GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO
TODAY'S JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
HEARING. WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA
TODAY, SO WE NEED TO BE
EFFICIENT WITH OUR TIME AS A
REMINDER EACH SIDE WILL BE
ALLOWED TO MAIN WITNESSES TO
WITNESS IT. TWO MINUTES EACH.
UH, WE HAVE A TIMER UP HERE. SO
WHEN YOU HEAR IT, BEEP THAT'S
TIME TO WRAP IT UP. AH
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES SHOULD
STATE THEIR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY. THIS ALLOWS
ALL AUTHORS A FAIR CHANCE TO
PRESENT THEIR BILLS AND ALL
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND EQUAL
CHANCE TO HAVE THEIR POSITION
REFLECTED IN THE RECORD. AS WE
PROCEED WITH OUR HEARING. I WANT
TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS THE COMMITTEE RULES
AND TO ENSURE WE MAINTAIN ORDER
AND RUN A FAIR AND EFFICIENT
MEETING 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 IMPEDE 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 THE 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 REMOVE
ALL OR OTHER ENFORCEMENT
PROCEDURES WITH THAT, AS A CLERK
TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
MAIENSCHEIN. ASSAILANT CONNOLLY
DIXON HANEY, CHOLERA HERE. THE
CZECH Ó. POPPING. RAISE HERE,
REBUS. SANCHEZ. WE DO HAVE A
QUORUM. INCREDIBLY, WE DON'T
HAVE AN AUTHOR. BOBBY. WITH ALL
THESE BILLS, YOU WOULD ASSUME
LOCKWOOD. SO WE'D LIKE TO HAVE
AUTHORS COME DOWN. YEP. ANY OF
TOLERANCE COMPANY.
WE WILL START WITH ITEM 13.
MAYBE 14 14, MR KALRA. NOT TO
FORGET THE LADY. YOU GOT ME ON
THE RESPONSES. COOL. GOOD.
SEBASTIAN.
GOOD MORNING. SHERRY MEMBERS. I
WANT TO START BY THANKING THE
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE AND I'LL
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS.
MAYBE 14 14 WOULD PROTECT
CONSUMERS AGAINST PREDATORY DEBT
COLLECTION LAWSUITS BY REQUIRING
DEBT COLLECTORS. THAT BUYERS AND
ORIGINAL CREDITORS PRODUCE AND
SUE ON A CONTRACT FOR CONSUMER
DEBT CASES RATHER THAN COMMON
COUNTS. THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC IS
EXACERBATED FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS
FOR LOW INCOME FAMILIES LEADING
TO MISS BILL PAYMENTS AND
INCREASED CHANCES OF EXPOSURE,
DEBT COLLECTORS AND DEBT BUYERS.
THAT BUYERS ARE COLLECTION
AGENCIES WHO PURCHASED PAST DUE
DEBTS FROM CREDITORS, SOMETIMES
FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR, WHO
OFTENTIMES ATTEMPT TO COLLECT
THE DEBT UNDER OUTDATED CAUSES
OF ACTION, LIKE OPEN BOOK
ACCOUNTS, THESE PLEADINGS, ALSO
KNOWN AS COMMON ACCOUNTS ARE
SUBJECT TO LESSER EVIDENCE
STANDARDS AND HAVE HELPED
COLLECTORS EVADE MODERN CONSUMER
PROTECTION LAWS IN TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF CASES. ACCORDING TO
THE CENTER FOR RESPONSIBLE
LENDING ATTORNEYS REPRESENT
DEFENDANTS AND ONLY 2% OF DEBT
CASES, WITH TWO THIRDS OF ALL
CASES, RESULTING IN DEEP ALL
JUDGES THAT CAN GARNISH WAGES OR
SEIZE BANK COUNTS. MAYBE 14 14
SIMPLY ENSURES THE CONTRACT THAT
GAVE RISE TO THE CONSUMER DEBT
CLAIM IS PRODUCED AND SUED ON IN
COURT. AND THE CONTRACT WAS NOT
ENTERED INTO INDIVIDUALS CAN SUE
ON AN OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT AS LONG
AS THEY PROVIDE RECORDS OF ALL
DEBIT AND CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
THAT MAKE UP THE ALLEGED
BALANCE. THIS BILL WILL CLOSE
AND EXPLOITATIVE LOOPHOLE THAT
HAS ONLY DRIVEN PEOPLE FURTHER
INTO POVERTY AND HOLDS DEBT
COLLECTORS, DEBT BUYERS AND
ORIGINAL CREDITORS ARE THE SAME
EVIDENTIARY STANDARDS AS EVERY
OTHER BUSINESS. I WANT TO SEE IF
ELIZABETH GONZALEZ, SUPERVISING
STAFF ATTORNEY, A PUBLIC COUNCIL
IS HERE. I DON'T KNOW. WE
ANTICIPATED GOING THIS SOON. SO
IF NOT WILL GO AHEAD AND
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR KALRA.
ANY UH, ANY WITNESSES IN MAIN
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT SEEN NONE
OTHER WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
SEEING NON WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE. MOTION
FROM MS REYES. 2ND 2ND FROM MR
CONNELLY. AH OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
SAYING NONE. MR KALRA, YOU MAKE
CLOTHES RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
EVA. WE'RE OFF TO A GOOD START.
UH OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION
WHICH IS DUE PASSES, AMENDED TO
BANKING AND FINANCE. AH ESCORT.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN I DAILY CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON HANEY.
CHOLERA, CHOLERA I PACHECO TO
CHECK O. I HAPPEN. IT HAPPENED.
I RAISE RAISE I RIVAS. SANCHEZ.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU, MR
CORA. NEXT UP IS MISS PAPIN. UH
A B 8 93. IN SEARCH OF A
WITNESS. PROCEED. HOPEFULLY
THEY'LL BE HERE. MR. CHAIR.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY. UM SO OVER THE PAST
15 YEARS, NEW BUSINESSES HAVE
EMERGED AS DISRUPTERS, FORCING
CHANGE AND ADAPTATION. GOOD
MORNING, UM IN THE CAR RENTAL
SPACE, PURE TO PURE RENTAL
PLATFORMS ARE NEW AVENUE FOR
INDIVIDUALS TO RENT THEIR
PRIVATE VEHICLES TO CONSUMERS.
WHILE THE TRANSACTIONS ARE
SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THAN THAT OF
A TRADITIONAL RENTAL CAR
COMPANY. THE END RESULT IS THE
SAME CONSUMER RENTS A CAR. THAT
IS, HOWEVER, WHERE THE
SIMILARITIES END. UNLIKE
TRADITIONAL CAR RENTAL SERVICES
APPEAR TO BE A REYNOLDS DO NOT
CURRENTLY TO HERE TO AN AIRPORT
REGULATION, NOR DO THEY SUPPORT
LOCAL AND STATE SERVICES THROUGH
FEES THE TRADITIONAL ENTERPRISES
PAY. GOOD MORNING. AND DESPITE
THE FACT THAT THE IMPACTS OF
PEER TO PEER OPERATIONS ARE
SIMILAR TO TRADITIONAL CAR
RENTAL SERVICES, THEY DO NOT
CONTRIBUTE TO SUPPORTING THE
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SUPPORTS THE
TOURISM INDUSTRY THAT DRIVES CAR
RENTAL BUSINESSES. THIS BILL
SIMPLY ADDRESSES GAPS IN CURRENT
LAW BY CLARIFYING THAT PERSONAL
VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAMS MUST
FOLLOW EXISTING REGULATIONS. A B
8 93 ENSURES THAT THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE IS NOT PICKING
WINNERS AND LOSERS IN AN
INDUSTRY THROUGH APPLYING
REGULATIONS TO ONE BUSINESS AND
NOT ANOTHER, WHERE THE END
RESULT IS THE EXACT SAME
CONSUMER RENTS A CAR. WE HAVE A
BROAD COALITION OF SUPPORT AND
WITH ME TO TESTIFY TODAY, UM IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL IS BRYAN
ROTH, THREE ON BEHALF OF
ENTERPRISE AND CHEN LIGHTS
SHOULD BE HERE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA AIRPORTS COUNCIL.
THAT'S YOU. WELCOME. GOOD
MORNING, USUALLY THE ALTERNATE
BUSINESS. WITNESSES. SECTOR
WELCOME THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE. WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
PLEASE GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR.
BRYAN ROTH, THREE FROM
ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS, VICE
PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT PUBLIC
AFFAIRS AND FLEW IN LAST NIGHT
FROM OUR HEADQUARTERS IN ST
LOUIS. UM HAPPY TO BE HERE WITH
YOU THIS MORNING. MY EXPERIENCE
ON THIS BILL RELATES TO HAVING
NAVIGATED THIS ISSUE ACROSS THE
COUNTRY OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS
, UM, HAVING TESTIFIED, AND I
BELIEVE MORE THAN 15 STATES ON
THIS ISSUE. UM, WE STANDARD
SUPPORTED THIS BILL. WE BELIEVE
THIS BILL REFLECTS UM, THE
GENERAL DIRECTION THAT THIS
ISSUE HAS BEEN RESOLVED IN OTHER
STATES. WE BELIEVE IT'S
REFLECTIVE OF COMPROMISE BETWEEN
THE PARTIES THAT REFLECTS THE
SIMILARITIES AND THE DIFFERENCES
. WE RECOGNIZE THERE'S
DIFFERENCES, BUT WE ALSO
HIGHLIGHT SIGNIFICANT
SIMILARITIES. AT THE END OF THE
DAY. A CAR IS RENTED, AND WE
THINK CERTAIN RULES APPLY TO
THAT HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. UM OF PARTICULAR
IMPORTANCE. UM. YOU KNOW, JUST
TO RAISE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT
WERE TRAIPSING BACK AND FORTH IN
THE LETTERS IN SUPPORT OR
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL. AS TO
AIRPORT ACCESS. WE CERTAINLY
AGREE THAT, UM NOT ALL AIRPORT
RENTALS ARE THE SAME. SOME COME
FROM A AN ACTUAL PHYSICAL
LOCATION ON SITE WHERE THERE'S A
LOCATION BUT FROM A TRADITIONAL
CARAMEL COMPANY. AND THAT HAS A
DIFFERENT COST ASSOCIATED WITH
THAT. OTHERS HOWEVER, ARE ACCESS
FROM AN OFFSITE. AND THERE'S A
DIFFERENT COST ASSOCIATED WITH
THAT. WE BELIEVE AIRPORTS HAVE
IT IN THEIR JURISDICTION TO
ASIDE THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF
REGULATION WITHIN THE RANGE OF
RENTALS THAT ARE PROVIDED AND
THAT'S DISCRETION THAT THE
AIRPORT HAS AND SHOULD HAVE. AND
I WANTED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT
SOMETHING BECAUSE IT'S BEEN
SUGGESTED THAT CARBONELL
COMPANIES ARE ARE SAYING THAT
PEER TO PEERS SHOULD PAY THE
EXACT SAME FEE AS THE MOST
EXPENSIVE EXAMPLE OF CARDINAL
COMPANY OF THE PROPERTY ON SITE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
THAT'S NEVER WHAT WE'VE SAID.
I'VE MADE THIS CLEAR IN
TESTIMONY ACROSS THE COUNTRY
THROUGHOUT THE PAST FOUR YEARS,
AND WE'VE BEEN CONSISTENT ON
THAT. UM JUST A FOR FRAME OF
REFERENCE. UM, YEAH. YOU CAN
WRAP UP SO THE AIRPORT ISSUE IS
, YOU KNOW, I'D BE HAPPY TO
PROVIDE MORE CLARITY ON THAT,
AND WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE
COMPANY SHOULD BE PAYING THEIR
FAIR TO THE TOURISM ASSESSMENT,
WHICH WE ALL BENEFIT FROM, AND
NUMBER OF THEIR CUSTOMERS ARE
BROUGHT HERE BECAUSE OF THAT.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, JIM
LIGHTS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA AIRPORTS COUNCIL. WE
REPRESENT THE 31 COMMERCIAL
AIRPORTS IN THE STATE IF A
COMPANY WANTS TO OFFER GOODS AND
SERVICES TO AIR TRAVEL
PASSENGERS, YOU MUST HAVE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE AIRPORT. AND
WHILE WE DO HAVE A HANDFUL OF
AIRPORTS THAT HAVE COME INTO
AGREEMENTS WITH CAR SHARE
COMPANIES, WE HAVE A NUMBER THAT
HAVE NOT WE HAVE AIRPORTS THAT
HAVE ISSUED A CEASE AND DESIST
LETTERS TO CAR SHARE COMPANIES
THAT HAVE NOT BEEN HONORED. AND
SO THIS BILL WILL PROVIDE A
FRAMEWORK A FLEXIBLE FRAMEWORK
FOR THOSE COMPANIES TO WORK WITH
AIRPORTS. THEY MAY NOT BE IN THE
CAR RENTAL FACILITY AT THE
AIRPORT. THERE COULD BE OTHER
OPTIONS, SUCH AS HAVING SPACES
IN THE REGULAR PARKING GARAGE.
AND SO WE DO WANT TO MAINTAIN
THAT FLEXIBILITY FOR AIRPORTS TO
TAKE IT, YOU KNOW, IN CA
AGREEMENTS THAT MAKE SENSE FOR
THE COMPANY AND THE AIRPORT, BUT
WE CERTAINLY SUPPORT SECTION
THREE OF THE BILL THAT CREATES
THAT FRAMEWORK. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? NO, SIR. THERE MAY BE
SOME THAT COME FORWARD, BUT SEEN
NO OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT,
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. JUST
RIGHT HERE. LET'S STAY HERE.
STAY HERE. THEY'RE GOING TO SIT
OVER THERE. YEAH THEY'LL SIT
RIGHT HERE. THANK YOU, MR
MUSICAL CHAIRS IS PART OF THE
GAME. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
GOOD MORNING. GO AHEAD. THANK
YOU. MY NAME IS, UH, LUBER TUKA.
I WORK FOR TOURO AT OUR SAN
FRANCISCO HEADQUARTERS IN
CALIFORNIA. WE'RE PROUD
CALIFORNIA COMPANY AND, UM,
WE'RE ASKING FOR OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL, I THINK EVERYBODY'S
ON THE SAME PAGE THAT THE INTENT
OF THE BILL IS, UM TO TALK ABOUT
A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. AND WE
ARE IN FULL SUPPORT OF A LEVEL
PLAYING FIELD. UM BUT THIS BILL
DOES NOT REFLECT THAT IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNDER THE
PERSONAL VEHICLE SHARING CODE.
WHICH WE'VE BEEN REGULATED UNDER
FOR OVER A DECADE. CAR SHARING
HAS TO CARRY THREE TIMES THE
AMOUNT OF INSURANCE HAS RENTAL
CAR COMPANIES. THREE X THE
AMOUNT OF INSURANCE NOTHING IN
THIS BILL SPEAKS TO THAT THAT
HAS A HIGH COST TO OUR HOSTS.
OUR HOSTS PAY ALL THEIR
REGISTRATION FEES WHEN THEY BUY
THEIR CARS, THEY ARE UNABLE TO
PASS THOSE FEES ON LIKE RENTAL
CAR COMPANIES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS
AND OUR HOST PAY TAX WHEN THEY
BUY THEIR CARS. THEY DO NOT
ELECT LIKE RENTAL CAR COMPANIES
TO AVOID THAT TAX, WHICH COST A
BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. NOW I'M
NOT SAYING THAT THEIR MODEL IS
WRONG. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WE
WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THESE
THINGS HOLISTICALLY BECAUSE OUR
CAR OWNERS CALIFORNIA CITIZENS
WHO SHARE THEIR CARS. THESE ARE
REAL PEOPLE. VERONICA'S HERE.
SHE'S A T S AGENT IN SACRAMENTO
. WE HAVE AN AIRPORT PERMITTED
SACRAMENTO AND FIVE OTHER
AIRPORTS. THAT UNIQUELY IDENTIFY
APPEARED APPEAR CAR SHARING AND
PERMIT US COMMENSURATE
COMMENSURATE WITH OUR IMPACT ON
THE FACILITY, OUR HOSTS OR YOUR
CONSTITUENTS THEIR TEACHERS.
THERE ARE PEOPLE ON SOCIAL
SECURITY. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO
ARE OUR STUDENTS? THESE ARE
PEOPLE THAT USED TO ROLL TO MAKE
MONEY FOR THEIR FAMILIES. AND
THIS BILL WOULD HARM THEM. WE
HAVE 19,000 HOSTS IN CALIFORNIA
AND 400,000 PEOPLE WHO SHARE
THEIR CARS. THIS BILL DOES NOT
HELP THEM FOR EVERYONE. CAR THAT
IS SHARED ON OUR PLATFORM THAT
IS 10 CARS THAT DO NOT NEED TO
BE OWNED IN YOUR COMMUNITY.
THERE IS A MOBILITY SUCCESS
STORY HERE. CALIFORNIA SUCCESS
STORY AND WE ASKED, OPPOSE THE
BILL. THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS.
GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU.
CHAIRMAN SHINE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
HAPPEN AND MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY TODAY. MY
NAME IS A DREAM RATS AND I
MANAGE GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIPS
THAT GET AROUND WHICH CONNECTS
CAR OWNERS WITH PEOPLE WHO NEED
SAFE, CONVENIENT AND AFFORDABLE
CARS TO LIVE AND WORK. GET
AROUND WORKS WITH MUNICIPALITIES
ACROSS THE US TO BUILD CAR SHARE
PROGRAMS TO FURTHER THEIR
SUSTAINABILITY GOALS AND TO
PROVIDE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY TO
COMMUNITIES. IN CALIFORNIA. SOME
OF OUR PARTNERSHIPS INCLUDE SAN
FRANCISCO, OAKLAND, BART AND L.
A METRO ARE PATENTED. TECHNOLOGY
ALLOWS USERS TO CONTACT LESLIE
BOOK THE CAR BY THE HOUR ON
DEMAND 24 7 WITHOUT STANDING IN
LINE OR MEETING ANYONE TO PICK
UP KEYS, THE VAST MAJORITY OF
YOU, OUR USERS IN CALIFORNIA 80%
ARE STATE RESIDENTS AND THE
MEDIAN LENGTH OF THE GET A ROUND
TRIP IN CALIFORNIA IS SEVEN
HOURS WHILE A RENTAL CAR
COMPANIES TYPICALLY REQUIRE ONE
DAY MINIMUM RENTAL. A B 8 93
INACCURATELY TREATS PEER TO PEER
CAR SHARING PROGRAMS. IT WAS AS
IF THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS
EACH OTHER AND THE SAME AS
RENTAL CAR COMPANIES. NONE OF
THE PEER TO PEER CAR SHARING
LAWS ENACTED AROUND THE COUNTRY,
INCLUDING CALIFORNIA'S 2010
INSURANCE LAW HAS TAKEN THIS
BLANKET APPROACH, CREATING CAR
SHARING WITH CAR RENTAL SECTION
. TWO OF THE BILL RESTRICTS THE
TYPES OF FEES THAT PROGRAMS CAN
CHARGE. GET AROUND, DISCLOSES A
LICENSE FEE CHARGED TO COVER THE
COST OF DRIVER RECORD PROCESSING
. THIS ENSURES THAT EVERY GET
AROUND GUEST HAS A VALID
DRIVER'S LICENSE. SECTION THREE
OF THE BILL MANDATES AT AIRPORTS
REQUIRE THAT ALL PEER TO PEER
PLATFORMS ABIDE BY THE SAME OR
REASONABLY SIMILAR STANDARDS OR
REGULATIONS AS CAR RENTAL
COMPANIES IF THEY SHARE VEHICLES
ON AIRPORT PROPERTY GET AROUND,
DOES NOT CURRENTLY OPERATE
AIRPORTS. BUT IF WE DID OUR
OPERATIONS AND USE OF AIRPORT
RESOURCES WOULD BE VERY
DIFFERENT FROM RENTAL CAR
COMPANIES, WHICH OWN THEIR CARS
REQUIRE RENTAL CAR COUNTER CAR,
RETURN AREA EMPLOYEE PARKING AND
A FUELING STATION SECTION FOUR
OF THE BILL WITHOUT A BURDENSOME
REQUIREMENT THAT PEER TO PEER
PLATFORMS OBTAIN AN ELECTRONIC
CERTIFICATION THAT THE VEHICLE
OWNER PAID. OR WAS EXEMPT FROM
SALES AND USE TAX THIS
INFORMATION THE STATE ALREADY
OBTAINED WITH EVERY VEHICLE
REGISTRATION AND COULD PREVENT
SHARING A CAR IN ANY SITUATION
WHERE THE OWNER THEMSELVES DID
NOT PAY THE TAX, SUCH AS IF A
CAR WAS PURCHASED OUT OF STATE
OR AS REQUIRED BY A FAMILY
MEMBER. FOR THESE REASONS
CURRENTLY DRAFTED, GET AROUND
OPPOSES 88 93. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION? NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY PLEASE. HAVE
BEEN ON BEHALF OF TECHNET
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED THE BILL.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE.
QUESTIONS ARE COMMENTS. MR
CHOLERA. THANK YOU, MR. THANK
YOU. MR. CHAIR I WANNA THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD
. I DO YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS IN
THE CITY COUNCIL CELLS, AND I
KNOW THAT I LOVE THE OTHER.
FOCUS ON THE CITY COUNCIL HAD TO
DEAL WITH AIRPORT ISSUES AND
THERE PRIVATE COMPLICATED. I WAS
HOPING ONCE I WAS IN THE
ASSEMBLY WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY
ABOUT THEM ANYMORE, BUT THEY
FOLLOW YOU. EVERYWHERE YOU GO.
UM I DO THINK THAT, UM YOU KNOW
, I KNOW THAT DIFFERENT AIRPORTS
DIFFERENTLY. SITUATED UH, NO IN
SAN JOSE, OR LOOK AT DIFFERENT
AIRPORTS. SOME HAVE SOME
ARRANGEMENTS WITH THESE THESE
TYPES OF COMPANIES AND SOME
DON'T AND I THINK SOME
UNIFORMITY IS NECESSARY. I DO
THINK THAT IF FACILITIES ARE
BEING USED, AND YOU KNOW, THERE
NEEDS TO BE SOME THAT NEEDS TO
BE ACCOUNTED FOR, UM, IF PUBLIC
FACILITIES AIRPORTS FACILITIES
ARE BEING USED BYE BYE, COS YOU
KNOW, I THINK I NEED TO BE
ACCOUNTED FOR AND SO I'LL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL JUST
ENCOURAGED THE AUTHOR TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION TO SEE IF THERE'S
WAYS TO ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF
THEIR CONCERNS. UM BECAUSE I DO
THINK THAT THERE IS AN ABILITY.
I THINK I THINK THERE'S A SPACE
FOR KIND OF ALL THESE DIFFERENT
TYPES OF MODELS TO OPERATE IN AN
AIRPORT ENVIRONMENT. UM AND
HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET TO SOME
UNIFORMITY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE
DIFFERENT RULES IN DIFFERENT
JURISDICTIONS AROUND THE STATE,
BUT RATHER HAVE SOME MANNER IN
WHICH THERE THERE'S OBLIGATIONS
PUT ON THESE COMPANIES. THAT
RECOGNIZED THEIR USE OF THE
PUBLIC FACILITIES, WHILE AT THE
SAME TIME RECOGNIZE THAT THERE
ARE SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE
RENTAL CAR COMPANIES AND THE WAY
THESE COMPANIES OPERATE. THANK
YOU MOVE THE BILL. MOTION FOR MR
COREN. WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND
FOR MISS REYES, MISS REYES. I
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING THIS. THE
UNIFORMITY I THINK IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT. DO KNOW THAT YOU
KNOW, ONTARIO IN MY AREA. UM,
THERE IS ALREADY AN AGREEMENT
EXISTING CONTRACT WITH TOURO. SO
MY QUESTION IF IT'S SOMETHING
THAT CAN BE ANSWERED NOW OR CAN
BE LOOKED AT IS WHAT HAPPENS TO
THOSE EXISTING CONTRACTS. THIS
BILL WILL NOT AFFECT THOSE
EXISTING CONTRACTS. THANK YOU.
MR ASTLEY. LET ME ASK ON THAT
BECAUSE IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME
READING IT. IT SAID THAT IF THE
AIRPORTS WERE TO HAVE CONTRACTS,
THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME TERMS
THEY HAVE WITH THE RENTAL CAR
COMPANIES. IS THAT NOT ACCURATE?
NO. BUT IT'S NOT ACCURATE. WE'VE
BEEN DISCUSSING THAT ISSUE WITH
THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE, AND THEY'VE
AGREED TO ENSURE THAT THAT
LANGUAGE IS CLEAR THAT EXISTING
CONTRACTS WITH CAR SHARE
COMPANIES WILL NOT BE AFFECTED
BY THIS BILL, AS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT SO
YOU'RE COMMITTED TO CHANGING
THAT PART OF THE LANGUAGE. YES
WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT CLARIFIED
SLIGHTLY. YES I THINK I
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
DO, AND I THINK I'M GENERALLY
SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING AN EQUAL
PLAYING FIELD. BUT THE DEVIL IS
ALWAYS IN THE DETAILS AND WHAT
IS EQUAL BECAUSE YOUR BUSINESS
MODELS ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT. UM
AND FOR EXAMPLE, YOU GUYS DON'T
PAY THE SALES TAX. IF YOU DON'T
PAY THE VEHICLE LICENSING FEE
THAT'S A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE.
