ALL RIGHT. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO
CALL THE HEARING TO ORDER, AND
WE'RE GOING TO INVITE MY
COLLEAGUES, AND ESPECIALLY
ANYONE OF MY REPUBLICAN
COLLEAGUES, TO JOIN ME ON THE
DAIS SO WE CAN START THE HEARING
, APPARENTLY, MY STAFF MEMBERS
WILL COVER ME, AND HOPEFULLY
THEY'LL APPEAR WHILE I'M READING
THE BEGINNING SO WE CAN START.
BECAUSE I APPRECIATE MR. WIENER
BEING HERE RIGHT ON TIME.
WELCOME TO ASSEMBLY, PRIVACY AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION HEARING TO
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE OUR TIME WILL
BE LIMITING TESTIMONY TO TWO
WITNESSES FOR SUPPORT AND TWO IN
OPPOSITION ON EACH BILL. EACH
WITNESS WILL BE ALLOWED TWO
MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR
TESTIMONY, FOUR MINUTES TOTAL
FOR EACH SIDE. AFTER THE SUPPORT
WITNESS ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM
WHO WANTS TO SHARE THEIR
SUPPORT, NAME AND ORGANIZATION
WILL BE INVITED UP. THE SAME
WITH THE OPPOSITION, AND WE ARE
ONLY TAKING IN-PERSON TESTIMONY,
BUT WE ALWAYS INVITE FOLKS TO
PROVIDE THEIR COMMENTS ON OUR
PORTAL, ON OUR WEBSITE, WE DO
HAVE A VERY ROBUST CONSENT
CALENDAR THANKS TO BIPARTISAN
COOPERATION. THANK YOU TO MY
REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES. SO WE
WILL TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN THEY
GET HERE. I WANT TO MAKE ONE
CHANGE CLEAR, ON SB 785 BY
SENATOR CABALLERO, THERE IS A
CHANGE THAT IS LIVE IN THE
ANALYSIS ONLINE, BUT WAS NOT IN
THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS, SO WE
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT FOR EVERYONE
TODAY AGAIN, THAT IS ONLINE. NOW
IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW UP TO READ
IT, BUT THE CHANGE TO THE
ANALYSIS IN SB 785 IS THAT
NUMBER SIX IN THE SUMMARY OF THE
ANALYSIS, THE TEMPORARY
EXEMPTION FOR SERIES TICKETS HAS
BEEN REMOVED. THE UPDATED
ANALYSIS, AS I SAID, IS POSTED
ON THE COMMITTEE WEBSITE AND THE
AUTHOR IS CONTINUING TO WORK
WITH THE COMMITTEE TO REFINE
THIS EXEMPTION WHILE IT IS IN
ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS. SO THE
EXEMPTION, ALTHOUGH IMPERFECT,
WILL LIKELY COME BACK IN
APPROPRIATIONS, THAT BILL IS NOT
BEING DISCUSSED NOW, BUT I
DIDN'T WANT TO FORGET TO MENTION
IT. SO I DECIDED JUST TO DO IT
AT THE TOP OF THE HEARING AND
LOOK AT THAT, MISS DIXON. THANK
YOU FOR BEING HERE. THAT MEANS
WE CAN START AS A SUBCOMMITTEE,
SO WE WILL TAKE UP MR. WEINER'S
BILLS, MR. WIENER, DO YOU WANT
TO START WITH SB 532? SURE. OR
YOU HAVE TO. SB 961.
MR. WIENER, ARE WE GOING WITH
532? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO
WE'LL HEAR SB 532. OKAY THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR,
THANK YOU FOR HEARING THE BILL
AND FOR WORKING WITH US. AND I'M
HAPPY TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS ON PAGES FOUR AND
FIVE OF THE ANALYSIS, THESE,
AMENDMENTS WERE ACTUALLY
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE TAKEN IN
THAT WE ARE TAKING IN THE
PRIVACY COMMITTEE, AND SO I
APPRECIATE THAT, SB 532
MODERNIZES PARKING PAYMENTS BY
AUTHORIZING BUT NOT REQUIRING A
TIME LIMITED PILOT PROGRAM FOR
SAN FRANCISCO TO IMPLEMENT PAID
PARKING WITHOUT HAVING TO INCUR
THE HIGH COST OF METER
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE.
CURRENT LAW, WHILE NOT REQUIRING
THAT CASH BE ACCEPTED, THAT'S
NOT REQUIRED UNDER EXISTING LAW.
A PHYSICAL METER IS REQUIRED,
AND THAT REQUIRES, SPENDING.
PRECIOUS TRANSPORTATION
RESOURCES TO PURCHASE, INSTALL,
AND MAINTAIN. FRANKLY OUTDATED
AND EXPENSIVE PARKING METER
EQUIPMENT, LAST YEAR, THE SAN
FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY, MTA,
SPENT, $26 MILLION ON THE
PARKING METER INFRASTRUCTURE,
WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY HALF OF
THE REVENUE THAT IT GOT FROM
THOSE METERS. SO WE'RE SEEING A
LOT OF METER REVENUE INSTEAD OF
GOING INTO TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS, JUST BEING CONSUMED BY
THE PHYSICAL METER
INFRASTRUCTURE. IT ALSO THEY
TAKE UP A LOT OF THEY TAKE UP A
LOT OF SPACE ON THE SIDEWALKS
THAT CITIES COULD DECIDE TO USE,
FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES. THEY GET
VANDALIZED. FREQUENTLY. AND SO
SP 532 WILL CREATE A FILE WITH
THE AMENDMENT OF FIVE YEAR PILOT
PROGRAM FOR SAN FRANCISCO TO
PILOT METER LESS PARKING PAYMENT
ZONES, WHICH WILL REQUIRE
SIGNAGE ABOUT HOW PEOPLE CAN
MAKE CASH PAYMENTS AND ALSO
REQUIRE THE CITY TO ADOPT AND A
PLAN AROUND EQUITY AND ACCESS.
AND THEN AT THE END OF THE FIVE
YEARS, THE LEGISLATURE WILL BE
ABLE TO ASSESS WHETHER TO RETAIN
OR EXPAND THE PROGRAM. SO I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE
WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY, IS
MATT SILBERLING WITH THE
CALIFORNIA MOBILITY AND PARKING
ASSOCIATION AND RAYNELL COOPER,
RESIDENTIAL PARKING POLICY
MANAGER AT SFMTA. THANK YOU. TWO
MINUTES EACH ONE. ARE YOU READY?
OKAY. MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
MATTHEW SEIVERLING, ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA MOBILITY AND
PARKING ASSOCIATION HERE IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL, SB
532. AGAIN, AS THE SENATOR
POINTED OUT, THIS IS TAKING AN
INCREMENTAL AND REASONABLE SMALL
STEP TOWARDS TOWARDS THE FUTURE
AND THE WAY THAT CITIES WE ALL
KNOW AND BELIEVE WILL BE
ENFORCING PARKING, AT SOME
POINT. SO TO START OFF IN A BITE
SIZED PIECE, TO DO IT IN THE
CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO AND
UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS, TO
EDUCATE PEOPLE AND, NORMALIZE
THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYING FOR
PARKING REMOTELY, WE THINK IS
IMPORTANT AND STRONGLY
SUPPORTED. SO WE URGE YOUR AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANKS,
MY NAME IS RAYNELL COOPER, AND
I'M A PARKING POLICY MANAGER AT
SFMTA. THE SAN FRANCISCO
MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY.
THANK YOU. CHAIR BARKAN AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, WE APPRECIATE
SENATOR WEINER'S LEADERSHIP AND
INTRODUCTION OF SB 532, WHICH
WOULD AUTHORIZE A TIME LIMITED
PILOT THAT WOULD ALLOW SAN
FRANCISCO TO MODERNIZE THE WAY
WE ACCEPT PAYMENT AND PAID
PARKING ZONES AND ALLOW THE CITY
TO SAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT A
TIME WHEN BUDGETS ARE TIGHT.
PAID PARKING IS THE BEST TOOL
THAT CITIES HAVE TO CREATE.
PARKING AVAILABILITY, WHICH
BENEFITS BUSINESSES, MINIMIZES
CIRCLING AND DOUBLE PARKING,
REDUCES EMISSIONS, SPEEDS PUBLIC
TRANSIT, AND MAKES STREETS SAFER
AND MORE EFFICIENT. BUT PARKING
METERS ARE EXPENSIVE. THE SFMTA
SPENT CLOSE TO $26 MILLION LAST
YEAR TO PURCHASE, INSTALL,
MANAGE AND MAINTAIN PARKING
METERS. THESE METERS ARE
PURPOSEFULLY BROKEN AND
VANDALIZED TO AVOID PAYMENT, AND
ARE TARGETS FOR CRIMINALS
LOOKING TO RIP OFF THE CITY OR
RIP OFF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
STATE LAW CURRENTLY PROHIBITS
MOBILE ONLY PAYMENT, EFFECTIVELY
REQUIRING CITIES TO USE PHYSICAL
PARKING METERS AND PAY STATIONS
TO ACCEPT PAYMENT FOR PARKING.
SB 532, AS PROPOSED TO BE
AMENDED, WOULD AUTHORIZE SAN
FRANCISCO TO PILOT MOBILE ONLY
PARKING PAYMENT ZONES FOR A FIVE
YEAR PERIOD AFTER IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE FIRST ZONE. IN ADDITION,
FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A BANK
ACCOUNT OR DON'T HAVE A PHONE,
THE LEGISLATION REQUIRES THAT
SAN FRANCISCO DEVELOP AN
ACCESSIBLE AND EQUITABLE PARKING
CASH PAYMENT PLAN IN MOBILE ONLY
PAYMENT AREAS. THESE WOULD BE
CREATED IN CONSULTATION WITH
LOCAL STAKEHOLDER GROUPS AND
APPROVED BY OUR LOCAL GOVERNING
BODY. THE LEGISLATION ALSO
INCLUDES A PROVISION THAT WOULD
REQUIRE SAN FRANCISCO TO STUDY
THE OPTION OF SENDING MAILED
INVOICES FOR PARKING SESSIONS
THAT COULD BE PAID LATER THROUGH
CASH OR OTHER PAYMENT METHODS.
WE'RE ALSO REQUIRING SIGNAGE
WITHIN 100FT FROM ANY PAID
PARKING SPACE THAT CLEARLY
STATES THAT PAYMENTS REQUIRED,
AND HOW IT CAN BE MADE. MOBILE
PAYMENT FOR PARKING IS NOT NEW.
CITIES ALL AROUND THE WORLD HAVE
HAD MOBILE PARKING PAYMENT FOR
OVER A DECADE, INCLUDING SAN
FRANCISCO, SO MANY MOTORISTS
WILL ALREADY BE FAMILIAR WITH
PAYING FOR PARKING ON A MOBILE
DEVICE. YOU COULD ALSO PAY BY
CALLING IN SO YOU DON'T NEED A
SMARTPHONE. YOU COULD PAY WITH A
PHONE CALL. AND WITH RESPECT TO
PRIVACY, CITIES ALREADY HAVE
MOBILE PAYMENT OPTIONS THAT
STORE CREDIT CARD INFORMATION
SECURELY AND HAVE ALL OF THE
REQUISITE SAFEGUARDS TO PROTECT
AN INDIVIDUAL'S IDENTITY AND
PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION. FOR ALL THESE
REASONS, THE CITY AND COUNTY OF
SAN FRANCISCO SUPPORTS SB. 532
AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANYBODY ELSE HERE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS MEASURE? PLEASE COME UP.
MARK. ON BEHALF OF STREETS FOR
ALL IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION
TO THE MEASURE? SUPPORT. MORE
SUPPORT. SORRY ABOUT THAT,
SYLVIA SOLIS SHAW HERE ON BEHALF
OF CITY AND COUNTY, SAN
FRANCISCO MAYOR LONDON BREED IN
SUPPORT AND ALSO ON BEHALF OF
CACTI. THE CALIFORNIA CITY
TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OKAY.
AND NOBODY GOT UP WHEN I SAID
OPPOSITION. SO I'M GOING TO GO
WITH SEEING NO OPPOSITION. WE
WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE DÍAS.
YEAH. MISS DIXON. THANK YOU.
SENATOR. I WENT THROUGH IT WHEN
I WAS ON CITY COUNCIL IN NEWPORT
BEACH TO TRANSITION FROM THE
PARKING METERS TO THE KIOSKS
THERE WAS DURING THE PUBLIC
DEBATE ON IT, THERE WAS A LITTLE
BIT OF MILD OPPOSITION BECAUSE
NOT EVERYBODY HAS A CELL PHONE
AND VARIOUS OTHER REASONS. THEY
LIKE PARKING METERS AND SO WE
DID FOR ECONOMIC REASONS,
FINANCIAL REASONS AND
CONVENIENCE REASONS AND THE
SHIFT AND THE TECHNOLOGY AND
MADE SENSE. SO NOW WE HAVE THE
KIOSK. SO IN NEWPORT BEACH AND
SO YOU WANT TO GO ONE STEP
FURTHER. SO I'VE NOT SEEN THAT.
SO IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN HOW THAT
WOULD WORK. SURE. AND THEN
MISTER COOPER MAY BE ABLE TO ADD
ON TO IT. YEAH. SO THE KIOSKS
ARE ALLOWED. THAT'S WHEN YOU
HAVE LIKE BASICALLY A GROUP
METER. RIGHT. AND THOSE ARE,
EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE TO INSTALL,
AS YOU KNOW. YEAH, AND SO THIS
WOULD, BE BASICALLY YOU PAY
THROUGH YOUR PHONE, ALTHOUGH
THERE WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE
SIGNAGE WITH A PHONE NUMBER YOU
CAN CALL TO DO A PAYMENT IF YOU
DON'T HAVE A PHONE. IS THAT IS
THAT AN APP LIKE PARK MOBILE OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH MAYBE
YOU CAN. YEAH, YEAH. RIGHT NOW
SAN FRANCISCO USES AN APP CALLED
PAY BY PHONE. THE CITIES CAN.
THERE'S MULTIPLE VENDORS OUT
THERE IN THE MARKET AND CITIES
CAN WORK WITH WITH WHOMEVER.
RIGHT NOW WE USE A PAY BY PHONE
IN SAN FRANCISCO. YEAH. YEAH AND
JUST TO, ONE THING I SHOULD HAVE
MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE'S BEEN
SOME, POLLING OR ANALYSIS ON
THIS, SO 97% OF PEOPLE IN THE US
HAVE CELL PHONES, 90% HAVE
SMARTPHONES. FOR PEOPLE WHOSE
INCOMES ARE UNDER $30,000, 94%
HAVE CELL PHONES, 79% HAVE
SMARTPHONES, AND SO, THERE IS
LIKE JUST A GROWING TREND
TOWARDS PEOPLE HAVING, YES, THIS
TECHNOLOGY. BUT WE DO HAVE THERE
WILL BE A PHONE NUMBER YOU CAN
CALL IF YOU DON'T HAVE A
SMARTPHONE. SO THEN THE PROCESS
IS YOU JUST PULL INTO THE SPACE
AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS. AND THEN
YOU GO ON TO THE APP. SO IT'S
RIGHT JUST LIKE HAVING THE
KIOSK, BUT YOU DON'T NEED TO GO
TO THE KIOSK BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT
THERE. EXACTLY. OR CALL THE OR
CALL THE NUMBER, WE ALSO THIS
WOULD NOT BE THE FIRST CITY.
