GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING. A B
8 36 A SALIH. HAS BEEN PULLED
FROM THE HEARING AND A BEFORE 19
BARRICADE HAND IS NOW OFF THE
CONSENT CALENDAR AND WILL BE
PRESENTED TODAY. WE HAVE A LONG
AGENDA TODAY AS AS WE USUALLY DO
IN THIS COMMITTEE SO INCLUDING
SEVERAL COUNTRIES, MORE
CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS, SO WE WILL
NEED TO BE EFFICIENT WITH OUR
TIME AS A REMINDER EACH SIDE
WILL BE ALLOWED TO MAIN
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT OR
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL. WE HAVE
A TIMER, SO IF YOU HEAR THAT,
HEAR IT BEEPING THAT MEANS LET'S
WRAP IT UP. UM AND ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES SHOULD STATE THEIR
NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY. THIS
ALLOWS ALL AUTHORS A FAIR CHANCE
TO PRESENT THEIR BILLS, ALL
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND EQUAL
CHANCE TO HAVE THEIR POSITION
REFLECTED IN THE RECORD AS WE
PROCEED WITH THE HEARING. I WANT
TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS OUR COMMITTEE RULES
TO ENSURE WE MAINTAIN ORDER AND
TO RUN A FAIR AND EFFICIENT
HEARING. IN ORDER TO FACILITATE
THE GOAL OF HEARING AS MUCH FROM
THE PUBLIC WITHIN THE LIMITS OF
OUR TIME. WE WILL NOT PERMIT
CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS, DISTURBS
OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT OF LEGISLATIVE
PROCEEDINGS. WE WILL NOT ACCEPT
DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR OR BEHAVIOR
THAT INCITES OR THREATENS
VIOLENCE, EVEN VEILED THREATS.
THE RULES OF CONDUCT BY MEMBERS
OF PUBLIC INCLUDE NO TALKING OR
LOUD NOISES FROM THE AUDIENCE.
PUBLIC COMMENT MAY BE PROVIDED
ONLY AT THE DESIGNATED TIME AND
MUST BE LIMITED TO YOUR NAME,
ORGANIZATION AND SUPPORT OR
OPPOSITION OF A BILL. NO
ENGAGING IN CONDUCT THAT
DISRUPTS, DISTURBS OR OTHERWISE
IMPEDES THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF
THIS HEARING. AND PLEASE BE
AWARE THAT VIOLATION OF THESE
RULES MAY SUBJECT YOU TO REMOVAL
OR OTHER ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
WITH THAT WE WILL PROCEED WITH
THE AGENDA. WE WILL BEGIN AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE. WE'LL GO IN NUMBER
ORDER AS WE DO SO AUTHORS AS YOU
SEE YOUR NAME ON THE AGENDA,
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU'RE HERE SO
WE CAN HAVE YOUR BILL HEARD WITH
THAT. WE'LL START WITH AGENDA
ITEM NUMBER ONE A. B 81
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RAMOS.
WELCOME. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM
TODAY, UM, I AM PRESENTING 80
81. A BILL THAT DEALS WITH THE
INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT. THE
INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT,
ESTABLISHED IN 1978 IS A FEDERAL
LAW THAT ESTABLISHES MINIMUM
FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR STATE
COURT CHILD WELFARE PROCEEDINGS
IN ANY CHILD CUSTODY PROCEEDINGS
INVOLVING INDIAN CHILDREN. AND
MORE ON THE LAW. THE LAW WAS
CREATED TO REVERSE ASSIMILATION
POLICIES INFLICTED UPON NATIVE
AMERICANS IN THE UNITED STATES
AND HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, SO THAT LAW IS VERY
IMPORTANT TO TRIBAL COMMUNITIES
. NOT ONLY HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA BUT ACROSS THE
NATION. BABY 81 WOULD REQUIRE
FOR CALIFORNIA COURTS TO
CONSIDER THAT CALIFORNIA'S EARLY
RELATIONSHIP WITH CALIFORNIA
TRIBES WAS FRAUGHT WITH VIOLENCE
, EXPLOITATION, DISPOSITION AND
THE ATTEMPTED DESTRUCTION OF
TRIBAL COMMUNITIES. THIS BILL
WOULD STRENGTHEN THE LAWS
SURROUNDING INDIAN CHILD CUSTODY
PROCEEDINGS PROTECTING
CALIFORNIA'S FIRST PEOPLE.
CURRENTLY THERE IS A CHALLENGE
TO THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT
PENDING IN THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT. OFTEN TIME WE
FIND THAT CALIFORNIA LAWS ARE
STRONGER THAN THEIR FEDERAL
COUNTERPARTS. THIS SHOWS
CALIFORNIA'S ONGOING COMMITMENT
TO CORRECTING THE WRONGS OF THE
PAST AND SHOWING THAT
PARTNERSHIP TO WORK WITH OUR
TRIBES AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS
AND TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF ALL
CHILDREN IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL
IS CHAIRMAN OF THE MERINGUE GO
TRIBAL GOVERNMENT CHAIRMAN
CHARLES MARTIN AND MICHELE
CASTING ME, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE CALIFORNIA TRIBAL
FAMILIES COALITION. GOOD
MORNING. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING COMMENTS
ON A B 81 TODAY. MY NAME IS
CHARLES MARTIN. AND I'M THE
CHAIRMAN FOR THE MERINGUE
ABANDON MISSION ENGINES. THE
MERINGUE ABANDONING MISSION
INDIANS IS A COSPONSOR OF A B 81
, ALONG WITH CALIFORNIA TRAVEL
FAMILIES COALITION AND WE ASKED
THAT AND THANK YOU FOR, UH, ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL
AS WELL THIS MORNING. MORE ANGER
IS ALSO ONE OF FOUR INTERVENING
TRIBAL NATIONS IN THE U. S
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASE
THAT IS CURRENTLY THE BIGGEST
THREAT TO INDIAN CHILD WELFARE,
THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT,
KNOWN AS THE BRAD KANE VERSUS
COLLINS CASE. THE PARAMEDIC
QUESTION BEFORE THE COURT IS
WHETHER TRIBES WILL CONTINUE TO
HAVE THE ABILITY TO REMAIN
FIERCE ADVOCATES IN CHILD
WELFARE CASES OR WHILE TRIBES GO
BACK TO THE DARK DAYS WHEN THEY
DID NOT HAVE A VOICE IN
PROTECTING CHARGEABLE FAMILIES
AND TRAVEL CHILDREN. ORAL
ARGUMENTS IN THE CASE WERE HEARD
BEFORE THE SUPREME BEFORE THE
SUPREME COURT THIS FALL, AND THE
OPINION IS SPECKED IT TO BE
RELEASED IN SPRING OF 2023. THIS
IS WHY I BE 81 IS SO CRUCIAL
THIS YEAR TO STRENGTHEN
CALIFORNIANS INDIAN CHILD
WELFARE ACT PROTECTIONS IN THE
EVENT THAT THE SUPREME COURT
WEAKENS THE FEDERAL PROTECTIONS
WHERE TRAVEL KIDS AND FAMILIES
THAT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER
40 YEARS. THE INDIAN CHILD
WELFARE ACT PROTECTS THE RIGHTS
OF TRIBAL FAMILIES AND TRAVEL
COMMUNITIES. SO WE HAVE A VOICE
IN THE CARE AND PROTECTION OF
OUR YOUNGEST AND MOST VULNERABLE
TRACTABLE CITIZENS. THE INDIAN
CHILD WELFARE ACT KEEPS TRIBAL
CHILDREN CONNECTED TO THEIR
FAMILIES, THEIR CULTURE AND
THEIR TRAVEL COMMUNITIES AND
THEIR HERITAGE. MARANGA IS PROUD
TO TAKE ON THIS FIGHT AND
HONORED THAT 500 TRIBES ACROSS
THE NATION, INCLUDING 109
FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED TRIBES IN
CALIFORNIA HAVE COME TOGETHER.
TO SUPPORT THE INDIAN CHILD
WELFARE ACT BEFORE THE SUPREME
COURT. AND WE AS TRIBES ARE
JOINED BY 87 MEMBERS OF THE
UNITED STATES. CONGRESS 24
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S LED BY
ATTORNEY GENERAL BANTA AND
DOZENS OF NON NATIVE
ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENT IN
OUR EFFORT, AND THAT'S WHY I'M
HERE TODAY. I URGE YOU TO
SUPPORT FOR THIS LEGISLATION
THAT WILL STRENGTHEN CALIFORNIA
LAW TO PROTECT THE TRIBAL
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,
REGARDLESS OF THREATS TO THE
FEDERAL INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT
. THANK YOU AND I ASK THAT YOU
SUPPORT A B ONE. THANK YOU NEXT
WITNESS. OH, GOOD JOB. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING US TO EXPRESS OUR
SUPPORT FOR A B 81 TODAY. MY
NAME IS MICHELLE CAST TI¾N. I'M
GOING ATTORNEY AND CO EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR AT CALIFORNIA TRIBAL
FAMILIES COALITION, WHICH IS A
COALITION OF NEARLY 50 MEMBER
TRIBES AROUND THE STATE, AND WE
ARE ENTIRELY LED BY TRIBAL
OFFICIALS. WE'RE SO HONORED TO
JOIN OUR MEMBER TRIBE MERINGUE
GO THE END OF MISSION INDIANS
AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RAMOS TODAY
ON A B 81 BECAUSE THIS BILL IS
VERY NEEDED, AS YOU HEARD THERE
IS A CHALLENGE TO THE INDIAN
CHILD WELFARE ACT CURRENTLY, AND
THERE ARE THREE PRIMARY REASONS
THAT CT FC AND OUR MEMBER TRIBES
ARE SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATIVE
EFFORT IN CALIFORNIA THIS YEAR.
FIRST THIS BILL IS TIMELY. THERE
IS A CHALLENGE TO THE INDIAN
CHILD WELFARE ACT AND THE
CALIFORNIA STATE PROVISIONS.
THAT MIRROR EQUAL PROTECTIONS
FOR TRIBAL CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES. CURRENTLY TRIBAL
CHILDREN ARE STILL IN ENTERING
THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM AT
RATES HIGHER THAN OTHER CHILDREN
. RIGHT NOW, THAT RATE IS
BETWEEN 2 TO 4 TIMES THE RATE OF
OTHER CHILDREN IN CALIFORNIA BUT
PRIOR TO EQUAL IT WAS CLOSER TO
16 TIMES THE RATE OF OTHER
CHILDREN, SO THIS LAW IS
DESPERATELY NEEDED. AND THE FIX
THAT A B 81 WOULD OFFER IS VERY
TIMELY. SECONDLY THE BILL
STRENGTHENS PROVISIONS IN
CALIFORNIA LAW THAT LEAD TO
BETTER OUTCOMES FOR TRIBAL
FAMILIES. WHEN IT WAS PROPERLY
APPLIED. KIDS ARE IN CARE FOR
LESSER AMOUNTS OF TIME, SAVING
THE STATE DOLLARS AND RESULTING
IN BETTER OUTCOMES FOR FAMILIES.
LASTLY THE BILL FURTHERS
CALIFORNIA'S INTEREST IN AN
ABILITY TO CONTINUE MUTUALLY
BENEFICIAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH
TRAVELS TRIBAL SOVEREIGN NATIONS
HERE IN CALIFORNIA. SO AGAIN,
WE'RE SO HONORED TO BE HERE AND
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US THE
TIME TO SHARE MORE ABOUT THE
BILL. THANK YOU FOR THE
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY. NICOLE WARD
ULLMAN ON BEHALF OF THE
CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
, RUTH DAWSON WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ACTION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEN NONE. WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SEEN ON
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MR HANEY. I JUST WANT
TO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS. I KNOW THAT
THERE'S SOME CHALLENGES THAT ARE
HAPPENING, BUT THESE LAWS ARE SO
IMPORTANT FOR OUR STATE AND FOR
PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN,
ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING OUR
HISTORY AND SO FOR US TO BE ABLE
TO BE PROACTIVE ON THIS AND
REALLY STRENGTHEN AND PROTECT
THESE STATUTES IS CRITICAL. SO I
JUST LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A CO
AUTHOR, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SEEN MISS REYES. I DO
WANT TO THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CHAIRMAN.
WELCOME TO YOUR CAPITAL. IT'S
ALWAYS GREAT TO HAVE YOU HERE
WITH US AND TO PROVIDE
TESTIMONY. I DO AGREE. THIS IS
TIMELY. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
DECISION IS GOING TO BE, BUT
MAKING SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THE
CALIFORNIA PROVIDES PROTECTION
AND GETS EVERYTHING SET UP SO
THAT IF THEY'RE THE DECISION
SHOULD BE UNFAVORABLE THAT
CALIFORNIA IS PREPARED TO
PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. SEE NO
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. MR THOMAS.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
IS IMPORTANT BILL. IT ENJOYS A
Dð PAST RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
CHAIR. WE DON'T HAVE YET HAVE A
QUORUM, SO TAKE PROMOTION AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. AH AND WITH
THAT, YOU MAKE CLOTHES, BUT
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU MEMBERS
FOR YOUR COMMENTS, AND IT TRULY
IS A CHANCE TO STAND WITH THEM.
CALIFORNIA'S FIRST PEOPLE, UM
AND ENSURING THAT OUR CHILDREN
CONTINUE TO RETAIN THEIR CULTURE
, A CULTURE THAT WAS TRYING TO
BE STRIPPED OF THEM, UM THROUGH
AN OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT. IT'S A
DIFFERENT DAY AND AGE HERE TODAY
, SO WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE WHEN THE TIME IS
APPROPRIATE. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. HI NEXT, MR GRAYSON. YOUR
LUCKY DAY. YOU MOVE UP FROM
NUMBER NINE. THAT'S PRETTY GOOD.
YOU'RE WELCOME. YEAH, YEAH.
THERE YOU GO. UH MAYBE 9 68.
GRAYSON, YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. GOOD MORNING, AND
GOOD MORNING TO THE MEMBERS. I
AM PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 1968.
I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, AS
DESCRIBED IN THE ANALYSIS. 89 68
IS A SIMPLE BUT NEEDED MEASURE
THAT WILL PROTECT HOMEBUYERS BY
ENSURING THAT THEY ARE INFORMED
OF ANY RECENT RENOVATION HISTORY
OF THEIR NEW HOME SPECIFICALLY,
THIS BILL WOULD ADD ADDITIONAL
DISCLOSURES TO THE EXISTING
TRANSFER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT.
THESE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
WOULD REQUIRE THE SELLER OF A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO DISCLOSE
RENOVATIONS DOWN TO A HOME PRIOR
TO ITS SALE. IF THE RENOVATIONS
WERE DONE BY A LICENSED
CONTRACTOR, AND IF PERMITS WERE
PULLED PROPERLY AND PROPERLY
OBTAINED FOUR THE RENOVATIONS
AND THIS BILL WOULD ONLY APPLY
TO HOMES THAT ARE BEING SOLD
WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF ITS
PURCHASE. WHILE THE EXISTING
TRANSFER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT IS
A VERY COMPREHENSIVE DOCUMENT,
IT MAY NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH
INFORMATION TO A HOMEBUYER TO
PROTECT THEM FROM THE ACTIONS OF
BAD ACTORS. IN SOME CASES, SELF
ASCRIBED HOME FLIPPERS.
OFTENTIMES THESE BAD ACTORS MAY
BE CONCERNED MORE CONCERNED
ABOUT MAKING A QUICK BUCK OR A
PROFIT, AND AS A RESULT, THEY
CUT CORNERS WHEN RENOVATING
THESE HOMES BY PERFORMING LOW
QUALITY WORK THAT MAYBE
UNPERMITTED. CURRENTLY THERE IS
NO MECHANISM THAT WOULD INFORM A
POTENTIAL HOME BUYER OF THESE
ISSUES. HOMEBUYERS SHOULD HAVE
THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT HAS BEEN
DONE TO THEIR HOME, SINCE IT IS
LIKELY THE BIGGEST PURCHASE THEY
WILL EVER MAKE A B 9 68 WILL
PROVIDE GREATER TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY, ENSURING
HOMEBUYERS THE ASSURANCE AND
INFORMATION NEEDED WHEN
PURCHASING A HOME. THANK YOU AND
OPEN FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU,
MR GRAYSON. BEFORE WE DO THAT,
LET'S ASK CLERK TO COLORADO
MAIENSCHEIN DAILY CONNOLLY DIXON
, HANEY CHOLERA. PACHECO PAPIN
RAISE. RIVAS SANCHEZ. OKAY, UH,
ANY WITNESSES, AND THANK YOU, MR
GRAYSON. ANY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEN NONE. WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SEEING NONE. I
KIND OF FELL HERE, MR. GRAYSON.
THAT'S GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
OKAY, MR CHEKOV. COME END UP. I
JUST WANT TO COMMEND THE AUTHOR
FOR THIS BILL. I'M ALSO A REAL
ESTATE BROKER, AND I KNOW THAT
DISCLOSURE FORMS ARE QUITE
LENGTHY. BUT I ALSO THINK THIS
ONE IS IMPORTANT. SO THANK YOU,
MR GRAYSON JUST TO CONFIRM. DO
YOU TAKE THE AMENDMENT COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS? THAT IS CORRECT. YES
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
JUST ONE MR SALIH. JUST A QUICK
QUESTION. UM WOULD YOU CONSIDER
ALLOWING AN EXCEPTION FOR
HOMEOWNERS WHO ACTUALLY LIVE IN
THEIR HOME AND THEN HAVE TO SELL
IT UNLESS THAN 18 MONTHS. WE'RE
NOT TALKING ABOUT FLIPPERS WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT. PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT
THE HOME LIVED IN IT AND YOU
KNOW, MADE SOME REPAIRS. I JUST
THINK THAT'S MAYBE A CLASS OF
PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE NOT REALLY
INTENDING TO COVER YOU KNOW, THE
INTENT IS TO COVER THE QUICK
FLIPS AND THE CHEAP, DIRTY,
DIRTY WORK. BUT IS THAT
SOMETHING YOU CONSIDER? UM
POTENTIALLY EXCLUDING? I THINK I
WOULD BE TOTALLY OPEN TO HAVING
A CONVERSATION WITH YOU ON THIS
AS THE BILL IF IT DOES MOVE OUT
OF COMMITTEE, WHERE WOULD BE
WILLING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION
WITH YOU ON THAT? BUT AS A
GENERAL CONTRACTOR MYSELF AND
VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE INDUSTRY
. I THINK THAT 18 MONTHS IS A
REALLY GOOD PLACE TO LAND, AND I
ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF YOU ARE
GOING TO DO WORK ON A HOME, IT
SHOULD BE DONE LEGALLY. AND
DISCLOSED AS SUCH. THANK YOU
APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? SEEN NONE.
MR. GRAYSON, YOU MAKE CLOTHES.
SO ANY GIVEN DAY YOU CAN TURN ON
A CHANNEL. UH THAT'S BEING
TELEVISED AND WITNESS, UH, FOLKS
FLIPPING HOMES AND THAT HAS
CREATED A MOVEMENT ACROSS OUR
COUNTRY OF FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING
TO REPLICATE THAT, BUT WHAT THEY
DON'T SEE ON TELEVISION ARE
BEHIND THE SCENES WORK OF
WORKING WITH INSPECTORS WORKING
WITH GENERAL CONTRACTORS THAT
ARE LICENSED AND MAKING SURE THE
QUALITY OF WORK IS PERMITTED AND
INSPECTED AND SIGNED OFF ON AND
SO MANY FOLKS ARE TRYING TO
REPLICATE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO
GRAB THAT BIG PROFIT THAT THEY
SEE BEING MADE ON TELEVISION AND
WHAT IT'S DOING IS IT'S RAISING
THE COST OF HOUSING WITHOUT
MATCHING IT WITH QUALITY AND
FOLKS ARE BUYING HOMES AND NOT
GETTING WHAT THEY'RE REALLY
PAYING FOR. SO WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION.
