GOOD MORNING. WE WILL CALL THIS
MEETING TO ORDER. AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE, WE DO NOT HAVE A
QUORUM JUST YET. BUT WE WILL
BEGIN WITH TODAY'S BUSINESS.
FIRST, A COUPLE HOUSEKEEPING
ITEMS. WE HAVE. TWO BILLS PULLED
BY THE AUTHORS THIS MORNING. AB
1873. SANCHEZ AND AB 2790.
PACHECO. WILL PUT THEM ON TO THE
CONSENT. SO WE WAIT FOR THAT?
YES ALL RIGHT. WE WILL BEGIN
AGAIN AS A SUBCOMMITTEE. BUT WE
WILL HAVE A BUSY AGENDA TODAY.
SO WE'LL START WITH OUR AUTHORS
AND OUR PRESENTATIONS, THE FIRST
ON THE LIST IS ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LOH AND WEE, FOLLOWED BY GABRIEL
AND DAVIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MR. CHAIR. AND COLLEAGUES, FOR
ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT ASSEMBLY
BILL 2814 WITH RESPECT TO
PACKAGE THEFT, THE LIKELIHOOD IS
THAT MANY OF YOU HAVE HAD YOUR
PACKAGES STOLEN FROM YOUR
DOORSTEP AND OR HAVE HAD FRIENDS
AND NEIGHBORS ALSO HAD PACKAGES
STOLEN FROM YOUR CURTILAGE OF
YOUR HOMES AS WELL TOO. THIS
BILL HELPS TO ENSURE THAT
PROSECUTORS CAN HELP ENFORCE,
WHILE MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE
PROTECTING OUR COMMUNITIES AND
NOT OVER CORRECTING AS WELL TOO.
I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE
THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM MANY
CONSTITUENTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES,
AND I HOPE THAT YOU'LL SUPPORT
THIS BILL TODAY. WITH ME IS MR.
RUBIN WITH THE COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
. RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AYE VOTE
YES. FIVE MINUTES. YEAH. FIVE
MINUTES. PLEASE BEGIN. SO THERE
ARE ABOUT 119 MILLION PACKAGES
STOLEN A YEAR, I'VE ALSO SEEN
ESTIMATES OF OVER $200 MILLION.
IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE TWO
MOST UNDERREPORTED CRIMES NEXT
TO, UNLAWFUL ATTEMPTS TO USE
PEOPLE, PEOPLE'S CREDIT CARDS.
HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE JUST
SITTING DOWN HAVE HAD PACKAGES
STOLEN FROM THEIR PORCH OR FROM
THEIR HOUSE? I SEE AT LEAST ONE,
SURE. I SEE AT LEAST ONE
INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS, IF THAT'S
JUST AN ACCURATE, PERCENT OF THE
GROUP HERE, THAT'S VERY UNUSUAL,
BECAUSE ABOUT THREE OUT OF EVERY
FOUR AMERICANS HAVE BEEN VICTIMS
OF PACKAGE THEFT. AND ALTHOUGH
WE CALL IT PACKAGE THEFT, IT'S
OFTEN CALLED PORCH PIRACY. IT'S
OFTEN CALLED A VERSION OF
BURGLARY. AND IT'S NOT LIKE MOST
OTHER THEFTS IN THREE DIFFERENT
WAYS. FIRST, IT THIS BILL WOULD
PUNISH ENTRY ONTO THE CURTILAGE
WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT THEFT
AND ENTRY ONTO THE CURTILAGE
INVOKES MUCH GREATER FEELINGS OF
A VIOLATION OF PERSONAL
SECURITY. IN MUCH THE SAME WAY
THAT A BURGLARY INVOKES, OUTRAGE
AND, CONTINUING FEELINGS OF A
BREACH OF PERSONAL SECURITY.
IT'S ALSO MUCH MORE LIKELY TO
RESULT IN VIOLENCE, NOT JUST
VIOLENCE, PERPETRATED AGAINST
THE PERSON COMING ON. COMING ON
TO THE, TO THE HOME. BECAUSE
WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEONE DOING
THAT, IT BECOMES MUCH MORE
LIKELY THAT THE HOMEOWNER SEEING
THIS PERSON BREACHED THEIR
PRIVACY TO COME ON TO AN AREA
THAT THE US SUPREME COURT HAS
RECOGNIZED FOR MANY, MANY YEARS
AS AN AREA OF SPECIAL
PROTECTION. THEY GO OUT AND THEY
WILL TAKE THE LAW INTO THEIR OWN
HANDS. THEY WILL GO OUT AND THEY
WILL FIGHT FOR THEIR PACKAGES.
YOU JUST HAVE TO GO ON YOUTUBE
AND LOOK AT THE VIDEOS TO SEE
HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL END UP
DOING THAT. IT'S A PEOPLE WHO
SEE THIS, ESPECIALLY PEOPLE
WHO'VE BEEN REPEATEDLY
VICTIMIZED. IT'S VERY
FRUSTRATING. AND THAT
FRUSTRATION IS SHOWN WHEN THEY
SEE COMING SOMEONE COMING UP TO
THEIR HOME AND THEY TAKE ACTION.
AND THEN THIRDLY, BECAUSE THIS
OFFENSE IS SO COMMON AND REALLY
THE CONSEQUENCES ARE SO DE
MINIMIS, IT ENCOURAGES BOTH
LAWLESSNESS AND AN EVEN GREATER
FAILURE TO REPORT, THE LESS THE
ENFORCEMENT, THE LESS THE
CONSEQUENCES. THE LESS THE
LIKELIHOOD THE CRIMES REPORTED,
THE LESS THE CRIME IS REPORTED,
THE MORE THE CRIMES INCREASE.
MOREOVER, IN EVERY WAY IN EVERY
WAY, THIS CRIME
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS
IMPOVERISHED NEIGHBORHOODS,
OFTEN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR,
BECAUSE, UNLIKE IN WELL-OFF
NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THEY CAN,
THEY CAN POTENTIALLY HAVE GATED
COMMUNITIES WHERE PEOPLE CAN
AFFORD PRIVATE SECURITY FORCES,
WHERE THEY CAN SPEND MONEY TO
TAKE OTHER MEASURES TO DETER
THIS TYPE OF CRIME. IMPOVERISHED
COMMUNITIES DON'T HAVE THAT
LUXURY. THE FOLKS WHO WANT TO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LOWER
COSTS THAT THEY CAN OBTAIN BY
USING ONLINE SHOPPING, THEY HAVE
TO ARRANGE FOR PACKAGES IF THEY
WANT TO BE SURE THAT THOSE
PACKAGES GET TO THEM, THEY HAVE
TO ARRANGE FOR OTHER MEASURES.
THEY HAVE TO GO TO LIKE ANOTHER
STORE WHERE THEY PROBABLY CAN
PICK IT UP, BUT THAT ADDS COSTS
THAT ADDS COST, EVEN IF IT'S
JUST THE COST OF HAVING TO TAKE
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN, EVEN
IF IT'S JUST THE COST OF HAVING
TO PAY FOR GAS TO DRIVE TO THIS
OTHER LOCATION. AND THAT'S VERY
DISRUPTIVE OF THEIR LIVES AS
WELL. PLUS PACKAGE THEFTS RAISE
THE COSTS FOR EVERYONE, YOU
KNOW, BEING ABLE TO HAVE
PACKAGES DELIVERED TO YOUR HOME,
WHETHER THAT'S MEDICINE FOR
FOLKS WHO CAN'T LEAVE THE HOUSE
OR OTHER CRITICAL PRODUCTS.
THAT'S A HUGE BENEFIT TO BE ABLE
TO HAVE IT COME TO YOUR HOME.
AND WHEN IT'S TAKEN, WHO EATS
THE COSTS OF THE THEFT? SOME
TIMES IT'S THE PERSON WHO IS
WAITING THERE FOR THE PACKAGE,
BUT OFTEN IT IS THE SELLER, AND
THE SELLER WILL OFTEN REIMBURSE
THE PERSON WHO HAS LOST THE
PACKAGE. BUT THESE ARE NOT JUST
BIG CORPORATIONS. THESE ARE
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SMALL
COMPANIES THAT HAVE TO EAT THE
COSTS EVERY TIME A PACKAGE IS
STOLEN. DOES ANYBODY ELSE IN
SUPPORT PLEASE COME UP AND STATE
YOUR NAME, ORGANIZATION AND
POSITION ONLY. THERE YOU GO.
GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS. COREY SUSILO, ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS, JULIAN
MORRIS, ON BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND SUPPORT
. GOOD MORNING, SARAH PALERMO
WITH CALIFORNIA RETAILERS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING MEG HOLTMAN WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, STEPHANIE, ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF SAN JOSE AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HI, NATALIE
BOUST, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE
IN SUPPORT. SEEING NO MORE
SUPPORT, DO WE HAVE OPPOSITION?
PLEASE COME FORWARD. STATE YES
.
PLEASE BEGIN. YOU HAVE FIVE
MINUTES TO SPLIT AMONGST
YOURSELVES. OKAY. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS MATT SOTO. ROSEN. I'M
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION.
I'VE BEEN A PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR
25 YEARS IN CALIFORNIA. WE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE THE CREATION
OF THIS NEW CRIME FOR SEVERAL
REASONS. FIRST, THIS IS AN END
RUN AROUND THE INTENT OF THE
VOTERS. CALIFORNIA DOES NOT NEED
TO IMPRISON MORE PEOPLE FOR
NONVIOLENT PROPERTY CRIMES. IT'S
BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT WE CANNOT
INCARCERATE OUR WAY OUT OF WHAT
HAS BEEN PERCEIVED AS A CONCERN
IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
PROPOSITION 47, THE SAFE
NEIGHBORHOODS AND SCHOOLS ACT,
WAS PASSED A DECADE AGO,
OVERWHELMINGLY BY THE VOTERS,
WITH 60% OF THE VOTE. AB 2814
WOULD UNDO THE HEALING OF SCARS
OF MASS INCARCERATION. FOR
EXAMPLE, THIS BILL WOULD MAKE
STEALING OF SOME GROCERIES OFF
OF A PORSCHE A FELONY, AND THEY
NEED NOT REMIND THE MEMBERS OF
THIS COMMITTEE THAT HAVING A
FELONY CONVICTION CAN HAVE
SEVERAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ON A
PERSON THEIR ABILITY TO GET A
JOB, TO GET STUDENT LOANS, TO
ABILITY TO VOTE, THEIR TAKE
AWAY, THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT
RIGHTS. THEY COULD LOSE THEIR
PROFESSIONAL LICENSE OR PERMIT,
NOT TO MENTION THE SAVINGS FROM
NOT SUBJECTING CALIFORNIANS TO
PRISON OR LENGTHY JAIL SENTENCES
FOR NONVIOLENT THEFT OFFENSES
ALLOWS CALIFORNIA TO REFOCUS
MILLIONS OF PRECIOUS TAX DOLLARS
ON MUCH NEEDED SERVICES FOR OUR
COMMUNITIES. ALSO, OTHER STATES
HAVE TRIED THIS WITH LIMITED
SUCCESS. FOR EXAMPLE, TEXAS WAS
ONE OF THE FIRST STATES TO PASS
A SIMILAR LAW IN 2019, AND THIS
HAS BEEN THE TEST THE TEXAS
EXPERIENCE. THERE HAVE BEEN OVER
100 PERSONS CHARGED IN TEXAS
WITH FELONIES UNDER THIS LAW,
AND NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN
REPORTED TO BE PART OF AN
ORGANIZED CRIME RING. MANY
PEOPLE CHARGED WERE HOMELESS,
SAID THEY WERE LOOKING FOR MONEY
TO FOR FOOD WHEN CITIZENS WERE
ASKED ABOUT THIS LAW, THEY SAID
COMMENTS LIKE A LOT OF THE
RESOURCES THAT GO INTO FINDING
SOMEONE WHO'S STOLEN A PACKAGE,
COULD BE REALLOCATED TO BETTER
USE SOMEWHERE ELSE, FINALLY
MAKING THIS A NONVIOLENT
PROPERTY CRIME, A FELONY IS NOT
GOOD POLICY, AND MAKING IT A
WOBBLER, AS IT'S WRITTEN, DOES
NOT MITIGATE AGAINST ITS HARM.
MY EXPERIENCE OF 25 YEARS OF
APPEARING WITH PEOPLE ACCUSED OF
FELONIES IN CALIFORNIA AND
CALIFORNIA STATE IS THAT, WHILE
THEY ARE OFTEN CHARGED AS
FELONIES AND A PERSON WHO'S
ACCUSED OF A FELONY, IS LESS
LIKELY TO GET OUT OF JAIL, AND
WHEN A PERSON IS IN CUSTODY, THE
DATA SHOWS, EVEN FOR TWO OR MORE
DAYS, THEY CAN LOSE THEIR
HOUSING, THEIR EMPLOYMENT, THEIR
PETS, THEIR CARS CAN BE TOWED IN
THEIR ABSENCE. THERE'S AN
IMMENSE AMOUNT OF PRESSURE
PLACED ON SOMEONE WHO'S
INCARCERATED AND ACCUSED OF A
FELONY TO PLEAD GUILTY TO A
CRIME, EVEN IF THEY'RE INNOCENT
OF THAT CRIME. AND UNDER OUR
CURRENT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS IN
CALIFORNIA, IT CAN TAKE UP TO
THREE MONTHS TO EXERCISE YOUR
RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL. WE SIMPLY
DO NOT NEED TO CREATE ANOTHER
FELONY FOR NONVIOLENT PROPERTY
OFFENSE IN CALIFORNIA. WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A NO VOTE
ON AB 2814. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS MICAH DOKHTOUROFF.
I'M A SENIOR STAFF ATTORNEY AT
THE ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION. WHILE WE
UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE
GOAL OF PREVENTING AND
ADDRESSING PACKAGE THEFT, THIS
BILL WILL NOT ACCOMPLISH THAT
GOAL. FIRST, WE DO NOT BELIEVE
THIS BILL IS NECESSARY. UNDER
EXISTING LAW, A PERSON CAN
ALREADY BE PROSECUTED FOR
ENTERING THE CURTILAGE OF A HOME
WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT A
THEFT. DEPENDING ON THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, A PERSON COULD BE
CONVICTED OF TRESPASSING,
ATTEMPTED GRAND THEFT, ATTEMPTED
PETTY THEFT, OR ATTEMPTED
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. GIVEN
THE AVAILABILITY OF EXISTING
LAWS, WE DO NOT BELIEVE A
SEPARATE CRIME IS NECESSARY.
SECOND, WE ARE CONCERNED THAT AB
2814 COULD BE USED AS A TOOL TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST HOUSELESS
PEOPLE. PEOPLE WITH MENTAL
ILLNESS AND PEOPLE OF COLOR IN
PARTICULAR, WE FEAR THAT THE
BILL COULD BE USED AS A PRETEXT
FOR ARRESTING PEOPLE AGAINST
WHOM LAW ENFORCEMENT OR PROPERTY
OWNERS ARE EXPLICITLY OR
IMPLICITLY BIASED. IT IS NOT
DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE A SITUATION
IN WHICH HOMEOWNERS IN A
PREDOMINANTLY WHITE AND WEALTHY
COMMUNITY NOTICE, EITHER THROUGH
THEIR OWN OBSERVATIONS OR THEIR
NEIGHBORS POSTS ON A SITE LIKE
NEXT DOOR, THAT A SMALL GROUP OF
BLACK TEENAGERS IS WALKING FROM
HOUSE TO HOUSE AND PAUSING ON
THE PORCH OF EACH HOME BEFORE
MOVING TO THE NEXT. THE
HOMEOWNERS BECOME SUSPICIOUS AND
CALL THE POLICE, WHO THEN ARREST
THE TEENAGERS AS IT TURNS OUT,
THE TEENAGERS WERE LEAVING
FLIERS FOR A LOCAL FUNDRAISER
AND NOT INTENDING TO STEAL
PACKAGES. LIKEWISE, THE
SITUATION COULD ARISE IN WHICH
POLICE OFFICERS ARREST AND
DETAIN A HOUSELESS PERSON
SITTING ON THE FRONT STEPS OF A
HOME SIMPLY BECAUSE THE OFFICERS
NOTICE A PACKAGE ON THE FRONT
STOOP. NEEDLESS TO SAY, HAD THE
GROUP OF TEENAGERS BEEN WHITE OR
THE HOUSELESS PERSON BEEN A
BUSINESSMAN DRESSED IN A SUIT
AND TIE, THERE PRESENCE NEAR THE
HOMES WOULD NOT HAVE GARNERED
THE SAME REACTION. WHILE THESE
ISSUES OF DISCRIMINATION AND
BIAS ALREADY OCCUR TODAY, WE
FEAR THAT THE CREATION OF THIS
NEW CRIME WILL ONLY EXACERBATE
THESE PROBLEMS. FOR THIS REASON,
WE'RE IN RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
PLEASE LINE UP FOR FURTHER
OPPOSITION. BEFORE WE DO THAT,
CAN WE PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? WE
HAVE A QUORUM. MCCARTY HERE.
ALANIZ HERE. LACKEY HERE. NGUYEN
REYES. TÍNH KING HERE. HERE.
HERE. HERE. HERE TÍNH. WILSON.
ZIPPER OKAY. DO YOU HAVE A
QUORUM? SO PLEASE STATE YOUR
NAME, ORGANIZATION AND POSITION
ONLY. NATASHA MINSKER SMART.
JUSTICE CALIFORNIA STRONGLY
OPPOSED. BARBARA CHÁVEZ, ON
BEHALF OF THE ELLA BAKER CENTER,
OPPOSE. MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE STRONGLY OPPOSE. ALYSSA.
MORE. ALL OF US ARE NONE AND
STRONG OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE COX,
LSPC STRONG OPPOSITION. TINA
VARGAS INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION
IN OPPOSITION. ROXANA GONZALEZ,
INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION.
STRONGLY OPPOSE. A LITTLE
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING, CARMEN NICOLE COX,
ACLU, CALIFORNIA ACTION. AHMAUD
ARBERY AND TRAYVON MARTIN ARE
NOT HERE TODAY BECAUSE SOMEONE
THOUGHT THEY HAD THE INTENT TO
DO SOMETHING. THANK YOU. TIFFANY
WHITTON WITH SEIU CALIFORNIA IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. OKAY. NO
OTHERS. THANK YOU QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS,
MR. LACKEY? YEAH, I THINK THAT
THIS IS A LONG IN COMING. VERY
THANKFUL BECAUSE OF THIS PORCH
PIRATE SITUATION HAS BECOME A
VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM. AND, I
WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED TO
BE A COAUTHOR IF THAT'S
PERMISSIBLE, BECAUSE I THINK
THAT THIS IS, THE PUBLIC, WELL,
DESERVES THIS, THIS APPROACH.
THANK YOU. MR. ZUBIATE SO, I
JUST WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR OF
THIS BILL. I DO THINK THAT THIS
IS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE
ADDRESSED. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT
THE BILL. I THINK NOT HAVING
SORT OF SUFFICIENT GUARDRAILS
AROUND IT. I THINK THE PENALTIES
ARE, THAT CAN BE IMPOSED FOR
FAIRLY MINOR THINGS ARE TOO
HARSH, AND, AND SO I JUST WANTED
TO FOR ME, AT THIS POINT, I
THINK THIS NEEDS A LOT MORE WORK
TO REFINE IT. AND BECAUSE OF
THAT, I'M GOING TO STAY OFF THE
BILL TODAY. THANK YOU. OKAY MR.
ALANIS, FOR THE OPPOSITION, YOU
MENTIONED THAT THERE'S ALREADY A
CRIME ON THE BOOKS ALREADY WHERE
THEY CAN BE CHARGED WITH IF THEY
ENTER THE HOME OR THE CURTILAGE.
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT MORE?
YES. OF COURSE, UNDER EXISTING
LAW, THERE ARE ALREADY SEVERAL
CRIMES THAT A PERSON COULD BE
CHARGED WITH, DEPENDING ON THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, A PERSON COULD BE
CHARGED WITH TRESPASSING,
ATTEMPTED GRAND THEFT IF THEY
ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO STEAL A
PACKAGE, ATTEMPTED PETTY THEFT.
AGAIN DEPENDING ON THE VALUE OF
THE PROPERTY OR ATTEMPTED
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. OKAY,
I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN THAT CHARGED
BEFORE. I DON'T KNOW, IT'S AN
AREA AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC
UNLESS THEY HAVE NO TRESPASSING
SIGNS OUT ALREADY, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT, SIR?
YES THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT
VARIATIONS ON TRESPASS, BUT NONE
OF THE VARIATIONS ON TRESPASS
ALLOW FOR SOMEONE TO BE PUNISHED
EITHER, AS A MISDEMEANANT OR A
FELON. JUST BECAUSE THEY ENTER
ONTO THE PROPERTY WITH THE
INTENT TO COMMIT PACKAGE THEFT
OR THEFT. THAT IS INCORRECT WHEN
THEY SAY THAT TRESPASS CAN COVER
THIS SITUATION, I HAVE NO OTHER.
OKAY. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS. MOVE THE BILL. THANK
YOU SIR. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND, MR. LOWE,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AYE VOTE IN
RECOGNITION THAT THIS SIMILAR
BILL HAS PASSED THIS COMMITTEE
IN THE PAST. THANK YOU. OKAY.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
AB 2814 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER LOWE.
THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY. MCCARTY AYE. ALANIZ.
ALANIZ. AYE. LAKI LACKEY. AYE.
NGUYEN. NGUYEN. AYE. REYES TING
TING. AYE. WILSON ZUBER. ZUBER.
NOT VOTING. THAT MEASURE PASSES.
THANK YOU. NEXT AUTHOR, MR.
GABRIEL. PLEASE. MR. CLOSE IN MY
BEST. OKAY. YES. BEFORE YOU
BEFORE YOU PROCEED. JUST ONE
MORE BILL THAT WAS RECENTLY
PULLED AND THAT WAS ITEM NUMBER
18, AB 2499 DAVIS. 406 2406.
OKAY OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. AND
COLLEAGUES, AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU TO THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
THOUGHTFUL ASSISTANCE ON THIS
MEASURE. I AM PLEASED TODAY TO
PRESENT AB 2432, WHICH
ESTABLISHED A PERMANENT SOURCE
OF FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS SERVING
CRIME VICTIMS, MODELED ON THE
BIPARTISAN FEDERAL VICTIMS OF
CRIME ACT, OR VOCA. AB 2432
MAKES IT EASIER FOR STATE AND
LOCAL PROSECUTORS TO HOLD BAD
ACTORS ACCOUNTABLE, SUPPORT
VICTIMS, AND PROTECT OUR
COMMUNITIES IN SEVERAL IMPORTANT
WAYS. FIRST, THE ENHANCED
PENALTIES IN THIS BILL WILL
ENSURE THAT BAD ACTORS CANNOT
EVADE RESPONSIBILITY WHEN THEY
DEFRAUD OR EXPLOIT VULNERABLE
CALIFORNIANS, THEY WILL
LITERALLY PAY FOR THEIR CRIMES.
SECOND, ENSURING THAT BAD ACTORS
ARE HELD FULLY RESPONSIBLE WILL
ENHANCE DETERRENCE AND HELP
PROTECT RESIDENTS ACROSS OUR
STATE. AND FINALLY, AND PERHAPS
MOST IMPORTANTLY, AB 2432 WILL
PROVIDE AN ESSENTIAL FUNDING
SOURCE FOR PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE
VITAL AND IN MANY CASES, EVEN
LIFE SAVING SERVICES TO CRIME
VICTIMS IN CALIFORNIA, INCLUDING
VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING,
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND CHILD
ABUSE. THIS YEAR, CALIFORNIA'S
CRIME VICTIM SERVICE PROVIDERS,
WHO PROVIDE CRITICAL SUPPORT
FACE A REDUCTION OF $170 MILLION
IN FEDERAL FUNDING, A CUT OF
APPROXIMATELY 40. THIS WOULD BE
DEVASTATING. IN PRACTICE, THIS
MEANS FEWER STAFF, LONGER WAIT
TIMES, LESS ASSISTANCE, AND
FEWER OF THE VITAL SERVICES
PROVIDED BY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
SERVICE PROVIDERS. RAPE CRISIS
CENTERS, LEGAL ASSISTANCE
NONPROFITS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING
NONPROFITS, AND MANY OTHERS. I'M
PROUD THAT AB 2432 IS SUPPORTED,
IS SUPPORTED BY A BROAD
COALITION OF PROSECUTORS, VICTIM
SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS AND
CRIMINAL JUSTICE GROUPS THAT
INCLUDE ATTORNEY GENERAL ROB
BONTA, THE CALIFORNIA
PARTNERSHIP TO END DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, THE COALITION TO
ABOLISH SLAVERY AND TRAFFICKING,
CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S LAW CENTER,
SMART JUSTICE, AND THE VENTURA
AND SANTA CLARA COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS, AMONG MANY OTHERS. IT
HAS NO RECORDED OPPOSITION WITH
ME TODAY TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT
OF THIS MEASURE ARE MARIKO, THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FROM HAVEN,
WHICH PROVIDE CRITICAL SERVICES
TO CRIME VICTIMS IN STANISLAUS
COUNTY, AND EVAN ACRION, THE
SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL ON WHITE COLLAR
AND CORPORATE PROSECUTIONS.
THANK YOU AND I RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK
YOU. YEAH FIVE MINUTES FOR YOUR
PANEL. PLEASE PROCEED. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER MCCARTY AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS MARIKO
, AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF HAVEN AND STANISLAUS
COUNTY, WHICH ACTUALLY INCLUDES
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALANIZ DISTRICT.
AND I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF AB 2432, ESTABLISHING
A NEW REVENUE STREAM FOR CRIME
VICTIMS IN CALIFORNIA. HAVEN IS
A PRIVATE NONPROFIT PROVIDING
SERVICES TO SURVIVORS OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SEXUAL
ASSAULT AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN
STANISLAUS COUNTY, INCLUDING
EMERGENCY SHELTER SINCE 1977.
LAST YEAR, HAVEN HELPED OVER
2500 SURVIVORS OF ABUSE AND
VIOLENCE FUNDING FOR CRIME
VICTIM SERVICES IN CALIFORNIA
HAS NOT KEPT UP WITH INCREASED
DEMAND. AS WE COME OUT OF THE
PANDEMIC, MORE PEOPLE ARE
SEEKING HELP WHILE OUR RESOURCES
TO SERVE THEM ARE SHRINKING. NOR
CAN WE RETAIN THE EXPERIENCED
STAFF THEY NEED. WHEN WE CAN'T
KEEP UP WITH COMPETITIVE WAGES.
IN JULY OF 2022, OUR FUNDING
INCLUDED TWO HOUSING GRANTS AND
A LEGAL GRANT, ALL FUNDED BY
VOCA. TODAY, THOSE GRANTS ARE
GONE, KNOCKING OUT MOST OF OUR
HOUSING PROGRAM AND TWO THIRDS
OF OUR LEGAL PROGRAM. TODAY, IF
SOMEONE CALLS US FOR HELP WITH A
RESTRAINING ORDER, IT WILL TAKE
TIME TO FIND SOMEONE WHO CAN
PROVIDE LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND
EVEN MORE TIME TO GET AN
APPOINTMENT. WHEN SOMEONE IS
HUNTING YOU, SOMEONE WHO KNOWS
ALL THE PLACES YOU'LL GO TO
HIDE, AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO
WILL HELP YOU THAT TIME MATTERS.
CONTINUE. PLEASE CONTINUE. TWO
YEARS AGO, THERE WAS A GOOD
CHANCE WE COULD PROVIDE
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE
TO ANYONE IN OUR EMERGENCY
SHELTER. NOW WE ARE VERY LIMITED
IN THE DIRECT ASSISTANCE WE CAN
PROVIDE IN OUR MASTER LEASE
UNITS ARE GONE. SOMEONE TODAY IN
OUR SHELTER IS UNLIKELY TO FIND
THEIR OWN HOUSING IN THE 4 TO 6
WEEKS THEY ARE WITH US. CRIME
VICTIMS IN CALIFORNIA DESERVE
BETTER. THEY COME TO US BECAUSE
THEY ARE IN A SYSTEM THAT IS
ALREADY FAILED THEM. AND WHEN WE
CAN'T MEET THEIR NEEDS IN A
TIMELY MANNER, THEY ARE FAILED
AGAIN. THEY NEED TO KNOW WHEN
THEY PICK UP THE PHONE, THEIR
CALL WILL BE ANSWERED QUICKLY.
WE CAN'T ENSURE THAT WITHOUT
THIS FUNDING PROVIDED BY THIS
MEASURE. YOUR SUPPORT ON AB 2432
WILL ENSURE OUR LIFE SAVING
PROGRAMS CONTINUE. THANK YOU AND
I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIR AND HONORABLE MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AB 2432
WITH YOU ON BEHALF OF ONE OF THE
CO-SPONSORS, ATTORNEY GENERAL
ROB BONTA. WE'D LIKE TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL FOR THE
DETAILED BILL ANALYSIS, AND WE
APPLAUD ASSEMBLYMAN GABRIEL FOR
HIS AUTHORSHIP OF 2432 TO ADD TO
BOTH THE AUTHORS AND MY
CO-SPONSORS PRESENTATIONS, AB
2432 WOULD ESTABLISH A STATE
LEVEL ADDITIONAL FUNDING
MECHANISM TO STRENGTHEN CRIME
SURVIVOR RESTITUTION. AND IT
SUPPORTS BY CREATING A CORPORATE
CRIMINAL FINANCIAL ENHANCEMENT
THAT CALIFORNIA COURTS CAN LEVY
ON CORPORATIONS FOLLOWING A
CRIMINAL CONVICTION OF THE
CORPORATION. ON THE MORE
TECHNICAL SIDE, CURRENTLY THE
DEFAULT CRIMINAL FINE IN
CALIFORNIA IS $10,000 PER FELONY
CONVICTION FOR ANY DEFENDANT,
WHETHER IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL OR A
CORPORATION, THERE ARE CERTAIN
SPECIALIZED CRIMINAL FINES IN
CERTAIN AREAS, SUCH AS
ENVIRONMENTAL AND WHITE COLLAR,
THAT CREATE LARGER FINES. THE
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT IN 2432
WOULD APPLY TO ALL CORPORATE
DEFENDANTS AND CORPORATE
DEFENDANTS ONLY, AND IT WOULD
SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING
FINANCIAL PENALTY ENHANCEMENT BY
GIVING THE COURTS ADDITIONAL
DISCRETION TO IMPOSE FINANCIAL
PENALTIES THAT MATCH THE
SERIOUSNESS OF THE CRIME.
WHENEVER A CORPORATION IS
CONVICTED OF A CRIME, THIS BILL
WILL HOLD CORPORATIONS
ACCOUNTABLE FOR CRIMINAL
WRONGDOING, BUT IT STILL
REQUIRES THE PROSECUTOR TO PROVE
CRIMINAL INTENT FOR EACH CRIME
THAT'S BEING CHARGED, AND TO
CREATE ANSARI AND TO OBTAIN A
CONVICTION BEYOND A REASONABLE
DOUBT. BEFORE THE PROPOSED
ENHANCEMENT COULD BE SOUGHT. AS
MENTIONED EARLIER, 2432 IS A WIN
WIN DUE TO DECLINING VOCA
FUNDING THAT IS LINKED TO
FEDERAL PROSECUTIONS. ATTORNEY
GENERAL BONTA RECENTLY JOINED A
COALITION OF ATTORNEY GENERALS
REPRESENTING 32 STATES AND
TERRITORIES, URGING CONGRESS TO
PROVIDE CRITICAL SUPPORT AND
SERVICES TO VICTIMS AND
SURVIVORS OF CRIME BY TAKING
STEPS TO INCREASE THE VOCA FUND
WITH SHORT TERME BRIDGE FUNDING.
AS NOTED IN THE COMMITTEE'S
ANALYSIS, BOTH THE CALIFORNIA
ADMINISTERED VOCA FUNDING, AS
WELL AS THE CALIFORNIA VICTIMS
COMPENSATION BOARD, ARE
PERPETUALLY UNDERFUNDED, LEAVING
MANY CRIME SURVIVORS WITH
LIMITED SUPPORT. I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND WE
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR AYE
VOTE SO THAT THE STATE MAY
CREATE SUPPLEMENTAL STATE
FUNDING FOR VOCA AND FOR THE
OTHER CAL VICTIM SERVICES BY
SUPPORTING PROSECUTING AGENCIES
WITH BRINGING THESE CRIMINAL
CASES FORWARD ON BEHALF OF
VULNERABLE CALIFORNIA. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHERS IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE LINE UP YOUR NAME,
POSITION ONLY. NATASHA MINSKER
SMART JUSTICE CALIFORNIA AND
STRONG SUPPORT DANICA ADAMO ON
BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE AND
STRONG SUPPORT. TIÂU NHÀ VARGAS.
INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION IN
SUPPORT JOHN FINLEY,
REPRESENTING THE CENTER FOR
COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS IN SAN
DIEGO. SPEAKING IN SUPPORT
CHERYL MARCEL, CEO, STAND UP
BLAKESPEAR IN STRONG SUPPORT.
JAMIE GARIC, ON BEHALF OF
SACRAMENTO LGBT CENTER IN STRONG
SUPPORT. MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE IN SUPPORT. HOLLY
FLEMING, CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY
CENTERS OF CALIFORNIA, AS WELL
AS HOMEBRIDGE VICTIM EMPOWERMENT
SUPPORT TEAM, WOMEN INC, JEWISH
FAMILY SERVICES IN LÀ, INTERFACE
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES,
SHELTER FROM THE STORM AND HOUSE
OF RUTH IN STRONG SUPPORT. AND
LITTLE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIANS
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE IN
SUPPORT. TUNISIA OWENS, POLICY
AND ADVOCACY MANAGER AT FAMILY
VIOLENCE LAW CENTER IN ALAMEDA
COUNTY AND THE GENDER BASED
VIOLENCE COALITION OF ALAMEDA
COUNTY IN STRONG SUPPORT. MR.
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS DAN LOZANO, ON
BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND
THE CRIME VICTIMS ACTION
ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, FAITH LEE. WITH ASIAN
AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, WE'RE IN
SUPPORT SARAH BRENNAN WITH THE
WIDEMAN GROUP ON BEHALF OF VALOR
USA, WHICH REPRESENTS A STRONG
NETWORK OF ADVOCATES, CRISIS
PROFESSIONALS, VOLUNTEERS AND
COMMUNITY PARTNERS THAT MAKE UP
CALIFORNIA'S SAFETY NET FOR
SEXUAL VIOLENCE SURVIVORS. WE'RE
PROUD TO CO-SPONSOR AB 2432 AND
URGE AND I VOTE. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING WITH GREENBERG TRAURIG
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PARTNERSHIP TO END DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, A CO-SPONSOR, THE
CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE NETWORK, CO-SPONSOR
CASA DE ESPERANZA CENTER FOR
DOMESTIC PEACE FAMILY SERVICES
OF TULARE COUNTY, FAMILY
VIOLENCE APPELLATE PROJECT,
HUMBOLDT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
SERVICES, AND NEXT DOOR
SOLUTIONS TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS LAURA MCMAHON. I'M THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
OF MARIN, AND WE STRONGLY
SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
LAWRENCE COX, LSPC STRONGLY
SUPPORT. ALYSSA. MORE. ALL OF US
ARE N N STRONGLY SUPPORT. TANA
OPPLIGER WITH CALIFORNIA UNITED
FOR RESPONSIBLE BUDGET STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. LISA
MANTARO. MORE WITH THE
STANISLAUS FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER
AS WELL AS THE CALIFORNIA FAMILY
JUSTICE NETWORK IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL? DOUBTFUL. IMPRESSIVE
COALITION OF SUPPORT. SEEING
NONE. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. WE DO HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND. MR. LACKEY.
YEAH. EXCUSE ME. I'D LIKE TO
SAY, FIRST OF ALL, I NEED TO BE,
CONSISTENT IN BEING A VICTIM'S
RIGHTS ADVOCATE. CLEARLY, THEIR
FUNDING IS IN JEOPARDY AND THEIR
ACTUALLY HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT
TIME THAT THIS ENVIRONMENT RIGHT
NOW. BUT, MY QUESTION TO THE
AUTHOR IS THIS. AND I KIND OF
INFERRED IT SOMEWHAT IN OUR
PREVIOUS CONVERSATION, BUT WHAT
IS THE ASSURANCE THAT THIS MONEY
WILL GO TO THE CRIME VICTIMS
CIRCUMSTANCE AND NOT BE DIVERTED
TO GENERAL FUND? YEAH, YOU HAVE
YOU HAVE MY COMMITMENT ON THAT.
AND RIGHT NOW THE MONEY IS SET
ASIDE SPECIFICALLY TO DO THAT.
OKAY. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS. YOU LIKE TO CLOSE,
MR. GABRIEL? YEAH. I JUST WANT
TO THANK YOU ALL. I WANT TO
THANK THE. REALLY IN PARTICULAR,
THANK THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE AND ALSO, MOST
IMPORTANTLY, ALL OF THE
ADVOCATES WHO DO THE INCREDIBLE
WORK IN OUR COMMUNITIES TO HELP
CRIME VICTIMS. THAT IS DIFFICULT
AND CHALLENGING WORK. AND THEY
MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE IN THE
LIVES OF A LOT OF FOLKS ACROSS
THE STATE. SO ON THEIR BEHALF
AND ON MY BEHALF, RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST. AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AB 2432
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER GABRIEL. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS TO THE
BANKING AND FINANCE COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY MCCARTY I ALANIS ALANIS
I LACKEY I LACKEY I NGUYEN
NGUYEN I REYES TING TING I
WILSON. ZUBER ZUBER I THAT
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU NEXT
AUTHOR ASSEMBLY MEMBER. IRWIN.
ITEM NUMBER TWO AB 1779.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
I'M PLEASED TODAY TO PRESENT AB
1779, WHICH RETURNS AUTHORITY TO
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS TO JOIN
CHARGES FOR MULTIPLE COUNTIES
INTO ONE TRIAL WHEN PROSECUTING
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT RINGS
THAT HAVE OPERATED ACROSS
MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS. THIS
MORNING, I WAS HONORED TO HAVE
THE MEASURE INCLUDED IN SPEAKER
RIVAS CALIFORNIANS TOGETHER
AGAINST RETAIL CRIME SLATE OF
BILLS. AS MY TWO WITNESSES WILL
SHARE MORE ABOUT ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT CONTINUES TO PLAGUE
OUR COMMUNITIES AND ITS
RESULTING FINANCIAL IMPACT
BURDENS NOT ONLY RETAILERS, BUT
ALSO THE AVERAGE FAMILY TRYING
TO PURCHASE GOODS. WHILE I'M
PROUD TO HAVE REVIVED THIS
ABILITY TO JOIN CHARGES FROM
MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS FROM THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL IN 2022, WE
HAVE HEARD FROM THE CHP AT THE
LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION AND
FROM RETAILERS THAT THERE ARE
MORE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL CASES
THAN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
IS WILLING TO TAKE ON. WITH
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS READY AND
WILLING TO RESPOND TO THEIR
CONSTITUENT CONCERNS. WITH
MULTI-JURISDICTION ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT AND OUR STATE
BUDGET INVESTMENTS BUILDING OUT
THEIR CAPACITY FOR THIS SPECIFIC
PURPOSE. IT IS AN APPROPRIATE
TIME TO REVIVE THIS TOOL FOR
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS. THIS BILL
WAS AMENDED LAST MONTH TO
PROVIDE THAT DA'S HAVE THE
WRITTEN AGREEMENT OF OTHER
JURISDICTIONS, OTHERWISE CHARGES
OCCURRING IN A NONPARTISAN
JURISDICTION WILL BE RETURNED
AND ADDITIONALLY, THIS COMMITTEE
HAS SUGGESTED ON PAGE FIVE OF
THE ANALYSIS, AN AMENDMENT TO
REQUIRE A JOINDER HEARING UNDER
PENAL CODE 954 BE ADDED TO
ADDRESS, CONSTITUTE PERSONALITY
CONCERNS. I ACCEPT THIS
COMMITTEE'S SUGGESTION AND, IN
CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMITTEE,
HAVE AGREED TO AMEND THE BILL
ACCORDINGLY ON THE ASSEMBLY
FLOOR. NOW, I'D LIKE TO
INTRODUCE MY TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES. VENTURA COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY ERIC NAZARENKO
AND PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION, RACHEL
MICHELIN. THANK YOU. PLEASE
PROCEED. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR
MCCARTY. MEMBERS OF THE
ASSEMBLY, PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE STAFF, I WANT TO THANK
ALL OF YOU FOR ENTERTAINING THIS
IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. I, TOO,
WANT TO THANK AND APPLAUD
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JACKIE IRWIN FOR
BRINGING FORWARD THIS BILL. LAST
YEAR IN VENTURA COUNTY. WE WERE
ABLE TO RECEIVE 17 MILLION IN
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
PREVENTION GRANT FUNDING, 15 TO
OUR SHERIFF, TWO TO THE OFFICE
OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. WE NOW
HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
PROSECUTORIAL RESOURCES IN
VENTURA COUNTY TO COMBAT THE
SCOURGE OF ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT. WE RESPECTFULLY SEEK AND
ASK YOUR ASSISTANCE IN CREATING
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT WILL
ALLOW US TO ADDRESS AND COMBAT
THESE ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
RINGS THAT OCCUR IN VENTURA
COUNTY AND ELSEWHERE. I WANT TO
EMPHASIZE THAT THIS IS A
SENSIBLE AND COST EFFECTIVE
PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WHY IS IT
SENSIBLE AND COST EFFECTIVE?
BECAUSE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO
TAKE ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFTS
THAT OCCUR IN MULTIPLE COUNTIES
AND CONSOLIDATE THEM INTO ONE
ACTION IN ONE COUNTY, SO LONG AS
THERE IS THE PERMISSION OF THE
OTHER DA'S IN THOSE SURROUNDING
COUNTIES. I WELCOME THE
AMENDMENT. THIS IS A LONG
STANDING PRACTICE IN CALIFORNIA
PENAL CODE TO SEEK THE
ACCEPTANCE OR BUY IN OF DAS,
WHEREIN THEFTS OR OTHER OFFENSES
OCCURRED, BUT IT ALSO PRESERVES
JUDICIAL ECONOMY RATHER THAN TRY
THE DEFENDANT IN MULTIPLE
OCCASIONS, IT CONSOLIDATES THE
LOCATION INTO ONE VENUE. AND
LASTLY, AND PERHAPS MOST
IMPORTANTLY, IT ALSO ENSURES AND
PROTECTS DEFENDANTS RIGHTS
RATHER THAN FACE PROSECUTION IN
MULTIPLE COUNTIES. THEY HAVE ONE
ACTION AND ONE COUNTY. SO I
ENCOURAGE THIS BODY TO VOTE IN
THE AFFIRMATIVE. AND I WANT TO
THANK ALL OF YOU FOR CONSIDERING
THE RESTORATION OF THIS
IMPORTANT CROSS
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS I'M CHAIRMAN MCCARTY,
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE. WE'VE ALL SEEN THE
VIDEOS. INDIVIDUALS WALKING INTO
A STORE, CLEANING OUT A SHELF
FULL OF PRODUCTS INTO A GARBAGE
BAG, AND RIDING OUT ON A BIKE.
OR WHAT ABOUT THE THIEVES
TARGETING ESSENTIAL ITEMS LIKE
BABY FORMULA, CROSSING COUNTY
LINES TO STEAL FROM MULTIPLE
STORES WHILE THREATENING A
RETAIL EMPLOYEE KNOWING IT WOULD
BE MORE DIFFICULT TO BE
PROSECUTED TO THE FULL EXTENT OF
THE LAW BECAUSE PROSECUTORS
CURRENTLY LACK THE AUTHORITY FOR
MULTI-JURISDICTION PROSECUTIONS.
RETAILERS, RETAIL EMPLOYEES AND
CALIFORNIA CUSTOMERS ARE
FRUSTRATED WITH SEEING RETAIL
THEFT AND ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME
HAPPENING ALL AROUND THEM. WE
MUST GIVE OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT
AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS THE TOOLS
THEY NEED TO ADDRESS THESE
SOPHISTICATED CRIME RINGS AND
HOLDS THESE ENTERPRISES
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR CRIMINAL
ACTIVITY, CALIFORNIA PROSECUTORS
EFFECTIVELY UTILIZED CROSS
JURISDICTIONAL CHARGING BETWEEN
2019 AND 2021, AND WHILE IN 2022
THE STATE ALLOWED FOR THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE ABILITY TO
CONTINUE PROSECUTING WITH THIS
TOOL, THE UNFORTUNATE FACT IS
RETAIL THEFT IS SO RAMPANT THAT
IN ORDER TO DETER IT FROM
INCREASING AND ENSURE OUR
BUSINESSES, EMPLOYEES AND
CUSTOMERS ARE SAFE FROM CRIMINAL
ACTIVITY, WE NEED TO RESTORE THE
ABILITY OF CROSS JURISDICTIONAL
CHARGING TO OUR DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS THROUGH COLLABORATION
AMONG THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND RETAILERS
ACROSS THE STATE, I'M CONFIDENT
WE CAN BEGIN TO TACKLE THE
GROWTH OF RETAIL THEFT ORK AND
BEGIN TO SEE SAFER RETAIL
ENVIRONMENTS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. WE SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS
TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS
REGARDING THE POTENTIAL
CONFLICTS BETWEEN NEIGHBORING
COUNTIES, TO REQUIRE THE
PROSECUTOR TO PRESENT WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION AND THE RECENT
AMENDMENTS. THE AUTHOR AGREED TO
TAKE ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR, AND
THIS BILL BUILDS ON A NUMBER OF
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AS PART OF
THE ASSEMBLY RETAIL THEFT
PACKAGE THAT TAKING
COMPREHENSIVELY COULD HAVE
MEANINGFUL IMPACTS ON STOPPING
THE GROWING THREAT OF RETAIL
THEFT AND ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME
IN CALIFORNIA. AND IT SENDS A
SIGNAL THAT THE CONVERSATION
AROUND THE ISSUE OF HOLDING
REPEAT OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THEIR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IS
CHANGING. AB 1779 ENSURES
CALIFORNIANS THAT WE WILL NOT
ALLOW CRIMINALS TO CIRCUMVENT
THE LAW BY CROSSING COUNTY LINES
TO AVOID ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
THEIR CRIMINAL ACTIONS. FOR
THOSE REASONS, I ASK FOR YOUR
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS
IN SUPPORT, PLEASE LINE UP YOUR
NAME, ORGANIZATION AND POSITION
ONLY. MR. CHAIR MEMBERS. JOLINA
VORCE ON BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR
MEMBERS, CORY SALZILLO, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, IN SUPPORT
. CHAIR AND MEMBERS DANIELLE
SANCHEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE CHIEF
PROBATION OFFICERS OF CALIFORNIA
IN SUPPORT. MR. CHAIR JACK
YANEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FUELS AND CONVENIENCE
ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT. MACK
HOLTMAN, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
. BRENDA BASS, CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, IN SUPPORT.
DANIEL CONWAY, CALIFORNIA
GROCERS IN SUPPORT. NATALIE
BOWERS, CALIFORNIA BUSINESS
ROUNDTABLE IN SUPPORT. SKYLAR
WONACOTT, CALIFORNIA BUSINESS
PROPERTIES ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. CANDACE CHUNG, ON
BEHALF OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ROB
BONTA IN SUPPORT. BRADLEY
CHANDLER IN ORANGE COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FULL
SUPPORT. MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS
DAN PALAZZOTTO, ON BEHALF OF THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT
OFFICE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
OPPOSITION. PLEASE COME FORWARD.
