WE'RE GONNA GO AND GO AHEAD AND
GET STARTED. UM GOOD AFTERNOON
AND WELCOME TO THE FIRST REGULAR
HEARING OF THE ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEE ON REVENUE AND
TAXATION FOR THE 23 24 SESSION.
I WANT TO START BY WELCOMING OUR
SEVEN NEW MEMBERS TO THIS
COMMITTEE. I LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH ALL OF YOU AS WE
CONSIDER BILLS UNDER OUR
JURISDICTION. BEFORE WE TAKE UP
BILLS ON THE AGENDA TODAY, WE
WILL, UH ACTUALLY NOT BE VOTING
ON. THE COMMITTEE RULED UNTIL
ONE MORE PERSON, UH, WALKS IN
BUT WE WILL BE. THAT'S THE FIRST
THING WE'LL BE DOING. I DO WANT
TO NOTE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
REINSTATING A SUSPENSE FILE, AND
DETAILS ABOUT THIS PROCESS ARE
SPELLED OUT IN THE COMMITTEE. UH
RULES AND SUMMARY BILLS WITH THE
FISCAL IMPACT OF PLUS OR MINUS
$150,000 WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE
IMMEDIATELY AFTER THEIR
PRESENTATION AND INSTEAD WILL BE
REFERRED TO A SUSCEPTIBLE
SUSPENSE FILE. THIS WILL ENABLE
THE COMMITTEE TO HOLISTICALLY
CONSIDER PROPOSALS BEFORE US AND
TO BETTER HERE, UH TO BETTER
PRIORITIZE POLICY CHANGES, WHICH
WILL, UM WHICH IS ESPECIALLY
IMPORTANT THIS YEAR, GIVEN THE
PROJECTED BUDGET CONDITIONS, AND
LUCKILY IT DOES LOOK LIKE WE
HAVE A FORUM RIGHT NOW, SO I AM
GOING TO ASK MISS HIGHLAND TO
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. IRWIN.
HERE, WALLACE. BAINES. GRAYSON
PACHECO. PATERSON. PETRIE-NORRIS
RIVAS TÂM. VALENCIA ZABAR, WE
HAVE COURT, ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A
QUORUM. AND NOW HOPEFULLY YOU'VE
ALL READ THE COMMITTEE RULES. UM
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP THE
ADOPTION. DO I HAVE A MOTION IN
A SECOND? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY
CHICO AND US WHO JUST MADE OKAY,
SECOND BY OUR CO CHAIR. AND UM,
CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THE VOTE?
IRWIN YES, IRWIN. I WALLACE WAS
I BEANS BEINGS. I GRAYSON.
PACHECO HØI JIM PATERSON,
PATERSON. I PETRIE-NORRIS RIVAS.
I VALENCIA, NEWBURGH. WE HAVE
DRILLS, ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. I
WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY IN THE
AUDIENCE AND THE MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC THAT THE COMMITTEE IS NOT
ACCEPTING REMOTE TESTIMONY. WE
ARE, HOWEVER, ACCEPTING WRITTEN
TESTIMONY THROUGH OUR PORTAL.
PLEASE MAKE SURE TO SUBMIT THE
LETTERS AT LEAST ONE WEEK PRIOR
TO THE COMMITTEE HEARING IN
ORDER FOR THEM TO BE REFLECTED
IN THE ANALYSIS. FINALLY DURING
BILL PRESENTATIONS, WE WILL TAKE
NO MORE THAN TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT AND TWO
PRIMARY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
OR WITH CONCERNS. THESE
WITNESSES HAVE TWO MINUTES EACH
TO PROVIDE THEIR TESTIMONY. ALL
SUBSEQUENT WITNESSES SHOULD
STATE THEIR NAME, THEIR
ORGANIZATION AND THEIR POSITION
ON THE BILL. ONLY AND WITH THAT
WE WILL MOVE TO THE FIRST ITEM
ON OUR AGENDA. A B 445 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S EASILY GOOD
AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK
YOU. WHENEVER YOU ARE READY.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I AM
PLEASED TO PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL
445 DEALING WITH HOME EQUITY
THEFT ASSEMBLY BILL 445 WOULD
REQUIRE A TAX DEFAULTED PROPERTY
BE OFFERED FOR SALE BY AUCTION
BEFORE BEING OFFERED TO A NON
PROFIT ORGANIZATION FOR PURCHASE
. THIS WILL ALLOW OWNERS WHO ARE
LOSING THEIR PROPERTY BECAUSE OF
UNPAID TAXES THE CHANCE TO
RECOVER ANY EQUITY THEY HAVE
BUILT UP IN THEIR HOME. AND A
MINORITY OF STATES IF A PROPERTY
OWNER FAILS TO PAY OR UNDER PAYS
THEIR PROPERTY TAXES. THE COUNTY
OR LIEN HOLDER CAN EVENTUALLY
TAKE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY ALONG
WITH THE EQUITY FOR A DEBT OF
JUST A FEW DOLLARS. THANKFULLY
CALIFORNIA IS NOT ONE OF THOSE
STATES. HOWEVER THERE IS A
LOOPHOLE IN CURRENT LAW THAT
ALLOWS PUBLIC AGENCIES TAXING
AGENCIES AND NON PROFITS TO
ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT TO
PURCHASE TAX DEFAULTED PROPERTY
BY THEIR SUBMITTING A REQUEST TO
PURCHASE OR BY OBJECTING TO THE
SALE OF PROPERTY SCHEDULED FOR
PUBLIC AND OR SEALED AUCTION.
THE RETURN OF EXCESS PROCEEDS TO
THE HOMEOWNER IS NOT REQUIRED IN
THOSE CASES. MOST PEOPLE DO NOT
INTENTIONALLY FAILED TO PAY
THEIR TAXES. MANY PEOPLE MAY
MISCALCULATE THEY GET SICK OR
THE EXPERIENCE UNEXPECTED
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP. FOR EXAMPLE,
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND
ELDERLY HOMEOWNERS ON FIXED
INCOMES ARE AT MUCH HIGHER RISK
OF BECOMING DELINQUENT ON THEIR
PROPERTY TAXES, ESPECIALLY
DURING TIMES OF ECONOMIC
UNCERTAINTY. BUT WHEN THEY GET
REALLY LARGE GAS BILLS LIKE THEY
DID JUST A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
THE SOLUTION IS SIMPLE. A B 445
PROPOSES TO PROTECT PROPERTY
OWNERS BY REQUIRING THAT TAX
DEFAULTED PROPERTIES MUST FIRST
BE OFFERED FOR SALE BY AUCTION
BEFORE BEING OFFERED TO A NON
PROFIT ORGANIZATION FOR
PURCHASE. BY DOING SO, THE
PROPERTY OWNERS FACING
FORECLOSURE DUE TO UNPAID TAXES
WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
RECOVER THE EQUITY. BEFORE IT'S
SOLD HERE WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT IS JOSH POLK
WITH THE PACIFIC LEGAL
FOUNDATION AND SCOT KAUFMAN WITH
THE HOWARD JARVIS JARVIS
TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION. THANK
YOU. OKAY GOOD AFTERNOON TO BE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE
AND TAXATION. MY NAME IS JOSHUA
POLK, AND I'M, AN ATTORNEY AT
THE PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION,
ONE OF THE NATION'S MOST
SUCCESSFUL FREEDOM BASED
LITIGATION FIRMS. UM AND WE'VE
BEEN LITIGATING THESE ISSUES FOR
NEARLY 50 YEARS, AND WE'RE
CURRENTLY WORKING ON OUR 15TH
16TH AND 17TH WINS OF THE US
FORECOURT. ONE OF THOSE CASES
RELATES DIRECTLY TO THE ISSUE
THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
UH EQUITY THEFT AS DESCRIBED BY
THE ASSEMBLY, MAN. UM IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. EQUITY IS THE
FINANCIAL INTERESTS THAT SOMEONE
HAS IN THEIR HOME ONCE YOU'VE
TAKEN ACCOUNT OF DEBTS, SUCH AS
TAX DEBTS, AND THAT EQUITY IS
JUST AS MUCH PROPERTY AS THE
LAND OR BUILDING ITSELF. AND AS
SUCH, THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE
U. S CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS THE
TAKING OF THIS EQUITY WITHOUT
JUST COMPENSATION GIVEN TO THE
PERSON FROM WHICH THIS PROPERTY
IS TAKEN. AND TO ITS CREDIT,
CALIFORNIA PROTECTS EQUITY AND
ORDINARY TAX SALES CHAPTER. THE
DEFAULT CHAPTER SEVEN SALES
PRESERVES EQUITY. UM BUT
UNFORTUNATELY THERE IS A THERE
IS A LOOPHOLE CHAPTER EIGHT OF
THE TAX CODE ALLOWS A GOVERNMENT
BODY OR PUBLIC INTEREST GROUP
TO, UM SKIP THE PUBLIC ACTIONS,
SO THERE'S NO EQUITY INTEREST
GENERATED. AND SIMPLY PURCHASE
THE PROPERTY OUTRIGHT FROM THE
TAXING AGENCY. UM AT WHICH POINT
THEY RECEIVE ABSOLUTE TITLE AND
THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY OWNER
RECEIVES NOTHING AND THAT IS
REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
TAX DEBT OR HOW MUCH THE
PROPERTY IS WORTH. CLOSING THIS
LOOPHOLE LEGISLATIVELY AS YOU
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO WITH
A B 445 WOULD NOT SUBJECT
CALIFORNIA COUNTIES TWO
ADDITIONAL LIABILITY. IN FACT,
IT WOULD DO THE OPPOSITE BY
CURBING THIS WRONG TO TAKE PLACE
IN THE FUTURE. UM ADDITIONALLY
ALSO CHAPTER EIGHT LOOPHOLE
ADDRESSING THE CHAPTER LOOPHOLE
EXCUSE ME WOULD ALSO HAVE A
MINIMAL IMPACT. COUNTY OFFICIALS
BECAUSE THE DEFAULT MECHANISM
FOR COLLECTING PROPERTY TAXES IS
CURRENTLY CONSTITUTIONALLY
ACCEPTABLE. UM AND ULTIMATELY BY
ELIMINATING POTENTIAL EQUITY
FAIR THROUGH THE CHAPTER EIGHT
LOOPHOLE WILL MAKE EVERYONE HOLD
THE TAXPAYERS AND THE GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES WITHOUT RUNNING AFOUL
OF THE CONSTITUTION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TESTIFY AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU. AND YOU'RE SPEAKING
ALSO, OKAY? HELLO I'M SCOTT
COFFIN WITH THE HOWARD DRIVERS
TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION. IT'S
EVERYTHING IS PRETTY MUCH BEEN
SUMMED UP, SO I'LL BE VERY
BRIEF, AND I'M JUST GOING TO
RESPOND TO A 22 ISSUES OF
CONCERN THAT WERE PUT INTO THE
STAFF REPORT. ONE WAS, UM TO OUR
EXTENSION OF THE ONE YEAR
CLAIMED TWO YEARS, I WOULD SAY
HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT THAT
PEOPLE TYPICALLY DON'T JUST STOP
PAYING THEIR PROPERTY TAXES.
