GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE
COMMITTEE. PUBLIC SAFETY. AH!
WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. AND SECRETARY COULD CALL
THE ROLL. JOHN SAWYER HERE.
ELONIS AIR BONTA. BRIAN BLACKIE.
ORTEGA. SANTIAGO ZILBER. HERE.
PRESIDENT, MR PRESIDENT. UM,
LET'S BEGIN. BUT A FEW
HOUSEKEEPING THINGS ALL WITNESS
TESTIMONY WILL BE IN PERSON.
THERE WILL BE NO PHONE TESTIMONY
OPTION FOR THIS HEARING. YOU CAN
FIND MORE INFORMATION ON THE
COMMITTEE'S WEBSITE ASSEMBLY DOT
CA.GOV. BACKSLASH COMMITTEES. SO
LET'S BEGIN WITH THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. THE PROPOSED CONSENT
CALENDAR IS ITEM NUMBER SIX A. B
3 TO 7 JONES SAWYER CRIMINAL
JUSTICE CRIME STATISTICS. ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT A. B 33 OH DIXON,
THE MEXICAN VIOLENCE VICTIMS
INFORMATION. CARD. ITEM NUMBER,
10 A B 353 JOAN SAWYER
INCARCERATED PERSONS ACCESS TO
SHOWERS. ONE OF MY PERSONAL
FAVORITES. I DON'T NUMBER 13 83
90 HANEY COMMISSION ON PEACE
OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING
ASSESSMENT OF TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS AND ITEM NUMBER. 14
83 9 19 VEHICLES. POLICE PURSUIT
DATA REPORTING. MAKE IT EMOTION.
MOVED. OKAY, WHO WAS FIRST? HE
WAS FIRST. OH I'LL SAY SECOND.
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. JOAN
SAWYER SAWYER I ALANIS ALANIS, I
BONTA BONTA I BRIAN LACKEY
LACKEY I ORTEGA SANTIAGO. ZABAR
SUPER. I THANK YOU WERE HERE.
HEARING TODAY'S MEASURES IN SIGN
IN ORDER. FIRST UP IS ITEM
NUMBER FOUR A B 97, MR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RODRIGUEZ. WHEN
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR MEMBERS. THANK
YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT A
B 97. FIRST I'M GONNA ACCEPT THE
COMMUNITY AMENDMENTS AND THANK
YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR WORKING
WITH ME ON THIS INFORMATION.
VERY IMPORTANT BILL. AS AMENDED.
THIS BILL REQUIRES THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO INCLUDE
INFORMATION ON ARREST FOR
POSSESSION OF AN ANSWER LIST
FARM AND THERE AND IN THEIR
ANNUAL REPORTING, ADDITIONALLY,
THIS BILLFOLDS IN PROVISION OF
LAST YEAR'S A B 24 18 BY SIMPLY
MEMBER CORA TO REQUIRE THE DOJ
REPORTING ON THESE DISPOSITION,
DISPOSITION OF PROSECUTIONS FOR
POSSESSION. OF AN ANSWER LIST
FIREARM BEGINNING IN 2029.
HAVING SERIAL NUMBERS ON
FIREARMS IS A CRITICAL TOOL FOR
PREVENTION AND INVESTIGATION OF
GUN VIOLENCE. WITHOUT SERIAL
NUMBERS, LAW ENFORCEMENT IS
UNABLE TO CONTACT THE
MANUFACTURER, DISTRIBUTOR,
IMPORTER RETAILER OR OTHERS
INVOLVED TO LEARN WHO PURCHASED
A FIREARM AND THE CONNECTION TO
A POTENTIAL CRIME. GHOST GUNS
ARE ATTRACTIVE TO CRIMINALS FOR
THAT REASON, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT
REQUIRE A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR
PURCHASES, AND THEY ARE
UNTRACEABLE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.
TO BEGIN THE ADDRESS THE
PROSECUTION OF GOD SKINS IN
CALIFORNIA. WE MUST COLLECT DATA
ON THE REST AND PROSECUTION FOR
POSSESSION TO INFORM FUTURE
POLICY WITH ME TO PROVIDE
TESTIMONY AND SUPPORT IS RON
SHERMAN, REPRESENTING THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
ASSOCIATION AND THE POMONA
POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.
YEAH. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
THANK GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS, RYAN SHERMAN. SOME
MEMBERS RECITE
SHERIFFSASSOCIATION AND POLICE
OFFICER ASSOCIATIONS OF
CLAREMONT PALACE, FORTIES. UP
LANDING LORD SCHOOL, PLEASE.
CORONA NEWPORT BEACH, SANTA ANA
ARCADIA, FULLERTON. RAMONA.
BURBANK RIVERSIDE COVERED CITY
ISLAND SUPPORT OF A B 97 AS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S STATED, MAYBE
97 WAS AMENDED AND WILL REQUIRE
THE O. J TO COLLECT INFORMATION
ON IN SERIALIZED FIREARMS AND
THEIR ANNUAL REPORTING BY
REQUIRING THE DOJ TO IDENTIFY
MISDEMEANOR ARRESTS FOR
POSSESSION OF AN UNSTERILIZED
FIREARM. OUR HOPE IS THAT
POLICYMAKERS WILL HAVE THE
NECESSARY INFORMATION. TO BETTER
UNDERSTAND WHERE THESE GHOST
GUNS ARE MOST PREVALENT AND THEN
BE ABLE TO FOCUS RESOURCES AND
ATTENTION TO ADDRESS THIS
GROWING PROBLEM. THESE ILLEGAL
FIREARMS SO WE CAN HAVE A K¾T IN
OUR COMMUNITIES AND HAVE BEEN
USED IN THE MURDER OF CALIFORNIA
RESIDENTS AND PEACE OFFICERS.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN 2019 AND A R 15
GHOST GUN WAS USED IN RIVERSIDE
TO COMMIT THE MURDER OF CHP
OFFICER ANDRE MOYAMOYA. MAYBE 97
WILL HELP US COLLECT THE
INFORMATION. WE NEED TO BETTER
RESPOND TO THESE DANGEROUS
FIREARMS AND RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
YES THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. WELL, NOW GO TO
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
CALDWELL HOUSTON FOR THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION. WE ARE WITHDRAWING
OUR OPPOSITION DUE TO THE
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. VERY
GOOD, MR RODRIGUEZ. BUT WITH
THAT SAID, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU
FOR WORKING, UH, NOT COMPLETELY
OUT OF THE WOODS YET. OKAY GOOD
MORNING, CARMEN. CARMEN WILLCOX
ON BEHALF OF A C O U CALIFORNIA
ACTION, SIMILARLY WITHDRAWING
OUR OPPOSITION, UM, IN
RECOGNITION OF THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY OTHERS IN OPPOSITION OR
WITHDRAWING OR TWEENER? OR
WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL YOURSELF
SEEN NONE. UM WELL, WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE FOR ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. SEE NONE
. YOU MAY CLOSE RODRIGUEZ ONCE
AGAIN. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR FOR
WORKING TO FIND THE MEMBERS THAT
WORK TOWARDS MY POLICY GOES AND
ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AS
STATISTICS AND LOCAL REPORTING
WILL TELL YOU THESE FORUMS CAN
BE FOUND IN EACH ONE OF OUR
COMMUNITIES. TODAY AS LAWMAKERS,
WE MUST HAVE COMPREHENSIVE DATA
ON GHOST GUNS AND COVERED IN OUR
COMMUNITY SO WE CAN BETTER
PREVENT THEM IN THE FUTURE.
THANKS VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. I RESPECT WE ASK FOR MY
VOTE. MOTION. SO MOVED SER.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEE. AS
YOU CAN SEE ONE. WHEN WE DO TRY
TO COME WITH SOME LITTLE GROUND
AND TRY TO WORK TOGETHER. YOU
CAN EVEN REMOVE OPPOSITION. SO I
COMMEND YOU ON WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE. SO I WANT THANK YOU
FOR THAT PERSONALLY WITH THAT
CALL THE ROLL. AND A B 97
RODRIGUEZ. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. JOAN
SAWYER SAWYER I ALANIS, I WANT
TO. I WANT TO I BRIAN BLACKIE,
BLACKIE. I ORTEGA ORTEGA I
SANTIAGO THE BERBER. SUPER I,
THAT MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. AND IN SIGNING ORDER
, ITEM NUMBER ONE A. B 15 DIXON
PUBLIC RECORDS CDCR. GOOD
MORNING. WELCOME.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GOOD MORNING.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, ALRIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. I'M DIANE DIXON.
SOMEBODY DISTRICT 72. I AM HERE
TO PRESENT ON ABBY 15, WHICH
SEEKS TO PROVIDE TRANSPARENCY AS
IT RELATES TO EARLY RELEASE
CREDIT FOR INCARCERATED
INDIVIDUALS. YOU WILL ALL RECALL
LAST APRIL, SIX PEOPLE WERE
MURDERED IN A MASS KILLING
SEVERAL BLOCKS FROM THIS CAPITOL
BUILDING. ONE OF THE ALLEGED
KILLERS WAS RELEASED FROM PRISON
AFTER HAVING SERVED SLIGHTLY
LESS THAN ONE HALF OF HIS
SENTENCE 5.5 YEARS. SLIGHTLY
MORE THAN ONE HALF OF A SENTENCE
5.5 YEARS OUT OF A 10 YEAR
SENTENCE. WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN?
IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION. THE
PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA DID DESERVE
TO KNOW WHY INCARCERATED
INDIVIDUALS ARE RELEASED EARLY
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AND REHABILITATION BEFORE THEIR
SENTENCE RELEASE DATE. PEOPLE OF
CALIFORNIA DESERVE TRANSPARENCY
. IT'S ONLY FAIR. WE ALL BELIEVE
IN TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT,
THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AND REHABILITATIONS, A PUBLIC
AGENCY. SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE TO
THE PUBLIC. THIS BILL WOULD NOT
INCREASE PRISON SENTENCES OR
MAKE ANY, UH, CHANGE OR MAKE ANY
SENSE ANY DAY LONGER. THE PUBLIC
HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW THAT
INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS ARE
BEING RELEASED INTO OUR
COMMUNITIES AFTER SERVING ONLY A
FRACTION OF THEIR SENTENCE, AND
THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW
THAT THE QUALITATIVE BASIS FOR
UNDERSTANDING PAROLE DECISIONS
IF PAROLE IS BASED ON
EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE OR
REHABILITATION, GOOD OR BAD THE
PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW AND THESE
QUANTITATIVE MEASURES RELATE TO
EDUCATION, VOCATIONAL
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS. VOCATIONAL
PROGRAMS AND SELF IMPROVEMENT,
NOT PRIVACY INFORMATION, OR
HIPAA QUALIFIED INFORMATION. ONE
MONTH AFTER THE SACRAMENTO
KILLING. THREE PEOPLE WERE EACH
CHARGED WITH THREE COUNTS OF
MURDER OF THE GROUP. ONE
INDIVIDUAL WAS A FELON IN
POSSESSION OF A FIREARM AND A
MACHINE GUN. POLICE SAY HE FIRED
HIS GUN AT LEAST 28 TIMES DURING
THE SHOOTING. CDCR LATER
CONFIRMED THAT HE WAS RELEASED
FROM PRISON A LITTLE OVER A
MONTH BEFORE THE SHOOTING, ONLY
HAVING SERVED ABOUT 5.5 YEARS OF
A 10 YEAR SENTENCE. CBS NEWS
SACRAMENTO, SEEKING TO
UNDERSTAND HOW A DEFENDANT IN A
GANG RELATED MULTIPLE HOMICIDE
CASE WAS ABLE TO BE RELEASED
FROM A 10 YEAR SENTENCE AFTER
SERVING HALF THE TIME SUBMITTED
A PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST,
CDCR RESPONDED BY DENYING THE
NEW STATIONS REQUEST, ARGUING
THAT CREDIT EARNING INFORMATION
WAS CONFIDENTIAL. 25,000
PRISONERS HAVE BEEN RELEASED
INTO OUR COMMUNITIES SINCE 2020
AND THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO
KNOW. THE REASONS FOR THE
RELEASE IN TERMS OF THEIR
PROGRAMMATIC CREDIT. THIS BILL
OFFERS A REMEDY TO THIS LACK OF
TRANSPARENCY BY AMENDING THE
PUBLIC RECORD TO ACT TO PROVIDE
THE CALCULATION OF A PRISON
INMATES RELEASE DATE. AND A
SUMMARY OF HOW THE INMATE EARNED
THE RELEASED. CREDIT IS NOT
CONFIDENTIAL AND IS A MATTER OF
PUBLIC RECORD SUBJECT TO
DISCLOSURE WHEN REQUESTED. WHEN
AN INCARCERATED PERSON SERVES A
FRACTION OF THEIR SENTENCE
IMPOSED BY THE JUDGE. THE PUBLIC
IS ENTITLED TO KNOW WHY THAT IS
THE CASE. MY PRIMARY EXPERT
WITNESSES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL IS SAN JOAQUIN DEPUTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY CINDY DE SILVA
, AND SHE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY
JONATHAN FELDMAN WITH THE
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND PUT IT
UP. PRIME MINISTER TOTAL IT UP
ANY WAY YOU THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I AM CINDY DESILVA WITH
THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND I'M HAPPY
TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF A B 15 AS
THE ASSEMBLY WOMAN MENTIONED IT
WOULD NOT INCREASE PUNISHMENT.
ALL IT DOES IS INCREASED
TRANSPARENCY. AS A PROSECUTOR.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO TELL VICTIMS
THAT YOU REALLY HAVE NO IDEA
WHEN THEIR PERPETRATOR IS GOING
TO BE GETTING OUT. THAT'S A
DIFFICULT THING TO TELL THEM. WE
CAN GIVE THEM A BEST GUESS. UM
ALSO, I WAS HERE A FEW WEEKS
AGO, AND I TALKED ABOUT THE
HEALING AND RESTORATIVE ASPECTS
OF JUSTICE. AND THAT OCCURS HERE
AS WELL. NOT EVERY VICTIM, UM,
IS INVESTED IN THE PERPETRATOR
DOING 100% OF THE TIME. THEY ARE
HAPPY OFTENTIMES OFTENTIMES TO
KNOW THAT THE PERPETRATOR HAS
ENGAGED IN PRO SOCIAL ACTIVITIES
WHILE INCARCERATED, IT HELPS
THEM THEIR FAMILIES AND THE
COMMUNITY THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE
DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE CRIME IN
QUESTION TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE
THAT THE JAILS AND PRISONS ARE
DOING THEIR JOB. THAT OF REFORM
AND LEARNING AND ENGAGING AS I
MENTIONED IN THE PRO SOCIAL
ACTIVITIES THAT PROGRAMMING
OFFERS, WHILE INCARCERATED. I
NOTICED SOME OF THE OPPOSITION
LETTERS AND I KNOW YOU'VE ALL
HAD A CHANCE TO READ THOSE ONE
OF THEM CALLED A B 15 FRIVOLOUS
AND I WOULD DISPUTE THAT.
BECAUSE IT'S NEVER FRIVOLOUS TO
GIVE TRANSPARENCY TO THE
TAXPAYERS AND THE VOTERS AND TO
LET THEM KNOW. UM WHAT? WHAT
WHAT? PRECISELY THE RUBRIC IS
FOR THE CDCR STAFF TO COME UP
WITH THE FIGURES THAT THEY COME
UP WITH. AND IT IS TRUE THAT
CALCULATING CREDITS AS A
DIFFICULTY, BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE
SHROUDED AND MR MYSTERY OR
SECRECY. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT
THE VOTERS ARE ENTITLED TO HAVE
ALSO WITH REGARD TO VOTERS, THE
CONSTITUENCY DOES VOTE WITH
THEIR FEET AND WE HAVE LOST. UM
SEVERAL PEOPLE IN OUR POPULATION
IN RECENT YEARS TO THE POINT
THAT WE'VE LOST REPRESENTATION
IN CONGRESS. AND PART OF THE
REASON FOR THAT IS THE FEELING
THAT, UM, THAT OUR SOCIETY AND
CALIFORNIA IS NOT AS FRIENDLY
TOWARD VICTIMS AND NOT AS
UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR NEEDS AND
JUST LETTING THEM KNOW THAT
THEIR PERPETRATOR ENGAGED IN THE
PRO SOCIAL REFORMS THAT
PROGRAMMING OFFERS CAN GO A LONG
WAY TOWARD HEALING THAT DIVIDE,
SO WITH THAT, I'LL YIELD THE
REST OF MY TIME TO MY PARTNER
HERE. YEP THANK YOU. UH THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS JONATHAN
FELDMAN ART STRATEGIES ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. I DON'T HAVE MUCH
TO ADD, BECAUSE THE WITNESS AND
THE AUTHOR OF COVERED THINGS SO
COMPREHENSIVELY, BUT JUST TO
REITERATE, YOU KNOW, EVERY
GOVERNMENT PROGRAM NEEDS
OVERSIGHT. GOOD OVERSIGHT FROM
THE PUBLIC AND FROM STAKEHOLDERS
REQUIRES INFORMATION, AND WE'RE
NOT GETTING THAT IN THIS CASE
AND WITH SOMETHING AS
SIGNIFICANT AS PROP 57, WHICH
HAS DRAMATICALLY CHANGED OUR
CORRECTION SYSTEM, UH, FOR THE
BETTER IN MANY CASES, YOU KNOW,
INCENTIVIZING INDIVIDUALS TO GO
THROUGH REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS
TO EARN THEIR EARLY RELEASE. I
THINK EVEN YOU KNOW, EVERYONE IN
LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN AGREE WITH
THAT. BUT IT HAS DEMONSTRABLY
FAILED. IN MANY INSTANCES, YOU
KNOW WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL GETS OUT
EARLY FROM PROP 57 GOES ON TO
KILL AN OFFICER AS IT HAPPENED
IN SELMA JUST EARLIER THIS YEAR.
THAT'S A FAILURE OF THE SYSTEM
AND TO EVALUATE HOW IT FAILED.
WHY IT FAILED. AND HOW DO WE
MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN
AGAIN REQUIRES THE DISSEMINATION
OF THIS INFORMATION AND TO THIS
POINT, CDCR HAS NOT ADEQUATELY
RESPONDED TO THE REQUEST. AND
THERE'S A GAP HERE THAT HAS TO
BE FILLED. I UNDERSTAND THE
PRIVACY CONCERNS. I UNDERSTAND
YOU KNOW SOME OF THE OTHER
ISSUES OUTLINED BY THE
OPPOSITION. I DON'T YOU KNOW, I
REJECT THE NOTION THAT THIS BILL
IS, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW OPPOSED TO
REHABILITATION AND OPPOSED TO,
YOU KNOW, REFORM EFFORTS. THAT'S
NOT WHY WE'RE HERE. WE'RE HERE
TO NARROW IN ON WHY DID THESE
SITUATIONS OCCUR? WHAT WAS THE
FAILING IN THE REHABILITATIVE
PROGRAMS THAT RESULTED IN
SOMEBODY GETTING OUT AND
MURDERING SOMEBODY ELSE? THERE'S
NO THERE'S NO ARGUMENT ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A
FAILURE. THERE WAS WE HAVE TO
FIGURE OUT IN THOSE DISTANCES.
WHAT HAPPENED? AND HOW DO WE
MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN
AGAIN? AND SO I, YOU KNOW, I
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR FOR
PUTTING FORTH THIS BILL AND ALL
HER EFFORT, AND, UH, I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? ITEM
NUMBER ONE. 15. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. COREY CELLS,
ILO ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. AND MR RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION AND ALL
THE POS. I PREVIOUSLY STATED IN
MY PRIOR TESTIMONY ON SUPPORT,
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MORNING MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS CARL LONDON ON
BEHALF OF CRIME VICTIMS UNITED
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OR ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
SEEING THAT OR ANY WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION.
YEAH GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS LESLIE
CALDWELL. HOUSTON I'M HERE TO
REPRESENT THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION. I HAVE
PERSONALLY WORKED IN INDIGENT
DEFENSE FOR OVER 40 YEARS. WE
MUST RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED A B 15
UNLESS THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
AMENDMENTS IN 2016, CALIFORNIA
VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVED
PROPOSITION 57 RECOGNIZING THAT
INCENTIVIZING INMATES TO BETTER
THEMSELVES WHILE INCARCERATED,
ULTIMATELY BENEFITS NOT ONLY THE
INMATES BUT ALL THE MEMBERS OF
OUR SOCIETY. PROPOSITION 57
INCREASED PAROLE CHANCES FOR
FELONS CONVICTED OF NONVIOLENT
CRIMES, ALLOWING AN INMATE TO
EARN CREDITS FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
AND EDUCATIONAL OR
REHABILITATIVE, ITS ACHIEVEMENTS
. WHILE THIS BILL EXCLUDES
RECORDS COVERED UNDER HIPAA,
THIS LEADS, UM Tð INFORMATION
REGARDING ANY WORK IN MENTAL
HEALTH OR IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE
TREATMENT NOT TO BE ALLOWED. UM
AS RELEASE OF INFORMATION. SO
RIGHTFULLY NO INFORMATION ABOUT
AN INMATE'S ATTEMPTS TO OVERCOME
ADDICTIONS OR TREAT MENTAL
HEALTH ISSUES WOULD BE RELEASED
. THIS ABSENCE WOULD LEAD TO
INCOMPLETE INFORMATION AND
MISLEAD THE PUBLIC IF THE BILL
WERE TO BE PASSED. GOT A LITTLE
CATCH 22 HERE. INFORMATION ABOUT
WHICH CLASSES AND ACTIVITIES AN
INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPATED IN
BEYOND THE VERY GENETIC GENERIC
. JUST SORRY DESCRIPTIONS SUCH
AS WORK OR EDUCATION SHOULD NOT
BE SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE.
CITIZENS IN THIS STATE ARE
ENTITLED TO ENJOY CERTAIN
PRIVACY RIGHTS, THEIR SCHOOL
TRANSCRIPTS AND JOB EVALUATIONS
ARE NOT PUBLIC RECORDS. IN THE
SAME VEIN. INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
EARNED EDUCATION OR
REHABILITATIVE CREDITS FOR THEIR
ACTIVITIES IN PRISON, RESULTING
IN THEIR RELEASE DESERVE THE
SAME PROTECTIONS. REVIEW OF THE
BLANK CDCR FORM FOR DETERMINING
CREDITS AND RELEASE STATES
REVEALS A FORM THAT LOOKS LIKE A
VERY COMPLEX. THIS FORM MUST NOT
BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC
BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF
FEDERALLY AND STATE WIDE
PROTECTED INFORMATION INCLUDED.
EXISTING LAW COVERS ALL THE
INFORMATION THAT MAY BE RELEASED
WITHOUT A VALID BRITAIN RELEASE
SIGNED BY THE INMATE OR PAROLEE
. THIS IS A LONG LIST OF IN FOR
MORE INFORMATION THAT IS MORE
THAN SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY
QUESTIONS THE MEDIA REPUBLIC MAY
HAVE. THIS BILL IS AN
UNFORTUNATE ATTEMPT TO USE A
TRAGEDY TO INSTILL FEAR IN THE
PUBLIC. IT IS A MISTAKE TO MOVE
BACKWARDS WHILE A B 15 PURPORTS
TO MAKE THE AWARDING OF CREDITS
AND PAROLE SYSTEM MORE
TRANSPARENT, IT IS ILL CONCEIVED
BECAUSE IT UNDERCUTS THE
EVIDENCE BASED RATIONALE.
PROPOSITION 57. WE WANT OUR
IMPRISONED INDIVIDUALS TO AVAIL
THEMSELVES OF ALL THE
REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS THAT
WILL ASSIST ASSIST THEIR
SUCCESSFUL MOVE BACK INTO
SOCIETY. WE DO NOT WANT TO
ENDANGER PRISONERS BY MAKING
PUBLIC SOME OF THE EFFORTS THEY
ARE MAKING TO BETTER THEMSELVES.
AND MAKE BOTH INMATES AND GUARDS
SAFER. FOR THESE REASONS, WE
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR NO
VOTE. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS KEN
HARTMAN. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF
ADVOCACY FOR TRANSFORMATIVE IN
PRISON WORKGROUP, AND WE
REPRESENT 85 COMMUNITY BASED
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD BE
DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS BILL.
I ALSO SERVED 38 YEARS IN THE
CALIFORNIA PRISON SYSTEM, AND I
PARTICIPATED IN MANY OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT I NOW REPRESENT.
UM A COUPLE OF THINGS COME TO
MIND. I ACTUALLY THOUGHT I WAS
JUST GOING TO WALK OVER THERE
AND SAY MY OPPOSED, BUT, UH,
COUPLE OF THINGS COME TO MIND
WHEN I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS.
THE FIRST IS, I THINK IT DOES
DISINCENTIVIZE PEOPLE FROM
PARTICIPATING IN PROGRAMS AND I
THINK IT ALSO DISINCENTIVIZE IS
PROGRAM PROVIDERS WHO ARE NOW
GOING TO FEEL LIKE ARE THEY IN
SOME KIND OF JEOPARDY BECAUSE
THEY HELP THE GUY WHO GOT OUT
AND DID SOMETHING WRONG. WITH
ALL DUE RESPECT TO YOU,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, UM I FEEL LIKE
THIS IS KIND OF LIKE WE'RE GOING
BACK TO THE EIGHTIES OR THE
NINETIES PASSING LEGISLATION
BASED ON THE LATEST TRAGEDY,
WHICH IS A TERRIBLE THING, NO
DOUBT. BUT I DON'T SEE HOW THIS
ACTUALLY ADVANCES THE CAUSE OF
REHABILITATION, AND I FIND
MYSELF IN AN ODD POSITION OF
DEFENDING THE CDCR, WHICH I
DON'T GENERALLY DO, FRANKLY, BUT
IN THIS CASE, I THINK THAT THEY
HAVE MADE A WISE CHOICE OF HOW
THEY'RE GOING TO CONDUCT HOW
THESE THINGS HAPPEN. THIS IS
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION IT
COULD PUT PEOPLE IN A BAD
POSITION, AND I DON'T THINK
THERE'S ANY UPSIDE TO DOING
THIS. SO WITH THAT AND AGREE
WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, UH,
RESPECTFULLY. WE OPPOSED THIS
AND ASK FOR A NO VOTE. THANK YOU
. ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION? GOOD MORNING, LIZZIE
BUCHANAN, REPRESENTING UNCOMMON
LAW, ALSO IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING. GLENN BECK IS FOR THE
L. A. BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS AND OPPOSITION. DANICA
ROAD, ARMEL ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION? IT WILL BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. MR
LACKEY? YEAH. I THINK THAT, UM.
FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST SAY
THAT FAILURES. ARE NOT TO BE
IGNORED, BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT
THE ONLY POSSIBLE BENEFIT THAT
THIS PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION
BRINGS FORWARD. TRANSPARENCY. UH
CAN EQUATE WITH PARTNERSHIP.
AND, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, VICTIMS,
AS WAS MENTIONED BY ONE OF THE
TESTIMONIES. VICTIMS CAN OFTEN
BE ENCOURAGED BY SEEING CHANGE
OF HEART CAN SEE, UH, THE FACT
THAT THERE'S BEEN EFFORT BEING
MADE TO, UH, RECOGNIZE THAT
CHANGE NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE. AND
THE FACT THAT SOMEONE HAS IS
GOING TO BE RELEASED EARLIER
THAN THEIR SET IN STATE CAN ALSO
MEAN THAT PARTNERS IN THE
COMMUNITY MAY WANT TO MORE
VIGOROUSLY ENGAGED IN SUPPORTING
UH, THIS CHANGE OF HEART. AND SO
I FEEL LIKE RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
CAN ALSO BE ACCOMPLISHED. BYE.
MEANINGFUL INFORMATION AND
HONEST INFORMATION THAT THIS IS
THE REASON AND THERE'S A REASON
WHY THEY'RE BEING RELEASED EARLY
BECAUSE THERE ARE MAKING EFFORTS
THAT INDICATE THAT CHANGE OF
HEART IS MORE LIKELY THAN NOT.
AND SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD
FOCUS ONLY ON THE NEGATIVE
ASPECT BECAUSE CERTAINLY THERE
ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE
DISHEARTENED. BUT WE CAN'T LET
THAT BE THE ONLY DRIVER BEHIND
THIS KIND OF TRANSFORMATIONAL
CONSIDERATION. SO I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU, MR
WEBER. GOOD MORNING. IT'S NICE
TO SEE YOU, UM YOU KNOW, WHILE
I'M SURE THAT THIS IS BUT HAS
GOOD MOTIVATIONS BEHIND IT. I AM
SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES IN UM
EXPERTS AND IN FACTS AND DATA,
AND I JUST DON'T SEE ANY DATA
THAT SUGGESTS THAT AND I ALSO
BELIEVE IN RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
PROGRAMS, AND I DON'T SEE ANY
DATA THAT SUGGESTS THAT THE
LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT THAT'S THERE
HAS HAD SOME KIND OF NEGATIVE
IMPACT. I KNOW THAT WE'VE YOU
KNOW, YOU'RE CITING A PARTICULAR
TRAGEDY IN THIS CASE. BUT YOU
KNOW, I LOOK AT FOLKS THAT ARE
EXPERTS AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
, THE ELLA BAKER CENTER AND
PERSUADED THAT THIS IS JUST NOT
THE RIGHT APPROACH. WHILE I
THINK MANY OF US BELIEVE THAT
THERE SHOULD BE MORE OVERSIGHT
OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF
OVERSIGHT THAT I THINK I WOULD
SUPPORT, SO I JUST BASICALLY
THINK THIS IS THE WRONG
APPROACH, UNFORTUNATELY, WON'T
BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY.
BANTER. I THINK I CERTAINLY AM.
VERY FOR GREATER TRANSPARENCY IN
C D. C ARE IN FACT SPENT THREE
HOURS YESTERDAY TRYING TO FIGHT
FOR TRANSPARENCY. UH WITHIN THE
CDCR S PRACTICES. MY CHALLENGE
WITH THIS PARTICULAR LEGISLATION
IS THAT IT ACTUALLY RELATES TO
THE INDIVIDUAL INCARCERATED,
HAVING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THEIR
PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE.
INFORMATION WHILE THEY ARE
INCARCERATED, RELEASED. TO THE
TO THE PUBLIC WITH WITH A GREAT
AMOUNT OF BIGNESS, QUITE FRANKLY
, IN THE WAY THAT THIS
LEGISLATION IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED
AND REALLY CREATE SUCH A COOLING
EFFECT ON THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE
TO SEEK REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS
THAT IT'S MORE THAN A CHALLENGE
OR A DISHEARTENING IT'S
POTENTIALLY LIFE THREATENING TO
THEM. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I
UNFORTUNATELY WON'T BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THIS BILL. ANYONE ELSE?
