GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO
ASSEMBLY BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE
FOR, I JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE
THAT TODAY IS DENIM DAY, SORT OF
THE BEGINNING OF THE WOMEN'S,
METOO MOVEMENT, AROUND THE
WORLD, AND TODAY WE'RE GOING TO
HEAR FROM THE CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD AND THE ENERGY
COMMISSION REGARDING ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLES AND THE
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION FUND.
WE HAVE THREE ITEMS THAT ARE
PLANNED FOR PRESENTATIONS. FOR
EACH PRESENTATION, I'LL ASK EACH
OF THE WITNESSES, REFERENCE IN
THE AGENDA TO INTRODUCE
THEMSELVES BEFORE THEY BEGIN
THEIR TESTIMONY. AT THE END OF
THE PRESENTATION, MEMBERS OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEE MAY ASK QUESTIONS
TO MAKE COMMENTS ON ANY OF THE
EIGHT NON PRESENTATION ITEMS.
WILL NOT BE TAKING ANY VOTES
TODAY. AFTER ALL, THE ITEMS ARE
HEARD, WE'LL TAKE PUBLIC
COMMENT. EACH MEMBER OF THE
PUBLIC WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO
SPEAK. THERE WILL BE NO REMOTE
TESTIMONY IN THIS COMMITTEE
TODAY. AND WITH THAT WE'LL BEGIN
WITH THE ISSUE ONE CARB AND THE
ENERGY COMMISSION ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE SPENDING PLAN.
AND THEN YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD
POINT. THAT'S A GOOD.
GETS READY. YEAH. AND WHEN
YOU'RE READY. OKAY. TAKE YOUR
TIME. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR
BENNETT. MY NAME IS BRANDON
MERRITT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE. THE ADMINISTRATION
REMAINS COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING
CALIFORNIANS WITH ACCESS TO
CLEANER TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS
AND TO PROTECTING CRITICAL
INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
TRANSITION TO ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES. AS PART OF IDENTIFYING
ZEV PACKAGE SOLUTIONS, THE
ADMINISTRATION FOCUSED ON
BALANCING AND MAINTAINING
PREVIOUS INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH BUILDING OUT CRITICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE TO FURTHER
SUPPORT THE STATE'S GROWING ZEV
NETWORK, WHILE ALSO ADDRESSING
THE PROJECTED BUDGET SHORTFALL
TO MAINTAIN CALIFORNIA'S
LEADERSHIP AND TRANSITIONING TO
ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES. THE
BUDGET MAINTAINS $10 BILLION NOW
EXTENDED OVER SEVEN YEARS,
INITIALLY FIVE YEARS IN
INVESTMENTS TO THE STATE'S ZEV
AGENDA, INCLUDING TARGETED
INVESTMENTS IN DISADVANTAGED AND
LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES. BY
INCREASING ACCESS TO THE
BENEFITS OF CLEAN TRANSPORTATION
AND BY CONTINUING TO DECARBONIZE
CALIFORNIA'S TRANSPORTATION
SECTOR AND IMPROVE PUBLIC
HEALTH. TO ADDRESS THE PROJECTED
SHORTFALL, THE BUDGET INCLUDES
$38.1 MILLION OF GENERAL FUND
REDUCTIONS, 475.3 MILLION IN
FUND SHIFTS TO THE GREENHOUSE
GAS REDUCTION FUND, AND $600
MILLION IN DELAYS ACROSS VARIOUS
ZEV PROGRAMS. AS PART OF THE
FUND SHIFTS, THE
ADMINISTRATION'S GOAL IS TO
CONTINUE IMPORTANT INVESTMENTS
FOCUSED ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND
INVESTING IN PROGRAMS THAT ALIGN
WITH FUNDING GOALS. DELAYS ARE
FOCUSED ON PROGRAMS THAT HAVE
ALREADY RECEIVED TENS OR
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
THAT STILL HAVE AVAILABLE
RESOURCES THAT MUST BE
LIQUIDATED. THE ADMINISTRATION
FOCUSED ON REDUCING RESOURCES
ASSOCIATED WITH THESE PROGRAMS
THAT WERE NEW OR HAD LOWER THAN
ANTICIPATED DEMAND. FURTHERMORE
THE ADMINISTRATION CONSIDERED
AVAILABLE FEDERAL RESOURCES
ASSOCIATED WITH SIMILAR, SIMILAR
PURPOSES AT STATE PROGRAMS AIMED
TO ACCOMPLISH THE EARLY ACTION
PACKAGE ADOPTED EARLIER THIS
MONTH INCORPORATED THE $38
MILLION IN REDUCTIONS, INCLUDING
THE DRAYAGE TRUCKS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PILOT PROGRAM.
ZEV MANUFACTURING GRANTS, AND
EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM.
THE EARLY ACTION PACKAGE ALSO
ADOPTED THE LEVEL OF GENERAL
FUND TO FUND SHIFTS, WHICH
ASSUMES THE $600 MILLION DELAY
AND 2425 PLANNED ZEV INVESTMENTS
TO 2728. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING
ME TO INTRODUCE THE 20 2425
GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLE SPENDING PLAN. THANK YOU
. ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE
ADMINISTRATION? LEO THANK YOU.
SARAH CORNETT WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST OFFICE. SO
AS AS THE AS THE ADMINISTRATION
DESCRIBED, RECENT BUDGETS
INCLUDED 10 BILLION OVER SEVERAL
YEARS FOR THE ZEV PACKAGE. THE
GOVERNOR PROPOSES TO RETAIN
ALMOST ALL OF THAT SPENDING,
WITH 38 MILLION OF REDUCTIONS,
DELAYS OF 600 MILLION, AND FUND
SHIFTS TO OF ABOUT 475 MILLION.
AS PART OF YOUR WORK TO ADDRESS
THE BUDGET PROBLEM, THE
LEGISLATURE COULD ULTIMATELY
CONSIDER, ALTERNATIVE OR
ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS IN LINE
WITH ITS HIGHEST PRIORITIES. AND
WHILE THERE IS SIGNIFICANT
UNSPENT FUNDING PLANNED FOR THE
BUDGET YEAR AND OUT YEARS, MOST
OF THIS IS GRF FUNDING, SO
CONSEQUENTLY, MAKING REDUCTIONS
WOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY
GENERATE, GENERATE, GENERATE
GENERAL FUND SAVINGS. BUT THE
LEGISLATURE COULD USE FREED UP
GRF TO BACKFILL OTHER GENERAL
FUND PRIORITIES. AND IN OUR
CLIMATE BUDGET SOLUTIONS REPORT,
WE DID IDENTIFY SEVERAL PROGRAMS
AND AREAS THAT WE THINK, COULD
BE CONSIDERED FOR ADDITIONAL
REDUCTIONS PROGRAMS THAT HAVE
SIGNIFICANT REMAINING FUNDING
LEFT IN THE BALANCE, AND
CHOOSING TO MAINTAIN ZEV
SPENDING AT THESE LEVELS
ULTIMATELY MEANS ACCEPTING
REDUCTIONS ELSEWHERE. SO
ULTIMATELY, IT'S JUST A QUESTION
OF YOUR HIGHEST PRIORITIES.
OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
BEFORE I TURN TO MR. CONNELLY
FOR A QUESTION, I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SORT OF AN OVERALL COMMENT.
WE'RE ALL IN, IN, IN A FAIRLY
TRICKY SITUATION HERE WITH
BUDGET CUTS, WITH UNKNOWN GRF
REVENUES IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE
OF SOME POTENTIAL RISK OF
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THOSE
WITH THE 2030 COMING UP WITH THE
POTENTIAL CHANGES BY CARB IN
TERMS OF CAP AND TRADE FUNDING,
AND THE POINT THAT I'D LIKE TO
GET ON THE RADAR SCREEN AND WITH
THIS EVOLVE BEING, SOLUTIONS NOT
TO THE BUDGET, BUT SOLUTIONS TO
CLIMATE CHANGE, YOU KNOW, ARE
THREE YEARS FROM NOW, WILL WE
SAY, HEY, INVESTING IN THIS KIND
OF ZEV TECHNOLOGY IS BETTER THAN
THIS KIND OF ZEV TECHNOLOGY. SO
JUST WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STAY
NIMBLE AND STAY FLEXIBLE AS WE
GO FORWARD, AND SO, WE CAN
ADJUST OUR LONG TERME GRF
SPENDING PLAN, BUT WE'RE ALREADY
ALLOCATING IT. YOU KNOW, THIS
WHOLE PACKAGE WENT FROM FIVE
YEARS TO SIX YEARS TO SEVEN
YEARS, GRF IS NOW, YOU KNOW,
WE'RE STRETCHING STUFF OUT THREE
YEARS FROM NOW. SO I JUST WANT
TO GO ON RECORD AS EVERYBODY
SHOULD LOOK AT THOSE COMMITMENTS
IN THE OUT YEARS AS VERY TENUOUS
COMMITMENTS, BECAUSE THERE ARE
JUST SO MANY THINGS THAT COULD
COULD CHANGE, AND THAT WE'RE ON
RECORD TODAY AS, SO PEOPLE DON'T
COME AND GO, YOU KNOW, FEEL
REALLY CERTAIN THAT THAT'S GOING
TO HAPPEN. BUT IN TERMS OF AFTER
MAKING THAT COMMENT, I'LL TURN
IT OVER TO, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CONNOLLY, YOU WHAT? YOU ASKED
THE FIRST QUESTIONS HERE SO THAT
YOU'RE SURE YOU'RE GET YOURS IN,
AND I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU
CHAIR. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE, IF
THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO
ASK SOME QUESTIONS ON CLEAN CARS
FOR ALL, SURE IS. ALL RIGHT,
LET'S DO IT, HOPING THAT THE
PANEL CAN PROVIDE CLARIFICATION
ON THE PROPOSED FUNDING.
ELIMINATION OF THE CLEAN CARS
FOR ALL PROGRAM. ACCORDING TO
OUR AGENDA, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL
WOULD ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR CSFA
FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS. DOES A
PROGRAM HAVE ENOUGH UNSPENT
FUNDING TO MAKE IT THROUGH THE
NEXT THREE YEARS? THANKS, THIS
IS MICHELLE BUFFINGTON. I'M THE
CHIEF BUDGET POLICY OFFICER AT
THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES
BOARD, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE
QUESTION. WE HAVE THE CCRA
PROGRAM THERE. THERE ARE TWO
TYPES OF PROGRAMS. THERE IS THE
STATEWIDE CC FOR A PROGRAM AND
THE DISTRICT RUN CC FOR A
PROGRAM, WE BELIEVE THAT THE
BOTH OF THOSE PROGRAMS HAVE THE
FUNDING TO LAST UP TO 2 TO 3
YEARS. OKAY, GREAT. SO MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD IS PROPOSING TO
REDIRECT FUNDING TO THE
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM,
WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE THE
RETIREMENT OF AN OLDER VEHICLE
AS ELIGIBILITY FOR THE PROGRAM
WITH THE CLEAN, CC FOR F OR FOR
A PROGRAM ALREADY REPLACING OLD
COMBUSTION VEHICLES WITH ZEVS
AND APPLYING TO LOW INCOME
INDIVIDUALS, CAN CARB EXPLAIN
WHY THE FINANCING ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM IS NEEDED, AND HOW IS
CARB ABLE TO MEASURE EMISSIONS
REDUCTIONS FROM THE FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM? IF A
COMBUSTION VEHICLE IS NOT
REQUIRED AS A PREREQUISITE FOR
THE PROGRAM? SURE. THANK YOU FOR
THE QUESTION, SO THE FINANCING
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WE'VE HAD,
WE HAVE HISTORICALLY HAD A
FINANCING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WE
STARTED A REGIONAL ONE AND THEN
MOVED TO A STATEWIDE ONE. WE
LEARNED SOME LESSONS AND ARE NOW
REOPENING THE FINANCING
ASSISTANCE STATEWIDE MORE
BROADLY. SO FIRST, I WANTED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS SOME
CONTEXT AS TO IT'S NOT THIS
ISN'T A NEW PROGRAM. THIS IS A
PROGRAM, A CONTINUING PROGRAM
FOR OUR LOW INCOME, CONSUMERS IS
THE REASON WHY WE FEEL THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT TO NOT ONLY OFFER
CLEAN CARS FOR ALL, WHICH IS, AS
YOU MENTIONED, WAS A SCRAP AND
REPLACE PROGRAM, BUT ALSO
FINANCING ASSISTANCE IS THAT
THERE HAS BEEN THERE IS AN
INEQUITY IN THE SYSTEM AND IN
ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO
PROVIDE ALL CALIFORNIANS WITH
THE TYPES OF, TRANSPORTATION
THAT THEY NEED, THERE ARE SOME
LOW INCOME INDIVIDUALS WHO DO
NOT OWN CARS THAT NEED THEM,
WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T
LIVE NEAR TRANSIT ROUTES OR
DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION, OR HAVE LONG,
COMMUTES. AND SO THE FINANCING
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IS REALLY
MEANT TO HELP GET LOW INCOME
CONSUMERS IN CALIFORNIA WHO DO
NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A CAR INTO A
VEHICLE SO THAT THEY CAN AFFORD
THEM. RIGHT? THEY WE HELP THEM
FINANCE AND, FINANCE THE CARS
THEMSELVES. SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT
THOSE WHO NEED VEHICLES HAVE
VEHICLES. BUT AT THE SAME TIME,
WE ARE ALSO INCREASING OTHER
PARTS OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT
REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
SO THAT THERE'S ACCESS. SO WE
REALLY THINK THAT WE'RE TRYING
TO WE'RE HOPING TO DO IS BALANCE
THE TRANSPORTATION ACCESS FOR
LOW INCOME INDIVIDUALS WHO
HAVEN'T TRADITIONALLY HAD ACCESS
TO BEING ABLE TO OWN THEIR OWN
CARS. AND CAN YOU, BEFORE YOU,
BEFORE YOU LEAVE THAT TOPIC, LET
ME KNOW, BECAUSE I HAVE FOLLOW
UP. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO ON
TO ANOTHER QUESTION, OKAY. IF
YOU'RE STILL ON THIS TOPIC, I
AM, WAS GOING TO ASK KIND OF A
LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION ON
CARB'S PROPOSAL IS NEEDS BASED
APPROACH, HOW THAT WILL ACTUALLY
WORK. I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT
THE QUESTION? THE NEEDS BASED
APPROACH. SO THAT'S A THAT'S A
GREAT QUESTION. IF YOU GIVE ME
JUST ONE QUICK SECOND, I WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT I FIND MY NOTES
AND COVER ALL OF THE IMPORTANT
ASPECTS HERE, SO AGAIN, THE
HISTORICALLY WE'VE HAD THE
COMMUNITY, THE REGIONAL FOCUSED
FINANCING ASSISTANCE, WHICH WAS
RUN ON A, A NEEDS BASED, NOT
FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE AND THEN
THE STATEWIDE, WHICH WE DID RUN
ON FIRST COME FIRST SERVE. AND
WE REALIZED THAT WHAT WE REALLY
NEEDED WAS SOMETHING TO FOCUS,
TO THAT WE NEEDED TO MOVE AWAY
FROM FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE TO
A NEED BASED APPROACH. SO MY
UNDERSTANDING, OUR UNDERSTANDING
OF THE NEEDS BASED APPROACH AND
THIS WAS DEVELOPED THROUGH A LOT
OF STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS AND
FEEDBACK, AS WELL AS JUST
LESSONS LEARNED FROM THOSE
PREVIOUS GRANTS. IS THAT THE
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH IS A PROGRAM WHERE
WE HAVE THREE TRANCHES OF
FUNDING, AND THE MOST THE, THE
APPLICATION WINDOW WHEN IT'S
OPEN, THOSE WHO ARE IN THE MOST
NEED WOULD THEN BE IN THAT FIRST
TRANCHE. AND AS THAT MONEY GETS
SPENT, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE
ACCESS TO THE SECOND AND THIRD.
BUT AS WE OPEN THE SECOND ONE,
THE WINDOW OF, WHO'S ELIGIBLE
EXPANDS A LITTLE BIT UNTIL THE
THIRD TRANCHE, WHEN IT'S
EXPANDED BROADLY AND THEY'RE
BASED ON FEDERAL POVERTY LEVELS
AS WELL AS WHETHER OR NOT
THEY'RE RECEIVING OTHER STATE
SERVICES. OKAY, GREAT. I HAVE
SOME MORE. BUT HOW HOW DO HOW
WILL PEOPLE BE INFORMED TO APPLY
FOR THOSE PROGRAMS? RAIMES, AND
THE CLEAN CARS FOR ALL PROGRAM?
I WANT TO CONTRAST THOSE
PROGRAMS. IS THAT JUST SOMEBODY
BRINGS IN THE CAR, THEY QUALIFY
FOR THE PROGRAM. YOU KNOW, IF
THEY IF THEY ALSO MEET THE AND
THEN THE FINANCING PROGRAM, IS
IT JUST IF THEY FIND OUT ABOUT
THE FACT THAT THERE'S A TRANCHE
OUT THERE AND THEY MAKE
APPLICATION IS IT THROUGH
NONPROFITS, ETC, THAT ENCOURAGE
PEOPLE TO MAKE THOSE
APPLICATIONS? HOW IS IT THAT LOW
INCOME PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FIND
OUT ABOUT THIS AND THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CLEAN
CARS FOR ALL AND THE FINANCING
PROGRAM? THAT'S A GREAT
QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR THAT,
IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE REALLY
EXCITED ABOUT. SO WE'VE BEEN
WORKING CLOSELY WITH COMMUNITY
BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND
COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES. SO
THERE'S ONE WAY THAT WE PLAN ON
ADVERTISING, WE HAVE A THIRD
PARTY ADMINISTRATOR THAT WILL BE
OPERATING THE PROGRAM AND A
LARGE AND A PORTION OF THAT, NOT
A LARGE, BUT A PORTION OF OUR
FUNDING WILL GO TOWARDS OUTREACH
AND ADVERTISING TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE LOW INCOME CONSUMERS
KNOW ABOUT THE PROGRAMS, THE
OTHER THING THAT WE WORKED ON
WITH THESE, WITH, WITH THE
COMMUNITIES AND THE
STAKEHOLDERS, WAS BRINGING
TOGETHER THE CLEAN CARS FOR ALL
STATEWIDE PROGRAM AND THE
FINANCING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. SO
IT IS ONE APPLICATION. SO IF YOU
APPLY FOR EITHER OF THOSE
PROGRAMS, YOU ARE YOU
AUTOMATICALLY KNOW ABOUT BOTH OF
THOSE PROGRAMS. AND SO SOMETIMES
THOSE PROGRAMS CAN BE USED HAND
IN HAND, SO IF YOU HAVE A CAR TO
SCRAP AND YOU BRING IT IN, BUT
YOU STILL NEED FINANCING
SUPPORT, THE FINANCING
ASSISTANCE WILL BE ABLE TO HELP
YOU, AND OR BUT YOU WILL BE
WALKED THROUGH THE OPTIONS. SO I
THINK ONE THING I FORGOT TO
MENTION THAT THAT I THINK WOULD
BE RELEVANT HERE IS THAT ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT WE LEARNED WITH
THOSE WITH THE PILOT PROGRAMS
THAT WE RAN, IS THAT THE HIGH
TOUCH? HIGH TOUCH IS IMPORTANT.