THERE'S A REASON, UM, HEART,
ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. OLDER
HOMEOWNERS. WE SEE THIS VERY
REGULARLY. OLDER HOMEOWNERS JUST
START FORGETTING TO PAY. OR
SOMEONE FALLS ON HARD TIMES, AND
THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY. AND SO
WE FEEL THAT ONE YEAR IS JUST
SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. THAT'S WHY WE
WOULD ALLOW FOR AN EXTENSION TO
A SECOND YEAR, I WOULD SAY IN
OUR IN OUR ORIGINAL BILL, WE
EXTENDED IT TO FIVE YEARS, WHICH
WAS THE TAX COLLECTORS WERE NOT
THRILLED ABOUT SO AFTER
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THEM. WE
AGREED TO TWO YEARS WITH THE TAX
COLLECTORS AND THEY HAVE
EXPRESSED THEIR NEUTRALITY ON
THIS BILL, AND SHOULD THEY HAVE
ANY ISSUES WOULD BE HAPPY TO
DISCUSS IT WITH THEM, BUT THEY
TOLD US THEIR NEUTRAL ON THE
SECOND QUESTION WAS OF THE
BILLS. TIMING I WOULD NOT SAY
THIS BILL IS PREMATURE, SHOULD
THE COURT RULE IN FAVOR OF THE
PLAINTIFF AND TYLER BE HENNEPIN
AND AT THE U. S SUPREME COURT
THE NEXT YEAR WILL BE TOO LATE
TO RIGHT THIS WRONG WHILE
PROTECTING WRITING IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, WRONG WHILE
PROTECTING THE STATE FROM
LIABILITY. I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE
AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY
BUT IN OPPOSITION, AND HE
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. OH
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND SPARK
SORRY. AND ARRESTED. NO
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. NO
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M I
LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION. I
BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE PUT IN
THE SUSPENSE FILE IS MY
UNDERSTANDING. UM BUT FROM FROM
OUR VIEWPOINT, THERE IS NO COST.
I BELIEVE TO THE TAXPAYER. IN
THIS. IN FACT, I THINK IT COULD
ACTUALLY INCREASE TAX REVENUE
BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES WILL BE
SOLD AT FAIR MARKET VALUE, WHICH
PRESUMABLY MIGHT GENERATE MORE
REVENUE FOR THE STATE, SO I
DON'T KNOW. I NEED THAT WORKS.
I'M NEW. I JUST GOING TO THROW
THAT OUT THERE. WELL, THIS
SUSPENSEFUL ESSENTIALLY IMPLIES
AN INCREASE OR DECREASE IN
REVENUES. ABSOLUTELY. ALRIGHT SO
, UM, ACCORDING TO THE
CONSULTANT, THE SUSPENSE FILE IS
IF THERE IS AN INCREASE OR A
DECREASE IN REVENUE OF 150,000,
SO THAT'S WHY IT WOULD BE
ELIGIBLE FOR THE SUSPENSE FILE.
OKAY? YEAH MIGHT INCREASE
REVENUE. ALL UM, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO, UM, MAKE ME CLOSING REMARKS
? NO I JUST THINK THE COMMITTEE
FOR THEIR TIME AND ATTENTION.
ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, AND WITHOUT OBJECTION.
THIS BILL WILL BE REFERRED TO
OUR SUSPENSE FILE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT WE HAVE MR
GALLAGHER UP NEXT. I'M SORRY,
MISS WILSON BERG IN FILE ORDER,
SO HOPEFULLY I'LL YOU ARE
SITTING SO PATIENTLY. ALRIGHT UM
UP. NEXT IS FILE ITEM TO BE 59
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GALLAGHER.
GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON.
YOU MAY BEGIN WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. WELL, THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO BE
IN FRONT OF YOU. UM AND THIS IS
A YOU KNOW AN ISSUE THAT WE'VE
WE'VE SEEN MANY TIMES IN THE
LAST FEW SESSIONS, BUT THE IDEA
OF REALLY FINALLY GETTING A
RENTER'S TAX CREDIT. HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, HOPING THAT THIS
WILL BE THE YEAR WE'RE ABLE TO
PROVIDE THIS, YOU KNOW MUCH
NEEDED BENEFIT TO RENTERS IN
CALIFORNIA. WHO ARE STRUGGLING
SO ABBY 59 WOULD INCREASE THE
RENTERS TAX CREDIT IN CALIFORNIA
AND RAISE INCOME THRESHOLDS TO
REFLECT THE RISING RENTAL
PRICES. FINANCIAL EXPERTS
RECOMMEND HOUSEHOLDS SPEND NO
MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR INCOME ON
RENT. THIS ENSURES THAT ENOUGH
MONEY IS LEFT OVER FOR THOSE
OTHER ESSENTIAL EXPENSES. UH
UNEXPECTED OR EMERGENCY
FINANCIAL BURDENS AND FINANCIAL
PLANNING GOALS. IN CALIFORNIA.
WE'RE ALMOST HALF OF HOUSEHOLDS
OR RENTALS. THIS GOAL IS
BECOMING INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT
TO ATTEND. AS YOU'RE KNOW TOO
WELL AND CAN IMAGINE CALIFORNIA
IS HOME TO SOME OF THE MOST
EXPENSIVE RENTAL MARKETS IN THE
COUNTRY DO THE HIGH COST OF
HOUSING IN THE STATE IS NOT
UNCOMMON FOR RESIDENTS TO SPEND
A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR
INCOME ON HOUSING. FOR EXAMPLE,
IN OAKLAND, WHERE THE AVERAGE
MONTHLY RENT IS $4430, THE
ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME WOULD
NEED TO BE $177,000 TO MEET THE
30% GOAL. IN FACT, MORE THAN
HALF OF CALIFORNIA'S RENTERS ARE
COST SPURRED AND SPENDING OVER
30% OF THEIR INCOME. ON RENT.
CURRENT LAW PROVIDES A
NONREFUNDABLE RUNNER RUNNERS
TRACK TAX CREDIT OF $120 FOR
JOINT FILERS, MAKING $98,440 OR
LESS, OR $60 FOR INDIVIDUAL
FILERS, MAKING $49,220 OR LESS
OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS WILLFULLY
INADEQUATE. SO WE'D LIKE TO
REMEDY THAT A B 59 WILL DO JUST
THAT AND RAISED THESE INCOME TAX
CREDITS. UM. SO I WOULD ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS MEASURE,
WHEN YOU ULTIMATELY COME FOR A
VOTE ON THIS? THANK YOU. DO YOU
HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
DO NOT ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE
AND SUPPORT.
TONY BOY WITH THE CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL. THANK YOU. MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE CORBYN WITH
THE CALIFORNIA TAX REFORM
ASSOCIATION. WE WON'T TAKE
FORMAL POSITIONS UNTIL THE 15TH
OF THIS MONTH. SO WE'RE ALMOST
THERE GONNA HEAR ME SAY THAT A
COUPLE TIMES TODAY VERY MUCH
AGREE WITH THE INTENT OF THE
AUTHOR THAT THERE IS A LOT OF
FOLKS IN THE STATE WHO COULD USE
SOME RELIEF DO HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE CURRENT CONSTRUCTION
IN THE BILL, AS WELL AS OVERALL
COST PRESSURES AND LOOK FORWARD
TO HAVING THAT CONVERSATION.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
QUESTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE.
RIGHT I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, SO
IF YOU IF YOU JUST INCREASE THE
CURRENT AMOUNTS BY INFLATION, IF
YOU'RE GETTING A NUMBER, MUCH
LOWER THAN THE NUMBER THAT YOU
ARE REQUESTING, CAN YOU EXPLAIN
HOW YOU CAME UP WITH THE NUMBER?
YOU SETTLED ON WELL, INFLATION
ADJUSTED AMOUNTS WOULD BE
APPROXIMATELY 525 AND $260. IT'S
FAR BELOW THE PROPOSED INCREASE.
RIGHT SO JUST INCREASING THE
CREDIT TO INFLATION ADJUSTED
AMOUNTS WOULD BE INSUFFICIENT,
YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE
TRYING TO SEE IF WE COULD DO
BETTER THAN THAT. OKAY? AND THEN
OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF NEGOTIATIONS
GOING GOING FORWARD. CERTAINLY.
UM AND I'LL JUST SAY WE
DEFINITELY WANT TO WORK WITH ALL
THE DIFFERENT OPPOSITION TO TRY
AND FIGURE OUT WHAT IS YOU KNOW
THE SWEET SPOT HERE, I GUESS,
BUT I THINK FOR MOST RUNNERS, WE
NEED SOMETHING MUCH BETTER THAN
WHAT WE GOT. I THINK THAT WHAT
IS THE TOTAL? UM GENERAL FUND
COSTS IS IT FOUR OR FIVE BILLION
? DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME
RIGHT NOW, BUT ARE YOU ASKING
FOR A BUDGET ALLOCATION ALSO
CORRESPONDING TO THIS REQUEST,
WE WILL BE OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
WELL, MR GALLAGHER, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? UM WELL, I JUST
LIKE TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT
WHEN IT WHEN IT COMES FOR A
VOTE. I KNOW YOU GUYS AREN'T
VOTING TODAY, BUT CERTAINLY I
THINK THIS IS A MUCH NEEDED
BENEFIT THAT MANY. MANY OF OUR
RENTERS IN CALIFORNIA NEED
DURING THESE TIMES, SO I JUST
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE WHEN THE TIME
COMES. REALLY APPRECIATE THAT,
AND WITHOUT OBJECTION, THIS BILL
WILL BE REFERRED TO OUR SUSPENSE
FILE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. NEXT STEP. WE HAVE. SORRY,
MISS WILSON, ALMOST MR RAMOS.
FILE ITEM. 5 46.
AND YOU MAY BEGIN WHENEVER YOU
ARE READY. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS. CALIFORNIA
CURRENTLY IS THE ONLY STATE TO
TAX THE PAY OF MILITARY
RETIREES. MAYBE 46 FOCUSES ON
OUR ARMED SERVICES AND SEEKS TO
EXTEND A STATE BENEFIT FOR A
RETIRED VETERANS HERE IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
ADDITIONALLY THIS BILL ALSO
EXEMPTS SURVIVOR BENEFITS FROM
BEING TAXED IN CALIFORNIA. THIS
EXEMPTION IS TO BEGIN UPON
RETIREMENT. AND WILL LAST FOR 10
YEARS UNTIL 2034 EVERY 46
FOCUSES ON HONORING THOSE WHO
DEDICATED THEIR LIVES TO SERVING
OUR COUNTRY, STRENGTHENING AND
ATTRACTING A SKILLED WORKFORCE,
WHICH IN TURN STRENGTHENS STATE
TAX REVENUE. TODAY YOU WILL BE
HEARING FROM TWO WITNESSES.
STEVE BANCEL, VICE PRESIDENT OF
THE SOLANO COUNTY CHAPTER OF THE
MILITARY OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF
AMERICA. AND SUE STORY. WHOSE
HUSBAND, DENNIS, IS A VIETNAM
WAR VETERAN WHO SERVED IN THE
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE FOR OVER
22 YEARS. THANK YOU. LISTEN TO
THE FIRST WITNESS, PLEASE. SOME
MEMBER RAINBOWS. I WANT TO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR INTRODUCING A
B 46. THIS BILL IS FOREMOST
ABOUT HELPING CALIFORNIA. IT IS
ABOUT INCREASING OUR 21ST
CENTURY WORKFORCE AND FILLING
OVER 60,000 HIGH SKILLED
VACANCIES. UNITED STATES
MILITARY IS ONE OF THE WORLD'S
MOST DIVERSE AND TEXT SATURDAY
WORKFORCES. ACTUALLY THE SERVICE
MEMBERS ARE STATIONED HERE. MORE
THAN ANY OTHER STATE. CALIFORNIA
HAS MOST OF THE SIGNED MILITARY
PERSONNEL. WE HAVE THE MOST TO
GAIN BY HAVING THEM STAY.
