OK. GOOD MORNING. WE'LL CALL
THIS MEETING TO ORDER IT LOOKS
LIKE WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. MCCARTY. HERE,
ALAN. LACKEY. WHEN REYES. TING.
WILSON. ZIPPER. OK THANK YOU. UM
WE WILL BEGIN BY, UH, DISPENSING
WITH THE CONSENT CALENDAR. WE
HAVE TWO ITEMS ON THE PROPOSED
KENT SET CALENDAR A B 1855 ALANI
AND A B 1875 MINNER. MOTION TO
SECOND THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
MOTION BY REYES SECONDED BY
TEAM, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. AND
THE CONSENT CALENDAR. MCCARTY
MCCARTY IY ALANIS ALANIS, I
LACKEY. WHEN REYES. REYES I TING
TING I WILSON. ZIPPER ZIPPER
EYE. OK THANK YOU. CONSENT
CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. WE WILL NOW
BEGIN WITH THE REGULAR ORDER OF
BUSINESS AND WE WILL BEGIN WITH
THE ITEMS. UH THAT MEMBERS
THROUGH SIGN AN ORDER IN OUR
FIRST MEMBER ON THE DOCKET IS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JIM PATTERSON.
I'M GONNA DEFER. OK, ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CSILLA, PLEASE COME UP.
STILL WAITING. FOR NUMBER SEVEN
A B 1909. PLEASE PROCEED. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
TODAY I PRESENT ASSEMBLY BILL
1909, WHICH UPHOLDS THE RIGHTS
OF VICTIMS OF CRIME BY ENSURING
THEY OBTAIN THE RESTITUTION FROM
DEFENDANTS, ACCORDING TO THE
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION CENTER,
SURVIVORS OF CRIME CRIMES OFTEN
STRUGGLE TO RECEIVE RESTITUTION
FROM DEFENDANTS, WITH MANY
RECEIVING VERY LITTLE
COMPENSATION. DESPITE THEIR
LOSSES, CALIFORNIA'S HAVE THE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ALL RIGHT TO
SEEK RESTITUTION FROM THE
PERSONS. CONVICTED OF THE CRIMES
THAT CAUSED THEM HARM AND
SUFFERING FOLLOWING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF OUR STATE'S
DIVERSION LAWS, THERE IS A RISE
IN THE NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS IN
DIVERSION PROGRAMS. OUR JUSTICE
SYSTEM IS CENTERED ON
REHABILITATION AND THE POWER OF
SECOND CHANCES FOR THOSE WHO
HAVE DONE WRONG. WHICH I FIRMLY
BELIEVE IN. HOWEVER WE MUST
RECOGNIZE THAT WELL, WE DO ALL
WE CAN TO SUPPORT REDEMPTION. WE
CANNOT FORGET THOSE WHO HAVE
BEEN HARMED ALONG THE WAY. A B
1909 IS ABOUT STRIKING THAT
BALANCE SUPPORTING INDIVIDUALS
OPPORTUNITIES TO TURN THEIR
LIVES AROUND WHILE ALSO MAKING
SURE THAT THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN
HARMED RECEIVE THE SUPPORT THEY
THEY NEED TO HEAL AND MOVE
FORWARD. ONCE A DEFENDANT HAS
SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED THEIR
DIVERSIONARY PERIOD, WE MUST
ENSURE THE VICTIM RECEIVES THAT
THEIR FAIR SHARE OF COMPENSATION
THAT IS RIGHTFULLY OWNED TO
THEM. ENSURING THAT VICTIMS
RECEIVE THEIR COMPENSATION IS
NOT ONLY FAIR, IT IS A
FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE VERY
NATURE OF JUSTICE WITH ME TODAY
TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY AND ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMITTEE MAY
HAVE IS MS TAMAR TOAT, DEPUTY
DISTRICT LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE
FOR THE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES
TO DIVIDE AMONGST YOUR WITNESSES
. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SARA I'M A
DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY WITH
THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. AND WE ARE
THE PROUD SPONSORS OF THIS
IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. ALTHOUGH
THIS BILL OFFERS A MINOR
CLARIFYING AMENDMENT TO THE
EXISTING LAW, IT WILL HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON, UH THE
CRIME VICTIM'S ABILITY TO
ACTUALLY RECEIVE THE RESTITUTION
THAT A COURT HAS ALREADY ORDERED
AT A RESTITUTION HEARING. CRIME
VICTIMS HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL
AND A STATUTORY RIGHT TO BE MADE
WHOLE BY RECEIVING RESTITUTION.
UH AND, UH BY THE DEFENDANT. IT
IS AN ACCEPT, ACCEPTED AND WELL
ESTABLISHED PART OF THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND IT IS NOT
CONSIDERED A PUNISHMENT FOR THE
DEFENDANT. IF ANYTHING, IT IS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF THE
REHABILITATION PROCESS BECAUSE
IT GIVES A WRONGDOER THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOME OF THE
DAMAGE THAT'S BEEN CAUSED AS A
RESULT OF THE CRIME, OTHERWISE
CRIME VICTIMS WOULD BE LEFT WITH
NOT ONLY DEALING WITH THE BURDEN
AND THE TRAUMA OF, UH, THE CRIME
ITSELF, BUT THEY WILL HAVE TO,
UH UH, DEAL WITH HAVING TO, UH
BEAR THE BURDEN OF THE FINANCIAL
DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE CRIME, AND
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
BURDEN FOR ANY ONE PERSON TO
HAVE TO HANDLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN
THEY'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG. OUR
EXISTING LAWS AROUND RESTITUTION
. RECOGNIZE THIS FACT IN EVERY
CRIMINAL CASE, UH, WHEN A COURT
ORDERS RESTITUTION AND A PERSON
COMPLETES THEIR PROBATION OR
THEIR PAROLE, OR, UH UH, THEIR
SUPERVISION OR THEIR RELEASE
FROM LOCAL CUSTODY, UH, THE
COURT IS ABLE TO CONVERT THE
RESTITUTION ANY UNPAID
RESTITUTION INTO A CIVIL
JUDGMENT IF IT HASN'T IF IT
HASN'T BEEN COMPLETED BY THE
TIME THE PROBATION OR THE PAROLE
HAS BEEN COMPLETED, UH AND THAT
IS SO THAT, UH, CRIME VICTIMS
DON'T TO FILE A SEPARATE LAWSUIT
IN A CIVIL COURT LAWSUITS ARE
NOT ONLY COSTLY FOR THE STATE,
BUT THEY'RE ALSO EXTREMELY
BURDENSOME ON CRIME VICTIMS, AND
IT FORCES CRIME VICTIMS TO
ACTUALLY HAVE TO RELIVE THE
TRAUMA OF THE CRIME, BUT HAVING
BY HAVING TO RECOUNT THE DETAILS
OF THE CRIME OVER AND OVER AGAIN
, AND RESTITUTION ORDERS ARE
ALSO ALLOWED FOR IN DIVERSION
CASES. UH IN FACT, RECENT
DIVERSION LAWS, UH, THAT HAVE
BEEN PASSED IN RECENT YEARS
EXPRESSLY CALL FOR THE RIGHT TO
RESTITUTION. FOR A COURT TO
ORDER RESTITUTION IN DIVERSION.
EVEN THOUGH SOMEONE HASN'T BEEN
CONVICTED. IT ALLOWS THE
DEFENDANT TO COMPLETE A PROGRAM
TO BE REHABILITATED, BUT ALSO
MAKE THE VICTIM WHOLE. UH
UNFORTUNATELY, THE, UH THE LAW
IS SILENT AS TO THE VIABILITY OF
THESE ORDERS ONCE THE DIVERSION
IS COMPLETED OTHERWISE, SO IF
RESTITUTION IS THE ONLY THING
OUTSTANDING, AND THE DEFENDANT
HAS SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED EVERY
OTHER ASPECT OF DIVERSION, THE
LAW IS SILENT. AS TO WHAT
HAPPENS. DOES THAT TURN INTO A
CIVIL JUDGMENT LIKE EVERY OTHER
CASE, OR DOES IT NOT? AND THIS
IS ACTUALLY BECAUSE THE LAW IS
SILENT ON THIS POINT. THIS HAS
CAUSED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
CONFUSION IN THE COURTROOMS IN L
, A COUNTY FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE
HAD CONFLICTING ANSWERS FROM
JUDGES. SOME JUDGES BELIEVE THAT
YES, IT CAN CONVERT TO A CIVIL
JUDGMENT EVEN THOUGH THE LAW IS
SILENT BECAUSE IT'S A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. YOU KNOW,
FOR A VICTIM TO HAVE DIVERSION,
BUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF JUDGES
HAVE, UH, TAKEN THE OPPOSITE
POSITION, WHICH HAS MADE
RESTITUTION. AND THOSE DIVERSION
CASES MEANINGLESS AND WE HAVE
SEVERAL EXAMPLES FROM L A COUNTY
WHERE THIS IS A PROBLEM. I'LL
GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE. WE HAD AN
ELDERLY VICTIM WHO WAS ATTACKED
IN A PARKING LOT. HE WAS PUNCHED
AND SHOVED INTO THE GROUND. UH,
HE BROKE HIS HIP. UH, AND HE
SUSTAINED THREE $100,000 IN
MEDICAL BILLS. UM THE COURT
PLACED THE DEFENDANT ON UH,
MENTAL HEALTH. UH, DIVERSION AND
ALSO ORDERED, UH, THE, UH, THE
DEFENDANT TO MAKE THIS
RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM. BUT
THE ISSUE IS THAT DIVERSION
LASTS ANYWHERE FROM ONE YEAR TO
A MAXIMUM OF TWO YEARS,
DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF
DIVERSION YOU GET. AND SO THAT'S
USUALLY NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR
SOMEONE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A
SIGNIFICANT RESTITUTION PAYMENT.
SO UNLESS, UH, THAT AMOUNT IS
ABLE TO BE CONVERTED TO A CIVIL
JUDGMENT AND ENFOR. THAT VICTIM
IS GOING TO BE LEFT HAVING TO
PAY THAT AMOUNT THEMSELVES, UH,
WITHOUT THE RESTITUTION ACTUALLY
, BEING MEANINGFUL IN THEIR
LIVES. A B 1909 DOES NOT CHANGE
ANY OF OUR EXISTING DIVERSION
LAWS OR THE COURT'S ABILITY TO
ORDER RESTITUTION IN DIVERSION
CASES. TO BEGIN WITH. THIS BILL
PICKS UP WHERE THE DIVERSION
PROGRAM ENDS. WE WANT DEFENDANTS
TO BE ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM ANY
DIVERSION PROGRAM. IF THEY ARE
ELIGIBLE AND SUITABLE. WE WANT
DEFENDANTS TO BE REHABILITATED
AND EARN A DISMISSAL IF THAT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR SITUATION,
BUT WE ALSO WANT CRIME VICTIMS
TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THE
RESTITUTION THAT A COURT HAS
ALREADY ORDERED FOR THEM SO THAT
WE CAN AT LEAST ALLEVIATE SOME
OF THE BURDENS FROM THEM. AND SO
THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO, UH TO
PAY FOR THE MEDICAL BILLS AND
YOU KNOW THE PROPERTY DAMAGE
BILLS AND THE COUNSELING BILLS
THEMSELVES. UH, SO TO THAT END
AND ON BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
ASSEMBLY MEMBER Kò SILVA FOR HER
DEDICATION TO HELPING CRIME
VICTIMS. AND I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK, UH, THIS
COMMITTEE FOR YOUR I VOTE ON A B
1909. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANY
MORE WITNESSES? AND ANYBODY HERE
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. PLEASE
LINE UP. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS, RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. ALSO POLICE OFFICER
ASSOCIATIONS OF ARCADIA, BURBANK
, CLAREMONT CORONA, CULVER CITY,
FT. MARIETTA NEWPORT BEACH,
NEVADA. PAS VERDE, POMONA,
RIVERSIDE. SANTA ANA UPLAND, THE
RESERVE PEACE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA AND
DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATIONS OF
MONTEREY COUNTY AND PLASTER
COUNTY. ALL IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS DÂN FOR IS OUT THIS
MORNING ON BEHALF OF THE CRIME
VICTIMS ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT.
AARON FRIDAY, OUR DUTY MOTHER OF
A DAUGHTER, WHO USED TO BELIEVE
THAT SHE'S A BOY. PROPONENT OF
PROTECT KIDS. CALIFORNIA I
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION?
PLEASE COME UP. YOU HAVE FIVE
MINUTES TO DIVIDE AMONGST
YOURSELVES.
GO. FOR GOOD MORNING, MARGOT
GEORGE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION, UM. WE ARE OPPOSED
TO A B 1909 BECAUSE IT EXTENDS
IT SEEKS TO EXTEND THE
RESTITUTION REQUIREMENT AND
IMPOSE IT ON CALIFORNIANS WHO
HAVE NOT BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF
ANY CRIMINAL OFFENSE. INCLUDING
CALIFORNIANS, WHOSE CASES WERE
DIVERTED AS A RESULT OF SERIOUS
MENTAL ILLNESS. THE FACT THAT A
PERSON HAS BEEN DIVERTED,
INCLUDING PURSUANT TO 1001.36.
DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE PERSON IS
GUILTY OF THE CHARGED OR ANY
OFFENSE SECTION. UM BILL A B
1909 SEEKS TO TREAT
PRESUMPTIVELY INNOCENT,
VULNERABLE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT
BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY OFFENSE AS
IF THEY HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF
CRIMINAL WRONGDOING. AND MOST
POINTEDLY, MENTAL HEALTH
DIVERSION IS ROUTINELY APPLIED
TO DEFENDANTS WHO WERE
INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL. SO A
B 1909. AND POINTLESSLY IMPOSE
CRIMINAL RESTITUTION LIABILITY
ON PEOPLE WHO ARE UNABLE TO
COMPREHEND THE NATURE OF THE
CHARGES AGAINST THEM, LET ALONE
ANY CORRESPONDING RESTITUTION
ORDER. SO UM, WE HAVE
COMMUNICATED WITH THE AUTHOR AND
WE WERE THINKING WE ARE SEEKING
AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD MAKE THIS
BETTER IT WOULD ADD PROCEDURAL
PROTECTIONS TO RESTITUTION
HEARINGS FOR DIVERTED
INDIVIDUALS AND CLARIFY THAT
THIS PROCEDURE DOES NOT APPLY TO
DIVERSION ORDERED DURING
INCOMPETENCY PRECEEDS. IT WOULD
ADD TIME LIMITS TO THE PERIOD
FOR WHICH THE POST RESTITUTION
ORDER APPLIES AND WE'RE ASKING
FOR ABILITY TO PAY PROVISIONS TO
ALLOW COURTS TO OPT OUT OF
POINTLESS ATTEMPTS TO SEEK
RESTITUTION FROM UNHOUSED
MENTALLY ILL. CALIFORNIANS WHICH
WOULD MERELY RESULT IN
ADDITIONAL COURT COST SINCE
THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE UNLIKELY
TO EVER BE ABLE TO PAY ANY
RESTITUTION, SO WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR BOAT ON A B 1909
UNLESS IT IS AMENDED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS,
IGNACIO HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STATEWIDE
ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE
LAWYERS. WE ARE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. UM LET ME JUST OFFER
A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS AND A
COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS GOING
FORWARD. I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR AND HER STAFF FOR HAVING
CONVERSATIONS LAST WEEK ABOUT
THE SPILL AND THE SPONSORS FOR
BRINGING IT, UM, YOU KNOW,
REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT THE LAST
COUPLE OF DAYS AND I'VE BEEN
INVOLVED IN DISCUSSIONS ON UM
YOU KNOW THE CIVIL JUDGMENTS FOR
VICTIMS WHEN WE REWROTE THAT
STATUTE A FEW YEARS AGO. UM, I
THINK HERE'S HERE'S THE
SITUATION. UM DIVERSION IS A
LEGAL CONSTRUCT, DESIGNED TO
TREAT PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY THAN AS
IF THEY WERE CONVICTED. THE GAP
IN LAW NOW WAS, IT'S NOT
VAGUENESS. IT IS A DELIBERATE
GAP WHERE WE DID NOT INCLUDE
DIVERSION IN, UH, THE, UH,
TRANSFORMATION INTO A CIVIL
JUDGMENT FOR VICTIMS. IT'S
SIMPLY NOT LISTED, UM, DIVERSION
IS LISTED, UH, IN THE
RESTITUTION FEE, WHICH IS CAPPED
AT $1000 THAT'S COLLECTED BY THE
CRIME. UM THE VICTIMS COMP BOARD
, SO THAT'S WHERE WE DID INCLUDE
DIVERSION, BUT WE DIDN'T INCLUDE
IT IN MONEY IN THE MONEY,
JUDGMENT OR CIVIL JUDGMENT, SO
THAT'S WHY THERE'S A GAP. IT WAS
INTENDED. UH AND ALSO BECAUSE IT
COVERS A LOT OF SITUATIONS AS,
UH, THE PREVIOUS WITNESS, UM
MENTIONED SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO
WE DO WITH THIS WRINKLE AND LAW
BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND, WE SEE
THAT THERE MIGHT BE VICTIMS, UH,
WHO WHO WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE
PAY AND SHOULD GET A MORE
RESTITUTION? AND SO I HAVE A
COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS? ONE IS,
UM, AS WAS MENTIONED. I THINK
THERE SHOULD BE AN ABILITY TO
PAY ASSESSMENT ON THE BACK END
OF DIVERSION DIVERSION IS
SUPPOSED TO BE DIFFERENT THAN A
CONVICTION. UH AND IF YOU HAVE
SOMEONE WHO'S SUCCESSFULLY, UH,
COMPLETES DIVERSION, AND IT SAYS
IN LAW THAT FAILURE TO PAY FULL
RESTITUTION SHOULD NOT BE CANNOT
BE A REASON TO NOT, UH, PROVIDE,
UM, THE END OF DIVERSION OR OR
SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF
DIVERSION. IT SAYS THAT IN LAW,
SO WE CAN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, WE
CAN'T KEEP THEM ON DIVERSION.
UM, AND IT'S DIFFERENT THAN
BEING ON PROBATION OR PAROLE. SO
IF WE DO, WE SHOULD DO AN
ABILITY TO PAY AT THE END. UM
AND ALSO ME. ASSESSMENT OF
SOMEBODY WHO MAYBE INTENDED NOT
TO PAY, UM THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD
OF DIVERSION IF THEY SIMPLY JUST
CHOSE NOT TO PAY AND IS HOPING
HE WOULD GO AWAY. THEN THERE
SHOULD BE AN ASSESSMENT ON THE
BACK END. THEY THINK THERE
SHOULD BE AN ASSESSMENT FOR
MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS AND
OTHER THINGS BECAUSE WE DO NEED
TO TREAT DIVERSION DIFFERENTLY
THAN SOMEONE WHO FINISHED
PROBATION OR PAROLE, WHO WHO WHO
WAS IN JAIL OR IN STATE PRISON
OR ON COMMUNITY SUPERVISION? WE
JUST HAVE TO OTHERWISE, YOU
KNOW, THAT'S THE DESIGN OF
DIVERSION, SO I THINK THERE'S A
BALANCING. I THINK WE CAN THREAD
THE NEEDLE IF WE DID SOME
PROCEDURES SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS
MENTIONED ALREADY, BUT I THINK
IT A MINIMUM ABILITY TO PAY AND
AN ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS OF
THAT PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL ON
THE BACK END, SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. SORRY THAT'S FIVE
MINUTES. JUST TRYING TO KEEP,
UM, THE RULES IN PLACE HERE.
SHOULD HAVE GIVEN YOU NOTICE ANY
OTHERS IN, UM IN OPPOSITION.
PLEASE LINE UP AND STATE YOUR
NAME AND ORGANIZATION ONLY. YES.
MY NAME IS ROBERT BOWDEN. I'M IN
OPPOSITION. RESPECTFULLY OF 19
Ó NINE. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS
LAWRENCE COX, L S¼ P èC. ALL OF
US ARE NONE IN OPPOSITION. MY
NAME IS GURU MARIO LS PC ALL OF
THE NÓ OPPOSITION. MY NAME IS
LENA DUN LS P èC I'M IN
OPPOSITION. OK, THANK YOU
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR LACKEY. I
WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, UM I
REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS,
BUT I'M VERY THANKFUL THAT, UH,
THE AUTHOR HAS, UH, ADDRESSED
THIS ISSUE BECAUSE I, I THINK
TOO OFTEN, VICTIMS HAVE BECOME
GHOSTS IN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM,
AND THIS ACTUALLY RECOGNIZES A
VERY, VERY CRITICAL PIECE OF
RESTORATION. AND I THINK THAT,
UH BOTH SIDES WOULD CONSIDER
JUSTICE SATISFIED WHEN JUDGMENTS
ARE MET. AND SO RESTITUTION IS
IN OUR CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION,
AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT
I BELIEVE THIS. FAIRLY
ADDRESSES, AND I'M HAPPY TO
SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU, MR TING.
I WAS HOPING THE AUTHOR OF THE
SPONSOR COULD JUST, UH, ADDRESS
MR HERNANDEZ'S THOUGHTS AND
COMMENTS AND ALSO THE YOUR
AROUND ASKING FOR RESTITUTION
FOR FOLKS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN
CONVICTED CAN ADDRESS THAT.
ISSUE. UH, THIS BILL IS. THE
REALLY DIFFICULT, BILL. I MEAN,
I. I KNOW THAT, UH, WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT VICTIMS, AND THEN WE TALK
ABOUT DEFENDANTS, WE USUALLY
HAVE VERY POLARIZED SIDES. WE
HAVE, UH. AS WAS MENTIONED
DIVERSION AND IT IS A VERY
DIFFICULT BILL FOR ME TO
ACTUALLY HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD AS
MORE AND MORE. I HAVE WANTED TO
LOOK INTO OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM TO
FIND OUT WAYS THAT VICTIMS CAN
BE MADE WHOLE AND YET, UH,
DEFENDANTS CAN ALSO NOT EXIT OUR
SYSTEMS AND HAVE A TAIL THAT
FOLLOWS THEM. UH, FOR MAYBE
DECADES. UH AND THEN ALSO KNOW
THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF PAIN
RESTITUTION, UH, MAY BE VERY
UNLIKELY, PARTICULARLY WITH THE
POPULATION. UH SO WE KNOW THAT
THERE IS WORK TO DO ON THIS BILL
. WE KNOW THAT SOME OF THE
SUGGESTIONS WE TAKE SERIOUSLY
AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON
THAT. IT'S A BILL THAT AT THIS
TIME IN OUR STATE, UH, WHERE WE
HAVE SUCH DIVISION AMONGST, UM.
ADVOCATES FOR ONE GROUP OR THE
OTHER, WHETHER IT'S FOR VICTIMS
OR FOR, UH, THOSE WHO HAVE
COMMITTED CRIMES TO MAKE ME MAKE
A STEP TO SAY. IS THERE A PLACE
WE CAN GET TO, UH THERE IS
RESEARCH THAT SHOWS THAT, UH,
WHEN DEFENDANTS HAVE, UH MAYBE
WHEN WE SAY MADE WHOLE MEANING
DOLLARS, THAT MAY NOT
NECESSARILY ACTUALLY HAPPEN, BUT
THE ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THE
IMPACT THEY'VE HAD ON SOMEBODY,
WHETHER THAT'S VERBALLY IT'S IN
RESTITUTION IN DOLLARS, SO IT'S
A STEP TOWARDS COMING TOWARDS
THE CENTER, BUT I'M FULLY AWARE
OF AS YOU YOU SAID, UH, YOUR
COMMENTS AND YOUR SUGGESTIONS,
UH, THAT IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE.
