT FORECAST A RECESSION.
HOWEVER WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT
THERE ARE RISKS ON THE HORIZON,
NAMELY HIGHER INFLATION AND
FURTHER TIGHTENING OF MONETARY
POLICY. UM OR FURTHER RATE
INCREASES BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE
. SHOULD THINGS GET WORSE. UM,
WE DO. ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE COULD
SLIP INTO A MILD RECESSION,
WHICH COULD LEAD TO ANYWHERE
BETWEEN 20 TO $40 BILLION.
GENERAL FUND REDUCTION THAT'S ON
TOP OF THIS 22.5 BILLION, UM OR
IF THERE IS A MORE SEVERE
MODERATE TO SEVERE RECESSION, WE
COULD BE LOOKING AT SOMETHING
OVER 60 BILLION IN REDUCED
GENERAL FUND REVENUES. UM AGAIN,
NOT DRAWING FROM THE RESERVES
NOW HELPS US MAKE DECISIONS
GOING FORWARD AND HELPS TO
MITIGATE CUTS TO, UM IMPORTANT
FOR PROGRAMS. SO WHAT ARE WE
PROTECTING THIS BUDGET? UM THERE
WERE REVENUE DECLINES ONLY
MODERATELY REDUCED THE
PROPOSITION 98 GUARANTEE, SO WE
ARE SAFEGUARDING OUR PUBLIC
EDUCATION SYSTEM. PROPOSITION 98
FUNDING IS REMAINS AT A CLOSE TO
$109 BILLION AND JUST IN TERMS
OF PER PUPIL SPENDING THAT 17
OVER 17,500 GENERAL FUND PER
PUPIL SPENDING IF YOU THROW IN
ALL FUNDS THAT'S OVER 23,700.
HER PUPIL SPENDING. UM AND WHAT
ARE SOME OF THE OTHER PROGRAMS
THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO
PROTECT? WE HAVE UNIVERSAL
TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN FOR
ALL FOUR YEAR OLDS, UNIVERSAL
SCHOOL MEALS. UM, THE STATUTORY
COLA TWO SCHOOLS OF 8.13. UM AN
EQUITY MULTIPLIER TO SUPPORT OUR
HIGHEST NEEDS SCHOOLS AND OUR
STUDENTS. UM CONTINUED
INVESTMENTS FOR ARTS AND
CULTURAL ENRICHMENT. UM, ALONG
WITH AN ADDITIONAL 940 MILLION
THROUGH PROPOSITION 28. IN
HIGHER EDUCATION. WE ARE
MAINTAINING THE HIGHER EDUCATION
COMPACTS WITH THE CSU AND UC
SYSTEMS AS WELL AS THE ROAD MAP
WITH THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES. WE
FURTHER SUPPORT INCREASED
RESIDENT UNDERGRADUATE
ENROLLMENT AT THREE U. C S, UM
AND WE SUPPORT FINANCIAL AID
PROGRAMS TO CONTINUE TO REDUCE
THE OVERALL COST OF ATTENDANCE
OF HIGHER EDUCATION. IN HEALTH
AND HUMAN SERVICES. THE BUDGET
IS FULL STEAM AHEAD ON HEALTH
CARE ACCESS TO ALL ELIGIBLE
CALIFORNIANS, NO MATTER THEIR
IMMIGRATION STATUS, AND WE
CONTINUE TO SUPPORT CAL AIM,
WHICH WILL INCLUDE OVER $10
BILLION WHEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED.
UM SUPPORT WE CONTINUE TO
SUPPORT THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CONTINUUM WITH OVER EIGHT
BILLION AND COMMITMENTS AS WELL
AS MAINTAINING OUR PUBLIC HEALTH
INFRASTRUCTURE. UM SUPPORTING
GRANT INCREASES TO R S. C S SP
PROGRAMS AS WELL AS 22.9%
INCREASE TO OUR COW WORKS
GRANTS. PUBLIC SAFETY THEY GOT
THE GENERAL FUND CONTINUES TO
PROVIDE SUPPORTS FOR CREATING
SAFER COMMUNITIES BY SUPPORTING
POSITIVE POLICING STRATEGIES,
REDUCING ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
, GUN VIOLENCE, ILLEGAL DRUGS
AND OTHER CRIMES. AND HOUSING
AND HOMELESSNESS. WE MAINTAIN
INVESTMENTS IN OUR HOMELESSNESS
SUPPORTS WHICH WE WILL WE
TRAILER BILL IS OUT TO CONNECT
THAT TO LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY
MEASURES. LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY
PLANS. WE CONTINUE TO PROVIDE
FUNDING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
TO SUPPORT LOCAL ENTITIES AS
THEY BUILD THEIR FAIR SHARE OF
HOUSING, INCLUDING AFFORDABLE
UNITS AS WE WORK TOWARDS
BUILDING THE 2.5 MILLION UNITS
THAT CALIFORNIA NEEDS. ON
CLIMATE. UM. THE BUDGET
CONTINUES IMPORTANTLY TO
INCLUDE, UM $48 BILLION OF THE
54 BILLION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN
THE PAST TWO BUDGETS. THAT'S 89%
THAT IS BEING PROTECTED OF THOSE
INVESTMENTS. UM AND WE CONTINUE
TO PRIOR PRIORITIZE EQUITY AND
INVESTMENTS IN PRIORITY
POPULATIONS, GENERALLY THOSE
WHICH FACES DISPROPORTIONATE
HARM FROM POLLUTION AND THE
CLIMATE CRISIS. SO IN CONCLUSION
, DESPITE A SIGNIFICANT TURN IN
REVENUES, THIS BUDGET IS ABLE TO
PROTECT AND SUSTAIN ALL THE
PROGRAMS THAT I MENTIONED AND
MANY MORE. UM AND THIS IS IN NO
SPOTS, NO SMALL PART DUE TO A
LOT OF WISE PLANNING FROM THE
PAST AND BUILDING A STRONG
FISCAL FOUNDATION. UM WE LOOK
FORWARD TO DISCUSSIONS WITH
LEGISLATURE THROUGHOUT THIS
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS THROUGHOUT
THE SPRING. AND I'M HAPPY TO
RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS. UM,
LATER ON FROM THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS LEE,
MR BRADDOCK. OKAY. THANK YOU,
UH, CHARITY EATING MR VICE CHAIR
FONG AND MEMBERS FOR INVITING
OUR OFFICE TO PARTICIPATE IN
TODAY'S HEARING. I THINK YOU
HAVE A HANDOUT THAT I WOULD LIKE
TO WALK THROUGH IF POSSIBLE, AND
THE HANDOUT IS AVAILABLE ON OUR
WEBSITE. UH AND SO I THINK A LOT
OF WHAT I WILL COVER IN MY
REMARKS WILL SHOW THAT THERE IS
A FAIR AMOUNT OF OVERLAP.
ACTUALLY WE SEE SOME OF THE
FISCAL SITUATION IN THE STATE'S
BUDGET PICTURE. FROM AN
ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT
SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, SIMILARLY TO
HOW MISLEAD JUST DESCRIBED IT
FROM FINANCE. UM BUT WE DO HAVE
SOME DIFFERENCES IN HOW WE
CHARACTERIZE SOME OF IT AND WE
WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS AS WE GO
FORWARD IN THE BUDGET PROCESS ON
THE WAYS IN WHICH THE
LEGISLATURE COULD MAKE ITS OWN
CHOICES AROUND THE SOLUTIONS.
THAT UM, THAT MY COLLEAGUE
TALKED ABOUT IN THE PROPOSAL. SO
ON THE FIRST PAGE, MOVING TO
PAGE ONE UM, BASICALLY IF I
COULD SPEND A MOMENT ON JUST THE
PROBLEM DEFINITION, AS MY
COLLEAGUE SAID THE GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET DOCUMENTS REFER TO A
$22.5 BILLION BUDGET PROBLEM, WE
WOULD SAY THAT THE SOLUTIONS IN
THE PROPOSAL REALLY ADD UP TO
ABOUT 18 BILLION, SO THERE'S A
LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE
THERE. THE DIFFERENCE IS MAINLY
IN TWO AREAS. ONE IT WAS
DESCRIBED THAT THERE WAS THREE
BILLION PUT INTO THE BUDGET PLAN
IN 2022 FOR TO ACCOMMODATE THE
HIGHER COST OF INFLATION. UH
ALSO RECOGNITION OF ABOUT 1.5
BILLION OF COSTS TO CASH FUND
CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECTS INSTEAD
OF USING LEAST REVENUE BONDS.
AND, UH, WHILE THOSE WERE, UH
YOU KNOW, PUT INTO THE KIND OF
SCORED IN THE MULTI YEAR
OUTLOOK. THEY WEREN'T ASSOCIATED
WITH ANY BUDGET LEGISLATION AND
EVER IT'S THE LEGISLATURE DID
NOT UM APPROPRIATE OR MAKE IT
OFFICIAL DECISION ON THOSE, AND
SO WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE THOSE AS
PART OF THE SPENDING BASE GOING
INTO THIS, AND WE WOULD NOT
INCLUDE THOSE IN THE BASELINE.
SO WHEN YOU TAKE THOSE OUT, WE
SEE IT MORE LIKE AN $18 BILLION
PROBLEM THAT SAID THE GOVERNOR
ALSO HAS ABOUT TWO BILLION OF
NEW DISCRETIONARY SPENDING IN
THE PROPOSAL AND ANY NEW
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING THAT IS
PUT FORWARD. OF COURSE WHEN
YOU'RE FACING A BUDGET PROBLEM.
REQUIRES A COMMENSURATE AMOUNT
OF SOLUTIONS TO, UH, TO OFFSET
THE COST OF THOSE NEW SPENDING
PROPOSALS. MOVING TO PAGE TO THE
WAY WE VIEW THE PROPOSED
SOLUTIONS. UM BASICALLY, WE
SHARE THE VIEW, AS WAS DESCRIBED
THAT A LOT OF THE FOCUS HERE IS
ON, UM, MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO
SPENDING THE SPENDING PLAN ON
THE STATE. IN FACT, THREE
QUARTERS OF THE SOLUTIONS THAT
THE GOVERNOR IS PUTTING FORWARD
ARE SPENDING SITE ADJUSTMENTS.
AND THE OTHER 25% REALLY ARE IN
THE COST SHIFT AREA, AS WAS
DESCRIBED OF THE IS SO OF THE
THREE QUARTERS, SPENDING SIDE
SOLUTIONS THAT COMES TO ABOUT
13.6 BILLION OF THAT 7.1 BILLION
OR IN VARIOUS FORMS OF DELAYED
SPENDING. SO THE WAY WE THINK OF
THAT IT'S WHEN YOU MOVE SPENDING
OUTSIDE OF THE BUDGET WINDOW,
BUT IT STILL WOULD OCCUR WITHIN
THE FORECAST PERIOD, WHICH GOES
THROUGH 2026 27. AND IT IS, YOU
KNOW, THE MAIN AREAS WHERE THIS
IS HAPPENING IS IN HIGHER
EDUCATION, HEALTHCARE AND
BROADBAND. UH MOVING TO PAGE
THREE LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE
BREAKDOWN OF THE SOLUTIONS. UH
WE SUM UP THAT THERE'S ABOUT 3.8
BILLION OF, UM, SPENDING SIDE
REDUCTIONS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO A
TRIGGER RESTORATION AS AS WAS
DESCRIBED. SO IF WE GET ABOUT
HALFWAY THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR,
AND IT SEEMS THAT THE DEPARTMENT
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
DETERMINES THAT THERE ARE
SUFFICIENT RESOURCES THIS
SPENDING WOULD BE TRIGGERED BACK
ON. THE AREAS WHERE THIS IS
OCCURRING IN THE PROPOSAL OR IS
IN NATURAL RESOURCES,
TRANSPORTATION AND THEN HOUSING
AND HOMELESSNESS PROPOSALS.
THERE IS 2.6 BILLION AND JUST
OUTRIGHT REDUCTIONS. IT WAS
NOTED, BUT THE LARGEST OF THESE
IS A $750 MILLION WITHDRAWAL OF
THE PREVIOUSLY PLANNED OPTIONAL
PAYMENT TOWARDS THE STATES'
PRINCIPAL DEBT ON ITS UI
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE LOAN FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND THEN
THERE ARE 4.3 BILLION IN WHAT WE
CALL CASH IFS. UH AND THESE
COSTS SHIFTS ARE PARTICULARLY IN
THE AREAS OF 1.5 BILLION,
SHIFTING THE COST OF CERTAIN
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
INITIATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN
UNDERTAKEN BUT SHIFTING THE COST
OF THOSE FROM THE GENERAL FUND
TO THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND. 850 MILLION IN LOANS TO
THE GENERAL FUND FROM VARIOUS
SPECIAL FUNDS. 500 MILLION IN
TRANSPORTATION COSTS WOULD BE
FUNDED OUT OF THE TRANSPORTATION
FUND, WHEREAS THEY HAD BEEN
PLANNED TO BE PAID FOR OUT OF
THE GENERAL FUND. AND THEN A 300
OR SO $330 MILLION TEMPORARY USE
OF MONEY HELD IN THE HEALTH CARE
AFFORDABILITY FUND. UM THAT
WOULD BE REPLACED IN A COUPLE OF
YEARS, SO ALL OF THESE SHIFTS
WOULD BENEFIT THE GENERAL FUND
IN THE BUDGET YEAR. AND THEN
THERE IS A UH, SMALLER REVENUE
SIDES PROPOSED SOLUTION WHICH IS
TO, UH, RECOMMENDATION OR
PROPOSAL TO FOR THE STATE TO
SEEK THE REAUTHORIZATION OF
MANAGED CARE ORGANIZATION TAX.
MM. CEO TAX IS SOMETHING WE HAVE
HAD IT EXPIRED AT THE END OF
2022 IN IT WOULD REQUIRE FEDERAL
APPROVAL AND IT WOULD GENERATE
AROUND 300 MILLION IN, UH
GENERAL FUND BENEFIT IN THE
BUDGET YEAR, ALTHOUGH THAT
AMOUNT WOULD GROW AS IT'S FULLY
IMPLEMENTED, IT WOULD GROW TO
BENEFITING THE GENERAL FUND BY
ABOUT TWO BILLION BY 2024 25.
MOVING TO THE NEXT PAGE. HERE IS
REALLY A IMAGE SHOWING THE
GENERAL FUND CONDITION OVER THE
BUDGET WINDOW AND WHAT I WOULD
NOTE HERE IS, AS WAS SAID, YOU
KNOW, THE GOVERNOR IS NOT
DECLARING A BUDGET EMERGENCY AND
DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY WITHDRAWALS
AT THIS TIME FROM THE STATES
RESERVES FROM THE STATE'S BUDGET
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT OR RAINY
DAY FUND. YOU CAN SEE ON THE
SLIDE THAT AT THE END OF THE
BUDGET YEAR, THE STATE UNDER ITS
ASSUMPTIONS FROM THE UNDER THE
ADMINISTRATIONS, ASSUMPTIONS
WOULD END WITH 3.8 BILLION IN
THE SPECIAL FUND FOR ECONOMIC
UNCERTAINTY. THE DISCRETIONARY
OPERATING BALANCE THAT WAS
MENTIONED IT'S NOT SHOWN HERE,
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THAT
AH, AFTER THIS BUDGET WINDOW,
THE THREE SUBSEQUENT YEARS OF
THE FORECAST PERIOD, THE
ADMINISTRATION IS SHOWING AND
ITS MULTI YEAR OUTLOOK ANNUAL
DEFICITS OF 18,000,000,004
BILLION IN THE THREE SUBSEQUENT
YEARS. AND SO, UM, THAT'S JUST,
UH SOMETHING ELSE. TO THAT I CAN
MENTION TALK ABOUT IN A MOMENT
FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE AUDIENCE.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE THE POWER
POINTS UP ON THE SCREEN IF
PEOPLE TRYING TO FOLLOW ALONG
WITH AND THE SERGEANTS ARE
SHAKING THEIR HEAD AGAIN. NOT
POSSIBLE. SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT
FOR ANY FOR ANYBODY THINK AGAIN
. PUBLICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE
ONLINE AND FOR ANYBODY WATCHING
AT HOME, THEY CAN PULL UP ON
THEIR WEBSITE. THANK YOU, UH, ON
PAGE FIVE. I JUST LIKE TO SPEND
A MOMENT HERE ON THE PROPOSITION
98 BUDGET, WHICH WE THINK OF AS
THE BUDGET WITHIN THE BUDGET. UH
SO, UH, COMPARED WITH THE
ENACTED BUDGET, IT WAS ALREADY
MENTIONED, BUT THE BIG PRIMARILY
BECAUSE REVENUES ARE COMING IN
LOWER THAN THE BUDGET ACT
ASSUMED THE MINIMUM GUARANTEE
UNDER PROPOSITION 98 WILL
DECLINE BY ABOUT 3.4 BILLION IN
THE CURRENT YEAR. RELATIVE TO
THE BUDGET ACT IN 20, THE BUDGET
ACT FROM JUNE OF 2022, THEN
ANOTHER 1.5 BILLION COMPARED TO
THAT SAME TIME FRAME IN THE
UPCOMING BUDGET YEAR, SO AS A
RESULT, WE WOULD GO FROM 110.4
BILLION, WHICH IS THE BUDGET THE
MINIMUM GUARANTEE IN THE ENACTED
BUDGET DOWN TO 100 AND SEVEN
BILLION IN THE CURRENT YEAR ON A
REVISED BASIS. AND THEN BACK UP
TO ONE. OH 8.8 BILLION IN THE IN
THE BUDGET YEAR. BUT EVEN WITH
THIS, UM LOWER FUNDING LEVEL AS
WE SEE IT, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY
SIX BILLION AVAILABLE FOR NEW
COMMITMENTS THAT CAN BE MADE AND
THIS IS PRIMARILY BECAUSE THERE
ARE LOWER THAN EXPECTED COSTS IN
CERTAIN PROGRAMS AND THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA. AND
ALSO BECAUSE THERE WAS A FAIR
AMOUNT OF ONE TIME SPENDING IN
RECENT BUDGETS. THAT IS, YOU
KNOW, AS ONE TIME SPENDING COMES
TO AN END, AND SO IT FREES UP
ONGOING CAPACITY, SO EVEN WITH
THOSE DECLINES WE, YOU KNOW THIS
HELPS PROVIDE SPENDING CAPACITY
WITHIN PROPOSITION 98. IN DOLLAR
TERMS, THE MOST SIGNIFICANT OF
THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSALS WITHIN
THE PROP 98 BUDGET IS AH TO FUND
A STATUTORY COLA OF 8.13% WHICH
IS THE HIGHEST STATUTORY COLA
SINCE THE EARLY 19 EIGHTIES. UM
AND WOULD COME AT A COST OF
ABOUT 5.5 BILLION. HE ALSO HAS A
920 MILLION OF PROPOSED
EXPENDITURES TO EXTEND CERTAIN
ONGOING PROGRAMS. BECAUSE OF
THESE PROPOSALS, THE AS WE LOOK
AT THE PROPOSAL, THE NEW
SPENDING DOES RELY ON THE USE OF
ABOUT 1.4 BILLION AND ONE TIME
SPENDING TO HELP COVER THESE
ADDITIONAL ONGOING COSTS. UH,
IT'S AFFORDABLE IN THE BUDGET IN
THE BUDGET YEAR, BUT IT DOES
LEAD TO SOME SOME DEFICITS IN
THE FUTURE YEARS OR, YOU KNOW,
UNDER THE ASSUMPTIONS THERE
WOULD BE A DEFICIT IN THE FUTURE
UNLESS THERE ARE HIGHER THAN
EXPECTED RESOURCES AVAILABLE
UNDER PROP 98 IN IN FUTURE
YEARS. THEN JUST GOING ON TO
HERE. BRING IT TO CONCLUSION ON
PAGE FIVE AND 66 AND SEVEN
RATHER ON PAGE SIX. REALLY IS
OUR L A. OH, COMMENTS ON THIS
OVERALL PACKAGE. AND THE FIRST
THING TO SAY REALLY IS THAT WE
THINK IT IS PRUDENT THAT THE
GOVERNOR HAS EMPHASIZED VERY
MUCH MAKE IDENTIFYING SOLUTIONS
ON. TWO ON THE SPENDING SIDE AND
MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO, UM,
SPENDING THAT WAS PLANNED OR
ANTICIPATED, AND NOT AS A FIRST.
IS A FIRST RESPONSE GOING TO,
UH, YOU KNOW, TAP INTO RESERVES.
WE DO NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT THE
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL NEW
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING AS I
MENTIONED BEFORE ADDS TO THE
NEED TO FIND OR IDENTIFY
ADDITIONAL SOLUTIONS. AH ALSO,
WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE
LEGISLATURE CONSIDER, UH,
IDENTIFYING SOLUTIONS TO A
SOMEWHAT LARGER PROBLEM THAN
WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING.
DOING SO WOULD BE CONSISTENT
WITH OUR VIEW OF THE ECONOMIC
AND REVENUE PICTURE. THE
REVENUES IN OUR ACCORDING TO OUR
ESTIMATES WOULD BE SOMEWHAT
LOWER THAN WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS
SHOWING IN HIS PROPOSAL. AND SO
THAT WOULD TRANSLATE TO A LARGER
BUDGET PROBLEM. AND YOU KNOW, IN
OUR VIEW THAT WE THINK YOU
SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR THAT.
IT'S MORE LIKELY THAT THAT WILL
HAPPEN. THEN YOU WILL GET AN
UPSIDE TO THE REVENUES. AND IN
THAT VEIN, WE THINK YOU SHOULD
CAN DREAM THIS TIME CONTINUED
IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS TO THE
RESULTING PROBLEM THAT OUR
ADJUSTMENTS TO SPENDING OR OTHER
OTHER CHANGES THAT YOU CAN MAKE
BEFORE GOING INTO THE RESERVES.
THE REASON FOR THAT IS PARTLY
JUST PRACTICAL. YOU HAVE MORE
TIME AT THIS PART OF THE YEAR.
YOU HAVE HEARINGS. YOU HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DELIBERATE AND
NEGOTIATE AND IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS
NOW. AH AND YOU KNOW, HOLDING
ONTO THE RESERVES AS A FLEXIBLE
OPTION FOR LATER IN THE PROCESS
SEEMS PRUDENT TO US. AND THEN
WHEN IT COMES TO THE MULTIYEAR
PICTURE, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF
OBSERVATIONS. THE FIRST IS THAT
WHEN YOU LOOK ACROSS THE FULL
SIX YEAR FISCAL PICTURE. THE
BUDGET WINDOW, THE THREE YEAR
BUDGET WINDOW, PLUS THE THREE
YEAR FUTURE YEARS, OUR OFFICE
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
HAVE VERY SIMILAR REVENUES IN
TOTAL. IN FACT, WE'RE REALLY
ONLY OFF BY $7 BILLION ACROSS
THOSE SIX YEARS, WHICH AMOUNTS
TO SOMETHING LIKE 0.57%
DIFFERENCE, SO IT'S VERY
SIMILAR. THE DIFFERENCE REALLY
IS IN THE TIMING. UH WE SEE
LOWER REVENUES HAPPENING NOW IN
THE BUDGET PERIOD. UH AND THAT
AND THEN, IN THE SUBSEQUENT
YEARS, WE EXPECT THE REVENUES
WILL BEGIN TO RECOVER BACK TO
HIM OR HISTORICAL TRENDS,
WHEREAS THE ADMINISTRATION SEES
SOMEWHAT HIGHER REVENUES RIGHT
NOW AND THEN KIND OF ANTICIPATES
IN MORE STAGNANT PERFORMANCE IN
THE FUTURE YEARS ON REVENUES, SO
THAT'S HOW THEY DIFFER. AND AS I
MENTIONED THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION'S MULTIYEAR
OUTLOOK SHOWS THAT YOU THE STATE
WOULD HAVE DEFICITS IN THE
FUTURE YEARS WE REALLY RECOMMEND
FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER
MAKING ADJUSTMENTS NOW TO TRY
AND ADOPT A BUDGET THAT WOULD
NOT PUT THE STATE ON A PATH TO
HAVE FUTURE YOUR DEFICITS, AS
MISS LEE SAID. THE
ADMINISTRATION IS NOT ASSUMING A
RECESSION. WE ARE NOT ASSUMING A
RECESSION, AND SO, UH, IF THAT'S
THE CASE, WE DON'T THINK IT'S
PRUDENT TO HAVE DEFICITS IN YOUR
MULTI YEAR, UM, OUTLOOK. UH AS
YOU GO THROUGH ON THE FINAL PAGE
AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS ONE THING
WE WOULD JUST LEAVE YOU WITH IS
THAT WE THINK THE GOVERNOR'S
OVERALL APPROACH FROM AN
ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT IS
PRUDENT, AND THERE'S A LOT TO BE
SAID FOR IT, BUT IT REALLY
REFLECTS HIS PRIORITIES AND YOU
HAVE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE,
UM PROPAGATED TO MAKE YOUR OWN
CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO THE
SPECIFIC SOLUTIONS AND IN THAT,
TO THAT END, WE DID PUT TOGETHER
IN OUR DOCUMENT. OUR BUDGET
OVERVIEW DOCUMENT A SET OF
CRITERIA THAT YOU CAN HOPEFULLY
USE TO CONSIDER OTHER
ALTERNATIVES TO SOLVING THIS
BUDGET PROBLEM. THAT MIGHT BE
THAT MIGHT HELP YOU. UH IDENTIFY
SOLUTIONS THAT ALIGN WITH YOUR
PRIORITIES NOT JUST SAY THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSALS ARE
MISALIGNED WITH THEM, BUT I
JUST, YOU KNOW, WANT TO ASSERT
THE LEGISLATURE'S PREROGATIVE IN
THIS SITUATION, SO WITH THAT ALL
STOPPED. THANK YOU, MR PADDOCK.
I THINK IT'S UM CLEAR OBVIOUSLY
, THAT THE GOVERNOR PROPOSAL IS
OUT THERE YOU HAVE YOUR, UH FOUR
CLASS, AND IT'S CLEAR THAT, UH
OR IN UNKNOWN TERRITORY, BUT IF
REVENUES WERE TO CONTINUE TO
DETERIORATE, KAMEI, OBVIOUSLY,
AS YOU SAID, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE
TO LOOK AT MORE BUDGET SOLUTIONS
THIS YEAR, SO WE DON'T PASS THE
PAINT ONTO NEXT YEAR AND
POTENTIALLY HAVE TO TAKE EVEN
LARGER, MORE PAINFUL ACTION. I'M
GONNA ASK MR GRIFFITH TO CALL
ANY ABSENT MEMBERS. TO ADD ON TO
THE MOTION APPROVING THE RULES.
SO AGAIN, WE HAD EMOTION, THE
SECOND TO ADOPT THE RULES. WE'RE
JUST GOING TO CALL ANY ABSENT
MEMBERS. CONNELLY. FRIEDMAN.
GARCIA. BACARDI. PATERSON,
PATERSON. RAMOS. THREE OF US.
WICKS. WOULD. THANK YOU WITH
THAT WE'LL GO TO OUR VICE CHAIR.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UH
APOLOGIZE FOR BEING A LITTLE
LATE. UH, ALSO WELCOME TO OUR
NEW MEMBERS. UM I'LL DO A QUICK
OPENING, AND THEN I WAS DIVING
TO MY QUESTIONS. UM THAT'S THE
LAST WEEK WAS LAST WEEK WAS
GROUND HOG DAY. AND IRONIC
TIMING BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE WE
CONTINUE TO DEAL WITH THE SAME
CHALLENGES AND CRISES TO THE
FRUSTRATION OF CALIFORNIANS,
DESPITE THE BUDGET, GOING
UNSUSTAINABLY SOMETHING I AND
OTHERS ON THE COMMITTEE HAVE
WARNED ABOUT WE HAVE WE HAVE OUR
WORK CUT OUT FOR US THIS YEAR
FROM A NEARLY $100 BILLION
SURPLUS LAST YEAR. TO A
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIT THIS YEAR
THAT COULD GROW WORSE. OUR JOB
ON THIS COMMITTEE DEMANDS
RESTRAINT AND CAREFUL
PRIVATIZATION OF TAXPAYER
DOLLARS. THE FUTURE IS UNCERTAIN
. THE STATE MAY FACE MULTI YEAR
DEFICITS ON THE HORIZON AS THE L
A HAS WARNED SIMPLY DELAYING AND
SHIFTING FUNDING JUST ISN'T
GOING TO CUT IT. THIS BUDGET
CONTINUES TO OVERSPEND WITH
LITTLE ACCOUNTABILITY. WE MUST
MAKE THE HARD CHOICES NOW TO
REIN AND SPENDING. A PENNY SAVED
IS A PENNY EARNED, AS THE LONG
SAYING GOES. WE'VE HIT A PERIOD
OF DIMINISHING RETURNS.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING HAS SHOT UP
OVER 150% OVER THE LAST DECADE,
WHILE THE COST OF LIVING PUSHES
RESIDENTS TO MORE AFFORDABLE
STATES. OUR ROADS ARE CRUMBLING
. THE ENERGY GRID CANNOT KEEP UP
WITH THE MANNED AND WATER
BECOMES AN EVEN SCARCER RESOURCE
AS TRILLIONS OF GALLONS FLOW OUT
TO THE OCEAN. THIS BUDGET STILL
FAILS TO PROTECT THE BASIC NEEDS
OF ALL CALIFORNIANS. AND SO
CALIFORNIANS ARE DEMANDING REAL
RESULTS. NOT MORE POLITICAL
HEADLINES. AND SO I LOOK FORWARD
TO THE QUESTIONS I'M ABOUT TO
ASK, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH THE CHAIR ON THIS
UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE. UM LET'S
TALK THE BIG ISSUES FIRST, UH,
THE BUDGET HERE ASSUMES.
WINDFALL PROFITS TAX IF I COULD
ASK, UH, MISS LEE, ARE THERE ANY
DETAILS YOU CAN SHARE ON WHAT AH
, THIS PROPOSAL IS GOING WITH
THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL IS GONNA
LOOK LIKE UM, THANK YOU, MR
FONG. FOR THAT QUESTION. THE
WINDFALL PROFIT TAX IS ON A
DIFFERENT TRAJECTORIES OUTSIDE
OF THE BUDGET, UM, COMMITTEE, SO
THAT'S ON A POLICY ROUTE, SO I
REALLY HAVE NO DETAILS TO SHARE
SO THIS THIS BUDGET DOESN'T
DOESN'T ASSUME ANY REVENUE FROM
ANY WINDFALL PROFITS TAX. THAT'S
CORRECT. OKAY, UM IN TERMS OF
GAS PRICES IN THE GAS TAX. DOES
THIS BUDGET ASSUME AN INCREASE
IN THE STATES GAS TAX IN THE
SUMMER? UM THERE IS NO
ASSUMPTION IN REGARDS TO GUESS
THE GAS TAX. UNDER SB ONE. THERE
IS AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE SUMMER
TIME. SORRY SO CURRENT LAW
REMAINS. THERE'S NO THERE ARE NO
CHANGES TO THAT, UM TO TWO SB
ONE. UNDER THIS BUDGET, THERE IS
AN ASSUMPTION BY THE GOVERNOR
THAT THE GAS TAX WILL GO UP IN
THE SUMMER. THAT IS CORRECT. AND
SO WHILE THE GOVERNOR TALKS
ABOUT GAS PRICES BEING HIGH.