THERE ARE VARIOUS CITIES THAT
ARE DOING THIS MIAMI, GALVESTON,
TEXAS, AND, SEATTLE. SO OTHER
CITIES THAT MAKE SENSE. YEAH, I
MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER
CONVERSATION, AS SOMEONE WHO
LOVES SAN FRANCISCO AND LIVES
NEARBY AND DINES AND GÓMEZ THERE
A LOT TO ENJOY EVERYTHING THAT
SAN FRANCISCO HAS TO OFFER. I
JUST HOPE WE GO TO ONE APP
BECAUSE IT DOES DRIVE ME CRAZY
IN EVERY CITY THAT IT'S A
DIFFERENT APP. I SHOW UP. I
DON'T HAVE THE APP. IT HAPPENED
TO ME RECENTLY. LUCKILY I WAS
WITH A FRIEND AND SHE JUST PAID
FOR MY CAR BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE
TIME TO DOWNLOAD THE APP BEFORE
I HAD TO GET TO MY APPOINTMENT,
BUT YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD REALLY
BE GREAT. COMPETITION IN THE
MARKETPLACE IS GREAT, BUT IT'S
JUST SO FRUSTRATING, SO I HOPE
THAT SAN FRANCISCO ENSURES THAT
PEOPLE THIS IS EASY BECAUSE WE
NEED SAN FRANCISCO TO BE
BOOMING, WHICH MEANS YOU NEED
ALL OF US COMING TO DINE IN YOUR
RESTAURANTS AND GO TO YOUR
THEATER, AND WE WANT TO DO THAT.
SO, BUT WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO
SUPPORT. SO WE ARE AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE. SO WE'RE NOT GOING
TO TAKE A MOTION BECAUSE WE
CAN'T YET, BUT WE WILL WHEN THE
TIME IS APPROPRIATE. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE, NO, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. AND I AGREE WITH YOU.
SEAMLESSNESS IS GOOD. WE DID IT
WITH CLIPPER IN THE BAY AREA, SO
HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL, AND OUR
SAN FRANCISCO GOAL WILL BE TO DO
THIS WELL AND PROVIDE A TEMPLATE
FOR OTHER CITIES. RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE. PERFECT.
OKAY, MR. WIENER, WE CAN MOVE ON
TO. THANK YOU BOTH. THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO YOUR SECOND
BILL, WHICH IS SB 532 961. OH,
WAIT, WE JUST DID THAT ONE. I
LIED. YOU'RE RIGHT. SB 961.
I, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR, COLLEAGUES, WE ARE IN A
TRAFFIC SAFETY CRISIS. MORE THAN
4000 CALIFORNIANS DIE EVERY YEAR
ON OUR ROADS. AND THAT NUMBER
HAS BEEN GOING UP. AND THAT IS
TRUE FOR THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE.
ABOUT ONE THIRD OF ALL TRAFFIC
FATALITIES IN THE STATE ARE
SPEEDING RELATED, AND SPEED IS
EXPONENTIALLY RELATED TO
FATALITY RISK IN A VEHICLE
COLLISION, SB 961 WILL REQUIRE
NEW CARS STARTING IN 2030,
MANUFACTURED OR SOLD IN
CALIFORNIA, TO IMPLEMENT
EXISTING TECHNOLOGY THAT ALREADY
IS BEING DEPLOYED IN SOME CARS,
THAT WILL ALERT DRIVERS IF THEY
EXCEED TEN MILES AN HOUR OVER
THE SPEED LIMIT, WHEN THIS BILL
WAS FIRST INTRODUCED, WE WERE
GOING TO REQUIRE TECHNOLOGY THAT
CARS WOULD BE PHYSICALLY UNABLE
TO GO MORE THAN TEN MILES OVER
THE SPEED LIMIT, WE HEARD LOUD
AND CLEAR THAT THAT WAS NOT
GOING TO FLY. AND SO IT IS NOW A
WARNING. WE KNOW FROM VARIOUS
STUDIES THAT HAVE HAPPENED THAT
THIS TECHNOLOGY IS EFFECTIVE AT
GETTING PEOPLE TO SLOW DOWN.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE DON'T EVEN
REALIZE HOW FAST THEY'RE DRIVING
, ESPECIALLY WITH NEWER CARS
THAT ARE VERY SMOOTH AND YOU
DON'T EVEN REALIZE IT, SO I DO
WANT TO JUST NOTE TRIPLE A IS
SUPPORTING THIS BILL. THE, THE
NTSB WAS A LEAD WITNESS IN
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE,
THIS IS A BILL THAT WILL SAVE
LIVES. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY, IS MARK, VUKOVICH,
DIRECTOR OF STATE POLICY AT
STREETS FOR ALL, AND JOE
MARTINEZ, WHO IS A MEMBER OF
FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS,
FAMILIES WHO HAVE BEEN IMPACTED
BY TRAFFIC VIOLENCE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. TWO MINUTES EACH WHEN
YOU'RE READY, SIR. GREAT. YES
GOOD AFTERNOON. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
B¢O BAUER-KAHAN. MEMBERS OF THE
PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTIONS
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS JOE
MARTINEZ. I'M A MEMBER OF
FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS. IT'S
A GROUP I HOPE NONE OF YOU WILL
EVER HAVE TO BE PART OF. WE ARE
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY
AFFECTED BY TRAFFIC CRASH,
EITHER AS CRASH SURVIVORS OR AS
PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD A LOVED ONE
HURT OR KILLED IN A CRASH. I
CAME HERE FROM FRESNO TODAY.
THAT'S WHERE I RAISED MY SON,
PAUL. AS A SINGLE PARENT. PAUL
WAS AN ARTIST AND A BASKETBALL
PLAYER. EVEN AS A YOUNG MAN,
PAUL STILL LOVED GOING TO
CHURCH. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, PAUL
WAS MY WHOLE WORLD. ON JUNE 5TH,
2013, IT WAS LATE WHEN THE PHONE
RANG. WHEN I ANSWERED, PAUL'S
COUSIN WAS SCREAMING INTO THE
PHONE THAT PAUL HAD BEEN HIT. IF
YOU'RE A PARENT, JUST IMAGINE
THAT PHONE CALL FOR A MOMENT.
PAUL HAD ALREADY PASSED BY THE
TIME I GOT TO THE HOSPITAL. I
CAN STILL PICTURE HIM COVERED IN
A WHITE SHEET AS I CROSSED THE
ROOM TO BE WITH HIM, I HUGGED
HIM. I KISSED HIS FOREHEAD FOR
THE LAST TIME. PAUL WAS SO
EXCITED ABOUT LIFE, JUST LIKE HE
SHOULD HAVE BEEN AS A 21 YEAR
OLD. BUT. BUT PAUL'S LIFE WAS
TAKEN AWAY BY A DRIVER GOING
54MPH IN A 40 MILE PER HOUR
ZONE. THE SAME YEAR PAUL WAS
KILLED. IN 2013, 1000
CALIFORNIANS LOST THEIR LIVES
BECAUSE OF SPEEDING AND EVERY
YEAR SINCE, THAT MEANS MORE THAN
10,000 PEOPLE HAVE DIED SINCE
PAUL DID, AND SPEEDING RELATED
CRASHES. YOU CAN CHANGE THAT AND
MAKE CALIFORNIA A LEADER IN
USING TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT SAFE
SPEEDS, SPEED KILLS AGAIN AND
AGAIN. PLEASE PLEASE VOTE YES ON
SB 961. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. YOUR SECOND WITNESS.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MARK VUKOVICH,
STREETS FOR ALL. SPONSOR OF THE
BILL. TRAFFIC VIOLENCE HAS
BECOME THE NUMBER ONE KILLER OF
ALL PEOPLE AGE FIVE THROUGH 44
YEARS OLD. IN CALIFORNIA.
PEDESTRIAN DEATHS IN THIS
COUNTRY HAVE SHOT UP 77% SINCE
2010. AND THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR
IS SPEED. AND TO BE CLEAR, THIS
ISSUE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTS
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND THE
PUBLIC AT A HIGH LEVEL IS AWARE
OF THIS. I BELIEVE IF THE PUBLIC
WAS ASKED IF THE LEGISLATURE
WANTS TO TACKLE THE NUMBER ONE
KILLER OF CHILDREN, THEY WOULD
SAY YES. THE LARGEST FACTORS
THAT PARENTS GIVE IN ALLOWING
THEIR CHILDREN TO WALK TO SCHOOL
IS NOT WHETHER THEIR KID IS
GOING TO GET KIDNAPED, IT'S
WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO DIE
GETTING HIT ALONG THE WAY. THE
INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY
SAFETY COMPLETED A SURVEY OF
1800 ADULTS, OVER 60% OF THEM
AGREED TO A SYSTEM THAT ALERTS
YOU AT ONE MILE PER HOUR OVER
THE SPEED LIMIT, 80% OF PEOPLE
AGREE TO SUPPORT IT WHEN IT
KICKS IN AT TEN MILES PER HOUR
OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. AND THAT'S
EXACTLY WHAT OUR BILL DOES. THE
PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO FEEL SAFE
ON OUR ROADWAY, AND I BELIEVE
THAT THE PUBLIC CONTRACT IS
BROKEN ON OUR ROADWAY. IF YOU
HAVE DRIVEN ON OUR ROADWAYS,
IT'S CRAZY. PEOPLE ARE DRIVING
LIKE MADNESS RIGHT NOW. THE
EXPERIENCE OF DRIVING HAS
ERODED. CONSIDER WHAT YOUR
DRIVING EXPERIENCE WOULD BE LIKE
IF OTHER PEOPLE AROUND YOU HAD
THIS IN THEIR VEHICLES. THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS ALREADY USED IN
VEHICLES RIGHT NOW. MANY MAJOR
AUTO MANUFACTURERS ALREADY HAVE
THIS IN NEW VEHICLES AND
EXISTING FEATURE CALLED ADAPTIVE
CRUISE CONTROL. DON'T LET THE
OPPOSITION TO TELL YOU THAT THIS
IS A NEW OR UNIMPLEMENTABLE
TECHNOLOGY. THE EUROPEAN
TRANSPORT SAFETY COUNCIL
ESTIMATED THAT THE UPCOMING
UPCOMING FITTING OF AESA ON ALL
CARS, VANS, BUSSES WILL
EVENTUALLY CUT ROAD DEATHS BY
20. THAT'S WHAT THE EU
ESTIMATED. IN TURN, THOUGH, THIS
IS GOING TO REDUCE WEAR AND TEAR
ON YOUR BRAKE PADS. IT'S GOING
TO INCREASE YOUR FUEL
EFFICIENCY. IT'S GOING TO MAKE
YOU A BETTER DRIVER AND
ULTIMATELY SAVE DRIVERS MONEY
THROUGH INSURANCE AND
MAINTENANCE. AND IT'S GOING TO
SAVE YOUR CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE
MONEY TO BUY CARS, NOT CRASHING
INTO LIGHT POLES AND DESTROYING
OUR ROADWAYS. THE LEGISLATURE
CANNOT PASS A BILL TOMORROW TO
CUT THE RATE OF CANCER IN HALF,
BUT THE LEGISLATURE CAN ACT ON
THIS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE HERE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL COME UP AND REGISTER
YOUR NAME, POSITION AND
ORGANIZATION IF YOU HAVE ONE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS JENNY HIÂU AND
I'M A MEMBER AND FOUNDER OF
FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS. SAN
FRANCISCO BAY AREA. MY MOTHER
WAS STRUCK BY A SPEEDING DRIVER
IN SAN FRANCISCO ALMOST 14 YEARS
AGO. THE CRASH TOOK JUDY AWAY
AND LEFT. NOW OUR FAMILY A
MOTHER. WHO IS YOU? THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOHN
LOWELL. I'M A SENIOR MEMBER OF
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA CHAPTER
OF FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS. I
AM A SURVIVOR OF A COLLISION
FROM A SPEEDING VEHICLE IN SAN
FRANCISCO IN 2001. AFTER I GOT
OUT OF THE HOSPITAL, $8.56
MILLION WERE FILED IN CLAIMS ON
MY HEALTH INSURANCE. THAT'S $21
MILLION IN 2020 FOR COST
ANALYSIS. THANK YOU. YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT. THIS BILL. MAKE SURE TO
REGISTER SUPPORT IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL WHEN YOU
COME UP. NAME. HELLO, MY NAME IS
MELINA MCKEE CABADA AND I
REPRESENT WALK SAN FRANCISCO AND
I SUPPORT SP 961. THANK YOU. HI,
MY NAME IS WHITNEY ERICKSON AND
I REPRESENT THE MARIN COUNTY
BICYCLE COALITION AND SAFE
ROUTES TO SCHOOL. MORAN. A
PROGRAM OF THAT COALITION AS
WELL AS THE BICYCLE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE. AND I SUPPORT THE
BILL. THANK YOU. HELLO. MY NAME
IS BERT HILL. I'M, EMPLOYED BY
MY COMPANY, BICYCLE COMMUTER
SERVICES, FOR 16 YEARS. I
MANAGED SAN FRANCISCO'S SAFETY
CLASSES FOR BICYCLISTS, A
PROGRAM WITH NATIONAL
RECOGNITION. PROFESSIONALLY, I
SERVE AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN
BICYCLE RELATED ROADWAY
LITIGATION. SPEED KILLS I
SUPPORT SB 961. THANK YOU.
HELLO, MY NAME IS REBECCA
RUDOLPH. I'M IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
JODY MEDEIROS. I'M THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF WALK SAN FRANCISCO.
AND WE ALSO ORGANIZE FAMILIES
FOR SAFE STREETS. WE'RE
CO-SPONSOR FOR THE BILL, AND WE
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. YES. MY NAME
IS PEGGY SIMPSON. AND I AM IN
SUPPORT OF 961. I'M A MEMBER OF
WALK SAN FRANCISCO. THANK YOU.
HI. ALI GELLER REPRESENTING SAN
FRANCISCO BAY AREA FAMILIES FOR
SAFE STREETS AND STRONG SUPPORT
OF 961. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
HI, I'M LAURA KEENAN, CO-FOUNDER
OF FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS,
SAN DIEGO. MY HUSBAND AND FATHER
TO OUR 15 MONTH OLD SON, MATT,
WAS KILLED BY A SPEEDING DRIVER
IN 2021. TEN MILES AN HOUR WOULD
HAVE SAVED HIS LIFE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. HI. I'M GRANDMA
BEVERLY. I'M THE CO-FOUNDER OF
SOCAL FAMILIES FOR SAFE STREETS
AND ALL OF OUR MEMBERS, ALIVE
AND DEAD, WANT YOU TO SUPPORT
THIS BILL. IT'S JUST A FEW BEEPS
AND IT MIGHT SAVE LIVES. THANK
YOU. I'M KELLY DUNLAP WITH BIKE
EAST BAY. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON.
ALEX RAMIREZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF LOS ANGELES WALKS AND
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES FOR SAFE
STREETS. AND WE SUPPORT THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. HELLO, I'M KATE
VÀ, A VISION ZERO NETWORK, A
NATIONAL NONPROFIT IN SUPPORT.
HELLO. MY NAME IS LORI
MARKOWITZ, AND I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF FAMILIES FOR SAFE
STREETS, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
AND MY SON JOSH WAS KILLED BY A
SPEEDING DRIVER 100MPH. PLEASE
SAVE LIVES. THANK YOU. I'M IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS NANCY ARBUCKLE. I'M A
SENIOR. I LIVE IN SAN FRANCISCO.