YOU HAVE THEY DON'T HAVE TO
MAINTAIN ALL THIS. UH YOU KNOW,
PHYSICAL PRESENCE AT AN AIRPORT
AND PAY ALL THESE FEES. THAT'S A
DAMAGE ON THEIR END. SO THE
QUESTION IS JUST HOW DO WE HOW
DO WE GET TO THAT EVEN PLAYING
FIELD? UM I KIND OF FEEL LIKE
WE'RE BACK IN THE DAYS OF UBER
VS TAXIS AND EVENTUALLY WE
FIGURED IT OUT. SO MAYBE DOES IT
DESIGNATED PICKUP AREA AT THE
AIRPORTS FOR TOUR? OH, I DON'T
KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT I REALLY
WOULD LIKE THE TWO SIDES TO WORK
MORE TOGETHER. I UNDERSTAND,
TORO, YOU ARE COMMITTED TO
WORKING WITH THE AUTHOR AND
REACHING A COMPROMISE. IS THAT
CORRECT? OF COURSE, WE ARE
COMMITTED TO A COMPROMISE. UM
MADAME AUTHOR, AND, UM, WE HAVE
COMPROMISED IN 20 OTHER STATES,
SO THE LANGUAGE EXISTS, AND I
THINK IN YOUR TESTIMONY YOU
MENTIONED THE OTHER STATES. WE
WOULD LOVE THAT. YEAH, I THINK
THAT WAS MAYBE A QUESTION FOR ME
. WHAT YOU HEARD FROM THE
COUNCIL OF AIRPORTS. IS THAT
CAROL HAS NOT REACHED AGREEMENTS
AT EVERY AIRPORT, AND THE
REALITY OF THE SITUATION IS THAT
PUBLIC AIRPORTS. PUBLICLY FUNDED
AIRPORTS WAS SHUTTLES WITH WITH
LIGHT RAILS WITH PARKING LOTS
ARE REALLY THE GOOSE THAT LAYS
THE GOLDEN EGG FOR FOLKS THAT
WANT TO HAVE CUSTOMERS THAT RENT
CARS. AND SO HOW IS IT THAT WE
MAKE EVERYBODY THERE BE PARODY
OF SOME FORM WITH THOSE
TRANSACTIONS ONLY WORK WITH THEM
ON THAT BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE
ARE SOME DETAILS LIKE THEY
SHOULDN'T. BUT THERE MUST BE. I
THINK THE DIFFERENCES ARE IF I
MAY, THERE MUST BE AN AGREEMENT
AND WHAT WE HAVE IS AIRPORTS
WHERE THEY USED TO HAVE
AGREEMENTS AND THEY'RE USING
THESE PUBLIC FACILITIES. SO
THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE LAW IS
TRYING TO GET AT IS THAT WE
MANDATE AGREEMENTS, EACH AIRPORT
IS FREE TO DO AS IT SO DESIRES,
INCLUDING AS ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
RAISE, SUGGESTED. ONTARIO
ALREADY HAS AN AN AGREEMENT AND
THIS BILL WILL NOT INTERFERE
WITH THE AIRPORTS HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO MAKE THOSE THAT'S
CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT, BUT
THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME
FLEXIBILITY AND IN THE FORM OF
THOSE AGREEMENTS, OKAY, I JUST I
IT'S THIS IS A IT'S AS A
CONSEQUENCE OF EVOLVING
TECHNOLOGY. I THINK WE'VE SEEN
IN OTHER INDUSTRIES. I THINK YOU
GUYS WILL EVENTUALLY GET THERE
AND I RESPECT THE. THE
COMPARISON WITH UBER AND LIFT IN
TAXIS AND REALLY, SHOULD WE HAVE
FAVORED ONE INDUSTRY OVER
ANOTHER OR ONE, YOU KNOW COMPANY
OVER ANOTHER NOTE, SO THAT
THAT'S WHAT THE BILL IS REALLY
AFTER IS TO HAVE PARITY.
LIKEWISE WITH AIRBNB IN HOTELS
AND PAYING TO YOUR T TAXES ON
SHORT TERM RENTALS, IT'S THE
SAME THING AND YOU'RE RIGHT. WE
WILL GET THERE. BUT THIS IS YOU
KNOW, THESE ARE DISRUPTORS. I
APPRECIATE IT. I APPRECIATE YOU
GUYS WILLING TO KEEP WORKING
TOGETHER. THAT'S I KNOW.
PROBABLY BE ANOTHER MEMBERS
WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU. HOPEFULLY
A COMPROMISE, SO THANK YOU. MR
CHEKOV, SPEAK K¾T. I'VE LOST MY
VOICE, BUT I'M GONNA TRY TO
SPEAK. UH I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
SEE A COMPROMISE, BUT I'M
CURIOUS TO HEAR IF YOU'RE AWARE
OF BECAUSE I HEAR FROM MY
COLLEAGUE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RAISE
THAT THERE'S SOME AIRPORTS THAT
DO HAVE AGREEMENTS. SO IS THAT
IN IN THE MINORITY? DO WE KNOW
HOW MANY AH, AND MAYBE WE DON'T
. BUT DO WE KNOW HOW MANY
AIRPORTS THAT HAVE THAT DO HAVE
AGREEMENTS? I BELIEVE THERE ARE
FIVE THAT HAVE AGREEMENTS WITH
TOURO. AND THERE'S ABOUT ANOTHER
SIX OR SO THAT ARE IN THE WORKS
CURRENTLY. BUT THEY HAVE BEEN
SEIZED INTO CYST ORDERS THAT
HAVE BEEN DISREGARDED BY TOURO.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE GENESIS OF
KIND OF HOW THIS LAW CAME ABOUT
THIS BILL CAME ABOUT HOPEFULLY A
LOT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. I UNDERSTAND THERE
WERE A COUPLE OF ME TOOS THAT
WERE JUST OUTSIDE THE DOOR, SO I
WILL ALLOW, YOU KNOW BRIEFLY
JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
ALLOWING THE PUBLIC WILL ALLOW
THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE. SO IF
THE ME TOO COULD JUST STAND UP,
COME TO THE MICROPHONE, YOU
KNOW, RATHER QUICKLY. UH, JUST A
FEW ONE OR TWO DIDN'T REALIZE
THIS WAS HALF THE AUDIENCE. BUT
MY NAME IS SMITH ERICKSON. I
LIVE IN SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA AND I OPPOSE A B 893.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS MICHAEL WILKINS, RESIDENT OF
WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA AND I
OPPOSE A B 893. THANK YOU. HI MY
NAME IS CALEB OR SUSAN. I LIVE
IN LINCOLN, CALIFORNIA AND I
OPPOSE ÁP A 93. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS MICHAEL
LEVIN. I LIVE IN SAN FRANCISCO.
AND I OPPOSE A B 893. THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS VERONICA TRIO AND I
OPPOSE A B 893. HI I'M MEMBER
STATES TRUJILLO AND I LIVE IN
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA AND I
OPPOSE A B 893. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS KIM'S MALIK AND I'M
RESIDENT OF SAN FRANCISCO, AND I
OPPOSE A B A 93. THANK YOU, UH,
SEEN NO FOR FURTHER WITNESSES IN
EITHER SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND. AND SEE THE
AUTHOR JUST TO CLEAR UP,
CLARIFY. YOU MAY HAVE SAID IT.
DO YOU ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? YES. OKAY
YES. WITH THAT, UH, YOU MAY
CLOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I JUST
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE
THE BUILDERS. FOUR THINGS
MANDATES. DISCLOSURE OF FEES
MANDATES THAT THAT CARS THAT ARE
RENTED AT A AIRPORT PLAY A
TOURISM FEE. THEY PAY AIRPORT
FEES AS AS SO NEGOTIATED AND
THAT, UM, YOU REPORT WHETHER OR
NOT YOU DID PAY THE SALES TAX
WHEN YOU PURCHASE THE CAR. THANK
YOU, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND S CLERK. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. AND THE MOTION IS, UH DO
YOU PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE
MAIENSCHEIN SALLY CONNELLY.
CONNOLLY. I DIXON. HANEY CHOLERA
, CHOLERA I PACHECO CHECKOUT. I
HAPPEN. I HAPPEN. I RAISE MY
REVERSE. SANCHEZ, JOSE. YOUR
BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. NEXT STEP, MR
GABRIEL.
GOT IT, OKAY. I KNOW. MR GABRIEL
PRESENT A B 36. THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR MEMBERS WAS TOLD I WAS
SUPPOSED TO SPEAK VERY, VERY
CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE. SOMEONE
ENDEAVOR TO DO THAT, UM, PLEASED
TODAY TO PRESENT A B 36 WILL
ADDRESS THE OFTEN DEADLY
INTERSECTION OF GUN VIOLENCE AND
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. IN PARTICULAR
. THIS BILL WILL PROHIBIT THE
PURCHASE AND POSSESSION OF
FIREARMS BY INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
PROTECTION ORDERS FOR THREE
YEARS AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF
THAT ORDER. WE KNOW THAT GUNS
TOO OFTEN TURNED DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE INTO DOMESTIC HOMICIDE
STUDIES SHOW THAT WHEN AN
ABUSIVE PARTNER HAS ACCESS TO A
GUN, A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIM
IS FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE
KILLED. UNDER EXISTING
CALIFORNIA LAW, DOMESTIC ABUSERS
ARE ABLE TO ACCESS DEADLY
FIREARMS AS SOON AS THE
PROTECTIVE ORDER EXPIRES OR
LAPSES. THIS BILL WOULD CHANGE
THAT, SO THAT THERE WOULD BE A
THREE YEAR CONTINUING
PROHIBITION ON THE PURCHASE OR
POSSESSION OF FIREARMS, AND
EXPERTS HAVE WARNED THAT
SURVIVORS ARE AT A SIGNIFICANTLY
ELEVATED RISK. WHEN VIOLENT AND
ABUSIVE PARTNERS WE GAIN
IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO FIREARMS.
THIS IS A COMMON SENSE MEASURE
TO KEEP FIREARMS OUT OF THE
HANDS OF ABUSIVE PARTNERS AND
REDUCE INCIDENTS OF GUN VIOLENCE
AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN OUR
STATE. WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY
AS AARON IMOLA ON BEHALF OF OUR
SPONSORED GIFFORDS WITH THAT I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST IN I
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS ERIN NIRMALA,
REPRESENTING GIFFORDS, THE
SPONSOR OF HB 36 WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR INTRODUCING THE
BILL AND FOR HIS COMMITMENT TO
THE ISSUE. MAYBE 36 RESTS UPON
THE PREMISE THAT THE RIGHT TO BE
SAFE AND FREE FROM VIOLENCE AND
ARMED INTIMIDATION IS ESSENTIAL
TO THE FREE EXERCISE OF OTHER
RIGHTS UNDER CURRENT CALIFORNIA
LAW, FIREARM ACCESS RESTRICTIONS
EXPIRE, AS THE AUTHOR SAID, AS
SOON AS THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR
OTHER COURT PROTECTIVE ORDER
EXPIRES OR LAPSES. AFTER THE
PROTECTION ORDERS EXPIRE,
SURVIVORS ARE AT A SIGNIFICANTLY
ELEVATED RISK WHEN VIOLENT AND
ABUSIVE RESPONSES, RESPONDENTS
REGAIN IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO
FIREARMS. UM UNDER CURRENT LAW,
THE ONUS IS EFFECTIVELY ON THE
SURVIVOR OF VIOLENCE TO INITIATE
UM, THE COURT PROCEEDINGS THAT
WOULD RESULT IN RENEWING A
PROTECTIVE ORDER. IN ADDITION TO
THIS, POSING A BURDEN, SOME
MIGHT CREDIBLY FEAR THAT THIS
PROCESS WOULD RESULT IN THEIR
ADDRESS IS BECOMING PUBLIC OR
OTHERWISE REVEALING THEIR
WHEREABOUTS TO THE RESPONDENT.
THAT'S WHY JURISDICTIONS LIKE
WASHINGTON, D C HAVE OPTED TO
PROHIBIT INDIVIDUALS SUBJECT TO
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROTECTION
ORDERS FROM ACCESSING FIREARMS
FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST FIVE
YEARS. AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF
THAT ORDER, SO THIS BILL WOULD
ENSURE THAT QUARTERS EXPIRES IN
A MORE SAFE AND STAGGERED MANNER
AND THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
SUBJECTED TO THOSE ORDERS DON'T
IMMEDIATELY REGAINED FIREARM
ACCESS UPON THE EXPIRATION OF
THE ORDER. FOR THAT REASON, WE
ASK YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE BILL.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEING NON WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SAYING NONE.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MISS PEPE. I JUST
LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL, AND, UM I
WOULD LOVE TO JOIN AS A CO
AUTHOR OF POSSIBLE OKAY, UH, WE
HAVE THE MOST. YEAH SO EMOTION
FROM MISS POP IN A SECOND FROM
MR KALRA, MISS PACHECO. I WOULD
ALSO LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A CO
AUTHOR. WITH GREAT PLEASURE.
IT'S LOOKING GOOD FOR YOUR BILL
. UH MR GABRIEL. THANK YOU,
OKAY. I'M FILLING UP MORE
OPTIMISTIC YOU'RE HERE. NO THANK
YOU, MR GABRIEL. FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL IS IMPORTANT BILL AS
YOU SAID, IT'S COMMON SENSE
MEASURE, BUT IT GETS THAT
PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE IN
NEED OF THAT. AND SO I THANK YOU
FOR NOT JUST THIS, BUT BUT YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE DURING
YOUR TIME IN THE ASSEMBLY. UH SO
WITH THAT YOU MAKE CLOTHES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE
ALL THE SUPPORT WOULD BE HONORED
TO ADD YOU ALL HIS CO AUTHORS
AND AS AS YOU NOTED, MR CHAIR,
AND I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN A LEADER
IN THIS ISSUE AS WELL. UM
THERE'S CERTAIN AREAS WHERE GUN
VIOLENCE MANIFEST ITSELF IN
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS CERTAINLY
ONE OF THOSE. AND SO THIS IS,
YOU KNOW, I THINK AN IMPORTANT
AREA FOR US TO PUSH FORWARD AND
PROTECT SOME PARTICULARLY
VENERABLE FOLKS. AND WITH THAT
WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND. ASK THE
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
OH AND THE MOTION IS DUE PAST
PUBLIC SAFETY. MAINTAIN
MAIENSCHEIN. I REALLY CONNELLY,
DIXON HANEY CHOLERA. PACHECO
PACHECO, I, PAPIN RAISE RAISE I
RIVAS. SANCHEZ. YOUR BILL IS
OUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
GABRIEL. MR HOLDEN. OKAY. THAT
EASY. THANK YOU. UH B 3 23. MR
HOLDEN. WELCOME THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE. IT'S A
PLEASURE TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT
TO YOU. ASSEMBLY BUILT 3 23. I'D
ALSO LIKE TO EXTEND MY
APPRECIATION TO THE COMMITTEE
STAFF ARE WORKING WITH US ON
AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL. WORKING
WITH DEVELOPERS TO ADDRESS THEIR
CONCERNS. WE HAVE AMENDED THE
BILL TO INCLUDE A 90 DAY WINDOW
FOR QUALIFIED BUYERS TO SUBMIT
APPLICATIONS TO DEVELOPERS TO
PURCHASE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED HOMES
BEGINNING FROM THE DATE OF THE
FINAL INSPECTION. SO MANY HOMES
IN CALIFORNIA ARE PROHIBITIVELY
EXPENSIVE FOR LOWEST INCOME
FAMILIES AND RESIDENTS. IN AN
EFFORT TO PROMOTE HOMEOWNERSHIP
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME CALIFORNIANS.
THE STATE HAS ESTABLISHED
PATHWAYS THROUGH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING POLICIES LIKE DENSITY
BONUSES AND INCLUSIONARY ZONING
PROGRAMS. HOWEVER THESE PATHWAYS
CAN BE REDIRECTED AWAY FROM
RESIDENTS THEY WERE INTENDED TO
ASSIST TO INSTEAD BENEFIT
PRIVATE INVESTORS. CURRENTLY
DEVELOPERS MAY PETITION THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO CHANGE A
UNIT DESIGNATION FROM OWNER
OCCUPANCY TO RENTAL OCCUPANCY.
EVEN QUALIFIED RESIDENTS HAVE
APPLIED TO BUY THE HOME. THE
PRACTICAL EFFECT BEING THAT
STATES AFFORDABLE HOUSING
POLICIES END UP SUBSIDIZING
INVESTORS INSTEAD OF PROVIDING
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES FOR
THOSE WHO WOULD OTHERWISE BE
UNABLE TO AFFORD IT. THIS EXACT
SCENARIO HAPPENED IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA IN 2022 HOMES AND
ENCINITAS BUILD USING DENSITY
BONUS PROGRAMS WERE REDESIGNATED
BY THE CITY FROM OWNER OCCUPANCY
TO RENTAL OCCUPANCY AT THE
REQUEST OF THE DEVELOPER. THE
DEVELOPER THEN SOLD THE HOMES TO
A PRIVATE INVESTOR, EVEN THOUGH
OVER 80 VERY LOW INCOME FAMILIES
HAD APPLIED TO BUY THE HOMES.
AFTER LEARNING THAT THEY WERE
PASSED OVER FOR AN INVESTOR.
THESE FAMILIES WERE JUST
DEVASTATED BECAUSE HOME FOR THEM
IS SECURITY, AND IT IS A NEST
EGG FOR THE FUTURE AND AN
OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD
GENERATIONAL WEALTH. SO PLEASE
JOIN ME IN PROTECTING THESE
HOMEOWNERSHIP PATHWAYS INSTEAD
OF PRESERVING A BACKDOOR FOR
INVESTORS TO INCREASE THEIR
PROFITS. HERE WITH ME TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT IS JENNIFER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS. BYE. MR CHAIR MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE JENNIFER SPEC.
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS.
EXTREMELY PROUD SPONSORS OF THIS
BILL, AND WE'D LIKE TO THANK THE
MEMBER FOR HIS LEADERSHIP IN
THIS SPACE. WE'D ALSO LIKE TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF AND
THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR EFFORTS
TO HELP US RESOLVE THE CONCERNS
OF THOSE THAT THAT HAD CONCERNS
WITH THE BILL PREVIOUSLY, THANK
YOU. AND TO BE CLEAR, MR ALLEN,
YOU ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS. YES
THANK YOU. WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
SAYING NONE WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SEEING NONE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. DO WE HAVE EMOTION?
MOTION FOR MR KALRA 2ND 2ND 2ND
FROM HIS PAPA. UH MR HOLDEN, YOU
MAKE CLOTHES. RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR I VOTE. THANK YOU. UH THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED TO
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE AS
A CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
MAIENSCHEIN. CONNELLY. CONNOLLY
I DIXON HANEY, CHOLERA. KALRA I
PACHECO, CHECK OUT I HAPPEN,
REYES. RIVAS. SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ?
AYE. YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR FONG. A B 4
32. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS ASSEMBLY BILL 432 WILL
CREATE THE CALIFORNIA COURT.
INTERPRETER WORKFORCE PILOT
PROGRAM TO EXPAND THE POOL OF
COURT INTERPRETERS IN OUR STATE.
WE KNOW THAT EQUAL ACCESS IS
CRITICAL TO ENSURING TRUST IN
OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. INTERACTING
WITH COURTS CAN BE DIFFICULT OR
EVEN POSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
DEAF OR HARD OF HEARING. OR
PEOPLE WHO PRIMARILY SPEAK A
LANGUAGE OTHER THAN ENGLISH, AND
IN ORDER TO ENSURE EQUAL ACCESS
ACCORD, INTERPRETERS MUST BE
AVAILABLE TO SERVE THOSE WHO
NEED THEM. THE DEMAND FOR
INTERPRETERS IS SIGNIFICANT. AND
WE KNOW THAT STAKEHOLDERS AGREE
THAT WE NEED TO EXPAND THE POOL
OF QUALIFIED INTERPRETERS. MAYBE
432 WILL CREATE A TRAINING PLAN
FOR APPLICANTS COVER THE COST OF
CERTIFICATION AND PROVIDE A
GUARANTEE OF EMPLOYMENT. THIS
WILL BRING OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM
CLOSER TO EQUAL ACCESS BY
ENSURING THAT MORE COURT
INTERPRETERS ARE AVAILABLE FOR
THOSE WHO NEED THEM JOINING US
TO TESTIFY AS AGNOSIA HERNANDEZ
, REPRESENTING CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF INTERPRETERS, AND
JENNY HOUDEK, THE VICE PRESIDENT
OF THE CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
INTERPRETERS, SPOKE A REQUEST
AND I VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU.
MY NAME IS JANET HEURICH. I AM
THE VICE PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF INTERPRETERS. I'M
ALSO A SPANISH INTERPRETER
WORKING FOR THE STATE COURTS FOR
THE COUNTY OF MADEIRA AND I'VE
BEEN IN MY PROFESSION FOR ABOUT
18 YEARS. IMPORTANT INTERPRETERS
ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE STATE
COURTS. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT
ENABLE ACCESS TO JUSTICE, AND IT
ALSO IS A FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS.
LAW. THE NEED FOR INTERPRETERS
HAS BEEN GROWING, AND IT HAS
BEEN GROWING FOR OVER QUITE SOME
TIME. AND THE NEED, UH, THE NEED
TO INCREASE INTERPRETERS ALSO
HAS BEEN GROWING, AND WE NEED TO
ACTUALLY MEET THAT NEED. IT IS A
PROFESSION. MANY INTERPRETERS
HAVE BECAME EMPLOYEES WHEN THE
INTERPRETER ACT PASSED IN 2003,
AND THEY ARE NEARING RETIREMENT
. MANY ARE INTERESTED. MANY
INDIVIDUALS ARE INTERESTED IN
BECOMING INTERPRETERS, BUT THEY
DON'T KNOW HOW TO GO ABOUT IT OR
WHAT TO DO. OR HOW TO EVEN JOIN
THE PROFESSION. THERE IS NO
INTERPRETING SCHOOLS. THERE'S A
FEW UNIVERSITIES THAT PROVIDE
SOME COURSES LIKE THE SAN
FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY U. C.
L A IN THE MONTERREY MILBURY
LANGUAGE INSTITUTE. BUT MANY
PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW TO GO
ABOUT THAT AND BECOME
INTERPRETERS. UM THEY ALSO DON'T
KNOW THAT THERE ARE JOBS
AVAILABLE AND THERE'S QUITE A
BIT OF JOBS AVAILABLE. THE STATE
COURTS HAVE A GROWING DEMAND
WITH INTERPRETERS, AND THIS BILL
WILL HELP ME THAT GROWING
DEMAND. THANK YOU. GREAT THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS, IGNACIO
HERNANDEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FEDERATION FOR
INTERPRETERS. LET ME JUST ADD
THAT TWO YEARS AGO, THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR, UM
ALLOCATED $30 MILLION IN THE
STATE BUDGET ONE TIME TO HELP
COURTS HIRE INTERPRETERS. UM FOR
THROUGHOUT THE STATE, BOTH IN
COURTROOMS AND FOUR COURTHOUSES
OF PUBLIC COUNTERS. UM, ONLY A
SMALL FRACTION OF THAT MONEY HAS
BEEN SPENT IN PART BECAUSE A LOT
OF INDIVIDUALS DO NOT KNOW HOW
TO GET INVOLVED IN THE
PROFESSION AND HOW TO NAVIGATE.
THE PROCESS WITH THIS BILL WILL
DO WILL CREATE A PIPELINE
IMPORTANT PIPELINES TO ENSURE
THAT WE HAVE INTERPRETERS COMING
IN, AS YOU HEARD AS A RETIREMENT
COULD BE COMING IN THE NEXT FEW
YEARS. THAT WE DON'T, UH, FALL
INTO A GAP WHERE WE DON'T HAVE
INTERPRETERS AVAILABLE FOR
INDIVIDUALS IN OUR COURTHOUSES.
SO THIS IS A CRITICAL BILL. WE
THINK IT COMPLEMENTS THE WORK
THAT THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
GOVERNOR HAS ALREADY DONE IN
ALLOCATING THE MONEY AND IS
CONSISTENT, UM, WITH WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UM HAS
BEEN ARGUING THE FEDERAL LEVEL,
INCLUDING JUST RECENTLY ENTERED
INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA, REQUIRING
THAT INTERPRETERS BE PROVIDED IN
EVERY SINGLE CASE, CIVIL AND
CRIMINAL AT NO COST TO THE
INDIVIDUALS, SO WE NEED TO MEET
THAT MANDATE, AND THIS WILL HELP
WITH THAT ASKED FOR SUPPORT
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS CARMEN RAMOS. I HAVE BEEN A
COURT INTERPRETER FOR THE SAN
WHAT KING SUPERIOR COURT AND FOR
ABOUT SIX YEARS, AND I HAVE BEEN
A COURT INTERPRETER IN
CALIFORNIA FOR APPROXIMATELY 33
YEARS. AND I SUPPORT THIS BILL.