GOOD MORNING. MATT ROSEN OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION. WE THANK THE MEMBER
FOR THE AMENDMENT. WE'RE
CONSIDERING WITHDRAWING OUR
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THERE WE
GO. MELANIE KIM, SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE IN
OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE COX, ON
BEHALF LSPC STRONG OPPOSITION.
ALYSSA MOORE. ALL OF US ARE NONE
IN STRONG OPPOSITION. BARBARA
CHÁVEZ WITH THE ELLA BAKER
CENTER OPPOSITION. THÀNH. THANK
YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND. QUESTIONS ARE MOTION AND
SECOND, BY MR. TING. MR. LACKEY.
YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE
AUTHOR AND ASK TO BE A CO
COAUTHOR ON THIS MEASURE. AND
THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE
ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE, SO I'M
THANKFUL IT'S HERE AGAIN. AND I
THINK THIS TIME IT HAS A GOOD
CHANCE OF GETTING WHERE IT NEEDS
TO GET, BECAUSE ACCOUNTABILITY
NEEDS TO HAPPEN. SO THANK YOU,
MR. ALANIS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
ECHO THOSE COMMENTS AND ALSO ASK
TO BE A COAUTHOR. MR. ZUBIATE, I
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR ON
THIS. I KNOW THAT SHE WORKED
HARD WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY
STAFF AND THE SPEAKER STAFF ON
THIS BILL, AND IT'S BEEN REFINED
AND WANT TO APPRECIATE THE HARD
WORK THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FURTHER
QUESTIONS. WE HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND. AND YOU DID, RECOGNIZE
THAT YOUR WILLINGNESS TO FURTHER
CLARIFY SOME OF THESE BEFORE THE
NEXT YES VOTE. WE'RE TAKING ALL
THE AMENDMENTS. YES. SO THANK
YOU. YOU MAY CLOSE, JUST
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION. A
SECOND, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
AB 1779 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
IRWIN. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS.
MCCARTY A MCCARTY A ALANIS
ALANIS A LACKEY. LACKEY I NGUYEN
NGUYEN I REYES REYES I TING TING
I WILSON WILSON I ZEBRA, ZEBRA I
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU VERY
NØ AUTHORS, MR. LONNIE. SO ARE
YOU READY FOR YOURS? POTENTIALLY
YES. YES. AS YOU SAW, VOTE ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR TO READ
THEM ALL. YES. THE CONSENT ITEMS
ARE AB 1772 RAMOS AB 1962.
BERMAN AB, 1972 ALANIS AB 2281.
SORIA AB 2531 BRYAN AB 2625
BRYAN AB 2645. LACKEY AB 2681
WEBER AND AB 3027 BAINS. WE HAVE
A MOTION. A MOTION BY MR. TÍNH,
SECOND BY MR. LACKEY. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. MCCARTY. MCCARTY AYE.
ALANIS. AYE. ALANIS. AYE. LAKI.
LAKI AYE. NGUYEN. NGUYEN. AYE.
REYES. REYES AYE. TING TING.
AYE. WILSON WILSON. AYE. ZUBER.
ZUBIATE. AYE OKAY. CONSENT
CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. MR. ALANIS,
PLEASE PRESENT YOUR MEASURE FOR
ITEM NUMBER SIX. AND NUMBER SIX
FIRST. YEAH. AB 1845. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS, I AM PROUD
TO PRESENT AB 1845. TODAY. I
WOULD LIKE TO START BY SAYING MY
OFFICE HAS BEEN TALKING TO THE
OPPOSITION ON THIS BILL, AND WE
ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUING
HAVING GOOD FAITH, CONVERSATIONS
, ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS THE
CONCERNS, MY MAIN GOAL WITH THIS
PROPOSAL IS TO HELP VERTICALLY
ELEVATE MISDEMEANOR CASES LIKE
RETAIL THEFT THROUGH THE SYSTEM.
COLLEAGUES WE ARE HAVING A LOT
OF NEEDED DEBATE AND DISCUSSION
AROUND RETAIL THEFT. OBVIOUSLY,
WE HAD A PRESS CONFERENCE JUST
ON IT NOT TOO LONG AGO, I HEAR
OFTEN PEOPLE SAY WE NEED TO
SIMPLY PROSECUTE THE LAWS THAT
ARE ON THE BOOKS ALREADY. WHILE
I DO NOT WANT TO TRIGGER DEBATE
ON THE EFFECTS OF CURRENT LAW
TODAY, WHAT MY BILL WILL DO IS
PROVIDE THE NEEDED RESOURCES TO
VERTICALLY ELEVATE CASES PENDING
BASED ON CURRENT LAW. AS I HAVE
TRAVELED UP AND DOWN THE STATE,
I HAVE SPOKEN WITH VARIOUS DA'S
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS
WHO HAVE TOLD ME THEY WOULD LOVE
TO FOCUS ON MISDEMEANOR CASES
SUCH AS RETAIL THEFT, BUT THEY
LACK THE NECESSARY RESOURCES TO
VERTICALLY ELEVATE THESE CASES
ON A WIDE BASIS. WE CAN HAVE ALL
THE LAWS WE WANT ON THE BOOKS,
BUT IF WE DO NOT HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO MOVE THOSE CASES IN
THE COURTS, THEY ARE IN FACT
INEFFECTIVE LAWS. WE MUST
CONTINUE TO FUND PROVEN AND
SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS LIKE THE
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT PROGRAM
GRANT PROGRAM, A PROGRAM THAT
HAS PROVEN TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN
STANISLAUS COUNTY, WHICH I
REPRESENT. I KNOW THE CHAIR IS
WORKING TO ADVANCE OTHER
INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS THROUGH
OTHER PROGRAMS PROVEN SUCCESSFUL
IN OTHER COUNTIES, AND I HAVE
PROMISED TO TAKE AMENDMENTS TO
THIS BILL TO SUPPORT THE CHAIR'S
EFFORTS THROUGH THOSE PROPOSALS.
I WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR FOR
HIS LEADERSHIP, AND I WANT TO
THANK HIM AND HIS STAFF FOR
WORKING SO COLLABORATIVELY WITH
ME AND MY OFFICE ON ISSUES LIKE
RETAIL THEFT, TO SPEAK ON
SUCCESS OF THE ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.
I HAVE THE STANISLAUS COUNTY DA,
JEFF LUCERO, WITH ME, WHO WILL
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT TO THIS
PROPOSAL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE,
I'M HONORED TO BE HERE TODAY
ALONGSIDE ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALANIZ
IN SUPPORT OF AB 1845, WHICH
WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES TO AGENCIES LIKE MINE
IN OUR ONGOING EFFORT TO COMBAT
RETAIL THEFT THROUGH VERTICAL
PROSECUTION, ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT. VERTICAL PROSECUTION HAS
BEEN A SUCCESSFUL STRATEGY FOR
STANISLAUS COUNTY FOR SEVERAL
REASONS. VERTICAL PROSECUTION
ALLOWS OUR OFFICE TO HAVE
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT CRIMES
HANDLED BY A SPECIALIZED
PROSECUTOR. FROM THE TIME THE
CASE IS RECEIVED IN OUR OFFICE
TO CASE RESOLUTION, THIS HAS
RESULTED IN A SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE IN SUCCESSFUL CASE
OUTCOMES. VERTICAL PROSECUTION
HAS EXPANDED OUR ABILITY TO
COLLABORATE WITH COMMUNITY
STAKEHOLDERS AND ALLOWED FOR A
MORE COHESIVE RESPONSE TO
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT THROUGH
OUR DEDICATED, ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT, PROSECUTOR AND DA
INVESTIGATOR, WE HAVE CULTIVATED
RELATIONSHIPS WITH AGENCY OUGHT
INVESTIGATORS, LOSS PREVENTION
OFFICERS, AND LOCAL BUSINESSES
NOT JUST THE BIG BOX STORES, BUT
THE MOM AND POP SHOPS AS WELL.
FROM THESE CONVERSATIONS, WE
HAVE WORKED TOGETHER TO DEVELOP
STRATEGIES DESIGNED TO DETER AND
REDUCE THEFT, EFFECTIVELY
PROSECUTE OFFENDERS, PROTECT
EMPLOYEES, STAFF AND SHOPPERS,
AND TO SUPPORT CONSUMERS BY
ENSURING NEEDED PRODUCTS ARE
AVAILABLE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD
STORES. ULTIMATELY VERTICAL
PROSECUTION HAS IMPROVED THE
QUALITY OF THE INVESTIGATIONS
AND CASE OUTCOMES SPECIFIC TO
OUGHT. THESE CASES CAN BE
COMPLEX AND
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL, SO HAVING
THE RIGHT RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO
CONDUCT THE REQUIRED FOLLOW UP
AND COORDINATION BETWEEN
PROSECUTING OFFICES IS PARAMOUNT
TO SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION. AS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, ALANIZ
REPEATEDLY STATED, RETAIL THEFT
IS NOT ONLY A POLICY ISSUE, BUT
ALSO A FUNDING AND A RESOURCE
ISSUE. AB 1845 BUILDS ON THE
SUCCESS OF OTHER RETAIL THEFT
FUNDING PROGRAMS, SUCH AS THE
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM, WHICH
WE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED
AND APPLIED IN STANISLAUS
COUNTY, ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
GRANT FUNDING HAS ALLOWED MY
OFFICE TO IMPLEMENT OUR AUT
STRATEGY. WITHOUT THIS GRANT
PROGRAM, WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD
THE MONEY OR RESOURCES NEEDED TO
EFFECTIVELY COMBAT OUGHT AND
ENFORCEMENT OF AUT CRIMES, AS
WELL AS THE AFFECTED BUSINESSES
AND CONSUMERS WOULD CONTINUE TO
SUFFER ORTEZ GRANT FUNDING HAS
ALLOWED US TO DEDICATE A
PROSECUTOR AND DA INVESTIGATOR
NOT JUST TO PREPARE AND
PROSECUTE THESE CASES, BUT TO
ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY AND
COLLABORATE WITH OUR LAW
ENFORCEMENT, RETAIL AND
COMMUNITY PARTNERS ON EFFECTIVE
STRATEGIES TO COMBAT ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. I'D LIKE TO THANK
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALANIZ FOR
AUTHORING THIS BILL AND FOR HIS
CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE
PROSECUTORS WHO WORK EVERY DAY
TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITIES SAFE.
HIS COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO
PROBLEM SOLVING IS SEEN IN
SACRAMENTO AND AT HOME AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL. I HOPE THIS
COMMITTEE WILL REWARD THAT
EFFORT BY VOTING TO ADVANCE THIS
MUCH NEEDED LEGISLATION FOR
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
. OTHERS IN SUPPORT, PLEASE COME
FORWARD. COREY SUSILO, ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. FOR MR. CHAIR RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION, THE
CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION, RIVERSIDE OR
CALIFORNIA RESERVE PEACE
OFFICERS, DEPUTY SHERIFFS OF
MONTEREY AND PLACER AND PEACE
OFFICER ASSOCIATIONS OF ARCADIA,
BURBANK, CLAREMONT, CORONA,
CULVER CITY, FULLERTON,
MURIETTA, NEWPORT BEACH, NOVATO,
PALOS VERDES, POMONA, RIVERSIDE,
SANTA ANA, AND UPLAND, ALL IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. WOW MAC
ALTMAN, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. JULIAN ALVAREZ WITH THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES IN
SUPPORT. SKYLAR WONACOTT, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
BUSINESS PROPERTIES ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. DANIEL CONWAY,
CALIFORNIA GROCERS IN SUPPORT.
SARA PALERMO, CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. JULIAN, CONNECTICUT.
CALIFORNIA HISPANIC CHAMBERS OF
COMMERCE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE? MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THAT
THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE HAS REACHED
OUT AND WE'RE HAVING
CONVERSATIONS. THANK YOU. MICAH
DOCTOROFF, ON BEHALF OF ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION, WE HAVE
OPPOSED THIS MEASURE, BUT WE'RE
ALSO EAGER TO HEAR ABOUT FUTURE
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. ON
LAWRENCE COX, ON BEHALF OF LSPC
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MOORE. ALL OF
US ARE NONE. OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS?
MR. ZUBIATE? I JUST WANT TO
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL, AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR REALLY YOUR LEADERSHIP
ON THIS WHOLE AREA OF RETAIL
THEFT. I KNOW THAT YOU'VE BEEN
ENGAGED IN ALL THE DISCUSSIONS
WITH MANY OF THE AUTHORS, AND I
THINK THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE OF
REALLY SOMEONE WHO IS LIKE
GETTING INTO THE DETAILS OF THE
REFORMS THAT WE SORT OF NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING
IS EFFECTIVE. AND SO, THANK YOU
FOR THAT. I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL TODAY AND THANK YOU TO BE
ADDED AS A I THINK I'M ALREADY
COAUTHOR. I THINK YOU ARE. IF
YOU'RE NOT, YOU WILL BE. IF I'M
NOT, I'D LIKE TO ADD IT. SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS
WILSON. THANK YOU. TO THE
AUTHOR. I HAVE ONE, JUST FOLLOW
UP QUESTIONS. GIVEN THE FACT
THAT IF THERE'S ENOUGH IMPACT OF
RETAIL THEFT ON A PARTICULAR
COUNTY, WOULDN'T YOU SAY THAT
DA'S WOULD PRIORITIZE IT ALREADY
IN TERMS OF THE RESOURCES?
BECAUSE THIS RESOURCES IS USED
FOR NOT JUST FOR THE DA'S, BUT,
YOU KNOW, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES AND MONEY FOR THEM. SO
I'M JUST WONDERING, WHEN THEY
PRIORITIZE IT ANYWAY, DO YOU
WANT TO ANSWER THAT? I CAN SPEAK
TO STANISLAUS COUNTY. OKAY. SO
OUR LOCAL AGENCIES HAVE RECEIVED
FUNDING AS WELL. AND BETWEEN
WORKING WITH THE AGENCIES AND
WORKING WITH THE BUSINESSES,
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO COLLABORATE
AND COME UP WITH A STRATEGY TO
ADDRESS NOT JUST SHOPLIFTING.
GENERALLY BUT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME. SO
IT HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE AS THE
PROSECUTING OFFICE. WE TEND TO
BE THE UMBRELLA AND BRING
EVERYBODY TOGETHER. SO THE
FUNDING FOR THE PROSECUTOR AND
THE RESOURCES REALLY ALLOW US TO
GO OUT AND HAVE THAT, THAT
DEDICATED PROSECUTOR TO BRING
THE RESOURCES IN THE COMMUNITY
TO TOGETHER AND TO FIGURE OUT
STRATEGIES ON HOW TO DEAL WITH
WITH ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT. SO
ARE YOU SAYING THEN IT WILL
ALLOW YOU TO HAVE BETTER FOCUS
ON THAT PARTICULAR. WHEREAS IF
YOU WOULD BE PULLED AWAY FOR
OTHER ISSUES, IF THE IF THIS
RESOURCE DIDN'T EXIST, IF THE
RESOURCE DIDN'T EXIST, WE WOULD
NOT BE ABLE TO DEDICATE A PERSON
TO THE TIME AND THE EFFORT THAT
IT DOES TAKE TO ADDRESS,
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT. OKAY. SO
THE FUNDS, OTHER MURDERS AND
OTHER THINGS WOULD TAKE PRIORITY
OVER IT AND COULD DERAIL. RIGHT?
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE A
DEDICATED PROSECUTOR
SPECIFICALLY FOR ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT VERSUS PULLING THEM
IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT
DIRECTIONS. OKAY. AND SO YOU'RE
FINDING THAT EFFECTIVE. AND SO
YOU'RE SAYING, YOU KNOW, OTHER
DA'S OR OTHER COUNTIES MAY NOT
HAVE THE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO
BE ABLE TO DO THAT SAME THING,
AND SINCE YOU'RE EFFECTIVE,
YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'VE BEEN A
PILOT, SO TO SPEAK. IS THAT
OKAY? THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
OKAY, MR. LACKEY? YEAH. I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO CONGRATULATE YOU ON
DOING SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS
PARTICULAR GRANT PROGRAM FOCUSES
ON THE UPSTREAM PARTICIPANTS AND
NOT JUST THE, THE OFFENDERS
THEMSELVES. SO IT'S TRULY IT'S A
SUBSTANTIVE VERSUS PUNITIVE
APPROACH TO WHAT NEEDS TO TAKE
TAKE PLACE IN THIS PROCESS OF
ADDRESSING THIS VERY, VERY
THREATENING TOXIN TO OUR
ECONOMIC, ECONOMIC SYSTEM. SO
THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND IT HAS
MY FULL SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
OKAY. MISS REYES, I ALSO WANT TO
THANK MY COLLEAGUE FOR A VERY
THOUGHTFUL APPROACH. I THINK
THAT, THE DEDICATION OF, OF AT
LEAST HALF THE TIME OF A FULL
TIME DEPUTY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
TO THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, HAVING
THAT AS THE FOUNDATION TO THEN
APPLY FOR AND RECEIVE THE GRANT,
I THINK IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
IT'S SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE IN
SO MANY OF OUR OF OUR DISTRICTS,
AND WE ALL HEAR FROM OUR
CONSTITUENTS, WE WANT THEY WANT
SOMETHING DONE. AND I APPRECIATE
THE APPROACH THAT YOU'VE PUT
HERE AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME, AS
WAS NOTED EARLIER, THAT YOU'VE
SPENT WITH THE COMMITTEE AND
WITH OTHERS TO GET IT RIGHT, TO,
TO THE POINT THAT YOU HAVE, SO
MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPORTING
IT. AND I THINK THIS REFLECTS ON
YOU AND THE GOOD WORK. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. THAT MEANS A
LOT. THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE A
MOTION? MOTION, MOTION BY
COUNCIL MEMBER NGUYEN, SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER REYES. FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, SEEING
NONE, I DID NOTE THAT YOU
MENTIONED OUR COMPANION
LEGISLATION, AND I APPRECIATE
YOU TALKING ABOUT HOW THIS
FUNDING COULD ENHANCE THE
FASTPASS PROGRAM. IF IT DOES
PASS LATER THIS AFTERNOON. THANK
YOU. YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR, FOR THIS. COMMENTS.
IT'S TEAMWORK. REALLY A LOT OF
US HERE IN THIS ROOM, WORKING
TOGETHER TO WORK ON REAL
SOLUTIONS. SO I'M VERY PROUD TO
BE PART OF THAT. I'M REALLY
HAPPY TO BE PART OF THIS AS
WELL, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE PROVING
DATA, SHOWING THAT THIS IS
HELPING US IN OUR IN STANISLAUS
COUNTY. I'M HOPING OTHER
COUNTIES CAN ALSO BE ABLE TO
ENJOY THIS AS WELL, WITH THAT, I
ASK RESPECTFULLY FOR YOUR AYE,
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION A SECOND, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AB 1845 AS A MEMBER.
ALANIS. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS TO
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY. MCCARTY AYE. ALANIZ.
ALANIZ. AYE. LAKI. LAKI AYE.
NGUYEN. HI. NGUYEN. AYE. REYES
REYES. AYE. TING TING AYE.
WILSON HI. WILSON. AYE. ZABIR.
ZABIR. AYE THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT
MEASURE. WE'RE GOOD. YES. WE'RE
GOOD. YES. THANK YOU. THAT'S
RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
EVERYONE. THANK YOU, NEXT WE
HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER SANCHEZ.
SANCHEZ.
SO WHICH ONE WILL SHE HAVE OVER?
SHE JUST ASKED. SHE PUT THAT ONE
IN. SHE HAS 1870. YEAH. PLEASE
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS. I'M PROUD TO
PRESENT AB 1872, WHICH WILL
PROVIDE CLARITY TO THE
ILLEGALITY OF USING AI GENERATED
IMAGES FOR EXTORTION PURPOSES.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS
MOVING AT A RECORD PACE. AND SO
ARE THE DANGERS IT POSES TO OUR
MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS. OF
PARTICULAR CONCERN FOR THESE
POPULATIONS, ESPECIALLY MINORS,
ARE SEXTORTION CASES INVOLVING
AI GENERATED IMAGES. SEXTORTION
INVOLVES COERCING VICTIMS INTO
PROVIDING SEXUALLY EXPLICIT
PHOTOS OR VIDEOS OF THEMSELVES,
THEN THREATENING TO SHARE THEM
PUBLICLY OR WITH THE VICTIM'S
FAMILY AND FRIENDS IF THEIR
DEMANDS ARE NOT MET. LAST YEAR,
THE FBI ISSUED AN ALERT TO WARN
THE PUBLIC OF THE GROWING USE OF
AI BY MALICIOUS ACTORS TO CREATE
MANIPULATIVE IMAGES IN VIDEOS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSNARING
VICTIMS. IN SEXTORTION SCHEMES.
THESE CRIMES CAN RESULT IN
VICTIMS HARMING THEMSELVES OR
EVEN COMMITTING SUICIDE. FROM
OCTOBER 2021 TO MARCH 2023, THE
FBI AND HOMELAND SECURITY
INVESTIGATIONS RECEIVED OVER
13,000 OF ONLINE FINANCIAL
SEXTORTION OF MINORS. THE
SEXTORTION INVOLVED AT LEAST
12,000 VICTIMS, PRIMARILY BOYS,
AND LED TO AT LEAST 20 SUICIDES.
THAT IS WHY I'VE PARTNERED WITH
THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT TO INTRODUCE AB 1872
AND HELP EQUIP OUR PROSECUTORS
WITH THE TOOLS THEY NEED TO
CRACK DOWN ON SEXTORTION CASES.
THIS IS A REASONABLE MEASURE
THAT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR
PROSECUTORS TO SUCCESSFULLY
CONVICT CRIMINAL CRIMINALS USING
AI TO EXTORT THEIR VICTIMS FOR
MONEY OR SEXUAL IMAGES. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE ON THIS MEASURE, AND
TESTIFYING WITH ME TODAY IS
INVESTIGATOR HEATHER TIMMONS
WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT. YES. GOOD MORNING
EVERYBODY. I'M INVESTIGATOR
HEATHER TIMMONS WITH THE ORANGE
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. I
HAVE BEEN A SWORN DEPUTY SHERIFF
FOR 16 YEARS. AND ASSIGNED AS AN
INVESTIGATOR FOR THE PAST FIVE
YEARS. I'M CURRENTLY THE SENIOR
INVESTIGATOR ASSIGNED TO THE
SPECIAL VICTIMS DETAIL, AS WELL
AS THE FEDERAL TASK FORCE
OFFICER WITH HOMELAND SECURITY
ASSIGNED TO THE ORANGE COUNTY
CHILD EXPLOITATION TASK FORCE.
FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS, MY
CASELOAD HAS PRIMARILY FOCUSED
ON POSSESSION, DISTRIBUTION, AND
MANUFACTURING OF CHILD. THE
LURING OF MINOR VICTIMS FOR
SEXUAL PURPOSES, AS WELL AS
WHAT'S COMMONLY BEEN REFERRED TO
AS SEXTORTION. IN JANUARY 2024,
THE FBI ISSUED A WARNING ON THE
GROWING THREAT OF SEXTORTION,
THE FBI REPORTS THAT IN THE SIX
MONTH PERIOD OF OCTOBER 20TH 22
TO 2023, THERE WAS A 20%
INCREASE IN THE REPORTING OF
FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED SEXTORTION
INCIDENTS, JUST IN MY OWN
EXPERIENCE WORKING AS SPECIAL
VICTIMS AND WORKING ON THE CHILD
EXPLOITATION TASK FORCE, I
RECEIVE A HANDFUL OF SEXTORTION
CASES A WEEK, PRIMARILY THESE
ARE COMING OUT OF, OUR VICTIMS
OR MIDDLE SCHOOL AS WELL AS HIGH
SCHOOL AGE, BUT I ALSO DO GET
ADULTS THAT ARE BEING VICTIMIZED
AS WELL. THE FBI IS NOW
REPORTING THAT THE PREVALENCE OF
SEXTORTION AND USING AI
GENERATED FAKE IMAGES IS, THAT'S
KIND OF A NEWER THING THAT I'M
SEEING NOW. AND THE REASON THAT
THIS IS SO HARMFUL IS BECAUSE A
LOT OF THESE MINOR VICTIMS ARE
NOT ACTUALLY MAKING A POOR
DECISION. THEY'RE NOT SENDING A
EXPLICIT IMAGE WHERE THEN THEY
CAN LOOK BACK AND THINK, OKAY,
WELL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE I
SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT, BUT
INSTEAD THEY'RE BEING VICTIMIZED
REGARDLESS. AND THERE'S NOTHING
STOPPING THESE IMAGES FROM BEING
CREATED. AND THEN THESE VICTIMS
HAVING TO GO TO SCHOOL AND FACE
CONSEQUENCES FOR SOMETHING WHERE
THEY DIDN'T EVEN DO AN ACTION TO
RECEIVE A CONSEQUENCE TO BEGIN
WITH, THE AVAILABILITY OF AI
TOOLS AND AI GENERATED IMAGES TO
CREATE THIS TYPE OF MATERIAL HAS
BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED IN RECENT
STUDIES. THE STANFORD INTERNET
OBSERVATORY FOUND MORE THAN 3200
IMAGES OF SUSPECTED CHILD SEXUAL
ABUSE IN THE GIANT, LARGE SCALE
AI OPEN NETWORK DATABASE USERS
ON A SINGLE DARK WEB FORUM
SHARED NEARLY 3000 EYE GENERATED
IMAGES OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IN
JUST ONE MONTH. THAT'S 3000
IMAGES IN ONE MONTH, ACCORDING
TO A RECENT REPORT FROM THE UK
INTERNET WATCH FOUNDATION. A
RECENT A RECENT EXAMPLE OF THIS,
WAS IN THE NEWS, AT A MIDDLE
SCHOOL IN BEVERLY HILLS AS WELL
AS WE DID HAVE SOME NEWS CAMERAS
RECENTLY IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE
AT LAGUNA BEACH HIGH SCHOOL OVER
AI GENERATED CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
MATERIAL, UNFORTUNATELY, THE
ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY HAVE MADE
IT SO MUCH EASIER FOR SUSPECTS
TO MANIPULATE PHOTOS, TO SEND
THEM TO OTHERS, AND TO SIMPLY
JUST POST THEM ONLINE FOR
ANYBODY TO SEE. FBI HAS REPORTED
ON FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED
SEXTORTION AND OFFENDERS
THREATENED TO TAKE WHAT THEY,
THE OFFENDERS DO IS THEY TAKE
THESE IMAGES THAT THEY'VE NOW
CREATED, THESE DEEPFAKE IMAGES,
AND THEN THEY THREATEN TO
RELEASE THEM TO THE PUBLIC TO
POST THEM ONLINE. IF THESE
VICTIMS DO NOT GIVE THEM MONEY,
USUALLY IN THE FORMS OF GIFT
CARDS OR A LOT OF TIMES WHAT
WILL HAPPEN TO OUR FEMALE
VICTIMS IS THEY'LL BE EXTORTED
FOR MORE. IMAGES, WHETHER THAT
BE THEM ACTUALLY HAVING TO
CREATE THEIR OWN, CHILD SEXUAL
ABUSE MATERIAL OR, MORE AI
GENERATED MATERIAL, EXAMPLES OF
SEXTORTION AND, IMPACTS THAT
I'VE SEEN ON THESE VICTIMS IS
THAT IT'S ABSOLUTELY HUMILIATING
FOR THESE KIDS TO GO TO SCHOOL
AND KNOW THAT THESE IMAGES HAVE
BEEN CIRCULATED, AROUND CAMPUS,
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S AN ACTUAL
IMAGE OF THEM OR AN AI GENERATED
IMAGE. THESE AI GENERATED IMAGES
LOOK SO REALISTIC THAT WHEN YOU
LOOK AT THEM, THERE'S NO WAY TO
TELL IF IT'S AI GENERATED OR IF
IT'S AN ACTUAL IMAGE. SO THESE
POOR KIDS, THEY'RE
SELF-CONFIDENCE IS BEING RIPPED
AWAY FROM THEM, THEIR ABILITY TO
FEEL COMFORTABLE AND SAFE AT
SCHOOL IS BEING RIPPED AWAY FROM
THEM. AND EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY,
THEIR RELATIONSHIP AT HOME WITH
THEIR FAMILY IS JUST BEING
FOREVER ALTERED DUE TO THIS
HUMILIATION. AND I KNOW IT WAS
POINTED OUT THAT, OVER A TWO
YEAR TIME FRAME, THERE WAS 20
SUICIDES, SIMPLY RELATED TO
SEXTORTION. AND THAT'S NOT EVEN
AN UP TO DATE ACCOUNT OF HOW
MANY SUICIDES THERE HAS BEEN.
AND ONE SUICIDE IS TOO MANY. BUT
TO SAY THAT 20 KIDS HAVE TAKEN
THEIR LIVES OVER SEXTORTION IS
ABSOLUTELY DEVASTATING TO OUR
SOCIETY. VÆ AB 1872 MAKES IT
CLEAR THAT EXTORTION INCLUDES
THREATENING TO POST, DISTRIBUTE
OR CREATE AI GENERATED IMAGES OR
VIDEOS OF ANOTHER. SO THIS, THIS
BILL IS SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE
IT'S GOING TO ADD ANOTHER FACTOR
TO KEEP THESE AI IMAGES FROM,
BEING ABLE TO BE USED TO EXTORT
PEOPLE. AS AN INVESTIGATOR WHO
WORK THESE CASES DAY IN AND DAY
OUT, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS AB
1872 AND TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SEND A STRONG MESSAGE THAT THOSE
WHO VICTIMIZE OTHERS AND VIOLATE
ONE'S PRIVACY WILL BE MET WITH
CONSEQUENCE. AND I ALSO WANT TO
POINT OUT THAT AS I GOT YOUR
TIME'S UP, I'M SORRY. IF YOU
COULD JUST RAP REAL QUICK. YEAH.
OKAY. PLEASE VOTE YES. THANK YOU
. ANY OTHER WITNESSES? PLEASE
LINE UP YOUR NAME POSITION AND
I'M GOING TO MOVE THE BILL. MR.
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS, RANDY PERRY,
ON BEHALF OF PERAK AND A
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
HIGHWAY PATROL AND SUPPORT. HI.
DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET AND STRONG SUPPORT. MR.
CHAIR MEMBER SHANE LEVINE, ON
BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION,
ORANGE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFFS
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. COREY
SUSILO, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION, SUPPORT. BRIAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, SUPPORT
ALSO THE CALIFORNIA COALITION OF
SCHOOL SAFETY PROFESSIONALS AND
THE OTHER POA'S AND DSA'S
PREVIOUSLY STATED. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION
?
GO AHEAD. OKAY. GOOD MORNING
AGAIN. ASSEMBLY MEMBERS. MY NAME
IS MATT SOTO ROSEN. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION. THÀNH,
I'VE BEEN A PUBLIC DEFENDER IN
CALIFORNIA FOR 25 YEARS, AND I'M
CURRENTLY A PUBLIC DEFENDER IN
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY, HAVE BEEN
FOR THE LAST 18 YEARS. KPDA
UNDERSTANDS THE CONCERN OF
POTENTIAL ABUSE OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE TO HARASS AND
INTIMIDATE INDIVIDUALS, ALSO, AS
THE PARENT OF TWO TEENAGERS, I'M
CONCERNED PERSONALLY WITH
HARASSMENT OF YOUNG PEOPLE, AS
WAS JUST REFERENCED IN THE
EARLIER TESTIMONY. HOWEVER
ASSEMBLY BILL 1872 AS IT IS
CURRENTLY WORDED, RAISES A
NUMBER OF CONCERNS. FIRST, THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PENAL
CODE, PRESENTS A CONSTITUTIONAL
ISSUE BECAUSE AS AS IT IS
WRITTEN, IT IS VAGUE, ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE IS A NOVEL
TECHNOLOGY THAT'S NOT EASILY
UNDERSTOOD BY THE AVERAGE MEMBER
OF THE PUBLIC. THE STATUTE ALSO
FAILS TO DEFINE THE TERME AS IT
IS WRITTEN SIMPLY AS AI
GENERATED IMAGES OR VIDEOS OF
ANOTHER PROSECUTORS, JUDGES AND
MOST IMPORTANTLY, JURIES WOULD
STRUGGLE TO INTERPRET AND APPLY
THE STATUTE IN CONSISTENT WAYS
BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT FAILS TO
PROPERLY DEFINE AND GIVE NOTICE
OF THE PROHIBITED CONDUCT, IT
UNDERMINES FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLES OF DUE PROCESS AND IF
THE DEFINITION OF AI THAT WAS
INCLUDED IN THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYSIS I READ LAST NIGHT IS
ANY INDICATION, THIS IS NOT A
TERME THAT IS EASILY DEFINED OR
UNDERSTOOD, THE SECOND ISSUE IS
THAT AS THE AMENDMENT IS
PROPOSED, IT IS OVERBROAD, IF
PASSED, THE MERE CREATION OF ANY
AI IMAGE, ANY AI IMAGE WOULD
CONSTITUTE A FELONY OFFENSE.
THIS COULD END UP RESULTING IN
SOME BIZARRE SCENARIOS. FOR
EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE SAID, GIVE
ME MONEY OR I'LL CREATE AN AI
IMAGE OF YOU SAVING A PUPPY FROM
A BURNING BUILDING, THAT WOULD
BE A FELONY. AS AS IT IS
CURRENTLY WRITTEN, NATURALLY,
THE IMPORT OF THIS CRIME OF
EXTORTION IS THAT SOMEONE
THREATENS TO EXPOSE OR IMPUTE TO
A PERSON SOME TYPE OF DEFORMITY,
DISGRACE, OR CRIME. ALSO, THIS
AMENDMENT IS NOT NECESSARY. SEE
PENAL CODES FIVE, 18, 519 AND
520 ALREADY COVER THIS TYPE OF
CONDUCT, BUT THE AMENDMENT THAT
WAS PASSED, IN I THINK IT WAS
2018 THAT CREATED PENAL CODE
SECTION 518 B COVERS THIS ISSUE
OF SEXPLOITATION BY EXPANDING
THE DEFINITION OF WHAT
CONSIDERATION IS TO INCLUDE
SEXUAL CONDUCT. BUT THE MEDIUM
BY WHICH SOMEBODY EXTORTS OR
ATTEMPTS TO EXTORT SOMEONE HAS
IS NOT LIMITED BY THE CURRENT
STATUTE. THE POTENTIAL FEARS
RAISED BY AI ARE NOT NEW, WITH
EACH NEW TECHNOLOGICAL
INNOVATION FROM PHOTOSHOP TO
VOICE RECORDINGS TO OTHER
TECHNOLOGIES THAT MANIPULATE,
MANIPULATE LIKENESSES, THERE IS
THE POTENTIAL FOR MISUSE. IN
FACT, ADDING AND SPECIFYING AND
SINGLING OUT. I COULD HAVE THE
UNINTENDED EFFECT OF EXCLUDING
THE USE OF OTHER TECHNOLOGIES TO
EXTORT FROM SUCCESSFUL
PROSECUTION. AND FINALLY, TO THE
EXTENT THAT THE ISSUE SOUGHT TO
BE ADDRESSED BY THIS PROPOSED
AMENDMENT, IS THE ISSUE OF
SEXPLOITATION THÀNH, PERHAPS
MONIES COULD BE DEVOTED TO,
EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO TEACH OUR
YOUNG PEOPLE ABOUT THE HARMS OF
THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT, RATHER
THAN REACTING AFTER THE FACT AND
CHARGING YOUNG PEOPLE WITH
FELONY CRIMES. WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR A NO VOTE ON ASSEMBLY
BILL 1872. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC? MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE IN OPPOSITION. OKAY.
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
I THINK, ASSEMBLY MEMBER WILSON
HAD A QUESTION, WELL, I WAS
ABOUT TO SAY GOOD AFTERNOON, BUT
I DON'T THINK WE'VE MADE IT
THERE YET. I THINK WISHFUL
THINKING. GOOD MORNING, TO THE
AUTHOR. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. I UNDERSTAND THE
INTENT AS IT RELATES TO,
EXTORTION AND INCORPORATION OF
AI GENERATED IMAGES. I DO HAVE
SOME CONCERNS THAT ARE
CONSISTENT WITH THE OPPOSITION.
AND SO I HAVE A FEW FOLLOW UP
QUESTIONS, RELATED TO THAT, IT
IS IT IS BROAD AND THE ANALYSIS
STATES AS SUCH, AND, WHEN YOU
LOOK AT WHERE YOU'RE AMENDING,
THERE'S AN A THROUGH E SECTION
AND THIS IS, THIS ADDS AN F, OR
IT WAS NUMBERS BEFORE, WHY NOT
RELATE THE, THE, THE NEW SECTION
THAT YOU'RE ADDING TO THOSE
OTHER ITEMS SO THAT I COULD BE
CONSIDERED AS, AS A POTENTIAL OF
A WAY TO EXPRESS THOSE. AND I'M
ASKING THAT PARTICULARLY BECAUSE
A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE VIEW, AS
THE OPPOSITION STATED, IT'S
BETTER TO BE TECH NEUTRAL, BUT A
LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE MAKE THE
ASSUMPTION OF IF IT'S I, IT'S
REASONABLE TO ASSUME BECAUSE
CURRENT AI TECHNOLOGY, IN SOME
WAYS, YOU CAN TELL IT'S AI AND
NOT REAL, BUT FOR THE MOST PART,
YOU KNOW, IT HAS A REAL LOOK TO
IT. AND SO WHY NOT MAKE IT
RELATE TO THE OTHER SECTIONS
VERSUS IT BEING ON ITS OWN?
SURE. SO WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK
WITH THE OPPOSITION AND CONTINUE
TO WORK ON THIS BILL AS YOU HAD
STATED, THE INTENT IS TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE'RE THAT AI IS
COVERED UNDER THE THREAT TO
EXTORT AN AB 1872, BUT I'M HAPPY
TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT
IS JUST AS IT IS. SURE, IT'S
VERY BROAD AND IT DOESN'T RISE
TO THE SAME LEVEL OF ALL THE
OTHER THE Ã THROUGH. SO TO
SPEAK. Â, BUT IF THEY WERE
RELATED TO THAT OUT IN THE BROAD
SENSE THAT A WAY TO DO THIS IS
NOT JUST, STATING IT OR IS TO
USE AI TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS
THOSE THAT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD
MAKE MORE SENSE. BUT, I THINK
THAT'S REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT.
OKAY. AND SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE
I'LL BE, I MIGHT LAY OFF AND
WAIT TO SEE WHAT, AS YOU WORK
THROUGH THAT ISSUE. BUT I THINK
RIGHT NOW IT IS EXTREMELY BROAD
AND COULD HAVE A LOT OF
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. SO I'M
GLAD TO HEAR THAT YOU'RE WILLING
TO WORK WITH OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU, MR. LACKEY. YEAH, I WANT TO
SAY THANK YOU, THIS IS CLEARLY
SOMETHING THAT'S BECOMING
WIDESPREAD. AND TO ME, THE
LANGUAGE AS AS EXPLICIT AS THE
ASSOCIATED BEHAVIOR, SOME
ARGUMENT THAT WAS THE SAME
ARGUMENT WAS USED WHEN USING THE
TERMS. WE ALL KNOW WHEN WE SEE
IT. AND I'LL TELL YOU THIS, THIS
I HAS BECOME SO GOOD. SO GOOD
THAT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT. NOT
ALL I NOT ALL AI IS CREATED
EQUAL. BUT I'M TELLING YOU, IT
IS REALLY REMARKABLE HOW GOOD IT
IS. AND WHAT ALSO IS VERY CLEAR
TO ME IS THE DISGUSTING, HURTFUL
AND DEMORALIZING CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT HAVE LONG LASTING IMPACTS
TO THESE VICTIMS. ONCE THIS HAS
HAPPENED TO YOU OR YOUR LOVED
ONE, IT DOESN'T DISAPPEAR, WITH
TIME, IT MAY SOFTEN, BUT THIS IS
A VERY, VERY HURTFUL OCCURRENCE
AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S MY
ARGUMENT THAT THERE'S NO
PROSECUTION THAT IS REALLY
ADDRESSING THIS IN A MEANINGFUL
WAY. AND IT'S TIME. IT'S TIME.
SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
TO OUR ATTENTION. CAN I ASK A
FOLLOW UP? IT'S COMING. FOLLOW
UP QUESTION I SEE THIS AS THE
MODERNIZATION OF SENATOR LEYVA'S
BILL OF 2019, AI IS CAUSING LOTS
OF ANGUISH THROUGHOUT, THE
COMMENTS BY MY, MY, MY COLLEAGUE
ABOUT IT BEING OVER OVERLY
BROAD. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY IS
AN ISSUE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE
ADDRESSED. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION, I THINK WHAT YOU ARE
TRYING TO DO, I THINK NEEDS TO
BE ADDRESSED. AND I APPRECIATE
THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE TACKLING
THIS, BUT MAKING SURE THAT THE
LANGUAGE ISN'T SO OVERLY BROAD
THAT WE THEN RUN INTO
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES WILL BE
IMPORTANT. SOME SAY THAT THIS IS
ALREADY COVERED IN LAW THE WAY
THE LAW IS ALREADY WRITTEN, BUT
I THINK ADDRESSING AI IS
SOMETHING THAT THAT IS VALID,
AND I APPRECIATE I APPRECIATE
THIS, BILL. I WILL BE SUPPORTING
IT TODAY. THANK YOU. MISS
WILSON, JUST A JUST A FOLLOW UP
QUESTION. HAS THERE BEEN A CASE
WHERE SOMEONE USED AI GENERATED,
MATERIALS IN EXTORTION AND THEY
WERE NOT ABLE TO BE PROSECUTED,
I HAVE SEEN MOST EXTORTION CASES
UNABLE TO BE PROSECUTED AT THIS
TIME. JUST OUR DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS HAVING A
HARD TIME BRINGING IT FORWARD,
SO I PERSONALLY HAVE NOT GONE TO
COURT ON A SEXTORTION CASE YET.
OKAY SO JUST IN GENERAL, JUST IN
GENERAL, IT'S THEY'RE HARD TO
PROSECUTE. SO WE HAVEN'T GOT
FACTORED IN THE AI PORTION YET.
OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. MR.
LACKEY, I JUST HAVE A COMMENT
THAT, I THINK A LOT OF REASONS
WHY WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CASE
LAW IS THERE'S NO FILING TAKES
PLACE, AND THAT'S THAT'S THE
BIGGER PROBLEM. AND THAT'S WHY
WE I MEAN, THERE IS GOING TO BE
DEBATE, BUT DEBATE IS GOOD,
DEBATE IS HEALTHY. AND THAT'S
HOW WE GET GOOD CASE LAW, AS I
MENTIONED BEFORE. AND SO I THINK
THAT THIS IT'S TIME FOR THIS TO
MOVE FORWARD. SO THANK YOU. YES
OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. WE'D LIKE
TO CLOSE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION OF THIS MEASURE. I
BELIEVE IT IS VITAL TO HELP
PROTECT OUR MOST VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS FROM EXTORTION CASES
INVOLVING AI IMAGES AND VIDEO. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON AB 1872 BY SOME
MEMBER SANCHEZ. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. MCCARTY MCCARTY I
ALANIS ALANIS. I LACKEY, A
LACKEY I NGUYEN REYES REYES I
TING TING I WILSON WILSON NOT
VOTING ZIPPER ZIPPER I. MEASURE
PASSES. NEXT MEASURE. ITEM
NUMBER 16 AB 2209. GOOD MORNING.
GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. AB 2209 IS A
CRITICAL MEASURE THAT WILL ALLOW
CALIFORNIA TO BETTER COMBAT THE
DEVASTATING FENTANYL CRISIS
PLAGUING OUR COMMUNITIES.
FENTANYL IS DEADLY DRUG THAT IS
EXTREMELY LETHAL AND VERY SMALL
AMOUNTS. IT IS 50 TIMES STRONGER
THAN HEROIN AND 100 TIMES
STRONGER THAN MORPHINE. IT'S
WREAKING HAVOC ACROSS THE
NATION, CLAIMING COUNTLESS LIVES
AND TEARING OUR FAMILIES APART.
IN CALIFORNIA, FENTANYL RELATED
DEATHS HAVE SKYROCKETED. WE MUST
DO EVERYTHING WE CAN AND USE
EVERY TOOL IN OUR BELT TO TACKLE
THIS ISSUE HEAD ON. CALIFORNIA'S
CURRENT SANCTUARY STATE POLICIES
CREATE A SIGNIFICANT ROADBLOCK
IN OUR FIGHT AGAINST THIS POISON
. AB TWO 209 IS A COMMON SENSE
APPROACH THAT ADDS FELONY
FENTANYL DEALING AND TRAFFICKING
TO THE LIST OF OFFENSES EXEMPT
FROM SANCTUARY STATE
PROTECTIONS. THIS PROVIDES LAW
ENFORCEMENT MORE FLEXIBILITY AND
DISCRETION TO DO WHAT THEY NEED
TO DO, WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF
OTHER LAWS TO ADDRESS THIS
FENTANYL CRISIS. BY EMPOWERING
LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BETTER
COMMUNICATE WITH FEDERAL
AUTHORITIES TO REMOVE THESE HIGH
LEVEL FENTANYL DEALERS FROM OUR
STREETS, WE CAN CREATE A SAFER
ENVIRONMENT FOR EVERYONE. THIS
ISN'T A PARTIZAN ISSUE. IN A
POLL LAST YEAR, SAN FRANCISCO
VOTERS, 70% OF THEM SAID THEY
SUPPORTED DENYING SANCTUARY
STATE PROTECTIONS FOR FELONY
FENTANYL DEALERS. IMAGINE WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN IF WE PULLED THAT
QUESTION STATEWIDE. I THINK IT'S
TIME WE LISTEN TO OUR
CONSTITUENTS AND OUR COMMUNITIES
WHO ARE RIGHTFULLY CONCERNED
WITH HOW THINGS HAVE BECOME AND
DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. THAT'S
WHY I'VE INTRODUCED AB TWO 209
TO COMPLETELY EXEMPT FELONY
FENTANYL CHARGES FROM STATE'S
SANCTUARY STATE PROTECTIONS.
TESTIFYING WITH ME TODAY IS RAY
GRANOFF WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. GREAT
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND
THANK YOU, ASSEMBLYWOMAN
SANCHEZ, FOR AUTHORING THIS VERY
IMPORTANT BILL, THE CALIFORNIA
VALUES ACT, OR SB 54, RESTRICTED
THE ABILITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
TO FULLY COMMUNICATE WITH OUR
FEDERAL PARTNERS. AND THAT'S WHY
MUCH OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OPPOSED
THE MEASURE, BECAUSE IT VIOLATED
, REALLY THE BEST PRACTICE OF
OPEN COMMUNICATION AMONG LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO ADDRESS SHARED
THREATS. THREATS LIKE THE
FENTANYL EPIDEMIC. FOR US IN
ORANGE COUNTY, THE NEGATIVE
CONSEQUENCES OF THIS LAW WAS
QUICKLY EVIDENT, FOR EXAMPLE,
DUE TO THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE
LAW IN 2019, THE MOST RECENT
FULL YEAR WITH A PRE-COVID JAIL
POPULATION IN OCSD, OUR
DEPARTMENT WAS PREVENTED FROM
NOTIFYING ICE ON THE RELEASE OF
1015 INMATES WHO HAD AN
IMMIGRATION HOLD PLACED ON THEM.
