GOOD AFTERNOON, WELCOME TO
ASSEMBLY, PRIVACY AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION COMMITTEE HEARING. I
KNOW, EVERYBODY HERE IS PROBABLY
HAPPY TO KNOW THE ORDER OF SOME
OF THESE BILLS, SO HOPEFULLY
THAT'S A BENEFIT TO ALL, TO
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE TIME TODAY,
BECAUSE WE ARE ON A TIGHT
TIMELINE, TESTIMONY WILL BE
LIMITED TO TWO WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT, TWO IN OPPOSITION, TWO
MINUTES EACH, WE WILL OBVIOUSLY
BE TAKING COMMENT FROM THOSE IN
THE ROOM. WE WILL BE STARTING
THE COMMITTEE AS, A
SUBCOMMITTEE. WE DO NOT YET HAVE
A QUORUM. AND WITH THAT, WE WILL
TURN TO THE FIRST BILL IN OUR
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS. AB
2829 PAPIN. WHEN YOU'RE READY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
THANK YOU TO THE STAFF FOR THEIR
HERCULEAN EFFORT WITH THIS BILL.
I REALLY APPRECIATE IT, SO I'M
HERE TODAY TO PRESENT AB 2829 OR
THE LIGHTS ACT, WHICH STANDS FOR
LONG TERME INVESTMENTS FOR KIDS.
EMOTIONAL SUPPORT. THE INTERNET
HAS COMPLETELY RESHAPED THE 21ST
CENTURY OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS,
THE ONLINE WORLD HAS GROWN
TREMENDOUSLY AND WITH IT, THE
PLATFORMS WHICH HAVE
DRAMATICALLY INCREASED OUR USE
OF TECH IN OUR EVERYDAY LIVES.
AS THE TECHNOLOGICAL WORLD HAS
GROWN, SO HAS OUR KNOWLEDGE THAT
THE MENTAL HEALTH AND THE USE OF
TECHNOLOGY ARE INEXTRICABLY
LINKED. THE DATA IS QUITE CLEAR
ON HOW DIGITAL CONSUMPTION IS
IMPACTING MENTAL HEALTH AMONGST
OUR YOUTH, CORRESPONDING WITH
THE RISE OF TECH, WE HAVE SEEN
INCREASING RATES OF ANXIETY,
DEPRESSION AND LONELINESS. THESE
MENTAL HEALTH CHALLENGES LEAD TO
EVERYTHING FROM DISORDERED
EATING TO SELF-HARM AND EVEN
SUICIDE. AND YET THE DEMAND FOR
SERVICES HAS RAPIDLY OUTPACED
SUPPLY, LEAVING FAMILIES WITHOUT
ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO OVERCOME
THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF
TECHNOLOGY. IN FACT, THERE HAS
BEEN REPORTING THAT IN THE NEXT
FIVE YEARS, THE DEMAND FOR
MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS WILL BE
40% MORE, 40% MORE THAN THOSE
AVAILABLE. THE LACK OF RESOURCES
IS DRIVEN PRIMARILY BY THE LACK
OF FUNDING AVAILABLE TO ADDRESS
THE CRISIS, WHICH HAS ONLY BEEN
MADE WORSE BY OUR CURRENT BUDGET
DEFICIT. SO WE HAVE THESE LARGE
COMPANIES WHO HAVE CAUSED THE
PROBLEM, BUT ARE NOT
CONTRIBUTING TO THE SOLUTION.
AND IN THE PROCESS, THEY HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO MAKE SUPERNORMAL
PROFITS. LOOKING AT THE FACTS
BEFORE ME, AS IT RELATED TO THE
CHALLENGES IN REGULATING CONTENT
AND THE HARM BEING CAUSED BY
TECH, I THINK THIS POLICY IS A
PRACTICAL COMPROMISE AND IT
PROVIDES A TREMENDOUS
OPPORTUNITY FOR CZECH TO BE A
PART OF THE SOLUTION. AB 2829
WILL IMPOSE A TAX OF 5% ON THE
ADVERTISING REVENUES GENERATED
IN CALIFORNIA BY COMPANIES THAT
GENERATE MORE THAN $100 MILLION
IN ANNUAL GROSS REVENUES, AND
DIRECT THOSE FUNDS TO YOUTH AND
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES. THIS
POLICY IS AKIN TO THE OTHER
SYNTAXES THAT WE'VE BEEN PUT IN
PLACE TO MITIGATE THE HARM
CAUSED BY THE PRODUCT, WHEN
PRODUCT RESTRICTION REALLY ISN'T
FEASIBLE. FOR DECADES, WE'VE
TAXED GOODS THAT IMPOSE GREATER
COSTS ON SOCIETY THAN THEIR
PRICE, REFLECTS THE SUPREME. THE
SUPREME COURT'S RECENT WAYFAIR
DECISION HIGHLIGHTS HOW A SMALL
STATE LIKE SOUTH DAKOTA COULD GO
ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT
TO EFFECT CHANGE AS IT RELATES
TO THE INTERNET, AND THAT
DECISION HAS OPENED THE DOORS
FOR THIS POLICY, AND THIS IDEA
MAY BE SO. WHILE THIS IDEA MAY
BE NEW AS IT RELATES TO TAXING
DIGITAL SERVICE SERVICES, IT'S
REALLY NOT NOVEL. MANY STATES IN
A BIPARTISAN FASHION, I MIGHT
ADD, HAVE HAD SIMILAR BILLS
INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED. WE
ARE NOT ALONE. CALIFORNIA IS NOT
THE FIRST. AS MUCH AS WE LIKE TO
BE. THE QUESTION I WANT TO LEAVE
YOU WITH, AS I CLOSE, IS SHOULD
TECH, GIVEN THE OUTSIZED ROLE
THAT THEY HAVE HAD IN THE
DETERIORATION OF THE MENTAL
HEALTH OF OUR KIDS, BE A PART OF
THE SOLUTION WITH ME TODAY. I AM
SO HONORED TO HAVE. VICTOR
OJAKIAN, FORMER PALO ALTO MAYOR
AND A MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCATE, AS
WELL AS FROM MY COUNTY, NANCY
MCGEE, WHO IS SUPERINTENDENT OF
THE WITHIN THE OFFICE OF
EDUCATION. SO WITH THAT, I'LL
TURN IT OVER TO MISTER OJAKIAN
AND THEN TO MISS MCGEE. AND
THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.
GREAT. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
SINCE I ONLY HAVE TWO MINUTES,
I'LL TALK QUICKLY. SO MY NAME IS
VICTOR OJAKIAN, AND I'VE BEEN
LABELED A SUICIDE PREVENTION
IST, WHO IS HERE REPRESENTING
ONLY MYSELF. THOUGH I'VE SERVED
ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
CALIFORNIA STATE SANTA CLARA
COUNTY AND LOCAL COMMITTEES AND
EFFORTS, SOME OF MY WORK IS, HAS
AND STILL INVOLVES YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH. I'VE ENCOUNTERED THE
ADVERSE EFFECT OF SOCIAL MEDIA
ON YOUTH, PARTICULARLY TEEN
SUICIDES. REMEMBER, I'M FROM THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO. WE'VE HAD TWO
TEEN SUICIDE CLUSTERS. I'VE
EXPERIENCED THAT ON SEVERAL
OCCASIONS. THERE'S AN ABUNDANCE
OF STUDIES GOING BACK MORE THAN
A DOZEN YEARS, CONNECTING
DIGITAL MEDIA USAGE AND YOUTH
MENTAL HEALTH. ADVERSE YOUTH
MENTAL HEALTH AND SUICIDALITY,
INCLUDING THE RECENTLY RELEASED
SURGEON GENERAL'S REPORT AND
WORK BY, THE AMERICAN
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION AND
SOME OTHER ARTICLES WHICH I LIST
IN MY TALK THAT I'LL GIVE YOU,
GOVERNMENT HAS HAD A LONG
STANDING OBLIGATION TO ENSURE
SAFETY. AS WITH REGULATIONS FOR
UNSAFE TOYS, TRANSPORTATION
MATTERS, AND MEDICATION, DIGITAL
MEDIA USAGE SHOULD SHOULD BE NO
DIFFERENT. COMPANIES HAVE SOME
CAPACITY TO ADDRESS YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH AND SUICIDE PREVENTION
ISSUES. I KNOW THAT FROM MY OWN
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, THE ONLY
QUESTION IS WILL THIS MATTER
CONTINUE TO BE IGNORED OR
DISMISSED, OR WILL IT BE
ADDRESSED? I COMMEND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER PAPPIN FOR TAKING ON THIS
ACTION. THE TIME FOR INACTION
AND APOLOGETIC TALK HAS PASSED.
IT'S TIME FOR SOLUTIONS AND AB
2829 PROVIDES THAT OPPORTUNITY.
THANK YOU AND I'LL TURN MY TALK
IN THIS REPORT INTO WHOEVER WILL
TAKE IT. OKAY. WE'RE GOOD TO
PARTY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME
IS NANCY MCGEE. I'M A 40 YEAR
EDUCATOR WHO HAS SERVED AS A
TEACHER AND DISTRICT AND COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR, ELECTED COUNTY
SUPERINTENDENT IN 2018. I'M HERE
TO URGE SUPPORT FOR AB 2829,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PAPIN'S PROPOSED
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD MAKE A
LONG TERME INVESTMENT IN THE
WELL-BEING OF YOUTH. MOST
CALIFORNIANS AGREE WE ARE
EXPERIENCING A YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS. OUR RECENT PUBLIC
POLICY INSTITUTE SURVEY SHOWED
81% OF ADULTS RESPONDED AS BEING
CONCERNED ABOUT STUDENTS MENTAL
HEALTH. THOSE SURVEYED CUT
ACROSS RACE, POLITICAL PARTY AND
FAMILY INCOME. THE US SURGEON
GENERAL, IN HIS 2021 ADVISORY
DECLARING A YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH
CRISIS, CITED NATIONAL SURVEYS
THAT SHOWED 1 IN 3 HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS AND HALF OF FEMALE
STUDENTS REPORTED PERSISTENT
FEELINGS OF SADNESS OR
HOPELESSNESS. THIS IS AN
INCREASE OF 40% FROM 2009. IN
2023, THE SURGEON GENERAL
FOLLOWED UP WITH A SECOND
ADVISORY ON THE EFFECTS OF
SOCIAL MEDIA ON YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH. HE NOTED AMPLE
INDICATORS THAT SOCIAL MEDIA
POSES A RISK OF HARM TO YOUTH.
THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER
THERE IS A YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH
CRISIS, BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO
DO ABOUT IT? AB 2829 PROVIDES A
FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTION TO A
SERIOUS PROBLEM THAT'S
CONSISTENT FUNDING OVER THE LONG
TERME. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT
YOUTH SERVING AGENCIES AND
SCHOOLS NEED TO TACKLE THE
CHALLENGE. THERE IS PRECEDENT.
PROP 56, A VOTER APPROVED IN
2016, PLACES AN ADDITIONAL $2
TAX ON CIGARETS. THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RECEIVES
15% OF THOSE REVENUES FOR
TOBACCO USE. PREVENTION
PROGRAMS. THE LIKES ACT CAN BE
THAT STORY OF SUCCESS FOR
ADDRESSING YOUTH MENTAL. THE
YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS.
TODAY, I STRONGLY URGE YOUR
SUPPORT FOR AB 2829, AND I THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME. OKAY. THANK
YOU. SPEAKERS AND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER, IT IS NOW TIME FOR
PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT. IS
THERE ANYBODY HERE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL THAT WISH TO SPEAK?
NORA LYNN, ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN
NOW IN SUPPORT. OKAY. IT IS NOW
TIME FOR OPPOSITION TESTIMONY
FOR THE BILL. PLEASE COME
FORWARD. ARE YOU OKAY? WHEN WE
HAVE TWO WITNESSES, ANYWAY.
MADAM CHAIR AND PRIVACY AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION COMMITTEE,
SIR, THIS IS FOR PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. ARE YOU
ONE OF THE PRIMARY WITNESSES?
I'D LIKE YOU TO. YEAH GOOD
AFTERNOON. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES
EACH, GOOD AFTERNOON, PETER
BLOCKER WITH THE CALIFORNIA
TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION. ON BEHALF
OF A BROAD COALITION IN
OPPOSITION TO AB 2829. FIRST,
I'D LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT
ALTHOUGH THE DISCUSSION ABOUT
THIS BILL HAS FOCUSED ON THE
LARGE COMPANIES THAT WILL PAY A
DIGITAL ADVERTISING TAX, THE
ECONOMIC BURDEN WILL SURELY FALL
ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND
CONSUMERS, BECAUSE THE TAX WILL
INCREASE COSTS THAT WILL BE
PASSED ON THROUGH HIGHER PRICES.
BUT THAT IS ONLY TRUE IF THIS
BILL SURVIVES THE INEVITABLE
LEGAL CHALLENGES IT WILL FACE.
AB 2829 IS NEARLY IDENTICAL TO
THE DIGITAL AD TAX PASSED IN
MARYLAND IN 2020, WHICH IS STILL
MIRED IN LITIGATION AS A RESULT
OF MULTIPLE LAWSUITS. THE SAME
LAWSUITS THAT THIS BILL WILL
FACE SHOULD HAVE BECOME LAW.
WITH SO MUCH LEGAL UNCERTAINTY,
WE DO NOT THINK THE LEGISLATURE
SHOULD BE CONSIDERING THE TAX
UNTIL THOSE ISSUES ARE RESOLVED.
AS MARYLAND IS EXPERIENCING,
LITIGATION CAN BE COSTLY AND IT
SHOULD BE A PRIORITY FOR THE
STATE TO AVOID THESE COSTS WHILE
EXPERIENCING A BUDGET DEFICIT.
AND THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS BILL
THAT ARE THE FOCUS OF LITIGATION
IN MARYLAND ARE SUBSTANTIAL. THE
TAX WOULD BE VULNERABLE TO LEGAL
CHALLENGES UNDER THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
AND EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF
THE US CONSTITUTION, AND AS THE
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS HIGHLIGHTS,
FOR RUNNING AFOUL OF THE
INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT, WHICH
BARS STATES FROM PASSING TAXES
THAT UNFAIRLY TARGET ONLINE
COMMERCE, THE TAX PROPOSED BY
THIS BILL IS DISCRIMINATORY AND
THEREFORE ILLEGAL UNDER THE
INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT,
BECAUSE ONLY ONLINE PLATFORMS
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE TAX.
WHILE TRADITIONAL FORMS OF
ADVERTISING, NAMELY BILLBOARDS
OR ADVERTISEMENTS PLACED IN
NEWSPAPERS, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD
NOT BE TAXED. AND THEN THERE ARE
THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGES
WITH THE TAX OF THIS KIND. AND
QUESTIONS LIKE HOW WOULD A
COMPANY COMPLY? HOW WOULD
REVENUE BE SOURCED? WHAT ARE THE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS? WHAT
ABOUT REFUNDS? SHOULD THERE BE A
LEGAL CHALLENGE? ANY GUIDANCE
NOT IN THE BILL WOULD LIKELY BE
TAKEN UP BY CDTFA, AND A
REGULATORY PROCESS WOULD BE TIME
CONSUMING AND COSTLY, AND
ESPECIALLY IF THE TAX IS
CHALLENGED AND DEEMED
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. IF YOU
WOULDN'T MIND, A COUPLE MORE
SECONDS, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND,
SO FINALLY, I'LL JUST CONCLUDE
BY SAYING THAT UNTIL THESE LEGAL
UNCERTAINTIES ARE, ARE
FINALIZED, WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU
URGE A NO VOTE ON THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS. ANNA LEE
AUGUSTINE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
FAMILY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA, A NONPROFIT
DEDICATED TO HELPING THE 1.4
MILLION FAMILY OWNED BUSINESSES
SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN
CALIFORNIA. WE ECHO THE CONCERNS
RAISED BY MY COLLEAGUE AND ARE
GREATLY CONCERNED WITH THE
EFFECTS THAT THIS COULD HAVE ON
BUSINESSES WHO RELY ON DIGITAL
ADVERTISING TO SPREAD WORD ABOUT
THEIR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES. WE
FEAR THIS WOULD INCREASE COSTS
ON SMALL BUSINESSES, NOT ONLY
THOSE EXCEEDING THE GLOBAL
REVENUE LIMIT, BUT THOSE BUYING
THOSE DIGITAL ADVERTISING SPOTS,
AS MANY FAMILY BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION MEMBERS RELY ON
DIGITAL ADVERTISING AS AN
EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY
CONSCIOUS METHOD OF ADVERTISING
TO THEIR COMMUNITIES, AND RISING
COSTS IN ONE MORE AREA OF
OPERATION COULD BE DETRIMENTAL
OR RAISE PRICES FOR CONSUMERS,
WHICH IS SOMETHING MANY OF OUR
MEMBERS TAKE GREAT EFFORTS NOT
TO DO. WE SINCERELY APPRECIATE
THE AUTHOR'S EFFORTS TO MITIGATE
THE MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS FACED
BY OUR YOUTH. HOWEVER, WE DO
HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE EFFECTS
ON OUR FAMILY OWNED BUSINESSES
AND RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, ARE THERE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION,
PLEASE, COME UP HERE, STATE YOUR
NAME AND AFFILIATION. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHRISTY
PIERCE, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF
OF THE AMERICAN ADVERTISING
FEDERATION. BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY, AS AN ADVOCATE FOR
SMALL BUSINESSES WHOM I HELP
MARKET AND ADVERTISE. EXCUSE ME.
SORRY. WE'RE ONLY DOING A NAME
AND AFFILIATION NOW. SORRY ABOUT
THAT. CHRISTY PIERCE, THREE FOLD
COMMUNICATIONS. THANK YOU. RYAN.
ELAINE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
AND OPPOSITION, THANK YOU. MR.
CHAIR MEMBERS STEVE CARLSON FOR
CTIA WHERE THE TRADE ASSOCIATION
FOR THE WIRELESS INDUSTRY AND
THE ASSOCIATION OF NATIONAL
ADVERTISERS IN OPPOSITION. JASON
SCHMELTZER HERE ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET, IN OPPOSITION. ROANOKE
ON BEHALF OF CAL CHAMBER IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. FELIPE
FUENTES HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION. IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. I'M
HOPING FOR MORE DISTRACTIONS,
THIS, COMMITTEE HEARING. SO ARE
THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM. THANK
YOU, MR. WARD. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR, THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR
FOR INTRODUCING THIS BILL. IT IS
CERTAINLY, PAST TIME THAT I
THINK THAT WE KIND OF LOOK AT
REAL SUBSTANTIAL WAYS TO BE ABLE
TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE MENTAL
HEALTH NEEDS, LOOK, I THINK WHEN
WE'RE THINKING ABOUT TAX
QUESTIONS, IT'S NEVER EASY. IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO BE
DILIGENT AND THOUGHTFUL ON. AND
FOR ME, ONE THING THAT I ALWAYS
GO STRAIGHT TOWARDS IS YOU KNOW,
WHAT IS THE NEXUS HERE? AND ARE
WE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT IF
THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW
CONVERSATION AROUND A NEW TAX,
IS IT NECESSARILY CONNECTED TO
THE THING THAT WE'RE TAXING AND
THE THING THAT WE ARE WE ARE
TRYING TO BENEFIT AND IF I DIAL
BACK TEN OR ESPECIALLY 20 YEARS
AGO, WE DIDN'T HAVE DIGITAL
ADVERTISING, CERTAINLY NOWHERE
TO THE DEGREE THAT WE HAVE
TODAY. WE DIDN'T HAVE DIGITAL.
I'M SORRY, BECAUSE I GOT THE
CONSTRUCTION NOISE BEHIND US. WE
DIDN'T HAVE DIGITAL ADVERTISING,
RIGHT. SO THERE'S A LOT OF NEW
REVENUE OPPORTUNITY. WE'VE TAKEN
ADVANTAGE OF IT PROBABLY IN OUR
OWN CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES THAT
WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOME
MESSAGING OUT THERE. AND SO WE
KNOW THAT THIS IS A POPULAR
SOURCE OF ACTIVITY TO BE ABLE TO
PUT OUT THERE, AND THERE'S A LOT
OF REVENUE GOING INTO IT, BUT WE
ALSO KNOW THERE IS A VERY STRONG
AND GROWING LINK BETWEEN SOCIAL
MEDIA ACTIVITY AND THE MENTAL
HEALTH CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE
OUT THERE, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR
YOUTH. AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO
DO ABOUT THAT? MONEY'S BEING
GENERAL FUNDS BEING TIGHT THAT
THEY ARE RIGHT NOW. I APPLAUD
YOU FOR TRYING TO THINK ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT IS NEXUS DRIVEN
AND TRYING TO MAKE THAT
CONNECTION, SO FOR THOSE
REASONS, I SEE AN
APPROPRIATENESS HERE THAT I TAKE
VERY SERIOUSLY SOME OF THE
OPPOSITION'S ARGUMENTS THAT
SOMEHOW THIS IS MIGHT HURT
BUSINESS ACTIVITY OR THAT THIS
IS GOING TO STYMIE OR FALL ON,
CHALLENGES FOR THE CONSUMERS.
BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO MEASURE
WHAT THE COSTS ARE FOR A LOT OF
SOCIAL MEDIA ACTIVITY, NEW
ACTIVITY THAT'S OUT THERE, BEING
BORN ON SOCIETY, BEING BORN ON
OUR YOUTH, RIGHT. AND BALANCING
THOSE TWO. I THINK IT'S AN
APPROPRIATE QUESTION TO BE ABLE
TO PUT FORWARD, AS YOU HAVE
DONE, AND TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
TO WORK ON SOME OF THE TECHNICAL
DETAIL, WHETHER IT'S THOSE
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS THAT
WE'RE STUDYING CLOSELY OR OTHER
FACTORS THAT COULD GO INTO A
PROPOSAL. SO IT'S A NEW SPACE,
BUT WE ARE IN A NEW TIME WITH A
NEW PRODUCT AND A NEW, ISSUE
THAT WE'RE GRAPPLING WITH RIGHT
NOW. AND YOU'RE TRYING TO LINK
THE TWO, SO I WOULD LOVE TO BE
ABLE TO SEE THIS CONTINUE. AND
I'M VERY WHEN I THINK THE TIME
IS RIGHT. PROUD TO SUPPORT THE
ITEM HERE TODAY. THANK YOU. SIR
THANK YOU, MR. LOWENTHAL. YEAH,
I JUST WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
SO MUCH FOR THIS VERY IMPORTANT
LEGISLATION. I, PRIOR TO JOINING
THE LEGISLATURE, I WAS THE
PRESIDENT OF A COMPANY THAT DID
100% OF ITS CUSTOMER ACQUISITION
VIA DIGITAL ADS, TO THE TUNE OF
HAVING 40 MILLION GLOBAL USERS
ON A MONTHLY BASIS. AND IT'S
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT FOR THOSE
THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE
ECOSYSTEM, THAT WE KNOW THAT
USERS ARE OUT THERE, FEEL
HEALTHY AND ARE HEALTHY, AND
THAT WE'RE CONTRIBUTING TO A
HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT. AND SO I
THINK IT'S I ENCOURAGE ALL OF
THOSE THAT SPOKE IN OPPOSITION
TO THIS BILL TO GET ON BOARD AND
BE PART OF THE SOLUTION AND
FIGURING OUT WHAT IS THE MOST
HEALTHY ECOSYSTEM THAT WE CAN
HAVE. I DON'T BEGRUDGE YOU FOR
BEING IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL
BECAUSE OF THE OPTICS OF WHAT
THIS CAN DO FINANCIALLY FOR
THOSE THAT ARE PAYING FOR AD
SPACE. AND SO I CERTAINLY
UNDERSTAND THOSE CONCERNS. BUT
ULTIMATELY, WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE
HEALTHY. WE WANT THEM TO BE
ONLINE CONSUMING MORE, DOING
MORE THINGS ONLINE. AND THEY CAN
ONLY DO THAT WHEN WE'RE NOT
CREATING A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
IN THE PROCESS, WHICH IS
UNDENIABLE. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. THANK
YOU. A GREAT THANK YOU. WOULD
YOU MIND IF WE JUST, ESTABLISH A
QUORUM BEFORE, WE GO ON TO THE
NEXT COMMENTS? OKAY. WELL,
YOU'RE HERE AND WHO KNOWS WHEN
PEOPLE ARE BOUNCING OUT. SO MÀ
KHN PATTERSON. PATTERSON HERE.
BRIAN. BRIAN HERE. DIXON HERE.
DIXON. HERE. HOOVER. IRWIN.
LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL. HERE.
ORTEGA. WARD WARD. HERE. WICKS.
WICKS. HERE. WILSON I'LL TAKE
THAT UP AFTER THIS ITEM. I'LL
TAKE UP THE CONSENT ITEM. BUT,
MISS DIXON AND I WISH THEY
FINISHED THAT WORK DURING PUBLIC
SAFETY. YEAH, I'LL TALK FAST, I
THANK YOU, ASSEMBLYWOMAN, FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
OBVIOUSLY, IT'S AN UNDERSTOOD
NEED IN THE COUNTRY IS NOT ONLY
CALIFORNIA FOR A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS, THE VOTERS JUST
PASSED, NARROWLY PASSED, ONE
THAT PROVIDES SIGNIFICANT FUNDS
FOR MENTAL HEALTH, DO YOU KNOW
IF YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS
FOR YOUTH ARE INCLUDED IN THAT?
IT JUST I THINK IT GOES ONLY
UNTIL IT GOES 18 TO 25. THAT'S
AS HIGH AS THAT WILL GO. SO WHEN
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AGES, SAY 13
TO 18, NOT COVERED BY PROP ONE,
AND IT'S DEFINITELY NOT COVERED
BY THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND
THEN THE COURSE OF LOOKING FOR
AVAILABLE SOURCES OF FUNDS TO
FUND THIS IMPORTANT PROGRAM DID
YOU COME UP WITH ANOTHER
ALTERNATIVE OTHER THAN TAXING
BUSINESS? NOT WITHSTANDING THE
FACT THAT THEY'RE LARGELY
CAPABLE, BUT, JUST ANOTHER TAX
ON BUSINESS OPERATING IN
CALIFORNIA. DID YOU COME UP WITH
ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVE SOURCE OF
REVENUE OR FUNDS? WELL, I FELT
THAT THIS ONE REALLY HAD A GOOD
NEXUS BETWEEN EVEN THOSE THAT
ARE, IN TECH THAT ARE WITH
ALGORITHMS AND WHATNOT ARE
REALLY ENCOURAGING OUR YOUTH TO
CONSTANTLY BE ONLINE. THOSE
ADDICTIVE QUALITIES ARE
UNDISPUTED. AND SO THEY MAKE
MOST OF THEIR, PROFITS THROUGH
ADVERTISING. SO FOR ME, I REALLY
TRIED TO GET TO BE THE CLOSEST
NEXUS BETWEEN HELPING THOSE THAT
ARE BEING HARMED BY THOSE THAT
ARE MAKING A LOT OF MONEY DOING
IT IN THE PROCESS. SO ONE
FURTHER, ONE FINAL QUESTION. SO
THE DIGITAL ADVERTISING, SO ALL
FORMS OF DIGITAL ADVERTISING NOT
JUST THOSE TARGETED TO YOUNG
PEOPLE, FOR EXAMPLE. THAT'S
RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT, AND THE
QUESTION CAME UP ABOUT, WELL,
ARE YOU DISCRIMINATING BETWEEN
PRINT ADVERTISING AND DIGITAL
ADVERTISING? AND THERE IS A
GROWING BODY OF THOUGHT THAT
THEY ARE APPLES AND ORANGES.
DIGITAL ADVERTISING IS TARGETED.
IT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
INTERACTIVE, INTERACTIVE USE, IF
YOU WILL PRINT ADS, YOU BUY
THEM, YOU HOPE SOMEBODY SEES
THEM. IT IS A FAR DIFFERENT
THING. SO THERE IS A GROWING
BODY THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE A
DISCRIMINATORY TAX WHEREBY
YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT TAXING ALL AD
WHICH IS CREATED EQUAL. THAT IS
NOT THE CASE ANYMORE. AND IT'S
EXTREMELY TARGETED, WHICH IS A
WHOLE DIFFERENT BALL GAME. WELL,
THEY ALL DIGITAL ADS SO
EVERYTHING TO ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION. YES, EVERYTHING THAT'S
ON YOUR CELL PHONE OR COMPUTER,
IPAD, EVERY DIGITAL AD, WHETHER
IT'S TARGETING YOUNG PEOPLE OR
NOT, CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT.
OKAY. BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY OF
REALLY DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN
WELL, I KNOW WE'VE DEALT WITH
THIS. I MEAN, JUST IN THE LAST
MEETING TRYING TO DEAL WITH
JUST, INTERNET PROGRAMS THAT
TARGET CHILDREN. IT'S VERY
DIFFICULT ANYWAY. WELL, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. OF COURSE, OF
COURSE. THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTIONS. OKAY. WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND, MR.
LOWENTHAL, ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
THOSE WERE SUCH WONDERFUL
QUESTIONS, ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND
QUITE APPROPRIATE. AND I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO, GIVE THE METAPHOR
OF THE EXAMPLE OF SMOKING, WHERE
WE HAVE A HEALTH CRISIS RELATED
TO SMOKING THAT WE ALL HAVE TO
PAY FOR BECAUSE OF THE DRAIN IS
ON OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM AS A
WHOLE. AND CREATING A TAX
ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE THAT ARE
USING CIGARETS. RIGHT. AND THE
CONSUMPTION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT
, LESSENS THE BURDEN ON THE REST
OF US, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO
REMIND ANYBODY IN HERE THAT THE
END USERS IN SOCIAL MEDIA ARE
THE ADVERTISERS. THE END USERS
ARE NOT US. WE'RE THE PRODUCT
THAT MR. CHAIR. YES, OF COURSE.
JUST A QUICK RESPONSE. I
APPRECIATE THAT. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LOWENTHAL AND THE CIGARET TAX. I
DON'T I'VE NEVER SMOKED, SO I DO
NOT KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE
TOTAL COST, BUT I KNOW IT'S
PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. I THINK IT'S
BEEN RISING OVER THE YEARS. I
DON'T THINK THAT EQUATES TO A 5%
TAX ON A $100 MILLION BUSINESSES
THAT DO SO. IS IT A TOTAL
REVENUES? NO. IT'S REVENUES IN
CALIFORNIA, 5% ON THE REVENUES
IN CALIFORNIA. BUT THE THRESHOLD
YOU MUST MEET IS $100 MILLION
WORLDWIDE. SO YOU GOT YOU GOT TO
BE ONE OF THE BIGGIES. NO, I
JUST THAT'S JUST A LOT OF MONEY.
OKAY. THEN THAT SPURS ANOTHER
QUESTION IN MY MIND, WE SAW THIS
JUST WITH THE VOTING RESULTS OF
PROP ONE. I UNDERSTAND THAT'S
NOT COVERED BY THIS, PEOPLE, MY
OPINION HAVE A LARGE QUESTION
OF. AND WE SEE THIS IN
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND THESE
OTHER STATE MANAGED PROGRAMS.
THERE'S JUST HOMELESSNESS THAT
JUST WAS CITED A WEEK AGO IN THE
STATE AUDIT THAT, THERE'S A LOT
OF MONEY, $23 BILLION SPENT, AND
WE STILL HAVE HOMELESSNESS, I
THINK IT'S MERITORIOUS TO
PROVIDE SOME SOURCE OF FUNDING
FOR MENTAL ILLNESS. I JUST AM
VERY TROUBLED OR CONCERNED BY
BRINGING IT TO THE STATE. AND
HOW WILL THAT MONEY BE SPENT FOR
CHILDREN? HOW WOULD THAT MONEY
BE USED YET TO BE WORKED OUT?
BUT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE
THAT IT GOES ONLY TOWARDS
CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH. I
KNOW, BUT THROUGH STATE
PROGRAMS. RIGHT. WE'LL HAVE TO
SEE. WE'LL HAVE TO SEE. I JUST
IT GIVES ME A PAUSE. BUT ANYWAY,
I APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. I DON'T
WANT IT TO GO INTO THE GENERAL
FUND. IN ANY EVENT, THAT'S NOT
WHERE IT'S NOT GOING INTO THE
GENERAL FUND. THAT'S NOT WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO GEAR IT TOWARDS.
OKAY, NOW, WE DO WANT TO SET
ASIDE, NO MATTER WHAT, FOR
CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH.
HOWEVER, THAT MECHANISM
ULTIMATELY PLAYS OUT. WE SHALL
SEE. OKAY. WELL, I APPRECIATE
YOUR INTENT. THE MOTIVES ARE
GOOD. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT
THE TAXATION AND THEN HOW THESE
PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO BE
IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. I JUST HONESTLY DO NOT
HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE STATE
MANAGING AND DISTRIBUTING THESE
FUNDS AND MANAGING MENTAL HEALTH
PROGRAMS, BUT THAT'S MY OWN
CONCERN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. GREAT. THANK YOU,
WELL, I DO APPRECIATE YOUR, YOU
KNOW, COMMITMENT TO THIS.
USUALLY WHEN MEMBERS,
PARTICULARLY FROM THE OTHER SIDE
OF THE AISLE, PULL ME ASIDE AND
WANT TO TALK TO ME ABOUT A BILL,
I KNOW IT'S AN ISSUE THAT THEY
TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY. I MEAN,
BECAUSE WE'RE ALL DOING A LOT OF
BILLS, RIGHT? AND YOU HAVE TO
PICK WHICH ONES YOU'RE GOING TO,
TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT ABOUT,
BECAUSE I HOPE YOU DON'T TALK TO
ME ON EVERY BILL, AND I WON'T
TALK TO YOU ON EVERY BILL I HAVE
EITHER, BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS
OBVIOUSLY A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE
TO YOU, I THINK, WHERE, YOU
KNOW, AND ALSO, THIS IMPACTS YOU
KNOW, I MEAN, THIS IS RIGHT IN
YOUR BACK YARD IN TERMS OF, YOU
KNOW, THE KIND OF, COMPANIES
THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT IS A PRETTY
BOLD, YOU KNOW, YOUR THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT TO YOU AND,
LAST WEEK, I SUPPORTED A BILL BY
ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE.