UH, BUT IT'S A PLACE TO TRY TO
CLARIFY. UM AND WE KNOW THAT WE
HAVE WORK TO DO ON THIS. THANK
YOU, MR ZUBER. THANK YOU. I WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD. I
THINK THAT IT TAKES SOME
IMPORTANT STEPS TO REALLY
PROTECT VICTIMS. UM WITH THAT
SAID, UM, I'M GRATEFUL TO HEAR
THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO CONSIDERING
SOME OF THE, UM UH, SOME OF THE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS AS CP HAS
SUBMITTED. I DO THINK ESPECIALLY
THE ONE RELATED TO ABILITY TO
PAY IS SOMETHING THAT'S
IMPORTANT THAT YOU CONSIDER IN
THE NEXT ROUND. AND SO I'LL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY, BUT
HOPE THAT YOU'LL CONTINUE
WORKING WITH èC Dð P A ON SOME
OF THE, UH SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS.
ACTUALLY. OK, I RACE. THANK YOU.
I TOO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL. UM AND I
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS BY MY
COLLEAGUE THAT, UM THIS IS IN
THE CONSTITUTION. OUR VICTIMS
MUST BE MADE WHOLE, THEY HAVE
RIGHTS. I. I AM I AM CONCERNED
ABOUT THE FACT THAT THIS IS A
DIVERSION AS OPPOSED TO A
CONVICTION AND THERE HAVE BEEN
VERY GOOD COMMENTS THAT HAVE
BEEN MADE, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
RESPONSE. I THINK YOU ARE THE
PERFECT AUTHOR FOR THIS BILL
BECAUSE YOU DO RECOGNIZE BOTH
SIDES. RECOGNIZE THE NEED TO
PROTECT OUR VICTIMS AND TO MAKE
THEM WHOLE BUT ALSO RECOGNIZE
THE ISSUES THAT AFFECT PEOPLE.
UH, MENTAL HEALTH. UM, ALSO, UM,
UH, INCOMPETENCE THAT WERE
MENTIONED EARLIER AND ISSUES TO
BE DISCUSSED AT A FUTURE TIME. I
WILL SUPPORT IT TODAY. I THINK
THIS THIS BILL DESERVES TO HAVE
FURTHER CONVERSATION ON IT. UM
SO I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. THANK YOU AND I'LL I'LL
JUST ALSO SAY THAT SOME OF THE
ISSUES RAISED, UM WE DIDN'T HEAR
THEM EARLIER, SO WE WEREN'T
OFFERING. AUTHORS AMENDMENTS
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS FOR YOU,
BUT, UM, I THINK THEY ARE. I DO
SUPPORT THIS, BUT I DO THINK
THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS
POTENTIALLY, YOU COULD WORK AT
AS YOU GO THROUGH THE NEXT STEP
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
SO I SUPPORT THIS AS OUR
RECOMMENDATION, MR ALAN LASTLY,
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I ALSO WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD AND A REMINDER AS
MY OTHER COLLEAGUES HAVE ALSO
THAT THIS RESTITUTION IS A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT AND THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE YOU NEED TO
REMEMBER. AND SO I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR THE, UH, DEPUTY Dð.
A UH, SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT
UP, UH, THAT PEOPLE HAVE NOT
BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF THE
CRIMINAL OFFENSE. COULD YOU
ATTEST A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THAT
, OR ADD TO THAT BECAUSE I KNOW
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT, GOING TO
DIVERSION? WELL THERE'S A REASON
THEY WENT TO DIVERSION AS A AS
OPPOSED TO BEING FOUND GUILTY OR
NOT GUILTY II. I WOULD START BY
SAYING THAT UNDER EXISTING LAW,
UH, RESTITUTION IS EXPRESSLY
ALLOWED IN DIVERSION SITUATIONS.
RECENT UH UH. DIVERSION LAWS
THAT PASSED, INCLUDING HEALTH.
UH DIVERSION EXPRESSLY ALREADY
CALLED FOR A RIGHT TO
RESTITUTION AND CALL FOR A COURT
TO HOLD A RESTITUTION HEARING TO
MAKE THAT EVIDENTIARY
DETERMINATION AT THE TIME THAT
ALSO INCLUDES AN ABILITY TO PAY
DETERMINATION AT A RESTITUTION
HEARING. THIS BILL DOESN'T
CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT, UH, THAT
PROCESS THAT IS A SEPARATE
PROCESS. THIS IS JUST ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENS WHEN DIVERSION IS
COMPLETED, AND THAT AMOUNT HAS
NOT BEEN PAID, BUT IT WAS
ORDERED BY THE COURT. SO
DIVERSION? YES, PEOPLE AREN'T,
UH, YOU KNOW THEY HAVEN'T BEEN
CONVICTED. BUT THE REASON THE
RESTITUTION LANGUAGE WAS PUT IN
EXISTING LAW IN THE FIRST PLACE
IS BECAUSE THE POINT OF
DIVERSION IS, UH, NOT TO PUT
PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T COMMITTED A
CRIME INTO A DIVERSION PROGRAM.
IT IS RATHER TO PUT PEOPLE WHO
HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME INTO A
DIVERSION PROGRAM IF THEY ARE
ELIGIBLE, AND IF THEY ARE
SUITABLE FOR THAT PROGRAM,
BECAUSE, UH, THEY COULD BE
REHABILITATED AND THEY CAN EARN
THE RIGHT HAD A DISMISSAL. IT'S
SO IT'S NOT, UH, FOR A PERSON
WHO'S IN A DIVERSION PROGRAM TO
COMPLETELY BYPASS ALL OF THE
CONSEQUENCES AND OBLIGATIONS
THAT COME OUT OF HAVING
COMMITTED THAT CRIME IN THE
FIRST PLACE. BUT THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER IS
THAT IT'S ALREADY ALLOWED FOR
UNDER OUR SEPARATE DIVERSION
STATUTES. SO WE ARE AMENDING THE
SECTION THAT TALKS ABOUT, UH,
YOU KNOW THE CIVIL JUDGMENT PART
, BUT THE RESTITUTION ORDER IN A
DIVERSION IS BE ALLOWED FOR. SO
IT SEEMS, UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF
THE OPPOSITION'S POINT IS, UH
AND A CRITICISM OF EXISTING LAW.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS BILL
IS. THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT BILL. THANK YOU FOR
MAKING THAT CLEAR AND AGAIN.
THANK YOU. I I'VE SEEN, UH MANY
TIMES IN MY EXPERIENCE. IN THE
COURTHOUSE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT,
WATCHING VICTIMS HAVE TO COME
BACK AND TRY AND DO THAT AND
AGAIN BE REVICTIMIZED. AS YOU
GUYS SAID, HAPPENED TO TELL
THEIR STORIES AGAIN AND THEY
THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO MISS WORK
OR ANYTHING ELSE TO MAKE SURE
THAT THIS, UH, IS MADE RIGHT
FROM THE BEGINNING. SO THANK YOU
FOR DOING THAT, AND YOU'LL BE
GETTING MY SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER? I JUST WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A NINE
VOTE. THANK YOU. THE MOTION.
MOVED AND SECONDED. AND A LINE.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ON A B
1809 BY SOME MEMBER CORK SILVA.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY MCCARTY, I ALANIS
ALANIS, I LACKEY LACKY I WHEN,
WHEN I REYES REYES I TING TING I
WILSON WILSON. I ZER ZIPPER. I
THANK YOU. THAT MEASURE PASSES.
THANK YOU. NEXT AUTHOR ASSEMBLY
MEMBER, PATTERSON. YOU MEASURES
AND WILL MEMBER JIM PATTERSON.
WE START THE A B 18 0 THREE.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UH,
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. BEFORE YOU IS
A 1803. UM. AS WE ALL KNOW,
ACCORDING TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. OUR STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. IT IS CONSIDERED
ONE OF THE LARGEST REGIONS FOR
HUMAN TRAFFICKING ACTUALLY IN
THE COUNTRY. AND AS THE STATE
CONTINUES TO TRY. TO PROSECUTE.
THE TRAFFICKERS AND FREE THE
TRAFFICKED. UH WE REALLY DO NEED
TO HOLD THOSE TRAFFICKERS.
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE FOR THE ACT,
BUT ALSO WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
THE VICTIMS ARE COMPENSATED FOR
THEIR PAIN AND SUFFERING UNDER
CURRENT LAW, VICTIMS OF CRIMES
ARE NOT ALLOWED TO COLLECT
NONECONOMIC LOSSES, IE PAIN AND
SUFFERING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
CHILD MOLESTATION RELATED CRIMES
, A 18 0 THREE EXPANDS THIS
ELIGIBILITY TO INCLUDE VICTIMS
OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. NOW. I'VE
HAD, UH. QUITE A BIT OF
EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE WHO'VE
BEEN TRAFFICKED BECAUSE OF MY
RELATIONSHIP WITH BREAKING THE
CHAINS. BEING THE FORMER MAYOR
OF FRESNO. UM. AND THE STORIES
THE REALITIES ARE HORRIFIC.
THESE TRAFFICKED GIRLS ARE OFTEN
BEATEN, THEY'RE OFTEN DRUGGED.
UH, RAPE. UM AND WHILE. THE
VICTIMS ARE HURT AND SCARRED,
MANY FOR LIFE. THE TRAFFICKERS
ARE CASHING IN. WHILE THE
VICTIMS STRUGGLE TO BASICALLY
GET THROUGH LIFE. THE
TRAFFICKERS HAVE CASH AND JEWELS
AND CARS. AND ALSO, I'VE I'VE
SEEN AND TALKED WITH MEMBERS,
UH, WHO HAVE BEEN HELPED BY
BREAKING THE CHAINS THAT WHEN
THE VICTIMS ARE OUT? PAIN
DOESN'T STOP. THERE HAS BEEN
HARM CERTAINLY TO THE VICTIMS
BODIES, BUT THEY IS HARM TO
THEIR SOUL. AND IT ALSO HARMS
THEIR FUTURE. AND I JUST THINK
WE NEED TO ON THE ONE HAND, SEE?
A TRAFFICKER. AND USING THESE
TRAFFICKED VICTIMS. UH, TO GAIN
SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS. OF MONEY.
AND IT'S PRETTY CLEAR. AND THAT.
THESE TRAFFICKERS ARE ENJOYING.
THE PROFITS OF SOMETHING THAT IS
EVIL. HURTFUL. AND POSSIBLY EVEN
FOR LIFE. SO MAYBE 1803. WILL
NOW MAKE THOSE PROFITS.
AVAILABLE TO THE VICTIMS. TO
HELP THEM REPAIR THEIR BODIES,
THEIR MINDS, THEIR SOUL AND
THEIR FUTURE. SO AS WE THINK
ABOUT THIS. WE HAVE TRAFFICKED
VICTIMS. WHO ARE FORCED INTO
UNIMAGINABLE CIRCUMSTANCES. UM.
ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT
BREAKING THE CHAINS HERE. AND
WHAT I REALLY LOVE ABOUT HOW THE
FRESNO POLICE DEPARTMENT HANDLES
THESE KINDS OF THINGS. RUN OUR
POLICE. ENCOUNTER THE
TRAFFICKED. WOMAN. THEY DON'T
ARREST THEM, AND THEY DON'T PUT
THEM IN THE COUNTY JAIL. THEY
SEPARATE THEM. FROM THE
TRAFFICKER. AND OFTEN TIMES THEY
ARE THEN. SENT TO A SAFE HOUSE.
IN FRESNO. AND SO WHAT? WE'RE
BASICALLY TRYING TO DO HERE. IS
TO RECOGNIZE THE HURT HOW LONG
IT LASTS AND HOW RESTITUTION
COULD REALLY HELP HEAL AND MOVE
THESE INDIVIDUALS OUT OF THAT
LIFE FOR GOOD. AND MOVE THEM.
FORWARD. UM. ON THE ONE HAND, WE
HAVE THE VICTIM WHO OFTENTIMES.
EXITS THAT LIFE IN POVERTY.
SCARS. HURT. AND THE TRAFFICKER
WHO JUST GOES ON AND CASHES THE
PUTS THE MONEY IN AND HAS A
GREAT OLD TIME. JUST GOES AND
TRIES TO FIND ANOTHER VICTIM TO
TAKE THE PLACE. SO I THINK WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT AS I SAID
EARLIER THOSE PROFITS. OUGHT TO
BE USED FOR THIS RESTITUTION.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING
TO DO HERE. DEBORAH RUSH HERE IS
THE FOUNDER OF BREAKING THE
CHAINS. SHE WILL TESTIFY AND
DOMINIQUE BROWN, WHO WAS A WHO
WAS TRAFFICKED, BUT GRADUATED,
GOT THROUGH THE PROGRAM AT
BREAKING THE CHAINS, AND WE'LL
TELL HER STORY. THANK YOU. YEP.
FIVE MINUTES TO SPLIT AMONGST
YOURSELVES. UM. THANK YOU. UM SO
DOMINIC BROWN AND I SUPPORT A B
18 Ó THREE BILL BECAUSE, AS
LIVED EXPERIENCE EXPERT, A
SURVIVOR, I KNOW FIRSTHAND THAT
HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS A
HORRENDOUS CRIME. THAT OFTEN
INVOLVES EXPLOITATION AND VERY
VIOLENT ABUSE, WHICH LEAVES
SURVIVORS WITH LONG LASTING
TRAUMAS TO ENDURE AND PROFOUND
CONSEQUENCES FOR THEIR
VICTIMIZATION. FINANCIAL
RESTITUTION CAN AND WILL ADDRESS
SOME TANGIBLE ISSUES AND
CONCERNS THAT SURVIVORS OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING
MAY HAVE EXPERIENCED, SUCH AS
LOSS OF INCOME MEDICAL EXPENSES,
DOCUMENTATIONS HOUSING AND OTHER
ECONOMIC HARDSHIPS RESULTING
FROM VICTIMIZATION. IT'S
IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT
RESTITUTION IS JUST ONE
COMPONENT OF OUR BROADER SUPPORT
SYSTEM NEEDED FOR SURVIVORS.
COMPENSATION ASSISTANCE MAY ALSO
HELP SURVIVORS ACCESS. MAY ALSO
HELP SURVIVORS ACCESS MEDICAL
AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES,
LEGAL SUPPORT, HOUSING,
EDUCATION AND JOB TRAINING,
HELPING SURVIVORS HELP
THEMSELVES GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY
TO REBUILD OUR LIVES AND MOVE
FORWARD AND RECOVERY AND
INDEPENDENCE. HELLO. I'M DEBORAH
RUSH. I AM ONE OF THE FOUNDERS
AND THE èC E Ó OF BREAKING THE
CHAINS. AND I ALSO AM A
SURVIVOR. MY TEENAGE YEARS WERE
STOLEN FROM ME BY A VIOLENT
TRAFFICKER WHO PREYED UPON MY
VULNERABILITIES, MANIPULATING
AND FORCING ME INTO A LIFE OF
SEX TRAFFICKING, WHILE MY RESCUE
BY A FRESNO POLICE OFFICER
MARKED A TURNING POINT IT WAS
FAR FROM THE END OF MY ORDEAL.
YOU SEE, THIS WAS 25 YEARS AGO
WITH NÓ SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN PLACE
TO SHIELD ME FROM THE LONG TERM
IMPACTS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. MY
LIFE QUICKLY SPIRALED OUT OF
CONTROL. MY TRAFFICKER. HE
DIDN'T JUST ROB ME OF MY DIGNITY
HAD A YEAR OF MY TEENAGE LIFE.
HE ALSO EXPLOITED MY INFORMATION
YOU SEE, JUST LIKE SO MANY
OTHERS. HE USED HIS CONTROL OVER
ME TO COMMIT FURTHER CRIMES. HE
PURCHASED VEHICLES OPENED BANK
ACCOUNTS AND PERPETUATED FRAUD
AGAINST MY NAME. MY NAME AND MY
CREDIT WAS DESTROYED. BUT BEFORE
I EVEN HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE
IT. THE DEVASTATION OF THESE CO
OCCURRING CRIMES LEFT ME UNABLE
TO OBTAIN A VEHICLE, A HOME OR
EVEN A BANK ACCOUNT. BECAUSE OF
THIS, THOUGH I WAS RESCUED. I
WAS HOMELESS, JOBLESS, RE
EXPLOITED AND FORCED TO LIVE ON
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AND BY ANY
MEANS THAT I COULD FIND THIS IS
AN EXPERIENCE THAT IS HAPPENING
TO 87% OF THE SURVIVORS
IDENTIFIED TO DATE OVER THE LAST
10 YEARS, MY ORGANIZATION
BREAKING THE CHAINS HAS
ESTABLISHED ONE OF THE LARGEST
AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE TRAUMA
TREATMENT CENTERS IN THE NATION
FOR INDIVIDUALS IMPACTED BY
HUMAN TRAFFICKING. WE HAVE
SERVED JUST OVER 2000
INDIVIDUALS IN THE CENTRAL SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY AND ARE SEEN AS A
BEACON AND MODEL FOR SERVICES
THROUGHOUT NOT ONLY CALIFORNIA,
BUT THIS NATION. OVER THE LAST
20 YEARS. I HAVE USED MY
EXPERIENCE AND PLATFORM AND NOW
EXPERTISE TO HELP OTHERS TO ALSO
SEEK A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF
THE BARRIERS THAT ARE PRESENT IN
THE LIVES OF VICTIMS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY. TODAY. I SIT BEFORE YOU
NOT JUST A SURVIVOR, BUT A
CERTIFIED TRAUMA PROFESSIONAL
THAT IS NATIONALLY RESPECTED AND
RECOGNIZED. I AM A CLINICAL
SOCIAL WORKER, A CERTIFIED DRUG
AND ALCOHOL COUNSELOR. AND A
PUBLISHED AUTHOR. I CAN ASSURE
YOU WITH NÓ RESERVATION IN FULL
EXPERTISE. THAT THE LASTING
EFFECTS OF TRAFFICKING ON
VICTIMS FUELED BY THE ACTIONS OF
THEIR TRAFFICKERS EXTEND FAR
BEYOND THE MOMENT OF RESCUERS
ESCAPE. IT SHATTERS THEIR
ABILITY TO EVER REGAIN A SENSE
OF NORMALCY FOR YEARS, IF NOT
DECADES TO COME. THIS IS WHY
THIS IS IMPERATIVE THAT VICTIMS
OF A CRIME WHO SUFFER ECONOMIC
LOSSES AS A RESULT OF CRIMINAL
ACTS RECEIVED DIRECT RESTITUTION
FROM THE PERPETRATORS THAT
PERPETRATED THE ACT. IT WILL
HELP TO REMOVE CRITICAL BARRIERS
, RESTORE DIGNITY AND ENSURE
THAT VICTIMS OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING RECEIVE THE JUSTICE
AND COMPS. THAT THEY DESERVE FOR
THOSE OF US. AND I'M ASSUMING AT
THIS COMMITTEE TODAY WHO
INTIMATELY UNDERSTAND NOW THE
MOTIVES OF TRAFFICKERS TO
EXPLOIT OTHERS FOR FINANCIAL
GAIN THROUGH FORCE FRAUD OR
COERCION. WE SHOULD ENSURE THAT
DIRECT RESTITUTION IS GIVEN BACK
TO THE VICTIMS. THIS BILL FOR
VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
SHOULD BE A NÓ BRAINER. AND I
WANNA THANK SENATOR OR EXCUSE
ME, ASSEMBLYMAN PATTERSON FOR
EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO NOT ONLY
FOR THE VICTIMS IN OUR COMMUNITY
, BUT THROUGHOUT THE STATE
DOMINATE FOR BEING SUCH A
POWERFUL VOICE. AND FOR THE
COUNTLESS SURVIVORS WHO I HAVE,
UM, WOULD BE GATHERED HERE TODAY
, BUT THEY ALL ASSUME THAT THIS
IS A NÓ BRAINER FOR THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE, TOO. THANK YOU
AND THE OTHERS IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE LINE UP AND STATE YOUR
NAME. ORGANIZATION ONLY. UH,
GREG BIRD, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ALCHEMY
GRAHAM ON BEHALF OF THE FRESNO
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. ERIN FRIDAY
OUR DUTY AUTHOR OF PROTECT KIDS,
CALIFORNIA MOTHER OF A DAUGHTER,
WHO USED TO BELIEVE THAT SHE WAS
A BOY. TIFFANY APPLE DOCKER, CO
FOUNDER OF BREAKING THE CHAINS
IN SUPPORT. JUDY CAHILL,
REGISTERED DEMOCRAT. I'M IN
SUPPORT. AND LITTLE ON BEHALF OF
DEBT. FREE JUSTICE CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT, IF AMENDED AND HAPPY TO
WORK WITH THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE ON
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. BROCK
CAMPBELL FROM LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH IN SANTA MARIA, UM, IN
SUPPORT. EMILY CAMPBELL. I'M A
MOM FROM LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH IN SANTA MARIA AND I'M IN
. RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION
AND ALL THE OTHER P Ó, A S¼ AND
Dð S¼, A S¼ PREVIOUSLY STATED IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OK, THANK
YOU. OPPOSITION. DO WE HAVE
OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME FORWARD.
BARCO GEORGE ON MARCO GEORGE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
OPPOSITION. UM CLEARLY BEING
TRAFFICKED FOR YOUR LABOR OR SEX
IS ABHORRENT AND TRAUMATIC. AND
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. A B 18 0
THREE IS AN UNWARRANTED
EXTENSION OF RESTITUTION FOR
NONECONOMIC LOSSES FROM THE
LIMITED CATEGORY OF CHILD
MOLESTATION VICTIMS TO ALL HUMAN
TRAFFIC VICTIMS, WHICH IS BAD
PUBLIC POLICY FOR TWO REASONS.