HE'S GONNA LET THE GAS TAX GO UP
IN THE SUMMER THERE. THERE IS NO
PROPOSAL ON GAS TAX. NOW IN LAST
BUDGET, THERE WAS A SUSPENSION
OF THE SALES TAX ON DIESEL FOR
ONE YEAR. THAT WAS SO WHEN DOES
THAT EXPIRE? UM I WILL HAVE TO
DEFER TO WHAT? MY COLLEAGUES ON
THE LINE FOR THE DATE. THIS IS
WHAT I WANT FROM THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE SO THE EXPAND THE
PAUSE ON THE DIESEL SALES TAX.
IS GOING TO EXPIRE IN OCTOBER.
1ST 2023 SO OCTOBER 1ST OCTOBER
2ND OF 2023. HE'S SO GAS DIESEL
PRICES ARE GONNA GO UP 23 CENTS.
IS THAT CORRECT? CURRENTLY THERE
IS NO UH, DIGITAL PROPOSAL THAN
WHAT WE'VE INCLUDED IN THE PAST
BUDGETS OR CURRENT LAW WILL
PERSIST. SO IT ANY SCHEDULED
INCREASE WILL INCREASE? YES. SO
THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO LET THE
DIESEL TAX EXPIRE UNDER THIS
PROPOSAL, BUT THERE IS NO
PROPOSAL BY THE GOVERNOR TO
EXTEND THE SUSPENSION. YES THERE
IS NO PROPOSAL TO EXTEND THAT
EXTENSION MAKE MAKE CLEAR TO
FOLKS. IT IS IRONIC THAT THE
GOVERNOR IS WILLING TO SUSPEND
THE SALES TAX ON DIESEL BUT NOT
SUSPEND HIS THE GAS TAX ON
GASOLINE. IN WHICH, UH,
MOTORISTS USE UM. IN TERMS OF,
UH WATER. UM THIS IS AN ONGOING
DISCUSSION I'VE HAD WITH YOU,
MISS LEE AND YOUR STAFF AND THE
GOVERNOR. UM THERE IS A $500
MILLION IN INFLATION. UM UM $500
FOR INFLATIONARY, UM, EFFECTS
FOR WATER STORAGE PROJECTS IN 25
26. SO SETTING ASIDE UH, THAT.
BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S
GOING TO EXIST IN THE FUTURE.
THERE ISN'T IS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL MONEY? UM FOR WATER
STORAGE ON TOP OF THE
PROPOSITION, BUT THE WATER BOND
I'LL SPEAK TO ABOUT 202 MILLION
FOR FLOOD INVESTMENTS. THAT'S
FLOOD INVESTMENT. I'M TALKING
ABOUT WATER STORAGE. UM I WILL
DEFER TO A COLLEAGUE ON THE
LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS
CRYSTAL MR DEWITT DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. SO AS YOU MENTIONED,
THERE'S $500 MILLION THAT'S BEEN
MAINTAINED IN THE BUDGET FOR
WATER STORAGE PROJECTS IN 25 26
. THIS BUILDS ON THE FUNDING
THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
PREVIOUSLY THE $2.7 BILLION IN
PROPOSITION ONE FUNDING
AVAILABLE. UM SO, BUT I WOULD
ALSO POINT TO THE ADMINISTRATION
CONTINUES TO EMPHASIZE KIND OF
THE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO
WATER RESILIENCY. SO WHILE THAT
FUNDING IS SPECIFICALLY FOR
WATER STORAGE PROJECTS, IT'S
ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT
THERE'S SIGNIFICANT FUNDING
INVESTMENTS ALSO IN GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE CAPACITIES WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT UNDERGROUND WATER
STORAGE, AND THERE'S ALSO
INVESTMENTS IN STORM WATER
CAPTURE AND UM, PERMITTING
STREAMLINING AS WELL AS
MODERNIZING WATER. WATER CAN VAN
SO AGAIN, THIS IS ALL KIND OF
PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH
. UM THERE'S REALLY THERE'S
REALLY FEELS LIKE BONG DAY. UH,
HOW MUCH MONEY ON TOP OF THE
WATER BOND IS IN THIS YEAR'S
BUDGET FOR WATER STORAGE, WATER
STORAGE ABOVE GROUND WATER
STORE. IF YOU'RE TALKING
SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ABOVE GROUND
WATER STORES, THE 500 MILLION IN
25 26 THIS YEAR THIS BUDGET YEAR
THIS BUDGET YEAR. 25 26 THIS
YEAR. THE BUDGET. WE'RE DEBATING
RIGHT NOW. THERE IS $0. THERE
ARE NO MONEY. THERE'S NO MONEY
IN THIS BUDGET FOR ABOVE GROUND
WATER STORAGE. IS THAT CORRECT?
IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS
FISCAL YEAR FOR ABOVE GROUND
STORAGE, THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO
I'M ASKING THE ADMINISTRATION.
IMAGINE IF WE HAD SCIENCE
RESERVOIR THAT WE HAD DONE
SUBSIDENCE WORK ON CURRENT FRANK
CANAL IF WE HAD IMPROVED, BUILT
RAISED, UH, CERTAIN RESERVOIRS
EXPANDED CAPACITY, ADDRESS THE
SUBSIDENCE ISSUES IN A NUMBER OF
CONVENIENCE FACILITIES. IMAGINE
HOW MUCH WATER WE WOULD HAVE
STORED. IF WE HAD DONE THAT. BUT
AT LEAST IN THE SEVEN YEARS OF
THE SIX YEARS NOW, SEVEN YEARS
IN THE LEGISLATURE, WE HAVE NOT
BEEN ABLE TO GET THE GOVERNOR TO
MOVE ON ANY OF THOSE PROJECTS.
AND NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
STREAMLINING. SO YOU INDICATED
THAT IN YOUR ANSWER IS, ARE ANY
OF THE PERMITS GOING TO GET
APPROVED FOR SITES RESERVOIR AND
ANY OF THE PROPER ONE WATER
SOURCE PROJECTS BECAUSE YOU CAME
. YOU SEEM LIKE ALWAYS HIGHLIGHT
THE PROP. ONE WATER SOURCE
PROJECTS. HOW MANY OF THOSE
PROJECTS ARE CONSTRUCTION OR
BEING EVEN CLOSER CONSTRUCTION?
YES SO I WOULD JUST SAY IN TERMS
OF THE PROP 11 FUNDING. IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY. THERE'S A THERE'S A
PROCESS THAT SORT OF LAID OUT
AND PROPOSITION ONE. SO THESE
ARE REALLY LOCALLY DRIVEN
PROJECTS. AND SO THE PACE AT
WHICH THOSE ARE MOVING ARE
REALLY DRIVEN BY THE INDIVIDUAL
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND
CHALLENGES AROUND PLANNING,
DESIGNING PERMITTING FINANCING.
UM, REALLY, AT THE LOCAL LEVEL,
I GET IT, BUT I HATE TO
APOLOGIZE, BUT MY WANT TO MAKE
SURE I MAXIMIZE MY TIME. BUT
EVEN THE GOVERNOR'S WATER PUT
PORTFOLIO PLAN RIGHT. HE'S
CALLING FOR MORE WATER STORAGE.
HE'S CREATED STRIKE TEAMS TO
SORT OF SOMEHOW FAST TRACK THESE
PERMITS. SO THIS WATER BOND THAT
WE'RE DEBATING RIGHT NOW THE
FUNDING THAT'S CURRENTLY
LANGUISHING. IT WAS PASSED IN
2014. AND NONE OF THESE PROJECTS
HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. NONE OF
THEM ARE EVEN CAN CONSTRUCTION
SO IF THERE IS A STRIKE TEAM IN
PLACE BY THE ADMINISTRATION,
WHEN ARE THESE PERMITS GOING TO
GET APPROVED FOR THESE PROJECTS
UNDER PROPER ONE? YOU'VE
OUTLINED STREAMLINING, SO I'M
ASKING YOU. WHERE'S THE
STREAMLINING? YEAH AGAIN. THESE
ARE THESE ARE LOCALLY DRIVEN
PROJECTS, SO THERE'S ONLY SO
MUCH THAT SORT OF WITHIN THE
CONTROL OF THE ADMINISTRATION IN
TERMS OF MOVING THOSE PROJECTS
PROJECTS FOR PERMITS, BUT THE
PERMITS ARE NOT LOCALLY DRIVEN.
THE PERMITS ARE WITHIN YOUR
ADMINISTRATION. THAT'S CORRECT.
SO WHEN THEY COME TO THE
ADMINISTRATION FOR ACTUAL REVIEW
, THAT'S KIND OF THE PURPOSE AND
AS YOU MENTIONED THE WATER
SUPPLY STRATEGY DIRECTED THE
RESOURCES AGENCY TO ESTABLISH
THAT INTERAGENCY STRIKE TEAM
THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO
FACILITATE THE STATE PERMITTING
PROCESS AND SUPPORT COMPLETION
OF THESE OF THESE PROJECTS, BUT
YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT
THOSE LOCALLY LED PROJECTS AGAIN
ARE NOT AT A PLACE WHERE IT'S A
PERMIT BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATION
. UM THAT'S THAT'S WHERE, SORT
OF, UM I THINK THE HANG UP IS
THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHICH
IS REALLY OUTSIDE OF THE
ADMINISTRATION, SORT OF SORT OF
PURVIEW, SO I FIND IT VERY FIGHT
. I FIND IT VERY INTERESTING
THAT YOU'RE BLAMING THE LOCAL
FOLKS. WHEN THE GOVERNOR'S OWN
PLAN CALLS FOR MORE WATER
STORAGE, AND THESE ARE THE
PROJECTS OF THE VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA APPROVED IN 2014, SO
SINCE WE ALL AGREE THAT THESE
PROJECTS ARE NECESSARY, I THINK
WE ALL NEED TO COME TOGETHER TO
FIGURE OUT A HOW WE CAN
STREAMLINE THESE PROJECTS AND BE
HOW WE CAN PUT THE MONEY AND
ADDITIONAL MONEY TO FINISH THESE
PROJECTS. I THINK THAT'S
ACTUALLY PRETTY COMMON SENSE. UM
AND I THINK THAT'S A VERY
FRUSTRATING CONVERSATION THAT
CONTINUE TO HAVE, UM, WITH WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION MOVING ON TO,
UM UH. TO THE U. I LOAN THE
DEBT, THE UI DEBT AND THE AND
WHAT WE CURRENTLY AS A STATE OF
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. UM THIS
BUDGET SEEKS TO CUT FUNDING TO
THAT WAS DEDICATED TO THE
REPAYMENT. IS THAT CORRECT? MISS
LEE? YES ONE BILLION WAS
DEDICATED TO TOWARDS THAT
PAYMENT. 250 MILLION WENT OUT IN
THE CURRENT YEAR. WE'RE
PROPOSING PULLING BACK THE 750
MILLION BUDGET YEAR. SO WHAT IS
THE ADMINISTRATION'S PLAN TO PAY
DOWN THIS DEBT? WELL I THINK WE
CONTINUE TO LOBBY AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL TO SPEAK WITH, UM, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN IN REGARDS
TO FORGIVENESS. UM WE ARE ALSO.
ENGAGING THE LEGISLATURE IN
REGARDS TO THE FULL BUDGET
INCLUSIVE OF THAT PROPOSAL, BUT
IF THERE'S NO ACTION BY THE
ADMINISTRATION, RIGHT, THE COSTS
GET PASSED ON AND BORN BY
BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA. THAT'S
CORRECT. EMPLOYERS WOULD BE
PAYING THIS TAX. SO IS. IS THERE
SOME SENSE OF URGENCY THAT TO
PAY DOWN THE DEBT? UM THERE
THERE IS. WE ALSO ARE TRYING TO
ADDRESS A $22.5 BILLION BUDGET
DEFICIT, AND THIS IS ONE OF MANY
PROPOSALS TO DO SO, UM, THAT IS
GOOD. BUT BUT BUDGETS REFLECT
PRIORITIES. SO WE HAVE A SO YES
, WE HAVE A 20 PLUS BILLION
DOLLAR DEFICIT, BUT WE HAVE A
BUDGET OF $297 BILLION. SO YOU
HAVE ALL OF THAT $297 BILLION
THAT CURRENTLY IS IN THIS
FRAMEWORK. YOU'RE TELLING ME
THAT THERE'S NOT ANY MONEY OR TO
PAY DOWN? THE DEBT WE OWE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. UM AS YOU
MENTIONED EARLIER, WE DO HAVE A
BALANCE IN THE FEDERAL TRUST
FUND. IT IS ABOUT $18.5 BILLION
, UNLESS WE PAY OFF THE FULL
AMOUNT THAT $18.5 MILLION. THE
FOOD TO THE FEDERAL TAX. UM UH,
THE CREDIT WILL CONTINUE TO
DECLINE. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING
THAT WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT AS WE
PUT THIS PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE.
THE L A. I WANT TO ADD ANYTHING.
MR FONG, I WOULD JUST UNDERSTAND
THE INTEREST IN IT. ONE THING I
WOULD JUST NOTICE THAT UM THE
TAX WOULD GO UP UNTIL THE
PRINCIPAL IS PAID OUT, PAID OFF
ENTIRELY. AND SO IN OTHER WORDS,
EVEN IF WE MADE THIS PAYMENT IN
THE BUDGET YEAR, ATTACKS WOULD
STILL REMAIN ELEVATED. IT
PROBABLY WOULD ALLOW US TO PAY
OFF THE FULL 18 BILLION IF
EVERYTHING WENT ACCORDING TO
PLAN A YEAR OR TWO EARLY, SO AT
THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE SOME
RELIEF FOR THE TAXPAYERS, UH,
THAT THAT BEING SAID UM, IT DOES
IMPLY THAT IF THE LEGISLATURE
WANTED TO MAKE THIS OPTIONAL
PAYMENT A COUPLE OF YEARS DOWN
THE ROAD THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T
HAVE A MATERIAL, YOU KNOW,
DIFFERENCE FOR THOSE PAIN, THE
TAX, SO IT'S JUST ANOTHER WAY TO
LOOK AT IT. IT DEPENDS ON HOW
MUCH WE PAY DOWN. THAT'S TRUE.
IF WE PUT EVEN MORE DOWN THEN
THERE WOULD BE MORE SAVINGS ON
THE BACK END ON THE FRONT END.
IT WOULD BE SOONER SOONER. IT'LL
BE LIKE PAYING OFF YOUR MORTGAGE
EARLY, RIGHT? SO IF I COULD ASK
YOU GAVE, MR PENNY WHAT IS THE
CURRENT AMOUNT THE STATE OWES
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE UI
LEVEL. I BELIEVE IT'S IN THE $18
BILLION RANGE. YEAH SO $18
BILLION IN AND THERE WAS A
PAYMENT TO BE MADE, AND NOW
THAT'S BEING PAUSED OR CUT PART
OF THAT PAYMENT. CORRECT. UM IN
TERMS OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
PROPOSAL TO RECAPTURE THE $92
MILLION FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS
COVID 19 RELIEF GRANT PROGRAM.
UM YOU KNOW WHAT WAS THE
JUSTIFICATION THERE WOULD, WHY
WOULD WOULDN'T WE USED THE $92
MILLION AND GIVE RELIEVE WE'RE
RELIEVED TO SMALL BUSINESSES OR
EVEN USE THAT TO PAY DOWN THE UI
DEBT WE HAVE PROPOSED AND PUT
OUT OVER $4 BILLION FOR THAT
PROGRAM, AND SO IN MANY CASES
WHERE WE COULD FIND FUNDS, WE
ATTEMPTED TO SWEEP THOSE AGAIN
TRYING TO LOOK EVERYWHERE FOR
BUDGET SOLUTIONS. BUT THAT WAS
THAT IT ASSUMES, THOUGH THE
BUSINESSES WERE PLAYING FOR THE
GRANT. THAT WASN'T A WIDE MEAN.
RIGHT IT'S BASED ON PEOPLE
APPLYING FOR THE GRANT BASED ON
THE CRITERIA THAT'S THERE.
CORRECT AND WE HAVE HAD OVER
FOUR BILLION AVAILABLE FOR THAT.
OKAY? UM IN TERMS OF IF I CAN
JUMP TO PUBLIC SAFETY, UM TO THE
WHAT ARE THE PROPOSED PRISON
PRISON CLOSURES OR CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES ARE ARE SLATED TO BE
CLOSED. WHAT IS THE TIMELINE? ON
THOSE CLOSURES. YES AND I'LL
TURN TO A COLLEAGUE FOR THE
SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THE DATES.
UM THE, UH. C C. C UM CALIFORNIA
CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION IS
PROJECTED TO CLOSE BY THE END OF
THIS FISCAL YEAR. UM AND THEN,
UM CAL CITY. AH WILL BE UM. I'M
SORRY. UH 3 30 2024. THEN WE'RE
LOOKING AT, UM CVS P BY 3 30
2025. AND HOW OUR COMMUNITIES
CONSULTED BEFORE THESE DECISIONS
ARE MADE, OR THEY CONSULTED
BEFORE THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE.
SO. UM CDCR TAKES INTO ACCOUNT.
A NUMBER OF FACTORS, INCLUDING
THE COMMUNITY, AND THEY'RE
TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO MINIMIZE
THE IMPACTS. TO UM, STAFF THE
INCARCERATED AND THEY DO LOOK AT
THE COMMUNITY AS WELL. RIGHT BUT
MY I GUESS THE QUESTION THE CRUX
OF MY QUESTION IS, ARE THE
COMMUNITIES AFFECTED? CONSULTED?
I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A CRITERIA
BY ARE THE COMMUNITIES
THEMSELVES WERE AFFECTED BY
THESE CLOSURES ARE THEY
CONSULTED? NO, WE DON'T CONSULT
THE COMMUNITIES. AND SO NOW THAT
THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS ARE MADE
WHAT IS BEING DONE TO
COMMUNICATE WITH THE
COMMUNITIES? WE WOULD HAVE TO
GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. HMM.
OKAY? I DON'T SEEM. TO THINK
THAT THAT IS AN APPROPRIATE
ANSWER. BUT I WILL, UM, MOVE ON
TO MY NEXT QUESTION. UM JUMPING
BACK TO ENERGY? UM CERTAINLY,
RATEPAYERS THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA
HAVE SEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE
IN THE COST OF NATURAL GAS. UM
WHAT RESOURCES IF ANY, DOES THE
PUC OR THIS BUDGET HAVE TO KIND
OF HELP ALLEVIATE THIS OR MAKE
SOME INVESTMENTS IN ENERGY
INFRASTRUCTURE? TO ALLOW MORE
SUPPLY. IS THERE ANYTHING IN
THIS BUDGET THAT ADDRESSES THAT
? YES CAN I ASK A COLLEAGUE FOR
SOME DETAILS ON THE ENERGY
PROPOSAL? YEAH HI. GOOD
AFTERNOON. INMAN MELVIN
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, SO THIS
CURRENT BUDGET PROPOSES ON TOP
OF THE INVESTMENTS IN THE 22
BUDGET ACT. AN ADDITIONAL $1
BILLION FROM THE CLEAN ENERGY
RELIABILITY INVESTMENT PLAN
INCLUDED IN SP 8 46. THAT PLAN
IS CURRENTLY WITH THE C E. C E
AND WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
LEGISLATURE BY MARCH. 1ST IN
THAT PLAN WILL CONTEMPLATE
ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENTS AND AFFORDABILITY.
PROPOSALS IN ORDER TO SUPPORT UM
THE ENERGY KIND OF SITUATION
WITHIN THE STATE. SO WHAT IS THE
PLAN S¼. SO C E C IS STILL
DEVELOPING IT AND WE'LL BE
PUTTING IT OUT FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, BUT SO IT HAS NOT BEEN
FINALIZED YET AND THERE WILL BE
TAKING IN PUBLIC COMMENT IN
ORDER TO INFORM IT AND THAT WILL
BE KIND OF PRESENTED TO THE
LEGISLATURE. MARCH 1ST, AT WHICH
POINT IT WILL BE, UH, FLUSHED
OUT IN ORDER FOR THE LEGISLATURE
TO REVIEW SO HOW DOES THAT
PROVIDE ANY RELIEF TO
CALIFORNIANS WHO ARE DEALING
WITH THE INCREASES IN THE SUPPLY
CHALLENGES NOW. SINCE HIS PLAN
IS KIND OF BEING DEVELOPED. SO I
CAN'T SPEAK TO IMMEDIATE
INVESTMENTS. I DO KNOW THAT THE
CPUC IS ACTIVELY CONTEMPLATING
WAYS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY,
INCLUDING ADVANCING THE CLIMATE
CREDITS AS WELL TO HELP
CALIFORNIANS WITH THEIR BILLS.
UM BUT SPECIFIC ACTIONS WITHIN
THE PLAN TO ADDRESS
AFFORDABILITY WILL HAVE TO WAIT
UNTIL IT COMES OUT. THAT DOESN'T
SEEM LIKE A VERY ADEQUATE
ANSWER, EITHER. UM LET ME JUMP
TOO HIGH SPEED RAIL, ANOTHER
TOPIC OF ATTENTION OR OF
INTEREST OF MYSELF. LAST YEAR,
THIS COMMITTEE CREATED AN
INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE HIGH
SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY. UM CAN YOU
TELL THE COMMITTEE WHETHER THAT
POSITION HAS BEEN FILLED WORK
CAN WE EXPECT THEM TO PRESENT IN
SUB THREE. WHEN WE HAVE THAT
HEARING AGAIN, I'LL NEED TO TURN
TO A COLLEAGUE ON THE LINE FOR
THE DETAILS FOR THAT QUESTION.
UH HELLO. STEVE WELLS DEPARTMENT
FINANCE. UM SO THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL POSITION IS, UH, THE
GOVERNOR WILL APPOINT THAT
POSITION BASED ON A NOMINATION
FROM THE LEGISLATURE. UH, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS LEGISLATURA HAS
, UH, HAS, UH, POSTED THE
POSITION AND I THINK THE, UH,
STATUTE REQUIRES A 60 DAY PERIOD
AND THEN REQUIRES A REVIEW
PERIOD. UM AND AT THAT POINT,
THE LEGISLATURE CAN PROVIDE A
LIST TO THE GOVERNOR OF
CANDIDATES FROM WHICH THE
GOVERNOR WILL CHOOSE. SO UM, I'M
NOT SURE WHERE THE LEGISLATURE
STANDS ON THAT LIST, BUT I KNOW
THAT IT WAS POSTED. UM I BELIEVE
WE'RE PROBABLY RIGHT AT THE END
OF THE 60 DAY TERM TERM SINCE
IT'S BEEN POSTED. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. I ONLY HAVE THREE MORE
QUESTIONS, MR CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE THE PATIENTS IN TERMS
OF THE DEPARTMENT FINANCE THE
MIDDLE CLASS TAX REBATE DELIVERY
. UM IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT
HAS BEEN HIT WITH ABOUT $90
MILLION WORTH OF FRAUD. UM IS
THAT AN ACCEPTABLE AMOUNT TO THE
ADMINISTRATION AND YOU KNOW WHAT
IS IN THE CONTRACT SPECIFICALLY
WHEN IT COMES TO ADDRESSING
FRAUDULENT PAYMENTS. TEACHER UM,
THE MONEY NETWORK IS THE VENDOR
AND, UM, THERE IS THE CONTRACT
THRESHOLD. UM AND DESPITE THEIR
ANY ANY KIND OF FRAUD WOULD SEEM
, UM, UNACCEPTABLE. BUT THERE IS
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A LARGE
PROGRAM OVER $9 BILLION AND THEY
ARE WITHIN THE THRESHOLD THAT
THEY AGREED TO WITHIN THAT
CONTRACT. SO IT'S THE POSITION
OF ADMINISTRATION THAT $90
MILLION WORTH OF FRAUD IS IT IS
NOT. AS I SAID, WE WOULD LIKE TO
SEE ZERO FRAUD. BUT IN REGARD TO
THE CONTRACT ITSELF, IT IS LESS
THAN 1% THAT WE HAVE. WE HAVE
SEEN JUST TO BE CLEAR. UNDER THE
CONTRACT. 1% OF FRAUD IS
ALLOWED. THERE IS IN THE
CONTRACT, A THRESHOLD THAT IS
ALLOWED, WHICH IS 1. IT IS IT IS
I IT IS LESS THAN LESS THAN THAT
. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT UM,
PERCENT THAT'S BEEN FOUND OR THE
EXACT PERCENT, BUT IT IS LESS
THAN 1% IN TERMS OF THE FRAUD.
WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SEND ME THE
CONTRACT? UM, WE WILL BE ABLE TO
SEND YOU WHAT WE CAN AND THEN I
GUESS THE NEXT QUESTION IS WHAT
CAN BE DONE IN THE FUTURE
CONTRACTS TO PREVENT SUCH FRAUD
AND I THINK WE ARE. WE ALWAYS
LOOK FOR WAYS IN WHICH TO
MITIGATE FRAUD ON THE FRONT END
RATHER THAN CATCHING IT ON THE
BACK END, SO THERE ARE A LOT OF
FRONT END TECHNOLOGIES IN
REGARDS TO IDENTITY ID,
IDENTIFICATION, VERIFICATION AND
IDENTIFICATION AT THE FRONT END
, SO WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO
MAXIMIZE THOSE TYPES OF TOOLS AT
THE FRONT END. THANK YOU AND MY
LAST QUESTION IN TERMS OF IN THE
HEALTHCARE DISCUSSION, UM THERE
DURING THE PANDEMIC, THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT INCREASED ITS MEDICAL
MATCH TO 56.2% THAT'S A
CALIFORNIA WHEN THE STATE
COULDN'T READ IT, ERM IN, UH,
MEDICAL ROLES NOW THAT WERE
EMERGING FROM THE PANDEMIC, THE
MEDICAL MATCH WILL START TO GO
BACK DOWN TO 50. IN TERMS OF
LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL SAVINGS
IS AS A STATE PLAN TO RE
DETERMINE MEDICAL ROLES AND LOOK
AT INELIGIBLE RECIPIENTS. UM,
I'LL HAVE TO TURN TO MY
COLLEAGUE FOR SOME DETAILS ON
THAT. BUT WE DO HAVE INCLUDED IN
THE BUDGET, THE ASSUMPTION THAT
THOSE RE DETERMINATIONS WILL
BEGIN AGAIN JULY ONE. MANRIQUEZ
WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE.
SO UM, EFFECTIVE, UM. THIS
SUMMER. WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN
WITH DETERMINING MEDICAL, UH,
RECIPIENTS AND, UM THE ENHANCED
FEDERAL MATCH WILL BE PHASING
DOWN STARTING THIS SUMMER AS
WELL SO THAT WILL BE UPDATED FOR
THE MEMBER VISION. OKAY AND MY
LAST QUESTION, UH, DEPARTMENT
FINANCE WHEN IT COMES TO, UM AH
, IT'S THE ASSISTANCE OF SMALL
BUSINESS TO REIMBURSE FOR, UM
BROUGH COST COMING OUT OF THE
PANDEMIC. THE GOVERNOR REASONS
THAT $500 MILLION IN REBATES
THAT THE LEGISLATURE AGREED TO
INCLUDE IN THE 2023 24 BUDGET,
UH, TO REIMBURSE SMALL
BUSINESSES FOR INCREASED FEDERAL
PAYROLL TAXES. UM HOW DID YOU
COME TO THAT CONCLUSION TO
RESCIND THE $500 MILLION AGAIN.
IT WAS ANYTHING WE'VE LOOKED AT
MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND
PROPOSALS. UM I JUST LIKE TO
STATE THAT THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
IS ALWAYS THE BEGINNING OF A
CONVERSATION. AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WE CONTINUE TO
WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION
ABOUT WHAT THE LEGISLATURE THIS
SPRING AND MY VERY LAST QUESTION
IS OF WHAT WAS APPROPRIATED IN
THE BUDGET. HOW MUCH FUN ON
UNALLOCATED. IS THAT YOU HAVE
THAT NUMBER LIKE WHAT'S LEFT?
THAT HASN'T BEEN ALLOCATED. SO
WE HAVE, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS A
DEFICIT BUDGET AND NOT A, UM,
SURPLUS. WE HAVE ALLOCATED ALL
THE FUNDS AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY
HAD TO PULL BACK AND WE PUT
THINGS IN THE TRIGGER AND HAD TO
LOOK FOR COST SHIFTS OR CALL, UH
, SHIFTS IN FUNDS. SO ALL THE
DOLLARS THAT ARE IN THIS BUDGET
ARE ALLOCATED THERE. THERE.
THERE ARE SOME CONTINGENCY
DOLLARS. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S
EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING
ABOUT, UM FOR WATER, FOR EXAMPLE
, UM, BUT WE HAVE ALLOCATED, UM,
ALL THE DOLLARS TOWARDS
UNENCUMBERED DOLLARS THAT ARE
HASN'T BEEN ALLOCATED YET OUT OF
WHAT WAS APPROPRIATED. BUT IF
THAT IF THAT IS INCORRECT,
PLEASE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. SURE
APPRECIATE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
. THANK YOU MEMBERS. THANK YOU,
MR VICE CHAIR. WE'RE GOING TO GO
WITH MR ALVAREZ AND MR BENNETT.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND I WANT
TO THANK, UH, PERMANENT FINANCE
FOR BEING HERE AND APPRECIATE
YOU ANSWERING QUESTIONS. UM, I
WOULD FIRST LIKE TO STATE THAT
THIS IS CLEARLY NOT A BUDGET
WITH GIMMICKS OR WITH ROSIE. UH
PROJECTIONS. IT'S A REAL BUDGET
. BUT REGARDLESS OF THAT, I
THINK, AS THE ALEJO'S POINTED
OUT FOR US IN THE LEGISLATURE IT
IS NOW THE TIME AND APPROPRIATE
FOR US TO TRY TO IDENTIFY THE
PLACES WHERE PERHAPS PRIORITIES
DONOR LINE BETWEEN THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE
LEGISLATURE, AND SO WITH THAT IN
MIND IS WHAT SOME OF MY
QUESTIONS ARE COMING FIRST ONE,
HOPEFULLY EASY ANSWER FOR ANYONE
WHO'S WANTS TO ANSWER THIS. THE
SPECIAL FUND FOR ECONOMIC
UNCERTAINTIES. WHEN DID THAT
START AND, UM AND WHY IS THAT
NOT PLACE IN RESERVES? THANK YOU
FOR THAT QUESTION, MR ALVAREZ.
I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHEN IT
STARTED. I THINK THE POINT
BEHIND HAVING WHAT WE CALL THE
SFTU IS TO ALLOW FOR THINGS THAT
ARE UNPLANNED FOR TO BE TAKEN
CARE OF. UM AND WE ACTUALLY DO
COUNT THAT AS PART OF THE TOTAL
RESERVE, SO THE $35.6 BILLION
THAT I MENTIONED DURING MY
PRESENTATION DOES INCLUDE THE SF
BIÂU. SO NONE OF THE THREE POINT
I THINK IT'S $3.8 BILLION. NONE
OF THAT IS ACTUALLY APPROPRIATED
THROUGH THIS BUDGET. CORRECT.
AND PERHAPS THAT IS WHAT MR FONG
WAS GETTING AT WITH HIS QUESTION
AS WELL. SO ARE 3.8 BILLION IS
UP SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN I
BELIEVE IT WAS 3.4 BILLION SFTU
AT THE 2022 BUDGET ACT, IN PART
BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE
ARE MORE UNKNOWNS AND MORE RISKS
GOING INTO THIS BUDGET, AND SO
THAT'S SLIGHTLY HIGHER. THANK
YOU APPRECIATE THAT ANSWER. ON
THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND. THE SHIFTING OF $1.55
BILLION FROM THAT FUN TO THE
GENERAL FUND. UM I ASKED THIS
EARLIER TODAY. I THINK I JUST
WANT CONFIRMATION. THAT MEANS
THAT THERE'S NO MORE FUNDS LEFT
IN THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND. AS A RESULT OF THIS ACTION
, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT TO BE
TRUE, BUT I'M GOING TO TURN TO A
COLLEAGUE FOR MORE SPECIFICS.