MILITARY RETIREES AND THEIR
FAMILIES AND TO OUR WORKFORCE.
THEY FILL VACANCIES IN
HEALTHCARE, TEACHING AND
CHILDCARE. BUT INSTEAD WE ARE
LOSING MILITARY RETIREES. THE
PROBLEM. WE ARE THE ONLY STATE
THAT FULLY TAXES MILITARY
FEDERAL MILITARY RETIREE PAID
CALIFORNIA IS LOSING MILITARY
RETIREES AT AN INCREASING RATE
10 TIMES GREATER THAN THE
GENERAL POPULATION. I HAVE
PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED THIS
ACCELERATED LOSSES. AN EMPLOYER
WHO SUPERVISED ABOUT 60 MILITARY
RETIREES, AND THE MAJORITY WERE
ENLISTED RETIREES. THIS YEAR.
MILITARY TERRIAN SERVICE PAY
WILL BRING IN $4.8 BILLION
FEDERAL DOLLARS INTO
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY. BUT
VIRGINIA IS EXPECTED TO CROSS
THE $7 BILLION THRESHOLD. TEXAS
AND FLORIDA ARE NEARING $8
BILLION OF INCOME. OTHER STATES
ARE GAINING FEDERAL DOLLARS AT
OUR EXPENSE. I'M ON THE
COMMITTEE THAT MONITORS SALES
TAX FROM MY CITY. I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYSIS HAS FULLY CONSIDERED
THE EXTRA ADDED INCOME TAX SALES
TAX AND PROPERTY TAXES. FROM
MILITARY FAMILIES THAT REMAIN IN
CALIFORNIA. THIS INCREASED LOCAL
TAX FROM THE BILL GREATLY HELPS
OR COUNTY OR COUNTIES AND
CITIES. THE BILL HELPS OUR
SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND HOSPITALS.
THE SOLUTION. 80 46 INCREASES
CALIFORNIA'S OVERALL TAX REVENUE
. IT IMPROVES OUR WORKFORCE AND
STRENGTHENS OUR COMMUNITIES. THE
SURVIVORS BENEFIT PLAN IS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF THIS BILL FOR
MILITARY FAMILIES. SPP IS PAID
FOR BY THE RETIREE THROUGH
PAYCHECKS PRODUCTIONS. WITH
THAT. I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE
SEUSS STORY. MY PARTNER WHO IS A
GOLD STAR, SURVIVING SPOUSE AND
RECEIVES SPP PAY. PLEASE HEAR
HER STORY ABOUT HER MILITARY
FAMILY THAT STAYED IN
CALIFORNIA. FIRST I'D LIKE TO
INTRODUCE YOU TO MY HUSBAND.
THIS IS MASTER SERGEANT DENNIS
STORY. MY NAME IS SUE STORY
RESIDENT OF ROOSEVELT,
CALIFORNIA A SURVIVING SPOUSE OF
MASTER SERGEANT DENNIS LEE'S
STORY. AND I RECEIVE SURVIVOR
BENEFIT PLAN. I AM REPRESENTING
THE GOLD STAR WIVES AND
SURVIVING SPOUSES OF CALIFORNIA
. MY HERO SERVED 22 YEARS, TWO
MONTHS AND 13 DAYS AND YES, WE
COUNTED EVERY ONE OF THEM.
SERVING IN THE UNITED STATES AIR
FORCE BEING DEPLOYED TWICE
EARNING HIM THE VIETNAM SERVICE
MEDAL ALSO SERVED. I ALSO SERVED
OUR COUNTRY, BUT I DIDN'T WEAR
UNIFORM WHEN DENNIS RETIRED AT
41 YEARS OLD FROM THE MILITARY,
WE DECIDED TO RETURN TO
CALIFORNIA. SO THAT OUR CHILDREN
CAN GET TO KNOW THEIR
GRANDPARENTS AND THEIR FAMILY
HERE. FAMILY MEANS A LOT TO US.
SOON AFTER RETURNING. I STARTED
SCHOOL TO OBTAIN MY DEGREE IN
TEACHING. AND DENNIS FULFILLED
HIS DREAM TO BECOME A BROADCAST
ENGINEER. HE CONTINUED WORKING
FOR ALMOST 29 YEARS BEFORE AGENT
ORANGE TOOK HIS LIFE. WE PAID 8%
OF HIS MILITARY RETIREMENT FOR
OVER 29 YEARS SO THAT I COULD
RECEIVE 55% OF HIS RETIREMENT.
WHICH IS MY SBP WHEN HE WAS SICK
. I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD ANY
REGRETS FOR VOLUNTEERING TO BE
DEPLOYED. HE STATED NO REGRETS.
MY SON IN LAW ALSO JOINED THE
ARMY AND WAS DEPLOYED TO
AFGHANISTAN WHEN HE'S WHEN HIS
SERVICE ENDED. THEY RETURNED
ALSO TO CALIFORNIA AND COMPLETED
HIS EDUCATION TO BECOME AN
OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST.
CURRENTLY HE'S WORKING IN SUNNY
VILLE AS AN OCCUPATIONAL
THERAPIST IN A NURSING HOME AND
MY DAUGHTER BECAME A FLAT BOTTOM
IST. WE ARE A FAMILY OF MILITARY
MEMBERS FROM MY GRANDFATHER, MY
FATHER, MY HUSBAND, SON IN LAW
AND EVEN MY GRANDCHILDREN. BUY
ME RECEIVING MY CREDENTIALS AND
MY HUSBAND GETTING HIS DREAM JOB
AS A BROADCAST ENGINEER GAVE US
OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE NEAR FAMILY
AND ENJOY THIS BEAUTIFUL STATE.
I PRAY YOU CONSIDER PASSING.
MAYBE 46. I'M OPEN TO ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE THANK YOU
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
JOINING US HERE TODAY. OF DO WE
HAVE ANY OTHER? UM WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT. RAMONA CHAVEZ U S AIR
FORCE 23 YEARS ALAMEDA COUNTY.
PLEASE SUPPORT 80 46. NICOLE
WARD ULLMAN ON BEHALF OF SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY AND SUPPORT.
I'M FRED JEFF AND RETIRED NAVAL
OFFICER. AND A RESIDENT OF
HAYWARD. MEMBER OF MANY VETERANS
SERVICE ORGANIZATION AND ALSO A
COMMITTEE MEMBER. OF THE ALAMEDA
COUNTY VETERANS AFFAIRS
COMMISSION. AND I SUPPORT THIS
BILL, AND WE NEED TO SUPPORT
PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT HAVE
TESTIFIED BEFORE YOU, MADAM
CHAIRMAN. HELLO MELISSA
WASHINGTON NAVY VETERAN ALSO
MARRIED TO A RETIRED MARINE, AND
ALSO WE SUPPORT A B 46 ON BEHALF
OF ALL WOMEN VETERANS WHO
PROUDLY SERVED HERE IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU.
ROCHELLE ARNOLD AND THE
SACRAMENTO COUNTY VETERANS
SERVICE OFFICER REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY
VETERANS SERVICE OFFICERS. I'M
ALSO RETIRED AIR FORCE AND I
SUPPORT A B 46. HI MY NAME IS
REGINA SPLEEN. I'M A NAVY
VETERAN. AND I ALSO WORK FOR THE
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION. AND I
DEFINITELY SUPPORT THIS. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SETH REED
WITH REED GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
REPRESENTING AMERICAN LEGION
DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS
DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA,
CALIFORNIA STATE COMMANDER
SPECTRUMS COUNCIL IN THE VIETNAM
VETERANS OF AMERICA. CALIFORNIA
STATE COUNCIL OWNED SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. GEORGE MARSH MARINE
CORPS VETERANS ASSOCIATION ON
BEHALF OF THE MARINE CORPS
VETERANS ASSOCIATION. WE SUPPORT
THIS BILL. BRIAN COX RETIRED
DISABLED COMBAT THAT I SUPPORT.
STEVE JAM, BARONI, ALSO DISABLED
VETERAN, RETIRED, AND I SUPPORT
THIS BILL. LYNN SNYDER
ENTHUSIASTICALLY SUPPORT MAYBE
46 ON BEHALF OF ALL MY BROTHERS
AND SISTERS AND VETERAN
SERVICES. RIGHT, AND HE
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS MADE THE CORBYN
WITH THE CALIFORNIA TAX REFORM
ASSOCIATION AGAIN. WE WON'T HAVE
POSITIONS OUT UNTIL MARCH 15TH
BUT DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
CLOSE TO A QUARTER BILLION
DOLLAR COST PRESSURES ON THE
GENERAL FUND OVER THE NEXT THREE
YEARS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? COMMENTS. NOT A
QUESTION JUST TO COMMENT. JUST
TODAY AND EVERY DAY. I JUST WANT
TO THANK EVERYONE THAT IS HERE
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
RIGHT I HAD A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS, AND I'M NOT SURE
WHICH OF YOUR EXPERTS MIGHT BE
ABLE TO ANSWER. THE FIRST IS
THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
MOST STATES ALREADY OFFER AN
EXEMPTION. IS THAT CORRECT? OR
IS IT ALL STATES? ALL OF THEM,
YOU KNOW? ACTUALLY. YEAH. GO
AHEAD THERE. EVERY OTHER STATE
OFFERS AT LEAST SOME EXEMPTIONS
. 38 STATES OFFER FULL EXEMPTION
THERE 11 THAT OFFER PARTIAL
EXEMPTION, AND MANY OF THOSE ON
PARTIAL EXEMPTION ARE ON A PATH
TO POTENTIALLY FOR EXEMPTION.
ALRIGHT UM AND OBVIOUSLY I WAS
SURE THAT THAT'S COMMITTEE
BEFORE AND HAVE ARE VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BILL. IT'S
YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM IN VETS
. YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM IN
REVENUE TAX. THE BILL HAS PASSED
THROUGH THOSE COMMITTEES. BUT
YOU SEEMS THAT THE ROADBLOCK IS
APPROPRIATIONS. SO HAVE YOU
CONSIDERED MAYBE SOMETHING. THIS
SAME BILL? UM, ENDED IN
APPROPRIATIONS LAST YEAR. HAVE
YOU CONSIDERED SOMETHING THAT
WOULD MIGHT LOWER THE COST, BUT
AT LEAST GET US MOVING IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. LIKE A PARTIAL
EXEMPTION. WE CONTINUE TO BE IN
IN DIALOGUE WITH APPROPRIATIONS
STAFF AND COMMITTEE. WE THINK
SOME OF THE SUNSET CLAUSES THAT
ARE THERE. UM MIGHT ADD TO SOME
OF THAT DISCUSSION. THAT'S
THERE. SO WE ANTICIPATE HAVING
FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ONCE
WE'RE OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE AND
WELL ON OUR WAY, OKAY? AND I
WOULD SAY THE OTHER THING IS,
UM, IT'S ALWAYS HELPFUL TO TRY
TO SECURE A BUDGET ALLOCATION.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT OF
PRESSURES ON THE ON THE STATE
BUDGET THIS YEAR. AND A LOT OF
UNCERTAINTY BECAUSE OF THE LATE
COLLECTION DATE, SO I WOULD
ENCOURAGE YOU TO, YOU KNOW, WORK
ALL ANGLES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
CAN GET THAT THIS PAST IN
CALIFORNIA THIS YEAR. SO THANK
YOU FOR THAT ADVICE. ALRIGHT
WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR
RAMOS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND THANK
YOU TO MY, UM WITNESSES WHO TALK
FROM FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE AND
WHEN THE APPROPRIATE TIME WOULD
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE AND HONORING
AMERICA'S VETERANS, ALRIGHT
WITHOUT OBJECTION. THIS BUILD
THE WILL BE REFERRED TO OUR
SUSPENSE FILE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ALL RIGHT, MR GIBSON. A B
543.