ONE IT UNDERCUTS THE CAREFUL
BALANCING AND WEIGHING OF
INTEREST THAT THE LEGISLATURE
HAS HISTORICALLY USED IN
DETERMINING RESTITUTION. FOR
SOME LOSSES THAT WOULD BE
AVAILABLE IN CRIMINAL COURTS,
WHILE OTHERS WERE BETTER LEFT TO
CIVIL COURTS TO DETERMINE AND
TWO. IT WILL COST THE STATE AND
COUNTIES MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO
HOLD RESTITUTION HEARINGS THAT
WOULD BE BETTER SPENT, AND
ACTUALLY PROVIDING SERVICES FOR
THE VICTIMS. UNDER EXISTING LAW,
RESTITUTION CAN BE ORDERED FOR
ADULTS FOR ECONOMIC LOSSES,
WHICH EXPLICITLY INCLUDES MENTAL
HEALTH COUNSELING EXPENSES, AS
WELL AS OUT OF POCKET LOSSES AND
WAGES OR PROFITS LOST DUE TO THE
INJURY INCURRED BY THE VICTIM
HOUSING. AS COUNSELING AND TIME
ASSISTING THE POLICE AND
PROSECUTION. VICTIM RESTITUTION
ALSO INCLUDES INTEREST AT 10%
PER YEAR. IT IS ENFORCEABLE AS A
CIVIL JUDGMENT BY GARNISHING
WAGES OR LIENS ONCE THE
INDIVIDUAL NÓ LONGER IS ON
PROBATION OR PAROLE. ARE OUT OF
PRISON. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
RESTITUTION FOR ECONOMIC LOSSES
AND NONECONOMIC LOSSES WILL LEAD
TO MORE COURT HEARINGS. ECONOMIC
LOSSES. HOUSING MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELING THEYRE FAIRLY EASY TO
ASCERTAIN AND DEFENDANTS OFTEN
STIPULATE TO THE AMOUNT WITHOUT
A HEARING. ON THE OTHER HAND,
NONECONOMIC LOSSES AND THE
AMOUNTS THAT HAVE BEEN AWARDED
FOR NONECONOMIC LOSSES IN THE
CHILD MOLESTATION CASES THAT
HAVE MADE IT UP TO THE APPELLATE
COURTS SO FAR HAVE BEEN IN THE
RANGE OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
OF DOLLARS TO MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE
FACING 1015 TO LIFE. INCREDIBLE
LINKS OF TIME IN PRISON OR MAY
NEVER GET OUT. AND THAT AMOUNT
IS BEING COMPOUNDED AT 10% A
YEAR. DEFENDANTS WERE GOING TO
LITIGATE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF
THOSE CLAIMS, COSTING THE STATE
AND COUNTIES MORE MONEY FOR
COURTROOMS FOR PROSECUTORS FOR
DEFENSE LAWYERS. FINALLY THE
MAJORITY OF INDIVIDUALS
CONVICTED OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
WILL. NEVER BE ABLE TO PAY. AND
SO THIS PROMISE OF THESE LARGE
RESTITUTION AWARDS FOR PAIN AND
SUFFERING WILL BE ANOTHER FALSE
PROMISE TO THE VICTIMS. WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR NÓ
VOTE ON A B 18 0 THREE. THANK
YOU AND THE OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION. SAYING NÓ OTHERS.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SOME MEMBER
RISK. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
EVERYTHING YOU SAID AT THE
BEGINNING, UM, ASSEMBLY MEMBER I
AGREE WITH THIS IS HORRIFIC. AND
DOMINIC. THANK YOU FOR SHARING
YOUR STORY. UH, YOUR LIVED
EXPERIENCES. AND THANK YOU FOR
BEING THE AUTHOR AND BEING THAT
EXPERT THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT.
WHEN IT IN BOTH OF YOUR
TESTIMONIES. YOU TALKED ABOUT
ECONOMIC DAMAGES ECONOMIC
LOSSES. THOSE ARE ALREADY
COVERED IN LAW. EVERYTHING THAT
YOU TALKED ABOUT. UM MEDICAL
EXPENSES. HEALTH COUNSELING
EXPENSES, WAGES LOST PROFITS
HOUSING THE LAW ALREADY PROVIDES
FOR THAT. SO THE BIG ISSUE IS
THE NONECONOMIC LOSSES. AS OF
NOW. UNDER CURRENT LAW, THERE
ARE ONLY THREE CIRCUMSTANCES IN
A CRIMINAL CASE WHERE
NONECONOMIC LOSSES ARE ALLOWED.
FELONY VIOLATIONS OF LEWD AND
LASCIVIOUS ACTS AGAINST A CHILD
UNDER 14 YEARS OF AGE.
CONTINUOUS SEXUAL ABUSE OF A
CHILD AND SEXUAL ACTS OF A CHILD
10 YEARS OF AGE OR YOUNGER. TO
TRAUMATIZE THE CHILD THAT YOUNG
TWICE FOR A CRIMINAL CASE AND
THEN A AAA CIVIL CASE WAS ONE OF
THE UNDERSTANDINGS IN PROVIDING
THAT SORT OF A AN EXCEPTION TO
THE RULE THAT THE ECONOMIC
LOSSES ARE ARE ARE GOING TO BE
GRANTED. THAT'S PART OF
PROBATION, PART OF PAROLE, PART
OF EVEN A DIVERSION PROGRAM THAT
WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER, BUT NON
ECONOMIC DAMAGES WERE LIMITED TO
JUST THOSE THREE. IT'S VERY
SERIOUS CRIMES AGAINST VERY
YOUNG CHILDREN. I SPOKE WITH THE
AUTHOR BRIEFLY, UM BEFORE I IT,
I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TO HAVE
THE NONECONOMIC LOSSES FOR THE
CHILDREN, I DON'T THINK THERE IS
AN ISSUE ABOUT THAT. YOU TALKED
ABOUT THE HUMAN TRAFFICKERS THAT
HAVE LOTS OF MONEY. IF YOU HAVE
A JUDGE MAKING A DECISION ON THE
NONECONOMIC LOSSES AS A RESULT
OF THE CRIMINAL TRIAL. YOU'LL
HAVE NÓ EXPERTS TO INTRODUCE TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS HUMAN
TRAFFICKER THAT WHAT WHAT? THE
MONEY THAT THEY HAVE, OR THE
DEEP POCKET THEY MAY HAVE. IT'LL
BE BASED ONLY ON WHAT HAS BEEN
PROVIDED DURING THE CRIMINAL
TRIAL. AND I'M NOT A CRIMINAL
TRIAL EXPERT. I AM A CIVIL TRIAL
EXPERT, BUT FOR CRIMINAL COURTS.
AND MR PATTERSON WILL WILL CAN
SHARE. IT'S WHATEVER THE
TESTIMONY WAS DURING THAT
CRIMINAL TRIAL, SO AS AN ADULT
IF YOU'RE A IF THERE IS A
JUDGMENT GIVEN BY A CRIMINAL
DURING A CRIMINAL TRIAL, YOU'RE
THEN GOING TO BE PRECLUDED FROM
HAVING A CIVIL TRIAL WHERE YOU
CAN ACTUALLY SEEK THOSE MILLIONS
FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING CAUSED BY
THE HUMAN TRAFFICKING. THAT
TESTIMONY WILL NOT BE GIVEN IN
THE IN THE CRIMINAL TRIAL. SO
WHAT? III I RECOGNIZE THE VALUE
OF HAVING SOMETHING RELATED TO
THIS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE
CHILDREN. BUT TO LIMIT AN ADULT.
FROM SEEKING ECONOMIC, NON
ECONOMIC DAMAGES IN THE CIVIL
TRIAL. I WOULD BE CONCERNED
ABOUT THAT, AND THE EX EXPANSION
OF THIS TYPE OF A LAW I WOULD BE
CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, BECAUSE I
THINK WE'RE TYING THE HANDS OF
OUR VERY VICTIMS TO BE ABLE TO
SEEK THOSE CIVIL DAMAGES OUTSIDE
I. I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO WORK
WITH THE AUTHOR. UM WE SPOKE
JUST BRIEFLY, AND I HOPE THAT
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN
LOOK AT. UM, BECAUSE I THINK IF
ECONOMIC DAMAGES IS WHAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT. LAW ALREADY
PROVIDES FOR THAT. IS THE
NONECONOMIC DAMAGES THAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT IN OUR IN OUR IN
OUR CONVERSATION. UH, YEAH, YOU
SUGGESTED, UH, AMENDMENT. UM
I'VE TALKED WITH, UH. BREAKING
THE CHAINS AND ALL WE'RE WILLING
TO WORK. WONDERFUL. UH, TO FIX
THAT THAT KIND OF CONCERN. UM IF
THERE'S THIS UNINTENDED
CIRCUMSTANCE, I, I I'M GLAD TO
CHANGE THE BILL. WONDERFUL WELL,
BASED ON THAT, AND THE FACT THAT
YOU'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH US
ON IT, I. I WILL BE VOTING FOR
IT. I APPRECIATE THAT. UH,
DEBORAH WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT
. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
YOUR WISDOM AND FOR DIRECTION. I
ALWAYS THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT WE CONSIDER ALL FACTS THAT
ARE INVOLVED AS WE DO WITH OUR
VICTIMS, AND I ALSO THINK THAT I
WOULD LIKE THE COMMITTEE TO
CONSIDER AS AN ONGOING
CONVERSATION THAT EXACTLY WHAT
WAS STATED IN THE BEGINNING
ADULTS OR VICTIMS. WE DO KNOW
AGAIN FROM OUR EXPERTISE THAT
THE MAJORITY THE OVERWHELMING
MAJORITY WILL NOT SEEK CIVIL.
UM, IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN THROUGH
A TRIAL, ESPECIALLY ONE OF THIS
MAGNITUDE, IT IS COMPLETELY
DEVASTATING. SO FOR US TO KIND
OF STREAMLINE, AND MAYBE THAT'S
SOME PLACES WE CAN HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION. KIND OF LIKE THE
YOUNG CHILDREN. THAT'S REALLY
OUR GOAL. UM, BECAUSE THEY
DESERVE THAT RESTITUTION AND
COMPENSATION AND THEY SHOULD NOT
HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH A
GRUELING COURT PROCESS AND MORE
MEMBERS THAN THE MEMBER WILSON
AND LACKED AND ZER THANK YOU,
CHAIR. UM THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. I THINK IT'S AN
IMPORTANT, UM, ISSUE AND AN
IMPACTFUL ISSUE. UM, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR BRAVERY FOR NOT ONLY
MOVING BEYOND YOUR OWN TRAUMA,
BUT, UM, TAKING TIME TO ENSURE
THAT OTHERS ARE NOT TRAUMATIZED
AS YOU WERE, AND THAT THOSE WERE
TRAUMATIZED HèA A POTENTIAL FOR
A BETTER LIFE, AND THAT'S
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. I LIKE TO
ALIGN. UM MY COMMENTS WITH MY
COLLEAGUE FROM THE EMPIRE, UM,
VERY THOUGHTFULLY SAID SO I
WON'T REHASH. IT UM, BUT JUST
ECHO ONE PARTICULAR POINT. MY
CONCERN ABOUT THE BILL CENTERED
AROUND THAT THE EXCEPTIONS WERE
JUST RELATED TO CHILDREN. UM AND
THAT THIS SOUGHT TO EXPAND IT TO
MORE THAN CHILDREN. AND SO FOR
ME, IF IT WAS, UM IT THE
ADDITION AS ONE OF THE ITEMS AS
HUMAN TRAFFICKING BUT KEEPING
WITH THE AGE SIMILAR AGE
REQUIREMENTS FOR CHILDREN, UM,
IT'D BE IT'D BE CLEAR NÓ BRAINER
, BUT THE FACT THAT IT DOES
EXPAND TO EVERYONE AND THEN I
FIND, UM WITH THAT EXPANSION, IT
WOULD CONTINUE TO EXPAND BECAUSE
THEN YOU KNOW FORMS OF RAPE ARE
VERY TRAUMATIC THAT HAVE NOTHING
TO DO WITH HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
AND WOULD THAT GO IN THERE? YOU
KNOW, THERE'S THAT ARE, UM,
DIFFICULT TO EXPERIENCE TO
TRIALS, AND WHEN IT COMES TO
MURDER, IT'S DIFFICULT TO
EXPERIENCE TWO TRIALS. I MEAN,
SO IT'S THIS CONSTANT WHETHER
SOMETHING IS CRIMINAL OR CIVIL,
AND SO I THINK IT SHOULD BE
NARROW. UM, THE EXCEPTION. THE
ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE EXCEPTION
WAS FOUR CHILDREN. UM AND I
THINK IT SHOULD BE, UH, TO BE
NARROWED FOR CHILDREN. SO UM,
FOR ME, UM, WITHOUT THAT
LANGUAGE IN THERE IT IS, UH,
HARD TO SUPPORT. AND I'M UM,
WOULD LIKE TO LISTEN TO MY REG.
MY REST OF MY COLLEAGUES BEFORE
I CONSIDER, UM, SUPPORTING THE
BILL. BUT THAT IS THE STICKING
POINT FOR ME, AND THAT WOULD BE
THE TYPE OF COMMITMENT I WOULD
NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROGRESS.
THIS BILL, WE WILL MAKE A
COMMITMENT. UH, TO AMEND IT.
WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS KIND OF
SCOPE. WHERE WHERE THAT
CHILDHOOD IS AT 18 AND UNDER
1717 AND. YOU LOOKING AT ME? I
WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S A
CONVERSATION WE SHOULD CONTINUE
TO HAVE. I THINK YOUR COMMITMENT
TO WORK WITH WITH, UH, THE
MEMBERS OF THE LACKEY MEMBER. I
DON'T WANT TO MAKE SURE WE FOCUS
HERE ON THE LINEUP, BUT ALSO
YOUR COMMITMENT TO WORK WITH
THESE. I DON'T WANT TO HASH OUT
THE AMENDMENT RIGHT HERE,
THOUGH. THANK YOU. SO MY MEMBER
LACKEY YEAH, I HAVE A LITTLE
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. I. I
THINK THAT, UH, DO THE UNIQUELY
USE HER TERM ABHORRENT. AND
TRAGIC NATURE OF THIS OFFENSE.
UM I THINK THAT A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF HURT NEVER GOES AWAY.
TO THESE PEOPLE AND TO DOMINIQUE
MY HEART GOES OUT TO YOU. VERY
BRAVE TO BE HERE TODAY AND WHAT
YOU'VE GONE THROUGH. WE CAN'T
EVEN IMAGINE WE CAN'T IMAGINE
IT. AND THIS IS SUCH UNIQUELY
HURTFUL. THAT I THINK FOR US. TO
JUST EXPAND THIS TO NONECONOMIC
LOSS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY
THERE'S HESITATION. I DO NOT AND
I'M SORRY. THAT UH, THESE
OFFENSES CONTINUED. I CAN'T
COMPREHEND THEM. I CAN'T. I
THINK IT'S ANIMALISTIC. IT'S NOT
EVEN HUMAN. TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW
SUCH BEHAVIOR TO TAKE PLACE FOR
PROFIT. AND NOW WE'RE JUST
HAVING WRESTLING WITH THE FACT
OF WHETHER THESE VICTIMS ARE
DESERVING OF NON ECONOMIC LOSS.
WOW. I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. I'M
SO SORRY. BUT I'M THANKFUL THAT
YOU'VE HAD THE COURAGE AND
WILLINGNESS TO COME AND KIND OF
RE VISIT SOME OF THOSE, UH, VERY
, VERY HURTFUL EXPERIENCES, SO
THIS IS NOT HARD FOR ME TO
SUPPORT AND I'M I. I JUST, UH
I'M PROUD TO SUPPORT IT. AND I
WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED TO
BE A CO-AUTHOR IF THIS CONTINUES
TO MOVE THANK YOU. SOME OF THE
MEMBERS OF THANK YOU. I THINK
THE ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO HUMAN
TRAFFICKING, YOU KNOW, ARE AMONG
THE MOST REPREHENSIBLE. AND SO I
DO. LOOK AT THIS IN A WAY THAT'S
DIFFERENT THAN I DO. OTHER KINDS
OF UM, YOU KNOW, ABHORRENT
CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. WITH THAT
SAID, I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS
OF MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE ISLAND
EMPIRE. I THINK OFTEN IN THESE
CASES THE DEVIL IS IN THE
DETAILS OF THESE LAWS. UM
OBVIOUSLY THE GOAL IS ONE.
THAT'S A GOOD ONE. UM, BUT I
AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES. UM
BOTH. BOTH OF MY COLLEAGUES
POINTS, WHICH THIS NEEDS TO
REALLY BE FINE TUNED. IT NEEDS
TO BE NARROWED ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT, UM THAT I'M REALLY
CONCERNED ABOUT. IN ADDITION TO
THE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN
EXPRESSED IS REALLY THE ABILITY
OF THIS TO GET TO ACTUALLY,
PEOPLE THAT ARE VICTIMS OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING, BUT AT THE SAME
TIME GOT CAUGHT UP IN THE, UM IN
THE ACTIVITIES SO THEY BECOME
ACCOMPLICES. AND SO I. I REALLY
DO THINK THAT YOU NEED TO FOCUS
ON THE VICTIMS OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING AND REALLY START
LOOKING AT SOME OF THE
EXCEPTIONS THERE, SO THAT FOLKS
LIKE THOSE OF YOU, WHO ARE
SITTING IN THE ROOM NOW ARE NOT
SUBJECT TO THESE TO HAVING LONG
DRAWN OUT PROCESSES RELATED TO
RESTITUTION. I ALSO THINK JUST
IN TERMS OF, UH, PRESERVING UM
YOU KNOW THE EFFICIENCY OF OUR
COURTS THAT I WOULD BOUND THIS
SUM? UM IT'S YOU KNOW, THIS
COULD BE REALLY ANYTHING AND I
AND WHILE UM VICTIMS OF, UH. YOU
KNOW, WHILE HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS
SOMETHING THAT I DO THINK WE
NEED TO DO MUCH MORE TO HELP
VICTIMS OF THAT, AND I THINK
THAT'S A GOOD GOAL OF THE BILL.
UM AND I WILL SUPPORT IT TODAY.
UH, BUT I'M HOPING THAT YOU'LL
CONTINUE WORKING WITH FOLKS
AROUND THE TABLE AND WITH THE
CHAIR AND WITH THE COMMITTEE AND
REALLY TIGHTEN THIS UP PRETTY
SIGNIFICANTLY. OK, THANK YOU,
BILL IRWIN. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AND THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD I. I GREW
UP IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE SEX
TRAFFICKING HUMAN TRAFFICKING
WAS A THING. IT WAS AN EVERYDAY
THING, AND I WOULD I WOULD SEE
IT. I CAME ACROSS A YOUNG LADY,
UH, SEVERAL, ACTUALLY WHERE I
TRIED TO HELP THEM ESCAPE, BUT
THEY COULDN'T BECAUSE OF SO MANY
DIFFERENT REASONS, YOU KNOW?
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING OUT
AND SPEAKING FOR SHARING YOUR
STORY. IT IS VERY HONORABLE FOR
YOU TO DO THIS BECAUSE THERE ARE
MANY, MANY YOUNG GIRLS WHO ARE
TRYING TO ESCAPE AND JUST CAN'T
AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS GIVING
THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY
THAT. WE CAN'T TAKE CARE OF YOU.
I ALSO KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
LIVE WITH THIS FOR THE REST OF
YOUR LIFE. THERE ARE TRIGGER
MOMENTS. COLORS ROOMS,
INDIVIDUALS, CARS, HOMES, ALL OF
THOSE CAUSE TRIGGER MOMENTS AND
I. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE
OVER HERE THAT THIS SHOULDN'T BE
SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE. TO SIT
DOWN AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE
ENTIRE DETAILS IS. THE NON
ECONOMIC LOSSES ARE SOMETHING
THAT YES, YOU GET A HOME. YES,
THERE ARE SUPPORT SERVICES THAT
ARE IN PLACE. BUT YOU ALSO NEED.
MONEY TO BE ABLE TO SURVIVE. AND
SOMETIMES. SOMETIMES THESE
SUPPORT SERVICES THAT ARE IN
PLACE AREN'T ENOUGH. AS YOU HAVE
MENTIONED EARLIER. AND SO I WILL
ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THIS BILL. I
THINK THAT THIS IS ABSOLUTELY
NEEDED. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU
SAID 80% ARE ARE STILL OUT THERE
RIGHT NOW AND ARE IN NEED OF
SERVICES. WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT?
THIS IS A GREAT STEP TO LET THEM
KNOW THAT HELP IS THERE HELP IS
ON THE WAY AND THAT WE ARE THERE
FOR THEM. I'M A MOTHER OF TWO
YOUNG GIRLS. AND I THINK SEVERAL
OF US HERE AS WERE OUR PARENTS.
I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO LIVE WITH
MYSELF IF MY DAUGHTER WAS PICKED
UP. AND I AND I UNDERSTAND THAT
SOMETIMES. YOU KNOW YOU YOU GET
CAUGHT UP IN IT, BUT YOU GET
CAUGHT UP IN IT BECAUSE MENTALLY
YOU HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO. NÓ
SUPPORT SYSTEM NÓ HELP NOWHERE
ELSE TO RUN TO. NOT BECAUSE YOU
WANT TO DO THIS, NOT BECAUSE
THIS IS SOMETHING YOU ENJOY
DOING, BUT BECAUSE YOU GET
CAUGHT UP INTO IT MENTALLY, AND
WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN
TO SAVE THESE GIRLS. SO I
ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FURTHER
QUESTIONS. YES WE DON'T HAVE ANY
PROPOSED CHANGES TODAY, BUT I,
BUT I TAKE YOUR, UM YOUR WORDS
EARLIER. I CLOSE IN A SECOND,
BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I
SUPPORT THIS MEASURE AND I. I UM
I RESPECT YOUR CONVERSATION WITH
SOME OF MY REYES AND LOOKING TO
ADDRESS I I'M GLAD THAT I'M I'M
GLAD TO DO THAT. THE ONE CONCERN
I HAVE IT. IF WE ARE NARROWING
IT. TOO YOUNG. PEOPLE MR
PATTERSON, WE'RE NOT. WE'RE NOT
DOING THAT RIGHT NOW. I JUST
WANT TO ASK THAT YOU COMMIT TO
CONVERSE WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER
RACE. AFTER THIS. I SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE. YOU CAN MAKE YOUR
CLOTHES WELL, I OK, I APPRECIATE
THE CONVERSATION. UH I I'M I'M
WILLING. I'M WILLING TO, UH TO
WORK WITH THE ASSEMBLY WOMAN. UM
AND WE NEED TO MAYBE TALK ABOUT.
THOSE DETAILS AND HOW II I JUST
WOULD HATE TO LOSE. TRAFFIC
YOUNG WOMEN AT 1819 2021. RIGHT
IF WE HAVE THIS ARBITRARY CUT
OFF. WE. WE'RE DENYING A WHOLE
RAFT OF VICTIMS ACCESS, SO I'M
WILLING TO TALK ABOUT THAT. WE
CAN NARROW IT. UM. BUT WE DO
NEED TO CAPTURE THOSE. I THINK
SOME OF THOSE 1820 2122 YEAR
OLDS. UM AND. WE ALSO HAVE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE BREAKING
THE CHAINS ABOUT THEIR
EXPERIENCE WITH HOW YOUNG DOES
THIS GO? UM. AND SO WE'LL HAVE
THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND I'LL
COMMIT TO THAT. OK. THANK YOU,
SIR. I THINK WE HAD A MOTION FOR
MR LACKEY AND THE SECOND FROM
MW. UH, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ON
A B 18 Ó THREE BY SOME MEMBER
JIM PATTERSON. THE MOTION IS DO
PASS MCCARTY MCCARTY, I ALANIS
ALANIS, I LACKEY LACKEY I WHEN I
REYES. REYES I TING TING A.
WILSON. I'LL WAIT TO SEE HOW THE
LANGUAGE ENDS UP, NOT VOTING.
WILSON NOT VOTING ZER. ZIPPER
EYE. MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU,
MR PATTERSON. NEXT MEASURE,
1804. THANK YOU. MEMBER WILSON
WOULD WOULD. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
JOIN WITH MEMBER REYES AS WE
TALK ABOUT WHERE THAT WHERE THAT
GOES. AND AGAIN, THE MR
PATTERSON. LET'S FOCUS ON YOUR
BILL, RIGHT? YEAH, THANK YOU.
MHM.
OK, PLEASE PROCEED. UM, THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. MEMBERS, UM IT IT
WE ALL KNOW THIS THAT THOUSANDS
OF CALIFORNIANS ARE, YOU KNOW,
BEING POISONED AS A RESULT OF
FENTANYL? UM WE HEAR THE. YOU
KNOW THE CRY OF MOMS AND DADS
WHO'S TEENAGERS. I WERE IN THE
MIDST OF A CRISIS. UH AND WE
NEED TO GIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT
SOME TOOLS THAT THEY NEED TO
TARGET. THE SUPPLIERS. UM
CURRENT LAW PERMITS AN
INTERCEPTION OF WIRE OR
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS. WHEN
THE CASE INVOLVES 10 GALLONS OR
THREE POUNDS OF FENTANYL.