OF THOSE INMATES, 238 WERE
REARRESTED FOR NEW CRIMES IN
ORANGE COUNTY, INCLUDING CHARGES
OF ASSAULT, BATTERY, RAPE,
ROBBERY, DRUG CRIMES. THESE ARE
AND MANY OTHERS. THESE NUMBERS
ONLY REFLECT INDIVIDUALS
ARRESTED ON NEW CHARGES WHO
RETURNED BACK TO THE JAIL IN
ORANGE COUNTY. BUT BEYOND THE
LIMITATIONS ON COMMUNICATION AND
THE CUSTODY SETTING, THE
LIMITATIONS OF THAT BILL CHILLED
OUR ABILITY TO COLLABORATE FULLY
WITH OUR PARTNERS IN AN
OPERATIONAL AND INVESTIGATIVE
SETTING. THIS IS PARTICULARLY
CONCERNING WITH REGARD TO OUR
EFFORTS TO COMBAT FENTANYL, TO
STOP THE FLOW OF FENTANYL INTO
OUR COMMUNITY IS IMPERATIVE THAT
LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT WORK HAND
IN HAND WITH OUR FEDERAL
PARTNERS, SUCH COLLABORATION
MAXIMIZES RESOURCES AND
INTELLIGENCE SHARING. WHILE
THERE ARE GREAT PARTNERSHIPS IN
OUR REGION, AMONG LOCAL AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES, THE
UNNECESSARY LIMITATIONS IMPOSED
BY SB 54 PREVENTS FULL SHARING
OF CRITICAL INFORMATION ON
FENTANYL TRAFFICKERS, HANDING
THE CARTELS AN ADDITIONAL
ADVANTAGE. PAGE AB 2209 WOULD
REMOVE THIS BARRIER BY MAKING
CLEAR IN THE LAW OUR ABILITY TO
COMMUNICATE WITH FEDERAL
PARTNERS REGARDING ANY PERSON
WHO IS ALLEGED TO HAVE VIOLATED,
OR WHO HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
CONVICTED OF VIOLATING LAWS
RELATING TO THE SELLING AND
DISTRIBUTION OF FENTANYL. TO BE
CLEAR, OUR SUPPORT FOR AB 2209
AND DESIRE TO WORK WITH FEDERAL
AUTHORITIES TO KEEP DRUG
TRAFFICKERS OUT OF THE COMMUNITY
SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN
WE HAVE ANY INTEREST IN
ENFORCING IMMIGRATION LAW. LOCAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT ENGAGE
IN IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT.
ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAW
IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND CARRYING
OUT OUR DUTIES. WE DO NOT ASK
THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF
SUSPECTS, WITNESSES, OR THOSE
WHO CALL TO REPORT CRIMES.
NOTIFYING FEDERAL AUTHORITIES OF
THE PENDING RELEASE OF A
FENTANYL TRAFFICKER IS NOT THE
ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAW.
THESE OFFENDERS HELP PERPETUATE
THE FENTANYL CRISIS IN OUR
COMMUNITIES, AND REMOVING THEM
IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR
DEPARTMENT'S MISSION TO ENHANCE
PUBLIC SAFETY FOR ALL RESIDENTS
IN ORANGE COUNTY. THESE
OFFENDERS, THEY DO NOT
DISCRIMINATE IN WHO THEY
PERPETUATE THEIR CRIMES AGAINST
AND WE MUST NOT HESITATE TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF EVERY OPPORTUNITY
TO KEEP THEM OUT OF OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS
COMMUNICATION IS EVEN NOW MORE
IMPORTANT WITH REGARD TO THE
CRISIS AT OUR BORDER IN
CALIFORNIA IS BEGINNING TO HAVE
A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THAT
CRISIS. MIGRANT ENCOUNTERS ARE
UP 85% IN THE SAN DIEGO BORDER
SECTOR. WHEN COMPARED COMPARING
FEBRUARY OF 2024 TO FEBRUARY OF
2023, WHILE MOST CROSSING THE
BORDER, UNDOUBTEDLY ENTERING OUR
COUNTRY IN SEARCH OF A BETTER
LIFE, THE SHEER VOLUME
OVERWHELMS RESOURCES AND MAKES
IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THOSE WHO
SEEK TO HARM US. THIS IS
DEMONSTRATED BY THE FACT THAT
169 PEOPLE ON THE TERROR WATCH
LIST WERE ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN
PORTS OF ENTRY AT THE SOUTHERN
BORDER DURING FISCAL YEAR 23,
WITH AN ESTIMATED 100 AND 860
GOTAWAYS IN FY 23. THERE'S A
HIGH LIKELIHOOD OTHERS ON THE
TERROR WATCH LIST ENTERED OUR
COUNTRY WITHOUT AN ENCOUNTER.
THE RISK WE FACE IS ALSO CLEAR
WITH REGARD TO FENTANYL
TRAFFICKING, WHICH IS WHAT THIS
BILL IS TRYING TO ADDRESS. WE
ARE SEEING A FLOOD OF FENTANYL
INTO OUR COMMUNITIES. WE HAVE
SEEN EXPONENTIAL INCREASES IN
FENTANYL SEIZURES BY OUR OWN
NARCOTICS TEAM IN ORANGE COUNTY.
IN 2021, WE SEIZED 104 POUNDS OF
FENTANYL AND 16,000 PILLS BY
2023, THAT INCREASED TO 808
POUNDS OF FENTANYL POWDER AND
658,000 PILLS. THESE NUMBERS
HIGHLIGHT THE IMPORTANCE OF
CONTINUED COOPERATION AND OPEN
COMMUNICATION WITH OUR FEDERAL
PARTNERS ON THE SHARED THREATS
THAT WE FACE. I URGE A YES VOTE
ON AB 2209. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. NEXT WITNESSES IS YOUR NAME
AND POSITION ONLY, MR. CHAIRMAN,
MEMBERS RANDY PERRY WITH AARON
REED AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF
PERAK AND THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF HIGHWAY PATROL IN
SUPPORT. DENISOVSKY WITH THE SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU
. CORY SALZILLO, ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION, IN SUPPORT. RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
NARCOTIC OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONS,
AND THE OTHER POA'S AND DSA'S
PREVIOUSLY STATED SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. I'M SORRY. YES. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. SEEING NO OTHERS IN
SUPPORT OPPOSITION. PLEASE COME
FORWARD.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES COMBINED
FOR YOUR PANEL. FOR OPPOSITION.
PLEASE BEGIN. YES GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS SEAN REARDON. I'M A
SENIOR STAFF ATTORNEY AT THE
ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,
BASED OUT OF OUR SACRAMENTO
OFFICE. HAVING SPENT MUCH OF THE
PAST HALF DECADE CHALLENGING
VIOLATIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
VALUES ACT BY ENFORCEMENT, LAW
ENFORCEMENT BODIES, INCLUDING
THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT, I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THAT LAW.
THE FENTANYL OVERDOSE CRISIS HAS
DEVASTATED COMMUNITIES ACROSS
THE UNITED STATES AND MUST BE
ADDRESSED WITH EVIDENCE BASED
SOLUTIONS IN ORDER TO SAVE
LIVES. HOWEVER AB 2209
CONTRADICTS WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT
THE DRUG TRADE AND SCAPEGOATS
IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES FIRST
TARGETING IMMIGRANTS FOR
FENTANYL AND OTHER DRUGS IGNORES
THE REALITIES OF THE DRUG TRADE.
IN 2022, US CITIZENS CONSTITUTED
89% OF CONVICTED FENTANYL
TRAFFICKERS, WHILE OVER 90% OF
FENTANYL SEIZURES OCCUR AT LEGAL
BORDER CROSSING POINTS AND
INTERIOR VEHICLE CHECKPOINTS
USED BY US CITIZENS. FURTHER
DRUG CONVICTIONS. FENTANYL OR
OTHERWISE, ALREADY CARRY SOME OF
THE MOST SEVERE IMMIGRATION
PENALTIES, INCLUDING MANDATORY
DETENTION WITHOUT BOND
INELIGIBILITY FOR NEARLY ALL
RELIEF AGAINST REMOVAL AND
DEPORTATION WITHOUT EVEN SEEING
A JUDGE. IN MANY CASES, THE
VALUES ACT ALREADY ALLOWS LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO COOPERATE WITH
ICE IN CASES OF A FELONY.
FENTANYL RELATED CONVICTION, AND
FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW ALREADY
IMPOSES THE MOST SEVERE
PENALTIES ON THOSE SO CONVICTED,
REGARDLESS OF HARDSHIP TO THE
PERSON OR TO THE US FAMILY, THAT
THEY LEAVE BEHIND. EVERYONE IN
THIS COUNTRY IS ENTITLED TO
BASIC PROTECTIONS WHEN THEY
INTERACT WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THE BILL REMOVES THESE BASIC
PROTECTIONS ONLY FOR IMMIGRANTS,
OPENING THE DOOR FOR GRAVE
ABUSES BY LAW ENFORCEMENT,
INCLUDING ASKING PEOPLE FOR
THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS,
DETAINING THEM WITHOUT A
WARRANT, WRONGFUL REFERRALS TO
ICE AND RACIAL PROFILING OF ÁP
BLACK AND LATINA COMMUNITY
MEMBERS. EVEN BEFORE LAW
ENFORCEMENT HAS FORMED A
REASONABLE SUSPICION OR PROBABLE
CAUSE THAT SOMEONE HAS COMMITTED
A FELONY OFFENSE. WE KNOW FROM
EXPERIENCE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES HAVE TOO OFTEN FAILED
TO FOLLOW EXISTING PROTECTIONS
UNDER STATE LAW RIGHT HERE IN
SACRAMENTO FOR YEARS, THE
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ILLEGALLY
TRANSFERRED COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO
ICE AND HID INFORMATION ABOUT
ITS PRACTICES FROM THE PUBLIC
AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. IT
TOOK YEARS OF ADVOCACY. THE
INTERVENTION OF THE COUNTY
INSPECTOR GENERAL, AND A LAWSUIT
TO END THESE PRACTICES. THE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOT CREATE
FURTHER EXCEPTIONS TO THE VALUES
ACT. I STRONGLY URGE MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE TO
VOTE NO ON AB 2209. PLEASE
PROCEED. MY NAME IS CARL
TANNENBAUM. I WAS A SAN
FRANCISCO POLICE OFFICER FOR 32
YEARS. I AM HERE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO AB 2209 ON BEHALF
OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION
PARTNERSHIP, LEAP. LEAP IS A
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONALS
ADVOCATING FOR SENSIBLE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE AND DRUG POLICY REFORMS
THAT WILL MAKE OUR COMMUNITIES
SAFER AND MORE JUST. THE IMPACT
OF THE OVERDOSE CRISIS HAS BEEN
FELT IN EVERY COMMUNITY. THIS IS
A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE THAT
WITHOUT A DOUBT, IS PERSONAL TO
US ALL. I SPENT THE FIRST SIX
YEARS OF MY CAREER WALKING A
FOOT BEAT IN SAN FRANCISCO'S
TENDERLOIN DISTRICT. I BUILT
RELATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND
WORKED TO IMPROVE CONDITIONS
THERE. I SAW THE PAIN CAUSED BY
ADDICTION AND ALSO THE LACK OF
ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO ADDRESS
THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. AT
THE HEIGHT OF THE WAR ON DRUGS
IN THE 80S AND 90S, I WAS
ASSIGNED TO THE NARCOTICS UNIT,
WHERE I PARTICIPATED IN
AGGRESSIVE ENFORCEMENT OF DRUG
LAWS. THERE I SAW THE PAIN. I'M
SORRY, MANY OF WHICH WERE LOW
LEVEL AND NOT THREATS TO PUBLIC
SAFETY. AFTER THE DEATH OF MY
PARTNER WHO WAS KILLED IN THE
LINE OF DUTY DURING A DRUG BUST,
I BEGAN TO QUESTION THE
STRATEGIES USED TO ENFORCE DRUG
LAWS. JOHN'S DEATH MADE ME
REALIZE THE FUTILITY OF WHAT WE
WERE DOING, AND THAT THERE HAD
TO BE A BETTER WAY. SO I TAKE
THIS ISSUE VERY SERIOUSLY, AND I
AM HERE TO TELL YOU THIS BILL IS
A TRAVESTY, SINGLING OUT PEOPLE
WHO HAPPEN TO BE IMMIGRANTS AS
THE CAUSE OF THE OVERDOSE CRISIS
IS A TEXTBOOK CASE OF
DISCRIMINATORY ENFORCEMENT. IT
IS ALSO ANOTHER FAILED ATTEMPT,
LIKE SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS AND
MILITARY INTERVENTION, TO
ADDRESS A MAJOR SOCIAL AND
PUBLIC SAFETY AND PUBLIC HEALTH
ISSUE SOLELY THROUGH LAW
ENFORCEMENT. THIS BILL IGNORES
THE FACT THAT 89% OF THOSE
CONVICTED OF TRAFFICKING
FENTANYL IN THE US ARE US
CITIZENS, NOT UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANTS OR ASYLUM SEEKERS. IT
ALSO CIRCUMVENTS THE LEGAL
TENANT OF DUE PROCESS OF THE
LAW. IT ALLOWS ANYONE SUSPECTED
OR CONVICTED OF DEALING FENTANYL
TO BE TURNED OVER TO ICE. STATE
LAW ALREADY ALLOWS LAW
ENFORCEMENT THE DISCRETION TO
CONTACT ICE FOR PEOPLE CONVICTED
OF DEALING DRUGS. I REPEAT,
STATE LAW ALREADY ALLOWS LAW
ENFORCEMENT THE DISCRETION TO
CONTACT ICE FOR PEOPLE CONVICTED
OF DEALING DRUGS. THIS BILL WILL
CREATE A WIDE DRAGNET PRIMED FOR
RACIAL PROFILING AND ABUSE. WE
NEED REAL SOLUTIONS TO THE
OVERDOSE CRISIS, BUT MORE MASS
INCARCERATION AND A
DISCRIMINATORY ENFORCEMENT WILL
ONLY MAKE THINGS WORSE. WHILE
DEPLETING THE FINITE RESOURCES
WE HAVE. FOR THESE REASONS, I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A NO VOTE
ON AB 2209. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION,
PLEASE COME FORWARD. NATASHA
MINSKER SMART JUSTICE CALIFORNIA
STRONGLY OPPOSED. MATT. SODA
ROSA IN THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION, OPPOSED.
RHONDA RIOS KRAVITZ, CEO OF
ALIANZA, STRONGLY OPPOSE.
CHERIEN MILES WITH THE
IMMIGRATION COALITION OF
SACRAMENTO AND ALSO WITH
SACRAMENTO AREA CONGREGATIONS
TOGETHER STRONGLY OPPOSE. TANA
OPPLIGER WITH CALIFORNIANS
UNITED FOR RESPONSIBLE BUDGET
STRONGLY OPPOSE. ANDREA
AMAVISCA, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY
CENTER, IN STRONG OPPOSITION.
DANICA RADAMEL, ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE AND LAW DEFENSE
AND STRONG OPPOSITION. MELANIE
KIM, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE IN OPPOSITION
AND ON BEHALF OF THE FOLLOWING
ORGANIZATIONS IN OPPOSITION.
PACIFIC JUVENILE DEFENDER
CENTER, HUMAN IMPACT PARTNERS,
BLACK ALLIANCE FOR JUST
IMMIGRATION, ORANGE COUNTY
EQUALITY COALITION, ASIAN
PRISONER, PACIFIC ISLANDER
REENTRY AND INCLUSION THROUGH
SUPPORT AND EMPOWERMENT SURGE,
SAN MATEO, NORCAL RESIST, VIET
REYES SENIOR AND DISABILITY
ACTION SIREN, INLAND COALITION
FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ALLIANCE,
SAN DIEGO LEGAL SERVICES FOR
CHILDREN, NATIONAL DAY, LABOR
ORGANIZING NETWORK. BETH FRANCO,
ON BEHALF OF THE ASIAN LAW
CAUCUS IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING, CLAIRE SIMONICH ON
BEHALF OF THE VERA INSTITUTE OF
JUSTICE. IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
MORNING, GRETCHEN BURNS BERGMAN.
A NEW PATH PARENTS FOR ADDICTION
TREATMENT AND HEALING AND MOMS
UNITED TO END THE WAR ON DRUGS
STRONGLY OPPOSE. JOHN RODNEY,
IMMIGRANT DEFENSE PROJECT IN
STRONG OPPOSITION. ALSO ON
BEHALF OF THE FOLLOWING
ORGANIZATIONS IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. SANTA CRUZ BARRIOS
UNIDOS TRANSITIONS CLINIC
NETWORK. BUEN VECINO INTERFAITH
MOVEMENT FOR HUMAN INTEGRITY,
COMMUNITIES UNITED FOR
RESTORATIVE YOUTH, JUSTICE,
GLIDE HARBOR INSTITUTE FOR
IMMIGRANT AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE,
SOUTH BAY PEOPLE POWER, SAN
MATEO COUNTY PARTICIPATORY
DEFENSE HUB. NATIONAL HARM
REDUCTION COALITION, PACIFICA,
SOCIAL JUSTICE, SAN FRANCISCO
GRAY PANTHERS, SAN FRANCISCO
PRETRIAL DIVERSION PROJECT,
SIRACH, VENTURA COUNTY CLERGY
AND LAITY UNITED FOR ECONOMIC
JUSTICE, BÀN, STAR HUMAN
SERVICES, AND UNIVERSIDAD
POPULAR. TIJUANA VARGAS AND
JUSTICE. ACTION IN OPPOSITION
ALICIA BENAVIDEZ ON BEHALF OF
DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE AND
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER
AND STRONG OPPOSITION ERIC
HENDERSON, ON BEHALF OF ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN OPPOSITION
AND LITTLE ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE IN OPPOSITION. MELISSA
MOORE. ALL OF US ARE NONE IN
OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE COX, LSPC.
OPPOSITION. BARBARA CHÁVEZ ELLA
BAKER, CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
OPPOSITION COMMENTS. QUESTIONS
FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR.
LANCE MOVING YOUR HANDS. YOU
WEREN'T SORRY. YOU WERE NOT.
OKAY. SO, MEMBER REYES. I
SINCERELY APPRECIATE THE
COMMENTS FROM THE OPPOSITION,
THE CALIFORNIA VALUES ACT IS A
PURPOSE FOR IT, AND THEY'RE
ALREADY HARSH CONSEQUENCES FOR
ANY OF OUR IMMIGRANTS. CGRTS,
WHO ARE CONVICTED OF, DRUG
CHARGES, AS IS NOTED IN THE
ANALYSIS, INDEFINITE DETENTION,
PERMANENT SEPARATION FROM THEIR
FAMILIES AND HOMES. SO I
APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE TO
PROVIDE THAT TESTIMONY, AND
ESPECIALLY OFFICER TANNENBAUM,
I'M SORRY FOR THE LOSS OF YOUR
PARTNER. THANK YOU. YES. THANK
YOU, MR. TÍNH. I'M JUST GOING TO
ASK THE SHERIFF A COUPLE
QUESTIONS. SO, YOU MENTIONED
THERE WAS 200 RE-OFFENDERS. WAS
THAT OVER A YEAR'S TIME? THAT
WAS IN THE CALENDAR YEAR 20
1920, SIR. GREAT. AND SO HOW
MANY OF THOSE RE-OFFENDERS WERE
DRUG CASES, I DON'T HAVE THE
EXACT NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME, BUT
THERE WERE SOME THAT WERE DRUG
CASES. YES WE CAN GET THAT
NUMBER TO YOU. ANY OF THEM
FENTANYL CASES, WE WOULD HAVE TO
LOOK AT THAT AND BE ABLE TO TELL
YOU THAT. BUT I THINK THAT THAT
WAS FROM 2019. WHAT WE'RE
TALKING THE CONCERN HERE WITH
FENTANYL NOW IS THAT AS WE'VE
SEEN, I DEMONSTRATED THE NUMBERS
OF THE GIANT INFLUX THAT WE'RE
CONTINUING TO SEE. AND WE DON'T
WANT TO CHILL THAT COMMUNICATION
FROM HAPPENING, NOW THAT WE HAVE
EVEN MORE FENTANYL COMING INTO
OUR COUNTRY. SO WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS GIVE LAW
ENFORCEMENT THE TOOL TO BE ABLE
TO TALK TO A PARTNER, FEDERAL
PARTNER THAT, TO HELP ADDRESS
THIS, THIS CHALLENGE THAT WE'RE
FACING. GREAT. GREAT QUESTION.
SO THE OPPOSITION SAYS YOU HAVE
THAT AUTHORITY RIGHT NOW UNDER
DRUG CASES. IS THERE A REASON
THEY'RE THERE? ARE YOU SAYING
THAT YOU'RE NOT YOU DON'T HAVE
THAT AUTHORITY? SURE SO THERE
ARE SOME DRUG CRIMES WHERE WE
ARE ALLOWED TO COMMUNICATE.
THERE ARE SOME WHERE WE'RE NOT.
SO IT'S NOT IN TOTALITY. ALL ALL
DRUG CRIMES. AND I THINK WHAT
THE ASSEMBLYWOMAN BILL IS TRYING
TO DO IS, WHICH IS JUST TO WHICH
DRUG CRIMES CAN'T YOU
COMMUNICATE WITH, I YOU KNOW, I
DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME
RIGHT NOW, BUT I KNOW THAT
THERE'S A LOT YOU DON'T HAVE IN
FRONT OF YOU WHEN YOU'RE COMING
TO TESTIFY ON THIS VERY
IMPORTANT CASE, RIGHT, OF THE
FENTANYL CASES, YOU MENTIONED
HOW MANY FENTANYL CASES LAST
YEAR. SO LAST YEAR, I'M. WE HAD
27 OF OUR 245 PEOPLE. WE WERE
UNABLE TO NOTIFY. ICE ON 27 WERE
REARRESTED FOR NEW CRIMES SO
THAT INCLUDED SOME DRUG CRIMES,
DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC NUMBERS ON
FENTANYL, BUT FENTANYL? I DON'T
HAVE THAT SPECIFIC NUMBER, SIR.
BUT WHAT I THINK THE POINT IS
THAT. HERE. EXCUSE ME, I'M
ASKING THE QUESTION, BUT YOU'RE
HERE TESTIFYING ABOUT A BILL.
THE AUTHOR IS TALKING ABOUT THAT
THIS IS TO, YOU KNOW, YOU TALKED
ABOUT HOW THERE'S A HUGE UPTICK
IN FENTANYL, RIGHT? VERY
IMPORTANT ISSUE. THIS IS A
COMMUNITY THAT'S VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT FENTANYL. WE'VE BEEN
PASSING A LOT OF FENTANYL BILLS.
YOU HAVE NO DATA ON HOW MANY
FENTANYL CASES. I CAN'T EVEN GET
MY NEXT QUESTION, WHICH IS HOW
MANY FENTANYL CASES ARE INVOLVED
IN ARE INVOLVING UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANTS. SO ONE OF THE
CHALLENGES, SIR, IS THAT WE
DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY TO
COMMUNICATE FULLY. AND SO THIS
IS GOING TO HELP US COMMUNICATE
BETTER WITH OUR FEDERAL
PARTNERS. AND I THINK WHEN I SAY
THAT WE'VE GONE FROM 104 POUNDS
OF FENTANYL TO 108 POUNDS, WE'VE
GONE FROM 16,000 PILLS TO
658,000 PILLS. THIS IS A CRISIS
THAT'S COMING INTO OUR COMMUNITY
AND WE AGREE. AND WHY WOULDN'T
YOU WANT US TO BE ABLE TO TALK
TO OUR FEDERAL PARTNER ABOUT. WE
TOTALLY AGREE. YOU DON'T HAVE
ANY FACTS. SO AGAIN, OF THE
FENTANYL CASES, YOU DON'T EVEN
HAVE THE NUMBER OF FENTANYL
CASES IN YOUR OFFICE. YOU CAN'T
EVEN ANSWER MY QUESTION OF THOSE
FENTANYL CASES, HOW MANY
INVOLVED IN UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANT, WHICH IS WHAT THIS
BILL DOES IF THIS IS WE'VE HAD
OTHER BILLS REGARDING FENTANYL,
WHICH WE HAVE PASSED OUT BECAUSE
THERE ARE VERY IMPORTANT. THIS
IS TO ME A BILL IN SEARCH OF A
PROBLEM. YOU CAN'T EVEN IDENTIFY
THE PROBLEM. OF COURSE IT'S A
PROBLEM. I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM.
AND WE'VE HAD IN ORANGE COUNTY,
OVER 700 PEOPLE DIE OF FENTANYL
IN A YEAR. SO IT'S A PROBLEM
WITH YOU? WE AGREE. WE WANT WHAT
WE'RE ASKING FOR IS THE ABILITY
TO TALK TO OUR FEDERAL PARTNERS
WHO ARE ENGAGED IN THE FENTANYL
CRISIS. WE WANT THE ABILITY TO
TALK TO THEM ABOUT PEOPLE IN OUR
CUSTODY THAT HAVE DRUG OFFENSES
RELATED TO FENTANYL. THE
OPPOSITION SAYS THAT YOU HAVE
THAT ABILITY. YOU CAN'T EVEN
ARTICULATE WHICH CASES YOU HAVE
THAT ABILITY IN WHICH YOU DON'T.
SO I THINK WHEN YOU COME BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE AND YOU TELL US
WHICH CASES YOU WANT US TO HELP
YOU WITH SO YOU CAN HAVE
COMMUNICATION, I THINK WE COULD
HAVE A DISCUSSION. BUT YOU YOU
DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT
HOW MANY FENTANYL CASES YOU
HAVE, ANY INFORMATION ABOUT HOW
MANY FENTANYL CASES INVOLVING
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS. YOU
DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT
EVEN WHICH CASES YOU CAN OR
CANNOT DISCUSS. SO WHAT PROBLEM
ARE WE TRYING TO SOLVE? WELL I
DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS. WE'RE
TRYING TO SOLVE THE INABILITY TO
COMMUNICATE WITH OUR FEDERAL
PARTNERS ABOUT THIS SERIOUS
THREAT OF FENTANYL, BECAUSE IF
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FENTANYL IS
A SERIOUS THREAT AND YOU
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT COMMUNICATION
WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTNERS TO
SOLVE OUR THREATS IS IMPORTANT,
THAT'S WHAT THIS THIS
LEGISLATION. SO YOU'RE TELLING
ME IN A FENTANYL CASE, YOU
CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR
IMMIGRATION PARTNERS WITH ICE?
CORRECT? CAN I ASK OPPOSITION TO
ADDRESS THAT ISSUE, SURE. SO THE
CALIFORNIA VALUES ACT ALREADY
CONTAINS AN EXPRESS EXCEPTION TO
THE GENERAL PROHIBITION AGAINST
NOTIFICATION OF ICE ABOUT
SOMEBODY BEING IN CUSTODY OR
TRANSFER TO ICE FOR CONVICTION
OF A FELONY, SUBSTANCE ABUSE
OFFENSE. SO FOR ANY FOR ANY
FELONY FENTANYL CONVICTION, LAW
ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE ABLE TO
COMMUNICATE. DO YOU WANT TO
RESPOND TO THAT? SO YOU HAVE A
FELONY CONVICTION. YOU HAVE THE
ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE. AND WHAT
IF IT'S NOT A FELONY CONVICTION?
I'M SORRY IF IT'S NOT A FELONY
CONVICTION. IF IT'S A
MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION, A
MISDEMEANOR FENTANYL CONVICTION,
OR IF THERE'S NOT A CONVICTION,
THEY'RE ARRESTED FOR A FENTANYL
CRIME IF THERE'S NOT A
CONVICTION. SO IF THEY'RE
ARRESTED FOR A FENTANYL CRIME,
AND WE WANT TO FURTHER
INVESTIGATE THAT WITH OUR
FEDERAL PARTNERS THAT WERE
PERMITTED FROM DOING THAT. SO IF
THERE'S AN ARREST THERE'S NOT
THEY CANNOT COMMUNICATE. IT HAS
TO BE A CONVICTION, THERE ARE
ALSO CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IF
THERE'S BEEN A PROBABLE CAUSE
DETERMINATION BY A JUDGE, THE
COMMUNICATION COULD OCCUR EVEN
WITHOUT A CONVICTION. BUT, OUR
BIG CONCERN ABOUT THIS BILL IS
THAT IT DOES ONE OF MANY
CONCERNS, BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST
CONCERNS IS THAT IT DOES ALLOW
THAT COMMUNICATION ON ON MERE,
QUOTE, ALLEGATION TO USE THE,
THE TERMINOLOGY AND THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENT, WHICH COULD BE
SOMETHING FAR SHORT OF AN
ARREST, EVEN IT COULD BE AN
OFFICER ENGAGING WITH SOMEBODY
ON THE STREET AND ENGAGING IN
SOME SORT OF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER
CONSCIOUS OR NOT. PRETEXTUAL
PROFILING THAT RESULTS IN, IN,
ICE BEING BROUGHT IN AND,
CONSEQUENCE IS FLOWING FROM
THAT. SO THAT'S ONE SET OF
CONCERNS AND THE OTHER, OF
COURSE, IS THAT IF, AS YOU'RE
HEARING, THERE'S A DESIRE BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT POTENTIALLY TO
COMMUNICATE, EVEN IN CASES WHERE
THERE'S NOT A CONVICTION AT ALL
AND THE STATE, SIMPLY SHOULDN'T
COUNTENANCE THAT, THAT KIND OF,
HIGH CONSEQUENCE COLLABORATION
WITH ICE WHEN THE WHOLE THRUST
OF THE VALUES ACT, WHICH HAS
PROTECTED SO MANY FAMILIES AND
KEPT SO MANY CALIFORNIA FAMILIES
TOGETHER, IS TO PREVENT THAT
KIND OF THING FROM HAPPENING,
KIND OF WRAP IT UP, MR. TÍNH.
YEAH. NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. I
MEAN, TO ME TO ME, I THINK IT'S
CLEAR THERE'S A REALLY LACK OF,
INFORMATION AND DATA. I'M NOT
REALLY UNDERSTANDING THE
CONNECTION BETWEEN THE BILL AND
THE SITUATION AROUND FENTANYL.
SO AT THIS POINT, I CAN'T VOTE
FOR THIS BILL. THANK YOU, MR.
ALANIZ. VICE CHAIR. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR, SO, OPPOSITION,
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THERE'S WAYS
THAT, LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN
COMMUNICATE, IF A JUDGE IS
INVOLVED, AT WHAT POINT IN STAGE
THE CASE DOES A JUDGE GET
INVOLVED? BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S
NO JUDGE OUT ON THE STREETS WITH
US WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO
INVESTIGATE A CRIME. SO I THINK
YOU'RE REFERRING TO, LIKE, INTO
THE COURT SYSTEM ALREADY. IS
THAT WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT?
RIGHT. YEAH. I MEAN, LAW
REQUIRES THAT SOMEBODY BE
PROMPTLY BROUGHT TO COURT IF
THEY'VE BEEN ARRESTED OR IF FOR
SOME REASON IT'S A CITATION
SITUATION, THEY OF COURSE HAVE
TO APPEAR FOR COURT. OKAY. BUT I
THINK THIS BILL, WHAT THIS BILL
IS, ADDRESSING IS THE
INVESTIGATIVE PORTION TO BEFORE
WE GET TO THAT PART, I IF YOU
CAN COMMENT ON THAT FOR ORANGE
COUNTY. SURE. SO YOU KNOW, IT'S
PART OF AN INVESTIGATION. WE
IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO
TALK TO OUR FEDERAL PARTNERS IF
THEY'RE IF THAT IF THERE'S A
NEXUS THERE, IF THERE'S A NEXUS
TO A LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
PARTNER, WE TALK TO OUR LOCAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTNER THAT AND
THAT'S REALLY WHEN I TALK ABOUT.
AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
COMMUNICATION WITH OUR PARTNERS,
THIS IS THE PRINCIPLE THAT GOES
ALL THE WAY BACK TO PRIOR TO 911
WHEN PEOPLE WEREN'T TALKING TO
EACH OTHER AND THERE WAS
BARRIERS AND WALLS TO
COMMUNICATION BARRIERS LIKE SB
54 WERE WERE UNABLE TO CONNECT
THE DOTS. SO WE ARE VERY, FOLLOW
THE LAW, THE STATE LAW. WE'RE
VERY, CLOSELY. WE THAT'S SO
IMPORTANT TO US. SO LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS ALWAYS GOING TO
ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION WHEN IT
COMES TO THE LAW. SO IF, IF WE
THINK WE'RE GOING TO VIOLATE SB
54, WE DON'T TALK TO OUR
PARTNERS. AND SO THIS WILL HELP
US DO THAT AS WE'RE
INVESTIGATING THESE FENTANYL
CASES. OKAY THANK YOU. AND ONE
LAST QUESTION, AS FAR AS, FELONY
FENTANYL CONVICTIONS WERE
BROUGHT UP, DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY
FELONY CONVICTIONS ON FENTANYL?
WE HAVE, I DON'T HAVE THE
NUMBERS SPECIFIC TO THOSE THAT
WE HAVE, COMMUNICATED WITH ICE
ON, BUT WE AS A AGENCY DO
COMMUNICATE WITH ICE ON ALL
THOSE CHARGES WHERE WE'RE
ALLOWED TO COMMUNICATE WITH ICE.
OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I'M SURE
SOME OF THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED
IN CLOSING. THANK YOU. JUST JUST
A BIG PICTURE. YOU KNOW, THIS IS
MORE MORE THAN FENTANYL AND THE
BILL IT'S OTHER, ENTITIES THAT,
YOU KNOW, WE THINK CRIMINAL
ACTIVITY THAT WOULD BE
APPLICABLE IN THIS. SO IT'S JUST
NOT JUST FENTANYL BUT JUST ON
FENTANYL. THERE'S SEVERAL BILLS
TODAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO PASS
SEVERAL NEXT WEEK ON THE DOCKET.
SEVERAL WE HAVE PASSED. SO IT'S
NOT LIKE WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING
THIS BIG ISSUE THAT WE
ACKNOWLEDGED. YOU KNOW, THIS IS
SOMEWHAT OF AN IMMIGRATION
ISSUE. I THINK THE LEGISLATURE
HAS STEPPED UP THE LAST FEW
YEARS AND SAID, THAT'S THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. OUR JOB HERE IN
CALIFORNIA IS STATE LAW
ENFORCEMENT. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT
TO FOCUS ON. SO I CONCUR THAT,
WITH WITH MR. TING, I DON'T
THINK THIS IS THE APPROACH THAT
THAT WE WANT TO GO TODAY, WITH
THAT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YES.
YEAH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
SURE. RESPECTFULLY, I DON'T
BELIEVE THIS IS AN
ANTI-IMMIGRANT BILL AT ALL. IT'S
ANTI FENTANYL. TO START, THIS
BILL SIMPLY IS A REFERENDUM ON
THE SANCTUARY STATE POLICY AS IT
RELATES TO FENTANYL DEALERS. I
DON'T BELIEVE CURRENT LAW IS
WORKING. AND I BELIEVE WE NEED
TO GIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT MORE
TOOLS TO PROTECT OUR CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITIES. AB 209 IS A CHOICE.
IT'S A CHOICE BETWEEN FIXING OUR
FENTANYL CRISIS OR DOING
NOTHING. IT'S A CHOICE OF EITHER
PROTECTING INNOCENT LIVES OR
PROTECTING THE LIVELIHOODS OF
CRIMINAL CARTEL MEMBERS. SO I
ASK MY COLLEAGUES TODAY, WILL
YOU VOTE TO PROTECT INNOCENT
LIVES OR OR END THE FENTANYL
CRISIS? THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON AB 2209 BY SENATOR
SANCHEZ. THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY MCCARTY. NÓ. ALANIS.
ALANIS. AYE. LACKEY LACKEY. AYE.
NGUYEN REYES. NO. REYES. NO.
TING TING. NO. WILSON. WILSON.
NO. ZUBER ZUBER. NO. THAT
MEASURE FAILS. NEXT. AUTHOR MR.
BERMAN. MAKE A SECOND. I WANT TO
MAKE A SECOND FOR RECON MOTION.
A SECOND FOR RECONSIDERATION.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
RECONSIDERATION FOR AB 2209
MCCARTY NØ MCCARTY. NO. ALANIZ.
ALANIZ, AYE LAKI LAKI AYE.
NGUYEN. REYES. REYES. NO TING
TING. NO. WILSON. WILSON NO.
ZUBER. ZUBER. NO. THAT MOTION
FAILS. OKAY. MR. BERMAN, PLEASE
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR
AND COLLEAGUES, WE'RE GOING TO
START WITH AB 1831, AB 1831, AB
1831 WOULD MODERNIZE OUR LAWS TO
ENSURE THAT AI GENERATED
SEXUALLY EXPLICIT IMAGES OF
CHILDREN ARE ILLEGAL, TO
POSSESS, DISTRIBUTE AND CREATE.
WITH THE RAPID ADVANCEMENT OF
AI, THIS TECHNOLOGY IS BEING
USED TO CREATE HIGHLY REALISTIC
IMAGES OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE,
WHICH CAN BE VIRTUALLY
INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM A REAL
CHILD. THE CREATION OF THESE AI
GENERATED IMAGES VICTIMIZES
THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN. BECAUSE
AN AI PROGRAM MUST FIRST LEARN
WHAT THESE IMAGES LOOK LIKE BY
USING THOUSANDS OF REAL IMAGES
OF CHILDREN ON THE INTERNET, LAW
ENFORCEMENT IN CALIFORNIA ARE
CATCHING PEOPLE WITH AI
GENERATED SEXUALLY EXPLICIT
IMAGES OF CHILDREN, BUT ARE NOT
ABLE TO PROSECUTE THOSE PEOPLE
BECAUSE THE CURRENT LOOPHOLES IN
OUR LAWS, THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE.
THE HEINOUS CRIME OF POSSESSING,
CREATING AND DISTRIBUTING
SEXUALLY OBSCENE IMAGES OF
CHILDREN MUST BE ILLEGAL, NO
MATTER IF IT IS AI GENERATED OR
NOT. THEREFORE, IT'S CRITICAL WE
ACT QUICKLY TO STOP CHILD
PREDATORS FROM ABUSING AI TO
PERPETUATE CHILD EXPLOITATION,
WE MUST ENSURE THAT OUR LAWS ARE
KEEPING UP WITH THIS EMERGING
TECHNOLOGY TO PROTECT CHILDREN
IN CALIFORNIA FROM THIS ABUSE.
HERE WITH ME IS, ERIC NAZARENKO,
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF VENTURA
COUNTY, AS WELL AS KAYLIN
HAYMAN, WHO IS A SURVIVOR AND
VICTIM ADVOCATE FROM VENTURA
FROM VENTURA COUNTY. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE FIVE
MINUTES COMBINED. GOOD MORNING,
CHAIR MCCARTY. MEMBERS OF THE
ASSEMBLY, PUBLIC SAFETY, GOOD TO
BE BEFORE YOU AGAIN. AND THANKS
TO YOUR STAFF AS WELL AS OURS,
TERRY DABROWSKI AND RAQUEL KELLY
OF THE VENTURA COUNTY DA'S
OFFICE. I WANT TO INTRODUCE A
CRIME SURVIVOR AND VICTIM
ADVOCATE, KAYLIN HAYMAN, AS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER. BERMAN JUST
MENTIONED SHE WAS VICTIMIZED BY
COMPUTER GENERATED SOFTWARE
SPECIFIC. ONLY HER FACE AS A
CHILD ACTRESS WAS IMPOSED UPON
ADULTS WHO WERE DOING SEX ACTS.
SHE BRAVELY AND COURAGEOUSLY
TESTIFIED AGAINST THE CHILD
PREDATOR. HE WAS CONVICTED IN
FEDERAL COURT, BUT AS ASSEMBLY
MEMBER, BERMAN JUST STATED, WE
DO NOT HAVE CURRENTLY A
COMPANION STATUTE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA THAT WOULD HAVE
PUNISHED THAT TYPE OF CONDUCT,
WHICH IS WHY I WANT TO THANK AND
APPLAUD ASSEMBLYMEMBER BERMAN
FOR INTRODUCING THIS LEGISLATION
. KAITLYN, THANK YOU, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, MY NAME IS CAITLIN AND
I AM A 16 YEAR OLD GIRL BORN AND
RAISED IN CALIFORNIA. I WAS
LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE A SERIES
REGULAR ON DISNEY CHANNEL'S JUST
ROLL WITH IT FROM THE AGES 10 TO
13. UNFORTUNATELY THE 12 YEAR
OLD VERSION OF MYSELF BECAME A
VICTIM OF MORPHED CHILD. ON JULY
16TH, 2023, THE LIVING SHIELD
PROTECTING MY INNOCENCE BROKE
WHEN I GOT A PHONE CALL FROM THE
FBI SAYING THAT A MAN WAS IN
POSSESSION OF IMAGES THAT WERE
MORPHED TO HAVE MY FACE ON
SOMEONE ELSE'S BODY,
PARTICIPATING IN SEXUAL ACTS, I
FELT VIOLATED AND DISGUSTED TO
THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT GROWN
MEN SEEM ME IN SUCH A HORRENDOUS
MANNER WHILE SPEAKING ABOUT THIS
TOPIC IS DAUNTING, I KNOW DEEP
DOWN I NEED TO SHARE MY VOICE. I
NEED TO BRING AWARENESS AND
JUSTICE TO THOSE IN MY POSITION.
THIS IS NOT ONLY AFFECTING
CHILDREN IN THE PUBLIC EYE, BUT
ALSO NORMAL KIDS SIMPLY
EXISTING. THESE CASES ALSO
AFFECT ONE'S SOCIAL LIFE AS WELL
AS BEING DETRIMENTAL TO MENTAL
HEALTH. IT TRULY GIVES THE
FEELING OF BEING ALONE. BUT TO
ALL OTHER VICTIMS, I AM LIVING
PROOF THAT YOU ARE NOT ALONE.
SINCE MY VICTIMIZATION, IT IS A
CONSTANT THOUGHT THAT EVERY MAN
HAS MALICIOUS INTENT AGAINST ME
BECAUSE I FEEL A LACK OF
PROTECTION IN MY EVERYDAY LIFE.
THESE CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE MADE ME
FEEL UNEASY AND ANGRY. THE FACT
THAT GROWN ADULTS THINK THAT
THIS IS RIGHT IS APPALLING AND
IS EVEN WORSE, THAT THOSE ARE
THE PEOPLE SETTING EXAMPLES FOR
YOUNG CHILDREN. THE CHILDREN
GROWING UP IN THIS WORLD ARE
BEING EXPOSED TO HARMFUL
MATERIAL, BUT THAT CAN BE
STOPPED. THERE IS DEVELOPMENT
GOING IN A NEGATIVE DIRECTION,
BUT WE CAN STILL CHANGE THE
ENDING. NOT ONLY IS THIS GOING
TO HELP CHILDREN ALL OVER THE
WORLD, BUT IT WILL PROTECT THEIR
INNER PEACE AND INNOCENCE.
CALIFORNIA IS A STATE WITH SO
MUCH POWER AND THIS IS AN
OPPORTUNITY ARISING FOR POSITIVE
GROWTH. THIS STATE IS ALSO HOME
TO THE BASE OF THE ENTERTAINMENT
INDUSTRY. THIS LAW WILL PROTECT
MINORS IN THE INDUSTRY FROM
BEING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED LIKE
THEY HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES. NO
MORE KIDS WOULD HAVE TO BE
SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE FEELING THAT
THEY WERE NOT PROTECTED
RESPECTFULLY, I ASK THAT YOU
PLEASE SUPPORT AB 1831. THANK
YOU. NEXT MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS.
RANDY PERRY, ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
HIGHWAY PATROL AND PAURAQUE IN
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS. ELIZABETH
ESPINOSA HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
VENTURA COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING. SHANE GUZMAN,
ON BEHALF OF SAG-AFTRA IN
SUPPORT AND A CO-SPONSOR, DYLAN
HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF TECHNET
AND STRONG SUPPORT INVESTIGATOR
HEATHER TIMMONS, ON BEHALF OF
THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT. STRONG SUPPORT. KIM
STONE STONE ADVOCACY ON BEHALF
OF THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY
INSTITUTE, ONE OF THE
CO-SPONSORS IN SUPPORT. RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION AND THE
OTHER POE AND DSA'S IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, MEG HOLTMAN,
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. CHAIR
MEMBERS JONATHAN FELDMAN,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION, SUPPORT COREY
SUSILO ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION, AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. WE HAVE OPPOSITION. PLEASE
COME FORWARD. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MICA
DOKHTOUROFF, ON BEHALF OF THE
ACLU OF CALIFORNIA, WE'VE
OPPOSED THIS BILL UNLESS AMENDED
. WE'VE HAD GOOD CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE. REALLY
APPRECIATE HIS WILLINGNESS TO
ENGAGE WITH US, AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING THE
CONVERSATION. THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR. LACKEY,
THE MOTION A SECOND MR. TÍNH AND
MR. ZUBIATE. YEAH, I WOULD JUST
LIKE TO JUST BRIEFLY THANK THE
WITNESS FOR SUCH A DISPLAY OF
COURAGE. THIS IS VERY, VERY
DIFFICULT AND WE APPRECIATE
THAT. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO BE HERE AND BE
PART OF OUR PROCESS. AND I AM
PROUD TO BE A COAUTHOR. AND I
THANK THE AUTHOR ALSO BECAUSE
THIS IS REALLY A CRASS, VILE
OFFENSE THAT DESERVES ATTENTION.
AND I'M THANKFUL WE'RE GIVING IT
THAT. SO THANK YOU. YES, MR.