OBVIOUSLY, I, I, AND I STATED
THEN THAT I RECOGNIZE AND I
BELIEVE THAT, SOME OF THESE
PLATFORMS HAS SOME OF THESE
PLATFORMS ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE
CONTRIBUTORS, I THINK, TO OUR
MENTAL HEALTH, ISSUES THAT WE
HAVE HERE. AND I'VE BEEN HAVING
THESE DEBATES WITH, ONE OF MY
FRIENDS WHO WORKS AT A COMPANY,
AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, WHEN
I WAS A LITTLE KID AND I'D GET
HOME FROM SCHOOL, I WANTED TO
PLAY VIDEO GAMES, AND I WAS KIND
OF LIKE ADDICTED TO THEM, YOU
KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, SUPER MARIO
BROTHERS OR SOME LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT. BUT SO I THINK THAT
KIDS OR PEOPLE WERE OFTEN
ADDICTED TO THINGS THAT THAT
KEEP US ENGAGED IN WHATEVER
WE'RE DOING. YOU KNOW, I MEAN,
WHETHER IT'S VIDEO GAMES OR
WHETHER IT'S I GET HOME AND I'M
GONNA EAT SOME SNACKS OR
SOMETHING, BUT I THINK THE
DIFFERENCE NOW IS OBVIOUSLY
PEOPLE HAVE THESE IN THEIR
POCKETS, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO
GO HOME AND LOOK AT A SCREEN. SO
I RECOGNIZE WAS THE
CONTRIBUTION. I THINK ALSO THE
IT'S ON ALL DIGITAL REVENUE.
IT'S ON ALL REVENUE. RIGHT. NOT
JUST LIKE AND I UNDERSTAND IT'D
BE HARD TO DECIPHER, BUT YOU
KNOW, WHEN YOU BUY CIGARETS,
THAT'S OBVIOUSLY JUST ON WHO'S
EVER BUYING THEM OR PRESUMABLY
MOST PEOPLE ARE SMOKING THEM.
RIGHT. WHEN YOU'RE PLACING A
DIGITAL AD, UNLESS YOU'RE
TARGETING IT TO CHILDREN THEN.
BUT THE TAXES ON EVERYBODY, IS
THAT CORRECT? THIS TAX WOULD BE
ON ALL DIGITAL ADS, NOT JUST THE
YOUTH ONES OR. YES, ALL DIGITAL.
OKAY. YEAH. COMPANY GENERATES
REVENUE FROM. YEAH. AND NOT THAT
I FEEL LIKE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO
THAT WOULD BE HARD TO DISCERN IN
THE BILL YOU KNOW. BUT I THINK
THAT IS A THAT'S A PRETTY BIG,
BECAUSE A LOT OF THE MONEY ISN'T
GOING TO TARGET ADS TO CHILDREN,
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO SO, SO
THAT IS A CONCERN THAT I HAVE
WITH, WITH THIS LEGISLATION. AND
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION
IS. I WANT TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE.
I THINK AS MUCH THIS COMMITTEE,
I THINK, TAKES IT VERY
SERIOUSLY. YOU KNOW, CONCERNED
ABOUT THIS PATH. I'LL BE
INTERESTED TO SEE WHERE IT GOES
AND WHAT KIND OF NEGOTIATIONS
YOU GOT INTO. BUT I THINK RIGHT
NOW IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S PRETTY
BROAD AND, TO ATTRACT A
POPULATION OF THE PEOPLE GETTING
SOCIAL MEDIA ADS, YOU SEE WHAT
I'M SAYING? SO BUT IF THERE'S
ANYTHING ELSE, I MEAN, IF YOU
WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT, GREAT.
BUT ALSO YOU'RE WELCOME. WELCOME
TO CLOSE. YEAH SO WHILE AN AD
MAY OR MAY NOT BE TARGETED TO A
CHILD, NUMBER ONE, THE CHILD
COULD SEE IT. BUT NUMBER TWO,
THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT
THESE PLATFORMS ARE DOING THAT
DO DRAW IN CHILDREN. AND SO AND
THEN WE DEAL WITH THE EFFECTS OF
THOSE. SO I'M NOT SURE I WOULD
NECESSARILY SAY, WELL IT HAD TO
BE AN AD JUST FOCUSED ON
CHILDREN. PLUS YOU GET IN
TROUBLE BY DISCRIMINATING
AGAINST ONLINE ADS THAT WAY. I
SAY YOU'RE NOT DISCRIMINATING
AGAINST BETWEEN A PRINT AD AND A
DIGITAL AD, BUT IF YOU TRIED TO
DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN DIGITAL
ADS, YOU COULD GET INTO TROUBLE
WITH DISCRIMINATION. SO THAT'S
WHY IT WOULD BE HARD TO TAKE
THAT ON. BUT I DO I DO SEE WHERE
YOU'RE TRYING TO GO WITH IT, BUT
I THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO CLOSE. I WOULD SAY THAT WHILE
THERE MAY BE LITIGATION ABOUT
OTHER STATES TRYING TO DO THIS,
WE HAVE CO-EQUAL BRANCHES OF
GOVERNMENT. AND, I THINK
OFTENTIMES LEGISLATURES,
LEGISLATURES ARE ARE SORT OF
LABORATORIES FOR DEMOCRACY. AND
SO I THINK WE SHOULD GO FULL
SPEED OUT AND TRY TO MAKE THIS
WORK FOR OUR YOUTH, IT WILL TAKE
SOME WORK AND SOME FORTITUDE.
BUT I, I THINK THE MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE WHO I KNOW, YOU
GET IT, AND I KNOW THAT YOU GET
THAT WE'RE IN TROUBLE HERE, IT
IS, THE WORD CRISIS CANNOT BE
UNDERSCORED. AND I SIT HERE AS A
PARENT BECAUSE THIS IS NOT EASY.
BUT IT'S NOT EASY BEING FROM MY
DISTRICT, WHICH IS A TECH
DISTRICT, BUT I AM COMMITTED TO
DOING THIS, AND I DEFY ANY
PARENT IN THIS ROOM TO COME
FORWARD AND SAY THEY HAVEN'T
COME HOME OR THEIR KID IS HAVING
A LOUSY DAY BECAUSE OF WHAT
HAPPENED ON SOCIAL MEDIA. IT IS
A TOUGH, TOUGH ROAD AS A PARENT,
BUT IN ANY EVENT, I THINK WE CAN
DO IT. AND I THANK THE COMMITTEE
FOR ITS, DEDICATION TO GIVING ME
A SHOT. AND WE'LL CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATION. BUT WE OWE IT TO
OUR KIDS. AND, THAT'S ALL I
HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
WELL, THANKS, I JUST WANT TO SAY
CONGRATS TO EVERYBODY KEEPING
THOUGHTS TOGETHER BECAUSE I'M. I
CAN'T CONCENTRATE. BUT WITH
THAT, WE CAN, AND THIS IS OUR
IMPORTANT ISSUES, BY THE WAY.
AND I CAN'T EVEN KEEP MY MIND
RIGHTEOUS. IS THAT RIGHT? IS
THAT LOUD? NO. THE MEMBER
CLOSED. IS IT ABOUT THE BILL?
BECAUSE I THINK WE CLOSED
ALREADY. OH. ALL RIGHT. OKAY
OKAY, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND.
TAKING, ROLL. THAT'D BE GREAT.
OKAY ITEM NUMBER ONE, AB 2829 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PAPIN. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO REVENUE
AND TAXATION COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. NØ. BRIAN. HI, BRIAN.
AYE. DIXON DIXON. NØ. HOOVER.
IRWIN. LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL. AYE.
ORTEGA. WARD WARD. AYE. WICKS.
WICKS. AYE. WILSON OKAY. ALL
RIGHT. IT'S, 4 TO 2. WE'LL KEEP
THE ROLL OPEN AND, WE'LL REPORT
BACK LATER. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. GOOD. SAME LONG DRIVE. I
GREAT TO SEE YOU. OH, THERE HE
IS. THANKS FOR SUPPORTING MY
GREAT COLLEAGUES. BILL YEAH, WE
GO WAY BACK. WAY BACK, WAY BACK.
SO YOU GOT A GOOD, GOOD
ADVOCATE. YEAH NHÀ HØI DIDN'T
EVEN DIDN'T EVEN SEE YOU THERE.
HOW ARE YOU? WELL, GOOD. GOOD
SPEAK UP FOR YOU. STILL HERE.
APPRECIATE YOU. GOOD, GOOD.
GREAT TO SEE YOU, NANCY. GOOD TO
SEE YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE. GREAT TO SEE YOU
AGAIN. THANK YOU, APOLOGIES IN
ADVANCE FOR THE FEELING LIKE
YOU'RE GETTING A CAVITY FILLED.
SHE'S A PROUD. ARE WE SHARING
THIS. ALL RIGHT, WELL, MR.
BERMAN, AB 1831 AND GODSPEED
GETTING THROUGH THIS, WITH THIS
GOING ON. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO
BEGIN BY THANKING THE COMMITTEE
FOR YOUR SERVICE THIS AFTERNOON,
BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO FEEL
LIKE THE MOUTHFUL OF CAVITIES BY
THE END OF IT, I'D LIKE TO BEGIN
BY THANKING COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THEIR WORK ON THIS. ON THIS
IMPORTANT BILL. I WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE
ANALYSIS 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 MATERIAL,
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 REAL IMAGES OF CHILDREN
TAKEN FROM 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 BECAUSE OF CURRENT
LOOPHOLES IN OUR LAWS. THIS IS
UNACCEPTABLE. THE ABHORRENT
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. AND HERE WITH
ME IS THE VENTURA COUNTY DEPUTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY, RAQUEL KELLY,
ALONG WITH KAYLIN HAYMAN, WHO IS
A SURVIVOR AND VICTIM ADVOCATE
FROM VENTURA COUNTY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE'LL HAVE TWO
MINUTES EACH. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, WITH THE ADVANCEMENTS
OF TECHNOLOGY, WE STAND ON THE
PRECIPICE OF A LOOMING CRISIS AS
THE TIDAL WAVE OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE GENERATED CHILD
SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL GAINS
MOMENTUM. THE FACTS ARE STARK
AND SOBERING. THE INTERNET WATCH
FOUNDATION THÀNH MONITORED ONE
DARK WEB WEBSITE AND FOUND OVER
11,000 IMAGES OF AI GENERATED
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL, OR
CSAM, IN JUST 30 DAYS OVER THE
COURSE OF SEVEN MONTHS. ONE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATOR
AMASSED 74,000 AI GENERATED CSAM
IMAGES. BUT THIS ISN'T JUST FOR
THE SOPHISTICATED USER. WE'VE
SEEN A RASH OF RECENT HEADLINES
OF MIDDLE SCHOOLERS USING THIS
TECHNOLOGY TO TORMENT THEIR
PEERS. NOW, THESE DEPICTIONS ARE
NOT JUST PIXELS ON A SCREEN.
THEY REPRESENT THE VICTIMIZATION
OF REAL CHILDREN, KIDS WHO HAVE
ENDURED UNIMAGINABLE TRAUMA. A
RECENT STUDY REVEALED THAT THE
COMPUTER GENERATION MODELS ARE
TRAINED ON SEXUAL DEPICTIONS OF
REAL CHILDREN. THOUSANDS OF
THOSE IMAGES ARE USED TO TEACH
AI HOW TO GENERATE IMAGES.
REVICTIMIZING THOSE LIVE
CHILDREN INTO PERPETUITY, AND
TRIGGERING THEIR TRAUMA AGAIN
AND AGAIN AND AGAIN. BUT IT GOES
EVEN BEYOND VICTIMIZATION. THÀNH
IF WE FAIL TO ACT AND REGULATE
THIS TECHNOLOGY, WE CREATE AN
INVESTIGATIVE DRAIN ON RESOURCES
, AND A LOOPHOLE INTO EXISTING
LEGAL FRAMEWORK POSSESSED BUYING
AND VIEWING THIS TYPE OF
TECHNOLOGY, OR THIS TYPE OF
IMAGERY DESENSITIZES PEOPLE. IT
BREAKS DOWN INTO PSYCHOLOGY
BARRIERS AND IT CREATES A
GATEWAY TO FURTHER HEINOUS ACTS
OF ABUSE. NOW, IT'S MY HONOR TO
INTRODUCE TO YOU TODAY A VERY
COURAGEOUS YOUNG WOMAN. KAYLIN
HAYMAN IS THE VICTIM OF THIS
INSIDIOUS CRIME, AND HER
PRESENCE HERE TODAY SERVES AS A
STARK REMINDER OF THE HUMAN COST
OF INACTION AND THE URGENT NEED
FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION. AND I'D
JUST LIKE TO THANK YOU, CAITLIN,
FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND SHARING
YOUR STORY. 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 A DISNEY CHANNEL
SHOW. 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 SEE 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 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
OUT THERE, 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 AND PRIVACY IN MY
EVERYDAY LIFE. THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE MADE ME FEEL
UNEASY AND ANGRY. THE FACT THAT
GROWN MEN SEEM ME IN SUCH A
HORRENDOUS MANNER IS APPALLING.
IT 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. WELL,
THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU
FOR BEING HERE TODAY TO SHARE
YOUR STORY. I REALLY APPRECIATE
THAT, ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES THAT WOULD LIKE TO
STATE THEIR NAMES AND
AFFILIATIONS ONLY, PLEASE. GOOD
AFTERNOON, ELIZABETH ESPINOSA
HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN THE
COUNTY OF VENTURA AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MITCH
STEIGER WITH CFT, A UNION OF
EDUCATORS AND CLASSIFIED
PROFESSIONALS ALSO IN SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, JASON SCHMELTZER
HERE ON BEHALF OF TECHNET AND
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON. ROANOKE, DEYLAMI WITH
CAL CHAMBER ALSO IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. PAT
ESPINOSA, SAMUEL COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, MIKE QUIXOTE, ON
BEHALF OF COMMON SENSE MEDIA AND
THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY
INSTITUTE, BOTH CO-SPONSORS AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE ANY
BILLS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED,
ANY, ARE YOU PRIMARY OPPOSITION?
OKAY, OTHER OPPONENTS? YES.
HELLO. RACHEL BHAGWAT WITH ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION. WE'RE AT AN
OPPOSING LOSS AMENDED POSITION
AND WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
WORKING WITH US, AS WE THINK
THROUGH AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU.
GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ANY
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE? WE
HAVE A QUESTION FROM MISS DIXON,
THANK YOU. CHAIR, I SUPPORT THE
BILL. I HOW ARE YOU GOING TO
IMPLEMENT IT? HOW IS IT GOING TO
BE ENFORCED? AND I SEE A NUMBER
OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORTERS.
SO IT'S THEY MUST HAVE A MEANS
TO DO IT. BUT WE'VE BEEN, AS YOU
KNOW, TALKING ABOUT HOW WE
TARGET THIS KIND OF ILLICIT
ACTIVITY ON THE INTERNET AND
TARGETING CHILDREN. SO HOW CAN
THEY HOW DO THEY FEEL THAT THEY
CAN DO IT? YEAH I'LL DEFER TO MY
EXPERT IN A SECOND. BUT, YOU
KNOW, THIS WAS BROUGHT TO US BY
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND IS BECAUSE
THEY WERE FINDING PEOPLE WHO HAD
THIS MATERIAL AND THEY WEREN'T
ABLE TO PROSECUTE BECAUSE OF THE
LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW. SO IT'S
CLOSING THE LOOPHOLE, WHICH WILL
GIVE THEM THE ABILITY THEY HAVE
THE MEANS NOW TO FIND IT. OR
WHEN THEY GO AFTER THEY SCAN THE
INTERNET. YES, LAW, AS IT STANDS
, EXISTING LAW ALLOWS US TO
PROSECUTE THE POSSESSION OF
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL
CONTAINING DEPICTIONS OF ACTUAL
LIVING MINORS, THERE IS A
LOOPHOLE THAT ALLOWS FOR THIS AI
GENERATED CONTENT OR CONTENT
THAT HAS THE DEPICTION OF A
CHILD THAT IS THEN MODIFIED TO
MAKE IT SEXUAL. SO WE ALREADY
HAVE THE MEANS. WE ARE ALREADY
ACTIVELY INVESTIGATING AND
PROSECUTING CSAM CRIMES. THIS
WOULD NOW JUST CLOSE THAT
LOOPHOLE TO ALLOW US TO
PROSECUTE CRIMES LIKE THOSE OF
WHICH CAITLYN WAS THE VICTIM OF.
AND SO WHETHER THAT BE AN
UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS, WHETHER
THAT BE, BE IN A IN THE COURSE
OF A REGULAR INVESTIGATION,
THERE ARE VARIOUS WAYS IN WHICH
WE COME INTO CONTACT WITH THIS
TYPE OF MEDIA. VERY GOOD. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, THANKS. MR.
LOWENTHAL, I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
IMPORTANT BILL FORWARD. BUT I
REALLY JUST WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR YOUR WONDERFUL TESTIMONY
TODAY AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS
FOR YOUNG PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO
UNDERSTAND THERE IS NOTHING
WRONG AT ALL THAT THEY'VE DONE
TO STAND UP, OUT AND STAND
AGAINST THIS. AND YOU JUST
DESERVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF
CREDIT FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
WELL, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME
BE A COAUTHOR ON THIS
LEGISLATION. I APPRECIATE THAT.
HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT TODAY.
OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF
AND AGAIN, APPRECIATE YOU FOR
COMING UP. I MEAN, A LOT OF MY
BILL IDEAS COME FROM PEOPLE
WHO'VE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING HAS
HAPPENED TO THEM OR SOMETHING
THAT, YOU KNOW, I LEARN ABOUT IN
THE DISTRICT. AND SO IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT
ARE ADVOCATING FOR THINGS THAT
IMPACT THEIR LIFE. SO REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT AGAIN. AND IF
YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE, HAPPY TO
HEAR IT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
ALSO JUST WANT TO THANK DEPUTY
DA KELLY. I WOULD I WOULD NOT
WANT TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF
YOU IN A COURTROOM, AND THANK
YOU, CAITLYN, FOR YOUR COURAGE,
YOUR BRAVERY, YOUR ADVOCACY FOR
COMING UP AND MAKING SURE THAT,
YOU KNOW, NOBODY ELSE ENDS UP IN
THE POSITION THAT YOU DID. WE'RE
SEEING, FAR TOO MANY REPORTS OF
THIS. THERE WAS A NEW YORK TIMES
ARTICLE ABOUT IT YESTERDAY ABOUT
HOW THIS IS HAPPENING IN FAR TOO
MANY STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
AND WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING
THAT WE CAN TO PUSH BACK ON IT.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR BRAVERY,
FOR SPEAKING UP AND RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. SO BE IT,
ANY COULD WE JUST DO THE MOTION
SECOND AGAIN, BECAUSE WE'RE
LOWENTHAL AND THIRD BY, MISS
DIXON. SO WELL, I'LL CALL I'LL
LET HER GET THE NEXT ONE. THANK
YOU FOR THAT. AND IF YOU
WOULDN'T MIND, CALLING THE ROLL.
OKAY. ITEM NUMBER TWO, AB 13,
1831 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE BY BAUER-KAHAN
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. AYE. BRIAN
BRIAN. AYE. DIXON. DIXON. AYE.
HOOVER IRWIN. LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA WARD.
WICKS. WICKS. AYE WILSON. IT'S
FIVE ZERO. WILL LEAVE THE ROLE
OPEN AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS
PASSING OUT PRETTY SOON. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE IT. APPRECIATE IT.
ALL RIGHT, MR. MCCARTY, YOU
HAVE, AB2203. CORRECT YES, I DO.
ALL RIGHT. WE'RE WE'RE READY
WHEN YOU ARE. THANK YOU. JUST
ME. I'M THE AUTHOR AND THE STAR
WITNESS. SO, FIRST OF ALL, I
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE, FOR
WORKING WITH US. AND WE WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE, THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS, THIS MEASURE SIMILAR
TO THE MEASURE YOU'RE GOING TO
HEAR IN A BIT, IS ABOUT
PURCHASING TICKETS. WE'VE ALL
HEARD THE STORIES ABOUT PEOPLE
FLYING HUNDREDS OF MILES TO TRY
TO GET TO A BIG SHOW. THERE WAS,
OF COURSE, THE TAYLOR SWIFT
INCIDENT WITH THE MOM FLYING TO
LOS ANGELES, BOUGHT THE TICKETS
ON STUBHUB, GOT THERE AND NEVER
GOT TO GO. SO WE'RE TRYING TO
REMEDY THE SITUATION AND NOT
HAVE TORTURED, CONCERT GOERS,
THAT WAS OF COURSE THE PLAYOFF,
THE OF THE NEW ALBUM OUT THERE.
BUT ANYWAY, THIS, THIS ISSUE
ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO ME AS WELL.
I TRIED TO GO TO A SOCCER MATCH.
WE BOUGHT OUR TICKETS ON
STUBHUB. WE GOT THERE. THE
TICKETS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE
DELIVERED AN HOUR BEFORE THE
MATCH. THEY WEREN'T THERE. WE
CALLED THE HOTLINE, DIDN'T QUITE
WORK, AND SO WE LOST OUT. SO
IT'S NOT JUST MISSING OUT ON
GOING TO THE SHOW. IT'S TRAVEL
TIME, THE EXPECTATION. SO IF THE
CONSUMER GOES ALL OUT TO TRAVEL
FAR AWAY DISTANCE TO SEE A
CONCERT AT A GAME, WHAT HAVE
YOU, THERE SHOULD BE SOME
EXPECTATION THAT WILL RECEIVE
THE TICKETS AT THE END OF THE
DAY. SO WITH US HERE TODAY WITH
THESE AMENDMENTS IS A SIMPLE
NOTION THAT WHEN YOU PURCHASE
YOUR TICKETS, THERE MUST BE AN
ELECTRONIC PROOF SENT TO YOU
IMMEDIATELY DELIVERED TO THE
CUSTOMER THAT CAN BE UTILIZED IF
SOMETHING GOES WRONG, THOSE
TICKETS DON'T WORK. SO THE EVENT
THAT THE CUSTOMER, THE CONSUMER,
CAN'T UTILIZE THOSE TICKETS AT
THE EVENT, THE VENUE WILL BE
REQUIRED TO HONOR THE PROOF OF
PURCHASE AND ALLOW THE PERSON TO
ENTER THE EVENT. WE THINK THIS
IS A ARTFUL SOLUTION TO THE
ISSUE AND AGAIN, THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR WORKING WITH US ON
THIS AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR. I VOTE. IT'S MY TURN TO BE
IN CHARGE, GREAT. ANYBODY HERE
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL? JUST ME.
JUST YOU. OKAY? ANYONE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL? COME ON
UP.
WE'RE ACTUALLY A TWEENER, OR.
I'M NOT SURE YET. SO, TIM LYNCH,
ON BEHALF OF THE GOLDEN STATE
WARRIORS CHASE CENTER, THE
AMBASSADOR THEATER GROUP, AND
SOME OTHER CLIENTS THAT BRING
EVENTS TO CALIFORNIA, IT'S A
COMPLETE REWRITE OF THE BILL. SO
WE'RE STILL ANALYZING IT, BUT I
GUESS I WOULD OBSERVE A COUPLE
OF THINGS. ONE IS IT HAS TO BE
TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE. TWO IS WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THE
PROOF OF PURCHASE IS BEING USED
IN LIEU OF THE TICKET, WE DON'T
HAVE TWO PEOPLE ACCESSING THE
SAME SEAT AT THE SAME TIME. AND
THEN THREE. I OBSERVED THAT IN
LIGHT OF ANOTHER BILL, WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON
LATER AB 2808. IT HIGHLIGHTS THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE VENUE AND THEIR
PRIMARY TICKETING VENDOR TO
ENSURE THAT IF THIS TYPE OF
MECHANISM IS IN PLACE, WE CAN
ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF IT. SO
THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE'LL BE
LOOKING AT AS THE BILL MOVES
FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS I'M SORRY
ABOUT THAT, ALSO A TWEENER,
AARON NIEMELA REPRESENTING
STUBHUB. WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL IN PRINT, AND WE WILL
JUST HAVE TO ANALYZE THE
AMENDMENTS OFFERED IN THE
ANALYSIS, BUT APPRECIATE THE
ORIGINAL BILL IN PRINT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY, NO OTHER
FOLKS IN THE ROOM. SO I'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE DÍAS, MR. BRYAN.
YEAH, NO, I, I, I DEFINITELY
RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM THAT'S
TRYING TO BE SOLVED HERE. RIGHT
WHERE YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN YOUR
YOUR TICKET FAST ENOUGH. I'M
ALSO THINKING BACK TO MY, MY
YOUNGER POOR DAYS AND HOW I'M
CURIOUS IF VENUES WOULD ALSO GET
AN ELECTRONIC COPY THAT THEY CAN
THEN VERIFY THAT THE ONE THAT I
HAVE MATCHES WHAT THEY HAVE, OR
COULD. LIKE ME AND MY 12
SIBLINGS ALL, YOU KNOW, SEND A
SCREENSHOT OF THE SAME OF THE
SAME RECEIPT AND JUST STAGGER
WHEN WE GO IN. THAT'S THAT'S THE
QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY FOR
THE VENUE TO, TO CHECK THE
AUTHENTICITY TO PREVENT FOLKS
FROM SHARING RECEIPTS OF
PURCHASE IN LIEU OF A TICKET AND
STILL GETTING ACCESS? WELL,
THANK THANK YOU. I ASSUME THAT'S
A HYPOTHETICAL. IT DIDN'T QUITE
HAPPEN, SO I PLEAD THE FIFTH.
YEAH. SO THE ISSUE THAT THAT I
THINK IS THE, THE SOLUTION IS A
GUARANTEE OF, OF THE TICKET.
LIKE I'M TRYING TO GO SEE TAYLOR
SWIFT IN VANCOUVER IN A FEW
MONTHS. I BUY MY TICKET ON
STUBHUB. IT SAYS YOU'LL GET YOUR
TICKET WITHIN A COUPLE OF DAYS.
WELL, NOW IT'S LIKE THREE, 4 OR
5, SIX MONTHS OUT. I'D LIKE TO
HAVE IT TODAY BETTER YET, MAYBE
THE DAY BEFORE. BETTER YET, THE
WEEK BEFORE, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING
TO BUY AIRFARE, HOTELS AND WHAT
HAVE YOU. SO I THINK THERE'S
SOME EXPECTATIONS THAT IT
SHOULDN'T BE UP TILL THE HOUR
BEFORE THE SHOW, WHICH HAPPENED
TO THE TAYLOR SWIFT MOM IN LA.
IT HAPPENED TO US GOING TO THE
SOCCER MATCH. SO SOME OF THE
ISSUES RAISED HERE BY THE
OPPOSITION, WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL
LOOK AT THAT. AND I SPOKE WITH
THE CHAIR AS WELL. AND WE KNOW
WE'RE TRYING TO END OF THE LINE
HERE, WHICH IS THIS COMMITTEE IS
ALL ABOUT PROTECT CONSUMERS.
THEY'RE GOING ON A LIMB SPENDING
A LOT OF THEIR RESOURCES, AND
IT'S NOT EVEN THEIR MONEY. THEY
JUST WANT TO GET WHAT THEY'RE
TRYING TO BUY. AND SO, WE WILL
CERTAINLY ENGAGE AND TRY TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE, ANSWER, THE
QUESTION AND ADDRESS THE PROBLEM
AND DON'T CREATE OTHER ISSUES
FOR THE VENUES. THANK YOU. YES.
AND LET ME JUST BEFORE I GO TO
MISS DIXON AND THE VICE CHAIR,
SO I APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR VERY
MUCH WORKING WITH US. WE YOU
KNOW, THE INTENT HERE IS, LIKE
YOU SAID, TO HAVE FOLKS GET THE
TICKET RIGHT AWAY. ONE OF THE
CONCERNS RAISED BY THE VENUES
IMMEDIATELY WAS THAT THAT WOULD
MAKE IT EASIER TO, YOU KNOW,
CREATE FRAUDULENT TICKETS. AND
SO THIS WAS A SOLUTION THAT WAS,
IN DISCUSSION WITH THE FOLKS WHO
MAKE SURE PEOPLE CAN GET ACCESS
TO THEIR SEATS, WHO WE HEARD
FROM TODAY. AND SO WE'LL
CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE CONCERNS WERE
ADDRESSED. AND I KNOW THAT THE
AUTHOR HAS EXPRESSED HIS
COMMITMENT TO DO THE SAME. SO TO
THE EXTENT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO
GET THIS RIGHT, AND I KNOW HE
WILL. YES, MISS DIXON, THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR, I THINK THIS
IS A GOOD IDEA. I MEAN, WE'VE
ALL EXPERIENCED IT. I REMEMBER
WHEN I BOUGHT ELECTRONIC TICKETS
TO ELTON JOHN, IT WAS TWO YEARS
IN ADVANCE, AND I NEVER I DIDN'T
GET THE TICKET UNTIL MAYBE A
COUPLE DAYS IN ADVANCE. SO THAT,
BUT YOU DO GET CONFIRMATION BY
EMAIL THAT YOU'VE PURCHASED. IS
THAT NOT SUFFICIENT WITH WITH
THE ORDER NUMBER AS TERMS OF
PROOF OF PURCHASE? YEAH I THINK
THAT THAT TAYLOR SWIFT, FAMILY
AND OUR EXAMPLE. YEAH. WE GOT
CONFIRMATION THE WORST PART
ABOUT YOU SAW IT COME OUT OF
YOUR APPLE PAY LIKE MY MONEY.
IT'S LIKE, OKAY, YOU GOT MY
MONEY, I GOT THE RECEIPT. DIDN'T
GET THAT. BUT ISN'T THAT
SUFFICIENT, THOUGH? NO, BECAUSE
THAT'S NOT THE ACTUAL TICKET.
THEY SAY THAT SOMETIMES YOU
WON'T GET YOUR TICKET SENT TO
YOU UP UNTIL AN HOUR BEFORE THE
SHOW OR THE DAY BEFORE, AND THEY
WOULDN'T HONOR IT IF IT'S NOT
SHOWN ON ANY APPLE PAY. WELL,
THERE ARE TWO HYPOTHETICALS. NO,
THAT'S JUST MY RECEIPT. IT'S NOT
THE ACTUAL TICKET. RIGHT. AND SO
THERE'S TWO EXAMPLES I KNOW OF.
AND ONE IS LITERALLY ME
FIRSTHAND THAT IT HAPPENED TO US
GOING TO A SOCCER MATCH. AND
THEY DIDN'T HONOR IT. NO. OKAY.
THANK YOU. YEAH. MR. VICE CHAIR.
GREAT. THANK YOU. I MEAN, I
THINK A LOT OF US HAVE HAD THIS
EXPERIENCE. I BOUGHT TICKETS TO
GO SEE MY FAVORITE FOOTBALL
TEAM, THE SAN FRANCISCO 40
NINERS. AND IT WAS ON A
DIFFERENT PLATFORM. AND I WAS
JUST HOPING. HOPING TO GOD ON MY
DRIVE THERE, I'D GET THE ACTUAL
TICKET DELIVERED TO ME. IT DID
COME. SO THAT'S THE GOOD NEWS.
BUT, HOW HOW DO YOU PLAN TO
ADDRESS IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, 40
NINERS SELL OUT A LOT FOR
EXAMPLE. SO IF THERE'S TWO
TICKETS OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW,
YOU HAVE THE PROOF OF PURCHASE.
IS THAT JUST SOMETHING YOU JUST
KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING,
WHICH I'M FINE WITH. I'M GOING
TO SUPPORT THE BILL. I'M JUST
WONDERING IF 7H
AT THE GATE, WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN. YEAH WE NEED TO ADDRESS
THAT. BUT I THINK THE BIGGER
THING TOO, AND WE'RE GOING TO
HEAR THAT SOME OTHER BILLS IS
THAT PEOPLE SOMETIMES WILL SELL
THEM, I THINK, AND NOT DELIVER
THEM, BECAUSE MAYBE THEY SELL
THEM TO YOU FOR 1000 BUCKS AND
THEY CAN SELL THEM THE DAY
BEFORE ON VIVID FOR 1500. SO WHY
GIVE THEM TO YOU THE LAST SECOND
WHEN THEY CAN MAKE MORE OVER
HERE? SO THAT'S THAT'S THE ISSUE
. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE
PERSON GETS A DELIVERY OF IT.
BUT THE FLIP SIDE, I KNOW THE
VENUES SAY THEY WANT TO HOLD ON
TO THEM FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE,
SO THEY DON'T HAVE MORE OF THE
RECYCLING OF THE TICKETS. AND
JACKING UP THE PRICES. SO THIS
IS A, THIS IS A PROBLEM AND
WE'RE WORKING ARTFULLY FOR THE
SOLUTION. AND SO, YEAH, WE'LL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
PARTIES THAT JUST TESTIFIED HERE
TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT
WORKS FOR THE INDUSTRY, BUT MOST
IMPORTANTLY, THE CONSUMER. LIKE
YOUR EXAMPLE. THANK YOU. SEEING
NO OTHER COMMENTS, WE HAVE A
MOTION FROM MISS WICKS AND A
SECOND FROM MR. LOWENTHAL, MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
OH, WAIT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? OKAY. SORRY, I APOLOGIZE
WITH THE DRILLING IN MY HEAD.
IT'S YEP. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER SIX,
AB 2203 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
MCCARTY. THE MOTION IS TO PASS,
AS AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. BAUER-KAHAN I KHN I
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. I BRIAN.
BRIAN. I DIXON. DIXON I HOOVER.
IRWIN LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL. I
ORTEGA. WARD WICKS. WICKS I
WILSON. THE CONSENT CALENDAR HAS
SIX VOTES. THAT WAS. OH, NO.
THAT WAS MR. MCCARTY'S VOTE. MR.