CONSIDER THAT'S ENOUGH FENTANYL
TO KILL OVER 680,000. UM A B 18
Ó FOUR WERE REALLY TRYING TO
BALANCE THE APPROACH. BECAUSE OF
THE DRUGS, LEGAL POTENCY. AND
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THE
BILL. IS TO LOWER THE THRESHOLD
OF THAT INTERCEPT WHEN LET'S
JUST CALL IT WHAT IT IS. IT'S
WIRETAPPING. TO 1.6 GALLONS. OR
EIGHT OUNCES. WHICH WOULD GIVE
LAW ENFORCEMENT THE NECESSARY
INTEL. TO DISCOVER AND PROSECUTE
LARGE SCALE. DISTRIBUTORS. AND
SO HERE TO TESTIFY ABOUT HOW
THIS BILL WILL WORK AND HOW WE
THINK IT WILL HELP. SAVE LIVES
AS FRESNO POLICE DETECTIVE DEAN
CARDENAL. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE
FIVE MINUTES AMONGST EACH OTHER.
MY NAME IS DEAN CARNALLY. I'M A
DETECTIVE WITH THE FRESNO POLICE
DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT FOR OVER 27 YEARS. I
WORKED IN THE FIELD OF NARCOTICS
FOR OVER 20 YEARS IN 2020. I
STARTED A TEAM IN FRESNO CALLED
THE FENTANYL OVERDOSE RESOLUTION
TEAM BETTER KNOWN AS THE FORT,
WHICH WOULD BE THE COM WHICH
SHOULD BECOME THE SECOND
OVERDOSE RESPONSE TEAM IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ONE OF THE,
UH, THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
FOUR TEAMS TO IDENTIFY THE
DISTRIBUTORS WHO SELL THIS POINT
TO OUR VICTIMS AND TO GIVE THE
VICTIMS FAMILIES SOME SORT OF
CLOSURE. WHAT ARE WAYS TO
ACCOMPLISH? THIS IS BY APPLYING
FOR A STATE WIDE ELECTRONIC
INTERCEPTION BY REDUCING, UH,
THE INTERCEPTION THRESHOLD FOR
WIRE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS.
THE A B 1804 BILL STRATEGICALLY
FOCUSES ON PROVIDING VALUABLE
INTELLIGENCE TO CATCH MAJOR DRUG
DEALERS RATHER THAN THE
INDIVIDUAL USERS. BY ADDRESSING
INTERCEPTION AUTHORIZATION
AMOUNT BY 1.67 GALLONS BY LIQUID
VOLUME. AND EIGHT OUNCES BY
WEIGHT FOR SOLID SUBSTANCE
CONTAINING FENNY OR ITS
PRECURSORS. IT WILL ASSIST US IN
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
INVESTIGATING MAJOR FENTANYL
SUPPLIERS. TO KIND OF GIVE YOU
AN EXAMPLE OF THE LETHAL DOSE OF
FENTANYL FOR NON OPIOID
DEPENDENT SUBJECT WHO WAS
APPROXIMATELY, WHICH IS
APPROXIMATELY 2 TO 3 MG IS A
LETHAL DOSE FOR FENTANYL. UH,
ONE OUNCE OF FENTANYL IS
APPROXIMATELY 28.5 G 28.5 G
CONVERTED TO MILLIGRAMS IS
APPROXIMATELY 28,500, MG OR 2,
MG, APPROXIMATELY 14,250 LE
LETHAL DOSES. THIS BILL WILL NOT
FOCUS ON THE USERS WHO WILL SELL
PANEL TO SUPPORT THEIR HABIT.
RATHER IT WILL FOCUS ON THE
MAJOR FENTANYL DISTRIBUTORS. YOU
KNOW, UH, A COUPLE DAYS AGO, I
GOT A MESSAGE. A TEXT MESSAGE
FROM A 17 YEAR OLD UH, THAT I
ARRESTED. UH I CHOSE NOT TO
ARREST WHO WAS A FULL BLOWN
FENTANYL ADDICT, UH, SUPPORTING
HIS HABIT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO
SHARE THAT MESSAGE WITH YOU TO
KIND OF SHOW YOU IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT. WE DO HAVE
COMPASSION FOR THE USERS, THE
USERS THAT ARE ACTUALLY SELLING
FENTANYL TO SUPPORT THEIR HABIT.
I UNDERSTAND THIS ADDICTION AND
I'D LIKE TO SHARE THIS MESSAGE
THEY SENT TO ME ON MY ON MY ON
MY PHONE. HEY, DINO. I GO UP BY
THE NICKNAME ADINO JUST WANNA
LET YOU KNOW AGAIN. HOW GRATEFUL
I AM FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR
ME. I WILL NEVER FORGET THE
GRACE. YOU SHOWED ME IN THE
SECOND CHANCE YOU GAVE ME IT WAS
THE IT WAS THE THREE YEAR
ANNIVERSARY OF WHEN WE MET A
WEEK AGO. TODAY I'LL BE 21 YEARS
OLD AND THE 25TH AND I JUST
WANTED TO TELL YOU AGAIN HOW
GRATEFUL I AM ABSOLUTELY
EVERYTHING I'VE I HAVE TODAY IS
BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU DID FOR ME.
IF YOU HAVE INTERVENED, I'LL BE
DEAD. AND IF YOU WERE, UH,
WEREN'T SO GRACIOUS I'D BE IN
PRISON. DON'T EVER FORGET HOW
IMPORTANT THE WORK YOU DO IS,
UH, YOU HAVE SAVED COUNTLESS
LIVES, INCLUDING MINE. I CAN'T
TELL YOU HOW MANY, UH, PEOPLE
THAT HAVE COME IN CONTACT WITH
VICTIMS AND I CALL THEM VICTIMS
THAT ARE SELLING FENTANYL TO
SUPPLY THEIR FENTANYL HABIT.
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND HOW THE
ADDICTION UH, THIS ADDICTION OF
FENTANYL IS TAKING OVER. UH, OUR
KIDS. THIS BILL WOULD ASSIST US
IN LAW ENFORCEMENT TO GO AFTER
THE MAJOR SUPPLIERS OF FENTANYL.
AND WHEN I SEE MAJOR SUPPLIERS
AS YOU COULD SEE JUST AN OUNCE
OF FENTANYL. HOW MUCH FENTANYL
THAT CAN KILL? UH UH UH IN YOUR
COMMUNITIES. SO THIS BILL WOULD
ASSIST US IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.
AND I'M ASKING YOU, PLEASE, TO
HELP US IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, UH,
ON THIS A B? UH, 1804 BILL.
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS. UH ARE
ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK? SIR?
BRIAN ESKIL HERE IS A FORENSIC
CHEMIST. HE'S GONNA HE'S
AVAILABLE TO ANSWER TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SUBSTANCE.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS IN
SUPPORT? PLEASE LINE UP AND YOUR
NAME ORGANIZATION AND POSITION
ONLY. RANGE FROM THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
NARCOTIC OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
AND THE OTHER PO, A. Dð SASS
PREVIOUSLY STATED THANKS. GREG
BURKE, CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL
AND SUPPORT. ERIN FRIDAY. OUR
DUTY AUTHOR OF PROTECT KIDS,
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING KI¾M STONE STONE
ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. BROCK
CAMPBELL FROM LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH IN SANTA MARIA IN
SUPPORT. EMILY CAMPBELL. I'M A
MOM FROM LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH AND IN SUPPORT JERRY SHY
PASTOR AT LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH IN SUPPORT. CHRISTINE
CAMPBELL FROM WHEATLAND,
CALIFORNIA, UM MOM IN SPORT.
GRACE GREGORY FROM YUBA COUNTY,
AND I'M IN SUPPORT. PASTOR
BRANDON CAMPBELL WITH BAPTIST,
CALIFORNIA BAPTIST FOR BLUE CORE
VALUES AND SUPPORT. YES, SIR
ISAAC DAVIS HARVEST BAPTIST
CHURCH IN ORLEAN, CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE OUR POSITION. PLEASE
COME FORWARD. HM? WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE YOUR MAIN WITNESS. GO AN
OPPOSITION FIRST. ALL RIGHT,
GOOD MORNING. CHAIR MEMBERS
APOLOGIZE FOR MY VOICE.
SACRAMENTO ALLERGY SEASON. UM,
RIGHT. ALICIA BENAVIDES HERE
REPRESENTING DRUG POLICY
ALLIANCE HERE IN OPPOSITION DRUG
POLICY ALLIANCE IS A NATIONAL
ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO
ADVANCING DRUG POLICIES THAT ARE
GROUNDED IN SCIENCE, COMPASSION,
HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS. AND
WHILE WE UNDERSTAND THE PRESSING
DESIRE TO RUN LEGISLATION TO
ADDRESS THE OVERDOSE CRISIS, WE
IMPLORE THIS COMMITTEE TO
RECOGNIZE THIS AS A HEALTH
CRISIS AND ALL DRUG WAR TACTICS
THAT HAVE NOT CURBED THE DRUG
TRADE OR INFILTRATION OF
CONTAMINANTS LIKE FENTANYL IN
THE DRUG SUPPLY. A 18 Ó FOUR
REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT
REDUCTION IN WEIGHT AMOUNTS THAT
WOULD PROVIDE THE BASIS FOR
SURVEILLANCE PRACTICES THAT WILL
NOT CURB THE OVERDOSE RATES IN
CALIFORNIA, NOR GUARANTEE THE
TARGET OF ONLY HIGH LEVEL
TRAFFICKERS INSTEAD BY LOWERING
THE MINIMUM QUANTITY REQUIRED
FOR HM? JUDICIALLY AUTHORIZED
COMMUNICATIONS SURVEILLANCE. WE
RISK PROSECUTING LOW LEVEL USERS
AND INDIVIDUALS WHO SELL
FENTANYL DUE TO THEIR STRUGGLES
WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL
HEALTH. WHICH THE HISTORY OF
DRUG WAR POLICIES HAS TAUGHT US
LARGELY RESULTS IN AN INCREASE
IN REPEATED INCARCERATION OF
INDIGENT PEOPLE, WHICH IS LIKELY
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON
PEOPLE OF COLOR. POLICIES SUCH
AS THIS DIVERT RESOURCES AWAY
FROM PROVEN STRATEGIES THAT ARE
EFFECTIVE IN CONNECTING PEOPLE
TO CARE AND SERVICES. AS A 2022
THE TOTAL COST OF CONDUCTING
AUTHORIZED INTERCEPTION
OPERATIONS IN CALIFORNIA WAS AT
OVER 17 MILLION, AN APPROXIMATE
15% INCREASE FROM WHAT WAS
REPORTED IN 2021. REDUCING THE
WEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR
ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE WILL
INCREASE THE COST ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS PRACTICE. IN ORDER TO
ADDRESS THE TRAGIC INCREASE IN
DRUG OVERDOSE DEATHS. CALIFORNIA
SHOULD INSTEAD BE INVESTING IN
EVIDENCE BASED SOLUTIONS, SUCH
AS THE EXPANSION OF ROBUST
VOLUNTARY SUBSTANCE USE
TREATMENT SYSTEMS AND HARM
REDUCTION SERVICES, SUCH AS DRUG
CHECKING, TESTING, TAILORED
PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENTIONS AND
INCREASED INVESTMENTS THAT
ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES RATHER
THAN PURSUING EXPENSIVE DRUG
ENFORCEMENT POLICIES. THIS
COMMITTEE HAS MADE INCREDIBLE
STRIDES IN ADDRESSING THE
DEVASTATING IMPACT THE CARCERAL
BASED POLICIES HAVE HAD IN OUR
COMMUNITIES AND INSTEAD OF OPTED
FOR PROGRAMS THAT FOCUS ON
PREVENTION AND REHABILITATION. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS BODY
CONTINUE ON THAT PATH FOR
CALIFORNIA AND FOR THESE REASONS
, AND THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN
SHARED BY MY COLLEAGUES IN
MEETINGS WITH YOU, UH, WE URGE
YOUR NOTE BOOK. OK, THANK YOU.
AND NOW, UH, OPPOSITION CAN LINE
UP AND STATE YOUR ORGANIZATION
AND POSITION. THANK YOU. UH, MY
NAME IS GIL ANTHONY M. I'M WITH
L S¼, P èC AND ALL OF THE NOS.
WE OPPOSE THIS. MY NAME IS
ROBERT BOWEN LEGAL SERVICES WITH
PRISONS WITH CHILDREN AND
RESPECT FOR OPPOSITION. MY NAME
IS LENA Dð L S¼ P èC. ALL OF US
ARE NONE AND I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
MY NAME IS ANNA LISA ZAMORA WITH
YOUNG WOMEN'S FREEDOM CENTER AND
SISTER WARRIORS FREEDOM
COALITION IN OPPOSITION. MARGOT
GEORGE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION AND THE SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDERS
OFFICE IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
ROAR ON BEHALF OF INITIATE
JUSTICE AND OPPOSITION. JIM
LINDBERGH ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA OPPOSED. MORNING
ERIC HENDERSON, LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE WITH A èC LU,
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN OPPOSITION.
MORNING HENRY ORTIZ WITH LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN AND ALL OF US IN
SACRAMENTO CHAPTER AND
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. THANK YOU.
YOU LOST HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MR
LACKEY. OK, WELL. FIRST OF ALL,
I'D LIKE TO, UH THANK YOU FOR
TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS VERY BIG
THREAT TO OUR SOCIETY. RIGHT NOW
. THIS FENTANYL IS A VERY TRAGIC
POISON THAT'S BEING DISTRIBUTED
AND UM, I'D LIKE TO THIS THING
SURVIVES BE CONSIDERED A CO
AUTHOR. UM. THERE. THERE'S JUST
A REAL IMPORTANT DISTINCTION
THAT I THINK IS DESERVED. HERE.
UM DISTRIBUTORS. ARE MUCH
DIFFERENT. THAN USERS. AND THAT
IS THE FOCUS OF THIS BILL. EVEN
THOUGH THERE'S A REDUCTION.
THERE THERE'S A SENSE AND
THERE'S AN ALLEGATION THAT IT'S
FOCUSED ON USERS, AND I THINK
IT'S AN UNFAIR ALLEGATION.
BECAUSE THIS IS STILL AN
ENORMOUS MAN OF FENTANYL THAT
YOU'RE FOCUSING ON AND WHAT THIS
BILL DOES IS JUST GIVE OUR
JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND OPPORTUNITY
TO GATHER EVIDENCE. THAT'S
REALLY ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON
THE DISTRIBUTORS. AND NOT ON THE
USERS. AND SO I THINK IT'S A
VERY FAIR APPROACH. AND I. I
THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S AS
BALANCED AS YOU CAN BE WHEN
YOU'RE, UH, ADDRESSING THIS
VERY, VERY NASTY. TRAGIC.
PARKSON. IT'S NOT THERE. THERE
ARE SOME WHO, ACTUALLY, AS YOU
MENTIONED THE EXAMPLE THERE ARE
SOME PEOPLE THAT HAVE
UNFORTUNATE ADDICTIONS. AND
THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT PATH.
AND I THINK WE ALL AGREE ON
THAT. AND BUT THIS IS FOCUSED ON
THE DISTRIBUTORS. SHAME ON
PEOPLE WHO VALUE MONEY OVER
LIVES. IT'S A REAL REAL PROBLEM
THAT I THINK OUR OUR SOCIETY
DESERVES OUR ATTENTION ON AND
THIS IS A TOOL TO HELP THAT
HAPPEN. AND SO I'M GLAD TO
SUPPORT IT AND I WILL BE
SUPPORTING IT TODAY. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WILSON. THANK
YOU. I APPRECIATE, UH, THE
SENTIMENT RELATED TO THIS BILL
IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, GOING
AFTER THE DISTRIBUTORS VERSUS
THE USERS. THAT IS A REALLY GOOD
THING. UM WE HAVE A LOT OF LAWS
THAT ARE INCONSISTENT THAT WE
HAVE A LOT OF CLEANING UP TO DO
IN THE LEGISLATURE. UM, AND SO
OVERALL, UM. WITH THIS BILL. MY
CONCERN IS WE'RE BEING
INCONSISTENT. SO I HAVE A
QUESTION AND IT MIGHT BE FOR YOU
OR FOR THE EXPERT WITNESS. OR IT
COULD EVEN BE FOR OUR UM,
COMMITTEE STAFF. IS THAT, UM, AS
I RECOGNIZE THE LANGUAGE, IT
SAYS YOU'RE REDUCING IT BECAUSE
THE AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE REDUCING
IT TO IS STILL AN EXORBITANT
AMOUNT OF FENTANYL AND THAT THE
ONLY PERSON WHO WOULD POSSESS
THAT WOULD BE SOMEONE WHO IS A
DISTRIBUTOR. UM BUT FENTANYL IS
THE DRUG OF TODAY. THAT'S UM YOU
KNOW. US QUITE A BIT OF HEADACHE
, BUT THERE WILL BE A NEW DRUG
TOMORROW. AND SO WHEN WE'VE HAD
DRUGS IN THE PAST, YOU KNOW
COCAINE, CRACK HEROIN, ALL OF
THOSE THINGS, AND SO I WONDERED
WHAT THE STANDARD WAS IN TERMS
OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE
A TYPICAL PERSON WOULD USE OR
HOLD IF THEY WERE A USER IN
COMPARISON TO THE NUMBER OF
UNITS THAT SOMEONE HOLD UP. THEY
WERE DISTRIBUTING. ARE WE BEING
CONSISTENT IN LAW WITH
COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS DRUGS
THAT HAVE PLAGUED OUR
COMMUNITIES? YOU UNDERSTAND THE
QUESTION IT'S A RATIO QUESTION.
KIND OF UNDERSTAND IT. BUT I CAN
TELL YOU, UH, BASED ON THE
EXAMPLE I GAVE HERE OF JULIAN
CARVER HALL WAS A WAS A 17 YEAR
OLD, FULL BLOWN FENTANYL ADDICT.
A LOT OF MY EXPERTISE CAME FROM
HIM AND TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN
EXAMPLE HE WAS USING ABOUT A
GRAM A DAY. TO MAINTAIN FROM NOT
GETTING DRUG SICK AND BEFORE HE
CHANGED TO POWDERED FENTANYL. HE
WAS TAKING ONE OF THOSE M 30
PILLS. THOSE FENTANYL LACE PILLS
EVERY THREE HOURS. SO ABOUT
SEVEN OR EIGHT PILLS A DAY SO HE
WOULD NOT GET DRUG SICK WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT OUNCES. THESE ARE
THESE ARE FOLKS THAT ARE SELLING
OUNCES FOR PROFIT. UH AND NOT
ONLY THAT, BUT NOW WE'RE
TRANSITIONING TO, UH AND I AND I
ACTUALLY I'LL INTERRUPT YOU FOR
A SECOND. BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND
THAT AND I THINK THAT IT TERMS
OF OUR LAWS. WE DEFINITELY NEED
TO TARGET THE DISTRIBUTOR. AND
THIS IS JUST SAYING THAT, HEY,
THEY COULD DO A WIRETAP ON TO
FIND OUT THE NETWORK AND ALL
THAT. AND I AND I GET THAT, BUT
I GUESS I'M MINE IS CONSISTENCY
IN A SENSE THAT LET'S SAY, FOR
INSTANCE, I'LL JUST USE THIS AS
AN EXAMPLE, BECAUSE IT'S EASY
NUMBERS. ONE UNIT IS A PERSON
WHO'S USING IN 10 UNITS IS A
PERSON WHO'S DISTRIBUTING NÓ
MATTER THE DRUG, RIGHT? AND SO
THAT'S THE THRESHOLD FOR
WIRETAPPING. SO I'M WONDERING
WHAT IS WIRETAPPING FOR SOMEONE
WHO'S YOU WHO'S UM, DISTRIBUTING
COCAINE OR SOMEONE WHO'S
DISTRIBUTING, YOU KNOW, HEROIN
OR OTHER ILLICIT DRUGS THAT ARE
ILLEGAL ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS.
UM ARE WE CHANGING THE THRESHOLD
FOR FENTANYL DIFFERENT THAN A
THRESHOLD FOR ANOTHER DRUG?
YEAH. WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER
FOR YOU RIGHT THERE ON THAT
QUESTION. AND IS THIS A
DIFFERENT ISSUE THAT HE WAS, UM
ADDRESSING BUT RIGHT AND THAT
WAS DIFFERENT, AND THAT'S WHY I
WANTED TO STOP. I JUST I COULD
TELL YOU THAT OBVIOUSLY,
FENTANYL IS A LOT DIFFERENT THAN
COCAINE AND HEROIN AND
METHAMPHETAMINE. YOU KNOW,
BECAUSE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE
ONE THE ONLY END RESULTS WERE
FENTANYL'S DEATH. IF YOU DO NOT
DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. UNLIKE
COCAINE AND CRACK, AND OTHER
THINGS LIKE THAT THE ONLY END
RESULTS USUALLY IS DEATH WITH
FENTANYL. AND I JUST LIKE A
LITTLE COMMENT ON UH WHAT? WHAT?
WHAT YOU COULD COME BACK. I'M
NOT SURE IF SHE HAD A QUESTION
FOR YOU, MR. UM PATTERSON, MR.
ZER. SO WHAT ARE. WHAT ARE THE
PRECURSORS OF FENTANYL? AND SO
THE ONE THING THAT'S DIFFERENT
ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT THAT'S
DIFFERENT FROM UM. THE HIGHER
AMOUNTS FOR THE OTHER SUBSTANCES
. HEROIN COCAINE P èC P IS IT
INCLUDES THE PRECURSORS. SO WHAT
IS A PRECURSOR OF FENTANYL AND
ARE THERE PRECURSORS THAT COULD
BE USED FOR BENIGN? ACTIVITIES.
THE PRECURSOR FOR FENTANYLS,
TYPICALLY, UH, IN PP AND WE'VE
GOT THAT AS A REGULATED CHEMICAL
NOW LIKE PSEUDOEPHEDRINE. IT'S A
LIST ONE CHEMICAL. UH THE COOKS
OF ALL WENT TO A CHEMICAL CALLED
UH, FOUR PURO, AND THAT'S THE
NEW PRECURSOR. THE CHINESE HAVE
BEEN MASKING IT AND DOING THINGS
TO DISGUISE IT COMING IN. BUT
THOSE ARE THE DIFFERENT
PRECURSORS. THEY'RE DIFFERENT
THAN METHAMPHETAMINE, WHICH IS
TYPICALLY PSEUDOEPHEDRINE OR P
TWO P. THIS HAS A DIFFERENT SET
OF PRECURSORS THAT ARE
ASSOCIATED WITH THE
MANUFACTURING OF THIS DRUG. WHY
DO THE PRECURSORS NEED TO BE
INCLUDED IN THIS BILL WHEN YOU
DON'T HAVE PRECURSORS FOR HEROIN
, COCAINE, THE OTHER THE OTHER
CLASSES OF DRUGS THAT ARE IN THE
OTHER SECTION. FIT IS A
SYNTHETIC DRUG. WHEN YOU LOOK AT
THINGS LIKE COCAINE AND HEROIN.