CHRISTIAN BELGIAN WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. UH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WOULD YOU MIND
REPEATING THAT QUESTION ONE LAST
TIME, SO I CAN. THERE'S A SHIFT
. THANK YOU. THERE'S A SHIFT OF
$1.5 BILLION FOR ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES FROM THE GENERAL FUND
FROM THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND. IS THAT FUN NOW
BASICALLY ZEROED OUT. NO SO WELL
TO BE TO BE CLEAR. I'M SORRY.
THIS IS CHRISTIAN BELTRAN WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. SO TO
BE CLEAR THE WAY THAT CAP AND
TRADE OR G R F IS STRUCTURED IS
THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 35% OF THE
ANNUAL AUCTION PROCEEDS COME IN.
THAT IS DISCRETIONARY. SO GIVEN
THE CURRENT, UM ASSUMPTIONS AND
PROJECTIONS FOR THE 23 24 BUDGET
YEAR WE BUILT IN, UH, FUND
SHIFTS FOR ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
PACKAGE AS WELL AS BUILDING IN
ABOUT $250 MILLION FOR 86 17
PROGRAMS, ALL OF WHICH ACCOUNT
FOR THAT DISCRETIONARY AMOUNT OF
FUNDS. SO IN ESSENCE, WE ARE
ACCOUNTING FOR THE FULL 35% OF
PROJECTIONS, BUT THOSE
PROJECTIONS WILL CHANGE IN THE
MAY REVISION SO WE COULD ASSUME
TO POTENTIALLY SEE MORE EVEN
LESS, DEPENDING ON WHERE
PROJECTIONS LIES. SO AS OF
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET THIS USE OF
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS TAKES UP THE
MAJORITY OF IT. THANK YOU
APPRECIATE THAT. UM TO THE L A
AND FIGURE FIGURE FOUR OF THE,
UM, PURPLE REPORT. UM, WHEN I'M
REFERRING TO. PRIOR YEAR FUND
BALANCES IN 21 22 22 23 23 34.
THOSE ARE, UM FUNDS NOT EXPENDED
IN THE PRIOR YEAR. I'M ASSUMING
AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY? IS
THAT WHAT THAT NUMBER REFERS TO
APOLOGIES. LET ME GO TO THIS
PAGE SIX. THAT REPORT. I'M
SORRY. AND SO YOU'RE ASKING
ABOUT WHICH YOUR FUND BALANCE
AND EACH OF THOSE THREE YEARS IT
VARIES IS THAT FUNDS NOT
EXPENDED IN THE PRIOR FISCAL
YEAR. IS IT AS SIMPLE AS THAT?
BASICALLY THAT'S CARRYING
FORWARD SO LIKE THERE'S AN
ASSUMPTION THAT WOULD SO WHEN WE
ADOPT THE BUDGET, WE HAVE AN
ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD SPEND
3.8 BILLION OR WE WOULD BE LEFT
WITH 3.8 BILLION IN THIS SPECIAL
FUND FOR ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY OF
REVENUES CAME IN MUCH HIGHER
THAN WHAT WE'RE ASSUMING, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND OUR EXPENDITURES
WERE WHAT WE ASSUME THEN OUR
PRIOR YOUR BALANCE IN THE NEXT
YEAR, IT WOULD BE HIGHER. OKAY?
UM MY NEXT SET OF QUESTIONS ARE
REGARDING APPENDICES THREE AND
FOUR IN THE L. A S REPORT. UM
MAYBE WE'LL START WITH THREE.
AND THESE ARE NEW EXPENDITURES,
AS HAS BEEN DESCRIBED BY THE L.
A S OFFICE. AND I THINK, UM
PERMANENT FINANCE COULD HELP
ANSWER ARE ARE THESE PROGRAMS
ALL NEW PROGRAMS AND DO THESE
AMOUNTS BEING ALLOCATED TO ALL
OF THESE PROGRAMS FULLY FUND
THESE PROGRAMS OR THE INITIATION
OF NEW PROGRAMS THAT WE SHOULD
EXPECT LONG TERM COMMITMENTS TO
. THESE ARE NEW, UH, SPENDING
PROPOSALS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I
CAN ANSWER THE SECOND PART OF
YOUR QUESTION. SURE AND AGAIN,
JUST TO CLARIFY IS THIS APPENDIX
THREE? APPENDIX THREE IN THE L.
A S OKAY, SO THE NEW
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING AND WOULD
YOU AGREE THAT THE $2 BILLION
WELL, SO IN MANY CASES, I WOULD
SAY THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT NEW INVESTMENTS IN
THIS GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. MANY OF
THESE ARE CAPITAL OUTLAY
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLANNED
, UM SO NOT NECESSARILY NEW
PROGRAMS. WE DO HAVE SOME NEW
PROGRAM AND NEW INVESTMENTS THAT
, UH, TRYING TO FOCUS ON AREAS
WHERE WE COULD DRAW DOWN. MORE
FEDERAL FUNDING. SO, FOR
EXAMPLE, PUTTING IN SOME, UM,
GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO DRAW
DOWN SOMEWHERE FEDERAL FUND
DOLLARS, AND IN SOME CASES WHERE
THERE HAVE BEEN SHIFTS SINCE THE
22 BUDGET ACT IN REGARDS TO SOME
PRIORITIES OF THE ADMINISTRATION
, WE HAVE SOME HAVE INCLUDED
SOME OF THOSE, UH, INVESTMENTS
HERE, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IT
IS. IT IS A MIX OF CURRENT
PROGRAMS, AND I THINK APPENDIX
FOUR REFERS TO WHAT YOU JUST
MENTIONED, WHICH IS, UM 2022 23
PROGRAMS THAT ARE ALSO RECEIVING
POTENTIALLY ALLOCATION AND 23
24. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS. UM OF
ALL THESE PROPOSED NEW PROGRAMS
, SORT OF WHICH ONES ARE LONG
TERM COMMITMENTS. THAT MAY BE A
QUESTION AND ANSWER ANOTHER
TIME. UH BECAUSE IT DOES. IF YOU
DO ADD UP ALL THESE TABLES, ITS
IT HITS THE $2 BILLION MARK AND
JUST INTERESTED TO SEE HOW, UM
WHAT THOSE HOW THOSE PRIORITIES
PRIORITIES WERE DETERMINED.
NOPE. MR ALVAREZ. ONE, UH, SO
GENERALLY CONCUR WITH MS LEE'S
CHARACTERIZATION, I WOULD SAY
LIKE THERE'S BUT THERE'S SOME
DETAILS WITH SOME OF THESE. LIKE
FOR EXAMPLE, ON APPENDIX THREE
FIGURE ONE THERE IS THE VERY
FIRST ITEM IS FOR THE DGS
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
FOR A CAPITAL PROJECT SACRAMENTO
REGION. NEW RICHARDS BOULEVARD
OFFICE COMPLEX. THAT'S FOR 402
MILLION, SO I MENTIONED DURING
MY REMARKS THAT SOME OF THE
PREVIOUSLY PLANNED THERE WERE
BOND THERE WAS A PLAN TO ISSUE
BONDS. UH THERE IS A PLAN, THEN
TO SWITCH TO USE CASH FUNDING
OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND TO PAY
FOR THAT. THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING
IN THE REVERSE. HERE WE'RE HERE.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO USE CASH TO
PAY FOR THIS CAPITAL PROJECT. A
REASONABLE QUESTION WOULD BE
WELL, COULDN'T YOU ISSUE BONDS
AND SAVE THE CASH TO HELP WITH
THE CURRENT YEAR? YOU KNOW THE
BUDGET YOUR PROBLEM AS I LOOK
INTO THIS ONE WHAT I FOUND WHAT
I FOUND OUT IS THAT FOR SOME
TECHNICAL REASONS. THIS PROJECT
IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR TAX EXEMPT
FINANCING IN THE MUNICIPAL BOND
MARKET, FOR EXAMPLE, SO THAT THE
STATE WOULD HAVE TO ISSUE
TAXABLE BONDS. AND SO I THINK
SO, LIKE SOME OF THESE HAVE
TECHNICAL EXPLANATIONS, I THINK
, AND OUR OFFICE WOULD BE
HELPING HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU
OR THE MEMBERS TO GO THROUGH ANY
PARTICULAR ITEMS ON THE LIST IF
YOU WANTED TO LOOK INTO THEM
FURTHER OR I'M IT WOULD BE
REALLY HELPFUL. WE CAN IDENTIFY
WHAT THOSE BARRIERS ARE TO DOING
BOND FINANCING ON THESE RATHER
THAN CASH AND THEN ALSO WHICH
ONES ARE WE'RE DRAWING AND WE'RE
MATCHING FUNDS. OBVIOUSLY WE
DON'T WANT TO JEOPARDIZE ANY
FUNDS THAT WE CAN GET FROM THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND I WOULD
JUST UNDERSCORE WHAT MR PADDOCK,
UM MENTIONED PART OF OUR
SOLUTIONS DOES. PART OF THE
SOLUTION DOES INCLUDE MOVING
FROM A CASH TO BOND AND BACK TO
BONDS AND IN CASES WHERE WE
COULD NOT SUCH AS THIS EXAMPLE,
UM, WHERE IT WAS EITHER TOO
RISKY OR FOR WHATEVER TECHNICAL
REASONS WE DID NOT CONVERT THOSE
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THESE ARE
MORE ONE TIME EXPENDITURES, THEN
ONGOING. OKAY THANK YOU. UM AND
THEN, LASTLY, ON APPENDIX FOR UM
, THAT ONE ALSO TALKS ABOUT NEW
FUNDING FOR SOME OF THE MORE
RECENT ADDITIONS TO THE BUDGET
THAT WILL NOW BECOME MULTI YEAR
UM, AND POTENTIALLY ONGOING AND
I THINK THE SAME QUESTIONS SO WE
DON'T GO OVER IT HERE AND SAVE
US TIME. JUST WHICH ONES ARE
GOING TO BE CONTINUED. ONGOING
VERSUS THIS IS REALLY ONE TIME
AND IT'S DONE. THERE'S THIS
FUNDING COMPLETE THAT PROJECT OR
SHOULD WE EXPECT MORE FUNDING
REQUESTS IN THE FUTURE? AND THEN
WHICH ONES ACTUALLY HELP US DRAW
DOWN FEDERAL DOLLARS? I THINK
THE SAME QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES
TO APPENDIX THREE FOR ME. I HAVE
FOR APPENDIX FOR IF YOU COULD
HELP US GETTING GET ANSWERS FOR
THOSE THOSE THAT WAS THAT WOULD
BE VERY APPRECIATED THE OTHER.
THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS, UM I
WANT TO THANK THE LAO FOR, UM,
THE MESSAGING THROUGHOUT THE
REPORT, WHICH IS WE REALLY NEED
TO DEVELOP. I'M JUST NOW QUOTING
A LARGER SET OF POTENTIAL BUDGET
SOLUTIONS NOW SO THAT THE
LEGISLATURE DOES CAN DO THIS
DELIBERATELY, RATHER THAN UNDER
THE PRESSURE OF THE MAY REVISIT
MAY REVISION, AND THEN ALSO THE
OUT YEARS, WHICH, UM, CERTAINLY
FOR A NEW MEMBER IS A CONCERN.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT
DOESN'T CONTINUE TO BE A BURDEN
ON US SO THAT WE CAN PROVIDE THE
SERVICES TO CALIFORNIA'S AS THEY
EXPECT, AND THEN THE OTHER
CONCEPT THAT I WAS VERY
INTERESTING TO ME. AND I WANT TO
THANK THE LAO FOR IS THE IDEA OF
ADDING TRIGGER REDUCTIONS AS
OPPOSED TO TRIGGER EDITIONS. I
THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD
, UM, REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT FROM
THE LEGISLATURE'S PERSPECTIVE
AND SEE WHAT THINGS WE MIGHT
WANT TO REDUCE. IF THE FUNDS
DON'T COME IN, AS OPPOSED TO ADD
, UM THAT'S A DIFFERENT WAY OF
LOOKING AT IT. BUT AGAIN, THANK
YOU TO BOTH AGAIN. THANKS TO THE
WORK OF THE DEPARTMENT FINANCE.
I KNOW THIS TAKES MONTHS TO GET
HERE. AND I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR
HELP IN ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.
OKAY, MR. BENNETT, THE MR
MURATSUCHI. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
, MR. CHAIR UM MY QUESTIONS ARE
FOR MISS LEE, BUT CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE MR PADDICK. WEIGHING
IN IF HE HAS ANY OTHER THOUGHTS
ON THAT. MY FIRST QUESTION IS
REMOVED SIGNIFICANT. GENERAL
FUNDING FROM UM E V PURCHASING
TO THE GREENHOUSE GAS FUND. AS
AS YOU MENTIONED, UM WHAT I'D
LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THIS. WHAT
LAST YEAR? WHAT DID WE USE THAT
GREENHOUSE GAS FUNDING FOR? SO
WHAT IS NOT NOW GOING TO BE DONE
OR WHAT WAS SHIFTED SOMEPLACE
ELSE? UM THAT ALLOWS A
GREENHOUSE GAS FUND OR IS THIS
GROWTH IN GREENHOUSE GAS FUND
EXPENDITURES? I CAN'T IMAGINE
IT'S ALL GROWTH AND, YOU KNOW,
GASSES COMPETITORS. COULD YOU
HELP ME WITH THAT? PLEASE? SURE
AND ACTUALLY, I WILL TURN TO A
COLLEAGUE ON THE LINE FOR THE
DETAILS OF THE G R F PLAN. YEAH
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BENNETT. THIS IS CHRISTIAN
BELTRAN WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE AGAIN. JUST WANTED TO RE
EMPHASIZE WHAT I EXPRESSED
EARLIER. UH FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
ALVAREZ IS, UH, AS YOU'RE
PROBABLY WELL AWARE OF THE OF
THE SPECIFIC CAP AND TRADE
AMOUNTS THAT COME IN THE
REVENUES THAT COME IN FROM CAP
AND TRADE THAT ARE DEPOSITED,
SAID GRS AROUND 35% IS LEFT FOR
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING. SO OF
THAT 35% DISCRETIONARY SPENDING
1.41 POINT FIVE APPROXIMATELY
BILLION DOLLARS IS BEING SHIFTED
TO PRIORITIZE THOSE PREVIOUS
INVESTMENTS. THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION AGREED TO WITH
THE LEGISLATURE IN THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS. ULTIMATELY UM
THE DISCRETIONARY, UH, AMOUNT OF
FUNDS THAT ARE GENERALLY USED
FROM BUDGET YEAR TO BUDGET YEAR
IS DETERMINED THROUGH THOSE
NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE
LEGISLATURE. SO HISTORICALLY
SPEAKING, WE'VE USED THE
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS TO INVEST IN
MANY DIFFERENT PROGRAMS,
INCLUDING A B 6 17 PROGRAMS,
WHICH THERE IS AN APPROPRIATION
FOR THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. BUT
THERE ARE QUITE A FEW DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN.
PREVIOUSLY AS WELL. AND YOU
KNOW, WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE SOME
OF THAT INFORMATION WITH YOUR
STAFF TO LET YOU KNOW SOME OF
THE OTHER HISTORICAL PROGRAMS
THAT WE FUNDED BEFORE. MY
QUESTION IS NOT HISTORICALLY.
WHAT DID WE FUND OF THOSE
HISTORICAL PROGRAMS THAT WE
FUNDED? WHAT IS NOT BEING FUNDED
SO I WANT TO BE SPECIFIC IN THE
QUESTION FUEL IDENTIFY WHICH OF
THOSE HISTORICAL PROGRAMS THAT
WERE FUNDED LAST YEAR ARE NOT
BEING FUNDED AS A RESULT OF THIS
SHIFT. AND RIGHT. I DO HAVE THAT
INFORMATION NOT ENTIRELY
INFORMED ME WITH SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT DO COME TO MIND. UM,
I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A
NUMBER OF INVESTMENTS RELATED TO
METHANE REDUCTION. UH THERE WAS
SOME AGRICULTURAL FOCUSED
INVESTMENTS AS WELL THAT EUROPE
WAS USED FOR BUT I WOULD HAVE TO
LOOK BACK ON MY DOCUMENTS TO
MAKE SURE THAT I CAN GIVE YOU
THE PROPER INFORMATION AND I'M
HAPPY TO SHARE THAT WITH YOUR
STAFF AT A FUTURE DATE AS WELL.
I APPRECIATE THAT. SECONDLY UM
THE GOVERNMENT'S BUDGET PROPOSES
CUTS IN IN TRANSIT FUNDING AND
THAT TRANSIT FUNDING WAS WAS
NEGOTIATED WITH THE LEGISLATURE
AND IN EXCHANGE FOR HIGH SPEED
RAIL BOND ALLOCATION. UM IT'S
BEEN EXPLAINED THAT THAT'S IT'S
BIG. IT'S EXPLAINED THAT THAT'S
PARTIALLY JUSTIFIED BECAUSE
THERE'S SO MUCH FEDERAL FUNDING
THAT HAS HAS COME IN THAT THAT
IS AVAILABLE. CANDID APARTMENT.
I IDENTIFY WHAT FEDERAL POTS
WILL FUND THE T I T I R C P, UM
, PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE THAT
WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. UM AND IS
THERE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF
THE PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE?
YES AND, UM, UM, MR BENNETT, I
WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT AT
THIS POINT, UM WE ARE LOOKING TO
FEDERAL FUNDS TO HELP BACKFILL
SO THE TRANSIT FUNDS. UM THE TWO
BILLION REDUCTION IN THE TRANSIT
FUNDS. WE ARE LOOKING FOR
FEDERAL FUNDS TO BACKFILL THAT
AND LOOKING BOTH AT THE
INFLATION REDUCTION ACT AS WELL
AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE,
INVESTMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
JOBS ACT AS WELL TO DATE, UM
CALIFORNIA SHOULD RECEIVE SHOULD
EXPECT US TO RECEIVE ABOUT 48
BILLION BETWEEN THOSE TWO, SO
JUST TO GIVE A SENSE OF SCALE.
SOME OF THAT IS SPACE
PROGRAMMING. SOME OF THAT OF
THAT IS ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING.
UM AND WE CONTINUE TO WAIT TO
SEE FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING. UM
SPECIFICALLY, UH, THAT WILL BE
COMING TO THE STATE IN REGARDS
TO THE PROJECTS AND YOU'RE MORE
SPECIFIC QUESTION ON PROGRAMS. I
WILL DEFER DEFER TO ONE OF MY
COLLEAGUES WHO HAS MORE DETAILS
ON THAT. THANK YOU. HELLO AGAIN.
STEVE WELLS DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY
ON THE ERCP FUNDING SO WE WHEN
WE WERE LOOKING AT, UM, YOU
KNOW, ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT
WHERE WE WERE GOING TO BE ABLE
TO FIND, UM, YOU KNOW, FIND A
SOLUTION TO THE TO THE ONGOING
SITUATION. WE LOOKED AT THE T R
C P BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WE LOOKED
AT PROGRAMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE FULLY FUNDED WHAT WE HAD
PROMISED. SO WE HAD ALREADY
PROMISED $3.7 BILLION AND WE HAD
A CALL FOR PROJECTS ON THOSE,
AND I BELIEVE IT JUST RECENTLY
IN THE LAST WEEK OR SO, UM, YOU
KNOW, WE ALLOCATED ABOUT 2.5
BILLION OF THAT 3.7. UM YOU KNOW
TOO MANY PROJECTS AND WITH
HIGHER EMPHASIS ON PROJECTS THAT
WERE LEVERAGING FEDERAL FUNDS,
SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO
THAT. I BELIEVE THE YOU KNOW,
THE NEXT ROUND WILL BE ANOTHER
$1.4 BILLION OUT OF THAT
FUNDING. UM IN ADDITION TO THAT
FUNDING, YOU KNOW THE I J. A THE
JUST ANNOUNCED THAT THEIR
FORMULA FUNDING FOR THE SECOND
YEAR OF UH UM, THE TRANSIT
FORMULA FUNDING THAT GOES
DIRECTLY TO TRANSIT AGENCIES. UM
THEY'VE ANNOUNCED THAT IT'S
GOING TO BE $2 BILLION IN STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. THAT'S A $600
MILLION INCREASE OVER THE
PREVIOUS, UH, THE PREVIOUS FAST
ACT FEDERAL ACT AND ITS A
MILLION IT'S $100 MILLION MORE
THAN LAST YEAR'S IJ, WHICH WAS
500 MILLION MORE ANNUALLY THAN
THAN THAT. SO WE'RE HOPING THAT
BECAUSE THOSE THAT FORMULA
FUNDING HAS HAS GONE UP BY 30%
THAT THAT CAN HELP FILL THE GAP.
UM, THE LARGEST PROGRAMMATIC
IMPACT UNDER THE I. J A IS IN
THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS
THROUGH THE TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, UH, THAT THAT
WAS A PROGRAM THAT WAS 2.3
BILLION ANNUALLY UNDER FAST ACT
NOW UNDER IJ. IT'S A 4.6 BILLION
ANNUAL, UH, ALLOCATION.
CALIFORNIA HISTORICALLY DOES
VERY WELL WITH THOSE WITH THOSE
BRANDS. WE MANAGED TO GET 20 TO
30% OF THAT FUNDING. SO THAT'S A
POTENTIAL ON THE LOW END OF 500
MILLION PER YEAR OR MAYBE MORE.
AND THEN, IN ADDITION TO THAT UH
, OVERALL COMPETITIVE FUNDING
UNDER THE I J A AND THROUGH
TRANSIT, BUS AND RAIL PROGRAMS.
UM THE ANNUAL AMOUNT AVAILABLE
NATIONALLY HAS GONE FROM SIX
BILLION TO ABOUT 18 BILLION. SO
UM, THAT'S ANOTHER AREA WHERE,
UH, WELL, WE'RE NOT WHAT WE
DON'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY, UH,
FORECAST OR PLANNED FOR T R C P.
WE STILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENT OF THE $5.7 BILLION
JUST FOR CRC. P UM IN THE BUDGET
IN THE GOVERNOR'S PLAN PROPOSAL
, SO IN THE SHORT RUN, YOU KNOW
THAT WE'RE HOT. WE'RE USING THE
I J A TO HELP LEVERAGE OURSELVES
THROUGH, UH, YOU KNOW, THROUGH
THIS SOLUTION AND THAT
ADDITIONAL TRC P MONEY THAT WE
HAD HOPED TO HAVE LAST YEAR AS
PART OF THE TRIGGER, SO IF WE IF
REVENUE DOES COME THROUGH AND WE
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, WE CAN
RESTORE THOSE FUNDS. AND YOU DO
HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL
THE PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE.
WELL, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE, UM I
MEAN THE REQUEST. THE QUEST OF
PROJECTS IS MASSIVE. I MEAN, FAR
MORE THAN THAN THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN YOU KNOW WHETHER WE
APPROPRIATE A BILLION DOLLARS OR
$2 BILLION NEXT YEAR. UM, I
BELIEVE LIKE JUST THE 20 FOR THE
20 BY 28 PROJECTS IN L A, UM,
WOULD NEED AN ADDITIONAL. I
DON'T KNOW THE LAST THERE WAS
LIKE $20 BILLION SO, UM, YOU
KNOW PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE.
OR ARE MASSIVE AND OVERWHELMING
. I'M SURE THAT WE COULD, UH,
YOU KNOW, COMPILE SOME LIST OF
THINGS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS
THROUGH THROUGH THE
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY AND GET
BACK TO YOU ON THAT. THANK YOU,
UM, COULD YOU WE RECENTLY HAD A
T R C P FUNDING ALLOCATION. UM.
GO YOU KNOW ROUND OF THAT GO
FORWARD. HMM TALKED ABOUT. I
MEAN, CLEARLY FROM YOUR ANSWER.
IT WAS OVERSUBSCRIBED. CAN YOU
TELL ME CAN YOU? CAN YOU GIVE US
A RANGE? HOW MANY PROJECTS WERE
FUNDED? HOW MUCH
OVERSUBSCRIPTION IS THERE? IS
THERE OUT THERE WITH THE
PROGRAM? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW
SPECIFICALLY WHEN WE WENT OUT
FOR A CALL FOR PROJECTS, YOU
KNOW THE CALL FOR PROJECTS WAS
FOR ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, WE
HAD SAID THAT THERE WAS, YOU
KNOW $3.7 BILLION AVAILABLE SO
TO THE EXTENT THAT WE RECEIVED
REQUESTS FOR THAT MONEY, I THINK
THAT YOU KNOW, TEMPERS THE
OVERALL UH, YOU KNOW, REQUEST I
DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY SEE
EVERYTHING. UM YOU KNOW, SCALED
UP AS LARGE AS IT MIGHT POSSIBLY
BE. WERE THAT NUMBER TO BE
BIGGER. UM I CAN TELL YOU, YOU
KNOW, CONCEIVABLY THAT NUMBER
COULD BE 3456 TIMES AS MUCH AND
WE WOULD PROBABLY GET A CALL.
YOU KNOW, WE PROBABLY GET STILL
MORE PROJECTS THAN THERE IS
AVAILABLE MONEY. UM, I DON'T
HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER ON ON WHAT
WAS WHAT WAS ASKED FOR ON THIS
ON THE THIS WOULD BE THE I THINK
ROUND SIX OF THE T R. C P IS
WHAT THIS CAME FROM. AND I DON'T
KNOW WHAT THE EXACT AMOUNT THAT
WAS REQUESTED. BUT I COULD
CERTAINLY LET YOU KNOW. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. YOU'RE
WELCOME TO MR MURATSUCHI. THEN
MR FONTE'S. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
I LIKE TO, UH AH, TRANSITION TO
EDUCATION. UM SPECIFICALLY T K
THROUGH 12. UM. I WANT TO START
OFF BY THANKING THE GOVERNOR.
FOR PROTECTING CLASSROOM
FUNDING. AND FOR PROTECTING AND
CONTINUING HIS COMMITMENT TO
MANY OF THE PRIORITIES AT THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
HAVE UH, COMMITTED TO IN RECENT
YEARS. MOST SPECIFICALLY. TO THE
UNIVERSAL TRANSITIONAL
KINDERGARTEN GOAL BY 2025. UM I
WANT TO THANK THE GOVERNOR FOR
THE ONGOING COMMITMENT TO REACH
THAT GOAL. UH AND, UM UH, ALSO
TO, UH. THANK THE GOVERNOR FOR
MAINTAINING THE FOUR BILLION AND
ONGOING PROP 98 FUNDING FOR THE
EXPANDED LEARNING OPPORTUNITY
PROGRAM. AND WE JUST HEARD THIS
MORNING, THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DELEGATION HAD A MEETING WITH
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED
SUPERINTENDENT ALBERTO CARVALHO.
AND, UM. HMM UH, CITED
SPECIFICALLY, UH, THEIR SUMMER
PROGRAM AS BEING KEY TO, UH, THE
CHALLENGE THAT WE'RE FACING
THROUGHOUT THE STATE IN TERMS OF
PANDEMIC, LEARNING LOSS AND THE
NEED FOR PANDEMIC LEARNING
RECOVERY, UM POST PANDEMIC
LEARNING RECOVERY. ALTHOUGH I
KNOW WE'RE NOT STILL COMPLETELY
OUT OF THE WOODS. UM WHAT I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT. YOU KNOW, IT
SEEMS LIKE THE GOVERNOR IS, UH,
YOU KNOW, CHAMPIONING, UM
CONTINUING TO BE THE CHAMPION OF
EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND
UNIVERSAL TRANSITIONAL
KINDERGARTEN IN PARTICULAR, BUT
THAT HE IS PROPOSING A DELAY IN
$550 MILLION FOR THE
TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN AS
WELL AS PRESCHOOL FACILITY
FUNDING. UM. TO BE 2024 2025
BUDGET. UH THE CONCERN, YOU
KNOW, I THINK MANY OF US ARE
HEARING ABOUT THE LACK AND THE
NEED. FOR FACILITIES TO BE ABLE
TO ACCOMMODATE. UH OUR GOAL OF
UNIVERSAL TRANSITIONAL
KINDERGARTEN. AND TO DELAY THE
FUNDING FOR THE FACILITIES, EVEN
BY A YEAR, UH, MAY INTERFERE OR
UNDERMINE OUR GOAL OF BEING ABLE
TO ACCOMMODATE. YOU KNOW ALL OF
THE KIDS ARE GONNA THEY'RE GONNA
BE COMING INTO OUR TRANSITIONAL
KINDERGARTEN. UM PROGRAMS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND SO I
WANT TO ASK. MISS LEE, UM. WHAT
THE THINKING WAS, UH, YOU KNOW,
AND DELAYING THE TK FACILITY
FUNDING, PARTICULARLY WHERE IT
SEEMS TO BE, UH, CONTRADICTORY
TO IS, UM AH, ONGOING
COMMITMENTS THROUGH THE REST OF
THE EDUCATION BUDGET. UM YES,
AND THANK YOU FOR THE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE
PROTECTIONS THAT ARE IN PLACE IN
THIS BUDGET. UM I WOULD LIKE TO
KNOW THAT THERE IS 100 MILLION
THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR THAT
PROGRAM ALREADY AND AGAIN,
LOOKING HOLISTICALLY ACROSS
PROGRAMS FOR BUDGET SOLUTIONS TO
FILL THE GAP, UM, TRYING NOT TO
EAT INTO PROGRAMS. UM AND NOT
THAT CAPITAL ISN'T A PROGRAM BUT
, UM, PUSHING THAT FORWARD, UM,
SEEMED REASONABLE BECAUSE THAT
THERE IS ALREADY INVESTMENT. UM,
IN PRIOR BUDGETS FOR THAT. OKAY,
BUT, UH UM WHAT I'M HEARING AND
I BELIEVE MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES
ARE HEARING IS THAT THE NEED FOR
EXCEEDS $100 MILLION THAT YOU
YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED UM. AND SO I
WOULD URGE THE GOVERNOR TO
RECONSIDER. UM THAT PARTICULARLY
WHERE WE YOU KNOW, ARE SO CLOSE
TO ROLLING OUT THIS, UH THIS
GOAL THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF
DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS I
BELIEVE AND INVESTING IN EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION. AH! YOU I
BELIEVE MISS LEE. YOU ALSO MADE
A COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT HOW YOU
ARE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO
TRANSITION FUNDING, ESPECIALLY
FOR CAPITAL AND, UH,
EXPENDITURES. FROM CASH IN THE
GENERAL FUND TO BOND FUNDING.
UM, I KNOW THAT, UH UM THE, UH.
BOND FUNDS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
AND MODERNIZATION FOR SCHOOL
FACILITIES HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED.
I BELIEVE THEY HAVE BEEN
EXHAUSTED, AND SO IS THAT
HIGHLIGHTING THE NEED FOR A NEW
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND. UM I
BELIEVE THE FUNDS ARE CURRENTLY
BEING SPENT, UM, IN TERMS OF THE
TIMING, WE DO WANT TO COME
FORWARD WITH A NEW FACILITIES.