YOU MAY START WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM. MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO
PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL 543. WHICH
SEEKS TO EXTEND A LONGSTANDING
PARTIAL TAX EXEMPTION FOR MARINE
FUEL THAT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT FOR
THE PAST TWO DECADES. OUR PORTS
ARE OUR ECONOMIC ENGINE HERE IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS
ESSENTIAL TO OUR CITIZENS IN MY
DISTRICT AND ACROSS THE STATE.
THESE JOBS ARE ESSENTIAL TO
FAMILIES. THAT APPEARS ON THE
WAGES FROM THESE HIGH PAYING
UNION JOBS IF THE EXEMPTION AND
THAT'S THE ONE TOUCH BASIS IF
THIS EXEMPTION IT DOESN'T GO
THROUGH FOR THE THERE'S
EXTENSION, POTENTIALLY
CALIFORNIA WILL LOSE THOUSANDS
OF THOUSANDS OF CALIFORNIA'S
FAMILIES COULD BE DEVASTATED BY
THIS PARTICULAR EFFECT. THIS TAX
STRUCTURE SUPPORTS THE STATE'S
ECONOMY ARE PUBLICLY OWNED
SEAPORT UNION JOBS AND
ULTIMATELY INCREASE STATE AND
LOCAL TAX REVENUE TO READ TO
REINSTATE THIS EXEMPTION. IT IS
NOT A HIT AND I WANT TO REPEAT
IT IS NOT A HIT ON OUR BUDGET,
IT ACTUALLY INCREASES REVENUES
THROUGH ENCOURAGING CONTINUOUS,
ROBUST SALES, WHICH IS SUPPORTED
BY RECENT ECONOMIC STUDIES THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE. I ALSO NOTE
THAT I WANT TO LET THE COMMITTEE
KNOW EXCEPT THAT THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS TO HELP STRENGTHEN
THIS BILL ASSEMBLY BILL 543
WOULD EXTEND THIS EXEMPTION FOR
FIVE YEARS, TAXES WOULD STILL BE
LEVIED FOR FUEL PURCHASE AND
CONSUMERS AND CONSUME UM UM IN
ITS BORDERS. ADDITIONALLY WE
WILL WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE TO
INCLUDE AMENDMENTS THAT WILL
COMPLY TO REVEREND TAX CODE.
SECTION FOUR. 31 WITH ME HERE
TODAY. DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY
ARE. THERE THEY ARE. PLEASE. I
COULDN'T BE A LITTLE GOOD LEADER
IF THERE'S NO ONE FOLLOWING ME,
SO PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. I'M
ENJOYING ME WITH ME OR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SELF
INTRODUCED THE INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATION OF MASTER MATE AND
PILOT IS AS WELL AS THE, UH,
INLET OF THE INLAND. UM BOTH MEN
UNION WHO WAS SELF INTRODUCING,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY AND SUPPORT OF 543.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR OF SUPPOSED TO TALK NOW.
I'M SORRY. SUPPOSED TO GIVE OUR
OH YES. YES PLEASE. MAYBE I WAS
JUMPING THE GUN. SORRY GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS J.
B DAVIS. I'M HERE REPRESENTING
THE MEN AND WOMEN OF THE INLAND
BOATMEN'S UNION. ARE YOU UNION
IS ASKING YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT
A B 5 43 THE EYE. BIÂU IS THE
MARINE DIVISION OF THE
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND
WAREHOUSE SMITH COMMUNION. BIÂU
MEMBERS, CREW WORK BOATS UP AND
DOWN THE CALIFORNIA COAST. THE
MEMBERS OF THE I B. YOU ARE
HARDWORKING MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE
, AND SOME OF OUR JOBS DEPEND ON
THE SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION
FROM MARINE FUELS. A B 5 43
WOULD EXTEND THE CURRENT SALES
AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FROM
MARINE FUELS PURCHASED IN STATE.
BUT CONSUMED BY COMMON CARRIERS
OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA WATERS AFTER
THE VESSELS FIRST OUT OF STATE
DESTINATION. TAXES LEVIED FOR
THE FUEL PURCHASED AND CONSUMED
WITHIN STATE BOUNDARIES WILL NOT
BE IMPACTED. RENT FUELS IS VERY
COMPETITIVE MARKET AND
INTERNATIONAL IN NATURE. BEING
THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS WORSHIPS
CAN FUEL SHIPS CAN SIMPLY BYPASS
CALIFORNIA PORTS THEY CAN
OFFLOAD AND ON LOAD CARGO AND
REFUEL ELSEWHERE, REFUSING TO
PAY AN ADDITIONAL TAX OF UP TO
10 AND A QUARTER PERCENT THAT IS
NOT IMPOSED IN ANY OTHER STATES
OR COUNTRIES. KEEPING A BUSINESS
IN STATE IS A WIN FOR BOTH THE
MARITIME INDUSTRY AND THE
STATE'S BUDGET. FOR THE PAST
THREE DECADES. UH, SALES AND USE
TAXES HAVE NOT BEEN IMPOSED WITH
TWO LIMITED AND DAMAGING
EXCEPTIONS IN 1991 AND 2003.
WHEN THE EXEMPTIONS WERE ALLOWED
TO EXPIRE IN 2003, STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES FELL
BY OVER $11 MILLION. THE
RESULTING STEEP DECLINE IN FUEL
SALE IN FUEL SALES RESULTED IN
HEAVY JOB LOSSES. WHEN THE
EXEMPTION WAS REINSTATED THE
NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THE
INDUSTRY REBOUNDED AND THE JOBS
CAME BACK. IN ORDER TO STAVE OFF
THE LIFES OF GOOD MIDDLE CLASS
JOBS. THE EYE BIÂU AGAIN ASKS
YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT A B 543.
THANK YOU. SPEAKER. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU.
EVERYBODY HERE AND FIRST. I JUST
WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY HERE FOR
THEIR SERVICE TO OUR GREAT
STATE. I REALLY APPRECIATE
THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK HERE TODAY. MY NAME IS
ANTONIO MÀ CATANO. AND I AM A
UNION REPRESENTATIVE WITH THE
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF
MASTER MATES AND PILOTS UNITED
INLAND GROUP PACIFIC MARITIME
REGION. IT'S A SEPARATE DIVISION
FROM OUR INTERNATIONAL GROUP.
THAT PRIMARY FOCUSES ON INLAND
WORK. TUG AND BARGE COMPANIES WE
REPRESENT ABOUT 500,
PROFESSIONAL US MERCHANT
MARINERS UP AND DOWN THE COAST
OF CALIFORNIA, RANGING FROM
ABOUT 500 MEMBERS IN CALIFORNIA
ALONE, RANGING FROM DECK HANDS
ALL THE WAY UP TO TWO CAPTAINS.
SO, UM. SO I AM HERE TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF EXTENDING THE MARINE
FUEL TAX EXEMPTION IN CALIFORNIA
AND TO GIVE TESTIMONY ON MY
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF THIS
CRITICAL BILL AND THE
DEVASTATING IMPACT IT HAD AND
WILL HAVE WITHIN THE INDUSTRY
AND TO OUR SURROUNDING
COMMUNITIES IF THE MARINE FUEL
TAXES NOT EXTENDED OR ELIMINATED
ENTIRELY. QUICK REALLY QUICK NOT
TO WASTE ANYBODY'S TIME I WAS
BORN AND RAISED IN THIS
BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. I'M A PROUD ANGELINO
BORN AND RAISED IN A SMALL TOWN
CALLED SAN PEDRO DISTRICT, 15.
AND WHAT STARTED THIS DAY I
RESIDE AND SAM PETERS, A SMALL
TALENT ON THE WATERFRONT OF L.
A, THAT WAS BUILT ON THE
BACKBONE. OF THE MANY
HARDWORKING MEN AND WOMEN WHO
IMMIGRATED OVER FROM ALL PARTS
OF THE WORLD TO WORK IN THE
FISHING AND MARITIME INDUSTRY
HAS MANY CAME OVER WITH NOTHING
BUT A DREAM. AND A DESIRE TO
PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES. AND
STILL TO THIS DAY, YOU WILL FIND
THESE RELATIVES AND THEY SETTLED
THESE RELATIVES OF THESE
SETTLERS WHO CONTINUE TO WORK IN
THESE PARTS, MYSELF BEING ONE OF
THEM. THE IMPACT ON THE
COMMUNITY WHEN THE MARINE FUEL
TAX WAS NOT EXTENDED WAS A
NIGHTMARE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THE
VESSEL SEIZED TO COME TO THE
POOR BUNKERING, CAUSING A HUGE
SPIRAL TO THE BOTTOM, AND MANY
OF THESE MARINERS WERE LAID OFF
AND HAD NOWHERE ELSE TO TURN TO.
THE OTHER COMPANIES THAT WERE
FACING THE SAME DILEMMA, SO
THERE WAS REALLY NOWHERE FOR
THEM TO GO BECAUSE THESE OTHER
COMPANIES WERE FACING EITHER
CLOSURES OR LAY OFF AS WELL. AND
WITH THE DECLINE IN BUNKERING
WITH, YOU KNOW, OIL REFINERIES
AND OTHER SUCH POSITIONS. THERE
IS VAST EMPLOYMENT THERE,
EITHER, SO THEY WERE JUST STUCK
WITH NOWHERE TO GO. AND YOU
KNOW, AND LIVING IN LIVING IN
THE AREA. THE RUMORS AND TALKS
THAT FLOODED THE COMMUNITY WAS
WAS VERY OVERWHELMING STORIES OF
MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS ARE
STRUGGLING AND EVENTUALLY LED
DIVORCE. PEOPLE LOST THEIR HOMES
AND CHILDREN WERE TORN AWAY FROM
THEIR FRIENDS AND THEIR
RELATIVES TAKEN OUT OF PRIVATE
SCHOOLS. IT WAS JUST DEVASTATING
, JUST CRUSHED OUR COMMUNITY. IT
JUST IT WAS HORRIBLE. AND UH,
AND AS OF TODAY THAT IMPACT OF
THIS TAX BILL CAN STILL BE FELT
BY MANY IN OUR COMMUNITIES. AND
IT IS MY OPINION THAT WE HAVE
YET TO SEE IT EVER RECOVER. IT
HAS YET TO RECOVER. AND THESE
STORIES OF THIS TIME IN MY LIFE
, YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE IN THE
WHEELHOUSE ISN'T AROUND IT. IT
SOUNDS LIKE AN OLD TOWN FABLE
LIKE THE GHOST THAT COMES OUT
EVERY FIVE YEARS. AND IT'S LIKE
OLD STORY AND THE HORROR STORY
THAT WE HERE AND I'M HERE TODAY
TO JUST SAY IT'S UP TO US.
PEOPLE AND SURROUNDING PEOPLE.