THOSE ARE DERIVED FROM NATURAL
PRODUCTS, AND THERE'S AN
EXTRACTION PROCESS. THOSE
COMPOUNDS ALREADY EXIST WHERE
FENTANYL IS A PURE, PURELY
SYNTHETIC COMPOUND THAT IS
SYNTHESIZED IN A CLANDESTINE
LABORATORY. ARE THERE USES FOR
THE PRECURSORS THAT ARE BENIGN?
YES, THERE'S OTHER USES. UH, IT
DEPENDS ON THE REAGENTS THAT YOU
ATTACH TO THOSE PRECURSORS. WE
CAN MAKE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
COMPOUNDS THAT CAN BE USED IN
COMMERCIAL USE. IN THIS CASE,
THOUGH, THE CLANDESTINE
LABORATORY SOLE PURPOSE IS TO
MAKE MANUFACTURE FENTANYL. OK UM
OTHER QUESTION IS HOW MANY
LETHAL DOSES IF THIS WAS IN
PILLS WOULD YOU HAVE INCLUDED IN
A IN THE EIGHT OUNCE THRESHOLD?
HOW MANY IF YOU TOOK THE LETHAL
DOSE? HOW MANY PILLS WOULD BE OR
I ASSUME IT'S PILLS. WOULD BE.
WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? WE'RE
GONNA CALCULATE IT. BUT AGAIN,
WE DON'T KNOW THE AMOUNT OF
LETHAL DOSE IN EACH PILL BECAUSE
THESE ARE MADE IN CLANDESTINE
LABS. SO WE DID. WE DID A TEST
ON TWO M 30 PILLS, A FENTANYL
PILLS THEMSELVES, AND EACH PILL
WAS DIFFERENT AS FAR AS THEY
CAN, UH, HOW MUCH FENTANYL CAN
WAS CONTAINED IN EACH PILL, SO
IT'S ALMOST PLAYING LIKE RUSH
ROULETTE WITH THESE PILLS. WE
DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH FENTANYL IN
IT EACH ONE OF THESE M 30 PILLS
ARE NOT MADE. AND YOU KNOW,
THESE ARE NOT PILLS YOU GET AT
èC B S¼. THESE ARE ACTUALLY
MADE IN CLANDESTINE LABS IN
MEXICO. UH YOU KNOW, THEY THROW
FENTANYL AND OTHER PRECURSORS
AND THEY MIX IT UP AND THEY YOU
KNOW, THEY MAKE SO WE DON'T KNOW
HOW MUCH FENTANYL IS IN EACH
PILL. OK? BUT BUT BUT YOU KNOW
WHAT A LETHAL DOSE IS. AND IF
YOU HAD A LETHAL DOSE IN YOU GOT
TO THE LETHAL DOSE IN EVERY PILL
. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
IS THIS 100,000 DOSES? IS IT A
MILLION DOSES IN EIGHT OUNCES? I
MEAN, I'M TRYING TO GET TO THIS
WHOLE ISSUE OF DISTRIBUTORS
VERSUS STREET USE. IT LOOKS LIKE
HE HAS THE CALCULATION RIGHT
HERE. SO. AND THEN I. I GUESS
THE LAST THING I'LL SAY WHILE
HE'S DOING THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T
WANNA I KNOW OTHERS TRUCKS HAVE
TIME. IS. I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE
ISSUE OF PREVENTING THESE. YOU
KNOW THESE MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF
FENTANYL FROM GETTING OUT INTO
THE COMMUNITIES ON THE STREETS,
AND I DO LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE
BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN I WOULD
SOMETHING. WHICH IS A, UM WHICH
IS A PENALTY ENHANCEMENT RELATED
TO THAT A LOT OF THE BILLS THAT
I DIDN'T SUPPORT LAST YEAR, UH,
WERE ONES WHERE WE HAD SMALL
AMOUNTS, AND WE HAD LARGE
PENALTY ENHANCEMENTS. THIS THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK I DO
LOOK DIFFERENTLY AT BECAUSE IT'S
ABOUT GIVING LAW ENFORCEMENT THE
TOOLS TO DETECT THESE THINGS IN
THE COMMUNITIES AS THEY GETTING
OUT THERE. UM AND SO I DO LOOK
AT IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY. BUT I
AM VERY, VERY NERVOUS ABOUT THE
FACT THAT, UM, ABOUT THIS ISSUE
WITH RESPECT TO THE PRECURSORS.
I MEAN, IF WE'VE GOT PRE OUT
THERE AND WE'RE GIVING LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND ABILITY TO GO
OUT AND WIRETAP ANYONE BECAUSE
THEY MAY HAVE A COMPOUND THAT IS
, UH, BENIGN USE. THAT'S A HUGE
EXPANSION OF WIRETAPPING
AUTHORITY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE,
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A
RESPONSE TO THAT. I MEAN, THE
WHOLE POINT IS IDENTIFYING THE
FENTANYL. THE WHOLE POINT. UH,
SO I MEAN THAT THE NOTION THAT
THERE'S A PRECURSOR IN IT. I SO
WHAT? WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT THE
PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE, SELLING
WHAT. IS SUPPOSED TO BE
FENTANYL, BUT IT'S A MIXED DOWN
SOMETHING WELL AS IN WATER, A
PRECURSOR TO FENTANYL. DON'T YOU
NEED WATER WHEN YOU SILLY
QUESTION, NÓ. IT'S NOT A SILLY
QUESTION. I THINK IT'S AN ISSUE
OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE
BENIGN USES OF COMPOUNDS THAT
WERE ACTUALLY EXPANDING WIRETAP
AUTHORITY FOR WHEN IT DOES NOT
HAVE TO DO WITH FENTANYL. YOU
KNOW, WATER IS NOT A PRECURSOR.
BUT YOU HAVE THE ANSWER TO THE
QUESTION FOR HOW MANY PILLS YOU
CAN GET WITH EIGHT OUNCES OF THE
LETHAL DOSES FOR THE EIGHT OUNCE
WEIGHT WOULD BE ROUGHLY A LITTLE
OVER 100 AND 13,000 LETHAL
DOSES. 113,000 THREE 196 IF
WE'RE USING 2 MG, WHICH WOULD,
UH, BE LETHAL TO THE AVERAGE
PERSON. OVER 100,000 TO SAY OK,
THAT'S UH I MEAN, I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY, BUT
VERY NERVOUS ABOUT THE PRECURSOR
ISSUE AND HOPING THAT YOU'LL
WORK ON THAT BECAUSE IT IS
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU HAVE FOR
THE OTHER STATUTE. IT'S
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU HAVE FOR
COCAINE, HEROIN, AND, UH AND I'M
WONDERING WHY THAT NEEDS TO BE
IN THERE. SO, UM, I I'LL BE
LOOKING AT IT AGAIN WHEN IT
COMES, IF IT COMES BACK TO YOU
WILL SAVE THIS FOR YOUR CLOSE,
MR PETTER. MR. ALAS, THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR. SO I. I DO HAVE
NUMBERS TO BREAK DOWN HERE. IF
YOU WANT. I'LL GIVE YOU THE COPY
HERE. UH, EIGHT OUNCES EQUATES
TO 226,796 MG, WITH THE LETHAL
DOSAGE OF 2 MG. THIS REPRESENTS
113,398 DOSES. IF. ONE OUNCE OF
FENTANYL REPRESENTS
APPROXIMATELY 400 FENTANYL LACED
PILLS, EIGHT OUNCES REPRESENTS
APPROXIMATELY THREE 1002 100,
FENTANYL, LACE PILLS AND I. I
HAVE THAT HERE FOR YOU GUYS ALSO
, UH, AND TO MY COLLEAGUE OVER
THERE, I THINK TO HELP WITH THE
QUESTION YOU'RE HAVING ABOUT
THERE, UH, WRITTEN IN HERE, IT'S
ABOUT 10 GALLONS OR IF IT
EQUATES TO ABOUT THREE POUNDS OF
THE DRUG THAT WE MAY BE TALKING
ABOUT. I KNOW WE'RE TAKING IT
DOWN TO THE EIGHT OUNCES. UH I
THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM HERE
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE
HAD ON ANOTHER COMMITTEE THAT I
WAS ON EXPLAINING TO AN ELECTED
Dð A IS THAT WE NEED TO STOP
LOOKING AT FENTANYL AS THE
NORMAL DRUG. WE'RE TAKING THIS
TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL. NOW IS
WHAT THIS IS, UH, WE GOTTA LOOK
AT THE LETHAL DOSAGES THAT IT'S
DOING. WE CAN'T NÓ LONGER
COMPARE IT AS APPLES AND ORANGES
KIND OF THING. UH, COCAINE. UM,
HEROIN, METH. ALL THOSE THINGS I
AS AS A SUPERVISOR WITH MY
DEPUTIES WOULD ARRIVE TO A SCENE
OF AN OVERDOSE WITH WITH ANY OF
THOSE DRUGS. I DIDN'T HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT MY DEPUTY FALLING
OVER AND GETTING KILLED BY
COMING INTO CONTACT, BREATHING
IT TOUCHING IT, UH, THAT THAT'S
HOW IT HAPPENS, UH, WITH
FENTANYL, THAT THAT'S WHAT WE
HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT. NOW AND I,
I THINK, JUST BY UH, DROPPING IT
DOWN TO EIGHT OUNCES. I. I KNOW
YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ALL ABOUT
ONE OUNCE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT WITH THIS. THIS TAKES IT
UP TO EIGHT OUNCES. RIGHT THAT'S
THAT'S A HUGE NUMBER IN IN THE
FENTANYL WORLD. IF WE WANNA LOOK
AT IT THAT WAY AND I, I THINK
THAT'S THE BIGGEST HURDLE THAT
THAT US AS LEGISLATORS NEED TO,
UH, MAYBE GET A LITTLE MORE
EDUCATED ON AS WELL IS STOP
LOOKING AT IT AS THE DRUGS OF
THE PAST. UH I KNOW MR LACKY,
AND I HAD A GENTLEMAN HERE
TESTIFYING ABOUT FENTANYL WHO
WAS A PRIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER, AND WE KIND OF HAD TO
EDUCATE HIM ON ON WHAT DID AS
WELL. UM SOMETHING THAT I WANTED
TO ASK THE OPPOSITION. YOU WERE
TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE
COSTS. UH I DIDN'T QUITE
UNDERSTAND WHY, WHY? WHY YOU
MEANT THAT AS FAR AS INCREASING
COSTS IF WE WENT, UH TO THE
EIGHT OUNCES. HAVE THAT FULL
BREAKDOWN FOR YOU. UM, BUT I'D
HAVE TO GET YOU THE COST UP. SO
ARE WE TALKING COST OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT FOR SURVEILLANCE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COST OF
SURVEILLANCE CORRECT. BUT UM,
FOR ME TO GIVE YOU FURTHER COST
BREAKDOWNS. I'D HAVE TO SPEAK
WITH YOUR OFFICE AFTER THIS. OK,
GOT YOU. AND SO DID YOU HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD ON THAT?
UH, NÓ, SIR. OK, THANK YOU. OK,
THANK YOU. SOME REYES. THANK YOU
, MR CHAIR. I HAVE THE
DISADVANTAGE THAT I WAS NOT ON
THIS COMMITTEE I THIS IS MY
FIRST TIME ON THE COMMITTEE. I'M
AN ATTORNEY BY TRADE, BUT NOT A
CRIMINAL ATTORNEY. I APPRECIATE
THE, UH, COMMITTEE, UH,
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS AND WANTED
TO SHARE SOME OF WHAT WAS I AM
LOOKING AT, AS I'M TRYING TO
DECIDE. WE LOOK AT THE
STATISTICS ABOUT DEATHS. UM IN
2022. 21,000 EMERGENCY ROOM
VISITS FROM OPIOID OVERDOSE.
7000 THREE 100, OPIOID RELATED
OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OF THOSE
6400 WERE THE DEATHS RELATED TO
FENTANYL. INTERCEPTIONS THE
STATISTICS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN 2022
INTERCEPTIONS. UM 89 DRUG
RELATED ARRESTS AND TWO
CONVICTIONS. JUST INTERCEPTIONS
RELATED TO DRUGS THAT HAVE
ALREADY BEEN AUTHORIZED. IN 2018
, OUR COLLEAGUE, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
JOAN SAWYER. ADDED FENTANYL TO
THE LIST OF CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES FOR WHICH
INTERCEPTION OF WIRE OR
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS COULD
BE ORDERED. AND THEN LAST YEAR
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BAINES. UM
INTRODUCED LEGISLATION TO
ESTABLISH THE FENTANYL ADDICTION
AND OVERDOSE PREVENTION TASK
FORCE. AND I UNDERSTAND FROM THE
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS $6.7
MILLION IS PROVIDED ONGOING IN
THE BUDGET SPECIFICALLY FOR
THAT. AND THAT'S TO COLLECT AND
ORGANIZE DATA, UM, SPECIFICALLY
RELATED TO FENTANYL. FENTANYL
ABUSE IN CALIFORNIA ASSESS THE
RESOURCES. UM THE DRIVERS OF
LEGAL AND ILLICIT FENTANYL
ACTIVITY IN CALIFORNIA ANALYZE
EXISTING STATUTES FOR THE
ADEQUACY IN ADDRESSING THIS
ISSUE. IT'S CLEAR THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING AS MY COLLEAGUES. UH,
WE'VE COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE LAW
ENFORCEMENT BACKGROUND AND I
APPRECIATE THEIR EXPERIENCE.
THIS IS A DRUG. UNLIKE OTHERS. I
ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THAT. IN
THE ANALYSIS AND THE COMMENTS
FROM THE AUTHOR ABOUT THE REASON
FOR IT. HE TALKS ABOUT. IT'S TO
CATCH MAJOR DRUG DEALERS RATHER
THAN INDIVIDUAL USERS. AND I
APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT AND YOUR
SHARING THAT, UM, THE ONE PERSON
UM, WHO YOU KNEW WAS A USER AS
OPPOSED TO A DEALER AND THE WAY
YOU DEALT WITH THAT PARTICULAR
PERSON. III. I CAN CAN SAY THAT
OVER THE YEARS WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT THE WAR ON DRUGS. UM AS A
LATINA. I KNOW THAT AFRICAN
AMERICAN MEN, LATINO MEN ARE THE
ONES WHO ARE MOST TARGETED OVER
THE YEARS THAT CONCERNS ME. I. I
DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO THE
PERIOD OF MASS INCARCERATION,
ESPECIALLY WHEN WE FIND THAT
THAT OUR OUR PRISONS ARE GOING
TO BE FILLED WITH OUR AFRICAN
AMERICAN AND LATINO MEN MORE
THAN ANY OTHER. SO TRYING TO
FIND THE BALANCE. I THEN GO TO
THE QUESTION. AND THEN ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS WE
TALK ABOUT OUR CONSTITUTION.
FOURTH AMENDMENT, THE U S¼
CONSTITUTION. PROTECTS AGAINST
UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND
SEIZURES BY THE GOVERNMENT. BUT
WE ALSO BECAUSE OF IT, WE HAVE
THIS EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY. SO
TRYING TO BALANCE THAT, BUT TO
ALSO DEAL WITH SOMETHING THAT IS
THAT IS SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT FENTANYL, IT'S SOMETHING
MORE THAN WHAT WE'VE TALKED
ABOUT IN THE PAST. BUT REDUCING
IT FROM 10 GALLONS. TO 1.67
GALLONS TO REDUCE IT FROM THREE
POUNDS DOWN TO EIGHT OUNCES. I
AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND I
THINK I OWE TO WHAT MY COLLEAGUE
WAS TALKING ABOUT. WHAT WAS IT
THAT. THAT WAS CONSIDERED IN
USING THE 10 GALLONS WHEN THIS
WAS FIRST WRITTEN WHAT IS IT
THAT IS CAUSING US TO REDUCE IT
TO 1.67 GALLONS? AND WHAT IS IT
THAT WAS CONSIDERED TO MAKE IT
THREE POUNDS? AND WHAT IS IT?
THAT IS NOW? WHAT WHAT IS IT
THAT NOW TELLS US THAT EIGHT
OUNCES IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT. SO THOSE ARE MY
QUESTIONS. YOU WANT TO RESPOND
TO THAT? THIS IS A DIFFERENT
DRUG THAN THE DRUGS WE'VE BEEN
DEALING WITH IN THE PAST. IF YOU
LOOK AT METHAMPHETAMINE AND
COCAINE, YOUR AVERAGE DOSES WERE
ABOUT 10, MG. THIS IS 100 AND 25
MCG, WHICH WOULD BE THE AVERAGE
DOSE. UM SO BECAUSE OF THAT,
WE'VE BEEN TREATING THIS AS A
MORE DANGEROUS DRUG. AND IF YOU
ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S
125 MCG IT'S ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT
TO TWO GRAINS OF SALT, AND
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE SO MANY
DEATHS BECAUSE TRYING TO CUT THE
DRUG UP TO, UH, A TABLET OR A
CAPSULE THAT HAS JUST TWO GRAINS
OF SALT WORTH A DRUG IN THERE IS
VERY DIFFICULT TO DO FOR A
STREET. OR CHEMIST. AND MORE
THAN LIKELY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE
HOT BATCHES GO OUT, AND THAT'S
WHERE WE SEE THE DEATHS. COME
IN. WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT. THAT
SAME SMALL GRAY AREA WITH THE
OTHER DRUGS WE'VE HAD IN THE
PAST. AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT,
WE'VE HAD TO ADDRESS THIS AS A
MORE DANGEROUS THREAT TO THE
PUBLIC AND ONE OF THE REASONS WE
HAD TO GO AFTER THE
INVESTIGATIONS IN THIS CASE, A
LITTLE MORE SERIOUSLY IN
DROPPING THESE THESE THRESHOLD
LEVELS. IS THE INFORMATION THAT
YOU JUST SHARED IS THAT
SOMETHING THAT IS BEING PROVIDED
PROVIDED TO THIS TO THE FENTANYL
ADDICTION AND OVERDOSE
PREVENTION TASK FORCE. THIS IS
IMPORTANT INFORMATION, BECAUSE
IF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS
USING TAXPAYERS' MONEY TO THE
TUNE OF $6.7 MILLION TO TRY TO
ADDRESS SUCH A SERIOUS ISSUE, I
AM HOPING THAT THIS IS THE
INFORMATION THAT IS BEING
PROVIDED SO THAT THEY CAN THEN
MAKE AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION
TO THE LEGISLATURE ON WHAT WOULD
WHAT WE NEED TO DO WHAT NEXT
STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE TO ADDRESS
SUCH A SERIOUS ISSUE. IS THIS
THE INFORMATION THAT IS BEING
PROVIDED TO THE TASK FORCE?
WHERE I'M I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT.
III I BELIEVE I'M A MEMBER OF
THAT TASK FORCE. OK HAVE YOU
RECEIVED THE INFORMATION AS A
MEMBER OF THE TASK FORCE? BUT
THIS INFORMATION AS A MEMBER,
NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT AS A
MEMBER. OF THE TASK FORCE IS THE
TASK FORCE MEETING AND RECEIVING
THIS INFORMATION SO THAT THEY
CAN PROVIDE THE DATA THAT WOULD
BE NEEDED. STUDIED SO THAT WE
CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS ON
SOMETHING I. I HOPE SO. BUT I IT
IT'S BEEN FAIRLY SILENT. I. I
MEAN, I. I DON'T KNOW WHO RUNS
THE TASK FORCE, BUT MAYBE WE
NEED TO GET IT MORE ACTIVE, I
SUPPOSE. AY. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU. WE'RE GONNA GO TO SOMETHING
OVER 10. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM
MY LINES WERE MY QUESTIONING WAS
SORT OF IN SIMILAR LINES TO MY
COLLEAGUE, UH, FROM THE INLAND
EMPIRE. UM SO YOU EXPLAINED THE
MAIN REASON TO LOWER THE DOSAGE
IS JUST BECAUSE THE LETHAL
DOSAGES BETWEEN FENTANYL AND
SOME OF THE OTHER DRUGS IS JUST
IS DIFFERENT, RIGHT? AND SO THAT
THAT'S THE REASONING FOR
LOWERING THE DOSAGE. CAN YOU
HELP US UNDERSTAND THE DOSAGE
AMOUNT YOU CHOSE? UM IS THERE
SOMETHING YOU KNOW? AND YOUR
EXPERIENCE THAT YOU FIND FOLKS
CARRYING IS THIS? YOU KNOW WHERE
. WHERE WHERE DID YOU COME UP
WITH THE LINE? BECAUSE JUST
BASED ON I, I COULDN'T DETERMINE
BASED ON THE BILL ANALYSIS OR
ANYTHING. WHAT KIND OF DATA WAS
USED TO DETERMINE YOU KNOW THAT.
LOWERING THAT PARTICULAR
THRESHOLD TO THAT PARTICULAR
AMOUNT. WELL, WE WORKED WITH, UM
THE PROFESSIONALS. WE WORKED
WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT WE DUG
DOWN INTO WHAT IS THE IMPEDIMENT
TO GOING TO COURT AND UH,
GETTING IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL
QUESTIONS ARE ARE DEALT WITH
WITH RESPECT TO A WIRETAP. UM
AND AGAIN, I THINK THE SIMPLEST
WAY TO UNDERSTAND IT IS. THE
KILL CAPACITY OF FENTANYL. IS SO
SMALL. I MEAN SO LARGE, BUT IT
IT AS AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT
HERE. UM BUT I ALSO. WITH
RESPECT TO SOME OF THE OTHER
CONCERNS RAISED THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THAT IT IS
TESTED IN THE COURT WHEN THEY
WHEN THEY GO AND ASK. WE HAVE SO
MUCH OF THIS. UM AND WE BELIEVE
THERE IS A NETWORK HERE. UH, THE
JUDGE IS GOING TO MAKE THOSE
KINDS OF DE DETERMINATIONS. BUT
I ALSO WANT TO SUGGEST THAT OK?
THIS IS A TOOL, AND THEN THE
QUESTION BECOMES. HOW DOES LAW
ENFORCEMENT USE THE TOOL? AND I
KEEP COMING BACK TO THE FRESNO
POLICE DEPARTMENT. UM YOU SAW
HOW THE FRESNO POLICE DEPARTMENT
WORKED. WITH A USER. THIS WAS
NOT ABOUT GOING AND FINDING THAT
PERSON AND THROWING THEM IN JAIL
. IT WAS ABOUT HELPING THEM AND
USING THE FENTANYL OVERDOSE.
RESCUE TEAM. THAT'S THE FORT
TEAM. AND BY THE WAY LAST YEAR
OR YEAR BEFORE, UM I PASSED A
BILL THAT REPLICATES THAT FORT.
IN SIX OTHER AREAS IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. AND WE ASK FOR $3
MILLION FROM FOR THAT FOR SIX OF
THESE PILOT PROJECTS. UH AND WE
GOT SEVEN. MILLION DOLLARS. AND
SO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, CENTRAL
CALIFORNIA AND THEN DOWN IN AND,
UH, IN IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
AND F AND IN CENTRAL CALIFORNIA.
SO THE. WHEN YOU HAVE THIS
INTERAGENCY WORKING TOGETHER.
THAT'S WHAT THE FOUR TEAMS DO.
UM THEY HAVE HEALTH PROVIDERS
WHO SHOW UP AT THE HOSPITAL.
WHEN THERE'S THIS OVERDOSE, AND
WHEN THERE'S A DEATH TO KIND OF
TALK AND TRACK BACK TO THE USER.