YOU MAY CLOSE. WELL, THANK YOU.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS
AGAIN. IN THE SPIRIT OF
TRANSPARENCY. THIS IS NOT AN
INVASION OF PRIVACY. THIS IS
INFORMATION THAT COULD REALLY
EMBOLDENED THE SOON TO BE
RELEASED, INCARCERATED
INDIVIDUAL TO KNOW THAT HE OR
SHE DID MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS
OF EARLY RELEASE. AND I THINK
NOT ONLY IS THE COMFORT TO THE
VICTIM'S FAMILY BUT TO THE
COMMUNITY THAT THEY WILL BE RE
ENTERING WITH A POSITIVE THE
WIND AT THEIR BACK ESSENTIALLY
THAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THE
PROGRAM AND IT SHOULD BE AN
PROGRAM IT THE PROGRAMMATIC. AH
PROGRAMS THAT ARE OFFERED IN THE
PRISON SYSTEM THAT ONE TAKES
INCARCERATED, INDIVIDUAL TAKES
INITIATIVE TO PARTICIPATE IN NOT
ALL OF MY UNDERSTANDING IS NOT
ALL PRISONERS VOLUNTARILY
PARTICIPATE. SO BY TAKING THAT
INITIATIVE TO TRY TO
REHABILITATE THEMSELVES AND HAVE
A SMOOTHER RE ENTRANCE INTO
SOCIETY TO ME AS A POSITIVE TO
THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS ABOUT
PUBLIC SAFETY AND HAVING THE
COMMUNITY FEELING. CONFIDENT
THAT THE PEOPLE AND THERE ARE
LARGE NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUAL
INMATES INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
BEING RELEASED AT THE COMMUNITY
NEEDS TO HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT
THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN AH,
REHABILITATED. I MEAN, THAT'S
THE PURPOSE OF CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION. WHY NOT VALIDATE
THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE MET
ALL THE STANDARDS AND NOT INTO
THE PRIVACY? I AGREE. WE'RE NOT
TRYING TO RELEASE GRADES AND THE
RANKING IN THE CLASS. IT'S JUST
THAT THEY HAVE MET THE
REQUIREMENT AND EDUCATION,
VOCATIONAL. AND SELF IMPROVEMENT
. JUST BASIC INFORMATION,
FRANKLY, THAT THE PUBLIC CAN SAY
OKAY, SOMEONE IS GIVEN THE
CORRECTIONS BAR. THE PAROLE
BOARD HAS GIVEN CAREFUL REVIEW
OF THIS INDIVIDUAL. I THINK IT
BENEFITS THE INDIVIDUAL, SO
THERE'S NOT A BLACK MARK UPON RE
ENTRY INTO THE COMMUNITY THAT HE
OR SHE VOLUNTARILY PARTICIPATED
, WANTED TO RE REFORMED
THEMSELVES AND GET BEYOND THE
REASONS WHY THEY WERE
INCARCERATED. I THINK IT'S A
POSITIVE AND VALIDATES THEM BY
NOT RELEASING THE FORMACION. IN
MY OPINION, IT SUGGESTS THAT
THERE'S SOMETHING TO HIDE. I
THINK ANYONE WHO IS RELEASED
FROM PRISON WE SHOULD CELEBRATE
THE FACT THAT THEY'RE
REHABILITATED AND LET US KNOW.
THE REASON WHY AND CELEBRATE
THAT FACT. SO THAT'S WHERE THE
SPIRIT OF WHERE I'M COMING FROM
WITH THIS BILL, AND THIS IS A
PUNITIVE. THERE'S NO EXTRA
SENTENCING INVOLVED. NO, NOTHING
PUNITIVE. IT'S SIMPLY TO REWARD
THAT EFFORT OF REHABILITATION
AND GIVE COMFORT TO THE
COMMUNITY THAT THIS PERSON HAS
MET. THAT WAS QUALIFICATIONS
WITHOUT GETTING INTO ANYTHING
SENSITIVE OR HIGHLY PRIVATE,
PRIVATE WHATSOEVER. SO I
APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION
AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH IF THERE
WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SATISFY ANY
OF YOUR CONCERNS, I CERTAINLY
WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT. THANK
YOU. UM AND, UH AT SOMEONE. HAS
SPENT. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A BIG
FAN OF THE CR AND HOW THEY DO
THINGS. AND AS SOMEONE WHO SPENT
THREE HOURS OF MY LIFE THAT I
CAN NEVER GET BACK. UM MR
LACKEY. IT'S BOUND TO AND
MYSELF. IT'S BEEN THREE HOURS.
TRYING TO JUST GET BASIC
INFORMATION FROM CDCR YESTERDAY
AND SUB FIVE UM, IT WAS
EXCRUCIATING. IN FACT, CITY HCR
UNITED DEMOCRATS IN A REPUBLICAN
REPUBLICANS AND THEIR OUTRAGE AT
THE FACT THAT WE COULDN'T GET
INFORMATION FROM THEM. SO WE
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FAMILY'S
GOING THROUGH VINCENT THE
PUBLIC'S GOING THROUGH WHEN YOU
TRY TO FIND OUT INFORMATION ON
THE CDCR. UM THEY HIPPO CONCERNS
ARE IMPORTANT. THE MEDICAL
CONCERNS ARE IMPORTANT. UM,
WHETHER YOU'RE IN DO YOU HAVE A
SUBSTANCE ABUSE OR MENTAL
HEALTH? YOU KNOW, I HAVE A
FRIEND THAT WORKED IN THE
CAPITAL, AND HE'S HAVING SOME
SUBSTANCE PROBLEMS. I WOULD NOT
WANT THE WORLD TO KNOW WHO IT IS
. WHAT HAPPENED? HE RECEIVING
TREATMENT RIGHT NOW. AND THAT
INFORMATION COULD BE REALLY
DAMAGING TO PEOPLE ON THE
OUTSIDE, EVEN TRYING TO GET GOOD
WORK. AND SO I THINK THERE'S
ANOTHER METHOD. SO ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT I TRIED TO DO WAS,
UM, ON THE IMPLEMENTATION IS
TRYING TO DO SOME, UM,
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES
INTERNALLY. ONE OF THE THINGS
WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL. TRYING TO
JUST GET INFORMATION ON ON
ROGUE. AND. PRISON GUARDS WHO
ARE DOING SOME ILLEGAL THINGS.
WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME, EVEN
GETTING THAT INFORMATION OR HOW
THAT'S DONE. OR EVEN WHAT
PRISONERS TO CLOSE. WE CAN'T GET
INFORMATION CDCR. AND SO WE
DIDN'T THEM. I'M JUST SAYING
THERE MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY.
THIS JUST IS NOT THE RIGHT BILL
RIGHT METHODOLOGY TO DO IT. BUT
THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF
OVERSIGHT SO THAT WE CAN
IMPROVE. ON THOSE ON THOSE
PROGRAMS, BUT NICELY RHYTHM. SO
IF WE COULD RECONSIDER THIS BE
HAPPY. I MEAN, SO I KNOW YOU'RE
A FRESHMAN. SO THIS IS HOW IT
GOES. IT'S GOING TO GET VOTED UP
OR DOWN. AND AFTERWARDS YOU CAN
ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION, AND I'M
PRETTY SURE IF IT GOES DOWN,
YOU'LL GET RECONSIDERATION. HMM
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE
IT. UNFORTUNATELY THE CHAIR IS
GONNA RECOMMEND THE NOVA.
ALRIGHT IS THERE A MOTION? SOME
OF SECOND. ON A B 15 BY A SEVEN
MEMBER DIXON. THE MOTION IS
PASSED TO THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE JOHN SAWYER, JOHN
SAWYER, NO COLONIES. I BONTA NÓ
BANTA. NO BRIAN, BRIAN. NO,
LACKEY LACKEY I ORTEGA ORTEGA NO
SANTIAGO THE BERBER NÓI. I'M
SORRY. THAT MEASURE FAILS. NOW
YOU CAN ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION.
COME BACK, MISS DIXON? YES THANK
YOU. YES, I WOULD ASK FOR
RECONSIDERATION. OKAY THANK YOU
KNOW OBJECTION THAT THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. WE
VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO GRAB
CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU
APPRECIATE IT. JIM. NOW ITEM
NUMBER FIVE. MR HOOVER A B 257.
CRIMINAL OFFENSES, ENCAMPMENTS.
GOOD MORNING, MR HOOVER. GOOD
MORNING. YOU CAN BEGIN WHENEVER
YOU'RE READY, ALRIGHT? GOOD
MORNING, COLLEAGUES. MR CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT THIS BILL TO YOU TODAY,
A B 2 57 WOULD PROVIDE A 500 FT
. BUFFER AROUND SCHOOLS, DAYCARE
CENTERS, YOUTH CENTERS AND
PLAYGROUNDS WHERE HOMELESS
ENCAMPMENTS WOULD NOT BE
ALLOWED. THIS MODELS, UM,
ORDINANCES THAT ARE BEING UM,
PURSUED AND PASSED IN OTHER
CITIES LIKE LOS ANGELES,
SACRAMENTO AND OUT GROVE. I
DON'T THINK I NEED TO REMIND ALL
OF US WHAT UM, A GROWING CRISIS
ARE HOMELESSNESS CRISIS IS IN
THIS STATE, ACCORDING TO
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE IN
A HEARING JUST A COUPLE WEEKS
AGO, WE HAVE SPENT $20 BILLION
IS A STATE SINCE 2 2018 AND
WE'VE SEEN A 77% INCREASE IN
CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS IN OUR
STATE IN MY COUNTY ALONE,
SACRAMENTO ARE HOMELESSNESS
CRISIS HAS GROWN 67% SINCE 2019
. AND IT'S NO WONDER WHY
QUINNIPIAC POLL JUST ONE WEEK
AGO PUT HOMELESSNESS AT THE TOP
OF THE LIST FOR CALIFORNIANS. IN
SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT THEIR
LEADERS TO TAKE ACTION ABOUT NOW
. I WILL I START WITH THAT
BECAUSE I WANT TO SAY THAT I
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH ALL
OF YOU AS WE CONTINUE TO SOLVE
THIS CRISIS AND GET PEOPLE TO
HELP THAT THEY NEED. UM AND I
WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS
BILL SPECIFICALLY IS A PUBLIC
SAFETY MEASURE TO KEEP OUR MOST
SENSITIVE PUBLIC SAFETY. I'M
SORRY. OUR MOST SENSITIVE PUBLIC
SPACES SAFE WHILE WE DO THAT
IMPORTANT. DIDN'T WORK. UM THIS
IS NOT A PANACEA TO HOMELESSNESS
. I AM NOT HERE TODAY, CLAIMING
THAT THIS IS THE SOLUTION TO
HOMELESSNESS. WHAT THIS BILL IS
A MEASURE TO KEEP OUR MOST
SENSITIVE PUBLIC SPACES SAFE
WHILE WE DO THE IMPORTANT WORK
THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. AND I'M
GONNA SPEAK, YOU KNOW, FROM A
COUPLE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
TODAY AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER
PRIOR TO COMING TO LEGISLATURE,
I WAS ON A SCHOOL BOARD IN
FOLSOM AND RANCHO CORDOVA AND WE
HAD A NUMBER OF INSTANCES,
PARTICULARLY IN RANCHO CORDOVA,
WHERE WE HAD HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS COME ONTO OUR
CAMPUSES AND INTERACT WITH WITH
OUR STUDENTS. IN A WAY THAT WAS
VERY CONCERNING FOR
ADMINISTRATORS. IT WAS VERY
CONCERNING FOR PARENTS AND THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT MUCH OF MY
DISTRICT IS SUPPORTIVE OF,
INCLUDING OUR SCHOOL OFFICIALS.
I WILL ALSO SPEAK FROM A PARENT
PERSPECTIVE AS SOMEONE WHO HAS
FOUND NEEDLES AND DRUG
PARAPHERNALIA IN THE PARK WHERE
MY OWN CHILDREN PLAY THIS. THESE
ARE THINGS THAT OUR COMMUNITY
CARES VERY DEEPLY ABOUT AND
THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE VERY
IMPORTANT TO KEEPING OUR
CHILDREN SAFE IN THE AREAS WHERE
THEY SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME.
AND SO THAT IS THE MOTIVATION
FOR WHY I BROUGHT THIS BILL
FORWARD. IT IS. IT IS A VERY
STRAIGHTFORWARD PUBLIC SAFETY
MEASURE. TO ADDRESS THESE VERY
ISSUES. WE DID WORK. I DID MEET
WITH SOME OF THE OPPOSITION. I
TOOK AMENDMENTS ON THIS BILL TO
TRY TO NARROW IT TO GET MORE TO
THE ISSUE THAT I WAS TRYING TO
SOLVE. WITH THIS BILL. I AM OPEN
TO CONTINUING TO WORK ON THE
BILL. BUT I DO WANT EVERYONE TO
KNOW THAT WE ARE WORKING TO MAKE
THIS BILL ACCEPTABLE FOR
EVERYONE. I'VE ALSO BROUGHT TWO
SPEAKERS UP FROM MY DISTRICT
TODAY, AND I WANT TO INTRODUCE
BOTH OF THEM. THEY WILL GO INTO
MORE DETAIL ON SOME OF THE
THINGS HAPPENING IN OUR
COMMUNITY. UM AND SO THE FIRST
IS GOING TO BE MR SAUL HERNANDEZ
, WHO IS ON THE SAN JUAN UH,
SCHOOL BOARD IN MY DISTRICT AND
THEN FROM RANCHO CORDOVA. WE
HAVE GARRETT GATEWOOD. WHO IS
SPEAKING AS A RANCHO CITY
COUNCIL MEMBER TODAY, SO SAUL
WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU FIRST.
IF THAT WORKS. YOU HAVE TOTAL
FIVE MINUTES AND YOU SPLIT IT UP
ANY WAY YOU WANT TO THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS HERNANDEZ
AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER AND A
MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY. I
BELIEVE THE SAFETY OF OUR
CHILDREN SHOULD BE OUR TOP
PRIORITY. THESE ENCAMPMENTS NEAR
AROUND SCHOOLS AND TAKE UP THE
ENTIRE SIDEWALK. CHILDREN MUST
CROSS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
STREET TO AVOID THEM BECAUSE
GETTING TOO CLOSE COULD BE
DANGEROUS. IT ONLY TAKES ONE
UNSTABLE PERSON DO IRREPARABLE
HARM, WHICH MAKES ALLOWING THESE
ENCAMPMENTS AND THERE ARE
SCHOOLS OF RISKS. WE CAN'T
AFFORD TO TAKE. PARENTS SHOULD
HAVE THE PEACE OF MIND THAT
THEIR CHILDREN CAN WALK OR RIDE
THEIR BIKES TO SCHOOL. WHAT'S
WHEN SAFETY THE TRASH AND DRUG
PARAPHERNALIA LEFT ON OR NEW
YORK CAMPUSES BY THOSE LIVING IN
THESE ENCAMPMENTS POSES ANOTHER
SERIOUS RISK. MOST SCHOOLS WITH
HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS NEARBY HAVE
TO SURVEY THE ENTIRE GROUNDS
BEFORE THEY START SCHOOL EACH
DAY FROM FIND CONDOMS, NEEDLES
AND ALCOHOL. I REALIZED THAT
HOMELESSNESS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE
IN CALIFORNIA THAT MUST BE
ADDRESSED, HOWEVER, PROTECT OUR
CHILDREN IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT
. A B 257 WAS SIGNIFICANTLY
INCREASED THE CHANCES THAT OUR
CHILDREN WILL REMAIN SAFE FOR
THEIR SAKE. I HOPE HE WILL
SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU,
SIR. NEXT ALL RIGHT, UM, FIRST
OFF, I GOTTA SAY YOUR SUIT IS
FIRE. PUT THAT RED IS KILLING
IT. MY NAME IS GARY GATEWAY. MY
NAME IS GARY GATEWOOD. I AM THE
CITY COUNCILOR FOR THE CITY
RANCH TO GO ABOUT IT, THE FIRST
BLACK DEMOCRAT EVER ELECTED IN
MY CITY. BUT THIS ISN'T A
PARTISAN ISSUE OR RACIALIST. SO
THIS IS A VERY ISSUE THAT COMES
CLOSE TO MY HEART. UH SPEAK IN
FAVOR OF A B 257 IN PARIS
APPEARED TO KEEP THE HOMELESS
ENCAMPMENTS AWAY FROM OUR
SCHOOLS AND PLAYGROUNDS.
HOMELESSNESS ISN'T HUMANITARIAN
, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC
SAFETY CRISIS BUT THE COLLECTIVE
FAILURE OF THE TO SOLVE THE
HOMELESS PROBLEM SHOULD NOT
COMPOUNDED BY FURTHERING
ENDANGERING OUR CITIZENS AND OUR
CHILDREN. ALMOST NOT SHOULD NOT
BE CRIMINALIZED, BUT NEITHER
SHOULD THEY BE ALLOWED TO ENCAMP
AND ROBBED THE SAFE PLACES OF
OUR SCHOOLS. MANY CITIES HAVE
TAKEN STEPS. SIMILAR ACTIONS IN
ENCAMPMENTS INCLUDED SACRAMENTO
, FOLSOM OUT GROVE, LAST ANGELUS
AND EVEN RANCHO AND THE SCHOOLS,
CHILDREN WALK PAST ENCAMPMENTS
EXPOSE HIM TO ADDICTS. OVERDOSE
VICTIMS DISCARD NEEDLES, CONDOMS
, NATION PIPES, METH RESIDUE AND
HUMAN WASTE. AND THIS IS JUST IN
MY CITY ON YOUR WAY AS YOU WALK.
PARENTS HAVE TO DO SWEEPS OF OUR
LOCAL PLAYGROUNDS RIGHT NOW TO
COLLECT NEEDLES TAINTED CONDOMS
AND FACE ACTUAL ATTACKS WHERE
THEY ACTUALLY RUN AT THE
CITIZENS. MANY OF THE PARKS AND
I'VE STARTED CALLING AROUND,
EVEN IN SAN FRANCISCO, THEY'RE
PICKING UP OVER 13,000 NEEDLES
AND SYRINGES A YEAR SANTA CRUZ
IS UP TO 14,500 IN AN ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL 20 OF THE STUDENTS WHO
HAVE BEEN PRICKED BY NEEDLES IN
THE PLAYGROUND ACROSS THE
NATION. WE HAVE OVER 600 STICKS.
A FIVE YEAR OLD UH, PERSON
UNDERGOES A BLOOD TRANSFUSION
AFTER BEING STRUCK BY A NEEDLE
AND GOT HEPATITIS B IN HER
SCHOOL IN ALBUQUERQUE, KYLE WAS
REACHING OUT TO PAY, PICK UP A
FOOTBALL AND GOT STRUCK BY
ANOTHER NEEDLE AND GOT HIV. UM
IN MY CITY ALONE, WHICH IS THE
MOST IMPORTANT BUT WHERE I
REALLY CARE ABOUT THE MOST, UM
UM MY CITIZEN WAS BRUTALLY
MURDERED, NOT JUST BRUTALLY
MURDERED. SHE WAS RAPED TO DEATH
AND THEN FOUND TIED TO A TREE BY
A HOMELESS PERSON. SHE WAS A
DISABLED GIRL WALKING DOWN THE
AMERICAN RIVER. HIS CAMPSITE WAS
NEAR ONE OF THE SCHOOLS, THE
OTHER 1 10, AND HER NAME IS EMMA
ROURKE. TIM FAIRLY WAS DRIVING
HIS BIKE DOWN THIS ROAD AND
MACHETE DID IN THE FACE. THIS IS
IN A SMALL LITTLE CITY OF RANCHO
CORDOVA. LITERALLY. HE TOOK A
MACHETE TO THE FACE. AND THEN
THE PERSON'S CAMP. IT WAS NEXT
TO OUR LITTLE LEAGUE FIELD NEXT
TO A SCHOOL. AND MAYBE IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF
THAT. HER GRANDMA RIGHT NOW
PLEADS TO COUNTY FOR HELP.
RANCHO CORDOVA ISN'T SOMEONE TO
COMPLAIN. WE'RE DOING OUR OWN
SELVES RIGHT NOW. WE'RE TRYING
TO TRIAGE TO FIND A SHELTER.
WE'RE PUTTING INTO OUR OWN HANDS
TO TAKE CARE OF US INSTANCE. BUT
HONESTLY, I NEED YOU GUYS HELP.
I JUST NEED A BREAK FOR A LITTLE
BIT TOO. LET ME TRY TO GET A
HOLD OF THIS PROBLEM IN MY OWN
CITY AND JUST PROTECT OUR KIDS
WHILE I FIGURE OUT A WAY TO PUT
HOMELESS SHELTERS UP, YOU KNOW
THAT TAKES TIME AND I JUST NEED
A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK AND MAKE
THESE PEOPLE FEEL SAFE. THE
PROBLEM WITH IN KAMPALA'S
DANGERS AS POSTED, IT IS ALL OUR
CHILDREN, BUT THE BODY CAN TAKE
THE ACTION TO PUSH THIS BILL
FORWARD AND REALLY PROTECT US. I
HOPE YOU GUYS PLEASE PASS A B
257 MAKE THE CRUSHES YOU NEED
AND DO WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO, BUT
I THINK RIGHT NOW IN SMALL
CITIES, I'VE LITERALLY LOST TO
MY CITIZENS. I'VE HAD HOMELESS
WALK IN HALF NAKED INTO OUR
SCHOOLS. AND I DON'T HAVE A FIX
YET. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ARE
THEY. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. NAME AND ORGANIZATION,
PLEASE. HI. GOOD MORNING, ALYSSA
UNLESS IT STILL HIGH ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY OF EAST DILLON
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
AND THE OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. ARE THERE ANY WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION? ANYONE
TESTIFYING. TWO OKAY, TAKE YOUR
TIME. DO YOU WANT ME? WE'RE
MAKING ROOM FOR YOU RIGHT NOW,
SIR.
TEST TEST TO TWO WITNESSES OR
JUST ONE. TO HAVE FIVE MINUTES
TO HEAR ME. YES, WE CAN HEAR
THIS THING ON SO YOU HAVE FIVE
MINUTES TOTAL. UM, SO AT LEAST
SOME TIME FOR EACH OF YOU TO
TALK. HAVE A GO, GO, 123 GO!
THERE YOU GO. MY NAME IS ALFRED
SANCHEZ. SOME HOMELESS ADVOCATE
IN THE CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS.
PUT ALL OF YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IS
THE GUY WHO'S OUT THERE. TALKING
WITH THE HOMELESS. EVERY DAY.
OKAY? SO. FOR THAT REASON I'M
THE GUY OUT THERE ON THE STREETS
TALKING TO THESE PEOPLE EVERY
DAY. THAT'S WHY I IMPLORE YOU TO
LISTEN TO ME, OKAY? I DON'T HAVE
A LOT OF TIME. I COULD TALK THIS
OFF FOR YEARS. NUMBER ONE.
PLEASE DO NOT SIGN ANY BILLS AS
YOU TALKING ABOUT AMENDING
WITHOUT CLEARLY DEFINING WHAT
CAMPING IS BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU
TAKE CITIES LIKE MINE AND THEY
TOLD THE GUY AS LONG AS HE
SLEEPS THERE. HE'S FINE, BUT THE
MANY PUTS A BLANKET ON THESE
CAMPING THAT IS SO WRONG. PLEASE
I IMPLORE YOU. YOU'RE LOOKING AT
THE GUY WHO'S OUT THERE EVERY
DAY. DO NOT SIGN ANY BILLS
UNLESS YOU CAN CLEARLY DEFINE
WHAT CAMPING IS EVEN IN MY OWN
CITY. I'M THE LIAISON BETWEEN
THE HOMELESS AND THE AND THE
CITY, AND THEY CANNOT DEFINE IT.
AND THAT'S JUST WRONG BECAUSE
YOU CANNOT PUNISH EVERYBODY FOR
WHAT A FEW PEOPLE ARE DOING AS
FAR AS YOUR SYRINGES. I'VE BEEN
OUT THERE FOR SIX YEARS I'VE
SEEN TOO AND NONE OF THEM WERE
HOMELESS CAMPS. UM HMM. TRUST
THE CITIES AND THE COUNTIES TO
REGULATE THEIR OWN PEOPLE. WHAT
WORKS IN SOME PLACES WILL NOT
WORK EVERYWHERE. IT'S A BROAD
LAW YOU'RE SAYING THIS SAY
YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS GONNA WORK
ACROSS THE WHOLE STATE, BUT IT'S
NOT IN OUR CITY. THE DEPARTMENT
OF PARKS AND RECS. THEY LET US
STAY THERE, PROVIDED WE FOLLOW
CERTAIN RULES. WHY CAN'T
EVERYBODY ELSE JUST DO THAT? IN
OUR CITY. WE SLEEP AT THE
LIBRARY PROVIDED WE FOLLOW
CERTAIN RULES. THIS IS TOO FAR
REACHING THIS TOO BROAD. WE NEED
TO TRUST THE CITIES TO REGULATE
THEIR OWN PEOPLE. THEY KNOW
THEIR OWN SITUATIONS. THEY KNOW
THEY'RE HOMELESS PEOPLE, THEY
KNOW WHAT CAN BE DONE. SO DON'T
JUST OUT OF FRUSTRATION. MAKE A
STATEWIDE BILL. THAT'S NOT
REALLY GONNA BE AKTOBE ALONG OR
I'M NOT. I'M LOOKING FOR THE
RIGHT TO THE RIGHT WORDS THAT
YOU KNOW THAT EVERYBODY CAN GO
BY. YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST TOO FAR
REACHING. THANK YOU. I LIKE THIS
GUY AND. SIMPLY CREATING LESS
PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO BE AND LESS
PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO SLEEP. IT
DOESN'T SOLVE THE HOMELESS
PROBLEM. ALL IT DOES IS MOVE
THEM AROUND. TRUST ME. WHEN I
TELL YOU, YOU CANNOT KEEP
SHUFFLING PEOPLE AROUND IS
DANGEROUS. YOU GUYS HERE YOU GO
HOME. YOU GO IN YOUR HOUSE IS
YOU GO TO SLEEP. YOU GO IN LIKE
YOU DO NOT REALIZE HOW DIFFICULT
IT IS FOR PEOPLE TO BE SHUFFLED
AROUND. I MEAN, IT'S E. IT'S
VERY TERRITORIAL. YOU CANNOT
JUST KEEP SAYING. OH, WELL, YOU
CAN'T BE HERE. YOU CAN'T BE
THERE CAN BE THERE. DO YOU WANT
TO MAKE SURE YOU LEAVE SOMETIME?
I'M SORRY. IT'S BEEN 2.5
MINUTES. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE
YOU LEAVE SOME TIME FOR YOUR
OTHER SPEAKER. THANK YOU. AND I
HOPE THAT YOU HEARD ME AND I
HOPE THAT YOU PAY ATTENTION.
HELLO. GOOD MORNING, BRENDAN
GREENE. I DIRECT THE RACIAL AND
ECONOMIC JUSTICE PROGRAM AT
CASTLE. YOU'VE JOINED THE
CALIFORNIA UM AND RESPECTFULLY
ASK THAT YOU ALL VOTE NO ON THIS
. THIS WOULD DO NOTHING BUT
FURTHER STIGMATIZED AND
CRIMINALIZED ON HOUSE POPULATION
. UH, THE MAJORITY OF WHICH IS
BLACK, BROWN AND INDIGENOUS. UM
IT RELIES ON NEGATIVE
STEREOTYPES OF VIOLENCE
PERPETRATED BY HOUSE PEOPLE. WE
ALL KNOW THAT. UM ALL OF THE
INCIDENTS OF VIOLENCE WHILE
TRAGIC, THEY WERE DISCUSSED OR
MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN BY HOUSED
PEOPLE WHO COMMIT VIOLENCE EVERY
SINGLE DAY. UM WE ALSO KNOW THAT
THERE'S NOT A DISTINCTION
BETWEEN ONE HOUSED PEOPLE IN
CHILDREN. SO IF WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT PROTECTING CHILDREN, MANY
ON HOUSED INDIVIDUALS ARE
CHILDREN. UM THIS DOES NOTHING
TO SOLVE THE AND HOUSED PRIVATE
PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA HOUSING FIRST MODEL
OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE A BETTER
SOLUTION. WE ALSO KNOW THAT
GIVEN THE UBIQUITY OF SCHOOLS,
DAYCARE CENTERS, ETCETERA, THIS
WOULD EFFECTIVELY BAR ON HOUSE
PEOPLE FROM ALL URBAN CENTERS,
WHICH IS WHERE THEY GET
SERVICES. THAT THEY NEED EVERY
SINGLE DAY. UM FINALLY, EVEN
THOUGH THIS HAS BEEN AMENDED TO
SORT OF LIMIT THE GEOGRAPHIC
SCOPE THAT WAS AMENDMENT TO DO
NOTHING, UH, TO MITIGATE ANY OF
THE HARMS THAT I DISCUSSED AND
SAW RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU
VOTE NO. THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION NAME AND
ORGANIZATION? GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS GREGORY CRAMER
ON BEHALF OF DISABILITY RIGHTS,
CALIFORNIA WE REJECT THE
GENERALIZATION THAT HOMELESS
PEOPLE ARE A THREAT TO CHILDREN
AND ORGANIZATION POSITION. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MICHELLE
PARASITE WITH PUBLIC ADVOCATES
IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. BUT I
DID ORGANIZATION. THANK YOU.
DANICA ROAD, UM, ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE AND LAWYERS
COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS IN
OPPOSITION. MARK'S DIVERS WITH
THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING
PARTNERSHIP IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. ALEX BASAT SKI ON BEHALF OF
NATIONAL ALLIANCE AND
HOMELESSNESS AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. CHRIS MARTIN ON
BEHALF OF HOUSING, CALIFORNIA
THE CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING AND OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
CYNTHIA CASTILLO ON BEHALF OF
WESTERN CENTER ON LAW AND
POVERTY AND OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. KARMA NICOLE COX ON BEHALF
OF A CEO YOU CALIFORNIA ACTION
AND OPPOSITION. LESLIE CALDWELL
, HOUSTON FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION.
EXCUSE ME IN OUR POSITION IN
YOU. GOOD MORNING, JIM LINDBERG
BEHALF OF THE FRIENDS COMMITTEE
ON LEGISLATION IN CALIFORNIA,
ALSO IN OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING
ESPANA, NEZ WITH THE ANTI
RECIDIVISM, COALITION AND SOCIAL
CHANGE IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING, ED LITTLE ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA'S FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. GLENN BECK IS ELLA BAKER
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? WE'LL NOW BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE. FIRST
QUESTION OR COMMENT. COMMENT
MORE THAN ANYTHING, I MUST
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER FORMER
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER PARENT OF
THREE I WENT TO A QUAKER SCHOOL
THAT ACTUALLY HOUSE THE HOMELESS
AND SHELTERED THE HOMELESS IN
THE EVENINGS AND THEN OPENED UP
ITS DOORS IN THE MORNINGS TO
EDUCATE ITS CHILDREN. UM LET ME
GIVE YOU ANOTHER SCENARIO, GIVEN
THE FACT THAT THERE ARE 25% OF
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS OR
CHILDREN. IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE
THAT THERE COULD BE A MOTHER AND
HER CHILD. IN CLOSE TO A DAYCARE
CENTER CLOSE TO A SCHOOL.
CAMPED. WHO COULD FIND
THEMSELVES SLEEPING NEAR WITHIN
THE 505 100. BUT RADIUS OF ONE
OF THE SITES THAT YOU HAVE
INDICATED HERE WHO COULD INSTEAD
OF GRAPPLING TO BE ABLE TO GET
THEIR CHILD INTO THAT SCHOOL THE
NEXT MORNING FOR BREAKFAST.
LUNCH AND EDUCATION. COULD FIND
THEMSELVES UNDER THIS
LEGISLATION. CHARGED WITH A
MISDEMEANOR. PUNISHED FOR UP TO
FIVE DAYS AND INCARCERATED AND
PUT IN COUNTY JAIL. AND.
RECEIVING A FINE NOT TO EXCEED
$25. THAT TO ME IS ABSOLUTELY
INHUMANE. THE WAY TO SOLVE
HOMELESSNESS. IS NOT TO
CRIMINALIZE POVERTY. I FULLY
SUPPORT THE INTENTION AND THE
DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR
PUBLIC SPACES ARE SAFE. THE
DESIRE AND INTENTION TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE RESOLVING AND
ADDRESSING THE ISSUES OF
HOMELESSNESS. I CANNOT IN GOOD
CONSCIENCE. AND THERE'S A
LEGISLATOR. AS A PARENT AND A
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER CONDONE. THE
NOTION THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY
CRIMINALIZE A CHILD AND THE
MOTHER. TRYING TO GET TO SCHOOL.