HAVING THOSE RESIDENTS, THOSE
CONSUMERS COME IN AND BE ABLE TO
TALK TO SOMEBODY WHO ABOUT THEIR
FINANCING AND ABOUT THEIR
OPTIONS, WAS ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE LEARNED WAS VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT. AND SO THAT'S GOING
TO BE PART OF THE OF THE
COMBINED PROGRAM STATEWIDE
PROGRAMS. GREAT. THANK YOU, I
APPRECIATE THE SENSITIVITY IN
DOING THE PILOT PROGRAM, TRYING
TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE
SOMETHING THAT THAT MAKES SENSE.
I WANT TO EMPHASIZE WITH THESE
KIND OF PROGRAMS, THEY'RE THEY
CAN VERY EASILY BE CAPTURED BY
THE INSIDERS. THE INSIDERS KNOW
ABOUT IT. THE INSIDERS MAKE SURE
THEIR FRIENDS ARE THE ONES THAT
APPLY. THE LAST THING WE NEED
WITH THIS PROGRAM IS A HEADLINE
STORY ABOUT HOW X AMOUNT OF THIS
MONEY WENT TO PEOPLE WITH INSIDE
CONNECTIONS, AND SO EVERYBODY
THAT TOUCHES THIS PROGRAM NEEDS
TO REALIZE AND NEEDS TO WORK IN
THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC
AND MAKE SURE THIS IS A FAIR
PROCESS THAT EVERYBODY, IF YOU
MEET THE INCOME QUALIFICATION,
YOU YOU SHOULD HAVE AN EQUAL
SHOT AT IN TERMS OF GETTING
THERE AND STUFF. SO I HOPE
YOU'LL HELP PASS THAT MESSAGE
BACK ON. BACK TO YOU. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. TURNING TO EV CHARGING
STATIONS, CAN CARBON CEC COMMENT
ON WHERE WE ARE, IN TERMS OF EV
CHARGING STATIONS DEPLOYMENT,
WHAT THE AGENCIES ARE DOING TO
ENSURE THE RELIABILITY OF SUCH
STATIONS. OBVIOUSLY, AN ONGOING
GOING ISSUE. WE'VE HAD MANY
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, BUT AN UPDATE
WOULD BE GREAT. YEAH. THIS IS
HANON RUSSELL WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION,
THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. SO
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THE
MOST IMPORTANT THINGS FOR US TO
WORK ON RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE
VERY FOCUSED ON IT. SO THIS
INCLUDES RELIABILITY ALSO
INTEROPERABILITY AND ALL THE
COMPONENTS THAT GO AROUND THE
DRIVER EXPERIENCE. SPECIFIC TO
RELIABILITY PURSUANT TO AB 2061
AND THEN FURTHERED BY AB 261.
WE'RE CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH A
REGULATORY PROCESS NOW. SO WE
ISSUED A FIRST DRAFT BACK IN
SEPTEMBER OF 2023. SUBSEQUENTLY,
AB 126 PASSED AND ADDED SOME NEW
REQUIREMENTS TO IT. SO WE
REDEVELOPED THAT REGULATION AND
JUST ISSUED OUR SECOND DRAFT. SO
A STAFF DRAFT WITH A SECOND
SECOND STAFF DRAFT WITH DRAFT
REGULATIONS IN THERE FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
A WORKSHOP IN APRIL AND ALSO
TAKE IN MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND
HOPE TO HAVE ME PULL UP MY
SCHEDULE, PUBLISH THE FINAL
DRAFT IN JULY, SEND IT TO THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
ALSO IN JULY, AND HOPEFULLY
ADOPTED BY THE END OF THE YEAR,
AND SPECIFICALLY IN THOSE
REGULATIONS, WE HAVE A FEW
DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. WE HAVE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND I'LL
NOTE THAT SOME OF THESE APPLY TO
THE BROADER WORLD OF CHARGERS,
AND SOME ONLY APPLY TO THOSE
THAT ARE PUBLICLY FUNDED OR
RATEPAYER FUNDED PURSUANT TO
LEGISLATION OR AUTHORITY
SOMEWHAT LIMITED ON SOME OF
THESE COMPONENTS. SO ON THE
RECORDKEEPING REPORTING FOR
ANYTHING PUBLIC OR RATEPAYER
FUNDED, WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE
REPORTING ON THOSE ALSO FOR ALL
CHARGERS, WHETHER WE FUNDED THAT
OR NOT, WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT
AN INVENTORY TO KNOW HOW MANY
CHARGES ARE OUT THERE.
HISTORICALLY IT'S BEEN A LITTLE
CHALLENGING TO CAPTURE THOSE FOR
MEDIUM DUTY HEAVY DUTY THAT ARE
AT DEPOTS THAT WE DIDN'T FUND OR
AT WORKPLACES OR MULTI-UNIT
DWELLINGS THAT WE DIDN'T FUND.
SO WE CAN DO A CHARGER INVENTORY
FOR ALL CHARGERS, UTILIZATION
FOR ALL CHARGERS, AND THEN GOING
EVEN FURTHER. AND THIS IS FOR
PUBLICLY OR RATEPAYER FUNDED
ONES, WE'RE GOING TO SAY THAT
THEY MUST BE UP 97% OF THE TIME.
SO 97% UP TIME. THIS CONFORMS
WITH THE NAVY FEDERAL STANDARDS.
AND WE'RE GOING EVEN FURTHER.
THIS I BELIEVE, IS, THE FIRST OF
ITS KIND TYPE. WE'RE SAYING THAT
THERE MUST BE A SUCCESSFUL
CHARGE 90% OF THE TIME. AND
REALLY THAT'S MEANT TO CAPTURE
WHAT'S NOT CAPTURED IN UPTIME.
AGAIN, THIS IS THINGS LIKE
INTEROPERABILITY OR PAYMENT
STANDARDS, WHERE THERE COULD BE
A FAULT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE
SYSTEM THAT'S NOT CAPTURED IN
UPTIME. AND THAT REALLY COMES TO
I MEAN, I HEARD YOU AT THE
RELIABILITY HEARING, WITH
COMMISSIONER MONAHAN AND I DRIVE
AN EV, I'VE GONE THROUGH THE
SAME EXPERIENCES AS THE CHARGERS
UP, BUT YOUR VEHICLE DOESN'T GET
TO CHARGE, AND IT IS VERY
FRUSTRATING. SO WE NEED TO SOLVE
FOR THAT AS WELL. NØ, I
APPRECIATE THAT. AND, LOOKING
FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO WORK ON
THAT, HOW DO PROGRAMS THAT BUILD
CHARGING STATIONS DIFFER BETWEEN
CARB AND THE CEC? IS THERE A
REASON THAT WE ASK TWO
DEPARTMENT OR TASK TWO
DEPARTMENTS WITH THIS WORK?
WHAT'S THE INTERPLAY THERE?
YEAH, I'LL SPEAK BROADLY THAT
GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE ENERGY
COMMISSION IS REALLY THE LEAD ON
THIS. THERE'S SOME LEGACY
PROGRAMS, AND I'LL LET MICHELLE
SPEAK TO THAT KIND OF WITH THE,
ELECTRIFY AMERICA SETTLEMENT. SO
THERE ARE SOME PROGRAMS OVER
THERE. BUT BY AND LARGE, THE
ENERGY COMMISSION IS THE LEAD ON
THAT. AND REGARDLESS OF WHO THE
LEAD IS, WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS
AT STAFF LEVEL ALL THE WAY UP
WITH THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD,
WITH GÓMEZ, CALTRANS,
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. AND
WE REALLY JUST HAVE A LOT OF
GOOD COMMUNICATION. OUR ANALYSIS
CAPTURES THAT INFO REGARDLESS OF
WHO'S, FUNDING IT OR DEVELOPING
IT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO
ADD ANYTHING ON THE. NO. I THINK
WHAT I WOULD HAVE ECHOED IS JUST
THAT THERE'S A REALLY STRONG
PARTNERSHIP. SO IN SOME CASES
THERE ARE THERE ARE THERE ARE
PLACES WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO
FUND A VEHICLE AND THE
INFRASTRUCTURE TOGETHER. BUT
REALLY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS,
WE'VE BEEN BUILDING A VERY
STRONG PARTNERSHIP WITH THE
ENERGY COMMISSION AND SHARING IN
THEIR OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO
COMBINE POTS OF FUNDING TO BE
ABLE TO FUND US FUNDING THE
VEHICLES, THE ENERGY COMMISSION
FUNDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND
SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS
, THERE'S A NEED FOR INVESTMENT
IN BOTH THE VEHICLES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WE'RE
WORKING IN CLOSE PARTNERSHIP
WHERE WE CAN. GREAT. AND THEN
FINAL QUESTION FOR NOW, IF THE
ENERGY COMMISSION CAN, COMMENT A
LITTLE BIT ON THE PLAN FOR
TRANSITIONING HEAVY DUTY
VEHICLES TO CLEANER OPTIONS LIKE
HYDROGEN. YEAH, THIS IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR US. OUR
LAST INVESTMENT PLAN WAS $1.9
BILLION, MULTIPLE YEARS. AND OF
THAT, OVER 1 BILLION I THINK WAS
1.15. LET ME GRAB THE NUMBER IS
TOWARDS MEDIUM DUTY. HEAVY DUTY.
AND THAT'S BOTH ELECTRIC AND
HYDROGEN. WE'RE INVESTING IN
BOTH, LET ME GRAB THAT NUMBER.
YEAH 1.15 BILLION OF THE 1.9
BILLION FOR MEDIUM DUTY, HEAVY
DUTY AND SO IT'S A MULTI-PRONGED
APPROACH, WE HAVE OUR ENERGIZED
BLOCK GRANT, WHICH HAS MULTIPLE
FUNDING LANES THAT DOES A LOT OF
INVESTMENTS. WE ALSO DO ONES WE
CALL THEM GRANT FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES, OR GFOSS. WE DO
DIRECTLY THROUGH THE ENERGY
COMMISSION AND ON THE MEDIUM
DUTY, HEAVY DUTY SIDE, ONE THAT
I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT, WHICH
IS TARGETED ON FREIGHT, FREIGHT
MOVEMENT, GOODS MOVEMENT, MEDIUM
DUTY, HEAVY DUTY. AGAIN, BOTH
ELECTRIC AND HYDROGEN. WE DID
ONE ON THE SIX PRIMARY FREIGHT
CORRIDORS LAST YEAR, AND THIS
ACTUALLY TOOK THE SIX PRIMARY
CORRIDORS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S
ANALYSIS AND REPORT. AND WE SAID
THAT ELIGIBLE PROJECTS MUST BE
ON THOSE SIX CORRIDORS. AND
AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE ONES THEY
IDENTIFIED AS THE MOST NEEDING
AND THE MOST INTENSE FREIGHT
GOOD MOVEMENT ON THOSE
CORRIDORS. SO WE DID THAT
SOLICITATION. I INTEND FOR THAT
TO BE IN A REPEAT SOLICITATION.
SO WE REALLY WANT TO DO THAT IN
CYCLES EVERY YEAR, RELEASE IT
AND CONTINUE TO BUILD OUT THOSE
NETWORKS, STILL IN EARLY DAYS OF
CONTEMPLATING THE NEXT ROUND OF
IT, BUT THE FEDS RELEASED THEIR
NATIONAL FREIGHT STRATEGY. SO I
THINK THE NEXT SOLICITATION
WOULD GO ON THE SIX CTC
CORRIDORS, BUT ALSO EXPAND IT TO
INCORPORATE THOSE FEDERALLY
IDENTIFIED CORRIDORS AS WELL.
OH, SORRY. AND ONE OTHER THING
I'LL NOTE IS, ON FEDERAL
FUNDING, WE DO INTEND TO APPLY
TO THE NEXT CFE GRANT, AND IT'S
VERY LIKELY GOING TO BE MEDIUM
DUTY, HEAVY DUTY FOCUSED,
LOOKING AT PORTS AND THE I5 AS
WELL. ANYTHING ELSE? GREAT COULD
YOU JUMP OVER TO THE, LOW INCOME
E-BIKE PROGRAM, WHICH WAS FUNDED
IN 2021, WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THAT UP
FOR APPLICATIONS, THE E-BIKE
PROGRAM IS GOING THROUGH. IT'S
GETTING READY TO DO THEIR SOFT
LAUNCH, AND THAT SHOULD BE,
HOPEFULLY NEXT MONTH, MAY SO
SOON. IT HAS INTERESTING
POSSIBILITIES FOR US AS WE TRY
TO COME UP WITH, ALTERNATIVES TO
PEOPLE NEEDING VEHICLES,
PARTICULARLY IN URBAN AREAS,
OVER IN JAPAN, I SAW TREMENDOUS
HEAVY USE OF THOSE AS AN
ALTERNATIVE. OUT THERE. AND
THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF JUST THE
KIND OF THING THAT, I MEAN, IS
THAT THINGS MAY CHANGE, BUT IF
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO
GET PEOPLE OUT OF CARS, TRANSIT
IS ONE WAY, BUT AMERICANS SEEM
TO BE SO INDIVIDUALISTIC, THAT
THAT, OTHER INDIVIDUAL MODES TO
GET PEOPLE OUT OF CARS. AND THIS
CERTAINLY COULD BE ONE, SO I
HOPE THAT WE ALL STAY ON TOP OF
THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM, THE,
THE COMMENTS THAT MR. CONNOLLY
BROUGHT UP ABOUT RELIABILITY. I
APPRECIATE THE ANSWERS IN TERMS
OF THAT. WHAT I HAVE A CONCERN
WITH, AND I KNOW IT'S A CONCERN
OF THE CEC, IS THE ISSUE OF
STRANDED ASSETS. ARE THOSE EARLY
CHARGING STATIONS THAT WE MAYBE
GAVE PUBLIC FUNDING TO, ARE WE
GOING TO JUST END UP FINDING
THOSE BEING STRANDED ASSETS
BECAUSE, THEY'RE NOT BEING
MAINTAINED PROPERLY? THE
COMPANIES ARE NO LONGER IN
EXISTENCE. THERE'S, THE
TECHNOLOGY HAS MOVED BEYOND
THEM. DO YOU HAVE CAN YOU HELP
ME UNDERSTAND? THERE'S ALWAYS
GOING TO BE SOME SOME SLOP IN
THE PROCESS WHEN YOU'RE. THAT'S
PROBABLY A NONSCIENTIFIC FIRM TO
USE. BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE
SOME ERRORS AS YOU TRY TO LAUNCH
ANY MASSIVE CONVERSION FROM A
CARBON ECONOMY TO A CARBON
ECONOMY. HOW SIGNIFICANT IS THAT
WITH STRANDED ASSETS AND EARLY
CHARGING STATIONS? YEAH, THAT IS
A FANTASTIC QUESTION AND
SOMETHING WE'RE LOOKING AT QUITE
A BIT. SO IT'S MULTIPLE
APPROACHES. SO ON THE ONE I
GUESS THE THRESHOLD WAY I VIEW
IT IS THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE
OFTEN COMPLEX CONSTRUCTION AND
ELECTRICAL JOBS. AND OFTENTIMES
THE BULK OF THE COST IS NOT THE
CHARGER ITSELF. IT CAN OFTEN BE,
IF YOU NEED AN UPGRADE TO A
TRANSFORMER, IT'S TRENCHING,
IT'S CONDUIT WIRE LAYING. AND SO
WE ARE SEEING INSTANCES WHERE
THE CHARGER NEEDS TO REPLACE
SOME. THIS IS HAPPENING ON BY
THE PRIVATE ENTITIES THEIR OWN.
I KNOW EVGO HAS A PROGRAM WHERE
THEY'RE REPLACING SOME AND
MOVING THEM TO NEW GENERATION
ASSETS. AND YOU'RE EXACTLY
RIGHT. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY
GROWING PAINS HAVE OCCURRED
ALONG THAT WAY. THE FIRST
GENERATION WAS NOT AS GOOD AS
THE CURRENT GENERATION WERE IN.
SO THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
POTENTIALLY REPLACE AND REPAIR
SOME OF THE OLDER ONES, WHICH
CAN HAPPEN. WE HAVE MONEY COMING
FROM THE FEDS, ABOUT $60 MILLION
TO REPLACE ABOUT 1300 CHARGERS.
SO ONE APPROACH IS WE'RE HOPING
MORE MONEY COMES FROM THE FEDS.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO REPLACE THOSE
EXISTING ONES. AGAIN. THE
CONDUIT AND WIRE IS OFTEN STILL
FUNCTIONAL. IT'S JUST YOU WANT
TO REPLACE THAT END PIECE. THE
OTHER THING WE'RE FINDING TO
YOUR POINT ABOUT THERE MAY BE
SOME COMPANIES THAT GO OUT OF
BUSINESS. IT'S REALLY LOOKING
FOR SOME BASELINE STANDARDS. SO
FROM THE VEHICLE TO THE CHARGER,
THINGS LIKE ISO 1511 EIGHT WHICH
IS THE COMMUNICATION STANDARD,
THEN FROM THE CHARGER TO THE
BACK END USING OCP, THAT SHOULD
REALLY HELP THE CASE WHERE IF
ONE ENTITY GOES UNDER, SOMEONE
ELSE CAN COME IN AND OPERATE IT
BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL USING THE
SAME COMMUNICATION STANDARD. SO
WE'RE TRYING TO PUT SAFEGUARDS
IN PLACE TO PROTECT AGAINST
THAT. AND THEN THE LAST PIECE
I'LL SAY IS THAT WE ARE FUNDING
A SURVEY, A STUDY BY UC DAVIS.
IT'S A THREE YEAR STUDY TO LOOK
AT CHARGERS, WHETHER WE FUNDED
THEM OR NOT, AND REALLY HAVE A
LARGE ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE TO SEE
WHAT'S HAPPENING. AND WE EVEN
WANT TO SEGMENT IT BY VINTAGE.
SO WHAT IS A RELIABILITY OF
SOMETHING BACK IN 2019 VERSUS
2023? SO WE'RE DOING A LOT ON
THAT FRONT. THE UC DAVIS STUDY
STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT. SO SOME
OF THOSE DETAILS MAY MAY CHANGE.