DID WE GOT TO PUT THIS GHOST
BACK IN THE GRAVE? THAT'S WHAT
WE GOTTA DO. SO I'M HERE IN
SUPPORT OF EXTENDING OR OR
PERMANENTLY UH, REMOVING THE
TAX. THE FUEL TAX EXEMPT ARE I'M
IN SUPPORT OF A B 543 AND I
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND GOD
BLESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN
SUPPORT? MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS,
ANDREW ANTHONY, WHICH CHILD
DINNER AND TWEETS MEASURING
LAYING ON BEHALF OF THE PACIFIC
MERCHANT SHIPPING ASSOCIATION.
WE SUPPORT. YEAH TOBIAS FALCON
WITH THE CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT OF THE
BILL ALSO THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
RIGHT UM AH. CAN YOU STAY OR
DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW OTHER
STATES UH, TAX BUNKER FUEL? MY
KNOWLEDGE, THEY DON'T. THEY
DON'T AND DO OTHER STATES HAVE
TAX INCENTIVES. I MEAN, THE
STORY YOU'RE TELLING IS IT IS IT
MAKES A VERY GOOD ARGUMENT FOR
CONTINUING THIS OBVIOUSLY,
BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THESE. UM
WE DON'T WANT THE REFUELING TO
GO TO OTHER STATES, SO THAT'S
REALLY ARE OTHER STATES TRYING
TO ATTRACT THIS BUSINESS WAS
REALLY MY QUESTION. ABSOLUTELY.
ABSOLUTELY. OH MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS, UM, OUR CLIENT PMS, A
COMMISSIONED THE ECONOMIC STUDY
THAT THE AUTHOR REFERRED TO AND
OUR KNOWLEDGE AS NORTHERN STATES
THAT IMPOSE THIS TAX OR HAVE AN
EXEMPTION THIS WAY THAT SERVES
AS AN INCENTIVE AND SHIPS
BASICALLY HAVE SOFTWARE THAT
ALLOWS THEM TO BYPASS UM,
LOCATIONS WHERE, IF THERE WERE
THERE FUEL THEY WOULD PAY THE
HIGHER TAX AND IT'S JUST A
MATTER OF PLANNING YOUR COURSE.
SO THEY WOULD JUST AVOID THESE
PORTS AND THESE BIRTHS AND KIND
OF USE THEIR LARGE, YOU KNOW
RESERVES OF FUEL TO HIT ANOTHER
DESTINATION THAT YOU KNOW HAS A
LOWER TAX RATE. RIGHT UM, WE
HAVE A QUESTION FROM MRS P. D
PETRIE-NORRIS. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR AND SOMEWHAT, I THINK KIND
OF PICKING UP ON THE TRAIN OF
THOUGHT. THAT YOU HAD BEGUN.
THERE'S BEEN, UH HIGH, AND I
THINK INCREASING LEVEL OF
SCRUTINY ON OUR TAX EXPENDITURE
POLICIES AS THE STATE. WE HAD A
HEARING THE CHAIR CONVENED A
HEARING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ON
THIS, AND AS YOU MAY BE AWARE
THERE'S BILLIONS AND BILLIONS
AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
VARIOUS TAX CREDITS. TAX
EXPENDITURES. SOME OF THEM
CERTAINLY SEEM IMPORTANT FOR
INCENTIVIZING BEHAVIOR THAT WE
WANT TO SEE AND IN ENCOURAGING
ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND THEN SOME
OF THEM SEEM LIKE THEY'RE KIND
OF GIVEAWAYS, RIGHT AND IT'S THE
JOB OF THIS COMMITTEE TO
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO. I
THINK THAT THE ARGUMENTS THAT
YOU MADE IN YOUR REMARKS. UH
WE'RE VERY COMPELLING, I THINK
WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL IF THE
COMMITTEE AND PERHAPS WE'VE
GOTTEN AND I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN
IT. I THINK IF WE COULD SEE THAT
ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS, I THINK
THAT WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL
BECAUSE I KNOW IN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS, IT SAYS THAT CDT ESTÁ
ANTICIPATES REVENUE LOSS AND
MODEST ONE BUT REVENUE LOSS. I
THINK IF THAT'S JUST A PARTIAL
ANALYSIS, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT
FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ELEVATE, UM
, THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE SO
THAT WE CAN HAVE AN INTEGRATED
PICTURE OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT
AS WE ARE WEIGHING THIS AGAINST
OTHER POTENTIAL TAX EXPENDITURES
AND CREDITS SURE PLEASES THE
COMMITTEE WILL BE MORE THAN
HAPPY TO GET THAT RESEARCH AND
SUBMITTED TO EACH ONE OF YOUR
OFFICES. IF THERE'S ANY FOLLOW
UP, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO
REACH OUT. GREAT THANK YOU. VERY
WELCOME. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? UH MR GIBSON, YOU MAY
WRAP IT UP. THANK YOU AGAIN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING
ME TO EVEN PRESENT THIS BILL.
SIMILAR BILL 543. WE THINK THIS
IS A GOOD POLICY MOVING FORWARD
AS THE WITNESS HAS ALREADY
ARTICULATED THE GHOST. UM, I
CHAIR THIS SELECT COMMITTEE ON
THE PORTS AND CERTAINLY THE
PORTS IS CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC
ENGINE AND WE HAVE GREAT
PARTNERS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE DON'T LOSE ANY ABILITY
TO CONTINUE TO KEEP CALIFORNIA
AS A FOURTH WORLD ECONOMY AND BY
DOING THIS PARTIAL TAX EXEMPTION
, UM, EXTENDING THE SUNSET TO IT
. WE BELIEVE THAT IT HELPS
CALIFORNIA AND IT ALSO KEEPS
PEOPLE MOVING FORWARD IN THIS
AREA. UM AND I'M JUST GOING TO
CLOSE ON THIS NOTE. FORMER STATE
SENATOR PHINEAS BANNING, UM, YOU
KNOW COMMUNITIES ARE NAMED AFTER
CHINESE SPANISH WHO'S
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PORTA LOS
ANGELES. UM AND SO I DON'T KNOW.
HE WAS REFERRING TO THAT HIM AS
BEING A GHOST BECAUSE HE'S BEEN
DEAD A LONG TIME BUT
NONETHELESS. IS SOMETHING THAT I
REALLY BELIEVE THAT THE
COMMITTEE AND REALLY LOVED THE
COMMITTEE TO SUPPORT IT WHEN THE
TIME COMES, SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT
THIS BILL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
AND WITH THAT OBJECTION, THIS
BILL WILL BE REFERRED TO OUR
SUSPENSE FILE. WE ARE NOW AT
FILE ITEM FOR 85 14 MR JOE
PATTERSON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THAT A C IS NOT WORKING. IT'S
GOING TO BE HOT SUMMERS IN HERE.
I SUPPOSE. ONCE THE PARTY GETS
STARTED, UM GOOD. GOOD AFTERNOON
, MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS. HAPPY
MONDAY, A B 5 14 WILL PROVIDE
FOR AN ANNUAL INCOME REFUNDABLE
INCOME TAX CREDIT OF 1502
INDIVIDUALS WHO ADOPT RETIRED
POLICE DOGS. AND THAT HAVE
SERVED FOR A PARTICULAR LENGTH
OF TIME. FIRST I LIKE TO POINT
OUT THE ANNOUNCED THE NICE
ANALYSIS POINTED OUT A COUPLE OF
THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SAY I'D
BE HAPPY TO TAKE ONE IS THAT TO
ENSURE THE CREDIT DOESN'T EXCEED
THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE PERSON
CLAIMING THE CREDIT AND THEN
ALSO HAPPY TO LIMIT THE CREDIT
TO DOGS THAT SERVED CALIFORNIA
AGENCIES PRIOR TO JOINING THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLY, I
SERVED AH, UM, SIX YEARS IS THE
TREASURER OF THE ROCKLAND PUBLIC
SAFETY FOUNDATION. AND AS A PART
OF THAT WE PURCHASED CANINES FOR
THE BROOKLYN CITY OF ROCKLAND,
WHICH EVENTUALLY WENT TO ASSIST
THE ROCKLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT.
AND WHEN WE WERE DOING THAT WE
REALLY CONSIDERED THE WHOLE LIFE
OF THE OF THE CANINE AND TO MY
SURPRISE, A LOT OF AGENCIES
CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE CANINES
BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST THE
TRAINING AND THE EXPENSE AND
THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT ONCE THE
DOG IS DONE WITH SERVICE.
OBVIOUSLY THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT SOMEBODY CAN ADOPT THE DOG
AND ITS LIFE WILL CONTINUE
BEYOND THAT. AND AS YOU CAN
IMAGINE, THE RIGOROUS TRAINING
ACTUALLY WAS KIND OF SURPRISED
WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAINING THAT
THESE CANINES GO THROUGH, AND
IT'S RIGOROUS AND ONCE THEY GET
OUT OF THEIR SERVICE, THEY AH,
THE EXPENSE OF THE MEDICAL BILLS
AND THE AND THE FOOD AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON,
AND ACTUALLY, IT'S QUITE COMMON
FOR THE BILLS TO BE $3000 FOR
SURGERY, YOU KNOW $500 A MONTH
FOR FOOD UP TO, BUT I MEAN,
REALLY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $250
A MONTH FOR FOOD AND THINGS LIKE
THAT. AND SO WE REALLY WANT TO
INCENTIVIZE. AH DEPARTMENTS TO
USE THESE NON LETHAL TOOLS TO
HELP OBVIOUSLY FIND PEOPLE WE
FOUND MISSING PEOPLE WITH OUR
WITH OUR CANINES, AND WE DON'T
WANT TO BE A HINDRANCE AS A
STATE SO I WANT TO MENTION TOO,
THAT THIS BILL'S EXTREMELY
LIMITED. IT'S ONLY FOR A FIVE
YEAR PERIOD. AND THAT'S THE DATA
DOESN'T BACK IT UP. OBVIOUSLY WE
WOULDN'T CONTINUE TO DO IT BUT
ONE OF THE BIGGEST BENEFITS IT'S
ONE OF THE CHEAPEST PIECES OF
LEGISLATION THAT YOU'LL CONSIDER
TODAY. SO UH SO WE SHOULD JUST
GO AHEAD AND, YOU KNOW, MOVE IT
PAST THE SUSPENSE FILE. AND
RIGHT ON TO THE NEXT COMMITTEE.