AND YOU'RE THAT CAMPUS FOR THOSE
REASONS. I WILL NOT BE VOTING
FOR THIS BILL. MR BRYANT. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. MY I DO RECOGNIZE
THAT THIS IS SOLVING
HOMELESSNESS, HOUSES, NOUS IS A
TOP PRIORITY FOR THE STATE AND
MANY OF OUR JURISDICTION. BUT I
THINK THIS APPROACH ULTIMATELY
RUNS COUNTER TO THOSE GOALS. LOS
ANGELES WAS MENTIONED. MANY
TIMES. I KNOW DEEPLY WHAT LOS
ANGELES HAS BEEN DOING. I MEAN,
IT'S BECAUSE 56 11 41 18. A
DECADE AGO, ONE IN 10 ARRESTS BY
THE LAPD WAS SOMEBODY WHO'S ON
HOUSED. TODAY. IT'S MORE THAN
ONE IN FIVE. EVERY DOLLAR WE'VE
SPENT PENALIZING AND
CRIMINALIZING POVERTY IS A
DOLLAR WE COULD HAVE INVESTED IN
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, WRAPAROUND
SERVICES. ON THE SIBLING. OF A
CROSSOVER YOUTH. NOW, ADULT. WHO
IS CURRENTLY ON HOUSED. AND THIS
KIND OF A SOLUTION PROHIBITS ON
HOUSE PEOPLE FROM BEING IN OUR
MUNICIPALITIES FROM BEING IN OUR
CIVIC CENTERS, AS WAS HEARD IN
THE TESTIMONY HERE, ALL OF THESE
SPACES IF YOU SET UP A 500 FT
PERIMETER, YOU ULTIMATELY BAR
OUT THE CITY. IT ALSO. BUT WHO'S
ME TO THINK THAT SOMEBODY WHO IS
STRUGGLING WITH DEEP POVERTY?
WOULD THEN BE SIDED WITH AN
INFRACTION THAT WOULD REQUIRE
THEM TO PAY ANYTHING. RIGHT THAT
RUNS COUNTER TO THESE GOALS. I
HOPE THAT WE CAN GET TO
MEANINGFUL SOLUTIONS. I THINK
THIS KIND OF APPROACH HAS BEEN A
MISTAKE AND EVERY SINGLE CITY
THAT'S TRIED IT AND I THINK IT
WOULD BE A MISTAKE FOR US AS A
STATE TO MANDATE THIS ACROSS
CITIES ACROSS THE STATE, AND SO
WHILE I RESPECTFULLY APPRECIATE
THE WILLINGNESS TO CENTER
HOMELESSNESS AS A PRIORITY. OF
THE AUTHORS. I THINK THIS
PARTICULAR APPROACH GOING
THROUGH CRIMINALIZATION IS
SOMETHING THAT I WILL ALWAYS
STAND UP AGAINST. THANK YOU.
ORTEGA. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. AND YOU
KNOW, I HEARD YOUR CONCERNS
ABOUT SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN AND
MAKING THEM A PRIORITY AS A
MOTHER. I THINK ABOUT THIS EVERY
DAY. I WANT MY CHILD TO BE SAFE
AT SCHOOL IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR
FORM. BUT AS I LOOKED AT THE
SUMMARY OF YOUR BILL TODAY, THE
FIRST SENTENCE THAT'S ON HERE
SAYS MAKES IT A CRIME TO CAMP ON
ANY STREET. HOMELESSNESS IS NOT
A CRIME. THIS ALSO TALKS ABOUT
DIM, DEMONIZING CRIMINALIZING.
TAKING AWAY RIGHT? TO THOSE THAT
ARE PROTECTING THE SAFETY OF OUR
CHILDREN. WE HAVE TEACHERS THAT
ARE HOMELESS. WE HAVE DAY CARE
PROVIDERS THAT ARE HOMELESS. IS
THAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY?
AS A STATE? BECAUSE YOU'RE
HOMELESS OR IN A FIND YOU AND
WE'RE GONNA SEND YOU TO JAIL.
THAT'S HOW WE'RE PLANNING TO
KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE. HOMELESS
ISN'T IT IS AN ISSUE THAT WE'RE
ALL TRYING TO WORK ON. BUT
CRIMINALIZING OUR HOMELESSNESS.
IT'S NOT THE WAY TO DO IT HERE
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, NOT
IN THE FOURTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN
THE WORLD, WE HAVE TO DO BETTER.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS
BILL. MR LACKING. OKAY THIS IS
OBVIOUSLY A VERY DIFFICULT AND
DELICATE TOPIC TO ADDRESS NO
DOUBT ABOUT THAT. BUT WE HAVE TO
TALK ABOUT REALITIES AS WELL.
AND. ONE OF THE REALITIES IS
LIKE IT OR NOT. LAW ENFORCEMENT
IS CURRENTLY THE RELIED UPON ARM
OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION THAT
DEALS WITH MENTAL HEALTH. UH,
DIFFICULTIES. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY
FOR A LONG TIME. ENFORCEMENT
DIDN'T ASK FOR THAT. THAT'S JUST
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LEFT WITH. AND
THIS IS A VERY NARROW FOCUS. IT
DOESN'T CLAIM TO SOLVE
HOMELESSNESS. IT DOESN'T CLAIM
TO REQUIRE OFFICERS TO ARREST
AND TAKE ACTION. IT JUST GIVES
THEM SOME AUTHORITY IN CASE THEY
GET RESISTANCE. BECAUSE YOU'VE
GOT TO REMEMBER. I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE PERCENTAGES ARE, BUT
IT'S A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE OF
THESE PEOPLE. THAT ARE HAVING
DIFFICULTIES THEY DON'T TRUST.
THE OUTSIDE, THEY DON'T TRUST
BECAUSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES WITHIN
THEIR OWN LIVES. THEY DON'T WANT
INTERVENTION. AND THEY HAVE A
HIGH DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY
MANAGING THEIR LIVES. SO WHAT
THIS BILL IS DESIGNED TO DO. IS
IT? IT'S DESIGNED TO BE A
BALANCED APPROACH. BALANCE IS
REALLY WHAT WHAT WE NEED BECAUSE
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE VERY STRONG
IMBALANCE. BECAUSE WE'RE DOING
NOTHING. VERY LITTLE. WE'RE
TRYING. BUT WE NEED SOMETHING
THAT WILL ACTUALLY WORK. AND
HERE, THIS NARROW FOCUS IS TO
PROTECT AND TO PROTECT THOSE WHO
DESERVE PROTECTION. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT SCHOOLS. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT SENSITIVE AREAS
WHERE, UM PEOPLE DESERVE TO FEEL
COMFORTABLE. AND UNFORTUNATELY
BECAUSE OF THE DYSFUNCTION, AND
THERE'S A LOT OF VERY DIFFICULT
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE HARD FOR
US TO UNDERSTAND, AS AS A
SOCIETY AND CLEARLY THAT'S THE
HOMELESS PROBLEM IS NOT A NEW
PROBLEM. IT'S CONTINUALLY
GROWING THE WRONG DIRECTION. AND
SO ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
GIVE ENFORCEMENT ANOTHER TOOL.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM TO HOOK
THESE PEOPLE UP AND TAKE THEM TO
JAIL JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE
CAMPING ON THE SIDEWALK. THEY'RE
TRYING TO BE THE ARM OF
INTERVENTION. AND TRYING TO
RELOCATE. UH THESE FOLKS. IS
WHAT EVERYBODY WOULD BENEFIT
FROM. AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY
BECAUSE THERE'S LACK OF TRUST
WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND THAT'S
PART OF OUR PROBLEM IS THERE'S
SOME NEGATIVE STEREOTYPING OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT GETS IN THE
WAY OF GOOD DECISION MAKING. AND
I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE
MAJORITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT THEY
WANT GOOD OUTCOMES. AND WHERE WE
SEE SOME EXAMPLES OF BETRAYAL OF
TRUST. PLEASE DON'T OVER
GENERALIZE AND THINK THAT THAT'S
THE MAJORITY OF OFFICERS. IT'S
JUST UNFAIR TO THEM AND IT'S
UNFAIR TO OUR PUBLIC. THEY DON'T
WANT TO JUST GO AND PUT
HANDCUFFS ON THESE PEOPLE AND
TELL THEM YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO
JAIL AND IMPOSE MORE DIFFICULTY
INTO THEIR LIVES. BUT THE TOOL
EXISTS AND IT'S LIKE A WOBBLE.
IT IT'S NOT A WOBBLER BECAUSE
THAT'S A FELONY AND MISDEMEANOR
. THIS IS AN INFRACTION AND
MISDEMEANOR, AND IT'S ONLY IF
THERE'S STRONG RESISTANCE. THEY
HAVE A TOOL THAT THEY CAN TAKE
ANOTHER COURSE OF ACTION.
BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, SOMETIMES
THAT IS THE ONLY SAFE
INTERVENTION. AND THAT'S THE
REASON WHY I'M GOING TO SUPPORT
THIS BILL IS BECAUSE IT JUST
GIVES ANOTHER TOOL THAT I HOPE
WOULD NEVER BE ABUSED. AND WE'VE
GOT TO DO SOMETHING TO PROTECT
THOSE WHO DESERVE PROTECTION.
AND TRY TO CREATE SOME KIND OF
BALANCED CIRCUMSTANCE. BECAUSE
RIGHT NOW, UH THERE'S JUST SO
MUCH DYSFUNCTION AND NOBODY IS
WINNING NOBODY. AND SO I'M I'M
GOING TO CLEARLY GET SUPPORT
THIS APPROACH. THANK YOU, MR
SANTIAGO. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
AH, THERE'S A LOT I WANT TO SAY,
UM WITHOUT HAVING TO REPEAT WITH
MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID. UM SO
ECHO THOSE COMMENTS TO BE
BRIEFER. UH WHAT'S GOING ON IN
MY SOUL AS WE TALK ABOUT
HOMELESSNESS? BECAUSE OFTENTIMES
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF
MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND A LOT OF
THINGS WE WANT TO THROW OUT
THERE. LIKE THIS CONCEPT OF
FOLKS WHO ARE HOMELESS DON'T
WANT HELP. NOBODY WAKES UP IN
THE MORNING AND DECIDES THAT
THEY CAN'T AFFORD THEIR RENT. OR
THEY DON'T WANT TO AFFORD THEIR
RENT. NOBODY WAKES UP IN THE
MORNING AND DECIDES THAT THEY'RE
GOING TO HAVE A TRAGEDY HAPPEN
IN OUR LIFE. AND I THINK THERE'S
A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS AROUND
SAYING WE'RE GOOD TO
CRIMINALIZE. AN ACT. BEING
HOMELESS, AND IT ASSUMES A LOT
OF DIFFERENT THINGS. IT ASSUMES
THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO THIS
AND ASSUMES THAT THERE AREN'T
ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES WERE
PERSON LOSES THEIR JOBS. IT
ASSUMES THAT THERE AREN'T MENTAL
HEALTHCARE ISSUES IN OUR SOCIETY
, ASSUME THAT THEY'RE NOT THAT
THERE ISN'T SUBSTANCE ABUSE
ISSUES AND IN OUR SOCIETY. AND
THE EASY THING TO DO WHEN WE'RE
SOLVING HOMELESSNESS, AND WE
WENT THROUGH THIS RIGHT IN LOS
ANGELES WENT THROUGH SINCE IT
WAS THROWN AROUND WHEN THEY DID
THE POLICIES OF CONTAINMENT
DECADES AGO, AND IT WAS EASY AT
THAT TIME TO SAY, YOU KNOW,
WE'LL SOLVE HOMELESSNESS BY
CONTAINING HOMELESSNESS IN A
PARTICULAR AREA. AND HERE WE ARE
GENERATIONS LATER THAT WE NOW
KNOW AS SKID ROW. AN AREA THAT
WASN'T SOLVED THE WAY IT SHOULD
HAVE BEEN FROM THE VERY
BEGINNING. AND THE EASY THING IS
ALWAYS TO DO IS, YOU KNOW, LET'S
LOCK THEM UP AND THROW AWAY THE
KEY. WE ALREADY WENT THAT
THROUGH THAT AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL WITH THE CRIMES ACT, BILL,
AND WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION ABOUT JUST LOCK
EVERYBODY UP. WHO WE DON'T LIKE
WHO, FOR ONE REASON ANOTHER
NEITHER DO THIS. THEY DO THAT,
OR THEY LOOK THIS WAY OR THEY'VE
DONE THIS. INSTEAD OF GOING TO
THE CORE ROOTS OF WHY THERE IS
HOMELESSNESS, WHY THERE IS AN
ISSUE IN SOCIETY. SO IT'S SO IF
WE'RE GONNA GET SERIOUS ABOUT
SOLVING HOMELESSNESS THAT THEN
LET'S GET SERIOUS ABOUT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. LET'S GET
SERIOUS ABOUT RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
LET'S GET SERIOUS ABOUT 10
PROTECTIONS. LET'S GET SERIOUS
ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH CARE FUNDING
. LET'S GET SERIOUS ABOUT ABOUT
SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT. LET'S
GET SERIOUS ABOUT THE THINGS
THAT PEOPLE REALLY NEED TO
PREVENT HOMELESSNESS AND TO EASE
US OFF OF HOMELESS AND GET
PEOPLE BACK ON THEIR FEET OR
INTO A UNIT. IN LOS ANGELES WENT
TO THIS DEBATE, BUT IT'S A VERY,
VERY DIFFERENT DEBATE. UM SO I
DON'T WANT TO GO INTO THE LOS
ANGELES DEBATE TOO MUCH, BUT BUT
BUT A BLANKET APPROACHES SAYS
LET'S CRIMINALIZE EVERYBODY WHO
DOESN'T HAVE A HOME BECAUSE ALL
OF A SUDDEN THE RENT WENT UP AND
SOMEBODY HAS TO LIVE ON THE
STREETS OF COMMON CRIMINAL. ALL
OF A SUDDEN THERE WAS A LANDLORD
TO KICK SOMEBODY OUT IN THAT
PERSON BECOMES A CRIMINAL. THAT
ALL OF A SUDDEN, AND I'M BEING
OVERLY SIMPLISTIC HERE WITH MY
COMMENTS NOT TO BE TAKEN OUT OF
CONTEXT. BUT IT REALLY IS IN A
LOT OF WAYS. AND I DON'T WANT TO
SAY THIS TO YOU DON'T I DON'T
LIKE TO SAY TOO MUCH FROM UP
HERE, BUT IT REALLY IS CRUEL AND
INHUMANE. DID THINK THAT
SOMEBODY IS HOMELESS AND LET'S
GO. MOVE THEM ACROSS THE STREET.
LET'S GO. MOVE THEM FIVE BLOCKS
DOWN, OR LET'S JUST GO PUT THEM
OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF LINE. UM AND
I DON'T WANT THIS CONVERSATION
TO BE PIT AROUND. YOU KNOW WHAT
LAW ENFORCEMENT SHOULD BE AS IT
RELATES TO, OR PIT ABOUT LAW
ENFORCEMENT SHOULD DO THIS LAW
ENFORCEMENT. LET'S BE VERY CLEAR
IF WE WRITE A LAW THAT SAYS LAW
ENFORCEMENT ARREST PEOPLE THEN
LAW ENFORCEMENT COULD BE
REQUIRED TO ARREST PEOPLE IF WE
IF WE DON'T WRITE THIS LAW, AND
IT DOESN'T PASS, AND THEY WON'T
THEY WON'T HAVE THE REQUIREMENT
TO DO IT. AND WE DON'T SEE A
WHOLE HECK OF A LOT AT LEAST,
YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT I SEE HERE,
A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT LINING
UP TO SAY, HEY, LET'S GO DO
THIS. AND I APPRECIATE THE
APPROACH OF AN AUTHOR SPONSORED
BILL. I'VE DONE THAT MANY TIMES
MYSELF. AH! BUT I THINK IT'S BUT
I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT I DO
APPRECIATE YOUR APPROACH TO
BRING ATTENTION TO AH, A VERY
IMPORTANT ISSUE LIKE
HOMELESSNESS. BUT I'D SAY, JOIN
THE EFFORT AND TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT SOMETHING THAT IS HUMANE.
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT CRUEL,
SOMETHING THAT WILL ADDRESS WHY
WE HAVE HOMELESSNESS, SOMETHING
THAT WILL HELP US TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEM TO BRING SOME DIGNITY TO
PEOPLE WHO FOR ONE REASON OR
ANOTHER, NOT FORTUNATE TO BE
HOUSED. AND I THINK LANGUAGE IS
IMPORTANT, TOO. I THINK SOME OF
US HAVE GRAVITATED FROM OFF AND
ON IT TO TALK ABOUT OUR OWN
HOUSE POPULATION. I THINK I
THINK LANGUAGES IS ALSO
IMPORTANT. IN THIS INDIGNITY
THAT LOOK, I CAN GO ON FOREVER
BECAUSE I FEEL VERY, VERY
EMOTIONAL ABOUT ABOUT THIS ISSUE
WHEN IT COMES TO THE ISSUE OF
HOMELESSNESS, BUT I DON'T WANT
TO OVERSTATE. I DON'T WANT TO
LET US ALLOW THE
OVERSIMPLIFICATION OF A
CONVERSATION THAT WE COULD JUST
ARREST OUR WAY OUT OF AH OUT OF
HOMELESSNESS, AND IT'S GOING TO
SOLVE THE PROBLEM. IT'S JUST NOT
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU.
ANOTHER COMMENTS. YOU MAKE
CLOTHES, MR. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE IT, AND I APPRECIATE
THE DISCUSSION. I DO AGREE WITH
MY COLLEAGUE, MR SANTIAGO THAT
THERE IS MUCH MORE THAT NEEDS TO
BE DONE. I DON'T THINK UH, I
THINK ALL OF US ACTUALLY AGREE
WITH THAT IN THIS ROOM, AND AS I
MENTIONED IN MY OPEN, YOU KNOW,
I LOOK FORWARD TO BEING A PART
OF THOSE SOLUTIONS AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ON
THE SOLUTIONS. I WANT TO JUST
CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS ON
THE BILL. THIS BILL
SPECIFICALLY, UM, BECAUSE I
THINK WE HAVE SPOKEN IN A LOT OF
GENERALIZATIONS ABOUT WHAT THIS
BILL DOES. UM, ONE OF THE
AMENDMENTS WE TOOK WAS TO
ADDRESS ADDRESS A SPECIFIC
CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP
PRETTY EARLY ON IN OUR FIRST
VERSION OF THE BILL, WHICH I
ACKNOWLEDGED WAS AN ISSUE AND WE
FIXED. UM WAS THAT THE GOAL OF
THIS BILL IS NOT TO CRIMINALIZE
AN INDIVIDUAL HOMELESS PERSON,
AND IT DOES NOT GIVE LAW
ENFORCEMENT ANY AUTHORITY TO
TAKE ANY ACTION AGAINST A
SPECIFIC HOMELESS PERSON AND
THEIR CHILD OR ANYTHING LIKE
THAT. WHAT THE BILL IN ITS
CURRENT FORM DOES SPECIFICALLY
IS ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF
ENCAMPMENTS SPECIFICALLY AS
DEFINED IN THE BILL, UM AS AND
IN THE WAY WE DEFINE IT IN THIS
BILL IS ENCAMPMENT MEANS THREE
OR MORE PERSONS CAMPING TOGETHER
WITHIN 50 FT OF EACH OTHER AND
WITHOUT PERMITTED ELECTRICAL
POWER. THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER PART
IN OUR DEFINITIONS THAT DISCUSS
UM, THE TIME PERIOD THAT THAT
WOULD INQUIRE SO AGAIN. UM THE
GOAL OF THIS BILL WAS NOT TO
ADDRESS AND INDIVIDUAL HOMELESS
PERSON'S ABILITY TO BE IN A
PUBLIC SPACE. IT IS IT IS SIMPLY
TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF
ENCAMPMENTS AND ACTUALLY LONG
TERM ENCAMPMENTS IN OUR PARKS.
UM AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE
SURE THAT, UM YOU KNOW THAT THAT
IS MADE CLEAR BECAUSE AND AGAIN
IT IS SOMETHING THAT I AM HAPPY
TO CONTINUE WORKING ON WITH THE
OPPOSITION. I'M HAPPY TO
CONTINUE WORKING ON WITH THE
FOLKS OF THIS COMMITTEE AS WELL
. BUT TO CLOSE I DO WANNA TOUCH
ON THE MAIN MOTIVATIONS FOR THIS
BILL, AND THAT IS THE PUBLIC
SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITY. UM YOU
KNOW THESE THESE STORIES ARE NOT
, UM, MEANT TO BE STEREOTYPES.
THEY ARE NOT MEANT TO CREATE
FEAR AROUND EVERYONE. WHAT THEY
ARE IS THAT WE ARE ACKNOWLEDGING
THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE
HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITIES
THAT NEED TO BE FIXED. UM AS MY
COLLEAGUE TO MY RIGHT MR
GATEWOOD TALKED ABOUT IN HIS
PRESENTATION. EMMA ROURKE. I WAS
RAPED AND MURDERED. SHE WAS 20
YEARS OLD. SHE WAS RAPED AND
MURDERED ON THE AMERICAN RIVER
PARKWAY IN RANCHO CORDOVA.
TIMOTHY FARRELL, 60 YEARS OLD
RIDING AN ELECTRIC BIKE AND
RANCHO CORDOVA NEIGHBORHOOD ON
NOVEMBER 28TH. HE WAS ATTACKED
WITH A MACHETE NEAR A PRESCHOOL.
AND ON HOUSED MAN. KILLED A 74
YEAR OLD CARMICHAEL RESIDENT IN
MY DISTRICT. UM IN WHAT THE
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CALLED AN
UNPROVOKED AND SENSELESS
HOMICIDE. THESE ARE REAL PEOPLE
, STORIES, UH, REAL INCIDENTS
THAT ARE HAPPENING IN MY
COMMUNITY. SPECIFICALLY THESE
ARE JUST THE THINGS HAPPENING IN
MY DISTRICT. AND I THINK WE NEED
TO BE HONEST THAT THESE THAT
THESE THINGS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN
IN OUR COMMUNITIES. AND THAT'S
THAT WAS THE MOTIVATION FOR WHY
I BROUGHT THIS BILL FORWARD. SO
AGAIN. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
I VOTE. I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH
THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE TO
IMPROVE THE BILL. IF THERE ARE
SUGGESTIONS, BUT I HOPE THEY
WILL SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. AND
THANK YOU, MR HOOVER. OH I GUESS
MY THE MAIN SUGGESTION. PROBABLY
THE ONLY SUGGESTION UM, AT LEAST
OF WHERE YOU CAN START UM, IF
THEY LOOK TO LOS ANGELES UH, I
THINK THAT BECAUSE MR SANTIAGO.
MR BRIAN AND I ARE FROM LOS
ANGELES. BUT MR SANTIAGO FOR
SEVERAL YEARS HAD SKID ROW.
WHICH IS NOW MY JURISDICTIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY. IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING IF WE WERE TO
SOLVE JUST SKID ROW ALONE. WE
COULD CUT 25. UP THE HOMELESS
POPULATION. UM OUT OF THE MIX.
AND MOVE FORWARD. BUT THE REAL
REASON WHY I SAY LOOK TO LOS
ANGELES HIM. GLAD YOU BROUGHT
YOUR PEOPLE FROM YOUR AREA IS I
HAVE A BILL WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
TRY TO CREATE HOMELESS OURS OR
HOMELESS LEADERS OR COORDINATORS
OR SOMEONE THAT CAN TAKE CARE OF
THAT CAN WRAP THEIR ARMS AROUND
IT. AND IT'S REALLY BASED ON
BARS. ANGELUS. SO LOOK TO LOS
ANGELES. LOOK WHAT KAREN BATH
MAYOR KAREN BASSETT DOING. AND
WHAT SHE DONE SO FAR AND HOW
SHE'S NOT ONLY GOT PEOPLE OFF
THE STREET BUT SHE'S NOT
CRIMINALIZING HIM. SHE'S
HUMANIZING THEM. SO THAT THEY
CAN GET THE WRAPAROUND SERVICES
AND GET TO SHELTER SO THAT WE
CAN THEN BRING THEM IN. BACK
INTO SOCIETY. IT'S A TOUGH JOB.
I THINK SHE'S DONE SEVERAL 100
SO FAR. AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE
HOW EFFECTIVE IT IS. BUT IT IS.
HAVING ONE PERSON. WHO'S HAS THE
GUTS AND THE BRAVERY TO SAY I'M
GOING TO YOU KNOW, TAKE THE BULL
BY THE HORNS, AND I'M GOING TO
TACKLE THIS AND THAT'S WHAT
GOING ON IN LOS ANGELES. SO WHEN
YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT WHAT KIND
OF SOLUTIONS WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT, UM I'M SAYING, LOOK
AT LOS ANGELES AGAIN. I'M NOT
SAYING IT BECAUSE FROM THERE,
IT'S JUST I'M SAYING IT BECAUSE
I COULD SEE IT AND I COULD SEE
HOW IT'S IMPROVING OUR ABILITY
TO HANDLE THE HOMELESS SITUATION
AND IT MAY. ULTIMATELY WHEN WE
LOOK BACK ON THIS YEAR FROM NOW,
TWO YEARS FROM NOW. IT MAY BE
THE WAY YOU HANDLE HOMELESSNESS
NATIONWIDE. AND SO I WOULD
SUGGEST, ESPECIALLY IF THIS WERE
TO NOT MAKE IT THAT YOU ACTUALLY
LOOK AT WHAT SOME SUCCESSFUL
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE THAT PEOPLE
HAVE DONE AND ONE OF THE THINGS
YOU WILL FIND. ACROSS THE BOARD
WHERE THEY'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL,
UM AS FAR AS ACTUALLY HELPING
HOMELESS PEOPLE. GET OFF THE
STREET INTO PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING. THAT THEY DON'T
CRIMINALIZE THEM. AND WE JUST
DON'T PUT THE BURDEN ON LAW
FORCE MINT. WE GET THE
PROFESSIONALS THAT CAN HELP.
PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE STREET
HELPED THEM MOVE ON INTO A
PRODUCTIVE LIFE. SO
UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T VOTE FOR
THIS. WHAT I WANT YOU TO DO IF
YOU REALLY SERIOUS SERIOUS ABOUT
COMING UP WITH THE METHODOLOGY
THAT TO WORK WITH EVERYONE, AND
I KNOW EVERY CITY IS DIFFERENT.
THAT'S WHY I WANT A HOMELESS DOG
AND DIFFERENT PLACES. BECAUSE
EVERY PLACE IS DIFFERENT. EVERY
PERSON IS DIFFERENT. AND SO, UH
, HOPEFULLY AS WE MOVE FORWARD,
YOU CAN EVEN SUPPORT MY BILL
ABOUT A HOMELESS ARE WE CAN GET
THINGS DONE. SO WITH THAT,
UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T SUPPORT
THIS BILL. BUT I THINK IF YOU
LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN LOS
ANGELES, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO
COME BACK IF YOU SO ASK FOR
RECONSIDERATION, UM, WITH
SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE THAT
WE ALL CAN AGREE ON. IS THERE A
MOTION? YES. TALKED ABOUT YES.
THE BILL'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED ON A B 2 57 BY A SEMI
REMEMBER HOOVER. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. SAWYER SAWYER, NO
ELONIS FELONIES I BONTA TO KNOW
BRIAN BRIAN. NO, LACKEY I ORTEGA
OR TAKE A NOTE. SANTIAGO
SANTIAGO NO SOBER. OH, NO, THAT
WAS THAT MADE YOU FEEL
APPRECIATE RECONSIDERATION, IF
THAT'S EXCEPT THERE IS NO
OBJECTION THAT BY UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THANK YOU. YOU WANT TO
OBJECT? OKAY? ITEM NUMBER SEVEN
A B 3 TO 8 SALIH. YEAH. OH TOUGH
CONCLUSION.
SEE YA. NO. HI GOOD MORNING, MR
STALEY. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN A B 3
TO 8. EVER. YOU'RE READY. GOOD
MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR.
JUST ONE SECOND.
I HATE THAT IT'S WORKING. IT'S
ALWAYS A PROBLEM. GOT IT. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME
AND CONSIDERATION IS REALLY
IMPORTANT BILL. AND THIS, UH
DISCUSSION WE'RE GOING TO ENGAGE
IN. I'M HERE TO PRESENT AS
ASSEMBLY BUILT 3 28, WHICH WILL
COMBAT GUN VIOLENCE BY RESTORING
THE SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT FOR
CRIMINALS WHO USE A FIREARM. IN
THE COMMISSION OF A VIOLENT
CRIME. IT WOULD REQUIRE A 20
YEAR. MANDATORY ENHANCEMENT IF
YOU FIRE THE GUN AND THE
COMMISSION OF VIOLENT CRIME, AND
IT REQUIRES A LIFE SENTENCE IF
YOU FIRE IF YOU USE A GUN TO
KILL ANOTHER PERSON, UM THE
CRIMES WERE TALKING ABOUT OUR
MURDER. KIDNAPPING. RAPE.
ASSAULT WITH A FIREARM ON A
POLICE OFFICER. AND LEWD ACTS ON
A CHILD. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT
ALL CRIMES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THE WORST CRIMES. IN 2018 SB 6
20 WENT INTO A FACT REMOVING THE
MANDATORY PRESIDENT ENHANCEMENT
FOR CRIMINALS WHO USE A GUN WHEN
COMMITTING THESE VIOLENT CRIMES.
SP 6 20 HAD ONE GOAL IN MIND. TO
REDUCE PRISON SENTENCES. WE KNOW
NOW THAT THIS MISGUIDED POLICY
HAS BEEN TREMENDOUSLY EFFECTIVE
IN ACCOMPLISHING ITS INTENDED
GOAL. THE PRISONS ARE QUICKLY
BEING EMPTIED. BUT IT HAS FAILED
MISERABLY AND PROTECTING THE
SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. SINCE SB 6
20 WENT TO EFFECT WE'VE
EXPERIENCED AN ALARMING AND
DEVASTATING INCREASE IN VIOLENT
CRIME COMMITTED WITH A FIREARM.
ACCORDING TO THE PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA,
COMPARED TO 2019 PRE PANDEMIC
LEVELS. GUN RELATED HOMICIDES
HAVE GONE UP BY 52. AND GUN
RELATED. AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS ARE
UP 64. THESE NUMBERS ARE
STAGGERING. THE A C L U AND
OTHER GROUPS WHO OPPOSE MY BILL
DO SO ON THE BASIS OF RACE. THEY
CLAIM THAT LONG PRISON SENTENCES
ARE INHERENTLY RACIST. AND
INSIDIOUSLY SUGGESTS THAT POLICE
AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ARE
RIGGING. THIS SYSTEM TO TARGET
MINORITY GROUPS THAT IS
RIDICULOUS AND UNTIL
INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST. OUR
JUSTICE SYSTEM IS COLOR BLIND.
THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THAT
PROSECUTORS CONSIDER RACE THE
RACE OF A DEFENDANT WHEN
DECIDING TO BRING CHARGES. IN
FACT, IT'S ILLEGAL AND
UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO DO SO. AND
THEY CERTAINLY DON'T DECIDE THE
RACE OF THE INDIVIDUAL PULLING
THE TRIGGER OF A GUN. IF WE WANT
TO TALK ABOUT RACE, LET'S HAVE
THE CONVERSATION. TWO THIRDS OF
ALL VIOLENT CRIME VICTIMS ARE
MINORITIES. UH I KNOW THERE ARE
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WHO
REPRESENT THE CITY OF OAKLAND.
JUST THIS WEEKEND, THE SAN
FRANCISCO CHRONICLE PUBLISHED
THE HEARTBREAKING ARTICLE
DETAILING THE EXPLOSION OF
UNSOLVED HOMICIDES IN THAT CITY.
