GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE WELCOME
TO THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON
COMMUNICATION AND CONVEYANCE. MY
NAME IS TASHA BURNER AND I
SERVED AS THE CHAIR OF THIS
COMMITTEE. JOINING ME AT THE
DIETS TODAY ARE OR NOT YET HERE
IS VICE CHAIR PATERSON AND SOME
OF MY COLLEAGUES ON COMBINED
COMMITTEE. I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GARCIA AND
BONTA WILL BE OUT TODAY. THE
SPEAKER HAS APPOINTED
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SZABO AND
CONLEY AS SUBSTITUTES. WE'RE
ALSO BEING JOINED BY EMILIO
PEREZ, THE CHIEF CONSULTANT OF
THE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE,
AND ELIZABETH DELGADO OF THE
COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE
SECRETARY. JOINING US FOR THE,
UH, THE HEARING IS DANIEL BALLON
, CONSULTANT WITH THE REPUBLICAN
CAUCUS POLICY UNIT. SO TODAY'S
AGENDA HAS FOUR ITEMS. THERE ARE
TWO ITEMS ON PROPOSED CONSENT
CALENDAR, INCLUDING A B 2 96
RODRIGUEZ AND MAYBE 4 15
RODRIGUEZ. BEFORE WE BEGIN OUR
BILL PRESENTATION. I'D LIKE TO
TAKE CARE OF SOME LOGISTICAL
HOUSEKEEPING IF ANY MEMBER OF
THE PUBLIC IN THE ROOM WOULD
LIKE TO TESTIFY ON A BILL DURING
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL
INVITE YOU TO APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE AT THE APPROPRIATE
TIME. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE
PUBLIC, NOT TOUCH THE
MICROPHONE. YOU CAN EXIT THE
HEARING ROOM. ONCE YOU'RE DONE
TESTIFYING OR RETURN TO YOUR
SEAT. NOW LET'S COVER THE GROUND
RULES FOR APPROPRIATE CONDUCT.
ASSEMBLY HAS EXPERIENCED A
NUMBER OF DISRUPTIONS TO
COMMITTEE AND FOUR PROCEEDINGS
IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, CONDUCT
CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS, DISTURBS
OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT OF THE HEARING IS
PROHIBITED. SUCH CONDUCT MAY
INCLUDE TALKING OR MAKING LOUD
NOISES FROM THE AUDIENCE
UTTERING LOUD THREATENING OR
ABUSIVE LANGUAGE SPEAKING LONGER
THAN THE TIME ALLOCATED,
EXTENDING EXTENDED DISCUSSION OF
MATTERS NOT RELATED TO THE
SUBJECT OF THE HEARING OR BILL
AND ANY OTHER DISRUPTIVE ACTS.
TO THIS ADDRESS ANY DISRUPTIVE
CONDUCT? I WILL TAKE THE
FOLLOWING STEPS. HAVE AN
INDIVIDUAL DISRUPTS OUR HEARING
PROCESS. I WILL DIRECT THEM TO
STOP AND WARNED THEM THAT
CONTINUE DISRUPTIONS MAY RESULT
IN REMOVAL FROM THE CAPITOL
BUILDING. I WILL ALSO DOCUMENT
ON THE RECORD, THE INDIVIDUAL
INVOLVED AND THE NATURE OF THE
DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT. I MAY ALSO
TEMPORARILY RECESSED THE HEARING
OF THE CONDUCT DOES NOT STOP. I
WILL REQUEST ASSISTANCE FROM THE
SERGEANTS AND ESCORTING THE
INDIVIDUAL FROM THE CAPITOL
BUILDING. SAYING THAT WE DO NOT
HAVE A QUORUM. WE WILL START AS
A SUBCOMMITTEE. AND WE WILL
START. YEAH. THIS IS FOR REAL.
OKAY? AH, WELL, WE'RE GONNA
START YEAH, WELL, ORDER.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDEN 80 41
ASSEMBLY MEMBER. SO TODAY WE'RE
HEARING A B 41 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDEN, THE
DIGITAL EQUITY AND VIDEO
FRANCHISING ACT OF 2023.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDING YOU MAY
OPEN AND READY. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
MEMBERS APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A B 41
THE DIGITAL EQUITY AND VIDEO
FRANCHISING ACT OF 2023, ALSO
KNOWN AS DIFFICULT. I WANT TO
BEGIN BY STATING I ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND THANK
THE CHAIR AND HER STAFF ARE
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE AND MADE
ME PERSONALLY OVER THE WEEKEND.
THAT TIME WAS WELL SPENT, AND I
DO APPRECIATE THAT. MAYBE 41
SEEKS TO UPDATE AND ADDRESS
PERSISTENT ISSUES WITH THE
DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND VIDEO
COMPETITION ACT OF 2006, ALSO
KNOWN AS DEF. DIFFICULT WAS
PASSED TO ENCOURAGE COMPETITION
, THE CABLE MARKET WITH THE
INTENT OF BENEFITING CONSUMERS
BY LOWERING PRICES AND PROMOTING
THE EXPANSION OF SERVICES THAT
INCLUDE CABLE PHONE AND HIGH
SPEED INTERNET. ACCESS BUNDLES
17 YEARS LATER, IT IS CLEAR THAT
THIS APPROACH SELF REGULATORY OF
THE INDUSTRY THROUGH COMPETITION
HAS FAILED. ACCORDING TO
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION. THERE ARE 353,494.
HOUSEHOLDS AND 743,380.
UNDERSERVED HOUSEHOLDS IN
CALIFORNIA AS OF DECEMBER, 31ST
2020 AS OF 2023. THERE ARE 2.3
MILLION CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS.
LIVE IN SINGLE PROVIDER
MONOPOLIES, ACCORDING TO CONNECT
CALIFORNIA. A B 41 SEEKS TO
LEVERAGE THE STATE'S LICENSING
AND AUTHORITY OVER CABLE
FRANCHISE HOLDERS WHO ARE AMONG
THE LARGEST INTERNET SERVICE
PROVIDERS IN THE STATE. I WILL
RENAME DEEPIKA TO DIGITAL EQUITY
IN VIDEO FRANCHISING ACT OR DEFY
TO HIGHLIGHT THE ULTIMATE POLICY
GOAL OF THIS BILL EQUITY AND
ACCESS TO VITAL SERVICES. MAYBE
41 ALLIANCE TO CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION AUTHORITY
UNDER FEDERAL LAW TO ENFORCE THE
BUILD OUT OF VIDEO AND CABLE
INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS BILL
UPDATES, DISCRIMINATION
PROTECTIONS FOR ALL POTENTIAL
AND EXISTING CUSTOMERS WHO LIVE
WITHIN FRANCHISE HOLDERS SERVICE
TERRITORIES BY ENSURING THEY
RECEIVE EQUAL ACCESS TO
SERVICES. BY DOING SO WE CAN
BRING THIS NEARLY TWO DECADES
OLD POLICY UP TO ITS ORIGINAL
INTENTIONS AND TODAY'S STANDARDS
BY EXTENDING CABLE VIDEO AND
BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE TO
CALIFORNIANS WITH ME TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT, OR SHANA EGLAND,
DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION. DIGITAL EQUITY
INITIATIVE, AND ARNIE SO WILL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NEXT CHEN.
THANK YOU EACH HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME
IS ARNIE SO WELL, AND I'M, THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NEXT GEN
POLICY. NEXT GENERATION
NONPROFIT THAT IS FOCUSED ON
EQUITY AND JUSTICE ISSUES, AND
DIGITAL EQUITY IS ONE OF OUR
CORE PRIORITIES WERE HERE DAY IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF A B 41 ARE
PART OF A LARGE AND DIVERSE
COALITION. THAT'S IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. UM I BRING A UNIQUE
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE TO THIS
ISSUE, UM TO TODAY'S
DELIBERATIONS BECAUSE I SPENT
ALMOST TWO DECADES IN THIS
BUILDING. AS A POLICY DIRECTOR
FOR FIVE SPEAKERS AND IN 2006. I
WAS THE LEAD STAFFER FOR SPEAKER
NUNEZ ON THE ORIGINAL DIFFICULT
BILL. AH I HAVE A CLEAR RECORD
ELECTION OF THE DIFFICULT
NEGOTIATIONS. THE EXPECTED
OUTCOMES THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED
IN THE VERY HEATED INTENSITY
AROUND THE ADVOCACY DURING THAT
TIME. PROPONENTS ARGUED THAT
DEEPIKA WOULD BRING MORE
COMPETITION TO THE CABLE VOICE
VIDEO AND, YES, BROADBAND MARKET
PLACE AND IN SO DOING, APPROVE
ACCESS INEQUALITY, LOWER PRICES.
SPUR INNOVATION AND HELP CLOSE
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE. OPPONENTS
WERE AGAINST OPENING UP THE
MARKET PLACE AND ARGUED THAT
DIFFICULT WOULD FALL SHORT WHEN
IT CAME TO ITS EQUAL ACCESS,
ANTI DISCRIMINATION AND CUSTOMER
COMPLAINTS ENFORCEMENT
PROVISIONS. AH TODAY AFTER TO
HAVE TO ATTEST THAT MY WORK AND
THE ORIGINAL DIFFICULT BILL ARE
INDEED INDEED VERY SERIOUS
REFORMS. YOUR COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
POINTS OUT MANY OF THE EXPECTED
OUTCOMES THAT HAVE FALLEN WELL
SHORT OF OUR INTENDED ORIGINAL,
UH, WORK WITH DIFFICULT TO
SPECIFICALLY I WANT TO POINT OUT
THE ANTI DISCRIMINATION AND THE
EQUAL ACCESS PROVISIONS. THESE
WERE INTENDED TO TRY TO PROTECT
A LOW INCOME, LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS AND, ALTHOUGH WELL
INTENTIONED, WERE NEARLY NOT
STRONG ENOUGH THE DONUT HOLE
ISSUE. BEING ONE MANIFESTATION
OF THE INEQUITIES CAUSED BY, UM
THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE IN THE
ORIGINAL DICK DIFFICULT. MAYBE
41 CORRECTS REFORMS, UPDATES AND
TACKLES THESE SHORTCOMINGS THE
ACCESS ISSUE TO BUILD OUT ISSUE
THE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE WITH A
PRAGMATIC APPROACH THAT BUILDS
ON THE LESSONS THAT WE'VE
LEARNED OVER THE LAST 17 YEARS,
AS WELL AS THE MOST RECENT
LESSONS THAT WE'VE LEARNED
DURING THE PANDEMIC. UM. NEXT
YEAR POLICY AND THE A B 41
COALITION. WANNA THANK THE CHAIR
. WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE
AND WANT TO THANK MR HOLDEN FOR
THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE ON THIS
BILL OVER THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS
AND WOULD ASK THE COMMITTEE FOR
AN I VOTE. THANK YOU. CHAIR
BURNER OF THE COMMITTEE AND SOME
OF THEM WERE HOLDING FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. MY
NAME IS SHANE IN ENGLAND. I'M
THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIGITAL
EQUITY INITIATIVE AT THE
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
, CO CONVENER OF THE STATEWIDE
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR DIGITAL
EQUITY, OR CADE, AND I SPEAK
TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE MORE THAN
50 ORGANIZATIONS RANGING FROM
SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND COUNTIES TO
COMMUNITY CLINICS AND
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE NONPROFITS
THAT ARE SERVING COMMUNITIES
ACROSS CALIFORNIA. AND WHO HAVE
WHOLEHEARTEDLY ASSIGNED ON IN
SUPPORT OF THIS LONG OVERDUE SET
OF REFORMS TO THE STATES.
ANTIQUATED FRANCHISE LAW. WE'RE
PROUD TO HAVE WORKED TIRELESSLY
ALONGSIDE THE AUTHOR, THE CHAIR
COMMITTEE STAFF AND OTHERS TO
ARRIVE AT A BILL THAT WHILE A
COMPROMISE REPRESENTS LEAPS AND
BOUNDS IN TERMS OF PROGRESS, AND
IS A CRITICAL PIECE OF THE
PUZZLE OF CLOSING THE DIGITAL
DIVIDE I WANT TO CALL THAT ONE
SPECIFIC AREA OF FOCUS AND MAYBE
41 YOU MIGHT HAVE HEARD OR READ
IN THE BILL ANALYSIS AROUND
DONUT HOLES, AND TYPICALLY, WE
TALK ABOUT DONUT HOLES AS
GEOGRAPHIC AND PACKETS OF NO
SERVICE THAT ARE SURROUNDED BY
AREAS WITH SERVICE. BUT THERE
ARE IN FACT, MYRIAD WAYS THAT
DONUT HOLDS SHOW UP AND TO
HIGHLIGHT JUST ONE EXAMPLE. KATE
ALLY, PHILIP NEUFELD, WHO IS THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF ENTERPRISE
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES AT
FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
LET AN ANALYSIS OF 11 MILLION
DATA POINTS COLLECTED FROM
70,000 DISTRICT PROVIDED STUDENT
LAPTOPS VIA THREE TIMES DAILY
MEASUREMENTS BETWEEN JULY 2021
CONTINUING ON THROUGH TODAY AND
FOUND THAT AT LEAST 20% OF THE
TIME STUDENTS WHO ACCESS THE
INTERNET FROM THEIR HOMES IN
FRESNO'S LOW INCOME
NEIGHBORHOODS. WE'RE CONNECTING
AT SPEEDS BELOW THE BARE MINIMUM
OF 2025 3, WHICH IS TOO SLOW TO
STAY LOGGED ONTO CLASSES TO
UPLOAD ASSIGNMENTS OR COMPLETE
OTHER CORE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS.
THOSE STUDENTS SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED UNSERVED, AND THIS IS
TRUE DESPITE GETTING THEIR
SERVICE IN MANY CASES FROM THE
EXACT SAME FRANCHISE HOLDER IN
THIS CASE, IT'S COMCAST AS THEIR
WEALTHIER NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ABLE
TO RELIABLY CONNECT AT FASTER
SPEEDS AGAIN. THAT'S A DONUT
HOLE. IN ADDITION, THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT PARTICIPATED IN THE
EDUCATION SUPERHIGHWAY BRIDGED A
BROADBAND PROGRAM INTENDED FOR
SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO PARTNER WITH
INCUMBENT ISPS TO BRING SERVICE
. MANY CASES PAID FOR BY THE
DISTRICT TO THE MOST VULNERABLE,
DISCONNECTED STUDENT HOUSEHOLDS.
IN FRESNO UNIFIED COMCAST
REPORTED BEING UNABLE TO SERVE
8365 OF THE DISTRICT IDENTIFIED
HOUSEHOLDS. THAT'S MORE THAN ONE
IN 10, ALL OF THEM IN HIGH
POVERTY COMMUNITIES, ALL IN
COMCAST FRANCHISE SERVICE AREA
THAT ALSO SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD
AS A DONUT HOLE, DAD FOR EMS IN
PART TO CLOSE THE DONUT HOLES
AND CREATE MECHANISMS FOR
COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY
LEADERS LIKE MR NEUFELD. TO MAKE
THESE ISSUES KNOWN TO THE PUC
AND TO ENSURE THEY ARE ADDRESSED
AS PART OF THE FRANCHISE
PROCESS. MAYBE 41 IS REASONABLE,
RESPONSIBLE, NECESSARY AND
OVERDUE. AND WE THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, AND WE'RE GONNA
PAUSE RIGHT THERE. I THINK WE
HAVE A QUORUM. SO WITH THAT,
I'LL ASK THE COMMITTEE SECRETARY
TO CALL THE ROLL.
BOERNER HORVATH BOERNER HORVATH
PRESENT. JIM PATTERSON. JIM
PATTERSON PRESENT, CONNOLLY.
DAVIES DAVIES PRESENT HOLDEN
HOLDEN PRESENT HOOVER HELLO.
MAIENSCHEIN. PAPIN AND PRESENT
LOSE RIVERS. RODRIGUEZ SHIAVO
SHOVEL PRESENT. WEBER. WHOEVER
PRESENT AND WHAT'S THAT? WE HAVE
A QUORUM. UM NEXT. WE'LL MOVE TO
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
ANY WITNESSES AND SUPPORT IN THE
ROOM MAY APPROACH OF THE MIC
WITH YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ONLY PLEASE. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR JONATHAN
CLAY ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGO IN SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON. TRACY RYAN, RURAL
COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE,
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT. NICOLE
WARD ULLMAN ON BEHALF OF THE
CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP AND
SUPPORT GOOD AFTERNOON, SASHA
HORWITZ, LOS ANGELES UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT AND SUPPORT.
JEFF TARTT AGUILA AND ADVOCATE
IN SUPPORT AND WOULD LIKE TO
HEAR SOMEONE WITH YOUR VISIONS
YOU CAME UP WITH OVER THE
WEEKEND. DAMON CONKLIN WITH THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
STANDARD. RICHARD POLANCO
RETIRED. IN SUPPORT REPRESENTING
THE CALIFORNIA EMERGING
TECHNOLOGY FUND. ANDREA DEVO ON
BEHALF OF CAL, CALM AND SUPPORT.
OKAY SEE NO FURTHER WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT WE'LL NOW MOVE TO
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. UM WE
HAVE ONE PRIMARY WITNESS AND
OPPOSITION WHO MAY APPROACH THE
DESK. AMANDA VALDERRAMA,
LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY
DIRECTOR AT CAL BROADBAND. WHEN
YOU'RE READY. YOU CAN GO AHEAD
AND START YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR. VICE
CHAIR MEMBERS AMANDA GUADARRAMA
WITH CAL BROADBAND AND WE ARE
OPPOSED TO A B 41. WE APPRECIATE
THE CONVERSATIONS. WE'VE HAD
WITH THE AUTHOR, HIS STAFF AND
THE COMMITTEE. REGARDING THIS
BILL, WE SHARE THE GOAL OF EQUAL
ACCESS TO VIDEO SERVICES, BUT
THEY REMAIN UNWORKABLE
PROVISIONS AND ABBY 41. THE BILL
IN PRINT INCLUDES A PROVISION OF
100% BUILD OUT THIS WOULD
REQUIRE FRANCHISE HOLDERS TO
BUILD OUT ACCESS TO LOCATIONS
WITHIN THEIR SERVICE TERRITORY,
REGARDLESS OF HOW EXPENSIVE THAT
BUILD OUT WOULD BE, AND
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE VIDEO
SERVICE OR CABLE IS EVEN WANTED
IN THOSE AREAS. THIS SETS UP A
FRANCHISE HOLDER WITH AN
ECONOMICALLY UNFEASIBLE
SITUATION. AND ACTUALLY DETERS
FRANCHISE HOLDERS FROM EXPANDING
THEIR SERVICE, THUS PREVENTING
FURTHER BUILD OUT OF
INFRASTRUCTURE. WE BELIEVE THE
BETTER OPTION IS TO RELY ON THE
DENSITY REQUIREMENT OUTLINED IN
THE BILL. THIS CREATES A BALANCE
TO ENSURE THAT A FRANCHISE
HOLDERS SERVING ALL THE AREAS
AND THEIR SERVICE TERRITORY
WHERE THERE IS SUFFICIENT DEMAND
TO SUPPORT THE BUILD OUT AND
MAINTENANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE.
ANOTHER UNWORKABLE PROVISIONS IN
THIS BILL IS THE REQUIREMENT TO
PROVIDE VIDEO ACCESS TO 100% OF
ALL LOW INCOME RESIDENTS IS
WITHIN A SERVICE TERRITORY.
SIMILAR TO THE 100% BUILD UP
PROVISIONS. THERE ARE ECONOMIC
AND TECHNICAL REALITIES THAT MAY
PREVENT A FRANCHISE HOLDER FROM
PROVIDING VIDEO SERVICE TO
SPECIFIC HOUSEHOLDS. EVEN MORE
TROUBLING IN THIS IN THAT
PROVISION. IS THE REQUIREMENT
THAT A FRANCHISE HOLDER ACTIVELY
SEEK OUT THE INCOME LEVELS OF
ALL RESIDENCES WITHIN THEIR
SERVICE TERRITORY. THE ONLY
PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION
REGARDING INCOME LEVEL IS
THROUGH THE CENSUS BUREAU, WHICH
PROVIDES INFORMATION BASED ON
CENSUS TRACT, NOT BY RESIDENTS,
WHICH WOULD LIKELY BE DEEMED A
PRIVACY VIOLATION. THAT'S THIS
PROVISION PLACES A REQUIREMENT
ON FRANCHISE HOLDERS THAT THE
FRANCHISE HOLDERS HAVE NO WAY OF
ENSURING COMPLIANCE. AGAIN THE
DENSITY DENSITY REQUIREMENT DOES
RESOLVE THIS ISSUE SINCE IT IS
BASED ON OBJECTIVE CRITERIA
ENTIRELY NEUTRAL WITH RESPECT
RESIDENTS INCOME LEVEL. THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER PROVISIONS
IN THIS BILL THAT ARE CONCERNING
TO US, THE GENERAL INCREASE IN
THE CPI UCS AUTHORITY THE
PROLONGED TIME FRAMES WITH
REGARD TO OBTAINING AND
MAINTAINING A FRANCHISE, AND THE
EXORBITANT INCREASE IN FINES ARE
JUST A FEW WHILE WE ARE
COMMITTED TO CONTINUE
CONVERSATIONS REGARDING THIS
BILL AT THIS TIME, THE BILL IS
GENERALLY UNFEASIBLE AND
THEREFORE WE REQUEST AND NO
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND I
WAS MISTAKEN. YOU HAVE FOUR
MINUTES. SO IF YOU WANT TO TAKE
AN EXTRA TWO YOU CAN, BUT IF
YOU'RE DONE, THAT'S ALSO OK.