MOVE TO GO. SECOND MOTION FROM
MR HANEY SECOND FROM MR CONNELLY
. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED AS A CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN. I
REALLY I, CONNELLY CONNELLY I
DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY HANEY I
CHOLERA PACHECO! CHICO, I PAPIN
REYES RAISE, I REVERSED SANCHEZ.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR HOLDEN IS MR ALLEN
APPROACHES TO EVER MOTION ON THE
RAMOS BILL. MOTION FROM MS REYES
SECOND FROM HIS PACHECO TO, UH
AS A CLERK AND THE AND THE
MOTION IS DO PASS. ESCORT
COLORADO MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN. AYE SLE E I,
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DIXON.
DIXON. I HANEY KAIKOURA PACHECO
PACHECO EYE POPPING REYES RIVAS
SANCHEZ. OKAY YOU'RE MR RAMOS
BELL, BABY 81 IS OUT, MR HOLDEN
. WELCOME. YOU MAY PROCEED.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. IF I COULD,
I'D LIKE TO TAKE UP THE A. J OUR
FIRST BECAUSE I'M WAITING FOR MY
WITNESSES WHO ARE ABOUT 10
MINUTES OUT. MAYBE LESS THAN
THAT. NOW, SURE. OKAY, THANKS.
SO WE'LL BE HEARING A J. A. J. R
ONE. GOOD MORNING MEMBERS AND
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT A J. R ONE. I WANT TO
BEGIN BY STATING THAT EXCEPT THE
CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS PROPOSED
BY THE COMMITTEE. AND THINK THE
CHAIR AND MEMBERS FOR HEARING
THIS IMPORTANT RESOLUTION TODAY.
DDR ONE CONDEMNS AZERBAIJAN'S
BLOCKADE OF THE ELATION
CORRIDOR. AND URGES THE UNITED
STATES GOVERNMENT TO TAKE
IMMEDIATE ACTION AND PROVIDE
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO THE
ARMENIANS AND OUR SOCK.
AZERBAIJAN HAS MAINTAINED A
TOTAL BLOCKADE OF THE ONLY ROAD
BETWEEN ARMENIA AND THE ETHNIC
ARMY AND NAGORNO KARABAKH REGION
, WHICH IS HOME TO OVER 120,000
ETHNIC ARMENIANS SINCE DECEMBER.
12 2022. THE BLOCKADE COMPLETELY
SEVERS OUR SOCKS ONLY
HUMANITARIAN LIFELINE TO
ARMENIA. PREVENTING THE
TRANSPORT OF FOOD, FUEL,
MEDICINE AND OTHER VITAL
HUMANITARIAN SUPPLIES TO THE
REGION. IT HAS BEEN MORE THAN
100 DAYS SINCE THE THIS BLOCKADE
HAS BEGUN. FOR OVER 100 DAYS
WERE 120,000 ARMENIANS,
INCLUDING WOMEN, CHILDREN,
ELDERLY AND DISABLED, HAVE BEEN
CUT OFF FROM ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES.
CALIFORNIA IS HOME TO A LARGE
DISPLAY OR A OF ARMENIAN
AMERICANS, MANY WHOSE FAMILY AND
FRIENDS ARE BEING IMPACTED BY
THE CONTINUED BLOCKADE. HERE
WITH ME TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
OF A J. R ONE. IS ENTOURAGE. AH!
PROJECT. WHOSE FAMILY IS
DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE
BLOCKADE. AND COTTAGE TARZAN, A
MEMBER OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY
AREA ARMENIAN NATIONAL
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. FIRST
WITNESS. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS ANTHONY CHURCH CHAMPION. I AM
A FORMER U. S. MARINE AND
RETIRED CIVIL SERVANT. I'M HERE
TO TALK ABOUT THE SITUATION IN
ARTSAKH. AS YOU KNOW, AZERBAIJAN
HAS BEEN BLOCKADING FOR OVER 100
DAYS UNDER 20,000. ARMENIANS
HAVE BEEN BLOCKADING THE ONLY
ROAD THAT CONNECTS OUR TALK TO
ARMENIA HAS BEEN CLOSED OFF WITH
NOTHING GOING THROUGH FOOD,
MEDICINE OR ANYTHING. NO PASTA.
NO, NO BREAD, NO BABY FOOD. I
THINK IT'S AVAILABLE OVER THERE
ANYMORE. I USED TO THINK THAT
THIS KIND OF THING WOULD NOT
HAPPEN IN OUR TIME.
UNFORTUNATELY I AM HERE TO TELL
YOU THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS
HAPPENING. ALSO WANT TO TELL YOU
THAT MY SON, WHO WAS BORN AND
RAISED IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN
2020, SEPTEMBER EARLY SEPTEMBER
, HE WENT TO ARMENIA TO HELP
WITH THE RURAL POPULATION DURING
COVID. SOON AFTER HE ARRIVED,
AZERBAIJAN ATTACKED AND THERE
WAS THE WAR AND HE STAYED AROUND
TO HELP WITH THE REFUGEES AND
DISPLACED PEOPLE. AND WITHIN
SHORT TIME HE MET A LOCAL GIRL
FELL IN LOVE AND GOT MARRIED AND
HAS A 16 MONTH OLD BABY DAUGHTER
OR GRANDDAUGHTER. AND, UH, THEN
THEY WENT TO ART TALKED TO HELP
WITH AS A PART OF HUMANITARIAN
FUND TO HELP FAMILIES WHO HAVE
LOST THEIR PRIMARY BREADWINNER.
WHILE HE WAS THERE. THE BLOCKADE
STARTED AND NOW HE ALONG WITH
HIS WIFE AND HER GRANDDAUGHTER
AND 120,000. ARMENIANS ARE PART
OF THAT BLOCKADE. THESE ARE REAL
PEOPLE, REAL HUMANS, REAL BABIES
WHO ARE BEING STARVED. WHAT
CHINA IS DOING IS THE FIRST STEP
OF GENOCIDE. AND WE HAVE TO TAKE
THEIR PRESENT AT HIS WORD WHEN
HE SAYS HE WANTS TO FINISH AFTER
ARMENIAN GENOCIDE. SO I AM HERE
TO ASK YOU. HOW COULD WE BE
SILENT? DECENT PEOPLE IN THE
CIVILIZED WORLD CANNOT STAND
SILENT TO THIS KIND OF CRUELTY.
I ASK YOU AS MY REPRESENTATIVES,
MY FRIENDS AND MY NEIGHBORS. TO
RAISE YOUR VOICE AND TO SAY THAT
YOU WILL NOT STAND INDIFFERENT
IN THE FACE OF THIS KIND OF
CRUELTY, WHETHER IT HAPPENS TO
ARMENIA'S IN ART OR ANYONE ELSE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS. MY NAME IS HAJI
CALCIUM. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE ARMY AND NATIONAL COMMITTEE
OF THE AREA. ON BEHALF OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF SAN
FRANCISCO IN THE BAY AREA. I'D
LIKE TO VOICE THEIR OVERWHELMING
SUPPORT FOR A J. R ONE
INTRODUCED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CHRIS HOLDEN, THIS COURAGEOUS
STEP AND CONDEMNING AZERBAIJAN'S
BLOCKADE OF ARTS OFF AND
REAFFIRMATION OF CALIFORNIA
COMMITMENT OURSELVES RIGHT TO
SELF DETERMINATION SPEAKS TO THE
ESSENCE OF OUR VALUES AS
AMERICANS AND AS CALIFORNIANS.
INHUMANE BLOCKADE THAT
AZERBAIJAN HAS IMPOSED ON THE
PEACEFUL POPULATION OF ARTS
AFTER WITH THE CLOSURE OF THE
ONLY LIFELINE CONNECTING OUR
TALK TO ARMENIA HAS DEPRIVED 100
AND 20,000 STRONG ARMENIAN
POPULATION OF FOOD. FUEL
MEDICINE AND ELECTRICITY.
NAZARIAN ARMED FORCES ON A
REGULAR BASIS OPENED FIRE,
KILLING ARMENIAN VILLAGERS WHILE
THEY TEND TO THEIR CROPS IN THE
FIELDS, MACHINES ON OUR TOP
POLICE OFFICERS IN THEIR
VEHICLES AND BLOCKED NEW
INTERNAL ROADS, THE FURTHER
ISOLATE OURSELVES FROM ARMENIA.
THE GOVERNMENT OF AZERBAIJAN,
AND SHE'S INSISTS THAT IT
REPRESENTS THE POPULATION OF
OURSELVES. WE GET IT BLOCKADES
THE CIVILIAN POPULATION TO
STARVATION AND MEDICAL SCARCITY
CUTS OFF THE GAS AND ELECTRIC
SUPPLIES THAT SAME IN THE DEAD
OF WINTER AND HAS GONE SO FAR AS
TO HAVE USED PHOSPHOROUS
MUNITIONS ON MAJOR POPULATION
CENTERS. MUCH THE SAME AS
HITLER'S GERMANY. WILL HAM
OLIVES, DESPOTIC KLEPTO CLIP
CLIP. CREDIT. AND IF UNCHECKED,
GENOCIDAL REGIME HAS LED A
CAMPAIGN OF HATE AT THE HIGHEST
NATIONAL ECHELONS OF GOVERNMENT
AGAINST ARMENIA AND ARMENIANS,
PEOPLE WHOSE ANCESTOR LENS. THEY
INTEND TO ANNEX BY FORCE, ABSENT
ALL OF THE RIGHTFUL HISTORICAL
AND TERRITORIAL CLAIMS OF
INDIGENOUS ARMENIANS AND IN THE
REGION, GIVEN THE ABOVE FACTS,
ELIGIBLE RIGHTS OF THE ARMENIANS
OF ARTS OF TO BECOME THE MASTERS
OF THEIR OWN DESTINY MUST BE
SUPPORTED. YOUR VOICE THROUGH
THIS RESOLUTION TODAY DOES JUST
THAT. ARTS OFF TODAY IS THE
EQUIVALENT OF THE UNITED STATES
AND 7 17 76. LET'S CONTINUES TO
STAND FOR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRATIC
VALUES IN THE REGION WHERE
DEMOCRATIC DEMOCRACIES ARE
SCARCE AND FREEDOM IS ELUSIVE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY FURTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEN NONE.
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. SEEN
NONE. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE. MISS REYES. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
OFTENTIMES WE HEAR IF THINGS ARE
HAPPENING AROUND THE WORLD. AND
WE I NEED TO KNOW MORE. WE NEED
TO SEE A FACE. OFTENTIMES OF
COURSE, WE HAVE A COLLEAGUE LIKE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDEN OR JUST
BEFORE THAT ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
KAZARIAN. WELL TO TELL US MORE
ABOUT IT. I THINK IT MAKES A
DIFFERENCE. I KNOW YOU'RE VERY
PROUD OF WHAT YOUR SON HAS DONE
. AND I'M SURE THAT IS HE SEES
THE TAPE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING
TODAY WILL BE VERY PROUD OF THE
FACT THAT YOU'VE COME HERE TO
SUPPORT HIM AND YOUR GRANDCHILD.
AND YOUR SISTER, YOUR DAUGHTER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SEEN NONE. MR.
HOLDEN, YOU MAKE CLOTHES. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. UM I MAY NOT BE
ARMENIAN. BUT MY HEART ACHES
ALONGSIDE THE ARMENIAN DISPLAY
OR A COMMUNITY AS THEIR HOMELAND
CONTINUES TO BE UNDER ATTACK BY
AZERBAIJANI FORCES. WE CAN NO
LONGER STAND IN THE FACE OF
INJUSTICE FOR POPULATION HAS
FACED AN UNIMAGINABLE PAIN AND
SUFFERING. THIS RESOLUTION HAS
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, AND I'M VERY
GRATEFUL TO MY COLLEAGUES WHO
JOINED ME IN BRINGING THIS VERY
IMPORTANT MEASURE BEFORE YOU ALL
I HEARD YOU ALL TO VOTE I FOR A
J. R ONE TO REQUEST HUMANITARIAN
ASSISTANCE TO OUR SISTERS AND
OUR BROTHERS AND OUR SOCK. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION
FROM MS REYES. SECOND MR PACHECO
AND JUST TO CONFIRM UH, MR
HOLDEN THAT YOU ACCEPT THE
AMENDMENTS. YES SO WE HAVE A
MOTION THAT A J. R ONE B ADOPTED
AS AMENDED AND A SECOND. ASK THE
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DICKSON
DICKSON I HANEY CORA PACHECO
PACHECO EYE POPPING REYES. RAISE
I RIVAS SANCHEZ. A J R PASSES.
THANK YOU. MR. ARE YOU READY? IS
YOUR WITNESS HERE? OR DO YOU
NEED TIME? YES. OKAY? SO WE WILL
PROCEED WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO A.
B 6 47.
UH THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE. WE'RE HERE TO PRESENT
A B 6 47, THE GROCERY WORKER
PROTECTION ACT. GROCERY STORE
EMPLOYEES WERE AMONG THE
ESSENTIAL FRONTLINE WORKERS
HELPING OUR COMMUNITIES RECEIVE
THE RESOURCES THEY NEEDED DURING
THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC. DESPITE
THEIR CONTINUED SERVICE. MANY OF
THESE WORKERS HAVE BECOME
COLLATERAL DAMAGE IN THE WAKE OF
MEGA GROCERY STORE CHAIN
MERGERS. MOST RECENTLY, THE WELL
KNOWN CHAINS, KROGER AND
ALBERTSONS ARE GEARING UP FOR AN
UNPRECEDENTED $25 BILLION
MERGER. ACCORDING TO THE
ECONOMIC ROUNDTABLE, WE LIKELY
WILL LIKELY SEE CONSEQUENCES IN
THE FORM OF LARGE SCALE LAYOFFS
AND FOOD, DESERTS AND SOME OF
OUR MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES.
A B 6 47 SEEKS TO PREVENT THIS
BY STRENGTHENING AND EXPANDING
STATEWIDE GROCERY WORKER
RETENTION AND REHIRING LAWS. AS
AMENDED. THIS BILL WILL EXPAND
GROCERY WORKER RETENTION LAW TO
INCLUDE WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES
INCREASED THE WORKER RETENTION
PERIOD FROM 90 DAYS TO 120 DAYS
AND REMOVE THE INCENTIVE TO
PROLONG A GROCERY STORE FROM
REOPENING TO AVOID POST MERGER
RETENTION PROCEDURES BY
EXPANDING THE WINDOW FROM SIX
MONTHS TO 18 MONTHS OR MORE. IN
ADDITION, THIS BILL PROVIDES
ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS THAT
ALLOW FOR THE LABOR COMMISSIONER
TO ENFORCE AND GRANTED PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION FOR AGGRIEVED
EMPLOYEES. I'VE HEARD THE
CONCERNS RAISED BY THE
OPPOSITION WITH REGARD TO THE
RETENTION INCREASE THE INCLUSION
OF WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES AND THE
CONSEQUENCES FOR SMALLER OWNED
STORES. LET ME BEGIN BY SAYING
THAT THE 30 DAY RETENTION
INCREASE ALLOWS MORE TIME FOR
THE NEWLY ACQUIRED COMPANY TO
ADJUST. AND IN RETURN HELP
WORKERS TO MAINTAIN SECURITY
DURING THIS TRANSITION PERIOD.
THIS BILL EXPANDS ON PROTECTIONS
TO WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES FOR THE
SIMPLE REASON THAT THESE MERGERS
ARE NOT SOLELY FOCUSED ON THE
RETAIL STORES, BUT ALSO INCLUDE
THE COMPANY'S DISTRIBUTION
FACILITIES. DISTRIBUTION CENTER
. WORKERS ARE ALSO AT RISK FOR
FACILITY CLOSURES AND MASS
LAYOFFS. AND ARE DESERVING OF
THE JOB PROTECTIONS PROVIDED IN
A B 6 47. FINALLY THIS BILL DOES
NOT LIMIT OPPORTUNITIES FOR
GROWTH FOR SMALLER LOCAL GROCERY
STORES, BUT RATHER PROVIDES MUCH
NEEDED PROTECTION FOR WORKERS.
WOULD THAT SAID WITH ME TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT OF A B 6 47.
IS JIM ARABY LOOKED PASSED
THROUGH THERE. YOU'RE NOT JIM.
OKAY BUT I WILL BE DOING GYM
STILL DOING THE TESTIMONY. OKAY
UM AND LET'S SEE, ALSO NOT JIM
AND ALSO NOT JIM. SO WE HAVE
MYSTERY WITNESSES THIS MORNING
AND CLOSING A B 6 47 WILL
PROTECT WORKERS BY PREVENTING
MASS LAYOFFS AND ENSURING THE
CONSISTENCY AND FOOD SAFETY AND
PHARMACEUTICAL KNOWLEDGE WITHIN
OUR COMMUNITIES. I RESPECT FOR
THAT'S FOR YOU. THANK YOU FIRST
WITNESS GRAY WALL WITH UFCW
WESTERN STATES COUNCIL, I WILL
BE DELIVERING JIM LARRABEES
TESTIMONY BECAUSE HE WAS NOT
ABLE TO MAKE IT HERE IN TIME DUE
TO THE WEATHER AND TRAVELING
FROM THE BAY AREA. SO HELLO,
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UM
I'M GIVING JIM ARABS TESTIMONY
ON HIS BEHALF. HE'S THE DIRECTOR
OF STRATEGIC CAMPAIGNS AT THE
UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL
WORKERS LOCAL FIVE IN THE BAY
AREA IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA.
LOCAL FIVE HAS 30,000 MEMBERS
THAT ARE HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO
THE WHIMS OF PRIVATE EQUITY
FIRMS AND MERGERS AND
ACQUISITIONS SOLELY UNDERGONE
BECAUSE EXECUTIVES DECIDED TO
PAD THEIR POCKETBOOKS. BUT IT'S
NOT JUST MY MEMBERS OR THE BAY
AREA THAT WILL BE AFFECTED.
OLIVE CALIFORNIA FEELS THE
EFFECTS OF MERGERS AND
ACQUISITIONS FROM THE HARD
WORKING PEOPLE AT YOUR LOCAL
GROCERY STORE TO THE STRAWBERRY
FARMERS IN CENTRAL CALIFORNIA.
THERE HAVE BEEN TWO MAJOR
MERGERS IN THE GROCERY INDUSTRY
THAT HAVE HAD RIPPLE EFFECTS IN
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY. FOR
DECADES, ALBERTANS PURCHASED
LUCKY'S IN 6 2006 SELLING OFF
NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY STORES AND
THE GOOD JOBS THEY'RE INTO NON
UNION COMPANIES. LIKE TRADER
JOE'S AND GROCERY OUTLET. THEN
AGAIN IN 2015, ALBERTANS BOUGHT
SAFEWAY AND HAD TO SELL OVER 100
STORES IN CALIFORNIA, WASHINGTON
STATE OPERATOR HAGEN. THESE
MERGERS WERE DISASTERS AND THE
GROCERY INDUSTRY. GOOD JOBS WERE
LOST COMMUNITY SUFFERED AND
CUSTOMERS FELT THE EFFECTS AND
THEIR CHECKBOOKS AS PRICES WERE
RAISED. AFTER THE ALBERTSONS
SAFEWAY HAGEN MESS WHEN I WHEN
HE WAS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
STATE COUNCIL IN 2015, UFCW
PASSED A BILL REQUIRING ANY NEW
EMPLOYER WHO PURCHASES AND
EXISTING GROCERY STORE TO RETAIN
THE CURRENT WORKERS FOR 90 DAYS
, THE EXPERTISE AND COMMITMENT
OF U. F. C. W S UNION WORKERS
PROVIDES CLEAR BENEFITS AND WE
MUST DO ALL WE CAN TO RETAIN THE
KNOWLEDGE IN OUR COMMUNITY
GROCERY STORES. GROCERY WORKERS
DON'T JUST SELL US FRESH FOOD.
THEY ARE IMPORTANT HEALTH AND
SAFETY STANDARDS THEY NEED TO
FOLLOW WHEN THEY HANDLE FIT.