IN 2020 TO 60 FOR 5% OF ALL
HOMICIDE VICTIMS IN OAKLAND WERE
BLACK AND PREDOMINANTLY MEN, 65.
ONE OF THOSE VICTIMS WAS 33 YEAR
OLD JAMAL WATKINS, THE ONLY SON
OF TINA HARRIS. SHE SPEAKS TO A
PICTURE OF HER SON EVERY DAY.
SHE TOLD THE REPORTER. I DON'T
KNOW HOW THE HEALING PROCESS CAN
EVER REALLY BEGIN. IF THERE'S NO
JUSTICE. I ASKED EACH OF YOU TO
CONTEMPLATE THE DEEP TRAUMA.
EVERY FAMILY FACES WHEN THEIR
LOVED ONE IS HARMED OR KILLED
WITH A GUN. THE FAMILIES OF
THESE VICTIMS DON'T WANT EMPTY
WORDS AND RHETORIC. THEY WANT
JUSTICE. IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT
COMBATING GUN CRIME. THEN WE
NEED SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES. A B 3
28 WILL REORIENT REORIENT OUR
PUBLIC SAFETY BACK IN THE
DIRECTION OF BELONGS PROTECTING
THE MOST INNOCENT AND VULNERABLE
MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY. THE
VICTIMS THE VICTIMS WHO ARE
PREDOMINANTLY PEOPLE OF COLOR
THAT ARE THE TRUE
DISENFRANCHISED MEMBERS OF OUR
SOCIETY. NOT THE VIOLENT
CRIMINALS, PERPETUATING THE
CRIMES AGAINST THEM. ONE OF THE
ARGUMENTS AGAINST MY BILL IS
THAT IT WILL REMOVE JUDICIAL
DISCRETION. I WANT TO DIRECT
YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE TWO OF
YOUR ANALYSIS. THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS. NUMBER SEVEN.
SUBSECTION C. LAST YEAR, A LAW
WENT INTO EFFECT. TAKING AWAY
THE DISCRETION FROM JUDGES. IT
SAYS IF THE APPLICATION OF AN
ENHANCEMENT RESULTS IN A
SENTENCE OF OVER 20 YEARS, WHICH
IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE
THE JUDGE SHALL DISMISS THE
ENHANCEMENT. WE'VE TAKEN THE
DISCRETION AWAY FROM THE JUDGES.
THE JUDGES DO NOT HAVE
DISCRETION TO IMPOSE THE 20 YEAR
OR LIFE ENHANCEMENT. MY BILL
REQUIRES WHEN YOU HURT OR KILL
SOMEBODY WITH A GUN. SO IF THAT
IS IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT
JUDICIAL DISCRETION, THEN WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT JUDGES
HAVE THE ABILITY TO IMPOSE THAT.
I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE. THE
CRIMES WE ARE DISCUSSING, AND
DIRECTING ARE THE MOST HEINOUS
THE FIREARM ENHANCEMENT SHOULD
BE APPLIED EQUALLY AND WITHOUT
EXCEPTION. TO ANY PERSONAL EVIL
ENOUGH TO COMMIT A VIOLENT
CRIME. I HAVE MORE COMMENTS.
I'LL SAVE THEM FOR CLOSING, BUT
I WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO MY
EXPERT WITNESSES. I ALSO BELIEVE
IN THE IMPORTANCE OF EXPERTS
AND, UM, AND DATA. AND I
ENCOURAGE YOU TO MAINTAIN AN
OPEN MIND WHILE YOU HEAR THEIR
TESTIMONY. JOINING ME THIS
MORNING IS RIVERSIDE POLICE
CHIEF LARRY GONZALEZ AND
PRESIDENT OF OUR COPS
ASSOCIATION OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY
CHIEFS OF POLICE AND RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF. ALSO JOINING ME IS NINA
SALARNO, UH, VESSEL MEN WHOSE
FAMILY MEMBER WAS KILLED BY A
FAR FIREARM. SHE'S HERE
REPRESENTING CRIME VICTIMS
UNITED. I THINK YOU BOTH FOR
BEING HERE AND I TURN IT TO
THEM. MR CHAIR. YES YOU BOTH
HAVE TOTALLY HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
WHATEVER WAY YOU WANT TO SPLIT
IT UP. THANK YOU, HONORABLE
CHAIRMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
I THINK EVERYBODY CAN AGREE THAT
SAFETY IS NOT REALLY A PARTISAN
ISSUE. AND WHILE WE HEAR CALLS
FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE FOR
A NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND MEET
IN THE MIDDLE, THE UNFORTUNATE
TREND OF LEGISLATION OVER THE
PAST 10 YEARS HAS CLEARLY BEEN
SHIFTED TO ONE SIDE. AND THIS IS
NOT THE SIDE OF PROTECTING
VICTIMS OF CRIMES. THERE IS
OFTEN A PICTURE PAINTED BY THE
MEDIA. THAT CRIME IS SOME
INANIMATE THING THAT JUST FLOWS
THROUGH COMMUNITIES. THIS IS NOT
TRUE. THE DANGER PLAGUING EVERY
CORNER OF THIS STATE TODAY HAS
CAUSED BY CRIMINALS OR
INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE WHO MAKE A
CHOICE TO ASSAULT, ATTACK, RAPE
AND MURDER. INNOCENT VICTIMS
MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITIES WHO
DON'T GET A CHOICE. THERE'S A
SENTIMENT AMONG SOME THAT MAY
THAT ANY LAW OR POLICY THAT
INCARCERATES CRIMINALS IS
MISGUIDED AND UNJUST. WE FIRMLY
REJECT THIS PREMISE. THE
UNEQUIVOCAL TRUTH IS IN ORDER TO
UPHOLD JUSTICE AND PROTECT
COMMUNITIES. THERE ARE CERTAIN
INDIVIDUALS WHO CANNOT BE LET
FREE THOSE WHO MAKE A CHOICE TO
PREY ON THE INNOCENT MUST LOSE
THEIR PRIVILEGE TO ROAM THE
STREETS WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE, AND
FURTHER TERRORIZE OUR FAMILIES,
FRIENDS AND CHILDREN. EVERY LAW
ENFORCEMENT LEADER IN CALIFORNIA
CAN PROVIDE THIS SICKENING
EXAMPLES OF THEIR OWN
JURISDICTIONS OF THE
CONSEQUENCES THAT SOFT ON CRIME
POLICIES HAVE EXCUSE ME. I CAN
JUST SHARE WITH YOU. JUST IN MY
CITY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF
MONTHS. WE HAD A MURDER. UM LAST
WEEK OR AN INDIVIDUAL SHOT. HIS
SISTER ALONG THE FACE WAS
ACCIDENTALLY WAS FILMING A VIDEO
KILLED HER. WHEN WE ARRIVED ON
SCENE, WE MET HIS BROTHER, WHO
WAS A WITNESS AND SAW THE MURDER
. WE RECOGNIZE THEM IMMEDIATELY
BECAUSE WE JUST ARRESTED HIM. HE
HAD JUST PLAYED OR BEEN ARRESTED
IN OUR CITY FOR SIX ARMED
ROBBERIES IN A MONTH. AND WAS
ALREADY OUT ON THE SCENE AS AN A
WITNESS OF A MURDER. WE ALSO HAD
A SPREE OF HOME INVASION
ROBBERIES LAST YEAR IN OUR CITY.
SIX AND ONE WEEK ARMED HOME
INVASION ROBBERIES. WE FINALLY
STARTED USING SEVERAL HOURS OF
INVESTIGATIVE RESOURCES AND GET
SOME PEOPLE IN CUSTODY. WE FOUND
OUT THE MAJORITY OF THOSE
SUSPECTS WERE ALL EXPERIMENTS
THAT WE'RE USING FIREARMS AND
COMMISSION. OF THESE THESE
FELONIES. UNFORTUNATELY I COULD
FILL THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS WITH
ONLY RECENT EXAMPLES OF
TRAGEDIES SUCH AS THESE WHERE
LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
AND DEPUTIES DID THEIR JOB WELL
REMOVED VIOLENT CRIMINALS FROM
THE STREETS ONLY TO HAVE THEM
RELEASED UNDER THE GUISE OF
JUSTICE REFORM OR SOME EQUALLY
IRONIC TERM. THERE WAS NO
JUSTICE IN POLICIES THAT
OBJECTIVELY CAN PRODUCE ONLY THE
OUTCOMES OF INCREASED VIOLENCE.
AND MORE VICTIMS IN OUR CITIES.
I IMPLORE THE LEGISLATION TO
LISTEN TO OUR COLLECTIVE VOICES
AS LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS. WHO
SEE DEVASTATING EFFECTS TO THESE
PREVENTABLE CRIMES EVERY DAY.
I'M SURE YOU GUYS HAVE ALL BEEN
HEARING THE SAME THINGS IN YOUR
DISTRICTS ABOUT CRIME, AND IT'S
ON THE RISE. READ SOME OF THE
OPPOSITION LETTERS TALKING ABOUT
THEY ARE NOT. THEY ARE AND THEY
DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE OF
IMPOSING ENHANCEMENTS. AND I'M
TELLING YOU THAT I'M SEEING THAT
EVERY DAY IN OUR CITY. AND
VICTIMS WHO SEEM TO BE
FORGOTTEN. AS ALL EFFORTS
SEEMINGLY ARE FOCUSED ON THE
ALREADY WELL DEFINED PROTECTIONS
FOR THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO
VICTIMIZE OTHERS. I TELL MY
COMMUNITY, UM ALL THE TIME THAT
I WILL DO, WE WILL DO.
EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY CAN, BUT
NOTHING THAT WE CAN'T AND IT
DOES GET DIFFICULT. IT'S
DISHEARTENING SOMETIMES TO LOOK
AT OUR VICTIMS IN OUR CITY THAT
WE SAID WE DID EVERYTHING WE
POSSIBLY COULD. AND THE JUSTICE
SYSTEM FAILED. YOU YEAH, I TOLD
HER OFFICERS AND WHEN YOU START
THE ACADEMY'S THREE TYPES OF
PEOPLE, WE SEEM TO RUN INTO
POLICE OFFICERS. NOBODY REALLY
CALLS 911 TO TELL US. WE'RE
DOING A GOOD JOB. BUT WE USED
CATEGORIZES MAD, SAD AND BAD.
RIGHT MAD FOLKS, BECAUSE THEY
GOT A TICKET. THEY GOT THEIR CAR
TOWED. WE ARRESTED A FAMILY
MEMBER SAD OR VICTIMS. PEOPLE
HAVE GOT SOMETHING STOLEN FROM
THEM. THEY GET ROBBED. THEY GET
RAPED, AND THEN THERE'S BAD,
WHICH IS WHAT THIS BILL REALLY
IS POINTING OUT. IT'S A VERY
SMALL MAJORITY OF OUR COMMUNITY
. VERY SMALL, BUT THEY'RE THE
ONES THAT TAKE NO HESITATION. NO
HESITATION AT ALL TO SHOOT A
POLICE OFFICER TO SHOOT A
CIVILIAN IN OUR COMMUNITY OR
EVEN DO A SCHOOL SHOOTING. UM SO
THIS IS WHAT THIS IS TARGETED
AT, SO PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THE
NECESSITY TO PROTECT THE
INNOCENT AND JOIN US IN
SUPPORTING A B 3 28. THANK YOU.
YES GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS NINA
SALARNO. BEST MEN. I AM THE
PRESIDENT OF CRIME VICTIMS
UNITED. THIS BILL IS ABOUT ONE
THING. IT'S ABOUT THE SAFETY OF
OUR COMMUNITIES, AND THAT'S
ABOUT THE VICTIMS. THE INNOCENT
AND UNINTENDED VICTIMS THAT I
DEAL WITH DAILY. YOU CAN LOOK AT
OUR PAPER EVERY DAY HERE. THE
NEWS. WE ALL SEE WHAT HAPPENS
WITH THESE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES OF SOME OF OUR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMS. THEY
HAVE CREATED MORE AND MORE
VICTIMS WE SAW ON THE HEIGHT IN
THE HEADLINES ABOUT MARY
TIBBETS, WHO WAS BRUTALLY
MURDERED AND RAPED BY REPEAT
FELON, THE SHOOTER JUST DOWN THE
STREET FROM THERE, BUT HERE'S
WHAT THE REALITY IS EVERY DAY. I
FEEL LITERALLY HAVE COMMUNITIES
OF VICTIMS WHO ARE BEING HARMED
BY GUN VIOLENCE. HERE IS THE
OTHER REALITY. MY SISTER WAS
MURDERED BY GUN VIOLENCE, SO
THESE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
HAVE CREATED VICTIMS. I LIVE
WITH SOMETHING THAT MOST OF YOU
PROBABLY DON'T LIVE WITH EVERY
DAY GOING TO A CEMETERY TO SEE
MY SISTER WHO WAS MURDERED BY
GUNS. I HEAR THOSE CALLS EVERY
DAY FROM VICTIMS. WHO JUST WANT
JUSTICE. SO, YES, WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT INCARCERATING LONGER, THE
WORST OF THE WORST BY ALLOWING
JUDICIAL DISCRETION TO HAVE
THESE ENHANCEMENTS. WE ARE
PROTECTING THE INNOCENT PEOPLE
IN OUR COMMUNITY. THE CHILDREN
WHO GREW UP WITHOUT A PARENT
BECAUSE THE PARENT WAS MURDERED.
SISTERS AND BROTHERS LIKE ME,
WHO GREW UP WITHOUT LOVED ONES
BECAUSE THEY WERE MURDERED BY
GUN VIOLENCE BY REPEAT FELONS.
THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT THIS
BILL TARGETS THAT IS A COMMON
THEME THAT IS REPEAT VIOLENT
FILMS AND GUN VIOLENCE. I ALSO
HAVE BEEN TO WORK AS A D A. FOR
YOLO COUNTY, THE FIRST COUNTY IN
THE STATE THAT DOES EMBRACE
BLIND. CHARGING OF CRIMES AND
OUR RELEASE OF A STUDY JUST CAME
OUT AS YOU'RE ALL AWARE THAT
SHOWED THAT THAT WAS CONSISTENT
WITH THE RISE IN VIOLENT CRIME,
AND IT WAS RACE BLIND
PROSECUTION BUT THE NUMBER OF
REPEAT VIOLENT FELONS HARMING OR
COMMUNITIES HAS RISEN TWO AND
75% OF IT WAS TO GUN VIOLENCE.
WE NEED TO STOP IT. WE NEED TO
QUIT CREATING VICTIMS BECAUSE OF
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? NAME
AND ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. THANK
YOUR TIE. CINDY DA SILVA ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. UNLESS A STILL HIGH
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EAST
VILLE AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY, YOU KNOW. THANKS
GO THROUGH THE LIST THIS TIME.
MORNING MR CHAIR MEMBERS, RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT OF 3 28, ALSO IN
SUPPORT, POLICE OFFICER
ASSOCIATIONS. OF CLAREMONT
PALACE. FERGIE'S UPLAND
INGLEWOOD SCHOOL, PLEASE CORONA
, NEWPORT BEACH, SANTA ANA,
ARCADIA FULLERTON. RAMONA
BURBANK, RIVERSIDE COVER CITY
AND PLASTER COUNTY DEPUTY
SHERIFF ASSOCIATION SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT AND WILL
NOW HAVE WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. COULD YOU ONE CHAIR.
THANK YOU. YOU HAVE FIVE
MINUTES. GOOD MORNING AGAIN.
LESLIE CALDWELL, HOUSTON FOR THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION. IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO A B 3 28. MAYBE 3
28 WOULD AMEND THE PENAL CODE
SECTION 13 85 TO PROHIBIT A
COURT FROM STRIKING A FIREARM
ENHANCEMENT UNDER PENAL CODE
SECTION 12 OH 22.53 IN THE
INTERESTS OF JUSTICE UNLESS THE
FIREARM WAS UNLOADED, OR THE
INDIVIDUAL DID NOT PERSONALLY
USE THE FIREARM. JUDGES SHOULD
NOT HAVE DISCRETION TAKEN AWAY.
AS THEY'RE THE ONLY INDIVIDUALS
IN OUR SOCIETY IN OUR ENTIRE
SYSTEM, CHARGED WITH VIEWING THE
SITUATION AS A WHOLE. THE
VICTIMS DAMAGES THE NEEDS OF THE
COMMUNITY AND THE COMPLICATED,
ALWAYS COMPLICATED INDIVIDUAL
BEFORE THEM. GUN VIOLENCE
HAPPENED BEFORE WE HAD MANDATORY
ENHANCEMENTS AFTER WE HAD
MANDATORY ENHANCEMENTS BEFORE WE
EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT MANDATORY
ENHANCEMENTS. IT'S OCCURRING NOW
AND IT WILL KEEP OCCURRING. YES
WE DO NEED TO ELIMINATE GUN
VIOLENCE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE
WAY SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS DO
NOT PREVENT CRIME AND WILL NOT
ADDRESS GUN VIOLENCE. WE KNOW
THIS. WE'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD
THESE EXCESSIVE ENHANCEMENTS OR
SOME OF THE DRIVING FORCES THAT
LED TO MASS INCARCERATION,
PARTICULARLY OF BLACK AND LATIN
X PERSONS MASSING CARPET
INCARCERATION IS RACIST AND
ECONOMIC DISASTER AND A HUMAN
RIGHTS VIOLATION. THE PURPOSE OF
13 85 PENAL CODE SECTION, 13 85
IS TO ALLEVIATE MANDATORY,
ARBITRARY AND RIGID SENTENCING
PROCEDURES THAT INEVITABLY LEAD
TO UNJUST RESULTS. MAYBE 3 28 6
TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL TIME IN
SPITE OF A JUDGE'S BELIEF THAT
IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. WHERE THE
AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL TIME WOULD
BE OUT OF PROPORTION TO THE
INDIVIDUALS, CULPABILITY OR THE
NEEDS OF THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS
. IN A CRIMINAL CASE, THE
COMMUNITY THE VICTIMS. LONGER
PRISON SENTENCES DO NOT MAKE
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITIES SAFER.
INSTEAD THEY DIVERT OUR PRECIOUS
RESOURCES FROM HOUSING,
EDUCATION AND MENTAL HEALTH
TREATMENT. THINGS THAT ACTUALLY
DO MAKE US SAFER. THERE IS NO
REASON TO RETURN TO A FAILED
PUBLIC POLICY. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
YOUR NO VOTE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS CARMEN
NICOLE COX. I'M DIRECTOR OF
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AT A C O U
CALIFORNIA ACTION AND WE ARE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO ASSEMBLY
BILL 3 28. WHILE WE SHARE THE
AUTHORS GOAL OF REDUCING GUN
VIOLENCE AND APPRECIATE THAT A B
3 28 PURPORTS TO RETAIN SOME
DISCRETION FOR JUDGES IN VERY
LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES. WE KNOW
THAT THIS POLICY WILL NOT
ACCOMPLISH ITS STATED GOAL
BECAUSE WE NEED A PUBLIC HEALTH
RESPONSE TO THIS PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS AND WE NEED EVIDENCE
BASED APPROACHES TO ROOT CAUSES
OF CRIME. PENAL CODE SECTION 11
78 1 STATES IN RELEVANT PART THE
LEGISLATURE FINDS AND DECLARES
THAT THE PURPOSE OF SENTENCING
IS PUBLIC SAFETY ACHIEVED
THROUGH PUNISHMENT,
REHABILITATION AND RESTORATIVE
JUSTICE WHEN THEY SENTENCE
INCLUDES INCARCERATION. THIS
PURPOSE IS BEST SERVED BY TERMS
THAT ARE PROPORTIONATE TO THE
SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE. IN
2017 A C O U CALIFORNIA ACTION
SPONSORED SENATE BILL 6 20 TO
GIVE JUDGES THE DISCRETION WHEN
IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
TO STRIKE A FIREARM RELATED
ENHANCEMENT TO IMPOSE SENTENCES
THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE
LEGISLATURE'S INTENT AGAIN TERMS
THAT ARE PROPORTIONATE TO THE
SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE. A B
3 28 SEEMINGLY IGNORES THIS
LEGISLATIVE INTENT AS THEY WILL
PREVENT JUDGES FROM MAKING THAT
THAT ASSESSMENT AND EXERCISING
THE DISCRETION NECESSARY. BY THE
EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUGGEST THAT
THE EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL
DISCRETION HAS CONTRIBUTED TO
GUN VIOLENCE. WE DO KNOW THAT
INCREASING PUNISHMENT IS NOT
EFFECTIVE IS NOT ONLY
INEFFECTIVE, IT MAY ACTUALLY
EXACERBATE RECIDIVISM AND REDUCE
PUBLIC SAFETY. ADMITTEDLY WE
HAVE SEEN A SPIKE IN GUN
VIOLENCE SINCE THE FATALITIES
AND COMMUNITY DISRUPTION CAUSED
BY COVID 19. WE'VE REACHED A
POINT OF DIMINISHING RETURNS,
HOWEVER, WITH RESPECT TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT RESPONSES TO THIS
PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS, THE POST
PANDEMIC PANDEMIC SURGE IN
VIOLENCE MUST BE TREATED AS THE
PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS THAT IT IS
WE MUST ADDRESS ROOT CAUSES THAT
INCLUDES CHRONIC STRESS, MENTAL
ILLNESS, HOUSING, INSTABILITY,
HISTORICAL OPPRESSION AND
POVERTY. WE CANNOT GENUINELY
CLAIMED TO CARE ABOUT
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR WHILE
ENACTING LAWS THAT WE KNOW WILL
DISPROPORTIONATELY HARM THIS
POPULATION. NOR CAN WE RELY ON
RACE NEUTRAL GOOD INTENTIONS
WHEN WE KNOW THE ACTUAL IMPACT
OF OUR POLICIES IS RACE BIASED.
BECAUSE IT OFFERS NO PUBLIC
SAFETY BENEFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF
ALREADY MARGINALIZED PEOPLE. WE
ARE OPPOSED TO 83 28. WE URGE
YOUR NO VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES? AN OPPOSITION NAME
AND ORGANIZATION. GOOD MORNING,
JIM LINDBERG ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA, ALSO IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANKS.
STEPHEN RANCH HEALTH EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS
FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE, OPPOSE
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, GLENN
BACCHUS FOR THE ELLA BAKER
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN
OPPOSITION. DANICA ROAD, ARMEL
ON BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE IN
THE SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE AND
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING, ED
LITTLE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA'S
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND CRIME
SURVIVORS FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE
IN OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING
ASPEN NUNEZ, WITH THE ANTI
RECIDIVISM COALITION AND SOCIAL
CHANGE IN STRONG OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR BRYANT. IF
YOU WANT TO GO FIRST, I'M MOSTLY
JUST CONFUSED, MR CHAIR. WE WERE
TOLD THAT THE ENHANCEMENTS HAVE
BEEN STRUCK IN FUR FARMS. THAT'S
NOT ACTUALLY THE CASE, RIGHT.
THE ENHANCEMENT STILL VERY MUCH
EXISTS. THE JUDGE JUST HAS THE
DISCRETION WHETHER TO USE IT OR
NOT. YOU POINTED TO THE ANALYSIS
PRIOR LEGISLATION. SEVEN A THE
LAST SENTENCE SAYS WAS HELD IN
THE ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. TO REMOVE THE
ENHANCEMENTS AND SO WHAT WE'VE
ALSO SEEN IS THAT SINCE THE
JUDGES HAVE BEEN GIVEN THIS
DISCRETION IN 2017, THEY HAVEN'T
USED IT TO NOT ENACT
ENHANCEMENTS ON ALMOST 3000
PEOPLE THEY HAVE ADDED 6255
ENHANCEMENTS AT ABOUT THE SAME
RATE THAT THEY DID BEFORE THAT.
I GUESS IF THERE'S ANYTHING I'VE
LEARNED FROM THIS BILL COMING IS
THAT THAT BILL THAT GAVE JUDGES
THE DISCRETION DIDN'T ACTUALLY.
ALLOW THEM TO USE IT IN THE
FURTHERANCE OF JUSTICE. AND SO
THE BILLS INTENTIONS HAVEN'T
ACTUALLY LIVED OUT IN REALITY,
WHEN ENHANCEMENTS ARE BEING
APPLIED ABOUT THE SAME RATE THAT
THEY HAD, HISTORICALLY, SO I
DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF
THIS BILL. IT LOOKS LIKE A
SOLUTION TO A PROBLEM THAT ISN'T
ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN OUR
JUSTICE SYSTEM. APOLOGIZE I MAY
HAVE MISSPOKE, MR CHAIR IF IT'S
SEVEN C AND S. P 81 WENT INTO
LAW LAST YEAR. ADDING THAT I
APOLOGIZE IF I MISSPOKE. IT'S
PAGE 27 C. SB 81 WAS SIGNED LAST
YEAR REQUIRING JUDGES TO DISMISS
THE ENHANCEMENT IF IT WILL ADD
20 YEARS OR MORE TO THE
SENTENCE. I APOLOGIZE ABOUT THE
BRADFORD BILL. I'M SORRY. ARE
YOU TALKING ABOUT THE BREAD? NOT
SURE THE AUTHOR IS MR CHAIR.
IT'S SB 81. SKINNER. THAT TOOK
AWAY THE DISCRETION. THAT'S WHAT
I WAS REFERRING TO. NOTHING. I
THINK IT GAVE DISCRETION. OIL
WHAT? WE DON'T WANT TO DEBATE IT
RIGHT NOW. SEVEN SEASON THE
REPORT, MR CHAIR AS YOUR
COMMITTEE DRAFTED OKAY. GOOD.
YOU MAY FINISH MR BRYANT. I WILL
NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL.
THANK YOU, MR WEBER. YEAH. I
MEAN, I, UM ALWAYS HAVE CONCERNS
WHEN YOU'RE TAKING AWAY JUDICIAL
DISCRETION TO ADVANCE JUSTICE IN
THE COURTROOM. UM YOU KNOW, IT'S
UM. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A WHOLE
PAGE OF ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE
TOOLS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND I
THINK THIS BILL WILL DO NOTHING
MORE THAN CREATE MORE VICTIMS
BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW JUDGES IT
WILL PREVENT JUDGES FROM
ACTUALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, UM,
SENTENCING FOLKS IN A WAY THAT'S
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. SO
BECAUSE OF THAT, I WON'T BE ABLE
TO SUPPORT THE BILL. THANK YOU,
MR BARTON. IN 22 IN 2022 6000
CHILDREN WERE KILLED BY GUN
VIOLENCE. YOU DON'T NEED TO TALK
TO ME ABOUT MOTHERS IN OAKLAND.
OAKLAND HAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST
EXPERIENCE ONE OF THE HIGHEST
HOMICIDES. THAT MEANS THAT THERE
ARE VICTIMS AND PEOPLE WHO ARE
PERPETRATING. IN IN THE CITY OF
OAKLAND, SAME COMMUNITY WHEN I
TALKED TO THE MOTHERS IN
OAKLAND'S THEY'RE MOSTLY
CONCERNED. ABOUT MASS
INCARCERATION. AND THEIR SONS
AND BROTHERS. AND FATHERS. AND
MOTHERS BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM
THEM. BECAUSE OF THE
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT. THAT
ENHANCEMENTS HAVE HAD ON THEIR
COMMUNITY. TAKEN AWAY FOR YEARS
MORE. THEN THEY NEED TO BECAUSE
OF THOSE ENHANCEMENTS 80% OF THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE SENTENCED TO
STATE PRISON. OR EXPERIENCING A
LENGTHEN SENTENCE BECAUSE OF
ENHANCEMENTS. LONGER SENTENCING
DOES NOT PREVENT CRIME.
CERTAINTY OF APPREHENSION DOES.
I WOULD LOVE TO WORK WITH THE
AUTHOR. ON REALLY ERADICATING
GUN VIOLENCE. BECAUSE THE
CHILDREN AND MOTHERS OF OAKLAND
AND IN MY DISTRICT ARE DYING
BECAUSE OF THE PROLIFERATION OF
GUNS. IF YOU WANT TO DO
SOMETHING ABOUT THAT. I'M MORE
THAN HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU ON
THAT ON THIS BILL THAT SUPPORTS
AND INCREASES MASS
INCARCERATION. I CANNOT STAND
FOR THAT. I WILL BE VOTING ON
THIS BILL. THANK YOU. ANYONE
ELSE? WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST? MR.
LACKEY JUST GO REAL QUICKLY. I
JUST HAVE HER. A COMMENT BECAUSE
CLAIRE. THIS IS VERY NARROWLY
FOCUSED BILL, AND IT'S FOCUSED
ON THE MOST HEINOUS CRIMES. THAT
ACTUALLY DO SHOCK THE CONSCIENCE
AND I THINK IT'S VERY RARE THAT
THE VICTIMS OF THE SENIORS
CRIMES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
POLITICAL ASPECTS OF CUSTODY.
AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE
HONEST. ABOUT THE GRAVITY OF
THESE CRIMES. AND THE NATURE AND
THE PERMANENT DAMAGE DONE. BY
THESE PERPETRATORS AND. THIS
BILL IS DEFINITELY CALLED FOR
AND I'LL DEFINITELY BE
SUPPORTING IT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. I JUST HAVE A FEW. I'VE ONE
BIG QUESTION, CHIEF. IF A LONG
PRISON SENTENCE FOR MOST
DANGEROUS OFFENDERS HAVE AN
EFFECT ON THE CRIME RATES. YES I
BELIEVE IT WILL IF IT WAS, IN
FACT. IN EFFECT. OKAY? AND MR
SILVERMAN. IF, UH, WOULD YOU BE
WILLING TO ACCEPT ANY AMENDMENTS
IF THEY CAME? I AM MORE THAN
WILLING, MR CHAIR STAND READY TO
WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE AND ITS
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE IS
COMMITTED TO MAINTAINING THE
DISCRETION FOR JUDGES TO
EXERCISE THAT I'D BE OPEN TO
AMENDING TO REMOVE. THE
REQUIREMENT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW
THEY DON'T HAVE DISCRETION. IT
SAYS THEY SHALL DISMISS AND
ENHANCEMENT OF THE SENTENCE
RESULTS IN OVER 20 YEARS. SO IF
WE REALLY WANT TO BE SERIOUS
ABOUT JUDICIAL DISCRETION, I I'D
BE WHERE IT WILLING TO WORK WITH
THE COMMITTEE TO RESTORE THAT,
AS THE MEMBER NOTED, UM, JUDGES
HAVE BEEN, UM UH, ENFORCING THE
ENHANCEMENT. I'D BE WILLING TO
WORK ON THAT. I REALLY I JUST IF
I IF I MAY, THIS MIGHT CLOSING,
MR CHAIR. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK
OR TO IT IS HERE. IF THERE'S
OTHER THIS AND YOU WANT TO DO IT
NOW QUESTIONS AND I'LL JUST
CLOSE AT ONE TIME. THERE'S
ANYTHING ELSE IS THERE ANYTHING
ELSE? OKAY I APPRECIATE IT, MR
CHAIR. UM AND I JUST I REALLY
WANT TO JUST ADDRESS SOME OF THE
POINTS MADE, UM I THINK WE CAN
DO BOTH. WE CAN ADDRESS THE ROOT
CAUSES OF CRIME. AND THE
COMMUNITIES THAT CRIME IMPACTS
OR INDIVIDUALS BEING AFFECTED IN
CRIME AND ADMINISTER JUSTICE.
YOU HAVE TO DO BOTH. UM AND I
THINK WE CAN DO BOTH. UM THEY'RE
NOT ARBITRARY ENHANCEMENTS.
