GOOD MORNING. I'D LIKE TO CALL
THE APRIL 24TH, 2024 HEARING OF
THE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS COMMITTEE
TO ORDER. WE WILL BEGIN AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE. IF MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE ARE MONITORING THIS
HEARING, PLEASE COME TO ROOM 444
OF THE STATE CAPITOL SO THAT WE
CAN ESTABLISH A QUORUM. I'D LIKE
TO WELCOME EVERYONE WHO IS HERE
IN THE HEARING ROOM AND WHO IS
WATCHING THE HEARING ONLINE. FOR
THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING, WE
ARE ACCEPTING WITNESS TESTIMONY
IN PERSON, AND WE ARE ALSO
ACCEPTING WRITTEN TESTIMONY
THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE'S
POSITION LETTER PORTAL THAT
PORTAL CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH
THE COMMITTEE'S WEBSITE AT ELC
DOT ASSEMBLY DOT CA.GOV. THE
COMMITTEE HAS EIGHT BILLS ON ITS
AGENDA. THERE ARE TWO BILLS ON
CONSENT. WHEN WE HEAR THE BILLS
ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL HEAR FROM
A MAXIMUM OF TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT AND TWO
PRIMARY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
OF THE BILL, WITH A LIMIT OF TWO
MINUTES PER WITNESS. OTHER
WITNESSES ARE LIMITED TO
PROVIDING THEIR NAME, THEIR
ORGANIZATION THEY REPRESENT, IF
ANY, AND THEIR POSITION ON THE
BILL. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WILL
BE RULED OUT OF ORDER. BEFORE WE
MOVE ON TO THE AGENDA, I HAVE AN
ADDITIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTS TO
MAKE. I HAVE A LETTER FROM
SPEAKER RIVAS APPOINTING
ASSEMBLY MEMBER REGGIE JONES
SAWYER TO REPLACE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER AKILAH WEBER ON THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF
TODAY'S HEARING, ONLY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER JONES, JOAN SAWYER,
WELCOME AND THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE. ADDITIONALLY, I HAVE A
LETTER FROM SPEAKER RIVAS
APPOINTING ASSEMBLY MEMBER JUAN
ALANIZ TO REPLACE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BILL AZALI FOR THE ON THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF
TODAY'S HEARING ONLY AND WE WILL
WELCOME HIM WHEN HE GETS HERE.
ALSO THE RULES COMMITTEE HAS
DETERMINED THAT THE FISCAL
IMPLICATIONS OF AB 2990 LOA
SHOULD BE ANALYZED IN THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE,
DESPITE THE BILL BEING KEYED NON
FISCAL ACCORDINGLY. AB 2990 WILL
BE SENT TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE IF IT PASSES THIS
COMMITTEE. WITH THOSE
ANNOUNCEMENTS OUT OF THE WAY, WE
WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE
COMMITTEE'S AGENDA. OF COURSE,
WE ARE STARTING AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE, AND WE WILL NOW GO
AHEAD AND TAKE UP OUR FIRST
BILL. AND IT'S IN SIGN IN ORDER.
SO WE HAVE AB 3239 BY WENDY
CARRILLO. YOU MAY BEGIN WHEN
YOU'RE READY. THANKS. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS. HAPPY
DENIM DAY, TODAY I AM PROUD TO
PRESENT AB 3239, WHICH PERMITS
CAMPAIGN FUNDS TO BE USED TO PAY
OR REIMBURSE AIRLINE TRAVEL
EXPENSES RELATED TO AN EMOTIONAL
SUPPORT ANIMAL BELONGING TO AND
TRAVELING WITH AN INDIVIDUAL
WHOSE TRAVEL IS ALREADY
AUTHORIZED TO BE PAID USING
CAMPAIGN FUNDS. ACCORDING TO THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH,
THERE IS INCREASING RECOGNITION
OF THE THERAPEUTIC FUNCTIONS
PETS CAN PLAY IN RELATIONS TO
MENTAL HEALTH. THE PRESENCE OF
AN EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMAL CAN
CAUSE CALMING EFFECTS TO AN
INDIVIDUAL'S WORK, SCHOOL AND
HOME, AND OVERALL HEALTH. THE
BILL DEFINES AN EMOTIONAL
SUPPORT ANIMAL TO MEAN AN ANIMAL
THAT PROVIDES EMOTIONAL,
COGNITIVE, AND OTHER SIMILAR
SUPPORT TO AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A
DISABILITY. IN 2020, THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION ANNOUNCED THAT IT
WAS REVISING ITS AIR CARRIER
ACCESS ACT REGULATIONS ON THE
TRANSPORTATION OF SERVICE
ANIMALS BY AIR. THERE IS NO
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL, AND I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT I
VOTE. ANY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
ANYBODY IN THE ROOM? I SEE OKAY.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
OKAY. BEFORE WE MOVE ON, WE WANT
TO GO AHEAD AND ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. SO, MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. PELLERIN
HERE, PELLERIN HERE. LACKEY
HERE. LACKEY HERE. BENNETT.
BERMAN. CERVANTES ALANIZ. ALANIZ
HERE. LOW BLOW HERE. JONES.
WEBER I MEAN JONES. SAWYER
SORRY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. JONES
SAWYER. HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM.
WONDERFUL, WE'LL NOW BRING THIS
BILL BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
Þ Þ. MR. BENNETT'S HERE. WE'LL
NOW BRING THE BILL BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS? MOVE THE BILL. SECOND,
WE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, YOU MAY CLOSE.
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD. SO
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD FOR
DISCUSSION. I BELIEVE EMOTIONAL
SUPPORT ANIMALS TRULY CONTRIBUTE
TO A PERSON'S WELL-BEING AND
PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN ONE'S
HEALTH AND I AM RECOMMENDING A
SUPPORT POSITION ON THIS BILL.
MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS. PELLERIN AYE. PELLERIN.
AYE. LACKEY. LACKEY AYE.
BENNETT. BERMAN. CERVANTES
ALANIZ. ALANIZ. AYE. LOW LOW.
AYE. JONES. SAWYER. JOHN. SAWYER
AYE. THAT BILL IS OUT 5 TO 0.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. AT
THIS TIME, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND
TAKE UP THE COMMITTEE'S CONSENT
CALENDAR. THERE ARE TWO BILLS ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE
COMMITTEE SECRETARY WILL READ
THE ITEMS ON CONSENT CALENDAR.
ITEM SIX AB 3184 BY BERMAN. THE
MOTION IS DO PASS AND BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS WITH A
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSENT.
CALENDAR ALSO. ITEM EIGHT AB
3284 BY THE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE.
THE MOTION IS DO PASS TO
CONSENT. CALENDAR DOES ANY
MEMBER WISH TO REMOVE AN ITEM
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR?
SEEING AND HEARING NONE. DO WE
HAVE A MOTION ON MOVE BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LACKEY AND
SECONDED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
JONES SAWYER. MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. PELLERIN.
AYE. PELLERIN. AYE LACKEY.
LACKEY. AYE. BENNETT. BERMAN
CERVANTES. ALANIZ ALANIZ. AYE.
LOW. LOW. AYE JONES. SAWYER.
JONES. SAWYER. AYE CONSENT
CALENDAR IS OUT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR
NEXT AUTHOR, WHICH IS, US AB
2724 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER REYES.
YOU MAY BEGIN WHEN READY. THANKS
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS, I'M PRESENTING TO AB
2724 TO PROVIDE HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS IN CALIFORNIA THE
OPPORTUNITY AND THE RESOURCES TO
PREREGISTER TO VOTE BY THE END
OF THE 11TH GRADE. EVERY
ELECTION CYCLE, WE DISCUSS HOW
LOW VOTER TURNOUT FROM ALL
ACROSS CALIFORNIA IS AFFECTING
OUR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT.
UNFORTUNATELY, MILLIONS OF
CALIFORNIANS PASS UP ON THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO EXERCISE THEIR
DEMOCRATIC RIGHT TO VOTE EVERY
ELECTION OAN ONE CRITICAL
STRATEGY WE CAN EMPLOY TO
ADDRESS THIS IS BY ENSURING THAT
CALIFORNIANS WHO ARE ELIGIBLE TO
VOTE ARE REGISTERED TO DO SO,
VOTER PRE-REGISTRATION IS AN
EXCELLENT TOOL THAT MAKES IT
POSSIBLE FOR 16 AND 17 YEAR OLDS
TO PRE-REGISTER TO VOTE SO THAT
UPON THEIR 18TH BIRTHDAY, THEY
ARE AUTOMATICALLY REGISTERED
VOTERS. HOWEVER, CURRENTLY, ONLY
11% OF 16 AND 17 YEAR OLDS IN
CALIFORNIA ARE ACTUALLY
PRE-REGISTERED TO VOTE. BY
FOCUSING ON OUR YOUTH AND
BRINGING THE RESOURCES TO THEM
AT THEIR HIGH SCHOOLS, WE CAN
ENSURE MORE CALIFORNIANS,
ESPECIALLY YOUNG CALIFORNIANS,
ARE VOTING AND DEVELOPING THE
HABIT OF DOING SO AT AN EARLY
AGE. CIVIC. CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IS
INVALUABLE, WHICH IS WHY WE NEED
AB 2724. THE HIGH SCHOOL VOTER
REGISTRATION ACT, SO MORE VOICES
CAN BE HEARD AT THE POLLS ON
ELECTION DAY HERE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL ARE VIVIAN
ESPARZA AND JOHN OTTO, BOTH ARE
YOUTH LEADERS FROM THE INLAND
EMPIRE AND ARE WITH OUR AND ARE
WITH OUR CO-SPONSORS. THE ELAN
CONGREGATIONS UNITED FOR CHANGE.
YES. YOU EACH HAVE TWO MINUTES.
THANK YOU. HELLO. MEMBER. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR. AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS VIVIAN
ESPARZA, AND MY PRONOUNS ARE
SHE, HER. I AM A VOTER
ENGAGEMENT STUDENT ORGANIZER
WITH INLAND CONGREGATIONS UNITED
FOR CHANGE, ALSO KNOWN AS ICUC,
AND I ATTEND CAJON HIGH SCHOOL.