I'M A FULL TIME PEDESTRIAN, AND
I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, GOOD
AFTERNOON. IN 2000, I BOUGHT A
NEW CAR. IT LET ME SET A SPEED
WARMING WARNING. IT CHANGED THE
WAY I DROVE, PAUL WORMER, SAN
FRANCISCO RESIDENT AND WALKER
AND I SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. HI. MY NAME IS FIONA YIM.
I'M A SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENT
REPRESENTING WALK SAN FRANCISCO,
WHICH IS A CO-SPONSOR OF THIS
BILL. AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. INBETWEENER, STEVE
WALLACH, ON BEHALF OF THE
ALAMEDA CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT
DISTRICT, THEY HAVE A SUPPORT,
IF AMENDED, POSITION. THEY DO
SUPPORT THE INTENT OF THIS BILL.
THE SAFETY WILL PROVIDE FOR NOT
ONLY ITS BUS RIDERS, BUT
PEDESTRIANS AND OTHER VULNERABLE
ROAD USERS. BUT THEY ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT THE COST IMPACTS
ON TRANSIT BUSSES. TRANSIT
BUSSES HAVE GONE UP IN PRICE.
THE SUPPLIERS HAVE GONE DOWN AND
SO THEY'RE VERY SENSITIVE ABOUT
NEW REQUIREMENTS ON THESE
VEHICLES GOING FORWARD. SO WE DO
HOPE YOU HAVE TAKEN IN
CONSIDERATION THE IMPACTS THIS
WOULD HAVE ON TRANSIT OPERATORS.
THANK YOU. ANYONE HERE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, JOHN MOFFAT,
ON BEHALF OF THE ALLIANCE FOR
AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, WE
SUPPORT THE GOALS OF THE BILL.
WE SUPPORT SAFE VEHICLES. WE
APPRECIATE THE STORIES THAT HAVE
BEEN SHARED TODAY. WE OUR
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL IS
PRIMARILY UNDER THE GUISE THAT,
YOU KNOW, THERE IS A ROLE FOR
THE STATES AND THERE'S A ROLE
FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN
IT COMES TO VEHICLE SAFETY. AND
WE BELIEVE MANDATING TECHNOLOGY
SUCH AS THIS ON A VEHICLE IS THE
ROLE THAT THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH
WE HAVE THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION, THE AUTHOR NOTED
THE SAFETY BOARD MADE A
RECOMMENDATION TO NHTSA, THE
REGULATORY AGENCY, ON THIS
TECHNOLOGY. NHTSA IN APRIL OF
THIS YEAR RESPONDED BACK TO THE
BOARD THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE
TWO PILOT PROGRAMS GOING RIGHT
NOW TO SEE IF THIS TECHNOLOGY
EVEN WORKS AND HAS THE INTENDED
EFFECT THAT THAT EVERYONE'S
HOPES IT MIGHT HAVE, AND IT'S A
IS NOT A DO NOTHING AGENCY IN
THIS SPACE. THEY ARE YOU KNOW,
THEY HAVE OVER 600 EMPLOYEES.
THEY HAVE A $1.6 BILLION BUDGET.
AND THIS IS WHAT THEY DO, ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT THEY MANDATED,
ON VEHICLES AND VEHICLE
MANUFACTURERS, THIS YEAR, WHICH
THROUGH THEIR TESTING, THEY
BELIEVE WILL HAVE A POSITIVE
IMPACT ON PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, IS
THE MANDATE FOR AUTOMATIC
EMERGENCY BRAKING SYSTEMS, WHICH
HAVE TO BE PUT ON CARS UNDER
THEIR EDICT BY SEPTEMBER OF
2029. AND SO, AGAIN, WE
APPRECIATE THE STORIES THAT WERE
SHARED TODAY. WE APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR AND THE SPONSORS INTENT
WITH THE BILL, AND BUT I THINK
FROM FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE
BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD LET NHTSA
CONTINUE TO DO THEIR WORK. AND
IF THIS IS TECHNOLOGY THAT
PROVES TO HAVE ITS INTENDED
IMPACT ON DRIVERS, THEY WILL
MANDATE IT ON US, AND WE WILL DO
IT FOR ALL 50 STATES, NOT JUST
FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU. ADDITIONAL OPPOSITION
IN THE ROOM. COME ON UP, THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MATT ROBINSON,
ON BEHALF OF THE SPECIALTY
EQUIPMENT MARKET ASSOCIATION.
SEMA, JUST ECHO THE COMMENTS OF
THE ALLIANCE. I WAS ALSO ASKED
TO CONVEY THE OPPOSITION OF
SHASTA COUNTY. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, JAMES LOMBARDO. ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA MOTORCYCLE
DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND A BETA
CALIFORNIA MOTORCYCLE RIGHTS
SAFETY ORGANIZATION. NOT EVEN IN
EUROPE. DOES THIS APPLY TO
MOTORCYCLES? THANK YOU. LAWRENCE
GORDON, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION,
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. THANK YOU.
KASHA HUNT HERE WITH NOSSAMAN,
WE OPPOSE, UNLESS AMENDED, TO
EXCLUDE MOTORCYCLES ON BEHALF OF
MOTORCYCLE INDUSTRY COUNCIL.
THANK YOU. SEEING NO ADDITIONAL
TESTIMONY IN THE ROOM ON THIS
BILL, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
DAIS. QUESTIONS CONCERNS. WE DO
NOT HAVE A QUORUM YET. NO. WE'RE
TRYING. WELL, SENATOR, I WANT TO
THANK YOU BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE
HEARD THE OPPOSITION AS WE
WORKED ON THIS BILL, AND WE ALL
HOPE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL
DO EVERYTHING WE NEED THEM TO DO
TO PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES. BUT
WE ALSO KNOW THE FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLE OF STATES RIGHTS IS
THAT WE WILL GO FURTHER TO
PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES WHERE
THE WE BELIEVE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IS FALLING DOWN ON
ITS JOB. AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU, SIR. AND EVERYONE WHO
SHOWED UP HERE TO REMIND US OF
THEIR LOVED ONES. YOU KNOW WHO
YOU COULDN'T HAVE BEEN MORE
ACCURATE WHEN YOU SAID, WHEN MY
KIDS WALK TO SCHOOL OR THEY'RE
WALKING TO THEIR SUMMER CAMP
RIGHT NOW, I ACTUALLY DON'T
WORRY, THEY'LL BE KIDNAPED. BUT
I WORRY EVERY DAY THAT SOMEBODY
IS DRIVING UNSAFELY ON THE ROADS
IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN MY
LITTLE SON, WHO'S TALL, NOT SO
TALL FOR A TEN YEAR OLD, WON'T
BE SEEN, AND PEOPLE NOT ONLY ARE
THEY DRIVING TOO FAST THESE
DAYS, THEY'RE ALSO DRIVING,
DISTRACTED ON THEIR CELL PHONES.
AND IT IS REALLY SCARY. AND SO I
THINK THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY
MODEST APPROACH THAT GOES, IF IT
CAN SAVE ANY ONE OF THESE LIVES,
IT IS WORTH IT. AND AS TO THE
OPPOSITION OF THE COUNTIES, IT
IS HARD FOR ME TO TAKE SERIOUSLY
A QUESTION ABOUT THE COST TO OUR
COUNTIES WHEN THE LIVES THAT
HAVE BEEN LOST AND WERE SPOKEN
FOR TODAY ARE PRICELESS. BUT I
KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE BUDGET
CHAIR HERE TODAY WHO OBVIOUSLY
WANTS TO LOOK OUT FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT. AND HAVING COME FROM
LOCAL GOVERNMENT HIMSELF. SO TO
THE EXTENT THAT THAT IS A NEED,
HOPEFULLY WE CAN ADDRESS IT
THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS TO
MAKE SURE THAT THIS SAFETY
TECHNOLOGY IS AVAILABLE TO
EVERYONE. AND WE'RE NOT PUTTING
AN EXTRA BURDEN ON OUR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS, BECAUSE I AGREE
THAT OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY
SHOULD BE PROTECTING OUR
COMMUNITIES. AND THIS BILL DOES
THAT. SO WITH THAT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE, SENATOR? THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AND I REALLY
WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE
FAMILIES FOR BEING HERE TODAY. I
AND I SAID THIS YESTERDAY IN
TRANSPORTATION. I'LL SAY IT
AGAIN, THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A
DEVASTATING, PERMANENTLY LIFE
CHANGING, LOSS, TO BE ABLE TO
TURN THAT DEVASTATING TRAGEDY
INTO ADVOCACY SO THAT OTHER
FAMILIES DON'T HAVE THE SAME
EXPERIENCE, I'M IN AWE OF
PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO DO THAT. SO
THANK YOU. AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE. SO WE WILL
TAKE THAT UP WHEN WE HAVE A
QUORUM. THANK YOU SENATOR. THANK
YOU. COLLEAGUES. YEAH. SENATOR
CABALLERO, I BELIEVE YOU ARE
NEXT WITH SB 785. AND SINCE I'M
REMEMBERING, I'LL REITERATE THE
CHANGE THAT WE MENTIONED AT THE
TOP OF THE HEARING IN THE
ANALYSIS THAT IS ONLINE ON SB
785, WHICH IS THAT THE TEMPORARY
EXEMPTION FOR SERIES TICKETS HAS
BEEN REMOVED AND THE AUTHOR IS
GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON
THAT EXEMPTION AS WE MOVE
FORWARD. AGAIN, THAT IS LIVE ON
OUR WEBSITE IF YOU WANT TO SEE
IT. AND WITH THAT, I ACTUALLY,
IF YOU DON'T MIND, SENATOR,
BEFORE I HAVE TO GO VOTE IN
JUDICIARY. SO I HAVE TO STEP
OUT, BUT BEFORE YOU BEGIN, I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PARTNERSHIP ON THIS BILL AND
YOUR SINCERE EFFORT TO PROTECT
CONSUMERS, LET'S WAIT FOR THE
ROOM TO CLEAR. I KNOW THAT FIRST
AND FOREMOST, YOU HAVE PUT
CALIFORNIA'S CONSUMERS FIRST IN
THIS PROCESS. AND IT IS A HARD,
HARD ISSUE TO TACKLE, AS WE BOTH
HAVE LEARNED, BUT I THINK THAT
YOUR YOUR WORK ON THIS, YOUR
DEDICATION IS SHOWING THROUGH
THIS LEGISLATION AND I'M HAPPY
TO BE MOVING THE BILLS AS IT
STANDS TODAY, HOPEFULLY THROUGH
THIS COMMITTEE, I JUST WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTNERSHIP
ON THAT. AND WITH THAT, WHEN
YOU'RE READY AND I WILL BE
TURNING THE GAVEL OVER. THANK
YOU VERY THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS, I TOO
WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE WORK
THAT THEY DID ON THIS ISSUE AND
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
AT THIS TIME. SB 785 IS A
CONSUMER PROTECTION BILL THAT
ENDS THE PREDATORY PRACTICES
THAT CURRENTLY PLAGUE THE LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT TICKETING INDUSTRY
BY ENACTING MEANINGFUL REFORMS
THAT PUT CONSUMERS, VENUES,
ARTISTS AND TEAMS FIRST. I'VE
HEARD COUNTLESS STORIES FROM
CONSUMERS WHO WERE MISLED DURING
THE PURCHASE OF LIVE TICKET
EVENTS. CONSUMERS PURCHASED
TICKETS THROUGH SECONDARY
SELLERS ONLY TO DISCOVER THEY
ARE INVALID UPON ENTRY TO THE
EVENT VENUE. AS A RESULT, SMALL
INDEPENDENT VENUES ARE LEFT TO
DEAL WITH THE CONSUMER
COMPLAINTS, REFUND REQUESTS OR
DISPUTES OVER TICKET
AUTHENTICITY. THESE TICKETS ARE
KNOWN AS SPECULATIVE TICKETS.
SPECULATIVE TICKETING IS THE
PRACTICE OF LISTING TICKETS ON
SECONDARY SITES BEFORE A
RESELLER OWNS OR POSSESSES THE
TICKET. SPECULATIVE SPECULATIVE
TICKET SALES CAN STRAIN THE
RELATIONSHIP OF VENUES WITH
ARTISTS OR PROMOTERS, AND ERODE
TRUST IN CUSTOMERS. WHEN A
CONSUMER PURCHASES TICKETS TO
LIVE ENTERTAINMENT EVENTS, THEY
CARE ABOUT TWO THINGS. ONE IS
SEAT LOCATION AND TWO PURCHASING
A REAL TICKET. SB 785 WOULD
ENSURE CONSUMERS KNOW EXACTLY
WHAT THEY PAY FOR BY REQUIRING A
TICKET SELLER TO DISCLOSE,
DISCLOSE, SEAT INFORMATION. THE
BILL WOULD ENHANCE CONSUMER
TRUST AND END SPECULATIVE
TICKETING BY REQUIRING THAT A
TICKET SELLER OWN POSSESS, OR
HAVE A CONTRACTUAL RIGHT TO THE
TICKET AT THE TIME OF THE SALE.
FURTHERMORE, IN AN EFFORT TO
EFFECTIVELY BAN THE PRACTICE OF
SCALPING AND THE USE OF BOTS,
THIS BILL ESTABLISHES SERIOUS
PENALTIES FOR THE USE OF
DECEPTIVE URLS THAT LURE
CONSUMERS INTO BUYING TICKETS AT
INFLATED PRICES, AND FOR
EMPLOYING BOTS THAT ALLOW
PROFESSIONAL SCALPERS TO HOARD
TICKETS AND ENGAGE IN LARGE
SCALE SCALPING, DEPRIVING
CONSUMERS OF ACCESS TO FACE
VALUE. TICKETS I HAVE HAD
PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH
THE COMMITTEE CHAIR AND
DISCUSSED CONCEPTS INCLUDING
CAPS ON FEES, CAPS ON RESALE AND
TRANSFERABILITY. HOWEVER, I WILL
NOT BE MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY
OF THOSE PROVISIONS IN AN EFFORT
TO AVOID AFFECTING THE ONGOING
LAWSUIT AGAINST LIVE NATION, THE
PARENT COMPANY OF TICKETMASTER.
MOREOVER, WE RECEIVED TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE TO ENSURE THAT
NO PROVISION IN THIS BILL WILL
BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ONGOING
LAWSUIT. IT'S TIME TO MODERNIZE
CALIFORNIA'S TICKETING STATUTE
IN ORDER TO PROTECT CONSUMERS
FROM ANTI-CONSUMER PRACTICES AND
PRICE GOUGING, WHILE PRESERVING
THE RIGHTS OF ARTISTS,
ENTERTAINERS, TEAMS AND VENUES
WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT IS GABRIEL DOCTOR WITH
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
INDEPENDENT VENUES AND TIM
LYNCH, ON BEHALF OF THE SAN
FRANCISCO WARRIORS. THANK YOU,
SENATOR CABALLERO. EACH OF YOU
HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU. MY
NAME IS GABE DOCTO. I'M WITH THE
NATIONAL INDEPENDENT VENUE
ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER.