THEY'RE CHARGED AND THEY'RE
PROVEN AND FOUND GUILTY BY A
JURY OF THEIR PEERS. SO THESE
ARE NOT ARBITRARY. IT'S NOT MASS
INCARCERATION. WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT INDIVIDUAL CASES IN WHICH
YOU ARE CHARGED WITH THE MOST
HEINOUS CRIME AND YOU USE A
FIREARM TO COMMIT IT. THERE IS
NO REHABILITATION FOR SOMEBODY
WILLING TO PULL A TRIGGER.
AGAINST ANOTHER HUMAN BEING.
THAT IS NOT ALWAYS REHABILITATE
A BLE. SOMETIMES THAT'S JUST
PURE EVIL. AND WE HAVE TO LOCK
YOU UP TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF
THE COMMUNITY. SO YOU WILL NOT
DO IT AGAIN. IF YOU WANT TO TALK
ABOUT RECIDIVISM. IF YOU'RE
LOCKED UP FOR LIFE, YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO COMMIT IT AGAIN. THAT'S
100. YOU WILL NOT HAVE
RECIDIVISM. THIS IS A VERY
NARROW ISSUE AND TO DEAL WITH
THE WORST OF THE WORST. UH MR
CHAIR, I WE ARE NOT INTERESTED
IN MASS INCARCERATION. THAT'S
NOT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING THE
WORST OF THE WORST OFF THE
STREET WHO ARE WILLING TO SHOOT
A POLICE OFFICER IN THE FACE
LIKE DEPUTY CORDERO IN MY COUNTY
WAS SHOT BY A THIRD STRIKER, WHO
WAS LET OUT ON BAIL SHOT IN THE
FACE. THAT'S NOT A PERSON WE CAN
REHABILITATE. SO I HEAR IT. I
APPRECIATE I WANT TO WORK WITH
THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. I
CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THE SAFETY OF
OUR COMMUNITY. AS I'M SURE THE
MEMBERS HERE TOO, AND SO WE CAN
WORK TOGETHER, UM TO RESTORE THE
DISCRETION PROPERLY TO THE
JUDGES. I WELCOME THAT, UH, MR
CHAIR AND IN CLOSING, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
OKAY AND THERE'S SOME THINGS WE
PROBABLY NEED TO JUST JUST
CLARIFY, BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT SB
6 20 BRADFORD CHAPTER 682
STATUTE. 2017 ALLOWS THE COURT
IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE TO
STRIKE OR DISMISS A FIRE EARNING
HALF MINT. WHICH OTHERWISE AS A
STATE PRISON TERM OF 34 OR 10,
YEARS OF 56, OR 10 YEARS,
DEPENDING ON THE FIREARM OR
STATE PRISON TERM OF 10 YEARS,
20 YEARS OR 25 YEARS, DEPENDING
ON THE UNDERLYING OFFENSE AND
MANNER OF USE. UM THAT'S THE
BILL I VOTED ON, AND THAT KIND
OF GIVE THE JUDGES A LITTLE MORE
DISCRETION BECAUSE BEFORE IT WAS
AUTOMATIC THAT THEY WOULD UM
JUST SENTENCED PEOPLE BECAUSE
THEY FELT LIKE JUDGES SHOULDN'T
USE PRONOUNS. BUT JUSTICE FELT
LIKE THEY HAD NO RECOURSE. THEY
JUST HAD TO DO IT BECAUSE THE
LAW SAID IT AND WE WORKED VERY
HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
LOOKED AT EVERY INDIVIDUAL CASE.
THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE'S TALKING
ABOUT. WE DEFINITELY DO FEEL FOR
THE TRAGEDIES. WHAT HAPPENED TO
THE SHERIFF'S IN RIVERSIDE?
SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED. WE
NEED TO DO EVERY THING WE CAN TO
MAKE SURE THAT ANYONE IT'S NOT
MURDERED FOR ANY REASON, AND I'M
PRETTY SURE YOUR WITNESSES MAY
HAVE A RACE BASE OR RACE NEUTRAL
ATTITUDE. BUT IN YOUR COUNTY
RIGHT NOW. YOUR SHERIFF. IS
UNDER A CIVIL RIGHTS PROBE. AND
WHAT THE MEMBERS OF THIS GROUP
IS SAYING THAT YOUR LAW BYE. WE
MET THIS GENTLEMAN. THIS LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MAY BE
ABUSED. BY OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS. Tð. AGAIN FILL THE
PRISONS WITH BLACK AND BROWN
FOLK. CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.
THAT'S BEING INSTITUTED BY
FORMER COLLEAGUE OF MINE HERE IN
THE ASSEMBLY WHO'S NOW THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL. UM, I TAKE
VERY SERIOUSLY. AND SO WRAPPED
IN THAT WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT
WHAT'S GOING ON. IN. FOR
EXAMPLE, IN YOUR COUNTY
RIVERSIDE, UM TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE DON'T ENABLE INDIVIDUALS WHO
MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME
DEDICATION. YOU HAVE TO MAKE
SURE THAT THAT BLACK AND BROWN
FOLK ARE NOT UNJUSTLY.
PROSECUTED SO UNFORTUNATELY, I
CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, UM I
UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
BUT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT
WE SEE WHAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING
WITH. AGAIN. YOUR NEW YOUR
FRESHMAN. UM A LOT OF THESE LAWS
THAT CAME IN. I WISH YOU COULD
HAVE HEARD A LOT OF THAT
TESTIMONY. WHY WE HAVE THESE
THINGS NOW BECAUSE WE GOT HERE
TOO LONG. FOR ME FOR A LONG 10
YEAR PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO MAKE
THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OR JUST UM
AND WE'RE GETTING THERE AND WE
CAN TWERK TWEAK SOME MORE THINGS
. BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK, FOR
THE MOST PART, GIVING JUDGES
DISCRETION IS REALLY, REALLY
IMPORTANT AND THE FACT THAT
THAT, UM LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
OTHERS ARE TRYING TO TAKE AWAY
DISCRETION FROM JUDGES TELLS ME
THAT MAYBE THEY ARE STARTING TO
GO INTO THE RIGHT. DIRECTION OF
LOOKING AT THE INDIVIDUAL AND
NOT JUST DOING A BLANKET. WE'RE
JUST GONNA LOCK EVERYBODY UP AND
THROW AWAY THE KEY. THERE ARE
MOTION AND THE SEX. ON A B 3 TO
28 BY SOME MEMBER SLE. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASSED THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE JOAN
SAWYER, JOHN SAWYER. NO, ELONIS
BONTA, BUT TO KNOW BRIAN BRIAN,
NO. LAKI LAKI. AYE, ORTEGA OR
TAKE A NOTE. SANTIAGO SANTIAGO
NÓ. THE BERBER. BRUNO. THAT
MEASURE PALE. THANK YOU, MR
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
RECONSIDERATION. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, OBJECT. Tð
RECONSIDERATION. YES, THERE IS.
THEN WE'LL TAKE IT TO A VOTE. ON
RECONSIDERATION FOR A B 3 28 THE
MOTION BY MS PONTA. IS THERE A
SECOND? JOHN SAWYER. SO YOU'RE
NOT VOTING COLONIES? COLONIES. I
BONTA. LANTERN UP VOTING FOR
RECONSIDERATION OR NO I MEAN, NO
FOR RECONSIDERATION. OKAY, THANK
YOU. EXCUSE ME. BOND TO KNOW FOR
RECONSIDERATION. BRIAN BRIAN,
NOT VOTING LACKEY LACKEY. I
ORTEGA ORTEGA NOT VOTING.
SANTIAGO SANTIAGO NOT VOTING,
ZABAR. NOT VOTING
RECONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION
FAILS. THANK YOU, SIR. I THOUGHT
THERE WAS A COMMON COURTESY.
OKAY? I SAID, DON'T. OH I DON'T
NUMBER 12 83 60 GIBSON.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, MR
GIBSON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING
ME TO PRESENT THIS BILL BEFORE
YOU. UH THIS IS MY FIRST BILL
THIS YEAR COMING BEFORE THIS
COMMITTEE AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL
ASSEMBLY BILL 3 60, WHICH AIMS
TO BAN THE TERM OF EXCITED
DELIRIUM. AS A LEGITIMATE
DIAGNOSIS OR CAUSE OF DEATH ON
THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THOSE
WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES WHILE
IN POLICE CUSTODY. EXCITED TO
LAYER DELIRIUM TERM IS USED TO
DESCRIBE MANY TERRORIST IX SUCH
AS EXCITABILITY. PARANOIA
EXTREME AGGRESSION. PHYSICAL
VIOLENCE AND A PARENT TO IMMUNE
TO PAIN. THIS TERM, EXCITED TO
REALLY, UH, EXCITED. YOU KNOW
WHAT I'M SAYING? HEY I'M EXCITED
TO REALLY, UM AH HAS BEEN USED
TO CATCH TO BE A CATCH ALL FOR
DEATHS INVOLVING POLICE OFFICERS
RESTRAINTS WHEN INDIVIDUALS ARE
IN CUSTODY, HOWEVER, THE
MAJORITY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS
HAVE DIED FROM EXCITED DELIRIUM.
AND HAVE BEEN BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICANS, MEXICANS OR LATINOS
AND OTHER PEOPLE OF COLOR SUCH
AS ANGELO PINTO, FILIPINO
AMERICAN IN 2000. AND 10 REPORT
HAS DONE HAS BEEN DONE ON DEATHS
AND, WELL PLEASE OFFICERS AND
INDIVIDUALS BEEN PLACED IN
CUSTODY AND AS USED EXCITED
DELIRIUM THAT HAS BEEN FOUND
THAT 166 REPORTED DEATHS. 56%
WERE AFRICAN AMERICAN AND ALSO
LATINOS. 56% OUT OF 166 AND
ADDITIONALLY, REPORT IS DONE IN
TEXAS FROM 2005 TO 2017
DISCOVERY THAT MORE THAN ONE AND
SIX DEATHS IN POLICE CUSTODY
WERE LINKED TO EXCITED DELIRIUM
. I NEED THAT TO SEEK IN FOR A
MOMENT, WE CONTINUE TO SEE THE
IMPACT OF THESE TURNS TODAY WITH
THE DEPTHS OF ANGELO QUINTO.
MANY OF YOU REMEMBER ANGELA
KINTU ARE BROUGHT THE NAME AND
THE CASE BEFORE YOU LAST YEAR,
AND YOU VOTED THIS BILL OUT, AND
THAT WAS ASSEMBLY BILL FOR 90.
AH DEALING WITH POSITIONAL FIX
CIA. BUT IT GOES ON. ELIJAH
MCCLAIN, AGRO AGORA, UM COLORADO
AND MANY OTHER COUNTLESS
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE LOST THEIR
LIVES AND THE DEATH CERTIFICATE
SHOWS EXCITED DELIRIUM AND I CAN
LIST ALL THOSE INDIVIDUALS
NAMES, BUT YOU WILL BE HERE PAST
LUNCH IF DOING SO IN 2020.
ANGELO CAME TO A FILIPINO
AMERICAN. NAVY VETERAN. OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
DEALING WITH A MENTAL CRISIS.
STOP BREATHING. WHEN HE WAS ON
THE FLOOR. AND ANY ATTACK,
POLICE OFFICERS PLACED THEIR
KNEE ON HIS NECK. FOR FIVE
MINUTES. ON THE FLOOR. IN FRONT
OF THE WITNESS THAT I SIT NEXT
TO TODAY. AND BECAUSE OF THAT
SITUATION I INTRODUCED AND WROTE
ASSEMBLY BILL 4 90 BANNING SUCH
TECHNIQUES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THAT BILL WAS SIGNED
INTO LAW BUT ANGELO CUENTOS CASE
IT TOOK EIGHT MONTHS. AFTER THE
DEATH FOR CONDRA ACOSTA COUNTY
TO ISSUE A REPORT BEFORE BEFORE
THE AUTOPSY WAS EVEN COMPLETED.
THE OFFICIAL DEATH CAUSE OF
DEATH. ANGELO KETO WAS A TRIBUTE
TO GUESS WHAT EXCITED DELIRIUM
SYNDROME. EXCITED DELIRIUM
SYNDROME IS NOT ACCEPT IT. BY
CERTAIN. WELL AUTHORITATIVE
ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION HAS
DEBUNKED, IT SAID IT DOESN'T
EXIST. THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC
ASSOCIATION SAID IT DOESN'T
EXIST. THE WORLD HEALTH
ORGANIZATION AND THE LIST GOES
ON AND ON IN ADDITIONALLY THERE
IS NO RECOGNITION OF THE
DEFINITION. THERE IS NO
DIAGNOSIS. NO THING TO VALIDATE
THIS TERM TO EVEN BEING USED IN
THIS COUNTRY. YET THE TERM IS
STILL BEING USED TO EXPLAIN THE
BIO MEDICAL EXAMINERS. BY
BANNING THIS TERM. IT WILL ALLOW
US TO FOCUS ON THE UNDERLYING
FACTOR THAT CONTRIBUTES TO
INDIVIDUALS ACTUAL CAUSE OF
DEATH. UH, I WANT TO INTRODUCE
MY WITNESS, MISS SANDRA QUINTO,
UM COLLINS, THE MOTHER OF ANGELO
QUINTO, WHO LOST HIS LIFE. AT
THE HANDS OF POLICE OFFICERS
DURING A POSITIONAL FIXING TO
AND THE DEATH CERTIFICATE SHOWED
THAT IT WAS EXCITED DELIRIUM AND
THE SAME TOPIC THAT WE'RE HERE
TODAY THAT ASSEMBLY BUILT 3 90
WISH TO CORRECT IN THE YOU HAVE
FIVE MINUTES AND I MOVED THE
BILL. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
SHERIFF JONES, SAWYER AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. MY NAME IS
CASSANDRA COLLINS, ANGELA K¾T
MOTHER. THANK YOU. DECEMBER 23RD
OF 2020. ANTIQUE PLEASE
ASPHYXIATED MY SON, ANGELO. TO
DEATH IN FRONT OF ME. ON MY
BEDROOM FLOOR. ANGELES HAVING A
MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS. AT THAT
TIME. BUT WHAT'S NOT VIOLENT,
HAD NO WEAPONS. AND WAS NOT
UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF COMMON
SUBSTANCES OF ABUSE. THE POLICE
OFFICERS STILL RESTRAINED HIM
EXCESSIVELY. KNEELED ON THE BACK
OF HIS NECK. FOR AT LEAST 4.5
MINUTES. AFTER. I ASKED THEM IF
HE WAS ASLEEP. THE QUANTA COSTA
COUNTY SHERIFF'S CORNER. LACKING
TRANSPARENCY. ACCOUNTABILITY.
OBJECTIVITY. AND INDEPENDENCE,
RULED HIS CAUSE OF DEATH AS DUE
TO EXCITED DELIRIUM. THE
SYNDROME IS THE BANKED AND
SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS. THAT HAS
BEEN WIDELY DISCREDITED BY
GROUPS LIKE THE AMERICAN MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION. AND MORE. IT IS
USED ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IN CASES
OF LOW ENFORCEMENT RELATED
DEATHS. THAT INVOLVES EXCESSIVE
FORCE. WHY DO YOU USE OF TASERS?
IN OUR CASE IN ANGELA'S CASE, HE
DID NOT EVEN EXHIBIT THE
SYMPTOMS. THEY USUALLY CLAIM
POINT TO THIS DIAGNOSIS. OUR
CASE IS NOT UNIQUE. EXCITED
DELIRIUM. USED TO OFTEN. TO
COVER UP LOW LAW ENFORCEMENT
WRONGDOING. THIS HAS TO CHANGE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
DANICA ROAD, ARMEL ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. LESLIE CALDWELL,
HOUSTON ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. LITTLE ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
KARMA NICOLE COX ON BEHALF OF A
CEO YOU CALIFORNIA ACTION AND
SUPPORT ROBERT COLLINS, FATHER,
ANGELO QUINTO IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. BELEK INTO COLLINS,
SISTER VANJA LOOKING DON'T
SUPPORT THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION? ANY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. SEEING
NONE OF BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MR BRYANT.
ABOUT MR WEBER. I WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR THIS BILL. IT'S A
GREAT BILL. IF YOU'RE LOOKING
FOR CO AUTHORS, PLEASE LET US
KNOW. BE HAPPY TO JOIN YOU IN
THIS FIGHT. THANK YOU TO THE
FAMILY FOR YOUR ADVOCACY AND FOR
YOUR WORK, YOU ARE MAKING A
DIFFERENCE FOR ALL OF
CALIFORNIA. SO THANK YOU. BANTA.
THANK YOU FOR THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING FORWARD THIS BILL. I
JUST WANT TO ALSO JUST THINK THE
KEITH OF FAMILY ANGELOS FAMILY
FOR CONTINUING TO COME HERE AND
FOR TURNING YOUR PAIN INTO
SOMETHING. THAT WILL PREVENT
OTHERS FROM SUFFERING IN THIS
WAY. I'M SO HAPPY TO SEE YOU.
GROWING. UH AND I'M SO SAD THAT
I HAVE TO SEE YOU. AGAIN IN THIS
CONTEXT. IT IS OVER. MISKIN TOE
. I JUST WANTED TO SAY HOW SORRY
I AM TO HEAR. I'M SUCH A
HORRIFIC EXPERIENCE IN YOUR
FAMILY AND YOUR SON AND MR
GIBSON. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL WILL BE SUPPORTING IT
TODAY. THANK YOU. MR LACKEY.
YEAH I FEEL VERY AWKWARD IN THIS
PARTICULAR MOMENT JUST BECAUSE I
KNOW THE SENSITIVITIES. OF WHAT
TOOK PLACE. VERY TRAGIC, VERY
TRAGIC IN MY SYMPATHIES ARE FOR
YOU HAVE HEARD YOUR STORY
MULTIPLE TIMES. AND I JUST THINK
IT'S VERY DANGEROUS FOR US TO
RESPOND POLITICALLY. TO MEDICAL
DETERMINATION. UM I THINK
THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO DO IT. AND
I FIND THIS TO BE A VERY
DIFFICULT DECISION FOR ME. I'M
NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW I'M GOING
TO ADDRESS IT, BUT I THOUGHT
THERE'S JUST A BIG DANGER AND
TELLING THE MEDICAL PROFESSION
HOW TO DO THEIR BUSINESS. THANK
YOU. ANY YES. I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY, SO WE JUST HEARD FROM
TESTIMONY AND FROM THE AUTHOR
THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT
RECOGNIZED. UH EXCITED. DELIRIUM
IS NOT ACTUALLY RECOGNIZED BY
THE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OR
OTHERS. SO I'M CURIOUS, MR LUCKY
ABOUT THAT CONCERN. YEAH, THAT
THAT IS SOME OF THE MEDICAL
PROFESSION. CERTAINLY. AND
THAT'S WHAT MAKES US VERY
DIFFICULT. I UNDERSTAND THE
ADVOCACY AND UNDERSTAND WHERE
IT'S COMING FROM, AND I'M NOT
SAYING IT'S MISPLACED, BUT I AM
SAYING THAT I THINK IT'S VERY
DANGEROUS THAT WE TELL PEOPLE IN
THIS PROFESSION HOW THEY ARE TO
COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. UM
AND I FIND THAT TO BE VERY
TROUBLING. YOU MAKE CLOTHES, MR
GIBSON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND
THANK, UM EVERYONE WHO HAS
SPOKEN THUS FAR. UM A SIMILAR
BILL 3 60. WILL PLACE
ACCOUNTABILITY ON THE ACTION OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE MEDICAL
EXAMINER'S OFFICE. UM ULTIMATELY
, THIS BILL WILL PROVIDE CLARITY
AND CLOSURE ON THE CAUSE OF
DEATH OF LOVED ONES. ASSEMBLY
BILL 3 60 IS SUPPORTED BY THE
CAMP. THE CAMPAIGN ZERO
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC, UM DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION LR BAKERS. UM CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. AND IF I MAY
JUST FOR A FEW MOMENTS THAT WE
HAVE CREDIBLE ORGANIZATIONS THAT
I NAMED, WHICH IS A WORLD HEALTH
ORGANIZATION, WHICH IS
ABSOLUTELY CREDIBLE, CREDIBLE OF
THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC
ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS THE
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, UM
, AND IF THEY DON'T EMBRACE OR
HAVE GIVEN A DEFINITION OR
VALIDATED SUCH TERM TO BE USED.
WHY ARE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S
OFFICE ONLY USING THIS TERM WHEN
PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED IN CUSTODY
AND DIE IN CUSTODY, AND THAT'S
ALL WE'RE SAYING? WHEN YOU FIX
AS A MEDICAL OR FORENSIC
PATHOLOGIST ON PROVING
SCIENTIFICALLY ON HOW INDIVIDUAL
DIE? THAT SHOULD BE. IT SHOULD
BE NO QUESTION. BUT IF WE BACKED
UP BY FACT, IF SOMEONE COMMITS
SUICIDE, IT'S DRUGS OR GUNSHOT
WOUND. IT'S GONNA REPAIR APPEAR
ON THE AUTOPSY REPORT, BUT
EXCITED TO REALLY, UH, EXCITED
TO THAT. I CAN'T EVEN SAY IT.
WELL EXCITED DELIRIUM CANNOT BE
PROVEN OR VALIDATED AT ALL IN
ANY MEDICAL GROUP WHATSOEVER IN
THE COUNTRY, AND SO WE SHOULD
NOT BE USING IT. MEDICAL
EXAMINER'S OFFICE SHOULD NOT BE
USING IT AND ALSO UM, AUTOPSIES
SHOULD NOT CONCLUDE THAT THIS IS
THE CAUSE OF DEATH. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK WHEN I VOTE.
THANK YOU, MR GIBSON. AND, UM.
YOU KNOW THE FACT THAT THERE'S
NO OPPOSITION. AND THAT IF
MEDICAL EXAMINERS OR FORENSIC
SCIENTISTS OR WHOEVER REALLY
BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THIS IS A
TERM OR A PROBLEM OR SOMETHING
THAT SHOULD BE ON. THE DEATH
CERTIFICATE. WE WERE GOT
SOMETHING IN WRITING. IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN HERE TO PROTEST. SIT.
NOT SEEING THAT HERE. TELLS ME
THAT MAYBE THIS TERMINOLOGY IS
PROBABLY SOMETHING, UM, THAT
CAN'T EITHER CAN'T BE VALIDATED
OR SHOULDN'T BE USED AT ALL. UM
AND SO I THINK I ASK FOR A
MOTION TO APPROVE IT. IS THERE A
SECOND? YES. ON A B 3 60 BY SOME
MEMBER GIBSON. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASSED TO THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE, JOHN SHORT. EXCUSE
ME, JOHN SAWYER. SAWYER I ELONIS
. I WANT TO. I WANT TO I BRIAN,
BRIAN, I LACKEY LACKING, NOT
VOTING, ORTEGA. ORTEGA I
SANTIAGO SANTIAGO EYES UBER.
SUPER AYE. MEASURE THAT MEASURE
PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. MR ALLEN EASE. ELONIS
ITEMS NINE AND 11 A B 3 TO 5 AND
A B 355. AND THEN WE'LL. I MEAN,
I THINK WE CAN GO TO.
OH, I JUST SAW IT.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR.
THIS IS WHAT IT'S LIKE TO SIT
DOWN ON ON THIS END. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MY FELLOW
MEMBERS. MR CHAIR. LET ME START
OFF BY THANKING YOUR OFFICE AND
YOUR STAFF. AH! AND THE
COMMITTEE STAFF AS WELL FOR
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE ON THIS
VERY IMPORTANT SUBJECT. I HAVE
FOUND OUR CONVERSATIONS
CONSTRUCTIVE. ENLIGHTENING AND,
MOST IMPORTANTLY, PRODUCTIVE.
FELLOW MEMBERS. I HAVE HEARD YOU
AND I HAVE LISTENED CAREFULLY TO
YOUR POINTS OF VIEWS OVER THE
FIRST TWO COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND
INCLUDING THIS SESSION AS WELL.
I DON'T THINK IT IS A SECRET TO
ANYONE HERE THAT I HAVE REAL
CONCERNS ABOUT THE REAL DEFICITS
, I BELIEVE EXISTS WITH
PROPOSITION 47. WHILE
PROPOSITION 47 HAS INDEED
ACCOMPLISHED THE GOALS ITS
SUPPORTERS HAD SET FORTH. I DO
ALSO BELIEVE IT HAS HAD NEGATIVE
CONSEQUENCES OR SEVERELY HARMING
RETAILERS IN BIG AND SMALL.
ACROSS THE STATE. THESE
RETAILERS ARE BEARING THE BURDEN
OF INCREASING RETAIL THEFTS.
FOLLOWING OUR HEARING LAST WEEK
, I MET WITH LARGE AND SMALL
RETAILERS IN MY DISTRICT. THEY
ALL SAID TO ME THE SAME THING.
EVERY ONE OF THEM LOOKED ME IN
THE EYE AND SAID HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, THE PROBLEM IS
GETTING WORSE AND NOT BETTER. MR
CHAIRMAN. I ALSO HEARD YOUR
WORDS LAST WEEK ABOUT RETAIL
THEFT LAW THAT YOU PASSED SOME
YEARS AGO. I IMMEDIATELY
INSTRUCTED MY STAFF TO BRIEF ME
ON THAT LEGISLATION AND FOUND
MYSELF ASKING WHY THAT LAW WAS
NOT BEING WIDELY ENFORCED ACROSS
THE STATE. I DON'T KNOW THE
ANSWER YET, MR CHAIRMAN, BUT
HAVING FINISHED MY 20, PLUS
YEARS, CAREERS AS A SHERIFF'S
DEPUTY AND SERGEANT, MOST
RECENTLY IN THE ASSIGNED TO THE
COURT SERVICES DIVISION, ISIS
SAID. I SUSPECT THAT IT'S
BECAUSE THE SYSTEM REMAINS
BACKLOGGED AND OVERWHELMED. I AM
BETTING THAT DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICES ARE HAVING TO TRIAGE,
HIGHER CRIMES OVER MISDEMEANORS
LIKE RETAIL THEFT. AND THE
RESULT IS OPEN SEASON ON
RETAILERS IN CALIFORNIA. TO GET
SOME INSIGHT ON THIS VERY TOPIC
. I HAVE INVITED STANISLAUS
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MR JEFF
LAZARO HERE TOMORROW, RIGHT TO
TESTIFY WITH ME TODAY. MR
CHAIRMAN AND FILL THE MEMBERS. I
MAY BE NEW TO THE BODY. AND THIS
LINE OF WORK, BUT I CAN ALSO
COUNT TO 41. 2, 21 AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY TO OUR BUSINESS
TODAY TO FIVE. I WAS UNDER NO
ILLUSIONS WHEN I INTRODUCED THIS
BILL BACK IN DECEMBER THAT IT
WAS NOT LIKELY TO WIN THE
MAJORITY SUPPORT. I AM PROUD.
BUT THIS BILL PRIOR TO MY
ATTENDING AMENDING THE BILL HAD
GARNERED BIPARTISAN AND
BICAMERAL SUPPORT. I PROMISED MY
CONSTITUENTS I WOULD WORK ON
THEIR CONCERNS WITH PROPOSITION
47. AND I INTRODUCED THIS BILL
BECAUSE I REALLY WANTED TO HAVE
SERIOUS CONVERSATIONS AND BRING
ATTENTION TO THE VOICES OF
BUSINESSES, BIG AND SMALL.
ACROSS THE STATE WHO ARE ASKING
FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND RELIEF
FROM THIS BURDEN OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. IN EVERY PRESS
CONFERENCE IN EVERY TOWN HALL.
EVERY CHANCE I GET TO SPEAK ON
THIS ISSUE, I HAVE SAID IF
THERE'S BIPARTISAN GROUND TO BE
FOUND I WOULD DEFINITELY TAKE
IT. TODAY I AM PLEASED TO SIT
HERE BEFORE YOU FOR MY FIRST
TIME TO SAY I BELIEVE THE RESULT
OF HONEST AND SERIOUS
DISCUSSIONS HAVE NOW PUT US
FIRMLY ON HONORABLE AND
REASONABLE, BIPARTISAN GROUND TO
GET REAL ANSWERS TO SOME OF
THESE OPEN QUESTIONS. THE
AMENDMENTS TO HB 335. WHICH
WOULD ASK THE LITTLE HOOVER
COMMISSION TO COMPREHENSIVELY
REVIEW THE QUESTIONS THAT
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE AND
THIS LEGISLATURE HAVE HAD FROM
BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE AND TO
REPORT BACK WITH THOSE ANSWERS.
SO WE MAY WORK TOGETHER TO
GENERATE MORE. JUST LAWS AND
BETTER POLICIES FOR ALL OF OUR
CONSTITUENTS. I WILL PROBABLY
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS THAT
HAVE COME AS A RESULT OF OPEN
AND HONEST CONVERSATIONS. AND
AGAIN WITH ME AGAIN TODAY IS DHF
LIKE GERALD FROM THE STANISLAUS
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT
HIS EXPERIENCES WITH PROP 47 HIS
PERSPECTIVES AS AN ELECTED D A
HERE IN CALIFORNIA. YEP. FIVE
MINUTES TOTAL. THANK YOU AND
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO MY HONOR TO
BE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY. THANK
YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE
AND TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT IN
SUPPORT OF A B 335 AND THE
PROPOSED LITTLE HOOVER
COMMISSIONS STUDY. NOW THAT
WE'VE HAD THE BENEFIT OF TIME
AND EXPERIENCE WITH PROPOSITION
, 47 SEEMS APPROPRIATE TO
EXAMINE THOSE RESULTS AND
EVALUATE PROPOSITION 47
IDENTIFYING THE NEEDS FOR
LEGISLATIVE FIXES. PERFECT
EXAMPLE OF THIS CAN BE FOUND IN
THE ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
LEGISLATION, AND THAT WAS A
PERFECT EXAMPLE OF IDENTIFYING
AND NEED AND NARROWLY TAILORING
A LEGISLATIVE REMEDY TO THE
RETAIL THEFT PROBLEM THAT WE
WERE SEEING THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA AND MR CHAIR. I THANK
YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, AND
THAT UM, MY OFFICE IS UTILIZED
THE STATUTE TO PROTECT
BUSINESSES AND THEIR LIVELIHOODS
AND TO PROSECUTE DEFENDANTS THAT
WILL REPEATEDLY STEALING FROM
THESE BUSINESSES, CAUSING
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN LOSSES.