ONE A NEW FACILITY. BOND. YES,
OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU. WE'RE GONNA MISS, UM NOT
JUST TO MR PHONES. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. FIRST I DO WANT TO JUST
ACKNOWLEDGE AND SAY, I THINK YOU
, UH, LOOKING AT THIS PROPOSED
BUDGET. I SEE THAT THE GOVERNORS
BUDGET INCLUDED SEVEN MILLION
OVER FIVE YEARS TO CONTINUE THE
CLEANUP EFFORTS AT STRINGFELLOW.
SUPER FUN, HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE
IN HER PA VALLEY IN THE DISTRICT
THAT I DO REPRESENT, AND SO I AM
FULLY IN FAVOR OF THIS. HOWEVER
I DO WANT TO PIVOT TO HIGHER
EDUCATION. THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES A ONE
YEAR DELAY AND DISTRIBUTING
FUNDING FOR SEVERAL CAPITAL
OUTLAY PROJECTS, INCLUDING 83
MILLION FOR THE FACILITIES
EXPANSION AT UC RIVERSIDE AND UC
MERCED. AS YOU MAY RECALL, THIS
FUNDING WAS PART OF THE INLAND
RISING FUNDING REQUEST
CHAMPIONED BY MYSELF. OR MY
FORMER ASSEMBLY COLLEAGUES,
MEDINA AND GRAY. AND THIS IS THE
PURPOSE OF THIS BUDGET ASKED WAS
TO HELP LEVEL THE PLANE FILLED
AFTER DECADES OF THE STATE,
NEGLECTING AND UNDERFUNDING BOTH
THE INLAND EMPIRE IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. WHICH MANIFESTED WITH
THESE TWO UC CAMPUSES IN THESE
REGIONS. GIVEN THAT DYNAMIC IT
IS CONCERNING TO ME TO SEE
FUNDING FOR OUR INLAND REGIONS
DELAYED. WHEN THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSED BUDGET DOES NOT DELAY
FUNDING FOR OTHER CAPITAL OUTLAY
PROJECTS AT OUR PUBLIC
INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
AND OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN THE CALCULUS
AND CHOOSING TO DELAY THE
DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDING FOR UC
RIVERSIDE AND UC MERCED? YES AND
FIRST I'D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT IT IS A DELAY AND IT IS NOT
PART OF OUR REDUCTIONS. IT'S NOT
PART OF OUR TRIGGER. SO WANTED
TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THESE
CONTINUE TO BE PRIORITIES WITHIN
THIS BUDGET AND AGAIN LOOKING
FOR BUDGET SOLUTIONS. THE DELAY
IS A YEAR. UM IT IS ONE OF
SEVERAL, AS YOU HAVE NOTED, UM,
IN ADDITION TO A èC BERKELEY
PROJECT AS WELL AS YOU CLOCK
PROJECT UM, SO AGAIN, JUST
LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS AND
ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS IS A
PARTY. IT IS AN IDOL, A BUCKET.
YES GABE PADDOCK. I WAS JUST
GOING TO WEIGH IN AND SAY THAT
WE HAVE A FORTHCOMING AND
ANALYSIS OF THE CSU BUDGET
PROPOSAL IN WHICH WE WOULD SAY
THAT THIS THE WAY MAY WARRANT UH
, ANOTHER LOOK BY THE
LEGISLATURE BECAUSE BASED ON
EXISTING SPACE UTILIZATION AT
THE DIFFERENT CAMPUSES, WE'RE
NOT SURE THAT THIS ONE, UM IS
THE BEST ONE FOR DELAY. THANK
YOU BOTH FOR YOUR RESPONSES. I
DO WANT TO END BY ACKNOWLEDGING
THAT, UH, THESE DELAYS UH, YOU
KNOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT
EQUITY ACROSS THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA WORKED CONTINUING TO
FUND PROJECTS AND MORE AFFLUENT
PART OF THE STATE ON TIME INSIDE
. YOU JUST WANT TO CLOSE WITH
THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR
FONTE'S MR. FONG MR. JACKSON
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR CHAIRMAN
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE
PRESENTATIONS HERE TODAY. I'D
LIKE TO FOCUS MY COMMENTS ON THE
HIGHER EDUCATION SEGMENT. AND
THEY GET TO THE GOVERNOR.
RELIGION GENERALLY, SUPPORT OF
ALL THREE HIGHER EDUCATION
SEGMENTS PROPOSALS WHEN WE LOOK
AT THE PROPOSED 8.13% INCREASE
FOR CALLER FOR POP 98 AS YOU
MENTIONED, THAT'S UM PRETTY
SOLID. I ALSO APPRECIATE THE
GOVERNOR'S SUPPORT AND LOOKING
AT EXEMPTING STATE TAXES ON
STUDENT LOAN DEBT. AS DISCHARGED
BY THE GOVERNMENT. UM, WE'RE
CLOSELY TRACKING THAT. AND WE
HAVE THE BILL ASSEMBLY BILL 26
ON THAT AS WELL. IN TERMS OF
BASIC NEEDS. I KNOW A NUMBER OF
THE COMMUNITY, COLLEGE BOARD
MEMBERS AND TRUSTEES AND
LEADERSHIP CAME UP TO SACRAMENTO
LAST WEEK AND AS WE HEARD FROM A
NUMBER OF THE COMMITTEE COLLEGE
LEADERSHIP REALLY CONCERNED
ABOUT ONGOING. ISSUES AROUND IN
ROMAN DECLINE, AND WE WILL LOOK
AT BASIC NEEDS. UH, THE FOOD IN
TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION COST
ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO
CONTINUE TO PUSH FOR FUNDING FOR
TRANSIT PASSES THAT WILL HELP
OUR STUDENTS GET TO SCHOOL AND
TO STAY IN SCHOOL OR SOMETHING
THAT, UH WE WILL BE KEENLY
FOCUSED ON AND THEN IN TERMS OF
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
AS WELL. AND WE KNOW THAT
GOVERNORS PROPOSED $14 MILLION
FOR WORKFORCE TRAINING AND
GRANTS, BUT IN CONVERSATIONS
WITH A NUMBER OF FOLKS IN
DIFFERENT SEGMENTS, WE KNOW THAT
WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO PUSH HARD
ON MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELORS ON
PSYCHIATRIC TECHNICIANS AND A
NUMBER OF AREAS IN THE CAREER
PATHWAY PROGRAMS. UM AND LEADING
UP SIMILAR QUESTION, ALSO, AND
FACILITIES AND HOUSING THAT MR
VONTAZE REFERENCED. I'M ALSO
VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL TO DELAY FUNDS ON
MONTHS LATER FOR STUDENT HOUSING
, THE $250 MILLION THAT'S
PROPOSED FOR THE 30 YEAR GRANTS
AND THE $900 MILLION IN
REVOLVING LOAN FUND. AND WE KNOW
THAT STUDENT HOUSING IS CRITICAL
TO REALLY ADDRESSING OUR
ENROLLMENT DECLINES, ESPECIALLY
IN OUR COLLEGES. AND SO LAST
YEAR, THERE WERE ABOUT $3
BILLION IN REQUEST LAST YEAR,
AND WE KNOW THAT WE'RE ABLE TO
FUND $1.1 BILLION, AND THERE'S A
TREMENDOUS NEED IN OUR COLLEGE
COMMUNITIES TO ADD HOUSING FOR
STUDENTS OR FACULTY FOR STAFF IN
OUR COMMUNITIES AND TO LIKE A
SEVERAL READY PROJECTS THAT CAN
BE BUILT AND THE NEXT YEAR OR
TWO. WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATION
PROPOSED DELAY FUNDING. FOR
STUDENT HOUSING FOR THE CCS YOU
AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM IN
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU, MR FONG.
UM AGAIN, JUST WANT TO START OFF
WITH STATING THAT WE HAVE 1.75
BILLION OUT THERE THROUGH THIS
CURRENT YEAR. UM FOR THAT
PROGRAM, THE HIGHER EDUCATION
STUDENT HOUSING GRANT PROGRAM WE
ARE PROPOSING DELAYING 250
MILLION OF WHAT WAS PLANNED IN
THE BUDGET YEAR. INITIALLY IT
WAS 750 MILLION. WE ARE GOING TO
KEEP 500 MILLION AND, UM DEFER
TO OR DELAY 250 MILLION, SO I
JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THERE IS THERE. THERE ARE
DOLLARS OUT THERE SIGNIFICANT
DOLLARS, UNDERSTAND THAT THE
NEED IS GREATER THAN THE DOLLARS
THAT ARE OUT THERE IN REGARDS TO
THE REVOLVING LOAN FUND. WE ARE
PUSHING THAT OUT BY A YEAR. UM
ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THESE
ARE IN THE DELAY BUCKET. THESE
ARE NOT IN THE REDUCTION BUCKET
SO AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTING THE THAT
THEY REMAIN A PRIORITY FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION AS WELL. THANK
YOU SO MUCH, MR ANTHONY. WE CAN
CONTINUE TO PUSH ON RUNNING FOR
STUDENT HOUSING FOR FACILITIES
AS CRITICAL TO MEET THE NEEDS OF
OUR SEGMENTS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
HERE IN CALIFORNIA, SO THANK YOU
SO MUCH. MR JACKSON. THEN WE'LL
GO TO MS BANTAM. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. MR CHAIRMAN. I THINK MY
FIRST FEW QUESTIONS ARE JUST IN
REGARDS TO THE BUDGET AS A
WHOLE. AND I THINK MY QUESTION
IS ACTUALLY FOR BOTH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND THE L
A. OH AND THAT IS WHEN YOU'RE
THINKING ABOUT WHICH SHOULD BE
FUNDED. ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT
IT IN TERMS OF PRIORITIES? ARE
YOU TALKING? ARE YOU THINKING
ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF NEW VERSUS
OLD FUNDING, RIGHT CONTINUED
FINDING THINGS WE FUNDED IN THE
PAST, AS OPPOSED TO NEW THINGS.
UH WHAT IS YOUR OR IS IT A
COMBINATION OF THE BOTH? UM YES
. THANK YOU. FOR THAT QUESTION.
I WOULD SAY IT IS A COMBINATION
OF BOTH. UM BUT REALLY LOOKING
AT PRIORITIES AS A PRIORITY, SO
LOOKING AT THE FORMER TWO
BUDGETS, IN PARTICULAR WHERE A
LOT OF THIS MULTI YEAR FUNDING
TOOK PLACE AND AGAIN GOING BACK
TO, UM, UH, MY DISCUSSION OF
USING THE SURPLUS WE HAD FOR ONE
TIME FUNDING AND A LOT OF THAT
WAS SIGNIFICANT FUNDING OVER
MULTIPLE YEARS BEING ABLE TO
PULL THAT BACK IF NECESSARY, AND
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING IS. SOME OF THOSE
REDUCTIONS ARE THOSE PULLBACKS.
IN THOSE, UM ONE TIME MULTIYEAR
EXPENDITURES. UM AND OBVIOUSLY
THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE
BUDGET ACT. AND SO YOU ARE
SEEING SOME NEW INVESTMENTS IN
HERE AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, UM,
SUCH AS A WATER CONTINGENCY. UM
THERE ARE SOME CAL COMPETES
FUNDING TO DRAW DOWN FEDERAL
FUNDS. SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT
HAVE CHANGED SINCE OUR
PRIORITIES IN THE 22 BUDGET ACT
THAT YOU ARE SEEING IN THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. PROPOSAL.
HMM. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION
. GABE PADDOCK, LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE AND UH, WHAT I
WOULD SAY TWO IN RESPONSE IS
REALLY INTO SIGNIFICANT EXTENT.
WE TRY TO FOLLOW YOUR LEAD AND
THINK ABOUT WHAT YOUR PRIORITIES
HAVE BEEN AND WHAT YOU'VE
EXHIBITED THE LEGISLATURE'S
PRIORITIES TO BE OVER THE YEARS.
WHAT I WOULD POINT OUT IS THAT
IN THE LAST TWO FISCAL YEARS
BEFORE THE CURRENT ONE, WE SAW
EXTRAORDINARY REVENUE GROWTH 30%
IN 2020. 2021 21 22. WE SAW
ANOTHER 20% GROWTH, SO THESE
WERE HISTORIC RATES OF REVENUE
GROWTH, PUTTING OUR REVENUES AT
A HISTORIC PEAK. AND PRUDENTLY.
THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE
ALLOCATED A VERY SUBSTANTIAL
SHARE OF THAT PEAK REVENUE. THE
SURPLUSES THAT RESULTED FROM
THAT PEAK REVENUE TO ONE TIME
AND TEMPORARY PURPOSES. UH AND
SO, AS WE LOOK AT THE SITUATION
NOW AND THINK ABOUT, UM YOUR
CORE SERVICES, THE CORE STATE
OPERATIONS WHERE YOU'RE
PROVIDING KEY SAFETY NET
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES TO PEOPLE
THAT WOULD BE VULNERABLE AND AN
ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, FOR EXAMPLE.
UM ONE OF THE REASONS WE'VE SAID
TO HOLD OFF ON TAPPING INTO THE
RESERVES NOW IS THAT'S A
POSSIBILITY WE COULD HAVE THAT
KIND OF A DOWNTURN WHERE YOU
WOULD BE FACED WITH THOSE KIND
OF CHOICES. THAT'S WHY AT LEAST
THE WAY WE INTERPRET THE RECENT
ACTIONS BY THE LEGISLATURE.
HAVING CHOSEN TO PUT A LOT OF
THOSE SURPLUSES TO THESE ONE
TIME PURPOSES. PARTLY FOR BUDGET
RESILIENCE PURPOSES. THAT'S THE
GOOD FIRST PLACE TO LOOK IN OUR
IN KIND OF THE WAY. WE'RE
FRAMING THIS FOR YOU. UM, BUT
CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN. IT'S
REALLY THE LEGISLATURE'S
PRIORITY, YOU KNOW, CHOICES TO
MAKE, BUT AS WE KIND OF
INTERPRET THE RECENT CHOICES.
YOU'VE MADE THE RECENT FISCAL
SITUATION AND WHAT IT IS NOW
THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE SHAPED
SOME OF OUR COMMENTS THAT THAT
YOU SEE IN OUR REPORT. THANK YOU
FOR THAT. UM IN TERMS OF THIS
PROPOSED BUDGET. I MEAN, HOW
MANY DIFFERENT UM, CORPORATE TAX
CREDITS AND TAX INCENTIVES ARE
IN THIS BUDGET. UM. AS I
MENTIONED, THERE'S A CAL
COMPETES EXTENSION, UM WITH
THEM. SORRY. THAT'S ACTUALLY
GRANT. SO WE HAVE THE FILM TAX
CREDIT THAT IS INCLUDED IN HERE.
UM AND THAT IS, I WILL TURN TO A
COLLEAGUE ON THE LINE. BUT THAT
IS THAT IS THE ONE NOTABLE ONE.
THAT IT UM LIKE A NOTE. YEAH
THIS IS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. IN TERMS OF CORPORATE
TAX CREDIT. UM IT IS THE CASE.
SEPTIC FILM TAX CREDIT IS STILL
ONLY ONE THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED,
UM, IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET.
OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM
OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A LARGE NUMBER
OF TECHNOLOGY FIRMS IN OUR STATE
, AND THEY'VE GONE THROUGH A LOT
OF DIFFERENT LAYOFFS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. AND I KNOW SOME HAVE
BEEN REHIRED FROM OTHER UM OTHER
CORPORATIONS. BUT WHAT? UH DO
YOU THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO
HAVE ANY TYPE OF IMPACT AT ALL
ON OUR BUDGET? UM THERE'S TWO
THINGS I'LL SAY TO THAT IN THE
FIRST ONE IS THAT, UM AS I
MENTIONED, OUR TAX STRUCTURE IS
RELIANT, HEAVILY RELIANT ON
HIGHER INCOME TAX EARNERS IN
REGARDS TO THEIR, UM PERSONAL
INCOME TAXES, AND TO THE EXTENT
THAT THERE ARE LAYOFFS AT A
HIGHER LEVEL TECH FIRMS WHERE
THEY MAY BE, UM, PAID. HIGHER
INCOMES. THEN THERE COULD BE
IMPACTS TO OUR REVENUE. UM AT
THE SAME TIME, UM THE STATE IS
LOOKING AT, UH, LOOKING AT THIS
AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING ON
NEW TALENT TO THE STATE
WORKFORCE, SO DEALING WITH
WORKFORCE ISSUES, SO THAT'S THE
SECOND POINT. BUT YES, I THINK
THAT THAT IS ONE OF THE RISKS
THAT WE SEE, UH IN REGARDS TO
THE ECONOMY TURNING. IF THERE
ARE MORE LAYOFFS, UNEMPLOYMENT
RATE WILL GO UP. AND POTENTIALLY
OUR REVENUES WILL BE IMPACTED.
ELIO YES, SURE. WE DO SEE
EVIDENCE OF THIS SHOWING UP IN
OUR WITHHOLDING TAX COLLECTIONS
THEY WERE DOWN YEAR OVER YEAR
THROUGH DECEMBER 6.7% AND THEN
14% IN JANUARY COMPARED TO THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL
ASSUMPTIONS. AND THOSE
WITHHOLDING TAX COLLECTIONS DO
REFLECT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE
TECHNOLOGY SECTOR IN PARTICULAR
, WHEN YOU THE TECH FIRMS THAT
ARE GOING PUBLIC OR ISSUING, YOU
KNOW, INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERINGS.
THOSE WERE DOWN SUBSTANTIALLY IN
2022. SOME OF THOSE FIRMS WERE
DOING THE LAYOFFS. AND UM, WHEN
THOSE FIRMS DO GO PUBLIC, IT
DOES GENERATE A LOT OF
WITHHOLDING TAX AND SO WERE, YOU
KNOW, SUSPECT THAT A LOT OF THE
UNDERPERFORMANCE IN THAT
PARTICULAR REVENUE STREAM IS
RELATED TO THIS AND SO IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE'RE WATCHING
QUITE CLOSELY. MOVING ON TO
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, UH,
ISSUES HERE. UM OF COURSE, WE
ALWAYS TALK ABOUT THE OVERALL
RAINY DAY FUND. UM AM I CORRECT
THAT THERE'S ALSO A HUMAN
SERVICES RAINY DAY FUND AS WELL.
UM, I MENTIONED THAT THE SAFETY
NET RESERVE FUND WHICH IS ABOUT
900,000,900 MILLION, OKAY? AND
IS THAT IS THAT THE ONLY BEST AS
THAT AS MUCH AS AS STATUTORY
LEE? AVAILABLE MEANING IF YOU
CAN'T MAX OUT MORE THAN THAT,
RIGHT, THERE IS NO STATUTORY
LIMIT. OKAY, SO THAT'S JUST BEEN
WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN WILLING
TO PUT INTO THAT FUND. IT HAS
BEEN ABOUT 404 150 MILLION IN
PAST AND IS NOW 900 MILLION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM OBVIOUSLY
, BY ALL METRICS WERE ALSO IN A
MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS. UM EVEN
THOUGH WE DON'T TALK ABOUT IT AS
A CRISIS, I MEAN IT'S A BIG
DEAL. MHM UM AND, UM, I AM
CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN
TERMS OF, UM AND THERE SHE TIBBS
AND THE AREAS OF BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH AND PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SOME OF THOSE DELAYS. UM IN
TERMS OF US BEING ABLE TO MEET
THE CURRENT CRISIS. UM AND IN
TERMS OF MEETING FUTURE CRISIS
IS IN TERMS OF, OF COURSE, RIGHT
AFTER THE PANDEMIC, THEN WE HAVE
MONKEY POX. AND THEN WE HAD
RIGHT. THESE THINGS ARE GONNA BE
HAPPENING MORE FREQUENTLY. UM,
HOW DO WE DO? WE REALLY, UM UH,
I WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH YOU
ALL AND REEVALUATING SOME OF
THOSE THINGS THAT MAKE SURE
CALIFORNIA STATES PREPARED IN
TERMS OF THESE THINGS AND TO
MEET THE CURRENT CRISIS SIMILAR
TO WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE
HOUSING CRISIS AND THE
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS. WE'RE
BASICALLY THROWING EVERYTHING,
INCLUDING THE KITCHEN SINK AT
IT, BUT WE'RE NOT DOING IT FOR
MENTAL HEALTH. UM AND I WOULD I
SAY THAT SOMETIMES, UH, IT COULD
BE EVEN A BIGGER PROBLEM THAN
SOME OF THE ISSUES WERE ALREADY
CALLING A CRISIS. AND SO, UM, I
WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SOME FUTURE
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT, UM AND
SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE
SETTING OURSELVES FOR THE
FUTURE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE IN
LEAN TIMES. I'M WORRIED ABOUT
THE FUTURE HERE WHEN IT COMES TO
SOME OF THESE TARGETED, UH, UH,
TARGETED DELAYS OR AND, UH I
BELIEVE THESE ARE DELAYS
CORRECT? THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY
THAT WE HAVE OVER $8 BILLION IN
, UM, PROGRAMMING FOR MENTAL
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROGRAMS OF
WHICH 2.7 BILLION BY THE END OF
THIS FISCAL YEAR WILL BE GOING
OUT FOR A COUPLE OF THOSE
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING THE
CONTINUUM OF CARE INFRASTRUCTURE
PROGRAM AND THE BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH BRIDGE PROGRAM. UM WHILE
THERE ARE SOME DELAYS IN SOME OF
THE WORKFORCE HEALTH WORKFORCE
UM, SPECIFICALLY, AS YOU
MENTIONED, THERE'S ALSO QUITE A
BIT OF NEW INVESTMENTS. UM AND
REALIZING THAT THERE ARE CUTS TO
THOSE THE TOTAL AMOUNT. THERE IS
STILL A SIZABLE INVESTMENTS AND
WE CONTINUE TO AND WE WILL TAKE
YOU UP ON YOUR OFFER TO CONTINUE
TO WORK WITH YOU THROUGH THE
SPRING ON THIS. I APPRECIATE
THAT. UM LASTLY, IN TERMS OF,
UH, EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION.
UM I CONTINUOUSLY HEAR SOME
CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, IS GREAT
THAT WE'RE EXPANDING TK, BUT
WE'RE NOT TAKING A WHOLE FAMILY
APPROACH WHEN IT COMES TO TK
PRIMARILY IF I'M A WORKING FAT
OF FINE, UM. PART OF A WORKING
FAMILY, AND TK IS ONLY HALF DAY
. UM, I CAN'T. HOW CAN I MAKE
THAT STUFF KIND OF HAPPENED ARE
ARE WE LOOKING AT MAKING IT MORE
FULL DAY AS A AS OPPOSED TO, UM
AH! ONE SIZE FITS ALL KIND OF
THING FOR FAMILIES. UM YEAH, I
WOULD SAY THAT THE GOVERNOR IS
VERY INTERESTED IN EARLY
EDUCATION AND CHILDCARE, AND THE
MOVEMENT IS TOWARDS MORE A FULL
DAY PROGRAMMING. UM, THAT THAT
IS, UM INCLUSIVE OF OUR EXTENDED
DAY PROGRAM. THERE'S BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED
INFORMER BUDGETS THAT ARE
CONTINUING TO BE IMPLEMENTED TO
EXTEND THE DAY BEFORE SCHOOL AND
AFTER SCHOOL TO MEET SOME OF
THOSE CONCERNS AS YOU MENTIONED
FOR CHILDCARE AND WORKFORCE AND
FAMILIES GOING TO WORK. UM CAN I
JUST JUST REITERATE ONE POINT
HERE BECAUSE I THINK, MR JACKSON
, YOU HAVE AN EXCELLENT 1.0.1 OF
THE MAIN INHIBITORS TO FOUR DAY
TK IS THE ISSUE THAT OUR
COLLEAGUE MR MURATSUCHI BROUGHT
UP WHICH IS FACILITIES. IT'S
BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE AND SUB TO
NOT AS MUCH AS STAFFING ISSUE
BUT A FACILITY ISSUES SO IF WE
DON'T HAVE THE FACILITIES WHICH
HAVE BEEN CUTTING THE BUDGET.
AND WE CAN'T MOVE TOWARD ALL
DAY, WHICH I THINK THERE IS AN
INTEREST, ESPECIALLY FOR WORKING
FAMILIES, RIGHT? APPRECIATE YOUR
QUESTION, AND I WOULD EVEN SAY
AN IMPERATIVE IN TERMS OF WHO
WAS ABLE TO ACCESS HALF DAY
RIGHT? THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT
EQUITY ISSUES. WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT INCOME ISSUES. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT SINGLE PARENT
VERSUS TWO PARENT HOUSEHOLDS.
THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. UH LASTLY
, I KNOW WE YOU'RE PROPOSING TO
DELAY TOO CLOSE TO ABOUT 20,000
CHILDCARE SLOTS. UM. BUT IN THE
BUDGET TO DELAY THAT CORRECT,
IT'S LESS OF A DELAY AND MORE OF
AN ALIGNMENT TO THE REALITIES ON
THE GROUND. AT THIS POINT, UM,
OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF BUDGETS
WE HAVE OVER 100,000 SLOTS THAT
HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. UM THEY HAVE
NOT ALL BEEN UTILIZED. AND SO
THIS IS A BIT OF A KETCHUP TO
ALLOW FOR THAT IN THE BUDGET
YEAR, RATHER THAN PUTTING OUT
20,000 NEW SLOTS. TO ALLOW FOR
THOSE OTHER THOUGHTS THAT HAVE
BEEN OPENED UP TO BE FILLED.
HAVE WE THOUGHT ABOUT USING THAT
MONEY INSTEAD TO RAISE THE RATES
OF CHILD CARE WORKERS SO THAT WE
CAN ACTUALLY PROPERLY STAFFED
THEM? AND, UM, THERE ARE
DISCUSSIONS UNDERWAY WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION AND STAKEHOLDERS
IN REGARDS TO A SINGLE
ALLOCATION FOR THE RATES. SO
THAT IS UNDER DISCUSSION. YES
DEFINITELY. THERE'S MANY OF US
WHO WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO
HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AS WELL.
UM AND THEN I THINK, LASTLY, I
WAS JUST TALK ABOUT THE, UM,
HOMEOWNERS PROGRAM. CALIFORNIA
DREAM FOR ALL AND CAL HOME. HMM
YOU ARE PROPOSING TO, UM. MAKE
CUTS TO THAT AS WELL. HOW
SIGNIFICANT ARE THOSE CUTS?
THERE'S ABOUT A TOTAL OF 350
MILLION FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP
PROGRAM. CUTS TO HOMEOWNERSHIP
PROGRAMS AND THE THINKING BEHIND
THAT WAS TO REALLY WORK, UM LESS
ON HOME OWNERSHIP AND BUILDING
MORE UNITS IN INSTEAD. OKAY? AND
I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT FOR ME,
MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. MISS MISS
BENTO, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND ONCE
AGAIN, MISS KOREA HAS TO LEAVE.
SHE'S HOPING TO GET IN ONE QUICK
QUESTION. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. UH MY QUESTION IS
SPECIFIC TO THE ONLY TAX CREDIT
DISCUSSED IN THE BUDGET AND I
WANT TO THANK THE GOVERNOR
HIMSELF FOR HIS COMMITMENT
TOWARDS DIVERSITY AND EQUITY BY
CREATING THE FIRST, UM AH!
DEPARTMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE
FOCUSED ON EQUITY AND INCLUSION
AND DIVERSITY WITHIN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. BUT THE FILM TAX
CREDIT AND ITS LAST REITERATION
INCLUDED COMPONENTS THAT WOULD
ALLOW FOR BELOW AND ABOVE THE
LINE. DIVERSITY UM, WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENTS SINCE WE CAN'T
MANDATE DIVERSITY, BUT WE
CERTAINLY CAN BE CREATIVE ABOUT
HOW WE INCLUDE THE PEOPLE OF
CALIFORNIA AND AN INDUSTRY THAT
IS FROM CALIFORNIA, SPECIFICALLY
A LEADING INDUSTRY AROUND THE
WORLD THAT IS INCREDIBLY
BENEFICIAL TO THE ECONOMY OF
CALIFORNIA. I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE
COMMITMENT IS FROM THE GOVERNOR
TO CONTINUE THIS PROGRAM ONE BUT
TWO MOST IMPORTANTLY, ENSURE
THAT THERE IS DIVERSITY
MEASUREMENTS AND MEASUREMENTS OF
SUCCESS WITHIN THE FILM INDUSTRY
, THE FILM COMMISSION IN THE
FILM TAX CREDIT AS WE MOVE
FORWARD, UM, I MET THIS BUDGET.
YES THE GOVERNOR IS COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING THE DISCUSSIONS
AROUND EQUITY IN REGARDS TO THE
FILM TAX CREDIT, AND WE CONTINUE
TO LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOU AND OTHERS ON THAT LANGUAGE
FOR THE TRAILER BILL. THANK YOU.
MISS PANTER. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
. IT'S ALREADY BEEN STATED THAT
THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
CERTAINLY INCLUDES SOME VERY
DIFFICULT CUTS. UH BECAUSE WE
NEED TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE
ECONOMIC DOWNTURN. AND WHILE WE
CONSIDER THE PULLBACKS ON
SPENDING THAT WE MUST DO, I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
CONSIDERING THE OPPORTUNITY
COSTS WHEN WE MAKE THOSE, UH,
SPENDING CUTS TO VITAL SERVICES
AND PROGRAMS, PARTICULARLY TO
OUR VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS.
WHAT THESE FORCED CUTS WERE
FORCED TO MAKE SOME VERY
DIFFICULT DECISIONS AND WE
SHOULD BE PRIORITIZING
SAFEGUARDING OUR INVESTMENTS AND
ALSO CONSIDERING THE OPPORTUNITY
COSTS WHEN WE LET SOMETHING GO
IN THE SHORT TERM IN TERMS OF
WHAT IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON OUR
POPULATIONS THAT ARE MOST
VULNERABLE OVER THE LONG TERM. I
WANT TO TURN A LITTLE BIT TO
PUBLIC SAFETY. NOW WITH THAT IN
MIND. I CERTAINLY LOOK FORWARD
TO DISCUSSIONS AND SUBCOMMITTEE
FIVE WHERE ALL OF THE PROPOSED
CUTS THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS
OFFERED. UM $340 MILLION OUR
LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES AND VERY
FEW, IF ANY, ARE REDUCTIONS TO
THE SUB FIVE DEPARTMENTS WITH
THAT I'D LIKE TO TURN SOME
ATTENTION TO THE CDCR
SPECIFICALLY. AND ASK IF YOU ALL
CAN EXPLAIN WITH SOME DETAIL WHY
THE COST OF STATE CORRECTIONS
CONTINUES TO RISE YEAR AFTER
YEAR. WHEN THE POPULATION HAS
BEEN DECREASING FOR THE LAST
DECADE. NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE ARE HEALTH OR HEALTH CARE
RELATED COSTS AND STAFFING, BUT
IT IS A QUESTION FOR US TO ASK
WHETHER THERE WE CAN JUSTIFY
SPENDING 4 60,000 BUDGETED
POSITIONS WHEN OUR PRISON
POPULATION IS 95,000 PEOPLE. CAN
YOU SPEAK TO SOME OF THE DETAILS
RELATED TO THAT? YEAH, I WOULD.