TODAY, I AM TESTIFYING IN FAVOR
OF AB 2724, AS WE KNOW, THE
ELECTORAL PROCESS PLAYS A
SIGNIFICANT PART IN UPHOLDING
OUR DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM.
CONSISTENT ELECTIONS FOR
CITIZENS TO VOTE ARE THE REASON
WE ARE FUNCTIONING AS A NATION,
VOTING ALLOWS CITIZENS TO HOLD
THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS
ACCOUNTABLE AND TO GAIN INSIGHT
INTO THE NEEDS OF ITS OF THEIR
CONSTITUENTS. AS A LOW INCOME
YOUTH IN MY COMMUNITY, I CAN
CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT WE HAVE A
DIVERSE POPULATION OF VARIOUS
BACKGROUNDS, ETHNICITIES, AND
MOST NOTABLY, AGE GROUPS. WHILE
IT'S TRUE THAT YOUTH IS OUR
NATION'S FUTURE, IT IS EVIDENT
THAT WE NEED TO BE MORE
ADEQUATELY EQUIPPED TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE ELECTION
PROCESS OF OUR GREAT STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AB 2724 WILL GIVE
STUDENTS LIKE ME THE OPPORTUNITY
TO TAKE THE INITIATIVE IN A
PROCESS THAT OFTEN SEEMS TOO
MATURE AND OVERWHELMING.
PERSONALLY, I HAD THE PRIVILEGE
OF VOTING IN THE LAST PRIMARY
ELECTION. THIS WAS SUCH A
FORMATIVE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE I
WAS ABLE TO BE THE INSTRUMENT TO
COMMUNICATE MY UNDOCUMENTED
PARENTS VOICE. BY USING MY LIVED
EXPERIENCE, I WAS NOT ONLY ABLE
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS, BUT ALSO EXPERIENCE A
SENSE OF EMPOWERMENT AND
SOLIDARITY FOR MY COMMUNITY,
BEGINNING WITH MY FAMILY. THIS
BILL, IF IMPLEMENTED, COULD
FURTHER STRENGTHEN THESE BONDS
OF SOLIDARITY AND COMMUNITY,
CREATING A LONG TERME IMPACT
THAT TRANSCENDS GENERATIONALLY.
THIS BILL WOULD ALSO ENSURE THAT
HIGH SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOLS ACROSS
CALIFORNIA ARE REQUIRED TO
PROVIDE STUDENTS WITH
INFORMATION ON HOW TO
PREREGISTER, TO VOTE AT LEAST
ONCE BEFORE THE END OF THEIR
11TH GRADE. THIS MEASURE IS
CRUCIAL IN PROVIDING EQUAL
OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL STUDENTS,
REGARDLESS OF THEIR BACKGROUND
OR CIRCUMSTANCES. WE BELIEVE
THAT THIS WILL HELP SO MANY
STUDENTS LIKE MYSELF BECOME
PRE-REGISTERED TO VOTE,
EMPOWERING THEM TO PARTICIPATE
IN FUTURE ELECTIONS, JUST LIKE I
WAS ABLE TO IN THIS PAST
ELECTION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. THANK YOU. HELLO CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS ARTURO, COMMUNITY
ORGANIZER WITH ICAC. JOHN WASN'T
ABLE TO JOIN US TODAY, SO I'LL
BE READING HIS TESTIMONY ON HIS
BEHALF, THANK YOU, CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS JOHN HARO, AND I AM A
SENIOR AT ARROYO VALLEY HIGH
SCHOOL IN SAN BERNARDINO. I'M
HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS THE
IMPORTANCE OF AB 2724 AB 2724
SEEKS TO INCREASE VOTER
REGISTRATION AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE
IN CALIFORNIA BY ENLIGHTENING
STUDENTS ON THEIR VOTING RIGHTS
AND PREREGISTER THEM TO VOTE. AB
2724 IS A BILL THAT WILL EMPOWER
AND FORM A CULTURE WHERE
STUDENTS ARE ACTIVELY ABLE TO BE
INVOLVED IN SHAPING THEIR OWN
FUTURE. I GREW UP IN AN
IMMIGRANT HOUSEHOLD WHERE MY
PARENTS DID NOT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE ME AND MY
SIBLINGS ABOUT OUR RIGHTS AS US
CITIZENS GROWING UP WITHOUT THE
KNOWLEDGE OF VOTING, WHICH IS A
GOD GIVEN RIGHT, IS NOT ONLY A
PREDICAMENT THAT I SUFFER FROM.
YOUNG ADULTS AGED 18 THROUGH 34
MAKE UP 31% OF THE POPULATION IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT ONLY 18% ARE
LIKELY TO BE VOTERS. YOUTH ARE
YOUTH YOUTH NOT JUST IN SAN
BERNARDINO, BUT ACROSS THE
STATES, SUFFER FROM THE LACK OF
VOTING LITERACY EITHER TO EITHER
FOR BEING TOLD THAT THEIR VOTE
DOESN'T MATTER, OR GROWING UP IN
AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE VOTING
DOESN'T MATTER. MY FRIEND SARA
MENDEZ WAS TOLD HER WHOLE
CHILDHOOD AND THROUGH THE MEANS
OF HER RELIGION, SHE SHOULDN'T
GET INVOLVED IN POLITICS. YET
ALONE VOTING, THIS FIXED MINDSET
INFLUENCES A CULTURE THAT
DIMINISHES YOUTH'S SENSE OF
EMPOWERMENT. THE AND INSTEAD
ADDS TO THE ALREADY EXISTING
LACK OF VOTING. VOTING LITERACY.
OUR VOTING LITERACY ISN'T ONLY,
CONSTRUED BY OUR UPBRINGINGS,
BUT BY THE ENVIRONMENT WE ARE
PLACED IN. ALTHOUGH WE LIVE IN A
NATION BUILT OFF OF DEMOCRACY,
IT IS DRIVEN BY SOCIAL MEDIA,
WHERE MISINFORMATION IS A
DECEPTIVE TACTIC USED TO
UNEDUCATED AND UNSUSPECTING
VOTERS. THIS MISINFORMATION IS
EMBEDDED INTO SOCIETY, CREATING
A SOCIAL NORM WHERE WHERE PEOPLE
WHO KNOW VERY LITTLE ARE
PERSUADED BY MANIPULATIVE MEANS.
THIS POLICY WOULD INFORM
STUDENTS OF THE FACTS AND ALLOW
THEM TO COME TO THEIR OWN
CONCLUSIONS. GIVE STUDENTS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE, AND
UNDERSTAND THE THAT THEIR VOTE
MATTERS, WHICH WILL CREATE A
CULTURE OF HEALTHY VOTER
LITERACY. AB 2724 WILL FORM A
CULTURE WHERE ALL STUDENTS WILL
BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW
THEIR RIGHTS, EQUIP STUDENTS
WITH THE INFORMATION THAT THEY
NEED, AND RESOURCES TO
UNDERSTAND THEIR PARTICIPATION
IN EFFECTS. DEMOCRATIC
ACTIVITIES. THUS SUPPORTING AB
2724 WILL NOT ONLY STEP TOWARDS
WILL NOT ONLY ONLY TAKE. SORRY
IS NOT ONLY A STEP TOWARDS
TEACHING STUDENTS ABOUT THEIR
CIVIC DUTIES, BUT ALSO AN
INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE OF THE
DEMOCRACY OF CALIFORNIA. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ARE
THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN THE
ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO REGISTER
THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE BILL? IF
SO, PLEASE COME ON UP. IF IT'S
YOUR NAME AND ANY ORGANIZATION
YOU REPRESENT AND YOUR POSITION.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
KAREN STOUT HERE ON BEHALF OF
POWER CALIFORNIA ACTION. WE'RE A
CO-SPONSOR OF THE MEASURE AND IN
STRONG SUPPORT. ANYONE ELSE? IS
THERE ANYBODY IN THE ROOM WHO IS
A PRIMARY WITNESS IN OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL? ANYBODY WHO WANTS
TO REGISTER THEIR OPPOSITION TO
THE BILL, SEEING NONE, WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR
. I JUST WANT TO THANK, THE
STUDENTS WHO HAVE AND THE YOUNG
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE TESTIFIED
HERE TODAY TO TAKE TIME OUT OF
YOUR BUSY SCHEDULES FOR US TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THE IMPORTANT WORK
AND THE POTENTIAL THAT YOU HAVE
AND HOPE THAT WILL CONTINUE IN
SUPPORT AND SUPPORTING THE
EFFORTS THAT YOU HAVE, AS YOU
MAY KNOW, THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, WE HAVE SUPPORTED
PROPOSALS TO ALLOW 17.5 YEAR
OLDS TO VOTE IN ELECTIONS, THIS
IS CLEARLY INCONSISTENCY TO HELP
ENGAGE YOUNGER VOTERS SO THAT WE
HAVE LIFELONG VOTERS AS WELL,
TOO. SO I THANK THE VERY MUCH
THE AUTHOR AND WILL, MAKE A
MOTION IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER JOAN
SAWYER. WELL, AND I AND I
APPLAUD THIS, AND I ALSO HOPE,
AT SOME POINT, THOSE OF US THAT
ARE LONG IN THE TOOTH, REMEMBER,
IT WAS A TIME WHERE IT WAS
MANDATORY THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE
CIVICS CLASSES. AND I STILL
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE
NEED IT'S PROBABLY THROUGH THE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE. WE NEED TO
GET BACK TO THAT, BECAUSE I
THINK THAT ALSO HELPED NOT ONLY
FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND
THE PROCESS, BUT WHY THEY NEED
TO VOTE FOR CERTAIN PEOPLE AND
WHAT THEY DO. BECAUSE I FIND
SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW,
ESPECIALLY YOUNG PEOPLE. I MEAN,
I KNOW ADULTS THAT DON'T KNOW
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A
CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE,
THE US SECRETARY OF STATE, AND
WHAT THE SECRETARY THAT WORKS IN
THEIR OFFICE DOES. AND WE NEED
TO BE THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO
UNDERSTAND THE FULL PROCESS. AND
I THINK THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BE
MORE ENGAGED TO VOTE IF THEY
UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE
INDIVIDUALS DO. AND IT'S
UNFORTUNATE THAT A LOT OF US
DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO OUR COUNCIL
PERSON IS, WHO OUR ASSEMBLY
PERSON. THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHAT AN ASSEMBLY PERSON DOES.