WE REPRESENT HUNDREDS OF
INDEPENDENT VENUES, PROMOTERS IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS WELL
AS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. ON A
NATIONAL LEVEL, TICKETING REFORM
HAS BEEN A PRIORITY OF NEVIS
SINCE THE SUMMER OF 2022,
PREDATING THE TAYLOR SWIFT
DEBACLE. TODAY, OUR MEMBERS IN
THE STATE ARE EXCITED AT THE
PROSPECT OF CALIFORNIA TAKING
THE LEAD TO BAN SPECULATIVE
RESALE, REQUIRE SECONDARY MARKET
DISCLOSURES AND INCREASED
PENALTIES FROM DECEPTIVE
PRACTICES THAT TRICK FANS INTO
PAYING TOO MUCH MONEY FOR FAKE
TICKETS. AS INDEPENDENT VENUE
OPERATORS, WE DEAL DIRECTLY WITH
THE CONSUMER DEESCALATING
FRUSTRATION AND ANGER CAUSED BY
FRAUDULENT TICKETS THAT WE HAVE
NO ASSOCIATION OR CONTROL OVER.
FANS SHOW US FAKE TICKETS ON A
NIGHTLY BASIS THAT COME FROM
SECONDARY PLATFORMS, WHERE A $30
TICKET IS INFLATED TO 150, EVEN
IF THE SHOW IS NOT SOLD OUT.
FANS OFTEN BLAME US FOR THE
PRACTICES OF BAD ACTORS LEAVING
OUR REPUTATIONS TARNISHED AND
OUR PATRONS TRUST TATTERED. THIS
DYNAMIC IS DISHEARTENING AND
THREATENS OUR ALREADY
CHALLENGING MARGINS,
DESTABILIZING, DESTABILIZING OUR
BUSINESSES AND LEAVING THEM
VULNERABLE TO CORPORATE
ACQUISITION. DON'T TAKE MY WORD
FOR IT. ON JUNE 8TH, THE SONOMA
PRESS DEMOCRAT ARTICLE TITLED
SONOMA NAPA COUNTY VENUES ARE
WARNING CONCERT GOERS ABOUT
UPTICK IN INFLATED TICKET
PRICES, OFFERED A SNAPSHOT OF
WHAT OUR VENUE MEMBERS DO DEAL
WITH ON A NIGHTLY BASIS. THE
VENUE FEATURED IN THE ARTICLE IS
NEVADA'S HOP TAVERN, BILL
DECARLI, THE VENUE'S DIRECTOR OF
MUSIC, AND HE IS HERE WITH US IN
SUPPORT ON THIS MEASURE TODAY, I
WANT TO BE CLEAR, THIS MEASURE
IS NOT A GIVEAWAY TO LIVE NATION
OR TICKETMASTER AND DOES NOT
STRENGTHEN MONOPOLISTIC POWER AS
THE OPPONENT SUGGESTS. INDIE
VENUES AND PROMOTERS HAVE BEEN
ADVOCATING ACROSS THE NATION FOR
REFORMS CONTAINED IN THIS BILL
SINCE 2022. SB 785 TAKES
NECESSARY STEPS TO TRULY PROTECT
NOT ONLY THE FANS, BUT THE
ARTISTS AND THE VENUES WHO
DEPEND ON THE FANS, ATTENDANCE
AND TRUST TO MAKE A LIVING. FOR
THOSE REASONS, NIVA AND OUR
MEMBERS IN CALIFORNIA ARE IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE
AND URGENT. I VOTE TODAY. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, GOOD AFTERNOON,
TIM LYNCH, ON BEHALF OF THE
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS, AND WE
ECHO THE COMMENTS OF OUR FRIENDS
AT NIVA. AND REGARDLESS OF THE
SIZE OF THE VENUE, THE ISSUES
ARE THE SAME. WE ARE THE FRONT
LINES THAT FACE THE CONSUMERS
THAT COME TO THE VENUE EVERY
SINGLE DAY. AND IF WE DON'T GIVE
THEM A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE,
WHETHER IT'S THROUGH OUR OWN
PRODUCT, THE WARRIORS ON THE
FLOOR OR THE DOZENS AND DOZENS
OF OTHER EVENTS THAT COME
THROUGH THE CHASE CENTER, WE
HAVE NO PRODUCT WITHOUT THE
TRUST OF THE FANS. WE CANNOT BE
SUCCESSFUL. WE THANK THE AUTHOR
AND THE COMMITTEE FOR FOCUSING
THIS BILL ON THREE ESSENTIAL
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS AROUND BOTS
DECEPTIVE URLS, AND SPECULATIVE
TICKETING. JUST BY WAY OF
EXAMPLE, IN THE LEAD UP TO THIS
HEARING, I DID A LITTLE
SEARCHING FOR WARRIORS TICKETS.
YOU'LL FIND THAT THE OFFICIAL
NBA SITE THROUGH WHICH WE SELL
OUR TICKETS AND LINK THROUGH OUR
TICKETS ENDS UP FOURTH OR FIFTH
OR SIXTH. WHEN YOU SEARCH DUE TO
MANIPULATION OF SEARCH OR
DECEPTIVE URLS. FURTHER, WHEN
YOU CLICK THROUGH ON SOME OF
THOSE SITES TO LOOK FOR TICKETS
FOR WARRIORS TICKETS, YOU'LL
FIND TICKETS FOR SALE FOR AN
OCTOBER EVENT THAT DOES NOT YET
EXIST. WE DO NOT HAVE OUR
SCHEDULES YET, AND THAT DOES NOT
EXIST. WHEN YOU CLICK THROUGH
THAT, THE WEBSITE FURTHER
PROMPTS YOU ALONG BY TELLING YOU
TICKETS FOR THIS EVENT ARE
SELLING FAST OR TICKETS ARE
GOING QUICKLY. FOR THIS EVENT,
ENCOURAGING CONSUMERS TO BUY A
PRODUCT THAT IS SPECULATIVE AT
BEST. SO WE THANK THE COMMITTEE.
WE THANK THE AUTHOR FOR HER HARD
FOCUSED WORK WITH THIS BILL AND
WE ENCOURAGE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER SUPPORTERS IN THE ROOM?
ORTEZ PRISCILLA CROSS HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA ARTS
ADVOCATES, WE JUST WANT TO
QUICKLY THANK THE AUTHOR FOR THE
AMENDMENTS THAT SHE HAD TAKEN.
THANK YOU. HI, I'M PATRICK
MALONEY, SONOMA COUNTY RESIDENT,
20 YEAR EVENT PRODUCER AND
PROMOTER IN SUPPORT OF SB 785.
YEAH, MY NAME IS BILL DECARLI.
I'M DIRECTOR OF HOT MONK
PRESENTS. WE WORK WITH HOT MONK
TAVERN, PRODUCE ALL THE SHOWS, I
AM WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN SUPPORT OF
785. MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS, I
WOULD KIDANI REPRESENTING THE
LOS ANGELES RAMS. STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR
. MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS. ALEX
TORRES HERE. ON BEHALF OF A FEW
FOLKS WITH THE INDULGENCE OF THE
CHAIR VENUES WHO COULDN'T MAKE
IT TODAY, THAT INCLUDES JIM
CORNETT, OWNER OPERATOR OF
HARLOW'S AND PRESIDENT OF NEVA
CALIFORNIA, REPRESENTING ANY
VENUES IN THE CAPITAL REGION
LIKE GOLDFIELDS HOTEL, FOLSOM
BOARDWALK AND TORCH CLUB LOS
ANGELES VENUES. THE BELLWETHER
TERAGRAM BALLROOM, MOROCCAN
LOUNGE, AND THE LEGENDARY
TROUBADOUR IN SANTA MONICA, SAN
DIEGO. VENUES. MUSIC BOX AND
BRICK BY BRICK. LASTLY ALSO
VOICING SUPPORT FOR ANOTHER
PLANET ENTERTAINMENT,
HEADQUARTERED IN BERKELEY THAT
MANAGES THE GREEK THEATER BILL
GRAHAM, OUTSIDE LANDS AND MORE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS
ISLA GARCIA FOR LIVE NATION
ENTERTAINMENT IN SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, JORDAN CURLEY ON
BEHALF OF THE MUSIC ARTIST
COALITION AND SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON. JOSH LIEBERMAN,
GENERAL MANAGER OF AUGUST HALL
AND A PROUD MEMBER OF NHIÀU
CALIFORNIA. ALSO IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. CHAIR MEMBERS CHRIS
SCROGGIN WITH THE PRAYING
COMPANY ON BEHALF OF AEG AND
SUBSIDIARY ACCESS AND SUPPORT.
HI, I'M GRAHAM LEBRON FROM CAFE
DU NORD IN SAN FRANCISCO. I'M AN
INDEPENDENT VENUE OPERATOR AND
MEMBER OF NEVA AND I'M IN
SUPPORT. I'M JOHN GUNTON, I'M
THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE
INDEPENDENT IN SAN FRANCISCO AND
THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE NEWLY
BUILT BEING BUILT VENUE IN
SACRAMENTO, CHANNEL 24, AND I AM
ALSO IN SUPPORT. I'M DANIEL
ROMANDIA, THE MARKETING DIRECTOR
AND TALENT BUYER FOR HARLOW'S
AND THE STARLET ROOM, AS WELL AS
A CO-OWNER OF CAFE COLONIAL
RIGHT HERE IN SACRAMENTO. AND I
AM IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
CHARLES BOSWELL. I REPRESENT SOL
BLOOM MUSIC FESTIVAL. I ALSO
REPRESENT ANTI LEGENDS, WHICH IS
A CONCERT TOURING COMPANY. AND I
ALSO REPRESENT THE RING STUDIOS,
WHICH IS A LOCAL MUSIC VENUE
HERE. AND I SUPPORT. MCKAY
CARNEY ON BEHALF OF THE SAN JOSE
SHARKS IN SUPPORT ANDREW
GOVERNOR ON BEHALF OF THE SAN
FRANCISCO 49 ERS IN SUPPORT AND
ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA'S FIVE
BASEBALL TEAMS ARE STILL WORKING
ON A POSITION, BUT WE APPRECIATE
THE AMENDMENTS AND WORKING WITH
THE AUTHOR. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, DO WE HAVE PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
GOOD AFTERNOON. OKAY. THANK YOU.
IT'S AN HONOR TO ADDRESS THE
COMMITTEE TODAY. I'M DIANNA
MOSS, VICE PRESIDENT AND
DIRECTOR OF COMPETITION POLICY
AT THE PROGRESSIVE POLICY
INSTITUTE LIVE NATION.
TICKETMASTER IS THE SUBJECT OF A
LONG AWAITED ANTITRUST CASE. YET
CONTINUES TO DEPLOY ALL MEANS TO
PROTECT ITS MONOPOLY. LIVE
NATION HAS TURNED TO BACKING
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD IMPAIR
COMPETITION IN THE RESALE MARKET
. THIS MARKET IS THE LAST
FRONTIER OF COMPETITION IN
TICKETING AND POSES AN ONGOING
THREAT TO THE LIVE NATION
MONOPOLY. PPI SUPPORTS
LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES THAT
PROMOTE RESALE TICKET
TRANSFERABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY
, BUT MANY CONSUMER PROTECTION
BILLS INCLUDE PROVISIONS THAT
WILL ACT TO STIFLE COMPETITION
IN RESALE AND STEER TICKET
BUYERS BACK TO TICKETMASTER.
THESE BILLS ALL SHARE A
MISPLACED FOCUS ON TICKET
SCALPING BOTS AND SPECULATIVE
TICKETS. THESE ARE THE EXCEPTION
AND NOT THE NORM. INDEED, SOME
STUDIES SHOW THAT OVER 50% OF
RESALE TICKETS ARE SOLD BELOW
FACE VALUE. A WELL FUNCTIONING
COMPETITIVE RESALE MARKET WORKS
EFFICIENTLY TO MATCH UP MORE
TEAMS AND ARTISTS WITH MORE FANS
AT PRICES THAT REFLECT THE
DYNAMICS OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND.
THERE ARE MAJOR DOWNSIDES TO
BILLS THAT INTERFERE WITH
COMPETITION IN RESALE. THEY HAND
LIVE NATION MORE MARKET POWER.
SB 785 RESTRICTIONS ON URLS.
CLASSIFYING A TICKET AS A
LICENSE, AND ANY POTENTIAL PRICE
OR FEE CAPS WOULD IMPAIR
COMPETITION TO THE DETRIMENT OF
FANS AND ARTISTS. SUCH BILLS
ALSO CREATE CONFLICTS WITH
ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT.
REGULATION OF RESALE. IN THE
MIDST OF A DOJ CASE TO WHICH
CALIFORNIA HAS SIGNED ON COULD
CREATE A MOVING TARGET IN
LITIGATION OR EVEN IMMUNIZE
FUTURE ANTITRUST ACTIONS
INVOLVING TICKETING. PPI URGES
THE COMMITTEE TO HIT THE PAUSE
BUTTON ON SB 785, WHILE THE DOJ
CASE RUNS ITS COURSE. WE ALSO
URGE YOU TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE
ON THE BENEFITS OF RESALE AND
HOW THE BILL TILTS THE SCALES TO
THE LIVE NATION MONOPOLY. THANK
YOU, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ANY
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. ROBERT HARRELL,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA, RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED
TO SB 785. LET ME JUST START
BROADER, BIGGER PICTURE, AND
THEN I'LL DRILL DOWN A LITTLE
BIT. FIRST OF ALL, APPRECIATE,
THE SENATOR, WHO I'M SURE HAS
LEARNED NOW OVER THE PAST COUPLE
OF YEARS, AS HAVE OTHERS, WHAT A
QUAGMIRE IT IS TO GET INVOLVED
IN THIS PUBLIC POLICY ISSUE. BUT
IT'S A WORTHWHILE CONVERSATION
TO HAVE AND AN IMPORTANT ONE TO
HAVE. BIG PICTURE, WE FEEL AT
THE CONSUMER OF CALIFORNIA WITH
THIS MASSIVE ANTITRUST CASE THAT
YOU HEARD PREVIEWED IN THIS
COMMITTEE AND COMMITTEES LAST
YEAR, THAT IT WAS COMING AND
HERE IT IS, THE US DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, 29 STATES, INCLUDING,
SUCH PROGRESSIVE BELLWETHERS AS
WYOMING, TEXAS, FLORIDA, WEST
VIRGINIA, I BELIEVE ARKANSAS.