BUT WE'RE HOPING TO ACTUALLY GET
RESULTS FROM THAT AS EARLY AS
THE END OF THIS SUMMER. AND
WE'LL CONTINUE TO GET INPUT FROM
THAT. SO THAT'S A THREE YEAR
STUDY THAT HOPEFULLY START. SO
IT'S BEEN IN PROCESS FOR THREE
YEARS. NO I'M SORRY. WE'RE JUST
STARTING IT NOW. SO THE FIRST
TRANCHE OF DATA SHOULD COME OUT
THIS SUMMER OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE
ANY DATA ON HOW MANY STATIONS WE
FUNDED OR ARE JUST STRANDED
ASSETS RIGHT NOW THEY'RE NOT
WORKING. WE DON'T HAVE GREAT
DATA ON THAT. THE CHARGERS WE
FUNDED PRE 2021, WE DIDN'T HAVE
REQUIREMENTS TO APPLY TO PROVIDE
THAT RELIABILITY DATA. SO THAT
IS INFORMATION WE WILL CAPTURE
GOING FORWARD. RIGHT. SO AND I
APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWER ABOUT THE
SORT OF THE ISSUE OF, OF ZEV ON
THE SIX MAJOR FREIGHT CORRIDORS,
HOW EXTENSIVE IS THAT PLAN? DO
YOU HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW
FAR APART THESE, THESE EV
STATIONS SHOULD BE TO WHAT
EXTENT ARE THESE GOING TO BE
BOTH ELECTRIC AND HYDROGEN'S EV
STATIONS, WILL THEY BE HYDROGEN
HEAVY DUTY CHARGING AND WILL
THEY BE, WHAT CAN YOU FILL US IN
ON WITH REGARD TO THAT? YEAH. SO
THEY WILL BE PRIMARILY HEAVY
DUTY. WE REALLY WANT TO CAPTURE
THOSE DRAYAGE TRUCKS AND LONG
HAUL VEHICLES. SO SUPPORT HEAVY
DUTY. THE FIRST FUNDING THAT WE
DID ON THAT ONE WAS ABOUT $30
MILLION. AND THREE PROJECTS WERE
FUNDED. AND WHEN I SAY PROJECTS,
THERE'S MULTIPLE SITES. SO WE
ASKED THEM TO ACTUALLY START
BUILDING OUT A BIT OF THAT
NETWORK, AS WE DO FUTURE
ITERATIONS OF IT, WE'RE GOING TO
BE MORE TARGETED IF WE START
SEEING ONE AREA GETTING
SATURATED, WE'LL PUSH PEOPLE TO
OTHERS. ON THE FIRST ONE, WE
DIDN'T HAVE THAT PARAMETER. IT
WAS, HEY, THESE SIX CORRIDORS
WERE JUST IDENTIFIED. LET'S
START BUILDING THOSE. RIGHT, AND
I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THE MAP WITH
YOU. IF YOU WANT TO SEE THAT AS
WELL. WE HAVE A MAP FROM THE CTC
PERCENTAGE OF BATTERY VERSUS
HYDROGEN. SO LET ME PULL THAT
FOR YOU FROM OUR NOTEBOOK. SO
FROM THE FIRST PROJECT FOR THE
NOTICE OF PROPOSED AWARDS, THERE
WERE 218 CHARGERS AND THREE
HYDROGEN DISPENSERS. ALTHOUGH
I'LL NOTE THOSE HYDROGEN
DISPENSERS CAN FUEL MORE
VEHICLES THAN A CHARGER. SO SO,
DEFINITELY MORE UPTAKE ON EVS ON
THAT FIRST ONE. BUT ONE THING WE
DO IS WE SAY THERE MUST BE AT
LEAST ONE HYDROGEN PROJECT, AT
LEAST ONE ELECTRIC PROJECT, AND
THEN WE KIND OF ELIMINATE THOSE
BUCKETS AND SAY THE BEST
PROJECTS THAT SCORED HIGHEST
AFTER THAT WILL GET FUNDED. SO
WE CERTAINLY HAVE MECHANISMS TO
ENSURE THAT WE'RE FUNDING
HYDROGEN AS WELL AS ELECTRIC,
WHICH WE OFTEN DO. WHAT IS THE
SIX SORT OF ANALYSIS AT THIS
POINT IN TIME IN THIS
COMPETITION BETWEEN HYDROGEN AND
BATTERIES FOR, FOR HEAVY DUTY,
PARTICULARLY HEAVY DUTY LONG
HAUL SEMI TRUCKS. SO LEANING
TOWARDS ONE OR THE OTHER OR
STILL COMPLETELY, WHAT DO YOU
SEE HAPPENING? WHAT WHAT DOES
THE TECHNOLOGY TELL US IS LIKELY
TO, TO BE THE ONE THAT WE SHOULD
BE FUNDING MORE OF Tð. YEAH, I
WOULD SAY WE'RE AGNOSTIC AT THIS
POINT. IT'S A LITTLE EARLY TO
SAY WHICH ONE IS GOING TO
PROLIFERATE. I THINK IT'LL
ULTIMATELY BE SOME MIX, AND
WHETHER THAT'S ONE WAY, ONE WAY,
WEIGHTED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IS
YET TO BE DETERMINED. BUT WE'RE
STILL IN EARLY DAYS, SO I WOULD
BE HESITANT TO SAY THAT ONE IS
GOING TO WIN OVER THE OTHER. DO
YOU SEE ONE HAVING WHAT ARE THE
ADVANTAGES OF ONE OVER THE
OTHER? DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF
ROUGH ANALYSIS THERE AS ONE
BETTER AT A CERTAIN KIND OF
TRIP? AND THE OTHER BETTER AT A
DIFFERENT KIND OF TRIP? I'LL
DEFER TO CARB ON THE VEHICLE
SIDE OF THAT. SURE. I THINK THAT
WE HAVE EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT
BOTH ARE INCREDIBLY VALUABLE AND
VIABLE OPTIONS FOR ZERO EMISSION
FUTURE. I FEEL THAT I THINK ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO
KEEP IN MIND IS THAT WHEN WE IF
WE PUT BATTERY ELECTRIC AGAINST
FUEL CELL, WE'RE TAKING THE TWO
MOST LIKELY TECHNOLOGIES TO GET
US TO THE FUTURE AGAINST ONE
ANOTHER, WHEN IN REALITY IT'S
GOING TO TAKE ZERO EMISSION TO
GET US TO OUR TRANSPORTATION
GOALS. AND THAT MEANS THAT WE
NEED THOSE THOSE TECHNOLOGIES TO
WORK TOGETHER AND TO BE AND TO
SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY SO THAT
WE CAN REDUCE OUR PETROLEUM, OUR
DEPENDANCE ON PETROLEUM AND
COMBUSTION VEHICLES. I THINK ALL
OF US AGREE THAT THAT IT'S ALL
OF THE ABOVE APPROACH, JUST
TRYING TO IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE
ATTRIBUTES OF ONE VERSUS THE
OTHER IS ONE. DOES CARB HAVE ANY
ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF FOR LONG
HAUL TRUCKING IS ONE SEEM TO BE
AHEAD. THIS ALL CAN CHANGE IN
FIVE YEARS. AS I'VE MENTIONED
HERE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS,
FOR OUR, SHORT REPEAT TRIPS,
DOES ONE SEEM TO BE AHEAD? DO
YOU HAVE ANY ANALYSIS, ANY DATA
ON THAT? WELL, WE HAVE A LOT WE
HAVE A LOT OF DATA AND A LOT OF
ANALYSIS. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT,
AGAIN, THAT THERE IS A CLEAR
WINNER IN PARTICULAR IN THE
AREAS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
FOR EXAMPLE, LONG DISTANCE
TRUCKS. WE HAVE WE HAVE SOME
BATTERY ELECTRICS THAT ARE
COMPETING WITH SOME OF THOSE
HYDROGEN. THE LONGER THE LONG
HAUL HYDROGEN TRUCKS. AND WE'RE
WORKING ON KEEPING THE DATA
UPDATED SO THAT WE CAN BETTER
UNDERSTAND HOW THEY OPERATE IN
THE LONG TERME. I KNOW THAT
WHENEVER WE HAD BEEN WORKING,
WHENEVER WE MOVED FORWARD WITH
THE INNOVATIVE CLEAN TRANSIT
REGULATION, WHICH WAS THE FIRST
PLACE WHERE WE REALLY KIND OF
STARTED LOOKING AT
ELECTRIFICATION, MANY PART OF
THAT REGULATION REQUIRED THE
TRANSITS TO PRESENT PLANS ON HOW
THEY WOULD ELECTRIFY AND THEY'VE
GONE WE'VE SEEN PLENTY OF
EXAMPLES OF WHERE THEY WERE
GOING WITH BATTERY ELECTRIC, BUT
ALSO EXAMPLES OF WHERE THEY WERE
GOING WITH FUEL CELLS. AND SO
REALLY AGAIN, IT'S VERY EARLY
IT'S EARLY DAYS TO BE PICKING
WINNERS. BUT WE CERTAINLY
THERE'S A LOT OF A WEALTH OF
DATA OUT THERE THAT IF YOU'RE
INTERESTED IN SEEING, WE'D BE
HAPPY TO SHARE WITH YOU. I'LL
LEAVE YOU WITH THIS. AND I'M
VERY CURIOUS ABOUT GOING UP
GRADES I HAVE. I HAVE NO IDEA
WHICH ONE SEEMS TO BE AT THIS AT
THIS STAGE, PERFORMING BETTER IN
TERMS OF STEEP GRADES, GETTING
UP OVER MOUNTAINS, ETC, AND WITH
THAT WE HAVE, ASSEMBLYMEMBERS OF
BR HERE. AND SO THIS SEEMS TO BE
THE ITEM WE'RE HAVING ISSUE ONE.
SO WE'RE ON ISSUE ONE. I'M ALSO
NEEDED IN ELECTIONS. SO I'M
GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CONLEY AND GO ON
TO ISSUE TWO. BUT WE'LL LET YOU
ASK WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER. RIGHT SO THANK
YOU ALL, I ACTUALLY HAD, JUST
ONE GROUP OF QUESTIONS, I WAS
LOOKING AT THE, THE, THE
BASICALLY THE ZEV PLAN, AND ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT IT, IN
TALKING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IS
BEEN A, ONE OF THE MESSAGES THAT
THEY HAVE CONVEYED IS THAT THEY
ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY FUNDING TO
ALLOW THEM TO DO THE KIND OF
PLANNING THAT THEY ARE SEEKING
TO DO, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE
ACTUALLY HAVE, PLANS FOR
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION, YOU
KNOW, SEEKING, SEEKING FUNDING
AND ACTUALLY DISTRIBUTING IT TO,
TO FOLKS IN THEIR JURISDICTIONS,
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, BUILD OUT
FOR ELECTRIFICATION FOR
VEHICLES, BOTH PASSENGER
VEHICLES AS WELL AS, AS WELL AS
MEDIUM DUTY TRUCK FLEETS. LAST
YEAR, SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE LOOKING FOR
WHETHER THERE'S FUNDING,
AVAILABLE IN ANY OF THE CURRENT
ALLOCATIONS TO ALLOW LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS TO DO SORT OF THE
KINDS OF PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN
DONE IN SANTA MONICA AND OAKLAND
WHERE THEY'VE ACTUALLY LOOKED
AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT KINDS OF
STRATEGIES ARE IN PLACE TO MAKE
SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, APARTMENT
BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEING NEWLY
BUILT ARE PUTTING IN CHARGING
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY'RE
THINKING ABOUT ON STREET
CHARGING CAPACITY, ALL THE AREAS
TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IN
OUR COMMUNITY IS READY FOR THE
TIME WHEN WE'RE ONLY SELLING
ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN THE STATE,
CAN YOU I NOTICED DOWN HERE ON
THE OTHER AT THE END THAT
THERE'S A CATEGORY THAT LOOKS
THAT SAYS COMMUNITY BASED PLANS
AND PROJECTS. IS THAT AVAILABLE
FOR EXAMPLE, FOR, YOU KNOW, THIS
THE CITY OF CULVER CITY, FOR
EXAMPLE, TO BE ABLE TO SORT OF
PUT TOGETHER AN ELECTRIFICATION,
YOU KNOW, A CLIMATE ACTION
ELECTRIFICATION PLAN OR ELEMENT
TO THEIR GENERAL PLAN, YOU KNOW,
TO JUST DO THE PLANNING WORK
THAT THEY NEED TO DO. WHILE I AM
HOLDING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT
IS A YES, I BELIEVE THAT CITIES
ARE AVAILABLE, BUT REALLY, THE
PLANNING AND CAPACITY GRANTS ARE
MEANT FOR COMMUNITIES TO BE ABLE
TO BUILD OUT EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING THE PLANS TO ELECTRIFY OR
TO DECARBONIZE, AND THEN THEY
HAVE THE THEN THEY GET TO THE
NEXT STEP IS THAT WE HAVE OTHER
PROGRAMS AVAILABLE, LIKE OUR
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION
EQUITY PROJECT, WHICH STEP AND
OUR CLEAN MOBILITY OPTIONS
PROGRAM WHERE THEY CAN THEN IF
AS THEY PUT THE PLANS TOGETHER,
RECEIVE FUNDING, FUNDING TO
SUPPORT SOME OF THE ACTIONS THAT
THEY WILL TAKE, AND I JUST WANT
TO DOUBLE CHECK, YES. CITIES ARE
ELIGIBLE AS WELL TO APPLY FOR
THOSE PLANNING CAPACITY GRANTS.
I'VE GOT A BILL THAT'S MOVING
FORWARD AB 1176. WOULD YOU TAKE
A LOOK AT THAT? AND TAKE A LOOK
AT WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK THIS
BUCKET OF FUNDING WOULD BE
AVAILABLE FOR JURISDICTIONS TO
ACCESS TO DO THE PLANNING THAT
THAT WOULD REQUIRE? I ENCOURAGE
YOU TO REACH OUT TO DAVID GARCIA
THROUGH OUR LEGISLATIVE OFFICE.
OKAY THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PETRIE-NORRIS,
ANY QUESTIONS FOR PANEL ONE?
WE'RE JUST KIND OF WRAPPING UP.
NO QUESTIONS ON PANEL ONE.
EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. SO I THINK
THAT CONCLUDES PANEL ONE. THANK
YOU EVERYONE, VERY INFORMATIVE.
AND WE'LL INVITE PANEL TWO UP
WHICH WILL INCLUDE
REPRESENTATIVES FROM DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE AND THE LAF. AND
ISSUE TWO OF COURSE IS
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION FUND
SPENDING PLAN. GOOD MORNING.
HE'S KICKING US OFF OKAY. GOOD
MORNING. MORNING, CHAIR CONNOLLY
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE,
BRANDON MERRITT WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. I'M HERE
TODAY TO PRESENT THE CAP AND
TRADE EXPENDITURE PLAN, AS
PROPOSED IN THE 2425 GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET. THIS PLAN PRIMARILY USES
THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND, OR GRF, TO PROTECT MANY
PREVIOUSLY GENERAL FUNDED
PRIORITY CLIMATE INVESTMENTS.
SPECIFICALLY, THE PLAN SHIFTS A
TOTAL OF 1.8 BILLION IN ELIGIBLE
GENERAL FUND CLIMATE PROGRAM
SPENDING TO THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND, INCLUDING $557
MILLION IN CURRENT YEAR FUNDING
VIA EARLY ACTION, AND 1.2
BILLION IN 2425 ACROSS VARIOUS
CLIMATE PROGRAMS. IN ADDITION TO
THE PROPOSED FUND SHIFTS, THE
PLAN INCORPORATES APPROPRIATIONS
THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO
LAST YEAR WITH THE LEGISLATURE,
WHICH INCLUDES 250 MILLION FOR
AB 617 AND 230 MILLION FOR THE
ZERO EMISSION TRANSIT CAPITAL
PROGRAM. THE ADMINISTRATION CAN
ACCOMPLISH THIS SPENDING PLAN BY
UTILIZING UPDATED REVENUE
PROJECTIONS. AS FOR BE HIGHER
THAN ANTICIPATED AUCTION
PROCEEDS IN THE CURRENT YEAR AND
DELAYING 600 MILLION FOR
MULTIPLE PLANNED ZEV PROGRAM
INVESTMENTS. THE DELAYS FOR ZEV
PROGRAM SHIFTS PLAN INVESTMENTS
FROM 2425 TO 2728 TO ENABLE
OTHER PRIORITY CLIMATE PROGRAMS
TO BE SHIFTED ONTO GRF IN 2425,
THE ADMINISTRATION REMAINS
COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING
CALIFORNIANS ACCESS TO CLEANER
TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS AND TO
PROTECT CRITICAL INVESTMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRANSITION
TO ZEVS. AS PART OF IDENTIFYING
ZEV PACKAGE SOLUTIONS, THE
ADMINISTRATION FOCUSED ON
BALANCING AND MAINTAINING
PREVIOUS INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH BUILDING OUT CRITICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE TO FURTHER
SUPPORT THE STATE'S GROWING ZEV
NETWORK, WHILE ALSO ADDRESSING
THE PROJECTED BUDGET SHORTFALL.
ONE OF THE KEY TENETS OF THIS
BUDGET IS KEEPING OUR
COMMITMENTS TO THE EXTENT
POSSIBLE, AND HOW WE CAN KEEP
SOME OF OUR COMMITMENTS ON
VARIOUS CLIMATE PROGRAMS IS BY
SHIFTING THEM TO GRF. THE
ADMINISTRATION LOOKED AT WHAT
GENERAL FUNDED CLIMATE PROGRAMS
STILL HAVE A FUNDING AVAILABLE
THAT MOST ALIGNED WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PRIORITIES,
INCLUDING SUPPORTING EQUITY,
MEETING GRF GOALS, AND THOSE
THAT HAVE ALSO PREVIOUSLY BEEN
FUNDED OUT OF GRF. THE MIX OF
PROGRAMS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE
SHIFTED TO GRF MEET THOSE
CONSIDERATIONS. THE EARLY ACTION
PACKAGE ADOPTED EARLIER THIS
MONTH APPROVED THE $1.8 BILLION
LEVEL OF FUND SHIFTS, WITH
DETAIL ON THE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS
THAT WOULD BE SHIFTED TO GRF TO
BE DETERMINED AT A LATER TIME.
THANK YOU. AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE
FURTHER QUESTIONS AS WE CONTINUE
THIS DISCUSSION ON THE 2425 CAP
AND TRADE EXPENDITURE PLAN,
THANK YOU. SARAH. CONNECT WITH
THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST OFFICE.
SO JUST FOR SOME CONTEXT, AS YOU
LIKELY KNOW, MOST OF GRF, ABOUT
65% OF THOSE REVENUES GO
AUTOMATICALLY TO A SET OF
CONTINUOUS APPROPRIATIONS
DETERMINED IN STATUTE. AND THE
GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING A 2.3
BILLION DISCRETIONARY SPENDING
PLAN FOR THE REMAINDER OF THOSE
FUNDS, SO AS AS THE
ADMINISTRATION MENTIONED, THE
PROPOSAL IN INCLUDES THE 557
MILLION AGREED TO FOR EARLY
ACTION, PRIMARILY FOR ZEV
ACTIVITIES YET TO BE DETERMINED
AND THE SPENDING PLAN LARGELY
BACKFILLS GENERAL FUND
REDUCTIONS TO CLIMATE AND
TRANSPORTATION ACTIVITIES,
INCLUDING VARIOUS CLIMATE
PACKAGES, AND THERE'S ALSO THIS
THE 250 MILLION FOR AB 617, THE
COMMUNITY AIR PROTECTION PROGRAM
AND THE PLAN INVESTMENTS. AGREED
TO IN THE LAST BUDGET FOR
TRANSIT. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT
YOU ADOPT A GRF SPENDING PLAN
THAT REALLY FOCUSES ON YOUR
HIGHEST PRIORITIES AND MAXIMIZES
GENERAL FUND SAVINGS, BECAUSE
GRF FUNDS WERE AUTHORIZED WITH A
TWO THIRDS VOTE, THEY CAN, IN
THEORY, BE USED FOR BROAD
PURPOSES, SO THIS IS JUST
SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS WORTH
KEEPING IN MIND. WE ALSO
RECOMMEND THAT YOU MINIMIZE
OUTYEAR GRF COMMITMENTS, WHICH
WOULD PRESERVE GREATER
FLEXIBILITY DEPENDING ON HOW THE
BUDGET SITUATION EVOLVES. AND
FINALLY, WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU
MONITOR AUCTIONS AND UPDATE
SPENDING LEVELS ACCORDINGLY TO,
TO REFLECT EVOLVING REVENUE
TRENDS. SO THE ADMINISTRATION
HAS AN UPDATED REVENUE
FORECASTING METHODOLOGY AS THE
DEPARTMENT FINANCE MENTIONED, WE
BELIEVE THAT THIS IS MORE
ACCURATE THAN THE METHODOLOGY
USED IN PREVIOUS YEARS. HOWEVER
WE DO THINK THERE IS MORE. THERE
WILL BE MORE AVAILABLE, JUST
GIVEN THE MOST RECENT FEBRUARY
AUCTION, WHICH CAME IN HIGHER
THAN THAN EXPECTATIONS, THERE
THERE WILL BE MORE DISCRETIONARY
GRF FUNDING AVAILABLE THAN WHAT
THE ADMINISTRATION INCLUDED IN
IN ITS JANUARY BUDGET PROPOSAL.
THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. BEFORE WE START WITH,
MEMBER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS,
I'D JUST LIKE TO EMPHASIZE ONE
THING AS WE LOOK AT GRF, IF YOU
IF YOU LOOK BACK, CAP AND TRADE,
THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT WAS WE
WERE GOING TO ALLOW MORE
POLLUTION NOW, BUT CHARGE PEOPLE
FOR THAT AND USE THAT FUNDING TO
DECREASE OUR, OUR EMISSIONS IN
THE FUTURE. AND THAT THAT WAS
THE APPROPRIATE TRADE OFF THE
POLLUTION OF TODAY WILL FUND THE
SOLUTIONS SO THAT WE HAVE LESS
POLLUTION IN THE FUTURE. AND I
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
KEEP EMPHASIZING THAT'S THE
PRIMARY GOAL, BECAUSE IF WE DO
ACTUALLY REDUCE EMISSIONS IN THE
FUTURE, WE SOLVE PROBLEMS, AND
YOU GET THE BENEFITS. LONG TERME
SOME PEOPLE WANT TO TAKE THAT
MONEY AND FOCUS IT ON THE
IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE. AND
THAT'S NOT AN INAPPROPRIATE
EFFORT. THAT'S THAT'S AN
APPROPRIATE USE. BUT IT DOESN'T
HAVE THE SAME BANG FOR THE BUCK
THAT IT DOES. IF YOU CAN
ACTUALLY DECREASE EMISSIONS IN
THE FUTURE. AND SO, WE SEE SOME
OF OUR PROGRAMS ARE MORE, MORE
LIKELY TO DECREASE EMISSIONS IN
THE FUTURE THAN OTHERS. AND I
JUST HOPE THIS IS SORT OF A
REMINDER FOR ALL OF US TO KEEP
OUR EYE ON THE PRIZE, WHICH IS
MAKE SURE WE USE GRF AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE TO ACTUALLY GET THOSE
EMISSIONS DOWN IN THE FUTURE, OR
WE WILL BE MISSING A BIG
OPPORTUNITY. THAT WE SORT OF
PLANNED AS OUR AS OUR BIG
CLIMATE ACTION PROGRAM AS IT
MOVES FORWARD, WITH THAT, I HAVE
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MEMBERS,
ANY MEMBERS HAVE, QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE
ABOUT GRF? ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
CONNELLY. ASSEMBLY MEMBER. THANK
YOU, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
THOUGHTS AS WELL, SO INITIAL
QUESTION TO LEO, YOUR OFFICE HAS
FLAGGED THAT ALTHOUGH CAP AND
TRADE AUTHORIZATION EXPIRES IN
2030, REVENUES ARE EXPECTED TO
DECLINE DUE TO INVESTOR
UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE STATUS OF
THE PROGRAM. ADDITIONALLY, LÀ Þ
STATES THAT VOLATILITY RELATED
TO REAUTHORIZATION QUESTIONS, IS
NOT LIKELY TO BE A SIGNIFICANT
RISK THIS YEAR, BUT COULD
DEVELOP OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL
YEARS CLOSER TO 2030. SO I GUESS
BASED ON THE LEO'S ANALYSIS OF
THE PROJECTED REVENUE DECLINE,
WHEN SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE
REAUTHORIZE CAP AND TRADE AND
COULD THE LEGISLATURE RESOLVE ON
THE SPECULATORY ISSUES BY
REAUTHORIZE THE PROGRAM NEXT
YEAR, THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.
SO I THINK THERE ARE TWO, TWO
KIND OF SEPARATE ISSUES HERE,
FIRST IS THE QUESTION THAT YOU
RAISE OF REAUTHORIZATION, SO OUR
OFFICE DOESN'T NECESSARILY
BELIEVE THAT THAT REVENUES ARE
GOING TO DECLINE. Dð DUE TO THE,
DUE TO THE, THE, THE CLOSE STATE
OF REAUTHORIZATION ALONE, THAT
THE ISSUE THAT WE REALLY WANT TO
KIND OF FLAG FOR YOU IS THAT THE
LONGER THE LEGISLATURE WAITS TO
EXTEND THE PROGRAM, THE MORE
THAT INVESTORS OUTSIDE INVESTORS
WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE CAP AND
TRADE AUCTIONS, THE MORE
UNCERTAINTY THERE MAY BE IN
TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, IS IT WORTH
BUYING A CAP AND TRADE AUCTION
ALLOWANCE WHEN I DON'T KNOW IF
THE PROGRAM IS GOING TO BE
AROUND FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR PAST
2030? SO THAT'S THAT'S JUST THE
ISSUE THAT WE WANTED TO FLAG. WE
DON'T BELIEVE THAT REVENUES ARE
WE DON'T EXPECT THAT REVENUES
ARE GOING TO DECLINE IN A IN A
SERIOUS MAGNITUDE, ANYTIME SOON.
HOWEVER, FROM, FROM OUR
UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW,
REAUTHORIZATION AS, AS, AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE IF THE LEGISLATURE
WANTS TO CONTINUE WITH THE
PROGRAM, IT'S UP. IT'S UP TO THE
LEGISLATURE ULTIMATELY, BUT
DOING SO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
WOULD, WOULD HELP MITIGATE THOSE
RISKS OF UNCERTAINTY. AND THEN
THE SECOND ISSUE I JUST WANTED
TO BE SURE TO MENTION IS, THE
CAP AND TRADE RULEMAKING
PROCESS. SO CARB IS CURRENTLY
CONSIDERING MAKING CHANGES TO
THE PROGRAM, WE'RE EXPECTING TO
SEE MORE DETAILS ABOUT WHAT
THOSE CHANGES WILL BE THIS YEAR,
BUT THAT THAT WILL DEFINITELY
HAVE AN IMPACT ON GRF REVENUES
IN TERMS OF HOW CARB ULTIMATELY
MAKES CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM. SO
THAT'S THOSE ARE KIND OF THE TWO
FACTORS WE REALLY WANTED TO
HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU THAT ARE
CONTRIBUTING TO SOME UNCERTAINTY
THAT THAT WE WANT TO JUST MAKE
SURE, YOU KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN
YOU'RE MAKING THESE OUTYEAR
COMMITMENTS WITH GRF. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CONNOLLY, IF I COULD JUST
FOLLOW UP WITH THAT. AND THAT IS
THAT. EVIDENCE FROM THE LAST
TIME AS WE APPROACHED THE
EXPIRATION AND DIDN'T HAVE
CERTAINTY ABOUT IT CONTINUING,
IS THAT REVENUES DID TAKE A
SIGNIFICANT HIT. SO I THINK IT
WOULD IT WOULD NOT BE PRUDENT
FOR US TO THINK THAT IT'S OKAY
TO GET CLOSE TO 2030 AND NOT
SEND THE APPROPRIATE SIGNALS.
AND SO I HOPE WE'LL USE THIS
COMMITTEE AND MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE TO TRY TO EMPHASIZE
THE NEED FOR EARLY ACTION ON
MAKING SURE WE CLARIFY WHATEVER
COMBINATION OF THINGS WE'RE
GOING TO DO THAT FOLLOWS THE
EXPIRATION OF CAP AND TRADE IN
2030. IS IT AN EXTENSION? IS IT
A MODIFICATION OF WHAT WE'RE
GOING TO DO? BACK TO YOU, SIR.
AGREE WITH THAT. SO WELL PUT,
JUST SO A FOLLOW UP, KIND OF IN
THE INTERIM IN TERMS OF TRYING
TO ENSURE PREDICTABILITY, WHAT
STEPS NEED TO BE TAKEN TO ENSURE
THAT THE NEXT, LET'S SAY, THREE
CAP AND TRADE AUCTIONS ARE
PREDICTABLE? WELL, IN TERMS OF
REVENUE GENERATION, I THINK THAT
THAT MAY BE A MORE APPROPRIATE
QUESTION FOR THE ADMINISTRATION.
THE LEGISLATURE THERE ISN'T
REALLY IN A POSITION TO KIND OF,
INTERVENE IN THE WAY IN, IN THE
CURRENT STRUCTURE OF CAP AND
TRADE AUCTIONS. AGAIN THE KIND
OF SETTLEMENT PRICE OF THOSE
ALLOWANCES IS UNCERTAIN. IT'S
DETERMINED IT'S A MARKET BASED
SYSTEM. SO WE CAN'T REALLY
ANTICIPATE FOR SURE WHAT THOSE
ARE GOING TO WHAT THOSE ARE
GOING TO BE. HOWEVER, THE PAST
FEW AUCTIONS AND THE PRICE OF
ALLOWANCES HAS BEEN INCREASING,
AND THE MOST RECENT AUCTION, THE
FEBRUARY 1ST, DID COME IN AT, AT
A, AT A HIGHER SETTLEMENT PRICE
THAN WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION
PREDICTED. SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT
THAT WILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN, AS
YOU KNOW, IN DEPENDING ON HOW
INVESTORS ARE KIND OF TAKING IN
THESE PROPOSED CHANGES FROM
CARB. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN
REALLY IDENTIFY FOR YOU STEPS
THAT YOU CAN TAKE AT THIS TIME
TO ENSURE, STABILITY THERE.
YEAH. THANKS. AND THEN FINAL
QUESTION. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
THAT THE $200 MILLION ANNUALLY
FOR WILDFIRE PREVENTION
ACTIVITIES ENDS IN 2028, 29. CAN
THE LEGISLATURE REAUTHORIZE AND
EXTEND THIS FUNDING? IF SO, WHEN
WOULD THE LATEST THAT THE
LEGISLATURE COULD DO SO WITHOUT
JEOPARDIZING, JEOPARDIZE
PROJECTS AND PREVENTION WORK,
HAPPEN, I THINK AGAIN, THAT THAT
THAT IS A PROBABLY THE SECOND
PART OF YOUR QUESTION IS A
BETTER ONE FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION. THÀNH, BUT THE
FIRST PART, IN TERMS OF CAN THE
LEGISLATURE DO THAT AGAIN? YES,
THAT IS, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE
CONTINUOUS APPROPRIATIONS,
INCLUDING THE WILDFIRE, 200
MILLION OFF THE TOP, THOSE ARE
ALL AUTHORIZED IN STATUTE. AND
IF THE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO
CONTINUE WITH THOSE IN THE
FUTURE, YOU COULD ABSOLUTELY DO
THAT THROUGH LEGISLATION AS, AS
AS HAS BEEN DONE PREVIOUSLY.
THANK YOU. ADMINISTRATION. DO
YOU WANT TO OPINE ON ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CONNELLY'S, HOW DO WE
ENSURE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE GREAT
AUCTIONS THE NEXT THREE
AUCTIONS? AND I'M SURE YOU HAVE
THE EXPERT ANSWER TO THAT RIGHT
NOW, RIGHT. THE THIRD DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE ALREADY, KICK IT OFF.
AND THEN IF, ONE OF OUR
COLLEAGUES WANTS TO ADD ANYTHING
ON, THEY CAN AS WELL. BUT AT
THIS POINT, WE'RE NOT
ANTICIPATING ANY DECREASE IN
REVENUE OVER THE NEXT THREE
AUCTION. THEN AS THE ELIO
COLLEAGUE MENTIONED, IT'S
ACTUALLY BEEN HIGHER REVENUES
THAN WE HAD ACTUALLY BEEN
PROJECTING, AND SO NO, NO, NO,
POTENTIAL ISSUE THERE IN TERMS
OF THE WILDFIRE RESILIENCE
RELATED QUESTION. SO THAT IS AN
ANNUAL APPROPRIATION. SO AS LONG
AS THE AS THE EXTENSION HAPPENS
BEFORE THE EXPIRATION HAPPENS,
THERE REALLY SHOULDN'T BE ANY
SORT OF PROGRAMMATIC IMPACT AS
LONG AS IT HAPPENS BEFORE THE
EXPIRATION WOULD HAPPEN. RIGHT.
GO AHEAD. THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTION. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
DONNELLY AND BENNETT, MATTHEW,
I'M THE DIVISION CHIEF OF THE
INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY DIVISION AT
THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES
BOARD. AND AMONG OTHER THINGS, I
OVERSEE THE STATE'S CAP AND
TRADE PROGRAM. AND I THINK THE
IMPORTANT THING FOR US IS TO
REMEMBER THAT THE FUNDAMENTAL
PURPOSE OF THE CAP AND TRADE
PROGRAM IS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS
AND TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAINTY
AND DECLINING CAP ON GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSIONS FOR OUR MAJOR
SOURCES OF EMISSIONS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND THE
PURPOSE IS NOT NECESSARILY TO
JUST GENERATE REVENUE AND OR TO
HAVE A STABLE REVENUE STREAM FOR
THE STATE. SO TO THE EXTENT THAT
WE MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY, Kò IN
THE DESIGN OF THE PROGRAM IN THE
LONG TERME TRAJECTORY, ON THE
EMISSION REDUCTION SIDE, THE
MARKET AND THE ACTORS THAT ARE
PARTICIPATING IN THE CAP AND
TRADE PROGRAM SEE THAT CERTAINTY
AND THAT PROVIDES STABILITY IN
THE OVERALL SECONDARY MARKET ON
PRICES AND IN THE AUCTIONS THAT
COME FORWARD. SO FROM US AND FOR
OUR PERSPECTIVE, THE IMPORTANT
THING TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE HAVE CLARITY ON THE MARKET
RULES AND THE LONG TUM EMISSIONS
TRAJECTORY, SO THAT THAT
CONFIDENCE IS STILL BAKED INTO
THE PROGRAM. AND WE HAVE THAT,
CONSISTS IN THE SECONDARY MARKET
. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. AND
BEFORE I TURN TO THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ON MY LEFT HERE, IT
REMINDS ME OF SERVING ON THE
FIRST FIVE COMMISSION AND PEOPLE
LAMENTING THE FACT THAT SMOKING
WAS GOING DOWN. AND SO THE
REVENUES WERE DROPPING. AND, WE
DO HAVE TO REMEMBER, THIS IS NOT
DESIGNED FIRST AND FOREMOST TO
BE A REVENUE GENERATOR FOR THIS
IS DESIGNED TO BE AN EMISSIONS
REDUCTION PROGRAM. AND IF WE
DON'T PROPERLY PRICE CARBON
EMISSIONS, WE WILL NEVER
EFFICIENTLY USE, UTILIZE. AND I
THINK IT'S REAL CLEAR, AS THE
ECONOMISTS, ROMEO, I'M HOPEFUL
WE'LL AGREE, PROPER PRICING OF
EVERYTHING IS ONE OF THE WAYS TO
MOST EFFICIENTLY ALLOCATE IT.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAP
AND TRADE SHOULD BE DOING IS
PUTTING THE PROPER PRICE ON
CARBON EMISSIONS, SO THAT WE
ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE CARBON
EMISSIONS WHERE IT IS, IT HAS
THE BEST SORT OF SHORT TERME
VALUE FOR, FOR ALL OF US AS WE
MOVE FORWARD. SO I HOPE THAT'S
SOMETHING WE WILL CONSIDER AS WE
RE-UP CAP AND TRADE IS TO TRY TO
MAKE SURE WE ARE SENDING THE
RIGHT PRICING SIGNALS, BECAUSE
THE MARKET WITH THE PROPER
PRICING SIGNALS CAN DO FAR MORE
THAN WE CAN DO WITH REGULATION.
IF WE SEND THE PROPER PRICING
SIGNALS. ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, SO PICKING
UP ON, THE CHAIR'S POINT THAT
IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL THAT WE
GET THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR
BUCK BUCK IN TERMS OF, GRF
SPENDING. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT
FOR ME. BASED ON THE INFORMATION
THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US TO
ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S
REALLY HAPPENING, SO I GUESS
RATHER THAN ASK SOME SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC,
SPENDING PLAN BEFORE US AND SOME
OF THE FUND SHIFTS, I GUESS LET
ME TAKE A STEP BACK AND CAN YOU
HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW YOU
EVALUATE? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW,
EVERYBODY WANTS A PIECE OF GRF,
RIGHT? PARTICULARLY IN OUR
CURRENT BUDGET ENVIRONMENT. HOW
DO YOU EVALUATE WHAT WHAT, WHAT
IS IN FACT, THE BIGGEST BANG FOR
OUR BUCK? AND HOW DID YOU PUT
TOGETHER THE PROPOSED SPENDING
PLAN? WELL, I'LL TAKE A CRACK AT
THAT FIRST, AND THEN I'M GOING
TO TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUE
AT CARB. SO, I WOULD JUST JUST
NOTE THAT WHILE COST
EFFECTIVENESS IS AN IMPORTANT
FACTOR, IT IS NOT THE ONLY
FACTOR FOCUSING SOLELY ON COST
EFFECTIVENESS WOULD PROVIDE
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES TO SUPPORT
PROGRAMS THAT FOCUS, THAT ALSO
FOCUS ON EQUITY AND SUPPORTING
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, WHICH
IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT LENS AND
STATUTORY PRIORITY FOR CAP AND
TRADE FUNDS. CARB DOES RELEASE
AN ANNUAL CAP AND TRADE
CALIFORNIA CLIMATE INVESTMENTS
REPORT, WHICH DOES INCLUDE
INFORMATION ON COST
EFFECTIVENESS FOR THE VARIOUS
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN
PREVIOUSLY FUNDED OUT OF GRF,
AND WE CAN PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION FOR THOSE PROGRAMS,
WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO TURN OVER
TO MATTHEW FOR ANY FURTHER
COMMENT. YEAH, I, THANKS. I
DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE MUCH MORE TO
ADD THAN JUST TO REITERATE THE
POINTS THAT FINANCE MADE WITH
RESPECT TO ALL OF THE
INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED ON
THE CLIMATE INVESTMENT SIDE,
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS,
CO-BENEFITS, STATUS OF FUNDING,
ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. THE
CARB TEAM WORKS ACROSS THE
ADMINISTRATION WITH THE OTHER
IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES TO PRODUCE
THAT INFORMATION TWICE A YEAR
AND MAKES IT AVAILABLE ON THE
WEBSITE FOR THE LÀ FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, AS YOU
ALL MAKE DECISIONS ON THE BUDGET
, MAYBE JUST JUST ONE THING TO
ADD TO SO WITH WITH COST
EFFECTIVENESS AS THE
ADMINISTRATION MENTIONED, THAT'S
COST EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF
REDUCING EMISSIONS. SO, WE SEE,
YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE WAY THAT
THE ADMINISTRATION DEVELOPS THE
SPENDING PLAN IS, IS NOT
DESIGNED NECESSARILY WITH THAT
AT THE FOREFRONT. BUT, YOU KNOW,
THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S,
YOU KNOW, DATA THAT'S AVAILABLE.