UM AND WITH THAT I HAPPY TO TAKE
ANY QUESTIONS. RIGHT DO YOU HAVE
ANY, UH ADDITIONAL WITNESSES OR
WELL, I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA BRING
SOMEBODY WITH A CANINE BUT KNEW
THAT THIS WAS GONE RIGHT TO
SUSPENSE. UH, ALTHOUGH I'M
ADVOCATING FOR IT NOT TO. WELL I
HAVE. I HAVE SOME, UH PEOPLE
LINED UP. YES, SUPPORT. WELL
THERE'S ONE SUPPORTER SUPPORTER
. HE'S A FAMILIAR ONE, USUALLY
NOT IN THIS COMMITTEE, THOUGH. I
THINK THIS WAS BROKEN WHEN I GOT
HERE, MAN, I'M SURE MADAM CHAIR
COREY CELLS, ILO ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFSASSOCIATION HAPPY TO BE
HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
CORBYN WITH THE CALIFORNIA TAX
REFORM ASSOCIATION. SO NICE TO
SEE YOU IN COMMITTEE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S I'LL BE SURE
ONCE AFTER MARCH, 15TH WE
DEVELOP OUR POSITION TO TWEET IT
AT YOU. UM WE DO HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MEASURE AS WELL AS ITS UTILITY
WILL BE FOLLOWING UP AFTER THAT
TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
CANCELED. DO WE HAVE ANY MORE
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? ALRIGHT
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MISS BAINES. JUST A
QUESTION. WHAT DETERMINES
RETIREMENT OF A POLICE DOG? WELL
THE BILL HAS BASED ON THE LENGTH
OF TIME. UM AH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S
THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AGENCIES
ARE AGENCY HAD HAD A POLICY
BASED ON ACTUALLY WHEN MEDICAL
BILLS GOT SO EXPENSIVE, BUT THEY
USUALLY RANGE FOR ABOUT 3 TO 5
YEARS THAT THEY WILL HAPPEN WITH
THAT THEY WILL HAVE THEM, BUT I
BELIEVE IT'S UP TO EVERY AGENCY
TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IT IS
AND WE WOULD PURCHASE A NEW DOG
ABOUT EVERY FIVE YEARS FOR THE
FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. DOES
THE DOG DECIDE OR DO WE DECIDE
THAT? NO, THE DOG WILL
DEFINITELY TELL YOU WHEN IT'S
READY TO RETIRE. SO ALRIGHT, MR
PATTERSON. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? OH, I'M SORRY.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PETRIE-NORRIS.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, SO I
JUST WANTED TO, UH, PULL. IT'S A
QUESTION THAT THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS RAISED AS WELL, WHICH
IS WHETHER THIS IS AN INCENTIVE
OR REWARD SO AGAIN WITH WITH ANY
KIND OF TAX INCENTIVE, UM,
THERE'S ALWAYS A PROBLEM OF KIND
OF THAT'S THE FREE RIDER PROBLEM
, RIGHT SO LIKE HOW MANY OF
THESE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DONE X
IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT INCENTIVE
, AND IS THE IS THE INCENTIVE IN
ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY GET THE
BEHAVIOR THAT YOU WANT. OR RIGHT
. IS IT JUST A FREE RIDER
SITUATION SO I GUESS. WHAT ARE
YOUR YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? IT
SEEMS LIKE THESE THESE DOGS ARE
ALREADY GETTING ADOPTED. SO IS
THIS AN INCENTIVE AROSA, SO A
REWARD? WELL FORTUNATELY, I READ
THE ANALYSIS. UM SO, UM, YEAH.
YOU KNOW, WE CONSIDER THAT I
THINK YOU KNOW THE ANALYSIS
POINTS OUT. THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THESE CANINES ARE ADOPTED BY
THEIR HANDLER ONCE THEY'RE DONE
WITH THEIR SERVICE, BUT AS I
INDICATED EARLIER IS THAT SOME
AGENCIES ARE CHOOSING NOT TO GET
CANINES IN THE FIRST PLACE
BECAUSE OF WHO'S GOING TO WANT
TO ADOPT AND ACCUMULATE THAT
EXPENSE ONCE THE CANINE IS DONE
WITH ITS SERVICE, BECAUSE YOU
KNOW WHEN THEY'RE DONE WITH
THEIR SERVICE, THEY'RE NOT THE,
UH, YOU KNOW THAT THE YOUNG DOG
PUPPY THAT THEY USED TO BE THERE
THEY ARE OLDER THEY ARE OFTEN
EXPERIENCING, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE
THE TYPE OF BREEDS HIP DYSPLASIA
AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THE
CITY DOES. SO IT'S MORE OF, UM,
YOU KNOW, TO INCENTIVIZE. CITIES
TO GET IT IN THE FIRST PLACE
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO WILL
ADOPT THEM WE'LL GET THIS CREDIT
AND THEN IT'LL MAKE PEOPLE FEEL
MORE COMFORTABLE TO GET IT. I DO
ACTUALLY THINK OF $1500 CREDIT
IS PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL TO
CONSIDER, UM, YOU KNOW, GETTING
THESE THESE DOGS AND FEELING
MORE COMFORT LEVEL TO ADOPT THEM
ONCE ONCE THEY'RE OUT OF
SERVICE. SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT
IS INSUFFICIENT POOL OF WILLING
ADOPTERS IS ONE OF THE
CHALLENGES. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY,
ALRIGHT. MR JACOB. SO I HAVE A
QUESTION AND AS A DOG OWNER, I
KNOW WE ALL GET ATTACHED TO OUR
DOGS. UM AND I KNOW WITH
OFFICERS THEY GET ATTACHED ALSO
WITH THEIR CANINES. AND I KNOW
YOU MENTIONED TYPICALLY WHEN A
WHEN A CANINE RETIRES IS
TYPICALLY THEIR HANDLER THAT
WILL THEN TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE
DOG. UH SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE
WE SEEING A HIGH RATE OF DOGS ON
WHICH THE HANDLER DOES NOT WANT
TO TAKE OWNERSHIP, OR ARE WE
SEEING A SITUATION WHERE NOW
DOGS ARE BEING PLACED IN ANOTHER
HOME OR IN A SHELTER? DO WE HAVE
ANY DATA AS TO THAT? WELL, THANK
YOU FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION. UM
AGAIN. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT THAT
THE MAJORITY OF THE DOGS ARE
ADOPTED BY THE HANDLER AT THE
END OF THE DAY. UM BUT WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT
OPPORTUNITY, UH THAT DOGS ARE
ACTUALLY BECOMING OF SERVICE FOR
POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN THE FIRST
PLACE. OF COURSE WE I DON'T HAVE
DATA ON WHAT CITIES ARE CHOOSING
NOT TO HAVE CANINES OR A LESSER
AMOUNT OF CANINES BECAUSE PEOPLE
AREN'T ADOPTING THE DOGS, YOU
KNOW, SORT OF THE OPPORTUNITY
COST OF NOT BEING ABLE TO ADOPT
AFTER THE FACT BUT I'LL TELL YOU
JUST FROM MY EXPERIENCE AGAIN,
HAVING BEEN THROUGH THREE OF
THESE PURCHASES IN THE PAST, WE
DEFINITELY WOULD CONSIDER THE
ABILITY OF SOMEBODY TO ACTUALLY
ADOPT THE DOG BEFORE WE WENT OUT
AND PURCHASED ONE BECAUSE IT IS
A LIFELONG COMMITMENT, AS YOU
KNOW, FOR HAVING A DOG. AND IF
IT AGENCY, ESPECIALLY A SMALLER
AGENCY IS UNABLE TO FULFILL THAT
COMMITMENT. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO
ADOPT IT, OR THEY'RE NOT GONNA
GET A DOG IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELL THANK
YOU SO MUCH AND WITHOUT
OBJECTION, WE ARE GOING TO BE
AH. I OBJECT? I'M JUST KIDDING.
OH I'M SORRY. YOU GET TOO CLOSE
SO YOU COULD TRY TO TALK ME INTO
IT. IT'S STILL GOING ON THE
SUSPENSE FILE. BUT PLEASE FEEL
FREE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
APPRECIATE I JUST ASK THAT YOU
DON'T MAKE ME OH, FOR TWO ON MY
BILLS OUT OF COMMITTEE, SO WITH
THAT I ONCE IT GETS OFF SUSPENSE
. THAT'S WHAT I'M ROOTING FOR.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
YEAH. YEAH, I SAID WITHOUT
OBJECTION, BUT WITHOUT OBJECTION
. GO TO SUSPENSE ARE RIGHT. AND
WE HAVE THE VERY PATIENT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILSON UP NEXT
FILE ITEM SIX A. B 321. YOU MAY
START WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
WELL GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS. IT IS A
PLEASURE TO BE BEFORE THIS
COMMITTEE. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME
BEFORE REVEREND TAX. I AM
PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 3 TO 1,
WHICH WILL ESTABLISH A NEW
EXEMPTION FROM THE STATE PORTION
OF THE SALES AND USE TAX FOR THE
PURCHASE OF ZERO EMISSION VARIES
BY PUBLIC TRANSIT AGENCIES SUCH
AS LONG BEACH TRANSIT WAITER AND
GOLDEN GATE FERRY THROUGH 2029
AFTER THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
AND THANK YOU FOR THOSE THIS
WILL REDUCE THE COST TO DEPLOY
ZERO EMISSION FERRIES AND TO
HELP THEM COMPLY WITH CALIFORNIA
AIR RESOURCES BOARD ACTUALLY
KNOWN AS CARB, COMMERCIAL HARBOR
CRAFT REGULATION, ALSO KNOWN AS
CHC. CARB RECENTLY APPROVED
AMENDMENTS TO CHD REGULATIONS
THAT REQUIRE PUBLIC TRANSIT
AGENCIES TO DEPLOY ZERO EMISSION
VARIES BY 2026. CALIFORNIA'S
PUBLIC TRANSFER TRANSIT, VERY
OPERATORS FACE AND PENDING.
IMPEDING TRANSIT OPERATION
FUNDING SHORTFALLS DUE TO THE
PANDEMICS IMPACT ON PARTNERSHIPS
. THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE
CAPITAL OUTLAY COST SAVINGS,
ALLOWING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO
BE MAINTAINED FOR TRANSIT
OPERATIONS, EXEMPTING ZERO
EMISSION FERRIES PURCHASED BY
PUBLIC AGENCIES FROM STATE SALES
AND USE TAX IS ESTIMATED TO SAVE
CALIFORNIA. PUBLIC TRANSIT, VERY
OPERATORS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS,
AND IT WILL HELP US REACH
CALIFORNIA'S GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION GOALS. MY WITNESS,
LARA GHOULA, GOULART, WITH THE
WATER EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY, WHICH I REFERRED TO
AS WELL AS BEFORE, IS HERE TO
PROVIDE TESTIMONY. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR WINNING
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
LAUREN GALARDI FROM THE 10
MINUTES AGO, BAY AREA WATER
EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY. I CALL IT BECAUSE
IT'S TOO LONG. WE OPERATE SER
FRANCISCO BAY FERRY SERVICES
WHERE PUBLIC REGIONAL PUBLIC
TRANSIT AGENCY TASKED WITH
OPERATING AND EXPANDING FERRY
SERVICE IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY
AND ALSO FOR COORDINATING THE
WATER TRANSIT RESPONSE TO
REGIONAL EMERGENCIES. WE CARRY
OVER THREE MILLION PASSENGERS
ANNUALLY, UTILIZING A FLEET OF
16 HIGH SPEED PASSENGER ONLY
VESSELS. AND WE CURRENTLY SERVE
THE CITIES OF ALAMEDA, OAKLAND,
RICHMOND, SAN FRANCISCO, SOUTH
SAN FRANCISCO AND VALLEJO. WE
ARE CO SPONSOR OF THE 3 TO 1 AND
I JOIN YOU TODAY TO URGE YOUR
SUPPORT FOR THIS IMPORTANT BILL.
THIS PROPOSED TAX SALES TAX
EXEMPTION WOULD ASSIST THE
STATE'S PUBLIC FERRY OPERATORS
IN TRANSITIONING TO ZERO
EMISSION TECHNOLOGY AND REDUCE
THE COST TO COMPLY WITH CARBS.