AND I'M MISSING SOME. THOSE ARE
SOME OF THE 29 STATES PLUS DC. I
ACTUALLY HAVING READ THE
COMPLAINT AND IT IS QUITE A
READ, YOU SHOULD ALL READ IT. I
THINK, BECAUSE WE KNOW THOSE
CASES WILL TAKE YEARS. THE
OVERUNDER IS FIVE SIX YEARS, AND
I'LL BET THE OVER PUN INTENDED,
I THINK THAT IS REALLY AN
INVITATION TO STATE LEGISLATURES
TO TAKE ACTION THAT CLIPS THE
WINGS OF THE MONOPOLY. THIS BILL
ONLY CLIPS THE WINGS OF THOSE
WHO COMPETE AGAINST THE
MONOPOLY. OVERWHELMINGLY THAT IS
NOT TO SAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT
TO THE SENATOR AND HER
SUPPORTERS, WHICH INCLUDE THE
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, NOTED
STRONG CONSUMER ADVOCATES FROM
THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE AND THE VERY MONOPOLY
THAT'S BEING SUED RIGHT NOW BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL, THAT THERE
IS A CONVERSATION TO BE HAD
ABOUT SPEC TICKETING. THERE IS A
CONVERSATION TO BE HAD ABOUT
DECEPTIVE URLS, AND WE'RE
WILLING TO HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION. THIS PROBABLY
ISN'T THE LANGUAGE THAT WE WOULD
LAND ON. AND THINGS HAVE BEEN
MOVING VERY QUICKLY. AND WHILE I
WAS IN THE HALLWAY, I HEARD AN
ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION. I COULDN'T
HEAR OVER THE DIN OF THE
HALLWAY, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT
THAT IS, BUT I GUESS WE'LL FIND
OUT. DRILLING DOWN JUST A LITTLE
BIT TO CLOSE MY COMMENTS. THERE
IS. THERE ARE A FEW PROVISIONS
HERE THAT WE WORRY ABOUT
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT DO
WIND UP UNINTENTIONALLY
STRENGTHENING THE HAND OF THE
MONOPOLY. I'LL GIVE YOU ONE
EXAMPLE. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME
SITUATIONS WHERE SEASON TICKET
HOLDERS WHO RELEASE SOME OF
THEIR SEATS TO THE SECONDARY
MARKET HAVE BEEN THERE'S BEEN
RETRIBUTION AGAINST THEM BY THE
TEAMS OF WHICH THEY ARE SEASON
TICKET HOLDERS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU
GET SPECIFIC ON SPEC TICKETING
OR ON SOME OF THE PROVISIONS,
YOU NOW HAVE IDENTIFIED WHAT THE
SEED IS, WHICH I THINK FOR A FAN
IS A GOOD THING, BUT IT ALSO HAS
POTENTIAL UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES TO PUNISH THE
SEASON TICKET HOLDER WHO
RELEASED THOSE TICKETS. THAT
CONCERNS ME. THAT CAME UP IN
MARYLAND, AND THAT'S A PROVISION
JUST ONE OF MANY THAT CONCERNS
ME. SO WE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE
THE BILL, WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH THE AUTHOR. WE
HAVE NOT DONE SO IN A WHILE, BUT
WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. AND WE
THINK THIS BILL STILL NEEDS A
LOT OF WORK. AND THE FOCUS
SHOULD NOT JUST BE ON THOSE
COMPETING AGAINST THE MONOPOLY,
BUT IT ALSO OUGHT TO INCLUDE
MONOPOLISTIC PRACTICES THAT HARM
CONSUMERS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION, MADAM CHAIR,
MEMBERS. JAMES JACK, ON BEHALF
OF THE COALITION FOR TICKET
FAIRNESS, ASSOCIATE MY COMMENTS
WITH MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION. WE'RE STILL
OPPOSED TO THE MEASURE. THANK
YOU. MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
COURTNEY JENSEN, ON BEHALF OF
SEATGEEK AND TICKPICK IN
OPPOSING LAST AMENDED POSITION,
I APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR WORKING
WITH US, BUT STILL DO HAVE
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH THE
BILL. THANK YOU. HI EVERYONE.
TISH RYLANDER, ON BEHALF OF
VIVID SEATS AND WE ARE OPPOSED
UNLESS AMENDED. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, AARON NÚMERO
REPRESENTING STUBHUB. WE STILL
HAVE AN OPPOSED POSITION, BUT WE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S OPEN
DOOR AND WE'LL CONTINUE WORKING
WITH HER. THANK YOU. CHAIR
MEMBERS. HEATHER LAMBERT, ON
BEHALF OF LATIN BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION. HISPANIC 100 AND
THE CENTRAL VALLEY LATINO MAYORS
AND ELECTED OFFICIALS COALITION.
WE ARE RESPECTFULLY IN
OPPOSITION. ROBERT SINGLETON
CHAMBER OF PROGRESS ALSO
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT,
I WOULD LIKE TO JUST CALL THE
ROLL REAL QUICK. WE HAVE A
QUORUM. BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON.
BRIAN DIXON. DIXON. HERE. HOOVER
IRWIN. IRWIN. HERE. LOWENTHAL.
HERE LOWENTHAL. HERE. ORTEGA.
ORTEGA. HERE WARD. WARD. HERE.
WICKS WICKS. HERE. WILSON. WE
HAVE A QUORUM. ALL RIGHT. DO WE
HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WICKS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
FIRST OF ALL, AS MANY OF YOU
KNOW, I DOVE DEEP INTO THIS
ISSUE THIS YEAR AND IT IS INDEED
A THORNY ONE, SO I THINK
EVERYONE WHO CAME UP TO EXPRESS
SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION I MET WITH
MULTIPLE TIMES, AS I KNOW YOU
HAVE AS WELL, OVER THE PAST YEAR
AND A HALF, SO I'M IN YOUR CLUB
HERE AND TRYING TO FIX THIS VERY
VEXING, CHALLENGE, I CAN'T
IMAGINE A BETTER AUTHOR TO WORK
ON THIS THAN YOU. AND I ASSUME
THE BILL IS GOING TO MOVE OUT OF
COMMITTEE TODAY. I SHARE SOME OF
THE CONCERNS THAT THE OPPOSITION
HAS RAISED, THE OPPOSITION THAT
HAS RAISED THESE CONCERNS IS THE
COALITION I WAS WORKING WITH ON
MY BILL, I'M GOING TO LAY OFF
TODAY, BUT THE BILL, I THINK
WILL GET OUT. AND I WANT TO WORK
WITH YOU AS WE HEAD INTO
APPROPRIATIONS, BECAUSE I THINK,
YOU KNOW, YOU AND I HAVE A
HISTORY OF LANDING SOME TOUGH
PLANES, SO I WOULD LOVE TO BE,
YOU KNOW, A THOUGHT PARTNER WITH
YOU AS THIS BILL MOVES FORWARD
IN ITS PROCESS AND SEE IF WE CAN
LAND THIS IN A PLACE WHERE WE
CAN HAVE SOMETHING, YOU KNOW,
COMING OUT OF THAT PROCESS THAT
WE CAN ALL AGREE TO. BUT I LOOK
FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATIONS. I
KNOW YOU'LL DIVE IN, ROLL UP
YOUR SLEEVES AND JUMP ON IN AND
ARE SOMEONE WHO'S VERY
THOUGHTFUL AND ENGAGING WITH
OPPOSITION. AND SO WE'D LOVE TO
WORK WITH YOU ON IT, IF THE BILL
MOVES OUT OF COMMITTEE TODAY.
SOUNDS GOOD. THANK YOU.
ACTUALLY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S
ANY OTHER COMMENTS I WILL, I'LL
JUST MAKE SOME COMMENTS TO, WE
HEARD ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS BILL
EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND IT IS
QUITE A BALANCING ACT WITH ALL
THESE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT HAVE
CONCERNS. AND AS YOU KNOW, LAST
YEAR, WE WERE THE COAUTHORS ON
AB EIGHT WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER
FRIEDMAN, AND WE REALLY DID SEE
WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT A DIFFICULT
BALANCE IT IS. AND THEN IN
ADDITION, YOU HAVE, THE LAWSUITS
GOING, BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT
MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T I
MEAN, EVERYTHING THAT THAT THE
OPPOSITION TALKED ABOUT, NOT
STIFLING COMPETITION, MAKING
SURE THAT WE ARE REALLY DOING A
VERY PRO-CONSUMER BILL. I THINK
THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
AND I, I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY, BUT I, I WOULD
REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK
WITH THE APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR
AND, AND SEE IF WE CAN GET TO A
PLACE THAT'S, AS I SAID, LOOKS
AT THESE CRITICAL AREAS THAT ARE
NOT COVERED IN YOUR BILL YET.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
APPRECIATE THAT. ALL RIGHT. AND
YES, ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWENTHAL.
YES, JUST VERY BRIEFLY, I WANT
TO COMMEND THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I WANT TO
ECHO THE COMMENTS OF MY
COLLEAGUES WHO UNDERSCORE THE
COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUE. I'LL
TELL YOU, YOU KNOW WHAT MAKES
THIS, EASIER TO MAKE A
DETERMINATION ON IS WHEN MAIL IS
SENT INTO OUR COMMUNITIES
DUMBING DOWN THE ISSUE TO
CONSTITUENTS PURPORTING TO BE
CONSUMER ORIENTED MAIL THAT IS
CLEARLY, YOU KNOW, ONE ASPECT OF
THE INDUSTRY WHO STANDS TO GAIN
A LOT, BY THE TERMINATION OF THE
BILL. AND SO I, YOU KNOW,
CAUTION INDUSTRY IN THESE TYPES
OF SITUATIONS WHEN YOU'RE
DUMBING IT DOWN FOR SOMETHING
THAT IS SO COMPLEX, IT'S IT
DOESN'T MAKE THE SITUATION
EASIER FOR US TO TRY AND
RESOLVE, SO WITH THAT, I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL
RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? WELL I APPRECIATE
THE COMMENTS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS
WHERE EVERY TIME YOU THINK
YOU'VE GOT A SOLUTION, SOMETHING
ELSE BLOWS UP. AND IN THE END, I
HAD A BUNCH OF MOVING PIECES
THAT I THOUGHT WAS GOING TO DEAL
WITH EACH ONE OF THE INDUSTRIES.
THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS IN FOOTBALL IS
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HAPPENS IN
BASEBALL. IT HAS TO DO WITH
WHETHER YOU OWN THE FACILITY OR
YOU DON'T OWN THE FACILITY.
RIGHT, IT'S NOT AN EASY IT'S NOT
AN EASY TASK. BUT WHAT I CAN SAY
IS I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT THE
APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR HAS, DIPPED
HER FINGERS IN THIS PARTICULAR
ISSUE BECAUSE SHE UNDERSTANDS
FROM A FROM A REALLY PRACTICAL
POSITION WHAT THE CHALLENGES ARE
THAT ARE THAT WE HAVE, WE
BASICALLY NARROWED IT DOWN TO
THE BOTTOM OF YOUR URL AND THE
SPECULATIVE AND THEN CHECKED
WITH THE AG TO MAKE SURE THAT,
OUR BILL, WOULD WORK WITH THE
LITIGATION AND BE VERY CLEAR
ABOUT THAT. I'M NOT INTERESTED
IN DOING ANYTHING THAT'S GOING
TO, AFFECT OR MAKE THAT
LITIGATION LOOK BAD, AND SO I'M,
I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
THEIR OFFICE AND I, AND I
PROMISE THAT I WILL WORK WITH,
THE CHAIR OF APPROPRIATIONS TO
TRY TO COME UP WITH THE BEST
BILL THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN
GET. IF IT'S THIS ONE, GREAT. IF
IT'S, SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS,
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO LOOK AT
IT. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. AND THEN
JUST FOR THE COMMENT FROM THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION ON THE,
AMENDMENT, IT'S ONE CHANGE IN
THE ANALYSIS NUMBER SIX, IN THE
SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS, THE
TEMPORARY EXEMPTION FOR SERIES
TICKETS HAS BEEN REMOVED, THE
UPDATED ANALYSIS IS POSTED ON
THE COMMITTEE WEBSITE. AND WITH
THAT, CAN I HAVE THE SECRETARY
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? I'M SORRY.
OH, A MOTION SECOND. ALL RIGHT.
THAT WAS A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ORTEGA. A SECOND BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER. MEMBER WARD.
AND THE MOTION IS, Dð PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. YES OKAY. AS
AMENDED, DO PASSES AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. OKAY OKAY. ITEM
NUMBER TWO, SB 785 BY SENATOR
CABALLERO. THE MOTION IS DO PASS
AS AMENDED, TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON. BRIAN
DIXON. DIXON. AYE. ERWIN. AYE.
ERWIN. AYE. HOOVER LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA ORTEGA.
AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE WIX. WIX.
NOT VOTING. WILSON OKAY. FIVE
VOTES. YEAH. THAT BILL, NEEDS
ONE MORE, VOTE, AND WE WILL
HOLD. THE ROLL OPEN, AND WE ARE
GOING OUT OF ORDER BECAUSE, Ã.
SENATOR SMALLWOOD CUEVAS HAS
ANOTHER OBLIGATION. SO WE'RE
GOING TO BE HEARING SB 1446
RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR. GOOD AFTERNOON TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS. GOOD TO BE
WITH YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM
PLEASED TO PRESENT SB 1446, THE
RETAIL THEFT PREVENTION AND SAFE
STAFFING ACT. WELL, YOU GOT SOME
ACOUSTICS IN HERE. CAN YOU HEAR
ME? OKAY SHOULD I GET CLOSER? SO
I WANT TO JUST START BY SAYING I
WILL BE ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS, WHICH CLARIFY OUR
DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENTIAL
WORKPLACE TECHNOLOGY, AND ALSO
CLARIFIES HOW NOTICE OF THESE
TECHNOLOGIES MUST BE GIVEN. AND
I WANT TO THANK COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR YOUR HELP WITH THIS, SB 1446
WILL PROTECT WORKERS AND
CONSUMERS BY ENSURING SAFE
STAFFING LEVELS AT STORES WHICH
UTILIZE SELF-CHECKOUT AND ENSURE
WORKERS AND CONSUMERS ARE
NOTIFIED WHEN EMPLOYERS ADOPT
CONSEQUENTIAL WORKPLACE
TECHNOLOGIES, AS AMENDED. THIS
BILL WOULD REQUIRE LARGE
RETAILERS AND GROCERY STORES TO
ENACT SAFE STAFFING RATIOS WHEN
UTILIZING SELF-CHECKOUT KIOSKS,
AND REQUIRES EMPLOYERS TO NOTIFY
THEIR WORKERS AND CONSUMERS WHEN
THEY ADOPT TECHNOLOGIES THAT
AUTOMATE, ELIMINATE, OR
ELECTRONICALLY MONITORS AND
ALTERS A WORKER'S CORE FUNCTIONS
. FROM A CONSUMER PROTECTION
STANDPOINT, SB 1446 ENSURES THE
PUBLIC AND WORKERS HAVE NOTICED
WHEN TECHNOLOGIES ARE BEING
DEPLOYED THAT ELECTRONICALLY
MONITOR THEM OR UTILIZE AI IN A
WAY THAT SIGNIFICANTLY,
SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTS THEIR CORE
JOB FUNCTIONS. RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY LIKE
SECURITY CAMERAS WITH FACIAL
RECOGNITION BODY CAMERAS THAT
CAN BE WORN BY RETAIL STAFF,
SMART CARTS, AND MORE WILL
CONTINUE TO RAPIDLY CHANGE
WORKERS AND THE CONSUMER
EXPERIENCE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
PRIVACY IS PROTECTED, AND IT'S
CRUCIAL THAT OUR LAWS KEEP PACE
WITH THIS RAPIDLY CHANGING
INDUSTRY AND TECHNOLOGY. IN
RECENT YEARS, WE HAVE SEEN
AUTOMATION IN OUR RETAIL,
GROCERY AND DRUG STORES
DRASTICALLY CUT WORKERS, AND
THAT ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO OTHER
ISSUES AND CONCERNS IN OUR
COMMUNITIES AS WE RELATE TO
POVERTY AND, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO
HOLD A SAFETY NET THAT CAN HOLD
ALL OF THESE WORKERS. THE
CUTTING OF THE WORKFORCE ALSO
LEADS TO CHRONIC UNDERSTAFFING
IN OUR STORES, WHICH CREATES
SOME UNSAFE WORKING CONDITIONS.