THEY PROBABLY THINK WE ASSEMBLE
THINGS AND SO I THINK IT'S
REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE
ALSO, COME UP WITH A DEVELOP A
PLAN. TO REENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE
IN CIVICS SO THEY LEARN HOW THIS
NOT ONLY HOW THE PROCESS WORKS,
BUT WHAT THESE ACTUAL
INDIVIDUALS DO. SO AND I THANK
YOU. AND WE'LL BE VOTING FOR
THIS TODAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS? ASSEMBLY MEMBER LACKEY
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG MY TOOTH
IS, BUT I'VE BEEN AROUND A
WHILE, I WILL SAY THAT, BACK
WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL, WHICH
WAS SEVEN DECADES AGO, I WAS
SENT TO A PROGRAM CALLED
PRESIDENTIAL CLASSROOM FOR YOUNG
AMERICANS. I WAS SENT TO
WASHINGTON, D.C. FOR THREE DAYS.
I NEVER IMAGINED THAT I WOULD
ACTUALLY BE IN A LEGISLATURE
MYSELF, BUT IT DID INTRODUCE ME
TO CIVIC ENGAGEMENT, AND IT GOT
ME EXCITED ABOUT GOVERNANCE. AND
SO THOSE KIND OF THINGS, YOU
JUST NEVER KNOW WHAT IT CAN LEAD
TO. SO IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO
SUPPORT EARLY REGISTRATION. AND
I, I TRY TO VISIT HIGH SCHOOLS
IN MY DISTRICT TO TRY TO
ENCOURAGE THESE, JUNIORS AND
SENIORS TO BECOME ACTIVE AND
BECOME PART OF THE PROCESS. AND
IT IS VERY, EXCITING TO SEE
THAT, MANY OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY
NOW STARTING TO CONSIDER
BECOMING ENGAGED IN OUR CIVIC
PROCESS. AND I FEEL THAT THIS IS
A THE ONLY THING THAT'S GOING TO
GIVE OUR COUNTRY HOPE, BECAUSE
SOON YOU GUYS WILL BE RUNNING
THIS COUNTRY ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE FROM
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, ASSEMBLY
MEMBER, YOU MAY CLOSE. WELL, I
WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE
WORDS OF SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY FOR
OUR YOUTH. I APPRECIATE THAT
THEY ARE HERE TODAY TO PROVIDE
TESTIMONY. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
STEP, MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE
PRE-REGISTERED AND ON THEIR 18TH
BIRTHDAY, THEY ARE REGISTERED
VOTERS. AND BY THAT TIME, THEY
WILL HAVE SPENT A LITTLE BIT OF
TIME ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT. AND
MAYBE WE'LL SEND THEM ALL TO
D.C, TO THIS PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL
, BUT WITH THAT, I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE
, AND DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO
MOVED. WE HAD A MOTION BY MR.
LOWE. MR. LOWE MOVED. AND WAS IT
A VICE CHAIR? LACKEY. SECONDED.
OKAY. AND, SO I'D LIKE TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD, AS WE KNOW, YOUTH
VOTERS ARE THE LEAST LIKELY AGE
GROUP TO PARTICIPATE IN
ELECTIONS. I'M THRILLED TO SEE
YOU BOTH HERE TODAY. IT'S VERY
EXCITING SEEING YOUNG PEOPLE
COME AND TESTIFY. AND THERE'S A
CLEAR CONNECTION BETWEEN CIVIC
ENGAGEMENT AND VOTER
PARTICIPATION. THAT'S WHY I ALSO
HAVE A BILL TO HELP EDUCATE AND
ENGAGE YOUNG VOTERS, AND IN MY
PAST LIFE AS COUNTY CLERK, I DID
A LOT OF VOTER REGISTRATION AND
OUTREACH AT HIGH SCHOOLS, AND IT
WAS ALWAYS VERY INSPIRING SEEING
OUR FUTURE LEADERS AND
REGISTERING TO VOTE, I'D BE
HONORED TO BE A COAUTHOR IF
YOU'LL HAVE ME. I WOULD LOVE
THAT. AND FOR THESE REASONS, I'M
RECOMMENDING A SUPPORT POSITION.
MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AND BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PELLERIN. HI PELLERIN I LACKEY.
LACKEY I BENNETT. BERMAN.
CERVANTES. ALANIZ LOW. LOW I
JONES-SAWYER I JONES. SAWYER I.
THAT BILL WILL BE ON CALL FOR
OUR ABSENT MEMBERS. BUT THANK
YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. WE'LL
NOW MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AUTHOR.
IN THE ROOM WE HAVE AB 2911 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER MCKENNA.
YOU MAY BEGIN WHEN YOU'RE READY.
GOOD MORNING. HAPPY DENIM DAY.
HAPPY DENIM DAY. MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, I WOULD LIKE TO START
BY, LETTING YOU GUYS KNOW THAT I
WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION ON THIS BILL. AB 2911
WILL DISCOURAGE THE USE OF DARK
MONEY IN LOCAL ELECTION AND EASE
SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL BURDENS ON
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BY REVISING
THE LEVINE ACTS ARBITRARILY LOW
CONTRIBUTION LIMIT, A LIMIT THAT
HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED IN 35
YEARS. CURRENT LAW SEVERELY
LIMITS A LOCAL LOCAL CANDIDATES
ABILITY TO RUN A COMPETITIVE
CAMPAIGN, COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY
WITH VOTERS, AND HAS RESULTED IN
AN INCREASE IN THE USE OF NON
CANDIDATE CONTROLLED INDEPENDENT
EXPENDITURES FINANCED WITH DARK
MONEY. A 2021 STUDY PUBLISHED IN
THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL
APPLIED ECONOMICS CONCLUDED,
CONCLUDED THAT POLICIES THAT SET
LOW CONTRIBUTION LIMITS REDUCE
THE CONCENTRATION OF POLITICAL
POWER IN THE HANDS OF RICHER
INDIVIDUALS. ADDITIONALLY IN
JUST THE PAST TWO YEARS,
COMPLIANCE WITH SB 1439 HAS COST
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS RESOURCES THAT WOULD BE
BETTER SPENT SUPPORTING LOCAL
PUBLIC SAFETY PROGRAMS,
INFRASTRUCTURE, OR EFFORTS TO
ADDRESS CALIFORNIA'S HOUSING AND
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS. HERE TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF AB 2911 IS
JENNIFER PEREZ, PRESIDENT OF
CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CITY
ASSOCIATION AND MAYOR OF THE
CITY OF NORWALK, AND DYLAN
ELLIOTT, ON BEHALF OF FRESNO
COUNTY, THANK YOU. EACH WILL
HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. AND GOOD MORNING.
DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS.
AS SAID, I AM JENNIFER PEREZ,
COUNCIL MEMBER FROM THE CITY OF
NORWALK AND INCOMING PRESIDENT
FOR THE CALIFORNIA CONTRACT
CITIES ASSOCIATION, CA FOR
SHORT. IT IS HONOR TO BE HERE
TODAY TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF AB
2911 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER MCKENNA.
CA IS AN ASSOCIATION COMPRISED
OF 80 MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ADVOCATING
FOR OUR MEMBER CITIES AND 8
MILLION RESIDENTS. SINCE 1957,
CA HAS BEEN DEDICATED TO
PROMOTING THE INTERESTS OF OUR
CITIES AND RESIDENTS, AND TODAY,
I'M PROUD TO CONTINUE THAT
TRADITION. AB 2911 SEEKS TO
INCREASE THE LEVINE ACT FROM
$250 TO $1500. THIS INCREASE IS
CRUCIAL AS TODAY'S LOW LIMITS
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS
CANDIDATES WITH LIMITED
FINANCIAL STABILITIES CREATING
NEW BARRIERS FOR LOW INCOME
RESIDENTS SHOULD THEY WANT TO
RUN FOR OFFICE. MEANWHILE,
WEALTHIER CANDIDATES CAN EASILY
SELF FINANCE THEIR CAMPAIGNS,
CIRCUMVENTING THESE LIMITS. THIS
DISPARITY UNDERMINES THE
PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS AND
EQUALITY IN OUR ELECTORAL
PROCESS. THERE OUGHT TO BE EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL QUALIFYING
CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS TO RUN FOR
OFFICE IF THEY WISH TO DO SO,
NOTABLY, CA IS GENERALLY
SUPPORTIVE OF RESPONSIBLE
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORMS FOR
ELECTED OFFICIALS AT BOTH THE
STATE AND LOCAL LEVELS. HOWEVER,
WE DO NOT FILL THE CURRENT
LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY THE LEVINE
ACT OFFER SUCH FRAMEWORK.
INSTEAD, IT CURRENT POLICIES
HAVE INADVERTENTLY CREATED MORE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR DARK MONEY IN
LOCAL POLITICS. CONTRIBUTIONS
THAT WOULD TYPICALLY GO TO A
CANDIDATE CANDIDATE'S CAMPAIGN
ARE NOW MORE LIKELY TO BE
REDIRECTED TO INDEPENDENT
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER THIRD
PARTY CAMPAIGNS, MAKING THE
MONEY EXTREMELY HARD TO FOLLOW.
UPPING THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS
TO $1,500 WOULD NOT ONLY PROMOTE
MORE DIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS, BUT
THE POLICY CHANGE WOULD ALSO
INCREASE TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY IN CAMPAIGN
FINANCING AND STRENGTHEN
DEMOCRACY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. NEXT WITNESS,
PLEASE. TWO MINUTES PLEASE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR. COMMITTEE MEMBERS, DYLAN
ELLIOTT HERE SPEAKING WITH YOU
ON BEHALF OF FRESNO COUNTY, I
WANT TO YOU KNOW, FIRST AND
FOREMOST, THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, KEEP MY
COMMENTS BRIEF, OBVIOUSLY, AS
MENTIONED BY THE AUTHOR, ONE OF
THE CHALLENGES THAT HAS BEEN
EXPERIENCED AS A RESULT OF SB
1439 IS AN INCREASED STAFF TIME
AND BARRIERS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
PURPOSES THAT HAVE LED TO AN
INCREASED COST. ADDITIONALLY THE
LEGISLATION LIMITS CANDIDATES,
CANDIDATES FROM ELECTED OFFICES,
FROM RECEIVING A CERTAIN LEVEL
OF FUNDING THAT MAY BE ESSENTIAL
TO THE SUCCESS OF THEIR
CAMPAIGNS, AND MAY FURTHER
INHIBIT QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS
FROM SEEKING PUBLIC OFFICE.