OKAY. THANK YOU THAT FOR THAT.
UM MOVING ON. ARE THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING ROOM?
IF SO, YOU MADE ALMOST APPROACH
THE MIC WITH YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ONLY,
PLEASE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS, YOLANDA BENTZ AND
REPRESENTING US TELECOM, THE
BROADBAND ASSOCIATION. WE ARE
FACILITY BASED WIRE LINE
BROADBAND PROVIDERS PROVIDING
BROADBAND SERVICES IN
CALIFORNIA. WE ARE OPPOSED. OKAY
SEEING NO FURTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. I WANT TO THANK YOU
AND I KNOW I WANT TO RETURN IT
TO THE COMMITTEE FOR QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS. NO QUESTIONS ARE
COMING. LIKE CATS GOT OUR TONGUE
TODAY. UM AND SO, UM.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDEN WOULD
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? WELL I
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT,
AND I DO, AS I SAID EARLIER.
APPRECIATE WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE, UM AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE OPPOSITION TO, UM
BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW THE
DENSITY PIECE WORKS OR DOESN'T
WORK, BUT WE CERTAINLY ARE OPEN
TO CONVERSATIONS IN THAT
RESPECT. AND ALSO DATA SO WE GET
THAT, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMITTEES. HELPING WORKING
WITH US AND ALSO THE SPONSORS
WHO HAVE BEEN VERY COMMITTED TO
THIS EFFORT. NOT JUST SINCE I'VE
BEEN A MEMBER OF CARRYING THE
LEGISLATION, BUT FOR MANY YEARS
AND THERE THEIR COMMITMENT AND
THE PEOPLE THAT THEY REPRESENT
ALL OF US REPRESENT AND MAKING
SURE THAT THEY ARE GETTING THE
FULL ACCESS TO THE INTERNET AND
VIDEO SERVICES. THAT'S WHAT THIS
IS ALL ABOUT EQUITY AND FAIRNESS
. SO I WITHOUT I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU SO
MUCH, MR HOLDEN FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION AND THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH US ON AMENDMENTS.
YOU AND I HAVE HAD VARIOUS
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS OVER
THE YEAR YEARS. AND I'M THANKFUL
THAT YOU'VE HEARD ME AND ALL THE
STAKEHOLDERS YOU'VE SHOWN YOUR
COMMITMENT TO CONTINUE TO WORK
ON THIS POLICY AND GET THIS BILL
IN THE BEST POSITION TO MEET OUR
SHARED OBJECTIVES FOR CONNECTING
MORE HOUSEHOLDS. ESPECIALLY OUR
UNSERVED AND UNDERSERVED AND I
WANT TO THANK THE SPONSORS OF
THE BILL. UM THIS ISN'T IN MY
TALKING POINTS, SO I'M I'M GOING
ROGUE, AMELIA. UM BUT, UH, I
HAVE TO SAY I'VE BEEN ON THIS
COMMITTEE SINCE I'VE GOT HERE.
THERE'S MAYBE THE THIRD YEAR
I'VE HEARD THIS BILL AND I HAVE
LEARNED SO MUCH IN THE LAST
COUPLE OF MONTHS. AND SO I
REALLY WANT TO SAY SINCERELY.
I'VE I'VE LEARNED NEW ASPECTS
THAT I DIDN'T LEARN PREVIOUSLY,
AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL
YOUR WORK, AND THERE'S MORE THAT
WE HAVE TO DO TOGETHER. YOU
KNOW, THERE ARE DONUT HOLES AND
THE DONUT HOLES. I THINK THE
MISS ENGLAND POINTED OUT ARE
DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO
DEAL WITH. IT'S NOT JUST
UNSERVED UNDERSERVED. THERE'S
AFFORDABILITY PROBLEMS. THERE'S
ALL THESE ASPECTS THAT WE AS
LEGISLATORS NEED TO SERVE TO
SERVE CALIFORNIA. AND REALLY
CLOSE THE DIGITAL DIVIDE. AND I
SUPPORT WHAT YOU'RE CALLING, UH,
TRYING, UH, WHAT YOU'RE DOING
HERE? UM AND, UH, WHEN I WHEN I
THINK WE HAD THOSE FIRST
CONVERSATIONS, MR HOLDEN, I WAS
LIKE, HOW DO WE BOTH GET TO? YES
AND SOMEHOW WE BOTH GOT TO I AND
I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. AND IT
WASN'T EASY. UM I THINK I JUST
LIKE, HIGHLIGHT REALLY QUICKLY.
I THINK WE CONSIDER THIS THE
THINGS THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT
MOVING FORWARD. I'M CONSERVED
ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE ALL
THIS F F A POTENTIALLY BEAT
FUNDING COMING IN AND RURAL
AREAS AND WHAT THE 100% BUILD
OUT WILL MEAN FOR SERVING IT
WITH VIDEO SERVICE. UM I ALSO
WHEN IT COMES TO LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLD, I THINK THE DATA
THING WE NEED TO WORK OUT. WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE
YOU KNOW ALL THE PROVIDERS CAN
MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. UM
WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO MEET THE
REQUIREMENTS IS DIFFERENT THAN
CAN WE MEASURE THAT THEY'VE MET
THE REQUIREMENTS? I THINK WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT THAT. UM AND LASTLY
, I STILL MAINTAIN. I HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THE PUC AND HOW
THEY'RE BEHAVING. AND SO WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE. UM YOU KNOW, WE'VE
SEEN THEM THEY'VE STRUGGLED AND
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE
LANGUAGE IS CLEAR ON THE INTENT
OF THE LEGISLATURE, WHICH IS
REQUIRED TO LOOK AT EVERY ISSUE
CAREFULLY WITH THAT. I'M
SUPPORTING YOUR BILL, AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH
YOU. AS THIS BILL MOVES FORWARD.
I DON'T HAVE A MOTION YET. DO I
HAVE A MOTION? MOVED BY POPPIN
SECONDED BY WEBER. UM MEMBERS.
THERE'S BEEN EMOTION IN A SECOND
. THE MOTION ON A B 41 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLDEN IS DO
PASS AS AMENDED AND RE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. WILL THE
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
BOERNER HORVATH I BERNARD
HERBERT I JIM PATTERSON, JIM
PATTERSON, NOT VOTING. CONNOLLY
DAVIES DAVIES NÓ. HOLD THEM. I
HOOVER HOOVER, NO LOW.
MAIENSCHEIN PAPIN HAPPENED. I
THREE OF US THREE OF US, AYE,
RODRIGUEZ. BROUGH. BROUGH I, DR
WEBBER. DR WEBBER. AYE. MEMBER
THAT BILL SEASON NEEDS STILL
NEEDS A COUPLE OF VOTES TO GET
OUT THE BILLS, UNCLE.
I DON'T SEE ANY MISS AGUILAR
CURRY IN THE ROOM. SO UM, WE CAN
GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO WANG
CARILLO. A B 9 65. THANK YOU AS
MUCH AS YOU APPROACH THE DESK
TODAY WE'RE HEARING A B 9 65 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WONG CARILLO
RELATING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
BROADBAND PERMITS AND
APPLICATION. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CARILLO. YOU MAY OPEN WHEN
YOU'RE READY, AND EACH OF YOUR
WITNESSES WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING
ME TO PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL 965.
I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE
COMMITTEE CONSULTANT IN THE
CHAIR FOR WORKING WORKING
CLOSELY WITH MY OFFICE AND THIS
BILL. AND WOULD LIKE TO ALSO
EMPHASIZE MY APPRECIATION FOR
THE CONTINUED DIALOGUE WITH THE
COUNTIES, CITIES, MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES ASSOCIATIONS AND OTHER
CRITICAL PARTNERS OVER THE PAST
WEEKS. BEFORE I CONTINUE. I
WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT I WILL
BE ACCEPTED THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS. MAYBE 9656 TO
REQUIRE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO
MAKE A DECISION ON A GROUP OF
BROAD BRAND PROMISE WITHIN 60 TO
90 DAYS. THAT'S 33 MONTHS TO
MAKE A DECISION. THE DECISION
THEY CAN MAKE INCLUDE APPROVED,
CONDITIONALLY APPROVED OR
REJECTED PERMIT. EXTEND THE
AMOUNT OF TIME OF REMOVED
CERTAIN PERMITS FROM THE BATCH
AS LONG AS THERE IS MUTUAL
AGREEMENT WITH THE APPLICANT.
LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PERMITS
THEY'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT. MAKE
A HEALTH AND SAFETY
DETERMINATION TO JUSTIFY NOT
ALONG WITH THE PERMIT TO MOVE
FORWARD AND TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY. 32
STATES HAVE ADOPTED LEGISLATION
TO STREAMLINE THE PERMITTING OF
BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE. WHEN
THEY BROUGHT THEM PROJECT HAS
BEEN DEPLOYED IN A COMMUNITY.
OFTENTIMES THERE ARE NUMEROUS
LOCATIONS WHERE IDENTICAL
TELECOMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE
HAS BEEN INSTALLED TO PROVIDE
HIGH SPEED INTERNET IN THE
COMMON YEARS. WE'RE GOING TO SEE
A HUGE INFLUX OF BROADBAND
PROJECTS AS A RESULT OF PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE INVESTMENTS. AS YOU
KNOW, WE'RE FACING A DECEMBER
2024 DEADLINE TO SPEND BILLIONS
OF FEDERAL BRAND BROADBAND
DOLLARS AT RISK OF LOSING IT.
OUR CONSTITUENTS WANT US TO
SHOVELING READY PROJECTS IN OUR
COMMUNITIES SO THEY CAN BENEFIT
FROM HIGH SPEED INTERNET. 965
IMPLEMENTS THE BEST PRACTICE OF
PRIMITIVE MATCHING TO STREAMLINE
THE APPROVAL OF PROGRAM PERMITS
AROUND THE STATE. IT ALSO
CREATED FRAMEWORK. BROADBAND
INSTALLERS CAN SUBMIT A BATCH OF
NEARLY IDENTICAL BROADBAND
PERMITS TO THE LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS AT THE SAME TIME,
IN ORDER FOR THOSE PERMITS TO BE
A REVIEW THAT KNOCKED IT ON IN A
REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. MAYBE
965 IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
BECAUSE IT WILL HELP COMMUNITIES
GET CONNECTED TO HIGH SPEED
INTERNET IN MONTHS INSTEAD OF
YEARS. CALIFORNIA'S OVERWHELMING
SUPPORT OF THIS KIND OF
GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY. IN A
RECENT REPORT CONDUCTED BY THE
BAY AREA COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC
INSTITUTE, THEY FOUND THAT 75%
OF CALIFORNIA'S VOTER SUPPORT
STATEWIDE STREAMLINING THE
BROADBAND PROJECTS. WHILE 70%
SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO
FOLLOW A UNIFORM STATE MANDATED
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR PROGRAM
PROJECTS. 965 ALSO STRIKES THE
RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN EFFICIENCY
FOR STATEWIDE BROADBAND
DEPLOYMENT AND LOCAL CONTROL,
AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IT
WILL ALLOW FOR LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS TO STILL MAINTAIN
FULL CONTROL. AS A FORMER CITY
PLANNER WHO HAS DEALT WITH HIS
PERMITS. I KNOW FIRSTHAND THAT
THE PROCESSING OF SUBSTANTIALLY
SIMILAR BROADBAND PERMITS BY
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. AT THE SAME
TIME WILL BE MORE EFFICIENT IN
THEIR WORKLOAD OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT STAFF. PERMITTING
FIELDS WILL STILL BE RECEIVED BY
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BUT STAFF CAN
MORE EASILY PROCESSED ROUTINE
HIGH VOLUME BROADBAND PERMITS AS
A GROUP INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUALLY.
TO HELP BRIDGE THE DIGITAL
DIVIDE. GIVEN THE PUBLIC'S
INTEREST INCREASED RELIANCE ON
HIGH HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS
TO THE IMPORTANCE OF BROADBAND
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, PUBLIC HEALTH
ECONOMIC GROWTH, EDUCATION, JOB
CREATION, HOUSING, AFFORDABILITY
AND EMISSION REDUCTIONS. IT IS
IN CALIFORNIA'S BEST INTEREST
FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROGRAM
PROJECTS PROMISED TO BE
PROCESSED AS QUICKLY AND
EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE WHILE
MAINTAINING LOCAL CONTROL. YOU
WANT ME TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
AND ANSWER QUESTIONS IS WHICH
SHELL SWANSON, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
MANAGER OF CON CASTLE AND PETER
LORRE MUNOZ, SENIOR VICE
PRESIDENT OF TECH AND INNOVATION
AT SILICON VALLEY LEADERSHIP
GROUP. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, AND
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT WE DO
HAVE EMOTION IN A SECOND. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON,
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS AND
ROCHELLE SWANSON, AS POINTED OUT
AS AN EXTERNAL FAIR MANAGERS FOR
CROWN CASTLE WAS ALSO EIGHT
YEARS A COUNCIL MEMBER AND
ABROAD BEING ADVOCATE FOR THE
COMMUNITY AND SCHOOLS FOR CLOSE
TO 20 YEARS. UM CROWN CASTLE IS
THE NATION'S LARGEST SHARED
COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE
PROVIDER, INSTALLING, OPERATING
AND MAINTAINING BROADBAND FOR A
VARIETY OF CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING
K THROUGH 12 DISTRICTS. LOCAL
GOVERNMENT UNIVERSITIES. I S P S
AND WIRELESS CELL PHONE
PROVIDERS, WHICH IS CRITICAL TO
CONNECTIVITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY
AND SUPPORTING FIRST RESPONDERS.
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR AND
THE CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
ADVANCING INTERNET CONNECTIVITY
IN CALIFORNIA. CASTLE WORKS WITH
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS EVERY DAY IN
THIS STATE AND ACROSS THE
COUNTRY TO DEPLOY BROADBAND 89
65 REFLECTS THE BEST PRACTICE OF
PERMIT MATCHING THE BILL SIMPLY
REQUIRES LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO
MAKE A DECISION ON A GROUP OF
BROADBAND PERMITS AND A
REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME OF 2
TO 3 MONTHS, DEPENDING UPON THE
TYPE OF INSTALLATION. IT IS NOT
INTENDED NOR DESIGN TO SHORT
CIRCUIT, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
PERMITTING AUTHORITY AND DUTIES.
HERE'S THE DECISIONS THEY CAN
MAKE. THEY CAN APPROVE THE
PERMIT CONDITIONALLY APPROVED
THE PERMIT EXTEND THE AMOUNT OF
TIME BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT, REMOVE
CERTAIN PERMITS FROM THE BATCH
AND MAKE A HEALTH AND SAFETY
DETERMINATION TO JUSTIFY NOT
ALLOWING THE PERMIT TO MOVE
FORWARD. 89 65 IS NEEDED BECAUSE
EVEN THOUGH SOME LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS ARE USING PERMIT
MATCHING FOR BROADBAND PROJECTS,
MANY ARE NOT. WITH CONSTRAINTS,
STAFFING RESOURCES, WE MUST FIND
EFFICIENCIES THAT MOTIVATE
APPLICANTS TO ORGANIZE AND
BUNDLE THEIR PROJECTS AND GIVE
STAFF TOOLS SO THAT THEY CAN
MORE EASILY REVIEW AND PROCESS
THE NEED TO PERMIT IN ADDITION
TO THE STATE'S INVESTMENT OF $6
BILLION IN BROADBAND, THE
PRIVATE SECTOR IS ALSO BEEN
INVESTING BILLIONS IN THE STATE
AND CONTINUES TO EACH YEAR. IN
THE COMING MONTHS. THERE WILL BE
A LARGE INCREASE IN BROADBAND
PROJECTS, AND THIS BILL IS
CRITICAL TO MAKE SURE THAT
DECISIONS ARE MADE IN A TIMELY
MANNER AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. WE
VALUE OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS AND FEEL THAT THE
AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY THE
COMMITTEE STRIKE THE RIGHT
BALANCE, THEY WILL LEAD TO A
MORE CONTROL CONSISTENT STREAM
OF HANDLING A BROADBAND PERMITS
WHILE MAINTAINING LOCAL CONTROL
. CROWN CASTLE IS COMMITTED TO
WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT TO BEST MEET THE
CHALLENGES BEFORE US. IN SHORT,
THIS BILL WILL ENSURE BEST
PRACTICES ARE BEING USED
CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT THE
STATE TO CONNECT COMMUNITIES.
THE PUBLIC IS COUNTING ON ALL OF
US BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
SECTOR TO GET COMMUNITIES
CONNECTED TO HIGH SPEED INTERNET
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. CROWN
CASTLE IS A PARTNER IN THIS
EFFORT, AND WE GENUINELY THANK
YOU FOR YOUR I VOTE. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR IN HIS
SEEMED COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS PETER LAURENT. WHEN YOU
ALSO NICE SERVICE GENERAL
COUNSEL AND S. V P OF TECH
POLICY FOR THE SILICON VALLEY
LEADERSHIP GROUP OF BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTING
HUNDREDS OF COMPANIES AND
INSTITUTIONS THAT WORK IN THE
INNOVATION, ECONOMY AND SIMILAR
TO ROCHELLE. I ALSO SERVED IN
LOCAL GOVERNMENT THREE TERMS AS
MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THE CITY OF
GIL, RIGHT. THE LEADERSHIP GROUP
IS VERY PLEASED TO SUPPORT A B
1965 BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT IT
WILL ACCELERATE THE BUILD OUT OF
CRITICAL BROADBAND
INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA. DOING SO WILL
SUPPORT THE STATE'S ECONOMY,
GROW JOBS AND BRIDGE THE DIGITAL
DIVIDE. THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC
HASTEN THE MIGRATION OF WORK,
EDUCATION, BUSINESS AND
HEALTHCARE TO ONLINE PLATFORMS,
THOSE WITH ACCESS TO HIGH SPEED
AND RELIABLE INTERNET TRANSITION
QUICKLY TO THE NEW REALITY OF
FULLY REMOTE EMPLOYMENT, ONLINE
CLASSES OR VIRTUAL DOCTOR'S
APPOINTMENTS. SADLY MANY RURAL
LOW INCOME AND MINORITY
COMMUNITIES LACK THE BROADBAND
ARCHITECTURE FOR SUFFICIENTLY
ADVANCED INTERNET. TO KEEP PACE
WITH THESE CHANGES. AS A RESULT,
EXISTING INEQUITIES WERE FURTHER
EXACERBATED. 89 65 WILL INCREASE
CALIFORNIANS ABILITY TO ACCESS
AND LEVERAGE ONLINE RESOURCES BY
IMPLEMENTING INDUSTRY BEST
PRACTICES THAT SPEED UP THE
APPROVAL OF DIGITAL
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AT THE
COMMUNITY LEVEL. THE BILL WILL
ALLOW FOR APPROVING
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR BROADBAND
PERMIT APPLICATIONS
SIMULTANEOUSLY AVOIDING
DUPLICATIVE AND REDUNDANT RED
TAPE REVIEWS THAT STYMIE EFFORTS
TO EXPAND CRITICAL INTERNET
ACCESS. AND IT IS CRITICAL TO
NOTE AS WELL THAT THE FULL POWER
RESTS WITH THE LOCAL BODIES
THEMSELVES TO APPROVE OR DENY.
SO NO POWER IS IN ANY WAY TAKEN
FROM THEM. 89 65 WILL ALSO GROW
THE STATE'S ECONOMY AND JOBS,
BROADBAND CONSTRUCTION OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE WILL IMMEDIATELY
REQUIRE GREATER NUMBERS OF
WORKERS. ENHANCED INTERNET
INFRASTRUCTURE WILL ALSO
INCREASE THE NEED FOR WORKERS IN
DIGITAL INDUSTRIES, WHETHER
CYBER I T DATA AND OTHERS.
FINALLY THE BILL OFFERS AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR CALIFORNIA TO
OBLIGATE FEDERAL, CORONAVIRUS,
STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY
FUNDS FOR BROADBAND PROJECTS BY
NEXT YEAR'S DEADLINE OF
DECEMBER, 2024. THE SILICON
VALLEY LEADERSHIP GROUP IS PROUD
TO SUPPORT A B 9 65. PLEASE
CONSIDER US A RESOURCE AS THE
BILL IS CONSIDERED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT. WE'LL
MOVE ON TO ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT IN THE ROOM. YOU MAY
APPROACH THE MIC WITH YOUR NAME
, AFFILIATION AND POSITION ONLY.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS ALEX
TORRES WITH THE BAY AREA COUNCIL
ON BEHALF OF OUR INSTANT
ECONOMIC INSTITUTE AS WELL,
WHICH THE AUTHOR REFERENCED IN
HIS REPORT IN A IN HIS COMMENTS
AND SUPPORT TODAY. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
CAMERON DIMITRI ON BEHALF OF T
MOBILE AND SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, AMANDA WILL DRUM WITH
CAL BROADBAND AND SUPPORT
YOLANDA BENSON, US TELECOM, THE
BROADBAND ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CORNELIUS BURKE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. MADAM CHAIR, MR VICE CHAIR
, STEVE CARLSON PROCEED TO WHERE
THE TRADE ASSOCIATION FOR THE
WIRELESS INDUSTRY IN SPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING GLAND,
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
HERE IN SUPPORT. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS NATE SOLOVE AND SUPPORT
ON BEHALF OF FRONTIER
COMMUNICATIONS, THE WIRELESS
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION IN THE SAN
FRANCISCO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO THOSE
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT NOVEL MOVE
TO WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. WE
HAVE ONE PRIMARY WITNESS AN
OPPOSITION WHO MAY APPROACH THE
DESK. JASON HE CARED. IS THAT
CORRECT? CLOSE THAT'S CLOSE
ENOUGH CLOSE ENOUGH. I MEAN, MY
LAST NAME'S WAS BOERNER HORVATH
. SO THAT'S WHY I DROPPED FOUR
OF ATHENS JUST BURNER. ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES ASSOCIATION, YOU MAY
BEGIN THANK YOU, MADAM MINUTES.
YES EXCELLENT. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS JASON INCURRED
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ARE
SATIATION CMU A AND
UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T NEED THE
FULL FOUR MINUTES WILL WILL TRY
AND MAKE THIS A QUICK AND
EFFICIENT BECAUSE WHILE SEEING
THE WAY WHOSE MEMBERS ARE THE
LOCAL PUBLICLY OWNED POWER
UTILITIES SERVING 25% OF THE
STATE ARE OPPOSED TO THE BILL.
OUR OPPOSITION IS ACTUALLY QUITE
SIMPLE, BUT I WANT TO START BY
SAYING THAT WE APPRECIATE THE
FACT THAT WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY
A COUPLE WEEKS AGO TO MEET WITH
THE AUTHOR STAFF WITH THE
SPONSORS OF THE BILL, AND WE
REALLY APPRECIATE THE GOOD WORK
OF YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF WHO
WHOSE AMENDMENTS THAT THAT THAT
WAS WORKED ON WITH THE AUTHOR
THAT THEY DO IMPROVE THE BILL,
IN PARTICULAR THE FACT THAT
SAFETY STANDARDS ARE GOING TO BE
MAINTAINED NOW. BUT AT THE END
OF THE DAY, OUR OPPOSITION IS
FUNDAMENTAL TO THE FACT THAT
THAT FROM SIMI WAYS PERSPECTIVE
AND ITS MEMBERS PERSPECTIVE
EXISTING STATE AND FEDERAL LAW
ALREADY COVERS THIS ISSUE FOR
PUBLICLY OWNED UTILITIES. WE
THINK IT'S DUPLICATE IN SO IN
2011 A B 10 27 WAS ENACTED. IT
WAS ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BUCHANAN
BILL AND IT IT ACTUALLY GOVERNS
ACCESS TO OUR POLLS FOR WIRED
INFRASTRUCTURE. AND IT INCLUDES
SHOT CLOCKS THAT ARE QUITE
SIMILAR TO WHAT'S CONTEMPLATED
IN THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS, AND
IT ALSO INCLUDES BATCH
PERMITTING. IN ADDITION TO THAT
, UM, THE FCC AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL IN 2018 ADOPTED A SMALL
CELL ROLE THAT APPLIES TO
WIRELESS FACILITIES AND, AND
THAT RULE LIKEWISE INCLUDE SHOT
CLOCKS, AND IT INCLUDES, UM IT
INCLUDES BATCH PERMITTING
PROCESS. SO AT THE END OF THE
DAY, WHILE WE APPRECIATE THE
AUTHORS EFFORTS, WE APPRECIATE
WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO. WE DON'T
THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO HAVE
PUBLICLY OWNED UTILITIES COVERED
BY THIS BILL. WE THINK IT WOULD
BE MORE APPROPRIATE IF THEY WERE
EXEMPT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY
COVERED BY OTHER STATE AND
FEDERAL LAW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
. DO WE HAVE A SECOND WITNESS
THAT DIDN'T REGISTER WITH US AND
MEMBERS? GREGG COOK,
REPRESENTING NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
POWER AGENCY, THE AMENDMENTS
THAT WENT IN THE BILL ON SUNDAY
RAISE SOME SERIOUS QUESTIONS.
HOWEVER YESTERDAY I HAD AN
EXTRAORDINARY PRODUCTIVE MEETING
WITH MR CARILLO STAFF. AND BASED
ON THAT MEETING, I'M QUITE
CONFIDENT AS THIS BILL GOES
FORWARD, THE QUESTIONS THAT WE
RAISE WILL BE ANSWERED, AND I
THANK THE STAFF AND THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBERS FOR THEIR COOPERATION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UM MOVING ON. ARE THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING ROOM?
YOU MAY HAVE REPROACHED THE MIC
NAME AFFILIATION. NOON. TRACY
RYAN. WE'RE ALL KIND OF
REPRESENTATIVE CALIFORNIA. WE DO
NOT HAVE A FORMAL POSITION ON
THE BILL. HOWEVER WE APPRECIATE
THE WORK THAT THE COMMITTEE
STAFF AUTHOR SPONSORS HAVE TAKEN
WITH US TO TALK ABOUT FINDING A
COMPROMISE TO ADDRESS OUR
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS. AND WE
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATION. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS DAVID CONCORD WITH THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES,
JUST ECHOING THE PREVIOUS
COMMENTS, UM APPRECIATE THE HARD
WORK OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE
AUTHOR AND OTHER STAFF ON THE
MOST RECENT ITERATION LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO WORK
WITH YOU ON OUR OUR EXISTING
CONCERNS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, SEEING NO FURTHER
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM ALL
RETURN TO THE COMMITTEE FOR
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SEEING NONE. AH DO YOU
HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY UH, SAYING
NONE. AH, SOMETHING MY GRAND
CAREER. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
YES THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO
ASSURE YOU THAT I AM COMMITTED
TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH OUR
COUNTY CITIES AND MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES. TO PROVIDE CLARITY ON
THE LANGUAGE AND ADDRESS ANY
OUTSTANDING CONCERNS CONSIDERING
THEIR UNIQUE SITUATIONS. WITHOUT
OUR RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, MR
CARILLO. FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD WITH THE AMENDMENTS. I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL.
WHILE THERE IS CLEARLY A NEED TO
EXPAND BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
ACROSS THE STATE, ESPECIALLY
CONSIDERING ALL THE FUNDING
THAT'S COMING THROUGH. GETTING
200% CONNECTIVITY WILL BE A
CHALLENGE, AND I THINK YOU'RE
RIGHT. THAT PERMITTING CAN BE A
CHALLENGE AND WE SHOULD CONSIDER
WAYS TO MAKE THAT PROCESS. WORK
BETTER FOR EVERYONE. WE TOOK
LOTS OF AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL
TO MAKE IT WORKABLE, AND I
ULTIMATELY THINK WE FOUND A GOOD
BALANCE TO CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATION. SHOULD THIS BOOK
PASS, WHICH I HOPE IT DOES. IT
WILL BE REFERRED TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT NEXT EMOTION BY
DAVID'S SECOND BY HOLDEN. THE
MOTION IS A B 9 65 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WONG CARILLO IS
DO PASS AS AMENDED, AND WE REFER
TO THE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENT. WELL THE COMMITTEE
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
BOERNER HORVATH. I HORVATH. I'VE
JIM PATTERSON. JIM PATTERSON. I
CONNOLLY DAVIES DAVIES, I HOLDEN
HOLDEN. I HOOVER HOOVER. I LO
MAIENSCHEIN HAPPEN. I
THREE OF US THREE OF US. AYE
RODRIGUEZ. BROUGH. DR WEBBER. DR
WEBBER. AYE. MEMBERS A B 9 65
HAS PASSED AND WE WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE OPEN SO THAT MEMBERS CAN
ADD ON THEIR VOTES. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR CRAIG QUÊ. SO WE
COULD GO BACK TO THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, SAYING NO AUTHORS
ENCOURAGE ASSEMBLY MEMBER
AGUILAR CURRY OR SANTIAGO TO
MAKE THEIR WAY TO THE COMMITTEE
ROOM. SO WE HAVE A PROBLEM. SO
WE HAVE A COMPOSED CONSENT
CALENDAR ITEM. FIVE A. B 2 97
RODRIGUEZ OFFICE OF EMERGENCY
SERVICES 911 PUBLIC EDUCATION
CAMPAIGN. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS
AS AMENDED AND RE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
AND ITEM 6 84 FOR 15 RODRIGUEZ.
EMERGENCY FAIRGROUNDS
COMMUNICATIONS GRANT ACT.
MOTIONS DO PASS AND WE REFER TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
TO HAVE EMOTION. MOVED BY WAS
THAT PATERSON? PATERSON, SECOND
BY DAVIES. BUT THAT COMMITTEE
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
BOERNER HORVATH BOERNER HORVATH
I JIM PATTERSON, JIM PATTERSON.
I CONNOLLY DAVIES DAVIES I
HOLDEN HOLDEN I HOOVER HOOVER, I
LO MAIENSCHEIN HAPPEN. HAPPENED.
I THREE OF US HI, THREE OF US.
AYE, RODRIGUEZ. SHOVE Ó.
WHOEVER DR WEBBER. DR WEBBER, I
AM. OKAY? MR SANTIAGO IS ON HIS
WAY. SO HE WILL WAIT A FEW
MINUTES AND THEN HOW DID HE
SHOULD BE HERE?
CONSENT. CALENDAR IS UP, BUT
WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR AUTHORS
TO ADD OUR MEMBERS TO ADD ON.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO BACK AND
MEMBERS CAN ADD ON TO A B 41
HOLDEN. THE MOTION IS DUE PAST
AS AMENDED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. NO. NEVER MIND.
THERE'S MR SANTIAGO. A QUICK
FLASH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO
TODAY WE'RE HEARING A B 12 31 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SANTIAGO
RELATED TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS,
COMBINING LIFELINE, FEDERAL
LIFELINE AND FEDERAL AFFORDABLE
CONNECTIVITY PROGRAM SUBSIDIES.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SANTIAGO, YOU
MAY OPEN AND YOU'RE I THINK WE
HAVE ONE PRIMARY SUPPORT WITNESS
SO YOU WOULD HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
SURE AND WE'LL BE BRIEF AS
POSSIBLE. THAT'S OKAY WITH THE
CHAIR. WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT A
BILL A B 12 31 AND MADAM CHAIR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
WORKING COMMITTEES WORK TO HELP
US TO MAKE THIS A BETTER BILL
AND SORT OF IS. WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE TRYING TO
A LOT OF FOLKS TO HAVE MORE
ACCESS TO BROUGHT IT TO HIRE
GIGABYTES IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO
ACCESS MORE INFORMATION. AS
WE'RE MOVING FORWARD, AND JUST
THAT'S THE GENERAL SENSE OF IT.
AND THE REASON WHAT WE'RE GOING
ABOUT THIS BILL IS HAVING THE
ABILITY, UH, TO CONTINUE THE
WORK THAT WAS DONE DURING COVID
WHEN THE PUC ALLOWED WIRE LINE
AND WIRELESS CUSTOMERS TO STAG
BBB BENEFITS WITH FEDERAL
LIFELINE TODAY, UM WE WANT TO
CONTINUE THAT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE
THE BEST SERVICE TO ALL
CONSUMERS, IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR
THEIR INCOME STATUS. WE HAVE ONE
WITNESS. MADAM CHAIR IF THAT'S
OKAY WITH YOU. YES UH, CAN I
JUST CLARIFY IF YOU'RE ACCEPTING
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS? OH
YEAH. AND I THOUGHT I STARTED
WITH THAT. SO I APOLOGIZE. YES,
OF COURSE, I WOULD SAY THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANIELLE
PARRY. AND I'M THE CHIEF
COMPLIANCE OFFICER FOR TRUE
CONNECT. I ALSO SIT ON THE BOARD
FOR THE NATIONAL LIFELINE
ASSOCIATIONS AND I CHAIR THE
CALIFORNIA REGULATORY IN
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE FOR
NALA. I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 12 31. CONNECT IS
THE LARGEST LIFELINE PROVIDER IN
CALIFORNIA AND THE ONLY PROVIDER
BASED IN CALIFORNIA. WE PROVIDE
CONNECTIVITY AND MOBILE
BROADBAND TO CALIFORNIA LIFELINE
PARTICIPANTS THROUGH AN
AGREEMENT WITH OUR NETWORK
PARTNER, T MOBILE. WE'RE PLEASED
TO PROVIDE THIS INVALUABLE
SERVICE TO CALIFORNIANS. WE'VE
SEEN A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THE
AMOUNT OF DATA CONSUMERS USE
MONTHLY. AND THE COVID PANDEMIC
REALLY HIGHLIGHTED THE NEED FOR
ALL CONSUMERS, REGARDLESS OF
INCOME TO HAVE ACCESS TO MORE
DATA FOR SCHOOL WORK, TELEHEALTH
AND STAYING CONNECTED WITH
FRIENDS AND FAMILY. CONGRESS
RECOGNIZED IN 2022 THAT THE
DIGITAL DIVIDE WAS CONTINUING TO
GROW AND PASSED THE AFFORDABLE
CONNECTIVITY PROGRAM TO HELP
BRIDGE THAT GAP. IN FACT, THE
FCC ENCOURAGES STATES TO ALLOW
FOR THE COMBINING OF STATE AND
FEDERAL BENEFITS SO THAT
CONSUMERS HAVE ACCESS TO THE
MOST DATA POSSIBLE. THEY
RECOGNIZE THAT THE MORE
SUBSIDIES THAT CAN BE COMBINED,
THE MORE IT WILL AID LOW INCOME
CONSUMERS AND HELP CLOSE THE
DIGITAL DIVIDE. A B 12 31 SIMPLY
WOULD ALLOW LOW INCOME CONSUMERS
TO COMBINE STATE LIFELINE,
FEDERAL LIFELINE AND FEDERAL
SUBSIDIES AND TO ONE PLAN. IN
ORDER TO BE ABLE TO OBTAIN THE
MOST ROBUST VOICE AND BROADBAND
SERVICE POSSIBLE. THE BILL IS
NEEDED BECAUSE THE CPUC HAS
PROHIBITED CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS
FROM COMBINING THEIR CALIFORNIA
LIFELINE AND A CPP BENEFITS TO
MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF DATA THEY
RECEIVE THE ABILITY FOR
CONSUMERS TO COMBINE ALL THREE
BENEFITS WILL PROVIDE THEM WITH
ROBUST DATA ACCESS. OUR INDUSTRY
WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THESE
CONSUMERS WITH THE BEST POSSIBLE
PLANS. LOW INCOME FAMILIES CAN'T
SIMPLY AFFORD LARGE DATA PLANS,
COMBINING ALL AVAILABLE
SUBSIDIES, SUBSIDIES WILL
PROVIDE A MORE ROBUST PLAN THAT
WILL UNDOUBTEDLY HELPED TO
CORRECT THIS. WE STAND READY TO
HELP MORE LIFELINE RECIPIENTS
RECEIVE BETTER PLANS BY ALLOWING
CONSUMERS TO COMBINE THEIR
BENEFITS. THANK YOU AND I ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE AND THEN AVAILABLE
TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS
NEEDED. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM
NEXT, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
IN THE ROOM. YOU MAY APPROACH
THE MIC WITH NAME, AFFILIATION
AND POSITION ONLY PLEASE. MY
NAME IS MY NAME IS LUIS MARTIN
AND I LIVE AT THE ST FRANCIS
SENIOR COMMUNITY. AND I'M HERE
TO SAY THAT DIAMOND SUPPORT OF
MAYBE 12 31. THANK YOU. MY NAME
IS WILLIE MAE WALKER. I'M IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF A B 12 31.
HELLO LESLIE LEWIS, SOCIAL
WORKER WITH ST FRANCIS MANNER.
I'M IN STRONG SUPPORT OF A B 31.
HELLO MY NAME IS GWEN ALDRIDGE
GRANT. I'M A RETIRED STATE. AH
AH! AH AND STATE COUNTY AND
SCHOOLS. UM EMPLOYEES. AND I'M
IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. HELLO MY NAME IS
ANITA. I'M A CASE MANAGER WITH
SACRAMENTO. FOP HOUSING. I AM
ALSO IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HI.
MY NAME IS SOPHIE SOLOMON. KILL
HIM. ALSO KISSINGER WAS
SACRAMENTO SELF UP HOUSING AND I
SUPPORT. CATHERINE JULY RT
COMPLETE SUPPORT OF THIS BILL 12
31. THANK YOU. SUZANNE FOX WITH
A CAPS IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
THANK YOU. I AM GOING, RUNYON.
I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL. JOE
TAYLOR SUPPORTED THE BILL. NOT
ONLY CRAIG'S CASE MANAGER WITH
SSH AGENT SUPPORTED THE BILL. DR
KENNETH GREEN CASE, MANAGER OF
SACRAMENTO SELF HELP POLICY AND
AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR
ACHIEVERS ACADEMY CONSULTING
GROUP SUPPORTED THE BILL. AS THE
CRIME EREZ RESIDENT OF
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, AND I'M IN
SUPPORTIVE BILL. WHAT A B 1231
THANK YOU. SORRY.
SORRY, MAN. MY NAME IS DOING TO
ME. UM. I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS
DWAYNE TOOLEY. UM SUPPORTED THIS
BILL BECAUSE I'VE SEEN HOMELESS
PEOPLE ON THE STREET. NEED HELP.
SER COMMUNICATION COMMUNITY, USE
THE PHONE AND THEY DON'T HAVE IT
. THEY DON'T HAVE ANY HELP, AND
THEY NEED THEIR PHONES HAVE SEEN
TOO MANY PEOPLE. YOU KNOW THEY
NEED HELP WITH THEIR DRUG
ADDICTION, THEIR PROBLEMS THEY
HAVE THEY NEED A PHONE TO USE.
THEY HAVE TO KEEP CONTINUING
THIS BECAUSE IT'S LIFE OR DEATH
FOR SOME OF THESE PEOPLE.
INTERESTING. IT JUST NEEDED
SORRY. THANK YOU. HI MY NAME IS
HENRY ORTIZ. I'M THE LEAD
ORGANIZER FOR ALL OF US. AND ON
THE SACRAMENTO CHAPTER. I GOT
SOME OF OUR MEMBERS HERE WHO ARE
ON HOUSED IN OUR IN THE FIGHT OR
IN THE FIRE AND ON BEHALF OF
THEM IN IN THE COMMUNITY HERE
THAT CONTINUES TO INCREASE IN
THE HOUSED WE NEED TO SERVICES
FOR THEM BECAUSE EVERY
GOVERNMENT AGENCY THAT'S
SUPPOSED TO MEET THEIR NEEDS.
THEY WANT YOU TO GO ONLINE NOW,
EVER SINCE COVID. NOBODY WANTS
TO. THERE'S NO FACES PEOPLE
FACING HOUSING ISSUES AND
NOBODY'S ANSWERING EMAILS.
NOBODY'S ANSWERING TO THESE
PEOPLE, AND THE ONLY THING THEY
GOT TO COMMUNICATE AS FAR JONES.
THIS UPLIFT OF CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS, THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS AND I
AS A COMMUNITY, LET'S LET'S
UPLIFT THE RIGHTS OF OUR PEOPLE
HERE. MY NAME IS HENRY ORTIZ.
ALL OF US. YOU KNOW, SACRAMENTO?
THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND NAME
AFFILIATION AND POSITION. THANK
YOU. I'M LEILANI MOLINA AND I'M
WITH ALL OF US IS NOT. AND UM
I'M ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
HOMELESS AND HAVE BEEN IN THE
SITUATION AND I'VE SEEN MANY
TIMES THROUGH THE YEARS WHEN I
WAS IN NURSING AND SEEING HOW
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TREATED WITH,
LIKE NO PHONES, OR THEY KNOW NO
COMMUNICATIONS AND THEY CAN'T
GET THEIR MEDICATIONS. THEY
CAN'T DO WHATEVER THEY NEED TO
DO. AND SO IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT
FOR EVERYBODY. JUST TO LET YOU
GUYS KNOW. THANK YOU SO MUCH WE
APPRECIATE HELLO. I'M CORIN
TUNNEL. WASHINGTON SEGOLELA. UM
I AM PART OF THE HOMELESS
COMMUNITY. UM, EVERYBODY'S OUT
THERE FOR DIFFERENT REASONS. BUT
WE ALL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS.
WHATEVER WE'RE OUT THERE TO GET
OFF OF THE STREETS. IT'S
EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. NOT HAVING
ACCESS. TO WIFI. IT. IT CAN MAKE
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOMEBODY
BEING ABLE TO GET OFF OF THE
STREET AND HAVING TO SPEND THE
REST OF THEIR LIVES ON THE
STREET. UM I'M FROM SACRAMENTO
CHAPTER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING
STORIES AT THIS POINT. PLEASE
JUST SAY YOUR NAME AFFILIATION
AND YOUR POSITION OF IT'S A
SUPPORT OR POST STEVENS. ALL OF
US ARE NONE OF US AND I'M IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR. MY NAME IS
BROTHER KEVIN CARTER. I AM A CO
CHAIR. FOR THE NATIONAL THE POOR
PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN NATIONAL CALL
FOR MORE REVIVAL AND WE ARE ALL
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AH RASHID
SADIQ WERE RCD CONSULTING AND
STRONG SUPPORT A B 12 31. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL THE
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT UM, WELL,
NOW MOVE TO WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. WE HAVE ONE PRIMARY
WITNESS AND OPPOSITION WHO MAY
APPROACH THE DESK IGNACIO
HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF THE
UTILITY REFORM NETWORK. TURN MR
HERNANDEZ. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR
MINUTES. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
IGNACIO HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
TURN WE DO HAVE AN OPPOSED WAS
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS. FIRST OF
ALL, I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE AND THE AUTHOR FOR
ADOPTING. UM THE AMENDMENT
TODAY. WE THINK THAT IT MAKES
THE BILL MUCH BETTER MOVES IN
THE RIGHT DIRECTION. YOU KNOW,
TURNS CONCERN IS REALLY YOU KNOW
, TWO OR THREE ISSUES NUMBER
ONE. THERE IS A PROCEEDING THAT
THE COMMISSION RIGHT NOW. WE
FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THE
COMMISSION WILL IN FACT, ADOPT A
STACKING PROTOCOL AND
REQUIREMENTS, SO WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THIS BILL WOULD NOT
PROHIBIT THE COMMISSION FROM
TAKING STRONG ACTION THAT WILL
PROTECT CONSUMERS NUMBER ONE BUT
ALSO HOLD PROVIDERS ACCOUNTABLE
, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE PLANS ARE GOOD AND IMPORTANT
AND ROBUST, SO WE NEED SOME
ADDITIONAL DEFINITION. THE ONE
THING THAT WE HAVE SEEN WHEN
THERE WAS A PILOT PROJECT. IS
THAT SOME OF THE PROVIDERS WERE
NOT COMPLYING WITH SOME OF THE
REQUIREMENTS. SO WE HAD, FOR
EXAMPLE, MULTIPLE PROVIDERS WHO
WERE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE STACKING PILOT PROJECT ON
THE CONDITION THAT THEY WOULD
HAVE THEIR FEDERAL PLANS
APPROVED OR THE PLANS APPROVED
AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. WE HAD
MORE THAN ONE PROVIDER NOT
FOLLOW THROUGH OR NOT PROVIDE
EVIDENCE OF COMPLYING WITH
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AND HAVING
THEIR PLAN APPROVED AND AS A
RESULT, THE COMMISSIONER TO TAKE
LENGTHY AND COSTLY ACTION TO
RECOUP SOME OF THE MONEY THAT
THEY ACTUALLY DID NOT QUALIFY
FOR BECAUSE THEY HAD NOT SATISFY
THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION. SO WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THE WAY THIS BILL IS
DRAFTED. THIS WOULD BE ALLOWED
FOR THESE PROVIDERS TO
PARTICIPATE WITHOUT A LOT OF
THESE REQUIREMENTS. SO EITHER
THE BILL HAS TO BE STRONGER OR
IT HAS TO BE CLEAR THAT THE
COMMISSION DOES HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO PUT REQUIREMENTS
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ON THE
PROVIDERS AND NOT SIMPLY A FREE
PASS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
STACKING, UM, PROCESS. SO FOR
THOSE REASONS WE ARE OPPOSED, WE
LOOK FORWARD. WE APPRECIATE THE
COMMUNICATION THAT WE'VE HAD
WITH THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE HAVE A
LOT OF RESPECT FOR THE AUTHOR
WORK WITH HIM ON A NUMBER OF
THINGS. IF THE BILL MOVES
FORWARD, WE WILL CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH THE AUTHOR ON THIS
ISSUE. THANK YOU MOVING ON. ARE
THERE ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING
ROOM? YOU MAY APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE NAME. AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ONLY. SEEING NONE. I'LL
RETURN TO THE COMMITTEE FOR
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. MOVES THE
BILL. UM MOTION BY DAVIES,
SECOND BY RODRIGUEZ. UM. AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SANTIAGO. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN I VOTE. THANK YOU FOR
HELPING US WITH THE AMENDMENTS,
WHICH WE ACCEPT, AND WE EXPECT
THAT CONVERSATION TO CONTINUE
ALSO RELATES TO AUTHORITY OR NON
AUTHORITY OF THE PC MOVING
FORWARD. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR HARD WORK. THANK YOU,
MR SANTIAGO FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH US ON AMENDMENTS. I
AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE STATE
NEEDS TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO
MAXIMIZE BROADBAND BENEFITS FOR
THE PUBLIC, AND I THINK WE HEARD
THAT VERY CLEARLY IN THE PUBLIC
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THE
DECISION OF THE PUC IS DECISION
FOR USING CALIFORNIA LIFELINE
FUNDS TO SUPPLEMENT PLANS IS
OVERLY RESTRICTIVE. I AGREE THAT
IT HAS THE EFFECT OF
UNNECESSARILY RESTRICTING ACCESS
FOR LOW INCOME FOLKS, AND
THERE'S ROOM TO MAKE AN
IMPROVEMENT. THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS BEFORE IT'S MUCH
NEEDED AS THE ANALYSIS NOTES.
THE SOLUTION IS NOT SIMPLE
AMENDMENTS. WE AGREED TO CREATE
A PATH FOR EXPANDING ACCESS FOR
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS WILL
BALANCING THE FISCAL
CONSIDERATIONS. THESE AMENDMENTS
ARE WE DO NOT EXPAND THE PUC S
RATE SETTING AUTHORITY, AND
WE'RE HAPPY TO KEEP WORKING WITH
THE AUTHOR AND THE SPONSORS. UM
AS IT MOVES FORWARD, I THINK WE
CAN GET THERE AND ENCOURAGE YOU
TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THE BEST
BALANCE FOR THE STATE AND FOR
THE LIFELINE PARTICIPANTS. I
WILL BE SUPPORTING YOUR BILL. WE
HAVE A MOTION BY DAVIES SECOND
BY RODRIGUEZ. UM THE MOTION IS A
B 1231 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
SANTIAGO IS DO PASS. THIS
AMENDMENT AMENDED AND RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. WILL THE
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
BOERNER HORVATH. AYE,
BOERNER HORVATH I JIM PATTERSON
. JIM PATTERSON. I CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DAVIES DAVIES, I
HOLDEN HOLDEN, I HOOVER HOOVER.
I LO MAIENSCHEIN. HAPPEN
HAPPENED? I THREE OF US RIVERS I
. RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ. I BROUGH.
DR WEBBER. DR WEBBER. I'M. YEAH
MEMBERS. A B 12 31 HAS PASSED
AND WE LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN SO
THAT MEMBERS CAN OUT ON THEIR
VOTES. AND.
OKAY I THINK I SEE MR AGUILAR
CURRY OUR LAST BILL OF THE DAY
TODAY WE'RE HEARING 83 16 BY
ASSEMBLING ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
AGUILAR CURRY RELATING TO
VEHICLES. AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
REMEMBER, AGUIAR-CURRY YOU MAY
OPEN. I WILL SAY I HAVE TO STEP
OUT REAL QUICK. UM MY VICE CHAIR
WILL TAKE OVER AS AFTER WE GET
THIS GOING AND THEN I'LL BE
RIGHT BACK UP AGAIN. YOU CAN
OPEN AND YOU HAVE TWO WITNESSES
EACH I THINK WITH TWO MINUTES
EACH REQUEST TO USE A PROP YES,
THANK YOU. YES. I DIDN'T SEE
YOUR CHIEF OF STAFF COME IN WITH
A LARGE BOWL, AND I WAS LIKE,
WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? THANK
YOU. YOUR AREA. THAT'S RIGHT.
ALRIGHT, LET'S NOT KNOCK THAT
OVER. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. CHAIR
BURNER AND MEMBERS. I WOULD LIKE
TO THANK YOU PERSONALLY AND YOUR
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR WORKING SO
CLOSELY WITH OUR OFFICE AND I
WILL BE ACCEPTING YOUR
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TODAY.
MEMBERS YOU UNDOUBTEDLY HAVE
HEARD MANY THINGS ABOUT THIS
BILL. THE SUGGESTION THAT IT IS
A BAN ON TESTING AND DEPLOYMENT
OF AUTONOMOUS TRUCKING IS AN
ATTEMPT BY SOME IN THIS INDUSTRY
TO MISCHARACTERIZE AND CONFUSED.
THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT
HAVING ABOUT HAVING A HUMAN
BEING IN THE CAB OF AN OTHERWISE
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE THAT PREVENTS
THE TESTING AND DEPLOYMENT OF
THE AUTONOMOUS TRUCK TRACKING
TECHNOLOGY. THE GOAL OF THIS
BILL SIMPLE. WHEN AN ON TOP
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE OVER £10,000
IS OPERATED ON A PUBLIC ROAD. IT
MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY QUALIFIED
HUMAN SAFETY OPERATOR. TODAY THE
ONLY FULLY ATON UM, ASSED
TESTING AND DEPLOYMENT OF
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY ON
CALIFORNIA'S PUBLIX ROADS HAS
BEEN WITH LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES IN
SAN FRANCISCO. OVER 92 INCIDENTS
WITH AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES HAVE
PROMPTED CITY OFFICIALS TO ASK
THE CPUC TERRAIN IN THE
DEPLOYMENT OF DRIVERLESS
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES. YOU CAN SEE
ON THIS MAP. THAT THE INCIDENTS
COVERED DOWNTOWN SAN FRANCISCO
AND MORE INCIDENTS ARE BEING
REPORTED ON A WEEKLY BASIS.
MEANWHILE MEANWHILE, THE
COMPANIES DEPLOYING THE
TECHNOLOGY ARE INSISTING ON ON
AND LOBBYING FOR EXPANSION OVER
AND ABOVE LOCAL LOCAL ELECTED IN
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICIALS
OBJECTIONS. AND THESE INCIDENTS
DRIVERLESS VEHICLE STOPPED
SUDDENLY. IMPEDING TRAFFIC AND
CAUSING ACCIDENTS. AND OTHERS
THEY HAVE BLOCKED EMERGENCY
VEHICLES. DRIVEN THROUGH
EMERGENCY SCENES AND DROVE AWAY
FROM POLICE OFFICERS DOING
DURING A VEHICLE STOP. MORE
RECENTLY, ONE COMPANY OPERATED
OUTSIDE THE CONDITIONS ALLOWED
IN THE PERMIT AND MULTIPLE
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES DROVE PAST
POLICE TAPE. AND INTO DOWN
UTILITY WIRES. TODAY. THEIR
PERMIT HAS NOT BEEN AFFECTED BY
THIS INCIDENT. WHAT I BELIEVE
THIS TECHNOLOGY HAS GREAT
POTENTIAL. I DO BELIEVE THAT
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO
BELIEVE THIS EXPERIENCE WILL BE
REPEATED IN TESTING DRIVERLESS
TRUCKS. BUT WITH VEHICLES THAT
WAY AN EXTRA £76,000 DRIVE IT
HIGHER SPEED AND PRESENT AN
EXPONENTIALLY GREATER THREAT TO
THE PUBLIC. AS A MEMBER AS THE
MEMBER WHO REPRESENTS A DISTRICT
LAYING BETWEEN THE CAPITAL AND
BAY AREA, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
DRIVING FROM HOME TO WORK AND
BACK AND THOUSANDS OF TRUCKS
MOVING GOODS FROM PORTS EAST AND
GOODS TO THE POOR WEST. I
BELIEVE IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY
TO BE AND HAVE THE LEGISLATURE
BE THE FINAL STEP IN AGREEING
TRUCKING WITHOUT ANY HUMAN
OPERATION IS SAFE. WE MUST ALSO
ADDRESS THE REALITY THAT
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKING COULD
DECIMATE THE QUALIFIED WORKFORCE
BEFORE WE FIND OUT WHAT THE
EMPLOYEE NEEDS ARE IN THE FUTURE
ARE RESULTING IN A SEVERE
SHORTAGE OF TRAINED AND CAPABLE
WORKERS TO MEET THE FUTURE
NEEDS. THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A
HUMAN SAFETY OPERATOR GIVES
COMPANIES THE INCENTIVE TO HELP
TRAIN AND TRANSITION ARE
TRUCKING WORKFORCE, AS OPPOSED
TO ELIMINATING ONE OF THE MOST
COMMON JOBS IN CALIFORNIA.
500,000 OF OUR BROTHERS AND
SISTERS WORKING IN THE TRUCKING
INDUSTRY CANNOT BE AN
AFTERTHOUGHT. WE HAVE ALREADY
MET AND WILL CONTINUE TO MEET
WITH THE EXPERTS AND
STAKEHOLDERS IN TRACKING AND
TRACKING EMPLOYMENT TECHNOLOGY,
PUBLIC SAFETY GOODS, MOVEMENT
AND LOGISTICS. THIS BILL IS A
COMPROMISE BETWEEN THOSE WHO
WOULD PREFER TO BAN THESE
TECHNOLOGIES AND THOSE WHO SEEK
OFTEN WITH ENORMOUS FINANCIAL
INCENTIVES TO MEET LEE DEPLOYED
AS AN YET UNPROVEN TECHNOLOGY.
WELL, I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR
OUR PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICIALS AT
DMV AND CHP. I BELIEVE AS THE
PERSON I BELIEVE, AS THE
PERSON'S MOST DIRECTLY
ACCOUNTABLE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS
FOR THEIR SAFETY. AND WELL BEING
. WE OWE IT TO THEM TO BE A PART
OF DETERMINING WHEN THE THREAT
TO THE PUBLIC IS MINOR ENOUGH TO
REMOVE HUMANS FROM CALIFORNIA
TRUCKING. RECEIVING THE RESULTS
OF RESEARCH AND REPORTING UNDER
THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN FROM THE
SINCE THE TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE WILL ALLOW A ROBUST
DISCUSSION IN THE LATE
LEGISLATURE WHEN IT IS COMPLETE.
A HEARING WILL ALLOW PUBLIC
TRANSPARENCY AND DEBATE. MEMBERS
PLEASE JOIN ME AND OVER THE 20
BIPARTISAN CO AUTHORS OF THIS
BILL. US REPRESENTATIVE LEE
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER REFERENCE
REPRESENTATIVE SHIFT AND THE
MAYOR OF LONDON BREED. THE LOCAL
WITH THE MOST EXPERIENCE DEALING
WITH AUTOMATED TRANSPORTATION ON
HER STREETS AND PROTECTING
PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR WORKFORCE.
PASSING THIS BILL WILL ALLOW
COMPANIES TO TEST AND DEPLOY
AUTOMATED VEHICLES WHILE
PROVIDING A HUMAN BACKSTOP IN
THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, AND I HAVE
SUPPORTERS HERE, BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TRINA
GRANT AND I AM A TEAMSTERS
DRIVER FROM LOCAL 4 39. I'M HERE
AS A STRONGEST SPORT OF THE A B
3 16. AND FOR THE PAST 35 YEARS,
I HAVE BEEN A PROFESSIONAL
DRIVER IN THE TRANSPORTATION AND
LOGISTICS INDUSTRY. BEING A
TRUCK DRIVER IS LIKE PLAYING
CHESS. WE ALL KNOW HOW TO PLAY
CHESS. WE HAVE TO STRATEGICALLY
PLAN OUR ROUTES. IT'S ALWAYS
CHANGING, AND YOU ALWAYS NEED TO
BE ONE STEP AHEAD MANEUVERING
VEHICLES OF THAT CAPACITY TO GET
IN AND OUT OF HAZARDOUS WAY.
THAT AND I'LL TAKES HUMAN
INSTINCTS. YOU CAN'T DO THAT
WITH A THOMAS VEHICLE. I'VE
EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND DIFFERENT
TECHNOLOGY, TECHNOLOGICAL
CHANGES THROUGHOUT MY 35 YEAR
TENURE. SOME OF THE CHANGES HAVE
MADE MY JOB EASIER AND OTHERS
HAVE MADE IT HAD MORE OF A
HAZARD MANY TIMES THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY
IS NOT PERFECT, AND THAT
ACTUALLY CAUSE ROADWAY SAFETIES.
UNTIL WE KNOW NEW TECHNOLOGY
LIKE DRIVERLESS TRUCKS. IT IS
CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE TRAINED
DRIVERS IN THE VEHICLE TO TAKE
CONTROL IN AN EMERGENCY TO
NAVIGATE, IMPLEMENT WEATHERS AND
TO STEER CLEAR OF HAZARDS THAT'S
IN THE ROADWAY. MADAM CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. AS A
DRIVER. I'M ALSO A STEWARD OF
THE ROAD. I'M ALSO A FIRST
RESPONDER OF THE ROAD. I SEE
THINGS BEFORE THEY HAPPENED AND
REACT TO THEM TO HELP KEEP
PEOPLE SAFE FOR AN EXAMPLE OF
STALLED VEHICLE. STOP BIG RIGS.
THAT DRIVERLESS VEHICLE WOULD
NOT BE ABLE TO ASSIST. I WAS
ABLE TO EXAMPLE STOP THE
TRAFFIC. GET THAT AND HELP THAT
DRIVER GET TO SAFETY IN THAT
PARTICULAR INSTINCTS. DRIVERLESS
TRUCK WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO
THAT. THIS IS NOT A NEW STORY,
BUT A COMMON STORY OF WHAT I'VE
DONE OVER THE PAST 35 YEARS, AND
MANY OF MY FELLOW TRUCK DRIVERS
DO DAILY. WE HELP OTHERS BECAUSE
IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP
THE ROADS SAFE. DRIVERS LIST
TRUCKS WITHOUT AN OPERATOR WILL
NOT ONLY TAKE AWAY THESE EXTRA
SET OF EYES, BUT IT WILL ALSO
TAKE AWAY FROM OUR SOCIETY. IT
ELIMINATES NOT JUST A JOB. BUT
IT TAKES AWAY FROM OUR FAMILY.
BEING A DRIVER IS A WAY OF LIFE.
IT ALLOWS ME TO PROVIDE FOR MY
FAMILY. GOOD LIVING WAGES
HEALTHCARE WITHOUT THOSE WITHOUT
DRIVERS BEHIND THE WHEEL, WE
LOSE THAT. AS A STATE AND WE
LOOK FORWARD AS A STATE START TO
TESTING AND DEPLOYING THESE
TRUCKS. WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
THE SAFETY MEASURES IN PLACE FOR
NOT ONLY THE GENERAL PUBLIC
FAMILIES IN WHICH THE TRUCKS
IMPACT A B 16 IS NEEDED TO
SAFELY AND RESPONSIBLY RIP
LAWYER AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES OVER
£10,000. THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS. SARAH FLOCKS.
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION. UM
I ALMOST JUST THROW AWAY MY
NOTES AFTER MR GRANT SPOKE
BECAUSE SHE BASICALLY SAID
EVERYTHING I WAS GOING TO SAY, I
WILL JUST START BY THINKING THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE STAFF
AND THE AUTHOR FOR THEIR HARD
WORK ON THIS BILL. UM AND JUST
SAY THAT THERE ARE OVER HALF A
MILLION MORE PROFESSIONAL
DRIVERS IN THIS STATE LIKE MISS
GRANT, WHO EVERY DAY NOT ONLY
KEEP OUR ECONOMY RUNNING, BUT
MAKE SURE THAT OUR ROADS, OUR
HIGHWAYS, OUR PORTS. OUR PUBLIC
TRANSIT ROUTES ARE SAFE. AND THE
GREAT THING ABOUT MAYBE 3 16, IN
CONTRAST TO WHAT THE OPPOSITION
IS GOING TO SAY, IS THAT THIS
BILL IS ADDITIVE. IT IS NOT ANTI
TECHNOLOGY. IT IS NOT PREVENTING
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES FROM BEING
ON OUR ROADS. BUT IT IS SAYING
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE EVERYTHING
DRIVERS BRING TO THEIR JOBS. THE
EXPERIENCE THE EXPERTISE, THE
TRAINING, THE COMPASSION AND THE
INSTINCTS, EVERYTHING THAT KEEPS
US SAFE WITH PROFESSIONAL
DRIVERS. THEY'RE GOING TO BRING
THAT AND COMBINE IT WITH
TECHNOLOGY SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT
IS THERE A WAY WE CAN MOVE
FORWARD, MAKING OUR ROADS SAFER
AND MAKING JOBS BETTER? UM AND
SO THAT IS SIMPLY WHAT THIS BILL
DOES. IT SAYS THIS IS A
TECHNOLOGY IT IS BEING INSTALLED
BY PRIVATE COMPANIES INTO VERY
LARGE VEHICLES, INCLUDING
VEHICLES THAT CARRY PASSENGERS,
INCLUDING VEHICLES THAT MAY BE
CARRYING CHILDREN TO SCHOOL. IN
SCHOOL ZONES. WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THEY'RE THE SAFEST THAT
THEY CAN BE. AND SO WE ARE VERY
HAPPY THAT THE LEGISLATURE IS
TAKING THIS ON TO SAY WE'RE
GOING TO PUT GUARDRAILS ON THIS
. WE ARE GOING TO COMBINE THE
EXPERTISE OF SKILLED WORKERS
WITH TECHNOLOGY. WE ARE GOING TO
HAVE A POINT WHERE THERE IS
OVERSIGHT AND DATA AND MAKE
DECISIONS FROM THERE SO WE THINK
IT'S A GREAT BILL. WE'RE HONORED
TO WORK WITH THE TEAMSTERS AND
MISS GRANT AND THE AUTHOR, AND
WE URGE YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
UNDERSTAND. WE HAVE LOTS OF
PEOPLE WHO HAVE A PICKING ON
THIS BILL. SO I THINK THAT THOSE
WHO ARE OUTSIDE OR ANYBODY IN
THE ROOM AND SUPPORT PLEASE LINE
UP NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION, WHICH IS SUPPORT
OPPOSED ONLY OR YOU CAN HAVE
AGAINST SUPPORTIVE AMENDMENT
OPPOSED IN A MINUTE OR NO
POSITION, BUT ANYWAYS, SUPPORT
OUR POST MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MATT BROUGHT HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TEAMSTERS AND AMALGAMATED
TRANSIT UNION. BOTH CO SPONSORS
OF THE BILL. WE URGE YOUR I VOTE
AND THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD
WORK ON THIS MEASURE. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS MATT
CRIMMINS HERE ON BEHALF OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL THREE
AND THE CALIFORNIA NEVADA
CONFERENCE OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON,
ANTHONY SAMPSON HERE ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA NEW CAR
DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT
GOOD AFTERNOON. ROSS BUCKLEY,
MPF, SACRAMENTO MAYOR DARRELL
STAMBERG AND SUPPORT. HI MY NAME
IS MICHAEL AS OH, MY TEAMSTER
FROM HERCULES, CALIFORNIA AND I
SUPPORT THIS BILL. GO BEARS.
JIMMY THESE AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL
3 15. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE
BILL. MY NAME IS EDWARD BARTON
AND I SUPPORT THE BILL. SAL
MEDINA, TEAMSTERS LOCAL 2 75. I
SUPPORT THE BILL. ALRIGHT
WILFREDO DIAZ, SAN FRANCISCO.
AND I SUPPORT THE BILL. JOHN
JOHNSON LOCAL 856 IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. AFTERNOON STEVE LOON,
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 986 IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL. DK LEAVE TEAMSTERS
4 39. I SUPPORT THE BILL. ROSIE
ALL RICHARD'S TEAMSTERS, LOCAL
2010 AND I SUPPORT THE BILL. HI
EZEKIEL LITTLEJOHN LOCAL 4 39 TO
SUPPORT THE BILL. HI LANI
RICHARDSON, LOCAL 2010 AND I
SUPPORT A B 316. MY NAME IS
CATHERINE COBB. LOCAL 2010. I
SUPPORT THE BILL. MY NAME IS
GILBERT GÓMEZ LOCAL 4 39, AND I
SUPPORT THE BILL. MY NAME'S
DIMITRI AUSTIN. LOCAL 4 39. WE
SUPPORT THE BILL. GOOD AFTERNOON
. ROBERT SANDOVAL. TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 3 50. WE SUPPORT THE BILL.
HI FLORENCIO, SNUGGIE 665 AND
PORTABLE. GOOD AFTERNOON. SERGIO
LARRANAGA WITH TEAMSTERS LOCAL 3
50. WE SUPPORT THIS BILL. RIGHT
APOLLO WALLACE, TEAMSTERS LOCAL
2785. WE SUPPORT THE BILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON. PEREZ, TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 56 IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
HOWARD KING, LOCAL 3 15
MARTINEZ. I SUPPORT THE BILL.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MICHELLE KING,
LOCAL 3 15. I SUPPORT THE BILL.
GOOD AFTERNOON. ROBERT MADDOCK,
TEAMSTERS 856 FROM SONOMA
COUNTY. I SUPPORT THE BILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON. PHILIP JAVIER,
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 2785 AND I
SUPPORT THIS BILL. NO, HE SAID
THE REVOLUTION SUPPORT THE LAW
AUGUST TWO TWENTIES. 27 POINT.
CLINT CURTIS LOCAL 27 85 SAN
FRANCISCO. WE SUPPORT THE BILL.
JOHN BIRCH IN OVER 30 YEAR TEAM
SERVE LOCAL 1 50. I SUPPORT THE
BILL. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
SARAH MASK EVIL AND SUPPORT THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS ALEX PADILLA LOCALLY.
56 I SUPPORT THE BILL. GOOD UM,
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
TRINIDAD. UM MY LOCAL IS, UH 56
AND PROTECT YOU. HELLO ALBERT
SAMORA TEAMSTERS LOCAL 56. I
SUPPORT THIS BILL. TRISH IS A
CABLE INTERRUPT TEAMSTERS JOINT
COUNCIL SEVEN AND I SUPPORT THIS
BILL. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS, DOUG SUPERS ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. OTIS HALL ON
BEHALF OF TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 9 48
FROM BEAUTIFUL MODESTO,
CALIFORNIA AND VISALIA,
CALIFORNIA WE SUPPORT THE BILL.
THANK YOU. RADIO. LOUIS DEAR
SECRETARY, TREASURER TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 9 48. WE'RE HERE ALSO
SUPPORT THIS BILL ON BEHALF OF
ALL 6000 MEMBERS. THANK YOU.
DAME SERVES A 56 MANUEL
RODRIGUEZ. I SUPPORT THIS BILL.
HI MARIA MANZO AND SUPPORT TO
BUILD 318. HI YOLANDA JIMENEZ.
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 8 56. I SUPPORT
THIS BILL. OKAY MY NAME IS KATHY
PALACIO. UM STEVE SER A 56 AND I
SUPPORT THIS BILL. JEEZ ON ME
HERE. BUSINESS AGENT OUT OF
LOCAL 4 31, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA
AND I SUPPORT THIS BILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON. JAVIER ELECTORAL
LOCAL 856 AND I SUPPORT THIS
BILL. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR, FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS
NICOLE TRUE HERE. RICE ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION TRADES
COUNCIL AND SUPPORT AS THE
SWINDLER. SHALL YOU ENTER ANTWI
REPRESENTING SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR
LONDON BREED. THANK YOU, THE
AUTHOR FOR THE EARLIER SHOUT OUT
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
TO ALL OF OUR WITNESSES AND
SUPPORTERS THINK SOME OF YOU
CAME FROM VERY FAR AWAY, AND
SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO COME TO
CAPITOL SO I APPRECIATE THAT
NOW. WE'LL MOVE TO WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. WE HAVE TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION WHO MAY
APPROACH THE DESK. CHRIS CHILDS
, RETIRED CHP ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER AND JEFF FARAH
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION. YOU EACH HAVE TWO
MINUTES.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS CHRIS CHILDS. I'M A
NATIVE CALIFORNIAN AND RECENTLY
RETIRED ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY
PATROL WITH NEARLY 28 YEARS OF
SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS
STATE. FOLLOWING MY
CERTIFICATION AS A COLLISION
RECONSTRUCTIONIST THROUGH BOTH
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AND THE
CHP'S COLLISION RECONSTRUCTION
SCHOOLS. I SPENT SEVERAL YEARS
AS AN INVESTIGATOR WITH THE CHP
S MULTIDISCIPLINARY ACCIDENT
INVESTIGATION TEAM. I RESPONDED
TO NUMEROUS MULTI FATAL
COLLISIONS AND SAW FIRSTHAND THE
DEVASTATING EFFECTS CAUSED BY
TRAFFIC CRASHES. I PERSONALLY
SAT WITH GRIEVING FAMILIES THAT
HOSPITALS, COURTHOUSES AND IN
THEIR HOMES AS THEY GRAPPLED
WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF POOR
HUMAN DRIVING BEHAVIOR. IN 2005
RESPONDED WITH A TEAM OF
RECONSTRUCTIONIST TO A FIERY
CRASH THAT KILLED THREE U C.
BERKELEY DOCTORAL STUDENTS. I
WISH THIS TYPE OF SENSELESS LOSS
OF LIFE WAS AN ISOLATED
INCIDENT. TRAGICALLY, IT IS NOT
LESS THAN THREE WEEKS AGO, A
CHAIN REACTION CRASH OCCURRED
INVOLVING A DRUNK DRIVER IN SAN
JOAQUIN COUNTY THAT TOOK THE
LIVES OF FOUR INDIVIDUALS. THIS
TIME, THERE WERE THREE STUDENTS,
THIS TIME FROM UC DAVIS.
COINCIDENTALLY THESE STUDENTS
OUR CLASSMATES OF MY YOUNGEST
CHILD, WHO ALSO STUDIES THAT U.
C. DAVIS WITHIN THREE DAYS OF
THIS CRASH AT CALTRANS
CONTRACTOR WORKER WAS BRUTALLY
KILLED BY ANOTHER DRUNK DRIVER
IN THE SAME COUNTY. THINK OF THE
DEVASTATION. THESE FAMILIES MUST
WADE THROUGH. THESE TYPES OF
INCIDENTS CONTINUE TO OCCUR AT
THE HANDS OF HUMAN DRIVERS IN
CALIFORNIA CAN DO BETTER.
FOLLOWING LAW ENFORCEMENT
EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP TRAINING AT
THE FBI ACADEMY IN QUANTICO. I
OVERSAW THE CHP'S REGULATORY
RESPONSIBILITIES TOWARD THE
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE INDUSTRY IN
CALIFORNIA. MY TEAM AND I
PERSONALLY DOVE DEEP INTO A V
ISSUES ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE
OF THIS STATE. WE VISITED A B
COMPANIES ACROSS CALIFORNIA AND
OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS DEVELOPED
A FIRST HAND UP CLOSE
UNDERSTANDING OF THESE
INCREDIBLE TRANSPORTATION
ADVANCES. IT IS MY OPINION THAT
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY IS
SAFER THAN HUMAN DRIVING AND
WILL PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN
REDUCING ROADWAY INJURIES AND
DEATHS. THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD
ENCOURAGE REGULATORS TO EVALUATE
THE RISKS AND BENEFITS TO THE
PUBLIC AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND
THEN APPROVE IT FOR USE WHEN IT
HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT A V
TECHNOLOGY IS SAFER THAN THE
STATUS QUO. THIS IS THE PATH OF
LEGISLATURE CHOSE TO FOLLOW 10
YEARS AGO AND IN MY OPINION AS
ONE TASKED WITH EVALUATING
SAFETY. UNDER THE LAW, THIS
SYSTEM HAS WORKED. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
JEFF FARRAH AND I AM PROUD TO
LEAD THE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. I'M HERE
TODAY IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO A
B 316 AND WANT TO EMPHASIZE
SEVERAL IMPORTANT POINTS. FIRST
THERE IS AN EPIDEMIC OF DEATHS
ON CALIFORNIA'S ROADS. THEY
TALLIT EASE, INCLUDING TRUCK
CRASHES, KEEP CLIMBING. WHAT
CALIFORNIA HAS TRIED, HAS FAILED
AND DOING THE SAME THING AND
EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT
WILL ONLY LEAD TO MORE NEEDLESS
DEATHS. BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT
A BEE 316 WOULD DO BY
EFFECTIVELY BANNING LIFESAVING
TECHNOLOGY IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. SECOND A B 316
CONTINUES TO BE AN EFFECTIVE BAN
IN THIS LIFE SAVING TECHNOLOGY
WITH NO REALISTIC PATHWAY FOR
CALIFORNIANS TO BENEFIT FROM
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS. THERE IS NO
SUNSET, SOFT OR OTHERWISE OF THE
HUMAN SAFETY OPERATOR
REQUIREMENT. INSTEAD THE
AMENDMENTS PLACE NEW BURDENS ON
A V DEPLOYMENT. CALIFORNIANS
WOULD BE DENIED LIFE SAVING
TECHNOLOGY UNTIL THE CALIFORNIA
STATE LEGISLATURE AND NOT
EXPERIENCED REGULATORS APPROVED
EACH INDIVIDUAL COMPANY'S PERMIT
. THAT IS WHAT THE AMENDMENT
SAYS. THIRD SUPPORTERS OF A B
316 HAVE SHOWN ZERO EVIDENCE
THAT A V TRUCKS ARE UNSAFE OR
WILL CAUSE MASS LAYOFFS OF TRUCK
DRIVERS. THIS COMMITTEE IS BEING
ASKED TO TAKE ACTION BASED ON
NOTHING MORE THAN SPECULATION.
FOURTH. A B 316 WILL UPEND A
DELIBERATE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
ESTABLISHED BY SENATOR PADILLA'S
2012 LEGISLATION THAT ALLOWS THE
EXPERT REGULATORS TO EVALUATE
THE TECHNOLOGY. AS A RESULT,
CALIFORNIA COMPANIES HAVE
INVESTED BILLIONS AND
HEADQUARTERED THEIR OPERATIONS
HERE. A B 316 IS PREMATURE AS
THERE ARE NO DRAFT RULES FROM.
DMV-DIRECTOR-JEAN-SHIOMOTO-DONATE-LIFE-REPRESENTATIVES-CEO-ERIC-BURCH-BOARD-PRESIDENT-MONICA
. FINALLY AND WE SHOULD BE VERY
CLEAR ABOUT THIS POINT. A B 316
WILL DO NOTHING TO IMPACT ANY OF
THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT MEMBERS
OF THIS COMMITTEE MIGHT HAVE
WITH TESLA. THESE ARE
FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT TYPES OF
TECHNOLOGY, AND THIS SHOULD BE
NOTED. MAYBE 316 PASSES,
CALIFORNIA WILL CEDE ITS
POSITION AS A LEADER IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES TO OTHER STATES THAT
ARE EMBRACING THIS LIFE SAVING
TECHNOLOGY AT A RAPID PACE. I
URGE THIS COMMITTEE TO VOTE
AGAINST A B 316 AND I THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ARE
THERE ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING
ROOM? YOU MAY BE APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE WITH NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ONLY.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE ANDREA DEVO ON BEHALF
OF ARORA IN OPPOSITION. LEAH
BARROWS ON BEHALF OF CHAMBER OF
PROGRESS IN OPPOSITION. ALEX
TORRES, BARRIER COUNCIL AND
OPPOSITION. INJURY A COW WITH A
CALIFORNIA ASIAN PACIFIC CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE WITHIN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. MORGAN
ROTH FROM EMOTIONAL AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. BE ANY
TALK WITH TECHNET RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. CAMERA, DIMITRI WITH
NET CHOICE AND OPPOSITION. PETER
LAURENT WINDOWS WITH THE SILICON
VALLEY LEADERSHIP GROUP
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. DEAN TALLY
WITH THE CALIFORNIA
MANUFACTURERS AND TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION RESPECT THEY
OPPOSED. BRADY THAN ENGLAND.
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. CALLIE
SULLIVAN, REPRESENTING WAYMO
OPPOSED OKAY? THANK YOU, UM I'LL
NOW RETURN TO THE COMMITTEE FOR
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. DR
WEBBER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS BEFORE IT AND
INITIATING THIS CONVERSATION AND
DO I DIDN'T HAVE QUESTIONS. UM
BEFORE, BUT NOW I DO. UM SO. THE
FIRST QUESTION, UM, IS TO THE
AUTHOR. YOU HAD A DIAGRAM UP,
INDICATING, UM. ACCIDENTS FROM
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES WERE ALL OF
THOSE VEHICLES FROM ONE
PARTICULAR COMPANY, TESLA. NO.
NUMEROUS COMPANIES. AND NONE OF
THEM WERE TESLA. OKAY? AND THEN
. FOR THE OPPOSITION. YOU SAID
THAT THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY AH
BAN THE USE OF AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES, I GUESS, OVER A
CERTAIN WAY. HOW? HOW HOW WOULD
IT DO THAT? HOW WOULD THIS BILL
DO THAT SOME MEMBER THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. I
THINK THE FIRST THING TO NOTE
HERE IS THAT THE CHART THAT I
THINK IS BEING REFERRED TO THESE
HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ÁP
TRUCKS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VERY
DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. IN TERMS
OF MY STATEMENT THAT THIS IS AN
EFFECTIVE BAN. THE SITUATION
THAT WE FIND OURSELVES IN IS
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. A VIS THAT
ARE ABLE TO DRIVE THEMSELVES
THAT WOULD NOW HAVE TO HAVE A
HUMAN OPERATOR IN THEM. THIS IS
A MOMENT IN TIME WHERE STATES
AROUND THIS COUNTRY ARE
EMBRACING TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE OF
HIS LIFE SAVING YOU CAN NOW IN
INTERSTATE COMMERCE GO FROM
ARIZONA ALL THE WAY TO THE
SHORE'S OF GEORGIA BECAUSE THESE
STATES HAVE ALL EMBRACED IT, AND
THEY'RE DOING IT WITHOUT ANY
REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE A
HUMAN DRIVER. AND SO THESE
COMPANIES THAT ARE INVESTING IN
THIS LIFE SAVING TECHNOLOGY HAVE
TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHERE IT
IS. THEY'RE GOING TO GO AND
WHERE IT IS. THEY'RE GOING TO
INVEST. HOW IS IT THAT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO CONTINUE TO POUR
MONEY INTO CALIFORNIA? KEEP IN
MIND. THESE ARE CALIFORNIA BASED
COMPANY'S WHEN THERE'S A
SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE
A HUMAN IN THE CAB OF THIS A V
TO DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. THIS
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THAT
IS EVEN FEASIBLE. WE HAVE A
TRUCK DRIVER SHORTAGE IN THIS
COUNTRY OF 80,000 TRUCK DRIVERS
THAT'S GOING TO DOUBLE BY 2031.
SO IT'S NOT CLEAR WHERE IT IS.
THESE HUMAN SAFETY OPERATORS ARE
GOING TO COME FROM CALIFORNIA,
AS I SAID, IS GOING TO CONTINUE
TO CEDE ITS LEADERSHIP ON A VÆ.
YES BECAUSE OTHER STATES REALIZE
THIS IS LIFE SAVING. IT WILL
HELP US SUPPLY CHAIN CHALLENGES
. IT WILL HELP TO CREATE JOBS,
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
CALIFORNIA IS, UNFORTUNATELY
GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION ON
DO YOU HAVE ANY? UM STUDIES IN
YOUR RESEARCH ANY DATA? THAT
SHOWS THAT THIS IS SAFE AT THIS
POINT TODAY WITHOUT NEEDING A
HUMAN THEY'RE JUST IN CASE
THINGS GO AWRY. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
, IN FACT, ARE A B COMPANIES
HAVE BEEN TESTING ON PUBLIC
ROADS FOR MORE THAN A DOZEN
YEARS. THEY HAVE A REMARKABLE
SAFETY RECORD. IF YOU THINK
ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE
OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF CRASHES
IN THIS COUNTRY, WHETHER FROM
TRUCKS OR FROM CARS ARE FROM
HUMAN AIR, WHY IS THAT IT'S
BECAUSE PEOPLE TEXT WHILE
DRIVING, THEY DRIVE DRUNK, THEY
DRIVE ON DRUGS. THEY'RE FATIGUED
THERE DROWSY. THEY'RE BEING
DISTRACTED BY ALL SORTS OF OTHER
THINGS. THOMAS VEHICLES DO NOT
SUFFER FROM ANY OF THOSE
SITUATIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE
PROGRAMMED TO BE A MODEL DRIVER.
THEY HAVE THREE 160 DEGREE
VISIBILITY ALL AROUND THE
ENTIRETY OF THE A V. THEY'RE
ABLE TO GRAB INTO THEIR
INFORMATION FLOWS THINGS THAT
HUMAN DRIVERS WOULD NEVER BE
ABLE TO ABSOLUTELY OBTAINED. AND
SO THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE THE
FUTURE IS VERY BRIGHT IN TERMS
OF SAFETY FOR A V S. WE ARE
STRONG BELIEVER THAT THAT SAFETY
IS AT THE CORE OF EVERYTHING
THAT THE A V INDUSTRY DOES, AND
WE'RE VERY COMMITTED TO
DEPLOYING THESE IN A SAFE AND
EFFECTIVE WAY IN CALIFORNIA.
YEAH NO, I, UM I THINK FOR ME
THE CHALLENGE WITH COMPARING TO
HUMAN DRIVERS ON THE ROAD IS
THAT RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ALL WE
HAVE. SO YOU CAN'T REALLY
COMPARE LIKE APPLES TO ORANGES.
IF YOU DON'T HAVE ORANGES THERE.
SO MY QUESTION WAS SPECIFIC TO
DO YOU HAVE THE DATA? BECAUSE I
AGREE. THIS IS WHERE WE ARE
PROBABLY GOING AND I DO NOT WANT
TO SHUT THE DOOR AND I DO NOT
WANT THESE TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES
TO LEAVE, AND I DO NOT WANT TO
PUT A REQUIREMENT THAT IS, UM,
ONLY PRESENT HERE IN CALIFORNIA
AND NOT ANYWHERE ELSE IN THIS
COUNTRY. BECAUSE THAT, UM WELL,
I BELIEVE WILL HURT US IN THE
FUTURE. BUT MY QUESTION IS THIS
QUESTION IS SPECIFIC FOR TODAY.
DO WE HAVE DATA SHOWING THAT
THESE VEHICLES ARE SAFE WITHOUT
A HUMAN DRIVER? WE DO HAVE HAVE
THAT DATA. AND I THINK THIS IS
SOMETHING WHERE THE U S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAS
HAS SAID THAT THE AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES ARE THE FUTURE BECAUSE
THEY CAN ULTIMATELY MAKE THESE
MUCH QUICKER DECISIONS THAT THEY
DON'T SUFFER FROM A LOT OF THE
SITUATIONS I MENTIONED BEFORE IN
TERMS OF TEXTING IN TERMS OF
DRUNK DRIVING AND WHATNOT. THERE
HAVE BEEN STUDIES OUT THERE THAT
HAVE SHOWED THAT AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES UNDER SIMULATION HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO AVOID SOMETHING
LIKE 88 OF 91 INCIDENTS WHERE
HUMANS FAILED TO ULTIMATELY NOT
HAVE NOT HAVE AN ACCIDENT. AND
SO THERE'S MORE INFORMATION THAT
WE CAN PUT ON THE RECORD, I WILL
SAY. A THAT THE EFFECT OF A B
316 WILL BE TO PUT CALIFORNIA
BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL. THE
REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE AGAIN
, THESE COMPANIES NEED TO MAKE
DECISIONS ABOUT WHERE IT IS.
THEY'RE INVESTING THEIR
RESOURCES, AND THEY CANNOT IN
GOOD FAITH BEING A SITUATION FOR
AT LEAST SIX YEARS. THEY ARE NOT
ABLE TO OPERATE IN THE WAY THAT
THEY ARE PREPARED TO DO SO AND
THEN ULTIMATELY NOT BE ABLE TO
DEPLOY BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE
DECIDED NOT TO ALLOW IT AFTER
THAT SIX YEAR PERIOD. UM IF YOU
HAVE THAT DATA, PLEASE PASS THAT
ON TO MY STAFF. I DON'T KNOW IF
THE BILL WOULD GET OUT. BUT IF
IT DOES, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT
BEFORE. YOU KNOW, WE GET TO THE
FLOOR AND VOTE ON THE FINAL
BILL. UM THE OTHER QUESTION THAT
I HAVE, AND IT'S UM.
NOTWITHSTANDING PARAGRAPH ONE IF
THE APPLICATION SEEKS APPROVAL
FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES CAPABLE
OF OPERATING WITHOUT THE
PRESENCE OF A DRIVER INSIDE THE
VEHICLE, THE DEPARTMENT MAY
IMPOSE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
SO THERE'S SOMETHING THIS
PARAGRAPH RIGHT HERE. DOES THIS
STILL ALLOW FOR THE POSSIBILITY
IN THE FUTURE OF ÁP VEHICLES
WITHOUT DRIVERS. WE THINK THAT'S
EXISTING LAW. OKAY AND IS THAT
GOING TO BE THE SAME? YEAH.
THROUGH THE CHAIR BROUGHT HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TEAMSTERS. WE TOOK LANGUAGE FROM
THE EXISTING STATUTE THAT
AUTHORIZES LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
AND JUST MIRRORED THAT FOR THE
HEAVY, HEAVY DUTY. SO WHAT
YOU'RE REFERENCING RIGHT NOW IS
ALREADY EXISTING LAW WILL ALLOW
FOR IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES,
THESE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES. TO
OPERATE WITHOUT A HUMAN DRIVER
UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS UNDER
UNDER THIS BILL, IF IT'S AN
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE OVER £10,000
, SO IT HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE, IT
WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A HUMAN
SAFETY OPERATOR ON BOARD. FOR
PUBLIC ROADS. YEAH. PRIVATE
RESIDENCE NOT INCLUDED. THANK
YOU TO THE OPPOSITION. WANNA
RESPONDED, I RESPOND REALLY
QUICKLY AGAIN. MATT BROUGHT HERE
ON BEYOND BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS. UM I WE
ECHO EVERY CONCERN THEY'VE MADE
, UM, ABOUT ROADWAY SAFETY. I
THINK OUR RECORD AS A AS AN
ORGANIZATION, THE TEAMSTERS
SPEAKS PRETTY STRONGLY IN TERMS
OF US WANTING TO MAKE ROADS
SAFER. OUR MEMBERS ARE ALL ON
THE ROADS ALL THE TIME. I WANT
TO JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS BILL
DOES REQUIRE A HUMAN SAFETY
OPERATOR. UM AND IF WE'RE
COMMITTED TO TRYING TO MAKE
ROADS SAFER, WHY NOT HAVE THE
BENEFIT OF AUTONOMOUS SEE WHERE
IT GOES, BUT ALSO HAVE AN EXTRA
SET OF EYES JUST IN CASE
SOMETHING GOES WRONG. WE DO KNOW
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT £10,000
VEHICLES ALL THE WAY UP TO
£80,000. THIS ISN'T THE
PASSENGER SCALE VEHICLES.
THERE'S IMPLEMENT WEATHER AS WE
MENTIONED THERE'S TIRE BLOWOUTS
. UM ONE THING THAT I THINK
OFTEN FORGOT ABOUT WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT TRUCKING
SPECIFICALLY IS WE HAVE TECH
COMPANIES THAT ARE SELLING THESE
PRODUCTS GETTING THEM OUT ON THE
ROAD. THEY'RE NOT TRUCKING
COMPANIES, TRUCKING COMPANIES,
AND I KNOW THIS FROM HAVING
WORKING WITH THEM IS THAT WE
HAVE WHOLE COMPLIANCE
DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CHP.
TODAY TO DEAL WITH TRUCKING
COMPLIANCE RULES BECAUSE THEY
DON'T ALWAYS GET IT PERFECT. AND
SO WHEN YOU'RE RELYING ON A
TECHNOLOGY THAT'S DEPENDENT ON
CAMERAS, LIDAR SENSORS, WE JUST
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RELATIVE
SAFETY OR EFFICACY OF THE
TECHNOLOGY IS. THIS IS NOT A
BILL THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T TEST
THESE ON PUBLIC ROADS. IT
DOESN'T SAY YOU CAN'T DEPLOY
THEM, IT BASICALLY SAYS. TECH
COMPANIES COME BACK TO THE
LEGISLATURE. IT'S INCUMBENT ON
YOU TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOUR
PRODUCT IS SAFER AND THEN WE CAN
TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT THE HUMAN
SAFETY OPERATOR REQUIREMENT. BUT
THERE'S NO. IN THE BILL. THERE'S
NO SENSE THAT DATE SO UNDER
UNDER THE STRUCTURE. UM AND
THESE WERE AMENDMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. ESSENTIALLY, WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN IS 2029 OR FIVE
YEARS AFTER DEPLOYMENT BEGINS,
THE D M V WOULD COME BACK THEY
WOULD DO A STUDY WITH THE LABOR
AGENCY TO LOOK AT WORK. FIRST
IMPACTS CALTRANS TO LOOK AT
INFRASTRUCTURE, UM CARVED TO
LOOK AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS,
AND THEY WOULD PRESENT A REPORT
ON THE RELATIVE EFFICACY OF THE
TECHNOLOGY AND THE HUMAN SAFETY
REQUIREMENT, A RECOMMENDATION
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER AN
INFORMATIONAL HEARING AND THEN
THE LEGISLATURE WOULD BE ABLE TO
REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT. UM, BY
UM UH, BY LEGISLATIVE
AUTHORIZATION, AND WE THINK THAT
THIS IS A MUCH BETTER APPROACH
BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT
THE DATA. UM YOU KNOW, WITH
RESPECT TO THESE GUYS, THEY HAVE
THEIR DATA. WE ALSO HAVE OUR
DATA THAT SAYS IT'S NOT SAFE.
AND SO I THINK YOU KNOW YOU
COULD GO EITHER WAY. IT WOULD BE
BETTER TO HAVE A NEUTRAL
GOVERNMENT AGENCY. LOOK AT IT.
MAKE THAT DECISION. AND THEN YOU
AS THE LEGISLATURE CAN WEIGH IN.
SO WHAT? UM WHAT IS YOUR
RESPONSE TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT
IF THIS IS A HINDRANCE, WE MAY
NOT HAVE THIS DATA HERE IN
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT
CHOOSE TO OPERATE THESE VEHICLES
IN CALIFORNIA. WHERE DO WE GET
THAT DATA FROM? UM WELL, WITH
WITH RESPECT TO THAT THAT
QUESTION, I THINK THAT THERE IS
DATA COMING IN FROM OTHER STATES
THAT THE D M V COULD LOOK LOOK
AT I THINK UNDER THIS BILL,
NOTHING STOPS THE REGULATION
FROM GOING FORWARD. SO IF YOU'RE
ASKING ME, WHAT DO WE DO IF WE
THINK THAT COMPANIES ARE GOING
TO TAKE CALIFORNIA HOSTAGE AND
NOT OPERATE HERE BECAUSE OF THIS
REQUIREMENT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT
QUESTION. THAT BEING SAID
CALIFORNIA IS THIS THE YOU KNOW
THE CENTER OF, UM WHERE PORTS
ARE. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A HUGE
TRUCKING INFRASTRUCTURE HERE
HALF A MILLION TRUCKERS IN THE
STATE. I'M CONFIDENT THAT IF
THIS BILL PASSES, THEY WILL BE
ABLE TO DEPLOY AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS
WILL GET A REALLY GOOD SENSE OF
HOW THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS, AND WE
CAN COME BACK AND MAKE THAT
ASSESSMENT. MAY I MAKE A
COMMENT? IT WAS SEEMED VERY
STRANGE TO ME THAT CALIFORNIA
WOULD RELY UPON GETTING DATA
FROM TEXAS OR MISSISSIPPI OR
SOME OTHER STATE WHEN YOU'RE
TRYING TO MAKE DECISIONS OUT
HERE. THE OTHER THING THAT IS
IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THAT YOU
NEED CALIFORNIA SPECIFIC DATA.
THE FIRST STEP IN AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES IS MAPPING THE ENTIRE
DOMAIN OF WHERE THE VEHICLES ARE
GOING TO GO NEEDS TO BE MAPPED.
THAT IS THE FIRST STEP OF ALL OF
OUR MEMBER COMPANIES, AND SO
THEY ARE GOING TO BE MAPPING
SPECIFIC SPOTS ON I FIVE. I 10,
THE FOUR OR FIVE SO ON AND SO
FORTH. AND SO DATA THAT'S TAKING
PLACE OUTSIDE OF JACKSON.
MISSISSIPPI IS JUST NOT GOING TO
BE AS RELEVANT SO YOU ARE GOING
TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE
COMPANIES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO
MAKE DECISIONS. THEY'RE GOING TO
DEPLOY RESOURCES IN THE
SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST AND
OTHER PLACES BECAUSE THOSE ARE
THE PLACES THAT ARE EMBRACING A
V TECHNOLOGY. YOU'LL HAVE SHODDY
DATA HERE. THE DMV AND CHP WILL
NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE AN ADEQUATE
RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN YOU
JUST LOST OVER SIX YEARS OF
TIME. WHILE MORE DEATHS CONTINUE
TO ACCUMULATE ON CALIFORNIA
ROADS. OKAY THANK YOU. THANK YOU
SO MUCH REMEMBER HAPPENED. SO I
THINK DR WEBBER FOR HER
INSIGHTFUL COMMENTS. WHAT IT
LEFT ME WITH IS AT THIS POINT IN
TIME. I THINK THIS BILL STRIKES
THE BALANCE OF WHERE WE SHOULD
BE. AND I'M GONNA MOVE WITH THE
BILL. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM
COMMITTEE REMEMBER RODRIGUEZ AND
THEN DAVIES. WHAT'S GONNA WANT
TO THANK THE MEMBER FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD. OBVIOUSLY
IT'S KIND OF TORN BETWEEN BOTH
OF THE THINGS BECAUSE MY FATHER
WAS A 30 YEAR TRUCK DRIVER AND
THE TEAMS ARE DRUNK DRIVER FOR
THAT MATTER, RIGHT AND AS A KID
GROWING UP, SEEING ALL THE
UNIQUE BALANCES AS THEY NOT ONLY
A DRIVER OF VEHICLE BUT OF A
TRUCK DRIVER UH, HOW HUGE THOSE
VEHICLES ARE AND THE NEED THAT
WE DO HAVE TO HAVE SOME HUMAN
CONTROL. SO TO SPEAK. YOU TALK
ABOUT THE SAFETY OF AUTOMATION
THAT TESLA'S I'M WE'RE GETTING
THERE WITHIN TIME, RIGHT? BUT
SOMETIMES I THINK WE NEED TO
TAKE VERY CAUTIOUS APPROACHES.
JUST A FEW DAYS AGO, A TESLA CAR
HIT A FIRE ENGINE. THERE WAS ON
A FREEWAY ON THE 6 80. THE
DRIVER GOT KILLED AND IT SOUNDS
LIKE FROM WHAT? I'M READING THAT
IT WAS ON AUTOMATED PILOT,
RIGHT? IT WAS OUT. UM, THAT'S
WHAT I'M HEARING. I MEAN, I
COULD BE WRONG. JUST SAYING WHAT
I'M HEARING BUT THE FACT THAT IT
OCCURRED AND INJURED
FIREFIGHTERS, SO I THINK IT'S
GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME. WE'RE
GONNA GET THERE EVENTUALLY, BUT
TO BE THAT'S 100% FAIL SAFE. I'M
STILL NOT 100. I CAN SAY THAT.
YEAH, IT IS BECAUSE THINGS ARE
GONNA HAPPEN. DIFFERENT WEATHER
PATTERNS, DIFFERENT PARTS OF
STATES, THE SEVERE ISSUES OF THE
FLOODS, THE SNOW AND EVERYTHING
. IT'S. IT'S A VERY UNIQUE
COURSE THAT WE TAKE WITH THE
AUTOMATION. IT'S GOING TO GET
THERE. OBVIOUSLY, IT WILL WITHIN
TIME, BUT I DON'T THINK WE
SHOULD RUSH IT RIGHT AWAY. JUST
BECAUSE WE NEEDED REALLY. IT
COULD BIG SAFETY COMPONENTS.
LIKE I SAID. THERE'S STILL BEEN
ACCIDENTS, WITH SOME OF THESE
VEHICLES DRIVING ON AUTOMATED
PILOT RIGHT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT
COMES TO EMERGENCY VEHICLES. SO
IT'S YOU CAN'T SIT THERE AND SAY
IT'S 100% WHEN WE JUST HAD A
VEHICLE ACCIDENT. NOT TOO LONG
AGO, AND I'M SURE THERE'S OTHER
IF YOU LOOK INTO IT AS WELL, SO
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO
SUPPORTING THE BILL. THANK THE
MEMBER FOR BRINGING FORWARD AND
WITHIN TIME I THINK WE'LL GET
THERE. BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW WE
STILL GOT TO HAVE THAT HUMAN
COMPONENT IN THERE AS WELL.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S PREACHERS. I
SAID IN MY OPENING THIS BILL HAS
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH
TESLA IF YOUR ISSUES ARE WITH
TESLA SAFETY, TESLA HAS NOTHING
TO DO WITH A B 316. THIS IS THIS
IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ISSUE.
IF YOU ALL HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT
TESLA SAFETY, MAYBE A HEARING ON
THAT TOPIC WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
BUT THIS THIS IS NOT THE BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WHAT
HAPPENED? THANK YOU. SELENA
RODRIGUEZ. REMEMBER DAVIES?
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I SAW
THIS IN TRANSPORTATION A COUPLE
WEEKS AGO, AND OBVIOUSLY
SOMETHING UNIQUE. BUT WHAT I DO
IS WHEN I GO TO VOTE. I WANT TO
ALSO MAKE SURE THAT I'M VOTING
FOR MY DISTRICT. AND YOU KNOW
WHAT THEIR PERSPECTIVE IS, SO WE
ACTUALLY PUT A SURVEY OUT TO OUR
DISTRICT AND SAID, YOU KNOW,
WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE
WITHOUT HAVING A HUMAN BEHIND
THE WHEEL OF A TRUCK OR BUS? A
LARGER VEHICLE? OR WOULD YOU BE
FINE AND IT CAME OUT TO 117 SAID
THEY WOULD WANT TO HUMAN BEHIND
IT AT THIS TIME. UH AND 10.
PEOPLE SAID THAT THEY'D BE FINE
WITHOUT IT, AND I THINK THAT
RIGHT NOW, ESPECIALLY I LOOK AT
IT AT THE MOBILITY AS WELL AS A
PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE. I HAVE THE
DISTRICT DOWN IN SOUTH ORANGE
COUNTY AND NORTH SAN DIEGO. AND
IF YOU KNOW THAT AREA THERE YOU
HAVE THE OCEAN AND THEN YOU HAVE
CAMPAÑA, WILTON AND ALL YOU HAVE
IS THE FIVE FREEWAY AND IT WAS
SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THAT FIVE
FREEWAY. THERE'S NO WAY OF
GETTING AROUND, AND ESPECIALLY
IF THERE'S A DISASTER. WE'VE HAD
FIRES AT CAMP PENDLETON. BUT MY
CONCERN, TOO, IS WHEN YOU HAVE A
LARGER VEHICLES SUCH AS A TRUCK
OR A BUS. AND SOMETHING GOES
DOWN. MAYBE THERE IS A FLAT
TIRE. MAYBE THE BRAKES CODE OR
SOMETHING, AND THIS IS BLACKING
ENTIRE IS BLACK AND ENTIRE
FREEWAY. WHAT DO YOU DO? HOW
LONG DOES IT TAKE TO ACTUALLY
MOVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS? IT'S
NOT LIKE A YOU KNOW, UH, VEHICLE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DRIVING
AND SO MOBILITY TO ME IS
IMPORTANT. PUBLIC SAFETY IS
IMPORTANT AND AGAIN, I THINK
GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIND
OUT. YOU KNOW WHAT ARE THE
GLITCHES WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT
LARGE VEHICLES LIKE THIS, YOU
KNOW, HOW CAN WE FIX? THEM SO
THEY DON'T HAPPEN AGAIN. SO UM
AGAIN. I JUST THINK MY ABILITY
AND I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR.
I SAID ONE OF THE THINGS WAS
IMPORTANT TO US IS THAT IF
THERE'S GOING TO BE A THERE
SHOULD BE A STUDY AND REPORTS
GOING CONSISTENTLY SO THAT WE
KNOW HOW LONG DID IT TAKE THE
CHP? IF THERE WAS IF THERE WAS
AN ENCOUNTER, HOW LONG DID IT
TAKE FOR THE CHP TO ACTUALLY
MOVE THE VEHICLE? UM, YOU KNOW,
UM HOW HOW LONG WERE PEOPLE
BLOCKED UP THERE? JUST THINGS
LIKE THIS, SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE
THE INFORMATION SO WE CAN MAKE
GOOD DECISIONS AT THE END AGAIN.
WE SEE THIS MOVING FORWARD DOWN
THE LINE. BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW
I HAVE TO, UM, AGAIN PUBLIC
SAFETY MOBILITY AND I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL AND WOULD
HAVE TO BE A CO AUTHOR. THANK
YOU. SO WE HAVE EMOTIONAL MIGHT
POP AND WAS THAT A SECOND, MISS
DAVIES? SECOND BY DAVIES. SURE
YES, SORRY. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
HOOVER. THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I
JUST WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING
I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A VERY
COMPLEX BILL. I HAVE TREMENDOUS
RESPECT FOR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO DO HERE, AND I DO HAVE SOME
CONCERNS, BUT I WANTED TO ASK A
COUPLE QUESTIONS. UH, ONE OF THE
OPPOSITION AND THEN ONE
POTENTIALLY OF THE PROPONENTS OF
THE BILL, UM AND THE AUTHOR AS
WELL. UM CAN CAN YOU CAN SOMEONE
TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LIKE THE
CURRENT REGULATORY PROCESS FOR
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE
VEHICLES? AND IF THIS BILL DID
NOT PASS TODAY, LIKE, WHAT WOULD
WHAT? WHAT DOES THE NEXT 5 TO 10
YEARS LOOK LIKE? I THINK THAT'S
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET A BETTER
IDEA OF SOME EVER THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. IT'S AN
EXCELLENT ONE. AS I NOTED IN MY
OPENING, SENATOR PADILLA'S BILL
FROM 2012 SET FORTH A VERY
DELICATE PROCESS WHERE THE
EXPERT REGULATORS WITH CHP AND
DNB WOULD WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT
REGULATIONS THAT NEED TO BE PUT
IN PLACE. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO DO DURING THAT
TIME, THE LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE
REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE,
WHICH IS WHY YOU SEE A LOT OF
THE DEPLOYMENTS THAT ARE TAKING
PLACE IN VARIOUS SPOTS IN
CALIFORNIA. EARLIER THIS YEAR
WAS THE VERY FIRST WORKSHOP THAT
WAS HELD RELATED TO HEAVY DUTY
WITH A B DRUGS. AND SO THERE WAS
A PUBLIC STAKEHOLDER ENVIRONMENT
WHERE PEOPLE ABLE TO COME AND
SHARE VIEWS ORGANIZATION
PARTICIPATED IN THAT THAT WAS
THE VERY, VERY FIRST STEP. THERE
ARE NO DRAFT RULES. THERE'S NOT
EVEN BEEN ANNOUNCED. SECOND
WORKSHOP. THAT IS THAT IS
HAPPENED. SO THAT IS SOMETHING
WHERE WE'RE VERY EAGER TO SEE
THAT TAKE PLACE. IF THE
LEGISLATURE WANTS AFTER AN
APPROPRIATE TIME OF LOOKING AT
THE DRAFT REGULATIONS AND
DETERMINES THAT THEY ARE NOT
ADEQUATE, OR THERE IS SOME PIECE
MISSING. YOU ALL HAVE TIME TO
STEP BACK IN AND TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT. YOU ALSO HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY OBVIOUSLY TO CONDUCT
VERY, VERY RIGOROUS OVERSIGHT
OVER CHP N. D M V. THIS IS ALL
PART OF THE HEALTHY DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS, BUT MAYBE 316 STEPS
RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT
KICKS OVER THE CARD TABLE AND
COMPLETELY PUTS AGAIN,
CALIFORNIA BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL
IS RELATED TO THE TRUCKS. UH TO
THE AUTHOR, OR YEAH, IF I GUESS
I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOU KNOW
WHAT DOES THE PROPONENTS OF THE
AUTHOR FEEL? IS THERE LIKE IS
THAT PROCESS LACKING, I GUESS.
SURE THANK YOU. MATT BROUGHT
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE TEAMSTERS.
WE DO FEEL LIKE THE PROCESS IS
LACKING. I THINK THAT'S WHERE
THE AUTHOR STARTED WITH THE
PRESENTATION AND SAID, THIS IS
WHERE WE'VE SEEN THIS. NOT JUST
IN THEORY. WE HAVE RIGS OUT
THERE FOR LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES.
AND IT'S GOING TERRIBLY RIGHT. I
MEAN, BY ALL OBJECTIVE, MAN, UH
, I STANDARDS IT'S NOT GOING
WELL AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
PASSENGER VEHICLES IN A VERY
SMALL LIMITED DEPLOYMENT, MAINLY
IN SAN FRANCISCO. AND SO WE'RE
SAYING WE HAVE LOST IN MY
OPINION AND REPRESENTING THE
TEAMSTERS. WE'VE LOST CONFIDENCE
IN THE D. M V UNDER THE CURRENT
REGULATORY PACKAGE. TO BE
LOOKING AT WHAT THEY NEED TO BE
LOOKING TO DEPLOYING THE SAFETY
SAFELY. LIKE WE SAID, THERE'S
BEEN A NUMEROUS OF THESE
INCIDENTS IN WHICH NOT A SINGLE
LICENSE HAS BEEN SUSPENDED OR
REVOKED, AND I WOULD AGREE THAT
WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO DO
OVERSIGHT. ALRIGHT THERE IS WELL
BUT SEPARATE. AND ASIDE FROM
THAT AGAIN, WE DIDN'T TAKE DO
THIS BUILDING AFFECT THOSE
VEHICLES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
LARGE VEHICLES UP TO £80,000.
WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF SAFETY
CONCERNS. WE DON'T HAVE THAT
MARGIN OF ERROR THAT WE HAVE FOR
PASSENGER VEHICLES AND
RELATIVELY LIMITED SETTINGS THAT
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE, UM, WITH
RESPECT TO TRUCKS. OKAY. THANK
YOU. UM, THE SECOND QUESTION I
WOULD HAVE IS, UM YOU KNOW,
ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE WITH
THE BILL IS THE SHORTAGE OF
TRUCK DRIVERS AND POTENTIALLY OF
SAFETY OPERATORS. WHERE THIS TO
PASS, YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF
THE OTHER BENEFITS OF AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES BESIDES, I THINK THE
SAFETY BENEFITS THAT AND I THINK
THIS COMMITTEE SEEMS TO BE AN
AGREEMENT THAT EVENTUALLY THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS GOING TO BE THE
FUTURE. UM IS THE ABILITY TO
EXPAND COMMERCE RIGHT IN
CALIFORNIA TO EXPAND ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, WHICH IS SOMETHING
THAT I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT.
AND SO ONE CONCERN THAT I HAVE
IS THIS WORK FOR SHORTAGE, IF
THERE IS NOT A SAFETY OPERATOR
AVAILABLE, OR YOU KNOW TO BE IN
THESE VEHICLES, ASSUMING THAT
THESE VEHICLES CONTINUE TO
OPERATE IN CALIFORNIA. OH WHAT
AND YOU KNOW, AND THE TECHNOLOGY
IS DEEMED SAFE BY THAT POINT.
YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT WHAT ARE WE
TO DO IS THAT HOW IS THAT GOING
TO AFFECT OUR ECONOMY, AND I
THINK THAT'S THAT'S A CONCERN
THAT I DEFINITELY HAVE. MAY I?
UM ABSOLUTELY. AND UM, WE'VE
DONE QUITE A BIT OF WORK ONE OF
OUR OUR BIG FRUSTRATION WITH THE
DMV THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS THAT
LAST YEAR WE WORKED TOGETHER
WITH THE DMV ON EXPANDING
COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S CENTERS
BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO WANT
TO START WORKING AT DRIVERS
COMING OUT OF TEAMSTER
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. THEY
CAN'T GET TESTED FAST ENOUGH. WE
HAVE FOUR CENTERS FOR THE ENTIRE
STATE. UNTIL LAST YEAR, WE HAD
TO COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S CENTERS.
WE DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A
TRUCKER SHORTAGE. WE THINK
THERE'S A GOOD JOB SHORTAGE. UM
OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A
LARGE EMPLOYERS ARE EMPLOYERS
THAT ARE SUCCESSFUL HAVE NO
PROBLEM FINDING PEOPLE TO DO
JOBS. AND SO I THINK IT'S A
LITTLE BIT OF A MIX OF BOTH. BUT
WE'VE WE'VE SAID STRONGLY TO THE
DMV E THAT, INSTEAD OF TRYING TO
REGULATE AWAY TRUCK DRIVERS, WE
SHOULD BE ENCOURAGING MORE
PEOPLE TO GET INTO THE
PROFESSION. PUTTING HIM THROUGH
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS AND
GETTING THEM IN GOOD JOBS. UM
AND I'LL CLOSE. I KNOW WE NEED
TO MOVE ON. I GUESS MY LAST
QUESTION BEFORE I MAKE A FINAL
COMMENT, UM WHAT? WHAT DOES THE
OPPOSITION BELIEVE THE ECONOMIC
IMPACT OF THIS BILL WILL BE THE
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THIS BILL FOR
CALIFORNIA IS GOING TO BE
DEVASTATING NUMBER NUMBER ONE.
AS YOU SAID ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S.
THERE'S A MASSIVE ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY HERE. THAT'S GOING
TO BE LOST CALIFORNIA IN THE
PORT OF LONG BEACH AND LOS
ANGELES, NEAR WHERE I GREW UP,
IT IS IT IS LOST A LOT OF ITS
LEADERSHIP AND A LOT OF ITS
LUSTER IT TO PORTS IN THE IN THE
EAST. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S
VERY TRAGIC. IT'S VERY
DETRIMENTAL IN THE LONG RUN TO
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT
THAT I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT.
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKING IS A WAY TO
SOLVE A LOT OF THESE SUPPLY
CHAIN CHALLENGES THAT ARE OUT
THERE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
YOU ALL SHOULD BE EMBRACING
BECAUSE THE REALITY IS
CALIFORNIA IS THE STATE THAT IS
BEST POSITIONED TO BENEFIT FROM
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS. THE NATIONAL
LEADERS IN THIS TECHNOLOGY ARE
CALIFORNIA COMPANIES, BUT THEY
CANNOT OPERATE THEIR OWN
TECHNOLOGY WITHIN CALIFORNIA,
NOR WILL THEY APPARENTLY, EVER
BE ABLE TO DO IT IF A B 316 IS
TO PASS. THANK YOU JUST TO CLOSE
MY COMMENTS. UM I DON'T THINK
I'M GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY. I APPRECIATE MY, UM
WHAT MISS DAVIES HAD TO SAY, UH
, MY DISTRICT ACTUALLY HAS A LOT
OF OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. I
HAVE LOCAL CHAMBERS AND
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. I ALSO
HAVE ARE ONE OF MY, UM COUNTY
SUPERVISORS. RICH DESMOND, WHO'S
ALSO A FORMER CHP OFFICER. IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL, AND SO
YOU KNOW, THE WHAT I'VE HEARD
FROM MY LOCALS IS VERY
CONCERNING TO ME. UM YOU KNOW, I
ALSO AM. UM I'M STRUGGLING WITH
THIS BECAUSE IF THE OPPOSITION
IS CORRECT, AND THIS DOES LEAD
TO, UM, A COOLING OFF OF THE
TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENTS IN
CALIFORNIA, I THINK THIS IS
ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE REALLY
LONG TERM HARMFUL IMPACTS ON
PUBLIC SAFETY. BECAUSE I THINK
IN MY OPINION, THE MOST
DANGEROUS THING ON THE ROAD IS
THE HUMAN. AH, AND I THINK THAT
THAT HAS BEEN SHOWED WE HAVE
THOSE STATISTICS AND WE WANT TO
REDUCE THOSE AND I THINK WE CAN
REDUCE THOSE BY EMBRACING
TECHNOLOGY. I MY FEAR IS THAT
THIS BILL WILL WILL HARM THE
ADVANCEMENT OF THAT TECHNOLOGY
AND ULTIMATELY UM BE ACTUALLY
WORSE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR
ROADS IN THE LONG TERM, AND I
GUESS MY FINAL POINT WOULD JUST
BE THAT I, YOU KNOW, I KNOW. I
MENTIONED THAT. I ALSO JUST WANT
TO CLOSE THIS SAYING, I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE PROPONENTS OF
THIS BILL SITTING DOWN WITH ME.
I KNOW WHEN WE SPOKE, I
MENTIONED A POTENTIAL SUNSET
DATE. I KNOW THAT THAT HAS KIND
OF BEEN RESISTED UP UNTIL THIS
POINT, I WOULD I'D BE HAPPY TO
RECONSIDER MY VOTE ON THIS BILL
IF THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE AT
SOME POINT, UH, MY FEAR IS AFTER
READING THROUGH THE EVENT THAT
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS ON THIS, UH
IT'S JUST NOT A TRUE SUNSET DATE
. IT'S STILL REQUIRES THE
LEGISLATURE TO ACTIVELY
INTRODUCED A BILL TO CHANGE THIS
IN THE FUTURE. AND THAT IS
REALLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT A
SUNSET WOULD DO. AND SO I AM
HAPPY TO CONSIDER CHANGING MY
THOUGHTS ON THIS AS WE MOVE
FORWARD IF A SUNSET DATE WAS
ADDED, BUT AT THIS POINT, I
THINK A PERMANENT, UH, A
PERMANENT BILL TO MAKE THIS
PERMANENT POLICY IS SOMETHING
I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
SO MUCH MEMBER WHO WERE
REMEMBER, THOUGH. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR AND THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR THE AUTHOR FOR ALLOWING
US THIS CONVERSATION. I KNOW
THAT WE'VE EXCHANGED
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS AS WELL
AND ALSO A LETTER THAT, UM I
ALSO HAD SENT ALONG WITH THE
CHAIR WITH RESPECT TO THE
RULEMAKING PROCESS TO THE
GOVERNOR AND THE MINISTRATIONS.
UM AND THAT YOU PROVIDED US THIS
OPPORTUNITY FOR CONVERSATION.
FIRST QUESTION IS TO THAT OF
OPPOSITION. SPECIFICALLY, UM YOU
HAD MADE COMMENTS WITH RESPECT
TO DEMOCRATIC PROCESS MULTIPLE
TIMES. THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS. IT IS THE OBLIGATION
AND ALSO THE AUTHORITY OF THE
LEGISLATURE TO MAKE LEGISLATIVE
CHANGES IN ABSENCE OF THE
ENGAGEMENT FOR THE MINISTRATIONS
AND THE BALANCE OF POWER, SO WE
ARE OPERATING IN THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS, SO I JUST WANT TO
REAFFIRM THAT POINT BUT
SPECIFICALLY THEIR NUMBER OF
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AS I'M
HEARING THE DISCUSSION HERE. ONE
IS ABOUT THAT OF THE PUBLIC
SAFETY ISSUE, AND I KNOW THAT
THAT'S WHAT THE AUTHOR HAS
CONTINUOUSLY SAID TIME AND TIME
AGAIN, LIKE A BROKEN RECORD FOR
HER. THIS IS ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY
, UM, SPECIFICALLY, BUT ON THE
ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO THE
ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. THE
ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS THAT OF
THE PLACEMENT OF WORK THE LOSS
OF JOBS THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY
PART OF THIS CONVERSATION. AND
SO THE QUESTION TO THE
OPPOSITION IS FOR THOSE
COMPANIES THAT YOU REPRESENT.
HAVE YOU ENGAGED WITH THOSE IN
OPPOSITION TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF
WORK AND HELP THE SKILL SETS AND
TRYING TO IDENTIFY AND REAL
MEANINGFUL WAYS TO HELP ENSURE
THAT WE IDENTIFY THE LOSS OF
JOBS AND THOSE OF UNION WORKERS
THAT WERE VERY MUCH VALUE IN THE
STATE. SOMEONE BELOW THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION AND
THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON
A HOST OF TECHNOLOGY ISSUES OVER
OVER OVER MANY YEARS. THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT I CARE DEEPLY
ABOUT. I'VE BEEN ENGAGED
INTERNATIONAL LEVEL, HAVING
DIALOGUE ABOUT JUST THIS VERY
QUESTION AND THE IMPACT OF
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES AND
WORKFORCE THIS IS SOMETHING
WHERE ARE OUR VIEW IS THAT
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS ARE GOING TO
ULTIMATELY BE A GREAT THING FOR
AMERICA'S TRUCK DRIVERS AND THE
REASON WHY IS THAT IF YOU THINK
OF THE NATURE OF TRUCK DRIVING
THIS CAN BE A VERY, VERY
DIFFICULT JOB. A LOT OF TIMES IT
TAKES PEOPLE AWAY FROM THEIR
FAMILIES OFTENTIMES EVOLVES VERY
LONG HOURS BEING AT IT WAS IN
THE CAB OF THE TRUCK. THIS IS
SOMETHING WHERE A LOT OF THAT
THOSE LONG HOURS REALLY ARE
THINGS THAT THAT LEND TO A LOT
OF THE SAFETY ISSUES OUT THERE
IN TERMS OF PEOPLE FALLING
ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL AND HAVING
OTHER OTHER SAFETY ISSUES THAT
ARE THEIR AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS ARE
GOING TO REALLY KIND OF CHANGED
THE PARADIGM IN MANY WAYS, IF
YOU LOOK AT A LOT OF AUTONOMOUS
TRUCK COMPANIES, BUT THEY ARE
TALKING ABOUT DOING IS SOMETHING
THAT SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS A
TRANSFER HUB MODEL OR OR A HUB
AND SPOKE MODEL WHERE ULTIMATELY
THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEPOSED THAT
ARE GOING TO RESEMBLE, IN MANY
WAYS OUR NATION'S AIRPORTS WHERE
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE LONG HAUL
TRUCKING, THEY CAN GO BETWEEN
MANY OF THESE DEPOTS. THESE ARE
THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
BECAUSE THEY'LL BE ABLE TO MAYBE
GO OVER OVER THE EVENING TIME
AND NOT BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL
IDLING AND TRAFFIC AND WHATNOT.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE A
LOT OF THAT MONOTONOUS TYPE OF
TRUCKING CAN NO LONGER BE DONE
BY HUMAN BEINGS. AND THEREFORE
YOU GET A LOT OF THE SAFETY
BENEFIT WHAT THAT MEANS. DO YOU
CREATE MORE ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES AROUND THE CITY
CENTERS THAT ARE THERE AND SO
YOU HAVE MORE JOBS. IN ADDITION
TO THAT YOU ALSO HAVE JOBS FOR
FLEET TECHNICIANS AND LOGISTICS
SPECIALISTS AND WHATNOT THAT ARE
GOING TO HAPPEN AT A LOT OF
THESE HUBS. AND SO THIS IS
SOMETHING WHERE WE WOULD LOVE TO
DIALOGUE MORE WITH WITH FOLKS IN
LABOR BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO
BENEFIT THEM AS WELL. AND AS I
SAID, I HAVE A PASSION FOR THIS
BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S THE WAY
WITH THE FUTURE CLEARLY OF
YOU'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, BUT,
UM RESPECT THAT SOUNDS LIKE A
TALKING POINTS. THE SPECIFIC
QUESTION ON HONING IN ON THE
SPECIFICS. THIS IS ABOUT THE
LOSS OF UNION JOBS AND THE FEAR
OF THE LOSS OF JOBS. SO IT'S
BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL THAT IS
SITTING NEXT TO YOU HAVE HAS THE
INDUSTRY ENGAGED IN MEANINGFUL
AND FRUITFUL CONVERSATIONS AND
TALKING ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD
ALSO THE FUTURE OF WORK ALSO
HELPS UP LIFT UNION WORKERS AND
THAT OF THE ADDRESSING THE FEAR
OF THE LOSS OF JOBS FROM
TEAMSTERS. I CERTAINLY
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE FEAR OF
LOSS OF JOBS, I DON'T THINK THAT
THAT IS WHAT IS ULTIMATELY GOING
TO HAPPEN. I THINK THE FIRST
POINT IS THAT AS I SAID, WE HAVE
AN 80,000 TRUCK DRIVER SHORTAGE
IN THIS COUNTRY, AND SO WE HAVE
A MASSIVE HOLE TO DIG OURSELVES
OUT OF BEFORE ANY TRUCK DRIVERS
JOB. IS IT ANY FEAR OF BEING
LOST AT ALL? BUT EVEN IN THE
SITUATION WHERE HE WOULDN'T HAVE
THAT WE HAVE THE SITUATION WHERE
WE CAN CREATE A LOT MORE JOBS,
AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO
CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS.
SO UM, YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M JUST
TO ANSWER THE CODE THAT THE
CONVERSATION HAD NOT OCCURRED.
THAT'S FAR IS THAT IS THAT
RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO HONE IN ON
THAT. I JUST WANTED MY MIND
THROUGH THE CHURCH. JUST ASK
SPECIFICALLY. YES, WE COULD HAVE
A YES OR NO ANSWER TO THE
GENTLEMAN TO MY RIGHT AT THE
ASSEMBLY TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE ABOUT A MONTH OR SO
AGO AND WE HAD A SHORT
DISCUSSION. I'M HAPPY TO HAVE
FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AT ANY TIME.
I THINK THAT'S UM UM PART OF THE
CHALLENGE THAT EXISTS. UM IN
WHICH WE'RE ALSO OBSERVING WITH
RESPECT WITH SPECIFICS TO THE
FEAR AND THE LOSS OF JOBS, UM,
AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, UM,
AND THAT IS WELL DOCUMENTED
ACROSS TECHNOLOGY, AND AI. I
MEAN, THIS IS JUST THE TIP OF
THE SPEAR. SO IN THE CONTEXT OF
THE LOSS OF JOBS, GOOD PAYING
JOBS THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND
AH AS COMING FROM SILICON VALLEY
. I HAVE NOT SEEN TECH COMPANIES
ENGAGED IN FRUITFUL, MEANINGFUL
WAYS. SO I JUST MIGHT SUGGEST
THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING
THAT I KNOW. I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE. SIMILARLY I HAVE HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO GET TOWARDS
MULTIPLE OCCASIONS IN WAYMO AND
AN AURA IN SILICON VALLEY, AND I
THINK THAT TECHNOLOGY IS
INCREDIBLE AND FASCINATING. IT'S
THE LAST THING THAT WE AS
POLICYMAKERS WANT TO DO AND
SEEING A LOSS OF LIFE OR AN
ACCIDENT UNDER OUR WATCH IN
WHICH WE ALLOW FOR THE
TECHNOLOGY AND OOPS, THERE'S
BEEN A MISTAKE. BUT THERE HAS
BEEN A RULEMAKING PROCESS THAT
HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, BUT VERY
SLOW TO SAY THE LEAST. AND
THAT'S PART OF THIS CONVERSATION
IN WHICH IN ABSENCE OF THE
ADMINISTRATION, TAKING THE
RULEMAKING PROCESS SERIOUSLY.
WERE LEFT TO THE DEVICES OF THE
FEAR THAT WE SEE AND AN
OPPORTUNITY THEN TO SAY, WELL,
LET'S PUT THE ONUS ENFORCING
THAT CONVERSATION ON THE TECH
COMPANIES, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
SEEING HERE. PLAY OUT VERY
CLEARLY. SO IT I JUST HOPE
YOU'LL INTERPRET THOSE COMMENTS
TO SAY IN A MEANINGFUL WAY TO
ADDRESS THAT OF THE HARDWORKING
UNION MEMBERS AND ADDRESSING THE
LOSS OF JOB THAT'S VERY
IMPORTANT. AND THEN IF I MIGHT
THROUGH THE CHAIR TO THAT OF THE
SUPPORT AND TEAMSTERS THE
LANGUAGE THAT I UNDERSTAND IS
THAT WITH THE AMENDMENT, IT
WOULD BE THAT SPECIFICALLY TO,
UM APPROPRIATE FUNDING, WHICH
THEN GOES TO THE DMV TO SUBMIT A
REPORT A LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT
HEARING AND THE ONE YEAR WAIT TO
ISSUE A PERMIT. THERE IS AN
ACCURATE THAT'S CORRECT AND TO
MR BROAD IT SHOULD SHOULD AFTER
THIS CONCLUDES UM, AND THEIR
RULE MAKING PROCESS, AND THE
OVERSIGHT HEARING INDICATES THAT
THIS TECHNOLOGY IS INDEED SAFE,
WITH THE TEAMSTERS BEING A
POSITION TO SUPPORT THIS
TECHNOLOGY. I THINK WE COULD
HAVE A MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION
ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I
THINK A LOT OF WHAT YOU JUST
EXPERIENCED RIGHT HERE IS WHAT
WE'RE EXPERIENCING, WHICH IS
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TECHNOLOGY
THAT THEY WILL TELL YOU IS ALL
ABOUT SAFETY. WHEN WE LOOK AT
IT. WE SEE IT'S ALL ABOUT
GETTING RID OF LABOR COSTS.
THAT'S WHAT IT'S ABOUT, AND WE
WANT TO HAVE MEANINGFUL
CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM. WE
HAVEN'T HAD THIS CONVERSATIONS.
I THINK THAT LEARNING MORE AND
COMING BACK AND SEEING WHAT THE
DATA TELLS US WON'T WILL INFORM
US ABOUT WHAT SORT OF
CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE
SHORT OF THAT. IT FEELS
PREMATURE. MR HOOVER'S QUESTION
. ONE OF THE REASONS WE REALLY
GRAPPLED WITH THE SUNSET IS HOW
DO YOU PICK A TIME FRAME THAT'S
NOT ARBITRARY IS IN FIVE YEARS
IS THAT 10 YEARS IS IT 15 YEARS?
WE NEED TO SEE THE DATA AND BE
ABLE TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT AND
WE JUST HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT YET
. UM, WE'RE WE'RE OPEN MINDED
LIKE LOOK. THE NAME TEAMSTER. WE
CAME FROM DRIVING HORSES WERE
NOT OPPOSED TO TECHNOLOGY. WE
DIDN'T RUN A BILL THAT SAID NO
AUTONOMOUS TRUCKS. WE COULD HAVE
RUN THAT BILL. INSTEAD WE RAN A
BILL THAT SAID, OKAY, THIS IS
HAPPENING. THE ADMINISTRATION
PLANS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT
. WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE
COGNIZANT THAT THE WORLD IS
CHANGING. LET'S MAKE SURE THAT
IT'S DONE SAFELY SO WE CAN LEARN
AND OUT OF THAT. MAY WE MAY FIND
OUT THAT THE NATURE OF TRUCKING
MAY CHANGE, BUT THERE COULD
STILL BE A JOB THERE AT THE END
OF THE DAY, WE DON'T KNOW TO
MISS DAVIES POINT WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT VEHICLE RETRIEVALS LIKE WE
DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT'S GOING
TO TAKE. WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE
GOING TO NEED PEOPLE IN A CAB.
TO PROTECT PROTECT MERCHANDISE.
WE DON'T KNOW IF THESE THINGS
CAN BE HACKED. THERE'S A WHOLE
HOST OF CONCERNS AND ISSUES WE
JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT. AND I
THINK THIS BILL THREADS THE
NEEDLE. IF GETTING THESE THINGS
ON THE ROAD, GETTING THEM WITH
PEOPLE IN THERE SO WE CAN MAKE
IT WORK EFFICIENTLY AND THEN WE
CAN COME BACK AND HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION. I APPRECIATE THE
ANSWER. I JUST, UM I WOULD
INTERPRET AND, UM, CONCLUDE THAT
THIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY A PROXY.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC
SAFETY. IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE
LOSS OF JOBS FUNDAMENTALLY, AND
, UM, IT IS IMPORTANT THEN TO
ACKNOWLEDGE AND ADDRESS FROM
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION ON WHAT
THAT ISSUE REALLY IS ALL ABOUT.
AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT IF
WE LOOK AT THAT OF THE FINANCIAL
MARKET CURRENTLY IN SILICON
VALLEY, THESE COMPANIES ARE NOT
MAKING MONEY AND MONEY IS NOT
JUST COMPLETELY ENDLESS. AND
PART OF THE CHALLENGE THAT WE
ALSO FACED WITH CREATING AN
ECONOMIC CLIMATE IN CALIFORNIA
SUPPORT INNOVATION IS THAT THESE
THINGS WILL TAKE TIME AND IF WE
CONTINUE TO PUT UP BARRIERS IN
THIS MARKET, WE MAY NOT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO UTILIZE AND TALK
ABOUT THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH
THE FUTURE WORK IN TEAMS BECAUSE
THEY TECHNOLOGY WOULD COMPLETELY
GO UNDER. IN FACT, SOME OF THESE
COMPANIES HAVE ALREADY GONE
CLOSE TO A DECADE ALREADY IN
TERMS OF THE FUNDING, AND THIS
THIS IS NOT UNLIMITED. SO PART
OF THAT CHALLENGE EXISTS OF THE
SUNSET LANGUAGE. AND HOW DO YOU
FIND THAT? COMMONALITY
ADDRESSING THAT OF THE PUBLIC
SAFETY ISSUE, WHICH WE ALL AGREE
UPON, AND THEN ALSO THE FUTURE
WORK, LOSS OF JOBS. AND THEN
WHAT DO WE HOPE TO SEE WITH
PERSPECTIVE? INNOVATION IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA? AND THIS IS
PERCEIVED IN THE MARKET AT HOME
AS ANTI INNOVATION AND DOES NOT
PROVIDE CONFIDENCE IN THE MARKET
SPECIFICALLY, SO I THINK THAT'S
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
HOW TO ADDRESS THE COMMONALITY
OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ALSO
SUPPORTING THE INNOVATION
ECONOMY THAT ALSO EXISTS TO, UM
SO IN ANY CASE, I THE AS AS IS
BEFORE US RIGHT NOW. I'M NOT
ABLE TO SUPPORT THE BILL, BUT
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
CONTINUED CONVERSATION THEY KNOW
IS WRITTEN VERY EARNEST
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE AUTHOR.
THANK YOU SO MUCH REMEMBER LOW?
I THINK DR WEBBER HAD A COMMENT.
YEAH I JUST WANTED TO PIGGYBACK
OFF OF MY, UM, MY COLLEAGUE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LOW AGAIN. I
DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN WITH THE BILL AND THE
COMMITTEE OR EVEN ON THE FLOOR.
HOWEVER. UM IF IT DOES MAKE IT
THROUGH WHAT I WOULD HOPE AND
ACTUALLY EXPECT IS THAT OVER THE
NEXT FEW YEARS, UM THAT THERE
ARE DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN, UM THE
TEAMSTERS AND THESE VARYING.
INNOVATIVE COMPANIES AS TO HOW
YOU CAN TRANSITION INTO THE
FUTURE. BECAUSE THE LAST THING
THAT I WOULD WANT IS FOR US TO
GET A REPORT IN SIX YEARS. YEAH
THAT SAYS THAT THIS IS SAFE AND
WE'RE RIGHT BACK HERE AT THE
SAME POINT, RIGHT? AND WE HAVE
NOT, UM, TRAINED THE CURRENT
WORKFORCE TO EVOLVE INTO WHAT IS
COMING NOT WHAT MAY COME, BUT
WHAT IS COMING SO I WOULD
STRONGLY HOPE THAT, UM, IF THIS
PASSES. SERIOUS CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT HOW WE WON'T HAVE A LOSS
OF JOBS, IF ANYTHING, I THINK IN
THE WORKFORCE, UM AT THE SAME
PAY LEVEL OF, YOU KNOW, AS IF
NOT MORE AND ALL OF THE
CONVERSATIONS THAT THAT THAT
PEOPLE GET THROUGH THE UNIONS,
BUT I WOULD HATE FOR US TO BE IN
THE SAME POSITION IN 67 YEARS
WHERE WE KNOW THAT THESE
VEHICLES ARE SAFE. BUT NOW WE'RE
WORRIED, WORRIED ABOUT A HUGE
LOSS OF JOBS, AND WE HAVE THIS
OPPORTUNITY. TO UM, TO NOT BE
THERE TO BE IN A BETTER PLACE
WHERE WE CAN ADVANCE AND THOSE
WHO HAVE THESE JOBS CAN GO WITH
IT. SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THAT UP, AND I JUST WANTED TO
ECHO THAT POINT. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO
SPEAK ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RIVAS.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YOU
KNOW, I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE CHAIR FOR SPENDING A
LOT OF TIME ON ON THIS BILL, AND
, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD SOME
CONCERNS, MAINLY ABOUT CHANGING
THE CURRENT PROCESS, WHICH I
KNOW PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT
FOR A V. YOU KNOW, I'M I WAS AN
ENGINEER. AND UM, WHEN I STARTED
MY CAREER AS A ELECTRICAL
ENGINEER I WORKED IN AUTOMOTIVE
ELECTRONICS, AND, UM THEY HAD
JUST ENDED A PROJECT AND THERE
WAS A LONG TIME AGO, AND THEY
HAD JUST ENDED A PROJECT THAT
WAS RELATED TO AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES AND, YOU KNOW HAD
SEVERAL FAILURES AND IT WASN'T
THE RIGHT TIME BACK THEN. I
THINK FOR THIS COMPANY, BUT I
JUST HEARD A LOT ABOUT MY
COLLEAGUES. AND SOMETIMES I
THINK WHEN YOU'RE IN TECHNOLOGY
, I JUST REMEMBER THE FEELING
YOU WANTED IT TO HAPPEN RIGHT
AWAY OR FAST BECAUSE WE GET
EXCITED AS PEOPLE IN TECHNOLOGY
AND ENGINEERING. UM BUT
SOMETIMES IT'S NOT THE RIGHT
TIME, RIGHT? AND I THINK THAT'S
THE BALANCE. UM AND I FEEL THAT
IN ORDER TO OPPOSE IF I WERE TO
OPPOSE THIS BILL WOULD HAVE TO
BELIEVE THAT THIS IS LIFE
CHANGING TECHNOLOGY. AND I
WASN'T CONVINCED THAT THIS IS WE
DON'T HAVE THE DATA. UH, WE
DON'T UM, WE HAVEN'T DONE ENOUGH
TESTING, RIGHT? WE CAN'T JUST
SAY THIS IS, UM LIFESAVING
TECHNOLOGY. UM AND I'D HAVE TO
BELIEVE YOU AND I JUST AND I
RIGHT NOW I DON'T UM, AND IT'S
NOT THAT I EVER WILL. UM AND,
YOU KNOW, BUT AND SO I YOU KNOW,
I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTING THE
BILL. UM I THINK IF YOU KNOW, I
THOUGHT WHEN ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
DAVIES TALKED ABOUT HER SURVEY,
I THINK IF I WERE TO DO THE SAME
I THINK ALMOST 100% OF MY
CONSTITUENTS WOULD WANT ME TO
SUPPORT THIS RIGHT NOW. UM I
THINK I'M MORE ABOUT TECHNOLOGY
THAN THEY ARE, BUT ALSO BECAUSE
WE HAVE MANY WORKERS THAT THAT
DRIVE TRUCKS IN MY DISTRICT,
MAYBE TEAMSTER MEMBERS AND. YOU
KNOW, THEY CONCERNS THE LABOR
CONCERNS, UM, ARE IN ISSUE TO
WRITE ON SAVING THESE JOBS. UM,
AND YOU KNOW, I DEFINITELY WANT
UM BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS
CHANGING AND I KNOW SOMETIMES WE
ARBITRARILY CHOOSE SUNSET DATES
. I KNOW, UH, THAT THAT WE
CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS AS IT
MOVES ALONG THE PROCESS, BUT I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
WE'VE HAD A ROBUST DISCUSSION. I
THINK EVERYBODY FOR BEING SO
OPEN AND PATIENT WITH THAT WE
HAVE A MOTION BY PAP IN A SECOND
BY DAVIES. AH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
AGUIAR-CURRY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? SURE FIRST OF ALL, I WANT
TO THANK THE OPPOSITION ON THE
BILL. UM AND I WANT TO THANK ALL
MY COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR HAVING
THIS CONVERSATION. THERE'S NO
DOUBT ABOUT IT IS THE FIRST
THING I EVER THINK ABOUT IS
QUITE FRANKLY, SAFETY WHEN A
YOUNG CHILD COMES UP TO ME AND
SAYS, WHAT'S YOUR JOB AND MY JOB
SAFETY, WHETHER IT'S LIGHTS OR
ROADS OR IF IT'S FIRE
DEPARTMENTS OR WHATEVER IT'S ALL
ABOUT SAFETY AND SAFETY COMES TO
MIND FIRST AND FOREMOST, BUT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WORKFORCE,
RIGHT? AND I THINK IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT AND IT'S REALLY
ENLIGHTENING TO ME THAT WE
HAVEN'T HAD A DISCUSSION HOW
WE'RE GOING TO TRANSFER,
TRANSFER, MAYBE OR WORKFORCE OR
HELP THEM. UM IF THAT WHEN,
WHEN, AND IF THE TIME COMES THAT
THESE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES AROUND
THE ROAD I LOVE TECHNOLOGY.
EVERYONE IN THIS BUILDING KNOWS
I LOVE TECHNOLOGY. THIS JUST
ISN'T THE TIME FOR AND I WANT TO
REMIND YOU THAT THE LEGISLATURE
CAN ACT AT ANY TIME TO REMOVE
THE REQUIREMENTS ON THIS, SO IF
IT MOVES ALONG QUICKER SO BE IT
. UM AND I HOPE IT DOES. BUT THE
FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT
AND SOME OF THE PLACES THAT ARE
BEING TESTED. THEY'RE NOT
TESTING HIM. THANK GOD IN
DOWNTOWN SAN FRANCISCO OR
METROPOLITAN AREAS THEY'RE GONNA
THEY'RE TESTING THEM IN MORE
REMOTE AREAS WHERE THE ROADS
THAT GO STRAIGHT FOR LONGER
PERIOD OF TIME. UM WE DON'T HAVE
ENOUGH DATA. I THINK WE ALL
AGREE WITH THAT. AND THE
ACADEMIC EXPERTS EVEN SAY THAT
WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DATA. SO UM
, I JUST THINK THAT WE ARE GOING
TO GET THERE. I THINK ALL OF US
IN THIS ROOM KNOW WE'RE GOING TO
GET THERE AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO
HELP YOU HAND HOLDING ALL OF US
TO GET THERE. BUT I ALSO DON'T
WANT TO LOSE ANY JOBS. AND I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY, UM
MANY OF MY GOOD FRIENDS DON'T
TRUCKING COMPANIES, AND THIS
WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO A LOT OF
BLACK FAMILIES IN MY RURAL
DISTRICT. SO WITH THAT BEING
SAID, I SIMPLY ASKED FOR I VOTE
MEMBERS. THE TIMES ARE CHANGING
. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE
WITH IT, BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE
INCREMENTAL STEPS. THANK YOU. SO
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
AGUIAR-CURRY AND THANK YOU FOR
AGREEING TO THE AMENDMENTS. I
APPRECIATE YOU AND THE AND THE
SPONSORS ENGAGEMENT ON THIS ON
THE AMENDMENTS. AND I THINK, AS
I'VE SAID THROUGH THE ENTIRE
PROCESS, I BELIEVE WE'RE IN
AGREEMENT A LOT AROUND A LOT OF
THE CONCERNS UNDERPINNING YOUR
BILL. AND THE NARRATOR, THESE
HEAVY DUTY A V S ARE NOT REALLY
READY FOR DEPLOYMENT WITHOUT A
HUMAN SAFETY OPERATOR. WE NEED
RIGOROUS TESTING. WE NEED
BENCHMARKS BEFORE THERE'S
CONFIDENCE IN THE PUBLIC FOR
THIS TECHNOLOGY, AND I THINK
THAT'S IN THE INTEREST OF THE A
V COMPANIES AS WELL. IF I WERE
RUNNING AN A V COMPANY, AND I
HAD AN AUTONOMOUS HEAVY DUTY
VEHICLE. THAT HIT A CAR AND
KILLED THE BABY. WE ARE SETTING
BACK THE ENTIRE AVI INDUSTRY AND
THIS STATE BY DECADES. AND SO
IT'S IN THE INTEREST OF THE A. V
S. I THINK TO HAVE HUMAN SAFETY
OPERATOR IN THE NEAR TERM. IN
THE LONG RUN. I THINK MANY OF US
AGREE THAT TECHNOLOGY MAY BE
SAFER THAN HUMAN OPERATED
VEHICLES AND AGAIN, WE NEED THE
RIGOROUS TESTING AND
VERIFICATION ABOUT THAT
TECHNOLOGY. IN MANY SCENARIOS, I
THINK WHAT WE HAVE IS A MIDTERM
PROBLEM. IF THESE TECHNOLOGIES
WORK, WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES
WHAT IS THE PROCESS. TO PROVE
THAT THEY ARE READY. AND I
BELIEVE OUR AMENDMENTS ARE
LAYING OUT THE PATH FOR
EVENTUALLY GETTING DEPLOYMENT IF
THE TECHNOLOGY PROVES TO BE SAFE
IN CALIFORNIA. AND THE MIDTERM
THAT WILL BE REPORTING THAT WE
TESTING AND CONTINUE TO
ASSESSMENTS TO ADDRESS ALL THE
IMPACTS THESE TECHNOLOGIES WILL
HAVE ON SOCIETY BOTH ON SAFETY,
AND IF YOU NOTICED IN THE REPORT
ON JOBS MY POSITION ON A VISA IS
GENERALLY VERY OPTIMISTIC. I WAS
ACTUALLY PROMISED A V S. WE'RE
GOING TO SAVE THE PLANET AND
MAKE SURE THAT MY DAUGHTER WHO
IS NOW 12 WHEN SHE TURNED 16
NEVER HAS TO DRIVE AND THEY'RE
CLEARLY NOT THERE YET. UM WE
SHOULD ALL BE AFRAID OF THAT. UM
SORRY, MAYA. UM AND I REALLY
WANT THIS BILL TO REFLECT THE
POSSIBILITY THAT WE GET THERE. I
ALSO WANT TO LEAVE A FUTURE
LEGISLATURE BECAUSE I MAY NOT BE
HERE. WHEN THIS REPORT COMES
BACK. I WANT TO LEAVE A FUTURE
LEGISLATURE WITH THE DATA AND
THE PROCESS TO MAKE AN EDUCATED
DECISION WITH OBJECTIVE DATA.
AND THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO
ME. UM I THINK ABOUT ALL MY NEW
COLLEAGUES HAVE COME IN WHO ARE
GOING TO BE THE ONES LIKELY THAT
WE'LL BE SEEING AND MAKING THESE
DECISIONS IN THE FUTURE, AND I
WANT TO LEAVE THEM A PATH. THAT
IS OBJECTIVE AND INDEPENDENT AS
POSSIBLE. UM AND SO I DON'T
BELIEVE ANY OF US ARE IN FAVOR
OF AN OUTRIGHT BAN, AND I DON'T
BELIEVE THIS DOES THAT YOU COME
BACK WITH THE DATA SHOW. IT'S
SAFE. THERE'S A PATH FOR YOU. IF
WE WANT TO SEE THESE
TECHNOLOGIES TO TESTED SAFELY AS
WE MOVE TO POTENTIAL DEPLOYMENT,
AND I THANK YOU AGAIN AND YOUR
STAFF TO MISS AGUIAR-CURRY AND
RESPONSES FOR WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE ON THIS BILL. WE HAVE
A MOTION BY POPPING A SECOND BY
DAVIES. THE MOTION IS A B 13 16
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AGUILAR
CURRY IS DO PASS AS AMENDED, AND
WE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. WILL THE
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
BOERNER HORVATH BERNARD HARBOR I
JIM PATTERSON, JIM PATTERSON,
NOT VOTING. CONNELLY CONNELLY.
I, DAVIES DAVIES. I HOLDEN
HOLDEN I HOOVER NO, NO. LOW LOW
, NOT VOTING. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN. AYE PAPIN, PAP AND
I THREE OF US THREE OF US. AYE
RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ. I BROUGH.
WEBER. DR WEBBER. AYE. MEMBERS
ÁP. MEMBERS MAYBE 3 16 HAS
PASSED AND WE LEAVE THE ROLE
OPEN SO THAT MEMBERS CAN ADD ON
TO THEIR VOTES. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. OKAY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WHO STILL NEED TO VOTE
ON BILLS. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK
TO A B. 41 SECRETARY, PLEASE THE
DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THE MOTION.
OKAY? PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FOR
THE ABSENT MEMBERS FOR A B 41
CONNELLY CONNELLY. AYE. LOW LOW
I MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN. AYE
RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ? AYE.
LOOK HERE. A B 41 IS OUT 10.
IZED TO NOSE. LET'S LIFT THE
CALL AND THE REMAINDER BILL
REMAIN REMAINING BILLS. MEMBERS.
A B AND 9 65. CONNELLY CONNELLY
. I LO LO, I MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN. AYE RODRIGUEZ
RODRIGUEZ. I BROUGH.
OKAY? THAT DOES STILL OUT AND
WE'RE WAITING FOR MISS JAVA
WHO'S ON HER WAY HERE. FOR A B
12 31. HELLO. LOW I MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I BROUGH.
MAIENSCHEIN YOU NEED TO COME
BACK. CONTENT THAT CONSENT.
CONSENT CALENDAR IS A B 2 96.
AND 4 15. CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
LO LO, I'M MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN, AYE RODRIGUEZ
RODRIGUEZ. I SZABO. JOB.
I TELL YOU.
SECRETARY. PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. A B 3 16. BROUGH
VÚI. MAYBE 3 16 IS OUT 10 TO 1.
A B 9 65 SHIAVO? AYE. 89 61. 13
TO 0. A B 12. SORRY, THAT WAS A
B 9 65. 13 TO 0. A B 12 31 VÚI.
EVERY 12 31 13 TO 0. CAN SYNC
CALENDAR THIS IS A B 2 96 AND A
B 4 15 SHIAVO VÚI. CONCERNS
CALENDARS OUT 13 TO 0. THANK YOU
. OH, AND THE HEARING IS
ADJOURNED.