JUST, UM I AGREE WITH YOUR
POINTS AND REGARDS TO THE
HEALTHCARE COSTS AS WELL AS SOME
OF THOSE FIXED COSTS. UM THAT
ARE HARDER TO CREATE SAVINGS,
AND OBVIOUSLY, THERE ARE PRISON
CLOSURES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED
THAT WILL GENERATE SOME SAVINGS
, BUT IN REGARDS TO SOME OF THE
MORE DETAILED MORE DETAILS OF
YOUR QUESTION, I WILL TURN TO A
COLLEAGUE ON THE LINE. THIS IS
CYNTHIA ABANDONS THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE. THE ADMINISTRATION
REMAINS COMMITTED TO REDUCING
CALIFORNIA'S EXPENDITURES
PRESENTS WHILE PROMOTING PUBLIC
SAFETY. CDCR S BUDGET HAS BEEN
REDUCED AS A RESULT OF PRISON
CLOSURES AND THE CHANGES IN
AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION THROUGH
THE ANNUAL POPULATION ADJUSTMENT
, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CLOSURE OF
DUAL VOCATIONAL INSTITUTION IN
CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTER
ARE ESTIMATED TO GENERATE ANNUAL
SAVINGS OF APPROXIMATELY 293.2
MILLION AND A REDUCTION OF 1773
POSITIONS. THESE REDUCTIONS ARE
HAVE BEEN OFFSET BY TARGETED
INVESTMENTS AND REHABILITATIVE
AND HEALTHCARE PROGRAMS SUCH AS
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS,
PSYCHIATRIC CARE, UM, EXPANDED
COLLEGE EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY
FOR THE INCARCERATED. AND IN
RECENT YEARS WE JUST WANT TO
NOTE THAT A SIGNIFICANT PORTION
OF INCREASED SPENDING IN RECENT
WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE VARIOUS
RESPONSES TO THE COVID 19
PANDEMIC. ANOTHER FACTOR THAT
WAS MENTIONED ARE THE RISING
HEALTH CARE COSTS FOR THE
INCARCERATED POPULATION. AND
WHILE THE POPULATION IS REDUCING
OVER THE YEARS, THE AGE OF THE
INCARCERATED POPULATION IS
OLDER. WHICH RESUME RESULTS IN
THESE HIGHER LEVEL OF HEALTHCARE
COSTS, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL
STAFF. UM AND JUST TO NOTE
HEALTHCARE REPRESENTS A
SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF CDCR S
BUDGET. IT'S AT 3.8 BILLION, OR
JUST OVER A QUARTER OF CDCR S
TOTAL BUDGET. HOWEVER WE ARE
BEGINNING TO SEE A CONTINUAL
DECLINE AND OVERALL COSTS DUE TO
THE STEADILY DECLINING
POPULATION. UM IN NOVEMBER, 2022
CITIES YEAR BEGAN THE CLOSURE OF
A SECOND PRISON AND EXPECTS IT
TO BE IN WARM SHUT DOWN BY THE
END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. UM THEY
CDCR IS ALSO ANNOUNCED THE
CLOSURE OF TWO ADDITIONAL
PRISONS IN THE CLOSE CLOSURE OF
FACILITIES WITHIN SIX PRISONS
OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS, SO
WE'LL SEE SIGNIFICANT ONGOING
SAVINGS THAT WILL BE REALIZED
UPON COMPLETION OF THOSE
ENDEAVORS. AND THEN THERE WILL
ALSO BE A COMMENSURATE REDUCTION
AND BUDGETED POSITIONS. I
APPRECIATE THAT. I DO WANT TO.
JUST, UH HIGHLIGHT AGAIN THAT
THE LEGISLATURE HAS PUT TOGETHER
SOME SPECIFIC LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES AND SOLUTIONS TO, UH
TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NO
NEED TO HAPPEN WITHIN CDCR S
PURVIEW, AND I WOULD DEFINITELY
LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ENSURE THAT THOSE LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES WHERE WE HAVE OUR
LEGISLATORS GOING INTO PRISONS,
UH AND UNDERSTANDING FROM THE
MOST IMPACTED PEOPLE. WHAT
ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE CHANGED
ACTUALLY CAN BE REFLECTED IN OUR
BUDGET, AND I'LL ALSO GIVE SOME
SPACE FOR THE L. A TO RESPOND.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND WE
WOMEN, UM I THINK THIS IS A
REALLY IMPORTANT LINE OF
QUESTIONING OR OFFICE THINKS
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION ISN'T
TAKING FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE
POPULATION TRENDS THAT WE SEE
OVER THE NEXT, UH IN THE NEAR
TERM, THERE'S GOING TO BE
SOMETHING AROUND 10,000 EMPTY
BEDS THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM.
GROWING TO 20,000 BEDS, WHICH
COULD CREATE THE SPACE TO CLOSE
4 TO 5 PRISONS OVER SOME PERIOD
OF TIME IN THE NEXT SEVERAL
YEARS, WHICH COULD GENERATE
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN SAVINGS.
SO WE DO THINK THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT THE LEGISLATURE COULD
CONSIDER EXPLORING MORE
CONCERTEDLY WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION. UH AND, OF
COURSE ON ANOTHER COST DRIVER IN
THIS AREA IS EMPLOYEE
COMPENSATION AND WOULD BE
ANOTHER TOPIC TO EXPLORE WHEN
LOOKING AT THE COST OF CDCR.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I WOULD
ALSO JUST LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT
CLEARLY, ONE OF THE COST DRIVERS
IN CDCR HAS BEEN THE INORDINATE
AMOUNT OF LITIGATION THAT HAS
OCCURRED IN CD WITHIN CDCR
BECAUSE OF THE VIOLATION OF
SERIES OF LAWS. UM AND THE
REMEDIAL MEASURES THAT ARE
CAUSED FROM THAT IT'S TAXPAYER
DOLLARS THAT ARE USED TO BE ABLE
TO SUPPORT ATTORNEY'S FEES. AND
THE EX POST REMEDIAL MEASURES
THAT WE HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE. IN
RESPONSE TO THAT. IT SEEMS LIKE
A VERY REACTIVE, UH, PROGRAMMING
MODEL THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE
RIGHT NOW. AND I WOULD LIKE TO
UNDERSTAND WHETHER THERE HAVE
BEEN MEASURES PUT IN PLACE TO
REALLY UNDERSTAND MORE FULLY.
WHAT KIND OF CORRECTIONS NEED TO
BE. SO THAT WE ACTUALLY CAN BE
MORE PROACTIVE. I'D LIKE TO TURN
TO SOMEBODY ON THE LINE FOR A
LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THAT. THIS
IS ALISON HEWITT DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE, ONE OF THE FIRST NOTE
THAT MUCH OF THE LITIGATION, UM
THAT THAT IS BEING REFERRED TO
OUR LONGSTANDING CLASS ACTION
LITIGATION. FOR EXAMPLE, THE
COLEMAN LAWSUIT, WHICH DEALS
WITH MENTAL HEALTH WAS FILED IN
19 90/3. DECADES AGO. THE
ARMSTRONG LITIGATION IN 1994 AND
THE PLOT OF LITIGATION IN 2001,
SO THESE ARE NOT STRICTLY
SPEAKING NEW LITIGATIONS AS YOU
REFERENCED. IT'S WHERE THE
DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN WORKING
THROUGH REMEDIAL PHASES FOR A
PERIOD OF TIME, BUT SO IT'S NOT
TAKE TYPICALLY OR TECHNICALLY
SPEAKING, NEW LITIGATION WOULD
NOTE THAT CDCR IS IMPLEMENTING A
NUMBER OF MEASURES TO TRY TO
ASSESS ITS OPERATIONS AND
POLICIES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE
AND THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
INCLUDES SOME TARGETED RESOURCES
, UNDERSTANDING THE FISCAL
CLIMATE BUT SOME TARGETED
RESOURCES TO FURTHER SUPPORT THE
DEPARTMENT'S EFFORTS TO WORK
TOWARDS DURABLE, SUSTAINABLE
COMPLIANCE. WITH THE REMEDIAL
MEASURES, WHICH IS, UM AND
LEVERAGING TECHNOLOGY BASED
SOLUTIONS. UM SO YES, IT'S
SOMETHING THAT SERIOUS. ER AND
THE ADMINISTRATION ARE
CONSTANTLY LOOKING AT, UM AND,
UM IT'S TIME TO DO AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE. UM, AND TRYING TO BE
PROACTIVE AND IMPLEMENT. UM KIND
OF TARGETED STAFFING MODELS OR
OTHER PROVISIONS TO PREVENT. UM
ISSUES FROM ARISING IN THE
CURRENT CLASS ACTION LITIGATION
, AS WELL AS THE FILING,
DEPENDING NEW LITIGATION IN THE
FUTURE. I APPRECIATE THAT, AND
IT'S CERTAINLY LOOK FORWARD TO
THE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS
THAT WE WILL HAVE THROUGH OUR
HEARING PROCESS IN BUDGET SUB
FIVE. I DID WANT TO JUST
TEMPORARILY TURN OUR ATTENTION
BACK TO EARLY CHILDCARE AS MY
COLLEAGUE, UH, TALKED ABOUT MR
JACKSON. UM WE HAVE A SITUATION
NOW WHERE WE'VE ENGAGED IN
CONTINUED DESTABILIZATION OF OUR
EARLY CHILDCARE. AH! WORKFORCE
ARE ENTREPRENEURS WHO ARE IN
EARLY CHILDCARE AND HAVE
DESIGNED ESSENTIALLY A SYSTEM
THAT IS NOT AH, REALLY MEETING
THE NEEDS OF WORKING FAMILIES
RIGHT NOW FOR CHILDREN WHO ARE
IN THE BIRTH TO FOUR CATEGORY.
QUITE FRANKLY, UM UH, HAS THERE
BEEN CONCERTED EFFORT BY THE
ADMINISTRATION IN THIS BUDGET OR
JUST CONSIDERATIONS ACROSS THE
YELLOW TO REALLY THINK ABOUT
PUTTING IN SOME MEASURES THAT
WOULD ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO
PROVIDE IF NOTHING ELSE, A JUST
TRANSITION AND KIND OF MORE
URGENT AND EMERGENT SUPPORT, TOO
EARLY CHILDCARE PROVIDERS AS WE
TRANSITION TO UNIVERSAL TK. UM
I'LL JUST NOTE SOME OF THE PAST
INVESTMENTS IN THE CHILDCARE
SPHERE OVER TWO BILLION IN THE
LAST COUPLE OF YEARS FOR
CHILDCARE. UM WE HAVE, UM, THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN WORKING
WITH C CPU AS WELL TO ADDRESS
SOME ISSUES, BUT I'LL TURN TO
SOMEBODY ONLINE FOR MORE DETAILS
TO YOUR QUESTION. UM THANK YOU.
MEMBER WANT TO GET INTO OUR
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE? I JUST
WANT TO, UM AGO MS LI'S COMMENTS
AND THAT THE ADMINISTRATION
LOOKS FORWARD TO ENGAGING WITH
CPU AND FORTHCOMING NEGOTIATIONS
FOR BARGAINING TO GET TO A
SUCCESSOR AGREEMENT, WHICH YOU
KNOW PRESENT WOULD INCLUDE
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE ISSUES
THAT THAT YOU JUST RAISED. I
APPRECIATE THAT AND JUST WANT TO
ELEVATE THAT THE WOMEN'S CAUCUS
IN PARTICULAR CONTINUES TO
PRIORITIZE EARLY CHILDCARE. I
KNOW THAT THERE ARE MANY
LEGISLATORS, MR JACKSON INCLUDED
, AS PART AS THE CHAIR OF THE
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. UH,
THAT REALLY WANTS TO KIND OF DIG
INTO THE EXTENT TO WHICH WE ARE
PROVIDING THE IMMEDIATE AND
URGENT SUPPORT THAT IS NEEDED TO
STABILIZE OUR CHILDCARE.
INDUSTRY IN THIS MOMENT RIGHT
NOW FOR WORKING FAMILIES IN A
WAY THAT ACTUALLY WILL ALLOW US
TO BE ABLE TO HAVE UNIVERSAL TK
THAT WILL BE USED BY AS MANY
PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY NEED IT, BUT
ALSO RECOGNIZES THAT WE NEED TO
DO A LOT MORE TO BE ABLE TO
ENSURE THAT OUR BIRTH 23 AND
FOUR CHILDREN HAVE THE ABILITY
TO END FAMILIES. OF CHILDREN IN
THAT IN THAT AGE GROUP ACTUALLY
HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE SUSTAINED
AMIDST THE PERFECT STORM OF
COVID. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
UNIVERSAL TK AND THE CURRENT
ECONOMIC REALITIES IN THE STATE.
THANK YOU, MISS PRONTO MISTRESS
DAILY. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. JUST
HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS HERE. I'LL
START WITH TRANSPORTATION SIDE
ON THE DIESEL EXCISE TAX. I
UNDERSTAND THAT THAT BRINGS IN
ABOUT 9.5 BILLION IS THAT SOUND
ACCURATE? I'LL HAVE TO TURN TO
SOMEBODY ON THE LINE FOR THAT
DETAIL. THIS IS A STEVE BALDWIN
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AGAIN. UM
THE DIESEL EXCISE TAX. I THINK
THE NUMBER YOU'RE QUOTING IS, UH
MORE. THE DIESEL AND THE
GASOLINE EXCISE TAX TOGETHER.
THE DIESEL EXCISE TAX BRINGS IN
ABOUT $1.2 BILLION A YEAR, 1.3.
AND THEN THE GASOLINE BRINGS IN
ABOUT 7.5. BILLION. BILLION YES
. OKAY. SO TOTAL BETWEEN THE TWO
IS AROUND $9 BILLION. CORRECT
AND OUT OF THAT NINE BILLION,
HOW MUCH OF IT IS DIVERTED TO
THE GENERAL FUND? UH, NONE OF
IT. NONE NONE OF IT. NO, NO.
OKAY I'M SORRY THERE IS THERE'S
A SMALL PORTION OF GENERAL FUND
ON THAT WAS RELATED TO, UM. THE
SO BACK WHEN WE HAVE BACK WHEN
WE ELIMINATED THE SALES TAX ON
GASOLINE AND CREATED THE
INCREMENT. UH UM, THE PART THE
PART OF THE GASOLINE THAT IS
FROM, UM FROM USE. THAT'S NOT ON
STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM. THE
PORTION THAT IS, THE BASE GOES
TO THAT DEPARTMENT. SO LET'S SAY
THE PART THAT THERE'S AN AMOUNT
BASED ON FOR VOTING. SO THE PART
THAT IS IN THE BASE FOR BOATING
GOES TO BOATING, THE PART THAT'S
IN THE INCREMENT, WHICH USED TO
BE THE SALES TAX THAT WE
CONVERTED TO AN EXCISE TAX. THAT
PART GOES TO GENERAL FUND. SO IF
YOU ADDED UP THE SECTIONS, THE
VOTING SECTIONS THE OFF HIGHWAY
VEHICLE TRUST FUND, UH, SEVERAL
OTHERS IT'S SOME NUMBER A LITTLE
LITTLE LESS THAN 200 MILLION.
BUT THE BUDGET HAS FROM READING
IT CORRECTLY. THEY'RE DIVERTING
$500 MILLION FROM ROAD PROJECTS,
TOO. BIKE LANES AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS. IS THAT
CORRECT? SO WHAT? THE BUDGET WE
PROPOSED, UM WE PROPOSED TO TAKE
OUT OF THE EIGHT THE ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM, WHICH IS
A PROGRAM THAT HAS A BASELINE
FUNDING COMPONENT FROM THE
FEDERAL FUNDS AND FROM THE STATE
HIGHWAY ACCOUNT. UM IT HAS
BASELINE OF ABOUT 200. $230
MILLION A YEAR. IT'S A FEDERAL
PROGRAM THAT THAT WE PROVIDE
MATCHING FUNDS TO. UM SO, UM,
THAT'S WHERE WE'RE PROVIDING AN
ADDITIONAL 300 MILLION TO FULLY
FUND THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM. BUT IT IS A
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM THAT IS
BEEN IN PLACE WE'VE HAD IN PLACE
FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. UM THAT'S
JUST FUNDING TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT PROGRAM IS KEPT COMPLETELY
WHOLE AGAIN. WE HAD WANTED TO
AUGMENT IT IN IN 2022 TO PROVIDE
SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS, AND WE'VE
ALREADY GONE OUT AS A CALL FOR
PROJECTS ON THAT. SO WE WANTED
TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CALL FOR
PROJECTS THAT WE WERE STILL ABLE
TO FUND IT. THE OTHER 200
MILLION IS IN THE CLIMATE
ADAPTATION PROGRAM, WHICH IS
ALSO A NEW FEDERAL PROGRAMS. SO
WHEN WE INITIALLY DID THE
FUNDING FOR THAT WE HAD THE 200
MILLION FROM THE FED THE FED
FUNDING AND THEN THE STATE MATCH
WE WERE GOING TO STATE MATCH IT
WITH WITH GENERAL FUND BUT
BECAUSE IT'S A BECAUSE IT'S A
STATE HIGHWAY, UH, EARTH FEDERAL
HIGHWAY. FUND PROGRAM. WE'RE
GOING TO MATCH IT WITH STATE
HIGHWAY ACCOUNT FUNDING, OKAY,
BUT I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT THIS DOES BECAUSE YOU KNOW
CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT WHEN
THEY'RE PAYING THE GAS TAX. THEY
THINK THAT'S GOING TO PAY FOR
ROADS, ROAD REPAIRS AND ROAD
CONSTRUCTION. AND THE BUDGET
REALLY ORIGINALLY HAD THE 500
MILLION. YOU JUST REFER TO
COMING OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.
BUT NOW YOU'RE PROPOSING TO TAKE
IT OUT OF THE GAS TAX FUND. SO
IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, WHAT WE
WERE PROPOSED. SO THESE ARE BOTH
PROGRAMS THAT ARE FUNDED OUT OF
THE GAS TAX. LAST YEAR. WE HAD
HOPED THAT WE HAD HAD, YOU KNOW,
IN IN TRYING HAVING SOME
ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND. WE LOOK
TO BOOST THOSE PROGRAMS AND
PROVIDE, YOU KNOW ADDITIONAL ONE
TIME FUNDING OVER AND ABOVE THE
BASELINE. AND AS THE AS WE'VE
HAD TO MAKE CHOICES ON WHERE TO
FIND SOLUTIONS, UH, THOSE THOSE
TWO SOURCES BECAUSE THEY WERE
LIKE SAID, BECAUSE THEY WERE
BASELINE, UM, TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAMS TO BEGIN WITH. WE'RE
FINDING THEM OUT OF THEIR THEIR
NORMAL FUNDING SOURCE. SO YES OR
NO? YOU'RE TAKING 500 MILLION
OUT OF THE GAS TAX FUND. FOR
THOSE PROJECTS. FUNDS ARE BEING
FUNDED OUT OF THE GAS TAX FUND
ALONG WITH AS THEY'VE ALWAYS
BEEN FUNDED OUT OF THE GAS TAX
FUND FOR IT FOR 80 P. WE'VE HAD
THE PROGRAM FOR MULTIPLE YEARS
AND THE FEDS THE FEDS HAVE, UM,
GUIDANCE FOR HOW MUCH OF THE
FUNDS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE USED.
IT'S NOT ALL TO BE USED FOR
HIGHWAYS AND ROADS. THERE'S
GUIDANCE FOR MULTIMODAL. UH USES
FOR THOSE FUNDS. SO UM, YOU
KNOW, LIKE I SAID, WE WERE
LOOKING TO BUMP THAT. BUT THEN,
YOU KNOW, UH, AS PART OF THE
SOLUTION, WE, UH WE SHIFTED
THOSE FUNDS OVER. OKAY. THANK
YOU. I WANT TO MOVE ON TO PUBLIC
SAFETY ON THE ISSUE OF PRISONS,
WHICH WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING.
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ESTIMATES
THAT THE PRISON POPULATION IN
THE NEXT YEAR IS GOING TO
DECREASE BY 6. OR SO IS THAT
CORRECT? MISS LEE? YES AND I'LL
TURN THAT QUESTION TO MS HEWITT
AGAIN FOR THE NUMBER.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. UM YES,
IT'S IT. IT IS PROJECTED TO
DECREASE AND WHAT IS THE BASIS
FOR THAT? THAT PROJECTION? UM IS
THAT JUST BASED ON TRENDS OR HOW
DID YOU GET THAT 6% NUMBER? IT'S
ACTUALLY DERIVED FROM. CDCR S
OFFICE OF RESEARCH, AND THEY
LOOK AT A NUMBER OF FACTORS,
INCLUDING RECENT LEGISLATION. UM
TRENDS IN POPULATION. UM. AND A
VARIETY OF OTHER FACTORS THAT GO
INTO THAT. OKAY AND JUST THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE IS AWARE THAT
VIOLENT CRIME HAS BEEN ON THE
INCREASE IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
YES WE ARE. WE ARE AWARE YES. SO
WHILE VIOLENT CRIME IS
INCREASING, WHERE PLANNING FOR
SMALLER POPULATION IN THE
PRISONS IS THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE
EXPECTING LESS CRIME, OR IS THAT
BECAUSE YOU'RE YOU'RE EXPECTING
TO RELEASE MORE PRISONERS AGAIN
? THESE ARE TRENDS BASED ON WHAT
WE'VE SEEN. OKAY? ON THE ISSUE
OF ALSO PUBLIC SAFETY. I WANT TO
DISCUSS JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS. I
COME FROM RIVERSIDE COUNTY. WE
HAVE A MASSIVE SHORTAGE OF
JUDGES. UH IT'S ESTIMATED THAT
WE HAVE 22 FEWER JUDGES THAT
NEEDED AND AS WE'RE SITTING HERE
TODAY, WE HAVE CASES BEING
DISMISSED CRIMINAL CASES BEING
DISMISSED IN OUR COUNTY BECAUSE
THERE'S A LACK OF JUDGES TO HEAR
THE CASES WE'VE HAD ABOUT 1500
CASES BE DISMISSED SO FAR. SO I
SEE THAT THERE'S $2.9 BILLION
BEING PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET TO
SUPPORT TRIAL COURTS. CAN YOU
TELL ME IF THERE'S ANY MONEY FOR
ANY JUDGESHIPS IN THE BUDGET? UM
YES, THE 2022 BUDGET ACT DID
INCLUDE ABOUT 43 MILLION GENERAL
FUND IN THE CURRENT YEAR, AS
WELL AS 42.3 MILLION IN THE
BUDGET YEAR FOR 23 ADDITIONAL
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGESHIPS AND WE
ARE FULLY FUNDING ALL OF THE
AUTHORIZED POSITIONS. UM FOR THE
COURTS, BUT IN THIS BUDGET FOR
THIS YEAR, THERE'S NO NEW
JUDGESHIPS BEING FUNDED.
CORRECT. UM THERE ARE 23
ADDITIONAL JUDGESHIPS BEING
FUNDED. SO IN THIS BUDGET,
YOU'RE GOING TO FUND 23. MORE
JUDGES FOR THIS IS A PART OF THE
2022 BUDGET, WHICH IS A MULTI
YEAR FUNDING. UM PROPOSAL AND
THERE WAS 43 MILLION IN THE
CURRENT YEAR AND ANOTHER 43
MILLION IN THIS YEAR. I'M SORRY
IN THE BUDGET. SO THE BUDGET
BEFORE US YOU'RE SAYING IT'S 43
MILLION FOR JUDGES. UM THAT'S
CORRECT AND HOW MUCH OF THAT
WILL GO TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY? I
WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON
THE PARTICULARS FOR RIVERSIDE
COUNTY. OKAY I'LL BE VERY
INTERESTED IN THAT PLACE. THANK
YOU. UM ALSO, MISS LEE, WOULD
YOU AGREE THAT REDUCING GUN
VIOLENCE IS IMPORTANT? UH TO THE
GOVERNOR, CORRECT AND YOU'RE
FAMILIAR WITH THE ARM PROHIBITED
PERSONS SYSTEM, THE APP SYSTEM.
YES OKAY, AND THERE'S ABOUT A
BACKLOG OF 24 25,000 INDIVIDUALS
WE KNOW SHOULD NOT HAVE GUNS BUT
HAVE A REGISTERED GUN IN THEIR
NAME. IS THERE ANY FUNDING BEING
DEDICATED TO REDUCING THAT
BACKLOG IN THIS BUDGET? SURE AND
I WILL HAVE TO TURN TO A
COLLEAGUE FOR SPECIFICS ON THAT,
OKAY?
THIS IS MARK COMMENDED FROM
FINANCE. ALL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP
WITH YOU AND YOUR STAFF ON THAT
ON THAT QUESTION, SO AS YOU SIT
HERE, YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY
FUNDING DEDICATED TO REDUCING
THE BACKLOG IN THE APP SYSTEM.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM UH, ALL
WE'LL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU
ON THAT. OKAY I MEAN, THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT. SO, PLEASE,
YEAH. PLEASE GET THAT
INFORMATION TO US. UM AND THEN,
LASTLY, ON THIS UNDER WRAPS, MR
SILLY. I WOULD SAY THAT BECAUSE
THERE WAS A BACKLOG IN APPS.
IT'S BEEN LONGSTANDING THROUGH
MANY. MANY ATTORNEY GENERAL'S WE
ACTUALLY DID, UM, SET UP A PILOT
PROGRAM TO WORK WITH CERTAIN
COUNTIES TO HAVE, UM SOME OF
THEIR REPOSSESSION OF FIREARMS
DONE. AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. SO
HAPPY TO YOU KNOW, WE WILL BE
TALKING MORE ABOUT THAT IN SOME
FIVE, BUT REALLY DO APPRECIATE
YOUR LINE OF QUESTIONING ON
THAT. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR FOR
CLARIFYING THAT. YEAH, THAT'S
THAT'S IMPORTANT. IF YOU KNOW WE
CAN USE LOCALS TO HELP RESOLVE
THAT BACKLOG. WE WANT THOSE GUNS
OUT OF THOSE PEOPLE'S HANDS.
THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE THEM. UM ON
THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.
THERE'S A DEBT YOU SAID ABOUT 18
BILLION. HOW DID WE FIND
OURSELVES IN $18 BILLION THAT
AND THAT FUND. SORRY ABOUT THAT,
UM, THE $18 BILLION TRUST FUND
BALANCE IS LARGELY DUE TO THE
PANDEMIC RECESSION AND HIGH
UNEMPLOYMENT OVER THE PAST TWO
YEARS. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED
FRAUD? UH THAT WAS, UH, HOW MUCH
FRAUD WAS DURING THE PROGRAM
THAT WAS HANDED OUT IN THOSE
BENEFITS. I HAVE TO SAY THAT
SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS IN THE
PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT, UM,
PROGRAM OR POOR AND THAT WAS I
BELIEVE 20 OR 30 BILLION THAT I
WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT NUMBER
AND I CAN GET THAT TO YOU. BUT
IN THAT REALM. AND DOES THAT
NUMBER FACTOR IS THAT GO TOWARDS
THE 18 BILLION UM, THAT DOES NOT
. IT'S A DIFFERENT DIFFERENT.
THAT IS A DIFFERENT PROGRAM.
OKAY BUT 20 TO 30 BILLION WAS
LOST DUE TO FRAUD FROM THAT
PANDEMIC MONEY. AND, UH, IDEALLY
, THAT MONEY COULD HAVE BEEN
USED FOR HELP PAY FOR THE
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, WHICH IS
$18 BILLION DEFICIT. AND IF I
UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, THE
GOVERNOR'S PLAN TO FIX THIS
UNFUNDED LIABILITY IS TO ASK FOR
FORGIVENESS. IS THAT CORRECT?
WHAT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS
THAT WE ARE IN WE WILL BE
LOBBYING TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT FOR SOME FORGIVENESS
, BUT IT IS A LARGE AMOUNT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE UNDERSTAND IS
ON THE BACKS OF EMPLOYERS. AND
AGAIN, UM I WOULD LIKE TO
CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THAT WITH
THE LEGISLATURE. UM BUT IN
REGARDS TO THE ACTUAL BENEFIT OF
PAYING DOWN SOME OF THAT TRUST
FUND. UNLESS WE PAY DOWN THE
FULL AMOUNT, WE WOULDN'T
NECESSARILY SEE THE BENEFIT TO
EMPLOYERS, UM 18.5, OR SO
BILLION DOLLARS WOULD HAVE TO BE
A HUGE DEBT LOOMING, AND I WOULD
JUST ASK THAT THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE TO REALLY PRIORITIZE THAT
BECAUSE I'M HEARING FROM A LOT
OF BUSINESSES. THEY'RE VERY,
VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
PAYMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO GO UP
TO PAY THIS. THEY'RE VERY, VERY
WORRIED ABOUT IT. AND, UH SMALL
AND LARGE BUSINESSES. AND THEN
MR IS IT PATEK? YEAH BUT I
WANTED TO ASK YOU BECAUSE YOU
MENTIONED ON THE REVENUE SIDE
INCREASING REVENUE. ONE OF THE
PROPOSALS WAS TO RENEW ATTACKS.
CORRECT BUT I WANT TO ASK. ARE
THERE ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
TO INCREASING REVENUE LIKE
MAKING CALIFORNIA MORE BUSINESS
FRIENDLY TO INCREASE THE TAX
BASE? UM INCREASED TAX REVENUE
BY ENCOURAGING MORE BUSINESSES
TO COME TO CALIFORNIA OR
REDUCING THE REGULATORY BURDEN.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS OR
CONVERSATIONS ON THAT LEVEL? UM
WELL, THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION
MORE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION. TO
MY KNOWLEDGE. THE MAIN REVENUE
PROPOSAL IS THE ONE I MENTIONED
ON THE MANAGED CARE
ORGANIZATIONS THE CEO TAX, BUT
I'M NOT AWARE OF OTHER TAX
PROPOSALS. UM THERE ARE NO OTHER
TAX PROPOSALS. WHAT WE HAVE BEEN
ATTEMPTING TO DO IS TO SUPPORT
OUR BUSINESSES, BOTH SMALL AND
LARGE THROUGH VARIOUS
INVESTMENTS OVER THE PAST COUPLE
OF YEARS, INCLUDING THAT $4
BILLION IN THE SMALL BUSINESS
GRANTS. WE HAVE A FEW WAIVERS,
UM, AS WELL AS TAX CREDITS. THAT
OF, UM, WERE REDUCED THE NET NET
OPERATING LOSS AND THE N O L IN
THE PAST SO AGAIN, TRYING TO
ENCOURAGE MORE BUSINESS COMPETES
PROGRAMS. UM THE GRANT AS WELL
AS THE TAX CREDIT. AND THEN, OF
COURSE, THE FILM TAX CREDIT. I
APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST IT'S
JUST A COMMENT THAT YOU KNOW
THERE'S TWO WAYS TO INCREASE
REVENUES. ONE IS TO RAISE TAXES,
BUT THE OTHER WAY IS TO SORT OF
GROW THE PIE. AND ENCOURAGE MORE
BUSINESSES TO BE HERE, WHICH
GENERATES MORE TAX REVENUE. SO
THERE'S A DIFFERENT APPROACH. I
THINK THAT WE COULD LOOK AT
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE WE HAVE A
STRONG ECONOMY, IT COULD BE EVEN
STRONGER AND THEN THAT WOULD
RESULT MORE TAX REVENUE. SO WITH
THAT I HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU,
MR SILLY. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO
MR LACKEY AND THEN MISS SANCHEZ.
WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. SO
YOU GUYS CAN RELAX. I ACTUALLY
JUST HAVE TO REAL BRIEF COMMENTS
. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO
COMMEND THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL
OR NOT AT THIS POINT, GOING
AFTER THE INTELLECTUAL AND
DEVELOPMENTAL, DISABLED
COMMUNITY AT THIS JUNCTURE AND
KEEPING THEM WHOLE. THAT'S A
VERY, VERY BIG DEAL TO THAT
COMMUNITY WHO HAS FOUGHT VERY,
VERY VIGOROUSLY TO GET TO WHERE
THEY ARE NOW, AND, UH, TYPICALLY
IN BUDGET. DIFFICULT YEARS.