MCCARTY'S BILL HAS SIX VOTES AND
IT IS OUT. BUT WE'LL LEAVE IT ON
CALL FOR ABSENT MEMBERS. DO WE
HAVE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR MOVED BY MISS WICK,
SECONDED BY MR. LOWENTHAL? MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. OH, I
SHOULD READ THE MOTIONS. I'M
MOVING TOO FAST TODAY. THERE WAS
TOO MUCH GOING ON. AB 2681
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEBER. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE WITH
RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONSENT
CALENDAR AB 2777 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CALDERON Dð. PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR AB 2905 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LOWE. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASSED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, AB 3207, BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER JO PATTERSON. MOTION IS
TO PASS IS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATION AND CONSENT. AB
3286 BY THE COMMITTEE. MOTION IS
TO PASS, AS AMENDED, WITH
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CONSENT
CALENDAR ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, BAUER-KAHAN I
BAUER-KAHAN I PATTERSON.
PATTERSON I BRIAN. BRIAN I,
DIXON I DIXON I HOOVER. IRWIN.
LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL I ORTEGA.
WARD. WICKS. WICKS I WILSON.
CONSENT CALENDAR HAS SIX VOTES.
IT IS OUT. WE WILL LEAVE THE
ROLL OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS.
ONE NOTE THAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO
MAKE AT THE BEGINNING THAT I DID
NOT IS AS MANY KNOW, TODAY'S
COMMITTEE HEARING IS A SPECIAL
HEARING. AND SO, VETS, MILITARY
AND VETERAN AFFAIRS WILL MEET IN
HERE AT 4:00, AND WE WILL
RECONVENE, IF NECESSARY, AT
FIVE. AND GIVEN THE LENGTH OF
OUR AGENDA, I IMAGINE IT WILL BE
NEEDED. BUT IF NOT, GOOD NEWS.
AND NOW I WILL PRESENT MY BILL.
SO LET'S HAND THE.
SUBCOMMITTEE. COME ON. WASN'T
EVEN PLANNED. WE'RE SO CUTE. ALL
RIGHT. WHICH WHICH BILLS, THE
FIRST VICTIM. THIS IS AB 3204.
ALL RIGHT. PERFECT THESE LOVELY
LADIES WALKED UP, SO WE'LL START
THERE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, I WANT TO START BY
THANKING COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THEIR DILIGENT WORK ON THIS
BILL. THEY REALLY ARE THE BEST
STAFF IN THE BUILDING. AND I'M
NOT BIASED, ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE IS AN INCREDIBLY
EXCITING AND LUCRATIVE
TECHNOLOGY IN CALIFORNIA. AI IS
BEING USED TO AUTOMATE MUNDANE
TASKS AND ENHANCE HUMAN
ABILITIES. IN MANY CASES, AI
SIMPLY OFFERS A MORE EFFICIENT
WAY OF DOING FAMILIAR THINGS,
BUT IN OTHER CASES, IT DOES A
LOT MORE. EARLIER, YOU HEARD A
BILL AND WE DISCUSSED THAT
PHOTOS OF CHILDREN ARE BEING FED
INTO AI MODELS AND USED TO
GENERATE DEEPFAKE CHILD. THAT IS
AN EXAMPLE OF AI GONE HORRIBLY
WRONG. WE LEARNED IN THAT
CONVERSATION THAT SOME OF THE
MOST COMMON IMAGE DATA SETS
CONTAINED CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
MATERIALS. THIS IS NOT AN
ISOLATED ISSUE WHEN IT COMES TO
AI. THERE'S A CULTURE OF
CARELESSNESS SURROUNDING
TRAINING DATA AT SOME
INSTITUTIONS, ALTHOUGH NOT ALL.
AS THE NEW YORK TIMES RECENTLY
REVEALED EXACTLY. THEY TALKED
ABOUT HOW VORACIOUS THE AI
INDUSTRY IS WHEN IT COMES TO
CONSUMING DATA. META IS ABLE TO
SCRAPE FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM TO
TRAIN ITS AI TOOL, LLAMA. GOOGLE
CAN SCRAPE GMAIL, GOOGLE DRIVE
AND YOUTUBE TO TRAIN GEMMA AND
BARD. OPENAI HAS CONSUMED NEARLY
ALL OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
MEDIA HUMANITY HAS PRODUCED. THE
NEW YORK TIMES INVESTIGATION
REVEALED HOW LITTLE IS KNOWN OR
UNDERSTOOD ABOUT THE HARMS
CAUSED BY THESE DATA SETS. THAT
INVESTIGATION FOCUSED ON
COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS, BUT THIS
BILL FOCUSES ON PERSONAL
INFORMATION, WHICH TO ME AND IN
MY MIND, AND HOPEFULLY IN THE
VIEW OF THE COMMITTEE, IS AN
EVEN BIGGER ISSUE. IF YOU'VE
EVER POSTED A PHOTO OF YOUR
CHILD TO SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU CAN
BE CONFIDENT THAT THEIR PHOTO IS
NOW BEING USED TO TRAIN AN AI
MODEL. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND
THIS INDUSTRY BETTER. AB 3204
CREATES A DATA DIGESTER REGISTRY
FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT USE
PERSONAL INFORMATION TO TRAIN AI
UPON REGISTERING THESE DATA,
DIGESTERS WOULD DISCLOSE WHICH
CATEGORIES OF PERSONAL
INFORMATION ARE IN USE. AB 3204
IS MODEST. IT IS MERELY A
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW
THE STATE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND
THE WAY CALIFORNIA'S DATA IS
BEING USED TO TRAIN AI MODELS.
WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME,
TWO PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK WITH
ME, TRACY ROSENBERG FROM
OAKLAND. PRIVACY AND SAMANTHA
CORBIN WITH THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION. TRACY.
THANK YOU, OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON,
VICE CHAIR PATTERSON AND MEMBERS
. MY NAME IS TRACY ROSENBERG.
I'M WITH OAKLAND PRIVACY. WE ARE
A REGIONAL COALITION THAT
ADVOCATES FOR SAFEGUARDS AND
GUARDRAILS IN THE IN THE
INTERESTS OF PRIVACY
PROTECTIONS, CIVIL RIGHTS, AND
COMMUNITY CONSENT. AB 3204 IS A
TRANSPARENCY BILL THAT WILL HELP
CALIFORNIANS UNDERSTAND THE
SCOPE OF AI TRAINING AND
DEVELOPMENT. IT IS SIMILAR TO
THE DATA BROKER REGISTRY THAT
THE LEGISLATION THAT THE
LEGISLATURE PUT FORWARD IN 2018
TO HELP CALIFORNIANS BETTER
UNDERSTAND THAT SECTOR. IF YOU
ASK THE AVERAGE CALIFORNIAN
THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE,
WHEN AND HOW THE PERSONAL DATA
OF THEMSELVES AND THEIR CHILDREN
AND THEIR FAMILIES IS BEING USED
TO TRAIN AI, THEY DON'T KNOW
WHEN THE CCPA WAS WRITTEN, WHICH
WAS NOT THAT LONG AGO, BUT
THINGS MOVE FAST. GENERALLY OF
AI DEPLOYMENT AS WE SEE IT NOW.
REALLY WASN'T ANTICIPATED. AND
THE PRIVACY RIGHTS, WHICH ARE
FUNDAMENTAL AND ARE LAID OUT IN
THE CCPA, ARE GOING TO BE
INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO
EXECUTE WITHIN THESE AI SYSTEMS
AS THEY DEVELOP. SO AB THREE 204
IS A FOUNDATION FOR CALIFORNIA'S
PRIVACY LAWS TO MEET THE
CHALLENGE OF ONGOING NEWER
TECHNOLOGIES, A REGISTRY IS NOT
SORT OF A BE ALL AND A CURE ALL
FOR EVERYTHING, BUT IT'S A
USEFUL SNAPSHOT OF THE CURRENT
STATE OF PLAY AND A FIRST STEP
THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE IN ORDER TO
SORT OF ITERATIVELY DEVELOP OUR
FUNDAMENTAL PRIVACY RIGHTS LAWS.
SO THEY WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE
AND CONTINUE TO PROTECT US.
THANKS MADAM CHAIR, MR. VICE
CHAIR MEMBERS, AND WHAT I HOPE
OUR UNIONIZED CONSTRUCTION
EMPLOYEES, SAMANTHA CORBIN, ON
BEHALF OF THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION, A SAN
FRANCISCO BASED NONPROFIT THAT
WORKS TO PROTECT CIVIL LIBERTIES
IN THE DIGITAL AGE, HERE TODAY
IN SUPPORT OF AB 3204, WHICH
WOULD ESTABLISH A REGISTRY FOR
DATA DIGESTERS, ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE HAS EXISTED SINCE
THE 1950S AND HAS BEEN IN
REGULAR USE ACROSS MANY
INDUSTRIES SINCE THAT TIME,
OFTEN WITHOUT CONSUMERS EVEN
REALIZING THE ROLE THAT AI HAS
PLAYED IN DELIVERING THEIR
PRODUCT OR SERVICE, MUCH LESS
HOW OR WITH WHAT INFORMATION ON
WHAT. THAT I WAS TRAINED. IN
RECENT YEARS, HOWEVER, THE
GROWTH AND APPLICATION OF AI HAS
BEEN BOTH RAPID AND EXPANSIVE,
CREATING NEW OPPORTUNITIES AND
CHALLENGES REGARDING ITS USE AND
REGARDING THE DATA ON WHICH IT
WAS TRAINED. IT'S UNDENIABLE
THAT THIS DRAMATIC EXPANSION HAS
CREATED SIGNIFICANT DEMAND FOR
MORE INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE
CONTINUED GROWTH AND MORE
EFFECTIVE USE OF THESE AI TOOLS,
AB 3204 TAKES A POSITIVE STEP BY
INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY THAT
CONSUMERS SO OFTEN LACK WHEN
INTERACTING WITH BUSINESSES THAT
USE PERSONAL INFORMATION TO
TRAIN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
AND RELATED TOOLS. CALIFORNIA
ALREADY HAS A STRONG HISTORY AS
A NATIONAL PRIVACY LEADER, AND
IT IS ONLY FITTING THAT THE
STATE FULFILLS A SIMILAR ROLE IN
REGARD TO THE UNIQUE CONSUMER
PRIVACY CHALLENGES THAT
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RAISES.
FOCUSING ON TRANSPARENCY AROUND
DATA USED FOR TRAINING LAYS A
SMART CORNERSTONE UPON WHICH WE
HOPE THE STATE WILL BE ABLE TO
THOUGHTFULLY BUILD ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIONS. IT IS AS IT IS AT
THIS KEY JUNCTURE, WHERE IT IS
MORE POSSIBLE FOR CONSUMERS TO
ACTUALLY OPT OUT OR ASK TO HAVE
THEIR INFORMATION DELETED. A
DIFFICULT AND SOMETIMES
IMPOSSIBLE FEAT ONCE MODELS HAVE
ALREADY BEEN TRAINED ON LARGE
DATA SETS. FOR THESE REASONS, WE
SUPPORT AB THREE, TWO THREE 204
AND RESPECTFULLY URGE THE
COMMITTEE'S AYE VOTE. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. OKAY. MOTION BY MISS
WICKS. AND, SECOND, HE'S
THINKING ABOUT IT BY MR. BRIAN.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE ANY
OPPONENTS TO THIS MEASURE? OKAY.
THANK. Ó. OKAY I'M KIND. YOU
MISSED MY MENOPAUSE, BILL. WE'RE
GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT.
THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR
MEMBERS. ROANOKE DELORME WITH
CAL CHAMBER. RESPECTFULLY. AND
STRONG OPPOSITION TO AB 3204. AS
WE STATED IN OUR LETTER, WE
GREATLY RESPECT THIS AUTHOR AND
HER GENERAL APPROACH TO
LEGISLATION IN WRITING NOT ONLY
STRONG LAWS, BUT DOING SO IN A
BALANCED WAY THAT AVOIDS
UNNECESSARY HARM. UNFORTUNATELY,
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL FAILS
TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE. AB 3204
SEEKS TO PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY
AND TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE
DEGREE TO WHICH CONSUMER PII IS
BEING USED TO TRAIN AI SYSTEMS
BY WAY OF CREATING A CENTRAL
REPOSITORY SIMILAR TO THE
EXISTING DATA BROKER REGISTRY.
FUNDAMENTALLY, WE DON'T THINK A
REGISTRY IS WARRANTED HERE.
REASONABLE DISCLOSURES AROUND
TRAINING OF AI CAN BE
ACCOMPLISHED, CAN BE
ACCOMPLISHED IN THE ABSENCE OF A
REGISTRY AND THE ASSOCIATED
COSTS AND BURDENS IMPOSED ON THE
STATE AND BUSINESSES. TO BE
CLEAR, WE DON'T DISPUTE THAT
TRANSPARENCY CAN BE BENEFICIAL,
BUT IT HAS TO BE DONE IN A
TARGETED WAY FOR SPECIFIC
PURPOSES THAT CAN BE REASONABLY
BE PUT INTO PRACTICE WITHOUT
REQUIRING BUSINESSES TO FURTHER
INVADE THE PRIVACY OF THEIR
CUSTOMERS AND COMPROMISING THEIR
COMPETITIVENESS AND INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY ALONG THE WAY. TO THAT
POINT, WE FIND THE SCOPE OF AB
3204 TO BE EXTREMELY CONCERNING,
AT A PRACTICAL LEVEL, THE BILL
REQUIRES AN ENORMOUS NUMBER OF
BUSINESSES TO REGISTER AS A DATA
DIGESTER. BEAR IN MIND THE
UTILITY OF THE DATA BROKER
REGISTRY TO THE AVERAGE CONSUMER
WAS QUESTIONED LAST YEAR SIMPLY
BECAUSE IT CAPTURED SEVERAL
HUNDRED BUSINESSES. WE'RE NOW
TALKING ABOUT HAVING THOUSANDS
UPON THOUSANDS OF BUSINESSES
REGISTER AS DATA DIGESTERS AND
HAVING THEM PROVIDE EXTENSIVE
IDENTIFYING DETAILS NOT ONLY
ABOUT HIGH RISK AI, BUT LOW RISK
AI AS WELL. WHILE WE APPRECIATE
THAT RECENT AMENDMENTS INDICATE
AN OPENNESS TO INCLUDING A
THRESHOLD THAT MUST BE MET FOR
AN ENTITY TO BECOME A DATA
DIGESTER, A 1000 PERSON
THRESHOLD IS TOO LOW TO
MEANINGFULLY CHANGE THE SCOPE OF
THE ENTITIES COVERED UNDER THIS
BILL. EVEN MORE ALARMING IS THE
FACT THAT COMPLIANCE WILL
INVARIABLY REQUIRE BUSINESSES TO
DETERMINE IF THEY CAN FEASIBLY
TRACE BACK EACH PIECE OF
INFORMATION USED TO TRAIN AI TO
A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL, AND IF
SO, REVIEW THEIR MEDICAL RECORDS
TO DETERMINE IF THE INDIVIDUAL
HAS PROVIDED SENSITIVE SERVICES.
THIS APPLIES REGARDLESS OF
WHETHER THE BUSINESS OPERATES IN
HEALTH CARE. BEYOND BEING
INCREDIBLY IMPRACTICAL, IF NOT
IMPOSSIBLE, THIS IS EXTREMELY
PRIVACY INVASIVE. MOREOVER, IT'S
EXTREMELY PROBLEMATIC THAT THE
LEVEL OF GRANULAR DATA REQUIRED
UNDER THIS BILL WILL INVARIABLY
FORCE BUSINESSES TO DIVULGE
TRADE SECRETS OR OTHER HIGHLY
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION IN
HELPING THEIR COMPETITORS TO
THEIR OWN DETRIMENT. BECAUSE
3204 APPLIES TO COMPANIES DOING
BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA AND NOT
JUST THOSE DEVELOPING AI IN
CALIFORNIA, IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY
THAT BUSINESSES WOULD RISK
ROLLING OUT CERTAIN PATENTED,
PATENTED TOOLS AND ALGORITHMS IN
CALIFORNIA ALTOGETHER. IF THIS
BILL BECOMES LAW, IF YOU
WOULDN'T MIND. OH, LOOKS LIKE
YOU'RE WRAPPING IT UP. LAST NOTE
AND FINALLY, WE NOTE THAT WHILE
THE BILL IS CLEARLY MODELED ON
THE DATA BROKER REGISTRY AND
RELIES ON VARIOUS TERMS DEFINED
UNDER THE CCPA, IT FAILS TO
INCLUDE ANY OF THE EXEMPTIONS
THAT ARE CRITICAL TO BOTH OF
THOSE LAWS. SO FOR THESE
REASONS, WE MUST RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE. THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK
YOU, ANYBODY ELSE IN OPPOSITION,
NAME AND AFFILIATION ONLY,
PLEASE. THANK YOU. WHAT I'M JUST
KIDDING, JASON SCHMELTZER HERE
ON BEHALF OF TECHNET AND
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL. EMILY DALE, ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA CREDIT UNION
LEAGUE IN OPPOSITION, VANESSA
LUGO, ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
BANKERS ASSOCIATION, OPPOSITION.
TO CAROB. UNDER THE COMPUTER AND
COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. RYAN, ELAINE, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION. IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. SO WE
NEED A REGISTRY. APPARENTLY,
RETAILERS AND BAKERS ARE MAKING
AN ACTUAL. THANK YOU, ANY
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE? I'M
JUST HOPING TO GET THE HEALTH
COMMITTEE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE,
WHICH I ALSO SIT ON, I JUST HAVE
A QUESTION FOR THE OPPOSITION,
IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'VE NOTICED
SOME, I CAUGHT ABOUT 20% OF THE
STATEMENT I'M GOING TO PUT IN
AIRPODS AND LISTEN TO THEM ON
THE, ON THE, I THERE WERE SOME
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT
OPPOSE THIS MEASURE, OR, IS THAT
JUST BECAUSE THEY COLLECTED. I
DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT,
COULD YOU HELP ME? I THINK IT'S
THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT THEY
HAVE TO PROVIDE IN TERMS OF WHAT
IS PROVIDED ON THE REGISTRY.
IT'S NOT JUST YOU REGISTER, IT'S
THAT YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH A
HOST OF REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE
INCREDIBLY CUMBERSOME. AND IT'S
NOT JUST FOR FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS. THAT'S FOR ALL
BUSINESSES THAT THAT'S THE ISSUE
THAT WE'RE HAVING WITH THIS,
PERSONAL INFORMATION UNDER THE
CCPA ISN'T JUST INFORMATION THAT
IS IDENTIFIABLE ON ITS FACE.
IT'S THINGS THAT CAN BE PIECED
TOGETHER WITH OTHER PIECES OF
INFORMATION TO IDENTIFY AN
INDIVIDUAL INDIRECTLY, EVEN. AND
SO NOW, BASED ON SOME OF THE
REQUIREMENTS IN THE BILL, WE
FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO NOW SIT
DOWN AND TRY AND CONNECT EACH
PIECE OF INFORMATION WE HAVE TO
SEE IF WE CAN IDENTIFY IT
BELONGS TO ROANOKE, DELORME OR
OR OR SALLIE MAE, AND TRY AND
FIGURE OUT IF, IF WE NEED TO,
COMPLY WITH THE BILL. SO CAN YOU
PUT THE MIC CLOSER? IT'S JUST
REALLY HARD TO HEAR. I'M SORRY.
SORRY, I CAN'T EVEN HEAR MYSELF
KNOW OR SPEAK. AND I REALLY Tê.
AND I GUYS, MY THOUGHTS ARE MY
THOUGHTS ARE JUMBLED, SO I
APOLOGIZE. I DON'T KNOW IF
ANYTHING WE'RE SAYING. YEAH
INFLUENCES ANYBODY, BUT I KNOW,
DID THE AUTHOR WANT TO RESPOND
TO THAT? BECAUSE YOU'RE KIND OF.
THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. MR. VICE CHAIR. SO A
COUPLE THINGS. ONE IS IT ONLY
APPLIES TO I'M I MEAN, I THINK
THIS MIGHT BE HELPING MY POINT
BECAUSE THE BILL ONLY APPLIES TO
DATA DIGESTERS, WHICH AS DEFINED
BY THE BILL, ARE ENTITIES THAT
DESIGN CODE OR PRODUCE AN
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM
OR SERVICE THAT OR MODIFY SUCH A
SERVICE, THAT AFFECTS A CERTAIN
NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL HOUSEHOLDS.
I DON'T THINK AS FAR AS I KNOW,
THE RETAILERS OR BANKERS ARE
BUILDING. I MODELS OF THAT
MAGNITUDE, BUT PERHAPS THEY ARE.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE
OPPOSING IT, BUT THE ONLY LETTER
WE HAVE IS A GROUP LETTER. SO
AND I WOULD SAY THAT ONE OF THE
MOST IMPORTANT CLARIFICATIONS
I'D LIKE TO MAKE ABOUT THE BILL
IS THAT IT IS A VERY SIMPLE WE
ARE NOT ASKING FOR EVERY PIECE
OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION YOU
TRAIN ON ALL WE'RE ASKING IS FOR
YOU TO REGISTER AND SAY, I TRAIN
ON AND CHECK A BOX. I TRAIN ON
SENSITIVE INFORMATION, I TRAIN
ON PERSONAL INFORMATION. I TRAIN
ON CME DATA, EDUCATION DATA.
NONE OF THEM. ALL OF I MEAN NONE
OF THEM. YOU WOULDN'T APPLY. BUT
JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS,
DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS YOU
TRAIN ON, WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU
TO HAND THAT DATA OVER TO THE
GOVERNMENT, NOR WOULD I WANT
THAT. I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE A
VERY BIG PRIVACY VIOLATION. SO
IF THE BILL IS UNCLEAR AND IT IS
THE OPPOSITION'S POSITION THAT
WE'RE ASKING YOU TO TURN OVER
THAT DATA THAT CONFUSES ME. BUT
WE'RE HAPPY TO CLARIFY THAT. SO
I'M SORRY. I'M NOT GOING TO LET
YOU RESPOND TO THE CHAIR I GET
UNLESS SHE WANTS TO, BUT I'LL
GET IN TROUBLE FOR THAT, ARE
THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? OKAY, GREAT. AND
WE HAD A MOTION AND A SECOND WAS
THAT ON THIS BILL? ALL RIGHT,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK
YOU. I MEAN, THIS REALLY IS A
VERY SIMPLE BILL THAT ASKS FOR
TRANSPARENCY. IT DOES NOTHING
MORE THAN SAY IF YOU ARE
TRAINING ON CALIFORNIA'S
PERSONAL INFORMATION, YOU NEED
TO TELL US THAT. AND THEN IT
GIVES CALIFORNIA THE TOOLS TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE DATA
DIGESTER WHICH THAT TERMS IS
FUNNY. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE
LAW, BUT WHAT THESE ENTITIES DO
AND FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD IN A
WAY OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT
THEY'RE USING CALIFORNIA DATA
FOR, I DON'T THINK IT'S TOO MUCH
TO ASK. WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. GREAT. THANK YOU. WOULD
YOU MIND TAKING ROLL? YES. ITEM
NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER THREE, AB
3204 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BAUER-KAHAN. THE MOTION IS DUE.
PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. BAUER-KAHAN I MÀ KHN
I PATTERSON. PATTERSON. NOT
VOTING. BRIAN. BRIAN I DIXON.
NOT. DIXON. NOT VOTING. HOOVER.
IRWIN IRWIN I LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. I ORTEGA. WARD.
WICKS. WICKS. I. WILSON.
CURRENTLY HAS, FIVE VOTES. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND
WE HAVE. SO WE'LL LEAVE THAT ON
CALL. MR. VICE-CHAIR. YES OF
COURSE. YES. I MEAN, IF I SAID
NO, THEN WHEN YOU CAME BACK UP,
YOU COULD JUST REVERSE THAT. BUT
ALL RIGHT, WE WILL, MOVE TO AB
2877, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, FOR A
START, I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO
MAKE CLEAR, I'M ACCEPTING
COMMITTEE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS.
AND TODAY WE HAVE AB 2877, A
MEASURE WHICH SIMPLY RESTRICTS
THE ABILITY OF COMPANIES TO
TRAIN AI SYSTEMS USING THE
PERSONAL DATA OF CHILDREN, AS
YOU ARE ALL AWARE, THE PACE AT
WHICH AI IS DEVELOPING AND
GROWING INTO ALL FACETS OF OUR
LIVES IS ASTONISHING. WE JUST
TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE PRIOR
BILL, AND THE CCPA DOES AN
IMPORTANT THING, WHICH IS
PROTECT CHILDREN'S DATA. THIS
MERELY DOES THE SAME BY ENSURING
THAT WE LINE UP WHAT IS IN THE
CCPA FOR, FROM USING THE
PERSONAL DATA OF CHILDREN UNDER
16 TO TRAIN AI TOOLS AND LESS
EXPLICIT AUTHORIZATION IS GIVEN
BY THE CHILD'S, PARENT OR
GUARDIAN WITH ME TODAY,
REPRESENTING THE SPONSOR OF THE
BILL IS TRACY PIZZO. FREE. PIZZO
FREE. THANK YOU EVERYONE
MISPRONOUNCES MY NAME, SO I
APOLOGIZE OF COMMON SENSE MEDIA.
HI EVERYBODY. THANK YOU FOR
HAVING ME HERE TODAY. AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH TO THE CHAIRWOMAN
FOR AUTHORING THIS BILL, I'M
HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AB
2877, MY NAME IS TRACY PIZZO
FERRÉ. I'M A SENIOR ADVISOR TO
COMMON SENSE MEDIA ON AI. I CAME
TO COMMON SENSE MEDIA AFTER
SPENDING 11 YEARS AT GOOGLE,
INCLUDING THREE YEARS AT GOOGLE
FOR EDUCATION RELEVANT TO THIS
HEARING. IN 2017, I CREATED AND
SUBSEQUENTLY RAN ALL OF GOOGLE
CLOUD'S RESPONSIBLE AI WORK
UNTIL MARCH OF 2022. AI IS
EVOLVING AT AN UNPRECEDENTED
PACE WITHOUT SUFFICIENT
GUARDRAILS TO PROTECT HUMAN
RIGHTS AND OUR DEMOCRACY. WHILE
AI PRESENTS MANY EXCITING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LEARNING,
DISCOVERY, INNOVATION AND
ECONOMIC GROWTH, THE STATUS QUO
PRESENTS SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES
THAT PUT THE SAFETY AND PRIVACY
OF ALL CALIFORNIA FANS, BUT
ESPECIALLY CHILDREN AND TEENS,
AT RISK. SPECIFIC SAFEGUARDS ARE
NEEDED WHEN DATA INGESTION AND
ANALYSIS IS INHERENTLY PART OF A
PRODUCT OR SERVICE, INCLUDING IN
WAYS THAT ARE OPAQUE TO
CONSUMERS. WHILE THERE ARE
SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS FROM AI
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, AMONG THE
MANY RISKS, ONE OF THEM IS THE
POTENTIAL TO WEAKEN OR EVADE
DATA PRIVACY PROTECTIONS FOR
MINORS. AB 2877 TAKES A SIMPLE
BUT IMPORTANT STEP IN ENSURING
THAT DATA COLLECTION USED IN THE
TRAINING OF AI MODELS IS ALIGNED
WITH THE CALIFORNIA PRIVACY
PROTECTION ACT. IT IS CRITICAL
THAT ALL AI PRODUCTS ARE
DESIGNED RESPONSIBLY, AND EVEN
MORE SO, AS WE'VE HEARD ABOUT
FOR THE EARLIER BILLS TODAY. FOR
PRODUCTS USED BY MINORS,
PRODUCTS BUILT WITH ETHICS AND
RESPONSIBILITY BY DESIGN SHOULD
INCLUDE ASSESSING USE BY MINORS
AND THE DATA THAT COMES FROM
THEM AT THE OUTSET OF PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT. THE RESULT OF THIS
SORT OF RESPONSIBLE AI PRACTICE
WILL SERVE TO MAKE THESE
PRODUCTS BOTH BETTER FOR
EVERYONE, MORE BENEFICIAL TO
MINORS, AND LIKELY TO BE MORE
SUCCESSFUL FOR THE ORGANIZATIONS
CREATING THEM. IT IS NOT
IMPOSSIBLE FOR AI PRODUCTS TO
PROTECT PRIVACY, BUT IN ORDER TO
DO SO, THEY NEED TO BE DESIGNED
WITH THAT GOAL FROM THE
BEGINNING. UNFORTUNATELY, THE
VAST MAJORITY OF EXISTING AI
TOOLS WERE NOT DESIGNED FROM THE
START. WITH PRIVACY IN MIND,
REQUIRING EXPRESS CONSENT FROM
CONSUMERS UNDER THE AGE OF 16
FOR USE OF THEIR DATA TO TRAIN
AI MODELS, AND FURTHER REQUIRING
THE DE-IDENTIFICATION AND
AGGREGATION OF THAT DATA IS AN
IMPORTANT STEP IN REALIZING THE
BENEFITS OF AI WHILE MITIGATING
THE HARMS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? GOOD AFTERNOON, MY
QUIXOTE WITH COMMON SENSE MEDIA
IN SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE.
THANK YOU. BRINA SHEEHY,
REPRESENTING PROTECTION OF THE
EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS.
ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? ANY NON PRIMARY
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. ROANOKE.
DELORME. ON BEHALF OF CAL
CHAMBER, WE DON'T HAVE A FORMAL
POSITION ON AB 2877 AT THIS
TIME, BUT WE FELT IT WAS
CRITICAL TO SPEAK ON THIS BILL
ON PROCESS ALONE. I WON'T
BELABOR THE POINT. AND I WANT TO
REALLY CONVEY OUR SINCERE
RESPECT FOR THIS COMMITTEE AND
THE AUTHOR AND THE CHAIR, BUT WE
FIND IT VERY CONCERNING TO SEE A
BILL GET GUTTED AND GUT AND
AMENDED FOUR DAYS PRIOR TO A
HEARING, PARTICULARLY THIS EARLY
IN THE PROCESS. WE, OF COURSE,
WILL BE REVIEWING THE BILL AND
LOOK FORWARD TO ENGAGING WITH
HER IN THE FUTURE. ON THIS. BUT
WE DID FEEL IT WAS CRITICAL TO
CONVEY OUR DISAPPOINTMENT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? MR. BRIAN I
THINK IF YOU'RE GONNA GUT THEM
IN FOUR DAYS BEFORE A HEARING TO
DO THAT IN THE FIRST HOUSE, IN
THE FIRST HEARING, I THINK IS
PLENTY OF PUBLIC NOTICE FOR
EVERYONE TO WEIGH IN AND BE A
PART OF THE PROCESS. AND KNOWING
THE AUTHOR, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT
EVERYONE WILL BE A PART OF THE
PROCESS, KUDOS TO YOUR WITNESS
WHO LAID THIS PROBLEM OUT PRETTY
PLAIN, AND THE JUSTIFICATION AND
RATIONALE FOR THIS BILL. THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING IT. THANK YOU,
MR. BRIAN. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
THERE'S A MOTION BY MISS WICKS
AND A SECOND BY MR. LOWENTHAL. I
WAS JUST, THINKING ABOUT THIS,
FIRST OF ALL, I, I TOTALLY AGREE
WITH THE INTENT. I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THE BILL. JUST
EXPRESSING, A LITTLE BIT, YOU
KNOW, THERE I THINK ARE PEOPLE
IT'S KIND OF A HOW DO YOU NUANCE
THIS? BUT PEOPLE UNDER 16 TÍNH
MAY BE FAMOUS PEOPLE. YOU KNOW
THAT VOLUNTARILY, AND THEY WANT
THEIR INFORMATION OUT THERE AND
MAYBE EVEN USED AS PART OF THESE
AI MODELS, SO THE AI MODELS CAN
TELL YOU ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THAT
PERSON BEING FAMOUS OR WHATEVER
IT IS. SO I WAS JUST THINKING
ABOUT THAT SITTING HERE. BUT THE
INTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING
ESSENTIALLY IS MY CHILDREN OR
YOUR CHILDREN OR ANYBODY ELSE'S
CHILDREN WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, JUST
HAVE THEIR, INFORMATION ON THE
WORLD WIDE WEBS AND I HAD A BILL
KIND OF LIKE THIS, NOT LIKE
THIS, BUT A BILL WITH ON
EDUCATION PLATFORMS THAT CAME
THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE, I THINK
LAST YEAR, OR MAYBE IT WAS THIS
YEAR, IT ALL RUNS TOGETHER, BUT,
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE SAME
CONCEPT IS THAT WHEN YOU PUT
THAT WE INTUITIVELY KNOW THAT
WHEN PEOPLE PUT THEIR PICTURES
OF THEIR KIDS ONLINE, HONESTLY,
WE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE'RE
ADMITTING WE KNOW THAT THAT'S
GOING TO GO OUT TO WHO KNOWS
WHERE. BUT IT STILL DOESN'T
REALLY MAKE ME COMFORTABLE THAT
THAT'S KIND OF LIKE MONETIZED
AND, YOU KNOW, USED FOR
SOLUTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT I DO HAVE SOME BLAME IN
THAT. BUT BUT I LIKE WHERE
YOU'RE GOING WITH THE BILL
PERSONALLY, SO I'D LIKE TO, YOU
KNOW, IT MAKES ME A LITTLE
NERVOUS BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY
FOUR DAYS, RIGHT? OR WHATEVER IT
WAS. BUT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO DO IS SPOT ON. THAT'S
GREAT. YOU KNOW, OUR CHILDREN
SHOULD NOT BE COMMODITIES, YOU
KNOW, COMMODITIES. SO WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU. I WILL
TAKE THAT AS MY CLOSE, MR. VICE
CHAIR. OH, THAT'S GOOD. I SHOULD
AUTHOR THIS BILL THEN. ALL
RIGHT. YOU'RE WELCOME. AS A
COAUTHOR, WOULD YOU TO. I
HAVEN'T READ THE WHOLE. I'M JUST
KIDDING. I'M JOKING. DON'T QUOTE
ME ON THAT. DIGITAL DEMOCRACY.
JUST BECAUSE WE CAN HERE NOW, WE
WON'T QUOTE YOU ON IT. I KNOW
EXACTLY MY BRAIN IS ALL OVER THE
PLACE RIGHT NOW. ALL RIGHT, ITEM
NUMBER FOUR, AB 2877 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BAUER KHN. THE MOTION IS
Dð PASS, AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. BAUER
KHN I B¢O KHN I PATTERSON I
PATTERSON I BRIAN. BRIAN I
DIXON. DIXON I HOOVER. IRWIN.
IRWIN I LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL I
ORTEGA. WARD WICKS I. WICKS, I
WILSON. ALL RIGHT. THAT BILL IS
OUT 7 TO 0. AND NOW WE'LL KEEP
IT OPEN. AND NOW THAT YOU'RE
BACK, I AM GOING TO HEALTH
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. MOVING
RIGHT ALONG. WE ARE GOING TO
HEAR AB 2808 WICKS. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS STAFF
WHO'VE WORKED ON THE BILL. I
WANT TO START OFF BY SAYING, I'M
GOING TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS TODAY, BUT WITH A
CAVEAT. AMENDMENT 2BI HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT. I THINK THE
INTENT IS TO BRING THE ARTISTS
INTO THE CONVERSATION, WHICH I
THINK IS CRITICAL, AND WE SHOULD
ABSOLUTELY DO THAT, BUT I DO
SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT,
SOME OF MY COALITION HAVE RAISED
AROUND THE POTENTIAL THAT IT
MIGHT UNDERMINE OR THE LANGUAGE
AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, MAYBE
ISN'T IN THE BEST INTEREST OF
CONSUMERS. AND SO I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE WORK TOGETHER
MOVING FORWARD. I KNOW THAT YOUR
GOAL IS TO PROTECT CONSUMERS, AS
IS MINE. AND SO AS THE BILL. IF
IT MOVES THROUGH COMMITTEE
TODAY, WE CAN WORK
COLLABORATIVELY TO ENSURE THAT
THAT'S THE PRIMARY FOCUS, IS
ENSURING THAT OUR CONSUMERS ARE
PROTECTED. AND SO, AS MENTIONED,
I'LL ACCEPT THAT. BUT REALLY
WANT TO OBVIOUSLY BILLS CHANGE
AS THEY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
BUT WITH SPECIFIC FOCUS ON
AMENDMENT TWO. B THE OTHER THING
I WANTED TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW,
THE PROPOSED, COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS IN THIS COMMITTEE, I
DON'T THINK REFLECT THE
COMMITMENT I MADE TO THE ARTS
CHAIR. SO IF THE BILL MOVES
FORWARD TODAY, I'M GOING TO,
WE'LL CONTINUE TO MAKE CHANGES
TO HONOR MY COMMITMENT TO THE
ARTS CHAIR, WHICH WAS TO EXEMPT
SPORTING EVENTS, AND IF WE GET
THE BILL OUT TODAY, THEN I'LL
CONTINUE TO DO THAT. SO I WANT
TO JUST BE CLEAR AROUND THOSE
TWO SPECIFIC ITEMS BEFORE WE
START, AND WITH THAT, HAPPY TO
PRESENT THE BILL, AS IS WRITTEN
IN THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS TODAY,
AS MANY OF US REMEMBER, WE USED
TO TAKE BUYING TICKETS TO
CONCERTS AND LIVE ENTERTAINMENT
VENUES, AT, BOX OFFICES. AND WE
USED TO GO INTO OUR COMMUNITY
AND BE WAITING IN LINE SOMETIMES
FOR HOURS, WHICH ACTUALLY HAD
ITS OWN BENEFITS. I THINK,
OBVIOUSLY HOW TICKETS ARE SOLD
HAS CHANGED CONSIDERABLY. AND
NOW WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE ONE
COMPANY, LIVE NATION
TICKETMASTER, THAT CONTROLS 80%
OF THE TICKET SALES SOLD IN THIS
NATION. IN 2010, TICKETMASTER
MERGED WITH LIVE NATION. DESPITE
ANTITRUST CONCERNS AND NOW
CONTROLS 80% OF TICKETING, THEY
ALSO CONTROL THE CAREER OF
HUNDREDS OF ARTISTS AND NEARLY
80% OF LIVE ENTERTAINMENT VENUES
. SINCE THESE COMPANIES BECAME
LIVE. SINCE THESE COMPANIES
BECAME ONE LIVE EVENT, TICKETING
PRICES HAVE ESCALATED 140,
ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, AS THE
COMPANY'S GRIP ON THE SUPPLY,
LOCATION AND PRICE OF EVENTS
TIGHTENS AS THE COMPANY NOW
DETERMINES WHO WINS AND WHO
LOSES NOT JUST AMONG CONSUMERS
BUT AMONGST ARTISTS AND VENUES
AS WELL. THIS IS NOT JUST A
PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA AS
DEMONSTRATED LAST WEEK WHEN THE
FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FILED AN ANTITRUST LAWSUIT
AGAINST LIVE NATION,
TICKETMASTER. WHILE IT MAY TAKE
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT YEARS TO
RESPOND, THE REALITY OF THIS
MONOPOLY IS A DISTORTED
MARKETPLACE IN WHICH FEW REAL
PEOPLE CAN ACCESS THE ULTRA
EXCLUSIVE PRIMARY SALES MARKET
AND MOST PEOPLE ARE FORCED INTO
SECONDARY MARKET. ALSO, LARGELY
DOMINATED BY TICKETMASTER OR
PROFESSIONAL TICKET PURCHASERS.
THRIVE, CONSUMERS DESERVE
BETTER, AND AB 2808 IS DESIGNED
TO ADDRESS AT THE HEART OF THE
PROBLEM, THE CONSUMERS TICKET
BUYING EXPERIENCE. AGAIN, THE
HEART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE LACK
OF COMPETITION AT THE POINT OF
SALE. AND THAT IS THE THING THAT
I AM COMMITTED TO WORKING ON AND
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HOLD
CLOSE TO US, REQUIRING MORE
COMPETITION AT THE PRIMARY POINT
OF SALE. WHEN THE TICKETS ARE
FIRST DISTRIBUTED OUT, THIS BILL
WILL MAKE TICKET RETAILERS
COMPETE AGAINST ONE ANOTHER FOR
OUR BUSINESS AT THE OUTSET OF
THAT SALE, JUST LIKE WE DO NOW
FOR HOTELS AND AIRLINES AND ALL
KINDS OF OTHER RETAIL
EXPERIENCES THAT WE HAVE ONLINE
AND IN OTHER WORDS, JUST LIKE
EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY IN THE
UNITED STATES. SO WE KNOW THE
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LAWSUIT IS
REAL. WE ALSO KNOW THAT IT'S
GOING TO TAKE TIME, BUT WE KNOW
THAT CALIFORNIANS DESERVE CHOICE
NOW. OUR CONSUMERS DESERVE
CHOICE NOW. AND MY ULTIMATE GOAL
WITH THIS BILL IS TO ENSURE THAT
WE ARE PROTECTING CONSUMERS, FOR
THOSE OF YOU THAT THAT KNOW ME,
KNOW THAT THAT IS A REALLY CORE
VALUE FOR THE WORK THAT I DO.
SINCE I'VE BEEN IN THIS
LEGISLATURE, SINCE I'VE BEEN
POLITICALLY ACTIVE. AND THAT IS
WHAT I WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO
THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THIS
BILL IS ENSURE THAT OUR
CONSUMERS HAVE MORE CHOICE,
BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT WILL
DRIVE DOWN THE TICKET PRICES.
I'LL ALSO SAY THERE'S A LOT TO
THIS WHOLE SPACE, AND I KNOW
WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS A LOT LAST
YEAR IN THIS COMMITTEE. I KNOW
THERE'S OTHER BILLS IN THIS
SPACE AS WELL, BUT I DO BELIEVE,
WELL INTENDED SMART PEOPLE CAN
GET TOGETHER AND TRY TO SOLVE
THIS PROBLEM, AND WE CAN DO IT
TOGETHER, EVEN WITH THE
COMPLEXITIES OF THE POLITICS OF
THE TICKETING SPACE. AND THAT IS
WHAT I AM COMMITTED TO, WITH ME
HERE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT IS
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA, ROBERT HARRELL.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS, I'M ROBERT HARRELL,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA. AND MY EARS HAVE
JUST STOPPED RINGING ABOUT 30S
AGO. I'M SURE YOURS ARE AS WELL.
WE'RE THE SPONSORS OF AB 2808.
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THE BILL FORWARD. THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA HAS WORKED FOR A
NUMBER OF YEARS ON BOTH
ANTI-MONOPOLY ISSUES AND ALSO
JUNK AND HIDDEN FEE ISSUES. AB
2808 REPRESENTS A STRONG
INTERSECTION OF BOTH THOSE
ISSUES, WE'RE ALSO A MEMBER OF
THE NATIONAL TICKET BUYER BILL
OF RIGHTS, ALONG WITH A NUMBER
OF OTHER NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
THAT FIGHT FOR CONSUMERS. THE
REASON WE'RE HERE TODAY ON THIS
BILL IS BECAUSE OF A MONOPOLY,
THE LIVE NATION, TICKETMASTER
MONOPOLY, THIS MONOPOLY
STRANGLES COMPETITION, CRUSHES
MINORITY ENTREPRENEURS, AND COST
CONSUMERS DEARLY IN A MYRIAD OF
WAYS, FROM OUTRAGEOUS FEES TO
TICKET PRICES THAT HAVE GONE UP
ASTRONOMICALLY. AS YOU JUST
HEARD FROM THE AUTHOR, MADAM
CHAIR, AS THIS COMMITTEE HEARD
EARLIER THIS YEAR IN YOUR
INFORMATIONAL HEARING AND IN
YOUR ANALYSIS AND COMMENT NUMBER
TWO ON PAGES SIX AND SEVEN,
DETAILS, THE MONOPOLY DIRECTLY
REPRESENTS HUNDREDS OF ARTISTS,
OWNS NUMEROUS VENUES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, HAS EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT
RIGHTS WITH MOST VENUES OF ALL
SIZES. CONTROLS 80% OF THE
PRIMARY OR INITIAL TICKETING
MARKET SOMEWHERE AROUND. BASED
ON ESTIMATES, TWO THIRDS OF THE
SECONDARY OR RESALE MARKET
THROUGH THEIR OWN PRODUCT THAT
IN MANY CASES THE MONOPOLY
FORCES CONSUMERS TO USE IF THEY
WANT TO RESALE A TICKET. THE
POWER EXTENDS TO THOSE IN THE
LIVE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY WHO
AREN'T DIRECTLY REPRESENTED BY
THE MONOPOLY. TO BE CLEAR, YOUR
ANALYSIS ALSO POINTS THIS OUT
VERY ADEPTLY ONE A TOUR AND USE
A VENUE NOT CONTROLLED BY THE
MONOPOLY. GOOD LUCK. WANT TO USE
A TICKETER OTHER THAN
TICKETMASTER TO HAVE FUN PLAYING
YOUR SHOW AND YOUR FRIEND'S
BACKYARD PATIO. SINCE NO OTHER
VENUES YOUR SIZE WILL BE
AVAILABLE, THAT'S MONOPOLY
MARKET POWER IN ACTION. THE
ROBBER BARONS, WHO IN ESSENCE
INVENTED THE AMERICAN VERSION OF
THE MONOPOLY IN THE 18 AND
1900S, SUCH AS VANDERBILT,
CARNEGIE MELLON, J.P. MORGAN AND
ROCKEFELLER WOULD ALL BE SO
PROUD OF LIVE NATION AND
TICKETMASTER. BUT WE SHOULDN'T
BE. THESE ANTI-CONSUMER AND
ANTI-COMPETITIVE TACTICS ALSO
BREAK THE LAW. SO MUCH SO THAT
LAST WEEK, THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL REPORTED THAT THE
FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IS
REPORTEDLY PREPARING A MASSIVE
ANTITRUST LAWSUIT AGAINST THE
MONOPOLY AS EARLY AS NEXT MONTH.
HISTORY HAS SHOWN US THAT TWO
THINGS USUALLY HAVE TO HAPPEN TO
REDUCE MONOPOLY POWER. THE FIRST
IS GOVERNMENTAL ANTITRUST ACTION
. THIS APPEARS TO BE PENDING
WITH THE FEDERAL DOJ. HOPEFULLY
CALIFORNIA'S AG WILL BE PART OF
THAT. THE SECOND IS FOR BODIES
LIKE THIS TO TAKE STRONG ACTION
TO PROTECT CONSUMERS AND
ENCOURAGE TRUE COMPETITION. NONE
OF WHICH IS HAPPENING IN A
MEANINGFUL WAY IN THE CURRENT
TICKETING AND LIVE EVENT
INDUSTRY. THAT'S WHERE AB 2808
COMES IN. THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE SHOULD TAKE STRONG
ACTION TO RESTRICT THE POWER OF
THE MONOPOLY. THIS BILL ATTEMPTS
TO DO JUST THAT. IT'S NEVER EASY
TO TAKE ON A MONOPOLY. LET'S BE
CLEAR THEY HAVE OTHER ANCILLARY
ORGANIZATIONS THAT DEFEND THEIR
PRACTICES AND SERVE AS A BIT OF
A SHIELD FOR DIRECT CRITICISM OF
THEIR TACTICS. IF TAKING ON A
MONOPOLY WAS EASY, EVERYBODY BE
DOING IT. BUT HARDLY ANYBODY
DOES. IT BUT ASSEMBLYMEMBER WICK
SAYS, WITH THIS BILL AND SHOW
AND SO SHOULD THIS COMMITTEE, WE
SHOULD WRAP UP WHEN YOU GET A
CHANCE. THANKS I JUST WANTED TO
FINISH MADAM CHAIR, JUST BY
NOTING THAT, AS THE AUTHOR
NOTED, WE DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS
WITH THE AT THE TOP OF PAGE 11
OF THE ANALYSIS THAT TO BE WE
ARE COMMITTED TO WORK WITH ALL
STAKEHOLDERS ON THAT LANGUAGE.
WE JUST WORRY THAT IT WOULD
HAVE, POTENTIALLY THE OPPOSITE
IMPACT OF WHAT THE INTENDED
IMPACT IS. SO WITH THAT, WE
THANK YOU. AND ON BEHALF OF A
NUMBER OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
THAT DON'T HAVE LOBBYISTS AND
AREN'T HERE, CæA, LULAC, ETC. OR
GENEVA. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE HERE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL? COME ON UP. MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS, AARON NÚMERO
REPRESENTING STUBHUB IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL IN PRINT. WE HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT TO BE AS WELL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MADAM
CHAIR, MEMBERS. JAMES JACK, HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE COALITION FOR
TICKET FAIRNESS, WE REMAIN IN
SUPPORT AND THANK THE AUTHOR AND
SPONSOR FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A TWEENER?
COME ON UP. THIS IS YOUR MOMENT,
MADAM CHAIR. COURTNEY JENSEN, ON
BEHALF OF SEATGEEK AND TICKPICK,
WE DON'T HAVE A FORMAL POSITION
ON THE BILL, BUT ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE AMENDMENT TO BE LISTED
IN THE ANALYSIS. THANK YOU.
WIENER WIENER. OKAY, SO I KNOW
WHAT JULIE BAKER, CALIFORNIA
ARTS ADVOCATES, REPRESENTING THE
NONPROFITS, THANKS TO THE AUTHOR
AND TO THE COMMITTEE FOR WORKING
WITH US ON AMENDMENTS. WE ARE
STILL IN OPPOSITION THÀNH UNTIL
WE HAVE A CHANCE TO REALLY
REVIEW THEM. I DID WANT TO MAKE
ONE QUICK POINT, THOUGH, AROUND
UCS AND CSUS THAT HAVE OPERATE
PERFORMING ARTS ON ON THEIR
CAMPUSES THAT ARE NOT
RECOGNIZED. 501 C THREE SECONDS
TO CONSIDER THEM ALSO AS EXEMPT.
THANK YOU. HELLO EVERYONE. WENDY
PACHECO WITH THE YOUTH
LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE, AN
ORGANIZATION THAT AMPLIFIES
YOUTH VOICE AND I AM IN SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HELLO. ANDREA GIL,
CONSTITUENT. AND I AM SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CARLOS SINGER, ON
BEHALF OF THE LOS ANGELES
PHILHARMONIC, WE ARE A NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION THAT OPERATES THE
HOLLYWOOD BOWL, THE FORD
THEATER, AND THE WALT DISNEY
CONCERT HALL IN LOS ANGELES. ALL
OF WHICH ARE NOT OWNED BY US AS
A NONPROFIT BUT ARE OPERATED BY
US. SO WE'RE HOPING TO SEE THE,
LANGUAGE, ONCE IT ACTUALLY
BECOMES AVAILABLE. AND SO WE ARE
ARTICULATING AN OPPOSITION UNTIL
WE SEE SUCH AMENDMENTS. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY
PRINCIPLE WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION JOIN US AT THE TABLE.
TWO MINUTES EACH. YOU CAN GO IN
WHATEVER ORDER YOU SO CHOOSE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MY NAME IS
PRASHANT KUMAR. I'M AN ARTIST
MANAGER AND CONSULTANT BASED IN
THE EAST BAY AREA. I SERVE AS A
BUSINESS PARTNER, MANAGER AND
CONSULTANT TO ARTISTS FROM
CREATION TO PROMOTION. SO I'M
WORKING WITH THEM IN THE STUDIO,
WITH DISTRIBUTION, MARKETING AND
ALSO WITH THEIR TOURING, I'M
HERE TODAY WITH THE ARTISTS
MUSIC ARTIST COALITION TO SPEAK
ABOUT HOW THIS BILL AFFECTS
ARTISTS AND THEIR FANS, FIRST,
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIR AND
THE AUTHOR FOR THEIR CONTINUED
WORK ON RESPECTING ARTISTS
RIGHTS. WHILE WE ARE STILL
OPPOSED, WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE
CONTINUED DISCUSSION. I KNOW
THIS BILL WAS WRITTEN WITH THE
BEST INTENTIONS, BUT AS SOMEONE
WHO IS ON THE FRONT LINES WITH
THE CREATIVES, THIS BILL IS
STILL CREATING MORE PROBLEMS FOR
THE FAN EXPERIENCE THAN THE
CURRENT SYSTEM. AS AN ARTIST
REPRESENTATIVE, I CARE ABOUT THE
MUSIC FANS, THE ARTISTS AND
THEIR TEAMS, THE BIGGEST PROBLEM
WE'RE FACING FOR FANS AND
ARTISTS IS UNREGULATED, FOR
PROFIT RESALE AND THE SECONDARY
PLATFORMS WHO BENEFIT THE MOST
FROM OUTLANDISH PRICES AND ALSO
LACK OF CONSUMER PROTECTIONS.
BUT BUT WE DON'T SEE A DIME.
ARTISTS WE SEE WE DON'T SEE ANY
MONEY FROM THE HIGH PRICES. ALL
THE SECONDARY SOURCES DO, THERE
NEEDS TO BE A BETTER
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ARTISTS
AND THE TICKETING VENDORS AND OR
THIRD PARTIES, NOT JUST THE
VENUE. WHILE I KNOW THAT THE
COMMITTEE AND AUTHOR ARE WORKING
TO ADDRESS OUR WORRIES, THE
SYSTEM PROPOSED WOULD CREATE TOO
MUCH CHAOS FOR ARTISTS AND FANS
AND NOT ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES
THAT WE ARE FACING.
RESPECTFULLY, I ASK THAT WE
CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS BILL.
CHAIR AND MEMBERS, ALEX TORRES
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL
INDEPENDENT VENUE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA, WE REPRESENT
APPROXIMATELY 500 INDEPENDENT
BRICK AND MORTAR VENUES AND
FESTIVAL PROMOTERS IN THE STATE.
WE ARE OPPOSED. WE WERE OPPOSED
UNLESS SIGNIFICANTLY AMENDED IN
THE BILLS PREVIOUS ITERATION.
ONE EXPRESSED A THANK YOU TO THE
AUTHORS WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH
US AND TO YOURSELF AND YOUR
TEAM. MADAM CHAIR, FEW POINTS OF
CONCERN HERE. FIRST, THE
CAPACITY QUESTION MARK, WHICH IS
ADDRESSED IN THE ANALYSIS OF
CALIFORNIA'S MEMBERSHIP, HAS A
VARIETY OF TICKET PROVIDERS TO
CHOOSE FROM. WE OFTEN HAVE
MULTIPLE PLATFORMS ETIX, DICE
LIGHT TIX ARE COMPETING TO
SERVICE OUR VENUES ON THE SIZE
OF THE VENUES. THIS MEASURE
SHOULD APPLY, SHOULD APPLY TO.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE PROTECT
INDEPENDENT VENUES THAT RELY ON
EXCLUSIVE CONTRACTS WITH TICKET
SELLERS TO PROVIDE NECESSARY
REVENUE AND TECHNICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE, AS THE ANALYSIS
CORRECTLY POINTS OUT, WE ALSO
CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR
LANGUAGE TO PROVIDE SIMILAR
PROTECTIONS FOR MUSIC FESTIVALS
AND SPACES THAT ARE NOT
INHERENTLY VENUES THAT MIGHT
FALL INTO THIS SYSTEM. SYSTEM OF
A DOWN AND DEFTONES ARE DOING A
SHOW AT GOLDEN GATE PARK IN
AUGUST AND PROMOTED BY AN INDIE
BAY AREA BASED PROMOTER. WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE ABILITY
TO DO SHOWS LIKE THAT WITH A
TRUSTED TICKETING PROVIDER AND
NOT PLACE ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON
INDIE PROMOTERS WHO HAVE SMALLER
STAFFS AND LESS RESOURCES.
OTHERWISE, THE WHOLE COMPETITIVE
PIECE OF THIS IS THROWN OUT.
OTHERWISE LARGER PROMOTERS WILL
JUST DO THE WORK THAT INDIE
PROMOTERS CAN'T AFFORD TO DO
WITH THOSE RESOURCES. SECOND, WE
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON
LOGISTICAL APPLICATIONS OF THE
BILL FOR R&D PROMOTERS. IF THERE
ARE MULTIPLE PRIMARY TICKETING
PROVIDERS FOR A LARGE VENUE THAT
CREATES, VENUES MIGHT HAVE TO
HAVE DEDICATED ENTRANCES FOR
DIFFERENT PROVIDERS BECAUSE
SCANNING DEVICES DIFFER BETWEEN
PLATFORMS. HOW WOULD THE VENUE
AND PROMOTER DEAL WITH REFUNDS?
BECAUSE EACH PROVIDER HAS
DIFFERENT REFUND POLICIES. AND I
WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ARTIST
EMPOWERMENT PROVISION OF THE
BILL ENSHRINING IN STATE LAW THE
RIGHTS OF ARTISTS TO CONTROL
THEIR OWN WORK PRODUCT ONLY
SUGGESTION IS TO CONTINUE THE
WORK THERE, TO MAKE SURE ARTISTS
, WE TALK ABOUT THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS THERE TO MAKE SURE IT
BALANCES, THE ARTIST NEEDS WHAT
THE ARTISTS LIKE TO DO, AS WELL
AS THE VENUES ABILITY TO
ACTUALLY DELIVER ON THAT AND
WORK WITH THE ARTISTS, LASTLY,
THE DEFINITION OF CONSUMER AS
PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED IS
CRITICAL. THE CONSUMERS ARE THE
REASON INDEPENDENT VENUES ARE IN
BUSINESS. AND THAT MAKES IT
CLEAR THE CONSUMER IS AN ACTUAL
PERSON INTENDING TO GO TO A
SHOW, NOT A PLATFORM OR A PERSON
IN THE BUSINESS OF RESELLING A
TICKET. AND THIS IS A BATTLE.
INDEPENDENT VENUES ARE
CONTINUING TO FIGHT ACROSS THE
NATION TO MAKE SURE THAT IS
ABUNDANTLY CLEAR. SO WITH THAT
SAID, I DO WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR AGAIN, THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFF AND LOOK FORWARD
TO THE CONVERSATIONS TO COME ON
THIS IMPORTANT MEASURE. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION? COME ON UP. NAME,
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION,
PLEASE. CRYSTAL STRAIT, ON
BEHALF OF THE MUSIC ARTS
COALITION. AGAIN THANK YOU FOR
TOOBY. WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE
CHAIR AND THE AUTHOR AND LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING AS YOU
CONTINUE ON. THANK YOU. MELISSA
CORTEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE SAN
FRANCISCO 49 ERS, RESPECTFULLY
IN OPPOSITION, I HOPE WE CAN
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE AUTHOR
ON THIS. TIM LYNCH, ON BEHALF OF
THE GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS AND
CONTINUED OPPOSITION. AND JUST
TWO QUICK OBSERVATIONS. ONE I
MADE IN THE LAST COMMITTEE
RELATIVE TO THE SPORTS
EXEMPTION, IS THAT WE DO MORE
THAN SPORTS. THAT'S ONLY 30% OF
WHAT HAPPENS AT CHASE CENTER. SO
DISENTANGLING THOSE TWO IS
NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE. AND THEN
WE'LL BE FOCUSED ON THE
EXCLUSIVITY PROVISIONS OF THE
BILL, WHICH WE OPPOSED IN SB 829
WILK. MCKAY CARNEY, ON BEHALF OF
THE SAN JOSE SHARKS,
RESPECTFULLY IN OPPOSITION.
MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS, I WOULD
KIDANI REPRESENTING THE LOS
ANGELES CLIPPERS AND THE LOS
ANGELES RAMS, APPRECIATE THE ALL
THE AUTHOR'S DILIGENCE IN THIS
MATTER AND WILLINGNESS TO WORK
WITH US. WE CONTINUE TO HAVE
CONCERNS WITH THE BILL, BUT LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH HER,
THROUGH THIS PROCESS. MADAM
CHAIR, MEMBERS, CARL LONDON, ON
BEHALF OF THE RECORDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, STANDING
IN COALITION WITH OUR ARTIST
PARTNERS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
I'LL TAKE A MOMENT OF PERSONAL
PRIVILEGE AND SAY THAT WE HAD AN
INCREDIBLE INFORMATIONAL HEARING
WHERE THE TEAMS OPTED NOT TO
SHOW UP AND PROVIDE THEIR
THOUGHTS ON TICKETING, AND I
THINK THAT ABSENCE IS CLEAR
TODAY. SO IN THE FUTURE, WHEN
FOLKS ARE INVITED TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION TO THIS COMMITTEE, I
ADVISE YOU TO SHOW UP, ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE.
YES, MISTER BRIAN, I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THE BILL TODAY, A LOT OF
LOVE AND RESPECT FOR THE AUTHOR.
I JUST, THIS IS A VERY
COMPLICATED ISSUE, YOU MENTIONED
HOTELS IN YOUR OPENING, AND I
WAS SITTING AND THINKING ABOUT
IT, AND I WAS LIKE, ALL RIGHT,
WELL, THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU'VE
GOT EXPEDIA AND ORBIT AND ALL
THESE COMPETING PEOPLE PUTTING
HOTEL ROOMS UP. THE DIFFERENCE
IS, THOUGH, ONCE I BOOK MY NIGHT
AT THE CITIZEN, THERE'S NO
SECONDARY MARKET FOR ME TO SELL
THAT ROOM FOR TWO, THREE, FOUR
TIMES X. SO EVEN IF I HAVE
COMPETITION AT THE PRIMARY
SOURCE, SOMEONE CAN STILL GO
THROUGH ALL OF THE PLATFORMS,
BUY UP THE COMPETING PRICES, AND
CREATE THE NEW SECOND OR THIRD
MARKET. IT'S ESPECIALLY RELEVANT
TO ME TODAY BECAUSE I WAS
LOOKING FOR FAT HAM TICKETS TO
SURPRISE MY FIANCE IN LOS
ANGELES, ONLY TO SEE THAT
THEY'RE SOLD OUT AND ONLY ON THE
SECONDARY MARKET AT $400 A
PIECE. SO WE'RE NOT GOING, I
THINK ALSO, WHILE I RECOGNIZE
KIND OF THE MONOPOLISTIC
CHARACTERISTICS OF LIVE NATION
AND TICKETMASTER AND THAT
ENTANGLEMENT, I THINK THERE'S
DEFINITELY A LOT TO UNPACK THERE
, I KNOW THAT THE ARTISTS FEEL
LIKE THEY HAVE MORE CONTROL IN
THIS RELATIONSHIP THAN THEY
MIGHT OTHERWISE, AND THAT'S
WHAT'S FORCED NEW TECHNOLOGIES
LIKE THE LOTTERY SYSTEMS AND
OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE ALLOWED
THEM TO CONTROL, YOU KNOW, THE
PATHWAYS FOR THEIR TRUE FANS TO
GAIN ACCESS. I KNOW I'VE, AGAIN,
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BENEFITED
FROM ADELE'S VEGAS RESIDENCY,
WHERE TICKETS WENT ONLINE AND
THERE WAS A LOTTERY SOFTWARE
THAT WAS CREATED THAT ALLOWED
FOR KIND OF THE TRUE FANS TO BE
ABLE TO, TO GET IN THERE BEFORE
THEY SOLD OUT IN MINUTES. AND SO
I TRUST THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
WORK THROUGH ALL OF THIS AND
ACTUALLY HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE,
BUT INCREDIBLY INSPIRED TO SEE
YOU TAKE ON SUCH AN INCREDIBLY
COMPLICATED AND RIGHTEOUS ISSUE.
SO THANK YOU FOR LEADING THAT
FIGHT, AND AGAIN, YOU HAVE MY
SUPPORT TODAY. THANK YOU, MR.
RYAN. MR. NGUYEN, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND I DO SHARE THE CONCERN
THAT WE HEARD FROM A LOT OF THE
SPEAKERS THAT POTENTIALLY SOME
OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTIONS ARE
UNDERMINED WITH THE AMENDMENT
BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT
STRUCTURE, THE CURRENT
TICKETING, INFRASTRUCTURE, WE
HAD A VERY GOOD OVERSIGHT
HEARING I WORKED ON WITH
ASSEMBLY MEMBER FRIEDMAN ON, AB
EIGHT, AND IT IS A EXTREMELY
COMPLICATED ISSUE, AND I KNOW
THAT, YOU HAVE A LOT OF
DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS TO LISTEN
TO, BUT IT IS ONCE YOU DEAL WITH
THE ISSUES OF ONE GROUP, THEN
ANOTHER GROUP IS NOT HAPPY. SO
IT'S QUITE A BALANCING ACT TO
GET THROUGH. BUT I'M SURE IF YOU
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CHAIR
OF THE COMMITTEE, THAT'S, WE
HOPEFULLY CAN RESOLVE THIS ISSUE
AND REALLY MAKE, THE CONSUMER
MAKE SURE THAT THE CONSUMER HAS
THE EXPERIENCE THAT THEY SHOULD.
THANK YOU, MR. NGUYEN. MISS
WILSON, THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR
FOR TRYING TO ATTACK. ATTACK
TWO, A SLAP BABY TO ADDRESS IS
THE WORD I MEANT TO USE. ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE, AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS
IT IS COMPLICATED. AS IS NOTED,
FROM MY COLLEAGUES WAS
DEFINITELY NOTED FROM THE
ANALYSIS, AND, AND FOR ME, AS A
JUST A CONSUMER, AND ONLY BEING
ABLE TO REALLY LOOK AT THIS BILL
OVER THE LAST 24 HOURS AND
VARIOUS ITERATIONS OF SUCH, I
STILL FIND IT QUITE CONFUSING
AND COMPLEX, AND, AND SO MY
GUIDING PRINCIPLES IS LOOKING AT
THIS IS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE AND AN
UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE AND
TRYING TO HOW DO YOU THEN THREAD
THE NEEDLE, TO ADDRESS THE UN
AND UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
? NOT SAYING THAT EXISTS, BUT
THAT IT WAS WHAT I WAS LOOKING
THROUGH IS IF NOT JUST BECAUSE I
DON'T THINK AS A LEGISLATURE,
IT'S IN OUR POSITION TO, ADDRESS
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES THAT IS
ESSENTIAL TO THE MARKET. AND,
AND, BUT IF THERE IS AN UNFAIR
ONE THROUGH LACK OF REGULATION,
THEN LET'S, WEIGH IN ON THERE.
AND SO, MY CONCERN LOOKING AT
THE, THE ONE THAT'S IN MY BOOK
AND IN MY IPAD AND THEN, SOME OF
THE AMENDMENTS LATER IS, I DON'T
KNOW IF WE HIT THAT HAT THAT
SPACE YET, AND THROUGH, YOU
KNOW, I DIDN'T GET TO HEAR THE
FIRST PART OF YOUR TESTIMONY. MY
APOLOGIES WAS IN ANOTHER
COMMITTEE, BUT I ALSO, I DON'T I
DON'T PERSONALLY, AND I DON'T
KNOW IF I'LL BE SUPPORTING
TODAY, BUT I'M INTERESTED IN THE
DIALOG FROM THE REST OF MY
COLLEAGUES IS I DON'T KNOW IF
THERE'S ENOUGH RUNWAY, IN THIS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION, TO. I'M
SORRY. WHILE IT'S IN OUR HOUSE
TO ADDRESS ALL, ALL THE CONCERNS
THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP
BECAUSE AS WAS NOTED FROM MY
COLLEAGUE, IS THAT, YOU KNOW,
ADDRESSING ONE PERSON'S CONCERNS
CREATES ISSUES FOR ANOTHER. AND
IT IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE. AND I
WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE ROBUST
CONVERSATIONS WITH ALL THE
STAKEHOLDERS, SO THAT THE
INITIAL BILL THAT'S INTRODUCED
IS JUST TWEAKS, YOU KNOW, TO
FINE TUNE, BASED ON PERSPECTIVES
NOT UNDERSTOOD VERSUS TRYING TO,
YOU KNOW, CRAFT IT AS, AS YOU GO
, AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE
CONCERN, YOU KNOW, THAT I HAVE.
AND SO MY I'LL ASK THE QUESTION,
AS THE FINAL OF MY STATEMENTS IS
JUST, WHERE DO YOU SEE AND, AND,
AND YOUR LANGUAGE, WHERE YOU
FEEL LIKE YOU ARE ADDRESSING
THE. YOU KNOW, THE ONLY PART
THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS IF
THERE'S AN UNFAIR COMPETITIVE
ADVANTAGE. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND
I THINK THIS MIGHT SPEAK TO ALSO
MR. BRIAN'S REMARKS AS WELL.
AND, AND MISS IRWIN'S, YOU KNOW,
I SEE A CLEAR UNFAIR COMPETITIVE
ADVANTAGE WITH TICKETMASTER LIVE
NATION, YOU KNOW, TICKETMASTER,
LIVE NATION CONTROLS BOTH THE
VERTICAL AND THE HORIZONTAL OF
THE INDUSTRY ACROSS THE BOARD,
THE MANAGERS, THE PROMOTERS, THE
VENUES, THE TICKET DISTRIBUTION
AND THE PRIMARY MARKET AND THE
SECONDARY MARKET ACROSS THE
BOARD, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. AND
80% OF THE VENUES, FOR INSTANCE,
IN THIS COUNTRY ARE ARE LIVE
NATION, TICKETMASTER. PLUS THEY
CONTROL THE TICKET SALES. I
MEAN, Ã AND THERE'S BEEN
NUMEROUS, YOU KNOW, SENATE
HEARINGS ON THIS AND
INVESTIGATIONS. OBVIOUSLY THE
ANTITRUST LAWSUIT THAT WAS
ISSUED LAST WEEK BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, I THINK
IS GOING TO TRY TO GET TO SOME
OF THESE ISSUES AROUND THE
UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE, AS
YOU MENTIONED. RIGHT. SO TO ME,
THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THAT
EXISTS. THE QUESTION IS THEN
WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT? AND I
THINK THERE'S ALSO VALID
CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED
AROUND THE SECONDARY MARKET. I
MEAN, I THINK ALL OF THESE
THINGS ARE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.
BUT I ALSO THINK PART OF THE
CONCERNS AROUND THE SECONDARY
MARKET COME BECAUSE THERE IS NO
COMPETITION IN THE PRIMARY
MARKET. SO YOU HAVE TO I THINK,
TACKLE ALL OF THESE THINGS
TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, AS NOTED,
SENATOR KABIRU HAS A BILL THAT'S
FOCUSED ON THE SECONDARY MARKET,
MY BILL IS FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON
THE PRIMARY MARKET, AND MY HOPE
IS THAT WE CAN GET INTO A PLACE
WHERE WE CAN CREATE, A I DON'T I
DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF I
WANT TO CALL IT LIKE A PACKAGE
OF BILLS, BUT COMPLEMENTARY
BILLS THAT SEEK TO REALLY TACKLE
THIS HOLISTICALLY, THAT ADDRESS
THAT, SO THAT ULTIMATELY, AT THE
END OF THE DAY, THERE IS THERE'S
FAIRNESS FOR CONSUMERS, THERE'S
MORE AGENCY FOR ARTISTS, THAT
THE CONNECTION OF THOSE TWO
ENTITIES IS STRONGER BECAUSE
THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS IN THE
MIDDLE, AND I ALSO RECOGNIZE
THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS IN THE
MIDDLE ARE NEEDED TO PULL OFF
BIG CONCERTS AND PROMOTE THEM
THE RIGHT WAY AND DO ALL THAT
SORT OF STUFF. THAT'S PART OF
THE BUSINESS OF, OF MUSIC
SPECIFICALLY, BUT MY HOPE IS
THAT WE CAN CRAFT SOMETHING THAT
REALLY BENEFITS CONSUMERS,
BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE MY FOCUS
IS, WHICH IS WHY I'VE BEEN VERY,
SPECIFICALLY DEDICATED TO,
ENSURING COMPETITION AT THE
PRIMARY POINT OF SALE. SO THAT'S
THE PIECE THAT WE'RE STILL
WORKING THROUGH. I'LL ALSO SAY
WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN OUR
FIRST HOUSE OF ORIGIN WHERE, YOU
KNOW, IT WENT TO IT WAS IN,
WHAT, JUDICIARY, YOU KNOW, ART,
SORRY. ARTS COMMITTEE LAST WEEK,
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, A CHAIR IN
THE ARTS COMMITTEE WHO HAS
OPINIONS ON THIS THAT ARE VERY
VALID AND IMPORTANT CHAIR OF
PRIVACY, WHO ALSO HAS SPECIFIC
OPINIONS. SO FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE, WORKING WITH THE
CHAIRS, WHO'S THE BILL HAS BEEN
IN THOSE COMMITTEES MAKING SURE
THAT THEY ARE ALSO COMFORTABLE
WITH WHAT WE'RE CRAFTING HERE.
BECAUSE I WANT TO RESPECT THEIR
AUTHORITY IN THIS PROCESS AND
THEIR LEVEL OF EXPERTISE IN THIS
PROCESS IS PART OF IT. HAVING
SAID ALL THAT, I RECOGNIZE THIS
IS A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. AS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER ERWIN CAN ATTEST
TO, AS WELL AS MISS FRIEDMAN.
BUT THAT'S THE GOAL IS TO CREATE
AN OVERALL, YOU KNOW,
COMPLEMENTARY BILLS WITH THE
SENATOR, SENATOR CABALLERO, THAT
WILL HOPEFULLY PUT REFORMS BOTH
ON THE PRIMARY MARKET AND THE
SECONDARY MARKET. THE CHAIR ONE
FOLLOW UP, YOU NOTED, AND THANK
YOU FOR MENTIONING IT, THE, THE
INVESTIGATION, GIVEN THAT THERE
IS A INVESTIGATION THAT WOULD
DETERMINE WHETHER ANY ANTITRUST
LAWS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED. AND OF
COURSE, THROUGH THAT PROCESS,
THERE WOULD BE ACTUAL ACTION IF
IT IS TRUE, RIGHT, BECAUSE,
YEAH, THE INVESTIGATION YOU
CAN'T SAY IT IS. IT'S AN
ALLEGATION. OAN. RIGHT, SO
WOULDN'T THEN TRYING TO NAVIGATE
IN THIS SPACE, BE PREMATURE?
WELL, IT COULD TAKE YEARS. YOU
KNOW, I MEAN, THESE
INVESTIGATIONS TAKE A LONG TIME,
SO, YOU KNOW, WE COULD WAIT FOR
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON A LOT
OF THINGS. AND NØ VERY TRUE, BUT
I'M JUST NOTING THE FACT THAT
THERE IS AN ACTIVE INVESTIGATION
THAT'S BROUGHT OUT, THAT THERE
IS CONCERN ALLEGATIONS. THERE'S
AND THROUGH THAT INVESTIGATION,
THERE IS EXPERTISE THAT IS
INVOLVED, WHERE THE THEY HAVE,
MUCH AT THEIR DISPOSAL TO BE
ABLE TO PROPERLY INVESTIGATE AND
REALLY THREAD THE NEEDLE TO BE
ABLE TO PROTECT EVERYONE IN
THEORY. AND SO, SO SINCE IT'S
SUCH A COMPLICATED ISSUE, AND
THE WAY IT'S BEING DEALT WITH IS
PRETTY COMPLEX, IT'S NOT TRYING
TO INCREMENTALLY BE DO ANYTHING.
IT'S TRYING TO TACKLE THE WHOLE,
SO THAT, THAT, IS A CAUSE OF
CONCERN THAT IT MAY BE PREMATURE
AS WELL. BUT THANK YOU. I, YOU
KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT
YOU'RE DOING IN THE SPACE FOR
SURE. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND MY HOPE IS TO GET THIS BILL
OUT OF COMMITTEE TODAY SO THAT
WE CAN CONTINUE THOSE
CONVERSATIONS, WORK WITH SENATOR
CABALLERO, WORK WITH ALL THE
STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE A PART OF
THIS. AND THERE ARE A LOT IT'S A
VERY COMPLICATED BILL SO THAT WE
CAN KEEP FLESHING OUT AND
HAVING, REAL DIALOG AND
HOPEFULLY LANDING ON SOME
SOLUTIONS HERE THAT WORK FOR
EVERYONE. THANK YOU, MR. HOOVER.
THANK YOU, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE
STAFF FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS BILL
, OBVIOUSLY VERY COMPLEX ISSUE.
I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING VERY
HARD ON IT, AND I'VE BEEN
WRESTLING WITH IT. HONESTLY, IT
IS, YOU KNOW, VERY COMPLICATED.
BUT YOU KNOW, I GET THE KIND OF
FRUSTRATION AND DIFFICULTIES
BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY,
ALL OF THAT. I THINK MY QUESTION
AND WHERE MY CONCERN REMAINS
TODAY AND WHY I'M STRUGGLING
WITH THE BILL, IS REALLY THE
CONCERN FROM THE ARTISTS. AND SO
I WAS I WAS WONDERING IF YOU
COULD SPEAK TO THAT BRIEFLY ON
JUST LIKE, WHAT WHAT YOU THINK
CAN BE DONE TO ADDRESS THOSE
CONCERNS? BECAUSE REALLY, I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
ARTISTS MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW,
THEIR THEIR FLEXIBILITY AND
THEIR FREEDOM IN THIS PROCESS AS
WELL. SURE I, I'M HAPPY TO
OPINE, BUT I ALSO WOULDN'T MIND
HEARING FROM THE ARTISTS ON
THAT. BUT I'M HAPPY TO GIVE YOU
MY OPINION ON IT. AS WELL.
THAT'D BE GREAT AS WELL. BUT I
LOVE BOTH, HONESTLY. YEAH, YEAH.
I MEAN, I THINK AND SPECIFICALLY
AROUND TOOBY THAT THAT SPECIFIC
AMENDMENT, I THINK SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED BY THE
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME BACK
UP AND SAY, I THINK THE INTENT
OF THAT AMENDMENT IS TO ENSURE
THAT THE ARTISTS HAVE A SEAT AT
THE TABLE HERE IN A IN A SERIOUS
WAY, WHICH I AGREE WITH THE
INTENT OF THAT. I THINK SOME OF
THE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY
THE CONSUMER GROUPS, AND
OBVIOUSLY ROBERT SHOULD JUMP IN
HERE WITH THE PLEASURE OF THE
CHAIR. IS THAT AS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN, THE LANGUAGE, DOESN'T
PUT THE CONSUMER FIRST AND
FOREMOST IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE,
A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE ARTISTS
ARE STILL, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY
UNDER EMPLOYMENT BY LIVE, LIVE
NATION, TICKETMASTER. AND SO I
THINK THAT'S PART OF THE
CONCERN, OBVIOUSLY THE CONSUMER
GROUP SHOULD SPEAK OUT TO THAT
MORE SPECIFICALLY, BUT I THINK
THAT'S PART OF THE CHALLENGE.
AND SO HOW DO WE TETHER
TOGETHER, ENSURING THAT ARTISTS
HAVE REAL RIGHTS IN THE BILL
WHILE ALSO HONORING THE
CONSUMERS IS, I THINK, WHERE I'M
TRYING TO MAKE THIS PLANE LAND,
WHICH IS WHAT MY GOAL IS COMING
OUT OF THIS ONCE WE GET THE BILL
OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE. THROUGH
THE CHAIR, IF I MIGHT BRIEFLY,
PLEASE. YEAH. WE HAVE TO BE OUT
OF HERE, THE, ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
IT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION, AND
I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT FOR THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA, THE HEARTBURN ON
TOOBY ISN'T THE INTENT BEHIND
IT, BECAUSE BECAUSE WE BELIEVE
THAT ARTISTS SHOULD HAVE MORE
CONTROL. THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT
AND AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, THIS
LANGUAGE BEGINS TO LOOK A LOT
LIKE A PROVISION IN THE
CABALLERO BILL THAT KFC'S BEEN
OPPOSED TO FOR ABOUT A YEAR,
WHICH IS TO SAY YOU CAN DO
WHATEVER YOU WANT IN THOSE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS. I WOULD ASSERT
THAT THAT'S NOT A REAL CHOICE.
THE CONSUMER HAS. THE CHOICE IS
EITHER CLICK THE BOX AND I GO TO
THE SHOW, OR I DON'T CLICK THE
BOX AND I STAY HOME. THAT'S NOT
A REAL CHOICE IN OUR OPINION.
AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE
TAYLOR SWIFT FIASCO HAPPENED,
THERE WERE SOME LAWSUITS FILED.
THE MONOPOLY IMMEDIATELY SAID,
OH NO, NO, NO, YOU CAN'T SUE
BECAUSE YOU ALL AGREED TO GO TO
BINDING ARBITRATION WHEN THEY
CLICKED THE BOX TO BE ABLE TO GO
TO THE SHOW PERIOD. SO THAT'S
THAT'S SOME OF THE CHALLENGES
HERE. I WOULD JUST NOTE FOR
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WILSON'S
QUESTION, THE INVESTIGATION HAS
BEEN GOING ON BY THE FEDERAL
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR ABOUT
A YEAR AND A HALF. IT IS NOT
BRAND NEW. IT ACTUALLY PREDATED
THE TAYLOR SWIFT FIASCO.
NORMALLY WE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT
IN THIS CASE WE DO. THE LAWSUIT
APPEARS TO BE IMMINENT BASED ON,
YOU KNOW, TRIPLE SOURCED
REPORTING FROM THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL. AND I CAN GUARANTEE YOU
THAT BASED ON THE HISTORY OF
ANTITRUST LAWSUITS BASED ON ALSO
COMMENTS THAT I SAW FROM
TICKETMASTER AND LIVE NATION'S
OWN EMPLOYEES THAT THEY WILL
FIGHT IT VIGOROUSLY AND THIS
WILL TAKE YEARS, AND THANK YOU.
I THINK YOU WERE ADDRESSING MR.
HOOVER'S POINT. SORRY. THANKS.
YEAH. AND JUST I DON'T KNOW IF
ANYONE REPRESENTING THE ARTISTS
WANTS TO SHARE. I APOLOGIZE IF I
MISSED IT, BUT HOW DO YOU FEEL
ABOUT THE AMENDMENT SPECIFICALLY
THAT TO BE AMENDMENT? I DON'T
KNOW IF ANYONE HAS ANY THOUGHTS,
BUT, WELL, WE APPRECIATE THE
FACT THAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING
TOWARD CREATING MORE OPPORTUNITY
AND MORE OPTIONS FOR THE
ARTISTS, BUT STILL, IT LEAVES US
VERY LIMITED. YOU KNOW, WE'RE
THE ONES THAT DO ALL THE WORK
WITH THE ARTISTS, ARE THE ONES
THAT DO ALL THE WORK, DO ALL THE
PROMOTION, ARE ON THE FOREFRONT
IN THE IN THE FACE, AND WE
ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT OUR FANS.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT THE FANS
TO GET RIPPED OFF OR
OVERCHARGED. THAT'S NOT REALLY
SET UP, NOT THE WAY WE'RE
SETTING THINGS UP. BUT THERE'S
NO THERE'S NO BENEFIT TO US AT
ALL. YOU KNOW, IT GOES TO
ANOTHER MARKET. WE HAVE NO
CONTROL. IF IT GOES THROUGH THE
THROUGH THROUGH THE VENUE, WE
STILL DON'T REALLY HAVE CONTROL.
AND, IT JUST LEAVES. IT LEAVES
TOO MUCH ON THE TABLE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. THROUGH THE
CHAIR. IF I MAY RESPOND TO THAT.
I THINK THAT WE GOT BOTH SIDES.
I THINK WE'RE GOOD ON THAT,
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL. WE HAVE A
MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND, WAS
THAT MR. BRYAN WHO SECONDED IT?
YEAH. THANK YOU, SO I WILL SAY,
I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR. I
THINK THAT SHE HAS LED ACROSS
INDUSTRIES AS IT RELATES TO
ENSURING THAT CONSUMERS ARE
PROTECTED FROM ANTITRUST
MONOPOLIES. AND THIS IS JUST
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HER WILLING
TO, REALLY TAKE THAT ON. AND I
THINK THAT IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT TO CONSUMERS. AND I
KNOW THAT SHE AND I AND THE
COMMITTEE, SHARE THE SAME GOAL
HERE, WHICH IS CALIFORNIANS
FIRST, AND CONSUMERS FIRST. THIS
IS A CONSUMER PROTECTION
COMMITTEE. SO IT'S IN THE NAME
OF THE COMMITTEE WHO IS CENTERED
IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, I THINK THAT
I WOULD AGREE THAT THE COMMITTEE
DID A REALLY INCREDIBLE JOB IN
ARTFULLY RETHINKING THE BILL TO
TRY TO FIGURE OUT A PATH FORWARD
TO PROTECT CONSUMERS. BY NO
MEANS DO WE FEEL LIKE IT'S DONE.
YOU'VE HEARD THAT FROM THE
AUTHOR. YOU'RE HEARING IT FROM
ME, AND I THINK THAT AS WE MOVE
FORWARD ON THIS BILL AND ON THE
CABALLERO BILL, WHICH ALSO SITS
IN OUR COMMITTEE, THAT WILL BE
WHO GUIDES US. AND I THINK, YOU
KNOW, WE TOOK A STEP FURTHER IN
TRYING TO SUPPORT THE ARTISTS
WHO ARE ALSO IMPORTANT TO
CALIFORNIA'S ECOSYSTEM, NOT EVEN
THE ARTISTS SEEMED TO LIKE THAT,
SO WE, WE WILL CONTINUE TO PUT
THE CONSUMERS FIRST, AND
HOPEFULLY WE CAN MAKE THE REST
OF THE ECOSYSTEM WORK AROUND
ENSURING THAT FANS GET THE
EXPERIENCE THEY WANT. AND I
REALLY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ONE
THING WHICH I THINK WAS KEY,
WHICH WE HEARD FROM ACTUALLY THE
OPPOSITION WAS THE DEFINITION OF
CONSUMER, WHICH WAS PLACED BOTH
IN THIS BILL AND IN THE MCCARTY
BILL. I WILL NOTE, BECAUSE IT
WAS IMPORTANT TO US THAT THAT BE
CONSISTENT ACROSS LEGISLATURA
THÀNH TO START TO CENTER THOSE
CONSUMERS, THE PEOPLE WHO INTEND
TO SHOW UP AND THEN IN PART IS
BECAUSE WE AS A COMMITTEE THINK
ONE OF THE LARGEST PROBLEMS IN
THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY EVEN THE
MONOPOLY AT THE FRONT END,
ALTHOUGH THE PRIMARY MARKET IS A
HUGE PROBLEM, BUT IT'S THE
BROKERS IN THE MIDDLE AND THE
BROKERS WHO ARE BUYING UP THE
TICKETS AND LEADING TO A LOT OF
THE PROBLEMS THAT MR. BRYAN HAS
EXPERIENCED IN THE MARKETPLACE.
AND SO BY TALKING ABOUT
CONSUMERS AS THE FAN, THAT TENDS
TO SHOW UP, IT REALLY DRAWS THAT
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE BROKERS
THAT ARE BUYING UP THE TICKETS
AND THE CONSUMERS THAT WANT TO
ACTUALLY ATTEND. AND SO THAT I
THINK, IS A REALLY GOOD STEP
FORWARD IN THIS CONVERSATION,
AND ONE THAT I THINK WILL GUIDE
IT GOING INTO ITS NEXT
COMMITTEE, WHICH I KNOW IS
YOURS. MISS WICKS, IF IT MAKES
IT OUT OF HERE TODAY. SO THAT
GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO
REALLY CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS
AND ENSURE THAT WE ARE ALLOWING
FANS TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TÊ
THAT THEY WANT. SO WITH THAT, WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? I JUST
APPRECIATE THE CHAIR'S WORK, THE
CONVERSATIONS FROM COLLEAGUES I
KNOW THIS IS NOT AN EASY ISSUE,
AND I WELCOME GENUINELY WELCOME
DIALOG FROM THE OPPOSITION, AS I
ALWAYS DO WANT TO GET IT RIGHT,
ALSO KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO GET IT RIGHT
HERE, AND I'M COMMITTED TO
MAKING SURE WE WORK WITH WITH
ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS,
STAKEHOLDERS TOWARDS THAT END ON
A VERY COMPLICATED BILL. AND
WITH THAT, RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE. THANK YOU, MADAM
SECRETARY. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
YES. ITEM NUMBER FIVE AB 2808 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS. THE
MOTION IS DO PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN I BAUER-KAHAN I
PATTERSON. BRIAN I BRIAN I
DIXON. YES I'M SORRY. NO, I'M
NOT VOTING. NO NO NO. THANK YOU.
DIXON. NO. HOOVER NO. HOOVER.
NO. ERWIN. LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE. WARD
WARD I. WICKS, I. WICKS I.
WILSON OH. OKAY. THE BILL HAS
SIX VOTES. IT IS OUT. WE WILL
LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. WE ARE GOING TO CALL
THE ROLL ON TWO BILLS BEFORE I
STEP OUT FOR PESACH, SO THE
FIRST IS, AB 2829. PAPIN WILL
CALL THE ROLL FOR ABSENT MEMBERS
. ITEM NUMBER ONE. THE MOTION IS
DUE. PASS TO THE REVENUE AND
TAXATION COMMITTEE. THE VOTE IS
FOUR ZERO. THE CHAIR VICE CHAIR
VOTING NO. BAUER-KAHAN I
BAUER-KAHAN I HOOVER. ITEM
NUMBER ONE. NO. HOOVER NO. ERWIN
ORTEGA. ORTEGA I WILSON. SHE'S
GONE TOO. SO THAT BILL HAS SIX
VOTES. SO IT IS OUT. BUT WE'LL
LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. WE'LL CALL THE ROLL ON
AB. 30 I'M NOT WEARING MY
GLASSES. 1831 BOURBON. ITEM
NUMBER ONE. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS, AS AMENDED, TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. THE
VOTE IS FIVE ZERO. THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. BAUER-KAHAN. I
BAUER. KHN I. HOOVER A HOOVER I
ERWIN ORTEGA. ORTEGA I WARD.
WARD I WILSON. THAT ONE HAS A
LOT OF VOTES. NINE VOTES. IT IS
OUT. WILL EITHER ALL OPEN
PRESENT MEMBERS AND MISS CARILLO
YOU WILL PRESENT 2355 WHEN
YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS, I'M PROUD TO
PRESENT AB 2355, WHICH WILL
REQUIRE A DISCLOSURE WITH
GENERATIVE AI IS USED IN
ELECTORAL ADVERTISING TO
SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER EXISTING
MEDIA OR CREATE CONTENT THAT
WOULD FALSELY APPEAR TO BE
AUTHENTIC TO A REASONABLE
PERSON. AND I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR AS WELL AS THE COMMITTEE
STAFF, FOR WORKING WITH MINE TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE INTENT OF THE
BILL IS WHAT WE WANT IT TO BE,
AS WELL AS BEING, THE MORE
DIRECT ACT POLICY AS POSSIBLE,
THE AVAILABILITY OF TOOLS TO
DOCTOR IMAGES, VIDEO AND SOUND
IS NOT NEW. HOWEVER, RAPID
IMPROVEMENTS IN ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE OR AI AND LARGE
LANGUAGE MODELS OR LLMS THAT ARE
CAPABLE OF GENERATING SOUND
IMAGES AND TEXT HAVE ALREADY
RESULTED IN THE CREATION OF
MATERIALS THAT ARE LIKELY TO
PASS OFF AS CONVINCINGLY REAL
WHEN THEY ARE INDEED FAKE. IN
JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, A ROBOCALL
USING THE AI GENERATED VOICE OF
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN TOLD NEW
HAMPSHIRE VOTERS TO SAVE THEIR
VOTE FOR NOVEMBER RATHER THAN
VOTE IN THE STATE'S PRIMARY
ELECTION. THE INDIVIDUAL WHO
CREATED THE AUDIO TOLD NBC NEWS
THAT IT TOOK LESS THAN 20
MINUTES AND COST ONLY $1. AS
THIS TECHNOLOGY BECOMES CHEAPER,
FASTER AND EASIER FOR PUBLIC USE
AND IS EMBRACED BY CANDIDATES
AND POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS, ITS
EFFECT ON DEMOCRACY REQUIRES US
TO ACT. THERE IS A RISK, NOT
JUST IN FALSITIES, BEING PASSED
OFF AS REAL, BUT ALSO THE SPREAD
OF CYNICISM AND VOTERS BECOMING
COMING TO BELIEVE THAT NOTHING
IS, IN FACT REAL IN THIS NEW
ENVIRONMENT. SENSIBLE
REGULATIONS THAT PROTECT FREE
POLITICAL EXPRESSION AND SPEECH
ARE VITAL TO GET AHEAD OF THIS
TECHNOLOGY. THE LEGISLATURE WILL
BE EVALUATING A NUMBER OF BILLS
THIS YEAR THAT AIM TO GET AHEAD
OF THE IMPACTS OF GENERATED AI,
AND LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS WILL
UNDOUBTEDLY HAVE OUR SOCIETY,
AND IN OUR DAILY LIVES. THESE
CONVERSATIONS ARE NECESSARY
BECAUSE WE KNOW WE WANT TO BE
INTENTIONAL AND NOT BE CAUGHT
OFF GUARD WHEN IT COMES TO THE
IMPACT OF IMPROVING TECHNOLOGY,
I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT THE BILL
ENJOYS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. AND
HERE TO ADDRESS MORE ON THE NEED
FOR THIS BILL IS TRACY ROSENBERG
WITH OAKLAND PRIVACY Ó. GOOD
AFTERNOON EVERYONE. STILL, TRACY
ROSENBERG WITH OAKLAND PRIVACY,
WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT
FOR AB 2355, WHICH SEEKS TO HELP
VOTERS WHO ARE TRYING TO
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT IS REAL
AND WHAT IS NOT, AS THEY MAKE UP
THEIR MINDS HOW TO VOTE. THE
BILL REQUIRES THAT MOSTLY OR
TOTALLY SYNTHETIC PAID POLITICAL
ADVERTISEMENTS BE LABELED AS
SUCH. THIS PROVISION IS
STRUCTURED IN VERY MUCH THE SAME
MANNER AS OTHER LONG STANDING
LAWS ABOUT PAID POLITICAL
ADVERTISEMENTS, INCLUDING
DISCLOSURE LAWS LIKE WHO PAID
FOR AN AD, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE
LABELING DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN
ANY VOTER CAN SEEK AN INJUNCTION
. BUT AND THIS IS IMPORTANT,
THEY HAVE TO GO TO A JUDGE. SO
DECISIONS WITH FIRST AMENDMENT
RAMIFICATIONS ARE MADE BY A
TRAINED JUDGE WITH EXPERIENCE IN
INTERPRETING AND APPLYING
CONSTANT CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, NOT
A TECH COMPANY WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT TO MY FRIENDS AT THE
COMPANIES, WE THINK THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT, DECISIONS WITH
RAMIFICATIONS THAT ARE CENTRAL
TO OUR DEMOCRACY BE DONE BY
TRAINED ENTITIES AND NOT
CORPORATIONS. WE ALSO APPRECIATE
THE FOCUS IN TWO, THREE, FIVE,
FIVE ON TRYING TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEM RATHER THAN ASSESSING
FINES AND PENALTIES AND FEES
AFTER THE FACT. SO WE HOPE THAT
YOU WILL SUPPORT AB 2355. THANK
YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND MISS
ROSENBERG, ARE THERE ANY,
ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT'S
HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS
BILL? GOOD AFTERNOON. CHAIR
MEMBERS NAOMI PETRONE, ON BEHALF
OF THE COMPUTER AND
COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, WE HAVE A SUPPORT,
IF AMENDED, POSITION AND LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
AUTHOR. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. ROANOKE. ALONG WITH
CAL CHAMBER, WE ALSO HAVE A
SUPPORTIVE AMENDMENT POSITION.
THANK YOU. OKAY. SEEING NO
OTHERS, IS THERE ARE THERE ANY
SPEAKERS HERE? PRIMARY PRINCIPAL
SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL? SEEING NONE, ARE THERE ANY
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL
OR METOO'S? SEEING NONE, WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE HAVE I
HAVE A MOTION. AND, TO HAVE A
SECOND, A SECOND. OKAY I HAVE A
MOTION FROM MISS DIXON. A SECOND
FROM MR. WARD, YOU KNOW, I, I
WOULD SIMPLY SAY TO THE AUTHOR,
I CAN'T ENVISION A WORLD THAT
WE'D BE GOING INTO WITHOUT THIS
LEGISLATION, ESPECIALLY WITH
THE, THE LACK OF TRUST THAT
EXISTS BETWEEN THE ELECTORATE
RIGHT NOW AND THE POLICYMAKING
PROCESS AS A WHOLE, AND POLITICS
AS A WHOLE. SO I APPLAUD YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS VERY IMPORTANT
LEGISLATION FORWARD. AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO, SUPPORTING IT. THANK
YOU. AND WITH THAT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. AND THANK YOU TO THE
MEMBERS, I'M JUST REALLY GLAD
FOR ALL THE CONVERSATIONS THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE VARIETY
OF, IN THE SEVERAL COMMITTEES AS
WELL AS, FOLKS INTERESTED IN
THIS SPACE. I IS NEW, AND I
THINK AS THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS
ON ELECTIONS NOT ONLY IN THE
STATE BUT ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE JUST GET
AHEAD OF IT. WE ALL WANT CLEAR,
CLEAN ELECTIONS THAT ACTUALLY
HELP ENCOURAGE VOTERS TO COME
OUT AND BE PARTICIPANTS IN OUR
DEMOCRACY, AND TRUTH MUST
PREVAIL. AND I THINK I JUST HAS
AN OPPORTUNITY TO MARK THE
WATERS. AND SO THE FASTER THAT
WE ACT ON HOW WE PROTECT OUR
ELECTORAL PROCESS AND OUR
CAMPAIGNS, WE ARE IN A BETTER
POSITION. AND AGAIN, I JUST WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF,
THE CHAIR AND ALL THE
CONVERSATIONS RELATED TO HOW DO
WE MAKE THIS BILL, WHAT WE
INTEND IT TO BE AND PROTECT OUR
DEMOCRACY IN THE PROCESS. WITH
THAT, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AN
AYE VOTE. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND. MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN, AB 2355 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WENDY CARRILLO.
THE MOTION IS Dð. PASS TO Dð TO
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. B¢O
KHN. PATTERSON. BRIAN DIXON.
DIXON I HOOVER. ERWIN. LOWENTHAL
I LOWENTHAL, I ORTEGA. WARD.
WARD I. WICKS. WILSON OKAY.
WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE ROLL
OPEN FOR THAT FOR THE MANY
MEMBERS COMING IN AND OUT
TESTIFYING IN COMMITTEE TODAY.
GAVEL DOWN THAT, WE WILL BE ON
RECESS FOR THE NEXT FROM 4 TO
5:00, AND WE WILL RECONVENE AT 5
P.M. OKAY, WE'LL BE WE'LL
RECONVENE AT 5:00. AND IN THE
MEANTIME, IN THE MEANTIME, YES,
WE CERTAINLY CAN. CAN WE OPEN
THE ROLL FOR PAST VOTES, PLEASE?
YES LET ME LET ME FINISH THIS
ANNOUNCEMENT REALLY QUICKLY.
THERE WILL BE ANOTHER COMMITTEE
CONVENING IN HERE DURING THAT
TIME. SO WE WILL ALL NEED TO
LEAVE. ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE
UNTIL FOUR? WE'RE GOING TO
FINISH AFTER THIS RIGHT NOW AND
WE'LL RECONVENE AT FIVE 5:00.
ALL RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY. ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR FOR, HOOVER
ERWIN. ORTEGA. WARD. WARD I
WILSON 070. EIGHT. ITEM NUMBER
THREE AB 3204 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BAUER-KAHAN. IT'S FIVE ZERO.
CHAIR VOTING AYE. PATTERSON,
VICE CHAIR NOT VOTING. HOOVER.
ORTEGA. WARD WARD I WILSON SIX
ZERO. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AB 2877
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER BAUER-KAHAN.
IT'S SEVEN ZERO. CHAIR AND VICE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. HOOVER.
ORTEGA. WARD THIRD WARD I WILSON
EIGHT ZERO. ITEM NUMBER SIX AB
2203 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER MCCARTY.
THE MOTION IS Dð PASS AS AMENDED
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
THE VOTE IS SIX ZERO. CHAIR AND
VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE. HOOVER
ERWIN. ORTEGA. WARD. WARD I
WILSON SEVEN ZERO. THANK YOU.
WE'RE ADJOURNED. WE'RE RECESS.
WE'RE IN, WHAT I MEANT TO SAY IS
WE'RE IN RECESS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ARAMBULA, WE ARE
READY FOR YOU. AND I BELIEVE YOU
HAVE TWO BILLS TODAY. YEAH.
OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
ALL RIGHT. IF WE CAN HAVE IT
QUIET BACK THERE, PLEASE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. WHEN, HOPEFULLY
YOUR, WITNESSES ARE, HAVE STUCK
AROUND AND. AND PLEASE START
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. WE ARE
STARTING WITH A B 2390
LUTHERVILLE. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, CHILDREN AND
ADOLESCENTS WHO USE SOCIAL MEDIA
SHOULD BE SAFE FROM HARM. AB
2390 WILL ADDRESS THE MENTAL
HEALTH IMPACTS HAPPENING NOW
THAT ARE THE RESULTS OF
INTENTIONALLY ADDICTIVE DESIGN
OF SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS. THE
PROMISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA WAS TO
BUILD VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES THAT
WOULD BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER TO
SHARE INFORMATION AND IDEAS, AND
IN MANY WAYS, THIS PROMISE HAS
BEEN FULFILLED. SOME PLATFORMS
HAVE BILLIONS OF USERS AND ACT
AS A DIGITAL THREAD CONNECTING
FRIENDS AND FAMILIES.
UNFORTUNATELY, SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES HAVE ABUSED THEIR
POSITION AS FACILITATORS OF SOME
OF THE MOST PERSONAL HUMAN
INTERACTIONS BY PRIORITIZING
SCREEN TIME AND PROFITS OVER THE
MENTAL HEALTH OF THEIR USERS.
SOCIAL MEDIA IS ADDICTIVE.
DESIGN EXACERBATES COMPUL SIVE
AND OBSESSIVE BEHAVIORS,
DETRACTING FROM REAL WORLD
IN-PERSON ENGAGEMENT AND
CONTRIBUTING TO SOCIAL
ISOLATION. A 2022 SURVEY FOUND
THAT 35% OF TEENAGERS REPORT
USING ONE OF THE FIVE MAJOR
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SEVERAL
TIMES A DAY. CHILDREN AND
ADOLESCENTS WHO SPEND MORE THAN
THREE HOURS A DAY ON SOCIAL
MEDIA DOUBLED THEIR RISK OF
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, INCLUDING
ANXIETY AND DEPRESSION. BECAUSE
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS ARE THE
MOST HEAVILY IMPACTED. IT IS
IMPORTANT TO ME THAT THE THAT
THIS EFFORT BE LED BY THE VOICES
OF THOSE WHO ARE ON THE FRONT
LINES OF THIS EPIDEMIC. AB 2390
ESTABLISHES A PEER TO PEER PILOT
PROGRAM TO DEVELOP METHODS TO
MITIGATE THE HARM TO YOUTH AND
ADOLESCENTS CAUSED BY MODERN
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM DESIGN. I
TRUST THAT THE KIDS KNOW WHAT
THEY NEED. THIS BILL WILL
PROVIDE THEM THE SPACE TO ACT
WITH ME. TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT
OF AB 2390 IS DOCTOR FLO COFER,
SENIOR DIRECTOR OF POLICY AT
PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCATES, AND
NANCY AGUILAR, WHO'S A YOUTH
PARTICIPANT AT YOUTH LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE. WELCOME. THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DOCTOR
FLO JOHN COFER, AND I'M THE
SENIOR DIRECTOR OF POLICY FOR
PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCATES, AB 2390
SOCIAL MEDIA HARM REDUCTION
PILOT PROGRAM TO ENGAGE PEER TO
PEER PROGRAMS IN DEVELOPING AND
EVALUATING A CURRICULUM TO
CREATE HEALTHY SOCIAL MEDIA
HABITS AND K TO 12 ONLINE SAFETY
STANDARDS. SOCIAL MEDIA IS A NEW
TECHNOLOGY THAT EXISTS IN, AND
ALSO HAS CONTRIBUTED TO, A MAJOR
RESTRUCTURING OF OUR SOCIAL
ENGAGEMENT, AND WE WANT TO STATE
PLAINLY THAT IT DOES A LOT OF
GOOD. IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO FIND
NICHE COMMUNITIES TO SUPPORT
THEIR IDENTITIES AND INTERESTS.
AND THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE,
INCLUDING YOUNG PEOPLE, USING
SOCIAL MEDIA, HAVE A POSITIVE
EXPERIENCE. HOWEVER THERE ARE
ALSO RISKS. YOU SPEND A LOT OF
TIME ON SOCIAL MEDIA AN AVERAGE
OF AROUND FIVE HOURS PER DAY,
AND THROUGH A COMBINATION OF THE
CONTENT THEY ENCOUNTER AND THE
SOCIAL MEDIA REPLACING OR
COMPETING WITH OTHER ACTIVITIES,
MANY YOUNG PEOPLE DESCRIBE
SOCIAL MEDIA AS A MAJOR AND
DIRECT CONTRIBUTOR TO DEPRESSION
AND ANXIETY, AND SIMILAR TO HOW
THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN
VEHICLES WHO TRAVEL FROM POINT A
TO B DO SO SAFELY, WE CAN BOTH
APPRECIATE THE BENEFITS OF
EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION AND
THEIR HARMS, POLLUTION AND
VEHICLE CRASHES. AND SO THIS
BILL IS INTENDED TO HELP YOUTH
MAXIMIZE THE BENEFITS AND
MINIMIZE THOSE HARMS. PARENTAL
SUPPORT IS HIGH AND BIPARTISAN.
THERE IS ALMOST A DESPERATION
AMONG PARENTS FOR HELP IN
NAVIGATING APPROPRIATE, SAFE AND
ONLINE ONLINE HABITS, AND THIS
BILL FOCUSES ON THE LEADERSHIP
OF YOUNG PEOPLE, YOUNG PEOPLE
WHO ACTUALLY USE SOCIAL MEDIA
AND WHO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN TIKTOK AND TIC TAC TOE
TO HELP DEVELOP THE SAFETY
STANDARDS TO KEEP THEMSELVES AND
THEIR PEERS SAFE. AND FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE REALLY URGE YOU TO
VOTE YES. THANK YOU. YES GOOD
EVENING. MY NAME IS NANCY
AGUILAR, AND I'M PART OF THE
HEALTHY ONLINE PLATFORMS FOR
EVERYONE HOPE YOUTH COALITION, A
PROGRAM UNDER YOUTH LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE, AND HOPE WE'RE
WORKING TOWARDS HOLDING ONLINE
PLATFORMS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE
HARM YOUTH RECEIVE WHILE
UPLIFTING HEALTHY, POSITIVE
MESSAGES. SO OUR SOCIAL MEDIA
FEEDS ARE FULL OF CONTENT WE
ENJOY OR CURRENTLY TRENDING AND
PUSHED BY ALGORITHMS. I'VE SEEN
THE SPACES YOUTH TURN TO FOR
ENJOYMENT AND COMMUNITY HAVE
CAUSED GREAT HARM, WITH YOUTH
COMPARING THEMSELVES TO OTHERS
OR THE HARMFUL CONTENT PROMOTED
AND ADS SHOWN ON THEIR FEEDS AND
ALCOHOL AD APPEARED ON MY FEED
WHEN I'M NOT EVEN 21 YET. I
DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS ON MY
FEED AND I KNOW I'M NOT ALONE.
IT'S WORRYING TO THINK ABOUT THE
HARM THAT COULD COME FROM
EXPOSING VULNERABLE YOUNG PEOPLE
TO THESE ADS. I'VE SEEN YOUTH
DEACTIVATE AFTER RECEIVING
HARASSMENT AND DEATH THREATS OR
HAD THEIR INFORMATION DOXXED,
WHICH MADE THEM LOSE THEIR SENSE
OF SAFETY ONLINE AND OFFLINE. NO
ONE KNOWS IF THEY'RE COPING IN A
HEALTHY WAY OR NOT. I TALKED
ABOUT THESE ONLINE YOUTH
EXPERIENCES IN HOPE. WE DID A
STUDY TO UNDERSTAND THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOUTH AND
SOCIAL MEDIA, AND CREATED YOUTH
CENTERED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
PLATFORMS DESIGNS, AND COMING UP
WITH THESE IDEAS ON MAKING THESE
PLATFORMS A HEALTHY SPACE. I
ALSO TALKED ABOUT MY EXPERIENCE
AS AN OLDER SIBLING, DEALING
WITH MY BROTHER, WANTING TO USE
SOCIAL MEDIA AT 11 YEARS OLD
ALREADY, AND USEFUL SCREEN TIME
CONTROLS FOR MANAGING HIS GAME
USAGE AS WELL. IMPLEMENTING AB
2390 WILL HELP YOUTH LIKE MY
YOUNGER BROTHER LEARN ABOUT THE
HARMS OF SOCIAL MEDIA. THEY CAN
LEARN GOOD HABITS AND HEALTHY
ONLINE USE. LEARNING THIS BEFORE
REACHING THE PLATFORMS MINIMUM
AGE REQUIREMENT IS NEEDED SO
THEY CAN BE PREPARED AND SAFE.
AS THESE YOUTH GROW OLDER, THEY
COULD TALK ABOUT THEIR SOCIAL
MEDIA EXPERIENCE WITH EACH
OTHER. IT'S A WONDERFUL
OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT WITH EACH
OTHER AND DISCOVER SHARED
EXPERIENCES, WHETHER POSITIVE OR
NEGATIVE. HAVING A SPACE TO TALK
ABOUT THIS IS NEEDED WHEN IT'S A
BIG PART OF OUR LIVES. A HEALTHY
AND SAFE SPACE WITH A GOOD
COMMUNITY IS WHAT THE YOUTH
NEED. THIS IS WHAT THE HOPE
YOUTH COALITION PROVIDES. WHAT
SIMILAR PEER TO PEER PROGRAMS
DO. IT'S WHAT SOCIAL MEDIA
SHOULD BE, BUT IT'S NOT AT THAT
PLACE YET. TOGETHER WE CAN START
A PATH TOWARDS THAT NOW. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU
DID A GREAT JOB. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? GOOD
EVENING. KIM LEWIS, REPRESENTING
CHILDREN NOW IN SUPPORT. HELLO.
MY NAME IS ALIA AGUILAR. I'M A
PART OF THE HOPE YOU LOCAL AND I
AM HERE IN SUPPORT. HELLO, MY
NAME IS ANDREA GILL. I AM A
SENIOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR FOR
THE HOPE YOUTH COALITION. I'M
HERE IN SUPPORT AND ALONGSIDE
WITH OUR PARTNER, DALY CITY
YOUTH HEALTH CENTER IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. HI. MY NAME IS
ALEXANDRA CHÁVEZ. I'M A PROGRAM
MANAGER OF WAIALAE YOUTH
LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE. ALSO IN
SUPPORT. HELLO EVERYONE.
PACHECO, SENIOR TRAINER AND
CONSULTANT WITH THE YOUTH
LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE AND ON
BEHALF OF WAIALAE AND THE SOCIAL
INJURY, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY
NAME IS SAMANTHA VIGIL. I'M A
PHD STUDENT AT UC DAVIS IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION IN
SUPPORT. HELLO. EMILY RIVAS,
DIRECTOR WITH YOUTH LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY
PRINCIPAL WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. AND
NOBODY IN THE ROOM THAT WISHES
TO REGISTER THEIR OPPOSITION.
ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE MEMBERS?
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON, WE'RE
SEEING A LOT OF THESE KINDS OF
BILLS BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO
REMAKE SO MUCH LAW THAT AFFECTS
SUCH AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR
SOCIETY AND YOUNG PEOPLE
ESPECIALLY. I COMMEND YOU FOR
YOUR EXCELLENT TESTIMONY. AND
THE AUTHOR, TOO. THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I LIKE
THE IDEA THAT IT IS A PILOT
PROGRAM. LET'S SEE WHAT'S GOING
ON. IS THIS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IS
THIS THE ONLY ONE TO REALLY TEST
IMPACTS AND IN A PILOT AND ANY
BILL THAT'S CURRENTLY GOING
THROUGH THE PROCESS ADDRESSING
SOCIAL MEDIA, I BELIEVE SO. BUT
THERE IS A PEER TO PEER PROGRAM
FOR MENTAL HEALTH THROUGH THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE
SERVICES, AS WELL AS AN 80 YEAR
HISTORY OF EVIDENCE BASED
APPROACHES WITH PEER TO PEER
THROUGH ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS. AS
AN EXAMPLE. I THINK THIS IS
ESSENTIAL. AND SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR DOING IT. THANK YOU.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SECOND THE
BILL? YES. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE
A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WARD, A SECOND BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER DIXON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. ALL RIGHT. CAN I
PLEASE HAVE THE SECRETARY CALL
THE ROLL? YES. ITEM NUMBER NINE,
AB 2390 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ARAMBULA. THE MOTION IS DUE.
PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. BAUER-KAHAN
PATTERSON. BRIAN. DIXON. YES
DIXON. I HOOVER. IRWIN. I IRWIN.
I LOWENTHAL. ORTEGA. WARD I
WARD. I WICKS. WILSON I'M SORRY.
AB 2390 ARAMBULA. ITEM NUMBER
NINE. YES. ALL RIGHT. I THAT'S
FOUR. ALL RIGHT. FOUR VOTES. AND
WE WILL WAIT FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. AND WHY DON'T YOU GO
AHEAD WITH YOUR NEXT BILL? AND
THAT IS AB 2657. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, IN MY
PREVIOUS PRESENTATION ON
ASSEMBLY BILL 2390, I EXPLAINED
THAT WE NEEDED TO PROVIDE
SOMETHING OF A LIFELINE FOR
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS WHO ARE
CURRENTLY AT RISK OR ALREADY IN
CRISIS. MY MOTIVATION FOR
INTRODUCING AB 2657 IS THE SAME,
BUT WE ARE LOOKING UPSTREAM
INSTEAD. SOCIAL MEDIA ADDICTIVE
DESIGN EXACERBATES COMPULSIVE
AND OBSESSIVE BEHAVIORS AND
PREVENTS USERS FROM EXPERIENCING
REAL WORLD IN-PERSON ENGAGEMENT.
THIS HAS LED TO A LITANY OF
ISSUES, BUT ONE STATISTIC HAS
HIT ME ESPECIALLY HARD. AND THAT
WAS THAT IN 2021, 23.6% OF ALL
TEENAGE GIRLS HAD A SUICIDAL
PLAN. AS A FATHER OF THREE
DAUGHTERS, I FIND THAT
ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING BECAUSE OF
THE RISKS OF HARM THAT ARE
ASSOCIATED WITH SOCIAL MEDIA
USE, THE OFFICE OF THE SURGEON
GENERAL CANNOT CONCLUDE THAT
SOCIAL MEDIA IS SAFE FOR
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS. IT'S
TIME THAT CALIFORNIA MOVE AWAY
FROM PLAYING WHACK A MOLE WITH
OUR ATTEMPTS TO REGULATE SOCIAL
MEDIA. WHILE TECHNOLOGY
COMPANIES CONTINUE TO EXPERIMENT
ON OUR CHILDREN, AB 2657 WILL
ESTABLISH A COMMISSION THAT WILL
INVESTIGATE THE METHODS USED BY
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES TO
MAXIMIZE SCREEN TIME AT THE
EXPENSE OF MENTAL HEALTH,
COMPRISED OF SPECIALIZED
SUBCOMMITTEES, THE COMMISSION
WILL RECOMMEND A HOLISTIC
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK INTENDED TO
MITIGATE FUTURE NEGATIVE
IMPACTS, RESULTING FROM SOCIAL
MEDIA ON THE MENTAL HEALTH OF
OUR CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS
TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLY BILL 2657 IS DOCTOR FLO
COFER, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF POLICY
AT PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCATES, AND
SAMANTHA VIGIL FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT
DAVIS. WELCOME BACK, DOCTOR.
THANK YOU AGAIN. I AM DOCTOR PHÐ
COFFER, THE SENIOR DIRECTOR OF
POLICY FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
ADVOCATES. AND AS MENTIONED, AB
2657, ESTABLISHED AS A SOCIAL
MEDIA COMMISSION TO CREATE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO PROTECT YOUTH
MENTAL WELL-BEING. AND AS
MENTIONED, SOCIAL MEDIA IS THIS
NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT HAS
RESTRUCTURED SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT
AND IT ALSO HAS BENEFITS AND
RISKS. AS THE RISKS ARE BEING
HIGHLIGHTED, THERE'S MOMENTUM TO
PASS LEGISLATION TO PROTECT
YOUTH AS ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON
MENTIONED, THERE ARE LOTS OF
THESE BILLS MOVING FORWARD, IN
PARTICULAR BECAUSE PEER REVIEWED
STUDIES SHOW THAT SOCIAL MEDIA
IS A MAJOR AND DIRECT
CONTRIBUTOR TO THE YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS, AND 37% OF YOUNG
PEOPLE SAY SOCIAL MEDIA IS A
PRIMARY CAUSE OF POOR MENTAL
HEALTH COMPARED TO FAMILY AND
COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS, ÓRDENES,
SOCIAL PRESSURE AND EVEN
BULLYING. AND SO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DOES HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY TO DEVELOP
EVIDENCE INFORMED POLICY, AND
YOUNG PEOPLE MAY BE AT
PARTICULAR RISK BECAUSE THE
BRAIN REGIONS INVOLVED IN
RESISTING TEMPTATION AND REWARD
ARE NOT YET FULLY DEVELOPED. BUT
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT AS WE
CONSIDER LEGISLATION TO REGULATE
AND ENSURE SAFETY IN CALIFORNIA
FOR YOUNG PEOPLE, WE DO SO WITH
INPUT FROM YOUNG PEOPLE WHO USE
SOCIAL MEDIA, AS WELL AS
EDUCATORS, PARENTS AND EXPERTS,
AND WITH THE FULL CONSIDERATION
OF EXISTING RESEARCH AND FOR
THESE REASONS, WE URGE YOU TO
VOTE YES ON THIS BILL. THANK YOU
. HELLO. MY NAME IS SAMANTHA
VIGIL. I'M A DOCTOR. SORRY. I'M
A DOCTORAL STUDENT IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AT
UC DAVIS, WHERE I RESEARCH
ADOLESCENT SOCIAL MEDIA USE AS
IT RELATES TO FACETS OF HUMAN
DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS MENTAL
HEALTH AND WELL-BEING, WITH
SPECIFIC EMPHASIS ON INFORMING
AND EXAMINING PUBLIC POLICY IN
THIS AREA. IN THE ACADEMIC
SECTOR, WE OFTEN THINK OF SOCIAL
MEDIA AS A TOOL, ONE THAT IS NOT
INHERENTLY GOOD OR BAD, BUT MAY
HAVE EITHER POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE
USES AND OUTCOMES DEPENDING ON
THE INDIVIDUAL USER. WITH THIS,
WE SOMETIMES FIND THAT SOCIAL
MEDIA IS A TOOL WHICH
ADOLESCENTS ARE NOT
DEVELOPMENTALLY WELL EQUIPPED TO
WIELD SAFELY ON THEIR OWN.
ADOLESCENTS TEND TO PLACE AN
INCREASED IMPORTANCE ON THINGS
SUCH AS PEER BELONGING AND
SOCIAL COMPARISON, AND ARE STILL
DEVELOPING CRUCIAL SKILL SETS
SUCH AS EMOTION REGULATION AND
TIME MANAGEMENT, ALL OF WHICH
MAY LEAD TO POOR OUTCOMES AS A
FUNCTION OF THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA
USE. AS INCONGRUENCIES BETWEEN
SOCIAL MEDIA DESIGN AND WHAT IS
BEST FOR CHILDREN AND
ADOLESCENTS BECOME CLEARER, A
GREATER PUSH FOR REGULATION HAS
EMERGED ON BOTH THE NATIONAL AND
GLOBAL SCALE IN PLACES SUCH AS
SOUTH KOREA AND THE U.K.
LEGISLATION, WHICH PLACES A DUTY
OF CARE ONTO SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES TO PROTECT THE SAFETY
OF UNDERAGE CONSUMERS, ALREADY
EXISTS IN THE US. OVER 25
STATES, INCLUDING CALIFORNIA,
HAVE PROPOSED OR ENACTED SOME
VERSION OF LEGISLATION AIMED AT
REGULATING SOCIAL MEDIA FOR
MINORS. THE WORD I WOULD LIKE TO
EMPHASIZE HERE IS VERSION. IN
ORDER TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE
WIDE VARIETY OF METHODS, EACH OF
THESE BILLS HAS EMPLOYED, THINGS
SUCH AS AGE VERIFICATION,
REGULATING THE USE OF
ALGORITHMS, AND SO ON. A
COMMISSION, AS PROPOSED IN AB
2657, WOULD ALLOW FOR EXPERTS
ACROSS SECTORS TO PARSE THROUGH
EXISTING WORK, HIGHLIGHTING AND
EMPHASIZING THE IMPORTANT WORK
THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE,
WHILE PROPOSING INFORMED
RECOMMENDATIONS ALLOWING
CALIFORNIA TO BE A NATIONAL
LEADER IN THE PROTECTION OF
MINORS ON SOCIAL MEDIA. THANK
YOU. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? KIM LEWIS
WITH CHILDREN NOW IN SUPPORT.
NANCY AGUILAR WITH HOPE AND
SUPPORT. ANDREA GIL WITH YOUTH
LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE AND DALY
CITY YOUTH HEALTH CENTER IN
SUPPORT. I LED AGUILAR PRADO FOR
IN SUPPORT ALEXANDRA CHÁVEZ WITH
YOUTH LEADERSHIP IN SUPPORT.
WENDY PACHECO, YOUTH LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE AND THE SOCIAL CHANGE
AND SUPPORT EMILY RIVAS,
DIRECTOR WITH YOUTH LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE, IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
? QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? I GUESS I HAVE ONE
QUESTION. I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD
VERY OBVIOUSLY DO. ARE THERE NO
COMMISSIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL
THAT ARE ALREADY LOOKING AT THIS
ISSUE? NO I'VE SPOKEN WITH
DOCTOR GHALY, THE WHO OVERSEES
OUR HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT AND WHAT WAS
IMPRESSIVE TO ME WAS HIS WANTING
TO BRING URGENCY TO THIS ISSUE.
THAT'S THE SAME COMMENTS THAT
WE'RE HEARING FROM SO MANY
PARENTS. AND WHILE WE'RE NOT
HAVING AN URGENCY CLAUSE IN
HERE, I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT
FOR US TO MAKE SURE TO PASS THIS
AS A STATE. I FEEL A
RESPONSIBILITY WHEN MANY OF
THESE COMPANIES ORIGINATE HERE
IN CALIFORNIA, THAT THE
SOLUTIONS ARE ALSO COMING HERE
FROM OUR STATE. WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK Ó. I JUST WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR THIS
VERY CRITICAL, YOU KNOW, PIECE.
WE NEED A CENTRALIZED LOCATION
TO BE A REPOSITORY FOR FAMILIES
AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA TO BE ABLE TO GO TO
AND BE HEARD AND UNDERSTAND THAT
ALL THAT INFORMATION IS BEING
SYNTHESIZED IN ONE PLACE. THAT'S
REFLECTIVE ON HOW WE FEEL
COLLECTIVELY AS A STATE AND
CREATE A ROADMAP GOING FORWARD.
AND SO THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE
SHOULD BE DOING AS LEGISLATORS
IS CREATING THAT AVENUE. SO
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. AND VERY
ENTHUSIASTICALLY GOING TO
SUPPORT TODAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
MOVE THE BILL WITH THAT? I'D
LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL. ALL RIGHT
. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWENTHAL, A
SECOND BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ORTEGA. AND THE BILL. THE MOTION
IS DUE PASSED TO APPROPRIATIONS.
CAN WE PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? THE
HOUSE? YES. BOOM YEAH. OKAY.
ITEM NUMBER 12 AB 2657 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ARAMBULA. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON. BRIAN A
BRIAN A DIXON. YES. DIXON I
HOOVER. IRWIN I IRWIN. I
LOWENTHAL, I. LOWENTHAL I
ORTEGA. ORTEGA I WARD. WARD I.
WICKS I. WICKS I WILSON I WILSON
I THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND, THE
VOTE IS EIGHT ZERO. YOUR BILL IS
OUT, AND WE'RE GOING BACK TO
FILE ORDER. ASSEMBLY MEMBER TO
WITH AB 1856, PLEASE, WHENEVER
YOU ARE READY. YES, I'M READY,
MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, FIRST I WANT TO START
BY. I I ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENT
FROM THE COMMITTEE. I ALSO LIKE
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THEIR WORK ON THE ANALYSIS AND
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE AND LET
THE THANKS MY. AND I'D LIKE TO
THANK MY JOY. ARTHUR, ASSEMBLY
MEMBER AVILLO FOR HIS LEADERSHIP
AND COLLABORATION EFFORT FOR
THIS BILL. AB 1856 WOULD MAKE IT
A MISDEMEANOR FOR A PERSON TO
KNOWINGLY DISTRIBUTE,
ARTIFICIALLY GENERATE SEXUAL
IMAGE AND VIDEO OF, AND IDENTIFY
IDENTIFIABLE PERSON WITH THAT
PERSON. CONSENT ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMING OR AI IS
A USEFUL TOOL IN THE RIGHT
CIRCUMSTANCE. HOWEVER, IT CAN
ALSO BE USED TO A DE FACTO
COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE AND
VIDEO OF PEOPLE THAT APPEAR
GENUINE. DEEPFAKE TECHNOLOGY HAS
BECOME MORE WIDELY ACCESSIBLE IN
RECENT YEARS, AND CAN BE USED TO
QUICKLY CREATE FAKE DIGITAL
CONTENT THAT IS SO REALISTIC IT
IS TYPICAL TO TELL IF IT IS REAL
OR NOT. IMAGE OF INNOCENT PERSON
ARE NOT AN INTERNET PERMANENTLY
AND ARE ON THE INTERNET
PERMANENTLY, AND CAN DESTROY A
VICTIM'S LIFE. IT IS VIRTUALLY
IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE THAT IMAGE
ARE NOT REAL. THE OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL WILL STATE THAT THIS
BILL MAY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT THE FIRST
AMENDMENT DOES NOT PROTECT
SOMEONE FOR DESTROYING ANOTHER
PERSON. REPUTATION AND WELL
BEING. ANOTHER ARGUMENT THAT THE
OPPOSITION IS MAKING IS THAT IT
IS UNNECESSARY. AT ASSISTANT
LAW. ALLOW FOR CIVIL LAWSUIT TO
BE FILED. I DISAGREE WITH THAT.
ASSISTANT LAW DOES ALLOW
INDIVIDUALS TO TAKE CIVIL
LAWSUITS. HOWEVER, THAT ACTION
IS NOT ACCESSIBLE TO MOST
PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY LOW INCOME
PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE LARGE
RESOURCES REQUIRE TO FILE A
CIVIL LAWSUIT. AS WITH THE NEW
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY,
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CAN
IMPROVE PEOPLE'S LIVES. HOWEVER,
DEEPFAKE MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO
FABRICATE HARMFUL AND DIGITAL
MEDIA WITHOUT CONSENT. THIS
POSES A SERIOUS THREAT TO THE
HEALTH, REPUTATION, AND
FINANCIAL AND MENTAL STABILITY
OF TARGET INDIVIDUALS. NEW YORK
PASSED A SIMILAR LAW LAST YEAR,
BUT I BELIEVE THE CALIFORNIA
SHOULD BE THE FOREFRONT OF THIS
ISSUE. I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE
MARK BERMAN WITH ORGANIZATION
FOR SOCIAL MEDIA SAFETY AND KIM
STONE WITH CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEY ASSOCIATION TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU ALL. YOU'D
LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL. OKAY.
YOU'RE THE FIRST ONE TO MOVE THE
BILL. THERE MISS DIXON, GOOD
AFTERNOON, KIM. STONE OF STONE
ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION. MY TALKING POINTS
WERE PREPARED BY IVY FITZPATRICK
AND ACTUAL DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, WHO HAD TO CATCH A
FLIGHT TO GO BACK HOME. AS YOU
KNOW, AI HAS PROLIFERATED IN
RECENT YEARS, AND WHILE IT'S
CERTAINLY A USEFUL TOOL, THE
POTENTIAL FOR NEGATIVE
IMPLICATIONS ARE GREAT, AND THE
LAW IS JUST NOW CATCHING UP TO
THE REALITY, I, AS YOU KNOW, CAN
BE USED TO CREATE DEEPFAKE
COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGES AND
VIDEOS OF PEOPLE THAT APPEAR
GENUINE IN THESE IMAGES CAN BE
CREATED CHEAPLY, QUICKLY AND
WITH THE USE OF THE INTERNET,
PROLIFERATED AND DISTRIBUTED
NEARLY INSTANTANEOUSLY. THOSE OF
YOU WHO WERE HERE EARLIER THIS
AFTERNOON HEARD CAITLIN, ONE OF
THE VICTIMS OF THIS TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF 1831, THE BERMAN BILL
THAT APPLIED TO THIS KIND OF,
MATERIALS. BUT FOR MINORS, THIS
BILL IS ABOUT ADULTS, THERE'S AN
INCREASING ONLINE TREND OF
POSTING PHOTOS AND VIDEOS OF
PEOPLE WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE
AND CONSENT. YOU CAN IMAGINE THE
LONG TIME CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH
ACTIONS. THE IMAGES ARE SO
REALISTIC THAT IT'S NEARLY
IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE PERSON TO
PROVE IT'S NOT THEM, AND THEN
THESE IMAGES HAVE PROLIFERATED
SO QUICKLY ONLINE, THEY CAN
LITERALLY RUIN A PERSON'S LIFE,
THEIR REPUTATION, THEIR
FINANCIAL WELL-BEING, THEIR
MENTAL HEALTH CAUSING LASTING
TRAUMA AND DISTRESS. MANY TIMES
THESE VICTIMS ARE YOUNG PEOPLE
WITH THEIR LIVES AHEAD OF THEM.
THE ALREADY THE LAW ALREADY AND
APPROPRIATELY CRIMINALIZES
REVENGE, BUT THERE'S A GAP FOR
AI GENERATED, WHICH IS EQUALLY
DESTRUCTIVE TO A VICTIM'S LIFE.
AND AS THIS COMMITTEE IS AWARE,
WHILE AB 602, IN 2019 CREATED A
CIVIL CAUSE OF ACTION FOR THE
CREATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF
UNAUTHORIZED AI IMAGES, NOT ALL
VICTIMS HAVE THE MEANS TO FILE A
CIVIL CASE, LEGISLATION HAS
CERTAINLY TAKEN STEPS IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT MORE MUST
BE DONE TO PROTECT VICTIMS AND
TO DETER THIS BEHAVIOR FROM THE
OUTSET, AB 1856 WOULD MAKE IT A
MISDEMEANOR FOR A PERSON TO
KNOWINGLY DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT THE
INDIVIDUAL'S CONSENT. AI
GENERATED SEXUAL IMAGES THAT
APPEAR AUTHENTIC TO A REASONABLE
OBSERVER, WHILE THE CREATION OF
THE IMAGES IN AND OF ITSELF IS
DISTURBING, IT IS IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT THIS BILL ONLY
CRIMINALIZES THE DISTRIBUTION OF
THE ACT, AND THAT DISTRIBUTION
HAS TO BE KNOWING THAT IS WHAT
CAUSES THE GREATEST AND LASTING
HARM TO VICTIMS, AND THAT
DISTRIBUTION IS AN ACTION NOT
PROTECTED BY THE FIRST
AMENDMENT. HOPEFULLY, WITH
ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT, WE CAN
PREVENT THIS BEHAVIOR FROM THE
OUTSET AND MOST IMPORTANTLY,
GIVE VICTIMS ADDED LEGAL
PROTECTIONS, ON BEHALF OF CD-R
AND IVEY'S EMPLOYER, THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WE WOULD ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. HELLO. MY NAME IS
MARK BERKMAN. I AM THE CEO OF
THE ORGANIZATION FOR SOCIAL
MEDIA SAFETY, THE LEADING
CONSUMER PROTECTION ORGANIZATION
FOCUSED EXCLUSIVELY ON SOCIAL
MEDIA. WE'RE PROUD TO STAND IN
SUPPORT AND SPONSOR AB 1856,
WHICH RESPONDS TO THE NEW AND
FRIGHTENING DANGER CREATED BY
DEEPFAKE TECHNOLOGY,
SPECIFICALLY, IN THIS CASE,
MALICIOUS DEEPFAKES. AS THE
BILL'S SPONSOR, THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER NOTED, DEEPFAKES
ARE FORGED VIDEOS CREATED VIA
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WHERE A
PERSON'S LIKENESS, INCLUDING
THEIR FACE AND VOICE, IS
REALISTICALLY SWAPPED WITH
SOMEONE ELSE'S. TO BE CLEAR,
DEEPFAKES LOOK REAL. THIS IS NOT
AN ABILITY WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE
OUTSIDE OF HOLLYWOOD, AND
BECAUSE OF THIS HYPER REALISM OF
DEEPFAKE TECHNOLOGY, WE HAVE
BEEN DEEPLY CONCERNED BY ITS
POTENTIAL FOR CYBERBULLYING,
HARASSMENT, AND SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION. AND THERE IS
EVIDENCE FOR THIS CONCERN SINCE
THE INTRODUCTION OF DEEPFAKES IN
LATE 2017, THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN
USED EXTENSIVELY TO INSERT
WOMEN'S LIKENESSES INTO FILMS
WITHOUT CONSENT. WE SPONSORED
SIMILAR LEGISLATION BACK IN
2019, WARNING ABOUT THE FUTURE
HARM THIS TECHNOLOGY WOULD
CAUSE. WELL, TRAGICALLY, THAT
HARM HAS NOW BEEN INFLICTED ON
CALIFORNIANS AS THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS NOTES, A THIRD SCHOOL
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN
HIT WITH ALLEGATIONS OF
DIGITALLY MANIPULATED IMAGES OF
STUDENTS CIRCULATING AROUND
CAMPUS. 16 EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
WERE IDENTIFIED AS BEING
VICTIMIZED, AS WELL AS FIVE
EGREGIOUSLY INVOLVED EIGHTH
GRADERS, ACCORDING TO BEVERLY
HILLS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
SUPERINTENDENT MICHAEL BREGY. AB
1856 IS A NECESSARY POLICY
RESPONSE TO REAL, SIGNIFICANT
THREATS POSED BY NEW TECHNOLOGY.
IT IS A NARROWLY TAILORED,
CONSTITUTIONALLY COMPLIANT
RESPONSE TO A NEW DANGER THAT
WILL PROTECT VULNERABLE WOMEN
AND GIRLS, ESPECIALLY ACROSS
CALIFORNIA. THE ORGANIZATION
STANDS IN STRONG SUPPORT AND
ASKS FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. VERY
GOOD. THAT WAS EXACTLY TWO
MINUTES. GOOD TIMING. ANYBODY
ELSE IN SUPPORT? MADAM CHAIR?
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, SHANE
GUSMAN ON BEHALF OF SAG-AFTRA IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? ALL
RIGHT. COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE OR QUESTIONS? OKAY.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BRIAN, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS
JUST, TO THE QUESTION ABOUT YOU
MENTIONED 16 EIGHTH GRADERS OR A
NUMBER OF EIGHTH GRADERS. SO IF
WE PASS THIS LAW, THE IDEA IS
THEN TO HIT EIGHTH GRADERS WITH
MISDEMEANORS, I THINK IT'S A
NECESSARY DETERRENT. AND WHAT
HAPPENED WAS, FEDERALLY, THOSE
CHILDREN WERE PROSECUTED UNDER
CURRENT FEDERAL LAW. SO WE NEED
THIS DETERRENT BECAUSE THE LEVEL
OF HARM IS SO SEVERE RIGHT NOW.
AND THIS WAS THIS WAS IN, I
KNOW, NEAR YOUR DISTRICT AND
NEAR US AS WELL, WE'RE SEEING IT
ALL OVER AND I THINK IT'S VERY
EASY TO, DISMISS IT AS NOT BEING
A REAL VIDEO OR REAL ASSAULT.