LEÓN FRONT LINE CLERKS ARE
FORCED TO SERVE CUSTOMERS WHILE
MONITORING SELF-CHECKOUT STANDS,
LEAVING THESE STORES EASY
TARGETS FOR THEFT AND WORKPLACE
VIOLENCE. MANY RETAILERS HAVE
THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGED THE
CHALLENGES OF SELF-CHECKOUT AND
HAVE EITHER LIMITED OR REMOVED
THEM ALTOGETHER. I WANT TO GIVE
A QUOTE FROM A CEO OF DOLLAR
GENERAL, WHICH REMOVED ALL OF
THEIR SELF-CHECKOUT FROM
THOUSANDS OF THEIR STORES, AND
THE QUOTE SAYS THERE IS TRULY NO
SUBSTITUTE FOR AN EMPLOYEE
PRESENCE AT THE FRONT END OF THE
STORE TO GREET CUSTOMERS AND TO
PROVIDE EXCELLENT CUSTOMER
SERVICE, INCLUDING AT THE
CHECKOUT. I ALSO WANT TO NOTE
THAT THERE HAVE BEEN STUDIES
THAT SHOW THAT 20 MILLION
AMERICANS HAVE STOLEN FROM
SELF-CHECKOUT, AND WHEN ASKED,
YOU KNOW, MORE ALMOST HALF OF
THEM SAID THAT THEY'RE PLANNING
TO DO IT AGAIN, SO THESE KIOSKS
ALONE CAUSE ABOUT FOUR TIMES
MORE SHRINKAGE OF MERCHANDISE
THAN TRADITIONAL CASHIER
CHECKOUTS, ABOUT $10 BILLION
THAT THE INDUSTRY HAS REPORTED
IN LOST REVENUE AND BEYOND
THEFT, SELF-CHECKOUT KIOSKS HAVE
ALSO CREATED CHALLENGES FOR
CONSUMERS WHO NEED EXTRA
ASSISTANCE IN STORES. AND WE
KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR OUR
STORES TO HAVE A GOOD SHOPPING
EXPERIENCE. AS WE'RE COMPETING
WITH ONLINE BRANDS, WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE FOLKS CONTINUE TO COME
TO OUR BIG BOX STORES. OLDER
ADULTS AND PARTICULARLY
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
MAY NEED ASSISTANCE BAGGING
ITEMS, HELPING TO NAVIGATE SOME
OF THE SCREEN IN THE IN THE
TECHNOLOGY NEEDED FOR
SELF-CHECKOUT, AND CAN BE A
STRUGGLE AGAIN FOR THE LONE
WORKER WHO IS TRYING TO MANAGE
ALL OF THIS AT SELF-CHECKOUT AND
FOR ALL TOO OFTEN, ALONE. I WILL
CLOSE BY SAYING THAT MORE
WORKERS IN STORES MEAN MORE
PEOPLE EMPLOYED WHO SPEND THEIR
DOLLARS IN OUR COMMUNITIES AND
HELP TO GROW OUR THRIVING
ECONOMY. AND IT'S BETTER FOR
SERVICE WHEN WE ENSURE THAT WE
HAVE A HANDLE ON EMERGING
TECHNOLOGIES AND TECHNOLOGIES
AND CAN INTEGRATE THESE TWO
THINGS, WORKERS AND TECHNOLOGIES
IN SAFE AND FAIR WAYS, ALSO WITH
US TODAY IS ALEX QUEZADA, A
GROCERY STORE WORKER IN ALAMEDA
COUNTY WHO WILL BE A WITNESS AS
WELL AS SARAH FLOCKS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION.
JASSI GREWAL IS HERE FOR WITH
UFC IS HERE FOR TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS. IF YOU ALL HAVE THEM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITNESSES.
ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MY
NAME IS ALEX QUEZADA. I AM A
GROCERY STORE WORKER AT LUCKY'S
AND A FORMER SAFEWAY EMPLOYEE,
OTHER GROCERY WORKERS, LIKE
MYSELF AND I HAVE WITNESSED
FIRSTHAND THE REDUCTION IN
STAFFING DUE TO SELF-CHECKOUT
AND THE INCREASE IN WORK OR
WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, PERSONALLY,
I HAVE BEEN ATTACKED BY A
CUSTOMER BEFORE, WHENEVER I'VE
WORKED SELF-CHECKOUT, ALONE,
I'VE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR
SUPERVISING, NOT JUST THE
SELF-CHECKOUT MACHINES, BUT THE
ENTIRE, LIKE, CHECKOUT AREA
MYSELF, WHICH MEANS THAT I
MONITOR THE SELF-CHECKOUT
STATIONS, WHILE ALSO PERFORMING
OTHER TASKS LIKE RUNNING THE
CASHIER KIOSK. PERFORMING
MANAGER DUTIES, SELLING LOTTO
TICKETS, PROCESSING MONEY
ORDERS, RUNNING BACKUP CUSTOMER
SERVICE FOR REFUNDS, WRITING
RAIN CHECKS, PRICE CHECKS, ALSO
LIQUOR LOCK UP, AND CABINET. OR
HANDLING CUSTOMER SERVICE PHONE
LINES AND ANSWERING THE MANY
QUESTIONS THAT CUSTOMERS HAVE.
IN THE PROCESS. IT'S GOING LIKE
1,000,000MPH. CUSTOMERS ALREADY
HAVE TONS OF ISSUES USING THE
MACHINES AS THEY ARE, BECAUSE
THEY ARE VERY SENSITIVE, AND
SOMETIMES, THEY NEED THOSE,
ALERTS NEED TO BE REMOVED, SOME
OF WHICH CAN ONLY BE CLEARED
WITH MANAGER APPROVAL, AND THEN
WHEN THEY LOCK UP, MORE
CUSTOMERS HAVE TO WAIT. AND,
THEY JUST GET IRRITATED. I'VE
HAD THEM YELL AT ME, FOR BEING
TOO SLOW. I'VE HAD THEM COMPLAIN
AT ME THAT THE PURCHASING SYSTEM
SUCKS, AND SOMETIMES THAT'S
CAUSED OUR CUSTOMERS TO GET
PHYSICAL, WHEN I'VE LEFT
SELF-CHECKOUT, UNATTENDED,
CUSTOMERS HAVE JUST STOPPED
SCANNING THEIR ITEMS ALTOGETHER
AND JUST WALK AWAY OR SOME WILL
SCAN SOME ITEMS WHILE LEAVING
SOME ITEMS UNSCANNED, AND I
BELIEVE IN ORDER TO BE FAIR, THE
SELF-CHECKOUT AREA TO BE
PROPERLY MANAGED, THERE NEEDS TO
BE MORE THAN ONE WORKER, AT
LEAST TWO, I THINK HAVING
ADDITIONAL WORKERS IN THE
SELF-CHECKOUT AREA, ENSURES MORE
SAFETY FOR US AND WILL LEAD TO
LESS VIOLENCE. AND WE'RE, AS
WORKERS, ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE
BETTER SERVICE, THE COMPANY IS
PUTTING US IN HARM'S WAY BECAUSE
THEY ARE CHOOSING NOT TO SAFELY
STAFF THE STORE, JUST HAVING
THAT I THINK WOULD MAKE THE
STORES A LOT SAFER. THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS, MADAM CHAIR MEMBER
SARA FLOCKS, CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION. WE'RE A PROUD
CO-SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. IT IS
ACTUALLY PART OF A PACKAGE OF
FIVE BILLS TO PUT WORKER
CENTERED GUARDRAILS ON THE
DEPLOYMENT OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE
WORKPLACE AND I'M GOING TO TALK
ABOUT ONE PART OF THIS BILL,
WHICH GOES BACK TO ALEX'S STORY,
WHICH IS THAT WHEN SELF-CHECKOUT
CHECKOUT WAS PUT INTO USE IN
GROCERY STORES, I DON'T THINK
THERE WAS A LOT OF THOUGHT BY
EITHER THE DEVELOPERS OF THE
PRODUCT OR BY RETAILERS OF WHAT
THE IMPACT WOULD BE OF WHAT
FRUSTRATED CUSTOMERS WOULD DO TO
CHECKERS, OF WHAT THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR THEFT WOULD BE,
AND THAT LACK OF CONSIDERATION
LED ACTUALLY FOR TO UFCW AND
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION TO
SUPPORT THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER MÀ
BILL, WHICH BANNED THE USE OF
SELF-CHECKOUT FOR ALCOHOL AND
TOBACCO, BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE
AREA WHERE WE SAW THERE COULD BE
ABUSE OF THIS SYSTEM. AND SO
THIS BILL REALLY LOOKS AT
THERE'S THE STAFFING ASPECT, BUT
THE OTHER IS ABOUT THE NOTICE OF
THE USE OF CONSEQUENTIAL
WORKPLACE TECHNOLOGY. AND REALLY
THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO HAVE
EMPLOYERS THINK ABOUT WHAT THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS. AND THEN GIVE
WORKERS AND CUSTOMERS NOTICE OF
ANY KIND OF TECHNOLOGY THEY'RE
GOING TO PUT THEY'RE GOING TO
USE THAT AUTOMATES OR ELIMINATES
JOB FUNCTIONS OR USES ELECTRONIC
MONITORING OF JOB FUNCTIONS AND
WHAT'S THIS TECHNOLOGY WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT? WE'RE NOT TALKING
ABOUT LIKE THE OPPOSITION SAYS,
REFRIGERATION. I THINK THAT WAS
VERY WELL OUTLINED IN THE
ANALYSIS. THIS IS TECHNOLOGY
LIKE DIGITAL SMART CARDS THAT
ARE BEING TESTED AT WHOLE FOODS
AND SAN MATEO. IT'S ABOUT THE
AMAZON. JUST GET UP AND GO
TECHNOLOGY. IT'S ABOUT THE
ROBOTS. THEY ALREADY HAVE TO
STOCK AND TO DO CUSTOMER
SERVICE. TALLY MARTY NIVI BADGER
, THAT DO FACIAL RECOGNITION,
COMPUTER VISION, RETINAL
SCANNING, ALL KINDS OF DATA
COLLECTION, AUTOMATING OF TASKS.
THESE ARE ALREADY IN GROCERY
STORES. AND WHAT WE WANT THIS
NOTICE TO DO IS LET CUSTOMERS
KNOW LET WORKERS KNOW IN ADVANCE
OF THIS PUTTING IN THE STORE.
AND WE HOPE BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN
IMPACT ASSESSMENT, BUT THAT IT'S
A SMALL STEP TOWARDS RETAILERS
THINKING ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO BE
ADVANTAGED BY THIS, WHO'S GOING
TO BE DISADVANTAGED, WHAT ABOUT
THE UNBANKED SENIORS, THE
DISABLED, NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS,
YOUTH, WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE CREDIT
CARDS? WHAT ARE ALL OF THE
IMPACTS? THINK ABOUT IT. ARE WE
CREATING A TWO TIER SYSTEM WHERE
SOME PEOPLE CAN BREEZE THROUGH
AND OTHERS ARE STANDING IN LINE
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE
GROCERY STORE? WE ACTUALLY WANT
PEOPLE TO GO TO THE GROCERY
STORE AND NOT GO ONLINE. SO WE
THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT
BILL. IT'S IN A VERY IMPORTANT
FIRST STEP. AND WE URGE YOUR AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? GOOD
AFTERNOON. GLENN BACKUS FOR THE
PROSECUTORS ALLIANCE, PROUD
CO-SPONSORS AS A CRIME
PREVENTION MEASURE. THANK YOU,
CATHERINE BRACY, TECH EQUITY
COLLABORATIVE AND SUPPORT MARIKO
YOSHIDA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR WORKER
POWER AND SUPPORT. TIFFANY
WHITEN, WITH SEIU CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,
HOW ABOUT PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION?
EXCUSE ME, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS
MARGARET GLADSTEIN, CAPITAL
ADVOCACY HERE IN OPPOSITION, ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION, WE OPPOSE
THIS BILL. AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE
DO NOT THINK THE AMENDMENTS
ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS. I WOULD
NOTE THAT THE AUTHOR MADE A
WONDERFUL OBSERVATION, WHICH IS
THAT THE MARKET IS ALREADY
HELPING. STORES OR STORES ARE
ALREADY ADAPTING THEIR
SELF-CHECKOUT. POLICIES BASED ON
WHAT EACH STORE DEMANDS AND WHAT
EACH BRAND WANTS TO DO. WE THINK
THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO
DO IT, THE WITH EVEN WITH THE
AMENDMENTS, THE BILL WILL STILL
REQUIRE WILL STILL LIMIT
RETAILERS ADOPTION OF NEW
TECHNOLOGY. AND OUR STORES IN
CALIFORNIA, WE DON'T REQUIRE LAW
FIRMS LOBBYING FIRMS OR EVEN
TICKET SELLERS TO PROVIDE THE
TYPE OF NOTICE THAT THIS BILL
WOULD REQUIRE. SB 1446 IS OVERLY
PRESCRIPTIVE IN OTHER WAYS AS
WELL, LIMITING THE NUMBER AND
TYPE OF ITEMS THAT CAN BE
PURCHASED AT SELF-CHECKOUT WILL
BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE AND WILL
ONLY FRUSTRATE CUSTOMERS IN ONE
STORE. THEY MAY BE ABLE TO BUY
CERTAIN COSMETICS THROUGH
SELF-CHECKOUT AND THE OTHER
STORE THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO. THE
SAME IS TRUE. IT WILL CONFUSE
OUR EMPLOYEES BECAUSE THE ITEMS
THEY CAN BUY WILL BE DIFFERENT
FROM STORE TO STORE, IT'S ALSO
ORPHALI, THE STAFFING
REQUIREMENT IS ALSO UNWORKABLE.
RETAILERS CURRENTLY OFFER
SELF-CHECKOUT LANES IN A MANNER
THAT REFLECTS THE CLIENTELE OF
THAT LOCATION. WE'RE A CUSTOMER
FOCUSED INDUSTRY, AND WE
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S NO ONE
SIZE FITS ALL APPROACH. SETTING
A SPECIFIC RATIO OF EMPLOYEES TO
SELF-CHECKOUT LINE UNDERMINES
THAT FLEXIBILITY THAT STORES
NEED, AND MUST HAVE TO MEET THE
NEEDS OF THEIR CUSTOMERS AND
THEIR EMPLOYEES. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE ASKED FOR A NO VOTE.
THANK YOU, GOOD AFTERNOON,
DANIEL CONAWAY WITH THE
CALIFORNIA GROCERS ASSOCIATION
HERE TO EXPRESS OUR STRONG
OPPOSITION TO SB 1446, AS AS MY
COLLEAGUE MADE CLEAR, THERE'S
NUMEROUS CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE
WITH THIS BILL, FUNDAMENTALLY,
JUST THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS TO
REGULATE OUR STORE OPERATIONS,
WE THINK IS UNNECESSARY. AS WAS
MENTIONED, THERE'S REALLY NO ONE
SIZE FITS ALL APPROACH FROM
LOCATION TO LOCATION, LET ALONE
OVER THE COURSE OF THE BUSINESS
DAY, THE NEEDS OF OUR CUSTOMERS
CHANGE. AND SO WE WANT TO BE
ABLE TO RUN OUR STORES IN A WAY
THAT REFLECTS THAT. I THINK MORE
IMPORTANTLY, YOU KNOW, SOME OF
THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY
THE GENTLEMAN, IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL, I THINK HIGHLIGHT A LOT OF
THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE,
FRANKLY, WHICH IS ALREADY WE
FACE, CONCERNS IN OUR STORES
AROUND RETAIL THEFT, AROUND
CONFLICTS WITH CUSTOMERS,
BECAUSE FRANKLY, IT IS GETTING
HARDER AND HARDER TO RUN A
GROCERY STORE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. I WAS IN HERE FIVE
HOURS AGO THIS MORNING TALKING
ABOUT A SERIES OF RETAIL THEFT
BILLS THAT WERE GOING TO, I
THINK, HELP SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BILL WAS
NEVER A PART OF THAT PACKAGE,
AND I DON'T THINK IT DOES
ANYTHING TO MEANINGFULLY ADDRESS
THOSE CONCERNS IN A WAY THAT'S
GOING TO HAVE ANY KIND OF REAL
IMPACT ON OUR STORES.