ALANIS, I'D ALSO LIKE TO ECHO
THOSE GREAT JOB AS A PRIOR
CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN'S
DETECTIVE, THIS ONE TOUCHES ME
RIGHT HERE. SO I'D ALSO LIKE TO
BE A COAUTHOR IF POSSIBLE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. A
MOTION, A SECOND. NO MORE
QUESTIONS. MR. BERMAN, YOU MAY
CLOSE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
WANT TO THANK DEAN NAZARENKO FOR
BRINGING THIS ISSUE TO US. I
HONESTLY COULDN'T BELIEVE PEOPLE
DID THIS WHEN I FIRST HEARD
ABOUT IT, AND THEN AS WE LEARNED
MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW OFTEN
THIS HAPPENS, AND HOW HOW
AVAILABLE THESE IMAGES ARE,
ESPECIALLY ON THE DARK WEB, IT'S
TERRIFYING, AND THEN I
ABSOLUTELY WANT TO THANK CAITLYN
FOR YOUR BRAVERY, FOR YOUR
COURAGE, FOR LEANING INTO THE
ADVOCACY PROCESS TO MAKE SURE
THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN TO MORE
YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE FUTURE. SO
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU STEPPING
UP, AND SHARING, YOU KNOW, THE,
THE ABSOLUTELY AWFUL EXPERIENCE
THAT YOU WENT THROUGH THAT
NOBODY SHOULD HAVE TO, SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU TO
COLLEAGUES. RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR I VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AB 1831
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER BERMAN. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS TO THE
PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
COMMITTEE. MCCARTY MCCARTY I
ALANIS, ALANIS I LACKEY. LACKEY
I NGUYEN REYES REYES I TING TING
I WILSON WILSON I ZIPPER ZIPPER
I THAT MEASURE PASSES. THANK
YOU. NEXT MEASURE I THINK NUMBER
29. ARE YOU GOING TO GO PRESENT
3209. YEAH YOU WANT TO DO IT
RIGHT NOW. DO YOU WANT TO GO
RIGHT NOW. YEAH I'M GOING TO
DUCK OUT. OKAY. I'LL COME BACK
TO THAT NEXT BILL. YES. NO
WORRIES. I'M GONNA GO BACK TO MY
COMMITTEE. THANKS OKAY.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. ASESORÍA ALL
RIGHT. YEAH. MAYBE 1960. PLEASE
BEGIN. OKAY READY? OKAY GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS, AB
1960, RESTORES AN IMPORTANT TOOL
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO COMBAT
RETAIL THEFT AND KEEP OUR
COMMUNITY SAFE, AS YOU ALL MAY
RECALL, MEMBERS, IN JANUARY THIS
YEAR, THE GOVERNOR, GOVERNOR
NEWSOM DELIVERED TO US, THE
LEGISLATURE AN URGENT CALL TO
ACTION TO SEND HIM LEGISLATION
THAT CRACKS DOWN ON PROPERTY
CRIME, THE GOVERNOR, IN NO
UNCERTAIN TERMS, CALLED FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO SEND HIM NEW
LAWS, THAT EXPAND CRIMINAL
PENALTIES TO HOLD CRIMINALS
ACCOUNTABLE, BOLSTER POLICE AND
PROSECUTOR TOOLS TO COMBAT THEFT
AND TAKE DOWN SUSPECTS WHO
PROFIT FROM SMASH AND GRABS
RETAIL THEFT AND CAR BURGLARIES,
WE RECEIVED THAT MESSAGE LOUD
AND CLEAR. AND THAT'S WHAT WE
ARE HERE TODAY TO PRESENT AB
1960, WHICH CHECKS ALL THE
BOXES. IT EXPANDS CRIMINAL
PENALTIES FOR THEFT. IT BOLSTERS
THE POLICE AND PROSECUTOR TOOLS
TO COMBAT, TO THEFT IN OUR
COMMUNITIES. AND IT HELPS TAKE
TAKE THOSE DOWN WHO PROFIT FROM
SMASH AND GRABS AND RETAIL
THEFT. SPECIFICALLY, THE BILL
REINSTATES, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY
LAW FOR 40 YEARS. A TIERED
SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT SYSTEM.
IF THE VALUE OF THE STOLEN AND
DAMAGED PROPERTY IS
EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH, THIS BILL
ENSURES THE PUNISHMENT ACTUALLY
MATCHES THE CRIME AND HOLDS
INDIVIDUALS WHO STEAL LARGE
AMOUNTS ACCOUNTABLE. ENHANCE
PENALTIES TO HOLD ACCOUNTABLE
THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AND
VICTIMIZE THEIR NEIGHBORS WILL
DETER OTHERS FROM FOLLOWING THE
SAME PATH AND HARMING OUR
COMMUNITIES, JUST A FEW WEEKS
AGO, ACTUALLY, IN FRESNO, WHICH
IS ONE OF THE COUNTIES THAT I
REPRESENT AT THE SHOPPING CENTER
RIGHT IN CENTRAL FRESNO, FIG
GARDEN FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT
KNOW THAT COMMUNITY, A SUSPECT
ACTUALLY BACKED HIS TRUCK
THROUGH THE DOORS BREAKING, THE
WINDOWS AND THE DOORS OF A
COMMERCIAL RETAIL SPACE, NOT
ONLY STEALING A LOT OF THE
MERCHANDISE, BUT OBVIOUSLY
DESTROYING A LOT OF PROPERTY, IN
THIS PARTICULAR COMMERCIAL
ESTABLISHMENT, THANK GOD THERE
WERE NO EMPLOYEES OR, YOU KNOW,
SHOPPERS PRESENT AT THE TIME.
BUT THE TYPE OF DAMAGE AND, THAT
, THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL COST,
THIS RETAIL BUSINESS, WAS NOT
THE FIRST TIME ACTUALLY, THIS
HAS HAPPENED A COUPLE OF TIMES
TO, TO THE SAME, THIS SAME,
RETAIL BUSINESS. AND SO THESE
ARE THE TYPES OF INSTANCES THAT
WE ARE TRYING TO PREVENT AND
DETER. AND WE KNOW THAT HERE IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WE NEED
GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY. AND
THAT'S WHAT AB 1960 DOES. OUR
COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, NOT NOT JUST IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY, ARE, YOU KNOW,
DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES AND
ASKING US TO BRING SOLUTIONS
FORWARD, CRIME, ESPECIALLY
RETAIL THEFT, IS NOT ONLY A
PROBLEM IN MY DISTRICT, BUT,
ACROSS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
AND SO TODAY, THIS BILL HELPS TO
ADDRESS THAT ISSUE, AND
ADDRESSES IT WITH URGENCY AND
ACTION. I ALSO WILL SAY THAT I'M
PROUD THAT MY BILL IS PART OF
THE LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE TO
COMBAT RETAIL THEFT THAT IS LED
BY SPEAKER RIVAS AND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER RICK SABER. I WANT TO
THANK THEM FOR THE INCREDIBLE
WORK THAT THEY'VE SPENT OVER THE
LAST FEW MONTHS, WITH MANY OF US
TALKING TO THE STAKEHOLDERS,
LIKE MANY OF THE RETAILERS I'VE
SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH MY
LOCAL COMMUNITY, WITH OUR
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND OUR LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS TO TRY TO
FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN COMBAT
THIS ISSUE THAT MANY OF OUR
BUSINESSES ARE CONFRONTING. AND
AS WELL AS, IS IMPACTING MANY OF
THE EMPLOYEES AND EVEN CUSTOMERS
WHEN THEY'RE VISITING SOME OF
THESE ESTABLISHMENTS, HERE TODAY
WITH ME TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL IS TOM FIFE, THE MERCED
COUNTY CHIEF DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
AND I ALSO HAVE, RACHEL MICHELIN
, PRESIDENT, CEO OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
. THANK YOU. PLEASE BEGIN, GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS,
MY NAME IS TOM FIFE. I'M A CHIEF
DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AT THE
MERCED COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I'M HERE
TODAY IN SUPPORT OF AB 1960 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER SORIA, AND WOULD
LIKE TO THANK HER FOR HER
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. THIS
BILL WOULD REENACT THE
PREVIOUSLY SUNSET STATUTE
PROVIDING ENHANCED PENALTIES
WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL TAKES OR
DESTROYS PROPERTY DURING THE
COMMISSION OF A FELONY. WHEN THE
VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS
EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH, PENAL CODE
SECTION 122.6 WAS ENACTED OVER
40 YEARS AGO, AND WAS
CONTINUALLY RENEWED BY THE
LEGISLATURE UNTIL IT SUNSET ON
JANUARY 1ST, 2018. THIS IS THIS
ENHANCEMENT IS CRITICAL TO
COMBATING RETAIL THEFT, SMASH
AND GRABS THAT HAVE BEEN
INCREASING AT AN ALARMING RATE.
ACCORDING TO DATA FROM THE
PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF
CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL
SHOPLIFTING INCREASED BY 28.7%
IN 2022 ALONE. COMMERCIAL
BURGLARY SAW AN INCREASE OF 5.8,
WHILE COMMERCIAL ROBBERY ROSE BY
9. THE DAMAGE IN MANY OF THESE
CASES IS WELL OVER $50,000.
PENAL CODE SECTION 122.6 IMPOSES
PENALTY ENHANCEMENTS THAT PUNISH
THESE ACTS AND HELP DETER
CRIMINALS FROM CAUSING
SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE DURING THE
COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED
COMMISSION OF A FELONY. THE
EXCESSIVE TAKINGS ENHANCEMENT
ARE ALSO EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN
THE PROSECUTION OF WHITE COLLAR
AND ELDER ABUSE CRIME IN
CALIFORNIA. MANY WHITE COLLAR
CRIMES ARE ESPECIALLY DIFFICULT
TO PROSECUTE BECAUSE THE
OFFENDERS HAVE SOPHISTICATED
MEANS TO CONCEAL THEIR
ACTIVITIES. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF
CASES IN OUR COUNTY OF THEFT OF
RESIDENCES, BUSINESSES AND
EMBEZZLEMENT FROM ELDERLY
PEOPLE, WHERE THE LOSS HAS BEEN
WELL OVER $100,000. WITHOUT
THESE ENHANCEMENTS, THE
PENALTIES FOR THE THEFT AND
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OVER $1
MILLION IS THE SAME. IS THE SAME
AS THE THEFT OF PROPERTY WORTH
$951 AND ENHANCEMENT IS NEEDED
FOR A CRIME THAT INVOLVES THE
INTENTIONAL TAKING, DAMAGE OR
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY VALUED
OVER $50,000 DURING THE
COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED
COMMISSION OF A FELONY. FOR
THESE REASONS, I RESPECT
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE
ON AB 1960 TODAY. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. TWO
MINUTES LEFT. OKAY. CHAIRMAN
MCCARTY, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE ACROSS THE
STATE, CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS HAVE
SEEN PRODUCTS LOCKED UP OR IN
SOME CASES, PRODUCTS NOT EVEN
SOLD IN STORES. THEY'VE SEEN
RETAIL THEFT HAPPEN BEFORE THEIR
OWN EYES. EVERYONE SEEMS TO HAVE
A RETAIL THEFT STORY. WHAT'S
WORSE, THE LEVEL OF VIOLENCE WE
ARE SEEING AND THE DESTRUCTION
OF PROPERTY CRIMINALS ARE USING.
THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF VIDEOS OF
RETAIL STORES, LARGE AND SMALL,
BEING DESTROYED, WHILE THIEVES
RUN OUT OF THE STORES WITH
STOLEN PRODUCTS. AB 1960 GOES
AFTER THESE EGREGIOUS ACTS.
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN THE
COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED
COMMISSION OF A FELONY, OR A
PERSON WHO IS RECEIVING STOLEN
PROPERTY CHARGED AS A FELONY.
THEY KNOW THEY ARE ENGAGING IN
CRIMINAL CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR AND
AS SUCH SHOULD BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE WITH ENHANCED
CONSEQUENCES. THIS BILL SENDS A
CLEAR MESSAGE THAT THIS TYPE OF
VIOLENT BEHAVIOR WILL NO LONGER
BE TOLERATED IN CALIFORNIA. IT
SIGNALS THAT THIS LEGISLATURE
WILL PUT THE SAFETY OF OUR
COMMUNITIES AND THAT OF LAW
ABIDING CALIFORNIANS ABOVE THOSE
WHO CHOOSE TO COMMIT CRIMES THAT
NOT ONLY PUT OUR EMPLOYEES AND
CUSTOMERS AT RISK, BUT ALSO
DESTROY PROPERTY AND THE
LIVELIHOODS OF BUSINESSES ACROSS
THE STATE. THIS BILL THIS BILL
BUILDS ON SEVERAL OTHER
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AS PART OF
THE ASSEMBLY RETAIL THEFT
PACKAGE THAT TAKEN
COMPREHENSIVELY COULD HAVE
MEANINGFUL IMPACTS ON DETERRING
THE GROWING THREAT OF RETAIL
THEFT AND ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME
IN CALIFORNIA, AND SENDS A
SIGNAL THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO
DAMAGE OR DESTROY PROPERTY IN
THE COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED
COMMISSION OF A FELONY WILL FACE
NEW SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS IN
CALIFORNIA FOR THOSE REASONS, I
REQUEST YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK
YOU. OTHERS IN SUPPORT, PLEASE
COME FORWARD. RANDY PERRY, ON
BEHALF OF PORAC AND SUPPORT,
THANK. GOOD MORNING, BRENDA
BASS, CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, DANIEL CONWAY,
CALIFORNIA GROCERS IN SUPPORT
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS. SKYLER
WONACOTT, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUSINESS PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN. CHRIS
MICHELI, ON BEHALF OF THE LOS
ANGELES AREA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. MR. CHAIR MEMBERS. JOLEEN
VOIGTS, ON BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA CITIES IN SUPPORT.
MR. CHAIR MEMBERS JACKIE ONIS ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA FUELS
AND CONVENIENCE ALLIANCE IN
SUPPORT. MR. CHAIRMAN JULIAN
KENNEDY, ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
HISPANIC CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE,
IN SUPPORT. CHAIR. MEMBERS
JONATHAN FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA
POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. BRIAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION,
THE OTHER POE AND DSA'S IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MIKE HOLTMAN
, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT BRADLEY
SCHINDLER IN ORANGE COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. FULL
SUPPORT. CANDACE CHUNG, ON
BEHALF OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ROB
BONTA IN SUPPORT. COREY SALAZAR
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OPPOSITION.
PLEASE COME FORWARD.
ALL RIGHT. FIVE MINUTES BETWEEN
YOUR PANEL. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS CLAIRE
SIMONICH. I'M THE ASSOCIATE
DIRECTOR AT VÀ, CALIFORNIA,
WHICH ADVANCES POLICIES TO
PROMOTE COMMUNITY SAFETY AND
MASS INCARCERATION AND ADVANCE
RACIAL JUSTICE. AB 1960 WOULD
ADD SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS OF
FOUR YEARS OR MORE IN PRISON FOR
DAMAGING PROPERTY IN THE
COMMISSION OF ANY FELONY.
ALTHOUGH THE BILL PURPORTS TO
ADDRESS ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
OR SO-CALLED SMASH AND GRAB
ROBBERIES, ITS REACH EXTENDS FAR
BEYOND RETAIL THEFT TO COVER
PROPERTY DAMAGE IN THE
COMMISSION OF ANY FELONY, AND
THE BILL IS A SHARP SWERVE AWAY
FROM THE LEGISLATURE'S RECENT
PROGRESS IN REDUCING SENTENCING
ENHANCEMENTS AND REACHES AGAIN
FOR AN OLD, INEFFECTIVE PLAYBOOK
. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
POINT ABOUT THIS BILL. IT'S NOT
A NEW BILL. IN JUST 2018, THE
LEGISLATURE DETERMINED THAT A
NEARLY IDENTICAL BUT LESS HARSH
VERSION OF THIS LAW SHOULD
SUNSET, AND SINCE THEN,
INCLUDING WITH LANDMARK
LEGISLATION IN 2021, THIS
LEGISLATURE HAS TAKEN MULTIPLE
STEPS TO RECOGNIZE THAT
SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS HAVE A
DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON
OVERCROWDING OUR PRISONS AND
JAILS, AND INCREASING RACIAL
DISPARITIES. THIS BILL WOULD
REVERSE COURSE ON SOME OF THESE
IMPORTANT GAINS. FURTHER,
DESPITE YEARS OF INFLATION OAN
SINCE THE 2008 BILL THAT SET
PRIOR LIMITS ON PROPERTY DAMAGE
PUNISHMENTS, THIS BILL WOULD SET
THE THRESHOLD $15,000 LOWER THAN
THAT WAS WHAT WAS IN EFFECT
BEFORE WITH INFLATION, ACCORDING
TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR
STATISTICS. THIS BILL SHOULD SET
THE THRESHOLD FOR DAMAGE AT
$95,000. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
$2,008, THE BILL ALSO RISKS
ROPING IN INNOCENT OR ACCIDENTAL
CONDUCT BY OMITTING THE PRIOR
REQUIREMENT IN THE LAST BILL
THAT DAMAGE BE INTENTIONAL.
EVIDENCE HAS SHOWN THAT
SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS ARE
INEFFECTIVE AT DETERRING CRIME.
STUDY AFTER STUDY HAS SHOWN
THIS, AND THE LEGISLATURE HAS
SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER TOOLS AT
HAND TO ADDRESS RETAIL THEFT,
INCLUDING SO-CALLED SMASH AND
GRAB ROBBERIES, THINGS LIKE
REGULATING ONLINE MARKETPLACES
AND SUPPORTING RETAIL WORKERS BY
ENHANCING PAY AND MANDATING
INCREASED STAFFING. WE URGE A NO
VOTE ON THIS BILL. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS DANICA
RADAMEL, ON BEHALF OF INITIATE
JUSTICE, ENHANCEMENTS ARE
SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN OVER AND
OVER AGAIN TO BE INEFFECTIVE.
THIS BILL IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER
OR NOT PEOPLE SHOULD BE PUNISHED
FOR ILLEGAL CONDUCT, BUT ABOUT
HOW LONG AND HOW HARD, WHILE
WE'RE ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY HAVING
CONVERSATIONS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA ABOUT THE NEED TO
CONTINUE TO DECREASE OUR PRISON
POPULATION, IT COSTS OVER
$130,000 A YEAR TO INCARCERATE
ONE PERSON IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM.
THIS IS THE KIND OF POLICY THAT
LED TO AN EXPLOSION IN OUR
PRISON POPULATION AND MASS
INCARCERATION. AND WE'RE STILL
TRYING TO KEEP IT IN CHECK. SO
THAT WE ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
OF CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT.
AND SO THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND
OF THING THAT WILL PUT US BACK
INTO THAT TERRITORY WITHOUT ANY
PROOF AT ALL. THAT IT WILL
MEANINGFULLY DETER ANY CONDUCT
IN PART BECAUSE, AS IS POINTED
OUT IN THE SAME THING THAT IS
CITED IN EVERY ANALYSIS ABOUT
ENHANCED CGRTS, THIS DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE REPORT, WHICH I
HIGHLY RECOMMEND EVERYBODY TAKE
A LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT WOULD
BE REQUIRED FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO
KNOW IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY BE
DETERRED BY SOMETHING LIKE A
SENTENCE ENHANCEMENT IS JUST NOT
IN THE REALM OF REALITY, OF WHAT
PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY THINKING
ABOUT BEFORE THEY COMMIT CRIMES.
SO FOR ALL OF THOSE REASONS, AND
BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT IT WILL
COST THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA A
LOT OF MONEY AND DO MORE HARM
THAN GOOD IN THE PROCESS, WE
URGE A NO VOTE. THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE
COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR
POSITION ONLY. ROXANA GONZALEZ,
BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE
ACTION, OPPOSE. GRETCHEN BURNS
BERKMAN A NEW PATH PARENTS FOR
ADDICTION TREATMENT AND HEALING
OPPOSE. OLIVIA GLEASON, ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA UNITED FOR
A RESPONSIBLE BUDGET, STRONGLY
OPPOSE. MATT SOTO ROSEN OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION. WE OPPOSE. MELANIE
KIM, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE IN OPPOSITION.
ERIC HENDERSON, ON BEHALF OF
ACLU CALIFORNIA ACTION IN
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MOORE. ALL OF
US ARE NONE IN OPPOSITION. IN
LAWRENCE COX, LSPC OPPOSITION.
BARBARA CHÁVEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE
ALI BAKER CENTER, WE OPPOSE.
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER WILSON, THANK YOU
TO THE AUTHOR FOR YOUR INTENT
AND BEING A PART OF THE GREATER
COALITION TO DEAL WITH THIS
PARTICULAR ISSUES. I KNOW,
OPPOSITION BROUGHT UP SOME
CONCERNS ABOUT SENTENCE
ENHANCEMENT, AND I THINK QUITE A
FEW OF US ON THE COMMITTEE,
SHARE THOSE JUST IN GENERAL. ONE
CONCERN I HAVE, AND I WONDER IF
YOU ADDRESS IT TODAY, IS SO
PREVIOUSLY, AND I THINK YOUR
WITNESSES PROVIDED THIS AS A
PART OF THE TESTIMONY THAT, THE
LEGISLATURE HAD REGULARLY
REVIEWED THIS PARTICULAR
LEGISLATION, AND PART OF IT, AS
I UNDERSTAND IT, HAD TO DO WITH
THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS AS WELL. SO
FORCING A, A REVIEW PERIOD
BASICALLY TO CONSIDER WHETHER
THOSE THRESHOLDS, WERE
SUFFICIENT ENOUGH. AND SO, NO,
THERE'S NO ADJUSTMENT TO THAT. I
THINK THE, STAFF ANALYSIS, THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT,
YOU KNOW, THE, THE AMOUNTS THAT
WERE EQUIVALENT, FROM 2018 TO
TODAY WOULD BE A MUCH HIGHER
THRESHOLD, BUT YOUR, YOUR BILL
GOES LOWER THAN EVEN, WHAT, 2018
NUMBERS WOULD BE TODAY. AND
SINCE IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THIS
SUNSET PROVISION, THERE'S NO
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE
LEGISLATURE AUTOMATICALLY REVIEW
WHETHER THAT'S RELEVANT OR NOT,
WHICH IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE
EXIST TODAY. BUT WE HAVE TIME
LIMITS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE
HERE LATER. AND SO I JUST WONDER
WHY WHY TAKE OUT THIS, THE
SUNSET AND LEAVE THE DOLLAR
AMOUNTS STATIC THERE? LOWER SO
THAT MEANS EVERY SINGLE YEAR, IN
THEORY, THE THRESHOLD IS GETTING
LOWER AND LOWER AND EXPANDING
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD
BE IMPACTED BY THIS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, ASSEMBLYWOMAN,
WILSON, FOR THAT POINT AND FOR
YOUR QUESTION, WE'RE HAPPY TO
HAVE THE CONVERSATION. IF, YOU
KNOW, HAVING A SUNSET AND
ALLOWING US TO COME BACK AND
REVIEW THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT
IS WORKING, HAPPY TO WORK
THROUGH THAT WITH WITH THE
COMMITTEE, IN TERMS OF THE
THRESHOLD, I THINK THAT FOR US,
AS WE WERE MAKING A
DETERMINATION WHERE WE SHOULD
LAND, WE WERE LOOKING AND HAVING
HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH A
VARIETY OF STAKEHOLDERS. AND I
WILL TELL YOU, I HEARD FROM MANY
OF THE KIND OF SMALL BUSINESSES
THAT I'VE BEEN TALKING THAT HAVE
TALKING TO, THAT HAVE BEEN
VICTIMIZED. THE THRESHOLD IS
EVEN A LITTLE BIT LOWER, BUT WE
WERE TRYING TO REACH A MIDDLE
GROUND AND, YOU KNOW, AND
PRESENT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE
HELPFUL AND WILL BE A TOOL TO
OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS TO
GO AFTER, FOLKS, I FEEL THAT,
THAT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE,
THE PUNISHMENT DOES, MEET THE
CRIME. AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN
OUR COMMUNITIES. I JUST
MENTIONED IN FRESNO JUST THREE
WEEKS AGO, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE
BUSTING IN WITH CARS AND
BREAKING DOORS AND WINDOWS.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE CHEAP, TO
REPLACE, AND SO FOR ME, I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE BEING
IMPACTED, THAT ARE SMALLER
BUSINESSES THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE
TO AFFORD ALSO, FEEL LIKE THEY
HAVE A SENSE OF JUSTICE WHEN,
PEOPLE ARE BEING HELD
ACCOUNTABLE. SO BE HAPPY TO WORK
WITH WITH THE COMMITTEE AND WITH
YOU GUYS TO FIGURE OUT AN
APPROPRIATE, TIMELINE OF REVIEW,
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT,
GIVEN THAT THIS IS A PART OF
GREATER COALITION, I'LL SUPPORT
THE BILL TODAY. BUT I DO THINK
THAT A SUNSET WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE. PERSONALLY
ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IN 2018, THE
LEGISLATURE'S HAD, THE MINDSET
THAT ENHANCEMENTS DON'T WORK
EVEN IN 2024. WE FIND THAT THE
OVERALL, VIEW OF THE LEGISLATURE
IS ENHANCEMENTS, YOU KNOW, DON'T
DETER THEY DON'T DO WHAT WE'RE
SUPPOSED TO. AND SO IF WE ARE,
AS A GREATER COALITION,
DETERMINING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE
STRONGER LAWS AS IT RELATES TO,
YOU KNOW, PROPERTY CRIME, WE MAY
FIND THAT THAT'S NEEDED NOW, BUT
THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY
TO REEVALUATE THAT AND NOT BE
IN, IN PERPETUITY. SO I WOULD
RECOMMEND, PUTTING IN SOME TYPE
OF SUNSET, BUT GIVEN THAT IT'S
PART OF A GREATER COALITION, OF
SUPPORTING A STRONGER, LAWS
RELATED TO PROPERTY CRIME, I
WILL SUPPORT IT TODAY. THANK
YOU. OKAY. ASSEMBLY MEMBER TÍNH.
YEAH, I THINK, ASSEMBLYMEMBER
WILSON SORT OF STOLE MOST OF MY
THOUGHTS, SO I WOULD AGREE WITH
HER ON ALL POINTS. I THINK, I
DID HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING
THE INTENT LANGUAGE, BECAUSE IT
SEEMS LIKE THE INTENT LANGUAGE,
WAS NOT AS NARROW AS THE
PREVIOUS LAW. AND I DID WANT TO
UNDERSTAND AROUND THE FELONY
LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT SEEMED THAT
WITH THE FELONY LANGUAGE, IN THE
PREVIOUS LAW, THERE WAS MORE
SPECIFICITY, SO THAT EVEN THOUGH
IT DIDN'T SAY, IT DIDN'T SAY
ONLY THEFT, IT SORT OF INFERRED
THAT IT WAS REALLY INFERRING TO
THEFT. SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS, IF
YOU COULD ADDRESS THOSE, THOSE
TWO ISSUES. YEAH. IF I MAY,
PLEASE BE HAPPY TO. SURE. SO
THEFT IS A ALL KINDS OF THEFT IN
PARTICULAR, AS A SPECIFIC INTENT
CRIME. SO EVEN THOUGH THE
ENHANCEMENT IS BASED ON A
NUMBER, THE PROSECUTOR STILL HAS
TO PROVE THE SPECIFIC INTENT TO
STEAL. IN PARTICULAR ON THEFT
CRIMES BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT
, AND EVEN IN OTHER CRIMES LIKE
VANDALISM OR OTHER PROPERTY
CRIMES, IT'S STILL A GENERAL
INTENT CRIME. WE HAVE TO PROVE
INTENT. THESE ARE NOT STRICT
STRICT LIABILITY OFFENSES LIKE A
SPEEDING TICKET. JUST BECAUSE
YOU DO IT, EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T
INTEND TO, IT'S STILL AGAINST
THE LAW. WE DO HAVE TO PROVE
INTENT, BUT I GUESS. IS THERE A
REASON WHY YOU. YOU BROADENED
THE INTENT LANGUAGE FROM THE
PREVIOUS LAW? WELL I, I DON'T
BELIEVE WITH RESPECT TO THE,
DOLLAR AMOUNTS, NOT THE DOLLAR
AMOUNT. JUST JUST THE LANGUAGE
AROUND INTENT. YEAH. WOULD YOU
PLEASE. SO THANK YOU. I DON'T
KNOW WHAT. DO YOU KNOW WHAT
SECTION YOU'RE LOOKING AT? I'LL
HAVE MY GLASSES, AND I
APOLOGIZE. YEAH WHAT? WELL, THIS
IS A PREVIOUS LIE. WAS SECTION
12022.6. I JUST HAVE THE CURRENT
BILL. YEAH, YEAH. SORRY I
HAVEN'T SEEN THE BILL, SO JUST
JUST IT WAS JUST COMPARING THE
BILL FROM THE. YEAH I MEAN, I
WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, WE ON
UNDERLYING THE UNDERLYING
OFFENSE. WE STILL HAVE TO PROVE
THE INTENT. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT
THE, THE, DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN
THE OLD 122.6 AND THE CURRENT
VERSION, BUT, BUT WE STILL HAVE
TO PROVE INTENT. GOT IT. AND I
UNDERSTAND REGARDING JUST THE
FELONY, I THINK IN THE PREVIOUS,
IN THE PREVIOUS LAW, THERE
ACTUALLY WAS SPECIFICITY AROUND
THEFT, SO THAT IT WAS SORT OF AN
UNDERSTANDING THAT IT REALLY WAS
AROUND THEFT VERSUS THIS IS JUST
BROAD, IT IS BROADER. AND I
THINK THE IDEA FOR THAT IS IT'S
JUST REALLY KIND OF A AS AS,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER SORIA INDICATED
IT'S SORT OF A, PUNISHMENT FITS
THE CRIME TYPE OF SITUATION.
SOMETIMES A THEFT OF $951 IS A
LOT DIFFERENT OR CAN BE, THAN A
THEFT OF 50,000 OR 1 MILLION OR
$20 MILLION. AND SOMETIMES. AND
I NOTED, THE OPPOSITION'S
COMMENT THAT, WELL, SOMETIMES
IT'S INADVERTENT, YOU KNOW, THE
DAMAGES OR THE AMOUNTS, BUT
SOMETIMES IT'S NOT, AND JUDGES
STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THOSE
THINGS WHEN IT COMES TO
SENTENCING, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO
THE JUDGES HAVE THE DISCRETION
TO DISMISS THESE ENHANCEMENTS OR
TO ADJUST THEM APPROPRIATELY, SO
I THINK THE PART OF THE CONCERN
IN THIS WHOLE AREA WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT IS THIS THERE'S NO
INCREASED PUNISHMENT FOR
INCREASED DAMAGE. AND, FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE, PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE
TRYING TO, HOLD PEOPLE
ACCOUNTABLE AND MORE ACCOUNTABLE
FOR MORE SERIOUS CRIMES AND MORE
SERIOUS DAMAGES. AND WE WANT THE
PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY TO FEEL
LIKE THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS
HOLDING PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. GOT
IT. YEAH. SO I, I THINK THEY
WANTED TO RESPOND THE OPPOSITION
BRIEFLY. SURE. THANK YOU. I'LL
BE BRIEF. I HAVE THE LANGUAGE
FROM THE PRIOR BILL. SO THE 2018
BILL INCLUDED A PROVISION THAT
THE DAMAGE OR ATTEMPTED DAMAGE
HAD TO BE WITH THE INTENT TO
CAUSE THAT TAKING DAMAGE OR
DESTRUCTION. AND I THINK THIS IS
AN IMPORTANT POINT BECAUSE IT
COULD, LOOP IN CONDUCT THAT
OCCURS IN ANY FELONY THAT CAUSES
DAMAGE, EVEN IF THAT DAMAGE WAS
NOT INTENTIONAL. SO SAY, FOR
EXAMPLE, SOMEBODY WAS DOING
RECKLESS DRIVING AND THAT'S A
FELONY THAT WOULD LOOP IN ANY
DAMAGE AS A RESULT OF THAT AND
ADD THE SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT
ON TOP, EVEN IF THAT DAMAGE WAS
NOT INTENTIONAL, EVEN IF THE
DAMAGE ITSELF WAS NOT RECKLESS.
SO THE SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT
ITSELF IS STRICT LIABILITY, EVEN
IF THE UNDERLYING OFFENSE IS NOT
, WHICH I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT
POINT. AND THEN AS TO THE
DISCRETIONARY POINT AND JUDGES
DISCRETION, CERTAINLY WE
APPRECIATE THAT SB 81 HAS ADDED
SOME DISCRETION INTO THE MIX,
BUT THIS BILL DOES SAY SHALL AND
I THINK THAT MAY. SO SOME
CONFUSION FOR COURTS WHO ARE
TRYING TO BALANCE THOSE TWO
THINGS. GOT IT. SO I THINK, I
SHARE A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT
ARE, YOU KNOW, MY COLLEAGUE FROM
SUISUN, MENTIONED, IT SEEMS LIKE
YOU HAVE THE VOTES TO GET OUT OF
COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO LAY OFF
TODAY. IT HOPES THAT YOU CAN
KIND OF ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE SO
THAT I COULD VOTE FOR IT ON THE
FLOOR. SO OKAY. THANK YOU. AND
ONE MORE QUESTION. YEAH. AND
JUST FOLLOWING UP ONTO THAT,
NOTING WHAT, THE OPPOSITION
NOTED IS THAT I THINK THAT
INTENT LANGUAGE IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A
LOT OF CRIMES THAT AREN'T
INTENTIONAL, THAT EVEN OUR YOUNG
PEOPLE GET INVOLVED IN, AND,
THAT, WE DON'T WANT THAT
SENTENCING OPINION ENHANCEMENT
ON AND TO THE POINT THE
OPPOSITION MADE IN REGARD TO
CHAU VERSUS MAY, BEING A LOCAL
LEADER, WE DEALT WITH THAT A LOT
CHAU VERSUS MAY. AND SO BECAUSE
BECAUSE THE WORD MAY IS NOT
THERE AND THE WORD IS SHALL THAT
DOES NOT GIVE DISCRETION. AND SO
IF YOU SO I WOULD SAY ONE OR THE
OTHER, I'D PREFER BOTH. NOT ONLY
THE INTENT PLUS MAY BUT IF
YOU'RE GOING TO PICK ONE I WOULD
SAY TAKING OUT THE CHAU AND
SAYING MAY WOULD ALLOW THE JUDGE
TRULY TO HAVE DISCRETION, BUT
I'LL BE SUPPORTING. AND SINCE WE
DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS IN
HERE, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AND
JUST THE SECOND POINT OF
CLARIFICATION IS YOUR DESIRE TO
HAVE SOME SUNSET IN THERE. YES,
YES. SO I'M HAPPY. YEAH. YEAH.
SO WITH THAT YOU MAY CLOSE.
AWESOME. THANK THANK YOU MR.
CHAIRMAN. AND I APPRECIATE
OBVIOUSLY MY COLLEAGUES, YOU
KNOW, THE POINTS THAT YOU GUYS
RAISED, THEY'RE WELL TAKEN. I
WILL DEFINITELY BE WORKING WITH
YOU GUYS MOVING FORWARD TO
ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE
TECHNICALITIES. AND THEN ALSO,
LOOKING AT A SUNSET, THAT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR REVIEW. HAPPY TO
DO THAT. SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
THE TIME. AND I ASK FOR YOUR I
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON AB 1960 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER SORIA. THE MOTION
IS DUE PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY A MCCARTY. AYE. ALANIS
LAKI LAKI. AYE. NGUYEN REYES.
TING TING. NOT VOTING. WILSON.
WILSON AYE. ZUBIR. YEAH YEAH.
WILSON. CALL NEEDS TO THE BILL.
IS ON CALL, NEXT WE HAVE MR.
REGGIE JONES. SAWYER YOU HAVE
TWO BILLS. MR. CHAIR EMERITUS.
FIRST, WE'LL START WITH, ITEM
NUMBER FOUR, AB 1802. OKAY DOKEY
. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR MEMBERS. I
PRESENT AB 1802, WHICH WILL
ELIMINATE THE SUNSETS ON THE
CRIME OF ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
AND THE OPERATION OF CALIFORNIA,
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
PROPERTY CRIMES TASK FORCE. IN
2017, I AUTHORED, AB 1065, WHICH
CREATED THE CRIME OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. THE BILL WAS
CAREFULLY CRAFTED TO
SPECIFICALLY TARGET ORGANIZED
CRIME RINGS. AB 1065 ALSO
ESTABLISHED THE CALIFORNIA
HIGHWAY PATROL PROPERTY CRIMES
TASK FORCE, WHICH TO DATE HAS
RECOVERED OVER $30 MILLION IN
STOLEN GOODS. THIS YEAR. I'VE
OFFERED AB 1802 TO ELIMINATE THE
SUNSET FROM MY ORIGINAL BILL AND
MAKE THE CRIME OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT AND THE CHP TASK
FORCE PERMANENT TOOLS AVAILABLE
TO LAW ENFORCEMENT IN
CALIFORNIA. THIS WILL ENSURE
THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS THE
NECESSARY MEANS TO ARREST AND
PROSECUTE THE ORGANIZED CRIME
RINGS AND NHIÀU, AND CONTINUE TO
DISRUPT LIFE IN THE GOLDEN STATE
WITH WITH ME. TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL IS BILL
FELICI ON BEHALF OF THE BILL'S
SPONSOR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCON.
YES. PLEASE PROCEED, MR.
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS DAN FELIZARDO,
ON BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, WE ARE HAPPY TO SPONSOR
AB 1802. AS THE ASSEMBLYMAN SAID
, AB 1802 WILL REMOVE THE SUNSET
ON CALIFORNIA'S ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT STATUTE. GOOD QUESTION.
EVERYBODY REALIZES THAT
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT IS A
GROWING PROBLEM, NOT ONLY IN
CALIFORNIA BUT ACROSS THE
COUNTRY. SINCE THE COVID
PANDEMIC, ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT
HAS INCREASED 26% NATIONWIDE.
WE'VE ALL SEEN VIDEOS OF HIGH
END STORES, NEIMAN MARCUS, SAKS
FIFTH AVENUE BEING VICTIMIZED BY
BY ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT RINGS.
BUT IN REALITY, OVER 80% OF
THESE THEFTS OCCUR AT SMALLER
NEIGHBORHOOD STORES THAT HAVE A
MUCH GREATER IMPACT ON ALL
CALIFORNIANS ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT MAKES OUR CITIZENS FEEL
UNSAFE WHEN THEY'RE SHOPPING. IT
ALSO DRIVES UP THE COST OF
GOODS, AND COUPLED WITH
INFLATION, THAT IS HUGELY
PROBLEMATIC. WE ALSO HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT THE FACT THAT MANY,
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS ARE
CLOSING THEIR DOORS IN PARTIAL
BLAME, BECAUSE OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. THIS WILL HAVE A
HUGE IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
WHEN IT'S YOUR LOCAL PHARMACY
THAT GETS CLOSED AND YOU NOW
HAVE TO MAKE A MUCH GREATER
DISTANCE TO TRAVEL TO GET EVERY
DAY GOODS THAT ARE NEEDED IN LOS
ANGELES COUNTY. LAST YEAR, OUR
OFFICE FILED OVER 500 COUNTS OF
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT, 434
FELONY FILINGS AND 107
MISDEMEANOR FILINGS. THIS LAW IS
ONE OF THE MAIN TOOLS THAT WE
HAVE TODAY TO COMBAT ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. AND FOR THAT
REASON, WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S
TIME THAT THE SUNSET BE REMOVED
AND THIS BECOME A PERMANENT PART
OF OUR EFFORTS TO COMBAT RETAIL
THEFT IN CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT, PLEASE COME
FORWARD. ETHAN NAGLER, ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD IN
SUPPORT. DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET, IN SUPPORT.
BRENDA BASS, CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE IN SUPPORT. MR.
CHAIRMAN CHRIS MICHELI, ON
BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND SUPPORT.
DANIELLE SANCHEZ WITH THE CHIEF
PROBATION OFFICERS OF CALIFORNIA
IN SUPPORT. RYAN ELAINE, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
JACK YANEZ ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FUELS AND CONVENIENCE
ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT JULIANA
BORIS ON BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES IN SUPPORT
NATALIE BOLSTAD, THE CALIFORNIA
BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE IN SUPPORT.
DANIEL CONWAY, CALIFORNIA
GROCERS IN SUPPORT. BRIAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION AND THE
OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT
ASSOCIATIONS I REPRESENT IN
SUPPORT. CANDACE CHUNG FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME
FORWARD SEEING NONE. QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, MR. LACKEY. YEAH, I'D
JUST LIKE TO CONGRATULATE THE
AUTHOR, FOR ALLOWING THE
SUCCESSFUL EFFORT TO CONTINUE
BEYOND THE SUNSET DATE, IT
SHOULD BE, COMMENDED THAT WE'RE
TRYING TO ESTABLISH PERMANENCE
FOR SUCCESS, SO. THANK YOU. OH,
AND I WANT TO BE A COAUTHOR. YES
THANK YOU. MOTION AND A SECOND.
SO MOVED MOTION SECOND, MR.
LACKEY. MR. TÍNH, THANK YOU, MR.
JONES-SAWYER. AND I KNOW THIS
IS, YOUR WORK, AND I THINK IT'S
APPROPRIATE THAT, WE'RE
FINISHING THIS, WITH YOU BACK
HERE TODAY TO CONTINUE THIS
EFFORT. SO YOU MAY CLOSE, I
DON'T WANT TO MESS IT UP. THIS
IS MY FIRST LACKEY COAUTHOR,
BILL. SO, SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE YES, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON AB 1802 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER JONES-SAWYER. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY MCCARTY I, ALANIS LACKEY
. LACKEY I NGUYEN NGUYEN I REYES
TING TING I WILSON. CYBER
MEASURE IS ON CALL. I NEED ONE
MORE VOTE. YOUR NEXT ITEM, MR.
JONES-SAWYER IS ITEM NUMBER 15.
AB 2064. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR MEMBERS. I
PRESENT AB 2064, WHICH WILL
ESTABLISH THE COMMUNITY VIOLENCE
INTERDICTION GRANT PROGRAM. THIS
BILL IS AMONG THE 14 PRIORITY.
BOYLE MOVED AND SECONDED,
IDENTIFIED BY THE CALIFORNIA
BLACK CAUCUS AS PART OF
REPARATIONS PACKAGE. THIS BILL
WOULD BE ADMINISTERED BY THE
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES AGENCY, WHICH WILL
ENSURE FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY
DRIVEN SOLUTIONS TO DECREASE
VIOLENCE IN OUR SCHOOLS AND
NEIGHBORHOODS, AS OPPOSED TO THE
CONTINUATION OF INCARCERATIONS.
THESE FUNDS WOULD BE SECURED
THROUGH AN APPROPRIATION OF THE
SAVINGS FROM ANY FUTURE PRISON
CLOSURE WITHIN THE STATE. BY
USING FUNDS FOR THESE
PREVENTATIVE PROGRAMS, WE REDUCE
INCARCERATION, EVEN FURTHER AND
FOCUS ON FINDING SOLUTIONS TO
CRIME BEYOND THE INCARCERATION
OF MOST VULNERABLE, UNDERSERVED
COMMUNITIES. AB 2064 ALLOWS FOR
A TRUE REHABILITATION THROUGH
PUTTING AN EMPHASIS ON THE
COMMUNITY AND THE VICTIM
IMPACTED, GIVES THEM VOICE, AND
REDUCES MONETARY EXPENDITURES
ACCRUED ON IMPRISONMENT, WHICH
HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN TO REDUCE
RECIDIVISM. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE THANK YOU
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. IGNACIO
HERNANDEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SUPPORT.
FOR THE GREATER SACRAMENTO URBAN
LEAGUE IN SUPPORT. TIÂU NHÀ
VARGAS. INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION
IN SUPPORT. MARGO GEORGE, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK
YOU. DO WE HAVE OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL? SEEING NO OPPOSITION
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SEEING NONE.
WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND YOU
MAY CLOSE. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AB 2064
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES SAWYER.
THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
HEALTH COMMITTEE. MCCARTY.
MCCARTY AYE. ALANIZ. ALANIZ.
AYE. LACKEY NO. LACKEY. NO.
NGUYEN. NGUYEN. AYE REYES. TING
TING. AYE. WILSON. ZEBRA
MEASURES ON CALL. YOU NEED ONE
MORE VOTE. MR. BERMAN, YOU'RE
BACK. OH WE MOVE RIGHT. I'M
STILL A LITTLE THROWN OFF BY ALL
THE BUSINESS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
SUPPORT FOR THAT JONES-SAWYER
BILL, BUT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON
. MR. CHAIR AND COLLEAGUES, AB
3209 WILL PROVIDE WOULD PROVIDE
A NEW ENFORCEMENT TOOL THAT WILL
KEEP STORES AND WORKERS SAFE
FROM THE RISE OF RETAIL CRIME.
IN RECENT YEARS, RATES OF RETAIL
THEFT AND ROBBERY HAVE RISEN IN
CALIFORNIA, AND THIS AFFECTS
BOTH OUR COMMUNITIES AND OUR
BUSINESSES. AB 3209 WOULD NOT
ONLY ADDRESS RETAIL THEFT, BUT
ALSO THE ISSUES OF VANDALISM
WITHIN THE STORES AND ASSAULTS
ON THE EMPLOYEES WORKING IN
RETAIL. IT WOULD AUTHORIZE A
COURT TO IMPOSE A RETAIL CRIME
RESTRAINING ORDER FOR UP TO TWO
YEARS FOR THEFT, VANDALISM OR
BATTERY ON AN EMPLOYEE WITHIN
THE STORE. IMPORTANTLY AB 3209
WOULD REQUIRE THE COURT TO
CONSIDER WHETHER THE INDIVIDUAL
RESIDES IN A FOOD DESERT WHERE
THE AFFECTED STORES THE ONLY
LOCATION FOR NECESSITIES AND
ENCOURAGES DIVERSION PROGRAMS
FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THE
RESTRAINING ORDER. THEREFORE
THIS BILL STRIKES A BALANCE
BETWEEN PROVIDING A NECESSARY
ENFORCEMENT TOOL TO KEEP STORES,
CUSTOMERS, AND WORKERS SAFE.
WHILE NOT PERPETUATING THE
UNDERLYING CAUSES OF RETAIL
THEFT, SUCH AS POVERTY. I WANT
TO CLARIFY THAT THE INTENT OF
THIS BILL IS TO AUTHORIZE A
COURT TO IMPOSE A RESTRAINING
ORDER FOLLOWING TWO OR MORE
CITATIONS, NOT ARRESTS, WHICH IS
THE CURRENT LANGUAGE. THERE WAS
A DRAFTING ERROR BY LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL, BUT I WILL WORK WITH
COMMITTEE AND CORRECT THIS ERROR
AT THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY. HERE
WITH ME IS RACHEL MICHELIN WITH
THE CALIFORNIA RETAILERS
ASSOCIATION AND JASON CALLERY.
KOIN WITH DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO
PARTNERSHIP. THANK YOU. PLEASE
BEGIN. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN
MCCARTY. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE, THE SAFETY OF
RETAIL EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS
IS OUR TOP PRIORITY. AND TOO
OFTEN, RETAIL EMPLOYEES OR
CUSTOMERS HAVE BEEN PUT IN
HARM'S WAY DUE TO REPEAT RETAIL
THEFT. OFFENDERS AB 3209 WOULD
PROVIDE A NEW ENFORCEMENT TOOL
THAT WOULD KEEP STORES AND
WORKERS SAFE FROM REPEATED
RETAIL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. AB
3209 WOULD AUTHORIZE A COURT,
WHEN SENTENCING A PERSON FOR AN
OFFENSE INVOLVING THEFT FROM A
RETAILER, VANDALISM OF A RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENT OR BATTERY OF A
RETAIL EMPLOYEE TO ISSUE A
CRIMINAL PROTECTIVE ORDER
PROHIBITING A PERSON FROM
ENTERING THE RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENT, INCLUDING ANY
PARKING LOTS OR OTHER FRANCHISE
OR CHAIN LOCATIONS OF THE
RETAILER. RETAIL THEFT IS
BECOMING INCREASINGLY PREVALENT
PROBLEM ACROSS CALIFORNIA, WITH
DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON BOTH
LOCAL BUSINESSES AND CUSTOMERS.
THE SIGNIFICANT LOSSES INCURRED
BY RETAILERS DUE TO THEFT NOT
ONLY THREATEN THEIR FINANCIAL
STABILITY, BUT ALSO JEOPARDIZES
THEIR ABILITY TO PROVIDE
ESSENTIAL GOODS AND SERVICES TO
THE COMMUNITIES THEY SERVE.