BUT THIS IS REAL ASSAULT THAT'S
OCCURRING. SO I GUESS MY, MY
CHEN, MY GENERAL CONCERN IS THAT
I RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM, AND
IT'S DEFINITELY A PROBLEM AND
NEW TECHNOLOGY AND IT'S AMONGST
THE WORST TIMES EVER TO BE A KID
, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE
PROLIFERATION OF THIS KIND OF
CONTENT THAT'S FLOWING THROUGH
OUR SCHOOLS IS BECAUSE THE
STUDENTS ARE UNAWARE OF THE
PENAL CODE, RIGHT? AND THAT, YOU
KNOW, NEW STATUTES TO
CRIMINALIZE THIS BEHAVIOR WOULD
ACTUALLY DETER THEIR BEHAVIOR. I
ACTUALLY THINK IT MIGHT LEAD TO
SOME CHILDREN BEING PROSECUTED
WITH MISDEMEANORS AND OTHERS
NOT, AND THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF
MY GENERAL CONCERN, WITH, WITH
THE POINT YOU MADE ABOUT IT, YOU
KNOW, IN ITS RELATION TO YOUNG
PEOPLE, I THINK AS A BROADER
CONCEPT, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH
THE AUTHOR AND THE INTENTS OF
THIS BILL, I'M JUST DEEPLY
CONCERNED ABOUT ITS APPLICATION,
ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE KNOW A LOT
OF THIS IS HAPPENING IN OUR
SCHOOL SETTINGS AND THAT
DISPARATE PUNISHMENT ALREADY
TAKES PLACE. AND IN INSTANCES
WHERE CRIMINAL IZATION IS PART
OF THAT PUNISHMENT SCHEME, IT'S
IMPACTING CERTAIN STUDENTS,
CERTAIN DISTRICTS AND CERTAIN
POPULATIONS IN A DIFFERENT
SCALE. I WOULD IMAGINE THE
STUDENTS IN BEVERLY HILLS
PROBABLY AREN'T GOING TO GET HIT
WITH THIS MISDEMEANOR FOR THE
SAME TYPE OF BEHAVIOR, BUT
STUDENTS IN A DIFFERENT SCHOOL,
IN A DIFFERENT DISTRICT JUST
MIGHT END UP IN HANDCUFFS. SO
CAN WE HAVE AN ANSWER FROM THE
FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS? IS
THE IDEA TO PROSECUTE CHILDREN
UNDER. WELL ANY MISDEMEANOR OR.
I MEAN, ANY CRIMINAL LAW
VIOLATION, COULD ALSO BE BROUGHT
AGAINST JUVENILES. IT WOULD BE
BROUGHT AS A JUVENILE CASE FOR A
JUVENILE ADJUDICATION AND WOULD
FOLLOW THE RULES AS IT APPLIES
TO JUVENILE JUVENILES. SO, YEAH,
IT'S I MEAN, IT'S NOT DESIGNED
TO GO AFTER EIGHTH GRADERS WHO
DO THIS. IT'S DESIGNED TO GO
AFTER ADULT YOUNG MEN WHO DO
THIS TO OTHER YOUNG PEOPLE. BUT
IF YOU KNOW, AND THEN THE
PROSECUTORS IN THOSE CASES WOULD
USE THEIR DISCRETION TO DECIDE
WHETHER TO BRING CASES, IF IT
WAS CHILDREN DOING THIS TO OTHER
CHILDREN, WHICH IS LIKE
PARTICULARLY HORRIBLE AND
SYMPATHETIC FOR BOTH THE, YOU
KNOW, THE CHILDREN DOING IT AND
THE CHILDREN BEING VICTIMIZED.
YOU'RE COMPLETELY RIGHT ABOUT
THAT. IT'S ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WILSON WAS NEXT. AND THEN WE'LL
CALL. THANK YOU, TO THE AUTHOR
FOR THIS BILL. THIS CAME UP IN
PUBLIC SAFETY AND THERE WAS LOTS
OF CONVERSATION OFTEN AROUND
JUST THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE IS
MINORS. AND I'M ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT I HAD ASKED, YOU
KNOW, IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER
AMENDMENTS, RELATED TO MINORS,
YOU DID DO SOME TECHNICAL
CLARIFICATION, TECHNICAL AMENDS
AND CLARIFYING THROUGH THE WORK
OF THE COMMITTEE, AND ONE THING
THAT HAD CHANGED MY MIND IN
TERMS OF HOW I VOTE TODAY, I,
YOU KNOW, LAST TIME IN PUBLIC
SAFETY WAS MORE RELATED TO
COURTESY IS THE FACT THAT THE
EXISTING LAW, AS IT RELATES TO
AN ACTUAL PERSON, THEIR HEAD AND
THEIR BODY BEING THE SAME, YOU
KNOW, WHICH IS, DEFINED OR, IN
PUBLIC AS REVENGE. SO TO SPEAK,
DOESN'T HAVE A CARVE OUT FOR
THERE'S NOT A DIFFERENT
PUNISHMENT FOR YOUTH. IT'S JUST
THAT LOWER LEVEL MISDEMEANOR.
AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, EVEN
THOUGH I DO SHARE THOSE CONCERNS
ABOUT MINORS, BECAUSE THE LAW
RELATED TO ACTUAL IMAGES IS,
DOESN'T HAVE THAT CARVE OUT, AND
THIS IS JUST AS DEVASTATING WHEN
YOU HAVE, USING AN APP LIKE
NOTIFICATION, WHICH COULD PRETTY
MUCH MIMIC SOMEONE'S, BODY AT A
TIME, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY FOR
YOUNG PEOPLE AT A TIME WHEN IT
COULD BE, A LOT OF SHAME AROUND
WHAT YOUR BODY LOOKS LIKE.
ANYWAY, SO WITH THAT, I AM GOING
TO SUPPORT THE BILL TODAY, GIVEN
OUR CONVERSATION, LAST TIME, AS
YOU WERE GOING THROUGH PUBLIC
SAFETY, RECOGNIZING THAT YOU ARE
BEING CONSISTENT IN APPLICATION
OF THE LAW, WHERE THERE WASN'T A
CARVE OUT FOR MINORS AND THAT
LAW NOT ALLOWING A CARVE OUT FOR
MINORS IN THIS ONE. SO THANK
YOU, FOR JUST CONTINUING TO WORK
ON THIS. I REALLY, I REALLY I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT.
AND WE ALL WERE RIGHT NOW THAT I
CONTINUE TO GROW. SO I MEAN, IF
WE DON'T HAVE ANY, ANYTHING IN
PLACE THAT'S GOING TO BE BECOME
A MORE SERIOUS ISSUE IN THE
FUTURE. SO I THINK THAT MY,
MEASURE IS, I THINK, REALLY FAIR
FOR EVERYONE. AND I THINK THAT
RIGHT NOW WE, REGARDING WE LIKE
OR WE DON'T LIKE IT, YOU KNOW,
OR I ISSUE OUT THERE AND, YOU
KNOW, THE WHOLE COUNTRY WE
DISCUSS ABOUT AI AND YOU KNOW,
THAT CONTINUE TO BE LIKE THE
ISSUE THE MORE LEGAL ISSUE IN
THE FUTURE. YEAH THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWENTHAL. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WANT TO,
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING
THIS LEGISLATION FORWARD. THIS
IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM CONFRONTING
THE STATE, CONFRONTING THE
NATION AND THE WORLD AT. AND
WE'RE CATCHING UP TO IT, AND
WE'RE BEHIND, AND WE NEED TO GET
OUT IN FRONT OF THIS. SO I
APPLAUD YOU FOR TAKING THIS ON.
I'VE KNOWN YOU FOR MANY YEARS,
AND I KNOW, YOU KNOW, HOW, YOU
LOOK AT POLICY THROUGH THE LENS
OF FAMILIES AND HOW THINGS
IMPACT FAMILIES. AND SO I REALLY
WANT TO APPRECIATE THAT, I WANT
TO ECHO THE CONCERNS OF MY
COLLEAGUE FROM LOS ANGELES JUST
BROUGHT FORWARD, I'M MYSELF ON A
LEARNING ODYSSEY RIGHT NOW
ABOUT, UNDERSTANDING HOW
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACTS TO
SPECIFIC COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND THE
APPLICATION OF THE LAW AND HOW
WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THAT AS
WE'RE CREATING POLICY GOING
FORWARD. AND I WILL ALSO BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY WITH
THE HOPE AND THE EXPECTATION
THAT THERE CAN BE SOME
BIFURCATION BETWEEN WHEN YOUTHS
ARE DOING THIS VERSUS ADULTS
DOING THIS, BECAUSE LET'S FACE
IT, PHYSIOLOGICALLY,
ANATOMICALLY, YOU KNOW, YOUNG
PEOPLE, THEIR BRAINS ARE NOT
FULLY DEVELOPED. AND WE HAVE TO
MAKE A DIFFERENTIATION IN THAT
REGARD AS TO, THEIR OWN FUTURES
AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THEM.
SO I REALLY WANT TO IMPLORE YOU
TO LOOK AT THAT SERIOUSLY. AND
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO BE
LOOKING BACK AT THAT AS THIS
REACHES THE FLOOR. I DO HAVE A
FEW QUESTIONS AS WELL. I'D LIKE
TO ASK FOR THE EXPERTS OR THE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER THEMSELVES. IF
YOU COULD EXPLAIN TO ME, AGAIN,
IN THE CONTEXT OF SUPPORTING THE
BILL. BUT JUST SO I CAN
UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT BETTER
WHAT CONSTITUTES DISTRIBUTION
AND WHAT CONSTITUTES CONSENT. SO
LEGALLY, DISTRIBUTION IS
RELATIVELY LIMITED. IT COULD BE
POSTING IT. IT COULD BE EMAILING
IT TO SOMEONE. THERE WAS A BILL
THAT WE DID ON REVENGE THROUGH
THIS HOUSE A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
IT WAS A GUY WHO TOOK PICTURES
OF HIS TALKING ABOUT IT.
DISTRIBUTION. NO NO NO NO NO NO
NO. HE TOOK PICTURES OF HIS
EX-GIRLFRIEND'S NAKED BODY AND
PLASTERED IT ON THE SIDE OF HIS
CAR AND PARKED THE CAR IN FRONT
OF HER PLACE OF WORK AND HER
FAMILY, AND THAT WAS NOT
CONSIDERED DISTRIBUTION. SO WE
CHANGED THE LAW SO THAT IT WAS
BECAUSE THAT'S LIKE JUST AS BAD
AS PUTTING IT ON FACEBOOK. OUR
STUDENTS, IN A IN A GROUP CHAT
ON SNAPCHAT IS THAT DISTRIBUTION
? PROBABLY. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW
IF THAT'S BEEN LEGALLY ANSWERED
YET. SO I GOT TO BE A DISCLAIMER
HERE. BUT YEAH, ANY ANY STUDENTS
THAT ARE IN A GROUP CHAT THAT
ARE NOT REPORTING THIS, ARE THEY
CONSPIRATORS TO I DON'T KNOW IF
THEY'RE CONSPIRATORS, BUT IT'S
PROBABLY DISTRIBUTION. OKAY. SO
I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO
UNDERSTAND HOW YOUNG PEOPLE ARE
USING THE INTERNET TODAY AND
WHAT THIS CAN ACTUALLY MEAN IN
APPLICATION, SPECIFICALLY WITH
THE CONCERNS THAT MY COLLEAGUE
BROUGHT FORWARD IN HIS COMMENTS.
THOSE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNING, AND
WE HAVE TIME TO WORK THESE
THINGS OUT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT
WORKS FOR ALL CALIFORNIANS. THE
LAST THING THAT I WANT TO SAY IS
THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT
LEGISLATION. WE ARE, WE ARE,
WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE
SIDE WHICH IS THE STICK WHICH IS
THE BITE, HOW WE GO ABOUT THIS.
BUT WE ARE MISSING IN A FEW
OTHER AREAS IN CALIFORNIA THAT
THIS BILL SHOULDN'T ADDRESS. BUT
I'M JUST KIND OF SAYING THIS TO
EVERYBODY AT LARGE, WHICH IS
WE'RE BEHIND IN DIGITAL
LITERACY, WAY BEHIND AND
UNDERSTAND KNOWING AND TEACHING
YOUNG PEOPLE IN PARTICULAR,
WHAT'S RIGHT AND WHAT'S WRONG.
RESPONSIBILITY AND COLLECTIVE
INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR AND
COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR. COLLECTIVE
BEHAVIOR IS SO CRITICAL. AND
THEN THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE
BEHIND IN IS WE'RE BEHIND WITH
OUR LEGAL SYSTEM IN SPECIALIZED
SESSION ON HOW WE EXPEDITIOUSLY
TAKE THINGS BACK FROM THE
DIGITAL ETHER. WE'RE BEHIND. WE
DON'T HAVE THAT SPECIALIZATION
RIGHT NOW IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM,
AND THIS IS JUST PROLIFERATING
TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'RE COMING
OUT WITH ALL THESE BILLS TO
PROTECT US. BUT ONCE THINGS ARE
OUT THERE, WE NEED TO HAVE A
MUCH, MUCH BETTER MECHANISM TO
BRING THAT BACK. SO I HOPE THAT
WE CAN ALL RECOGNIZE THAT AND
COMPLEMENT THIS TYPE OF
LEGISLATION WITH THINGS THAT WE
NEED TO DO. FUTURE. THANK YOU
AGAIN. ASSEMBLY MEMBER. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. PATTERSON HEY, THANK
YOU, VERY MUCH. ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
TIDE THOUGHT I JUST SAW YOU IN
THE LAST COMMITTEE WE WERE AT,
FIVE MINUTES AGO. SO YOU KNOW, I
THINK, I THINK, MY GOOD FRIEND,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BRIAN, HIS,
CONCERNS ARE MORE SYSTEMIC THAN
ON THIS BILL. THE ONES HE
EXPRESSED. AND, AND THEN TO MY
COLLEAGUE, MR. LOWENTHAL FROM
LONG BEACH, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
OKAY GOOD. JUST MAKING SURE I
HAD AS MUCH HAIR AS YOU DID WHEN
I GOT ELECTED BY THE WAY, AND,
BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN MY
COMMUNITY, THERE HAVE BEEN,
CASES OF SEXTORTION WITH YOUTH
INVOLVED AND SEXUAL IMAGES GOING
OUT NOW, NOT USING AI, BUT I'M
JUST SAYING THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING UNFORTUNATELY, THAT
YOUTH ARE, PARTICIPATING IN, AND
IT SCARES ME TO DEATH. THINKING
OF MY CHILDREN WHO THEY'RE GOING
TO GET OLDER EVENTUALLY, GOD
WILLING. AND THEY'RE GOING TO,
YOU KNOW, BE ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND
THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I THINK,
YOU KNOW, IT'S A I THINK WHEN I
LOOK AT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE
PROSECUTION THÀNH, GENERALLY, I
THINK THIS LEGISLATURE HAS
SPOKEN LOUDLY, BUT ALSO, I THINK
OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITIES,
FOR THE MOST PART, HAVE GOTTEN
IN. I'M ALWAYS INTERESTED TO THE
DISCUSSIONS LIKE, HEY, LOOK, WE
DON'T WANT TO RUIN THIS KID'S
LIFE FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE
BECAUSE OF A MISTAKE THAT THEY
MADE. BUT ALSO, I THINK THAT
THERE IS A DETERRENT FACTOR. I
WAS WAY MORE SCARED OF, POLICE
USE AS A CHILD AND, YOU KNOW,
AND OH MY GOSH, LIKE, I GOT TO
BE CAREFUL IF I DO THIS, YOU
KNOW, I THINK THAT DETERRENT
FACTOR REALLY DOES IT. CHILDREN
THINK ABOUT THAT. KIDS THINK
ABOUT THAT. AND, BUT I ALSO
THINK THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS AN
OUT THERE THINKING, HEY, LOOK,
WE GOT TO, YOU KNOW, 15. I'M NOT
SAYING IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. I'M
NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T HAPPEN,
BUT I WE DO HAVE TO CREATE A
DETERRENT FOR THIS KIND OF
ACTIVITY BECAUSE IT IS IT IS
GOING TO GROW AND I THINK YOUR
BILL IS, IS A GOOD FIRST STEP TO
THAT. I THINK SOME CONCERNS
OUTLINED. I WOULD BE CONCERNED
IF WE SAID, HEY, LOOK, KIDS, YOU
KNOW, THERE WILL BE NO
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR YOUTH, BUT I
THINK KEEP THAT CONVERSATION
GOING. BUT I DO THINK WE NEED A
DETERRENT FOR THEM, TOO, BECAUSE
THAT IS WHERE WE'RE SEEING I
DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT SNAPBACK IS
OR, YOU KNOW, FACE GOOGLE IS,
YOU KNOW, BUT, THE KIDS ARE
USING THEM AND THEY TELL ME THAT
IT'S A BIG DEAL. AND SO WE DO
HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S
SOME ACCOUNTABILITY THERE. BUT I
DO AGREE. LOOK, HEY, I DON'T
WANT SOME 16 YEAR OLD KID GOING
TO JAIL FOR SIX MONTHS BECAUSE
THEY MADE A REALLY DUMB MISTAKE.
AND, BUT I THINK WE I DO TRUST
OUR PROSECUTORS WITH THAT KIND
OF DISCRETION, ESPECIALLY GIVEN
WHAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS TOLD
THEM. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO
SUPPORTING THIS BILL, AND I'M
GLAD THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATIONS WITH
MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE. SO THANK
YOU. YES, I REALLY APPRECIATE
THE I REALLY APPRECIATE THE,
CONCERNS FROM SENATE MEMBER,
BRIAN. SO I THINK THAT MAYBE
IT'S A FIRST STEP BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, WE ALL ARE AWARE THAT ALL
THE YOUNG PEOPLE RIGHT NOW,
THEY'RE USING AI AND IF WE DON'T
HAVE ANY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY LAW.
IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY BILL, IF WE
DON'T HAVE ANY MEASURE, IF THIS
ADRIN PLACE. SO, WE DO NOT WE
HAVEN'T PROVIDE ANY, ANY TOOL
FOR OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT. I
UNDERSTAND MY BILL IS ONLY
INTEND TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUNG
PEOPLE, THEY UNDERSTAND SO THEY
DO NOT COME UP WITH THE DEEPFAKE
TECHNOLOGY TO HARM ANOTHER YOUNG
PEOPLE. THAT'S MY INTENTION.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T
HAVE ANYTHING. SO THE YOUNG
PEOPLE, THEY CONTINUE TO CREATE
AI IMAGE TO HARM THEIR FRIENDS
OR THE OTHER YOUNG PEOPLE, AND
THAT WHAT WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE.
YEAH YEAH. AND I JUST WANT TO
KIND OF BRING MY, MY THOUGHTS
FULL CIRCLE. NOW HAVING HEARD
EVERYBODY ELSE, I THINK MY
COLLEAGUE FROM ROCKLAND, IS
RIGHT IN THAT I AM THINKING
ABOUT THIS FROM KIND OF A
SYSTEMIC LENS AND INCLUDING THE
CURRENT REVENGE PORT STATUTE. I
THINK THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T
HAVE KIND OF CLARITY AROUND
YOUNG PEOPLE, THAT DOESN'T, FOR
ME, PROVIDE A JUSTIFICATION OF
WHY WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO GO
DOWN THAT ROUTE. IT MEANS WE
MIGHT HAVE MISSED THE FIRST PASS
AT GETTING THIS RIGHT AND REALLY
THINKING THROUGH THE FRAMEWORK.
I KNOW PLENTY OF DA'S WHO HAVE,
YOU KNOW, FELT TERRIBLE ABOUT
THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE TO
CHARGE MIDDLE SCHOOLERS WITH
REVENGE STATUTES BECAUSE THEY'VE
THEY'VE SHARED CONTENT, BUT ALSO
THE DISCRETION POTENTIALLY NOT
TO IN SOME CASES. AND IT'S THAT
WIGGLE ROOM THAT MAKES ME
NERVOUS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT DISTRIBUTION. THIS
BILL ISN'T ABOUT THE CREATION OF
THE IMAGES, RIGHT. AND IT
CERTAINLY DOESN'T GO AFTER THE
KIND OF PLATFORMS THAT ALLOW YOU
TO CREATE THE DEEPFAKE IMAGES TO
BEGIN WITH. SO WE ARE LITERALLY
GOING ABOUT THE YOUNG PEOPLE,
MANY OF WHOM DIDN'T EVEN CREATE
IT, PROBABLY HAD IT SENT TO
THEM, WHO THEN SENT IT ONE MORE
TIME, AND I THINK THAT IS A VERY
KIND OF DANGEROUS AND SLIPPERY
SPACE. SO I'M GOING TO LAY OFF
TODAY JUST SO WE CONTINUE TO ASK
QUESTIONS. BUT I THINK YOU'RE
GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL THROUGH
THIS COMMITTEE, AND I THINK YOU
HAVE THE RIGHT, KIND OF PASSION
AND HEART FOR THIS WORK TO
REALLY WRAP YOUR HANDS AROUND
THIS ISSUE. SO THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING IT FORWARD. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ORTEGA. I THINK
MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE LA AREA
HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD, WHEN
IT COMES TO PLATFORMS, YOU KNOW,
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT
PENALIZING YOUTH, AND I DON'T
WANT TO REPEAT WHAT'S BEEN SAID,
BUT I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE
FACT THAT PLATFORMS ARE ALLOWING
THIS TO HAPPEN. AND IF WE'RE
GOING TO CRIMINALIZE YOUTH, WE
SHOULD REALLY THINK ABOUT
PENALTIES AND CRIMINALIZING
THOSE THAT ARE ALLOWING THIS TO
HAPPEN. I JUST SAT IN ANOTHER
HEARING WHEN IT COMES TO DRUG
USE AND FENTANYL AND YOUTH
ACCESSING DRUGS ON THE STREETS,
WHERE A PEDIATRICIAN WAS QUOTED
IN THE HEARING SAYING, YOU KNOW,
THESE SITES ARE NEW DRUG
DEALERS, OUR NEW GENERATION DRUG
DEALERS, SO, YEAH, HAVE CONCERNS
, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY
BECAUSE I WANT TO CONTINUE THAT
CONVERSATION. BUT I ALSO WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT WE COULD
POTENTIALLY BE LOOKING AT THE
WRONG, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS
IN AND NOT LOOKING AT THE WHOLE
PICTURE AND GOING AFTER THE
PLATFORMS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT,
SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER DIXON AND A SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ORTEGA, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE WHEN THE THANK
YOU COMMITTEE, STAFF. AND I WANT
TO THANK THE CHAIR FOR WORKING
WITH MY OFFICE, AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR. I
VOTE. VERY GOOD. CAN WE DO THE
ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT, AB 1856 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER TOF. THE MOTION
IS TO PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. B¢O C¢M
PATTERSON. OAN PATTERSON. AYE,
BRIAN. NOT VOTE. BRIAN NOT
VOTING. DIXON. DIXON. AYE
HOOVER. IRWIN. AYE IRWIN. AYE.
LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL. AYE.
ORTEGA ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD.
AYE. WICKS WILSON. WILSON. AYE
THANK YOU. OKAY. THE VOTE IS
SEVEN ZERO. THAT BILL IS OUT.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE
HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER VÆ WITH AB
2004 53. WHENEVER YOU ARE READY.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. MEMBERS, I'M PROUD TO
PRESENT AB 2453, WHICH CLARIFIES
THE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TASKS
THAT DO NOT IMPACT THE EV
CHARGING STATIONS. METRO LOGICAL
FUNCTION DO NOT REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL TESTING. THE CURRENT
SYSTEM UNINTENTIONALLY
INCENTIVIZE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
AND REPAIR TASKS FOR MORE MORE
EV CHARGERS. CURRENTLY, EV
CHARGER STATIONS MUST BE RE
RETESTED AND PLACED BACK INTO
SERVICE BY REGISTERED SERVICE
AGENT RSA. EVERY EVERY TIME
MAINTENANCE ON REPAIRS ARE
CONDUCTED. THIS COULD INCLUDE
SOME AS SMALL AS REPLACING THE
CONDUCTOR CLIP OR THE WHIPPING,
WIPING DOWN THE SCREEN. DUE TO
THE OVER LACK OF RSAS, THE
TESTING EQUIPMENT THAT CAN COST
ANYWHERE BETWEEN 45,000 TO
50,000 COSTS INCURS BY CHARGING
STATION OWNERS AND OPERATORS CAN
RANGE FROM 400 TO 500 PER PORT,
WITH WITH. MANY STATIONS HAVE
MULTIPLE CHARGING PORTS.
IMPORTANTLY, NONE OF THESE
CHARGES IN THIS BILL WILL
RESTRICT COUNTY'S ABILITY.
ABILITY TO ENFORCE DEVICE
ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS. WITH ME
TO TESTIFY TODAY IS JUSTIN
WILSON, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF
REGULATORY POLICY AND PROGRAM AT
CHARGEPOINT, MADAM CHAIR,
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, JUSTIN
WILSON, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF
REGULATORY POLICY AND PROGRAMS
AT CHARGEPOINT, FIRST, WANT TO
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR INTRODUCING
THIS IMPORTANT MEASURE, AS HE
EXPLAINED, AB 2453 IS A BILL
THAT WILL HELP STREAMLINE THE
PROCESS TO CONDUCT ROUTINE
REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE ON EV
CHARGING STATIONS. CURRENTLY,
ANY REPAIR OR MAINTENANCE THAT
IS CONDUCTED ON AN EV CHARGING
STATION REQUIRES THE STATION TO
REMAIN OFFLINE UNTIL A
REGISTERED SERVICE AGENT CAN
COME OUT AND INSPECT THE
CHARGING STATION TEST TO ENSURE
THAT THE METER IS OPERATING
CORRECTLY, AND THEN PLACE THE
CHARGING STATION BACK IN
SERVICE. THIS TESTING
REQUIREMENT ALSO APPLIES TODAY
TO ROUTINE REPAIR AND
MAINTENANCE THAT DO NOTHING TO
IMPACT THE STATION METER
ACCURACY, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, REPLACING A
CONNECTOR CLIP OR SIMPLY
REMOVING GRAFFITI OR STICKERS
FROM THE CHARGING STATION. THIS
IS AN UNNECESSARY ADDED EXPENSE
AND KEEPS THE STATION OFFLINE
LONGER THAN NECESSARY.
ADDITIONALLY, DUE TO THE LACK OF
REGISTERED SERVICE AGENTS AND
THE COST OF THE TESTING
EQUIPMENT, WHICH, AS NOTED, IS
ANYWHERE BETWEEN 45,000 AND
$50,000 INDIVIDUAL TEST TO
STATION OWNERS ARE ABOUT $500
PER PORT, AND MANY STATIONS HAVE
MULTIPLE PORTS. AB 2453 WILL
EXEMPT ROUTINE REPAIRS AND
MAINTENANCE THAT DO NOT IMPACT
THE STATIONS ACCURACY. THIS WILL
HELP BRING REPAIRED STATIONS
BACK ONLINE QUICKER AND IT WILL
HELP INCENTIVIZE OWNERS TO
REPAIR THEIR EQUIPMENT.
CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN A LEADER IN
THE ROLLOUT OF EVS, AND IT'S
IMPERATIVE THAT WE REMOVE THAT.
WE REMOVE BARRIERS THAT IMPEDE
PEOPLE FROM REPAIRING BROKEN
STATIONS. WE RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST YOUR AYE VOTE ON AB
2453. NEXT WITNESS. THANKS HI
THERE, MEGAN MICKELBERG HERE. ON
BEHALF OF THE EV CHARGING
ASSOCIATION, WANT TO THANK
ASSEMBLY MEMBER VILLA FOR
INTRODUCING THIS BILL, WHICH
WILL HELP STREAMLINE AND REPAIR
MAINTENANCE PROCESS FOR EV
CHARGING STATIONS, CALIFORNIA
HAS A COMMITMENT TO
TRANSITIONING TO ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW,
TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, WE NEED A
ROBUST AMOUNT OF EV CHARGING,
ACCORDING TO THE CEC, CALIFORNIA
NEEDS TO INSTALL APPROXIMATELY
1.1 MILLION CHARGERS BY 2030 TO
MEET THE ESTIMATED 7.1 MILLION
LIGHT DUTY PLUG IN EVS THAT ARE
ANTICIPATED TO BE ON THE ROAD
THAT YEAR. THAT EQUATES TO
APPROXIMATELY 359 CHARGERS PER
DAY. THAT WOULD NEED TO BE
INSTALLED BETWEEN NOW AND 2030.
AB 2453 WILL HELP STREAMLINE THE
PROCESS OF ROUTINE REPAIR AND
MAINTENANCE BY REMOVING THE
REQUIREMENTS TO RETEST THE
EQUIPMENT IN CASES THAT DON'T
IMPACT THE METEOROLOGY OF THE
CHARGING STATION FROM BEING
CORRECT. AT PRESENT, CHARGING
STATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE
TESTED EVERY TIME, AS I THINK
YOU'VE HEARD THUS FAR,
IMPORTANTLY, AB 2453 MAINTAINS
THE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY TO
REQUIRE TESTS OF ANY CHARGING
STATIONS THAT THEY DEEM
NECESSARY WHEREVER THEY WISH TO
DO SO. THIS BILL IS AN IMPORTANT
STEP TO REMOVE UNNECESSARY
TESTING AND UPHOLD CONSUMER
PROTECTION. I ALSO JUST WANT TO
TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
REGISTER A FEW ME TO SUPPORTS ON
BEHALF OF CAL START, VALLEY
CLEAN AIR NOW AND FLO EV
CHARGING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SUPPORT IN ADVANCE. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT? GOOD EVENING,
TIMOTHY BURR, ON BEHALF OF
RIVIAN AND SUPPORT CLIFTON
WILSON ON BEHALF OF TESLA IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION,
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE, MOTION. ALL RIGHT,
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWENTHAL, A
SECOND BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON.
AND THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. CAN WE JUST
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? YEAH,
CERTAINLY. ASK FOR VOTE. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER
TEN, AB 2453 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
VIA. THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. I BRIAN. BRIAN I
DIXON I DIXON I HOOVER IRWIN.
IRWIN I LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL I
ORTEGA. ORTEGA I WARD. WARD I
WICKS. WILSON. WILSON I. 8 TO 0.
THAT BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER KALRA. YOU ARE
UP NEXT. THANK YOU SO MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO START
BY THANKING, THE COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR THEIR WORK AND THIS ON THIS
BILL, AND WILL BE ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS. AB 2602
WOULD REQUIRE A PERFORMER'S
INFORMED CONSENT AND PROPER
REPRESENTATION WHEN EXECUTING A
CONTRACT FOR ANY TRANSFER OF.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, FOR ANY
TRANSFER OF RIGHTS TO THAT
INDIVIDUAL'S LIKENESS OR VOICE
AMIDST THE RISE OF THE DIGITAL
AGE, PERFORMERS ACROSS THE
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY HAVE
INADVERTENTLY BEEN SIGNING AWAY
THE RIGHTS TO THEIR DIGITAL
SELVES THROUGH CLAUSES THAT CAN
LOOK LIKE STANDARD COPYRIGHT
LANGUAGE. SPECIFICALLY
INDIVIDUALS ARE UNKNOWINGLY
AUTHORIZING STUDIOS TO USE THEIR
VOICE AND LIKENESS IN ALL MEDIA
BY ALL CURRENT AND FUTURE
TECHNOLOGIES, IN PERPETUITY, AND
WITH NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION.
AB 2602 STRIKES THE BALANCE
BETWEEN INDUSTRY PROGRESS AND
PROTECTING PERFORMERS RIGHTS TO
THEIR DIGITAL SELF AND
LIVELIHOOD. THIS BILL DOES NOT
OUTRIGHT PROHIBIT THE USE OF
DIGITAL REPLICAS, BUT RATHER
ENSURES THAT IF A PERFORMERS
AGREE TO LICENSE OUT THEIR
DIGITAL SELF, THAT THEY ARE
FULLY AWARE OF THE EXTENT OF AND
THE INTENTIONS FOR THAT USE.
I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE TO THEIR
CONCERNS. HAVE TAKEN AMENDMENTS
THAT ADDRESS RETROACTIVITY, AND
CLARIFIES. THIS BILL IS INTENDED
TO TARGET NEW PERFORMANCES BY A
DIGITAL REPLICA THAT WOULD HAVE
OTHERWISE BEEN PERFORMED BY A
LIVE ACTOR HERE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT. SHANE GUZMAN ON BEHALF
OF SAG-AFTRA AND YVONNE
FERNANDEZ, LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION. GOOD EVENING, SHANE
GUZMAN, ON BEHALF OF SAG-AFTRA
AND ON BEHALF OF OUR 160,000
MEMBERS THAT ARE PERFORMERS
ACROSS ALL DIFFERENT LINES OF
MEDIA, WITH THE RAPID
DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY,
PARTICULARLY AI AND, AND,
DIGITAL REPLICAS, THERE'S A
GROWING CONCERN THAT WITH OUR
MEMBERS THAT IT COULD HAVE A
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THEIR
PROFESSION. THEY FEEL LIKE IT'S
THE RIGHT TIME TO BUILD IN SOME
GUARDRAILS. AS THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER SAID, WE'RE NOT OUTLAWING
THE TECHNOLOGY. WE JUST THINK
THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME FAIR
GUARDRAILS. SO PEOPLE'S
PROFESSIONS AREN'T UNFAIRLY
IMPACTED. WE'D LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE
COMMITTEE, IN WORKING WITH US,
WITH THE AMENDMENTS, I THINK IT
MAKES IT A BETTER BILL. I THINK
IT PRETTY MUCH GETS THERE, AT
LEAST THE STATED CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION AND WE WILL CONTINUE
TO WORK WITH THEM IF WE NEED TO.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE THERE.