IF MR PATTERSON I THINK WE'RE
GONNA GET BACK TO MR TING'S
QUESTION IF I COULD ASK YOUR, UH
, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
THAT'S OK, MR PATTERSON. UM YOU
KNOW IN IN YOUR EXPERIENCE CAN
CAN YOU HELP US? UNDERSTAND? UM
WHAT? WHAT YOU'VE EXPERIENCED IN
TERMS OF WHAT? YOU KNOW WHAT
PEOPLE CARRY WHAT YOU FOUND. WHY
I SO I. I UNDERSTAND THE
LOWERING OF THE THRESHOLD. UH,
UNFORTUNATELY, FENTANYL HAS A
HUGE ISSUE IN IN MY CITY. UH AND
SO I'M I'M AWARE OF THE
DIFFERENCES IN THE LEGAL DOSAGE.
SO I. I REALLY APPRECIATE HAVING
THE CHEMIST KIND OF TALK THROUGH
THAT AND SORT OF HELPING US. UH,
GUIDE THROUGH THAT. I DON'T I
DON'T TAKE THIS LIGHTLY IN TERMS
OF, UM, DURING THE SEARCH AND
SEIZURE, BUT I JUST WANNA
UNDERSTAND SO THAT WE'RE NOT I
PUT SOME SORT OF ARBITRARY
NUMBER, BUT THAT THIS IS BASED
ON PEOPLE'S YOU KNOW, OFFICERS
EXPERIENCE WHAT THEY'RE SEEING
IN THE FIELD BASED ON SOME DATA,
NOT JUST BASED ON, YOU KNOW, 11
SITUATION OR NOT. SO IS THERE,
MR TING? UM, JUST IF YOU'RE IF
YOU'RE SELLING OUNCE QUANTITIES
OF FENTANYL IN MY EYES, AND IN
MY EXPERIENCE OVER 27 YEARS, YOU
ARE A MAJOR DRUG DEALER. AND
ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE
IN POSSESSION OF EIGHT OUNCES OF
MORE OF FENTANYL, UM YOU KNOW,
THIS IS NOT THE NORMAL USER DOSE
WITH WHAT I WAS MENTIONING.
EARLIER GRAMS, UH, THESE ARE
OUNCES, AND THESE ARE MAJOR AND
DRUG DISTRIBUTORS AND A LOT OF
TIMES THEY BREAK IT DOWN INTO
OUNCES BECAUSE THEY MAKE MORE
MONEY OFF OF, UH UH, FENTANYL.
IF YOU SELL IT BY OUNCES, AND
THEN YOU INCLUDE, YOU KNOW,
THESE OUNCES BEING PUT INTO
OTHER NARCOTICS LIKE COCAINE,
METHAMPHETAMINE, HEROIN. UH,
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE STARTING TO
SEE NOW AND IF YOU'RE LIKE, SO
YOU'RE TALKING THAT LET'S SAY
YOU'RE THE COMMON STREET
SALESPERSON, RIGHT SE. SELLING
WHAT? WHAT? WHAT AMOUNT ARE THEY
NORMALLY CARRY? IF THEY'RE JUST
THE PERSON ON THE STREET SELLING
IT? APPROXIMATELY JUST WELL,
UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT JUST FIT
BY ITSELF. SO THEY'RE MIXING IT
WITH POUNDS THAT GIVE THE
FENTANYL WHAT WE CALL A
SYNERGISTIC A BOOST XYLAZINE
KETAMINE. AND SO WHAT YOU MIGHT
SEE IS MAYBE 1 MG IN A TABLET,
BUT WHEN IT'S MIXED WITH THE
XYLAZINE, IT BECOMES DEADLY.
RIGHT. SO 'RE YOU'RE
MILLIGRAMS, RIGHT? AND HOW MANY
MILLIGRAMS WOULD MAKEUP EVEN ONE
OUNCE? I'M LOOKING AT MY I DON'T
HAVE MY CALCULATOR. I MEAN, JUST
I MEAN, ROUGHLY. I'M NOT ASKING
MILLIGRAMS, APPROXIMATELY 14,250
LETHAL DOSES. SO. BUT BUT I'M
SAYING LIKE, LIKE A NUMBER OF A
FEW MILLIGRAMS IT IT WOULD TAKE
A LOT OF MILLIGRAMS TO MAKE UP
EVEN ONE OUNCE AND YOU'RE
TALKING EIGHT OUNCES CORRECT. SO
IN YOUR IN YOUR EXPERIENCE WHAT
YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT YOU KNOW,
SOMEONE WITH EIGHT OUNCES IS NOT
SOMEONE LIKE NÓ NÓ. ONE ON THE
STREET IS CARRYING EIGHT OUNCES.
THIS IS SOMEONE WHO'S WHEREVER
THEIR OFFICE THEIR HOUSE. THEY
ARE USING THAT EIGHT OUNCES AND
THEY ARE THEY GOT, THEY'RE
THEY'RE GONNA GIVE IT TO A WHOLE
BUNCH OF OTHER PEOPLE TO SELL.
THIS IS NOT THIS IS NOT YOU'RE
NOT GONNA PULL SOMEONE OVER ON
THE STREET AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS
THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN
POSSESSION OF EIGHT OUNCES.
CORRECT. SO FOR ME, I THINK THAT
THIS IS II. I SHARE MY COLLEAGUE
FROM SASSOON CONCERNS AS WELL IN
TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, LEGISLATING
THE. THE DRUG OF THE DAY,
HOWEVER, HAVEN'T SEEN WHAT THIS
IS DOING IN SAN FRANCISCO. I DO
FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO, UM, DO
EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO, YOU
KNOW, GIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT THE
TOOLS TO UH, TO GO AFTER THIS.
AND I. I ALSO AGREE WITH THE
OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, PART OF
THE PART OF THE AND THIS IS WHAT
WE DO IN OUR CITY, TOO. IT'S NOT
EITHER OR IT'S BOTH. YOU HAVE TO
DO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PART AND
YOU HAVE TO DO THE PUBLIC HEALTH
PART AND IT DOESN'T WORK UNLESS
YOU DO BOTH. SO AGAIN. UM YOU
KNOW, I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY. I WOULD REALLY
ENCOURAGE YOU TO MAKE SURE AS
YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, UM,
PARTICULAR AMOUNT THAT YOU HAVE
SOME SOME DATA TO KIND OF BACK
UP. WHY THAT PARTICULAR LINE
BECAUSE JUST ON FIRST READING,
IT LOOKED A LITTLE BIT ARBITRARY
, SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL AND FOR THE FUTURE
COMMITTEES I DON'T. YEAH, I
AGAIN. UH I DON'T HAVE THAT
DETAIL IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.
BUT IT, MR PATTERSON, WE'LL
WE'LL GET THOSE DETAILS LATER.
I'M GONNA MOVE TO MISS WILSON
RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING ME FOR A FOLLOW UP. I
APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE THAT WAS
HAPPENING FROM MY COLLEAGUE FROM
IN LUMBAR AND FROM SAN
FRANCISCO. THAT HELPED FLESH IT
OUT A LITTLE BIT FOR ME, BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT I WAS CONCERNED
ABOUT THE ARBITRARY MOUNTAIN.
YOU SAID SOMETHING. I THINK IN
PARTICULAR THAT I WANTED TO JUST
MAKE SURE I HEARD IT CORRECTLY
AND THEN FIND OUT THE
IMPLICATIONS OF THAT. DID YOU
SAY THAT FOR COCAINE? IT WAS 10
MG IS A TYPICAL DOSE. IT DEPENDS
ON THE USER AND THEIR TOLERANCE.
BUT IF YOU LOOK ON THE AVERAGE,
UH AND DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH
PURITY IS IN THE DRUG BUT 10 MG
FOR METHAMPHETAMINE FOR COCAINE
FOR THE TYPICAL STIMULANTS IS
THAT WHAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT WE
SEE IS WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT
TO THE WHAT? THE TWO MILLI WHAT
WAS IT? 10 MG IS THE AVERAGE 10
FOR THAT, BUT WHAT WAS IT FOR
FENTANYL? I TOOK 100 AND 25 MCG
MICROGRAMS. OK EQUIVALENT TO,
UH, IS A AAA DOSE THAT'S
EQUIVALENT TO TWO GRAIN OF SALT.
YEAH 2 G OF SALT BUT EQUIVALENT
TO A 10 MG DOSE. FOR A DIFFERENT
TYPE OF DRUG FOR ANOTHER USER.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN CORRECT
AND THAT'S AN AVERAGE SO AS YOU
BUILD UP TOLERANCE, YOU COULD
HAVE OBVIOUSLY MORE. I'M JUST
TRYING TO GET THE RELATIVE OF
WHY IT WOULDN'T ALL BE 10
GALLONS. AND SO THAT WAS WHAT I
WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHAT
HOW ARE WE? HOW DO WE BE
CONSISTENT IN THE LAW, AND IT
SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MORE ABOUT
CONSISTENCY OF IMPACT OR
CONSISTENCY OF LIKE THIS. THE
SIZE IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR,
UM, NOT THE SIZE OF IT. IT'S
SMALLER, BUT I MEAN THE AMOUNT
THAT SOMEONE WOULD USE IN A DOSE
AND MAKING SURE THE THRESHOLD IS
UM, MATCHES THAT IS THAT THE
INTENT I LOOK TO THE AUTHOR FOR
THAT ONE. THE QUESTION IS YOUR
INTENT IS TO MATCH IT'S SIMILAR
THRESHOLDS BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A
SMALLER. IT'S SUCH A SMALL
AMOUNT THAT'S USED IN COMPARISON
TO THE OTHER DRUGS WHERE IT WAS
10 MG. IS EQUIVALENT DOSE WOULD
YOU SAY? I THINK THE, UH
EQUATION HERE THAT WE'RE TRYING
TO GET TO, UM IS TO RECOGNIZE
THE SMALL AMOUNT. THAT THAT IS
AS DEADLY AS THE LARGE AMOUNT OF
OTHER DRUGS, SO WE ARE TRYING TO
EQUALIZE. UM SO THAT, UH, MR
PATTERSON, IF QUESTION DIDN'T
GET ANSWERED, AND I COULD YOU
WANNA GO AND JUST DO YOUR
CLOTHES? YEAH. UM, SURE. UM. AS
I WAS SAYING EARLIER ABOUT, UH,
THE FOR THE FOR TEAM. UM I THINK
THE PRESUMPTION THAT LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS GOING TO
RECKLESSLY USE THIS OR IN OR IN
SOME WAY. I CAN ONLY TELL YOU
ABOUT FRESNO, CALIFORNIA. OUR
POLICE WANT TO INTERVENE AND GET
PEOPLE HELP. AND THAT'S THE
PRACTICE THAT YOU HEARD HERE.
AND I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT
POLICE PRACTICES ARE EVOLVING
AND IMPROVING OVER TIME. I
REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THAT THEY
UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THEY HAVE
THE FORCE OF LAW. TO INTERVENE.
AND TO GET PEOPLE HELP. AND
WE'RE HOPING THAT THIS TOOL WILL
ALLOW JURISDICTIONS. TO SORT OF
BREAK APART THIS UH, YOU KNOW
THIS INVISIBLE NETWORK. THAT IS
OUT THERE. UM AND THAT, I THINK
CAN BE VERY HELPFUL IN
IDENTIFYING BREAKING UP A AND UM
. THEY'RE GOING. GO GOING AFTER
THOSE THAT ARE BEHIND THE EIGHT
OUNCES. MAYBE I AND I THERE LIKE
OUR EXPERT SAID. THEY'RE SMART
IN PACKAGING. THEY THEY HAVE A
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM. IT AND. IT
HAS BEEN HELPFUL FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO BE ABLE TO GET
THOSE WIRE TAPS FOR THE THESE
OTHER KINDS OF DRUGS. UM. AND I
THINK THAT FENTANYL HAS TO BE
FIT INTO THAT IN A WAY. THAT UM,
YOUR UNDERSTANDING HOW SERIOUS
FENTANYL IS AND HOW IT KILLS IN
SIZE. UH, I MEAN, CONSIDER THE
ALTERNATIVE. I IF YOU CAN ONLY
WHAT IS IT A HOW MANY POUNDS AND
GALLONS AND ALL OF THAT. UM THE
UH, THAT'S NOT COMPARABLE, UM.
AND THERE HAS BEEN. I THINK SOME
DIFFICULTY GETTING UH, COURTS TO
WIRETAP BECAUSE IT'S UNUSUAL TO
FIND THAT LARGE AMOUNT. UM. BUT
THE LARGE AMOUNT IS REAL. IT'S
IN OUR COMMUNITIES. THEY JUST
GOT IT SLICED UP INTO THESE.
EIGHT OUNCES AND A DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM THAT'S UNDER THE RADAR.
UM WITH THAT, II, I ASK. I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. I THINK THIS
IS A BALANCED APPROACH TO IT,
AND I THINK, UH, THAT THEY THAT
THIS IS A TOOL THAT I THINK WILL
BE USED, UH, JUDICIOUSLY, IT
WILL HAVE TO TEST THE IN THE
COURTS WITH RESPECT TO A JUDGE'S
APPROVAL, AND I THINK THAT MOST
LAW ENFORCEMENT. IS INTERESTED
IN STOPPING THE TRADE BUT ALSO
HELPING THE ADDICTS. I REALLY
BELIEVE THAT AND I THINK MR
LACKEY AND MR LANDIS I YOUR
EXAMPLES OF THAT? WELL, THANK
YOU. AND WITH THAT, I'M I'M I'M
ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT, AND I
APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION. IT'S
BEEN VERY HELPFUL. THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR THE, UH,
DIALOGUE THAT WE HAD HERE ON THE
COMMITTEE TODAY. OBVIOUSLY WE,
UH, DEFINITELY MAKE SURE THAT
EDUCATION IS SOMETHING ALSO THAT
LEGISLATION ALSO RECEIVES AS
MUCH AS EVERYONE ELSE. I. I
STILL NEED A FORMAL MOTION ON
THIS BILL. LUCKY, MR TING. AND
UH, THE CHAIR'S RECOMMENDATION
CHAIR MCCARTY'S RECOMMENDATIONS
AN EYE ON THIS ONE. ON MAY 18 Ó
FOUR BY SOME MEMBER JIM
PATTERSON. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. MCCARTY ALANIS ALANIS
. I LACKY LACKEY I WIN WHEN I
REYES IT'S NOT VOTING TING. I
WILSON. WILSON. I ZER. ZIPPER
EYE. THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MEMBERS
APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION. UH
AND YOU DO HAVE MY COMMITMENT TO
GET THE DETAIL BEHIND THE CHOICE
MAKING OF THE NUMBERS YOU HAVE
IN FRONT. THERE WILL BE
JUSTIFICATION AND RATIONALE FOR
THAT. I JUST DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT
HERE. BUT THANK YOU, MR
PATTERSON. I'M GONNA HAVE YOU
TALK TO THEM LATER. I'M GONNA
MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. UH, MR
TELL ME MEMBER BRIAN, ARE YOU
READY TO PRESENT? VICE CHAIR.
AND WE HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER OF
BRIAN HERE ON A B 1810. FLOOR IS
YOURS. SECOND WOW. THANK YOU
CHAIR. UH, ALANIS. UH IT'S GOOD
TO BE. IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK WITH
YOU ALL. UH GOOD MORNING, MISS J
AND COLLEAGUES. TODAY I RISE TO
PRESENT A B 1810 A BILL THAT
WILL BRING MINSTREL EQUITY TO
CALIFORNIA STATE PRISONS, LOCAL
JAILS AND JUVENILE FACILITIES.
PERIOD PRODUCTS SUCH AS
MENSTRUAL PADS AND TAMPONS ARE
BASIC NECESSITIES. STATE LAW
REQUIRES CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
TO SUPPLY THESE PRODUCTS TO
INCARCERATE SOME WOMEN AT NÓ
COST UPON REQUEST. HOWEVER A
2020 THREE REPORT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY ATTORNEY
GENERAL REVEALED THAT NEARLY
HALF OF OUR STATE'S èC Dð èC R
FACILITIES ARE NON COMPLIANT.
WITH STATE MANDATES REGARDING
MENSTRUAL PRODUCT DISTRIBUTION.
EVEN WORSE OF THE DOCUMENTED
CASES OF èC Dð èC R OFFICERS
WITHHOLDING PERIOD PRODUCTS AS A
FORM OF RETALIATION AGAINST
INCARCERATED WOMEN WHO HAVE
FILED FORMAL COMPLAINTS AGAINST
THEM. NATIONWIDE THERE HAVE BEEN
NUMEROUS REPORTS OF CORRECTIONAL
OFFICERS USING ACCESS TO
MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS TO COERCE
INCARCERATED WOMEN INTO SEXUAL
FAVORS. THOSE GROSS ABUSE OF
POWER HAVE CREATED CONDITIONS
WHERE INCARCERATED PEOPLE DO NOT
FEEL COMFORTABLE ASKING FOR THE
MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS THEY NEED AND
DESERVE, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE FREE
OF COST, DUE TO THE FEAR THAT IT
WILL LEAD TO THAT KIND OF
COERCION, HUMILIATION OR
HARASSMENT. THESE WOMEN WOULD
RATHER MAKE SHIFT PADS AND
TAMPONS OUT OF TOILET PAPER AND
BED SHEETS RATHER THAN PUT
THEMSELVES IN AN UNSAFE AND
UNDIGNIFIED. OF ASKING THEIR
CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS, OFTEN MEN
FOR A MENSTRUAL PRODUCT. IN SOME
CASES, THEY'RE WALKING AROUND IN
BLOODSTAINED CLOTHES BECAUSE
THEY'VE RUN OUT OF THEIR SUPPLY
OF MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS AND ARE
ONLY ALLOWED TO DO LAUNDRY ON
CERTAIN DAYS. THIS LACK OF
TIMELY AND ADEQUATE ACCESS TO
PADS AND TAMPONS HAS LED TO
SEVERE HEALTH COMPLICATIONS SUCH
AS URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS,
TOXIC SHOCK SYNDROME, AND, IN
SOME CASES, HYSTERECTOMIES FOR
INCARCERATED PEOPLE. SO WHILE
OUR STATE CURRENTLY GUARANTEES
FREE MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS, THEY
OFTEN COME AT A PRICE OF
HUMILIATION. AND ABUSE FOR
INCARCERATED WOMEN. MAYBE 1810
WILL BRING OUR STATE CLOSER TO
THE MINSTREL HEALTH EQUITY
NEEDED BY REQUIRING THAT
MINSTREL PRODUCTS ARE FREE AND
READILY AVAILABLE FOR ALL
INCARCERATED WOMEN. WE WILL ALSO
BRING OUR STATE CLOSER TO PARITY
WITH SEVERAL OTHER STATES THAT
HAVE BEEN LEADING IN THIS
CATEGORY SUCH AS LOUISIANA.
TENNESSEE. AND FLORIDA. ALL OF
WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE THEIR
INCARCERATED WOMEN TO REQUEST
THESE BASIC NECESSITIES FROM
THEIR CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS.
TODAY I HAVE WITH ME ALYSSA
MOORE FROM LEGAL SERVICES FROM
PRISONERS AND CHILDREN TO
PROVIDE TESTIMONY. THANK YOU.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. HØI MY
NAME IS ALYSSA MOORE TODAY I'M
THE REENTRY COORDINATOR FOR ALL
OF US OR NONE THAT SAID, I
SERVED A TOTAL OF 25 YEARS IN
BOTH LOCAL AND STATE FACILITIES,
BOTH AS A JUVENILE AND ADULT. I
ENTERED THIS CALIFORNIA STATE
PRISON SYSTEM AT 17 YEARS OLD,
STILL VERY MUCH A CHILD. I WILL
START BY EXPLAINING THE DYNAMIC
BETWEEN STAFF AND INCARCERATED
PEOPLES AS YOU ARE FULLY AWARE
OF THE RAMPANT SEXUAL ASSAULTS
AND HARASSMENT IN CALIFORNIA
WOMEN'S FACILITIES AT PRESENT,
IT WON'T BE TOO MUCH OF A
STRETCH. TO ENVISION IF YOU WILL
, WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SHARE.
IMAGINE BEING SEXUALIZED BY THE
MAJORITY OF STAFF. YOU COME IN
CONTACT WITH IMAGINE DAILY
UNWARRANTED CATCALLS. COMMENTS
ON YOUR BODY YOUR LOOKS,
ETCETERA, AND LET THAT BE THE
LEAST OF THE WORST THAT YOU
IMAGINE WITH THAT BEING SAID,
I'M FULLY I'M I'M ALREADY
FEARFUL OF MOST STAFF, THE
MAJORITY OF WHICH ARE MALE. I
PERSONALLY NOT ONLY WITNESS THE
HARASSMENT, ASSAULT AND RAPES OF
MY PEERS, BUT ALSO WAS SUBJECT
TO SEVERAL ASSAULTS DURING MY
INCARCERATION, MOST OF WHICH
WERE REPORTED BY OTHER
INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS TO
STAFF. THESE MATTERS WERE
INVESTIGATED. AND NEVER WAS
ANYONE FIRED FOR IT. IN MY CASE,
I WAS NEVER PROTECTED. I OFTEN
FELT HUMILIATED AND ASHAMED AND
EMBARRASSED WHEN I WOULD HAVE
TO. ON OCCASION, ASK THE SAME
STAFF THAT HAD VICTIMIZED ME FOR
SANITARY SUPPLIES. I'D LIKE IT
TO BE KNOWN THAT IF YOU HEAVY
FLOW OR A MEDICAL CONDITION. THE
AMOUNT THAT IS ISSUED IS NOT TO
EACH INDIVIDUAL DOES NOT
SUFFICE, AND IT SHOULD BE NOTED.
IF MY REASON FOR NEEDING MORE
MEDICAL, UM, NEEDING MORE
SUPPLIES IS A MEDICAL CONDITION.
IT'S ALSO A HIPAA VIOLATION FOR
ME TO HAVE TO DISCLOSE THIS TO A
èC E Ó TO RECEIVE SUPPLIES,
BUT IT'S STILL AN ACTIVE
PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA TODAY. WHEN I WAS IN
THE GENERAL POPULATION, I WOULD
TRADE AND BARTER FOR MY PEERS
FOR EXTRA PADS AND TAMPONS. SO
MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, I WOULD USE
THIS METHOD TO ACQUIRE WHAT I
NEED RATHER THAN DEAL WITH THE
HUMILIATION OF ASKING AN OFFICER
THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY ASSAULTED ME
BECAUSE I NEVER KNEW WHEN THEY
WOULD USE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO
DENY ME OR HEAL, HUMILIATE ME
FOR WHAT I NEEDED. ALSO THIS
BECAME A MUCH LARGER ISSUE WHEN
I WAS IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT IN
WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE SHOE OR ADS
DUE TO THE FACT I WAS TOTALLY AT
THE MERCY OF THE CORRECTION
OFFICERS AND IT IS TOTALLY
ACCEPTABLE. UM AND THERE ARE NÓ
FORMS OF PROTECTIONS FOR ANY
INCAR INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
AND NÓ TIMELINE IN WHICH
SANITARY SUPPLIES MUST BE ISSUED
. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE LOGS
AND CHARTS TO KEEP TRACK OF THIS
OFFICERS EASILY AND OFTEN
FALSIFY THESE DOCUMENTS. èC Dð
èC R IS FULLY AWARE THAT THEY
DO NOT CANNOT OR WILL NOT ISSUE
ADEQUATE SANITARY SUPPLIES IN A
TIMELY MANNER. AND THIS IS WHY
THERE ARE TAMPONS, SANITARY PADS
AND EVEN TOILET PAPER AVAILABLE
FOR PURCHASE ON CANTEEN AND IN
ALL VENDOR CARE PACKAGES. SO
WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT EVEN
THOUGH WE ARE CONSIDERED STATE
PROPERTY, THE EXISTING
PROTECTION FOR OUR MEN SUPPLIES
THAT IS BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL
IS FALLING SHORT OF THE MARK AND
CAUSING MORE HARM IT HAS CAUGHT
AS IT IS COMMON FOR INCARCERATED
INDIVIDUALS IN THEIR TO PAY FOR
THESE ITEMS THEMSELVES RATHER
THAN BE HUMILIATED. THEREFORE I
STRONGLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF
A B 1810 SO THAT INCARCERATED
WOMEN WILL NOT HAVE TO CONTINUE
WITH THIS HUMILIATING, HARMFUL
TREATMENT FROM èC Dð èC R.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OH, GO
AHEAD. DANICA ROAR ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE AND STRONG
SUPPORT. MARGOT GEORGE ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION AND THE
SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDERS
OFFICE AND STRONG SUPPORT.