THEY'RE THE FIRST ONES TO GET
CUT. SO I'M I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT AH, THE BUDGET DOES NOT DO
THAT THIS YEAR AND I WILL FIGHT
WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY BEING THE
MAINTAIN THAT IF I HAVE THAT
ABILITY TO FIGHT, I'M CERTAINLY
GOING TO BE THE VOICE OF PROUD
VOICE OF TRYING TO MAINTAIN. UH,
THE SERVICES TO THAT COMMUNITY
BECAUSE THEY ARE SO EASILY
OVERLOOKED. AND I THINK THAT
THAT'S DISGRACEFUL AND I'M
THANKFUL AT THIS POINT. THERE'S
STILL WHOLE AND I HOPE TO MAKE
SURE THAT THAT DOES NOT ERODE.
THROUGH THIS PROCESS. UM I'M
ALSO A BIT FRUSTRATED, AND I
WANT TO EXPRESS MY FRUSTRATION
WITH 81 30. UH THERE THERE'S A
CERTAIN PART OF A B 1 30 THAT IS
ADVERSELY IMPACTING MY DISTRICT
. WE HAVE A DENTAL PROGRAM, AN
INTERNSHIP PROGRAM THAT
BASICALLY HAS BEEN DAMAGED AND
ESSENTIALLY EFFECTIVELY ENDED.
BECAUSE OF ONE OF THE PROVISIONS
THAT REQUIRE, UM, FINGERPRINTING
OF ALL PEOPLE THAT ARE
ASSOCIATED WITH THE STUDENTS. UH
BASICALLY, THERE ARE 20 STUDENTS
IN THAT CLASSROOM, AND, UH, THAT
MEANS ONE STUDENT TO EVERY
DENTAL OFFICE IN THE REGION, AND
EACH OFFICE HAS ESSENTIALLY 8 TO
10 EMPLOYEES. AND SO THAT MEANS
INVESTIGATIONS AND
FINGERPRINTING FOR APPROXIMATELY
160 TO 200 EMPLOYEES, AND THAT'S
A DEAL BREAKER. FOR THIS CAREER
TECHNICAL EDUCATION PROGRAM THAT
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE INTENT
, AND I JUST I LOOK FORWARD AND
HOPE THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL
WORK WITH OUR OFFICE TO TRY TO
RESOLVE THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT
BECAUSE I THINK IT'S VERY
RESOLVABLE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
THAT. AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I'VE
GOT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
LACKEY. WE'RE HAPPY TO ADDRESS
THAT ISSUE, ESPECIALLY IN THE
SUBCOMMITTEE. THANK YOU. MISS
SANCHEZ. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS
DIRECTED DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY AND
JUDGESHIPS. AND WHY ARE THERE
NEW? NO NEW JUDGESHIPS IN THE
BUDGET, EVEN THOUGH JUDICIAL
COUNCIL HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT
CURRENT BACKLOGS AND WAIT TIMES
INDICATE THAT WE NEED TO LEAST
98 NEW JUDICIAL OFFICERS. YES,
AS I STATED EARLIER, THERE WERE,
UM ALL THE JUDGESHIPS THAT ARE
AUTHORIZED ARE FULLY FUNDED IN
THE CURRENT YEAR AS WELL AS IN,
UM, THE BUDGET YEAR, SO ABOUT 43
MILLION HAS BEEN ADDED. FOR
THOSE JUDGESHIPS, AND WE DON'T
KNOW HOW MANY FOREVER SAID
COUNTY CORRECT. WE HAVE JUST
FOUND OUT THAT THERE ARE 44.
OKAY UM, I CAN TELL YOU BECAUSE
IN RIVERSIDE, THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT NEED FOR MORE OF
THEM. CRIMINAL CASES CONTINUE TO
BE DISMISSED AT AN ALARMING RATE
. BECAUSE OF THIS JUDGE SHORTAGE
WE HAVE OVER 1500 CASES BEING
DISMISSED. THESE ARE FELONY
CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES.
ILLEGAL FIREARM CHARGES THAT ARE
COMPLETELY DISMISSED. AND AS A
MOTHER OF A 10 YEAR OLD. THIS IS
HORRIFIC TO ME. DOES THIS
ADMINISTRATION CARE ABOUT CRIME
VICTIMS AND MAKING SURE THAT
CRIMINALS ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?
AND DO THEY WANT CALIFORNIA TO
HAVE SAFER STREETS? IF THEY DO,
I WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER FUNDING
JUDGESHIPS, ESPECIALLY IN AREAS
LIKE RIVERSIDE. AND THEN I ALSO
HAVE ANOTHER HEALTHCARE RELATED
QUESTION. I SAW THIS BUDGET THAT
THE GOVERNOR IS CUTTING 50
MILLION IN FUNDING FOR PUBLIC
HEALTH, WORKFORCE, TRAINING AND
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. MY LOCAL
HOSPITALS AND HEALTHCARE
FACILITIES ARE DESPERATE FOR NEW
HEALTHCARE WORKERS. STATEWIDE WE
KNOW THERE ARE SHORTAGES OF
NURSES, DOCTORS AND JUST ABOUT
EVERY CATEGORY. WHY THEN DOES
THIS BUDGET DEFUND PROGRAMS THAT
HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO HELP
INCREASE OUR STATES HEALTHCARE
WORKFORCE? AND AGAIN, I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO SAY WE LOOK FORWARD
TO WORKING WITH YOU AND THE
LEGISLATURE ON WHAT THE BUDGET
LOOKS LIKE WITH OUR SHARED
PRIORITIES AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN
THE SPRING. SURE. IT'S FINE OF
THE BUDGET DECIDES TO FUND OTHER
PROGRAMS, BUT WE KNOW THAT THESE
DEFUNDED PROGRAMS ACTUALLY WORK
. I'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH
HEALTH CARE FACILITIES THAT HAVE
SAID THAT THESE PROGRAMS HAVE
WORKED QUITE WELL. UM IT'S NOT
ACCEPTABLE TO DEFUND THESE
PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE OUR
HOSPITALS. WITH MORE TRAINED
HEALTHCARE WORKERS, REDUCE WAIT
TIMES AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF
CARE FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. HMM. THANK YOU,
MISS SANCHEZ. SO I HAVE A COUPLE
QUESTIONS AS WELL. I WANTED TO
GO BACK TO OUR SUB FIVE CHAIRS.
QUESTIONS AROUND CDCR. SO, UM.
MR PERRY, CAN YOU CAN YOU JUST
REMIND US AGAIN? I KNOW A LOT
ABOUT A REPORT. AH DELINEATING
HOW MANY PRISONS UH, YOU'RE
OFFICE ESTIMATED WE COULD
POTENTIALLY CLOSED. YES MR TING
. WE ESTIMATE IN THE RANGE OF 4
TO 5 ADDITIONAL PRISON
FACILITIES AND HOW MANY WERE
PROPOSED IN THE GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET. SURE WE HAVE. UM UH.
LET'S SEE. THERE IS A D V. I,
OBVIOUSLY IN PAST THE CALIFORNIA
CORRECTIONAL CENTER, AND SUSAN
VILLE, UM CALIFORNIA CITY AND
CHUCKLE WALA CURRENTLY AND THEN
SIX PRISONS WITH, UM YES,
SPECIFIED FACILITIES. AND THEN
IN THE CALIFORNIA CITY PRISON IN
MR PADDOCK AGAIN WAS 4 TO 5 ON
TOP OF THE FIRST TO YOU
ANNOUNCED, UM, WITH CALIFORNIA
CITY. UH WAS THE REASON THAT YOU
, UH, CLOSE THAT BECAUSE IT'S A
PRIVATE PRISON. YES, IT'S THE
LAST PRIVATELY RUN PRISON. AND
WHILE I'M SUPPORTIVE OF CLOSING
PRIVATE PRISONS, I THINK ONE OF
THE CONCERNS WITH THAT
PARTICULAR PRISON FROM A FISCAL
POINT OF VIEW IS, UM YOU KNOW,
IT'S OVERSEEN BY THE SAME STAFF
UNION THAT OVERSEAS MANY OF THE
OTHER PRISONS AND ALSO THERE,
UM, IN QUITE GOOD CONDITION, SO
WE DON'T HAVE THE DEFERRED
MAINTENANCE ISSUES THAT WE DO
AND SOME OF THE OTHER PRISONS.
SO IS THERE A REASON GIVEN THE
HUGE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE COSTS
FOR MANY OF THE OTHER
FACILITIES. WHY THAT WAS CHOSEN
VERSUS SOME OF THE OTHER
FACILITIES THAT HAVE
SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER COSTS, AND
I HAVE TO TURN TO A COLLEAGUE ON
THE LINE FOR THAT. THIS IS
CYNTHIA MINDO AND THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE. UM CITY CR DOES
CONSIDER A NUMBER OF FACTORS,
INCLUDING, UM AND THEY GO BY THE
GUY. THE. CODE 2067, WHICH
INCLUDES CONSIDERATION OF COSTS.
FACILITY UM, PREVIOUS
INVESTMENTS, PUBLIC SAFETY AND
REHABILITATION AND THE
DURABILITY OF THE STATE SOLUTION
TO PRISON OVERCROWDING. UM, AND
A NUMBER OF OTHER FACTORS. WHEN
DETERMINING THOSE PRISONS TOO
CLOSE. NO I UNDERSTAND THE PENAL
CODE. THEY'VE RECITED IT IN
SUBCOMMITTEE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT
TIMES WHEN I DON'T UNDERSTAND,
AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
TRANSPARENT ON IS THE RANKING.
HOW THEY COME TO THAT RANKING.
SO DO YOU HAVE ANY GREATER
ILLUMINATION ON THAT ISSUE? I'D
HAVE TO GET MORE DETAILS FOR
YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING RIGHT
NOW. I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO SEE
YOU IN SUB FIVE. UM THEN THEN
GOING INTO THAT LOGIC. UM YOU
HAVE SIX FACILITIES WHICH COULD
HAVE YOU KNOW FOUR OR FIVE OF
WHICH COULD BE CLOSED. WHAT WAS
THE LOGIC TO LOOK AT CLOSING
JUST CERTAIN YARDS DOING A VERY
PIECEMEAL APPROACH RATHER THAN
UM CLOSING FACILITIES OUTRIGHT.
IT SEEMED JUST FROM A FEEDBACK
POINT OF VIEW, TOO. HAVE CREATED
A LITTLE BIT OF UH, CHAOS WITHIN
THE CDCR STAFF. SURE THERE'S
THERE ARE SOME BENEFITS TO DO
DEACTIVATING YARDS WITHIN
PRISONS. UM IT PROVIDES THE
DEPARTMENT WITH LONG TERM
OPERATIONAL FLEXIBILITY AND
HOUSING THE INCARCERATED
POPULATION AND ALLOWS THE
DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS THE
CHANGING NEEDS OF THE POPULATION
. ADDITIONALLY UM, DEACTIVATION
IS LIKE THIS ARE LIKELY TO
RESULT IN THE LEAST AMOUNT OF
DISRUPTION TO THE STAFF AND
INCARCERATED PERSONS BECAUSE
THEY COULD MOVE WITHIN THE
FACILITY. UM AND IF THERE ARE
ANY STAFFING SHORTAGES THIS
ALLOWS, UM THIS IS A POTENTIAL
SOLUTION TO ADDRESS THOSE
STAFFING SHORTAGES. THEN WHY?
WHEN YOU ANNOUNCED THE FIRST TWO
FACILITIES YOU CLOSE TO
FACILITIES? WHY DIDN'T WHY
WASN'T THIS APPROACH USED
THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM EARLIER.
UNDERSTOOD THERE. THERE IS A
PROCESS THROUGH THE ANNUAL
POPULATION, UM, ADJUSTMENT THAT
LOOKS AT HOUSING UNIT
CONVERSIONS AND CHANGES. UM
HOWEVER, THIS WAS SOMETHING JUST
DECIDED ON BECAUSE IT WOULD
ALLOW THE ADMINISTRATION TO THE
FASTER AND REALIZING SAVINGS AND
REDUCING POSITIONS. AS WELL AS
CONTINUING TO FOCUS ON CLOSING
PRISONS. AS I SAID BEFORE THE
ADMINISTRATION IS, UM, COMMITTED
TO REDUCING CALIFORNIA'S
EXPENDITURES ON PRISON IN IN
CONTINUING TO PROMOTE PUBLIC
SAFETY. UM WHAT. COST SAVINGS.
DID WE WALK AWAY FROM BY NOT
CLOSING THE FACILITIES. UM
ASSOCIATED WITH THE SIX UH,
FACILITY. THE ACTIVATIONS.
THAT'S CORRECT. IT UM UPON FULL
IMPLEMENT IMPLEMENTATION,
DEACTIVATING THOSE SIX
FACILITIES WILL RESULT IN AN
ESTIMATED ANNUAL SAVINGS OF
APPROXIMATELY 150.1 MILLION AND
A REDUCTION OF AROUND 860
POSITIONS. BUT IF YOU HAD
INSTEAD CLOSED, LET'S SAY THREE
OF THOSE FACILITIES INSTEAD OF
DOING THAT THE ACTIVATION THAN
HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD HAVE BEEN
SAVED. IT'S HARD TO SAY THERE'S
A LOT OF ANALYSIS THAT GOES INTO
, UM, THE COSTING OF PRISON
CLOSURE, BUT I CAN SAY, UM,
CLOSING THE DUAL VOCATIONAL
INSTITUTION RESULTED IN A
SAVINGS OF 150.3 MILLION. UM
CLOSING THE C C C. RULE RESULTS
IN APPROXIMATELY 100 AND 42.9
MILLION IN ANNUAL SAVINGS. UM
THIS IS ANOTHER SOLUTION THAT
CDCR CAN LEAN ON TO, UM JUST
PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY. AND,
UM. ADDRESS THEIR POPULATION
NEEDS. I UNDERSTAND THE
FLEXIBILITY, BUT I GUESS YOU
KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE A BUDGET THAT
HAS GONE UP AH! MORE THAN $5
BILLION. OVER. THE LAST 10 YEARS
AT THE SAME TIME WE'VE SEEN I
FORGET THE PERCENTAGE. BUT LET'S
SAY IT'S 100. PERCENT OR 50%
REDUCTION OF POPULATION. UM. IT
DOESN'T QUITE MAKE FISCAL SENSE.
TO GO THIS APPROACH, ESPECIALLY
WHEN OUR L A. OH, AND I'LL LET
THE L A. OH, I'M IN HERE FOR A
SECOND. I MEAN, SAYS WE COULD
HAVE CLOSED. 4 TO 5 FACILITIES.
JUST DOING SIMPLE MASS FOUR
TIMES. 150 MILLION GETS YOU A
LOT MORE SAVINGS. AND YOU DO
FROM. DOING THIS NIP AND TUCK
APPROACH AROUND A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT FACILITIES. HELLO. UH
IF I MAY JUST OFFER THE WAY WE
WERE LOOKING AT THIS SITUATION
IS KIND OF IN TWO WAYS ONE. YOU
HAVE THE BUDGET PROBLEM OUT
THERE, TOO. WE HAVE THIS LONG
TERM MISMATCH OF THE FACILITY
CAPACITY IN THE DECLINING
POPULATION IN THE PRISONS. MY
OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE
YARD CLOSURES THAT THEY'RE
TALKING ABOUT? YIELD MORE
IMMEDIATE SAVINGS BUT SMALLER
AMOUNT OF SAVINGS, BUT THEY CAN
BE IMPLEMENTED MORE QUICKLY. THE
TRADE OFF. OF COURSE, IS THAT
YOUR YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT
YOU'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, FOCUSED ON
CLOSING THE FACILITIES, THE
OVERALL PRISONS. THOSE ARE WHAT
GENERATE THE LARGER SAVINGS BUT
MAYBE TAKE LONGER TIME, SO I
DON'T KNOW IF THE ADMINISTRATION
WOULD SAY THIS, BUT PERHAPS LIKE
THE FOCUS RIGHT NOW ON THE YARD
CLOSURES IS IN RESPONSE TO THE
IMMEDIATE BUDGET PROBLEM. BUT IT
DOESN'T REALLY RESOLVE THAT
UNDERLYING LONGER TERM ISSUE. I
FEEL LIKE THAT. YOU'RE UM
FOCUSING ON MR TING. WELL, I
THINK IT'S A PERFECT ALLEGORY
FOR OUR CURRENT BUDGET SITUATION
. AS YOU DESCRIBED IN YOUR
REPORT. IF YOU DON'T MAKE THE
DIFFICULT DECISIONS NOW WE'VE
GOT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT
DECISIONS ON THE ROAD. AND THAT
SEEMS TO PURE TO BE WHAT THE
DEPARTMENT DECIDED. TO DO. UM
AND. OVER THE LAST NUMBER OF
YEARS. THE DEPARTMENT'S TALKED
ABOUT HE'S CRITERIA. WE'VE NEVER
SEEN IT. I'VE NEVER SEEN IT IN
PUBLIC. I'VE NEVER SEEN ANY
DELINEATION. THAT CRITERIA.
THESE CLOSURES AND THESE YARD
CLOSURES. UH, SEEM OFTENTIMES TO
JUST BE ARBITRARY. INTO SOMEWHAT
COME OUT OF THIN AIR. UH AND AT
A TIME WHEN WE WERE MOVING
TOWARD PRISON CLOSURES NOW WE'RE
MOVING TOWARDS YARD CLOSURES. I
DON'T I APPRECIATE THAT. THE
ESTIMATION FROM DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. UH FRANKLY, DOESN'T
QUITE MAKE MUCH SENSE TO ME.
ESPECIALLY AT A TIME WHEN YOU
HAVE A FIVE BILLION DOLLAR
INCREASE IN AN OFFICE BUDGET.
IT'S YOURS. IT'S THE ONLY ONE
THAT'S INCREASED WHILE
EVERYTHING ELSE IS DECREASED. WE
DON'T DO THAT FOR COW WORKS. WE
DON'T DO THAT FOR CAL FRESH. WE
DON'T DO IT FOR MEDICAL. WE
DON'T DO FOR ANY OTHER PROGRAM
AREAS THAT WE SUPPORT. AT THE
WHOLESALE LEVEL. SO THIS IS
SOMETHING WE'RE OBVIOUSLY GOING
TO BE. WE'RE VERY INTERESTED IN
REVISITING IN SUBCOMMITTEE. I
THINK WE'RE I'LL JUST SAY THIS.
I'M VERY PERSONALLY
DISAPPOINTED. UH, IN THE
DEPARTMENT AND THIS APPROACH.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I THINK
MAKES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
SENSE TO ME. BUT YOU KNOW, I'VE
I HAVE FOUND THIS DEPARTMENT
FAIRLY PUZZLING SINCE I'VE BEEN
HERE. SO UM, I DID WANT TO ASK
JUST WHAT WE'RE ON CCR. THERE
WAS A COUPLE OF NEW
AUGMENTATIONS IN THERE ON THAT
AUGMENTATION LIST AROUND
CORRECTIONAL. VIDEO SURVEILLANCE
, COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYEE HEALTH
PROGRAMS AND QUENTIN E.
DISCOVERY INTEGRATED SUBSTANCE
USE. IS THERE A REASON WHY THESE
ARE ADDITIONS VERSUS NONE OF
THESE COULD HAVE BEEN FUNDED
WITHIN THE $15 BILLION
APPROPRIATION ALREADY? LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET. UM I'LL START AT
A HIGH LEVEL AND THEN I'LL HAVE
TO TURN IT OVER FOR SOME MORE
DETAILS. UM BUT SOME OF THESE
ARE THE SURVEILLANCE IS, UH, AN
ONGOING COST. THAT'S UM UM,
GROWN FROM A PILOT, SO THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT IS ABOVE AND
BEYOND. WHAT'S UM, IN THE BASE,
AND THEN SOME OF THE OTHER
ADDITIONS ARE, UM NEEDS THAT
HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED SINCE THE
2022 BUDGET ACT, BUT I'LL TURN
TO MY COLLEAGUE ON THE LINE FOR
SOME DETAILS. HI THIS IS ALLISON
HEWITT. YES SO THE VIDEO
SURVEILLANCE CONTINUATION IS AN
ONGOING PROJECT THAT WAS
INITIATED BY THE ADMINISTRATION.
ALRIGHT YEARS AGO. AND SO THIS
REPRESENTS THE FINAL YEAR AND NO
THOSE COSTS COULD NOT BE
ABSORBED AND WITHIN EXISTING
RESOURCES. YOU MENTIONED THE
INTEGRATED SUBSTANCE USED TO
SORT OF TREATMENT PROGRAM. THE
ADMINISTRATION IS ACTUALLY
PROPOSING A REDUCTION TO THAT
PROGRAM AS A PART OF THAT BI
ANNUAL POPULATION ADJUSTMENT
PROCESS TO KEEP THE EXPENDITURES
FOR THAT PROGRAM MORE IN LINE
WITH THE CURRENT POPULATION
TRENDS. IN TERMS OF WE, UM
WITHIN CDCR. WE TOOK VERY
THOUGHTFUL APPROACH IN TERMS OF
FUNDING ANY NEW PROJECTS AND, UM
, AS WE DID ACROSS THE BUDGET
TRIED TO AVOID COMMITTING TO
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING AS AS
MUCH AS THIS FEASIBLE. SO THE
ANSWER IS NOTE. NONE OF THE
PROPOSALS FOR INCREASED FUNDING
THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.
WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE TO
ABSORB WITHIN EXISTING RESOURCES
. I WOULD SAY THE LARGEST AREA
OF INCREASED FUNDING IN THE
BUDGET IS ACTUALLY NOT BUDGET
CHANGE PROPOSALS. IT'S RELATED
TO EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND
RETIREMENT ADJUSTMENTS THAT ARE
SUBJECT TO THAT, UM, ANNUAL THAT
ANNUAL PROCESS AND OUR, UH, PART
OF THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE VARIOUS
BARGAINING UNIT, SO IT'S
ACTUALLY FAIRLY TECHNICAL IN
NATURE. THERE IS NOT A
SIGNIFICANT, UM, PORTION OF NEW
FUNDING PROPOSED SPECIFICALLY
FOR BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSALS.
SOME OF IT IS MORE TECHNICAL AND
RELATED TO EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION
ISSUES, WHICH I THINK WAS
ALLUDED TO EARLIER. GOT IT. I
JUST I'M JUST WONDERING, I
UNDERSTAND THE FACT THAT NEEDS
ARISE. UM ISSUES HAVE COME UP,
BUT IN A YOU KNOW, BUDGET YEAR
WHERE WE'RE CONTRACTING, IT JUST
SEEMS ODD. UM AND I APPRECIATE
LOOK, I'M SURE AND AGAIN JUST
LOOKING AT ALL THE NEW
AUGMENTATIONS. THEY THEY ALL
LOOK INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT,
BUT IN A YEAR WHEN WE'RE
CONTRACTING TO ACTUALLY ADD MORE
TO THE LIST SEEMS SURPRISING.
YES UM, MAY I ASK MY COLLEAGUE
DREW SODERBERG TO AH, WAY IN
HERE. KIND OF DREW SODERBERGH
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE
JUST TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT
MORE CONTEXT. WE DO VIEW SOME OF
THESE, UH THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN
PROPOSED NEW EXPENDITURES FOR
CDCR AS THINGS THAT THE
LEGISLATURE COULD RECONSIDER. IT
IS TRUE THAT THE AUDIO VIDEO
SURVEILLANCE IS A PROGRAM THAT
HAS BEEN PROPOSED IN PAST YEARS.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE
LEGISLATURE IS COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING TO EXPAND IT,
PARTICULARLY IN AN ENVIRONMENT
WHERE THE LEGISLATURE MAY WANT
TO LOOK AT PRISON CLOSURES. AND
WE THEREFORE WANT TO AVOID THIS
SITUATION WHERE IT MIGHT INSTALL
VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AT PRISONS
THAT WILL ULTIMATELY BE CLOSE,
ALSO WITH RESPECT TO THE
INTEGRATED SUBSTANCE USE
DISORDER TREATMENT WELL, THE
OVERALL FUNDING FOR THE PROGRAM
IS GOING DOWN. IT IS IMPORTANT
TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE CHANGES
TO THE METHODOLOGY FOR HOW THE
FUNDING IS PROPOSED. THAT IS
RESULTING IN MORE FUNDING BEING
PROVIDED THAN WOULD HAVE
OTHERWISE BEEN THE CASE AND
AGAIN. THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE
WILL CONTINUE TO SCRUTINIZE AND
PROVIDE AND PUT ON IN IN THE
COMING WEEKS. THANK YOU. UM
GOING BACK TO SOME OF THE NEW
AUGMENTATIONS? I BELIEVE, UM
MISS LEE MENTIONED A DROUGHT
CONTINGENCY FUND. JUST CURIOUS.
WHAT IS A DROUGHT? CONTINGENCY
FUND IS THAT TIED TO ANY FEDERAL
LONDON THAT'S 125 MILLION
GENERAL FUND THAT IS SET ASIDE
FOR, UM, NEEDS THAT WILL ARISE
THAT MAY ARISE. NO IS THERE A
REASON WHY YOU NEED THAT TO BE A
SEPARATE CONTINGENCY FUND VERSUS
RESERVE OF OFTENTIMES WE HAVE,
UM, FUNDS FOR DISASTERS THAT
COME UP THAT ARE FAIRLY EASILY
WITHDRAWN. I THINK ABOUT HOW WE
HAVE MONEY SET ASIDE FOR CAL
FIRE INCLUSIVE WILDFIRES. IS
THERE A REASON WHY WE NEED TO
SEPARATE CONTINGENCY FOOD? I
THINK IT'S TO HIGHLIGHT THE
PRIORITY THAT IT HOLDS WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION. BUT FOR FURTHER
DETAILS ALL TURNED OUR COLLEAGUE
ON THE LINE. CRYSTAL IS YOUR
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. SO THIS
IS SIMILAR TO THE APPROACH THAT
WE TOOK LAST YEAR WHERE WE SET
ASIDE FUNDING INTO A 99 NO. ONE
ITEM TO BASICALLY ALLOW, UM THE
DEPARTMENTS TO GATHER MORE
INFORMATION ON WATER DATA AS WE
HEAD INTO THE NEXT SEVERAL
MONTHS TO INFORM WHETHER OR NOT
THERE ARE INVESTMENTS THAT ARE
THAT ARE NEEDED IN THE DROUGHT
AREA. AS YOU MENTIONED. THERE
ARE DIFFERENT MECHANISMS FOR HOW
WE COULD PROVIDE FUNDING. I
THINK GENERALLY THE ONES YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT. SOME OF THEM
MIGHT ACTUALLY REQUIRE AN
EMERGENCY DECLARATION. UM,
THERE'S ALSO YOU KNOW, THERE'S A
FLOOD CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION
THAT'S BUILT IN THAT WE ACTUALLY
HOW TO UTILIZE THIS YEAR AGAIN.
THOSE ARE USUALLY AROUND KIND OF
EMERGENCY EVENTS. SO THIS IS
JUST US SELLING FUNDING ASIDE TO
ACCOUNT FOR IT AS PART OF THE
OVERALL GENERAL FUND
ARCHITECTURE, BUT ALLOWING US
MORE TIME DETERMINED WHAT THE
SPECIFIC NEEDS ARE ONCE WE HAVE
ADDITIONAL WATER DATA
INFORMATION. OKAY. I JUST FIND
IT JUST PUZZLING BECAUSE THERE'S
$125 MILLION IN HERE. BUT THERE
WAS A THERE WAS $40 MILLION CUT.
FROM A STUDY TO HELP DEAL WITH
GROUNDWATER AND TO HELP MITIGATE
SOME OF THE FLOODING THAT
HAPPENED IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY.
SO IT'S JUST WEIRD WHEN YOU CUT
SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IN THE
LAST TWO BUDGETS, AND THEN YOU
END UP ADDING SOMETHING WHERE
YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE
MONEY'S GONNA GO FOR. IN A YEAR
THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MAKING
SOME TOUGH CHOICES. SO THIS THIS
ITEM DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF
SENSE. WHAT ABOUT THE URBAN
FLOOD RISK REDUCTION? SORRY, IS
IT? IS THERE A QUESTION ON THAT?
THERE IS ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
WHAT IS IT? YES SO THE URBAN
FLOOD RISK REDUCTION JUST
WONDERING WHAT IT IS. YEP SO
THIS IS 135 AND 1350.5 MILLION
GENERAL FUND OVER TWO YEARS THAT
IT WOULD SUPPORT LOCAL AGENCIES
, UM, TO WORK TO REDUCE URBAN,
UH, FLOOD RISKS IN THEIR
RESPECTIVE UM, RESPECTIVE AREAS
, SO THERE IS SEVERAL PROJECTS
THAT ARE BEING FUNDED AS PART OF
THIS PROPOSAL THAT INCLUDES THE
AMERICAN RIVER COMMON FEATURES
PROJECT THAT YOU MIGHT BE
FAMILIAR WITH THAT WE'VE BEEN
FUNDING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL
YEARS. THAT INCLUDES WEST
SACRAMENTO PROJECT LARA, CACHE
CREEK, UM SAN JOAQUIN MARYSVILLE
RING LEVEE PROJECT, SO THERE'S
SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT ARE
INCLUDED IN IN HERE THAT ARE
LARGELY CONTINUING, CONTINUING
PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE SUPPORTED
, UM IN THE PAST, AS WELL, BUT
INVOLVED ALL THESE PROJECTS
SOUND. UM, I THINK GOOD AND
IMPORTANT. WHY IS THERE
ADDITIONAL AUGMON? PATIENT. SO
THIS IS JUST FUNDING THE NEXT
SORT OF PHASES, MOSTLY FOR THESE
PROJECTS, SO FOR A LOT OF URBAN
FLOOD RISK REDUCTION PROJECTS,
WE OFTEN KIND OF PROVIDE
INCREMENTAL FUNDING. UM, SO IT
MIGHT BE THE PLANNING PHASE OR
WE COULD BE MOVING INTO
CONSTRUCTION PHASE. SO THESE
PROJECTS ARE KIND OF AT VARIOUS
STAGES, SO WE OFTEN WILL FUND
THEM FROM INCREMENTALLY AS
OPPOSED TO PROVIDING FULL
PROJECT COSTS. UM AS SORT OF 11
INVESTMENT TO ALLOW FOR KIND OF
CONTINGENCIES AS THEY GO THROUGH
THE THROUGH THE PROJECT VISAS.
NO, I UNDERSTAND. I THINK AGAIN
LIKE I SAID, YEAH, MR BRADDOCK.
UH NOT AS SPEAK FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION. BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SOME OF
THESE PROPOSALS DO LEVERAGE
FEDERAL FUNDS AS WELL. SO THAT
MIGHT BE PART OF A PART OF THE
RATIONALE FOR INCLUDING THEM.
WELL, THAT'S FINE. DO THIS. I
GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION. DO
THESE. DOES THE URBAN FLOOD RISK
REDUCTION PROGRAM LEVERAGE
FEDERAL FUNDS? AS MISS LEE WAS
CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. ALL 101
MILLION OF IT. I WOULD NEED TO
GO BACK AND VERIFY. I'M NOT SURE
IF ALL OF IT DOES, BUT I THINK
THE MAJORITY DOES HAVE A
BREAKDOWN FOR US THAT BE
HELPFUL. UM THEY THEN GOING
BACK, UM, YOU YOUTH JOB CORPS.
