OKAY GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING,
EVERYONE WELCOME. I'D LIKE TO
CALL ORDER THIS HEARING OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES
AND ENERGY FIRST EXTRAORDINARY
SESSION. IT'S NOT, UM GATHER
DECORUM YET SO WE WILL START AS
A SUBCOMMITTEE SERGEANTS, PLEASE
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS. BEFORE
WE MOVE TO THE AGENDA. I HAVE A
FEW HOUSEKEEPING ANNOUNCEMENTS
TO MAKE TODAY WE HAVE ONE
MEASURE ON THE AGENDA. AND OF
COURSE, AS ALWAYS, IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WE MAINTAIN
QUORUM DURING THE HEARING AS
CUSTOMARY IN ORDER TO HEAR AS
MUCH FROM THE PUBLIC WITHIN THE
LIMITS OF OUR TIME. THANK YOU SO
MUCH OR FOLLOWING THOSE
INSTRUCTIONS. WE'LL ASK, UM,
SECRETARY TO CALL THE ROLE WHEN
WE HAVE A QUORUM. I KNOW WE HAVE
AN AUTHOR, SO WE WILL INTRODUCE
ITEM ONE. SB TWO. AND. SKINNER,
SENATOR SKINNER, UM, PLEASE. YOU
MAY BEGIN AND I SEE THAT YOU
HAVE YOUR WITNESSES THAT WILL BE
TESTIFYING THERE AS WELL. WE
WILL LIMIT THEIR TESTIMONY TO
TWO MINUTES, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
CHAIR AND MEMBERS VERY PLEASED
TO PRESENT SB X 12. THIS IS A
BILL, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO
PROTECT CALIFORNIANS AGAINST OIL
COMPANY PRACTICES THAT HAVE LED
TO OUTRAGEOUS GASOLINE PRICE
HIKES. CALIFORNIANS WERE CHARGED
AGAINST THE MOUNT. WE WERE
CHARGED FOR A GALLON OF
GASOLINE. WAS HIGHER. THEN
CHARGE TO ANYONE IN ANY OTHER
STATE. NOW SOME OF YOU MAY THINK
WELL, THAT'S NORMAL. IT IS NOT
NORMAL WENT ON AVERAGE THAT
HIGHER PRICE WAS $2.61 HIGHER
THAN WHAT OTHER STATES PAID.
NOW, ANY OF US WHO DOOR HOMEWORK
CAN GIVE A VERY WE CAN CALCULATE
EXACTLY WHAT THE ADDITIONAL
CHARGES ARE IN CALIFORNIA FOR
OUR GOOD, CLEAN AIR BLEND. FOR A
VARIETY OF GOOD PRACTICES FOR
THE SUPPORT FOR OUR ROAD
MAINTENANCE AND OTHER
TRANSPORTATION ACTIVITIES. WE
CAN CALCULATE THAT AND WE CAN
DEBATE PERHAPS WHAT THAT AMOUNT
IS, BUT IT IS NOWHERE AND I AM
SAYING NOWHERE NEAR $2.61. AND
THOSE SHOCKING PRICES WERE
CHARGED AT A TIME WHEN OIL
COMPANIES WERE POCKETING RECORD
PROFITS IN 2022 ALONE, OIL
COMPANIES REPORTED MORE THAN 200
BILLION IN PROFITS. IF YOU ARE I
MADE $98 MILLION A YEAR FOR 2000
YEARS, WE STILL WOULDN'T MAKE AS
MUCH AS OIL COMPANIES DID LAST
YEAR. CALIFORNIANS DESERVE TO BE
PROTECTED AGAINST ANY BUSINESS
THAT. MAY UNSCRUPULOUSLY PAD ITS
PROFITS AT OUR EXPENSE. SPX 12
IS A CONSUMER PROTECTION
REGULATION. THAT CAN SAFEGUARD
ALL OF US FROM AN INDUSTRY.
WHOSE PRACTICE MAY DO US HARM.
SPECIFICALLY THE BILL CREATES A
NEW INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG, THE
DIVISION OF PETROLEUM MARKET
OVERSIGHT WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION. AND THAT
AGENCY OR THAT DIVISION. EXCUSE
ME. THE DIVISION WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING
CALIFORNIA'S PETROLEUM MARKET TO
ENSURE THAT MARKET PARTICIPANTS
PLAY BY THE RULES. IT ALSO
CREATES AN INDEPENDENT CONSUMER
FUELS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MADE UP
OF EXPERTS THAT WILL BE
APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR AND
THE LEGISLATURE. IT ESTABLISHES
NEW DATA REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
ON OIL COMPANIES AND REFINERIES
TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION
NECESSARY FOR THE NEW WATCHDOG
AGENCY TO CONDUCT ITS ANALYSIS.
IT GIVES THE NEW DIVISION
SUBPOENA POWER TO ENSURE THAT WE
HAVE THE DATA AND THE RECORDS
THAT WE NEED TO DETERMINE IF
THERE IS A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT
OR PRICE MANIPULATION. IT GIVES
THE DIVISION THE AUTHORITY TO
REFER VIOLATIONS OF LAW TO OUR
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
PROSECUTION. AND IT AUTHORIZES
THE ENERGY COMMISSION TO
ESTABLISH A MAXIMUM GROSS
GASOLINE REFINING MARGIN. THAT
IS BASED ON THE ANALYSIS
PROVIDED BY THE NEW DIVISION,
WHICH, OF COURSE, THE NEW
DIVISION WILL CONDUCT THAT
ANALYSIS BASED ON THE DATA AND
INFORMATION THEY COLLECT BY
VIRTUE OF THE DATA REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED
IN THE BILL. AND THEN. IT IS
ENABLES THE C E C TO SET A
PENALTY ONLY IF THE PRICE OF
GASOLINE IS DETERMINED TO EXCEED
THE GROSS GASOLINE REFINING
MARGIN, AND THAT WOULD BE AFTER
THE EEC UNDERTAKES A PUBLIC
RULEMAKING PROCESS. SO THIS DOES
NOT GUARANTEE A PENALTY. IT SETS
UP A MECHANISM TO DO SO IF IT IS
WARRANTED. BUT OF COURSE, IF THE
OIL COMPANIES PRACTICES ARE SUCH
THAT IT IS NOT WARRANTED THAN
THE PENALTY WOULD NEVER BE USED
, IF IN CASE THE PENALTY IS USED
, THE BILL ESTABLISHES A PRICE
GOUGING PENALTY FUND IN THE
STATE TREASURY. AND IT ENSURES
WE, THE LEGISLATURE'S AUTHORITY
TO APPROPRIATE ANY MONIES THAT
ARE IN THAT FUND. AND FOR THE
PURPOSE OF ADDRESSING THE
CONSEQUENCES OF PRICE GOUGING.
THIS ALSO PROVIDES FOR AN ANNUAL
REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE THAT
INCLUDES A REVIEW OF GASOLINE
PRICES IN THAT YEAR. AND TO
PROTECT THE LEGISLATURE'S
ABILITY TO INTERVENE IF
NECESSARY. IF WE FEEL THAT IT IS
NOT WORKING THE PROGRAM AS WE'VE
JUST DESIGNED IT, IT REQUIRES
THE STATE AUDITOR. NO LATER THAN
MARCH. 1ST 2033 TO COMPLETE AN
AUDIT OF THE PROGRAM AND MAKE A
DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER THE
PROGRAM IS ACHIEVING THE
INTENDED GOAL OF REDUCING
GASOLINE PRICE. BIKE HIKES,
PRICE SPIKES AND STABILIZING THE
GASOLINE FUEL SUPPLY MARKET IF
THE AUDITOR CONCLUDES THAT THE
PROGRAM IS NOT WORKING, AS
INTENDED. THEN THE ENERGY
COMMISSION ITSELF WILL BE
REQUIRED TO CEASE IMPLEMENTING
THE MAXIMUM GROCERY FINING
MARGIN AND THE PENALTY
PROVISIONS WITHIN 180 DAYS. AND
IF THE LEGISLATURE CHOOSES TO DO
SO THEY CAN INTERVENE AND END
IT'S FASTER. NOW THE
TRANSPARENCY MEASURES THAT I
MENTIONED THOSE DATA
REQUIREMENTS HAVE THE POTENTIAL
TO DETER. EXCESSIVE PRICING. IF
THE OIL COMPANIES SO CHOOSE, AND
THAT'S WHAT WE HOPE THAT THIS
DOES, BUT IF NOT IT CREATES THAT
ABILITY TO HAVE A PENALTY.
THAT'S IT WILL HOLD BIG OIL
ACCOUNTABLE TO PREVENT FUTURE
EXCESSIVE PROFITS AT THE EXPENSE
OF EXPENSE OF OUR HARDWORKING
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES. AND NOW I
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MY LEAD
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT LAUREN
SANCHEZ, WHO IS THE SENIOR
CLIMATE ADVISER FROM THE OFFICE
OF GOVERNOR, GAVIN NEWSOM. AND
JANNAH STANDIFORD, WHO IS FROM
THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL,
UH, BONTA FROM DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
BEFORE WE PROCEED. I'M GOING TO
ASK THE SECRETARY CALL THE ROLL
SO THAT WE MAY ESTABLISH A
COURT. GARCIA. GARCIA HERE,
PATTERSON PATTERSON HERE,
BARRACK KHN. BAUER-KAHAN HERE,
CALDERON. CALLED AROUND HERE.
KOREA. CHAN. CONNELLY. CONNELLY
HERE, HOLDEN. HOLDING HERE.
MATHIS IS HERE. MURATSUCHI
MURATSUCHI HERE, RAISE. PHRASE
HERE. SANTIAGO JAVA. SHALL GO
HERE, TING. WALLACE WALLACE
HERE. OR LIKE YOU MAY BEGIN,
PLEASE. WHEN I WAS THE CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME HERE
TODAY. I'M LAUREN SANCHEZ, THE
GOVERNOR'S SENIOR CLIMATE
ADVISER. AND I JOIN YOU TODAY ON
BEHALF OF GOVERNOR NEWSOM. LAST
FALL, GAS PRICES SPIKED IN THIS
STATE TO AN AVERAGE OF $6.41 IN
MANY OF YOUR DISTRICTS CLIMBING
ABOVE $7 OR $8 A GALLON AS THE
SENATOR OUTLINED THAT WAS A
RECORD $2.61 ABOVE THE NATIONAL
AVERAGE. CALIFORNIA GAS PRICES
INCREASED 84 CENTS IN JUST 10
DAYS. ENERGY AND MARKET EXPERTS
, ECONOMISTS, INDUSTRY PARTNERS
AND STATE GOVERNMENT ITSELF
COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHY. IN FACT,
NO ONE KNEW WHY THESE FIVE
COMPANIES THAT CONTROL 97% OF
OUR MARKET INVENTORIES DROPPED
TWO DECADES LOW. OR HOW THEIR
CHANGES IN PRODUCTION WERE
IMPACTING OUR PRICES. BUT WHAT
WE DO KNOW IS THAT JUST A FEW
WEEKS LATER OIL COMPANIES
REPORTED HISTORIC PROFITS.
POSTING $63 BILLION IN JUST 90
DAYS. THAT'S $700 MILLION A DAY.
FOR THE GOVERNOR, AND FOR EVERY
SINGLE ONE OF US WHO ARE PAYING
RECORD PRICES AT THE PUMP.
ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH. WE HAD TO
TAKE ACTION. HE CALLED A SPECIAL
SESSION TO HOLD THESE OIL
ACCOUNT COMPANIES ACCOUNTABLE
AND DEMAND THAT THEY STOP
FLEECING CALIFORNIAN FAMILIES.
SINCE LAST FALL. WE'VE WORKED
TIRELESSLY AND COLLABORATIVELY
WITH LEGISLATIVE LEADERS,
EXPERTS AND STAKEHOLDERS ON HOW
TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM AND IT
KEEPS COMING BACK TO ONE ISSUE
WHICH YOU ALL HEARD EXHAUSTIVELY
AT THE INFO HEARING LAST WEEK.
UNLIKE COMMODITIES, ELECTRICITY
AND MANY OTHER MARKETS. THIS IS
AN INDUSTRY THAT HAS BEEN
ALLOWED TO OPERATE IN THE
SHADOWS. IT HAS LACKED THE
ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND
THE OVERSIGHT THAT WE HAVE LONG
REQUIRED OF OTHER CRITICAL
SECTORS. THE STATE DOESN'T YET
HAVE THE DATA IN THE INFORMATION
NEEDED TO PROTECT HARDWORKING
FAMILIES. FROM OIL COMPANIES
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEM AT THE
PUMP. THIS PROPOSAL DOES JUST
THAT. THE BILL. YOU SEE TODAY
THAT THE LEGISLATURE AND OUR
TIRELESS WORKING GROUPS
CONTRIBUTED TO IS A BETTER BILL
THAN WHAT WAS INTRODUCED LAST
FALL. IT PROVIDES THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE
LEGISLATURE WITH THE TOOLS TO
MITIGATE THESE PRICE SPIKES
GOING FORWARD AND WITH THE
TRANSPARENCY MEASURES TO FINALLY
LOOK UNDER THE HOOD OF THIS
INDUSTRY AND ASK WHAT ARE THESE
COMPANIES HIDING? IT EMPOWERS
THE ENERGY COMMISSION TO SET A
PRICE GOUGING PENALTY AND
ESTABLISHES AN INDEPENDENT
WATCHDOG THAT WILL PROVIDE THE
OVERSIGHT THAT THIS MILLION
MULTIBILLION DOLLAR MARKET HAS
EVADED FOR TOO LONG. AND IT DOES
SO WELL, PROTECTING
CONFIDENTIALITY AND DEVELOPING
THE PLAN TO TRANSITION OFF
PETROLEUM WHILE ENSURING
RELIABLE AND AFFORDABLE FUELS
FOR CALIFORNIANS. THANK YOU FOR
PUSHING US TO MAKE THIS PROPOSAL
BETTER BY QUESTIONING OUR STAFF
IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND
ACROSS THE ADMINISTRATION AND
DIGGING INTO THE SMALLEST
DETAILS. ON BEHALF OF THE
GOVERNOR. THANK YOU FOR TAKING A
BOLD STANCE FOR YOUR COMMUNITIES
AND FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS WILL
BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS
YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. REMINDER WITNESSES IF WE
COULD STAY WITHIN THE TWO
MINUTE, MARK. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JANICE
STANDIFORD I'M A DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL AND LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND
ON BEHALF OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
ROB BONTA WANT TO START BY
THANKING SENATOR SKINNER FOR
CARRYING THIS HISTORIC
LEGISLATION. THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL IS PROUD TO STAND WITH
GOVERNOR NEWSOM AND CO SPONSORED
THIS BILL TO TAKE ON BIG OIL AND
PROTECT CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS
LAST YEAR, OIL COMPANIES RIGGED
IN RECORD PROFITS WHILE
CALIFORNIANS STRUGGLED TO MAKE
ENDS MEET HIGH GAS PRICES AND
EXCESSIVE PROFITS REAPED IN BY
THE OIL INDUSTRY HAVE COME AT
THE EXPENSE OF HARDWORKING
CALIFORNIAN FAMILIES. AND THE
FINANCIAL BURDEN OF SKYROCKETING
PRICES HAS BEEN SHOULDERED
DISPROPORTIONATELY BY LOWER
INCOME CALIFORNIANS. THIS BILL
WOULD AUTHORIZE THE ENERGY
COMMISSION THROUGH A PUBLIC
PROCESS. TO IMPOSE THE PRICE
GOUGING PENALTY TO CURB
EXCESSIVE PROFITS AND RETURN THE
FUNDS TO HARDWORKING CALIFORNIA
FAMILIES. IT WOULD ALSO IMPROVE
TRANSPARENCY INTO CALIFORNIA'S
PETROLEUM MARKET. AND CREATE AN
INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG WITHIN THE
ENERGY COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE
THE INDUSTRY'S MARKET ACTIVITIES
AND REPORTS REFER POTENTIAL
VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL. FOR DECADES,
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
HAS INVESTIGATED GAS PRICES
LOOKED FOR PRICE FIXING AND
MARKET MANIPULATION AND
PROSECUTED BAD ACTORS THAT
SCHEMED TO DRIVE UP THE PRICE OF
GAS DURING PREVIOUS PERIODS OF
MARKET DISRUPTION. WE'RE STILL
ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN LITIGATION
AGAINST TO MULTINATIONAL
GASOLINE TRADING FIRMS. THAT
ALLEGEDLY MANIPULATED
CALIFORNIA'S GAS PRICES AND COST
CONSUMERS MORE AT THE PUMP. IN
THE WAKE OF THE 2015 EXPLOSION
AT A GASOLINE REFINERY IN
TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY
GENERAL STANDS READY TO ENFORCE
AND DEFEND THIS BILL AS WELL AND
PROSECUTE BAD ACTORS ROOTED OUT
THROUGH THE INCREASED
TRANSPARENCY AND OVERSIGHT
INCLUDED IN THE BILL. CALIFORNIA
CONSUMERS HAVE BEEN PAYING TOO
MUCH AT THE PUMP, WHILE OIL
COMPANIES CONTINUE TO RECORD
REPORT RECORD PROFITS AT THEIR
EXPENSE. THIS HAS GONE ON FAR
TOO LONG AND ATTORNEY GENERAL
BONDI URGES YOUR I VOTE ON THIS
HISTORIC LEGISLATION, AND I ALSO
JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO
INTRODUCE MICHAEL JORGENSEN,
WHO'S WITH ME FROM OUR ANTITRUST
SECTION. IF YOU HAVE ANY
ANTITRUST RELATED QUESTIONS,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE
ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES TESTIFYING
IN OPPOSITION. PLEASE COME
FORWARD.
MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS ELI GARCIA
FOR THE WESTERN STATES PETROLEUM
ASSOCIATION. REPRESENTING THE
STATE'S REFINERS AND MAJOR OIL
AND GAS PRODUCERS. WE CONTINUE
TO OPPOSE THIS BILL BECAUSE IT
FAILS TO ADDRESS THE CORE ISSUES
FACING CALIFORNIA'S FIELDS
MARKET THAT SUPPLY AND
INFRASTRUCTURE. THE ASSEMBLY
SELECT COMMITTEE EXAMINED
GASOLINE PRICING LAST SUMMER.
RECEIVED INFORMATION, WRITTEN
TESTIMONY AND BEYOND. THAT
CLEARLY IDENTIFIED CALIFORNIA'S
GROWING SUPPLY AND DEMAND IN
BALANCE AS THE ISSUE. THAT WAS
IN JULY. THAT WAS BEFORE THE
SUMMER BREAK. AND WE CERTAINLY
ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO BACK AND
TAKE A LOOK AT THAT TESTIMONY
THAT WRITTEN MATERIAL. PROFESSOR
BORNSTEIN, WHO YOU'VE HEARD FROM
CONSISTENTLY YOU HEARD FROM LAST
WEEK. AT THAT HEARING AND
WRITTEN TESTIMONY. CLEARLY
STATED THAT REFINERS ARE NOT THE
ISSUE. YES HIS MYSTERY SURCHARGE
IS NOT A REFINER ISSUE. WE'VE
HEARD THAT CONSISTENTLY. BUT YET
THIS BILL FOCUSES ON REFINERS.
AND THE ONLY SOLUTION IS REFINER
RELATED. THE BILL THAT YOU'RE
RUSHING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
ADDS BODIES, ADDS BUREAUCRACY AT
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION. ADDS AUDIT
REQUIREMENTS AT PENALTIES. WHAT
IT DOES NOT DO IS ADD SUPPLY.
DOES NOT EXPEDITE PORTER
PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE'RE STILL REVIEWING THE
SPECIFICS OF THE MASSIVE NEW
DATA REPORTING REQUIREMENT, AND
IT IS MASSIVE. IT IS A
INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF NEW DATA
THAT'S REQUIRED. BUT MOST
IMMEDIATELY CONCERNING IS THE
CONFIDENTIALITY OF THIS NEW
INFORMATION. THE BILL NOW MAKES
SOME OF THAT CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT MARKET SENSITIVE
INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO AN
APPOINTED NEW TASK FORCE
BUREAUCRACY, SOME OF IT AGAIN
NONE. APPOINTED POLITICALLY
APPOINTED, NOT STATE EMPLOYEES
MAKES IT AVAILABLE TO
LEGISLATIVE STAFF. AND
ULTIMATELY MAKES SOME OF THAT
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC,
INCLUDING POTENTIALLY SOME OF
THE ACTORS THAT THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL DIS MENTIONED ARE IN
CURRENT LITIGATION. WE THINK YOU
OUGHT TO ACT WITH CAUTION HERE
IN TERMS OF THE INFORMATION AND
HOW IT'S PROTECTED. THE
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO THE
ENERGY COMMISSION TO IMPLEMENT A
MAXIMUM REFINERY MARGIN IN
SECTION FIVE IS A MISTAKE. AND
COULD MAKE A SUPPLY AND DEMAND
IMBALANCE SITUATION WORSE, IT
SENDS A CLEAR SIGNAL NOT TO
INVEST IN CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA
IS SORT OF FUEL SUPPLY THE
AUTHORITY THAT YOU'RE GRANTED.
THE ENERGY COMMISSION IS THE
WRONG ONE. YOU HEARD THAT FROM,
UH, FROM YOUR ECONOMIST,
INFORMATIONAL HEARINGS. AGAIN.
WE URGE YOU TO TAKE TIME TO
EVALUATE THE RIGHT SOLUTION IN
THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.
ALSO MAJOR CONCERN IS THE NEW
LANGUAGE IN SECTION THREE OF THE
BILL THAT AUTHORIZES THE ENERGY
COMMISSION TO DICTATE REFINERY
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES. THAT'S
ALSO A MISTAKE FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE. ONE THING IS TO
FIND OUT WHEN IT'S HAPPENING TO
BE INFORMED TO TRY TO AVOID ON
UNEXPECTED LOSSES AND SUPPLY BUT
TO DICTATE SCHEDULES IS A STEP
TOO FAR. AS POTENTIALLY
DANGEROUS NOT ONLY TO OUR
EMPLOYEES, BUT OUR COMMUNITIES.
THIS BILL IS MOVING FAST. AND IT
WAS CLEAR IN THE SENATE ENERGY
COMMITTEE. THAT THERE ARE
LANGUAGE ISSUES. THERE ARE
ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED
UP. I'M SURE YOU'RE GOING TO
HEAR OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF
MONTHS. WE NEED TO CLEAN UP THAT
BILL THAT WE RUSH THROUGH. ONE
OF THE ISSUES THAT WAS CLEAR WAS
THAT PRODUCERS WERE UNINTENDED
LEE CAUGHT IN THIS BILL. SENATOR
GROVE ASKED THE QUESTION. I
BELIEVE THE ADMINISTRATION
AGREED TO THAT. MAYBE THAT WAS
NOT INTENDED, BUT WE WOULD
CERTAINLY LIKE CLARITY ON THAT.
IS THAT INTENTIONAL? IS IT NOT
BECAUSE THERE ARE CLEARLY
LANGUAGE ISSUES. I NEED TO BE
ADDRESSED HERE. 30 SECONDS AS A
MAN AS AMENDED. THIS BILL CALLS
FOR STUDIES AND EVALUATION OF
SUPPLY AND DEMAND. BUT ONLY
AFTER IT FIRST DELEGATES
CRITICAL AUTHORITY TO THE ENERGY
COMMISSION. WE WOULD ENCOURAGE
YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT PAGE 10 OF
THE ANALYSIS ALL OF THE SO
CALLED EVALUATION THAT'S GOING
TO TAKE PLACE IS CLEARLY WAITED.
AFFIRMATIVE ANSWER. IT'S CLEAR
THAT THE ENERGY COMMISSION WILL
FIND A WAY TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY
. SO WE URGE YOU TO TAKE THE
TIME TO GET IT RIGHT. MAKE SURE
THAT THIS IS NOT MAKE THIS
SUMMER SITUATION WORSE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. VERY
GENEROUS OF ME. FOUR MINUTES.
PLEASE. IF YOU KEEP YOUR
COMMENTS ABSOLUTELY, MR CHAIR.
AND YEAH, I WOULD WORK ON WORK
ON BREVITY. MY SET HERE, UM, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. GOOD MORNING.
BRADY VAN ENGLAND. HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE, AND WE REMAIN
OPPOSED. THIS BILL SETS A BAD
PRECEDENT AND SENDS THE WRONG
MESSAGE TO OTHER INDUSTRIES HERE
IN CALIFORNIA. ALLOWING AN
UNELECTED BODY DOES NOT
ACCOUNTABLE TO ANYONE
CONSTITUENCY DETERMINE WHAT A
REASONABLE PROFIT MARGIN IS,
SENDS THE WRONG SIGNAL TO THE
BUSINESS COMMUNITY LEAVES THEM
ASKING IF THEY WILL BE NEXT.
MEASURE WILL NOT LOWER THE PRICE
OF FUELS OR TRANSPORTATION FUELS
HERE IN CALIFORNIA. QUITE
FRANKLY, TO BE CLEAR PRICE IS A
BYPRODUCT OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND.
THIS MEASURE WILL NOT IMPACT
EITHER ONE OF THOSE BUT RATHER
FOCUSES ON SETTING PRICE CAPS ON
REFINERS. YOU'RE TRYING TO MEET
THE DEMAND FOR TRANSPORTATION
FUELS HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
ANYTHING THAT COULD LEAD TO
HIGHER PRICES, WHICH WILL ONLY
EXASPERATE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS
WE'RE FACING HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
THAT'S WHAT HURTS SMALL
BUSINESSES AND THOSE THAT CAN
AFFORD IT THE LEAST. JUST A FEW
WEEKS AGO WE HEARD FROM OTHER
EXPERTS THAT ATTACKS ON PROFITS
WON'T WORK AS I MENTIONED A
MOMENT AGO WHETHER THAT TAX
INCREASES IMPLEMENTED BY THE
LEGISLATURE OR THE CDC IS
IRRELEVANT. THAT AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
LEGISLATOR LEGISLATURE AND
IDENTIFYING WAYS TO ADDRESS
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS, HOWEVER,
WE BELIEVE THIS MEASURE WILL NOT
HELP TO LOWER THE COST OF
TRANSPORTATION FUELS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, AND FOR THAT REASON
WE STAND HERE OPPOSED TO THIS
BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR
CHAIR. THANK YOU WILL NOW NOW
OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS,
THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK FAVOR OR
AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL, PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
YOUR POSITION. ONE SECOND. GIVE
HIM A SECOND AT THE MIC ON FOR
YOU. MR SERGEANT. THANK YOU. ON
BEHALF OF THE CURRENT COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. THEY'RE
ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THIS BILL
AND ARJUN NOVO. THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. JOHN WINGER ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA FUELS
AND CONVENIENCE ALLIANCE AND
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS JAMES MICHAEL
APOLLO WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES. STRONG
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. TOBIAS. WELCOME
WITH THE CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION.
SECURE CARTER ON BEHALF OF
SIERRA CLUB, CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS JUSTIN FANS ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, THE
WESTERN STATE COUNCIL OF SHEET
METAL WORKERS AND THE CALIFORNIA
COALITION OF UTILITY EMPLOYEES
ALL IN SUPPORT, ALSO
REPRESENTING OVER 125 SIGNATORY
MEMBERS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS TO
PROTECT AMERICA. IT'S IMPORTANT.
THANK YOU. MEGAN SHUMWAY, UM,
REPRESENTING FOSSIL FREE
CALIFORNIA AND SACRAMENTO BRIEF
50 IN SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING.
CHRISTINA'S PARENTS FOR THE
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
AND STRONG SUPPORT. MELANIE
MERRILEES WITH THE GREEN LINE
INSTITUTE AND STRONG SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING. STEPHEN KING WITH
ENVIRONMENT, CALIFORNIA IN
STRONG SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING
CHAIR MEMBERS. TYSON BAGLEY,
REPRESENTING, UH, SEVERAL 100
MEMBERS OF USW LOCAL 3 26 IN
STRONG OPPOSITION BECAUSE OF THE
THREAT OF SAFETY TO THE MEMBERS
THAT WE REPRESENT. GALILEO
ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HIM STONE
STONE ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF
CONSUMER WATCHDOG AND A LARGE
COALITION OF OVER 100,
ENVIRONMENTAL, CONSUMER AND
OTHER GROUPS THAT I WON'T READ
EACH OF THEM ALOUD TO YOU, BUT
COPIES OF THE LETTERS OUTSIDE
AND IT'S A BIG AND MIGHTY GROUP.
GOOD MORNING. MATT WAS AM
BAFFLED STU CALIFORNIAN SUPPORT
. GOOD MORNING, DR GLIAL SABA
WITH 3 50 SACRAMENTO IN SUPPORT
. THANK YOU. SO YOU NO ONE ELSE
LINING UP. I WILL BRING BACK
CONVERSATION. TWO DIETS AND TO
MY LEFT. SEE IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS, PLEASE MOISTURE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN. FIRST OF
ALL I REALLY DO WANT TO OBJECT
TO THE PROCESS. THAT IS
HAPPENING HERE. UH THIS HAS BY.
I THINK THIS COMMITTEE'S OWN
ADMISSION, SOMETHING LIKE $9
MILLION PRICE TAG FOR THE STATE.
AND YET IT WILL BE PASSED. TO
THE FLOOR. WITHOUT GOING TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. I'VE
BEEN HERE 10 YEARS. I DON'T
THINK I HAVE EVER SEEN ANYTHING
PUSHED THROUGH. WITH THIS KIND
OF PRICE TAG WITHOUT THE
OVERSIGHT AND THE LOOK BY THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
SECONDLY, I THINK WITH DUE
RESPECT TO THE, UH CLAIMS OF
WHAT THE BILL IS GOING TO DO.
YOU KNOW, THOROUGH ANALYSIS ON
THIS. WE HAVE TAKEN A HARD LOOK
AT IT. AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
CONCERNS. OBVIOUSLY I DO THINK
THAT THERE IS A REAL RISK FOR
PRICE CONTROLS HERE. AND AS THE
U. C BERKELEY ECONOMIST
BORNSTEIN TESTIFIED BACK IN
JANUARY JUNE OF 2022. CREATING
PRICE CONTROLS DISCOURAGES
PRODUCTION. AND LEADS TO
SHORTAGES AND GAS LINES. WE'RE
NOT ADDRESSING HAS BEEN SAID
EARLIER HERE, THE SUPPLY
CHALLENGES UM. CALIFORNIA'S
PRODUCTION OF CRUDE OIL HAS
TUMBLED TO ONE THIRD OF WHAT IT
WAS IN 1985, AND IT IS SURE TO
CONTINUE DECLINING DUE TO THE
LAW IN LARGE PART TWO STATE
POLICIES. THERE'S ALSO I THINK A
CONCERN WITH RESPECT TO THE
PROCESS OF CREATING. THIS
UNELECTED BUREAUCRACY. AND
GIVING THEM POWER. TO IMPOSE
WHAT AMOUNTS TO A TAX. UM ALSO
OBJECT TO THE END RUN THAT THIS
BILL DOES AROUND THE
RESPONSIBILITY. I THINK OF THE
ELECTED BODIES HERE. UH TO VOTE
IN A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY FOR A
TAX INCREASE. YOU CAN CALL THIS
A PENALTY IF YOU WANT TO. BUT I
THINK ANYBODY THAT REALLY TAKES
A THOROUGH LOOK, UM, SEES THAT
THIS IS CALLED A PENALTY, BUT IT
IS A WINDFALL PROFITS TAX. AND
SO HERE WE HAVE ONE OF THE MOST
SIGNIFICANT PIECES OF
LEGISLATION TO COME. BEFORE THIS
BODY. AND IT DODGES A SINGULAR,
IMPORTANT VOTE. THAT'S THE TWO
THIRDS VOTE TO IMPOSE A TAX. YOU
CAN CALL IT A PENALTY IF YOU
WANT TO, BUT THE FACT REMAINS
THAT IT ACTS AS A TAX AND IT
CREATES THE KINDS OF
DIFFICULTIES THAT A TAX CREATE.
UH. AGAIN. THE. AS WAS MENTIONED
BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
WORKFORCE IN THE REFINERIES. FOR
ME. THIS IS ONE OF THE
SIGNIFICANT THREATS OF THIS
BILL. IF WE MISS HANDLE REFINERY
SAFETY THAT'S GOING TO BE A
SIGNIFICANT ISSUE OR HEALTH. AND
FOR THE OPERATIONS OF REFINERIES
THAT WE NEED TO BE AT THEIR
MAXIMUM TO BE SAFE AND TO BE
ONLINE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. WE
ARE ALLOWING EMPOWERING THE C E.
C. TO MANAGE THE TIMING OF
PLANNED REFINERY MAINTENANCE,
ALLOWING IT TO INTERFERE AND Tð.
MICROMANAGE. THIS VERY SENSITIVE
WORK. AND THE WARNING HERE IS IF
THIS IS POORLY DONE. THIS IS
GOING TO THREATEN EMPLOYEE
SAFETY. THE EQUIPMENT. AND THE
STATES SUPPLY OF FUELS. THINK
ABOUT THIS FOR A MINUTE. WE'RE
GOING TO PLACE INTO THE HANDS OF
APPOINTED POLITICAL BUREAUCRATS
, THE AUTHORITY AND THE POWER.
TO DICTATE. THE MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULES AND HOW THESE
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES. OUR OUR,
UH CONCLUDED. I ALSO WANT TO
JUST REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THIS
FOCUS ON THE REFINERY LEVEL
ACTIVITY IS REALLY THIS IS NOT
JUST MISDIRECTED. THIS IS A HEAD
FAKE. PROFESSOR BORNSTEIN MADE
THAT CLEAR BACK IN THAT HEARING
THAT I JUST MENTIONED MOST
QUOTING HIM. NOW MOST OF THE
MYSTERY GASOLINE SURCHARGE IS
DOWNSTREAM. OCCURRING AFTER THE
REFINERY LEVEL. BUT NONETHELESS
, THE MAXIMUM MARGIN AND PENALTY
WOULD APPLY ONLY TO THE
REFINERY. OPERATIONS. AND. THE
FACT THAT THIS IS BEING RUSHED
THROUGH THE FACT THAT WE ARE
HEARING THIS ON A MONDAY MORNING
AND WE'LL SEE IT VERY SHORTLY.
AS IT BYPASSES THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. AND HE
HEADS TO THE FLOOR. AH! I JUST
WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS
UNPRECEDENTED USE OF LEGISLATIVE
AND EXECUTIVE POWER. AND I
OBJECT TO IT. STRENUOUSLY THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MR RICE SHOULD
FOR THAT STATEMENT. DO YOU HAVE
A QUESTION? YOU HAVE A QUESTION
FOR ANY OF THE PALACE? OKAY?