ULTIMATELY, AT THE END OF THE
DAY, WHAT THIS DOES IS THIS WILL
CODIFY SOME OF THE WORST THINGS
WE SAW FROM COVID, WHERE OUR
EMPLOYEES ARE ASKED TO ENFORCE
THE LAW ON OUR CUSTOMERS. SO
WE'RE ALREADY HEARING ABOUT
CONFLICT IN STORES. I THINK THIS
BILL IS ONLY GOING TO LEAD TO
MORE CONFLICT, PARTICULARLY WITH
THE LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF
ITEMS YOU CAN GET AND THE TYPES
OF ITEMS YOU CAN GET. I DON'T
WANT OUR EMPLOYEES TO HAVE TO
EXPLAIN TO A PARENT WHY THEY
HAVE TO GO INTO A DIFFERENT
LINE, BECAUSE THEY BOUGHT BABY
FORMULA, LAST THING I'LL SAY, I
DO APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. THEY DID A
LOT TO KIND OF NARROW AND
CLARIFY THE BILL, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, AGAIN, I THINK IT
JUST HIGHLIGHTS HOW OVERREACHING
AND TROUBLING THIS BILL IS. AND
FRANKLY, IT'S OVERLY NARROW.
IT'S FOCUSED ON GROCERY AND
PHARMACY. WE ARE A LATE ADOPTER
INDUSTRY. WE DON'T INVEST IN
TECHNOLOGY UNLESS WE'RE
ABSOLUTELY SURE IT'S GOING TO
BENEFIT OUR EMPLOYEES AND OUR
CUSTOMERS. SO TO BE FOCUSING ON
US, I THINK, IS NOT THE BEST USE
OF THIS BODY'S TIME. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? LARA
BENNETT, ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, IN
OPPOSITION. MADAM CHAIR CHRIS
MICHELI, LOS
ANGELES AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND A RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. JAMIE
HUFF ON BEHALF OF THE CIVIL
JUSTICE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA, RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. THANKS MADISON D¯ÚI
PAGOSA, WITH POLITICAL SOLUTIONS
ON BEHALF OF TARGET IN
OPPOSITION, DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET, RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. GOOD AFTERNOON.
STEPHANIE MORRELL ON BEHALF OF
THE CONSUMER TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION, IN OPPOSITION. GOOD
AFTERNOON. DOMINIC. TAMARA HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE SAN DIEGO
REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN
OPPOSITION. HI, MADAM CHAIR, OUT
OF ORDER, WAS IN SENATE
JUDICIARY, ROBERT HARRELL WITH
THE CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WIX THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THE BILL
FORWARD. REALLY APPRECIATE IT
AND YOUR SPONSORS, AND WOULD
LOVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE
THE BILL. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. I APPRECIATE WHAT
YOU DO. I SAW YOU EARLIER TODAY
IN JUDICIARY. YOU'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE WORKERS, AND I
UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING
FROM, AS AS I'M SURE WE ALL HAVE
EXPERIENCED SELF CHECKOUT. AND
THIS REMINDS ME OF MAYBE MANY
YEARS AGO. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY
PEOPLE REMEMBER, BUT WHEN ATM
MACHINES WERE DEVELOPED AND
INTRODUCED, THERE WAS A LOT OF,
ADAPTATION ISSUES. PEOPLE. I
MEAN, CHANGE IS HARD FOR SOME
PEOPLE, AND PARTICULARLY
TECHNOLOGY, AND WE LIVE IN RAPID
TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE EVERY,
EVERY MOMENT, EVERY DAY. I CAN
SAY THAT I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH
THOSE WHO MAY HAVE BEEN
FRUSTRATED AT FIRST. YOU KNOW,
YOU BRING YOUR OWN BAG AND THEN
IT TELLS YOU TO MOVE THE BAG.
AND I WOULD SAY HELP. AND I WAS
GLAD, AND I STILL AM GLAD THAT
THERE IS A PERSON STANDING THERE
TO CORRECT MY WAYS, BUT
TECHNOLOGY IN THIS CASE IS A
GOOD THING, IF NOT IN MANY
CASES, AND I THINK IT ALLOWED ME
I JUST USED IT THIS WEEKEND AT A
GROCERY STORE, AND THAT WAS
FASTER THAN THE REGULAR CHECKOUT
LINE. AND I WAS IN AND OUT WITH
MY TEN ITEMS AND NO TIME. SO I
THINK CONVENIENCE AND CHANGE IS
SOMETIMES DIFFICULT. I, I HAVE
OFTEN SPOKEN IN THESE KINDS OF
HEARINGS WHERE WE'RE IMPOSING
MORE RULES, MORE REGULATIONS,
MORE CONSTRAINTS ON ON BUSINESS
TODAY. AND I, I JUST THINK IT'S
GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. I
ACTUALLY, THINK FROM A LABOR
STANDPOINT TO CONSIDER WHILE A
BUSINESS HAS TO OPERATE, BE
SUCCESSFUL IN GROCERY STORE
MARGINS, PROFIT MARGINS ARE VERY
THIN. AND SO THEY'RE ALWAYS
LOOKING AT WAYS TO KEEP FOOD
COSTS LOW, AND PASS THOSE
SAVINGS ON TO CONSUMERS. IF
WE'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRING
ADDING MORE PEOPLE TO HANDLE THE
SELF-CHECKOUT. I JUST THINK THAT
THAT IS PROBABLY,
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. SO I CAN'T
SUPPORT THIS. I I SUPPORT YOU'RE
TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, OUR
WORKERS IN OUR STORES, RETAIL,
WHEREVER, HAVE SAFE WORKING
CONDITIONS. AND I ENCOURAGE YOU
TO DO THAT. I DON'T THINK THIS
IS A SAFETY FACTOR. I THINK IT'S
A CONSTRAINT FACTOR. AND IT'S
ONE MORE ENCUMBRANCE ON DOING
BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA. AND WHEN
YOU SEE GROCERY STORES,
ALBERTSONS AND WHATEVER WAS A
SAFEWAY JUST RECENTLY ANNOUNCED
A CONSOLIDATION, STORES HAVE TO
CONSOLIDATE BECAUSE COSTS ARE
GOING UP FOR ALL BUSINESSES. AND
SO THEY CONSOLIDATE. AND THAT'S
NOT SOMETHING YOU LIKE NONE OF
US LIKE, BECAUSE SOME WORKERS
ARE LOSING THEIR POSITIONS. SO
JUST BE MINDFUL OF MY OWN
RECOMMENDATION IS BUT YOU'RE
TRYING TO PROTECT YOUR WORKERS.
BUT THE LONG TERM BE CAREFUL
WHAT YOU WISH FOR IS THOSE JOBS
MAY JUST GO AWAY AT SOME POINT
WHEN THE GROCERY STORE GOES
AWAY. SO THAT'S I SUPPORT WORKER
CONDITIONS. BEING SAFE, BUT I
ALSO SUPPORT TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE
OUR LIVES CONVENIENT AND
EFFICIENT. SO THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER PATTERSON.
GREAT. THANK YOU. WELL, MY WIFE
WAS A MEMBER OF UFCW, ACTUALLY,
HERE LOCALLY, AND I WOULD OFTEN
HEAR, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME
INTERESTING THINGS, ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, BEING ON THE JOB. AND IT'S
DEFINITELY NOT AS, IT'S NOT AN
EASY JOB AT TIMES, FOR SURE, BUT
ALSO, WE ARE, YOU KNOW, THE
BLESSED WITH FOUR CHILDREN, ONE
OF WHO'S WHO'S WITH ME HERE
TODAY. MAKING THINGS A LITTLE
BIT MORE COMPLICATED, BUT, BUT
ONE OF THE THINGS WE REALLY
VALUE, I THINK, IS OUR TIME, YOU
KNOW, WHEN WE'RE BUSSING OUR
KIDS AROUND. BECAUSE NOW WE'RE
JUST BASICALLY FREE LABOR FOR
THEM. WE NEED EMPLOYMENT LAW, BY
THE WAY, FOR THAT. BUT, YOU
KNOW, BUSSING THEM AROUND AND,
AND OUR TIME IS REALLY IMPORTANT
TO US. AND I THINK GOING INTO A
STORE LIKE ANY STORE AND BEING
ABLE TO HAVE OPTIONS FOR US TO
BASICALLY GET IN AND OUT AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE IS, GREAT. I'M
ACTUALLY EXCITED ABOUT BEING
ABLE TO JUST PUT THINGS IN YOUR
CART. AND ACTUALLY THERE'S
THINGS LIKE IT, I THINK SOME OF
THE SPORTS STADIUMS WHERE YOU
JUST PUT IT UP THERE AND IT
SCANS IT, AND THEN YOU JUST PAY.
AND I'M PERSONALLY, EXCITED
ABOUT THAT. BUT I JUST WANT TO
SAY TWO ANECDOTES AND THEN I
HAVE A ONE QUESTION OR ONE MORE
ANECDOTE, AND THEN I HAVE A
QUESTION, I WAS MEETING WITH A,
MCDONALD'S FRANCHISE OWNER
YESTERDAY, AND WE WERE JUST I
JUST WAS HAPPENED TO ASK HIM
ABOUT HOW TECHNOLOGY HAS CHANGED
THE OPERATION OF HIS BUSINESSES.
AND, HE OWNS SEVERAL. AND ONE OF
THEM, YOU KNOW, THEY EACH HAVE
ABOUT 60 EMPLOYEES EACH. AND I
WAS ASKING HIM HOW THE
TECHNOLOGY REALLY CHANGED HIS
BUSINESS. AND HE SAID, WELL,
REALLY IT HASN'T. WE HAVE MORE
JOBS. AND WE USED TO ACTUALLY WE
JUST REDEPLOY THEM OTHER PLACES
TO MAKE THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE
BETTER. AND I THOUGHT THAT THAT
WAS AN INTERESTING POINT. BUT,
BUT THE OTHER THING I JUST
WONDER IN TERMS OF, WAREHOUSE
STORES AND I'M ALWAYS IN SUPPORT
OF EXEMPTING AS MANY PEOPLE AS
POSSIBLE OUT OF A BILL. BUT WHAT
WAS THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF AND
YOU MIGHT HAVE SAID IT, I CAME
IN KIND OF LATE ABOUT EXEMPTING
THE WAREHOUSE STORES. SO AND
I'LL HAVE JESSE SPEAK TO IT. WE
DID EXEMPT WAREHOUSES ARE NOT IN
THIS BILL. WE'RE FOCUSING ON
GROCERY, RETAIL STORES THAT ARE
OVER 15,000FT². BUT I'LL HAVE
JAZZIE SPEAK TO THAT WAREHOUSE
PIECE. YEAH SO, I BELIEVE YOUR
QUESTION IS REGARDING MEMBERSHIP
STORES. I AM, SO IT'S A TOTALLY
DIFFERENT MODEL. I THINK IF YOU
LOOK AT A SAFEWAY OR ALBERTSONS,
THERE'S NO MEMBERSHIP TO COME
IN. IT'S A VERY OPEN AND PUBLIC
PLACE, OFTENTIMES A LOT OF FOLKS
CONGREGATE WITHIN GROCERY
STORES. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT
LIKE A COSTCO OR A SAM'S CLUB,
IT IS A MEMBERSHIP MODEL. FOLKS
ARE CHECKING RECEIPTS ON THE WAY
OUT. SO IT'S A DIFFERENT MODEL
THAN YOUR TYPICAL SAFEWAY OR
ALBERTSONS, BUT THEY AREN'T
EXEMPT FROM THE TECHNOLOGY
NOTICE PIECE, SO THEY ARE STILL
COVERED UNDER ANY TECHNOLOGY OR
NOTICE THAT IS REQUIRED. OKAY, I
ACTUALLY THINK WHEN YOU, AT
LEAST THE COSTCO THAT I GO TO
ON, ON MANY OCCASIONS WHEN
PEOPLE WALK IN THERE, IT JUST
SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, A WHOLE
NEW ATTITUDE AND BEING GO OVER
THEM AND, YOU KNOW, AS THEY'RE
RUSHING TO GET THEIR GROCERIES
AND STUFF. SO, SO I JUST THINK,
YOU KNOW, IT'S I UNDERSTAND THE
MODEL, BUT IF YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I
SO IT MAKES SENSE TO EXEMPT, YOU
KNOW, CERTAIN BUSINESSES, LIKE
IN ALL SORTS OF LAWS. I'VE
TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE, YOU CAN
MAKE A PUBLIC POLICY FOR IT, BUT
I THINK IT IT'S IT DOES CONCERN
ME THAT THAT WE'RE TARGETING
REALLY SOME OF THE GROCERY
STORES. AND DOES THIS APPLY ALSO
IT'S CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CHANGE,
RIGHT. CERTAIN NUMBER OF
LOCATIONS. WELL NOT A CERTAIN
NUMBER OF LOCATIONS, BUT A
CERTAIN DEFINITION OF WHAT WE
MEAN BY GROCERY STORE, WHAT WE
MEAN BY, SUPERSTORES, BASED ON
SQUARE FOOTAGE, SQUARE FOOTAGE.
OKAY GREAT, WELL, GREAT. WELL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE
PRESENTATION. AND I'LL REPORT
BACK TO MY WIFE ON ON THE
OUTCOME. SO THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LOWENTHAL, THANK YOU TO
THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
VERY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION
FORWARD. AND I CANNOT RECALL IF
I HAD ASKED ALREADY WHEN I SAT
THROUGH AND SPOKE IN LABOR
COMMITTEE, IF I HAD ASKED TO BE
A COAUTHOR, AND IF I HAVE NOT, I
WOULD LIKE TO BE ON IF YOU WOULD
HAVE ME AS A COAUTHOR ON THIS
BILL, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE
GOOD CHAIRPERSON FROM HAYWARD MY
FORGIVENESS TO HAVE TO LISTEN TO
MY COMMENTS ONCE AGAIN, SINCE I
WAS A GUEST IN THE LABOR
COMMITTEE WHEN THIS WAS
PRESENTED, AND I WANT TO THANK
MY COLLEAGUE FROM ROCKLIN,
BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE SPEAKS, I
LEARN SOMETHING MORE ABOUT HIS
FAMILY, AND WHAT AN INTERESTING
FAMILY THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, I
INVITE YOU TO JOIN ME AT THE
LAKER GAME ANY TIME ON ME. WOULD
LOVE TO HAVE YOU DOWN. AND WHEN
WE'RE AT THE CRYPTO.COM ARENA,
WE WILL GO INTO THE AMAZON
STORES THAT EXIST RIGHT NOW THAT
HAVE AROUND 200 TRANSPONDERS ON
THE CEILING THAT ARE MONITORING
YOUR EVERY MOVE SINCE I KNOW
PRIVACY IS AN IMPORTANT THING TO
YOU, AND THE MOST SALIENT THING
TO NOTICE THERE IS THAT THE
PRICES IN THOSE STORES ARE NO
DIFFERENT THAN THE PRICES
ELSEWHERE, WHERE YOU HAVE
CHECKOUTS INSIDE THE ARENA. AND
SO WHAT THAT IS, MY FRIEND, IS
WEALTH CONSOLIDATION. THERE IS
NO CONSUMER BENEFIT AT ALL.