BUT THERE IS A WIDE VARIETY IN
TERMS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS OF
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS WITH THESE
PROGRAMS. AND IN ADDITION, OUR
OFFICE AND SOME RESEARCHERS HAVE
KIND OF RAISED SOME ISSUES WITH
THE METHODOLOGY THAT CARB USES
TO MAKE THOSE COST EFFECTIVENESS
CALCULATIONS. SO JUST WANTED TO
KIND OF PUT THAT OUT THERE AS
SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN
WE'RE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THIS ISSUE, I THINK THAT'S
REALLY CRITICAL. AND PERHAPS
THIS IS A CONVERSATION FOR I. IT
CERTAINLY IS A LONGER
CONVERSATION. AND I THINK A
CONVERSATION FOR NOT JUST
ANOTHER DAY, BUT, YOU KNOW,
MANY, MANY OTHER DAYS, BECAUSE
WE'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT'S
CALLED THE GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION FUND. I THINK THAT IF
YOU ASK 100 CALIFORNIANS, 99 OF
THEM WOULD PRESUME THAT THE
PRIMARY GOAL OF THE GREENHOUSE
GAS REDUCTION FUND IS INDEED TO
REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES, AND SO
I WOULD REALLY CHALLENGE THE
NOTION THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING
ANYTHING BUT EVALUATING COST
EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF MAKING
THOSE EXPENDITURES BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, DOING A LAUNDRY LIST OF
STUFF THAT MIGHT SOUND GOOD AND
MAKE US FEEL GOOD, BUT ISN'T
ACTUALLY PUSHING US TO OUR GOAL
IS NOT SERVING ANY COMMUNITIES
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND
IT'S ALSO NOT HELPING US DELIVER
ON OUR CLIMATE GOALS, WE HAVE AN
INCREDIBLY AMBITIOUS AND
INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING TARGETS.
I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE'RE
NOT ACTUALLY ON TRACK TO DELIVER
ON THOSE TARGETS. SO I THINK
WE'VE GOT TO GET REALLY, REALLY
SERIOUS ABOUT EVALUATING WHAT
WE'RE DOING NOW WITH THOSE FUNDS
AND THINKING ABOUT HOW DO WE,
SCRUTINIZE THOSE EXPENDITURES
AND ENSURE THAT WE ARE
OPTIMIZING THOSE DOLLARS. AND AS
THE CHAIR SAID, GETTING THE
BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK. SO
I'LL JUST NOTE THAT AS LIKE A I
THINK A REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT
PIECE OF FOLLOW UP. AND I THINK
A REALLY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION
FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO HAVE WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION ON, THIS YEAR
AND VERY QUICKLY. VÆ, I DO HAVE
ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION FOR, FOR
CARB. SO RELATED TO, THE, YOU
KNOW, PROPOSED CHANGES IN CAP
AND TRADE ALLOCATIONS, ARE WE
CONSIDERING THE IMPACT TO
ELECTRIC AND GAS RATEPAYERS AS
YOU'RE MAKING, YOU KNOW, AS
YOU'RE CONSIDERING THOSE
PROPOSED CHANGES? AND I GUESS
THE REASON I ASK IS THAT WHILE
ON THE ONE HAND, YOU KNOW, THAT
MIGHT NOT BE THE PRIMARY FRAME
OF REFERENCE, WE ARE IN ORDER
FOR US TO ACTUALLY DELIVER ON
OUR CLIMATE GOALS, WE NEED TO
HAVE MASS ELECTRIFICATION. IF
THAT BECOMES COMPLETELY
UNAFFORDABLE. INCENTIVES ARE SO
MISALIGNED THAT, WE'RE NOT GOING
TO DELIVER. SO I GUESS HOW ARE
YOU THINKING THROUGH HOW WE'RE
ALIGNING ALL OF THOSE INCENTIVES
? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTION. ASSEMBLY MEMBER, IT'S
A REALLY GOOD ONE. AND I ALSO
WANT TO COME BACK TO WHAT YOU
SAID PREVIOUSLY AND WHAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BENNETT SAID AS
WELL, WITH RESPECT TO THE
IMPORTANCE OF REDUCING
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF DOING THAT COST
EFFECTIVELY, ONE OF THE
FUNDAMENTAL TENETS OF HAVING A
CAP AND TRADE PROGRAM IS THAT
IT, BY DESIGN, LOOKS TO FIND
THOSE MOST COST EFFECTIVE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION
REDUCTIONS, BECAUSE IT DOES PUT
A PRICE ON CARBON. IT HAS AN
AUCTION MECHANISM IN A SECONDARY
MARKET BY WHICH THE COVERED
ENTITIES IN CALIFORNIA, THE
MAJOR SOURCES OF GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS, ARE ABLE TO EITHER
PURCHASE AN ALLOWANCE FOR THEIR
COMPLIANCE OR LOOK FOR
OPPORTUNITIES TO ABATE THEIR OWN
EMISSIONS THROUGH TECHNOLOGY
CHANGES THROUGH, INSTALLING
RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY AND ENERGY
PROJECTS THROUGH GREENHOUSE GAS
REDUCTION TECHNOLOGIES AT THEIR
OWN INDIVIDUAL PRODUCTION
FACILITY, AND THAT GIVES THE,
MAJOR EMISSION SOURCES IN
CALIFORNIA THE FLEXIBILITY TO
FIND THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE
EMISSION REDUCTIONS IN
CALIFORNIA UNDER THE CONTEXT OF
THE CAP AND TRADE PROGRAM. AND
SO IT IS ONE OF OUR MAIN
STRATEGIES TO REALLY PUT THAT
PRICE ON CARBON AND TO DO IT
COST EFFECTIVELY. NOW, THE
QUESTION ABOUT IMPACTS ON
UTILITIES AND RATEPAYERS.
ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT HAS BEEN A KEY
CONSIDERATION FOR THE PROGRAM
SINCE DAY ONE. AND IN FACT, THE
CURRENT DESIGN OF THE CAP AND
TRADE PROGRAM, ACCOMMODATES AND
ADDRESSES SOME CONCERNS ABOUT
RATEPAYER IMPACTS BY PROVIDING
SIGNIFICANT ALLOWANCES,
SIGNIFICANT ALLOWANCE VALUE TO
THE STATE'S UTILITIES FOR FREE,
WHICH THEY THEN TURN AROUND AND
PROVIDE CLIMATE CREDITS ON BILLS
FOR RATEPAYERS, AS PART OF
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM.
SO THERE'S ALREADY A REVENUE
RETURN MECHANISM TO HELP OFFSET
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
PROGRAM ON RATEPAYER BILLS.
CERTAINLY A BIG QUESTION GOING
FORWARD, SOMETHING THAT WE'RE
VERY KEEN ON. AND WE'VE HAD
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW CAN WE
MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROGRAM IS
SUPPORTING THE BUILD OUT OF THE
ELECTRIFICATION AND THE UTILITY
NETWORK THAT IS NEEDED FOR OUR
DEEP DECARBONIZATION OBJECTIVES
AND DOING IT IN A WAY THAT
MINIMIZES ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS
ON RATEPAYERS. SO DEFINITELY A
CONSIDERATION, SOMETHING THAT
WE'RE CONTINUING TO LOOK AT AS
PART OF UPDATING THE PROGRAM AS
WELL. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S
WONDERFUL TO HEAR BECAUSE I
THINK IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT
ALONGSIDE OUR CLIMATE GOALS THAT
WE'RE KEEPING AFFORDABILITY
FRONT AND CENTER, IF FOR NO
OTHER REASON THAN I FEEL LIKE
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE VAST
MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS, 100,
100% BEHIND US AS WE REACH TO
ACHIEVE OUR VERY AMBITIOUS AND
IMPORTANT CLIMATE GOALS. I THINK
THERE'S NO MORE CERTAIN WAY FOR
US TO LOSE PUBLIC SUPPORT, THAN
RATES AND BILLS THAT ARE OUT OF
CONTROL. SO APPRECIATE YOU
KEEPING THAT FRONT AND CENTER.
AND I THINK RECOGNIZING THAT
ACHIEVING THAT AFFORDABILITY
GOAL IS REALLY ALSO VERY PIVOTAL
IN ACHIEVING OUR CLIMATE GOALS.
THANKS. SEEING NO OTHER
QUESTIONS, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE
ON TO ITEM THREE, ISSUE THREE.
AND WHICHEVER ONE OF YOU IS
GOING TO GO FIRST. ALL RIGHT. SO
THANK YOU. CHAIR BENNETT AND
MEMBERS, I'M GRANT HARRIS. I'M
THE DIVISION CHIEF OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
AND PEOPLE HERE. CAN PEOPLE HEAR
HIM BACK THERE? NO I THINK IS
THAT BETTER? YEAH. GET IT AS
CLOSE AS YOU CAN. ALL RIGHT. SO
THANK YOU. CHAIR BENNETT AND
MEMBERS, I'M GRANT HARRIS. I'M
THE DIVISION CHIEF OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
. I'M GOING TO DISCUSS OUR
PROPOSAL FOR THE CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD. SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
CONTRACT. CARB IS REQUESTING
149,000 FOR ONE PERMANENT
POSITION AND CONTRACT FUNDING TO
RENEW CARB'S CURRENT SOUTHERN
HEADQUARTERS BUILDING MANAGEMENT
CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF 6.1
MILLION AND 24, 25, 9,000,025
26, AND 9.4 MILLION AND 2627,
AND ONGOING. THE ONE FULL TIME
PERMANENT POSITION WILL FOCUS ON
THE BUILDING MANAGEMENT AND
MAINTENANCE CONTRACT OVERSIGHT.
IN ADDITION TO TOURS AND EVENTS
AT THE FACILITY. CURRENTLY
SEVERAL ANALYST LEVEL EMPLOYEES
WITHIN THE SOUTHERN FACILITIES
UNIT MANAGE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF
THOSE TASKS, CENTRALIZING THOSE
DUTIES WILL ALLEVIATE THE
ADDITIONAL WORKLOAD PLACED ON
THOSE ANALYSTS, AND ALLOW THEM
TO FOCUS ON THEIR DUTIES AND
ENSURE COMPLETED STAFF WORK.
CARB IS IN CHARGE WITH
PROTECTING CALIFORNIANS FROM
HARMFUL EFFECTS OF AIR
POLLUTANTS AND DEVELOPING
PROGRAMS AND ACTIONS TO FIGHT
CLIMATE CHANGE BY PROVIDING A
STATE OF THE ART MODERN
LABORATORY THAT INTEGRATES THE
LATEST IN EMISSIONS TESTING
TECHNOLOGY, EQUIPMENT AND
PLACING EMPLOYEES IN A
FUNCTIONALLY EFFICIENT,
ACCESSIBLE AND CODE COMPLIANT
BUILDING EMPLOYEES PRODUCTIVITY
IS ENHANCED. CARVES NEW SOUTHERN
HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROVIDES A
SINGULAR, RELIABLE BASE OF
OPERATION FOR CARB'S ACTIVITIES
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, AND THIS
FACILITY COMPLIES WITH THE
EXECUTIVE ORDER B 18 DASH 12,
ENSURING THAT THIS PROJECT WILL
MEET OR EXCEED STANDARDS FOR
GREEN BUILDING PRACTICES. THE
BUILDING MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR
WILL MANAGE CRITICAL FACILITY
SYSTEMS AND ENSURE EQUIPMENT
WARRANTIES REMAIN IN EFFECT, AND
ENSURE THE FACILITY ACHIEVES THE
ZERO NET ENERGY RATING AS
EXPECTED. THIS ROLE IS CENTRAL
TO THE SUCCESS OF CARB'S NEW
SOUTHERN HEADQUARTERS BUILDING,
PROVIDING A SAFE, EFFICIENT
ENVIRONMENT FOR CARB STAFF TO
CONTINUE TO BUILD ON THE
IMPORTANT WORK THEY DO. I WOULD
LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
AND AT THIS TIME I WILL BE HAPPY
TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS AS WE
HAVE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS ABOUT
THE, THE $9.4 MILLION INCREASE
IN STAFFING COSTS. SO, I'M SURE
WE'RE GOING TO ASK ABOUT THOSE
UNLESS THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
HAS ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD,
AND THEN WE'LL GO TO LÀ. OH, NO
FURTHER. TO ADD NOTHING FURTHER
TO ADD AT THE MOMENT. LEO, JUST,
JUST BRIEFLY, WE DID REVIEW THIS
PROPOSAL AND WE DO FIND IT
JUSTIFIED. AND IN AN IDEAL
WORLD, THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD
HAVE ANTICIPATED THESE COSTS,
HOWEVER, SINCE DGS HAS
ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT'S NOT ABLE
TO STAFF THE BUILDING GIVEN ITS
SPECIALIZATION, WE WERE NOT
REALLY ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY,
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS. SO SO I
APPRECIATE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE
VALUE OF THE BUILDING, BUT I'M
TRYING TO FIND OUT FROM CARB
AND, THE BUILDINGS ALREADY
BUILT, WHY DIDN'T WE PREDICT
THESE COSTS? WHAT IS SO
SPECIALIZED AND THAT'S GOING ON
THAT IT CAN'T BE HANDLED BY, BY
DGS, STAFFING, I MEAN, IS THE
9.4 MILLION. AND I'M TURNING TO
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. THAT'S ON
TOP OF WHAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED
FOR THIS BUILDING. HOW DID WE
OVERLOOK THIS 9.4 BILLION,
MILLION? WELL, I'M GOING TO I'M
GOING TO FIRST TURN IT OVER TO,
TO MY COLLEAGUE TO TALK ABOUT
WHY IT'S, THESE COSTS ARE
REQUIRED TO BE CONTRACTED OUT,
AND IT'S IN SOMETHING DGS IS NOT
ABLE TO HANDLE. SO FOR THAT
QUESTION, I'D LIKE TO TURN IT
OVER. YEAH WHEN WE FIRST BROUGHT
THE BUILDING ONLINE EARLY 2022,
PRIOR TO THAT, IN 2021, WE WERE
GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH
DGS TO ASSESS IF THEY COULD
SUPPORT THE BUILDING. THEY DID
LOOK AT THE SITE, AND THEY
ULTIMATELY DETERMINED THEY
DIDN'T HAVE THE AVAILABLE
STAFFING OR THE EXPERTISE TO
SUPPORT THE EQUIPMENT, AT THAT
TIME, WE DID SUBMIT A BCP TO
FUND A BUILDING MAINTENANCE
CONTRACT, I BELIEVE, FOR
APPROXIMATELY 18 MONTHS. AND AT
THAT TIME WE OPENED UP THE
BUILDING. WE DID SECURE A
CONTRACTOR. AND SINCE THAT TIME,
WE'VE BEEN LIVING IN THE
BUILDING AND REALLY ASSESSING
WHAT IT TAKES TO PROVIDE ALL THE
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE, KEEP
ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT UP AND
RUNNING IN A SAFE AND, OPTIMAL
FASHION. AND WITH THAT, WE'VE
DEVELOPED A MORE COMPREHENSIVE
SCOPE FOR THE ONGOING CONTRACT.
AND WITH THAT SCOPE, IT HAS
GOTTEN LARGER. THERE WERE
CERTAIN EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE
BUILDING THAT WEREN'T INCLUDED
IN THE ORIGINAL SCOPE AS FAR AS
MAINTENANCE, A LOT OF OVERHEAD
CRANES, LIQUID NITROGEN SYSTEMS,
THINGS LIKE THAT, AND THOSE HAVE
RAISED THE COST, THE OTHER
FACTOR THAT THAT COMES INTO PLAY
HERE IS WE WERE ABLE TO SECURE
THE COST OF THAT CONTRACT LATE
2021 BEFORE WE'VE KIND OF FELT
THE IMPACT OF SOME OF THE
INFLATION OVER THE LAST FEW
YEARS. SO WITH GOING BACK OUT TO
BID, THAT'S GOING TO BE AN
IMPACT AS WELL. SO WE'RE
PROJECTING SOME INCREASE THERE,
AND WITH THAT EXERCISE AS WELL
EARLY THIS YEAR WE ENGAGED WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
SERVICES. AGAIN. THEY DID
ANOTHER ASSESSMENT OF THE
BUILDING. AND IN FEBRUARY CAME
BACK AGAIN AND CONFIRMED THAT
THEY STILL DO NOT HAVE THE
AVAILABILITY TO SUPPORT THAT
FACILITY. SO THIS IS A $9
MILLION INCREASE OVER WHAT WE
THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO COST TO
OPERATE THE BUILDING. TO MY
KNOWLEDGE, I DON'T BELIEVE I
DON'T BELIEVE OPERATING COSTS
FOR BUILDING MANAGEMENT WERE
BUILT INTO THE ORIGINAL FUNDS
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION. SO IT'S
NOT ON TOP OF ANYTHING THAT WAS
ALREADY GRANTED. IT'S JUST THE
TOTAL FOR THE CONTRACT PARTMENT
OF FINANCE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
COMMENT ON THAT? IS THIS NINE $9
MILLION ANNUALLY OVER THE
ORIGINAL ESTIMATES FOR
OPERATIONS OF THE BUILDING? YES,
WELL AS, AS MY COLLEAGUE
MENTIONED, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS
CONTRACT IN PLACE THAT WAS KIND
OF AN INTERIM GETTING THINGS UP
AND RUNNING, IN THE AMOUNT OF, I
THINK 18 MONTHS. CORRECT. AND SO
THE COSTS WERE ALREADY TRENDING
IN THAT DIRECTION IN TERMS OF
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS OF
THE BUILDING. THIS CAME IN AND
KIND OF SOLIDIFIED THAT AMOUNT.
AND I'D LIKE TO ALSO IF, IF WE
GET TO THAT, THERE'S KIND OF A
COMPARABLE COST WHEN YOU COMPARE
THE DGS ESTIMATES FOR WHAT IT
MIGHT TAKE IF THEY WERE ABLE TO
ACTUALLY UNDERTAKE THIS WORK,
TO, TO MAINTAIN THE FACILITY
VERSUS WHAT WE'RE OBTAINING IN,
IN COSTS VIA A CONTRACT, WHEN
YOU KIND OF LOOK AT THE
COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO,
WE'RE ACTUALLY SEEING SOME COST
EFFICIENCIES IN A CONTRACT
METHOD VERSUS A DGS OVERSIGHT
METHOD. DO YOU HAVE THE COST OF
THAT 18 MONTH CONTRACT? WHAT WAS
THAT? WHAT WAS THAT 18 MONTH
CONTRACT COST? I DON'T HAVE AN
EXACT I BELIEVE IT WAS
APPROXIMATELY 6 MILLION A YEAR
FOR THAT CONTRACT. 6 MILLION A
YEAR. SO 18 MONTHS, IT WAS 9
MILLION AROUND ABOUT. YEAH. SO I
THINK IN 24, 25, YOU'LL YOU'LL
SEE A SLIGHT CONTINUATION OF
WHAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY. AND THEN
OBVIOUSLY WE'RE JUMPING UP A
LITTLE BIT IN 2526. AND THEN IT
STABILIZES AND ONGOING AT THAT 9
MILLION. AND CHANGE ROUGHLY
ONGOING. WHAT WAS IT LAST YEAR
THEN. DO YOU HAVE THAT, COST OF
THE CONTRACT FOR THAT YEAR, COST
OF THE CONTRACT LAST YEAR? I
DON'T HAVE I DON'T HAVE THAT
WITH ME. I COULD FOLLOW UP WITH
THAT. CERTAINLY. FOLLOW UP ON
THAT PIECE. THANK YOU. OTHER
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS QUESTIONS?