THANK YOU. MS ELOYSA. GOLDMAN'S
RACE, FOLLOWED BY MR MURATSUCHI.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. FIRST SLOW
DOWN. FIRST I WANT TO THANK
SENATOR SKINNER FIRST
CHAMPIONING, CHAMPIONING THIS
EFFORT. WE'VE AS HAS BEEN NOTED
EARLIER. WE DID HAVE THAT
INFORMATIONAL HEARING WE HEARD
ABOUT THE VOLATILITY OF GASOLINE
PRICES. AND THE DISCREPANCY
BETWEEN WHAT CALIFORNIANS WERE
PAYING. WHAT OTHER STATES WERE
PAYING, AND THE PROFIT THAT WAS
REALIZED BY OUR REFINERS. KIM'S
CONSUMER WATCHDOG NOTED THAT
REFINERS MADE 30% MORE PROFIT IN
CALIFORNIA THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN
THE WORLD. AND WE'VE HEARD ABOUT
THE $2.61 PER GALLON. UH, PROFIT
THAT HAS BEEN THAT HAS BEEN, UM,
SCENE. UM ANOTHER NOTE WAS THAT
TOP EXECUTIVES AND INSIDERS AT
CALIFORNIA'S FIVE BIG. REFINERS
CASHED OUT $590 MILLION IN STOCK
AND TO 2022 UM. AND ALSO THAT
THEY POSTED PROFITS OF 66 67.6
BILLION IN THE FIRST NINE MONTHS
OF 2022 COMPARED QUADRUPLE OF
WHAT THEY HAD RECEIVED JUST THE
YEAR BEFORE OF 17.6 BILLION. AND
OF THE 590 MILLION REFINER.
STOCKS CASH OUT IN 2020 TO 231
MILLION WENT TO 29 EXECUTIVES
AND DIRECTORS THAT TOOK HOME
MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS
EACH. THAT CHEVRON ALONE,
EXECUTIVES AND DIRECTORS CASHED
OUT $150 MILLION WORTH OF STOCK
IN 2022. I HEAR THE COMMENTS
ABOUT SUPPLY AND DEMAND. BUT
NOWHERE AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD IN
THE INFORMATION INFORMATIONAL
HEARINGS. HAS THERE BEEN AN
EXPLANATION OF THESE PROFITS
RELATED TO SUPPLY AND DEMAND?
THE WORKERS' SAFETY, I THINK IS
SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF
US FOR ME, AND SO MANY OTHER OF
MY COLLEAGUES. THAT IS AN ISSUE
THAT ABSOLUTELY NEEDS TO BE, UM
, LOOKED AT AND MAKE SURE THAT
THAT OUR WORKERS WILL ALWAYS BE
SAFE. AND THAT WHATEVER
SCHEDULES ARE ARE SET UP DOES
NOT IN ANY WAY INFRINGE UPON
THEIR SAFETY. WE HAVE LOTS OF
LAWS THAT DIRECT US OR DIRECT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, UM, TO
PROTECT CALIFORNIANS AGAINST
PRICE GOUGING, WE SAW IT DURING
THE PANDEMIC, EVEN IF THE THERE
WAS PRICE GOUGING OF HAND
SANITIZER. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
WAS THERE. AND YET HERE WE HERE
WE HAVE THIS TYPE OF PROFIT.
PRICE GOUGING BY BY ALL ACCOUNTS
, AND YET NOTHING COULD BE DONE.
NOTHING WAS DONE. SO I THINK
THAT MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE
ADDRESSED AGAIN. I THANK YOU.
THANK THE SENATOR FOR HER WORK
IN THIS REGARD. I DO HAVE ONE
QUESTION. AND THIS WAS BROUGHT
TO US BY A NUMBER OF OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUPS.
THEY HAD NOTED THE NEED TO
INCLUDE WITHIN THE. THE
COMMISSION, THE GROUP
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE VOTE, UH,
VOICES UM, THESE ENVIRONMENTAL
GROUPS HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE
NEED TO ESTABLISH AN INTERAGENCY
PETROLEUM FUELS INFRASTRUCTURE
TRANSITION WORKING GROUP AND
THAT IT CAN BE HOUSED IN THE E P
A AND LED BY KELLY P. A. TO
ENSURE COMMUNITIES ARE AT THE
TABLE. AND PUBLIC HEALTH IS AT
THE FOREFRONT. I KNOW THAT IN
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE GOVERNOR
, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HE WILL
CONSIDER. AND SO MY QUESTION TO
YOU, UM, SENATOR SKINNER IS THIS
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EXPECT IN
THIS BILL, OR PERHAPS IN CLEANUP
LEGISLATION? IT IS NOT IN THIS
BILL, BUT, UH UM, I'M SURE
THERE'S ANY NUMBER OF
LEGISLATORS WHO MIGHT BE WILLING
TO INTRODUCE SUCH SUCH A BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MRS GOMES
RACE, MR MURATSUCHI, FOLLOWED BY
A MEMBER OF BAUER-KAHAN. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. MR CHAIR. FIRST
OF ALL, I, UH, WANT TO THANK
SENATOR SKINNER AND GOVERNOR
NEWSOM, UH, FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP
AND BRING THIS MEASURE FORWARD.
UM. CONTRARY TO THE VICE CHAIRS
, COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THIS IS
BEING RUSHED THROUGH. I KNOW
THAT, UH, THAT EVER SINCE THE
GOVERNOR FIRST CALLED FOR THE
ORIGINAL WINDFALL PROFIT TAX
PENALTY THAT WE HAVE HAD
EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS AMONG MY
COLLEAGUES, UM AND, UM AND,
FRANKLY, I WANT TO THANK
GOVERNOR NEWSOM FOR WORKING
CLOSELY WITH THE LEGISLATURE TO
COME UP WITH THIS BILL, WHICH I
BELIEVE IS, UM MUCH STRONGER
THAN WHAT THE GOVERNOR
ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WITH THE
GOVERNOR ORIGINALLY PROPOSED. I
WAS RELUCTANT TO SUPPORT
PRIMARILY BECAUSE I MY MAIN
OBJECTIVE WITH THIS MEASURE IS
TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS
FROM GAS PRICE GOUGING, AND I
WAS CONCERNED THAT THE ORIGINAL
PROPOSAL FOR IMPOSING PENALTIES
WITHOUT THE TRANSPARENCY IN THE
DATA NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE, UM. AH PENALIZE THE PRICE
GOUGING ACTORS RATHER THAN
HAVING THE PRICE IS PASSED ON TO
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS IN THE FORM
OF HIGHER GAS PRICES. THAT WAS
MY CONCERN WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. WITH THIS
MEASURE. UH NUMBER ONE. IT IS
CLEARLY THE EMPHASIS ON
TRANSPARENCY AND AS UH, THE LOS
ANGELES TIMES INDICATED IN THEIR
EDITORIALS FRIDAY. NO ONE SHOULD
BE CONCERNED ABOUT TRANSPARENCY
IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE. AND
SO I BELIEVE STRONGLY THAT THIS
IS GOING TO BE FIRST AND
FOREMOST BEST IN THE INTEREST OF
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS BY HAVING
THAT TRANSPARENCY BY EMPOWERING
THE ENERGY COMMISSION, ALONG
WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE TO HAVE A GREATER
SUBPOENA POWER. TO HAVE GREATER
TRANSPARENCY TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE OIL COMPANIES ARE ARE
SERVING CALIFORNIA INTERESTS AND
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. HAVING
SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO,
UH, REMIND YOU NOT THAT YOU NEED
REMINDING CENTRAL SKINNER THAT I
HAVE THREE REFINERIES IN OR JUST
RIGHT OUTSIDE OF MY DISTRICT,
THE PBF REFINERY IN TORRANCE,
SEVERAL REFINERY AND AL SEGUNDO
AND THE PHILLIPS 66 REFINERY
JUST SAT ASIDE OF MY DISTRICT ON
THE BORDER OF WELLINGTON AND
PALS, FREDDY'S YOUR OLD STOMPING
GROUNDS CENTER. I KNOW YOU KNOW
THAT THE COMMUNITY VERY WELL.
AND YOU, UM AND SO YOU KNOW, AS
A REPRESENTATIVE OF YOU KNOW,
THREE OF COMMUNITIES ON THE
FRONT LINES OF THREE AH,
REFINERIES AND IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA I AM CONCERNED ABOUT
YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT YOU
KNOW, GOING TO THE COMMON MID
RACE BY THE UNITED STEELWORKERS
, UH, THAT YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW
HAVING THE ENERGY COMMISSION. UM
UH, YOU KNOW, PARTICIPATING IN,
UM. AND UH, EFFORTS TO REGULATE
THE SCHEDULE OF THE OF THE
MAINTENANCE TURNAROUNDS. UM YOU
KNOW, THE CONCERN WAS RAISED
THAT IT WOULD ACTUALLY WOULD PUT
NOT ONLY, UH, THE SAFETY OF
WORKERS AT RISK, BUT YOU KNOW, I
I'M ALSO VERY MUCH CONCERNED
ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE
FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES. UM I SEE
AND THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS THAT
YOUR BELL SENATOR IS AUTHORIZING
THE C E. C TO REGULATE AND
CONSULTATION WITH THE LABOR AND
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY,
THE TIMING OF TURNAROUND AND
MAINTENANCE IF SUCH A REGULATION
CAN PROTECT WORKER AND PUBLIC
HEALTH AND SAFETY WHILE ALSO
MINIMIZING THE RISK OF
MAINTENANCE, DRIVING DRIVEN
SUPPLY SHORTAGES OR PRICE SHOCKS
. COULD YOU SENATOR OR ANY ONE
OF YOUR WITNESSES? UH RESPOND TO
THE CONCERNS RAISED BY THE
STEELWORKERS ABSOLUTELY RESPOND.
UH AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING. UM
THE LOCATION OF THE REFINERIES
IN YOUR AREA. I ACTUALLY HAVE
TWO REFINERIES DIRECTLY IN MY
DISTRICT AND THREE ADJACENT SO
FIVE REFINERIES AND OF WHICH MY
CONSTITUENTS HAVE ALREADY
EXPERIENCED BOTH EXPLOSIONS AND
FIRES AND HAD TO HAVE, UH, NOT
ONLY EVACUATIONS, BUT ALSO STAY
IN PLACE ORDERS. FOR DAYS AT A
TIME. SO REFINERY SAFETY IS VERY
IMPORTANT TO ME. THAT'S WHY I
AUTHORED A BILL WITH SENATOR
HANCOCK BACK IN 2014 REGARDING
THESE, UH, TURNOVERS AND
MAINTENANCE AND WE IN THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS BILL, EVEN
THOUGH THERE IS THE ADDITION OF
THE ENERGY COMMISSION. HAVING A
ROLE IN THIS THEIR ROLE DOES NOT
SUPERSEDE OSHA'S AND THAT'S
UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
AND THE BILL. THE 2014 BILL IS,
OF COURSE GOVERNED BY OSHA, SO
THE SAFETY WOULD ALWAYS COME
FIRST AND THE PURPOSE OF THE
ENERGY COMMISSION'S REVIEWING OF
THAT MAINTENANCE TIME IS PURELY
TO ASSIST OR TO HELP US. ACHIEVE
THEIR NOT BEING. ALL THE
REFINERIES DOWN AT THE SAME TIME
AND CREATING A FALSE OR
ARTIFICIAL SUPPLY PROBLEM IN
TERMS OF A REFINED PRODUCT NOW,
OBVIOUSLY, IF THEY ALL NEED TO
BE DOWN BECAUSE EACH OF THEM
HAVE BEEN CITED FOR A SAFETY
ISSUE, A LEGITIMATE SAFETY
ISSUE, THEY WILL ALL BE DOWN.
BUT IF NOT, THEN THE ENERGY
COMMISSION WOULD HELP TO ENSURE
THAT THEY ARE NOT. SO UH, THIS
DOES NOT SUPERSEDE THE 2014 BILL
OR OTHER STATUTES THAT WE HAVE
PASSED. TO PROTECT BOTH
COMMUNITIES AND WORKERS IN TERMS
OF THE REFINERIES. THANK YOU,
SENATOR. IF I MAY, MR CHAIR, UM
MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR MR
GARCIA. UM. SO YOU, UH, RAISED
THE CONCERN, MR GARCIA, THAT, UH
THAT THIS MEASURE IS GOING TO
IMPACT SUPPLY. UH, AND THAT
ULTIMATELY IS GOING TO IMPACT
HIGHER PRICES AT THE PUMP FOR
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS. AND YET
I'M I'M LOOKING AT THE PLAIN
LANGUAGE OF THE BILL. UH WHICH
INDICATES THAT THE ENERGY
COMMISSION IS SPECIFICALLY AND
AH, SEEKING TO ADDRESS THE
REGULATIONS AS WELL AS THE
POTENTIAL, UH, POWER TO IMPOSE
PENALTIES THAT. THAT IS
SPECIFICALLY IS REQUIRED TO
CONSIDER THOSE EXACT
CONSIDERATIONS NUMBER ONE.
WHETHER IT'S LIKELY THAT, UH,
THE MAX MARGIN AND THE PENALTY
WILL LEAD TO A GREATER IMBALANCE
BETWEEN SUPPLY AND DEMAND AND
CALIFORNIA AND SECOND AND
WHETHER IT IS LIKELY THAT THE
MAXIMUM THE MAXIMUM ARGININE
PENALTY WILL LEAD TO HIGHER
AVERAGE PRICES AT THE PUMP. AND
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND, MR GARCIA
. YOU KNOW WHERE THE LEGISLATION
SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES. YOU KNOW
YOUR PRIMARY CONCERNS OF THE
SUPPLY AND THE GAS PRICES. YOU
KNOW WHY YOU YOU CONTINUE TO
CLAIM THAT THIS IS GOING TO, UH
, YOU KNOW, WORKING CONTRARY AND
IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE
SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE BILL.
THANK YOU. MR MURATSUCHI
APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. I WOULD
I WOULD DIRECT YOU TO THE FIRST
LINE. PAGE 10 RIGHT BELOW THAT,
UH, REQUIREMENT THERE THE ENERGY
COMMISSION'S REQUIREMENT, WHICH
YOU JUST READ THE BARRIER TO AN
AFFIRMATIVE CONCLUSION APPEARS
LOW. IT IS AN ABSOLUTELY LOW
BARRIER FOR THE ENERGY
COMMISSION TO CONCLUDE THAT IT
DOES NOT IMPACT IT WON'T BE THE
PENALTY ITSELF. IT'S THE
IMPOSITION OF THE AUTHORITY
GRANTED TO THE ENERGY COMMISSION
TODAY, LIKELY YOU'RE GOING TO
VOTE TODAY ARE THIS COMMITTEE TO
THE FLOOR TO THE GOVERNOR?
GOVERNOR WILL SIGN YOUR SENDING
SIGNALS IMMEDIATELY TO THE
MARKET. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT MAY
OR MAY NOT HAPPEN AT SOME POINT
IN THE FUTURE. YOU HAVE NO DATE
SPECIFIC HERE OF WHEN THE ENERGY
COMMISSION SHOULD ESTABLISH THAT
PENALTY. WHEN IT SHOULD EVALUATE
WHETHER THAT PENALTY SHOULD BE
IMPLEMENTED OR NOT. YOU'RE
COMPLETELY SOCIETAL. ON THE
TIMING OF THAT. THAT ANALYSIS.
THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND IMBALANCES
SHOULD BE DONE FRONT ON THE
FRONT END. YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND
WHAT THAT SITUATION IS, AND
WHETHER A MARKET SIGNAL LIKE
THAT WILL IMPLANT IMPLEMENT AN
IMPACT SUPPLY. YOU'RE DOING IT
AFTER THE FACT. BUT YOU'RE
SENDING AN IMMEDIATE MARKET,
SAYING ON WHETHER THE ENERGY
COMMISSION EVER ESTABLISHES IT
OR NOT. YOU'RE DOING THAT TODAY.
AND SO THE LANGUAGE HERE. WE SEE
IT AS WHEN ESSENTIALLY WINDOW
DRESSING. THAT EVALUATION SHOULD
BE HAPPENING. ABSOLUTELY. BUT IT
IS NOT WHEN THAT'S GOING TO
PREVENT THE ENERGY COMMISSION
FROM IMPLEMENTING THE WHAT?