AND WITH THAT, WE ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU. WELL THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, YVONNE FERNANDEZ WITH
THE CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION
AND PROUD CO-SPONSOR OF 2602, A
BILL THAT WILL PROTECT WORKING
ARTISTS FROM THE UNPAID USE OR
EXPLOITATION OF THEIR DIGITAL
LIKENESS OR VOICE AS WHAT HAS
ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED, BY THE
AUTHOR AND MY COLLEAGUE. THE
ADVANCEMENT OF TECHNOLOGY SHOULD
BE TO THE BENEFIT OF WORKERS,
NOT THE DETRIMENT OF WORKERS. WE
BELIEVE THAT TECHNOLOGY, SUCH AS
AI CAN BE A PRODUCTIVE TOOL WHEN
USED TO SUPPORT WORKERS, NOT
REPLACE, EXPLOIT OR DE-SKILL
THEM. THE GUARDRAILS PUT IN
PLACE THROUGH AB 2602 ARE A
MODEL ON HOW TO EFFECTIVELY
REGULATE THE USE OF AI IN THE
WORKPLACE TO ENSURE WORKERS HAVE
REAL, MEANINGFUL OVERSIGHT ON
THE USE OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND
THE USE OF THE BY EMPLOYERS. AB
2602 REQUIRES PERFORMERS TO HAVE
UNION OR LEGAL REPRESENTATION
WHEN ENTERING A CONTRACT THAT
ALLOWS A DIGITAL REPLICA OF
THEIR VOICE OR LIKENESS. AS
MENTIONED, AB 2602 DOES NOT
PROHIBIT THE USE OF AI AS
STATED, IT SIMPLY REQUIRES
ADEQUATE WORKER REPRESENTATION,
IN CONTRACTS DEALING WITH A
RAPIDLY CHANGING TECHNOLOGY
WITHOUT THIS PROTECTION, AN
EMPLOYER COULD ESSENTIALLY
CREATE NEW CONTENT USING A
PERFORMER'S LIKENESS OR VOICE
WITHOUT TRUE AUTHORIZATION OR
DIRECTION FROM THE PERFORMER, AS
A TOOL IN THE ENTERTAINMENT
INDUSTRY, I CAN SUPPORT
PERFORMERS IN A WIDE RANGE OF
PROJECTS, BOLSTERING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTORS ACROSS
THE INDUSTRY. HOWEVER, THIS ONLY
OCCURS IF GUARDRAILS ARE PUT IN
PLACE TO ENSURE THAT PERFORMERS
ARE AT THE CENTER OF THE
DECISION MAKING PROCESS. AB 2602
WILL ADDRESS THE USE OF AI IN
THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY, BUT
THIS WORKER CENTERED CONCEPT CAN
BE APPLIED TO OTHER INDUSTRIES
IMPACTED BY EMERGING AI
TECHNOLOGY. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY URGE
YOUR AYE VOTE AT THE APPROPRIATE
TIME. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DO
WE HAVE OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? YEAH. MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS, CARL LONDON HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE RECORDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, WE'RE IN
CONCEPTUAL SUPPORT OF THE BILL,
WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE
SPONSORS AND STUDYING THE LATEST
ROUND OF AMENDMENTS. BUT WE
SHOULD BE, COMFORTABLE IN THIS
RELATIONSHIP. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU FOR THAT. DO WE HAVE ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, FELIPE
FUENTES, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION, THE
PRODUCERS OF YOUR FAVORITE FILMS
AND TELEVISIONS, FIRST OF ALL,
WE'D LIKE TO BEGIN BY THANKING
THE, COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE
THOROUGH ANALYSIS AND APPRECIATE
THE AMENDMENTS THAT THE AUTHOR
AND THE SPONSORS HAVE AGREED TO
HERE TODAY, THE SCREEN ACTORS
GUILD AND THE STATE FEDERATION
OF LABOR, THE MOTION PICTURE
ASSOCIATION SHARES SAG-AFTRA
CONCERN AROUND THE UNAUTHORIZED
USE OF DIGITAL REPLICAS AND
WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS
BILL IS TAILORED AND LIMITED TO
THE ISSUE OF INFORMED CONSENT
AND THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE TERMS IN THE SAG-AFTRA
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT,
WHICH OUR STUDIOS REACHED WITH
THEM RECENTLY. THE AMENDMENTS
PROPOSED IN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS ADDRESS MOST OF OUR
CONCERNS, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
AGAIN HOWEVER, THERE ARE TWO
MINOR AMENDMENTS THAT WE'D STILL
LIKE TO CONTINUE DISCUSSING WITH
THE AUTHOR. THE MOST SUBSTANTIVE
ONE IS AN AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE
THAT TALENT AGENCIES, IN
ADDITION TO LAWYERS, BE
CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE
REPRESENTATION THAT IS REQUESTED
IN THE BILL, LARGELY BECAUSE
TALENT AGENCIES ARE AUTHORIZED
UNDER THE LABOR CODE, SECTION
1700 TO PROCURE EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERFORMERS.
JOHNMYERS. WE URGE THAT THE BILL
REFLECT THAT INDUSTRY PRACTICE.
SECOND, WE WOULD LIKE TO ALSO
SEEK SOME ADDITIONAL
CLARIFICATION TO ENSURE THAT THE
EXEMPTION FOR WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL
IS REPRESENTED BY A LABOR UNION
WILL STILL APPLY IF THOSE
AGREEMENTS CONTAIN SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS FOR THE
TERMS DIGITAL REPLICA. AND THE
REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT
WE HAVE AN ITERATIVE PROCESS
WITH OUR LABOR PARTNERS AND THE
SCREEN ACTORS GUILD AND OTHER
UNIONS, FOR THAT MATTER, AND WE
NEGOTIATE CONTRACTS EVERY THREE
YEARS. AND JUST THIS LAST CBA IS
A MATTER OF EXAMPLE, HAS
VARIATIONS OF THE DEFINITION OF
DIGITAL REPLICA. SO WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT THERE ISN'T ANY
SORT OF STUMBLING OR
MISINTERPRETATION IN THE FUTURE.
AS CBAS GET NEGOTIATED EVERY
THREE YEARS. WE THINK THAT THIS
CLARIFICATION THAT WE'RE
REQUESTING IN SECTION THREE, Ã,
WOULD ALIGN WITH THE INTENT OF
THE BILL SPONSORS. WE OBVIOUSLY
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING OUR
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER, HIS SPONSORS, AND THANK
YOU AND THE COMMITTEE FOR YOUR
ATTENTION IN THIS MATTER. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS. ALEX
TORRES, ON BEHALF OF WARNER
BROTHERS DISCOVERY, WOULD ALIGN
OUR COMMENTS WITH OUR FRIENDS IN
THE MOTION PICTURES ASSOCIATION
OPPOSING THIS AMENDED. THANK YOU
. GOOD EVENING, TIFFANY PHªN, ON
BEHALF OF SONY PICTURES, ALIGNED
WITH THE COMMENTS MADE BY MPAA.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, QUESTIONS
AND COMMENTS. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BRIAN, I THINK ALL OF THIS HITS
INCREDIBLY CLOSE TO HOME,
DISTRICT WITH THREE OF THE MAJOR
STUDIOS, SAG-AFTRA'S
HEADQUARTERS AND CARS
HEADQUARTERS. I FEEL LIKE THIS
IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO BE TODAY,
BUT I THINK THE THING WE NEED TO
FOCUS ON IS THE HISTORIC STRIKE
THAT TOOK PLACE LAST YEAR, WHERE
OUR, OUR CREATIVE SAG MEMBERS
VOICED VERY LOUDLY FOR THE
ENTIRE COUNTRY. SOME OF THE
CONCERNS WITH AI MOVING TOO
FAST, TOO FAR, AND STEALING.
QUITE FRANKLY, THE CREATIVITY OF
FOLKS WHO HAVE DEDICATED THEIR
LIFE TO THE CRAFT OF
STORYTELLING, AND I'M RELIEVED
AND WAS RELIEVED TO SEE THAT
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING TAKE
PLACE. BUT I THINK WHAT WE
LEARNED IS THAT THIS PROCESS IS
BIGGER THAN THAT AGREEMENT. THIS
IS THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WRAPPING
OUR HANDS AROUND THIS AND BETTER
UNDERSTANDING HOW TO PROTECT
PEOPLE AND THEIR LIKENESS AND
THEIR DIGITAL REPLICAS FROM
BEING MISUSED TO TELL STORIES
THAT ARE INAUTHENTIC TO THEM.
AND SO I WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD. I'M A PROUD JOINT
AUTHOR ON THIS MEASURE. IT'S
NECESSARY. IT'S IMPORTANT. AND
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO
MOVE THE BILL. SECOND, I'M
AFRAID THOSE MOTIONS HAVE BEEN
TAKEN UP ALREADY. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER PATTERSON. GREAT. THANK
YOU, I SECONDED THIS BILL, BY
THE WAY, BUT I DID THAT. YOU
KNOW, I DO HAVE, I THINK WE'RE
HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I
MEAN, I'VE HAD GREAT
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SPONSORS
OF THE BILL, AND I ALWAYS
BROUGHT UP, MY MOM IS LIKE A
HUGE ELVIS FAN. SHE REMEMBERS,
LIKE, THE MOMENT ELVIS DIED.
EXACTLY WHERE SHE WAS SITTING,
WHAT NEWS STATION SHE WAS
WATCHING, YOU KNOW? AND SO I
WOULD TALK TO HER. YOU KNOW,
WE'VE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS
BILL LIKE MY MOM, SHE DOESN'T
CARE WHAT I DO, BUT WE TALK
ABOUT THIS BILL, ACTUALLY, AND,
SO BUT I DO HAVE QUESTIONS JUST
ABOUT, I THINK THE MOST
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE THEY BROUGHT
UP, AND I DIDN'T FULLY
UNDERSTAND IT. SO I WANTED TO
GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY, IF YOU
WOULDN'T MIND. AND THEN IF, IF
YOU COULD KIND OF, TALK ABOUT
WHAT THEIR CONCERN WAS. BUT, YOU
KNOW, THE LEGAL COUNSEL PART IN
TERMS OF REPRESENTING, YOU KNOW,
IF THEY HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL, CAN
YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT
MORE NUANCE TO ME? I READ THE
LETTER, OBVIOUSLY, AND I SEE YOU
ACTUALLY MOCKED UP AMENDMENTS,
WHICH THEY DID. AND I JUST
SIMPLY PUT TALENT AGENCIES,
ASIDE FROM BEING RECOGNIZED, IN
THE LABOR CODE, THEY ARE ALSO A
PRACTICE OF THIS INDUSTRY. AND
PRESUMABLY IF YOU SUBSCRIBE TO
THE SERVICES OF A TALENT AGENCY,
UNDOUBTEDLY THERE'S GOING TO BE
SOME FORM OF LEGAL
REPRESENTATION FOR THE
CONTRACTUAL PIECES OF IT. SO I
CAN'T SAY DEFINITIVELY THAT
EVERY SINGLE TALENT AGENCY,
WOULD FIT THE MODEL, BUT IT
SEEMS THAT IT'S BEEN THE PATTERN
AND PRACTICE AND IT'S WORKED.
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO, MAKE
CERTAIN THAT THAT'S CONSIDERED.
YEAH. WE, DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE
AN OBJECTION TO THAT. I THINK WE
NEED TO EXPLORE IT A LITTLE BIT
MORE, IN LOOKING AT THE
LANGUAGE, AND I THINK THE
LANGUAGE REFERRED THAT WAS
OFFERED BY MPA, REFERRED TO
TALENT AGENTS AND MANAGERS AND,
MANAGERS ARE COMPLETELY
UNLICENSED, IF YOU WATCH THE
ENTOURAGE, IT WAS LIKE THE BEST
FRIEND THAT WORKED AT THE PIZZA
PLACE WAS THE GUY'S MANAGER. SO
WE CAN'T REALLY HAVE THAT
SITUATION WHEN WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT TRANSFERS OF SIGNIFICANT
RIGHTS, THERE ARE LICENSED
TALENT AGENTS, AND SO I THINK
WE'RE EXPLORING INTERNALLY HOW
OFTEN THEY GET INVOLVED IN THIS
KIND OF, NEGOTIATION OVER THE
TERMS OF THE CONTRACT. I THINK,
MR. FUENTES IS EXACTLY RIGHT,
THE AGENT WILL REPRESENT THE
WORKER OR THE ACTOR, BUT THERE
WILL BE LEGAL COUNSEL THAT GO
OVER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT.
AND IN THOSE INSTANCES, IT WOULD
FALL UNDER THE TERMS OF THE BILL
ANYWAYS. SO, WE'RE NOT
NECESSARILY OBJECTING TO THAT.
WE JUST NEED TO FIGURE OUT IF
THAT REALLY WORKS, WOULD YOU I
MEAN, JUST LET'S SAY I AM A
FAMOUS, YOU KNOW, OR YOU ARE,
LET'S SAY I'M ELVIS AND I WANT
TO HIRE MY PIZZA PARLOR BUDDY TO
BE MY AGENT OR, YOU KNOW, OR
REPRESENT ME. WHY WOULD YOU
CARE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER, YOU
KNOW, IN TERMS OF HOW THAT
LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN? THERE WELL,
I KNOW THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
RIGHTS. I'M JUST SAYING I THINK
I THINK WE WOULD CARE BECAUSE
THERE'S A THERE'S A VERY MUCH AN
INTEREST, I THINK BOTH FOR THE
FOR THE INDIVIDUAL AND FOR
POLICY REASONS THAT WE DON'T
WANT INDIVIDUALS TO WILLY NILLY
GIVE AWAY THEIR RIGHTS WITHOUT
UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, WHAT
THEY'RE GIVING AWAY. AND WHEN
THEY HAVE COUNSEL, THEY SHOULD
BE FULLY INFORMED. THAT'S WHAT
INFORMED CONSENT IS ABOUT. AND I
THINK, YOU KNOW, BEING
REPRESENTED BY SOMEONE WHO'S NOT
A PROFESSIONAL OR WELL INFORMED
WOULD NOT BE KEEPING WITHIN WHAT
WE'RE INTENDING IN THIS POLICY.
OKAY JUST QUICKLY, YOU KNOW, I
WANT TO AGREE WITH MR. GUZMAN
HERE. TALENT AGENCIES IS
RECOGNIZED IN THE LABOR CODE
MANAGERS AND MY UNDERSTANDING
AND AGENTS ARE NOT. BUT I THINK
WE CAN SORT OF GET BACK TOGETHER
AND PEN TO PAPER AND SORT OF
FIGURE THAT OUT. OKAY. SO IT
SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE HEADED IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION, I THINK, WHICH
IS A YOU SHOULD JUST SAY LIKE,
YEAH, YEAH, OF COURSE, OF
COURSE. BUT I MEAN, THIS HAS
COME A LONG WAY SINCE IT'S, IT'S
COME IT'S COME A LONG WAY. BUT
THIS IS A NEWER KIND OF ASK, I
THINK, YOU KNOW, SUBSEQUENT TO
THE LAST ROUND OF AMENDMENTS. SO
I THINK THAT'S WHERE MR. GUZMAN
IS SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING
TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND MYSELF
AS WELL, AND I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT
IT. I MEAN, THESE ARE LEGAL
CONTRACTS. THERE'S A REASON WHY,
IT SAYS LAWYER. AND, YOU KNOW,
MANAGER IS, YOU KNOW, TALENT
AGENT AND THEN MANAGER IS
STARTING TO GET OUT THERE AND
SOMETIMES THE MANAGER IS
ASSIGNED BY THE LABEL OR THE
STUDIO OR WHAT HAVE YOU. SO
THERE COULD BE AN INTERMINGLING
RELATIONSHIP THERE AND
LOYALTIES. SO A LAWYER IS GOING
TO LOOK AT THE CONTRACT IN A
CERTAIN WAY TO PROTECT THE
INDIVIDUAL. AND THAT'S WHY A
LAWYER OR THE PEOPLE LIKE US OR
NOT, ARE UNIQUE IN THE SKILLS
THAT WE CAN BRING, IN CERTAIN
REALMS. SO AGAIN, I'M IN THE
SAME PLACE. I'M NOT OPPOSED. I'M
NOT SAYING THAT WE'RE
NECESSARILY IN AGREEMENT EITHER,
BUT THERE'S GIVEN HOW FAR WE'VE
COME ON THE OTHER ITEMS, THERE'S
ABSOLUTELY MORE ROOM FOR US TO
CONTINUE TO TALK. OKAY, GREAT.
WELL, I JUST ONE ONE MORE
COMMENT, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE DIRECTION
THAT WE'RE GOING HERE. I MEAN,
IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS A BIG
DELTA EARLY ON. AND, YOU KNOW, I
HOPE THOSE CONVERSATIONS CAN
CONTINUE. I DID MAKE THE SECOND
HERE, AND, I'M SORT OF LIKE, I'M
NOT GOING TO OPPOSE THE BILL. I
MEAN, I'M LEANING TOWARDS
SUPPORTING IT, HOPING THE
CONVERSATIONS CONTINUE. AND IT
SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE IN GOOD
FAITH. SO I THINK I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT IT, HOPING THAT YOU GUYS
CAN CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION.
SO WHEN IT GETS TO THE FLOOR, I
CAN STAY AND STAY IN THAT
POSITION. SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ASSEMBLY MEMBER WILSON,
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I
WAS GOING TO BE MY FOLLOW UP AS
IT RELATED TO THE OPPOSITION IS,
THE QUESTION OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO
CAN OPERATE AS AGENTS. AND IT
SEEMED FROM A LAYMAN'S POINT OF
VIEW, THAT TALENT AGENT AND
MANAGER, SEEM REASONABLE. SO I
APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTARY AROUND THAT, MY ONLY
EXCEPTION WOULD BE, AND I'M
SUPPORTING THE BILL. THIS IS
JUST BASED ON THE CONVERSATION
I'M COMMENTING. WOULD BE YOU YOU
MENTIONED INFORM COUNSEL AND
THAT ONLY A LAWYER AND A OR THE
UNION CONTRACTOR COULD PROVIDE
THAT FOR SOMEONE. AND I DO THINK
WE HAVE TO GIVE PEOPLE THE
CHOICE TO HAVE A DULY AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE. AND SO IF THERE
IS SOME MOVEMENT WHERE IT'S THAT
AND MAYBE TO THE EXTENT WHERE
YOU NOTED THAT IT IS
INDEPENDENT, THAT THERE ARE SOME
KIND OF VERTICAL RELATIONSHIPS
THAT COULD IMPACT THAT. AND SO
MAYBE IF IT'S SOMEONE WHO'S
INDEPENDENT, BUT IF I CHOOSE TO
HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A
LAWYER, REPRESENT ME AND
NEGOTIATE THING, IT SEEMS LIKE
THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWABLE. AND I
WOULD SAY TO THAT ASSEMBLY
MEMBER IS THAT THERE'S A REASON
WHY, IF IT'S LABOR
REPRESENTATIVE OR A LAWYER,
BECAUSE IF SOMEONE IS NOT
REPRESENTED BY A UNION AND NOW
NOW WE'RE EXTENDING IT TO BE
ANYONE THAT THEY CHOOSE TO
REPRESENT THEM. AND YOU HAVE
FOLKS, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE
FOLKS THAT MAY BE REAL QUICK. I
WAS I WAS STAYING IN THAT REALM
OF THE TALENT AGENCY. SO I
WASN'T TRYING TO SAY RANDOM
ANYONE, BUT JUST IF THAT PERSON
CHOOSE SOMEONE IN THAT REALM
THAT IS INDEPENDENT, RECOGNIZING
THAT THERE IS SOME LIKE, WELL,
IT'S THE STUDIO WHO'S THERE
NEGOTIATING AND THE STUDIO IS MY
MANAGER, THEN NO, THAT'S NOT
INDEPENDENT. SO I WAS TALKING
ABOUT AND SO THANK YOU FOR. YEP
FOR ADDING THAT. SO CLAIRE BEING
REALLY NARROW TO JUST THAT, THAT
PREEXISTING TYPE COMMON
RELATIONSHIPS, NOT, AS HE SAID,
THE PIZZA GUY, INDEPENDENT
PERSON. NO I APPRECIATE THE
FEEDBACK. I APPRECIATE THE
FEEDBACK. ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON
WELL, JUST TO FURTHER THIS,
DANCING ON THE HEAD OF A PIN
HERE, IN AS A LAY PERSON IN THE
MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY, I MEAN,
AGENTS NEGOTIATE CONTRACTS,
DON'T THEY? CAN SOMEONE AREN'T
THEY REPRESENT THEIR CLIENT AND
NEGOTIATING CONTRACTS AS A WAY
OF LIFE, ISN'T THIS JUST ANOTHER
CONTRACT THAT THE AGENT WOULD BE
REPRESENTING THEIR ACTOR CLIENT?
I THINK THERE'S A FINE LINE
THERE THAT THAT IN A LOT OF
INSTANCES, THE AGENTS MIGHT
NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF A OF A
DEAL, BUT THE, THE, YOU KNOW,
FINE LANGUAGE THAT GOES IN THE
SIGNED OFF BY A LAWYER IS GOING
TO BE LOOKED AT, AND THE LAWYER
IS GOING TO ADVISE HIS CLIENT,
THE LAWYER HAS A FIDUCIARY DUTY
TO THE CLIENT. PROBABLY THE
LICENSED TALENT AGENT ALSO HAS A
FIDUCIARY DUTY. THAT'S WHY WE'RE
WILLING TO LOOK AT THIS ISSUE,
BUT GOING KIND OF BEYOND THAT,
IT IS A CONCERN THAT SOMEONE
WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE NOT
NECESSARILY THE BEST INTERESTS
OF THE INDIVIDUAL AT HEART.
OKAY. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE
VERY CLOSE. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE
REALLY CLOSE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT,
WE HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WARD. AND, MR. PATTERSON,
ARE YOU STILL MAINTAINING THE
SECOND? I NEVER TAKE BACK MY
WORD. OKAY, SO A SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PATTERSON, AND
THE MOTION IS TO PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS. IF
YOU COULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
OH. I'M SORRY. YEAH. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. I WANT TO THANK ALL
OF YOU, PARTICULARLY JOINT
AUTHOR ASSEMBLY MEMBER O'BRIEN.
AND JUST KEEPING IN MIND THAT
THIS IS NOT APPLYING TO THOSE
REPRESENTED, YOU KNOW, THAT
THERE WAS A CONTRACT THAT THE
STUDIOS AND SAG-AFTRA SIGNED.
AND WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO MAKE
SURE WE COVER EVERYONE,
INCLUDING THOSE THAT ARE NOT
REPRESENTED, THAT ARE NOT PART
OF A UNION. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEY'RE PROTECTED. AND A
LOT OF FOLKS GET POPULAR THROUGH
SOCIAL MEDIA, WHAT HAVE YOU.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THEIR INTERESTS ARE
PROTECTED GOING FORWARD. AND I
THINK WE'RE AT A PLACE WHERE I
FEEL REALLY COMFORTABLE, AND I
THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO WITH THE
FEEDBACK OF THE COMMITTEE TODAY
AND THE AND THE MEMBERS, GET TO
A PLACE WHERE WE CAN BE IN
AGREEMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 11 AB
2602 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER KALRA.
THE MOTION IS Dð PASS AS AMENDED
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. AYE. BRIAN. BRIAN.
AYE. DIXON DIXON. NOT VOTING.
HOOVER IRWIN. IRWIN. AYE.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. LOWENTHAL AYE.
ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD.
AYE. WICKS. WICKS. AYE. WILSON
WILSON. AYE. THE VOTE IS EIGHT
ZERO. YOUR BILL IS OUT. AND NOW
WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM NUMBER 16,
AB 3030. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CALDERON, IF YOU WOULD HAVE
WALKED IN 15 SECONDS EARLIER,
YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AN HOUR
AND A HALF AGO. I AM VERY SORRY.
THAT'S OKAY. NO NEED TO
APOLOGIZE, MADAM CHAIR. ALL
RIGHT. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, I'D LIKE TO START BY
THANKING THE COMMITTEE FOR
WORKING WITH MY STAFF ON THIS
BILL, AND I WILL BE ACCEPTING
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS.
ASSEMBLY BILL 3030 REQUIRES
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS DEPLOYING
GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE FOR PATIENT
COMMUNICATION THÀNH TO DISCLOSE
THE TECHNOLOGY'S USAGE.
GENERATIVE AI IS A TYPE OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CAPABLE
OF CREATING NEW TEXTS, IMAGES,
VIDEOS, OR OTHER DATA USING
EXISTING INFORMATION. THÀNH
ACROSS THE STATE, PILOT PROGRAMS
ARE TESTING THE USE OF
GENERATIVE AI AS A TOOL TO
ASSIST ASSIST CLINICIANS WITH
PATIENT COMMUNICATIONS. FOR
INSTANCE, UC SAN DIEGO HEALTH
CURRENTLY HAS A PILOT PROGRAM
INTEGRATING GENERATIVE AI INTO
MYCHART, A PLATFORM WHERE
PROVIDERS CAN MESSAGE THEIR
PATIENTS AS HEALTH CARE
PROVIDERS DEPLOY GENERATIVE AI,
PATIENTS SHOULD BE AWARE OF WHO
THEY ARE COMMUNICATING WITH AND
HOW THEY CAN REACH A HUMAN
PROVIDER. AB 3030 IS SEEKING TO
ADVANCE THE ETHICAL USE OF THIS
TECHNOLOGY IN HEALTH CARE. I
DON'T HAVE ANY WITNESSES WITH
ME, BUT I HAVE MY STAFF TO HELP
WITH TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, ALL
RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ASK A
LOT OF QUESTIONS. YEAH. OKAY.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. OH IN
BETWEEN. OH, SURE. WIENER PLEASE
. GOOD EVENING, MARK FAROOQ, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, SO WE HAVE
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH THE
BILL AT THIS POINT, BUT I DO
WANT TO START WITH APOLOGIZING
TO THE AUTHOR AND TO THE
COMMITTEE FOR COMING IN SO LATE
ON THIS BILL. AND I THINK OUR
CONCERN IS RELATED TO AN
UNINTENTIONAL ISSUE, A COUPLE OF
UNINTENTIONAL ISSUES IN THE
BILL, THE CODE SECTION THAT THE
LANGUAGE IS IN THAT CHAPTER IS
SUBJECT TO UPWARDS OF $25,000
FINES PER VIOLATION BECAUSE IT'S
IN A CHAPTER, RELATED TO
SIGNIFICANT RIGHTS AND
RESPONSIBILITIES OF HEALTH
HEALTH CARE FACILITIES,
INCLUDING VIOLATIONS FOR
POTENTIALLY, WHAT'S KNOWN AS
PATIENT DUMPING. I ASSUME THAT'S
NOT INTENDED, IN THE WAY THE
LEGISLATION WAS CRAFTED. AND
THEN WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT
HOW UNINTENTIONAL VIOLATIONS MAY
BE TREATED. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE
DISCLAIMER IS REQUIRED TO GO OUT
ON THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION, IF
THE ON THE RECEIVING END, IF
YOUR EMAIL PLATFORM WERE TO CUT
OFF THAT DISCLAIMER OR OTHERWISE
REFORMAT THE EMAIL WHERE YOU
DON'T RECEIVE IT, IS THAT
CONSIDERED A VIOLATION? SO
REALLY, WE THINK THESE ARE
POTENTIALLY TECHNICAL ISSUES.
LOOKING FORWARD TO DISCUSSING
FURTHER WITH THE AUTHOR. AGAIN,
APOLOGIZE FOR THE LATENESS OF
OUR CONCERNS. ALL RIGHT. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE LATE
OPPOSITION? WELL, I MEAN, I, I
HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION, BUT THIS IS THE
FIRST I'VE HEARD ABOUT IT BEING
THE CODE SECTION. THÀNH. SO, WE
WILL CONTINUE TALKING, YEAH,
THAT'S ALL I HAVE. OKAY. AND, WE
KNOW THE AUTHOR AND I KNOW SHE
WILL CONTINUE TO WORK. THERE IS,
AS I'VE MENTIONED MANY TIMES, A
VERY LONG PROCESS TO GET TO THE
GOVERNOR'S DESK. SO, YES, I
THINK YOU WILL HAVE YOUR
OPPORTUNITY THERE, DO WE HAVE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE? AND WE HAVE A MOTION
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER. OH, I'M
SORRY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
YES, AGAIN, I'M GOING TO
CONTINUE, WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION, AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE. ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ORTEGA, A SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WILSON, AND THE
MOTION IS TO PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO APPROPRIATIONS, ITEM NUMBER
16, AB 3030 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CALDERON. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS, AS AMENDED, TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE BY
BAUER-KAHAN. PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. AYE. BRIAN BRIAN.
AYE. DIXON. DIXON. AYE. HOOVER
AYE. HOOVER. AYE. IRWIN. AYE.
IRWIN. AYE LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE. WARD
BY WARD. AYE. WICKS AYE. WICKS.
AYE. WILSON BY WILSON. WILSON.
AYE. THANK YOU. OKAY. THAT BILL
IS OUT TEN ZERO. AND, WE ARE
GOING TO GO FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBERS ALL THE WAY FROM THE
BEGINNING OF THE DAY. SO I
ASSUME ASSEMBLY MEMBER WARD HAS
VOTED YES. OKAY. GOOD. THANK
YOU. SO ONLY ONE IS THAT PERFECT
ATTENDANCE. IS THAT WHAT THAT
MEANS? OR EVERYBODY ELSE? OKAY.
SO I'LL START WITH S¼. ALL
RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO BE
STARTING WITH CONSENT ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. WE HAVE HOOVER
CONSENT CALENDAR. HOOVER CONSENT
HOOVER I IRWIN I IRWIN I WILSON.
OOPS WILSON AND ORTEGA. SORRY.
ORTEGA I OKAY. 11 ZERO, THE
CONSENT IS OUT. 11 ZERO, AB ITEM
NUMBER ONE AB 2829 PAPIN, THE
VOTE IS SIX TWO WITH THE CHAIR
VOTING AYE. VICE CHAIR VOTING
NO. IRWIN. NOT VOTING. IRWIN NOT
VOTING. WILSON I'M SORRY. ITEM
NUMBER ONE AB 2829 OH. PAPIN.
NOT VOTING. OKAY, SO THAT ONE.
SIX. NO PROBLEM. SO. SIX. TWO.
YEAH RIGHT. SIX. SIX. THREE.
SIX. THREE. I THINK ALL
REPUBLICANS WERE AGAINST. YEAH.
OKAY. SIX. OKAY. THE VOTE ON
THAT BILL IS SIX THREE, THAT
BILL IS OUT. OKAY ITEM NUMBER
TWO AB 1831. THE VOTE IS NINE
ZERO. THE CHAIR AND THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. IRWIN I IRWIN
I WILSON WILSON I 11 ZERO, THAT
VOTE IS 11 ZERO. THAT BILL IS
OUT. ITEM NUMBER THREE AB 3204
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER BAUER-KAHAN,
THE VOTE IS SIX ZERO WITH THE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. VICE CHAIR
VOTE NOT VOTING. NOT VOTING,
IRWIN. I'M SORRY. HOOVER. HOOVER
NOT VOTING. ORTEGA I ORTEGA I
WILSON. WILSON I. 880. THAT BILL
IS OUT. EIGHT ZERO ITEM NUMBER
FOUR AB 2877 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BAUER-KAHAN. THE VOTE IS EIGHT
ZERO. CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
VOTING I HOOVER. I HOOVER, I
ORTEGA I ORTEGA I WILSON. WILSON
I 11 ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT 11
ZERO ITEM NUMBER FIVE AB 2808 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS. THE VOTE
IS SIX TWO. THE CHAIR VOTING AYE
. PATTERSON. NO. PATTERSON NO.
IRWIN I IRWIN I WILSON. WILSON.
NOT VOTING. SEVEN THREE, THAT
BILL IS OUT. SEVEN THREE ITEM
NUMBER SIX AB 2203 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER MCCARTY. THE VOTE IS
SEVEN ZERO WITH THE CHAIR AND
VICE CHAIR VOTING. I HOOVER,
HOOVER I IRWIN I IRWIN I.
ORTEGA. ORTEGA I WILSON I WILSON
I 11 ZERO 11 ZERO THAT BILL IS
OUT ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AB 22 2355
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER WENDY
CARRILLO. THE VOTE IS THREE
ZERO. B¢O C¢M PATTERSON. NØ
PATTERSON. NØ BRIAN. BRIAN. I
HOOVER. NO. HOOVER. NO IRWIN I
IRWIN I. ORTEGA ORTEGA I. WICKS
I WICKS I WILSON. WILSON I 882
EIGHT TWO THAT BILL IS OUT I CAN
. Tð. SORRY ITEM NUMBER EIGHT AB
15 1856 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER TO
THE MOTION IS TO PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. THE VOTE IS SEVEN
ZERO, WITH THE VICE CHAIR VOTING
AYE. BAUER-KAHAN. HOOVER I
HOOVER, I, WICKS, THIS IS NUMBER
EIGHT, 1856 WICKS I OKAY, SO
WHAT IS THAT, 890890, THAT BILL
IS OUT. NINE ZERO ITEM NUMBER
NINE AB 2390 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ARAMBULA. THE MOTION IS DUE.
PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
VOTE IS FOUR ZERO. B¢O C¢M
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. I BRIAN.
BRIAN I HOOVER A HOOVER I
LOWENTHAL I LOWENTHAL I ORTEGA.
ORTEGA I WICKS. WICKS I THAT'S
TEN ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT TEN
ZERO. A COUPLE MORE ITEM NUMBER
TEN AB 2453 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
VILA. THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
THE VOTE IS EIGHT ZERO, THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. BAUER-KAHAN
HOOVER, I HOOVER, I WICKS. WICKS
I TEN ZERO, THAT BILL IS OUT TEN
ZERO. ITEM NUMBER 11 AB 2602 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER COLLURA. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS IS AMENDED
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
THE VOTE IS EIGHT ZERO, WITH THE
VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE. B¢O KHN.
HOOVER. HOOVER. I NINE ZERO.
THAT BILL IS OUT NINE ZERO. ITEM
NUMBER 12 AB 2657 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ARAMBULA. THE MOTION IS
DUE. PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE, THE VOTE IS EIGHT
ZERO. B¢O KHN PATTERSON. OAN
PATTERSON I HOOVER. HOOVER I SO
IT'S TEN ZERO. THAT BILL IS OUT.
TEN ZERO. ALL RIGHT. CAN I DO A
VOTE CHANGE? YES. SORRY, 2355.
CALL THEM OUT WHENEVER YOU GUYS
LEAVE. I'M GONNA CHANGE IT. ALL
RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, AB
2355. VOTE CHANGE. PATTERSON. NO
NO. YES. NO TO HI. NO TO. AYE.
OKAY I. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. AND
WITH THAT, OUR MEETING IS
ADJOURNED. GOOD JOB, MADAM CHAIR
. WELL.