THESE LEVELS OF RESTRICTION
PROMOTE INACTION AND RELUCTANCE
TO SUPPORT CANDIDATES THAT MAY
MOVE PROJECTS FORWARD FOR THE
GREATER BENEFIT OF THE
COMMUNITY. AND AS I SAID, IN
ADDITION, THIS LEGISLATION HAS,
YOU KNOW, INCREASED STAFF TIME
DEDICATED TO TRACKING
REQUIREMENTS AND INFORMATION AND
INCREASING THIS QUALITY COULD
CERTAINLY HELP THE COUNTY OUT.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE
ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO REGISTER
THEIR POSITION IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL? YOU COULD STEP UP TO THE
MIC AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. GOOD
MORNING. SILVIO FERRARA, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MCKAY
CARNEY, ON BEHALF OF LOS ANGELES
COUNTY, IN SUPPORT. KAREN STOUT,
ON BEHALF OF POWER CALIFORNIA.
ACTION IN SUPPORT. MIKE MONNING
ON BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING
TRADES IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. ARE THERE ANY PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL? IF THERE ARE, STEP ON UP
AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES TO MAKE
YOUR TESTIMONY GOOD. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M
KEVIN WOLF, CHAIR OF THE
CALIFORNIA CLEAN MONEY ACTION
FUND. I SPEAK TO YOU JOINING
COMMON CAUSE AND STRONG
OPPOSITION TO AB 2911 AS
WRITTEN. TWO YEARS AGO, THE
LEGISLATURE AND NEARLY ALL OF
YOU PASSED IT. SB 1439 TO EXTEND
CALIFORNIA'S LONG STANDING
LEVINE ACT PAY TO PLAY
PROTECTIONS TO LOCAL ELECTED
OFFICIALS. YOU PROPERLY VOTED TO
STOP DEVELOPERS, CITY
CONTRACTORS AND OTHER SPECIAL
INTERESTS FROM GIVING MORE THAN
$250 TO LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS
PRESIDING OVER THE PERMITS AND
CONTRACTS IN DOING SO, YOU TOOK
A STRONG STANCE AGAINST THE
APPEARANCE OF CORRUPTION IN
LOCAL POLITICS. MOST OF YOUR
CONSTITUENTS PROBABLY THINK 250
IS TOO MUCH, AND THAT'S WHY A
NUMBER OF CITIES ACTUALLY
COMPLETELY BAN THE CONTRIBUTIONS
FROM DEVELOPERS AND CITY
CONTRACTORS TO ELECTED OFFICIALS
THAT ARE PRESIDING OVER THOSE
DECISIONS. AND THAT'S WHY WE
WHY, THOUGH WE APPRECIATE THE
AUTHORS RECENT AMENDMENTS, WE
MUST ASK YOU TO REJECT AB 2911
BECAUSE IT WOULD INVALIDATE YOUR
VOTES ON SB 1439 AND MAKE THE
LEVINE ACT COMPLETELY MOOT. AND
MOST CITIES, FOR EXAMPLE,
MOUNTAIN VIEW HAS $1,000 LIMIT.
SANTA CLARA HAS $630 LIMIT. SAN
DIEGO HAS A $750 LIMIT. OXNARD
HAS A $500 LIMIT, AND THIS WOULD
INCREASE THE THRESHOLD SIX TIMES
FROM 250 TO $1500. THE
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE ASKED YOU
AND THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE
AND YOU YOURSELF SHOWED GREAT
RESOLVE BY VOTING TO SUPPORT SB
1439, VOTING NOW TO GUT IT AND
THE REST OF THE LEVINE ACT BY
EXPLODING THE THRESHOLD TO
$1,500, WOULD RISK TAKING AWAY
THE CONFIDENCE THAT EACH OF YOU
GAVE TO VOTERS THAT THE
LEGISLATURE WOULD CARE ABOUT
LIMITING PAY TO PLAY. WHILE WE
SUPPORT INDEXING $250
CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFLATION, WE
ASK THAT EXCEPT FOR THAT CHANGE
THAT YOU STAND BY YOUR PREVIOUS
VOTE ON SB 1439 AND PLEASE
REJECT THE APPEARANCE OF
CORRUPTION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
BY REJECTING AB 2911 AS WRITTEN.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS PLEASE. GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS, I'M
LAUREL BRODZINSKY ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA COMMON CAUSE.
RESPECTFULLY IN OPPOSITION. WE
WERE A STRONG SUPPORTER OF SB
1439 GLASER, WHICH EXTENDED THE
LEVINE ACT'S PROVISIONS TO LOCAL
ELECTED OFFICIALS. AND WHILE WE
DO APPRECIATE THE AUTHORS
AMENDMENTS THAT GREATLY REDUCED
THE SCOPE OF THIS BILL, WE DO
STILL THINK THAT THE THRESHOLD
IS TOO HIGH. BUT RECOGNIZE THAT
IT HASN'T BEEN CHANGED SINCE THE
LEVINE ACT WAS PASSED IN THE
1980S. AND SO DO THINK THAT
THERE'S SOME ROOM TO WORK ON A
POTENTIAL INCREASE. BUT JUST,
BELIEVE THAT THE 1500 IS TOO
HIGH, BUT ARE HOPING TO CONTINUE
THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN THE FUTURE.
ANY ANYBODY ELSE IN THE ROOM
WHO'S IN OPPOSITION THAT WANTS
TO REGISTER YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION? PLEASE STEP UP TO
THE MIC. GOOD MORNING. COMMITTEE
CHANEL FREEMAN, ON BEHALF OF THE
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. ANYONE ELSE IN THE
ROOM SEEING NONE. WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SURE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN. A COUPLE
OF QUESTIONS. SO A HYPOTHETICAL.
SO IF I NOT TOTALLY A
HYPOTHETICAL IF I'M REMODELING
MY HOUSE, AND A NEIGHBOR
COMPLAINS AND, FILES AN APPEAL
ON, ON SOMETHING, AND THEN MY,
PROJECT GOES IN FRONT OF THE
CITY COUNCIL. DOES THAT TRIGGER
THE LEVINE ACT? AND DOES THAT
MEAN THAT THAT I CAN ONLY MAKE
CONTRIBUTIONS UP TO WHATEVER IS
ALLOWED UNDER THE LEVINE ACT? I
MAYBE THAT'S TOO TECHNICAL. I
THINK THAT MIGHT BE TOO
TECHNICAL, BUT I WOULD ASSUME,
YES, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WOULD
BE A TRIGGER THAT GOES IN FRONT
OF THE ELECTED BODY. RIGHT? YES,
AND SO AND THEN THE LEVINE ACT
WAS ADOPTED IN 1982. YES. AND IT
WAS $250. IT WAS SET IN 1982,
AND IF I APOLOGIZE, I WALKED IN
IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR
PRESENTATION, WOLF. BUT YOU
WERE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
AND YOU WERE YOU WERE TALKING
THROUGH THE DIFFERENT
CONTRIBUTION LIMITS OF DIFFERENT
COMMUNITIES, BUT THOSE WOULD
STILL APPLY, RIGHT? THE
CONTRIBUTION LIMITS IN THOSE
COMMUNITIES OVERRIDE THE LEVINE
ACT. I DON'T THINK SO. I DON'T
THINK SO. NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE STAFF
ANALYSIS IS THAT IF THERE'S A
LOCAL CONTRIBUTION LIMIT, THEN
THEN THAT APPLIES. AND SO EVEN
IF WE PASS THIS BILL THAT ALLOWS
FOR $1,500, WHICH I THINK IS TOO
HIGH, AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN A
MINUTE, THE CITIZEN GO AHEAD
PLEASE. THE CITIES AND COUNTIES
STILL HAVE THE, THE TO LOWER IT.
RIGHT. NOT TO MAKE IT HIGHER,
BUT THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO
LOWER IT. YES. IF THE CITIES AND
COUNTIES WANT IT. SO IF A CITY
HAS A $500 CONTRIBUTION LIMIT,
THEN THAT STILL APPLIES NO
MATTER WHAT. AND NOBODY CAN. AND
THIS WON'T CHANGE THAT, RIGHT?
THEY CAN'T GO ABOVE THE $1,500.
BUT THEY CAN THEY COULD STAY
UNDER IT. RIGHT. YEAH RIGHT. AND
THE CITY COULD COULD. YEAH.
EXACTLY, LET ME KNOW IF YOU
DISAGREE WITH WITH THAT
ANALYSIS, BUT THAT'S MY I'M NOT
SURE, BUT I THINK THAT'S
CORRECT. OKAY, SO CITIES STILL
HAVE LOCAL CONTROL. YES, AND IF
CITIES STILL WANT TO ESTABLISH
LOWER LIMITS, THEY STILL HAVE
THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. 250 WAS
ESTABLISHED IN 82. I NOW SEE
HERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH THAT
THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $800 TODAY,
SO WHAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE,
THE AUTHOR TO DO, I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THE BILL TO SORT OF AS A
COURTESY VOTE TO KEEP THE
CONVERSATION GOING. I THINK 250,
IF A NEIGHBOR OF MINE APPEALS A
PROJECT, AND THAT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING, AND I'D LOVE TO
HEAR MORE, YOU KNOW, AFTER THIS,
IF FOLKS DISAGREE. BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING IS, IS IF A
PROJECT COMES BEFORE AN ELECTED
BODY THAT TRIGGERS THE LEVINE
ACT. AND SO I THINK 250 THAT WAS
SET IN 82 IS TOO LOW. I THINK
1500 IS PROBABLY TOO HIGH. I
THINK THERE'S, THERE'S I'M
GETTING A DIRTY LOOK. I'M NOT NO
, I'M NOT GIVING. I'M JUST LIKE,
I LIKE THE I LIKE THE IDEA OF
SAYING, HEY, WHAT WAS LIKE $250
IN $1,982 IS X IS 18 OR IS 800.