YOU'RE GIVING THEM THE AUTHORITY
TO DO HERE, SO WE DON'T SEE
THAT. AND IF I CAN I ALSO LIKE
TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE HERDED INTO
COMMITTEES ALREADY, THIS
LANGUAGE DOES NOT TRUMP OR OSHA
STANDARDS. THERE IS NO OSHA
STANDARD THAT SAYS THAT THEY
CANNOT SET SCHEDULES. THERE IS
AN OCEAN STANDARDS AS THEY HAVE
TO PROTECT SAFETY. BUT YOU ARE
NOW PASSING A SUBSEQUENT
LEGISLATION WITH CLEAR AND
UNAMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE THEY MAY
SCHEDULE THAT IS NOT THAT THAT
THAT SUPERSEDE. LANGUAGE THAT'S
NOT IN THE CODE AND THAT THIS IS
UNAMBIGUOUS. UNDER STATUTORY
CONSTRUCTION. YOU'RE CLEARLY
TRUMPING WHAT IS IN PRIOR IN LAW
. WE DON'T SEE ANY OTHER WAY AND
I'M NOT SURE ANY COURT WOULD SEE
IT ANY OTHER WAY. MR. GARCIA, I
WAS JUST UH, AGAIN, EMPHASIZE
WHAT THE SENATOR WELL, WHAT WHAT
I HAVE SAID EARLIER THAT THE
LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY CALLS FOR
THE ENERGY COMMISSION IN
CONSULTATION WITH THE LABOR AND
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO
SPECIFICALLY, UH, FOCUS ON
PROTECTING WORKER AND PUBLIC
HEALTH AND SAFETY AND AGAIN, YOU
KNOW, AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF A
DISTRICT THAT HAS THREE
REFINERIES THAT THERE ARE GOING
TO BE ON THE FRONT LINES OF
THESE REFINERIES. I WOULD WANT I
WOULD ONLY VOTE FOR A BILL THAT
WOULD WHERE WE CAN ENSURE THAT
THE WORKERS AND THE FRONTLINE
COMMUNITIES ARE PROTECTED. ASKED
HERE YOUR ARGUMENT AS TO, UH
MARKET SIGNALS, MR GARCIA, I YOU
KNOW, CALIFORNIA HAS ALREADY
SENT THE STRONG MARKET SIGNAL
THAT WE ARE GOING TO ACHIEVE
CARBON NEUTRALITY BUYER BEFORE
2045. WE'VE ALREADY SENT THE
SIGNAL THAT ALL NEW CARS AND
TRUCKS ARE GOING TO BE, UH, YOU
KNOW, UH ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES
AND NOT INTERNAL COMBUSTION
ENGINES BY OR BEFORE 2035. I
THINK THOSE MARKET SIGNALS ARE
INTENTIONALLY BEING SENT AND
THAT IN THE IN THE EFFORT TO
FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE, I AM FULLY
AND SUPPORTIVE LAST MR CHAIR, I
I'D LIKE TO JOIN MY COLLEAGUE
FROM RIVERSIDE AND EXPRESSING
SUPPORT TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
FOR FOLLOW UP CLEANUP LANGUAGE
TO PROTECT OUR FRONTLINE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES. FOR A WORKING GROUP
WITH REPRESENTATION FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES, ORGANIZATIONS TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE WORK ON THE
FUEL TRANSITION THAT WE HAVE THE
FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES
REPRESENTED IN THIS EFFORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
REMEMBER SOME MEMBER OF
BAUER-KAHAN, FOLLOWED BY MISS A
SIMILAR MORE SHALLOW. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR, AND I WANT TO THANK
SENATOR SKINNER, WHO, AS SHE
NOTED, REPRESENTS TWO OTHER FINE
ARIES THAT ARE IN MY BACKYARD
AND WE NEIGHBOR, THE OTHER THREE
AS WELL. AND SO, UM THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT AND I THINK
THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I
WANT TO START BY SAYING IS THAT
THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO
CALIFORNIANS, AND IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT TO THE CALIFORNIANS
WHO NEED US. MOST CALIFORNIANS
WHO ARE DRIVING FOUR HOURS FROM
THE CENTRAL VALLEY TO COME INTO
THE BARRIER TO DO THEIR JOB, WHO
ARE JUST BARELY MAKING ENDS MEET
AND WHEN PRICES DOUBLE AT THE
PUMP GOING TO WORK ALL OF A
SUDDEN DOESN'T MAKE A TON OF
SENSE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD
TO GET THERE. AND SO BECAUSE WE
SAW IN THE HEARING LAST WEEK,
THE PROFITS IN THOSE CHARTS ARE
NOT EXPLAINED BY ANYTHING THAT
WE OR THE ECONOMISTS UNDERSTAND.
AND SINCE PROFESSOR BORNSTEIN
ISN'T HERE, LET ME JUST
REITERATE SOMETHING, HE SAID IN
THE HEARING THE OTHER DAY, WHICH
IS THAT HE SUPPORTS THIS
LEGISLATION. THAT WAS VERY CLEAR
IN THE HEARINGS AND THE FACT
THAT THE OPPOSITION IS NOW CITED
HIM TWICE. I FIND DISINGENUOUS,
AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT HE
HAD COME AROUND, HE SAID, WAS
EXACTLY WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM
MR MURATSUCHI, WHICH WAS THAT HE
WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFECT
THAT THIS MIGHT HAVE ON SUPPLY
AND DEMAND HE WAS AFFECTED.
WORRIED ABOUT THE EFFECT ON
PRICES, BUT THIS LEGISLATION IS
CAREFULLY CRAFTED TO BE VERY
CLEAR DESPITE WHAT THE
OPPOSITION SAYS TO ENSURE, AND
IT SAYS THE COMMISSION SHALL NOT
SET A MAXIMUM GROSS GASOLINE OR
FINDING MARGIN OR PENALTY, SO
IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THEY MAY
NOT. THEY SHALL NOT SET THAT
UNLESS THEY FIND EXACTLY WHAT WE
HEARD. THAT IT WILL NOT MAKE
PRICES GO UP AND THAT IT WILL
NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT SUPPLY AND
DEMAND. SO THERE ARE PROTECTIONS
IN HERE FOR CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS
THAT ARE REALLY CLEAR AND THAT I
BELIEVE ARE SUFFICIENT TO
ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT
PROFESSOR BORNSTEIN HAD
PREVIOUSLY NOTED. UM TOUCHING ON
THE MAINTENANCE ISSUE. UM I JUST
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT BECAUSE I
THINK YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE
TO RESPOND. BUT SECTION 25354.2
MAKES VERY CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT
SENATOR SKINNER SAID THAT LABOR
STANDARDS AND SAFETY COME FIRST.
IT IS IN THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF
THE BILL, AND I'M A LITTLE BIT
CONFUSED THAT ANYONE WOULD SAY
OTHERWISE. UM AND YOU KNOW, I'M
ALSO CONCERNED BOTH ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF NOT
ALLOWING MAINTENANCE. THE SAFETY
IMPACTS OF THAT, BUT I THINK THE
BILL IS CAREFUL IN ENSURING THAT
SAFETY COMES FIRST. AND THEN WE
ARE ALLOWING TURNAROUNDS THAT
HELP WITH AIR QUALITY IN
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. THERE'S
JUST GONNA BE A LITTLE
COORDINATION REQUIRED. UM AND SO
I THINK THOSE ARE CAREFULLY
CRAFTED AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU
WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ON THAT
POINT, SENATOR YOU DID VERY
WELL. THANK YOU, UM SO ONE THING
I DID. I HAD TWO QUESTIONS. ONE
IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE HEARD
FROM THE OPPOSITION ON THIS IS
ABOUT THE PRIVACY AND TRADE
SECRET INFORMATION. UM I WANT TO
REITERATE WHAT WE HEARD FROM MY
COLLEAGUE, WHICH IS I'M EXCITED
ABOUT THE INFORMATION THAT'S
GOING TO BE GATHERED IN THIS
BILL. I THINK IT'S REALLY,
REALLY CRITICAL THAT WE
UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING FOR
THE PRICES IN CALIFORNIA. THOSE
CHARTS WE SAW LAST WEEK WERE
INEXPLICABLE, INEXPLICABLE TO
THE SMARTEST ECONOMISTS IN THE
WORLD, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE
DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION. AND
THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS AND I
SAID IT LAST WEEK, AND I'LL SAY
IT AGAIN IS THAT SUNSHINE IS THE
GREATEST DISINFECTANT. THAT IF
WE FORCE FOLKS TO TURN OVER THIS
INFORMATION. I ACTUALLY DON'T
BELIEVE WE'LL EVER NEED THE
PENALTY. BECAUSE THE FACT THAT
THEY HAVE TO TELL US WHAT'S
GOING ON, WE'LL STOP FROM THEM
FROM GOUGING CONSUMERS. AND SO I
THINK THE INFORMATION WILL BE
SUFFICIENT AND WE WON'T EVER
NEED TO SEE A PENALTY TO FOLLOW.
BUT I THINK THAT GIVEN THE
PROTECTIONS HERE, IT'S FINE. UM
BUT CALIFORNIA IS THE HOME OF
INNOVATION. IT IS BEAUTIFUL
STATE THAT WE HAVE HERE BECAUSE
WE PROTECT OUR COMPANIES FROM
TATE SECRET. WE PROTECT THEIR
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. MY
READING OF THIS BILL. ACTUALLY I
THINK IT GOES TO GREAT LENGTHS
TO PROTECT THE INFORMATION THAT
IS DISCLOSED, ALTHOUGH REQUIRING
IT TO THE COMMISSION. IT
ACTUALLY EVEN LIMITS YOUR
DISCLOSURE TO US THE LEGISLATURE
TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF THE
INFORMATION SO WANTED YOU TO
ADDRESS THAT, UH, COMMENT FROM
THE OPPOSITION. THANK YOU,
SEVERAL MEMBER. UM VERY GOOD
POINTS THAT YOU MADE. AND
ABSOLUTELY. THE BILL NOT ONLY
ADDS EXPLICIT PROTECTIONS
RECOGNIZING THE PRIVACY LAWS AND
ANTITRUST LAWS THAT EXIST BOTH
FEDERALLY AND IN THE STATE THAT
PROTECT BUSINESSES FROM.
INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR, UH.
THEIR PRACTICES THAT COULD
COMPROMISE THEIR IF THE
COMPETITION WERE TO HAVE THAT
INFORMATION WOULD COMPROMISE
THEIR ABILITY TO DO THEIR
BUSINESS. AND SO THE PROVISIONS
ARE CAREFULLY CONSTRUCTED TO
RESPECT ALL OF THOSE LAWS IN
ADDITIONAL AND ADD ADDITIONAL
AND ANY INFORMATION THAT WAS
THEN GIVEN TWO OF THE
LEGISLATURE, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD
BE AGGREGATED DATA WITHOUT ANY
IDENTIFICATION OF COMPANIES. SO
NON COMPANY SPECIFIC, BUT I'D
LIKE TO TURN TO THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE TO SEE WE HAVE
OUR ANTITRUST SPECIALISTS HERE
IF THEY WANT TO ADD ANY OTHER
POINTS. MIKE JORGENSEN WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE. SOME A SUPERVISING
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE
ANTITRUST SECTION. WHAT WE'RE
CONCERNED ABOUT IS COLLUSION
EFFORTS CREATED THROUGH THE
SHARING OF COMPETITIVELY
SENSITIVE BUSINESS INFORMATION.
UM. THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF
COURT OPERATE IN A MANNER TO
PROTECT THE SHARING OR
DISCLOSURE OF COMPETITIVELY
SENSITIVE INFORMATION. IT'S A
LEGITIMATE CONCERN. IN THE END,
I TRUST ARENA. WE WANT TO
ELIMINATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
COLLUSION, SHARING THAT
INFORMATION. AH THE BILL. UM AND
OTHER PIECES OF LAW UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT UNDER
THE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 11 1
80 PROTECT. UH, THAT INFORMATION
FROM BEING SHARED INCLUSIVE
MATTER THAT SAID, SHOULD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A LAW
ENFORCEMENT ACTION RELATED TO
COLLUSIVE ANTICOMPETITIVE
CONDUCT. ARISE. UH THAT
INFORMATION. UM. AFTER THE
PASSAGE OF TIME WOULD NEED TO BE
PART OF A LITIGATION EFFORT. BUT
AS TIME PASSES THE SENSITIVITY
OF THAT AH! COMPETITIVE
SENSITIVE INFORMATION. UH
DIMINISHES IF WE HAVE TO
LITIGATE CONDUCT THAT HAPPENED
FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO. SHARING
THAT IN A COURT OF LAW IN
LITIGATION SETTING, UM IS LESS
OF A CONCERN BECAUSE THERE'S NO
IMMEDIATE OPPORTUNITY FOR
COLLUSION. I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES
CONCERN. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN
I THINK IT IS ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE DID HEAR FROM THE
OPPOSITION, WHICH I THINK IT'S
ACCURATE AS WE HAVE BEEN HEARING
FROM PROFESSOR BERNSTEIN FOR
YEARS ABOUT THIS MYSTERY
SURCHARGE. PART OF THE REASON
IT'S A MYSTERY BECAUSE HE
DOESN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET IN THIS
BILL, SO WE MAY FINALLY
UNDERSTAND WHY CALIFORNIANS PAY
MORE AT THE PUMP THAN IS
EXPLAINED BY BASIC ECONOMICS. UM
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HE
DOES TALK ABOUT IS THAT HE
DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT THE PRICES
THAT WE'RE SEEING ARE DRIVEN BY
THE REFINERIES RIGHT THAT
THEY'RE DRIVEN DOWNSTREAM AND WE
HEARD THAT LAST WEEK AT THE
HEARING, AND WE'VE HEARD IT
BEFORE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT IS CONCERNING TO ME HERE IN
CALIFORNIA IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE
AS MUCH COMPETITION AT THE PUMP.
WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH MANY
INDEPENDENT, UM GAS STATIONS AS
OTHER STATES, WHICH IS A PROBLEM
, THE MORE COMPETITION, THE MORE
YOU HAVE COMPETITION IN THE
MARKET, THE DRIVES PRICES DOWN,
AND SO I'M WONDERING, UM, I
THINK THE INFORMATION WE GATHER
THAT WILL HELP US UNDERSTAND THE
PRICE DYNAMICS MAY ALLOW US TO
MAKE MOVES THAT ENABLE
COMPETITION BUT I WOULD I WONDER
IF SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO REMARK
ON THAT AND HOW WE'RE ALSO GOING
TO DRIVE COMPETITION AT THE PUMP
TO DRIVE DOWN THOSE PRICES THAT
ARE PASSED THE REFINING POINT.
THIS BILL ADDRESSES THAT ALL OF
OUR THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW TO DO IT
IN THE FUTURE. APOLOGIES I WILL
TURN TO MY BILL SPONSOR TO
ANSWER THE QUESTION. LAUREN
TENSION THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR THE
QUESTION. UM IT IS TRUE THAT DR
BORNSTEIN IS VERY FOCUSED
DOWNSTREAM OF THE REFINERY. I
WOULD REMIND THE COMMITTEE
BRIEFLY THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER
OF OTHER EXPERTS THAT ARE REALLY
FOCUSED ON ISSUES AT THE
REFINERY LEVEL, AS WELL AS
ISSUES AT THE SPOT MARKET, WHICH
IS WHY WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF
YOU IS A COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSAL
LOOKING INTO EACH PART OF THE
SUPPLY CHAIN FROM FROM REFINING
TO RETAIL STATION AND MAKING
SURE THAT OUR, UH EXPERTS HAVE
ACCESS TO THE DATA ALONG THERE
AND CAN IDENTIFY PRICING
IRREGULARITIES AT THE REFINING
LEVEL. AND AT THE RETAIL LEVEL.
UM ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WE DO ALSO
ASK THE ENERGY COMMISSION EVERY
THREE YEARS TO WORK ON AN
ASSESSMENT LOOKING INTO EXACTLY
THE ISSUE THAT YOU'VE RAISED THE
NUMBER OF RETAIL STATIONS HERE
IN CALIFORNIA. ALSO UNBRANDED
VERSUS BRANDED RETAIL STATIONS
IN CALIFORNIA AND PRICING
DIFFERENCES. WE SEE THERE
ALONGSIDE A NUMBER OF OTHER KIND
OF ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED
AT THE STATE LEVEL RELATED TO
HOW WE BRING FUEL AND REFINED
PRODUCT INTO THE STATE. WE'RE
VERY EXCITED FOR THE ENERGY
COMMISSION TO FINALLY HAVE THE
UNDERLYING DATA TO INFORM THAT
ASSESSMENT AND COME BACK TO THE
LEGISLATURE WITH ADDITIONAL
REGULATIONS OR BILLS THAT MIGHT
BE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THOSE
SPECIFIC ISSUES. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THAT, AND I JUST WANT
TO CLOSE BY SAYING, I THINK UM,
I HEAR THE CONCERNS OF HOW THIS
BILL IS MOVING, BUT I ALSO I
WANT TO BE REALLY COGNIZANT THAT
THIS ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN
OVERNIGHT. THIS BILL SETS UP A
SCHEME FOR US TO GET IT A VERY
LARGE PROBLEM FOR EVERYDAY
CALIFORNIANS. AND AGAIN, I THINK
THAT PROBLEM IS ALREADY HITTING
THE MOST VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS
THE MOST, AND THAT'S ONLY GOING
TO EXACERBATE AS THE YEARS GO
BY, AND WE MOVED TO UM LESS
DEMAND ON THE FUELS MARKET THAN
WE SEE TODAY AS WE MOVE TO A
CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE, AND SO I
THINK THAT WE NEED TO TAKE SWIFT
ACTION TO PROTECT CALIFORNIANS.
I THINK WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
THE PROFIT MARGINS THAT WE SAW
THAT OUTPACED ANYWHERE ELSE IN
THE WORLD ARE TAKEN CARE OF. FOR
THE CALIFORNIANS WHO EVERY DAY
ARE JUST TRYING TO GET TO WORK
AND TAKE THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL
AND DO THE EVERYDAY THINGS THAT
THEY WANT TO DO, BUT RIGHT NOW
THEY'RE HAVING TO MAKE CHOICES.