MOREOVER, THE RISE IN ORGANIZED
RETAIL CRIME HAS LED TO SAFETY
CONCERNS FOR BOTH EMPLOYEES AND
CUSTOMERS, FURTHER AGGRAVATING
THE PROBLEM. THE INTRODUCTION OF
THE RETAIL THEFT RESTRAINING
ORDER PRESENTS A PROACTIVE AND
EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO COMBATING
THIS GROWING ISSUE, BY ENABLING
RETAILERS TO OBTAIN CIVIL
RESTRAINING ORDERS AGAINST
HABITUAL OFFENDERS. THIS
LEGISLATION EMPOWERS BUSINESSES
TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AND DETER
POTENTIAL THIEVES FROM ENGAGING
IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES. IN
ADDITION, THE RESTRAINING ORDERS
PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH
VALUABLE TOOLS TO ADDRESS REPEAT
OFFENDERS, DISRUPT ORGANIZED
RETAIL CRIME NETWORKS, AND
ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY.
FURTHERMORE, THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE RESTRAINING ORDERS OFFERS
A BALANCED SOLUTION THAT UPHOLDS
THE RIGHTS OF BOTH RETAILERS AND
INDIVIDUALS WHILE HOLDING
ACCOUNTABLE THOSE WHO REPEATEDLY
ENGAGE IN CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR BY
TARGETING HABITUAL OFFENDERS AND
PROVIDING AVENUES FOR
REHABILITATION AND SUPPORT. THIS
LEGISLATION NOT ONLY ADDRESSES
THE SYMPTOMS OF RETAIL THEFTS,
BUT ALSO TACKLES THE UNDERLYING
ISSUES CONTRIBUTING TO CRIMINAL
BEHAVIOR. THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION URGES THE
SUPPORT OF AB 3209 AND THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE RETAIL
THEFT RESTRAINING ORDERS. BY
DOING SO, WE CAN TAKE MEANINGFUL
STEPS TOWARDS SAFEGUARDING OUR
LOCAL BUSINESSES, PROTECTING THE
LIVELIHOODS OF HARD WORKING
EMPLOYEES AND PROMOTE A SAFER
AND MORE PROSPEROUS RETAIL
SHOPPING ENVIRONMENT. FOR ALL
THIS BILL BUILDS ON A NUMBER OF
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AS PART OF
THE RETAIL THEFT PACKAGE TAKEN
COMPREHENSIVELY PROVIDES
MEANINGFUL IMPACTS ON STOPPING
THE GROWING THEFT OF RETAIL
THEFT AND ORGANIZED RETAIL
CRIME, AND SENDS A SIGNAL THAT
THE CONVERSATION AROUND THE
ISSUE OF HOLDING REPEAT
OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR
CURRENT BEHAVIOR IS CHANGING. AB
3209 ILLUSTRATES THAT THE SAFETY
OF RETAIL EMPLOYEES AS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF THE ASSEMBLY
RETAIL THEFT PACKAGE, AND WILL
HELP ENSURE THE RETAIL
ENVIRONMENT IS SAFE FOR BOTH OUR
EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS IN THE
STORE. FOR THOSE REASONS, I ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU.
GOOD. GOOD MORNING. COMMITTEE
CHAIR MCCARTY AND MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. MY NAME
IS JOSH CALORI KHÔNG, AND I'M
VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY AND
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT WITH THE
DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO PARTNERSHIP.
AND HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION,
THÀNH. THE CALIFORNIA DOWNTOWN
ASSOCIATION REPRESENTS THOUSANDS
OF DIVERSE BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA. KDA'S PRIMARY
PURPOSE IS TO FORMULATE
SOLUTIONS MUTUALLY TO FORMULATE
SOLUTIONS AND MUTUALLY SHARED
PROBLEMS, WHILE BEING COMMITTED
TO LONG TUM PRESERVATION OF OUR
URBAN CENTERS. WE WANT TO THANK
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN, AND WE
ARE HERE TODAY IN FULL SUPPORT
OF AB 3209, IN SAN DIEGO, THE
DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO PARTNERSHIP
MAINTAINS 275 BLOCKS OF PROPERTY
BASED BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICTS, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY
OWNER ASSESSED SERVICES THAT
PROVIDE ENHANCED SAFETY AND
JANITORIAL SERVICES ABOVE AND
BEYOND WHAT THE CITY PROVIDES.
I'M HERE TO REITERATE THE
REPETITIVE STORY THAT OUR CLEAN
AND SAFE TEAMS SEE AND HEAR ON A
DAILY BASIS, WHICH IS RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENTS AND SMALL
BUSINESS OWNERS IN AND AROUND
OUR URBAN CENTERS ARE TIRED.
THEY ARE TIRED OF SEEING AND
DEALING WITH THE SAME
INDIVIDUALS, DISRUPTING AND
DOING HARM TO THEIR STOREFRONTS,
BUSINESSES, THEIR COMMUNITIES,
AND THEIR EXCUSE ME AND THEIR
FAMILIES LIVELIHOOD ISSUES.
WHILE OUR URBAN CENTERS CONTINUE
TO BE PLACES WHERE INNOVATION,
ARTS, CULTURE, COMMERCE AND
CREATIVITY THRIVE, BUSINESS
OWNERS NEED TO KNOW THAT
LAWMAKERS AND ADVOCATES HAVE
EXHAUSTED ALL OPTIONS TO HOLD
REPEAT BAD ACTORS ACCOUNTABLE,
AND THEY NEED TO KNOW SOMEONE
HAS THEIR BACK. JUST LIKE THE
SAN DIEGO BIKE SHOP ON 600 C
STREET IN DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO,
WHO TIME AND TIME AGAIN MUST
FEND OFF REPETITIVE THIEVES
WHILE REPAIRING PERSONAL MODES
OF TRANSPORTATION OR ATTEMPTING
TO SELL TO NEW PATRONS. WE ARE
ALSO TALKING ABOUT BUILDING
CONFIDENCE IN THE CONSUMER TO
STEP INTO THESE SMALL BUSINESSES
. WHILE THE ACTUAL BOTTOM LINE
OF BUSINESS IS PRACTICAL, WE
ALSO SUPPORT THIS TO ADDRESS THE
PERCEPTION THAT PLAGUES IN AND
AROUND OUR RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENTS. I MENTIONED THIS
BEFORE, BUT BUSINESS OWNERS ARE
TIRED AND THEY HAVE REACHED
COMPASSION FATIGUE. THEY'RE
INVESTING MORE AND MORE IN THEIR
OF THEIR OWN MONEY, THEIR
FAMILY'S HARD EARNED MONEY TO
TRY TO KEEP THEIR DOORS OPEN.
AND FRANKLY, IT'S NOT FAIR. WE
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND
REQUEST YOUR VOTE TODAY. THANK
YOU. OTHERS IN SUPPORT, PLEASE
COME FORWARD. MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS
RANDY PERRY, ON BEHALF OF POREC
AND SUPPORT. BRENDA BASS,
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND SUPPORT. SKYLER WONACOTT,
CALIFORNIA BUSINESS PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. DANIEL
CONWAY, CALIFORNIA GROCERS
ASSOCIATION, ALSO IN SUPPORT.
JULIE NAVAS WITH THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES IN SUPPORT.
CANDACE CHUNG IN THE CALIFORNIA
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OPPOSITION.
GOOD MORNING. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
OLIVER CROWELL. I'M A DEPUTY
PUBLIC DEFENDER AT THE SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDERS
OFFICE. THANK YOU, PROVIDING
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO AB
3029. WE OPPOSE THIS MEASURE FOR
TWO MAIN REASONS. FIRST, AB 33
209 WOULD CREATE A HARMFUL NEW
PROCESS WHERE ATTORNEYS
REPRESENTING LARGE RETAILERS
COULD SEEK A TWO YEAR RETAIL
THEFT RESTRAINING ORDER FOR
NONVIOLENT PROPERTY CRIMES.
MISDEMEANORS SUCH AS PETTY THEFT
AND VANDALISM. OF COURSE, MY
OFFICE UNDERSTANDS THE
IMPORTANCE OF SAFE WORKING
CONDITIONS FOR EVERYONE,
INCLUDING RETAIL WORKERS, BUT
THIS BILL GOES BEYOND THAT. THIS
ORDER COULD BE SOUGHT MERELY IF
SOMEBODY'S BEEN ARRESTED, NOT
CONVICTED OF SUCH AN OFFENSE,
AND IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY
INVOLVE A PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. IT
WOULD BE THESE RETAILERS AND
THEIR ATTORNEYS PICKING, WHO,
WHO ARE THE TARGETS OF THESE
RESTRAINING ORDERS? THE
RESTRAINING ORDERS WOULD PREVENT
PEOPLE NOT JUST FROM ENTERING
THE STORE, BUT FROM EVEN SETTING
FOOT ON THE PARKING LOT OUTSIDE.
AND NOT JUST THAT STORE, BUT THE
BUT THE OTHER CHAINS ACROSS THE
STATE, IT'S YET ANOTHER TRIPWIRE
FOR MARGINALIZED, UNHOUSED
COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO SUCK THEM
INTO THE LEGAL SYSTEM. AND
THAT'S WHAT THIS WOULD CREATE,
ADDITIONALLY, SINCE IT WOULD
APPLY TO MULTIPLE STORES, RETAIL
WORKERS WOULD BE TASKED WITH
ENFORCING THE RESTRAINING ORDER
BASED ON PHOTOS OF SOMEONE WHO
MAY HAVE VISITED ANOTHER STORE
WITHIN THE PAST TWO YEARS. AND
OF COURSE, WE KNOW THAT A LARGE
MAJORITY OF WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS
STEM FROM EYEWITNESS
MISIDENTIFICATIONS, AND THIS
OPENS THE DOOR FOR EVEN MORE
RACIAL PROFILING AND
DISCRIMINATION. THE SECOND
REASON IS THAT THIS BILL IS NOT
NEEDED BECAUSE EXISTING LAW,
WHEN OAN ENFORCED PROPERLY,
WOULD MEET THE CONCERNS RAISED
BY THIS BILL. I KNOW THERE WAS A
BIT OF A DEBATE EARLIER ABOUT
THE SCOPE OF TRESPASSING LAW. I
DID WANT TO RESPECTFULLY POINT
OUT ONE I BELIEVE ERROR IN THE
BILL ANALYSIS, EXISTING TRESPASS
LAW 620 ALREADY PERMITS
MISDEMEANOR PROSECUTIONS FOR
TRESPASS WHEN SOMEBODY HAS BEEN
CONVICTED OF AN INFRACTION, A
REALLY LOW LEVEL OFFENSE IN A
STORE, AND THEY'RE ASKED TO
LEAVE BY THE PROPRIETORS AND
THEY REFUSE TO LEAVE, DOESN'T
REQUIRE A FELONY CONVICTION.
ADDITIONALLY, IF SOMEBODY IS
CAUSING A NUISANCE IN A STORE
OBSTRUCTING THE STORE'S BUSINESS
AND THEY'RE ASKED TO LEAVE,
THAT'S A MISDEMEANOR IF THEY
REFUSE TO LEAVE. AND OF COURSE,
ANY THREATS, LET ALONE VIOLENCE
AGAINST RETAIL WORKERS, CAN
ALREADY BE SEVERELY PUNISHED
UNDER THE LAW. THESE TOOLS ARE
STILL AVAILABLE, AND THEY'RE
MORE THAN SUFFICIENT FOR THEFT
AND VANDALISM OFFENSES. STUDY
AFTER STUDY DEMONSTRATES THAT
HARSHER PENALTIES, INCLUDING FOR
PEOPLE WITH PRIOR THEFTS, WILL
NOT BE EFFECTIVE AT COMBATING
RETAIL THEFT. MOREOVER, PEOPLE
HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES BECAUSE OF
OVERSTATED RETAIL THEFT CONCERNS
AND HAVE NEEDLESSLY BEEN SENT
INTO THE CRIMINAL LEGAL LEGAL
SYSTEM. BANCO BROWN, 24 YEAR OLD
BLACK TRANS MAN, SHOT AND KILLED
IN SAN FRANCISCO LAST APRIL BY A
WALGREENS SECURITY GUARD WHO
ACCUSED HIM OF SHOPLIFTING.
JOSEPH SOUTHWICK, A FORMER ARMY
CAPTAIN AND IRAQ WAR VETERAN,
BROKE A WINDOW OF A RESTAURANT
AND STOLE SIX CHOCOLATE CHIP
COOKIES. HE PUT HIS HANDS IN THE
AIR. OFFICERS SHOT HIM WITH A
FOAM ROUND, PUNCHED HIM,
WRESTLED HIM INTO HANDCUFFS, AND
THEN SOMEBODY LIKE JORDAN SMITH
LIVING IN AN RV WITH NO FOOD OR
HEAT, HE TRIED TO STEAL COPPER
WIRE FROM A WAREHOUSE. HE WAS
CONVICTED OF THEFT, SENT INTO
THE SYSTEM. HE COULD HAVE USED
THOSE RESOURCES AND HOUSING
INSTEAD OF BEING FUNNELED INTO
THE SYSTEM. THE ONE THING I
WOULD ADD WITH RESPECT TO THESE
TWO YEAR RESTRAINING ORDERS, I
REPRESENTED PEOPLE CHARGED WITH
MISDEMEANOR PETTY THEFT ALL THE
TIME, BOTH IN FRESNO AND IN SAN
FRANCISCO. YOU CAN ALREADY GET A
RESTRAINING ORDER BARRING YOU
FROM GOING INTO THE STORE EVEN
BEFORE YOU'RE CONVICTED AS A
BAIL CONDITION. AND THEN IF
YOU'RE PUT ON PROBATION, THE
COURT HAS BROAD POWERS TO PUT IN
THOSE THOSE PROBATION
CONDITIONS, INCLUDING BANNING
YOU FROM GOING BACK TO THE
STORE. SO THIS BILL WE SUBMIT,
IS NOT NEEDED AND WOULD PROVIDE
ANOTHER TRIPWIRE INTO THE SYSTEM
FOR THESE LOW LEVEL
MISDEMEANORS. SO WE WOULD URGE
YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS
IN OPPOSITION PLEASE COME
FORWARD. THANK YOU. CLAIRE
SIMONICH, ON BEHALF OF THE VERA
INSTITUTE, WE APPRECIATE THE
ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
AUTHOR ON THIS BILL, BUT WE HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THE BILL IN
PRINT. THANK YOU. TIÂU NHÀ
VARGAS INITIATED JUSTICE ACTION
AND OPPOSITION. MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MOTION A
SECOND. THANK THE AUTHOR, CAN I
JUST GET MAYBE A RESPONSE BACK
FROM THE RETAILERS IN REGARDS TO
KEEPING THEIR EMPLOYEES SAFE AS
OPPOSITION HAD BROUGHT UP WITH
IT ALREADY BEING ABLE TO BE USED
IN A MISDEMEANOR? SURE. I MEAN,
THIS IS OUR FIRST PRIORITY, IS
KEEPING OUR EMPLOYEES SAFE.
THESE ARE REPEAT OFFENDERS.
THESE ARE PEOPLE WE KNOW WHO
THESE PEOPLE ARE THAT ARE COMING
IN OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND
OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THE
HARASSING OUR EMPLOYEES. THEY
ARE YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO
GET INTO DETAIL THE AMOUNT OF
WHAT OUR EMPLOYEES ARE GOING UP
AGAINST, NOT ONLY OUR EMPLOYEES,
BUT OUR CUSTOMERS. WE THINK THIS
IS A TOOL FOR OUR, OUR, OUR
RETAILERS TO BE ABLE TO USE
LARGE AND SMALL. AND, YOU KNOW,
I THINK MY COLLEAGUE HERE
ALLUDED TO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT
LARGE RETAILERS. IT'S SMALL
RETAILERS, IT'S MOM AND POP
SHOPS. YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE
ARE THERE ARE PLACES HERE IN
SACRAMENTO WHO SEE THE SAME
PERSON COMING IN EVERY SINGLE
DAY STEALING FROM THEIR STORES.
AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW,
UNFORTUNATELY, WE NEED TO FIGURE
OUT A WAY TO, TO KEEP THEM FROM
COMING IN AND STEALING. AND I
THINK THIS IS AN INNOVATIVE WAY
TO DO IT. I THINK THERE'S
SAFEGUARDS HERE TO DO THAT. I
THINK IT'S A NEW APPROACH TO
DOING IT. AND FOR US, AGAIN,
IT'S DETERRING THEM FROM COMING
INTO THE STORES AND STEALING.
AND THAT'S OUR OUR KEY POINT.
AND SO WE APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. AND I
THINK IT'S A GOOD FIRST STEP TO
DOING IT. THANK YOU. CHAIR I
HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. JUST,
SB COAUTHOR THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION. A
SECOND AND AGAIN, THIS WAS PART
OF OUR RETAIL PACKAGE THAT WE
OUTLINED THIS MORNING, A TOOL IN
OUR TOOLBOX GOING FORWARD, YOU
MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR
AND COLLEAGUES. AND I APPRECIATE
THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING TO TALK WITH
OPPOSITION TO SEE WHAT WE CAN
DO. WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE A
BALANCED APPROACH, BUT WE DO
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S AN
APPROACH THAT IS STRONG ENOUGH
TO REALLY MATTER AND MAKE A
DIFFERENCE. AND SO, WITH THAT,
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AB 3209 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BERMAN. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATE COMMITTEE MCCARTY.
MCCARTY I ALANIS ALANIS I LAKI
LAKI I NGUYEN NGUYEN I REYES
TING TING I WILSON. ZEBRA
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU. WE'RE
GOING TO TRY TO SQUEEZE ONE MORE
BILL IN BEFORE OUR CAUCUS, LUNCH
. SO THAT NEXT ON THE LIST IS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, PACHECO. SO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CORREA WILL HAVE
YOU GO AFTER THE CAUCUS LUNCH.
38 3241 ITEM 30 AB 3241. WE HAVE
A MOTION TO SECOND. SO BE BRIEF,
QUICK BIPARTISAN MOTION FOR A
SECOND. WAS THAT WONDERFUL?
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, AB 3241 SETS CLEAR AND
COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE
STANDARDS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
K-9 PROGRAMS WITH THE GOAL OF
INSURANCE UNIFORMITY,
ACCOUNTABILITY AND EXCELLENCE IN
THE USE OF PUBLIC CANINES,
POLICE CANINES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA. THIS BILL REPRESENTS
A SIGNIFICANT STEP FORWARD IN
STANDARDIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT
CANINE PROGRAMS, ENHANCING
ACCOUNTABILITY, AND FOSTERING
TRUST BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES AND THE COMMUNITIES
THEY SERVE. IN PASSING AB 2332
41, CALIFORNIA WILL HAVE THE
MOST COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE
STANDARDS IN THE COUNTRY. I HAVE
. I HAVE WITH ME REPRESENTATIVES
FROM THE CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION AND THE
POLICE OFFICERS RESEARCH
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA HERE
TO TESTIFY. IF NEEDED. THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS ZACH
PFANNENSTIEL. I'M THE SAN DIEGO
POLICE CANINE TRAINING SERGEANT
REPRESENTING PORAC, A CO-SPONSOR
OF THE BILL. OUR GOAL AS POLICE
CANINE UNITS THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA IS TO INCREASE
OFFICER SAFETY AS WELL AS
COMMUNITY SAFETY. POLICE CANINES
ADD AN INCREDIBLE VALUE TO
PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE OF THE
HEIGHTENED SENSES THEY POSSESS,
WHICH CANNOT BE REPLICATED OR
REPLACED, THESE SENSES INCLUDE
SMELL, SIGHT, AND HEARING.
SOMETIMES TENS OF THOUSAND TIMES
GREATER THAN ANY HUMAN SENSE.
CANINE HANDLERS RELY ON THESE
SENSES FOR MAXIMUM OFFICER
SAFETY. WHEN PROPERLY TRAINED,
POLICE DOGS ARE CAPABLE OF
LOCATING AND OTHERWISE
UNDETECTABLE SUBJECT WHO MAY BE
LYING IN WAIT TO AMBUSH AN
OFFICER OR CIVILIAN VICTIM.
UTILIZING A POLICE DOG ALLOWS
OFFICERS TO REMAIN AT A SAFE
DISTANCE, ALLOWING TIME TO REACT
TO THE SUSPECT'S ACTIONS AND
DE-ESCALATE THE SITUATION. IN
ADDITION, POLICE DOGS ARE A
REACTIVE TOOL, NOT PROACTIVE OF
THE CANINE IS DEPLOYED BASED ON
THE INDIVIDUAL'S ACTIONS, WITH
THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF BRINGING
ABOUT A PEACEFUL SURRENDER.
DURING A FIVE YEAR SPAN FROM
2018 TO 2022, THE SAN DIEGO
POLICE CANINE UNIT RESPONDED TO
OVER 92,000 CALLS FOR SERVICE,
WITH ONLY 150 OF THOSE,
RESULTING IN AN APPREHENSION.
THIS IS DUE IN PART TO THE HIGH
CALIBER TRAINING AND STRUCTURED
CANINE PROGRAM. PORAC SUPPORTS
ALL CANINE UNITS IN CALIFORNIA,
MEETING THIS LEVEL OF TRAINING
STANDARDIZATION AS WILL BE
REQUIRED UNDER AB 3241. FOR
THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE CHAIR AND
MEMBERS JONATHAN FELDMAN WITH
THE CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION, ALSO A SPONSOR OF
THE BILL AND STRONG SUPPORT HERE
TO MORE ANSWER TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS, IF YOU HAVE ANY. BUT
I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT
LANGUAGE WAS DEVELOPED OVER A
PERIOD OF MONTHS WITH TOP LEGAL
EXPERTS IN THE STATE SHERIFFS,
POLICE CHIEFS, HANDLERS, AND
PRACTITIONERS, AND YOU KNOW,
REALLY THE FOCUS ON DEVELOPING A
COMPREHENSIVE PACKAGE THAT
ADDRESSES NOT JUST GUIDELINES,
BUT TRAINING, POLICY REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS AND A LEGAL
STANDARD. AND FOR THOSE REASONS,
WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT TODAY.
THANK YOU. OTHERS IN SUPPORT,
MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS, RANDY
PERRY, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
HIGHWAY PATROL AND PORAC,
CO-SPONSORS OF THE BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT, MR.
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS CORY SALZILLO,
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, IN
SUPPORT. RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
AND OTHER PO VSAS PREVIOUSLY
STATED, THANKS, MR. CHAIRMAN.
MEMBERS MATTHEW SEIBERLING, ON
BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR
LOS ANGELES DEPUTY SHERIFFS, THE
CALIFORNIA PEACE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION, AND ALSO ON BEHALF
OF THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF
POLICE, ALL IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. MAYOR COLTON, CALIFORNIA.
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. JULIANA
LEE OF CALIFORNIA. CITIES IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OPPOSITION.
PLEASE COME FORWARD
.
OKAY. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE
PADILLA, AND I AM A STAFF
ATTORNEY AT THE ACLU OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA. ON BEHALF OF ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION, I SPEAK TODAY
IN RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION OF AB
3241, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE
DANGEROUSLY BROAD LANGUAGE ON
PERMISSIBLE DEPLOYMENT
CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR EXAMPLE,
SECTION FOUR WOULD ALLOW THE
DEPLOYMENT OF POLICE DOGS TO
SEARCH FOR OR APPREHEND A
SUSPECT IN ESSENTIALLY ANY
SITUATION THÀNH, AND DOES NOT
PLACE STRICT LIMITATIONS ON
DEPLOYMENT IN WAYS THAT WOULD
MEANINGFULLY SAFEGUARD COMMUNITY
MEMBERS FROM HARM. RATHER, IT
WOULD DO THE OPPOSITE. DESPITE
AMPLE DATA PROVING THAT POLICE
AGENCIES OFTEN USE DOGS TO BITE
AND SERIOUSLY INJURE PEOPLE WHO
POSE NO THREAT TO OFFICERS OR
OTHERS, INCLUDING UNARMED PEOPLE
WHO ARE ALREADY LYING DOWN,
RESTRAINED OR WITH THEIR HANDS
IN THE AIR, OR INDIVIDUALS
EXPERIENCING A BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CRISIS. SUBDIVISION A1 WOULD
ALLOW POLICE DOGS TO BE DEPLOYED
IN THESE SITUATIONS. SUBDIVISION
A2 WOULD ALLOW THE USE OF POLICE
DOG WHEN A SUSPECT IS PHYSICALLY
RESISTING OR THREATENING TO
RESIST ARREST. A CANINE ATTACK
IS NOT PROPORTIONAL. AS A
RESPONSE TO ANY MOVEMENT, A
PERSON MAY MAKE OR ANY FORM OF
PHYSICAL OR THREATENED
RESISTANCE. SUBDIVISION A3 WOULD
ALLOW THE USE OF A POLICE DOG
WHEN A SUSPECT IS CONCEALED IN
AN AREA WHERE ENTRY BY A PERSON
WOULD POSE A THREAT TO THE
SAFETY OF OFFICERS OR THE
PUBLIC, A REPORT BY SPECIAL
COUNSEL TO THE L.A. COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CONCLUDED
THAT LESS HARMFUL ALTERNATIVES
TO POLICE DOGS CAN BE USED TO
APPREHEND HIDING SUSPECTS, AND
THAT GENERALLY, A SUSPECT
BARRICADED OR HIDING IN A
CONFINED AREA LIKE A SHED OR
CLOSET, CAN BE EXTRACTED WITHOUT
A DOG. ACCIDENTAL MAULINGS BY
POLICE. ATTACK DOGS ARE A
SERIOUS THREAT TO THE SAFETY OF
CALIFORNIANS, AND AB 3241 WOULD
OBSCURE EFFORTS TO ADDRESS THIS
THREAT. FOR EXAMPLE, SUBDIVISION
C1 A'S DEPLOYMENT DEFINITION IS
NARROW AND IS LIMITED TO
SITUATIONS WHERE A POLICE DOG IS
DEPLOYED FOR ANY LEGITIMATE LAW
ENFORCEMENT PURPOSE. THIS WILL
RESULT IN THE FAILURE TO
DOCUMENT AND REPORT CRITICAL
INFORMATION RELATING TO
ACCIDENTAL OR UNINTENTIONAL
INCIDENTS, BOTH OF WHICH OCCUR
WITH REGULARITY, SUCH AS WHEN
POLICE DOG BROKE OUT OF A PATROL
CAR AND ATTACKED A WOMAN IN A
PARKING LOT, CAUSING HER MAJOR
BITE WOUNDS. POLICE HAVE NO
INCENTIVE TO REGULATE
THEMSELVES. AB 3241 WILL CEDE TO
POST THE RESPONSIBILITY OF
CRAFTING GUIDELINES FOR THE USE
OF POLICE DOGS WITHOUT
ESTABLISHING CLEAR AND STRICT
STATUTORY LIMITATIONS. THIS IS
TROUBLING. THIS TROUBLING
CONCERN IS EXACERBATED BY THE
FACT THAT THIS IS SPONSORED BY
PERAK, WHO WE HAVE OBSERVED OVER
THE YEARS ALONG WITH OTHER
POLICE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS,
TO MANIPULATE THE OUTCOME OF
POST USE OF FORCE POLICY MAKING
PROCESS IN WAYS THAT COMPLETELY
UNDERMINED BOTH PUBLIC SAFETY
AND THE LEGISLATURE'S INTENT. AB
3241 WILL NOT SAFEGUARD OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND WILL
FURTHER PERPETUATE THE STATUS
QUO. IN A RECENT INTERVIEW, SAN
DIEGO POLICE CHIEF NICELY,
NICELY ADMITTED THAT AB THREE
3241 WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING
ABOUT THE WAY OFFICERS CURRENTLY
USE ATTACK DOGS. THE LEGISLATURE
MUST ENACT LEGISLATION THAT
INCLUDES CLEAR AND STRICT
LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF POLICE
DOGS, WHICH AB 3241 FAILS TO DO.
FOR THESE REASONS, WE
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR NO
VOTE. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE ABOUT
A MINUTE AND A HALF LEFT. MY
NAME IS CHRIS BURBANK, RETIRED
POLICE CHIEF FROM SALT LAKE
CITY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE
MAJOR CITY CHIEFS FOR FOUR
YEARS, AS WELL AS PRESIDENT OF
THE NATIONAL EXECUTIVE INSTITUTE
THAT REPRESENTED POLICE LEADERS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY. I'M SPEAKING
IN OPPOSITION TO THIS SIMPLY
BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A
VALUABLE TOOL. BUT THIS VALUABLE
TOOL SHOULD BE REGULATED BY A
LEGISLATIVE BODY THAT SAYS
STATUTORILY, THIS IS WHAT THE
RULES ARE. AND THEN POST AND THE
TRAINING STANDARDS SET FORTH,
IDENTIFY HOW YOU TRAIN THEM TO
THAT STANDARD. THAT'S BEEN
IDENTIFIED. I THINK WE ARE
MISSING A STEP IN THIS
PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE. THAT IS
A VITAL STEP. WE WOULD NOT SAY,
GO FORTH AND TELL US HOW TO USE
DEADLY FORCE. WE HAVE REGULATED
DEADLY FORCE. WE HAVE BATONS
TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
STATUTORILY, WE SAY THESE ARE
THE RULES. AND THEN POLICE
OFFICERS, SHERIFF'S DEPUTIES,
TELL US HOW YOU'RE GOING TO
ENFORCE THOSE RULES. I BELIEVE
THAT'S THE PROPER WAY IN ORDER
TO CONDUCT THIS, BECAUSE WE RUN
THE RISK OF LETTING FORTH A TOOL
THAT IS ONE OF THE MOST VIOLENT
TOOLS THAT POLICE OFFICERS HAVE
AT THEIR CAPACITY. WHEN WE TALK
APPREHENSION, YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT A DOG THAT'S TRAINED TO
BITE SOMEBODY. THAT IS PLAIN AND
SIMPLE. THAT'S WHAT APPREHENSION
IS ABOUT. AND THERE ARE THERE
ARE ALTERNATIVES. AND WHERE
ALTERNATIVES HAVE BEEN TAKEN
ACROSS THE COUNTRY, INCLUDING
NEW ORLEANS, SALT LAKE CITY, WE
HAVE NOT SEEN AN INCREASE IN THE
NUMBER OF OFFICER INJURIES. WE
HAVE NOT SEEN A DECREASE IN THE
NUMBER OF FELONY ARRESTS, AND WE
HAVE NOT SEEN THE INCREASE IN
CRIME THAT IS SOMETIMES
DISCUSSED ABOUT THIS. AGAIN,
THIS IS A TOOL THAT DESERVES TO
BE REGULATED, THAT THE PUBLIC
NEEDS TO HAVE INPUT ON FROM YOUR
BEHALF. AND THEN WE GO FORTH AND
SAY, THIS IS HOW WE'LL
ACCOMPLISH THE MISSION. THERE'S
AN OPPOSITION. PLEASE COME
FORWARD. TIÂU NHÀ VARGAS,
INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION IN
OPPOSITION. I WAS INSTRUCTED TO
GIVE THESE PICTURES TO THE
SECRETARY TO SHARE WITH YOU
FOLKS. SURE. YOU CAN HAND THEM
TO THE SERGEANT JUST BEHIND YOU.
THANK YOU. JUST STATE YOUR NAME
AND POSITION. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN, I, I HAVE A UNIQUE
PERSPECTIVE ON THIS BILL, AND.
YEAH, I'M SORRY WE RAN OUT OF
TIME FOR TESTIMONY. YOU COULD
JUST STATE YOUR YOUR NAME AND
YOUR VIEW ON THE BILL. YES OR NO
? I OPPOSE IT. SORRY MELANIE
KIM, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE AND OPPOSITION
. MARGO. GEORGE, I WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHORS OFFICE FOR THE
CONVERSATION, BUT WE REMAIN IN
OPPOSITION FOR CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU
. AND LITTLE WITH CALIFORNIANS
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE IN
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MOORE. WITH
ALL OF US OR NONE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE COX LSPC.
OPPOSITION ALICIA MONTEIRO.
CALIFORNIANS UNITED FOR
RESPONSIBLE BUDGET AND STRONG
OPPOSITION. ERIC HENDERSON, ON
BEHALF OF ACLU CALIFORNIA ACTION
AND STRONG OPPOSITION TO AB
3241. ALICIA BENAVIDES ON BEHALF
OF LIONS FOR BOYS AND MEN OF
COLOR IN OPPOSITION. GRETCHEN
BERGMAN, A NEW PATH PARENTS FOR
ADDICTION TREATMENT AND HEALING
IN OPPOSITION. CARMEN NICOLE COX
, ACLU, CALIFORNIA ACTION I DO
WANT TO THANK COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR MAKING IT VERY CLEAR THAT A
VOTE IN SUPPORT OF 3241 IS A
VOTE FOR INJUSTICE. THANK YOU.
OKAY, ANY OTHERS IN OPPOSITION?
SEEING NONE, QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
I'LL START HERE. AND, WE WANTED
TO HEAR THESE BACK TO BACK.
WE'RE GOING TO CAUCUS LUNCHES.
ANOTHER BILL HEARING ONE BILL AT
A TIME. SO I GUESS MY BIG
PICTURE ON THESE BILLS RELATED
TO, TO, CANINE POLICE, POLICE
DOGS OR CANINES ARE DOGS, BUT,
IS THAT A FEW YEARS AGO, WE HAD
A BIG DEBATE HERE IN THE
LEGISLATURE, AND I AUTHORED A
BILL WITH DOCTOR WEBER AND
CHANGING OUR USE OF FORCE
STANDARDS. AND WE WANTED TO
FOCUS ON DE-ESCALATION. AND ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT I ALWAYS
RECALL IS ONE OF THE HOT MÐI
AGENTS THAT BROUGHT THAT BILL TO
FRUITION IN 2019 WAS A SHOOTING
JUST DOWN THE STREET HERE IN
SACRAMENTO. A YOUNG MAN NAMED
STEPHON CLARK IN HIS GRANDMA'S
HOUSE HAD A CELL PHONE AND WAS
SHOT AND KILLED. AND IT GOT OUR
CITY'S ATTENTION, THE STATE'S
ATTENTION, THE NATION'S
ATTENTION. AND THAT BECAME A
FLASHPOINT FOR THAT BILL. AND
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD
OVER AND OVER AFTER THAT, WAS A
NEED FOR ALTERNATIVES OTHER THAN
DEADLY FORCE, DE-ESCALATION AND
THE FAMILY ACTUALLY ASKED MANY
TIMES, WHY DIDN'T YOU SEND IN
THE CANINE? WHY COULDN'T YOU
SEND IN OTHER PIECES? AND SO,
YOU KNOW, THESE ARE PIECES OF
THE PUZZLE, ESPECIALLY AS WE TRY
TO HAVE SAFER ALTERNATIVES WHEN
LAW ENFORCEMENT GOES OUT TO A
DANGEROUS SITUATION. SO I THINK
THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT BOTH
SIDES OF THE COIN HERE, THAT
BEING SAID, I DO SUPPORT THIS
AND WE WILL SUPPORT THE OTHER
BILL AS WELL, THIS WILL BE
DEBATING ONE BILL AT A TIME
HERE, BUT I'M TRYING. I THINK I
WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT IN CONTEXT
HERE AS WELL. THIS BILL
CERTAINLY SETS OUT KIND OF RULES
OF ENGAGEMENT, THE OTHER,
MEASURE IS MORE SETTING THE
DIRECTION FOR POST TO KIND OF
WORK ON THESE THINGS, IT'S, IT'S
MY HOPE AND OUR HOPE THAT YOU
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH OUR OTHER
AUTHOR AND, AND KIND OF COME
TOGETHER AND RECOGNIZE THE
LEADERSHIP OF THE PRIOR BILL
STARTED FIRST. SO BUT WITH THAT,
I DO SUPPORT THIS THIS MEASURE
TODAY AND ENCOURAGE YOU TO KEEP
ENGAGING NOT ONLY WITH THE OTHER
COMPANION MEASURE, BUT WITH THE,
OPPOSITION GROUPS AS WELL. SO
THANK YOU, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WILSON. SORRY IF I MAY. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WILSON, THANK THANK YOU
TO THE AUTHOR. FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD AND TRYING TO ADDRESS
SOME OF THE CONCERNS, FROM THE
BILL LAST YEAR. AND I THINK,
EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT TALKING
ABOUT THE BILL, I WILL NOTE,
THANK YOU TO, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
JACKSON FOR BEING A LEADER IN
THIS SPACE AND STARTING THE
DIALOG WITH THE LEGISLATURE ON
WHAT'S APPROPRIATE AND WHAT IS
NOT APPROPRIATE AND HOW I VIEW
THIS PARTICULAR BILL IS, SETTING
UP A STANDARD STATEWIDE, THAT
WAS ONE OF THE MANY
CONVERSATIONS THAT WERE
OCCURRING LAST YEAR, WAS ABOUT
THE INCONSISTENCY ACROSS THE
STATE, EVEN HOW THE USE THE USE
OF CANINES IN EVERY SINGLE
DEPARTMENT HAD THEIR OWN WAY OF
DOING IT. PRETTY MUCH THE WILD,
WILD WEST, WHEN IT CAME TO IT
AND HOW THERE WAS A NEED, AT
MINIMUM, FOR A STANDARD. AND SO
I'LL BE, SUPPORTING THIS BILL
TODAY AS, AS WE WORK THROUGH THE
FINE THAT STANDARD, I'M GOING TO
ALSO ENCOURAGE THE CONTINUED
CONVERSATIONS, WITH THE AUTHOR
WHO LED THIS DISCUSSION, ON THIS
, BECAUSE I THINK THIS DOES
CREATE A STANDARD THAT COMES
FROM THE POINT OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT, BUT AT THE SAME
TIME, THERE HAS TO BE A
DISCUSSION WHERE WE HAVE
COMMUNITY INPUT AND THE
LEGISLATURE HAS TO WEIGH IN ON
WHAT THE GUARDRAILS ARE, FOR
THIS. AND THAT CAN'T BE SILENT,
BECAUSE WE DO FIND, ALTHOUGH IT
IS A USEFUL TOOL AND AN
APPROPRIATE FOR DE-ESCALATION
AND ALTERNATIVE WAYS THAT DON'T
END IN DEATH, THERE ARE TRAGIC
INCIDENTS, THAT WE HEAR EVEN ONE
IN MY OWN AREA WHERE, IT WAS
ACTUALLY IN THE CITY, IN THE
COUNTY OF NAPA, BUT A PERSON, A
DOG WAS, PUT FORTH TO APPREHEND
SOMEONE. OAN, WHO WAS IN THE,
PROCESS OF COMMITTING A CRIME OR
HAD BEEN COMMITTING A CRIME,
THAT WAS CLEARLY VISIBLE. AND
THE DOG DID NOT, ATTACK THAT
PERSON, BUT ATTACKED SOMEONE
WELL BEYOND BEHIND THEM WHO WAS
ACTUALLY A RESIDENT FROM MY
COUNTY AND IN MY DISTRICT, AND
SO THAT WAS UNFORTUNATE, BUT
THERE WAS NO MECHANISMS IN PLACE
, TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT
SITUATION. SO I THINK THAT, JUST
LIKE WE HAVE RULES SURROUNDING
OTHER USES, POLICE USE OF FORCE,
THERE HAS TO BE RULES AROUND
THIS. AND IT HAS TO TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION NOT JUST GIVING
OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOLS TO
KEEP US SAFE, BECAUSE THAT'S
IMPORTANT. BUT FROM THE
COMMUNITY POINT OF VIEW, KEEPING
THE COMMUNITY SAFE FROM THE
TOOLS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. SO, MEMBER
ALANIZ, THANK YOU. CHAIR. I WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR AND THE
SPONSORS, EVERYBODY WORKING ON
THIS BILL. THIS THIS BILL IS AN
EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE
DOING. MOST OF OUR BILLS
ACTUALLY TALKING AND, WORKING
WITH THOSE THAT ACTUALLY PUT THE
BILL IN PLACE, WORKING WITH THE
HANDLERS, WORKING WITH THE
ASSOCIATIONS AS WELL, ONE OF THE
QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR THE
OPPOSITION, YOU HAD BROUGHT UP
THAT IN THE BILL. IT TALKS
ABOUT, CANINES BEING USED ON
UNARMED PEOPLE, CAN YOU
ELABORATE ON THAT? SORRY. SO THE
BILL ITSELF DOESN'T USE THAT
LANGUAGE, BUT OUR DATA SHOWS
THAT CANINES, WHEN CANINES ARE
USUALLY USED, THEY'RE USED IN
SITUATIONS. AND AGAINST PEOPLE
WHO ARE TYPICALLY UNARMED PEOPLE
WHO ARE POSING NO THREAT TO
OFFICERS, NO, NO IMMINENT SORT
OF THREAT OF SERIOUS BODILY
INJURY OR DEATH TO OFFICERS OR
OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THEY
ARE USED AGAINST PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPERIENCING A BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CRISIS, PEOPLE WHO HAVE
DISABILITIES, AND
DISPROPORTIONATELY AGAINST,
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, AND SO
WHEN I, WHEN I SAID THAT IT'S
USED AGAINST UNARMED PEOPLE, OUR
REVIEW OF OUR OF PUBLIC RECORDS
DATA FROM OVER 38 AGENCIES
REVEALED THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN
LAW ENFORCEMENT IS USING THESE
CANINES TO BITE PEOPLE, THEY'RE
USUALLY AGAINST PEOPLE WHO ARE
UNARMED AND WHO ARE NOT
COMMITTING ANY SORT OF VIOLENT
CRIME. AND WITH THAT DATA, DID
YOU HAPPEN TO SEE ANYTHING THAT
SHOWED HOW MANY SURRENDERS WERE
COLLECTED AS WELL? SO
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT DATA IS NOT
COLLECTED, AND, YOU KNOW,
ALTERNATIVELY, THERE'S NO SORT
OF DATA ON WHEN THERE ARE
SURRENDERS, IN SITUATIONS WHERE,
LIKE, NO CANINE IS USED TO SORT
OF LIKE COUNTER COMPARE, SO THAT
DATA AND AT WHAT LEVEL IS THAT
AT THE STATE LEVEL COLLECTED, OR
IS THAT AT THE INDIVIDUAL
DEPARTMENTS? THAT WAS SO IT WAS,
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DATA
THAT WE REVIEWED. SO IT WAS A
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST THAT WERE
SENT OUT TO 38 AGENCIES IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. OKAY. I
KNOW FOR A FACT IN MY NECK OF
THE WOODS, SURRENDERS ARE
COLLECTED AS FAR AS DATA, AND I
DON'T THINK I KNOW OF ANY OTHER
CANINE UNIT THAT DOES NOT
COLLECT THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S
BASICALLY THE BREAD AND BUTTER
OF A CANINE UNIT. WE WANT
SOMEBODY AS, AS AS MENTIONED IN
THE IN THE EARLIER BRIEFING, WAS
WE WANT TO DE-ESCALATE. WE WANT
TO HAVE A PEACEFUL SURRENDER.
THAT'S THE GOAL. IF I COULD TURN
IT BACK OVER TO, SUPPORTER OF
THE CANINE HOUNDS, CAN YOU CAN
YOU ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE
BIT MORE AS WELL? YES, SIR.
IT'S, OBVIOUSLY A DE-ESCALATION
TOOL TO HAVE THAT DOG THERE, ALL
FORCE IS APPLIED UNDER GRAHAM
VERSUS CONNOR, WHICH IS SEVERITY
OF THE CRIME. ACTIVELY RESISTING
AND IMMEDIACY OF THE THREAT,
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET
THAT CRITERIA BEFORE THE DOG IS
DEPLOYED, AS AS WE SAY THAT THE
SUSPECT'S ACTIONS ARE GOING TO
DICTATE THE CANINE HANDLER'S
RESPONSE, THEY ARE GIVEN
WARNINGS, NUMEROUS WARNINGS TO
GET THEM TO SURRENDER. AND IF
THEY DON'T, THEN THE DOG WOULD
BE DEPLOYED, THERE ARE CHECKS
AND BALANCES WITH THAT. AND
THERE IS STATISTICAL TRACKING
FOR THOSE INTERVENTIONS OR THOSE
SURRENDERS AS WELL. AND WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN TO A DOG AS AN
EXAMPLE? THAT WAS GIVEN TODAY
THAT, CANINE, INADVERTENTLY
ATTACKED SOMEONE ELSE OTHER THAN
THE SUSPECT. SO IF HE ATTACKED
SOMEBODY ELSE OTHER THAN THE
SUSPECT, EITHER A THAT DOG GETS
PULLED OFFLINE, HANDLER HAS
REMEDIATION TRAINING. THEY COULD
BE ON PERFORMANCE PLANS, YOU
HAVE TO GO INTO THE AVENUE. IS
IT A TRAINING ISSUE OR IS IT A
PERSONNEL ISSUE, LIKE A SIMILAR,
LIKE A USE OF FORCE COMPLAINT,
SO THERE WILL BE CHECKS AND
BALANCES FOR THAT. IT'S NOT JUST
A GIVE ME OR IT'S NOT JUST A,
HEY, WE'RE JUST GOING TO PUT
THIS ONE TO BED. GREAT. THANK
YOU. GLAD YOU GUYS ARE
ADDRESSING IT. I HAVE NO
FURTHER. SORRY. CAN I JUST ADD
ONE QUICK THING, ON THE YOU HAVE
A QUESTION FROM. WE'RE GOOD,
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER REYES. I'M SORRY
I ARRIVED LATE, BUT I UNDERSTAND
THAT OUR TWO BILLS REGARDING
CANINES BY BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER
PACHECO AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, JACKSON
JACKSON, DOCTOR JACKSON, I
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS ONGOING
DISCUSSION, WITH THE SPEAKER'S
OFFICE AND TRYING TO REACH A
PLACE TO HAVE BOTH OF THESE
BILLS THROUGH AND WITH THAT IN
MIND, I AM NOT GOING TO ASK ANY
QUESTIONS. I'M ASSUMING THAT
THAT PROCESS IS GOING THROUGH,
AND IN THE END, IT WILL BE
SOMETHING THAT IS ACCEPTABLE
BEFORE IT REACHES THE FLOOR.
OKAY. YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU,
AND THANK YOU AGAIN, EVERYONE,
FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT THIS
VERY IMPORTANT AND VITAL BILL
WITH RESPECT TO, CANINE
PROGRAMS, THIS WILL BE A BILL
THAT IS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE,
STATEWIDE STANDARDS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. AND IT'S A GREAT
TOOL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND I
WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
COMPANION BILL, ALSO, ALL
STAKEHOLDERS, IN ORDER TO GET
THIS BILL TO A RIGHT PLACE, SO
THAT, YOU KNOW, IT CAN BE
PRESENTED ON THE FLOOR AND,
HOPEFULLY I CAN ALSO GET YOUR
VOTES WHEN IT GETS TO THE FLOOR,
BUT THIS IS AN EXTREMELY VITAL
TOOL. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AB 3241
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER PACHECO. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY. MCCARTY AYE. ALANIS.
ALANIS. AYE. LAKI LAKI I WIN, I
WIN. AYE. REYES. REYES I TING I
TING AYE. WILSON ZEBRA. THAT
MEASURE PASSES AND WE WILL
RECESS UNTIL 130. WE'LL COME
BACK AT IN THIS ROOM AT 130 NÓ.
SO, APPARENTLY I'M LOOKING FOR
THE ARTICLE
.
WE WILL RECONVENE THIS HEARING,
THIS AFTERNOON, NEXT UP, WE HAVE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JACKSON. ALL
RIGHT, BEFORE WE GO ON, I NEED
TO TALK TO. OH, YEAH. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR, COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, THIS IS, AB 2042, WHICH
ENSURES THAT THE FIRST, FOR THE
FIRST TIME, CALIFORNIA HAS A
STATEWIDE LAW TO SAFELY AND
EFFECTIVELY USE POLICE CANINES.