MAYBE YOU DO A LITTLE HIGHER,
MAYBE YOU DO A LITTLE LOWER, AND
SO THAT I THINK IS SORT OF A
SWEET SPOT THAT I HOPE YOU I
HAVE MADE A COMMITMENT TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION. I, I'M NOT A MEMBER
THAT, NECESSARILY NEGOTIATES A
BILL ON IN COMMITTEE. NO, OF
COURSE, BUT I WILL DEFINITELY
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION ON THIS BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, WE WANT TO COME TO A
CONCLUSION WHERE EVERYONE'S
HAPPY, BUT REALLY AND TRULY MY
FEAR IS THE DARK MONEY, MY FEAR
IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THOSE
LIMITS SO LOW THAT THAT OUTSIDE
SOURCES CAN COME INTO THE
CITIES, WHICH IS HAPPENING IN MY
DISTRICT, COMING TO THE CITY,
ESPECIALLY WHEN I'M LOOKING AT
MY SCHOOL BOARDS AND THEY COULD
COME INTO THE CITY AND THEY
COULD JUST PUT IN WHATEVER,
BECAUSE IF WE IF WE'RE GOING TO
REALLY TALK ABOUT CLEANING UP,
MONEY, MONEY IN POLITICS, WE
HAVE TO CLEAN UP INDEPENDENT
EXPENDITURES BECAUSE THEN MY, MY
, MY, MY MOTHER THAT WANTS TO
THAT'S IN THE PTA THAT WANTS TO
RUN FROM SCHOOL FOR SCHOOL
BOARD. IF HER VIEWS ARE NOT
WHERE PEOPLE WANT OUTSIDE FORCES
WANT THEM TO BE, SHE CAN'T WIN
BECAUSE THEY COULD COME IN AND
PUT IN A LOT OF MONEY ON THAT
INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE SIDE. I
HEAR YOU SO, SO I WORRY A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT HOW KIND OF NORMAL
PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST DOING PRO
PROJECTS ON THEIR HOMES, WHICH
WE SUPPORT AND WANT TO HAPPEN,
CAN GET CAUGHT UP IN THIS AND
ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE HAVE WHAT I
THINK IS, IS AN ARBITRARILY LOW
LIMIT. THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN
1982 AND HASN'T BEEN INCREASED
SINCE THEN, I ALSO REALLY WANT
TO DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM
TALKING ABOUT PLAY, TO PLAY PAY
TO PLAY CORRUPTION IN POLITICS
LIKE IT'S, IF THAT EXISTS, THEN
THAT SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED AND,
AND PROSECUTED. BUT BUT THAT IS
NOT THE CASE. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE
THROW THOSE ACCUSATIONS AROUND.
AND I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT
THAT, FRANKLY, LOWERS PEOPLE'S
PERCEPTION OF GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS, WHEN THAT MIGHT NOT
BE WARRANTED. RIGHT. I GET
CONTRIBUTIONS ALL THE TIME, AND
I VOTE THE OPPOSITE WAY OF HOW
THOSE FOLKS WANT ALL THE TIME. I
DID IT WHEN I WAS ON THE CITY
COUNCIL. I DO IT IN THE STATE
ASSEMBLY. I REPORT IT, IT'S ALL
PUBLIC, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I
AGREE THAT LIMITS ARE ARE
IMPORTANT, BUT THAT'S NOT KIND
OF ACCUSED. EVERYBODY WHO TAKES
ANY CONTRIBUTION, OF BEING
CORRUPT, AND, YOU KNOW,
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S,
COMMITMENT TO KEEP, KEEP WORKING
ON THIS BECAUSE I THINK
INCREASING THE LIMIT MAKES SENSE
. I THINK THIS IS TOO HIGH RIGHT
NOW, I THINK 250 IS TOO LOW, AND
, APPRECIATE YOU CONTINUING TO
WORK WITH FOLKS TO, YOU KNOW,
TYING IT TO CPI FROM 82. THERE'S
SOME SIMPLE LOGIC IN THAT. AND
IT'S SOMETHING THAT, IS SORT OF
HARD TO ARGUE WITH, I THINK,
FROM A, FROM A LOGICAL
STANDPOINT. SO I'M GOING TO VOTE
FOR THE BILL TODAY. REALLY
APPRECIATE YOU CONTINUING TO
WORK OUT THE DETAILS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS? ASSEMBLY
MEMBER FOR THE OPPOSITION,
CONTINUE ON A LITTLE BIT OF THE
COMMENTARY FROM MR. BERMAN. IS
THE OPPOSITION ON THE, THE, THE,
THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF THE AMOUNT
FROM THE 250 TO THE NUMBER OF
THE 1500, IN YOUR TESTIMONY OR
IT SOUNDED MORE ABOUT THAT. THE
OPPOSITION WAS SUCH THAT THERE'S
A CORROSIVE NATURE TO MONEY. SO
FUNDAMENTALLY IT'S JUST A
PRINCIPLE OF, CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS AND ELECTIONS
POINT BLANK THAT I THINK WE
MIGHT HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFER
DIFFERENT VIEWS, DEPENDING ON
WHICH ORGANIZATION CALIFORNIA
CLEAN MONEY CAMPAIGN OR
CALIFORNIA COMMON CAUSE.
CALIFORNIA COMMON CAUSE IS
WILLING TO WORK ON AN ADJUSTMENT
TO THE THRESHOLD, AS ARE WE, BUT
IT IS A APPEARANCE OF
CORRUPTION. SO IT'S NOT JUST
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE CORRUPTING
FOR A LOT OF FOLKS, BUT IT CAN
APPEAR TO EVERYBODY THAT'S ON A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY
THAT'S BEING PROVIDED TO
SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO OVERSEE
A CONTRACT AND OVERSEE AN
AGREEMENT, AND WE DON'T NEED AN
APPEARANCE ANY MORE. APPEARANCE
OF CORRUPTION THAT'S ALREADY
GOING ON AND ON. DARK MONEY. IF
YOU REALLY WANT TO SWAMP THE
THING IN DARK MONEY, IT'S $1,500
ISN'T A BIG DEAL. YOU'LL JUST
PUT IN $10,000 AND RUN RIGHT
OVER IT, AND YOU STILL RUN A
DARK MONEY CAMPAIGN. SO I DON'T
THINK THIS IS A PROTECTION
AGAINST DARK MONEY. IT'S A
PROTECTION AGAINST APPEARANCE
THAT PEOPLE ARE DIRECTLY
INVESTING IN A LEGISLATOR BY
MAKING A LARGE CONTRIBUTION WAY
LARGER THAN MOST OF THE CITIES
THAT WE HAVE. AND SO THAT I
THINK IT'S AN APPEARANCE PROBLEM
, THE QUESTION THAT I'D HAVE
THEN IN FOLLOWING THAT ARGUMENT
IS ABOUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY
EFFORT. THEN, ON A CONTRIBUTION
TO A CANDIDATE, THIS IS PUBLICLY
DISCLOSED AND THERE IS
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THAT
CANDIDATE TO OWN UP TO THE
APPEARANCE BECAUSE THERE'S AN
OWNERSHIP. BUT SIMILARLY, THIS
COMMITTEE HAS ALSO SEEN THAT THE
CONCEPT OF A LEAKY BUCKET, THAT
YOU PLUG ONE HOLE, THEN THE
MONEY GOES ELSEWHERE WOULD GO TO
AN INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE
WITHOUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY. DO
YOU AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT?
YES, EXCEPT THE LOCAL PAPERS ARE
NOT COVERING THINGS. AND SO YOU
DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT THIS IS
GOING ON. BUT THE CANDIDATE
KNOWS THEY GOT THE MONEY, BUT
THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW BECAUSE
WE'RE NOT INFORMING THE PUBLIC
ABOUT THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL MUCH
ANYMORE. SO IF, FROM, CLEAN
MONEY CAMPAIGN, IS THAT RIGHT?
YES IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT
THAT, THEN, THAT THAT IS TRUE,
THAT THERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY FROM
THE CANDIDATE, WHEREAS THERE'S
NOT THE ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE
INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE,
WOULDN'T YOU PREFER FOR THE
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE CANDIDATE
VERSUS THAT OF AN INDEPENDENT
EXPENDITURE WHERE THERE'S NO
ACCOUNTABILITY? I'D LIKE TO
HAVE, THE POWER OF VERY WEALTHY,
INTERESTS NOT OVERWHELMING THE
ABILITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO OPPOSE
A PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S VERY
DIFFICULT TO RUN IN AN ELECTION
WITHOUT MONEY. AND $1,500 IS A
LOT OF MONEY IN A LOT OF CITIES.
AND YOU CAN GET ALL KINDS OF
MONEY IN THROUGH THESE PROJECTS,
AND IT OVERWHELMS THE ABILITY
FOR THE OPPOSITION TO BE ABLE TO
RUN A CAMPAIGN WHEN SO MUCH
MONEY IS COMING IN FROM THE
CONTRACTORS AND THE DEVELOPERS
INTO TO THE CANDIDATE'S COFFERS.
BUT SORRY, I'M JUST TRYING TO
FOLLOW THE BECAUSE I SHARE, THE,
THE CONCEPT OF THE ORGANIZATION
AND THE EFFORTS. BUT GIVEN THE
REALITIES OF CITIZENS UNITED, WE
ARE IN WE'RE WE'RE CONSTRUED BY
THE REALITIES THAT EXIST. WHERE
ARE THOSE? WE'RE ON THE DISCLOSE
ACT. IT SHOULD BE DISCLOSED. WE
NEED IF, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT
DISCLOSING IN THEIR ADS AND
THEIR ADVERTISING THAT THEY'RE
NOT, WHO'S PAYING FOR THEM, THEN
THE THRESHOLD THAT TRIGGERS THE
DISCLOSURE NEEDS TO BE DONE. AND
SO THAT WE HAVE A LOWER
DISCLOSURE RATE SO THAT WE KNOW.
BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT KNOWN.
SURE. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO
CONCLUDE, I WOULD MUCH PREFER
THE ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE
INDIVIDUAL RATHER THAN ZERO
ACCOUNTABILITY FROM AN
INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE.