ABOUT WHETHER TO DRIVE ALL THE
WAY TO WORK OR BUY DINNER FOR
THEIR FAMILY THAT NIGHT, AND SO,
UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
INCREDIBLE HARD WORK ON THIS.
THE PARTNERSHIP OF THE GOVERNOR
TO, UM WE'VE SEEN A VERY LARGE
MOVE FROM THE FIRST INTRODUCTION
OF THE SENATOR'S BILL, AND I
THINK IT IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE
THAT REALLY PUTS GUARDRAILS
AROUND AND PROTECTS CALIFORNIANS
FROM INCREASED PRICES AND
ENSURES THAT WE ARE UM, MAKING
SURE THAT BIG OIL ISN'T
PROFITING OFF THE BACKS OF
VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO, UM,
REMEMBER TO SOME MEMORY SHOVEL
FOLLOWED BY REMEMBER MATTHEWS
AND MR TEAM. THANK YOU. UM SO
FIRST I WANT TO THANK THE
SENATOR AND THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD
. YOU KNOW, I HAD A MEETING IN
MY COMMUNITY THIS WEEKEND. THIS
WAS A HOT TOPIC THAT WAS
DISCUSSED. AND UM, I KNOW SOME
FEEL LIKE THIS IS MOVING VERY
QUICKLY ABOUT FOLKS IN MY
COMMUNITY FEEL LIKE THIS CAN'T
BE MOVING FAST ENOUGH. AND, UM,
YOU KNOW, NO ONE IS FORGETTING
THE STING OF THESE SPIKES. UM
THAT IMPACTED THEM AND I HEARD
FROM, YOU KNOW, A PARENT IN MY
DISTRICT DURING WHEN THESE
INCREASES WERE HAPPENING, WHO
SAID IF SHE HAD TO GO INTO THE
OFFICE, SHE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO
AFFORD TO GO TO WORK.
UNFORTUNATELY SHE COULD WORK
FROM HOME. BUT MANY PEOPLE DON'T
HAVE THAT LUXURY. AND THIS WAS,
YOU KNOW, CRUSHING FOR PEOPLE
WHO ARE ALREADY EXPERIENCING THE
INCREASED COST OF INFLATION AND
ALL THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, IMPACTS
AND PEOPLES, WALLET AND PEOPLE'S
BUDGETS. AND THIS IS NOT ONLY
SOMETHING THAT HURTS PEOPLE. THE
PUMP. BUT WHEN PRICES GO UP ON
GAS, IT ALSO INCREASES INFLATION
. IT ALSO MAKES OTHER GOODS AND
SERVICES MORE EXPENSIVE, SO
THERE ARE RIPPLE EFFECTS WHEN
YOU KNOW GAS PRICES GO UP THAT
IMPACT PEOPLE MANY, MANY WAYS
AND PEOPLE ARE HAVING TO MAKE
THESE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT THEY CAN AFFORD TO GO TO THE
DOCTOR. GET MEDICINE, PUT FOOD
ON THE TABLE OR PUT GAS IN THE
TANK. AND THESE ARE CHOICES THAT
PEOPLE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE.
AND SO YOU KNOW, MY FRUSTRATION
IS THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF
TALK ABOUT COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE
REASONS THAT OIL AND GAS PRICES
WOULD HAVE RISEN. UM IT'S
BECAUSE YOU KNOW, OIL REFINERIES
WERE DOWN DUE TO MAINTENANCE OR
THE WAR IN UKRAINE, UKRAINE OR
STRAINED SUPPLY, ETCETERA. BUT
IF THAT WERE ALL TRUE, THEN THEY
WOULD NOT HAVE MADE HUGE
PROFITS. YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN
PAYING THOSE HIGHER COSTS AND
MAKING EITHER MORE NARROW
MARGINS OR TRYING TO MAINTAIN
CURRENT PROFITS. SO WHEN YOU
MAKE A 30% INCREASE IN PROFIT
OVER ANYWHERE ELSE, AND YOU ARE
GETTING AN AVERAGE OF YOU KNOW,
SOME COMPANIES WERE GETTING AN
AVERAGE OF 40 AND 50. HIGHER.
PROFITS AND $590 MILLION IN
STOCK CASH OUTS HAPPEN
COLLECTIVELY FOR REFINERY
EXECUTIVES HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
THERE'S TRULY NO OTHER
EXPLANATION FOR THIS
HISTORICALLY HIGH PRICES OTHER
THAN GREED. THE PROBLEM IS, WE
DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT
WE NEED TO PROVE THIS AND WE
DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO
PENALIZE THE KIND OF HISTORIC
PRICE KALAJIAN WE SAW LAST YEAR
. AND I SAY HISTORIC BECAUSE
THERE ARE ONLY THREE SPIKES LIKE
THIS. AND ONE OF THEM WAS TWO
DECADES AGO WHERE THE TORRANCE
REFINERY FIRE HAPPENED. SO TWO
OF THEM WERE LAST YEAR. WHICH IS
A DEBATABLE CAUSE. SO I'M
GETTING. IT'S GETTING REALLY OLD
TO HEAR THE OIL INDUSTRY AND OIL
EXECUTIVES AND COMPANIES TALKING
ABOUT. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THEY'RE
MAKING MASSIVE PROFITS ON THE
BACKS OF CALIFORNIANS WHO HAD TO
CHOOSE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, MAKE
THESE CHOICES BETWEEN THEIR
THEIR SURVIVAL AND PUTTING GAS
IN THE TANK. UM AND YOU KNOW WE
CAN'T. WE CAN'T HAVE THIS
SITUATION ANYMORE. WE KNOW THAT
OTHER INDUSTRIES ARE REGULATED
WHERE IT'S THIS KIND OF MONOPOLY
BEHAVIOR, AND WE NEED TO HAVE
THIS INFORMATION SO THAT WE CAN
MAKE THESE DECISIONS TO BE ABLE
TO HOLD FOLKS ACCOUNTABLE. IF
THERE IS PRICE GOUGING HAPPENING
, WE AS CALIFORNIANS DESERVE
THIS. THEY DESERVE THIS
INFORMATION. WE ARE LITERALLY
JUST TALKING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY.
AND POSSIBLY A PENALTY. THERE IS
NO REQUIREMENT FOR A PILOT LT.
NO ONE SAYS IT'S GOING TO
DEFINITELY HAPPEN, BUT THIS IS
JUST GETTING THE INFORMATION WE
NEED TO BE ABLE TO KNOW IF THERE
IS MANIPULATION OF THE MARKET
AND WHEN THESE KINDS OF PROFITS
ARE MADE, YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S A
SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUE. YOU
CAN'T SAY THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS
WHAT'S GOING ON. AND I KNOW
THERE WAS A BACK AND FORTH
BETWEEN MR TING AND THE WHISPER
REPRESENTATIVE LAST WEEK. ABOUT
WHY AND CALIFORNIA WERE PROFITS
30% HIGHER AND THE WHISPER
REPRESENTATIVE KEPT SAYING
SUPPLY AND DEMAND AND I KNOW IT
WAS. IT WAS ASKED A FEW TIMES,
AND IT WAS THE SAME RESPONSE.
AND I THINK THAT WHY THAT DIDN'T
FEEL LIKE AN ANSWER, BUT I THINK
IT'S ACTUALLY AN ANSWER TO MR
TING IS BECAUSE UM. IF I
TRANSLATE THAT SUPPLY AND DEMAND
IT BASICALLY MEANS BECAUSE YOU
CAN. THE PRICES WERE SO HIGH
BECAUSE YOU CAN BECAUSE YOU CAN
YOU KNOW, RAISE PRICES WITHOUT
ANYONE KNOWING WHY, WITHOUT
ANYONE UNDERSTANDING WHY, AND
MAKE BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS IN PROFITS AND WE HAVE
NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
UM AND SO. YOU KNOW, OIL AND GAS
. I DON'T SEE THE OIL COMPANIES
LEAVING CALIFORNIA BECAUSE
CALIFORNIA IS INCREDIBLY
PROFITABLE. YOU MAKE 30% MORE
HERE THAN ANYONE ANYWHERE ELSE.
UM AND IF THIS WERE TRUE IF IT
WERE SUPPLY AND DEMAND BASED,
THEN WE WOULD SEE GAS PRICES
GOING DOWN, THEN IN THE FUTURE,
BECAUSE YOU KNOW CLEARLY AS WE
IMPLEMENT ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES
, THERE'S GONNA BE LESS DEMAND
FOR GAS. SO THEN YOU KNOW, WE
CAN LOOK FORWARD TO VERY LOW GAS
PRICES IN THE FUTURE. I EXPECT
IF THAT'S THE CASE, RIGHT, SO
YOU KNOW IT IS THE BARE MINIMUM
THAT WE CAN DO. TO GET THIS
INFORMATION, SO WE KNOW WHAT'S
GOING ON. THIS HAPPENS AGAIN AND
OTHER INDUSTRIES. UM AND IT'S
THE LEAST THAT WE CAN DO FOR
PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITIES WHO
ARE SUFFERING BECAUSE OF THIS
KIND OF GREED. UM I DID WANT TO
ADDRESS THE CONCERNS AROUND THE
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES AND YOU
KNOW, I'M I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY,
BUT I HAVE READ LOTS OF UNION
CONTRACTS OVER THE YEARS AND I
JUST WANT TO READ THE LANGUAGE
SO THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE
EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE IN
TERMS OF WHAT THE LANGUAGES. SO
IT SAYS, IN CONSULTATION WITH
THE LABOR AND WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LABOR AND
INDUSTRY STAKEHOLDERS SHALL
CONSIDER WAYS SO IT DOESN'T SAY
YOU GOTTA DO IT. IT SAYS. YOU
NEED TO CONSIDER SOME WAYS TO DO
IT TO MANAGE NECESSARY REFINERY
TURNAROUNDS AND MAINTENANCE THAT
WOULD PROTECT THE HEALTH AND
SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES AND THE
PUBLIC. AND MINIMIZE THE IMPACT
OF MAINTENANCE RELATED
PRODUCTION LOSSES ON FUEL PRICES
. THE COMMISSION MAY BY
REGULATION IMPOSED REQUIREMENTS
GOVERNING THE TIMING OF
TURNAROUND AND MAINTENANCE
DEVELOPED THROUGH THE
CONSULTATION IN THIS SECTION, SO
THERE IS NOTHING SAYING RIGHT
HERE THAT I AM READING UNLESS
I'M WRONG, AND THERE'S A WHOLE
COMMITTEE OF PEOPLE WHO CAN
CORRECT ME. UM AND PLEASE. YOU
KNOW THE SPEAKERS TODAY CORRECT
ME, BUT THERE'S NOTHING I AM
READING THAT SAYS THERE IS A
REQUIREMENT TO MANAGE THE
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE OF
REFINERIES. IS THAT CORRECT?
SKINNER CORRECT. THANK YOU. UM
SO YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT AS SOMEONE WITH 20
YEARS IN THE LABOR MOVEMENT.
IT'S CRITICAL TO ME. THAT THE
LANGUAGES IN HERE THAT IT IS IN
CONSULTATION WITH THE LABOR AND
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND
ALSO THAT LABOR WILL BE A
STAKEHOLDER IN THIS PROCESS. UM,
AND I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THAT AS THIS IS BEING FIGURED
OUT THAT THERE THAT LABOR IS
VERY MUCH AT THE TABLE AS A
PARTNER AND FIGURING OUT HOW WE
CAN PREVENT WHAT HAPPENED LAST
TIME WHERE A BUNCH OF REFINERIES
ARE DOWN AT THE SAME TIME WHEN
IT IS PREVENTABLE,
THEORETICALLY, RIGHT? UM SO I
THINK THAT YOU KNOW WHEN, WHEN
GAS PRICES SPIKE. IT ALSO HURTS
WORKERS. IT ALSO HURTS UNION
BROTHERS AND SISTERS, AND WE
NEED TO PREVENT THAT FROM
HAPPENING TO THEM. AND THEN JUST
A QUESTION A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS
I HAD AROUND THE SUPPLY MODELING
IF I COULD, UM SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE PROVISION
EVALUATING THE CURRENT SUPPLY
AND AFFORDABILITY OF VARIOUS
TRANSPORTATION FUELS. AND AS YOU
KNOW, THE STATE HAS MADE AND
WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE
SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS IN
VEHICLES, WHICH RUN ON RENEWABLE
FUELS SUCH AS HYDROGEN AND
ELECTRICITY. ELECTRICITY SO MY
FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THE
DEFINITION OF TRANSPORTATION
FUELS. DOES IT INCLUDE RENEWABLE
FUELS AND WHETHER OR NOT THOSE
INCLUDE BOTH HYDROGEN AND
ELECTRICITY FOR ELECTRIC
VEHICLES. UM I'M GONNA HAVE MS
SANCHEZ. ANSWER THAT. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S UM AS YOU'LL
SEE ON PAGE 33 ARTICLE ONE IN
THE I PRESUME YOU'RE SPEAKING TO
THE ASSESSMENTS THAT THE EEC AND
CARB WILL BE DOING. THE
DEFINITION OF TRANSPORTATION
FUELS DOES INCLUDE RENEWABLE
FUELS. BIODIESEL HYDROGEN, AS
YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF OUR
REFINERIES HERE IN ST ARE
PRODUCING TWO ARE TRANSITIONING
TO PRODUCE THOSE RENEWABLE
FUELS. OKAY GREAT. YEAH I JUST,
UM I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT
THOSE ARE INCLUDED BECAUSE I
THINK IT'S IT NEEDS TO BE
INCLUDED IN A PLAN FOR
MONITORING THE TRANSITION AWAY
FROM FOSSIL FUELS AND TO ALSO
INCLUDE FORECASTING FOR ZB
ADOPTION AS A CONTRIBUTOR TO
DEMAND THE REDUCTION. SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, AND I JUST AGAIN
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. AS I SAID, YOU
KNOW, PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY
COULDN'T SEE THIS HAPPEN SOON
ENOUGH, AND I'M REALLY LOOKING
FORWARD TO SEEING INFORMATION
THAT WILL BE SEEING GOING
FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
SOON MEMBER WILL GO WITH SOME OF
THE MATH IS FOLLOWED BY REMEMBER
TEEN REMEMBER CONNOLLY, CARILLO,
HOLD IT. THANK YOU. MR CHAIR. UM
I THINK MY COLLEAGUE JUST
BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT WITH
INFLATION. UM I THINK THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING THAT WE HAVE TO
LOOK AT IS MARGINS OF INFLATION.
UM OIL IS NOT THE ONLY INDUSTRY
THAT HAS QUOTE RECORD BREAKING
PROFITS. AND PART OF THAT IS DUE
TO THE COST OF INFLATION,
DRIVING EVERYTHING IN EVERY
SECTOR UP. AND THIS STARTS WITH
OUR TAXES AND FEES HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. THAT PUSHES THE COST
OF THINGS UP. THEN YOU HAVE THE
COST OF LABOR. WE HAVE INCREASED
MINIMUM WAGE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND
AGAIN. THAT'S PUSHING COST
HIGHER. THEN WE HAVE THE OVERALL
COST OF ENERGY PRODUCTION JUST
TO KEEP THE LIGHTS ON. THAT'S
ANOTHER ADDITIONAL COSTS. THAT'S
GONE UP THAT HAS TO GET FACTORED
IN TO THE MARGIN. THEN YOU HAVE
THE INCREASE OF WATER. BECAUSE
WATER PRODUCTION IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA TAKES 10% OF ALL OF
OUR ELECTRICITY USE. LET'S NOT
FORGET THAT AND THEN WE GET INTO
FUELS. BUT THAT'S WHERE IT GETS
REALLY TRICKY WITH THIS
CONVERSATION BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
ADD IN THERE THAT THE COST OF
FUEL PRODUCTION, BUT YOU ALSO
HAVE TO LOOK AT THE COST OF
RENDERING THE RAMEN CEREAL. AND
THE COST OF PROCESSING THAT
MATERIAL AND THEN YOU GET TO
RESELL. WHICH GETS YOU THIS
CONVERSATION OF OUR WE PRICE
GOUGING OR NOT, OR WHAT'S
HAPPENING. THAT IS DRIVEN THE
COST. ON EVERYTHING. IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA UP NOW.
WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT ALL
OF OUR MONEY IS NOW KEPT ON OUR
DEVICES AND IT'S ALL ELECTRONIC.
IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS POST WORLD
WAR ONE WHERE YOU SEE PICTURES
OF PEOPLE WITH WILL BARRELS FULL
OF MONEY WHERE THEY COULD
ACTUALLY PAY ATTENTION TO HOW
INFLATION IS AFFECTING THEM. SO
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS
. NOT NOT IN THIS VACUUM OF JUST
SAYING WELL, IT'S JUST THE OIL
COMPANIES. THAT ARE DOING THIS.
EVERY SINGLE UNDERLINING THING
THAT GETS TO THE BOTTOM LINE IS
INCREASED IN THIS STATE. BUT
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL OF
THAT IN THIS CONVERSATION. I'VE
GOT A QUESTION FOR MISS SANCHEZ
, AND THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT I
HAD HEARD FROM THE COMMITTEE
HEARING JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.