THIS BILL BEFORE YOU TODAY DOES
NOT AND WILL NOT REMOVE POLICE
CANINES AS A TOOL FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT WORKING
COLLABORATIVELY WITH
STAKEHOLDERS. WE WILL CONTINUE
TO WORK ON THIS BILL TO DELIVER
A BALANCED APPROACH THAT WE CAN
ALL BE PROUD OF. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE. ANYONE IN
SUPPORT? MR. JACKSON, YOU HAVE
ANYBODY COME SPEAK. NO. OKAY
ANYONE IN SUPPORT FOR ME TO
PLEASE COME UP, GIVE YOUR NAME
AND ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. OKAY.
ANYONE IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE
COME UP TO THE TABLE. NO, WE'RE
NOT. WE'RE NOT DOING THAT YET. I
WANT OPPOSITION AT THE TABLE
FIRST.
SIR. OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
STEPHANIE PADILLA, AND I'M A
STAFF ATTORNEY AT THE ACLU OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. ON BEHALF
OF ACLU CALIFORNIA ACTION, I
SPEAK TODAY IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO AB 2042. UNLESS IT
IS AMENDED, THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE MUST ACT WITH
URGENCY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC
AND ENACT LEGISLATION THAT SETS
CLEAR AND STRICT LIMITATIONS ON
THE USE OF POLICE DOGS. BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, AB 2042, AS
WRITTEN, DOES NOT SATISFY THE
SUBJECTIVE. POLICE DOGS ARE A
TYPE OF FORCE THAT HAS THE
POTENTIAL TO END AND FOREVER
ALTER THE LIVES OF INDIVIDUALS,
POLICE DOGS, SHARP TEETH,
PUNCTURE AND ANCHOR FLESH, AND
WHILE THEIR MOLARS TEAR AND
SHRED TISSUE, CAUSING DEEP
PUNCTURE WOUNDS, EXTENSIVE
TISSUE LACERATIONS, AVULSIONS,
AND DEGLOVING, POLICE ROUTINELY
DEPLOY ATTACK DOGS AGAINST
PEOPLE WHO POSE NO DANGER OR
THREAT, WHO ARE NOT SUSPECTED OF
A CRIME, OF VIOLENCE OR ANY
CRIME AT ALL, WHO ARE
EXPERIENCING A MENTAL HEALTH
CRISIS, OR WHO WERE EXERCISING
THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
ASSEMBLE AND PROTEST. FOR
EXAMPLE, IN VISALIA, POLICE
RESPONDED WITH A POLICE DOG UNIT
TO A MOTHER'S 911 CALL TO HELP
TO TRANSPORT HER SON TO THE
HOSPITAL FOR A PSYCHIATRIC
CRISIS. DESPITE HAVING INFORMED
THE DISPATCHER AND RESPONDING
OFFICERS THAT HER SON WAS NOT
ARMED, TWO OFFICERS HELD HER
SON'S ARMS BEHIND THE BACK, AND
THE HANDLER COMMANDED THE DOG TO
BITE AND ALLOWED THE DOG TO JUMP
UP AND TEAR INTO HIS FACE,
SLICING OPEN HIS NECK, BOTTOM,
LIP, AND NOSTRIL ALMOST TO HIS
TOP LINE. STATEWIDE TWO THIRDS
OF CALIFORNIANS SEVERELY INJURED
BY POLICE DOGS ARE PEOPLE OF
COLOR. THE RACIALIZED USE OF
POLICE DOG ATTACKS IS SHOWN BY
STATISTICAL DISPARITIES AND BY
THE LANGUAGE AND SYMBOLISM USED
BY POLICE AGENCIES WHO DEPLOY
THE DOGS. PUBLIC RECORDS
DOCUMENT A SAN DIEGO POLICE
DEPARTMENT HANDLER JOKING THAT
HIS DOG ONLY LIKES DARK MEAT.
POLICE CANNOT ADEQUATELY CONTROL
THEIR ATTACK DOGS, WHO OFTEN
MOLE PEOPLE THEY ARE NOT
INSTRUCTED TO BITE. IN FRESNO, A
POLICE DOG ACCIDENTALLY ATTACKED
AND SERIOUSLY INJURED A POLICE
OFFICER, SENDING THAT OFFICER TO
THE HOSPITAL. WHEN THE DOG
ATTACKED, A DIFFERENT OFFICER
LATCHING ONTO HIS ARM AND
REFUSING TO RELEASE THE OFFICER
SHOT AND KILLED THE DOG. POLICE
DOGS CANNOT BE CONTROLLED AND
FREQUENTLY FAIL TO STOP
ATTACKING WHEN RECALLED. FOR
EXAMPLE, A SACRAMENTO COUNTY
SHERIFF'S ATTACK DOG TORE INTO A
MAN'S ARM, REQUIRING
RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY AND
RESULTING IN THE PERMANENT
DISFIGUREMENT OF HIS RIGHT ARM,
OF WHICH HE NO LONGER HAS FULL
USE OF. THIS POLICE DOG IGNORED
THE HANDLER'S RELEASE, AND
INSTEAD, HIS ITS JAWS STAYED
CLAMPED IN THE INDIVIDUAL'S ARM
FOR OVER ONE MINUTE AND DID NOT
RELEASE UNTIL A DEPUTY GRABBED
THE DOG'S HEAD WITH BOTH HANDS
AND PULLED HIM OFF. BECAUSE MANY
POLICE ATTACK DOGS REFUSED TO
RELEASE THEIR BITES WHEN
COMMANDED. CANINE SUPPLY
COMPANIES HAVE DEVELOPED OUTING
TOOLS SUCH AS METAL BARS THAT
HANDLERS CAN THEN STICK INTO
THEIR DOGS MOUTHS TO TRIGGER A
GAG REFLEX AND DISLODGE THEIR
JAWS, THIS BILL WILL NOT
SAFEGUARD OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS
AND WILL FURTHER PERPETUATE THE
STATUS QUO. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
YOUR NO VOTE ON AB 2042 UNLESS
AMENDED. TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU.
I'LL FOREGO THE INTRODUCTIONS.
MY NAME IS CHRIS BURBANK AGAIN,
I AM SITTING HERE BEFORE YOU FOR
THE SAME REASONS, RIGHT? THAT I
BELIEVE THIS BODY HAS A
RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT IN PLACE
STATUTES, LAWS THAT GOVERN THE
USE OF A CANINE AND THEN POST
AND THE OFFICERS ATTENDING ARE
THE ONES WHO THEN DEVELOP THE
POLICY, THE TRAINING THAT MEETS
THAT STANDARD. ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT I THINK IS VERY CONFUSING
ABOUT CANINE DEPLOYMENTS IS WE
OFTEN TALK ABOUT THE ABILITY TO
DE-ESCALATE SITUATIONS. WELL,
CANINE DOGS, BY MOST POLICIES IN
CALIFORNIA AND THROUGHOUT THE
NATION, ARE NOT DEPLOYED ON
ARMED INDIVIDUALS BECAUSE OF THE
DANGER AND RISK TO THE DOG. AND
I'M NOT STANDING HERE BEFORE YOU
AND ADVOCATING THAT WE ENDANGER
A POLICE DOG. HOWEVER, WE NEED
TO KNOW THAT WHEN WE START
EVALUATING THIS, THEY'RE NOT
DESIGNED TO BE AN ALTERNATIVE
FOR DEADLY FORCE. AND SO MANY OF
THE TACTICS THAT YOU USE A
POLICE DOG FOR, SUCH AS SEARCH,
SUCH AS LOCATION, SUCH AS
HOLDING AN INDIVIDUAL, ALL THOSE
THINGS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH
OTHER DOGS THAT ARE NOT NOT, IN
ESSENCE, ATTACK DOGS NOT
DESIGNED TO BITE PEOPLE.
BLOODHOUND PROGRAMS. THEY'VE
BEEN EFFECTIVELY USED IN SALT
LAKE CITY. WE ACTUALLY CHANGED
OUR PROGRAM DRASTICALLY TO WHERE
WE USED MORE BLOODHOUNDS AND
FEWER PATROL ANIMALS BECAUSE OF
THE RISK INVOLVED WITH IT AND
THE ACCOMPLISHMENT, WE DID NOT
SEE AN INCREASE IN VIOLENCE ON
OUR STREETS, NOR DID WE SEE A
DECREASE USE OR WE ACTUALLY, YOU
KNOW, DIDN'T SEE AN INCREASE IN
OFFICER, INJURIES THAT OCCURRED.
YEAH. 30S IN THE CITY OF NEW
ORLEANS BECAUSE OF A CONSENT
DECREE, THEY ACTUALLY NEARLY DID
AWAY WITH THEIR DOG PROGRAM.
THEY WENT THREE YEARS WITHOUT A
CANINE BITE, AND THEY DID NOT
SEE ANY INCREASE IN OFFICER USE
OF FORCE IN OFFICER INJURIES.
AND SO, AGAIN, I BELIEVE IT'S
THE RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THE
QUESTION SHOULD ALWAYS BE ASKED
OF POLICING, RIGHT? THERE'S MANY
THINGS THAT WE CAN DO. BUT
SHOULD WE DO THESE THINGS. AND
YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SET
THE STANDARD BY WHICH WE THEN
TRAIN EVERYBODY. AND IT IT WAS
SAID BY A MEMBER OVER HERE THAT
CALIFORNIA WOULD LEAD THE WAY.
RIGHT. IF YOU IN FACT, ENACTED
LAWS THAT SAID, THIS IS HOW THEY
WILL BE USED. AND THEN THE STATE
FOLLOWED THROUGH, THAT EVERYBODY
IN THIS STATE DID THIS. YOU
WOULD LEAD THE WAY. AND I WOULD
APPLAUD THAT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION, MR. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, CORY SALZILLO, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, IN
OPPOSITION. ERIC HENDERSON, ON
BEHALF OF ACLU CALIFORNIA
ACTION, WE WANT TO THANK DOCTOR
JACKSON FOR LISTENING TO US AND
LISTENING TO OUR CONCERNS, AND
WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOUR OFFICE AND RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE, UNLESS AMENDED. I'M
ELIZABETH ROSE MAY. I'M SORRY
FOR BEING SELFISH AND
INCONSIDERATE EARLIER, I'M
OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. YEAH.
JULIANNA BOSWORTH, LEAD
CALIFORNIA CITIES IN OPPOSITION.
CHEN MEMBERS JONATHAN FELDMAN,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION OPPOSED. MARCO
GEORGE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION, I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR THE CONVERSATION,
WE'RE AT THIS POINT STILL IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANK YOU
. MELANIE KIM, SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE
OPPOSED, UNLESS AMENDED. OKAY.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR. LACKEY.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO,
REMIND ALL MY COLLEAGUES AND
EVERYBODY THAT'S LISTENING AT
THIS POINT THAT, THIS FORCE
OPTION OVERWHELMINGLY RESULTS IN
A SURRENDER OVERWHELMINGLY, THE
NUMBERS ARE STAGGERING AS TO HOW
MANY TIMES WHEN A CANINE IS
PRESENT THAT IT RESULTS IN A
SURRENDER. I'M TALKING ABOUT
WHAT WE SHOULD SEEK. THAT'S WHAT
WE SHOULD SEEK A SURRENDER. I DO
HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THIS
PARTICULAR BILL RIGHT NOW, BUT I
UNDERSTAND THERE'S SERIOUS
NEGOTIATION GOING ON. I'M NOT IN
A POSITION TO SUPPORT AT THIS
MOMENT, BUT, WHEN IT GETS TO THE
FLOOR, IF NEGOTIATIONS ARE
SUCCESSFUL, I WILL SUPPORT IT.
SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. MR.
ZUBIATE, I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL. I
KNOW THAT, HIS GOAL IS, REALLY
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE USE OF
POLICE DOGS IS ONE THAT DOESN'T
HARM COMMUNITIES, AND THAT'S THE
OBJECTIVE. I DID HAVE A QUESTION
ABOUT FROM TO THE ACLU ABOUT
WHAT? WHAT'S THE GENERAL AREA OF
AMENDMENTS THAT YOU'RE, THAT
YOU'RE SEEKING, AND DISCUSSING
WITH THE AUTHOR. SO THAT'S A
GREAT QUESTION, SO WE'RE SEEKING
STRICT AND CLEAR LIMITATIONS ON
THE USE OF CANINE. SO IN
PARTICULAR, LIKE PARTICULAR,
SITUATIONS IN WHICH, CANINES CAN
BE DEPLOYED CURRENTLY THAT'S NOT
HERE. AND I KNOW THE, THE
ASSEMBLY, THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE WAS CONSIDERING AB
3241 EARLIER, BUT THERE NEEDS TO
BE STRICT AND CLEAR LIMITATIONS
THAT ARE SET FORTH BY THE
LEGISLATOR, OTHERWISE, WHAT
WE'VE SEEN IS THAT POST WILL
NOT, CREATE REGULATIONS IN A WAY
THAT ACTUALLY, HELP PUBLIC
SAFETY. WHAT THEY WHAT USUALLY
ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THAT POST,
REALLY SORT OF CEDES TO THE
SEEDS TO THE, TO SPECIAL
INTEREST GROUPS LIKE PORAC OR,
OTHER SPECIAL POLICE INTEREST
GROUPS, TO UNDERMINE AND WATER
DOWN THE REGULATIONS. AND SO YOU
BY HAVING STRICT AND CLEAR
LIMITATIONS IN THE LEGISLATURE,
IT WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR THAT TO
HAPPEN, AND IT WOULD CREATE A
MECHANISM FOR THE COMMUNITY TO
HOLD A LAW ENFORCEMENT
ACCOUNTABLE. SO, IF I MAY, COULD
I JUST ADD ONE THING TO THAT? SO
IMMEDIATELY COMING TO MIND ARE
THINGS LIKE CROWD CONTROL
SITUATIONS, HANDCUFFED
INDIVIDUALS. THESE ARE
INDIVIDUALS THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY
CAN LEGISLATE AND SAY, NO,
THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO DEPLOY
A DOG. AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE
OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IT
WOULD BE. GREAT. THANK YOU, I
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND
HIS STAFF FOR BEING SO ENGAGED
IN THIS. I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, JACKSON IS
WORKING WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CHICO ON THE TWO SETS OF BILLS
AND THAT, THERE ARE SERIOUS
NEGOTIATIONS OCCURRING. I WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.
I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE BILLS TO
GIVE, BOTH OF THE AUTHORS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE MOVING
THIS FORWARD. THANK YOU. VICE
CHAIR LANCE. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR, FOR OPPOSITION, I JUST
WANT TO CLARIFY REAL QUICK, YOU
MENTIONED ONE, THAT THE CANINES
ARE ROUTINE, ARE DEPLOYED
ROUTINELY, LIKE, HOW OFTEN ARE
THEY ARE THEY DEPLOYED WITH YOUR
COMMENTS THERE? YEAH. SO IN THE
SITUATIONS IN WHICH WE SEE, SO
CANINES ARE DEPLOYED IN, IN
LARGE NUMBERS AND I DON'T HAVE
THE EXACT NUMBERS IN FRONT OF
ME, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, THE
BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT
AGENT RESPONDED TO 100, LIKE
ALMOST OVER A THOUSAND, CALLS
WITH THE CANINE ON SCENE AND HAD
OVER, NEARLY 100, CANINE BITES
IN THE SPAN OF LESS THAN 24
MONTHS, AND SO, YOU SEE CANINES
BEING DEPLOYED. AND WHEN WE'RE
SEEING LIKE DEPLOYED AND
APPREHENSION SCENES, YOU'RE
SEEING THEM IN LARGE NUMBERS.
AND IN THOSE SITUATIONS, FOR
EXAMPLE, WITH THE BAKERSFIELD
POLICE DEPARTMENT, MOST OF THE
PEOPLE WERE UNARMED, WERE PEOPLE
WHO WERE EXPERIENCING SOME SORT
OF, LIKE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CRISIS, AND SO I DON'T HAVE THE
EXACT NUMBERS OF HOW OFTEN
THEY'RE, THEY'RE DEPLOYED, BUT
I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE THOSE
NUMBERS IF THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL. I'M SURE THOSE WOULD
HELP. YOU ALSO MENTIONED THAT
THEY'RE DEPLOYED ON PROTESTS.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN AND WHERE
ON PROTESTS THEY WERE DEPLOYED?
YEAH. SO THE POLICE HAVE USED,
CANINES TO DEPLOY THEM USUALLY
AT, LIKE POLICE BRUTALITY.
PROTESTS OR OTHER TYPES OF
PROTESTS. AND YOU SEE CANINES, I
CAN I CAN CIRCLE SORRY, I DON'T
HAVE THAT IN MY NOTES, BUT I CAN
CIRCLE BACK WITH, IF YOU COULD,
BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY VAGUE
BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE REFERRING
BACK TO, LIKE, THE 60S. NO. OR
ARE WE REFERRING TO, LIKE, THIS
YEAR? LAST YEAR? YEAH. SO, YOU
KNOW, IN THE LAST, LIKE, TWO,
THREE YEARS, WE'VE HAD, VARIOUS
INCIDENTS WHERE POLICE,
CALIFORNIA POLICE HAVE DEPLOYED
ATTACK DOGS DURING PROTESTS.
OKAY. HOLD ON. AND THAT'S
ANOTHER THING YOU KEEP SAYING.
ATTACK DOGS. ARE YOU TALKING
CANINES OR ARE YOU JUST CALLING
THE CANINES ATTACK DOGS? AND
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE NAMING THEM?
I'M CALLING CANINES ATTACK DOGS.
OKAY, OKAY, THANKS FOR THE
CLARIFICATION. BUT YES, WE'VE
SEEN THEM, BEING DEPLOYED AND
USED AGAINST PEOPLE, AGAIN, IN,
IN, IN IN PROTEST, MOST RECENTLY
THERE WAS A PROTEST, WITH
REGARDS TO AN UNARMED, A POLICE
SHOOTING OF AN UNARMED
INDIVIDUAL AND THE POLICE, HAD A
CANINE ON SITE AND THE, THE, THE
CANINE, GOT LOOSE AND BIT
SOMEONE WHO WAS TRYING, YOU
KNOW, WENT TOWARDS A CROWD AND
THEN ENDED UP BITING SOMEONE WHO
WAS TRYING TO SHIELD HIS CHILD
WHO WAS IN A STROLLER. OKAY AND
YOU YOU TOOK YOUR STATS FROM ONE
AGENCY. DID YOU HAPPEN TO TALK
TO OTHER AGENCIES? DID YOU TALK
LIKE, WITH, LIKE, THE RIVERSIDE,
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OR ANYTHING
LIKE THAT? DID YOU HAPPEN TO
REACH OUT TO THEM OR GET ANY
NUMBERS? SO THESE ARE JUST
EXAMPLES, I HAD MENTIONED
EARLIER, WHEN WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT AB 3241, BUT WE RELEASED
WE SENT OUT PUBLIC RECORDS
REQUESTS TO OVER 38 AGENCIES IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND SO
WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT THE DATA
AND WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT
INCIDENTS, THIS COMES DIRECTLY
FROM DATA THAT WE RECEIVED FROM
THOSE 38 AGENCIES. OUT OF THE
38, HOW MANY RESPONDED? MOST
MOST OF THEM PRODUCED, I DON'T
KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER. SORRY,
BUT MOST OF THEM PRODUCED, WELL
OVER 20 OF THEM PRODUCED,
RECORDS. AND THEN THIS IS ALSO
INFORMATION IS ALSO GATHERED
FROM MEDIA ARTICLES DESCRIBING,
REALLY, REALLY TRAGIC INCIDENTS
OF CANINES AND IN CONSULTATION
AS WELL WITH ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE
REPRESENTED INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
BEEN IMPACTED BY AND THESE
ARTICLES, I'M SURE THEY DON'T
EVER TALK ABOUT THE SURRENDERS
LIKE, OH, THIS PERSON GAVE UP
THOSE KIND OF THINGS. SO I THINK
IT'S KIND OF SKEWED ON THAT WAY.
JUST REAL QUICK. RIVERSIDE 699
TIMES THEY'VE HAD A CANINE
DEPLOYMENT AND OUT OF THE 699,
THAT'S SIX BITES, SO I JUST WANT
TO POINT THAT ALSO. AND THEN TO
YOU, SIR, YOU SAID YOU WERE A
CHIEF. FORMER CHIEF, A FORMER
CHIEF, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU
HAD A CANINE PROGRAM AND THAT
YOU BASICALLY GOT RID OF IT
BECAUSE LACK OF POLICIES. NO,
DID NOT GET RID OF IT, WE
ACTUALLY CHANGED IT TO WHERE WE
WENT FOR FEWER APPREHENSION.
DOGS AND MORE, YOU WENT TO,
LIKE, SEARCHING. YOU WENT TO
SEARCHING. NO APPREHENSION.
DOGS, NO PROTECTION, NO
APPREHENSION. DOGS. SO JUST DRUG
DETECTION, THAT KIND OF THING.
AND NO PROTECTION. WE DID HAVE
SOME, BUT WE NEVER DID NONE.
OKAY, OKAY. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU.
NO, NO. WE'RE GOOD. IF I MAY, WE
HAVE TO PROCEED. SHE DIDN'T ASK
A QUESTION. WE HAVE TO JUST MOVE
ON. I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO
MR. JACKSON. I TOLD YOU DURING
THE PRIOR BILL THAT ONE WE
ACKNOWLEDGED THAT YOUR
LEADERSHIP IN THIS, KNOWING THAT
IT'S AN ISSUE TO FOCUS ON
POLICIES AND PRACTICES WITH,
WITH CANINES. I DON'T CONCUR
THAT THEY'RE THE ATTACK DOGS
ALWAYS. THEY SERVE A PURPOSE.
AND I WILL NOTE A FEW YEARS AGO
WE HAD VERY TOUGH BILLS HERE
FOCUSING ON EXCESSIVE USE OF
FORCE AND CHANGING THE DEADLY
FORCE STANDARDS. AND OVER AND
OVER THIS WAS A TOOL THAT COULD
BE USED SO WE DON'T HAVE A
FATALITY, AT THE HANDS OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND EITHER AN
UNARMED INDIVIDUAL OR SOMEBODY
WHO'S, YOU KNOW, PARTIALLY ARMED
BUT NOT A FIREARM. SO I THINK
THERE IS A DELICATE BALANCE
HERE. AND I DO KNOW THAT YOU'RE
DOING THE HARD WORK BECAUSE
EVERYONE'S AGAINST YOUR BILL.
THAT MEANS YOU'RE DOING
SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE. AND I
APPRECIATE THAT. AND SO WE WANT
TO PUSH BOTH THESE MEASURES
FORWARD AND RECOGNIZE YOUR
LEADERSHIP. AND I KNOW YOU'RE
WORKING WITH THE OTHER AUTHOR
STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL AS THE
LEADERSHIP IN THE ASSEMBLY TO
HONE THIS AND NARROW THIS FOR
US. SO WITH THAT, I SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE. YOU MAY CLOSE, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I
MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU'VE,
HEARD TODAY, WE'VE REALLY GOT TO
GET OUT OF THE WAY, PERSONALITY
AND HISTORICAL CONFLICTS THAT
HAVE EXISTED HERE IN SACRAMENTO.
AND WE HAVE TO JUST GET TO GOOD
POLICY. AND I THINK THAT AT THE
END OF THE DAY, I BELIEVE WITH
ALL MY HEART THAT WE CAN CREATE
A BALANCED APPROACH HERE AND
THAT WE CAN CREATE ONE THAT BOTH
ACHIEVES BOTH SAFETY AND
JUSTICE. BUT IT TAKES THE HARD
WORK OF SITTING DOWN AND GOING
THINK, GOING THROUGH THINGS LINE
BY LINE AND BEING ABLE TO MAKING
SURE THAT, WE ALL COME TOGETHER
IN GOOD FAITH AND, AND THAT'S
WHAT I HAVE SEEK, SOUGHT TO DO,
IN THIS PROCESS. AND I WILL
CONTINUE TO DO SO. WE HAVE BEEN
ACHIEVING SOME GREAT PROGRESS BY
THE WAY, BY GOING THROUGH THIS
PROCESS IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY, AND
ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT THE WAY
WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS IS
REALLY WHAT WE ALL WOULD HAVE
HOPED TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH
WHEN WE COME HERE TO SACRAMENTO
TO CREATE GOOD POLICY. AND SO I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION MOVE BY MR. ZUBIATE,
SECOND BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
NGUYEN. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
AB 2042 BY ZOOM MEMBER JACKSON
JACKSON. THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY Ã MCCARTY. I KNOW WE'RE
HOPING TO GET TO A YES ON THE
FLOOR. ALANIS. NO. LACKEY.
LACKEY NOT VOTING WHEN NGUYEN I
REYES TING WILSON. ZEBRA ZIPPER
I THAT MEASURES ON CALL. THANK
YOU. NEXT AUTHOR ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CARILLO. SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION
AND YOUR PATIENCE. ITEM NUMBER
12 AB 1990.
WANT TO PULL THE MICROPHONE
CLOSER TO YOU? PLEASE BEGIN.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. GOOD AFTERNOON. I WOULD
LIKE TO BEGIN BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU
TO YOU AND TO YOUR STAFF FOR
YOUR DILIGENCE AND COMMITMENT TO
THE POLICY TODAY. I AM PROUD TO
PRESENT AB 1990, THE SECURE
TRANSACTIONS AND ORGANIZED THEFT
PREVENTION ACT, OTHERWISE KNOWN
AS THE STOP ACT, WHICH IS A
CRITICAL STEP TOWARDS SECURING
THE SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITIES
AND PUTTING A STOP TO RETAIL
THEFT. AB 1990 IS AN URGENT CALL
TO ACTION IN RESPONSE TO THE
ALARMING ESCALATION OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT THAT THREATENS THE
VERY FABRIC OF OUR COMMUNITIES.
SHOPLIFTING ADVERSELY AFFECTS
BOTH SMALL AND LARGE BUSINESSES,
AS WELL AS OUR STATE'S ECONOMY
AND THE SECURITY AND WELL-BEING
OF WORKERS, JOBS AND OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS. AB 1990 THE STOP
ACT AIMS TO INCREASE ENFORCEMENT
AND INTRODUCE TOUGHER PENALTIES
FOR SUSPECTED SHOP LIFTERS BY
GIVING PEACE OFFICERS THE
ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO FOLLOW
CURRENT LAW AND CITE AND RELEASE
AN INDIVIDUAL, OR NOW GIVE PEACE
OFFICERS THE DISCRETION TO
ARREST AND BOOK A SUSPECT
INVOLVED IN RETAIL THEFT WITH A
WITNESS REPORT. UNLIKE OTHER
POLICIES THAT YOU WILL HEAR
TODAY OR HAVE HEARD TODAY, AB
1990 DOES NOT PUT ADDITIONAL
BURDENS ON LAW ENFORCEMENT, DOES
NOT PUT ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON
SMALL BUSINESSES, AND THE POLICY
DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY MISDEMEANOR
PRIOR OFFENSES TO BE ARRESTED.
IF YOU COMMIT A CRIME AND THAT
CRIME IS RETAIL THEFT, THERE HAS
TO BE CONSEQUENCES.
ADDITIONALLY, AB 1990 ANSWERS
THE DIRECT CALL TO ACTION FROM
GOVERNOR NEWSOM IN JANUARY TO
ENSURE THE SAFETY OF
CALIFORNIA'S BY, QUOTE,
BOLSTERING LAW ENFORCEMENT'S
ABILITY TO ARREST SUSPECTS.
ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME DEMANDS,
ORGANIZED PREVENTION, AND THE
STOP THE STOP ACT REPEATS
REPRESENTS THE LEGISLATURE'S
COMMITMENT TO TAKING A PROACTIVE
AND ORGANIZED APPROACH TO
PREVENT ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME
THAT ULTIMATELY ENSURES THE
SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITIES, SMALL
AND LARGE BUSINESSES ALIKE, AND
THE VERY LIVELIHOODS AND THE
PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THESE JOBS.
ACCORDING TO THE PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA, CRIME
DATA INDICATES THAT RETAILERS
HAVE INCREASINGLY BEEN TARGETS
OF CRIME, WITH RETAIL THEFT
INCIDENTS RISING IN THE BAY AREA
AND TRENDING UP IN LOS ANGELES
AND COMMUNITIES ACROSS
CALIFORNIA. IN MY DISTRICT, THE
CITY OF LOS ANGELES SAW AN
INCREASE IN SHOPLIFTING, REPORTS
FROM 6500 TO OVER, CLOSE TO
12,000 OVER THE COURSE OF ONE
YEAR FROM 2022 TO 23, A
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE BY 81.
ADDITIONALLY, THE L.A. COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
RECENTLY REPORTED HAVING FILED
OVER 200 CASES OF ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT IN 2023 ALONE,
INDICATING A SIGNIFICANT SURGE
IN CRIME IN LOS ANGELES. IT IS
OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONFRONT A
PROBLEM THAT HAS BEEN
INCREASINGLY WORSENING OVER
TIME. THIS BILL PRIORITIZES
PUBLIC SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
LOCAL ECONOMIES, LOCAL
ECONOMIES, AND REPRESENTS A
SIGNIFICANT STEP FORWARD IN
ENHANCING THE SAFETY OF BOTH
EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS. FACING
AN ONSLAUGHT OF ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT AND A LETTER OF OPPOSITION
THAT YOU MAY SEE, IT STATES THAT
CURRENT LAW ALSO GIVES
SHOPKEEPERS AND THEIR AGENTS THE
POWER TO MAKE A CITIZEN'S ARREST
AND TURN THE ARRESTEE OVER TO
THE POLICE FOR PROCESS AND
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. IN 2021,
WHILE ON THE JOB AT A RITE AID
IN GLASSELL PARK IN MY DISTRICT,
36 YEAR OLD MIGUEL PENALOZA
TRIED TO STOP SOMEONE FROM
STEALING BEER AND WAS SHOT AND
KILLED BY THAT THIEF. LET ME
JUST BE VERY CLEAR. WORKERS WHO
ARE NOT PROPERLY TRAINED OR PART
OF ANY LOSS PREVENTION TEAM
SHOULD NOT BE RISKING THEIR
LIVES TO STOP SOMEONE FROM
LOOTING A STORE. THE TRAUMA THAT
MR. PENALOZA'S FAMILY FACED AS
WELL AS HIS HIS COWORKERS,
CANNOT BE NORMALIZED. BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, IT HAS BECOME THE
NORM. RETAILERS ACROSS
CALIFORNIA AND THE NATION ARE
ACTIVELY ALSO CREATING POLICIES
THAT PENALIZE THE WORKERS FOR
GETTING INVOLVED BECAUSE THEY
DON'T WANT ANYONE TO BE HURT
OVER RETAIL THEFT. IN FACT,
WORKERS HAVE BEEN FIRED. RETAIL
OWNERS ARE SHUTTING DOWN THAT
RITE AID THAT I MENTIONED. IT'S
NOW CLOSED IN MY COMMUNITY.
ANOTHER ARGUMENT THAT YOU MAY
HEAR IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
PROBABLE CAUSE AND REASONABLE
CAUSE, AS OPPOSED TO REASONABLE
SUSPICION. UNFORTUNATELY, THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS IS MISALIGNED
WITH THE CALIFORNIA
JURISPRUDENCE, WHICH STATES AS A
BASIS FOR ARREST THE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY
TERMS OF PROBABLE CAUSE,
REASONABLE CAUSE, AND REASONABLE
GROUNDS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY
EQUIVALENT TERMS. THE GENERAL
RULE IS THAT TO CONSTITUTE
REASONABLE OR PROBABLE CAUSE
THAT WILL JUSTIFY AN ARREST ON A
CRIMINAL CHARGE, THERE MUST BE A
STATE OF FACTS THAT WOULD LEAD A
PERSON OF ORDINARY CARE AND
PRUDENCE TO BELIEVE OR ENTERTAIN
AN HONEST AND STRONG AND STRONG
SUSPICION THAT PERSON ARRESTED
IS GUILTY. HAVING SAID THIS, AND
TO CLEAR ANY MISALIGNMENT ON THE
INTENT OF AB 1950 AND WORKING
WITH THE COMMITTEE TO RECTIFY
CONCERNS, WE ARE MAKING AN
AMENDMENT TO CHANGE REASONABLE
CAUSE TO PROBABLE CAUSE. SOME OF
THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE GROUPS THAT
YOU MAY HEAR FROM TODAY ALSO
RISE RAISED SOME OF THE
AFOREMENTIONED ARGUMENTS, AND I
HAVE WORKED WITH THESE GROUPS IN
THE PAST ON ADVOCATING FOR MUCH
NEEDED REFORMS THAT BENEFIT
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. HOWEVER
OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM DOES
NOT MEAN THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO
COMMIT CRIMES WILL NOT BE HELD
RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS,
ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR ACTIONS
THREATEN THE PUBLIC SAFETY OF
OTHERS. AS WE HAVE SEEN WITH THE
PROLIFERATION OF RETAIL THEFT,
STANDING BY AS LAWMAKERS,
WATCHING VULNERABLE PEOPLE BE
PUT AT RISK AND IN DANGER, AND
NOT DOING ANYTHING TO STOP IT IS
NOT THE OPTION. THIS BILL ENJOYS
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND SUPPORT
OF THE LEAGUE OF CITIES, LAW
ENFORCEMENT, SMALL BUSINESSES
AND LOCAL CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
WITH ME HERE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT IS JULIAN CANADY, THE
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE
CALIFORNIA HISPANIC CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, AND DANIEL CONWAY WITH
THE CALIFORNIA GROCERS
ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU. PLEASE
BEGIN. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN
MCCARTHY AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
GOOD AFTERNOON. JULIAN KENNEDY,
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE
CALIFORNIA HISPANIC CHAMBERS OF
COMMERCE, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE
COMMITTEE ON AB 1990 THIS
AFTERNOON, THE CALIFORNIA
HISPANIC CHAMBER CHAMBERS,
THROUGH OUR MEMBERSHIP NETWORK
OF OVER 125 HISPANIC AND DIVERSE
CHAMBERS AND BUSINESS
ASSOCIATIONS, REPRESENTS THE
INTERESTS OF NOT JUST THE
HISPANIC BUSINESS COMMUNITY, BUT
THE DIVERSE AND SMALL BUSINESS
COMMUNITY OF CALIFORNIA AT
LARGE. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CARRILLO, HER
STAFF, FOR THEIR WORK ON AB
1990. THIS LEGISLATION WILL GIVE
LAW ENFORCEMENT A NECESSARY TOOL
AND DETERRENT TO ASSIST IN
CURBING RETAIL THEFTS COMMITTED
AGAINST OUR SMALL BUSINESSES,
WITHOUT PUTTING ANY UNDUE BURDEN
UPON THEM. AB 1990 DIRECTLY
RESPONDS TO COMMUNITIES ACROSS
CALIFORNIA FACING AN ONSLAUGHT
OF ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT AND
LOSS OF JOBS, AND CREATES FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK
THAT INTENSIFIES THE CRACKDOWN
ON PROPERTY CRIMES. MEMBER
CARRILLO MENTIONED THE LOS
ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT AND LÀ
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S STATISTICS.
ONE THING THESE STATISTICS DON'T
TELL YOU IS THAT IT'S NOT JUST
THE RITE AIDS AND THE WALGREENS.
IT IS OUR SMALL BUSINESSES. IT
IS THE SMALL JEWELRY STORE
THAT'S IN THE DOWNTOWN AREAS OF
OUR COMMUNITIES. IT IS THE
CORNER, CONVENIENCE STORE, THE
7-ELEVEN, WHICH ARE ALL
FRANCHISED AND INDEPENDENTLY
OWNED. AB 1990. THIS BILL, AIMS
TO REAFFIRM AND GOVERNOR NEWSOM
AND THE LEGISLATURE'S COMMITMENT
TO PUBLIC SAFETY BY PROTECTING
OUR COMMUNITIES FROM THE
DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS OF ORGANIZED
CRIME AND RETAIL THEFT. RETAIL
THEFT AND ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT, DISPROPORTIONATELY
IMPACTS OUR DIVERSE OWNED
BUSINESSES, CAUSING SEVERE HARM
ON OUR COMMUNITY AND UNDERMINING
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC VITALITY.
AB 1990 WILL BE A CRUCIAL STEP
TOWARDS SAFEGUARDING THE
INTERESTS OF DIVERSE BUSINESSES,
ENTREPRENEURS, THEIR EMPLOYEES
BY CREATING A SAFER, MORE SECURE
ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR BUSINESSES,
FOR OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY, OUR
FAMILIES AND THE PUBLIC AT
LARGE. IN CLOSING, THOUGH, YOU
KNOW, SMALL BUSINESS ALWAYS
TALKS ABOUT THE IMPACT ON SMALL
BUSINESSES AND EVERYBODY THINKS
IT'S ABOUT THE BOTTOM LINE. A
PROFIT MARGINS. OUR BUSINESSES
KNOW THAT THE REAL IMPACT IS ON
THEIR CUSTOMERS AND COMMUNITIES
WITH INCREASED INCREASED COSTS
AND CONCERN FOR THEIR SAFETY. WE
SEE AB 1990 NOT ONLY AS A TOOL
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT A TOOL
FOR ECONOMIC AND SMALL BUSINESS
SUCCESS. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. LESS THAN
TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU SO MUCH,
CHAIRMAN, DANIEL CONWAY WITH THE
CALIFORNIA GROCERS ASSOCIATION.
AND AT CGA, WE REPRESENT SOME OF
THE LARGEST COMPANIES IN THE
WORLD, BUT ALSO INDEPENDENT MOM
AND POP SHOPS THAT ARE IN EVERY
COMMUNITY IN THIS STATE. AND
RETAIL THEFT HAS BECOME THE TOP
ISSUE FOR OUR MEMBERS, LARGE AND
SMALL, AS AS YOU'VE HEARD
THROUGHOUT THE DAY, THIS HAS
BECOME A CHALLENGE THAT, IT
PERMEATES OUR STATE. YOU KNOW,
WHAT WE SEE IN OUR STORES IS
WHAT HAPPENS IN OUR COMMUNITIES,
HAPPENS IN OUR STORES. RIGHT.
AND WHETHER THAT'S HOMELESSNESS
OR MENTAL HEALTH OR NOW RETAIL
THEFT, WE'RE SEEING IT EVERY DAY
IN OUR STORES. AND SO I
APPRECIATE, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CARRILLO'S, PROPOSAL HERE
BECAUSE WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO
IS IT'S GOING TO, ONCE AGAIN,
EMPOWER LAW ENFORCEMENT TO DO
THEIR JOB. I THINK WHAT'S BEEN
TROUBLING ABOUT, SOME OF THE
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN HAD
AROUND RETAIL THEFT, FRANKLY, IS
THAT, AT TIMES THERE SEEMS TO BE
AN EFFORT TO PUT MORE OF THE
BURDEN ON OUR EMPLOYEES TO
ESSENTIALLY ACT AS QUASI LAW
ENFORCEMENT, TO DETAIN PEOPLE,
TO HOLD PEOPLE, TO FILE DETAILED
REPORTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
ULTIMATELY, WE'RE HERE TO
CONTINUE TO PARTNER WITH LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT
OUR COMMUNITIES ARE SAFE. BUT
BUT WE DON'T WANT TO PUT OUR
EMPLOYEES OR OUR CUSTOMERS IN
HARM'S WAY. ULTIMATELY, THAT'S
WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT PEOPLE TO
HAVE SAFE AND WELCOMING STORES
IN THEIR COMMUNITIES, AND WE
WANT TO WORK WITH YOU TO MAKE
THAT BE TRUE GOING FORWARD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
JAMES, THE DIRECTOR WITH THE
CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL OF
LABORERS. WE'RE IN PROUD
SUPPORT. THANKS. THANK YOU.
CHAIR MEMBERS. SKYLER WONACOTT,
CALIFORNIA BUSINESS PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. CHAIR
MEMBERS JONATHAN FELDMAN,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL IN PRINT. WE'LL TAKE A
LOOK AT THE AMENDMENTS, BUT WE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR AND
ADDRESSING A VERY REAL PROBLEM.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. DANIEL SANCHEZ, ON
BEHALF OF THE CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICERS OF CALIFORNIA.
SIMILARLY IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL
IN PRINT AND WILL REVIEW
AMENDMENTS. APPRECIATE YOUR WORK
ON THIS. MR. CHAIR MEMBERS.
RYAN. ELAINE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT, THANK YOU. MIKE
ALTMAN, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. GENTLEMEN OF THE LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA. CITIES IN
SUPPORT. RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
AND OTHER POA'S AND DSA'S IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. PLEASE
COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS TIÂU NHÀ VARGAS. I'M THE
FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION. AND
TODAY WE ARE HERE URGING YOUR NO
VOTE ON AB 1990 FOR THREE
REASONS. FIRST, AB 1990 WOULD
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE
BLACK, BROWN, LOW INCOME OR
UNHOUSED AND THOSE WITH MENTAL
HEALTH DISORDERS, ACCORDING TO A
2021 PICK REPORT THAT WAS CITED
IN THIS BILL ANALYSIS, ABOUT 195
PEOPLE DIE EACH YEAR DURING
INTERACTIONS WITH LAW
ENFORCEMENT. MORE THAN 4 IN 10
PEOPLE TREATED FOR NON-FATAL
GUNSHOT WOUNDS CAUSED BY POLICE
HAVE A MENTAL HEALTH OR
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER, AND
BLACK CALIFORNIANS ARE THREE
TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE SHOT OR
SERIOUSLY INJURED BY POLICE,
ALLOWING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO MAKE
WARRANTLESS ARRESTS OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO THEY SUSPECT
HAVE COMMITTED LAW ENFORCEMENT
WOULD INCREASE POLICE
INTERACTIONS WITH THESE
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS AND PUT
THEM AT UNNECESSARY RISK.
SECONDLY, BECAUSE THIS BILL
EXEMPTS A PERSON ARRESTED FOR
SHOPLIFTING FROM THE REQUIREMENT
THAT THEY BE RELEASED ON
CITATION, INDIVIDUALS CAN BE
TAKEN INTO CUSTODY FOR BEING
SUSPECTED OF COMMITTING MINOR
OFFENSES, WHICH CAN HAVE MAJOR
IMPLICATIONS FOR THAT PERSON'S
LIVELIHOOD. AN ARREST CAN MEAN
THE LOSS OF A JOB OR HOUSING,
EXACERBATE ALREADY DIRE
CIRCUMSTANCES FOR PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING POVERTY. THIS BILL
WOULD ALSO LIKELY LEAD TO AN
INCREASE IN PRETRIAL DETENTION,
IN RAISING MAJOR CONSTITUTIONAL
AND CIVIL RIGHTS CONCERNS, AND
CREATING MORE OVERCROWDING IN
OUR COUNTY JAILS, WHERE WE ARE
CURRENTLY SEEING RECORD LEVEL
DEATHS AMONG THE AMONG THE
INCARCERATED POPULATION. AND
THIRDLY, AB 1990 DOES NOTHING TO
ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES OF
SHOPLIFTING, WHICH,
INCIDENTALLY, HAS LARGELY BEEN
EXAGGERATED BY RETAILERS AND
SENSATIONALIZED IN THE MEDIA. AS
STATED IN THE BILL'S ANALYSIS,
THE PC HAS FOUND THAT
SHOPLIFTING IS CURRENTLY 8%
BELOW PRE-PANDEMIC LEVELS AND IS
LOWER NOW THAN IT WAS EVERY YEAR
BETWEEN 2010 AND 2018. HOWEVER,
IF WE DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE
UNDERLYING CAUSES OF THE LOWER
THAN AVERAGE RATES OF
SHOPLIFTING WE'RE SEEING TODAY,
WE MUST INVEST IN SUSTAINABLE
ANTI POVERTY MEASURES, SUCH AS
ENSURING EVERYONE IN OUR
COMMUNITIES HAS ACCESS TO A
THRIVING WAGE, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND WRAPAROUND SOCIAL
SERVICES MEMBERS. THIS BILL IS
APTLY NUMBERED AB 1990, AS IT
HARKENS BACK TO THE FAILED
1990S. TOUGH ON CRIME, TOUGH ON
CRIME POLICIES THAT DID NOTHING
TO DETER CRIME BUT CAUSED A
PRISON POPULATION EXPLOSION AND
DEVASTATED OUR COMMUNITIES. WE
CANNOT GO BACKWARDS. LET US MOVE
FORWARD AND ADDRESS THE ROOT
CAUSES OF POVERTY AND ENSURE
EVERYONE IN OUR COMMUNITY FEELS
SAFE AND HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO
THRIVE. I URGE A NO VOTE ON AB
1990. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE ABOUT
TWO MINUTES LEFT. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
CLAIRE SIMONICH. I'M THE
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AT THE VERA
INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE. WE'RE A
NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND
IMMIGRATION REFORM ORGANIZATION,
AND WE OPPOSE 1990, WHICH WOULD
INCREASE ARRESTS FOR THE LOW
LEVEL CRIME OF SHOPLIFTING AND
NEGATIVELY IMPACT IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES IN CALIFORNIA. AS
MISS VARGAS EXPLAINED, THERE ARE
SIGNIFICANT RACIAL DISPARITIES
IN CALIFORNIA'S ARREST RATES
WITH BLACK AND BROWN
CALIFORNIANS. MANY OF WHOM ARE
IMMIGRANTS, ARRESTED AT FAR
HIGHER RATES THAN WHITE
CALIFORNIANS. CALIFORNIA'S
IMMIGRATION PROFILE, IN TURN,
INCLUDES 10.5 MILLION
IMMIGRANTS, OR 27% OF OUR TOTAL
POPULATION, AND ABOUT 5 MILLION
CALIFORNIANS WHO ARE ALREADY AT
RISK OF DEPORTATION BECAUSE
THEY'RE NON-CITIZENS. AB 1990
WOULD SUBJECT MORE IMMIGRANTS TO
ARREST, WHICH IN TURN RISKS
THEIR BEING BROUGHT TO ICE'S
ATTENTION AND PLACED IN
DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS.
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS CAN FACE
INCREASED DEPORTATION RISK EVEN
IF THEY ARE NEVER CONVICTED OF A
CRIME, AND THEIR RISK OF
IMMIGRATION CONSEQUENCES
INCREASES FROM ANY ARREST, EVEN
IF THEY'RE NOT TURNED OVER TO
ICE AUTHORITIES. AT THE TIME OF
THE ARREST. THAT'S BECAUSE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERACTIONS,
INCLUDING PAST ARRESTS, LIKE THE
TYPES OF ARRESTS THAT WILL OCCUR
UNDER 1990 THAT DON'T RESULT
NECESSARILY IN ICE DETENTION,
ARE GENERALLY A DISCRETIONARY
FACTOR THAT IMMIGRATION JUDGES
CONSIDER WHEN DECIDING WHETHER
TO GRANT RELIEF FROM REMOVAL BY
SUBJECTING MORE IMMIGRANT
CALIFORNIANS TO DETENTION AND
DEPORTATION. THIS BILL RISKS
SEPARATING IMMIGRANTS FROM THEIR
JOBS, FAMILIES, AND COMMUNITIES,
ALL FOR MISDEMEANOR SHOPLIFTING.