UNDERSTANDING THE RESTRAINTS
THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY IN, THAT
THERE'S GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY
FROM AN INDIVIDUAL WHO ACCEPTS
AND REPORTS VERSUS THAT. AND SO
IF THERE'S A CONVERSATION ABOUT
THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE
INDIVIDUAL VERSUS INDEPENDENT
EXPENDITURE VERSUS THAT OF THE
THRESHOLD OF THE ACTUAL NUMBER
THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT IT
SOUNDS LIKE CONCEPTUALLY HERE'S
AS OPPOSED TO THAT OF MONEY IN
ELECTIONS ITSELF. BUT
UNFORTUNATELY THAT THAT IS THE
REALITY THAT WE'RE IN. BUT I
JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION,
CLARIFICATION ON THE POSITION.
AND PRESENTLY THE CANDIDATES,
HAVE MORE ACCOUNTABILITY BECAUSE
THE MONEY IS COMING TO THEM THAN
IF IT GOES INTO DARK MONEY. AND
THE PUBLIC DOES NOT KNOW WHERE
THAT MONEY IS COMING FROM. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS?
LET ME JUST REAL QUICK. SURE. I
WILL SAY I, I TOTALLY APPRECIATE
YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE INFLUENCE
OF MONEY IN POLITICS. I
PERSONALLY WOULD LOVE TO SEE US
INVESTIGATE MORE SERIOUSLY A
PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS,
WHICH, BUT UNTIL WE DO THAT, WE
HAVE THIS, SO I, YOU KNOW, I
THINK EVERYBODY SORT OF,
PHILOSOPHICALLY ALIGNED, JUST
DISAGREEING ON SOME OF THESE
DETAILS, WHICH HAPPENS. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS BILL?
I'LL MOVE IT. WE'LL TAKE A
MOTION FROM AMEND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ALANIZ, BUT WE'LL LET
ASSEMBLY MEMBER MCKENNA CLOSE,
PLEASE. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO
WE HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ALANIZ, DO WE HAVE A
SECOND, SECOND, SECOND BY VICE
CHAIR LACKEY? AND, YOU KNOW,
CERTAINLY. THANK YOU TO THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD. CALIFORNIA HAS STRONG
CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS THAT
ENSURE ROBUST CAMPAIGN
DISCLOSURE, AND ALTHOUGH I
WASN'T IN OFFICE WHEN THE
LEGISLATURE APPROVED SB 1430
NINE INCHES 2022, THE PASSAGE OF
THAT BILL SIGNIFICANTLY
STRENGTHENED CALIFORNIA'S
CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS. AND AS IS
OFTEN THE CASE WITH MAJOR
CHANGES IN STATE LAW, THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF SB 1439 HAS
CREATED SOME SIGNIFICANT
UNANTICIPATED CHALLENGES FOR
THOSE WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THIS
BILL AND JUST A REMINDER THAT,
THE CITY STILL HAVE THE ABILITY
TO HAVE THAT LOWER LIMIT IF
THAT'S WHAT BEST MEETS THE NEEDS
OF THAT CITY. AND WE'VE SPOKEN
TO THE AUTHOR AS WELL, AS FAR
AS, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION TO COME UP WITH THAT
EXACT THRESHOLD NUMBER THAT
WORKS FOR EVERYBODY AND KEEPING
IT MAYBE CLOSER TO THE ADJUSTED
INFLATION RATE FROM, WHAT WAS
IT, 1982. SO BUT TODAY I'M
SUPPORTING THIS BILL. AND TO
KEEP THAT CONVERSATION GOING AND
BETWEEN THE AUTHOR AND THE
RELEVANT STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT WAYS
TO ADDRESS THOSE COMPLIANCE
CHALLENGES IN SB 1439. SO I'M
RECOMMENDING A SUPPORT POSITION.
MADAM SECRETARY, YOU MAY CALL
THE ROLL ON AB 2911 BY MCKENNA.
THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS PELLERIN
A PELLERIN A LACKEY A LACKEY I
BENNETT. BERMAN. BERMAN I
CERVANTES. ALANIZ. ALANIZ I LOW
LOW I JONES. SAWYER. JONES.
SAWYER I. THAT BILL IS OUT 6 TO
0. BUT WE'LL LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN
FOR OUR ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. WHO'S OUR NEXT?
GUEST OKAY, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR
NEXT AUTHOR IN THE ROOM. WE'VE
GOT, ASSEMBLY MEMBER VALENCIA
WITH AB 2803. IT'S AT THE. YOU
MAY BEGIN WHEN YOU'RE READY.
WELCOME YOU'VE GOT YOUR DENIM ON
Tê. I DO, I DO. IT'S DENIM DAY,
RIGHT? YES. EXCITED BUENOS DIAS,
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I JUST
WANT TO START BY THANKING THE
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR DILIGENCE ON
THIS BILL. WE WENT BACK AND
FORTH A COUPLE TIMES, AND I
THINK WE FOUND A GOOD WORKING
FOUNDATION, AB 2803 RESTRICTS
THE USE OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS FOR
CANDIDATES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS
WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF
PUBLIC CRIMES OR FRAUD. IF A
CANDIDATE OR ELECTED OFFICIAL
USES CAMPAIGN FUNDS IN DEFENSE
OF THESE CHARGES AND IS
CONVICTED, THEY MUST REIMBURSE
THE CAMPAIGN ACCOUNT. CAMPAIGN
DONORS EXPECT THEIR
CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE USED TO
SUPPORT THEIR CANDIDATE OR
ELECTED OFFICIAL, BUT CURRENTLY
THE LAW LACKS CLARITY WHEN FUNDS
ARE USED FOR DISHONORABLE LEGAL
CASES. CAMPAIGN FUNDS FOR LEGAL
CASES HAVE BEEN USED IN A NUMBER
OF HIGH PROFILE CASES THROUGHOUT
THE STATE'S HISTORY, WHETHER
IT'S AT THE LEGISLATURE OR EVEN
MOST RECENTLY BACK HOME IN
ANAHEIM. THESE ELECTED OFFICIALS
NOT ONLY BETRAYED THE PUBLIC'S
TRUST, BUT ALSO UNDERMINED THE
DONOR INTEGRITY BY USING THESE
DONATIONS TO FIGHT IMMORAL
CHARGES WHILE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,
CANDIDATES ARE ALREADY
PROHIBITED FROM RUNNING FOR
OFFICE IF THEY HAVE BEEN
CONVICTED OF PUBLIC CRIMES. SO
IN MY OPINION, THERE'S NO REASON
WHY THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO
SPEND CAMPAIGN FUNDS ON ACTS
THAT THEY HAVE DONE AND BEEN
CONVICTED OF. IT'S MY BELIEF
THAT I, IF YOU'RE AN ELECTED
OFFICE, IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
TO OWN UP TO THE ACTIONS AND THE
VOTES THAT YOU TAKE. AND IF YOU
DO SOMETHING THAT'S IMMORAL OR
WRONG, DEPENDING ON THE CRIMES
THAT ARE LISTED IN THIS BILL,
YOU SHOULD HAVE TO, PAY IN TERMS
OF THE FINANCIAL AND LEGAL
COMPONENT THROUGH YOUR OWN MEANS
WITH ME TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY
TODAY. MR. BILL MITCHELL, LAWYER
AND LONGTIME ORANGE COUNTY GOOD
GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE. GOOD
MORNING, MADAM CHAIR. FELLOW
MEMBERS, AS ASSEMBLYMAN, LINDSAY
JUST SAID, I'VE BEEN I'M A
PRACTICING LAWYER FOR A VERY,
VERY INVOLVED IN GOOD GOVERNMENT
INITIATIVES IN ORANGE COUNTY. IT
MAY SURPRISE SOME OF YOU THAT
ORANGE COUNTY HAS BEEN A LEADER
IN GOOD GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES.
EVERYTHING FROM CAMPAIGN FINANCE
REFORM, GIFT BAN ORDINANCE, CODE
OF ETHICS. AND THEN WE WERE A
LAGGARD. BUT WE DID FINALLY
ADOPT A CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND
ETHICS COMMISSION. AND THE
PERSON I WORKED WITH WAS A WOMAN
NAMED SHIRLEY GRINDLE. SHE'S
BEEN A STEADFAST, GOOD
GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE, AND I'VE
HAD THE PLEASURE OF BEING HER
WINGMAN. AND, ROB IN TO HER
BATMAN FOR OVER 30 YEARS. AND
IT'S A PRIVILEGE TODAY TO BE
HERE WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER
VALENCIA IN SUPPORT OF AB 2803,
THE WISDOM OF THIS LEGISLATION
SEEMS SELF-EVIDENT, AND CLOSES
AN A HOLE IN THE LAW THAT SEEMS
TO HAVE BEEN UNINTENDED, BOTH
VOTERS AND CAMPAIGN DONORS DO
NOT AND SHOULD NOT EXPECT THAT
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS SHOULD BE
USED FOR LEGAL EXPENSES OF
ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO HAVE BEEN
CONVICTED OF SERIOUS CRIMES, THE
KEY WORD HERE IN THIS BILL IS
CONVICTED. THIS BILL DOES NOT
BECOME EFFECTIVE UNLESS THE
ELECTED OFFICIAL IS CONVICTED.
THE OTHER KEY WORDS ARE PUBLIC
CRIMES AND A FELONY INVOLVING
FRAUD. THAT'S A HIGH STANDARD.
THE BAR HAS BEEN SET HIGH. THE
COMMITTEE AND THE ASSEMBLYMAN
HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF DEFINING
THIS BILL. SO IT'S THERE'S THE
APPLICATION IS NARROW BECAUSE IF
AN ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS ENGAGED
IN THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT, THEY
HAVE VIOLATED THE PUBLIC TRUST
AND THEY HAVE UNDERMINED THE
INTEGRITY OF THE POLITICAL
SYSTEM TO ALLOW AN ELECTED
OFFICIAL WHO'S BEEN CONVICTED OF
A SERIOUS CRIME TO USE CAMPAIGN
FUNDS IS SUBVERTING BOTH THE
LEGISLATIVE AND THE ELECTIVE
PROCESS, AND IS ESCAPING
CONSEQUENCES FOR THEIR OWN
WRONGDOING. SO LET'S WRAP UP.