WHITNEY FRANCIS FROM THE WESTERN
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY IN
SUPPORT. KENNETH HARTMAN FROM
THE TRANSFORMATIVE IN PRISON
WORK GROUP AND STRONG SUPPORT.
JIM LINDBERGH, ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA IN SPORT. GILBERT
ANTHONY ML, S¼, P, èC AND ALL
OF US NONE AND FULLY IN SUPPORT.
AND LISA ZAMORA WITH YOUNG
WOMAN'S FREEDOM CENTER AND COR
FREEDOM COALITION AND STRONG
SUPPORT. LENA DÂN S¼ P èC. ALL
OF US ARE NONE IN SUPPORT. ANNIE
THOMAS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE OF CHILD AND
FAMILY SERVICES IN STRONG
SUPPORT. LITTLE ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND STRONG SUPPORT.
ROBERT BOWDEN ON BEHALF OF LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN AND STRONG SUPPORT.
LAWRENCE COX LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONS WITH CHILDREN. ALL OF US
ARE NÓ STRONG SUPPORT. TO TRAN
WITH THE ELLA BAKER CENTER FOR
HUMAN RIGHTS, STRONG SUPPORT.
IGNACIO HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SUPPORT
ERIC ANDERSON ON BEHALF OF A èC
LU, CALIFORNIA ACTION AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE
FOR SUPPORT ALL OPPOSITION.
ANYBODY IN THE ROOM FOR
OPPOSITION? PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
GO AHEAD. COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS SOPHIA LAURIE AND I'M
WITH CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL.
A B 1810 SEEMS TO BE A POSITIVE
BILL. AT FIRST GLANCE, HOW CAN
ANYONE BE AGAINST MAKING SURE
INCARCERATED WOMEN HAVE BETTER
ACCESS TO MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS?
YET THIS BILL REPLACES ALL
MENTIONS OF FEMALES AND WOMEN
WITH THE WORD PERSON, ULTIMATELY
ERASING WOMEN AND PUSHING AN
IDEOLOGY THAT MEN CAN MENSTRUATE
OR MEN CAN GIVE BIRTH. A B 1810
DISREGARDS THE INHERENT DIGNITY
OF WOMEN BY ATTEMPTING TO
OBSCURE BIOLOGICAL DISTINCTIONS
BETWEEN MALES AND FEMALES. THIS
BILL ALLOWS FOR BIRTH CONTROL
AND MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS TO BE
AVAILABLE TO ALL PERSONS. SO
LET'S WALK THROUGH BASIC BIOLOGY
. DOES A MAN HAVE A UTERUS? NÓ
DOES A MAN HAVE A CERVIX? NÓ
DOES A MAN HAVE A VAGINA? NÓ
THUS, MALES DO NOT HAVE A
MENSTRUAL CYCLE AND MALES CANNOT
GET PREGNANT. LET ME REPEAT THAT
MALES DO NOT AND CANNOT HAVE A
MENSTRUAL CYCLE OR GET PREGNANT.
IT IS TRULY INCOMPREHENSIBLE
THAT TODAY WE HAVE ELECTED
OFFICIALS WHO LACK AN
UNDERSTANDING OF BASIC
REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY THAT MEN
CANNOT BECOME PREGNANT OR
MENSTRUATE. ALSO WHY WOULD WOMEN
NEED ACCESS TO BIRTH CONTROL IN
A FEMALE ONLY PRISON? WE KNOW
THROUGH BASIC COMMON SENSE
PROVEN BY SCIENCE. IT TAKES ONE
MAN AND ONE WOMAN FOR A WOMAN TO
BECOME PREGNANT. THIS
ACKNOWLEDGES THE UGLY REALITY
THAT DUE TO SENATOR WIENER'S S¼
B 132 FROM 2020 INCARCERATED MEN
ARE ALLOWED INTO WOMEN'S PRISONS
AND WOMEN ARE BEING RAPED AND
FORCED INTO CELLS WITH MEN 33.8%
OF WHICH ARE REGISTERED SEX
OFFENDERS. I URGE YOU ALL TO
VOTE NÓ ON A B 1810 UNLESS THIS
BILL IS AMENDED TO ONLY PROVIDE
BIRTH CONTROL AND MENSTRUAL
PRODUCTS TO ACTUAL WOMEN TO VOTE
YES, OR ABSTAIN FURTHER ADVANCES
THE ERASURE OF WOMEN AND IGNORES
BASIC BIOLOGY. OH AND IF MEN
MENSTRUATE, I'M INTRIGUED. WHERE
DOES THE TAMPON GO? I AM ERIN.
FRIDAY A DEMOCRAT AND BEHIND
PROTECT KIDS OF CALIFORNIA
BALLOT INITIATIVE. VOLTAIRE
STATED. THOSE WHO CAN MAKE YOU
BELIEVE ABSURDITIES CAN MAKE YOU
COMMIT ATROCITIES. LET'S START
WITH THE ABSURDITIES. A PERSON
WHO MENSTRUATES IS A FEMALE,
REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH
TESTOSTERONE IS PUMPED IN HER OR
WHAT SHE IDENTIFIES AS THIS IS
AN IMAGE OF A FEMALE
REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM. SCIENCE
SHOULD BE THE NORTH STAR FOR
LAWMAKERS, AND CERTAINLY Ó BGY
N S¼ LIKE DR WEBER. THIS IS ANY
PROPS. WE'RE NOT GONNA DO ANY
PROPS. YOU COULD JUST DO WHAT
YOU HAVE TO SAY. THERE ARE MEN
DO NOT HAVE UTERUSES A MAN WHO
HAS HIS PENIS SPLICED OPEN AND
TURNED INSIDE OUT, DOES NOT
CREATE A FUNCTIONING VAGINA, AND
HE CERTAINLY DOES NOT HAVE A
PERIOD. ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THAT
A WOMAN CAN BECOME A MAN OR VICE
VERSA BELIEVES IN ABSURDITIES
NOW FOR THE ATROCITIES IN 2020,
THE STATE DECIDED IT WOULD BE A
GOOD IDEA TO HOUSE MALE INMATES
WHO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE
FEMALE, INCLUDING BABY KILLERS,
PEDOPHILES AND RAPISTS WITH
ACTUAL FEMALES. WHAT COULD
POSSIBLY GO WRONG? THIS BILL
MAKES IT PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT
YOU KNOW WOMEN WILL BE RAPED AND
IMPREGNATED THE NEED FOR
CONTRACEPTION ONLY EXISTS
BECAUSE THERE ARE MEN
MASQUERADING AS WOMEN WHO PLACE
THEIR PENISES IN FEMALE VAGINAS.
YES THE RAPES ARE OCCURRING.
LOOK AT THE CASE OF CHANDLER
VERSUS èC Dð èC R. INSTEAD OF
TRYING TO PREVENT SEXUAL
ENCOUNTERS IN JUVENILE SETTINGS.
YOUR RESPONSE IS TO SUPPLY
CONDOMS, IGNORING THE ROOT
PROBLEM. DANA RIVERS IS A MAN
WHO DESPERATELY WANTED TO BECOME
A WOMAN, BUT COULD NOT SO HE
BRUTALLY SLASHED TWO LESBIANS
MULTIPLE TIMES AND THEN FOR GOOD
MEASURE. HE SHOT THEM. HE ALSO
MURDERED THEIR BLACK ADOPT IT,
SON. THIS UNHINGED MAN IS NOW
IMPRISONED WITH WOMEN, EACH ONE
OF YOU WHO VOTE TO APPROVE A B
1810 WILL BE PERPETUATING
ABSURDITIES AND ATROCITIES STOP
ERASING WOMEN AND GIRLS. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. WE STEP
FORWARD NAME, AN ORGANIZATION
ONLY. JUDY Kò HILL. WOMEN ARE
REAL. I'M A WOMAN, NOT A UTERUS.
HAVER. MEN ON ME, PLEASE. GRACE
GREGORY FROM FAITH BAPTIST
CHURCH. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
CHRISTINE CAMPBELL FROM
WHITLAND, CALIFORNIA IN
OPPOSITION AS WELL. AND PASTOR
TIM BENEFIELD GOLDEN VALLEY
BAPTIST CHURCH, AND I'M OPPOSED
UNLESS THIS BILL IS AMENDED. ANY
OTHERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE
COMMITTEE. THAT'S RIGHT. THANK
YOU FOR SHARING YOUR EXPERIENCE.
UM AND SHARING WITH US HOW EVEN
SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS AS, UH
UH, A PAD OR A TAMPON IS
WEAPONIZED AND USED AGAINST THE
WOMEN. UM, THANK YOU FOR SHARING
THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR
PROVIDING THAT I ALSO
APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT YOU
TALKED ABOUT HIPAA. UH, QUITE
FRANKLY, THAT THAT IS AN AREA
THAT I HAD NOT CONSIDERED IN
THIS. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO
DISCLOSE ANY CONDITION THAT YOU
MAY HAVE, UH, IN ORDER TO
RECEIVE. UM UH WHAT YOU NEED
HERE, A PAD OR TAMPON? UM II. I
WILL SHARE THAT I IN MY
COMMUNITY ARE GIRL SCOUTS CAME
TO ME AND SAID, WE NEED TO HAVE
TAMPONS AND PADS IN BATHROOMS.
FOR THIRD GRADE TO FIFTH GRADE
BECAUSE SIXTH GRADE WAS ALREADY
COVERED. AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT
UNTIL WE'RE TOLD THAT THERE IS
AN ISSUE, WE DON'T REALIZE THAT
THERE IS AN ISSUE. UM AND THAT
WAS SIGNED INTO LAW BY THE
GOVERNOR JUST LAST YEAR. UM
ASSEMBLY MEMBER? I'D LIKE TO BE
JOINED. I'D I'D LIKE TO JOIN YOU
AS A CO-AUTHOR. IF YOU'LL PERMIT
THAT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD BILL
THAT PROVIDES A PROTECTION THAT
I THINK IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
UH, AND WITH THAT I WOULD MOVE
THE BILL. SECOND SECOND AS WELL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE
COMMITTEE DO THAT IN THE
BEGINNING, OK, JUST TO MAKE SURE
ONE OF MY SECOND TO STAND I IF I
COULD THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO
COMMEND THE OFFICER FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT, AS WAS STATED BY BOTH
THE WITNESS AND, UM, MY
COLLEAGUE FROM INLAND AND BEER,
YOU KNOW, TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE,
UH, FOR WOMEN, THEIR BASIC NEEDS
. AND FOR THOSE AS THIS STATES,
WHICH I APPRECIATE THE WORDING
HERE BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR
AND I JUST WANT TO RESTATE IT.
UM, IN CASE, UH, FOLKS WERE
CONCERNED ABOUT IT. UM IT SAYS,
UH, PERSONS. LET'S SEE. LET ME
MAKE SURE I GET IT CORRECTLY.
WHO MENSTRUATES OR EX
EXPERIENCES, UTERINE OR VAGINAL
BLEEDING WILL HAVE ACCESS TO
WHAT THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO
TAKE CARE OF THAT. THAT IS A
BEAUTIFUL THING, BECAUSE BODIES
ARE COMPLEX AND, UM, IT IS
NEEDED. I THINK THAT IS AN
EMPOWERING TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO
HAVE THAT ISSUE TO BE ABLE TO
GET WHAT THEY NEED. AND SO THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THE
ATROCITIES THAT HAPPENED, THE
POWER IMBALANCE THAT HAPPENS AND
WE KNOW UM THAT THERE'S BEEN
PROVEN CASES MORE OFTEN THAN NOT
IN VERY SAD TO SAY WHERE WE HAVE
, UM THOSE THAT ARE ARE PAID TO
PROTECT. UM INMATES ARE NOT
PROTECTING THEM, BUT RAPING AND
ABUSING THEM. THANK YOU. MRS. I
ALSO WANNA THANK YOU FOR COMING
AND SHARING YOUR EXPERIENCES
HERE. I THINK THIS IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT BILL AND WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING IT AND
WOULD LOVE TO BE AT IT AS A
CO-AUTHOR. IF YOU'D BE OPEN TO
THAT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY
OTHERS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
RATHER IF YOU CLOSE. THANK YOU.
UH AND I APPRECIATE THE
OPPOSITION FOR COMING TODAY. WE
FULLY AGREE THAT PEOPLE. WHO
HAVE A MENSTRUATION WHO HAVE A
MENSTRUAL CYCLE WHO NEED CARE
SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THAT CARE.
UNFETTERED UNRESTRICTED ACCESS
TO THAT CARE. THIS IS ABOUT
RESTORING DIGNITY FOR WOMEN WHO
ARE INCARCERATED. THERE ARE
COUNTLESS WOMEN WHO ARE
CURRENTLY INCARCERATED AND
FORMALLY INCARCERATED WHO HAVE
COME AND BROUGHT THIS BILL
BEFORE US. UM ANYONE, ANY PERSON
WHO MENSTRUATES DESERVES THAT
CAR? IT'S NOT A LUXURY. IT'S NOT
A PRIVILEGE. IT'S A RIGHT AND
IT'S A RIGHT. THAT SHOULDN'T BE
CONDITIONAL ON YOUR RELATIONSHIP
TO YOUR JAILER. THAT IS THE
ESSENCE OF THIS BILL. THAT IS
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO. THAT
IS WHAT WE ARE BEHIND MANY OTHER
STATES IN DOING AND RESPECTFULLY
ASK, I VOTE. THANK YOU. I. I HAD
TAKEN SOME NOTES. I WROTE
DIGNITY BILL ON MINE AS WELL. SO
I'M THANKFUL YOU COVERED THAT.
RIGHT? I TAKE THE ROLL, PLEASE.
AND ALSO, UH, THE CHAIR WANTED
ME TO SHARE THAT THIS IS A
RECOMMENDED I VOTE. THANK YOU ON
A B 1810 BY BRIAN. THE MOTION IS
TO PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. MCCARTY ALANIS ALANIS
. I LACKEY LACKEY I WHEN I REYES
. REYES I TING TING I, WILSON
WILSON, I ZER ZIPPER. I THAT
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. NEXT WE HAVE A B 1814. SO
REMEMBER TING.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM WELL,
LET ME JUST FIRST. THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR WORK, UH,
WITH MY OFFICE ON THIS BILL, AND
WE ARE HAPPY TO ACCEPT THE
AMENDMENTS. UM. CURRENTLY UM,
THE EXISTING LAW ON FACIAL
RECOGNITION IS THAT IT IS
THERE'S ABSOLUTELY CURRENTLY NÓ
REGULATION AROUND FACIAL
RECOGNITION IN TERMS OF, UH WHAT
CAN OR CANNOT BE USED BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT? I WAS PROUD TO, UH,
CARRY A BILL IN 2019 IT BE 1215,
WHICH HAD A THREE YEAR
MORATORIUM ON THE USE OF FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE AND BODY
CAMERAS. UH I KNOW MY COLLEAGUE
FROM SASO, UH, THAT TORCH LAST
YEAR, AND HER BILL IS SITTING ON
THE SENATE FLOOR AS AS WE SPEAK,
UM THIS BILL, UH, ATTEMPTS TO
PROVIDE A GUARD RAIL ON FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE. UH BECAUSE
RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NÓ GUARD
RAILS ON FACIAL RECOGNITION
SOFTWARE. THAT MORATORIUM
EXPIRED ON JANUARY. 1ST 2020
THREE, UH, A B 1814 SIMPLY SEEKS
TO PREVENT LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM
JUSTIFYING AN ARREST, SEARCH OR
AFFIDAVIT FOR A WARRANT WHEN THE
SOLE BASIS OF THAT ACTION IS A
FACIAL RECOGNITION MATCH, SO IN
OTHER WORDS, THERE HAS TO BE
ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OTHER THAN
THE FACIAL RECOGNITION MATCH,
UH, FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO TAKE
ADDITIONAL ACTION. WE THINK THIS
IS A SMALL STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION. I KNOW THAT THE
OPPOSITION, UH, IS CONCERNED,
UH, THAT ANY LEGISLATION THAT
DOES NOT BÀN, UH, FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE CREATE A
MORATORIUM IS A STEP IN THE
WRONG DIRECTION. I WOULD SAY
THAT THE PERFECT SHOULD NOT TO
BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD. THIS
IS A SMALL STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION. UH CURRENTLY IT ALSO
DOES NOT, UH, IMPACT CITIES LIKE
MY OWN SAN FRANCISCO WHERE WE
HAVE BANNED FACIAL RECOGNITION
SOFTWARE OR THE CITY OF OAKLAND,
UH, AND ALSO ALLOWS CONTINUING
TO ALLOW LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO
TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION THAT THEY
SEE FIT. SO AGAIN, UH, I THINK
THIS IS A SMALL STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. I THINK IT'S
IRONIC IN THE ANALYSIS THE
OPPOSITION TALKED ABOUT, UH, A
ADDITIONAL GUARD RAILS,
ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES. I DID
THAT BILL LAST YEAR. UH AND THEY
STILL OPPOSED IT. AND SO AGAIN,
I THINK THIS IS A CLEAR ISSUE.
UH, I THINK THAT RIGHT NOW. UH,
I WOULD CONTINUE TO VOTE FOR A
MORATORIUM. UH, IF THAT WERE THE
BILL THAT WERE IN FRONT OF ME,
UH, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE
GIVEN THAT CHOICE. I THINK RIGHT
NOW WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NÓ
GUIDELINES AROUND FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE OR HOW IT'S
BEING USED IN A LAW ENFORCEMENT
SETTING. SO I THINK THIS IS A
RESPONSIBLE UH, FIRST STEP AND
DO YOU HAVE ANYONE TO TESTIFY?
NÓ OK? AH, ANYONE ELSE IN, UH,
SUPPORT. CHAIR MEMBERS, JONATHAN
FELDMAN WITH THE CALIFORNIA
POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. TO CHAIR MEMBERS, JOLI
NORRIS ON BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR
SUPPORT. OK, ANYONE FOR
OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME UP HERE.
HAVE A SEAT. YOU'LL HAVE FIVE
MINUTES. BECCA KRAMER MOER ON
BEHALF OF A èC LU, CALIFORNIA
ACTION IN RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION.
WE APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S
UNDERSTANDING OF THE HARMS OF
FACE SURVEILLANCE AND HIS DESIRE
TO PROTECT CALIFORNIANS FROM THE
COMPOUNDING HARMS OF FACE
SURVEILLANCE, FALSE MATCHES AND
WRONGFUL ARRESTS. HOWEVER A B
1814 WOULD MANDATE A POLICY THAT
HAS ROUTINELY FAILED TO PREVENT
THE LIFE DERAILING MISUSE AND
HARMFUL MISTAKES CAUSED BY THIS
TECHNOLOGY. IN AT LEAST FIVE OF
THE SEVEN KNOWN ARRESTS BASED ON
FALSE MATCHES. POLICE WERE
SUBJECT TO POLICIES NEARLY
IDENTICAL TO THE ONE THAT AB
1814 SEEKS TO PUT INTO
CALIFORNIA LAW. JUST LIKE THE
POLICY FAILED TO PROTECT THOSE
INDIVIDUALS FROM ARREST AFTER
FALSE MATCHES. A B 1814 WILL NOT
PROTECT CALIFORNIANS FROM THE
HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES OF FACE
SURVEILLANCE USE. ADDITIONALLY A
B 1814 WOULD CREATE PRO CONTINUE
THE PROBLEMS OF FACE
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY IN
POLICE INVESTIGATIONS. UM BY
LAYERING ON PSYCHOLOGICAL BIASES
THAT ONCE INTRODUCED CANNOT BE
UNDONE. THE FIRST IS SOMETHING
THAT'S CALLED AUTOMATION BIAS,
WHICH IS THE KNOWN PHENOMENON
WHEREBY PEOPLE, INCLUDING
EXPERTS. REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF
INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY THAT THEY
MAY EXHIBIT WHEN MAKING
DECISIONS. IF IT'S UH THE
DECISION IS REFERRED, UH, MADE
BY AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM. SO AN
OBVIOUS EXAMPLE OF THIS PLAYING
OUT IS THE CASE OF MICHAEL
OLIVER, WHERE POLICE TRUSTED THE
MATCH, CLAIMING HE WAS A SUSPECT
DESPITE LACKING THE SUSPECT MAC
LACKING MISTER OLIVER'S OBVIOUS
FACIAL TATTOOS. SECOND IS
CONFIRMATION BIAS WHERE ONCE THE
FACIAL RECOGNITION MATCH POPS UP
, OFFICERS WILL BE PREDISPOSED
TO FIND EVIDENCE THAT CONFIRMS
THE RESULT. THE MOST RECENT
PUBLIC FALSE MATCH CASE PROVIDES
A STUNNING EXAMPLE OF HOW
CONFIRMATION BIAS DISRUPTS
THOROUGH INVESTIGATIONS AND THE
HORRIFIC CONSEQUENCES FOR THE
PEOPLE IMPACTED. HARVEY EUGENE
MURPHY JUNIOR WAS ARRESTED AFTER
FALSELY BEING MATCHED AS THE
SUSPECT IN A HOUSTON AREA OF
RETAIL THEFT INCIDENT. EVEN
THOUGH AN INVESTIGATION INTO
WHETHER HE WAS A VIABLE SUSPECT
WOULD HAVE SHOWN THAT HE WAS IN
FACT, IN SACRAMENTO AT THE TIME
OF THE THEFT. A THOROUGH
INVESTIGATION WOULD HAVE SPARED
MISTER MURPHY FROM GOING TO JAIL
WHERE HE ALLEGES HE WAS RAPED.
INSTEAD TRUSTING THE TECHNOLOGY,
LAW ENFORCEMENT LOOKED FOR
EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE TECH
RIGHT. THE THIRD IS RACIAL BIAS,
WHICH EXTENDS BEYOND JUST THE
FALSE ERROR MATCH RATE TO THE
USE OF THIS SYSTEM WITH POLICE
DATABASES THAT ARE ESSENTIALLY A
RECORD OF RACIALLY
DISCRIMINATORY POLICIES LIKE THE
WAR ON DRUGS. PUT SIMPLY, MANY
OF THESE SYSTEMS ARE GOING TO BE
LOOKING FOR MATCHES IN LISTS OF
BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE ALREADY
TARGETED AND HARMED BY BIASED
POLICING. ADDITIONALLY POLICIES
LIKE THE ONE IN A B 1814.