FINALLY, BY GIVING LAW
ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION TO ARREST
EVERY PERSON ALLEGED TO HAVE
SHOPLIFTED FOR SOMETHING AS
SMALL AS A PACK OF GUM, AND NO
MATTER THEIR PERSONAL
CIRCUMSTANCES, EVEN IF THEY WILL
FACE THE EXTREME IMMIGRATION
CONSEQUENCES DISCUSSED HERE, AB
1990 WILL NOT MAKE OUR COMMUNITY
SAFER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE
LINE UP THAT YOUR NAME AND
POSITION ONLY. NATASHA MINSKER
SMART. JUSTICE CALIFORNIA. WE
HAVE REMOVED. WE HAVE REVIEWED
THE AMENDMENT. WE REMAIN
STRONGLY OPPOSED. THANK YOU.
DANNY GRATAMA ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE IN OPPOSITION,
ALICIA BENAVIDEZ ON BEHALF OF
DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE AND
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER
IN STRONG OPPOSITION. MARCO
JORGE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION, IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. MICAH DOCTROVE WITH
THE ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
ON BEHALF OF ACLU CALIFORNIA
ACTION IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
TIFFANY WHITING WITH SEIU
CALIFORNIA IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THÀNH TRAN ELLA BAKER,
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS,
RESPECTFULLY, OPPOSITION MELANIE
KIM, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE, IN OPPOSITION
AND ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER IN
OPPOSITION. ROXANA GONZALEZ, ON
BEHALF OF INITIATE, INITIATED
JUSTICE ACTION. STRONG
OPPOSITION. GRETCHEN BERNARD
BERGMAN, A NEW PATH IN
OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE COX, LSPC
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MOORE. ALL OF
US ARE NONE IN OPPOSITION. AND
LITTLE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIANS
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND GRACE
AND RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. BACK TO COMMITTEE MEMBER
REYES. WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS
SUMMARY THAT READ, AUTHORIZES A
WARRANTLESS ARREST FOR
SHOPLIFTING, NOT COMMITTED IN
THE PRESENCE OF A POLICE OFFICER
. I WAS EXTREMELY CONCERNED. I
THOUGHT, MUST BE WRONG. BUT THE
AUTHOR'S STATEMENT SAYS, BY
ENABLING ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO
MAKE WARRANTLESS ARRESTS BASED
ON PROBABLE CAUSE, EVEN IF THEY
WERE NOT PRESENT WHEN THE CRIME
OCCURRED. THIS BILL STRENGTHENS
THE TOOLS AVAILABLE. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT A WARRANTLESS
ARREST OF SOMEONE BY A POLICE
OFFICER WHO DID NOT WITNESS IT.
AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I AM
VERY GLAD THAT YOU ACCEPTED THE
AMENDMENT THAT REQUIRES THAT
SOMEONE WHO WITNESSED IT HAS TO
SIGN, AS A WITNESS THAT THEY
HAVE THAT THEY THEY WITNESSED
THIS, THIS, THIS SHOPLIFTING. I
AGREE, RETAIL THEFT HAS BECOME A
TOP ISSUE FOR STORES AND FOR
COMMUNITIES, AND IT'S SOMETHING
THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. I, I
UNDERSTAND, THAT THERE IS A
REASON TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING,
TO BE AS CREATIVE AS POSSIBLE. I
AM SO CONCERNED, AND I KNOW IN
THE ANALYSIS, IT TALKS ABOUT,
THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS COULD
BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. AND I THINK
IT IS AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN GET TO
BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
NONETHELESS I, I KNOW YOUR WORK.
I KNOW THAT YOU ARE SOMEONE WHO
IS COMMITTED TO TRYING TO FIND
SOLUTIONS, THE PROBLEMS IN THE
BILL AS IT IS WRITTEN, DOES NOT
PROVIDE THE SAFEGUARDS FOR THE
COMMUNITY THAT THE COMMUNITY
DESERVES, TO BE DETAINED AND TO
BE HELD, BECAUSE SOMEONE BECAUSE
BECAUSE LAW ENFORCEMENT, HAS
REASONABLE SUSPICION OR PROBABLE
CAUSE, REASONABLE CAUSE. SHOULD
NOT BE SUFFICIENT. THERE HAS TO
BE MORE. THERE HAS TO BE MORE.
AND WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY
SOMEBODY'S LIBERTY BECAUSE
SOMEBODY HAS A SUSPICION OF
SOMETHING THAT THEY DID NOT
WITNESS, BUT AGAIN, I KNOW YOUR
WORK, AND I AM GOING TO GIVE A
COURTESY VOTE. FOR YOU TO MOVE
FORWARD. BUT BUT I DO RESERVE MY
RIGHT AT WHEN WE VOTE ON IT ON
THE FLOOR. AND I ABSOLUTELY
REQUEST THAT THE CONVERSATION
WITH THE OPPOSITION CONTINUE
THOSE ARGUMENTS ARE VERY
IMPORTANT IN MAKING SURE THAT WE
HAVE THE PROTECTIONS AND THE
GUARDRAILS THAT ARE NECESSARY IF
WE'RE GOING TO IMPOSE US, IF
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE AWAY
SOMEBODY'S LIBERTY, TO, BY BY
ARRESTING THEM WITHOUT A
WARRANT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
IS THAT MOTION AS WELL? OKAY,
SECOND MOTION A SECOND. SO,
MEMBER LACKEY. YEAH. THANK YOU.
I HAVE TO LET ME BEGIN BY,
ADDRESSING ONE OF THE EXPRESSED
CONCERNS BY MY COLLEAGUE OVER
THERE. REASONABLE SUSPICION AND
PROBABLE CAUSE ARE COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS
SOME LANGUAGE CONFUSION.
CONFUSION BECAUSE THEY USED THE
TERMS, REASONABLE CAUSE. SUCH A
STANDARD DOESN'T EXIST.
CONSTITUTIONALLY REASONABLE
SUSPICION IN AS MUCH LESS
GREATER THAN PROBABLE CAUSE.
PROBABLE CAUSE IS A MUCH
STRONGER STANDARD. AND THAT'S
WHAT THIS BILL REQUIRES. THERE'S
PROBABLE CAUSE, NOT REASONABLE
SUSPICION. SO I JUST WANTED TO
MAKE THAT VERY, VERY CLEAR,
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A VERY
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION TO MAKE.
SECONDLY, I THINK THE
OPPOSITION'S EXPRESSION THAT,
THIS MAY RESULT IN PEOPLE
STEALING GUM IS ABSURD. IT'S
WELL, WHAT IT DOES, IT IT
CHEAPENS THE CREDIBILITY OF THE
OPPOSITION. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN
. I JUST GET FRUSTRATED BY SOME
OF THE EXTREME EXAMPLES BECAUSE
THIS IS TRYING TO STRIKE A
REASONABLE BALANCE TO THEFT AND
NOT EXCUSE IT, BECAUSE THERE WAS
A AN HONEST ATTEMPT TO TRY TO
BALANCE THE ENFORCEMENT STANDARD
, AND NOW IT HAS BEEN EXPLOITED.
AND NOW I NEED TO GET BACK TO AT
LEAST A REASONABLE STANDARD AND
PROBABLE CAUSE IS A REASONABLE
STANDARD THAT SOMEONE HAS IS
STEALING. BECAUSE I WILL TELL
YOU THAT, I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT
WE'VE EXCUSED THEFT. MY
DAUGHTER, WHO I'VE SHARED THIS
STORY BEFORE, BUT I'LL SAY IT
AGAIN. SHE WAS INSTRUCTED BY HER
EMPLOYER. HER EMPLOYER TOLD THE
EMPLOYEES WHEN WITNESSING THEFT.
TURN THE OTHER WAY. DON'T BRING
ANY ATTENTION TO IT. LET IT GO.
THAT'S THE MESSAGE THAT'S OUT
THERE RIGHT NOW. WE'VE GOT TO
CORRECT THAT. IT'S NOT FAIR TO
RETAILERS. IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE
CONSUMER. IT'S JUST NOT FAIR. SO
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. IT'S TIME. THANK YOU.
OKAY. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS NØ
OKAY. WELL A COUPLE COMMENTS AND
THEN A FEW QUESTIONS, SO LET'S
REMEMBER BEFORE PROP 47, I WAS
ACTUALLY ABLE TO MAKE THOSE
ARRESTS FOR SOMEBODY STEALING
$600 WORTH OF MERCHANDISE OFF
PROBABLE CAUSE OF WHAT I DID
DURING MY COURSE OF MY
INVESTIGATION, TAKING THEM TO
JAIL. THAT USED TO BE A THING.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE
TRYING TO BRING BACK RIGHT NOW,
FOR THE GROCERS ASSOCIATION, THE
OPPOSITION STATED THAT 80,
THERE'S 80% LOWER RATE IN
SHOPLIFTING, DO YOU AGREE WITH
THAT, THAT THERE'S BEEN AN 80%
DECREASE? CLARIFY. I SAID EIGHT,
8. OKAY AND I WAS CITING THE
REPORT AND THE ANALYSIS, JUST 8.
I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO SQUARE
UP WITH THE PICK, BUT FROM WHAT
WE'RE SEEING IN OUR STORES, IT'S
ABSOLUTELY WE'VE SEEN A STARK
INCREASE BETWEEN THE PASSAGE OF
PROP 47 AND THEN THE AFTERMATH
OF THE PANDEMIC. WE'VE
ABSOLUTELY SEEN CHANGES IN
BEHAVIOR AROUND THESE TYPE OF
ACTIVITIES. AND ARE YOU GUYS ARE
THE GROCERS OR RETAILERS? ARE
YOU NOT REPORTING THEM AS MUCH
AS YOU USED TO PRIOR TO THIS?
AND WHY? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.
WE ARE NOT REPORTING THESE, AT
AT, RATE THAT WE HAD IN THE PAST
BECAUSE THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GET
FROM OUR MEMBERS IS THAT
ULTIMATELY NOTHING HAPPENS AND
THEY HEAR THAT FROM THE POLICE
OFFICERS WHO COME. THEY HEAR
THAT FROM THE CRIMINALS WHO
COMMIT THESE CRIMES, BUT THEY
HEAR IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT IT'S
LIKE IT'S CATCH AND RELEASE,
WHICH IS PARTLY WHY WE'RE SO
GRATEFUL FOR THIS BILL, IS THAT
IT AT LEAST, IT'S GOING TO SERVE
AS A DETERRENT, WHICH IS A WORD
THAT I'VE HEARD A LOT TODAY, BUT
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SO MANY
MEMBERS WHO HAVE. IT'S THE SAME
PEOPLE. IT'S THE SAME FEW DOZEN
PEOPLE WHO ARE THERE, IF NOT
EVERY DAY, SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK.
AND SO IF WE CAN START TO
PREVENT THOSE FOLKS FROM COMING
IN AND GETTING AWAY WITH THINGS,
THEN I THINK WE'LL SEE A REAL
SHARP DECREASE IN THIS ACTIVITY
AND IMPROVEMENT THROUGHOUT OUR
STATE. THANK YOU. AND I JUST I
JUST WANT TO MAKE ANOTHER
COMMENT, I REPRESENT
COMMUNITIES, IMMIGRATION, LOWER,
LOWER, INCOME COMMUNITIES WHO
ARE HAVING DESSERTS HAPPEN IN
THEIR COMMUNITIES BECAUSE STORES
ARE CLOSING DOWN AND THEY'RE
BEING HURT A LOT BY THAT,
OPPOSITION. I KNOW YOU BROUGHT
UP THIS AS AN IMMIGRATION ISSUE.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN
IMMIGRATION ISSUE. IF ANYTHING,
I'M HELPING MY IMMIGRATION
COMMUNITIES BY DOING THIS,
GETTING THEM THE SAME SERVICES
THAT ALL THE OTHER COMMUNITIES
GET TO HAVE AS WELL. IT'S NOT
FAIR TO THEM THAT WE TURN AWAY
FROM CRIMES HAPPENING AND LET IT
HAPPEN. AND THEN THOSE STORES
GET CLOSED AND THEN THOSE
COMMUNITIES BE WITHOUT THESE
SERVICES. SO I'M HAPPY TO
SUPPORT THIS BILL AND I'LL
SECOND IT IF IT HASN'T HAD IT.
THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A MOTION A
SECOND I'LL LET YOU CLOSE. BUT
BEFORE THAT I DO SUPPORT THIS,
ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WAS
STATED BY SOME MEMBER REYES IS I
DO THINK WE BROUGHT MORE BALANCE
TO IT BY HAVING THAT DECLARATION
IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE
IS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR A FAIR
SHAKE FOR THE FOR THE ACCUSED,
WITH THAT, YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I APPRECIATE
ALL OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE
HAVE HAD RELATED TO THIS BILL,
TO THE TO THE OPPOSITION. I JUST
WANT TO SAY THAT I COMMEND THE
WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE. WE HAVE
WORKED TOGETHER IN A VARIETY OF
DIFFERENT THINGS IN THE PAST,
HAVING THIS HAPPEN IN MY
DISTRICT MULTIPLE TIMES EVERY
DAY, EVERY WEEK, WHERE SMALL
BUSINESSES WHO DON'T HAVE ACCESS
TO VIDEO CAMERAS, WHO DON'T HAVE
ACCESS OR RESOURCES TO HIRE LOSS
PREVENTION PERSONNEL OR PRIVATE
SECURITY, THEY WANT A RESPONSE
FROM US. AND IT IS UNFAIR TO PUT
THE BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESSES
WHO ARE ALSO PEOPLE OF COLOR,
WHO ALSO COME FROM LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES, WHO ARE ALSO TRYING
TO MAKE THEIR CALIFORNIA DREAM
AND THEIR AMERICAN DREAM BE A
REALITY. AND FOR US TO SIT BACK
AND DO NOTHING IS NOT WHERE WE
NEED TO BE. AND SO THIS IS A
STEP FORWARD, I DO WANT TO SAY
TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM, SAN
BERNARDINO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT
IT IS VERY DANGEROUS TO
INTERCHANGE THE WORDS BETWEEN
REASONABLE CAUSE AND REASONABLE
SUSPICION. THOSE ARE TWO VERY
DIFFERENT THINGS. NOWHERE IN THE
BILL DO WE TALK ABOUT REASONABLE
SUSPICION AND IN FACT,
REASONABLE CAUSE AND PROBABLE
CAUSE AS DEFINED BY CALIFORNIA
JURISPRUDENCE IS EQUIVALENT AND
THE SAME THING. AND WE ARE
CLARIFYING THAT IN THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE ARE TAKING
WITH THE COMMITTEE. AND SO I
KNOW THAT RETAIL THEFT CONTINUES
TO BE A LARGE CONVERSATION, BUT
WE CAN'T HAVE SOFT SOLUTIONS TO
A PROBLEM THAT IS HITTING OUR
COMMUNITIES HARDER AND HARDER
EACH DAY. AND THAT IS CAUSING
MORE JOBS, MORE LOSS OF JOBS AND
STORES CLOSING AND PEOPLE LOSING
THEIR ABILITY TO PAY THEIR RENT
AND FEED THEIR FAMILIES BECAUSE
THESE STORES ARE SHUTTING DOWN
AND BECAUSE THOSE JOBS ARE NO
LONGER AVAILABLE AND THAT IS
HAPPENING ACROSS MY COMMUNITY IN
THE HEART OF THE CITY OF LOS
ANGELES. AND SO WE ARE WORKING
TOWARDS COMING TO REAL
SOLUTIONS. AND AGAIN, I WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE AND THE
CHAIR FOR WORKING WITH ME ON
THIS POLICY. AND WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AB 1990 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER WENDY CARRILLO.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS, AS
AMENDED. MCCARTHY MCCARTY I
ALANIS, ALANIS I LACKEY. LACKEY
I NGUYEN NGUYEN I REYES REYES I
TING TING I WILSON. ZEBRA THAT
MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU. NEXT
MEASURE. ITEM 20 AB 2438
PETRIE-NORRIS.
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
AND GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. I KNOW THAT THERE HAS
BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION IN
TODAY'S COMMITTEE ABOUT, THE
RAMPANT GROWTH THAT WE'VE SEEN
IN ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT AND
SMASH AND GRAB CRIMES ALL ACROSS
THE STATE. I KNOW THAT THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS RECOGNIZE THE
HORRIFIC EFFECTS THAT, THESE
CRIMES ARE HAVING ON OUR SMALL
BUSINESSES, ON THE EMPLOYEES WHO
WORK THERE AND ON OUR
COMMUNITIES AND OUR OUR ECONOMIC
VITALITY AS A WHOLE, AB 248
2438, IS WORKING TO ADDRESS
SMASH AND GRABS THAT ARE BEING
COMMITTED BY ORGANIZED CRIMINAL
GANGS IN CALIFORNIA. IT'S REALLY
A PRETTY SIMPLE BILL. WHAT AB
2040 AT 2438 SAYS IS SIMPLY
THAT, IF THREE OR MORE PEOPLE
ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO ROB A
BUSINESS, COMMIT WHAT IS
OBVIOUSLY AN ORGANIZED RETAIL
THEFT, SUBJECT TO A JUDGE'S
DISCRETION, AN ENHANCEMENT OF
ONE, 2 OR 3 YEARS WOULD BE ON
THE TABLE AGAIN, SUBJECT TO A
JUDGE'S DISCRETION. AND I KNOW
THAT IN THIS COMMITTEE, THERE
HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN AROUND
THE TOPIC OF ENHANCEMENTS. AND,
WHY WOULD WE BE APPLYING ONE IN
THIS CASE? SO I'VE GOT, I GUESS,
IN MY MIND, TWO REASONS FOR ME
THAT AN ENHANCEMENT IN THIS
SITUATION IS APPROPRIATE. AND
IT'S THE BOTTOM LINE IS BECAUSE
WHEN YOU'RE WORKING IN AN
ORGANIZED GANG OF THREE OR MORE
PEOPLE, THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY
DIFFERENT THAN ONE PERSON
WORKING ALONE, A IT SPEAKS TO
THE ORGANIZED ELEMENT THAT HAS
BECOME SO PERVASIVE AND SUCH A
DANGEROUS PART OF THIS PROBLEM.
AND AT THE CORE OF WHAT WE ARE
TRYING TO ADDRESS WITH THE
LEGISLATION THAT HAS BEEN
PROPOSED BY MANY MEMBERS THIS
YEAR. AND NUMBER TWO, THE
IMPACT, THE IMPACT THAT THAT HAS
ON THE COMMUNITY, ON EMPLOYEES
IN A STORE, THERE'S A VERY BIG
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THREE OFTEN,
YOU KNOW, ARMED WITH BASEBALL
BAT GUYS RUNNING INTO A STORE
SMASHING UP THE STORE IN ORDER
TO ROB IT. THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT
THAN SOMEBODY WHO WANDERS IN AND
KIND OF LIKE TAKES A FEW THINGS
OFF THE SHELF, IN MY VIEW. SO
THAT IS WHY I THINK THAT AN
ENHANCEMENT IS APPROPRIATE IN
THIS SCENARIO. AND THAT'S WHY I
WAS I WAS OPEN TO THE SUGGESTION
. OAN WHEN THE ORANGE COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY APPROACHED US
WITH THIS, AND WE'LL NOW JUST
HAND IT OVER TO OUR
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE ORANGE
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY,
BRADLEY SHANE LEVIN, THANKS FOR
BEING HERE. SECOND. THANK YOU.
PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. MY
NAME IS BRADLEY SHANE LEVIN, AND
I'M A SENIOR DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I'M
BOTH HUMBLED AND HONORED TO
SPEAK BEFORE YOU TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2438.
AND I'D LIKE TO THANK MEMBER
PETRIE-NORRIS FOR AUTHORING THIS
BILL, ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS ARE
ATTACKING OUR STOREFRONTS AT
UNPRECEDENTED LEVELS GREATER
THAN WE'VE EVER SEEN BEFORE.
GONE ARE THE DAYS OF A SUBTLE
AND STEALTHY THEFT AT THE HANDS
OF A LONE THIEF. INSTEAD,
THIEVES ARE WORKING TOGETHER AND
HAVE SHOWN A COMPLETE DISREGARD
FOR ANY CONSEQUENCE AND COMMIT
THEFT, SHOWING LITTLE TO NO
WORRY OF CAPTURE, MUCH LESS
PUNISHMENT. I HAVE PERSONALLY
SPOKEN WITH BUSINESS OWNERS AND
FRONTLINE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE ALL
RELAYED THE SAME SENTIMENT THEFT
BY CRIMINALS ACTING IN CONCERT
IS TERRIFYING. IN FACT,
EMPLOYEES ARE QUITTING THEIR
MUCH NEEDED JOBS BECAUSE THEY'RE
SIMPLY TOO AFRAID TO GO TO WORK.
WHEN THESE THIEVES WORK IN
CONCERT, THEIR NUMBERS ARE THEIR
STRENGTH. THIS MAKES THEM HARDER
TO STOP, HARDER TO REGAIN THE
MERCHANDISE, AND EVEN HARDER TO
CAPTURE. OFTEN WHEN THESE
THIEVES COMMIT, THESE RECKLESS
THEFTS, THERE IS MORE THAN FEAR
LEFT BEHIND. BUT DAMAGE THE
STORE THEY HAVE JUST RANSACKED
CAN BE LEFT IN RUINS. THE AMOUNT
OF DAMAGE CAN BE DONE THAT CAN
BE DONE TO A STORE CAN COST MORE
THAN THE ITEMS THAT WERE EVEN
TAKEN. THIEVES MAY STEAL 5000 IN
MERCHANDISE, BUT LEAVE 50,000 IN
DAMAGE. AND IF ONE THIEF CAN
WALK AWAY WITH 5000 IN
MERCHANDISE, WHAT CAN TWO
THIEVES DO? OR FIVE OR 10 OR 15
ALL IN THE SAME INCIDENT, WE SEE
THESE CHAOTIC SCENES OF FLASH
MOBS SMASH AND GRABS PLAY OUT
OVER AND OVER ON THE NEWS AND IN
SOCIAL MEDIA, AS THEY DO MAKE
SENSATIONAL STORIES. BUT WHAT IS
NOT DISCUSSED IS THE DAMAGE TO
THE REPUTATION OF THE COMMUNITY
IN WHICH THE CRIME OCCURS. WHAT
IS NOT DISCUSSED ARE THE
COUNTLESS SHOPPERS, EMPLOYEES
AND BUSINESS OWNERS WHO ARE LEFT
TRAUMATIZED BY THE INCIDENT AND
LEFT TO LITERALLY PICK UP THE
PIECES WHO HAVE ANXIETY THE NEXT
TIME THEY WALK INTO A STORE, OR
WHO MUST CLOSE UP SHOP BECAUSE
OF THE DAMAGE DONE. IT IS FOR
THOSE FOLKS, THOSE COMMUNITIES,
THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE
TO DETER THIS CRIME. AB 2438
WILL BE A START AT DOING SO.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, PLEASE
COME FORWARD. CHAIR MEMBERS.
GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN, JONATHAN
FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION SUPPORT.
DANIEL CONWAY, CALIFORNIA
GROCERS ASSOCIATION ALSO IN
SUPPORT. SKYLAR WONACOTT,
CALIFORNIA BUSINESS PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATION, IN SUPPORT. RYAN,
ELAINE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. COREY SALZILLO ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, SUPPORT.
MIKE HOLTMAN, CALIFORNIA
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT. JULIAN VORIS, ON
BEHALF OF THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES IN SUPPORT.
BRIAN SHERMAN OF THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION AND OTHER
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, DANICA DARNELL,
ON BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE,
NOT AT ALL TO DISCOUNT THE KINDS
OF CONDUCT THAT WAS BEING
DISCUSSED AS THE IMPETUS FOR
THIS BILL. ABSOLUTELY. IT IS
TERRIFYING WHEN THOSE KINDS OF
THINGS HAPPEN AND HAVE A LOT OF
SYMPATHY FOR PEOPLE THAT
EXPERIENCE THAT AND THE HARM
THAT IS CAUSED, BUT THE TRUTH IS
, AGAIN, INCREASED PUNISHMENT IS
NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE
JUSTICE TO VICTIMS IN THE WAY
THAT WE OFTEN CLAIM THAT IT
WILL. THIS BILL WILL DO NOTHING
TO PROVIDE MORE RESOURCES TO
PEOPLE OR STORES THAT ARE HARMED
IN ANY WAY. AND I FEEL LIKE A
VERY UNFORTUNATE BROKEN RECORD
THIS YEAR OF HAVING TO REPEAT
AGAIN AND AGAIN. THERE IS NO
EVIDENCE THAT SENTENCE
ENHANCEMENTS REALLY PROVIDE ANY
MEANINGFUL PUBLIC SAFETY BENEFIT
OR DETERRENT BENEFIT. THEY COST
US A LOT, BOTH IN DOLLARS AND I
THINK IN THE HUMAN IN HUMAN COST
, BY DRAMATICALLY INCREASING
PRISON SENTENCES TO NO KNOWN
BENEFIT AT $130 A YEAR PER
PERSON IN CDCR. I THINK THE
RISKS THAT THIS BILL CAUSES MORE
HARM THAN GOOD. AGAIN, LIKE ALL
OTHER ENHANCEMENTS, BILLS WE'RE
CONSIDERING THIS YEAR IS VERY
HIGH, SO THE BILL I DON'T THINK
WILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT IT SEEKS TO
ACHIEVE AND INSTEAD WILL
ACCOMPLISH GREATER COERCED PLEA
DEALS, HIGHER SENTENCES, AND MAY
IN FACT HARM PUBLIC SAFETY. I
URGE, AND I VOTE THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. CLAIRE SIMONICH ON
BEHALF OF VERA, CALIFORNIA,
WHICH WORKS TO PROMOTE COMMUNITY
SAFETY AND MASS INCARCERATION
AND ADVANCE RACIAL JUSTICE. 2438
WOULD CREATE A NEW SENTENCING
ENHANCEMENT OF UP TO THREE YEARS
FOR ACTING WITH TWO OR MORE
PEOPLE TO TAKE OR DESTROY
PROPERTY DURING THE COMMISSION
OF ANY FELONY. THIS BILL ALLOWS
JUDGES UNFETTERED DISCRETION TO
CHOOSE BETWEEN ADDING ONE, TWO,
OR THREE YEARS ON TO A PERSON'S
SENTENCE WITHOUT ANY GUIDANCE TO
THE JUDGE ON HOW TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN THOSE ADDITIONAL
SENTENCES, AND IT ALSO USES THE
MANDATORY LANGUAGE OF CHAU MUCH
LIKE THE SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT
I SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER TODAY.
NOTWITHSTANDING EXISTING LAW,
IT'S UNCLEAR HOW A COURT WOULD
INTERPRET THAT. I WANT TO TALK
ABOUT HOW SENTENCING
ENHANCEMENTS, BOTH AS A GENERAL
MATTER AND WITH RESPECT TO THIS
BILL, WHOSE GOALS ARE TO ADDRESS
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT AND WHICH
MIRROR, TO SOME EXTENT, THE
PROVISIONS WITHIN CALIFORNIA'S
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT STATUTE,
HOW THIS SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT
RISKS INCREASING RACIAL
DISPARITIES IN OUR PRISONS AND
JAILS, ACCORDING TO BOOKING DATA
FROM 29 CALIFORNIA COUNTIES
BETWEEN 2020 AND 2023, A FULL
14% OF ARRESTS FOR ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT WERE OF BLACK BOYS
AND YOUNG MEN AGED 15 TO 24.
YOUNG BLACK MEN AND BOYS IN THAT
AGE GROUP, HOWEVER, MAKE UP JUST
0.4% OF CALIFORNIA'S POPULATION,
WHICH MEANS THERE'S A
SIGNIFICANT AND DISPROPORTIONATE
AMOUNT OF ARRESTS OF YOUNG BLACK
BOYS AND MEN FOR ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT. AND THIS BILL,
BECAUSE IT MIRRORS THE STATUTE,
BECAUSE IT MIRRORS THE ORGANIZED
RETAIL THEFT, RISKS RECREATING
THAT RACIAL DISPARITY. IN
ADDITION TO ALL WE KNOW ABOUT
HOW SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS
INCREASE RACIAL DISPARITIES. AND
THAT'S PRECISELY WHY WE'VE MOVED
AWAY FROM THEM OVER THE PAST
FIVE YEARS IN THIS LEGISLATURE.
STUDY AFTER STUDY HAS MADE CLEAR
THAT INCREASED PENALTIES AND
SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS ARE
INEFFECTIVE IN DETERRING CRIME,
AND THIS LEGISLATURE HAS BETTER
TOOLS AT HAND TO ADDRESS RETAIL
THEFT, INCLUDING SO-CALLED SMASH
AND GRAB ROBBERIES. THINGS LIKE
REGULATING ONLINE MARKETPLACE
REYES, ADDRESSING PEOPLE'S NEEDS
BY CONNECTING THEM TO HOUSING,
JOBS AND OTHER TREATMENT AND
SERVICES, AND SUPPORTING RETAIL
WORKERS AND INCREASING STAFFING
IN STORES. I URGE THIS COMMITTEE
NOT TO TURN BACK THE CLOCK, AND
I URGE THE COMMITTEE TO VOTE NO
ON THIS BILL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
NATASHA MINSKER SMART JUSTICE
CALIFORNIA STRONGLY OPPOSED
ROXANA GONZALEZ INITIATE JUSTICE
ACTION. STRONGLY OPPOSED. MARCO
JORGE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION, STRONGLY OPPOSED.
ALICIA MONTEIRO. CALIFORNIANS
UNITED FOR RESPONSIBLE BUDGET
STRONGLY OPPOSE. BARBARA CHAVEZ,
ELLA BAKER, CENTER FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS IN OPPOSITION OLIVER
KROLL, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC
DEFENDER, IN OPPOSITION. AND
LITTLE, ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE IN OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE
COX, ON BEHALF OF LSPC
OPPOSITION. ALYSSA MAURER. ALL
OF US ARE NONE. OPPOSITION
GRETCHEN BURNS BERGMAN A NEW
PATH IN OPPOSITION. THÀNH THANK
YOU. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER NGUYEN. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR, THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. JUST
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. THE
ENHANCEMENTS ARE FOR THE CRIMES
THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN
COMMITTED, NOT ATTEMPTED. RIGHT
THESE CRIMES, THE ENHANCEMENTS.
AND THEN THE SECOND THE SECOND
QUESTION IS JUST TO GIVE KIND OF
LIKE A SCENARIO WHERE IF THERE
WAS A GROUP OF FOLKS THAT WERE
GOING TO BREAK INTO A COMMERCIAL
STORE AND STOLE MERCHANDISE, THE
ALARM GOES OFF. THE POLICE SHOW
UP, AND THE ENHANCED AND THE
THEFT WASN'T COMPLETED YET. THE
ENHANCEMENT WOULD THEN NOT APPLY
TO THEM BECAUSE THE THEFT WASN'T
COMPLETED YET. CORRECT. AND
READING THE BILL, I KIND OF WAS
LOOKING THROUGH IT. AND THEN I
JUST, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN SPEAK
TO SECTIONS OF THE LAW WHERE IT
EXCLUDES ATTEMPT, WHERE IT
EXCLUDES IT, ATTEMPT, ATTEMPT,
ATTEMPT. YEAH. SO, SO THE BILL,
THE BILL AS IN PRINT WOULD APPLY
TO THE ATTEMPTED CRIMES. AND,
YOU KNOW, I'LL GIVE MY KIND OF
BIG PICTURE RATIONALE FOR THAT.
AND THEN WE'D LOVE FOR MR. SHANE
SHEINBAUM TO, TO CHIME IN, THE
REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THE
CRIMES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE,
OFTENTIMES THE LARGER SCALE ONES
WHERE YOU'VE GOT FOLKS THAT ARE
ATTEMPTING OAN, YOU KNOW, BIG
SMASH AND GRAB ALARM GOES OFF.
THEY KNOW THAT POLICE ARE ON
THEIR WAY. AND SO THEY SCATTER.
BUT IF THERE'S NOT A DETERRENT
TO THOSE, ATTEMPTS, THOSE
ATTEMPTS CONTINUE AND THAT
BECOMES A CRIME AND A PERVASIVE
CHALLENGE. SO IT DOES, AS
WRITTEN, APPLY TO ATTEMPTED AS
WELL. AND YOU CAN SPEAK TO WHY
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S AN
IMPORTANT ELEMENT, RIGHT? I KNOW
THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION DURING,
AMENDMENTS TO THIS ABOUT NOT
HAVING AN ATTEMPT OR A FOUR,
FIVE, NINE IN THIS THE ATTEMPT
LANGUAGE. FIRST OF ALL, AS IT
RELATES TO ENHANCEMENT, I'M
UNAWARE OF ANY ENHANCEMENT THAT
DOESN'T INCLUDE ATTEMPT LANGUAGE
IN IT, FURTHERMORE, IT WOULD
DEFY LOGIC TO, IN ESSENCE, APPLY
IT ONLY TO THOSE THAT ARE
SUCCESSFUL, BUT NOT TO THOSE WHO
FAILED. MAYBE BECAUSE THERE WAS
A LOSS PREVENTION OFFICER WHO
WAS ABLE TO INTERVENE. THE SAME
IS TRUE WITH YOU. BRING UP THE
IDEA OF A COMMERCIAL BURGLARY.
AGAIN, YOU WANT TO FOCUS ON THE
INTENT OF THE ACTOR, THE INTENT
OF THE CRIMINAL. AND WHEN THEY
COMMIT THAT BURGLARY CRIME,
THEIR INTENT IS TO COME IN AND
COMMIT FELONY THEFT, LARCENY,
ETC. AND SO AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT SUCCESSFUL, THIS
COVERS THAT GROUP AS WELL. AND
AGAIN, IT WOULD DEFY LOGIC TO
NOT HAVE THAT GROUP PART BE A
PART OF THIS ENHANCEMENT. BUT
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU SAY THAT ONE
LAST TIME, THAT LAST SENTENCE,
ONE MORE TIME? I WAS JUST
THINKING OF MY I WAS JUST
THINKING OF MY LAST QUESTION.
AND THEN WHEN YOU SAID THAT I
LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT. OF
COURSE, AS IT RELATES TO THE
459, THE BURGLARY ASPECT, IF A
GROUP OF ACTORS ARE GOING TO
COMMIT A BURGLARY THAT SHOWS
THAT THEIR INTENT WAS TO GO IN
AND IN FACT STEAL OR COMMIT A
FELONY, AND THE IDEA WOULD BE
THAT YOU'D WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT ENHANCEMENT APPLIES TO
THAT, EVEN IF THEY'RE
UNSUCCESSFUL. SO IF THEY GO INTO
THAT BUILDING WITH THAT CRIMINAL
MINDSET OF COMMITTING THAT
INTENT, INTENT OF THAT CRIMINAL
ACT, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
IF THEY DO IT IN THESE KINDS OF
NUMBERS, THAT THE ENHANCEMENT
WOULD APPLY, BECAUSE EVEN IF
THEY'RE NOT SUCCESSFUL IN TAKING
ANY OF THE PROPERTY, THE FEAR
THAT THEY'VE IMPOSED UPON THE
WORKERS WITHIN THAT STORE, THAT
COMMERCIAL BUILDING, THAT FEAR
IS ALREADY IN PLACE. THE WORKER
LEAVING THAT PLACE DOESN'T WALK
AWAY GOING, WELL, I'M OKAY,
BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T ACTUALLY
TAKE A PURSE, SO IT WAS LESS
TERRIFYING TO THE WORKER. THE
CRIME ITSELF IS THE TERRIFYING
PART. SO, SO RIGHT NOW, IF THEY
WERE TO GO IN AND ATTEMPT TO BUT
WEREN'T SUCCESSFUL, THEY WOULD
BE RELEASED AND BE ABLE TO
LEAVE. BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS
THAT THEY ATTEMPTED TO BUT THEY
WERE UNSUCCESSFUL, RIGHT? YEAH.
AS IS WRITTEN IN THE CURRENT
FORM, IF THEY WERE TO GO IN AND
ARE UNSUCCESSFUL, THE
ENHANCEMENT WOULD STILL APPLY,
WHICH OBVIOUSLY MAKES SENSE. AND
THAT WOULD BE THE ONE TWO AND
THE THREE ENHANCEMENT BASED OFF
OF OKAY. YEAH. BASED ON A
JUDGE'S DISCRETION BECAUSE RIGHT
NOW THERE ISN'T THERE ISN'T THAT
IN PLACE? THERE'S NOTHING IN
PLACE FOR THAT UNDER CURRENT
LAW. RIGHT. THERE'S NOTHING IN
PLACE UNDER CURRENT LAW,
ATTEMPTED ATTEMPTED BURGLARY,
ATTEMPTED THEFT CAN STILL BE
PROSECUTED. AND I THINK IN SOME
CASES IS, MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S
PERHAPS PROSECUTED LESS THAN IT
OTHERWISE WOULD BE, BECAUSE
WITHOUT KIND OF SUFFICIENT TEETH
, OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTNERS
END UP SPINNING THEIR WHEELS FOR
VERY LITTLE RESULT. OKAY IF
THAT'S TRUE, YEAH. THERE'S NO
CURRENT LAW FOR YOUR FOR YOUR
QUESTIONS. IF IT APPLIES NOW,
THERE'S NO CURRENT LAW TO
ADDRESS THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE AS
IT RELATES NOW. RIGHT. SO
THERE'S YEAH. RIGHT. SO THERE'S
A THERE ARE WE CERTAINLY
PROSECUTE ATTEMPTED BURGLARY,
ATTEMPTED THEFT, ATTEMPTED GRAND
THEFT AND SO ON. BUT RIGHT NOW,
TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF LARGE
GROUPS OF PEOPLE COMING IN AND
INFLICTING THAT TERROR UPON THAT
STORE, THERE IS NOTHING THAT
CURRENTLY ADDRESSES THAT. AND
THAT'S WHY THEY CONTINUE TO DO
IT. THEY CONTINUE TO, BECAUSE
THERE'S NOTHING THAT ADDRESSES
THAT. RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE'S
SAFETY. I MEAN, LIKE LIKE I SAID
IN THE STATEMENT, THERE ARE
SAFETY IN NUMBERS. I THINK WE
OFTEN UNDERESTIMATE OUR CRIMINAL
ACTORS IN THIS, IN THAT THEY
THEY PLAN THIS OUT, THEY DO
RECONNAISSANCE MISSIONS TO THE
STORES. WE KNOW THIS AND WE'VE
WE'VE TALKED TO THE DEFENDANTS.
WE'VE SEEN EVIDENCE OF IT. THEY
DO RECON THEY KNOW WHEN TO HIT,
HOW TO HIT AND WHO TO HIT. AND
THEN THEY DO. EACH PERSON HAS A
ROLE. AND THE FACT THAT WHEN
THEY COME IN, IN THESE LARGE
GROUPS, THAT BY ITSELF CREATES
AN ELEMENT OF FEAR, EVEN WITHOUT
BEING ARMED WITH A WEAPON OR A
TOOL, SUCH AS A HAMMER TO BREAK
IN. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
HERE TO ADDRESS. OKAY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SEEING NONE,
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
YOU MAY CLOSE. GREAT. WELL,
APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS.
APPRECIATE THE ENGAGEMENT, WITH
YOU, MR. TRAYER, AND WITH YOUR
COMMITTEE STAFF, I KNOW WE DID
NOT NECESSARILY FIND A LANDING
PLACE ON WHICH WE BOTH AGREED, I
THINK, AS I SAID IN, IN MY VIEW,
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN
ORGANIZED GROUP OF CRIMINALS
WORKING TOGETHER TO TERRORIZE
OUR SMALL BUSINESSES, OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OUR
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, THAT IS
SUFFICIENTLY DIFFERENT THAN
SOMEONE ACTING ALONE THAT IT
MERITS, IN MY VIEW, AND IN THE
VIEW OF THIS SPELL, A DIFFERENT
CONSEQUENCE, AND I THINK THAT, A
WORLD WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES IS,
NOT A WORLD WHERE PEOPLE
ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE RULES. AND
SO, WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE ON AB 2438.
THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON AB 2438 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
PETRIE-NORRIS. AS THE MOTION IS
DUE, PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE, MCCARTY NOT VOTING.
MCCARTY NOT VOTING. ALANIS.
ALANIS AYE LAKI LAKI. AYE.
NGUYEN NGUYEN. AYE. REYES TING
TING. NOT VOTING. WILSON. WILSON
NOT VOTING. ZIPPER. THAT'S ON
CALL. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANK
YOU. NEXT. AUTHOR MR. HOOVER.
MR. ZUBIATE AND YES, HE'S GOT
23. YOU. I DID. CALL CHOCOLATE.
PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT AB 2045 TO YOU. FIRST, I
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE ON THIS
BILL. AND START BY SAYING THAT I
DO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS, FENTANYL IS A
NATIONWIDE CRISIS, AND IS THE
NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH OF 18
TO 45 YEAR OLDS. UNFORTUNATELY
OUR LAWS DO NOT REFLECT THE
GROWING THREAT THAT FENTANYL
POSES TO OUR CHILDREN. THIS BILL
SEEKS TO REMEDY THAT
SPECIFICALLY, REGARDING CRIMES
THAT INVOLVE MINORS, AS AMENDED,
AB 2045. SIMPLY EXTENDS A ONE
YEAR PRISON ENHANCEMENT FOR AN
ADULT WHO SOLICITS, ENCOURAGES,
OR INTIMIDATES A MINOR TO COMMIT
A DRUG CRIME INVOLVING FENTANYL.
IF IT OCCURS ON THE PREMISES OF
A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION.
PLAYGROUND. YOUTH CENTER,
DAYCARE, OR PUBLIC SWIMMING
POOL. IT ALSO EXTENDS A TWO YEAR
PRISON ENHANCEMENT FOR THE SAME
CRIME. IF THE OFFENSE OCCURS
WITHIN 1000FT OF A PUBLIC OR
PRIVATE SCHOOL WHEN CHILDREN ARE
PRESENT, SIMPLY PUT, THIS BRINGS
FENTANYL IN LINE WITH OTHER HARD
DRUGS SUCH AS COCAINE AND
HEROIN. IT DOES NOT CREATE A NEW
PENALTY. WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT IS CORY
SALZILLO, REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION, AND I STRONGLY
ENCOURAGE AN AYE VOTE. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. MEMBERS CORY SALZILLO, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION HERE IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL, AS THE
AUTHOR SAID, FENTANYL INVOLVED
DEATHS CONTINUE TO RISE IN
CALIFORNIA EVERY YEAR. AND
UNFORTUNATELY, TOO MANY OF THOSE
INVOLVE MINORS, GIVEN THE
GROWING THREAT THAT WE'VE SEEN
VERY CLEARLY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO
UPDATE, REASONABLE PENALTY
ENHANCEMENTS TO COMBAT THE
DEVASTATION CAUSED BY THIS
DEADLY DRUG  TO RECOGNIZE
STATUTE THE REALITIES OF TODAY
AND THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
THAT OUR COMMUNITIES ARE FACING,
PERPETRATORS NEED TO FACE
APPROPRIATE CONSEQUENCES WHEN
ENCOURAGING MINORS TO BE ENGAGED
IN FENTANYL COMMERCE, AS IS
ALREADY THE CASE WITH OTHER HARD
DRUGS LIKE COCAINE AND HEROIN,
BUT WE KNOW THAT FENTANYL IS
UNIQUE. IT'S MORE DEADLY THAN
OTHER ILLICIT DRUGS. IT'S OFTEN
MARKETED TO CHILDREN AND OTHERS,
AS AS OTHER SUBSTANCES
ALTOGETHER. IN MANY CASES, THE
PERSON THINKS THEY ARE
PURCHASING SOME OTHER SUBSTANCE,
ONLY HAVE IT TO BE FENTANYL OR
LACED WITH FENTANYL AND
RESULTING IN A DEADLY POISONING.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE NEED TO DO
ALL WE CAN TO PROTECT OUR
COMMUNITIES. THIS IS A
REASONABLE UPDATE OF EXISTING
LAW, TO MATCH STATUTE TO WHAT IS
HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITIES AND
TO RECOGNIZE THE SCOURGE THAT
FENTANYL HAS QUICKLY BECOME OVER
THE LAST FEW YEARS. SO WE THANK
THE AUTHOR AND RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. OTHERS
IN SUPPORT, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
CHAIR MEMBERS JONATHAN FELDMAN,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. BRIAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
NARCOTIC OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
AND THE OTHER OPPOSED SUPPORT.
JEFF RUBIN, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. OPPOSITION PLEASE COME
FORWARD.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE,
I'M GRETCHEN BURNS BERGMAN,
CO-FOUNDER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
A NEW PATH PARENTS FOR ADDICTION
TREATMENT AND HEALING. HERE IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO AB
2045, A NEW PATH IS A NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION WORKING TO REDUCE
THE STIGMA ASSOCIATED WITH
SUBSTANCE USE. WE ADVOCATE FOR
THERAPEUTIC RATHER THAN PUNITIVE
DRUG POLICIES. FOR 25 YEARS NOW,
I'M THE MOTHER OF TWO SONS WHO
ARE IN LONG TUM RECOVERY FROM
HEROIN ADDICTION. I'VE
EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND THE
FAILURES OF OUR SOCIETY IN
TREATING DRUG USE AS A CRIMINAL
JUSTICE ISSUE, RATHER THAN A
PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE. FOR OVER 50
YEARS, WE'VE PRIORITIZED
INCARCERATION, THÀNH OVER
TREATMENT, AND YET PROBLEMS OF
ADDICTION AND OVERDOSE ARE
INCREASING, NOT DECREASING.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE APPROACHES HAVE
ALWAYS MADE THINGS WORSE.
ADOLESCENT DRUG USE IS AT A
RECORD LOW. HOWEVER THERE'S BEEN
AN ALARMING SPIKE IN TEEN DRUG
OVERDOSE DEATHS, AND FENTANYL
WAS A MAJOR FACTOR FOR. THIS IS
PARTICULARLY FRUSTRATING AS MANY
OF THESE DEATHS COULD HAVE BEEN
PREVENTED WITH PUBLIC HEALTH
STRATEGIES. I UNDERSTAND THE
AUTHOR'S INTENT, BUT TRYING TO
KEEP OUR YOUTH SAFE. BUT THIS
BILL DOES NOT PROPOSE A NEW
SOLUTION TO REDUCE THE RISK OF
TEEN OVERDOSE. WE REALLY NEED
MORE RESOURCES PROVIDING
STUDENTS WITH HONEST, FACT BASED
DRUG EDUCATION IS THE BIGGEST
WAY FOR YOUTH TO ASSIST THEIR
FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND KEEP
THEMSELVES SAFE. SINCE 2014,
WE'VE BEEN DOING OVERDOSE
PREVENTION TRAINING AND NARCAN
DISTRIBUTION THROUGHOUT OUR
COUNTY AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
TEENS NEED TO HAVE NALOXONE
AVAILABLE TO THEM AS WELL. THE
STATE MUST ALSO INCREASE ACCESS
TO SUBSTANCE USE TREATMENT, AND
THAT INCLUDES BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
AND MEDICATED ASSISTED
TREATMENT, INCLUDING AND
ESPECIALLY FOR YOUTH. WE MUST
PRIORITIZE THESE PUBLIC HEALTH
INTERVENTIONS WITH OPEN MINDS
AND WITHOUT JUDGMENT, AND
CRIMINALIZING THÀNH. WE CAN
ENGAGE YOUTH EARLY AND HELP THEM
LIVE FULFILLING LIVES. I AND
THOUSANDS OF PARENTS ACROSS
CALIFORNIA URGE THIS COMMITTEE
TO VOTE NO ON AB 2045. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR.
CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS OLIVER
CROWELL. I'M A DEPUTY PUBLIC
DEFENDER AT THE SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE. FIRST,
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
ALARMING PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS
POSED BY FENTANYL. AS A PARENT
MYSELF, I UNDERSTAND THE
IMPORTANCE OF DOING EVERYTHING
WE CAN TO PROTECT, PROTECT
CHILDREN. I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR ACCEPTING THE
AMENDMENTS. AND OF COURSE,
THERE'S NO ONE WHO DOESN'T WANT
TO ADDRESS THE FENTANYL
EPIDEMIC, BUT THIS BILL WILL NOT
MEET ITS STATED GOALS IN
PREVENTING OR REDUCING CRIMES
RELATED TO FENTANYL. ACTUALLY IT
WOULD RESULT IN A WASTE OF
CRITICAL RESOURCES AND WOULD
MAKE RACIAL DISPARITIES IN
SENTENCING EVEN WORSE. THE
EXISTING LAWS ON THE BOOKS ARE
ALREADY HARSH. THE CURRENT
PENALTY FOR ENCOURAGING A MINOR
TO USE A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE,
OR TO TRANSPORT OR POSSESS FOR
SALE THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IS
NINE YEARS IN PRISON BEFORE ANY
ENHANCEMENTS. THIS BILL WOULD
TAKE THE SAME ENHANCEMENTS THAT
DAMAGED COMMUNITIES DURING THE
CRACK COCAINE EPIDEMIC AND
EXTEND IT TO FENTANYL BASED ON
PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS, PLACES OF
WORSHIP AND OTHER SENSITIVE
AREAS. BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE
THAT THIS WOULD PREVENT TEENAGE
DRUG USE OR DETER DRUG SALES.
AND WE KNOW THIS BECAUSE THESE
ENHANCEMENT ZONES ARE NOTHING
NEW. DRUG FREE ZONE LAWS HAVE
EXISTED FOR DECADES. THE FIRST
SUCH LAW WAS PASSED BY THE
CONGRESS, THE FEDERAL CONGRESS,
IN 1970 TO, ALL 50 STATES HAVE
HAVE SOME VERSION OF THIS. AND
50 YEARS LATER AND $1 TRILLION
LATER, WE CONTINUE TO BE FACED
WITH A DEVASTATING PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS, INCREASING PRISON
SENTENCES FOR DRUG RELATED
CRIMES DOES NOT MAKE US SAFER,
AND IT WILL NOT SOLVE THE OPIOID
PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS. INSTEAD OF
PROTECTING CHILDREN, THESE
DRACONIAN LAWS RESULTED IN
WORSENING THE MASS INCARCERATION
OF BLACK AND LATINO
CALIFORNIANS, WHO ARE MORE
LIKELY TO LIVE IN URBAN AREAS
WHERE EVERY BLOCK HAS A SCHOOL,
A PLACE OF WORSHIP, OR A
COMMUNITY CENTER. COMPARED WITH
PERHAPS SUBURBAN OR RURAL AREAS,
DRUG SENTENCES FOR BLACK MEN
SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER THAN DRUG
SENTENCES FOR WHITE MEN. BETWEEN
2007 AND 2009. AND THIS BILL
ALSO LEANS INTO A KIND OF A, I
THINK, A FALSE SEPARATION
BETWEEN SELLERS AND USERS. 87.5%
OF PEOPLE WHO SELL DRUGS ALSO
USE DRUGS, AND ADDITIONALLY, 43%
OF THAT POPULATION MEET THE
CRITERIA FOR A SUBSTANCE USE
DISORDER. THE ENFORCEMENT BILLS
THAT RELY ON CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT
LIKE THIS ONE TAKE AWAY CRITICAL
RESOURCES THAT COULD GO TO
TREATMENT. STABLE HOUSING,
ALLEVIATING POVERTY, ADDRESSING
THE ROOT CAUSES OF DRUG USE AND
CRIME. I RESPECTFULLY URGE THIS
COMMITTEE NOT TO DOUBLE DOWN ON
ONE OF THE ORIGINAL FAILED WAR
ON DRUGS POLICIES IN DEFIANCE OF
EVIDENCE, THE EXPERTS AND WHAT'S
HAPPENING ON OUR STREETS. AND I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A NO
VOTE. THANK YOU. OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION. MELANIE KIM, SAN
FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE AND OPPOSITION. MARGO
GEORGE AGAIN FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION AND
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANK YOU
. AND LITTLE, ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE. IN OPPOSITION, NORMA
PALACIOS, ON BEHALF OF THE DRUG
POLICY ALLIANCE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. TIÂU NHÀ VARGAS WAS
INITIATE JUSTICE ACTION IN
OPPOSITION. TÂM TRAN, ELLA
BAKER, CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
OPPOSITION. MICAH DOCTOROFF WITH
THE ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
ON BEHALF OF ACLU CALIFORNIA
ACTION AND RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION
. ALICIA MONTEIRO WITH
CALIFORNIANS UNITED FOR
RESPONSIBLE BUDGET AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE
A MOTION, A MOTION A SECOND? I
DID NOTE, IN YOUR OPENING THAT,
YOU MENTIONED THAT WE DID OFFER
SOME AMENDMENTS WHICH YOU TOOK,
WHICH I THINK NARROW IT AND MAKE
IT MORE BALANCED AND NOT
OVERREACHING. SO WE THANK YOU.
AND WITH THAT, YOU MAY CLOSE.
THANK YOU. AND, YES, THANK YOU
AGAIN, MR. CHAIR. I YOU KNOW,
JUST JUST IN RESPONSE TO SOME OF
THE ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE
PRESENTED, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT IF
WE PUT THIS IN REVERSE, RIGHT,
IF SOMEONE WAS AUTHORING A BILL
TO ELIMINATE THESE ENHANCEMENTS
THAT EXIST IN CURRENT LAW FOR
HEROIN AND COCAINE, WOULD YOU
VOTE FOR THAT BILL? WOULD YOU
WANT TO VOTE FOR THAT BILL? ALL
MY BILL IS SIMPLY DOING IS
BRINGING FENTANYL IN LINE WITH
THOSE HARD DRUGS. AND IN FACT,
IN A LOT OF WAYS, FENTANYL IS
MORE HARMFUL TO OUR YOUTH. IT IS
ACTUALLY 50 TIMES MORE POTENT
THAN HEROIN. AND SO, YOU KNOW,
OBVIOUSLY, WHILE, I JUST THINK
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE
REMEMBER THAT THESE ENHANCEMENTS
ALREADY EXIST IN CURRENT LAW, WE
ARE SIMPLY ADDING FENTANYL TO
THEM. WE'RE NOT CREATING A NEW
PENALTY, YOU KNOW, THAT BEING
SAID, I WILL JUST CLOSE BY
SAYING THAT AS A PARENT OF A
FRESHMAN IN HIGH SCHOOL, MY
OLDEST IS NOW A FRESHMAN IN HIGH
SCHOOL. IT IS A TERRIFYING TIME
TO BE A PARENT OF A TEENAGER
RIGHT NOW. AND WE KNOW THIS
BECAUSE WE SEE, FENTANYL
CONTINUING TO COME INTO OUR
COMMUNITIES IN GREATER AND
GREATER NUMBERS. GOVERNOR NEWSOM
JUST RELEASED THE LATEST NUMBERS
A FEW WEEKS AGO, AND THE AMOUNT
OF FENTANYL THAT HAS COME INTO
OUR STATE IS EXPONENTIALLY
GREATER TODAY THAN IT WAS EVEN
THREE SHORT YEARS AGO. WE ARE
LOSING 115 CALIFORNIANS PER WEEK
TO THIS FENTANYL CRISIS. AND I
DO AGREE WITH SOME OF THE
COMMENTS OF THE OPPOSITION THAT
WE NEED TO ATTACK THIS AT EVERY
SINGLE ANGLE. WE DO NEED
RESOURCES. WE NEED MORE
RESOURCES. WE NEED NARCAN
AVAILABILITY. THERE ARE A LOT OF
DIFFERENT WAYS WE NEED MORE
EDUCATION FOR YOUTH, FOR
PARENTS, FOR TEACHERS. I HAVE
SUPPORTED THAT LEGISLATION. I
WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR THAT
AS WELL. BUT WE ALSO NEED MORE
ACCOUNTABILITY. AND THAT'S WHAT
I HOPE THIS BILL PROVIDES. I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
EYE VOTE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AB 2045
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER HOOVER. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY I, MCCARTY I ALANIS
ALANIS I LAKI LAKI I NGUYEN
NGUYEN I REYES TING TING I
WILSON WILSON NOT VOTING ZIPPER.
I'M SORRY. ZIPPER I THAT MEASURE
PASSES. THANK YOU
.
SO NEXT WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER
THREE, AB 1794. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
AND CHAIR MCCARTY. YES. THANK.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING, ME TO
PRESENT THIS MEASURE. AND, YES,
I WILL BE ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE
FORCED, THAT WERE FORCED UPON
ME, THIS IS AB 1794 IS PART OF
OUR PACKAGE, WHICH, YOU ARE PART
OF THIS MORNING IN OUR RESPONSE
TO RETAIL THEFT LAW IN
CALIFORNIA. THIS BRINGS A
BALANCED APPROACH, ALLOWING
BUSINESSES THAT ARE STRUGGLING
TO GRAPPLE WITH THE IMPACT OF
RETAIL THEFT, TO HAVE SOME TOOLS
TO ADDRESS THIS IN A SMART
MANNER. THIS BILL REALLY DOES
TWO THINGS. IT FOCUSES ON OUR
REPEAT OFFENDERS BY FOCUSING ON
AGGREGATION ISSUE TO FOCUS ON
INDIVIDUAL PERPETRATORS WHO
COMMIT CRIMES IN DIFFERENT
LOCATIONS AND WITH DIFFERENT
VICTIMS, IT ALSO STREAMLINES THE
PROCESS FOR REPORTING
SHOPLIFTING INCIDENTS DIRECTLY
TO PROSECUTORS FROM RETAILERS.
THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT WAS
MODELED HERE IN YOLO COUNTY, IN
MY ADJACENT COUNTY, AND THIS
WOULD CREATE A STATEWIDE MODEL
TO THAT AND ALLOW US TO MORE
EFFECTIVELY DEAL WITH RETAIL
THEFT IN A TIMELY MANNER,
THIRDLY, THIS FOCUSES ON A
MEASURE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP
EARLIER TODAY, WHICH IS THE
GRANT PROGRAM AND MAKES THOSE
RESOURCES AVAILABLE FOR THIS. WE
KNOW THIS IS AN ISSUE ACROSS OUR
STATE FOR LARGE RETAILERS AND
SMALL. YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THIS.
WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR LARGE
RETAILERS, CORPORATELY OWNED
RETAILERS, WALL STREET
COMPANIES. BUT WE ALSO HAVE MAIN
STREET COMPANIES YOU'RE GOING TO
HEAR FROM IN A SECOND. SMALL
BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT OUR
COMMUNITIES IN YOUR DISTRICT, IN
MY DISTRICT RIGHT HERE IN
SACRAMENTO, WE KNOW THAT
BUSINESSES ACROSS CALIFORNIA
HAVE REDUCED HOURS, ALTERED
THEIR STORE PRODUCT SELECTIONS
AND FORCED CLOSURES AND, AND,
AND WE MENTIONED EARLIER,
SOMETIMES THESE LOCATION HAVE
DESERTS BECAUSE OF THAT, THESE
IMPACTS AFFECT ALL OF US
CONSUMERS, BUSINESSES IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A WHOLE,
BUT WITH US TODAY IS A MEASURE
THAT WE THINK WILL ADEQUATELY
ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AS PART OF A
LARGER GLOBAL SOLUTION. I WITH
ME TODAY IS A SMALL BUSINESS
OWNER FROM THE NATOMAS AREA, MR.
JAZZ HUDNELL. OH, EXCUSE ME.
HELLO MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JAZZ
HANDEL. I OWN A COUPLE OF
BUSINESSES LIKE LIQUOR STORE AND
MOUNTAIN MIKE'S PIZZA IN NATOMAS
. AND SINCE, COVID, EVERYBODY
KNOWS IT CHANGED EVERYTHING.
AND, ESPECIALLY THE THEFT. WHICH
HAS BEEN HAPPENING AT OUR STORES
, IT HAS BEEN A REPEAT. THE
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN THE SAME.
PEOPLE ARE COMING AND DOING THE
REPEAT THEFT. AND, IT'S NOT ONLY
NOW AT THE LIKE A RETAIL STORE
OR LIQUOR STORE, IT STARTED AT
MY MOUNTAIN MIKE'S PIZZA ALSO.
SO PEOPLE SOMETIMES THEY ORDER
AND THEY SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING
TO COME AND PAY CASH AND THEY
ORDER LIKE FIVE, SIX PIZZAS AND
THEY SNATCH AND THEY WALK OUT.
SO SO EARLIER I HAVE SEEN THIS
AT THE LIQUOR STORES OR THE GAS
STATIONS, BUT NOW I'M SEEING
THIS HAPPENING AT THE PIZZA
PLACES, RESTAURANTS NOW. AND,
THE MAIN, THING IN THIS IS IT'S
NOT AFFECTING US FINANCIALLY.
IT'S AFFECTING EVERYBODY OVER
THERE. THE, THE WHEN THE
SHOPLIFTER COMES. RIGHT, AND
THEY ASK FOR, LIKE, A EXPENSIVE,
WINE BOTTLES OR WHISKEYS OR
WHATEVER, IS IT SO THEY COME AND
THEY LOOK AT IT AND THEY JUST
SNATCH FROM OUR EMPLOYEES HANDS
AND THEY RUN AWAY. OUR EMPLOYEES
ARE SO WORRIED NOW, AND THEY ARE
SO AFRAID THAT WE HAVE TO HIRE
AN ADDITIONAL SECURITY GUARDS
OVER THERE. SO NOW WE IF YOU
COME AT OUR, MY STORE IN NATOMAS
AND TRUCKS, EL CAMINO AND
DREXEL, WE HIRED WITH OUR WITH
THE HELP OF OUR LANDLORD, WE
HIRED A SECURITY COMPANY, WHICH
IS AN EXTRA EXPENSE FOR US,
WHICH IS REALLY HARD TO AFFORD.
AND NOT EVERY RETAIL GUY CAN
AFFORD THAT. THERE ARE, WE HAVE
TO AFFORD IT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO
RUN THE BUSINESS. OTHERWISE
WE'RE GOING TO SHUT IT DOWN. AND
IF SOMEBODY IS IN WANT TO BUY A
LIQUOR BUSINESS OR SOMETHING,
IT'S A LOT OF THEM ARE COMING ON
SALE BECAUSE OF THIS THING,
SECOND THING IS, FAMILIES
STOPPED COMING OVER THERE. THE
REASON WHEN THERE IS A
SHOPLIFTING HAPPENS. THOSE GUYS
COMES IN LIKE 2 OR 3 PEOPLE AT A
TIME. LIKE TOGETHER. AND IF OUR
EMPLOYEES TRY TO STOP THEM, THEY
THREAT THEM. THEY YELL AT OUR
EMPLOYEES. AND, THE THEN IT
AFFECTS THE OTHER CUSTOMERS AND
WE DON'T SEE ANY KIDS COMING IN
NOW AT THE STORES. THAT'S THAT'S
THE BIGGEST REASON WE'VE SEEN,
LESS NUMBER OF FEMALE, CUSTOMERS
. THAT'S SAME, SAME REASON
BECAUSE THEY IT'S AN UNPLEASANT
SITUATION HAPPENS OVER THERE,
THE FINANCIAL IS A BIG LOSS TO
US. AND, THE BIGGEST LOSS IS THE
THREAT. AND WHEN WE CALL, WHEN
WE SAY LIKE, I HEARD SOMEBODY
WAS SAYING LIKE, IT'S A DECREASE
IN THE SHOPLIFTING. NO, IT IS
NOT DECREASE. THERE'S NO
DECREASE IN THE SHOPLIFTING.
PEOPLE LIKE US, THEY STOP
REPORTING NOW BECAUSE WHEN WE
REPORT TO THE POLICE STATION,
THE POLICE, POLICE DEPARTMENT,
POLICE DEPARTMENT DOESN'T SHOW
UP BECAUSE THEY CANNOT EVEN DO
ANYTHING. SO THAT IS THE THING.
LIKE IT'S, SHOPLIFTING DOESN'T
DIDN'T DECREASE, IT INCREASED.
SO I WILL SERIOUSLY REQUEST YOU
GUYS TO SAY YES TO THIS BILL SO
THAT, OUR, SMALL RETAILERS CAN
BE TAKEN, LIKE, YOU GUYS CAN
HELP US. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
YOU STILL HAVE ANOTHER HALF A
MINUTE IF YOU WANT. IF ANYBODY
ELSE WANTS TO. OKAY ANYONE ELSE
IN SUPPORT, PLEASE COME UP. GIVE
YOUR NAME AND ASSOCIATION AND
YOUR CHAIR MEMBERS JONATHAN
FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, SUPPORT RYAN
LANE ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
DANIEL CONWAY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA GROCERS ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION. THE OTHER
DSA'S IN SUPPORT CAN STAND UP
THE CALIFORNIA NEW CAR DEALERS
IN SUPPORT. THANKS NORMALLY, I
WOULDN'T BE HERE DOING THIS IN
MY INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, BUT MY
SO IS A FORMER DEPUTY D.A. IN
SAN FRANCISCO. I JUST NEED YOUR
NAME, ERWIN NOWAK. YOU KNOW ME?
JUST NEED SUPPORT OR NOT. THANK
YOU. BECAUSE OF THE, YOLO THING
GOING STATEWIDE. THANK YOU. SIR
JELENA. BORIS, ON BEHALF OF THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, DANIEL
SANCHEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE CHIEF
PROBATION OFFICERS OF CALIFORNIA
AND SUPPORT, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ANYBODY ELSE IN SUPPORT?
OKAY. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION,
PLEASE COME UP TO THE TABLE.
DO YOU WANT TO JUST COME UP TO
THE MIC? MIKE WOULD BE OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, VERA. INSTITUTE
OF JUSTICE. CLAIRE SIMONICH.
WE'VE APPRECIATED ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AUTHOR ON
THIS BILL. WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH
THE BILL AS WRITTEN, BUT
APPRECIATE ENGAGING WITH ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN OPPOSITION?
SEEING NONE. COMMITTEE MR.
ZIPPER, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR. I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW,
ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE OF RETAIL
THEFT HAS BEEN ONE OF HIS
PASSIONS, AND HE'S BEEN MEETING
WITH ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS, THE
EXPANSION OF THIS CAL FAST PASS
PROGRAM, I THINK IS SOMETHING
THAT'S REALLY SIGNIFICANT, IT
REALLY GIVES FOLKS AN ABILITY TO
GO DIRECTLY TO THE DA'S AND MAKE
SURE THAT DA'S ARE TRACKING,
HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED
TO UNDERSTAND, WHEN WE'VE GOT,
YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE THEFTS
HAPPENING AND WHERE THEY'RE
CONCENTRATED. AND I JUST THINK
IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
DEVELOPMENT. SO I JUST WANT TO
THANK THE AUTHOR. OBVIOUSLY,
HE'S STRONGLY SUPPORTING THE
BILL. SO MR. NGUYEN, THANK YOU,
SIR. I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. AND THANK YOU FOR
COMING OUT HERE AND SHARING YOUR
STORY. I KNOW THAT TAKES A LOT
OF COURAGE AND YOU DID IT REALLY
WELL. AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE
THINGS YOU TALKED ABOUT IS THAT
NOT A LOT OF BUSINESSES ARE ABLE
TO, PUT THE EXTRA FUNDS OUT TO
BE ABLE TO PROTECT THEIR
EMPLOYEES AND THEIR STAFF. AND,
AND YOU DO THAT BECAUSE YOU CARE
ABOUT THEM. AND SO I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT HERE
FOR SPEAKING. AND, I'D BE MORE
THAN HAPPY TO MOVE THIS BILL
FORWARD, SUPPORT THIS BILL. AND,
CONTINUE TO SPEAK OUT AND WORK
WITH US, WORK WITH YOUR LOCAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND, AND YOUR
REPRESENTATIVE AS WELL TOO. SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU
SIR. MR. LACKEY. YEAH, I'D LIKE
TO FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATE
THE AUTHOR TO FOR AT LEAST
MOMENTARILY CONVERTING TO PUBLIC
SAFETY. I'M VERY THANKFUL TO SEE
THIS HAPPEN. AND I WANT TO ASK
TO BE A COAUTHOR. THAT'S IT.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I
ALSO WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL, SIR, ALSO FOR YOU,
PROBABLY COULD HAVE USED YOU
EARLIER. ALSO ON YOUR STATEMENTS
AS WELL, BUT I THINK YOU'VE SAID
WHAT ALL OF US ALREADY KNOW, FOR
A SENSE ON HOW RETAIL THEFT IS
AFFECTING BUSINESSES. SO THANK
YOU FOR COMING DOWN HERE, I
DON'T KNOW IF I'M A COAUTHOR ON
THIS, BUT IF I'M NOT, COULD YOU
PLEASE MAKE ME A COAUTHOR AS
WELL? AND WITH THAT, YOU MAY
CLOSE COAUTHORS FOR EVERYBODY.
YES YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT
WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS, THIS
MORNING OR ONE OF THE, BILLS
EARLIER TODAY, WE DIDN'T GET
INTO THIS OVERNIGHT, AND IT'S
NOT GOING TO TAKE ONE MAGICAL
SOLUTION TO GET OUT OF THIS
OVERNIGHT. IT'S AN ISSUE THAT
IMPACTS ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES,
AND WE SEE IT. PEOPLE SEE IT
WITH OUR OWN TWO EYES WHERE THEY
FEEL IT WHEN THEY'RE, YOU KNOW,
BUYING THEIR GOODS, YOU KNOW,
PAYING THEIR BILLS, OR THEY SEE
IT WHEN THEIR, YOU KNOW,
PRODUCTS ARE LOCKED UP. THERE IS
AN IMPACT ACROSS CALIFORNIA. AND
WE NEED TO BE SMART IN OUR
RESPONSE. AND WE THINK THIS IS
JUST THAT, A PIECE OF THE
PUZZLE, FOCUSING IN THIS ABSENT
PIECE OF THE AGGREGATING THESE
ACTS FOR MULTIPLE EVENTS,
MULTIPLE VENUES, MULTIPLE
VICTIMS, AND MAKING IT EASIER TO
USE THAT TOOL, BUT ALSO LOOKING
AT TOOLS WHERE OUR RETAILERS CAN
GO DIRECTLY TO OUR DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS TO MAKE THAT MORE
SEAMLESS AS WELL, SO WITH THAT,
THANK YOU FOR THE CONVERSATION
AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU. TAKE A ROLL,
PLEASE. ON AB 1794 BY MEMBER
MCCARTHY, THE MOTION IS TO PASS,
AS AMENDED, TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
MCCARTY. MCCARTY I ALANIS I
ALANIS I LAKI LAKI I NGUYEN
NGUYEN I REYES TING TING I
WILSON WILSON I ZUBIR ZIPPER I
THAT MEASURE PASSES. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT, MR.
ZIPPER, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET
ON TO YOU
.
YEAH. ITEM 25 AB 2943. MR.
ZIPPER, YOU HAVE IT. GREAT THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, I'LL START BY ACCEPTING
THE COMMITTEE'S PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS AND WANTED TO EXPRESS
THAT I'M DEEPLY GRATEFUL FOR THE
ONGOING ENGAGEMENT OF THE
COMMITTEE CHAIR. THE COMMITTEE
AND STAFF AS WE GO FORWARD WITH
REFINING THREE KEY PIECES TO BE
ADDED AS SOON AS WE FINALIZE THE
LANGUAGE AND FINALIZE, OUR
NEGOTIATIONS WITH VARIOUS
STAKEHOLDERS, I'M PROUD TO SERVE
AS THE JOINT AUTHOR, ALONG WITH
SPEAKER RIVAS, FOR THIS BILL. AB
2943, THE CALIFORNIA RETAIL
THEFT REDUCTION ACT. AS YOU MAY
HAVE HEARD THIS MORNING, THIS
BILL IS ONE OF THE IS ONE OF THE
COMPONENTS OF A BROADER
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY AND
PACKAGE OF BILLS THAT ADVANCES
BALANCED, EFFECTIVE AND
MEANINGFUL SOLUTIONS TO RETAIL
CRIME AND PRESERVES CRIMINAL
JUSTICE REFORMS THAT HAVE BEEN
EFFECTIVE AT KEEPING OUR
COMMUNITIES SAFE. WE HAVE WORKED
AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK HAND
IN HAND WITH THE SPEAKER'S
POLICY STAFF, THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE, THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
AND ALL THE KEY STAKEHOLDERS
FROM ALL PERSPECTIVES TO DEVELOP
THESE PROPOSALS, IT'S IMPORTANT
TO LAY OUT THE KEY ELEMENTS OF
THE BILL, EACH OF WHICH CAN BE
ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE AND
SIGNED INTO LAW WITHOUT VOTER
APPROVAL. FIRST, AB 2943 PLACES
GREAT EMPHASIS ON STOPPING
ORGANIZED CRIME RINGS THAT ARE
HARMING OUR COMMUNITIES BY
CREATING A NEW CRIME TARGETING
SERIAL RETAIL THIEVES FOR
EXAMPLE. THOSE ARE ENGAGED IN
REPEATED, SPECIFIED CONDUCT OR
WHO POSSESS A QUANTITY OF GOODS
INCONSISTENT WITH PERSONAL USE.
THIS AND OTHER COMPONENTS ARE,
ADVANCE COMPONENTS OF THE BILL.
ADVANCE KEY REPRESENTATIVE KEY
RECOMMENDATIONS RELEASED BY THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE EARLIER THIS
YEAR. AND I WANT TO THANK THE
GOVERNOR FOR HIS ENGAGEMENT AND
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE, AND
ALSO FOR THE ENGAGEMENT OF HIS
STAFF. THIS BILL ALSO MORE
SPECIFICALLY DEFINES HOW THE
VALUE OF THEFTS FROM DIFFERENT
VICTIMS CAN BE AGGREGATED TO
CHARGE GRAND THEFT, NOTABLY, THE
BILL CLARIFIES THE LAW THAT THE
INTENT STANDARD CAN BE MET BY
EVIDENCE THAT THE ACTS INVOLVED
THE SAME DEFENDANTS ARE
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR AND OCCUR
WITHIN A 60 DAY PERIOD. AB 2943
ALSO EXPANDS THE TOOLS FOR
POLICE TO ARREST, FOR
SHOPLIFTING, AND TO KEEP REPEAT
OFFENDERS AND THOSE COMMITTING
ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME IN
CUSTODY. AND SIGNIFICANTLY, THIS
BILL HELPS ADDRESS THE ROOT
CAUSE OF THEFT BY EXPANDING THE
USE OF DIVERSION AND
REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS OFFERING
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EARLY
DISCHARGE IF THE PROGRAM IS
COMPLETED. AS YOU KNOW, THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS IS LONG AND
THIS BILL WILL CONTINUE TO
EVOLVE. WE'RE STILL FINALIZING
LANGUAGE ON THREE ADDITIONAL
ELEMENTS TO BE ADDED TO THE
RETAIL THEFT REDUCTION ACT, AND
WILL BE CONFERRING WITH THE
RETAIL, WITH THE WITH YOUR
COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE CHAIR OF
THIS COMMITTEE AS WE DO THAT,
THESE ARE PROVISIONS THAT WOULD
PROTECT BUSINESSES FROM HAVING
NUISANCE ACTIONS BROUGHT AGAINST
THEM SIMPLY FOR REPORTING RETAIL
CRIME, TO ADDRESSING THE ROLE OF
ONLINE MARKETPLACES, AND THREE,
INCREASING DATA TRANSPARENCY
FROM LARGE RETAILERS. AGAIN I
WANT TO THANK THE SPEAKER, THE
GOVERNOR, THE CHAIR, THE MEMBERS
AND STAFF OF THIS COMMITTEE, THE
MEMBERS OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE
AND ALL OUR STAKEHOLDERS FOR
THEIR STRONG ENGAGEMENT OVER THE
PAST MANY MONTHS AND FOR
INVESTING IN DEVELOPING THIS
COMPREHENSIVE SET OF PROPOSALS
THAT WILL HAVE A MEANINGFUL
IMPACT ON RETAIL CRIME. I ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME WITH ME TODAY
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT AND TO
ASSIST WITH TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
OUR RACHEL MITCHELL AND
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
AND MICHAEL REDDING, SPECIAL
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL AT
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE. RACHEL THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT, I AM AGAIN. HELLO RACHEL
MICHELIN, PRESIDENT OF THE
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION, IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2943.
THIS BILL DEMONSTRATES THAT THE
CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY HAS LISTENED
TO RETAILERS LARGE AND SMALL, IN
ADDITION TO CALIFORNIANS ACROSS
THE STATE, AND SHOWS A SERIOUS
APPROACH TO ADDRESSING RETAIL
THEFT THAT IS PLAGUING OUR
COMMUNITIES AND PUTTING OUR
EMPLOYEES AND STORES AT RISK.
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN
THE CONVERSATION AROUND RETAIL
THEFT THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN FOR
SEVERAL YEARS IN THIS COMMITTEE.
THIS COMPREHENSIVE SET OF
PROPOSALS BUILDS ON A NUMBER OF
OTHER LEGISLATIVE BILLS AS PART
OF A PACKAGE THAT BRINGS
MEANINGFUL IMPACTS ON STOPPING
THE GROWING THREAT OF RETAIL
CRIME AND ENSURES OUR STORES ARE
SAFE FROM REPEAT CRIMINAL
ACTIVITIES. OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE A
SAFE PLACE TO WORK, AND OUR
CUSTOMERS CAN SHOP FREE FROM
WITNESSING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR
AROUND THEM. THIS BILL ADDRESSES
MANY OF THE ISSUES THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
HAS ADVOCATED FOR IN THE PAST,
INCLUDING PROVIDING CONSEQUENCES
FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS IN THE
CREATION OF A NEW FELONY FOR NOT
ONLY SERIAL SHOPLIFTING, BUT
ALSO IF SOMEONE POSSESSES
PROPERTY THAT WAS STOLEN FROM A
RETAIL BUSINESS, WHETHER OR NOT
THEY COMMITTED THE ACT OF
STEALING THE PROPERTY
THEMSELVES. WHILE WE APPRECIATE
THE ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE CLARITY
ON THE ABILITY TO AGGREGATE UP
TO THE $950 THRESHOLD, WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
AUTHORS TO FURTHER DEFINE THE
ISSUE OF AGGREGATE THÀNH, AS WE
BELIEVE THAT IS A KEY POINT THAT
MUST BE ADDRESSED TO ENSURE
REPEAT OFFENDERS ARE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR CRIMINAL
ACTIVITY AND ALSO SERVES AS A
DETERRENT FOR INDIVIDUALS TO NOT
COMMIT RETAIL THEFT IN THE FIRST
PLACE. AB 2943 ALSO PROVIDES
TOOLS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
MAKE ARRESTS FOR MISDEMEANOR
SHOPLIFTING, EVEN IF THE OFFICER
OBTAINS. WHEN THE OFFICER
OBTAINS A SWORN WITNESS
STATEMENT FROM A PERSON WHO
WITNESSED THE ALLEGED VIOLATION,
OR THE OFFICER OBSERVED VIDEO
FOOTAGE SHOWING THE PERSON TO BE
ARRESTED COMMITTING THE ALLEGED
CRIME, THE ARREST CAN BE MADE
EVEN IF THE OFFENSE WAS NOT
COMMITTED IN THE OFFICER'S
PRESENCE. IN ADDITION TO
INCREASING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
SERIAL RETAIL THEFT, THIS BILL
EXPANDS ON THE PARTICIPATION IN
COLLABORATIVE COURTS AND
REHABILITATION PROGRAMS,
SOMETHING THE RETAILERS
ASSOCIATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN
SUPPORTIVE OF. RETAIL THEFT IS A
REAL PROBLEM AND ONE THAT
IMPACTS BUSINESSES LARGE AND
SMALL IN EVERY COMMUNITY AND
EVERY CORNER OF THE STATE. AB
2943 ADVANCES A BALANCED,
MEANINGFUL SOLUTION TO
ADDRESSING MANY OF THE CONCERNS
FROM RETAILERS OF ALL SIZES
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA. WHILE
THERE'S STILL MORE WORK TO BE
DONE, THIS BILL IS PART OF THE
OVERALL ASSEMBLY RETAIL THEFT
PACKAGE. IS LIGHT YEARS. FROM
THE CONVERSATIONS AROUND RETAIL
THEFT, THIS BODY WAS HAVING JUST
A FEW SHORT MONTHS AGO. I'M
ENCOURAGED BY THE WILLINGNESS OF
THIS BODY TO WORK ON REAL
REFORMS THAT WILL LEAD TO
GREATER SAFETY FOR OUR RETAIL
EMPLOYEES, EMPLOYEES, OUR
CUSTOMERS, AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS
WE OPERATE IN. FOR THOSE
REASONS, I REQUEST YOUR AYE VOTE
. AND GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
MICHAEL REDDING. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIR MCCARTY. HONORABLE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, MY NAME IS
MICHAEL REDDING. I'M A SPECIAL
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF AB 2943, FIRST, THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD LIKE TO
THANK SPEAKER RIVAS AND CHAIR OF
THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT, CHÁVEZ
FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP ON THIS
BILL, WHICH INCLUDES ELEMENTS OF
THE GOVERNOR'S FRAMEWORK TO
COMBAT ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS HONORED
TO SUPPORT THIS BILL, WHICH
GIVES LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
PROSECUTORS ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO
COMBAT ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME.
ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME IS NOT
JUST ABOUT LOSSES TO RETAILERS.
IT'S ABOUT WORKERS WHO HAVE A
RIGHT TO SAFETY. IT'S ABOUT
FAMILIES WHO DON'T NEED AN
ADDITIONAL THING TO WORRY ABOUT
ON THEIR TRIP TO THE STORE. AND
IT'S ABOUT SENDING A MESSAGE TO
OUR COMMUNITIES THAT
ACCOUNTABILITY MATTERS. AB 2943,
IF PASSED AND SIGNED, WILL BE
EFFECTIVE AT MOVING US CLOSER TO
THESE GOALS. IT CLARIFIES THE
TERMS OF AGGREGATION SO THAT
REPEAT OFFENDERS WILL BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE. IT CREATES A NEW
CRIME THAT AIMS TO TARGET THOSE
WHO PEDDLE STOLEN GOODS. IT
ALLOWS FOR ARRESTS AND
APPROPRIATE THEFT CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND AS DISCUSSED, IT EMPHASIZES
COLLABORATIVE COURTS AND
ADDRESSING ROOT CAUSES. IN
SHORT, IT WILL BE A VITAL TOOL
FOR THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND FOR PROSECUTORS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE. THANK YOU,
AND I WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. OTHERS IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE COME FORWARD. RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION,
CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC OFFICERS AND
ALL THE OTHER POS AND SUPPORT.
THANKS BRENDA BASS, CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN SUPPORT.
STEPHANIE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
OF SAN JOSE IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. DANIEL CONWAY, CALIFORNIA
GROCERS IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU
FOR ALL YOUR WORK, KEN. STAND
UP, CALIFORNIA NEW CAR DEALERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. TIFFANY
NGUYEN WITH SEIU CALIFORNIA. WE
ARE THIS CLOSE TO BEING IN
SUPPORT AND CONTINUED
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AUTHOR'S
OFFICE OVER THE ROLE OF SECURITY
OFFICERS. THANK YOU. JONATHAN
FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION SUPPORT
NATALIE BALES FOR THE CALIFORNIA
BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE IN SUPPORT
DANIELLE SANCHEZ WITH THE CHIEF
PROBATION OFFICERS OF
CALIFORNIA. PLEASED TO SUPPORT A
CONCEPT THE ISSUES AND LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT.
THANK YOU. OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CLAIRE SIMMONS
FROM VERA INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE.
WE'RE ENGAGING IN VERY FRUITFUL
AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS,
AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THOSE
CONVERSATIONS WITH WITH BOTH THE
SPEAKER AND THE AUTHOR. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING THEM. BUT
WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE BILL
AS WRITTEN. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. CARMEN NICOLE
COX, ON BEHALF OF ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION. SAME, SAME.
WE HAVE CONCERNS. LOOKING
FORWARD TO ADDRESSING THEM.
THANK ALICIA BENAVIDEZ FOR
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER
I'M GOING TO COMMUNICATE WITH
YOUR OFFICE OVER CONCERNS JUST
TO MITIGATE ANY IMMIGRATION
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. SELENA
VARGAS INITIATED JUSTICE ACTION
IN OPPOSITION HAS WRITTEN. THANK
YOU. AND OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MR. LACKEY,
JUST ASK TO BE A COAUTHOR. THANK
YOU. I THINK I'M ALREADY A
COAUTHOR, BUT THANKS AGAIN FOR
DOING THIS. MAKING THIS HAPPEN.
VERY PROUD OF YOU. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. DO WE DO WE HAVE A
MOTION A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WILSON, SECOND BY VICE
CHAIR ALANIZ. YES. JUST, I KNOW
THAT THE SPEAKER WAS GOING TO
PRESENT EARLIER TODAY AND HE
COULDN'T BE HERE, BUT, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS CERTAINLY A TOP ISSUE
THAT WE BROUGHT. AS MANY PEOPLE
TOGETHER ON AS WE COULD. AND AS
YOU NOTED, AS PART OF AN OVERALL
PACKAGE. AND IT'S EARLY IN THE
LEGISLATIVE YEAR. SO WE'RE
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH
OTHERS, WHICH I KNOW YOU STATED
AS WELL. AND THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. AND WITH
THAT, YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
YOUR ENGAGEMENT ON THIS BILL AND
ON THIS ISSUE. I WANT TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, I'LL JUST
REITERATE THAT THIS BILL IS
INTENDED TO ADVANCE BALANCED,
EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL
SOLUTIONS THAT ADDRESS RETAIL
CRIME AND PRESERVE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE REFORMS THAT HAVE BEEN
EFFECTIVE AT KEEPING OUR
COMMUNITIES SAFE. I'M COMMITTED
TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH FOLKS
THAT HAVE CONCERNS TODAY FROM
BOTH SIDES. AS WE REFINE THIS
BILL AND MOVE AHEAD. WIDESPREAD
RETAIL CRIME IS NOT ONLY BAD FOR
BUSINESS AND A SOURCE OF SHOPPER
INCONVENIENCE, IT'S AN ISSUE OF
SAFETY FOR WORKERS AND
BUSINESSES, AS WELL AS AN ISSUE
OF THE PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION OF
SAFETY. THIS BILL SETS TO
ORGANIZE CRIME RINGS. WE MEAN
BUSINESS, AND WE'RE GOING TO
GIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT THE TOOLS
THEY NEED TO SHUT YOU DOWN. TO
THOSE WHO ARE ENGAGING IN
SHOPLIFTING TO SURVIVE. SO THESE
PROPOSALS EMBRACE NEW TOOLS LIKE
ENHANCED SUPERVISION AND
DIVERSION PROGRAMS TO HELP
PEOPLE GET ON THEIR FEET TO
WORKERS, SMALL BUSINESSES,
RETAILERS AND THE PUBLIC. THIS
BILL DEMONSTRATES THAT EFFECTIVE
REFORM IS ON ITS WAY. I'M
GRATEFUL FOR THE SPEAKER'S
LEADERSHIP. I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE
CHAIR'S LEADERSHIP AND FOR THE
GOVERNOR'S STRONG LEADERSHIP ON
THIS ISSUE, FOR ALL THE
STAKEHOLDERS WHO ARE HERE TODAY,
AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE MEMBERS
OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE FOR
INVESTING IN THIS COMPREHENSIVE
AND MEANINGFUL SET OF PROPOSALS.
WITH THAT, I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON AB 2943 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ZUBER. THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED, TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. MCCARTY MCCARTY I
ALANIS I ALANIS, I LACKEY I
LACKEY I NGUYEN NGUYEN I REYES I
TING TING I WILSON WILSON I
ZEBRA I ZIPPER I THAT MEASURE
PASSES THAT CONCLUDES. I KNOW NO
THAT CONCLUDES THE. SORRY I GOT
IT I GOT IT. THAT CONCLUDES THE
SCHEDULED BILLS TO BE HEARD.
WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK THROUGH
THE LIST NOW WITH THE ON CALL
ITEMS AND ANY VOTE CHANGES OR
ADD ONS. THE CONSENT CALENDAR
HAS BEEN DISPENSED WITH. ITEM
NUMBER ONE AB 1772 WAS ON
CONSENT. ITEM TWO AB 1779 HAS
BEEN DISPENSED WITH. ITEM NUMBER
THREE AB 1794 REYES. OH, SHE'S
NOT HERE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AB
1802 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES
SAWYER. THIS MEASURE WAS ON
CALL. ALANIS ALANIS I REYES
WILSON. WILSON I ZUBIATE ZIPPER
I THAT MEASURE PASSES. ITEM
NUMBER FIVE AB 1831. WHEN I WHEN
I. ITEM NUMBER SIX AB 1845 HAS
BEEN DISPENSED WITH. ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN AB 1872, WHEN OAN NGUYEN
I ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, AB 1873 WAS
PULLED BY THE AUTHOR. ITEM
NUMBER NINE AB 1960 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER SORIA. THIS MEASURE WAS
ON CALL ALANIS ALANIS I NGUYEN
NGUYEN I REYES. ZIPPER ZIPPER I
THAT MEASURE NOW PASSES ITEM
NUMBER TEN AB 1962 WAS ON
CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER 11 AB 1972
WAS ON CONSENT. THAT ITEM NUMBER
12 AB 1990 WILSON WILSON I ZEBRA
ZIPPER I ITEM 13 AB 2042 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JACKSON. THIS
MEASURE WAS ON CALL REYES TING.
I'M SORRY 2042 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER JACKSON TING. I WILSON.
OKAY. SORRY ABOUT SORRY. WILSON
I ON 2042. THAT MEASURE NOW
PASSES ITEM 14 AB 2045. MISS
REYES. ITEM NUMBER 15 AB 2064 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES SAWYER.
THIS MEASURE WAS ON CALL REYES.
OF COURSE. I'LL COME BACK TO YOU
IN JUST A MOMENT. MISS REYES ON
2064, WILSON. WILSON, I ZIPPER.
BY. BY SUMMER JONES. ZIPPER. I
THIS MEASURE NOW PASSES. MISS
REYES, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ON
TO AB 2064 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
JONES? SAWYER REYES I ON 2064,
ITEM NUMBER 16, AB 2209 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER SANCHEZ NGUYEN.
WHEN NOT VOTING ON
RECONSIDERATION. ON
RECONSIDERATION, NOT VOTING ITEM
NUMBER 17, AB 2281 WAS ON
CONSENT. ITEM 18 WAS PULLED BY
THE AUTHOR. THAT WAS AB 2406
DAVIES. ITEM NUMBER 19, AB 2432
REYES REYES I WILSON ON. THIS
WAS BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER GABRIEL
REGARDING CORPORATIONS. WILSON I
ITEM 20 AB 2438 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER PETRIE-NORRIS. THIS
MEASURE WAS ON CALL. REYES.
THOÁT REYES NOT VOTING ZIPPER.
ZIPPER. NOT VOTING. THAT MEASURE
FAILS. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE
TALKING ABOUT US. THIS MEASURE
I. WE'LL WAIT. WE'LL GO BACK
OVER HERE. SHE NEVER ASKED FOR
IT. YEAH. WE'RE GOOD. YEAH. NO
I'M SORRY. WE'RE ON BRIAN 21.
YES ON ITEM NUMBER 21, AB 2531
WAS ON CONSENT. ITEM 22, AB 2625
WAS ON CONSENT. ITEM 23, AB 2645
WAS ON CONSENT. ITEM 24, AB 2681
WAS ON CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER 25,
AB 2790 WAS PULLED BY THE
AUTHOR. ITEM NUMBER 26 AB 2014
2814 EXCUSE ME BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LO REYES. THIS MEASURE
ALREADY PASSED. IT'S JUST FOR
ADD ONS. REYES I ON 2814 WILSON
I WILSON I ITEM 27 AB 2943 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ZIPPER REYES.
REYES I ITEM 28 AB 3027 WAS ON
CONSENT. ITEM 29 AB 3209 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN REYES
REYES I. WILSON I WILSON I
ZIPPER. ZIPPER I. I YES. ITEM
NUMBER 30 AB 3241 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER PACHECO WILSON I WILSON I
ZIPPER ZIPPER I. AND NOW YOU
WANT TO GO BACK TO ITEM 12 FOR
YOU. YES AND I BUT ONE THROUGH
12 FOR MISS REYES FROM THE
BEGINNING. GIVE ME ONE SECOND.
YEAH OH, YEAH. AND A VOTE CHANGE
NUMBER 12. OKAY ON AB 1990, MISS
CARRILLO'S BILL. MISS WILSON.
CHANGE FROM I VOTE CHANGE I TO
NOT VOTING. WE'RE ALL DONE. SO
UNLESS THERE'S A VOTE CHANGES.
YOU WANTED TO DO A VOTE CHANGE
AS WELL. FOR WHICH ITEM, I THINK
IT'S ITEM 24, 2014. WHAT ITEM
NUMBER? IS IT 26? IT'S ITEM 26.
AB 2814 ON AB 2814 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LOW SABAH NOT VOTING TO
I. NOT VOTING TO I. AND THEN I'M
GOING TO DO YOUR THE FIRST HALF.
YOU'RE GOOD. YEAH. ON ITEM
NUMBER 317 AB 1794 BY MEMBER
MCCARTHY REYES. REYES I ITEM
NUMBER FOUR AB 1802 BY SOME
MEMBER JONES, SAWYER REYES.
REYES I ITEM NUMBER FIVE WAS
JUST A SUSPENSE WITH ITEM NUMBER
SIX HAS BEEN DISPENSED WITH.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN HAS BEEN
DISPENSED WITH. ITEM EIGHT WAS
PULLED BY THE AUTHOR. ITEM
NUMBER NINE AB 1960 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER SORIA REYES. REYES I,
ITEM NUMBER TEN WAS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 11. ONES ON CONSENT. ITEM
NUMBER 12 HAS BEEN DISPENSED
WITH. ITEM NUMBER 13 AB 2042 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JACKSON REYES
REYES I. I ITEM NUMBER 14 AB
2045 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER HOOVER
REYES. REYES I. IT'S ANYTHING
ELSE? YES. SHE CAME IN. YEP.
THAT'S GOOD. WE'RE ALL SET.
THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE WILL
ADJOURN. OH, I DIDN'T SAY TODAY.
THIS IS OUR. EVERYONE'S LEFT THE
ROOM. BUT. BUT WE ARE HERE. WE
ARE HERE. THIS IS. THIS IS THE.
THIS IS THE FINAL HEARING FOR
OUR AMAZING, CHIEF LEAD
CONSULTANT FOR THE ASSEMBLY
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, WHO'S
BEEN HERE A DECADE, JUST ABOUT A
DECADE IN AND, GOING ON TO OTHER
PUBLIC SERVICE, OPPORTUNITIES TO
HELP WORK ON THESE SAME ISSUES.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO
THIS COMMITTEE AND TO THE
ASSEMBLY. SANDY URIBE, THANK
YOU. THANK YOU