THE ASSEMBLY TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEES. IT'S CALLED TO ORDER
GOOD AFTERNOON, HAPPY NEW YEAR
AND WELCOME EVERYONE. I'M
EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY. THIS
IS MY FIRST HEARING OF 2024 AND
MY FIRST AS CHAIR OF THE
ASSEMBLY TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE. I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT
THIS TOPIC AND EAGER TO WORK
WITH EACH OF YOU TO IMPROVE THE
LIVES OF ALL CALIFORNIANS. THE
HEARING ROOM IS OPEN FOR
ATTENDANCE OF THIS HEARING, AND
IT CAN BE WATCHED FROM A LIVE
STREAM ON THE ASSEMBLY WEBSITE.
WE ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO
PROVIDE WRITTEN TESTIMONY BY
VISITING THE COMMITTEE WEBSITE.
PLEASE NOTE THAT ANY WRITTEN
TESTIMONY SUBMITTED TO THE
COMMITTEE IS CONSIDERED PUBLIC
COMMENT AND MAYBE READ INTO THE
RECORD OR REPRINT IT. WE WILL
ALL WE WILL ALLOW TWO MINUTES
FOR EACH OF THE TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT AND
OPPOSITION. ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
. COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO
NAME ORGANIZATION AND POSITION.
FINALLY THE ASSEMBLY HAS
EXPERIENCED A NUMBER OF
DISRUPTIONS TO COMMITTEE AND
FLOOR PROCEEDINGS IN THE LAST
FEW YEARS. CONDUCT THAT DISRUPTS
, DISTURBS OR OTHERWISE IMPEDES
THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF THE
HEARING IS PROHIBITED. SUCH
CONDUCT MAY INCLUDE TALKING OR
MAKING LOUD NOISES FROM THE
AUDIENCE, UTTERING LOUD
THREATENING OR ABUSIVE LANGUAGE
SPEAKING LONGER THAN THE TIME
ALLOTTED. EXTENDED DISCUSSIONS
OF MATTERS NOT RELATED TO THE
SUBJECT OF THE HEARING AND OTHER
DISRUPTIVE ACTS TO ADDRESS ANY
DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT. I WILL TAKE
THE FOLLOWING STEPS. IF AN
INDIVIDUAL DISRUPTS OUR HEARING
PROCESS, I WILL DIRECT THEM TO
STOP AND WARNED THEM THAT
CONTINUED DISRUPTIONS MAY RESULT
IN REMOVAL FROM THE BUILDING. I
WILL ALSO DOCUMENT ON THE RECORD
, THE INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED AND
THE NATURE OF THE DISRUPTIVE
CONDUCT I MADE TEMPORARILY
RECESS THE HEARING. IF THE
CONDUCT DOES NOT STOP, I WILL
REQUEST THE ASSISTANCE OF THE
SERGEANT AND EXTORTING THE
INDIVIDUAL FROM THE BUILDING.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR
COOPERATION. PLEASE NOTE THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TEAM WILL NOT
BE PRESIDENT TODAY'S HEARING AND
DOES NOT HAVE A REPLACEMENT.
WITH THAT. WE WILL BEGIN OUR
HEARING SECRETARY PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. WILSON. WILSON
HERE, FANG FANG HERE,
AGUIAR-CURRY BERMAN. CARILLO
CARILLO HERE, DAVIES DAVIES
HERE. HEART HEART HERE. JACKSON
JACKSON HERE, LOWENTHAL. HAPPEN
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ HERE, TING.
WALLACE WALLACE HERE, WARD. WORD
HERE. WIX! WIX. HERE WE HAVE A
QUORUM. THANK YOU. TODAY WE HAVE
TWO ITEMS ON OUR CONSENT
CALENDAR FILE. ADAM NUMBER FOUR
SCR 59 FILING THEM NUMBER FIVE
SCR 74 IT'S BEEN MOVED BY VICE
CHAIR FONG AND SECOND BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS. SCR 59
AND SCR 74. THE ACTION IS TO BE
ADOPTED TO THE CONSENT, UM
CALENDAR. WILSON. WILSON. I PHªN
. FOUND I I'VE ER CURRY BERMAN
CARILLO. FOR REAL. I BABIES,
BABIES I HEART AYE, JACKSON.
JACKSON, I LOWENTHAL HAPPEN.
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ. I TING. WALLACE
WALLACE. I WARD WORD I WICKS.
WICKS? AYE. THANK YOU. I'LL HOLD
THE ROLL OPEN FOR MEMBERS TO ADD
ON THE FOLLOWING BILLS WILL BE
HEARD TODAY. MAYBE 501 VINCE
FONG, MAYBE 6 TO 7 JACKSON A B
637 JACKSON LIKE TO INVITE
BECAUSE I DON'T SEE JACKSON. SO
I OH, SORRY. MY APOLOGIES. WELL,
WE CAN WE CAN GO IN ORDER IF
THAT'S ALL RIGHT. SO UM, I WAS
THINKING YOU'D BE DOWN THERE.
BUT I FORGOT YOU'RE UP HERE. MY
APOLOGIZE. MY APOLOGIES, UM VICE
CHAIR, FONG.
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS. ALL RIGHT. 2008 VOTERS
WERE PROMISED A HIGH SPEED RAIL
PROJECT THAT WOULD TAKE
TRAVELERS FROM LOS ANGELES TO
SAN FRANCISCO AND LESS THAN
THREE HOURS WE WERE LED TO
BELIEVE THAT THE PROJECTS TOTAL
COST WOULD BE $34 BILLION. 15
YEARS LATER, THE PROJECTED COST
HAS BALLOONED TO $128 BILLION,
AND NOTHING HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
THERE IS NO PRIVATE PRIVATE
INVESTMENT IN CALIFORNIA
TAXPAYERS ARE NOW AT RISK OF
GREATER COST BURDENS. THE
PROJECT IS ON LIFE SUPPORT. SO
MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN MISMANAGED.