WHEN GROCERY STORES CHANGE HANDS
, WE MUST ENSURE THAT IMPORTANT
SAFETY, KNOWLEDGE AND HEALTH
STANDARDS STAY IN OUR COMMUNITY
STORES. THE MASSIVE CHANGES
BROUGHT ON BY THE INCREASE OF
PRIVATE EQUITY OWNERSHIP IN THE
GROCERY INDUSTRY SHOWS HOW
IMPORTANT IT IS TO PROVIDE
SECURITY FOR THE THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE WHO WORK IN CALIFORNIA'S
GROCERY STORES. ABC 647 WILL
MINIMIZE DISRUPTIONS BY ALLOWING
WORKERS TO BE RETAINED FOR 120
DAYS INSTEAD OF 90 AND ENSURE
THAT SKILLED AND TRAINED WORKERS
CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE OUR
COMMUNITIES WITH ACCESS TO SAFE
FOODS, GOODS AND MEDICINE. BY
RETAINING AND REHIRING SKILLED,
KNOWLEDGEABLE WORKERS. OUR
COMMUNITIES WILL CONTINUE TO BE
HEALTHY AND THRIVE. I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST HER. I VOTE
ON A B 647 TODAY. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
CHAIRMAN. SHINE MEMBERS, SAID
HOWARD. LOBBYISTS AND COUNSEL
FOR US CW. PLEASED ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS? YOU MAY HAVE THANK
YOU ANY FURTHER WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT. MR CHAIR MEMBER. SARAH
FLOCKS. CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION IN SUPPORT. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS BETH SMOKER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA FOOD AND FARMING
NETWORK AND SUPPORT CHRISTOPHER
SANCHEZ WITH THE WESTERN CENTER
AND LAND, POVERTY AND STRONG
SUPPORT. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. SAYING NONE WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. TWINS PERSON HAS
BEEN LAID OFF AND SIMPLY GOT
ANOTHER JOB. SPEEDING UP THE
PROCEEDS. THERE WE GO, MR. YOU
MAY PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
LOUIS BROWN HERE TODAY ON BEHALF
OF CALIFORNIA GROCERS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION TO
TODAY'S BILL. WHAT WE'VE HEARD
IN TODAY'S BILL IS ALL ABOUT A
MERGER. OR OR SOME PAST MERGERS
. UM IN ALL REALITY, THE GROCERY
INDUSTRY IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IS OVER. 8000 STORES
OVER 320,000 EMPLOYEES. THE
MERGER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
IMPACTS LESS THAN 20% OF THE
STORES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND IN FACT IF THIS
BILL GOES FORWARD, IT WILL HAVE
THE EXACT OPPOSITE OUTCOME. AS
WE'VE HEARD TODAY, AS PRESENTED
WHAT WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON IS
THE INCENTIVES TO ACTUALLY HAVE
GROCERIES COME IN, IF, IN FACT
THE MERGERS APPROVED WHICH THIS
LEGISLATURE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE
ANY SAY OVER AT THE FEDERAL
TRADE COMMISSION IF THE MERGERS
APPROVED AND IF PART OF THAT
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
APPROVAL HAS A DIVESTMENT PLAN.
WELL WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT
IN CALIFORNIA IS HOW DO WE GET
BUSINESSES TO COME IN AND
ACTUALLY PURCHASE THOSE STORES
THAT WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE
DIVESTED? KROGER'S AND
ALBERTSONS WILL HAVE NO SAY OVER
THAT. AND SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS
WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING A TARGET
ON THOSE STORES WERE ACTUALLY
MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT. FOR
COMPANIES TO COME IN IF A STORES
DIVESTED AND ACTUALLY PURCHASED
THAT STORE. WE'RE CALLING IT A
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION. IF IN
FACT ALL THE STEPS IN THIS BILL
ARE NOT FOLLOWED AND THEIR
COMPLICATED WE'RE NOT ONLY
TALKING ABOUT HAVING TO HIRE
EMPLOYEES FROM A LIST. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HAVING TO ACTUALLY
GO BACK AND LOOK AT EMPLOYEES
THAT MAY NOT BE WITH THAT STORY
ANY LONGER, BUT HAVE SENIORITY
RIGHTS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
EMPLOYEES THAT MAY HAVE A RIGHT
TO REFUSAL FOR LIVING A CERTAIN
DISTANCE FROM A STORE BUT THEN
RETAIN SENIORITY RIGHTS. THESE
ARE ALL ELEMENTS THAT IF YOU
MISS YOU NOW HAVE A PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION FACING YOU. SO
ANY STORE ANY COMPANY IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT'S GOING
TO LOOK AT THIS POTENTIAL
DIVESTMENT PLAN. IT'S GOING TO
LOOK AT ALL OF THESE OBSTACLES
AND POTENTIAL LIABILITIES THAT
FACE THEM. AND MAKE A DECISION
BASED ON THAT, AND ODDS ARE MOST
OF THEM ARE GOING TO STEER AWAY
FROM THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY
INVEST IN CALIFORNIA AND GROW
AND KEEP THESE STORES OPEN
SIMPLY BECAUSE THIS BILL CREATES
MORE RIGHT LIABILITY. IT WILL
ULTIMATELY RESULT IN MORE FOOD
DESERTS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. MORE DISADVANTAGES
FOR COMMUNITIES AND CONSUMERS IN
THE STATE. WE ASKED FOR A NO
VOTE. THANK YOU, ANOTHER WORD
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. MR
CHAIR MEMBERS MATT BROUGHT ON
BEHALF OF THE TEAMSTERS. I'M
RUNNING A LITTLE LATE. WE ARE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. I WAS TRYING
TO FIGURE THAT ONE OUT AS YOU
WERE WALKING UP. GOOD MORNING,
ROANOKE, DAYLAMI ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, RESPECTFULLY AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. OKAY ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
AND TO BE CLEAR, MR HOLDEN, YOU
ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS. GREAT ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? MS PACHECO. OH HOLD
ON. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T SEE
SORRY. SNYDER FORMER GROCERY
STORE WORKER IN OPPOSITION. MS
PACHECO, THANK YOU. AND THANK
YOU FOR THE AUTHOR TO THE AUTHOR
FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND TO ALL
OF OUR GROCERY WORKERS, BUT I
HAD, UM MORE OF JUST QUESTIONS,
AND MAYBE THE INFORMATION CAN BE
PROVIDED TO ME AT A LATER TIME,
BUT I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY THE
INCREASE FROM 90 DAYS TO 120
DAYS. I'LL GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AT
HOWARD, SO THE INCREASE IS
SIGNIFICANTLY BASED ON THE FACT
THAT OUR EXPERIENCE SINCE THIS
LAW WAS ENACTED IN 2015 IS THAT
THE INCREASING INVOLVEMENT OF
PRIVATE EQUITY. IN THE OWNERSHIP
OF THE STORES CAN BE VERY
DESTABILIZING TO THE MARKET. AND
SO WE FELT ON THE BASIS OF THE
INCREASING RECORD OF PRIVATE
EQUITY BEING INVOLVED IN THESE
TRANSACTIONS THAT IT MAKES SENSE
IN ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME AN
ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO MAKE IT
CLEAR THAT OUR ABILITY TO RETAIN
THESE VALUED WORKERS AND
TREASURED WORKERS IS NOT UPENDED
BY A TIME PERIOD THAT WAS
WRITTEN BACK IN 2015. BUT IS
THERE ANY DATA TO SHOW THE
REASON. I GUESS I'M JUST NOT
UNDERSTANDING THE REASON AND HOW
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
EXTENDING IT FROM? 90 DAYS TO 1,
40 OR 1 35 LIKE I'M JUST CURIOUS
WHY 1 20 SO NO, I CAN'T SIT HERE
AND TELL YOU THAT 1 21 1 22 23
AS WITH THE ORIGINAL 90 DAYS AND
THE UNDERLYING BOB ITS CURRENT.
WE'RE TAKING OUR BEST SHOT AT
ATTEMPTING TO BALANCE THE
INTERESTS OF THE STORES. BEING
ABLE TO COMPLETE A TRANSACTION
AND THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC
AND MAKING SURE THAT THEIR FOOD
IS SAFE. SO THAT'S THE REASON
FOR THE ADDITIONAL MONTH. AND
IT'S FOUND THAT 90 DAYS ISN'T
SUFFICIENT. YES OUR FORECAST
BASED ON WHAT TRENDS IN THE
MARKET IS THAT WITH THE
INCREASING SO WHEN PRIVATE
EQUITY GETS INVOLVED IN A LOT OF
THESE TRANSACTIONS, IT ISN'T
NECESSARILY TO KEEP A STORE UP
AND RUNNING. IT'S SOMETIMES THEY
TAKE OVER BUSINESSES IN ORDER TO
SELL AND DIVEST THE ASSETS DRIVE
DOWN THE PROFITS IN ORDER TO
SELL THE REMAINING ASSETS. SO
WITH THE INCREASE OF INVOLVEMENT
IN PRIVATE EQUITY,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WE ALL BELIEVE
THAT THE EXTENDED AMOUNT OF TIME
OR THAT THE TIME SHOULD BE
EXTENDED. IF THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THINKS THERE'S
A DIFFERENT TIME, OF COURSE,
WOULD BE WILLING TO, BUT IT
SHOULD BE EXTENDED, SO AN
ADDITIONAL 90 DAYS IS OUR BEST
ESTIMATE BASED ON OUR
EXPERIENCES TO WHAT OFFERS THE
RIGHT BALANCE. AND HAS THE OTHER
BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH
OPPOSITION. WELL WE CERTAINLY
STAND READY TO. I MEAN, I THINK
THAT WHEN WE'VE AND WE'VE NOT
HAD ANY CALL STAR OFFICE AS I
UNDERSTAND IT TO SIT DOWN. WE'RE
CLEARLY ALWAYS WILLING TO DO
THAT. AND IF THAT IS IN THE DAYS
TO COME, WE'RE CERTAINLY STAND
READY TO HAVE THOSE
CONVERSATIONS, BUT IT HAS NOT
HAPPENED AT THIS POINT. AND I
DON'T KNOW IF THE IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO CHIME IN AND SAY
ANYTHING. UH HAPPY TO SIT DOWN
AND TALK DEEP RESPECT FOR MR
HOLDEN FOR THE YEARS THAT HE
SERVED. WE HAVEN'T MADE A
REQUEST TO HAVE A MEETING AND
THAT HAS NOT BEEN SCHEDULED. AS
OF YET. WE'RE STILL WAITING TO
HEAR BACK WHEN IT BE POSSIBLE TO
SIT DOWN AND MEET WITH THE
MEMBER BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE YOU CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING
BECAUSE I REMIND ALSO, ANY
INFORMATION THAT CAN BE PROVIDED
WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL. SO THAT
WAY I CAN MAKE ENOUGH ANOTHER
INFORMED DECISION AT THE VERY
END. UM AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS
BILL WILL CHANGE IN ANY WAY,
SHAPE OR FORM. UM BUT I ALSO
APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE AND THE
CONVERSATIONS FROM BOTH SIDES.
UH SO THANK YOU AGAIN AND THANK
YOU TO THE WITNESSES FOR BEING
HERE TODAY. THANK YOU. MS DIXON.
I GUESS THIS IS KIND OF A FOLLOW
UP QUESTION. HELP ME UNDERSTAND
? ISN'T THERE A STATE AND
FEDERAL WARN ACT ON AND WHICH IS
60 DAYS? I BELIEVE THAT'S RIGHT
. ALRIGHT SO THIS WOULD GO OVER
BEYOND THE FEDERAL LAW TO 60 TO
90 OR 120 DAYS. OUR STATE LAW
ALREADY GOES BEYOND THE FEDERAL
WARRANT TO 90 SO THAT THE
EXTENSION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
EVEN FURTHER BEYOND THE FEDERAL
LAW. AH! AND IT IS THEIR
SEVERANCE PAID TO TERMINATE IT
OR LAID OFF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE,
UH, DISMISSED. THAT WILL USUALLY
NOT. UH, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR
REFERENCE TO WITNESSES REFERENCE
TO PRIVATE EQUITY. I'M NOT A
DEFENDER, PRIVATE EQUITY NOTHING
TO DO WITH PRIVATELY, BUT, UM,
THEIR BUSINESS. I MEAN THEIR
BUSINESS TO BE PROFITABLE SO
THEY CAN HIRE MORE PEOPLE. UH SO
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE THAT
TYPE OF BUSINESS OWNER IN
AMERICA. YOU COULD OPERATE A
BUSINESS ANYWAY. YOU WANT AS
LONG AS YOUR LEGAL SO, UM I
THINK A BUSINESS AND THE MARGINS
. I'M NOT IN THE GROCERY
BUSINESS, EITHER. BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING OF MARGINS PROFIT
MARGINS IN THE GROCERY INDUSTRY
ARE VERY SLIM AND SO THE PURPOSE
FOR THIS POTENTIAL MERGER I
IMAGINE IS TO, UH, BECOME MORE
PROFITABLE SO THEY CAN INVEST IN
NEW STORES AND NEW EMPLOYEES. SO
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE IN
CALIFORNIA CONTINUE TO MAKE IT
DIFFICULT TO DO FOR BUSINESSES
TO DO BUSINESS. MORE OWNERS MORE
ONEROUS, MORE ONEROUS
REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. I
WORK FOR A COMPANY THAT
EXTENSIVE GLOBAL OPERATIONS AND
THIS SOUNDS VERY FAMILIAR TO ME
AT FRANCE STATUS IN GERMANY DOES
AND IT JUST MAKES, UH, COMPANIES
MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT TO HIRE
PEOPLE. YOU REALLY WANT PEOPLE
TO BE WORKING, AND THESE ARE
ANOTHER FORM OF OWNERS
REGULATIONS. SOMETHING REALLY
MAKE. SEND A MESSAGE TO
BUSINESS. I GUESS THAT WAS YOUR
COMMENT AS WELL AS TO MAKE IT
DIFFICULT TO DO BUSINESS IN
CALIFORNIA. SO UM, 60, I THINK
60 AND NOW IT'S A FEDERAL
STANDARD. IF IT'S 90 DAYS, I
THINK THAT IS SUFFICIENT. AND AS
WE JUST HEARD, SOME WITNESSES
SPEAK THAT THEY WERE IMMEDIATELY
HIRED. THOSE JOBS CAPABILITIES
ARE TRANSFERABLE. AH IF YOU ARE
A WORKER IN A GROCERY STORE,
THEY TYPICALLY DO MOVE AROUND
AND IF THEY NEED TO, AND THEY
GET HIRED VERY QUICKLY, SO I
GUESS I QUESTIONED THE PURPOSE
FOR THE BILL. SO THANK YOU ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? SEEN NONE.
WE HAVE A MOTION FROM IS REYES
SECOND FROM MR HANEY. UH, MR
HOLDEN, YOU MAKE CLOTHES. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. YOU KNOW, ALL I
WILL SAY IS THAT ONE WE, AS
ALWAYS STAND COMMITTED TO WORK
WITH THOSE WHO HAVE CONCERNS
AROUND THE BILL AND AROUND ANY
BILL THAT WE MAY HAVE, AND THEN
THIS ONE, PARTICULARLY, WE'RE
HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND
UNDERSTAND. UM NOT ONLY IN JUST
A PRESENTATION BEFORE A
COMMITTEE, BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF
THE PRACTICAL WAYS THAT WE CAN
LOOK AT THAT WE CAN OPENLY LOOK
TO MODIFY THE BILL THAT DOESN'T
INJURE THE INTENDED OUTCOME. AH
I'LL ALSO SAY THAT YOU KNOW, WE
CAN SAY THAT THE KROGER KROGER
ALBERTSONS MERGER IS A ONE OFF.
OR WE CAN SAY THAT THAT IS A
SIGN OF THINGS TO COME. AND IF
WE LOOK AT IT AND REALIZED THE
INJURY THAT SOME WORKERS UM HAD
DURING THAT PROCESS THEN DO WE
WAIT FOR THE NEXT ONE AND SAY
WELL? MAYBE THAT WAS JUST
ABERRATION OR THAT WE THEN SEE A
PATTERN. AND IF AND IF WE
BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A PATTERN
THAT COULD TAKE HOLD, THEN THAT
MEANS WE NEED TO ACT SO THAT WE
DON'T HAVE TO EXPERIENCE WORKERS
GOING THROUGH DIFFICULT TIMES
WHEN WE ALREADY RECOGNIZED WE'RE
IN AN INFLATIONARY PERIOD. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT GAS PRICES
YESTERDAY, AND WE KNOW THAT IT
IS HARD FOR SOME PEOPLE. THEY'RE
LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, AND
SO WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE
SOMETHING TAKE PLACE IN THE
MARKETPLACE THAT IS VERY MUCH.
UM INDICATION THAT BY WHAT WE'VE
ALREADY SEEN A POTENTIAL
PRECURSOR TO FURTHER ACTIONS,
AND SO WE THINK THAT THIS BILL
IS INCREDIBLY NECESSARY,
INCREDIBLY RELEVANT AND VERY
TIMELY AND AGAIN. WE HAVE NO
PROBLEM WITH TRYING TO HAVE
CONVERSATIONS ON HOW TO CONTINUE
TO MODIFY IT. BUT TO SAY IT IS
NOT NECESSARY IS NOT CORRECT.
AND SO WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE AND SUPPORT OF UM
MAYBE 6 47. THANK YOU. WE HAVE
EMOTIONAL SECOND DO PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATION
COMMITTEE AS THE COURT CALLED
ROLL MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
DAILY SALINO CONNELLY CONNELLY.
I DICKSON DICKSON. NO HANEY
HANEY, I KALRA PACHECO PACHECO,
I PAPIN REYES RIVAS. SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ. NO NEEDS ONE MORE VOTE
AND ITS ON CALL. THANK YOU, MR
MR WARD.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I'LL OPEN
ON A B 50 95 BY REALLY JUST
HONING IN ON THE SYNOPSIS FROM
YOUR ANALYSIS. IT'S A
STRAIGHTFORWARD AND
UNCONTROVERSIAL MEASURES TO HELP
REDUCE THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF
CHANGING ONE'S NAME BY
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF FREE
COPIES OF THE NAME CHANGE ORDER
PROVIDED BY THE COURT FROM 1 TO
3 THIS HAS BROUGHT TO US BY
ALLIES IN THE TRANSGENDER AND
GENDER NONCONFORMING COMMUNITY
OBTAINING VITAL RECORDS FOR
THOSE MEMBERS OF OUR OF OUR
COMMUNITY TO MATCH OUR GENERAL
GENERAL IDENTITY IS KEY. TO
PROTECTING THEIR PRIVACY AND
SAFETY. BUT THE PROCESS OF
UPDATING THEIR VITAL RECORDS
AFTER SUCCESSFULLY OBTAINING AN
APPROVED COURT ORDER CAN BE
EXPENSIVE DUE TO THE REQUIREMENT
OF OBTAINING MULTIPLE COURT
VERIFIED COPIES, SO THIS BILL
WILL REMOVE FINANCIAL BARRIERS
FOR INDIVIDUALS TO UPDATE THEIR
VITAL RECORDS FOR BY PROVIDING
IT NO CAUSE UP TO THREE COURT
CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE ORDER
GRANTING THE PETITION FOR CHANGE
OF THE NAME AT THE TIME OF
APPROVAL FOR WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT. I HAVE JONATHAN CLAY ON
BEHALF OF TRANS YOUTH
LIBERATION, AND I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE MOTION
FROM IS REYES SECOND. MR HANEY.
MR CLAY. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, JONATHAN CLAY
HERE ON BEHALF OF TRANS FAMILY
SERVICES AND TRANS YOUTH
LIBERATION. GIVEN THE MOTION,
I'LL KEEP THIS SUPER SHORT. UM
ONLY THING I'LL ADD TO THE
OPENING TESTIMONY IS THAT TRANS
FAMILY SERVICES SUPPORTS
FAMILIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WE
HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH
HELPING FOLKS NAVIGATE THIS
PROCESS. MULTIPLE EXAMPLES OF
THESE DOCUMENTS GETTING LOST IN
THE MAIL, UM, FOR BEING SENT IN
FOR TRYING TO GET A BIRTH
CERTIFICATE. WHICH THEN DELAYS
THE PROCESS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
GO BACK TO THE COURT, GET MORE
COPIES, SO JUST BEING ABLE TO
HAVE THOSE MULTIPLE COPIES THAT
ARE NECESSARY FOR ALL THESE
DOCUMENTS VERY HELPFUL IN THIS
PROCESS, WHICH CAN BE VERY
STRESSFUL FOR PARENTS AS THEY'RE
TRYING TO NAVIGATE THAT WITH
THAT URGE YOUR I SUPPORT THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEN NONE. WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE.
QUESTIONS ARE Ó. WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. I'M JUDITH CAHILL.