THANK YOU. SO I URGE SUPPORT AND
AN AYE VOTE ON THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE
HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BERMAN, A SECOND BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LOWE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D
LIKE TO REGISTER THEIR POSITION
OF SUPPORT? IF SO, STEP UP TO
THE MIC WITH YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION SEEING NONE. ANY
PRIMARY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL, OR ANYONE WHO JUST
WANTS TO REGISTER OPPOSITION,
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES, SAWYER,
IF YOU JUST, KIND OF DELINEATE
IT MAY ALL BE THE SAME BETWEEN,
SOMEONE WHO SETS UP A LEGAL
DEFENSE FUND VERSUS THEIR
CAMPAIGN FUNDS. IS THAT OR ARE
THEY CONSIDERED ONE IN THE SAME
OR OR ARE YOU SEPARATING THE
TWO? THIS BILL, ADDRESSES
CAMPAIGN COMMITTEES. THE LEGAL
DEFENSE FUND IS A SEPARATE
ENTITY. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO
CLARIFICATION. THAT IS NOT
COVERED WITHIN THIS BILL. IT'S
SPECIFIC TO THE ELECTED
OFFICIALS CAMPAIGN FUND. OKAY.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE
MEMBERS? SEEING NONE. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER VALENCIA. YOU MAY CLOSE.
PUBLIC TRUST IS FUNDAMENTAL TO
DEMOCRACY. AND I THINK THIS IS A
GOOD STEP IN CONTINUING THAT
PUBLIC TRUST. RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR A YES VOTE. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. SO WHEN MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC MAKE CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES,
THEY GENERALLY DO SO TO SUPPORT
THOSE CANDIDATES CAMPAIGNS FOR
OFFICE AND NOT TO DEFRAY LEGAL
EXPENSES. WHEN PUBLIC OFFICIALS
VIOLATE THE PUBLIC TRUST. SO
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD. THE BILL
HELPS TO ENSURE CANDIDATES AND
ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR ANY CRIMES THAT
BETRAY THE INTEGRITY OF THE
OFFICE THEY HOLD. AND FOR THAT
REASON, I'M RECOMMENDING A
SUPPORT POSITION. SO WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON AB 2803 VALENCIA. THE MOTION
IS TO PASS AND BE RE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PELLERIN. HI PELLERIN I LAKI
LAKI I BENNETT. BERMAN. YES.
BERMAN. YES CERVANTES. ALANIZ
LOW. LOW. I JONES. SAWYER.
JONES. SAWYER. I THAT BILL IS
OUT 5 TO 0. BUT WE'LL LEAVE THE
ROLL OPEN FOR OUR ABSENT
MEMBERS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE
NOW ARE DOWN TO OUR LAST TWO
BILLS, BOTH WITH SITTING MEMBERS
HERE AND MR. JONES. SAWYER, YOU
WERE HERE FIRST THIS MORNING. SO
YOU'RE UP. THANK YOU. AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES SAWYER IS
PRESENTING AB, 3123 TODAY, AND
YOU MAY BEGIN WHEN YOU'RE READY.
I'LL MOVE AS FAST. MOVE THE BILL
. I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND TO
NØ. SHORTEN MY SPEECH, THANK
YOU. MEMBERS AND, CHAIR, I WOULD
LIKE TO START BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS, I,
REPRESENTING AB 3123, WHICH
SEEKS TO ENSURE THAT ETHICS LAWS
THAT GOVERN ELECTED OFFICIALS
STATEWIDE APPLY EQUALLY TO LOS
ANGELES BOARD, METRO BOARD OF
DIRECTORS. WITH THE RECENT
PASSAGE OF SB 1439, WHICH
AMENDED THE LEVINE ACT IN 2023,
THE CALIFORNIA MADE CLEAR THAT
THERE SHOULD BE A UNIFORM ETHICS
LAW GOVERNING CONTRACT DECISIONS
BY LOCAL AND STATE OFFICIALS,
REGARDLESS OF THE COMPOSITION OF
A BOARD. HOWEVER, L.A. METRO
BOARD IS STILL SUBJECT TO A 30
YEAR OLD LAW THAT IMPOSES
DIFFERENT STANDARDS ON BOARD
MEMBERS REGARDING CONTRACT
DECISIONS AND CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CONTRACTORS.
FOR EXAMPLE, UNDER THE CURRENT
LAW LAW, BOARD MEMBERS ARE
PROHIBITED FROM ACCEPTING
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS OVER $10,
WHILE THE LEVINE ACT PROHIBITS
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS OVER 250
$50. THESE DIFFERING STANDARDS
AND REQUIREMENTS HAVE MADE IT
DIFFICULT FOR LA METRO TO COMPLY
SIMPLY BECAUSE BOARD MEMBERS ARE
SUBJECT TO BOTH THE LEVINE ACT
AND THE HAYDEN BILL IN THEIR
ROLES AS METRO BOARD MEMBERS. LA
METRO SEEKS TO BE CONSISTENT
WITH ALL OTHER OFFICIALS IN THE
STATE MAKING CONTRACT DECISIONS
UNDER THE STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE
OF THE LEVINE ACT, WHICH GOVERNS
THEIR PRIMARY. ELECTED OFFICIALS
. THIS BILL MAKES, MAKES ALSO
MAKES CHANGES TO THE METRO'S
LOBBYIST REGISTRATION STATUTE,
ALIGNING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS,
STANDARDS AND PROHIBITIONS WITH
SIMILAR AGENCIES. FINALLY, AB
3123 CODIFIES THE SPECIFIC
AUTHORITY OF METRO'S ETHICS
DEPARTMENT AND MANDATES ITS
INDEPENDENCE. WITH ME IN SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL IS MADELEINE MOORE,
DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF LA
METRO, AND PAUL SALAS, CHIEF
ETHICS OFFICER FOR LA METRO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS, LOS
ANGELES METRO IS A PROUD SPONSOR
OF AB 3123. I WILL NOW TURN IT
OVER TO PAUL SALAS, WHO IS
METRO'S CHIEF ETHICS OFFICER, TO
PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT
THE BILL, GOOD MORNING, MADAM
CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, I'M PAUL SOLIS,
METRO'S CHIEF ETHICS OFFICER.
METRO IS A THIRD LARGEST
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IN THE
UNITED STATES, AND HAS ONE OF
THE LARGEST CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION
AND SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAMS IN
THE NATION TO PREPARE FOR THE
2028 OLYMPICS AND BEYOND. I'M A
BOARD APPOINTED OFFICER AND
MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR OF
CALIFORNIA, CURRENTLY, I ADVISE
L.A. METRO ON ISSUES RELATED TO
STATE PAY TO PLAY LAWS. METRO IS
SUBJECT TO TWO OF THESE LAWS,
ONE IN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
THAT APPLIES EXCLUSIVELY TO
METRO, AND ONE IN THE GOVERNMENT
CODE KNOWN AS THE LEVINE ACT.
THAT APPLIES STATEWIDE. THE
METRO SPECIFIC PUC LAW EMPLOYS
DIFFERENT TERMS LANGUAGE, DOLLAR
THRESHOLDS AND TIME PERIODS IN
THE LEVINE ACT. IMPORTANTLY, THE
LEVINE ACT HAS AMPLE
INTERPRETIVE GUIDANCE ISSUED BY
THE CALIFORNIA FAIR POLITICAL
PRACTICES COMMISSION AND COURTS.
WHILE THE PUC LAW HAS VIRTUALLY
NONE, THIS CREATES ISSUES WITH
COMPLIANCE, AND IT'S FRANKLY
VERY CONFUSING. IT ALSO CREATES
LIABILITY AND RISK FOR METRO.
THE CURRENT SPONSORED AMENDMENTS
WILL ALLOW THE LEVINE ACT TO
GOVERN THE METRO METRO BOARD'S
PAY TO PLAY RESPONSIBILITIES
CONSISTENT WITH ALL OTHER
AGENCIES IN THE STATE, AND THE
INTENT OF THIS LEGISLATURE
EXPRESSED IN 2023. THERE ARE
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS. I'LL
BRIEFLY EXPLAIN. FIRST, THE BILL
WOULD MAKE AMENDMENTS TO METRO'S
LOBBYIST REGISTRATION STATUTE,
KEEPING IT CONSISTENT WITH OTHER
JURISDICTIONS LIKE THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND THE CITY OF LOS
ANGELES. NEXT, THE BILL WOULD
REMOVE OUT OF DATE LANGUAGE IN
THE METRO BOARD'S CODE OF
CONDUCT. THE CONTRAST WITH
CURRENT APPLICABLE STATE LAW AND
METRO'S ADMINISTRATIVE CODES.
THE BILL WOULD ALSO ENACT
CHANGES AND ADDITIONS THAT EXIST
IN PEER AGENCY CODES. FINALLY,
THIS BILL STRENGTHENS METRO'S
ETHICS DEPARTMENT BY SPECIFYING
ITS AUTHORITY AND RELATIONSHIP
WITH THE BOARD AND AGENCY, AND
IT ALSO ADDS A TWO THIRDS VOTE
REQUIREMENT INSTEAD OF A SIMPLE
MAJORITY TO FIRE THE CHIEF
ETHICS OFFICER, THE SAME AS
METRO'S INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THAT'S CURRENTLY CODIFIED IN
STATE LAW. IN CONCLUSION, METRO,
SIMPLY SEEKING TO IMPLEMENT A
CLEAR SYSTEM WHERE BOARD
MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES, LOBBYISTS,
AND CONTRACTORS CAN ALL HAVE
CONFIDENCE THEY'RE KNOWLEDGEABLE
AND COMPLIANT WITH IMPORTANT
ETHICS LAWS AND RULES. THUS, WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT AB 3123. THANK
YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE
AUDIENCE WHO WANTS TO REGISTER
YOUR SUPPORT POSITION FOR THIS
BILL? IF SO, STEP ON UP. SEEING
NONE, ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL OR ANYONE
WHO WANTS TO REGISTER THEIR NAME
IN OPPOSITION OAN SEEING NONE.