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PETRIE-NORRIS I
HAVE TO SAY I AM, I AM I'M VERY
CONFUSED BY THIS. JUST BECAUSE
$9 MILLION A YEAR SEEMS JUST
LIKE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF
MONEY. IT'S POSSIBLE. I JUST
DON'T UNDERSTAND. LIKE CAN YOU
DESCRIBE FOR US A LITTLE MORE.
WHAT IS THIS BUILDING THAT IT'S
REQUIRING A $9 MILLION A YEAR?
SURE CONTRACT. THIS IS A UNIQUE
CAMPUS. IT'S NOT LIKE YOUR
STANDARD OFFICE BUILDING. IT IT
IS THAT, BUT IT ALSO
INCORPORATES ALL OF THE TESTING
FACILITIES AS WELL AS A CHEMICAL
LABORATORY SPACE. SO WHEN YOU
COMBINE ALL OF THOSE, IT THE
EASIEST WAY TO DESCRIBE IT IS
KIND OF LIKE COMBINING A
HOSPITAL AND AN OFFICE BUILDING
AND AN AUTOMOTIVE SHOP ALL INTO
ONE. SO WE HAVE TO PROVIDE
SERVICES TO ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT
THAT SERVICE SERVICE THOSE
VARIOUS TASKS, THERE'S A LOT OF
HEALTH AND SAFETY THINGS THAT
HAVE TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS FAR AS
THE LABORATORIES AND MONITORING
ALL THE VARIOUS CHEMICALS.
THERE'S COMPLEX SYSTEMS WITHIN
THE BUILDING. WE HAVE AN OZONE
GENERATION SYSTEM FOR TREATING
ALL OF OUR WATER RUNOFF THAT HAS
TO BE MAINTAINED, OPERATIONAL,
OR DOES HAVE POTENTIAL SAFETY
IMPACTS FOR OUR STAFF. IF OZONE
WANTS TO BUILD UP IN AN ENCLOSED
SPACE, IT'S JUST IT'S REALLY
HARD TO DESCRIBE ONE THING WE
ARE OFFERING TO ALL THE MEMBERS.
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, WE MORE
THAN HAPPY TO SET UP TOURS TO
TAKE YOU THROUGH THE FACILITY
AND REALLY SHOW YOU THE
COMPLEXITY OF ALL THE BEHIND THE
SCENES AND EQUIPMENT, THE SWITCH
GEARS, AND THE THINGS THAT
REALLY DOES TAKE TO OPERATE. AND
THEY'RE SO CRITICAL BECAUSE THE
WORK CARB DOES, WE HAVE TO BE
ABLE TO VERIFY OUR TESTING AND
ENSURE IT'S REPEATABLE. SO IF WE
HAVE ANY DIPS IN POWER, ANY
CHANGES IN THE ENVIRONMENT
WITHIN THE CHAMBERS, THE TESTING
IS VOID. SO IT'S VERY CRITICAL
THOSE SYSTEMS MAINTAIN OPERATION
OR THE WORK OUR PROGRAMS ARE
DOING IS MOOT. OKAY. AND YES, I
WOULD WELCOME A TOUR TO SORT OF
UNDERSTAND AND SEE WHAT'S
ACTUALLY HAPPENING. AND I WILL
SAY, I'M SURE THAT I RECOGNIZE
THAT $9 MILLION IN THE CONTEXT
OF YOUR BUDGET IS, IT DOESN'T
SEEM LIKE A HUGE ADDITION. I
THINK IT'S, TO ME, KIND OF THE
PRINCIPLE OF HOW WE NEED TO BE
APPROACHING BUDGETING,
PARTICULARLY IN OUR CURRENT
SITUATION. AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE STAFF, AND I THINK
YOU ALL RECEIVED THIS PACKET.
YOU KNOW, STAFF IDENTIFIED A
COUPLE OF AREAS, WHERE THERE ARE
SOME DISCRETIONARY
APPROPRIATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
MADE IN PAST YEARS, BUDGETS
OUTSIDE OF THE CLIMATE PACKAGE,
AND I WOULD REALLY CHALLENGE YOU
TO TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE
APPROPRIATIONS AND ASK YOURSELF,
IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE
UP FOR THIS DEFICIT, UTILIZING
SOME OF THOSE EXISTING FUNDS?
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE
ORIENTATION THAT THAT WE NEED TO
HAVE, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE
A LONGER LIST OF STUFF THAT WE
WANT TO DO THAN MONEY WE HAVE.
AND THAT HASN'T BEEN THE CASE.
WE'VE HAD BUDGET SURPLUSES THE
LAST FEW YEARS. AND I THINK, I'M
NOT SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, CARB
HAS GOTTEN INTO THIS HABIT, BUT
IN A WORLD OF BUDGET SURPLUS,
IT'S REALLY EASY TO JUST DO
EVERYTHING ON YOUR WISH LIST.
BUT LIKE, WE CAN'T DO THAT
ANYMORE. AND SO I WOULD REALLY
CHALLENGE US, YOU KNOW, WITH
THIS PROJECT AND WITH OTHERS TO
THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE DO MORE
WITH THE RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE.
AND LIKE I SAID, I WOULD WELCOME
THE OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT IS YEAH, IN IN REAL LIFE,
WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THIS CAMPUS
SO I CAN MAKE SENSE OF A $9
MILLION MAINTENANCE CONTRACT.
WE'LL BE HAPPY TO THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THAT. ANYTHING ELSE?
ALL RIGHT. WE ARE, ANY COMMENTS
ON THE NON PRESENTATION ITEMS
OUTSIDE OF WHAT YOU HAD TO SAY?
ALL RIGHT. WE ARE READY TO TAKE
PUBLIC COMMENT. WE CAN'T START
WITH. NO.
MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS BETH ALSO
ON BEHALF OF THE AGRICULTURAL
ENERGY CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION,
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS
AND THOSE OF ASSEMBLYMEMBERS
PETRIE-NORRIS ON BANG FOR THE
GRF BUCK, WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT
DAIRY METHANE PRODUCTION? DAIRY
METHANE REDUCTION PROGRAMS HAVE
BEEN AT THE TOP OF THAT LIST FOR
YEARS, TO THAT END, WE STRONGLY
SUPPORT THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PROPOSAL FOR $24 MILLION FROM
THE GENERAL FUND TO GRF FOR OUR,
CDFA DAIRY METHANE REDUCTION
FUNDING. THIS FUNDING IS
CRITICAL FOR THE ALTERNATIVE
MANURE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, IT
WILL HELP US TO LEVERAGE $85
MILLION FROM USDA. SO 25 GETS US
85. AND WHICH SO IT'S A 2 TO 1
MATCH. WE SUPPORT RESTORATION OF
$23 MILLION GENERAL FUND INTO
GRF FOR THE ENTERIC METHANE
REDUCTION PROGRAM AT CDFA. THIS
PROGRAM IS CRITICAL AS
COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE FEED
ADDITIVES WILL SOON BE AVAILABLE
AND IMPORTANT TO ADD TO THE
MAJOR REDUCTIONS ALREADY
ACHIEVED BY DAIRY METHANE
REDUCTION PROGRAMS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS
MICHAEL PIMENTEL, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA
TRANSIT ASSOCIATION. GOOD TO BE
WITH YOU THIS MORNING. I JUST
WANT TO START OFF BY
ACKNOWLEDGING AND THANKING THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE ACTIONS LAST
YEAR TO PROVIDE $5.1 BILLION IN
EMERGENCY FUNDING TO CALIFORNIA
TRANSIT AGENCIES, THIS YEAR, IN
THE FACE OF BUDGET DEFICIT,
WE'RE REALLY APPRECIATIVE THAT
THE EARLY ACTION BUDGET
PRESERVES THAT FUNDING. BUT I
DID WANT TO CALL IT AN IMPORTANT
NOTE, AND THAT IS THE EARLY
ACTION BUDGET, OF COURSE,
APPROVES A TOP LINE FIGURE FOR
GENERAL FUND TO GRF FUNDS
SHIFTS, EMBEDDED WITHIN THAT
FUND SHIFT PER THE GOVERNOR'S
JANUARY BUDGET, IS QUITE A LOT
OF MONEY FOR MAINTAINING THAT
INVESTMENT OF $5.1 BILLION. THAT
INCLUDES, $261 MILLION FOR THE
FORMULA BASED RCP, AS WELL AS
SEVERAL HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS FOR THE ZERO EMISSION
TRANSIT CAPITAL PROGRAM. IN
ADDITION, THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
INCLUDES A FUND SHIFT FOR
MAINTAIN ING INVESTMENTS IN
ALREADY APPROVED PROJECTS FOR TÊ
RCP CYCLE SIX. AND SO WE WOULD
JUST ENCOURAGE THAT AS YOU'RE
MAKING YOUR FINAL DECISIONS THAT
YOU MAINTAIN THOSE COMMITMENTS
IN MOVING THE, SPECIFIC LINE
ITEMS FORWARD AS PRESENTED IN
THE GOVERNOR'S JANUARY BUDGET.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
STEPHEN KING, AND I'M THE CLEAN
ENERGY ADVOCATE WITH ENVIRONMENT
CALIFORNIA, SO NOT ONLY DO
CALIFORNIANS CONTINUE TO BREATHE
SOME OF THE DIRTIEST AIR IN THE
NATION, BUT WE'RE ALSO
INCREASINGLY FEELING THE IMPACTS
OF CLIMATE CHANGE FROM EXTREME
WEATHER TO WILDFIRES AND MORE.
WE KNOW THAT WE NEED STRONG
CLIMATE AND CLEAN AIR
INVESTMENTS IN OUR STATE BUDGET.
IF WE'RE TO CUT POLLUTION AND
YOU KNOW, HAVE HEALTHIER
COMMUNITIES AND WE UNDERSTAND
THAT STATE DECISION MAKERS HAVE
SOME TOUGH BUDGETING DECISIONS
TO MAKE AHEAD OF THEM. BUT WE
ALSO KNOW THAT EVERY DOLLAR THAT
WE SAVE BY CUTTING CLIMATE
INVESTMENTS TODAY WILL ONLY COST
US FAR MORE IN THE LONG RUN.
INSTEAD OF CUTTING CLEAN AIR
PROGRAMS IN THE STATE BUDGET, WE
MUST INVEST IN CLEAN CARS AND
HEALTHY HOMES. WE SHOULD START
BY ELIMINATING ALL SUBSIDIES FOR
POLLUTING OIL AND GAS COMPANIES
THAT ARE DRIVING CLIMATE CHANGE
AND POLLUTING OUR COMMUNITIES.
WE SHOULD ALSO DIVERT FUNDING
AWAY FROM WASTEFUL AND
UNNECESSARY HIGHWAY EXPANSION
PROJECTS THAT GO AGAINST OUR
CLEAN AIR AND CLIMATE GOALS. SO
I URGE YOU TO PROTECT CRITICAL
CLIMATE INVESTMENTS IN THE STATE
BUDGET. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
GOOD MORNING. ELISE VONDRAK ON
BEHALF OF THE ASIAN PACIFIC
ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK, APN IS
URGING THE LEGISLATURE TO
RESTORE THE 160 MILLION FOR THE
SGC COMMUNITY RESILIENCE CENTER
PROGRAM. THIS IS WHAT WAS
PREVIOUSLY EARMARKED FOR THIS
FISCAL YEAR, BUT ZEROED OUT IN
LAST YEAR'S BUDGET. IT'S AN
EXTREMELY POPULAR PROGRAM IN
ROUND ONE OF CRC, FUNDING WAS
OVERSUBSCRIBED BY ALMOST 700%
FOR THEIR EXISTING FUNDING
CAPACITY. THE BUDGET REQUEST IS
AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
PRIORITY, AND APAN IS REQUESTING
THAT THE FUND THE PROGRAM BE
FUNDED AMBITIOUSLY VIA GRF
DOLLARS ALONGSIDE OTHER PRIORITY
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING
TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE
COMMUNITIES AND EQUITABLE
BUILDING. DECARBONIZATION UPON
ALSO WANTS TO TAKE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO URGE THE
LEGISLATURE TO SUPPORT A ROBUST
AND EQUITABLE CLIMATE BOND THAT
SUPPORTS EJ PRIORITIES,
INCLUDING CRCS, TCS, EQUITABLE
BUILDING, DECARB AND COMMUNITY
SOLAR AND STORAGE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. BILL
MCGOVERN WITH THE COALITION FOR
CLEAN AIR. IT'S ESPECIALLY
IMPORTANT THIS YEAR THAT WE USE
OUR TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS
WISELY. AND AS YOU NOTED, CHAIR
BENNETT, THE POINT OF THE GRF IS
TO REDUCE EMISSIONS. THEREFORE
WE RECOMMEND THAT THE CUTS TO
THE ZEV MOBILITY AND HEAVY DUTY
PROGRAMS BE RESTORED WITH GRF
FUNDS, GRF CAN BE FREED UP BY
BACKFILLING TURK-P WITH STATE
HIGHWAY ACCOUNT AND OR FEDERAL
TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS.
SECONDLY, ON THE POINT RAISED BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CONNELLY, WE DO
SUPPORT REDIRECTING FUNDS TO
MAKE SURE THAT CLEAN CARS FOR
ALL PROGRAMS IN THE AIR
DISTRICTS, WHICH ARE POPULAR AND
IN DEMAND, DO NOT RUN OUT OF
FUNDING, WE CAN DO THAT. AND
KEEP OTHER PROGRAMS RUNNING AT
THE SAME TIME. SO APPRECIATE
YOUR BRINGING THAT TO THE
ATTENTION, MR. CONNELLY. AND IN
THE STAFF REPORT, WE'RE GOING TO
GIVE AN AWARD FOR EVERYBODY THAT
BEATS THE RINGER. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. I'M NOT FEELING GOOD.
BRENDAN TUIGG, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, THAT'S THE
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICERS
FROM ALL 35 LOCAL AIR DISTRICTS.
AS THE STATE CONTENDS WITH A
SIGNIFICANT BUDGET DEFICIT THIS
YEAR, WE ASKED FOR YOUR
CONTINUED PRIORITIZATION OF
PROGRAMS THAT COST EFFECTIVELY
REDUCE EMISSIONS, BOTH FROM
GREENHOUSE GASES AND CRITERIA
POLLUTANTS, MEANING WE GET BOTH
PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS AND
CLIMATE BENEFITS TO AIR DISTRICT
PROGRAMS THAT DO DO SO COST
EFFECTIVELY WITH MOBILE SOURCES
IS THE COMMUNITY AIR PROTECTION
PROGRAM, AB 617 PROGRAM, AND THE
FARMER PROGRAM. THEY PROTECT
PUBLIC HEALTH AND ALSO COST
EFFECTIVELY REDUCE GHGS AND
CRITERIA HEALTH POLLUTANTS. SO
THAT MEANS OUR INVESTMENTS ARE
GOING FURTHER BY PRIORITIZE
USING THESE PROGRAMS.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE COMMUNITY AIR
PROTECTION PROGRAM, HAS NOW IT'S
NOT UNFORTUNATE THAT IT HAS 19
COMMUNITIES. WHAT'S UNFORTUNATE
IS IT'S RECEIVING ABOUT THE SAME
LEVEL OF FUNDING AS IT DID WITH
TEN COMMUNITIES WHEN IT FIRST
STARTED. SO THANK YOU. I'LL STOP
THERE. NO, JUST ONE LAST THING.
WE HAVE, SUPPORT ITEM SIX AND
SEVEN ON THE AGENDA. MICHAEL.
JARED, ON BEHALF OF CLIMATE
RESOLVE, I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT
OPRAH'S EXTREME HEAT AND
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PROGRAM.
THEY'RE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT
AWARDING $20 MILLION IN GENERAL
FUND. THEY RECEIVED INTEREST FOR
$160 MILLION. SO WE'RE CONCERNED
THAT BY ZEROING OUT THE REST OF
THEIR GENERAL FUND AND SHIFTING
THE REST OF THE FUNDS TO GRF,
THERE WILL BE NO FUNDING IN THE
IMMEDIATE TIME TO FUND PROJECTS,
WHICH WE THINK ARE VITALLY
IMPORTANT TO DEAL WITH THE MOST
DEADLY IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE,
EXTREME HEAT. SO WE WOULD URGE
YOU TO PRESERVE AS MUCH GENERAL
FUND FOR THAT PROGRAM AS
POSSIBLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. THANK YOU. GOOD GOOD
MORNING, EDDIE ROMERO ON BEHALF
OF VALLEY CLEAN AIR. NOW, JUST
HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
ENSURING THAT CLEAN CARS FOR ALL
PROGRAMS ARE KEPT WHOLE, JUST
WANT TO NOTE THAT IN THE VALLEY,
SINCE WE'VE RELAUNCHED INCENTIVE
DELIVERY IN OCTOBER, WE'VE SEEN
A THREE TIMES INCREASE IN
APPLICATION RATE AND THE
APPLICATION RATE JUST WANT TO
SIGNAL THAT WITH ALL THE CHANGES
LAST YEAR, INCREASING THE
INCENTIVE AMOUNT, MAKING THE
INCENTIVES AVAILABLE TO ALL ZIP
CODES, NOT JUST STACKS AND,
SEEING A THE USE OF MARKET
RECOVERING, WE ANTICIPATE THAT
THIS WILL BE THE CASE ACROSS THE
BOARD. AND WHEN THERE ARE ANY
GAPS IN FUNDING, THIS KIND OF
CAN SOW DISTRUST IN THE PRIORITY
COMMUNITIES. WE'RE TRYING TO
TRANSITION INTO CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION. SO JUST WOULD
LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU,
MR. CONNOLLY, FOR UPLIFTING THAT
AND WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE KEPT
KEEP THESE PROGRAMS WHOLE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. MARK FENSTERMAKER FOR THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION RELEASED EARLIER
THIS WEEK, STRATEGIES TO ENSURE
THAT OUR NATURE IS PART OF THE
CARBON SOLUTION, IN SEQUESTERING
CARBON. SO WE SUPPORT THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL FOR WILDFIRE
PREVENTION GRANTS AT CAL FIRE
REGIONAL FOREST AND FIRE
CAPACITY PROGRAM AT DEPARTMENT
OF CONSERVATION TO ENSURE THAT
OUR FORESTS ARE ACTING AS CARBON
SINKS, NOT CARBON SOURCES, AND
NOT EMITTING HIGH LEVELS OF
POLLUTION AND CARBON THROUGH
EXTREME WILDFIRE. I ALSO WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT OUR SUPPORT FOR CFA'S
STATE WATER ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM. WE KNOW THAT REDUCING
OUR WATER NEEDS MEANS THAT WE'RE
MOVING LESS WATER AROUND, WHICH
REQUIRES ENERGY, WHICH EMITS
CARBON, BUT ALSO HELPS US IN OUR
CLIMATE. RESILIENCE FACTORS.