I'M A DEMOCRAT, SANTA CLARA
COUNTY. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
ALISON SNYDER CONCERNED PARENT
TAXPAYER VOTER ON BEHALF OF
PARENTS PAYING ATTENTION TO THE
EROSION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AND
THE STINKS, STATE SANCTIONED
PROMOTION OF STERILIZATION AND
MUTILATION OF CHILDREN. I SAY
NO. LISA MULLINS, MOTHER OF A
KID WHO CHANGES HER NAME LIKE
SHE CHANGES HER HAIR COLOR NÓ.
RENE YEAH. SAMARA UM, PARENT OF
A TEENAGE DE TRANSITION ER
OPPOSING BILL. BEST BORN
DEMOCRAT YOLO COUNTY POSE. LABAN
URBANO, PLASTER COUNTY DEMOCRAT
I OPPOSE. I'M A PARENT OF A
CHILD WHO IS CHANGING NAMES.
LINDLEY HOGAN, SANTA CLARA
COUNTY. I'M THE PARENT OF A
DAUGHTER, WHO WAS TOLD SHE COULD
BE A BOY. AND SO SHE THINKS SHE
IS I OPPOSE. KIRK RUN MOTHER
REGISTERED NURSE SAN FRANCISCO
COUNTY. I OPPOSE THIS. STAY IN
HILTON DEMOCRAT CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY OPPOSED. ERIN FRIDAY, A
MOTHER OF A FORMERLY TRANS
IDENTIFIED CHILD. I OPPOSE.
PAMELA GARFIELD JAGGER LICENSED
CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER. I OPPOSE
. GREG BURKE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
FAMILY COUNSELING OPPOSITION.
AND I GRIFFITHS, STUDENT
DEMOCRAT OPPOSED. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
SEEN NONE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. MR SALIH. MR
WHERE I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY IT.
EVEN THOUGH THIS IS UM WAS
SPONSORED BY THE GROUP WITH YOU
TODAY, THE TRANS FAMILY SUPPORT
SERVICES. DOES THIS APPLY TO
ANYBODY WHO CHANGES THEIR NAME?
OF COURSE. SO IF YOU CHANGE YOUR
NAME BECAUSE OF MARRIAGE, OR
YOU'RE ADOPTING A CHILD ANY TIME
YOU NEED TO HAVE A NAME CHANGE,
YOU CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL COPIES
THROUGH THIS BILL. UM, FROM FROM
THE COURTS. JUST IT DOESN'T
CHANGE THE PROCESS TO CHANGE
YOUR NAME. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE SEEN
NONE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND, UH, AS MR WARD PROJECT
CLOSE, RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
I VOTE. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS
TO A PROGRAM. THE APPROPRIATION
COMMITTEE ESCORT TO CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN. I
S ALY SALEI. CONNELLY CONNELLY.
I DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY KENNY
I CHOLERA. PACHECO PACHECO, I
POP IN AND I RAISE MY REVERSE.
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ A PASSES. THANK
YOU. MS PETRIE-NORRIS. A B 8 18.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I AM HERE THIS MORNING
TO PRESENT A B 8 18, WHICH WILL
STRENGTHEN GUN AND DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, RESTRAINING ORDERS.
BEFORE I JUMP IN. I'D LIKE TO
THANK YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
ALL OF THEIR EXCELLENT WORK ON
THIS, AND I'M HAPPY TO ACCEPT
THE PROPOSED COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. IN CALIFORNIA, ONE
IN THREE WOMEN AND NEARLY AS
MANY MEN WILL EXPERIENCE SOME
FORM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DURING
THEIR LIFETIMES. WHEN A GUN IS
PRESENT THE RISK OF HOMICIDE
DURING A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
INCIDENT INCREASES BY 500.
CURRENT LAW REQUIRES THAT A
PERSON WHO IS SUBJECT TO A
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR GUN
VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER
PROHIBITED FROM HAVING FIREARMS
OR AMMUNITION, AND, FORTUNATELY
, VICTIMS. ADVOCATES REPORT THAT
WHEN A VICTIM REQUESTS THAT A
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SERVED
THIS PROTECTIVE ORDER AND
CONFISCATE FIREARMS, LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES SOMETIMES
REFER VICTIMS TO ANOTHER AGENCY
ELSEWHERE. VICTIMS THEN HAVE TO
LOCATE AND DRIVE TO ANOTHER
AGENCY TO HAVE THIS ORDER SERVED
. THIS IS CONCERNING BECAUSE IT
UNDERMINES OUR GOAL OF QUICKLY
GETTING GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF
THOSE WHO ARE PROHIBITED FROM
HAVING THEM AND FROM PROTECTING
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE EXPERIENCING
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. THIS BILL
STRENGTHENS OUR CURRENT LAW TO
ENSURE THAT ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY SHALL REMOVE FIREARMS
FROM PROHIBITIVE PERSON WHEN
REQUESTED AND ENTER THAT
INFORMATION INTO THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE'S STATEWIDE DATABASE
. THIS WILL PROTECT VICTIMS AND
MAKE ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES
SAFER. I'M NOW PLEASED TO
INTRODUCE JULIA WEBER FROM
GIFFORDS, THE GUN VIOLENCE
PREVENTION ORGANIZATION, LED BY
FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN AND GUN
VIOLENCE SURVIVOR GABBY
GIFFORDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. GOOD
MORNING. UM AS WAS MENTIONED.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF GIFFORDS
IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL, A B 818
, WHICH WE VIEW AS A LIFE SAVING
MEASURE TO ADDRESS THE SERIOUS
GAP CURRENTLY IN OUR STATE. I
ALSO TEACH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE LAW
AT GOLDEN GATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL
OF LAW AND HAVE WORKED WITH
ADDITIONAL COUNSEL WHERE I
SERVED AS CO COUNSEL TO THE
FAMILY AND JUVENILE LAW ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR 17 YEARS WORKING
ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE POLICY AND
SPECIFICALLY IN THE AREA OF
FIREARMS POLICY, AS WELL AS
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUN
VIOLENCE, RESTRAINING ORDER, SO
THIS IS AN AREA THAT I HAVE DEEP
EXPERIENCE WITH AND I'M VERY
PLEASED ABOUT A B 818. GOING
INTO THE DETAILS THE WEEDS SO TO
SPEAK OF HOW WE MAKE THESE
ORDERS AS EFFECTIVE AS POSSIBLE
, SO OF COURSE I HAVE ON MY MIND
SO MANY DIFFERENT CASES, PEOPLE
I'VE WORKED WITH LIVES THAT HAVE
BEEN SHATTERED BY GUN VIOLENCE,
INCLUDING THE KIND OF GUN
VIOLENCE THAT THE COUNTRY
WITNESSED YESTERDAY IN NASHVILLE
. WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE
CAN TO PREVENT THAT FROM
HAPPENING, AND WHEN OUR COURTS
ISSUE ORDERS THAT ARE FIREARM
PROHIBITING WHICH IS WHAT
HAPPENS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,
RESTRAINING ORDER CASES AND GUN
VIOLENCE. RESTRAINING ORDER
MATTERS. THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE
THAT EFFECTIVE IS IF THE PERSON
WHO BECOMES PROHIBITED IS
ACTUALLY SERVED. AND THEN GIVEN
THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLY, AND
THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLY
HAPPENS WHEN A LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER SERVES THE ORDER AND
UNDER LAW REQUESTS THOSE
FIREARMS THAT THEY CURRENTLY OWN
SO WE HAVE 24,000 PEOPLE IN THE
ARMED PROHIBITED PERSONS SYSTEM
OR APPS. RIGHT NOW, THOSE ARE
FOLKS WHO AT ONE TIME WERE
ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREARMS AND
APPROPRIATELY LEGALLY REGISTERED
THEM. THEN BECAME PROHIBITED. UM
IF WE REDUCE THAT TIME BETWEEN
WHEN THEY BECOME PROHIBITED AND
WE ACTUALLY HAVE THEM RELINQUISH
THE FIREARMS, WE CAN DECREASE
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN APPS.
WE'RE CONTINUING TO ADD PEOPLE
TO THAT SYSTEM, DESPITE SOME
REALLY CONCERTED EFFORTS TO
REDUCE THAT 24,000 NUMBER AND
THE ONLY REASON THEY'RE IN THERE
IS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T REDUCED
THEY HAVEN'T ELIMINATED. THE
FIREARMS THAT THEY CURRENTLY OWN
. SO AGAIN. WE SEE THIS AS A
LIFE SAVING MEASURE, AND I ALSO
WANT TO COME IN THE STAFF. THE
COMMITTEE STAFF DID AN EXCELLENT
JOB ON THE ANALYSIS FOR THIS
BILL, UH, AND WOULD BE HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
SAYING NONE WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
MR SALIH. THANK YOU. I REALLY
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL AS A FORMER
PROSECUTORS DEALT WITH DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE CASES THERE OFTEN. THE
MOST DIFFICULT THEY'RE MESSY. UM
THERE'S A CYCLE OF VIOLENCE THAT
THAT'S THEIR PEOPLE IN THE
SYSTEM GET FRUSTRATED, SOMETIMES
WITH THE VICTIMS, BUT I COME
FROM A DISTRICT WHERE WE HAD A
DEPUTY THAT WAS SHOT AND KILLED.
RESPONDING TO A DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, CALL DEPUTY CALHOUN
RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
THEY'RE THE MOST DANGEROUS
CALLS. FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
RESPOND TO AND IN THIS CASE WHEN
A JUDGE HAS MADE AN ORDER,
THERE'S BEEN DUE PROCESS. THOSE
ORDERS DO NEED TO BE ENFORCED TO
THE LETTER AND THE MORE
RESOURCES I THINK THAT'S PUT IN
THE FRONT END. TO DISARM THEM.
UM IT'S GOOD. IT'S GOOD FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT KEEPS THEM SAFE FOR
FUTURE CALLS, AND OBVIOUSLY, THE
INTENT IS TO KEEP THE VICTIMS
SAFE AS WELL. SO I REALLY
COMMEND THIS. UM AND I WILL BE
STRONGLY SUPPORTING IT. AND I
JUST THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN
MIND THE IMPORTANCE OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT. I MEAN, WE NEED
THEM TO BE PROACTIVE AND UM AND
DO THEIR JOBS, AND I JUST HOPE
WE KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WE
CONSIDER OTHER BILLS THAT ARE
COMING TO THE FLOOR THAT SEEK TO
MAKE IT HARDER FOR THEM TO DO
THEIR JOB. UM WE NEED POLICE
OFFICERS. WE NEED THEM TO KEEP
VICTIMS SAFE. WE NEED TO KEEP
DOMESTIC BALLOT VIOLENCE VICTIMS
SAFE AS WELL AS OTHERS. SO THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THIS, MISS
DIXON. YES AND THANK YOU FROM
THE SIDE APPRECIATED DÍAS. SINCE
I'VE BEEN IN SACRAMENTO BECOME
AWARE OF THE ART PROHIBITED
PERSONS SYSTEM, WHICH, OF COURSE
I WOULDN'T HAVE KNOWN ABOUT
UNTIL I GOT HERE AND I THINK YOU
SAID 24,000 PEOPLE ON THAT LIST.
AND ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO REDUCE
THAT LIST AND GET THOSE GUNS OUT
OF THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO
SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS BECAUSE OF
THEIR CRIMINAL HISTORY. SO I
VERY MUCH SUPPORT THIS BILL AND
APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT
FORWARD AND APPRECIATE YOUR GOOD
WORK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR
THOSE COMMENTS. APPRECIATE OTHER
ANY OTHER. I'M SORRY ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? WAS THE BILL. MOTION
FROM HIS REYES SECOND FROM HIS
PACHECO. UH MISS PETRIE-NORRIS
MADE CLOTHES. THANK YOU TO
COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR YOUR
COMMENTS AND FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN
CALIFORNIA. WE'VE WORKED REALLY
HARD TO KEEP OUR RESIDENTS SAFE
FROM GUN VIOLENCE. BUT WE'VE GOT
TO RECOGNIZE THAT OUR LAWS ARE
ONLY AS EFFECTIVE AS THEIR
ENFORCEMENT AND SO THIS IS, I
THINK AN IMPORTANT MEASURE TO
ENSURE THAT WE'RE CLOSING A GAP
IN CURRENT LAW AND KEEPING HANDS
OUT OF THE GUNS OF PEOPLE THAT
ARE A DANGER TO THEMSELVES AND
TO OUR COMMUNITIES. SO WITH
THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION IN THE MOTIONS DO PASS AS
AMENDED PUBLIC SAFETY. ASK THE
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DICKSON
DICKSON. I HANEY I CORA PACHECO
PACHECO EYE POPPING HAPPENED? I
RAISE RAISE I RIVAS SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ, I YOUR BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
BAUER-KAHAN. I LOVE THAT BABY 4
19. OH, I WISH IT WAS ALWAYS
THAT KUMBAYA. AH! THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. YOU READY?
PROCEED THANK YOU. MR CHAIRMAN.
MEMBERS REALLY APPRECIATE THE
WORK OF THIS INCREDIBLE
COMMITTEE AS ALWAYS UNHAPPY TO
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
. THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT BILL THAT FOCUSES ON
THE WAY. UM SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT ARE TREATED IN OUR
COURTROOMS. WE'VE SEEN EXAMPLE,
AFTER EXAMPLE OF SURVIVORS BEING
RE TRAUMATIZED ON THE STAND
BECAUSE THE PERSON WHO IS
CHARGED WITH ENSURING THAT A
COURTROOM RUNS IN A WAY THAT IS
RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE'S RIGHTS
DOESN'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO TREAT
A SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR IN
THAT MOMENT TO ENSURE THEY ARE
SAFE AND CAN TELL THEIR STORY
AND SEEK JUSTICE. UM SO WITH ME
TODAY, UH, IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL IS THE INCREDIBLE FORMER D
A OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, NANCY
O'MALLEY. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. UM, I WANTED TO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE FOR
HEARING THE BILL AND THANK YOU
TO ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR BRINGING
IT FORWARD. THIS IS NOT
UNPRECEDENTED TO REQUIRE JUDGES
TO BE TRAINED IN THE IMPACT OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT CRIMES SEVERAL
YEARS BACK UNDER THE VIOLENCE
AGAINST WOMEN ACT, CALIFORNIA
JUDICIAL COUNCIL CREATED A
COMMISSION I WAS ON THE
COMMISSION. AND WE HEARD FROM
MANY VICTIMS ABOUT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE VICTIMS ABOUT THEIR
EXPERIENCE AS A VICTIM OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND JUDGES
WERE THEN REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH
TRAINING TO UNDERSTAND THE
TRAUMA AND THE IMPACT OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THAT KIND
OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE. AND
SO IT'S NOW THE CASE WHERE
JUDGES ARE TRAINED EVERY THREE
YEARS AS A AS AN INCENTIVE, THEY
GET THE FORM OF A MALPRACTICE
INSURANCE. FOR PARTICIPATING IN
THE TRAINING. BUT IT'S VERY
CLEAR THAT WHAT WE SEE NOW IN
THE COURTROOM WHERE JUDGES WHO
ARE NOT ADVISED, ARE NOT
KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE TRAUMA
AND ESPECIALLY THE LIFELONG
TRAUMA OF SEXUAL ASSAULT CRIMES
I RECENTLY WITNESSED IN MY
COUNTY, A JUDGE ALLOW A DEFENSE
ATTORNEY TO CROSS EXAMINE A NINE
YEAR OLD SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM.
FOR TWO DAYS. SHE HAD NO CLUE
WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT WAS ON
THAT CHILD. AND I SPOKE TO THE
JUDGE AFTER THE CASE WAS OVER,
AND SHE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
AS A JUDGE OF THE COURTROOM, SHE
CONTROLLED THE TENOR, BUT SHE
ALLOWED THAT CHILD TO BE RE
TRAUMATIZED THAT WILL STAY WITH
HER FOR HER LIFETIME. HOPEFULLY,
IT WON'T STAY AND YOU KNOW
CAUSED SUCH GREAT NEGATIVITY TO
HER, BUT IT WILL STAY WITH HER
FOR SURE. SO UM, FOR THOSE
REASONS, I URGE YOU ALL AND I
VOTE THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SAYING
NONE WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
SEE NONE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. DO WE HAVE
EMOTION? WE HAVE A MOTION FOR MR
SALIH 2ND. 2ND PACHECO, MISS BAR
. CAN YOU MAKE CLOTHES AND THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR? WE HAVE A MOTION
IN A SECOND. Dð PASS AS AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS ASKED CLARK TO
CALL THE ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN ISIL E. CONNOLLY
DICKSON DICKSON I HANEY CHOLERA.
PACHECO PACHECO EYE POPPING UP
AND I RAISE RIVAS. SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ. AYE. YOUR MOTION IS OUT
THERE. THE BILL IS OUT. THANK
YOU, MR YAKKING. STRANGE. UH I
SEE NO OTHER AUTHORS HERE. I
WILL PRESENT MY BILL. MR ASTLEY.
SO NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM ITEMS.
SEVEN MAYBE. 853 ASSEMBLYMAN
MAIENSCHEIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS IN
OCTOBER 2022 KROGER, ALBERTSONS
, THE 1ST AND 2ND LARGEST
GROCERY CHAINS IN THE NATION
ANNOUNCED AN UNPRECEDENTED $25
BILLION MERGER FOR WHAT WOULD BE
THE LARGEST GROCERY STORE MERGER
IN AMERICAN HISTORY. THE
COMBINATION OF THESE TWO LARGE
GROCERY CHAINS WILL CREATE A
COMBINED MARKET SHARE AND
CONTROL OF 36% OF THE U. S
GROCERY SUPERMARKET OPERATIONS.
WHEN MERGERS LIKE THESE TAKE
PLACE, IT'S COMMON TO SEE
STAFFING DECLINE IN PRICES
INCREASED, RESULTING IN A DIRECT
IMPACT TO THE QUANTITY, QUALITY
AND COST OF GOODS AVAILABLE TO
THE PUBLIC. LAST YEAR,
CALIFORNIANS SAW RECORD
INFLATION IN THE GROCERY
INDUSTRY, HITTING LOW INCOME
FAMILIES THE HARDEST AND PUSHING
THEM TOWARDS FOOD AND SECURITY.
A B 8536 TO ENSURE NECESSARY
INFORMATION IS PROVIDED FOR
FUTURE MERGERS THAT CAN HELP
EVALUATE THE PROPOSED
TRANSACTION AND ILLUMINATE ANY
POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF
CONSOLIDATION. THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE GROCERY OR DRUG RETAIL
COMPANIES TO FILE A NOTICE TO
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 180 DAYS IN
ADVANCE OF FINALIZING A PROPOSED
MERGER OR ACQUISITION IN THE
GROCERY OR DRUG RETAIL
INDUSTRIES. THE NOTICE WILL
PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE
IMPACT OF THE MERGER ON
COMMUNITIES AND WORKERS,
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON THE
FINANCES OF THE GROCERY OR DRUG
RETAIL COMPANIES, AND ANY PLANS
TO SELL, MERGE OR CONSOLIDATE
ASSETS. THE COMPETITIVE EFFECTS
OF THE MERGER ON PRICING SUPPLY
AND ACCESS TO FOOD OR MEDICINE
AS WELL AS IMPACTS TO WORKERS,
SUCH AS WAGES, BENEFITS AND
UNEMPLOYMENT. CALIFORNIANS
DESERVE TRANSPARENCY AND MUST
HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT
PROPOSED MERGERS THAT AFFECT THE
SUPPLY AND AFFORDABILITY OF FOOD
AND MEDICINE. MAYBE 853 PROVIDES
AN INFORMED BASIS FOR THE
LEGISLATURE, THE PUBLIC AND
PUBLIC ENFORCERS TO ENSURE
RELIABLE, CONVENIENT AND SAFE
ACCESS TO THESE ESSENTIAL GOODS.
WITH ME TODAY AND SUPPORT OUR
BETH SMOKER FROM THE CALIFORNIA
FOOD AND FARMING NETWORK AND ED
HOWARD ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED
FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS.
THANK YOU AND MR MANCHIN, DO YOU
ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS, WITNESS
AND SUPPORT? YOU MAY PROCEED.
GREAT THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
MEMBERS. I'M BETH SMOKER WITH
THE CALIFORNIA FOOD AND FARMING
NETWORK WERE A 50 MEMBER
ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS DIVERSE
FOOD SYSTEMS SECTORS. ANTI
HUNGER, SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
, FARM WORKERS, ENVIRONMENTAL,
JUSTICE, PUBLIC HEALTH AND LOCAL
ECONOMIES WERE ACCOUNTABLE TO A
STEERING COUNCIL OF GRASSROOTS
LEADERS AT THE FRONT LINE OF
FOOD SYSTEM INJUSTICES. I AM
HERE TODAY TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT
OF A B 853. I DON'T OFTEN FIND
MYSELF IN THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE, ALTHOUGH I SEE SOME
FAMILIAR FACES. THE FACT THAT
OUR ISSUES ARE HERE IS NOTABLE.
A THRIVING FOOD SYSTEM IS ONE
WHERE COMMUNITIES CAN FEED
THEMSELVES WITH AFFORDABLE,
SUSTAINABLE, ACCESSIBLE AND
CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE FOOD. THE
FACTOR ASKING FOR INTERVENTION
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
ILLUMINATES HOW FAR WE ARE FROM
THIS REALITY. TODAY'S
UNPRECEDENTED SET OF CRISES.
FIRE FLOODING, INFLATION,
PANDEMICS HAVE REVEALED THE
SHORTCOMINGS IN OUR SEEMINGLY
ROBUST MULTI TRILLION DOLLAR
GLOBALIZED FOOD SYSTEM. WHICH
HAS PROVEN ILL EQUIPPED TO
HANDLE DISRUPTION, USDA
SECRETARY VILSACK AFFIRMED THAT
THE PANDEMIC QUOTE EXPOSED TO
FOOD SYSTEM THAT WAS RIGID,
CONSOLIDATED AND FRAGILE THAT
REWARDS SIZE OVERALL ELSE END
QUOTE CORPORATE CONTROL IS
ACHIEVED BY EXPLOITATION OF
BIPAC WORKERS AND COMMUNITIES.
WE EXPERIENCED CORPORATE
MONOPOLIES ACROSS THE ENTIRE
FOOD SYSTEM. FROM SEEDS TO
FARMLAND, OWNERSHIP TO FOOD
COMPANIES. AND THE REASON WE'RE
HERE TODAY GROCERY STORES, THE
PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE ADVANCED
NOTICE ON GROCERY SHORT GROCERY
MERGERS WITH AN IMPACT
ASSESSMENT ON COMMUNITIES. WE
SEE THREE DEVASTATING IMPACTS.
THE FIRST IS HUNGER MERGERS,
CREATE FOOD, DESERTS AND
INCREASED FOOD PRICES, WHICH IS
ESPECIALLY CONCERNING KNOWING
THAT TWO DAYS AGO ON MARCH 26TH
KYLE FRESH RECIPIENTS RECEIVED
THEIR LAST FEDERAL EMERGENCY
ALLOTMENT, CREATING A SEVERE
SEVERE HUNGER CLIFF. THE SECOND
IS BOXING OUT SMALL REGIONAL
FARMERS MERGERS LEAD TO
CONSOLIDATION IN THE FOOD SUPPLY
CHAIN, CREATING FOR DRILL
FRAGILITY AND DEPENDENCY ON A
SMALL HANDFUL OF LARGE CORPORATE
ALSO CONSOLIDATED GROWERS.
THIRDLY A DECREASE IN REGIONAL
ECONOMIC RETURNS, LOSS OF SMALL
BUSINESSES, INCLUDING CO OPS AND
ETHNIC MARKETS, WHERE DOLLARS
SPENT RETURN MORE DOLLARS BACK
IN THE COMMUNITY. IN CONCLUSION
. THIS BILL GIVES US A NEW TOOL
AND UPSTREAM SOLUTION, CREATING
TRANSFER TRANSPARENCY ABOUT
HIDDEN IMPACTS ON HIDDEN
COMMUNITIES. IT'S A TOOL TO MOVE
US TOWARD A STATE THAT'S FOOD
SECURITY IS ROOTED IN REGIONAL
FOOD SYSTEMS WHERE EVERYONE HAS
DIGNITY TO DETERMINE THE FOOD
THEY EAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. GOOD
MORNING, ED HOWARD ON BEHALF OF
THE UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL
WORKERS UNION. PLEASED TO
SPONSOR THIS IMPORTANT BILL AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AT LEAST TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT
HAVE. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT IN THE
AUDIENCE? PLEASE COME TO THE MIX
THAT YOUR NAME, ORGANIZATION AND
POSITION. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS. SARAH FLOCKS.
CALIFORNIA LABOUR'S FEDERATION
IN SUPPORT. CHRISTOPHER SANCHEZ
WITH THE WESTERN CENTER AND
LAND, POVERTY AND STRONG
SUPPORT. MR CHAIR MEMBERS MAP
BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE
TEAMSTERS IN SUPPORT. MR. CHAIR
JIM CARREY, UFCW LOCAL FIVE
REPRESENTATIVES OF 30,000 GROSS
WORKERS IN THE BAY AREA. WE'RE
IN STRONG SUPPORT, ALSO FOR
PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK AS
WELL. THANK YOU SEEING THE
OTHERS ARE THERE ANY WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION TO THE BILL?
MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE LOUIS BROWN BACK UP
BEFORE YOU TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA GROCERIES
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION TO A B
5853 AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
A PIECE OF LEGISLATION DEALING
WITH A MERGER. UM AND THAT
IMPACTS AN ENTIRE INDUSTRY. UH
WE'RE OVER 8000 STORES IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 320,000
EMPLOYEES. UM THIS BILL WHILE IT
DOES TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY
ALSO IMPACTS ALL OR NEARLY ALL
TRANSACTIONS THAT WOULD TAKE
PLACE. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT
JUST THE, UM THE CONTROLLING
INTEREST, AND IN FACT, THE
ANALYSIS IS WRONG WHEN IT SHOWS
AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE BILL ONLY
COMES INTO EFFECT WHEN THE
CONTROLLING INTEREST IS AT STAKE
. THE BILL SAYS. ANY INTEREST IN
THE TRANSACTION OR ACQUISITION
WITH STORES OF 300 EMPLOYEES OR
MORE, SO NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
TRANSACTIONS TRANSACTIONS THAT
WOULD INCLUDE THAT WOULD INCLUDE
THE TRANSITION OF TWO OR THREE
STORES, SO WE'RE NOT TALKING
ABOUT MAJOR MERGERS GOING
FORWARD AND NOW THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL WOULD HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP
REGULATIONS. OUTSIDE OF THE A P
A PROCESS SO WE INTERESTED
STAKEHOLDERS WOULD HAVE NO
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY OR
PROVIDE ANY TYPE OF INPUT DURING
THE REGULATION. AND THEY WOULD
BE ABLE TO DELAY THE TRANSACTION
. WE GIVE THEM SIX MONTHS NOTICE
IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
COULD THEN DELAY THE TRANSACTION
EVEN LONGER, SO. THIS IS AN
INDIAN. THIS IS A BILL THAT'S
GOING TO IMPACT THE ENTIRE
INDUSTRY. IT'S GOING TO STIFLE
INVESTMENT. IT'S ACTUALLY GOING
TO CREATE MORE FOOD DESERTS. I
WOULD SAY THAT MERGERS DON'T
CREATE FOOD, DESERTS, LAWS AND
REGULATIONS DO AND THAT'S WHAT
WE'VE SEEN HAPPEN IN THIS
INDUSTRY, ACCORDING TO
ECONOMISTS, THE CALIFORNIA
GROCERY INDUSTRY IS ACTUALLY HAD
A STEADY PACE OF GROWTH FOR THE
LAST FIVE YEARS. WE ARE ONE OF
THE BRIGHT SEGMENTS IN THE
CALIFORNIA ECONOMY. AND YET
BILLS LIKE THIS WANT TO STIFLE
INVESTMENT, AND THEY WANT TO
CREATE ADDITIONAL OBSTACLES THAT
ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE A
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES.
WE ASKED FOR A NO VOTE. THANK
YOU THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. OKAY
SEEING NONE. UH ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
SEEING NONE. MR. MAIENSCHEIN
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, AND THE OPPOSITION
CLAIMS THE BILL WOULD IMPACT
INDEPENDENT GROCERS WHO WHO WISH
TO PURCHASE A SINGLE STORE.
THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT THE INTENT
OF THE BILL WILL CONTINUE TO
WORK ON THAT ISSUE AS NECESSARY
. AND WITH THAT WOULD
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION?
I'LL MAKE A MOTION MOTION BY MS
PARTICULARLY SECOND SEGMENT,
MISS PAPIN AND WE'LL CALL THE
VOTE DO PASSES AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I ESSENTIALLY NOT
VOTING CONNELLY. DICKSON
DICKSON. NO, HANEY. CORA PACHECO
PACHECO EYE POPPING UP AND I
RAISE REVERSE. SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ?
NO. MORE VOTES AND NEEDS THREE
MORE VOTES. THE BILLS ON CALL.
THANK YOU NEXT, MR BRIAN. YES.
MR. CHAIR, FRANK.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
COLLEAGUES TODAY I COME BEFORE
YOU TO PRESENT A B 9 20. WHICH
AIMS TO END THE FLAGRANT
DISCRIMINATION OF SOME OF OUR
MOST VULNERABLE NEIGHBORS,
PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS 89 20 ADS HOUSING
STATUS TO THE LIST OF PROTECTED
CHARACTERISTICS UNDER OUR
STATE'S ANTI DISCRIMINATION
CODE. THIS CODE. UH, WAS CREATED
AND INTENDED SO THAT STATE
AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS AND
PROGRAMS FUNDED BY THE STATE
COULD NOT BE USED TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST FOLKS IN
OUR POPULATION HAS BEEN AMENDED
MANY TIMES TO PROTECT FOLKS SO
THEY ARE NOT DISCRIMINATED.
BASED ON HOW YOU IDENTIFY WHO
YOU LOVE, HOW YOU WEAR YOUR HAIR
AND WITH THE PASSAGE OF THIS
BILL, WHERE YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT.
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
, INDOOR ROUTINE AND UNDUE
DISCRIMINATION PURELY BECAUSE
THEY ARE ON HOUSE. THEIR TARGETS
OF BIAS, MOTIVATED VIOLENCE AND
ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY VICTIMS
OF ASSAULT AND HARASSMENT.
ADDING HOUSING STATUS AS A
PROTECTED CHARACTERISTICS WE
WILL BE PROTECTING ON HOUSED
PEOPLE FROM BEING TARGETED,
PERSECUTED OR DENIED ACCESS TO
PROGRAMS AND BENEFITS BY THE
STATE. OFTENTIMES THE VERY
PROGRAMS AND BENEFITS THAT ARE
INTENDED TO HELP AND UPLIFT
THEM. THIS BILL REFLECTS FEDERAL
REGULATIONS WHICH PROHIBIT
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS SUCH
AS SNAP FROM DENYING A PERSON
BENEFITS SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE
ON HOUSE. FEDERAL LAW RECOGNIZES
THAT WE CANNOT EXCLUDE THE MOST
IMPOVERISHED PEOPLE FROM
PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO ALLEVIATE
POVERTY. CALIFORNIA SHOULD DO
THE SAME. MAYBE 9 20. HAS A
RACIAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
COMPONENT TO IT AS WELL. IT WILL
ENSURE THAT OUR NATION'S OR THAT
OUR STATE SOLUTION FRAMEWORK FOR
HOMELESSNESS IS CENTERED ON CARE
, COMPASSION, SUPPORTIVE
SERVICES AND ACCESSIBILITY FOR
OUR MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS,
JOINING ME TODAY TO PROVIDE
TESTIMONY AND SUPPORT GREGORY
CRAMER WITH DISABILITY RIGHTS,
CALIFORNIA AND BRANDON GREEN
WITH THE BLUE OF NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA. FIRST WITNESS. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS GREGORY CRAMER AND
I'M, A SENIOR LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE FOR DISABILITY RIGHTS.
CALIFORNIA WE'RE PROUD TO CO
SPONSOR ASSEMBLY BILL 9 20. IT'S
A BILL THAT WOULD PROVIDE EQUAL
PROTECTION TO UNUSED INDIVIDUALS
WHEN ACCESSING STATE FUNDED
SERVICES OR PROGRAMS. MANY STATE
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HARASSED
AND DISPLAYS AND SEGREGATE ON
HOUSE CALIFORNIANS INSTEAD OF
PROVIDING THEM WITH A SAFE AND
PERMANENT AND AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. DISPROPORTIONATELY
HARMING PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
AND PEOPLE OF COLOR. ASSEMBLY
BILL 9 20 WILL PROTECT THE
HEALTH, THE WELL BEING AND
DIGNITY OVEN HOUSE PEOPLE
THROUGHOUT THE STATE FUNDED
PROGRAMS. THE STATE PROVIDES A
NUMBER OF HOMELESS PROGRAMS TO
ASSIST ON HOUSE PEOPLE. ONE
MAJOR PROGRAM IS THE HOUSING,
HOMELESS, HOUSING ASSISTANCE AND
PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM. WHICH
OFFERS FUNDING TO ALL COUNTIES
AND THE 13 LARGEST CITIES. THIS
PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE
NEEDS OF THE UN HOUSED,
INCLUDING PROVIDING ACCESS TO
SECURE SHELTER, HOUSING AND
ASSISTANCE. BUT UNFORTUNATELY,
THESE PROGRAMS MAY DENY ACCESS
TO THEIR INTENDED PARTICIPANTS
BECAUSE THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED
HOMELESSNESS. ASSEMBLY BILL 9 20
ACKNOWLEDGES THAT ONE HOUSE
PEOPLE REQUIRE SAFEGUARDS IN
ORDER TO ACCESS THESE CRITICAL
PROGRAMS. AND WILL ASSIST THE
STATE AND REDUCING THE STATE
THAT TOTAL HOMELESSNESS RIGHT IN
THE STATE. ASSEMBLY BILL 9 20
AFFIRMS CALIFORNIA'S COMMITMENT
TO EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW
AND TO THE RIGHT OF ALL PEOPLE
TO FULL AND EQUAL PROTECTION IN
SOCIETY. HOMELESSNESS PUTS A
PERSON AT RISK OF
CRIMINALIZATION OR DENIAL OF
INTENDED SERVICES OR BENEFITS ON
THE BASIS OF THEIR DISABILITY.
IT COULD LEAD TO STIGMATIZATION
AND CRIMINALIZATION.
DISCRIMINATION RESULTING IN
UNEQUAL TREATMENT AND INADEQUATE
ACCESS TO SERVICES. EQUAL
PROTECTION ENSURES THAT UNHAPPY
INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO
UNFAIR TREATMENT TO HARASSMENT
OR EXCLUSION FROM HOUSING,
EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR
HEALTHCARE. FINALLY ASSEMBLY
BILL 9 20 SHIFTS PRIORITIES
TOWARDS REAL SOLUTIONS,
INCLUDING SAFE, AFFORDABLE AND
PERMANENT HOUSING. WE BELIEVE
THAT THIS BILL WILL SPUR A
COLLABORATION AMONG GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES, NON PROFITS AND THE
PRIVATE SECTOR TO ADDRESS
HOMELESSNESS MORE EFFECTIVELY.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, WE URGE
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT WITNESS, BRENDAN
GREENE, DIRECTOR OF THE REGIONAL
ECONOMIC JUSTICE PROGRAM WITH
SL, YOU HAVE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
HERE ON BEHALF OF A C L U
CALIFORNIA ACTION. UM THANK YOU
ALL. 89 20 WOULD MAKE CONCRETE
THE PROPOSITION THAT UN HOUSE
PEOPLE ARE NEIGHBORS AND ARE
ENTITLED TO LIVE THEIR LIVES
WITH DIGNITY. THE EXISTING LAW
PROTECTS IDENTIFIED POPULATIONS
AND IDENTITIES. THAT'S
PROTECTION DOES NOT GO FAR
ENOUGH. WE KNOW THE BLACK
CALIFORNIANS IN PARTICULAR,
IMPACTED DISPROPORTIONATELY BY
HOMELESSNESS. HOWEVER THESE
CALIFORNIA'S AT THE INTERSECTION
OF RACE AND HOUSING STATUS OR
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST DAILY
PASSING A B 9 20 WILL SEND A
STRONG SIGNAL THAT WE CANNOT
DEMONIZE AND CRIMINALIZE OR
DISCRIMINATE OUR WAY OUT OF THE
HOUSING CRISIS, BUT THAT WE MUST
INSTEAD INVEST IN THE SOLUTIONS
WE KNOW WORK. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU FOR THE WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
, NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY
PLEASE. UM HMM. GOOD MORNING.
TRACY ROSENBERG, SPEAKING ON
BEHALF OF OAKLAND PRIVACY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 9 20. GOOD
MORNING, LINDA WAY WITH WESTERN
CENTER ONLINE POVERTY, PROUD CO
SPONSOR AS WELL AS SUPPORTER
ALSO HERE IN SUPPORT FOR HOUSING
. CALIFORNIA PUBLIC ADVOCATES
NBA ACTION CALIFORNIA HOUSING
PARTNERSHIP CORPORATION, ALL
HOME AND VENICE JUSTICE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, REBECCA GONZALES WHEN
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER AND SUPPORT ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SAYING
NONE WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I
WOULD LIKE TO CATEGORIZE
OURSELVES AS TWEENERS. WE DON'T
NECESSARILY SUPPORT OR OPPOSE.
WE DO REPRESENT. I WORK WITH THE
CALIFORNIA STRATEGIC ADVISORS.
WE REPRESENT THE APARTMENT
ASSOCIATION OF ORANGE COUNTY
EAST BAY RENTAL HOUSING
ASSOCIATION AND THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION.
PACIFIC SOUTHWEST FIRST, I'D
LIKE TO THANK THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BRIAN ISAAC AND NOTABLY
HIS STAFF, AMY FOR WORKING WITH
OUR OFFICE TO CLARIFY THE INTENT
AND PURPOSE. UM HOWEVER, WE DO
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED FOR THE SAME REASONS, AS
NOTED WITHIN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS AS WRITTEN, THE BILL
CREATES A PROTECTED
CHARACTERISTIC BUT DOES NOT
CREATE A CIVIL, RIGHT. UM
ACCORDING TO BASED ON THE
HOUSING STATUS DEFINITIONS AND
TERMS. SO WE AGREE WITH THE
INTENT AND PURPOSE. WE JUST
BELIEVE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE
AMENDED. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION SEEN
NONE. UH ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE? MR
SALIH, SO THE HOMELESS THEY'RE
BEING DISCRIMINATED FROM SNAP.
IS THAT THE CONCERN OR WHAT? CAN
YOU EXPLAIN SOME OF THE
DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE I'M NOT.
I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THIS. THAT
SURE IS A FEDERAL PROGRAM. OKAY
WE THEY WERE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WAS FINDING THAT IT
WAS BECOMING INACCESSIBLE FOR
PEOPLE WHO ARE IN HOUSE TO
BENEFIT FROM SNAPPING SO THEY
CREATED THEIR OWN DEFINITION OF
HOUSING STATUS TO ENSURE THAT
FEDERAL DOLLARS, UM REACH THEIR
INTENDED POPULATIONS AND THAT
THE WAY THE PROGRAMS ARE
STRUCTURED AND ADMINISTERED,
DON'T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANY
PARTICULAR POPULATION AND
PARTICULARLY THE ONE THAT IT'S
MOST UM DESIGNED TO SERVE AN
EXAMPLE WOULD BE IN MANY
INSTANCES, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO
HAVE A HOME ADDRESS TO RECEIVE A
BENEFIT ON HOUSE FOLKS DO NOT
HAVE A HOME ADDRESS AND SO
POVERTY ALLEVIATION PROGRAMS AND
MECHANISMS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO
ALLEVIATE POVERTY. THAT IT CAN'T
BE ACCESSED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE ON
HOUSED THE THERE HAS TO BE
PROTECTIONS IN THAT CASE, AND I
IF THAT'S HAPPENING, I AGREE
WITH YOU. I MEAN, THEY SHOULD
HAVE ALTERNATIVES FOR ADDRESSES
AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I'M A
LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT CREATING
A WHOLE PROTECTED CLASS AROUND.
UH HOMELESSNESS SUCH A BROAD
TERM AND INVOLVES A LOT OF
PEOPLE. YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT, UM
YOU KNOW, ARE DOWN ON THEIR LUCK
AND TRYING REALLY HARD AND THEY
NEED ASSISTANCE. YOU HAVE SOME
PEOPLE THAT ARE SUFFERING FROM
UNTREATED. BEHAVIORAL OR DRUG
ALCOHOL ISSUES, AND THERE MAY BE
REASONS TO TREAT SOME OF THEM
DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHERS. SO I
JUST HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW
BROAD THIS IS, UM BUT BUT THANK
YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTION.
MISS DIXON. I COME FROM LOCAL
GOVERNMENT, SO I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND. BUT WE HAVE A
HOMELESS PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA.
WE HAVE A HOMELESS PROBLEM RIGHT
OUTSIDE THE DOORS HERE. UM I
KNOW THAT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, UH
SOCIAL WORKERS. POLICE LAW
ENFORCEMENT ARE WORKING NIGHT
AND DAY TO HELP HOMELESS PEOPLE
GET THE SERVICES AND THE SHELTER
THAT THEY NEED. I SEE IT. I'M
AWARE OF IT. AT LEAST THE CITY
THAT I REPRESENT. I KNOW
HUNTINGTON'S BEACH, NEWPORT
BEACH. UM AND OTHER CITIES IN
ORANGE COUNTY ARE ARE BUILDING
FUNDING AND BUILDING CENTERS FOR
MOUNTAIN ILLNESS AND HOSPITALS.
I I'M NOT AWARE FROM TALKING
WITH ENFORCEMENT. THAT A
HOMELESS PERSON HAS BEEN DENIED
THEIR RIGHTS. IF ANYTHING, AND
I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF YOUR
INTENT IF ANYTHING, I PEOPLE SAY
, WELL, WHAT ABOUT MY RIGHTS? IN
TERMS OF RESIDENCY? I CAN'T DO
THIS, BUT A HOMELESS PERSON
COULD DO THAT, AND EVERYBODY
NEEDS TO REALIZE WE HAVE TO HELP
THE HOMELESS PEOPLE AND I FEEL
THAT CITIES IN PARTICULAR ARE
CERTAINLY COMPLYING WITH THE
NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION. THE
BOISE DECISION, AND THEN IF YOU
WANT TO SLEEP ON THE BEACH, YOU
COULD SLEEP ON THE BEACH. IF YOU
ARE HOMELESS. WE CITIES ARE
SPENDING MILLIONS AND MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO
BUILD SHELTERS AND SUPPORT ALL
THE ANCILLARY PROGRAMS. TOTALLY
I AGREE THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT.
I WISH THERE WAS SOMETHING TO DO
ABOUT THE HOMELESSNESS
SACRAMENTO AS WE'RE SITTING HERE
, TALKING ABOUT HOMELESS AND
IT'S A IT'S AN ENDEMIC AND IT'S
AN, UH IT IS AN EPIDEMIC IN
SACRAMENTO, WHICH IS SHOCKING TO
ALL OF US ANYWAY. UM I JUST
DON'T KNOW WHAT SERVICES OVER
AND ABOVE WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING
PROVIDED. I SEE THIS ALL THE
TIME FROM HOUSING AND HOUSING
VOUCHERS AND GETTING PEOPLE INTO
A SHELTER THAN INTO A PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. WHAT WHAT IS
NOT BEING DONE. THAT'S WHAT I
DON'T UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE I SEE
IT EVERY DAY. PEOPLE MOVING IN
AND CRIMINAL ACTION IS NOT THE
SOLUTION. I TOTALLY AGREE UNLESS
THERE IS A CRIMINAL ACT
COMMITTED WITH DRUGS, ETCETERA,
BUT BECAUSE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM. JUST THEY GO IN AND THEY
COME OUT. I SEE IT WITH MY OWN
EYES. SO THAT'S NOT THE
SOLUTION. SO THE MENTAL ILLNESS
AND OTHER ADDICTION RELATED
PROGRAMS ARE BEING WORKED. JUST
HELP ME UNDERSTAND? WHAT ARE WE
NOT DOING? YEAH NO, I THINK YOU
KNOW MORE BROADLY, THERE'S A
HUGE DISCUSSION THAT WE AS A AS
A BODY AND HIS COLLEAGUES NEED
TO HAVE ON OUR APPROACH TO
GETTING PEOPLE HOUSING AND THE
SUPPORTIVE SERVICES AND
PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM FALLING
INTO HOMELESSNESS RIGHT? BECAUSE
WE KNOW FOR EVERY HANDFUL WE GET
OFF THE STREET. MORE PEOPLE FALL
INTO THE STREET, SO THERE'S A
LOT OF WORK TO DO. AND I AGREE
WITH YOU THAT CRIMINALIZING
POVERTY AND BEING ON HOUSES, NOT
THE SOLUTION BECAUSE IT'S A
CYCLE THAT EXACERBATES THE ROOT
CAUSES. I THINK WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IN THIS BILL IS TO
PREVENT THE CONTINUATION OF
TRYING THINGS WE KNOW DON'T WORK
, NEEDING COURT DECISIONS TO
CORRECT OUR COURSE AND GOING
BACK AND FORTH IN THAT PROCESS
AND INSTEAD SAYING IF IT
REQUIRES STATE MONEY, AND YOU
ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS, YOU CANNOT DISCRIMINATE
THEM FOR BEING UNHAPPY. HOUSED.
WE HAVE TO ROOT OUR SOLUTIONS IN
DIGNITY AND AFFIRMATION AND
HOUSING AND CARE AND THAT IF WE
ARE USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND
THE DISCRIMINATORY FASHION
THAT'S ONLY MAKING THE PROBLEM
WORSE. IT IS HAPPENING. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE. SAYING NONE. DO
WE HAVE A MOTION? VISITOR MOTION
FROM HIS PAPIN'S SECOND FROM MR
CONNELLY. MR BRIAN, YOU MAKE
CLOTHES. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
RIVAL. THANK YOU HAVE EMOTIONAL
SECOND, THE MOTION IS DUE PAST
TO APPROACH S CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
SALI NÓ CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DIXON DIXON. NO, HANEY. KALRA.
PACHECO PACHECO. EYE POPPING
HAPPEN. I RAISED RIVAS. SANCHEZ.
UH MOTION IS UNCLEAR. YOUR BILL
IS ON CALL NEEDS TWO MORE VOTES.
THANK YOU, MR. THANK YOU, MISS
WICKS.
A B 1119. AND YOU MAY PROCEED.
MR. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, ALMOST TWO OUT OF THREE
DEBT CASES IN CALIFORNIA ARE
DEFAULT JUDGMENTS IN FAVOR OF
THE DEBT COLLECTORS, TOO OFTEN
IN CONSUMER CASES HAS HAPPENS
BECAUSE DEFENDANTS NEVER
RECEIVED A NOTICE FROM THE COURT
OR THEY HAVE WORK OR CHILDCARE
COMMITMENTS. THEY CAN'T SKIP. OR
THEY HAVE DIFFICULTY NAVIGATING
THE COURT SYSTEM AND ARE SIMPLY
UNAWARE THAT THEY MUST TAKE
ACTION AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED
. ABBY 11 19 REFORMS THE DEBT
COLLECTOR COLLECTION PROCESS TO
MAKE IT LESS LIKELY A BENCH
WARRANT WILL BE ISSUED FOR
DEFENDANTS ARREST. THE BILL
PROVIDES ALTERNATIVE WAYS FOR A
DEFENDANT TO SHARE INFORMATION
ABOUT THEIR ASSETS, PARTICULARLY
WHEN THEY ARE INDIGENT OR NOT
SUBJECT TO COLLECTION AND IF THE
DEFENDANT IS UNABLE TO SUBMIT
THIS INFORMATION, MAYBE 11 19
REQUIRES ACCORD TO ISSUE AN
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, GIVING THE
PERSON A FINAL CHANCE TO PROVIDE
A REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR ANY
FAILURE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE
COURT ISSUES A BENCH WARRANT. A
B 11 19 DOES NOT END THE
RESPONSIBILITY. CONSUMERS HAVE
TO SETTLE DEBTS THEY OWE. IT
INSTEAD PROVIDES AN ALTERNATIVE
WAY FOR LOW INCOME AND
INDIGENOUS CALLUM FOR
CALIFORNIANS, ESPECIALLY TO
REPORT A COURT, UH TO REPORT TO
A COURT AND DEBT COLLECTORS
ABOUT THEIR ASSETS WHILE STILL
RESERVING THE RIGHT OF A COURT
TO ISSUE A BENCH WARRANT WHEN IT
IS TRULY NECESSARY. I WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR WORKING
WITH MY OFFICE AND STAKEHOLDERS
ON AMENDMENTS PROVIDING GREATER
CLARITY TO THE COLLECTION
REFORMS. THIS BILL PROPOSES. I
AM PLEASED THAT IN THE LAST FEW
DAYS WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO A
RESOLUTION WITH THE CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, WHICH
PLANS TO GO NEUTRAL ONCE WE
ADOPT LANGUAGE OUTLINED IN THE
ANALYSIS THAT THAT EXEMPTS
RENTAL DEBT FROM THIS BILL'S
PROVISION. MY DOOR, OF COURSE
ALWAYS REMAINS OPEN, AND I'M
HOPEFUL WE CAN RESOLVE CONCERNS
FROM ANY OPPONENTS THAT COME
BEFORE US IN THE COMING WEEKS
TODAY ASKED THE CHAIR MEMBERS TO
MOVE THIS LEGISLATION FORWARD TO
GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO STRIKE
A BETTER BALANCE SO MORE
CALIFORNIAN CONSUMERS CAN
RESOLVE THEIR DEBT CASES WITHOUT
FACING THE THREAT OF ARREST OR
JAIL WITH ME TO TESTIFY TO
TESTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE BILL'S
COSPONSORS. IS DANIELLE KENDO
CANCER. HEUSER SORRY, CLARIFY,
BEFORE WE GET IT. YOU TOOK THE
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS? YES FIRST
WITNESS. GOOD MORNING, DANIEL.
CANDLE KAISER. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE SPONSORS OF A B 11
19, THE CALIFORNIA LOW INCOME
CONSUMER COALITION AND THE
NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER
WHILE IT DEALS WITH A
COMPLICATED AREA OF LAW, THE
GOALS OF A B 11 19 ARE SIMPLE TO
MAKE CLEAR THAT NO ONE SHOULD BE
ARRESTED OR THREATENED WITH
ARREST OVER A CONSUMER DEBT.
THIS BILL DOES NOT TAKE AWAY ANY
COLLECTION TOOLS, BUT SIMPLY
GIVES LOW INCOME PEOPLE THE
ABILITY TO SHOW THAT THEIR
JUDGMENT PROOF WITHOUT HAVING TO
GO TO COURT. AND BY HAVING THEM
SIGN A COMPLETE FINANCIAL
STATEMENT UNDER PENALTY OF
PERJURY. COURTS CAN STILL
ULTIMATELY COMPEL ATTENDANCE IF
A CONSUMER FAILS TO FILE A
STATEMENT. OR IF THE CREDITOR
PROVIDES EVIDENCE THAT SOMETHING
ON THE CONSUMER'S FINANCIAL
STATEMENT IS MISSING OR
INCORRECT. MAYBE 11 19 WOULD
SIMPLY PUMP THE BRAKES ON
ISSUING WARRANTS AND CONSUMER
DEBT MATTERS BY REQUIRING THE
COURT TO FURTHER EXAMINE WHETHER
A WARRANT IS NECESSARY. AND TO
GIVE LOW INCOME CONSUMERS
ANOTHER CHANCE TO FILE A
STATEMENT. BRIEF BACKGROUND ONCE
A DEBT COLLECTOR HAS OBTAINED A
JUDGMENT AGAINST A CONSUMER. THE
DEBT COLLECTOR MAY SEEK TO
EXAMINE THE CONSUMER TO
DETERMINE THEIR ASSETS. IF THE
DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPEAR FOR
THE DEBTOR'S EXAM, WHICH
INVOLVES GOING TO COURT, THE
JUDGE MAY ORDER A BENCH OR
ARREST WARRANT TO BE ISSUED FOR
A DEFENDANT WHETHER OR NOT THE
WARRANT ACTUALLY RESULTS IN JAIL
TIME. ITS EXISTENCE MAY POSE A
PROBLEM FOR LOW INCOME
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE RISK OF
FUTURE ARREST. THERE IS GROWING
RECOGNITION THAT NO CONSUMER
SHOULD FACE FACE JAIL TIME OVER
A DEBT BEING OWED PERIOD. THESE
ACTIONS DISPROPORTIONATELY HARM
FAMILIES OF COLOR DUE TO
SYSTEMIC RACISM IN THE CRIMINAL
LEGAL SYSTEM, AND BECAUSE
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR ARE ALMOST
TWICE AS LIKELY TO FACE
COLLECTION ACTIONS. WHILE MOST
PEOPLE THINK DEBTORS PRISONS ARE
A VESTIGE OF THE PAST, THIS BILL
WILL HELP TO MAKE THAT A REALITY
WHILE PRESERVING DEBT COLLECTION
TOOLS IN COURT POWERS, THE
AUTHOR AND SPONSORS ARE AN
ACTIVE DISCUSSION WITH THE
REMAINING OPPOSITION TO FIND
COMPROMISE LANGUAGE. THAT WOULD
ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS WHILE
ENSURING THIS BILL STILL
ACHIEVES ITS GOALS. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? DEBORAH
CARLTON, THE CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. WE HAD
LISTED A LETTER IN OPPOSITION,
BUT WE THINK THE AUTHOR WHO HAS
TAKEN OUR AMENDMENTS AND WE
REMOVE OUR OPPOSITION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEN NONE.
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN
, UM CLIFF BERG. GOVERNMENTAL
ADVERTS. IT'S HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
COLLECTORS FIRST LET YOU MAKE IT
CLEAR WE SUPPORT THE PROVISION
IN THE BILL THAT RECEIVED THE
MOST ATTENTION WHICH TO
ELIMINATE THE BENCH WARRANT. UM
NO PERSON SHOULD GO TO JAIL FOR
NOT PAYING A DEBT. SO WE SUPPORT
THE PROVISION THAT HAS BEEN MOST
DISCUSSED BY THE AUTHOR OF THE
SPONSORS. AND UM, THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS. HOWEVER, THIS BILL
CONTAINS OTHER PROVISIONS THAT
REALLY HAVE NOT BEEN DRILL DOWN
UPON WHICH OUR CONCERN TO US
BECAUSE, IN ESSENCE, THE IDEA
THAT YOU CAN EXEMPT SOMEONE
INCOME AND ASSETS FROM AN
EXAMINATION POST JUDGMENT AFTER
A PREVAILING PARTY HAS SECURED A
VICTORY IN COURT. WHICH IS THE
PARTY KNOWN AS THE JUDGMENT.
CREDITOR AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
DEBTOR, WHICH IS THE LOSING
PARTY IN COURT. UM WE HEAR A LOT
ABOUT WELL, THERE ARE DEFAULT
ACTIONS. THERE ARE LOW INCOME
PEOPLE. MY CLIENTS TELL ME THAT
WE WOULD NOT INCUR THE COSTS OF
HIRING AN ATTORNEY AND GOING TO
COURT DEBT COLLECTORS ARE ASSIGN
EASE THEIR THIRD PARTY ASSIGN
EASE. THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED IN
SMALL CLAIMS COURT. THEY HAVE TO
GO TO REGULAR COURT. THEY HAVE
TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY. THEY HAVE
TO GO THROUGH ALL THE EXPENSES
OF FILING A CASE. IN ORDER TO
GET A JUDGMENT. THEY ONLY DO
THAT WHEN THEY BELIEVE THAT THE
DEBTOR CAN PAY. THE BILL HAS TO
ASSETS AND INCOME TO PAY THE
EXAMINATION, WHICH WAS NOT
REALLY BEEN DISCUSSED. HERE IS
MERELY A TOOL POST JUDGMENT TO
EXAMINE THE DEBTOR'S ABILITY TO
PAY AND UNCOVER ASSETS THAT THEY
MAY BE CONCEALING A JUDGMENT.
CREDITOR CAN BE ANYBODY FROM YOU
LEAVE THIS BUILDING DRIVE HOME
TONIGHT GET T BONED IN AN
INTERSECTION. AND SUE THE PERSON
WHO T BONE YOU YOU'VE BECOME A
JUDGMENT. CREDITOR CONSUMERS ARE
JUDGMENT. CREDITORS UM THIS BILL
AS INTRODUCED CREATED A VERY
SIMPLE PROCESS RIGHT FOR ABUSE
AND FRAUD TO ALLOW SOMEONE
SIMPLY TO SAY. MY INCOME AND
ASSETS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE
JUDGMENT. WE APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR WORKING WITH US AND THE
COMMITTEE STAFF WORKING WITH US
THE STATEMENT AND THAT'S NOW
REQUIRED A STEP IN THE IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. BUT THE
DECISION ABOUT WHO INCOME AND
ASSETS ARE EXEMPT AS A COMPLEX
LEGAL AND FACTUAL DECISION. THE
BILL BASICALLY SAYS THAT IF THE
COURT GETS THE STATEMENT, THE
REQUEST FOR THE EXAMINATION IS
AUTOMATICALLY DISMISSED. THE WAY
THAT WE READ THE BILL. UM THERE
SHOULD BE JUDICIAL REVIEW. WE
HAVE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE
AUTHOR THAT WOULD SAY THAT THE
COURT NEEDS TO REVIEW THE
STATEMENT. UM AND THE CREDITOR
SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
CONTEST THE STATEMENT, WHICH IS
NOT IN THE BILL. SO FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE STILL REMAIN OPPOSED
, BUT WE DO WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR OF THE SPONSORS AND THE
COMMITTEE FOR WORKING WITH US ON
THE AMENDMENTS AND ANALYSIS AND
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO WORK
WITH THEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION? GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS MELANIE CUEVAS
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
BANKERS ASSOCIATION. APOLOGIES
FOR NOT GETTING A LETTER IN.
WE'VE COMMUNICATED OUR OPPOSED
UNLESS AMENDED POSITION TO THE
AUTHOR'S OFFICE AS WELL AS THE
COMMITTEE AND LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING TOWARDS THE RESOLUTION
THAT WOULD REMOVE OUR
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SAYING NONE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MR CHECCO. I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR, UM,
FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS THIS
MORNING. AS YOU KNOW, I USED TO
REPRESENT SMALL MOM AND POP
LANDLORDS. AND SO THAT WAS MY
MAJOR CONCERN. UH BUT I
APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE AND I
KNOW YOU HAVE AN OPEN DOOR
POLICY, SO I KNOW YOU'LL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION. BUT MY MAJOR CONCERN
WAS A SMALL MOM AND POP
LANDLORDS FOR ME. I APPRECIATE
IT. THANK YOU. OF COURSE. THANK
YOU. AND I APPRECIATE THE INPUT
THAT YOU GAVE. YEAH. MISS
PEPPER. I DO HAVE A QUESTION
ABOUT THE LAST THING WITH HAVING
SOME REVIEW OF WHAT IS EXACTLY
EXEMPT. I CAN SEE THAT YOU
REALLY TRIED TO NARROWLY
TAILORED THE BILL, AND I DO
APPRECIATE THAT HAVING SOMEWHAT
OF A SIMILAR BACKGROUND, BUT IS
THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO ON THAT
EXEMPT PART OF THAT MEETING WITH
THEM LATER TODAY, ACTUALLY, SO
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE
CONVERSATIONS AND OUR HOPE IS TO
GET FOCUS OFF OF OPPOSITION
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEING NONE. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? ISABELLE. I'LL TAKE IT
FROM MISS POPPIN SECOND FROM HIS
PACHECO. UH MISS WEEKS. YOU MAY
CLOSE. RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION. UH DO YOU PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROACH THE CLERK TO
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I,
SALLY. CONNELLY CONNELLY. I.
DIXON HANEY. CORA PACHECO
PACHECO, I POP HAPPENED. I
REYES. RIVAS. RIVAS I. SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ. NO. YOU NEED ONE MORE
VOTE BILL IS ON CALL AS MISS
CARILLO APPROACHES, I'D ASKED
FOR A MOTION ON THE CONSENT
AGENDA. MISS POPPIN MAKES A
MOTION ON THE CONSENT OF GENDER,
MR CONNELLY SECONDS. FOR THE
RECORD. THE CONSENT AGENDA
INCLUDES A B 48 AGUIAR-CURRY.
MAYBE 448 CARILLO. MAYBE 10 43 A
SALIH, MAYBE 11 66 BAINES. MAYBE
11 79 PACHECO. A B 12 80
MAIENSCHEIN. S CLERK. CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
ESSENTIALLY CONNELLY CONNELLY I
DIXON PAINTING. CHOLERA. PACHECO
PACHECO, EYE POPPING AND I RAISE
RIVAS RIVAS. I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ
GETS SENT AGENDA IS OUT. UM NEXT
STEP IS MISS CARILLO A B 665 MS
CREOLE. THANK YOU, MR SPEAKER
AND MEMBERS. SORRY, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I AM PROUD TO PRESENT A
B 665, WHICH WOULD EXPAND ACCESS
TO MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR YOUNG
PEOPLE USING MEDICAL ACROSS THE
COUNTRY'S OUR COMMUNITIES ARE
FACING A YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH
CRISIS AND THE NUMBERS ARE
SHOCKING FROM MASS SHOOTINGS AND
PUBLIC SPACES AND IN PARTICULAR
IN SCHOOLS, SCHOOL SHOOTINGS. AS
WELL AS AS WELL AS FENTANYL
OVERDOSES AND SOCIAL MEDIA.
BULLYING YOUNG PEOPLE ARE
EXPERIENCING A NEW REALITY VERY
DIFFERENT FROM THE REALITY THAT
WE MAY HAVE HAD GROWING UP AND
YOU REPORT FROM THE CENTER FROM
DECEASED CONTROL AND PREVENTION
STATES THAT TWO IN FIVE TEENS
FELT PERSISTENT SADNESS OR
LONELINESS AMONG TEENAGE GIRLS
IS THREE OUT OF FIVE. THAT'S 60.
13 YEARS AGO, THERE WAS A
BIPARTISAN AGREEMENT THAT WE
NEEDED TO EMPOWER YOUNG PEOPLE
TO ADDRESS THEIR MENTAL HEALTH
NEEDS AS EARLY AND AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE, BUT WE CLOSED THE DOOR
ON YOUNG PEOPLE THAT ARE MEDICAL
RECIPIENTS ONLY ABOUT 20% OF
YOUNG PEOPLE RECEIVING MEDICAL
GET SCREENED FOR DEPRESSION. BUT
WE KNOW THAT THE NEED IS MUCH
HIGHER. WE ALL DESERVE A LIFE
WITH PRIDE AND DIGNITY. IN OUR
LATINO COMMUNITY. WE ARE
SHIFTING THE STIGMA AROUND
MENTAL HEALTH AND WE'RE MAKING
IT OKAY TO SAY THAT YOU NEED
HELP, AND YOU NEED SOMEONE TO
TALK TO. IT STARTS WITH
OURSELVES OUR PARENTS, OUR
GRANDPARENTS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
TRAUMA OF OUR FAMILIES THAT WHAT
THEY HAVE LIVED THROUGH AND
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A BIG
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SURVIVING AND
LIVING HERE TO TESTIFY AND TALK
MORE ABOUT THE NEED FOR THIS
BILL, IN PARTICULAR THE NEED FOR
MEDICAL ACCESS. MENTAL HEALTH
ACCESS FOR MENTAL HEALTH
RECIPIENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANSWER
ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS ARE
RACHEL BUCKLE, HELPS DIRECTOR OF
THE MENTAL HEALTH AT DIRECTOR OF
MENTAL HEALTH FOR THE NATIONAL
CENTER FOR YOUTH LAW AND FIONA
LU█T HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT ACHIEVE
POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR
FOR GENERATION UP. THANK YOU.
FIRST WITNESS. GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU, CHAIRPERSON
MAIENSCHEIN AND MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION OF ASSEMBLY BILL
665, AUTHORED BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CARILLO. MY
NAME IS RACHEL VOLKOV. HOLTZ.
I'M AN ATTORNEY AND DIRECTOR OF
MENTAL HEALTH AT THE NATIONAL
CENTER FOR YOUTH LÀ, A CO
SPONSOR AND STRONG SUPPORTER OF
86 65 ADDRESSES A DEEPLY
INEQUITABLE POLICY THAT CREATES
ADDED BARRIERS FOR YOUTH ON
MEDICAL TO ACCESS MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELING. WE ALL WANT
CALIFORNIA'S YOUNG PEOPLE TO
LIVE HEALTHY, SAFE AND THRIVING
, LIVES TO ENSURE THAT THEY NEED
ACCESS TO QUALITY HEALTH CARE,
INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT
FROM TRUSTED PROVIDERS.
CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS HAVE LONG
RECOGNIZED THIS. TWO YEARS AGO,
THE LEGISLATURE OFFERED
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT FOR THE
HISTORIC INVESTMENT IN THE
CHILDREN'S BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
INITIATIVE, AND MORE THAN FOUR
DECADES AGO, THE LEGISLATURE
PASSED A LAW ALLOWING YOUNG
PEOPLE AGES 12 AND OLDER TO
ACCESS OUTPATIENT MENTAL
HEALTHCARE BASED ON THEIR OWN
CONSENT. IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES,
THIS LONG STANDING RIGHT HAS
BEEN A CRITICAL PATHWAY TO CARE.
BUT DUE TO AN INCONSISTENCY
BETWEEN PARALLEL SECTIONS OF
FAMILY CODE SECTION 6924 AND
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 1
TO 4 TO 60 YOUTH WHO RELY ON
MEDICAL MUST BE SIGNIFICANTLY
HIGHER LEVELS OF ACUITY BEFORE
INSURANCE WILL COVER THEIR CARE
IN PRACTICE. THIS MEANS THAT
YOUTH ON PRIVATE INSURANCE CAN
ACCESS NEEDED CARE AT AN EARLIER
STAGE, WHILE YOUTH ON MEDICAL
MUST EFFECTIVELY BE IN CRISIS
BEFORE INSURANCE WILL PAY FOR
THEIR CARE. YOUTH ON MEDICAL ARE
PREDOMINANTLY YOUTH OF COLOR AND
YOUTH EXPERIENCING POVERTY AND
THE STRICTER STANDARD COMPOUNDS
THE ALREADY HEIGHTENED RISK
FACTORS THEY FACE. A B 665 WOULD
ADDRESS THIS INEQUITY BY
ALIGNING THE STANDARDS IN THE
FAMILY CODE WITH LONG
ESTABLISHED LAW IN THE HEALTH
AND SAFETY CODE, SO THAT ALL YOU
CAN ACCESS THE SUPPORT THEY NEED
WITHOUT RESPECT TO WHICH
INSURANCE THEY HAVE. REMOVING
THIS BARRIER IS MORE IMPORTANT
THAN EVER GIVEN THE MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS THAT OUR YOUTH ARE
FACING RIGHT NOW, PARTICULARLY
THOSE YOUTH OF COLOR WITH THE
FEWEST RESOURCES WHO RELY ON
MEDICAL CDC DATA SHOWS THAT RACE
OF PERSISTENT SADNESS AND
HOPELESSNESS AND ATTEMPTED
SUICIDE HAVE INCREASED AND THAT
GIRLS STUDENTS OF COLOR AND
STUDENTS WHO IDENTIFY AS LGBT Q
PLUS EXPERIENCE HEIGHTENED RISK.
TRAGICALLY SUICIDE RATES OF
YOUNGER YOUTH HAVE ALSO RISEN,
MAKING IT EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO
OPEN EVERY DOOR TO CARE TO VOTE.
YES THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND
NEXT WITNESS GOOD MORNING CHAIR
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS FIONA LOU,
AND I'M A HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR IN
ORANGE COUNTY. I'M HERE TODAY TO
REPRESENT GENERATION UP A YOUTH
LED ORGANIZATION WORKING ON
EQUITY FOR YOUTH IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF A B 665. MAYBE 665
WOULD ALIGN STANDARDS FOR
MEDICAL YOUTH TO BE ABLE TO
CONSENT TO MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES, HOLDING THEM TO THE
SAME STANDARDS AS YOUTH ON
PRIVATE INSURERS. CURRENTLY
YOUTH LIKE ME ON MEDICAL ARE
SUBJECT TO HIGHER STANDARDS,
SUCH AS HAVING TO PRESENT
SERIOUS DANGER TO OURSELVES OR
TO OTHERS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE
THE MENTAL HEALTH CARE THAT WE
NEED AS A STUDENT FROM A LOW
INCOME FAMILY WHO USES MEDICAL
THESE SERVICES GRANTED BY
CALIFORNIA OFFER GREAT
ASSISTANCE TO MY FAMILY BY
PROVIDING ESSENTIAL HEALTH CARE
ACCESS, EVEN WHEN WE STRUGGLE
WITH THE COSTS OF OTHER
NECESSITIES, HOWEVER, AS A
STUDENT HIGH SCHOOL AND AS A
YOUNG PERSON FROM A MORE
TRADITIONAL FAMILY I CAN ATTEST,
THE MENTAL HEALTH STIGMA THAT
CAUSES YOUTH LIKE ME TO BE
AFRAID TO TALK TO HER OWN
PARENTS ABOUT OUR MENTAL HEALTH
STRUGGLES. IN MY FRESHMAN YEAR
OF HIGH SCHOOL WHEN I STRUGGLED
WITH DEPRESSION AND MISS SCHOOL,
OFTEN BECAUSE OF MENTAL
EXHAUSTION, I ONLY FELT
COMFORTABLE SPEAKING WITH MY
FRIENDS AND SCHOOL COUNSELOR
ABOUT WHAT I WAS GOING THROUGH.
MY EXPERIENCES ARE SIMILARLY
REFLECTED IN SURVEYS THAT SHOW
HOW TEENAGERS REPORT THAT HAVING
TO GET PARENTAL OR GUARDIAN
PERMISSION HAS BEEN A BARRIER TO
GETTING THE CARE THAT THEY
WANTED, AND THEY NEED.
ADDITIONALLY SINCE MY MOM WORKS
LONG HOURS TO SUPPORT MY FAMILY
ON TOP OF TAKING CARE OF ME, MY
LITTLE BROTHER AND MY GRANDMA,
HER SCHEDULE MAKES IT NEARLY
IMPOSSIBLE FOR ACCOMPANY ME TO
ANY POTENTIAL TREATMENT
SESSIONS. ALSO SIMILAR TO MANY
OTHER LOW INCOME YOUTH. WE OFTEN
FEEL GUILTY THAT ASKING OUR
PARENTS OR GUARDIANS TO BE
INVOLVED WITH OUR MENTAL HEALTH
EXPERIENCES WOULD BE PUTTING AN
UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON THEM.
MAYBE SUCCESS, FIVE DOES NOT
CREATE NEW POLICY TO EXPAND
MINOR RIGHTS, BUT ONLY ENSURES
THAT YOUTH WHO ARE ON MEDICAL
WHO ARE OFTEN ALREADY SYSTEM
IMPACTED YOUTH RECEIVED THE SAME
ACCESS TO TREATMENT WHEN IT
COMES TO MENTAL HEALTH. FOR
THESE REASONS, I URGE YOUR I
VOTE ON A B 665. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT NAME AND
ORGANIZATION, PLEASE WESTERN ON
POVERTY IN SUPPORT. ANDREA
RIVERA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PEN, ETHNIC HEALTH
NETWORK AND SUPPORT KIM LEWIS,
REPRESENTING HIS SPEAR NET IN
THE CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR
YOUTH AND SUPPORT. ADRIAN
SHELTON WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ALLIANCE OF CHILD AND FAMILY
SERVICES, PROUD CO SPONSOR AND
SUPPORT. REBECA GONZALEZ
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL
WORKERS CALIFORNIA CHAPTER AND
SUPPORT. PURCELL KYOTO'S ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA ACADEMY
OF CHILD AND ADOLESCENT
PSYCHIATRY AND CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF PSYCHIATRISTS AND
STRONG SUPPORT. NORLAND WITH
CHILDREN NOW AND ALSO IN SUPPORT
, ALSO ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE OF CHILD AND
FAMILY SERVICES. CAL VOICES
GENERATION UP NATIONAL CENTER
FOR YOUTH LAW NATIONAL HEALTH
LAW PROGRAM THE CHILDREN'S
PARTNERSHIP, THE CALIFORNIA
CHILDREN'S TRUST. ÁP AYE.
QUALITY L A SPIRIT NET
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR YOUTH
CALIFORNIA HIGH SCHOOL DEMOCRATS
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL BASED HEALTH
ALLIANCE, CASA PACIFICA CENTERS
FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.
COMMUNITIES UNITED FOR
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, YOUTH
JUSTICE SORRY COMMUNITY HEALTH
COUNCILS COUNTY BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION
COUNTY WELFARE DIRECTORS
ASSOCIATION. HAYWOOD BURNS
INSTITUTE, HEALTH NET AND ITS
AFFILIATED COMPANIES, JOHN
BURTON. ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL
WORKERS SPECIFIC CLINICS.
SOUTHEAST ASIA RESOURCE ACTION
CENTER. STEINBERG INSTITUTE
SYCAMORES TIGHT COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CENTER, THE LOS
ANGELES TRUST FOR CHILDREN'S
HEALTH AND THE WESTERN CENTER ON
LAW AND POVERTY. THANK YOU. I'M
NOT SURE THERE'S TWO MORE
ORGANIZATIONS. BUT YOU TOO CAN
YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND GO ANYWAY.
KELLY BEAM ON BEHALF OF HEALTH
NET OF CALIFORNIA, SERVING OVER
THREE MILLION MEDICAL MEMBERS
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. MR CHAIR
MEMBERS, BRANDON MARCHI WITH THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. SEEING NO
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT,
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. HI
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS AARON.
FRIDAY THE CO LEAD OF OUR DUTY
AND I'M AN ATTORNEY. THE
ANALYSIS IS WRONG. THIS BILL
DOES NOT MERELY ALONG TO ALIGN
TO EXISTING STATUTES, FAMILY
CODE 69, 24 HEALTH AND SAFETY 12
40 TO 60 SUCH THAT MINORS
COVERED BY MEDICAL CAN OBTAIN
MENTAL HEALTH CARE WITHOUT
PARENTAL CONSENT. WHAT IT DOES
IS GREATLY EXPAND THE POWER OF A
COUNSELOR RELATIVE TO
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES. THIS
BILL PERMITS A COUNSELOR TO
DECIDE IF A CHILD 12 OR OLDER IS
MATURE ENOUGH TO BE PLACED IN A
FACILITY AWAY FROM HIS PARENTS
WITHOUT ANY CLAIM OF ABUSE, OR
INDICATION THAT THE CHILD IS IN
DANGER. 12 40 TO 60 DOES NOT
ADDRESS RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES,
BUT 69 24 DOES. THIS BILL IS
STATE SANCTIONED KIDNAPPING AS
EXISTING 69 24 REQUIRES AN
ALLEGATION OF ABUSE OR A RISK OF
SERIOUS HARM BEFORE IT,
COUNSELOR CAN UNILATERALLY SEND
A CHILD TO A RESIDENTIAL
FACILITY. THE INTENT WAS TO
PREVENT SUICIDE, SPECIFICALLY
LGBTQ YOUTH. FOR THE C. D. C.
THE YEAR THAT 69 24 WAS AMENDED
. 408 10 TO 14 YEAR OLDS
COMMITTED SUICIDE BY 2020. IT
INCREASED TO 5 81 OR 4 581. SO
THE INTENT OF 69 24 FAILED
SUICIDES FOR THE 14 TO 24 YEAR
OLDS GREW TO 55,355 OVER THAT
TIME FRAME. INSTEAD OF REPEALING
THE FAILED LAW, THE RESPONSES TO
PLACE EVEN MORE POWER IN THE
HANDS OF COUNSELORS TO REMOVE
CHILDREN FROM THEIR LOVING
FAMILIES. AN EXAMPLE OF THE
CALIBER OF COUNSELORS WHO DECIDE
IF A 12 YEAR OLD COMES HOME FROM
SCHOOL IS KENNETH COOK, WHO HAS
ACCESS TO THE KIDS AT DAVIS
UNIFIED. SHE HELD A BD SM GROUP
CALLED SLAPS GIVING, SHE
AUTHORED BLOGS. HOW TO BE A
BETTER BUT. 12 IS THE AGE THAT
CALIFORNIA CAN STEAL THE RIGHTS
OF PARENTS AND HAND OVER MENTAL
HEALTH DECISIONS TO A CHILD OR
WORSE. A PERVERT. NEXT WITNESS.
HELLO MY NAME IS PAMELA GARFIELD
YEAGER. I'M A CALIFORNIA STATE
LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER
WHO'S TRAINED AT NEW YORK
UNIVERSITY. I WAS A PRACTICING
SCHOOL COUNSELOR AND SUPERVISOR
FOR 10 YEARS IN ADDITION TO
WORKING AT MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES. 86 65 IS HARMFUL TO
MINORS. SCHOOL COUNSELORS ARE
BEING TRAINED TO KEEP SECRETS
FROM PARENTS AND TAKE ON AN ANTI
THERAPEUTIC ACTIVIST ROLE.
INSTEAD OF WORKING WITH FAMILIES
. COUNSELORS ARE NOW DIVIDING
FAMILIES DELIBERATELY TURNING
CHILDREN AGAINST LOVING PARENTS.
SEPARATING CHILDREN FROM PARENTS
IS ONE OF THE MOST TRAUMATIC
THINGS YOU CAN DO TO A CHILD AND
SHOULD ONLY BE DONE AS A LAST
RESORT. THE JOB OF A THERAPIST
IS A REPAIR THE FAMILY UNIT, NOT
DESTROY IT. IT IS APPARENT THAT
11 RESULT OF THIS BILL WOULD BE
THE REMOVAL OF TRANS IDENTIFIED
CHILDREN FROM THE HOME. IN THIS
DYSTOPIAN NIGHTMARE WE'RE LIVING
IN IF A PARENT DOESN'T USE A
CHILD'S CHOSEN PRONE IN HER
NAME, THEY'RE LABELED DANGEROUS
. THIS IS ABSURD AND ALL BASED
ON STATISTICS, STATISTICAL LIE
ABOUT SUICIDE. COMPLETED
SUICIDES FOR TRANS IDENTIFIED
CHILDREN ARE SIMILAR TO KIDS
WITH AUTISM, DEPRESSION AND
OTHER SERIOUS MENTAL HEALTH
ISSUES. AND I WORKED IN GROUP
HOMES. I KNOW WHAT THEY'RE
REALLY LIKE, AND THEY'RE FAR
FROM IDEAL. RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES. LEAGUE HEADS TO
ADOPT NEW HARMFUL HABITS SUCH AS
DRUG USE, SELF HARM AND VIOLENT
BEHAVIOR. USED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES ARE USUALLY UNLOCKED
, AND MANY KIDS RUN AWAY INTO
THE HANDS OF SEX TRAFFICKERS.
COUNSELORS ARE MANDATED TO
REPORT GENUINE AND NEGLECT,
GENUINE NEGLECT AND ABUSE. BUT
THIS BILL WILL REMOVE THIS
NEEDED THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT AND
CAUSE MORE HAVOC ON FAMILIES. MY
20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH
FAMILIES AND CHILDREN HAVE
TAUGHT ME THAT CONDUCTING
THERAPY WITHOUT ANY WITHOUT
PARENTAL INPUT IS INEFFECTIVE.
JUST LIKE THE OTHER BILL WHERE
WE'RE WORKING WITH KIDS WITHOUT
THEIR PARENTS, AND I'VE HAD MANY
YEARS DOING THAT IT DOES NOT
WORK. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION? NAME
AND ORGANIZATION. IF ANY. GREG,
BUT WITH THE CALIFORNIA FAMILY
COUNSELING OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. LINLEY HOGAN, SANTA CLARA
COUNTY MOTHER OF A DAUGHTER, WHO
THINKS SHE'S A BOY. I OPPOSE
THIS. ALISON SNYDER REGISTERED
VOTER TAXPAYER MOTHER. ON BEHALF
OF PARENTS PAYING ATTENTION TO
THE EROSION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS
AND STATE SANCTIONED PROMOTION
OF STERILIZATION AND MUTILATION
OF CHILDREN. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
JUDITH CAHILL REGISTERED
DEMOCRAT SANTA CLARA COUNTY. I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. AT LEAST A
MULLINS, MOTHER OF A DAUGHTER. I
DON'T ALLOW INTO THE WELLNESS
CENTER BECAUSE IT'S SO
INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS. YVETTE
CORCORAN MOTHER AND REGISTERED
NURSE SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY. I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. SAMARA MOTHER
OF TEENAGE DE TRANSITION. ER, I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. STAN HELTON,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEMOCRAT. I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. SUSAN KREGEL,
DEMOCRAT PARENT. I OPPOSE THIS
BILL. ELEVON URBANO, PLASTER
COUNTY PARENT. AND I HAD A
THERAPIST. TELL US THAT OUR
CHILD IS NOT TILL SHE HAS A
HISTORY. GRIFFITHS STUDENT
DEMOCRAT AND I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
THAT'S BORN MOTHER, YELLOW
COUNTY. I'M A DEMOCRAT. AND I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK YOU ANY
WITNESSES FOR THE WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION SEEN NONE QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
MR SILLY. THANK YOU, MR GRANT.
THANK YOU FOR, UM, BRINGING THE
CONCERNS OF MENTAL HEALTH. I
AGREE. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT
THE MENTAL HEALTH OF KIDS AND WE
HAD ANOTHER SCHOOL SHOOTING
YESTERDAY. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO
HAVE A BIG CONVERSATION OF
MENTAL HEALTH. AND I WELCOME
THAT CONVERSATION. I HOPE THAT
COULD BE BIPARTISAN. UM WE NEED
TO LOOK AT SOCIAL MEDIA AND WHAT
EFFECT THAT'S HAVING ON KIDS. UM
BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T
SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR BILL.
UM, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT A
BIGGER ISSUE THAT'S HAPPENING
CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS THE EROSION
OF PARENTAL RIGHTS, UM AND I
HAVE THIS CONCERN THAT CHILDREN
ARE BEING EMPOWERED TO MAKE
ADULT DECISIONS. UM WHETHER
THAT'S SEEKING COUNSELING IN A
PARTICULAR WAY OR OTHER ANOTHER
, WE'RE MAKING MEDICAL DECISIONS
AND PARENTS ARE BEING PUSHED TO
THE SIDE AND TREATED AS
SPECTATORS OF THEIR KIDS INSTEAD
OF PARENTS TO RAISE THEM, UM AND
I THINK IT'S CREATING A WEDGE
BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILDREN,
AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
KIDS NEED THEIR PARENTS. THEY
NEED THAT NURTURING. THEY NEED
THAT SUPPORT. AND I DON'T THINK
THE STATE SHOULD BE MAKING
POLICY THAT TRIES TO SEPARATE
THEM. WE SHOULD BE WORKING
TOGETHER. UM AND I DO UNDERSTAND
THE CONCERNS THAT SOME FAMILY
DYNAMICS HAVE. THEY MAY NOT BE,
UH, WELCOMING TO, UM ALL FORMS
OF MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT, BUT
WE NEEDED WE NEED TO HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION WITH PARENTS AND
FIGURE OUT HOW TO OVERCOME IT.
I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS. THE
SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT
PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIRECT
THE UPBRINGING AND EDUCATION OF
THEIR CHILDREN AND BE INVOLVED
IN MAKING THEIR MEDICAL
DECISIONS. SO I DO HAVE SOME
CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS WITH IT.
BUT I AGREE WITH THE PREMISE AND
I AND I WELCOME A CONVERSATION.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN WORK ON THE
BIGGER ISSUE. JUST RESPECTFULLY
. I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS BILL.
BUT I THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SCENE NINE. DO WE
HAVE A MOTION? LOOK AT THIS
MOTION FROM HIS REYES SECOND
FROM MR REVIS MISCREANT. YOU
MAKE CLOTHES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND THANK YOU TO
THE MEMBERS AND ALSO
RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE
OPPOSITION BUT ALWAYS WELCOME
PARENT INVOLVEMENT IN ANY
CONVERSATION RELATED TO THE
FUTURE OF CHILDREN ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THIS BILL
MAKES EQUITABLE MENTAL HEALTH
AVAILABLE FOR CHILDREN ON
MEDICAL. THE ORIGINAL BILL
PASSED IN 2010. IT WAS
BIPARTISAN. IT HAD NO REGISTERED
OPPOSITION. IT WAS SIGNED BY
GOVERNOR ARNOLD SORCERER AS
CALIFORNIA REALLY BEGAN
CONVERSATIONS RELATED TO MENTAL
HEALTH AND YOUNG PEOPLE. THIS
ONLY CREATES PARODY. SO IF
YOU'RE ON PRIVATE INSURANCE, YOU
HAVE ALL THE ACCESS YOU CAN GET.
IF YOU'RE A MEDICAL RECIPIENT,
YOU DON'T HAVE ANY ACCESS AT ALL
. THIS CREATES PARITY ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND DO PASS AS A
CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN IAS
ELLIE. ELLIE NO! CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON HANEY, KALRA
PACHECO PACHECO EYE POPPING
REYES RAISE I REVERSE. RIVAS
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ, NO. MOTION IS
OUT. THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE BILL
REMAINING WHILE WE'VE BEEN TOLD
HE'S ON HIS WAY. IF HE'S NOT
HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, MAYBE IT
ASK MISS RAISE, MR RIVAS IF ONE
OF THE TWO OF YOU PRESENTED IN
THE MEANTIME, LET'S GO AHEAD
AND, UH Dð ADD ONS FOR EVERYONE.
WE'LL START WITH THE CONSENT
AGENDA AS OPEN THE ROLE AS A
CLERK. UH CALL THE ABSENT
VOTERS. I DIXON HANEY, KALRA
REYES. AYE SANCHEZ. I HAVE
SANCHEZ. SORRY. ITEM ONE A. B
81. CHOLERA POPPIN I, RIVAS
RIVAS. I SANCHEZ. THAT I'M
SORRY. ITEM ONE A. B 81.
NOTHING. ALRIGHT, HERE WE GO.
I'M HOLDING TO A B 6 47 LIFT THE
CALL. THE CLERK LARA PAPIN AND
I, RIVAS RIVAS. AYE. THAT BILL
IS OUT. YES. ASK ASK THE CLERK
TO LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM 5 88
18. KARA RIVAS DECIDE THOSE OUT.
DO YOU WANT WITH THEM? WE'LL
LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN. MAYBE 853 ASKED CLARK TO
CALL THE ABSENT VOTERS. CONNELLY
CONNELLY I. HANEY CHOLERA,
REYES. RAISE I RIVAS. RIVERSIDE.
THAT BILL IS OUT. LIFT THE CALL
ON ITEM EIGHT. MAYBE 9 20.
HANEY, CARA. RAISE RIVAS RIVAS.
AYE. THAT BILL IS OUT. ADD ONS
FOR ITEM NUMBER 9 89 68 CHOLERA
POPPING HAPPENED? I RIVAS RIVAS.
I SANCHEZ. A B 9 68. I'M NOT
NINE. WELL IF THE CALL AN ITEM
10 A B 1119, SALLY SALINO DIXON
HANEY. CHOLERA REYES RAISE AYE.
THAT BILL IS OUT. FOR ITEM 11 A
B 15 85 CHOLERA. RIVAS RIVAS
SIDE. AND WE'LL ADD ON ADD ONS
FOR ITEM 12 A. JR ONE TO HAPPEN.
HAPPENED I RIVAS RIVAS. I
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ. AYE. WILL YOU
ADD ONS TO ITEM 14, WHICH WAS
PULLED FROM CONSENT BEFORE 19 S
CLERK TO CALL THE ABSENT VOTERS?
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I HANEY
CHOLERA, REYES. AYE RIVAS RIVAS
HIÂU. MS PATRICK, DID YOU HAVE
ME FOR 6 47? FIVE. 6 47 ITEMS,
TOO. HOLDEN. WE HAVE YOU AS AN I
THANK YOU. MS REYES, WOULD YOU
MR HANEY, I THINK IS STUCK
PRESENTING A BILL.
AND WE'LL ASK MISS RACE TO STEP
IN FROM MR HANEY, MR. RICE. YOU
MAY PROCEED. UH, MAYBE 8 16.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I AM
PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HANEY A B 8 16.
WHICH WOULD ALLOW A MINOR WHO IS
6 16 YEARS OLD OR OLDER TO
CONSENT REPLACEMENT NARCOTICS
ABUSE TREATMENT THAT USES UP
RENTAL FRAME WITHOUT PARENTAL
CONSENT. MAYBE 8 16 WOULD
REQUIRE THAT THE MEDICAL
PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTERING THIS
PLAN SHOULD SEEK TO INCLUDE THE
PARENTS OF THE MINOR IN THE
TREATMENT PLAN OF APPROPRIATE
THE BILL. UM HOW SUPPORT FROM
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF
PEDIATRICS. CALIFORNIA BRIDGE,
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR YOUTH
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL
WORKERS AND THE STEINBERG
INSTITUTE AND NO OPPOSITION
NOTED ON FILE. THANK YOU
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT HI. I'M DR
LEE TROPE. I'M A PEDIATRICIAN
WHO TREATS YOUTH WITH OPIATE
ADDICTION. UM AND I'M SPEAKING
ON BEHALF OF BILL SPONSOR
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
REPRESENTS MORE THAN 3000,
PEDIATRICIAN'S PRIMARY CARE AND
SUBSPECIALTY PEDIATRICIANS IN
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU FOR HAVING
ME TODAY. UM I THINK EVERYBODY
HERE KNOWS THAT WE'RE IN THE
MIDST OF A SERIOUS PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS IN OUR STATE AND REALLY
ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY WITH A
RECORD NUMBER OF YOUTH LIVING
WITH OPIATE ADDICTION AND DYING
FROM OPIOID OVERDOSE,
PARTICULARLY FENTANYL OVERDOSE.
UM AND THIS EMERGENCY, I THINK
CALLS FOR VERY SWIFT RESPONSE
FROM OUR STATE GOVERNMENT. THIS
MEDICATION BUPRENORPHINE. SOME
OF YOU MAY KNOW IT AS SUBOXONE
IS CONSIDERED THE MOST EFFECTIVE
WAY FOR YOUTH TO MOVE INTO A
STATE OF RECOVERY. UM AND IT'S
ALSO VERY SAFE. UNLIKE METHADONE
, IT'S ESSENTIALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO
OVERDOSE ON IT UNLESS YOU ARE
TAKING IT INCORRECTLY. UM IT IS
THE SAFEST AND MOST EFFECTIVE
MEDICATION, BUT WHEN THEY'VE
DONE RESEARCH LESS THAN 5% OF
YOUTH ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
HAVE ACCESS TO THIS MEDICATION.
YOUTH WITH OPIATE ADDICTION
DON'T HAVE ACCESS. AND JUST ONE
OF THESE BARRIERS IS PARENTAL
CONSENT. I JUST WANT TO
EMPHASIZE I KNOW PARENTAL
CONSENT HAS COME UP BEFORE TODAY
AS A PEDIATRICIAN. MY GOAL IS
ALWAYS ALWAYS TO ENGAGE FAMILIES
. UH FOR TREATMENT. THIS IS
ESPECIALLY TRUE WITH ADDICTION
BECAUSE FAMILY ENGAGEMENT HAS
BEEN SHOWN TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES.
BUT PARENTAL CONSENT REALLY IS
NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE,
PARTICULARLY IN THIS PATIENT
POPULATION. PEOPLE WITH OPIATE
ADDICTION. SOME YOUTH DON'T HAVE
A PARENT WHO IS AVAILABLE, UM TO
CONSENT BECAUSE OF ADDICTION ON
THEIR OWN, THAT'S VERY COMMON
AND OTHER TIMES, UH, YOUTH ARE
UNWILLING TO, UM ARE KIND OF
DISCLOSED TO THEIR FAMILIES,
THEIR THE SERIOUSNESS OF THEIR
ADDICTION. UM IN THESE
SITUATIONS, I STRONGLY BELIEVE
THAT PARENTAL CONSENT SHOULD NOT
BE A BARRIER TO LIFESAVING
TREATMENT. ONE PATIENT. I JUST
WANT TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF A
PATIENT WITH THIS HAPPENED TO
VERY RECENTLY IN MY CARE WAS A
17 YEAR OLD FOR PRIVACY REASONS.
I'M GOING TO CALL HER JASMINE.
AND SHE CAME INTO MY HOSPITAL
SEEKING OPIOID TREATMENT. UM
CARE OF WITH BUPRENORPHINE. HER
MOTHER CAME WITH HER AND
CONSENTED TO THE MEDICATION
BUPRENORPHINE. SHE DID VERY WELL
AND WE SENT HER OUT TO THE
OUTPATIENT WORLD IN THE
OUTPATIENT SETTING. THERE NEEDS
TO BE ACCORDING TO CALIFORNIA
LAW RIGHT NOW, THERE NEEDS TO BE
A CONSENT FROM FAMILIES FROM
PARENTS IN ORDER TO GET
BUPRENORPHINE. AND SO, UM, SHE
WENT TO THE OUTPATIENT
APPOINTMENT, AND IN THE INTERIM
, HER MOM RELAPSE FROM HER OWN
OPIATE ADDICTION AND DID NOT
SHOW UP TO HER OUTPATIENT
APPOINTMENT WITH HER, SO THE
PATIENT WAS NOT ABLE TO BE
CONTINUED ON THE MEDICATION, BUT
IT WAS OKAY. WE SAID OKAY, WE'LL
GIVE IT ANOTHER CHANCE WITH AN
APPOINTMENT. THE NEXT DAY, MOM
AGAIN DIDN'T WRAP UP. MOM AGAIN
DIDN'T SHOW IN THE PUNCH LINE IS
THAT THE MOTHER WHO WAS
SUFFERING FROM HER OWN ADDICTION
DID NOT SHOW THE PATIENT
ULTIMATELY COULD NOT GET THE
MEDICATION AND RE ELAPSED. THIS
BILL WOULD ALLOW YOUTH LIKE HER
WHO ARE UNABLE TO OBTAIN
PARENTAL CONSENT. ACCESS UM,
ACCESS TO THIS LIFE SAVING
TREATMENT IF THEY'RE 16 OR OLDER
, SO I STRONGLY UH, THINK WHAT
YOU CONSIDER TO, UM THANK THANK
YOU. MISS REYES DID AN ADMIRAL
JOB, MR HANEY. SO, SO IT'S
PRETTY UH, ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT? NAME AND
ORGANIZATION. NEW ORLEANS WITH
CHILDREN NOW IN SUPPORT. KIM
LEWIS, REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR YOUTH
AND SUPPORT GOOD MORNING TAYLOR
CHAMBERS WITH THE NATIONAL
CENTER FOR YOUTH LAW AND
SUPPORT. MR CHAIR MEMORIES. THE
COMMITTEE BRANDON MARCHI WITH
THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. REBECCA
GONZALES, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF SOCIAL WORKERS, CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER AND SUPPORT ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SAYING
NONE WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
HI GOOD MORNING. AARON FRIDAY,
LICENSED ATTORNEY PARENTS. UM
ONCE AGAIN, CALIFORNIA IS MAKING
PARENTS TO BE PARIAHS AND THAT
WE SHOULDN'T HAVE, UM ANY KIND
OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR
CHILDREN AND BE IN THE KNOW AND
SECRETS SHOULD BE KEPT. I HAVE
ABSOLUTE EMPATHY FOR CHILDREN
WHO ARE ADDICTED TO OPIOIDS,
OTHER DRUGS OR OR ALCOHOLICS BUT
TO CARVE OUT THE PARENTS AS PART
OF UH, RECOVERIES. JUST NOT
GONNA WORK. I THINK CALIFORNIA
REALLY NEEDS TO LOOK AT GO BACK
IN TIME. GO BACK 10 YEARS WHEN
THESE BILLS WERE FIRST PROPOSED
69 24 69 29. DID THEY DO WHAT
THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING
TO DO OUR CHILDREN BETTER OFF IN
THE STATE, OR THEY WERE SOF.
YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT THEY
ARE WORSE OFF WHEN YOU CUT THE
PARENTS OUT OF THE RECOVERY FOR
CHILD, YOU WERE CUTTING OUT
THEIR LIFELINE. SO FOR THOSE
REASONS I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
THANK YOU, HEATHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY. STAN HELTON,
DEMOCRAT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY.
I'M A POST JUDITH CAHILL.
DEMOCRATS SANTA CLARA COUNTY
OPPOSED. PAMELA GARFIELD JAGGER
LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER
OPPOSED LINLEY HOGAN, SANTA
CLARA COUNTY MOTHER OF A GIRL
WHO THINKS BY POSTING. LISA
MULLINS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY I
OPPOSE. RENE? YEAH. SAMARA, UM,
OPPOSE. YVETTE CORCORAN, MOTHER
NURSE THERE, MY CHILDREN, MY
PARENTS THEM, NOT THE STATE.
ELEVON URBANO, DEMOCRAT PLASTER
COUNTY. I ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED.
DON'T ERODE OUR RIGHTS. ALISON
SNYDER, MOTHER, PARENT
REGISTERED VOTER. MEMBER OF
PARENTS PAYING ATTENTION TO THE
EROSION OF OUR RIGHTS AND STATE
SANCTIONED. UM UTILIZATION, UM
UTILIZING AND STERILIZATION OF
CHILDREN. I OPPOSE. AM I?
GRIFFITH STUDENT DEMOCRAT I
OPPOSE. BEST BORN YELLOW COUNTY.
I'M A DEMOCRAT. AND I OPPOSE
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION SEEN ON QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEING NONE. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? MOTION FROM MR REVIS,
SECOND FROM MS REYES. AH! THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS. MR HANEY.
YOU MAKE CLOTHES. FIRST OF ALL,
I'M I APOLOGIZE TO THE
COMMITTEE. I GOT STUCK IN BMP,
WHICH IS IN THE OTHER BUILDING,
AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS
RACE FOR STEPPING IN AND DR
TRUMP FOR BEING HERE. UH WE WANT
TO GET THESE YOUNG PEOPLE HELP.
THIS IS A DEADLY DRUG. IF PEOPLE
ARE SEEKING ASSISTANCE IF
THEY'RE SEEKING TREATMENT, WE
SHOULD NOT STAND IN THE WAY MOST
FOLKS WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK WITH
THEIR PARENTS. BUT THOSE WHO
CAN'T ARE OFTEN THE MOST
VULNERABLE. THIS WILL ABSOLUTELY
SAVE LIVES. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. MR
CHENEY, WITH THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS AS THE CLERK TO COLORADO
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN, I S
HALEY. CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DIXON. HANEY HIGH CHOLERA
PACHECO, CHECCO EYE POPPING UP
AND I RAISE RAISE I RIVAS. RIVAS
SANCHEZ. EXCEPT THE BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO WE WILL
DO, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S JUST MR
HANEY THAT NEEDS TO DO AND DIXON
THAT NEEDS TO DO ADD ONS. WE'LL
DO. WE'LL LET LET'S DO ADD ONS
FOR MR HANEY. YOU CAN ASK THE
CLERK TO DO ADD ONS FOR THE
CONSENT AGENDA. UH PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. DIXON HANEY, MR HANEY
CONSENT AGENDA. HANEY? AYE. ITEM
NUMBER THREE. AS A CLERK TO
DIXON. HANEY HANEY I ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN. HANEY. KENNY I ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT. HANEY. KENNY. I
ITEM NUMBER 10. DIXON, TINY. ANY
I ITEM 14. HANEY. ANY? AYE.
OH, YEAH. ANYMORE. SO THAT I'M
JUST GOING TO ALLOW, UH, TWO
MINUTES FOR MISS DIXON. SHE HAD
11 AND FOUR THAT SHOULD BE BACK.
YEAH.
UH TODAY'S COMMITTEE. JULIA
CHECK COMMITTEE MEETING IS
ADJOURNED. THANK YOU ALL VERY
MUCH.