COMMERCIAL HARBOR CRAFT
REGULATIONS FOR BACKGROUND CURBS
RECENT AMENDMENTS TO THE CHC
REGULATIONS WENT INTO EFFECT ON
JANUARY 1ST OF THIS YEAR. UH AND
THEY REQUIRE THAT SHORT RUN
FERRIES, WHICH ARE ROUTES UNDER
THREE NAUTICAL MILES. BE 100% 0
MISSION STARTING JANUARY 1ST
2026. IN ADDITION, THEY ALSO
REQUIRE FAIRIES TO UPGRADE TO
TEAR FOR ENGINES AS WELL AS
INSTALLATION OF A DIESEL
PARTICULATE FILTER. THIS WILL BE
A COSTLY TRANSITION FOR PUBLIC
AGENCIES AND WILL REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL STATE SUPPORT. TO
ACHIEVE. TO ACHIEVE. EXCUSE ME.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY THREE PUBLIC
TRANSIT FERRY OPERATORS IN THE
STATE IMPACTED BY THE CHC
REGULATIONS AND BY THIS BILL, UH
, WITH A TOTAL OF 27 VESSELS,
LONG BEACH TRANSIT HAS FOUR
VESSELS W E. T S 16 VESSELS AND
GONE. GATE FERRY HAS SEVEN
VESSELS AS THESE AGENCIES
DEVELOPED PLANS TO COMPLY WITH
CARB CHC REGULATIONS EXEMPTING
ZERO EMISSION VESSELS FROM THE
STATE SALES TAX WILL SAVE
PRECIOUS PUBLIC FUNDS. AND
INCENTIVIZE OPERATORS TO CHOOSE
A ZERO EMISSION PATHWAY AT AN
ACCELERATED RATE, PUSHING THE
MARITIME INDUSTRY TO ADVANCE
THIS TECHNOLOGY W E T A HAS A
HAS CURRENTLY HAS AN AGGRESSIVE
SCHEDULE TO TRANSITION TO ZERO
EMISSIONS WITH 90 EMISSION
VESSELS SCHEDULED FOR DELIVERY
BETWEEN FY 26 F Y 33. IF THIS
BILL WAS APPROVED THAT ESTIMATED
SAVINGS FOR W. T A WOULD BE IN
THE RANGE OF 9 TO $10 MILLION
OVER THAT TIME FRAME. THESE
SAVINGS COULD BE USED TO
PURCHASE ADDITIONAL ZERO
EMISSION VESSELS TO PROVIDE EVEN
GREATER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR
THE STATE IN 2019 AND 2020 2022
SIMILAR BILLS, MAYBE 74 MAYBE 26
22 WERE PASSED TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
TRANSIT BUS OPERATORS WITH THIS
SAME SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR THE
PURCHASE OF ZERO EMISSION
BUSSES. THROUGH THIS BILL TO IS
PROPOSING TO MAKE THE SAME
BENEFIT AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC
TRANSIT FERRY OPERATORS AGAIN. I
URGE YOUR SUPPORT FOR A B 321 AT
THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, AND I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. STEVE
WALLACE NEVER HAVE TO GOLDEN
GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND
TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT. ALSO IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL, GO GET
BRIDGE ALSO OPERATES FERRIES AS
WELL AS BUS SERVICE BETWEEN
MARIN AND SONOMA IN SAN
FRANCISCO. SEVERAL YEARS AGO,
THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD PASSED
THE ENERGETICALLY IN TRANSIT
ROLE THAT REQUIRED ALL TRANSIT
BUSSES TO GIVE BIRTH TO ZERO
MISSION BY CERTAIN DEADLINES.
JUST THIS YEAR WITH THE PASSAGE
OF THE ENACTMENT OF THE CRUCIAL
HARBOR CRAFT RULE WERE ALSO
REQUIRED TO TRANSITION OR
FERRIES. IN ORDER TO DO THAT. IT
TAKES MULTIPLE FUNDING SOURCES.
IT'S NOT JUST DONE WITH FEDERAL
FUNDS OR FUNDS AND ELSIE TOP
FUNDS, BUT IT'S A COMBINATION OF
ALL THOSE THIS BILL IS ONE OF
THOSE PIECES THAT ARE CRITICAL
TO THAT MUCH LIKE WITH THE
BUSSES THAT THE EXEMPTION THAT'S
IN PLACE FOR THAT IT HELPS PIECE
THAT MONEY THAT FUNDS TOGETHER
IN ORDER TO BEAT THOSE MANDATES,
AND THIS IS ANOTHER PIECE OF
THAT EFFORT TO TRY AND FINANCE
THOSE CLEANER TECHNOLOGIES.
ALRIGHT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT?
GOOD AFTERNOON ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
LEWIS MERANTI WITH THE BAY AREA
COUNCIL HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL. THANKS THANK YOU.
HELLO MICHAELA ELDER ON BEHALF
OF CAL START WITH E C. ALSO IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILSON'S BILL.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. ALRIGHT THEN, UH MISS
WILSON Ó. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. SOMEBODY HAS
TO JUMP IN FOR BELK WORK MISSED
OUT. WE MISSED UP. UM OKAY. I
JUST WANT TO ASK A QUESTION
THAT'S RAISED PRETTY POINTEDLY.
I THINK IN THE ANALYSIS, SO AH,
THE ANALYSIS NOTES THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION OF PARTIAL S U T
EXEMPTIONS CAN BE VERY
COMPLICATED AND OFTEN. KIND OF
JUST FRIGHTENED, RIDDLED WITH
ERRORS, AND I BELIEVE OKAY,
ANALYSIS STATES. UH THE STATE
COULD INCREASE THE ALLOCATION TO
THE PROGRAM BY AN AMOUNT
EQUIVALENT TO THE REVENUE LOSS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS EXEMPTION,
WHICH WOULD FULFILL THE GOAL OF
THIS BILL TO HELP WITH THE
INCREASED COSTS ELIGIBLE
OPERATORS RESULTING FROM THE CHC
REGULATIONS WITHOUT FURTHER
COMPLICATING ADMINISTRATION
BECAUSE IT'S REALLY SORT OF MORE
OF A SUBSIDY THAN IT IS AN
INCENTIVE, SO THERE'S DIFFERENT
WAYS IN WHICH YOU COULD
IMPLEMENTED, SO IT'S WHY WOULD
WE TAKE THE UM AS YOU T
EXEMPTION APPROACH RATHER THAN
APPROACHING IT IN THAT WAY,
WHICH MIGHT BE LESS, UH OUT TO
BE RIDDLED WITH THERE'S, UM WHAT
THAT STATE TRANSITIONS FORMULA
IS A FORMULA ALLOCATION TO ALL
TRANSIT OPERATORS. SO IF YOU
TOOK THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT
THIS BILL WOULD WOULD MAYBE COST
BENEFIT THE TRANSIT OPERATORS
AND INCREASE SDA ALLOCATION BY
THAT AMOUNT. IT'S GOING TO GET
PROPORTIONATELY ALLOCATED TO ALL
OPERATORS, NOT JUST VERY
OPERATORS, SO WE JUST GET A
SMALL PIECE OF THAT, WHILE YOU
KNOW, YES TRANSIT OPERATED
ACROSS THE STATE NEED OPERATING
FUNDS, AND THAT WOULD DEFINITELY
ENCOURAGE YOU TO INCREASE THAT
AMOUNT. THIS IS NOT A WAY TO
KIND OF GIVE TO THAT INCENTIVE
FOR OFFSETTING THE COST OF ZERO
MISSION FERRIES. YOU'D HAVE TO
INCREASE IT BY FIVE TIMES AS
MUCH IN ORDER TO GET THE SAME
BENEFIT. OKAY I'M JUST FIVE
TIMES OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
BUT THAT'S BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE
BECAUSE IT'S ALLOCATED BY
FORMULA. GOES EACH REGION EACH
OPERATOR GET A SHARE OF ESTÁ
THAT GOES OUT BY POPULATION, AND
A HALF OF IT GOES OUT BY YOUR
FARE BOX RIDERSHIP AND SO SECOND
T WOULD GIVE PEACE OF THAT. YOU
KNOW, EVERYBODY AND I DON'T KNOW
ENOUGH ABOUT ESTÁ. SO IT'S NOT,
UH UM, GRANULAR ENOUGH YOU'RE
SAYING TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM
IN THE WAY THAT YOU WOULD KNOW
IT WOULD NOT TARGET THE THREE
OPERATORS WITH THE 27 VARIES, IT
WOULD NOT DO NOT WOULD DO THAT.
SO IT WOULD BE AN ALLOCATION.
THEY WOULD RECEIVE A PORTION OF
THE ALLOCATION, BUT THE
INTENTION IS PARTICULARLY FOR
THESE ZERO EMISSION VESSELS TO
HAVE THE SAME, UM INCENTIVE, SO
TO SPEAK, OR SAME SUBSIDY THAT
THE BUS IS THE CURRENT BUSSES.
CERRO MISSION BUSSES, TOO. WHAT
WOULDN'T HAVE BUDGET ALLOCATION
. WOULDN'T YOU BE ABLE TO DIRECT
A BUDGET ALLOCATION JUST TO
THESE FAIRIES? WE DID DO A
BUDGET ALLOCATION AS WELL. OKAY,
OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE?
ALL RIGHT. WELL THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, AND WITHOUT OH, YES. BEEN
WAITING SO LONG ALL AFTERNOON.
I'M SURE YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
A CLOSING STATEMENT TO I
RECOGNIZE THAT AND THANK YOU FOR
THE ADVANCED NOTIFICATION OF IT
GOING TO SUSPENSE, AND THAT IS
THE ORDER OF THE DAY. BUT JUST
NOTING WHEN IT DOES COME OUT FOR
A DECISION, WE WOULD HOPE THAT
THEY'RE BEING I VOTE FROM THE
COMMITTEE. WE THINK THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT, NOT ONLY AND
IN SUPPORT OF THESE, UM VARIES
BUT ALSO IN SUPPORT OF OUR
CHEMICALS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MISS WILSON. AND
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THIS BILL
WILL BE REFERRED TO SUSPENSE.
AND NOW OUR FINAL AGENDA ITEM
SEVEN. AND UM, THIS IS A B 3 14
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PATERSON AND
WE WILL BE HAVING A VOTE AT THE
END OF THIS PRESENTATION. SO
DON'T LEAVE YET, HMM. OR YOU'LL
HAVE TO COME BACK. THEN YOU
MISSED THE OPPORTUNITY OF MAKING
THIS UNANIMOUS. HMM. THANK YOU,
MADAM. CHAIR MEMBERS. FIRST I AM
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS, UH DO APPRECIATE THE
COMMITTEE AND STAFF WORKING WITH
US ON THESE TECHNICAL
CLARIFICATIONS. IT DOES HELP THE
BILL A B 314 IS EXTENDING THE
SUNSET FOR FIVE YEARS ON A SALES
AND USE TAX EXEMPTION. THAT
ALLOWS COMMERCIAL TRUCKS AND
TRAILERS TO BE PURCHASED FROM
CALIFORNIA DEALERS TAX FREE
WITHOUT ADDITIONAL BURDENSOME
REQUIREMENTS. AND IT ALSO BRINGS
PARODY TO THE LAW BY SIMPLY
CLARIFYING THAT USED TRAILERS
ALSO QUALIFIED FOR THIS
PROVISION. IN ADDITION TO NEW
AND REMANUFACTURED TRAILERS, SO
WHEN I BROUGHT THE ORIGINAL BILL
A B 3 21 BEFORE THE COMMITTEE IN
2019. FOR A COMMERCIAL TRUCK
PURCHASED IN CALIFORNIA TO
QUALIFY AS INTERSTATE COMMERCE
FOR TAX PURPOSES. IT HAD TO MEET
TWO QUALIFICATIONS. IT MUST BE
OUT OF THE STATE MORE THAN 51%
OF THE TIME AND THE VEHICLE MUST
MAKE ITS INITIAL TRIP WITH A
LOAD INTO THE STATE, EVEN IF IT
WAS PURCHASED IN CALIFORNIA.
