GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING. AH
DUE TO LATE OPPOSITION. A B 12
53 MAIENSCHEIN WILL BE PULLED
OFF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND THE
BILL WILL BE PRESENTED. WE HAVE
A LONG AGENDA TODAY, SO WE WILL
NEED TO BE EFFICIENT WITH OUR
TIME AS A REMINDER. EACH SIDE
WILL BE ALLOWED TWO MINUTES OR
TWO MAIN 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
RUN A FAIR AND EFFICIENT HEARING
IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE GOAL
OF HEARING AS MUCH FROM THE
PUBLIC WITHIN THE LIMITS OF OUR
TIME, WE WILL NOT PERMIT CONDUCT
THAT DISRUPTS, DISTURBS OR
OTHERWISE IMPEDES THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT OF LEGISLATIVE
PROCEEDINGS. WE WILL NOT ACCEPT
DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR BEHAVIOR
THAT INCITES OR THREATENS
VIOLENCE, EVEN VEILED THREATS.
THE RULES OF CONDUCT BY MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC INCLUDE NO TALKING
OR LOUD NOISES FROM THE AUDIENCE
. PUBLIC COMMENT MAY BE PROVIDED
ONLY AT THE DESIGNATED TIME AND
MUST BE LIMITED TO YOUR NAME
ORGANIZATION AND SUPPORT HER
OPPOSITION OF A BILL NO ENGAGING
IN CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS,
DISTURBS OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES
THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF THIS
HEARING, NO ENGAGING IN PERSONAL
ATTACKS OF MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE AUTHORS OR STAFF. AND
PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE VIOLATION
OF THESE RULES MAY SUBJECT YOU
TO REMOVAL OR OTHER ENFORCEMENT
PROCESSES. UM KUDOS TO THIS
COMMITTEE. WE ALREADY HAVE A
QUORUM. SO VERY PROUD OF
EVERYBODY. HERE. I WILL ASK THE
CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
HERE. MAIENSCHEIN HERE DAILY
CONNOLLY. DIXON HANEY, CHOLERA
PACHECO HAPPEN, REYES RIVAS
SANCHEZ. SELECT COMMITTEES HERE,
BUT ZERO AUTHORS, SO I WILL.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND PRESENT MY
BILL.
ITEM NUMBER NINE. A B 12 53.
AGAIN WHEN YOU WOULD LIKE TO
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I WANT TO BEGIN BY
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS AS
PROPOSED IN THE ANALYSIS A B 12
53 PROTECTS VICTIMS OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT FROM BEING FORCED TO
REPEATEDLY RELATE RELIVE THEIR
TRAUMA IN COURT IN 2021 IS
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RULING
CHANGED THE WAY PROBABLE CAUSE
HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED DURING
THE SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATORS
CIVIL COMMITMENT PROCESS. THE
COURT RULED THAT WITHOUT AN
EXPRESS HEARSAY EXEMPTION IN
STATUTE HEARSAY, CONTAINED IN AN
EXPERT EVALUATION REPORT IS
INADMISSIBLE AS A RESULT OF
VICTIM OF A SEXUAL OFFENSES
FORCED TO RELIVE THE WORST
MOMENT IN THEIR LIFE AND TESTIFY
TO THEIR SURVIVED VICTIMIZATION
ORDER TO PROVIDE THE BASIS FOR
AN EXPERT'S OPINION BECAUSE OF
THE NATURE AND STATUTORY TIGHT
TIMELINE OF SBP HEARINGS, THE
VICTIM IS OFTEN FORCED TO
TESTIFY WITH MINIMAL NOTICE OR
PREPARATION ABOUT CRIMES THAT
HAPPENED YEARS OR DECADES PRIOR
THIS LEAVES NO TIME OR
OPPORTUNITY TO USE TRAUMA,
INFORMED CARE WITH THE FORMER
VICTIMS OR TO ALLOW THEM TO SEEK
APPROPRIATE MENTAL HEALTH CARE
TO HELP THEM PREPARE FOR THEIR
TESTIMONY. A B 12 53 PROVIDES A
NARROW HEARSAY EXEMPTION TO
ALLOW THE FOLLOWING PORTIONS OF
A POLICE REPORT TO BE ADMITTED
IN S. V P. PROBABLE CAUSE
HEARINGS OF VICTIMS STATEMENT A
STATEMENT OF AN EYEWITNESS TO
THE OFFENSE AND THE STATEMENT OF
A SEXUAL ASSAULT MEDICAL EXAMINE
ATOR. EXAMINER WHO EXAMINED THE
VICTIM. THESE ITEMS ARE ONLY
ADMISSIBLE IF THE REPORT COVERS
A PRIOR SEXUAL OFFENSE THAT
RESULTED IN A CONVICTION, THE
VICTIM AND ANY WITNESSES WILL
STILL BE REQUIRED TO TESTIFY AND
BE CROSS EXAMINED DURING THIS VP
TRIAL PHASE WHERE CIRCUMSTANCES
MUST BE PROVED BEYOND A
REASONABLE DOUBT. A B 12 53
ALLOWS THE STATE TO USE PRIOR
STATEMENTS TO MEET THE PROBABLE
CAUSE BURDEN WHILE RELIEVING
VICTIMS OF THE PRESSURE OF
MAKING A SUDDEN AND IMMEDIATE
DECISION TO TESTIFY. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. AND I DON'T SEE MY WITNESS
HERE. UM BUT HOPEFULLY THEY'LL
SHOW UP ANY WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT A D 12 53. SEEING NONE.
ANY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
SEEN NONE. LET'S BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE AND HE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. SAYING NONE WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MADAM CHAIR, RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST AND I VOTE. TO THE ALL
RIGHT. LET'S TAKE ROLL. MOTIONS
DO PASSES AMENDED. MAIENSCHEIN
HIÆN IAS SALLY I. CONNELLY
CONNELLY. DICKSON DICKSON. I
HANEY HANEY I CHOLERA. PACHECO
PACHECO EYE POPPING, RAISE HIGH
I REVERSE SANCHEZ. IT COMES OUT
BILL IS OUT. WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN
FOR THOSE WHO ARRIVED LATE SO
THEY CAN ADD ON. THANK YOU, UM
OUT LOOKING FOR AUTHORS, WE CAN
TAKE UP THE CONSENT CALENDAR. WE
HAVE MOTION. MOTION MOTION FROM
MS REYES SECOND SEEMS LIKE A TIE
IT. MISS MISS MACEK PACHECO BEAT
THEM JUST BY AN INCIDENT. SO WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS
THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. OH YEAH. THE CONSENT
CALENDAR INCLUDES ITEM 8 11 39
GARCIA. UH NUMBER ITEM 10 A B 13
76 CARILLO. ITEM 11 A B 16 50
PATTERSON 12 12 A B 17 20
BAUER-KAHAN. PLEASE CALL THE
WELL MAINTAINED. MAIENSCHEIN AYE
ASILI. CHI CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY PENNY I
KARA PACHECO PACHECO EYE POPPING
UP AND I RAISE RAISE RIVAS
SANCHEZ. CONSENT AGENDA IS OUT.
WE ARE WAITING ON, UH, WE'VE
MADE CALLS. TO MISS WICKS, MISS
BONTA. MS RUBIO. MR WALLACE, MR.
TA AND MR GIBSON. HOW CAN WE GET
THIS 23 HOURS? HOW CAN YOU KEEP
OUR RECORD GOING AT THESE
AUTHORS WILL NOT COOPERATE.
WHAT'S.
YEAH.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR RUBIO.
BEALL. ITEM NUMBER THREE A B 11
71. MAYBE AGAIN. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A B 11 71
, WHICH WOULD EMPOWER THE
LICENSED CANNABIS MARKET TO SEEK
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST
UNLICENSED OPERATORS. I WANT TO
BEGIN BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS AND THANK
THE CHAIR AND HIS WONDERFUL
STAFF. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY
WONDERFUL JOB FOR YOUR
ASSISTANCE IN ENSURING THIS
MEASURE MEETS THE INTENDED GOAL.
OVER THE YEARS, MYSELF AND MANY,
MANY AUTHORS PRESENT HERE, UH,
PRESENT HERE HAVE SPONSORED,
SUPPORTED AND ADVOCATED FOR
ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT AGAINST
ILLICIT OPERATORS IN THE
CANNABIS MARKET. UNFORTUNATELY
THE ILLICIT MARKET HAS CONTINUED
TO GROW DESPITE THE ADDITIONAL
ENFORCEMENT STEPS WE HAVE TAKEN
IN THE PAST YEARS, THERE ARE
SEVERAL CLEAR INDICATORS OF THE
TOLL IT IS TAKING ON LICENSED
OPERATORS. CURRENTLY FOR OUT OF
FIVE CANNABIS PURCHASES MADE IN
CALIFORNIA ARE MADE ON THE
ILLICIT MARKET IN MAY OF 2022.
THEY WERE CLOSE TO 1500 BRANDS
IN THE MARKET LESS THAN A YEAR
LEADER. ONLY ABOUT 1000 REMAIN.
THIS HAS LED TO THE LARGEST
MULTI STATE OPERATORS
CHARACTERIZING CALIFORNIA'S
OPERATING CONDITIONS AS BRUTAL
AND THE INVESTMENT CLIMATE AS
HOSTILE. THIS IS A THIS, IN TURN
DEVASTATES THE UNIONIZED
WORKFORCE OF LICENSED OPERATORS
AND REDUCES THE OPPORTUNITIES
FOR WORKERS IN THIS SPACE AS THE
LEGAL BUSINESS LEAVES THE STATE
. AS SUCH, IT IS CLEAR, UNIQUE
STEPS MUST BE TAKEN TO FURTHER
EMPOWER THE LEGAL MARKET. MAYBE
11 71 PROVIDES THAT UNIQUE
SUPPORT BY SIMPLY EMPOWERING
LICENSED OPERATORS TO SEEK
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST NON
LICENSED OPERATORS. I DO NOT
TAKE THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION
LIGHTLY. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW,
HOWEVER, THIS INDUSTRY IS AT A
CRISIS POINT AND WE MUST PROVIDE
THEM WITH THE TOOLS TO ENSURE
THEY CAN COMPETE. THIS MEASURE
SIMPLY IMPOSES ADDITIONAL
PRESSURE ON ILLICIT OPERATORS
AND ENCOURAGES THEM TO EITHER
SEEK A LICENSE OR LEAVE THE
MARKET TO LEGAL OPERATORS.
AMENDMENTS TAKEN TODAY ENSURE
THIS PROCESS IS NOT ABUSED,
WHILE ALSO DETERRING FURTHER BAD
ACTORS FROM ENTERING THE MARKET.
11 71 IS A UNIQUE SOLUTION TO AN
INCREDIBLY COMPLEX PROBLEM, AND
IT'S AND AS SUCH HAS NO
OPPOSITION WITH ME TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT IS CHRISTIAN HEIDEL
BACK ON BEHALF OF UFCW, WESTERN
STATES COUNCIL AND ALBERTO TO
RICO ON BEHALF OF THE SAN DIEGO
IMPERIAL COUNTY, JOHN LEE JOINT
LABOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS RUBIO.
FIRST WITNESS, PLEASE. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS KRISTEN
HUDDLE. BACH CANNABIS
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE FOR UFCW
WESTERN STATES COUNCIL. UH I
WANT TO FIRST THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR HER TIRELESS WORK IN TRYING
TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ILLEGAL
AND ILLICIT OPERATORS IN THE
CANNABIS INDUSTRY. UFCW HAS
PARTNERED WITH HER IN THE PAST
ON THIS ISSUE, AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO DO SO AS LONG AS
SUCH A NEED AS PRESENT PRESENT.
YOU HAVE C W REPRESENTS OVER
6000 WORKERS ACROSS THE CANNABIS
INDUSTRY IN CALIFORNIA THROUGH
BONA FIDE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENTS, AND WE ARE WORKING
TO REPRESENT THOUSANDS MORE WHO
WORK FOR EMPLOYERS THAT HAVE
SIGNED LABOR PEACE AGREEMENTS
WITH VARIOUS UFCW LOCALS, ONE OF
THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES FOR
LICENSED UNIONIZED CANNABIS
EMPLOYERS IS THE FACT THAT 60 TO
70% OF CANNABIS PRODUCTS CAN BE
TRACED TO ELICIT OR UNLICENSED
OPERATORS. UNFORTUNATELY STATE
AND LOCAL ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN
ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH THE GROWING
ILLICIT MARKET. ADDITIONALLY
UFCW REMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT WORKERS MUST ENDURE WHILE
WORKING FOR BAD ACTORS. WE
UNFORTUNATELY HAVE HEARD
FIRSTHAND STORIES OF WORKERS
FALLING INTO GRINDERS, LACK OF
PPE ROBBERIES AND MORE, THESE
WORKERS EXPERIENCED THE WORST
WORKING CONDITIONS HAVE LITTLE
TO NO RESOURCES TO SEEK HELP. IN
SHORT, MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE TO
CLAMP DOWN ON THE NEFARIOUS
ACTORS. MAYBE 11 71 EXCUSE ME
WILL EMPOWER LICENSE OPERATORS
TO SEEK JUDICIAL RELIEF AGAINST
THEIR ILLEGAL COMPETITORS BY
GIVING THEM STANDING IN SUPERIOR
COURT TO SEEK A PERMANENT
INJUNCTION AGAIN. EXT.
UNLICENSED OPERATORS. ONE FINAL
POINT. UFCW DOES NOT SUPPORT
FURTHER CRIMINALIZING UNLICENSED
CANNABIS OPERATORS. WE SUPPORT A
B 11 71 BECAUSE IT IS STRICTLY
CIVIL REMEDY, WHICH IS MUCH
NEEDED IN ORDER TO PROTECT AND
BOLSTER LICENSED OPERATORS. WE
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU
, MR CHAIRMAN, ALBERTO TORRICO
ON BEHALF OF THE JOINT LABOR
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE BETWEEN
UFCW LOCAL 1 35 IN MARCH AND ASH
WANT TO BEGIN BY THANKING THE
AUTHOR FOR HER CONTINUED EFFORTS
IN THIS IN THIS SPACE, AS
MENTIONED BY MS HEIDEL BACK, WE
HAVE PARTNERED WITH HER ON THIS
ISSUE IN THE PAST. WANT TO THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN AND YOUR STAFF
FOR THE AMENDMENTS IN THE IN THE
ASSISTANCE IN GETTING THIS BILL
TO A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE
CLARIFIED THE ISSUE OF STANDING,
WE'VE ENHANCED THE PENALTY.
WHICH WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT
DETERRENT. I JUST WANT TO SAY
THAT, UM THE JOINT LABOR
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, WE BELIEVE
IS THE FIRST OF ITS KIND IN THE
COUNTRY, UM, BETWEEN THE
CANNABIS EMPLOYER IN A UNION.
IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT FOR
COMPANIES THAT ARE ARE LICENSED
, ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING BY
THEIR EMPLOYEES BY JOINING THE
UNION SIGNING A COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENT PAYING, UM
EXCELLENT WAGES AND PROVIDING
BENEFITS. THAT WE TAKE A
SIGNIFICANT STEPS TO DETER.
LISTEN, MARKETPLACE, THE CTF. A
REPORT REPORTED LAST YEAR THAT
THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT DROP IN
TAX REVENUE FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND HAS MISHANDLED
BAG NOTED 50 60, OR 70% OF
MARKETPLACES CURRENTLY
COMPLETELY UNLICENSED. THE
SECONDARY PROBLEM IS THAT THERE
ARE LICENSED OPERATORS THAT
OPERATE A SECOND. PARALLEL
BUSINESS. AND UNLIKE HIS
MARKETPLACE, WE THINK THIS BILL
IS GOING TO HELP ON BOTH FRONTS
AND ELEVATE THE INDUSTRY AND
THEREBY ELEVATING THE SENATE OF
LIVING FOR THE WORKERS IN THIS
SPACE, PROUD TO BE THE CO
SPONSOR OF THE MEASURE OF
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FURTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT NAME AND
ORGANIZATION ONLY, PLEASE.
MORNING MR CHAIR MEMBERS,
ELIZABETH ESPINOSA ON BEHALF OF
THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAN
MEMBERS NICOLE WARD LEMAN ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
CANNABIS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION,
ALSO IN SUPPORT. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. SAYING
NONE WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SAYING NONE WITH EMOTION FROM MS
REYES, SECOND FROM HIS POPPIN
ANYBODY WISH TO OKAY, MR.
HEINOUS, OKAY. I WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR AND THE SPONSORS. UH,
YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
I'VE HEARD SO MUCH FROM OUR
LOCAL CANNABIS OPERATORS. YOU
KNOW THE TAXES, THE REGULATIONS
THAT WORKING AND DOING THE RIGHT
THING WITH LABOR AND YET THEY
LOOK RIGHT OUTSIDE AND FOLKS ARE
STILL BEING ABLE TO SELL ILLEGAL
CANNABIS BLATANTLY WITHOUT
REGARD FOR THE LAWS, AND THAT'S
NOT FAIR. IT'S GOING TO LEAD TO
THE DEATH OF OUR LEGAL CANNABIS
INDUSTRY IF WE DON'T ACT AND
UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT
HAS STEPPED AWAY FROM
ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE WE ARE
ENCOURAGING THE LEGAL MARKET, SO
WE HAVE TO GET CREATIVE ABOUT
HOW WE DO ENFORCEMENT. AND I
THINK THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AND
I APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS AND
I'M VERY STRONGLY IN SUPPORT.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED AS
A CO AUTHOR. THANK YOU. ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. MR SALIH.
THANK YOU. I'M SHOCKED. THERE'S
NO OPPOSITION FROM OPERATORS. OH
SO I'M NOT A CONSUMER, BUT IT IS
LEGAL. AND UH, I'M SHOCKED AT
60% OF THE INDUSTRY'S UNLICENSED
. I MEAN, IMAGINE IF WE HAD 60%
OF DOCTORS PRACTICING WITHOUT A
LICENSE, SO I DO SUPPORT THE
BILL. UM DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION,
THOUGH? HOW DO YOU IDENTIFY THE
PERSONS ENGAGING IN BECAUSE WHEN
I TALKED TO CITIES, THEY SAY,
YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO SHUT THEM
DOWN. BY THE TIME WE GET THROUGH
THE COURT PROCESS. THEY'VE
ALREADY REOPENED SOMEWHERE ELSE
UNDER A NEW NAME. SO HOW DO YOU
HOW DO YOU KEEP UP WITH THAT?
WHACK A MOLE? IF YOU KNOW IF I
MAY, AND THEN I'LL ASK FOR MORE
ASSISTANCE. THIS IS I THINK THIS
IS MY FIFTH BILL ON IN THE
CANNABIS INDUSTRY, AND SO WE TRY
TO DO ONE THING AT A TIME. SO
LAST YEAR, WE HAD A BILL THAT,
UH, WAS BASICALLY PENALIZING,
AIDING AND ABETTING. UH AT LEAST
ILLICIT MARKET. SO SOME
LANDLORDS WERE LEASING KNOWINGLY
THAT THAT THESE, UH VENDORS WERE
NOT LEGAL, AND SO WE INSTEAD OF
TRYING TO TACKLE THAT PROBLEM.
WE SAID TO THE LANDLORDS. IF YOU
ATE IN A BED, THESE FOLKS, THEN
THE PENALTY IS GOING TO BE ON
YOU. SO WE'RE TRYING TO SHUT
DOWN THE WHACK A MODE THAT THAT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. SHUT DOWN
THE DIFFERENT AVENUES THAT THERE
IS SKIRTING BASICALLY THE LAW.
SO WE HAVE THAT BILL. UM AND I'M
LOOKING FORWARD TO ACTUALLY
WORKING MORE IN THIS SPACE. BUT
I WOULD LIKE SOME HELP FROM
OTHER FOLKS THAT THAT WE CAN
COME UP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE
PACKAGE BECAUSE I'M DOING ONE
THING AT A TIME, AND I THINK A
COUPLE OF OTHERS ARE DOING ONE
THING AT A TIME AND REALLY? WE
CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE CREATIVE
WAYS THAT THE ILLEGAL OR ILLICIT
MARKET IS AH, GETTING BY. BUT IN
THIS CASE, WE DID THAT FOR THE
ACTUAL BUILDING. UM, SO THE
LANDLORDS ARE ON THE HOOK IF
THEY RENT TO ILLEGAL OPERATORS,
AND SO THIS GIVES THE, UH, NEXT
DOOR NEIGHBOR BASICALLY THE
OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THEY ALL
KNOW EACH OTHER. COME ON. WE
KNOW THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS EACH
OTHER. THEY ALL KNOW EACH OTHER,
AND SO THIS GIVES THEM SOME
REMEDY, BUT ON HOW THEY'RE
KEEPING UP, THAT'S NOT MY PAY
GRADE. I THINK THAT'S UH THERE.
UH, WAY OF THEY CAN ANSWER THAT
QUESTION. MR CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY,
MR VICE CHAIRMAN, A COUPLE OF
COUPLE OF THINGS. FIRST
IDENTIFYING ILLICIT OPERATORS.
ACTUALLY SURPRISINGLY SIMPLE.
THE DEPARTMENT OF CANNABIS
CONTROL HAS A WEBSITE. AND ALL
THE LICENSED OPERATORS ARE
LISTED THERE, SO YOU SIMPLY PUT
IN THE NAME OF THE OPERATION. IF
IT DOESN'T SHOW UP, THERE'S NO
LICENSE. THAT'S AN UNLISTED
OPERATOR GIVES. UH, THE CANNABIS
STOP. THE AMENDMENTS IN THE BILL
NOW GIVES A KIND OF A SHOP DOWN
THE STREET, THE ABILITY TO GO
INTO COURT AND GET AN INJUNCTION
AND SHUT IT DOWN. MORE
IMPORTANTLY, ON THE DETERRENT
EFFECT. EXCUSE ME, THE PENALTY
THAT'S ADDED IN THE BILL WITH
COMMITTEE MEMBERS TODAY OF
$500,000. WE THINK IT'S GOING TO
BE A VERY SIGNIFICANT DETERRENT
FOR OPERATORS TO JUST SHUT DOWN
AND THEN TRY TO REOPEN WITH THE
RISK OF ANOTHER $500,000 FINE
OVER THEIR HEAD IF THEY DO IT
AGAIN. SO IS THE LITIGATION
AIMED AT AN INDIVIDUAL OR IS IT
AIMED AT LIKE ABC MARIJUANA SHOP
BECAUSE IT'S LIKE YOU COULD KNOW
WHAT THE NAME OF THE SHOP IS.
IT'S HARD SOMETIMES TO KNOW
WHO'S BEHIND IT. ANYWAY I'M JUST
POINTING OUT THAT THERE'S STILL
A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE. I
THINK YOU HAVE BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT ON FIXING THIS ISSUE,
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE UM
MORE CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT AND
TAX REFORM BECAUSE I DO THINK
THE HIGH TAXES ARE CREATING A
FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR THE FOR
THE BLACK MARKET. SO WITH THAT,
I THANK. YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY IF
I MAY, UM MR CHAIR AND THAT'S
WHAT I THINK A LOT OF US HAVE
BEEN TRYING TO DO. I THINK THE
COMPLAINTS THAT I HEAR FROM THE
CANNABIS INDUSTRY IS THAT WE'RE
NOT DOING ENOUGH. AND, YOU KNOW
, HONESTLY, I'M ONE AUTHOR, AND
I KNOW THAT I THINK MR CONROY
HAS ENGAGED IN THIS SPACE AS
WELL. SOME WERE DOING THE WHACK
A MOLE AND I THINK AT SOME POINT
WE HAVE TO GET TOGETHER AND COME
UP WITH A PACKAGE. I BELIEVE SO
THAT YOU KNOW THE I WORK WITH U
F C W ON THIS ISSUE ALL THE
TIME. AND SO WE CAN YOU KNOW,
FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN PASS MORE
LEGISLATION THAT CAN HELP THE
LEGAL MARKET. SO I'M ASKING FOR
A YES VOTE TODAY, BUT I'M ALSO
ASKING FOR SOME HELP. AND
PERHAPS IF ANY OF YOU HAVE IDEAS
, WE CAN, UM SET UP. YOU KNOW,
SOME KIND OF A COMMITTEE OR TASK
FORCE THAT WE CAN ALL TALK ABOUT
HOW WE MOVE FORWARD THE
FOLLOWING YEAR, AND THE YEAR
AFTER THAT, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT
THAT THE LITTLE THINGS THAT
WE'RE DOING IS NOT HELPING. AND
SO AGAIN, THEY'RE VERY CREATIVE
. WE'VE KNOWN THAT FOREVER. AND
SO. SO WHEN WE DO ONE THING
THEY'RE DOING FIVE THINGS. AND
SO I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY,
BUT I ALSO ASK IF ANY OF YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN WORKING ON A
PACKAGE, MAYBE NEXT YEAR. UM
THEN I WOULD LOVE TO PARTNER UP
WITH ALL OF YOU SO THAT WE CAN
COME UP WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS.
I'M L A COUNTY MIGHT ISSUES ARE
VERY DIFFERENT THAN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. AND SO I WOULD LIKE SOME
REGIONAL SUPPORT, IF YOU WILL,
SO THAT WE CAN ALL SIT DOWN AND
TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC ISSUES IN IN
IN THIS SPACE. MISS DIXON. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD
WORK ON THAT. I DID NOT KNOW THE
HISTORY TELL ME WHY LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS NOT WORKING. THE
RESOURCES. THEY DON'T HAVE
ENOUGH RESOURCES FOR THE STATED
REASONS, RIGHT BY THE TIME THEY
GO AND LOOK FOR, YOU KNOW THIS
CANNABIS SHOP THE NEXT DAY,
THEY'RE GONE AND THEY DON'T HAVE
THE RESOURCES TO KEEP GOING BACK
AND BACK. ELLIE UM, CITY OF L, A
ACTUALLY PARTNERED UP A COUPLE
OF YEARS AGO WITH THE WATER
DEPARTMENT. UM WITH WITH THE
WATER PEOPLE, AND, UM THEY HAVE
LIKE A TRIAGE IF YOU WILL. WHERE
WHERE THE WATER. PEOPLE ARE
CALLING THE CITY AND SAYING, HEY
, UM, THE THERE'S TOO MUCH WATER
AND THERE'S TOO MUCH POWER BEING
USED AS THIS LOCATION AND WE
DON'T HAVE A LICENSE. NOW
THEY'RE DOING IT BECAUSE IT'S
IMPORTANT TO THEM, BUT THAT'S
ONLY ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW WE CAN
DO IT. HOWEVER THE RESOURCES ARE
NOT AVAILABLE TO US. THE CITY OF
L. A HAS THEIR OWN WATER AND
POWER DEPARTMENT IN SACRAMENTO.
THERE'S TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT
ONES, AND I KNOW IN ORANGE
COUNTY THERE'S TWO OR THREE, SO
IT'S NOT, UM, A WAY TO
COORDINATE THOSE EFFORTS. SO THE
ENFORCEMENT PART THE OBVIOUSLY
THE RESOURCES AND YOU KNOW L A,
FOR EXAMPLE, HAS SO MANY OTHER
ISSUES, BUT THEY THEY'VE
ACTUALLY PRIORITIZE PART OF THIS
AS AS AN ISSUE AND I DON'T THINK
ALL OF THESE OTHER COMMUNITIES
ARE ACTUALLY PRIORITIZING THIS
BECAUSE THEY SEE IT AS A STATE
PROBLEM, NOT NECESSARILY OR
LOCAL PROBLEM. AND SO THAT'S
WHAT I BELIEVE. I DON'T KNOW,
BUT I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE
REASON. BUT I THINK THE MAIN
REASON IS THE LACK OF RESOURCES
THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THE
POLICE TO GO KEEP GOING OUT. AND
UM, TO THE POINT THAT MR THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SALIH WAS
MAKING HIS BY THE TIME THEY GET
THERE, THEY'VE ALREADY MOVED
SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO THEY'RE
THEY'RE CHASING, YOU KNOW, I
OKAY, I GET THAT. I'M JUST I'M
JUST CONCERNED HOW THE HOW THE
COURT SYSTEM IF THEY CAN'T FIND
HIM ON THE STREET. HOW ARE THEY
GOING TO GO AFTER THEM LEGALLY.
HOW DOES THAT WORK? SO FOR SOME
OF THEM STAY IN. IF I MAY CAN I
SPEAK? CAN'T FIND THEM. WHERE
ARE THEY? WELL THEY KIND OF ADD
TO THE POINTS PREVIOUS MADE
PREVIOUSLY MADE. THEY THERE HAS
BEEN SOME GRACE THAT WE'VE ASKED
LAW ENFORCEMENT TO GIVE THESE
OPERATORS WE'VE BEEN IN A LEGAL
OPERATED REGULATED STRUCTURE
SINCE 2018 AND THAT TAKES SOME
HOOPS JUMPING THROUGH GETTING
EVERYONE LICENSED. AND SO IT
REALLY DEPENDS ON THE LOCATION.
I PERSONALLY UFCW. WE FEEL THAT
ENFORCEMENT SHOULD BE A
MULTIPRONGED APPROACH. SO YOU
NEED ACTIVITY FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. YOU NEED THE DCC TO
DO THEIR JOB OF ENFORCING THE
LAWS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON THE
BOOKS. AND THEN YOU ALSO NEED A
COORDINATED EFFORT FROM THE
LOCALS IN ORDER TO TAP INTO
THAT, AND THAT, BASED ON THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE SIZE
AND THE DIFFERENT LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THEY MAY
HAVE DIFFERENT FEELINGS ABOUT
CANNABIS. AND SO I THINK THAT
IT'S GOING TO TAKE. UH THIS IS
JUST ANOTHER TOOL BECAUSE WE
HAVE OPERATORS THAT ARE
UNIONIZED. THEY'RE PAYING, YOU
KNOW GOOD WAGES THERE. THEY'VE
GOT SUBSIDIZED CHILDCARE FOR
THEIR FOLKS. AND YET THEY'RE
COMPETING WITH A SHOP DOWN THE
STREET. ALL OF THEM MOVE AROUND.
IT DEPENDS ON THE LOCATION IN L
A. I AGREE. TOTALLY AGREE AND
COMMEND THEM FORCE MINT ASPECT,
AND THAT'S NOT RIGHT FOR THE
LEGAL OPERATORS, LICENSED
OPERATORS. I'M JUST CONCERNED
ABOUT FEEDING THIS INTO THE
COURT SYSTEM AND HOW YOU
IDENTIFY THEM. IT'S JUST YEAH.
HOW SUCCESSFUL IS THAT GOING TO
BE, UH, IN TERMS OF HOLDING THEM
ACCOUNTABLE IN THE COURT SYSTEM
IT JUST EXPANDING THAT AND FOR
LICENSED FIRMS. IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING. CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG, IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'VE
EXPANDED THE RIGHT TO PRIVATE
LEGAL ACTION TO LICENSE HOLDERS
OR NON LICENSE HOLDERS OR
LICENSE HOLDERS. I GUESS IT IS.
SO THEN CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, I
THINK ENFORCEMENT IS NECESSARY.
I TOTALLY AGREE. IT NEEDS TO BE
, UH, THE STEPS THAT WE ARE
DOING IN OTHER FORMS OF
LEGISLATION TO TIGHTEN UP THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR LEGAL ENTITIES
TO WORK SUCCESSFULLY. I'M JUST
CONCERNED ABOUT THE LEGAL AT THE
COURT SYSTEM ASPECT OF IT IF I
MAY, UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE
IS A CIVIL ACTION RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE TAKING SOME RESPONSIBILITY
. THE LICENSE OPERATORS ARE
TAKING SOME RESPONSIBILITY AND
WE'RE NOT JUST DEPENDING ON BOMB
FOR IS MEANT TO SHUT THEM DOWN
THE COURT SYSTEM. I THINK IT'S I
YOU'RE I KNOW YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY
. I'M NOT. I'M NOT. I'M MARRIED
TO ONE STORY. I FORGOT ABOUT
THAT. I GUESS I AM. NO, YOU ARE.
BUT IT'S SO YOU KNOW THAT THAT
THE IMPACT ON THE LEGAL SYSTEM
IS WHAT IT IS, REGARDLESS OF
WHAT WE ADD AGAIN, IN MY
OPINION, UM, AND SO GIVING THE
LICENSE OPERATORS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BASICALLY TURN IN
THE ILLEGAL FOLKS TAKES A LITTLE
PRESSURE OFF THE CITIES. UM THE
ENFORCEMENT PART OF IT, UM, THE
LEGAL SYSTEM I THINK IS, YOU
KNOW IF THEY CAN'T FIND THEM, I
JUST UNDERSTAND, BUT I CAN FIND
THEM. LIKE I SAID, LIKE WE WERE
STATING SO THEY WILL LEAVE THIS
LOCATION AND LIKE TWO BLOCKS
AWAY, THEY'LL FIND ANOTHER
LOCATION. YOU KNOW, SO THEY
DON'T LEAVE THE AREA BECAUSE
THEY ALSO HAVE TO STAY CLOSE TO
THE LICENSE OPERATORS SO THAT
THEY'RE NOT YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A
RED FLAG FOR ENFORCEMENT, SO
THEY'RE WITHIN THE AREA AGAIN IN
MY AREA THERE WITHIN THE AREA OF
WHERE THE LICENSE OPERATORS ARE,
BECAUSE THEN THEY'RE NOT
SUSPICIOUS, RIGHT AND LEGAL AND
THEN THEY ALL KNOW. LIKE I SAID,
THEY ALL KNOW EACH OTHER RIGHT?
AND SO WE KNOW WHO'S DOING IT ON
THE GROUND. THE FOLKS THAT ARE
LEGAL KNOW WHO'S DOING
ILLEGALLY, GIVING THEM THE
ABILITY TO BRING CIVIL ACTION
THAT HELPS US LAW ENFORCEMENT
RIGHT, BUT IT HELPS THEM AT
LEAST TRY TO REMEDY THE LOCAL
SITUATION. BUT AGAIN TRYING TO
FIND THEM. THEY'RE TWO BLOCKS
AWAY. OKAY I APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
WHEN MEASURED. WE HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND WILL USE THAT AS
YOUR CLOSE, MS RUBIO. THANK YOU
. THANK YOU FOR THIS BILL. WE'RE
PLEASED. WE'RE ABLE TO WORK WITH
YOU ON THIS. YOU KNOW YOUR THIS
EFFORT AS AN ATTEMPT TO BRING
ORDER OUT OF CHAOS, SO IT'S
APPRECIATED. THANK YOU TO OUR
FRIENDS IN LABOR WHO ARE
WEIGHING IN ON THIS BECAUSE I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. IT'S
ALWAYS GOING TO BE PROBLEMATIC
JUST BECAUSE IT'S SO LUCRATIVE.
UH, IF FOR NO OTHER REASON. SO I
APPRECIATE THIS BILL. CERTAINLY
PLEASED TO SUPPORT IT WITH THAT.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ASK THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL PASS AND THE MOTION IS DUE
PASSES AMENDED. ESCORT TO
COLORADO. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I, SALI CONNOLLY.
COMING UP CALMLY. I DIXON HANEY
, KALRA TÔI PACHECO PACHECO, I
POP IN AND I RAISE RIVAS SANCHEZ
SANCHEZ, I BILL IS OUT. THANK
YOU, MR RUBIO. MR TÂM. THANK
YOU. NUMBER SIX A B 14 58. YOU
MAY BEGIN. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS AND
HERE THIS MORNING TO PRESENT A B
14 58 THIS VIEW SECTOR CORRECT
CURRENT PROBLEM IN HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION BOARD ELECTION. I
DEEPLY APPRECIATE THE C¢M
COMMITTEE STAFF DOCUMENT INPUT
AND ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED
COMMITTEE IS AMENDMENT. MY
REMARK WILL REFLECT THIS UPDATE.
LANGUAGE ONE OF CALIFORNIA HOMES
IN COMMON INTERESTS. DEVELOPMENT
ALSO KNOW AS HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATION OR OH, A S O A ACT
ACTS LIKE THE FACTOR OF
GOVERNMENTS IN RE REGULATING
THEIR COMMUNITIES. ELECTED WAR
CREATE POLICY. UM. LEVEL
ASSESSMENT AND METE OUT
PUNISHMENT TO HOME OWNERS.
CALIFORNIA LAW SPARE WELL, HOW
ACTUALLY ELECTION TO BE
CONDUCTED. MANY ASSOCIATION ALSO
HAVE GOVERNING DOCUMENT THAT IN
LOWER CORAM FOR ELECTION.
UNFORTUNATELY MANY ACTUALLY ARE
UNABLE TO HOLD ELECTION DUE TO
AND INABILITY TO MEET THEIR
MINIMUM CORN REQUIREMENT. THIS
OFTEN RESULT IN BOARD MEMBERS
SAYING OFFICE FOR MANY YEARS
BECAUSE OF THE ACTUAL IS UNABLE
TO CONDUCT AN ELECTION. THIS IS
AN UNDEMOCRATIC AND NOT STAND
OUT. FOR MOST OF THE ELECTION,
FOR INSTANCE, THERE'S NO MINIMUM
VOTING REQUIREMENT FOR ELECTION
FOR THE LEGISLATOR, CITY COUNCIL
OR CONGRESS, NOT IN THE
COMMITTEE AND ANALYSIS DURING
THE 2022 PRIMARY IN LAST ANGELES
COUNTY, ONLY 14.45% OF VOTERS
BUT THIS IP EIGHT A B 14 58 6 TO
REMEDY THIS PROBLEM BY LOWERING
THE QUORUM REQUIREMENT FOR
FOLLOW UP FOR ELECTION TO 20% OF
HOME OWNERS IN THE EVENT. IN
ASSOCIATION IS NOT ABLE TO READ
THE REQUIRED QUORUM IN THE FIRST
ELECTION. THIS BILL, THERE IS
NOT MAKE ANY CHEN TO CALM
REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTION TO
CHANGE AND SHOW A GOVERNING
DOCUMENTS OR TO RAISE ASSESSMENT
. I HAVE WORKED WITH THE CHAIR
AND COMMITTEE. JACK REST
CONCERNS REGARDING TIMELY
NOTIFICATION BEFORE SECOND
ELECTION IS HELL. THIS CHANCES
ARE REASONABLE AND PROVIDE THE
TRANSPARENCY NEEDED TO ENSURE
ASSOCIATION MEMBERS ARE
INFORMED. THE SECOND ELECTION
MEETING. I HAVE WITNESSES WITH
ME TODAY FROM THE COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION INTO TWO AND THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
COMMUNITY MANAGER ONLY ASK FOR
THE EVIL THANK YOU. FIRST
WITNESS. THANK YOU. COMMITTEE
AND CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
I'M HERE SPEAKING IN SPONSOR OF
HB 14 58, WHICH ALLOWS AN
ASSOCIATION TO AFTER THEIR CIVIL
CODE PROCESSED ELECTION HAS
FAILED TO GAIN QUORUM TO OPEN
THEIR BALLOTS WITH A REDUCTION
TO 20% OF THE MEMBERS. I'VE BEEN
IN THE ASSOCIATION INDUSTRY FOR
OVER 20 YEARS. IN A LOT OF
DIFFERENT CAPACITIES CURRENTLY
MANAGED 12 DIFFERENT
COMMUNITIES. THROUGH NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA. CURRENTLY ELECTIONS
ARE A MINIMUM OF 120 DAYS OF
NOTICES REMINDERS, CONTINUAL
BALLOTS AND COSTS. THE CURRENT
PROCESS REQUIRES EITHER A MEMBER
TO STEP UP AND BE THE INSPECTOR
OF ELECTIONS OR TO GO THROUGH A
COMPANY TO DO THE ELECTION
INSPECTOR WORK, WHICH IS $2000
PER ELECTION, JUST FOR THE
INSPECTOR. THEN YOU ALSO HAVE
THE COST OF MAILING AND BALLOT
MATERIALS. IF YOU HAVE TO KEEP
RESCHEDULING TO TRY TO GET
RESPONSES, THAT'S ADDITIONAL
COSTS FOR THAT INSPECTOR OF
ELECTIONS. YOU ALSO HAVE SMALL
ASSOCIATIONS. SMALL ASSOCIATIONS
ARE HARD HIT MY SMALLEST
ASSOCIATION SEVEN MEMBERS. UM I
HAVE WIDE RANGE IS 108 160. WE
MANAGE A LOT IN MY OFFICE,
HOWEVER. EVERYONE HAS HIT THE
SAME. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
NOT BEEN ABLE TO HOLD AN
ELECTION BECAUSE THEY CAN NEVER
GET QUORUM OF A MINIMUM OF 25.
THIS BILL DOESN'T TAKE AWAY
THEIR RIGHTS TO VOTE. IT DOESN'T
HAVE ALL THE POWER TO DO THE
PROCESS AND GO THROUGH THE
PROCESS. ALL THAT DOES IS TAKE
AWAY THE ADDITIONAL BURDEN AND
COST. THAT IT WOULD BE TO
CONTINUOUSLY SEND OUT MAIL TO GO
NOWHERE. SO. IT'S ESPECIALLY
SIGNIFICANT WHEN NO ONE'S EVEN
RUNNING TO OPPOSE MOST OF MY
ASSOCIATIONS. IT'S THE SAME
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SERVING FOR
2030 YEARS SIMPLY BECAUSE
THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES THAT CARE
. I HAVE OTHER ASSOCIATIONS THAT
ARE VERY ACTIVE AND THEY'RE
WONDERFUL. SO I REALLY URGE YOU
TO VOTE YES, TO STOP THIS
EXPENSE TO THE COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS, MR
CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
LOUIS BROWN HERE TODAY ON BEHALF
OF THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS
INSTITUTE, CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATIVE ACTION COMMITTEE, CO
SPONSOR OF THE BILL AND SUPPORT
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE'S WORK
ON THE NOTIFICATION AMENDMENTS.
WE DO THINK THAT THIS HELPS MAKE
THIS BILL MUCH MORE TRANSPARENT
AS WELL AS THE ABILITY FOR
ASSOCIATIONS TO HOLD EFFECTIVE
ELECTIONS AND ALLOW FOR MEMBERS
TO SERVE THAT WANT TO HEAR FOR
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. IF THERE
ARE ANY ASKED FOR AN I VOTE,
THANK YOU WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS JENNIFER
WADA ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY
MANAGERS, CO SPONSOR OF THE BILL
AND SUPPORT. ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT. SAYING NONE
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I AM
MARJORIE MURRAY FROM THE CENTER
FOR CALIFORNIA HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATION LAW. I AM HERE WITH
MY COLLEAGUE, SUPERIOR COURT
COMMISSIONER TOM SER. FIRST OF
ALL, WE WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR ITS FINE AND
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE BILL
AND FOR POINTING OUT OUR MANY
CONCERNS ABOUT IT. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH MR TAW
ON RESOLVING SOME OF THESE
CONCERNS, PARTICULARLY THE
NOTICE ISSUE. AH BECAUSE THIS
BILL CALLS FOR A SECOND
HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION BOARD
ELECTION WITHOUT THE SAFEGUARDS
ALREADY PRESENT IN LAW THAT IS
SURE ASSOCIATION ELECTIONS ARE
CLEAN AND FAIR. THE NOTICE ISSUE
IS A PRIMARY CONCERN TO US. YOU
KNOW, WE MIGHT WELL ASK. WELL
WHO CARES ABOUT ASSOCIATION
ELECTIONS? WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL
HERE? WHY HAVE WE COME TO
SACRAMENTO TO PETITION THE
LEGISLATURE TO MAKE CHANGES IN
STATUTES GOVERNING HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATION ELECTIONS? WELL IT'S
A VERY SIMPLE REASON. HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATION. HOW MUCH
ASSOCIATION THAT'S ENTITIES
COMPRISE ANOTHER LEVEL OF
GOVERNMENT. THE CALIFORNIA
COURTS OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS
HAVE MADE THIS CRYSTAL CLEAR
HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS ARE
ANOTHER LEVEL OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT. THEY HAVE
EXTRAORDINARY POWERS GRANTED BY
THE LEGISLATURE OVER THE MONEY,
THE PROPERTY THE BEHAVIOR OF THE
PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THEM. SO
WHOEVER SITS ON THE ASSOCIATION
BOARD HAS THIS EXTRAORDINARY
POWER VESTED IN THEM. THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS FORM OF
GOVERNMENT AND THE CITY COUNCIL
OR THE LEGISLATURE IS THAT THERE
IS NO SEPARATION OF POWERS. THE
BOARD MAKES UP THE RULES DECIDES
WHO'S BROKEN THEM. BRINGS
ENFORCEMENT ACTION, ETCETERA. UM
. I NEED YOU TO WRAP UP. YES I
KNOW. I KNOW. I'M SORRY. I'M
ENGAGED IN THE ISSUE, AS YOU CAN
TELL, BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH
ABUSE IN ASSOCIATION ELECTIONS
ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE BILL IS
THE QUORUM ISSUE BECAUSE THE
QUORUM IS MEANT TO ENSURE THE
ELECTIONS ARE TRULY DEMOCRATIC,
AND THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT
PARTICIPATION BY THE MEMBERSHIP.
I WILL LET MY COLLEAGUE TOM SER
TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS
THAT WE HAVE ABOUT THE BILL.
THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS.
EXCUSE ME. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS TOM. SIR
I'M A RETIRED COMMISSIONER AND A
MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATIVE
COMMITTEE OF THE CENTER. UM AS
NOTED BY THIS PREVIOUS WITNESS
THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING AN
ELECTION ARE EXTREMELY DETAILED.
AND THIS IS IN LARGE PART DUE TO
OUR WORK OVER MANY YEARS TO
ADDRESS MANY, MANY ABUSES IN
THIS PROCESS THAT WE HAVE
IDENTIFIED PEOPLE WHO COME TO US
WITH THE MOST OUTRAGEOUS TALES
OF HOW THESE ELECTIONS ARE
ABUSED. SO THAT WHAT THIS BILL
ALLOWS IS A SECOND FOLLOW UP
ELECTION TO TAKE PLACE IN ORDER
TO MEET A QUORUM, BUT WITHOUT
MOST OF THE PROCEDURAL
PROTECTIONS THAT ARE IN PLACE
FOR THE FIRST ELECTION. SOME OF
THESE SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE NOT IN
THIS BILL INCLUDE. THERE'S NO
PROVISION FOR INSPECTOR OF
ELECTIONS. WHO'S GOING TO RUN
THIS SECOND ELECTION IN A
NEUTRAL WAY? SECONDLY THERE'S NO
PROVISION FOR PREPARATION OF OR
MAILING A BALANCE. THERE'S NO
MENTION OF BALLOTS. HOW DO THE
VOTERS GET THEIR BALLOT? IN THE
FIRST CASE, THEY WOULD GET IT IN
THE MAIL. IN THIS CASE, THERE IS
NO TIME FOR THAT. THIRD THERE'S
NO PROVISION FOR INDIVIDUAL
DELIVERY OF THE BALLOT OR
ELECTION OPERATING RULES. THIRD
BY PERMITTING ONLY GENERAL
NOTICE. IN THE SECOND ELECTION.
SUCH NOTICE CAN BE MADE BY AS
LITTLE AS POSTING A, UH, WRITTEN
NOTICE ON A BULLETIN BOARD
SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT
AND FINALLY, THERE'S NO
PROVISION FOR VOTING BY MAIL AND
SO THERE'S ONLY ONE OPTION IN
THE FIRST ELECTION. YOU CAN VOTE
BY MAIL OR YOU CAN SHOW UP IN A
MEETING IN THIS ELECTION THAT'S
PROPOSED. THERE'S ONLY ONE
OPTION AND SO WITHOUT NAILING
BALLOT. AND VERY, UH, INADEQUATE
NOTICE THE LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING
EVEN THIS NUMBER OF VOTERS THAT
YOU HAD IN THE FIRST PLACE IS
GREATLY REDUCED. I WOULD SAY
THAT THAT IT WOULD BE AH, ALMOST
FOR SURE YOU'RE GUARANTEEING A
LOWER TURNOUT AND SO THESE
PROVISIONS ARE IN PLACE TO
PROTECT THE INTEGRITY ELECTION
AND THEIR ABSENCE IS REALLY
TANTAMOUNT TO A DENIAL OF THE
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
SEEN NONE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. MISS DIXON.
SO THANK YOU. CHAIR I'VE SPOKEN
WITH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TIME AND
HE KNOWS OF MY COMMENTS I'M
GOING TO BE MAKING NOW. I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE SOME AMENDMENTS. I
AM VERY FAMILIAR AS A HOMEOWNER
IN N H O A. I ACTUALLY SERVED ON
A BOARD ABOUT 12 YEARS AGO. AH,
WELL, I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON ALL
THE BYLAWS AND THERE ARE MANY
PROTECTIONS I I'VE EXPRESSED
THIS CONCERN AND I HOPE THIS CAN
BE AN AMENDMENT. I THINK IT
AFTER THE FIRST BALLOT TO DROP
DOWN TO AS A GENTLEMAN JUST
STATED THESE DIFFERENT PROCESS,
VOTING PROCESSES AND DOWN TO A
20% QUORUM REQUIREMENT. TO ME.
THAT'S TOO STEEP OF A FALL. I
WISH THERE WERE A TIERED. IN
FACT, I USE THAT WORD
SPECIFICALLY A TIERED PROCESS. I
UNDERSTAND AND TALKING WITH MR
TAZ REPRESENTATIVES THAT THERE
WAS A BILL I GUESS A FEW YEARS
AGO IN THE LEGISLATURE PERSON
PROPOSED THAT TO HAVE A TIERED
APPROACH. I ACTUALLY SUPPORT A
TIERED APPROACH TO GO FROM THE
CURRENT 50% MAYBE TO 35 OR 40.
TRYING TO GET THE VOTES AND THEN
DOWN TO MAYBE AS A DIFFERENT WAY
, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH
MAYBE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR COMPROMISE AND WORKING THIS
OUT. IT IS HARD TO GET THE
BALLOT. I JUST COMPLETED MY OWN
BALLOT AND MY OWN HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATION, UH FEW WEEKS AGO,
AND THEY GOT THE QUORUM ON THE
FIRST BALLOT. LAST YEAR. IT
TOOK, UH TWO BALLOTS AND LOTS OF
COMMUNICATIONS AND POUNDING ON
DOORS, BUT THEY GOT HIM IN. UM,
I THINK IT IT IS BECAUSE OF
PROPERTY RIGHTS, AND I'M A
FERVENT BELIEVER IN PROPERTY
RIGHTS THAT WE SHOULD PROTECT
THAT AND THIS WOULD POTENTIALLY
WITHOUT THIS TIERED APPROACH.
AH! ESTABLISHED THAT A SMALL
GROUP OF PEOPLE IN FOR PUTIN IN
PERPETUITY CONTROL THE BOARD OF
THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, AND I
THINK IT IS PROBLEMATIC. I
HAPPEN TO LIVE IN ONE THAT
THERE'S NO BAD ACTORS. BUT THERE
ARE BAD ACTORS IN THIS INDUSTRY.
I'M SORRY TO SAY SO. ANYWAY, I
HOPE TO MR TÂM REMEMBER TALK
THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT
AMENDMENTS BECAUSE I YOU'RE ON
THE RIGHT TRACK. I WOULD JUST
LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE
PROTECTIONS ON THE ON THE
EFFICACY OF THE VOTING AND
INTEGRITY OF THE VOTING. SO
THANK YOU. I REALLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMON FIRMS CINNAMON
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S DIXON AND BUT
THE LAST FEW WEEKS THAT THE
OPPOSITION HAVE NOW OUR CONTACT
MY OFFICE AND HAVE NOT, UH,
ACTUALLY, ANY MEETING TO COME UP
WITH ANY COMPROMISE SOLUTION? I
THINK THIS BILL IS I THINK THAT
IS A REALLY GOOD LEAN IN, AND I
THINK THAT AND EASY TO ASK FOR
THE SECOND ELECTION AS EVERYONE
COULD ABLE TO PARTICIPATE. I
ASKED WHAT IVO AND IF YOU HAVE
ANY OTHER CONCERNS IN ANY DETAIL
. SO I HAVE MY WITNESS HERE WHO
WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE
CONCERNS? YEAH. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. SEEN AND WE HAVE
EMOTION. SOME OF THE SEGMENT.
MOTION FOR MR CARLOS SECOND FROM
MR HANEY MOTION IS DUE PASSES
AMENDED AS THE CLERK TO PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN I HIGHLY HIGHLY I.
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I DICKSON
DICKSON. I HANEY HANEY, KALRA
TÔI PACHECO, HØI PAPIN PEP AND I
RAISE LUZ RIVAS. SANCHEZ SANCHEZ
, A BILL IS OUT. NEXT IS MISS
BONTA ITEM TO A B 11 48.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
FIRSTLY I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR TIME SPENT
ON THIS BILL AND THE CHAIR AS
WELL. I ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS, WHICH WERE
THOROUGHLY LAID OUT IN THE
ANALYSIS. I DEEPLY APPRECIATE
THE TIME YOU YOUR COMMITTEE
STAFF AND EVERYONE ON YOUR TEAM
SPENT WORKING COLLABORATIVELY ON
THIS A B 11 48, THE STABLE
PARENTS STABLE CHILDREN'S ACT.
BRINGS CRUCIAL REFORM TO THE
CHILD SUPPORT SYSTEM AND
ALLEVIATES FINANCIAL STRAINS FOR
FORMERLY INCARCERATED PARENTS
AND THEIR FAMILIES. CURRENT
CALIFORNIA LAW MANDATES FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PARENTS BEGIN
PAYING BACK CHILD SUPPORT 30
DAYS AFTER A TURNING HOME FROM
PRISON OR JAIL IF UNABLE TO PAY.
THEY FACE PUNITIVE CONSEQUENCES
, WHICH INCLUDE SUSPENSION OF
DRIVER'S LICENSE. UH THE
INABILITY TO OBTAIN A PASSPORT
AND INCREASED AMOUNT OF FINES
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHILD
SUPPORT THAT IS OWED. 30 DAYS
SETS PEOPLE UP FOR FAILURE. IT
FAILS TO RECOGNIZE THE MANY
BARRIERS PEOPLE RE ENTERING INTO
SOCIETY FACE PARTICULARLY AND
THE DIFFICULT D AND FINDING
STABLE EMPLOYMENT RATES OF
UNEMPLOYMENT ARE EARNINGS AND
EARNINGS AMONG FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PEOPLE ARE LOW
RESEARCH SHOWS THAT UNEMPLOYMENT
RATE FOR FORMERLY INCARCERATED
PEOPLE IS NEARLY FIVE TIMES.
HIGHER THAN UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
FOR THE GENERAL UNITED STATES
POPULATION. FORMERLY
INCARCERATED BLACK WOMEN, IN
PARTICULAR EXPERIENCE, SEVERE
LEVELS OF UNEMPLOYMENT STUDIES
SHOW IT TAKES FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PEOPLE AT LEAST 6
TO 8 MONTHS TO FIND EMPLOYMENT
AND TYPICALLY 10 TO 12 MONTHS
FOR STEADY EMPLOYMENT. PEOPLE IN
RURAL COMMUNITIES HAVE
DIFFICULTY FINDING EMPLOYMENT
AND REACHING ECONOMIC SECURITY
AS THEY FACE A MULTITUDE OF
SYSTEMS, ONE RETURNING HOME, IT
CAN TAKE THEM MUCH LONGER TO
FIND STABLE EMPLOYMENT, GIVEN
THE ADDITIONAL BARRIERS THEY
FACE. PROVIDING APPARENT ENOUGH
TIME TO SECURE STABLE EMPLOYMENT
AND GET BACK ON THEIR FEET
ENSURES THEY CAN ADEQUATELY
ADEQUATELY SUPPORT THEMSELVES
AND THEIR FAMILIES. A B 11 48
WILL HELP SUPPORT FAMILIES IN
THE FOLLOWING WAYS. FIRST IT
EXPANDS THE TIME TO RESUME CHILD
SUPPORT PAYMENTS FROM 30 DAYS
AFTER REENTRY TO 10 MONTHS,
ALLOWING TIME FOR FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PARENTS TO SECURE
STABLE EMPLOYMENT. SECOND. IT
ALSO USES A PROCESS UNDER
EXISTING LAW CALLED AUTOMATIC
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT TO
HELP ADJUST HOW MUCH CHILD
SUPPORT A PERSON GOES TO ACCOUNT
FOR THEIR CURRENT INCOME. THIS
BILL IS A MECHANISM FOR FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PERSONS TO FIND
SOME FINANCIAL STABILITY AND
BEGIN RESUMING FINANCIAL
OBLIGATIONS THAT WILL ALLOW THEM
TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES AND THEIR
CHILDREN. I ALSO WANT TO JUST
REITERATE THAT WE ARE FOCUSING
ON PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING OUT OF
THE SYSTEM WHO ARE INCARCERATED
. THIS IS NOT BROADLY TRYING TO
REDEFINE CHILD SUPPORT, OR THE
METHODOLOGY USED TO BE ABLE TO,
UH, TO SUPPORT CHILD SUPPORT FOR
CHILDREN. AND I WILL ALSO SHARE
THAT I THIS COMES FROM A DEEP
PLACE. OF KNOWLEDGE FOR ME BEING
SOMEBODY WHO IS PARENTS GOT
DIVORCED WHEN THEY WHEN I WAS
TWO YEARS OLD AND WHO HAD TO
DEAL WITH CHILD SUPPORT BEING,
UH, DAILY WEEKLY MONTHLY ISSUE
IN OUR FAMILY. UM SO WITH THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE OFFERED THE
TESTIMONY OF CLAUDIA GONZALEZ
WITH ROOT AND REBOUNDS AT THE
SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. MR CHAIR.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE? MY NAME IS CLAUDIA
GONZALEZ. I AM THE POLICY
ASSOCIATE AT RUDE AND REBOUND.
WHO IS ILLEGAL, NONPROFIT
SUPPORTING, INCARCERATED AND
FORMERLY INCARCERATED PEOPLE AND
ALSO THE SPONSOR OF HB 11 48 AM
HERE TODAY AND REPRESENTATION OF
OUR CLIENTS IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY, FORMERLY INCARCERATED
WOMEN. WHO HAVE A REALLY
DIFFICULT TIME NAVIGATING
MULTIPLE SYSTEMS AND
IMPOVERISHED COMMITTEE
COMMUNITIES. AND WHO ARE OFTEN
UNABLE TO FIND EMPLOYMENT. THESE
WOMEN ARE BURDENED WITH
FINANCIAL STRAINS, INCLUDING THE
INABILITY TO MAKE ENDS MEET OR
PAY CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS.
OUR CLIENT BELIEVES CIA IS
$23,000 IN DEBT. EXPECTED TO PAY
$650 A MONTH SHE HAD TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN PAIN, RENT OR PAYING
CHILD SUPPORT WHEN SHE DIDN'T
MAKE THOSE CHILD SUPPORT
PAYMENTS, HER LICENSE GOT
SUSPENDED, AND THEN SHE
ULTIMATELY LOST HER JOB. LOUISE
ANOTHER CLIENT OF OURS GOT
RELEASED IN JUNE OF 2021. WHEN
SHE CAME HOME. SHE WAS ALREADY
$4000 BEHIND. HER COURT ORDERED
MONTHLY PAYMENT WAS $765. BY THE
TIME SHE FINALLY OBTAINED
EMPLOYMENT, SHE HAD ACCRUED A
DEBT OF $11,000. NEGATIVELY
AFFECTING HER CREDIT AND
CREATING ADDITIONAL BARRIERS TO
FINDING HOUSING AND PROVIDING
FOR HER CHILDREN. MORE THAN HALF
OF HER PAYCHECK WAS GARNISHED.
EVERY COUPLE OF WEEKS, LEADING
TO FURTHER INSTABILITY. A B 11
48 IS NOT MEANT TO BE AN ALL
ENCOMPASSING SOLUTION TO THE
CHILD SUPPORT ISSUE. THIS BILL
WILL ENSURE PEOPLE LIKE LOUISE
AND FELICIA ARE ABLE TO FIND
SOME FINANCIAL STABILITY BEFORE
THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY CHILD
SUPPORT AGAIN. REENTRY IS A VERY
DIFFICULT JOURNEY. AND WE HAVE
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND
THE PLIGHT OF PEOPLE, INCLUDING
UNDERSTANDING THAT PEOPLE DO NOT
HAVE THE SAME RESOURCES WHEN
THEY CAME HOME. AND SO BECAUSE
OF THESE STORIES, I WANT TO URGE
YOU TO VOTE YES, ON 11 48. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? GOOD MORNING. CARMEN
NICOLE COX, CALIFORNIA A CMU
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. I SEE NO OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING. AND THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND ESTEEMED COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS GRETCHEN
LICHTENBERGER, AND I'M, THE
LEGISLATIVE CHAIRPERSON FOR THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
JUDGMENT PROFESSIONALS AND ALSO
THE OWNER OF JUSTICE MATTERS.
AND UM, I'VE HAD A MEETING WITH
THE AUTHOR'S STAFF. AND I
APPRECIATE THAT, AND I BELIEVE
THAT THE COMMITTEE MADE A VERY
THOUGHTFUL ANALYSIS, AND I
APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL. BUT
THIS MEASURE REMAINS FLAWED. IN
THE DIP IT THE D. C S S. THE
DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT
SERVICES DOES NOT CONTROL ALL
CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS. THEY ARE
FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON PEOPLE THAT
HAVE GOTTEN, UM PUBLIC BENEFITS.
IF YOU ARE A PRIVATE CITIZEN
THAT'S NEVER GOTTEN PUBLIC
BENEFITS. YOU CAN GO TO D. C S S
AND ASKED THEM AND APPLY FOR
THEM TOO. TO ENFORCE YOUR CHILD
SUPPORT ORDER. BUT OVER 60% OF
CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS ARE NOT IN
THE HANDS OF D. C S S. SO I
SHARED THE CONCERNS WITH THE
AUTHOR STAFF ABOUT THAT. SO
THERE IS A LARGE PORTION OF
CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS THAT ARE
GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS
BILL. THIS BILL HAS A BROAD
BRUSH IT PAINTS FOR ALL PEOPLE
ARE IN A SIMILAR SITUATION AND
THEY'RE NOT THERE'S A LOT OF
PEOPLE THAT ARE INCARCERATED
THAT DON'T HAVE FINANCIAL
PROBLEMS. TAKE MARTHA MARTHA
STEWART, FOR EXAMPLE. NOT THAT
SHE OWES CHILD SUPPORT, BUT
MARTHA STEWART HAD PLENTY OF
FINANCIAL MEANS TO PAY WHATEVER
BILLS SHE HAD WHEN SHE GOT OUT.
SO I THINK THAT THERE HAS TO BE
SOME SOME, UH CHANGES TO THE
SCOPE OF THE BILL AND SOME
TIERED ASSESSMENT OF WHO IT
ACTUALLY APPLIES TO. AND IT PUTS
THIS THIS MEASURE PUTS ALL THE
ONUS ON EVERYONE, BUT THE PERSON
GOING THE CHILD SUPPORT. AND
THAT IS MY BIGGEST ISSUE WITH
THIS BILL. THE ACCOUNTABILITY
EVERYBODY THAT OWES CHILD
SUPPORT. UNLIKE A LOT OF
JUDGMENTS THAT ARE OUT THERE,
THEY KNOW THEY OWE CHILD SUPPORT
. THEY KNOW THEY HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO FILE SOMETHING
WITH THE COURT. IF THEIR
CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. THEY
ALREADY HAVE A MECHANISM TO
FILES YOU TO WRAP UP. AND SO I'M
SUGGESTING A FORM CAN BE CREATED
THAT THEY CAN FILE UPON BEING
RELEASED AND ASKED TO ASKING.
THAT'S OUR SIGNAL AND ASK FOR,
UM FOR THE COURT TO MODIFY OR OR
SUSPEND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR A NO VOTE. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? SEEING NON QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
PACHECO. SO I ALSO AND I KNOW
THE OTHER NICE BOOK YESTERDAY,
BUT I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT
ABOUT THE CHILDREN. AH BECAUSE
IT'S THE CHILDREN THAT MAY BE
IMPACTED IF THE PARENT WHO WAS
INCARCERATED IS RELEASED, AND
THEY HAVE TO WAIT 10 MONTHS
BEFORE THE CHILD RECEIVES ANY
KIND OF SUPPORT, SO MY CONCERN
IS ABOUT IS TO THE ABOUT THE
CHILDREN, AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN
VERY MINDFUL ABOUT CHILDREN. AND
SO MY QUESTION IS, UM, TO THE
AUTHOR. MY UNDERSTANDING. I KNOW
WE HAD A CONVERSATION THAT THE
NORMALLY THE AMOUNT OWED IS $500
. WHEN A PERSON IS RELEASED FROM
CUSTODY. AND THEY BEGIN TO PAY
FOR CHILD SUPPORT. BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING OF THE FAMILY LAW
COURT SECTION IS THAT THE THAT
AMOUNT CAN BE SUSPENDED IF THE
PERSON DOES NOT HAVE EMPLOYMENT.
YOU'RE MY INCORRECT SO I'LL JUST
SHARE THAT I FUNDAMENTALLY WANT
TO SUPPORT CHILDREN AS WELL. I
THINK THAT CHILDREN NEED
FINANCIALLY STABLE. UH, PARENTS
WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ACTUALLY
ENGAGE WITH THEM. WHAT WE DO
KNOW HAPPENS FOR CHILDREN WHO
ARE NOT FOR REENTERING PEOPLE
AND CHILDREN. AS OUR WITNESS,
UH, TESTIFIED AROUND IS UH,
PARENTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO NOT
TRY TO REUNIFY WITH THE WITH THE
SPECTER AND BURDEN OF FIGHT
FINANCES THAT ARE INSURMOUNTABLE
, STANDING BETWEEN THEM AND
THEIR CHILD, SO THAT IMPACTS
THEIR ABILITY TO ACTUALLY
REUNIFY WITH THEIR CHILDREN. UM,
AND THEY'RE ALSO LIKELY TO
RECIDIVIST BECAUSE THEY ENGAGE
IN FAST MONEY AS OPPOSED TO
STABLE MONEY. THE REALITY RIGHT
NOW IS THAT THE SYSTEM IS SET UP
SO THAT PEOPLE ARE COMING OUT OF
PRISON, EXPECTED TO PAY MONEY
THAT THEY DON'T HAVE BECAUSE
THEY'VE EARNED $8.30 8 CENTS AND
30 CENTS SEVEN CENTS AN HOUR
WHILE THEY WERE IN PRISON AND
ARE EXPECTED TO PAY THAT IS NOT
A SYSTEM THAT IS SET UP TO
ACTUALLY SUPPORT THE CHILDREN
RIGHT NOW. AND THIS BILL BILL
SEEKS TO CHANGE THAT WITH
REGARDS TO YOUR QUESTION AROUND
THE ABILITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO
MODIFICATION HEARINGS. THE
REALITY IS AGAIN AS A WITNESS
TESTIFIED AND ALLUDED TO WHILE
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS
AVAILABLE, IT IS NOT ACTUALLY
USED. FOR PEOPLE. IT'S ONE OF
THE MANY DIFFERENT KINDS OF, UH
, SYSTEM ENTANGLEMENTS THAT
PEOPLE WHO ARE FORMERLY
INCARCERATED WHO ARE COMING OUT
AND REENTERING HAVE TO ENGAGE.
IT IS A SERVICE AND AN
OPPORTUNITY THAT TYPICALLY IS
THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT NOTIFIED
ABOUT DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO
ACCESS AND DON'T ACCESS. UH AND
MY COMMENT ABOUT EARLIER IN OUR
EARLIER CONVERSATION AROUND.
IT'S AN AVERAGE AMOUNT OF $500
JUST TO PUT THAT INTO
PERSPECTIVE. SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT
GETTING A JOB UP UNTIL 10 TO 12
. MONTHS OUTSIDE OF PRISON. UM
WHO GETS A SALARY ON AVERAGE OF
$15,000 A YEAR MEANS THAT THEIR
MONTHLY SALARY IS ABOUT $1750 A
MONTH AND THE AVERAGE CHILD
SUPPORT PAYMENT IS $500. THE
PENALTIES THAT ENSUE WHEN
SOMEBODY HAS NOT THE ABILITY TO
NOT PAY THAT. AND THE INTERESTS
THAT GO ACTUALLY GO TO THE STATE
DOESN'T GO TO THE CHILD. SO THIS
BILL ESSENTIALLY ATTEMPTS TO
CORRECT SOME OF THE ALREADY
EXISTING CHALLENGES THAT ARE
KEEPING CHILDREN FROM BEING
SUPPORTED AND THE WAY THAT THEY
SHOULD. AND THAT HAD A QUESTION
TO THE OPPOSITION. UH AS TO IF,
LIKE, MAYBE MY UNDERSTANDING OF
THE FAMILY LOCAL LAW CODE
SECTION IS INCORRECT, BUT IF
SOMEONE IS UNABLE TO PAY FOR
CHILD SUPPORT BECAUSE THEY DO
NOT HAVE EMPLOYMENT HAS THERE
BEEN TIMES WHEN THE COURTS HAVE
SUSPENDED CHILD SUPPORT? DURING
THAT TIME PERIOD UNTIL THE
PERSON IS ABLE TO FIND
EMPLOYMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
QUESTION. YES THAT THAT HAPPENS
REGULARLY. UM ALL IT TAKES IS
FOR THE WORD, THE PERSON THE
OBLIGATORY THE PERSON THAT OWES
THE MONEY IS TO FILE A FORM AND
MAYBE WE NEED TO CREATE A
SIMPLER PROCESS FOR THAT, WITH
WITHIN THIS BUILD OF THE FORM
THAT'S CREATED, BUT IT'S VERY
SIMPLE BECAUSE WHAT CAN HAPPEN
WITHOUT EVEN A HEARING? THEY CAN
FILL OUT A FORM REQUESTING A
SUSPENSION. FOR FINANCIAL
REASONS, BECAUSE THEY JUST GOT
OUT OF PRISON. THEY CAN'T AFFORD
IT ANYTHING. AND THEY SUBMIT
THAT FORM AND IT COMES WITH AN
ORDER IN THE COURT CAN JUST SIGN
THAT ORDER SUSPENDING IT FOR THE
10 MONTHS. AND WITHOUT EVEN
TAKING UP COURTS TIME TO HAVE A
HEARING. WE ALREADY HAVE
PROCESSES LIKE THAT WITHIN
FAMILY LAW AND WITHIN CIVIL LAW
SO WE COULD EXTEND THAT HERE.
AND IT WOULD GIVE EVERYONE THE
OPPORTUNITY. ONE OF THE BIG
PROBLEMS IS WHEN FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PEOPLE COME OUT OF
PRISON OR JAIL. WHAT ADDRESS? DO
WE SERVE THEM AT? HOW DO THEY
PROVIDE AN ADDRESS? SO IF THEY
WERE TO FILE SOMETHING RIGHT
AWAY, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO
PROVIDE AN ADDRESS. THEN D. C S
S. WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO GIVE
NOTICE. ACCORDING TO THIS BILL,
OR A PRIVATE CHILD SUPPORT
PERSON WHO'S OWED MONEY WOULD
HAVE A WAY TO COMMUNICATE WITH
THE OBLIGATORY SO PROVIDING AN
ADDRESS WOULD BE GOOD, SO A FORM
COULD HAVE COULD HAPPEN THAT
WAY. SO AGAIN. WE HAVE AN
INSTANCE WHERE THERE ARE A LOT
OF HYPOTHETICALS AROUND WHAT WE
HOPE HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE REENTER
AND SOCIETY. THOSE THINGS ARE
NOT HAPPENING, WHICH IS WHY WE
HAVE A BROKEN SYSTEM RIGHT NOW
EXTENDING AND DEFERRING THE
CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO 10
MONTHS ALLOWS FOR PEOPLE TO
ACTUALLY GET A JOB. IT'LL ALSO
PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO
REUNIFY WITH THEIR FAMILIES. AND
IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY NOT
BE BURDENED BY INTEREST AND
PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH CHILD
SUPPORT PAYMENT THAT THEY
SHOULDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE
ABLE YEAH, THAT THEY CANNOT PAY
RIGHT NOW. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
HMM. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, MR
RAINEY? OKAY MOTION FROM MR
HANEY, SECOND FROM MR KALRA. MS
BARTER YOU MAKE CLOTHES. THANK
YOU TO THE CHAIR FOR HIS WORK ON
THIS BILL. I RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST NEIGHBOR. THE MOTION IS
TO PASS AS AMENDED AS A CLERK TO
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN. I S ALY
SALINO CONNOLLY. CONNOLLY I
DICKSON DICKSON. NO HANEY.
HANEY. I KALRA KALRA. I PACHECO
PAPIN. POP AND I RAISE RIVAS
SANCHEZ. SANCHEZ? NO. BILL NEEDS
ONE MORE VOTE WILL KEEP THE ROLE
OPEN. PERHAPS A MEMBERS. THANK
YOU NEXT, MR WALLACE. I'LL ASK
MR GIBSON AND MISS WICKS TO
PLEASE COME TO COMMITTEE.
OH, OKAY. MOTION FROM MR ASTLEY
. SECOND FROM MS SANCHEZ. MR
WALLACE. YOU CAN TAKE THAT HINT
FOR WHAT? WHAT YOU WANT. GOOD
MORNING, MR SHARON. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS I HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY
ASSEMBLY BILL 14 48 A B 14 48
WILL ENHANCE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT
MECHANISMS FOR UNLICENSED
CANNABIS ACTIVITIES WILL SKIP
THROUGH THE REST OF THIS AND
JUST I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE AND THE CHAIR FOR YOUR
WORK ON THIS BILL AND HAVE WITH
ME TODAY. UH SARAH DUQUETTE
POLICY ADVOCATE FOR OUR CRC, THE
SPONSOR OF HB 14 48. THANK YOU.
FIRST WITNESS, PLEASE GOOD
MORNING CHAIR COMMITTEE MEMBERS
SARAH TO GET ON BEHALF OF THE
RURAL COUNTY. REPRESENTATIVES OF
CALIFORNIA COUNTIES AND CITIES
ARE BEING INUNDATED WITH
UNLICENSED CANNABIS ACTIVITIES
AND AN INVESTIGATIVE SERIES
PUBLISHED LAST YEAR IN THE LOS
ANGELES TIE TIMES, DESCRIBED THE
SCALE OF THE ILLICIT MARKET AS
IMMENSE. IT'S ALSO BEEN NUMEROUS
ARTICLES IN COW MATTERS, TALKING
ABOUT HOW PROLIFIC ESPECIALLY
WHEN IT COMES TO ENVIRONMENTAL
DEGRADATION. THE STATUTORY
PENALTIES AND A BMP CODE ON THE
BOOK ACTS AS A REALLY IMPORTANT
DETERRENT FOR THIS ILLICIT
ACTIVITY. UNFORTUNATELY THE WAY
IT'S SET UP 100% OF THE PROCEEDS
GO TO THE STATE, SO THERE'S
REALLY NOT A MECHANISM FOR
LOCALS TO USE THIS AND BE ABLE
TO RECOUP OUR FULL COSTS AND
REINVEST AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
ARE DOING THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ACROSS
THE STATE. WHAT THIS PROPOSES TO
DO IS GO BACK TO WHAT WAS
ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED IN
MAKARSKA WITH A 50 50 SPLIT THAT
WOULD THEN ALLOW THE STATE TO
ACTUALLY MAKE REVENUE BECAUSE
LOCALS AREN'T BRINGING THESE
ACTIONS FORWARD AS WELL AS US TO
PAY FOR OUR COSTS AND REINVEST
INTO INVESTMENT IN ENFORCEMENT.
THE SECOND SECTION OF THE BILL,
WHICH WE APPRECIATE THE
AMENDMENTS AND WILLINGNESS TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WORK ON IS
REALLY AROUND CODE ENFORCEMENT.
WHAT WE'VE DONE IS REALLY MOVED
FROM THE CRIMINAL TO CIVIL AND
ONE OF THE BEST MECHANISM TO DO
THAT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AS COURT
CODE ENFORCEMENT SO CITIES AND
COUNTIES REALLY BUILT THESE
ROBUST UNITS TO DEAL WITH IT.
UNFORTUNATELY A TRADITIONAL CODE
ENFORCEMENT FOR AN UNPERMITTED
UM AND PERMANENT BUILDING
ETCETERA WAS REALLY NOT MEANT TO
ADDRESS THE SCALE AND THE
COMMERCIAL SCALE. AND SO A LOT
OF TIMES, UH, THE PEOPLE THAT
ARE DOING THESE VIOLATIONS ARE
DRAGGING OUT THE PROCESS FOR 34
MONTHS, SO REALLY LOOKING AT
MECHANISMS MECHANISMS TO STREAM
LIGHT SO WE CAN SHUT DOWN THE
BUSINESS AND A BAIT AND MOVE
FORWARD WITH THAT. I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND WE
RECOMMEND YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY
PLEASE. THE COLD WAR. TILLMAN ON
BEHALF OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
AND CALIFORNIA CANNABIS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. WELDER
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES
AND SUPPORT IS HE SIMILAR ON
BEHALF OF THE SISKIYOU BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND SUPPORT? THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT SEEN NONE. WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SAYING NONE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. AND BEFORE WE GO TO
OH, I SEE. I APOLOGIZE AND SEE
YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS ANTHONY HILTON WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE
ASSOCIATION JUST WANTED TO NOTE
THAT WE'RE NEUTRAL FOR THE
AMENDMENTS. REMOVING THE SUPER
PRIORITY LEAD FROM THE BILL.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING CHAIR
AND MEMBERS DEALING WITH JOHN ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CREDIT
UNION LEAGUE WOULD ECHO THE
COMMENTS JUST MADE REGARDING THE
AMENDMENTS. THANK THE COMMITTEE
FOR THEIR WORK, AND WE'LL BE
GOING NEUTRAL. THANK YOU. AND
BEFORE I GO TO MR CARON, MR
WALLACE, YOU ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS? YES. HAPPY
TO ACCEPT THEM. THANK YOU, MR
KALRA. WITH THE ACCEPTANCE
ACCEPTANCE THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. I THINK I ALSO
SUPPORT THE BILL TODAY. I THINK
THE COMMITTEE HIGHLIGHTED SOME
LEGITIMATE CONCERNS. I
DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE INTENTION
HAD OTHER BILL EARLIER REGARDING
CAN THE INDUSTRY AND, UM, I
THINK DEFINITELY NOT MORE NEEDS
TO BE DONE. BUT I THINK THAT
SOME OF THE CONCERNS RAISED BY
THE COMMITTEE ARE LEGITIMATE NOW
. SO DEFINITELY KEEP AN ISA BILL
MOVES FORWARD. BUT I APPRECIATE
YOU WORKING WITH THE STAFF TO
TAKE THOSE AMENDMENTS VISITING
CAN DEFINITELY UM, YOU KNOW, AS
WE EVEN HEARD FROM OPPOSITION
BETWEEN THE NEUTRAL, I THINK IT
IT ADDRESSES THE MAJOR CONCERNS
AND OTHERWISE SUPPORTIVE OF THE
BILL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE,
MISS DIXON? I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY THAT SUPER POSITION LEAN
SITUATION HAS HAPPENED AMENDED
TO CLARIFY, SO THAT'S CLEAR.
ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. SEEING NONE.
UH. MR WASHINGTON CLOSE. THANK
YOU. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I
ACCEPT YOUR AMENDMENTS AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS AND I
VOTE. THANK YOU. THE MOTION IS
TO PASS AS AMENDED. WE DO HAVE
EMOTIONAL SECOND AS A CLERK.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL CHANGE.
MAIENSCHEIN I SALI E I CONNOLLY
CONNOLLY, I, DICKSON DICKSON. I
HANEY CHOLERA. CHOLERA I,
PACHECO PACHECO, I HAPPEN.
HAPPENED I RAISE THIS SANCHEZ.
SANCHEZ A. YOUR BILL IS OUT LIKE
YOU. HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT OUR TWO
WITNESSES ARE ON THE WAY. I
GUESS WE CAN GO AHEAD AND.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO ADD ONS
RIGHT NOW START WITH THE CONSENT
AGENDA RIPPED OPEN THE ROLE TO
CHOLERA I RIVAS SANCHEZ SANCHEZ.
AYE.
WELL, ALSO TO ADD ON TO A B 12
53. WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER NINE.
THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL CALL RA. RIVAS SANCHEZ. I
DON'T KNOW. THE GUY SANCHEZ?
AYE. YEAH. YEAH MR. REEVES IS ON
A ON A B 12 12 53. HE WAS
WALKING DOWN THE ROAD. THIS AYE.
I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THEM
OFF. OKAY? WE'LL GO AHEAD AND
START WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA AS
A CLERK TO CALL THE RAW RIVAS
RIVAS. AYE. ITEM TO LIFT THE
CALL ON A B 11 48 BONTA ESCORT,
KALRA REVERSE THREE OF THE SIDE.
THAT BILL IS OUT. ITEM THREE.
MAYBE 11 71. REYES RIVAS RIVAS.
AYE. ITEM FIVE A. B 14, 48
WALLACE REYES GRIEVOUS I ITEM
SIX, MAYBE 14 58 TÂM. RACE RIVAS
RIVAS. AYE.
YEAH.
SORRY. I'VE SEEN. GOOD YOU'RE
PICKING UP WHAT I'M PUTTING DOWN
THIS WEEK'S GOOD. WELCOME.
SORRY. TO GET MY KIDS TO SCHOOL
AND THE TWO YEAR OLD HAD A LOT
OF FEELINGS THIS MORNING, OKAY?
GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS CHAIR. I
THINK FIRST WILL PRESENT A B 13
94. UM. I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR MEMBERS FOR THE
CONVERSATION JUST TO BE CLEAR.
WE'RE MISS WICKS HAS TWO BILLS
SO WE'LL START WITH ITEM FOUR. A
B 13 94 AHEAD AND PROCEED, OKAY?
CHILD SEX ABUSE MATERIAL
COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS SEE, SAM
IS TRAGICALLY PERVASIVE ON THE
INTERNET, AND NOT ONLY IS IT AND
IT'S ILLICIT CORNERS ON THE SO
CALLED DARK WEB, BUT ALSO ON
POPULAR SOCIAL MEDIA WEBSITES
AND APPLICATIONS THAT BILLIONS
OF PEOPLE USE EVERY DAY. THIS
TRAGEDY IS COMPOUNDED BY THE
FACT THAT CERTAIN WEBSITES AND
APPLICATIONS ARE NOT ONLY A
CONVENIENT MEANS FOR SHARING
SUCH CONTENT BUT ARGUABLY
REDUCED ITS PRODUCTION. SINCE
2000 TRAFFICKERS HAVE RECRUITED
55% OF SEX TRAFFICKING VICTIMS
ONLINE. USE OF FACEBOOK
FACILITATES 65% OF THIS
TRAFFICKING. FORBES REVIEW OF
HUNDREDS OF RECENT TIKTOK LIVE
STREAMS REVEALS HOW VIEWERS
REGULARLY USED THE COMMENTS TO
URGE YOUNG GIRLS TO PERFORM
SEXUALLY REWARDING THOSE WHO
OBLIGED WITH TIKTOK GIFTS, WHICH
CAN BE REDEEMED FOR MONEY OR OFF
PLAT PLATFORM PAYMENTS TO VENMO
, PAYPAL OR CASH APPS. A B 13 94
HOLD SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
LIABLE FOR KNOWINGLY RECKLESSLY
OR NEGLIGENTLY FACILITATING,
AIDING OR ABETTING CHILD SEX
TRAFFICKING AND REQUIRES THE
PLATFORMS TO PREVENT RE
VICTIMIZATION OF CHILD
SURVIVORS. THIS MEASURE PROPOSES
TO ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES IN
TWO WAYS. FIRST THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
TO PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR USERS
TO REPORT THIS CONTENT AND THESE
IMAGES IN WHICH THEY ARE
DEPICTED PLATFORMS WITH THEN
GENERALLY HAVE 30 DAYS TO VERIFY
THAT THE MATERIAL IS IN FACT
HARMFUL AND BLOCK IT FOR ME
APPEARING SECOND, THE BILL WOULD
PROVIDE VICTIMS OF COMMERCIAL
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION, THE RIGHT
TO SUE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
FOR DEPLOYING FEATURES THAT WERE
A SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR IN CAUSING
THEIR EXPLOITATION. REGARDING
DAMAGES. THE BILL ALREADY SAYS
THAT THE CEILING OF 250,000 IS
TO BE RESERVED FOR THE WORST
OFFENDERS. IN DETERMINING THE
AMOUNT OF A CIVIL PENALTY
PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH, A
COURT SHALL CONSIDER THE
WILLFULNESS AND SEVERITY OF THE
VIOLATION AND WHETHER THE SOCIAL
MEDIA PLATFORM HAS PREVIOUSLY
VIOLATED THIS SECTION OR SECTION
3344.2. AH THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS NOTES THAT A SAFE
HARBOR PROVISION THAT ALLOWS THE
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANY TO REMOVE A
FEATURE THAT THEY BECOME AWARE
OF HAS BEEN USED TO FACILITATE
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGES.
WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON
AMENDMENTS THAT WILL ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE. UM I ALSO WANT TO
SAY MY JOINT AUTHOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HEATH FLORA
COULDN'T BE HERE TODAY, BUT HE
AND I HAVE HAD A LOT OF
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS AND
WILL BE WORKING ON THAT
PARTICULAR MEASURE IN
PARTICULAR, AND SPECIFICALLY
WITH ME HERE TO TESTIFY IN
PERSON IS ASHLEY BRYANT, THE
FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THREE STRANDS. AND ED HOWARD,
SENIOR COUNSEL AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF SAN DIEGO SCHOOL OF LAW'S
SCHOOL OF LAW'S CHILDREN
ADVOCACY INSTITUTE TO ANSWER
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS,
RESPECTFULLY ASKED FOR AN I
VOTE. THANK YOU, MA'AM, YOU HAVE
TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. THREE STRANDS GLOBAL
FOUNDATION HAS BEEN CAN
COMBATING ALL TYPES OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING THROUGH PREVENTION
WORK FOR 13 YEARS TO DATE, WE
HAVE SERVED 838 SURVIVORS AND AT
RISK INDIVIDUALS AND EDUCATED
767,000 STUDENTS AND 110,000
ADULTS. WE HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND
THIS PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS AND
THE TOLL THAT IT HAS TAKEN ON
OUR CHILDREN AND I ASK YOU TO
SUPPORT A B 13 94 STRONGLY.
HUMAN TRAFFICKING A CRIME WHERE
INDIVIDUALS PROFIT FROM THE
EXPLOITATION OF OUR MOST
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS IS AMONG
THE WORLD'S FASTEST GROWING
CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES AND IS
ESTIMATED TO BE 150 YEAR A
GLOBAL INDUSTRY WITH MORE THAN
25 MILLION VICTIMS. SINCE 2001
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL, OR
CCM REPORTS FROM THE NATIONAL
CENTER OF MISSING AND EXPLOITED
CHILDREN HAVE INCREASED BY A
FACTOR OF 206,000 TO PUT THAT IN
PERSPECTIVE IN 2001, NICK NICK
RECEIVED JUST 421 C SAME REPORTS
BY 2021. THAT NUMBER HAD
INCREASED TO ALMOST 85 MILLION.
TODAY IS TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENTS
CONTINUE TO MAKE OUR LIVES
EASIER, MORE ENJOYABLE, MORE
CONNECTED MORE FUN. WE FIND
OURSELVES AT THIS DIFFICULT
CROSSROADS IN THE FIGHT TO
DEFEND OUR CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL
ABUSE WITH THE EXPLOSION OF THE
INTERNET, ONLINE COMMUNICATION
AND SOCIAL MEDIA, HUMAN
TRAFFICKERS HAVE FOUND A NEW
PATHWAY TO EXPLAIN INDIVIDUALS.
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS, IN
PARTICULAR, HAVE CREATED MORE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERPETRATORS.
EVEN WHEN A CHILD IS REMOVED
FROM AN ABUSIVE SITUATION THERE,
ABUSE LIVES ON FOREVER MAKING
RECOVERY DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE
. THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE
REVICTIMIZED WITH EVERY VIEWING
AND ARE OFTEN EVEN RECOGNIZED IN
PUBLIC IN JOB INTERVIEWS AND IN
THEIR PERSONAL LIVES FROM THEIR
ONLINE ABUSE MATERIAL, EVERY
DIGITAL PLATFORM WHERE YOU CAN
UPLOAD A PHOTO CAN BE USED TO
SHARE. SEE, SAM. THIS HAS
CREATED THIS PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS. ACCORDING TO THE UNITED
NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND
CRIME, THE INTERNET IS USED BY
TRAFFICKERS AS DIGITAL HUNTING
FIELDS, ALLOWING THEM TO ACCESS
ALLOWING THEM ACCESS TO BOTH
CUSTOMERS AND POTENTIAL VICTIMS
WITH CHILDREN BEING TARGETED BY
TRAFFICKERS. THIS BILL A 13 94
WOULD HELP PERMANENTLY BLOCKED
REPORTED MATERIAL FROM BEING
VIEWABLE ON ANY SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORM AND HOLD THESE
PLATFORMS LIABLE FOR PLAYING A
PART IN TRAFFICKING CHILDREN. I
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE NEXT WITNESS.
MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS AT A HOWARD
, SENIOR COUNSEL AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF DAN DIEGO SCHOOL
OF LAW'S CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY
INSTITUTE. PLEASED AND HONORED
TO CO SPONSOR THIS IMPORTANT
MEASURE WITH COMMON SENSE MEDIA
AND PLEASE, TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. YOU MAY HAVE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. REBECCA
MARCUS ON BEHALF OF COMMON
SENSE, MEDIA AND SUPPORT. MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. KATHY VAN AUSTIN
ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY,
WOMEN, CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT,
SEEN NONE. WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
DYLAN HOFFMAN ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET, AND WE ARE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED TO A B 13 94 AND FIRST I
JUST WANT TO SAY WE COULDN'T
AGREE MORE WITH THE INTENT OF
THIS BILL ARE PLATFORMS VERY
AGGRESSIVELY GO AFTER CHILD
SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL AND HUMAN
TRAFFICKERS ARE PLATFORMS. NOT
ONLY DO OUR RULES PROHIBIT THAT
TYPE OF CONTENT, BUT WE'VE
DEVELOPED NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO
AID IN OUR ABILITY TO IDENTIFY
REMOVING BLOCK IT. UM AS WELL AS
DEVELOPED PARTNERSHIPS, NOT ONLY
WITH NONPROFITS, BUT LAW
ENFORCEMENT SO THAT THE REPORTS
THAT WE PROVIDE TO THOSE
PARTNERS ACTUALLY TURNED INTO
PROSECUTIONS. UM OBVIOUSLY,
THERE IS MUCH, MUCH MORE WORK TO
BE DONE IN THIS SPACE, BUT WE
STAND READY TO BE A PARTNER IN
THAT SOLUTION. HOWEVER I DON'T
THINK OUR PLATFORMS BELIEVE THAT
LIABILITY IS A GOOD WAY TO SOLVE
THAT. I THINK THERE ARE A LOT
MORE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
FROM FROM LIABILITY. I'M
LIMITING MY COMMENTS TO THE
LIABILITY PROVISIONS AS THAT'S
PRIMARILY THE JURISDICTION OF
THIS COMMITTEE. I THINK THE
REPORTING ASPECTS THERE. THERE
MAY BE SOME CLARIFICATIONS THAT
WE'RE LOOKING FOR. THAT MAYBE
MAKE THAT MORE WORKABLE, BUT
PRIMARILY THE LIABILITIES WILL
I'LL SPEAK TO TODAY I THINK THE
MASSES STATUTORY DAMAGES OF
BETWEEN A MILLION AND $5 MILLION
WILL LEAD TO A LOT MORE
LITIGATION IN THIS SPACE. UM I
THINK THERE ARE SOME AMBIGUITIES
AROUND WHAT A SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR
IS. I THINK WE HAVE A DIFFERENT
INTERPRETATION OF WHETHER THAT
IS A HIGH OR LOW BAR. WE THINK
IT'S A PRETTY LOW BAR TO COVER
THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL JURY
INSTRUCTIONS IDENTIFY A
SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR AS A STAND IN
FOR THE BUT FOR TEST FOR
CAUSATION THAT IS, BUT FOR THE
DEFENDANT'S ACTIONS THEY WERE
THE CAUSE THAT HARM WOULD NOT
HAVE HAPPENED TO THE PLAINTIFF.
I THINK, UH, A I THINK WHAT
WE'RE GETTING AT HERE IS THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENERAL AND
SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE. WITH REGARDS
TO THIS TYPE OF HARM. WE KNOW
THIS HAPPENS ON OUR PLATFORMS
AND WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE
CAN TO STOP IT, BUT I THINK
PLAINTIFFSATTORNEYS AND
PLAINTIFFS IN PARTICULAR WILL,
UM, CLAIM THAT ANY AMOUNT OF OUR
KNOWLEDGE IS SUFFICIENT TO HOLD
US LIABLE IN THIS INSTANCE. SO
WE'RE READY TO TALK ABOUT
ALTERNATIVES THAT AVOID
LIABILITY. I THINK AS NOTED,
THERE MAY BE SOME ISSUES AROUND
PREEMPTION WITH THIS BILL. UM
WE'RE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT
ALTERNATIVES THAT AVOID THOSE
ENTIRELY. UM SO, UH, WE GREATLY
APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF THIS
BILL, BUT BELIEVE THERE WILL BE
NUMEROUS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
FOR THAT REASON. RESPECTFULLY
POST. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR. REMEMBER
SHANE LEVIN WITH CAPITAL
ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF NET CHOICE
, AND I'D LIKE TO ALIGN MY
COMMENTS ON THIS, ROTHMAN. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
SAMANTHA CORBIN WITH THE
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
AND RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. RONALD BELLAMY COUCH
CHAMBER RESPECTFULLY IN
OPPOSITION. I SEE NO OTHER
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE, MS DIXON THANK YOU.
ARTISTIC CLARIFY THE SITUATION
BETWEEN, UM THE INDUSTRY THAT'S
SUPPOSED AND THE ADVOCATES FOR
THIS. WHERE'S THE GAP? WOW SOME
SEXUAL ABUSE. JUST GETTING
THROUGH. I GUESS THIS IS WHERE
WE ARE. COULD YOU JUST DESCRIBE
I MEAN, DESPITE THEIR BEST
EFFORTS, WHICH I COMMEND YOU,
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.
IT CONCEPTUALLY AND SUPPORT. BUT
THERE STILL IS A PROBLEM. BUT
YOU JUST DESCRIBED THEM MORE
CLEARLY. YEAH I THINK THAT WHEN
I SAID THAT THERE WERE 421
SEASON REPORTS IN 2085 MILLION
TODAY, IT REALLY ILLUMINATES THE
PROBLEM WE HAVE, AND THE PROBLEM
IS THAT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING
TO ACTUALLY END THIS PUBLIC
HEALTH CRISIS, AND I THINK PART
OF IT IS PUTTING A STAKE IN THE
GROUND AND BEING ABLE TO SAY WE
KNOW YOU DO YOUR VERY BEST
EFFORT. WE KNOW THAT YOU TRY TO
MAKE IT SO THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN,
BUT IT'S STILL HAPPENING. AND SO
HOW ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO
MAKE IT HAPPEN? AND ALSO JUST
FOR THE VICTIM. THE USER IS THAT
THE VICTIM OR THE PERSON WHO'S
PORTRAYED, UH, ONLINE. AS JUST
CURIOUSLY. IS THIS THEIR ONLY
RECOURSE? I MEAN, IF THEY
DISCOVERED THAT THEIR ON
MULTIPLE PLATFORMS, I GUESS THEY
HAVE TO DO THEIR OWN PERSONAL
RESEARCH ON THIS AND SHOCKINGLY
, THEY DISCOVER THIS IS THIS.
THEIR ONLY WAY IS TO SEEK A
REMEDY THIS WAY IS, IS THERE
OTHER OTHER OTHER WAYS TO SEEK A
REMEDY? SURVIVORS THAT WE SERVE
? IT IS REALLY DIFFICULT TO BE
ABLE TO GET THIS OFF. THE
INTERNET IS EXTREMELY IT IS ONE
OF THE WORST NOT ONLY FOR
FINDING A JOB. TO BE ABLE TO BE
ABLE TO GO THROUGH ON WITH THEIR
LIFE. IT'S JUST CONSTANT BARRIER
AFTER BARRIER, SO THAT'S WHAT
THAT'S WHAT WE SEE WITH
SURVIVORS WE SERVE. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING
THE BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESS, MS PACHECO?
JUST A BRIEF COMMENT AS I WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR OF BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD. I KNOW YOU'RE
GOING TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH
THE OPPOSITION, BUT I REALLY
COMMEND YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD AND, UH, JUST FOR THE
CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD AS
WELL, THANK YOU ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
MS SANCHEZ? THANK YOU FOR THIS.
WORK YOUR WORK ON THIS BILL. I
KNOW FROM OUR CONVERSATIONS.
YOUR INTENT IS VERY GOOD. THAT
BEING SAID, I KNOW YOU WILL WORK
HARD WITH THE OPPOSITION TO
ADDRESS ANY AND ALL CONCERNS,
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING
TELETEXT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS ARE COMING FROM THE
COMMITTEE. UH SEEN NONE. MISS
WICK CENTER. WE'VE HAD A NUMBER
OF DISCUSSIONS ON THIS BILL. I
KNOW YOU'RE CONTINUING TO WORK
WITH IT A COMPLICATED TOPIC. I
APPRECIATE YOU THE EFFORTS
YOU'VE TAKEN ON THIS REALLY
IMPORTANT MATTER. IT'S DIFFICULT
. IT'S DEFINITELY GETS IN THE
WEEDS PRETTY QUICKLY. BUT THANKS
FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS, AND I'M
PLEASED TO SUPPORT IT TODAY
CLOSE. APPRECIATE THAT I'M EAGER
TO MEET DIRECTLY WITH THE
PLATFORMS AND ALWAYS THINK WE
GET STRONGER BILLS WHEN WE MEET
WITH OPPOSITION SO I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE TO
KEEP THE PROCESS GOING. THANK
YOU. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION
FROM HIS PACHECO, SECOND FROM MS
DICKSON, AND THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS. ESCORT TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MAIENSCHEIN I
ESSENTIALLY CONNELLY CONNELLY. I
DICKSON DICKSON. I HANEY CORA
PACHECO PACHECO I POP IN.
HAPPENED? I RAISE GRIEVOUS.
RIVAS SANCHEZ SANCHEZ SIDE. YOUR
BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT IS, UH, ITEM ONE A B 8
86 MISTAKES. YOU MAY BEGIN.
THANK YOU AND I'LL HAVE MY
WITNESS COME HERE, BUT I WILL
JUST START AH, IN THE DESIRE TO
MOVE THIS QUICKLY ALONG THE
FASTEST JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
HEARING. I THINK WE'VE SEEN
TODAY. UM WITH THAT MR CHAIRMAN,
MEMBERS AND STAFF AND OTHERS. UM
I WANNA TALK A LITTLE ABOUT
JOURNALISM TODAY AND MY BILL,
MAYBE 886, THE CALIFORNIA
JOURNALISM PROTECTION PREVENTION
ACT PROVIDES A LIFELINE FOR NEWS
OUTLETS AND JOURNALISTS IN PRINT
, DIGITAL AND BROADCAST MEDIA
THAT BEAR THE COST OF GATHERING
AND REPORTING NEWS. WHILE LARGE
INTERNET PLATFORMS BEAR NONE.
CALIFORNIA'S LAST MORE THAN 100
NEWSPAPERS IN THE LAST DECADE,
AS NEWS CONSUMPTION HAS MOVED.
ONLINE COMMUNITY NEWS OUTLETS
HAVE BEEN DOWNSIZED AND CLOSING
AT AN ALARMING RATE. IT'S NOT
THAT NO ONE READS OR WATCHES
NEWS ANYMORE. IT'S THAT DOMINANT
TECH PLATFORMS. BOTH SEARCH
ENGINES AND SOCIAL NETWORKS HAVE
SUCH UNRIVALED MARKET POWER THAT
NEWSROOMS ARE COERCED TO SHARE
THE CONTENT THEY PRODUCED, WHICH
THE TECH COMPANIES SELL
ADVERTISING AGAINST PARADING
ALMOST NO COMPENSATION IN
RETURN. BORROWING FROM SIMILAR,
THOUGH NOT IDENTICAL LEGISLATIVE
EFFORTS IN EUROPE, AUSTRALIA,
CANADA AND OUR OWN FEDERAL
CONGRESS HERE. A B 886 REQUIRES
LARGE TECH COMPANIES TO PAY A
FEE FOR ACCESSING AND FEATURING
JOURNALISM CONTENT ON THEIR
PLATFORMS. VITALY THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATION ALSO REQUIRES THAT
70% OF THE FUNDS DERIVED FROM
THE BILL TO BE SPENT ON
JOURNALISTS, ENSURING THAT FUNDS
ARE REINVESTED IN THE NEWSROOM.
CRITICS HAVE PUT FORTH NUMEROUS
ARGUMENTS OF WHICH YOU WILL HEAR
TODAY. I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT
JUST TO RESPOND TO THOSE
DIRECTLY. ARGUMENT ONE TECH
PLATFORMS DON'T MAKE MONEY OFF
THE BACKS OF JOURNALISTS, IF
ANYTHING IS THE OTHER WAY AROUND
MY RESPONSE TECH PLATFORMS.
WE'RE NOT MAKING MONEY OFF OF
NEWS IF IT DID NOT HAVE A VALUE
THAT TECH ESSENTIALLY MONETIZED,
THEN IT WOULD NOT BE PRESENT AS
A FEATURE OF ITS PRODUCT. TECH
PLATFORMS THAT THEIR ESSENCE
COMPETE FOR OUR ATTENTION AND
ACCESS TO JOURNALISM GIVES THEM
VITAL CONTENT THAT KEEPS USERS
ENGAGED. THAT IS WHY IN OTHER
COUNTRIES WERE SIMILAR LAWS HAVE
BEEN PASSED. TECH HAS NOT
ABANDONED ITS USE OF NEWS ON THE
PLATFORM ARGUMENT TO THIS BILL
VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
THIS BILL WAS WRITTEN TO
WITHSTAND FIRST AMENDMENT
CHALLENGES AND UNDER ITS
PROVISIONS, PLATFORMS ARE NOT
FORCED. FORCED TO DISPLAY ANY
CONTENT. THEY REMAIN FREE TO
IMPLEMENT THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE
AND OTHER MODERATION PRACTICES
IF IT COVERED PLATFORM FINDS A
NEWS ORGANIZATIONS CONTENT
DISTASTEFUL. THEY CAN CONTINUE
TO CHOOSE NOT TO INCLUDE IT ON
THEIR SITE. THIS WAS ALSO NOTED
IN THE ANALYSIS. IF YOU TURN TO
PAGE FIVE, THERE'S A WHOLE
SECTION WITH THE HEADLINE. THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS RAISED
BY THE OPPONENTS SEEM MOSTLY
OVERSTATED, WHICH IS CLEARLY
OUTLINED IN THE ANALYSIS.
ARGUMENT THREE. THE BILL WOULD
INCENTIVIZE CLICKBAIT, AND
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HEAR
THE OPPOSITION SAY. UM THIS WAS
ALSO NOTED IN THE PRIVACY
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS AND THE
COMMITTEE LAST WEEK. UM, AND THE
FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT,
UM RIGHT NOW, OUR NEWS
PUBLICATIONS ARE TRYING TO DO
EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO GET
EYEBALLS ON THEIR PLATFORMS.
IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE OF THE
POWER OF OUR ON THEIR SITES.
IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE OF THE
POWER OF THESE PLATFORMS. AH AND
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING
THAT THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY TRIED.
UM AND IN FACT, THIS IS QUOTED
FROM THE PRIVACY COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS. ONE CAN MAKE THE
OPPOSITE ARGUMENT. IT IS
CONCEIVABLE THAT WITH
FINANCIALLY SOUND BOOKS AND
HEALTHIER NEWSROOMS, MORE
ENGAGING IN INVESTIGATIVE
REPORTING WHAT LEAD TO QUALITY
STORIES BASED REAL EVENTS
CITY HALLS, SCHOOL BOARDS AND
COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE STATE.
THIS WILL LEAD TO MORE CLICKS
BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A HIGHER
QUALITY OF CONTENT, NOT LESS.
ARGUMENT NUMBER FOUR. THE ENTIRE
PREMISE OF THE BILL IS FLAWED.
IT IS SIMPLY THAT THE INTERNET
ITSELF IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
DECLINE IN JOURNALISM AND
TRADITIONAL JOURNALISM HAS TO
DIE IN ORDER FOR SOMETHING ELSE
TO BE REBORN. MY RESPONSE. THE
ECONOMIES WHICH SUPPORT QUALITY
JOURNALISM, AND THE
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES THAT
IMPACT ITS VITALITY HAVE NEVER
BEEN IGNORED BY THE AMERICAN
GOVERNMENT, WHETHER ADAPTING TO
TELEGRAPH RADIO BROADCAST
TELEVISION NOW AND NOW THE
INTERNET ARE FOURTH ESTATE HAS
ALWAYS HAD THE HELP OF LAWMAKERS
TO BOLSTER ITS STANDINGS BECAUSE
OF OUR SHARED BELIEF THAT A FREE
PRESS IS VITAL TO OUR DEMOCRACY.
ALLOWING RANK AND FILE
JOURNALISM TO CONTINUE TO
ATROPHY OR DIE OFF HAS NEVER
BEEN OUR COUNTRY'S APPROACH.
WHEN JOURNALISM HAS FACED
CHALLENGES, WE'VE ALWAYS MADE
SPACE FOR THE FOURTH ESTATE IN
OUR DISCOURSE, BECAUSE WITHOUT
IT, OUR CIVIC HEALTH IS AT RISK
. THERE WAS AN ARTICLE A COUPLE
OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT THE LH IN THE
L A TIMES DISCUSSING THE
NEWSROOM IN SALINA IN CERTAIN
SALINAS SALINAS, CALIFORNIA,
WHICH IS A NEWSPAPER THAT
CURRENTLY HAS NO MORE REPORTERS
LEFT IN IT. BECAUSE OF THE
DECLINE OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN
OUR NEWSROOMS, DAILY TIMES NOTED
LAST MONTH, QUOTE THE ONLY
ORIGINAL CONTENT FROM SALINAS
NOW COMES FROM THE FORM OF PAID
OBITUARIES, MAKING DEATH
VIRTUALLY THE ONLY SIGN OF LIFE
AT AN INSTITUTION ONCE
CONSIDERED A MUST READ BY MANY
SELENA INS, AND THIS IS TRUE IN
COMMUNITIES ALL ACROSS
CALIFORNIA, PARTICULARLY IN OUR
IN OUR MORE RURAL COMMUNITIES
THAT CANNOT SUPPORT THESE
NEWSROOMS. A THRIVING PRESS.
DIVERSE PRESS IS THE BACKBONE OF
A HEALTHY, VIBRANT DEMOCRACY.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M DOING THIS
BILL I'VE SPOKEN WITH ALMOST I
THINK, ACTUALLY EVERY SINGLE ONE
OF YOU HERE ON THE COMMITTEE AS
WELL AS THE COMMITTEE LAST WEEK.
IT'S A TOUGH ISSUE, BUT ONE THAT
I THINK IS IMPORTANT. I BELIEVE
THAT OUR DEMOCRACY RESTS ON OUR
ABILITY TO HAVE THRIVING
NEWSROOMS. WHICH IS WHY I'M
DOING THIS. WE ARE MEETING WITH
OPPOSITION. WE ARE GOING TO
CONTINUE TO MEET WITH
OPPOSITION. THEY'RE GOING TO BE
AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL, BUT I
REALLY WANT THIS CONVERSATION TO
KEEP MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE I
THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE FOR
DEMOCRACY THAT IT DOES WITH ME
HERE TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT IS
TRY MASTERS, PUBLISHER OF THE
LOS ANGELES BLADE AND HOUSING
ER, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH AND
MANAGING DIRECTOR OF ECON ONE.
ALSO DANIEL COFFEE IS HERE TO
HELP ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS WHEN WE GET TO THAT
SECTION THANK YOU FIRST WITNESS,
PLEASE. UM UH, GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS TROY
MASTERS. I'M PUBLISHER OF THE
LOS ANGELES BLADE WHERE THE ONLY
LGBT MEDIA OUTLET FOR LOS
ANGELES AND THE LARGEST ONE IN
CALIFORNIA. WE PRINTED WEEKLY
PRINT EDITION NEWSPAPER AND WERE
VISITED BY ABOUT 500,000
VISITORS ONLINE PER MONTH. UM
WHERE THE NATION'S ONLY L G B
KEY. L G B T Q. I HAVE TROUBLE
WITH THOSE ACTING NIMES MYSELF
SOMETHING, UM WE'RE THE NATION'S
ONLY LGBTQ MEDIA OUTLET MEMBER
OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS,
AND WE ALSO PUBLISH THE
WASHINGTON BLADE IN D. C I AM
ALSO PUBLISHER OF GAY CITY NEWS,
WHICH IS THE GAY AND LESBIAN
PAPER FOR LGBT Q NEWSPAPER FOR
NEW YORK CITY. UM WE PROVIDE
COVERAGE OF LOCAL, NATIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL NEWS AND EVENTS
THAT PROVIDE UNIQUELY GRANULAR
COVERAGE OF THE PLACES THAT WERE
IN OPERATION IN LOS ANGELES
REGION AND ALL OF CALIFORNIA.
WHAT WE PROVIDE, I BELIEVE IS
HEALTHY IS CRITICAL TO THE
HEALTH OF OUR COMMUNITY IN THE
PAST YEAR ALONE, MORE THAN 600
ANTI LGBTQ BILLS HAVE PASSED. UM
AND ASSEMBLIES AROUND THE
NATION. UM AND THAT'S HOW TO
DEVASTATING IMPACT ON OUR
COMMUNITY AND MORE THAN 40
STATES AND MOST OF THOSE STATES.
THERE THERE IS NO STRONG LGBT
LOCAL MEDIA THAT EXISTS IN PART
BECAUSE NEARLY IT'S BECOME
NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SURVIVE IN
THIS CURRENT MEDIA ENVIRONMENT.
MANY HAVE FAILED BECAUSE WE JUST
NOTED NEW YORK TIMES REPORTED
THAT JUST SINCE THE PANDEMIC
MORE THAN 400 NEWSPAPERS,
MAINSTREAM NEWSPAPERS HAVE
FAILED ACROSS THE COUNTRY, SO
IT'S NOT JUST A PROBLEM OF
CALIFORNIA JUST NOT LGBT OR A
NICHE. IT'S A GENERAL PROBLEM
THAT WAS CREATED NEWS DESSERTS
ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
INCLUDING MANY HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. THE FAILURES ARE
CAUSED, IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF
MARKET OR FLIGHT TO SOCIAL
MEDIA. THEY'RE RAPIDLY MOVING
AWAY FROM DIRECT MARKETING
RELATIONSHIPS WITH LOCAL MEDIA
AND NATIONAL NEWSPAPERS AND
EVENTS. LOCAL TV SOCIAL MEDIA
SOCIAL MEDIA ESSENTIALLY OFFERS
LOCAL BUSINESSES FREE MARKETING
AND ABLE IN ENABLING THEM TO
BUILD ROBUST COMMUNITY PAGES OF
THEIR OWN. MARKETERS CAN BOOST
THERE ARE PAGES FOR EVEN MORE
ENGAGEMENT AND AS PART OF THE
BIG TECH STRATEGY TO FURTHER
MONETIZE ITSELF. BUT IT'S
INCREASINGLY LESS POPULAR AND
AH! FOR MOST SMALL LOCAL
BUSINESSES, IT'S A SUFFICIENT
MARKETING FOR THEMSELVES. BIG
TECH IS ALSO SPENT HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TRAINING
THESE PEOPLE HOW THE LOCAL
BUSINESSES HOW TO THEY CAN
ELEVATE THEIR BRANDS ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AND OTHER PLATFORMS. SO UM
, THAT'S ALL TO SAY THAT I NEED
YOU TO WRAP UP. YEAH. UM
ESSENTIALLY, UM, I'M HERE TO
SUPPORT THE BILL BECAUSE I
BELIEVE THAT WE ARE SUPER
PROVIDER OF CONTENT AND WE
PROVIDE THEM WITH MY ABOUT
EYEBALLS THAT ARE MONETIZED TO
OUR DETRIMENT. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS, PLEASE. THANK YOU. I'D
LIKE TO JUST MAKE THREE POINTS.
FIRST THE NEWSPAPER INDUSTRY IS
IN CRISIS. MARKET FORCES ARE
FAILING TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE
RESOURCES AND INTERVENTION TO
ADDRESS THE POWER AND BALANCE
BETWEEN DOMINANT PLATFORMS AND
NEWS PUBLISHERS IS BADLY NEEDED.
THE DOMINANT ONLINE PLATFORMS
APPROPRIATE THE VALUE ADDED OF
NEWS PUBLISHERS BY REFRAMING
ARTICLES IN RICH PREVIEWS
CONTAINING HEADLINES, SUMMARIES
AND PHOTOS. THIS REFRAMING
DEPRIVES NEWSPAPERS OF CLICKS
AND OF SUBSCRIPTION REVENUES,
THE EFFECT OF SHRINKING
NEWSPAPER ADVERTISING REVENUES
IS LESS CASH FLOW TO SUPPORT
JOURNALISTS. A CLEAR EMPLOYMENT
EFFECT FLOWING FROM THE EXERCISE
OF MONOPOLY POWER BY THE
DOMINANT PLATFORMS, EMPLOYMENT
AMONG NEWSPAPER EMPLOYEES FELL
FROM 73,008 TO 31,020 20.
DECLINING AD REVENUES DOESN'T
REFLECT A BROKEN BUSINESS MODEL
OF LEGACY NEWSPAPERS. NEW
DIGITAL MEDIA ENTRANCE ARE
EQUALLY HARMED BY THE POWER AND
BALANCE. JUST LAST MONTH,
BUZZFEED SHUT DOWN ITS NEWS
DIVISION VICE IS REPORTEDLY
HEADING FOR BANKRUPTCY AND
PROTOCOL SHUT DOWN IN NOVEMBER
IN REPORTING ON THIS CALAMITY
DEAL BOOK OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
NOTED THAT QUOTE NETWORKS LIKE
FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE ENDED UP
KEEPING MOST OF THE AVAILABLE AD
DOLLARS IN OUR INCREASINGLY
FAVORING CONTENT FORMATS THAT
YIELD LESS MONEY FOR PUBLISHERS.
SECOND THE PROPOSED INTERVENTION
IN THIS BILL IS MODEST. NEWS
PUBLISHERS ARE SIMPLY ASKING FOR
A NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR OPERATING
UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE STATE
TO HEAR THEIR ASSESSMENT OF THE
ANNUAL VALUE BEING APPROPRIATED
BY THE PLATFORMS ALONGSIDE THE
PRESUMABLY LOWER ASSESSMENT BY
THE DOMINANT PLATFORMS OF THE
SAME VALUE. AND TO MAKE A
DETERMINATION AS TO WHICH OF THE
TWO ASSESSMENTS COMES CLOSEST TO
APPROXIMATING FAIR MARKET VALUE
. THIRD AND FINALLY, THE
CALIFORNIA BILL IS AN
IMPROVEMENT ON THE FEDERAL BILL
THAT SEEKS TO OFFER RELIEF
NATIONWIDE IN SEVERAL WAYS BUT
CRITICALLY AND ELIGIBLE DIGITAL
JOURNALISM PROVIDER IS REQUIRED
TO SPEND AT LEAST 70% OF FUNDS
RECEIVED PURSUANT TO THIS BILL.
ON NEWS JOURNALISTS. THE BILL
WOULD THUS SLOW AND HOPEFULLY
REVERSE THE DECLINE IN
EMPLOYMENT AMONG NEWSPAPERS
IMMEDIATELY I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? SEEING NONE. OH ARE YOU
IN SUPPORT OR SUPPORT? OKAY.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE BRITTANY BAR
SORRY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA NEWS PUBLISHERS
ASSOCIATION, STRONG SUPPORT AS
WELL AS THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC
LIBERTIES PROJECT. BURBANK
LEADER GLENDALE NEWS PRESS MEDIA
ALLIANCE MEDIA GUILD OF THE WEST
NATIONAL NEWSPAPER ASSOCIATION,
NATIONAL PRESS PHOTOGRAPHERS
ASSOCIATION, OJAI MAGAZINE. OJAI
VALLEY NEWS OUTLOOK PASADENA
OUTLOOK. VALLEY SUN PICKET
FENCE, MEDIA RADIO TELEVISION
DIGITAL NEWS ASSOCIATION SAN
FERNANDO VALLEY SON SAN
FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, SAN MARINO
TRIBUNE. SOUTHOUSE TODAVÍA
REVIEW, THE AUTHORS GUILD AND
THE L A TIMES IN SAN DIEGO.
UNION TRIBUNE. THANK YOU. MARK
POWERS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BROADCASTERS
ASSOCIATION AND ALL THE RADIO
AND TELEVISION STATIONS. NEW
DISTRICT ASKING FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEEING
NONE. WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION.
GO AHEAD. MR CHAIR. MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. MATT SHEERS,
PRESIDENT OF THE COMPUTER AND
COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OF TRADE,
REPRESENTING INFORMATION,
COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY
FIRMS. FEW DISPUTE THAT
OBJECTIVE AND RELIABLE
JOURNALISM IS CRITICAL TO AN
INFORMED ELECTORATE. BUT THE
QUESTION HERE TODAY IS WHETHER A
HEALTHY NEWS SECTOR IS BEST
ACHIEVED BY CHANGING ITS FATE TO
SUBSIDIES FROM A HANDFUL OF
FIRMS THAT ARE ROOTED IN A
UNPRECEDENTED MANDATORY
ARBITRATION SCHEME. THAT TURNS
ON HYPERLINKS. THE BUILDING
BLOCK OF THE INTERNET. NOW.
TAXES AND FEES ON LINKS UPEND
THE BASIC ARCHITECTURE OF OUR
CONNECTED ECONOMY AND OPEN THE
DOOR TO OTHER TOLLS AND FEES AND
TAXES ON THE FREE AND OPEN
INTERNET. THIS SCHEME IS
INCONSISTENT WITH BOTH THE FIRST
AMENDMENT THAT I'M HAPPY TO
DISCUSS. MORE OF THAT IF YOU
HAVE QUESTIONS AND ALSO WITH THE
LIBERATE CHOSEN POLICY
OBJECTIVES MADE BY CONGRESS IN
FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAW, COPYRIGHT
PROTECTS ARTICLES OF JOURNALISM
, BUT IT DOES NOT REACH MERE
FACTS OR IDEAS OR QUOTATIONS OR
CRITICALLY HEADLINES AND
HYPERLINKS. THIS BILL
CONTRAVENES ALL OF THAT BY
COMPELLING COMPANIES TO PAY
MERELY BY ACCESSING PORTIONS OF
NEWS PUBLISHERS CONTENT AND THEN
DIRECTING BILLIONS OF MONETIZE
HERBAL LINKS TO THAT CONTENT AND
DIGITAL SERVICES. OPT OUT THIS
BILL LABELS THAT RETALIATION
THAT MAKES IT MUST CARRY AND
MUST PAY. OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE
EXPERIMENTED UNSUCCESSFULLY WITH
LINK TAXES JUST BY WAY. OF
EXAMPLE, US GOVERNMENT REPORTS
HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE SPANISH
LINK TAX HURT SMALLER NEWS
PUBLISHERS BEFORE BEING
SUPERSEDED BY AN EU DIRECTIVE
UNDER THE FRENCH LINK TAX
MISINFORMATION PROVIDER IS
CURRENTLY LITIGATING WITH GOOGLE
, SAYING THAT IT'S COVID 19
FALSEHOODS SHOULD HAVE BETTER
SEARCH VISIBILITY. IN CANADA.
WE'RE SEEING SIMILAR ISSUES AND
JUST TO CONCLUDE THE OFF CITED
AUSTRALIAN NEWS MEDIA BARGAINING
CODES. PLATFORM DESIGNATION
PROCESS FOR TRIGGERING
ARBITRATION, WHICH IS FREQUENTLY
CITED HAS NEVER BEEN USED. THESE
ARE NOT EXAMPLES OF SUCCESS, BUT
FAILURE. I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS
THOSE FURTHER AND THANKS FOR
YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE. THANK
YOU. AND IF YOU COULD JUST MOVE
THE MICROPHONE. THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
SAMANTHA CORBYN. I REPRESENT THE
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
HERE TODAY IN OPPOSITION TO 886
LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR THE
TIME THAT SHE HAS SPENT MEETING
WITH US. HOWEVER WE REMAIN
CONCERNED THAT A B 866886 SCUSE
ME IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL WILL NOT
RESURRECT LOCAL NEWS AND REWARDS
CLICKBAIT AND MISINFORMATION AS
A REVENUE SCHEME. THIS BILL DOES
VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHTS OF ONLINE PLATFORMS BY
REQUIRING THEM TO CARRY CONTENT
FROM ALL COVERED NEWS
ORGANIZATIONS THAT REQUESTED WE
RESPECTFULLY BELIEVE THE STANCE
IN THE ANALYSIS ON ONE A MISSES
THE MARK. THE ISSUE IS INHERENT
IN THE DEFINITION OF RETALIATION
, WHICH IN ESSENCE COMPELS A
PLATFORM TO PUBLISH CONTENT
UNLESS THEY BE LIABLE FOR
RETALIATION AND FAILING OR
REFUSING TO DO SO. MAYBE 886
WILL NOT ENCOURAGE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF NEW LOCAL
INDEPENDENT NEWS. INSTEAD IT
BENEFITS MEDIA CONGLOMERATES
THAT HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR
DOWNSIZING, NEWSROOMS AND
SELLING OFF ASSETS. THESE FIRMS
WILL COMPARATIVELY DOMINATE
NEGOTIATIONS WOULD TAKE PLACE.
FORMS COLLECTING THE LION'S
SHARE OF PAYMENTS MANDATED BY
THIS BILL. THIS CONCERN IS
SHARED BY MANY WORKING
JOURNALISTS HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR
OPPOSITION TO SIMILAR FEDERAL
LEGISLATION. PUT ANOTHER WAY.
THIS BILL WOULD CREATE A SYSTEM
THAT BENEFITS CONGLOMERATES LIKE
FOX NEWS, WHO PRODUCED GREAT
VOLUMES OF CONTENT AND ARE
BETTER POSITION TO NEGOTIATE
WHILE INDEPENDENT MARGINAL WHILE
WHILE MARGINALIZING SMALLER,
INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATIONS SUCH
AS CAL MATTERS. THE RETALIATION
PROVISIONS IN THIS MEASURE WILL
HAVE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE
OF PROTECTING CLICKBAIT. AND MR
INFORMATION FROM BEING REMOVED
BY PLATFORMS. THE DRIVING
INCENTIVE TO INCREASE THE USAGE
FEE WILL NOT BE CONTENT THAT
INFORMS THE PUBLIC BUT RATHER
THAT THAT PROMOTES ENGAGEMENT
SHARING OF LINKS AND PUBLIC
OUTRAGE. AT A TIME WHEN
CALIFORNIA IS MOVING AWAY FROM
ARBITRATION USED FOR SENSITIVE
MATTERS. MAYBE 886 GRANTS
ANONYMOUS ARBITRATORS THE RIGHT
TO RANK THE VALUE OF SPEECH,
SOCIETAL, FINANCIAL AND
OTHERWISE, IMAGINE THIS SYSTEM
OPERATING IN FLORIDA OR TEXAS.
WHAT SPEECH MIGHT ARBITRATORS
THEY'RE DETERMINED IS VALUABLE.
AND WITHOUT MY TESTIMONY. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
DYLAN HOFFMAN ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET. RESPECTFULLY, A POST.
TO BRING FOR CUETO ON BEHALF OF
CHAMBER OF PROGRESS OPPOSED.
DAYLAMI CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE. RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED.
THANK YOU. WELCOME TO THE
CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION
IN OPPOSITION. MACHINE LEVIN WAS
CAPITAL ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF
THEIR CHOICE AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION SEEN? NONE
QUESTION, MS PAPIN. SO I WANT TO
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR YOUR
GENEROSITY OF TIME IN DISCUSSING
THIS MATTER OFFLINE WITH ME. UM
AS I MENTIONED IN PRIVACY, WE
VERY MUCH AGREE ABOUT THE
PURPOSE OF THE BILL AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE BILL,
ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO
LOCAL JOURNALISTS, UM, AND THE
PIVOTAL ROLE THAT THEY PLAY IN
DEMOCRACY IN, UM. CITY
GOVERNMENT STATE GOVERNMENT AND
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT REALLY
IMPACTS PEOPLE'S DAILY LIVES.
SO, UM, I HAVE A PROFOUND AND
PERSONAL INTEREST IN MAKING SURE
THAT, UM MM. THOSE ENDEAVORS OF
JOURNALISM SURVIVE BEYOND JUST A
MERE PAYWALL. UM BUT AS I
MENTIONED IN PRIVACY, STILL HAVE
SOME CONCERNS IN YOU AND I
TALKED YESTERDAY ABOUT THE
DIFFERENCES IN DIFFERENT TYPES
OF TECH. NOT ALL TECH IS CREATED
EQUAL. SOME SCRAPE ARTICLES.
OTHERS JUST REPURPOSE THEM AND I
KNOW YOU'RE WORKING ON TRYING TO
GET SOME LANGUAGE THERE. SO I
APPRECIATE THAT IF YOU WANT TO
GIVE US AN UPDATE, THAT'S GOOD
TO SECOND. I AM I DO HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THIS MONEY. I
APPRECIATE THE 70% FIGURE. I
REALLY DO WANT TO SEE IT. GET IN
THE HANDS OF JOURNALISTS. I
THINK THEY'RE REMARKABLY
UNDERPAID. THERE'S A LOT OF BIG
JOURNALIST OUTFITS SO OR OR
PUBLISHING OUTFITS THAT AREN'T
DESPERATE FOR MONEY BY ANY
MEANS. BUT I DO WANT TO SEE IT.
GET IN THE HANDS OF JOURNALISTS.
I WANT TO, UM MM. PROMOTE THEIR
PROFESSIONALISM, AND I THINK
THAT THAT PAY IS ONE OF THE WAYS
THAT WE ENSURE THAT AND I KNOW
YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS NOTHING
NEW THAT I HAVEN'T COMMENTED ON
ABOUT THE BILL AND ITS INNER
WORKINGS. THE OTHER THING THAT
DOES CONCERN ME IS THIS
ARBITRATION, UM I WON'T CALL IT
A SCHEME BUT THE ARBITRATION
PROCEDURES AND ONE OF THE THINGS
I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THAT THAT WE
HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT AND WE
DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IN PRIVACY IS
OUR THEIR APPEAL RIGHTS TO IT.
AND UM I DON'T THINK THAT'S BEEN
FULLY VETTED WHEN WE TALKED
YESTERDAY, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW
THAT WORKS. BUT YOU KNOW IF YOU
GET A PANEL OF THREE FOLKS UM
AND THEY'RE MAKING DECISIONS ON
WHAT FEES WILL BE. THAT IS A AND
IN INDIA. THEN YOU HAVE NO RIGHT
TO APPEAL. IT HAS THIS IMPACT ON
THE ABILITY TO DO BUSINESS,
WHICH IS, UH, IT SEEMS, UM THERE
MIGHT BE SOME DUE PROCESS IS I
DON'T KNOW. SO ANYWAY, WE TALKED
ABOUT IT YESTERDAY. I KNOW IS
THE ONLY ONE. BRING IT UP IF YOU
CAN. AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS
PROCESS FIGURE OUT, UH, HOW THAT
WORKS ITS WAY THROUGH. I WOULD
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE IT. BUT I
COMMEND YOUR OPENNESS TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH BECAUSE
THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS ON
THIS. NOBODY DISAGREES THAT
NEWSPAPERS HAVE TAKEN A BIG HIT
, AND THEY PLAY A CRUCIAL ROLE
IN DEMOCRACY THAT SAID. UM, WE
GOT TO WORK THROUGH SOME OF THIS
STUFF, AND I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING
AND I JUST DON'T REALLY HAVE A
QUESTION OTHER THAN TO CONVEY MY
CONCERNS, AND THEN THE
ARBITRATION ONE IF WE GOTTA TALK
A LITTLE FURTHER ABOUT THAT,
TOO. THANKS. THANK YOU. UH YOU
WANT ME TO ADDRESS SOME OF THAT
NOW OR I CAN ALSO WAIT. IF YOU
WANT. YOU WANT TO WAIT AND DO IT
IN YOUR CLOTHES, MR HANEY. THERE
MIGHT BE OTHERS. SO THAT'S WHAT
I WAS THINKING. IT WAS KIND OF
PROBABLY COME BACK UP. I ALSO
WANT TO APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR
AND CERTAINLY THAT THE
CHALLENGES THAT UH PUBLISHERS
AND NEWSPAPERS MEDIA OUTLETS ARE
FACING IS A CRITICAL CONCERN FOR
OUR DEMOCRACY. AND SOME OF I
THINK THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY
SOLUTIONS THAT NEED TO BE FOUND
IN THIS. SPACE ACTUALLY HAD TWO
OF THE SAME QUESTION. SO I WON'T
, UH, AND CONCERNS THAT THAT I
HOPE THAT YOU CAN ADDRESS ONE IS
THIS ISSUE OF THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN THE PLATFORMS AND
OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE SOME
PLATFORMS WHERE INDIVIDUAL USERS
ARE SHARING IT AND WHAT THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THAT WILL BE AS
OPPOSED TO A PLATFORM THAT
AGGREGATE SIT ON THEIR OWN. AND
HOW THAT'S REFLECTED IN THE
BILL. AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW, I
HAVE DEEP RESPECT AS WE ALL DO
FOR OUR OUR JOURNALISTS AND THAT
I APPRECIATE THE WORK TO FOCUS
THE REVENUE ON INVESTMENTS IN
JOURNALISTS AND INVESTMENTS IN
NEWSROOMS. I HAVE QUESTIONS
ABOUT HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE
ENFORCED. WHAT THE OVERSIGHT IS.
HOW DO WE ACTUALLY MAKE SURE
THAT THIS ISN'T SIMPLY PROFITS
HANDED FROM ONE MADE COMPANY TO
ANOTHER BIG COMPANY AND ACTUALLY
GETS INTO THE NOT EVEN NECESSARY
COMPANY. INVESTMENTS AND FOLKS
ARE FOCUSED ON VENTURE FIRMS AND
SUCH. SO HOW DO WE MAKE SURE
THAT THIS ACTUALLY HELPS
NEWSROOMS AND MEDIA COMPANIES
AND HAVE ENFORCEMENT AROUND THAT
AND AGAIN APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR
ONGOING WORK ON THIS AND YOUR
COMMITMENT TO A VERY TOUGH ISSUE
, AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT YOU'LL
BE ABLE TO WORK ALL THESE THINGS
OUT? DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND AT
ONCE? OKAY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
MR ASTLEY. THANK YOU. AND, UH, I
DO. COMMEND THE AUTHOR FOR YOUR
WORK ON THIS AND YOUR
LEADERSHIP. IT'S A REALLY
IMPORTANT ISSUE SOME QUESTIONS
FOR THE OPPOSITION. YOU'RE WITH
THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER
FOUNDATION. CORRECT I THINK I
ASKED THIS LAST TIME. I NEVER
GOT A CLEAR ANSWER. ARE YOU
FUNDED BY GOOGLE FACEBOOK? NO
NOT IN ANY WAY. YOUR FUNDING IS
VERY OBSCURE ON YOUR WEBSITE.
IT'S NOT CLEAR YOU VERY $15
MILLION LAST YEAR. IT DOESN'T
SAY THE ORGANIZATION HAS OVER
40,000 INDEPENDENT DONORS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND YOU
MENTIONED ONE OF YOUR CONCERNS
IS YOU WERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF
OF CAL MATTERS. YOU REFERENCE
THEM AS ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS
WHO ARE WORRIED ABOUT. ARE YOU
AWARE THAT COW MATTERS GETS OVER
$500,000 FROM FACEBOOK. I'M NOT
. I'M JUST AWARE THAT THEY'RE IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS MEASURE AS
WELL. AND THAT INJECTS TO
POSITION TO FOX NEWS. ONE WOULD
ARGUE THAT THEY ARE MUCH
SMALLER. THEY ARE SMALLER. I
AGREE, BUT THEY ARE GETTING
MONEY FROM BIG TEXT. I'M NOT
SURE THAT THEY'RE AN OBJECTIVE
PLAYER IN THIS. I WOULD JUST SAY
THIS. I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN
DENY THAT BIG TECH IS PROFITING
OFF OF JOURNALISM. YOU GUYS
SCRAPE INFORMATION FROM THEIR
ARTICLES. YOU SUMMARIZE THEM AND
YOU FEED THEM TO YOUR USERS, AND
IT DISINCENTIVIZE PEOPLE FROM
ACTUALLY CLICKING ON THE LINK.
TO MONETIZE THEIR WEBSITE AND
THEIR PLATFORMS. WE'VE ALL SEEN
THIS WHERE WE SEARCH FOR ISSUE
OR TOPIC AND GOOGLE GIVES IT TO
US AT THE VERY TOP. FULL SUMMARY
DON'T EVEN HAVE TO CLICK THE
LINK. AND I NEVER REALLY THOUGHT
ABOUT IT BEFORE, BUT THE MORE I
THINK ABOUT IT, IT IS A
DISSERVICE TO THE CONTENT
PROVIDERS. GOOGLE DOESN'T CREATE
CONTENT AND THIS IN THIS SPACE,
IT USES OTHER PEOPLE'S CONTENT.
SO WHILE I AGREE, I DO NOT
BELIEVE IN CORPORATE WELFARE. I
DON'T BELIEVE IN TRANSFERRING
WEALTH, BUT I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE
IN UNJUST ENRICHMENT, AND I DO
THINK BIG TECH IS BEING UNJUSTLY
ENRICHED. UM OFF THE BACKS OF
JOURNALISTS. NOW WITH THAT SAID
, I THINK GOOGLE SCRAPING IS
DIFFERENT FROM AS WE'VE TALKED
ABOUT MS WICK SOCIAL MEDIA, IN
WHICH NEWS PUBLISHERS ARE
VOLUNTARILY PUTTING THEIR
CONTENT ON THERE, AND I DO THINK
THERE'S SOME CULPABILITY THERE
FOR JOURNALISTS. YOU GUYS DO
RECEIVE A BENEFIT FROM FROM
THAT. IT'S ESSENTIALLY FREE
MARKETING, AND IT'S GETTING YOUR
CONTENT OUT TO READERS WHO WOULD
OTHERWISE, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE
SEEN IT NOW. I DO THINK THERE
ARE SOME MONETIZATION THAT'S
STILL HAPPENING, BUT TO MISS
POPPINS POINT GOOGLE AND SOCIAL
MEDIA SHOULD BE TREATED
DIFFERENTLY. AND MISS WEEKS. I
KNOW YOU'RE COMMITTED TO GETTING
THIS RIGHT AND WORKING ON IT. UM
SO WITH THAT I'D LIKE TO ADD ON
AS A CO AUTHOR TODAY, UM, AND
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU TO GET
THIS, RIGHT. UM AND I THINK
YOU'RE GOING TO GET THERE. I
THINK WE CAN UNDERESTIMATE THE
IMPORTANCE OF FREE PRESS. IT'S
OUR FIRST AMENDMENT. IT'S THE
VERY FIRST AMENDMENT. WE HAVE TO
HAVE A VIBRANT AND DIVERSE PRESS
TO HOLD THE GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABLE. YOU LOOK IN THIS
ROOM TODAY. I DON'T THINK
THERE'S A SINGLE REPORTER. UM
OTHER THAN THOSE AT THE TABLE.
WHAT THE PRESS IS DYING. AND UH,
WHAT IS THE WASHINGTON POST
QUOTE. DEMOCRACY DIES IN
DARKNESS. IT'S DARK RIGHT NOW,
SO WITH THAT I WOULD LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
YOU. AND I HOPE WE CAN GET THIS
RIGHT. MISS ROSS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I ALSO WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR BEING CREATIVE AND
TRYING TO SOLVE SOMETHING THAT
WE ALL RECOGNIZE AS AN ISSUE. I
WANT TO ASSOCIATE MY COMMENTS
WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HAPPENED, UM.
THE ISSUE BROUGHT UP BY MISS
CORBIN. I THINK IT'S AN
IMPORTANT ONE. WHETHER OR NOT
WE'RE DEALING WITH AN ISSUE THAT
MAYBE BE DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
. UM AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT
CLEARLY HAS TO BE ADDRESSED, AND
I KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING
THAT YOU'RE WORKING ON. UM ALL
OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN
THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BY MY
COLLEAGUES ARE EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT. AND SO WORKING ON
TRYING TO FIND THE BEST BALANCE
BUT DOING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE
INTENDING TO DO, I THINK IS
IMPORTANT, MAKING SURE THAT THAT
IF WE RECOGNIZE THAT OUR
NEWSPAPERS ARE JOURNALISM ARE
NECESSARY OR IMPORTANT TO OUR
DEMOCRACY, FINDING WAYS THAT WE
DON'T HAVE SOMEBODY WHO IS
UNJUSTLY ENRICHED. UM, BUT. BUT
STILL BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE THE
INFORMATION THAT THAT WE ALL
NEED. YES IT IS CONVENIENT TO
CLICK AND SEE GOOGLE PROVIDED
FOR US, BUT IF THEY ARE BEING
UNJUSTLY ENRICHED THAN SOMETHING
DOES NEED TO HAPPEN, SOMEBODY
CREATED THAT CONTENT, AND IT
SHOULD NOT BE USURPED WITHOUT
PROPER COMPENSATION. THANK YOU.
MS DIXON. UM YES, WE'RE ALL I
THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT
THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO CHANGE.
I'M ACTUALLY HAVE A PERSONAL
INTEREST. BOTH MY PARENTS ARE
JOURNALISTS AND OWNED NEWSPAPERS
MANY YEARS AGO. THEY PROBABLY
WOULD BE OUT OF BUSINESS TODAY
BECAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNITY
NEWSPAPERS. UM. INTERESTINGLY
AND I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE, BUT AS
YOU WORK THROUGH THIS, I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES
THAT ARE AT STAKE HERE THAT ARE
CREATED THE COUNTRY CALLED
CONTENT TODAY, BUT ITS
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THAT IS
CREATED BY UH, THE NEWS
ORGANIZATION THAT IS, UH, AND
THE REPORTER THAT I GUESS THE
NEWS ORGANIZATION OWNS THE
COPYRIGHT ON THE CONTENT. BUT I
THINK THAT IS THAT'S THAT'S ALL
YOU HAVE IS, UH, THE CONTENT OF
WHAT YOU CREATE. AND IT'S A
GREAT CONCERN TO ME. ONE
QUESTION I HAVE, THOUGH, ON AND
I KNOW YOU'RE WORKING ON A LOT
OF REALLY CRITICAL ISSUES. COULD
YOU JUST EXPLAIN HOW THE
ARBITRATION PROCESS WOULD WORK?
ACTUALLY LET DANIELLE SPEAK TO
IT? UM, WHO I THINK CAN
ARTICULATE THANK YOU. SO I'M
ACTUALLY HE'S AN ARBITRATOR. HE
ACTUALLY NEGOTIATES FOR A LIVING
. HE'D ACTUALLY BE THE ONE
ARBITRATING THIS SO I DO THINK
HELL WOULD ACTUALLY BE BEST TO
ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT SO WHAT WOULD
HAPPEN IS WE WOULD GO IN WITH AN
ECONOMIST EVALUATION EXPERT ON
THE OTHER SIDE. I'D SAY GOOGLE
OR FACEBOOK WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN
AND WE WOULD PRESENT THE
ARBITRATION PANEL. WHAT WE THINK
EVALUATION IS BY THE WAY, WE'VE
ALREADY DONE SOME STUDIES ON OUR
OWN. BASED ON CONSUMER SURVEYS,
WE ASKED CONSUMERS HOW WHAT'S
THE REASON WHY YOU'RE GOING TO
THESE WEBSITES LIKE HIS NEWS
IMPORTANT AND HELP LESS FREQUENT
? WOULD YOU GO TO THESE SITES IF
NEWS WASN'T ON THE SITE, AND WE
GET THESE PERCENTAGES OF TIME
PERCENTAGES OF VALUE? I JUST
WANT TO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR. I
REALIZED I'M GOING TO GET BACK
TO THIS NOTION THAT IT'S A LINK
TAX IS A COMPLETE MISNOMER. OUR
EVALUATION METRICS HAVE NOTHING
TO DO WITH THE NUMBER OF LINKS.
WHEN WE ASKED CONSUMERS IN THESE
SURVEYS. WHY ARE YOU GOING TO
FACEBOOK? YOU KNOW WHY YOU GOING
TO GOOGLE? HOW MUCH LESS TIME
WOULD YOU SPEND THEIR WITHOUT
THE NEWS? IT HAS NOTHING TO DO
WITH AN ACCOUNTING COUNTING UP
OR SUMMATION OF LINCOLN LINKS
WHEN HE USES THE WORD LINK TAXES
AN INTENTIONAL MISNOMER,
MISLEADING AS TO AS TO HOW VALUE
IS GOING TO BE DETERMINED AT THE
ARBITRATION PANEL. WHEN I'M DONE
SPEAKING, GOOGLE OR FACEBOOK IS
GOING TO PUT UP THEIR VALUATION
EXPERT. I'M SURE HE'S GOING TO
SAY SOME NOT NOT VERY KIND
THINGS AND HE'S GOING TO THEN
PUT FORWARD OR SHE'S GOING TO
PUT FORWARD THEIR OWN ESTIMATION
OF THE VALUE ADDED THAT
NEWSPAPERS AND NEWS PUBLISHERS
BRING TO THAT PLATFORM. AT THAT
POINT, THE ARBITRATION PANEL
WILL BE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT
VALUATIONS AND UNDER BASEBALL
STYLE ARBITRATION. THEY CAN'T
SPLIT THE BABY. THEY HAVE TWO
INSTEAD. DECIDE AND DETERMINE
WHICH OF THE TWO ESTIMATES
CLOSEST, APPROXIMATES THE FAIR
MARKET VALUE OF WHAT'S BEING
APPROPRIATED OR CONFERRED BY THE
NEWS PUBLISHERS TO THE PLATFORMS
. AT THAT POINT, THE PROCESS
ENDS. WHO WOULD APPOINT THE
ARBITRATION PANEL. THAT'S AH,
IT'S UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF THE
AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION
, AND IT ALSO FOLLOWS THE
GUIDELINES AS ARTICULATED IN THE
BILL. SO YOU'D YOU'D PICK FROM
AND THIS IS HOW IT'S TYPICALLY
DONE IN THE MARKETPLACE WHERE
YOU DON'T HAVE A GOVERNMENT
ENTITY IS IT HAPPENS IN THE
MARKETPLACE? YOU PICK A PANEL OF
THREE FROM THE A DIFFERENT. A AH
AH, AND THEN YOU FOLLOW THE
GUIDELINES OF WHAT YOU SUBMIT
SHARING OF DOCUMENTS THAT, YOU
KNOW, ABIDE BY FEDERAL RULES OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE. SO ON AND SO
FORTH, YOU YOU SHARE THE
DOCUMENTS WITH THE OTHER PARTIES
AND THEN WITHIN A TIME FRAME
THAT SPECIFIED IN THE BILL, YOU
HAVE TO PUT FORWARD THE FINAL
OFFER. EACH SIDE PUTS FORWARD
THE FINAL OFFER, AND IT FOLLOWS
A SET OF GUIDELINES AND IT'S
ENUMERATED SO THAT YOU SO THAT
THERE'S GUARDRAILS SO THAT THERE
IS A PROCESS AND IN FORMAT. THAT
YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW. SO THERE'S A
FAIR AND SPEEDY CONCLUSION TO
NEGOTIATIONS. WELL, I COME IN
WHAT YOU'RE DOING, MISS WICKS. I
THINK THIS SETS UP A HIGH
STANDARD AND I JUST FOR
JOURNALISM ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN
CALIFORNIA BEING ON THE LEADING
EDGE OF THIS BECAUSE JUST TO GET
OUR ARMS AROUND, IT IS VERY
COMPLEX. AND I KNOW YOU'RE
WORKING THROUGH ALL THIS. I JUST
COMMEND YOU. I MEAN, THAT'S
COMING OUT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
WHERE THERE'S BRILLIANT. THERE
USED TO BE PEOPLE WHO WOULD
FOLLOW LOCAL CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS AND BOARDS OF
SUPERVISORS. YOU REALLY DON'T AS
MR SAYLOR SAID. SHE REALLY DON'T
SEE PEOPLE THEY GET IT. SECOND
HAND OFF OF BLOG SOMEWHERE. I
THINK ALL THAT IS GOOD AND AT
FURTHER PEOPLE'S INFORMATION,
BUT I THINK THE PEOPLE THAT NEED
TO BE PROTECTED IN THE CREATION
OF CONTENT AND I HOPE IT SEEPS.
I GUESS THIS IS MY POINT. I HOPE
IT SEEPS DOWN TO THE LOCAL LEVEL
. THAT'S WHAT'S CRITICAL TO OUR
LOCAL DEMOCRACY. IT'S JUST NOT
BEING COVERED. AND WE ALL AGREE
, SO I'M SURE THE WASHINGTON
POST WILL SURVIVE AND THE NEW
YORK TIMES AND THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE
DIGITAL POWER, VERY POWERFUL
DIGITAL WALLS, BUT I REALLY WANT
TO SEE THIS BENEFIT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT,
LOCAL NEWSPAPERS, LOCAL
JOURNALISM FOR THE FURTHER
ACCEPT DEMOCRACY, SO THANK YOU
SO MUCH ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
YEAH. MISS PAPIN. I THINK THE
QUESTION WAS, HOW DO YOU SELECT
THE ARBITRATORS? SO I'M ASSUMING
THERE'S A PANEL AT TRIPLE A FROM
WHICH TO SELECT, AND EACH SIDE
WOULD SELECT ONE. AND THEN THOSE
TWO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
MAYBE I'M READING TOO MUCH INTO
THE BILL, BUT THOSE TWO WOULD
THEN SELECT THE THIRD. IS THAT
WHAT YOU'RE ENVISIONING? BECAUSE
REMEMBER, THIS IS WHY I ASKED
ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF APPEAL
BECAUSE IT SELECTING THE
ARBITRATORS IS ALMOST JUST AS
IMPORTANT AS PERHAPS A RIGHT TO
APPEAL. BUT USUALLY THAT'S HOW
IT GOES WHEN YOU GOT THREE. BUT
YOU YOU MAY WANT TO CLARIFY THAT
. THAT IS EXACTLY THE RIGHT THE
WAY THAT YOU JUST OUTLINED IT.
UM IT'S KIND OF LIKE A VETO
PROCESS. IF YOU WILL, THAT YOU
WOULD ENCOUNTER AND PICKING A
JURY IN IN FEDERAL COURT THE WAY
THAT YOU OUTLINED. IT IS
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. AND THERE'S
AGAIN THERE'S A SET OF
GUIDELINES. IN THE TRIPLE A
DIFFERENT TRIPLE A RULE OF
FEDERAL OVERALL PROCEDURES BY
WHICH YOU GO ABOUT WITH THE
OTHER PARTY PICKING AND A SET OF
VETOES THAT YOU GET OVER THE
EACH EACH OF THE THREE PANEL OF
ARBITRATORS WE FOLLOWED THAT,
YOU KNOW, AND ONE OF THE THINGS
YOU MIGHT ASK IS SHOULD THEY
HAVE A CERTAIN SET OF EXPERTISE
AND CRITERIA AND WE THOUGHT
ABOUT THAT THE BILL IS SO
CUMBERSOME AND THE MORE YOU GET
INTO THESE INTRICACIES ABOUT HOW
THE ARBITRATION PANELS PICKED
AND SO FORTH, BUT THAT'S
SOMETHING WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT
AS FAR AS HAVING THEM HAVE SOME
EXPERIENCE, TOO. SO THAT'S
THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE'VE
CONSIDERED. USUALLY PEOPLE WILL
WILL PICK THOSE THAT HAVE THAT
BACKGROUND BY NATURE. BUT HOW DO
YOU GET THE THIRD ONE WAS KIND
OF WHERE I WAS COMING FROM A. I
MEAN, IT'S UNPRECEDENTED THAT
THE GOVERNMENT WOULD OUTSOURCE
THIS KIND OF DECISION MAKING. TO
A NON ARTICLE THREE PARTIES WITH
NO APPELLATE MECHANISM COMING
OUT. GENERALLY PARTIES AGREED TO
ARBITRATION AND HERE IT'S BEING
FORCED ON THEM BY THE GOVERNMENT
WITH NO CLEARER APPELLATE PREP
PACK, AND THIS IS AROUND
SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS NO
ADJUDICATED RIGHT BECAUSE
FEDERAL COPYRIGHT HAS DICTATED
THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT THESE
RIGHTS ARE AND WHERE NEWS
PUBLISHERS CONTENT THAT IS
PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT IS BEING
USED. LICENSING DOES OCCUR AND
DIGITAL SERVICES LICENSE
MILLIONS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS OF CONTENT THROUGH
VARIOUS PRODUCTS HERE, BUT WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR LINKS
AND HYPERLINKS QUOTATIONS THAT
ARE NOT COVERED BY FEDERAL LAW.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. I WOULD JUST
SAY I DON'T WANT TO BE LABOR
THIS, BUT THERE IS ACTUALLY
TREMENDOUS PRECEDENT FOR
ARBITRATION PANELS TAKING PLACE
IN THE MARKETPLACE. I MEAN, THEY
TAKE PLACE ACTUALLY JUST BREAK
IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S BEEN
ANSWERED, BUT GO AHEAD. YOU CAN
DO IT IN 15 SECONDS. GO AHEAD.
THE NOTIONS UNPRECEDENTED IS
ALSO FALSE. I'VE TESTIFIED IN
FRONT OF THE US COPYRIGHT
TRIBUNAL, WHERE THEIR DISPUTES
OVER IN DISTANT ROYALTY FEES
BETWEEN SPORTS PROGRAMMERS AND
CABLE OPERATORS, SO THE NOTION
THAT THIS IS A PRESIDENT'S FALSE
THANK YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE SEEN
NONE MISS WEEKS BEFORE HE GOES,
AS YOU KNOW, AND YOU'RE HEARING
FROM ME. IT'S TOUGH BILL.
EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES IT'S
COMPLICATED THE DEVIL, AS MISS
PAPIN SAID. THE DEVIL'S IN THE
DETAILS ON THIS, YOU KNOW, AND I
THINK ALL OF US, YOU KNOW, JUST
HEARING THE SENSE IT AND ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE AISLE, YOU KNOW.
LOT OF MEANT WHAT IS SEEING, YOU
KNOW, IT WAS CERTAINLY HAS BEEN,
IN SOME SENSE. THE DEATH OF
JOURNALISM. IT'S THERE'S
COMPLICATED SOCIETAL REASONS FOR
THAT. THIS BILL OBVIOUSLY WILL
NOT SOLVE ALL THOSE, UM EVEN
ONCE IT GETS TO THE FINISH LINE
WHEN AND IF IT GETS TO THE
FINISH LINE, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S
SO MUCH THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS.
I MEAN, WE WEREN'T TALKING
ABOUT. YOU KNOW, THE INTERNET.
THAT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO. IT
WASN'T THAT LONG AGO THAT
PROBABLY ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM
WENT OUT AND GOT THE PAPER. OFF
YOUR DRIVEWAY THAT YOU KNOW.
HIGH SCHOOL KID THROUGH THERE. I
MEAN, THAT'S LONG GONE. SO THESE
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, SAME THING
. I THINK ALL OF US WHO CAME OUT
OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT REMEMBER
SEEING THE SAME REPORTERS THE
YOU KNOW, THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE MEETING OR HIGH SCHOOL
, YOU KNOW THAT COVERED LOCAL
GOVERNMENT. WELL. UH HUH. AND
THAT'S GONE TO IT. WE SEE IT UP
HERE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT
THERE'S VERY LITTLE COVERAGE FOR
ANY OF US. MAYBE CERTAINLY IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, MAYBE MORE
SO. AND I'M PROBABLY YOUTUBE.
MISS WICKS, UM FROM THE LOCAL
PAPERS WHO DON'T HAVE A PRESENCE
APPEAR IN SACRAMENTO THAT IT'S
YOU KNOW, TOO FAR AWAY, AND SO
ALL OF THESE ISSUES I THINK, AND
THERE'S NO THERE'S NO SIMPLE
ANSWER TO THAT. HOW DO YOU? HOW
DO YOU FIX THAT? MAYBE IT WILL
NEVER GET FIXED. MAYBE THAT SHIP
HAS SAILED. I DON'T KNOW. I
DON'T THINK ANY OF US KNOW WHERE
THIS IS GOING TO LAND. YOU KNOW,
A YEAR FROM NOW, 10 YEARS FROM
NOW, 20 YEARS FROM NOW, WHERE
THIS IS ALL HEADED. I THINK WE
ALL SEE THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN
IT THAT WHEN THE PUBLIC ISN'T
AWARE OF THE DECISIONS BEING
MADE ISN'T AWARE OF WHAT THEIR
GOVERNMENT DOES IT JUST FURTHER
ALIENATES. PEOPLE FURTHER MAKES
PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY DON'T WANT
TO VOTE OR DON'T NEED TO GET
INVOLVED, SO THERE'S A LOT ON
THE PLATE HERE TO TRY TO GET
OUT. I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS
ON THIS. I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT
TODAY. GLAD TO HEAR YOU. I KNOW
YOU, YOU KNOW YOU AND I IN
PARTICULAR WORK TOGETHER A
NUMBER OF COMPLICATED BILLS, SO
I KNOW YOU'LL CONTINUE TO WORK.
I LOOK FORWARD TO DOING THAT.
BUT WITH THAT, MISS WORKS YOU
MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU APPRECIATE
IT. APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS
AND THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD
WITH ALL OF YOU HERE TODAY, JUST
TO SORT OF, I THINK TOUCH ON A
COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE
RAISED ONE AND THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD
JOB LAYING OUT SOME OF THESE
CHALLENGES AS WELL ON THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GOOGLE AND
META. I AGREE. THERE'S A
DIFFERENCE AND SO AND WE HAD A
VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETING WITH
META YESTERDAY. I THINK THEY
NEED TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY.
HOW YOU PUT THAT INTO STATUTE IS
THE QUESTION, BUT I'M COMMITTED
TO SORT OF FIGURING THAT OUT. I
THINK MEDICINE AND FACEBOOK
STILL GETS VALUE FROM NEWSPAPERS
PUBLISHED CONTENT. IT'S
DIFFERENT THAN GOOGLE'S, AND SO
DELINEATING THAT I THINK IS
GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT.
I'M COMMITTED TO THAT ON THE
QUESTION ABOUT SORT OF THE 70%
AND ENSURING THAT THE MONEY GOES
TO JOURNALISTS THAT MR HANEY
RAISED AND OTHERS. THIS IS A
PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE TO THE TWO
UNIONS WHO ARE SUPPORTING THE
BILL, THE JOURNALISM UNIONS IN
CALIFORNIA THE TWO MAIN ONES,
THEY CARE A LOT ABOUT THAT. I
CARE A LOT ABOUT THAT. I'M NOT
INTERESTED IN LINING THE LINING
THE POCKETS OF THE HEDGE FUND
MANAGERS WHO MANAGE SOME OF
THESE PUBLICATIONS. I'M NOT
INTERESTED IN A MARK ZUCKERBERG
ZUCKERBERG VERSUS YOU KNOW, UM,
YOU KNOW, NAME YOUR CORPORATE
CEO OF PUBLISHERS. I'M THAT'S
NOT A FIGHT. I'M TRYING TO WAGE
HERE. I WANT MORE MONEY IN THE
POCKETS OF JOURNALISTS. THAT
THEY CAN HAVE A LONG AND
ILLUSTRIOUS ILLUSTRIOUS CAREERS
HOLDING US ACCOUNTABLE. THAT'S
WHAT THEY SHOULD DO. THAT'S
THEIR JOB. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED
MORE OF, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE
IMPACT ON WHAT HAS HAPPENED, IT
IS IT'S DECIMATED JOURNALISM.
AND SO THIS IS COMPLICATED. BUT
WHAT WE ALSO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND
THE VALUE. I MEAN, THINK ABOUT
HOW THE ME TOO. MOVEMENT STARTED
. WHAT HAPPENED WITH HARVEY
WEINSTEIN. IT WAS REPORTERS WHO
GOT TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT DOGGED
REPORTERS WHO ARE TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND THE CORRUPT NATURE OF
WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE. WHEN
YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW BILLS THAT
I KNOW MANY OF US HAVE RUN. IT'S
BECAUSE WE READ ABOUT IT IN OUR
PAPER. WE SAY THIS IS IN JUST WE
HAVE TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. THINK
ABOUT THE USC GYNECOLOGIST WHO
WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTING WOMEN
FOR DECADES. IT WAS REPORTERS
WHO FIGURED THAT OUT. WE RAN
LAWS ON THAT, SO THAT'S WHY THIS
IS IMPORTANT. AND IT IS
COMPLICATED. UM AND I KNOW THAT
AND I'M LIVING AND BREATHING IT
EVERY DAY AND TAKING ON A PRETTY
TOUGH FIGHT, BUT I THINK WE HAVE
A LOT OF SMART PEOPLE ON BOTH
SIDES OF THIS ISSUE. WHO I THINK
DO AGREE WITH THE PREMISE OF THE
PROBLEM. AND IT'S TRYING TO LAND
SOME OF THESE PLANES, WHICH I'M
ACTUALLY CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC
WE CAN DO AND I WE WILL HAVE
AMENDMENTS BEFORE THIS GETS TO
THE FLOOR BECAUSE I ALSO
UNDERSTAND I'M GETTING SOME
GOODWILL FROM COLLEAGUES HERE TO
KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING
FORWARD, AND I'M COMMITTED TO
FINDING SOLUTIONS TO SOME OF
THESE PROBLEMS AND ALSO
APPRECIATE YOUR CO AUTHORSHIP
AND YOUR PARTNERSHIP. AND WITH
THAT, RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AND I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE NEED A
MOTION. MR SALIH MOVES, MR
CONNELLY SECONDS. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS THE CLERK TO PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN
MAIENSCHEIN IAS ALY SALEI,
CONNELLY CONNELLY. I, DICKSON
DICKSON I HANEY CORA. UH I
PACHECO CHICO, I PAPIN AYE,
REYES. RIVAS RIVAS. I SANCHEZ.
YOUR BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR GIBSON. PORTANTINO
.
WELCOME WELCOME, MR GIBSON. WE
HAVE A MOTION FROM MR CHOLERA.
SECOND SECOND FROM MS PACHECO.
MR GIBSON, GET THE HEAD. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. AH CHAIRMAN
MAIENSCHEIN ADVICE CHAIR HALEY
INTO THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU
FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT A J.
R FIVE. AND I'LL JUST SUMMARIZE
THIS IS I THINK EVERYONE SAW
WHAT TRANSPIRED IN TENNESSEE,
UM, CALIFORNIA BEING SUCH A
LARGE A STATE. UM WE CANNOT BE
SILENT ON OUR DEMOCRACY. WE
CANNOT BE SILENT ON THE THINGS
THAT MATTER WHAT TRANSPIRED IN
TENNESSEE SHOULD NOT HAPPEN IN
ANY LEGISLATIVE BODY IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND
WHAT THIS, UM, A J R FIVE.
SIMPLY DOES IT WANT IT PUTS
CALIFORNIA ON RECORD TO MAKING
SURE WE DENOUNCED THE ACTIONS
THAT WERE TAKEN. UM AND ALSO
MAKING SURE THAT THIS NEVER
HAPPENS BECAUSE AGAIN, MANY OF
YOU AND I DON'T NEED TO CONVINCE
YOU MANY OF YOU IN THIS ROOM,
KNOW HOW OTHER STATES WATCH
CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA BECAUSE
THIS ERODES OUR DEMOCRACY. WHAT
TRANSPIRED NEEDS TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE GO ON RECORD DENOUNCING
IT, BUT ALSO MAKING SURE THAT
THIS NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN. I
RESPECTFULLY ASKED WHEN I VOTE.
THANK YOU WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
SEEN NONE. WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION. SAYING NONE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. MR KALRA. THANK THE
AUTHOR. I KNOW THERE'S A NUMBER
OF US HERE THERE ARE ALREADY CO
AUTHORS THINK IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO NOT REMAIN
SILENT. UM WHEN WE SEE THIS KIND
OF ATROCIOUS BEHAVIOR AND
ACTIVITIES ARE HAPPENING ON
OTHER LEGISLATIVE BODIES, YOU
KNOW, I THINK THE REST OF THE
WORLD SAW THAT HAPPEN IN
CALIFORNIA AND THE REST OF WORLD
LOOKS. TO CALIFORNIA AS MUCH AS
THE REST OF THE NATION DOES FOR
US TO SPEAK UP AND STAND UP
AGAINST THAT KIND OF BEHAVIOR,
SO I APPRECIATE THE OFFER. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR ASTLEY. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR, AND THANK YOU, MR
GIBSON. I WAS HOPING TO
HOPEFULLY SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT
THIS BEFORE BECAUSE I AGREE WITH
THE CONCLUSION OF THE RESOLUTION
. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE FACTUAL
BASIS AND I DON'T KNOW BRIEFLY
EXPLAIN WHY IT SUGGESTS THAT
THEY WERE DISCIPLINED OR
EXPELLED FOR EXERCISING THEIR
RIGHT TO PROTEST OR THEIR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO
PROTEST. UM THE CONDUCT ACTUALLY
ENGAGED IN WAS USING A BULL HORN
ON THE FLOOR AND LEADING A
PROTEST. UM DO I THINK THAT
WARRANTS EXPULSION? ABSOLUTELY
NOT. SO MY POINT IS, I THINK
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN ABUSE
OF POWER BY A SUPERMAJORITY. UM
RATHER THAN A CONSTITUTIONAL
VIOLATION. I ALSO CAN'T IGNORE
THE RACE ELEMENT IN IT. WHERE
THREE PEOPLE ACCUSED OF THE
BREAKING THESE RULES. THE ONLY
TWO EXPELLED WERE, UH WERE
AFRICAN AMERICANS AND THE THIRD
PERSON WAS NOT SO I CAN'T IGNORE
THAT EITHER. I DO THINK THAT'S A
SERIOUS ISSUE IN A PROBLEM. I
WOULD JUST LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU'RE WILLING TO CHANGE ANY OF
THE STUFF TO ACCURATELY REFLECT
WHAT OCCURRED AND TO CONDEMN IT.
ABSOLUTELY I DO THINK THERE'S A
RACIAL ANIMUS. UM, A PART OF IT
THAT MOTIVATED THE EXPULSION. I
DON'T I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT
. BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE
EXPELLED FOR SIMPLY PROTESTING.
IT WAS FOR VIOLATING THE RULES.
I ALSO I JUST POLITICALLY
THERE'S SOME COMMENTS IN THERE
ABOUT THE MASS SHOOTINGS. IT
DOESN'T JUST DENOUNCE THE
SHOOTER. WHO IS THIS ALLEGEDLY
TRANS SHOOTER WHO WAS UPSET WITH
THIS CHRISTIAN CHURCH. IT
DOESN'T ANNOUNCE GUN VIOLENCE IN
GENERAL, I WOULD SAY MOST GUN
VIOLENCE IS NOT MASS SHOOTING.
MOST VIOLENCE IS ONE ON ONE, AND
WE KNOW THE MAJORITY OF THOSE
VICTIMS ARE MINORITIES, SO I
JUST SOME OF IT'S A LITTLE
POLITICAL. I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU'RE WILLING TO WORK ON THE
LANGUAGE, BUT I ABSOLUTELY AGREE
WITH THE CONCLUSION AND SO
THAT'S WHY IT'S PUTTING ME IN A
DIFFICULT PLACE ON ON THIS BILL.
IF YOU WISH TO RESPOND TO ANY OF
THAT, IT'S BUT BUT I DO RESPECT
YOU AND I DO RESPECT THE INTENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. UH, MR
GIBSON. I THINK THIS IS I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS. I
THINK IT IS MY OPINION IS IT IS
FACTUALLY CORRECT. UM, IT'S
UNPRECEDENTED. WHAT HAPPENED TO
THOSE INDIVIDUALS? WHILE THERE
MAY HAVE BEEN A BREACH INTO
QUORUM ON SOME SORT OF SMALL
LEVEL. CERTAINLY DIDN'T RISE TO
THE LEVEL OF EXPULSION. I DO
THINK YOU ACCURATELY
CHARACTERIZE THAT COULD YOU
INCLUDE EVERY SINGLE FACT IN THE
HISTORY OF TENANTS, EXCEPT THAT
IT WOULD BE 50 PAGES LONG AND IT
WOULD, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING
THAT WOULD REALLY LOSE SOME OF
ITS MEANING. SO I DO BELIEVE YOU
ACCURATELY CAPTURED THE ACTIONS
THAT OCCURRED IN TENNESSEE. UM,
CERTAINLY PLEASED TO SUPPORT
THIS. IF I'M NOT ALREADY A CO
AUTHOR, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ONE.
UM AND DEFINITELY APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING THIS BILL. SO WITH
THAT, UM, WE DO HAVE EMOTION. WE
DO HAVE A SECOND. MR GIBSON. YOU
MAKE CLOTHES. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE
THUS FAR, AND I JUST WANTED TO
SAY CHAIRMAN MAIENSCHEIN. YOU'RE
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IN TERMS OF
IF I CHRONICLED EVERYTHING THAT
TRANSPIRED WILL BE IT WILL BE A
VERY EXTENSIVE DOCUMENTS. AND SO
WE TRIED TO GET THE HIGHLIGHTS
THAT WAS RAISED IN ELEVATED AND
YOU YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. UM
JONES, UM JONES WAS BORN AND
RAISED IN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA.
HE'S A CALIFORNIAN, EVEN THOUGH
IT'S IN TENNESSEE AND CERTAINLY
UM, WE DO BELIEVE THERE WAS A
RACIALLY MOTIVATED TO HAVE TO
EXPEL AND THE THIRD, JOHNSON
ACTUALLY INDICATED THE REASON
WHY SHE WAS NOT EXPELLED AS WELL
. AND AGAIN. CALIFORNIA IS TOO
BIG FOR US TO REMAIN SILENT ON
THESE THINGS. AND I THINK JUST
BY THIS A J R, WITH BOTH HOUSES
PARTICIPATING, AND I THINK THE
JOINT AND THE CO AUTHORS OF THIS
I THINK IT SENDS A CLEAR MESSAGE
TO THAT AGAIN. WE CANNOT ERODE
OUR DEMOCRACY. WHETHER YOU'RE
DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN. THIS IS
THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR. LABOR
CANNOT BE SUPPORTED OR TOLERATED
AGAIN. I RESPECTFULLY ASK WHEN I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION AND THE MOTION IS BE
ADOPTED. AND A SECOND I'D ASK
THE COURT TO PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAIENSCHEIN MENTIONED I,
SALI. CONNELLY. CONNOLLY. I
DIXON. HANEY CORA, CALL HER I
PACHECO HØI PAPIN RAISE REVERSE
THIS. I SANCHEZ. HERE IT IS.
IT'S OUT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR
GIBSON. SO THAT WILL, UH,
CONCLUDE CONCLUDE, WE WILL DO
ADD ONS, AND IT'S. EVERYONE ELSE
HAS ADDED ON. WE'RE JUST WAITING
ON MISS REYES. SO EVERYBODY IS
FREE TO GO. AND WE'LL KEEP THE
ROLL UP IN FROM HIS REYES. IF
SOMEBODY COULD PLEASE CONTACT
HER OFFICE. THANK YOU.
YEAH OKAY. WE WILL, UM, OPEN THE
ROLL ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH SEVEN.
ITEM NUMBER ONE A B 86. O'CLOCK
TO RAISE I ITEM TWO A B 11 48
RACE RACE I THREE A B 11 71 RACE
RACE. I AM FOUR A B 13 94 REYES
GRACE, I FIVE A B 14 48 RACE
RACE. I AM 68 B 14 58 RACE RACE
SIDE SEVEN A. J R FIVE RACE I
THANK YOU AND THAT CONCLUDES
TODAY'S JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
MEETING.