THE AUTHORITY CAN NO LONGER
AFFORD TO BUILD THE FIRST
SEGMENT WITHOUT AN INFUSION OF
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. IT IS NO
LONGER TOO PREMATURE TO MAKE A
DECISION ON WHETHER TO CONTINUE
THE LEGISLATURE'S SIGNIFICANT
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PROJECT.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS
ALREADY GRANTED BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS TO BAIL OUT THIS PROJECT
. AND YET THE $3.07 BILLION THAT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RECENTLY
DECIDED TO AWARD THE AUTHORITY
DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT
THE VIABILITY OF THE PROJECT.
THIS IS JUST A DROP IN THE
BUCKET. CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS
REMAIN ON THE HOOK FOR THE VAST
MAJORITY OF PROJECT COST. THE
REASON WHY THIS PROJECT RECEIVED
CAP AND TRADE FUNDS IS TO REDUCE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, THE
HIGH SPEED RAIL PROJECT
CURRENTLY BEFORE US IS NO LONGER
MEETING THAT GOAL. WE'VE GIVEN
THE AUTHORITY 15 YEARS TO
DELIVER, AND THEY HAVEN'T COME
CLOSE. THE AUTHORITIES STILL
NEEDS IS THAT THE AUTHORITY IS
STILL $7 BILLION SHORT OF BEING
ABLE TO FUND ONLY THE MERCED TO
BAKERSFIELD LINE. THIS
CONTRIBUTION IS LESS THAN WHAT
THEY NEED TO MEET THEIR BUDGET
PROJECTIONS COMPOUNDED BY THE
IMPENDING $68 BILLION STATE
BUDGET DEFICIT. THE LEGISLATURE
IS SPENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
IN CAP AND TRADE REVENUES WITH
NO POSSIBILITY THAT THIS PROJECT
WILL PRODUCE ANY MEANINGFUL
CARBON REDUCTIONS. THE PEER
REVIEW GROUP, SAID THAT THIS IS
NOT THE PROJECT THAT THE VOTERS
APPROVED IN 2008, NOR A
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION PROJECT
AS IT WILL NOT HAVE A DRAMATIC
EFFECT IN THE CONTEXT OF
CALIFORNIA'S CLIMATE GOALS TO
MAKE A MEANINGFUL IMPACT ON THE
LIVES OF CALIFORNIANS. THIS
MONEY WOULD BE FAR BETTER SPENT
ON RURAL ROAD SAFETY
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. THE
RISK OF DYING IN A CRASH IS 62%
HIGHER ON A RURAL ROAD IN AN
URBAN ROAD WITH THE SAME TRIP
LENGTH. CALIFORNIA HAS 11,385
MILES OF PUBLICLY MAINTAINED A
RURAL ROADS, AND MANY OF THEM DO
NOT HAVE ADEQUATE SHOULDERS,
PASSING LANES OR BARRIERS.
CALIFORNIA IS HOME TO BEAUTIFUL
VISITORS ACCESS BY OUR STATE
HIGHWAY SYSTEM. THE RISK OF
DEATH ON THESE ROADS IS
EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER THAN THE
RISK OF DEATH ON URBAN ROAD. IT
IS TIME FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO
REALLOCATE THE NEARLY $1 BILLION
GIVEN TO HIGH SPEED RAIL EACH
YEAR TOWARDS RURAL ROAD SAFETY
INFRASTRUCTURE. SO THAT THIS
MONEY CAN BE USED TO SAVE
CALIFORNIA LIVES AND LIVELIHOODS
. CALIFORNIA'S ACROSS THE STATE,
USE OUR RAILROAD SYSTEM AND
DESERVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO SAFE,
RELIABLE ROADS THAT CONNECT OUR
COMMUNITIES. THE STATE OWES IT
TO THE TAXPAYERS DEVELOP AND
IMPLEMENT SAFETY PLANS TO HELP
CURB THIS RURAL ROAD SAFETY
EPIDEMIC. THE TIME TO ENACT
MEANINGFUL CHANGES. NOW YOU MUST
INVEST THIS FUNDING SO THAT WE
CAN SAFEGUARD THE COMMUNITIES
THAT DESPERATELY NEED TO PROTECT
THEIR LIVES THROUGH ENHANCED AND
PROVEN RURAL ROAD SAFETY
MEASURES. MAYBE 501 WILL STOP
THE SPENDING GOING TO THE FAILED
HIGH SPEED RAIL PROJECT AND MAKE
IT AVAILABLE FOR THE LIFESAVING
ROAD PROJECTS ACROSS CALIFORNIA.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR.
WANG. UM ARE THERE ANY DO YOU
HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OR
OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
. I WILL TURN TO THE MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. MAYBE 501.
NOW ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS WHO
ARE OPPOSED AND MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC WHO ARE OPPOSED TO A B
501 AS A REMINDER? LIMIT YOUR,
UM, TESTIMONY TO NAME
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION
CREATION. CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED
RAIL AND THE DISTRICT COUNCIL OF
IRONWORKERS, THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA VICINITY HERE IN
OPPOSITION TO EVERYONE, LET ME
START WITH WHAT I AGREE WITH
YOU. STILL REMEMBER ON THAT IS
THAT WE DO NEED ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES TO GO TO OUR RURAL
ROADS. SB ONE WENT A LONG WAY,
BUT WE CAN ALWAYS DO MORE, AND
I'M HAPPY TO TALK TO HIM AND ANY
OF YOU ABOUT OPPORTUNITIES TO
LOOK AT NEW FUNDING TO MAKE SURE
THAT EVERYONE IN OUR STATE IS
SAFE. NOW WITH THAT I HAVE TO
OPPOSE A B 501 AND DISAGREE WITH
THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE
ABOUT THE PROGRESS ON THE
PROJECT. WE JUST DID NOT RECEIVE
A BAILOUT RECEIVED A FUNDING
INVESTMENT FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT FOR THE FIRST IN THE
NATION. HIGH SPEED RAIL. IT DOES
TAKE A NUMBER OF YEARS TO GET
THESE THINGS BUILT AND WE ARE
MAKING PROGRESS. I WILL SAY I
TELL YOU THAT WE DO NOT HAVE AN
OPTION OF ADDITIONAL IN STATE
AIR FLIGHTS. THE AIRPORTS ARE
IMPACTED. WE HAVE THE HIGHWAYS
IN THE SKY THAT HAVE NO MORE
ROOM OR CAPACITY. HIGH SPEED
RAIL IS THE FUTURE FOR
TRANSPORTATION, NOT ONLY FOR
CALIFORNIA AND WE'RE GOING TO BE
THE FIRST BUT ALSO FOR OUR
NATION AND TAKES TIME. IT TAKES
INVESTMENT. IT TAKES COMMITMENT.
I CAN TELL YOU ON BEHALF OF THE
IRONWORKERS UNION. WE SHOW UP
EVERY DAY. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE
IN THEIR LIVES. IT'S NOT A JOBS
PROGRAM. IT'S A TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM. BUT IT'S CHANGING LIVES
WITH THOSE THAT ARE THERE
WORKING. IT'S GOING TO CHANGE
THE THAT THE CENTRAL VALLEY AND
HOW WE COMMUTE AND GET INTO
SILICON VALLEY FOR WORK. IT'S
GOING TO OPEN UP OPPORTUNITIES
FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING FOR
PEOPLE TO LIVE IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY, ONE OF THE LAST FEW
PLACES IN ADDITION TO, UH, THE
ANTELOPE VALLEY, WHERE THERE'S
LOW COST HOUSING AVAILABLE
OUTSIDE OF THE HEART. URBAN
CORES OF L. A AND SAN FRANCISCO
BAY AREA, SO THIS IS A LONG TERM
INVESTMENT NOT ONLY FROM THE
STATE BUT ALSO FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND AGAIN. $3.1
BILLION. THE STATE AND FEDERAL
PARTNERSHIP CONTINUES TO MOVE
THIS PROGRAM FORWARD. IT'S GOOD
FOR THE STATE IS GOOD FOR THE
ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR THAT, I
HAVE TO ASK FOR YOUR OPPOSITION
TO 85 01. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
UM, YOU WERE RECOGNIZED AS THE
PRIMARY. UM UH, WITNESS AND
OPPOSITION ALLOWING FOR TWO
MINUTES. SO THE REST I'M GOING
TO ASK THAT YOU LIMIT YOUR
TESTIMONY TO NAME ORGANIZATION
AND POSITION FOR OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS JAMES THROW ACTOR WITH
THE CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL OF
LABORERS AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIRMAN OF MEMBERS MATT CREMINS
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
NEVADA CONFERENCE OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS IN STRONG OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
MIKE WEST ON BEHALF OF THE STATE
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES
COUNCIL AND OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU SEEING NO MORE. I'LL BRING
IT BACK TO MEMBERS TO SEE IF YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD. THANK
YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING
FORWARD THIS IDEA. I UNDERSTAND
THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME
SIGNIFICANT TRADE OFFS THROUGH
THIS PROPOSAL. I'M WONDERING IF
YOU, UM SUPPORT OR DO NOT
SUPPORT THE JOBS THAT ARE
CREATED THROUGH THE HIGH SPEED
RAIL PROJECT. CERTAINLY I
UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENTS FROM
THE OPPOSITION. THE JOBS NUMBERS
PROBABLY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN
EVOLVING. THEY USED TO BE JOBS,
AND THAT WAS JOB HOURS. SO WHAT
ACTUALLY HAS BEEN PROJECTED IN
TERMS OF THAT HASN'T REALLY
MATERIALIZED TO THE LEVEL THAT
WOULD WITH THE CENTRAL VALLEY
WAS TOLD. DO YOU KNOW THAT THE
PEOPLE IN YOUR DISTRICT ARE
WORKING BECAUSE OF THIS PROJECT?
I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS PROJECT
HAS BEEN OVERSOLD AND IN MY
COMMUNITY, AND I WOULD JUST SAY
THIS THE AMONGST THE MEMBERS ON
THIS COMMITTEE. I'M THE ONLY
MEMBER THAT REPRESENTS THE
CENTRAL VALLEY. THIS PROJECT IS
ACTUALLY DIVIDING MY COMMUNITY
LIKE CUTTING IT IN HALF,
ELIMINATING FARMLAND IMPACTING
OUR HOUSING ABILITY. IMPACTING
UM, OUR ABILITY TO FUNCTION AND
PROSPER. AND SO AND SO I WOULD
JUST RESPECTFULLY SAY THAT THAT
WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE
ARGUMENTS, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT
THE DATA. WE WOULD. STILL I
WOULD AGREE WITH THE MY FELLOW
COLLEAGUE FROM WHO TALKED ABOUT
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. I WOULD
LOVE TO HAVE THESE LABORERS WORK
ON RURAL ROAD SAFETY PROJECTS.
WE'RE NOT DISPUTING THE FACT
THAT WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECTS IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY
AND THAT WE WANT THOSE JOBS TO
STAY IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY. MY
ARGUMENT IS THAT AMONGST THE
TRADE OFFS, I WOULD THINK THAT
THESE JOBS COULD BE USED TO
CONSTRUCT. AND PRODUCE A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF RURAL ROAD
SAFETY PROJECTS IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY THAT WOULD CREATE JOBS.
BIG CRITICAL INVESTMENTS IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY AND SAVE PEOPLE'S
LIVES, OF COURSE, AND OF COURSE,
THE STATE HAS DONE MORE TO BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT ROAD
INFRASTRUCTURE. HAVE YOU
SUPPORTED OR DO YOU REJECT THE
STATE'S USE OF SB ONE FUNDS IN
YOUR DISTRICT FOR ROAD RURAL
ROAD SAFETY PROJECTS? LIKE SP
ONE WAS WAS PASSED AND JAM
THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE. I WAS
THE ONE THAT LED THE OPPOSITION
TO SB ONE. I HAD AN ALTERNATIVE,
THE ALTERNATIVE ACTUALLY WOULD
HAVE PUT MORE MONEY INTO, UH,
ROAD SAFETY PROJECTS AND
PROJECTS IN GENERAL ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I WOULD
HAVE DEDICATED MORE OF THE
GENERAL FUND INTO, UM INTO ROAD
SAFETY PROJECTS AND TO ROAD
PROJECTS IN GENERAL WITHOUT
RAISING THE GAS TAX, SO I WOULD
I WOULD HAPPILY HAVE THAT
ARGUMENT WITH ANYBODY. ACTUALLY
I THINK MY BILL THAT I
INTRODUCED IN THE LEGISLATURE
WHEN I FIRST CAME IN IN 2016 WAS
ACTUALLY A BETTER APPROACH.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SIMILAR
MEMBER CRITERIA. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. I DO RECOGNIZE THAT
MANY CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA AND TRANSPORTATION IS
ONE OF THEM. AND I CANNOT
SUPPORT THIS VIEW. UH THE
BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION HAS
BEEN REALIZED, BEEN ABLE TO MAKE
SIGNIFICANT PROCESS PROGRESS,
INCLUDING NEAR COMPLETION OF ITS
FIRST CONSTRUCTION PACKAGE. BUT
IS COMPOSED OF THE SOUTHERN SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY REGION AND WOULD
INCLUDE A STATION ON THE
OUTSKIRTS OF MY DISTRICT. SO THE
PRESIDENT GO TO MY DISTRICT AND
GOES THROUGH THE CITY OF
PALMDALE BECAUSE RIGHT THROUGH
THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY, I
WOULDN'T SAY THAT IT'S CARRYING
THE SERIES. I WOULD SAY THAT
IT'S ACTUALLY CONNECTING THE
HIGH DESERT WITH A POTENTIAL, UH
, EFFECTIVE WAY TO GET PEOPLE
FROM THE HIGH DESERT TO THE
REGION WHERE MOST OF THE JOBS
ARE IN THE L. A BASIN AREA, SO I
DO SUPPORT THIS PRICE. SPEED
RAIL. I'M OPPOSED TO THIS BILL.
THERE IS ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE THAT PUBLIC PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIP WITH BRIGHT LINE
BEING A PRIVATE ENTITY THAT IS
GOING TO START CONSTRUCTION IN
CALIFORNIA SOON. THAT HAS BEEN
PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE IN
FLORIDA. I BELIEVE THAT THIS
WILL ACTUALLY CREATE A HEALTHY
COMPETITION BETWEEN THAT STATE
PROJECT. IN A PRIVATE PROJECT
WILL BE STARTING CONSTRUCTION IN
CALIFORNIA SOON. I BELIEVE THAT
ONCE BRIAN GETS SEEN IN
CONSTRUCTION IN MORE JOBS WILL
BE CREATED MORE OPPORTUNITIES.
MORE PEOPLE WILL BE MOVING AFTER
THE HIGH DESERT BECAUSE HOUSING
IS MORE AFFORDABLE THERE AND
CHAIRS THE NUMBER OF JOBS, AS
WAS INDICATED IT'S ALSO AN
IMPORTANT FACTOR TO TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION. WHEN WE ARE
LOOKING AT THIS MEGA PROJECTS SO
WITHOUT A RESPECTFULLY ASK THE
MEMBERS TO OPPOSE THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. CERTAINLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMENT FROM MY COLLEAGUE
FROM DAN LAVALLEY. I WOULD JUST
TELL THE COMMITTEE AND ASK THE
COMMITTEE TO COMPARE THE BRIGHT
LINE PROJECT TO THIS ONE. ONE
THAT HAS TREMENDOUS PRIVATE
INVESTMENT TO ONE THAT DOESN'T
HAVE ANY AND I WOULD HOPE THAT
YOU ARE CORRECT IN SOME WAYS
THAT IT GETS THE PALMDALE BUT
THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY TO GET
THE FIRST LEG CONSTRUCTED, WHICH
IS FROM MERCED TO BAKERSFIELD,
WHICH IS MY DISTRICT. SO IT'S
NEVER GOING TO GET THE PALMDALE
IF IT NEVER GETS TO BAKERSFIELD.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATA THIS
PROJECT ISN'T EVEN CLOSE TO
GETTING FINISHED THE FIRST
SEGMENT. YOUR YOUR YOUR
COMMUNITY IS AFFECTED BY THE
SECOND OR THIRD OR FOURTH
SEGMENT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT
GETS THERE. WELL I WOULD ALSO
SAY THAT WITH THE RECENT $3.1
BILLION, IT WAS ALREADY
MENTIONED BY ONE OF THE SPEAKERS
BRIAN AND ALSO RECEIVED MONEY
FOR THAT PROJECT ITSELF TO SO
REALIZING THAT I THINK THAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS SEXUALLY
LOOKING AT THESE MEGAPROJECTS TO
BECOME A REALITY IN THE US
BECAUSE LET'S FACE IT. WE'RE
BEHIND EUROPEAN COUNTRIES THAT
ALREADY HAVE THE SYSTEMS FOR
DECADES. AND I THINK THAT WE'RE
BEHIND IT IN THE UNITED STATES
AND CALIFORNIA BEING THE ONE
THAT WAS GOING TO BE BUILT FOR
US. I THINK THAT THAT'S A REALLY
GOOD MESSAGE TO SEND TO THE REST
OF THE NATION AND TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT BECAUSE WE NEED TO
HAVE THIS COMPETITIVE
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN THE US
AND CALIFORNIA WILL LEAD THE
WAY. SEEING NO OTHER MEMBERS
WISHING TO COMMENT. UM I INVITE
THE AUTHOR TO CLOSE UH,
CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE BACK
AND FORTH AS I MENTIONED BEFORE.
UM I WANT MORE PROJECTS.
INFRASTRUCTURE BE BUILT. I JUST
WANT ONES THAT ACTUALLY ARE
NEEDED AND ACTUALLY WILL GET THE
JOB DONE. AND WE'LL SAY PEOPLE'S
LIVES. UH, YOU GOTTA LOOK AT THE
DATA AND I ASKED THE COMMITTEE
TO LOOK AT THE DATA AND I
BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE
COURSE TO BEST UTILIZE PRECIOUS
TAXPAYER DOLLARS IN A YEAR WITH
SIGNIFICANT BUDGET DEFICIT. THIS
LEGISLATURE MUST PRIORITIZE
THESE TYPES OF INVESTMENTS.
TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT BE BEARING
THE BURDEN FOR THIS FAILING
PROJECT. THIS PROJECT IS STILL
UNDER THE FIRST LEG IS $7
BILLION SHORT. $7 BILLION SHORT,
IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO
COMPLETE THE FIRST LEG AND OF
COURSE, IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH
MONEY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT
HAS ENVISIONED AND THE AND THE
PROJECT THAT WAS ENVISIONED IS
NO LONGER A GREENHOUSE GAS
PROJECT. AND THERE'S NO LONGER
WHAT WAS PROMISED TO THE VOTERS.
AND SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE. WHERE A B 501 BECAUSE I
BELIEVE IT TAKES THE RESOURCES
THAT WE CURRENTLY ARE SPENDING
AND PUTS IT INTO MORE
INFRASTRUCTURE STRUCTURE
PROJECTS THAT WILL CREATE JOBS,
INVEST IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY AND
SAVE PEOPLE'S LIVES. THANK YOU,
VICE YOUR BONG FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD. AS YOU KNOW, I AM
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF HIGH SPEED
RAIL. AND I BELIEVE BUILDING IT
IS ESSENTIAL FOR FUTURE
GENERATIONS. THIS BILL WOULD
ESSENTIALLY STOP THE PROJECT. I
KNOW THE PROJECT FACES
SIGNIFICANT FUNDING CHALLENGES
THAT RAISE QUESTIONS FOR SOME
ABOUT ITS VIABILITY AND WHETHER
WE SHOULD GO FORWARD WITH THE
PROJECT WHILE WE STILL NEED A
FIRM, A PERMANENT FUNDING
PARTNER LIKE WE HAD FOR THE
STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM. THE
PROJECT RECENTLY RECEIVED, AS
WAS NOTED EARLIER, SIGNIFICANT
FEDERAL FUNDING. I THINK IT'S
PREMATURE. TO TAKE ANY ACTIONS
THAT WOULD JEOPARDIZE THE
PROGRESS OF THE PROJECT. AND
EVEN IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT HIGH
SPEED RAIL, DIVERTING RESOURCES
IS NOT THE WAY TO MAKE A
DECISION ABOUT WHETHER THIS
PROJECT GOES FORWARD. I HAVE
GREAT RESPECT FOR YOU AS MY
COLLEAGUE AND YOU HAVE BEEN
INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT FOR A
VERY LONG TIME, BUT I WILL NOT
BE ABLE TO SUPPORT YOUR BILL
TODAY. WITH THAT. I LOOKED TO
MEMBERS IF THERE'S A MOTION
SECOND. UM THE THERE'S A MOTION
MADE BY SYMBOL MEMBER WALLACE.
UH SECOND MADE BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER DAVIES. UM AS IT WAS
NOTED THE CHAIRS. AN OPPOSITION
SECRETARY CALLED THE ROLE MAYBE
501 DO PASS AND RE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
WILSON. NO, WILSON. NO FONG FONG
I AGUIAR CURRY BERMAN. BERMAN.
NO, CARILLO. CARILLO NÓ DAVIES.
DAVIES I HEART. NO JACKSON
JACKSON, NO LOWENTHAL LANDFALL
NO HAPPEN. NO NO. SANCHEZ.
SANCHEZ? AYE. THING, WALLACE.
WALLACE I BOARD WORD. NO WICKS.
WICKS. NO. ALRIGHT WE'LL HOLD
THAT OPEN FOR, UM MEMBERS. TO
ADD ON. BUT THAT WILL MOVE ON TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JACKSON HOOVER,
PRESENTING ON A B 6 TO 7, AS
WELL AS A B 637. WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR. APPRECIATE IT. I
WOULD LIKE TO START BY ACCEPTING
THE COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS AND
THINK THE COMMITTEE AND STAFF
ARE WORKING WITH MY OFFICE. I'M
ON THIS MEASURE. MAYBE 627
REQUIRES THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A
REIMBURSABLE VOUCHER. FOR SOME
OF OUR HARDEST WORKING
CALIFORNIANS, WHICH IS OUR
TRUCKERS. THIS VOUCHER PROGRAM
WILL ALLOW THE OWNERS OF OUR
HEAVY DUTY TRUCK FLEETS
ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES TO
CONVERT THEIR FLEETS TO
SUSTAINABLE AND CLEANER BURNING
FUELS. THIS BILL PRIORITIZES
FLEETS, UH FIVE OR FEWER FOR
THOSE VOUCHERS AND WITH DIRECT
THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES
BOARD TO BE IN CHARGE OF THEIR
DISTRIBUTION. UM ADDITIONALLY, A
B 627 PLACES A PRIORITY TO
CONVERT OR REPLACE REYES TRUCKS,
WHICH ARE THE MOST COMMON
VEHICLES USED TO TRANSPORT GOODS
FROM CALIFORNIA PORTS TO OUR
WAREHOUSES, UM, IN WHICH MOST
CASES ENDS UP IN MY REGION OF
THE L N EMPIRE. WHICH ALSO HAS
SOME OF THE WORST AIR QUALITY IN
THE NATION. A B 627 ALSO AS
CLARIFYING LATE LANGUAGE THAT
SEEKS TO SPECIFY THAT THE H VIP
PROGRAM IS NOT LIMITED TO DRE IS
TRUCKS. SO WITH THAT I ASKED FOR
AND I VOTE. THANK YOU. SOME OF
THEM ARE JACKSON. DO YOU HAVE
ANY WITNESSES HERE TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT? I DO NOT ALL RIGHT.
I WOULD NOTE. ARE THERE ANY
WITNESSES HERE TO TESTIFY AND
OPPOSITION? I INVITE YOU TO COME
TO THE YOU CAN COME TO THE TABLE
AND WHEREVER YOU IN FACT, ADAM.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS MARCO
PRAIA. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF
PUBLIC SERVICES, AND WE COMMEND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JACKSON FOR
LOOKING TO ADDRESS A PROBLEM
THAT IS PARTICULAR TO HIS
DISTRICT. REGRETTABLY WE DO HAVE
TO OPPOSE THE MEASURE. FOR THE
REASONS STATED IN OUR LETTER.
THEY ARE THREE WE BELIEVE THAT
ENACTMENT OF A B 627 AS AS
CURRENTLY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.
WILL LIMIT THE ARBS FLEXIBILITY
IN ALLOCATING FUNDS AS NECESSARY
, AND THAT CHANGES WILL OCCUR IN
THE MARKETPLACE AND CHANGES WILL
OCCUR IN TERMS OF NEED FROM TIME
TO TIME, AND THAT THEREFORE THIS
MEASURE BEING PLACED IN STATUTE
WOULD LIMIT THAT FLEXIBILITY. WE
RECOGNIZE THAT YOU HAVE STILL
GIVEN A RB FLEXIBILITY, BUT WHEN
YOU PRIORITIZE A PARTICULAR TYPE
OF VEHICLE FOR A PARTICULAR TYPE
OF PURPOSE IT SETS UP THE
SITUATION WHERE FAILING TO
PROVIDE WHAT WOULD BE DEEMED AS
PRIORITY FUNDING, WHICH SUBJECT
THE A, R B TWO RIGHTFUL
CRITICISM, WHICH WE DON'T THINK
IS DO GIVEN THAT THEY ARE VERY
DILIGENTLY TRYING TO ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE WITH A FINITE AMOUNT
OF MONEY, AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT
THERE IS NEEDS FOR ADDITIONAL
FUNDS IN ALL ACROSS THE
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR.
UNFORTUNATELY BY PRIORITIZING.
ONE WE D PRIORITIZE THE OTHER.
WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THIS
INVITES FURTHER INITIATIVES LIKE
THIS THAT WOULD TEND TO
CANNIBALIZE THIS FUNDING,
PLACING MONEY AND PRIORITIES
THAT LIMIT OR TAKE AWAY THE
ABILITY FOR CARB TO BE
RESPONSIVE AGAIN. I KNOW THE
BILL SPECIFIES THAT CARB HAS THE
FLEXIBILITY. BUT IF MONEY RUNS
OUT THAT FLEXIBILITY JUST SIMPLY
GOES AWAY. AND SO AGAIN FROM THE
STANDPOINT OF ADDRESSING THESE
ISSUES, GRADES TRUCKS, AS YOU'LL
NOTE HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED OVER
A BILLION DOLLARS OF FUNDING. WE
THINK THAT THIS IS CERTAINLY AN
IMPORTANT ISSUE, BUT THERE ARE
OTHER TRANSPORTATION SECTORS AS
WELL AS OTHER COMMUNITIES WHO
WOULD BENEFIT FROM THIS FUNDING.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE RB IS
BEST SUITED TO APPROACH TO
ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS AND TO DO
SO IN A TIMELY FASHION. AND FOR
THOSE REASONS WE MUST
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED THE
MEASURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NOW MOVING TO, UM, PUBLIC
TESTIMONY. THIS IS AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC TO, UM, WAY IN STATING
YOUR NAME. UM AND YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION, SO I
ASKED FOR THOSE TO BEGIN TO
BEGIN WITH THOSE IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. THIS IS A B 6 TO 7.
AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR CHRIS
MOTOR WITH THE CALIFORNIA
TRUCKING ASSOCIATION. I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR AND
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS
BILL WITH THE TAKING OF THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS WERE
REMOVING OPPOSITION AND ARE
NEUTRAL IN THE MEASURE. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS. BREAKEVEN, ENGLAND,
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
ECHOING THE COMMENTS OF MY
COLLEAGUE FROM CALIFORNIA
TRACKING ASSOCIATION, LIKE TO
THANK DR JACKSON, HIS STAFF AND
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE HARD
WORK IN PUTTING TOGETHER THIS
BILL, UM WE WERE PREVIOUSLY
OPPOSED AND WE'LL BE REMOVING
OUR OPPOSITION AND MOVING TO
NEUTRAL. THANKS. THANK YOU
MOVING TO THOSE WHO ARE MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL. NOT BE
APPROPRIATE TIME TO COME
FORWARD. ALRIGHT SEEING NONE ALL
MOVE TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR
CONCERNS ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE
HAD ALREADY ENJOYS A MOTION AND
A SECOND. IF I RECALL WHO MOTION
MY VERMIN AND SECOND BY
LOWENTHAL, UM WITH THAT, I JUST
WANT TO THANK YOU
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JACKSON FOR
BRINGING THE BILL FORWARD. I
APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE
AMENDMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THIS
PROGRAM CONTINUES TO BE A USEFUL
TOOL TO INCENTIVIZE. UM THE
ADOPTION OF ZERO EMISSION MEDIUM
AND HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES AND
ASSIST FLEET OWNERS IN THIS
TRANSITION, ULTIMATELY, A
SUCCESSFUL INCENTIVE PROGRAM
WILL IMPROVE THE AIR QUALITY FOR
RESIDENTS THAT ARE
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED BY
FREIGHT MOVEMENT. I'LL BE
SUPPORTING YOUR BILL TODAY WITH
THAT. I ASKED THE SECRETARY TO
CALL THE ROLL. MAYBE 6 TO 7 Dð
PASSES AMENDED AND RE REFER TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
WILSON. BY WILSON. I. FONG.
KHÔNG. AYE AGUILAR CURRY? AYE.
AGUIAR-CURRY AYE, BERMAN BERMAN.
I CARILLO VÚI DAVIES. BABIES I
HEART. AYE. JACKSON JACKSON. I
LOWENTHAL. NO ONE THOUGHT I
HAPPEN. UP IN I SANCHEZ SANCHEZ,
I TING WALLACE WALLACE. I AWARD
WORD I WICKS. AYE. THANK YOU
ALL. HOLD THAT ROLE OPEN FOR
EVERYBODY HERE. OKAY ALRIGHT,
THAT ONE IS OUT. 14 0. UM AND
BUT I WILL. I DID FORGET TO ASK
YOU IF YOU WANTED TO CLOSE AND I
KNOW THERE WAS OPPOSITION GIVEN,
SO I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE RECORD IF
YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO ANY OF
THAT AND PROVIDE ANY CLOSING
REMARKS ON YOUR BILL. WELL, I
WOULD. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT
THIS BILL HAS MORPHED INTO ALL
KINDS OF THINGS SINCE THE
BEGINNING, WHICH IS WHY IT WAS A
TWO YEAR BILL IN THE FIRST
PLACE. BUT WE HAVE PROBABLY ONE
OF THE MOST INCLUSIVE PROCESSES
FOR THAT, SO WE'RE MORE THAN
HAPPY TO INCLUDE THEM IN THAT
PROCESS AS WE CONTINUE ON WITH
THE BILL, BUT I LOVE THE
DISCUSSION, LOVE THE BACK AND
FORTH ABOUT IT. I THINK WE CAN
HAVE A BILL. WE CAN ALL BE PROUD
OF. THANK YOU. GREAT ALRIGHT,
THE FLOOR IS YOURS. A SIMILAR
MEMBER JACKSON FOR A B 637.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR
A B 637 SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE FLEET
SUBJECT TO ADVANCE CLEAN FLEET
REGULATION. TO RENT ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE TRUCKS OVER
DIESEL TRUCKS. AS YOU MAY KNOW,
THE A C F ADOPTED BY THE
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
LAST YEAR REQUIRES FLEETS OF A
SPECIFIC SIZE TO PROCURE THEY
HAVE TRUCKS. UM THE A. C F ALSO
CAPTURES AND REQUIRES THE
COMPLIANCE OF CERTAIN COMPANIES
THAT RENT TRUCKS. HOWEVER, THESE
COMPANIES AREN'T TRADITIONAL
FLEETS. THEY ARE NOT THE END
USERS OF THEIR TRUCKS BUT RATHER
THEIR CUSTOMERS. WHILE THE A. C
F AND SENTENCED FOR RELEASE XEV
TRUCK FOR A YEAR OR LONGER. IT
DOES NOT DO THE SAME FOR RENTALS
OF LEASE LESS THAN A YEAR. A B
637 SEEKS TO ADDRESS THIS GAP BY
INCENTIVIZING REGULATED FLEETS
TO RENT A XEV TRUCK AND GET
CREDIT UNDER A CF, HELPING LOWER
CALIFORNIA'S EMISSIONS. UM
JOINING ME TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT
OF A B 637 IS BENJAMIN PALMER
WITH ENTERPRISE MOBILITY? WHO IS
THE BILL SPONSOR? THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR BENJAMIN PALMER,
DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT AND
PUBLIC AFFAIRS FOR ENTERPRISE
MOBILITY, LIKE TO THANK THE
AUTHOR CHAIR COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THE TIME THEY SPEND ON THE BILL.
WE'RE PLEASED TO BRING FORWARD
ON BEHALF OF OUR CUSTOMERS. WE
ALL KNOW THE WORD ROAD TOWARDS
ADOPTION OF ZERO EMISSION
TECHNOLOGIES, INCLUDING
ESPECIALLY MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY
TRUCKS FACED NUMEROUS CHALLENGES
, INCLUDING LACK OF
INFRASTRUCTURE DEMAND, INCREASED
COSTS, AVAILABILITY. AND YOU
KNOW WE ARE SEEING KIND OF
MINIMAL DEMAND AT THIS TIME.
RENTAL COMPANIES ARE IN THE
MIDDLE. FUNDAMENTALLY, WE'RE IN
THE BUSINESS OF MEETING OUR
CUSTOMERS' MOBILITY NEEDS. IT'S
OUR CUSTOMERS THAT DRIVE
ENTERPRISE VEHICLES. IT'S OUR
CUSTOMERS AT THE SIDE OF THE
TYPE OF TRUCK THEY WANT TO RENT
ON A PARTICULAR DAY. REGARDS TO
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES. WE WANT
TO BE THOUGHTFUL, ENSURE THAT
VEHICLES THAT WE HAVE TO
PURCHASE OR DRIVEN AND NOT
SITTING IDLE IN A PARKING LOT.
IT'S FOR THOSE REASONS THAT
WE'RE PROUD TO SPONSOR A B 637
IDEA THAT CAME FROM OUR
CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND THE NEED FOR
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY IN HOW TO
ACQUIRE THEIR EMISSION TRUCKS TO
MEET THE OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE
A. C. F. UNDER THE A. C F
PURCHASES AND LEASES FOR YEAR
LONGER OF THEIR MISSION TRUCKS
COUNT TOWARDS COMPLIANCE. BUT
THE REGULATION DOES NOT GIVE
CREDIT TO FLEETS THAT CHOOSE TO
RENT A ZERO MISSION TRUCK LESS
THAN A YEAR. MAYBE 6 37 6 TO
FILL THAT GAP BY ENSURING THAT
CUSTOMERS THAT RENT ZERO MISSION
TRUCKS GET CREDIT FOR MAKING THE
CHOICE TO RENT A ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE. OVER ITS INTERNAL
COMBUSTION COUNTERPART AND THE
RESULTING REDUCTION IN
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. WITH
THIS MODEST CHAINS, OUR
CUSTOMERS ARE ABLE TO GET CREDIT
TOWARDS COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION
EVERY TIME THEY MAKE THAT CHOICE
TO RENT AS THEIR EMISSION TRUCK.
INCIDENT INCENTIVIZING. THAT
CHOICE IS CONSISTENT WITH
CALIFORNIA'S GREENHOUSE
REDUCTION GOALS, INCLUDING THE
CF. THAT RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. UM I SEE
THERE'S NO OPPOSITION REGISTERED
ON VIOLENT JUST TO ENSURE THAT
THERE'S NO ONE WHO WANTED TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION AS A PRIMARY
WITNESS. SEEING NONE. I MOVE TO
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. THIS IS
OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC IF THERE'S A ME TOO,
WHERE YOU SAY YOUR NAME,
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION THAT
ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL. GO
AHEAD. HI GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
TRICIA, DELAWARE. CHICANO I'M
THE HEAD OF POLICY FOR COW START
AND WE ARE HERE TO SHOW OUR
SUPPORT FOR A B. 637 THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR CHRIS MOTO WITH
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION.
WE APOLOGIZE. WE GOT OUR LETTER
IN LATE, BUT WE ARE IN SUPPORT
OF THE MEASURE. THANK YOU. MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS DAMON KANSEN
WITH LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
WHEN I THINK DOCTOR JACKSON FOR
INTRODUCTION THIS BILL PROUD
SUPPORT THE BILL. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ANTHONY
TANNEHILL WITH CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION,
ACCORDING THE SENTIMENTS OF MY
COLLEAGUE FROM THE LEAGUE OF
CITIES. GOOD AFTERNOON, TEARING
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARK
NEWBERGER AT THE CALIFORNIA
STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES.
Y'ALL ARE ALSO IN SUPPORT OF
THIS MEASURE AND MOVE ON TO
THANK THE AUTHOR AND SPONSORS.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THE BILL?
SEEING NONE MOVING TO MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE IF THERE'S ANY
QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS OR
COMMENTS MOVE THE BILL. RIGHT.
MOVE BY AGUIAR-CURRY SECOND BY
WALLACE. WITHOUT A, UM, YOU HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME MEMBER
JACKSON TO CLOSE. RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, DR JACKSON FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD. I
SUPPORT CREATIVE SOLUTIONS TO
HELP EASE COMPLIANCE FOR
ENTITIES THAT ARE LEADING THE
WAY IN OUR STATE'S AMBITIONS
TRANSITION TO ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES UNDERSTAND THAT MOVING
FORWARD THERE MAY BE MORE WORK
NEEDED TO CLARIFY THE BILL. AS
WE STATED AND ENSURE THAT IT
DOES WHAT THE AUTHOR INTENDED,
AND WITH THAT I'LL BE SUPPORTING
YOUR BILL TODAY ASKED THE
SECRETARY TO CALL THE ROLL.
MAYBE 637 DO PASS, AND WE REFER
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. WILSON. HI,
WILSON. I FANG BANG I AGUILAR
CURRY. AGUIAR-CURRY. AYE BERMAN
BERMAN. I CARILLO RIO. I DAVIES
BABIES I HEART PART II, JACKSON.
JACKSON SORRY, I LOWENTHAL ONE
THOUGHT I HAPPEN. HAPPENED I
SANCHEZ SANCHEZ WRITING WALLACE
WALLACE. I WARD WARD. I WIX WIX.
AYE. OUT. THAT BILL IS OUT 14 0.
DO YOU? RIGHT? MOVING BACK TO
CONSENT FOR THOSE MEMBERS WHO
ARE AVAILABLE TO ADD ON WE HAD
TWO BILLS ON CONSENT. SCR 59 AND
SCR 74 AS SECRETARY OF THE CALL
THE WORLD AGUILAR CREE.
AGUIAR-CURRY. AYE, BERMAN. FIRM,
AND I. LOWENTHAL AND THOUGHT I
HAPPEN. HAPPEN. I. THAT BILL IS
OUT. 14 0 MOVING ON TO, UM MAYBE
501 PHªN. MAYBE 501
AGUIAR-CURRY. YOU'RE CARINO.
THAT BILL IS FOR 10. AND SO IT
FELT. YEAH, RIGHT. OKAY? ALL
RIGHT, UM WE ALREADY DID. OKAY?
UM, MOTION TO ADJOURN. I GET A
CURRY MOVED AND FONG SECONDED.
ALL RIGHT.