UM IT WAS MENTIONED THAT YOU'RE
ARE YOU REMOVING OIL EXTRACTORS
OUT OF THIS, OR ARE WE,
INCLUDING THEM? THANK YOU FOR
THE QUESTION. ASSEMBLY MEMBER,
UM, EXISTING LAW, THE PETROLEUM
INDUSTRY INFORMATION REPORTING
ACT AS WE WERE REFERENCING
EARLIER DOES REQUIRE ANNUAL
REPORTING FROM OUR OIL PRODUCERS
IN ST THIS LEGISLATION WOULD
ONLY REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL
REPORTING OF MAJOR OWNERS IN
THOSE ANNUAL REPORTS. THAT IS TO
SAY THE FOCUS OF THIS
LEGISLATION IS NOT ON THE FIRMS
THAT ARE EXTRACTING CRUDE OIL
HERE IN CALIFORNIA, IT IS
DOWNSTREAM OF THAT PROCESS, AND
I APPRECIATE THAT.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S UH PATTERSON
RAISED EARLIER THE ISSUES OF
CRUDE OIL PRODUCTION IN
CALIFORNIA. I THINK YOU'VE HEARD
FROM DR BORNSTEIN AND OTHERS
THAT THE GLOBAL PRICE OF CRUDE
WHILE A BIG DRIVER OF GAS PRICES
IN CALIFORNIA DOES NOT
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN CRUDE THAT
IS PRODUCED HERE IN THE STATE
VERSUS IMPORTED CORRECT. SO I
JUST YOU'RE YOU'RE GONNA EXCLUDE
OUR EXTRACTORS CORRECT? THEY ARE
INCLUDED IN THE LEGISLATION BY
REFERENCE AGAIN BECAUSE OF THAT
NEW REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. THE
MAJOR OWNERS THAT WILL NOW BE A
PART OF THEIR ANNUAL REPORTING.
THEY ARE SUBJECT TO REPORT INTO
THE ENERGY COMMISSION UNDER
OTHER STATE STATUTE. UM. WHAT IS
THIS GONNA DO FOR OUT OF STATE
PRODUCERS? BUT WHETHER IT'S
TEXAS IMPORTING OIL IN OR SAUDI
OR INDIA BECAUSE WE KNOW THE
SAUDIS ARE BUILDING REFINERIES
TO MAKE CALIFORNIA GRADE FUELS.
INDIA HAS ALREADY DONE SO. SO
WHAT IS THIS GOING TO DO TO
ENSURE THAT THEY'RE NOT SPIKING
THE BALL? I'M SORRY REFINERIES
ABROAD THAT ARE PRODUCING
REFINED PRODUCT CORRECT. SO UH,
INCLUDED IN THE ADDITIONAL
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IS THE
DETAIL ON IMPORTS INTO THE STATE
OF BOTH REFINED PRODUCT AND
UNFINISHED PRODUCT THAT IS AGAIN
DESPERATELY NEEDED SO THAT THE
STATE KNOWS HOW MUCH SUPPLY OF
WHICH TYPE OF PRODUCT WE HAVE ON
HAND OR COMING IN VIA IMPORTS OR
AS BEING FRANKLY EXPORTED OUT OF
STATE BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT OUR
REFINERIES ALSO EXPORT REFINED
PRODUCT. WE HEAR A LOT OF
DISCUSSION AROUND SUPPLY AND
DEMAND AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS
THE STATE DOESN'T KNOW HAVE
ENOUGH GRANULARITY AROUND THE
SUPPLY. BUT YEAH, WE'RE NOT
DOING ANYTHING TO INCREASE
SUPPLY HERE. I WOULD REFERENCE
THE ASSESSMENT THAT I MENTIONED
TO THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S EARLIER
AND ASKING THAT THAT'S FINE.
I'LL ALSO REFERENCED THE FACT
THAT WE? WE HAD A GENTLEMAN THAT
RAN CAL JIM, WHO SUDDENLY
DECIDED TO LEAVE ON HIS OWN
TERMS AFTER PROCESSING
APPLICATIONS, SO A OUR STATE
SEEMS TO HAVE A. IN THE GOVERNOR
SAID IT PUBLICLY THAT HE IS NOT
INTERESTED IN INCREASING OIL
PRODUCTION HERE. SO AGAIN,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S I THINK YOU'RE
REFERRING TO CRUDE OIL
PRODUCTION. THIS LEGISLATION IS
VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON REFINED
PRODUCT AND GASOLINE. WELL, HOW
HOW DO YOU GET REFINED PRODUCT.
I WOULD NOTE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
THAT THE, UH, DURING THE TIME
WHERE WE EXPERIENCE THOSE VERY
HIGH PRICES, THERE WAS NOT A
SUPPLY ISSUE THAT THE DATA WE'VE
GOTTEN SO FAR SHOWED. SO UH,
WHILE CLEARLY SUPPLY COULD VERY
WELL BE A FACTOR, WHICH IS WHY
IT IS PART OF THE DATA
COLLECTION AND WAS PART OF THE
REQUIREMENT OF ANALYSIS. UM UH,
ON THE PART OF THE, UM DIVISION
BEFORE THE ENERGY COMMISSION
COULD ACT. UH HUH. AS WAS ALSO
POINTED OUT THESE GLOBAL SUPPLY
PRICE ON THE BARREL OF OIL IS
INDEPENDENT OF WHERE THAT OIL
COMES FROM. ON THAT. THAT WOULD
BE FUN TO SEE HOW THAT FLESHES
OUT. THEN, UH, FINAL QUESTION
HERE. WE WHEN IN THE HISTORY AS
ADDING ANOTHER. REGULATORY
BURDEN DECREASED COST. IF WE ARE
IF WE WANT TO SPEAK TO PRICE
GOUGING, FOR EXAMPLE. AH AFTER A
NUMBER OF AREAS WERE HIT BY
FIRE. UM WE ENACTED, UH, A RENT
CAP, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE. WE
EMPOWERED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
TO ENFORCE IF THAT WAS EXCEEDED
, BECAUSE KNOWING THAT HOUSING
SUPPLY IN THE AREA WAS DOWN, WE
DID NOT WANT OWNERS TO, UH. TO
BASICALLY, UM, EXPLOIT THE
TRAGEDY THAT PEOPLE EXPERIENCED
SO THAT KEPT PRICES DOWN. FOR
EXAMPLE, DURING THE PANDEMIC
WHEN WE HAD, UH, RUNS ON CERTAIN
PRODUCTS, AND WE STARTED TO SEE
PRICES GO UP LIKE ENHANCED
SANITIZER AND SUCH AGAIN. WE UH
, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
ALREADY HAS THE POWER FOR THAT
PRICE GOUGING. UM WE DID KEEP
PRICES DOWN. AS A RESULT OF THE
ACTIONS WE TOOK. THOSE ARE GREAT
EXAMPLES, YET CAUSE IS STILL
CONTINUE TO RISE. SO CLEARLY
WHAT WE'RE DOING ISN'T WORKING.
HOUSING STILL THROUGH THE ROOF.
CAST AND RETAILS STILL THROUGH
THE ROOF. SO I THINK THE LARGEST
CONCERN THAT WE HAVE AND THIS IS
PROBABLY WHY WE HAVE SO MUCH
OPPOSITION TO THIS IS THIS IS
ONE OF THOSE KEY PIVOTAL
FACTORS. THAT AFFECTS COSTS.
ACROSS THE BOARD. WHETHER YOU'RE
A SMALL BUSINESS, LARGE BUSINESS
, A FAMILY, UM, THERE ARE JUST
NEWLY OUT THE GATE TRYING TO GET
STARTED. UM I KNOW FOR MANY OF
MY COLLEAGUES THAT THE COST OF
TRANSPORTATION IS NOT THE SAME.
BUT IF YOU LIVE IN A RURAL AREA
LIKE MINE, FRANKLY, AN AREA
THAT'S HALFWAY COVERED WITH
WATER RIGHT NOW, OR AN ELECTRIC
VEHICLE JUST WON'T WORK. UM THIS
IS VERY CONCERNING AND THIS IS
NOT. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT
WE COULD GO ABOUT, UM, LOOKING
AT IT. WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH
OUR OIL COST BUT HAVING A FIXED
PERSPECTIVE, WHETHER YOU CAN
CALL IT THEY MAY OR SHALL OR OR
WHAT, BUT TO SAY THERE'S GOING
TO BE ANY TYPE OF WINDFALL. ON
THE TABLE. FRANKLY, FOR ANY
INDUSTRY. IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
SINCE WHEN DO WE AS A REPUBLIC
IS A DEMOCRACY S¼ WE'RE GOING TO
PENALIZE. ANY INDUSTRY. THAT'S A
VERY SCARY QUESTION. IN A VERY
SCARY FUTURE. I'M NOT SUPPORTING
THIS. THANK YOU. SO REMEMBER,
REMEMBER 10. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
. I THINK I'M GONNA PICK OFF
FROM MY COLLEAGUE FROM LARRY
LEFT OFF, WHICH IS I THINK HE,
UM I WENT THROUGH AND, UM,
EDUCATED US ON WHERE THE PRICE
AND THE COST COMES FROM. I'M
GONNA GO BACK TO WHERE MY
QUESTIONS LEFT UP AT THE
INFORMATION HERE BECAUSE I
COULDN'T GET AN ANSWER LAST
TIME, WHICH IS WHY THERE'S A
HIGHER PROFIT IN CALIFORNIA.
THAN IN OTHER PARTS OF THE
COUNTRY. MR GARCIA IS NODDING
HIS HEAD. I THINK MAYBE HE'S
MORE READY TO ANSWER THE
QUESTION THAN THE LAST
REPRESENTATIVE. THANK YOU FOR
THE QUESTION. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
COMPETITION. IT'S ABOUT
COMPETITION. YOU KNOW, WE HEARD
EARLIER FROM MR MURATSUCHI.
WE'VE BEEN SENDING MARKET
SIGNALS IN CALIFORNIA FOR A LONG
TIME. WE HAVE WE'VE DRIVEN OUT A
GREAT NUMBER OF REFINERS OUT OF
CALIFORNIA. AND ONE THING I
HAVEN'T HEARD AT ALL AS A
CONSIDERATION IS WE ARE A FUELS
MARKET FUELS ISLAND. WE START
THAT WAY. WE CONTINUE TO BE THAT
WAY. SO WE HAVE A UNIQUE FEEL
SPECIFICATION IN CALIFORNIA. WE
HAVE ABSOLUTELY LIMITED TO NO
IMPORT CAPACITY. WHEN WE'RE
SHORT, WE ARE MORE SHORT THAN
THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. WE HAVE
A LESS ABILITY TO RESPOND. THE
TWO FUEL SHORTAGES. WE DON'T
HAVE PIPELINES COMING INTO
CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T HAVE THE
AMOUNT OF PORK CAPACITY. LAST
SUMMER AND LAST FALL. WE HAD A
GLOBAL SHIPPING ISSUE. I'M SORRY
FOR THE MIC HERE. WE HAD A
UNIQUE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHERE GLOBAL SHIPPING WITH AN
ALL TIME LOW WE HAD A WAR IN
EUROPE. WE WERE POST PANDEMIC.
WE ARE INCREDIBLE SET OF SERVICE
CIRCUMSTANCES. AND ONE THING I
LEARNED IN LAW SCHOOL IS BAD
FACTS MAKE BAD LAW. SO WE FOCUS
ON A BAD SET OF FACTS. AND SAY
WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE AND WE
DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FIELDS
MARKET A GLOBAL FIELDS MARKET.
SO WE ARE OPERATING IN A GLOBAL
FIELDS MARKET AS AN ISLAND HERE.
THAT IS A THAT IS A FACT THAT WE
ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO FACTOR IN
HERE. WE'RE NOT LIKE TEXAS.
WE'RE NOT LIKE LOUISIANA. WE'RE
NOT LIKE THE NORTHEAST. WE DON'T
HAVE A FUNGIBLE FUEL SUPPLY. WE
HAVE CHOSEN TO DO THAT. WE HAVE
SET OURSELVES UP. BY 30 YEARS OF
PUBLIC POLICY, SO TO SIT HERE
NOW AND BE SURPRISED THAT
SOMETHING IS GOING ON AND NOT
UNDERSTAND, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
COMPETITION. SO WHEN WE'RE SHORT
PRICES GO UP. WHEN PRICES GO UP
. THOSE WHO ARE IN THE MARKET
MAKE A PROFIT. AND I WILL POINT
TO YOU TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE
LAST FALL OR LAST SUMMER,
ACTUALLY. WHEN PROFESSOR
BORNSTEIN AGAIN BEFORE WE
SETTLED ON A WINDFALL PROFIT IS
THE FOCUS. HE TOLD YOU, THEN
IT'S JUST LIKE YOUR HOUSING
MARKET. WE DIDN'T MAKE IT. BUT
YES, REFINERS GOT THE BENEFIT OF
IT. BUT WE DIDN'T MAKE UP THIS
MARKET. WE WERE SHORT AND WE HAD
A SMALL NUMBER OF REFINERS.
DOMESTICALLY AND ABROAD THAT
COULD SUPPLY THIS MARKET. I HOPE
THAT HELPS ITS COMPETITION, AND
IT'S THE UNIQUENESS OF
CALIFORNIA'S FIELD
SPECIFICATIONS. I APPRECIATE THE
QUESTION, SO I THINK YOU'RE
SAYING THAT THE LACK OF
COMPETITION ALLOWED. UM. THE
INDUSTRY TO EARN A GREATER
PROFIT. I THINK THAT'S ONE WAY
TO PUT IT. IT ALLOWED FOR PRICES
TO GO UP. WELL THAT'S WHAT I
HEARD FROM ABSOLUTELY ABSOLUTELY
AGAIN. BUT WE DIDN'T ESTABLISH
THIS MARKET. I DIDN'T SAY HE
DID. SO UM AND I THINK GOING
BACK TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM TULARE
COUNTY'S POINT, HE ASKED THE
QUESTION. ABOUT REGULATION. WHEN
DOES WINDOWS REGULATION ACTUALLY
CREATE A LOWER PRICE? AND AS ANY
ECONOMIST WOULD SAY, IT'S WHEN
YOU HAVE A MONOPOLY. WE HAVE AN
OLIGOPOLY. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A
REGULATION AND I THINK, UH, MR
GARCIA PUT IT QUITE WELL BECAUSE
YOU HAVE LESS COMPETITION. YOU
HAVE FEWER PLAYERS, PLAYERS
CONTROLLING MORE OF THE MARKET.
WHAT'S HAPPENING. THEY GET TO
SET THE PRICE. WE HAVE TO PAY
WHATEVER THEY CHARGE. AND WHEN
THAT HAPPENS, CONSUMERS ARE
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF AND SO JUST
LIKE WE SAW WITH THE ELECTRICITY
INDUSTRY WHERE WE HAD TO COME
IN, YOU HAVE A MONOPOLY. WE HAVE
TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A
CERTAIN WAY CERTAIN CERTAIN
PROFIT THAT THE ELECTRICITY
COMPANIES CAN EARN. THAT'S
REASONABLE. THEY HAVE A
REASONABLE RATE OF RETURN.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR
COMMITTEE DISCUSSES QUITE A BIT.
AH THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW
YOU HAVE FIVE COMPANIES
CONTROLLING 90% OF MARKET. YOU
KNOW THE DEFINITION BUT
OLIGOPOLY. NOW YOU NEED ACTUALLY
REGULATORY BODY TO COME IN.
BECAUSE THEY CAN SET THE PRICE
WHATEVER THEY WANT. THERE'S NOT
THERE'S NO ONE STOPPING THEM.
WHEN ADDITIONS AS I REMEMBER,
UTILITIES ALSO HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO SERVE. THEY HAVE A
GUARANTEED MARKET GUARANTEED
RATE OF RETURN. IS THAT WHAT
YOU'RE PROPOSING FOR THE
REFINERS? NOT AT THIS POINT,
RIGHT, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE UP
TO THE CC TO RESEARCH HERE'S
HERE'S HERE'S ONE OF THE BIG
PROBLEMS. WE DON'T KNOW. WE
DON'T WE DON'T HAVE THAT
INFORMATION. THAT'S ONE OF THE
CHALLENGES. THERE WERE THREE AND
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF
DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE, UH, THE
PRICE BIKES. THREE PRICE BIKES,
TWO OF WHICH WE ABSOLUTELY CAN'T
EVEN EXPLAIN ONE WE CAN, WHICH
WAS WHICH IS WHERE MY NEXT
QUESTIONS ARE GONNA GO. SIX
REFINERIES WENT DOWN IN OCTOBER.
RIGHT THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S
ABSOLUTELY WOULD BE REMISS OF US
NOT TO DEAL WITH REFINERIES
GOING DOWN. CAN YOU WALK US
THROUGH? WHAT HAPPENED IN
OCTOBER? WITH THE REFINERIES
GOING DOWN? ARE YOU SPEAKING
ABOUT PLANNED OUTAGES TURN
AROUND OR UNPLANNED INDUSTRY
REPRESENTATIVE? WE CAN'T GET
INFORMATION. SIX REFINERIES WENT
DOWN. WHAT HAPPENED? ASKING YOU
TO CLARIFY WHAT WENT DOWN MEANS
OH, SORRY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS
WHEN THERE WAS MAINTENANCE
PLANNED MAINTENANCE. I DON'T
KNOW. YOU TELL ME WAS PLANNED OR
UNPLANNED. I CAN'T GET THE
INFORMATION WE'VE BEEN LOOKING.
