ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. WELCOME
TO ASSEMBLY BUDGET SUB THREE.
THIS WILL BE OUR FIRST VOTING
MEETING THEIR 27 27 ITEMS ON THE
VOTE ONLY CALENDAR, WHICH WERE
HEARD LAST WEEK. TODAY WE'LL
HEAR FROM THE AIR RESOURCES
BOARD, THE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD
AND AGRICULTURE AND THE ENERGY
COMMISSION, BUT ONLY ON ZERO
EMISSIONS VEHICLE ITEMS FOR THE
ENERGY COMMISSION. THIS WILL
INCLUDE AN INFORMATIONAL
OVERVIEW OF THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND AND SPENDING PLAN
AND IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE ON THE
$10 BILLION.00 ADMISSIONS
VEHICLE PACKAGE AND THE PROPOSAL
THE PROPOSED CUTS AND
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PACKAGE
AS WELL AS NEW PROPOSALS FROM
THE DEPARTMENT'S. THIS INCLUDES
20 PROPOSALS ON THE NON
PRESENTATION CALENDAR AND SIX
PRESENTATION ITEMS. FOR EACH
PRESENTATION ITEM. I'LL ASK EACH
OF THE WITNESSES IN THE AGENDA
TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES BEFORE
THEY BEGIN THEIR TESTIMONY. AT
THE END OF THE PRESENTATION
ITEMS. MEMBERS OF THIS
SUBCOMMITTEE MAY ASK QUESTIONS
OR MAKE COMMENTS ON ANY OF THE
NON PRESENTATION ITEMS. AFTER
ALL, THE ITEMS ARE HEARD. WE
WILL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT IN
REGARDS TO THE DEPARTMENT'S
BEFORE US TODAY. FIRST IN THE
ROOM, FOLLOWED BY PHONE
TESTIMONY. EACH MEMBER OF THE
PUBLIC WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO
SPEAK. THE PHONE NUMBER IS ON
THE COMMITTEE WEBSITE AND SHOULD
ALSO BE ON THE SCREEN. IF YOU'RE
WATCHING OVER THE INTERNET, THAT
NUMBER IS 877692. THE ACCESS
CODE IS 131. 5447 IF YOU
ENCOUNTER ANY PROBLEMS, PLEASE
CONTACT THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
COMMITTEE AT 916319. AND A STAFF
MEMBER WILL ASSIST YOU. LET'S
TAKE ROLL, PLEASE. BENNETT HERE.
THE SALINE. KIDMAN. GARCIA.
PATERSON. BREATHE IT. KI¾M FROM
. HIS PRESIDENT. THAT'S GREAT.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. UM WE'LL
TAKE THREE MOTIONS FOR THE VOTE
ONLY CALENDAR. THE FIRST VOTE IS
TO APPROVE AS BUDGETED VOTE ONLY
ITEMS ISSUES 13467. THROUGH 15
17 18 22 22 24 25 27 CAN I GET A
MOTION ON THOSE ITEMS? WHICH
MOVED BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CALMLY
AND SIX CONLEY AND EXECUTIVE BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S REVIS. RIGHT?
ROLL CALL, PLEASE. AYE.
CONNELLY. YOU'RE FAILING. BY
FRIEDMAN. GARCIA. THANK YOU. THE
SECOND VOTERS TO APPROVE AS
BUDGETED VOTE ONLY ISSUES 258,
23 AND 26. CAN I GET A MOTION
FOR THAT? PLEASE? 19 IS NOT
LISTED 258, 23 AND 26. YEAH 16
AND 19 OF THEM BE ANOTHER. MOVED
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S REVIS AND
SECONDED BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CONNOLLY. THAT IT AYE. CONNELLY.
YOU SAY LEE FREEDMAN. GARCIA.
PATERSON. REVERSE. AND THE LAST
VOTE IS TO APPROVE HIS BUDGET
AND VOTE ONLY ISSUES 16 AND 19.
MR CHAIR. CAN WE CAN WE SEPARATE
THOSE TWO? BECAUSE I THINK WE
MAY HAVE DIFFERENT VOTES ONLY 16
. ALRIGHT MOTION, PLEASE. FOR
16. UM. CAN I MAKE A MOTION WITH
A COMMENT? IS THAT SURE, OKAY.
MR CHAIR. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVED
16. BUT MY EXPECTATION IS THAT
THE DEPARTMENT WILL EXPEDITE
SEQUEL REVIEWS. SO I MOVED TO
APPROVE THAT. RIGHT. GREAT
EMOTION. RIGHT MR SLE AND
SECONDED BY SEVERAL MEMBER
RIVAS. AND VOTE. THERE WE GO.
WELCOME MR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
FALL. WE'RE READY FOR VOTE ON
ITEM 16. ITEMS. 16 BENNETT. AYE.
CONNELLY. YOU SAY LEE HIGH
FRIEDMAN. GARCIA. PATERSON.
RIVAS. OKAY? UM ITEM 19. WE HAVE
. AUTUMN 19 IN FRONT OF US NOW
WE NEED A MOTION. WE NEED A
MOTION FOR ITEM 19. REMEMBER
REVIS SECOND SPICE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CONNELLY. THANK
YOU. DONE IT. AYE, CONNOLLY.
REALLY? NO. FRIEDMAN. GARCIA.
PATERSON RIVETS. ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR
THE ABSENT MEMBERS. AND. WE ARE
NOW READY TO MOVE TO DISCUSSION
ITEM 10 EMISSION VEHICLE PACKAGE
IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE AND
GENERAL FUND SOLUTIONS. SO I
MOVED TO OUR SO IF THE
ADMINISTRATION WITNESSES WILL.
WELCOME TO THE COMMITTEE
HEARING. AND WHICHEVER WHICHEVER
MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
WANT TO START OFF. GREAT YEAH,
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
CHRISTIAN BELTRAN WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. SO THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS WORKED WITH
THE LEGISLATURE TO MAKING
HISTORIC INVESTMENTS IN THE
EXPANSION AND ROLL OUT OF ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES OVER THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS, THE
ADMINISTRATION REMAINS COMMITTED
TO PROTECTING THESE HISTORIC
INVESTMENTS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE
FOR THE STATE TO CONTINUE TO
MAKE MAJOR STRIDES IN REDUCING
THE AMOUNT OF GREENHOUSE GAS IS
EMITTED FROM THE STATE'S
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR. ACTOR. AS
SUCH, THE ADMINISTRATION HAS
TAKEN A METHODICAL AND BALANCED
APPROACH IN HOW WE ARE
PROTECTING THESE INVESTMENTS,
BUT ALSO SOLVING FOR LOWER
PROJECTED GENERAL FUND REVENUES
. OVERALL THE ADMINISTRATION IS
PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN ABOUT
ALMOST 90% OF THE ORIGINAL
INVESTMENTS. BUT BEFORE YOU JUMP
INTO HOW THE ADMINISTRATION
APPROACHED THE GENERAL FUND
REDUCTIONS, I'D FIRST LIKE TO
PROVIDE A HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF
WHERE THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD
AND THE ENERGY COMMISSIONER AT
AND IMPLEMENTING SOME OF THE 21
22 APPROPRIATIONS. FIRST IN
LOOKING AT FISCAL YEAR. 21 22
CARBONS ENCUMBERED OVER 90% OF
THE $1.7 BILLION INCLUDED IN THE
ZEP PACKAGE, AND IT SPENT ALMOST
A QUARTER OF THOSE FUNDS THROUGH
THE END OF LAST YEAR THROUGH
INVESTMENTS IN PROGRAMS LIKE THE
CLEAN VEHICLE REBATE PROJECT,
CLEAN CARS FOR ALL AND THE
HYBRID AND ZERO EMISSION, TRUCK
AND BUS VOUCHER INCENTIVE
PROJECT. C E. C HAS ENCUMBERED
APPROXIMATELY 90% AS WELL OF THE
785 MILLION IN 21, 22 FUNDING
AND ABOUT 117 MILLION OF THE 22
23 FUNDING FROM THE 21 ZIP
PACKAGE. THIS INCLUDES ADDING
FUNDING TO BLOCK GRANTS TO
ACCELERATE INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPLOYMENT FOR PASSENGER
VEHICLES, TRUCKS AND BUSSES AND
TARGETED INVESTMENTS WHERE THE
PRIVATE MARKET MAY NOT OTHERWISE
ACT. INCLUDING RURAL COMMUNITIES
AND APARTMENTS. FOR FISCAL YEAR
22 23. THE FINAL BUDGET BILL WAS
SIGNED INTO LAW IN SEPTEMBER OF
2022. AND CARBS BOARD APPROVED
ITS FUNDING PLAN FOR THE ZEP
PACKAGE INVESTMENTS IN NOVEMBER
OF 2022. DEDICATING THE FULL TWO
POINT 4,000,000,002 PROJECTS AND
CAR WILL BEGIN ENCUMBERING THOSE
FUNDS THIS QUARTER. FOR THE 2022
Z PACKAGE FOR C E. C A TOTAL OF
874 MILLION WAS APPROPRIATED TO
THE DEPARTMENT OR EXCUSE ME, THE
COMMISSION. VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE, MEDIUM HEAVY
DUTY AND OFF ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE
AND EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES WILL
ALL GET SUPPORT FOR ELECTRIC AND
HYDROGEN FUEL CELL VEHICLES AND
CC ALSO INTENDS TO ENCUMBER
THOSE FUNDS THIS QUARTER. NOW,
I'D LIKE TO PIVOT TO HOW THE
ADMINISTRATION APPROACHED THE
GENERAL FUND REDUCTIONS AND
FRIENDSHIPS. THE BUDGET
MAINTAINS $8.9 BILLION OF A 10
BILLION, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY
AROUND 90. INCLUDED IN THE MULTI
YEAR SPENDING PLAN FOR ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES THAT WAS
ORIGINALLY AGREED UPON WITH THE
LEGISLATURE THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS. THE OVERALL GENERAL FUND
REDUCTION FOR XEV IS
APPROXIMATELY $2.5 BILLION
ACROSS MULTIPLE YEARS, BEGINNING
IN 23 24 25 26. HOWEVER THE
ADMINISTRATION IS PROPOSING TO
SHIFT $1.4 BILLION OF THE 2.5
BILLION REDUCTION TO BE FUNDED
BY THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND, RESULTING IN A NET
REDUCTION OF $1.1 BILLION. THE
ADMINISTRATION'S METHODOLOGY FOR
THE ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE FUND.
SHIFTS AND REDUCTIONS INCLUDED A
PRIORITIZATION OF CRITICAL
PROGRAMS FOCUS ON EQUITY AND A
CONSIDERATION OF WHERE FEDERAL
FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE AS A RESULT
OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
AND JOBS ACT, OR I, I J A AS
WELL AS THE INFLATION REDUCTIONS
ACT, THE IRA THE BUDGET ALSO
INCLUDES CONTROL SECTION THAT
PROVIDES A MECHANISM TO ALLOCATE
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCRETIONARY CAP
AND TRADE AUCTION PROCEEDS
TOWARDS THE ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE PROGRAMS THAT RECEIVED
GENERAL FUND REDUCTIONS AND HAVE
NOT OTHERWISE ALREADY BEEN FULLY
OFFSET BY G R F. SPECIFICALLY
THE CONTROL SECTION AUTHORIZES
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AFTER
THE FOURTH CAP AND TRADE AUCTION
IN THE 23 24 FISCAL YEAR IF THE
ANNUAL G R F REVENUES ARE
GREATER THAN PROJECTED IN THE 23
BUDGET. TO ALLOCATE THE
REMAINING FUNDS TO PROGRAMS,
WHICH INCLUDE FUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS, TRANSIT
BUSSES AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SCHOOL BUSSES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
, PORTS, COMMUNITY BASED PLANS
PROJECT AND SUPPORT AND
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGIES
, EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES AND
CHARTER BOATS. COMPLIANCE. ONE
IMPORTANT NOTE IS THAT THERE IS
SIGNIFICANT NEW FEDERAL FUNDING
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION BELIEVES
WOULD HELP OFFSET THESE
REDUCTIONS STEMMING FROM THE
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND
JOBS ACT AND THE INFLATION
REDUCTION ACT. MANY OF THE SAME
STAKEHOLDERS THAT WOULD BENEFIT
FROM THE STATE PROGRAMS WITH
THEORETICALLY BE ABLE TO ALSO
APPLY TO SOME OF THE FEDERAL
PROGRAMS. IN TOTAL THROUGH THE I
J AND IRA THE BIDEN HARRIS
ADMINISTRATION HAS MADE
AVAILABLE NATIONALLY,
APPROXIMATELY $27.8 BILLION FOR
DIRECT XEV RELATED PROGRAMS. THE
ADMINISTRATION'S GENERAL
STRATEGY ON FEDERAL ZERO.
MISSION FUNDING IS TO LEVERAGE
FORMULA FUNDING WHEREVER
POSSIBLE. DIRECTLY APPLY OR
SUPPORT PARTNERS APPLYING FOR
COMPETITIVE FUNDS CREATE
OPPORTUNITIES TO USE SMART
FINANCE TO STRETCH PUBLIC
DOLLARS AS FAR AS POSSIBLE. WE
NOTE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF INTEREST IN
THE COMPETITIVE SOLICITATIONS,
AND THERE IS NO ASSURANCE THAT
CALIFORNIA WILL GET THOSE FUNDS
, BUT THAT BEING SAID CALIFORNIA
IS A LEADER IN THE ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE SPACE IN THE
ADMINISTRATION BELIEVES THAT THE
STATE WILL BE VERY COMPETITIVE
FOR THESE FUNDS. GIVEN THAT THE
MOST FEDERAL PROGRAMS BENEFITS
RELATED TO ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES COME IN THE FORM OF NON
REFUNDABLE TAX CREDITS. THE
ADMINISTRATION MAINTAINED ALL
FUNDING RELATED TO EQUITY
PROGRAMS SUCH AS CLEAN CARS FOR
ALL AND EQUITABLE AT HOME,
CHARGING VIA FUND SHIFT TO CAP
AND TRADE, OR G R F ADDITIONALLY
, GIVEN THE ROLE OF DRAINAGE
TRUCKS AND THEIR IMPACT ON LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES AROUND PORTS
AND MAJOR RAIL CORRIDORS, THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS MAINTAINED A
LARGE MAJORITY OF INVESTMENTS
MADE IN DRAKE'S TRUCKS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE. TO CONCLUDE I
WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT
DESPITE THESE REDUCTIONS CARBON
C E C, ANTICIPATE DEPLOYING A
SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES AND REFUELING
STATIONS. THIS INCLUDES OVER
10,000 VEHICLES 20,000 LEVEL TWO
CHARGERS FOR MULTI DWELLING
UNITS AS WELL AS REFUELING
CAPACITY TO SUPPORT OVER 1300
MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS AND
BUSSES AS WELL AS 15,000 LIGHT
DUTY FEELS SELL ELECTRIC
VEHICLES. THIS INCLUDES MY
PRESENTATION, AND I'M JOINED
TODAY BY DR VERGIS FROM THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD AND DIRECTOR
RUSSELL TO HELP ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. THE COMMITTEE MAY
HAVE. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE
FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. HUESO.
HELLO. THANK YOU. I'M SARAH
SARAH KORNET WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE. UM
WE FIND THAT THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSALS OF IN THE DEAD PACKAGE
ARE GENERALLY REASONABLE. UH THE
REDUCTIONS ARE TARGETING NEWER
PROGRAMS AND WHERE THERE IS
POTENTIAL FOR FEDERAL FUNDS,
SUCH AS FUNDING ZERO EMISSION
ACTIVITIES AT PORTS. WE ALSO
FIND MERIT AND MAINTAINING
FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS THAT ARE
DESIGNED TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AND
AIR POLLUTION IN LOW INCOME AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, SUCH
AS THE DREDGE TRUCK PROGRAMS. WE
RECOMMEND THAT THE LEGISLATURE
BEGIN WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
SOLUTIONS, BUT CONSIDER
ADDITIONAL OR ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS ACROSS PROGRAMS BASED
ON ITS GOALS AND HIGHEST
PRIORITIES. THE LEGISLATURE MAY
WANT TO CONSIDER NARROWING THE
SCOPE OF CERTAIN PROGRAMS AS IT
LOOKS TO MAKE FUNDING REDUCTIONS
. FOR EXAMPLE, THIS COULD
INCLUDE NARROWING THE SCOPE OF
THE CLEAN CARS FOR ALL PROGRAM
TO FOCUS. BENEFITS TO THOSE
CONSUMERS WHO WHOSE INCOMES ARE
TOO LOW TO ACCESS FEDERAL TAX
INCENTIVES TO PURCHASES OF
ANOTHER OPTION COULD BE FURTHER
TARGETING CHARGING FUNDS TO
SUPPORT CHARGES THAT HAVE
RECEIVED LESS PRIVATE
INVESTMENT, SO THIS COULD
INCLUDE CHARGES AND APARTMENT
BUILDINGS IN LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES AND CHARGERS FOR
HEAVY DUTY AND HYDROGEN
VEHICLES. WE ALSO RECOMMEND, UM
, REJECTING THE GOVERNOR'S JDRF
TRIGGER PROPOSAL TO
AUTOMATICALLY ALLOCATE
ADDITIONAL JDRF REVENUES THAT
COME IN HIGHER THAN EXPECTATIONS
TO XEV PROGRAMS. WE BELIEVE THIS
WOULD LIMIT LEGISLATIVE
FLEXIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OVER
OVER THESE THESE MIDYEAR GROF
REVENUES. AND AS WE'LL TALK MORE
ABOUT IN AN UPCOMING ITEM, WE
ALSO RECOMMEND CONSIDERING
WHETHER IT'S HAVE PROGRAMS
REPRESENT THE HIGHEST PRIORITY
FOR GRR FUNDS AS THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL WOULD USE THE MAJORITY
OF DISCRETIONARY DU JURA FUNDS
TO BACKFILL REDUCTIONS IN
PROGRAMS AND ALSO COMMIT OUT
YEAR DREW GIRAFFE REVENUES,
WHICH IS UNUSUAL AND WOULD WOULD
LIMIT THE AVAILABILITY OF THE
SPENDS IN THE FUTURE. UM AND WE
ALSO RECOMMEND CONSIDERING THESE
PROPOSALS IN LIGHT OF OTHER
INVESTMENTS IN INDIA EMISSION
VEHICLE PROGRAMS SUCH AS, UM, A
B A FEW REVENUES AND ALSO A
PROPOSAL. FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES TO FUND UM ZERO
MISSION BE VEHICLE CHARGING AT
STATE OWNED AND LEASED
FACILITIES. THIS THIS ISN'T
BEING CONSIDERED IN THIS
SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT, UM BUT WE
THINK IT COULD MAKE SENSE TO
FUND IT THROUGH THROUGH THE
PACKAGE GIVEN EDITS, UM, RELATED
TO SIMILAR ACTIVITIES. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AS WE
AS WE DID AT THE FIRST COMMITTEE
HEARING THAT WE HAD, WE WOULD
APPRECIATE IT IF JUST
CONSISTENTLY, THE ADMINISTRATION
WILL LIST THE ACTUAL CUTS THAT
THEY'RE MAKING. SO COULD THE
ADMINISTRATION POLICE LIST THE
NET REDUCTIONS PER PROGRAM AND
HOW THAT COMPARES TO WHAT WAS
ADOPTED IN THE PREVIOUS BUDGET,
PLEASE? ABSOLUTELY SO. CHRISTIAN
BELCHING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE AGAIN. HAPPY TO DO THAT
FOR YOU, MR CHAIR. SO IN THE 23
24 YEARS, SPECIFICALLY THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD CLEAN CARS FOR
ALL PROGRAM WOULD HAVE $125
MILLION REDUCTION. FOR THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION. IT
WAS FOR ITS EQUITABLE AT HOME,
CHARGING IT WOULD HAVE $160
MILLION REDUCTION. FOR THE
DRAINAGE TRUCKS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM WITH THE
AIR RESOURCES BOARD THAT WOULD
HAVE AN $80 MILLION REDUCTION.
FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION FOR THE DREDGE TRUCKS
AND INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD
HAVE AN $85 MILLION REDUCTION.
FOR THE AIR RESOURCES, BOARD,
TRANSIT, BUSSES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT WOULD HAVE
$38 MILLION. FOR THE ENERGY
COMMISSION FOR TRANSIT, BUSSES
AND INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL. THAT
WOULD HAVE A $25 MILLION
REDUCTION. FOR THE ENERGY
COMMISSION'S CLEAN TRUCKS,
BUSSES AND OFF ROAD EQUIPMENT
THAT WOULD HAVE $98 MILLION
REDUCTION. AND. I BELIEVE THAT
COVERS ALL OF THE REDUCTIONS.
MR. CHAIR THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE'RE GOING TO NOW OPEN THIS UP
FOR MEMBER QUESTIONS AND
COMMENTS. DO WE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS? ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
REVIS AND WELCOME ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. THANK YOU, MR. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION
REALLY ABOUT THE PROPOSED
ADVANCED CLEAN FLEETS RULE. UH
YOU KNOW, I SIGNED ONTO A LETTER
UPDATED FEBRUARY 13TH, WITH A
GROUP OF MEMBERS URGING CARB TO
ENSURE THAT THE RULE DOES NOT
IMPACT UTILITY RELIABILITY AND
EMERGENCY RESPONSE. WE HAVEN'T
RECEIVED A RESPONSE YET AND SO I
WANTED TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING
TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT WE
ARTICULATED IN THAT LETTER. AND
WHEN WILL WE WERE, WE WILL
RECEIVE A RESPONSE. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE
LETTER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. MY
NAME IS SYDNEY VERGIS. I'M A
DIVISION CHIEF AT THE CALIFORNIA
RESOURCES BOARD. I OVERSEE BOTH
INCENTIVES AND MANY OF OUR
REGULATIONS SO HAPPY TO SPEAK TO
ADVANCED CLEAN FLEETS. SO JUST
FOR A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND
FOR FOLKS WHO ARE ON UNFAMILIAR
WITH THE HISTORY ON THIS IN 2021
, THE BOARD ADOPTED WHAT WE CALL
OUR ADVANCED CLEAN TRUCK
REGULATION, WHICH REQUIRED
MANUFACTURERS TO BRING ZERO
MISSION TRUCKS TO OUR MARKET.
OUR BOARD RECOGNIZED THAT EVEN
WITH THAT REGULATION THAT 12
MILLION CALIFORNIANS WOULD STILL
BE BREATHING UNHEALTHY AIR. AND
THAT HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS WOULD
STILL BE CONTRIBUTING A
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT TO
TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS, HAVING
A REAL IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES WHO
LIVE NEXT TO TRUCK CORRIDORS. SO
THEY ASKED US TO FOLLOW UP WITH
THE ADVANCED CLEAN FLEETS
REGULATION, WHICH YOU'RE
REFERRING TO, WHICH IS A
REQUIREMENT TO ACCELERATE THE
ZERO EMISSION TRUCK MARKET BY
REQUIRING FLEETS TO PURCHASE
THESE VEHICLES, INCLUDING
UTILITIES, PRIVATE AND PUBLIC
SECTOR. WITH RESPECT TO
EMERGENCY RESPONSE DEFINITELY
SHARE YOUR CONCERNS AND
EMERGENCY VEHICLES ARE ACTUALLY
EXEMPTED OUT OF THE REGULATION.
OKAY WELL, WE RECEIVED A
RESPONSE IN WRITING ALL
CERTAINLY BRING THIS BACK TO OUR
ALLEGED OFFICE. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. YOU'RE FORMALLY ENTERED
INTO THE OUR OFFICIAL DOCKET. I
DON'T KNOW IF THAT BRINGS YOU
ANY COMFORT, BUT WE'LL FOLLOW
UP. MY I'LL HAVE MY OFFICE
FOLLOW UP TO THANK. YOU KNOW, I
WANT TO SUPPORT THE STRONGEST
ROLE POSSIBLE AND THIS BUDGET
REQUEST, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THESE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED.
SO THANK YOU. THANKS FOR YOUR
INTEREST. YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR
AND APPRECIATE THE TESTIMONY ON
IT DELVED DEEPER INTO THE
PROPOSED CARDS ON THE ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE PROGRAM. OF
COURSE, WE'RE ALL SUPPORTIVE OF
THE STATE'S AMBITIOUS GOALS TO
ACHIEVE 100% OF AH, BUT WE FIND
OURSELVES NOW EVALUATING
PROPOSALS TO CUT SIX
SIGNIFICANTLY FUNDS TO THAT
PROGRAM. SO JUST A FEW QUESTIONS
TO GET INTO MORE OF THE DETAILS
ON THAT. BEGINNING WITH, UM. IN
LIGHT OF THESE CUTS. HOW MANY
REBATES? UH, ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES, CHARGERS AND ALIKE
WILL NOT BE SUBSIDIZED OR
PURCHASE BECAUSE OF THESE CARDS.
YET THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CONNOLLY SO I BELIEVE ON PAGE 26
OF THE AGENDA. THERE IS A TABLE
THERE THAT HIGHLIGHTS AND
IDENTIFIES THE SPECIFIC AMOUNT
OF VEHICLES THAT WOULD
POTENTIALLY NOT BE DEPLOYED AS A
RESULT OF SOME OF THESE CUTS
THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD COMPONENT OF IT.
UM I BELIEVE THE C E C IS ALSO
IN THE PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING
WHAT WILL NOT BE FUNDED AS A
RESULT OF THE CUTS AS WELL. BUT
I DO ALSO WANT TO JUST HIGHLIGHT
A COUPLE OF THINGS FIRST AND
FOREMOST, AS HIGHLIGHTED IN MY
FIRST KIND OF OPENING COMMENTS.
WE ARE PROTECTING APPROXIMATELY
90% OF THE OVERALL PACKAGE. UM,
SO WHEN LOOKING AT THE GRAND
SCHEME OF THE GENERAL FUND
CONDITION THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE AS THE ADMINISTRATION BELIEVE
THAT THIS IS KIND OF AH,
CRITICAL IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT
OF FUNDS THAT WE ARE PROTECTING
AND HOW WE ARE PRIORITIZING THE
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE SPACE. BUT
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT
THAT IN TERMS OF THE SPECIFIC
KIND OF ROLL OUT, UH, IN TERMS
OF WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE
FUNDING. THE EEC HAS IDENTIFIED
THAT FOR THIS BUDGET YEAR, WE
WILL INDEED ROLL OUT. 20,000
LEVEL TWO CHARGES FOR MULTI
DWELLING UNITS. 700
APPROXIMATELY 740 DREDGE TRUCKS
WILL BE SUPPORTED 500 TRANSIT
BUSSES WILL BE SUPPORTED AND
15,000 LIGHT DUTY. UH FUEL CELL
ELECTRIC VEHICLES WILL ALSO BE
SUPPORTED AND AIR RESOURCES
BOARD IS PROJECTING THAT 8500
VEHICLES DEPLOYMENTS WILL BE
SUPPORTED 910 DRAINAGE TRUCKS,
370 TRANSIT BUSSES AND 900
VEHICLES. UH FOR THE COMMUNITY
BASED PLANS, SO I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO IDENTIFY SOME OF
THE POSITIVES THAT ARE STILL
THERE. UNDERSTANDING THAT IN THE
OUT YEARS AT THE VERY LEAST,
THERE WILL BE SOME A LITTLE BIT
OF IMPACTS. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S
OUT YEARS. UM AND THERE IS THAT
GROF TRIGGER THAT WE ARE ALSO
PROPOSING THAT WOULD HELP KIND
OF BACKFILL. THOSE SPECIFIC CUTS
ALSO WANT IT IS SPECIFICALLY
FLAGGED THE ISSUES OF SCHOOLS
AND THEIR TRANSITION TO CLEANER
BUT TECHNOLOGIES AND AGAIN
LOOKING AT PAGE 26 JUST TO BE
PERFECTLY CLEAR. THERE WILL BE
SIGNIFICANT CUTS IN THE NUMBER
OF SCHOOL BUSSES THAT WOULD BE
FUNDED AS WELL. SO I WOULD JUST
IDENTIFY THAT. I BELIEVE LAST
YEAR WE HAD SOME PROPOSITION 98
GENERAL FUND DOLLARS THAT WERE
WAS INCLUDED THAT IS NOT BEING
TOUCHED AS PART OF THE GENERAL
FUND SOLUTIONS, SO THIS IN
PARTICULAR IS FOCUSED ON NON
PROP $98. SO WE ARE STILL
MAINTAINING THAT PREVIOUS
FUNDING FROM LAST YEAR. GREAT
YOU TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
FEDERAL FUNDING AND SOME
OPPORTUNITIES WE HAVE TO BAG
FILLED WITH THAT. OF COURSE, WE
KNOW THAT THAT FUNDING IS VERY
COMPETITIVE, AND THAT INCLUDES
AROUND ZAB ZAB. INFRASTRUCTURE
CERTAINLY IS NOT GUARANTEED. HOW
CONFIDENT ARE YOU? WE WILL BE
ABLE TO COMPETE EFFECTIVELY FOR
THIS FINDS AND ULTIMATELY GET
THEM. UH I'LL KIND OF MAKE A
BRIEF COMMENT, BUT THEN I'LL
TURN IT OVER TO THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD TO MAYBE JUST
TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW
THEY'RE HELPING IN PARTICULAR
SOME OF THOSE LOCAL SCHOOL
DISTRICT. SO I WOULD SAY THAT,
AS MENTIONED IN THE COMMENTS
THAT I SAID IN DURING MY OPENING
STATEMENT THAT YOU KNOW
CALIFORNIA IS REALLY COMPETITIVE
IN TERMS OF OBTAINING A LOT OF
THOSE GENERAL SCHOOL BUS FUNDS,
AND SO THERE ARE A LOT OF THE
FEDERAL FUNDING THAT IS BEING
IDENTIFIED IN THE I J AND I ARE
A WE HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF
OBTAINING A LOT OF THOSE FUNDS
IN OUR LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS
OBTAINING THOSE FUNDS, BUT TO
GIVE MORE DETAIL ABOUT HOW THE
STATE IS ALSO HELPING OUR
PARTNERS OBTAIN THOSE FUNDS.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. SURE HAPPY TO
SPEAK TO THAT. SO SYDNEY VERGIS
AGAIN CALIFORNIA RESOURCES BOARD
SO WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHOOL
BUS YES, THANK YOU. WITH RESPECT
TO SCHOOL BUS MONEY. WE HAVE A
PRETTY DEEP RELATIONSHIP WITH U
S EPA SO WE CAN BROADEN IT
BEYOND SCHOOL TOUCH ON THAT
SPECIFICALLY, BUT THEN MORE
BROADLY TO HAPPY TO ISSUE. YEAH
DEFINITELY SO BETWEEN CALIFORNIA
AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
THESE ARE TWO OF THE BIGGEST
SCHOOL BUS INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
THAT EXIST SO AS MY COLLEAGUE AT
BOF MENTIONED WE HAVE ABOUT $1.1
BILLION TO SPEND OVER THE NEXT
SEVERAL YEARS TO HELP
INCENTIVIZE SCHOOL BUSSES, WHICH
WERE LOOKING TO ACTIVELY
LEVERAGE WITH THE $5 BILLION
COMING FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A
LOT OF QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO
HOW THOSE FUNDS FOR SCHOOL
BUSSES WILL BE ROLLED OUT,
FEDERALLY, BUT ONE OF THE
ONGOING CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE
HAVING WITH US CPA IS HOW BEST
DO WE MOVE THE MARKET TOWARDS
ZERO MISSION IN A WAY THAT
SCHOOLS THAT SERVES SCHOOL
DISTRICTS AND CAN LEVERAGE BOTH
THESE POTS OF FUNDING. TO YOUR
BROADER QUESTION. YOU KNOW, THE
BENEFITS THAT COME TO CALIFORNIA
WILL BE I IN DIRECT PROPORTION
TO HOW MANY ELECTRIC VEHICLES
GENERALLY ARE SOLD IN CALIFORNIA
AND ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS
ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE'S
CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR MANY OF
CALIFORNIA'S INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
IS THE ABILITY TO STACK THOSE
WITH FEDERAL INCENTIVES, WHICH
NECESSARILY MEANS. THAT MORE
FEDERAL BENEFITS WILL BE FLOWING
TO CALIFORNIA. SO RIGHT NOW IN
CALIFORNIA, WE OFFER PURCHASE
REBATES ON THE LIGHT DUTY SIDE.
WE OFFER INCREASED REBATES IF
YOU'RE WILLING TO SCRAP A
VEHICLE, BUT THOSE CAN BE
COMBINED WITH THE FEDERAL TAX
CREDITS THAT WE ALL KNOW ARE
COMING. GREAT AND THEN FINAL
QUESTION FOR NOW. IN WHAT WAYS
ARE WE PRIORITIZING HELPING
LOWER INCOME CALIFORNIANS
ACHIEVING. IN OTHER WORDS,
ACHIEVING MORE EQUITY IN THE
RESULTS? WE WANT TO TRANSITION
FROM OLDER POLLUTING VEHICLES TO
ZERO MISSION. VEHICLES WHICH, AS
WE KNOW, ARE STILL RELATIVELY
EXPANSIVE IN THE MARKET. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT QUESTION.
MANY OF OUR PROGRAMS OVER TIME
HAVE IN FACT TRANSITION FROM
BEING VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON HOW
DO WE GET THE ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE MARKET STARTED TO NOW?
HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT
COMMUNITIES ARE NOT BEING LEFT
BEHIND IN THIS ELECTRIFICATION
TRANSFORMATION, SO FOLLOWING THE
GUIDANCE OF THE LEGISLATURE, ONE
OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT WE A CURB
EMBARKED ON WAS TO PRODUCE SB 3
33 3 50 REPORT. WHICH LOOKED AT
LOW INCOME BARRIERS TO ACCESSING
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES AND ZERO
MISSION TRANSPORTATION
GENERALLY. SO WHAT YOU SEE IN
OUR PORTFOLIO IS REALLY AN
ATTEMPT TO MAKE CONSUMERS WHERE
THEY ARE. SO IF YOU'RE A LOW
INCOME CONSUMER LIVING IN A
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY, AND
YOU'RE WILLING TO SCRAP THE
VEHICLE, WE WILL PROVIDE YOU
PURCHASE REBATE OR TRANSIT CARDS
OR OTHER MOBILITY OPTIONS. UM IF
YOU'RE LIVING IN A COMMUNITY
WHERE YOU DON'T NECESSARILY WANT
OR CAN HAVE THE OVERHEAD OF A
PERSONAL VEHICLE WE HAVE
PROGRAMS LIKE OUR CLEAN MOBILITY
OPTIONS PROGRAM, WHICH ARE
REALLY MEANT TO BE COMMUNITY
BASED SOLUTIONS LIKE ZERO
EMISSION CAR SHARE PROJECTS.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER HANAN RESULT
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION.
I'LL JUST ADD ON INFRASTRUCTURE
PIECE OF IT TO, UM THIS IS
EXCEEDINGLY IMPORTANT TO US.
WE'VE COMMITTED AT LEAST 50% OF
OUR FUNDING TO BE DEPLOYED AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND
LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES. WE
ACTUALLY STARTED AN EFFORT LATE
LAST YEAR AND WILL HOLD A SECOND
WORKSHOP LIKELY IN MARCH AND MAY
SLIP INTO APRIL TO DEFINED
BENEFIT EVEN BEYOND LOCATIONAL
BASED SO WE WANT TO SEE. CAN WE
GO A LAYER DEEPER ON THAT AS
WELL? BECAUSE WE KNOW THE
LOCATION ALONE ISN'T ALWAYS A
FACTOR OF WHO BENEFITS FROM IT.
SO THAT'S AN EFFORT WE'RE TAKING
IN EARNEST AS WELL. UM IN
ADDITION TO SETTING THAT 50%
FLOOR OF MAKING INVESTMENTS IN
LOCATION BASIS, WE ALSO DESIGN
SOLICITATIONS FOCUSED ON
SPECIFIC SEGMENTS. SO A LITTLE
OVER A YEAR AGO, WE HAD A
SOLICITATION FOCUSED SOLELY ON
MULTI UNIT DWELLINGS, APARTMENTS
AND CONDOS. WE ALSO HAD ONE
SOLELY FOCUSED ON RURAL
COMMUNITIES AND ALSO WANTS
SOLELY FOCUSED ON HIGH MILEAGE
VEHICLES. WE'RE GOING TO
RELAUNCH THE APARTMENT AND CONDO
ONE AGAIN HOPE TO RELEASE THAT
LATE MARCH COULD SLIDE INTO
APRIL, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING WE
WANT TO DO ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
THE GENERAL FUND. MONEY WE HAVE
RECEIVED HELPS US DO THAT, AND
THEN I KNOW IT'S JUST LATER ITEM
BUT ALSO EXTENSION OF A B EIGHT.
FUNDING WOULD HELP US DO THAT,
FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME TO
CORRECT. THANK YOU, MR COLLEY
BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FONG, UM, FIRST
I WANT TO WELCOME YOU TO THE
HEARING. I KNOW.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TING IS ALSO
GOING TO JOIN US AND PART OF WHY
THERE IS SO MUCH INTEREST IN
THIS IS $10 BILLION. FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE IS A HUGE
COMMITMENT ON THE PART OF
CALIFORNIA AND I THINK THERE'S
GOING TO BE A LOT OF INTEREST IN
IT. I THINK THAT TO THE EXTENT
THAT WE CAN HAVE AS MUCH
INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE AND
RECOGNIZED THAT THIS IS GOING TO
CONSTANTLY BE EVOLVING AND
ADJUSTING AS TECHNOLOGY CHANGES
AS WE FIND OUT ABOUT FEDERAL
FUNDING COMING IN AND. TO THE
THIS THIS WON'T BE THE LAST TIME
WE'LL TALK ABOUT PRESERVE
INFRASTRUCTURE, THIS BUDGET AND
YOU KNOW, AS WE GO FORWARD TO
CALIFORNIA, IT'S JUST GOING TO
BE A HUGE QUESTION FOR US. AND I
WANT TO GET ON THE RADAR SCREEN
SORT OF A GENERAL OVERALL.
THOUGHT THAT I HAVE IS THAT THE
YOU KNOW, IN PREPARATION FOR
THIS CONVERSATION, AND THAT'S
THE ISSUE OF TRYING TO KEEP UP
WITH TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, WHILE
A GOVERNMENT ENTITY IS TRYING TO
PLAY THIS UNIQUE ROLE WHEN THE
MARKET GETS MATURE THAN CHANGES
, YOU KNOW CAN EASILY BE HANDLED
BY THE MARKET. BUT WHEN YOU'RE
IN THIS CHICKEN AND EGG
SITUATION OF NOBODY WANTS TO BUY
THE VEHICLES UNTIL THE CHARGING
STATIONS THERE. NOBODY WANTS TO
BUILD A CHARGING STATIONS UNTIL
THERE'S A DEMAND BECAUSE PEOPLE
HAVE THE VEHICLES. YOU HAVE A
WITH THE GOVERNMENT HAS A VERY
INTERESTING AND CHALLENGING ROLE
BECAUSE YOU'RE TRYING TO SORT OF
LIKE ANTICIPATE WHERE THINGS ARE
GOING. AND SO I'VE SAID THIS TO
MANY PEOPLE BEFORE AND CERTAINLY
HAVE SAID IT TO CEASE AND CARVED
REPRESENTATIVES, BUT I WANT TO
GET THIS SAID AT THE COMMITTEE
HEARING. SO THAT IS OUT THERE.
AND THAT IS, I THINK BACK TO THE
EARLY 19 FIFTIES, AND THAT'S I
WAS ALIVE THEN, AND VERY FEW
PEOPLE YOU KNOW, ARE AROUND. BUT
THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION CAR
COMPANIES PURCHASED UP ALL THE
ELECTRIC BATTERY. CARS AND THE
PATENTS FOR THOSE ELECTRIC
BATTERY CARS AND KILLED THAT
INDUSTRY AND THE CRIB. AND
NOBODY ON THE GOVERNMENT'S SIDE
STOOD UP TO THAT AND SAID, HEY,
WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE BOTH OF
THESE TECHNOLOGIES COMPETING
WITH EACH OTHER EARLY IN THE
ADOPTION OF VEHICLES AND HOW
MUCH BETTER OFF WE WOULD HAVE
BEEN IF WE WOULD HAVE AT LEAST
KEPT THAT ALIVE LONG ENOUGH TO
SEE WHETHER IT WAS COMMERCIALLY
VIABLE. AND BUT TODAY WE HAVE A
VERY DIFFERENT AIR QUALITY
EQUATION AND POTENTIALLY A
GREENHOUSE GAS EQUATION. IF WE
HAD DONE THAT. SO WHILE WE'RE IN
THIS NEXT PHASE OF TRYING TO GO
FROM A CARBON ECONOMY TO A
CARBONLESS ECONOMY, I WANT YOU
TO KNOW FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. I'M NOT
TRYING TO PICK WINNERS. I'M
TRYING TO KEEP AS MANY OPTIONS
OPEN AS POSSIBLE, AND THAT'S
PART OF WHY I WANT TO MAKE SURE
WE ARE MAKING THE APPROPRIATE
HYDROGEN INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENTS. AND STILL MAINTAIN
AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY AS POSSIBLE
SO WE CAN SHIFT AS AS A
TECHNOLOGY SHOES. SO WITH THAT,
THAT'S JUST AN OVERVIEW THAT I
THINK WE'LL INFLUENCE SOME OF
SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS AND
CERTAINLY THE QUESTIONS THAT I
HAVE, AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FONG
WELCOME. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I
WANTED TO GET STEPPED BACK A
LITTLE BIT AND ASK ABOUT JUST
WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW AND WITH
THE GOALS ARE BEING FORWARD, SO
I'VE I'VE READ THE C E. C.