AND THESE AREN'T YOUR TYPICAL
SHOPLIFTERS. WE WHO WE OFTEN
SUCCESSFULLY DIVERT INTO
PROGRAMS AND NEVER SEE AGAIN IN
THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
THESE ARE ORGANIZED GROUPS
TARGETING RETAILERS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE, DECIMATING
INVENTORIES AND IMPACTING THE
RETAILER'S ABILITY TO REMAIN IN
BUSINESS. LIKE MOST PROSECUTING
OFFICES, WE MUST ALLOCATE OUR
LIMITED RESOURCES TO ADDRESS THE
MOST PRESSING PUBLIC SAFETY
NEEDS. PROPOSITION 47 HAS
INCREASED THE NUMBER OF OFFENSES
THAT QUALIFY AS MISDEMEANORS. AS
MANY MISDEMEANOR OFFENSES
DIRECTLY IMPACT THE QUALITY OF
LIFE IN OUR COMMUNITIES. WE
CONTINUE TO COMMIT SIGNIFICANT
RESOURCES TO ADDRESS THOSE
OFFENSES AND USE A VARIETY OF
PROGRAMS TO REHABILITATE AND
DETER, INCLUDING PRE AND POST
FILING DIVERSION. EVEN WITH
THESE EFFECTIVE AND NOVEL
SOLUTIONS ARE COURTHOUSE HAS TWO
DEDICATED MISDEMEANOR COURTROOMS
WITH DISCUSSIONS TO OPEN A
THIRD. ARE MISDEMEANOR ATTORNEYS
CARRY TREMENDOUSLY LARGE
CASELOADS, AND WE CONTINUE TO
ADD MISDEMEANOR ATTORNEYS TO OUR
STAFF TO SPREAD OUT THE WORK. AT
TIMES WE HAVE USED MORE SENIOR
ATTORNEYS TO ASSIST WITH THE
MISDEMEANOR CASELOAD. THIS IS
NOT IDEAL AS IT PULLS ARE FELONY
ATTORNEYS AWAY FROM THE FELONY
CASES THAT THEY'RE TASKED WITH
HANDLING. BOTTOM LINE IS THAT
MISDEMEANOR CASE LOADS EXCEED
OUR ANY REASONABLE CAPACITY OR
ANY SUSTAINABLE CAPACITY TO
HANDLE. I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF
THIS BODY'S EFFORTS TO FACT FIND
AND DEVELOP SOLUTIONS TO ASSIST
OUR RETAILERS IN OUR COMMUNITIES
AS WELL AS PROVIDED CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM, THE LEGAL
FRAMEWORK AND RESOURCES NEEDED
TO WORK FOR EVERYONE. ENGAGING
THE LITTLE WHOEVER COMMISSIONED
TO CONDUCT REVIEWS. AN IDEAL WAY
TO SUPPORT THIS BODY IS CRITICAL
WORK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS LAURIE HOFF. I'M I'M NOT AN
ELECTED. I'M JUST ALIGN DEPUTY,
UH, WITH THE SAN DIEGO DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION. I ALSO AM
HERE, UM, WITH THE STANDING
AGAINST CRIME, AND I'M ALSO
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE C D. A
WERE ALSO IN SUPPORT OF A B 335
. I THINK AS PROSECUTORS IN SAN
DIEGO, WE'VE ALSO SEEN SOME OF
THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF PROP 47
OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. UM
WE'VE SEEN THE VICTIMIZATION OF
COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES. ACROSS
THE STATE, BUT ALSO IN SAN
DIEGO. WE'VE SEEN DAMAGE TO
STORE FRANCE. WE'VE SEEN
VANDALISM ROBBERIES. UM AND
WE'VE SEEN CITY CENTERS THAT ARE
NOT SAFE ANYMORE. UM NOT TO
MENTION THE LOSS THAT HAS BEEN
MENTIONED TO BUSINESSES
THEMSELVES. WE'VE SEEN ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT, WHICH YOU'VE ALSO
SOUGHT TO ADDRESS, BUT I THINK,
UM HAS COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF
SOME OF THE IMPACTS OF PROP 47
WHEN INDIVIDUALS ORGANIZED TO,
UM. STEAL FROM STORES IN A
MASSIVE AND ORGANIZED WAY. THE
SAN DIEGO DÍAS OFFICE, ACTUALLY,
UM CAME TOGETHER TO WORK WITH
CHP WHEN OTHER CITIES COULDN'T
PROSECUTE AND DID PROSECUTE
ORGANIZED, RESET RETAIL AFTER
ACROSS THE STATE. UM AND I ALSO
SEE THOSE THOSE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT BEING ABLE
TO GET INDIVIDUALS INTO THOSE
DIVERTED PROGRAMS, THE TREATMENT
PROGRAMS THAT WERE JUST
MENTIONED. I THINK THAT'S A ONE
OF THE SORT OF UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES OF PROP 47 THAT WE
NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT.
OVERALL I THINK THIS IS A
DISCUSSION THAT'S WORTH
CONTINUING, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE
SUPPORTING 83 35. AND WE'D ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT AS WELL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES AND EXCUSE ME
AND SUPPORT OF THE 335. SEEING
NONE ANY WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. KARMA NICOLE COX ON
BEHALF OF AXIAL YOU CALIFORNIA
ACTION REMOVED, WITHDRAWING OUR
OPPOSITION IN LIGHT OF THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. ELLA BAKER
CENTER, WITHDRAWS ITS
OPPOSITION. CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION WITHDRAWS
OUR OPPOSITION. LITTLE ON BEHALF
OF CALIFORNIA'S FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE. WITHDRAW THIS
OPPOSITION AND IN LIGHT OF THE
AUTHOR'S AMENDMENTS, AND WE
REMAIN CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC.
JIM LINDBERG FRIENDS COMMITTEE
ON LEGISLATION OF CALIFORNIA
WITHDRAWING OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. NOW BRING IT. OH, MR
ORTEGA. BRING IT BACK FIRST. UM
I JUST WANT TO THANK MY
COLLEAGUE ELONIS FOR HIS
THOUGHTFUL AND BALANCED APPROACH
TO THIS ISSUE, YOU KNOW, AS WE
DISCUSSED LAST WEEK, WE'RE NOT
INTERESTED IN, UM YOU KNOW,
FILLING OUR PRISONS BACK UP.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THIS
COMMITTEE AND THE CHAIR HAS
WORKED ON. VERY FOR VERY LONG
THOUGHT TIME AND PUT A LOT OF
THOUGHT AND EFFORT. HOWEVER WE
ARE HEARING FROM OUR SMALL
BUSINESSES THEIR RETAIL DEATH.
IS ON THE RIGHT. SO I LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND
I MARSHALL ALSO CAUTIOUSLY
AFTERNOON AND APPRECIATE YOUR
THOUGHTFULNESS AND WORKING WITH
THE COMMITTEE AND MAKING THOSE
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. RIGHT RESPONSES. I WANT TO
THANK OUR COLLEAGUE FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. MR ALLEN EASE. UM
DESPITE QUITE FRANKLY THAT
TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES HERE
, I THINK YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT
TRACK OF THE SECOND WITNESS. YOU
ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK IN MAKING
US TAKE A GOOD HARD LOOK USING
DATA AND BEING INFORMED TO
UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT.
UNFORTUNATELY YOU HAD A WITNESS
WHO DECIDED TO ENTER INTO
CAUSALITY SPACE. UH AROUND PROP
47 THAT THAT WEAKENED THE
ARGUMENT. I THINK THAT YOU WERE
TRYING TO MAKE AND IN THE
LEGISLATION THAT YOU ARE MOVING
FORWARD, I WILL BE SUPPORTING
THIS BILL IN UH, IN CONCURRENCE
WITH YOUR INTENTION TO BE ABLE
TO HAVE US BE DATA INFORMED IN
OUR DECISION MAKING AROUND
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT,
CERTAINLY AN ISSUE THAT IS OF
CONCERN IN MY DISTRICT AS WELL.
I CAUTION YOU MOVING FORWARD,
HOWEVER, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
WITNESSES THAT YOU BRING FORWARD
ACTUALLY ARE SPEAKING TO THE
NATURE OF YOUR LEGISLATION, AND
THAT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF IT.
TAKE IT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE?
YEAH. UM SO WE'VE WE'VE GOT A
THING HERE IN THE LEGISLATURE.
WE CALL IT AN AUTHOR PROBLEM.
AND IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE AN
AUTHOR PROBLEM AND THE PROBLEM
IS THAT YOU ARE DOING A REALLY
GOOD JOB. OF BEING INCREDIBLY
THOUGHTFUL. WITH YOUR FIRST
LEDGE PACKAGE AND DOING THE
RECONSIDERATION WORK PRIOR TO
THE CHAIR TELLING YOU YOU NEED
TO BECAUSE YOUR RECOGNIZING UM,
THE SPACES WHERE YOU CAN BUILD
COLLABORATIVELY. THERE ARE SOME
THINGS ABOUT THIS THAT I DON'T
LIKE. AH! BUT IN THE SPIRIT OF
THAT COLLABORATION AND IN
RESPECT TO YOUR LEADERSHIP AND
THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE
HEADED. I WILL BE SUPPORTING
THIS AS WELL. THANK YOU. WHAT
ELSE? THAT'S IT. YOU MAKE
CLOTHES. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR IN
CLOSING COLLEAGUES, THERE'S NO
DOUBT THAT PROPOSITION 47 HAS
HAD SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON
BUSINESSES AND OUR COMMUNITIES
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA. WITH THE
ONGOING WORKFORCE SHORTAGE AND
INCREASING WORKLOADS, LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND PROSECUTORS ARE
STRUGGLING TO TRIAGE. THE
GROWING NUMBER OF MISDEMEANOR
CASES THAT PROPOSITION 47 HAS
CREATED. REAL QUESTION. REAL
QUESTION REMAINS, SUCH AS HOW
OFTEN ARE CRIMES OF RETAIL THEFT
AND SHOPLIFTING ACTUALLY
REPORTED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT. HOW
OFTEN ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES RESPONDING TO REPORTS
OF RETAIL THEFT AND MORE TO THE
POINT HOW MANY OF THOSE REPORTS
ARE BEING SENT TO THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE UNDER THE LAW,
PASSED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF
PREVIOUS SESSION FOR
PROSECUTION? THERE ARE REAL
CONCERNS AMONG RETAIL BUSINESSES
FOR THE SAFETY OF THEIR
EMPLOYEES. THERE ARE REAL
CONCERNS ABOUT SIGNIFICANT
ECONOMIC LOSSES CAUSED BY RETAIL
THEFT. AND OF COURSE, THERE ARE
REAL AND LEGITIMATE CONCERNS
AMONG OUR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR
ABOUT OVER INCARCERATION RELATED
RELATED TO SHOPLIFTING. BOTTOM
LINE. WE NEED ANSWERS, AND WE
WANT OUR LAWS TO WORK. 83 35 IS
AN HONEST ATTEMPT TO ANSWER
THOSE QUESTIONS BY DIRECTING THE
NONPARTISAN LITTLE HOOVER
COMMISSION TO REPORT TO THE
LEGISLATURE AND PROVIDE ANSWERS
TO THOSE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS.
GETTING FACTUAL DATA BACK WILL
HELP US TO BETTER DO OUR JOBS
HERE AND INSTEAD OF POINTING
FINGERS ACROSS THE AISLE, WE CAN
SHOW CALIFORNIA'S THAT WE ARE
ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER. AND THAT
WE CAN WORK TO MAKE CALIFORNIA
SAFER TO ENSURE OUR LAWS ARE
ENFORCED AND THAT OUR JUSTICE
SYSTEM CAN BE MADE FAIR AND JUST
FOR ALL COMMUNITIES. I THINK YOU
ALL FOR YOUR TIME. I THANK YOU
GUYS FOR ALL WORKING WITH MY
TEAM. AND I'M READY TO WORK WITH
EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU
TOWARDS THAT GOAL. AND WITH THAT
, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU. I THINK WHEN WE
TALK. THIS IS ABOUT UM, THE WAR
OF WORDS AND IMPROPER 47-57. AND
EVEN JUST WHAT I CALL THE BIG WS
. WALMART WALGREENS. YOU GOT
WALGREENS SAYING THAT ALL OVER
THIS? A LOT OF PEOPLE DO THAT.
THEY JUST MADE IT UP AND YOU GOT
WALMART CLOSING STORES, SAYING
THAT IT'S BECAUSE OF RETAIL
THEFT. HOW CAN TOO BIG GROUPS
COME WITH TWO COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT. IDEAS OF WHAT'S GOING
ON AND THERE THE LARGE ONES IN
THE RETAIL BUSINESS. SO WHAT?
THE AUTHOR, AND I TALKED ABOUT
IT. LET'S GET SOME ANSWERS.
BECAUSE AS I'M GOING TO PUSH
BACK ON YOUR WITNESSES, UM I
NEED TO FIND OUT IF THIS IS
PASSIVE POLICING. OR IS THIS
ARTIST D A S AND DERELICT IN
THEIR DUTY TO PROSECUTE OR
JUDGES NOT MEETING OUT JUSTICE?
UM AND THE DELIBERATE ATTEMPTS
TO SABOTAGE 47-57 BY LETTING
THIS GET OUT OF HAND. THAT'S
WHAT'S IRRITATING ME. I WENT OUT
OF MY WAY TO PUT IN AN ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT THAT NOBODY IS
PICKING UP AND DOING IN THE D A.
I'M GLAD YOU'RE DOING IT. I'M
GLAD YOU'RE THE GOVERNOR PUT IN
$200 MILLION TO HELP WITH
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES SO YOU'LL
BE ABLE TO GET IT DONE. IF I
BELIEVE IF YOU HAD EFFECTIVELY
IMPLEMENTED MY BILL WORKING.
WORKING WITH THE HIGHWAY PATROL.
WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION IN THIS MANNER
RIGHT NOW. BUT I BELIEVE THE
HOOVER COMMISSION WILL SHOW WILL
SHINE A LIGHT WILL ACTUALLY KNOW
WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON.
OTHERWISE YOUR SIDE IS GOING TO
SAY PROP 47TH NOT WORKING. MY
SIDE IS GOING TO SAY IT IS, BUT
YOU GUYS YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST
GONNA KEEP GOING. BACKBOARD
CRIME IS UP CRIME NOSTALGIA.
CRIME IS UP. LET'S FIND OUT.
TRULY WHAT WE NEED TO DO. TO
MOVE THIS FORWARD. AND I THINK
THE LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
MAYBE, UM, IMPARTIAL ENOUGH. TO
GIVE BOTH OUR SIDES A REALITY
CHECK OF WHAT'S REALLY
HAPPENING. ON SHOPLIFTING,
SMASHING GRAVITY ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT FRONT BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT WE HONESTLY NEED
THAT RIGHT NOW. WAS THEIR
EMOTION. I SHALL MOVE. YOU MAY
FIND IS CLOSER TO WHAT I'M
SAYING THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
I'M JUST SAYING. THANK YOU. ON A
B 3 35 LICENSE. REMEMBER, ALAN
EASE THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. JOHN SAWYER. JOHN
SAWYER. I ALANIS, I BONTA I
BRIAN BRIAN, I LACKEY LACKEY. I
ORTEGA ORTEGA I SANTIAGO
SANTIAGO EYES THE BURR SOBER,
AYE. PASSAGE. I DON'T NUMBER
355. AH! REMEMBER 11? MAYBE 355
. WE MAY HAVE THAT MANY ISLANDS
WITH NOT TODAY. THANK YOU.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. OH, YEAH.
WHEN WE BEGAN. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. AGAIN THANK YOU GUYS FOR
HAVING ME HERE AND FOR LISTENING
TO ME AGAIN. AH START OFF. I'LL
BE ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS TODAY. AND
UH, LET'S GET INTO THIS 83 55
HAS SENT A SENSIBLE APPROACH IN
CORRECTING AN OVERSIGHT IN
CURRENT LAW BY ALLOWING PEACE
OFFICER CADETS ENROLLED IN BASIC
TRAINING PRESCRIBED BY THE
COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER
STANDARDS AND TRAINING OR NOT
BETTER KNOWN AS POST OR OTHER
CERTIFIED TRAININGS TO USE A
TACTICAL RIFLE WHILE ENGAGED IN
FIREARMS TRAINING AND SUPERVISED
BY A FIREARMS INSTRUCTOR. THE
CURRENT LAW EXEMPTS LAW
ENFORCEMENT FROM RESTRICTIONS ON
POSSESSION OF A TACTICAL WEAPON.
HOWEVER THOSE EXEMPTIONS APPLY
TO ONLY SWORN PEACE OFFICERS.
NOT CADETS ENROLLED IN A POST
ACADEMY OR TRAINING. THIS IS
CAUSED LOGISTICAL ISSUES WITH
GETTING CADETS ADEQUATELY
TRAINED AND CERTIFIED DURING THE
ACADEMY IN PREPARATION FOR ENTRY
INTO THE FIELD TRAINING PROGRAM.
WELL. CADETS ARE REQUIRED TO
TRAIN WITH HANDGUNS DURING THE
POST ACADEMY. UNDER EXISTING LAW
, THEY ARE TECHNICALLY
PROHIBITED FROM GOING THROUGH
THAT SAME TRAINING WITH THESE
TACTICAL RIFLES. HOWEVER POST
REQUIRES PROFICIENCY IN THE USE
OF THESE FIREARMS, SO TO RESOLVE
THIS CONFLICT AGENCIES HAVE TO
GRADUATE CADETS WITHOUT
COMPLETING TACTICAL RIFLE
TRAINING. THEN SEND THEM BACK TO
RECEIVE THE REST OF THEIR
FIREARMS TRAINING AS SWORN PEACE
OFFICERS. THIS DELAYS AND
UNNECESSARILY COMPLICATES CADET
TRAINING AND THEIR ENTRY INTO
THEIR AGENCY. STAFFING RANKS AS
YOU CAN SEE. LET ME BE CLEAR. A
B 355 DOES NOT ALLOW CADETS TO
USE OR POSSESS. A TACTICAL RIFLE
ANYWHERE BUT UNDER THE
SUPERVISION OF INSTRUCTORS
DURING FIREARMS TRAINING. BY
MAKING THIS TECHNICAL CHANGE. WE
CAN ENSURE THAT CADETS ARE
PROPERLY TRAINED ON TACTICAL
RIFLES BEFORE THEY GRADUATE.
WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT. IS JONATHAN FIELDMAN
WITH THE CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION AND MEGAN
POLOS. FROM THE COMMISSION ON
PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND
TRAININGS TO ANSWER ANY
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
EVERY READY AND MEMBERS. GOOD
MORNING AGAIN JONATHAN FELDMAN
WITH OUR STRATEGIES ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION, WILL BE QUICK AND
NOT REITERATE, WITH THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ALREADY STATED, UH BUT
THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE THAT'S
BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE THAT
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH POST TO
TRY AND RESOLVE AND WHAT IT
ULTIMATELY COMES DOWN TO IS THAT
WE NEED THE STATUTORY CHANGE TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE CADETS CAN
TRAIN LEGALLY WITH THE TACTICAL
RIFLES IN THE ACADEMY AND NOT
HAVE TO BE GRADUATED OUT AND
THEN SENT BACK. UH WHICH OTHER
THAN JUST THE LOGISTICS PROBLEM,
YOU KNOW, FINDING THE TIME
FINDING WHEN THEY'RE ACTUALLY
OFFERING THE TRAINING. UH, KIND
OF HITS ON ANOTHER MAJOR ISSUE
THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS FACING,
WHICH IS STAFFING SHORTAGES,
STAFFING SHORTAGES. SINCE I'VE
BEEN REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
POLICE CHIEFS HAS BEEN ONE OF
THE TOP THREE ISSUES OVER THE
LAST 10 YEARS, AND IT'S ONLY
GOTTEN WORSE SINCE I'VE BEEN
REPRESENTING THE GROUP. IT'S AT
THE POINT NOW WHERE YOU KNOW,
SENDING A OFFICER AWAY FOR TWO
DAYS FOR TRAINING THAT THEY
SHOULD HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED. AN
ACADEMY IS CAUSING MAJOR MAJOR
PROBLEMS AND, YOU KNOW,
JEOPARDIZES THE OPERATIONS THAT
CITY AND COUNTY FIRE LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE TRYING
TO, UH STAFF THEIR WAY THROUGH.
UM SO WITH THAT, WE, UH THANK
THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER FOR
AUTHORING THE BILL, AND WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
YES WERE YOU TESTIFYING? I'M
MAKING BULLETS. I'M WITH THE
COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER.
STANDARDS AND TRAINING. I'M JUST
HERE TO ANSWER ANY SORT OF
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. YOU MAY
HAVE. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT NAME AND
ORGANIZATION. MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS, RANDY PERRY WITH THEIR
READING ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF
POOR I CAN SUPPORT THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES AND SUPPORT AND
HE WITNESSES, AN OPPOSITION.
YES. COME UP TO THEM. YOU HAVE
FIVE MINUTES TOTAL WHENEVER YOU
READ. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS REBECCA MARCUS
ON BEHALF OF THE BRADY CAMPAIGN.
WE RESPECT RESPECTIVELY ASKED
THAT YOU VOTE AGAINST A B 3 55
TODAY. WE DO APPRECIATE THE
AMENDMENTS OFFER, BUT WE DON'T
THINK THEY GO FAR ENOUGH ASSAULT
WEAPONS ARE UNIQUELY LETHAL, AND
THAT'S DUE TO SPECIFIC FEATURES
THAT DIFFERENTIATE THESE WEAPONS
FROM HUNTING RIFLES THAT FIRE
THE SAME CALIBER AMMUNITION.
THESE FEATURES ALLOW A SHOOTER
TO EITHER CONCEAL THE WEAPON OR
TO MAKE IT EASIER TO FIRE A HIGH
VOLUME OF AMMUNITION. IN A SHORT
PERIOD OF TIME WHILE MAINTAINING
ACCURACY. I TOOK A TYPICAL AIR
15 BULLET LEAVES THE BARREL OF
THE GUN THREE TIMES FASTER THAN
A TYPICAL NINE MILLIMETER
HANDGUN BULLET WHEN IT ENTERS
THE HUMAN BODY. THE BULLET IS
DESIGNED TO FRAGMENT AND TUMBLE
THE HIGH VELOCITY DAMAGES AND
KILLS TISSUE AS THE BULLET
TRAVELS, CAUSING CATASTROPHIC
INTERNAL BLEEDING. CALIFORNIA
HAS TAKEN A STRONG POSITION
AGAINST THE POSSESSION OF
ASSAULT WEAPONS, AND THIS SPILL
AIMS TO WEAKEN THAT ALLOWING ANY
PERSON ENROLLED IN THE COURSE OF
BASIC TRAINING. PRESCRIBED BY
THE POST OR ANY OTHER FIREARMS
COURSE TRAINING CERTIFIED BY THE
COMMISSION. CHIP HAS ASKED THESE
WEAPONS OF WAR. THIS BILL IS NOT
JUST LIMITED TO THOSE TRAINING
TO BE POLICE CADETS, THE
TRAINEES COVERED IN 83 55
INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT
WORKING TOWARDS BECOMING A
TRADITIONAL PEACE OFFICER. THE
TRAINEES COULD INCLUDE ANY
NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO
NEED FOR THIS TYPE OF TRAINING
AND WHO HAVE NOT BEEN SUBJECT TO
A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK OR
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION.
PERMITTING ANY PERSON INVOLVED
IN THIS COURSE TO POSSESS THESE
WEAPONS UNDERMINES THE LAW, AND
IT'S DANGEROUS. THERE ALREADY
EXISTS A CARVE OUT FOR ACTUAL
PEACE OFFICERS, WHICH IS A
PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED A NARROW
EXEMPTION THAT MAKES SENSE
IMPORTANTLY, IT IS ENTIRELY
UNCLEAR WHY THIS EXEMPTION IS
NEEDED NOW. THESE TRAINING
SESSIONS HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT
SINCE 1989 WHEN CALIFORNIA'S
ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN WENT INTO
EFFECT. WITHOUT THE PARTICIPANTS
HAVING ACCESS TO THESE WEAPONS,
AND THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT
CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT IS
NOT SUFFICIENTLY TRAINED IN
WEAPONRY, PLACING THESE WEAPONS
IN THE HANDS OF ANY PERSON
TAKING THESE COURSES BECAUSE
THEY MAY WANT TO HANDLE THESE
GUNS. IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE.
CALIFORNIANS HAVE CLEARLY STATED
THEIR POSITION ON ASSAULT
WEAPONS AND MORE GENERALLY ON
GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND THIS
WOULD UNDERMINE THE WILL OF THE
PEOPLE AND TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SAFETY FOR THESE WILLIAMS, BRADY
AND THE BRADY CALIFORNIA OPPOSED
3 55. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OR
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SEEING NONE WILL
BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. HOW AM I READ THE
LETTER AND THANK YOU FOR THE
TESTIMONY BY THE BRADY CAMPAIGN
. UM AND I'M LOOKING AT THE BILL
LANGUAGE AND WAS CONCERNED ABOUT
HOW LOOSE IT IS, IN THE SENSE
THAT IT SAYS THAT IT DOESN'T
APPLY TO THE LOAN OF AN ASSAULT
WEAPON OR THE POSSESSION OF AN
ASSAULT WEAPON WHILE ENGAGED IN
FIREARMS TRAINING. UM, SORT OF
THE BILL ANALYSIS SORT OF
IMPLIES THAT THIS ONLY APPLIES
TO CADETS AND THAT IT WOULD ONLY
BE THAT THEY'D ONLY BE AVAILABLE
DURING THE TRAINING ITSELF, BUT
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE LANGUAGE
WOULD ALLOW THE LOAN OF A
FIREARM WHEN IT IS FIREARMS TO
SOMEONE WHO IS IN THE COURSE OF
THIS TRAINING, SO I GUESS THE
QUESTION I HAD IS, HOW LONG DOES
THIS TRAINING TAKE? AND OUR
CADETS ARE PEOPLE OTHER THAN
CADETS ALLOWED TO TAKE THIS
TRAINING? UM SO LET ME THAT IS
THE FIRST QUESTION. I CAN ANSWER
THAT. SO THE RIFLE TRAINING IN
THE POST REGULAR BASIC COURSES
TOTAL OF 16 HOURS. THAT'S A
MANDATORY, THE ACADEMY'S DO HAVE
THE OPTION TO GO LONGER IF THEY
WISH. UM AND THE ONLY PEOPLE
ENROLLED IN THE RAZOR REGULAR
BASIC COURSE ARE THOSE WHO ARE
HOPING TO BE PEACE OFFICERS.
JUST JUST ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION
. I MEAN, WITH THE WITH THE
AUTHOR BE AMENABLE TO TIGHTENING
THIS UP SOME SO THAT IS ACTUALLY
LIMITED TO CADETS. UM AND I
GUESS I HAD ONE OTHER QUESTION.
ASSUME CADETS ARE SUBJECT TO UM
, PSYCHOLOGICAL SCREENING AND
BEHAVIORAL SCREENING IS THAT IS
THAT THE CASE TO BE ENROLLED IN
THE REGULAR BASIC COURSE YOU
HAVE TO PASS THE DOJ CLARENCE.
SO YOU HAD TO BE A CLARITY OF
ANY SORT OF CRIMINAL BACKGROUND
TO ENTER THE ACADEMY. MOST
CADETS WHEN THEY ARE ENROLLED IN
THE ACADEMY, ARE ALREADY HIRED
BY A POLICE AGENCY. THERE'S A
VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE THAT ARE
NON SPONSORED AS WE REFER TO
WHERE THEY ARE NOT ALREADY HIRED
BY A POLICE AGENCY. IF THEY'RE
HIRED BY A POLICE AGENCY.
THEY'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THE
REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE
10 31 GOING THROUGH THE
APPROPRIATE BACKGROUND,
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMS AND SO FORTH
TO BE HIRED. AND I JUST LIKE
SOMEONE FROM THE BRADY CAMPAIGN
TO RESPOND SO BASED ON A BILL
PASSED A FEW YEARS AGO. IT'S NOT
JUST THOSE TRAINING FOR THE
POLICE ACADEMY TO UNDERGO THE
FIREARMS TRAINING FOR POST IT'S
ALSO THOSE WHO ARE ARE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA HORSE RACING BOARD
STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE
SERVICES. DTSC CALPERS HCG. I
MEAN, THERE'S A LONG LONG WINE
OF FOLKS WHO ARE ALLOWED IN THE
UNDER THE UHH THAT HAVE TWO ARE
REQUIRED TO TAKE POST TRAINING.
THANK YOU. I'M GONNA VOTE FOR
THIS TO ALLOW IT TO GET OUT OF
COMMITTEE. BUT I'D LIKE TO ASK
THE AUTHOR TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH THE BRADY CAMPAIGN TO
TIGHTEN THIS UP. I DO THINK IT'S
STILL TOO LOOSE. UM AND, UM YOU
KNOW THE LANGUAGE RELATED TO
LOANING OF THE OF THE OF THE
WEAPON AND THE FACT THAT IT'S
NOT LIMITED TO JUST CADETS GIVES
ME CONCERN AND SO I RESERVED THE
RIGHT TO VOTE AGAINST THIS WHEN
IT COMES BACK TO THE FLOOR
SIMILAR GETS OUT OF THE
COMMITTEE TODAY. APARTMENT.
YEAH, I JUST WANT TO HAVE A
LITTLE BIT A LOT MORE CLARITY ON
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PERHAPS NOT.
UH ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE HIRED
ON IN. IN IN A PEACE OFFICER
POSITION AND WHO ARE ABLE TO GET
THIS TRAINING. SO TO KIND OF TO
MR ZIMMER'S LINE OF QUESTIONING
. YOU KNOW, WE ONLY NEED ONE
PERSON TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO
GET THIS ADDITIONAL TRAINING
AROUND ASSAULT WEAPONS TO THEN
GO ON AND COMMIT. A MASS
SHOOTING, AND I APPRECIATE THAT
DESIRE AND THE NEED TO SUPPORT
EXPEDIENCY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR
PEACE OFFICERS ARE FULLY TRAINED
IN THE USE OF ASSAULT WEAPONS,
BUT I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT. I
WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE VERY
FEW IS BOTH ON THE ON THE FRONT
END AND WHO IN TERMS OF WHO'S
GETTING THIS THE VERY FEW IN
TERMS OF WHO ULTIMATELY END UP
GETTING TRAINED WITH THAT AND
ASSIGNED TO BECOME A POLICE
OFFICER. WHAT'S THE VARIANTS
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. I
DON'T KNOW THAT THE PERCENTAGE
OF THE TOP OF MY HEAD OF HOW
MANY NON SPONSORED CADETS GO
THROUGH THE ACADEMY EACH YEAR,
BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE NUMBER IS
SMALL. YEAH WHAT SMALL JUST JUST
PERSONALLY IN MY AREA. SORRY IN
MY AREA. YES, THERE'S I'VE. IT'S
VERY RARE THAT YOU HAVE AN
UNSPONSORED. YOU HAVE AGENCIES
COMPETING TO GET THEIR CADETS OR
THEIR NEW HIRES IN THOSE
ACADEMIES SO THEY CAN BRING THEM
ON. IT'S VERY, VERY RARE. AT
LEAST IN MY AREA. IT COULD BE
DIFFERENT IN OTHERS TO HAVE AN
UNSPONSORED CADET. I WOULD JUST
MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE'S CLEAR
THAT IF YOU'RE UNSPONSORED, YOU
STILL GET FINGERPRINT CHECKED
BACKGROUND CHECK BY DOJ.
EVERYBODY THAT GOES THROUGH, SO
IT'S NOT ANY PERSON OFF THE
STREET WITH NO CLEARANCE. THEY
ARE REVIEWED. YOU KNOW, THESE
ARE PEOPLE THAT WE DO YOU KNOW,
SUFFICIENT BACKGROUND CHECKS ON
THROUGH DOJ. I UNDERSTAND THE
CONCERN, YOU KNOW, AND WE'LL
WORK TO SEE IF THERE'S A
SPONSOR. I CAN, YOU KNOW. TRYING
TO WORK ON LANGUAGE TO TIGHTEN
UP. YOU KNOW THE CONCERNS THAT
YOU GUYS HAVE RAISED, BUT IT'S A
VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF
INDIVIDUALS THAT MIGHT FALL INTO
THIS CATEGORY AND I FEEL LIKE
THEY COULD GET THE TYPE OF
TRAINING AND SKILLS. IF I MEAN
THEY'RE COMMITTED TO DOING THAT,
OR JUST GRADUATING THROUGH, SO
YOU KNOW I THINK IT'S UH, AN
ISSUE THAT'S THAT'S WORTH US
TRYING TO ADDRESS, BUT I WANT TO
MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS
THAT EVERY PERSON THAT GOES INTO
THE ACADEMY HAS BEEN BACKGROUND
CHECKED BY DOJ. I JUST AGAIN.
I'M OBJECTING A BIT TO THIS
LANGUAGE. SMALL PERCENTAGE. YOU
KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME
PRETTY CRITICAL NUMBERS AND I
APPRECIATE THAT IN YOUR AREA.
IT'S A VERY RARE INSTANCE. THIS
IS A LAW THAT WILL APPLY TO THE
ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND I
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE AND MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. MS
ORTEGA ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT
MISS MY COLLEAGUE, VONTAZE
EXPRESSING, UM, JUST WONDERING,
WHAT ARE THE GRADUATION RATES? I
KNOW THAT THERE'S A PART OF THE
PROBLEM WITH OUR SHORTAGE AND
STAFFING IS THAT A LOT OF CADETS
DO NOT FINISHED THE TRAINING AND
SO THEREFORE MY CONCERN IS THAT
WE'RE NOW TRAINING MORE FOLKS TO
USE ASSAULT WEAPONS WHO DON'T
ACTUALLY GRADUATE. I KNOW HOW TO
USE THEM. SO I HAVE. I'M JUST
WONDERING WHAT THE GRADUATION
RATE IS WHAT THERE'S STILL THAT
SMALL PERCENTAGE. I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT IT TODAY, BUT I STILL
HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. AND
ALSO RESERVE MY RIGHT TO VOTE
NO. LATER. IN THE OTHER. YEAH,
MR LACKEY. YEAH. I SUPPOSE I
APPRECIATE THE CONCERNS, BUT I
THINK THAT THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH
DISPLACED BECAUSE I'M TELLING
YOU, UM THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS A
PRAGMATIC PEACE AND TRYING TO
PREPARE OFFICERS TO DEFEND.
AGAINST VERY, VERY. TROUBLING
CIRCUMSTANCES AND IT'S HERE TO
SHOW OUR SUPPORT FOR THOSE WHO
ARE WILLING TO ACTUALLY LOSE
THEIR LIFE. THEY'RE USING ONE OF
THESE WEAPONS OR LIFE IS BEING
THREATENED. AND I THINK THAT, UH
THE BILL INDICATES TO THAT. IT'S
NOT ONLY NARROW, BUT IT'S SAYING
THAT THIS POPULATION HAS TO BE
UNDER SUPERVISION, SO THEY'VE
BEEN SCREENED. YOU HAVE
SUPERVISION. AND I THINK. THAT
SOME OF THE OPPOSITION IS JUST
PEOPLE THAT HATE WEAPONS PERIOD.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE DISDAIN
BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF
HEARTBREAK BECAUSE OF THE MISUSE
OF WEAPONS, AND SO IT'S NOT JUST
PLACED BUT IT'S JUST PLACED FOR
THIS POPULATION. BECAUSE ALL
THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN
HIRED THAT ARE WILLING TO DIE
FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. UH, AND
TRYING TO STOP THREATS. AND.
THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO HERE, AND I APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR FOR ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE
BECAUSE IT'S A PRAGMATIC
EXERCISE. IT'S ONLY TO HELP
FACILITATE A TRAINING ASPECT BY
THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SCREENED AND
BEEN SELECTED. AND THAT PROCESS
IS PRETTY PRETTY RIGOROUS. I'LL
TELL YOU THAT RIGHT NOW. SO I
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD AND CLEARLY WILL BE
SUPPORTING IT. ANOTHER QUESTION
FOR THE ARTERY. ARE YOU WILLING
TO TAKE AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD
PRESCRIBE THIS SPECIFICALLY TO
THE CATEGORY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE
UH, PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
SCREENED, TRAINED WHO ARE, UH
HOLDING, UH, POSITION INWARD
SPONSORED WHO ARE HOLDING A
POSITION IN A IN A POLICE UNIT,
AND, UH, JUST TO KIND OF MAKE IT
VERY, VERY NARROWLY TAILORED TO
THE CATEGORY OF PERSON THAT YOU
ARE TRYING TO CREATE EXPEDIENCY
FOR AND LIMITING THE PEOPLE WHO
COULD BE GETTING THIS TRAINING
FOR A DIFFERENT PURPOSE OR IN A
DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT. I AM, AND
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE
OPPOSITION'S WITH PEPPERS. AND
I'VE I'VE NEVER HEARD OF ANY OF
THOSE PEOPLE EVER IN AN ACADEMY.
SO WHAT TO LOOK INTO THAT AS
WELL. BUT YES, I WOULD HAVE THE
SAME CONCERNS IF I WAS UP THERE
ALSO WITH NARROWING AND MAKING
SURE THAT THOSE SPECIFICALLY WHO
WERE WANTING TO EXPERIENCE ARE
THE ONES THAT WERE ACTUALLY
COVERING. YES MR WEBER ALONG,
UH, ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BRANTAS
QUESTION. ARE YOU ALSO WILLING
TO LIMITED. TO POSSESSION ONLY
DURING THE TRAINING ITSELF HAD
AN ADDITIONAL CONCERN ABOUT
THESE WEAPONS BEING LOANED TO
PEOPLE DURING TRAINING AND SAID
IT'S ONLY 16 HOURS, BUT IT COULD
BE INTERPRETED TO THE ENTIRE
POLICE TRAINING. UM AND SO FOR
ME TO ULTIMATELY BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THIS ON THE FLOOR, IT
WOULD HAVE TO BE REALLY NARROW
SO THAT THERE IS BEING USED ONLY
DURING THE TRAINING ITSELF. AND
YOU VERY, VERY GOOD CONCERNS ON
EVERYONE'S AND, UH, NO. THIS
WOULD JUST BE DURING THE ACADEMY
. THIS WOULD JUST BE OK, GUYS,
WE'RE PULLING OUT THE RIFLES.
WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR TRAINING.
WE'RE BRINGING HIM BACK. THAT'S
THE SUPERVISION THAT THEY'RE
GOING TO GET. VERY I UNDERSTAND
YOUR CONCERNS, BUT YES, THAT
WILL BE ADDRESSED. OKAY? SAYING
THAT YOU MAKE CLOTHES. ALL RIGHT
. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU
MEMBERS. VERY GOOD QUESTIONS.
HONESTLY, I HAD THOSE SAME
CONCERNS WHEN THE BILL WAS WAS
TO ME AS WELL, BECAUSE, AS WAS
BROUGHT UP THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE
YES, THAT THAT MAY HAVE ISSUES
AND I HAD THOSE SAME ISSUES AS
WELL. SO I THOUGHT WE HAD
TIGHTENED IT UP ENOUGH, BUT
OBVIOUSLY WE'LL TIGHTEN UP A
LITTLE BIT MORE. AND, UH, I
ASKED FOR AN I VOTE. THANK YOU.
I THOUGHT WE HAD TIGHTENED IT UP
ENOUGH, EVIDENTLY NOT. UM SO I
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE
AMENDMENT. UM, FROM THE
DISCUSSION HERE. YOU CAN SEE
THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK TO BE
DONE. YOU DEFINITELY NEED TO BE
OPEN TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT
LOANING THOUGHT WE HAD TIGHTEN
IT UP IN THE LANGUAGE. LOOKS
LIKE WE NEED A LITTLE MORE
BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE BY THE
QUESTIONING. WE DON'T WANT TO
CADET TO LOAN IT OUT TO SOMEONE.
SOMETHING HAPPENS TO CADET OR.
SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT
THROUGH THE PROGRAM BECAUSE THEY
LATER FIND OUT THAT THEY MAY NOT
BE SUITABLE TO BE LAW
ENFORCEMENT. AND NOW WE'VE
TRAINED THEM AND THE USE OF A
HIGH POWERED WEAPON OR WEAPON OF
MASS DESTRUCTION, AND NOW
THEY'RE OUT ON THE STREET FULLY
TRAINED, I THINK THAT CONCERN. I
THINK THERE'S A WAY TO TIGHTEN
IT UP. THAT'S EITHER THAT THAT I
HAVE SOME IDEAS. WE NEED TO HAVE
A LONG DISCUSSION WITH THE BRADY
CAMPAIGN BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT
THERE THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT A FISHING GAME
PERSON SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THIS
, EVEN THOUGH THE CANNABIS
SITUATION NOW MAYBE FISHING GAME
NEED SOME TRAINING WITH THAT, SO
WE NEED TO NARROW IT TO MAKE
SURE UH, PEOPLE DON'T REALLY
NEED THIS TRAINING. JUST BECAUSE
THEY HAVE A BADGE AND THE
UNIFORM. THEY GET IT. OR WE JUST
NEED TO TIGHTEN TIGHTEN IT UP,
AND I THINK THE BRADY CAMPAIGN
CAN HELP US. GET TO THAT.
NARROWER UM, SPECIFICATION. UM,
I'M NOT DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR
THEM, BUT I I'M SURE THEY
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE OTHER
PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT HAVE THESE
WEAPONS AND ABSOLUTELY WE NEED
TO WHAT WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER
TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T ADD TO
THAT NUMBER ON THE OTHER SIDE. I
THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HEARING
FROM EVERYONE HERE THAT WE DON'T
WANT TO ADD TO THAT NUMBER
INADVERTENTLY. UM AND SO WITH
THAT. THE CHAIR IS GOING TO
RECOMMEND, AND I KNOWING THAT IF
WE DON'T GET WHERE WE NEED TO
GO, UM IT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA
PROBABLY NOT GONNA GET A LOT OF
MEMBERS HERE, MOVING IT FORWARD.
FIRST I GOTTA GET EMOTION, I
GUESS. MOVE THE BILL. SHEPHERD.
ON A B 355 BY SOME MEMBER ALANIS
. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED. JOAN SAWYER YOUR EYE,
ALANIS. I GOTTA I BRIAN. BRIAN I
LACKEY LUCKY I ORTEGA ORTEGA I
SANTIAGO ZIPPER. ZIPPER I
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU, MR
NUMBER TWO AND THREE A B 61. AND
A B 93 BRIAN.
ITEM NUMBER WHICH ONE YOU WANT
TO DO? FIRST NUMBER 61. YES SIR
. OKAY CHAIR MOVES UP APPROVAL
OF ITEMS 61. WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I RISE TODAY TO PRESENT
A B 61 A BILL THAT WILL REQUIRE
ARRAIGNMENT HEARINGS TO OCCUR
WITHIN THE 1ST 48 HOURS
FOLLOWING AN ARREST. AND CODIFY
THE REQUIREMENT THAT A JUDGE
REVIEW ALL ARREST FOR PROBABLE
CAUSE, AS IS CURRENTLY REQUIRED
CONSTITUTIONAL. CALIFORNIA'S
PRETRIAL TIMELINE REQUIRES
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ARRESTED TO
HAVE THEIR FIRST COURT
APPEARANCE WITHOUT UNNECESSARY
DELAY AFTER ARREST. PENAL CODES
AT THE 48 HOUR TIMEFRAME FOR
THESE ARRAIGNMENT HEARINGS BUT
ALLOWS FOR EXCEPTIONS, INCLUDING
SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS. THEY CAN
ELONGATE. TO BE AS LONG AS FIVE
DAYS. AS A RESULT OF THESE
EXCEPTIONS, PEOPLE CAN REMAIN IN
CUSTODY. AND IT'S EXTREMELY
HARMFUL TO THEIR STABILITY.
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT HAVING A
PERSON INCARCERATED FOR MORE
THAN 24 HOURS CAN UNNECESSARILY
JEOPARDIZE THEIR HOUSING THEIR
JOB SECURITY, THEIR FAMILY
STABILITY, THEIR MENTAL HEALTH.
CURRENTLY, PEOPLE WHO ARE
ARRESTED CAN BE HELD IN JAIL FOR
DAYS WITHOUT SEEING A LAWYER,
EVEN THOUGH MANY WILL NOT BE
CHARGED IN 2021 PROSECUTORS
REJECTED OVER 20,000 FELONY
ARRESTS FOR LACK OF SUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE OR MISTAKES. THESE
PEOPLE CAN BE DETAINED WITHOUT
EVER SEEING A JUDGE AGAIN FOR AS
LONG AS FIVE DAYS. 13 STATES.
INCLUDING TEXAS. FLORIDA AND
ALABAMA REQUIRE AN ARRAIGNMENT
HEARING WITHIN 40 OUT EIGHT
HOURS WITHOUT OF AN ARREST
WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS AGAIN. WE
ARE BEHIND TEXAS. FLORIDA AND
ALABAMA. A B 61 ALSO CODIFIES
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
CASE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
VERSUS MCLAUGHLIN. THIS CASE
REQUIRES A NEUTRAL JUDGE TO
REVIEW FOR PROBABLE CAUSE EVERY
ARREST MADE WITHOUT A WARRANT
WITHIN 48 HOURS, AND WITHOUT
ADDITIONAL TIME WERE EXCEPTIONS
THAT IS ALREADY HAPPENING. IT'S
JUST NOT CODIFIED IN OUR PENAL
CODE. OTHER STATES AGAIN, LIKE
FLORIDA, LOUISIANA AND ARIZONA
HAVE CODIFIED IT IN THEIR PENAL
CODE. THIS CAME AS A
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
GOVERNOR'S COMMITTEE ON THE
REVISION OF THE PENAL CODE FOR
WHICH I SIT ON AS THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. BOTH OF THESE CHANGES
WILL ENSURE THAT INCARCERATED
PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT FORMALLY
BEEN CHARGED WITH ANY WRONGDOING
HAVE THEIR PROMPT JUDICIAL
REVIEW SO THAT THEIR HOUSING
THEIR EMPLOYMENT, THEIR FAMILY
STABILITY AND THEIR LIVELIHOOD
ARE NOT UNJUSTLY JEOPARDIZED TO
GIVE TESTIMONY TODAY I'M JOINED
BY CECILIA CHAVEZ, AN ATTORNEY
WITH SILICON VALLEY DEBUG AND
STEVE MONK LIT EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA
ATTORNEYS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
THANK YOU AND GOOD MORNING. I'M
STEVE MANKELL. I'VE BEEN
PRACTICING CRIMINAL OFFENSE LAW
FOR 45 YEARS, INITIALLY IN SAN
DIEGO AND CURRENTLY IN NEVADA
CITY. I'M ALSO THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS
FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE. THE
STATEWIDE ASSOCIATION OF
CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS. CJ AS
A CO SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. AND
IF WE. HAD COORDINATED OUR
REMARKS. THERE WOULD BE LESS
OVERLAP, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO
HEAR IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF
MINUTES, BUT UM, JUDICIAL REVIEW
OF WARRANTLESS ARRESTS IN LESS
THAN 48 HOURS HAS BEEN THE
CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARD IN THE
UNITED STATES FOR MORE THAN
THREE DECADES. IT'S EMBARRASSING
THAT CALIFORNIA HAS NOT ACTED TO
CONFORM OUR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
TO THE MINIMUM CONSTITUTIONAL
STANDARDS SET IN THE UNITED
STATES. SUPREME COURT CASE
RIVERSIDE VERSUS MCLAUGHLIN.
IT'S A CALIFORNIA CASE AND WE
DON'T COMPLY. UM. OVER THOSE 30
YEARS, I HAVE PERSONALLY HANDLED
MANY CASES IN SEVERAL
JURISDICTIONS WITHIN CALIFORNIA
, WHERE THERE WAS NO JUDICIAL
REVIEW OF PROBABLE CAUSE WITHIN
48 HOURS OR ANY OTHER TIME. THIS
BILL WILL BRING CALIFORNIA INTO
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTION
REQUIRING REVIEW OF PROBABLE
CAUSE WITHIN 48 HOURS BY AN
INDEPENDENT MAGISTRATE. AND THIS
CHANGE WOULD UNDER THE BILL
WOULD APPLY TO BOTH ADULT
CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE CASES. A
RELATED PROBLEM IN PROCEDURE IS
THE PERMISSIBLE DELAY IN
BRINGING IN ACCUSED BEFORE THE
COURT TO ARGUE FOR RELEASE FROM
CUSTODY AND GET ARRAIGNMENT ON
CHARGES. CURRENTLY PENAL CODE
SECTIONS. 8 25 AND 8 49 SPECIFY
THE STANDARD MENTIONED EARLIER.
BRINGING THEM TO COURT WITHOUT
UNNECESSARY DELAY. OBVIOUSLY A
VAGUE TERM. SECTION 8 25 SETS
THE OUTER LIMIT FOR THE FIRST
APPEARANCE AT 42 HOURS. BUT
EXEMPTING SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS.
THIS BILL ADDRESSES. THERE'S
EXEMPTIONS. UM THE ONE EXAMPLE
OF THE PROBLEMS CREATED FOR
INDIVIDUALS ARRESTED. BY THE
EXCESSIVE DELAY IS THE
THANKSGIVING WEEKEND. MOST
PEOPLE ARRESTED ON A WEDNESDAY
WON'T APPEAR BEFORE A JUDGE
UNTIL THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY.
THAT'S ALMOST AN ENTIRE WEEK
THAT THEY SIT IN CUSTODY BEFORE
THEY GET TO TALK TO ANYBODY OR
HAVE ANY REVIEW OF THEIR CASE AT
ALL. UM THIS BILL WOULD AMEND UH
, PENAL CODE UM, A 25 TO
ELIMINATE THE EXEMPTIONS AND AS
MENTIONED, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
STATES THAT ARE ALREADY
REQUIRING THAT INITIAL COURT
APPEARANCE WITHIN 48 HOURS OR
LESS SEVERAL STATES REQUIRED
WITHIN 24 HOURS. BY MAKING THESE
CHANGES WILL HELP INDIVIDUALS
GET BACK TO THEIR JOBS AND
FAMILIES MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT
WHILE THEIR CASES PENDING AND BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR CHILDREN
AND GRANDCHILDREN. UM REMEMBER,
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE
ARRESTED WILL NOT HAVE THEIR
CASE FINALLY RESOLVED FOR WEEKS,
MONTHS OR SOMETIMES LONGER. FOR
MANY, THE FIRST FEW DAYS ARE
AFTER ARREST. MAYBE THE ONLY
TIME THEY'RE INCARCERATED INTO
UNTIL THE CASE IS COMPLETED. AND
THE LONGER THAT DELAY STRETCHES
OUT FOR THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO
SEEK RELEASE FROM CUSTODY. UH
THE WORST. THE CONSEQUENCES WILL
BE FOR THEM, THEIR FAMILIES AND
THE COMMUNITY. WE ASK YOU TO
SUPPORT THIS BILL, THEN I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR HAVING
FOR HAVING US. MY NAME IS
CECILIA CHAVEZ, AND I'M, A
COMMUNITY ORGANIZER WITH SILICON
VALLEY DEEPER. UM SO CAN VALUE.
THE BOOK IS A COMMUNITY ADVOCACY
GROUP THAT SUPPORTS LOVED ONES
WHO ARE GOING THROUGH THE
CRIMINAL IMMIGRATION AND
JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS. WE WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THE STORIES
OF THE FAMILIES, UM HAVE COME
THROUGH OUR DOORS OR THE YEARS
WE HAVE SUPPORTED HUNDREDS OF
FAMILIES THROUGH THE PRE TRIAL
AND ARRAIGNMENT STAGE OF THE
SYSTEM. SINCE THE HUMPHREY
RULING WE'VE BEEN IN ARRAIGNMENT
COURT EVERYDAY COLLECTING
OBSERVATIONS THAT CONNECT
CONNECTING WITH FAMILIES
DESPERATELY TRYING TO GET THEIR
LOVED ONES HOME IS IMPORTANT TO
OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE HIS
DIRECTLY IMPACTS OUR LOVED ONES
RIGHT TO AN ARRAIGNMENT WITHIN
48 HOURS. WE KNOW THAT A LOT OF
THINGS CAN HAPPEN WITHIN THE
REST AND THE TIME OF ARRIVAL
ARRANGEMENT THAT AFFECTS OUR
COMMUNITY. SUCH AS LOSING THEIR
HOUSING, LOSING EMPLOYMENT AND
SOMETIMES EVEN LOSING THEIR
CHILDREN. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU
YEARS AGO WE SUPPORTED LOVED ONE
A B WHO WAS ARRESTED ON
SEPTEMBER 21ST AND HIS AGREEMENT
WASN'T UNTIL SEPTEMBER. 27TH
THAT WAS SIX DAYS FROM THE TIME
OF THE REST TO A TIME OF
ARRAIGNMENT. THIS WAS A CRUCIAL
MOMENT IN NAVY'S LIVES BECAUSE
OF HIS DAUGHTER WAS BORN JUST
TWO DAYS BEFORE HIS ARREST. HE
WENT ON TO BE ON PRE TRIAL
FOLLOWING TWO YEARS UNTIL HIS
CHARGES WERE DROPPED. DURING
THAT TIME, HE LOST VALUABLE TIME
WITH HIS DAUGHTER. HER FIRST
STEPS HER FIRST WORDS, HE EVEN
LOST OPPORTUNITY TO RENEW HIS
DACA STATUS, WHICH LEFT HIM IN
LIMBO IN A VULNERABLE STATE.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS THAT OF
GODWIN, WHO WAS IN CUSTODY FOR
FRIDAY'S WITHOUT EVEN BEING
ARRANGED. CHARGES WERE
ULTIMATELY NEVER FILED. BUT
YEAH, HE HAD TO WAIT FIVE DAYS
FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. DURING THE
TIME HE WAS LIVING OUT OF HIS
CAR. AND WHAT WITH HIS PREGNANT
PARTNER, WHICH, UM, WHICH HIS
CAR WAS TOWED AND HE COULDN'T
GET BACK AND LOST HIS JOB
OPPORTUNITIES. THIS CASE ALSO
HELPED UNCOVER ILLEGAL PRACTICES
IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY BY THE
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, WHERE THEY
WERE HOLDING INDIVIDUALS WHO THE
D A. DIDN'T PROCEED WITH THE
CHARGES UNTIL THE LAST AVAILABLE
, OUR FOR A RAYMOND, RESULTING
IN UNNECESSARY HOLDING OF OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR THE PAST
48 HOURS. WE GREATLY APPRECIATE
YOUR YES. VOTE ON THIS VERY
CRITICAL BILL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT NAME AND ORGANIZATION.
NATASHA MINSK, ER, SMART
JUSTICE, CALIFORNIA AND STRONG
SUPPORT. DANICA ROAD, ARMEL ON
BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE AND
SUPPORT. LESLIE CALDWELL,
HOUSTON FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOING BACK
IS ELLA BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
LITTLE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIANS
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND RC
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. KARMA
NICOLE COX ON BEHALF OF A C O U
COLLECTION AND SUPPORT HE
WITNESSES AN OPPOSITION.
MORNING AGAIN. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS LAURIE HOFF AGAIN. I'M
UH PROSECUTOR REPRESENTING OVER
330 UNION MEMBERS FROM THE SAN
DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION, THE SAN DIEGANS
AGAINST CRIME. AND C D. A WE ARE
OPPOSED TO A B 61 AS IT'S
CURRENTLY WRITTEN. WE'RE
ACTUALLY NOT OPPOSED TO EARLY
PRE TRIAL PROCEDURES, BUT WE
DON'T FEEL THIS BILL. UM
ADDRESSES WHAT IT THINKS IT'S
GOING TO ADDRESS AND I THINK THE
WAY IT'S WRITTEN WILL ACTUALLY
POTENTIALLY CRIPPLE THE ENTIRE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IF IT'S
PASSED. COMPARING CALIFORNIA'S
ARRAIGNMENT PROCEDURES TO OTHER
STATES THAT THE STATES, FOR
EXAMPLE, THAT HAVE BEEN
MENTIONED OR THAT ARE LISTED IN
THIS BILL IS KIND OF LIKE
COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES
BECAUSE OUR ARRAIGNMENT PROCESS
IS VERY DIFFERENT. UM, FOR
EXAMPLE. OTHER STATES LIKE THE
ONES LISTED DO REQUIRE PROBABLE
CAUSE HEARING WITHIN 48 HOURS OF
ARREST BASED ON A POLICE
OFFICERS, UM, OFFERED IN A
POLICE OFFICER'S AFFIDAVIT. WE
WE ACTUALLY IN SAN DIEGO. DO
THAT WITHIN 24 HOURS. UM FOR
WARRANTLESS ARREST. FOR EXAMPLE
, UH, PROBABLE CAUSE
DECLARATIONS ARE REVIEWED BY
JUDGES WITHIN 24 HOURS AND I
JUDGE WILL RELEASE INDIVIDUALS
PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT, IF
PROBABLE CAUSE IS FOUND TO BE
INSUFFICIENT. THAT IS, UH, IN
ALIGNMENT WITH THE RIVERSIDE. UH
CASE THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT BEING
CODIFIED THAT'S APPROPRIATE. UM
BUT AT. THIS INITIAL HEARING.
OTHER STATES, FOR EXAMPLE,
TYPICALLY DO NOT REQUIRE
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL. UM, THEY
DON'T REQUIRE A D A CHARGING
DOCUMENT, AND THEY THEY DO
INFORM INDIVIDUALS OF THEIR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS,
CALIFORNIA ON THE OTHER HAND,
NOT ONLY INFORMS INDIVIDUALS OF
THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
APPOINTS COUNSEL AT THAT TIME,
AND IT ALSO REQUIRES THE D A TO
FILE CHARGES OR THE INDIVIDUAL
IS RELEASED. UM A LOT OF OTHER
STATES. THE ONES THAT ARE
MENTIONED, FOR EXAMPLE, DON'T
EVEN HAVE A DEADLINE FOR
PROSECUTORS TO FILE THOSE
CHARGES. SOME OF THOSE STATES
THAT WERE MENTIONED, UM, REQUIRE
A D A TO FILE A CHARGING
DOCUMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THIS
PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING. UM IN
MANY OF THESE STATES, SOME OF
THAT THAT ARE LISTED, UM
DESIGNATE NO BAIL CASES FOR
CASES THAT ARE SERIOUS. THEY ARE
COMPLETELY EXEMPT FROM THIS 48
HOUR HEARING REQUIREMENT. I
SPOKE TO THE BUREAU CHIEF IN UH
, ANTICIPATION OF THIS HEARING
IN NEW YORK. SHE IS CHIEF OF
INTAKE, SHE TOLD ME SPECIFICALLY
, THERE IS NO AUTOMATIC RELEASE
. NO AUTOMATIC KICK OUTS FOR
INDIVIDUALS IN SERIOUS CASES,
LIKE MURDERS OR WHAT SHE CALLS
PATTERN SERIOUS CASES LIKE
SERIAL ROBBERIES. FOR EXAMPLE,
IF THE D A DOES NOT FAIL CHARGES
WITHIN 24, OR 48 HOURS THERE ARE
NO EXCEPTIONS IN THIS BILL FOR
THESE TYPES OF SERIOUS CASES FOR
THE D A TO REVIEW AND FILE
CHARGES. IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT
WAY THAT WE DO IT HERE AND IF
WE'RE GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO
THESE OTHER STATES, WE NEED TO
HAVE EVERYTHING SIMILAR. FINALLY
I THINK THIS BILL IS GOING TO BE
AN EXTREMELY FINANCIAL UH, AN
EXTREME FINANCIAL BURDEN ON OUR
TAXPAYERS, BECAUSE WHAT IT MEANS
IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO
OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. OPEN AT
NIGHT NIGHT COURT. UM WITH, UH,
COURTS FULLY STAFFED. DÍAS
OFFICES STAFFED PUBLIC DEFENDERS
STAFF LAW ENFORCEMENT STAFF
BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO TRANSPORT
INDIVIDUALS TO AND FROM COURT.
UM I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE ARE
EXPERIENCING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT
OF STRAIN. UM IN OUR IN OUR
COURTS. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE
ENOUGH JUDGES IN SAN DIEGO TO
TRY MISDEMEANOR CASES, LET ALONE
BE OPEN ON THE WEEKENDS AND AT
NIGHTS. FOR THIS TYPE OF SERIOUS
COMMITMENT. UM SO I DO THINK
THERE ARE WAYS ULTIMATELY THAT
WE CAN GET TO THIS. THIS
PROBABLE CAUSE REQUIREMENT
THINGS THAT WE DO. FOR EXAMPLE,
IN SAN DIEGO THAT ARE GOOD LIKE
THAT 24 HOUR RULE THAT JUDGES
HAVE TO REVIEW PROBABLE CAUSE
WARRANTS FOR WARRANTLESS ARREST
. I THINK THAT'S GREAT, BUT I
JUST THINK THAT IT'S JUST NOT
WRITTEN VERY WELL. IT'S GONNA
IT'S GOING TO HAVE A MASSIVE
IMPACT BEYOND WHAT I THINK THE
INTENT IS, UM SO WITH THAT I
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. I WOULD
ASK AT THIS TIME FOR A NO VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION? CNN WILL BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS. IT'S
ABOUT. TO UM AND. LOVE WHAT
DURING DISCUSSION, AS OPPOSED TO
JUST IN CLOSING FOR THE AUTHOR
TO BE ABLE TO HAVE UH, RESPONSE
TO THE CHARGE THAT THIS IS NOT A
VERY WELL WRITTEN BILL. FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE, ANYTHING THAT
ALLOWS US TO BE ABLE TO CARRY
OUT JUSTICE WHILE ENSURING THAT
WE ARE DOING SO IN A TIMELY
MANNER, UM, ENDS ENSURING THAT
WE'RE NOT HOLDING PEOPLE
UNNECESSARILY. FOR A TIME. THAT
IS NOT OURS. IT'S THEIRS WHEN
THEY'RE CAPTURED IN THE IN OUR
CAR SOCIAL SYSTEM SEEMS TO BE
LIKE A VERY IMPORTANT THING FOR
US TO BE ABLE TO DO AND AN
ARGUMENT THAT IT WILL REQUIRE US
ALL TO DO OUR WORK BETTER AND
FASTER AND MORE EXPEDIENTLY
SEEMS LIKE A INCREDIBLY TERRIBLE
ARGUMENT. UH AS A AS IS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON THE
CUTTING EDGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
TRANSFORMATION, SO ABOVE THE
AUTHOR JUST TO BE ABLE TO
RESPOND TO THE TESTIMONY. YEAH,
I MEAN, IT'S DEFINITELY THE
FIRST TIME I'VE PUBLICLY BEEN
ACCUSED OF TRYING TO BRING DOWN
THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM. UM ALSO IF I WAS LOOKING
FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DO THINGS
BETTER, I PERSONALLY WOULDN'T
CALL RIKERS ISLAND EITHER. UM UH
, DELAYING ARRANGEMENTS FOR AS
LONG AS FIVE DAYS ON
THANKSGIVING WEEKEND FOR PEOPLE
WHO HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH
ANY WRONGDOING HAVEN'T BEEN
CHARGED OR CONVICTED. IS WRONG.
IT'S SHAMEFUL. THERE ARE OTHER
STATES WHO DO THIS BETTER WHO DO
THIS FASTER. THIS MAY REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS IN THE
SYSTEM. BUT I'M NOT THINKING
ABOUT WHETHER THE JUDGES CAN
HANDLE THIS OR WHETHER WHETHER
PUBLIC DEFENDERS CAN HANDLE
THIS. WHETHER DHS CAN HANDLE
THIS. WE BUILD THE
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THEM TO
HANDLE THIS. I'M THINKING ABOUT
THE OVER 20,000 PEOPLE WHO
LANGUISHED IN JAIL LAST YEAR NOT
TO EVER BE CHARGED AT ALL. RIGHT
IF YOU THINK ABOUT OUR OWN HOUSE
POPULATION, ONE OF THE QUICKEST
PIPELINES TO GOING ON HOUSES
GOING INTO THE JAIL SYSTEM FOR
EVEN JUST A FEW DAYS WHEN YOU'RE
LIVING CHECK BY CHECK OR GETTING
PAID HOURLY. SO IMAGINE 20,000
PEOPLE GOING INTO JAIL, NOT
HAVING A HEARING IN FIVE DAYS,
FINDING OUT THAT THEIR CHARGES
HAVE BEEN DROPPED IN AN ENDING
UP ON THE STREETS. WHAT DOES
THAT COST THE SYSTEM? WHAT IS
THAT OVERLOAD IMPACT ON THE
STATE AND SO THAT WOULD BE MY
RESPONSE TO THOSE COMMENTS. IT
WAS INCREDIBLY WELL WRITTEN. I
KNOW THAT BECAUSE I TOOK TIME ON
IT. I KNOW THAT BECAUSE IT CAME
FROM THE COMMITTEE ON THE
REVISION OF THE PENAL CODE, THE
GOVERNOR'S COMMITTEE IT TOOK
OVER A YEAR OF WORK FROM
COMMUNITY AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS
. UM AND THE CASE THAT IT'S
CODIFYING AGAIN. IT IS A
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT CASE.