IF HE WOULD JUST ASK THE
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS, YOU WOULD HAVE THAT
INFORMATION BECAUSE THEY HAVE
THAT ONE YEAR IN ADVANCE. SO IF
IT'S A PLANNED MAINTENANCE YOU
DO HAVE THAT AS A STATE AGENCY
IN OCTOBER. WHAT HAPPENED? WAS
THERE PLANNED MAINTENANCE OR
SUSPECT THERE WAS SOME PLANT
MAINTENANCE BECAUSE IT HAPPENS
EVERY FALL. TO KEEP UP WITH
CALIFORNIA'S FEEL SPECIFICATIONS
TO MAKE A SWITCH OVER TO A
WINTER BLEND FUEL. WE HAVE
TURNAROUNDS THROUGH THE CHAIR,
PLEASE, IF WE DID HAVE IF WE DID
HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THAT
DIVISION HERE, THEY WOULD TELL
YOU THAT THE ORIGINAL PLANNED
MAINTENANCE THAT DATES THAT WERE
SUBMITTED TO THEM WERE THEN
CHANGED TOWARDS THE FALL. SO
THEY THE WHAT WAS SUBMITTED? DID
NOT HAVE SIX REFINERIES. AH IN
EFFECT NOT OPERATING AT THE SAME
TIME, AND SENATOR, I THINK MY
UNDERSTANDING WAS THE REFINERIES
. PLANS WERE CHANGED BECAUSE
THEY WERE MAKING TOO MUCH MONEY
IN THE SPREAD. THEY OPTED NOT TO
HAVE THE PLANNED MAINTENANCE
THAT THEY HAD REQUESTED OVER. A
YEAR AGO, BUT BECAUSE THEY WERE
MAKING SO MUCH MONEY DECIDED.
HEY, WE'RE MAKING SO MUCH MONEY.
WE'RE GONNA WAIT THAT WAS THAT
YOUR UNDERSTANDING? I CANNOT, UH
. I CAN DEFINITELY, UM, FROM THE
DATA KNOW THAT THEY WERE MAKING
A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY, WHETHER
THAT WAS THEIR MOTIVATION OR
SOMETHING ELSE, BUT CERTAINLY
ONE COULD COME TO THAT
CONCLUSION. APPRECIATE THAT
CENTER. I MEAN, WHAT I FIND IS
INSINCERE AS WHEN THE INDUSTRY
COMES AND SAYS, HEY, YOU KNOW,
MAINTENANCE IS SO IMPORTANT
HEALTH AND SAFETY AND SO
IMPORTANT. BUT NOT MORE
IMPORTANT THAN MAKING MONEY.
BECAUSE WHEN IT CAME TO MAKING
MONEY, THEN WE'RE GOING TO DELAY
THE MAINTENANCE THAT WE PLANNED
A YEAR AGO. SO AGAIN. THIS IS
WHERE I FEEL LIKE I'M A LITTLE
BIT FRUSTRATED WITH INDUSTRY
APPLICATIONS UP YOUR STATION
INDUSTRY DOUBLE. SPEAK WHERE WE
REALLY CAN'T GET. UH A LOT OF
ANSWERS, WHICH IS WHY THIS
LEGISLATION SO IMPORTANT. I
THINK ALL WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOME
ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS. WE ASK
ABOUT PROFITS. WE DON'T GET
ANSWERS BACK. I WANT TO GO TO MS
STAND. I WANT TO GO TO, UH, THE
SANCHEZ JUST ABOUT SUPPLY. UM
YOU HAVE. HOW MUCH HOW MUCH OF
OUR SUPPLY. UH THAT'S PRODUCED
HERE AND KIND OF HOW MUCH DO WE
HAVE ENOUGH SUPPLIES TO SORT OF
FUND? ARE CALIFORNIA MARKET.
HERE. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR THE
QUESTION. I BELIEVE YOU ALL
HEARD FROM VICE CHAIR GUNDA FROM
THE ENERGY COMMISSION ON THIS
TOPIC LAST WEEK. UM IT'S
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE FOR
THE MOST RECENT DATA WE HAVE ON
ANNUAL REPORTING ARE REFINERS
MET 88% MET OUR ENTIRE IN STATE
DEMAND. THAT WAS 88% OF THEIR
PRODUCT. THEY THEN EXPORTED AN
ADDITIONAL 12% OF THEIR PRODUCT
. I THINK YOU ALL HEARD ABOUT
THE 85% OF NEVADA'S MARKET THAT
WE REFINED FUELS FOR. I ALSO
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT FOR THE
COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR. GUNDA DID
REFERENCE IT, UH, DATA SUGGESTS
THAT 2017 WAS PEAK GASOLINE
DEMAND IN CALIFORNIA. WHICH IS
TO SAY FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS.
GASOLINE DEMAND HAS BEEN ON THE
DECLINE. SO AS WE THINK ABOUT
THESE ISSUES OF SUPPLY AND
DEMAND, ENSURING THAT DEMAND
DECLINE AS WE TRANSITION AWAY
FROM PETROLEUM FUELS. UM IS
ANOTHER REASON WHY WE'VE ASKED
THE AIR BOARD AND THE ENERGY
COMMISSION TO CREATE OUR
TRANSITION PLAN. SO YOU'RE
SAYING I MEAN, THE INDUSTRY IS
SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ENOUGH. SUPPLY WE NEED MORE
SUPPLY. WE NEED MORE SUPPLY.
YOU'RE SAYING IN FACT, WE HAVE
ENOUGH TO APPLY FOR CALIFORNIA.
WE HAD SO MUCH WE ACTUALLY
EXPORTED 12. TO ARIZONA AND
NEVADA. THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE
ALSO THE THIRD LARGEST GASOLINE
MARKET IN THE WORLD FOR THESE
COMPANIES. AND THE THIRD LARGEST
STATE IN TERMS OF REFINING
CAPACITY. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK
YOU. SO I THINK, MR CHAIR. I
THINK I THINK YOU SEE THE
LEGISLATION HERE. THAT'S
COMPLETELY MEETING THIS MOMENT.
WHAT WE HAVE IS. WE HAVE LESS
COMPETITION, STRIVING PRICES
THROUGH THE ROOF BECAUSE YOU
HAVE FIVE COMPANIES THAT CAN
CHARGE WHATEVER THEY CAN CHARGE.
WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GET ENOUGH
INFORMATION OR DATA ONTO WHY
THEY HAVE THESE RECORD PROFITS.
I APPRECIATE MR GARCIA'S
RESPONSE. UM AND THAT'S WHY WE
NEED THIS INFORMATION. WE NEED
MORE TRANSPARENCY AND WE NEED
REGULAR TOUR BODY TO COME IN TO
ENSURE THAT THE PRICING IS FAIR
TO OUR CONSUMERS. LASTLY, WE
HAVE SO MUCH SUPPLY OF OUR
CALIFORNIA OIL. WE NOT ONLY ARE
SUPPLYING OUR IN STATE MARKET.
WHICH I BELIEVE PEAKED A FEW
YEARS AGO. DEMAND FOR OIL IS
GOING DOWN IN OUR STATE WERE
ACTUALLY SUPPLYING MOST, YOU
KNOW, ALMOST ALL OF NEVADA'S GAS
AND OIL DEMAND. AS WELL AS SOME
ARIZONA'S. SO AGAIN, I THINK
APPRECIATE THE SENATOR
APPRECIATE THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE, AND, UM, WORKING WITH
THE LEGISLATORS TO REALLY
DEVELOP. I THINK THAT'S VERY
SENSIBLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION TO
ATTACK. UH A PROBLEM THAT IS ON
MANY CALIFORNIANS MINDS TO TRY
TO GET THESE GAS PRICES UNDER
CONTROL. THANK YOU. MR CONNELLY.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND I'M GONNA
REALLY PIGGYBACK ON THAT. I
THINK IT WAS WELL SAID AND GOING
BACK TO THE QUESTION POSED BY
OUR COLLEAGUE FROM TILLERY. WHEN
DOES REGULATION CREATE LOWER
PRICE? YEAH THAT THAT FRANKLY,
IS THE BASIS FOR ANTITRUST LAW
FOR UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW WHERE
YOU HAVE AN INDUSTRY SUBJECT TO
MARKET MANIPULATION. WELL DO.
OKAY WITH DUE RESPECT, I THINK
MY COLLEAGUE PUT IT WELL. WE
HAVE A SITUATION HERE WHERE WE
HAVE FIVE MARKET PLAYERS. WE
KNOW AS A FACT THAT THE PRICES
ARE NOT SIMPLY EXPLAINED, OR THE
RECORD PROFITS ARE NOT SIMPLY
EXPLAINED BY THE LEVEL OF TAXES
AND REGULATION. UM, AT A MINIMUM
, WE NEED MORE TRANSPARENCY TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN
THE MARKET BY IT, BUT BY ALL
AVAILABLE EVIDENCE THIS INDUSTRY
IS GAINING EXCESS PROFITS AT THE
EXPENSE OF CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS.
SERVING AS A FORMER DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL DURING THE
ENERGY CRISIS THAT OUR STATE
PHASE I'VE SEEN FIRSTHAND HOW
OUR ENERGY MARKETS ARE
VULNERABLE TO MANIPULATION AND
PRICE GOUGING. AND DURING A
RECORD TIME OF INFLATION AND
ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY FOR
CONSUMERS. NOW IT'S NOT THE TIME
TO RETREAT FROM WHAT'S BEFORE US
. WE NEED TO PROTECT WORKING
FAMILIES, UH, AND CONSUMERS IN
THE STATE. SO AS MENTIONED I AT
THE INFORMATIONAL HEARING, I
THINK GIVING THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL AND THE NEW DIVISION
WITHIN C E. C SUBPOENA POWER. I
THINK THAT'S A KEY ASPECT OF
THIS. DO YOU OBTAIN IT FROM
MATION WILL HELP CONSTRUCT A
CLEAR PICTURE AROUND RECENT
PRICE SPIKES AND THE
DISPROPORTIONATE COST IMPACTS AT
CALIFORNIA'S ARE FACING AT THE
POP. AND I THINK THIS IS JUST A
FIRST STEP. THE RULE MAKING
PROCESS LAID OUT IN THIS BILL
CREATES A PATHWAY FOR ALL
STAKEHOLDERS TO ENGAGE WITH THE
C E C TO DETERMINE THE MOST
EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR ACTUALLY
REQUESTING AND ANALYZING THE
RELEVANT INFORMATION. SO I LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO ENGAGE
WITH MY COLLEAGUES. UH AND I
APPRECIATE SENATOR SKINNER YOUR
WORK AND BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE. A G
BONTA. AND MEMBERS OF THIS BODY
WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN THE WORK. TO
THIS POINT. UH I, FOR ONE WILL
CONTINUE TO BE VERY ENGAGED ON
THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
, SAM. REMEMBER CARILLO,
FOLLOWED BY SOME MEMBER HOLDING
. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND I
JUST A SPECIAL RECOGNITION TO
ALL OF THE MEMBERS IN THE
ASSEMBLY WHO WORKED REALLY HARD
TO LAND US TO WHERE WE ARE
TODAY. I THINK A LOT HAS BEEN
SAID ABOUT THE REASONS AS HOW
HOW WE GOT HERE. PROWSE GOUGING
AND THE IMPACT TO FAMILIES
ACROSS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
I WANT TO FOCUS A LITTLE BIT
MORE ABOUT FUTURE AND THE
IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS OF THIS
BILL AND PARTICULARLY, UM,
ESTABLISHING THE DIVISION OF
PETROLEUM MARKET OVERSIGHT
WITHIN THE COMMISSION WITHIN THE
CC, WHOSE AUTHORITY UH, WHO'S
INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY AND
DIRECTOR WOULD BE APPOINTED. BY
THE GOVERNOR. AS WELL AS THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INDEPENDENT
CONSUMER FUELS ADVISORY
COMMITTEE. WITHIN THE C C
CONSISTENT OF SIX MEMBERS
APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR, ONE
APPOINTED BY THE SPEAKER AND ONE
APPOINTED BY THE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON RULES. MY GENERAL
CONCERN, AND I'D LOVE TO FIGURE
OUT MORE DETAILS ABOUT THIS. IF
MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING IN THE
WORKS THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF. MY
GENERAL CONCERN RELATED TO
APPOINTMENTS ON SUCH A HUGE UM,
TWO HUGE OVERSIGHT COMMISSIONS
THAT ARE BEING INTRODUCED AND
ESTABLISHED. IS REALLY THE
PRIORITIES OF WHOMEVER IS
GOVERNOR. SO GOVERNOR NEWSOM
CLEARLY A PRIORITY CLEARLY A
PRIORITY TO THE LEGISLATURE NOW.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE LEAVE? WHAT
HAPPENS WHEN GOVERNOR NEWSOME
TERMS OUT? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE
MEMBERS OF THE CURRENT
LEGISLATIVE LEGISLATIVE BODY
TERM OUT AND SO I'M I'M MY
CONCERN IS MOSTLY IF THE
POSITIONS ARE APPOINTED. THEY'RE
UNDER THE WOMEN. PRIORITY OF
WHOMEVER IS IN CHARGE. AND SO
I'M CAUTIOUS ABOUT THAT. I'M
ALSO CAUTIOUS ABOUT, UM ANY, UM
, REGULATIONS OR ANY. HOW ARE WE
? HOW IS THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE?
SELECTING INDIVIDUALS TO BE PART
OF THIS COMMITTEE? WHAT ARE THE
REQUIREMENTS TO SERVE IS IT AN
APPOINTMENT, BASED ON WHO'S
AVAILABLE? ARE THEY
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE
LEGISLATURE? HOW HOW WOULD THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS PLAY OUT? UM AND
ULTIMATELY, WHAT ARE THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DIRECTOR OF
THE DIVISION OF PETROLEUM MARKET
OVERSIGHT, WHO WOULD BE
APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR, AND
I'M CONTINUING TO READ THAT THIS
WOULD HAVE AN ANNUAL COST OF
OVER $9 MILLION AND AGAIN, IT'S
NOT. IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF THE
IMPORTANCE OF WHAT WE'RE
DISCUSSING IN THE I'M TALKING
ABOUT FUTURE. WHAT HAPPENS IN
THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. WOULD YOU
LIKE A RESPONSE? THANK YOU, UM
FIRST ON THE ON THE DEFINITION
OF WHO WOULD BE APPOINTED TO THE
INDEPENDENT CONSUMER FUELS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE. UM AS I
MENTIONED THEY, THEIR
APPOINTMENTS THAT WOULD BE BY
THE GOVERNOR BUT APPROVED BY THE
LEGISLATURE. UM ON PAGE 39
ARTICLE FOR IT LISTS. THAT THERE
WOULD BE. THE APPOINTMENTS WOULD
INCLUDE A MEMBER A PERSON WHO,
UH, HOLDS AN ACADEMIC
APPOINTMENT WITH KNOWLEDGE OF
ECONOMICS OR BUSINESS OPERATION
OF THE FUELS MARKET. ANOTHER
MEMBER WOULD REPRESENT
CALIFORNIA PETROLEUM FUELS
INDUSTRY ANOTHER REPRESENTING
CONSUMERS, ANOTHER REPRESENTING
LABOR, ANOTHER WITH EXPERTISE IN
COMMUNITY, ENVIRONMENTAL OR
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES,
AND THEN ANOTHER WITH EXPERTISE
IN ANTITRUST LAW, AND THEN THERE
WOULD BE A MEMBER APPOINTED BY
THE SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY AT
THE DISCRETION OF THE SPEAKER OF
THE ASSEMBLY, SO IN OTHER WORDS
, WITHOUT A DEFINITION OF HIS
PARTICULAR EXPERTISE, AND SAME
BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON
RULES. UM AND, UH AND THERE'S
ALSO RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR THOSE
INDIVIDUALS TAKING ANY, UH AH
CONTRACTS OR INCOME FROM THE
PETROLEUM INDUSTRY DURING THE
TIME THAT THEY ARE SERVED.
OBVIOUSLY THE PERSON FROM WHO IS
REPRESENTING THE CONTRIBUTORY
LIAM FUELS INDUSTRY THERE.
THERE'S LANGUAGE THAT OBVIOUSLY
ALLOWS FOR THAT IN THAT, UH THAT
CIRCUMSTANCE NOW AS TO YOUR
CONCERN ABOUT YOU KNOW IF THE
LEGISLATURE CHANGES OR THE
GOVERNOR CHANGES THAT WE FACE IN
EVERY SINGLE UH UH, IN THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, EVERY
APPOINTMENT THAT IS MADE WHO
SERVES IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
, WHO SERVES AS IN EVERY
COMMISSION AND REGULATORY AGENCY
, WHO SERVES AS THE DEPARTMENT
HEAD AND OF COURSE, SOME OF
THOSE ALSO HAVE LEGISLATIVE
APPOINTMENTS, THOUGH NOT ALL. SO
THAT'S JUST A FACTOR. I THINK OF
ALL I MEAN, ANY GOVERNMENTAL
ENTITY HAS SUCH STRUCTURES, SO
THAT CONCERN OF WHO IS THE
FUTURE GOVERNOR WHO'S THE FUTURE
LEGISLATURE EXISTS FOR EVERY
ASPECT OF OUR STATE OPERATIONS.
UM BUT THIS IS DESIGNED. I THINK
CAREFULLY, UM, WITH KNOWING THAT
THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT IS NOT
FULLY UNDER THE UNDER OUR
CONTROL. THANK YOU, UM, SENATOR
FOR THE RESPONSE. I THINK, UM
WHAT COMES UP FOR ME, AND I
THINK, AS WE DO A LOT OF
OVERSIGHT WITH DIFFERENT
AGENCIES AS TO DEPARTMENTS IS
THAT APPOINTMENTS ARE DIFFERENT
THAN MANAGEMENT OF AN OFFICE.