78 UH MILLION DOLLARS. I SEE
THAT EXPENDITURE DOES THAT LET
IS THAT A LEVERAGING FEDERAL
FUNDS PROGRAM AS WELL. UM, THAT
IS I? I WILL CONFIRM WITH
SOMEBODY ON THE LINE. I DO NOT
BELIEVE THAT IS LEVERAGING
FEDERAL FUNDS. IT IS SOMETHING
THAT IS TAKING TAKING ON ANOTHER
PROGRAM THAT WAS FUNDED IN THE
CURRENT YEAR OF 25. MILLION UM,
BUILDS ON BASICALLY REPLACES
THAT WITH ANOTHER SOMEBODY 78
MILLION. ONGOING UM, BUT CAN
SOMEONE ON THE LINE CONFIRM
WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE ANY
FEDERAL FUNDS LEVERAGE THERE?
ABSOLUTELY THIS IS IMAGING WORTH
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE OF THE
YOUTH JOB CORPS PROGRAM, AS WE
SUGGESTED, DOES NOT HAVE ANY
FEDERAL FUNDS ATTACHED AS PURELY
A GENERAL FUND PROGRAM.
INITIALLY IT WAS ESTABLISHED
WITH RP FUNDING, BUT IT'S A
GENERAL FUND PROGRAM. AND WHILE
I LOVE YOU JOB PROGRAMS, MY
THESE ARE APPLYING FOR JOBS THIS
SUMMER, SO I'M VERY SENSITIVE
THAT ISSUE. WHY IS THIS IN THIS
BUDGET? I THINK YOU'LL SEE THAT
THIS IS A PRIORITY FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF PRIORITY FOR
THE GOVERNOR IN PARTICULAR.
OKAY? AH AH AH, AND IT'S SUCH A
PRIORITY THAT THEY
ADMINISTRATION COULD NOT FIND
$70 MILLION FROM ARE YOU KNOW,
200. $30 MILLION GENERAL FUND,
THE SUBSTITUTE OUT UM, AGAIN, WE
LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION IN THE SPRING JUST
IN REGARDS TO OUR PRIORITIES.
WELL, I GUESS IT. YOU KNOW, AND
I'VE AND I'VE SAID I'VE SAID
THIS EARLIER, BUT IT JUST, UM IT
WAS. VERY CLEAR. AT LEAST THE
MAYOR, AND THIS IS JUST MY
PERCEPTION THAT AGAIN, UM MANY
OF THE. CUTS THAT WERE MADE OR
EXTENSIONS WERE LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES. I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT
MANY OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PRIORITIES. THAT WERE UM SHELVED
AND TO HAVE THAT AND THEN TO
HAVE MORE EXPENDITURE. ON TOP OF
THAT. I THINK. IT DOESN'T SET
THE BEST TOÀN, I GUESS FOR A
JANUARY PROPOSAL, ESPECIALLY FOR
COMING ON THE HEELS, WHERE WE
HAD A LOT OF AGREEMENT. YEAH.
BUDGET AGREEMENT. SO IT SEEMS
ODD THAT, UH WE WOULD HAVE CUTS
AND THINGS THAT WE AGREED ON AND
THEN TO HAVE ADDITIONS.
UNDERSTOOD AND I JUST WOULD LIKE
TO SAY THAT THERE WAS NO, UM,
STRATEGY TO CUT LEGISLATIVE
PROPOSALS OVER ADMINISTRATIVE
PROPOSALS BUT UNDERSTOOD,
UNDERSTOOD. IT WAS JUST
COINCIDENCE. UM I THINK THERE
ARE THERE ARE DEFINITELY
ADMINISTRATIVE PRIORITIES IN
HERE. BOTH THAT HAVE BEEN
PRESERVED AND SOME NEWS. NEW
ONES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED. THAT
IS CORRECT. WE WERE WE WERE, IT
WAS CLEAR THAT THEY WERE
PRESERVED. SO I THINK THAT'S THE
CHALLENGE. SO, UM. GREAT ONE
LAST QUESTION, CAL FIRE, SO I
PRAY AGAIN. I'M A BIG FAN OF CAL
FIRE. I THINK THIS IS VERY
IMPORTANT. BUT ALSO AGAIN. NOT
CLEAR AFTER WE'VE ADDED MILLIONS
AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO CAL
FIRE'S BUDGET WHY THEY NEEDED
ANOTHER. 32 MILLION IN
ADDITIONAL FUNDING. CAN I ASK
SOMEBODY ON THE LINE TO RESPOND?
I'M SORRY. EXCUSE ME, JUST AND
JUST WHY THAT WASN'T ALREADY
ABSORBED INTO PREVIOUS
APPROPRIATION. SURE. COULD
SOMEBODY ON THE LINE. PLEASE
RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION. HI
STEPHEN VENTS WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I THINK
YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE PROPOSAL
FOR ADDITIONAL TRAININGS THAT
OUR CAPACITY YES. SO THE REASON
FOR THAT IS THE SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENTS THAT ARE MADE IN THE
RECENT YEARS HAVE BEEN TO ADD
IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, CRITICAL
POSITIONS FOR RELIEF STAFFING
FOR FIRE CREWS FOR THINGS LIKE
THAT, SO THEY'RE ALL STAFFING
RELATED WITH THE ADDITION OF ALL
THE ADDITIONAL STAFFING THERE
ARE TRAINING NEEDS FOR EACH OF
THE YOU KNOW FIREFIGHTERS THAT
HAVE BEEN ADDED, AND CURRENT
CAPACITY IN CAL FIRE SYSTEM
DOESN'T SUPPORT TRAINING CENTER
CAPACITY DOESN'T SUPPORT ALL OF
THAT NEW POSITIONS, AND SO THIS
PROPOSAL AUGMENTS TRAINING
CENTER CAPACITY SO THAT WE CAN
SUPPORT ALL THE NEW POSITIONS
ADDED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS. GOT IT? I GUESS MY
RECOLLECTION WASN'T THAT
EVERYTHING THAT CAL FIRE GOT WAS
STAFFING. SO I THINK WE'LL HAVE
TO BE GOING BACK AND DOUBLE
CHECKING THAT INFORMATION AND
SEEING IF THEY COULDN'T HAVE
BEEN SOME, YOU KNOW, GREATER
EFFICIENCY. MAINTAINED WITH
THEIR BUDGET. CERTAINLY NOT
EVERYTHING I MEAN, THERE WERE
THERE HAS BEEN ONE TIME
INVESTMENTS IN LIKE HELLA
TANKERS AND OTHER TYPES OF FIRE
ENGINES, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THE RECENT
INVESTMENTS HAS BEEN, UH,
POSITION AUGMENTATIONS. GREAT
THANK YOU AND AGAIN APPRECIATE
LIKE, I THINK, MISS MISS LEE DID
REITERATE THIS AT THE BEGINNING
OF DISCUSSION, NOT THE END, AND
WE KNOW THIS IS THE FIRST OF
MANY. MANY UH BUDGET HEARINGS,
BUDGET SUB HEARINGS VERY MUCH
LOOK FORWARD TO THIS. YEAR UH,
WITHOUT SEEING ONLY MYSELF AND
THE VICE CHAIR LEFT. WE WILL NOW
GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. AND WE'RE
ASKING FOLKS TO. ONE MINUTE. ONE
MINUTE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. MR
MCFEELY. YES MR CHAIR CHRIS
MCKINLAY ON BEHALF OF THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY. UM OUR
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ADOPTED A
TRANSIT PLAN BASED UPON THE JUNE
BUDGET, THE DEFERRAL POTENTIALLY
PLACES A NUMBER OF PROJECTS IN
JEOPARDY AS WE AND OTHER TRANSIT
AGENCIES FACE THE PROVERBIAL
FISCAL TRANSIT FISCAL CLIFF. WE
WANT TO ENSURE THAT TRANSIT IS
VIABLE IN THE STATE, ESPECIALLY
AS WE'RE COMING OUT OF THE
PANDEMIC AND WANT TO RETURN OUR
RIDERSHIP SO WE WOULD URGE, UM,
CONTINUED FUNDING IN THAT AREA.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND MR VICE
CHAIR AND STAFF MITCH STEIGER
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION. APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO ECHO THE COMMENTS OF THE
PREVIOUS SPEAKER AND EXPRESSED
CONCERN ABOUT THE PROPOSED
BILLION DOLLARS AND THE FURROWS
ARE CUTS WHERE WE'D LIKE TO
DEFINE IT TO TRANSIT CAPITAL
PROJECTS, BUT ALSO URGED THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO
COME TOGETHER AND FIND SOME SORT
OF A SOLUTION TO THE LOOMING
CRISIS IN TRANSIT OPERATIONS
FUNDING. AS WAS MENTIONED
WITHOUT SOME SORT OF SIGNIFICANT
ACTION. LIKELY STATE ACTION. WE
WILL SEE LOTS OF DIFFERENT LOCAL
TRANSIT AGENCIES SUFFER IN A BIG
WAY. IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, THE
KINDS OF SERVICE CUTS THAT WOULD
BE NECESSARY WOULD BE
DEVASTATING, COULD VERY POSSIBLY
EVENTUALLY LEAD TO THE END OF
ENTIRE TRANSIT AGENCIES, THE
LOSS OF THOUSANDS OF LIVING WAGE
JOBS AND ALSO LEAVING US IN A
SPOT WHERE IT'LL BE PRETTY
PRETTY DIFFICULT, IF NOT
IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO MEET OUR
CLIMATE GOALS IF WE FORCE THAT
MANY PEOPLE BACK OUT INTO SINGLE
OCCUPANCY VEHICLES, SO WE URGE
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
TO FIND A SOLUTION TO BOTH OF
THOSE ISSUES. GOOD EVENING
CHAIRS. THANK YOU FOR THE
DISCUSSION COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND
STAFF AS WELL. RYAN MORE
IMMUNITY HERE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES, UM, ON BEHALF OF ALL
58 COUNTIES, GIVEN THE STAGE
PROJECTED BUDGET DEFICIT, SISAK
IS GRATEFUL THAT THE GOVERNOR
HAS PROPOSED BUDGET PRESERVES
CRITICAL INVESTMENTS FOR
HOMELESSNESS. MEN ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION SUPPORT FOR LOCAL
PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENTS,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CARE ACT,
UM AS WELL AS, UH, FIRE
PREVENTION, FLOOD PROTECTION AND
EXPEDITING WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS
. HOWEVER SEE SACK. WE REMAIN
CONCERNED WITH ANY CUTS TO
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT RESILIENCE
PROGRAMS, UM. WE'RE ALSO IN NEED
OF ADDITIONAL STATE SUPPORT FOR
D. J J REALIGNMENT AND THEN ALSO
CONCERNED WITH ANY FURTHER
DELAYS, THE BROADBAND EXPANSION
THAT SAID, UM, COUNTIES WE
REMAIN COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH
LEGISLATURE ADMINISTRATION ON
ADDRESSING OUR SHARED CHALLENGES
AND NEEDS AND TO MEET THE NEEDS
OF OUR COMMUNITIES. UM, IN
PARTICULAR, UM WHERE WE'RE
COMMITTED TO WORKING
COLLABORATIVELY ON A
COMPREHENSIVE HOMELESSNESS
SYSTEM, UM, WHERE THEY'RE
CLEARLY DEFINED ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ALL LEVELS
OF GOVERNMENT AND ALSO CONCLUDES
SUSTAINABLE FUNDING. THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING, ERICA ROMERO ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL
CONSERVATION COURSE,
REPRESENTING THE 14 LOCAL CORES
ACROSS THE STATE THAT ENGAGE AT
USED AT YOUTH RISK ON
CONSERVATION DISASTER WAS SENT
RESPONSE PROJECTS ACROSS THE
STATE. UM, HERE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE $5 MILLION FOR
FUELS REDUCTION PROJECTS ACROSS
THE STATE, WHICH WILL HELP THE
STATE ME ITS CLIMATE GOALS.
HOWEVER ALSO WANT TO RAISE
CONCERN OF THE $23.5 MILLION IN
CUTS TO THE LOCAL AND TRIBAL
NATURE BASED SOLUTION. CORE
PROGRAMS. UM YOU KNOW, UH, IF
THIS LEGISLATURE IN A ENACTS THE
PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU, THIS WOULD
FORCE LOCAL CORES TO REDUCE
SERVICES AND, UM LAY OFF STAFF
THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, PLANNING TO
ENGAGE IN IN THESE PROJECTS, SO
WE URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER THOSE
CUTS, WHICH ARE GOING TO HAVE A
DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECT ON AT
RISK YOUTH, UNDERSERVED
COMMUNITIES AND, OF COURSE, THE
MOST CLIMATE IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE STATE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN NAME IS GRACE DECO HERE
ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT PROGRAM
ASSOCIATION. FIRST WE'D LIKE TO
THANK THE GOVERNOR FOR HONORING
THE STATE'S PROMISE TO BUILD UP
TO 200,000 NEW CHILDCARE SLOTS
FOR FAMILIES TO ACCESS. WE ALSO
APPRECIATE THE GOVERNOR'S
EMPHASIS ON THE CONNECTION AND
IMPACT THAT AVAILABILITY AND
ACCESS TO CHILDCARE HAS TO A
THRIVING ECONOMY. HOWEVER WE'D
LIKE TO RAISE A FEW CONCERNS.
ASIDE FROM THE CHILDCARE SLOTS,
THE BUDGET DOES NOT INCLUDE A
MEANINGFUL INVESTMENT INTO
INCREASING THE CHILD CARE
REIMBURSEMENT RATES OR RESOURCE
IN A PIPELINE OF NEW CHILDCARE
WORKERS. REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR
CHILD CARE PROVIDERS IS THE
HIGHEST PRIORITY THAT MUST BE
ADDRESSED. CURRENT REIMBURSEMENT
RATES FALL SHORT OF COVERING THE
ACTUAL COST OF PROVIDING
CHILDCARE. IN THE LAST THREE
YEARS, CALIFORNIA HAS LOST OVER
A THIRD OF ITS LICENSED FAMILY
CHILD CARE HOME. PROVIDERS AND
CENTERS. ALSO, IT'S TAKING THEM.
NEARLY 12 4 MONTHS TO, UH,
BECOME LICENSED. WE'D ALSO LIKE
TO RAISE CONCERNS DURING THIS
BUDGET CYCLE ON THE TIMING OF
ONE THE BUDGET IS ENACTED SO
WHEN THE ACTUAL FUNDING FROM THE
BUDGET ARE RELEASED TO THE
COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR
ENROLLMENT OF NEW CHILDCARE
SLOTS THE FIELD DID NOT ACTUALLY
BEGIN RECEIVING THE ALLOCATIONS
FOR THE 2022 TO 23 ENROLLMENTS
UNTIL LATE NOVEMBER.
ADDITIONALLY WE WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE SURE DURING THE BUDGET
PROCESS THAT THE COMMUNITY BASED
SO MUCH OKAY, THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND MR VICE
CHAIR. MY NAME IS ABBY ALVAREZ
WITH THE CALIFORNIA MEDICINE
SCHOLARS PROGRAM. MEDICINE
SCHOLARS PROGRAM. UH SUPPORT IS
A HEALTH WORKFORCE PIPELINE
PROGRAM THAT SUPPORTS STUDENTS
FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS FROM
THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LEVEL
THROUGH THEIR TRANSFER, AND
THREE OR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITY
MEDICAL SCHOOL AND EVENTUALLY,
THE CALIFORNIA WORKFORCE PROGRAM
SEEKS TO ADDRESS THE ONGOING
PHYSICIAN SHORTAGE ACROSS
CALIFORNIA AND INCREASED
DIVERSITY IN THE MEDICAL FIELD.
THE PROGRAM WAS LAUNCHED
SUCCESSFULLY AS A PILOT AFTER
BEING FUNDED IN THE 2021 BUDGET
, AND WE'RE ASKING THAT IT
CONTINUES TO BE FUNDED THIS YEAR
AND BEYOND. THANK YOU. GOOD
EVENING, MR CHAIR AND VICE
CHAIR. BETH NON OSCAR, THE STU
CALIFORNIA WE'RE HAPPY TO SEE
THAT THIS BUDGET DOES MAINTAIN
KEY INVESTMENTS. GIVEN THE
BUDGET DEFICIT, WE WOULD
EMPHASIZE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO
MAINTAIN AND FUND PUBLIC
SERVICES NOW, AS THEY ARE
CRUCIAL, PROVIDING THE SAFETY
NET THAT IS ALL THE MORE
IMPORTANT TIMES OF FINANCIAL
HARDSHIP WOULD BE REMISS IF WE
DID NOT MENTION OUR DEEP
CONCERNS WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL TO PULL BACK AND
ELIMINATE ROUGHLY 50 MILLION
INVESTMENTS TO PUBLIC HEALTH
WORKFORCE. ANYTHING THAT WE
LEARNED OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS
WAS HOW ESSENTIAL IT IS THAT WE
MAINTAIN OUR PUBLIC HEALTH
WORKFORCE. THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL
WOULD EMPHASIZE THE NEED FOR
INVESTMENTS IN WORKFORCE,
ESPECIALLY OUR SCHOOL, SOCIAL
SERVICES AND CHILD CARE IS
CRUCIAL TO A STRONG ECONOMY.
WE'VE LEARNED FROM 2008 THAT
CUTTING AND CONTRACTING OUT,
SUCH AS CENTRAL SERVICES ARE
MORE COSTLY, BENEFICIAL IN THE
LONG RUN. AGAIN WE UNDERSTAND
THAT REDUCTIONS. REVENUE MEANS
TOUGH DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE
, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH ALL OF YOU AND THE
MINISTRATIONS TO CLOSE THE CAP
AND KEEP OUR CALIFORNIA STRONG.
THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING SHIRTING
AND VICE CHAIR FONG MY QUEST ON
BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL. THE
BUILDING TRADE SUPPORTS FULL
FUNDING OF HIGH SPEED RAIL AND
THOSE LIFE CHANGING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR APPRENTICES
AND JOURNEY WORKERS AND OF THE
BUILDING TRADES. BUILDING TRADES
ALSO OPPOSES CUTS IN
INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING, AND
SPORTS. FULL FUNDING OF THAT. ON
WAGES DUE TO CATION. THE
BUILDING TRADES SUPPORTS
STREAMLINING AND, UM. EFFORTS TO
IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY AND
TIMELY PROCESSING OF WAGE AND
HOUR CLAIMS. AND THEN ON
DROUGHT, RESPONSE AND WATER
RESILIENCE TO YOUR POINT, MR
VICE CHAIR, ALTHOUGH NOT A HUGE
CUT, THE BUILDING TRADE SUPPORTS
SPENDING ON WATER, RESILIENCE
AND EVENTUAL FULL FUNDING OF
PROP. ONE WATER PROJECTS. UM WE
LOOK FORWARD TO ENGAGING IN THE
SUBCOMMITTEE PROCESS ON
ADDITIONAL ITEMS SUCH AS HOUSING
BUILDING, DECARBONIZATION AND
OTHER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR. TING VICE CHAIR
PHªN TIFFANY PHANTOM, HAVE A
CALIFORNIA COURT APPOINTED
SPECIAL ADVOCATES ASSOCIATION OR
CAL. CASA UM CASA IS A NONPROFIT
POWERED BY VOLUNTEERS. WHICH ARE
HIGHLY TRAINED AND WORK ONE ON
ONE WITH FOSTER CHILDREN. COST
OF VOLUNTEERS PROVIDE IN DEPTH
RECOMMENDATION TO JUDGES
INDEPENDENCY COURT, BUT EACH
CHILD'S BEST INTEREST COSTS. I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
LEGISLATURE AND PARTICULARLY
MEMBERS AND STAFF OF BUDGET
SUBCOMMITTEE FIVE ON PUBLIC
SAFETY FOR LAST YEAR'S BUDGET,
INCLUSION OF 60 MILLION OVER
THREE YEARS FOR CASA
UNFORTUNATELY, THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSED BUDGET ZEROS OUT.
YOU'RE TOO AND YOUR THREE OF
COST OF FUNDING THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL, NATION OF TWO THIRDS
OF THE COST OF FUNDING WILL SET
CALIFORNIA BACK SIGNIFICANTLY
AND RESULT IN FEWER FOSTER
CHILDREN SERVED BY OUR LOCAL
COST OF PROGRAMS OVER 80,000
WARDS OF THE STATE. THE STATES
CHILDREN WOULD GREATLY BENEFIT
FROM THE RESTORATION OF THIS
COST OF FUNDING. THANK YOU. GOOD
EVENING, MR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
ABRAHAM MENDOZA ON BEHALF OF THE
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. WHILE
OUR ORGANIZATION IS GLAD TO SEE
THE PROPOSED BUDGET INCREASES TO
DROUGHT, CONTINGENCY FUNDING AND
THE CONTINUED INVESTMENT TO
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS
LEVIES, WE REALLY WANT TO REMIND
BOTH OF YOURSELVES THAT THE
DROUGHT IS NOT OVER, AND NEITHER
ARE THE NUMEROUS DROUGHT RELATED
ISSUES PLAGUING COMMUNITIES
ACROSS OUR STATE. LAST YEAR
ALONE OVER 1400 WELLS WENT DRY
IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY. THIS IS A
BACKLOG THAT COULD TAKE WELL
OVER A DECADE TO ADDRESS IF THE
CURRENT RATES OF WELL DRILLING
HOLDS, AND WHILE WE KNOW THE
ECONOMIC FORECAST IS MURKY FOR
THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS, THE
STATE MUST PROACTIVELY PLAN FOR
CONTINUED DROUGHT CONDITIONS,
INVEST IN THE NECESSARY
INFRASTRUCTURE TO ADDRESS THE
WELL BACKLOG AND ENSURE THAT
WE'RE PRIORITIZING THE FAMILIES
AND COMMUNITIES WHO ARE RELYING
ON OUR STATE'S AQUIFER FOR THEIR
PRIMARY SOURCE OF DRINKING
WATER. AND LASTLY, I WANT TO
MENTION THE NEED FOR THIS
COMMITTEE AND THE GOVERNOR TO
WORK ON WATER AFFORDABILITY.
WATER RATES CONTINUE TO RISE
FASTER THAN INFLATION AND THE
GUN OF THE GOVERNOR IDENTIFIED
THIS PROBLEM IN HIS WATER SUPPLY
STRATEGY LAST YEAR, AND WE HOPE
TO LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
ALL OF YOU TO ADDRESS THESE
ISSUES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY
MORE PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE ROOM?
OKAY, SEEING NONE OPERATE, ARE
YOU THERE? YES. IF YOU COULD
START WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON
THE PHONE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,
IF YOU WISH TO QUEUE UP FOR
PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU MAY PRESS
ONE AND ZERO AT THIS TIME. FIRST
WE GO TO LINE 16, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD EVENING. THIS IS
CHRIS CHÁVEZ, WITH COALITION FOR
CLEAN AIR AND THE CHARGE AHEAD
CAMPAIGN. WE UNDERSTAND THE
DIFFICULT BUDGETARY CONDITIONS
FACING THE STATE. WE URGE BOTH
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
TO FIND AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE
MASSIVE CUTS TO CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT.
RATHER THE STATE SHOULD
REALLOCATE FUNDS FOR PROGRAMS
THAT WORK AGAINST THE STATE'S
CLIMATE AND CLEAN AIR
OBJECTIVES, SUCH AS FOSSIL FUEL
SUBSIDIES AND HIGHWAY
EXPANSIONS. TO BE CLEAR. CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS
AREN'T JUST ABOUT REBATES FOR
ELECTRIC CARS, WHETHER THEY'RE
FUNDING FOR CUTTING FUNDING FOR
CLEAN FOR TRANSIT, CLEAN, HEAVY
DUTY TRUCKS AND MOBILITY. IT'S
GOING TO HURT LOW INCOME EARNERS
AND RESIDENTS OF DISADVANTAGED
CAN USE THE MOST WHILE THESE
CUTS UNDERMINE CALIFORNIA'S
REPUTATIONS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE
LEADER THEY ALSO MOVED TO
CALIFORNIA EVEN CLOSER OR
FURTHER AWAY FROM MEETING ITS
OBLIGATIONS TO THE FEDERAL AND
STATE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.
WELL, YOU'RE TO MEET THESE
STANDARDS WILL RESULT IN MORE
PAIN, SUCH AS THE LOSS OF
FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING. WELL
THAT'S HER YEARS PROPOSED BUDGET
NOMINALLY PRESERVES MOST OF THE
MULTIYEAR, CLEAN TRANSPORTATION
FUNDING PLAN. THE EFFECTS OF THE
CUTS WILL BE FAR GREATER. MOST
THESE GUARANTEED CUTS WILL BE
REALIZED IN THE 2023 2024
BUDGET, AND THERE'S NO GUARANTEE
THAT THE INVESTMENTS IN THE
FUTURE BUDGET YEARS WILL BE
PRESERVED. GIVEN LIMITED
RESOURCES, CALIFORNIA MISS
PRIORITIZED CLIMATE INVESTORS
THAT MAXIMIZE THEIR QUALITY
BENEFITS AND PRIORITIZE OUR MOST
VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS. WE ALSO
NEED TO CONSIDER HOW TO END THE
BOOM AND BUST FUNDING CYCLES FOR
CLEAN TRANSPORTATION AS WELL AS
ADDRESS MAYBE EIGHT
REAUTHORIZATION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
NEXT WE GO TO LINE 20, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD EVENING, MR CHAIR
AND VICE CHAIR. JARED CALL WITH
NOURISH CALIFORNIA WANT TO
EXPRESS OUR APPRECIATION FOR THE
GOVERNOR'S BROAD APPROACH TO
THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, WHICH AVOIDS
PAINFUL CUTS TO OUR SAFETY NET
PROGRAMS, BUT WE ARE CONCERNED
BY THE LACK OF INVESTMENT IN
FOOD AND NUTRITION PROGRAMS AT A
TIME WHEN ONE IN FIVE
CALIFORNIANS ARE FACING FOOD
INSECURITY. THE LINES THAT ARE
FOOD BANKS ARE JUST AS LONG AS
THEY'VE BEEN THROUGHOUT THE
PANDEMIC, AND CAL FRESH. THE
CULPRITS CASELOAD HAS RISEN BY
NEARLY ONE MILLION INDIVIDUALS
SINCE SINCE THE PANDEMIC STARTED
SPECIFIC WE WERE DEEPLY
DISAPPOINTED BY THE PROPOSAL TO
DELAY THE EXPANSION OF THE
CALIFORNIA FOOD ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM. WHICH WAS FUNDED LAST
BUDGET CYCLE TO EXPAND VITAL
FOOD ASSISTANCE. THE
CALIFORNIANS AGE 55 OVER WERE
INELIGIBLE FOR CAL FRESH SOLELY
DUE TO THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS.
RECENT RESEARCH SHOWS THAT
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS IN
CALIFORNIA FACED FOOD INSECURITY
AT MORE THAN TWICE THE RATE OF
THE GENERAL POPULATION. AND
NEARLY TWO THIRDS OF
UNDOCUMENTED CHILDREN LIVING A
FOOD IF FOOD INSECURE
HOUSEHOLDS. UNDOCUMENTED
CALIFORNIANS SIMPLY CAN'T WAIT
TO AFFORD TO WAIT ANOTHER HALF
DECADE TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS AN
EQUITABLE NUTRITION TAKING YET
SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH THE COMMITTEE, THE
LEGISLATURE AND ADMINISTRATION
TO ENSURE THAT THE CALIFORNIA
FOOD PROGRAM IS EXPANDED TO
INCLUDE CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANTS OF
ALL AGES, REGARDLESS OF
IMMIGRATION STATUS WITHOUT DELAY
, AND WE ALSO LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU TO MITIGATE THE
UNPRECEDENTED HUNGER CLIFF THAT
HOUSEHOLDS WILL FACE IN MARCH.
WHEN THOSE CAL FRESH EMERGENCY
ALLOTMENTS THOSE EXTRA PAYMENTS.
THAT WERE PROVIDED DURING THE
PANDEMIC ABRUPTLY EXPIRE. STATE
JUST NEEDS TO BE USING EVERY
COOL AVAILABLE TO BOOST CAL
FRESH THANK YOU. NEXT WE GO TO
LINE 22, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS
IS ISABELLA WITH OUR QUOTA WITH
THE HEALTH OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
OF CALIFORNIA, WHICH REPRESENTS
THE POSITION HEALTH OFFICERS IN
CALIFORNIA, CITY AND COUNTY
JURISDICTIONS. I THINK I'M GONNA
BUDGET PROPOSES NOT A TRIGGER
REDUCTION NOR DELAY, BUT IT CUT
TO ONE TIME FUNDING ENACTED IN
LAST YEAR'S BUDGET THAT WOULD
HELP REBUILD THE PUBLIC HEALTH
WORKFORCE. THERE IS ALSO NOTHING
IN THIS BUDGET THAT WILL HELP
THE STATE PUBLIC HEALTH
DEPARTMENT CONTINUE DOING THE
WORK THAT HELPS US SUCH AS
MODELING AND PROJECTION CAPACITY
, MAINTAINING DATA SYSTEM AND
CREATING AND STOPPING A NEW,
ONGOING BRANCH TO ADDRESS COVID
19. IN THE PAST, INVESTMENTS IN
PUBLIC HEALTH LED TO A DRAMATIC
INCREASE IN LIFE EXPECTANCY AND
THE LEVELING OFF OF PREVENTABLE
DISEASES. HOWEVER THE MEMORY OF
EACH EPIDEMIC STATED PUBLIC
HEALTH FELL VICTIM TO
DISINVESTMENT AND THE IDEA THAT
HEALTH IS AN INDIVIDUAL
RESPONSIBILITY. WE ARE SEEING
HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF AS THE
MOST RECENT PANDEMIC ALREADY
BEGINS TO FADE INTO THE
BACKGROUND AND FUNDING IS
RESCINDED. LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU AND ENSURING
THAT CALIFORNIANS RECEIVE THE
ROBUST, WELL FUNDED PUBLIC
HEALTH SYSTEM THAT SAVES LIFE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT
SPEAKER. NEXT WE GO TO LINE 31,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING,
MRS DIANNA DOUGLAS WITH HEALTH
ACCESS CALIFORNIA, THE STATEWIDE
HEALTHCARE CONSUMER ADVOCACY
COALITION ACCESS APPLAUDS THE
CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO
IMPLEMENT THE MEDICAL EXPANSION
TO THE REMAINING 26 TO 49 YEAR
OLD AGE GAP IN JANUARY OF 2024,
AS INCLUDED IN THE GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET, AND WE APPRECIATE THE
LEGISLATURES AND THE
ADMINISTRATION'S JOINT CONTINUED
COMMITMENT TO ENSURE THAT ALL
CAN ENROLL IN MEDICAL,
REGARDLESS OF IMMIGRATION STATUS
BY NEXT YEAR, EVEN WITH A
DIFFICULT BUDGET DECISIONS
AHEAD. HEALTH ACTIONS CONTINUES
TO ADVOCATE FOR BOTH ACCESS AND
AFFORDABILITY, AND WE'RE
EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED AND THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED SWEEPING OF
OUR STATES INDIVIDUAL MANDATE
PENALTY REVENUE INTO THE GENERAL
FUND. WE URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO
SAFEGUARD THESE FUNDS, WHICH ARE
PAID BY THE UNINSURED,
SPECIFICALLY ENSURE THEY GO
MAKING COVERAGE MORE AFFORDABLE
FOR COVERED CALIFORNIA ENROLLEES
WHO DESPERATELY NEED HELP IN THE
FACE OF $5000 DEDUCTIBLES AND
ALMOST $50 COPAYS FOR PRIMARY
CARE VISITS. WE CAN ELIMINATE
MUCH OF THIS COST SHARING BURDEN
NOW IF WE USE THE PENALTY
REVENUE AS INTENDED. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT
OVERTIME. 37. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
IS THAT ME IS OPEN. SO CHAIR.
CHAIR MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SERENA
LODGE. I'M CALLING FROM PASTOR
COONEY. AND UH SO LET ME GET
THIS STRAIGHT IN THIS BUDGET,
THIS GOVERNMENT BUDGET PROPOSAL.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY FOR OR
LITTLE MONEY FOR ROAD PROJECTS.
WATER STORING. WE'RE NO HALTING
, HIGHER EDUCATION. UH NO
ADEQUATE DAYCARE WORKERS, NO GAS
TAX RELIEF FOR THE WORKERS. SO I
GUESS THAT WAS A LIE FROM THE
GOVERNOR AND CALIFORNIANS. YOU
KNOW, UH, WE'RE GOING TO BE
DEALING WITH PRISONERS BEING LET
OUT OF PRISON AND THIS WOULD BE
HIGHER CRIME. I DON'T SEE
ANYTHING IN THIS BUDGET THAT
ADDRESSES THESE ISSUES. SO UM,
YOU KNOW, AS A TAXPAYER, THESE
ARE WHAT THIS IS WHAT IS
IMPORTANT TO US HERE IN
CALIFORNIA? WE WANT BETTER
EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN. WE WANT
WATER STORAGE. WE WANT THAT NOW
, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE WATER
STORAGE, WE WILL DIE. GET THAT
STRAIT CALIFORNIA. THIS IS WHAT
YOU VOTED FOR. THESE ARE THE
PEOPLE YOU VOTED FOR. THEY DO
NOT CARE ABOUT WATER STORAGE IF
WE IF WE DO NOT IF WE ARE NOT
ABLE TO GIVE GIVE WORDS WHO ARE
AGRICULTURE SO THEY CAN SO WE
CAN GROW OUR CROPS. WE WILL NOT
HAVE FOOD, SO THIS NEEDS TO BE A
PRIORITY. LISTEN TO ME IS
PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, AND WE NEED
TO ADDRESS IT NOW. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT SPEAKER. LINE.
33, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI CINDY.
HILLARY WITH WELBY HEALTH WELL
BEING HEALTH WOULD LIKE TO
COMMEND THE ADMINISTRATION'S
ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT INTO
PROGRAMS OF ALL INCLUSIVE CARE
FOR THE ELDERLY OR PACE AND
ENCOURAGES THE LEGISLATURE TO
MAINTAIN THAT FUNDING IN THE
BUDGET TO INCREASE THE
EFFICIENCY OF THE ADMINISTRATION
OF AND THUS ACCESS TO PACE FOR
CALIFORNIA'S FRAIL AND ELDERLY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT
SPEAKER. NEXT WE GO TO LINE 40,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING
SHARE, AND I WOULD SAY MEMBERS,
BUT APPARENTLY EVERYBODY LEFT.
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK EXCEPT FOR
FONG. THANK YOU FOR SAYING WE
APPRECIATE YOU. I'D LIKE TO
SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT PAGE 14
SMARTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, BUT
BUDGET INCLUDES GENERAL FUND
EXPENDITURE OF 176.6 MILLION TO
CONTINUE TO PROTECT IN QUOTES.
THE PUBLIC HEALTH AGAINST COVID
19. RECENT RASMUSSEN SURVEY
FOUND THAT MORE THAN ONE IN FOUR
AMERICANS BELIEVES THAT THEY
KNOW SOMEONE WHO LIKELY DIED AS
A RESULT OF THE COVID VACCINE.
THERE HAS BEEN AN ALARMING SPIKE
AND DEATHS OF PROFESSIONAL
ATHLETES IN THEIR PRIME DUE TO
STROKE AND HEART ATTACK LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE
REPORTING LOSSES DUE TO A 40%
INCREASE IN ALL CAUSE MORTALITY
RATES OF THE EMPLOYED POPULATION
SINCE THE INTRODUCTION OF THE
COVID VACCINE MANDATES. THE
TWITTER FILES REVEALS THAT EVEN
HEAVY CENSORSHIP COULD NOT STOP
THIS INFORMATION FROM REACHING
THE PEOPLE. YOU. THE LEGISLATURE
AND GOVERNOR HAVE LITERALLY
SPENT BILLIONS OF OUR MONEY ON
VACCINES, TRACKING TESTING,
TRACING, AND INSTEAD WE THE
PUBLIC WANT TO SEE THESE FUNDS
SPENT IN A WAY THAT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THIS NEWLY
EMERGING DATA REGARDING THE
DEVASTATING INJURIES AND DEATHS
THAT ARE IRREFUTABLY BEING
CAUSED BY THE COVID VACCINE. SO
WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO DO TO HELP
REBUILD PUBLIC UP IN AMERICAN
INSTITUTIONS, PARTICULARLY IN
THE CDC, NIH AND FDA, FOR
INSTANCE, IN FLORIDA THEY ARE
WRAPPED UP, PLEASE. GRAND JURY.
NEXT WE GO TO LINE 41, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD EVENING CHAIR
TRAINING MEMBERS, JENNIFER
MALLEY WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES JUST WANTED
TO KNOW THAT WE APPRECIATE THE
OVERALL APPROACH OF THE GOVERNOR
, UM, AND HOW HE TOOK, UM HOW WE
TRIED TO PRESERVE MANY OF THE
INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE
LEGISLATURE ELECTIONS LAST YEAR
, BUT UNDERSTAND THAT THINGS
WOULD LIKELY LOOK DRASTICALLY
DIFFERENT IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS
. UM WE REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON
THE ISSUES OF UNDERSTAFFING,
RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT AND A
VARIETY OF SECTORS AND THE
WORKFORCE LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING
THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU AS
WELL IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. WE
JUST URGE THE STATES OF
PRIORITIZE WORKFORCE STABILITY
BY PROVIDING ACCESS TO CHILDCARE
PROTECTING FUNDING FOR EXISTING
TRANSIT OPERATIONS TO ENSURE
THAT WORKERS HAVE ACCESS TO
RELIABLE AND SAFE TRANSIT AND
GOOD PAYING JOBS THAT CAN
SUPPORT THEMSELVES AND THEIR
FAMILIES ALSO WANTED TO NOTE
THAT THE LEGISLATURE PASSED AND
GOVERNOR SIGNED A B 25 30. LAST
YEAR, WHICH PROVIDES TIMELY AND
AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO COVER
CALIFORNIA INSURANCE FOR WORKERS
LOCKED OUT OR ON STRIKE. AND DUE
TO AN OVERSIGHT. THE PROGRAM WAS
ACTUALLY NOT FUNDED IN LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET, SO WE'RE HOPING
THAT WE CAN REGAIN THE $2
MILLION TO SUPPORT THE PROGRAM.
UM FOR THIS YEAR. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT SPEAKER. NEXT WE
GO TO LINE 46, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD EVENING, MR CHAN MEMBERS
NICOLE WARD ULLMAN ON BEHALF OF
THE CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP, THE
CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP. THANKS
GOVERNOR NEWSOM FOR RECOGNIZING
THE COMPLEXITY OF FAMILIES LIVES
AND AVOIDING CURRENT AND FUTURE
CUTS TO SAFETY NET PROGRAMS THAT
HINDER CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND
WELL BEING. WE SUPPORT
MAINTAINING THE EXPANSION OF
UNIVERSAL HEALTH COVERAGE,
CONTINUING TO PROVIDE UNIVERSAL
SCHOOL MEALS, SUSTAINING FUNDING
FOR SUPPORTING THE MENTAL HEALTH
OF YOUTH AND SENDING RACIAL
EQUITY AND USE EMPOWERMENT
COMMISSION. IN THE AFTERMATH OF
THE PANDEMIC AND THE UNWINDING
OF THE PHD THERE IS MORE WORK TO
DO IN OUR STATE'S BUDGET TO
IMPLEMENT AND EXPAND POLICIES
AND PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT THE
IMMEDIATE AND LONG TERM HEALTH
OF CHILDREN AND COLOR AND KEEP
THEM CONNECTED TO SUPPORT THEY
NEED TO BE HEALTHY AND THRIVED,
INCLUDING EXPANDING THE
CALIFORNIA FOOD ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM TO INCLUDE ALL AGES,
INCLUDING CHILDREN. SUPPORTING
THE MENTAL HEALTH OF YOUTH AND
YOUNG CHILDREN, WITH AN EMPHASIS
ON MOVING UPSTREAM TOWARDS TROOP
OF INSTANT PREVENTION AND EARLY
INTERVENTION. AND EWING
COMMUNITY WISDOM AND LEADERSHIP
IN THE HEALTH DELIVERY BY NOT
DELAYING THE COMMUNITY HEALTH
WORKER WORKFORCE CERTIFICATION
AND TRAINING. IF YOU COULD PLAY
OUT ABOUT PROPOSED TRIP YEP. WE
ARE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT
PROPOSED TRIGGERED CUTS IN THE
AREAS OF CLIMATE, TRANSPORTATION
AND HOUSING AND APPRECIATE YOUR
ATTENTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT SPEAKER. NEXT WE GO TO LINE
50. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS
MICHELLE GIBBONS. I'M AT THE
COUNTY HEALTH EXECUTIVES
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA. WE
REPRESENT LOCAL HEALTH
DEPARTMENTS ACROSS THE STATE,
AND WE RESPECTFULLY MUST OPPOSE
THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL TO CUT
PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING
PROGRAMS BY ROUGHLY $50 MILLION
. LAST YEAR, THE LEGISLATURE
SHOWED TREMENDOUS LEADERSHIP AND
SECURING FUNDING FOR THESE
PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING
PROGRAM. WHICH INCLUDES FUNDING
FOR THINGS LIKE THE PUBLIC
HEALTH PATHWAYS PROGRAM, WHICH
TAKES EARLY CAREER PROFESSIONALS
FROM THE COMMUNITY AND PLACES
THEM IN LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
TO GAIN EXPERIENCE THAT ALLOWS
THEM TO QUALIFY FOR FULL TIME
EMPLOYMENT OF THE INCUMBENT
WORKER, UPSCALE TRAINING THAT
ALLOWS OUR CURRENT WORKFORCE TO
CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THEIR SKILLS
, GET ADDITIONAL TRAINING AND
ALLOW THEM GROWTH AND
PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FROM
WITHIN THE CALI. I S TRAINING
WHICH PREPARES AND TRAINS ARE
EPIDEMIOLOGISTS, MICROBIOLOGISTS
TRAINING THAT GIVES
MICROBIOLOGIST HANDS ON EXPIRY.
REINCE TO BE ABLE TO GET
CERTIFICATION AND OUR PUBLIC
HEALTH LABS BY YOUR PROGRAM THAT
ALLOWS US TO CONTINUE TO
GENERATE NEW PUBLIC HEALTH LAB
DIRECTORS, WHICH IS MANDATED TO
OPERATE PAM PUBLIC HEALTH
LABORATORIES IN CALIFORNIA.
THESE PROGRAMS ARE NEEDED TO
SUSTAIN AND GROW OUR WORK UP WHO
HAVE BEEN ON THAT? YES UH AND WE
JUST ENCOURAGE AND ASK THAT YOU
ALL REJECT THESE. THESE CUTS AS
WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT
HOUR. NEXT WE GO TO LINE 45,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. ONE MOMENT. SAN
FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT
DISTRICT OR BART, SOMETHING FAR.
A PIPE. UM GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR.
TAKE ADVICE. CHAIR FONG ALEX
WALKER, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
MANAGER FOR THE BAY AREA, RAPID
TRANSIT DISTRICT OR PART UM,
JUST WANT TO REITERATE SOME OF
OUR COLLEAGUES THAT FIRST OF
ALL, WE HOPE TO SEE THE
RESTORATION OF TWO BILLION IN
THE TRC PETERSON FUNDING THAT
WAS CUT BECAUSE THESE CAPITAL
DOLLARS ARE IMPORTANT TO DELIVER
PROJECTS THAT WILL HELP BRING
ROGERS BACK WITH MORE RELIABLE
SERVICE TRANSIT SERVICE AND THEN
ALSO, THESE FUNDS ARE IMPORTANT
FOR LEVERAGING THE FEDERAL FUNDS
THAT ARE COMING TO PROJECTS. AND
THEN IN ADDITION, WE LIKE TO
THANK, UM SUB CHAIR BENNETT
ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS COMEDIAN
BUDGET STAFF FOR MEETING WITH US
WHEN WE WERE IN SACRAMENTO LAST
WEEK, UM AND TALKING, AND WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT THE FISCAL CLIFF
THAT A LOT OF AGENCIES WILL
FACE. ACROSS THE STATE. WE
REALLY ARE AT A REALLY GREAT
LEVEL OF COORDINATION WITH OUR
BAY AREA OPERATORS AND OPERATORS
ACROSS THE STATE THROUGH THE
CALIFORNIA TRANS ASSOCIATION TO,
UM YOU KNOW, SHOW THE NEED FOR
SUPPORT FOR TRANSIT OPERATIONS
POTENTIALLY DOWN THE LINE AND TO
SHOW WHAT WE ARE DOING TO BRING
RIDERS BACK AND WE UNDERSTAND
THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW,
WITH RIDERSHIP STILL LAGGING FOR
OFFICE RETURNED IN THE BAY AREA
THAT, UM, ARE. SURE THAT WE ARE
, UM, SEEING FISCAL CLIFF
GETTING CLOSER CLOSER, EVEN WITH
RESPONSIBLE STEWARDS OF THE
FEDERAL RELIEF TO LOOK FORWARD
TO WORKING WITH YOU TO SUPPORT
OUR STATE TRANSIT THROUGH THIS
DIFFICULT TIME. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU NEXT CALLER. NEXT WE GOT THE
LINE. 51, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES.
MY NAME MATARAM IN PLEASURE.
COUNTING SO MANY TABLES ALREADY
SAID THAT I WAS GOING TO SAY I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT WATER STORAGE
OUR STREETS. VACCINES AND HOW TO
TRAIN TO NOWHERE REALLY
IRRITATES ME AND THIS TRANSITION
TO ELECTED VEHICLES IS ASININE.
THE COVID VACCINES THAT SO MANY
PEOPLE HAVE DIED FROM THE YOU
PEOPLE IMPOSED THEN. MAKING THEM
GET THEM AND ALL THESE TESTS AND
ALL THE ILLEGALS THAT WE HAVE TO
SUPPORT MY TAX MONEY GOING TO
THAT IS INFURIATING. AND I WISH
HE WOULD PUT AN END TO IT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT CALLER. I
FORGOT TO LINE 52. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MICHAEL PIMENTAL,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
CALIFORNIA TRANSIT ASSOCIATION,
AND I JOIN YOU TODAY THAT SIMPLY
ECHOED THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
PROPOSED CUTS TO THE TRANSIT
INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM
THAT WE'RE INCLUDING THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. WE ABSOLUTELY
UNDERSTAND THE STATUS FACING
SOME DIFFICULT BUDGET TIMES, BUT
I DO WANT TO RECALL THAT THE
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS A
CENTRAL COMPONENTS. OF LAST
YEAR'S TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
PACKAGE AND WILL BE CRITICAL AND
LEVERAGING FEDERAL FUNDS IN THE
COMING YEARS. NOW WE WOULD ASK
THAT THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
ADMINISTRATION MAINTAINED
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM AT THE
PREVIOUSLY PRESCRIBED LEVELS AND
IN THE SAME BREATH, OF COURSE,
WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THE OPERATIONS
FUNDING SHORTFALLS THAT MANY OF
OUR AGENCIES ARE FACING THE NEED
TO PROVIDE TARGETED SUPPORT FOR
THOSE PURPOSES? I ALSO WANT TO
JUST TO CLOSE AND ACKNOWLEDGING
THAT WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE
AN EXTENSION OF STATUTORY RELIEF
THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED BY
THE LEGISLATURE TO TRANSIT
AGENCIES THROUGH. FISCAL YEAR.
24 25. CURRENTLY THOSE SET SHORT
RELIEF MEASURES EXPIRE AT THE
END OF THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS
AFTERNOON. NEXT WE GO TO LINE
53, PLEASE GO AHEAD. DANICA
ROAD, ARMEL ON BEHALF OF THE
TRANSFORMATIVE IN PRISON WORK
GROUPS. WE APPRECIATE THE HARD
WORK DONE IN THE ASSEMBLY LAST
YEAR TO SECURE FUNDING TO
SUPPORT COMMUNITY BASED PROGRAMS
, PROVIDING ESSENTIAL
REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS IN OUR
STATE PRISONS. CURRENTLY THESE
PROGRAMS RECEIVE LESS THAN 1% OF
CBC, OUR BUDGET AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU TO
IDENTIFY AREAS AND THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR
CBC ARE THAT CAN BE SHIFTED OVER
TO ENSURE CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR
THESE PROGRAMS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU NEXT CALLER. NEXT WE GO TO
LINE 27, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
EVENING. WHAT DO YOU HASTINGS
WITH THE CLIMATE CENTER. WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATE IS
FACING A POTENTIAL LARGE BUDGET
SHORTFALL THIS YEAR BUT
ADDRESSING THE CARPET, BUT
CARBON BUDGET CAN'T WAIT. THE
CLIMATE CENTER RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTS THAT THE APPROXIMATELY
SIX BILLION IN PROPOSED CUTS TO
HIGH PRIORITY CLIMATE AND
ENERGY, RELIABILITY AND
RESILIENCE, INVESTMENTS. BE
RESTORED. WE BELIEVE THAT IF
THESE CUTS REMAIN THE STATE'S
ABILITY TO MEET ITS CLIMATE
GOALS AND THE GOALS OF SP 100
FOR 100% CLEAN ENERGY AND GRID,
RELIABILITY WILL BE HINDERED.
THE CLIMATE CENTER ALSO BELIEVES
THAT SOME OF THE PROPOSED CUTS
WILL DISPROPORTIONATELY HARM
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES WHO ARE
ON THE FRONTLINES OF CLIMATE
IMPACT, SPECIFICALLY CRITICAL
CLIMATE AND ENERGY RELATED
BUDGET CUTS THAT CONCERN THE
CLIMATE CENTER INCLUDE THE 1.1
BILLION IN CUTS FROM ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE PROGRAMS, 800
MILLION NET CUT IN THE CLEAN
ENERGY INVESTMENTS. UH CLEAN
ENERGY INVESTMENTS IN 779
MILLION FROM THE NATURE BASED
SOLUTION INITIATIVES AND 500
MILLION NET CUT IN THE EXTREME
HEAT AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCE
PROGRAMS. THANK YOU. OKAY? THANK
YOU NEXT CALLER. NEXT WE'LL GO
TO LINE 55, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
MAYBE MR CHAIR. THIS ISN'T DREAM
OF VISCO AT THE CALIFORNIA
IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER. WE
THINK THE GOVERNOR'S BIRTHDAY
NIAN STRONG FOR HEALTH FOR ALL
BUT THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED
BUDGET MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY TO
ENSURE ALL CALIFORNIANS HAVE
ACCESS TO FOOD ASSISTANCE AND
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS BY
DELAYING IMPLEMENTATION FOR FOOD
FOR ALL FOR ALL CALIFORNIANS
AGES 55 OLDER UNTIL 2027 NOT
INCLUDING ANYONE AGED BELOW 55.
AS WELL AS NOT INCLUDING FUNDING
FOR THE SAFETY NET FOR ALL
WORKERS ACT, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TO EXCLUDE
AN IMMIGRANT WORKERS.
CALIFORNIANS WILL CONTINUE
EXPERIENCING ECONOMIC HARDSHIP
AND STUDENT SECURITY TODAY,
UNDOCUMENTED CALIFORNIANS CANNOT
AFFORD TO WAIT. WE HOPE THE
LEGISLATURE WILL CONTINUE
DEFENDING HELP FOR ALL AND
PRIORITIZED ASSISTANCE AND
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR
UNDOCUMENTED CALIFORNIANS. WE
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU
TO MAKE THIS A REALITY. THANK
YOU. NEXT COLOR. NEXT WE GET TO
LIFE 56, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBER STATE
CONNOLLY WITH NEXT GEN.
CALIFORNIA WE STRONGLY SUPPORTED
THE PAST PASSAGE OF THE 54
BILLION CLIMATE COMMITMENT AND
WHAT TO SEE. THE STATE
MAINTAINED THAT COMMITMENT IN
PARTICULAR, WERE CONCERNED ABOUT
THE PROPOSED CUTS TO THE ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND THE
LACK OF FUNDING FOR TRANSIT
OPERATIONS. LASTLY WE ALSO ECHO
OUR COLLEAGUES WHO ARE SEEKING
SUPPORT FOR CAL SHAPE COMMUNITY
RESILIENCE AND EQUITABLE
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION FUNDS
THAT CANNOT BE READILY
BACKFILLED BY OTHER FUNDING
SOURCES. THANK YOU. NEXT. WE
HAVE TO LINE 57. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS
GARCIA WITH LEADERSHIP COUNCIL
INABILITY. WE HAVE SERIOUS
CONCERNS ABOUT THE CUTS AND THE
LANES TO THE EQUITABLE BUILDING
DECARBONIZATION PROGRAM
COMMUNITY CENTER PROGRAMS, SINCE
WHEN WE HAVE A NEW REGION OVER
CIVILIANS, ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM AND THE ZERO EMISSIONS
MOBILITY PROGRAM, IT ALL FUNDS,
THESE ALL FUN CRITICAL SERVICES
AND RESEARCHERS WERE COMMUNITIES
EXPERIENCING THE FRONT. OF
IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE THE
RECENT NIGHT ATMOSPHERE RIVERS,
WHICH HAVE IMPACTED COMMUNITIES
ACROSS IN THE CALIFORNIA WITH
FLOODING, HAVE EMPHASIZED THE
URGENCY PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES
FUNDS FOR FINDING RESILIENCE.
CLINTON STATION OF THE GROUP OF
SERVICES THAT VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES THE RESOURCES THEY
NEED TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT OF
CLIMATE CHANGE. THANK YOU FOR
THE CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN
HOUSING. WE APPRECIATE THE
GOVERNMENT'S COMMITMENT TO
WORKING WITH THE LEGISLATOR TO
THE LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP
POLICIES THAT STRENGTHEN STATE
HOUSING. TO HOLD LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS ACCOUNTABLE IS
APPOINTED. THE GOVERNOR DID NOT
ALLOCATE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO
THE HOMELESS PREVENTION FUND.
THE FUND. THIS FUNDING HAS
HELPED LEGAL AID ORGANIZATIONS
AND LOCAL CBO TRADE LOCAL RIGHT
OF COUNSEL RATES OF COUNCIL
PROGRAMS THAT WITH HOUSING COSTS
, RISING, EXPANDING THIS PROGRAM
TO MEET THE STATEWIDE SKILLS
WILL HELP FOR THAT ELECTIONS AND
HOMELESSNESS KEEPING LOW INCOME
TENANTS HOUSE WE STRONGLY URGE
ELECTORALLY TRUE TO ALLOCATE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO THE THANKS
. PS LAST WOULD LIKE TO ECHO
GIVEN BY COMMUNITY WATER CENTER
. YES WE JUST LIKE TO ECHO THE
COMMENTS GIVEN BY COMMUNITY
WATER CENTER ON WATER. THANK
YOU. I FORGOT THE LINE. 54,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING,
CHARTING AND VICE CHAIR PHªN
CARLOS ROJAS TO REPRESENT THE
CURRENT COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF
SCHOOLS OFFICE AND THE 46
CURRENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT
SERVES 200,000 STUDENTS, OF
WHICH 69% ARE LOW INCOME.
ENGLISH LEARNERS ARE FOSTER
YOUTH. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE
MANY WAYS TO THE LEGISLATURE HAS
RECENTLY ADDRESSED LONGSTANDING
INEQUITIES IN EDUCATION THROUGH
THE L C, F F SPECIAL EDUCATION
AND HOMELESS SCHOOL
TRANSPORTATION, THE CURRENT BOND
SYSTEM FOR FUNDING SCHOOL
FACILITIES IS ALSO AN EQUITABLE
AND HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE
HEALTH SAFETY AND ACADEMIC
PREPARATION OF OUR STUDENTS. A
RECENT STUDY BY THE PPC REPORTS
THAT THERE IS A WIDE DISPARITY
IN SCHOOL FACILITY FUNDING THAT
IS SYSTEMATICALLY RELATED TO LOW
SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY
VALUATION AND LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES. LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES LACK THE ABILITY TO
GENERATE LOCAL FUNDS TO THE SAME
DEGREE AS WEALTHIER COMMUNITIES
. AND AS A RESULT, 38% OF
STUDENTS ATTEND SCHOOLS THAT DO
NOT MEET MINIMUM FACILITY
STANDARDS AND BETWEEN 2015 AND
19 2108 SCHOOLS CLOSED
TEMPORARILY DUE TO POOR OR
UNSAFE FACILITY CONDITIONS. WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU
CONSIDER THE RESTORATION OF THE
PROPOSED $550 MILLION DELAY TO
THE CALIFORNIA PRESCHOOL TK AND
FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN FACILITIES
GRANT PROGRAM. THE PROPOSED
DELAY WILL ONLY ADD TO THE
ALREADY EXISTING BACKLOG OF
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS NEEDED TO
PREPARE CLASSROOMS FOR INCOMING
PK STUDENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME AND CONSIDERATION. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ON
THIS ISSUE OVER THE COMING
MONTHS. THANK YOU NEXT CALLER.
NEXT WE GO TO LINE 18, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD EVENING. ENRICO,
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR AT CLIMATE
RESULT WE'RE A NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION BASED IN LOS
ANGELES. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW
POINTS. FIRST EXTREME HEAT IS
HERE. IT'S GETTING WORSE AND THE
STATE IS NOT PREPARED. EXTREME
HEAT IS CAUSING A PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS. IT IS RESULTING IN
PREVENTABLE DEATHS, ESPECIALLY
FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE AND
MARGINALIZED. SECOND, THE
PROPOSED $75 MILLION TRIGGER CUT
TO THE EXTREME HEAT AND
COMMUNITY BRASILIENSE PROGRAM.
REPRESENTS ALMOST A 50%
REDUCTION. WE BELIEVE THIS IS A
DISPROPORTIONATELY LARGER CUT
AND OTHER AREAS. CLIMATE RESOLVE
WHAT URGED THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE TO PROTECT ALREADY
APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO ADDRESS
EXTREME HEAT, AND WE COMMIT TO
WORKING WITH YOUR STAFF TO FIND
OTHER AREAS FOR BUDGET SAVINGS
THAT WILL NOT HAVE SUCH A
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON THE
MOST VULNERABLE. WE WOULD LIKE
TO ESPECIALLY CALL OUT THE
OFFICE WAS PLANNING IN
RESEARCHES, EXTREME HEAT AND
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PROGRAM. IT
IS VITAL THAT THIS INNOVATIVE
AND FORWARD LOOKING PROGRAM HAVE
THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO ADVANCE
CUTTING EDGE COMMUNITY PULLING
PROJECTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. NEXT WE'LL GET TO LINE 11,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI MY NAME IS
STEPHEN KING AND I'M THE CLEAN
ENERGY ADVOCATE WITH ENVIRONMENT
, CALIFORNIA THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME TODAY, BUT WE ALL EXPECTED
A TOUGH BUDGET YEAR. THE
GOVERNOR'S RECENT BUDGET
PROPOSAL, UNFORTUNATELY ASSIGNED
SOME OF ITS BIGGEST CUTS TO THE
ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE AND ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES. THE PROPOSAL
WOULD CUT A CRITICAL $6 BILLION
IN INVESTMENTS MEANT TO STAVE
OFF THE WORST IMPACTS OF THE
CLIMATE CRISIS IN CALIFORNIA,
INCLUDING CUTS TO CLEAN ENERGY
PROGRAMS, ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
INCENTIVES AND CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION FUNDS. THE DATE
HAS RECENTLY PASSED IMPORTANT
CLIMATE LEGISLATION. BUT WE'RE
CONCERNED THAT NOT ENOUGH
RESOURCES HAVE BEEN COMMITTED TO
IMPLEMENT THESE PROGRAMS AND
ULTIMATELY ACHIEVE OUR BOLD
CLIMATE GOALS. INVESTMENTS IN
CLIMATE ARE NOW MORE CRUCIAL
THAN EVER. JUST IN THE LAST
SEVERAL MONTHS. WE FELT EXTREME
WEATHER, INCLUDING HEATWAVES,
INTENSE RAIN AND FLOODING, AND
UNLESS WE KEEP OUR CLIMATE
INVESTMENT, STRONG IMPACTS WILL
ONLY ESCALATE IN THE FUTURE. I
URGE YOU TO SIGN A MORE CLIMATE
FRIENDLY BUDGET THAT SETS US ON
A BRIGHTER PATH AND BETTER
REFLECTS THE SCALE OF CURRENT
AND FUTURE CLIMATE IMPACTS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT
CALLER. NEXT WE GO TO LIFE. 59,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HEIDI, IS THAT
ME? AM I ON WITH THE BUDGET?
HELLO. YOU'RE ON. GREAT UM, I
JUST WANT TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE SMARTER PLANS. UM IT'S
CLEAR NOW THAT TWO YEARS AFTER
THESE VACCINES OR QUICKLY ROLLED
OUT AND INJECTED INTO A BILLION
PEOPLE, WHICH WAS AN
UNPRECEDENTED EVENT, WE SEE
CLEARLY THAT THESE VACCINES
WHICH AREN'T EVEN VACCINES THAT
MRNA TECHNOLOGY SUPPRESS THE
IMMUNE SYSTEM, WHICH IS
REPRESENTATIVE BY THE RECENT
STUDY OF HOSPITAL STAFF AT THE
CLEVELAND CLINIC, REVEALING THAT
THE MORE VACCINES A PERSON
RECEIVES, THE MORE LIKELY THEY
ARE TO CATCH COVID. AND NOW IT
IS BECOMING CLEAR THAT THE
INEFFECTIVENESS OF THE VACCINE
IS CAUSING THE ACCELERATION OF
THE COVID VARIANT. WHICH HAS
MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO END THE
SITUATION WITH COVID, AND IN THE
LAST FEW YEARS, THE MAINSTREAM
MEDIA ABANDONED INVESTIGATIVE
JOURNALISM ALTOGETHER TO BECOME
UNQUESTIONING CHEERLEADERS FOR
LOCKDOWNS, MASS SOCIAL
DISTANCING AND UNTESTED VACCINES
, EVEN THOUGH NONE OF THESE
INTERVENTIONS WERE SUPPORTED BY
VALID SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.
RELEASED DOCUMENTS REVEAL THAT
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES UNDER THE
DIRECTION OF THE WHITE HOUSE
IMPLEMENTED THE LARGEST
SURVEILLANCE AND CENSORSHIP
PROGRAM IN HISTORY. WE WERE
PROMISED A NEW NORMAL AND WHAT
WE'VE GOT IS A WORLD WHERE
CHILDREN ARE HAVING ATTACK
FEATURES ARE FALLING. AND THIS
TIME, THERE'S NO FURTHER
COMMENTS IN QUÊ. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT HERE IN THE
ROOM? OKAY SEEING NO PUBLIC
COMMENT IN THE ROOM HEARING. NO
PUBLIC COMMENT ADDITIONAL ON THE
PHONE. WE WILL ADJOURN. THANK
YOU.