I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, WE HAVE
A MOTION BY, I BELIEVE, ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN AND SECONDED BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWE, ASSEMBLY
MEMBER JONES. SAWYER. YOU MAY
CLOSE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR AND
SPONSORS GOAL TO TRY TO REDUCE
COMPLEXITY AND ENSURE CONSISTENT
APPLICATION OF THE LAWS
GOVERNING LA METRO'S ACTIVITIES
AND I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
AND SPONSOR FOR WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE STAFF ON THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED IN
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. SO WITH
THAT, I'M RECOMMENDING A SUPPORT
POSITION. AND MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL AB 3123 BY
JOAN SAWYER. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED AND BE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PELLERIN I,
PELLERIN I LACHIE LACHIE NOT
VOTING. BENNET BERMAN. BERMAN I
CERVANTES. ALANIZ LOW. LOWE I
JOAN SAWYER I JOAN SAWYER I.
THAT BILL WILL BE ON CALL FOR
OUR ABSENT MEMBERS TO COME IN
AND SIGN IN. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE ON OUR LAST
BILL NOW, WHICH IS AB, 2990 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWE. AND YOU
MAY BEGIN WHEN YOU'RE READY. YOU
ALREADY HAVE A MOTION BEFORE YOU
EVEN GET TO THE CHAIR. I THINK
OF THAT. THIS IS EFFICIENT
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COLLEAGUES, FOR ALLOWING ME TO
PRESENT 2990 TO STRENGTHEN THE
WORK OF THE FPPC, TO TAKE
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION WITHIN TWO
YEARS OF A CASE OPENING OR FIVE
YEARS OF A VIOLATION OCCURRENCE.
AND WE ARE DEEPLY COMMITTED TO
WORKING WITH THE FPPC THROUGHOUT
THE PROCESS TO CREATE
FLEXIBILITY FOR COMPLEX CASES. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AYE VOTE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT TODAY? ANYBODY IN THE
ROOM WHO WANTS TO REGISTER
SUPPORT? WE SEE MOVEMENT, BUT
NOT FOR YOU, ANYBODY IN THE ROOM
WHO IS A PRIMARY WITNESS IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL? ANYONE
WANT TO REGISTER YOUR NAME IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL? BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? WE HAVE A
YAWN. I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY. I'M
SO BORING. SORRY I CALLED YOU
OUT ON THAT. SO POLICY, A GOOD
POLICY. OKAY, SO SEEING NO
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, I'LL BRING IT
BACK TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWE.
YOU MAY CLOSE. YES. BROUGH. OKIE
DOKE, I AGREE THAT THE FPPC
INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RESOLVED
IN A TIMELY FASHION. HOWEVER
UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OCCUR AND
THIS BILL DOES NOT ALLOW THE
FPPC FLEXIBILITY AND DISCRETION
TO GO BEYOND THE TWO YEAR LIMIT.
IF CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT A
LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. SO I ASK
FOR THE AUTHOR'S COMMITMENT TO
WORK WITH THE FPPC TO ADDRESS
THAT CONCERN. AND AS THE BILL
MOVES FORWARD IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS, YES, YES. OKAY. WITH
THAT COMMITMENT, I AM
RECOMMENDING A SUPPORT POSITION.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN. DO I HAVE A
SECOND, SECOND, SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER JONES SAWYER.
MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL AB 2990 BY LOWE. THE MOTION
IS DUE PASS AND BE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PELLERIN I PELLERIN I LACHIE
LACHIE NOT VOTING BENNETT
BERMAN. BERMAN I CERVANTES
ALANIS LOW I LO I JONES SAWYER
JOHN SAWYER I THAT BILL WILL BE
ON CALL AND WE'LL ROUND UP THOSE
ABSENT MEMBERS TO GET ON THE
ROLL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
YOUR PRESENTATION TODAY. AND WE
WILL REMAIN OPEN FOR THOSE
ABSENT MEMBERS SO THE SERGEANT
CAN CALL THEM AND SAY, COME ON
DOWN TO ROOM 444. THANK YOU. MR.
OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO ADD
ONS. I BELIEVE THE ONLY PERSON
HERE TODAY AT HOME WOULD BE
BERMAN, RIGHT? YEAH. A LOT OF NÓ
NHIÀU SAU. BUT HE'S NOT HERE.
AND THAT'S TRUE. HE'S NOT HERE.
YEAH. SO WE CAN OPEN UP FOR ADD
ONS IF YOU'D LIKE TO GET IT
DONE. YES. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.
OKAY, ITEM ONE 2724 REYES. THE
MOTION IS Dð PASS AND BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. BERMAN HI.
BERMAN. I. WE HAVE BENNETT ON
THAT ONE, TOO. IF WE WANT TO
OPEN IT FOR BENNETT, WE'RE
OPENING UP THE CALL ON THE REYES
BILL ON AB 2724 REYES. MR.
BENNETT. BENNETT. AYE OKAY, ON
AB 2803 VALENCIA. BENNETT.
BENNETT. I ON AB 2911 BY MCKENNA
BENNETT. ON AB 2911 BY MISS
MCKENNA BENNETT. IT IS CURRENTLY
6 TO 0 SIX ZERO. SO THAT'S OUR
THAT'S OUR RIGHT. YEAH. YOU'RE
NOT VOTING OKAY. ITEM FOR AB
2990 BY MR. LO BENNETT. BENNETT
I ITEM FIVE, AB 3123 BY JONES,
SAWYER BENNETT. BENNETT I. ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WHICH IS
AB 3184 AND 3284, MR. BENNETT
BENNETT I BERMAN I BERMAN I ON
ITEM SEVEN AB 3239 BY MISS
CARRILLO BENNETT BENNETT NOT
VOTING BERMAN WHAT WAS THE VOTE
ON THAT? IT WAS FIVE ZERO.
BERMAN I AND I HAVE YOU ON.
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO
WHAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO DO, I HE
SAID HE HAD A PRESS CONFERENCE
OR SOMETHING. HE'S FINISHING UP.
HE'LL BE BACK AND HE'LL BE BACK
MOMENTARILY. OKAY. IT'S COMING
FROM THE LOBBY. THAT'S WHERE THE
PRESS CONFERENCE IS. SO I NEED
TO START GOING
.
YEAH. YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH
.
JUST TELL ME WHICH ONE. NUMBER
ONE. I'M SORRY. IT'S OKAY. OKAY.
WE NEED TO LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM
ONE. AB 2724. BENNETT WHO'S THE
AUTHOR, ON AB 2724 BY REYES
BENNETT. I THANK YOU. OKAY,
WELL, THEN NOW LEAD TO, LIFT THE
CALL ON ITEM FIVE, AB 3123, AB
3123 JONES. SAWYER. BENNETT.
BENNETT AYE. OKAY. AND FINALLY,
WE NEED TO LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM
FOUR, AB 2990 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LO BENNETT. BENNETT. AYE OKAY,
THAT IS OUT. SORRY. NOW I'M
SORRY. OKAY. I'M JUST MESSING
UP. THAT'S OKAY. SORRY. OKAY, SO
GOING BACK ON AB 2724, IT WAS
OUT. AND THE VOTE COUNT. 6 TO 0,
27, 24. THE BILL IS OUT SIX
ZERO. AND ON FIVE ON ITEM FIVE
OUT FIVE ZERO. AN ITEM FIVE IS
NOW OUT. AB 3120 350. YES. AND
THEN. 2990 AN ITEM FOUR AB 2990
LOW FIVE ZERO. IT'S OUT. ITEM
FOUR AB 2990 IS OUT. FIVE ZERO.
OKAY, OKAY. PUBLIC SAFETY. I'LL
DO IT THERE. OKAY. SO YOU GO. DO
YOU NEED TO DO THAT SAME THING
FOR THE CARILLO BILL OR FOR
CONSENT OR ARE THOSE OKAY? THOSE
WERE OKAY. OKAY. I'M SORRY I GOT
CONFUSED. THAT'S ALL. GOOD.
THAT'S ALL GOOD. WE NEED TO ADD
ON. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON. IF
YOU NEED ME TO COME HERE. OKAY?
OKAY. I WILL, WE'LL JUST. OKAY?
OKAY LET'S DO HER SO SHE CAN GO.
OKAY OKAY. ON ITEM ONE 2724 BY
MISS REYES SEVEN, I CERVANTES, I
ITEM TWO AB 2803 BY VALENCIA
CERVANTES I CERVANTES I ITEM
THREE AB 2911 BY MISS MACKINNON.
CERVANTES. I JUST WANTED TO
PUBLICLY NOTE THAT I WILL BE
GIVING THIS BILL A COURTESY VOTE
AND RESERVE THE RIGHT TO LOOK AT
IT ON THE FLOOR. I CERVANTES, I
ITEM FOUR AB 2990 BY MR. LOWE,
AND THAT IS Dð PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. CERVANTES I
CERVANTES I ON AB FIVE. EXCUSE
ME. ITEM FIVE AB 3123 JONES.
SAWYER CERVANTES I CERVANTES. I
ITEM SIX AB 3184 BERMAN.
CERVANTES I CERVANTES. I. AB
3239 BY MISS CARILLO CERVANTES I
CERVANTES. I.
YEAH. THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS
WE GOT YOU WITH THE 3184. THANK
YOU. ARE DONE. HE'S RIGHT HERE.
OH, YEAH. I TRIED SAYING IT LOUD
ENOUGH. AND YOU WERE SAYING. I'M
SORRY. WE'LL DO THIS ONE MORE
TIME. ITEM ONE. AB NÓ AB 2724 BY
MISS REYES. ALAN ALANIZ. ALANIZ
I, ITEM TWO AB 2803 BY VALENCIA
ALANIZ A, ALANIZ I. ITEM FOUR AB
2990 BY LOWE ALANIZ. ALANIZ NOT
VOTING ITEM FIVE AB 3123 BY JOAN
SAWYER. ALANA ALANIS NOT VOTING
I'M SORRY THAT I MESSED UP YOUR
NAME. YOU'RE DOING GREAT, ON THE
GOT YOU ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
SO WE ARE GOOD. I THINK WE'RE
DONE, THAT'S THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. IT IS GREAT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
YES THIS COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.
THIS COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU