GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. WE NEEDLESS
TO SAY, HAVE A LONG AND FULL
AGENDA TODAY, SO WE NEED TO BE
EFFICIENT WITH OUR TIME AS A
REMINDER. EACH SIDE WILL BE
ALLOWED TO WITNESSES TWO MINUTES
EACH. ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
SHOULD STATE THEIR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY. THIS ALLOWS
ALL AUTHORS A FAIR CHANCE TO
PRESENT THEIR BILLS AND ALL
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND EQUAL
CHANCE TO HAVE THEIR POSITION
REFLECTED IN THE RECORD. AS WE
PROCEED WITH OUR BILL HEARING, I
WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS OUR COMMITTEE RULES
TO ENSURE WE MAINTAIN ORDER, AND
WE RUN A FAIR AND EFFICIENT
MEETING. IN ORDER TO FACILITATE
THE GOAL OF HEARING FROM AS MANY
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITHIN THE
LIMITS OF OUR TIME. WE WILL NOT
PERMIT CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS,
DISTURBS OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES
THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF BUSINESS.
WE WILL NOT ACCEPT DISRUPTIVE
BEHAVIOR OR BEHAVIOR THAT
INCITES OR THREATENS VIOLENCE,
EVEN VEILED THREATS. RULES OF
CONDUCT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
INCLUDE NO TALKING OR LOUD
NOISES FROM THE AUDIENCE. PUBLIC
COMMENT MAY BE PROVIDED ONLY AT
THE DESIGNATED TIME AND MUST BE
LIMITED TO YOUR NAME
ORGANIZATION AND SUPPORT FOR
OPPOSITION OF A BILL ENGAGING IN
KONYA CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS,
DISTURBS OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES
THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF THIS
HEARING, NO ENGAGING IN PERSONAL
ATTACKS AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE AUTHORS OR STAFF.
PLEASE BE AWARE THAT VIOLATION
OF THESE RULES MAY SUBJECT YOU
TO REMOVAL OR OTHER ENFORCEMENT
PROCESSES. UM WE, UH, WILL START
UH UM, AS A SUBCOMMITTEE AND WE
NEED AN AUTHOR. HEY WELCOME TO
THE COMMITTEE READY TO ROLL,
OKAY? GREAT. THANK YOU, MR HANEY
FOR STEPPING UP. WE, UM. WE WILL
START WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO A. B
24.
AND REMEMBER PROCEED. YOU MR
CHAIR, REMEMBERS A B 24 REQUIRE
GAS STATIONS, LIBRARIES BARS.
HOTELS CAPITAL OPIOID BLOCKER,
NASAL SPRAYS FOR NARCAN ON SITE
TO PREVENT DEATHS FROM OPIOID
OVERDOSES WOULD ONLY APPLY TO
COUNTIES AT THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH HAS
DETERMINED TO BE IN AN OPIOID
OVERDOSE CRISIS AND WOULD BE
PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT TO
THESE FACILITIES IN THOSE
COUNTIES. OPIOID BLOCKERS PRAISE
WORK BY BINDING THE SAME
RECEPTORS IN THE BRAIN THAT ARE
ACTIVATED WHEN CONSUMING OPIOIDS
AFTER THE SPRAY IS ADMINISTERED
, THE OVERDOSE CAN BE COMPLETELY
REVERSED IN 30 SECONDS AND LIFE
IS SAVED. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
LIFE AND DEATH WHEN SOMEONE
OVERDOSES IS HOW QUICKLY THE
OPIOID BLOCKER CAN BE ACCESSED.
FOR AN OPIOID BACKER. TO BE
EFFECTIVE AND SAVE A LIFE. IT
REQUIRES SOMEONE NEAR THE PERSON
OVERDOSING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE
MEDICATION BECAUSE OPIOID USERS
WHO ARE IN THE MIDST OF AN
OVERDOSE CANNOT SELF ADMINISTER
THE MEDICATION ONCE THEY BECOME
UNCONSCIOUS. IT'S ALSO EASY TO
USE AND HAS NO DANGEROUS SIDE
EFFECTS. I SAY THIS BECAUSE I
HAVE PERSONALLY ADMINISTERED
NARCAN AFTER SOMEONE HAD
OVERDOSED ON THE SIDEWALK IN
FRONT OF MY APARTMENT IN SAN
FRANCISCO'S TENDERLOIN. THE
OPIOID CRISIS IS HURTING OUR
SONS, DAUGHTERS, MOTHERS AND
FATHERS IN EVERY COUNTY AND
ASSEMBLY DISTRICT IN OUR STATE.
WE MUST GET FENTANYL OFF OF OUR
STREETS AND OUT OF OUR
COMMUNITIES WHO MUST
DRAMATICALLY EXPAND ACCESS TO
TREATMENT AND RECOVERY. BUT
THERE'S ALSO NO EXCUSE NOT TO
MAKE SURE THIS LIFESAVING
INTERVENTION IS AVAILABLE WHEN
SOMEONE OVERDOSES JUST LIKE A
FIRST AID KIT OR A FIRE
EXTINGUISHER. WE HOPE WE NEVER
HAVE TO USE IT. BUT THE RISK IS
GREAT ENOUGH THAT IT SHOULD BE
THERE IN THE RARE CASE THAT WE
DO THERE'S NOT REALLY ANY
ANALYSIS. WE WORKED ON A NUMBER
OF AMENDMENTS WITH THE COMMITTEE
ON LIABILITY AND IMMUNITY
LANGUAGE. THESE AMENDMENTS WILL
ALIGN THE BILL WITH EXISTING LAW
AND SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE
CONCERN RAISED BY SOME OF THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT GROUPS. I WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE HEALTH
DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE THE MOST
EFFECTIVE WAY TO ADMINISTER
THESE KIDS. AND WITH ME TODAY IS
TERROR. GAMBOA EASTMAN, SENIOR
ADVOCATE FROM THIS STEINBERG
INSTITUTE. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS TAR GAMBO EASTMAN, WITH
THE STEINBERG INSTITUTE. REALLY
PROUD TO SUPPORT A B 24, WHICH
WOULD EXPAND ACCESS TO
LIFESAVING OPIOID BLOCKERS. DRUG
OVERDOSE IS NOW THE LEADING
CAUSE OF DEATH FOR CALIFORNIANS
, 15 TO 44 YEARS OLD. THE RATE
OF OVERDOSE DEATHS AMONG
TEENAGERS HAS INCREASED BY 370%
SINCE 2017. FENTANYL IS INVOLVED
IN AT LEAST 55% OF ALL FATAL
OVERDOSES. AND THERE'S ARE NOW
11 TIMES AS MANY MANY FENTANYL
DEATHS AS THERE WERE FIVE YEARS
AGO. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT
OVERDOSES CAN BE COMPLETELY
REVERSED, USING THE FIRST AID
TREATMENT CALLED AN OPIOID
BLOCKER. THERE ARE NO DANGEROUS
SIDE EFFECTS, AND THEY ARE
COMPLETELY SAFE TO USE EVEN IF
THE PERSON WHO RECEIVED THE
MEDICATION IS NOT HAVING AN
OPIOID OVERDOSE. HOWEVER OPIOID
USERS WHO ARE IN THE MIDST OF AN
OVERDOSE CAN'T SELF ADMINISTER
NALOXONE ONCE THEY BECOME
UNCONSCIOUS. MAKING SURE THE
MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL TO STOP
OVERDOSES IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE IS
CRITICAL TO STOPPING DEATHS AS
THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S POINTED OUT
, WHILE OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH
INTERVENTIONS LIKE FIRST AID
KITS AND FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ARE
REQUIRED TO BE KEPT IN PUBLIC
LOCATIONS, OPIOID BLOCKERS ARE
NOT THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL SEEKS
TO DO. MAKE CRITICAL PUBLIC
HEALTH INTERVENTIONS MORE
READILY AVAILABLE, AND THAT'S
WHY THE STEINBERG INSTITUTE IS
THRILLED TO SUPPORT A B 24 THANK
YOU, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU
TO MOVE THE BILL. OH WELL, WE
DON'T HAVE A QUORUM QUITE YET.
BUT ONCE WE DO UH OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SEEN NONE.
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. SAYING
NON QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE. SEEN NONE. MR
HANEY, YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU AGAIN, MR CHAIR
AND THE COMMITTEE FOR YOUR
SUPPORT ON SOME OF THE LIABILITY
IMMUNITY LANGUAGE, AND THIS IS
ONE OF THE MANY THINGS THAT WE
HAVE TO DO TO CONFRONT THE MOST
DEADLY EPIDEMIC FACING OUR STATE
AT THE MOMENT, WHICH IS FENTANYL
AND OVERDOSE EPIDEMIC. THIS IS,
UH, THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL TO
ENSURE WE CAN SAVE LIVES. AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU, AND WE DO HAVE A
QUORUM NOW, SO THAT'S THE CLERK
TO CALL THE ROLL MAIENSCHEIN
HERE. A SALLY HERE. CONNOLLY
DIXON HANEY. ALRIGHT. CHOLERA.
PACHECO POPPING REYES. RIVAS
SANCHEZ. OKAY, SO WE DO HAVE A
QUORUM. MISS PAPIN MAKES THE
MOTION HAVE A SECOND. MR
CONNELLY. SECONDS UH, THANK YOU
FOR THIS BILL. I THINK IT'S A
GOOD BILL. PLEASED TO SUPPORT IT
. AND I ASKED CLARK TO PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROACH IS THE MOTION
MAIENSCHEIN. AYE MAIENSCHEIN I
SALI SALEI, CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DIXON HANEY, KALRA PACHECO.
HAPPEN REYES RIVAS SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ HIGH YOUR BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE A
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS. MR
HOLDEN, A B. 12 28.
LIKE I MET THE KIDS. JUST NOT
SURE THAT EVEN.
AS MY WITNESSES ARE JOINING MR
CHAIR, LET ME THANK YOU AND THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL 12 28 A
BILL THAT WE REQUIRE THAT FAST
FOOD RESTAURANT FRANCHISORS
SHARE WITH ITS FAST FOOD,
RESTAURANT, FRANCHISEES, ALL
CIVIL LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
CIVIL LIABILITY FOR THE
FRANCHISEES LABOR VIOLATIONS. AS
MANY OF YOU KNOW, CALIFORNIA
THAT'S FAST FOOD INDUSTRY
EMPLOYS OVER 55 556,000
CALIFORNIANS THE HIGHEST NUMBER
OF ANY STATE IN THE COUNTRY. OF
THOSE FAST FOOD WORKERS. NEARLY
70% ARE PEOPLE OF COLOR. WE HAVE
HEARD FAST FOOD WORKERS
EXPERIENCES OF WAGE THEFT,
VIOLENCE AT WORK, SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND INSULT. DENIAL OF
EARNED SICK DAYS. INTENSE HEAT
FOR WORKPLACE SAFETY PRACTICES
AND RETALIATION FOR SPEAKING
OUT. WELL THIS IS NOT IMPLY THAT
ALL FAST FOOD FRANCHISEES
MYSTERY THEIR WORKERS. IT IS
CLEAR THAT WE MUST ENSURE THAT
OUR FAST FOOD WORKERS ARE ABLE
TO THRIVE IN THEIR WORKPLACE AND
IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. LAST YEAR,
I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN
TO FAST FOOD WORKERS,
FRANCHISEES, FRANCHISORS AND
EVEN MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE
REGARDING JOINT LIABILITY.
DURING OUR DISCUSSION. THERE WAS
A COMMON THEME THAT WAS VOICED.
THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR FRANCHISORS TO ADDRESS LABOR
VIOLATIONS BEFORE THERE IS JOINT
LIABILITY. THAT IS WHAT THIS
BILL DOES. MAYBE 12 28 STATES
THAT NO CIVIL ACTION SHALL
COMMENCE AGAINST THE FAST FOOD
FRANCHISE OR PRIOR TO 30 DAYS
AFTER RECEIVING A WRITTEN NOTICE
OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION. THE
TIME PERIOD IS EXTENDED TO 60
DAYS OF A FRANCHISOR MAKES A
WRITTEN REQUEST TO THE NOTICING
PERSON FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO
COMPLETE THE INVESTIGATION. THE
BILL FURTHER STATES THAT THE
FRANCHISOR WOULD NOT BE LIABLE
IN A CIVIL ACTION IF THE
FRANCHISOR CURES THE ALLEGED
VIOLATION WITHIN THE ACCEPTABLE
TIME PERIOD. FINALLY THE BILL
WOULD PROVIDE THAT A WAIVER OF
THIS BILL PROVISION OR ANY
AGREEMENT BY A FRANCHISEE TO
INDEMNIFY HIS FRANCHISER FOR
LIABILITY IS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC
POLICY AND HIS VOID AND
UNENFORCEABLE. WITH ME TO
TESTIFY THIS MORNING IS RAMI
CRUZ WENDY WORKER FROM OAKLAND.
AND BRIAN. LACI CHIEF ECONOMIST
OPEN MARKETS INSTITUTE. I
RESPECT FOR THE LAST YEAR I
VOTE. THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS
TWO MINUTES. WHEN I WAS A AS
MEAN HOMBRES ARE MALDA CRUISE.
KHÔNG WENDY'S, EVEN THOUGH THE
OAKLAND. YOU KNOW, SORT OF A
HOME. YOU KNOW THEM IS
COMPANEROS. PASO ELEMENT. I SAW
THEM. THIS YEAR. CORREA VIDA.
SALSAS MESSAGE. I WANT TO MISS
COMPANY ERAS. GONDOLA COMIDA
PARA THE BB GUN LÀ KARA. ADIOS,
SIESTA BEING OH, JOE. PICKIEST
STEAMY. JOLIE. SLIPPERY AMMI
MANAGER, NOBODY ELSE SECURITY
IMPLEMENTED CONTEST Ó. LOS
SUENOS, NOT ANY CORSO'S.
SECURITY. GET HIM LICCARDO.
SAYS, UM. PIENSO QUE SI. LÀ
CORPORATION. A UH, LOST, LOST.
DOLORES LAST PLAYED GERA'S
NOMBRE LANGUAGE WEB Ó. EITHER
SUSTAINED US, UM. SOURCE MM.
SIMILARLY, THE MARIA. CÁC
SIHEYUAN RESPONSIBILITY. UM.
CONTROL THE LAST SEGURIDAD
SIMPLY ODDO'S TRABAJO. SO IS
MORE IMPORTANT. 70 YOKO BANANAS,
CITRUS. AREA UNION DOES RAPIDA
IN CALIFORNIA. E SO. E YOU CAN
PROVIDE A BALLET MASK. GONNA
SIMPLY SALSA. MOORLACH VIDA.
MUCHAS GRACIAS. THANK YOU
TRANSLATE. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS RAMALLAH CRUISE. I WORK AT
WENDY'S IN AUCKLAND. I WANT TO
TELL YOU WHY THAT HAPPENED AND
MY JOB AND THEN IN THE ENTIRE
FAST FOOD INDUSTRY. ON ONE
OCCASION, A CUSTOMER THREATENED
ONE OF MY COWORKERS FOR AN EXTRA
SAUCE POCKET, TELLING HIM THAT
HE WANTED TO LEAVE, HE WOULD
GIVE HIM MORE SOUTH. A FEW
MONTHS AGO, ANOTHER WORKER WAS
SHOT IN THE FACE WITH A BB GUN
FOR NO REASON. THANK GOD SHE'S
OKAY. I'M AFRAID TO GO TO WORK
EVERY DAY. I TOLD HIM MANAGEMENT
ABOUT MY FEARS AND CONCERNS, BUT
THEY TELL ME THAT THE OWNER SAID
IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE AND THEY
DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY
THEM. PUT THEM TO IMPROVING THE
SECURITY AT THE STORE. I THINK
HOW FAST FOOD CORPORATIONS HAVE
CONTROL OVER EVERYTHING FROM THE
LOOK OF THEIR STORES TO THE
COLOR OF OUR OUR UNIFORMS AND
THE NAMES OF THE SANDWICHES WE
SERVE. IF THEY CAN CONTROL THAT
THEY CAN ALSO CONTROL AND ENSURE
THAT ALL THEIR STORES ARE SAFE
AND THAT THEIR WORKERS ARE
LIVING IN FAIR. THAT'S WHY A V
12 28 IS SO IMPORTANT FOR THE
MORE THAN HALF A MILLION FAST
FOOD WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA IS
ORIENTED CORPORATIONS TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SAFETY OF
THEIR WORKERS. OUR LIVES ARE
WORTH FAR MORE THAN A SAUCE
PACKET. PLEASE SUPPORT A B 12
28. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SECOND
WITNESS TWO MINUTES? SURE SO
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TESTIFY. MY NAME IS BRIAN CA
LACI I'M CHIEF ECONOMIST AT THE
OPEN MARKETS INSTITUTE, WHICH IS
WHAT? WE'RE A D. C BASED THINK
TANK FOCUSED ON ECONOMIC POLICY.
SO STUDYING THIS INDUSTRY IF
IT'S ONE THING ECONOMISTS KNOW
ABOUT THE LOW WAGE LABOR MARKET.
IT'S THAT FAST FOOD JOBS TEND TO
BE BAD JOBS. THE AVERAGE
CALIFORNIA FASTED WORKER EARNS
JUST 16 21 AN HOUR COMPARED TO
1915 FOR OTHER RETAIL WORKERS.
UM AND SO WHY ARE WE JUST SOLO?
WELL, WHEN WE STARTED THE
INDUSTRY, WE FIND THAT THAT A
LOT OF MAJOR FACTOR IS A
FRANCHISE BUSINESS MODEL.
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT
FRANCHISE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS
PAY LOWER WAGES AND NON
FRANCHISED EQUIVALENTS AND THAT
WORKERS THAT FRANCHISE
ESTABLISHMENTS HAVE FEW
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROMOTION
ADVANCEMENT. IN ADDITION,
FRANCHISE FAST FOOD
ESTABLISHMENTS VIOLATE MINIMUM
WAGE AND OVERTIME LAWS AND A
MUCH HIGHER RATE THAN NON
FRANCHISED FAST FOOD TO STOP
ESTABLISHMENTS. NOW, WHY IS THIS
? IT'S NOT BECAUSE LOCAL
FRANCHISEES WANT TO PAY WORKERS
LESS OR TREAT THEM WORSE OR
IGNORE THEIR SAFETY. ANY MORE
THAN THE CORPORATE FRANCHISORS
DO. IT'S BECAUSE OF THE
CORPORATE FRANCHISES LEAVE
FRANCHISEES LITTLE CHOICE BUT TO
OFFER BAD JOBS WITH POOR WORKING
CONDITIONS. CORPORATE FRANCHISES
EXERCISE CONSIDERABLE CONTROL
OVER WAGES AND WORKING
CONDITIONS THAT FRANCHISE
RESTAURANTS AND THEY DO IT BY
CONTROLLING EVERY OTHER VARIABLE
AND THE FRANCHISES. PROFITS
CHOICE SET EXCEPT WAGES AND
WORKING CONDITIONS. SO FRANCHISE
CONTRACTS CREATED BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT WHERE FRANCHISEES
HAVE TO FOCUS ON PUSHING NOW
LABOR COSTS AS VIRTUALLY THE
ONLY WAY TO MAKE A PROFIT. SO
THIS ALLOWS FRANCHISORS TO ENJOY
THE BENEFITS OF CONTROLLING
THEIR BUSINESSES WITHOUT
INCURRING LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
. AS EMPLOYEES OF THE PEOPLE WHO
WORK THERE MY RESEARCH OVER THE
PAST SEVERAL YEARS WITH CO
AUTHORS, OTHER RESEARCH SHOWS
THE MANIFOLD WAYS. THIS IS
UNFAIR TO BOTH THE FRANCHISEES
WHO ACTUALLY OPERATE THE
RESTAURANTS AND THE FRONTLINE
WORKERS WHO ARE EMPLOYED BY
THEM. SO I SUPPORT AND WE
SUPPORT ASSEMBLY BILL 12 28.
BECAUSE IT WILL HOLD FRANCHISES
DRUNK RESPONSIBLE FOR LABOR
VIOLATIONS THAT FRANCHISES
RESTAURANTS. IT IS NECESSARY TO
CLOSE THIS MAJOR LOOPHOLE AND
CORRECT A LARGE A LONGSTANDING
INJUSTICE IN THE FRANCHISING
BUSINESS MODEL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. OKAY WITNESSES, WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT. I'M GONNA WRITE.
REMIND PEOPLE THAT IT WE HAVE A
LOT OF WITNESSES HERE TODAY.
IT'S NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY.
THANK YOU. MR CHAIR, REMEMBERS
MITCH STEIGER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION IN
SPORT. JONATHAN HARRIS AND AN
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW HERE
IN CALIFORNIA, AND I SUPPORT
OKAY, ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL, SAID THE
SERGEANTS CALLING IN MORE.
RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE
MICROPHONE. AND IF YOU JUST SAY
YOUR NAME, AND IF YOU'RE FROM AN
ORGANIZATION, YOU CAN SAY THAT
OR JUST YOUR NAME ONLY PLEASE GO
AHEAD. MY NAME IS MARICELA LOPEZ
AND I'M WORKING ON LITTLE
CAESAR, OKAY? I LIVED IN OAKLAND
. UM JUST NAME AND JUST NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY. AH, SEE THANK
YOU. HELLO MY NAME IS SARAH.
LINDA AND I WERE IN DOMINOES.
AND I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE A B
12 28 PERFECT. VILLA. WHEN MONEY
EVERY WOMAN I USED OLIVIA
GARCIA. I WORK FOR DOMINO'S
SPEAKS AND SANDALS LIKE
CALIFORNIA I SUPPORT 28.
ALLOWING US HE ASKED ME NUMBERS.
MARIA TERESA, UH, APPOINTMENT
CALIFORNIA. YOU KNOW, BREAST
MEDIUM BENITEZ. CORNER. WHEN I
WAS A AS PARLIAMENT ADVICE
WITHOUT THE CALIFORNIA SEA, LOVE
IT. THOSE ARE THE TOUCH. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS DAVID GARCIA
AND I'M STRONG SUPPORT OF A B 12
28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
SANDRA. HOWARD AGGIE. I'M HERE
FOR OUR SUPPORT THAT 12 28
WARREN JACK IN A BOX. HELLO
EVERYONE. MY NAME IS BEN MASTER
. I'M ONE OF THE CAMPAIGN
COORDINATORS WITH THE FAST FOOD
CAMPAIGN WITH THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION,
AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST ON
BEHALF OF THE 500,000 FAST FOOD
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA. YOU'RE I
VOTE ON 12 28. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MARIKO YOSHIHARA ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
HERE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HI
I'M FATTY MIKE BALLS AWAY WITH
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? GIVE THE
SERGEANT ONE LAST TIME TO CHECK
OUTSIDE. WE'RE GOOD.
OKAY SO SEEING NO FURTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. WE WILL GO
TO THE MAIN WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION, PLEASE. YOU CAN COME
UP HERE. MAIN WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION.
WELCOME AND YOU MAY PROCEED.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME
IS MARISOL SANCHEZ AND AS A
PROUD LOCAL RESTAURANT OWNER
WITH FRANCHISE RESTAURANTS IN
BOTH THE CHAIRMAN AND MR
HOLDEN'S DISTRICT, I COME TO
SPEAK IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO A
B 12 28. BEFORE OWNING A LOCAL
RESTAURANT. MY PARENTS WORKED AS
EDUCATORS IN EAST LOS ANGELES AS
A CHILD OF IMMIGRANTS. MY FATHER
DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO CAPITAL OR
CASH TO OPEN A TRADITIONAL
BUSINESS, BUT HE DREAMED OF
WORKING TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT
COULD CREATE GENERATIONAL
OPPORTUNITY FOR HIS CHILDREN IN
1982, MY PARENTS HAD A LIFE
CHANGING OPPORTUNITY TO OWN AND
OPERATE A MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT
IN EAST L. A. MY SIBLINGS AND I
HELPED OUT AROUND THE
RESTAURANTS ON WEEKENDS AND
AFTER SCHOOL. SINCE THEN, OUR
FAMILY HAS LEVERAGED THAT FIRST
RESTAURANT INTO A FAMILY
BUSINESS THAT PRIDES ITSELF ON
GIVING BACK TO OUR COMMUNITIES
AND BEING EMPLOYERS OF CHOICE. A
B 12 28 WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY
DESTROY THIS PIPELINE OF
OPPORTUNITY AND BUSINESS
OWNERSHIP FOR WOMEN AND PEOPLE
OF COLOR LIKE ME, A B 12 28
WOULD FORCE NATIONAL FAST FOOD
CORPORATIONS TO EXERT
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE CONTROL OVER
MY LOCAL BUSINESS BY MAKING THEM
LEGALLY LIABLE FOR EMPLOYMENT
DECISIONS AT MY RESTAURANTS. THE
AUTHOR OF THIS BILL MAKES THE
MISGUIDED CLAIM THAT THIS BILL
WILL IMPROVE WORKPLACE SAFETY
FOR EMPLOYEES. BUT A B 12 28
DOES NO SUCH THING. IT WOULD
ELIMINATE MY ABILITY TO CARE FOR
MY EMPLOYEES AND TO RUN MY
RESTAURANTS. AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
. WE PROVIDE OUR EMPLOYEES WITH
MORE THAN JUST A PAYCHECK. WE'VE
HELPED DOZENS OF OUR CREW
MEMBERS PURSUE CITIZENSHIP,
BECOME HOMEOWNERS AND APPLY FOR
AND GRADUATE COLLEGE. MANY OF
OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE WORKED AT OUR
RESTAURANTS FOR OVER 30 YEARS
AND WE CONSIDER THEM FAMILY.
IT'S UNIMAGINABLE WHY ANYONE
WOULD WANT TO TAKE DECISIONS OUT
OF MY HANDS AND INSTEAD PUT THEM
IN OUT OF STATE CORPORATIONS IN
CHARGE OF MY CREW MEMBERS.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON A B 12 28.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS, PLEASE. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME
TODAY. MY NAME IS JOY ROSENQUIST
. I'M AN ATTORNEY PRACTICING
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW HERE IN
SACRAMENTO. I REPRESENT DOZENS
OF FRANCHISEES FROM DIFFERENT
BRANDS. AND I'M HERE TODAY ON
THEIR BEHALF. I WANT TO FIRST
POINT OUT THAT THE WAGE CLAIMS
IN THE QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANT
INDUSTRY ARE ACTUALLY VERY LOW,
ACCORDING TO DATA TAKEN FROM THE
LABOR COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE.
WAGE CLAIMS FILED IN CALIFORNIA
IN 2022 FROM FRANCHISE QUICK
SERVICE RESTAURANTS REPRESENTED
LESS THAN 1% OF ALL CLAIMS FILED
STATEWIDE. THIS IS SIGNIFICANT
BECAUSE THE SHARE OF THE
WORKFORCE REPRESENTED BY QUICK
SERVICE RESTAURANTS IS MORE THAN
DOUBLE THAT. SECOND A B 12 28
WOULD UPEND THE FAST FOOD
FRANCHISE MODEL IN CALIFORNIA,
STRIPPING LOCAL RESTAURANT
OWNERS OF THE RIGHTS TO MANAGE
AND OPERATE THEIR OWN
BUSINESSES. AND THIRD, WHILE THE
AUTHOR POINTS TO A CURE
PROVISION. THIS IS UNFORTUNATELY
A HOLLOW REMEDY. A B 12 28
MANDATES THAT THE FRANCHISOR
ABATE EACH AND EVERY VIOLATION
ALLEGED AND THAT ANY FAST FOOD
RESTAURANT WORKERS AGAINST WHOM
A VIOLATION WAS COMMITTED ARE
MADE WHOLE. SO IF AN EMPLOYEE
MAKES AN ALLEGATION ON BEHALF OF
A SINGLE EMPLOYEE OR DOZENS OF
EMPLOYEES OR EVEN HUNDREDS THE
ONLY WAY TO MAKE THEM WHOLE AND
AVOID A LAWSUIT IS TO PAY THEM
WHATEVER THEY ARE DEMANDING. A B
12 28 LANGUAGE DOES NOT ALLOW
FOR A REDUCED PAYMENT OR NO
PAYMENT AT ALL IN THE EVENT AND
INVESTIGATION FINDS THERE WAS NO
VIOLATION AND OTHER WORDS OF
FRANCHISOR EITHER PAYS IN FULL
OR MUST LITIGATE. AND THAT
LITIGATION BRINGS IN NOT ONLY
THE FRANCHISOR BUT ALSO THE
FRANCHISEE. TO THOSE WHO BELIEVE
THIS BILL HELPS FRANCHISEES BY
PUSHING LIABILITY TO THE
FRANCHISORS. THAT IS WRONG. A B
12 28 FORCES FRANCHISORS TO TAKE
CONTROL AWAY FROM THE FRANCHISEE
AND ASSUME THEIR DAY TO DAY
OPERATIONS. THIS IS NOT WHAT
FRANCHISEES WANT, AND IT WILL
RESULT IN THOUSANDS OF NEW
LAWSUITS. THIS IS NOT GOOD
POLICY FOR CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES
, FRANCHISEES OR FRANCHISORS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. I'M
SORRY. JUST WAIT. OK, HMM. OKAY
SO WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE QUITE A FEW
WITNESSES HERE ON THIS. SO LET
ME JUST REMIND YOU NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY THANK YOU.