MANDATING THIS UNNECESSARY
INBOUND TRIP REQUIREMENT.
INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION
POLLUTION WHERE AND TEAR ON THE
ROADS. UH EDIT DID DISCOURAGE
BUYERS FROM PURCHASING THEIR
COMMERCIAL TRUCKS IN CALIFORNIA.
MAYBE 314 INSURERS NOW THAT BOTH
COMMERCIAL TRUCKS AND TRAILERS
WILL CONTINUE TO BE EXEMPT FROM
THE INBOUND TRIP REQUIREMENT.
CHRISTIAN MODA WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION
IS HERE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. OKAY GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHERYL. WHEN THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS CHRISTIAN MOTO OF THE
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION
, SO YOU AS THE SIMILAR MEMBER
STATED EQUIPMENT PURCHASE FOR
USE IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE HAS
LONG BEEN EXEMPT FROM SALES AND
USE TAX BUT REQUIRED THAT THE
EQUIPMENT FIRST BE USED OUT OF
STATE IN 2019 83 21 REPEALED THE
OUT OF STATE FIRST USE
REQUIREMENT FOR NEW TRUCKS,
WHICH IS REDUCED UNNECESSARY OUT
OF STATE SHIPMENTS BY TRUCK
DEALERS IN THE ASSOCIATED FUEL
GREENHOUSE GASSES AND ROAD WEAR.
THIS PROVISION SUNSETS NEXT YEAR
, THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST IS
NOTED IN THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
WAS TASKED WITH ASSESSING THE
PROVISION IMPACT AND FOUND THAT
IT COULD NOT QUANTIFY ANY FISCAL
IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH A B 3 21.
IF THE SUNSET WERE TO LAPSE, NO
ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE WOULD
ACCRUE TO THE STATE OR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT IS OUT OF STATE
SHIPMENTS WOULD SIMPLY RESUME 83
14 EXTENDS THIS SUNSET
PROVISIONS TO 2029 WOULD ADD
USED TRAILERS TO THE SECTION IS
NEW TRAILERS ARE ALREADY EXEMPT
FROM THE FIRST USE REQUIREMENT.
83 14 WILL BENEFIT AIR QUALITY,
REDUCE CONGESTION BY REDUCING
UNNECESSARY TRUCK TRIPS BY
DEALERS. AND KEEP CALIFORNIA'S
TRUCK DEALERS COMPETITIVE IN AN
INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT OPERATING
ENVIRONMENT. FOR EXAMPLE,
STARTING NEXT YEAR FOR THE FIRST
TIME IN OVER 30 YEARS,
CALIFORNIA WILL ENFORCE A
CALIFORNIA ONLY EMISSION
STANDARD FOR NEW TRUCKS SOLD IN
THE STATE, WHICH WILL PUT OUR
TRUCK DEALERSHIPS AT A GREAT
COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE VERSUS
DEALERS IN NEIGHBORING STATES.
FOR THESE REASONS, WE ARE PROUD
TO SUPPORT MAYBE 3 14 AND THANK
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PATTERSON FOR
HIS CONTINUED LEADERSHIP. RIGHT.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? WE'VE
EMPTIED OUT THE ROOM. WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE. ALL
RIGHT, UM MISTER VALENCIA. THANK
YOU. MR PATTERSON. THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD. DO
WE HAVE A SENSE, AND I KNOW IT.
STATES IN THE INFORMATION AT THE
ELIO WILL TRACK THESE MOVING
FORWARD. BUT DO WE HAVE A SENSE
HISTORICALLY OF HOW MANY USED
TRAILERS AND SEMI TRAILERS OR
HAVING HISTORICALLY SOLD IN
CALIFORNIA? I DO NOT HAVE THE
STATISTICS NOW. SO NO SENSE OF
WHAT IT'S BEEN LIKE ON AN ANNUAL
BASIS PRIOR TO THIS POTENTIAL
CAN GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF, UH
WHAT THE BILL HAS DONE TO MAKE.
UH, CALIFORNIA. TRUCK DEALERS
MORE COMPETITIVE AND WE ARE
ACTUALLY SEEING INCREASED SALES
AS A RESULT OF THIS ORIGINAL
BILL WAS BROUGHT TO ME BY THE
FRESNO TRUCK CENTER. THIS IS ONE
OF THE LARGEST TRUCK DEALERSHIPS
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND
THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS, AS HAS
BEEN STATED. THE VALUE IN THE
BILL IS THAT IT REDUCES THE AIR
QUALITY. THE WEAR AND TEAR ON
THE ROADS, SAYS BOTH BUYERS AND
DEALERS. TÌM. WHEN PURCHASING OR
SELLING COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, AND
IT HAS DEMONSTRATED IMPROVED
COMPETITIVENESS FOR CALIFORNIA
TRACK DEALERS IN PARTICULAR, AND
I HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF IT.
IN FRESNO, THE FAMILY THAT OWNS
THE COMPANY ARE FRIENDS OF MINE
AND ACTUALLY BROUGHT THE IDEA.
TO ME AT THE TIME IT HAS WORKED
WELL AND ASKING FOR YOUR I VOTE
. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. AND JUST
ONE MORE QUESTION. SO THEN LET'S
SAY, JUST, FOR EXAMPLE, SAKE, A
NEW TRAILERS SOLD, UH, THEN
RESOLD IN CALIFORNIA AS A USED
TRAILER. UH IT WOULD BE EXEMPT
TWICE BECAUSE IT'S PURCHASED NEW
AND THEN PURCHASED USED AGAIN IN
CALIFORNIA. CORRECT. GREAT.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE
GOING TO BE VOTING ON THIS TODAY
BECAUSE THE IMPACT IS LESS THAN
$150,000. SO DO YOU AGREE TO THE
AMENDMENT, AND THEN GENERALLY,
WE DO LIKE TO HAVE AN L A OVER
REPORT. QUANTIFY UH, YOU KNOW
HOW SUCCESSFUL THE BILL IS, BUT
THERE WAS DIFFICULTY OF THE L A
O HAD DID HAVE DIFFICULTY
QUANTIFYING. AH! WHAT WAS
HAPPENING WITH THIS? SO UM,
CERTAINLY I DON'T THINK THAT WE
NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT EFFORT
AGAIN. SO WE ARE ALSO
RECOMMENDING THAT THERE'S NO NO
REQUIREMENT FOR AN L. A REPORT
THE NEXT TIME AH, UM ALRIGHT.
WELL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE MR
PATTERSON? ALRIGHT. RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. AND BY THE
WAY, I WILL BE GLAD TO, UH,
PROVIDE SOME DIRECT INFORMATION
WITH RESPECT TO FRESNO TRUCK
CENTER AND HOW BEFORE THE BILL
AND AFTER THE BILL, IMPROVE
THEIR COMPETITIVENESS AND ALSO
BROUGHT THE REDUCTION IN THE AIR
POLLUTION AND THE TRIP MILES AND
ALL OF THAT. AND SO I ASKED THE
RIGHT VOTE AND THANK YOU ALL
RIGHT? YES. AND I WILL BE
RECOMMENDING AND I VOTE. SO DO I
HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND? SO
THAT WAS A MOTION BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GRAYSON AND A
SECOND BY ASSEMBLYMAN. OH I'M
YOU KNOW THE THREE OF YOU OVER
THERE. I COULDN'T HEAR ALL
RIGHT. AH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
TAUGHT AND, UM, A SECOND BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PETRIE-NORRIS.
UM CAN I HAVE, UH, THE HELP,
PLEASE. ON THE MOTION. I'M SORRY
DO PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. MAYBE 3 TO 14.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASSES AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS. IRWIN IRWIN,
I. WALLACE BAINES BAINES. I
GRAYSON GRACE AND I PACHECO AYE.
JIM PATTERSON A LITTLE BIT
CONFLICTED AT THE MOMENT, BUT
I'M GLAD THAT BOAT I PATERSON
PETRIE-NORRIS PETRIE-NORRIS, AYE
RIVAS TÂM. THAI VALENCIA. ONCE
YOUR EYE SUPER SUPER I FEEL IS
OUT. THANK YOU. ZERO ALRIGHT
THAT RUSSIAN PASSES 9 TO 0.
THANK YOU. EVERYBODY MIGHT WANT
. TO. ALL RIGHT, AND WE WILL
HOLD THE ROLL OPEN FOR FIVE
MINUTES. FRED ONS. YOU CAN, BUT
IT'S NOT RECORDED ANYWHERE. SO
IF YOU'D LIKE TO BE. UM ON THE
COMMITTEE RULES OR ADD ONS.
GRAYSON DID HE LEAVE? IT'S UH
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ON TO
THE FOR THE RULES, ALL RIGHT ON
THE COMMITTEE RULES, GRACE AND I
PETRIE-NORRIS NORRIS I REVIS
VALENCIA ONCE YOUR EYES WERE,
AYE. GREAT. NO. THANKS. I WAS
LOOKING AGAIN. OTHER USUALLY
WAIT. THEY WALKED AWAY NOW.
DON'T DO IT AT HOME. AND WHEN
THEY'RE GOING TO. BLACK SPORT.
YEAH. 2 STARTED? YEAH. WHAT WAS
THAT, LIKE BEING A DOCTOR?
THAT'S JUST DO THAT, REALLY. OH,
THAT'S RIGHT. MAYBE PROBABLY.
FOR ME? YEAH. SORRY.
YEAH. EVERYBODY THINKS THANK YOU
FOR THE C. I CALLED YOU THE LAST
TIME I SAID THIS REPORT WE
MISSED BILL. MHM. BUT YOU'RE I
NEED TO TELL. I DON'T THINK SHE
SAID IS TRUE. A SYSTEM FOR
WEATHER. YEAH. SPECIFICALLY FOR
WHAT SHE WANTS. YOU CAN DO IT.
DO A LINE ITEM ALLOCATION
DIRECTLY TO MAKE THOSE THREE TO
THOSE THREE KINDS OF YEAH, AND
IT JUST WHAT IF. THAT'S IT
BECAUSE IT WAS. IT WAS ALWAYS
ONE WOULD ASK ABOUT THE FREE
RIDE RIDER PROCESS. IT'S GOTTA
BE ME NOW. TODAY TOMORROW,
EASIER WAY TO DO IT, DO IT ABOUT
YOU.
ALL I AM. YEAH KNOW THAT. I
DON'T NEED TO RUSH THAT. ALRIGHT
LET'S OKAY. YEAH, THERE WE ARE.
YEAH. ON EXCUSE ME. ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN A B 314. THE MOTION IS DO
PASS A MINUTE INTO
APPROPRIATIONS BILL HAS PASSED,
UM REVERSE I RIVERSIDE? YES MR
WALLACE, DO IT. AND THAT SHOULD
DOES. MISS RIVAS VOTE ON THE
RULES TO CAN ON THE COMMITTEE
RULES. RIVAS SIDE THAT'S IT. YES
EVERYTHING ELSE IS ON SUSPENSE.
A FEW WEEKS.
ALL RIGHT. AND OUR LAST
COMMITTEE MEMBER, THE CO CHAIR
IT'S HERE. WHAT IS THAT? ON A B
3 14. THE BILL HAS PASSED ITS DO
PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. WALLACE. AND I
JUST ASKED HIM ABOUT THE
COMMITTEE RULES. THE RULES. HE
WAS HERE HE WAS HERE. ALL RIGHT,
SO THAT'S IT. OKAY. AND WITH
THAT? THIS COMMITTEE MEETING IS
ADJOURNED.