WHEN WE GET INTO DROUGHT YEARS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
CHARLES WATSON ON BEHALF OF
BART, THE BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT
DISTRICT, ECHOING SOME OF THE
PREVIOUS COMMENTS BY CTA, I WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR ITS
ACTIONS LAST YEAR TO SUPPORT
TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL
PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE,
AND ALSO ON TO SUPPORT THE
PROPOSED FUND SHIFTS
SPECIFICALLY FOR TCP AND THE
ZERO EMISSION TRANSIT CAPITAL
PROGRAM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
BARRY BESSER FROM THE CLIMATE
CENTER, A RECENT REPORT RELEASED
BY NEXT TEN, SAID THAT
CALIFORNIA IS NOT ON TRACK TO
MEET OUR 2030 CLIMATE GOALS. IN
FACT, WE ARE GOING TO BE 17
YEARS LATE. SO CUTTING CLIMATE
INVESTMENTS FROM THE BUDGET WILL
ONLY MAKE THIS REALITY WORSE, AS
WE CONSIDER WHAT EXPENDITURES
SHOULD BE SHIFTED FROM THE
GENERAL FUND TO GRF, WE NEED TO
PRIORITIZE THOSE THAT PRODUCE
CLEAN AIR, PUBLIC HEALTH AND
EQUITY BENEFITS. AND AS YOU
CONFRONT THE DIFFICULT DECISIONS
BEFORE YOU DELAYING THESE VITAL
PROGRAMS, WE MUST STOP
SUBSIDIZING FOSSIL FUELS AS A
STATE, ENDING OIL AND GAS
SUBSIDIES, ESPECIALLY THROUGH
LARGER PROGRAMS LIKE THE WATER'S
EDGE, ELECTION AND RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT TAX CREDITS, CAN
POTENTIALLY REDIRECT HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO CLIMATE
GOALS. I ALSO WANT TO SUPPORT MY
COLLEAGUE FROM THE COALITION OF
CLEAN AIR'S, REQUEST TO SHIFT
STATE HIGHWAY ACCOUNT FUNDS AND
FEDERAL FUNDS TO SUPPORT ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION AND CLEAN ENERGY
PRIORITIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JANE
BENDER, AND I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH
THE CLIMATE CENTER. AND I LIVE
IN SONOMA COUNTY, WHERE WE HAVE
BEEN DEVASTATED BY WILDFIRES
WITH THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE LOSING
THEIR HOMES. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT
BEING STUCK NOW WITH NO FIRE
INSURANCE BECAUSE OF THE THREAT
OF FIRE, BECAUSE OF CLIMATE
CHANGE. SO I URGE YOU TO NOT CUT
THE FUNDS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND INDEED, LET'S CUT THE FUNDS
TO SUBSIDIZING THE FOSSIL FUEL
INDUSTRY BECAUSE THEY'RE THE
ONES WHO HAVE CREATED THIS
DISASTER WITH ALL OF US AND
THESE PEOPLE. WE DON'T NEED ANY
MORE OF THIS. SO WE NEED YOUR
HELP. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MAYA INIGO
WITH COMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER
ENVIRONMENT AND CHARGE AHEAD,
I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TODAY TO
PROTECT OUR ZEV PACKAGE. THESE
ARE TRULY LIFE SAVING PROGRAMS.
MY STEPSON IS ONE OF MANY
ANGELENOS WHO USES AN INHALER
AND I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT
ROUGHLY 7200 CALIFORNIANS DIE
EACH YEAR DUE TO PM 2.5
POLLUTION RELATED ILLNESSES. WE
COUNT ON YOU TO PROTECT OUR ZEV
PACKAGE, INCLUDING HEAVY AND
MEDIUM DUTY PROGRAMS, CLEAN CARS
FOR ALL. WE APPRECIATE CARB'S
EXPERTISE, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO
SEE THAT PROGRAM CONTINUE ITS
MOMENTUM AS WELL AS COMMUNITY
MOBILITY PROGRAMS. WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THE
MOST VULNERABLE ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE COMMUNITIES, AS AN
ANGELENO, I CAN SPEAK TO, SOME
OF THE REAL DAMAGE, TO
COMMUNITIES WHEN WE SEE CANCER
CLUSTERS AND YOUNG KIDS MISSING
SCHOOL DUE TO ASTHMA. I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND WE
HOPE THAT YOU WILL PRIORITIZE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES AS YOU MAKE THESE
CHALLENGING BUDGET DECISIONS.
THANK YOU. AND WHILE WE HAVE SO
MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, I DO
WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT AND I
HOPE THAT PEOPLE WILL LOOK AT
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S
OVERALL EFFORTS IN TERMS OF
CLIMATE FUNDING, THE LAST FEW
YEARS, BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE
BUDGET SURPLUS, FAR MORE MONEY
WENT INTO CLIMATE. IT PROGRAMS
AND POLICIES. AND SO
UNFORTUNATELY, AND I CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS HERE
TODAY, THOSE ARE THE PROGRAMS
BECAUSE THEY GOT THE MOST RECENT
AND THEY GOT ONE TIME FUNDING.
THOSE ARE THE PROGRAMS THAT,
ARE, ARE BEING LOOKED AT. BUT I
HOPE WE'LL ALL LOOK AND SAY,
WHERE ARE WE AT THE END OF THIS
YEAR RELATIVE TO WHERE WE WERE
THREE YEARS AGO, IN TERMS OF THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE PUTTING
INTO CLIMATE. AND HOPEFULLY THAT
WILL BE STILL A SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE IN CALIFORNIA'S
COMMITMENT TO THE CLIMATE. BUT
WE'RE ALL FRUSTRATED. AND I JUST
WANT TO SHARE YOUR FRUSTRATIONS
WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO HOLD ON
TO ALL OF THE GAINS WE MADE IN
THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH CLIMATE
FUNDING. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS EDSON PEREZ
WITH ADVANCED ENERGY UNITED, WE
REPRESENT A BROAD ARRAY OF
TECHNOLOGIES AND CLEAN ENERGY
AND CLEAN TRANSPORTATION, WHICH
HAVE REALLY BEEN AT THE TIP OF
THE SPEAR IN ENABLING OUR CLEAN
ENERGY TRANSITION. SO WE'VE
IDENTIFIED THE FOLLOWING
PROGRAMS AS INSTRUMENTAL IN
ACHIEVING OUR MANY GOALS FROM
NOW TO 2045. AND THEY'RE THE
CLEAN THE DRAYAGE TRUCKS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PILOT PROJECT,
THE CLEAN TRUCKS, BUSSES AND OFF
ROAD EQUIPMENT PROGRAM. THE ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE FUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS AND THE
ZERO EMISSION SCHOOL BUSSES
FUNDS. AND I JUST WANT TO
QUICKLY EMPHASIZE THAT THE
REALLY THE MOMENTOUS TASK THAT
LIES AHEAD FOR OUR MEDIUM AND
HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE OWNERS AND
OUR FLEET OPERATORS IS NOW,
WE'RE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH OUR
AGGRESSIVE TIMELINES FOR THEM TO
DECARBONIZE. IT'S MUCH NEEDED,
AS WE HEARD, ESPECIALLY WITH
THOSE CLOSE TO POPULATION
CENTERS, BUT THEY NEED EXTENSIVE
SUPPORT TO GET THERE. AND I
THINK THEY ALSO NEED A STRONG
SIGNAL FROM THE STATE THAT WE
INTEND TO ENFORCE OUR TIMELINES
AND HELP THEM IN GETTING THERE.
AND WE CAN DO THAT BY
PRIORITIZING THE PROGRAMS
OUTLINED HERE. SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS MARY DOVER. I'M THE
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS OFFICER FOR
THE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT
DISTRICT IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY. WE
OPERATE BUS, RAIL, PARATRANSIT
AND MICRO TRANSIT SERVICES
ACROSS 1000 SQUARE MILE SERVICE
AREA, FIRST, I'D LIKE TO THANK
YOU FOR THE 5.1 BILLION, FOR TCP
AND ZERO EMISSION CAPITAL
PROJECTS FOR TRANSIT AGENCIES,
OUR PORTION OF THAT IS
APPROXIMATELY 113 MILLION. AND
OUR PLAN FOR THOSE FUNDS
INCLUDES CRITICAL CUSTOMER
EXPERIENCE AND RESILIENCY
PROJECTS, AS WELL AS SOME
OPERATING SUPPORT, THE SB 125
FUNDING, ESPECIALLY YEAR TWO,
WILL HELP US INCREASE RIDERSHIP,
EXPAND CAPACITY AND DO OUR PART
TO HELP THE STATE MEET THE
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION. SORRY,
REDUCTION GOALS, SO WE'RE HERE
ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT THE FUND
TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL FUND
TO THE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
FUND FOR TCP. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, CHRIS SCROGGIN ON
BEHALF OF CHARGEPOINT. I JUST
WANTED TO VOICE OUR SUPPORT OF
THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET Ã
SPECIFICALLY AROUND MAINTAINING
FUNDING IN THE CLEAN
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM FOR THE
COMMUNITIES IN CHARGE PROGRAM,
ENERGIZE AND CAL VIP TO, WE VIEW
THESE AS INTEGRAL PROGRAMS TO
THE ROLLOUT. AND FOR THE ROLLOUT
OF EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE IN
THE STATE AND, APPRECIATE THE
GOVERNOR MAINTAINING THAT
FUNDING AND ENCOURAGE THE
LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE IT AS
WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MELISSA
ROMERO WITH CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS, WE WANT TO
URGE YOU TO REJECT THE CUTS TO
FURTHER CUTS TO THE CLIMATE
BUDGET, AS SOMEONE SAID BEFORE,
THE LATEST CLIMATE SCIENCE IS
SHOWING THAT WE ARE NOT ON
TARGET TO REDUCING POLLUTION AND
NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO CUT
CLIMATE FUNDING, ESPECIALLY THIS
DRASTIC Kò. AND PROTECTING THAT
FUNDING ISN'T JUST ABOUT THE
CLIMATE, IT'S ALSO ABOUT ALL OF
THE THINGS THAT IT TOUCHES. SO
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROTECTING
EQUITY AND LOWERING ENERGY COSTS
FOR LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND
COMMUNITIES, WHETHER THAT'S THE
CLEAN CARS FOR ALL PROGRAM THAT
YOU HEARD SOMEONE JUST TALK
ABOUT OR BUILDING
DECARBONIZATION, AN EQUITABLE
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION
PROGRAMS OR UTILITY FINANCING
ASSISTANCE, ASSISTANT PAYMENT
PROGRAMS, THESE ARE PROGRAMS
THAT DIRECTLY HELP LOWER INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS REDUCE THEIR
TRANSPORTATION AND HEATING AND
COOLING COSTS AT A TIME WHERE
THAT'S REALLY NEEDED. AND
INSTEAD OF CUTTING THOSE THOSE
FUNDS, WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT
ELIMINATING SUBSIDIES TO THE OIL
AND GAS INDUSTRY. AS YOU ALREADY
HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TODAY
ENDING OIL AND GAS SUBSIDIES
LIKE THE WATER'S EDGE ELECTION
OR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CAN
POTENTIALLY FREE UP BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS AND FILL UP THAT GAP
THAT'S NEEDED TO FILL THOSE
PROPOSED CUTS. THANK YOU. WANT
TO URGE YOU TO ALSO PASS A
CLIMATE BOND. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
ABIGAIL SMITH, ON BEHALF OF THE
PEOPLE, FOOD AND LAND
FOUNDATION, WITH REGARD TO THE
COMMENTS AND STAFF ANALYSIS
REGARDING THE GRF CONTINUOUS
APPROPRIATIONS, WE AGREE THAT
IT'S TIME FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO
REOPEN THIS ISSUE AND EVALUATE
THE EFFECTIVENESS AND MERITS OF
THE ACTIVITIES OVER THE PAST
YEARS. SPECIFICALLY, WE BELIEVE
IT IS TIME TO REEVALUATE THE
CONTINUOUS APPROPRIATIONS
WITHOUT CAPS AND WITHOUT SUNSET
DATES THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO
GROW AND CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY
WITHOUT ANY REVIEW. THE PEOPLE,
FOOD AND LAND FOUNDATION IS
CO-SPONSORING SB 1135 BY SENATOR
LEE MON, WHICH WE BELIEVE IS A
MUCH BETTER USE OF CONTINUOUS
GRF FUNDS. THIS BILL PROVIDES A
TAX CREDIT USING GRF FOR COMPOST
UTILIZATION FOR RANCHERS,
FARMERS AND OTHER LANDOWNERS ON
NATURAL AND WORKING LANDS.
SPREADING COMPOST IS AN
INEXPENSIVE WAY TO REDUCE GHG
EMISSIONS, AND STUDIES SHOW THAT
ONE APPLICATION CAN CONTINUE TO
REDUCE EMISSIONS FOR UP TO 70
YEARS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GRF,
YOU CONSIDER PROVIDING 1% NOT TO
EXCEED $120 MILLION PER YEAR FOR
TEN YEARS TO FUND SB 1135. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
DANNY ALFORD WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES
HERE, JUST TO SUPPORT OUR
REQUEST TO INCLUDE, FUNDING FOR
ZERO EMISSIONS PORTS IN THIS
YEAR'S GRF PLAN, RATHER THAN
DELAYING IT TO 2627. THANKS.
THANK YOU. HI THERE. MEGAN
MEKELBURG HERE ON BEHALF OF
CALSTART, THEY ARE PARTICULARLY
INTERESTED IN THREE THINGS
RELATED TO THIS PACKAGE. THE
FIRST ONE IS HAVING A MEDIUM
DUTY FLEETS. WE ARE SEEING THAT
THERE IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE
RUNNING OUT OF MONEY AROUND
BEFORE MARCH OF THIS YEAR, WHICH
WOULD MEAN THAT A DELAY INTO
NEXT YEAR WOULD RESULT IN NO
FUNDING FOR AT LEAST A FEW
MONTHS IN THE HIP PROGRAM IN
PARTICULAR. NEXT ITEM IS THE
INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING. JUST
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF MAKING SURE
THAT THAT CAN HAPPEN BECAUSE
THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO
ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO GET THOSE
VEHICLES ON THE ROAD, AND THEN
THE LAST ITEM IS RELATED TO
INNOVATIVE MOBILITY. THE CLEAN
MOBILITY OPTIONS PROGRAM IS
DELAYED UNTIL 20 2728, AND
CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE ANY
FUNDING. SO THAT IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT PROGRAM TO HELPING OUR
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BE ABLE TO
PLAN FOR INNOVATIVE MOBILITY. SO
THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALIZE YOU
HAVE A GREAT CHALLENGE AHEAD OF
YOU, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME
TODAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
MARISSA WU WITH THE GREENLINING
INSTITUTE, THE STATE SURPASSED
1.5 MILLION EVS ON OUR ROADS
LAST YEAR AND IS WELL UNDERWAY
TO MEET 5 MILLION BY 2035. YET
LOW INCOME AND DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES CONTINUE TO FACE
SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS TO EV
ADOPTION AND BEAR THE BRUNT OF
AIR POLLUTION IN THE STATE.
CLAIMS TO PRIORITIZE EQUITY YET
IN BUDGET SHORTFALLS, EQUITY
PROGRAMS ARE THE FIRST TO GO. WE
URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO ALIGN
THE BUDGET WITH YOUR VALUES AND
PRIORITIZE INVESTMENTS LIKE
CLEAN CARS FOR ALL TO FIGHT
EMISSIONS AND IMPROVE PUBLIC
HEALTH FOR LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. WE ALSO
URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO ENSURE
NO FURTHER CUTS OR DELAYS TO THE
ZEV PACKAGE, AND TO AVOID
CLAWBACKS OF UNENCUMBERED FUNDS
TO FILL BUDGET GAPS, WHICH WILL
FURTHER SET BACK THE STATE AND
SUPPORTING LOW INCOME AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. WE
REQUEST THAT THE LEGISLATURE
EXPLORE THE NEED FOR
REALLOCATION OF FUNDS TO KEEP
PROGRAMS UP AND RUNNING, AND
ENSURE THEY DELIVER MUCH NEEDED
BENEFITS TO OUR MOST IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. ROSS BUCKLEY, ON BEHALF
OF SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, WE VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE THE AB 617
FUNDING VERIFIED IN THE
GOVERNOR'S SPENDING PLAN FOR
DISTRICTS IMPLEMENTATION
INCENTIVES, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE
BUDGET SHORTFALL. HOWEVER,
REQUESTS TO CONTINUE
PRIORITIZING OF THE AB 617
FUNDING, WHICH PROVIDES TARGETED
SUPPORT FOR DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES IN TERMS OF
IMPROVING AIR QUALITY AND
PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH.
CURRENTLY, THE AB 617 PROGRAM IS
SEVERELY UNDERFUNDED. THERE ARE
NOT ENOUGH RESOURCES TO SUPPORT
THE EXISTING COMMUNITIES
THROUGHOUT THE STATE IN
PARTICULAR, THE SOUTH COAST
REGION INCLUDES ALMOST TWO
THIRDS OF THE EJ COMMUNITIES.
THESE ARE THE COMMUNITIES THAT
ARE HARMED THE MOST BY THE
REDUCTION OF RESOURCES. AND TO
HELP ADDRESS THIS RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST, ASK THAT THE AB 617
FUNDING BE RESTORED TO LAST
YEAR'S LEVELS. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MEMBERS. KODY BOYLES,
ON BEHALF OF THE WESTERN
AGRICULTURAL PROCESSORS
ASSOCIATION, WE WOULD LIKE TO
VOICE SUPPORT FOR THE FARMER
PROGRAM, WHICH PROVIDES
ASSISTANCE TO HELP FARMERS
TRANSITION THEIR TRACTORS TO
CLEANER BURNING OR ZERO EMISSION
EQUIPMENT. THIS PROGRAM PROVIDES
IMMEDIATE HEALTH BENEFITS AND
CLIMATE BENEFITS TO
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES WITHIN
THE CENTRAL VALLEY. I'M ALSO
HERE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
DAIRIES, INC. WE'D LIKE TO ALIGN
OUR COMMENTS WITH THE FIRST
SPEAKER IN PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
AND EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR
REINSTATING FUNDS FOR CFA'S
DAIRY METHANE PROGRAM. THANK YOU
. HELLO, MY NAME IS PETER
HOBERG. I'M WITH THE CITIZENS
CLIMATE LOBBY, AND I'D LIKE TO
VOICE MY THANKS FOR ALL THE
EFFORTS THAT YOU'VE DONE. AND
I'D LIKE TO, VOICE MY SUPPORT
FOR CONTINUING PROGRAMS,
SPECIFICALLY THOSE THAT ADDRESS,
CLEAN CARS AND CLEAN HOMES AND I
WOULD LIKE TO ALSO JUST POINT
OUT THAT CALIFORNIA IS A LEADER
IN CLIMATE AND ALL THE EFFORTS
THAT YOU'VE DONE, WE CAN'T GIVE
UP NOW. WE HAVE TO CONTINUE. I
THINK THAT WE'RE SETTING A
PRECEDENT FOR WHAT THE REST OF
THE COUNTRY AND THE REST OF THE
WORLD SEES. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS MARIELLA
ROCHA FROM THE AMERICAN LUNG
ASSOCIATION, WE URGE YOU TO
CONTINUE FUNDING CLEAN AIR
PROGRAMS AND ZERO EMISSION
PROGRAMS. TODAY, WE RELEASED OUR
25TH ANNUAL STATE OF THE AIR
REPORT, WHICH SHOWS THAT 98% OF
CALIFORNIANS CONTINUE TO LIVE IN
A COMMUNITY WITH UNHEALTHY AIR.