REPORT. HOW MANY MEN AND LET ME
KNOW IF THIS IS CHANGED FROM
FROM FROM WHEN IT CAME OUT, BUT
HOW MANY CHARGING STATIONS ARE
NECESSARY, MOVING FORWARD THAT
WE NEED TO GET TO YEAH, OUR
PROJECTIONS ARE WE NEED 1.2
MILLION CHARGERS BY 2030. AND
THAT'S FOR THE LIGHT DUTY
PASSENGER SIDE. APPROXIMATELY
157,000 CHARGERS FOR MEDIUM DUTY
HEAVY DUTY TO SUPPORT 180,000
VEHICLES. ALSO 2030 NOTE THAT WE
ARE DRAFTING OUR SECOND MAYBE 21
27 REPORT NOW, SO SOME OF THOSE
NUMBERS MAY BE UPDATED WITH NEW
DATA. AND SO WHERE ARE WE?
CURRENTLY HOW MANY CHARGING
STATIONS ARE CURRENTLY SET UP
ACROSS THE STATE. I KNOW THERE
WAS A LOT OF ATTENTION ON SOME
THAT ARE NOT FUNCTIONING. SO DO
YOU. DO YOU HAVE A CURRENT
ACCOUNT OF HOW MANY HAVE
CHARGING STATIONS ARE CURRENTLY
SET UP? BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY
ARE FUNCTIONING? YEAH WE'RE
ESTIMATING 80,000 CHARGERS
TODAY. AND WITH THE FUNDING WE
RECEIVED FROM THE GENERAL FUND
AND CURRENT AVIATE FUNDING, WE
THINK WE'LL GET TO ABOUT 260,000
SHORTLY AFTER 2025 OUR GOAL WITH
2 50,000 BY 2025. WE MAY BE
SLIGHTLY BEHIND THAT, UM, SO WE
HAVE PROJECTING A GAP OF 900,000
CHARGERS. AND DO YOU DO? DO YOU
HAVE A YEARLY OR MONTHLY GOALS
OR I MEAN, HOW DO YOU MEASURE? I
MEAN, HOW OFTEN DO YOU MEASURE
WHERE WE'RE GOING? AND ONE THING
WE ACTUALLY INTEND TO DO BECAUSE
WE HEARD THIS FROM SOME
STAKEHOLDERS IS ON THE NEXT.
MAYBE 21 27 REPORT TO HAVE THAT
GRANULAR DATA ON A YEAR BY YEAR
BASIS AND SEE HOW WE'RE TRACKING
AGAINST THAT. BECAUSE OFTEN IT'S
NOT LINEAR RIGHT AT THE VEHICLES
RAMPED ECONOMIES OF SCALE.
ABSOLUTELY EXACTLY. RIGHT.
EXACTLY RIGHT. SO WHAT IS IF I
COULD ASK LIKE, WHAT IS YOUR
NEXT TWO OR THREE YEAR GOALS?
YES SO I THINK A COUPLE THINGS
WE NEED TO DEPLOY THE FUNDING WE
HAVE, YOU KNOW, RECEIVED FROM
THE GENERAL FUND AND HOPE TO
CONTINUE TO RECEIVE AND HIT THAT
250,000 CHARGER GOAL. UM YOU
KNOW, IDEALLY, WE CAN ACCELERATE
A FEW THINGS AND HIT THAT BY THE
END OF 2025 LOOKING MORE LIKE
2026, MOSTLY DUE TO PERMITTING
AND UTILITY INTERCONNECTION.
THERE'S ALSO BEEN SOME SUPPLY
CHAIN ISSUES AS WELL THAT WE'RE
DEALING WITH THAT HAVE SLOWED
DOWN SOME OF THE PROGRESS BUT
NEAR TERM WE'RE VERY COMMITTED
TO HITTING THAT GOAL. BOTH THE
250,000 CHARGERS, UM YEAH,
PLEASE. SORRY IT'S ON THREE IN
THREE YEARS. YOU WANT AN
ADDITIONAL 260,000? THAT'S
CORRECT. 160,000 DELTA BETWEEN 2
50 90. YEAH THAT'S ON TOP OF THE
80 THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. SO NO
SO WE OUR GOAL IS TO GET TO 2
50. SO UM, IF WE'RE AT 80 WOULD
BE THE DIFFERENCE. OKAY, SO YOUR
GOAL YOUR GOAL IS TO PUT 170,000
MORE CHARGING STATIONS IN THE
NEXT THREE YEARS. EXACTLY RIGHT?
YES. AND WHAT IS THE WHAT IS THE
PER UNIT COST PER CHARGING
STATION? I MEAN, I KNOW IT
DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU ARE THE
LOCATION. I REPRESENT THE
CENTRAL VALLEY, SO CERTAINLY THE
CONNECTION WILL BE A LITTLE BIT
MORE CHALLENGING. YEAH THAT'S A
FANTASTIC QUESTION. AND YOU'RE
RIGHT. IT DOES VARY QUITE A BIT,
SO WE BASE OUR INCENTIVE LEVELS
AROUND WHAT IT TAKES TO MOVE THE
MARKET IN A CERTAIN DIRECTION,
SO YOU KNOW, ILLUSTRATIVE
PURPOSES. WE BELIEVE IT MAY COST
ABOUT $2000 FOR A LEVEL TWO IN A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME. MAYBE 7000
FOR THAT SAME LEVEL TWO AT A
MULTI UNIT DWELLING, PERMANENT
CONDO. UM, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO
TACKLE EQUITY, LIKE A LOW INCOME
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. IT
MAY COST YOU MORE. UM SO FOR
LEVEL TWO WE'RE ESTIMATING ABOUT
$7000 IN INVESTMENT AND
APPROXIMATELY 70,000. 4 50 KW
FAST CHARGERS BUT AGAIN AS A
MARKET DEMAND HIGHER POWER FAST
CHARGERS THAT DOES COST MORE
MONEY TRYING TO TACKLE MORE
DIFFICULT SEGMENTS DOES COST
MORE MONEY. SO SO, I GUESS WHAT
WOULD THE AVERAGE COST OF A FAST
CHARGING STATION IT WOULD BE
TOUGH TO PUT THAT DOWN IN JUST A
ONE AVERAGE. DO YOU HAVE A
RANGE? WE CAN PROVIDE ONE WE CAN
PROVIDE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO
SHOOT FROM THE HIP ON THAT,
OKAY? SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE
THAT INFORMATION, ESPECIALLY
WITH WITH AS A CHAIR SAID THE
AMOUNT OF RESOURCES IS BEING
REQUESTED IN TERMS OF YOUR
ACCOUNT THE WHEN, WHEN A SINGLE
FAMILY HOME OR CONDO OR
APARTMENT COMPLEX WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY PUT IN, UM YOU KNOW,
CHARGING, UH, EQUIPMENT. YOU'RE
NOT COUNTING THAT AS CHARGING
STATIONS. SO WE'RE NOT COUNTING
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WE DO COUNT
WHAT WE CALL SHARED PRIVATE, AND
THAT WOULD BE MULTI UNIT
DWELLINGS, WORKPLACES AND THE
WAY WE DEFINE SHARED PRIVATE IS
IN A AREA THAT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE
BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC, BUT IT IS
SHARED AMONG SEVERAL PEOPLE,
EITHER THE TENANTS OR THE WORK
SO THOSE ARE COUNTED IN IN THE
80,000 SMES CORRECT. AND SO HOW
OUT OF THE OUT OF THE 80,000
CURRENTLY HOW WHAT IS WHAT
PORTION OF IT IS STATE
SUBSIDIZED AND WHAT? HOW MUCH OF
HOW MUCH OF THOSE ARE PRIVATELY
FUNDED. YOU KNOW, IT VARIES
QUITE A BIT. UM I THINK ON THE
DC FAST CHARGER SIDE, WE KNOW
THAT A GOOD CHUNK OF THOSE ARE
PRIVATELY FUNDED. BUT A LOT OF
THAT IS TESLA. RIGHT SO THAT'S
THE DIFFERENT NETWORK THAN
GENERALLY OPEN. WE'RE GLAD THAT
TESLA STARTED TO OPEN UP SOME OF
THE CHARGERS, BUT THERE IS THAT
UNIVERSE OF PRIVATELY FUNDED
CHARGERS. AND THEN THERE'S A
PORTION THAT GOING FORWARD, WE
HOPE WILL BE FEDERALLY FUNDED.
WE DEFINITELY WANNA BRING THAT
MONEY TO CALIFORNIA.
HISTORICALLY NOT A LOT OF
FEDERAL FUNDING ON STATE
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CHARGERS, AND
THEN THE BALANCES EITHER STATE
FUNDED OR UTILITY REPAIR FUNDS.
SO THEN JUST TO YEAH. TAKE
ANOTHER LAYER OFF THE ONION. SO
OUT OF THE 80,000 YOU COUNTING
THE TESLA AND YOU'RE CUTTING ALL
ARE YOU CARRYING ALL THOSE IN
THE ACCOUNT? WE ARE. WE ARE A
LARGE VEHICLE POPULATION TODAY
IS TESLA. SO WE COUNT THOSE
CHARGERS AS WELL TO SUPPORT
THOSE VEHICLES. IT'S I WILL. I
WILL SAY THAT THAT'S A PRETTY
LARGE DELTA TO GET FROM 80,000
TO 1.2 MILLION. I MEAN, ARE THE
ARE YOUR ESTIMATES REASONABLE?
WE THINK SO. WE THINK SO. WE ARE
SEEING MUCH MORE ACTION IN THIS
SPACE, FEDERALLY STATE, LOCAL
AND PRIVATE WE DO NOT PRETEND
THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN
OVERNIGHT OR THAT IT'S EASY. IT
WILL TAKE CONTINUED FUNDING. IT
WILL TAKE CONTINUED EFFORT AND
IT'S IMPORTANT. THIS IS 50. OF
THE GREENHOUSE GASSES IN OUR
STATE COME FROM TRANSPORTATION,
SO THEY ARE AMBITIOUS GOALS,
BUT, YOU KNOW WE'RE AIMING FOR
THEM THOSE ROAD TARGETS. SO NOW
THAT WAS, I GUESS THE
CONVERSATION WE JUST HAD WAS
SPECIFICALLY ON THE CAR SIDE.
AND YOU DIDN'T MENTION THAT YOU
THAT, UM THAT THAT THE REPORT
INDICATED. 100 50,000 MEDIUM OR
CHARGES FOR THE MEDIUM SIZED
LEADS. YES THAT'S CORRECT, 100
AND 57,000. HOW MANY OF THOSE
CURRENTLY EXIST? WE'RE ACTUALLY
STARTING TO COLLECT THAT DATA.
UM AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, FOR SOME
OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS
BEHIND THE FENCE ON SITE A
LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT TO GET
THAT DATA. WE'RE GOING TO SEE
WHAT MORE WE CAN DO TO COLLECT
THAT INFORMATION. SO DO YOU HAVE
AN ESTIMATE OF HOW MANY THERE
ARE NOW? LET ME CHECK WITH OUR
STAFF, AND WE CAN GET BACK TO
YOU. WE HAVE A PUBLICLY FACING
DASHBOARD BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE
A TRANSPARENT AS WE CAN, AND WE
JUST ADDED A TAB FOR MEDIUM DUTY
HEAVY DUTY, AND I'M NOT
RECALLING IF THERE'S A TAB FOR
THE VEHICLES AND THE
INFRASTRUCTURE OR JUST ONE, BUT
WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
I'LL JUST ECHO WITH THE CHERRY
JUST SAID, WHICH IS YOU KNOW
YOU'RE ASKING FOR A LOT OF
MONEY, AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHERE
WE ARE TO GET TO WHERE WE NEED
TO BE. AND YOU KNOW I THINK IT'S
PRETTY. I THINK IT'S A PRETTY
BASIC QUESTION TO ASK HOW MUCH
IS A CHARGING STATION AND COSTS.
I THINK IT'S PRETTY BASIC TO ASK
LIKE HOW MANY CHARGING STATIONS
WE HAVE. AND WHERE THEY ARE. SO
UM, I JUST WANT TO KIND OF
CHANNEL. MY COMMENTS WITH THE
CHAIR THAT I THINK WE NEED MORE
INFORMATION. AND I THINK THE
FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS THIS
HEARING AND WE CAN'T GET THOSE
BASIC FACTS IS VERY FRUSTRATING.
FRUSTRATING UM, IN TERMS OF THE
GRID BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED
UTILITY CONNECTIONS EVERYTHING
ELSE. ARE THERE ANY RESOURCES
THAT ARE GOING INTO ACTUALLY
LIKE THE GREAT INFRASTRUCTURE?
CAL MATTERS DID A PIECE THAT THE
HEADLINE WAS KING CALIFORNIA'S
POWER GRID, HANDLE A 15 FOLD
INCREASE IN ELECTRIC CARS, AND
THEY OUTLINED KIND OF SOME
SIGNIFICANT OBSTACLES THERE DOES
DOES ANY OF THE INVESTMENT GO
INTO ACTUALLY LIKE THE ACTUAL
ELECTRICITY GRID. YES, SO THOSE
INVESTMENTS ARE MADE BY
UTILITIES. BUT I THINK THERE'S
SOMETHING IMPORTANT WE SHOULD
ARTICULATE HERE IS THAT EVEN IN
2030? WE EXPECT TVS TO BE LESS
THAN 5% OF THE PEOPLE OWED AND
LESS THAN 10% OF THE ENERGY
DEMAND AND WERE PLANNING TO MEET
THAT NEED. SO WE HAVE ELSE'S
ANALYSIS AND REPORT WE'RE DOING
THROUGH OUR ENERGY ASSESSMENT
DIVISION. THAT LOOKS AT A 10
YEAR FORECAST FOR THIS
INFORMATION AND CONTEMPLATES NOT
JUST WHERE WE ARE TODAY, BUT
WHERE WE NEED TO GET WITH THE
CARB REGULATIONS TAKEN INTO
PLACE, SO WE'RE PLANNING FOR
THAT FOR THAT TRANSITION, BOTH
FROM A MODELING AND ANALYSIS
SIDE AND ALSO A DATA SIDE, AND
I'LL ALSO NOTE THAT WE ARE
MAKING THOSE INVESTMENTS IN THE
GRID THROUGH OTHER THINGS
OUTSIDE OF THE FIELD AND
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION. I MEAN
, I CERTAINLY WILL. I MEAN, I
THINK IF YOU LOOK AT I MEAN
EVERYONE'S GOT DIFFERENT DATA
POINTS, AND SO I WHY YOU SAY
THAT IT'S ONLY 125% I MEAN, THAT
IS A I THINK YOUR OWN REPORT
INDICATES THAT 42% INCREASE IN
ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION THAT'S
NECESSARY TO EVEN MEET THAT THAT
THAT GOAL RIGHT? I'M NOT
FAMILIAR WITH HOW MUCH YOU HAVE
A REPORT FOR US TO POINT TO BE
HAPPY TO LOOK AT IT, AND IT'S IN
THE IT'S IN THE KALE MATTERS
PIECE THAT SAYS, I MEAN AND, OF
COURSE, I AM HAPPY TO SHARE IT
WITH YOU. BUT I MEAN THE AMOUNT
OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION AS
NECESSARY TO SUPPORT A 15 FOLD
INCREASE. UM AND AN ELECTRIC
VEHICLES ON THE ON THE GRID IS
PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL. I WOULD YEAH
. AND WE BE HAPPY TO COLLABORATE
WITH YOUR OFFICE AND UNDERSTAND
WHERE THAT NUMBER CAME FROM,
BECAUSE OUR ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT
IT WOULD BE 10. ADDED
ELECTRICITY AND 2030 FROM TV
LOAD AND ONLY 5% AT THE PEAK.
OKAY, UM. I'LL I'M HAPPY TO HAVE
THAT CONVERSATION WITH YOU. IN
TERMS OF I JUST WANT TO JUMP
REAL QUICKLY. TWO TO THE COURT,
THE FREIGHT CORRIDOR
INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE PORTS. UM
IN TERMS OF FUNDING. HOW MUCH
FUNDING IS NOW REMAINING FOR THE
FREIGHT CORRIDOR. YES
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. I THINK I CAN
ADDRESS THAT QUESTION FOR YOU.
JUST GIVE ME ONE MOMENT WHILE I
TURN TO THAT. OKAY SO FOR GRADES
TRUCKS AND, UH FREIGHT CORRIDORS
. WE HAVE THE CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD WOULD RECEIVE
FOR THE ALL THE MULTI YEAR
FUNDING 445 MILLION, WHICH IS
ACTUALLY THE FULL AMOUNT THAT WE
ORIGINALLY APPROPRIATED. FOR THE
ENERGY COMMISSION. THEY WOULD
RECEIVE 500 MILLION WHICH IS
AGAIN 100% OF WHAT WAS
ORIGINALLY APPROPRIATE AGREED
UPON LAST YEAR IN THE ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE PACKAGES. AND
THEN FOR THE DRAINAGE TRUCKS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PILOT PROJECTS.
WE WOULD HAVE 40 MILLION, UH AS
WELL AS 25 MILLION, UM, FOR BOTH
THE ENERGY COMMISSION AND THE
AIR RESOURCES BOARD, AND THAT
WAS ALL FUNDED LAST YEAR. EXCUSE
ME TWO YEARS AGO IN THE 2021
2022 PACKAGES. OKAY AND THEN AND
SO WITH THE WITH THE FUNDING
CUTS TO THE TO THE PORTS. HOW
MUCH? HOW MUCH RESOURCES DO YOU
ANTICIPATE? GOING TO THE PORTS
WITH ALL THESE FEDERALLY
COMPARATIVE FUNDS, ARE YOU? ARE
YOU SEEKING TO OFFSET THEM
COMPLETELY. WE DEFINITELY KNOW
THAT THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THE PORTS IN
THAT PACKAGE, AND WE DO
ANTICIPATE THAT IT WOULD I WOULD
SAY, SOMEWHAT MATCH WHAT WAS
INCLUDED IN THE REDUCTIONS WE
HAVE ABOUT 250 MILLION PLUS 150
FOR C E. C SO ROUGHLY AROUND 400
MILLION TOTAL WAS PART OF THE
REDUCTIONS AND OUT OF THE 27.8
BILLION THAT'S AVAILABLE IN
FEDERAL FUNDING. I THINK IT'S
REASONABLE TO EXPECT SOMEWHERE
ALONG THE LINES OF 400 MILLION
GOING TO PORTS AND THEN LASTLY,
I THINK IN THE ANALYSIS
INDICATED THAT, UM IN TERMS OF
THE IN TERMS OF THE TRIGGER
REDUCTIONS. RESTORATIONS THAT,
UH, THAT YOU THAT WHATEVER
LANGUAGE OR ARE YOU LIKE TO USE
IT PROVIDES, UM ADMINISTRATION
WITH UM. WITH THE AUTHORITY TO
SHIFT THOSE FUNDS AROUND. IS
THAT CORRECT? YES SO THE LOGIC
THERE IS. WE SIMPLY TRIED TO
BACKFILL SOME OF THE REDUCTIONS
THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY AGREED UPON
ACROSS ALL THE DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS THAT DID NOT RECEIVE
THE GRS BACKFILL IN THE CURRENT
PLAN FROM GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. I
GUESS THE ONE QUESTION TO THE L
A IS DO YOU HAVE A PERSPECTIVE
ON WHETHER THAT'S A REASONABLE
THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE THEM OR
SHOULD WE, AS A LEGISLATURE
MAINTAINED THAT AUTHORITY SO WE
, WE, WE RECOMMEND REJECTING THE
STRUCTURE OF TRIGGER PROPOSAL.
TYPICALLY WHEN G R F REVENUES
COME IN HIGHER THAN THAN THE
ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATES,
THERE'S A MID YEAR PROCESS TO
DETERMINE YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT
THOSE FUNDS WILL BE USED FOR,
AND THIS THIS BUDGET SECTION
CONTROL LANGUAGE WOULD WOULD
KIND OF GIVE GIVE GIVE AWAY TOO
MUCH LEGISLATIVE GIVE AWAY TOO
MUCH LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY IN
OUR VIEW. I APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE
IT. THANK YOU, MR FONG
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FRIEDMAN. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. I DO HAVE A
QUESTION AND IT MAY. THIS MAY
NOT BE THE RIGHT PANEL FOR THIS
QUESTION. SO YOU KNOW IF YOU
DON'T FEEL THAT YOU'RE THE RIGHT
ONES TO ANSWER IT. THAT'S FINE.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE
FUNDING PROPOSAL FOR THE
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY PLANS AND
STRATEGIES. UM SECTION FALLING
FROM 200 MILLION TO 80 AND THEN
2 59. MY QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE
, UM, WHAT KIND OF METRICS DO WE
USE TO EVALUATE THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FUNDING FOR
THESE PROGRAMS? ANOTHER WORDS.
THERE'S BEEN REPORTS AND
ANALYSIS THAT HAVE SHOWED THAT A
LOT OF THE STATES PLANNING
ORGANIZATIONS ARE NOT ACTUALLY
MEETING THE GOALS UNDER THIS,
JUST THERE. THE OLD SP 3 75
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGIES
. LEGISLATION THAT THEY'RE
PLANNING IS NOT NECESSARILY
REDUCING VM T OR PRIORITIZING.
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS THAT
WOULD LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN
BMT. SO I'M WONDERING, YOU KNOW,
WE ARE FUNDING A LOT OF THESE
PLANS. AND HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT
THE PLANS THAT ARE BEING
PRODUCED WITH THIS MONEY
ACTUALLY MEETS THOSE CLIMATE
GOALS? SURE SYDNEY VERGIS WITH
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
HAPPY TO TAKE A STEP AT THIS,
BUT IF IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE
ASKING, PLEASE STOP ME. UM SO IN
TERMS OF THE METRICS FOR OUR
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO MANY OF OUR EQUITY
AND MOBILITY PROGRAMS, WE LOOK
AT A WIDE ARRAY OF METRICS AS
LAID OUT FOR ALL CALIFORNIA
CLIMATE INVESTMENT PROGRAMS, AND
THAT INCLUDES METRICS LIKE COST
EFFECTIVENESS. GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSION REDUCTIONS, AIR QUALITY
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A
THERE'S A NUMBER OF METRICS.
THAT WE AS A STATE LOOK AT EVERY
YEAR AND PUT OUT IN A IN AN
ANNUAL REPORT FROM D O F, UM IN
TERMS OF REDUCING VM T, I WOULD
SAY BY AND LARGE, AT LEAST FROM
THE CAR PERSPECTIVE, MANY OF OUR
PROGRAMS ACTIVELY WORKED TO
REDUCE COMBUSTION. THE M T,
WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT
THAN WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, BUT
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
REALLY MEET. CONSUMERS AND
COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY ARE SO IF
THEY'RE WILLING TO GET RID OF A
PERSONAL VEHICLE. WE WANT TO
HELP THEM GET INTO A CLEANER
VEHICLE. BUT THAT'S NOT THE GOAL
OF THE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
STRATEGIES. SO I'M ASKING
SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE
THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT TRYING TO
DO THAT. IT'S NOT SAYING WE WANT
YOU TO PLAN FOR PEOPLE SWITCHING
OVER FROM ICE ENGINES, TWO TVS.
WHAT IT'S SAYING IS WE WANT YOU
TO PLAN FOR COMMUNITIES THAT ARE
MORE WALKABLE BYE, KABLE AND
THAT USE MORE PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S WHAT THE
SUSTAINED. THAT'S WHAT THIS $200
MILLION.80 MILLION DOLLARS $59
MILLION IS IT'S NOT ABOUT
GETTING PEOPLE INTO ZEB. SO UM,
SO HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT THIS
MONEY THAT THOSE PLANS THAT ARE
PRODUCED USING THIS MONEY
ACTUALLY IS SERIOUS ABOUT DOING
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND LAND USE
, PLANNING AND FUNDING
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS THAT
ACTUALLY REDUCE VM T FUNDING IT.
SO HOW DO WE WHAT ARE THE
METRICS THAT ENSURE THAT SURE SO
THE DOLLARS THAT WOULD GO TO THE
COMMUNITY BASED PROGRAMS ARE
MORE LIKE THE ONES THAT WHERE WE
GO INTO COMMUNITIES AND SAY, YOU
KNOW, HEY, IF YOU DON'T HAVE
ACCESS TO TRANSIT, HOW DO WE GET
YOU INTO A ZERO MISSION FORM OF
MOBILITY SO YOU CAN GET TO WHERE
YOU NEED TO GO. OKAY THAT'S I'M
SORRY. THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT
THIS MONEY IS FOR. I'M ASKING
ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET
ITEM. WHICH IS ABOUT SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES, PLANS AND
STRATEGIES, NOT ABOUT OTHER WAYS
OF GETTING PEOPLE INTO TVS. SO
MAYBE MAYBE THAT'S I MEAN, YOU
SEE THAT? MAYBE IF YOU LOOK AT
THE PAGE, IT'S THE TOP OF PAGE
25. IT'S THE LINE ITEM.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
SOME STRATEGIES UNLESS I'M
MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT THAT
BUDGET ITEM IS FOR.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FREEMAN
CHRISTIAN BELCHING WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I'M HAPPY
TO ACTUALLY GO BACK AND TAKE A
LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT METRICS
THAT WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON THOSE
DOLLARS SPECIFICALLY, I BELIEVE
IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT
FUNDING WAS MORE FOCUSED ON HOW
TO WHAT DR VERGES HAD MENTIONED
HOW TO ALLOW FOLKS THE DIFFERENT
OPTIONS AND ZERO AND WHEN I MEAN
DIFFERENT OPTIONS, IT'S
DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO HAVE A NET
ZERO EMISSIONS IMPACT IN
COMMUNITIES, SO I THINK THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD HAS KIND OF
TAKEN A BROAD VIEW OF WHAT THAT
FUNDING CAN BE USED FOR AND HOW
IT'S USED, BUT I'M HAPPY TO TAKE
IT BACK, AND I'M NOT TALKING
ABOUT ALL THE FUNDING GOING INTO
GETTING INTO ELECTRIFYING OUR
FLEET. SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
STRATEGIES IS A VERY SPECIFIC
GOAL IN A VERY SPECIFIC, UM,
TERM OF ART. SO UM, SO MAYBE I'M
MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT THIS IS,
SO MAYBE IT'S MAYBE I'M GETTING
THROWN BY WHAT YOU'RE CALLING IT
BECAUSE WHEN I HEAR SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES, I THINK ABOUT SP 3
75 AND HELPING COMMUNITIES PLAN
THROUGH REAP TWO POINT OH, THE
MONEY THAT WE HAD ALLOCATED
TOWARDS TOWARDS PLANNING FOR
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS THAT
REDUCE VM T. AND THAT ARE MADE
FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
BECAUSE ZEV. INCREASING VEHICLES
IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE STRATEGY
FOR REACHING ZERO EMISSIONS.
IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S PART OF A
STRATEGY, BUT THE STRATEGY IS
ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE CREATING
USING LAND SO THAT YOU CREATE
OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO WALK AND
BIKE AND ALSO SO THAT WE CAN GET
PEOPLE INTO PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S WHAT A
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY IS. SO YOU
KNOW, I'LL DIG DEEPER INTO THIS.
I THINK MAYBE EITHER I'M NOT
UNDERSTANDING THE WAY THE TERMS
BEING USED HERE OR THERE IS A
DISCONNECT, BUT, UM I APPRECIATE
THE ANSWER. AND REALLY THE
QUESTION IS THAT WE HAVE ASKED
THROUGH LEGISLATION THAT'S NOW
14 YEARS OLD. COMMUNITIES AS
THEY DO THEIR PLANNING TO TRY TO
FOCUS ON PROJECTS THAT REDUCE VM
T. AND TO FOCUS ON PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION, NOT FOCUS ON
LET'S LET'S JUST GET EVERYONE IN
ELECTRIC VEHICLE AND CONTINUE
GETTING EVERYBODY MORE CARS.
IT'S THAT WE ACTUALLY WANT
PEOPLE TO DRIVE LESS TO. THAT'S
PART OF OUR STRATEGY. THAT'S
BEEN CURBS AND YOU KNOW, YOUR
BMT REDUCTION IS IN THERE, SO
THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN HAVE THAT
25% BMT REDUCTION THAT'S IN YOUR
SCOPING PLAN IS TO GET PEOPLE
OUT OF CARS. THAT'S WHAT YOU
HAVE A V REDUCTION, NOT A SWITCH
TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE STRATEGY. SO
IN ORDER TO DO THAT OUR
COMMUNITIES HAVE TO PLAN FOR
WAYS OF DOING THAT THROUGH
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION THROUGH
WALKING AND BIKING MORE. SO IF
WE'RE GIVING THEM MONEY TO DO
THAT, WHICH WE ARE IN THIS
BUDGET, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT
THEIR PLANS ARE ACTUALLY DOING
THAT AND THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY
PRIORITIZING PROJECTS THAT DO
THAT, AS OPPOSED TO HIGHWAY
WIDENING AND OTHER TYPES OF
CAPACITY PROJECTS? THAT'S WHAT
MY QUESTION IS. WHAT ARE THE
METRICS AROUND THAT? SO MAYBE
YOU CAN. IF YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT
NOW, GET BACK TO ME WITH HOW WE
ARE ENSURING THAT THEY ARE. WE
ARE MEETING THOSE GOALS AND HOW
WE GET TO THAT 25% BMT REDUCTION
THAT'S IN CARBS SCOPING PLAN.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TING. THANK YOU
, MR CHAIR. JUST QUICK QUESTION
FOR CARB. UM I'VE BEEN A HUGE
FAN OF THE CLEAN VEHICLE REBATE
PROGRAM. UM BUT GIVEN THE
SUCCESS THAT WE'VE HAD LAST
YEAR, AS WE ALL KNOW THE TESLA
MODEL THREE THE TESLA MODEL Y,
WHERE THE TO TOP SELLING CARS IN
THE ENTIRE STATE, NOT IN THAT
CATEGORY, BUT ACROSS THE BOARD.
BEATING OUT THE COROLLA BEATING
OUT THE RAV FOUR. SO AT WHAT
POINT UM AND AGAIN I DON'T KNOW
WHEN THIS POINT IS, BUT AT WHAT
POINT WOULD WE WANT TO START
THINKING ABOUT SHIFTING SOME OF
THE CVR P MONEY INTO THE CLEAN
CARS OR SOME OF THE OTHER EQUITY
PROGRAMS THAT ARE MORE FOCUSED
ON USED VEHICLES? PART OF THE
CHALLENGE WITH INCENTIVIZING
USED VEHICLES WAS THERE THEIR
LACK OF INVENTORY. NOW THAT
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE AND
MORE INVENTORY COMING OUT,
THAT'S GOING TO BE USED AT SOME
POINT IT WOULD, I THINK, WOULD
MAKE SENSE TO START SHIFTING OUR
FOCUS INTO USED VEHICLES.
DEFINITELY AND I HAVE ALWAYS
APPRECIATED YOUR LEADERSHIP ON
THE C B R P PROGRAM. GLAD WE'RE
ALSO THINKING ABOUT THE USED
MARKET. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
PROGRAMS IN PLACE AS YOU
MENTIONED THAT, DO YOU FOCUS ON
USED VEHICLES ARE FINANCING
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND CLEAN
CARS FOR ALL PROGRAM, WHICH HAS
BEEN LEGISLATIVELY SUPPORTED IN
THE PAST. UM AND DEFINITELY
APPRECIATE THAT LEADERSHIP IN
TERMS OF TRANSITIONING THE FUNDS
HAPPY TO DEFER TO MY DO F
COLLEAGUES ON THAT, BUT WE, TOO,
ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE USED
VEHICLE MARKET, AND I THINK, AS
WE SEE REGULATIONS LIKE ADVANCED
CLEAN CARS TO COMING ONLINE,
WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE AND MORE
NEWS IN THE MARKET, WHICH ALSO
MEANS MORE USE OF WELL BEFORE WE
HEAR HIM. ANSWER. HE'S GONNA GO
. UM YOU KNOW HAVE HAVE YOU BEEN
DOING STUDIES, I GUESS REGARDING
THE YOU KNOW, INFLECTION POINTS
THAT MAKES SENSE FOR USED
VEHICLES. AND WHEN, YOU KNOW, I
MEAN, JUST I'M GONNA PICK YOU
BACK OFF MY VICE CHAIRS,
COMMENTS AT SOME POINT, BUT, UM,
YOU KNOW, JUST JUST LIKE WE'RE
SEEING THINGS GROW LOG
RHYTHMICALLY. WE'RE GOING TO
PROBABLY SEE THE SAME WITH USED
CARS. BUT WHAT CAN WE DO THIS
SORT OF BOOST THAT, ESPECIALLY
IN MANY OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT
AS WE KNOW CERTAIN INCOME LEVELS
DON'T BUY NEW CARS ABOUT USED
CARS, SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF
YOU'VE DONE ANY RESEARCH, OR
WHAT KIND OF RESEARCH WHAT YOUR
RESEARCH IS STARTING TO SAY.
SURE ONE OF KIND OF THE HALLMARK
PIECES OF WORK ON THIS WAS
ACTUALLY LEGISLATIVELY DIRECTED
ITS RSP 3 50 REPORT, AND IT
REQUIRED US TO GO OUT INTO A LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES AND REALLY
LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS TO
ACCESSING ALL FORMS OF ZERO
MISSION TRANSPORTATION, WHETHER
IT BE NEW USED TRANSIT, AND SO
WHAT YOU REALLY SEE FROM THE
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THAT WERE
RUNNING IS A FOCUS ON BOTH THE
NEW AND USED MARKET. RIGHT NOW.
ONLY ABOUT 3.6% OF VEHICLES ON
THE ROAD ARE CURRENTLY IS OF,
BUT WE KNOW THAT NUMBER'S GOING
TO GROW OVER TIME, SO I WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO
MEET CONSUMERS WHERE THEY ARE
AND PROVIDE BOTH OPTIONS. WHAT
WERE THE BARRIERS THAT YOU
DISCOVERED? WELL I WOULD SAY
THAT THEY WERE NUMEROUS. BUT I
THINK YOU HIT ON ONE OF THE
BIGGEST ONES, ACTUALLY, WHICH IS
THE BARRIER TO THE OVERHEAD OF
HAVING A PERSONAL VEHICLE. SO
THAT CAME IN MULTIPLE FORMS.
BOTH THE UPFRONT PURCHASE PRICE
BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT HAVING
A ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE IN THE
LONG RUN IS ACTUALLY MORE COST
EFFECTIVE FOR THE CONSUMER, BUT
IT'S IT WAS THAT UPFRONT
PURCHASE PRICE. WE'RE REALLY
TRYING TO GET AT AND OTHER
BARRIERS ALSO INCLUDED THINGS
LIKE HAVING ACCESS TO FINANCING.
UM AND SO WE PROVIDE A FINANCING
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS
FOLKS TO GET NOT ONLY DOLLARS ON
THE HOOD, BUT ACCESS TO
FINANCING. OR MAYBE THEY
WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
OTHERWISE. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT
CHARGING? UM ARE INCIDENT
PROGRAMS CURRENTLY DID YOU SEE
CHARGING AS A BARRIER?
ABSOLUTELY AND I THINK ONE OF
THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO
GET OUT TO IS RECOGNIZING THAT
NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN THE SAME
KIND OF HOME RIGHT? SOME PEOPLE
LIVE IN APARTMENTS. SOME PEOPLE
RENT SOME PEOPLE OWN THEIR OWN
HOMES. AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS
WITHIN OUR PROGRAMS IS PACKAGED
UP AN OPTION. FOR EITHER THE
STATE WILL HELP YOU INSTALL A
LEVEL TWO CHARGER OR WILL HELP
YOU GET ACCESS TO A CHARGE CARD
THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO CHARGE
OUT USING THE BROADER NETWORK.
GREAT I ASSUME FINANCE WILL JUST
REITERATE WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS
FROM THE GOVERNOR. IS THERE
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD?
NO THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
THANK YOU READ MY MIND. UH JUST
GOING TO CC FIRST. THANKS FOR
DOING THE STUDY. IT'S GREAT TO
ACTUALLY HAVE ANALYSIS.
UNDERSTAND SORT OF WHAT OUR
GOALS WHERE WE NEED TO GO, UM,
JUST KIND OF PIGGYBACKING OFF
THE VICE CHAIRS, COMMENTS. DO
YOU HAVE A SENSE OF WITH THE
INSTEAD OF PROGRAM? UM DO WE?
ARE WE USING THAT MONEY TO DO
SUBSIDIES OR ALL THOSE? IS THAT
MONEY? REALLY GOING TO, UH
BUILDING. CHARGING STATIONS, I
GUESS OR IS IT IS IT, YOU KNOW,
AND IF IT'S INCENTIVES, WHEREAS
WHERE IS THAT GOING? IS IT GOING
TO UTILITIES? IS IT GOING TO
INDEPENDENT, UM, INDEPENDENT
COMPANIES? YEAH THANK YOU.
HANNAH ANDERSON, CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION. IF I
UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION
CORRECTLY, IT'S A LADDER. SO THE
WAY WE DO IT IF WE USE A
PORTFOLIO APPROACH WE WITH BLOCK
GRANTS. WHICH SENT A INCENTIVE
OR REBATE LEVEL AT A CERTAIN
AMOUNT FOR LEVEL TWO AND THE CFC
. THAT DOES VARY WITH THE POWER
OF THE D. C F C. WE'RE SEEING
THE MARKET WANTING HIGHER POWER
FASTER CHARGING. SO FOR OUR NEXT
BLOCK, GRANT, WE'RE LAUNCHING.
WE'RE SETTING 150 KW FLOOR FOR
THAT CHARGING. WE ALSO USED
TARGETED INVESTMENTS AND WE RUN
THOSE MORE DIRECTLY IN HOUSE.
THOSE UM, ARE MUCH MORE TARGETED
AND ACROSS THE BOARD. WE'RE
FOCUSED ON EQUITY, BUT THESE
EVEN MORE SO AT HARDER TO REACH
SEGMENTS. SO LAST LITTLE BIT
OVER A YEAR AGO, WE DID ONE
SOLELY FOCUSED ON MULTI UNIT
DWELLINGS, ONE SOLELY FOCUSED ON
RURAL COMMUNITIES, ONE SOLELY
FOCUSED ON HIGH MILEAGE
VEHICLES. AND THE INCENTIVE
AMOUNT THAT IT TAKES TO TIP THAT
FOR DIFFERENT SEGMENTS DOES VARY
QUITE A BIT. I MEAN, BUT BUT
ROUGHLY WHAT ARE YOUR GREAT
RANGES? FOR OUR FOR THE TARGETED
. YEAH. YEAH. SO UM, WE WOULD
HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH A
NUMBER ON THAT BECAUSE IT DOES
VARY QUITE A BIT. SOME OF THE
PROPOSALS WE GOT WILL GIVE YOU
THE M U D ONE. FOR EXAMPLE.
SORRY. THE MULTI UNIT DWELLINGS
ONE WE ALLOWED FOR ON SITE LEVEL
ONE ASIDE FOR ON SITE, LEVEL
TWO, AND WE ALLOWED FOR CLOSE
PROXIMITY. HIGH POWER CHARGERS,
SO WITHIN HALF A MILE OF THE OF
THE WANT TO SUPPORT. SOME OF THE
PROPOSALS WERE JUST LEVEL ONE
SUMMER, LEVEL ONE AND LEVEL TWO.
SO THERE'S A BLEND. WE CAN
CERTAINLY DISAGGREGATE THAT FOR
YOU AND BRING THAT INFORMATION
BACK. JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY. WHY
WOULD YOU DO LEVEL ONE? YOU
KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING. WE HEARD
FROM SOME STAKEHOLDERS THAT
LEVEL ONE WAS THE CHEAPEST
OPTION TO PROVIDE ACCESS,
ESPECIALLY FOR OLDER BUILDINGS
THAT HAVE LOWER CAPACITY IN THE
PANEL. AND SO I THINK THERE IS A
HEALTHY DEBATE ON SHOULD
EVERYTHING BE LEVELED TO NETWORK
OR ABOVE. THERE ARE SOME
STAKEHOLDERS ESPECIALLY, UM,
SOME EQUITY STAKE HOLDERS WHO
FELT LIKE WE SHOULD DO LEVEL
ONE. FOR NOW, I WILL SAY WE'RE
GONNA LAUNCH A SECOND MULTI UNIT
DWELLING FOCUSED, UH,
SOLICITATION AND THE NEXT MONTH
OR SO FOR THAT ONE. WE'RE NOT
ALLOWING THE CFC. WE'RE SAYING
WE'RE GOING TO USE OTHER
STRATEGIES TO DO FAST CHARGERS.
WE WILL STILL ALLOW LEVEL ONE
FOR THAT, BUT I COULD SEE
REFINING THAT PROGRAM OVER TIME
AS WELL TO NOT ALLOW LEVEL ONE.
IF THAT'S THE BEST INTEREST OF
THE STATE AND LEGISLATIVE
GUIDANCE AND ALL THAT. I MEAN, I
THINK I THINK LEVEL ONE DOES
WORK DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH YOU
DRIVE FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME. LEVEL
ONE IS VERY, VERY HARD BECAUSE
OF MY MILEAGE. BUT I KNOW I'M
TEND TO BE ON THE HIGHER END OF
MILEAGE USERS. SO I THINK, UM,
IF I WAS DOING MY COMMUTE.
BEFORE I TOOK THIS JOB, A LEVEL
ONE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN
TOTALLY FINE. SO I COULD SEE. I
COULD UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT
WITH BLOCK GRANTS WITH THE BLOCK
GRANTS GOING TO ARE THEY GOING
TO A JURISDICTION? THEY'RE
GOING, THEY'RE GOING BY REGION.
ARE THEY GOING BY? TYPE IT. IT'S
JUST IT'S ARRANGED. SO WE'RE
LAUNCHING TO BLOCK GRANTS NOW
FOR THE LIGHT DUTY SIDE, AND WE
HAVE ONE FOR THE MEDIUM DUTY
HEAVY DUTY SIDE ON THE LIGHT
DUTY SIDE. UM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE
ONE FOCUSED ON HIGH POWER FAST
CHARGERS TO REALLY GET
INFRASTRUCTURE OUT. THERE WERE
GONNA TEAR THOSE TIER ONE, TIER
TWO AND TIER THREE AND TRY TO
GET THAT FUNDING OUT QUICKLY. AS
FAR AS THE RECIPIENT GOES, IT
CAN BE QUITE A FEW DIFFERENT
FOLKS. WE'VE HAD TV SPS DO BE
THE APPLICANT WITH THAT SIDE
HOST DO IT. WE'VE HAD PUBLIC
ENTITIES DO IT AS WELL. WE WANT
TO CONTINUE TO TARGET THAT
FUNDING FOR THE ONE THAT WE JUST
OPENED UP. IT'S GOING TO BE OPEN
FOR ABOUT A MONTH. WE'RE
REQUIRING 100. OF THOSE TO BE IN
LOW INCOME AND DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. AND SO WHAT? WE
MIGHT SEE A DIFFERENT MIX OF
APPLICANTS FOR THAT ONE. AND
THEN ARE YOU, UM TARGETING
PROXIMITY TO YOU KNOW, FREEWAYS,
HIGHWAYS, OR IS IT HOW DO YOU
FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU WANT THE
CHARGING STATIONS TO BE PLACED?
YEAH RIGHT NOW WE'RE SHOWING
FROM THE A B 21 27 REPORTS THAT
WE HAVE GAPS REALLY THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. AND SO THE STRATEGY
WE HAVE IS BLOCK RAMPS SHOULD BE
RAPIDLY DEPLOYING THIS
INFRASTRUCTURE TO CREATE ACCESS
FOR EVERYONE AND THEN TARGETING
OUR IN HOUSE SOLICITATIONS TO
SPECIFIC AREAS. WE CAN CONTINUE
TO REFINE BLOCK GRANTS AND
TARGET THOSE IN A CERTAIN WAY.
UM, ONE THING I WANT TO DO FROM
THE 80 21 27 REPORT WE'RE
WORKING ON THE SECOND ITERATION
. NOW IS WE HAVE A LOT OF THIS
DATA RIGHT? BUT IT'S PRETTY
OPAQUE IN A 200 PAGE DOCUMENT.
WE ACTUALLY WANT TO CREATE A
HEAT MAP OR SOME KIND OF GIS
TOOL TO SHOW WHERE THOSE GAPS
ARE AND AS WE CONTINUE TO REDUCE
THE GAPS IN CERTAIN AREAS, WE
CAN CONTINUE TO REFINE. AND
FOCUS ON INVESTMENTS WHERE THE
LARGEST GAPS EXIST. CAN YOU GIVE
US A I MEAN IS THERE IS THERE A
WAY THAT YOU CAN PRODUCE A LIST?
WE UNDERSTAND. WHO THE GRANTS
ARE GOING TO AND WHAT'S BEING
SUBSIDIZED? ABSOLUTELY YEAH, AND
THEN IN TERMS OF THIS YEAR AND
THE NEXT YEAR HOW MANY CHARGING
STATIONS DO WE THINK ARE COMING
ONLINE THIS THIS FISCAL YEAR AND
NEXT FISCAL YEAR? YEAH YOU KNOW,
WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO
ACCELERATE QUITE A BIT. UM
SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES HAVE BEEN A
CONCERN FOR SOME FOR SOME
APPLICANTS NUMBER. WE DON'T WE
CAN. WE CAN TRY TO PULL THAT
TOGETHER FOR THE NEXT 21 27
REPORT. WE ARE GOING TO SHOW
EACH YEAR WHERE WE NEED TO GET
AND THEN DROP. SUPPOSE THAT WITH
WHERE WE ARE GIVEN OUT. BLOCK
GRANTS LAST YEAR, RIGHT? YES. I
ASSUME BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED WE
WANT THESE BUILT SOONER. I WOULD
HOPE THAT SOME OF THE MONEY LAST
YEAR'S COMING ONLINE THIS YEAR
THE CHARGES COMING ONLINE THIS
YEAR. YES THERE'S CERTAINLY
SHOULD BE SANDAL. COME ON LATER
THIS YEAR. I THINK ONE THING WE
LEARNED FROM OUR OLD BLOCK GRANT
IS IT WAS FIRST COME, FIRST
SERVED. AND SO WE HAD SOME
PROJECTS THAT CAME IN AND GOT
STUCK IN THE QUEUE BECAUSE THEY
JUST WEREN'T READY TO BUILD AND
IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE WANT
TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR EQUITY
COMMUNITIES WHO MIGHT NOT BE AS
READY TO BUILD TODAY. WE ALSO
DON'T WANT TO SLOW DOWN THE
PROGRESS. WE NEED TO MAKE WHAT
WE'RE DOING FOR THE NEXT ROUND
OF BLOCK GRANTS IS DIVIDING IT
INTO 23 CHAIRS. IF YOU HAVE
APPLIED FOR A PERMIT AND APPLIED
TO THE UTILITY, YOUR CHAIR ONE
IF YOU'VE DONE OR YOUR TIER TWO,
IF YOU'VE DONE NEITHER YOUR TIER
THREE AND WE WANT TO FUND THE
TIER ONE PROJECTS FIRST AND GET
THOSE BELT AS SOON AS WE CAN.
WHAT ABOUT INTERCONNECTION? WE
HEARD A LOT ABOUT
INTERCONNECTION TOWARD THE END
OF LAST YEAR. AND YOU KNOW THE
CHALLENGES AROUND
INTERCONNECTION, ESPECIALLY IF
YOU'RE IN COMMUNITIES ARE
ALREADY UNDERSERVED HOUSING.
HOW'S THE INTERCONNECTION GOING
AND ARE THERE THINGS THAT WE
NEED TO DO? LEGISLATIVELY TO
MAKE IT EASIER TO GET THESE
CHARGING STATIONS UP AND GOING
YEAH. I MEAN, I WOULD HAVE TO
DEFER TO OUR COLLEAGUES AT THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION ON THE
INTERCONNECTION PIECE. OVERALL I
WILL SAY THAT RECENTLY PASSED
EITHER A DECISION OR RESOLUTION
TRYING TO SET A BENCHMARK FOR
HOW QUICKLY THESE NEED TO BE
INSTALLED. I THINK THEY SAID 125
DAYS FOR THE FOR THE
INTERCONNECTION PROCESS, BUT I
HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT UM, BUT
THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT
INTERCONNECTION AND ENERGY
IZATION STILL IS AN ISSUE AS
WELL AS PERMITTING TO GET THESE
THINGS BUILT AS QUICKLY AS WE
NEED TO. I MEAN, I THINK MY
THOUGHT IS I THINK IT MAKES
SENSE TO DEFINITELY SET ASIDE
RESOURCES. MAKE SURE WE ARE
INVESTING IN COMMUNITIES THAT
WILL HAVE A LONGER LEAD TIME.
BUT GIVEN THE GIVEN THE DEMAND
FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, I THINK
IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO SHOW
RESULTS. UH, IN THE FACT THAT I
DON'T. I DON'T THINK WE GET
BROWNIE POINTS FOR SPENDING
MONEY OR GETTING MONEY ON THE
STREET UNLESS THERE'S A CHARGING
STATION AT THE END OF IT, RIGHT.
SO I THINK THE FACT THAT YOU'RE
COMING HERE AND YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT ALL THE MONEY WE'RE
SPENDING WHICH IS NICE, BUT YOU
CAN'T ANSWER ANY OF MY QUESTIONS
ABOUT HOW MANY STATIONS AND
WHERE THEY ARE. THAT'S
CONCERNING RIGHT. WELL, I THINK
I THINK WE SHOULD BE VERY LASER
FOCUSED ON THAT END GOAL AND WE
CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION TO YOU. IT IS
CONTAINED ARE 21 27 REPORT AND
SOME OF THE ZEB DASHBOARDS WE
HAVE. I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW
EXACTLY WHERE THOSE ARE LOCATED.
BUT WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION AND
WE CAN CERTAINLY SHARE THAT WITH
YOU. YEAH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
YOU SHOULD. HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO
GO THROUGH IN YOUR SLEEP IN MY
OPINION, BECAUSE IF YOU KNOW
WHAT'S THE POINT OF PUTTING THE
MONEY ON THE STREET? IF WE DON'T
HAVE CHARGING STATIONS, 234
YEARS OR NEVER RIGHT, SO IT'S
NOT. IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT ABOUT
THE MONEY. IT'S ABOUT THE
STATIONS THAT WERE TRYING TO
BUY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH RIGHT NOW. AND YOURS. SAY
THAT AGAIN. SURE SO YOU'RE WE'VE
GO 123. ALRIGHT BEFORE WE GO TO
123 AS AS I THINK WE CAN SEE
THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
INTEREST IN THIS ISSUE. UM ABOUT
ALERT EVERYBODY. I DON'T THINK
THIS IS GONNA BE THE LAST
HEARING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SO
WE JUST NUMBER ONE. HOPEFULLY
THAT WILL HELP. EVERYBODY
REALIZED WE DON'T HAVE TO GET IT
ALL DONE RIGHT NOW. BUT I DO
WANT TO ALERT YOU THAT WE WILL
BE COMING BACK. OBVIOUSLY THIS
IS A BIG BUDGET ITEM, AND IT'S
ALSO A BIG ITEM. THAT POLICY
ITEM THAT LOTS OF MEMBERS HAVE
LOTS OF INTERESTED IN STUFF SO
WE WILL BE COMING BACK AND I
STILL I HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT
QUESTIONS ALSO, AS WE MOVE
FORWARD. SO WE WILL GO TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SLE. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIRMAN. I'LL YIELD TO MR
PRESSURE. OKAY UM, GOOD MORNING
. UM WE ARE OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT
VIEWPOINTS HERE, BUT I THINK
THERE'S ONE THING THAT WE ALL
AGREE ON AN ECHO IS THAT IF
WE'RE GOING TO SPEND A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OUR
TAXPAYER RESOURCES WE EXPECT, UM
CLEAR GOLD GOALS AND RESULTS AND
HAVE SOME OUTCOMES THAT ARE
DELIVERED TO THE TAXPAYER. WE
DON'T INTEND TO JUST KEEP
SPENDING MONEY FOR GOALS. BUT
LET ME JUST ASK A COUPLE
QUESTIONS. I WANT TO UNDERSTAND
. UM IT'S MR IS IT RUSSELL? OKAY
MR. RUSSELL OUR GOAL IS TO GET
TO, UM UM ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES
BY 2035 100. IS THAT CORRECT?
YES, IT IS. THAT'S THE GOAL FOR
TWO CARB ON THAT PARTICULAR
GOALS. THEY SET THOSE OKAY, AND
SO, UM, TO GET TO 100% WERE AT
WHAT PERCENT? DID YOU SAY WE'RE
AT RIGHT NOW? 33.6% OF VEHICLES
ON THE ROAD OR ZERO MISSION, AND
WE'RE AT ABOUT 19% SALES. OKAY
SO 3% OF THE ROADS ARE ZERO
EMISSIONS. SO IN THE NEXT 10
YEARS, WE'RE GONNA GO FROM 3%
100. DO WE THINK THAT'S
REALISTIC? WELL WE'RE CERTAINLY
WE HAVE A PACKAGE OF REGULATIONS
THAT ARE INTENDED TO ACCELERATE
GETTING TO THAT GOALS AND THE
INCENTIVE PACKAGES THAT YOU HAVE
IN FRONT OF YOU CERTAINLY HELP.
OKAY SO I'LL ASK YOU THAT, SO
WE'RE PLANNING TO SPEND 10
BILLION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS
. HOW MANY ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES WILL THAT PUT IN THE
ROAD? AT THE END OF THAT
SPENDING IN FIVE YEARS? WHAT IS
THE NUMBER? HAPPY TO PROVIDE
THAT TO YOU, A SIMILAR MEMBER OF
SALLY SO CHRISTIAN BELCHING WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. SO
WHAT WE DO HAVE IN FRONT OF US
RIGHT NOW IS JUST THE 23 24
NUMBERS ANY OF THE FUNDING THAT
GOES INTO BUDGET YEAR. WE HAVE
THE RESULTS FOR THAT FUNDING
THAT IS CURRENTLY ESTIMATED. BUT
WE CAN DEFINITELY WORK WITH THE
AIR RESOURCES BOARD, AS WELL AS
TO SEE THE ROLLOUT IN TERMS OF
WHAT WE EXPECT IN THE NEXT FIVE
YEARS. UH IN TERMS OF THE BUDGET
YEAR, THOUGH, APPROPRIATIONS,
I'M HAPPY TO SAY THAT THE OF THE
729 MILLION DOLLARS THAT WILL BE
GIVEN TO SEE EC. UM 20,000 LEVEL
TWO CHARGERS FOR MULTI DWELLING
UNITS. 740 TRADES TRUCKS ARE
SUPPORTED 500 TRANSIT BUS IS ARE
SUPPORTED. UM AND THERE WILL
ALSO BE SUPPORT FOR 15,000 LIGHT
DUTY, UH, FUEL CELL ELECTRIC
VEHICLES FOR THE VEHICLE
SPECIFIC DEPLOYMENT WITH THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. WE ESTIMATE OF
THE 412 MILLION BEING
APPROPRIATED. TO THE DEPARTMENT
OR EXCUSE ME TO THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. 8500 VEHICLES
WILL BE DEPLOYED AS PART OF THE
CLEAN CARS FOR ALL PROGRAMS.
OKAY, SIR, I DON'T MEAN TO
INTERRUPT, BUT YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT THOUSANDS OR TENS OF
THOUSANDS. WE HAVE MILLIONS OF
CARS ON THE ROAD. ABSOLUTELY FEW
1000 CARS HERE THERE IS
INSIGNIFICANT IS NOT GOING TO
GET 200% SO I JUST I JUST I'M
JUST OBSERVING THAT THAT GOAL
MAY NOT BE REALISTIC, AND WE
SHOULD BE REALISTIC WITH THE
VOTERS AND THE TAXPAYERS. AND
WHAT IS IT WHAT IS ACHIEVABLE? I
BELIEVE IN ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES. I HAVE ONE AND, UM AND
I, I WOULD LOVE FOR EVERYONE TO
HAVE ONE. BUT WE HAVE TO BE
REALISTIC WITH THE WITH THE
MARKET FACTORS. LET ME ASK YOU.
WHAT IS THE ROLE OF HYBRIDS IN
OUR IN OUR FUTURE HERE. I MEAN,
THERE'S A LOT OF TALK ABOUT ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES AND ALMOST NO
CONVERSATION ABOUT HYBRIDS.
THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE
ECONOMY, AND IT TAKES A LOT OF
CARBON EMISSIONS OFF THE ROAD.
SO I'LL ASK YOU, UM MS FERGUS.
FERGUS WHAT IS THE ROLE OF
HYBRIDS? SO IN OUR INCENTIVE
PROGRAMS, WE DO ALSO PROMOTE THE
USE OF PLUG IN HYBRID ELECTRIC
VEHICLES AND OFFER INCENTIVE
AMOUNTS FOR THOSE TWO. WE
RECOGNIZE THAT YOU KNOW, RIGHT
NOW IS ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
MIGHT NOT WORK FOR EVERYONE. IF
YOU'RE SOMEONE WITH A LONGER
COMMUTE OR HAS A FURTHER WAY TO
GO TO TRAVEL, A PLUG IN HYBRID
MIGHT BE MORE THAN APPROPRIATE.
BUT THERE'LL BE ILLEGAL BY 2035
CORRECT. HMM. NO THAT'S JUST FOR
SALES. THE ILLEGAL SELL IT,
OKAY. AND THEN I WANT TO NOTICE.
MR. UM VASU. BE ILLEGAL TO SELL
IT. YEAH. MR STILL, UM, YOU SAID
THAT 50% OF GREENHOUSE GASSES
COME FROM CARS IS THAT CORRECT?
YEAH SO I'LL DEFER TO CARD. THEY
DO THIS ANALYSIS BUT
APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM
THE STATE COME FROM
TRANSPORTATION OR UPSTREAM FUEL
PRODUCTION. OKAY AND, UM, CARS
HAVE TO BE CHARGED WITH
ELECTRICITY, CORRECT AND WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF OUR ELECTRIC
ELECTRICITY COMES FROM NON
RENEWABLE ENERGY. WE ARE WELL ON
OUR GOAL TO MEET MEETING UM, THE
SEMI QUESTION WHAT PERCENTAGE OF
OUR ENERGY COMES FROM NON
RENEWABLE RESOURCES WOULD HAVE
CHECKED WITH MY COLLEAGUES WHO
ASSESS THAT WITHIN OUR ENERGY
ASSESSMENT DIVISION, BUT I WILL
NOTE THAT WE DO HAVE A STATE
GOAL THAT WE ARE MOVING TOWARDS
TO GET TO 100% YOU'RE AT 666.4%
ACCORDING TO ENERGY DOT CA.GOV.
IS THAT YOUR AGENCY? ENERGY
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY. WHERE THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION,
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION, IS THAT NOT IS THIS?
NOT YOUR WEBSITE AND I'M SORRY.
COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? YOU SAID
ENERGY DOT CA.GOV? YES, THAT'S
YOUR WEBSITE. OKAY SO YOUR
WEBSITE HAS A GRAPH 66.4% YOU
HAVE IS THERMAL AND NON
RENEWABLE ENERGY. SO THE ONLY
REASON I BRING THAT UP IS WHAT
IS THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN THIS
MARKET? I THINK WILL TAKE CARE
OF CARS AND SUPPLIES. THE MARKET
WILL DELIVER WHAT PEOPLE WANT
TESLA OR THE NUMBER ONE SELLING
CAR RIGHT NOW, NOT BECAUSE THE
GOVERNMENT SAID SO. BUT BECAUSE
PEOPLE WANT IT. THE MARKET WILL
MAKE CARS THAT ARE DESIRABLE
WITH THE GOVERNMENT, I BELIEVE
SHOULD FOCUS ON IS HAVING
RELIABLE AND CHEAP ENERGY. THAT
SHOULD BE YOUR JOB. HOW DO WE
MAKE ELECTRICITY, CHEAP AND
RELIABLE, SO THAT WHEN PEOPLE
BUY THESE CARS, THEY'RE NOT
GOING TO GO BANKRUPT, CHARGING
THEM. WE HAVE OUR ELECTRICITY
BILLS OR 83% HIGHER THAN THE US
AVERAGE 83. AND PART OF IT IS
THIS PUSH TO GET TO 100%
RENEWABLE ENERGY. I UNDERSTAND
THE GOAL, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO
BE CONSIDERATE ABOUT HOW QUICKLY
WE TRANSITION AND THE EFFECT IT
HAS ON COSTS. AND, UM. THIS IS
OUTSIDE THE SCOPE AND, YOU KNOW,
MONGOL, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GO IN
DETAIL, BUT I REALLY THINK WE
NEED TO HAVE A SERIOUS
CONVERSATION ABOUT NUCLEAR
POWER. BECAUSE I DON'T IN THE
PORTFOLIO THAT YOU HAVE.
RENEWABLES ARE STILL ABOUT 20%
WHEN YOU LOOK AT, UM SOLAR AND
WIND AND IF WE REALLY WANT TO
GET TO A CLIMATE POLICY WHERE WE
HAVE ZERO EMISSIONS ZERO CARBON.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT NUCLEAR, SO I
WILL I'LL END THERE, I THINK,
FOCUS ON RELIABLE AND AFFORDABLE
ENERGY AND LET THE MARKET DO THE
REST. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM
THANK YOU. WE HAVE, UH. WE HAVE
A LOT OF INTEREST IN THIS TOPIC
, AND I KNOW ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
FRIEDMAN WANTS TO RESPOND. UM
AND I'LL LET HER RESPOND. AND
THEN I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT
ABOUT WHAT I HOPE THE GOAL IS OF
THESE COMMITTEE HEARINGS ALL THE
TIME. GO AHEAD AND SEND THEM
AROUND, FRIEDMAN. THANK YOU. I
JUST WANTED TO ADD TO THE
DISCUSSION AND RESPOND TO MY
COLLEAGUE. UM AND I AGREE THAT
THE COST IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
AND WE CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT AS WE TRANSITION TO
CLEAN ENERGY AND TO CLEANER CARS
THAT WE DO IT IN A WAY THAT IS
AFFORDABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
AND I APPRECIATE THE CONCERN. I
DO WANT TO SAY, THOUGH. YOU
KNOW, WHEN I WENT TO, UM, ONE OF
THE CLIMATE COPS AND WAS ABLE TO
TALK TO INDUSTRY WHEN I TALKED
TO INDUSTRY HERE IN CALIFORNIA,
AS I OFTEN DO. UM HAVING A CLEAR
MARKET SIGNAL AND A CLEAR
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE FUTURE
OF REGULATIONS IS A BIG PART OF
THEIR, UM, FUNDING FOR THEIR
OWN, R AND D AND FOR THEIR OWN
PRODUCTION, AND WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY INVEST IN A TRANSITION FROM
A TYPE OF ENGINE THAT THEY'VE
BEEN MAKING FOR, YOU KNOW, 50
YEARS TO A BRAND NEW TYPE OF
ENGINE. THEY ALSO WANT TO KNOW
THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A
VERY LARGE PLACE TO SELL THAT
AND KNOWING THAT CALIFORNIA IS
GOING TO HAVE THE REGULATIONS IN
PLACE TO SAY. VISAS WHAT YOU'RE
GOING TO BE SELLING HERE AND
EVERYONE WILL BUY IT BECAUSE
THEY DON'T HAVE ANOTHER OPTION
IS A HUGE REASON WHY THEY PUT
THE AMOUNT OF MONEY R AND D INTO
THAT TRANSITION. THEY WANT THE
COMFORT TO KNOW THAT IF THEY'RE
GOING TO PUT THEIR OWN CAPITAL
BEHIND, TRANSITIONING THEIR
WHOLE PRODUCTION LINE THAT THEY
HAVE A CUSTOMER AT THE END OF
THE DAY, AND SO A CALIFORNIA SUN
IS ACTUALLY VERY FRIENDLY TO
INDUSTRY, WHICH SAYS YOU'RE
DOING THE RIGHT THING. YOU'RE
TRANSITIONING. DO IT A LITTLE
FASTER, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE
THERE TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE
CUSTOMERS FOR THESE VEHICLES. SO
I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY IS THE
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT TO ENSURE
THAT AND THAT'S THE SINGLE BEST
WAY THAT WE CAN BRING COSTS DOWN
FOR CONSUMERS BECAUSE THE REASON
THOSE VEHICLES ARE WERE MORE
EXPENSIVE A FEW YEARS AGO IS
BECAUSE THEY WERE MAKING SO FEW
OF THEM SO YOU DON'T YOU LOSE
THAT ECONOMY OF SCALE? BUT ONCE
THE ASSEMBLY LINES ARE CRANKING
OUT THOUSANDS OF E V S, WE ARE
SEEING WHAT ALREADY THE RESULT
OF THAT WHICH IS THE PRICE IS
DROPPING LIKE ROCKS AND, UM, THE
CAR COMPANIES COMPETING AGAINST
EACH OTHER TO BRING THOSE CARS
TO THE MARKET FOR THAT, LOWER
THROUGH THAT VERY PRICE
SENSITIVE CUSTOMERS, SO TESLA
HAS HAD THE MARKET BECAUSE
THEY'RE ASPIRATIONAL AND WEALTHY
PEOPLE BUY THEM, BUT NOW WE'RE
SEEING CARS LIKE THE BOLT BOLT
BOLT BOLT STILL DRIVE A 15 YEAR
OLD PRIUS. SO YOU KNOW, I DON'T
KNOW WHAT'S ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW,
ALWAYS IN THE NAME OF THE CARS.
UM BUT THEY'RE OUT THERE NOW,
AND PEOPLE WHO ARE YOU KNOW,
MEDIUM AND LOWER INCOME ARE ABLE
TO BUY THEM ALONG WITH THE USED
VEHICLES, AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF
GOVERNOR NEWSOM'S VERY AMBITIOUS
AND ASPIRATIONAL GOALS THAT'S
ACTUALLY RESULTING IN BRINGING
THE PRICE DOWN FOR PEOPLE NOT
RAISING THE PRICE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SO I
WANT TO SAY THIS JUST ABOUT OUR
PROCESS, AND THAT IS, I THINK
IT'S VERY APPROPRIATE THAT THESE
COMMITTEE HEARINGS TO HAVE
HEALTHY PHILOSOPHICAL POINT OF
VIEW EXPRESSED, AND WE JUST WE
JUST HAD THAT HERE ON BOTH SIDES
. UM AND I THINK IT'S VERY
HEALTHY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ASK
QUESTIONS AND SOMETIMES
DIFFICULT QUESTIONS OF THE
ADMINISTRATION AND POINT OUT
THINGS THAT WE ARE CONCERNED
WITH. BUT WHAT I WANT TO
EMPHASIZE IS THAT WE CAN DO THAT
IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT HAVE
ANYBODY FEEL LIKE IT IS A
PERSONAL EITHER INTERRUPTION OR
ATTACK AND SO I'M GOING TO ASK
ALL OF US ON THIS COMMITTEE WHEN
THE ADMINISTRATION IS ANSWERING
A QUESTION THAT WE LET THEM
COMPLETE THEIR ANSWER. UH AND
NOT INTERRUPTED OR TALK OVER
THEM, AND WE TRY TO KEEP THIS SO
IT IS AT AS PROFESSIONAL OF
LEVEL AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE WE
ACTUALLY ARE ALL ON THE TRYING
TO DO THE SAME THING. WE'RE
TRYING TO DO GOOD GOVERNMENT. WE
HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS ABOUT WHAT
IS GOOD GOVERNMENT, BUT
EVERYBODY INTENDS TO DO THAT.
BUT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT
MUCH BETTER IF WE KEEP IT VERY
PROFESSIONAL, AND I'M GOING TO
INSIST ON THAT, AND I JUST
WANTED TO GET THAT SAID HERE
EARLY THAT BEING SAID, I'M GOING
TO GET TO MY QUESTIONS. UM, IF I
CAN AND ONE I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY ONE OF YOUR ANSWERS. YOU
TALKED ABOUT 1.2 MILLION
CHARGING STATIONS NEED TO BE OUT
THERE. AH THAT'S TOTAL CHARGING
STATIONS PRIVATE, YOU KNOW,
SUBSIDIZED EVERYTHING ELSE WE'RE
TRYING TO TRYING TO GET TO THE
1.2 MILLION. YES THAT INCLUDES
EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THOSE IN
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. OKAY AND
THEN WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT 1.2
DO YOU ANTICIPATE? WE WILL HAVE
TO INCENTIVIZE TO GET TO 1.2
BECAUSE SOME OF THESE ARE BEING
BUILT, OBVIOUSLY, WITHOUT
INCENTIVES. YEAH THAT'S A GREAT
QUESTION, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE
DO PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE
WAY WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS
CURRENTLY IS THAT AND WE'RE
CALLING IT. A LITTLE THEORY OF
CHANGE IS THAT THE ANNUAL SALES
ARE GREAT, BUT REALLY WHAT'S ON
THE GROUND TODAY ON THE ROAD
THAT IS USING THOSE CHARGERS, SO
WE HAVE ENOUGH UTILIZATION TO
MAKE THOSE PROFITABLE FOR THE
PRIVATE MARKET. RIGHT NOW. YOU
KNOW WE'RE SEEING ABOUT 50% OF
WHAT'S BEING DEPLOYED IS FROM
PRIVATE INVESTMENT AGAIN. A
LARGE PORTION OF THAT TESLA SO
THAT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT
MISLEADING. UM FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS NOT PUT A BUNCH
OF MONEY INTO IT YET. THEY'RE
STARTING TO A LOT OF THE EARLY
INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN FROM
UTILITY RATEPAYERS AND FROM
PUBLIC INVESTMENT IF YOU EXCLUDE
THE TESLA PIECE BUT WHEN WE LOOK
AT THE THEORY OF CHANGE, AND
WE'RE DEVELOPING, TO PUT NUMBERS
BEHIND THIS IS YOU HAVE TO LOOK
AT HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE ON THE
ROAD AND USING THOSE CHARGERS,
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY OF THE
PERCENTAGES ON THE ROAD. HOW
MANY OF THOSE DON'T HAVE ACCESS
TO SINGLE FAMILY HOME CHARGING?
I LIVE IN A CONDO? I HAVE A BOLT
PRIMARILY CHARGE AT HOME. I AM
NOT THE UTILIZATION THOSE
CHARGERS NEED OUT IN THE FIELD.
SO WE'RE BUILDING THAT THAT
THEORY AND STRUCTURE TO BETTER
UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION, AND
WE'LL START PUTTING NUMBERS
BEHIND IT. BUT I DON'T HAVE AN
ANSWER FOR YOU TODAY. ON ONE WE
CAN STOP FUNDING IT. THANK YOU.
MY GUESS IS WILL ALWAYS NOT HAVE
ALL OF THE ANSWERS BECAUSE THIS
IS SUCH A FLEXIBLE SITUATION
THAT WE HAVE. IT'S CONSTANTLY
EVOLVING MY SECOND QUESTION. UM
I KNOW THAT DOING ENERGY
COMMISSION IN PARTICULAR IS
CONCERNED ABOUT CREATING
STRANDED ASSETS. AND SO YOU
KNOW, TRYING TO FUND THINGS THAT
DINNER CAN BE USED AT THE SAME
TIME. UM THE THINGS THAT I
EXPRESSED EARLIER IN IN THIS
COMMITTEE HEARING ABOUT TRYING
TO KEEP VARIOUS OPTIONS. OPEN AS
THE TECHNOLOGY IS STILL EVOLVING
, AND WE'RE AT THIS EARLY STAGE,
SO I HAVEN'T IT'S NOT 100% CLEAR
TO ME IS THE ENERGY COMMISSION
COMMITTED TO A HYDROGEN HEAVY
AND HEAVY AND MEDIUM DUTY
QUARTERS CONNECTING THE PORTS TO
THE FREEWAYS AS WELL AS A
BATTERY CHARGING YOU KNOW? COURT
OR, IN OTHER WORDS, DO WE HAVE A
HYDROGEN HIGHWAY COURT FREE
QUARTER AND POOR CONNECTION
SYSTEM AND ELECTRICITY? ONE SO
THAT WE HAVE BOTH OF THOSE
TECHNOLOGIES AND BEFORE I TAKE
YOUR ANSWER PREFERENCES BY
SAYING IT, I THINK IT'S VERY
CLEAR THAT ON THE LIGHT DUTY
SIDE BATTERY TECHNOLOGY IS
LEADING THE WAY. WE PROBABLY
SHOULD STILL HAVE SOME HYDROGEN
JUST JUST FOR THE COMPETITIVE
PURPOSES OF THAT. BUT ON THE
HEAVY DUTY SIDE, IT'S NOT CLEAR
FOR SURE WHERE THIS IS GOING.
TESLA'S YOU KNOW, NOW TESTING
THEIR HEAVY DUTY SEMI AND WE'VE
HEARD ABOUT THAT, BUT IT TAKES
TWO HOURS FOR THAT TRUCK TO
CHARGE AND TWO HOURS HOW DO YOU
BUILD TRUCK STOPS THAT YOU COULD
HAVE TRUCKS THAT TAKE TWO HOURS
TO CHARGE RATHER THAN 10 OR 15
MINUTES TO, YOU KNOW TO FILL UP
BATTERY TECHNOLOGY IS HAVING
CHALLENGES IN IN COLD, COLD
CLIMATES, AND YOU KNOW, WE
CERTAINLY HAVE TO GET OVER THIS
YEAR, NEVADA'S AND ALL OF THAT.
I'M NOT CERTAIN HYDROGEN. YOU
KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE WITH
HYDROGEN. SO UH, TRYING TO IN
THE HEAVY DUTY SIDE. I THINK THE
JURY IS STILL OUT IN TERMS OF
WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO UNTIL I
WOULD HOPE THAT THE C C WOULD BE
OPEN TO TRACK TO THAT
PHILOSOPHY, EVEN MORE SO IN THE
HEAVY DUTY SIDE THAN THE LIGHT
DUTY SIDE WHERE I'VE SEEN THAT
BEING THE CASE, SO COULD YOU.
ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT OUR IS
THE C E C COMMITTED TO THIS THIS
QUARTER, THE STRAIGHT QUARTER
AND PORK CONNECTION BEING BOTH
BATTERY AND HYDROGEN CONNECTED.
YES YES, WE DEFINITELY ARE.
WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE
RESULT OF SENATE BILL 6 71, THE
CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION. WE WANT TO RELEASE
THE SOLICITATION THAT WILL BE
OPEN TO BOTH ELECTRIC AND
HYDROGEN AND TARGET THOSE FIVE
CORRIDORS FIRST, BECAUSE WE
AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK WE NEED
TO INVEST IN BOTH THOSE NOW SEE
WHERE THE MARKET TAKES HOLD, AND
THEN MAYBE WE TAKE A CERTAIN
DIRECTION OVER TIME, BUT WE NEED
TO BE INVESTING IN BOTH ELECTRIC
AND HYDROGEN FOR HEAVY DUTY
GOODS MOVEMENT. WHAT ARE YOU
HEARING FROM THE PORTS IN TERMS
OF THEIR INTEREST ON HYDROGEN
VERSUS VERSUS BATTERY AND FUEL
CELL VERSUS BATTERY IS PROBABLY
A BETTER WAY FOR ME TO SAY IT.
YEAH IT'S A MIXED BAG. IT'S A
MIXED BAG. THERE ARE SOME THAT
FEEL LIKE HYDROGEN IS DEFINITELY
THE RIGHT PATH FOR THEM. THERE'S
OTHERS WHO FEEL LIKE ELECTRICS
THE RIGHT PATH, I THINK,
ULTIMATELY BECAUSE THERE IS SO
MUCH EQUIPMENT AND
TRANSPORTATION THAT COMES IN AND
OUT AND ON POURED. IT COULD VERY
LIKELY BE A MIX. ACTUALLY, I'M
NOT SURE THAT ONE MAY NGUYEN
YEAH, I COULD. I COULD SEE THE
DREDGE TRUCKS THAT ARE DOING
SHORT, YOU KNOW, SHORT AND
STEADY AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE
PARKED AT THAT NIGHT, ALWAYS IN
THE SAME SPOT, WHICH COULD BE A
DIFFERENT KIND OF TECHNOLOGY,
AND THEY DON'T HAVE AS MUCH OF
THE WAY AND THE LONG DISTANCE
HAULERS ARE GOING TO NEED A
DIFFERENT KIND OF TECHNOLOGY AND
DIFFERENT ACCESS TO FEELING
STATIONS, ETCETERA. UM THE YOU
YOU WERE ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT
HOW MUCH MONEY FOR PORTS. I
HEARD YOUR ANSWER, BUT I WANT TO
TRY TO JUST CLARIFY, UM, YOU
TALKED ABOUT $400 MILLION BEING
CUT, YOU KNOW, WITH WITH THE CUT
SUPPORTS, BUT YOU TALKED ABOUT
YOU THOUGHT THAT WITH THE
FEDERAL FUNDING OUT THERE THAT
YOU'D BE ABLE TO REPLACE THAT AM
I CORRECT THERE, AND THAT'S MORE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I
BELIEVE, RIGHT. TERMS OF THAT.
I'M SORRY. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CAUGHT ME. WOULD YOU MIND
REPEATING THAT CUTS TO THE
PORTS? HOW MUCH DO YOU
ANTICIPATE GOING TO THE PORCH
FROM THE COMPETITIVE FUNDS AND
IN YOUR ANSWER ALSO, YOUR YOUR
ANSWER DEALT WITH WITH THEIR
FEDERAL FUNDS OUT THERE ALSO,
AND I'M NOT SURE WHETHER IT WAS
WHICH OF YOU TWO ARE THE RECEIPT
FOR YOURSELF. THAT ANSWERED THAT
QUESTION. UM BUT DO ANTICIPATE
THE PORTS. FUNDING WITH THE CUTS
WILL BE WILL BE REPLACED WITH
THE COMPETITIVE GRANTS AND
FEDERAL FUNDING. I WOULD SAY
THAT IT'S THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PERSPECTIVE THAT IT'S WE'RE
DEFINITELY GOING TO SEE A LOT OF
FEDERAL FUNDS COMING FROM THE IJ
AND IRA. WE ARE VERY COMPETITIVE
IN THAT SPACE, WHETHER IT'S THE
100% BACKFILL FROM FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. I'M NOT SURE WE CAN
SAY 100% WILL BE BACKFILLED BY
FEDERAL FUNDS, BUT WE CERTAINLY
CAN ASSUME THAT OF THE 27 POINT
. 8,000,000,400 MILLION IS A
REASONABLE LEVEL OF FUNDING WE
COULD SEE COME THROUGH THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT VERY MUCH.
AND THEN, UM, I JUST WANT WANT
TO COMMENT OF HELIOS
PRESENTATION FOLLOWING THE
HISTORICAL APPROACH THAT WE'VE
HAD OF TRYING TO RESERVE AS MUCH
FLEXIBILITY AS POSSIBLE IS
CERTAINLY I THINK ONE THAT MAKES
SENSE. I WOULD LIKE TO GET A BIT
OF A RESPONSE. UM THEY TALK
ABOUT, UH, DOES THAT DOES THAT
CAUSE FOR C. E. C S PLANNING AND
FOR CARBS PLANNING, UH, DOES
THAT CAUSE A PROBLEM HOLDING
ONTO FLEXIBILITY FOR? UM YOU
KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT ADOPTING
LANGUAGE THAT, UH, THAT THE
ADDITIONAL G R F FUNDINGS, WHICH
PROGRAMS ETCETERA. DOES IT DOES
IT CAUSE A PROBLEM FOR YOU GUYS
IN TERMS OF YOUR PLANNING? IF WE
HOLD THAT THAT FLEXIBILITY OF
OPEN FOR THE LEGISLATURE? I
BELIEVE THAT THE GRS SPENDING IS
AGAIN SEPARATED BY THE
CONTINUOUS APPROPRIATION SIDE,
SO THAT IS CONTINUING TO SHOW
THE COMMITMENT AND PLAN IN TERMS
OF THE DIFFERENT INVESTMENTS
THAT WE HAVE FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL
. UH L C TOPPED ERCP SO THOSE
THOSE COMMITMENTS WILL CONTINUE
IN TERMS OF THE DISCRETIONARY
AMOUNT OF FUNDS. THAT'S A
CONTINUOUS DISCUSSION THAT WE
HAVE WITH THE LEGISLATURE
USUALLY EVERY YEAR. SO IN TERMS
OF PLANNING, I THINK IT ACTUALLY
HELPS THE ADMINISTRATION PLAN.
AS TO WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE
RECEIVING FUNDING FOR THE VERY
IMPORTANT ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
SPACE BY PUTTING THOSE DOLLARS
ASIDE FOR THAT PURPOSE. THANK
YOU, BUT I THINK THERE WILL BE
AN ONGOING CONVERSATION AS AS WE
CONSTANTLY HAVE THIS TENSION
ABOUT TRYING TO HOLD ONTO
LEGISLATIVE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE
FUTURE FUNDING, ETCETERA, RIGHT?
YEAH GO AHEAD, MR CHAIR. I HOPE
YOU DON'T MIND. YOU CAUGHT ME
MID THOUGHT EARLIER, AND I JUST
WANTED TO CLARIFY ABOUT READING
OFF THE REDUCTIONS. I BELIEVE I
MAY HAVE READ THE INCORRECT
AMOUNTS. BUT CAN I GO BACK ON
THE RECORD AND CORRECT THOSE
VALUES FOR YOU OKAY? YES SO, UH
, OF THE REDUCTIONS IN TOTAL,
THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD FOR THE
CLEAN CARS ROLL WOULD HAVE ABOUT
UM ZERO IN TERMS OF REDUCTIONS
FOR THE ENERGY COMMISSION, THEY
WOULD HAVE ROUGHLY ABOUT 210
MILLION IN 23 24 FOR THE ZIP,
FUELING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS.
FOR THE LET'S SEE. RESOURCES
WERE TRANSIT, BUSSES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE. IT WOULD BE
ROUGHLY AROUND IN 23 24 AROUND
140 130 MILLION FOR TRANSIT,
BUSSES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION. IT WOULD BE AROUND
40 MILLION FOR THE SCHOOL BUSSES
AND INFRASTRUCTURE. IT WOULD BE
FOR EVERY SOURCES BOARD 135
MILLION FOR THE CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION. IT WOULD BE
15,000,023 24. FOR THE CLEAN
TRUCKS AND BUSSES AND OFF ROAD
EQUIPMENT. BUT FOR CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION THAT IS ALL
BACKFILLED BY JDRF SNOW CUTS
THERE AND THEN FOR THEIR
RESOURCES BOARD FOR PORTS AND
ENERGY COMMISSION REPORTS. IT
WOULD BE $100 MILLION TOTAL
THERE. AND THEN FOR THE
COMMUNITY BASED PLANS. IT WOULD
BE $140 MILLION IN 23 24 FOR AIR
RESOURCES BOARD EMERGING
OPPORTUNITIES, IT WOULD BE $35
MILLION IN THE BUDGET YEAR AND
FOR ENERGY COMMISSION FOR
EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES. IT WOULD
BE $35 MILLION THERE. AND THEN
FOR THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD FOR
THE CHARTER BOATS THAT
COMPLIANCE WOULD BE 40 MILLION
BUDGET YEAR, BUT WE WERE PLACE
THAT 40 MILLION IN THE OUT YEARS
WITH $20 MILLION OF BACKFILL
FROM G R F AND IF IT'S IF IT'S
HELPFUL FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE TO GO BACK AND LET
EVERYBODY KNOW THAT WE WILL AT
THESE COMMITTEE HEARINGS, ASKED
FOR THAT LISTENING EACH TIME SO
YOU CAN BE PREPARED FOR THEM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, RIGHT? GO AHEAD. I WAS
GONNA WAIT TILL THE NEXT PANEL.
BUT I THINK THE PANEL IS THE
SAME. SO LET ME JUST QUICKLY GO
TO REAL QUICK ON THESE PREPAID
CARDS. HOW MUCH IS BEING
PROPOSED TO GIVE THE ZEB DRIVERS
TO CHARGE THEIR CARS AND IN
TERMS OF THE PREPAID CARDS IN
THE CONTRACT? WHO IS THE
CONTRACT WITH AND DOES THE
CONTRACT SPECIFY AN AMOUNT THAT
IS ALLOWED FOR FRAUD. THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION SO I
CAN GET AT MOST OF THAT, BUT
WE'LL NEED TO CIRCLE BACK WITH
YOU ON SOME OF IT. UM SO I WOULD
SAY FOR THE PREPAID CARDS HOW
MUCH YOU GET IS KIND OF
DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH YOU HOW
MUCH YOU CAN ON ARE ELIGIBLE TO
STACK SO YOUR LOWER BOUND IS
2000. YOUR UPPER BOUND IS $8000
IN TERMS OF THE CHARGE CARD
REPRESENTS ABOUT TWO YEARS OF
CHARGING. WHICH SENTENCE STANDS
IN STARK CONTRAST TO HOW MUCH
ONE WOULD SPEND ON GASOLINE IN
THAT PERIOD, WHICH IS ABOUT
$10,000. SO IN TERMS OF YOUR
CONTRACT IN QUESTION, I'M HAPPY
TO CIRCLE BACK ON THAT. BUT AS
YOU KNOW, UH, CARB DOES NOT
STAND FOR FRAUD AS THE AGENCY
THAT YOU KNOW, OVERSAW VW. IF
YOU KNOW A FRIED LET US KNOW
BECAUSE WE WILL FOLLOW UP AND
I'M NOT SAYING THAT I JUST
LEARNING FROM LEARNING FROM THE
MIDDLE CLASS TAX REFUND. AH
PROGRAM. THERE WERE CREDIT CARDS
STOLEN. UH AND THERE WAS THERE
WAS ROD. AND SO WHO IS THE
CONTRACT WITH TO DELIVER THE
PREPAID CARDS FOR THE ASSISTANCE
YOU'RE PROVIDING HERE, RIGHT? I
CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON THAT.
I'M SURE IT'S A SUBCONTRACTOR
SUB TO A SUBCONTRACTOR. SO LET
ME LET ME FOLLOW UP ON THAT
INFORMATION, AND I WILL CIRCLE
BACK SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHO
DELIVERS YOUR CARDS? NOT IN THIS
MOMENT, BUT MY TEAM DOES
CONTRACT SIGNED. YES. CONTRACT
SIDE. WHO WITH WHO? I DON'T
PERSONALLY KNOW THAT I DON'T
HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT
NOW, BUT I'M HAPPY TO CIRCLE
BACK WITH YOU ON THAT. THAT'S A
VERY DISAPPOINTING ANSWER. THANK
YOU. WE'RE GONNA OPEN THE ROLL
BACK UP HERE AND THEN, UM
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FRIEDMAN HAS A
QUESTION AND THEN WE'LL GO TO
THE PRESENTATIONS ON ISSUE TWO.
AH! OPEN THE ROLL, PLEASE.
MOTION ONE, FRIEDMAN AYE.
GARCIA. MOTION TO FRIEDMAN HIGH
SIERRA. MOTION. THREE FRIEDMAN
BY GARCIA. RUSSIAN FOUR FRIEDMAN
I, GARCIA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND TO HELP ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
FRIEDMAN WITH HER SCHEDULE.
WE'RE GOING TO LET HER ASK HER
QUESTION ON ISSUE TWO AND THEN
WE'LL HAVE THE PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M ASSUMING IT'S THE SAME PANEL
THE SAME SAME PEOPLE. OKAY SO I
AM SORRY, APOLOGIZING. I'M GOING
TO SKIP TO THE NEXT TOPIC
BECAUSE I DO HAVE TO GO TO OTHER
MEETINGS. UM SO I DO WANT TO
CIRCLE BACK. FIRST OF ALL I WAS,
YOU KNOW, I WOULD LOVE MAYBE
SOME INFORMATION. I WAS ASKING
ABOUT THE PROGRAM, THE
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES, PLANS
AND STRATEGIES PROGRAM AT THE
TOP OF 25, MY TRANSPORTATION
STAFF WHO'S A LOT MORE IN THE
WEEDS ON THIS THAN ME IS ALSO
CONFUSED BECAUSE WE THINK THAT
MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT PROGRAM
THAT HAS THIS SAME EXACT NAME.
AS A SIMILAR PROGRAM, SO I
WANTED TO JUST SEE IF WE HAVE IF
THEY REALLY ARE TWO SEPARATE
PROGRAMS THAT FUND TWO SEPARATE
THINGS OR NOT, UM, SO THAT WOULD
BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT FOLLOW UP,
BUT I WANTED TO JUMP AHEAD TO
THE CARBS SCOPING PLAN THAT'S
ANTICIPATING OR BASING SOME OF
ITS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS ON A
25% BMT REDUCTION. AND FIRST LET
ME SAY THAT I THINK THAT THAT'S
A VERY IMPORTANT GOAL AND I SEE
THAT AS A GOAL AND ASPIRATIONAL
AND A TARGET. BUT JUST BECAUSE
IT'S A GOAL DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE
DON'T HAVE TO TAKE VERY REAL
STEPS IN TRYING TO ACHIEVE IT.
YOU KNOW? CERTAINLY WE
UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN'T GET TO
THAT. JUST THROUGH
ELECTRIFICATION. YOU KNOW IT'S
GONNA TAKE A WHILE. IT'S NOT
SUSTAINABLE FOR OTHER REASONS
THAT WE HAVE TO DO BETTER WITH
MOBILITY FOR EQUITY REASONS FOR
PUBLIC HEALTH REASONS FOR BETTER
LAND USE REASONS FOR CREATING
HOUSING REASONS. LOTS OF
REASONS. SO MY QUESTION IS HOW
DO YOU ANTICIPATE MEETING THAT
GOAL AND THIS MAY REQUIRE, YOU
KNOW, I UNDERSTAND SOME FOLLOW
UP, BUT DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC
ROAD MAP AS TO HOW WE MEET THAT
GOAL AND DOESN'T INCLUDE WHAT
PROJECTS WE FUND IN THE
TRANSPORTATION SPACE AND ALSO
HOW WE USE LAND. AND IF SO, HOW
DO HIS CARB INTERACT WITH THE
ENTITIES THAT FUND
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND THAT
DO LAND PLANNING TO MAKE SURE
THAT THAT GOAL IS REALIZED? AND
DON'T CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. THAT'S MY FIRST
QUESTION. GREAT THANK YOU. UM
AND HAPPY TO HAVE A FOLLOW UP,
OF COURSE. SO WE SEE OUR ROADMAP
REALLY AS THE STATE'S SCOPING
PLAN, WHICH CARB CONTRIBUTES TO,
BUT IT INCLUDES. I THINK THOSE
KIND OF ROADMAP MILESTONES THAT
YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AND INCLUDES
DIFFERENT POLICIES LIKE
ENCOURAGING INFILL DEVELOPMENT,
ENCOURAGING ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION, THAT KIND OF
THING, SO WE REALLY AS A STATE
AND AS ALL THE AGENCIES WORKING
FOR THE STATE LOOK TO THAT ROAD
MAP TO HELP GUIDE US, BUT I
THINK YOU'RE HITTING ON
SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT,
WHICH IS THAT THE SCOPING PLAN
ITSELF AND THOSE BMT GOALS. UH
UM, ARE REALLY AS YOU SAID,
ASPIRATIONAL, BUT I THINK
RECOGNIZES THAT ALL OF US HAVE A
ROLE TO PLAY AND REDUCING VM T
AND THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY
THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CREATING
THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT THAT WE
LIVE IN. CURRENTLY IN THE
TRANSPORTATION PATTERNS. WE ALL
ENGAGE IN. CURRENTLY THERE WERE
A NUMBER OF FACTORS THAT LED US
TO THIS POINT, AND THERE'S GOING
TO BE A NUMBER OF AGENCIES, BOTH
STATE AND LOCAL. YOU KNOW,
CONTRIBUTING TO THESE BMT
SOLUTIONS. THANK YOU. AND YOU
KNOW, I'VE BEEN TRYING TO HAVE A
VERY SERIOUS DISCUSSION NOT JUST
THROUGH DISCUSSIONS AND HEARINGS
, BUT ALSO THROUGH LEGISLATION
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROJECTS
THAT WE FUND IN THE
TRANSPORTATION SPACE ALIGN WITH
THESE GOALS, AND IT'S NOT BEEN A
PARTICULARLY SUCCESSFUL
CONVERSATION TO THIS POINT, SO I
THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO
DO. AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN WORK
ON THAT SO THAT WE MAKE THESE
GOALS REAL AND THAT WE LOOK AT
ALL OF OUR POLICIES AND MAKE
SURE THAT THIS IS WHERE THEY
LEAD AND THAT WE CAN'T ALLOW US
TO FALL INTO THE TRAP OF SAYING.
WELL, THESE ARE OUR GOALS, BUT
WE'RE JUST GONNA WE'RE GONNA PUT
THEM WE'RE GOING TO DO THEM IN
THE FUTURE AT SOME POINT THAT
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW
PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE
PLANNING STAGES OR EVEN
SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, FURTHER
ALONG, UM, THAT WE KNOW ARE
COUNTED TO THESE GOALS THAT THAT
THAT ACTUALLY WILL INCREASE VM T
TO MOVE FORWARD THAT WE'VE GOT
FIND A WAY OF TRYING TO FINAL,
THE INTEREST AND THE
PRIORITIZATION TOWARDS THINGS
THAT REALLY REDUCE VM T. WE ALSO
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE
PROJECTS REALLY DO RESULT IN
THAT YOU KNOW THAT IF IT'S IF
IT'S AN ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS, FOR INSTANCE, HOW DO
WE KNOW THAT IT'S REALLY IN THE
RIGHT PLACE AND DONE IN THE WAY
THAT'S REALLY GOING TO ENCOURAGE
PEOPLE TO USE IT? AND WE NEED TO
HAVE SOME METRICS BEHIND THAT,
YOU KNOW? ARE WE, FOR INSTANCE,
ALLOWING AGENCIES TO PAINT XIROS
AND STREETS WHEN WE DON'T REALLY
KNOW IF THAT ACTUALLY MAKES
PEOPLE FEEL SAFE ENOUGH TO
ENCOURAGE AN INCREASE. IN
CYCLING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE
EXAMPLE I WOULD GIVE. AND IF SO,
YOU KNOW WHERE OUR POLICIES TO
ACTUALLY DIRECT MONEY TOWARDS
THE PROJECT THAT PAY THE BIGGEST
DIVIDENDS. ARE WE PRIORITIZING
THE BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT
ACTUALLY CONNECTS THE THINGS
THAT WE NEED TO CORRECT, CONNECT
OR ARE THEY LIKE PASSING A PARK
? SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT WE THAT OUR POLICIES REALLY
HELP YOU ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS,
AND I THINK I'D LIKE TO SEE A
LOT MORE OF A CONVERSATION ABOUT
THAT. AND I'M GOING TO ASK THE
NEXT TWO QUESTIONS. JUST EVEN
THOUGH THEY'RE SEPARATE
QUESTIONS. I'M JUST GOING TO GET
THEM OUT THERE. THE FIRST ONE IS
HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THIS REDUCTION
WITHOUT HAVING A SERIOUS
CONVERSATION ABOUT PRICING? AND
WHEN DO WE HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION TO KNOW THAT WE CAN
STILL PAY FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE
PAY FOR THE REPAIR OF OUR
EXISTING ROADS AND OUR
INFRASTRUCTURE? IF WE'RE
REDUCING BMT, WHEN DOES PRICING
COME INTO THIS AND WHAT'S THE
TIMETABLE? AND HOW DOES CARB GET
US THERE? AND THEN LASTLY, WHAT
ARE THE HURDLES RIGHT NOW IN
ACHIEVING THESE GOALS AS FAR AS
YOU SEE THEM? WHERE WHERE ARE
THEY NOT BEING MET? IS IT AT THE
MPO LEVEL? IS IT AT THE STATE
LEVEL, YOU KNOW? ARE THERE
BARRIERS OUT THERE AND I'LL JUST
GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. I WAS JUST
A CAL COG LAST WEEKEND, AND
THERE'S A LOT OF AGENCIES IN THE
STATE AND A LOT OF CITIES IN THE
STATE THAT ARE REALLY TRYING TO
DO THE RIGHT THING. YOU KNOW,
THEY'VE GOT THE PROJECTS ON THE
BOOKS. THEY'RE TRYING TO MOVE
THEM FORWARD, AND THEY'LL SAY
IT'S GONNA COST US $50 MILLION
TO DO A SEQUEL PLANNING FOR A
BIKE PATH IN OUR COMMUNITY. IT'S
JUST TOO EXPENSIVE OR WHATEVER
THE BARRIER IS, YOU KNOW, THEY
HAVE THEIR BARRIERS AND, YOU
KNOW, ARE YOU SITTING DOWN WITH
THEM TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE TO SEE
IF THEY MAKE SENSE? DOES THAT
MAKE SENSE? AND ARE THERE WAYS
OF STREAMLINING THESE BETTER
PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW ARE MORE
ENVIRONMENTAL THAT MEET OUR
GOALS SO THAT WE REMOVE THE
BARRIERS FOR AGENCIES THAT ARE
REALLY TRYING TO GET US THERE.
SO THOSE ARE MY 22 LAST
QUESTIONS. WELL I'LL JUST SAY
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST
IN LEADERSHIP ON THIS TOPIC.
WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO
MAKE ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS BETTER.
SO WELCOME THE CONVERSATION.
I'LL JUST TOUCH ON A FEW OF THE
THEMES YOU HIT ON. YOU HAD ASKED
ABOUT PRICING. ALL DEFER TO OUR
ALLEGED OFFICE ON THAT, BUT I
BELIEVE THAT TO DO SOMETHING
LIKE ROAD PRICING THAT THAT
MIGHT REQUIRE SOME ACTIVITY ON
THE LEGISLATIVE SIDE. THAT'S
CERTAINLY NOT MY AREA OF
EXPERTISE. BUT THAT'S WHAT I
PICKED UP IN THE ETHER, AT LEAST
THE HURDLES AS I SEE THEM. UM
I'LL JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, AS I
ALLUDED TO BEFORE INNER SCOPING
PLAN, I THINK IT'S REALLY
RECOGNIZING THAT THE SOLUTIONS
TO BMT REALLY NEED TO BE
MULTIFACETED AND A LOT OF THE
SOLUTIONS THAT YOU WERE POINTING
TO, YOU KNOW, HAD SHARED
RESPONSIBILITY ABOUT BOTH THE
STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL, WHICH IS
CHALLENGING RIGHT BECAUSE IT'S
NOT JUST ONE AGENCY THAT CAN
HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEM. THANK
YOU. RIGHT THANK THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WE WILL NOW GO TO ISSUE
NUMBER TWO, AND WHICHEVER
ADMINISTRATION WITNESS WOULD
LIKE TO GO FIRST. HI, CHRIS.
OKAY, COOL, JACK. YEAH. OH,
DUDE, I GRAB YOUR. GOOD MORNING
, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS DAVID
EVANS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. I WILL PRESENT ON THE
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM, THE AIR
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND
THE ENHANCED FLEET MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM. COLLECTIVELY THESE
PROGRAMS THEY SUPPORT THE
STATE'S GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
GOALS. THEY PROVIDE GRANTS FOR
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES, FUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE. THEY PROVIDE LOW
INTEREST FINANCING, SO TRUCK
OWNERS CAN OBTAIN CLEANER
VEHICLES, AND THEY ALSO HELPED
LOW INCOME EARNERS WHO HAVE
HIGHER POLLUTING ORDER VEHICLES
AND HELPS THEM SWITCHED TOWARDS
CLEANER TRANSPORTATION. THE
REVENUE COLLECTED FROM THESE
PROGRAMS, WHICH YOU'RE QUITE
SURE, APPROXIMATELY ABOUT $173
MILLION ANNUALLY. UM THEY
SUPPORT LOW INCOME AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES THAT
ARE EXPERIENCING
DISPROPORTIONATE LEVELS OF AIR
QUALITY POLLUTION. THE PROPOSAL
IS TO REQUEST AN EXTENSION OF
THE VEHICLE REGISTRATION. THE
SMOG ABATEMENT FEES WHICH
SUPPORT THESE PROGRAMS THEY'RE
CURRENTLY ANTICIPATED TO EXPIRE
ON JANUARY 1 2024. THE REQUEST
IS TO EXTEND THESE FEES. UM
UNTIL JUNE 30TH JULY 1ST OF 2035
TO MAKE MINOR UPDATES TO THE
CLEAN TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM.
BUT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PASS IT
TO DIRECTOR RAZO AT THE ENERGY
COMMISSION TO EXPLICATE A LITTLE
BIT MORE ON THESE PROGRAMS. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS HANNAH
ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION THAT FEELS AND
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION. I WILL
BE PRESENTING THE OPENING
STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE
ENERGY COMMISSION AND THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. BOTH AGENCIES
ARE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. UM
TRANSPORTATION DOES ACCOUNT FOR
50% OF THE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS IN THE STATE. IT ALSO
THEY SIGNIFICANT CAUSE OF LOCAL
AIR POLLUTION IN OUR COMMUNITIES
AND NEGATIVELY IMPACT PUBLIC
HEALTH. WE MUST CONTINUE TO
ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS
, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THEY DO
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT LOW
INCOME AND MINORITY COMMUNITIES.
CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES ARE
COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING THE
ADOPTION OF ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER
THAT CREATES ACCESS FOR ALL
CALIFORNIANS. THE TRANSITION IS
OCCURRING AND WE NEED TO ENSURE
THAT IT WORKS FOR EVERYONE, AND
WE DO NOT LEAVE ANYONE BEHIND.
WE HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT
PROGRESS. THE ENERGY COMMISSION
AND CARB HAVE MADE MEANINGFUL
INVESTMENT WITH THE FUNDS THAT
HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO US. WITH
ALMOST 90% OF NEW SALES IN 2022
BEING THEIR EMISSION VEHICLES,
BUT THERE IS STILL WORK TO BE
DONE AS YOU HEARD ONLY ABOUT
3.7% OF THE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD
TODAY ARE ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES. TODAY, I WILL GIVE AN
OVERVIEW OF OUR REQUEST TO SEEK
REAUTHORIZATION AND FUNDING FOR
THE THREE IMPORTANT PROGRAMS.
THE CLEAN TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
ADMINISTERED BY THE ENERGY
COMMISSION, THE AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ADMINISTERED
BY THEIR RESOURCES BOARD. AND
THE ENHANCED FLEET MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM, OR F, MP ADMINISTERED
BICARB AND THE BUREAU OF
AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR. WE ARE
REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF THESE
PROGRAMS AND FEES. UM UNTIL THE
SUMMER OF 2035. THE CLEAN. LET
ME FIRST TALK ABOUT THE CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND I'LL
GO TO THE OTHER ONES AS WELL.
THE CTP PROVIDED ABOUT $110
MILLION PER YEAR, PRIMARILY FOR
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THIS IS
ELECTRIC AND HYDROGEN
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PASSENGER
VEHICLES AND MEDIUM DUTY, HEAVY
DUTY TRUCKS AND BUSSES. WE ARE
SEEKING MINOR MODIFICATIONS,
SUCH AS ADJUSTING THE LANGUAGE
TO ALIGN MORE WITH R ZERO
EMISSION STATE GOALS. UM AND THE
CTP HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN
MEETING SEVERAL STATE GOALS WE
HAVE INVESTED APPROXIMATELY HALF
ARE FUNDS AND LOW INCOME AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. WE'VE
MADE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS AND
ELECTRIC AND HYDROGEN
INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT LIGHT
DUTY VEHICLES. WE HAVE INCREASED
OUR FOCUS ON TRUCKS AND BUSSES
AS THOSE MARKETS CONTINUE TO
MATURE. WE HAVE FUNDED OVER 25
IN ST MANUFACTURING PROJECTS
SUPPORTED OVER 20,000 TRAINEES.
AND WE HAVE LEVERAGED SIX
SIGNIFICANT NON PROGRAM FUNDS
TOWARDS THESE GOALS. WE
RECOGNIZE THE LEGISLATURE HAS
MADE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS
TOWARDS THE ABSENCE OF
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WE'LL GRATE
GRATEFUL FOR THE RECENT GENERAL
FUND INVESTMENTS, AND WE
APPRECIATE THE FEDERAL
INVESTMENTS WHICH ARE OCCURRING
AS WELL. TO PUT THOSE IN
CONTEXT. A LITTLE BIT WILL GET
ABOUT $384 MILLION OVER FIVE
YEARS IN FORMULA FUNDING FOR
THEIR EMISSION VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WE WILL
COMPETE FOR THE $2.5 BILLION
POT, WHICH IS GOING TO BE
COMPETITIVE THROUGHOUT THE
NATION. HOWEVER THE FULL AND
EQUITABLE TRANSITION DESERVES
WILL STILL TAKE TIME AND STATE
INVESTMENT. WE DO NEED STABLE
AND ONGOING INVESTMENTS TO
SUPPORT LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
AND ALSO THE SMALLER INDEPENDENT
OWNER OPERATORS OF SMALL FLEETS.
UM TO PROVIDE CONTEXT WE DO HAVE
ABOUT 80,000 CHARGERS TODAY. AND
WE WILL NEED 1.2 MILLION BY 2030
. WE ANTICIPATE HAVING A GAP OF
ABOUT 900,000. BASED ON THE
CURRENT FUNDING WE HAVE THAT
WILL NEED TO BRIDGE AND ALSO
CONTINUE INVESTING MEDIUM DUTY
HEAVY DUTY THAT INFRASTRUCTURE
AND AGAIN THE GOOD NEWS HERE IS
WE ARE ON OUR WAY TO REACHING
THE 250,000 CHARGER GOAL
SLIGHTLY AFTER 2025 THE 200
HYDROGEN STATION GOALS, WHAT FOR
LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES. UM WE'RE
COMMITTED TO MEETING THOSE NEAR
TERM GOALS AND ALSO LONG TERM
GOALS THROUGH A PORTFOLIO
APPROACH. UM, WE'VE ALREADY
TALKED ABOUT THAT PORTFOLIO
APPROACH. I WON'T BELABOR IT
HERE IN THE INTEREST OF TIME,
BUT WE DO MAKE BLOCK GRANTS AND
TARGETED INVESTMENTS AS WELL.
AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE
THOSE INVESTMENTS WHERE THE
PRIVATE MARKET MAY NOT OTHERWISE
ACT. UM SO IF THIS PROGRAM IN
EXTENDED, THE CTP WILL CONTINUE
TO SUPPORT THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENTS STATE MANUFACTURING
, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND ALSO
FUEL PRODUCTION. WE GO THROUGH A
REALLY IMPORTANT PUBLIC
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. BECAUSE WE
DO WANT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO
STAKEHOLDERS AND EVOLVING
TECHNOLOGY AND MARKET CONDITIONS
. THAT'S INFORMED BY DIVERSE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND JUST
DISADVANTAGED UM, COMMUNITIES
SORRY, DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
ADVISORY GROUP. SO NEXT, LET ME
TALK ABOUT THE AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OR EQUIP AND
THE ENHANCED FLEET MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM. E F MP EQUIPMENT
ADMINISTERED BICARB. IT RECEIVES
ABOUT 30 YEAR AND SUPPORTS THE
DEPLOYMENT OF CLEANER COMBUSTION
AND ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES AND
EQUIPMENT. IT FILLS THE GAPS IN
CARBON CENTER PORTFOLIO, FOR
EXAMPLE, THE EQUIPPED FUNDED
TRUCK LOAN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
PROVIDE FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES
FOR SMALL BUSINESS TRUCK OWNERS
WHO FALL BELOW CONVENTIONAL
LENDING CRITERIA AND ARE UNABLE
TO QUALIFY FOR TRADITIONAL
FINANCING SINCE PROGRAM
INCEPTION. THAT PROGRAM HAS
SUPPORTED NEARLY 100,000 CLEANER
VEHICLES. NEXT THE E F M P OR
THE ENHANCED FLEET MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM THAT RECEIVES ABOUT $33
MILLION A YEAR. IT PROVIDES
INCENTIVES TO LOW INCOME
INDIVIDUALS JUST GRAB HIGH
POLLUTING VEHICLES AND REPLACE
THOSE WITH CLEANER ALTERNATIVES.
REMOVING THE OLDEST VEHICLES
FROM THE ROAD AND A KEY PART OF
THE STATE STRATEGY TO REDUCE
SMOG FORMING EMISSIONS TO
ACHIEVE HEALTH BASED AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS. THERE'S TWO
COMPONENTS TO THAT PROGRAM. ONE
IS ADMINISTERED BY BAR. IT'S A
SCRAP ONLY OPTION, WHICH OFFERS
ELIGIBLE LOW INCOME CONSUMERS A
$1500 INCENTIVE. AND THIS
ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT 90% OF THAT
FUNDING TO DATE THAT IS
SUPPORTED ABOUT 100,000 VEHICLES
SCRAPPED CARBS PORTION OF IT IF
HE SCRAPPED AND REPLACED PROGRAM
, WHICH PROVIDES LOW INCOME
MOTORISTS WITH A RETIREMENT
INCENTIVE AND ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION TOWARDS THE
PURCHASE OF A CLEANER HYBRID OR
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE. THIS IS
RUN THROUGH A RED DISTRICT, WITH
VOUCHERS VALID AT ABOUT $4500
TOWARD THE PURCHASE OF A NEWER
CLEANER. REPLACEMENT VEHICLE OR
TOWARDS TRANSIT OR OTHER
MOBILITY OPTIONS. CARD
COORDINATED FUNDING CLOSELY WITH
ITS RELATED CLEAN CARS FOR ALL
FUNDING, AND TODAY THEY HAVE
SUPPORTED ABOUT 3700 VEHICLES
RETIRED AND REPLACED. IN
CONCLUSION. WE'RE VERY PROUD OF
THE WORK THAT WE'VE COLLECTIVELY
DONE IN CALIFORNIA WITH THE
GUIDANCE OF THE LEGISLATURE TO
ADVANCE YOUR EMISSION VEHICLE
ADOPTION AND WE STRIVE FOR
EQUITY ACROSS THE BOARD. WE ALSO
WANT TO ENSURE THAT CALIFORNIA
CONTINUES TO BE THE LEADER IN
JOBS OF THE FUTURE. WE HAVE
ABOUT 55 IN ST SEVERAL AIDED
MANUFACTURERS 70,000 RELATED
JOBS AND MORE THAN 11,007
MANUFACTURING JOBS IN THE STATE.
WE ALSO LEVERAGE SIGNIFICANT
OTHER FUNDS. SO ACROSS THESE
PROGRAMS, WE HAVE LEVERAGED
SIGNIFICANT NON PROGRAM
INVESTMENTS FOR EVERY $1 WE
INVEST. WE LEVERAGE OVER $1 IN
NON PROGRAM FUNDING. AND
TRANSITION. CALIFORNIA VEHICLE
FLEET AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS IS
A LONG PROCESS, AND IT WILL TAKE
TIME. BUT WE SO THIS IS WHY
WE'RE ASKING FOR STABLE,
CONSISTENT AND, UH PREDICTABLE
PUBLIC FUNDING TO SUPPORT AND
EXTEND THESE PROGRAMS FOR A BIT
LONGER, AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT
WE ARE AT AN INFLECTION POINT.
AND WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE THESE
INVESTMENTS NOW. THANK YOU.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE
ADMINISTRATION. L A. OH THANK
YOU, SARAH KORNET WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE, SO
I'LL REFER TO THE FEES THAT FUND
THESE PROGRAMS AS A B EIGHT FEES
, WHICH IS HOW THEY'RE OFTEN
REFERRED TO REFERENCING THE BILL
. THAT REAUTHORIZE, UM IN 2013.
SO THIS THIS THE SUNSET DATE ON
THE FEES THAT FUND THESE
PROGRAMS IS OFFERING A GOOD
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE LEGISLATURE
TO CONSIDER WHAT WHAT? WHAT
PROGRAMS ARE BEING FUNDED WITH
THEM. AND IF, IF THE LEGISLATURE
WANTS TO CONSIDER USING THE
REVENUES FOR OTHER PURPOSES. SO
THOUGH THESE ARE RELATIVELY
MODEST, THESE FEES DO REPRESENT
ATTACKS AND OUR CONCERT AND ARE
CONSTITUTIONALLY CONSIDERED
ATTACKS. UM AND THE DIRECT COST
TO HOUSEHOLDS. VEHICLE FEARS
HAVE ALSO INCREASED
SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE PAST
DECADE, SO IT'S WORTH
CONSIDERING WHETHER THEY'RE COST
MERITS THE BENEFITS. AND THESE
FEES WERE LAST REAUTHORIZED IN
2013. SINCE THEN, THE STATE HAS
ADOPTED A NEW NEW, UM, AMBITIOUS
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS,
AND IT'S ALSO COMMITTED
SIGNIFICANT FUNDING TO SUPPORT
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE ACTIVITIES
THROUGH THE RECENT ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE PACKAGE INVESTMENTS AND
ALSO THROUGH THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND, WHICH IS
HISTORICALLY FUNDED, ACT FUNDED
PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORTS YOUR
EMISSION VEHICLES AS WELL. SO
EXTENDING A B EIGHT FEES COULD
PROVIDE A RELIABLE SOURCE OF
FUNDING AND HELP TO POTENTIALLY
OFFSET POTENTIAL BUDGET
REDUCTIONS. BUT BUT THE
REAUTHORIZATION DOES OFFER AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THE
HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR THE FUNDS.
SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE
REAUTHORIZED THE FEES, THE
FUNDING COULD SUPPORT A
DIFFERENT MIX OF CLEAN VEHICLE
PROGRAMS, OTHER CLIMATE
ACTIVITIES OR A DIFFERENT SET OF
EFFORTS ENTIRELY. THE
LEGISLATURE COULD ALSO CONSIDER
RESTRUCTURING THE FEARS TO TRY
TO REDUCE SOME OF THE BURDEN
THEY PLACE ON LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS. SO THIS COULD
INCLUDE, UH, POTENTIALLY USING A
MORE PROGRESSIVE STRUCTURE THAT
BASES THE FEE ON THE VALUE OF
THE VEHICLE. THE FEES COULD ALSO
BE EXTENDED TO MEDIUM AND HEAVY
DUTY VEHICLE OWNERS, AS THIS
CATEGORY OF VEHICLES CURRENTLY
RECEIVES ABOUT HALF THE BENEFITS
FROM THE FEE REVENUE, WHILE THE
FEES THEMSELVES ARE PAID BY
PASSENGER VEHICLES. AND OVERALL
, WE THINK THE LEGISLATURE UM
SHOULD SHOULD CONSIDER YOU KNOW
WHAT WHETHER THESE FEES ARE
STILL ARE STILL NECESSARY IN THE
CONTEXT OF OTHER FUNDING AND
REGULATIONS, AND SHOULD IT
CHOOSE TO REAUTHORIZE THE FEES
CONSIDER ITS HIGHEST PRIORITIES
FOR THE USE OF THE FUNDS, WHICH
WHICH MAY INCLUDE A DIFFERENT
MIX OF PROGRAMS AND THE ONES
CURRENTLY BEING FUNDED. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE TESTIMONY
OF BEFORE I OPENED UP THE MEMBER
QUESTIONS I DO WANT. TO SAY THAT
I APPRECIATE THE
ADMINISTRATION'S INTEREST IN
SORT OF A CLEAN REAUTHORIZATION
OF THIS, AND SO THAT YOU HAVE
THE STEADINESS OF PLANNING. AT
THE SAME TIME, I WOULD BE REMISS
IF I DIDN'T POINT OUT THAT
THERE'S SIGNIFICANT ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ASSEMBLY SORT OF INTEREST
IN TAKING A LOOK AT THIS AND SO
CERTAINLY THIS IS ISSUE THAT.
HELPS QUITE A BIT OF
CONVERSATION GOING ON WITH WITH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SO GET THAT OUT
THERE. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS? MR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S DAILY. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. AND, UM. GOOD
MORNING AGAIN. SO WE HAVE A
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. UM, I
READ YOUR REPORT. AND, UM, I WAS
A LITTLE SURPRISED THAT UM A B
EIGHT WAS PASSED AS A FEE AND
NOT ATTACKS. IS THAT MY
UNDERSTANDING? SO THERE IT'S
THESE A B EIGHT IS OFTEN
REFERRED TO AS FEES. HOWEVER
THEY ARE ATTACKS AND
CONSTITUTIONALLY ARE CONSIDERED
A TAXING. IT'S MORE OF LIKE A
COLLOQUIAL DECISION, TOO OFTEN
REFERRED TO THEM SVS, BUT THEY
ARE ATTACKS WAS APPROVED BY TWO
THIRDS OF THE LEGISLATURE. THE
LAST REAUTHORIZATION WAS WAS
APPROVED BY TWO THIRDS OF THE
LEGISLATURE IN 2013, OKAY, AND
IS IT YOUR POSITION? IF WE WERE
TO EXTEND THESE FEES, THEY WOULD
REQUIRE ANOTHER TWO THIRDS VOTE
VOTE OF THE LEGISLATURE. THAT'S
THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING. YES
OKAY. AND DOES THE
ADMINISTRATION AGREE WITH THAT
ASSESSMENT? DAVID EVANS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. YES. YOU
AGREE? IT'S A TAX. NO, I AGREE
THAT IT IS ÁP. SO IT IS. IT IS
CLASSIFIED AS A FEE. UM AND IT
IS A FEE THAT IS. MODERATE UM,
THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT IS
COLLECTED. IT'S ABOUT AT MOST
$18.50. I DON'T WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A
MODERATE EXCEPTION TO THE
CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR
TAXES. SO CAN YOU ARTICULATE TO
ME WHY THE ADMINISTRATION VIEWS
THIS AS A FEE AND NOT A ATTACKS?
I CAN GET BACK WITH YOUR OFFICE
ON THAT. I'D APPRECIATE THAT.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RACHEL SAILORS
WITH THE L A. OH, MAYBE JUST A
CLARIFICATION. I THINK THAT PART
OF THE TERMINOLOGY ISSUE IS THAT
THE FIRST TIME THAT THE THAT THE
FEES WERE AUTHORIZED WAS BEFORE
THE BALLOT PROPOSITION THAT, UM
, DREW A TIGHTER DESCRIPTION
AROUND WHAT IS A FEE AND WHAT IS
ATTACKED, SO I THINK THAT'S WHY
THEY WERE ORIGINALLY IN STATUTE
REFERRED TO AS A FEE AND THEN
FORGIVE ME FOR NOT REMEMBERING
THE NUMBER OF THE PROPOSITION
THAT THAT THAT, UM, THAT MADE
THAT KIND OF MORE FIRM
DISTINCTION THAT THE REVENUES
HAD TO BE USED EXPLICITLY TO
ENFORCE THE REGULATION IF IT
WERE TO BE CONSIDERED A FEE, SO
I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHERE IT
BECAME ATTACKS, IF YOU WILL, UM
AND SO I THINK NOW, BECAUSE OF
THE WAY THE REVENUES ARE USED IT
IT IS KIND OF THOUGHT OF AS A
TEXT AND WOULD REQUIRE TWO
THIRDS VOTE. I APPRECIATE THAT
CLARIFICATION. I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE CLEAR
TERMINOLOGY AND UNDERSTANDING OF
EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.
I MEAN, TAXES AND FEES. IT'S AN
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. IT'S A
HIGHER THRESHOLD TO GET THROUGH
THE LEGISLATURE, AND I THINK WE
HAVE TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH OUR
CONSTITUENTS ON ON WHAT WE'RE
DOING THE LEGISLATURE, SO I
APPRECIATE THAT, AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S
, UH, EXPLANATION OF WHY THEY
DISAGREE WITH THE L. A O, WHICH
I FIND THEIR REPORTING ANALYSIS
TO BE QUITE SOUND. SO I
APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. UM
MR. DIRECTOR I APOLOGIZE.
RUSSELL, YOU. YOU MENTIONED YOU
MENTIONED AGAIN THAT 50% OF
GREENHOUSE HOUSES. GREENHOUSE
GASSES COME FROM CARS, AND
THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF YOUR FOCUS
HAS BEEN, UM JUST THAT ACCOUNT
FOR, UM WELL, LET ME ASK YOU
THIS. ARE ALL CARBON INITIATIVE
IN MISSIONS EQUAL AND YOUR
VIEWPOINT AND WHAT GOES IN THE
ATMOSPHERE. DO YOU DISTINGUISH
AMONG CARBON EMISSION? I WOULD
HAVE TO DEFER TO CARVE ON THE
CARBON PIECE, BUT, UM, I WILL
JUST REITERATE THAT THESE
EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION OR
A SIGNIFICANT CAUSE OF CANCER,
PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES, SO IT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE ARE COMMITTED
AS STATE AGENCIES TO ADDRESS I
UNDERSTAND THAT. I GUESS MY
QUESTION IS ALL CARBON EMISSIONS
EQUAL, OR DO YOU DIFFERENTIATE?
MY POINT IS, ARE YOU CONSIDERING
WILDFIRE EMISSIONS IN THAT
PERCENTAGE? BECAUSE DO YOU KNOW
WILDFIRES HAVE MADE A LOT OF
CARBON I'LL REFER TO CARBON HOW
THEY CALCULATE THAT. WE HAVE
RECENTLY BEGUN INCORPORATING
WILDFIRE EMISSIONS INTO OUR
SCOPING PLAN AND THE 50% NUMBER.
IT'S OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
. SO I THINK MAYBE WHAT YOU'RE
GETTING AT IS THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN LIKE CARBON DIOXIDE AND
METHANE, AND THAT'S ALL KIND OF
ROLLED UP INTO THIS 50% NUMBER
POSITION THAT WILDFIRE EMISSIONS
ARE NOT GREENHOUSE GASSES. NO IN
FACT, WILDFIRE EMISSIONS ARE
BAKED INTO THE SCOPING PLAN,
WHICH LOOKS AT THE CARBON
EMISSIONS AND GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS FROM THE STATE AS A
WHOLE. SO WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE
CARBON EMISSIONS FROM WILDFIRES
IN THE LAST 10 YEARS IS YOUR
POSITION. STILL, THAT 50% OF
GREENHOUSE GASSES COME FROM CARS
OR DO YOU NOW REVISED THAT
NUMBER? I THINK THERE'S A FEW
WAYS YOU CAN SLICE AND DICE IS
IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO. BUT
AGAIN, I THINK THE IMPORTANT
FACTOR HERE IS THAT TRANSPORT
TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS ARE
SIGNIFICANT CAUSE OF THE CLIMATE
CRISIS AND PUBLIC HEALTH. SO I
THINK YOU KNOW YOU CAN CERTAINLY
SLICE IT IN DIFFERENT MANNERS IF
YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO, BUT THIS IS
STILL AN AREA THAT WE ARE
COMMITTED TO SOLVING. NO I
APPRECIATE THAT. BUT MY QUESTION
ISN'T ONE OF OPINION. IT'S A
FACT. I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE
CARBON EMISSION FROM WILDFIRES,
IT'S MASSIVE AND IT'S WIPED AWAY
ABOUT OVER 10 YEARS OF THE
EFFORTS WE'VE DONE TO LOWER OUR
CARBON EMISSIONS, SO I JUST
DON'T THINK IT'S ACCURATE. TO
KEEP SAYING THAT 50% OF THE
EMISSIONS ARE ATTRIBUTED TO CARS
WHEN WE KNOW WILDFIRES HAVE
CONTRIBUTED FAR MORE THAN THAT.
I JUST IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE
HONEST IN THESE CONVERSATIONS,
BECAUSE IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT
DEALING WITH CLIMATE AND CARBON
EMISSIONS, WE HAVE TO BE HONEST
AND TRANSPARENT AND SCIENCE
SPACE, RIGHT. I MEAN, THAT'S
IMPORTANT. I'M SO HAPPY. YOU
SAID THAT THE CARB IS BEGINNING
TO INCORPORATE WILDFIRE
EMISSIONS. UM WILL THE
ADMINISTRATION TAKE A LOOK AT A
B 397 AND PROVIDE A POSITION?
THAT IS MY BILL TO REQUIRE
WILDFIRE EMISSIONS TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE SCOPING PLAN?
YOU'VE INDICATED THAT THAT'S THE
DIRECTION CARBS GOING, SO I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKE A
LOOK AT THAT AND PROVIDE YOUR
POSITION. WOULD YOU DO THAT FOR
ME? I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE A
LOOK AT YOUR BILL. THANK YOU
APPRECIATE I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE
QUESTIONS, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THERE ARE NO OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS WILL MOVE
ON TO ISSUE THREE. MR CHAIR. MR
SHERIFF, WE COULD COME BACK,
PLEASE JEFF BELL WITH DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO
ADDRESS THE EARLIER QUESTION
THAT WE HAVE THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE IN OUR OFFICE
ON WHETHER WE DISAGREED OR NOT.
ON THAT LAST TOPIC THAT YOU HAD
BROUGHT UP, SIR. ON THE TAXES ON
THE TAXES. YES I JUST WANTED TO
BE CLEAR THAT IT WASN'T WHETHER
WE DISAGREED WITH THEM OR NOT.
IT WAS WHETHER WE WERE INDEED
TAKE A LOOK AT THAT ISSUE OR NOT
. WE WILL COME BACK TO THAT
ISSUE, AND SOMEBODY FROM OUR
STAFF WILL GET WITH YOUR STAFF
AND GET BACK ON THAT TOPIC WITH
YOU. OKAY I WANTED TO BE CLEAR
ON THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU
DIDN'T HAVE A IT APPEARS THAT WE
HAD A DISAGREEMENT WITH THE
LEGISLATION. HONEST OFFICER THAT
WAS IT WAS AN UNCLEAR STATEMENT
, SO I APPRECIATE IT WASN'T A
TRICK QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO
UNDERSTAND IF THE ADMINISTRATION
AGREES WITH THE, UH, THE
ANALYSIS AND THE VIEWPOINT OF
THE L A. AND I APPRECIATE THAT
THAT COMMITMENT. I JUST WANTED
TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEARED
FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WE'RE NOW ON TO ISSUE
THREE AND WE HAVE A NEW PANEL
COMING UP, ALL RIGHT. SUPPLY.
ALRIGHT SO ADMINISTRATION
REPRESENTATIVES IF YOU'LL BE
SURE TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF WHEN
THE BEGINNING OF YOUR COMMENTS
AND WE'LL LET THE ADMINISTRATION
DECIDE WHO'S GOING TO GO FIRST.
GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
BRANDON MERIT WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
ADMINISTRATION PROPOSES TRAIL
BILL LANGUAGE THAT MODIFIES
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS TO ALIGN
CARBS VSC STANDARD WITH RECENTLY
PUBLISHED FEDERALLY GSC
STANDARDS BY THE JOINT OFFICE OF
ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION. THIS
MODIFICATION WILL PROVIDE
CONSISTENT REQUIREMENTS THAT
ELECTRIC VEHICLE SERVICE
PROVIDERS. AND THE VSC
MANUFACTURERS MUST MEET AS WELL
AS ENSURE CONSISTENT CONSUMER
EXPERIENCE NATIONWIDE. MAKING
THIS CHANGE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
WE'LL GIVE TVS PS AND SC
MANUFACTURERS MORE TIME TO
PREPARE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE
FEDERAL FUNDING AND THEREFORE
SUPPORTS CALIFORNIA'S DEPLOYMENT
OF FEDERAL DOLLARS TO REALIZE
THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC
BENEFITS OF INVESTMENT AS EARLY
AS POSSIBLE. QUICKLY
IMPLEMENTING FUNDS PROVIDES
GREATER ASSURANCE THAT THE
RAPIDLY GROWING MARKET FOR ZEB
WILL BE SUPPORTED BY BOTH STATE
AND FEDERAL INVESTMENTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ADVANCES THE
STATE'S GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
GOALS. AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN
IT OVER TO MY. ANYBODY ELSE FROM
THE ADMINISTRATION JUST WANTED A
CHRISTIAN BELCHER WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. JUST WANT
TO SAY WE ALSO HAVE STAFF HERE.
JENNIFER GRASS FROM THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS
OKAY, KEEP GRADE L. A S OFFICE.
UM WE DO NOT HAVE COMMENTS OR
CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WITH ANY QUESTIONS. I
HAVE TWO VERY QUICK QUESTIONS.
WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MAJOR CREDIT
CARDS AND DEBIT CARDS IN
CIRCULATION IN CALIFORNIA RIGHT
NOW, OUR CAP ENABLED. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS.
NICE TO SEE YOU. JENNIFER GRESS
WITH THE CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. THE MOST RECENT
DATA THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE IS
ABOUT TWO YEARS OLD IN HIS
CURRENTLY REFLECTED IN THE
AGENDA, BUT TO RADIO RATE IN THE
FOURTH QUARTER OF 21 VISA
REPORTED ABOUT 15% OF
TRANSACTIONS WERE YOU TAP CARDS
AND MASTERCARD REPORTED THAT
WITHIN 24 MONTHS OF THEIR REPORT
IN 2021, THEY ANTICIPATED ABOUT
25% OF TRANSACTIONS. WE
CURRENTLY HAVE A CONTRACT IN
PLACE TO UPDATE THOSE NUMBERS.
WE ANTICIPATE THE THAT REPORT
SOMETIME EARLY THIS SUMMER. WE
DO KNOW THAT THE DEPLOYMENT OF
TAP TECHNOLOGIES IS EXPANDING
RAPIDLY. 15% AND 25. WHAT IS
THEIR PROJECTION IN TERMS OF
WHEN THE INTENSITY ESSENTIALLY
ALL CARS BEING TAPPED ENABLED.
WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET THAT
INFORMATION FROM VISA AND
MASTERCARD AT THE TIME THAT WE
WERE ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS WHAT
WE UNDERSTAND FROM THAT TIME,
YOU KNOW FULL DEPLOYMENT OF NEW
CAR TECHNOLOGIES CAN TAKE
ANYWHERE FROM 3 TO 7 YEARS. BUT
AS I MENTIONED WE ARE WE ARE. DO
YOU HAVE A CONTRACT IN PLACE TO
UPDATE OUR NUMBERS? WE HAVE THE
MOST AVAILABLE. MOST CURRENT
NUMBERS POSSIBLE, ARE ARE ALL
NEW CARDS TAP ENABLED, OR ARE
THEY STILL ISSUING CARDS THAT
ARE NOT HAPPENING? OUR
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT FOR CREDIT
CARDS, THE MAJOR ISSUERS ARE
ROLLING OUT TAP FOR ALL NEW
CARDS. THAT MAY NOT BE TRUE,
THOUGH FOR DEBIT CARDS AND UPEND
ISSUERS WHO MAYBE KIND OF LESS
MAJOR. SO THE ONLY THING I WANT
TO WANT PENIS THAT, YOU KNOW THE
ISSUE OF MOVING TO TAP ONLY
CARDS. THE QUESTION IS WHO'S
LEFT BEHIND AND WILL IT BE IS
THE MOST DISADVANTAGE OF THE
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE
GREATEST GREATEST CHALLENGES.
MAYBE BECAUSE THEY DON'T UPDATE
THEIR CARDS VERY OFTEN OR
BECAUSE WITH DEBIT CARDS OR
THEY'RE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE
TAPPAN ABLE TO SIDE OF IT,
ETCETERA. SO, UM THAT'S THAT'S
THE ONE COMFORT LEVEL I HAVE AT
THE SAME TIME. OH, OVERALL.
WE'RE GONNA WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO
GET THERE. UM AND I THINK THE
EUROPEANS ARE FURTHER ALONG THAN
US, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF GOING
THIS DIRECTION, SO WE SHOULD BE
ABLE TO GET THERE IN THE
QUESTION IS IN THE TRANSITION
SIDE OF THIS. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS, ALL RIGHT. WE WANT TO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH POSITION WE
WILL MOVE ON TO ISSUE FOR.
CARBON GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND SPENDING PLAN AND THE
GENERAL OVERVIEW ON THIS ONE. WE
DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. I'M
SURE GOOD MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS
. BRENNAN MERIT AGAIN WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. THE
ADMINISTRATION PROPOSES A $2.8
BILLION CAP AND TRADE SPENDING
PLAN IN 2023 24, WHICH YOU CAN
FIND ON PAGE 46 OF YOUR AGENDA.
THE SPENDING PLAN IS BASED ON
THE ESTIMATED GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND OR A GIRAFFE. AS
AS IS KNOWN REVENUES THAT ARE
RESULT OF AUCTION PROCEEDS FROM
FOUR QUARTERLY AUCTIONS PER
FISCAL YEAR AND ASSUMES ALL
CURRENT AND ADVANCED ALLOWANCE
TO SELL AT THE FLOOR PRICE.
SIMILAR TO HISTORICAL PRACTICES
. THIS METHODOLOGY IS USED BY
THE ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE THE
ADMINISTRATION IS SENSITIVE DO
NOT CREATING SPECULATION ON AN
UPCOMING CHANGES RELATED TO THE
FLOOR PRICE. DO NOT SEND ANY
FORM OF MARKET SIGNAL AND HELP
MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE
AUCTION PROCESS. HOWEVER WE DO
UPDATE OUR REVENUE ESTIMATES TO
REFLECT ACTUALS AFTER AUCTIONS
OCCUR. THE ADMINISTRATION WILL
BE EVALUATING CAP AND TRADE
REVENUES FOR THE MAY REVISION
AND REFLECT ANY UPDATES AT THAT
POINT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT THERE ARE STATUTORY
OBLIGATIONS CALCULATED AS
IMMEDIATE OFF THE TOP
DEDUCTIONS. IN PARTICULAR THE
STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREA.
FEEDBACK FILLED AND
MANUFACTURING TAX CREDIT AND THE
HEALTHY AND RESILIENT FORCE.
NEXT IS THE MANDATORY 65%
DEDUCTION FOR CONTINUOUS
APPROPRIATIONS TO THE FOLLOWING
PROGRAMS, HIGH SPEED RAIL,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES, TRANSIT
AND INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL
PROGRAM, LOW CARBON TRANSIT
OPERATIONS PROGRAM AND THE SAFE
AND AFFORDABLE DRINKING WATER
PROGRAM. WHAT REMAINS IS 35% OF
REVENUES, WHICH IS CONSIDERED
DISCRETIONARY FOR THE 2023 24
GOVERNORS BUDGET THE
ADMINISTRATION EXCLUSIVELY
PROPOSES THIS DISCRETIONARY POT
TO BACKFILL GENERAL FUND
SOLUTIONS, SPECIFICALLY 250
MILLION TOWARDS A B 6 17
PROGRAMS AND 611 MILLION TOWARDS
ZEB. GENERAL FUNDS SOLUTIONS.
WHICH ARE SPLIT BETWEEN CARB AND
SEXY. LASTLY AS MENTIONED, UM,
DURING THIS DISCUSSION FOR ISSUE
ONE OF THIS HEARING CONTROL
SECTION 15.14 CONTAINS LANGUAGE
SPECIFYING THAT ANY ADDITIONAL
DISCRETIONARY JDRF REVENUES IN
THE 2023 24 FISCAL YEAR. SHALL
BE USED AS ADDITIONAL BACKFILL
FOR XEV PROGRAMS IMPACTED BY
GENERAL FUND REDUCTIONS. THAT
CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION IN
AISLE ALONG WITH MY CARB
COLLEAGUES IS NEEDED IN HAPPY TO
ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY
HAVE. THANK YOU. UM WE FIND THAT
THE GOVERNOR'S ESTIMATES OF GROF
REVENUES ARE CONSERVATIVE SO
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION ASSUMES
ALLOWANCES FOR THE CAP AND TRADE
ACTION WILL SELL AT THEIR PRICE
FLOOR, WHICH IS NOT A TYPICAL
SCENARIO AS AUCTION AS
ALLOWANCES HAVE SOLD ABOVE THE
PRICE FLOOR AND IN RECENT YEARS
UNDER OUR REVENUE SCENARIO OF
STABLE ALLOWANCE PRICES. WE
ESTIMATE THAT THE STATE WILL
HAVE A TOTAL OF ABOUT 800
MILLION OF ADDITIONAL DOLLARS
AVAILABLE AND DISCRETIONARY JU
GRF REVENUES FROM THE CURRENT
AND FROM THE CURRENT YEAR AND
BUDGET YEAR, UM, COMPARED TO THE
ADMINISTRATION'S ESTIMATES. THIS
INCLUDES ABOUT 280 MILLION FOR
THE CURRENT YEAR FROM THE RECENT
FEBRUARY AUCTION AND THE
UPCOMING MAY AUCTION AND ROUGHLY
520 MILLION IN THE 2023 24
FISCAL YEAR BASED ON OUR HIGHER
ESTIMATES. WE HAVE FIVE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU
REGARDING TREE GRF. FIRST WE
RECOMMEND THE LEGISLATURE
CONSIDER WHETHER THE CONTINUOUS
APPROPRIATIONS CONTINUE TO
REFLECT LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.
AS AS MANY OF THESE WERE DECIDED
ON IN THE 2014 2015 BUDGET ACT,
AND PRIORITIES MAY HAVE CHANGED
SINCE THEN. SECOND WHILE THE
GOVERNOR PRIORITIZES ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE PROGRAMS, THE
LEGISLATURE MAY PREFER A
DIFFERENT ALLOCATION OF
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, AND WE
RECOMMEND THE LEGISLATURE
ALLOCATE THESE REVENUES BASED ON
ITS HIGHEST PRIORITIES, AND
THIRD. AS I NOTED IN THE EARLIER
AGENDA ITEM, WE RECOMMENDED THE
LEGISLATURE REJECT THE
GOVERNOR'S JDRF TRIGGER
PROPOSAL. AS THIS WOULD
SIGNIFICANTLY LIMIT LEGISLATIVE
AUTHORITY OVER MIDYEAR. JDRF
REVENUE THIS AND THIS IS
ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT
IS LIKELY THAT YOU GRF IS WILL
BE WILL COME IN HIGHER THAN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S EXPECTATIONS.
UM, FOURTH, THE ADMINISTRATION
HAS NOT YET PROVIDED AN UPDATED
FUND BALANCE FOR JDRF, MEANING
HOW MUCH IT ESTIMATES WOULD
REMAIN IN RESERVE. UNDER ITS
SCENARIO BECAUSE THIS
INFORMATION COULD HELP THE
LEGISLATURE BETTER UNDERSTAND
THE GRS PICTURE. WE RECOMMEND
THAT THE LEGISLATURE REQUEST
THIS INFORMATION FROM THE
ADMINISTRATION BEFORE THE MAY
REVISION. AND FINALLY WE
RECOMMEND THE LEGISLATURE.
CONSIDER WHETHER IT IS
COMFORTABLE COMMITTING OUT YOUR
G R F REVENUES NOW, AS THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL
COMMITS ABOUT 400 MILLION NEXT
YEAR AND ANOTHER 400 MILLION IN
THE FOLLOWING YEAR, OR WHETHER
IT WOULD PREFER TO WAIT AND MAKE
DECISIONS ABOUT FUTURE YEAR
PRIORITIES, AS AS AS PART OF THE
BUDGET, UM NEGOTIATIONS FOR THAT
YEAR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
COUPLE COUPLE OF QUICK
QUESTIONS. UM CAN YOU. PROVIDES
A LIST OF THE GENERAL FUND CUTS
TO CARVE THAT ARE ON PAGE 47.
COULD YOU READ THOSE INTO THE
RECORD, PLEASE? I I'M SORRY.
COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I
COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU. CARDS
LIST OF THE GENERAL FUND CUTS TO
CARVE THAT ARE ON PAGE 47,
RIGHT? AND WHAT WAS THE
QUESTION? COULD YOU READ THOSE
INTO THE RENT OF THE RECORD? UM
MAYBE 6 17 IMPLEMENTATION $250
MILLION FUND SHIFT FROM GENERAL
FUND TO G D GRF. UM MAYBE 6 17
IMPLEMENTATION $50 MILLION
REDUCTION. AND EQUITABLE
BUILDING TO CARBON IZATION. UM,
THAT'S A $20 MILLION GENERAL
FUND REDUCTION OUT OF $40
MILLION TOTAL. UM AND CAN YOU
ANSWER WHY NO CUTS INTO THE
DISCRETIONARY G R F FUND? IN
COMPARISON TO THE 2022 CAP AND
TRADE PROGRAM, UM THOSE
DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS WERE UH,
UM. CONSIDER ONE TIME AND THEY
WERE INDEED IMPACTED WHEN YOU
LOOKED AT THE PROPOSAL FOR 2023
24. SO, UM. IT'S NOT QUITE
ACCURATE TO SAY THAT THERE WERE
NO DISCRETIONARY GENERAL AH
GENERAL FUNDED PROGRAMS.
IMPACTED IN COMPARISON TO 2022.
CHRISTIAN BELGIUM WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I THINK
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION APPROACH
THE CURRENT YEAR, APPROPRIATIONS
FROM THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND AS CRITICAL
INVESTMENTS TO CONTINUE KEEPING
RETAINED IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET,
AND SO THEREFORE WE DIDN'T
NECESSARILY APPROACH THOSE
DISCRETIONARY GROF
APPROPRIATIONS THAT ARE ONE TIME
IN NATURE USUALLY NEGOTIATED
WITH THE LEGISLATURE AS AN
APPROPRIATE, UH, FUNDING SOURCE
TO TAKE BACK GIVEN THAT A LOT OF
THOSE DOLLARS ARE ALREADY BEING
ENCUMBERED BY AIR RESOURCES
BOARD AND A SLEW OF DIFFERENT
OTHER DEPARTMENTS AS WELL. I DO
WANT TO MENTION THAT THE
STATUTORY REQUIRED CLEAN CLIMATE
INITIATIVE REPORT. THAT IS DUE
FROM THE ADMINISTRATION IN MARCH
, WILL BE COMING OUT SHORTLY AND
WILL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
WHERE ALL THE DEPARTMENTS ARE IN
TERMS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE
DOLLARS. THERE'S A LOT OF
INTEREST IN THIS IN THE SMALL
FARMERS SMALL OFF ROAD VEHICLE
PROGRAM. CAN YOU GIVE JUST AN
UPDATE IN TERMS OF WHERE WE ARE
WITH THAT? STATUS REPORT. YEAH
WE DO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES HERE
WILL DO A QUICK SWITCH TO MAKE
SURE WE GET THEIR QUESTIONS
ANSWERED FOR YOU. HI SYDNEY
VERGIS FROM CALIFORNIA RESOURCES
BOARD. SO THE QUESTION I HEARD
WAS ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE
FARMER PROGRAM AND THE SMALL OFF
ROAD ENGINE PROGRAMS. SO IN
TERMS OF THE FARMER PROGRAM, ALL
OF THOSE DOLLARS HAVE BEEN FULLY
ENCUMBERED. THE LOCAL AIR
QUALITY DISTRICTS AND DOLLARS
ARE ROLLING OUT NOW. IN TERMS OF
THE SMALL OFF ROAD ENGINE
PROGRAM PER SB 1 70. WE HAVE
DEVELOPED THAT AND INCENTIVE
PROGRAM THAT'S INTENDED TO HELP
INCENTIVIZE SMALL BUSINESS AND
SO PROPRIETORS WHO ARE
PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPERS GET
ACCESS TO ZERO MISSION
EQUIPMENT. UM THOSE DOLLARS ARE
ROLLING OUT NOW AND FISCAL YEAR
. 21 22. WE RECEIVED $30 MILLION
. THE PROGRAM OPENED IN
NOVEMBER. $8 MILLION HAS MOVED
OUT THE DOOR, WHICH REPRESENTS
ALMOST 18,000 PIECES OF
EQUIPMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA NUMBER
PHONE. I'LL BE VERY QUICK. UH,
CERTAINLY LOOKING AT THE CHART
ON ON ISSUE FOUR. UM THE ONE
ITEM THAT CERTAINLY STANDS OUT
IS THE $526 MILLION GOING TO THE
CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL
PROJECT. UM WITH THE RECENT
BUSINESS PLAN THAT CAME OUT, UH,
IDENTIFYING SOME FUNDAMENTAL
STRUCTURAL CHALLENGES AND FLAWS
, UM OUT OF CONTROL COSTS TIME
DELAYS LOWER RIDERSHIP
PROJECTIONS. IS THE
ADMINISTRATION WILLING TO
RECONSIDER THAT CONTINUOUS
APPROPRIATIONS FOR A PROJECT
THAT ISN'T SUSTAINABLE?
CHRISTIAN BELCHER WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AGAIN.
WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO ENGAGE
WITH THE LEGISLATURE ON
DISCUSSIONS IN TERMS OF WHERE
THESE FUNDS ARE GENERALLY GOING
TOWARDS. I WOULD MENTION THAT
THAT DOES REQUIRE A STATUTORY
CHANGE. UM BUT I'M AFRAID I
CAN'T COMMIT TO ANYTHING IN
PARTICULAR RIGHT NOW. AT THIS
TIME, ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THANK YOU
FOR THE QUESTION DOES DOES
ADMINISTRATION ACKNOWLEDGE THE
BUSINESS? PLAN AND WHAT WAS
OUTLINED IN IT, AND THE CONCERNS
THAT ARE IN IT. UH AGAIN. WE DO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT REPORT IS
PUBLIC AND THAT THERE ARE
CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED IN THAT
REPORT. UH IF YOU COULD, UH,
KIND OF SHED SOME LIGHT, WHAT IS
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF GRR FUNDING
THAT HAS GONE TO THIS PROJECT SO
FAR. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. WE DO
HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT I'D
HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THE
SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT HAS
BEEN APPROPRIATE TO THAT PROJECT
SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE CAP
AND TRADE FUNDING PROGRAM. DO
YOU HAVE A ROUGH AMOUNT? NOT
WITH ME ON HAND. NO. THERE'S
SOMEONE WITH YOU THAT CAN GET IT
TO ME RIGHT NOW OR YES, WE DO.
WHEN THE MUSIC STOPS, WHOEVER'S
NOT, WE NEED MORE CHAIRS UP HERE
, UM, ACCUMULATIVE TODAY THERE
ARE ABOUT $4.3 BILLION IN GDR
FUNDS HAVE GONE TO HIGH SPEED
RAIL. SO 4.3 BILLION HAS BEEN OF
GR FUNDING HAS EXCUSE ME. 1.3
BILLION 1.3 BILLION. 1.3 BILLION
IN 2022 4.3. CUMULATIVELY SINCE
THE BEGINNING OF G R F 4.3
BILLION HAS BEEN, UM HAS BEEN
SPENT AT A G R F FOR THIS
PROJECT IN IT AND IT SINCE IT'S
BEEN SINCE SINCE ITS INCEPTION.
AND. AND THE PROPOSAL THE
GOVERNMENT PROPOSAL IS TO SPEND
ANOTHER 526 MILLION. TAKE IT
AGAIN. I CLARIFY A SIMILAR
MEMBER FONG THAT THESE ARE
STATUTORY REQUIRED
APPROPRIATIONS TO THE HIGH SPEED
RAIL STIPULATE THAT I MEAN, BUT
OF COURSE WE'RE HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION OF. MAYBE WE SHOULD
CHANGE IT. AND SO IS THIS AND SO
I'M ASKING IS THE ADMINISTRATION
WILLING TO ENTERTAIN? UH, THE
IDEA OF MAYBE CHANGING THE
CONTINUES APPROPRIATION AND NOT
PROVIDING THAT FUNDING AND MAYBE
INVESTING IN OTHER THINGS THAT
ARE HIGHER PARTIES FOR
ADMINISTRATION AND FOR THE
LEGISLATURE AGAIN, ALWAYS HAPPY
TO ENGAGE WITH THE LEGISLATURE
ON THOSE CONVERSATIONS. HERE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. REMEMBER
GARCIA? CAN WE SPEND SOME TIME
TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE A B 617
PROGRAM WE'VE SEEN UM, KIND OF A
SHIFT. AND I'M SORRY, MR GARCIA
. I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR QUESTION.
THE FOCUS WOULD BE THE A B 617
PROPOSED CHANGES. MY QUESTION
IS, THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT HAS
SEEN AN INCREASE. IN COMMUNITY
DESERT NATIONS. FUN FROM ITS
INCEPTION HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT
FUNDED AT THE SAME LEVEL. LAST
YEAR. WE WERE ABLE TO GET AN
INCREASE NOW PROPOSED FOR A
REDUCTION. AND SO JUST WONDERING
WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT
IS GIVEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM
COMMUNITIES, CARB AIR DISTRICTS
, AND, UH AND PENDING
COMMUNITIES THAT AWAIT A MAYBE
SIX AND SEVEN DESIGNATION.
PROGRAM IS FOCUSED ON EMISSION
REDUCTION MEASURES WITH
COMMUNITY INPUT. ONE OF. ONE OF
A KIND PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY
THAT I WOULD IMAGINE WE'D WANT
TO HIGHLIGHT. FOND ADEQUATELY TO
BE ABLE TO MEET THOSE OBJECTIVES
AND SO JUST KIND OF TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE REASONING
BEHIND SOME OF THE REDUCTION
THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. I WOULD
JUST NOTE ONE THING THAT WE DO
MAINTAIN THE MAJORITY OF THE
FUNDING FOR THAT PROGRAM. UM AS
PART TWO AND $50 MILLION HAS
SHIFTED OVER TO GRR FROM THE
GENERAL FUND. UM SOLUTIONS THAT
WERE PROPOSED. THE MAJORITY OF
FUNDING IS ONE THING, BUT IT'S
NOT THE EQUAL TO OR, UM,
INCREASE THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKING
FOR SEVERAL YEARS, RECOGNIZING
THE BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS THAT
WE HAVE, BUT THIS IS A PROGRAM
THAT AGAIN HAS DOUBLED IN ITS
SIZE. AND THE FUNDING HAS
REMAINED RELATIVELY THE SAME.
AND SO WE MADE ONE STEP FORWARD
LAST YEAR AND ALMOST FEELS LIKE
WE'RE MAKING TWO STEPS BACK, SO
I THINK THERE HAS TO BE STRONGER
JUSTIFICATION. WE'RE GOING TO
REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF COMMUNITIES
THAT WHICH I DON'T THINK IT'S
GOING TO BE THE CASE. UM
CLEARLY, THE AIR DISTRICTS, UM I
NEED THIS SUPPORT IN ORDER FOR,
UM THESE EFFORTS TO WORK SO
YEAH. MAYBE ANOTHER SHOT AT THE
QUESTION IS THERE A MORE
SUBSTANTIAL REASON? UM, FOR THE
REDUCTION? CHRISTIAN BELGIUM
WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
AND I WOULD JUST ADD THAT YOU
KNOW IT IS A IT IS A DIFFICULT
YEAR IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL
GENERAL FUND PICTURE, AND I
THINK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION
TOTALLY ACKNOWLEDGES THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE A B 6 17
PROGRAMS IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT
RELY ON THOSE PROGRAMS. AND SO I
WOULD JUST SAY THAT GIVEN THE
BROADER PICTURE OF THE GENERAL
FUND CONDITION WE HAD TO MAKE
THE REALLY TOUGH DECISION TO
MODEST MODERATE MODESTLY REDUCED
THE $300 MILLION TO AROUND 250
JUST FOR CONTEXT AS WELL. WE DID
FIND ABOUT 2 270,000,086. 19
PROGRAMS IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR
THROUGH G R F. SO WE'RE TRYING
TO KEEP IN LINE WITH GENERALLY
WHERE AVERAGE WE FUNDED THE
PROGRAM PREVIOUSLY UNDER TOTALLY
ACKNOWLEDGING, THOUGH, THAT 300
IS DEFINITELY MORE THAN THE 250
MILLION, SO THE A B 617
COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
IDENTIFIED OR SOME OF THE
COMMUNITIES WITH THE HIGHEST
LEVEL OF AIR QUALITY POLLUTION.
WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF
RESPIRATORY DISEASE, PUBLIC
HEALTH BAGS TO PEOPLE IN
CALIFORNIA AND UM MOST LIKELY IF
WE DID A KIND OF OVERLAY OF
MAPS, IT'S WHERE MOST POOR
PEOPLE OF COLOR LIVE. AND WHERE
THEY'RE ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED. HI AXIS OR RATES
OF UM. HAVING ACCESS TO HEALTH
CARE SERVICES, AND THE LIST IS
LONG TO BE ADDED TO AND IT'S
JUST NOT. I THINK A GOOD
STRATEGY POLICY. AN APPROACH TO
BE IMPACTING THOSE COMMUNITIES.
BY REDUCING THE BUDGET ON
SOMETHING OF THIS SIGNIFICANT
IMPORTANT, SO I JUST WANTED TO
STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD, AND I
KNOW THAT I AM NOT ALONE WHEN IT
COMES TO THIS PARTICULAR
PROGRAM. I THINK MY SENTIMENTS
REFLECT UM THE SENTIMENTS OF
MANY MEMBERS OF MY THE WORK THAT
WE DO IN THIS AREA, SO THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND
THIS CERTAINLY THE APPROPRIATE
PLACE TO RAISE THAT THAT ISSUE
SO MANY MEMBER GARCIA. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS ON THIS? YEAH MR CHAIR
AGAIN, RACHEL SAILORS FROM THE
LEO JUST TO HIGHLIGHT YOUR
QUESTION. WE THINK IT'S A REALLY
IMPORTANT ONE IN THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT PROPOSE
ANY REDUCTIONS TO CURRENT YEAR
GROF SPENDING. BUT IN OUR REVIEW
, THERE ARE SOME PROGRAMS WHERE
THE FUNDS HAVE NOT BEEN EXPENDED
YET. SO WE REALLY THINK THAT IS
AS YOU'RE LOOKING ACROSS ALL OF
YOUR BUDGET AND ALL OF YOUR
PROGRAMS NOT JUST TO LOOK AT THE
GENERAL FUND BUT ALSO TO LOOK AT
G R F AND THINK ABOUT YOUR
HIGHEST PRIORITIES BECAUSE TO
THE DEGREE YOU MAKE REDUCTIONS
THERE AND FREE UP G R F. YOU CAN
USE IT FOR WHATEVER YOUR OTHER
HIGHER PRIORITIES ARE. IN SOME
WAYS, GENERAL FLYNN AND JDRF CAN
BE INTERCHANGEABLE FOR SOME OF
THESE PROGRAMS. SO WE THINK,
LOOKING BACK AT THE CURRENT YEAR
EXPENDITURES IS ALSO AN
IMPORTANT ACTIVITY AS PART OF
THAT EXERCISE. THANK YOU. AND
THANKS FOR POINTING THAT OUT. I
SO WE WILL BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO
ISSUE FIVE. JUST WANT TO GO BACK
TO ISSUES. UH THREE VERY QUICKLY
, AND, UM. I'M INTERESTED IN
MOVING. MADE THE RESPONSIBILITY
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION BECAUSE THEY DEAL
WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING.
UH AND SO THAT'S A CONVERSATION
WE WOULD LIKE TO ENGAGE WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION WITH THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. UM AND SO WE'RE NOW
ON TO ISSUE FIVE. WE WANT TO
WELCOME SECRETARY ROSS. FOR
BEING PATIENT BEING HERE ALL
THIS TIME, UM, VERY INFORMATIVE
AND I APOLOGIZE. I'M GOING TO BE
STANDING BETWEEN YOU AND LUNCH,
BUT HOPEFULLY I CAN MAKE YOU
HUNGRY TO HAVE SOME GOOD,
HEALTHY, NUTRITIOUS. CALIFORNIA
GROWING SOLUTION TO WRITE FRUIT
FOR US. WE WORK AT IT EVERY DAY.
SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR BEING HERE. WE ALWAYS
APPRECIATE HEARING FROM
DEPARTMENT. THANKS UH, IN THIS
SITUATION, SO, SECRETARY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. TURN IT OVER TO
YOU JUST KICK THIS OFF. I THINK
FINANCE WAS GOING TO INTRODUCE
THE SOLUTIONS AND THEN I'LL HAVE
PLENTY TO SAY AFTERWARDS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE THIS JT
CREADON FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE TOGETHER, THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE
LEGISLATURE MADE HISTORIC
INVESTMENTS AT $1.1 BILLION, AS
YOU KNOW, IN THE SUSTAINABLE
AGRICULTURE, FOOD, RESILIENCY
AND DROUGHT PROGRAMS BENEFITING
OUR AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITIES.
THE GOVERNANCE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
MAINTAINS $1 BILLION OVER $1
BILLION OF THESE HISTORIC
INVESTMENTS. UM BUT I WANT TO
LAY OUT JUST PART OF THE
FRAMEWORK THAT WE APPROACHED
WHEN WE LOOKED AT IDENTIFYING
GENERAL FUND SOLUTIONS ACROSS
OUR CLIMATE AND NATURAL
RESOURCES INVESTMENTS. ONE OF
THE PRIORITIES WAS PROTECTING A
MAJORITY OF THE FUNDING FOR MOST
PROGRAMS, AND WE ALSO WANTED TO
HAVE THAT EQUITABLY DISTRIBUTED
ACROSS THE CLIMATE SOLUTIONS.
UM, IN THE UH, SUSTAINABLE
AGRICULTURE PACKAGE. WE WERE
ABLE TO PRESERVE 89% OF THE
FUNDING, WHICH IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE RATIO BROADLY ACROSS
ALL OF THE CLIMATE PACKAGES. WE
ALSO WANT TO PROVIDE PRIORITIZE
INVESTMENTS IN PRIORITY
POPULATIONS, WHICH FACE
DISPROPORTIONATE HARM FROM
POLLUTION AND CLIMATE CRISIS AND
ALSO FUNDING FOR THE MOST
IMMEDIATE CLIMATE RISKS SUCH AS
WATER AND WILDFIRE. AND WE
WANTED TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTIONS
FOR PROGRAMS ALREADY UNDERWAY IN
CONCLUDING CONSIDERATIONS INTO
THE STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY
APPROPRIATED PROGRAMS AND THE
AVAILABILITY OF PROGRAM FUNDING
BY FISCAL YEAR AS WELL AS
IDENTIFY OTHER SOLUTIONS,
FEDERAL FUNDS AND SHIFTS TO
OTHER FUNDS ALL OF THE FUNDING
IN THE SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
PACKAGE. UM IS ALL PART OF THE
GENERAL FUND TRIGGERS WHICH
WOULD COME BACK ON IN A MORE
POSITIVE FISCAL FISCAL OUTLOOK.
THAT DEMONSTRATES THE
ADMINISTRATION'S CONTINUED
COMMITMENT TO THESE PROGRAMS AND
MR CHAIR SINCE I ALREADY KNOW
YOU'RE GOING TO ASK, I'LL JUST
GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THESE
LINE BY LINE. UM SO EACH OF
THESE ARE UNDER THE GENERAL FUND
SOLUTIONS, THE FARM TO COMMUNITY
FOOD HUBS PROGRAM OF 14.8
MILLION REDUCTION. UH URBAN
AGRICULTURE REDUCTION OF FIVE
POINT 8,000,008 5.0.5 MILLION
FOR SUSTAINABLE CALIFORNIA GROWN
CANNABIS. 40 MILLION FOR THE
SWEET PROGRAM STATE WATER
EFFICIENCY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM.
8.9 MILLION FOR THE HEALTHY
REFRIGERATION GRANT PROGRAM. 15
MILLION FOR HEALTHY SOILS. 14.5
MILLION FOR THE POLLINATE NATO
HABITAT PROGRAM 21.5 MILLION FOR
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR
CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLANS.
4.7 MILLION FOR THE RESEARCH
INTO GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS.
FIVE MILLION FOR INVASIVE
SPECIES COUNCIL 4.7 MILLION FOR
NEW END BEGINNING FARMER
TRAINING PROGRAM AND 25 MILLION
FOR THE CLIMATE CATALYST FUND.
THAT IS NOT OBVIOUSLY UNDER THE
CDFA, SO THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN
THE TOTAL 128.4 MILLION IN THE
SUSTAINABLE AG. ANOTHER 40
MILLION FOR SWEEP AND FOR JUST
THOSE THAT APPLY TO CDVA WILL
REMOVE THE CLIMATE CATALYST
FUND, ITS 143 MILLION IMPACT AND
I'LL DEFER TO THE SECRETARY. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO, UM, I'D
LIKE TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON
OUR PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTATION TO
MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF
HOW MUCH HAS BEEN COMMITTED AND
WHAT OUR PLANS ARE TO HAVE OUR
FENCE FULLY COMMITTED BY THE END
OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR. BUT
FIRST, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT
THIS INVESTMENT IN HEALTHY,
NUTRITIOUS FOOD THAT'S
SUSTAINABLY GROWN HAS REALLY
BEEN TRANSFORMATIONAL TO REALLY
MAKE THESE KINDS OF INVESTMENTS
AS WE TRANSITION TO CARBON
NEUTRALITY. AND IT'S SOMETHING
THAT'S VERY, VERY REWARDING WHAT
WE'VE DONE, PARTICULARLY WITH
OUR CLIMATE. SMART AG PROGRAMS
IS REALLY THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE
PROVIDE INCENTIVE GRANTS TO OUR
GROWERS FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO
TRY? THIS TAKES SOME OF THE RISK
OUT OF IT NEW PRACTICE AND HAVE
THE CONFIDENCE TO GROW THESE
PRACTICES BEYOND WHAT WE'RE
FUNDING DURING A GRANT PERIOD,
AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S
SHOWING IS THERE'S A BUSINESS
CASE IF WE CAN DO THIS, RIGHT?
AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF
TESTIMONIALS. ONE OF THEM IS
FROM AMY WITH MERIDIAN FARMS. HE
TALKED ABOUT GETTING A SMALL
LIKE LESS THAN $60,000 HEALTHY
SOILS, GRANT AND WITH THAT MONEY
THEY INVESTED IN COMPOST
APPLICATIONS AND HEDGEROW
PLANTINGS. THESE AS HEALTHY
STORES. PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO
DRAW DOWN CARBON, HOLD IT INTO
OUR SOILS IMPROVE THE
PRODUCTIVITY OF THOSE SOILS,
WATER HOLDING CAPACITY OF THOSE
SOILS. AND JUST AFTER ONE YEAR
THEY STARTED EXPANDING TO OTHER
ACRES ON THEIR FARM BEYOND THE
LIFETIME THAT GRANT THAT'S WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS USE
THESE PROGRAMS TO MAKE AN
INVESTMENT THAT WILL HAVE LONG
TERM IMPACT. THE OTHER ELEMENT
OF WHAT WE REALLY FOCUSED ON IS
EVERY ONE OF OUR GRANT PROGRAMS
PROVIDES TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
THIS IS OUR COMMITMENT TO EQUITY
. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OF WHAT
LANGUAGE YOU SPEAK. WHERE YOUR
FARMING WHAT PRACTICES ARE CROPS
YOU HAVE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO
KNOW ABOUT THESE PROGRAMS AND
HAVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO
SUPPORT THIS, SO THAT'S BEEN
REALLY ANOTHER IMPORTANT ASPECT
THAT I THINK WILL ALSO SPEAK TO
THE LONGEVITY OF THE PRACTICES
GOING FAR BEYOND THE INCENTIVE
GRANT PROGRAMS. SO I WANTED TO
START WITH. WE HAVE RECEIVED A
TOTAL AT THE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD
AND AGRICULTURE FOR OUR SPECIFIC
CLIMATE. SMART AD PROGRAMS. $742
MILLION IN 21 22 22 23. UM AND
OF THAT $288 MILLION HAS BEEN
COMMITTED AND 100 AND $43
MILLION AS YOU HEARD AS PART OF
THE GENERAL FENCE SOLUTION. THIS
LEAVES $311 MILLION. THAT'S
UNCOMMITTED. BUT AS I WALKED
THROUGH THESE PROGRAMS, YOU'LL
SEE THAT WE WILL HAVE THESE
FUNDS OUT THE DOOR THIS SUMMER
AND BEFORE THE END OF THE
CALENDAR YEAR. THE $128 MILLION
FOR A HEALTHY, RESILIENT AND
EQUITABLE FOOD SYSTEMS, WHICH
REALLY DEALS WITH REDUCING FOOD
INSECURITY, PROVIDING HEALTHY,
NUTRITIOUS FARM TO SCHOOL
PROGRAMS, HEALTHY REFRIGERATION
PROGRAMS AND REALLY ENGAGING OUR
COMMUNITIES AND WHAT IT IS TO
HAVE HEALTHY, NUTRITIOUS EATING
AS A WAY OF AVOIDING CHRONIC
DISEASES AND AN IMPROVED QUALITY
OF LIFE. WE HAVE $45 MILLION
REMAINING TO BE COMMITTED. UM
THIS IS PRIMARILY IN OUR FARM TO
SCHOOL PROGRAM. WE'VE ALREADY
PUT OUT $30 MILLION THIS YEAR,
AND THE REMAINING $30 MILLION
WILL BE OUT BY THE END OF THE
CALENDAR YEAR THAT'S SERVING AN
ADDITIONAL 1.5 MILLION SCHOOL
STUDENTS HAVING ACCESS TO THESE
TO THESE PROGRAMS. AND THE
PROGRAM IS VERY, VERY SUCCESSFUL
. IT'S OVERSUBSCRIBED BY 56.
WE'RE SEEING THAT THE CONCURRENT
INVESTMENT AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION FOR THAT SCHOOL
INFRASTRUCTURE KITCHENS,
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT TO COOK
NUTRITIOUS FOOD AND MAKE IT
SOMETHING THAT CHILDREN WILL
WANT TO EAT HAS BEEN AN
IMPORTANT COMPLEMENTARY PROGRAM
TO THIS. WE ALSO HAVE THE
CALIFORNIA NUTRITION INCENTIVE
PROGRAM WE ACTUALLY USED A TOTAL
OF LAST YEAR AND THIS YEAR'S
COMMITMENT OF STATE FUNDS AND
LEVERAGE THAT FOR $12.8 MILLION
IN FEDERAL FUNDS FOR USDA, I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE
AWARE THAT BOTH OF THESE
PROGRAMS HAVE A REALLY ROBUST
EVALUATION PROCESS THAT IS BEING
DONE BY THIRD PARTY, PART OF
THAT IS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL
GRANTS, BUT IT'S ALSO SOMETHING
WE WANT TO DO. SINCE THESE ARE
NEW PROGRAMS TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. TO PROVE THAT VALUE
THAT IT'S MORE THAN THE DOLLARS
THAT ARE SPENT. THESE ARE LIVES
ARE BEING CHANGED AND BEING
CHANGED FROM THE YOUNGEST AGE IS
POSSIBLE. THE NUTRITION
INCENTIVE PROGRAM IS ONE OF
ESPECIALLY FOND OF BECAUSE THIS
HELPS ARE LOW INCOME. RECIPIENTS
OF PROGRAMS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES AND THE SNAP
PROGRAM, BE ABLE TO REDEEM
COUPONS AND GET DOUBLE THE
PURCHASING POWER OF THOSE
COUPONS AT A FARMERS MARKET OR
SMALL LOCAL BUSINESS. REALLY
TRYING TO KEEP IN MIND. HOW DO
WE KEEP THOSE DOLLARS
CIRCULATING IN THE LOCAL
ECONOMY? UM AND I THINK OVER
TIME THAT WILL PROVE THAT IT HAS
REALLY CHANGED PEOPLE'S EATING
PATTERNS TO MORE FRESH FRUITS
AND VEGETABLES BETWEEN NUTS. UM
OUR CLIMATE. SMART AG PROGRAMS
HAVE BEEN REALLY WELL RECEIVED.
AND ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN
OVERSUBSCRIBED. WE HAVE $348
MILLION FOR CLIMATE SMART
PROGRAMS THAT ARE HOUSED AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND
AGRICULTURE. THERE ARE OTHER
PROGRAMS THAT CARBON AT C E. C
THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR AG. THESE
INCLUDE ARE HEALTHY SOILS
PROGRAM ARE METHANE REDUCTION
PROGRAM FOR THE LIVESTOCK SECTOR
ARE POLLINATOR HABITAT PROGRAM
AND THE SMARTEST RESEARCH
PROGRAM FOR GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTIONS AND WERE SPENT
SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THE
METHANE REDUCTION IN PARTICULAR
WITH THOSE FUNDS. TODAY WE HAVE
100 AND $52 MILLION THAT ARE
UNCOMMITTED. THAT WE HAVE THE
PLANS IN PLACE AND HAVE ALREADY
STARTED SOME OF THE APPLICATION
PROCESSES FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE
FULLY COMMITTED BY THE END OF
THE CALENDAR YEAR. I WANT TO
GIVE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF THE
RESULTS WERE ALREADY SEEING WHAT
THESE PROGRAMS AND ARE HEALTHY
SOILS PROGRAM, WHICH HAS BEEN
OVERSUBSCRIBED BY 144% WE HAVE
FUNDED 1500 GRANDS. THAT EQUATES
TO 1.1 MILLION METRIC TONS OF C
02 CARBON EMISSIONS THAT HAVE
BEEN REDUCED BY THE AGRICULTURAL
SECTOR. THAT'S NOT COUNTING WHAT
WE'RE PUTTING INTO THE SOIL AS
WE THINK ABOUT THE SOLUTION TO
CARBON IS US BEING ABLE TO HOLD
IT IN OUR SOILS, AND THE PROGRAM
RECEIVED $160 MILLION BETWEEN 21
22 22 23. $15 MILLION HAS BEEN
IDENTIFIED AS A AS ONE OF THE
SOLUTIONS THAT GIVES US OVER $70
MILLION TO PUT OUT INTO GRANTS
THIS YEAR, AND WE ARE ON TRACK
TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S FULLY
COMMITTED BY THE END OF THE
YEAR. UM THAT'S ONE OF MY
FAVORITE PROGRAMS TO TALK ABOUT
BECAUSE OF MULTI BENEFITS, UM
FOR OUR ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND
HIGH HIGH ROAD JOB GROWTH
PROGRAM. WE RECEIVED $57 MILLION
FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY. ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT PROGRAMS THAT
WE'VE DONE WITH THIS FUNDING IS
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL
AND HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED
POPULATIONS OF FARMERS. WE ALSO
HAVE A REGULATORY ALIGNMENT AND
RE REPORTING PROJECT THAT WE'RE
DOING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD INCLUDED $30 MILLION THAT
WENT TO THE FRESNO MERCED FUTURE
OF FOOD INNOVATION INITIATIVE.
THAT $30 MILLION WAS LEVERAGED
TO BRING HOME $68 MILLION IN
FEDERAL FUNDS FROM THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION, AND
THAT'S JUST WHERE ARE BEGINNING
AND NEW FARMER PROGRAM HAS
HOUSED. SO WE HAVE OF THIS
PROGRAM. WE HAVE ONLY $7 MILLION
LEFT TO BE COMMITTED, AND THAT
WILL BE OUT THE DOOR BY THE END
OF THIS SUMMER. I HOPE IT WILL
BE. I PROMISE IT WILL BE. UM AND
THEN WE HAVE OUR DROUGHT RELIEF
PROGRAM. THIS IS THE PROGRAM
THAT NOW HOUSES THE ON FARM
WATER USE EFFICIENCY PROGRAM
THAT IS OUR OLDEST CLIMATE SMART
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAM WAS
ESTABLISHED IN 2014 AND THE LAST
DROUGHT THAT I SURVIVED AND I
HOPE TO LIVE THROUGH THIS ONE AS
WELL. IT IS OVERSUBSCRIBED. AND
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I
FREQUENTLY GET IS THAT YOU'VE
HAD THIS PROGRAM IN PLACE FOR A
WHILE. WHEN DOES IT END? THE
TECHNOLOGY IS NOT ENDING. THAT
IS THE EXCITING THING ABOUT
AGRICULTURE AND INNOVATION.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ECOLOGY
CONTINUES TO GIVE US TOOLS TO
IMPROVE OUR WATER USE
EFFICIENCY. TO REDUCE OUR ENERGY
USE AND TO IMPROVE OUR NITROGEN
FERTILIZER EFFICIENCY. SO WHEN
YOU GET A TRIPLE WIN LIKE THAT,
WE HOPE TO SEE THAT PROGRAM
CONTINUE TO BE FUNDED. IT WAS
APPROPRIATED $207 MILLION. THIS
HAS RIGHT NOW. $106 MILLION LEFT
TO BE COMMITTED. THE SWEET
PROGRAM, AS YOU HEARD, HAS A
PROPOSED REDUCTION OF $40
MILLION BUT WE WILL STILL HAVE
$70 MILLION TO PUT OUT AND
GRANTS FOR THE REST OF THIS
CALENDAR YEAR. WE'RE ON TRACK TO
COMMIT THOSE DOLLARS AND WE KNOW
FROM THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM
. IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE
OVERSUBSCRIBED. BUT I DO WANT TO
NOTE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AT THE USDA HAS AN ADDITIONAL
$20 BILLION NATIONWIDE
CONSERVATION PROGRAMS AND
BECAUSE OF THE INVESTMENT WE'VE
MADE IN TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WILL BE ABLE TO HELP GEAR ARE
FARMERS WHO MIGHT APPLY FOR OUR
PROGRAMS AND WE'RE OUT OF
FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO SEEK SOME
FEDERAL FUNDS, SO WE LOOK
FORWARD TO DOING THAT. I DO WANT
TO NOTE SINCE THE EXCEPTION OF
THIS PROGRAM. WE HAVE OVER 1100
GRANTS THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN IT
HAS REDUCED OUR GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS BY 900,000. A METRIC
TONS, AND IT EQUATES TO 1.4
MILLION ACRE FEET OF WATER OVER
THE LIFETIME OF THESE PROJECTS
AND IMPROVED WATER, USE
EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION. UM
AND CLOSING. I WANT TO SAY THAT
WE'RE COMMITTED. WE DO A
CONSTANT FEEDBACK LOOP WITH
LISTENING SESSIONS, ENGAGING
WITH OUR STAKEHOLDERS TO RECEIVE
THEIR INPUT. WE ARE CONSTANTLY
REFINING THIS PROGRAM TO TRY TO
MAKE IT A STREAMLINED AND EASY
FOR FARMERS TO APPLY FOR AS
POSSIBLE, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY
OUR INVESTMENT IN TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE IS REALLY HELPED MORE
FARMERS, REGARDLESS OF WHERE
THEIR FARM KNOW ABOUT THESE
PROGRAMS AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
THESE PROGRAMS. SO WITH THAT I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. I HOPE
YOU'RE AS EXCITED ABOUT MY
PROGRAMS AS I AM GREAT. WE'LL
HEAR FROM THE L A. AND THEN
WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FRANKIE MENDEZ
WITH THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S
OFFICE. OVERALL WE FIND THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSALS AND THE
SPACE TO BE QUITE REASONABLE. IN
MANY CASES, THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSED REDUCTIONS TARGET NEW
OR RECENTLY ESTABLISHED PROGRAMS
. WE THINK IT'S REASONABLE FOR
THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER
REDUCING THESE PROGRAMS, GIVEN
THAT FUNDING HAS NOT YET BEEN
COMMITTED. AND A RELATIVELY NEW
PROGRAMS WITH, YOU KNOW, IN SOME
CASES, UNCERTAIN BENEFITS. IN
MOST CASES, THE GOVERNOR
PROPOSES TO RETAIN SOME FUNDING
FOR THESE PROGRAMS. THIS WOULD
ALLOW THE ACTIVITIES THE
LEGISLATURE INTENDED TO SUPPORT
TO CONTINUE, ALBEIT OUT OF AT A
SMALLER SCALE, ADDITIONALLY,
MAINTAINING SOME LEVEL OF
FUNDING FOR THESE PROGRAMS WOULD
ALLOW THE STATE TOGETHER
INFORMATION ON THEIR
EFFECTIVENESS. WHICH COULD BE
USEFUL FOR THE LEGISLATURE AND
IN FUTURE BUDGETS IN DETERMINING
WHETHER AUGMENTATIONS ARE
WARRANTED. I WILL KNOW, UM, OUR
OFFICES. RECENT ESTIMATES
INDICATE THE LIKELIHOOD OF A
WORSENING BUDGET PROBLEM AND IN
THE REPORT AND AS NOTED IN YOUR
AGENDA, WE IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS THAT THE LEGISLATURE
COULD CONSIDER. FOR INSTANCE,
THE LEGISLATURE COULD CONSIDER
REDUCING FUNDING FOR THE FARM TO
SCHOOL INCUBATOR GRANT PROGRAM.
THE PROGRAM IS RELATIVELY NEW
AND HAS A MODERATE AMOUNT OF
FUNDING THAT REMAINS
UNCOMMITTED. THE LEGISLATURE
COULD REDUCE FUNDING AND ALLOW
IT TO CONTINUE ON A MORE SCALED
DOWN LEVEL. THE STATE COULD THEN
GATHER INFORMATION ON HOW
EFFECTIVE THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN
IN MEETING ITS INTENDED GOALS
BEFORE CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL
AUGMENTATIONS. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE
ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CONNOLLY.
THANKS CHAIR AND THANK YOU TO
THE PANEL. JUST NOTE THAT
SECRETARY ROSS. I DO SHARE YOUR
ENTHUSIASM AS A NEW ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. AROUND SUSTAINABLE AG
AND HOW CLIMATE SMART POLICIES
FIT INTO OUR OVERALL GOALS. I'VE
GOT SOME QUESTIONS, BUT REALLY
TO FRAME IT. WE'RE HEARING SOME
COMMON THEMES. TODAY ONE IS
AMOUNT ALLOCATED OVER THE LAST
SEVERAL YEARS VERSUS DOLLARS
THAT HAVE ACTUALLY GONE OUT THE
DOOR. OF THOSE EXPENDITURES THAT
HAVE OCCURRED. WHAT ARE THE
METRICS? HOW ARE WE MEASURING
SUCCESS TOWARD THE INTENDED
PURPOSES, PARTICULARLY AROUND
EQUITY OBJECTIVES AND
UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES. AND
THEN FINALLY, IN BIG PICTURE?
YOU'VE TALKED IN MANY CASES OF
PROGRAMS THAT ARE ADMITTEDLY THE
BENEFICIAL, POPULAR AND INDEED
OVER SUBSCRIBED. YET THE
PROPOSED BUDGET CUTS THOSE VERY
PROGRAMS. I WANT TO GO THROUGH
SOME PARTICULAR EXAMPLES OF
THAT. BUT STARTING WITH CAN YOU
PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE
IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF THE $5
MILLION THERE WAS APPROPRIATE
FOR GRANTS TO FARMERS WHO ARE
TRANSITIONING THEIR CROPS TO
ORGANIC. DO THE ORGANIC PROGRAM.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE ORGANIC
TRANSITION PROGRAM. RIGHT? THAT
WAS NOT A QUESTION THAT I HAD IN
MY NOTES. I APOLOGIZE. UM THAT
PROGRAM IS IN PROGRESS THROUGH
ITS NATALIE WRITTEN A LETTER ON
THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE THAT IN
THE RECORD IF YOU DON'T HAVE
THAT, YEAH, I DO WANT TO RESPOND
TO IT. I WANT TO BE VERY
SPECIFIC, BUT I DO KNOW ABOUT
THE SAME TIME. A NEW, UM
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM
USDA CAME OUT FROM TRANSITIONS
AND WE WERE TRYING TO LEVERAGE.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT CURRENT
STATUS BUT WE WILL GET BACK TO
YOUR OFFICE AND THAT I'M
COMMITTED TO THAT. THANK YOU.
REMEMBER FRANK MENDEZ WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE. I
WOULD NOTE THAT THE PROGRAM THAT
YOU'RE REFERRING TO ISN'T
INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE OF
PROPOSALS THAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING. I BELIEVE IT WAS A
LEGISLATIVE ADD THROUGH BUDGET
NEGOTIATIONS FROM FROM LAST YEAR
AND I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION
ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT
PROGRAM. BUT IT WAS A RECENTLY
ENACTED PROGRAM AND I'M SURE
GETTING STILL UP TO DATE. LET'S
CONTINUE. I JUST HAD WHISPERED
IN MY EAR. WE WILL HAVE THE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OUT WITHIN
THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, SO IT IS ON
STATUS TO BE PUT OUT FOR GRANTS
YET THIS YEAR, AND I'M HOPING
THAT OTHER FARMERS WILL WILL
LOOK AT WHAT THE FEDERAL PROGRAM
HAS BECAUSE IT WAS THE HUNDREDS
OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR
TRANSITION TO ORGANIC LOOK
FORWARD TO FOLLOWING UP WITH YOU
ON THAT. WHAT POLICIES A C D E F
A ADOPTING TO ACHIEVE THE 20%
ORGANIC GO ABOUT 2045 AS
ARTICULATED IN CARBS, LATEST
SCOPING PLAN AND WHAT PERCENTAGE
OF CALIFORNIA CULTIVATED LAND IS
ORGANIC NOW? SO AS OF THE END OF
LAST YEAR, 2022 THE MOST CURRENT
NUMBER FOR CERTIFIED ORGANIC IS
2.1 MILLION ACRES THAT
REPRESENTS ABOUT 30, PLUS
PERCENT OF CERTIFIED ACREAGE.
CALIFORNIA IS DEFINITELY THE
LARGEST PRODUCER OF ORGANIC
PRODUCTS. AND SO THAT'S WHAT
THAT IS. BECAUSE THE CARB. BUT
SCOPING PLAN FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA WAS ADOPTED LATE IN
DECEMBER. IT IS SOMETHING WE
SPEND A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT
WANTING TO BE REALISTIC AND
PRACTICAL ABOUT WHAT HAS GROWTH
BEEN AND ALSO NOT TRYING TO GROW
A PROGRAM SO FAST THAT IT DIDN'T
GIVE FARMERS THE TIME TO MAKE
THE TRANSITION. BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY, THERE WAS A PREMIUM
FOR ORGANIC AND IF WE MEET HER
IT IN OVERTIME, IT WILL MAKE IT
MORE AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO
ALL. ALL PRODUCERS AND CONSUMERS
WITHOUT CRASHING THE MARKET
BECAUSE WE DO IT SUDDEN LEAP IN
ACREAGE, AND SO THAT'S ONE OF
THE THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO
BALANCE AND BE REALISTIC ABOUT
IT BECAUSE ORGANIC AGRICULTURE
IS BASED ON SOIL HEALTH. IT'S A
VERY NATURAL WAY TO LOOK FOR
CONTINUED GROWTH IN THE MARKET
DEMAND. AND GROWTH AND EQUIPPING
GROWERS TO HAVE THE TOOLS THEY
NEED TO BE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY
ACHIEVE THE GOAL THAT WE HAVE IN
THE SCOPING PLAN. OKAY I'M SURE
THAT WILL BE WORKED OUT MUCH
MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT. UM
SECRETARY, AS YOU MENTIONED
THERE HAS BEEN A HISTORIC
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE FUNDING
PACKAGE OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF
CYCLES. YET SMALL AND SOCIALLY
DISADVANTAGED FARMERS HAVE OFTEN
BEEN LEFT OUT OF THESE PROGRAMS
AS WE KNOW OR THEIR PROPOSALS
NOT FINDING HOW HAS THE
DEPARTMENT CONSIDERED EQUITY IN
THEIR VARIOUS PROGRAMS AND
EFFORTS? DID YOU OUTREACH AND
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ON BEHALF
OF SMALL FARMERS AND SOCIALLY
DISADVANTAGED FARMERS, INCLUDING
THOSE WITH THE LANGUAGE BARRIER
? YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT
QUESTION, BECAUSE EQUITY IS
EMBEDDED IN ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS.
UM AND WE HAVE HISTORICALLY HAVE
NOT BEEN IN THE GRANTS BUSINESS
SO GETTING GRANTS TO BE ABLE TO
DISPERSE, AS HAS REQUIRED US TO
REALLY STAND UP AND THINK DEEPLY
ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND IT
STARTS WITH WITH HAVING PRIORITY
POPULATIONS, WHICH SOME OF THAT
HAS BEEN DEFINED FOR US BY THE
LEGISLATURE, AND BY OUR
COLLEAGUES AT THE AIR RESOURCES
BOARD. BUT IT ALSO WAS INFORMED
CALIFORNIA WAS THE FIRST STATE
TO HAVE A FARMER EQUITY ACT AND,
IN FACT, OUR FARMER EQUITY
ADVISOR, THE WRITTEN HOUSES WITH
US AND SO HER KNOWLEDGE AS
PREVIOUS SHE IS A FARMER. BUT
SHE IS ALSO A PREVIOUS, UM,
TECHNICAL SERVICES PROVIDERS, SO
SHE KNOWS THE COMMUNITY VERY
WELL AND IT'S REALLY HELPED US.
THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE REACH THE
POPULATIONS THAT HISTORICALLY
DON'T SEE GOVERNMENT NECESSARILY
AS THEIR FRIEND OR SOMEBODY THAT
HAS SERVICES TO HELP THEM? AND
SO WE IMMEDIATELY STARTED
LOOKING AT INVESTING IN
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
TRADITIONALLY WE USE COOPERATIVE
EXTENSION AND ONE OF THE FIRST
THINGS WE DID. WITH THE CONTRACT
WITH UNIVERSITY, CALIFORNIA
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION TO RETAIN
WHAT WE CALL CLIMATE, SMART
AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY EDUCATORS
MAKING SURE THAT THEY WERE MULTI
LINGUAL SO THAT THEY COULD REACH
WHETHER IT WAS THE MON
POPULATION OUTSIDE OF FRESNO OR
THE KOREAN POPULATION OUTSIDE OF
SANTA MARIA OR OR THAT VERY
PREDOMINANT SPANISH LANGUAGE
POPULATION THAT'S IN THE FARMING
COMMUNITY, JUST REACHING OUT TO
THEM. GOING WHERE THEY ARE
WALKING THROUGH THE PROGRAMS
DOING DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS FOR
THEM TO BE AWARE OF THE PROGRAMS
AND PROVIDING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE TO APPLY. IT'S NOT
ONLY US THAT ARE DOING THAT. WE
ALSO HAVE INVESTED IN THE
CALIFORNIA RESOURCE CONSERVATION
DISTRICTS, WHICH HAVE REALLY
PROFESSIONALIZED THEIR SERVICES
AND REACHING ALL OF OUR
POPULATIONS AND OTHER NONPROFITS
. I WOULD ALSO POINT TO A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THAT
WE EXECUTED IN LATE OCTOBER OF
THIS YEAR. IT IS WITH THE
NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION
SERVICE. OUR STATE
CONSERVATIONIST CARLOS SUAREZ,
HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB OF
ADDING TRIBAL LIAISONS AND
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS
ON HIS STAFF AS WELL ASSOCIATE
HE FUNDS AND MULTIPLE LANGUAGES
TO REACH ALL PEOPLE. WE ALSO
HAVE IN THAT IN THAT MEMORANDUM
OF UNDERSTANDING, èC
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION AND THE
CALIFORNIA RESOURCE CONSERVATION
DISTRICT. THE GOAL OF THIS IS
FOR THE FIRST TIME TO BRING THIS
ALL OF OUR FOLKS TOGETHER AND DO
TRAINING ACROSS ALL OF OUR
PROGRAMS SO THAT WE'RE NOT
GETTING SILOED OF ONLY BEING
ABLE TO TALK TO A FARMER ABOUT
MY PROGRAM OR THIS ONE, AND SO
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE
TRYING TO DO, SO WE HAVE AN
INFRASTRUCTURE. TO DEPLOY
PROGRAMS FAR BEYOND THE LIFETIME
OF OUR GRANT PROGRAM. GREAT
THANKS TARGETS OF WHAT WE SET
FOR OURSELVES ON OUR UNDERSERVED
POPULATIONS WHEN WE DO OUR
GROUNDS. CAN THE DEPARTMENT
PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING
THE PROPORTION OF GRANT FUNDING
THAT IS AWARDED A SMALL SCALE
FARMERS IN COMPARISON TO LARGE
SCALE AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS?
WE CAN I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE
SPECIFIC BREAKDOWN HERE TODAY,
BUT WE ARE ABLE TO PARSE THOSE
NUMBERS OUT AND PROVIDE THAT TO
YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS.
THANK YOU. HAS A FARM TO SCHOOL
PROGRAM CREATED ANY NEW
COMMUNITY FOOD HUBS, OR DOES IT
ONLY FIND EXISTING FOOD, HERBS?
AND IF SO, WHERE ARE THE NEW
ONES LOCATED? SO I WILL HAVE TO
GET TO THE LIST OF WHERE THOSE
GRANTS HAVE GONE, BUT I WILL SAY
THAT WE HAVE BEEN VERY CREATIVE
BASED ON A LOT OF INTERVIEWS,
SURVEY WORK FOCUS GROUPS,
INCLUDING WITH STUDENTS ON
STANDING UP OUR FARM TO SCHOOL
PROGRAM. AND ON THE TRACK THAT
IS FOR THE FARMERS. UM THEY CAN
APPLY TO CREATE A FOOD HUB AND
WE'VE HAD A NUMBER THAT HAVE
DONE THAT. I CAN'T TELL YOU THE
EXACT NUMBER THAT HAVE BECAUSE
FOR SCHOOLS. THEY NEED TO SOURCE
AT A CERTAIN VOLUME, AND YET WE
WANT THEM TO BE SUPPORTING OUR
SMALL FARMERS WITHIN THAT LOCAL
COMMUNITY. SO THE FARMERS AFTER
THEY'RE IN THIS PROGRAM OR SEE
WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES ARE
COMING TOGETHER, OR AN EARLY
INNOVATOR IN THIS SPACE HAS BEEN
THE ONE TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO
CREATE A COMMUNITY FOOD HAVE
HERE SO WE CAN DO AGGREGATION.
HAVE SHARED CHILLING FACILITIES
AND BRING THE SCHOOL TO THOSE
BRING THE FOOD TO THOSE SCHOOLS,
SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT
FROM THE FIRST ROUND OF FUNDING
THAT WE DID AND GIVE YOU THE
LIST OF WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED.
WE'VE HAD GREAT GEOGRAPHIC REACH
OF THE FARM TO SCHOOL PROGRAMS,
SO THAT'S BEEN REALLY HEARTENING
TO SEE IT. GO INTO ALL
COMMUNITIES GREATER LOOK FOR THE
SPECIFIC FOLLOW UP ON THAT, JUST
SAY A FEW MORE QUICK QUESTIONS,
HEALTHY SOILS BENEFICIAL OVER
SUBSCRIBE. EFFECTIVE PROGRAM CAN
THE DEPARTMENT PROVIDE
JUSTIFICATION FOR CUTTING THIS
POPULAR PROGRAM? WHAT IS THE
JUSTIFICATION? TEND TO FINANCE
ONE OF THE ONE OF THE PRIORITIES
THAT WE LOOKED AT. WAS WHERE, UM
, FUNDS ACTUALLY WERE AT THE
TIME WE HAVE SEEN $67 MILLION IN
HEALTHY CEREALS GO OUT AND FROM
THE 21 22 FUNDS AND SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT STILL LEFT OUTSTANDING.
LET ME I CAN GET YOU THE EXACT
NUMBER, BUT THERE'S QUITE
THERE'S TENS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS STILL LEFT IN THAT
PROGRAM, PREPARING TO GO OUT TO
GRANTS, BUT YOU ARE PROPOSING A
$15 MILLION CUT. THAT'S CORRECT.
WHAT IS THE JUSTIFICATION FOR
THAT AGAIN? WE HAD TO MAKE. WE
HAD TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS RENT
TO MEET THE BUDGET SHORTFALL.
NONE OF THESE WERE EASY AND WE
HAD TO SPREAD THEM OUT AS MUCH
AS POSSIBLE TO CREATE THE LEAST
AMOUNT OF IMPACT TO TWO PROGRAMS
THAT PEOPLE RELY ON. AND THERE
WAS THERE WAS SOME ROOM TO
MANEUVER IN THAT BUDGET AND
STILL PRESERVE THE GRAND DOLLARS
TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FOR A
SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF
STAKEHOLDERS. SO WE SAW A LITTLE
BIT OF ROOM TO HELP US MEET OUR
BROADER GOAL TO CLOSE THE
SHORTFALL AND MEET THAT BUDGET.
WELL, YOU CAN. WELL. IMAGINE
WHAT THE PRIOR TESTIMONY. WE'RE
GONNA CONTINUE TO ASK QUESTIONS.
ABSOLUTELY. UM WOULD YOU SAY
HEALTH IS PROGRAMS ARE HEALTHY
SOILS AND SWEEP HAVE BEEN
EFFECTIVE AT ACHIEVING THEIR
STATED GOALS. I WOULD SAY BASED
ON THE TESTIMONIALS AND THE FACT
THAT WE CAN QUANTIFY GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSION REDUCTIONS, WHICH
IS ONE OF THE DRIVERS FOR THE
PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM. THEY ARE
SUCCESSFUL. OBVIOUSLY WE ALL ARE
EAGER TO SCALE THEM UP. BUT
RESOURCES AND TIME ARE THE TWO
BIGGEST RESTRAINTS RIGHT NOW.
GREAT AND THEN MORE BROADLY, UM,
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE
WANTS TO TALK TO THAT. BUT MORE
BROADLY SPEAKING, AND THIS GOES
TO KIND OF THE METRICS PIECE AND
I'LL WRAP UP ON THIS. WE'RE
REALLY LOOKING FOR AN UPDATE ON
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
SUSTAINABLE AG PACKAGE HAD THE
PROGRAM'S REACH THEIR GOALS AND
UPDATES ON OTHER APPROPRIATIONS
FROM THE DROUGHT PACKAGE. G R F
ONE TIME CAPITAL INVESTMENTS,
REALLY LOOKING FOR SPECIFICS
ABOUT SUCCESS IN THESE
ALLOCATIONS. BE HAPPY TO WORK
WITH YOU ON THAT. THAT'S THANK
YOU APPRECIATE YOUR QUESTIONS
AND INTEREST. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS. JUST. IF YOU'RE AN
ITEM SIX. WE'RE GOING TO BE THAT
JUST GIVE ME ONE MORE MINUTE AND
WHICH WE SHOULD BE RIGHT AND THE
WITH REGARD TO ITEM FIVE. AS AS
WE FINISH IT UP. WE HAVE WE HAVE
HAD CONSIDERABLE STAKEHOLDER
INTEREST IN THE CALIFORNIA
NUTRITION INCENTIVE PROGRAM.
BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL MATCH,
YOU KNOW FOR CAL, FRESH
RECIPIENTS AND STUFF, SO WE DO
HAVE A REQUEST FOR $35 MILLION
ADDITION THERE AND SO WILL BE
CONSIDERING THAT AND HAVING
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
DEPARTMENT ABOUT THAT, UM I
APPRECIATE ALL THE QUESTIONS
THAT CERTAINLY REMEMBERED
CONNOLLY ASKED ABOUT. EQUITY AND
I REALIZED, YOU KNOW THE
DEFINITION OF EQUITY IS VAGUE
AND BUT I THINK IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT TO THE LEGISLATURE
THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THESE
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN
PARTICULAR ARE REALLY HELPING
PEOPLE THAT ARE DISADVANTAGED
PEOPLE THAT HAVE LANGUAGE
BARRIERS AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE
THAT THOSE PEOPLE WHO REALLY
BENEFIT FROM FROM THESE PROGRAMS
, AND THAT'S THAT GROUP OF SMALL
FARMERS OUT THERE IS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF THE COMMUNITY
THAT WE WANT TO ACTUALLY MAKE
THIS TRANSITION AND WHO KNOWS
HOW MANY ENTREPRENEURIAL RIGHT
OUT OF THAT WILL THEN BECOME
LARGE SCALE ORGANIC PEOPLE OR
THEIR FAMILIES? WILL ETCETERA AS
WE GO FORWARD, SO REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME HERE, AND
WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM, BUT, UH,
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM SIX
AND ISSUE SIX AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S ESSENTIALLY TO
ASK THIS QUESTION IN ADVANCE
BECAUSE HE NEEDS TO LEAVE. OKAY
WE HAVE THE SAME PANEL HERE. GO
AHEAD. APPRECIATE THANK YOU.
BEFORE I ASK MY QUESTION, I TOO
EXCITED ABOUT THE PROGRAMS YOU
MENTIONED. I THINK THE EMPHASIS
ON HEALTHY EATING IS SO
IMPORTANT. WHEN I WAS A KID IN
SCHOOL. IT WAS ABOUT CHOCOLATE
MILK AND UPSIDE DOWN PYRAMID
THAT MAKES NO SENSE TODAY. SO
WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO ENCOURAGE
HEALTHY EATING, I THINK SO
IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY THE
CONTEXT OF HEALTHCARE AND, UH,
AND THE COSTS WITH HEALTHCARE. I
THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS MORE
UPFRONT ON DIET AND EXERCISE AND
GETTING THAT HEALTHY FOOD TO LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES BECAUSE A LOT
CHEAPER TO GET A DOLLAR MENU
ITEM THEN TO GO TO THE GROCERY
STORE, SO I'M ENCOURAGED, AND I
SUPPORT THAT. UM MADAM SECRETARY
. MY QUESTIONS ABOUT STATE
FAIRS. AS YOU KNOW, STATE FAIRS
ARE IMPORTANT. OUR COMMUNITIES
EVERYONE LOVES GOING TO THE
STATE. FAIR. UM I GO EVERY YEAR
, BUT THEY ALSO PROVIDE
EMERGENCY SERVICES,
ENTERTAINMENT, AGRICULTURE,
EDUCATION AND SERVE AS A MEETING
POINT IN MANY RURAL AREAS. I
KNOW YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH A B 14
99, WHICH HAS PASSED AND SIGNED
BY THE GOVERNOR, RECOGNIZING THE
VALUE OF FAIRS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE, AND THAT REVENUE IS
REALLY CRITICAL FOR CAPITAL
PROJECTS AND STAFFING. SO MY
QUESTION IS ABOUT THIS. THIS
BUDGET REQUEST OR PROPOSAL TO
REMOVE THE FUNDS FROM A B 14 99
TO FUND SOME STAFFING POSITIONS.
UM THE DEPARTMENT CURRENTLY HAS
300 VACANT POSITIONS ALREADY
THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FILLED. AND
SO MY QUESTION IS, CAN WE HOLD
OFF ON THIS OR DEFER THIS UNTIL
WE FILL THOSE EXISTING POSITIONS
. UM AND WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO
RECONSIDER THIS POSITION? I'M
LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING A
PROBABLY A NUMBER OF DISCUSSIONS
ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THERE'S ARE
IMPORTANT AND THEY ARE LOCAL,
AND THEY HAVE LOTS OF INTEREST
FROM LOTS OF DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDERS. UM I DO WANT TO
POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS,
SIR. ONE IS THIS IS NOT TAKING
THE MONEY AWAY FROM 14 95 IN THE
AFFAIRS. IT IS ABOUT CONTINUING
TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE STAFF
THAT WE HAVE FOR THE OVERSIGHT
THAT WERE REQUIRED TO DO AS A
STATE THAT'S ULTIMATELY LIABLE
FOR ANY FINANCIAL ISSUES OR
LOSSES. AND SO THIS IS ABOUT
COVERING OUR ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS, WHICH WE'VE BEEN FUNDING
OUT OF RESERVES 14 99 WHEN IT
PASSED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO,
THE FIRST ROUND OF FUNDING WAS
DONE ON ESTIMATES OF WHAT WAS
WHAT WAS BEING GENERATED AS FAR
AS SALES ON FAIRGROUNDS
THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, NOT JUST
THE VERY EVENT, BUT ALL THE
OTHER COMMERCIAL EVENTS THAT
THEY HAVE. AND WE DID NOT GET
ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY TO BE
ABLE TO FUND THE POSITIONS THAT
WE HAVE THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE,
WHETHER IT'S AUDITS PROVIDING
SUPPORT TO THE FARES, OVERSIGHT
OF THEIR SPENDING PATTERNS,
MAKING SURE THEY'RE IN
COMPLIANCE WITH BAGLEY, CLEAN
AND ALL THOSE OTHER TYPES OF
THINGS, SO THIS IS ABOUT
COVERING OUR ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS. I THINK ONE OF THE ALARMS
AND WE ARE MEETING WITH AFFAIRS,
NOT NEXT WEEK, BUT THE WEEK
AFTER WHEN I RETURNED FROM AN
OVERSEAS TRIP UM WHAT WHAT WE
ARE FACED WITH IS THAT THE
DOWNTURN OF NOT BEING ABLE TO DO
ANY FARES AT ALL IN YEAR 2020
MINIMAL ACTIVITY IN 2021.
GRADUALLY THEN PEOPLE WERE HAPPY
TO BE BACK IN 2022 IS THAT THOSE
REVENUES THROUGH WENT DOWN
DRAMATICALLY. THE ALLOCATION
THAT WE GET IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A
DISPROPORTIONATE PORTION. OF THE
FUNDING THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE
TO GO TO THE FARES. I ALSO WANT
TO POINT OUT AND RECOGNITION OF
THE EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES
THOSE FAIRGROUNDS WERE FACED IN
, AND MANY OF THEM ARE STATE ON
PROPERTIES, SO WE'RE RESPONSIBLE
FOR THOSE FACILITIES. THERE WAS
OVER $40 MILLION THAT WAS
APPROPRIATED BECAUSE OF THE
LAYOFF PROCESS THAT THEY HAD TO
GO THROUGH, AND AN ADDITIONAL
$50 MILLION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO
COVER THEIR OPERATIONS SO THEY
COULD CONTINUE TO BE IN BUSINESS
TO DO WHAT HAS BECOME JOB NUMBER
ONE FOR EVERY FAIRGROUND AND
THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND ABLE
TO RESPOND RAPIDLY FOR RESPONSE
BECAUSE OF THE DIVERSITY. UH OF
DISRUPTIONS AND VOLATILITY WE'VE
SEEN IN WEATHER AND OTHER EVENTS
. THAT'S JOB NUMBER ONE FOR ALL
OF US, AND THAT'S WHY THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
AGREED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF
BUDGETS TO PUT THAT KIND OF
MONEY INTO THOSE FARES UNTIL WE
CAN GET THEIR COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING THE ANNUAL
FAIR BACK WITH THE KIND OF
PROJECTED REVENUES THAT WE
ANTICIPATED FOR THIS PROGRAM,
BUT IT MIGHT TAKE A COUPLE OF
YEARS FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. I
APPRECIATE THE ANSWER, AND I
HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION. UM BUT THE FUNDS
ARE BEING DIVERTED FROM THE
PURPOSE THAT 14 99 ALLOCATED
THEM FROM. AND I WANT TO
RECOGNIZE THAT THAT THIS IS THE
REQUEST IS TO USE THE MONEY
DIFFERENTLY THAN HOW THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
INTENDED IT TO BE USED. AND UM,
YOU HAVE 300 UNFILLED POSITIONS
, SO CAN WE JUST USE THAT THAT
ALLOCATED FUNDS TO COVER THIS
POSITIONS THAT MOST LIKELY ARE
VACANT BECAUSE THERE IS NOT
FUNDING FOR THEM, AND WE DON'T
FEEL POSITIONS THAT WE DON'T
HAVE AN ALIGNED FUNDING MEASURE
FOR THEM. WE'RE ONLY TALKING
ABOUT THE EXISTING STAFF, NOT
NEW STUFF. AND PROGRAMS DO NOT
ADMINISTER THEMSELVES.
UNFORTUNATELY I WISH THAT THEY
DID, WE COULD PROBABLY DO THEM
FASTER THAN THE HIRING PROCESS
THAT WE OFTEN GOT TO GO THROUGH.
BUT THIS IS FOR MAKING SURE WE
HAVE SPENT ALMOST ALL OF OUR
RESERVES AND FLIPPING OUT OF
RESERVES NEXT YEAR THAT THE FUND
THAT HISTORICALLY WAS FUNDED BY
THE HORSE RACING HANDLE AND
OTHER REVENUE STREAMS IS
DECLINING RAPIDLY, AND SO WE ARE
IN A POSITION WHERE WE WILL NOT
HAVE THE STAFF. TO FULFILL OUR
STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS OF
OVERSIGHT AND ADMINISTRATION.
THANK YOU. AND, UM YEAH, I
REALIZED MONEY IS LIMITED. AND
UH, IF YOU WANT TO REALLOCATE
HIGH SPEED RAIL MONEY TO YOUR
DEPARTMENT, I WOULD WELCOME THAT
THAT REQUEST TO HIGHER PAY
SCALE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR FOR
ALLOWING ME TO ASK THAT YOU'RE
YOU'RE WELCOME. UM AND SO,
SECRETARY BACK TO YOU FOR
DISCUSSION OF I'M SORRY. I SEND
IT BACK. JUST WANTED TO KIND OF
PIGGYBACK ON SOME OF THE
COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE
SECRETARY I KNOW THAT UK DEARLY
ABOUT THE FAIR GROUNDS. YOU'VE
BEEN OUT TOO MANY OF THEM UP AND
DOWN STAIRS IN OURS. WE KNOW
THAT THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENT THAT'S GONE OUT TO
TRY TO MAKE A COUPLE
IMPROVEMENT. UM IF I RECALL
CORRECTLY, I MAY HAVE CO OPTED
THE BILL WITH THEM GREAT 14 99
TO REALLY NEED ITS PURPOSE. I'M
OPEN TO THE IDEA OF MOVING SOME
FUNDS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF
THERE'S A CUSTOMARY PRACTICE OR
NOT, MAYBE MAYBE THERE'S A CAP
BECAUSE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT
CONCERN BY STATEWIDE
STAKEHOLDERS IN THE FAIRGROUND
ARENA THAT WE START WITH A
LITTLE BIT. AND THEN BEFORE YOU
KNOW IT, THE ENTIRE FUND IS
BEING USED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
PURPOSES AND NOT NECESSARILY
MEANING. IT'S INTENDED GOAL. SO
I YOU KNOW AN IDEA HERE. MAYBE
THAT AS WE START OFF, MAYBE
THERE'S A CAP IN TERMS OF HOW
MUCH MONEY CAN BE USED FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES AS IT
RELATES TO 14 99 FRONT, SO JUST
A SUGGESTION THAT I WANT TO PUT
ON THE TABLE AND ALSO JUST
ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR WORK IN THIS
AREA. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, SO WE'LL TURN OVER TO
YOU GUYS FOR THE PRESENTATION
HERE ISSUE. 66 I GUESS I FELT
LIKE I TALKED ENOUGH. UM SO I'LL
JUST JUST TO REITERATE. UM YEAH
, I CAN BE BRIEF. I JUST WANT TO
REITERATE THAT THIS IS A
PROPOSAL THAT WILL ALLOW US TO
CONTINUE TO DO OUR OBLIGATION OF
OVERSIGHT AND FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITIES. AND IT IS IT
IS ABOUT COVERING THOSE COSTS
BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE
RESERVES LEFT TO GET US THROUGH
THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. SO THAT IS
THE POINT OF THIS AND APPRECIATE
THE DIALOGUE, AND AS I SAID, WE
ARE ENGAGING WITH THE
STAKEHOLDERS DON'T HAVE A
MEETING WITH A NUMBER OF THE
STAKEHOLDERS THE WEEK AFTER
NEXT, SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN COME
TO YOU WITH SOME GOOD SOLUTIONS
. ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE
ADMINISTRATION? LEÓN UH UM,
PROPOSALS NOT RAISE ANY CONCERNS
FOR US SECRETARY HARASS
MENTIONED THAT THESE ARE
EXISTING POSITIONS WHEN CDFA
THAT HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN
FUNDED FROM THE FAIR AND
EXPOSITION FUND. THE FUND CAN NO
LONGER SUPPORT THESE POSITIONS,
SO IT'S REASONABLE TO SUPPORT
THESE POSITIONS FROM ANOTHER
SOURCE. UM, THE LEGISLATURE
COULD FUND THESE POSITIONS FROM
THE GENERAL FUND, BUT IT MIGHT
BE DIFFICULT GIVEN THE CURRENT
BUDGET PROBLEM. IT ALSO RAISES
THE QUESTION OF WHO SHOULD BE
PAYING FOR THESE POSITIONS.
TAXPAYERS BROADLY OR FAIRGOERS
THEMSELVES. GREAT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE
ANY OTHER? QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. I HAVE. I HAVE NOTHING
ON THIS, BUT I DO WANT TO LET
PEOPLE KNOW THAT ISSUE. 19 I
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HEAR ISSUE ISSUE, 19. SO, UM
WITH THAT WE'VE COMMENTED ON AN
ISSUE SIX. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BEING YOUR
SECRETARY. I HOPE YOU GET A GOOD
LUNCH TODAY. GREAT. HOPE WE MAKE
IT THERE IN TIME. SO CARB. WE
COULD HAVE CARVED
REPRESENTATIVES SELF, PLEASE. SO
THIS IS A LOW CARBON FUEL
STANDARDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE
PUBLIC. HEARING THIS AND STUFF,
UM. AND NOW WE HAVE EVERYBODY
HERE. SO, UM WHAT'S THE
BREAKDOWN OF THE CREDITS BEING
GENERATED FOR EXAMPLE, THE
PERCENTAGE OF CREDITS THAT HAVE
BEEN GENERATED BY THE BUILDING
OF ZEB CHARGING AND FUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRYING TO GET
A LITTLE BIT OF A HANDLE ON THE
PARLIAMENT, FUELING STANDARD
ISSUE. AND MY OTHER QUESTION IS
GOING TO DEAL WITH BIO METHANE
AND THE LIVESTOCK OPERATIONS.
GOOD MORNING OR GOOD AFTERNOON.
NOW BRAND MERIT WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I'M GOING
TO HAND THAT STRAIGHT OFF TO MY
COLLEAGUE, CARB. HI THANKS FOR
HAVING MY NAME IS MATT PHOTO I
AM A DIVISION CHIEF AT THE
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
AND OVERSEE THE LOW CARBON FUEL
STANDARD PROGRAM. SO WE DO HAVE
A BCP IN REQUESTING POSITIONS
FOR THE LOW CARBON FUEL
STANDARD, BUT I'LL GET RIGHT TO
YOUR QUESTION SINCE I KNOW
SECRETARY ROSS SAID SHE WAS
HOLDING UP FOR LUNCH. IT LOOKS
LIKE IT'S ME, ACTUALLY. SO UH,
THE LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARD
SETS A DECLINING CARBON
INTENSITY PERFORMANCE STANDARD
ON THE TRANSPORTATION FUEL IN
CALIFORNIA, AND IN DOING SO, IT
CREATES A PRIVATE INVESTMENT
SIGNAL TO DELIVER LOW CARBON
FUELS INTO THE TRANSPORTATION
FUEL MARKET HERE IN THE STATE,
AND SO OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS,
IT HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN
DRIVING INVESTMENT IN LOW CARBON
FUEL PRODUCTION. AND WHAT THAT
HAS MEANT FOR CALIFORNIA IS THAT
WE ARE SEEING, UH LOW CARBON
FUELS LIKE RENEWABLE DIESEL,
BIODIESEL, RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
, ELECTRICITY AND OTHER LOW
CARBON FUELS THAT ARE COMING
INTO CALIFORNIA. SO YOUR
SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT YOU KNOW
THE BREAKDOWN AMONG THESE I HAVE
SOME NUMBERS FOR YOU. SO IN
TERMS OF CREDIT GENERATION, THE
SINGLE LARGEST CREDIT GENERATOR
IN THE STATE IS BIOMASS BASED
DIESEL. SO THAT'S RENEWABLE
DIESEL AND BIODIESEL. THAT'S 44%
OF THE TOTAL CREDITS GENERATED
AND DELIVERED INTO THE
CALIFORNIA MARKET. UM FOLLOWING
THAT WOULD BE THE ELECTRICITY,
UM, LOW CARBON ELECTRICITY THAT
IS DELIVERED TO SUPPLY
ELECTRICITY TO CHARGE VEHICLES
IN THE STATE. AND THAT'S ABOUT
25% OF CREDITS GENERATED IN THE
STATE AND THEN NEXT IN LINE IS
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS, WHICH IS
USED TO SUPPLY FUELING FOR
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS VEHICLES
IN THE STATE. AND THAT'S ABOUT
16% OF THE TOTAL CREDITS
GENERATED AND THEN FINALLY,
ETHANOL REPRESENTS ABOUT 14% OF
THE CREDITS GENERATED AND THEN
THERE ARE SMALLER LEVELS OF
CREDIT GENERATION FOR OTHER
FUELS. BUT THOSE ARE THE THOSE
ARE THE BIG ONES. THE LARGE, LOW
CARBON FUEL PATHWAYS. UH FOR THE
LIVESTOCK OPERATIONS, BIO
METHANE. UM, I'M CONCERNED THAT
WE'RE NOT CAPTURING, YOU KNOW,
THE FULL LIFE CYCLE ADMISSIONS
AND, UM. AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT
WHETHER WE HAVE A PROGRAM THAT
SORT OF MOVING JUST FOCUSED ON
ONE PART OF THIS AND ACTUALLY
INCENTIVIZING THE CREATION OF
MORE AH MORE ADMISSIONS SO THAT
YOU GET MORE. YOU GET MORE
CREDITS ON THE ON THE OTHER SIDE
AND GET MORE REIMBURSEMENT FOR
THAT, UM, SO HOW ABOUT THE TOTAL
LIFECYCLE? HOW DOES CARB SORT OF
ACCOUNT FOR, UM THE GREENHOUSE
GASSES GENERATED BEFORE AND
AFTER THE MANURE DIGESTION
PROCESS. CAN YOU HELP ME WITH
THAT? SURE SO AS PART OF
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LOW CARBON
FUEL STANDARD, WE LOOK AT THE
CARBON INTENSITY OF ANY
INDIVIDUAL FUEL THAT IS COMING
INTO THE CALIFORNIA
TRANSPORTATION FUEL MARKET. AND
IN DETERMINING WHAT THAT CARBON
INTENSITY OF A FUEL IS. WE LOOK
AT WHAT ARE THE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS THAT ARE GENERATED IN
THE PRODUCTION OF ANY PARTICULAR
FUEL? AND SO FOR THINGS LIKE
ELECTRICITY FOR BIOMASS BASED
DIESEL AND FOR RENEWABLE NATURAL
GAS THAT COMES FROM BY
EVERYTHING WE LOOK AT. WHAT ARE
THE GREENHOUSE GASSES ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PRODUCTION OF THAT
FUEL? DAIRY METHANE IS A LITTLE
BIT DIFFERENT. THE PRODUCTION OF
DAIRY METHANE COMES FROM THE
PRODUCTION OF MILK AND DAIRY
PRODUCTS THAT WE ALL CONSUME.
AND SO IN LOOKING AT HOW WE
ASSIGN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
TO THE PRODUCTION OF DAIRY, BIO
METHANE AND RENEWABLE NATURAL
GAS THAT GOES INTO THE
TRANSPORTATION MARKET. WE LOOK
AT WHAT ARE THE METHANE
EMISSIONS COMING OFF OF THE
MANURE THAT IS PRODUCED AS A
RESULT OF THE MILK PRODUCTION
AND DAIRY PRODUCTION THAT THE
STATE HAS. AND SO OUR ANALYSIS
LOOKS AT, FROM THE POINT AT
WHICH THAT MANURE IS PRODUCED TO
THE POINT AT WHICH THAT BIO
METHANE IS ENTERED INTO A
VEHICLE AND IS COMBUSTED IN A
VEHICLE. WHAT ARE THE GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSION? IS ASSOCIATED WITH
FROM MANURE. Tð COMBUSTION IN A
VEHICLE AND WE ASSIGN A CARBON
INTENSITY LIKEWISE, AND IT
REALLY GOES TO THE IDEA THAT
DAIRY IS NOT PRODUCING A FUEL.
IT'S PRODUCING A MILK PRODUCT
AND THEN A BYPRODUCT OF THAT
PRODUCTION IS THIS DAIRY METHANE
EMISSIONS? SO UM YOU HAVE. WHAT
ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE. WE
ARE INCENTIVIZING, LARGER HERDS.
AND ACTUALLY. ALMOST
INCENTIVIZING MORE MANURE
PRODUCTION. WITH THE SYSTEM THAT
WE HAVE THAT TIME, AT LEAST
SEEING IT AT THIS POINT IN TIME
AND WE WANT TO DO THE OPPOSITE,
WHICH IS WE WANT TO TRY TO
DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF MANURE
METHANE BEING PRODUCED IN
CALIFORNIA. YEAH AND IT DOESN'T
GET CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW
THE PROGRAM WAS GOING TO BE
TRYING TO DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF
MANURE PRODUCTION? YOU KNOW, IN
CALIFORNIA? UM, YOU KNOW, ARE
YOU CONSIDERING YOU KNOW, IF WE
HAVE LARGER AND LARGER HERDS, WE
HAVE MORE AND MORE OTHER AIR
POLLUTION AND WATER QUALITY
PROBLEMS THAT ARE CREATED BY
THAT, UM WE REALLY WANT TO
DECREASE BOATS. WE WANT TO
DECREASE METHANE PRODUCTION FROM
MANURE. AND WE WANT TO DECREASE
ADMISSIONS FROM THESE VEHICLES.
UM. AND I AM. DO YOU GUYS SEE A
CONNECTION THERE THAT I'M
MISSING THAT YOU COULD EXPLAIN
TO ME IN THE PUBLIC. YEAH NO, I
THINK THAT'S A GREAT COMMENT. UM
SO BROADLY, METHANE IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ABOUT 50% OF THE
WARMING THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING
ACROSS THE GLOBE FROM A CLIMATE
CHANGE PERSPECTIVE AND IN
CALIFORNIA METHANE REPRESENTS
ABOUT 40 MILLION METRIC TONS OF
ART. CARBON OXIDE EQUIVALENT
EMISSIONS AND DAIRY METHANE IS
ABOUT 25% DAIRY MANURE. METHANE
IS ABOUT 25% OF IT, SO TO HAVE A
REALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON
REDUCING IMMEDIATE WARMING. WE
NEED TO REDUCE METHANE EMISSIONS
THAT THE SCIENCE IS CLEAR,
UNEQUIVOCAL THAT THE STRATEGY IS
TO CUT METHANE EMISSIONS, AND
IT'S NOT JUST DAIRIES. IT'S FROM
OUR OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS. IT'S
FROM OUR LANDFILLS. AND IN ORDER
TO CUT METHANE EMISSIONS FROM
DAIRIES. WHAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE
TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT
MANURE METHANE ISN'T GOING INTO
THE ATMOSPHERE THAT THE METHANE
THAT COMES FROM THE KIND OF
ENTERIC EMISSIONS THAT ARE
ASSOCIATED WITH CATTLE FEED OR
ALSO REDUCED. AND SO WE ACTUALLY
HAVE LAWS HERE IN CALIFORNIA. SB
13 83 WITH THE LEGISLATURE
PASSED IN 2017 THAT TELLS US WE
HAVE A 40% METHANE REDUCTION
TARGET IN THE STATE ACROSS ALL
METHANE SOURCES, AND SO WE HAVE
BEEN MOVING VERY QUICKLY AT CARB
AND IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER
AGENCIES LIKE CDFA AND COVER
CYCLE TO ADDRESS THE CORE
SOURCES OF THOSE METHANE
EMISSIONS. AND WHAT WE'VE ALSO
BEEN DOING, AND THIS IS IN
RESPONSE TO 13 83 REQUIREMENTS.
WE'VE BEEN WATCHING AND
ANALYZING TRENDS IN THE DAIRY
INDUSTRY, SO JUST LAST YEAR IN
MARCH, WE RELEASED A REPORT THAT
LOOKED AT WHAT IS HAPPENING
ACROSS THE DAIRY INDUSTRY. AND
WHAT HOW WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS
ON OUR METHANE REDUCTIONS THAT
ARE SO IMPORTANT FOR THE
CLIMATE. AND WHAT WE FOUND. IS
THAT WE HAVE MADE SOME PRETTY
SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS THROUGH
DEPLOYMENT OF DAIRY DIGESTERS
AND THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MANURE
MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES TO
REDUCE METHANE EMISSIONS IN THE
STATE. WE WERE ABOUT HALFWAY TO
THE TARGET THAT WE'D SET IN
STATUTE AND THAT ADDITIONAL
PROJECTS WOULD BE NEEDED TO
CONTINUE TO REDUCE THOSE METHANE
EMISSIONS, AND WE ALSO LOOKED AT
WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE INDUSTRY
MORE BROADLY, AND FOUND THAT IN
CALIFORNIA. WE'RE SEEING A
REDUCTION IN OVERALL DAIRY HERD
OVER TIME, SO IT'S DECLINING.
BUT WE ARE SEEING THAT DAIRIES
ARE CONSOLIDATING, SO THEY'RE
GETTING LARGER IN CERTAIN AREAS,
BUT TOTAL DAIRY HEADCOUNT IN THE
STATE IS GOING DOWN. UM SO THERE
HAVE BEEN A NUMBER TOTAL DAIRY
HAD CALVIN'S GOING DOWN TO STILL
LIVESTOCK IS HEADLINING IN THE
STATE YEAR OVER YEAR. UM WE'RE
ACTUALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
NEXT ROUND OF USDA ACCENTS IS
DATA THAT COMES OUT NEXT YEAR,
WHICH GIVES US SOME MORE INSIGHT
INTO TOTAL HEARD COUNTS. BUT
WE'VE SEEN THESE TRENDS CONTINUE
, AND SO WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE'RE
LOOKING AT WHAT ARE GOING TO BE
OUR METHANE EMISSION PROJECTIONS
IF WE ASSUME THAT THE DAIRY SIZE
OR THE DAIRY HERD COUNCIL
CONTINUED DECLINE IN THE STATE,
UM AND THE DEPLOYMENT OF THINGS
LIKE DAIRY, DIGESTERS AND
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, AND
HOPEFULLY THINGS LIKE FEED
ADDITIVES THAT WILL REDUCE THOSE
WITH TERROR COMMISSIONS WILL
CONTINUE TO CUT INTO DAIRY
EMISSIONS OVER TIME HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. AND SO THAT'S THE
STRATEGY THAT WE'VE BEEN
DEPLOYING, AND IT HAS BEEN
WORKING THUS FAR, TOO, TO REDUCE
TERRY METHANE EMISSIONS AND WE
DO SEE, THOUGH, THAT THE OVERALL
INDUSTRY TRENDS ARE GOING TO BE
ONE WHERE THE DAIRY TOTAL DAIRY
HERD SIZES IN CALIFORNIA DECLINE
. UM THIS ULTIMATELY IS YOU
KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE DAIRY
INDUSTRY PRESENCE IN CALIFORNIA
IS BEING DRIVEN BY THE DEMAND
THAT WE ALL HAVE FOR DAIRY
PRODUCTS. AND SO WE IN LOOKING
AT THIS QUESTION ABOUT WHAT'S
GOING ON IN THE DAIRY INDUSTRY.
WE ALSO ENGAGED WITH EXPERTS AND
HELD A FULL DAY WORKSHOP LAST
YEAR ACROSS ACADEMIA. USDA US
CPA, LOCAL AIR AND WATER QUALITY
PERMITTING AGENCIES TO ASK
WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE DAIRIES
AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH DAIRY
PRODUCT DEMAND AND THE FINDINGS
FROM THAT WORKSHOP WORTH IT?
WE'RE STILL AS A POPULIST.
REQUESTING A LOT OF DAIRY
PRODUCTS AT STAYING PRETTY
CONSISTENT, AND SO WHAT? WHAT WE
HEARD THROUGH THAT EXPERT PANEL
WAS THAT MANY DAIRIES ARE
CONSOLIDATING TO INCREASE THEIR
MILK PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY TO
MEET THAT DEMAND. AND SO THAT'S
ALSO SOMETHING THAT IS HAPPENING
IN THE INDUSTRY MORE BROADLY
HERE IN CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS
THE NATION. TRYING TO. JUST
TRYING TO LOOK OUT INTO THE
FUTURE. TO THE EXTENT THAT WE
CAN INCENTIVIZE. I MEAN, WE MAY
HAVE WHATEVER THE DEMAND IS FOR
DAIRY. WHATEVER PERCENTAGE OF
THAT DEMAND. WE'RE MEETING WITH
CALIFORNIA DAIRY IF THOSE STATES
STEADY SO THAT WE'RE NOT JUST
EXPORTING THE MANURE PROBLEM
SOMEPLACE OUTSIDE THE STATE. IT
SEEMS THAT YOU KNOW, ONE WAY IS
WITH DIGESTERS TO TRY TO MAKE
SURE THAT THE MANURE. DOESN'T
GIVE OFF AS MUCH METHANE AND
ANOTHER IS TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW,
OTHER INNOVATIVE WAYS. TRY TO
SAY, HOW CAN WE HAVE MANURE THAT
DOESN'T HAVE AS MUCH METHANE,
YOU KNOW POTENTIAL IN IT IN THE
FIRST PLACE, FOR EXAMPLE, I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE
INVERSE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW,
INVERSE INCENTIVES HERE TO SAY
ACTUALLY. YOU KNOW, THE METHANE
IS BECOMING AS VALUABLE. I MEAN,
THE MANURE IS BECOMING AS
VALUABLE AS THE MILK. UM AND YOU
KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT TURNING THAT
INTO AN INCENTIVE AND NOT PAYING
ATTENTION TO HOW DO WE OVERALL
REDUCE THE PROBLEMS? I THINK I
SEE SOMEBODY ELSE READY TO GO
AHEAD JUST AS CHRISTIAN BELTRAN
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I JUST
KIND OF WANT TO TACK ON SOME
COMMENTS TO YOUR TO YOUR
COMMENTS, MR. CHAIR WE DID HAVE
ABOUT $30 MILLION IN LAST YEAR'S
BUDGET THAT FROM G R F
SPECIFICALLY THAT WAS INVESTING
INTO DAIRY DIGESTERS AND METHANE
REDUCTION. IN ADDITION TO THAT,
WE ALSO HAD A FEW MILLION
DOLLARS, I THINK ALSO
APPROPRIATED SPECIFICALLY TO
WORK WITH THE UCS ON THE STUDY
OF DIFFERENT FEED THAT IS
PROVIDED TO CATTLE AS WELL. SO
WE THE ADMINISTRATION IS
COMMITTED TO THOSE TWO SPECIFIC
ITEMS THAT YOU HIGHLIGHTED IN
YOUR COMMENTS, AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU ON
THAT, AND I REALIZED THAT
METHANE THAT'S COMING OUT OF
BOTH ENDS OF THE COW AND WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE WE INCENTIVIZE BOTH
ENDS. BUT YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF
THAT'S WHERE FEEDSTOCK IS
PROBABLY REAL IMPORTANT QUESTION
THERE. HEY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I APPRECIATE THAT, UM AND WILL
NOW OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT REALLY APPRECIATE THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. HANGING IN
HERE FOR ALL OF THIS. SO THANK
YOU. RIGHT AND. NOT QUITE ON
YET. WAIT. OKAY WE'LL START THE
PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE
DEPARTMENTS IN THE AGENDA. WE
WANT TO TRY TO REMIND PEOPLE. AS
FOR THE DEPARTMENTS IN THE
AGENDA, EVERYONE WILL HAVE ONE
MINUTE TO TALK. WE'RE GONNA
START WITH THOSE IN THE ROOM AND
THEN OPEN THE PHONE LINES AND
AGAIN, THE NUMBER IS 877692. THE
ACCESS CODE IS 131. 5447 THAT'S
ACCESS CODE 1315447. UM AND
WE'RE READY FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
WELCOME GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR
. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE JOHN
MARTIN ON BEHALF OF THE ALLIANCE
FOR AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, WHERE
THE TRADE ORGANIZATION FOR THE
FOLKS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
VEHICLES AND TECHNOLOGY FOR
ABOUT 98% OF THE SALES HERE IN
THE UNITED STATES WANTED TO
SPEAK TO ISSUE TWO ON TODAY'S
AGENDA. UH, WE WERE THERE AT THE
BEGINNING. WE WERE THERE FOR THE
REAUTHORIZATION WHERE HERE AGAIN
IN SUPPORT OF THE
REAUTHORIZATION. OF THE A B
EIGHT FEES WITH A BIT OF A
CAVEAT. I JUST LIKE TO SAY WE
ARE CONCERNED WITH THE ONGOING
SHIFT OF THOSE FUNDS OUT OF THE
LIGHT DUTY REFUELING SPACE AND
INTO THE MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY
REFUELING SPACE. I'D LIKE TO
ASSOCIATE OURSELVES WITH THE
COMMENTS MADE BY THE LAO THIS
$173 MILLION A YEAR PAID BY
FAMILIES, LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE
OWNERS. 50% OF THOSE FUNDS GO
INTO THE MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY
SPACE WHICH ARE BUSINESSES. WE
DON'T WE RECOGNIZE THOSE
INVESTMENTS ARE NEEDED. I THINK
OUR VIEW IS THAT THOSE FOLKS
SHOULD BE PAYING INTO THIS
PROGRAM. AS WELL AND THE THAT
THOSE FUNDS RAISED FROM LIGHT
DUTY VEHICLE OWNERS SHOULD STAY
IN THE LIGHT DUTY SPACE. I KNOW
SOME OTHER FOLKS ARE GOING TO
TALK ABOUT THE ONGOING NEED IN
THAT SPACE FOR HYDROGEN. I JUST
LIKE TO TALK ABOUT ELECTRIC
CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE. C E. C
S NUMBERS WE THINK WE'RE GOING
TO HAVE ABOUT 2.5 MILLION
ELECTRIC VEHICLES ON CALIFORNIA
ROADS BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR.
THE EC SAYS WE NEED ABOUT
140,000 PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
CHARGES TO MEET THAT NUMBER
RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT 30,000. THE
NEED IS STILL THERE WOULD LIKE
TO SEE THE PROGRAM CONTINUED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND FOR THE
BENEFIT OF EVERYBODY OUT THERE
WHEN YOU HEAR THAT BUZZER,
THAT'S THE ONE MINUTE BUZZER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, RIGHT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS MICHAEL. JARED I'M HERE
ON THE SUSTAINABLE AG ITEM. I'M
TALKING ON BEHALF OF THE
COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY
FARMERS CALF, WHICH REPRESENTS
OVER 8000 SMALL AND MID SCALE
FARMERS. UM WELL, CALF
APPRECIATES THE MAINTENANCE OF
THE ESSENTIAL DROUGHT RELIEF
FUNDING IN THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
, WERE DISAPPOINTED BY THE
INEQUITABLE CUTS TO THE
INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS OF
CALIFORNIA'S SMALL AND
UNDERSERVED FARMERS. THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
PROPOSES TO ELIMINATE ALL
FUNDING FOR THE FARMING
COMMUNITY FOOD HUBS PROGRAM
PROGRAM CREATED TWO YEARS BY AGO
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BLOOM THAT
WOULD CREATE NEW FOOD HUBS. IN
ADDITION, WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE
CUT OF 8.5 POINT $8 MILLION TO
THE URBAN AGRICULTURE PROGRAM
AND $5 MILLION TO THE BEGINNING
, FARMER AND FARM WORKER
TRAINING PROGRAM ALSO, UM WE
WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THAT
WHEN LOOKING AT THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSED FLOODING FUNDING THAT
YOU WOULD CONSIDER SMALL FARMERS
AS WELL. THEY HAVE BEEN
DRAMATICALLY IMPACTED BY RECENT
FLOODS. AND ARE LIKELY WILL BE
IMPACTED BY THE FLOODING THAT IS
GOING TO OCCUR THIS WEEKEND WHEN
ALL THE SNOW MELTS. UM SO PLEASE
CONSIDER THEIR NEEDS AND WHEN
ALLOCATING THAT FLOODING FUNDING
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
AFTERNOON. JUDY MERRILL,
REPRESENTING THE CENTER FOR FOOD
SAFETY, UM SPEAKING TO THE CITY
AND BLACK BUDGET ITEMS, THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET WOULD CUT
FUNDING FOR THE MULTI BENEFIT
CLIMATE. SMART AGRICULTURE
PROGRAMS. HEALTHY SOILS SWEEP
THE ALTERNATIVE MANURE
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, THE
POLLINATOR HABITAT PROGRAMS. AND
WHILE WE SUPPORT A BOND MEASURE
, WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AS
ONE SOLUTION, THOSE FUNDS WOULD
ONLY BECOME AVAILABLE LIKELY
UNTIL 2025 ABANDONING FUNDING
AND STRANDING THESE PROGRAMS FOR
FY 23 24. WE ASKED THAT FUNDING
FOR THOSE PROGRAMS BE RESTORED
IN FY 23 24 BUDGET SO THAT SMALL
MID SCALE AND UNDERSERVED
PRODUCERS CAN ACCESS THE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND
FINANCIAL INCENTIVES THAT THEY
NEED IN ORDER TO TRANSITION TO
CLIMATE, SMART AND CLIMATE.
RESILIENT FARMING, UM,
APPRECIATE DISCUSSION ON THE LOW
CARBON FUEL STANDARD WILL HOPE
THERE'S MORE WE ASK THAT YOU
CONTINUE TO WEIGH IN AS CARB IS
UNDERWAY WITH RULEMAKING AND THE
PROGRAM CONTINUES TO PROP UP, UM
DIGESTER FUELS WITH QUESTIONABLE
CLIMATE BENEFITS. UM IT'S
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ON ADJACENT
COMMUNITIES AND REAL DISTORTIONS
FOR THE DAIRY INDUSTRY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
, PHOEBE C. NOTE, LEADERSHIP
COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY FIRST, I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR HOLDING THIS. THIS
ITEM ITEM 19 OPEN. UM WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND
THE COMMITTEE AS YOU FURTHER
CONSIDER THE REALLY IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS RAISED IN THE AGENDA
AND OTHER QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS
WE HAVE ABOUT THE PROGRAM. UM
ANOTHER QUESTION RAISED WAS
REGARDING KIND OF GHG DOUBLE
COUNTING, WHICH WERE EXTREMELY
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT MULTIPLE
LAYERS MULTIPLE LEVELS OF STATE
FUNDING, TAXPAYER AND RATEPAYER
OF FUNDING OR FUNDING THE EXACT
SAME EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS TO LOW
CARBON FUEL STANDARD THAT DEDE
RDP PROGRAM, ETCETERA, SO I
THINK THAT WARRANTS SOME
INVESTIGATION. WE I MEAN, THE
YOU KNOW, THERE WAS CONVERSATION
ABOUT WHETHER WE'RE LOOKING AT
MILK PRODUCTION OR MANURE
PRODUCTION. YOU RAISED THE
CRITICAL POINT THAT IT SEEMS
LIKE WE MIGHT BE TRANSITIONING
TO MANURE PRODUCTION AND WE ARE
SEEING AND HEARING RESEARCHERS
AND VERY INDUSTRY ITSELF SAY
THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT MANURE
PROCEEDS APPROACH AND EXCEED
LOOK. PROCEEDS FINALLY, WE ARE
EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACT
THAT THE LOW CARBON FUEL
STANDARD IS HAVING. AND QUESTION
SOME OF THE ASSUMPTIONS ON MILK
DEMAND AND THE REDUCTION IN
OVERALL HERD SIZE. THANKS SO
MUCH. THANK YOU. MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS BRENDAN TO IT ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTING THE EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS FROM ALL 35 LOCAL AIR
DISTRICTS VERY MUCH APPRECIATE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA'S
COMMENTS REGARDING THE A B 6 17
PROGRAM. I WOULD ALSO ADD.
THAT'S A VERY COST EFFECTIVE
PROGRAM, BOTH ON THE GREENHOUSE
GAS SIDE REDUCTION SIDE AND ALSO
WHEN YOU COMBINE THAT WITH THE
CRITERIA POLLUTANT REDUCTION SO
YOU CAN GET BOTH YOUR PUBLIC
HEALTH BENEFITS AND CLIMATE
BENEFITS THAT HAS BEEN REDUCED
THE AMOUNT WE ASK YOU RESTORED
TO 300 MILLION AND EVEN CONSIDER
INCREASING IT. WHEN YOU'RE
LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS
OF COST EFFECTIVENESS AND HAVING
LESS MONEY, UM IF REVENUES IN
THE G R F EXCEED CURRENT
ESTIMATES, ALSO JUST ON THE
FARMER PROGRAM THAT'S ALSO AT
THE TOP IS IN TERMS OF COST
EFFECTIVENESS, AND THAT'S BEEN
ZEROED OUT FROM 150 MILLION LAST
YEAR, DOWN TO ZERO THIS YEAR.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO US,
AND WE ALSO ASK THAT YOU RESTORE
THAT AND THEN GO ABOVE AND
BEYOND. BASED ON G R F REVENUES
AND LAST I'LL JUST ADD THE WOOD
SMOKE REDUCTION PROGRAM ALSO
GETS YOU IT'S HISTORICALLY COST
EFFECTIVE GETS YOU BLACK CARBON
REDUCTIONS. GHG REDUCTIONS AND,
UH. TOXICS AND WE ALSO ASK YOU
CONSIDER THAT HERE WHAT? THAT
LAST PROGRAM WOULD SMOKE
REDUCTION PROGRAM. IT'S THERE'S
NO FUNDING IN THIS BUDGET, BUT
THERE WAS FIVE MILLION LAST YEAR
AND WE ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER
THAT AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR MEMBERS
ALLEN ABS WITH THE BAY AREA AIR
QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
COMPRISED OF THE NINE COUNTIES
SURROUNDING THE BAY AREA LIKE TO
ECHO MY, UH, COUNTERPARTS.
COMMENTS APPRECIATION FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA AND HIS
WORDS ON A B 6 17, AS HE NOTED
WHEN WE PASSED A B 6 17 56 YEARS
AGO, WE TOLD DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO
PASS CAP AND TRADE, BUT MAKE
SURE THAT THEY WEREN'T LEFT
BEHIND. WE STARTED OUT WITH 10
COMMUNITIES SIX YEARS AGO. WE
HAVE 19 COMMUNITIES AND THE
FUNDING IS ACTUALLY GOING DOWN
THIS YEAR TO SERVE THOSE 19
COMMUNITIES IN THE BAY AREA.
WE'VE GONE FROM TWO COMMUNITIES
TO FOUR COMMUNITIES. THE WORK
ISN'T DONE THAT THERE IS MORE
WORK THAN EVER TO GET THE
REDUCTIONS THAT WE NEED. AND SO
WE SHOULD. AS MY COUNTERPART
MENTIONED, WE SHOULD CONSIDER,
UM, FUNDING THAT TO THE FULLEST
EXTENT WE CAN G R F REVENUES
COME IN HIGHER THAN FORECAST.
THE OTHER THING I'LL MENTION IS
THE FARMER PROGRAM ZEROED OUT
FROM 100 AND 50,000,002 0 AND
OTHER BIG PROGRAM IN THE BAY
AREA. AND YOU CAN REPLACE THE 35
40 YEAR OLD TRACTOR WITH NO
POLLUTION CONTROLS WITH A BRAND
NEW TRACTOR WITH STATE OF THE
ART CONTROLS, EVEN ELECTRIC
TRACTORS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS MADDIE MUNSON
ON BEHALF OF THE AGRICULTURAL
ENERGY CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION. I
WANT TO TALK MOSTLY ABOUT THE
LIVESTOCK METHANE REDUCTION
PROGRAMS AND TO START OUT WITH
THE L. C. F S CONVERSATION. WE
JUST WANT TO SUPPORT AND
REITERATE CARBS. COMMENTS THAT
WE DO NOT FIND THAT THESE
PROGRAMS ARE INCREASING THE HERD
SIZE IN CALIFORNIA. IN FACT, OUR
DATA SHOWS THAT THE HERD SIZE
HAS BEEN DECLINING OVER RECENT
YEARS, AND WE DO NOT SEE THESE
PROGRAMS AS INCENTIVIZING GROWTH
IN THE INDUSTRY, BUT RATHER JUST
HELPING THE INDUSTRY TO ACHIEVE
THE IMPORTANT METHANE REDUCTION
GOALS AND SP 13 83 AND TWO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CONNOLLY'S
COMMENTS ON METRICS, THE
ADMINISTRATION TESTIFIED LAST
WEEK IN THE SENATE AND CARP HAS
ALSO FOUND THAT THE DIGESTER
PROGRAM IS ACTUALLY THE MOST
COST EFFECTIVE OF THE CLIMATE
PROGRAMS AND HAS HELPED TO
ACHIEVE THE GREATEST OVERALL
REDUCTION OF THOSE PROGRAMS SO
WE WOULD ASK, ACTUALLY FOR A $75
MILLION BUDGET ALLOCATION TO
THOSE PROGRAMS THIS YEAR, WHICH
IS SUPPORTED BY A RECENT
ANALYSIS FOR CAR BUT WE'D BE
HAPPY TO HAVE A MORE DETAILED
DISCUSSION WITH YOUR OFFICE ON
THESE COMPLICATED ISSUES AND
THANK YOU FOR DISCUSSING THEM
TODAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
ELISE VON DRAKE WITH TRENT AND
PRICE CONSULTING. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF NEXT GEN POLICY, AND I
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS AROUND
EQUITY, PARTICULARLY FOR THE CDF
TO INVESTMENTS AND ON THAT NOTE
, I WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT'S
DONE. CALIFORNIA ISN'T STRONG
SUPPORT AND RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTS AND INCLUSION OF $14
MILLION IN FUNDING FOR SP 907.
THIS WAS SIGNED INTO LAW LAST
YEAR AND CREATED LOCAL EQUITABLE
ACCESS TO FOOD PROGRAM, WHICH
AIMS TO EXPAND TV T ACCESS AT
ALL CERTIFIED FARMERS MARKETS IN
A NUMBER OF LOW AND COMMUNITIES
IN LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES AND
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF CERTIFIED
FARMERS MARKETS IN LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES. SO FUNDING WAS NOT
INCLUDED FOR THIS AND THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, AND WE WOULD
RESPECTFULLY INCLUDING UM,
IMPLEMENTING THAT PROGRAM AND
FUNDING FOR THAT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
AND MEMBERS DEREK DOLPHIN BEHALF
OF CHARGE POINT HERE IN SUPPORT
OF ISSUE NUMBER THREE, THE
ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY
EQUIPMENT PAYMENT METHODS.
TRAILER BILL THIS TRAILER BILL
WILL ALIGN WITH THE FEDERAL NAVY
RULE AND WE BELIEVE WILL HELP TO
EXPEDITE CHARTERS ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
TAYLOR ROSHAN WITH KANSEN
REASON. CONAWAY REPRESENT A
BROAD ARRAY OF AGRICULTURAL
STAKEHOLDERS. WE'D LIKE TO ECHO
THE COMMENTS OF MISS MUNSON
REGARDING THE METHOD EMISSION
REDUCTION PROGRAMS AND THE
COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE
FARMER PROGRAM. I'M HERE IN
CALIFORNIA THAT PROVIDES
IMMEDIATE AIR QUALITY BENEFITS
AND GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS TO
LOW AIR QUALITY IMPACT AREAS.
AND THEN FINALLY, WE JUST LIKE
TO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS ON
THE MEMBERS ON CEO FUNDS.
FOCUSING ON DEVELOPING AND
ENHANCING INFRASTRUCTURE TO
EXPEDITE OUR TRANSITION TO A
CARBON NEUTRAL FUTURE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. AFTERNOON CHAIR
BENNETT AND MEMBERS ORVILLE
THOMAS FROM CAL START HAPPY TO
HAVE THIS CONVERSATION ON ISSUE
ONE ABOUT THE ZEB FUNDING
PROGRAM, REALIZING THAT THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET DOES TRY TO
KEEP 90% OF THE FUNDING, BUT TO
THE EXTENT THAT THE LEGISLATURE
WANTS TO USE THAT AS A
FOUNDATION AND THINK THROUGH
ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS, CAL STAR
WOULD BE HAPPY TO HELP FOR OVER
30 YEARS WE'VE ADMINISTERED SOME
OF THE STATE'S LARGEST DEAF
PROGRAMS AND LETS THEM THE
DIALOGUE WITH THE LEGISLATURE.
AND AN ISSUE THREE. REITERATING
SUPPORT FOR THE TRAILER BUDGET
LANGUAGE, MAKING ANYTHING EASIER
FOR CHARGING PAYMENTS IS ALWAYS
A GOOD THING. THANK YOU ALL.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY
NAME IS CHRIS CHÁVEZ. I'M THE
DEPUTY POLICY DIRECTOR AT
COALITION FOR CLEAN AIR AS WELL
AS INVOLVED WITH THE CHARGER
HEAD CALIFORNIA CAMPAIGN AS WELL
AS THE INVEST IN CLEAN AIR
CAMPAIGNS. FIRST REGARDING ITEMS
1980, 16 AND 18 RELATING TO THE
MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY
MAINTENANCE INSPECTION PROGRAM
AND LOCOMOTIVE IN USE RULE
REGULATION. WE ARE SOME
SUPPORTIVE THAT REGARDING ISSUE
NUMBER ONE AND THE ZEV PACKAGE
WERE THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
GOVERNOR TO FIND AN ALTERNATIVE.
Tð CUTTING CALIFORNIA'S HISTORIC
CLIMATE AND SEVEN FED SOME
PACKAGE. CALIFORNIA IS HOME TO
THE DIRTIEST AIR IN THE NATION
AND COMMUNITIES, LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR BEAR THE BRUNT OF THE
IMPACT. WE APPRECIATE THE
GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURES INTENT
TO PRESERVE FUNDING BUT CUTTING
MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY TRANSIT
AND THE T I. R C P PROGRAM HURTS
COMMUNITIES NEAR GOODS MOVEMENT
HUBS IN QUARTERS AS WELL AS US
WITH THE GREAT EXPERIENCE TO
CLEAN TRANSPORTATION. JUST LAST
WEEK. 33 $33 MILLION CLEAN
MOBILITY PROGRAM WAS TAPPED OUT
IN A SINGLE DAY, SO THAT'S
IMPORTANT TO KNOW. WE DO BELIEVE
THAT CALIFORNIA SHOULD ALIGN ITS
CLIMATE INVESTMENTS WITH
MAXIMIZING AIR QUALITY BENEFITS
, AS WELL AS MAXIMIZING AIR
QUALITY AND REGARDING COST
EFFECTIVENESS. JUST WANT TO
POINT OUT THAT THESE PROGRAMS
HELP THE COMMUNITIES WITH THE
GREATEST BARRIERS TO CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION AND REALLY
PRIORITIZES. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. CHAIR AND MEMBERS DAN CHAR
WITH OMNI GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
HERE FOR FLOW, EACH CHARGING
FLOW STRONG SUPPORTS THE A B
EIGHT REAUTHORIZATION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANKS FOR KEEPING YOUR COMMENTS
BRIEF. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND
MEMBERS CAMERA DIMITRI ON BEHALF
OF CAPITAL ADVOCACY REPRESENTING
BLINK, CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
WERE IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER
THREE FROM CAR REGARDING THE
CONTACT LIST PAYMENT. TRADE THE
BILL LANGUAGE THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON,
MR CHAIR MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
ERIC ARE OMERO ON BEHALF OF
VALLEY CLEANER. NOW TODAY, UM,
IT'S OUR FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE
THAT THERE ARE SOLUTIONS TO
ENSURE THAT DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITY RESIDENTS HAVE ACCESS
TO TAP PAYMENT TECHNOLOGY EITHER
ON ON A CORRIDOR ON THEIR PHONE
TO PAY FOR EVIE, CHARGING. WE'VE
SEEN THIS WORK IN A PILOT
PROGRAM. UM, TO GIVE LOW INCOME
E B DRIVERS ACCESS TO CONTACT
THOSE PAYMENT TECHNOLOGY. WE
BELIEVE THAT EQUITABLE E V
CHARGING PAYMENT TECHNOLOGY FOR
DOC RESIDENTS IS A VERY SOLVABLE
ISSUE THAT SHOULDN'T BE HINDERED
BY REGULATION. AND GIVEN THIS WE
SUPPORT THE TRAILER BILL. THE
GOVERNOR'S E VSC TRAILER BILL,
WHICH ALIGNS STATE AND NATIONAL
POLICY AND WILL ENABLE THE E V
CHARGING INDUSTRY TO, UM TO
CREATE OR DEVELOP FULLY
EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS TO CONTINUE
TO ENSURE THAT THIS IS EFFECTIVE
AT 5 TO 10 YEARS IN THE FUTURE,
ADDITIONALLY VERY SUPPORTIVE OF
$125 MILLION FOR THE CLEAN CARS
FOR ALL PROGRAM, WHICH HAVE BEEN
MAINTAINED SO FAR. WE REQUEST
THE LEGISLATURE CONTINUE TO
PRIORITIZE THOSE INVESTMENTS.
THANK YOU. OH GOOD AFTERNOON
TURN MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
MICHAELA ELDER ON BEHALF OF THE
ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
ASSOCIATION, OR IKA, AND OF
COURSE, STRONGLY SUPPORTS THE
FUNDING PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES
TARGETED INVESTMENTS AND
DISADVANTAGED AND LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES BY INCREASING ACCESS
TO THE BENEFITS OF CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION, AND BY
CONTINUING TO DE CARBONIZED
CALIFORNIA'S TRANSPORTATION
SECTOR AND IMPROVE PUBLIC
HEALTH. THESE FUNDS ARE
IMPERATIVE TO ENSURE THAT
CALIFORNIA ACHIEVES ITS
AMBITION, AMBITIOUS CLIMATE
GOALS OF UNDERSTANDS THAT THE
CURRENT DEFICIT THE STATE FACES
AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL. HOWEVER WE URGE THE
LEGISLATURE TO REFRAIN FROM
FURTHER REDUCTIONS TO THE
PACKAGE, ESPECIALLY TO CC
ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS, SUCH AS
SEVEN PULLING, FUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS AND
EQUITABLE AT HOME, CHARGING I'M
ALSO WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA VAN POOL
AUTHORITY, ALSO KNOWN AS
CALVIN'S. CALVIN'S PROVIDE FAM
FOR VAN PULLS MOSTLY TO FARM
WORKERS TO GET TO AND FROM HOME
AND THEIR JOB SITES SINCE
CALVIN'S WAS FOUNDED IN 2010,
IT'S REDUCED ALMOST 1.2 BILLION
VEHICLE. MILES TRAVELED. WE ARE
HERE TODAY IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THE $200 MILLION IN THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET AND
COMMUNITY BASED PLANS, PROJECTS
AND SUPPORT AND SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITY STRATEGIES. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
BENNETT AND MEMBERS NICHOLAS
MAZZOTTI ON BEHALF OF MID
PENINSULA OPEN SPACE REGIONAL
DISTRICT, UM, HERE TO EXPRESS
OUR CONCERN AROUND THE PROPOSED
CUT $5 MILLION TO THE INVASIVE
SPECIES FUND AT THE DEPARTMENT
OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE. THESE
FUNDS ARE BUDGETED FOR FISCAL
YEAR 22 23 AS PART OF THE
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PACKAGE
TO SUPPORT TOP PRIORITY INVASIVE
SPECIES PROJECTS ACROSS THE
STATE. THESE PROJECTS PLAY A
CRITICAL ROLE IN REDUCING
WILDFIRE RISK PROTECTING NATIVE
BIODIVERSITY AND SUPPORTING THE
OVERALL ECOLOGICAL HEALTH OF THE
STATE'S NATURAL LANDS. THIS
SMALL $5 MILLION INVESTMENT WILL
SUPPORT PROJECTS THAT COULD SAVE
THAT COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE THE
STATE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OR
MORE. UM BY STOPPING THE SPREAD
OF FIRE PRONE INVASIVE SPECIES
AND TREATING HARMFUL INSECTS
THAT WRECK HAVOC ON FORESTS AND
CROPS. THESE PROJECTS OFFER A
HIGH RETURN ON INVESTMENT AND AN
INTEGRAL PART OF REACHING OUR
GOALS FOR BUILDING AND HEALTHY
LANDSCAPES AND PROTECTING OUR
STATE'S BIODIVERSITY. WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO
RECONSIDER THIS CUT. THANK YOU.
NEXT. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM CAN'T
SAY CHAIR BUT MEMBERS OF REBECCA
MARCUS ON BEHALF OF THE UNION OF
CONCERNED SCIENTISTS, WE ASKED
THAT THE LEGISLATURE UPHOLD THE
ZEB COMMITMENTS MADE IN PREVIOUS
BUDGET CYCLES TO THE GREATEST
EXTENT POSSIBLE IN ADVANCE.
SUSTAINED FUNDING SOLUTIONS. TO
THAT END, WE LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU TO REAUTHORIZE
THE ABBEY EIGHT FUNDING WHILE
ALSO ENSURING THAT THESE FUNDS
ARE PRIORITIZED FOR THE ZERO
EMISSION TECHNOLOGIES. PREVALENT
IN THE STATE, WHICH IS CURRENTLY
BATTERY ELECTRIC VEHICLES AGENCY
SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE GIVEN
DISCRETION ON INFRASTRUCTURE
SPENDING OF CERTAIN TECHNOLOGIES
TAKE OFF UNEXPECTEDLY BUT FOR
NOW CARVE OUTS FOR HYDROGEN
FUELING DIVERTS FUNDING AWAY
FROM CHARGING, WHICH SERVES THE
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF ZEBRAS
ON THE ROAD TODAY, AND THOSE
PROJECTED TO BE ON THE ROAD IN
THE FUTURE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CERTIFIED ORGANIC
FARMERS AND THE NATURAL
RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL. WE
ASK THAT YOU INVEST FIVE MILLION
IN THE ORGANIC TRANSITION
PROGRAM FOR FY 23 24. AND
RESTORE 15 MILLION FOR THE FARM
COMMUNITY HUBS PROGRAM, FINALLY,
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
AGRICULTURE AND CLIMATE NETWORK
15 MILLION FOR THE EQUIPMENT
SHARING PROGRAM FOR THE CHAIRS,
MAYBE 15 52. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS READOUT US ON BEHALF OF
THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
ASSOCIATION HERE TO SPEAK
SPECIFICALLY TO THE PAYMENT
STANDARDS TRAILER BILL IN STRONG
SUPPORT. IT'S VERY RARE THAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A LEADER
ON CLIMATE IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE
STEPPING UP ON ZEB. WE THINK IT
MAKES SENSE TO IT. YOUR
LEADERSHIP WITH THERE'S PASSING
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ALLOW YOU
TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE NUMBER
OF THE ISSUES YOU TALKED ABOUT
EARLIER TODAY AND HELP STAND AT
THE INDUSTRY. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, LOUIS BROWN ON BEHALF
OF WESTERN AFFAIRS ASSOCIATION.
TODAY WE HAVE AN OPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED ON THE DEPARTMENT OF 14
99 BCP WESTERN AFFAIRS
ASSOCIATION, ALONG WITH OUR CRC
WAS A CO SPONSORS OF A B 14 99
WRITTEN TO GENERATE SUSTAINABLE
FUNDING FOR FARES. THAT HASN'T
REALLY HAPPENED AS A RESULT OF
COVID ANOTHER ECONOMIC ISSUES.
WE THINK THAT THE NUMBERS IN THE
C C D F A B C P OR EXAGGERATED,
UM AND RIGHT NOW ABOUT 52% OF
THOSE MONIES WOULD GO FOR CDF A
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. WE DO
THINK IT'S REASONABLE FOR THE
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS TO BE
COVERED, AND WE HAVE SOME OTHER
ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO GET
THERE AND ALSO CREATE MORE
SUSTAINABLE FUNDING FOR FAIR
NETWORK, LOOKING FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU AND THE
ADMINISTRATION ON THAT ISSUE
GOING FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU SEEING NO OTHER FOLKS IN THE
HEARING ROOM. WE'RE GOING TO
START THE PHONE TESTIMONY. THANK
YOU. AND FOR THOSE PARTICIPANTS
ON THE PHONE IF YOU WOULD LIKE
TO MAKE A COMMENT, PLEASE PRESS
10. YOU WILL HEAR
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. TOÀN AT THAT
POINT AND OPERATOR WILL PULL
YOUR LINE PRIVATELY TO GIVE YOUR
LINE NUMBER AND THAT'S HOW WE'LL
ANNOUNCE YOUR LINE IS OPEN. AND
WITH THAT WE'LL GO TO LINE
NUMBER 20, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO MY NAME IS STEPHEN KING
AND I'M THE QUEEN ENERGY
ADVOCATE WITH ENVIRONMENT
CALIFORNIA THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME TODAY. I'M URGING YOU TO
RESTORE THE FUNDING FOR THE
STATE'S CLEAN TRANSPORTATION IN
CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAMS THAT ARE
SO CRITICAL TO ADDRESSING THE
CLIMATE CRISIS IN CALIFORNIA.
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL
ASSIGNED BIG CUTS TO CLEAN
ENERGY PROGRAMS, INCLUDING VITAL
HOME BATTERY STORAGE INCENTIVES
AND ALSO ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING PROGRAMS TO
HELP REPLACE THE FLEET OF DIRTY
DIESEL TRUCKS AND BUSSES WITH
CLEAN ALTERNATIVES. PROPOSED
CUTS WOULD ALSO THREATEN OUR
PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM WITH
COLLAPSED AT A TIME AND WE NEED
ALTERNATIVES TO CAR DEPENDENCE.
WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE FUNDING
, CUTTING. OUR RESPONSE TODAY
WILL ONLY MAKE MATTERS WORSE
TOMORROW. INVESTMENTS IN ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES ARE NOW MORE
CRUCIAL THAN EVER SUCCESSFUL
PROGRAMS LIKE QUEEN CARS FOR ALL
ALLOW LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS TO
REPLACE SOME OF THE STATE'S MOST
POLLUTING VEHICLES WITH CLEAN
CARS, REDUCING CLIMATE POLLUTION
AND CLEANING THE AIR. I URGE YOU
TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO BALANCE
THE BUDGET THAT ACKNOWLEDGE THE
SCALE OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND
SET US ON A BRIGHTER PATH. THANK
YOU. NEXT WE'LL GO TO LINE
NUMBER 41, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 41
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES HELLO.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. UH YOU
WANTED SECOND. SORRY. I'M
CALLING ON BEHALF OF ITEM ONE AS
A FUNDING PLAN. WE ASKED THE
GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE
RESTORE THE CUTS MADE TO THE
MULTIPLE PROGRAMS THAT ARE
DELIVERING DIRECT BENEFITS TO
LOW INCOME INTO THE BANDAGE
COMMUNITIES. THE VARIOUS
AGENCIES THAT ARE PART OF THE
PANEL EXPRESSED THAT THEIR
RESPECTIVE AGENCIES ARE
PROVIDING INVESTMENT AND NO
INCOME COMMUNITIES AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. YET
WE HAVE YET TO SEE THE FOUR
DIRECT MEANINGFUL BENEFITS AS
THE PROVIDED TO THESE
COMMUNITIES. BUT WE NEED TO SEE
FROM THIS FUNDING AGENCIES IS A
MORE INTENTIONAL AND TARGET
APPROACH TO ADDRESS THE BARRIERS
OF ACCESS AND AFFORDABILITY FOR
LOW INCOME. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE
A MOVE TO A NEED BASED APPROACH
RATHER THAN THE FIRST COME FIRST
SERVE A PROTESTS AND EQUITABLE
APPROACH THAT REWARDS THOSE WITH
MORE RESOURCES AND KNOWLEDGE OF
STATES FUNDED PROCESSES. WE
ASKED THE AGENCY TO ALSO BE
TARGETED AT IMPLEMENTING THE
DEBATE STRATEGY. SO THAT NO
INCOME IN DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES ARE BEING THOSE
DIRECT AND MEANINGFUL BENEFITS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. AND
NEXT WITHOUT TO LINE NUMBER. 37,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON
, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS DIAGRAM
WITH THE CALIFORNIA TRANSIT
STATION. I'M HERE TODAY TO URGE
THE SUBSPACE OKAY. THE VARIOUS
CARB AND EEC DOES BROOKE
PROGRAMS THAT BENEFIT CHANGING
AGENCIES ECONOMIC POSSIBLE AND
ALSO REGISTERED SUPPORT THE
REAUTHORIZATION INTERESTING
STATION PROGRAM WHILE WE
UNDERSTAND THE CURRENT BUDGET
OUTLOOK, LIKE TAKING ON THE
IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING
INVESTMENTS IN PROGRAMS AND
FUNDING SOURCES. THE VARIOUS
PROGRAMS IS VITAL TO TRANSIT
AGENCIES BECAUSE THE DRIVE DOWN
AND I J FEDERAL FUNDING AND
SUBSIDIZED AGENCIES MAN
TRANSITION'S ZERO EMISSION
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATING THE
DEVELOPMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE
AND SIMILAR CAPITAL PROJECT.
ADDITIONALLY INVESTMENT, HELPFUL
PRESSURES ARE OPERATING BUDGET,
WHICH ARE CRITICAL FOR INCITING
MOTION. MAINTAIN FUNDING
TRIGGERED AGENT 15. CALIFORNIA
OBJECTIVES, INCLUDING THOSE
IDENTIFIED IN CARBS, INNOVATIVE
CLEAN TRANSIT COMMERCIAL
HOVERCRAFT LOCOMOTIVE
REGULATION. FINALLY BUT THE
HEARING ON THE INVESTMENTS I
WANT TO PICK UP ON COMMENTS MADE
EARLIER AND EMPHASIZED THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE LEGISLATOR,
LEGISLATURE PROVIDING TRANSIT
OPERATIONS FUNDING THIS YEAR TO
ENSURE TO PROVIDE THANK YOU.
NEXT WE GO TO LINE NUMBER 35,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. I REMEMBER
CATHY MOSSBERG, REPRESENTING THE
PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE AND
CHANGE TO SUPPORT AN ITEM UNDER
ISSUE NUMBER FIVE UNDER CDF TO
THE CALIFORNIA NUTRITION
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS AND ALL SORT
OF A PROGRAM THAT WAS CALLED OUT
BY SECRETARY ROSS WAS VERY
POSITIVE COMMENTS PH I AND ROCK
ENCOURAGED THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO
INCLUDE 35 MILLION TO FULLY FUND
THE PROGRAM. CALIFORNIA HAS THE
LARGEST SENATE PROGRAM IN THE
COUNTRY, ADMINISTRATED THROUGH
CDF A AND THIS PROGRAM MATCHES
FEDERAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE. IF
IT'S JUST PRESSURE WICK AT
FARMERS MARKETS. THIS PROGRAM
ALLOWS LOAN FROM CALIFORNIA TO
PERSONS HEALTHY FOODS THAT ARE
GROWN BY CALIFORNIA FARMERS AND
HELPS THEIR NUTRITION DOLLARS
STRETCH FARTHER, BUT THE FEDERAL
FOOD CLIFF UPON US, WE NEED TO
MAINTAIN ALL PROGRAMS THAT HELP
HELP PRESSURE WITH DOLLARS
STRETCH AS FAR AS THEY CAN FOR
THESE VERY HARD HIT FAMILY, THIS
PROGRAM IS A WIN WIN WIN,
INCREASING THE SPENDING POWER OF
LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS
ENHANCING ACCESS TO FRESH,
HEALTHY PRODUCE AND FOOD AND
REINVESTING STATE AND FEDERAL
DOLLARS IN THE CALIFORNIA SMALL
AND MID SIZED FARMS AND RURAL
COMMUNITIES. WITHOUT AN
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS THIS
YEAR. WE WILL SEE THIS PROGRAM
ELIMINATED ALONG WITH ALL THE
GOOD THAT IT PROVIDES. WE HOPE
TO WORK WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE
AND BUDGET COMMITTEE. HOLY TO
SEE ABOUT FULLY FUNDING THIS
PROGRAM AS WE MOVE FORWARD, AND
I RESPECT YOU. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. NEXT WE WILL GO TO
LINE NUMBER 66, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS,
MRS STILL PROUD OF SEXTUS HMD
APPRECIATE 86 17 PROGRAM FROM
THE BEING PROVIDED IN THE
GOVERNMENT'S BUDGET FOR AIR
DISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION AND
INCENTIVES, ESPECIALLY DIFFERENT
STATES. BUDGET SHORTFALLS
REQUESTED CONTINUED
PRIORITIZATION OF FUNDING FOR
STATE PROGRAMS SUCH AS 86 17.
THE ELIO PREVIOUSLY ACKNOWLEDGED
HIGHLY PROTECTIVE INTERESTING
AIR QUALITY, PUBLIC HEALTH AND
CLIMATE CHALLENGES. CURRENTLY
THE 86 17TH PROGRAM IS SEVERELY
UNDERFUNDED. SO WE THANK
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA FOR HIS
COMMENTS ON 86 17 PROGRAM LEADS
TODAY. THE NUMBER OF COMMUNITIES
WITH PROGRAM HAS GROWN, BUT
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH RESOURCES
TO SUPPORT AGENCIES. 17
COMMUNITIES OF THE SOUTHWEST
REGION CONTAINS ALMOST TWO
THIRDS OF THE J COMMUNITIES IN
THE STATES. WE CANNOT SUPPORT
ADDITIONAL MAYBE 6 17
COMMUNITIES DUE TO LACK OF
RESOURCES TO ADDRESS THIS, WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK MAYBE 6 17
STANDARD THE RESTORED TO LAST
YEAR'S LEVELS. AND SHOULD YOU
HEAR US REVENUES SURPASSED
CURRENT ESTIMATES THAT YOU
CONSIDER ADDITIONAL ESTIMATES
FOR THE PROGRAM. THIS WILL HELP
COVER ACTUAL PROGRAM COSTS AND
COST EFFECTIVELY REDUCE
EMISSIONS AND HELP MEET FEDERAL
AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND
PROTECT THE HEALTH OF
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. QUITE
THANK YOU. NEXT WE GO TO LINE
NUMBER 69, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR STAYING
TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. I'M
SPEAKING TO MY NAME IS PAULA
DANIEL SPEAKING. ISSUES
TYPICALLY TO THE LEGACY OF YOUR
FORMER COLLEAGUE,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BLOOM AND THE
$15 MILLION FOOD TUB PROGRAM HE
CREATED IN 2021, WHICH IS
ESSENTIALLY BEEN GUTTED BY THE
PROPOSED CUTS, WITH ONLY THAT
$200,000 REMAINING AGAIN. I'M
PAULA DANIELS FOUNDED THE CENTER
FOR GOOD FOOD PURCHASING. IT WAS
THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES
INITIATIVES, WHICH I READ WHEN I
WAS A SENIOR ADVISER. QUESTION
WHERE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION WE
WORK IN 25 REGIONS THROUGHOUT
THE U. S. AND WE KNOW FROM THIS
WORK AND ALSO FROM THE USDA THAT
FOOD HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IS
CRITICAL FOR RESILIENCE IN TIMES
OF CRISIS, SUCH AS THE COVID
CRASH IN THE SPRING OF 2020
ENERGY AND WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
, SO THAT'S WHY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BLOOM CHAMPIONS, MAYBE 10 OR
NINE AND 2021. WHICH CREATED THE
FARM TO COMMUNITY FOOD HUB
PROGRAM AND ALLOCATED 15 MILLION
IT PASSED OUT OF THE ASSEMBLY
WITH 10 VOTE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE
AND NO OPPOSITION. IT HAS
SUBSTANTIAL SUPPORT IN BOTH
CHAMBERS. IT HAD THE SUPPORT OF
WELL OVER 120 ORGANIZATIONS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
APPRECIATE IT. I'M SORRY. YOUR
TIME IS UP. NEXT SPEAKER. AND WE
WILL GO TO LINE NUMBER 74,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. MR CHAIR AND
MEMBER SYLVIA SALAS SHAH HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE SAN HOCKING VALLEY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
TO SPEAK ON ISSUES NUMBER FOUR
AND FIVE. FIRST OF ALL IN
REGARDS TO THE FUNDING FOR THE
FARMER PROGRAM. THIS IS A
PROGRAM THAT IS INCREDIBLY
POPULAR LOCALLY. IT HAS
IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE GREENHOUSE
GAS REDUCTION IN AIR CRITERIA
POLLUTANT REDUCTIONS. YOU KNOW
THAT OLD EQUIPMENT IS SWITCHED
OUT FOR THE NEW EQUIPMENT SO
AGAIN IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE
IMPROVEMENT LOCALLY AND
STATEWIDE, AND IT IS
CONTINUOUSLY OVERSUBSCRIBED. WE
HAVE A PIPELINE $300 MILLION
PROJECT, SO WE ASKED THAT TO
STATE THE RECOGNIZE WHERE IS
TIMELESS FISCAL CRISIS. HOWEVER
WE DO ASK THAT THE FUNDING BEING
MAINTAINED AND OR INCREASE, IF
POSSIBLE, ALSO LIKE TO ECHO THE
COMMENTS OF THE OTHER AIR
DISTRICT COLLEAGUES AND
SUPPORTIVE CONTINUED FUNDING FOR
THE 6 17 COMMUNITY AIR
PROTECTION PROGRAM FUNDING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT WE GO
TO LINE NUMBER 44, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI KAREN MEMBERS. THANK
YOU ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PLANT SOCIETY, URGING
LEGISLATURE TO RESTORE THE FIVE
MILLION FOREIGN BASES SPECIES
ACTION, WHICH IS A CRITICAL OF
RAPID RESPONSE PROJECTS FOR
ADDRESSING BASIC SPECIES. THAT
WILL OTHERWISE SPREAD, THEREBY
INCREASING WILDFIRE RISK DEGREE
IN WATER RESOURCES AND MIGRATION
OPPORTUNITIES, DAMAGING STATE
WELLS, LIFE AND BIODIVERSITY AND
REDUCING AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTIVITY. THANK YOU. AND
NEXT WE GO TO LINE NUMBER 79,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI GOOD
AFTERNOON. SHARON STAFF. I'M DAN
GLEESON CAMP WITH THE CALIFORNIA
INSTITUTE OF UNIVERSITY,
SPEAKING ON ISSUE NUMBER FIVE WE
SHARE WE SHARE SECRETARY ROSS'S
AND MEMBER CONNOLLY'S EXCITEMENT
FOR THE CLIMATE. SMART AG
PROGRAMS. CALIFORNIA IS WELL
SERVED BY THOSE MODEST
INVESTMENTS. RELATIVELY MODEST
INVESTMENT. UM WE'D ASK THAT YOU
PLEASE REJECT THE PROPOSED CUTS
TO THE POLLINATOR HABITAT
PROGRAM. IT'S ONE OF JUST A
SMALL NUMBER OF PROGRAMS THAT IS
ACTIVELY ADDRESSING CALIFORNIA
FRIGHTENING LOSS OF POLLINATORS,
AND IT'S MUCH NEEDED INSTEAD OF
CUTTING. WE'D ASK THAT YOU
SUSTAINED THE POLLINATOR FUNDING
AND, MOREOVER, SUGGESTS
EXAMINING AND EXPANDING ON TV,
FAS PREVIOUS RARE PLANT SEED
BANKING PROJECT SO THAT WE CAN
COLLECT C BANK AND INCREASED
LOCAL NATIVE PLANTS SEED SUPPLY
THAT'S URGENTLY NEEDED ACROSS A
NUMBER OF PRIORITY INITIATIVES.
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU
GOING FORWARD. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND NEXT WE'LL GO TO LINE
76, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.
THIS IS THE SONG WITH EARTH
JUSTICE. THANKS FOR HANGING IN.
THERE ARE BENNETT. UM I WANTED
TO URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO
UNLEASH PLENTY OF FUNDING FOR
VEHICLES BY ALIGNING THE LCF S
BETTER WITH OUR STATE'S URGENT
SENTINELS BECAUSE ITS PROGRAM IS
A $3.60 BILLION DOLLAR PROGRAM
THAT SENDS ROUGHLY 80% OF
CREDITS. ACCORDING TO THE CDC,
TO FUELS THAT WE END UP BURNING
LIKE EITHER BIOFUELS OR BIO GAS
, AND THERE'S RIGHT NOW A GLUT
OF CREDITS FROM OVERVALUING
BIOGAS AND FROM CROP BASED
BIOFUELS. THAT ARE LEADING TO A
HISTORIC CRASHING CFS CREDIT
PRICE, UNDERMINING THINGS LIKE
DRAINAGE, TRUCK AND TRANSIT BUS
ELECTRIFICATION. SO IT'S TIME
FOR CARB TO USE OUR TRANSPORT.
STOP USING OUR TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM TO LAVISH INCENTIVES
INTENDING TO ENTICE AG INDUSTRY
TO CONTROL THEIR EMISSIONS. THE
LEGISLATURE GAVE CARBON
AUTHORITY TO DIRECTLY REGULATE
LIVESTOCK MANURE STARTING
JANUARY. 1 2024. SO WE HAVE TO
STOP RATING OR ELSE CFS PROGRAM
AS A PIGGY BANK TO OFFSET AG
POLLUTION, AND THE GOOD NEWS IS
BY DOING THAT, HAVING IN L CFS
CREDITS FOR BIOGAS AND BIO FUELS
. WE CAN LIFT THE CREDIT PRICE
AND RESUSCITATE FUNDING FOR ZERO
EMISSION TRANSPORTATION THAT WE
NEED TO DO. THIS IS AN ACTIVE
ROLE MAKING AND THE
LEGISLATURE'S INPUT WOULD BE
REALLY IMPORTANT GOING A LONG
WAY TO REFORM THE LCF S PROGRAM
AND UNLEASH MORE FUNDING FOR
URGENT GOLD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. NEXT WE GO TO LINE
NUMBER 73, PLEASE GO AHEAD. NO
MY NAME IS LAURA ROSEN, BURGER
HAIDER FROM PRESIDENT AGAINST
FRACKING. WE NEED MORE LAND IN
THE 30 BY 30 PROGRAMS. REQUEST
YOUR PLANT WASTE CARBON FOR THE
DESTROYED BY INDUSTRY AND WE
NEED ELECTRIC VEHICLE INCENTIVES
FOR THE LOW INCOME PEOPLE AND
DISADVANTAGED RURAL AREAS CAN
AFFORD ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND
PUBLIC CHARGES FOR THEM.
MUTUALIZATION OF THE GRID IS BAD
BECAUSE CALIFORNIA WOULD BE
IMPORTING ELECTRIC FROM COAL AND
OIL. INSTEAD, WE NEED MORE
BATTERY STORAGE. ORGANIC
TRANSITION PROGRAM NEEDS MORE
FUNDING, AND THE CALIFORNIA
NUTRITION PROGRAMS ARE ESSENTIAL
FOR PEOPLE TO BE PRODUCTIVE,
SAID THAT SANTA GET CHECKED WITH
VEGETABLES, THEY GET SICK. MORE
FUNDING FOR IMPLEMENTING A B 6
17. THANKS. AND THAT'S GONNA
LINE NUMBER 48, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS DOESN'T
MATTER THAT W STRATEGIES
REPRESENTING ANIMAL LEGAL
DEFENSE FUND WITH REGARD TO ITEM
19. WE WOULD LIKE TO ALIGN OUR
COMMENTS WITH OUR PARTNERS AT
THE CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND
LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY. WE
APPRECIATE THE STAFF COMMENTS AS
WELL AS THE DISCUSSION TODAY.
REALLY APPRECIATE THE CHAIRS.
QUESTIONS UM, IN COMMITTEE. WE
ASK THAT THE LEGISLATURE
CONTINUE TO ENGAGE IN THIS ISSUE
WITH CARVINGS UNDERGOING ITS
FULL MAKING. TO ENSURE WE'RE
MEETING OUR CLIMATE GOALS WHILE
ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE
IMPACT THESE VERY HAVE ON THE
ADJACENT COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE GO TO
LINE NUMBER 70, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU. THIS IS FOR THE
SUSTAINABLE AG ITEMS. MY NAME IS
HEATHER FROM BLOCK AND I WORK
WITH KITCHEN TABLE ADVISORS AND
INTEREST IN REGIONAL COMMUNITIES
TO LINK UNDERSERVED BY PLAQUE,
ORGANIC AND REGENERATIVE
CALIFORNIA PRODUCERS TO BUYERS
TO THE POWER OF FIGHTING
FACILITATION. SUPPORT THE
COMMENTS MADE BY CAP AND OTHERS
. THE SECRETARY SPOKE OF THE
IMPORTANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE
WITHIN SCHOOLS TO COOK HEALTHY
LOCAL MEALS. PERFORMERS IN THE
FIELD AND EVERY DAY I SEE THE
DIRE NEEDS OF BRIDGE THOSE TWO
EFFORTS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
CHANGE THE AGGREGATION
DISTRIBUTION AND PROCESSING
INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE SURE THAT
FOOD CAN GET THEIR TAKING OF THE
SMALL ORGANIC FARMERS. THEY WORK
WITHIN WASHINGTON, SELENA, FRESH
CARROTS AND KALE, SCHOOLS AND
HOSPITALS WANT YOU DON'T HAVE
THE COLD STORAGE AND PROCESSING
THE INSTITUTIONS NEED TO BE ABLE
TO GET IN THE DOOR. THE
APARTMENT COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE
PROGRAM WOULD PROVIDE THE MEATS
AND IMPACT BE ABLE TO BUILD
THOSE BRIDGES. PLEASE REJECT
THESE INEQUITABLE CUTS, THE
NEEDS OF CALIFORNIA'S
UNDERSERVED BOMBERS, COMMUNITIES
AND THE GOVERNMENT BUDGET AND
FULLY RESTORED HIS PROGRAM
FUNDS. NEXT WE GO TO LINE NUMBER
63, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS IS
WENDY REYNOLDS FROM CALIFORNIA
ADVISORS ON BEHALF OF THE
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY
DISTRICT. THEY WANT TO OFFER
THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE 81 18
REAUTHORIZATION FUNDS, AS WELL
AS THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED THAT
FUNDING. THANK YOU. AND NEXT TO
THE LINE NUMBER. 28. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI GOOD AFTERNOON. MY
NAME IS CARLY BRINKMAN AND I'M
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE ECOLOGY
CENTER IN BERKELEY, WHO LEADS
THE STATE WIDE MARKET MATCH
NUTRITION INCENTIVE PROGRAM, AND
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT THE
INCLUSION OF $35 MILLION FOR
SENIOR CDF PHASE BUDGET, WHICH
SECRETARY ROSTER RECORDED ON
MARKET MATCHES FUNDED THROUGH
SUBPOENAS AND MATCHES, CUSTOMERS
. NUTRITION BENEFITS LIKE CAL
CRUSHED 270 FARM DIRECT SITES.
LAST YEAR. THE PROGRAM LED TO
$19.5 MILLION OF SPENDING BY LOW
INCOME FAMILIES. TO PARTICIPATE
IN CAL FRESH AND THERE'S DOLLARS
DO MORE THAN JUST FOOD SECURITY
. THEY ALSO SUPPORT SMALL AND
MID SIZED FARMERS. UM
CALIFORNIANS ARE STRUGGLING TO
AFFORD BASIC NECESSITIES. AND
SEEING IT HELPS ADDRESS THE
ESSENTIAL FOOD SECURITY NEEDS
AND BRINGS IN FEDERAL MATCH. SO
WITH THIS SNAP EMERGENCY
ALLOTMENT ENDING THIS PROGRAM IS
NEEDED MORE NOW THAN EVER. THANK
YOU. AND THAT'S ONE LINE NUMBER.
75. PLEASE GO AHEAD. AH! YES MY
NAME IS ELI LITMAN ON CALLING ON
BEHALF OF NEW BALLET WERE
TRANSIT ADVOCACY GROUPS IN LOS
ANGELES WERE DISAPPOINTED THAT
THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL DID NOT
INCLUDE FUNDING TO REDUCE
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IN THIS
DECADE. SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERED
FUNDING PROGRAMS DESCRIBED IN
THE SB 1 50 REPORTS FAIR,
FREEZING TRANSIT PASSES,
TRANSPORTATION SERVICE FUNDING
AND MORE AFFORDABLE AND
EQUITABLE FORMS. OF ELECTRIC
MOBILITY TO STAFF REPORT NOTES
THAT THE G R F WILL HAVE 380
MILLION SURPLUS IN THIS YEAR 520
MILLION IN NEXT YEAR'S OPTION OF
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS ABOVE THE
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET IN THE SCOPING
PLAN BY CARTER SAYS THAT WE WILL
NOT ACHIEVE THE STATE'S CLIMATE
GOAL, EVEN WITH 100% SALES IN
THE LIGHT DUTY SECTOR BY 2035.
THEY CALL HIM THE PER CAPITA
REDUCTIONS OF 25% BELOW 2019
LEVELS. BY 2030. SO WE NEED
CHARGES IN THIS DECADE THAT ARE
IMMEDIATE AND NOT DEPLOYMENT OF
NEW MOBILITY, OPTIONS AND LAND
USE AND PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ISN'T GOING
TO REDUCE THE. UNTIL 20 THIRTIES
AND BEYOND. AGAIN, WE ENCOURAGE
YOU TO ALLOCATE FUNDING FOR
ABUNDANT TRANSIT SERVICE, FAIR
FREE STUDENT TRANSIT PASSES AND
AFFORDABLE AND EQUITABLE FORMS
OF ELECTRIC MOBILITY, SUCH AS E
BIKES IN YOUR BUDGET. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. YOUR TIME IS
UP. AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 78.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR BENNETT AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANDY NAH
JURY'S WITH THE AGRICULTURAL
INSTITUTE OF MARINE AND WE
BELIEVE THAT ALL PEOPLE SHOULD
HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTHY,
SUSTAINABLY GROWN FOOD FROM
LOCAL FARMERS. AFTER SUPPORT TO
CONTINUE FUNDING THE CALIFORNIA
NUTRITION INCENTIVE PROGRAM THAT
OUR COLLEAGUES AT THE ECOLOGY
CENTER DESCRIBED FOR $35 MILLION
AS WELL AS SUPPORT FOR MBT.
ELECTRONIC BENEFITS TRANSFER AT
FARMERS MARKETS TO FUND THE
LOCAL EQUITABLE ACCESS TO FOOD
OR SP 907 FOR $14 MILLION. THANK
YOU. NEXT WE GO TO LINE NUMBER
81, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS COLLEEN SHELLEY FROM
THE JEFFERSON ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE. WE WE
SUPPORT THEIR LEAVE, RUN AND
MOUNT SHASTA FARMERS MARKETS AND
FARM WORK, CALIFORNIA. AND I'M
JUST CALLING TO SAY THAT I'M IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE ASSEMBLY,
INCLUDING $14 MILLION IN FUNDING
FOR SP 907. WAS SIGNED INTO LAW
LAST YEAR AND CREATED LEAST
LOCAL EQUITABLE ACCESS TO FOOD
PROGRAM, WHICH AIMS TO EXPAND
THE VT ACCESS AT ALL CERTIFIED
FARMERS MARKETS IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. AND WE'LL GO TO LINE
NUMBER 15, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO MY NAME IS DARRYLL. GAIL
AND I LIVE IN DOWNTOWN LOS
ANGELES FOR 13 YEARS. THE AIR IS
ATROCIOUS. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
CLEAN VEHICLES OR THE LACK
THEREOF. WE'VE GOT OVER PRICED
CONDO AND HOTEL CONSTRUCTION
EVERYWHERE AND ADJACENT. THERE'S
ALWAYS THESE DIESEL TRUCKS THAT
ARE IDLING. LOTS OF THEM ARE SO
CALLED POST COVID ECONOMY HAS
CREATED A NEW INDUSTRY NONSTOP,
MOSTLY AMAZON DELIVERY TRUCKS
NOW UBIQUITOUS TRAFFIC IN AND
AROUND THE CITY IS WAY WAY WORSE
WHILE WE SUFFER WITH CONSTANT
METHANE BUSSES AS WE IMPATIENTLY
WAITS FOR YEARS FOR PROMISED
ELECTRIC BUSSES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE. PLEASE PLEASE
RESTORE BUDGETS FOR CLEAN
VEHICLES. THANK YOU. AND NEXT
ONE LINE NUMBER. 13. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. LINE 13. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. AND WE
WILL MOVE ON TO LINE NUMBER 68,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON
CHAIR BENNETT AND MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS SAM GREENLEE WITH
ALCHEMIST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, A NONPROFIT DURING
THE SECOND MIDDLE REGION IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE ASSEMBLY,
INCLUDING $14 MILLION IN FUNDING
FOR THE LOCAL EQUITABLE ACCESS
TO FOOD PROGRAM, WHICH WAS
CREATED BY SP 907 LAST YEAR, BUT
IT'S NOT BEEN FUNDED FOR
IMPLEMENTATION. THIS PROGRAM
WILL CREATE EQUITABLE HEALTHY
FOOD ACCESS FOR FOOD INSECURE
CALIFORNIA HELPFUL. IT DRIVES
BETTER ON NUTRITION BENEFIT
DOLLARS TO CALIFORNIA SMALL
FARMS. STIMULATING LOCAL
ECONOMIES. SEVERALLY WE ALSO
SUPPORT FUNDING THE CALIFORNIA
NUTRITION INCENTIVE PROGRAM IN
THE FOOD HUB PROGRAM. THANK YOU.
AND WE'VE GOT TO LINE NUMBER 91,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI. MY NAME IS
SCOTT BURNS. I'M THE RIVERSIDE
FOOD HUB COORDINATOR. REQUEST
THAT YOU RESTORE FUNDS TO THE
COMMUNITY THAT PROGRAM SO THAT
URBAN AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN
THE BEGINNING FARMER AND WE'RE
FROM THE WORKER TRAINING
PROGRAM. WE OPERATED OUT OF
RIVERSIDE UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT. HONORABLE SUPPORT,
ALMOST 25 UNDERSERVED FARMERS
WITH OUR FOOD, SO FOOD OBSERVER
REPORT FOR THIS STATE. THANK
YOU. AND MR CHAIR AND NO FURTHER
PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE PHONE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OPERATOR
APPRECIATE YOUR HELP WITH THIS.
WE WILL NOW ADJOURN THIS MEETING
AND WE WILL SEE EVERYONE NEXT
WEEK. THANK YOU.