UM 100% I LOVE MY PROFESSION AND
I WANT TO SEE IT SURVIVE. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. SEEN ON WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SEEING NONE. MR
CHOLERA. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO SOMEONE
THAT WORKED FOR 11 YEARS AS A
PUBLIC DEFENDER CAN DEFINITELY
ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT
INTERPRETERS ARE INDISPENSABLE
AND VALUABLE. UM AND ACCESS TO
INTERPRETERS IS AN ACCESS TO
JUSTICE ISSUE WITHOUT
INTERPRETERS ARE DENYING ACCESS
TO JUSTICE. TO A LARGE PORTIONS
OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND SO I
REALLY APPRECIATE FOR THIS BILL.
HOPEFULLY IT WILL HELP REALLY
HELP IN CREATING THAT PATH THAT
FOUNDATION FOR ENSURING THAT
WE'RE TAKING ALL THE STEPS
NECESSARY, GOING FORWARD TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE, UM,
INTERPRETERS FOR MANY YEARS TO
COME IN BOTH CRIMINAL AND CIVIL
COURTS LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR
MR KALRA. ARE YOU SECONDED? MR.
GO AHEAD AND WE HAVE A SECOND
FROM PACHECO PACHECO. GO AHEAD,
AND, UH, I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD. COURT INTERPRETERS ARE
VERY IMPORTANT. AND MY COLLEAGUE
MENTIONED IN CRIMINAL CASES BUT
FULLY IN CIVIL CASES, UH HAVING
COURT INTERPRETERS IS VITAL,
VITAL SO THAT INDIVIDUALS CAN
UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON IN
THE COURT. BUT SO THAT WAY THEY
CAN EXPRESS THEMSELVES
ACCURATELY IN THE COURTROOM, SO
I ALSO WANT TO BE ADDED AS A CO
AUTHOR ON THIS, BILL. ABSOLUTELY
THANK YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, RIGHT? YES TO BIRTH.
THANK YOU, UH, DOING THAT. WE DO
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? SEEN NONE. MR
FANG, YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. MR CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. I SPOKE A REQUESTER I,
BUT THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASSED, THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ASKED.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DIXON
HANEY. CHOLERA CHOLERA I CHICO
CHICO, I HAPPEN. I REST RIVAS.
SANCHEZ. YOU NEED ONE MORE. YOUR
BILL IS ON CALL. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. MR. FRANK. MR JACKSON. AS
MR JACKSON APPROACHES, WE HAVE A
MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
MOTION FROM MR CARLOS SECOND
FROM HIS PAPIN. UH, ASK CONSENT
AGENDA INCLUDES, UH MAYBE ITEM
16 84 69 FONG. ITEM 17 A B 8 67
FRIEDMAN A B 8 76 ROBERT RIVAS
MAYBE 10 29 PELLERIN A B 11 47
AT US A B 17 54 17 57 AND 17 58
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BILLS. ASK
THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN AYE, HALEY CONNELLY
. CONNELLY. I DIXON MANY KALRA.
CHOLERA I CHICO CHICO EYE
POPPING UP AND I RAISE RIVAS.
SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ? AYE. CONSENT
AGENDA IS OUT, MR JACKSON.
WELCOME YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. MR CHAIR.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE PRESENT A
B 10 79, WHICH WOULD CREATE A
HATE CRIMES INTERVENTION UNIT
WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC HEALTH. AND
ESTABLISHED THE CALIFORNIA AD
COUNCIL WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA
CIVIL RIGHTS DEPARTMENT. ANTI
BLACK HATE CRIMES CONTINUES TO
BE AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE
HIGHEST OF ALL HATE CRIMES EVERY
SINGLE YEAR SINCE 1991. WE ARE
SEEING, UM ANTI ASIAN HATE
SKYROCKET BY 177.5. WE ARE
SEEING. A RISE OF ANTI SEMITIC.
UM, HATE. NEARLY 50. THE IDEA IS
THIS. IS THAT CALIFORNIA IS
FACING. UM AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO
FACE. ANTI RACISM, ANTI
XENOPHOBIA. ANTI HATE FOR THE
FORESEEABLE FUTURE. NOT ONLY
THAT IT WILL INCREASE AS WE HEAD
INTO THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION. AND CALIFORNIA MUST BE
EQUIPPED. TO BEGIN TO GO ON THE
OFFENSE INSTEAD OF ALWAYS BEING
ON THE DEFENSE WHEN IT COMES. TO
THIS POISON THAT IS IN OUR
COMMUNITY. WE ARE TRANSFERRING.
MAJORITY OF THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF HATE CRIMES TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
WHY BECAUSE PUBLIC BECAUSE HATE
AND RACISM IS A PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS. WE ARE ALSO MAKING SURE
THAT WE, UH, THROUGH THE
CALIFORNIA AD COUNCIL THAT WE
BEGIN TO EDUCATE PEOPLE. ON ALL
MEDIUMS, WHETHER IT BE TV,
WHETHER IT BE SOCIAL MEDIA. AND
TO THE VARIOUS GROUPS TO ENSURE
THAT AS HATEFUL RHETORIC.
EXPANDS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
CALIFORNIA BEGINS TO, UM PUT OUT
. MORE ACCEPTING MORE LOVING AND
MORE EMPATHETIC MESSAGES WHEN IT
COMES TO OUR VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES. I HAVE SPENT. MY
DOCTORAL STARTED STUDIES. I HAVE
SPENT THE LAST THREE YEARS
REALLY STUDYING THIS SUBJECT
MATTER. AND I CANNOT. EXPLAIN TO
YOU HOW SERIOUS HOW SERIOUS THIS
ISSUE IS. AND HOW DANGEROUS OF A
TIME WE CURRENTLY ARE IN AND
UNFORTUNATELY IT'S GOING TO GET
MORE DANGEROUS. AS WE GET INTO
2024. SO WE MUST BEGIN TO MAKE
SURE THAT CALIFORNIA TRULY
BECOMES AN ANTI RACIST STATE. BY
EMBEDDING THESE THINGS INTO THE
VERY SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES OF
OUR STATE. SO THAT FOR FUTURE
GENERATIONS TO COME WE WILL
ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT OUR
SOCIETY AND OUR MOST VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS ARE PROTECTED. UM
FOUR TIMES TO COME. WE MUST HOLD
THE GROWING TIDE OF BIGOTRY,
HATE AND DOGMATIC IDEOLOGY.
CALIFORNIA MUST GO ON THE
OFFENSE. AND A B 10 79 BEGINS TO
MOVE US IN THAT DIRECTION TO
TRULY BEING AN ANTI RACIST
STATE. SO I RESPECT RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR MY VOTE. THANK YOU, MR
JACKSON, WITNESSES AND SUPPORT.
SAYING NONE WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
GREAT TO HEAR WITH THE ARK AND
UNITS. REAL POLICY CALIFORNIA
COLLABORATION. WE VERY MUCH
SUPPORT THE INTENT OF THE BILL
AND THINK THAT'S A JACKSON FIRST
LEADERSHIP. WE HAVE AMENDMENTS
WERE DISCUSSING WITH THE AUTHOR
AND HOPED AVAILABLE FORWARD
TODAY SO WE CAN CONTINUE THE
DISCUSSIONS. THANK YOU. ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SEEING NONE. YOU HAD ME AN
EMPATHY. HMM. WE HAVE A MOTION
FROM HIS PAPIN. WE HAVE A 2ND
2ND FROM MR CONNELLY. MR
JACKSON, YOU MAKE CLOTHES. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, AND I JUST
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THE MOTION IS DUE PAST TWO
APPROPRIATIONS AS THE CLERK TO
CALL THE ROLL MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON HANEY CHOLERA
CALL HER I PACHECO CHECKOUT, EYE
POPPING IT HAPPENED. I RAISE
RIVAS. SANCHEZ. YOUR BILL NEEDS
ONE MORE. IT'S ON CALL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MR BENNETT. A B
5 60. WELCOME. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I
WANT TO BEGIN BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS AND WANT
TO THANK THE CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR WORK
ON THIS BILL. UM I KNOW SOME
BILLS REQUIRE MORE MORE
ATTENTION TO DETAIL AND ARE MORE
COMPLICATED, AND THIS HAPPENS TO
BE ONE OF THOSE 85 60 IS VERY
SIMPLE IN CONCEPT. IT ASKED THE
WATER BOARDS AND DWR TO REVIEW
AND COMMENT ON THE WATER
ADJUDICATION DECISION FOR
CONSISTENCY WITH THE SIGMA LAW
BEFORE THEY'RE MADE FINAL SIGMA
AND THE LOCAL GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLANS. HAVE TAKEN
INCREDIBLE AMOUNTS OF
NEGOTIATIONS AND COLLABORATION
TO CREATE. UM I SERVED ON A
GROUNDWATER AGENCY AND VENTURA
COUNTY THAT WAS CREATED WAY
BEFORE SIGMA AND, UM, THEN
SERVED ON IT WHILE IT WAS TRYING
TO CREATE THESE, AND THESE ARE
THINGS THAT LOTS OF NEGOTIATIONS
AND TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF ALL
THE STAKEHOLDERS, ETCETERA. UM
TAKES YEARS TO DO THAT LOTS OF
RESEARCH. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
ETCETERA HAS GONE INTO THAT. UM
AND, UH, COMING UP WITH THE
SUSTAINABLE YIELD NUMBER IS A
HUGE DECISION AND A COMPLICATED
ONE AND AGAIN WITH LOTS OF LOCAL
INPUT AS YOU TRY TO ARRIVE AT
THAT JUDGES, WHO THEN APPROVE A
HIGHER WATER ALLOCATION THAN THE
SCIENCE AND THE GSA DETERMINES
ITS SUSTAINABLE WILL NOT ONLY
UNDO ALL THAT HARD WORK, BUT I
THINK COULD UNDERMINE SIGMA
COMPLETELY, BECAUSE IF THE
MESSAGE GOES OUT THAT YOU DON'T
HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL OF
THAT. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS FORM
ADJUDICATE, CREATE A LAWSUIT AND
ADJUDICATE THE BASIN. HAVE YOU
SKIPPED THAT WHOLE LOCAL PROCESS
AT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAS
SET UP UM AND TRY TO WIN, AND
PARTICULARLY THE MOST POWERFUL
TRY TO WIN WITH GREAT ATTORNEYS
TO BE CLEAR. THIS BILL DOES NOT
GIVE THE DEPARTMENT'S POWER TO
OVERRULE THE JUDGE'S DECISIONS.
IT'S SIMPLY CREATES AN
APPROPRIATE REVIEW OF A
COMPLICATED GROUNDWATER
SITUATION THAT WE HAVE, AND I
WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT BECAUSE I
KNOW THAT'S REALLY ONE OF THE
QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW. WHY SHOULD
WE BE DOING THIS AT ALL? THIS IS
NOT LIKE LOTS OF OTHER
SITUATIONS IN CALIFORNIA. THIS
IS A NEW ERA WHERE WE WENT FROM
VIRTUALLY UNREGULATED
GROUNDWATER PUMPING AND ALL OF
THE PROBLEMS THAT IT CREATED TO
FINALLY COMING UP WITH SOMETHING
IN 2014, AND IT HAS BEEN
DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT EVEN THAT
, AND SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE HUSBAND THAT THROUGH THE
PROCESS AS CAREFULLY AS POSSIBLE
TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS NEW
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT THAT
WE'VE TRIED TO CREATE DOESN'T
GET UNDERMINED RIGHT OFF THE BAT
WITH THE VERY FIRST
ADJUDICATIONS AND THOSE
ADJUDICATIONS ARE GOING FORWARD
. UM THE REVIEW IS SENSITIVE TO
THE THIS REVIEW IS SENSITIVE TO
THE HARDWORKING LOCAL
GROUNDWATER AGENCIES. THAT ARE
TRYING TO DO THIS VERY DIFFICULT
THING, AND I HAVE ACCEPTED AN
AMENDMENT FROM THE COMMITTEE TO
REINFORCE THE POINT THAT WE DO
NOT INTEND FOR THE DEPARTMENT
INPUT INPUT TO CONSTITUTE OF
VETO OF WHAT THE JUDGE SAYS THE
JUDGE CAN STILL DO THIS, BUT I
THINK FOR ALMOST ALL OF US, IF
YOU LOOK AT A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT, AND YOU LOOKED AT THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
IT WOULD NOT BE EASY TO TELL
WHETHER THEY WERE CONSISTENT OR
NOT CONSISTENT. THIS IS SIMPLY
SHEDDING A LITTLE BIT MORE LIGHT
ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT
SITUATIONS. ADJUDICATIONS OFTEN
FOCUS ON BRINGING THE PARTIES
TOGETHER. THAT'S THE CULTURE OF
A WATER ADJUDICATIONS IN
CALIFORNIA. WHAT CAN WE GET? YOU
KNOW, AND IN FACT, IN THE WAY
THAT THE LAW IS WRITTEN, IF YOU
GET 75% OF THE PEOPLE ON BOARD
IN THE ADJUDICATION YOU CAN
IMPLEMENT THAT. THAT'S THE OLD
WAY IT WAS IN. YOU COULD
IMPLEMENT THAT AND PEOPLE HAD TO
OBJECT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION, SO
THE CULTURE OF WATER
ADJUDICATIONS IS SORT OF
AGREEMENT OF THE POWERFUL PEOPLE
AT THE TABLE, NOT NECESSARILY
REPRESENTATION FOR THOSE THAT
ARE NOT AT THE TABLE. AND SO
THAT IS WHY I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. AND HOPE THAT
THIS ACTION WILL ALSO HELP US
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING THE
APPROPRIATE STEPS TO PROTECT
THOSE THAT AREN'T POWERFUL
ENOUGH TO HAVE A SEAT AT THE
TABLE AND THOSE WILL BE THE
PEOPLE THAT WILL BE LEFT OUT IF
WE CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE
IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT'S
HAPPENED AT THE G S A. YOU JUST
ADJUDICATED. YOU GET JUDGES THAT
ARE EXPERIENCED IN THE OLD STYLE
AND DON'T NECESSARILY
APPROPRIATELY GET THIS REVIEW.
AT LEAST LET'S GIVE THEM THIS
REVIEW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, MR BENNETT. ANY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEING
NONE. WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
GOING, CHERRY. GOOD MORNING
CHERRY MEMBERS LILY MCKAY ON
BEHALF OF UNITED WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AND WE
HAVE BEEN PUT UP OPPOSED PRIOR
TO THE AMENDMENTS. WE THINK THAT
THE AUTHOR AND THE COMMITTEE FOR
THEIR WORK ON CLARIFICATION AND
WILL REVIEW AND NOTIFY IF THIS
CHANGES OUR POSITION MOVING
FORWARD, THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. UM BRENDA BASS WITH
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPOSED
POSITION ON THE BILL. BUT
PENDING THESE AMENDMENTS. WE
NEED TO GO BACK TO OUR
MEMBERSHIP AND SEE IF THEY'VE
RESOLVED ALL OF OUR CONCERNS.
BUT THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
TAYLOR RUSSIAN ON BEHALF OF
VARIOUS ADD COMMODITY GROUPS.
WESTERN PLANT HEALTH ASSOCIATION
UNITED AGON WESTERN GROWERS
ASSOCIATION WITH THE PUZZLE IS
AMENDED. THANKS. DENNIS ALBION
WITH CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA PEAR
GROWERS, CALIFORNIA GRANTED FEET
WE ALSO WILL BE REVIEWING THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
OPPOSES. AMENDED. THANK YOU. AND
GOOD MORNING, KYLE JONES WITH
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER AND ALSO
ON BEHALF OF LEADERSHIP COUNCIL
IN JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
AND CLEAN WATER ACTION. WE HAD
SUBMITTED A LETTER OF CONCERN
WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THE
AMENDMENTS AND NOW CONNECT WITH
STAFF. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
SEEN ON QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE, MS PAPIN I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FROM GOING FROM WHAT WAS
ADJUDICATED AT THE COURT TO WHAT
HAS BEEN SETTLED. AT THE COURT
FORUM, IF YOU WILL, AND UM,
BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S
REALLY BEEN NEGOTIATED BETWEEN
BOTH SIDES, SO I'M OPTIMISTIC
ABOUT THAT CHANGE AND THE ONE
THING THAT YOU MAY WANT TO
CONSIDER IS JUST SOME TIME FRAME
WITH WHEN WITHIN WHICH THE WATER
FOLKS HAVE TO REVIEW IT BECAUSE
PEOPLE'S LIVES SORT OF HANG IN
THE BALANCE, SO MAYBE A 90 DAY,
WHATEVER YOU THINK MIGHT BE
REASONABLE. COULD BE HELPFUL TO
THE BILL. BUT I WILL BE
SUPPORTING AND THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR YOUR HARD WORK. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE, MS
PACHECO? SO I ALSO WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR, ESPECIALLY WITH POOR
WORKING WITH US. WITH THE
OPPOSITION. AH BUT, UH AND I
KNOW THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX AREA
OF WATER IS A VERY COMPLEX, BUT
I DO KNOW THAT WHEN JUDGES MAKE
THEIR DECISIONS, THEY HAVE
EXPERTS WHO TESTIFY WOULD BE
EXPERTS IN THE WATER OF FIELD.
SO I'M CURIOUS TO HEAR WHY YOU
FEEL THERE'S A NEED TO CREATE
ANOTHER BODY TO REVIEW DID IT
DECISIONS. AND I KNOW YOU SAY
THEY'RE NOT VETOING IT. BUT I
WANT, UM, CURIOUS AS TO WHY
THERE IS A NEED. WELL WATER
WATER EXPERTS THAT ARE OUT THERE
OFTENTIMES TESTIFY IN
ADJUDICATIONS AND HAD OFFER A
COUPLE OF THINGS NUMBER ONE, IF
A DUDE OF IF A DUTIFUL EFFORT
JUDI CATIONS WERE THE WAY TO FOR
US TO GET TO SUSTAINABLE YIELD,
THEY WOULD HAVE WORKED IN THE
PAST, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SO
WE'VE WE'VE WE'VE USED
ADJUDICATIONS BEFORE WE HAD
SIGMA. AND WE WERE STILL DRAWING
OUR GROUNDWATER DOWN AND DOWN
AND DOWN THE WHOLE CULTURE OF
WATER EXPERTS THAT GIVE ADVICES
TO JUDGES. THOSE THOSE JUDGES
ARE HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST
PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON WHAT CAN WE
GET AGREEMENT ON? OH WE GOT
AGREEMENT, GREAT BECAUSE IT'S SO
MUCH CONFLICTING INFORMATION,
PARTICULARLY ABOUT GROUNDWATER.
SO HAVING A REVIEW COMING FROM
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT IS
MUCH MORE I WOULD OFFER FOCUSED
ON ON THE BENEFITS FOR THE
PUBLIC AT LARGE AND FROM THE
EXPERTS WHO ARE REVIEWING FROM
THE STANDPOINT OF IS THIS
CONSISTENT WITH THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY IS MUCH
MORE APPROPRIATE THAN JUST A
PRIVATE SCIENTISTS HIRED UM,
USUALLY BY ONE OF THE MORE
POWERFUL PEOPLE IN THERE BECAUSE
THEY BRING THEIR EXPERTS TO THE
TABLE, AND THOSE EXPERTS
GENERALLY ALWAYS AGREE WITH WHAT
THEIR THEIR POSITION IS IN TERMS
OF THE SCIENCE, SO I THINK THAT
THAT'S THE PROBABLY THE
STRONGEST ARGUMENT THAT I CAN
MAKE IN TERMS OF THIS IS A
REVIEW BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF
THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA. THAT'S
WHAT WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT IN
TERMS OF DWR AND THE STATE WATER
BOARD. REPRESENTATIVES OF ALL
THE PEOPLE THE DISADVANTAGED
PEOPLE, THE FARM WORKERS WHO
DON'T HAVE HIRED A LAWYER AT THE
TABLE HIRED ATTORNEY AT THE AT
THE TABLE THERE REPRESENTING
THEM, UH, BECAUSE THOSE ARE HIGH
POWERED CONVERSATIONS THAT GO ON
AMONGST THE MOST HIGH POWERED
ATTORNEYS OUT THERE. THAT'S A
DIFFERENT KIND OF REVIEW THAN
YOU WOULD GET. IF YOU HAVE A AN
EXPERT SCIENTISTS COME IN THAT
EXPERT SCIENTISTS IS GOING TO
TRY TO GIVE JUST A TECHNICAL
ANALYSIS AND QUITE FRANKLY, IN
MANY OF THE WATER ADJUDICATIONS
I'VE SEEN YOU HAVE CONFLICTING,
YOU KNOW, EXPERTS WITH THAT, YOU
KNOW, WITH THAT OF JUST FROM A
SCIENTIFIC STANDPOINT, HAVING A
REVIEW BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
REPRESENTING ALL THE CITIZENS OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SEEMS
MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE. AND WHAT
HAPPENS IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH
THE JUDGE? THE JUDGE IS FREE TO
MAKE WHATEVER DECISION THEY
WANT. THAT THAT THAT THIS IS
VERY, VERY CLEAR. I MEAN, THE
JUDGE THIS THIS DOESN'T SAY JUST
BECAUSE THEY CAME UP WITH IT,
BUT IT IS IT WHICH SHOULD BE
ENLIGHTENING FOR THE JUDGE. WE
HOPE IT WOULD BE ENLIGHTENING
FOR THE JUDGES. THE JUDGE WOULD
TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION, BUT
THE JUDGE DOES NOT HAVE TO, UM,
GO ALONG WITH THE OPINION OF
STATE WATER BOARD AT ALL. ALSO,
IT IS A AH, A PUBLIC YOU KNOW,
ASSESSMENT AND PUBLIC
NOTIFICATION OF WHAT THE STATE
WATER BOARD THINKS OF THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. OKAY MR
CONNELLY. THANKS UH, ALSO WANTED
TO CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE ON
THE ISSUE OF WHETHER TO CONSIDER
SOME SORT OF TIMELINE
REQUIREMENTS SO THAT THEY
PROCEEDINGS OR NOT INORDINATELY
PROLONGED. LET ALONE
OVERBURDENING CHORDS. WHAT IS
YOUR CURRENT? GREAT THANKS. I
WAS GOING TO RESPOND TO THAT. I
JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS THE
APPROPRIATE TIME IN TERMS OF
THAT, UM, BUT IT IS AN IMPORTANT
ISSUE, AND YOU KNOW ONE OF THE
BENEFITS OF THE COMMITTEE
PROCESSES AS YOUR BILL MOVES.
THEY'RE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT
YOU FOCUS ON. UM AND WE ARE
TRYING TO WORK. AH AND COME UP
WITH WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE
TIME FRAME. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT
YOU DON'T WANT TO BE TOO LATE IN
THE PROCESS. YOU DON'T WANT IT
TO BE TOO EARLY IN THE PROCESS,
AND SO WE'RE HAVING SIGNIFICANT
CONVERSATIONS AND TRYING TO
FOCUS ON THAT AS THE NEXT STEP,
BUT THERE IS AN ISSUE OF HOW
LONG SHOULD WE ALLOW STATE WATER
BOARD AND DWR TO RESPOND. SO
THAT WE DON'T HOLD AND STRETCH
ADJUDICATIONS OUT. ALTHOUGH
ADJUDICATIONS HAVE BEEN
STRETCHED OUT FOR DECADES,
SOMETIMES RIGHT, UM SO I DON'T
THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE A
SERIOUS PROCESS. IF WE HAVE, YOU
KNOW A FEW MONTHS IN THERE OR
WHAT OR WHATEVER, BUT WE'RE
TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND MY
OWN. AND WHEN YOU ASK ABOUT MY
OWN SENSE IS, YOU KNOW SOME KIND
OF FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF WHEN
IS THE RIGHT TIME, BUT WE'VE
ADDRESSED A LOT OF THAT BY
SWITCHING FROM A JUDGMENT TO A
SETTLEMENT, BECAUSE BY GOING TO
A SETTLEMENT, SOMEBODY COMES UP
WITH THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL.
AND THIS IS THIS IS WHAT DOESN'T
HAPPEN RIGHT NOW. BUT SOMEBODY
WALKS IN, YOU KNOW FOR THE JUDGE
AND FOR OF THE PARTIES FOR THE
MAJOR PUMPERS CAME IN AND SAY
WE'RE WE ALL THINK THIS SHOULD
BE THE SETTLEMENT, RIGHT? WELL
THE JUDGE COULD WITHOUT OPINING
ON THAT. SEND THAT RIGHT TO DWR
AND STATE WATER BOARD FOR A
CONSISTENCY. YOU KNOW HOW HOW
CONSISTENT. DO YOU THINK THAT
YES. THAT SEEMS THAT SEEMS MUCH
MORE APPROPRIATE THAN FOR THE
JUDGE TO HAVE ALREADY BEEN TO
THE POINT WHERE THE JUDGE HAS
SAID SHE OR HE THINKS THIS IS
THE JUDGMENT, AND NOW YOU SEND
IT TO THE WATER BOARD. SO IT IT
. UH IT ALLOWS THE JUDGE TO
SATISFY THIS BY SENDING THE
SETTLEMENT POTENTIALLY AT
WHATEVER APPROPRIATE TIME. THE
JUDGE THINKS THAT'S ONE
POSSIBILITY. BUT ANYWAY, WE'RE
WORKING ON THAT, AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT AS WE
GO FORWARD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEN NONE. MR. BENNETT MADE
CLOTHES RESPECTFULLY ASKED FOR A
FIVE VOTE AND AGAIN APPRECIATE
THE GREAT WORK BY COMMITTEE
STAFF TO HELP US OUT WITH THIS
AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
THE COMMITTEE STAFF AS WE TRY TO
WORK ON THE TIMING ISSUE THAT
THE TWO OF YOU HAVE BROUGHT UP
GREAT MOTION IS DUE PASSES
AMENDED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE AS A CLERK TO PLEASE
CALL Ó. WE NEED THAT MOTION A
MOVE AND MOVES IT. DO YOU HAVE A
SECOND, MR CONNELLY? SECONDS IT.
UH DO PASSES MANAGED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ESCORT
. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN, AYE.
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DIXON HANEY
. CHOLERA CHOLERA I PACHECO
HAPPENED. HI RES. RIVAS.
SANCHEZ. FRANCESCA. YOUR BILL
NEEDS ONE MORE VOTE. IT IS ON
CALL. YOU BET. NEXT UP, MISS
PACHECO WILL BE PRESENTING ITEMS
. SIX ON BEHALF OF MS WILSON,
ABC, 7 79.
YOU MAY PROCEED. GOOD MORNING,
MR CHAIR. AND MEMBERS. I AM
BREAST I AM PRESENTING ON
BEHALF. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILSON
. I'M NOT SURE WHY THE PERSON
WITHOUT A VOICE IS THE
SUBSTITUTE BY BUT WE'RE ALL
PULLING FOR YOU. SO WE'LL SEE
HOW THIS GOES. IN RESPONSE TO
PERSISTENT CONDITIONS OF EXTREME
DROUGHT AND GROUNDWATER
DEPLETION. THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE ENACTED THIS
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT. SIGMA IN 2014,
HOWEVER, AS IMPLEMENTATION OF
SIGMA HAS CONTINUED TO UNFOLD,
MANY HAVE RAISED CONCERNS, SAID
SOME OF THE KEY BURDEN SIGMA
PLACES ON SMALL AND
DISADVANTAGED FARMERS ARE
RELATED TO THE PROCESS OF WATER
RIGHTS ADJUDICATION IN
GROUNDWATER BASINS WHERE RIGHTS
ARE DISPUTED. ADJUDICATIONS TAKE
PLACE AND NON SPECIALIZED COURTS
AND CAN BE LENGTHY, EXPENSIVE
AND OPAQUE FACTORS, WHICH
EXAMPLE THAT'S ASPIRATED
EXISTING DISPARITIES AND
UNDERREPRESENTATION OF SMART
SMALL FARMERS IN DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. THIS PAST FALL,
THEIR OFFICE OF ASSEMBLY WILL
MEMBER WILSON AND STUDENTS FROM
U C L. A LAW PUT TOGETHER A
RESEARCH PROJECT ALONG WITH A
SERIES OF STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS
AND IDENTIFIED SEVERAL AREAS OF
POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
ADJUDICATION PROCESS THAT
PROMOTES TRANSPARENCY EQUITY AND
ARE INTENDED TO BENEFIT ALL
PARTIES INVOLVED. WELL, THIS IS
LONG. THESE THOSE SUGGESTIONS
CAME TOGETHER IN A B 779 THE
BILL, WHICH IS BEFORE YOU TODAY.
SINCE INTRODUCTION OFFICE HAS
RECEIVED SEVERAL SUGGESTIONS AND
AREAS OF IMPROVEMENTS FROM
ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE
CHAMBER WESTERN GROWERS, THE
COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AND FAMILY
FARMERS, THEIR GROUNDWATER
COALITION, JUDICIAL COUNCIL AND
OTHERS AND VERY MUCH ANOTHER
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE
FEEDBACK, THEY HAVE SAID. AS
THESE CONVERSATIONS ARE STILL
ONGOING THE OFFICES IN THE
MIDDLE OF COORDINATING A LARGER
STAKEHOLDER MEETING TO REVIEW
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LEGISLATION
, AND IT LOOKED FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH ALL THESE
ORGANIZATIONS TO IMPROVE THE
ADJUDICATION PROCESS. I WOULD
NOW LIKE TO INTRODUCE WITNESS.
AH BETH KENT. AH THE EMMETT
FRANCO FRANCO FOLLOW IN
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY AT
U. C L. A WHO WAS A COORDINATOR
FOR THE STUDENTS FROM U. C. L. A
LAW WHO HAVE HELPED TO PUT
TOGETHER THIS IMPORTANT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. I WILL NOT TAKE A
BREAK. THANK YOU. YOU MAY
PROCEED. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS
BETH KENT, AND I'M AN EMMETT
FRANKEL FELLOW IN ENVIRONMENTAL
LAW AND POLICY AT UCLA LAW WHERE
I CO TEACH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND
POLICY CLINIC. I'M HERE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 779. I APPRECIATE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILSON FOR
INTRODUCING THIS BILL AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PACHECO FOR
PRESENTING IT TODAY, ESPECIALLY
AS YOU HAVE NO VOICE. UM, A B
779 IS INTENDED TO MAKE
CALIFORNIA'S GROUNDWATER RIGHTS
ADJUDICATION PROCESS EQUITABLE,
TRANSPARENT AND FAIR FOR ALL
WATER USERS. BY DETERMINING WHO
HAS GROUNDWATER RIGHTS AND HOW
MUCH WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS CAN
USE THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTS,
GROUNDWATER USE AND MANAGEMENT
THROUGHOUT THE STATE. THROUGH
CONVERSATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS
, INCLUDING NON PROFIT AND
AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS AND
WATER LAW EXPERTS. MY COLLEAGUES
AND I LEARNED THAT THE CURRENT
ADJUDICATION PROCESS POSES
SUBSTANTIAL BARRIERS FOR MANY
TYPES OF WATER USERS. A B 779
AIMS TO ADDRESS THESE BARRIERS
AND TODAY ALL FOCUS ON THE
PROVISION THAT RELATE TO THE
THREE KEY ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN
THIS COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS. FIRST
THE BILL REQUIRES PARTIES TO
FORWARD PLEADINGS TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
FOR THE DEPARTMENT TO POST
ONLINE. THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
IS COMPLEX AND OPAQUE, WHICH CAN
MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR IMPACTED
WATER USERS TO ENGAGE SOME WATER
USERS, SUCH AS TENANT FARMERS
MAY NOT BE NOTIFIED THAT IN
ADJUDICATION HAS COMMENCED IN
THEIR BASIN, EVEN THOUGH THE
JUDGMENT MAY IMPACT THEIR
ABILITY TO ACCESS WATER AND
MAINTAIN THEIR LIVELIHOODS.
MAKING THESE MATERIALS
ACCESSIBLE, CAN ALSO HELP WATER
USERS, POLICYMAKERS AND THE
PUBLIC PREPARE FOR AN IMPROVED
FUTURE ADJUDICATIONS. THESE
MATERIALS CAN BE DIFFICULT TO
FIND, OR MAYBE BEHIND A PAYWALL
, WHICH FRUSTRATES PUBLIC ACCESS
. 87 79 WOULD MAKE INFORMATION
EASILY ACCESSIBLE BY POSTING ON
A WEBSITE THAT COULD BE FOUND
EVEN WITH A SIMPLE INTERNET
SEARCH. SECOND THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE THE COURT TO INVITE A
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE
DEPARTMENT. THIS CAN HELP REDUCE
THE BATTLE OF THE EXPERTS AND
REDUCE COSTS IN THE LENGTH OF
THE ADJUDICATION AND BRINGING
TWR THE WATERBOARDING COULD HELP
PROVIDE OBJECTIVE SCIENCE BASED
INFORMATION. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
CONSIDERATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO
HELP THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WITH
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, KYLE JONES WITH
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER AND ALSO
ON BEHALF OF LEADERSHIP COUNCIL
FOR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
AND CLEAN WATER ACTION WE SENT
IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED LETTER
JUST SAYING HOW WE CAN LOOK AT
MAKING SURE THAT THE STATE
AGENCIES PROVIDING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE CAN CONSIDER THE
RANGE OF STATE INTERESTS BEYOND
JUST SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEN NONE. WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING AGAIN. THIS IS
BRENDA BASS WITH CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. WE ARE IN A
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED POSITION
ON THIS BILL CURRENTLY, BUT WE
ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO
CONTINUING PRODUCTIVE
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE AUTHOR TO
HELP PRESERVE RESOLVE OUR
CONCERNS. GOOD MORNING. TAYLOR
RUSSIAN ON BEHALF OF VARIOUS AG
, COMMODITY GROUPS, WESTERN
PLANT HEALTH ASSOCIATION, UNITED
AG AND WESTERN
GROWERSASSOCIATION. WAKE OF THE
COMMENTS OF HIS BEST. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SAYING NONE. UH
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. SEEN AND WE HAVE
EMOTION. MR HANEY MOVES THE BELL
MISHAP IN SECONDS. AH! MR
CHECKING MAKE CLOTHES.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WILSON WISHES
HE COULD BE HERE AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASSED, THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE ASKED HER TO PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. CHINA HIGH,
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DIXON TINY
CHOLERA. CHECK OH, I OH, I PAPIN
REYES. RIVAS. SANCHEZ SANCHEZ,
NO. YOUR BUILDING IS ONE MORE
VOTE. IT IS ON CALL. MR HANEY.
YOU HAVE TWO ITEMS. ITEMS WILL
START WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE A. B
12 AND THEN YOU'LL NEXT WILL BE
A B 13 39.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
, A B 12 WILL INCREASE HOUSING
ACCESS AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
IN OUR STATE BY LIMITING THE
AMOUNT THAT CAN BE CHARGED FOR
SECURITY DEPOSIT FOR A RENTAL
UNIT TO ONE MONTH'S RENT, MAKING
CALIFORNIA THE 12TH STATE IN THE
COUNTRY TO LOWER THESE BARRIERS
TO HOUSING. CALIFORNIA HAS THE
THIRD LOWEST HOMEOWNERSHIP RATE
IN THE COUNTRY WOULD NEARLY HALF
OF OUR STATES HOUSEHOLDS. 17
MILLION FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS
RENTING IN CITIES, SUBURBS AND
RURAL AREAS. CALIFORNIA'S
HOUSING SHORTAGE HAS CAUSED RENT
TO SKYROCKET. ACCORDING TO THE
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS. THE MEDIAN
RENT IN CALIFORNIA HAS INCREASED
BY 35% SINCE 2000 WHILE MEDIAN
RENTER HOUSEHOLD INCOME HAS ONLY
INCREASED BY 6. HIGHER RENTS
RESULT IN HIGHER SECURITY
DEPOSITS, WHICH FURTHER LIMITS
HOUSING ACCESS IN PLACES GREATER
BURDENS ON WORKING FAMILIES.
UNDER CURRENT CALIFORNIA LAW,
EVERY RENTER CAN BE REQUIRED TO
PAY UP TO THREE MONTHS RENT FOR
THE SECURITY DEPOSIT. THIS IS A
LAW THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE IN
1977 AND HASN'T BEEN CHANGED
SUBSTANTIALLY SINCE THEN.
BECAUSE OF THESE HIGH SECURITY
DEPOSITS, IT CAN COST OVER $8000
UPFRONT. TO MOVE INTO AN AVERAGE
ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT IN SAN
FRANCISCO OR LOS ANGELES. WHEN
YOU ADD THE SECURITY DEPOSIT AND
FIRST MONTH'S RENT A FEW PEOPLE
HAVE SUCH LARGE SUMS OF SOME
SAVED AND AS A RESULT ARE OFTEN
FORCED TO GO INTO DEBT OR FORGO
OTHER NECESSITIES. IN A RECENT
STUDY, 53% OF CALIFORNIA RENDERS
RENTERS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE
ABLE TO AFFORD THE RENT, BUT
THEY ARE UNABLE TO GET AN
APARTMENT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY
CANNOT AFFORD A SECURITY
DEPOSIT. THIS PUSHES MANY
FAMILIES, INCLUDING THOSE WITH
INDIVIDUALS MAKING MINIMUM WAGE
TO EITHER FOREGO NECESSITIES
SUCH AS FOOD AND UTILITIES
REQUIRE MORE DEBT IN ORDER TO BE
APPROVED FOR HOUSING. IT CAN
LEAD TO MANY WORKING FAMILIES
STAYING IN UNSAFE, ADEQUATE OR
OVERCROWDED LIVING SITUATIONS,
UNABLE TO AFFORD THE COST TO
MOVE INTO AN APARTMENT FIT FOR
THEIR FAMILY OR CLOSER TO WORK.
ALSO WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT A B
12 DOES NOT TAKE AWAY A
LANDLORD'S ABILITY TO HOLD THEIR
TENANTS ACCOUNTABLE. ONE MONTH'S
RENT WILL COVER THE LARGE
MAJORITY OF DAMAGES AND IN THE
EVENT THAT THEY DON'T AND
SIMILAR TO OTHER PRACTICES UNDER
LAW, THE LANDLORD CAN STILL TAKE
THE TENANT TO COURT TO BE
REIMBURSED FOR ANY DAMAGES THAT
EXCEED THAT AMOUNT. TENANTS ARE
STILL FULLY LIABLE FOR ANY
DAMAGES. THIS BILL ALSO DOESN'T
CREATE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL
APPROACH FOR DIFFERENT PARTS OF
OUR STATE. LANDLORDS STILL HAVE
FULL AUTONOMY TO DECIDE ON THE
RENT BASED ON THE MARKET THEY
LIVE IN. OTHER STATES HAVE
ALREADY TACKLED THIS ISSUE.
ALABAMA NEW YORK, MASSACHUSETTS
, DELAWARE, RHODE ISLAND
PROHIBIT LANDLORDS FROM CHARGING
MORE THAN ONE MONTH'S RENT
DESPITE CHANGES IN OTHER STATE
LAW CONTINUE. CALIFORNIA
CONTINUES TO FALL BEHIND. I'M
VERY GRATEFUL TO HAVE TWO
WITNESSES HERE WITH DIRECT
EXPERIENCE AROUND THIS ISSUE.
THIS THIS THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED
A WIDE SET OF SUPPORT FROM
WORKING FAMILIES FROM ACROSS THE
STATE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING THE
CHALLENGES OF THESE HIGH
SECURITY DEPOSITS, AND I FIRST
WANT TO START WITH WITNESS JUDY
REMY APPARENT PARA EDUCATOR FROM
ROOSEVELT CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THANK YOU. YOU MAY PROCEED. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS JUDY REMY
AND I DO WORK FOR ROSEVILLE CITY
SCHOOL DISTRICT AS A PEER
EDUCATOR. WORKING WITH CHILDREN
WHO ARE ON INDEPENDENT
EDUCATIONAL PLANS. THEY'RE
CALLED I P S AND WHAT I DO IS I
GET THE KIDS FROM REGULAR
CLASSROOMS AND THEN, UH, IF THEY
NEED EXTRA SUPPORT, I WORK WITH
THEM, WHETHER IT BE IN SPEECH
READING AND COMPREHENSION OR
MATH. THE PANDEMIC HAS BROUGHT
MANY CHANGES FOR ALL OF US, AND
FORTUNATELY IT US ABRUPT COST OF
LIVING TO SKYROCKET, INCLUDING
PRICES OF GAS, FOOD, UTILITIES
AND RENT. SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A
FAMILY HAS TO MOVE? WHAT EXAMPLE
IS ME. I READ A HOUSE IN
ROSEVILLE AND HAVE BEEN IN THE
HOUSE IN ROSEVILLE FOR THE PAST
20 YEARS. THIS PAST YEAR, MY
LANDLADY PASSED AWAY AT THE
YOUNG AGE OF 101. HER UM, THIS
HOUSE IS NOW IN PROBATE. IF I
HAVE TO MOVE IN A PIE HAVE TO
COME UP WITH THREE DIFFERENT
THINGS, YOU KNOW. RENT. AND UH,
IT'S SECURITY DEPOSIT FIRST LAST
INSECURITY. THAT I'M GOING TO
HAVE TO LEAVE CALIFORNIA.
BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD THAT. AND
I'VE LIVED IN CALIFORNIA ALL OF
MY LIFE. YEAH AND FOR ME TO HAVE
TO MOVE BECAUSE THE STRESS AND
CAUSE STRESS TO MY FAMILY. AND
FORTUNATELY, I'M IN THE SAME
POSITION AS MANY FAMILIES WHO
LIVE IN CALIFORNIA. MANY PEOPLE
HAVE NO OPTION AVAILABLE PUT TO
MOVE IN WITH RELATIVES. IN THESE
CASES, CHILDREN OFTEN SHARE A
BED WITH THREE OR MORE CHILDREN
. SOMETIMES THEY END UP SLEEPING
ON THE FLOOR. AS AN EDUCATOR. I
FIND THIS VERY DETRIMENTAL TO
CHILDREN IN MANY WAYS THEY LOSE
SLEEP. THEY'RE SICK. MORE OFTEN
. THEY MISSED SCHOOL FOR OTHER
THINGS, EMOTIONAL UP THINGS. AND
WHEN THEY DO COME TO SCHOOL.
THEY'RE TIRED AND THEY'RE
EMOTIONAL AND THEY'RE STRESSED.
BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO
SLEEP AND THE SECURITY THEY NEED
WITH THEIR OWN BED. WE DEPEND ON
THESE CHILDREN DEPEND ON US.
THEY TEND TO BE MORE
CONFRONTATIONAL WITH PEERS. HIS
CHILDREN. UH WE NEED TO PROVIDE
A WAY FOR FAMILIES TO BE ABLE TO
RENT HOMES OF THEIR OWN, NOT
PASSING A B 12 WILL SEVERELY
HURT PARENTS, CHILDREN, THEIR
EDUCATION AND THE INDIVIDUALS
WHO EDUCATE THEM. CHILDREN ARE
OUR FUTURE. AND IF CALIFORNIA
ONCE EDUCATED SISTERS, CITIZENS
, SOMETHING MUST BE DONE. BEING
SAID. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO SPORT.
IT'S SUPPORT A B 12. THANK YOU
FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK. THANK
YOU NEXT WITNESS, AND I'LL LET
HER INTRODUCE HER. HI I'M I'M MY
NAME IS JAMIE GIBSON AND I'VE
WORKED IN RETAIL AND AS A MEMBER
OF THE UNITED FOOD AND
COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION FOR THE
LAST 12 YEARS. AND I'VE BEEN A
RENTER FOR THE LAST 14 JUST DOWN
THE STREET HERE IN DAVIS. THE
AMOUNT OF PAID FOR RENT BETWEEN
THEN AND NOW HAS VARIED A LOT.
BUT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND
IS INCREASED SO MUCH THAT IT'S
IMPOSSIBLE TO MOVE BACK CLOSER
TO WHERE I WORK. IN 2018 THE
RENT I PAID FOR A TWO BEDROOM
APARTMENT IN DAVIS INCREASED
FROM $1300 A $1600. AND THEN
DEPOSIT INCREASE FROM 400 TO
$600. SO THE UPFRONT COST TO
CONTINUE IN THE SAME UNIT THAT I
HAD BEEN RENTING FOR THREE
YEARS. WOULD HAVE INCREASED TO
$4000. AND DURING THE PANDEMIC.
ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO, I MOVED TO
FAIRFIELD TO BE CLOSER TO MY
FAMILY. AND NOW FOR THE LAST
FOUR YEARS I'VE COMMUTED ABOUT
30 MILES EACH WAY TO WORK, WHICH
PUTS SUCCESSIVE WEAR AND TEAR IN
MY CAR IN ORDER TO MOVE BACK TO
DAVIS, THE SAME ONE BEDROOM
APARTMENT IN THE SAME COMPLEX
COST ABOUT IN A RANGE OF $4400
TO RENT WHILE TWO BEDROOM UNIT
SORRY, A TWO BEDROOM UNIT IN THE
SAME COMPLEX NOW COSTS UPWARDS
OF 2500 TO $2800. AND THAT'S NOT
INCLUDING A $600 DEPOSIT. SO I
WOULD NEED ALMOST $6000 TO PAY
FOR THE UPFRONT COST TO MOVE
BACK TO WHERE I WORK. UM JUST
THIS MONTH. UM MY COWORKER HAS
BEEN DEFERRING HER RETIREMENT
FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS TO HELP HER
DAUGHTER, A MOTHER AND A FAMILY
OF FIVE. SAVE UP FOR A DUPLEX IN
SOUTH NATOMAS. UM THEY HAD TO
PAY ALMOST $9000 TO SECURE. UM
TO SECURE THAT UNIT. MOST PEOPLE
LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK AND
GETTING AN APARTMENT SHOW BE
SAVING FOR A DOWN PAYMENT FOR A
HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF BILL A. B 12
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY PLEASE. GOOD MORNING
CHAIRMAN. SHINE MEMBERS JAMES
MICHAEL APOLLO WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASKED ME
WERE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
GIOVANNA FAJARDO WITH ACED
ALLIANCE OF CALIFORNIANS FOR
COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT WITH
17,000 MEMBERS STATEWIDE AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CASSIE MANCINI ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. DEB ROTH. DISABILITY
RIGHTS. CALIFORNIA SUPPORT THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS
AND STAFF MITCH STEIGER, WITH
THE CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION,
ALSO IN SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING.
DAN OCON FUSS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION FOR
INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS
REPRESENTING PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES. AND SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, ANYA LAWLER ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL
ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION AND THE
NATIONAL HOUSING LAW PROJECT AND
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING FAITHFULLY
WITH ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING
JUSTICE, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
WE'RE IN SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING,
DANIEL. CHERYL WITH S E I U
LOCAL 1000 AND SUPPORT JESSE
GRAHAM WELL WITH UFCW, WESTERN
STATES, COUNSEL AND SUPPORT GOOD
MORNING, TINA ROSALES WITH THE
WESTERN CENTER ON LAW AND
POVERTY AND THE KLU, CALIFORNIA
ACTION AND SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING
. MATT LOGIN. BAFFERT. ESTÁ YOU
CALIFORNIA SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, SYLVIA SALAS SHAH HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS FOR THE CITY AND
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, AND
ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
OF SANTA MONICA. BOTH IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
. DEVIN GRAY, PRESIDENT OF
POVERTY IN CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT THANKS. GOOD MORNING.
ANDREW SHANE AND CHILD POVERTY,
CALIFORNIA GRACE INSTITUTE AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEING NON
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
SURE. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DEBORAH
CARLTON WITH A CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. WE
REPRESENT ABOUT 50,000 RENTAL
PROPERTY OWNERS AND MANAGERS WHO
OWN AND OPERATE AFFORDABLE AND
MARKET RATE HOUSING. UM
UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. WE WILL
ARGUE, OF COURSE, THAT EVEN THE
CURRENT AMOUNT ISN'T ENOUGH. BUT
YOU KNOW IF A TENANT FAILS TO
LIVE UP THERE TO THEIR
OBLIGATIONS TODAY, A RENTAL
PROPERTY OWNER IS OBVIOUSLY
REQUIRED TO GO TO COURT THROUGH
THE EVICTION PROCESS, WHICH CAN
TAKE MONTHS. UM ALL THE WHILE
THEY'RE PAYING ATTORNEY'S FEES
AND COURT COSTS AND NOT GETTING
THE RENT. UM THEY ARE, UM, ALSO
, UH, HAVING TO PAY THEIR OWN
BILLS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY HAVE A
MORTGAGE ON THE HOME OR THE
APARTMENT BUILDING. SECURITY
DEPOSITS ARE REFUNDABLE. SO AS
THE WITNESS AND SUPPORT, UM,
TESTIFIED SHE'S BEEN IN HER
PLACE FOR MANY YEARS. THAT
SECURITY DEPOSIT SHOULD BE
COMING BACK TO HER. GIVEN THE
WAY IN WHICH WE'VE WRITTEN OUR
CURRENT STATUTE, SHE WOULD
RECEIVE HER SECURITY DEPOSIT. I
THINK THE UNFORTUNATE DOWNSIDE
TO THIS LEGISLATION IS THAT YOU
WILL SEE HIGHER RENTS. THAT'S
NOT REFUNDABLE. UM AND YOU WILL
SEE, UM IT'S HARDER TO ACCESS
HOUSING BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL
EITHER LOWER CREDIT OR ANY OTHER
TYPES OF OBLIGATIONS THAT ARE
REQUIRED UP FRONT. SO FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR NO VOTE TODAY. GOOD MORNING
, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS KAREEM
GREASY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS HERE TODAY IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 12, WHICH
FAILS TO TAKE A THOUGHTFUL
APPROACH TO THE ISSUE OF
SECURITY DEPOSITS. CERTAINLY WE
DO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE MORE
THOUGHTFUL APPROACHES OUT THERE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO IN THE FALL OF 2021 DID
IMPLEMENT A SECURITY DEPOSIT
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WHICH
SPECIFICALLY TARGETS INDIVIDUALS
AND FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 120% OF
AREA MEDIAN INCOME. IN SHARP
CONTRAST, A B 12 DOES NOT
SPECIFICALLY TARGET THOSE IN
NEED. NOR DOES IT TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE PLIGHT OF SMALL
HOUSING PROVIDERS WHO ARE OFTEN
SENIORS. RATHER THE BILL, IN OUR
ESTIMATION, TAKES A ONE SIZE
FITS ALL APPROACH, WHICH WE
BELIEVE IS MISGUIDED. WE WILL
RESPECTFULLY NOTE THE ONE THING
THAT HAS NOT BEEN MENTIONED. YET
IN THIS CONVERSATION IS A B 14
82, THE STATEWIDE RENT CAP BILL,
AS WELL AS OTHER RECENT
LEGISLATIVE SUCCESSES, WHICH
HAVE ADDRESSED ISSUES IN THIS
SPACE. WE WOULD LIKE TO
SPECIFICALLY NOTE A B 14 82
BECAUSE THAT LAW DOES CONTAIN A
PROVISION THAT REQUIRES THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE TO
SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE
LEGISLATURE ON THE EFFICACY OF
THOSE RENT CAP PROVISIONS AS
THEY RELATE TO HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY. UNFORTUNATELY A B
12 DOES NOT EITHER A WAIT FOR
THIS REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED TO
THE LEGISLATURE SO WE CAN SEE
WHAT IT SAYS OR BE AT LEAST
ADVANCE A THOUGHTFUL PROPOSAL.
WE DO BELIEVE THAT IT DOES TAKE
A ONE SIZE FITS ALL APPROACH,
UNFORTUNATELY, AND FOR THOSE
REASONS WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE
BILL, AND SPECIALLY REQUESTED NO
VOTERS DRAFTED. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION? GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS KATE
BELL ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RENTAL HOUSING ASSOCIATION AND
THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF
GREATER L, A AND OPPOSITION. MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS, PAT MORAN
WITH AARON READING ASSOCIATES
REPRESENTING THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA RENTAL HOUSING
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? SEE
NOTHING QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. MR CONNELLY.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND REALLY
APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT OF WHERE
THE SPILL IS COMING FROM. I
THINK WE'RE HEARING IN ALL OF
OUR DISTRICTS THAT RESIDENTS ARE
INCREASINGLY RED BURDEN. WE
HEARD THAT AGAIN THROUGH
TESTIMONY THIS MORNING. WHEN YOU
HAVE THE REALITY OF TWO MONTHS
RENT I FIRST AND LAST MONTH,
IRELAND THREE MONTHS BEING PUT
FORWARD AS SECURITY DEPOSITS
THAT ELIMINATES A LOT OF FOLKS
FROM BEING ABLE TO SECURE. BUY A
RENTAL HOUSING. THAT BEING SAID
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, HAVE
EMERGED AND JUST THOUGHT THE
AUTHOR MAY BE ABLE TO FLAG SOME
OF THESE ISSUES. WHAT RECOURSES
DO. LANDLORDS HAVE TO RECOVER
THE COST OF DAMAGES? LET'S SAY
IF THEY GO OVER THE STATED
SECURITY DEPOSIT AMOUNT, AND
SECONDLY, IS THERE A CONCERN
THAT THIS BILL IS GOING TO
REDUCE THE SUPPLY OF RENTAL
HOUSING AVAILABLE, I E WILL, UM
SMALLER MOM AND PIPE LANDLORDS
THINK TWICE ABOUT EITHER STAYING
IN THE RENTAL MARKET OR ENTERING
THE RENTAL MARKET. IF THERE
CAPTAIN SECURITY DEPOSITS THEY
CAN DO. THANKS THANK YOU. FOR
THOSE QUESTIONS, MUCH
APPRECIATED. UM SO, UH, ON THE
ON THE QUESTION OF RECOURSE
AGAIN, THIS BILL DOESN'T CHANGE
AT ALL THE LIABILITY THAT
TENANTS HAVE IF THEY DO DAMAGE,
UH, CURRENTLY IF A TENANT DOES
DAMAGE OR IS LIABLE FOR
ADDITIONAL AMOUNT. BEYOND WHAT A
SECURITY VASE. IT IS CHARGED.
WHATEVER AMOUNT THAT IS, THEY
CAN BE TAKEN TO COURT AND, UH,
THEY THEY STILL OWE THOSE FUNDS
AND CERTAINLY THE LANDLORD KNOWS
WHO THAT PERSON IS AND HOW TO
REACH THEM AS THE TENANT, UM,
SIMILAR APPLIES FOR TENANTS WHO
MAY HAVE A SECURITY DEPOSIT KEPT
FROM THEM UNFAIRLY. THEY ALSO
HAVE TO GO TO COURT. SO THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT EXISTS UNDER
CURRENT LAW. THEY WILL CONTINUE
TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AND YOU
KNOW, AS SOMEBODY WHO USED TO
PRACTICE IN THIS AREA OF LAW,
THE SECURITY DEPOSIT OF ONE
MONTH WILL COVER THE LARGE
MAJORITY OF CASES. IT'S THE RARE
CASES WHEN IT WOULD BE BEYOND
THAT, AND THE RECOURSE WOULD
WOULD STILL BE THERE. THE
PROBLEM THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING
HERE IS THAT THE SECURITY
DEPOSIT UPFRONT. IS UH, CREATING
A BURDEN FOR MANY FAMILIES AND
INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO ACCESS
HOUSING TO BEGIN WITH THERE,
STAYING IN UNSAFE, INSUFFICIENT
HOUSING SITUATIONS VERY FAR FROM
WHERE THEY WORK. IN SOME CASES.
IN SOME CASES, THERE ARE
CHILDREN WHO WERE MULTIPLE
CHILDREN IN THE BEDROOM AND THE
REASON WHY THEY CAN'T MOVE TO
ANOTHER PLACE IS BECAUSE THE
SECURITY DEPOSIT IS THE BARRIER.
AND SO THIS IS ABOUT ACCESS TO
HOUSING AGAIN THERE OVER 10
STATES WHO ALREADY HAVE ONE
MONTH WE HAD ACTUALLY, JUST A
FEW YEARS AGO, MR GLASER PASSED
A BILL UNANIMOUSLY MOVING THE
AMOUNT TO ONE MONTH FOR SERVICE
MEMBERS. UH AND WE HAVEN'T SEEN
ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF THAT. SO
THIS THIS IS ABOUT ACCESS TO
HOUSING. THERE'S NO EVIDENCE AT
ALL THAT IT WILL LEAD TO LESS
HOUSING BEYOND BEING ON THE
MARKET. UH FOLKS CAN STILL
CHOOSE HOW MUCH THEY WANT TO
CHARGE AND RENT AND WHO THEIR
TENANTS ARE. THEY STILL CAN LOOK
AT CREDIT SCORES OR ANY OTHER
THING THAT WE ALLOW UNDER THE
LAW TO DETERMINE WHO THEY WANT
TO BE THERE, TENANT. WE SIMPLY
WANT TO ENSURE THAT UPFRONT.
THERE'S THAT ACCESS TO HOUSING
THAT CURRENTLY IS I THINK BEING
UNDERMINED BY, UH, THOSE SET OF
FOLKS WHO ARE CHARGING VERY HIGH
SECURITY DEPOSITS. MR REEVES.
AND I JUST HAVE SOME SOME SOME
BRIEF COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR FOR THIS. THOUGHTFUL
APPROACH. UM AND THIS MEANINGFUL
BILL VERY MEANINGFUL TO MANY OF
THE FAMILIES IN MY DISTRICT. AS
WE HAVE ALL READ IN THE PAPERS.
THE TOWN OF POIROT REGIONAL
THERE WAS RECENTLY FLOODED. IT
WAS REPORTED THAT ABOUT 2500
FAMILIES OR RESIDENTS WHO WERE
DISPLACED BECAUSE OF THE
FLOODING. AS WE LEARNED, LOCAL
OFFICIALS TOLD US TELL ME IN
CRISIS. THAT RESIDENTS IN MY
DISTRICT, UM, FACE WHEN IT COMES
TO HOUSING, CRITICAL OR CREDIT
HOUSING, MASS EXPLOITATION WHEN
IT COMES TO HOUSING AND FAMILIES
, ESPECIALLY THE MOST VULNERABLE
FAMILIES, FARM WORKING FAMILIES
THAT HELPED FEED EVERY SINGLE
PERSON IN THIS ROOM. THEY ENDURE
THESE CONDITIONS BECAUSE THEY
HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE. UH AND SO
WHEN I LOOKED AT THE SITUATION
THAT SO MANY RESIDENTS OF THE
STATE FACE WHEN IT COMES TO
HOUSING THERE, JUST TRAPPED IN
THIS UNENDING AND THIS
GENERATIONAL CYCLE OF POVERTY.
UM, THIS BILL. WON'T SOLVE THE
PROBLEM, BUT IT'S GONNA HELP AND
IT'S A MEANINGFUL APPROACH.
THERE'S AS WE KNOW, THIS IS NOT
MY THE START OF MY FIFTH YEAR IN
THIS LEGISLATION. THERE'S NO
SILVER BULLET WHEN IT COMES TO
ADDRESSING OUR HOUSING PROBLEMS
AND SOLVING THIS HOUSING CRISIS.
BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL
HELP. AND SO I APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR FOR THIS VERY THOUGHTFUL
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR DAVIES. THANK YOU
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS PACHECO.
I'M DOING MY BEST OUTSIDE THIS.
WANNA THANK THE AUTHOR. I KNOW
WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
THIS BILL. AH AND I CAN ACTUALLY
SEE BOTH SIDES SURE REPRESENTED
SMALL MOM AND POP LORDS BEFORE
AH, SO I CAN SEE HOW THIS COULD
BE A BURDEN, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU
HAVE A TENANT. UH AND THEY
DESTROY THE PROPERTY AND
SOMETIMES THE ONE MONTH SECURITY
DEPOSIT OR THE SECURITY DEPOSIT
DOESN'T COVER IT AND TRYING TO
TAKE THEM TO COURT TAKE
ATTENDANT TO COURT IS EXTREMELY
DIFFICULT AND A LOT OF TIMES THE
MAJORITY OF THE LANDLORDS. DON'T
EVEN DECIDE TO EVEN TAKE THE
TENANT TO COURT BECAUSE THEY
DON'T HAVE THE MONEY AND THEY
WON'T BE ABLE TO RECOUP THE
MONEY. SO I HAVE A LOT OF
SYMPATHY WHEN IT BECOMES TOO
SMALL MOM AND POP LANDLORDS. BUT
I DO WANT TO HEAR HAVE THERE
BEEN DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN THE
OPPOSITION AND YOUR OFFICE? YES.
UH THERE WERE SOME CONVERSATIONS
BETWEEN MY STAFF AND SOME OF THE
OPPOSITION WE DIDN'T RECEIVE. I
BELIEVE ANY SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
BUT WERE CONTINUED TO BE IN
CONVERSATION AND HAPPY TO WORK
TOGETHER ON SOME OF THOSE
ISSUES, PARTICULARLY AS AS
RELATES TO THE IMPACT ON ON MOM
AND POP LANDLORDS, AND SOME OF
THOSE QUESTIONS WERE FULLY
WILLING TO CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATION THERE. AND TO THE
OPPOSITION. UM ARE YOU WILLING
TO HAVE A DIALOGUE WITH THE
AUTHOR? YES UM, ALWAYS THROUGH
THE CHAIR IF I MIGHT, YES,
ALWAYS ALWAYS WILLING TO COME TO
THE TABLE AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE AUTHOR. MOST
DEFINITELY. AND I JUST SAY, SAME
HERE. I THINK SOME OF THE OTHER
CONCEPTS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM
SUGGESTED, ARE YOU KNOW THEY'RE
BOND PROGRAMS OR INSURANCE
PROGRAMS. THAT COULD BE
ALTERNATIVES. UM IF SOMEBODY HAS
BAD CREDIT TO ENCOURAGE THE
LANDLORD TO ACCEPT THEM SO THERE
COULD BE DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS.
THANK YOU. MS PAPIN. YEAH. SO.
COMING OUT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
WE'VE TANGLED A LOT WITH THIS
ISSUE WRESTLED WITH THIS ISSUE,
AND, UM, I AGREE. THERE IS NO
MAGIC BULLET. UM LIKEWISE WITH
SOME OF THEM ARE TAKE. OH, I'VE
BEEN ON BOTH SIDES OF THE
EQUATION AS AN ATTORNEY, AND I
TO HAVE THAT SENSITIVITY TO THE
MOM AND POP ESPECIALLY COMING
AFTER, UM OR JUST FOLLOWING ON
THE HEELS OF WHERE WE ARE COVID.
THERE'S BEEN AS AS YOU WELL
KNOW. I AM A MORATORIUM ON
EVICTIONS. AND WHAT DO YOU SAY
WHEN YOU COME IN? AND YOU'RE
YOU'RE THAT MOM AND POP A
LANDLORD HANGING ON BY YOUR
KNUCKLES AND YOU? YOU SHARE THE
OWNERSHIP WITH THE MORTGAGE
COMPANY AND YOU WERE ON THAT
LINE. UM SO I, TOO WOULD WELCOME
IF THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ON
THAT BECAUSE I JUST LONG HAD
THIS SENSITIVITY. UM I'VE ALSO
SEEN VERY UNSCRUPULOUS
LANDLORDS, BOTH IN THE
RESIDENTIAL CONTEXT AND IN THE
COMMERCIAL CONTEXT, QUITE
FRANKLY, UM, AND EVEN DURING
COVID, WHICH IS SHOCKING TO ME,
BUT I'VE ALSO SEEN PROPERTIES
THAT ARE MOST RECENTLY I'VE BEEN
DEALING WITH ONE THAT IS JUST
BEYOND MEASURE AND I DON'T KNOW
HOW THE OWNERS REALLY GOING TO
COME UP WITH, UM UH WHAT SHE
NEEDS TO COME UP WITH, AND SHE'S
ALSO BEING ASKED FOR RELOCATION
EXPENSES, AND IT'S REALLY
HEARTBREAKING, AND IT WAS HER
MOTHER'S HOME LONG STORY ANYWAY
, SO I'VE SEEN BOTH SIDES OF IT.
SO IF YOU ALL COULD CONTINUE THE
DISCUSSION, BOY, I WOULD BE
REALLY APPRECIATIVE OF IT. SO
THAT'S WHERE I COME IN ON IT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SAYING NONE MISS
TRAINING. THANK YOU HEARD FROM
THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR
THIS BILL. AT THE SAME TIME. I
THINK THERE IS A CONSENSUS HOPE
YOU'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION ON THESE ISSUES. IT'S
COMPLICATED AND CERTAINLY WANT
TO GET TO A GOOD SOLUTION. SO
WITH THAT YOU MAKE CLOTHES.
ABSOLUTELY AND I HEAR THAT FROM
THE COMMITTEE AND YOU KNOW THERE
ARE THOSE EXTREME SITUATIONS
WHERE WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO HAS
HAS HAD A LOT OF DAMAGE AND I
THINK THERE'S A LOT THAT WE HAVE
TO DO IN THAT SPACE TO MAKE SURE
THAT WHEN THEIR LANDLORD TENANT
ISSUES THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO
RESOLVE THOSE MORE QUICKLY,
WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE THE
LANDLORD HAS A FILE AGAINST THE
TENANT OR THE TENANT IN SOME
CASES WOULDN'T MIGHT ALSO HAVE
TO GET THEIR SECURITY DEPOSIT
THAT THEY FEEL MAYBE UNJUSTLY
KEPT FROM THEM. WITH ALL OF THAT
SAID I AM FULLY COMMITTED TO
WORKING TOGETHER AND I HEAR THE
CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED AS WELL AS BY THE
CHAIR. UH AND I HOPE WE CAN MOVE
THIS BILL BILL FORWARD AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? MOTION MOTION FOR MR
REVIS. HAVE A SECOND EXACTLY
SECOND FROM MR CONNELLY. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I, SALLY CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON HANEY CHOLERA.
PACHECO PACHECO, EYE POPPING AND
I RAISE RIVAS. AYE, SANCHEZ.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. HMM. NEXT NEXT IS MR
HANEY IS A B 13 39. THANK YOU
AND GOOD MORNING CHAIR. UH,
MAIENSCHEIN, UH, AND MEMBERS I'M
HERE TO PRESENT ON A B 13 39
PREVENTING HOUSING
DISCRIMINATION BILL. I WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS TODAY AND THANK YOU
TO YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR
WORKING WITH ME AND MY STAFF ON
THIS BILL. MAYBE 13 39 REVISES
THE DEFINITION OF DISABILITY TO
INCLUDE PEOPLE RECEIVING
MEDICATION ASSISTED TREATMENT.
COMING COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS
MATT. THIS BILL WOULD PROHIBIT
HOUSING PROVIDERS WHO ACCEPT
STATE FUNDING FROM
DISCRIMINATING AGAINST
INDIVIDUALS ON MEDICATION
ASSISTED TREATMENT. SOME QUICK
BACKGROUND ON WHAT M 80 IS M E T
IS THE USE OF FDA APPROVED
MEDICATIONS LIKE BUPRENORPHINE
OR METHADONE TO TREAT
INDIVIDUALS SUFFERING FROM
OPIOID USE DISORDER. M. 80 HAS
PROVEN TO BE A SAFE AND
EFFECTIVE WAY TO TREAT OPIOID
USED TO SORT OF BECAUSE IT WORKS
TWO BY RESTORING DOPAMINE LEVELS
TO A NORMAL RANGE, WHICH
INCREASES PRODUCTIVITY AND
DECREASES OPIOID CRAVINGS OR
WE'RE TRYING TO DO A SOFTWARE
WITH THIS BILL IS TO MAKE
CALIFORNIA LAW CONSISTENT WITH
FEDERAL LAW RIGHT NOW. EXISTING
FEDERAL LAW PROTECTS INDIVIDUALS
WITH DISABILITIES FROM
DISCRIMINATION PEOPLE IN
RECOVERY FROM DRUG ADDICTION,
INCLUDING THOSE ON THE M 80.
GENERALLY ARE PROTECTED FROM
DISCRIMINATION BY THE 80 A
REHABILITATION ACT AND FAIR
HOUSING ACT. HOWEVER CALIFORNIA
LAW IS NOT CLEAR THAT M 80
TREATMENT FALLS UNDER THESE
FEDERAL PROTECTIONS. BECAUSE OF
THIS DESCRIPTION, THIS
DISCREPANCY IN CALIFORNIA LAW,
PEOPLE ON M 80 ARE BEING DENIED
HOUSING SERVICES OILY SOLELY
BECAUSE OF THEIR DECISION TO
PURSUE TREATMENT FOR THEIR
OPIOID USE DISORDER. TO ENSURE
CALIFORNIA IS ALIGNED WITH
FEDERAL LAW. 13 39 WILL CLARIFY
THAT PROVIDERS ACCEPTING STATE
FUNDING CANNOT DISCRIMINATE
AGAINST INDIVIDUALS ON M 80
TREATMENT BECAUSE IT IS DIRECTLY
TIED TO A PROTECTED DISABILITY
FOR CONTRACTORS THAT VIOLATE THE
LAW. IT REQUIRES CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATORS TO PLACE
CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS IN
BREACH, INCLUDING CANCELING
THEIR CONTRACTS. THIS BILL IS SO
CRITICAL BECAUSE SIMPLY PUT THE
CURRENT LAW IS CONFUSING AND
UNCLEAR AS CALIFORNIA WORKS TO
COMBAT HOMELESSNESS AND OPIOID
USE DISORDERS. THE TIME FOR
SETTING THIS CLEAR AND
UNAMBIGUOUS STANDARD IS NOW I
JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THIS
DOES NOT APPLY TO PRIVATE
HOUSING, AND THIS IS STATE
FUNDED HOUSING AND MAKE SURE
THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE ACCESSING
TREATMENT THAT CAN GET THEM OFF
OF OPIOIDS AND GET THEM HEALTHY
AND STABLE. DO NOT FACE
DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING WITH
ME HERE TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORTIVE BABY 13 39 IS VITKA
EISEN FROM HEALTH, RIGHT? 60 AND
ROB LANE FROM CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG
PROGRAM EXECUTIVES. FIRST
WITNESS, PLEASE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS AND THANK YOU SIMILAR
MEMBER HANEY FOR THIS BILL. MY
NAME IS VICTOR EISEN. I AM THE
CEO FOR HEALTH, RIGHT? 3 60,
WHERE A TREATMENT PROVIDER IN 11
. DIFFERENT COUNTIES WERE
PROBABLY LARGEST NONPROFIT,
SUBSTANCE USE TREATMENT PROVIDER
IN THE STATE. I'M ALSO THE VICE
PRESIDENT OF THE PROVIDER
ASSOCIATION ON THE BOARD OF KDP
. AH, AND FINALLY, I'M A PERSON
WITH LIVED EXPERIENCE OF FORMER
HEROIN USER FROM A MILLION YEARS
AGO. UM SO CALIFORNIA LOST
TRAGICALLY. 7175 OF ITS
RESIDENTS TO OPIOID OVERDOSES.
IN 2021. THOSE NUMBERS CONTINUE
TO RISE AND MAY T MEDICATION FOR
ADDICTION TREATMENT AS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HANEY DESCRIBED
M 80 FOR OPIOID USE DISORDER IS
THE MOST HEAVILY STUDIED MOST
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION WE HAVE
FOR OPIOID USE DISORDER, IT
PREVENTS CRAVINGS. IT STOPS
CRAVINGS. UH AND IT PREVENTS A
HELPS PEOPLE NOT USE STREET
DRUGS. AND IT HAS BEEN STUDIED
AGAIN AND AGAIN, OVER AND OVER
AGAIN. VERY EFFECTIVE AT, UH,
IMPROVING HEALTH. FORTUNATELY WE
LIVE IN A STATE THAT REALLY
SUPPORTS A MEATY OUR HEALTH
DEPARTMENT. OUR HEALTHCARE
SERVICES SUPPORTED. THERE'S BEEN
A LOT OF INVESTMENT IN HELPING
PEOPLE ACCESS M E T. THROUGH
THAT INVESTMENT FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE
SERVICES. EXCUSE ME. OVER
140,000 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
ENROLLED IN M 80. WE HAVE 16,000
PEOPLE IN THE STATE PRISONS.
CURRENTLY CALIFORNIA IS PROBABLY
THE MOST ONE OF THE MOST
PROGRESSIVE IN TERMS OF ITS
AVAILABILITY OF M 84 PEOPLE
INCARCERATED 16,000 PEOPLE ON M
E T IN THE STATE PRISONS, AND WE
HAVE 35 JAILS THAT OFFER M 80,
SO IT'S A BIG IMPACT ON CRIMINAL
JUSTICE POPULATION. TREATMENT
PROGRAMS THAT ARE LICENSED BY
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SUBSTANCES. TREATMENTS CANNOT
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST PEOPLE ON M
80, AND IN FACT, THEY'RE
INCENTIVIZES LOTS OF TRAINING TO
BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
OFFERED OR LINK PEOPLE TO THAT
CARE, BUT RECOVERY BRIDGE
HOUSING OR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
FOR PEOPLE COMING IN FOR PEOPLE
IN RE ENTRY IS NOT SIMILARLY
REGULATED. THESE HOUSING OFTEN
PROHIBIT PEOPLE ENTERING FROM
USING M 80. ONE WAY TO MAKE SURE
THIS HAPPENS. ONE WAY TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE PREVENT THIS IS TO
CUT FUNDING FROM PUBLIC ENTITIES
PROBATION PAROLE. UH ARE OFTEN
SEEKING HOUSING FOR PEOPLE
COMING OUT OF PRISONS, AND THEY
ARE USING THOSE DOLLARS TO, UH,
TO PAY FOR THAT HOUSING.
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HEALTH, RIGHT
3 60 CASE, MANAGE MANY PEOPLE
COMING OUT OF THESE SERVICES AND
CAN'T FIND WE CAN FIND HOUSING
FOR PEOPLE, BUT NOT IF THEY ARE
ON MEDICATIONS FOR ADDICTION
TREATMENT, AND SO WHAT WE'RE
ASKING FOR IS THAT THOSE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT THAT ARE
RECEIVING THOSE FOLKS HAVE TO
ATTEST THAT THEY WILL NOT
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST PEOPLE ON M
80. THEY HAVE TO SIGN AN
ATTESTATION. THAT WAY, PEOPLE
COMING OUT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SITUATION, CRIMINAL JUSTICE WILL
BE ABLE TO ACCESS HOUSING. SO
THANK YOU FOR THIS FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS IN CALIFORNIA, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG
PROGRAM EXECUTIVES LIKE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, HANEY SAID.
THIS BILL DUE TO SIGNIFICANT
THINGS, IT'LL STOP
DISCRIMINATION FOR PEOPLE ON
MATT. BUT IT ALSO IS PART OF THE
LARGER STATEWIDE SOLUTION FOR
HOMELESSNESS AND JUST IN
CALIFORNIA. IN 2021, A RECORD
HIGH OF 10,900 PEOPLE DIED FROM
A DRUG OVERDOSE, NOT JUST
OPIOID, BUT A DRUG OVERDOSE.
THAT'S UP FROM 75% PRIOR TO THE
PANDEMIC. UM MATT, AS VIKA AND
SOMEONE ROUHANI WAS SAYING IS
ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE
TREATMENTS FOR SUBSTANCE USE
DISORDERS. UM IT'S SO SUCCESSFUL
THAT D HCS SUPPORTS IT, AND IT'S
ACTUALLY PROVIDED BY CDCR DURING
THE RE ENTRY PROCESS. THESE
REPLACEMENT OPTIONS HELP ADDRESS
THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF
DETOXIFICATION AND, MORE
IMPORTANTLY, TO PREVENT
OVERDOSES. NEVERTHELESS SOME OF
THE MOST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT
OPTIONS IS ALSO THE MOST
SIGNIFICANT BARRIER TO FINDING
AND KEEPING A PLACE TO LIVE FOR
INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE PART OF THE
REENTRY POPULATION. MANY
CONSUMERS FACE HOUSING
DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE SOME
PROGRAMS LIKE WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT DON'T ACCEPT CLIENTS ON
MATT. BUT CALIFORNIA'S FEE HA
PROTECTS PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY
HAVE A MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS. WE DO
KNOW THAT TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
PROGRAM AND SEVERAL LIVING
COMMUNITIES ARE DENYING
ADMISSION BASED ON SOMEONE'S
MATT STATUS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT
CLEAN SUBURBS SOBER. MANY WHO
FACED THIS DISCRIMINATION WERE
ACTUALLY PRESCRIBED AS WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT MATT DURING THE
LAST PART OF THEIR SENTENCE, AND
MATT AS PART OF THEIR PRE
RELEASE PROGRAM. UM IT IS CLEAR
THAT THIS BIAS NOT ONLY COULD
FORCE CLIENTS BACK INTO
WITHDRAWAL SYMPTOMS BUT IT ALSO
PUTS PEOPLE AT RISK OF BECOMING
ONE MORE OF THE 115,000 ON
HOUSED INDIVIDUALS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. YES THEY COULD SUE
BECAUSE AS WE TALKED ABOUT THEY
HAVE A QUALIFIED MEDICAL REASON,
BUT IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY. THERE
ARE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT FINDING
HOUSING AND THEN THEY ARE ABOUT
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION. SO A B
13 39 WILL FIX THIS PROBLEM BY
PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION
WITHIN PUBLICLY FUNDED PROGRAMS
WERE GRATEFUL TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HANEY FOR
AUTHORING THIS BILL, AND WE'RE
HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU. UH AND MS TRAINING. YOU
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS?
YES. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? WESLEY
SABER WITH HEALTH, RIGHT 3 16 IN
SAN FRANCISCO. TREATMENT ON
DEMAND COALITION AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HI DARBY
KERNAN, REPRESENTING AMITY
FOUNDATION AND WEST CARE.
DEBORAH DISABILITY RIGHTS,
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SEEING
NONE. WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
SAYING NONE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
OKAY LETS PAP PAP AND MOVES THE
BILL. MR RIVAS SECONDS. AH! MS.
TRAINEE MAKE CLOTHES. I KNOW
WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE
FENTANYL AND OPIOID ADDICTION
EPIDEMIC. THIS IS A SOLUTION.
LET'S GET PEOPLE INTO TREATMENT.
LET'S GET THEM HELP AND LET'S
MAKE SURE THEY CAN ACCESS
HOUSING. THAT'S THE WAY WE CAN
CONFRONT THIS EPIDEMIC.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION DO
PASS TWO AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ASKED
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
HIÆN I, SALI. CONNELLY DIXON.
DIXON I HANEY I CHOLERA. BUT
CHECK UP OH, I PAPIN REYES
RIVAS. ALL RIGHT. SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ, A YOUR BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS
MCKENNA. YOU HAVE TWO BILLS.
WE'LL START WITH A B 9 37. AND
THEN MAYBE 14 18.
GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. I WOULD LIKE TO
BEGIN BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS AND
THANKING THE COMMITTEE CHAIR AND
CONSULTANTS FOR THEIR WORK ON
THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE AND HELPING
TO IMPROVE THE BILL AND HELP
THIS VULNERABLE POPULATION.
THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHEN A CHILD
IS REMOVED FROM THE CUSTODY OF
THEIR PARENTS, PARENTS ARE
TYPICALLY ENTITLED TO
REUNIFICATION SERVICES IN ORDER
TO STABILIZE AND REGAIN CUSTODY
DURING THIS REUNIFICATION PERIOD
, A SOCIAL WORKER MUST PROVIDE
REASONABLE SERVICES TO A PARENT
THAT ARE TAILORED TO RESOLVE THE
ISSUE THAT LED TO THE FAMILY
SEPARATION CURRENTLY IF A COUNTY
FAILS TO PROVIDE SERVICES WITHIN
18 MONTHS WINDOW FOR PARENTS TO
UTILIZE SERVICES, THERE'S NO
GUARANTEE THAT THE COURTS WILL
EXTEND THE TIMELINE TO GIVE
PARENTS A FAIR CHANCE TO REUNIFY
. AN EXAMPLE OF THIS ISSUE WAS
DECIDED IN THE SUPREME COURT
THIS PAST WEEK IN THE CASE OF
MICHAEL G, WHERE A FAMILY WAS
DENIED ADDITIONAL RENEWED
REUNIFICATION AFTER NOT
RECEIVING APPROPRIATE SERVICES
UNTIL THE END OF THE 18 MONTH
WINDOW. THIS RESULTED IN IN THE
PERMANENT SEPARATION OF A FAMILY
THAT HAD SHOWN POSITIVE
IMPROVEMENTS AND ENGAGEMENT IN
STABILIZING AND FAVORED A
REUNIFICATION OUTCOME. CURRENTLY
THERE IS AN EXCEPTION TO EXTEND
SERVICES FOR PARENTS IF THEY ARE
INCARCERATED IN THE CUSTODY OF
ICE OR SEEKING SUBSTANCE ABUSE,
COUNSELING AND CANNOT ADEQUATELY
RECEIVED OR UTILIZE SERVICES. A
B 937 WILL APPLY THE EXCEPTION
FOR ALL FAMILIES SEEKING
REUNIFICATION SERVICES, AS LONG
AS THE COURTS DETERMINED THAT IT
IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE CHILD.
TO REUNIFY WITH THE FAMILY. MY
WITNESSES IN COMMITTEE WITH ME
TODAY ARE JULIE HANNIGAN WITH
LEGAL DEPENDENT SERVICES AND
JODY ROGERS. THANK YOU. FIRST
WITNESS. GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE AND THANK YOU. MY
NAME IS JULIA HANNIGAN AND I AM
POLICY DIRECTOR FOR DEPENDENCY
LEGAL SERVICES, WHICH REPRESENTS
PARENTS AND CHILDREN IN CHILD
WELFARE PROCEEDINGS IN SIX
NORTHERN AND CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
COUNTIES. I ALSO WORK AS AN
ATTORNEY AND I HAVE SPENT A
LITTLE OVER 10 YEARS DIRECTLY
REPRESENTING PARENTS,
INDEPENDENCY COURT. DURING THIS
TIME I HAVE SEEN MANY CLIENTS
MAKE ASTONISHING LIFE CHANGES
THROUGH SUPPORTIVE SERVICES
TYPICALLY MEET PARENTS ABOUT 48
HOURS AFTER THEIR CHILDREN HAVE
BEEN REMOVED. FOR MOST OF THESE
FAMILIES. THIS IS THE WORST
MOMENT OF THEIR LIVES. I MEAN
PARENTS THAT ARE DEEP IN THEIR
ADDICTION OR IN THE MIDST OF A
PROLONGED CYCLE OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE. AFTER A SUCCESSFUL
PERIOD OF REUNIFICATION. I HAVE
CLIENTS THAT LEAD LIVES THAT ARE
UNRECOGNIZABLE TO THE ONES THAT
LED THEM TO CHILD WELFARE
INTERVENTION. I HAVE CLIENTS
THAT WORK SO HARD TO MAKE
CHANGES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO
CREATE A SAFE HOME FOR THEIR
CHILDREN AND TO MAKE SURE THEY
ARE NEVER SEPARATED AGAIN.
HOWEVER, I HAVE ALSO SEEN THE
OPPOSITE. FAILURE TO PROVIDE
PROPER REFERRALS TO HOUSING
SUPPORT. CONSISTENT VISITATION
OR PROPER THERAPEUTIC SERVICES
CAN STOP A PARENT'S PROGRESS IN
THEIR TRACKS. I HAVE SEEN
FAMILIES FOREVER SEPARATED
BECAUSE OF INSUFFICIENT
VISITATION. OUR PARENTS WHO WERE
REFERRED TO SERVICES HUNDREDS OF
MILES FROM WHERE THEY LIVED
PARENTS WHO ARE DESPERATELY
TRYING TO REUNITE, BUT THE
SOCIAL WORKER NEVER READ THE
COURT ORDERED PSYCH EVIL OR
PROVIDED THOSE RECOMMENDED
SERVICES. 89 37 ENSURES THAT IF
THE COURT DOES FIND THAT A
SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY HAS NOT
PROVIDED REASONABLE SERVICE
SERVICES, THE PARENTS SHALL. IN
MOST INCIDENTS, INSTANCES BE
ENTITLED TO MORE TIME TO PUT
THEIR FAMILIES BACK TOGETHER.
THIS WILL ENSURE THAT THERE ARE
CONSEQUENCES TO THE AGENCY'S
FAILURE IN THEIR OBLIGATION TO
WORK TOWARDS REUNITING FAMILIES
, AND IT WILL ENSURE THAT
FAMILIES THAT HAVE THE CAPACITY
TO REUNITE WILL BE GIVEN UP.
THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY IF WE GO TO THE NEXT
WITNESS. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
BE HEARD TODAY. MY NAME IS JODY
ROGERS. I AM A MOTHER WHO HAS
NAVIGATED REUNIFICATION SERVICES
WITH MY OWN CHILDREN. IF IT
WEREN'T FOR THE SERVICES THAT I
RECEIVED. WHEN MY CHILDREN WERE
REMOVED, I WOULD NOT BE STANDING
HERE TODAY TO TELL YOU WHY THIS
SUPPORT IS SO IMPORTANT TO
FAMILIES. I WOULD LIKELY STILL
BE HOMELESS, ADDICTED TO DRUGS
AND IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP,
MENTALLY AND EMOTIONALLY BROKEN
AND LIVING WITHOUT MY CHILDREN.
MY CHILDREN WOULD NOT HAVE HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY TO WATCH THEIR
MOTHER HEAL AND GROW AND SHOW
THEM THAT WAS SUPPORT. WE CAN
COME BACK STRONGER AND BETTER.
THAT WE CAN HEAL FROM OUR TRAUMA
AND LIVE A HEALTHY AND
PRODUCTIVE LIFE. WITH THAT SAID
, I CANNOT BEGIN TO TELL YOU HOW
IMPORTANT SUPPORT SERVICES ARE.
FOR PARENTS TRYING TO REUNIFY
WITH THEIR CHILDREN WHILE FACING
THE CHALLENGES OF THE CHILD
WELFARE SYSTEM. FAMILIES HEAL
AND OVERCOME THESE CHALLENGES
WHEN SUPPORT IS WRAPPED AROUND
THEM. TODAY I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE
OF MENTORING MANY PARENTS IN THE
REUNIFICATION PROCESS. WHEN
SUPPORT AND TIMELY SERVICES ARE
GIVEN TO THESE FAMILIES. I SEE
SO MANY GREAT CHANGES. I SEE
PARENTS RECOVER FROM
HOMELESSNESS AND DRUG AND
ALCOHOL ADDICTION. I SEE THEM
LEARN TO MANAGE THEIR MENTAL
HEALTH AS WELL AS THEIR PHYSICAL
WELL BEING. I SEE THEM BREAK THE
CYCLE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND
I SEE THEM REUNITE WITH THEIR
CHILDREN AND LIVING A LIFE THAT
THEY NEVER IMAGINED POSSIBLE
VERY MUCH LIKE MYSELF. I HAVE
ALSO SEEN PARENTS WHO HAVE NOT
RECEIVED SERVICES. THAT THEY
SHOULD IN THE SAME WAY THAT I
DID WITHOUT SERVICES LIKE
VISITATION. HOUSING SUPPORTS.
DRUG REHAB AND THERAPY. FAMILIES
WON'T SUCCEED. THE SUPPORTS.
GIVE US THE TOOLS THAT WE NEED
THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE BEFORE TO
BECOME STRONG PARENTS TO OUR
CHILDREN. IF REASONABLE SERVICES
ARE NOT OFFERED, THEN NOTHING
CHANGES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
, AND WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? NICOLE
WARD WOMAN ON BEHALF OF THE
CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP AND
SUPPORT. ROBIN ROBINS FOSTER
PARENTS, THEN I'M A COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA FOR 20 YEARS AND
SUPPORT OF THE A B 937. JULIE
MCCORMICK CHILDREN'S LAW CENTER
OF CALIFORNIA, PROUD CO. SPONSOR
THIS BILL IN STRONG SUPPORT.
ALIEN WITH ROUTINE REBOUND,
ANOTHER PROUD CO SPONSOR AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEN NONE.
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. SEE
NONE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE. MS REYES. WHAT A
COMMON SENSE THING TO DO. TO
MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMEBODY NEEDS
MORE TIME IT'S PROVIDED BUT HERE
EVEN MORE SO TO SAY YOU WILL
PROVIDE IT UNLESS IT'S
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. BUT YOU WILL
PROVIDED I REALLY APPRECIATE THE
LANGUAGE OF THE BILL AND THANK
YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY. I
DON'T KNOW IF THE BILL HAS BEEN
MOVED SECOND MOTION FROM
ISRAEL'S SECOND FROM MS DIXON
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. S¼ NONE.
MISS MCKINNEY, YOU MAY CLOSE
THANK YOU MEMBERS AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED. TO HUMAN SERVICES
ESCORT TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN SALLY CONNELLY
CONNELLY I. DIXON DIXON HIGH.
HANEY I CORA. PACHECO PACHECO, I
PAPIN HAPPENED. I RAISE RIVAS
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ UP. YOUR BILL IS
OUT. THANK YOU. AND NEXT, BILL,
MISS MCKENNA IS A B 14 18.
THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND WOULD
LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIR AND HIS
STAFF FOR ALL OF THEIR WORK ON
THIS BILL, AS WELL. MAYBE 14 18
ADDRESSES LOCAL ORDINANCES THAT
ARE TOUTED AS A RESPONSE TO
RISING CRIME AND ENCOURAGE AND
OFTENTIMES REQUIRE LANDLORDS TO
EVICT IN. IT'S BASED ON
ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
, EVEN THOUGH EVEN THOUGH EVEN
IF THOSE ALLEGATIONS DO NOT LEAD
TO AN CONVENTION OR EVEN AN
ARREST THE U. S DEPARTMENT HAS
RECOGNIZED THAT THESE POLICIES
PERPETUATE RESIDENTIAL
SEGREGATION. THESE ORDINANCE ARE
OFTEN ADOPTED IN COMMUNITIES
THAT HAVE SEEN A RECENT INCREASE
IN THE BLACK AND LATINO
POPULATION EVEN WHILE CRIME
RATES HAVE DECREASED. THESE
ORDINANCES ALSO OFTEN PENALIZED
PEOPLE SEEKING HELP FROM THE
POLICE OR OTHER EMERGENCY
SERVICES, A CALL FOR HELP. FOR A
DOMESTIC DISPUTE OR MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS CAN TRIGGER A
REQUIREMENT THAT A LANDLORD
EVICT SOMEONE. OFTEN POLICE ARE
CALLED OUT TO A DISTURBANCE AND
JUST THE ACT OF THE POLICE
ANSWERING THE CALL IS ENOUGH
UNDER SOME OF THESE LOCAL
POLICIES TO BE CONSIDERED A
NUISANCE AND AT LANDLORD IS
REQUIRED TO EVICT ON THAT BASIS
ALONE. BLACK RESIDENTS ARE FOUR
TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE EVICTED
UNDER THESE POLICIES AND LATINO
SIX PEOPLE ARE 30% MORE LIKELY
TO FACE EVICTION. 80% OF THESE
EVICTIONS UNDER THESE SO CALLED
CRIME FREE HOUSING POLICIES ARE
NON WHITE AND CALIFORNIA. ONE
QUARTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
HAVEN'T ACTED A CRIME FREE
HOUSING ORDINANCE. MAYBE 14 18
WOULD PROHIBIT A LOCAL
GOVERNMENT FROM ENFORCING OR
IMPLEMENTING AN ORDINANCE THAT
WOULD IMPOSE A PENALTY. K¾T ON A
RESIDENT OR REQUIRE A LANDLORD
TO EVICT DUE TO CONTACT WITH THE
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. I ALSO
WANT TO NOTE THAT THIS BILL DOES
NOT PROHIBIT A LANDLORD FROM
EVICTING ATTENDANT DUE TO
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. THIS BILL
JUST CLARIFIES THAT THE LANDLORD
CANNOT BE PENALIZED FOR NOT
EVICTING THAT TENANT. I HAVE
HERE WITH ME. TERRANCE STEWART
WITH HASHTAG TIME DONE. WHO IS
GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT HOW THESE
ORDINANCE HAVE IMPACTED HIS
FAMILY AND MARCUS SEC, WHERE WHO
IS AN ATTORNEY WITH THE NATIONAL
HOUSING LAW PROJECT? THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. FIRST WITNESS. HELLO.
MY NAME IS TERRENCE STEWART. UM
I AM HONORED TODAY TO BE HERE TO
BE A VOICE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
UM, BUT I'M A FATHER. MY HUSBAND
. UM I'M A COMMUNITY MEMBER.
SOME PEOPLE EVEN CONSIDER ME A
HUMANITARIAN AND ANOTHER TITLE
THAT I DON'T FEEL LIKE I SHOULD
HAVE FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE IS
I'M A PERSON LIVING WITH THE
PAST CONVICTION. AND WHAT I WANT
MORE THAN ANYTHING IN THIS WORLD
IS TO BE SAFE. AND THAT'S WHAT
HOUSING TO HOUSING PROVIDES
SAFETY FOR PEOPLE. IT PROVIDES A
SHELTER PROTECTION, A PLACE OF
SECURITY THAT'S ABOUT MENTALLY
SOME HOUSES EAT SOME APARTMENTS
EVEN HAVE GYMS AND RECREATIONAL
CENTERS. DOG PARKS. AND THAT
SAFETY TO ME. BUT BECAUSE OF MY
RECORD AND HE'S QUIET, FREE
HOUSING PILOTS POLICIES, ME AND
MY FAMILY. WHAT WE HAVE FACED IS
HOMELESSNESS. AND NOT JUST ME,
BUT MY WIFE, MY CHILD AND WHO
HAD NEVER COMMITTED A CRIME IN
THEIR LIFE. AND THEN ON TOP OF
THAT, WE CAN'T EVEN FEEL SAFE
BECAUSE IF WE CALL THE POLICE
WERE AT RISK OF BEING A VICTIM.
SO OVER ARCHING LEE. YOU KNOW? I
JUST WANT TO BE SAFE. AND BY, UM
, RADAR STUFF WITH THESE
COORDINATES. UM INCREASES SOME
ART AND LESS SAFETY. THANK YOU
NEXT WITNESS. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. ESTEEM COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARCUS
SEGURA, STAFF ATTORNEY WITH THE
NATIONAL HOUSING LAW PROJECT,
THE POLICIES THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MCKENNA AND MR
STEWART UH, TALKED ABOUT
ACCOMPLISHED, DISCRIMINATORY AND
DISPLACING EFFECT THROUGH
SWEEPING PROVISIONS THAT GO WELL
BEYOND ADDRESSING ACTUAL CRIME,
INNOCENCE ACTIVITY. UH FOR
EXAMPLE, FRESNO'S CRIME FREE
NUISANCE ORDINANCE DEFINES
NUISANCE IN AN INCREDIBLY
INCREDIBLY BROAD TERMS.
INCLUDING CAUSING ANNOYANCE OR
DISCOMFORT TO AN ORDINARY PERSON
OF NORMAL SENSITIVITIES AND THE
DISRUPTION OF THE CHARACTER OF
THE COMMUNITY. SO THESE TERMS
ARE CAPABLE OF INTERPRETATIONS
THAT MAY WELL INCLUDE, UH
PERFECTLY LAWFUL ACTIVITIES THAT
ARE NEITHER A CRIME OR A
NUISANCE. RIVERSIDE'S NUISANCE
ORDINANCE PROHIBITS LOUD AND
UNRULY BEHAVIOR. UH WHICH
DEFINES TO INCLUDE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE WITHOUT DISTINGUISHING
BETWEEN A PERPETRATOR AND VICTIM
FOR PURPOSES OF LIABILITY.
RIVERSIDE ORDNANCE ALSO MAKES
LANDLORD AND OR TENANTS LIABLE
FOR THE COST OF WHAT THEY CALL
EXTRAORDINARY POLICE SERVICE. UH
WHICH MAY INCLUDE A SINGLE
RESPONSE BY MULTIPLE OFFICERS,
NO MATTER THE UNDERLYING REASON
FOR THE CALL. AH FREMONT IN
MURRIETA HAVE WHAT THEY CALL
CRIME FREE PROGRAMS, AND THOSE
PROGRAMS REQUIRE OR ENCOURAGE
THE USE OF A CRIME FREE LEASE.
ADDENDUM UH, REQUIRES A PERSON'S
EVICTION. UM ON THAT THAT OCCURS
EITHER ON OR OFF THE PROPERTY,
WHETHER THERE'S A CONVICTION OR
EVEN WHEN THERE'S NO CONVICTION,
WHERE THERE IS NO ARREST OR EVEN
A FORMAL CHARGE. SO THESE TYPES
OF POLICIES, UH ARE THE TYPES OF
POLICIES THIS BILL WILL
ELIMINATE POLICIES THAT ARE
SWEEPING, UNTETHERED FROM THE
STATED PURPOSE OF FIGHTING CRIME
AND NUISANCE BEHAVIOR, AND THEY
ARE DESIGNED TO DISPLACE
COMMUNITIES DEEMED UNDESIRABLE
FOR ARBITRARY AND DISCRIMINATORY
REASONS. AND SO WITH THAT, I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THE COMMITTEE MAY HAPPEN. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. DEBORAH DISABILITY
RIGHTS, CALIFORNIA ALSO HERE ON
BEHALF I FEEL YOU CALIFORNIA
ACTION. ER SEASON PROUD
COSPONSOR OF THE BILL AND A C L
U IS IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
THANK YOU. NICOLE WARD ULLMAN ON
BEHALF OF THE CHILDREN'S
PARTNERSHIP, ALSO IN SUPPORT.
DEBORAH CARLSON WITH THE
CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, PAT MORAN WITH AARON
READING ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RENTAL
HOUSING ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. ALIEN WITH WRITTEN
REBOUND, PROUD COSPONSOR OF THIS
BILL AND SUPPORT. TINA RESULTS
WITH THE WESTERN CENTER ON LAW
AND POVERTY, PROUD CO SPONSOR
AND SUPPORT. ON YOUR COLLAR ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA RURAL
LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION OF
PODCAST, SPONSOR AND SUPPORT
ALSO IN SUPPORT FOR THE
CENTROLEGAL DELAROSA COALITION
FOR ECONOMIC SURVIVAL. THE
INTERCITY LAWCENTER LEGAL AID
MARIN LEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY
POLICY LINK PROJECT SENTINEL,
THE PUBLIC LAWCENTER BETSY TICK
LEGAL SERVICES, THE PUBLIC
INTEREST LAW PROJECT FAIR
HOUSING ADVOCATES OF NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC COUNSEL LEGAL
AID OF MARIN. COMMUNITIES UNITED
FOR RESTORATIVE YOUTH, JUSTICE
AND LEGAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS
WITH CHILDREN. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SAYING NONE WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION. SAYING NOTHING
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? MISS ROSS. I WANT
TO BEGIN FIRST BY WELCOMING MY
DEAR FRIEND TERRANCE STEWART.
IT'S SO GOOD TO HAVE RIVERSIDE
IN THE HOUSE. UM THANK YOU FOR
SHARING. UM UH WHO YOU ARE, I
THINK OTHER OTHER TITLES THAT
WOULD BE GIVEN TO YOU WOULD BE
LEADER AND MENTOR AND PROTECTOR
. SO MANY OTHER TITLES. UM SO I
APPRECIATE SO MUCH THAT YOU
PROVIDED YOUR TESTIMONY HERE
TODAY. UM BEING ABLE TO AND I
APPRECIATE THAT THE APARTMENT
OWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS ALSO IS
ALSO VOICING THEIR SUPPORT FOR
THE BILL. THEY DON'T WANT TO
HAVE TO EVICT. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE
ORDINANCES THAT, UM, GIVE A PATH
FOR EVICTION, THAT BECOMES A
PROBLEM. SO WITH THAT I WOULD
MOVE THE BILL. THANK YOU HAVE
EMOTION FROM MS REYES. SECOND
FROM MR HANEY ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SAYING NONE. UH MISS
MCKINNEY. YOU MAY CLOSE. YES UM
, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
YOU ALSO TERRENCE FOR BEING A
PROTECTOR OF YOUR FAMILY. SO WE
HAVE A MOTION DO PASS AS AMENDED
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
ASKED THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL HIGH, CONNELLY CONNELLY
. I DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY I
KARA THE CHECKUP. I PAPIN. AYE.
REYES RIVAS SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ I
BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU, MISS
PETRIE-NORRIS. MS PETRIE-NORRIS
IS PRESENTING A B 10 27. THANK
YOU. HELLO. GOOD MORNING. I GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY
TO PRESENT A B 10 27. I THINK
EVERYONE GOES WITHOUT SAYING
THAT EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM
RECOGNIZES THE URGENCY OF THE
FUNCTIONAL CRISIS. UM WE ALL
WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
UM AND THE BILL BEFORE YOU TODAY
A B 10 27. AIMS TO BE PART OF
THE SOLUTION. 80 10 27. I WILL,
UH, BE PART OF THE SOLUTION BY
ENACTING STORAGE REQUIREMENTS
FOR SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES. AND
I WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND
YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF ARE WORKING
WITH MY TEAM ON THIS BILL AND
HAPPY TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE'S
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS. AND I
GUESS BEFORE I JUMP IN, LET ME
JUST TAKE A MINUTE TO KIND OF
FRAME AT THE PROBLEM STATEMENT
AND THEN PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT
AROUND WHY WE THINK THAT THE
SOLUTION PROPOSED IN THE BILL IS
AN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD. SO
FENTANYL. UH THE FENTANYL CRISIS
HAS BECOME THE MOST DEADLY AND
DANGEROUS DRUG IN THE WORLD. I'M
JUST TWO MG OF FENTANYL IS
ENOUGH TO KILL. SO THAT'S TWO
GRAINS OF SAND AND IN 2020.
ALMOST 4000 CALIFORNIANS DIED
BECAUSE OF FENTANYL POISONING.
THAT IS A 1551. INCREASE IN A
FOUR YEAR PERIOD. AND UM WE'RE
REALLY SEEING TOO DISTURBING
TRENDS THAT ARE THAT HAVE
DRAMATICALLY ESCALATED THE
DANGERS OF THE PENSIONABLE
CRISIS. SO THE FIRST IS
DECEPTIVE USE OF FENTANYL IN
COUNTERFEIT PILLS, SO PEOPLE
THINK THAT THEY ARE BUYING AND
OXYCONTIN OR PERCOCET, OR YOU
NAME IT, AND IT'S LACED WITH
FENTANYL. IN SOME CASES, IT'S
PURE FENTANYL. AND THEN THE
SECOND TREND THAT WE'RE SEEING
IS THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA TO
TRAFFIC. THESE PILLS TO OUR KIDS
AND SO WE HAVE JUST HEARD. I
THINK ALL OF US HAVE HEARD
HEARTBREAKING STORIES IN OUR OWN
COMMUNITIES OF PARENTS WHOSE
KIDS THOUGHT THEY WERE BUYING A
PERCOCET AND ENDED UP BUYING A
FENTANYL PILL AND TRAGICALLY
LOST THEIR LIVES. SO UM, WE'VE
SEEN A DEAL. DEALERS HAVE
CAPITALIZED ON THE EASY
COMMUNICATION AND THEN AND AN
ENEMY. MY GOD, THAT'S A HARD
WORD. A SOCIAL MEDIA SITES
TARGET PRE TEENS, TEENS AND
HOUSED YEARS, SOME SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS HAVE CHATS, CHAT
SETTINGS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO
ERASE HISTORY AFTER JUST A FEW
HOURS, WHICH MAKES IT DIFFICULT
, UM AND ACTUALLY KIND OF
IMPOSSIBLE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
TO ACTUALLY INVESTIGATE CRIMES,
INVESTIGATE DEATHS AND PROSECUTE
ONLINE PENSIONABLE TRAFFICKERS.
SO MAYBE 10 27 SIMPLY WOULD
REQUIRE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES
TO KEEP A RECORD OF
COMMUNICATIONS FOR A MINIMUM OF
SEVEN DAYS, AND THIS REALLY WILL
PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH
CRITICAL INFORMATION THAT CAN
HELP WITH THEIR INVESTIGATIONS
WERE ASKING SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES TO STEP UP TO DO A
LITTLE BIT MORE AND BE OUR
PARTNERS AS WE AS WE ALL ENGAGED
IN THIS FIGHT AND CONTINUE TO
WORK TO COMBAT THE PENSION
CRISIS. SO PLEASED TO BE JOINED
TODAY BY CHRIS DIDIER, WHO IS
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AVOID
AND CARL DOCILE AND THE
NARCOTICS INVESTIGATOR WITH THE
ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU FIRST
WITNESS. THANK YOU AGAIN. MY
NAME IS CARL DOCILE AND I'M IN
NARCOTICS INVESTIGATOR WITH THE
ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT. I AM HERE ON BEHALF
OF SHERIFF DON BARNES, WHO IS IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL AND
EXPRESSES HIS GRATITUDE FOR THE
INTRODUCTION OF IT. AND THE
SHERIFF HAS SAID MANY TIMES IN
THE PAST THAT HE BELIEVES THE
FINAL EPIC EPIDEMIC IS ONE OF
OUR NATION'S MOST SIGNIFICANT
HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS, AND
I FULLY AGREE WITH THAT. I HAVE
SEEN FIRSTHAND AND WORKED IN THE
FIELD AND WITNESSED THE RISE OF
FENTANYL FROM UH, MERELY NOT
EXISTING AT ALL TO HAVING BECOME
ONE OF THE MOST COMMON AND AH,
DEADLY DRUGS OUT THERE TODAY,
FENNEL HAS COMPLETELY ALMOST
COMPLETELY REPLACED HEROIN. UM
AND IT'S INVOLVED IN ALMOST
EVERY INVESTIGATION WE HAVE IN
OUR CASELOAD RIGHT NOW. AH, JUST
IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. THE, UH
LETHALITY OF FENTANYL HAS REALLY
BEEN OPENED OUR EYES IN 2016,
THE ORANGE COUNTY CORONER
REPORTED. I BELIEVE 37 FENTANYL
RELATED DEATHS AND IN 2021, THAT
NUMBER WAS UP TO 717. ALSO FOR
THE YEAR. 2021 UNFORTUNATELY,
FENTANYL RELATED OVERDOSE WAS
THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH
REPORTED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY
CORNER AND THOSE 17 AND YOUNGER
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE TRUTH IS
THAT SOCIAL MEDIA IS SO
PREVALENT WITH EASE OF ACCESS,
UH, AND AVAILABILITY OF MODERN
TECHNOLOGIES SUCH AS SMART
PHONES. UM AND IF I CAN DO IT,
UM GUARANTEE ANY HIGH SCHOOL OR
CAN DO IT AS WELL. I HAVE
PERSONALLY WORKED SEVERAL
INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING SOCIAL
MEDIA SPECIFICALLY, THE D A. HAS
INVESTIGATED, UM, JUST LAST YEAR
BETWEEN THE MONTHS OF MAY AND
SEPTEMBER. THREE ABOUT 390 DRUG
RELATED OVERDOSE CASES AND FOUND
THAT ABOUT A THIRD OF THOSE OR
DIRECTLY TIED TO SOCIAL MEDIA.
AND AGAIN THE INVESTIGATIONS
THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY BEEN A
PART OF OR CONDUCTED INVOLVE
SIMPLY IDENTIFYING ACCOUNTS AND,
UM ORDERING NARCOTICS TO
ASSISTING HOMICIDE. DETAILS WITH
OVERDOSE DEATH CASES THE PROBLEM
THAT WE ARE COMING ACROSS AS THE
RETENTION OF RECORDS AND
AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS BY THESE
COMPANIES, UH, COMPANIES SUCH AS
SNAP INCORPORATED ONLY RETAINED
24 HOURS WORTH, BUT THAT'S JUST
SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. USUALLY 24
HOURS HAS COME AND GONE BEFORE.
AND INVESTIGATORS EVEN ABLE TO
SUBMIT ANY LEGAL PROCESS TO
THOSE COMPANIES. SO AGAIN. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF SHERIFF BARNES, WHO
ASKED FOR YOUR SUPPORT NEXT
WITNESS. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
CHRIS SEEDIER. I'M A MEMBER OF
VOID, AND I'M GRATEFUL TO SPEAK
TO YOU TODAY. TWO DAYS AFTER
CHRISTMAS, I FOUND MY YOUNGEST
SON, ZACH, APPEARING TO BE
ASLEEP IN HIS BEDROOM. BUT NOT
BREATHING. LOSING A CHILD FROM A
DANGER WE HAD NOT HEARD OF
BEFORE, IS AN UNSPEAKABLE LOSS.
ZACH WAS SOLD A FAKE
PRESCRIPTION PILL THROUGH
SNAPCHAT. DESPITE HAVING NO
HISTORY OF DRUG USE. ZACK DIED
FROM FENTANYL POISONING AT AGE
17. ZACK AND OTHERS WERE SO
DEADLY FAKE PILLS ADVERTISED AS
HARMLESS PERCOCET. MANY SOCIAL
MEDIA PLATFORMS GIVE THE
APPEARANCE OF A SAFE VENEER OF A
TRUSTWORTHY APP THAT'S
ENTERTAINING. HOWEVER FEATURES
LIKE SCREENSHOT PROTECTION, SELF
DESTRUCTION MESSAGES AND
ENCRYPTION MAKES SOCIAL MEDIA
ACTIVITY BOTH EPHEMERAL AND
PROTECTED. THESE FEATURES HAVE
HELPED BUILD A PATCHWORK DRUG
CARTEL MAKING CELLPHONES A
SUPERHIGHWAY. FOR ILLICIT DRUG
TRAFFICKING. THESE UNREGULATED
DESIGNS MAKE IT RIFE FOR
DANGEROUS CONTENT THAT ONLY
BOLSTERS AND A FERIA SACKED
YVETTE E. THE SAFE HARBOR OF
SECTION 2 30 C OF THE
COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT.
DISINCENTIVIZE IS THE ADOPTION
OF SAFE FEATURES THE HUBRIS OF
BIG TECH, BELIEVING THAT THEY
ARE SHIELDED FROM LIABILITY
PREVENTS COMPANIES FROM
IMPLEMENTING APPROPRIATE
SAFEGUARDS. CAR MAKING COMPANIES
WOULDN'T INVEST IN SEATBELTS
AIRBAGS UNLESS MINUSTAH IMPOSES
CRASH TEST REQUIREMENTS OR FOOD
RETAILERS WOULDN'T INVEST IN
STORES PROCESSING OR PROPER
LABELING, AND THAT'S THE FDA
IMPOSES HANDLING CODES AND
REGULATIONS. CURRENT LAWS NEVER
INTENDED TO PROVIDE LEGAL
PROTECTION TO WEBSITES THAT
UNLAWFULLY FACILITATE HARMFUL
CONTENT. PUBLIC LAW 1 15-1 64 IS
A CLEAR EXAMPLE THAT PROHIBITS
ONLINE SEX TRAFFICKING. IN
CONCLUSION. A PERSON DIED SEVEN
MINUTES AGO FROM ILLICIT
FENTANYL IN OUR COUNTRY. CLEARLY
THERE IS A NEEDED AND FLEXION
POINT WITH SOCIAL MEDIA THAT
LEVEE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR BOTH
HARMFUL CONTENT AND NOT
COMPLYING WITH COURT AUTHORIZED
SUBPOENAS. PLEASE SUPPORT MAYBE
10. 27 THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. AND YOUR I VOTE.
THANK YOU, SIR. VERY SORRY FOR
YOUR LOSS ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEN NONE. WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
DYLAN HOFFMAN ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET AND WHERE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED TO MAYBE 10 27 1ST OUR
PLATFORMS VERY MUCH SHARE THE
GOAL OF THE AUTHOR AND TRYING TO
ELIMINATE DRUG TRAFFICKING ON
OUR SITES. IT'S NOT SOMETHING
THAT WE WANT. IT'S PROHIBITED ON
OUR SITES. IT'S ALSO ILLEGAL
CONTENT. WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO
TRY TO REMOVE IT, SO WE TAKE
PRETTY AGGRESSIVE ACTIONS WHEN
WE COME ACROSS THIS CONTENT. UM,
WE USE PRETTY SOPHISTICATED
AUTOMATED SYSTEMS TO IN ORDER TO
DETECT IT. UM AND PICK UP ON
TRAFFICKERS ACTIVITIES AS WELL,
UM, SO THAT WE'RE NOT JUST
RELYING ON USER REPORTS,
ALTHOUGH WE DO, UM, ALLOW USERS
THE ABILITY TO REPORT UNLAWFUL
ACTIVITY ON OUR PLATFORMS AND
THEN FOLLOW UP ON IT, SO WE'RE
VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO
BEING PARTNERS IN THIS
CONVERSATION. AND TRYING TO MAKE
PROGRESS ON THIS ISSUE, AND SO,
TO THAT END, WE GREATLY
APPRECIATE THE RECENT AMENDMENTS
THAT REMOVE THE STRICT LIABILITY
PROVISIONS AND TO LIMIT
ENFORCEMENT ON THE RETENTION
SECTION TO PUBLIC PROSECUTORS.
SO WE THINK THIS BILL IS
TRENDING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
UH THAT WILL ENABLE A MORE
PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION NOT JUST
BETWEEN SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS,
BUT BETWEEN OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT
PARTNERS, CIVIL SOCIETY AND THIS
LEGISLATURE. SO AGAIN, WE CAN
CONTINUE MAKING PROGRESS ON THIS
ISSUE. I WILL JUST QUICKLY
HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF CONCERNS
THAT WE STILL HAVE WITH THE
RETENTION ISSUE. AND I THINK
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE
THINGS THAT YOU KNOW THERE ARE A
FEW VALUES THAT ARE SOMEWHAT
INTENTION. UM SO WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT INCREASING
SECURITY AND SAFETY ON PLATFORMS
, WE MAY BE TALKING ABOUT
REDUCING PRIVACY. AND SO ONE
THING THAT OUR PLATFORMS HAVE
TRIED TO DO IN RESPONSE TO
PRIVACY CONCERNS BOTH FROM OUR
USERS, BUT ALSO THIS
LEGISLATURE. IS TO INCORPORATE
MORE FEATURES THAT PROTECT THEIR
INFORMATION AND THEIR DATA. THAT
IN PART IS THROUGH ENCRYPTED
MESSAGING. SO UM, ONLY THE
RECIPIENT AND THE CENTER OF THAT
MESSAGE ARE ABLE TO ACCESS THAT
INFORMATION. WHEN A MESSAGE IS
ENCRYPTED, IT'S PHYSICALLY
IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO ACCESS THAT
CONTENT. UM SO WITH THE
RETENTION REQUIREMENTS IN THIS
BILL UM, IF WE CAN'T ACCESS AN
ENCRYPTED MESSAGE THAN WE'RE
LIABLE FOR, UM NOT BEING ABLE TO
TURN THAT OVER, AND I THINK
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED. YOU KNOW WHEN WE'RE
MOVING FORWARD AND HAVING
DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS AROUND,
UM AS WE INCREASE SAFETY AND
SECURITY, WE MAY BE ASKING
PLATFORMS TO ROLL BACK SOME OF
THOSE PRIVACY CONCERNS, SO I
JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT.
VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO
CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION AND
APPRECIATE THE WORK OF THE
AUTHOR IN THIS COMMITTEE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? GOOD
MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS, NAOMI
ADRIN ON BEHALF OF THE COMPUTER
AND COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, ALSO IN OPPOSITION.
MARGARET GLADSTEIN ON BEHALF OF
NET CHOICE, ALSO IN OPPOSITION.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. SEEN NONE. UH
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MS. DIXON JUST FOR MY
OWN EDIFICATION. IS THERE ANY
LAW, STATE OR FEDERAL? THAT IS
ATTEMPTING TO LIMIT AND THERE'S
ILLEGAL ACTIVITY ON ON THE
INTERNET IS THEIR LAW. SO A LOT
OF THIS REALLY IS WITHIN THE
PURVIEW OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND IS WITHIN FEDERAL
JURISDICTION. KIND OF THE YOU
KNOW LIMITATIONS ON WHAT IS
HAPPENING ON THE SITES
THEMSELVES AND UM, YOU KNOW, I
WOULD. I WOULD SAY THAT THERE IS
A LOT OF CONVERSATION GOING ON
RIGHT NOW ON THE HILL, AND
ACTUALLY, OUR WITNESS PROBABLY
CAN COMMENT MORE ABOUT IT
BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE HAS
BEEN A RECOGNITION NATIONALLY.
THAT KIND OF THE CURRENT FREE
FOR ALL IS NOT WORKING, BUT
THAT'S NOT FOR US TO SAY. NOR IS
THAT KIND OF WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
THIS BILL, BUT RIGHT NOW, NO,
THERE ARE NO LIMITATIONS SUCH
THERE'S NO EXISTING LAW THAT
WOULD ACCOMPLISH HALF OF WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO SO AND SO WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS FIND
SOMETHING. UH STEP THAT WE CAN
TAKE WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE
STATE WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION TO
SIMPLY SAY, WELL, LET'S AT LEAST
STORE THE INFORMATION SO THAT
WHEN SOMEONE DIES, WE'RE ABLE TO
ACTUALLY ACCESS THAT INFORMATION
WHEN LAW ENFORCEMENT TRYING TO
CONDUCT THEIR INVESTIGATIONS,
YEAH, YEAH. UM YOU MENTIONED
SOMETHING NOW DO YOU REPRESENT
THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY OR YOUR
COMPANY OR WHAT'S YOUR ROLE IN
THE INDUSTRY TRADE ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTS ABOUT 100 COMPANIES
IN THE TECH AND INNOVATION
SPACE. MANY OF THEM ARE SOCIAL
MEDIA AND ONLINE PROVIDERS, AND
YOU MENTIONED A LIABILITY ISSUE.
THAT IF THE MESSAGE IS THERE
THOUGH. WITH WHATEVER THAT
COMMUNICATION IS ENCRYPTED.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT YOU CAN
ACCESS THAT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING? YEAH SO CURRENTLY UNDER
THE BILL, UM, WERE REQUIRED TO
RETAIN NOT ONLY ALL
COMMUNICATION LIKE A RECORD OF
ALL THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT
HAPPENED, BUT ALSO THE CONTENT
OF THOSE COMMUNICATIONS. AND SO
AS WE INTERPRET THE LANGUAGE,
UM, IF A MESSAGE IS ENCRYPTED,
WE'VE VERY LITERALLY DO NOT HAVE
THE CONTENT OF THAT THAT MESSAGE
AND SO WE CANNOT TURN THAT OVER,
EVEN IF IT'S REQUESTED, AND SO
THAT WOULD BE A BARRIER TO US,
UM, COMPLYING WITH THE LIVE AND
IN GOOD FAITH, SOMETHING
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THAT YOU'VE
CONSIDERED AND HOW ARE YOU
CONSIDERING THAT SO WE HAVE HAD
CONVERSATIONS WITH STEAK WITH
INDUSTRY STAKEHOLDERS AND, UH,
CERTAINLY, OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE NOT
GOING TO ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING
THAT'S ACTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE. UM
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
THAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO DOING
IS, YOU KNOW WITH SOME OF YOUR
MEMBER COMPANIES AND SOME OF OUR
KEY LAW ENFORCEMENT
STAKEHOLDERS. BRINGING EVERYONE
AROUND A TABLE TO DETERMINE FOR
THAT SET OF COMMUNICATION. SO
THE ENCRYPTED MESSAGES HOW CAN
WE ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL? UM,
WITHIN THE REALM OF WHAT? WHAT
IS ACTUALLY GOING? YES AND THEN
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT THIS THE
ONLY TOOL THAT HAS EXISTED AT
PRESENT TIME TO REALLY GO AFTER
ENFORCEMENT AND HAVING THIS
PERIOD OF TIME TO GO AFTER AND
LOOK AT THAT INVESTIGATION THAT
WILL FACILITATE YOUR
INVESTIGATION. ABSOLUTELY ALL
RIGHT. I MOVED THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MOTION FROM MS
DICKSON. SECOND FROM ISRAEL'S MR
HANEY. UM WELL, FIRST OF ALL, MR
PETRIE-NORRIS, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND FOR
TACKLING THIS WITH REAL
SOLUTIONS. IT'S TERRIFYING. AND
I'M SO SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS, AND
I REALLY COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING
ON THIS CHALLENGE OF ADDRESSING
THE FACT THAT FOR MANY PEOPLE
AND ESPECIALLY YOUNG PEOPLE,
THEY'RE ACCESSING THESE DEADLY
DRUGS. ONLINE THEY'RE BEING
TRICKED. THEY'RE BEING PREYED
UPON AND SO WE ABSOLUTELY NEED
SOLUTIONS IN THIS SPACE, AND SO
, UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL AND MOVING IT FORWARD. UM,
I DO HAVE SOME SOME CONCERNS,
PARTICULARLY RELATED TO PRIVACY
, UH, ON ON ISSUES THAT DON'T
RELATE AT ALL TO FENTANYL OF
PEOPLE. ARE SENDING PRIVATE
MESSAGE THAT THAT THEY BELIEVE
TO BE ENCRYPTED IF THEY ARE
DISCUSSING THINGS THAT ARE
SENSITIVE FOR A VARIETY OF
REASONS, UM AND I THINK THAT
THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT,
AND ALSO, UH, THE ISSUE OF
KEEPING DATA FOR SEVEN DAYS,
PARTICULARLY DATA THAT HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH FENTANYL OR
PRIVATE MESSAGES. THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT I JUST HOPE THAT
WE CAN LOOK AT FURTHER AND
REALLY TARGETING ON PROTECTING
YOUNG PEOPLE PROTECTING PEOPLE
AND MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN HOLD
PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. WHO ARE
COMMITTING CRIMES AROUND THIS
PARTICULAR AREA, SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND FOR
WORKING ON THESE ISSUES, AND I
WILL BE SUPPORTING IT TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THANK
YOU FOR YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS AND CERTAINLY COMMITTED
TO CONTINUING TO WORK ON THAT
AND MAKE SURE THAT WE, UH,
THREAD THAT NEEDLE AND I WILL
ALSO NOTE THAT CERTAINLY NOTHING
IN THIS BILL CHANGES THE
STANDARDS IN TERMS OF WHAT'S
REQUIRED TO ACCESS ANY DATA. SO
IN MOST INSTANCES, YOU HAVE TO
ACTUALLY OBTAIN A SEARCH WARRANT
. AND CERTAINLY NONE OF THAT
WILL CHANGE THAT THE GOAL OF THE
BILL REALLY IS SIMPLY TO ENSURE
THAT ONCE PEOPLE HAVE GONE
THROUGH THAT BURDEN OF PROOF.
PAST THOSE HURDLES THAT THERE'S
ACTUALLY SOMETHING AT THE END OF
THAT TUNNEL RIGHT RATHER THAN
JUST A BIG BLACK HOLE. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE, MS
PAPIN I JUST WANT TO DOVETAIL A
LITTLE BIT ON ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
HANEY. FIRST OF ALL, I'M SORRY
FOR YOUR LOSS. A MOTHER OF A 17
YEAR OLD GIRL AND IT FRIGHTENS
ME. SO I THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE AND HAVING THE COURAGE TO
BE HERE. UM, I'M A LITTLE
WORRIED ABOUT THE PRIVACY THING,
ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO
OTHER STATES WHO DON'T HAVE
SIMILAR LAWS TO OURS WHO HAVE
LAWS THAT I MIGHT OBJECT? YOU
AND I DON'T WANT THEM TO GET AT
THIS INFORMATION. UM SO IF YOU
COULD WORK AT SOME POINT, I'LL
BE VOTING FOR IT. I KNOW THIS
COMING UP ON PRIVACY. THAT'S WHY
I HAD SOME RESERVATIONS WHEN WE
CAN YOU, NICK ATED ABOUT IT. I
AM, BUT I DO WANT TO ASK ONE
THING OF THE OPPOSITION. IT IS.
HOWEVER IF SOMETHING IS
ENCRYPTED, YOU MAY STILL GET THE
METADATA OF THERE WAS A
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN X AND Y ON
A CERTAIN DATE. DO I HAVE THAT
RIGHT? APOLOGIZE FOR THE AWKWARD
SETUP OF THIS GROUP. YES I
BELIEVE WE WOULD HAVE THE RECORD
OF THAT. BUT WE WOULDN'T HAVE
THE CONTENT OF THE MESSAGES. I
GOT YOU. BUT IF IT'S SOME BLACK
MARKET SALES FOR, YOU KNOW, AN
INNOCUOUS PERCOCET AND WE KNOW
THAT SOME CHILD HAD A
COMMUNICATION WITH THAT PURVEYOR
. YOU COULD AT LEAST PROVIDE
THAT. I THINK IT'S CALLED
METADATA INFORMATION, RIGHT?
YEAH. I BELIEVE WE WOULD HAVE
THAT RECORD CORRECTLY. THAT'S
WHAT I WAS JUST WANT TO CLARIFY
. SO I'LL SEE YOU IN PRIVACY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR ASK
EVERYONE BEGIN FIRST BY THE
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. I MEAN,
YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT
WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE, WE DO
WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT,
ESPECIALLY OUR MINERS WHO ARE
ACCESSING SOMETHING THAT IS SO
IMPORTANT TO THEM, AND THAT'S
THE INTERNET. UM THAT'S ALWAYS A
GOOD START, AND I'M GLAD YOU
STARTED THERE. I AM VERY SORRY
FOR YOUR LOSS. AND I DO
APPRECIATE THAT. YOU ARE LENDING
YOUR VOICE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
REST OF US GET TO SEE HOW
SERIOUS THIS IS. I THINK THAT
CLEARLY IT'S A RESPONSE TO
DESPERATE MEASURE TO THE
DESPERATE ISSUE. WE ARE
DESPERATE. WE'RE TRYING TO FIND
SOLUTIONS TO SOMETHING THAT'S
JUST AFFECTING. ALL ALL OF US IF
IT HASN'T AFFECTED SOMEBODY
PERSONALLY, IT WILL. I THINK THE
STATISTICS THAT I HEARD IN
ANOTHER INFORMATIONAL HEARING.
SOMETHING THAT I'D LIKE TO GO
BACK TO WHAT MY COLLEAGUE MR
HANEY WAS SAYING, UM, BUT IT IN
IN LAW AS ATTORNEYS, WE KNOW
THAT IF WE WANT TO PRESENT
EVIDENCE, BUT WE DON'T WANT THE
OTHER SIDE TO SEE THE CONTENTS
OF IT UNTIL SOMEBODY HAS DECIDED
WHETHER OR NOT IT RELATES TO THE
CASE. YOU TAKE IT TO THE JUDGE
IN CAMERA AND THE JUDGE REVIEWS
IT DETERMINES. NOW, IF THIS BILL
WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO NOT ENCRYPT
UNTIL AFTER SEVEN DAYS. IS THAT
SOMETHING THAT IS POTENTIALLY
POSSIBLE? UM THERE'S THANK YOU
FOR THE QUESTION. THIS IS WHERE
I'LL PLEAD THAT I'M NOT A
COMPUTER SCIENTIST, NORA, AN
ENGINEER ON THE TECHNICAL
ASPECTS OF THE UM SO I DON'T
KNOW IF THE QUESTION UM THAT IS
SOMETHING I HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON
AND GET BACK TO YOU. I THINK,
UM, THE I WILL SAY, THOUGH I
THINK THE PURPOSE OF ENCRYPTING
IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. UM WHEN
THE MESSAGE IS SENT IS TO GIVE
ASSURANCE TO BOTH THE SENDER AND
THE RECIPIENT THAT IT CAN'T BE
ACCESSED EITHER IN TRANSIT OR AT
ANY POINT ALONG THE LINE, AND I
THINK IF THERE'S A WAITING
PERIOD, IT'S SOMEWHAT UNDERCUTS
THE VALUE OF THAT PROTECTION. UM
BUT I WOULD HAVE TO CIRCLE BACK
ON WHETHER IT'S SOMETHING YOU
CAN DO LATER OR IF IT HAS TO BE
DONE AT POINT IN TIME, THEN
WE'RE WE'LL BE STUCK WITH THEM.
THE ONLY EVIDENCE WILL BE FOR
THOSE SEVEN DAYS. AS MY
COLLEAGUE HAS SAID, IS, YOU WILL
KNOW THAT THERE WAS A
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN A AND B. I
BELIEVE, BUT WE KNOW THERE'S A
COMMUNICATION, RIGHT? I BELIEVE
SO. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE DO
HAVE INFORMATION THAT, UM, WE
CAN SHARE WITH OUR LAW
ENFORCEMENT PARTNERS CURRENTLY
OR FIGURE OUT WAYS TO IMPROVE
THAT INFORMATION SHARING. I
THINK WE'RE VERY OPEN AND VERY
WILLING TO HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION BECAUSE, LIKE I
SAID, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
NOT ONLY ARE OUR REPORTS, UM OF
THIS TYPE OF CONTACT GETTING
REMOVED FROM THE PLATFORM, BUT
THAT THEIR ACTIONABLE AFTERWARDS
RIGHT THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS
ABLE TO FOLLOW UP BECAUSE YOU
KNOW WE CAN KEEP PLAYING. WHACK
A MOLE ALL DAY AND REMOVING
THESE TRAFFICKERS FROM OUR
SITES. BUT IF THEY'RE NOT BEING
FOLLOWED UP IN THE REAL WORLD,
AND THEY'RE NOT LEADING TO
PROSECUTIONS, YOU WERE GOING TO
BE PLAYING A LOT OF WHACK A
MOLE. AND THEY'LL USE A
DIFFERENT ADDRESS NEXT TIME.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CONNELLY. QUICK FOLLOW UP TO
THAT, AND I APPRECIATE THE BILL
COMING FORWARD. WHY THE SEVEN
DAY WHAT? UH WHAT'S THE MAGIC
NUMBER ON SEVEN DAYS? THAT WAS
THE RECOMMENDATION FROM OUR FROM
THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE. SO PERHAPS YOU CAN.
TODAY. WHY WHY THIS? IT'S BETTER
THAN ZERO DAYS. IT'S DEFINITELY
BETTER THAN ZERO DAYS AND YEAH,
TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE SET UP OF
THIS ROOM. UM NO IT THE REALITY
OF THE SITUATION IS WHEN WE LOOK
AT CASES INVOLVING OVERDOSES
AND, YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY
OVERDOSES THAT RESULT IN DEATH.
AH, 24 HOURS, WHICH SOME IS THE
STANDARD. UM RETENTION PERIOD
FOR SOME COMPANIES LIKE
SNAPCHAT. BEFORE THE
COMMUNICATION OCCURS. 24 HOURS
GOES BY AND THEN ALL RECORD OF
THAT COMMUNICATION IS YOUR ACED.
UM REALLY, AND ANY MORE TIME
AFTER THAT IS JUST GONNA
EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE OUR
CHANCES OF BEING ABLE TO
IDENTIFY UM, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR SELLING THAT SUBSTANCE TO
THE INDIVIDUAL WHO PASSED AWAY?
IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC REASON
FOR THE SEVEN DAYS EXACTLY. I AM
NOT SURE I CANNOT ANSWER ANSWER
TO THAT. EXACTLY UM, BUT I DO,
SAY SEVEN DAYS IS ENOUGH TIME
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO AT LEAST
HAVE THE CASE GO FROM THE
RESPONDING OFFICER TO AN
INVESTIGATOR'S FILE WHERE THEY
CAN ACTUALLY START. WORKING
LEADS AND HAVE POTENTIALLY HAVE
SUCCESS. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. UH MISS
PETRIE-NORRIS. THANKS FOR THIS
BILL. UH WHAT YOU KNOW, AND I
THINK THE COMMITTEE HAS
RECOGNIZED WHAT WE'RE FOCUSED
HERE ON HIS SORT OF THE LEGAL
ISSUES AND THE ISSUES UNDER THE
PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE,
PARTICULARLY ON PREEMPTION,
WHICH I KNOW THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS HAVE ADDRESSED. THESE
OTHER ISSUES ARE VERY IMPORTANT
. I THINK ALL OF US HAVE
CONCERNS ON THEM AND I KNOW
THEY'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED IN
THE PRIVACY COMMITTEE MOVING
FORWARD. I ALSO DO YOU KNOW,
THIS ISSUE IS UNPRECEDENTED IN
IN ALL OF OUR LIFETIMES. I MEAN,
THE DEADLINESS OF FENTANYL, AS
YOU SAID, TO ESSENTIALLY TWO
GRAINS OF SAND AND THEN FOR ALL
OF US, YOU KNOW, ALSO HAVING
TEEN CHILDREN. IT IS SO SCARY
THAT JUST SOMEBODY COULD SIMPLY
GIVE THEM A TYLENOL. AND IT
COULD BE LACED WITH SOMETHING
ELSE. THAT UNKNOWING NATURE OF
WHAT THEY'RE CONSUMING IS JUST
SO UTTERLY TERRIFYING. SO HAPPY
THAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS
THAT THIS IS 11 BILL, ATTEMPTING
TO ADDRESS THAT AND POLICE THAT
WE'RE GETTING A CHANCE TO
SUPPORT THIS TODAY. SO WITH THAT
YOU MAY CLOSE. WELL THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND
AS YOU SAID, CERTAINLY AS A MOM
THE ESSENTIAL CRISIS TERRIFIES
ME, RIGHT? IT IS THE KIND OF
THING THAT I THINK KEEPS ALL OF
US. UP AT NIGHT AND AS
LEGISLATORS. I KNOW THAT THAT I
AM AND YOU ARE IN SO MANY OF US
ARE ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED TO
DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT. AND UM
, THIS IS CERTAINLY NOT THE
ENTIRETY OF THE SOLUTION. BUT I
DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE PUZZLE.
AND UM, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE
THAT THE WILLINGNESS OF
OPPOSITION TO WORK WITH US TO
ENGAGE AND REALLY TO BE PARTNERS
BECAUSE THE REALITY IS WE NEED.
WE NEED EVERYONE MARCHING IN THE
SAME DIRECTION. IF WE ARE GOING
TO MAKE PROGRESS AND ACTUALLY
KEEP OUR KIDS SAFE ONLINE, SO,
UM, WITH THAT, RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. WE HAVE EMOTION,
DO PAST PRIVACY AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION COMMITTEE ASKED THE
COURT TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL,
MAIENSCHEIN CONNOLLY. CONNOLLY I
, DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY
CHOLERA. CHOLERA I PACHECO CHICO
! I HAPPEN. I REYES RIVAS
SANCHEZ. BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. WE ARE CRUSHING IT
TODAY COMMITTEE. ALL RIGHT, WE
ARE GETTING THROUGH THIS. UH
NEXT UP IS MR SANTIAGO ITEM 12,
MAYBE 13 44. PUT THE BILL. MHM.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE BILL, MR
SANTIAGO AND WE HAVE A BY MS
REYES. WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR
CHOLERA. THINK I THINK THE HINT
IS PRETTY CLEAR, MR CHAIR, SO I
WILL. UM, I WILL MOVE BRIEFLY.
IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIR.
YES. YEAH, AND I THINK OUR
WITNESSES WILL ALSO MOVE BRIEFLY
BECAUSE WE GOT THE MESSAGE AND
ITS SIMPLEST TERMS. ABBEY 13 44
WERE ESTABLISHED A STATE FUND
SURVIVORS BENEFIT PROGRAM FOR
CHILDREN WHO HAVE LOST PARENTS
OR WHO ARE INELIGIBLE FOR THE
FEDERAL, THE FEDERAL, UM, O A S
D I PROGRAM WHILE INCREASING
AWARENESS FOR BOTH PROGRAMS. THE
BASIC GIST OF IT IS THERE IS A
FEDERAL PROGRAM FOR SURVIVORS
WHO HAVE LOST A PARENT, BUT
THAT'S BUT THOSE SURVIVORS WOULD
NOT BE COVERED. IF THE IF THE
PARENTS OR THE GUARDIAN WAS IN
IN THE INFORMAL ECONOMY OR WAS
UNDOCUMENTED, AND WE WANT TO SET
UP A STATE PROGRAM TO CAPTURE
THOSE MANY CHILDREN, MANY
CHILDREN IN MANY CASES AND
SURVIVORS WHO DON'T HAVE A
SAFETY NET OTHERWISE. HIGH IN
ITS SIMPLEST TERMS, AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE
FIRST WITNESS GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS DEVIN GRAHAM, THE
PRESIDENT OF END POVERTY IN
CALIFORNIA EPIC FOR SURE. WE'RE
IN ADVOCACY GROUP THAT WAS
FOUNDED LAST YEAR BY FORMER
STOCKTON MAYOR MICHAEL TUBBS.
OUR WORK IS FOCUSED ON CENTERING
THE EXPERIENCES AND VOICES OF
THOSE WHO ARE LIVING IN POVERTY
CLOSEST TO THE ISSUE AND
ADVOCATING FOR THE TYPES OF BOLD
SOLUTIONS THAT WE NEED TO
ULTIMATELY ERADICATE POVERTY IN
THE STATE. SO I'M HONORED TO BE
SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF ÁP 13 44
TO URGE YOU ULTIMATE CAL
SURVIVOR. A REALITY. I THINK THE
QUESTION BEFORE US TODAY IS
RELATIVELY SIMPLE. WILL THE
STATE SHOW UP TO PROVIDE SOME
FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR EVERY
CHILD WHO'S EXPERIENCED WHAT
REALLY IS AN UNIMAGINABLE LOSS
OF LOSING A PARENT OR GUARDIAN
AT AN UNNATURALLY YOUNG AGE, OR
WILL WE ALLOW CERTAIN CHILDREN
TO SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS?
SOCIAL SECURITY PROVIDES CENTRAL
MONTHLY PAYMENTS TO A VARIETY OF
BENEFICIARIES, INCLUDING
FAMILIES, YOUNG FOLKS WHO HAVE
LOST A BREADWINNER TO AN
UNTIMELY DEATH, SO CURRENTLY ARE
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS MEAN
THAT THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN IN
CALIFORNIA WHOSE PARENTS WORKED
AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE WEALTH OF
THIS STATE OR INELIGIBLE, UNABLE
TO RECEIVE THE KINDS OF
FINANCIAL SUPPORTS THAT WOULD
ALLOW THEM TO PLAN FOR AND HAVE
HOPE IN THE FUTURE. AND THANKS
THIS ANTIQUATED ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEM KIDS ARE BEING LEFT OUT
OF THE SAFETY NET. AT A TIME
WHEN THEY NEED OUR HELP THE
MOST. SO I THINK IT'S TIME FOR
CALIFORNIA TO STEP IN AND
SUPPORT EVERY CHILD GOING
THROUGH THIS UNIMAGINABLE LOSS,
ESPECIALLY THE MORE THAN 20,000
KIDS IN THE STATE WHO
EXPERIENCED THAT LOSS DURING THE
COVID 19 PANDEMIC, MANY OF WHOM
HAD PARENTS WHO WERE ESSENTIAL
WORKERS WORKING LOW WAGE JOBS
THAT CONTINUE DESPITE THE
PANDEMIC SHUTDOWNS. I THINK IT
SORT OF SAYING THAT IN RECENT
YEARS WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF
PROGRESS ON THE FRONT OF MAKING
OUR BENEFITS SYSTEMS. MORE
INCLUSIVE TWO GROUPS THAT HAVE
BEEN HISTORICALLY EXCLUDED FROM
THESE PROGRAMS. WHILE WE HAVE
MANY MORE WORK TO DO ON THIS,
AND THIS BILL WOULD CERTAINLY BE
A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I
THINK IT'S WORTH RECOGNIZING
THAT THIS PROGRESS THAT WE'VE
MADE IN RECENT YEARS IT'S ONLY
NECESSARY BECAUSE IN PAST
DECADES. WE DESIGNED THESE
PROGRAMS TO ESSENTIALLY DEEM
SOME BENEFICIARIES DESERVING AND
OTHER GROUPS. THOSE SIMILARLY
SITUATED UNDESERVING AND THIS
FALSEHOOD. I THINK IT'S
PARTICULARLY HARMFUL. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN IN
PARTICULAR CHILDREN WHO ARE
ALREADY ECONOMICALLY VULNERABLE
AND THOSE WHO ARE GOING THROUGH
A TRULY WORST CASE SCENARIO FOR
THEM EARLY ON IN LIFE, AND WE'RE
SENDING THEM. WE'RE SETTING THEM
UP FOR A DISADVANTAGE IF WE
DON'T STEP INTO LEVEL THE
PLAYING FIELD FOR THEM. SO WITH
THAT, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS ANDREW SHANE WITH GRACE
AND CHILD POVERTY. CALIFORNIA UM
, LOOK, I'LL BE I'LL BE BRIEF. I
JUST WANT TO REMARK THAT THIS IS
LONG OVERDUE THAT FOR TOO LONG.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS SET
UP THIS SYSTEM IN WHICH WE HAVE
CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS HAVE PAID
INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT
BECAUSE THEIR FARM WORKERS
BECAUSE THEIR DOMESTIC WORKERS
BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT HAVE ENOUGH
CREDITS, THEY HAVEN'T WORKED
LONG ENOUGH BEFORE THEIR
UNTIMELY DEATH BECAUSE THEY'RE
DOING THE TYPE OF WORK THAT
TAKES THEM FROM US TOO QUICKLY,
AND I JUST WANT TO COMMEND MR
SANTIAGO AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS
BODY IS PREPARED TO MOVE
FORWARD. AND LEGISLATION TO
ADDRESS THAT CALIFORNIA MUST AND
CAN BE A SPACE WHERE WE SAY THAT
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE THAT WE'RE
GONNA DO RIGHT BY THESE KIDS,
AND THIS IS A CRITICAL TOOL TO
HELP CLOSE THE RACIAL WEALTH GAP
AND I ASKED HER ABOUT THANK YOU
SO MUCH. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEING
NONE. WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
SAYING NONE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE. SEE
NONE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND, MR SANTIAGO. CLOSE
RESPECTFULLY. ASTRONAUTS THANK
YOU. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS TO
APPROACH ESCORT CALL. ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIN CHINA EASILY.
CONNOLLY. CONNOLLY. I DIXON.
PENNY CHOLERA, CHOLERA I PACHECO
PACHECO. EYE POPPING HAPPENED. I
REYES RACE I REVERSE SANCHEZ.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU. SO
WE HAVE ONE BILL LEFT, WHICH IS
OMNIBUS. I WILL PRESENT THAT MS
REYES IF YOU WOULD CHAIR BUT I
DO WANT TO CALL ON ALL MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE TO PLEASE COME
TO THE COMMITTEE. WE WILL. AS
SOON AS THIS BILL IS DONE, WE
WILL KEEP THE ROLE OPEN FOR A
VERY BRIEF TIMES TO LET
EVERYBODY ADD ON BUT EVERYBODY
WHO IS NOT HERE. THIS IS THE
CALL AND THEN TO GET HERE WHILE
WE PRESENT THIS.
PRESENT THE OMNIBUS BILL. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS
ASSEMBLY BILL A OR A B. 17 56 IS
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CIVIL
LAW OMNIBUS BILL CONTAINS
NUMEROUS MINOR UPDATES TO
VARIOUS CODE SECTIONS WITHIN THE
JURISDICTION OF THIS COMMUNITY,
THUS SAVING US FROM HEARING AT
LEAST A DOZEN BILLS. YOU ARE ALL
WELCOME. UH AMONG THE PROVISIONS
. THIS BILL RENAMES A PROGRAM
AND ASSOCIATED FUNDED. THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PROVIDES
RELIEF FOR LOWER INCOME
CALIFORNIANS. VIOLENT GOVERNMENT
CLAIMS ACT CASES CLARIFY SEVERAL
PROVISIONS OF WAR RELATED TO
CONSUMER AUTO DEBT. UH AND THIS
BILL ALSO MODIFIES ADOPTION LAW
TO HELP FOSTER FAMILIES PASSED
ON INHERITANCE TO FORMER FOSTER
YOUTH AGAIN. ALL OF THE CHANGES
IN THE BILL ARE FAIRLY MINOR AND
GENERALLY CLARIFYING IN NATURE.
THE BILL HAS NO OPPOSITION AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE
I'D LIKE TO CONFIRM MR CHAIR. DO
YOU ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS OF THE
COMMITTEE? I DO. I DO. WELL
THOUGHT OUT AS USUAL. THANK YOU
. WE THOUGHT SO. TOO GREAT
COMMITTEE HERE. ANY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS
CLIFF COST ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT WOULD LIKE TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE.
HOLD ON. WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE
SURE IT GETS RECORDED ONE MORE
TIME, MR COSTA. ONE MORE TIME
CLIFF COSTUME THEY HAVE. THE
CALIFORNIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION IS
STRONG SUPPORT. WE APPRECIATE
THE CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE FOR
WORKING WITH US ABOUT IT. I
THINK HALF OF THE OMNIBUS BILLS
OR REQUESTS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
JUDGES ASSOCIATION, SO WE
APPRECIATE THAT. SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. SAYING NONE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK
YOU VERY MUCH RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTED. I VOTE. THANK YOU.
WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROOM
MOTION IS DUE PASSES AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN IAS. ALY CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DICKSON DICKSON I
HANEY CHOLERA, CHOLERA. IS THERE
A MOTION MOVED SECOND.
MAIENSCHEIN AYE, CONNOLLY. I
DIXON DIÆN EI CHOLERA I PACHECO
PACHECO I POP IN AND I RAISE
RAISE RIVAS. HI SANCHEZ SANCHEZ.
AYE. IT'S OUT, OKAY? OKAY NOW WE
WILL GO THROUGH AND DO ADD ONS.
WE'LL START WITH THE CONSENT
AGENDA. ASKED THE CLERK, PLEASE
. UH CALL THE ROLL. DICKSON
DICKSON. I HANEY HANEY I REYES
RIVAS RIVAS. ITEM NUMBER ONE.
WE'LL JUST GO AND ORDER ITEM
NUMBER ONE A. B 12 HANEY. SALLY
DICKSON. DIXON NO KALRA TÔI
REYES RAISE I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ,
NO. ITEM NUMBER TWO A. B 36
GABRIEL ASSAILANT. DICKSON
DICKSON. NO HANEY E I. RIVAS.
BUT I. ITEM NUMBER THREE ESCORT
OPEN. MAYBE 3 23 HOLDEN SALIH.
DICKSON DICKSON. NO, HANEY.
HANEY I RAISE MY RIVAS RIVAS.
AYE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR A B 4 32.
PHªN. WE'RE LIFTING THE CALL.
SALLY DICKSON. DIXON. NO HANEY.
I RAISE I RIVAS RIVAS. I IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE. A B 5 60
BENNETT LIFTING THE CALL DIXON
DIXON, NO REYES RIVAS RIVAS IS
OUT. ITEM NUMBER SIX A. B 7 79
WILSON LIFTING THE CALL DIXON
DIXON. NO CHOLERA, CHOLERA. I
REYES. AYE RIVAS RIVAS IS OUT.
ITEM NUMBER 7 88 93 PAPIN. DIXON
VOTING. KINI I RIVAS. RIVAS.
AYE. NUMBER ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
MAYBE 9 37. SKINNER ASKED CLARK
TO OPEN THE ROLE. CHOLERA CALL
REID ITEM NUMBER NINE A. B 10 27
PETRIE-NORRIS LEÓN. ITEM 10,
MAYBE 10 79. JACKSON WE'RE
LIFTING THE CALL DIXON. DIXON
IT'S NUMBER 10. MAYBE 10 79
JACKSON. YES. DIXON I HANEY, I
RAISE RIVAS BESIDE OUT ITEM
NUMBER 11 A B 13 39 HANEY
CHOLERA. TÔI REYES GREAT ITEM
NUMBER 12 13 44 SANTIAGO. NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER 13 MAYBE 14 14
CHOLERA. DICKSON DICKSON. NO
HANEY HANEY. I RIVAS. HI REVIS.
I SANCHEZ AND NUMBER 14 14
CHOLERA. YOU'RE YOU'RE WELL
TRAINED, MR CARL, RIGHT? HEARD
YOUR NAME AND YOU IMMEDIATELY
WENT TO I AND THAT'S GOOD, BUT,
UM, YOU AND MR MCCARTHY JUST
KNOW INSTANTLY. UH ITEM NUMBER
14 A B 14 18 MAKIN CALL RYE ITEM
NUMBER 15 A B 17 56 JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE. OKAY THANK YOU ALL
VERY MUCH. WELL DONE. EVERYONE
WILL KEEP THE HOLD THE ROLL OPEN
UNTIL MR MR MR SILLY ANOTHER FEW
MINUTES TO GET OVER HERE. DOWN
THIS OVER. CINDY'S ARE WE.
OKAY WE'LL START. WE'LL OPEN THE
ROLL FROM MR CELIE CONSENT
AGENDA ASKED HER TO COLORADO.
ITEM NUMBER. ONE A. B 12 HANEY,
SALLY NÓI NUMBER TWO A. B 36
GABRIEL. UM. YOU NOT VOTING.
ITEM NUMBER THREE, MAYBE 3 23
HOLDEN, NOT VOTING. ITEM NUMBER
FOUR A B 4 32 FOLLOWING ISRAELI
SALINO. ITEM NUMBER 5 85 60
BENNETT. AND WE HAVE YOU ALREADY
ON THAT ONE ITEM NUMBER. SIX
MAYBE 7 79 WILSON ACELINO. ITEM
78. OKAY, WHEREVER YOU'RE NOT
VOTING ITEM NUMBER 8 89 37 MAKIN
ER I. I WAS GONNA ASK ME A CO
AUTHOR ON THAT. THAT'S TOO LATE.
YEAH, OKAY. ITEM NUMBER NINE
MAYBE 10 27 PETRIE-NORRIS DAILY.
NOT VOTING. NOT VOTING. I
REMEMBER 10 ITEM NUMBER 10 8.
EXCUSE ME. THAT WAS ITEM NUMBER
10. NO, NO, THAT WAS ITEM NINE
OR NINE. SORRY ITEM NUMBER 10.
MAYBE 10 79 JACKSON. ITEM NUMBER
11 A B 13 39 HAYNIE. ELLIE
ELLIE, I ITEM NUMBER 12. MAYBE
13 44 SANTIAGO, NOT VOTING. ITEM
NUMBER 13 MAYBE 14 14. NO NO, I
DON'T NUMBER 14 A B 14 18
MCKENNA NOT VOTING. I DON'T KNOW
15 A B 17 56 JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
. I THANK YOU. THIS MEETING IS
ADJOURNED. APPRECIATE IT.