THAT IS, UH, MORE LONG TERM
THAT'S MORE OF AN EMPLOYEE
STRUCTURE. I FIND THAT ARE NOT
I'M TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT
THE GOVERNOR'S APPOINTMENTS AS
RELATED TO THE BILL. IS THAT.
THEY VARY IN EXPERIENCE, AND
THEY VARY ON COMMITMENT,
DEPENDING ON WHO THEY ARE. AND
SO SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS THE
STRUCTURE OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN
THE LEGISLATURE, IN MY OPINION
DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT'S THE
STRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO USE
MOVING FORWARD, ESPECIALLY WHEN
ESTABLISHING SOMETHING SO BIG
AND MONUMENTAL. UM. SO AGAIN,
IT'S A CONCERN TO US BASED ON
OTHER OVERSIGHT HEARINGS IN
WHICH FOLKS COME IN AND OUT AND
SO IN TRYING TO ESTABLISH
SOMETHING THAT'S MORE LONG TERM
VISIONARY IN TERMS OF UM,
LONGEVITY AND INSTITUTIONAL
KNOWLEDGE ON THE ISSUE. IT'S A
CONCERN THAT I SHARE BECAUSE
I'VE SEEN IT IN OTHER OVERSIGHT
HEARINGS IN WHICH FOLKS ARE NOT
AS PREPARED AND SO IT'S JUST
SOMETHING THAT I THAT I WANTED
TO RAISE IN ADDITION TO THE
INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD BE
APPOINTED WE TALK A LOT. AND
OVERSIGHT RELATED TO DIVERSITY
ON GENDER, RACE, ETHNICITY AND
THE COMPOSITION OF WHAT THOSE
COMMISSIONS CAN POTENTIALLY LOOK
LIKE AGAIN. IT'S SOMETHING THAT
WE SEE ANOTHER OVERSIGHT
HEARINGS, AS WELL AS TO WHO IN
PARTICULAR IS KNOWN BY THE
GOVERNOR OR KNOWN BY US TO BE
ABLE TO PUT A RECOMMENDATION
FORWARD AND SO IN AN EFFORT TO
TRY TO ESTABLISH Tð TWO NEW, UM
. COMMISSIONS I OR COMMITTEES.
I'M SORRY. I'M ALSO CONCERNED
ABOUT WHO ACTUALLY GETS
APPOINTED AND WHAT THAT BODY
LOOKS LIKE MOVING FORWARD SO
JUST THINGS THAT I WANTED TO
FLAG WITH YOU AND HOPEFULLY
WE'RE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT AS THIS
MOVES FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. SO HOLD IT. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I JUST WANTED TO, UM SAY
THANK YOU TO THE SENATOR. UH
EVERY TIME THERE'S A BIG BILL, I
LOOK UP AND THERE YOU ARE. SO WE
KNOW THAT YOUR WISDOM AND
HISTORY AND UNDERSTANDING OF HOW
IMPORTANT BILLS LIKE THIS ARE TO
MEET THE TIMES IS WHAT SPOKEN
LIKE TO THANK THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE AND THE GOVERNOR. FOR
PROVIDING LEADERSHIP CLARITY. TO
BRING THE LEGISLATURE TOGETHER.
THE FOCUS ON AN ISSUE THAT IS
VERY CRITICAL AND VERY TIMELY.
FOR US TO FINALLY GET OUR ARMS
AROUND IN A MEANINGFUL WAY AND
TO SHOW HOW WE CAN DEVISE.
CREATIVE APPROACHES TO BRING
TRANSPARENCY AND UNDERSTANDING
TO COMPLEX ISSUES. ROME WASN'T
BUILT IN A DAY. THIS BILL IS A
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I
THINK THAT THE ELEMENTS OF THE
BILL THAT HAVE BEEN CLEARLY
TALKED ABOUT THAT. UM THERE MAY
NEED TO BE SOME ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS AND MAYBE CLEAN UP
LANGUAGE AT ANOTHER STATE,
ANOTHER TIME. UH, ARE PROBABLY
APPARENT BUT I THINK GENERALLY
PEOPLE ARE HURTING. INFLATION
ACROSS THE BOARD. PEOPLE ARE
HURTING. AND I THINK THE WAY
THAT THIS HAS PLAYED OUT HAS
COME AT A TIME THAT IS ELEVATED
IN A VERY SIGNIFICANT WAY. AND
FOR THE INDUSTRY THAT HAS KEPT
THE CALIFORNIA CONSUMER IN THE
DARK FOR SO LONG ON THIS KIND OF
ISSUE. THIS ISSUE OF PRICE
GOUGING AT THE PUMP. THAT THE
LEGISLATURE TAKING UP THIS ISSUE
AT THIS TIME TO DO ANYTHING LESS
WOULD BE A DERELICTION OF OUR
DUTY. FOR US TO GET INTO THIS
AND TO UNDERSTAND THE
COMPLEXITY. TO UNDERSTAND THE
ECONOMICS. THE RAMIFICATIONS. TO
WORKING. MEN AND WOMEN AND
FAMILIES AND WHO ARE ON THE
MARGIN. THE TIME IS NOW. AND SO
I DO SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION
THAT'S BEFORE US. AND NOT UNLIKE
SP 901. WELFARE MITIGATION
ISSUES THAT WERE NEEDED TO BE
ADDRESSED AT THE TIME OR
DESTABILIZATION AND THE ENERGY
MARKET AND 10 54 WAS A APPROACH
TO ADDRESS THAT. ALL OF THOSE
RECORD BREAKING TIME IN TERMS OF
WHEN THEY WENT FROM CONCEPT TO
SIGNED LEGISLATION. AND I
BELIEVE THAT IN MOST OF THOSE
CASES THAT DIDN'T MAKE ITS WAY
BACK TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. MAYBE IN THE SENATE
AND THE EARLY FORMS BUT IN THE
LATTER IN IT DID NOT MAKE ITS
WAY TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE AND EVEN ON OUR RPS
BILLS FROM THE EARLY DAYS NOT
ALL OF THOSE MADE THEIR WAY TO
APPROPRIATIONS EITHER. BECAUSE
OF THE TIMELINESS AND THE
URGENCY OF THE MATTER AND THE
TIME THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT.
AND SO I THINK THAT THIS IS AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO MOVE
FORWARD. IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
THIS REPORT SHOWS APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE HAS WEIGHED IN THE
STAFF HAS GIVEN THERE COST
ESTIMATES, SO IT'S NOT DEVOID OF
ANY REVIEW FROM APPROPRIATIONS.
I WOULD SAY THAT ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT THIS COMMITTEE AND
PROBABLY ON THE SENATE SIDE
SHOULD CONSIDER DURING THE
BUDGET PROCESS IS MAYBE MAKING
SURE THAT THERE'S RESOURCES THAT
CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THIS
COMMITTEE. AND ON THE SENATE TO
HAVE APPROPRIATE STAFF. I MEAN,
WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT TREMENDOUS
STAFF. DON'T GET ME WRONG, BUT
WE'RE DELVING INTO ANOTHER AREA
OF VERY EXCUSE ME. COMPLEX AREA
THAT THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO
HAVE THE RESOURCES TO MEET THE
MOMENT. WE APPRECIATE THE CC AND
CARB AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE,
BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
OUR LEGISLATIVE REVIEW WE HAVE
THAT FOLKS WHO CAN ALSO EVALUATE
THE CLUMP PLEX NATURE OF THIS
INDUSTRY. AND I KNOW HOW
CHALLENGE THIS COMMITTEE CAN BE
IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE WE GET
OUR ARMS AROUND ALL OF THE
THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE
TABLE. SO I WOULD I WOULD SAY
THAT TIME IS NOW. AND YOU HAVE
MY SUPPORT. I KNOW THAT THIS IS
OBVIOUSLY FOR THE INDUSTRY
CHANGE. BUT IT'S ONE THAT'S
IMPORTANT. AND THEY PROVIDING OF
THE INFORMATION. AND WHAT YOU
FEEL IS CONFIDENTIAL WE HAVE A
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WILL BE PART
OF THIS CONVERSATION AS WELL. SO
I'M SURE THAT ALL OF THAT WILL
BE EVALUATED IN DUE COURSE OF
TIME AND MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING
IS DONE TO INJURED INADVERTENTLY
THE INDUSTRY BUT AT THE SAME
TIME INFORMATION THAT HELPS US
BEING THE STRONGEST POSITION TO
MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS AND
UNDERSTAND HOW THIS INDUSTRY
WORKS AND HOW THE PRICES ARE
IMPACTED AT THE PUMP. AS THE
TIME IS NOW. SO, MR CHAIR, I
WOULD UM, TIME IS APPROPRIATE.
MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ADOPT
THE BILL BEFORE US MOTION BY MR
HOLDEN. SECOND BY MR TING. WE
HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL MEMBER WHO
WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THAT IS A
SOME MEMBER WALLACE. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR. APPRECIATE IT. WELL, I
WANT TO JUST FIRST SAY THANK YOU
TO THE AUTHOR AND THE
ADMINISTRATION FOR ACKNOWLEDGING
GAS PRICES. UM AND HOW THEY
IMPACT OUR CONSTITUENTS BACK IN
MY DISTRICT SIMILAR TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MATHIS INLAND
COMMUNITY. WE'RE VERY DEPENDENT
ON OUR VEHICLES TO GET TO AND
FROM WORK. SO WHEN WE DO SEE
THESE MASSIVE GAS PRICE SPIKES
THAT HAS A VERY NEGATIVE IMPACT
, I DID JUST WANT TO ASK ONE
QUESTION TO MS SANCHEZ HERE. UM
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUPPLY AND
DEMAND AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
HOW WE HAVE REFINERY SUPPLY THAT
OUTWEIGHS DEMAND, RIGHT? IS THAT
CORRECT? OVER THE COURSE OF
ANNUAL DEMAND FOR THE PRODUCT.
YES. OKAY, UM THIS CALIFORNIA
PRODUCING A FEEDSTOCK TO MEET
OUR DEMAND, OR ARE WE IMPORTING
IRAQ CRUDE IN ORDER TO REFINE IT
? WE DO IMPORT CRUDE INTO THE
STATE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF, UH WHAT
PERCENTAGE CALIFORNIA CRUDE
MAKES UP FOR OUR TOTAL GAS
SUPPLY. TOTAL GAS SUPPLY. NO IN
TERMS OF THE BALANCE BETWEEN
IMPORTS AND CALIFORNIA CRUDE. I
THINK IT'S ABOUT 30% IN STATE
PRODUCTION 70% IMPORTED BUT
AGAIN THAT IS A GLOBAL PRICE AND
SO THE GLOBAL PRICE OF CRUDE OIL
IS THE SAME FOR THE BARREL OF
OIL THAT'S COMING FROM OUT OF
STATE VS IN STATE, AND IT DOES
NOT AFFECT GAS PRICES. OKAY UM,
JUST, UH, HUMOR ME HERE DO DO WE
KNOW WHAT THE PERCENTAGE OF
CALIFORNIA CRUDE MADE UP OUR
SUPPLY WAS ABOUT 10 20 YEARS
AGO. WAS IT ABOUT THE SAME OR
HAS THAT CHANGED? IT WAS HIGHER
, HIGHER. WE PRODUCE MORE
LOCALLY. ALRIGHT GREAT. BUT
AGAIN, I THINK YOU'VE HEARD FROM
A NUMBER OF PROFESSORS AND
EXPERTS AND ECONOMISTS WHO WILL
TELL YOU THE PRICE OF CRUDE OIL
IS GLOBALLY SET AND THEREFORE IT
DOES NOT MATTER IF THE BARRELS
COMING FROM KERN OR FROM
ELSEWHERE. THE INPUT IS THE
SAME. OTHER TRANSPORTATION COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT TO GET
PASSED ALONG. YES IN BOTH CASES
. OKAY. GREAT THANK YOU. UM, AND
THEN, UH, MR GARCIA, I JUST
WANTED TO TOUCH ON ONE MORE
THING WITH YOU, UM SO WAS THE
INDUSTRY CONSULTED ON THE
FEASIBILITY OF REPORTING ALL
THIS DATA? NO, SOME MEMBER WE
WERE NOT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT
, UM YOU'LL BE ENGAGED IN AS WE
MOVE FORWARD. I KNOW WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT SOME CLEANUP. WE
HOPE TO BE. I MEAN, I THINK
WE'RE DEALING WITH A DATA ISSUE
TODAY, BASED ON LAST YEAR'S
LEGISLATION, WHERE WE
SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR A
RULEMAKING TO CLARIFY ALL OF THE
INACCURACY IS THE
INCONSISTENCIES AND LANGUAGE.
AND WE'RE STILL STRUGGLING WITH
LAST YEAR'S BILL, BUT THIS IS A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF NEW DATA
WITH SOME INCONSISTENCIES ALSO
BUILT IN AND I THINK THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS REFLECTS
THAT. UM BUT WE HOPE TO AND WE
WILL ENGAGE WITH ADMINISTRATION
OF THE ALLOW US TO MAKE SURE
THAT YOU GET GOOD DATA,
CONSISTENT DATA AND HOPEFULLY
USEFUL DATA. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. I THINK THAT THEN THE
QUESTIONS FROM ALL THE MEMBERS
UP HERE ON THE DIET. WE WILL ASK
THE AUTHOR OF THE BILL. IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE. THERE IS
EMOTION IN A SECOND. THAT THIS
BILL HAS HAS ENJOYED DO PASS
RECOMMENDATION TO THE ASSEMBLY
FLOOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WANT
TO THANK MY SPONSORS THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND ALSO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL BONDI'S OFFICE.
FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS BILL. I
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE THERE
WERE MEMBERS OF BOTH THE
ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE THAT
WORKED VERY HARD IN IF WE TAKE
THE BILL IS INTRODUCED BACK IN
DECEMBER, AND OBVIOUSLY THE BILL
THAT'S BEFORE US IS, IT IS QUITE
REVISED. THERE WERE MANY GREAT
CONVERSATIONS AND WORK WITH
STAKEHOLDERS MEETINGS WITH
STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING THE
INDUSTRY. UM AND I THINK THIS IS
A FAR BETTER PRODUCT. WHAT WE
HAVE BEFORE US, THEN WHAT WAS
PRESENTED IN DECEMBER, AND IT
WAS THE THAT WORK IN THE INPUT
OF MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE.
AND THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO THAT INPUT
FROM MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE
THAT IMPROVED TO THE PRODUCT.
AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT IF YOU
HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, IN A TYPICAL
FAMILY IN CALIFORNIA, WHO OWNS
TWO VEHICLES IF THEY'RE HAVING
TO GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF, UH THE
DISTANCE FROM THEIR WORKPLACES
AND SUCH IF THEY HAVE TO FILL
BOTH VEHICLES THE TANKS ONCE A
WEEK. AND YOU THINK ABOUT A $2
EXTRA A GALLON AND THE COST THAT
PUTS ON THAT FAMILY. THAT'S A
MINIMUM OF 300 EXTRA MONTH AND
UPWARDS TO 500 OR SO DEPENDING
ON WHAT THE FUEL EFFICIENCY OF
THEIR VEHICLE IS WHAT FAMILIES
HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 500 A MONTH
TO, UH, TO SPEND TWO IN ORDER?
MANY ARE, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY
AS WAS POINTED OUT BY A NUMBER
OF OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE
DIOCESE. THAT YOU THEN HAVE TO
START WONDERING. OKAY. IS IT
WORTH IT TO GO TO WORK? SO I
THINK THAT WHAT WE ARE DOING NOT
ONLY THINK WHAT WE ARE DOING AND
MANY OF YOU SPOKE TO THIS, AND I
GREATLY APPRECIATE THE
CONVERSATION FROM THE DIOCESE.
WE ARE PUTTING IN A GOOD
CONSUMER PROTECTION REGULATION
THAT HOPEFULLY WILL NEVER HAVE
TO BE USED. AND THE OIL
COMPANIES IF THEY RESPOND AND
REFINERIES AS APPROPRIATELY THEN
PERHAPS WE WILL NOT HAVE SUCH
PRICE HIKES, AND THUS WE WILL
NOT EVER HAVE TO USE THE
PENALTY. BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE
ALL OF THE CONVERSATION TODAY
AND ALL OF THE GOOD WORK ON
THIS. AND WITH THAT, I ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU, SENATOR
SKINNER. I WILL ASK THE
SECRETARY TO CALL THE ROLL. THE
MOTION AND SECOND THAT, UM, IS
ON THE FLOOR. SB TO THE MOTION
IS DUE PASS TO THE FLOOR. GARCIA
GARCIA, I PATERSON PATERSON KNOW
ABOUT BAUER-KAHAN. BAUER-KAHAN I
CALLED AROUND. CALDERON? AYE.
KOREA. CARILLO. AYE CHAN. CHEN
NO, CONNOLLY. CONNOLLY, I HOLD
IN. HOLD ON I MATHIS. MATTHEW
SNOW MURATSUCHI. MURATSUCHI I
RAISE REYES I SANTIAGO.
SANTIAGO, I SZABO. VÚI TING.
THING I WALLACE WALLACE. NO. 11
4. 11 FOR THE BILL IS OUT, UM,
DIRECTION TO THE ASSEMBLY. FLOOR
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL ADJOURN.