REINFORCE SOME OF THESE
PROBLEMATIC PIECES, BRINGING
PROBLEMATIC FACIAL RESULTS INTO
OTHER PARTS OF THE INVESTIGATION
, INCLUDING PHOTO LINEUPS AND
WITNESS INTERVIEWS SO THAT THE
FACIAL RECOGNITION IS NOT THE
SOLE BASIS FOR PROBABLE CAUSE.
WHEN POLICE INCORPORATE FACIAL
RECOGNITION RESULTS INTO PHOTO
LINEUPS. FOR EXAMPLE, POLICE ARE
NOT ONLY RELYING ON FALSE FACIAL
RECOGNITION MATCHES BUT ALSO
VIOLATING BEST PRACTICES OF
PHOTO LINEUPS. DECADES OF
RESEARCH RECOMMEND ONLY
CONDUCTING EYEWITNESS. I Dð IF
THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL BASIS TO
BELIEVE THIS IS THE SUSPECT
COMMITTED THE CRIME. AS OPPOSED
TO SIMPLY BEING A DOPPELGANGER
FOR THE ACTUAL SUSPECT.
COMPOUNDING THIS ISSUE IS WHEN
THE OFFICER CONDUCTING A PHOTO
LINEUP OR THE WITNESS REVIEWING
THE PHOTO ARRAY KNOWS THAT
FACIAL RECOGNITION FOUND A MATCH
BRINGING AUTOMATION BIAS
DIRECTLY INTO THE ALREADY
PROBLEMATIC FACIAL RECOGNITION
PHOTO LINEUP AND THIS IS NOT A
HYPOTHETICAL. THIS HAS BEEN
SHOWN TO BE A FACTOR IN SEVERAL
OF THE FALSE MATCH CASES THAT
HAVE LED TO WRONGFUL ARRESTS,
WHERE THE OFFICER ADMINISTERING
THE LINEUP AND OR THE WITNESS
REVIEWING THE LINEUP WERE
INFORMED THAT THERE WAS A
RECOGNITION MATCH. ADDITIONALLY
EVEN IF THE SOLE BASIS LANGUAGE
WERE EFFECTIVE AND DIDN'T BRING
IN THESE UNINTENDED BUT HARMFUL
CONSEQUENCES, THERE'S NÓ
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM TO ENSURE
LAW ENFORCEMENT COMPLIANCE, AND
EVEN IF SUPPRESSION OR A PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION WERE ADDED NÓ
TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENT TO
ENSURE DEFENDANTS EVEN FIND OUT
A FACIAL RECOGNITION THAT FACIAL
RECOGNITION WAS USED IN THEIR
CASE TO BE ABLE TO DEPLOY THE
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM AND ALL
TOO OFTEN, FACIAL RECOGNITION IS
NOT DISCLOSED TO THE PEOPLE.
USED AGAINST FOR THESE AND OTHER
REASONS, WE MUST RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE A B 1814. THANK YOU. ANY
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR
HENDERSON ON BEHALF OF A èC LU
CALIFORNIA ACTION AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. ALSO HERE ON BEHALF
OF OAKLAND PRIVACY MEDIA
ALLIANCE SECURE JUSTICE, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER RACIAL
JUSTICE COMMITTEE AND THE N YU
LAW SCHOOL POLICING PROJECT.
THANK YOU. MARGO GEORGE, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION, WERE IN
OPPOSITION UNLESS IT'S AMENDED
ARE ALREADY EXISTING, UH,
PROTOCOLS. THAT WE WOULD ASK THE
COMMITTEE TO ADOPT. THANK YOU.
JUST THANK YOU. GILBERT ANTHONY
MODIO LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND ALL
THAT, AND NONE STRONGLY OPPOSED.
ROB BOWDEN. LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PERSONS WITH CHILDREN. ALSO ALL
OF US KNOW STRONGLY OPPOSED.
LEAN IT IN L S¼ P èC. ALL OF US
ARE NONE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MOORE, L S¼ P
èC, OBVIOUSLY OPPOSING THANK
YOU, ANY OTHERS IN OPPOSITION?
OK? COMMITTEE, MISS WILSON.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. WE'VE HAD LOTS OF
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT FACIAL
RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY AND
INCLUDING MY BILL THAT THE BANS
IT ON BODY CAMERAS AND STILL, UM
, SUPPORT THE BÀN IN REGARD TO
BODY CAMERAS. IT IT MESSES WITH
OUR CONSTITUTION ARTICLE ONE AS
WELL AS THE FOURTH AMENDMENT FOR
OUR STATE. OUR, UM U S¼
CONSTITUTION AS IT RELATES
SPECIFICALLY TO THIS, I, YOU
KNOW, I SEE THE, UM THE INTENT
AND WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO GO
WITH THE OVERALL USE OF FACIAL
REC RECOGNITION. UM, TECHNOLOGY
AND THE FACT THAT CURRENTLY
THERE ARE NÓ PROVISIONS IN PLACE
AS FAR AS UM, STATE LAW AND OUR
DEPARTMENTS, OUR POLICE
DEPARTMENTS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES ARE ALLOWED TO DO WHAT
THEY WILL WITH IT, AND THERE'S
INCONSISTENCY WHEN YOU LOOK AT,
UM, WHO'S USING IT, HOW THEY'RE
USING IT AND, UM WHAT EVEN
POLICIES THEY HAVE AROUND IT. I
DO AGREE WITH THE ONE OF THE
OPPOSITION'S LETTERS, UM IN
TERMS OF OPPOSITION, UNLESS
AMENDED, HAD SOME REALLY GOOD,
UM, SUGGESTIONS FOR THE LAW. BUT
UM, COME FROM PRACTICE IN L. A
UH UM THIS WAS FROM, I THINK
THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE L A S¼
Dð, UH, MANUAL POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES. ONE IN PARTICULAR
THAT I WANT YOU TO STRONGLY
CONSIDER, UM AND LOVE TO HAVE
CONTINUE TO HAVE MORE
CONVERSATIONS ON THIS BILL WITH
IT IS THE FACT THAT, UM FR Tð IS
NOT AS IT DOES HERE. IT'S NOT
MEMORIALIZED IN ANY WAY IN THE
INVESTIGATION, AND SO THERE'S NÓ
WAY FOR ANY PERSON WHO IT WAS
USED AGAINST THEM, EVEN THOUGH
IT'S NOT THE SOLE, UM BASIS FOR
PROBABLE CAUSE. THERE'S NÓ WAY
FOR ANY PERSON TO KNOW, UM THAT
IT WAS USED AND WHETHER THAT WAS
FAULTY AND THAT FAULTY LED TO
FURTHER HARM THROUGH
INVESTIGATION. AND SO I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE, UM THAT
MEMORIALIZING THE INVESTIGATIVE
REPORT, WHICH IS NOTED, WHICH IS
NOTED IN PART OF THE OPPOSITION
UNLESS AMENDED, AND THERE ARE A
FEW THINGS THAT SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED, BUT I THINK THAT'S
PROBABLY THE STRONGEST ONE. IT'S
THE ONE THAT WE SAW THE MOST
EXAMPLES OF WHEN WE WERE LOOKING
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE POLICE
BÀN, UM, THE BÀN ON POLICE
CAMERAS, UH, JUST THIS USE OF
FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE AND
NOT KNOWING THAT IT WAS USED. UM
AND SO THAT IS A REALLY KEY AND
ENSURING THAT WE DON'T CONTINUE,
UM TO COMPOUND THE HARMS AND
ALLOW PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
REDRESS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS
FROM THE COMMITTEE, MR ZER. SO
I. I THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING
FOR ONE FOR BRINGING IN THE BILL
AND THE OPPOSITE FOR BEING HERE.
I. I, UM YOU HAVE A LOT OF
RESPECT FOR THE OPPOSITION. I
THINK THAT IT WAS A, UM, VERY
GOOD. EXPLANATION AS TO SOME OF
THE RISKS OF FACIAL RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGY. I THINK THE THING
THAT I'M JUST GRAPPLING WITH IS
THE FACT THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS
BILL REALLY TAKES JUST ONE MINOR
STEP IN ADDRESSING SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT, SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND,
REALLY THE BASIS OF THE
OPPOSITION AS OPPOSED TO, I
THINK, WORKING WITH THE AUTHOR
TO TRY TO STRENGTHEN THE BILL IN
SOME OTHER WAYS. UM BECAUSE
UNLESS I'M WRONG IF THIS BILL
ISN'T PASSED, YOU CAN USE FACIAL
RECOGNITION AS THE SOLE BASIS
FOR A CONVICTION. IS THAT IS
THAT RIGHT, MR TING? OR OR OR OR
ANY BASIS RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE
NÓ GUIDELINES AROUND FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY,
MY, MY BILL. MY LAW. UH PA, YOU
KNOW, THE MORATORIUM HAS NOW,
UH, PASSED SO AS OF JANUARY, 1ST
2020 THREE. LAW ENFORCEMENT
COULDN'T DO ANYTHING THEY WANT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D LIKE TO
RESPOND. YEAH, I WOULD LOVE TO.
THANK YOU. UM WE AGREE THAT, UM
I THINK EVERYONE HERE AT THIS
TABLE IS AGREEING THAT FACIAL
RECOGNITION POSES REALLY SERIOUS
PROBLEMS. OUR CONCERN IS THAT.
WHAT WE HAVE SEEN PROPOSED HERE
LAST YEAR ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO
TRY AND REGULATE FACIAL
RECOGNITION. UM WHILE IT SOUNDS
GOOD, AND IT IT LOOKS LIKE IT
SHOULD PROVIDE PROTECTIONS. IT'S
BEEN SHOWN THAT IT DOESN'T
ACTUALLY PROVIDE THE PROTECTIONS
INTENDED. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH
WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE, WE
HAVE SEEN THAT IN AT LEAST FIVE
OF THE SEVEN KNOWN CASES LAW
ENFORCEMENT WAS ALREADY SUPPOSED
TO BE USING. FACIAL RECOGNITION
NOT AS THE SOLE BASIS AND YET
PEOPLE WERE STILL ARRESTED
DESPITE MISMATCHES DESPITE VERY
CLEAR, EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE, UM
AND SO IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY
PROVIDE THE PROMISE PROTECTION.
UM I WE'RE WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
BE DIFFICULT WHEN WE SAY THAT
THE WAY TO DEAL WITH FACIAL
RECOGNITION IS THROUGH A B N R
MORATORIUM. IF THERE WAS A
REGULATION THAT WOULD WORK AND
WOULD ACTUALLY PROVIDE
PROTECTION RATHER THAN JUST LOOK
GOOD ON THE PAPER. IT WOULD BE.
WE WOULD BE ALL FOR GOING FOR
THAT SIMPLER ROUTE. BUT THE
REASON THAT WE HAVE CONTINUED TO
SAY THAT A BÀN OR A WAR TIME IS
THE ONLY WAY TO DEAL WITH FACIAL
RECOGNITION IS SIMPLY BECAUSE
IT'S BEEN SHOWN AGAIN AND AGAIN.
THAT REGULATION DOESN'T ACTUALLY
PROVIDE THE INTENDED PROTECTIONS
THAT ONLY A BÀN OR A MORATORIUM
PROVIDES THOSE PROTECTIONS AND
PUTTING DOWN PROTECTIONS ON
PAPER THAT WE KNOW DON'T WORK.
THAT THEY FEEL THAT THEY HAVE
HARMFUL UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
IS NOT THE WAY TO DEAL WITH THE
PROBLEM. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE
IN OPPOSITION TODAY. THANK YOU.
UM I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D LIKE TO
RESPOND. SURE. ABSOLUTELY WELL,
FIRST, THERE'S NÓ EVIDENCE THAT
A BÀN WORKS BECAUSE ACTUALLY,
THERE'S NÓ STATE THAT CURRENTLY
BANS FACIAL RECOGNITION
SOFTWARE, SO THEY THEY HAVE AN
IDEOLOGY. THEY HAVE A
PHILOSOPHY. CERTAIN CITIES HAVE
BANNED IT. BUT THERE ACTUALLY IS
NÓ STATE BANS THERE'S ACTUALLY
NÓ DATA NÓ EVIDENCE. UM THE
OTHER PIECE, JUST LIKE MY
COLLEAGUE FROM THE INLAND EMPIRE
. UH, JUST VERY QUICKLY IT IT'S
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME ON THE
COMMITTEE, AND IT SEEMS VERY
INTERESTING THAT OPPOSITION ON A
NUMBER OF THE BILLS DOESN'T WANT
TO TALK ABOUT THE MERITS OR THE
PROS AND CONS OF A BILL, BUT
THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT ALL THE
PROBLEMS WITH OUR CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM OF WHICH WE KNOW
THERE ARE MANY. UH, THAT'S NOT
WHAT THIS BILL IS TACKLING. UH
OPPOSITION MEN SOME CONCERNS
ABOUT THE PROCESS, MANY OF WHICH
HAPPEN IN OTHER STATES, BUT YOU
KNOW WHETHER YOU DO A LINE UP OR
WHETHER YOU'RE GOING THROUGH A
PHOTO BOOK. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS
BILL IS HAS ISSUE WITH RIGHT. A
LOT OF HER CONCERNS ARE FRANKLY
WITH WITH REGARDS TO THE OVERALL
SYSTEM OF WHICH I HAVE A LOT OF
I SHARE A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS.
THAT'S NOT THE BILL THAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT. UH QUITE SIMPLY,
THIS BILL ADDS ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIONS WHEN THERE ARE NONE.
UH THE OPPOSITION HAS MADE IT
VERY CLEAR WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE
IS A COMPLETE BÀN ON FACIAL
RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY. AND
RIGHT NOW, WITHOUT THAT, THEY
CAN'T SUPPORT ANY, UH, POLICY
EVEN WHEN, UM MANY OF THE STEPS
THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE
OPPOSITION HAD STATED I DID LAST
YEAR IN MY BILL, UM AND REALLY
PUSHING THIS ISSUE FORWARD. SO
AGAIN, UM YOU KNOW THAT? I THINK
IT'S VERY, VERY CLEAR THAT THEY
ABSOLUTELY ARE FOR A BANAN AGAIN
JUST TO RESTATE THAT NÓ STATE
HAS BANNED EVERY STATE THAT HAS
CHOSEN POLICY HAS CHOSEN TO
REGULATE RATHER THAN TO BÀN. UM
THE TECHNOLOGY. UH, WE HAVE A
NUMBER OF MAJOR EVENTS COMING TO
OUR STATE. WHETHER IT'S THE
WORLD CUP, WHETHER IT'S THE
OLYMPICS. UM I THINK IT REALLY
IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE SOME
POLICIES SET FORWARD BECAUSE I
KNOW THAT FACIAL RECOGNITION
SOFTWARE WILL BE USED FOR THAT
FOR THOSE EVENTS SO AGAIN, UH,
IF THERE IS NÓ GUIDANCE IN LIKE
MY, LIKE, MY COLLEAGUE FROM
SASSOON SAID, RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE
HAVE IS WE HAVE EVERY
JURISDICTION DOING IT A LITTLE
BIT DIFFERENTLY. NÓ GUIDELINES
NÓ POLICIES NÓ PROTECTIONS TO
REGARD DEPENDING ON WHATEVER
JURISDICTION YOU'RE IN, UH,
THEY'RE ONLY THERE'S ONLY A FEW
CITIES THAT HAVE BANS, INCLUDING
MY OWN, BUT, UM RIGHT NOW, UH,
THIS IS AGAIN SMALL STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. I WOULD HAVE
PREFERRED SOMETHING MORE ROBUST.
I OFFER SOMETHING MORE ROBUST
LAST YEAR, WHICH THE OPPOSITION
AGAIN DID NOT LIKE BECAUSE IT
WASN'T A BAND. BUT BUT AGAIN,
THIS TO ME IS A REASONABLE STEP
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR
ALANI. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UH,
FOR THE OPPOSITION YOU YOU KEEP
SPEAKING OF THE FIVE OF SEVEN
KNOWN CASES, UH, OUT OF HOW MANY
CASES ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN IN
GENERAL? THAT IS AN EXCELLENT
QUESTION, AND WE DON'T KNOW. UM
LIKE IF I REMEMBER, WILSON
POINTED OUT, OFTENTIMES PEOPLE
ARE NOT THERE. IT'S THE USE OF
FACE SURVEILLANCE IS NOT
INCLUDED. IN THE RECORD. PEOPLE
ARE OFTENTIMES NOT NOTIFIED. UM
FOR FOLKS WHO GOT TO LISTEN TO
MR WILLIAMS WHEN HE CAME LAST
YEAR, HE EXPLAINED, AND I THINK
HE'S THE FIRST OF THE KNOWN
CASES. THE ONLY REASON HE EVEN
FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS USED IN
HIS CASE WAS THAT IN THE
INTERVIEW, ONE OF THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS MADE AN
OFF THE CUFF REMARK OF I GUESS
THE TECHNOLOGY GOT IT WRONG. HE
THAT KIND OF STUCK WITH HIM. HE
DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS ABOUT.
HE MENTIONED IT TO HIS WIFE. WHO
THOUGHT HM. THAT SOUNDS LIKE
FACE SURVEILLANCE. THEY REACHED
OUT TO AN ATTORNEY. THEY WERE
ABLE TO GET THAT INFORMATION.
BUT WITHOUT THAT OFF THE CUFF
REMARK, HE WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN
KNOWN THAT IT WAS USED IN HIS
SITUATION. AND SO WE DON'T KNOW
HOW MANY CASES IT'S BEEN USED IN
BECAUSE IT'S OFTENTIMES NOT
REVEALED THAT WAS USED. OK,
THANK YOU, SO WE COULD BE
TALKING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS
OF CASES IT IS UNKNOWN. HOW MANY
CASES ARE IT'S BEEN USED IN HOW
MANY ARRESTS ARE BASED ON FALSE
MATCHES. THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT
OF THE SEVEN KNOWN ARRESTS. YES.
CAN I JUST OUT OF THE SEVEN
THOUGH TO ME IF THERE ARE
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF CASES
WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS
COMPARED TO HOW MANY OTHER LIVES
COULD HAVE BEEN SAVED?
KIDNAPPINGS HOMICIDE SUSPECTS
THAT COULD HAVE BEEN SOLVED DUE
TO THIS TECHNOLOGY IS WHAT I'M
GETTING AT. AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WE BROUGHT UP AS
COMMITTEE EARLIER WANTING TO
KNOW THE NUMBERS LIKE WHEN WE
WERE TALKING ABOUT FENTANYL.
WELL, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE
OTHER PORTION IS? WELL I WOULD
LIKE TO KNOW THAT ALSO, I WOULD
LOVE TO ALSO. SO LET ME KNOW IF
YOU'D LIKE TO PARTNER ON TRYING
TO GET THAT INFORMATION FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT. IT WOULD BE GREAT
TO KNOW HOW MANY OF THE CASES
THEY USE IT IN. HOW MANY OF THE
TIMES IT IS ANY, IF ANY
ASSISTANCE AND ALSO HOW MANY
TIMES IT ACTUALLY HINDERS THE
CASE BY POINTING LAW ENFORCEMENT
TO THE WRONG KIDNAPPING SUSPECT,
FOR EXAMPLE, AND ALL RESOURCES
DIVERTED FROM THE ACTUAL SUSPECT
. OK, AND THEN THE OTHER THING
DO YOU KNOW OUT OF THOSE FIVE OR
SEVEN CASES WHERE THOSE ACTUALLY
TAKEN FROM BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE?
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ANY OF
THEM WERE TAKEN FROM BODY CAMERA
FOOTAGE AND TO THE AUTHOR. THIS
IS BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE IS WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. NÓ NÓ. THIS
IS ALL FACIAL RECOGNITION. THIS
IS ALL. YEAH. UM MY PREVIOUS
BILL, WHICH IS MY COLLEAGUE'S
BILL BILL, UM, WAS ONLY DEALING
WITH BODY CAMERAS. THIS IS ALL
FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE AND
THE REASON I WANTED TO DO THAT
IS BECAUSE NOW THE TECHNOLOGY IS
UBIQUITOUS. YOU COULD BE USING
FACIAL RECOGNITION FROM
SOMEONE'S SECURITY CAMERA. YOU
SHOULD YOU COULD BE USING FACIAL
RECOGNITION FROM SOMEONE'S HOME
SECURITY CAMERA. I MEAN, THIS IS
THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT
SITUATION THAN WE HAD SAY, EVEN
FIVE OR 10 YEARS AGO. SO IT IS.
IT IS BROADER THAN THAT. THANK
YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. THANK
YOU. NÓ FURTHER QUESTIONS. YEAH,
THANK YOU, MR TING. I WAS I
WORKED WITH YOU ON THIS MEASURE
LAST YEAR AND, UH, I, I THINK
THIS IS A, UH, A FAIR, BALANCED
APPROACH, BRINGING SOME RULES TO
THE GAME AS AS YOU ALLUDED, AND
YOU DIDN'T HAVE THIS, YOU'D HAVE
NOTHING YOU'D HAVE WILD WILD
WEST WITH EVERY EVERYBODY FOR
THEMSELVES. SO I THINK THAT THIS
SETS, UM THE APPROPRIATE
STANDARD. SO WITH THAT I SUPPORT
THIS BILL. DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
MOTION THE SECOND FROM AND WHEN
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. I'M SORRY.
I JUST HEAR THE VOICES. THANK
YOU. ON A B 1814 BY MEMBER TEAM.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
TO THE PRIVACY AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION COMMITTEE. MCCARTY
MCCARTY, I ELAN ELAN! I LACKEY
LACKY NOT VOTING WHEN I REYES
REYES. I TING TING I WILSON.
WILSON. I ZER ZIPPER. I. OK THAT
MEASURE PASSES AND WE'LL GO BACK
AND LIFT THE, UM THE CALL. BUT
BEFORE WE DO THAT, WHERE ONE
LEAVES I WANT TO RECOGNIZE OUR
LAST DAY FOR OUR CHIEF DEPUTY,
UH, CONSULTANT TO THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE WHO WAS TAKING
A RETIREMENT. SO UH, THANK YOU
MUCH VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE
TO THE UH, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AND, UH, THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE. SO, CHERYL, THANK
YOU, CHERYL ANDERSON. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE. WELL
EARNED. UM YES, PLEASE GO BACK,
AND, UM WE'LL DO ADD ONS AND
LIFT THE CALLS. ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. LACKEY LACKEY I WHEN,
WHEN I WILSON WILSON, I. ITEM
NUMBER ONE. A B 18 Ó THREE HAS
BEEN DISPENSED WITH ITEM NUMBER
TWO A B 18 Ó FOUR BY SOME
MEMBER JIM PATTERSON. MCCARTY
MCCARTY, I. ITEM NUMBER THREE A
B 1810 BY A SEMI MEMBER, BRIAN
MCCARTY. MCCARTY. I. ITEM NUMBER
FOUR. A 1814 WAS JUST DISPENSED
WITH ITEM NUMBER FIVE, A B 1859
WAS ON CONSENT ITEM NUMBER SIX,
A B 1875 WAS ON CONSENT AND ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN EB 1909 HAS BEEN
DISPENSED WITH OK, THANK YOU.
THIS CONCLUDES TODAY'S HEARING
WITH THAT WE ARE ADJOURNED.