WE'RE STILL ALREADY OPEN TO
CIVIL SUITS IF WE VIOLATE THAT
CASE, OTHER STATES HAVE ADDED
THAT CASE TO THEIR PENAL CODE SO
THAT THERE'S NOT VARIATION
COUNTY TO COUNTY AND
JURISDICTION BY JURISDICTION.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
THIS IS SMART GOVERNANCE. THIS
IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE AND I WILL USE THAT AS MY
CLOTHES, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU. UM
SHARES RECOMMENDED I VOTE. THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
UH, A LITTLE. A LITTLE, UH,
TAINTED SINCE I'VE TRIED THIS. A
COUPLE OF TIMES BEFORE GOVERNOR
BROWN MY ATTEMPTS, SO I THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING IT BACK. THE
SECOND. SECOND. ON A B 61 BY
SIMONE MEMBER BRIAN. THE MOTION
IS PASSED AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. JOAN
SAWYER, I ALANIS ALANIS, NOT
VOTING BONTA. BANTA I BRIAN,
BRIAN. I LACKEY LACKEY. NO.
ORTEGA ORTEGA I SANTIAGO
SANTIAGO, I ZABAR AYE. YOU
SHOULD HAVE THAT MEASURE PASSES.
WE'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER THREE.
80 93 CRIMINAL. SEE JOE SENSUAL
, CERTAIN WE'RE ALMOST DONE
HERE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
COLLEAGUES. IT'S A FINAL BILL OF
COMMITTEE TODAY I RICE WAS IN A
B 93 A BILL THAT WOULD SPECIFY
THAT CONSENT. TO CONDUCT A
SEARCH WITHOUT AN EVIDENTIARY
BASIS IS NOT A LAWFUL
JUSTIFICATION FOR A SEARCH.
CURRENTLY, POLICE OFFICERS NEED
PROBABLE CAUSE TO SEARCH THE
VEHICLE. UM OR PROBABLE CAUSE
THAT A VEHICLE CONTAINS EVIDENCE
OF WRONGDOING CAN CONDUCT
WARRANTLESS SEARCH. THEY'RE
ALLOWED TO CONDUCT A MORE
LIMITED SEARCH WHEN THEY
REASONABLY SUSPECT THAT A PERSON
IS ARMED AND DANGEROUS FOR OTHER
SEARCHES. LIKE SEARCHING MY
CELLPHONE, YOU WOULD NEED A
WARRANT. OR YOU CAN BYPASS ALL
OF THOSE LEGAL THRESHOLDS. IF
YOU SIMPLY ASK ME IF YOU CAN
SEARCH MY STUFF, AND I ACQUIESCE
AND SAY YES. THESE CONSENT. THIS
CONSENT. WAVES THE STATUTORY AND
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS THAT
PROTECT ALL CALIFORNIANS FROM
UNJUST SEARCH AND SEIZURES. IN
2022 LAST YEAR, OFFICERS
REQUESTED CONSENT TO SEARCH
PEOPLE FOR THEIR PROPERTY NEARLY
60,000 TIMES DURING TRAFFIC
STOPS. TODAY. CONSENT SEARCHES
REQUIRE NO OBJECTIVE OR RATIONAL
BASIS AND RELY ON EXPANSIVE
DISCRETION OF INDIVIDUAL POLICE
OFFICERS. THIS DISCONNECT FROM
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONAL
EXAMINATION OF EVIDENCE OF
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY MAKES THIS
TYPE OF SEARCH PARTICULARLY
VULNERABLE TO BIAS. IMPLICIT
EXPLICIT AND OTHERWISE. INDEED,
THE DATA SHOWS EXACTLY THE TYPE
OF BIAS AND ENFORCEMENT THAT
PLAGUED THIS PURELY
DISCRETIONARY LAW ENFORCEMENT
ACTION. THIS YEAR. THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA'S RACIAL AND IDENTITY
PROFILING ADVISORY BOARD, WHICH
IS HOUSED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, BASED ON LEGISLATION
THAT WE PASSED OUT OF HERE FOUND
THAT BLACK INDIVIDUALS WERE FOUR
TIMES AS LIKELY. AND LATINOS 2.5
TIMES AS LIKELY AS THEIR WHITE
COUNTERPARTS TO BE ASKED FOR
CONSENT SEARCH DURING A ROUTINE
TRAFFIC STOP. MOREOVER THE DATA
SHOWS THAT THESE DISCRETIONARY
SEARCHES WERE WIDELY
INEFFECTIVE. CALIFORNIA LAW
ENFORCEMENT REPORTED TO THE
RIPPER BOARD. THE VAST MAJORITY
OF CONSENT SEARCHES DO NOT
RESULT IN THE DISCOVERY OF
ANYTHING ILLEGAL. REPEAT, DO NOT
RESULT IN THE DISCOVERY OF
ANYTHING ILLEGAL OVER 93% OF THE
CONSENSUS OF BLACK INDIVIDUALS
RESULTED IN NO DISCOVERY OF
CONTRABAND. OFFICERS WERE LESS
THAN HALF AS LIKELY TO FIND
CONTRABAND IN THE POSSESSION OF
A BLACK OR BROWN PERSON COMPARED
TO WHITE FOLKS. BOTH THE RIPPER
BOARD AND THE COMMITTEE ON THE
REVISION OF THE PENAL CODE. HAVE
RECOMMENDED PROHIBITING SEARCHES
BASED SOLELY ON A PERSON'S
PURPORTED CONSENT. THE RIPPER
BOARD, IN FACT, CALLS TO BAN
CONSENT SEARCHES IN CALIFORNIA.
CALIFORNIA WOULD NOT STAND ALONE
AND NARROWING EXCEPTIONS TO THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS
AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND
SEIZURE. MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY,
RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT HAVE
IMPLEMENTED SIMILAR POLICIES
WITHOUT ANY NEGATIVE IMPACT ON
PUBLIC SAFETY. AND THE CURRENT
LAW PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO TELL
AN OFFICER THAT THEY DO NOT
AGREE TO A CONSENT SEARCH.
IMAGINE HOW OFTEN YOU SAY NO TO
A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AT ANY
POINT DURING AN ENCOUNTER,
PARTICULARLY IN BLACK BROWN PORN
INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES. YOU
DON'T HAVE TO IMAGINE BECAUSE IN
98.5% OF THE OCCASIONS. PEOPLE
DO NOT DENY AN OFFICER'S REQUEST
TO SEARCH FOR GOOD REASON. UNDER
CURRENT LAW OF PEOPLE OF COLOR
ROUTINELY AND DISPROPORTIONATELY
ASKED TO WAIVE THEIR RIGHTS BY
OFFICERS UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW,
CONSENT SEARCHES ARE INEFFECTIVE
. THEY'RE COSTLY, THE RACIALLY
BIASED AND THEY'RE EFFECTIVELY
NON VOLUNTARY, THEIR COERCIVE.
TO GIVE TESTIMONY TODAY I'M
JOINED BY ANDRE GUERRERO QUOTE
CO CHAIR OF THE RIPPLE BOARD,
AND MARSHALL ARNWINE, AN
ATTORNEY WITH THE A. C L U
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARSHALL
ARNWINE. AND I'M HERE TO ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT FOR 89 3. I WORK
FOR THE A. C L U OF NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA. AS OUR CRIMINAL
JUSTICE POLICY ADVOCATE. TODAY I
WILL SHARE WITH YOU MY
EXPERIENCE OF BEING QUARTER BY
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SEARCHED BY
LAW ENFORCEMENT. IN 2009 AT THE
AGE OF 16. I WAS DRIVING HOME
FROM MY HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL
GAME AS I WAS PULLED OVER JUST
AS I TURNED ONTO MY STREET IN
INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA. TWO
OFFICERS APPROACHED MY CAR WITH
THEIR HANDS ON THEIR GUNS. THEY
TOLD ME THEY PULLED ME OVER
BECAUSE MY HEADLIGHTS WERE OFF
AT NIGHT. OUT OF 2000 VOLVO WITH
MANUAL CONTROL HEADLIGHTS, AND I
FORGOT TO TURN THEM ON. THE
OFFICERS TOLD ME THAT THEY
NEEDED ME TO TURN OFF THE ENGINE
AND THROW THE KEYS OUT OF THE
WINDOW. FROM THERE. THEY TOLD ME
TO PUT BOTH OF MY HANDS OUTSIDE
THE WINDOW SO THEY COULD TAKE ME
OUTSIDE MY VEHICLE. THEY TOLD ME
I WAS NOT UNDER ARREST, BUT THAT
THEY NEED TO HANDCUFF ME FOR
THEIR SAFETY. WHEN I WAS OUTSIDE
THE CAR. I WAS HANDCUFFED SEARCH
. ASKED WHAT GANG I WAS FROM AND
PUT IN THE BACK OF THE POLICE
CAR. AND THE POLICE CAR. I
WATCHED THEM SEARCH MY ENTIRE
VEHICLE. AFTER MORE THAN AN
HOUR. I WAS FINALLY ISSUED OUT.
FINALLY LET GO OUT OF THE POLICE
CAR. WITHOUT EVEN GETTING A
TRAFFIC TICKET. AS I DROVE HOME
TRAUMATICALLY SHAKING FROM THIS
ENCOUNTER. IT WAS ONLY BY GOD'S
GRACE THAT NOT DIE OR GO TO JAIL
THAT NIGHT. IN HINDSIGHT, I
WOULD HAVE MUCH RATHER RECEIVED
THAT TRAFFIC TICKET. TO THIS DAY
. I STILL HAVE TO ACTIVELY
MANAGE MY TRIGGERS WHEN I'M
DRIVING ON THE ROAD AND I SEE
LAW ENFORCEMENT NEAR ME. I WOULD
NEVER FORGET THE FEELING OF
DEHUMANIZATION OF BEING
HANDCUFFED FOR NO OTHER REASON
THAN THE COLOR OF MY SKIN IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LIVED IN. IF
A LAW WOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED. TO
PREVENT CONSENT SEARCHES UNLESS
THE OFFICER HAD REASON TO
BELIEVE THEY WILL UNCOVER
EVIDENCE OF A CRIME. I WOULD NOT
BE HERE SHARING WITH YOU MY
TRAUMATIC ENCOUNTER TODAY.
THEREFORE, I ASK FOR YOUR
ARRIVAL. FOR A B 93, SO THAT'S
EXPERIENCES LIKE MINE BECOMES
THE EXCEPTION AND NOT THE NORM.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK
YOU. YES. HAVE YOU ALREADY? GOOD
MORNING. I'M ANDREA GET IT ALL
IN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
ALLIANCE SAN DIEGO COMMUNITY
BASED HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION
IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY. I'M ALSO
THE CO CHAIR OF THE RACIAL
IDENTITY PROFILING ACT BOARD A
STATUTORY BOARD THAT THE
LEGISLATURE CHARGED WITH
ANALYZING STOP DATA. AND MAKING
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS BODY. ON
JANUARY 1ST 2023. WE MADE THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THEY
INCLUDE. THE PROHIBITION OF
CONSENT SEARCHES PERIOD. NO.
EXEMPTIONS. NO EXCUSES. UM. THIS
IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO US AND TO
CALIFORNIANS FOR A NUMBER OF
REASONS ARE ALREADY ARTICULATED
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BRIAN. BUT
ALSO BECAUSE IT UNDERMINES OUR
FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO FROM
UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND
REASONABLE SEARCHES THAT REQUIRE
PROBABLE CAUSE. ASKING SOMEBODY
FOR THEIR CONSENT IS AN END RUN
AROUND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTION. TO BE FREE OF
UNREASONABLE SEARCHES. IT IS
BECAUSE OF THIS THAT THE RIPPER
BOARD WAS UNEQUIVOCAL IN ITS
RECOMMENDATION, UNEQUIVOCAL
BECAUSE OF THE RACIAL
DISPARITIES BECAUSE OF THE BIAS
AT PLAY, AND BECAUSE OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE
SACROSANCT. THE IMPACT ON THE
COMMUNITY IS WELL DOCUMENTED.
YOU HEARD A GREAT EXAMPLE FROM
MARSHALL. UH THE RIPPER BOARD
REPORT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL DATA
ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH HOLE THAT
THESE KINDS OF CONSENT SEARCHES
ARE TAKING, LEADING TO SENT TO
CALIFORNIANS FEELING HIGH RATES
OF DISTRESS, SENSE OF INJUSTICE,
FEELING OF HOPELESSNESS.
FEELINGS OF DEHUMANIZATION. THEY
ARE VOTING RIGHTS, AND THEY ARE
ERODING TRUST AND PUBLIC SAFETY
DEPENDS ON PUBLIC TRUST. IF WE
DO NOT HAVE THAT, THEN WE ARE
NOT SAFE. I WANT TO, UH, POINT
OUT THAT THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
ON THIS BILL NEEDS A CORRECTION
IN THAT. BILL ANALYSIS THAT SAYS
THAT THEY THIS BILL A B 93 GOES
BEYOND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF
THE RIPPER BOARD. AND THAT IS
NOT TRUE. IN FACT, THE RIPPER
BOARD REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS GO
FURTHER AND CALL FOR THE
ELIMINATION OF NOT ONLY CONSENT
SEARCHES BUT ALSO SUPERVISION
SEARCHES, WHICH ARE NOT THE
SUBJECT OF THIS BILL. TO BE
CLEAR. THIS BILL IS WELL
WRITTEN. CLEAR. AND RESPONSIVE
TO THE RIPPER RIP BOARD
RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS BILL IS
NOT ONLY APPROPRIATE IT'S ALSO
CONSISTENT WITH OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND
RECOGNIZES WHAT CALIFORNIA
HIGHWAY PATROL HAS ALREADY DONE
, WHICH IS ELIMINATE SINCE 2001.
CONSENT SEARCHES AND IF
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL THE
LARGEST LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
IN THE STATE CAN DO IT, SO CAN
EVERYBODY ELSE. I'M AVAILABLE TO
ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE RIPPER BOARD
RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK THANK YOU
IN THE OTHER WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT WILL MOVE THE BILL TOO.
LIZZIE BJOERGEN. HULU CALIFORNIA
ACTION PROUD TO COSPONSOR THIS
BILL, ALSO FOR THE ANTI
RECIDIVISM COALITION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. NATASHA MINSTER,
SMART JUSTICE, CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT. LESLIE CALDWELL,
HOUSTON FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. DANICA ROEDER, MEL FOR
INITIATE JUSTICE IN THE SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE AND SUPPORT RAYMOND
GOINGS ON BEHALF OF SER
COMMONALITY, BUG AND SUPPORT. IT
LITERALLY HALF OF CALIFORNIA'S
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND
SUPPORT. AND CECILIA CHAVEZ WITH
SILICON VALLEY DEBUG ALSO IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. IF YOU ANY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. YEAH.
SORRY IN ADVANCE. MY NAME IS
LAURIE HOFF AGAIN. I STILL
REPRESENT THE SAN DIEGO DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION, THE
STANDING AGAINST IT. THE SAN
DIEGANS AGAINST CRIME AND CDVA.
WE'RE WE'RE ALSO OPPOSED TO THIS
BILL. UM I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
TO REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE VERY
COMPREHENSIVE CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTIONS FOR CONSENT SEARCHES
THAT THAT EXISTS THERE WELL
SETTLED IN CASE LAW. WE KNOW
THAT COURTS CRITICALLY REVIEW UM
, CONSENT SEARCHES FOR
VOLUNTARINESS FOR SCOPE AND TO
PROTECT AGAINST COERCION. UM. I
THINK WITH THE ADVENT OF BODY
WORN CAMERA, WE HAVE THE ABILITY
FOR COURTS TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT
HAPPENED. AND SO BWC IS CRITICAL
WHEN COURTS ARE REVIEWING, UH
THE APPROPRIATENESS OF CONSENT
SEARCHES AS A RELATES TO ALL OF
THOSE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT. UM THERE'S
BEEN SOME CRITICISM THAT CONSENT
SEARCHES DON'T YIELD AS MUCH
EVIDENCE AS PROBABLE CAUSE
SEARCHES. I DON'T SEE THAT AS A
NEGATIVE. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD
THING THAT PROBABLE CAUSE
SEARCHES YIELD MORE EVIDENCE
THAN CONSENT SEARCHES. SHOULDN'T
BE A CRITICISM OF CONSENT
SEARCHES. UM. IN SAN DIEGO. I
CAN TELL YOU THAT WE SEE GOOD
EVIDENCE COMING FROM CONSENT
SEARCHES IN THE LINE OF WORK I
DO. IT'S PRIMARILY WITH GHOST
GUNS. AND IT'S PRIMARILY WITH
DRUGS, INCLUDING FENTANYL. UM I
THINK WE'RE STRIPPING LAW
ENFORCEMENT OF SOME LAWFUL TOOLS
THAT THEY HAVE THAT THEY CAN
EMPLOY TO GET. YOU KNOW WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT PROLIFERATION OF
ILLEGAL GUNS, GHOST GUNS ARE BIG
, BIG DEAL, AND I ALSO SEE SOME
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THIS
BILL BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING
WHEN I LOOK AT WHEN I WENT BACK
TO LOOK AT CASE LAW ON EXAMPLES
OF CONSENT SEARCHES THE MAJORITY
OF CASES THAT I CAME UP WITH
WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT PART CASES
IS MURDERS THAT HAVE BEEN SOLVED
, AND THAT IS BECAUSE MURDERERS
EITHER CONSENT TO SOMETHING THAT
THEY'VE THAT THEY EITHER THEIR
BODY OR SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE
, LIKE GIVING POLICE. ONE CASE
WAS GIVING THE POLICE THERE.
SHOES WHICH HAD BLOOD ON THEM,
WHICH SOLVED THE CASE, OR A LOT
OF TIMES. WHAT WE SEE IS FAMILY
MEMBERS OR FRIENDS GIVING
CONSENT. TO SEARCH SOMETHING.
THAT HAD EVIDENCE OF THE MURDER
IN IT THAT SOLVED THAT CASE. I
THINK WE ARE POTENTIALLY GOING
TO LOSE OUT ON SOLVING SOME VERY
SERIOUS CASES. AND I THINK ABOUT
LIKE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS, FOR
EXAMPLE, THEY PERHAPS SHE OWNS A
CAR, BUT HER BOYFRIEND ABUSER IS
DRIVING THAT CAR. SHE WANTS TO
GIVE POLICE CONSENT TO SEARCH
HER CAR BECAUSE SHE THINKS THAT
THERE'S A GUN IN THE CAR THAT HE
HAS THREATENED HER WITH AND
UNDER THIS LAW, SHE WOULD NOT BE
ALLOWED TO DO THAT. UM I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING
TO OUR FREE WILL JUST AS
CITIZENS. HOW DO WE HAVE THE
RIGHT TO TELL CITIZENS THEY
CAN'T GIVE CONSENT TO POLICE TO
SEARCH MY OWN BODY. IF I WANT
TO, OR MY OWN CAR IF I WANT TO.
I THINK WE ARE TAKING A RATHER
PATERNALISTIC VIEW OF OUR
CITIZENS AND WHAT THEY'RE
CAPABLE OF. UM. IF WE WANT YOU
KNOW? TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES OF
CONSENT THAT WERE BROUGHT UP. I
THINK MAYBE REQUIRING, FOR
EXAMPLE, BWC IN ANY CONSENT
SEARCH THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD
BE A GOOD THING THAT WOULD BE
VALUABLE AND I THINK VALUABLE
FOR COURTS TO REVIEW AS WELL.
REQUIRING OR MANDATING MORE
TRAINING FOR POLICE OFFICERS IN
THIS AREA WOULD BE WOULD BE A
GOOD THING TO ADDRESS WHEN IT'S
APPROPRIATE. AND WHEN IT'S NOT
AN IMPLICIT BIAS, BECAUSE THAT'S
REALLY WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT TO
CURB. UM AND MAYBE MANDATING THE
EDUCATION OF OUR OWN CITIZENS.
I'VE BEEN A PART OF A C. L U S
CONSTITUTION DAY FOR MANY YEARS
WHERE WE GO TO SCHOOLS, AND WE
TALKED TO KIDS ABOUT THEIR
RIGHTS AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR
CITIZENS TO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS.
BUT SOME OF THAT INCLUDES WHEN
YOU WANT TO GIVE CONSENT. AND
WHEN YOU DON'T UM AND. AND I
JUST THINK, THROWING THE BABY
OUT WITH THE BATHWATER. IT MIGHT
NOT BE THE SOLUTION TO THIS
PROBLEM. SO I ASKED FOR YOUR NO
VOTE ON THIS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS RANDY PERRY
WITHIN READING ASSOCIATES ON
BEHALF OF PERAK, AND WE OPPOSE
THE BILL. THANK YOU, SIR. AND
NOW BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE
MEMBERS FOR COMMENTS AND
QUESTIONS, MR ZUCKERBERG SO I,
UM. YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A
LOT THAT WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER
TO UM. YOU KNOW, REALLY
TRANSFORM OUR INSTITUTIONS AND
OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. UM
AND I WAS AT A QUALITY
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORTED THE
LEGISLATION THAT CREATED THE
RIPPER BOARD AND WE WERE ACTIVE
IN MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THAT BOARD. UM AND FOR ME, YOU
KNOW? WE CAN'T SORT OF CHANGED
INSTITUTIONS. IF WE'RE NOT
WILLING TO SORT OF CHANGE THE
THINGS WE DO. UM AND IF WE'RE
NOT WILLING TO YOU KNOW,
CRITICALLY MAKE CHANGES. I MEAN,
A LOT OF I THINK WHAT WE'VE
HEARD TODAY IS EVERY TIME WE
MAKE A CHANGE, THERE'S GOING TO
BE RIPPLE EFFECTS, AND THERE'S A
LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO
CHANGE. BUT THE FACT IS, THERE'S
A LOT OF THINGS WE NEED TO
CHANGE. AND FOR ME, I HAD GREAT
COMFORT FROM THE FACT THAT THE
RIPPER BOARD HAS MADE A
RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE THIS
CHANGE. IT'S ONE OF THE KEY
RECOMMENDATIONS AND SO, UM I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS AND WANT
TO THANK SOMEBODY MEMBER BRIAN
FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD TODAY,
ORTEGA I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING
HIM. WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD
YESTERDAY IN MY DISTRICT,
FEDERAL JURY AWARDED A BLACK
WOMAN AND TWO DAUGHTERS, TWO OF
HER DAUGHTERS, WHO ARE
HANDCUFFED BY ALAMEDA COUNTY
SHERIFF'S FOR SITTING IN FRONT
OF A STARBUCKS AND WHILE THEY
WERE ARRESTED AFTER THEY
REFUSED, YOU KNOW THEY WERE JUST
SITTING THERE. UM AND THEY WERE
ASKED FOR CONSENT. AND THEY
REFUSED. UM YOU KNOW, THEY ASKED
. WHAT DID I DO? WHAT KIND OF
CRIME DID I COMMIT? I WAS
SITTING HERE AT A STARBUCKS
AFTER DRIVING FOR HOURS WITH MY
DAUGHTERS. ARE YOU ASKING FOR MY
IDENTIFICATION? SO TO SAY THAT
WE ARE NOW CREATING POLICY
THAT'S TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S FREE
WILL TO CONSENT WHERE WAS THEIR
FREE WILL WHEN THEY WERE
ARRESTED? THÀNH. I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR YOU WITH THE CHP IN
REGARDS TO CHP. YOU SAID IN 2001
. THEY'VE BEEN PRACTICING NO
CONSENT. CAN YOU ELABORATE ON
THAT? A LITTLE BIT MORE. SURE IN
2001 CHP VOLUNTARILY DECIDED TO
END ITS CONSENT SEARCHES. IT DID
SO FROM 13 4006. AH THAT WAS A
MANDATORY PROHIBITION, AFTER
WHICH THEY HAVE VOLUNTARILY
CONTINUED TO, UM, TO ONLY
CONDUCT SEARCHES WHEN THEY ARE
BASED ON PROBABLE CAUSE, AND I
THINK THEY DEMONSTRATE. THE
MODEL FOR WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN
IN CALIFORNIA. THE COMMISSIONER
FOR CHP, WHAT IS SITS ON THE
RIPPER BOARD WITH ME AND IS A
COLLEAGUE AND WAS PART OF THE
DISCUSSIONS. UH THAT LED TO THE
RECOMMENDATION TO FOR THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO
PROHIBIT CONSENT SEARCHES ONCE
AND FOR ALL. THANK YOU AND, UH,
SO BEING PRIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
CONSENT SEARCHES WERE A LOT OF
THE THINGS I DID AS WELL AND, UH
SEARCH WARRANTS ARE VERY TIMELY
AND I JUST I FEAR THAT IF WE DO
GET AWAY FROM CONSENT SEARCHES,
THEN WE'RE NOW GOING TO BE
HOLDING THESE PEOPLE UNTIL WE
GET THESE SEARCH WARRANTS AND
THEY WILL BE THERE LONGER WHILE
WE'RE WHERE WE ARE LEGALLY
WAITING FOR THE ALLOTTED TIME TO
GET A JUDGE TO GET ONE OVER
THERE. AND SOMETIMES IT'S TAKEN
CARE OF REALLY QUICK, UM, WITH A
CONSENT SEARCH, AND THEN WE'RE
ON OUR WAY. I JUST I JUST FEAR
THAT THIS IS GOING TO BLOCK DOWN
THE SYSTEM A LITTLE BIT MORE AND
TAKE AWAY THE TOOLS AND REAL
QUICK WAS THAT WITH OPERATION
PIPELINE WITH THE 2001 THING
WITH CHP. YEAH, THERE WAS A
LITIGATION THAT PROMPTED. CHP TO
TAKE THIS ACTION IN 2001, BUT
THEY HAVE SINCE CONTINUED TO DO
SO VOLUNTARILY. AND IF I COULD
JUST RESPOND QUICKLY TO YOUR
CONCERN ABOUT WARRANTS SO UNDER
THE CONSTITUTIONAL. STANDARD
FOURTH AMENDMENT STANDARD, WHICH
IS ECHOED IN THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION. ENFORCEMENT NEEDS
EITHER A WARRANT OR PROBABLE
CAUSE, UM, THIS RIGHT TO
UNREASONABLE TO BE FREE OF
UNREASONABLE SEARCHES IS A
FOUNDATIONAL RIGHT? IT WAS
WITHIN THE 1ST 10 AMENDMENTS
THAT WERE ADOPTED. BY OUR
FOUNDING FATHERS, BECAUSE IT WAS
SO IMPORTANT, RIGHT? AND SO I
THINK THE QUESTION THAT THE
LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO ASK ITSELF
IS ARE WE GOING TO TAKE
SERIOUSLY THESE FUNDAMENTAL
RIGHTS TO BE FREE OF
UNREASONABLE SEARCHES BECAUSE WE
MUST UNDERSTAND CONSENT SEARCHES
TO BE AN END RUN AROUND THAT
FUNDAMENTAL, RIGHT? IT'S BEEN
USED FOR TOO LONG AND CHP HAS
SHOWN US THE WAY LET'S SEND THEM
I GOT YOU AND CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG, THE JUDGES ALSO WILL MAKE
SURE THAT ARE THROWN OUT. JUDGES
ARE IN THE POSITION OF
INTERPRETING THE LOT. YOU ALL
ARE IN THE POSITION OF MAKING
THE LAW AND THEY ARE
INTERPRETING THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT AND, UM AND HOPEFULLY
THEY SOON WILL BE INTERPRETING
THE ENDING OF CONSENT SEARCHES,
BUT WE ALSO DIDN'T THROW THAT
MANDATORY THROUGHOUT IN HERE. WE
DIDN'T TRIGGER ANY TRUTH AND
EVIDENCE. WE DIDN'T WE ACTUALLY
LEFT THAT ALONE. I HAVE TO LOOK
AT IT MORE ANTIQUE, THEN. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU AND THE OTHER
THAT YOU MAY CLOSE. UM WITH
RESPECT TO THE OPPOSITION'S
TESTIMONY. THE OVERWHELMING
MAJORITY OF CONSENT SEARCHES.
THE RESULTING FINDINGS HAVE NO
FINDING OF WRONGDOING OR
ILLEGALITY. AND I'M NOT TALKING
ABOUT 50. PLUS 1% I'M NOT
TALKING 60. I'M NOT 70 80. WE'RE
TALKING NEARLY 95% OF THE TIME
THEY DO THIS KIND OF SEARCH. IT
YIELDS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. ALL
IT DOES IS BREAK DOWN TRUST
BETWEEN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT IS ALREADY
ALREADY FRAGILE OR NON EXISTENT.
IN MANY PARTS OF OUR STATE. THIS
IS A THOUGHTFUL BILL. IT CAME
FROM A LOT OF WORK FROM A LOT OF
PEOPLE FOLLOWING A LOT OF
EXAMPLES BOTH AROUND THE COUNTRY
AND WITHIN OUR OWN STATE
INSTITUTIONS. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. CHAIRS
RECOMMENDED I VOTE IS THERE. YES
SHOOTING. CALL FOR THE VOTE. ON
A B 93 BY SEVEN MEMBER BRIAN.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS. JOHN
SAWYER, JOHN SAWYER, ALANIS SNOW
BONTA. I, BRIAN, BRIAN, I LACKEY
ORTEGA ORTEGA EYES SANTIAGO
SANTIAGO EISENBERG. ZIPPER I
THAT MEASURE PASSES AND I WILL
CHECK UH, ANY ADD ONS LIFTING OF
A CALLS BOTH CHANGES. MADAM
VICTOR'S PLEASE GO THROUGH ALL
THE MEASURES TAKEN UP TODAY ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR. BRIAN
BRIAN I. ORTEGA ORTEGA EYES
SANTIAGO SANTIAGO. AYE. I DON'T
WANT A B 15 BY SEVEN MEMBER
DIXON. SANTIAGO. NÓ SANTIAGO NO
ON RECONSIDERATION. SANTIAGO.
AYE. I DON'T NUMBER TWO A. B 61
WAS JUST DISPENSED WITH I DIDN'T
NUMBER THREE A B 93. BRIAN WAS
JUST DISPENSE WITH ITEM NUMBER
FOUR A B 97 BY A SEVEN MEMBER,
RODRIGUEZ, BRIAN. YEAH I FORGOT.
READY, RODRIGUEZ. HI. BRIAN I.
SANTIAGO SANTIAGO. AYE. ITEM
NUMBER FIVE BY A B. I'M SORRY
I'M AFFECT MAYBE 2 57 BY SOME
MEMBER HOOVER HAS BEEN DISPENSED
WITH ITEM NUMBER 6 83 27 WAS ON
CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN A B 3
28 BY SUMMER ASSAILANT HAS BEEN
DISPENSED WITH NUMBER 8 83 30
WAS ON CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER 9 83
35 HAS BEEN DISPENSED WITH I
DON'T NUMBER 10 83 53 WAS SUNG
CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER 11 83 55 BY
SOME MEMBER ELONIS SANTIAGO
SANTIAGO. AYE. I HAVE A NUMBER
12 83 60 BY DECEMBER MEMBER
GIBSON HAS BEEN DISPENSED WITH
ITEM NUMBER 13 83 90 WAS ON
CONSENT ITEM NUMBER 14 83 99 WAS
ALSO ON CONSENT. MR LACKEY DID
NOT VOTE ON COMING. NOT COMING
BACK. OKAY WITH THAT PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE STANDS
ADJOURNED. OKAY?