IN FACT, SIX CALIFORNIA CITIES,
RANKED IN THE TOP TEN FOR THE
SMOGGIEST CITIES IN THE UNITED
STATES AND 12 CALIFORNIA CITIES
APPEAR AMONG THE TOP 25 LIST FOR
THE MOST POLLUTED IN THE NATION.
THIS IS WHY IT IS SO CRITICAL TO
CONTINUE INVESTING IN CLEAN AIR
PROGRAMS THROUGH OUR STATE
BUDGET. CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS SAVE
LIVES AND PROVIDE VITAL HEALTH
BENEFITS THAT CALIFORNIANS,
CALIFORNIANS DESPERATELY NEED.
WE AGREE WITH COMMENTS FROM
COALITION FOR CLEAN AIR,
ESPECIALLY ON THE CLEAN CARS FOR
ALL PROGRAM. ALSO, ZERO EMISSION
DRAYAGE TRUCKS MOBILITY OPTIONS,
EQUITABLE BUILDING,
DECARBONIZATION, AND OTHER
PROGRAMS IMPLEMENTED BY STATE
AND LOCAL AIR DISTRICTS.
TARGETED TARGETING, CLEAN UP IN
OUR MOST IMPACTED COMMUNITIES
MUST REMAIN IN PLACE. WE URGE
YOU TO ENSURE GRF FUNDS ARE USED
TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES AND
OTHER HARMFUL AIR POLLUTANTS
INSTEAD OF DELAYING CUTS IN
FUNDING FOR THESE PROGRAMS.
SORRY THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. CHAIR AND MEMBERS NATE
SOLOVE, ON BEHALF OF THE PORT OF
LA, I APPRECIATE THE SUPPLY
CHAIN INVESTMENTS YOU MADE IN
THE 22 BUDGET. PART OF THAT WAS
SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS
FOR PORTS TO TRANSITION TO ZERO
EMISSION. THAT FUNDING WAS
DELAYED TO 2627, WE'RE ASKING
THAT A PORTION OF THAT BE
INCLUDED IN THIS YEAR'S GRF
PLAN. IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
TIMING WISE, BECAUSE WE'RE IN
THE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR
FEDERAL GRANT FUNDING, AND IT'S
IMPORTANT TO HAVE A STATE MATCH
FOR THAT. ALSO, THE PORTS HAVE A
2030 DEADLINE TO GO ALL Â. SO
THIS FUNDING IS CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT FOR PORTS TO MEET THAT
TRANSITION, SINCE HISTORICALLY
IT'S BEEN A HIGH POLLUTING
INDUSTRY. SO THIS MONEY WILL
DIRECTLY, IMPACT BRINGING THOSE
EMISSIONS DOWN AND HELPING THE
PORTS TRANSITION TO ZERO
EMISSION. SO IF IT CAN BE 100
MILLION SPREAD OUT OVER THE NEXT
FEW YEARS, AS OPPOSED TO WAITING
UNTIL 2627, IT'LL HAVE A HUGE,
HUGE IMPACT TO CALIFORNIA'S PORT
COMMUNITY. APPRECIATE YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
MADELEINE MOORE WITH LOS ANGELES
METRO GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND
THE INTEREST OF TIME, I WOULD
LIKE TO ALIGN LA METRO WITH THE
COMMENTS MADE BY THE CALIFORNIA
TRANSIT ASSOCIATION. IT IS
CRITICAL TO CONTINUE OUR
INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M
CHRIS THOMAS, I'M FROM SONOMA
COUNTY AND HAVE EXPERIENCED THE
FIRE DISLOCATION AND THE SMOKE
DAYS. I'M A VOLUNTEER BOTH WITH
THE CLIMATE CENTER AND WITH
CLIMATE ACTION CALIFORNIA. I
WANT TO URGE YOU TO ELIMINATE
ALL OF THE FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES
, TO RETRAIN ALL OF THE CLIMATE
FUNDING AND ACTUALLY TO FUND THE
IMPLEMENTATION FOR SB 253 AND SB
261, IT'S NOT GOING TO GET ANY
EASIER. IN FACT, IT'S GOING TO
GET MORE DIFFICULT EACH YEAR
WITH THESE BUDGET ISSUES. AND IF
YOU DON'T TAKE THESE ACTIONS
NOW, IT WILL ADD THE INTENSITY
IN THE FUTURE. THANKS VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. I'M
JANET COX WITH CLIMATE ACTION
CALIFORNIA. WE WORK IN COALITION
WITH MANY GROUPS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE AND NATIONALLY, ALL OF
WHOM ARE EXTREMELY CONCERNED
ABOUT FUNDING AND EARLIEST
POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
DISCLOSURE BILLS. SB 261 AND SB
253, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE
SEX KIND OF CHICKEN HEARTED
DECISION TO EXCLUDE SCOPE THREE
FROM THEIR REQUIRED REPORTING.
IT'S JUST ESSENTIAL THAT
CALIFORNIA FILL THAT GAP AND
LEAD THE WAY, AND THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY IN THE CARB BUDGET. WE
THINK IT'S OVERESTIMATED, BUT
IT'S STILL A TINY AMOUNT OF
MONEY. IT'S A VERY FEW THOUSAND
DOLLARS. AND IT'S JUST THESE
IMPLEMENTING THESE BILLS HAS TO
HAPPEN HAS TO HAPPEN SOON. THE
OTHER THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
IS THE NEED TO REDUCE THE
SUBSIDIES FOR OIL AND GAS, BOTH
THE RATHER SURGICAL ONES THAT
THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED IN HIS
JANUARY BUDGET. AND ALSO WE
DON'T NEED WATER'S EDGE AND THE
MONEY WE CAN SAVE BY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. I'M SURE
YOU GET IT. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR
AND MEMBERS, PHOEBE SEATON WITH
LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY. I JOIN
OTHERS IN IN IN SAYING THAT WE
CANNOT AFFORD TO CUT FUNDING FOR
PROGRAMS THAT ARE ADDRESSING
CLIMATE POLLUTION AND IMPROVING
OUR AIR QUALITY. THE INNOVATIVE
AND PRECEDENT SETTING EQUITABLE
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION PROGRAM
IS CRITICAL TO ENSURING THAT THE
MOST VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS CAN
BE SAFE AND HEALTHY IN THEIR
HOMES, EVEN IN TIMES OF EXTREME
HEAT. WE URGE YOU TO PROTECT
EBRD FUNDING FUNDING CUTS AND
DEFERRED FUNDING WILL ONLY COST
US MORE IN THE LONG TERME AND
COST PEOPLE THEIR HEALTH, THEIR
WELL-BEING AND EVEN THEIR LIVES.
SIMILARLY, THE COMMUNITY
RESILIENCE CENTER PROGRAM AND
THE TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE
COMMUNITIES PROGRAM ARE
NECESSARY TO HELP NEIGHBORHOODS,
COMMUNITIES AND TOWNS FACE THE
ONGOING AND WORSENING CLIMATE
CRISIS BY BOTH PROTECTING THEM
FROM THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE
CHANGE. ADDRESSING THE INPUTS OF
CLIMATE CHANGE, AND TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES
THAT CLIMATE CHANGE PRESENTS US.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. RIGHT GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
JEAN WARD WALLER REPRESENTING
CAL BIKE TRANSFORM AND ALSO
LEADERSHIP COUNSEL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ON ALIGN MY
COMMENTS WITH THE SPEAKERS THAT
HAVE ALREADY TALKED TO YOU ABOUT
THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM AND BACKFILLING THAT
WITH STATE HIGHWAY ACCOUNT
FUNDS. I ALSO WANT TO ALIGN MY
COMMENTS WITH ALL THE SPEAKERS
THAT HAVE TALKED ABOUT ENDING
FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES THAT ARE
WORSENING THE CLIMATE CRISIS
WITH AIR AND WATER POLLUTION,
SPECIFICALLY, WE ENCOURAGE YOU
TO, NOT USE SCARCE RESOURCES FOR
THE CFA'S DAIRY DIGEST OR
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MARIA. I'M A
CAMPUS ORGANIZER WITH MORRELL.
WOULD YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE
DOWN, PLEASE? THANK YOU. IS THAT
BETTER? THAT'S BETTER. MY NAME
IS MARIA AYALA. I'M A CAMPUS
ORGANIZER WITH CALPERS STUDENTS.
AND CLIMATE CHANGE IS BECOMING
AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT ISSUE,
ESPECIALLY FOR YOUNG PEOPLE AND
OUR FUTURE, AND INSTEAD OF
CUTTING CRITICAL ZERO EMISSION
TRANSPORTATION, CLEAN AIR AND
CLIMATE PROGRAMS, WE SHOULD
ELIMINATE SUBSIDIES FOR
POLLUTING INDUSTRIES THAT ARE
WORSENING AIR QUALITY AND
CLIMATE CHANGE THROUGH PROGRAMS
LIKE THE WATER'S EDGE ELECTION,
THE STATE'S BIGGEST POLLUTERS
ARE RAKING IN RECORD PROFITS,
WHILE THE STATE'S LIFE SAVING
CLEAN AIR AND CLIMATE PROGRAMS
ARE SET TO BE ZEROED OUT.
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES NEED
THESE PROGRAMS TO EQUITABLY
BUILD RESILIENCY AGAINST CLIMATE
CHANGE. GOVERNOR NEWSOM HAS
PROPOSED 2.9 BILLION CUTS TO
CLIMATE PROGRAMS, BUT BY ENDING
OIL AND GAS SUBSIDIES, WE CAN
POTENTIALLY REDIRECT BILLIONS IN
FUNDING FOR THE STATE'S CLIMATE
GOALS, PREVENTING PRESENTS A
VIABLE ALTERNATIVE SOURCE OF
REVENUE. AND WITH THE WORSENING
EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND
WITH OUR CLIMATE FUNDING UNDER
THREAT, MAKES NO SENSE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH TO CONTINUE TO
HUNT POLLUTION. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HI. MY NAME IS EMILY
CONTRERAS. I'M A FIRST YEAR
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY MAJOR AT UC
DAVIS AND A MEMBER OF CALPERS
STUDENTS. I'M HOPING TO
ENCOURAGE THIS COMMITTEE TO
CAREFULLY AVOID BUDGET CUTS FOR
CLEAN AIR AND ENERGY PROJECTS.
MANY RECENT STUDIES HAVE SHOWN
HOW AIR POLLUTION NEGATIVELY
IMPACTS COMMUNITIES OF COLOR,
SPECIFICALLY, WHO ARE
STATISTICALLY MORE LIKELY TO BE
EXPOSED TO DANGEROUS AIR QUALITY
CONDITIONS. FOR GENERATIONS,
INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES IN THE
UNITED STATES HAVE SUFFERED FROM
SYSTEMIC ABUSES, INCLUDING
SUBSTANDARD HOUSING AND
INADEQUATE PROTECTION FROM
SOURCES OF POLLUTION. THIS HAS
LED TO POLLUTANTS LIKE NITROUS
OXIDE, SULFUR OXIDES, AND
PARTICULATE MATTER CAUSING
RESPIRATORY AND CARDIOVASCULAR
PROBLEMS FOR COUNTLESS
COMMUNITIES. DESPITE IT BEING A
STRAINED BUDGET YEAR, WE NEED TO
PRIORITIZE PUBLIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OVER
SUBSIDIES FOR THE FOSSIL FUEL
INDUSTRY OR HIGHWAY EXPANSION
PROJECTS. BY ELIMINATING THE
WATER'S EDGE, DODGE THE WATER'S
EDGE TAX DODGE THAT BENEFITS OIL
GIANTS LIKE CHEVRON, WE CAN
REDIRECT UP TO $4 BILLION
TOWARDS EQUITABLE CLEAN AIR.
LET'S FUND THE BEST VERSION OF
OUR FUTURE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS SHREYA
AND I'M A FIRST YEAR
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND
POLITICAL SCIENCE STUDENT AT UC
DAVIS, AND I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF
CAL PARK STUDENTS. I'D LIKE TO
ENCOURAGE THIS COMMITTEE TO
MAINTAIN BENEFICIAL BUDGET
PROGRAMS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT,
SUCH AS CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN
ENERGY PROGRAMS. OUR GENERATION
EXPERIENCES THE EFFECTS OF
CLIMATE CHANGE EVERY DAY. FOR
EXAMPLE, EXTREME HEAT TROUBLES
EVERY REGION IN CALIFORNIA, HEAT
RELATED DEATHS ARE PROJECTED TO
RISE BY A FACTOR OF 2 TO 3. MANY
OF THOSE DEATHS WILL BE AND HAVE
BEEN FROM IMPOVERISHED, UNHOUSED
AND PEOPLE OF COLOR COMMUNITIES.
Kò CAUSES SCHOOL TO CANCEL AN
AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY TO
STRUGGLE. THE BACKBONE OF
CALIFORNIA IS AT RISK. WHILE IT
MAY BE A STRAINED BUDGET THIS
YEAR, WE OWE IT TO CALIFORNIANS
WHO CAN'T HELP THEMSELVES TO
SECURE A SAFE AND EQUITABLE
ENVIRONMENT. OUR STATE IS A
LEADER IN ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS, SO LET'S DIVERT
SUBSIDIES, INCREASING OUR CARBON
FOOTPRINT, AND REDIRECT FUNDS TO
EQUITABLE, CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN
ENERGY PROGRAMS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
CHEN ENGSTROM. I'M THE STATE
DIRECTOR OF CALPIRG, THE PUBLIC
INTEREST ADVOCACY GROUP, AND WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATE BUDGET
IS STRAINED, BUT CUTTING
IMPORTANT PROGRAMS THAT WILL
LEAD TO CLEANER AIR AND
HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES IS NOT THE
ANSWER. THE FIRST STEP SHOULD BE
CUTTING SUBSIDIES AND TAX
EXPENDITURES FOR OIL AND GAS, AS
WELL AS UNNECESSARY HIGHWAY
EXPANSION, WHICH HARMS OUR
HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT AND
DOESN'T SOLVE CONGESTION. WE
APPRECIATE THAT THE GOVERNOR'S
DRAFT BUDGET DOES INCLUDE SOME
CUTS TO FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES,
BUT THERE ARE MORE CUTS TO BE
MADE AS HAS ALREADY BEEN
HIGHLIGHTED. CALIFORNIA SHOULD
CUT THE WATER'S EDGE. ELECTION
TAX EXPENDITURE THAT WILL ALLOW
MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS TO
COMPUTE THE INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE
TO CALIFORNIA ON THE BASIS OF A
WATER'S EDGE, RATHER THAN THE
WORLDWIDE COMBINED REPORT.
CUTTING THESE HARMFUL AND
UNNECESSARY EXPENSES THAT
ACTIVELY MAKE CLIMATE CHANGE
WORSE WILL ALLOW US TO REDIRECT
STATE RESOURCES TOWARDS PROGRAMS
THAT PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES AND
OUR PLANET. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HI, SAMANTHA SAMUELSON, ON
BEHALF OF THE BUILDING
DECARBONIZATION COALITION, WE
REQUEST THE STATE MAINTAIN
FUNDING FOR THE CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION'S EQUITABLE
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION PROGRAM
. THE EBRD PROGRAM IS A FIRST OF
ITS KIND PROGRAM THAT HELPS LOW
INCOME CALIFORNIANS ACCESS
COMPREHENSIVE HOME RETROFITS TO
IMPROVE INDOOR AIR QUALITY,
HEALTH, COMFORT AND ENERGY
AFFORDABILITY, ALL WHILE
FURTHERING CALIFORNIA'S CLIMATE
GOALS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MISS CHAIR MEMBERS MICHAEL
PIMENTEL. HERE AGAIN, I'M GOING
TO BE SUPREMELY BRIEF AS I'M
DOUBLE DIPPING, HERE ON BEHALF
OF YOU CERTAINLY ARE HERE ON
BEHALF OF VÀ TRANSPORTATION,
ENCOURAGING THE MAINTENANCE OF
FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2425 FOR
CARB'S VARIOUS LOW CARBON
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY PROGRAMS.
THOSE ARE THE CLEAN MOBILITY
OPTIONS SUSTAINABLE
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY PROGRAM
AND CLEAN MOBILITY AND SCHOOLS
PROGRAM. THANK YOU. ALAN ABS FOR
THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. I'D LIKE TO
ALIGN MY COMMENTS WITH MY
COUNTERPARTS FROM CAPCO, THE
SOUTH COAST AQMD, THE AMERICAN
LUNG ASSOCIATION, AND THE
COALITION FOR CLEAN AIR,
ENCOURAGING CONTINUED SUPPORT OF
PRIORITIZATION OF COST EFFECTIVE
PROGRAMS TO REDUCE AIR EMISSIONS
, INCLUDING CLEAN CARS FOR ALL
PROGRAM AND THE AB 617 PROGRAM,
WHICH SUPPORTS FOR COMMUNITIES
IN THE BAY AREA AND ALSO
ENCOURAGE CONTINUED
PRIORITIZATION OF THE EQUITABLE
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION
PROGRAM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, OPEN IT UP
FOR YOU, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
TRICIA GERINGER WITH
AGRICULTURAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA ON TWO PROGRAMS THAT
HAVE BEEN MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY.
FIRST, THE FORMER PROGRAM ON
FARM EMISSIONS EQUIPMENT
PROGRAM, HIGHLY EFFECTIVE.
ECHOING THE COMMENTS IN SUPPORT
OF FUNDS FOR THAT PROGRAM IN OUR
FARMING COMMUNITIES AND ALSO IN
SUPPORT OF THE 24 MILLION THE
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSAL TO
MOVE 24 MILLION FROM GENERAL
FUNDS OVER TO GRF FOR LIVESTOCK
METHANE REDUCTIONS AT CDFA THAT
PROGRAM, AND THEN ONE NEW ONE TO
FLAG FOR YOU THAT FITS RIGHT IN
LINE WITH YOUR BANG FOR THE BUCK
COMMENTS. EARLIER, THE FOOD
PRODUCTION REDUCTION AND FOOD
PRODUCTION INVESTMENT PROGRAM
KNOWN AS PIP AT THE CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION, THIS IS A
SMALL BUT MIGHTY PROGRAM THAT'S
HELPING LOCAL FOOD PRODUCERS
REDUCE THEIR EMISSIONS WHILE
THEY PROCESS CALIFORNIA GROWN
FOOD. 80% OF THE FUNDS, OVER 80%
OF THE FUNDS ARE GOING INTO
DISADVANTAGED AND LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES. SO WE ASK FOR YOUR
COMMITMENT. THERE TOO. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND
WITH FURTHER COMMENTS, WE. YEAH,
I DO. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION
FOR YOU. ARE WE SO WE HAVE A
BREAK NEXT WEEK AND THEN WE'RE
OKAY BREAK NEXT WEEK. AND THEN A
SUBSEQUENT. OKAY. ONE OF THOSE.
OKAY I'LL LOOK IN MY LIST