GEORGIA HALL WENDY'S FRANCHISE
IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AND
STRONGLY OPPOSED 12 28. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. CCN AND LOCAL
FRANCHISES OWNER IN CARDIFF
ORANJE AS JOHNNY WILL POSE A B
12 28. REGINA YIN, COUNTING
EMPLOYEE. 20 YEARS, NO FRANCHISE
YOU EVER MCDONALD'S IN SOLANO
COUNTY OPPOSED A BEAT UP 28.
LEAVE YOU VISIT TO FRANCHISE
OWNER IN RENTAL CORDOVA,
CALIFORNIA AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED 12 28. REAGAN CALL YOUR
CHICK FIL A FRANCHISEE IN
REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA AND I
OPPOSE 12 28. MR CHAIRMAN, MY
COLLEAGUE ASHLEIGH HOFFMAN, FROM
THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE ASKED ME TO EXPRESS
THEIR OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. A
SHOP OWNER OF INVESTMENT AND I
SUPPOSED TO BE A B TWO OR 28.
SÐNG SEEING CASKET FROM THE
IMPOSSIBLE FOR MARKET. I'M GONNA
OWNER BUT I OPPOSE. SEE ARM A
FRANCHISE OWNER IN LOS ANGELES
POSE DROP 28. NATHAN CARTER,
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE AND L A
COUNTY AND ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED.
CORWIN JOHNSON. I'M A FRANCHISE
OWNER IN SAN DIEGO. AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED MAYBE 12 28.
GOOD MORNING, RANDY PUBLIC ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION AND THE
INTERNATIONAL FRANCHISE
ASSOCIATION IN THEIR 10,000
FRANCHISE, FRANCHISEES AND
OPPOSITION. MY NAME IS RICHARD
SCHELL HUB. I'M A FRANCHISEE IN
THE COACHELLA VALLEY, THE CITIES
OF TO MACULA, REDLANDS. AND
RIVERSIDE AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED
12 28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
CARRIE HARPER. HOWIE I'M A
FRANCHISE OWNER IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, A SECOND GENERATION
FRANCHISE OWNER AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSE A B 12 28. HELLO MY NAME
IS DAN CASSIDY, MCDONALD'S
FRANCHISEE AND PLASTER COUNTY
AND I OPPOSED 12 28. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS KEN
WRIST, A MINIMUM 40 YEAR
FRANCHISEE FROM MCDONALD'S AND
THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA, AND
I STRONGLY OPPOSED TO 12 28.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. STEVE
JOBS WAY FRANCHISE DIRECTOR OF
OPERATIONS AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED TO WHAT HELLO, JOSEPH
WONG. MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE SORT
OF IMMIGRANT PARENTS AND
OPPOSITION OF A B 12 28. HELLO
RICHARD TO FRANCHISEE FOR
MCDONALD'S IN SAN JOSE. I
STRONGLY OPPOSE 12 20. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS ALADDIN SEMI
KI¾M, MY FRANCHISE OWNER AND
SOLANO, CONTRA COSTA AND ALAMEDA
COUNTY AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED A
B 12 28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS ROBERTO VASQUEZ. I WORK FOR
MCDONALD'S, AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED. OR THE STATEMENT LIKE
UM, I AM THE CHAIR. WHAT
MOUNTAIN OF THE NATIONALS, AND
MCDONALD'S FRENCH EYES IS AND WE
STAND TOGETHER WITH KATLA FOR
OPERATE AND IMPOSING A BIT OLD
28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
TILA. BANUELOS GUERRERO AND I
HAVE BEEN AN OPERATOR FOR 2032
YEARS. I STRONGLY OPPOSED A B 12
28 WITH MY FELLOW WOMEN AND
MINORITIES. GOOD MORNING, ERIC
MASON. AH OPERATOR LOCAL CHICK
FIL A FRANCHISE IN SACRAMENTO
AND I OPPOSED 12 28. HI I'M JAN
PETE AND I OWN 18 FRANCHISE
RESTAURANTS IN CALIFORNIA, AND
I'M A POST. GOOD MORNING. I'M
STEVE PEAT AND I, ALONG WITH JAN
OAN MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS, AND
WE ARE IN OPPOSITION OF A B 12
28 STRONGLY GOOD MORNING, HOWARD
GOLDBLATT AND I HAVE BEEN A
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE FOR 55
YEARS. VERY PROUD OF THAT. AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED 12 28. THANK
YOU. MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS, PAUL
GLADFELTER ON BEHALF OF
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEES STATEWIDE
, AND WE ARE ALSO STRONGLY
OPPOSED TO THE BILL. HI MY NAME
IS AN LU N, MY LOCAL SACRAMENTO
SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. GOOD MORNING
AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
JASON DIRE. LOCAL CHICK FIL A
FRANCHISEE AND I STAND IN
OPPOSITION OF TOP 28. GET THIS
GRASS POINTER FRANCHISE OPERATOR
IN STANISLAUS COUNTY, AND I
OPPOSED THE BILL. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CARLY
SCHRADER ON BEHALF OF ALL WOMEN
OPERATORS AND SOMEONE CAME
VALLEY. WE OPPOSE THIS BILL.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS COREY.
THIRD GENERATION MCDONALD'S
OPERATED OUT OF SACRAMENTO AND
OPPOSITION OF THE BILL. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS CHAIRS.
SORRY MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE HERE
IN SACRAMENTO AND THE FORMER
CREW PERSON. HELLO MY NAME IS
RAYMOND KOSTYA I'M OPERATOR AND
MONTEREY COUNTY AND SAN BENITO
COUNTY. AND I OPPOSE A B 12 TO
8. HELLO MY NAME IS JESSE CLAIRE
OPERATOR IN SACRAMENTO STRONGLY
OPPOSED 12 28. MY NAME IS
JULIANA KENDRICK. MY FAMILY OWNS
FRANCHISED RESTAURANTS AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 12 28. MY
NAME IS JOSH KENDRICK. MY FAMILY
OWNS RESTAURANTS IN SACRAMENTO
PLASTIC COUNTY. I STRONGLY
OPPOSE THIS BILL. HELLO MY NAME
IS TO MARIE RICHARDSON,
PRESIDENT AND CEO, THE SOLANO
COUNTY BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
SUPPORTING SMALL BUSINESSES AS
WELL AS FRANCHISE OWNERS, AND WE
STRONGLY OPPOSED 12 28. HELLO
GEORGE GONZALEZ. UH MCDONALD'S
EMPLOYEE FIRST AND ONLY JOB
CURRENTLY AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED
12 28. HELLO MY NAME IS HAPPY,
DESI. I'M A FRANCHISEE FROM
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. STRONGLY
UPLOAD OPPOSED 12 28. HI MY NAME
IS MARY ANN LOU. I'M A
FRANCHISEE IN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA, SOLANO, YOLO COUNTY
IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY AND ONE OF
18,000 FRANCHISE OPERATORS IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 85% AND
OVER OUR WOMEN AND MINORITIES
AND IMMIGRANTS, AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSE 12 28. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS SERGEI VORONENKOV. I'M
REPRESENTING COUNSEL FOR CROSS
CULTURAL AFFAIRS, ORGANIZER OF
INTERNATIONAL KIDS FESTIVAL THAT
BRINGING MORE THAN 10,000 PEOPLE
FOR EVENT AND SUPPORTED BY LOCAL
RESTAURANTS. AND I OPPOSED A B
12 28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
ALYSSA YURCHENKO. RUSSIAN
AMERICAN MEDIA. I OPPOSED A BIT
WELL, 28. MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
JOHN LATIMER ON BEHALF OF YOUNG
BRANDS. IT'S PIZZA HUT, TACO
BELL, KFC AND THE HABIT AND
OPPOSITION IN ADDITION TO
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS,
ASSOCIATION AND OPPOSITION,
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS TONY CHAN AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED 12 28. HELLO MY NAME IS
MIKE AUGUSTINO. I'M PROUD. THIRD
GENERATION MCDONALD'S OWNER
OPERATOR WITH RESTAURANTS IN
FRESNO, MADERA COUNTY, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE 12 28. HELLO I
STRONGLY OPPOSED TOP 28 ALONG
WITH MY WOMEN. MINORITY AND
FAMILY OWNED FRANCHISES IN
ANTELOPE VALLEY, LANCASTER,
PALMDALE IN LOS ANGELES. HI MY
NAME IS LESLIE LATER ON AND I
OPPOSED 12 28. HELLO MY NAME IS
JULIE. PANICKY FRANCHISEE FROM
ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA AND ALONG
WITH OTHER WOMEN AND MINORITY
FRANCHISEES. I STRONGLY OPPOSED
12 28. HI. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS PATRICIA YIN. I AM A FIRST
GENERATION IMMIGRANT AND ALSO A
FIRST GENERATION OWNER OPERATOR
FOR MCDONALD'S IN LOS ANGELES.
NORWALK SOUTHGATE, UM I'M
MISSING ONE MORE. AH SORRY,
SANTA FE SPRINGS AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSE 12 28. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING T. CHANG AND MCDONALD'S
CREW PERSON 52 YEARS AGO AND NOW
A FRANCHISE SEE IN L, A AND
VENTURA COUNTIES. I OPPOSE THIS
BILL BECAUSE IT TAKES AWAY MY
RIGHTS AS A INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS
PERSON. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
. MY NAME IS DEAN SANCHEZ. I'M A
SECOND GENERATION MCDONALD'S
FRANCHISEES IN LOS ANGELES AND I
OPPOSE A B 12 28. MY NAME IS
PETER L AND THE FRANCHISEE IN
SAN FRANCISCO AS WELL AS BALLET
HÌ, AND I STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 12
28. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
ROSA LOUIS EMMA, AREA SUPERVISOR
FOR A FRANCHISE IN SAN FRANCISCO
. AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED A B
2012 28. GOOD MORNING, JAKE IN C
. I WORK FOR MCDONALD'S. I
STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 12 28.
JACKIE ANNA'S ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FUELS AND CONVENIENCE
ALLIANCE AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS LEON D¯ÚI ARMORED,
REJECTED THAT PROFESSIONAL CIVIL
ENGINEER INSTEAD OF CALIFORNIA
STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 12 28. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, TANISHA
HERRING ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA, HAWAII AND CPV
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIRING COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS TYLER
GERLACH WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ASIAN PACIFIC CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE REPRESENTING OVER
746,000 ÁP BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT
THE STATE AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. HELLO MY
NAME IS VICTOR JIMENEZ. I WORKED
FOR MANY YEARS AT JACK IN THE
BOX AND MCDONALD'S AND I LIKE
THIS JOB. IT'S VERY BLESSED TO
WORK, I SUPPOSE. WHEN WAS THE
LAST MEETING? ANTONIO MEXICANOS,
MCDONALD'S? THE NUMBER IS.
ANTONIO MCDONALD'S MCDONALD'S.
I'M AGREE. THAT WHAT HE DOES SO
SORRY. WE DIDN'T WANT TO SAY
ANYTHING, BUT SO GO AHEAD. HOLD
JUST TO MAKE IT SIMPLE. JUST
YOUR NAME. GO AHEAD, SIR. YOU
YOU SAY YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION YOUR POSITION ON
THE BELT AND THEN, MA'AM, IF YOU
WOULD JUST TRANSLATE HIS NAME
ORGANIZATION POSITION, OKAY.
PABLO. MCDONALD'S AGAIN
SACRAMENTO. LIKE HIS NAME IS
PABLO. HE WORKED IN SACRAMENTO
HERE. POSSIBLE UH, 12 20 AM
SORRY FOR THAT. MY NAME IS
PROBLEM AT ALL. MARIA AND I WORK
FOR A FRANCHISE OWNER OPERATOR.
HARRISON MARY LOU AND I'M A POST
A B 12 20 D¯ÚI HI. MY NAME IS
EDUARDO. I WORK FOR A FRANCHISE
OWNER HARRISON, MARY LOU AND I
OPPOSED TO A B 12 28. HELLO GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS GUADALUPE
AND I WORK FOR AN EMPLOYER OF
FRANCHISE OWNER BREEDER
HARRISON, MARY LOU AND I OPPOSED
TO A B A B 12 28. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS MAGDALENA LIMOS AND I
WORK FOR THE ORGANIZATION.
HARRIS AND MARY LOU AND I'M
OPPOSED TO THE A B 12 28. HOLD
ON. MY NAME IS SAMIR NOW WORK
WITH MCDONALD'S FOR 13 YEARS
WITH THE HARRISON MARYLOU
ORGANIZATION OPPOSED TO 12 TO 8.
HELLO MY NAME IS JENNIFER
FREEMAN AND I WORKED FOR GOLD
LARGE ENTERPRISES IN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA FOR 13 YEARS AND I
OPPOSE THIS BILL. HI MY NAME IS
LATISHA GRANADOS. OUR WORK FOR J
HAS SORRY ORGANIZATION.
MCDONALD'S ARE BEING WITH
MCDONALD'S FOR 22 YEARS AND I
LOVE MY JOB AND I LOVE MY
FRANCHISE OWNER. SO PLEASE, I'M
A POST. HI MY NAME IS MOMMY NHÀ
ALI. I WORK FOR MCDONALD'S WITH
JSA ORGANIZATION AND I OPPOSE.
GOOD MORNING. HARRIS, LOU
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE OF 23
YEARS HERE IN SACRAMENTO. I
OPPOSED 12 28. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS SCOTT. RODERICK I'M A
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISEE OF 30
YEARS. I OPERATE IN SAN
FRANCISCO AND SAN MATEO. AND I'M
STRONGLY OPPOSED TO A B 12 28.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS JASON GOLDBLATT. I'M A SECOND
GENERATION FRANCHISEE IN CONTRA
COSTA ALAMEDA COUNTIES, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE 12 TO 8. I'M
PHYLLIS GOLDBLATT AND I'M AN
OPERATOR OWNER OPERATOR OVER 50
YEARS AND I HAVE MY FAMILY IN
THE BUSINESS AND I OPPOSE THIS
BILL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS BRAD
GOLDBLATT, UH, OWNER OPERATOR,
ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
BUT IN THE BUSINESS FOR OVER 30
YEARS, SECOND GENERATION AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE MAYBE 1 TO 28.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING FAITH
BORDERS ON BEHALF OF THE FAMILY
BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED.
TOP OF THE MORNING TO EVERYONE.
JAMES WILLIAMS, MCDONALD'S
FRANCHISEES, SMALL BUSINESS
PERSON, ALSO A VETERAN, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED MAYBE 2028.
THANK YOU. HELLO MY NAME IS CARL
YANG. UM I'M A SMALL BUSINESS
OWNER AND I OPPOSED A B 12 28.
THANK YOU. HELLO MY NAME IS
KEVIN SANDERS WITH HARMON
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED A B 12 28.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, TIM
LYNCH ON BEHALF OF THE DIVERSE,
DIVERSIFIED RESTAURANT GROUP I
TACO BELL FRANCHISEE UP AND DOWN
THE STATE AND WERE OPPOSED TO
THE BILL. HELLO MY NAME IS
BRENDA SCHMIDT AND I'M FROM SAN
DIEGO. AND I'M FROM A FAMILY
BUSINESS A MCDONALD'S FRANCHISE
FOR OVER 45 YEARS AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSE A B 12 28. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, BROOKE SULLIVAN.
I'M THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, AND OUR EMPLOYEES
STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 12 28. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN.
MANY IDEAS REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA HISPANIC CHAMBERS OF
COMMERCE NOT POSITIONED TO A B
12 28. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
JOHN MOFFITT ON BEHALF OF RBS.
BASKIN ROBBINS, BUFFALO WILD
WINGS, DUNCAN, SONIC AND JIMMY
JOHN'S IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
AFTERNOON OR GOOD MORNING CHAIR
AND MEMBERS KATE BELL ON BEHALF
OF CHICK FIL A. ALSO AN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS FRANK
SANCHEZ. I'M IN MCDONALD'S
FRANCHISEE AND SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA AND WE STRONGLY
OPPOSED THIS LEGISLATION. OKAY
WE DID IT. THANK YOU ALL VERY
MUCH SEEN NO FURTHER WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. I WILL TURN IT
OVER. TO THE COMMITTEE. MS.
SANCHEZ, DID YOU EVER END UP?
OKAY, MISS SANCHEZ. ONLY ALLOWS
FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF LABOR CODE
VIOLATIONS TO BE CURED. HOW DID
THE CURE PROVISIONS AND PAIGE A
AND A B 12 TO 8 WORKED TOGETHER
WHEN A PLAINTIFF HAS BROUGHT A
POCKET CLAIM AGAINST A
FRANCHISE? THE BILL IS DESIGNED
TO GIVE THE FRANCHISE OR
ENFRANCHISE E A TIMEFRAME TO BE
ABLE TO CURE BEFORE THERE IS A
MOVE TO HAVE THE JOINT LIABILITY
EXERCISE. SO THERE IS A CURE
PERIOD, WHICH WE BELIEVE IS
CONSISTENT AND DOES GIVE THE
PARTIES AN OPPORTUNITY TO
RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT. AND
LEARN TO BE ABLE TO CURE THE
COMPLAINT WITH THE STATED PERIOD
OF TIME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COME, MR ASTLEY. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. UM, JUST A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS. AH, SIR, I THINK YOU
SAID YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY. NO I'M
AN ECONOMIST, ECONOMIST. EVEN
BETTER. YOU MENTIONED THAT WAGE
VIOLATIONS WHERE, UH,
SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER IN THE FAST
FOOD INDUSTRY THAN OTHER
INDUSTRIES. WHAT ARE YOU BASING
THAT ON A NUMBER OF STUDIES. SO?
I'M SORRY US. SO I JUST WAS SO
FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S JUST THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COLLECTS DATA
CALLED THE QUARTERLY CENSUS OF
EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES. SO YOU CAN
JUST COMPARE THE FAST FOOD
INDUSTRY, WHICH IS THE INDUSTRY
KNOWN AS LIMITED SERVICE
RESTAURANTS TO RETAIL, WHICH IS
WHAT I DID IN MY REMARKS AS A
NUMBER OF OTHER STUDIES, ONE BY
THE LATE ALAN KRUEGER SECOND I
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS THAT
PEOPLE IN RETAIL GETTING PAID
MORE THAN PEOPLE IN FAST FOOD?
I'M TALKING ABOUT WAGE
VIOLATIONS. ARE THEY VIOLATING
CALIFORNIA LAW RIGHT, SO THAT
THAT'S A THAT'S A DIFFERENT
STUDY, WHICH IS BY ECONOMISTS
USED TO RUN THE WAGE AND HOUR
DIVISION AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
LEHMAN AND DAVID WEIL. I PUT A
FOOTNOTE TO THAT STUDY IN MY
WRITTEN TESTIMONY, BE HAPPY TO
PROVIDE A COPY OF IT IN ANY
OTHER FORMAT. BUT YEAH, THE
VIOLATIONS OF WAGE AND HOUR LAWS
ARE MUCH HIGHER AT FRANCHISED
FAST FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
RELATIVE TO NON FRANCHISE FAST
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT. AND YOU'RE
SAYING THAT'S BASED ON A STUDY
BY MR DAVID LYLE AND G. I FORGET
THE FIRST NAME. OKAY WHAT ABOUT
I BELIEVE THE OPPOSITION
TESTIFIED THAT BASED ON THE D, L
S C S OWN DATA THAT WAGE CLAIMS
IN THIS INDUSTRY REPRESENTS LESS
THAN 1. THE CLAIMS. YES. SO
THAT'S THAT'S LOOKING AT THAT'S
LOOKING AT THE CLAIMS THAT COME
IN. NOT NOT NOT SO, UH, CLAIMS
TEND TO COME FROM HIGH HIGHER
WAGE. UH, MORE EDUCATED SOON IN
ENGLISH WORKERS RELATIVE RATHER
THAN SO, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR
JUST WITH THE CLAIMS, COME IN.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA YOU'RE NOT
GONNA GET A IT'S NOT. IT'S
CALLED SELECTION BIAS. YOU'RE
ONLY GETTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
AWARE OF THE RIGHTS ARE BEING
VIOLATED. THE G AND WILD STUDY
LOOKS AT ACTUAL VIOLATIONS FOUND
OF FEDERAL LABOR LAWS, A
NATIONWIDE STUDY OKAY, WE'LL
TAKE A LOOK AT THE NATIONWIDE
STUDY. BUT THIS LAW SPECIFIC TO
CALIFORNIA, UM AND THEN I'LL
JUST WILL ASK THE AUTHOR THE
WITNESS WHOEVER, BECAUSE I
WASN'T HERE WHEN A B 257 WAS
PASSED IN MY UNDERSTANDING THIS
IS THIS WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE
BILL. BUT IT WAS REMOVED AS PART
OF THE NEGOTIATION WITH THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE. SO MY
QUESTION IS WHAT'S CHANGED OR
WHAT? WHAT HAPPENED TO TAKE IT
OUT. AND WHY. IS IT BACK THIS
YEAR? WELL THE NEGOTIATIONS WAS
NOT WITH THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
TO NEGOTIATIONS WITH WITH THE
OPPOSITION. THAT AS WE WERE
GOING THROUGH A PROCESS SIMILAR
TO THIS WE WERE HEARING AND
GETTING FEEDBACK. AND AS WE WERE
LOOKING AT THE TOTALITY OF THAT
BILL, WHICH WAS PUTTING IN PLACE
A COUNCIL TO HAVE EQUAL PARODY
AMONGST THE WORKERS AS WELL AS
THE FRANCHISEE FRANCHISOR TO
ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WORKPLACE.
UM VIOLATIONS AND ISSUES OF
SAFETY. THAT WE WERE ABLE TO, UM
. DISCUSS HOW WE MIGHT MAKE THE
BILL MORE ACCEPTABLE. TO THE
OPPOSITION, SO WE REMOVED THAT
PROVISION, AMONG OTHER
PROVISIONS AS PART OF THAT
ONGOING DISCUSSION AS WE MADE
OUR WAY BETWEEN THE ASSEMBLY AND
THE SENATE AND SO WHEN IT MADE
ITS WAY TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
, THAT ELEMENT HAD ALREADY BEEN
TAKEN OUT. OKAY, AND SO IS IT?
ARE WE BACK? BECAUSE NOW THEY'VE
DONE THE REFERENDUM. WE'RE BACK
BECAUSE THE ISSUE SHOULD NOT
HAVE. I MEAN, IT WAS SOMETHING
OF VALUE THAT WE TOOK OUT OF A
BILL. OKAY SO WE'RE FOCUSING ON
THE VALUE OF THAT. PROVISION
SOLELY AS A PART OF WHAT THIS
CONVERSATION HIS TARGETED ABOUT
I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR ANSWERS.
I APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR, AND I
THINK YOUR INTENT IS TO PROTECT
. YOU KNOW, FRONTLINE WORKERS
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT I HEARD
THE TESTIMONY. BY THE WAY. I
SYMPATHIZE WITH THOSE FRONTLINE
WORKERS. I THINK WE'VE ALL SEEN
VIDEOS ON SOCIAL MEDIA PEOPLE
BEHAVING TERRIBLY AT FAST FOOD,
RESTAURANTS AND OTHER PLACES,
BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S UM THE
FAULT OF THE SMALL BUSINESS
OWNERS AND FRANCHISE SEAS ARE
SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS. MY FAMILY
WHO ARE IMMIGRANTS ALSO HAVE A
FRANCHISE AND IT'S THEIR
INDEPENDENT BUSINESS. AND SO
IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT. I THINK
IT'S SOCIETY'S FAULT. WHAT'S
GOING ON RIGHT NOW? THERE'S JUST
A TOTAL LACK OF RESPECT RIGHT
NOW IN SOCIETY TOTAL LACK OF
RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW. AND
UM, THERE'S LITTLE TO NO
ACCOUNTABILITY AND YOU LOOK AT
TARGETS AND WALMARTS. THEY HAVE
TO LOCK EVERYTHING UP NOW
BECAUSE OF THE CRIME THAT'S
GOING ON IN THERE. SO IF YOU
WANT TO SUE SOMEBODY SEE THE TWO
US POLICYMAKERS THAT HAVE
IMPLEMENTED THESE POLICIES THAT
HAVE REDUCED ACCOUNTABILITY. UM
AND CONSEQUENCES FOR CRIME AND
BEHAVIOR. AND I THINK AS A
SOCIETY WE NEED TO DO BETTER,
AND WE NEED TO TREAT PEOPLE WITH
RESPECT TO EACH OTHER. I JUST
DON'T AGREE THAT IT'S THEIR
THEIR FAULT AND THEY SHOULD BE
LIABLE. SO FOR THAT. I
RESPECTFULLY WON'T BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THIS TODAY. BUT I THANK
YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.
MY PLEASURE, MISS REYES. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. AND FIRST.
CONGRATULATIONS UM I ALWAYS
APPRECIATE THOSE WHO GO INTO
BUSINESS FOR THEMSELVES. WE KNOW
SMALL BUSINESSES TO PROVIDE
EMPLOYMENT FOR SO MANY PEOPLE
MORE MORE THAN ANY OTHER
ORGANIZATION IN IN THE OTHER
GROUP. THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT
. UM I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE ARE ISSUES THAT AFFECT NOT
JUST FRANCHISE THESE BUT ALSO
THE WORKERS. AND TRYING TO FIND
A SOLUTION THAT PROTECTS THE
WORKERS. BUT IT APPEARS THAT THE
INTENTION IS ALSO TO PROTECT THE
FRANCHISEES. UM I HEAR THE
OPPOSITION AND I KNOW THAT
THERE'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING
SOMETHING MORE THAT IS HAPPENING
HERE. THE FACT THAT THAT WHEN A
VIOLATION IS FOUND, THERE IS A
PERIOD OF TIME THAT IS GIVEN TO
CURE IT. THAT'S NOT FOUND IN
VERY MANY BILLS. IF YOU VIOLATE
THE LAW, THAT'S IT. THEN THE
LAWSUIT IS FILED, WHEREAS HERE
IN THIS BILL, AND I APPRECIATE
IT VERY MUCH, BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE
GIVING JOINT AND SEVERAL
LIABILITY. THEN YOU'RE GIVING AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CURE THAT
VIOLATION. I APPRECIATE THAT
THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THERE. UM,
THE. IT SEEMS THAT THERE ARE
WE'RE HEARING FROM ALL THE GOOD
PLAYERS THAT YOU YOU ALL TREAT
YOUR EMPLOYEES WELL, BUT CLEARLY
THAT ISN'T TRUE OF EVERY
FRANCHISEE. AND IF THE
FRANCHISEE IS NOT ABLE TO TAKE
CARE OF THAT LAWSUIT, AND THE
FRANCHISORS HAVE SO MUCH CONTROL
OVER WHAT THE FRANCHISEES DO, OR
DON'T DO, THEN HAVING THE
FRANCHISOR SHARING THAT
RESPONSIBILITY. SEEMS LIKE THAT
WOULD BE A GOOD SOLUTION WITH
THAT I WOULD MOVE THE BILL.
MOTION FROM MS RAISED. WE HAVE
2ND 2ND FROM MR KALRA ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? SEEING NONE.
UH A FEW COMMENTS. MR HOLDEN.
ONE IS I HOPE YOU'LL CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH THE OPPOSITION AS THIS
GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS,
THERE'S OBVIOUSLY I THINK SOME
ISSUES THAT PROBABLY DURING THE
COURSE OF NEGOTIATIONS COULD BE
WORKED OUT. APPRECIATE ALL THE
PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES WHO CAME IN
HERE TODAY TO TESTIFY. I DO
THINK THE CURE PROVISIONS ARE
SIGNIFICANT. I THINK THAT'S
THAT'S HELPFUL. UM. IT IS
FRUSTRATING THAT I THINK A WHOLE
LOT OF GOOD OWNERS ARE GETTING
CAUGHT UP WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME
BAD APPLES I KNOW IN PARTICULAR
IS A FEW IN SAN DIEGO THAT YOU
KNOW, I EAT AT THE RESTAURANT.
UM, AND THEY'RE GREAT OWNERS.
AND I RECOGNIZE THEM AND THEY'RE
THERE AND SAY HI, AND I THINK
THEY DO A GOOD JOB, AND I THINK
THEY ARE GETTING A LITTLE BIT
CAUGHT UP IN THIS TOO. IT IS,
YOU KNOW, THAT'S PART OF IT. UM
SO I HOPE YOU'LL KEEP WORKING
WITH THE OPPOSITION HERE TODAY.
MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT, MR
HOLDEN, YOU MAY CLOSE WELL,
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. AND LOOK, I
HAVE SAID THIS EVERY TIME I'VE
HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK NOT
ONLY ON THIS BILL, BUT ON THE
PREVIOUS BILLS THAT I'M A FORMER
FRANCHISING MYSELF. SO WHEN I
LOOK AND HERE I'LL STIPULATE
THAT EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM IS A
GOOD OPERATOR, THAT EVERYONE IN
THIS ROOM TAKES CARE OF THEIR
WORKERS. THEY DO THE RIGHT THING
. THEY CREATE THE RIGHT
ENVIRONMENT. THEY'RE LIKE THE
COMMERCIALS THAT SAY THEY WILL
EVEN PROVIDE SCHOLARSHIPS FIRST
FOR COLLEGE, BUT THERE ARE
OTHERS WHO ARE PERFORMING WAGE
THEFT. THERE ARE OTHERS THAT ARE
CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT THAT'S
NOT SAFE. SO ARE WE TO TURN A
BLIND EYE TO THAT? AND I THINK
THAT THIS BILL BECAUSE OF THE
CURE PROVISION IS TRYING TO ALSO
RECOGNIZED THAT IF SOMEONE FINDS
THAT THE THEY'VE BEEN CAUGHT UP
IN IT, THAT THEY HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THAT
AND HAVE A PROCEDURE IN WHICH TO
CURE THAT, AND SO WITHOUT. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND
WE HAVE A SECOND. THE MOTION IS
DO DO PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. AS THE CLERK TO
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I SALI
SALI NO! CONNOLLY. DIXON. HANEY.
CHOLERA CHOLERA I PACHECO PAPIN
VOTING. REYES HIGH. RIVAS
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ, NO. YOUR BILL
IS ON CALL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. UM. AND WHILE EVERYBODY A
NUMBER OF PEOPLE WILL BE EXITING
THE ROOM NOW, I ASSUME SO. WHILE
THAT'S HAPPENING, CERTAINLY
WELCOME TO STAY. BUT UM, I JUST
ASKED IF YOU COULD PLEASE EXIT
QUIETLY. WHILE WE CONTINUE TO
WORK. I'LL ASK THIS A GOOD TIME
TO ASK FOR A MOTION ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION FROM MR
CHOLERA. 2ND 2ND FROM MS REYES.
I THINK, UM, AND ASKED THE CLERK
CONSENT AGENDA IS 10 A B 17 17
17 VILLE VALLAPUDUA A B 7 48
VALLAPUDUA A B 9 50 MAIENSCHEIN
A B 12 10 CHOLERA MAYBE 13 66
MAIENSCHEIN. A B 14 OH, FOUR
WINDY CORIO A B 15 97 ALVAREZ.
WE HAVE A MOTION OF SECOND ESTÁ
CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I. SALI
CONNOLLY, DIXON, HANEY CORA.
COBRA I PACHECO CHICO, I POP IN
AND I RAISE MY RIVAS. SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ. AYE. THAT IS OUT. UM
NEXT IN ORDER, MR HART, THIS
HERE A B 6 31.
MR ART, YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M
PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 6 31 TO
THE COMMITTEE TODAY. I WANT TO
START BY ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND THANK THE CHAIR
IN THE STAFF FOR THEIR VERY HARD
WORK. 86 31 INSURERS. CALIFORNIA
HAS 21ST CENTURY ENFORCEMENT
TOOLS TO PROTECT COMMUNITIES
FROM OIL OPERATORS THAT VIOLATE
THE LAW, ENDANGER PUBLIC HEALTH
AND THREATEN THE ENVIRONMENT.
SPECIFICALLY THIS BILL EMPOWERS
THE CALIFORNIA GEOLOGIC ENERGY
MANAGEMENT DIVISION, KNOWN AS
CALLE JEMB, TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF FROM A SUPERIOR COURT
WHEN URGENT COMPLIANCE IS NEEDED
TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT. 86 31 ALSO ALLOWS
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT CASES TO BE
REFERRED TO PARTNER AGENCIES AND
MODERNIZES CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
PENALTIES CONSISTENT WITH OTHER
STATE AGENCY AUTHORITY. CAL JIM
CURRENTLY LACKS SOME OF THE
BASIC STATUTORY ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITIES THAT MOST
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY
AGENCIES RELY UPON LIKE THE
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE. IN MY
DISTRICT, CAL JAM RESPONDED TO
OVER 400 LEAGUES IN AN OIL
FACILITY OPERATED BY ONE
COMPANY. NUMEROUS WELLS WERE
APPROACHING A HIGHLY DANGEROUS,
POTENTIALLY EXPLOSIVE SITUATION
WHILE THE COMPANY IGNORED ORDERS
TO FIX THE ISSUES. GALGENWAARD
UNABLE TO SEEK A SEASON'S DESIST
ORDER, OR EVEN STEP INTO SECURE
THE SITE, THIS ACTION INACTION
THREATENED PUBLIC HEALTH AND
COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED A CAL
JIM HAD THE AUTHORITY THAT OTHER
STATE AGENCIES CURRENTLY HAVE TO
ENFORCE COMPLIANCE. 86 31 ALSO
AUTHORIZES CAL JIM TO REFER
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT CASES TO A
CITY ATTORNEY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
OR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
REFERRING CASES WILL INCREASE
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENFORCEMENT
AND ENSURE COORDINATION AMONG
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES.
RECOVERED PENALTIES WOULD BE
USED TO OFFSET PARTNER AGENCY
PROSECUTION COSTS AND TO PLUG IN
ABANDONED THOUSANDS OF ORPHANED
WELLS ACROSS THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. FINALLY THIS BILL
MODERNIZES CRIMINAL AND CIVIL
PENALTIES CONSISTENT WITH OTHER
STATE AGENCIES TO ENSURE
APPROPRIATE COMPLIANCE AND
EFFECTIVE DETERRENCE. BETWEEN
2018 2020 CAL JIM ISSUED 66
ENFORCEMENT ORDERS AND ONLY 11
HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. IN 2020
CAL JIM ISSUED OVER $190,000 IN
CIVIL PENALTIES AND FAILED TO
COLLECT A SINGLE DOLLAR.
ENFORCEMENT DATA IS CLEAR THAT
EXISTING LAW IS NOT SUFFICIENT
TO DETER BAD ACTORS. THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS MAINTAIN
EXISTING LAW AROUND THE TYPES OF
VIOLATIONS THAT ARE CONSIDERED
CRIMINAL AND BETTER ALIGNED
PENALTIES WITH THE AUTHORITY OF
OTHER STATE ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATORY AGENCIES AND
CONCLUSION. MAYBE 6 31 IS AN
IMPORTANT STEP TO ENSURE THE
STATE HAS NECESSARY ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITY TO HOLD VIOLATORS
ACCOUNTABLE AND PROTECT
COMMUNITIES FROM ENVIRONMENTAL
AND PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS POSED
BY OIL OPERATIONS. SPEAKING IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL WITH ME
TODAY IS AN ALEXANDER WITH THE
NATURAL RESOURCES, DEFENSE
CALENDAR AND DAN RESTS ON BEHALF
OF THE CENTER ON RACE, POVERTY
AND THE ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU.
FIRST WITNESS. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS AN
ALEXANDER I'M A SENIOR ATTORNEY
WITH THE NATURAL RESOURCES
DEFENSE COUNCIL, AND I'M HERE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 6 31. FOR
MULTIPLE REASONS. A B 6 31 IS
THE RIGHT SOLUTION AT THE RIGHT
TIME. UM FIRST. THE PENALTY
PROVISION AVAILABLE TO CAL JEMB
ARE WOEFULLY OUTDATED JUST BY
WAY. OF EXAMPLE, THE CRIMINAL
PROVISIONS WERE LAST UPDATED IN
1983. BUT SECOND, THESE
PROVISIONS HAVE NOT BEEN WORKING
CALCIUM HAS BEEN SERIOUSLY HIM
STRONG IN ITS EFFORTS TO PURSUE
VIOLATORS BY LOW FINES, LIMITED
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AUTHORITY AND
INABILITY TO SEEK RELIEF IN
COURT. UM ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HEART
HAS ALREADY MENTIONED THE, UH
DAMMING UP PROPUBLICA REPORTS
STATISTICS IN PARTICULAR
CALDERON REPORTING THAT IT
ISSUED $191 AND CIVIL PENALTIES
BUT COLLECTED ZERO IN 2020. IT'S
IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT IN
ADDITION TO THAT LAST YEAR,
DOZENS OF IDLE WELLS WERE FOUND
TO BE LEAKING DANGEROUS LEVELS
OF METHANE AND HAZARDOUS AIR
POLLUTANTS AND THE BAKERSFIELD
AREA. AH NEAR HOMES AND A
DAYCARE CENTER, AMONG OTHER
THINGS. WHEN CAL JAM DIDN'T GET
IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE, IT WAS
UNABLE TO GO TO COURT TO SECURE
THAT COMPLIANCE. FOR THIRD, THE
LACK OF ADEQUATE ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITY IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC
SAFETY. UH FOR THE REASONS I
JUST MENTIONED WE'RE DEALING
WITH HAZARDOUS PUBLIC SITUATIONS
, A LEGAL SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T
ALLOW CAL JAM TO IMMEDIATELY
ABATE THESE CONDITIONS IS NOT
WORKING AND FORTH EVERYTHING
BEING PROPOSED IN A B 6 31. IS
IN LINE WITH SIMILAR TYPES OF
PROVISIONS IN FEDERAL AND STATE
LAW. THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE OF
THE PENALTIES BEING PROPOSED IN
THE MEANS OF CALCULATING THE
PENALTY, UM, AND THE HEIGHTENED
PENALTIES FOR REPEAT VIOLATIONS
ARE ALL STANDARD FARE IN BOTH
STATE AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUTES. AND FINALLY, TO PUT IT
ALL IN PERSPECTIVE. LET'S RECALL
THAT THE OIL INDUSTRY HAS BEEN
RAKING IN RECORD PROFITS OF
LATE. TAKE FOR INSTANCE, EXXON,
WHICH REPORTED $19.7 BILLION OF
PROFIT IN JUST THE THIRD QUARTER
OF LAST YEAR. BY MY CALCULATION
, THE $70,000 MAXIMUM DAILY
PENALTY BEING PROPOSED HERE
WOULD AMOUNT TO ROUGHLY OF ORDER
30 SECONDS OF THAT PROFIT. THE
OIL INDUSTRY SHOULD WRAP UP OKAY
. OIL INDUSTRY SHOULD NOT BE
HEARD TO COMPLAIN OF THE
UNFAIRNESS OF THAT. FOR ALL OF
THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY
URGE YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS DAN RESTS HERE
REPRESENTING THE CENTER AND
RACE, POVERTY AND THE
ENVIRONMENT. CRP IS COMMITTED TO
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND
UPLIFTING, UNDERREPRESENTED
COMMUNITIES IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY, MOST REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS
TODAY WHO STAND IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF A B 6 31. THAT CRP.
WE WORK CLOSELY WITH IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES TO ADVOCATE FOR
THEIR NEEDS IN PUBLIC HEALTH.
OUR COMMUNITIES ARE LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, WITH
NEIGHBORHOODS OFTEN IN CLOSE
PROXIMITY TO OIL AND GAS WELLS,
AND THEY DEPEND ON CALCIUM TO
PROTECT THEM. MAYBE 6 31 GIVES
CALCIUM THE TOOLS NECESSARY TO
ADEQUATELY ENFORCE HEALTH AND
SAFETY REGULATIONS, A TASK AT
WHICH THE AGENCY HAS BEEN
FAILING FOR ITS ENTIRE HISTORY
UNDER EXISTING LAW. MANY OF OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS SUFFER A RANGE
OF HARMS FROM LIVING NEAR OIL
AND GAS WELLS, INCLUDING ASTHMA,
CHRONIC HEADACHES, CANCER AND
MORE. WELL CALIFORNIA'S OIL AND
GAS REGULATIONS LAGGED BEHIND
THE REST OF THE NATION. IN MANY
RESPECTS, WE DO HAVE SOME
IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS IN PLACE
WITH OTHERS, INCLUDING STATEWIDE
SETBACKS LIKELY COMING SOON.
YEAH HOWEVER STRONG I
REGULATIONS MAY BE OR BECOME,
THEY FAILED TO PROTECT
COMMUNITIES WHEN THEY ARE
UNENFORCED, AS IS THE STATUS
QUO. AS A RESULT, HUMAN HEALTH
SUFFERS OUR COMMUNITIES SUFFER.
CALDERON MUST BE ABLE TO PROTECT
OUR COMMUNITIES FROM LEAKS AND
OTHER HARMS FROM BOTH ACTIVE
WELLS AND THE OVER 37,000 IDLE
OIL WELLS. AND THEIR ABILITY TO
SAFEGUARD THE HEALTH OF THESE
COMMUNITIES IS ONLY AS STRONG AS
THEIR ABILITY TO ENFORCE
REGULATIONS. UNFORTUNATELY
CALDERON HAS BEEN UNABLE TO
ENFORCE AGAINST OIL OPERATORS.
EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE WELL'S
LEAKING CARCINOGENS AND OTHER
POLLUTANTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES,
INCLUDING NEAR SCHOOLS, HOUSES
AND CHURCHES. MAYBE 6 31
PROVIDES ENFORCEMENT TOOLS TO
CALCIUM, SUCH AS INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF, COORDINATED CIVIL
ENFORCEMENT AND INCREASED FINES
. THESE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
WILL ALLOW CALCIUM TO HOLD OIL
WELL OPERATORS ACCOUNTABLE AND
BETTER KEEP COMMUNITIES SAFE.
ESPECIALLY AS THE TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF IDLE WELLS CONTINUE
TO AGE AND GROWING RANKS AND AS
THE RISKS OF TOXIC LEAKS GET
HIGHER. AS SUCH, OUR
ORGANIZATION SUPPORTS MAYBE 6 31
TO ENSURE CALCIUM CAN ENFORCE
CRUCIAL OIL WELL REGULATIONS AND
PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES URGE YOU
TO VOTE YES AND A B 6 31. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL? NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY. GO AHEAD. HI ERIN WILLEY
ON BEHALF OF SIERRA CLUB,
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT. MIKE
BALL, SO BEAR WITH CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS IN SUPPORT
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
SEEN NONE. WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. YEAH YOU CAN TEST
WITH THIS, SAID ASKED THE PEOPLE
AT THE TABLE TWO PLEASE MOVE. SO
THE OTHER TWO INDIVIDUALS
CONSENT. MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
PALMIERO, REPRESENTING THE
WESTERN STATES PETROLEUM
ASSOCIATION. UM. WE HAVE A
STRONG OPPOSED ON THE BILL AS IT
SINGLES OUT OWNERS AND OPERATORS
OF OIL WELLS AND PRODUCTION
FACILITIES FOR EXTREME CIVIL AND
CRIMINAL PENALTIES, REALLY,
WITHOUT PROVIDING RATIONAL BASIS
FOR IMPOSING SUCH OUTSIZED
PENALTY INCREASES WORSE, THE
BILL WOULD RAISE THE SPECTER OF
STRICT LIABILITY FOR MASSIVE
FINES AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR
VIOLATIONS OF EVEN THE MOST
INSIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF LAW.
WITHOUT ANY REQUIREMENT TO SHOW
ACTUAL HARM OR ANY CULPABLE
INTENT BY THE VIOLATOR. IN SOME
CASES, THE PROPOSED CRIMINAL AND
CIVIL PENALTIES ARE FAR IN
EXCESS OF THOSE PRESCRIBED UNDER
EXISTING CALIFORNIA LAW FOR
SIMILAR VIOLATIONS. THE BILL
CONTAINS PENALTY FINES,
INCLUDING IMPRISONMENT THAT GO
FAR BEYOND WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN
STATUTE FOR SIMILAR PENALTY
PROVISIONS. WE ARE GOING TO SIT
DOWN WITH THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE
AND WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO
DO THAT. BUT WE REMAIN OPPOSED
TO THE BILL. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS, CHAIR MEMBER SHAWN
WALLENSTEIN FROM THE CALIFORNIA
INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM
ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING 350 OIL
AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCERS IN
CALIFORNIA SERVICE AND SUPPLY
COMPANIES, AS WELL AS ROYALTY
OWNERS IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL
. UM YOU KNOW, JUST TO PUT IT
VERY PLAIN SIPPERS. OIL
PRODUCERS ARE EXTREMELY
COMPLIANT WITH ALL OF
CALIFORNIA'S LAWS. THE MYRIAD OF
THEM, UM AIR, SOIL AND WATER
LAWS. WE ARE VERY COGNIZANT THAT
ANY PROBLEMS WITH AN OIL WELL
ARE IMMEDIATELY DEALT WITH BY
CAL JIM THERE THEY DON'T DO A
BAD JOB OF ENFORCEMENT. ACTUALLY
THEY ACTUALLY ARE QUITE GOOD AT
ENFORCEMENT. WHAT THEY'RE NOT
GOOD AT IS ISSUING PERMITS. WE
STILL HAVE 1500 PERMITS STILL
SITTING THERE YEARS OLD AND ONLY
ONE PERMITS BEING ISSUED THIS
YEAR. SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO
COMPLY. WE DO TAKE UMBRAGE
RESPECTFULLY, SO TO THE IDEA
THAT WE ARE RENEGADES OUT THERE
, UM OPERATING OIL WELLS,
LACKING COMPLIANCE AND BEING
SCOFFLAWS THAT IS JUST SIMPLY
UNTRUE. THAT IS NOT EVEN TRUE AT
ALL. WE DO COMPLY AND UH, SO
LEGAL COUNSEL MIGHT HELP HERE
BUT AH, THE STATE OIL AND GAS
SUPERVISOR ALREADY HAS THE
AUTHORITY TO SHUT DOWN ANY
HAZARDOUS WELL IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND EVERY ONE OF OUR
OIL PRODUCER MEMBERS KNOWS THAT.
THE VERY LAST THING THAT AN OIL
PRODUCER IN CALIFORNIA WANTS TO
DO IS SPILL ONE DROP OF OIL OR
LEAK. ONE MICROGRAM OF A
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. AND SO, UH
, WE'RE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN WITH
THE AUTHOR AS WELL AND WE HOPE
WE CAN DO THAT. AT THIS TIME. WE
REMAIN OPPOSED TO THE BILL.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SAYING NONE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. YEAH. SEEN AND WE
HAVE EMOTION. COME ON SECOND. MR
KALRA MOVES, MISS PAP IN
SECONDS. UH SEEN NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MR HART, YOU MAKE
CLOTHES. I JUST RESPECTFULLY
URGENT. I VOTE THANK YOU. WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND DO
YOU PASS AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ASKED
THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I SALI
ACELINO CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DIXON HANEY. KARA. KALRA I
PACHECO CHECCO EYE POPPING
HAPPENED. I RAISE RIVAS. AYE.
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ. NO. YOUR BILL
IS OUT. THANK YOU, MISS CARILLO.
MS CARILLO IS PRESENTING A B 13
17.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I'M HERE TO PRESENT A B
13 17. WHICH WOULD REQUIRE
PROPERTY OWNERS OF NEW MULTI
FAMILY PROPERTIES ACROSS 10
COUNTIES TO LEASE PARKING AS A
SEPARATE AND OPTIONAL EXPENSE,
COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS AN
BUNDLING PARKING. THE BILL IS
SPONSORED BY STREETS FOR ALL AND
SUPPORTED BY NUMEROUS PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
ADVOCATES. BUILDING OWNERS OFTEN
PROVIDE FREE PARKING AS PART OF
A LEASE. UNFORTUNATELY DOING SO
OBSCURES PARKING COSTS AND
PASSES THEM ON TO TENANTS.
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY NEED
OR WANT THE PARKING A B 13 17
WOULD REQUIRE RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTY OWNERS TO UNBUNDLE
PARKING FROM THE PRICE OF RENT
THROUGH A RENTAL AGREEMENT,
AMENDMENT OR SEPARATE RENTAL
AGREEMENT AND BUNDLING PARKING
SEPARATE SEPARATES HOUSING COSTS
FROM PARKING COSTS, ALLOWING
RESIDENTS TO ONLY PAY FOR THE
NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS. THEY
NEED. A B 13 17 WILL PROVIDE A
POWERFUL INCENTIVE TO TENANTS TO
USE ALTERNATIVE MODES OF
TRANSPORTATION AS THEY NO LONGER
NEED TO PAY FOR PARKING. TO RENT
AN APARTMENT. ADDITIONALLY THIS
BILL WILL ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS
AND PROPERTY OWNERS WHERE PARKED
OR PARKING DEMAND IS LOW TO
BUILD FEWER PARKING SPACES,
FREEING UP LAND FOR OTHER USES,
SUCH AS HOUSING AND BUNDLING.
PARKING IS ALREADY POLICY AND
SANTA MONICA AND SAN FRANCISCO.
IN FACT, IN CERTAIN PLACES IN
LOS ANGELES, IT'S ALREADY IN
EXISTENCE, BUT NOT THROUGH
POLICY. JUST AS A FORM OF, UM UM
, POLICY WITHIN THE PARK WITHIN
THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
CALIFORNIA SHOULD LOOK TO
FURTHER EXPAND THIS POLICY GIVEN
HOW THE MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA
RENTERS ARE RENT BURDEN AND THAT
CALIFORNIA'S TRANSPORTATION
SECTOR ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT 50% OF
THE STATE'S GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS. THIS BILL IS WELL
TAILORED AND COST EFFECTIVE,
APPROACHING APPROACH TO
ALLEVIATING THE STATE'S DUAL
HOUSING AND CLIMATE CRISIS. ALL
WHILE GIVING TENANTS GREATER
FLEXIBILITY AND PROMOTING EQUITY
. THIS BILL APPLIES TO NEW
CONSTRUCTION OF 16 UNITS OR MORE
IN THE COUNTIES OF ALAMEDA,
FRESNO, LOS ANGELES, RIVERSIDE,
SACRAMENTO, SAN BERNARDINO, SAN
JOAQUIN, SANTA CLARA, SHASTA AND
VENTURA TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
OF A B 13 17. YES MARK
VUKCEVIC'S CO DIRECTOR OF STATE
POLICY FOR STREETS ROLE, AND
MICHAEL LANE, STATE POLICY
DIRECTOR FOR SPORT. THANK YOU.
FIRST WITNESS. GOOD MORNING
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS MARK
VUKCEVIC'S FROM STREETS FOR ALL,
UM, FOR THE PROUD SPONSORS OF
MAYBE 13 17. WE BELIEVE THAT WE
HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS
HERE IN CALIFORNIA WITH OUR
STATE RANKING 47TH OUT OF 50 FOR
COST OF LIVING, AND THAT'S
LARGELY DRIVEN BY THE HIGH COST
OF HOUSING IN THE INCREASINGLY
HIGH COST OF OWNING A CAR. WE
BELIEVE THAT A PERSON SHOULDN'T
HAVE TO PAY FOR PARKING IF THEY
DON'T USE IT. AND THIS IS CLOSE
TO HOME FOR MY OWN LIFE WHERE MY
PARTNER AND I HAVE DECIDED TO BE
A ONE CAR HOUSEHOLD DUE TO THE
SUBSTANTIAL SAVINGS WE GET FROM
NOT OWNING, MAINTAINING FILLING
UP INSURANCE PAYMENTS AND PAYING
FOR A SECOND PARKING SPOT AT OUR
APARTMENT COMPLEX. I ESTIMATE
FROM MY OWN PERSONAL BUDGETING
THAT WE SAVE ALMOST $9000 A YEAR
ON NOT HAVING A SECOND CAR, EVEN
AFTER THE OCCASIONAL BUS OR UBER
STREETS FOR ALL BELIEVES THAT IT
IS ALSO IMPERATIVE TO LOWER
GREENHOUSE GAS, GAS EMISSIONS
AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED.
RESEARCH SHOWS THAT BUNDLED
PARKING HOUSEHOLDS DRIVE 3800
MORE MILES. THOSE ARE MILES THAT
POLLUTE 40% MORE THAN BUNDLED
HOUSEHOLDS ARE MILES THAT ARE
ASKED OUR WORK OR ADDING TO OUR
WORSENING TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
LASTLY WE'RE VERY CONCERNED WITH
THE STATE OF OUR TRANSIT
AGENCIES, WHICH ARE FACING
FALLING RIDERSHIP IN THE WAKE OF
THE PANDEMIC. THIS IS A POLICY
OUTSIDE OF THE STATE BUDGET THAT
WILL SLOWLY BRING BACK
CONSISTENT RIDERSHIP TO TRANSIT.
A PAPER ON THIS TOPIC OUT OF
CLASS STATES QUOTE, BUNDLED
PARKING IS NEGATIVELY CORRELATED
TO TRANSIT USE HOUSEHOLDS WITH
UNBUNDLED PARKING ARE
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO BE
FREQUENT TRANSIT USERS.
POLICYMAKERS CONCERNED WITH
CLIMATE CHANGE AS WELL AS
FOLLOWING TRANSIT RIDERSHIP MUST
CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF
PARKING POLICY HAS ON TRAVEL
BEHAVIOR. THE COMPANY PARK AIDE
ESTIMATES THAT ABOUT 50% OF NEW
HOUSING IS ALREADY UNBUNDLED
VOLUNTARILY. THE CITIES OF SAN
DIEGO, SAN FRANCISCO AND SANTA
MONICA, HAVE ALREADY ADOPTED
THIS LOCALLY. LET'S EXPAND THIS
POLICY FURTHER BY PASSING THIS,
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS,
MICHAEL LANG WAS SPUR OF PUBLIC
POLICY THINK TANK IN THE SAN
FRANCISCO BETTER. THERE'S A
GROWING RECOGNITION THAT OVER
MANY DECADES ARBITRARY ONE OFF
STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON A
BUILDING BY BUILDING BASIS,
USING STATIC FORMULAS HAS LED TO
A CUMULATIVE ACCESS OF COSTLY
PARKING. 2020 ANALYSIS BY THE
CITY OF BERKELEY FOUND THAT
NEARLY 50% OF OFF STREET PARKING
SPOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
IN THE JURISDICTION SAT EMPTY.
RECENT SENATE CLARA UNIVERSITY
STUDY FOUND THAT THE INVISIBLE
COST OF PARKING AT 17% OF THE
COST OF RENT OFF STREET PARKING
IS AN AMENITY VALUED HIGHLY BY
SOME AND NOT NEEDED BY OTHERS.
AND BUNDLING THE PARKING IS
BECOME A BEST PRACTICE FOR NEW
APARTMENTS AND IS THE BEST WAY
TO ALLOCATE A FINITE AND
EXPENSIVE COMMODITY. THOSE
TENANTS WHO ARE CARVED FOR YOUR
CAR LIGHT SHOULD NOT THROUGH THE
COST OF THEIR RENT SUBSIDIZED
THE COST TO PROVIDE TWO PARKING
SPACES FOR OTHERS. PARKING IS
NEVER FREE, AND WE MUST REMOVE
THE ASSUMPTION AND PERCEPTION
THAT IT IS AND WE RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST AND I VOTE. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
NAME AN ORGANIZATION ONLY
PLEASE. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS, CARON LING ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AND
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
JORDAN'S BANANA CARVAJAL NUMBER.
HAVE A CALIFORNIAN BE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SAYING
NONE WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS KAREEM GREASY ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS, CRS REMOVED ITS
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL AS
AMENDED ON APRIL 17TH 2023 WISH
TO SINCERELY THANK THE AUTHOR
AND THE COMMITTEE AND THE
SPONSOR FOR THEIR TREMENDOUS
WORK ON THIS BILL AND FOR
ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS DEBORAH
CARLTON WITH A CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. WE WANT
TO SAY WE APPRECIATE THE
DIRECTION THAT THE AUTHOR IS
GOING. NEW CONSTRUCTION MAKES
SENSE. IT'S MUCH EASIER TO
UNBUNDLE AS WE GO FORWARD. I
THINK WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH THE AUTHOR TO MAKE
SURE WE FIND SOME PLAUSIBLE
AMENDMENTS THAT HELP. FOR
EXAMPLE, WE WOULD ALWAYS PREFER
THAT THIS BE A STATEWIDE
APPROACH, UM OR AT LEAST AT A
MINIMUM IN AREAS WHERE HE HAD
ROBUST, UH, PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION WILL ARGUE SHASTA
DOES NOT. BUT SAN FRANCISCO
DOES. SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE AT
LEAST LOOKING AT THOSE AREAS
THAT HAVE ROBUST PARKING. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? SEEING
NONE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE PACHECO SO I
DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS
BILL. UM FIRST. WHY? WHY DOESN'T
IT APPLY TO THE WHOLE STATE?
BECAUSE I DID NOTICE, SAN
FRANCISCO WAS OMITTED. WE TOOK
AN APPROACH AS A PILOT PROJECT,
UM, TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE
LOOKING AT COUNTIES THAT HAVE
ROBUST, UM, TRANSPORTATION. IN
WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEE CHAIR
AND THE COMMITTEE CONSULTANTS TO
FIND A PATHWAYS SO THAT WE CAN
MOVE FORWARD WHILE ALSO TAKING
INTO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE
OPPOSITION FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UH, FOR SORRY FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION. UM INITIALLY, WE
DIDN'T HAVE, UM, A MAXIMUM OR A
MINIMUM ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS,
SO WE MOVED TOWARDS 16 UNITS OR
MORE NEW CONSTRUCTION. NO SENSE
OF DATE, ALLOWING FOR DEVELOPERS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLAN. AND SO
THIS AGAIN, THIS IS AN INITIAL
START TO A PILOT PROJECT FOR
THESE COUNTIES WITH THE HOPE
THAT IF IT WORKS, WE CAN EXPAND
TO OTHERS. SO MY CONCERN IS L A
COUNTY IS SO DENSELY POPULATED I
MEAN, THERE'S ALREADY ISSUES
WITH STREET PARKING. WE I WAS ON
CITY COUNCIL IN DOWNEY. AND THAT
WAS ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES. UH SO
ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES WAS A LOT
OF RESIDENTS, UH, FELT LIKE UM,
NEARBY TENANTS WERE PARKING IN
THE STREETS, AND IT WAS JUST NOT
ENOUGH PARKING. SO WHAT ENDED UP
HAPPENING? IS THERE SEVERAL
STREETS IN DOWNEY THAT HAVE
PREFERENTIAL PARKING? SO WHAT
THAT MEANS IS ONLY THE
HOMEOWNERS CAN PARK THERE AND
THEN WHAT ARE THE TENANTS
SUPPOSED TO DO? WHAT IF, UM
PARKING ISN'T BEING PROVIDED FOR
WHERE ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO PARK
? SO I'M CURIOUS. WHY WHY ALI
COUNTY AND YET? AGAIN IT'S NOT A
FACT IT'S NOT AFFECTING SAN
FRANCISCO AND I FEEL LIKE BOTH
OF THEM ARE ARE DEALING WITH
STREET ISSUES. OR PARKING ISSUES
COUNTY OUT OF THE 58 COUNTIES,
IS THE LARGEST COUNTY WITH THE
MOST POPULATION AND THE MOST
LAND ACROSS THE STATE. SAN
FRANCISCO IS NOT SAN FRANCISCO.
IT'S MUCH MORE COMPACTED, AND IN
FACT, SAN FRANCISCO IS CURRENTLY
GOING THROUGH THEIR OWN CITY
ORDINANCE FOR A LOT OF THEIR
VACANT HOMES, SO IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY A PLACE WHERE NEW
CONSTRUCTION FOR NEW UNITS 16
AND ABOVE IS HAPPENING. SO THAT
WOULD BE, UM AND MORE THAN
WELCOME TO HAVE OUR OUR
WITNESSES ALSO CONTINUE. UH IN
ADDITION, YOU KNOW THE CONCERNS
ABOUT L. A COUNTY. I HEAR YOU ON
THEM. BUT THE GOAL OF
TRANSPORTATION IN WHICH THE L. A
COUNTY DELEGATION IS ALSO
PUSHING FOR IS TO INCREASE
TRANSPORTATION WITHIN L. A
COUNTY TO INCREASE RIDERSHIP TO,
UM, MAKE IT MORE FEASIBLE AND
SAFE FOR FOLKS TO USE PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION, WHICH WE SEE
CURRENTLY IN A LOT OF THE HUBS
AND, UM, THE MORE URBAN AREAS OF
L, A COUNTY. NOT NECESSARILY L.
A COUNTY'S HUGE RIGHT YOU CAN
DOWNEY IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES AND THE SAN
FERNANDO VALLEY. SO UM THE GOAL
AND HOPE IS TO CREATE ALLOW
DEVELOPERS TO HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO FIND LOCATIONS
WHERE THERE IS HIGH TRANSIT
AREAS TO APPLY THIS POLICY
TOWARDS BUILDING MORE HOUSING.
BUT I'M GOING TO DEFER TO OUR
WITNESSES SAY. SEVERAL YEARS AGO
, THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO ACTUALLY REMOVED ANY
MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
, AND SO DEVELOPERS HAVE ALREADY
MOVED TO THE UNBUNDLING. KIND OF
AN APPROACH VERY BROAD. IT'S
BECOME A BEST PRACTICE AND MUCH
OF THE BAY AREA. AND THEN, UH,
ADDING ON THAT, UM SO WE'RE
ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO, UM YOU
DON'T TAKE TRANSPORTATION. BUT
AS YOU KNOW, ALI COUNTY. UM
THERE'S A LOT OF CITIES THAT
AREN'T NEAR GREAT TRANSPORTATION
, SOME CURIOUS IF YOU'D BE
WILLING TO EVEN AMEND IT TO ONLY
APPLY TO, UM THOSE UNITS THAT
ARE NEAR TRANSPORTATION HUBS. AH
TO HELP AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WORKING
FAMILIES WHO HAVE TO HAVE TO
TRAVEL FOR WORK NEED TO GO FROM
LIKE THE SUBURBS LIKE DOWNY
LAKEWOOD, THREE TOES. I NEED TO
GET TO DOWNTOWN L A BECAUSE IF
THEY TRY TO TAKE PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION, IT'S GONNA TAKE
A LOT LONGER TO GET TO DOWNTOWN
L A VERSUS DRIVING. I WOULD SAY
THAT THE ONUS ON THE TENANT TO
WANT TO LIVE IN AN APARTMENT
WITHOUT PARKING IS ENTIRELY UP
TO THEM. THIS IS NOT TAKE AWAY
FROM APARTMENT COMPLEXES ALREADY
IN DOWNEY OR LAKEWOOD THAT OFFER
PARKING. THIS IS FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION WITH THE KNOWLEDGE
THAT YOU ARE RENTING AN
APARTMENT THAT IS, YOU CAN HAVE
PARKING. IT'S ON BUNDLING. IT
DOESN'T REMOVE PARKING. IT JUST
MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR
THE PARKING SO THE DEVELOPERS
STILL CAN BUILD PARKING AS THE
MINIMUM FOR THE CITIES IN WHICH
THEY'RE BUILDING. HCP HAS THEIR
OWN ORDINANCE. COUNTY IN GENERAL
HAS A DIFFERENT ORDINANCE.
OVERALL THE CITY OF DOWNEY, THE
CITY OF GLENDALE, HAVE THEIR OWN
ORDINANCE FOR BUILDING HOUSING
AND FOR PARKING, THE SIMPLY UN
BUNDLES IT WHICH MEANS THAT THE
TENANT CAN CHOOSE TO TAKE THE
PARKING OR NOT TAKE THE PARKING
AND I'M CURIOUS, UM, WHETHER
IT'S BEEN THOUGHT, WHAT HAPPENS
IF, UM YOU KNOW? PROBABLY
APARTMENT OWNERS, PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT COMPANIES, IF THEY IF
IT'S UNBUNDLED, WHAT HAPPENS IF
THEY CHARGE A LARGE AMOUNT OF
MONEY FOR THE PARKING SPACES? MY
CONCERN IS NOW WORKING IN A
SYSTEM WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE
MORE EXPENSIVE THAN TO RENT. I
DON'T KNOW IF THAT ARGUMENT HAS
BEEN THOUGHT OF SO LET'S SAY A
COUPLE THINGS, SO THE REALLY THE
LOWEST INCOME AMONG US,
ESPECIALLY IN L. A COUNTY ARE
THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE CARS,
AND I THINK THAT'S EVEN IN AREAS
THAT HAVE LOW TRANSIT RIDERSHIP
OR OR LOW WALK ABILITY, AND
THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING WE SEE
HERE AND SO I DON'T IMAGINE
THAT'S JUST TOTAL SEA CHANGE IN
TERMS OF THOSE AREAS THAT BEING
SAID, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES, YOU
KNOW, ALLOW FOR THE MARKET RATE
COST OF PARKING ON, ACCORDING TO
THE LANDLORD. BUT I THINK WHAT
WE ARE SEEING AND WHAT WE'VE
SEEN IN OTHER PLACES IS THAT WE
DON'T SEE THIS MASSIVE RISE IN
THE IN THE COST OF PARKING IN
THE TOTAL COST, MOSTLY BECAUSE I
WOULD SAY A BROADER MARKET
FORCES. IS THAT IF YOU'RE NEXT
DOOR NEXT DOOR APARTMENT COMPLEX
IS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY
LESS MONEY THAN YOU BECAUSE THAT
LANDLORD IS CHARGING LESS
PARKING COSTS THAN YOU. THEN
YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO MOVE THERE.
AND SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN
, BUT I THINK BECAUSE OF THE
BROADER MARKET FORCES ON THIS,
WE'RE NOT SEEING THAT IMPACT IN
THE IN THE WAY THAT YOU'RE
DESCRIBING. I HOPE THAT MAKES
SENSE. THAT WAS JUST ONE OF THE
CONCERNS I HAD. BUT I DO
APPRECIATE THAT. THE AUTHORS
WORKING WITH OPPOSITION, UH I
HOPE THERE'S MORE CONVERSATIONS
. I WILL BE AN EVIL TODAY
BECAUSE I WANT DO WANT THOSE
CONVERSATIONS TO HAPPEN, AND
IT'S ALREADY BEEN STATED THAT
THAT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING WITH
THEM. SO I DO APPRECIATE THAT. I
JUST HAD SOME QUESTIONS AND
CONCERNS. SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU, MR KALRA. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. AND
THANKS TO THE AUTHOR FOR BEING
THIS FORWARD, AND I THINK THE
MARKET DICTATES A LOT OF THIS IN
SAN FRANCISCO AS MENTIONED, THEY
ALREADY HAVE ON BUNDLING BECAUSE
THE VALUE I MEAN, IT'S ONLY IT'S
ONLY 49 SQUARE MILES. SO UM, YOU
KNOW, WITH 100,000 PEOPLE, SO
WHEN THEY START WHEN THEY BUILD
NEW CONSTRUCTION THEY WANT YOU
TO. YOU HAVE TO PAY A PREMIUM TO
HAVE A PAKISTANI EVEN IF YOU'RE
BUYING A CONDO OR RENTING THIS
PLACE THERE. BECAUSE THE VALUE
IS A LOT OF PEOPLE IS ABSOLUTELY
DON'T HAVE CARS ENTERING INTO
THAT MARKETPLACE, KNOWING THAT'S
WHAT THE MARKET PLACES LIKE. I
THINK IF YOU GO TO MORE, AND I'M
GLAD SANTA CLARA COUNTY IS
INCLUDED. BECAUSE WE LIKE L A
DOES HAVE MORE MORE SUBURBAN
TYPE APARTMENT, ALTHOUGH WE ARE
BUILDING A LOT MORE URBAN AS
WELL. BUT THAT BEING SAID, I
THINK THAT THERE'S AN INCENTIVE
FOR THE APARTMENT OWNER TO WANT
THEIR PARKING SPOTS. TO BE USED.
AND SO THEY'RE NOT THAT THAT'S
GOING TO BE A DISINCENTIVE FOR
THEM TO OVERCHARGE BECAUSE THEY
HAVE AN EMPTY SPOT THAT MAKES NO
SENSE, AND I THINK ULTIMATELY,
WHAT IT'S ABOUT IS THAT A TENANT
NEEDS A SPOT. THEY PAID FOR A
SPOT. THEY DON'T NEED A SPOT.
THEY DON'T PAY FOR A SPOT AND A
LOT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
APPROPRIATELY SO MARKET THE FACT
THEY'RE NEAR TRANSIT. THAT'S
GREAT. YOU'RE NEAR BART. YOU'RE
NEAR A BUS LINE. THAT'S
FANTASTIC. AND THEY'RE THEY'RE
MARKETING THAT FOR A REASON,
BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE TO BE NEAR
TRANSIT, EVEN IF WHETHER THEY
HAVE A CAR OR NOT, BUT I THINK
THAT IT INCREASES THE LIKELIHOOD
THAT SOMEONE ALL SO YOU KNOW
WHAT? I'M GONNA TRY TO GO
WITHOUT A CAR AS I SIGNED THIS
NEW LEASE, OR SOMETIMES THERE'S
THREE BEDROOMS THAT GIVE
AUTOMATICALLY GIVE TWO SPOTS.
FOR A THREE BEDROOM. WELL, MAYBE
THEY DON'T NEED TO. MAYBE THEY
ACCEPT ONE CAR WITH THAT
PARTICULAR FAMILY, AND THEY
DON'T NEED TO HAVE TWO SPOTS.
THIS GIVES THEM THAT OPTION. AND
SO I REALLY LIKE THE SPILL
APPRECIATE, UM, THE AMENDMENTS
IN THAT HAVE COME FORWARD.
WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEE AND
OPPOSITION WOULD LOVE TO BE
ADDED AS A CO AUTHOR AND LOVE TO
MOVE THAT WOULD MOVE THE BILL
MOTION FROM MR CHOLERA. SECOND
FROM ISRAEL'S MISS DIXON. JUST A
QUICK QUESTION. I MAY HAVE, MR I
DID MISS EARLY PART OF THE
DISCUSSION. WHAT WOULD BE THE
SITUATION? WHEN RENTER GETS PAYS
FOR AN APARTMENT WITHOUT PARKING
, BUT THEY HAVE A CAR PARK ON
THE STREET. HOW DO YOU PREVENT
THAT? THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO THIS
BILL ONLY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES, 16 OR
OVER AND OR IN IN, UM,
CONJUNCTION WITH LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY ORDINANCE RELATED
TO BUILDING AND TO HOUSING, SO
IF YOU ARE GOING IF A TENANT IS
POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT AN
APARTMENT WHERE THERE IS PARKING
AVAILABLE, BUT IT'S UNBUNDLED,
MEANING YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO
PAY EXTRA FOR THE PARKING OR NOT
PAY FOR IT AT ALL. SO IT DOESN'T
APPLY TO APARTMENTS THAT
CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE PARKING. NO
I KNOW, BUT UNDER THE GOING
FORWARD, SO SOMEONE WANTS TO GET
A LOWER COST APARTMENT WAS A
REASONABLE DECISION, BUT THEY DO
HAVE A CAR BECAUSE THEY NEED TO
GET TO WORK. THEY'RE GOING TO
PARK ON THE STREET. IS THAT THE
OPTION? THEY CAN EITHER PAY FOR
THE PARKING AND THE BUILDING. OR
THEY CAN PARK ON THE STREET.
LIKE TRADITIONALLY, FOLKS
ALREADY DO. CORRECT I MEAN
INTEREST AS THE COUNCILWOMAN
FROM THE COUNCIL WASN'T
ASSEMBLYWOMAN FROM FORMER
COUNCILWOMAN FROM DOWNIE. AH
PARKING AND SOME OF OUR
COMMUNITIES. I KNOW THIS BILL
DOES NOT APPLY IN ORANGE COUNTY,
BUT PARKING IS LIMITED. AND I'M
JUST ANTICIPATING THAT MAY BE AN
ISSUE. WE REALLY NEED TO MOVE
TOWARDS CURB MANAGEMENT AS WELL
BECAUSE THAT ALSO THERE'S A COST
TO THAT. AND THAT PUBLIC RIGHT
AWAY WHERE PEOPLE ARE PARKING
THEIR CARS AND SO PERMIT
PARKING, PARTICULARLY WHERE YOU
DO HAVE MAYBE CHRONIC
CONDITIONS. AND IF YOU LIVE IN
THE COASTAL ZONE, YOU CANNOT DO
THAT. YEAH WELL, THAT'S HOW MANY
CITIES DO IT. YOU CAN'T DO IT.
IF YOU'RE A COASTAL CITY, RIGHT,
RIGHT. THAT'S OTHER ISSUES YOU
HAVE TO HOLD ON. WE DON'T HAVE A
QUESTION. YOU CONCLUDED WITH
YOUR COMMENTS, MS DIXON. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTION? MS RACE, AGREE WITH MY
COLLEAGUE FROM DOWNEY. I WOULD
LOVE TO SEE THIS STATEWIDE. I
KNOW THE INLAND EMPIRE IS
INCLUDED HERE, BUT, UM AND I
APPRECIATE ALSO, AS WAS
MENTIONED THAT YOUR DISCUSSIONS
WITH THE REALTORS AND IT SOUNDS
LIKE THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
APARTMENT OWNERS IS ALSO WORKING
. SO I APPRECIATE THAT THAT
THOSE IT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY TO
BRING EVERYBODY ON BOARD. SO
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEN NONE TO THE AUTHOR. THANK
YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE
DONE WITH THE COMMITTEE ON THIS
BILL, THIS IS THIS HAS BEEN A
HEAVY LEFT. I THINK OUR
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE WORK
THEY HAVE DONE ON THIS WITH YOU
AS WELL. AND YOUR ABILITY TO TRY
TO WORK WITH SOME REALLY
COMPLICATED BILL. UM I THINK
THERE'S SOME COMPROMISES THAT
ARE IN MAY. THERE HAVE BEEN
POSITIVE IT. THIS IS A PILOT
PROGRAM FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPRESSING SOME CONCERNS ABOUT
IT. WE'LL GET TO SEE SOME
RESULTS AND SEE WHAT WORKS AND
WHAT DOESN'T AND THAT WILL BE
HELPFUL AND BENEFICIAL AS PEOPLE
MOVE FORWARD TACKLING THESE
TOUGH ISSUES. I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT KEY
PHRASE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP
HERE IS FOR REGIONS WITH ROBUST
TRANSPORTATION, AND THAT IS
CERTAINLY NOT ALL REGIONS IN
THIS STATE. UH AND SO IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE ROBUST TRANSPORTATION,
THESE ISSUES ARE REAL PROBLEM.
SO I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A GOOD
EFFECT OF COMPROMISE TO BALANCE
WHAT THE NEEDS ARE. SEE WHAT YOU
KNOW WHAT WORKS IN REGARDS TO
THIS BILL AS PRIVATE PROGRAM AND
THEN THAT WILL EDUCATE THE
LEGISLATORS MOVING FORWARD. SO
WITH THAT, MR OBVIOUS SUPPORT OF
THIS AND I'VE ASKED YOU TO
PLEASE CLOSE. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND APPRECIATE THE ROBUST
CONVERSATION WITH THE MEMBERS OF
THIS COMMITTEE. I ALSO DO WANT
TO EXPRESS MY SINCEREST THANKS
TO YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF. AS WELL
AS TO MY TEAM AND OUR SPONSORS.
FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT'S GONE
INTO, UM, MOVING THIS BILL
FORWARD AND A SPECIAL THANK YOU
TO THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION AND
THE REALTORS. I KNOW IT'S NOT
ALWAYS EASY TO COME TO THE TABLE
AND COME TO AN AGREEMENT. BUT I
THINK WE ARE. WE ARE ALL IN IN
CONSENSUS. THAT ONE. WE NEED TO
BUILD MORE HOUSING. SECOND THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS HIGHLY
INVESTING IN INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PUBLIC TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT. IN
FACT, THE GOVERNOR JUST MADE A
HUGE ANNOUNCEMENT ON THAT VERY
PARTICULAR ISSUE JUST YESTERDAY
, AND SO, WHILE WE ALIGN STATE
GOALS, THE VERY VERY FIRST THING
WE NEED TO DO IS REALLY THINK
ABOUT THE WAY THAT PEOPLE ARE
THEIR BEHAVIOR AND HOW THEY'RE
MOVING FORWARD WITH THEIR OWN
HOUSING AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES
AND HOW THEY GET TO ONE PLACE TO
ANOTHER. SO AGAIN, AS NOTICED IN
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS, THE BILL
IN PRINT HAS LARGELY ADDRESSED
THE OPPOSITION'S ARGUMENTS. THIS
BILL DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY
MANDATES ON EXISTING PROPERTIES
, EXISTING LEASES OR SMALL
PROPERTY OWNERS, AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO HAVING A CONTINUED
CONVERSATION AS THIS BILL MOVES
FORWARD AND ADDRESS ADDITIONAL
CONCERNS. SPECIALLY REQUESTED MY
VOTE. THANK THANK YOU VERY MUCH
. MISS CARILLO. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS. UH, WE HAVE EMOTIONAL
SECONDS CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I,
SALI. THE SALINO CONNELLY
CONNELLY, I, DICKSON DICKSON.
NO, HANEY. CHOLERA CHOLERA I,
PACHECO PACHECO, I PAPIN PAP AND
I RAISE RAISE. RIVAS RIVAS
SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ? NO. YOUR BILL
IS OUT. WE ARE WAITING ON
AUTHORS. WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE.
WE HAVE, UH MISBAH BAUER-KAHAN.
MR MCCARTY, MR. GABRIEL, MISS
WICKS. AND THE COMMITTEE WOULD
STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO COME
FORWARD. WE'LL TAKE A. WHAT.
MORE IMPORTANT.
YES, WE CAN MAKE USE OF OUR TIME
BY DOING SOME ADD ONS. AH SO
WE'LL START WITH THE CONSENT
AGENDA. ASK THE CLERK TO CALL A
ROLE. CONNOLLY. CONSENT.
CONNOLLY I DIXON, THIS IS FOR
CONSENT CONSENT. DIXON, I HANEY.
RIVAS. WE'LL ASK THE CLERK TO
LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM ONE A. B
12 28 HOLDEN. CONNELLY CONNELLY.
I DIXON DIXON. WHICH ONE ITEM
ONE YES. OH, THANKS. DIXON'S I
WAS AT 12 28. YES NO, NO, NO.
WOW. WELL WE'LL GET THERE YOU'LL
GET YOU'LL GET IT. HANEY RIVAS
RIVAS? AYE. THAT BILL IS STILL
ON CALL. ROOT OUT. WAS THERE
ANOTHER 12 MORE WERE OKAY. WELL,
WE'LL LET YOU KNOW. GO AHEAD.
ITEM TWO. HANEY B 24 S CLARK
KOMAROV. DIXON. YES. DIXON I
CALL LARA. KALRA I PACHECO ITEM
TO HANEY. 24 HI. PACHECO I RAISE
RAISE RIVAS, RIVERSIDE. NEXT IS
THE HEART BILL. ITEM THREE A. B
6 31. THAT'S A CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLL, DIXON NO, DIXON. NO HANEY.
RAISE RAISE. AYE. OKAY, WE HAVE
EVERYBODY. IN THE GARDEN.
SORRY.
SURE.
YEAH YEAH, UM POSSIBLY.
YEAH, YEAH.
IT'S ABUSE NEW èC. YEAH.
AROUND.
NOW. YEAH, PERFECT. OKAY? UM MR
MCCARTY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE A B 7
47. YOU MAY PROCEED, OKAY? BRING
HIM BACK. HELLO. THAT'S YOU.
OKAY, TERRORIST. TRUMP POSTURE.
ARE YOU? HE HAS BECOME PERHAPS
TÍNH. OKAY YOU MAY BEGIN, MR
PARTY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. YES THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING US TO PRESENT A B 7 47
. THIS IS A MEASURE, WHICH IS
ALSO HEARD IN THE LABOR
COMMITTEE LAST WEEK. THIS IS WE
BELIEVE A WIN FOR WORKERS AND A
WIN FOR NEW BUSINESS CREATION
ACROSS CALIFORNIA. UM THIS
BUILDING IS A SIMPLE CONCEPT
THAT NON COMPETES. AGREEMENTS IN
CALIFORNIA HURTS IN EMPLOYMENT
AND HURTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THINK ABOUT SILICON VALLEY AND
ALL THE EFFORTS THERE AND WHAT
THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD WE HAD
THESE NON COMPETES REALLY
ENFORCED THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA.
THAT'S REALLY IMPACTS, LOW WAGE
WORKERS AND JOBS, KNOWING, UM
ESPECIALLY THAT, UM, THESE
THINGS WHILE IN PRACTICE ARE NOT
ALWAYS ENFORCEABLE. THE THREAT
OF THEM HAS A PROFOUND IMPACT.
ONE IN FIVE WORKERS IS BOUND BY
A NON COMPETE CLAUSE. EVEN
PRESIDENT BIDEN AS RECENT STATE
OF THE UNION ADDRESS, MENTIONED
THE DEVASTATING IMPACT OF THESE
NON COMPETE AGREEMENTS AS AND DE
FACTO NON COMPETES. KEEP IN MIND
. THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
ECONOMISTS ESTIMATE THE NON
COMPETES LOWER WORKERS'
COLLECTIVE INCOME THEIR INCOME
BY ABOUT $250 BILLION AWAY A
YEAR. DOING AWAY WITH THESE
NATIONWIDE WILL WILL LIKELY
LOWER CONSUMER PRICES AND
HEALTHCARE AS WELL TO THE TUNE
OF 100, PLUS BILLION DOLLARS A
YEAR. THIS IS A MEASURE THAT
CREATES AN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM
FOR THESE NON COMPETE CLAUSES,
WHICH EMPLOYERS AND COUNCIL
UNFORTUNATELY CONTINUE TO USE.
THE STATE BAR IS ALSO AN
AGREEMENT THAT THESE PROVISION
SHOULD NOT BE USED. UM UH WE ARE
CERTAINLY OPEN TO WORKING WITH
ALL PARTIES AND DO ACCEPT THE
PROPOSED COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
BEFORE US TODAY AS WELL WITH ME
TODAY, A LOT, PROFESSOR FROM
LOYAL LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR JOHN
HARRIS AND REPRESENTATIVE FOR
THE CALIFORNIA NURSES
ASSOCIATION CAN TALK ABOUT THE
IMPACTS. OF DEBT THROUGH THESE
CLAUSES. THANK YOU. RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. FIRST
WITNESS. GOOD. HELLO MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS JONATHAN HARRIS AND I'M
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW AT
LMU LOYAL, A LAW SCHOOL LOS
ANGELES. N F L, A WITH THE
STUDENT BORROWER PROTECTION
CENTER. I AM TESTIFYING TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 7 47, WHICH WOULD
CREATE AN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM
TO THE WIDESPREAD IN
EXPLOITATIVE PRACTICE THAT
HAMPERS INNOVATION AND LIMITS
NEW BUSINESS CREATION THROUGH
BOTH TRADITIONAL NON COMPETES
AND DE FACTO NON COMPETES. THIS
BILL WOULD PROHIBIT THE USE OF
ALL NON COMPETE CLAUSES AND
FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT
CONTRACTS LIKE TRAINING
REPAYMENT AGREEMENT PROVISION,
ALSO KNOWN AS TRAPS. TRAPS
REQUIRE WORKERS WHO RECEIVE ON
THE JOB TRAINING TO PAY BACK THE
SO CALLED COST OF THIS TRAINING
TO THEIR EMPLOYER IF THEY LEAVE
THEIR JOB BEFORE IT FIXED PERIOD
OF TIME. THESE TERMS ARE OFTEN
IMPOSED AS A MANDATORY PRE
CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT. AND THE
COST OF THESE AGREEMENTS CAN BE
EXORBITANT IN RELATION TO THE
EARNINGS OF WORKERS MAKING
DEPARTURE IMPOSSIBLE. A B 7 47
WILL BUILD ON THE BIDEN
ADMINISTRATIONS PRO COMPETITION
AGENDA AND RECOGNIZE THAT
BUSINESSES HAVE USED PREDATORY
CONTRACTS TO WORK AROUND STATE
LEVEL BANS ON NON COMPETES. THIS
IS PARTICULARLY TRUE FOR
CALIFORNIA, WHERE TRADE GROUPS
HAVE OPENLY RECOMMENDED THAT
EMPLOYERS IN OUR STATE USED
TRAPS AS WORKAROUNDS TO
TRADITIONAL NON COMPETE
AGREEMENTS, KNOWING THAT THEY
WILL ACCOMPLISH THE SAME
OUTCOME, BUT THROUGH A MECHANISM
THAT WILL FACE FAR LESS SCRUTINY
THAN A TRADITIONAL NON COMPETE.
A B 7 47 WILL KEEP EMPLOYERS
FROM BLOCKING WORKERS FROM
PURSUING HIGHER WAGES OR BETTER
WORKING CONDITIONS WITH THE
THREAT OF DEBT. AND ESTABLISH A
CLEAR ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR
CALIFORNIA'S EXISTING
PROHIBITION ON ENFORCEMENT OF
NON COMPETE AGREEMENTS SO THAT
WORKERS CAN ENJOY THE
PROTECTIONS THEY'RE ENTITLED TO.
I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR I
VOTE ON THIS CRITICAL
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU NEXT
WITNESS. THANK YOU. CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS JOHN PASHA. I'VE BEEN A
CARDIOVASCULAR ICU NURSE FOR
OVER 12 YEARS, MANY HOSPITALS,
TRAPPED NURSES AND UNSAFE AND
UNFAIR JOBS THROUGH DEBT. IN
2018. I ACCEPTED A JOB AT A
HOSPITAL WITH THE PROMISE OF
TRAINING AND A $10,000 SIGN ON
BONUS, BUT THE HOSPITAL REQUIRED
I WORKED FOR TWO YEARS OR ELSE
PAY THEM BACK. BEFORE THE TWO
YEARS ENDED, THE PANDEMIC BEGAN
. CONDITIONS WERE DANGEROUS FOR
NURSES AND PATIENTS. AND AS YOU
KNOW, THE HOSPITALS FAILED TO
PROVIDE PPE. WE WERE SEVERELY
SHORT STAFFED. NURSES WERE
MISSING BREAKS AND THREATENED
WITH LAYOFFS. WHEN WE COMPLAINED
. LUCKILY WE FOUGHT BACK AND
TOGETHER WITH OUR UNION AS AN
EXPERIENCED NURSE, I COULD HAVE
GONE TO ANOTHER HOSPITAL WITH
BETTER CONDITIONS, BUT I FELT
TRAPPED BECAUSE THE BONUS I
NEVER RECEIVED THE PROMISED
TRAINING. AND THE BONUS FELT
LIKE A LOAN, NOT A GIFT. I ALSO
WORK WITH NEW GRADS WHO ARE
REQUIRED TO SIGN CONTRACTS FOR A
TRAINING PROGRAM AND IF THEY
QUIT OR TERMINATED FOR ANY
REASON BEFORE THE TWO YEARS,
THEY'RE FORCED TO REPAY
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR ALLEGED
COSTS OF TRAINING. MY HOSPITAL
ENTICES NEW GRADS INTO THIS DEBT
WITH THE PROMISE OF TRAINING.
BUT IT'S A BAIT AND SWITCH.
INSTEAD OF GETTING SIX MONTHS OF
TRAINING THAT'S REQUIRED OF ANY
NEW HIRE ON SPECIALTY UNITS LIKE
MINE TO SAFELY CARE FOR
DEFINITELY SICK PATIENTS. THESE
NEW GRADS ARE GIVEN FULL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PATIENTS JUST
AFTER 6 TO 8 WEEKS. THE NEW
GRADS ARE SCARED OF LOSING THEIR
LICENSES BECAUSE THEY'RE SO
UNPREPARED AND PATIENT CARE
CONDITIONS ARE SO UNSAFE, BUT
THE HOSPITAL USES THE THREAT OF
REPAYMENT TO FORCE THEM TO KEEP
WORKING. THESE DEBT CONTRACTS,
HANDCUFFS TO EMPLOYERS THAT
EXPLOIT OUR CALLING AS NURSES TO
CARE FOR OTHERS WITH THE THREAT
OF DEBT HANGING OVER US WERE
SILENCED FROM SPEAKING OUT ABOUT
UNSAFE WORKING CONDITIONS AND
UNSAFE PATIENT CARE. WE URGE YOU
TO PASS A B 7 47 SO THAT THE
EMPLOYERS CANNOT TRAP NURSES AND
OTHER WORKERS IN JOBS UNDER THE
WEIGHT OF A DEBT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY PLEASE. THANK YOU. MARIKO
YOSHIDA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS,
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT THANK
YOU. MEGHAN ABLE ON BEHALF OF
TECH EQUITY, COLLABORATIVE AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. BRIAN
KARACHI OPEN MARKETS INSTITUTE
IN STRONG SUPPORT. MITCH STEIGER
, WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION, ALSO IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES. OKAY ANY OTHER SCENE
? NO FURTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT, WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SPONSORS A LITTLE
BIT. FISH. MR CHAIR. GOOD
MORNING, CHRIS MAKELELE ON
BEHALF OF THE HOLLYWOOD CHAMBER
AND ALSO ON BEHALF OF MY
COLLEAGUE ASHLEIGH HOFFMAN AT
CAL CHAMBER, UNFORTUNATELY,
STUCK ACROSS THE WAY IN SENATE
JUDICIARY, APOLOGIES TO HAVING
MY BACK TO MEMBERS AND MR
SPEAKER DESIGNATE, WE HAVE THREE
MAIN ISSUES IN OPPOSITION TO A B
7 47. UH THE FIRST ACTUALLY IS
NON COMPETES, HAVE BEEN
GENERALLY UNENFORCEABLE IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR YEARS.
AND SO WE HAVE REAL NOTE REALLY
? NO ISSUE OR DISPUTE WITH THAT,
AND IT SHOULD BE CODIFIED. THE
MAIN ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS THE
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM ON PAGE
SEVEN AND SECTION FIVE OF THE
BILL. IT IMPOSES A $5000 PER
EMPLOYEE PENALTY. WHICH IS
MANDATORY. THERE'S NO DISCRETION
PROVIDED TO A JUDGE. IT'S
APPLICABLE TO ALL TYPES OF
BUSINESSES ACROSS THE BOARD, SO
IT'S BASICALLY A MINIMUM
STATUTORY PENALTY FOR VIOLATION
OF THIS NEW PROVISION. IN
ADDITION, YOU HAVE NEW LABOR
CODE SECTION 9 25, WHICH IS ON
PAGE NINE IN SECTION SEVEN OF
THE BILL, AND HERE THERE ARE TWO
ITEMS FIRST. IT PROVIDES A NEW
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AND
SECONDARILY BECAUSE IT'S AN
ADDITION TO THE LABOR CODE. IT
IS SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT
THROUGH THE PRIVATE ATTORNEYS
GENERAL ACT, BAGA. THE WE THINK
THAT THOSE THREE ITEMS OR
EXCESSIVE, UH, AND THOSE STRONG
ENFORCEMENT PENALTIES I THINK
ARE PARTICULARLY PROBLEMATIC FOR
SMALL EMPLOYERS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, THE THIRD AND FINAL
PIECES ON THE DEBT PIECE OF THIS
BILL. THERE ARE TWO MAIN
PROVISIONS, OF COURSE. UH THIS
SECOND DEBT PIECE IS, TO THE
EXTENT THAT EMPLOYER AND
EMPLOYER MANDATES TRAINING FOR
EMPLOYEES. LABOR CODE SECTION 28
OH, TWO ALREADY REQUIRES PAYMENT
OR REIMBURSEMENT BY THE EMPLOYER
IN DOING SO, YOUR COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS ON PAGE EIGHT. I THINK
SAYS THAT THE BILL WOULD HAVE
THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF
APPLYING TO VOLUNTARY BENEFITS
SUCH AS HIRING BONUSES OR
EDUCATIONAL TUITION ASSISTANCE.
AND WE THINK THAT UNFORTUNATELY
, THIS PROVISION WILL HAVE THE
OPPOSITE EFFECT THAT IS,
EMPLOYERS WILL BE PROVIDED A
DISINCENTIVE TO PROVIDE THESE
TYPES OF, UH PAYMENTS OR
REIMBURSEMENTS TO THEIR
EMPLOYEES. AND SO FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE ARE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO A B 7 47. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR FOR THE ADDITIONAL
MOMENTS. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR, EDUARDO MARTINEZ
ON THE HELP OF ULTIMATE HEALTH
SERVICES. WE ARE OPPOSED TO LESS
AMENDED POSITION. WE ARE WE
OFFER A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS,
VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS TO OUR
EMPLOYEES TO ESSENTIALLY UPSCALE
. THESE PROGRAMS ARE NOT
COMPULSORY OR REQUIRED AS A
CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT. FOR
EXAMPLE, WE ALLOW A MEDICAL
ASSISTANT TO BECOME L V N AND
THEN TO BECOME AN RN MANY OF OUR
EMPLOYEES CAN AFFORD TO PAY
THESE COSTS UPFRONT. AND SO WE
FOUND A REIMBURSEMENT TYPE
APPROACH DOESN'T NECESSARILY
WORK FOR OUR FOR OUR EMPLOYEES,
SO WE'RE HAPPY TO KEEP WORKING
WITH THE AUTHOR AND SPONSORS ON
A SOLUTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES? AND
OPPOSITION NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY PLACE SERENA LOCKHART ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ATTRACTIONS AND PARKS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. DEAN TAYLOR WITH THE
CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. GOOD
MORNING. GOOD MORNING, NICK
CHAPPY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION
AND OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THEN
HAVING COME BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF FOOD
PRODUCERS AND OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. OR GREAT. GLAD SHE NUMBER
HALF OF CALIFORNIA RETAILERS
ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION SEEN
NONE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE. MR KALRA. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN. A THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD
BECAUSE WE DID GIVE THIS A LABOR
COMMITTEE AS WELL. AND I THINK
THIS IS LONG OVERDUE. I KNOW
THAT THE NURSES IN PARTICULAR
HAVE BEEN FRUSTRATED WHEN THERE
HAS BEEN TRAININGS THAT HAVE
BEEN MANDATORY OR COSTS. THAT
WHEN, UM PARTICULAR EMPLOYEES
TRY TO LEAVE THEY GET SADDLED
WITH WITHOUT THAT WITHOUT THAT
FOR KNOWLEDGE THAT, UM, SO
THEY'LL BE HELD TO PAY BACK,
ESPECIALLY AS RETRAINING. BUT
REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE WHAT IT'S
FOR. OF US OR BONUS. WHAT HAVE
YOU THE REALITY IS THAT A LOT OF
WORKERS ARE ENTICED INTO
EMPLOYMENT, BUT THOSE TYPES OF
BENEFITS AND THEN BUT YOU DON'T
WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN AS SOMEONE
TRAPPED IN A POSITION OF
EMPLOYMENT. UM FOR WHO KNOWS HOW
LONG BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO REPAY.
BUT. BUT WE'RE NEVER KIND OF PUT
FORWARD AS AS DEBTS. AS STATED
APPROPRIATELY AND THE ANALYSIS
IF IT'S ALONE, THAT'S SOMETHING
DIFFERENT. IF YOU SAY IF IT'S UP
FRONT HEY, YOU KNOW WE'RE GONNA
WE'RE GONNA FRONT YOU SOME MONEY
FOR YOU GOT TO GO TO SCHOOL AS
ALONE. PS BACK A FANTASTIC. THIS
IS GOING TO HELP ME GET MY
DEGREE. HELP ME ADVANCE IN MY
CAREER, WHETHER I STAY HERE AND
GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS THERE THAT IS
BEING TREATED AS SUCH. BUT I
THINK IT'S THE OTHER TYPES OF
ENTICEMENTS THAT ARE USED AT END
UP TRAPPING EMPLOYEES IN THESE
POSITIONS, AND THAT'S GOING TO
END. AND FOR THOSE REASONS I
SUPPORT THE BILL. BE HAPPY TO
MOVE. THE BILL WILL BE ADDED ON
AS A CO AUTHOR OF EMOTION FROM
MR KARA. SECOND FROM HIS NO. DO
YOU HAVE A SECOND? SECOND FROM
ISRAEL'S MISS PACHECO. SO I
ACTUALLY HAVE SOME CONCERNS
ABOUT THIS BILL, SO MY MOM IS A
NURSE. SHE WORKED AT THE USC
MEDICAL CENTER, AND THERE WAS AN
INCENTIVE FOR HER TO CONTINUE
WITH HER EDUCATION. IT WAS
BECAUSE OF THE ALLOWED HER TO
CONTINUE WITH HER EDUCATION AND
BECAUSE THE COUNTY WAS WILLING
TO PAY FOR EDUCATION, SHE WAS
ABLE TO GO TO CAL CRLA. SO SHE
WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN HER BASTARDS
AND EVENTUALLY OBTAINED HER
MASTERS. AND IF IT WASN'T FOR
THIS INCENTIVE, SHE WOULDN'T
HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET HER HER
MASSIVE MASTERS IN NURSING
ADMINISTRATION. SO MY CONCERN IS
THIS WOULD BE, UM, THERE WOULD
THERE WOULDN'T BE AN INCENTIVE
FOR HOSPITALS OR, UH, EMPLOYERS
TO PROVIDE THESE TYPES OF
PROGRAMS. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S
MY BIG CONCERN, BECAUSE AGAIN
THERE WAS BECAUSE OF THAT SHE
OBTAINED HER MASTERS. AND I
DON'T KNOW IF THE AUTHOR HAS
ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT MR AND
MAYBE I CAN JUST ADDRESS THAT
MAYBE SOME BLANKET TO THE OTHER
ISSUES SO THAT THAT MAY BE A
HYPOTHETICAL THAT ARE PROFESSOR
CAN ADDRESS THAT. IT'S NOT
EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT
HERE. BUT THE BIG PICTURE ISSUES
AS FAR AS THE ENFORCEMENT OF
$5000 FOR EMPLOYEE PER INCIDENT,
WE TOOK THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT.
WHICH MAKES THAT NOT AN
AUTOMATIC, BUT THE JUDGE, MAY
YOU KNOW A WARRANT THAT BASED
UPON THE ACTUAL SITUATION, AND
THEN UM, WITH THE, UH, WITH WITH
WITH THE DEBT AND SOME OF THE
OTHER ISSUES, I THINK THIS
HYPOTHETICAL ALLOW US TO DIG
INTO THAT ISSUE RIGHT HERE. YEAH
JUST TO CONTEXTUALIZE THIS TO
EMPLOYERS, OFTEN. TOOK ON THE
COST OF JOB TRAINING ON THE JOB
TRAINING IS JUST THE COST OF
DOING BUSINESS AT MY OWN LAW,
SCHOOL OIL OR LAW SCHOOL FOR
MANY, MANY DECADES, EMPLOYERS
WOULD SEND THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES
PART TIME TO OUR LAW SCHOOL. UH
AND PAY FOR IT WITH NO TRAP
ATTACHED. NO REPAYMENT
OBLIGATION. SO UM, THIS IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT HASN'T HAPPENED
BEFORE. I WILL ALSO SAY,
SPECIFICALLY MEMBER PROTECT CODE
TO YOUR QUESTION. UM MY
UNDERSTANDING IS A LITTLE
DIFFERENT. WHAT YOU'RE
DESCRIBING THE SENSE THAT UM,
IT'S A LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM
IS A WAY OF FORGIVING LOANS SORT
OF, LIKE PUBLIC SERVICE LOAN
FORGIVENESS, UM, TRAPPED. ON THE
OTHER HAND, UH, CREATE THAT
LOANS. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR
GIVES THAT TRAPS CREATE DEBT ON
THE FRONT END. UM, AND THAT'S I
THINK WHAT THIS BILL IS REALLY
AIMING AT TRYING TO GET UH, MR
SALLY'S NEXT AND THEN MS DIXON.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. QUOTE. SO
JUST SO I UNDERSTAND. AND WHEN I
STARTED LAW FIRM, THEY DID
SOMETHING SIMILAR. THEY GAVE US
AN UPFRONT BONUS. LET'S SAY
10,000. AND IF YOU WORK THERE AT
LEAST A YEAR, THEN YOU DON'T
HAVE TO PAY IT BACK. BUT IF YOU
LEAVE BEFORE THE YEAR, YOU HAVE
TO PAY IT BACK. SO WOULD THAT BE
ILLEGAL UNDER THIS? THIS BILL?
UM SO I YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
LIKE A SIGNING BONUS. YES YEAH,
OR RELOCATION BONUS. THINGS LIKE
IT'S JUST IT'S A BONUS. WE IT'S
A WAY TO ATTRACT EMPLOYERS. HIGH
QUALITY EMPLOYEES. UM, ONE OF
THE VERY DIFFICULT JOB MARKET.
IT'S VERY HARD TO GET GOOD
TALENT AND TO KEEP THEM SO IF AN
EMPLOYER WANTS TO INCENTIVIZE
COME WORK FOR ME. HERE'S A
$10,000 UPFRONT BONUS. BUT YOU
GOTTA AT LEAST STAY HERE YEAR SO
I CAN RECOUP THE MONEY. AND IF
NOT, THEN YOU HAVE TO PAY IT
BACK. SO WOULD THAT BE ILLEGAL?
YEAH. SO LET ME AGAIN JUST
CONTEXTUALIZE THIS BY SAYING
THIS IS ABOUT EMPLOYERS SHIFTING
COSTS ONTO WORKERS THAT THAT
DIDN'T NORMALLY HAPPENED IN THE
PAST. SO WHETHER IT'S WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT PROBLEMS HERE THAT
WE'VE SEEN ON THE GROUND. WE'VE
HAD OUR OUR NURSE HERE. IT'S
JUSTIFIED TO WHAT'S HAPPENING
WAYS IN WHICH THESE TRAPS ARE
USED TO KEEP WORKERS. LOCKED IN
THERE. WE HAVE LIMITED TIME. I
APOLOGIZE FOR CUTTING YOU OFF.
BUT CAN YOU JUST ANSWER MY
QUESTION WITH THAT SCENARIO BE
ILLEGAL UNDER THE STATUTE. NO
EMPLOYER BE ABLE. SO WHAT YOU'RE
EXPLAINING AGAIN, IT'S A
SITUATION OF FORGIVENESS OF THE
LOAN VERSUS REPAYMENT OF A DEBT.
AND SO THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT
THIS IS ABOUT, UH, KEEPING
WORKERS FROM BEING UNABLE TO
AFFORD TO LEAVE THE DESCRIPTION
. THINK YOU'RE DESCRIBING. IF
YOU'RE IN WORKING IN A LAW FIRM
, YOU CAN PROBABLY AFFORD TO
HAVE A NEW LAW FIRM THAT YOU
WORK FOR A COVER THAT REPAYMENT.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT HERE. THESE ARE MIDDLE
WAGE IS YES, IT'S ILLEGAL, SO I
YOU KNOW, HAVE A PROBLEM WITH
THAT BECAUSE I THINK EMPLOYERS
SHOULD BE ABLE TO INCENTIVIZE
GOOD TALENT. AND SO YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT NURSES. I'VE
TALKED A LOT OF HOSPITALS. MY
SISTER WORKS AT HOSPITALS. THERE
ARE NURSES OF USING THE SYSTEM
RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY CAN GO
BECOME A TRAVEL NURSE AND GET
PAID TRIPLE. THEN WHAT A REGULAR
NURSE AND IT'S DESTROYING MORALE
AT THE HOSPITALS. IT'S TOTALLY
DESTABILIZING OF LOMA LINDA
HOSPITAL. MY REGION THEY'RE ON
THE VERGE OF THERE'S A LOT OF
HOSPITALS ON THE VERGE OF
BANKRUPTCY. UM AND THERE'S A LOT
OF IT COMES TO LABOR COSTS, AND
THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ATTRACT
AND KEEP GOOD TALENT AND NOT GO
BANKRUPT. AND SO I WORRY ABOUT
THAT. SO FOR THAT I CAN'T
RESPECTFULLY. I CAN'T SUPPORT
THIS, BUT I DO IF YOU COULD WORK
OUT A WAY TO ALLOW, MAYBE JUST
REALLY CLEAR DISCLOSURES. SO
THAT WAY NOBODY UNWILLINGLY OR
UNKNOWINGLY GETS INTO THIS, BUT
THERE'S CLEAR DISCLOSURE. I
THINK LIMITS LIKE I THINK A YEAR
IS A REASONABLE LIMIT FOR A
BONUS, UM, TO KEEP IT, SO I
AGREE WITH REASONABLE
RESTRICTIONS. I JUST I'M AGAINST
A COMPLETE BAR. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. THANK YOU, MS DICKSON.
THANK YOU. CHAIR LET ME CLARIFY
, UM, THAT'S IN THE LEGAL WORLD
IN THE BUSINESS WORLD.
OFTENTIMES COMPANIES DO THE SAME
TYPE OF THING. THERE'S A
COMPETITIVE JOB MARKET. YOU WANT
THE BEST PEOPLE AND SO YOU'LL
PAY A RETAINING BONUS TO HAVE
SOMEONE COME ON, AND THAT'S
SIMPLY A BONUS AND THEY AND
USUALLY THERE'S A CONTRACT
INVOLVED. THAT THE EMPLOYEE
UNDER ALL THESE TERMS OF
EMPLOYMENT, ONE OF THE LINES,
THE TERMS WILL BE THAT YOU'VE
RECEIVING THIS BONUS AND YOU
WILL COMMIT TO WORKING X NUMBER
OF MONTHS OR YEARS. AH ALSO,
THERE'S A CERTAIN TRAINING
OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE COMPANY
IS INVESTING IN THESE NEW
EMPLOYEES. SO THE COST OF DOING
BUSINESS TRAINING EMPLOYEES AND
THERE'S A AND THAT SHOULD BE
ANOTHER TERM OF THE HIRING
PROCESS. THAT EMPLOYEE AGREES
THAT THE COMPANY IS GOING TO
INVEST $10,000 OR $25,000. IN
HELPING THE EMPLOYEE. THE NEW
EMPLOYEE DEVELOP SKILLS TO
ADVANCE THEIR CAREER. UM AND FM
AND THERE'S THE TERM IS THAT THE
THIS IS A GIFT TO THE EMPLOYEE.
IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE EMPLOYEE
PROVIDED YOU COMMIT TO WORKING
FOR THE COMPANY FOR THIS
EMPLOYER. WHATEVER THE TERM OF
THE AGREEMENT IS SO IF THE NEW
EMPLOYEE ACCEPTS THAT TERM OF
WORKING EMPLOYMENT GETS A
RETENTION BONUS OR THE TRAINING
BONUS AND LEAVES BEFORE, SO I'M
TRYING TO CLARIFY IS THAT WHAT
YOU SAY WOULD BE ILLEGAL IF THEY
LEAVE BEFORE THEY AGREED TO UPON
TERM OF THEIR SERVICE TO HAVE
CREATED VALUE FOR THEIR TRAINING
AND FOR THE EMPLOYER, YOU'RE
SAYING THAT'S ILLEGAL. UH AS
YEAH, UNDER THIS BILL, THAT
WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL
IN IT AGAIN. IT'S ABOUT NOT
KEEPING WORKERS FEELING LIKE
THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO LEAVE.
EMPLOYERS ARE STARTING TO USE
THESE KINDS OF ARRANGEMENTS TO
GET AROUND OUR STATES ON
ENFORCEMENT OF TRADITIONAL NON
COMPETE AGREEMENTS. WE'VE SEEN
EXAMPLES OF THAT OF OPENLY
PUBLICIZING, UM TO MEMBER TRADE
GROUPS TO THEIR MEMBERS. ON HOW
TO USE THINGS LIKE TRAPS TO
AVOID CALIFORNIA'S REFUSAL TO
ENFORCE NON COMPETE AGREEMENTS.
SO THIS IS ONE OF MANY WAYS THAT
WE'RE SEEING OF WAYS TO GET
AROUND THIS AND I THINK THAT'S
THE SPIRIT OF WHY THIS BILL IS
BEFORE YOU. OKAY THANK YOU. HOLD
ON. THANK YOU. THERE'S NO
QUESTION, PENNY. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? MS
PAPIN. HAVE A QUESTION AND I
APOLOGIZE WITH THIS CAME UP IS
THERE UM IS THIS ONLY HAVE YOU
CONSIDERED ONLY MAKING THIS
PROSPECTIVE AS OPPOSED TO AND
INVALIDATING RETROACTIVELY ALL
CONTRACTS THAT EXIST OUT THERE?
THAT'S NUMBER ONE TO ANSWER TO
THAT. I HAVE NOT BEFORE THREE
SECONDS AGO, SO YOU WILL TAKE
THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT IS
THAT IT'S AN APPROACH THAT
POTENTIALLY LOOK AT. THANK YOU.
UM AND THEN I GOT ONE MORE. UM
UH, SO IS THERE SOME CONCERN
THAT THIS MIGHT DISINCENTIVIZE
EMPLOYERS? FROM FROM PROVIDING
SUCH BENEFITS, BECAUSE, UM THEY
DON'T EVER REALLY REAP THE
BENEFIT THEMSELVES FROM TRAINING
AND EMPLOYEE. UM YOU KNOW, THIS
IS A VERY INFLUX JOB MARKET IN
CALIFORNIA AND NOT TO MENTION
WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. INFLUX
YEAH, OKAY. JUST DIDN'T HEAR
YOU. SORRY. UM SO YOU KNOW,
EMPLOYERS HAVE TO BE EXTREMELY
CREATIVE. UM BUT, YOU KNOW,
ENTICING PEOPLE FOR EMPLOYMENT
WITH YOUR NO LESS THAN 4%
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS A KEY ISSUE
, BUT BUT TRAPPING PEOPLE THERE
IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE THINK
IS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY AS A
WHOLE, YOU KNOW, KEEPING PEOPLE
PLACES WHERE THEY DON'T
NECESSARILY WANT TO BE IN AN
EMPLOYMENT. UM BUT THIS IS
CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT IS A
THAT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT AND
LOOKING AT OTHER OPTIONS AS WELL
AS WE MOVE ALONG LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS. ANY OTHER ONE MORE IF,
UM, AND WHAT ABOUT THIS IDEA
THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE? YOU KNOW,
LIKE LIMITING THIS TO THE
RECEIPT OF, UM EDUCATIONAL
BENEFITS THAT JUST DON'T APPLY
TO THE JOB ITSELF. HAVE YOU
THOUGHT ABOUT THAT? SURE AGAIN
WITH THINGS LIKE PUBLIC SERVICE
LOAN FORGIVENESS THAT IS
FORGIVENESS OF LOANS WHEN THE
TUITION HAS BEEN PAID UPFRONT.
UM THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE
CREATION OF THAT, LIKE A LIKE A
TRAP, AND SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S
A DIFFERENT SITUATION. THAT
CERTAINLY I MEAN, I DON'T WANT
TO SPEAK FOR YOU
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BUT YOU WOULD
NOT WANT TO, UM, YOU KNOW,
PRECLUDE EMPLOYERS FROM UM,
HELPING TO REIMBURSE WORKERS FOR
TRAINING THAT WOULD HELP THEM
EXCEED. UM IN THEIR CAREER PATHS
WITH THINGS LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW,
A DEGREE, A BACHELOR'S IN
NURSING OR SO FORTH FROM AN
ACCREDITED UNIVERSITY OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S NOT
WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE, AND
THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THIS THIS
BILL IS TALKING ABOUT. OKAY
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? UH TWO, OKAY. ANY
SECOND. WE HAVE WE HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND, MR MCCARTY. I
THINK OF RIGHT BEFORE I LET YOU
CLOSE. THERE'S BEEN SOME
APPRECIATE THAT THE DIALOGUE
YOU'VE HAD WITH COMMITTEES
CERTAINLY BEEN SOME SUGGESTIONS.
MAYBE AN ANALYSIS. I THINK
YOU'RE HEARING THAT TONE AND
TENOR OF SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.
SO MAYBE AS YOU MOVE FORWARD,
YOU MAY ADDRESS THIS IN A CLOSE,
BUT MAYBE AS YOU MOVE FORWARD,
YOU'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON SOME
OF THESE ISSUES SO IT DOESN'T
HAVE SOME OF THE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES THAT MAY HAVE
ARISED TO SORT OF BEING RAISED.
HERE BY A GROUP OF LAWYERS. UH
SO, UH, WITH THAT, MR MCCARTY,
I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL. BUT
I LIKE TO ASK YOU TO CLOSE.
YEAH, YOU KNOW, UM, PROBABLY 50
FT AWAY IN OUR EDUCATION
COMMITTEE OVER HERE. THERE ARE
SIMILAR TO THE WEEK FOCUSED ON
LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR PEOPLE WHO
WORK IN EDUCATION IN SCHOOL
DISTRICTS AND EARLY EDUCATION.
THERE'S A LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR
NURSES THAT PROGRAM AS WELL. AND
SO YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THE CONCEPT
OF THESE FOR EDUCATION. BUT WE
ALSO KNOW THE FLIP SIDE WHEN
THEY FOCUS ON NOT PEOPLE IN LAW
FIRMS, NOT FRANKLY, PEOPLE IN
PUBLIC HOSPITALS, EXTREMELY LOW
WAGE WORKERS AND THIS IS WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT. BUT
THAT BEING SAID, UM, WE THINK
THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN WORK
WITH THE OPPOSITION AND CLARIFY
AND WE HAD A GOOD SUGGESTION
HERE BY REMEMBER FROM THE
PENINSULA AND WE WILL TAKE THOSE
GOING FORWARD AND RESPECTFULLY
ASK YOUR I VOTE. IS IT THE
PENINSULA'S I SAY, RIGHT? OKAY
GOOD. THE UH THE MOTIONS DO
PASSES MANAGE THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. WE HAVE EMOTIONAL
SECOND S CLERK. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
SALI SALI NO, CONNOLLY. DIXON.
HANEY. CHOLERA CHOLERA I PACHECO
HAPPEN AND I REYES RAISE I RIVAS
RIVERS, I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ, NO.
YOUR BILL IS ON CALL. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR GABRIEL.
MR GABRIEL IS PRESENTING A B 13
. OH, FIVE. EVERYBODY LEFT. YEAH
HOPEFULLY, THAT'S NOT COMMENTARY
ON YOUR BILL. BUT YOU MAY
PROCEED, MR GABRIEL OR ON ME
PERSONALLY. LIVING. YEAH, RIGHT
THERE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I AM PLEASED TODAY TO
PRESENT A B 13 OH, FIVE, WHICH
WERE ESTABLISHED FIRST IN THE
NATION TRANSPARENCY STANDARDS
FOR THE VOLUNTARY CARBON OFFSET
INDUSTRY CONCEPT OFFSET CREDITS
REPRESENT A REDUCTION IN CARBON
EMISSIONS TO INVESTMENTS AND
PROJECTS THAT REDUCE SEQUESTER
OR PREVENT THE RELEASE OF CARBON
EMISSIONS. UNFORTUNATELY THIS
HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE IN
PRACTICE, AND RECENT REPORTS
HAVE SHOWN THAT MANY OFFSETS
FAILED TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCTION
IN CARBON EMISSIONS, CLAIMED A
RECENT REPORT BY THE GUARDIAN
FUND THAT OVER 90% OF OFFSET
CREDITS RELATED TO RAINFOREST
PRESERVATION IN ONE OF THE
LARGEST PROJECT REGISTRIES DID
NOT REPRESENT A MEANINGFUL
REDUCTION IN CARBON EMISSIONS.
CURRENTLY THERE EXISTS NO
GOVERNMENTAL STANDARDS OR
REGULATIONS FOR VOLUNTARY
OFFSETS, LEAVING CONSUMERS WITH
LITTLE CONFIDENCE THAT WHAT THEY
ARE PURCHASING IS ACTUALLY
LEGITIMATE. 13 OH, FIVE, SEEKS
TO ADDRESS THE WILD WEST AND THE
UNREGULATED MARKETPLACE BY
REQUIRING DISCLOSURE OF CRITICAL
INFORMATION, INCLUDING WHERE
THESE OFFSET PROJECTS ARE
LOCATED, AND THE DATA AND
METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE
THE AMOUNT OF CARBON THAT HAS
BEEN OFFSET FOR BUSINESSES THAT
PURCHASE THESE CREDIT AND MAKES
CLAIMS REGARDING EMISSION
REDUCTIONS. MAYBE 13. OH, FIVE,
WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO DISCLOSE
THE DETAILS REGARDING THE
CREDITS PURCHASED AND HOW THE
CLAIM IS ACHIEVED. THESE
DISCLOSURES WERE NOT ONLY GIVE
CONSUMERS THE ABILITY TO COMPARE
THESE CREDITS TO DECIDE WHICH
ARE THE MOST IMPACTFUL BUT ALSO
GIVE OUR RESEARCHERS THE TOOLS
NEEDED TO FURTHER EVALUATE THESE
PRODUCTS AND SEE WHICH PROJECT
TYPES OF PRACTICES REPRESENT
LEGITIMATE OFFSETTING OF CARBON
REDUCTIONS WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT OF THE BILL
IS BARBARA HIATT, DIRECTOR OF
THE BERKELEY CARBON TRADING
PROJECT. THANK YOU AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED MY VOTE.
THANK YOU. FIRST WITNESS. UH HI
. UM THIS IS I'M PART, DR
BARBARA HYAH, DIRECTOR OF THE
BERKELEY CARBON TRADING PROJECT
AT UC BERKELEY, AND I'VE STUDIED
CARBON OFFSET QUALITY FOR 20
YEARS. AND OVER THE WHOLE TWO
DECADES THAT HAVE BEEN STUDYING
THESE PROGRAMS, QUALITY HAS BEEN
EXCEPTIONALLY POOR. FOR EXAMPLE,
WE JUST CAME OUT WITH A STUDY
FOCUSED ON COOK STOVES OF SET.
PROJECTS UM, AND ESTIMATE THAT
ACROSS THIS POOL OF PROJECTS, UM
THEY'RE GENERATING SEVEN TIMES
MORE CREDITS THAN THEY SHOULD.
THAT IS ONLY ONE IN SEVEN
CREDITS REPRESENT REAL
ADDITIONAL EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS.
UM AND THESE LEVELS OF OVER
CREDITING OR NOT UNCOMMON, THE
VOLUNTARY OFFSET MARKET IT'S
CREATED MAINLY BY FOUR PRIVATE,
UNREGULATED CARBON OFFSET
REGISTRIES. THESE REGISTRIES
DECIDE WHAT PROJECT TYPES ARE
ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE. THEY
ADOPT METHODS FOR MONITORING,
CALCULATING AND VERIFYING
CLIMATE BENEFITS. THEY ISSUE
CREDITS AND THEY KEEP TRACK OF
WHO OWNS THOSE CREDITS AND WHO
RETIRES THEM. OFFSET QUALITY
MATTERS BECAUSE THOSE CREDITS
ARE THEN BOUGHT BY COMPANIES
THAT MAKE CLIMATE. UH CLAIMS
THEY CAN CLAIM CARBON NEUTRALITY
THEY CAN CLAIM TO SELL CARBON
NEUTRAL PRODUCTS, UM, AND THEY
CAN BUY THESE CREDITS IN PLACE
OF DIRECTLY REDUCING THEIR OWN
EMISSIONS. QUALITY IS DIFFICULT
TO REGULATE. THESE PROGRAMS WORK
WITH CARBON CALCULATIONS THAT
ARE INTENSELY COMPLEX AND OFTEN
VERY UNCERTAIN. BUT IT'S EASY TO
REGULATE DISCLOSURE. THE
REGISTRIES HAVE ALL OF THE
DOCUMENTS THAT THEY NEED TO
REPRODUCE, UM AND ASSESS THE
CREDIT CALCULATIONS. THEY JUST
DON'T MAKE THEM PUBLIC. UM AND
WITH DISCLOSURE, RESEARCHERS CAN
STUDY THE QUALITY AND BUYERS CAN
DO DUE DILIGENCE ON WHAT THEY
BUY. AND I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT AND EASY
STEPS THE GOVERNMENT CAN TAKE TO
REGULATE THE VOLUNTARY OFFSET
MARKET IS REQUIRING DISCLOSURE
THAT ALLOWS BUYERS TO KNOW WHAT
THEY'RE BUYING IN THIS MOST
IMPORTANT OF MARKETS. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
SEEN NONE. WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. MR CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS PAUL DEAR OH,
REPRESENTING WESTERN STATES
PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION. WE WE
DON'T HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL
OPPOSITION TO TRANSPARENCY AND
WHAT THE BILL IS ATTEMPTING TO
DO WE UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM. UM
WE BASICALLY BELIEVE THAT A
BUSINESS ENTITY WHO IS
INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING A
PROJECT TO GENERATE GENERATE
VOLUNTARY CARBON CREDIT. MUST
FOLLOW PROTOCOLS DEVELOPED BY
THE EXISTING CARBON REGISTRIES
SUCH AS THE AMERICAN CARBON
RIGHT REGISTRY AND THE CLIMATE
ACTION RESERVE. PROTOCOLS
DEVELOPED BY THESE REGISTRIES
ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT IS
DELIVERING CARBON REDUCTIONS OR
REMOVAL. ONCE A PROJECT IS
VERIFIED. IT IS THEN LISTED AND
RESPECT, RESPECTIVE REGISTRY'S
WEBSITE FOR PUBLIC VIEW AND
INCLUDES ALL OF THE INFORMATION
THAT A B 13 5 IS ASKING FOR.
AGAIN WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE
TO SIT WITH DOWN WITH THE AUTHOR
AND THE SPONSOR AND PLAN ON
DOING THAT. WE BELIEVE THERE IS
A SOLUTION TO THIS. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SURE PARTY ON BEHALF
OF SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA, WHERE
SUPPORT IN CONCEPT AND LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
AUTHOR TO ENSURE THE BILL IS AS
STRONG AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU
SEEN NO OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEN AND WE HAVE A MOTION. MS
REYES MOVES, SECONDS. PACHECO MR
GABRIEL CLOSE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. I JUST WANT TO SAY WE ARE
OBVIOUSLY LOOK FORWARD TO
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
OPPOSITION. BUT ALL OF THE
INDEPENDENT FOLKS WHO HAVE
LOOKED AT THIS EXPERTS LIKE DR
HYAH, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS
HAVE FOUND THAT THERE IS REALLY
A LOT OF GREENWASHING GOING ON
IN THIS SPACE, AND WE THINK
TRANSPARENCY IS HEALTHY FOR
ANYTHING, AND THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT FIRST STEP TO MAKE
SURE THAT CONSUMERS CAN FEEL
CONFIDENT IN THE CLAIMS THAT ARE
BEING MADE BY BUSINESSES ABOUT
THE ACTIONS THAT THEY'RE TAKING
ON OUR CLIMATE EMERGENCY. SO
WITH THAT WOULD RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS. JUST TO
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. ASK
THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I.
SALI CONNOLLY DIXON. HANEY.
LARA. PACHECO PACHECO, EYE
POPPING. HAPPEN I RAISE RAISE I
REVERSE SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ KNOW
YOUR BILL IS ON CALL. THANK YOU,
MISS WICKS. PLAYING HOCKEY.
OKAY? YOU CAN HAVE A PRICK. OH,
IF YOU WANT. WHAT DO YOU THINK?
YES OKAY. THIS WICKS THINK MISS
BARRACK CANS, MAYBE SLIGHTLY
MORE COMPLICATED, SO OKAY.
HOPEFULLY, WE CAN GET THROUGH
THIS WEEK'S QUICKLY. I ONLY DO
THE SIMPLE BILLS. YEAH I KNOW.
YEAH EXPERIENCE TELLS ME THAT
EVERY TIME YOU WALK UP TO ME, I
HAVE A SIMPLE BILL. I KNOW IT'S
GOING TO NEED YOUR I VOTE
MAIENSCHEIN. DON'T WORRY. OKAY.
THANK YOU, MISS WICKS. MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR
TAKING THE TIME TODAY AND THANKS
FOR YOUR STAFF ON THIS BILL.
MAYBE 14 65 TACKLES THE PROBLEM
THAT PLAGUES CALIFORNIA
NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOODS WITH
OIL REFINERIES IN THEIR BACKYARD
AT TOO MANY OF THESE FACILITIES
. IN RECENT YEARS, THERE HAVE
BEEN SERIOUS DECLINES IN
COMPLIANCE WITH AIR QUALITY
REQUIREMENTS, COUPLED WITH
INCREASING INCREASES IN FLARING
EVENTS THAT RELEASE TOXIC AIR
CONTAMINANTS INTO COMMUNITIES.
REFINERY FLARING CAN RESULT IN
SHELTER IN PLACE NOTIFICATIONS,
SCHOOL CLOSURES AND A SURGE OF
VISITS TO HEALTHCARE FACILITIES
FOR MEDICAL CARE. IN THE BAY
AREA REFINERIES REMAIN AMONG THE
LARGEST SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION
SPECIFICALLY IN MY DISTRICT,
INCREASED FLARING EVENTS HAVE
LED TO INCIDENTS THAT NEGATIVELY
IMPACT THE HEALTH OF MY
CONSTITUENTS AND SCHOOLS IN THE
SURROUNDING AREAS. A B 14 65
TRIPLES THE CIVIL PENALTY
SEALING FOR AIR QUALITY
VIOLATIONS THAT OCCUR AT
REFINERIES IN THE DISCHARGE IN
THE IF THE DISCHARGE CONTAINS
ONE OR MORE TOXIC AIR
CONTAMINANTS. FINES ARE DESIGNED
TO ACT AS CREDIBLE DETERRENCE
AND MOST AIR QUALITY CIVIL
PENALTIES ACROSS OUR STATE ARE
IN FACT WORKING AS INTENDED, BUT
REFINERIES ARE LARGE AND THEIR
AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS ARE
POTENTIALLY FAR MORE DANGEROUS
THAN OTHER FACILITIES.
REFINERIES MUST BE HELD MORE
ACCOUNTABLE WHEN THEY POLLUTE
THE AIR. THE CONSEQUENCES FOR
AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS MUST BE
SEVERE ENOUGH TO DETER AH,
DISCHARGE BEFORE IT OCCURS SO
REFINERIES DON'T SIMPLY TREAT
FINES FOR CAUSING COMMUNITY
DISRUPTION AS AN ACCEPTABLE COST
OF DOING BUSINESS WITH ME HERE
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT IS ALAN
ABS ON BEHALF OF OUR SPONSORED
THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN CHINA AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M
ALAN ABS REPRESENTING THE BAY
AREA, AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT AND SPONSOR OF HB 14 65
. PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN REFINERY
COMMUNITIES EXPERIENCE SOME OF
THE HIGHEST CUMULATIVE HEALTH
BURDENS IN CALIFORNIA, EVEN IN
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE REFINERIES
ARE OPERATING WITHIN ALL THEIR
PERMIT CONDITIONS. UNFORTUNATELY
REFINERIES DON'T ALWAYS OPERATE
WITHIN THEIR PERMIT CONDITIONS
IN A B 14 65 PROVIDES AN
APPROPRIATE REMEDY TO TRY TO
REFOCUS REFINERIES ON OPERATING
WITHIN EXISTING AIR QUALITY
LAWS. AW IN BEING A GOOD
NEIGHBOR IN THEIR COMMUNITY. FOR
THE PAST FIVE YEARS, WE'VE SEEN
A TREND OF INCREASING VIOLATIONS
IN THE BAY AREA IN AND IN 2021.
THE AQMD ISSUED OVER 250 NOTICES
OF VIOLATION AND FOR 2022 THAT
TOTAL EXCEEDED 300. THIS
INCLUDES FLARING EVENTS, WHICH
HAVE TOTALED UP TO 70 INDIVIDUAL
INCIDENTS IN RECENT YEARS, WHICH
IS ONE IN EVERY FIVE DAYS WHERE
YOU MIGHT BE TOLD TO STAY INSIDE
YOUR CHILD MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO
GO TO SCHOOL OR YOU MIGHT HAVE
TO SEEK MEDICAL CARE BECAUSE OF
EXCESS EMISSIONS OF SOX PM AND
TAX. OTHER VIOLATIONS WE'VE SEEN
RECENTLY INCLUDED A FAILURE TO
ACCURATE ACCURATELY REPORT
EMISSIONS FOR OVER A 10 YEAR
TIME PERIOD 10 YEARS, FAILING TO
TELL THE COMMUNITY WHAT THEY
MIGHT BE EXPOSED TO AND THE
THANKSGIVING NIGHT INCIDENT THAT
EMITTED OVER 10 TONS OF HEAVY
METAL LADEN DUST OVER A TWO DAY
EVENT. BLANKETING CARS, HOMES,
YARDS AND STREETS IS THE EAST
BAY TIMES REPORTED THE COMPANY
REASSURED RESIDENTS OVER
FACEBOOK THAT THE SAND WAS
NONTOXIC, NONHAZARDOUS AND
NATURALLY OCCURRING. SPENT
CATALYSTS DUST USED IN THE
REFINING PROCESS IN IT OFFERED
FREE CAR WASHES WHAT THEY DIDN'T
ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THAT SPENT
CATALYSTS CONTAINED HEAVY METALS
AND THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T HAVE
BEEN BREATHING IT IN THE FIRST
PLACE. THE COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT LATER HAD TO WARN THE
COMMUNITY ABOUT HEAVY METALS IN
THE SOIL AND DISCOURAGED PEOPLE
TO EAT FOOD GROWN IN THEIR
GARDENS. AS THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS ACKNOWLEDGES, AND IT
AND IT REALLY IS A GOOD
ANALYSIS. IN MANY CASES,
REFINERY VIOLATIONS ARE LIKELY
TO BE SETTLED UNDER STRICT
LIABILITY PROVISIONS, AND THE
PENALTY CEILING WAS $10,000 IN
2000 AND HIS ONLY RAISED
SLIGHTLY WITH INFLATION. WITH
THAT. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME,
AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. YOU PICKED UP ON THE NOT
SO SUBTLE CUES ON THAT. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEING NON WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. MHM.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBER ZACHARY WITH THE WESTERN
STATES PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION,
WHICH WE RESPECTFULLY HAVE A
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED POSITION
ON A B 14 65. AH! WELL THIS BILL
IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE THE
AUTHOR CARRIED LAST YEAR. A B 18
97. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCES. UH, MAYBE 14 65,
UNFORTUNATELY, CREATES A NEW
PRECEDENT AND CODE BY TREATING
IDENTICAL AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS
SIMPLY BASED ON FACILITY TYPE
DIFFERENTLY. UM WE BELIEVE THAT
THE BEST APPROACH WOULD BE TO
THE CURRENT STRUCTURE AND IN LAW
AND SHOULD APPLY AS IT DOES
TODAY TO ALL FACILITIES. AH IN
ADDITION, I THINK YOU KNOW LAST
YEAR'S BILL 18 97 TRIPLED THE
PENALTY OF ONE UH, CODE SECTION.
THIS BILL TAKES SIX CODE
SECTIONS FROM EXISTING LAW THAT
ALREADY HAVE PROGRESSIVELY
INCREASING LEVELS OF PENALTIES
AND TRIPLES, ALL OF THEM WITHOUT
. AN EVENT OR RATIONALE THAT
WOULD JUSTIFY THE INCREASE IN
PENALTIES. SO WE ARE
RECOMMENDING TO TWO AMENDMENTS.
UM THE FIRST WOULD BE TO TREAT
ALL AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS
EQUALLY, REGARDLESS OF FACILITY
TYPE. AND THEN THE SECOND WOULD
BE THAT THE. THAT IS KIND OF
SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS IN 18 97
LAST YEAR THAT DID PASS THIS
COMMITTEE. WHICH IS IN ORDER FOR
THE PENALTIES TO BE TRIPLED. THE
DISCHARGE WOULD HAVE TO RESULT
IN RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT,
SHELTER IN PLACE, EVACUATION OR
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY SIMILAR
TO WHAT WAS IN THE BILL LAST
YEAR THAT THESE AMENDMENTS WERE
OPPOSED MUSLIM ENDED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SEEN NONE TURN IT TO
THE COMMITTEE QUESTIONS.
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE. MS
PACHECO QUESTION HAVE HAVE BOTH
OF YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK. IT SEEMS LIKE THE
OPPOSITION HAS SOME CONCERNS AND
SOME AMENDMENTS ALREADY. YEAH WE
WE'VE WE'VE SPOKE. WE'VE SPOKE
LAST YEAR TO THIS IS OUR SECOND
TIME GOING AROUND ON THIS, AND I
THINK THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF I
THINK OF PHILOSOPHICAL
DISAGREEMENT. UM YOU KNOW, THE
BILL IS TARGETED SPECIFICALLY TO
REFINERIES BECAUSE THEY'RE FAR
AND AWAY THE ONES THAT ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAJORITY OF
AIR POLLUTION. I'M HAPPY TO KEEP
TALKING TO THEM ALWAYS HAVE AN
OPEN DOOR. BUT THE AMENDMENTS
THEY'RE OFFERING I THINK ARE TOO
BROAD AND COMPLICATE THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE BILL. SO
UM, AND IT IS IT IS DIFFERENT
THAN LAST YEAR. WE MADE SOME
CHANGES IN NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMITTEE EARLIER, UM AND WILL
CONTINUE TO HAVE MORE
CONVERSATIONS ALONG THE WAY.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
SEEN AND WE HAVE EMOTION. MOTION
FROM MS REYES. SECOND FROM MR
REVIS MISTAKES. YOU MAKE
CLOTHES. WE ASKED FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THE MOTION. YOU
PASSED THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. WE HAVE MOTION OF
SECOND ASKED CLARK TO PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON PENNY. ANY I
CHOLERA. PACHECO PACHECO, I
PAPIN HAPPENED. I RAISE REYES
RIVAS RIVAS I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ
KNOW YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK
YOU, MR BAUER-KAHAN. ITEM 4 60.
MAYBE 4 60. ANYONE GET
COMFORTABLE. SEE YOU'RE GETTING
A LITTLE PEACE AND QUIET IN HERE
WAS NICE. GOOD MORNING MORNING
BECAUSE THIS COMMITTEE IS
RUNNING SO EFFICIENTLY
IMPRESSED. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M HERE TO
PRESENT BEFORE 60, WHICH WILL
INCREASE THE STATE WATER BOARD
OF FORCE MINT AUTHORITY TO HELP
BETTER MANAGE OUR PRECIOUS WATER
RESOURCES. I WANT TO START BY
THANKING THE COMMITTEE AND YOUR
STAFF FOR THEIR INCREDIBLE WORK
ON THIS BILL. WE CONTINUE TO TRY
TO IMPROVE IT AND ENSURE THAT
THERE IS PROPERTY PROCESS AND
THE GREAT WORK BY THIS COMMITTEE
HELPED US GET FURTHER IN THAT
PROCESS. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND
HAPPILY ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS IN
THE ANALYSIS. AS YOU ALL KNOW,
CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, AND WE
ARE SEEING IT IN THE WAY WATER
APPEARS IN CALIFORNIA THIS YEAR
AND IN THE DROUGHT YEARS OF THE
PAST FEW YEARS, WE KNOW THAT OUR
FUTURE WILL BE FILLED WITH
DROUGHT AND WE NEED TO BE
PREPARED FOR IT. THAT MEANS
MANAGING OUR WATER RESOURCES
RESPONSIBLY AND DILIGENTLY AS
MANY OF YOU HAVE, UM, PROBABLY
COME TO LEARN. AT THIS POINT. IT
WAS ILLUSTRATED IN THE ANALYSIS.
LAST YEAR, WE HAD A GROUP OF
WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS IN THE
NORTHERN PART OF THE STATE WHO
DECIDED THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE
CURTAILMENT ORDERS OF THE WATER
BOARD, SO THEY WERE JUST GOING
TO VIOLATE THEM AND PAY THE COST
OF THE FINES. THE COST $500 A
DAY FOR EIGHT DAYS WAS $4000 THE
COST OF DOING BUSINESS. THEY
DRAINED THE RIVER OVER THOSE
EIGHT DAYS, THE WATER BOARD DID
NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO
IMMEDIATELY STOP THEM FROM
TAKING THAT PRECIOUS RESOURCE.
THAT IS A REAL PROBLEM, AS NOTED
IN THE ANALYSIS, WE NEED TO BE
ABLE TO TAKE SWIFT ACTION WHEN
OUR WATER RESOURCES ARE BEING
TAKEN BY THOSE WHO SHOULD NOT
TAKE THEM. THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE.
BUT AS WAS DISCUSSED IN WATER
COMMITTEE LAST WEEK, IT IS ONLY
ONE EXAMPLE OF TIMES WHEN OUR
WATER RESOURCES ARE BEING USED
BY THOSE WHO DO NOT DO NOT HAVE
A LAWFUL RIGHT TO DO SO. SO
ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT WE SEE
OFTEN IN THIS STATE IS ILLEGAL
MARIJUANA GROWERS WHO ARE TAKING
TRUCKING WATER OFF OF OUR RIVERS
, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY
TO IMMEDIATELY HALT THAT TAKE OF
WATER, WHICH IS REALLY CRITICAL
TO THE SECTION OF THIS RESOURCE
TO OUR COMMUNITIES. TO OUR
AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITIES WHO
NEED THE WATER AND OTHERS. SO
THIS BILL IS SIMPLE. IT UM,
ALTHOUGH THE OPPOSITION PROBABLY
DIDN'T THINK SO. BUT I'LL GO
WITH IT. SIMPLE UM, IT ALLOWS
FOR IMMEDIATE INTERIM RELIEF
ORDER TO HAPPEN AT THE
WATERBOARD. IT INCREASES
PENALTIES FROM THAT $500 A DAY
YOU HEARD THAT WAS SO
EGREGIOUSLY INEFFECTIVE,
ALTHOUGH THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS TODAY ALLOW FOR A
LOWER UH, PENALTY AT THE WATER
BOARD LEVEL AND A HIGHER PENALTY
IN THE COURTS. SO LOWERING A
LITTLE BIT OF THAT AUTHORITY AT
THE REGULATORY AGENCY AND ALLOWS
TO SAY WATERBOARD TO OBTAIN AN
INSPECTION WEREN'T TO GO CHECK
AND SEE IF THIS ILLEGAL TAKE OF
WATER IS HAPPENING BY SOMEONE.
AND IT'S JUST THE WATER RIGHTS
VIOLATION PENALTIES SO THEY
ADJUST WITH INFLATION, WHICH, BY
THE WAY, I THINK WE SHOULD DO ON
ALL PENALTIES. I DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE FIXED AND
WE HAVE TO REVISIT THEM AND
LEGISLATION. BUT THAT'S AN
ASIDE. YOU WILL HEAR A LOT FROM
THE OPPOSITION ABOUT THE WATER
BOARD AND HOW THIS WILL STOP ALL
HOUSING. IT WILL STOP ALL WATER
PROJECTS. UM I DON'T SEE THAT
NOTHING IN THE BILL ADDS
ADDITIONAL LAW OR REGULATION TO
ANY OF OUR WATER RIGHTS USERS OR
HOLDER IN CALIFORNIA. IN MERELY
ENFORCES CURRENT LAW. IT MAKES
IT EASIER FOR THE WATERBOARD TO
ENFORCE IT IMMEDIATELY. YES
THAT'S WHAT IT DOES. UM, BUT
THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE
WATER FLOWS FAST AND IN DROUGHT
YEARS YOU CAN DO A LOT OF DAMAGE
REALLY QUICKLY, AND RIGHT NOW IT
TAKES 20. DAYS FOR THE WATER
BOARD TO STOP SOMEONE FROM
TAKING WATER OFF OF OUR RIVERS.
UM SO I THINK THAT I WILL. YOU
KNOW, ANSWER WITH THE OPPOSITION
HAS TO SAY, BUT THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS DIDN'T INCREDIBLE JOB
AND SAYING WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
GET RID OF JUDICIAL REVIEW, WE
BELIEVE DUE PROCESS IS RIGHT
HERE. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE AND
GLADLY TAKE THE AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE I THINK THEY STRENGTHEN
DUE PROCESS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING
THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. WE JUST
WANT THAT IMMEDIATE RELIEF WHERE
IT IS SO NECESSARY. AND WITH ME
TODAY IS MATT CLIFFORD OF TROUT
UNLIMITED. AND KIM DELFINO ON
BEHALF OF CAL TRAP. MR CHAIR
MEMBERS. GOOD MORNING. I'M MATT
CLIFFORD. I'M WITH TRIED
UNLIMITED AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT OF BABY. FOR 60.
UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW, THE
OWNERSHIP OF ALL WATER LIES WITH
THE EXCUSE ME LIES WITH THE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE. PRIVATE
PARTY IS GOING TO RETAIN THE
RIGHT TO USE THAT WATER AT
CERTAIN TIMES AND PLACES IN
CERTAIN AMOUNTS, BUT THAT USES
SUBJECT TO THE OVERLYING PUBLIC
OWNERSHIP OF THE WATER ITSELF.
AND ALSO THE PUBLIC INTEREST
THAT THAT WATER SUPPORTS,
INCLUDING FISH, WILDLIFE AND
ECOSYSTEMS. NOW IN TIMES OF
WATER SHORTAGE, WHICH ARE
BECOMING MORE FREQUENT AND
SEVERE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE. THE
STATE WATER BOARD HAS THE
UNENVIABLE TASK. OF MANAGING THE
CONFLICTS AND THAT INEVITABLY
ARISE BETWEEN UM, THE REPUBLICAN
THESE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
INTERESTS AND ALSO AMONG THE
SOME 30,000 PRIVATE WATER RIGHTS
THERE CLAIMED IN THIS STATE. NOW
WELL, THAT'S A TOUGH SITUATION
FOR ANY AGENCY TO BE, UM, UH, TO
BE IN WELL, I'LL JUST SAY THIS
CONFLICTS ARISE IN REAL TIME.
AND THE STAKES ARE OFTEN VERY
HIGH. WHEN A RIVER IS DEWATERED
ENDANGERED FISH DON'T HAVE 20
DAYS TO WAIT FOR A HEARING. WHEN
THE STREAM DRIES UP, THEY DIE.
THE BOARD HAS TO HAVE THE
ABILITY TO ACT FAST. NOW THIS IS
A TOUGH, CHALLENGING SITUATION
FOR AN AGENCY TO BE IN, BUT IT'S
BY NO MEANS A NOVEL OR UNIQUE
ONE. THERE ARE NUMEROUS NUMEROUS
AGENCIES THAT ARE CALLED UPON TO
BALANCE THE PUBLIC INTEREST
AGAINST VESTED PRIVATE RIGHTS IN
URGENT SITUATIONS HAPPENS ALL
THE TIME. THE LAW ESTABLISHES
WAYS TO DO THIS CONSISTENT WITH
DUE PROCESS PRINCIPLES. THINGS
LIKE TIME LITTLE BIT OF TIME
LIMITED ORDERS BASED ON A
FINDING OF IMMINENT AND
IRREPARABLE INJURY. SUBJECT TO
PROMPT JUDICIAL REVIEW. AND YES
, COUPLED WITH SUFFICIENT
MONETARY PENALTIES TO ENSURE
THAT THESE ORDERS ARE COMPLIED
WITH THIS IS THE BASIC MODEL
THAT APPLIES TO NUMEROUS
LICENSING AGENCIES, FOR EXAMPLE
, WHICH MUST BALANCE PUBLIC
HEALTH AND SAFETY AGAINST
INDIVIDUALS RIGHT TO EARN A
LIVING. IT ALSO APPLIES TO
NUMEROUS STATE AND LOCAL PUBLIC
HEALTH AGENCIES WHO HAVE TO
BALANCE THE PUP PROTECTING
PUBLIC HEALTH. IN THE FACE OF
SIMILAR KINDS OF PRIVATE
INTERESTS. THE OPPONENTS WOULD
HAVE YOU BELIEVE THAT THE SKY
WILL FALL IF THE AGENCY
RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT IS PERHAPS
OUR MOST PRECIOUS PUBLIC
RESOURCE WHERE TO HAVE THE SAME
BASIC TOOLS AVAILABLE TO IT. WE
FRANKLY RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE
WITH THAT. WE FIND IT IN DEFENSE
OF THE BOARD DOES NOT ALREADY
HAVE THESE TOOLS. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT
MAYBE FOR 60 AND MR CHAIRMAN. I
JUST NEED TO ADD IF I MAY HAVE
BEEN AUTHORIZED BY BOTH THE
KARAOKE TRIBE AND THE YUROK
TRIBE. TO SAY THAT THEY ARE ON
RECORD SUPPORTING THIS BILL IS
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL AS
WELL. THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS,
PLEASE. GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS KIM DELFINO. I'M HERE
REPRESENTING CAL TROUT AND
SUPPORTIVE BEFORE 60. 84 60 IS A
PRODUCT OF RECOMMENDATIONS BY
PREEMINENT WATER RIGHTS
ATTORNEYS TO ADDRESS THE FACT
THAT THE STATE BOARDS CURRENT
ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES ARE
LACKING. IN A NUTSHELL. THE
STATE BOARDS CURRENT ENFORCEMENT
FRAMEWORK FOR ILLEGAL DIVERSION
FUNDAMENTALLY FAILS TO PROVIDE
ANY REAL DETERRENTS AND WITHOUT
SUFFICIENT DETERRENCE. THERE'S
LITTLE REASON FOR ANYONE TO
FOLLOW THE LAW. IT IS AS SIMPLE
AS THAT. DESPITE CLAIMS BY THE
OPPOSITION, 84 60 WOULD ONLY
AFFECT THOSE WHO VIOLATE
EXISTING LAW DOESN'T GIVE THE
BOARD ANY NEW WATER LAWS OR
POLICIES TO ENFORCE. IT RELIES
ON ALREADY EXISTING LAWS THAT
EVERYONE HAS HAD TO ABIDE BY FOR
DECADES. WELL THE OPPOSITION
WILL SAY THAT THEY THINK WHAT
HAPPENED AT THE SHASTA'S WRONG
THEY'VE NOT POSITIONED
THEMSELVES TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM
WITH SUGGESTIONS INSTEAD,
THEY'RE MAKING. INSTEAD THEY'RE
MAKING SWEEPING CLAIMS THAT THE
BILL VIOLATES CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
AND RESULT IN ABUSE OF DUE
PROCESS. THIS IS NOT TRYING TO
SOLVE A PROBLEM. IT'S TRYING TO
STOP A VERY MODEST BILL THAT
MAKES A VERY SMALL CHANGE THAT
MAKES CHANGE IN THE WATER
BOARD'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE THE
LAWS MORE EXPEDITIOUSLY QUOTE.
WHEN IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE IS
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO PROTECT
AGAINST IMMINENT AND IRREPARABLE
HARM. AS A COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
LAYS OUT VERY CLEARLY THE
OPPOSITION SWEEPING ASSERTIONS
ARE EITHER UNFOUNDED OR ADDRESS
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. THE
ISSUANCE OF AN INTERIM ORDER IS
SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL REVIEW,
WHICH MEANS THERE IS NO
VIOLATION OF SEPARATION OF
POWERS. MOREOVER THE REMEDY OF
INTERIM RELIEF IS NOT UNCOMMON.
THE CALIFORNIA ÁP RECOGNIZES
INTERIM SUSPENSION AS A FORM OF
EMERGENCY RELIEF, AND THE
LEGISLATURE HAS GRANTED SUCH
AUTHORITY TO OTHER AGENCIES. FOR
EXAMPLE, HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
SECTION 1569.4 BY THOSE ALLOWS
THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
SERVICES TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND
A LICENSE OF A CARE FACILITY.
PRIOR TO A HEARING WHEN, IN THE
OPINION OF THE DIRECTOR, THE
ACTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT
RESIDENTS OR CLIENTS OF THE
FACILITY, AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS
EXAMPLES. IN CONCLUSION. 84 60
IS A MODEST BILL THAT IS VERY
CLEARLY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE
TOOLS FOR THE WATERBOARD TO ACT
WHEN THERE IS ILLEGAL ACTIVITY,
PROVIDING AN IMPORTANT
DETERRENCE AGAINST ILLEGAL
DIVERSION OF WATER, WHICH
FRANKLY BENEFITS ALL OF US THE
PUBLIC WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS WHO
ARE ACTING LEGALLY AND OUR
ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY. MORNING ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
I'M MATTHEW BAKER, POLICY
DIRECTOR FOR PLANNING
CONSERVATION LEAGUE SPONSOR OF
THE BILL, AND IN STRONG SUPPORT
. I'M ALSO BEEN ASKED TO TODAY
TO OFFER SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF
THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW FOUNDATION
. CLIMATE ACTION, CALIFORNIA
CLEAN WATER ACTION AND THE
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING,
ERIN WOOLY ON BEHALF OF SIERRA
CLUB, CALIFORNIA AND ALSO ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA COAST
KEEPER ALLIANCE AND SUPPORT GOOD
MORNING, DANIEL BROWN ON BEHALF
OF THE UNION OF CONCERNED
SCIENTISTS AND SUPPORT GOOD
AFTERNOON ATLANTA ROTTEN WITH
TROUT AND PRICE REPRESENTING
WATER FOUNDATION AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, SAYING NON
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. COME
ON UP. I'LL NEED TWO OF THE.
WITNESSES TO PLEASE MOVE SO THE
OPPOSITION CAN SIT THERE. YOU
WANT ME TO MOVE UP? YOU'RE FINE
. YOU'RE FINE. JUST TWO CHAIRS
RIGHT HERE, OKAY? THANK YOU.
REVERSED YOU GO AHEAD. NO. CAN
YOU PLEASE GIVE US YOUR ONE CAN
JOIN THE PARTY. FIRST WITNESS,
PLEASE. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIRMAN. MY NAME IS AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
BRIAN PAULSON. I AM GENERAL
COUNSEL TO ELDORADO IRRIGATION
DISTRICT. FIRST I'D LIKE TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENTS
INCLUDED IN TODAY'S ANALYSIS OF
A B 4 60. NOTWITHSTANDING THESE
AMENDMENTS, WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS
CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS WITH
THIS BILL. THE BILL PURPORTS TO
ADDRESS A GAP IN EXISTING LAW.
THAT IS, THE ABILITY OF THE
STATE BOARD TOO QUICKLY PREVENT
ILLEGAL DIVERSIONS OF WATER. BUT
THE SHASTA RIVER CASE IS NOT
EVIDENCE OF A GAP IN THE LAW
BECAUSE THERE WERE EXISTING
LEGAL REMEDIES, NAMELY THE
ABILITY TO SEEK A TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION WHICH THE
STATE BOARD DID NOT USE IN THAT
CASE. TO BE CLEAR WATER AGENCIES
DO NOT SANCTION ILLEGAL
DIVERSIONS. IT IS A BEFORE
SIXTIES THREAT TO LEGAL
DIVERSIONS, HOWEVER, THAT HAS
PROMPTED OUR OPPOSITION. UNDER
EXISTING LAW, THE STATE WATER
BOARD MAY ATTAIN INTERIM RELIEF
AGAINST THE DIVERTER. IF THE
STATE WATER BOARD HAS EVIDENCE
TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE
DIVERSION IS ILLEGAL. BUT IT
MUST GO TO COURT TO DO SO. THIS
IS BECAUSE IN ISSUING
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, A
JUDGE, SOMEONE WHO IS TRAINED IN
JURISPRUDENCE MUST BALANCE THE
INTERESTS OF THE PARTIES
INVOLVED AND ENSURE THAT THE
COURT DOES NOT UNNECESSARILY
RESTRICT THE VESTED RIGHTS OF A
PARTY WITHOUT SUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING.
FUNDAMENTALLY A BEFORE 60
REPLACES THE ROLE OF JUDGES. THE
INDEPENDENT ARBITERS. AND MAKES
THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD, THE PROSECUTOR,
JUDGE AND JURY. THE STATE WATER
BOARD, ALONG WITH ITS STAFF IS
COMPOSED OF SMART AND TALENTED
INDIVIDUALS WITH GOOD
INTENTIONS. BUT THEY ARE NOT
JUDGES. THEY ARE NOT TRAINED IN
THE RULES OF EVIDENCE. THEY ARE
NOT BOUND BY PRECEDENT. AND THEY
ARE NOT INDEPENDENT FOR THESE
REASONS AND OTHERS. WE OPPOSE A
BEFORE 60 AND I'D BE HAPPY TO
TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. I'M JENNIFER
PEER, UM, GENERAL MANAGER OF THE
STATE WATER CONTRACTORS
RESPECTFULLY IN OPPOSITION TO 84
60. THE STATED PURPOSE OF THE
BILLS MORE QUICKLY ADDRESS
ILLEGAL DIVERSIONS, AND WE
CONCUR WITH THE NOTION THAT THE
STATE WATER BOARD NEEDS STRONG
TOOLS TO EFFECTIVELY ENFORCE
VIOLATIONS OF CURTAILMENT ORDERS
, INCLUDING FEES THAT ARE MORE
LIKELY TO DETER ILLEGAL
DIVERSIONS. HOWEVER THIS BILL
WOULD APPLY TO ILLEGAL AND LEGAL
DIVERSIONS SUBSTANTIALLY
BROADENING THE STATE WATER
BOARD'S AUTHORITY BEYOND WHAT IS
NECESSARY TO ENFORCE THE WATER
RIGHTS SYSTEM, WHICH WOULD BE TO
THE DETRIMENT OF ALL WATER
USERS. ALL OF US, NOT JUST THE
STATE WATER CONTRACTORS,
ELDORADO WE BELIEVE THAT OUTSIDE
THE VERY REAL LEGITIMATE DUE
PROCESS AND LEGAL CONCERNS WITH
84 60, THE PRACTICAL
CONSEQUENCES OF THE MEASURE
WOULD HAVE A REAL IMPACT ON
CALIFORNIANS. AT A TIME WHEN
WATER AGENCIES MUST RAPIDLY
INVEST IN THEIR WATER SUPPLY
PORTFOLIOS TO BE CLIMATE
RESILIENT, A COMPLETE
DISMANTLING OF THE WATER RIGHTS
SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT THIS BILL
WOULD RESULT IN WILL PARALYZE
THESE AGENCIES FROM MAKING THESE
URGENT AND NECESSARY
INVESTMENTS. WATER AGENCIES MAKE
INVESTMENTS IN THEIR
INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON THEIR
WATER RIGHTS, WHICH IS THE
FOUNDATION OF THEIR WATER SUPPLY
PORTFOLIOS. WATER AGENCY
CONSIDERING AN INVESTMENT IN A
GROUNDWATER BANK OR NEW
RESERVOIR, OR RECYCLED WATER
FACILITY CAN'T JUSTIFY THE
INVESTMENT IF THE ENTIRE WATER
RIGHT THEY DEPEND ON IS IN
QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL
DOES FOR LEGAL DIVERT EAR'S.
LIKEWISE WHEN YOU HAVE A MAJOR
DISRUPTION IN THE CALIFORNIA
WATER RIGHTS, STRUCTURE AND
SYSTEM, WHICH LEADS TO THESE
UNCERTAINTIES AND SUPPLIES FOR
WATER MANAGERS, THE ABILITY FOR
COMMUNITIES TO PLAN AND DEVELOP
HOUSING AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE
TO MEET LONG TERM NEEDS IN
CALIFORNIA IS UNTENABLE.
COMMUNITIES NEED TO MAKE THE
NECESSARY FINDINGS UNDER
EXISTING LAW WITHIN THE
SUBDIVISION MAP ACT THAT WATER
IS AVAILABLE. HOW DO YOU DO
THAT? IF IT'S UNCERTAIN IF THE
WATER RIGHT THAT YOU'RE RELYING
ON IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE
AVAILABLE TO YOU? WE BELIEVE
THIS MEASURE POSES SIGNIFICANT
RISK OF FUTURE HOUSING AND
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE
BELIEVE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PCL
REPORT THAT COULD BE EFFECTIVE
IN ADDRESSING SOME OF THE
SPECIFIC CONCERNS HAVE BEEN
RAISED, AND WE HAVE SUPPORTED
MEASURES AND LEGISLATION
CONSISTENT WITH THOSE RECOMMEND
RECOMMENDATIONS. EXAMPLES
INCLUDE FUNDING FOR THE STATE
BOARD STAFF TO UPDATE AND
MODERNIZE THE WATER RIGHTS
INFORMATION SYSTEM AND IMPROVED
MONITORING. FOR THESE REASONS.
WE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED 84 16
REQUESTS YOUR NO VOTE. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION NAME AND ORGANIZATION
ONLY PLEASE. DON GILBERT FOR THE
SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION SERVING 2.7 MILLION
AIR IAN'S IN OPPOSITION. CHAIR
MEMBERS, DEAN TALLY WITH THE
CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. CHAIR
MEMBERS ELI GARCIA FOR THE
INTERNATIONAL BOTTLED WATER
ASSOCIATION AND OPPOSITION.
KARIN LANG ON THE SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE
STANISLAUS COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND THE SELF SAME
JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. KRISTIN
OLSEN WITH CALIFORNIA STRATEGIES
ON BEHALF OF SAINT LOUIS DELTA
MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY AS WELL
AS UNITED WATER CONSERVATION
DISTRICT RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED.
ALEX BEARING WITH THE CALIFORNIA
FARM BUREAU'S EXCUSE ME,
RESPECTIVELY. APPROACH HMM.
ALLERGY MEDICINE. WHAT CAN I SAY
? DRY MOUTH OPPOSED? THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHRIS ANDERSON ON
BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES AND
THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER
ASSOCIATION AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, BRENDA
BASS WITH THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. GOOD MORNING, DOMINIC
TOMORROW HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS ON THE SAN
JOAQUIN RIVER IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING TO REMEMBERS
ALFREDO MEDINA HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
AND OPPOSITION AS WELL. GOOD
MORNING, ANDREA ABORIGINAL WITH
THE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES ASSOCIATION IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING ANALLY AKIN ON BEHALF OF
MESA WATER DISTRICT, SEEING
GABRIEL VALUE IN GABRIEL VALLEY
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT IN
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER AGENCY
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. GOOD
MORNING. NOEL CRAMER'S WITH WINE
INSTITUTE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING OCEAN
ON BEHALF OF VARIOUS AG
ASSOCIATIONS AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, DANNY
MERKLEY WITH THE LOCAL GROUP ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF WINE GRAPE
GROWERS, UM KERN COUNTY WATER
AGENCY, KINGS, RIVER INTERESTS
AND MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS
TRICIA GEHRINGER WITH
AGRICULTURAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED.
GAIL DEL HAT WITH WESTERN
GROWERS ASSOCIATION AND
OPPOSITION. JASON OCCURRED ON
BEHALF OF THE ORANGE COUNTY
WATER DISTRICT, ALSO IN
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING.
CAROLYN JENSEN K P PUBLIC
AFFAIRS ON BEHALF OF WESTERN
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, THE
MOJAVE WATER AGENCY NOT
POSITION. ERIC TURNER ON BEHALF
OF TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT
AND SANTA MARIA SANTA MARGARITA
WATER DISTRICT IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. CYRUS DEALERS IN THE
CABOOSE FOR THE MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY, LAST
VIRGIN ISTS MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT AND THE COACHELLA
VALLEY WATER DISTRICT IN A
PROPOSITION THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? SEEN
NONE. UM, I WANT TO, UH KIND OF
FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMITTEE
OF BENEFIT PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC
NARROW DOWN WHAT IT IS THAT
WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING HERE TODAY.
WHAT THIS COMMITTEE IS ACTUALLY
DOING HERE TODAY, SO I'M GOING
TO GO THROUGH THE OUR COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS DID A NUMBER OF
THINGS ONE REQUIRED THE WATER
BOARD TO ADOPT A FORMAL
STANDARDIZED HEARING PROCESS FOR
INTERIM ORDER REVIEWS. SO THIS
ENSURES THAT ALL PARTIES WILL
KNOW THE PROCESS AND ALL PARTIES
ARE TREATED THE SAME. SECONDLY
LIMITED THE ISSUANCE OF INTERIM
ORDERS TO ONLY CASES TO PREVENT
IMMINENT OR OPERABLE,
IRREPARABLE INJURY TO WATER
RIGHTS OR THE ENVIRONMENT. THREE
TO LIMIT ALL INTERIM ORDERS 280
DAYS FOR GUARANTEEING THE RIGHT
TO APPEAL AN INTERIM ORDER TO
THE SUPERIOR COURT. FIVE
GUARANTEEING NO INTERIM ORDER
COULD BE MODIFIED WITHOUT A
FORMAL HEARING AND SIX CLARIFIED
THE CIVIL PENALTIES. THOSE ARE
THE LEGAL ISSUES. THAT'S WHAT
THAT'S WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
OF THE COMMITTEE. WE MADE A LOT
OF SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS. I
THINK THAT AUTHOR AGREES TO THAT
IMPROVED THAT, UH, BILL IN WAYS
THAT ARE IMPORTANT, PARTICULARLY
DUE PROCESS. WHAT THE AMENDMENTS
DO NOT DO IS CHANGE THE SCOPE OF
THE WATER ISSUES THAT THE WATER
BOARD CAN ISSUE AN INTERIM ORDER
ON THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THIS
COMMITTEE'S JURISDICTION. THOSE
ISSUES MAY OR MAY NOT BE REAL
MARONITE MAY OR MAY NOT BE
IMPORTANT TO MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE. BUT THOSE ARE
SEPARATE ISSUES, SO THAT'S WHAT
WE HAVE DONE HERE TODAY WITH THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. ULTIMATELY
THAT'S WHAT THIS THAT'S WITHIN
THE JURISDICTION OF THIS
COMMITTEE. WHAT THIS COMMITTEE
IS ULTIMATELY VOTING ON. SO WITH
THAT, TO SORT OF SHAPE THAT, UH,
NOW TURNOVER COMMITTEE IF
THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
FROM ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE. MS
REYES. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
CLARIFICATION IT ALWAYS IS OF
GREAT CONCERN WHEN OUR VERY OWN
WATER DISTRICTS, UM, OPPOSE A
BILL BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONES
THAT ARE PROVIDING THE SERVICE,
BUT I THINK THAT WITH THE. WITH
THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN
TAKEN IN THE FACT THAT THE VERY
WATER DISTRICTS THAT HAVE IF
THEY'RE STOPPED, THEY HAVE AN
APPEALS PROCESS AND IT IS WITHIN
15 DAYS, SO THAT IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT, WHEREAS BEFORE, IF
THE WATER IF THERE IS NO WAY TO
STOP THE ILLEGAL, ILLEGAL
ILLEGAL ACTIVITY THEN IT'S GOING
TO GO ON FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AS
WAS NOTED BY YOU, SO WITH THAT I
WOULD MOVE THE BILL FROM MS
RAISED. WE HAVE A SECOND. HMM. A
SECOND FROM MR HANEY. ANY, MR
CONNELLY. YEAH AND I APPRECIATE
THE ARTHUR AND THE WITNESSES
COMING FORWARD. UM AND I
APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION
CHAIR. IT'S OFTENTIMES HARD.
STAY IN OUR LANE IN COMMITTEES
AND AH! WHAT STRIKES ME IS THE
CHARACTERIZATION OF THIS AS A
MODEST SPILL. I THINK THAT'S
BEING DISPUTED TO SAVE THE
WASTED. IT IS, UM, RECOGNIZING A
SERIOUS ISSUE, AND THAT IS THE
UNLAWFUL DIVERSION OF WATER,
PARTICULARLY IN DROUGHT.
SITUATIONS WE DO NEED TO CRACK
DOWN ON THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT
THE RELEVANT REGULATORS HAVE THE
TOOLS THAT THEIR DISPOSAL TO DO
THAT SO I APPRECIATE THE SPIRIT
WITH WHICH THIS IS BEING BROUGHT
FORWARD. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT
THE SCOPE. UM AND WE'LL SAVE
THAT FOR ANOTHER DAY. SINCE THIS
IS NOT THE COMMITTEE FOR THAT.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONCERNS
RAISED ABOUT THE REORDERING OF
INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL REVIEW
RELATIVE TO ADMINISTRATIVE
REVIEW. UM. THE AMENDMENTS SEEK
TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. I DON'T
KNOW IF THE AUTHOR WITNESSES
WANT TO KIND OF WEIGH IN ON
WHERE THINGS STAND WITH THOSE
AMENDMENTS RELATIVE TO THE
CHARGE THAT THIS WORD UM, WE CAN
INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND
ALL THE EVIDENCIARY PROCEEDINGS
AND RULES. AND INDEPENDENT
JUDGMENT THAT GOES ALONG WITH
THAT VIS A VIS THROWING THIS, UH
WHAT, FRANKLY WIDE RANGE OF
WATER RIGHTS AT THIS POINT MORE
INTO THE ADMINISTRATIVE REALM. I
WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT
QUESTION IF I MAY, UM, MR
CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU FOR RAISING
THAT ISSUE. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CONNELLY. UM THE BILL. IT WAS
UNCLEAR TO ME. IT WAS UNCLEAR TO
ME BASED ON THE AMENDMENTS. UM,
HOW THE, UH, THE AMENDMENTS TO
SECTION 11 15, WHICH WERE
CLEARLY SET FORTH IN THE
ANALYSIS TODAY, UM UH, WORK
TOGETHER WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 11 26 IN TERMS OF
JUDICIAL REVIEW, THE MARCH 30TH
VERSION OF THE BILL ELIMINATES
INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FROM
EXISTING LAW. EXISTING LAW.
UNDER EXISTING LAW, IT IS
INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT IS THE
LEGAL STANDARD FOR REVIEWING AN
ORDER ADOPTED BY THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD. 11 15
THE AMENDMENTS IN THE ANALYSIS
INDICATE THAT THE YOU KNOW,
CHANGE THE STANDARD TO
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. AH BUT HOW
WILL THAT WORK WITH SECTION 11
26 THAT THAT IS A FUNDAMENTAL
CONCERN OF WATER RIGHTS HOLDERS
IS THAT WE'RE CHANGING EXISTING
LAW NOT JUST FOR THIS BILL, BUT
EXISTING LAW FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
OF A OF A OF ADOPTED ORDERS FROM
THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD TO MAKE THE
STANDARD FOR WATER. I TOLD HER
MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN
SINCE THE SINCE THE SINCE THE
JUDGE IN THIS CASE WOULD NOT
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
INDEPENDENTLY ASSESS AND REVIEW
THE FACTS UNDER UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES YES, NOVA REVOLT
REVIEWS. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR
THE RESPONSE. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S UM SO I JUST
WANT TO SAY, UM AND IT'S NOTED,
ACTUALLY IN THE ANALYSIS, UM,
THE MARCH 30. I THINK IT WAS
MARCH 30TH OF Ó. I DON'T KNOW.
TIME IS FUZZY, BUT WE DID MAKE
AMENDMENTS. SO AS YOU MAY HAVE
NOTED, EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO'S
OPPOSED IS OPPOSED. NOT ONE OF
THEM IS OPPOSING, LESS AMENDED.
WE ARE TRYING REALLY HARD TO
MAKE THIS BETTER IN THE ABSENCE
OF ANY PARTICIPATION IN THE
OPPOSITION AND KUDOS TO THE
COMMITTEE FOR BEING A PARTNER IN
THAT WE WANT TO DO PROCESS TO BE
WELL DONE, AND WE'RE DOING SO IN
A VACUUM, WHICH IS NEVER THE WAY
ONE. I DON'T WANT TO CONDUCT
BUSINESS THAT WAY, AND I DON'T
THINK IT IS GREAT, BUT IT'S WHEN
FOLKS DON'T COME TO THE TABLE.
IT'S WHERE YOU ARE. UM, I KNOW
THAT THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR
INPUT ON THAT STANDARD OF THE
RULING WAS NOT GIVEN ONE AS
NOTED IN THE ANALYSIS. UM AND SO
I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S
SOMETHING I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSING
. BUT I THINK IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE ALLOW FOR, AS
NOTED BY OUR COLLEAGUE THAT YOU
GET INTO COURT. YOU GET INTO
COURT QUICKLY. I MEAN, THESE ARE
NOT MINOR THINGS WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT. I AGREE. I WANT HOUSING
TO BE BUILT. I WANT WATER
PROJECTS TO BE BUILT. I WANT
YOUR WATER AGENCIES TO HAVE THE
RIGHT TO DELIVER WATER TO YOU.
NONE OF THIS SHOULD BE STOPPED
HERE AND I THINK THE STANDARD
WE'RE SETTING HERE, WHICH IS
IMMINENT AND IRREPARABLE INJURY
IS A HEIGHT. STANDARD WHEN YOU
GET INTO COURT IN MATTERS
REVIEWED ON ANY STANDARD, A
COURT IS GOING TO LOOK AT THAT
AND BALANCE THE RIGHTS. THE
IMPACT THE ABILITY TO WAIT JUST
LIKE THEY WOULD ON ANY STANDARD,
AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY
CRITICAL. WE ARE OPEN TO
DISCUSSIONS ON THAT WE INVITE
THE OPPOSITION TO PLEASE JOIN US
AND TELL US WHAT YOU THINK OF IT
BECAUSE WE PUT IT OUT THERE IN
HOPES THAT WE GOT IT RIGHT. AND
THEN WE SET IN COMMITTEE AND
HEAR THAT. THEY DON'T LIKE IT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD I
WOULD ASK FOR THEM TO COME TO
THE TABLE AND HELP US TO GET
THIS RIGHT. RESPECTFULLY WE'RE
WORKING ON AMENDMENTS. SO YEAH,
NO QUESTION PENDING. DO YOU HAVE
ANY MORE QUESTIONS, MR CONNOLLY,
AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT. I
THINK AT A MINIMUM THIS AND I'M
GLAD YOU'RE RECOGNIZING THIS IS
A WORK IN PROGRESS. I'M NOT
THERE YET. AND PERHAPS, YOU KNOW
, WE SEND THIS FORWARD WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT SIGNIFICANT
WORK WILL OCCUR, PARTICULARLY
AROUND THAT DUE PROCESS.
INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL REVIEW.
ISSUE AND, UM, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR
THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO ENGAGE
FURTHER ON THAT IT DOES SOUND
LIKE IT'S AN ISSUE AT THIS
POINT. ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS? CAN YOU MISS PAPIN?
SO I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
AUTHOR. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
GENEROSITY OF TIME. UM I
REPRESENT ONE OF THOSE
COMMUNITIES THAT INVESTED
BILLIONS. TO ENSURE THAT WE HAD
RELIABLE WATER. MR HANEY IS PART
OF THAT AREA AS WELL. UM SO AS I
EXPRESSED TO THE AUTHOR WHO WAS
SO GENEROUS OF HER TIME THAT
THAT'S WHERE I HAD A LOT OF
CONCERNS. SO WHILE WE'RE TRYING
TO SEPARATE OUT WHAT WE'RE
REVIEWING, WITH HOW WE'RE
REVIEWING, UM I'M NOT SURE WE
CAN TOTALLY DO IT. SO AS WE
DISCUSSED THE BREATH WITH WHICH
THIS PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE COULD
BE APPLIED MAKES ME
UNCOMFORTABLE. UM AND ESPECIALLY
AS WE TALKED ABOUT WATER GETS
SHORT, WE COULD PROBABLY MAKE
THAT UMBRELLA PRETTY LARGE. SO I
GET UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT. AND
THEN WHEN WE COMBINE IT WITH THE
FACT THAT THERE PROBABLY ISN'T
AN OVAL REVIEW, IF YOU GO INTO
COURT, AND YOU HAVE A WATER
AGENCY WHO HAS, UM ALREADY
DECIDED AGAINST YOU, AND WE'RE
SORT OF WAR. WEIGHING THAT
LIKELIHOOD OF PREVAILING. THAT
MAKES IT REALLY TOUGH, SO I AND
I APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR WITH ME
THAT HEY, TALK. LET'S TRY TO
FIND SOME AMENDMENT THAT REALLY
WORKS AND THAT YOU KNOW WHERE MY
ISSUES WERE, AND I APPRECIATE
THAT YOU'VE BEEN RECEPTIVE TO
HIM. SO I AM GOING TO SUPPORT
THE BILL TODAY. THIS IS VERY
HARD VOTE FOR ME. I HOPE YOU
UNDERSTAND. UM, BUT YOU HAVE
BEEN VERY FORTHRIGHT WITH ME
THAT GIVE ME SOMETHING. LET'S
WORK WITH IT. LET'S SIT DOWN AND
HAMMER IT OUT. AND UM I'M A FIRM
BELIEVER IN THAT, SO I HOPE WE
GET THERE. BUT I JUST WANTED,
YOU KNOW THAT. YEAH SEYARTO, BUT
GOING INTO COURT WITH THE
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY ALREADY
DECIDING AGAINST YOU. THAT'S I
MEAN, YOU'VE LITIGATED. I
BELIEVE YOU KNOW WHAT THAT'S
LIKE. THAT CERTAINLY GIVES YOU A
LIKELIHOOD OF PREVAILING. YEAH,
YOU GO WAY UP AND THAT THAT
WORLD SO WE'RE WITH LIKE YOU
WITH THE SUMMER MCANALLY. THE
NOVA MIGHT BE A LITTLE BETTER
FOR ME ANYWAY, THAT'S WHERE I AM
. AND I THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME
OUT. YOU'VE BEEN VERY GENEROUS
TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND MY
HEARTBURN ON THREE DIFFERENT
OCCASIONS. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS
, SO I BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE
CERTAINLY WILLING TO DO THIS. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? SEEING NONE. MISS
BAR. CAN YOU MAKE CLOTHES? THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND AGAIN. I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
THEIR INCREDIBLE WORK TO GET US
FURTHER TOWARDS DUE PROCESS. I
KNOW WE DON'T ALL AGREE WERE
THERE BUT I THINK, UM THE
COMMITTEE DIDN'T INCREDIBLE JOB
AND WHAT I THINK IS DUE PROCESS
OBVIOUSLY DID. UM AS MENTIONED.
THERE ARE OTHER LAWS THAT ARE
AVAILABLE TO FOLKS THE WRIT OF
MANDATE. I THINK WAS THERE
BEFORE WE PUT IT IN THERE, BUT
NOW IT'S IN THERE TO BE CLEAR.
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ILLEGAL
WATER USERS THAT IS THE BENEFIT
OF ALL OF US WHEN PEOPLE ARE
TAKING THE WATER ILLEGALLY,
WHETHER IT'S UNDER CURTAILMENT
ORDER OR JUST TAKING IT TO GROW
MARIJUANA LEGALLY, ETCETERA
THAT'S HURTING ALL OF US. THE
WATER IS A SHARED RESOURCE THAT
EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US NEEDS
AND IT NEEDS TO BE MANAGED
RESPONSIBLY AS SPECIALLY IN DRY
YEARS. AND SO I TRULY BELIEVE
THAT WE CAN GET TO A PLACE WHERE
THE AGENCY HAS THE ABILITY TO
STOP THOSE ILLEGAL USERS THAT I
KNOW. IN OUR LAST HEARING, MS
PIERRE AGREED THAT WE SHARE THAT
LAUDABLE GOAL. UM AND THAT WE
CAN GET TO A PLACE WHERE OUR
AGENCIES THAT WORK SO HARD EVERY
DAY TO PROVIDE US WITH WATER AND
TO DRINK AND TO LIVE CAN FEEL
SAFE THAT THEY WILL NOT BE.
CAUGHT UP IN THIS, SO THANK YOU.
AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK PRIVATE
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND
A SECOND. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASSES, UM, AND TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ASKED
THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I,
SALI CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DICKSON DICKSON. NO, HANEY.
HANEY, I KALRA. PACHECO. HAPPEN
AND I REYES REYES. AYE, RIVAS.
RIVAS. I. SANCHEZ SANCHEZ. NO.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU LAST BILL, MR HANEY.
YOU STARTED? YES.
GO AHEAD. I'LL MOVE THE BILL.
THANK YOU IN MOTION AND A SECOND
MOTION FROM HIS PAP IN A SECOND
FROM MR RIVAS WITH THAT SUBTLE
HINT, MR HANEY. THANK YOU. CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. I WANT TO START BY
THANKING THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THEIR WORK AND ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE'S TECHNICAL
AMENDMENTS. 13 56 STRENGTHENS
CALIFORNIA'S WORKER ADJUSTMENT
AND RETRAINING NOTIFICATION ACT
OR WARN ACT BY EXPANDING
PROTECTIONS FOR WORKERS IMPACTED
BY MASS LAYOFFS. WE'VE SEEN
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE GET LAID OFF
AND IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS AND
THAT'S HELPED US IDENTIFY SOME
OF THE LOOPHOLES AND
SHORTCOMINGS IN OUR STATE'S
WARREN ACT. ONE OF THE BIGGEST
LOOPHOLES THIS BILL IS
ADDRESSING IS THAT CONTRACT
WORKERS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY THE
WARREN ACT, EVEN THOUGH MANY OF
THESE CONTRACT WORKERS ARE DOING
THE SAME JOB AS DIRECTLY HIRED
EMPLOYEES. CONTRACT WORKERS CAN
INCLUDE ENGINEERS, JANITORS,
CAFETERIA WORKERS WHO GET NO
NOTICE OF GETTING LAID OFF WHILE
THEY'RE DIRECTLY HIGHER.
COLLEAGUES DID. ADDITIONALLY THE
WARRANT ACT ONLY REQUIRES 60
DAYS OF NOTICE, WHICH IS NOT
ENOUGH TIME FOR WORKERS TO
TRANSITION EFFECTIVELY. LASTLY
ANOTHER LOOPHOLE IS THIS BILL
AIMS TO FIX IS THAT UNDER THE
WARN ACT NOW EMPLOYEES CAN BE
REQUIRED TO SIGN AWAY THEIR
RIGHTS AS A REQUIREMENT TO
SIMPLY RECEIVE THE PAY THEY'RE
OWED. UNDER THE WARRANT ACT.
THIS IS TIMELY LEGISLATION.
WE'RE SEEING MORE LAYOFFS HAPPEN
ACROSS DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES.
THIS IS NOT GOING TO STOP
LAYOFFS. UNFORTUNATELY, THEY MAY
STILL HAPPEN, BUT IT JUST ALLOWS
WORKERS A BIT MORE TIME TO
TRANSITION EFFECTIVELY. WE HAVE
TO PROTECT OUR WORKFORCE AND WE
SHOULDN'T BE UNREASONABLY
EXCLUDING CERTAIN WORKERS
BECAUSE OF THEIR STATUS WITH ME.
I HAVE DAVID KRAUSE, A FORMER
CONTRACT WORKER AT GOOGLE AND
MITCH STEIGER FROM THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION.
THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS. I'D
LIKE TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
THEIR TIME. MY NAME IS DAVID
JONES, KRAUSE AND I REMEMBER OF
ALPHABET WORKERS UNION CW, A
ALPHABET CALLS THEIR INDIRECT
EMPLOYEES, T V. C S, WHICH
STANDS FOR TEMP VENDOR
CONTRACTOR IN FOUR YEARS AT
GOOGLE. I'VE BEEN A T, UH V AND
A C I, ALONG WITH THE VAST
MAJORITY OF CONTENT MANAGER T.
V. C S WAS LAID OFF IN NOVEMBER
WITHOUT ANY FORM OF SEVERANCE.
I'M STILL UNEMPLOYED TODAY. AND
EVERY TIME I SPEAK OUT AGAINST
THE INEQUITIES, T V C S FACE. I
WORRY THAT I PROLONG MY
UNEMPLOYMENT, MY FINANCIAL
UNCERTAINTY, BUT I HAVE THE
PRIVILEGE OF NO DEBT AND A
SPOUSE WITH A STABLE JOB. THOSE
BLESSINGS WOULD BE SQUANDERED IF
I DIDN'T SPEAK OUT ON BEHALF OF
THOSE FOR WHOM THE RISKS OF
BEING OUTSPOKEN ARE TOO GREAT TO
COME HERE TODAY. RIGHT NOW IT'S
CHEAPER, FASTER AND LESS
NEWSWORTHY TO GET RID OF T V. C
S WHO MAKE UP THE MAJORITY OF
ALPHABETS WORKFORCE LEGISLATION
, LIKE A B 13 56 IS A
SUBSTANTIVE STEP TOWARDS
ALLEVIATING THE WORST OUTCOMES
OF THIS EXPLOITATIVE SYSTEM FOR
WORKERS LIKE MYSELF. WHO HAVE
VIRTUALLY NO PROTECTIONS DURING
LAYOFFS, AND LATE AUGUST I
NOTICED AN INCREASED VENDOR
DELEGATION WAS AMONG THE STATED
GOALS FOR Q FOUR. AS A TEMP
WORKER, I FEARED THAT MEANT MY
JOB WOULD BE PASSED OFF TO A
LARGE VENDOR MANAGEMENT FIRM IN
MID NOVEMBER. EXACTLY THAT
OCCURRED. WE WERE LAID OFF IN
MASS, OFTEN WITH HIS LITTLE AS
TWO WEEKS. NOTICE IF GOOGLE DO
THIS WAS THE PLAN IN AUGUST. WHY
WAIT UNTIL NOVEMBER TO TELL US
MANY OF MY COWORKERS ARE PARENTS
SUDDENLY UNSURE OF HOW TO
PROVIDE FOR THEIR CHILDREN,
THEIR H ONE B VISA HOLDERS UP
AGAINST THE CLOCK TO FIND NEW
SPONSORSHIP TO PRESERVE THEIR
STATUS. STATISTICALLY T V. C S
ARE MORE LIKELY TO BELONG TO
ALREADY MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES
. MAYBE 13 56 YOU ARE ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVES CAN PROTECT THE
MOST VULNERABLE MEMBERS OF OUR
CONSTITUENTS OF YOUR
CONSTITUENCY WITH IMPACTFUL
PROTECTIONS FOR THE INEVITABLE
LAYOFFS IN OUR FUTURE, LAYOFFS
INVARIABLY IMPACT THEM FIRST AND
MOST SIGNIFICANTLY. AS LONG AS
EMPLOYERS LACK A LEGAL MANDATE
TO PROVIDE CONTRACT WORKERS WITH
ADVANCED NOTICE OF THEIR
TERMINATION. THEY'LL DO SO ON A
TIMELINE THAT SERVES THEIR
BOTTOM LINE AND SHAREHOLDERS NO
MATTER THE OFTEN CATASTROPHIC
IMPACT ON THOSE OF US THAT
LETTING GO ARTICLES CALL US THE
SHADOW WORKFORCE LEGISLATION
LIKE A B 13 56 THAT ACKNOWLEDGES
OUR WORTHINESS OF THE SAME
PROTECTIONS AFFORDED TO DIRECTLY
HIRED EMPLOYEES IS VITAL IF
WE'RE EVER GOING TO MAKE IT INTO
THE LIGHT. THANK YOU. SECOND
WITNESS, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS AND STAFF MITCH
STEIGER, WITH THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION, PROUD TO CO
SPONSOR THIS BILL, ALONG WITH A
LARGE COALITION OF OTHER LABOR
ORGANIZATIONS AND WORKER RIGHTS
GROUPS, FOR ALL THE REASONS
STATED SO WELL BY THE AUTHOR AND
PREVIOUS WITNESS, WE WOULD JUST
REALLY EMPHASIZED THE ROLE OF
THIS LEGISLATION AS AN UPDATE
THAT THIS IS TAKING LEGISLATION
THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER 20
YEARS WHEN THE STATE LOOKED VERY
DIFFERENT WHEN THE WORKFORCE
LOOK DIFFERENT AND MAKING IT
MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE STRUGGLES
THAT WORKERS FACE NOW IN 2023,
THE EXAMPLE UH, NAMELY, BEING
THAT WORKERS ARE MUCH MORE
LIKELY NOW TO NOT ACTUALLY BE
TECHNICALLY EMPLOYED BY THE
COMPANY OUT WHICH THEY WORK.
THEY'RE FAR MORE LIKELY NOW TO
ACTUALLY WORK FOR SOME SORT OF
CONTRACTORS, SOME OTHER COMPANY
THAT IT WAS NOT NEARLY AS COMMON
BACK WHEN THIS BILL WAS BACK
WHEN THE WARRANT ACT WAS FIRST
ENACTED, AND SO WE NEED TO MAKE
SURE THAT THAT CHANGE IN THE
ECONOMY THAT CHANGE IN THE
WORKFORCE FOR SO MANY WORKERS,
AS REFLECTED THERE'S NO REASON
WHY THESE WORKERS SHOULDN'T BE
COVERED. THE IMPACT OF THEM IS
JUST THE SAME AS IT IS FOR
DIRECTLY HIRED WORKERS AS WELL
AS THE IMPACT OF THEIR
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. ONE OF
THE REASONS THAT THEY WEREN'T
ACT IS THERE SO THAT UPDATE WE
THINK IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT.
ALSO GOING FROM 60 TO 90 DAYS
REFLECTS THE FACT THAT
CALIFORNIA USED TO BE A MUCH
MORE AFFORDABLE PLACE TO LIVE
THAT NOW GIVEN THE SKYROCKETING
COST OF EVERYTHING. IT CAN BE
MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO FIND
LIVING WAGE EMPLOYMENT THAT CAN
COVER ALL OF THE EDUCATION AND
HEALTH CARE AND RETIREMENT
SECURITY AND EVERYTHING THAT THE
WORKERS NOW STRUGGLE TO PAY FOR.
AND SO WE THINK THAT EXTRA 30
DAYS THAT EXTRA EXTENSION IS
SOMETHING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT
FOR WORKERS TO BE ABLE TO STAY
IN CALIFORNIA AND MEET THEIR
NEEDS AND THEN REGARDING THE
SEVERANCE PAY AND WHAT WE'VE
SEEN THIS RESPONSE TO SOMETHING
THAT HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED WHERE
WORKERS HAVE BEEN FORCED TO SIGN
AWAY THEIR LEGAL RIGHTS IN ORDER
TO ACCESS THE BENEFITS TO WHICH
THEY ARE ENTITLED. UNDER THIS
LAW, WORKERS SHOULD HAVE ACCESS
TO THOSE RIGHTS WITHOUT HAVING
TO SIGN AWAY OTHER RIGHTS AND
FOR IN ALL OF THOSE AREAS. WE
THINK THIS CONSTITUTES
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT UPDATE AND
WE URGE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS,
MARIKO YOSHIDA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION, PROUD CO SPONSOR
URGE YOUR SUPPORT. MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS LEANNE STRATTON,
REPRESENTING CENTER FOR
RESPONSIBLE LENDING AND SUPPORT.
MEGAN ABLE ON BEHALF OF TECH
EQUITY, COLLABORATIVE, PROUD CO
SPONSORS AND ALSO ON BEHALF OF
ASIAN LAW, ALLIANCE, EQUAL
RIGHTS ADVOCATES AND STRONGER
CALIFORNIA ADVOCATES. NETWORK.
THANK YOU. MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
. MICHELLE TERAN WOLF WORK WITH
THE CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON THE
STATUS, WOMEN AND GIRLS IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS, MARIE
LOPEZ WITH THE CALIFORNIA NURSES
ASSOCIATION IN STRONG SUPPORT
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT,
SAYING NON WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. JEEZ BE CAREFUL.
THERE'S A LOT OF LAWYERS HERE TO
BRING SUIT. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD
. THANKS MR CHAIR, CHRIS
MAKELELE ON BEHALF OF THE
HOLLYWOOD CHAMBER, AND ALSO MY
COLLEAGUE, ASHLEIGH HOFFMAN FROM
CAL CHAMBER AND I WANT TO NOTE
OUR POSITION IN THE COALITION IS
OPPOSING LESS AMENDED. WE
APPRECIATE THE WORK OF THE
AUTHOR AND HIS STAFF. I KNOW
THAT MISS HOFFMAN HAS SHARED
AMENDMENTS WITH THE AUTHOR AND
HIS STAFF ARE CONSIDERATION. WE
HAVE FOUR ITEMS. THE FIRST IS
ARE CONCERNED WITH INCREASING
THE WARN ACT. TIME FROM 60 TO 90
DAYS. WE THINK THAT THAT MIGHT
HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT. IN OTHER
WORDS, EMPLOYERS WHO ARE WORRIED
ABOUT VIOLATING THE STATUTE WILL
BE OVER INCLUSIVE IN THEIR WORN
ACT NOTICES. THE SECOND ON PAGE
THREE, AND SECTION ONE IS THE
DEFINITION OF COVERED
ESTABLISHMENT, CHANGING IT FROM
75 EMPLOYEES OF THE SINGLE
ESTABLISHMENT TO 75 OF ALL
FACILITIES, WHICH MEANS, FOR
EXAMPLE, YOU COULD HAVE AT ONE
FACILITY 100 INDIVIDUALS. AND
THEN AT A 2ND 11 PERSON IN THAT
SECOND FACILITY WOULD ALSO HAVE
TO ISSUE A WARRANT ACT NOTICE.
THE THIRD ITEM IS THAT ALSO IN
THE DEFINITION THERE IN TERMS OF
FRANCHISEES WE HAVE OVER 76,000
FRANCHISEES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND WE SHOULD NOT
MAKE THOSE INDIVIDUALS
RESPONSIBLE FOR KNOWING WHAT
OTHER FRANCHISEES ARE DOING. THE
LAST ITEM IS ON THE DEFINITION
OF CONTRACTOR ALSO PAGE THREE,
SECTION ONE. UM, WE UNDERSTAND
THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DOING
BASICALLY THE SAME WORK. UH SIDE
BY SIDE WITH THE EMPLOYEE MIGHT
BE DIFFERENT, UH, AND
APPROPRIATE. UH, APPROPRIATELY
RECEIVING A NOTICE, HOWEVER, THE
LANGUAGE IS SO BROAD. WE THINK
THAT SOMEBODY WHO ONLY WORKS
PERHAPS A FEW HOURS A WEEK COULD
BE SUBJECT TO THE WARRANT ACT
NOTICE AS WELL. THOSE ARE FOUR
CONCERNS AND AGAIN, WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
AUTHOR ON POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU.
FURTHER WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. HAVE BEEN COMING
AFTER THE CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF
FOOD PRODUCERS ALSO AN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. MARGARET
GLADSTONE ABOUT HEALTH.
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
ALLYING OURSELVES WITH MR
MAKELELE'S COMMENTS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH TO SEE NO FURTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. WE
HAVE MOTION A SECOND. ANY
QUESTIONS, MR CONNELLY? BE HAPPY
TO MOVE AND AS DISCUSSED WITH
THE AUTHOR WOULD LOVE TO BE A
PRINCIPLE. ABSOLUTELY THANK YOU.
OKAY MR PACHECO, SO I ALSO HAVE
CONCERNS THAT IT MAY BE OVERLY
BROAD. SO UM, I LIKE THAT
THERE'S HOPEFULLY THERE'S
CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING, AND
MAYBE WE COULD MORE NARROWLY
DEFINED SOME THE BROADNESS OF IT
. SO THAT WAY, IT'S NOT SO
BROAD. BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING
TODAY. WE ALREADY HAD A MOTION.
YEAH BUT WE'RE JUST VERY
THOROUGH. SO MUCH LOVE. UH WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MR
HANEY. YOU MAY CLOSE, APPRECIATE
THE SUPPORT IN THE COMMITTEE AND
THE CONCERNS OF THE OPPOSITION
DEFINITELY WILL CONTINUE TO WORK
ON THOSE ISSUES, PARTICULARLY
AROUND THE DEFINITIONS OF
ESTABLISHMENTS AND FRANCHISEES,
ETCETERA AND RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO THE AS AMENDED, THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ASKED
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN SLE
CONNELLY CONNELLY. AYE. DIXON.
KINDA DIXON. NO, HANEY, I CORA
PACHECO. CHOLERA I PACHECO I
PAPIN HAPPENED. I RAISE MY RIVAS
RIVAS I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ. NO WELL
DONE. IT IS 11 56, MEANING ME.
WE WILL DO ADD ONS. WE HAVE A
COUPLE BILLS ON CALL, SO HOLD ON
. WE'RE GONNA DO ADD ONS, UH,
AND OUR ON CALL, SO WE'LL START
WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA AS A
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
CONSENT ANY I OKAY? ITEM NUMBER
ONE IS ON CALL A B 12 28 HOLDEN
AS THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.
HANEY. ALRIGHT, I. THAT BILL IS
OUT ITEM NUMBER. GRANITE ITEM
NUMBER. ADAM ADAM NUMBER 3 84 60
BAUER CAN AS CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLL CHOLERA. ALRIGHT. AYE. ADAM
FOUR A B 6 31 HEART, HANEY DIÆN
. NUMBER FIVE IS ON CALL A B 7
47 MCCARTHY ASKED THE CLERK TO
PLEASE OPEN THE ROLE. CONNELLY
CONNELLY. I DIXON NO, DIXON. NO.
HANEY HANEY. AYE. BILL IS OUT.
NUMBER SIX IS ALSO ON CALL. 13
OH, FIVE. GABRIEL ASK THE CLERK
TO PLEASE OPEN THE ROLE.
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DICKSON
DICKSON. NO! HANEY HANEY, I
CHOLERA. CHOLERA I RIVAS
RIVERSIDE BILL IS OUT. ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN A. B 13 17 WENDY
CARILLO S A CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLE. I. ITEM NUMBER NINE A B 14
65 WEEKS ESTÁ CLERK. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. DICKSON DICKSON. NO
CHOLERA. CHOLERA? AYE. WELL
DONE, EVERYBODY THAT CONCLUDES
TODAY'S MEETING OF THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE MEETING ADJOURNED.