THERE IS ONLY A LACK OF LABOR
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. AND
FINALLY, TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM
NEWPORT BEACH, I CHALLENGE YOU
ON SAYING THAT TECHNOLOGY IS A
GOOD THING. TECHNOLOGY OVERALL
CAN BE A GOOD THING WHEN IT'S
IMPLEMENTED AND UTILIZED
PROPERLY. I I'M VERY MUCH
CONCERNED AS ARE SO MANY
CALIFORNIANS AND DARE I SAY,
OUTSIDE THE STATE, ABOUT HOW
AUTOMATION IS BEING IMPLEMENTED
AND WHAT IT'S DOING TO THE
FABRIC OF COMMUNITIES, THIS BILL
IS ABOUT SAFETY. THANK GOODNESS
THAT THEY ARE BRINGING UP THE
SAFETY COMPONENT, BECAUSE THAT
IS REAL. BUT THERE ARE ALSO
OTHER COMPONENTS. WHAT IS IT
DOING TO THE FABRIC OF A
COMMUNITY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE
PEOPLE WORKING THERE? WHAT IS IT
DOING TO THE ECONOMY WHEN YOU
HAVE LESS WORKERS? I DISAGREE
COMPLETELY THAT GROCERY STORES
ARE OPERATING ON A VERY THIN
MARGIN. AS A MATTER OF FACT, FOR
THE VERY TOUGH THANK YOU THAT
GROCERY STORE WORKERS HAD FOR
BEING FRONTLINE WORKERS AND
GETTING COVID AND BRINGING COVID
BACK TO THEIR HOMES, THERE WAS A
$4 BILLION GAIN BY KROGER IN
THAT YEAR, AS A MATTER OF FACT,
AND DID A $1 BILLION STOCK
BUYBACK INSTEAD OF CREATING
BETTER WORKING CONDITIONS FOR
THEIR EMPLOYEES AND INSTEAD
IMPLEMENTING MORE AUTOMATION, WE
ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE
PROBLEMS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA UNTIL WE HAVE A PLAN
ON AUTOMATION POINT BLANK. WE
DON'T HAVE A PLAN. AND SO UNTIL
WE HAVE A PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO
CONTINUE TO SEE BILLS LIKE THESE
THAT I WILL COAUTHOR AND SUPPORT
OR CARRY ALL DAY LONG UNTIL WE
HAVE A PLAN. AND THAT PLAN HAS
TO BE VERY INTENTIONAL IN
STUDYING WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ON
COMMUNITIES, WHAT ARE THE
IMPACTS ON ECONOMY? WHAT IS THE
IMPACT ON WORKER SAFETY AND
NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY AND THE LACK
OF THAT PLAN? AND THIS AFFECTS
MORE THAN GROCERY WORKERS IN MY
DISTRICT. IT'S A BIG, BIG ISSUE.
YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE ILWU AND
THE LONGSHOREMEN AND THE GOODS
MOVEMENT SECTOR AND TRUCKERS AND
SO FORTH, AND THIS IS ALL WOVEN
TOGETHER, AND WE HAVE TO
CONSIDER THAT IT IS THAT'S NOT
TO DISCOUNT THE VERY, VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT TENANTS OF THIS BILL,
VERY SPECIFIC TO THIS BILL. BUT
AGAIN, WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE
TO PLAY DEFENSE IN THIS STATE
AND HAVE TO REACT TO THESE
INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS UNTIL WE
THROW DOWN AND ACTUALLY CREATE A
PLAN ON AUTOMATION, WHERE WE
IDENTIFY JOBS THAT ARE AT PERIL
AND WHAT IT WILL COST. ALL OF US
TO TAKE THOSE JOBS OFF THE GRID,
AND WHERE WE SHOULD BE
INTENTIONAL ABOUT PUTTING JOBS
ON THE GRID. I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
YOU'D PROBABLY LIKE TO SECOND
THE BILL TOO, RIGHT I DID. OH,
DID YOU? OKAY, SO THOSE COMMENTS
I'M SORRY, COMMENTS I'M AFRAID
NOT. WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW THE
SENATOR TO, CLOSE, PLEASE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
MADAM CHAIR, AND THANK YOU TO MY
DEAR COLLEAGUES IN THE IN THE
ASSEMBLY, I ABSOLUTELY
APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS THAT
HAVE BEEN MADE AND SAID HERE,
THIS IS A REALLY TOUGH JOB AND
IT'S GETTING TOUGHER BY THE DAY,
WHERE WORKERS ARE ENCOUNTERING
THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES. AND
UNFORTUNATELY, ALL OF THESE
ISSUES ARE COLLIDING, RIGHT.
THIS ISSUE OF WORKER SAFETY,
WORKPLACE VIOLENCE, THE ISSUE OF
RETAIL THEFT, AND THE ISSUES OF
HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT AS WE'RE
INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGY, THAT WE
ARE NOT DISPLACING OUR COMMUNITY
MEMBERS WHO WE RELY ON TO HAVE A
SAFE AND THRIVING COMMUNITY WHO
PAY SALES TAX, PROPERTY TAX,
INCOME TAX, ALL OF THE THINGS
THAT A MACHINE JUST SIMPLY
DOESN'T DO. WE HAVE TO PUT THE
WORKERS FIRST. AND WORKERS HAVE
POINTED OUT THESE ISSUES.
THEY'VE ASKED US TO ADDRESS IT.
THE FIRST SELF-CHECKOUT CAME IN
THE 1990S. WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD
A SUBSTANTIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT
IT NOW, AND WE'RE HAVING IT NOW
BECAUSE THESE ISSUES ARE
COLLIDING THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL
WITH. WE ARE ALWAYS HAPPY TO
WORK WITH THE OPPOSITION ON
THIS. I THINK WE CONTINUE TO
WORK ON IT AND, YOU KNOW,
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS THAT
HAVE BEEN MADE THUS FAR. BUT
THIS IS ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT
OUR COMMUNITIES ARE SAFE, OUR
WORKERS ARE SAFE, AND THAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT RETAIL THEFT UPSTREAM
, RIGHT, AND DOWNSTREAM, WE KNOW
WE'RE WORKING ON SAFER
COMMUNITIES, AND THERE ARE GOING
TO BE COMMUNITIES OF COLOR THAT
ARE GOING TO CARRY THE BURDEN OF
THOSE BILLS. AND IF WE HAVE 16
MORE TIMES THEFT, RETAIL THEFT
HAPPENING AT OUR SELF-CHECKOUT,
WE NEED INDUSTRY TO LOOK AT THAT
AND TO LOOK UPSTREAM AND FIGURE
OUT HOW TO BE PART OF THE
SOLUTION WITH ALL OF US. SO WITH
THAT, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. AND IF I COULD HAVE
THE SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. ITEM NUMBER 22, SB 1446 BY
SENATOR SMALLWOOD CUEVAS. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED,
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN. PATTERSON.
PATTERSON NO. BRYAN. DIXON. NO
DIXON. NO. IRWIN. NOT VOTING.
IRWIN. NOT VOTING. HOOVER.
LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL. AYE.
ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD.
AYE. WICKS WICKS. AYE. WILSON
THAT BILL HAS FOUR VOTES, AND WE
WILL KEEP THE ROLL OPEN. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE
WHILE WE HAVE SENATOR PADILLA
COMING UP. IF WE COULD PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL FOR THE THREE
BILLS WE MISSED AND THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, I THINK WE HAVE TWO.
WE HAVE, TWO WIENER BILLS AND
CABALLERO. YES. I MEAN, OH, NO,
IT'S JUST TWO OF THE WIENER.
OKAY WHICH ONE? SO WE HAVE A
MOTION BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS
AND A SECOND BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ORTEGA. AND THIS IS FOR THE
WIENER BILL. AND IS THIS, WE
HAVE SB FIVE 532 AND SB 961 IS
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS DO
PASS, AS AMENDED FOR 532, OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S DO THE ROLL
CALL ON 532 THEN. OKAY
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON FOR SB
532. PATTERSON I BRIAN DIXON.
DIXON AYE. IRWIN. AYE. IRWIN.
AYE. HOOVER LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA ORTEGA.
AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE WICKS.
WICKS. AYE. WILSON SEVEN VOTES.
THAT'S, SEVEN ZERO. AND THAT
BILL IS OUT AND THEN LET'S MOVE
OVER TO SB 961. MOVING A MOTION
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS. A
SECOND BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ORTEGA. AND THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS AS AMENDED, TO
APPROPRIATION TO APPROPRIATIONS.
RIGHT ITEM NUMBER TEN SB 961, BY
SENATOR WIENER BAUER-KAHAN
PATTERSON. PATTERSON NØ BRIAN
DIXON. DIXON, NØ IRWIN. AYE.
IRWIN. AYE. HOOVER LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA ORTEGA.
AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE WICKS A.
WICKS. AYE. WILSON FIVE FIVE
VOTES FIVE ZERO. THAT BILL IS
OUT AND CONSENT. CONSENT
CALENDAR IS MOTION BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WICKS SECOND BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER ORTEGA OKAY. OKAY OKAY.
CONSENT CALENDAR. YOUNGER.
OKAY. SB 961 HAS FIVE VOTES, SO
WE NEED SIX FOR IT TO BE OUT.
OH, OKAY. SO SB FIVE, FIVE
VOTES. WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLL
OPEN. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT.
CONSENT CALENDAR BAUER-KAHAN.
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. AYE BRIAN.
DIXON. DIXON. AYE. IRWIN AYE.
IRWIN. AYE. HOOVER LOWENTHAL.
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA.
AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE. WICKS
WICKS. AYE. WILSON SEVEN VOTES.
OKAY, THAT VOTE IS 7 TO 0 AND
THAT BILL IS OUT. BUT WE WILL
KEEP THE ROLL OPEN, SENATOR
PADILLA, WE ARE GOING TO START
WITH, SB 893, PLEASE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, I WANT TO BEGIN BY
THANKING THE COMMITTEE FOR
WORKING WITH MY STAFF, AND WE
WILL BE ACCEPTING COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. SENATE BILL 893
WOULD REQUIRE THE GOVERNMENT
OPERATIONS AGENCY, THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF BUSINESS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY TO
COLLABORATE WITH ACADEMIC
INSTITUTIONS ACROSS THE STATE
AND ESTABLISHING THE CALIFORNIA
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
HUB. CALIFORNIA AI RESEARCH HUB
WOULD FURTHER THE RESEARCH,
DEVELOPMENT, DEPLOYMENT AND
APPLICATION OF AI TECHNOLOGY FOR
THE PUBLIC GOOD BY FACILITATING
ACCESS TO COMPUTING RESOURCES
AND DATA FOR ACADEMIC
INSTITUTIONS, AS WELL AS
DEVELOPING WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES. CERTAINLY, OUR
ACTIONS WILL HAVE A DIRECT
IMPACT ON A TOOL THAT STANDS TO
CHANGE OUR WORLD IN WAYS WE
HAVEN'T SEEN SINCE THE DAWN OF
THE INTERNET AGE. AT THE SAME
TIME, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AROUND
AI IS GUIDED BY STRONG
PRINCIPLES AND GUARDRAILS THAT
PROTECT PRIVACY, ADVANCE
SECURITY, AND ADDRESS RISKS AND
POTENTIAL HARMS TO SOCIETY.
TODAY PRIVATE COMPANIES SUCH AS
GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, META HAVE LED
THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF
AI TECHNOLOGY. THIS IS BECAUSE
THIS DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES VAST
AMOUNTS OF RESOURCES AND CAPITAL
THAT ARE NOT AVAILABLE AT
COMPARABLE SCALE TO ANY SINGLE
ENTITY ALONE. THERE IS NO WAY
FOR THEM TO MATCH THE FINANCIAL
MIGHT OF CORPORATIONS WORKING ON
THE FRONTIER OF THIS TECHNOLOGY.
HOWEVER, THIS STATE HAS THE
WORLD'S PREMIER INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER LEARNING, LED BY SOME OF
THE GREATEST MINDS IN THEIR
FIELDS. THEIR TALENT IS
FORMIDABLE, DIVIDED, IMAGINED
JUST WHAT BREAKTHROUGHS THEY
COULD PIONEER IF THEIR EFFORTS
WERE UNITED. CALIFORNIA, WITH
OUR VAST NETWORK OF INSTITUTIONS
GENERATING RESEARCH FOR THE
PUBLIC GOOD, CAN BE AT THE
FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPMENT AND
RESEARCH OF AI TECHNOLOGIES AND
ENSURE THAT WE MAXIMIZE BENEFITS
TO THE PUBLIC GOOD. AS THE
FOURTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE
WORLD, CALIFORNIA CAN SEE CAN
USE THE POWER AND INFLUENCE OF
OUR MARKET TO LEAD THE
DEVELOPMENT OF ETHICAL AND
RESPONSIBLE AI TECHNOLOGY THAT
CENTERS THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST BY
ADDRESSING THE GAP IN COMPUTING
RESOURCES, FACILITATING ACCESS
TO DATA AND HARNESSING THE POWER
OF OUR WORLD CLASS NETWORK OF
RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS. BY
HARNESSING THE POWER OF OUR
ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS THROUGH A
CALIFORNIA AI RESEARCH HUB,
CALIFORNIA CAN LEAD THE
DEMOCRATIZATION OF THIS SPACE OF
AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITH
PUBLIC SERVICE AND PUBLIC GOOD
AT ITS HEART, WE CANNOT AFFORD
TO CEDE THE FRONTIER TO STATES
LIKE NEW YORK, MARYLAND, AND
OTHERS WHO HAVE PUT FORTH
SIMILAR PROPOSALS. AFTER THE
INTRODUCTION OF OUR LEGISLATION.
THE RESEARCH HUB IS AN EXCITING
BLEND OF OUR INCREDIBLE ACADEMIC
TALENT, GROUNDBREAKING
ADVANCEMENTS IN THIS SPACE
ALREADY HAPPENING HERE, AND THE
FINANCIAL HEFT OF OUR STATE.
THIS HUB CAN BECOME A TOOL TO
FOSTER INNOVATION THAT WE CANNOT
EVEN DREAM OF. YET IT IS UP TO
US TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC
REMAINS AT THE HEART OF THIS
EFFORT. WITH ME TODAY IS DANIEL
ZHANG, SENIOR MANAGER WITH THE
STANFORD INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN
CENTERED ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE. THANK YOU. YOU MAY
START, MADAM CHAIR, AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF SB 893. GOVERNMENT
ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPS HAVE
HISTORICALLY DRIVEN AMERICAN
INNOVATION, PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN
LONG TERM, CURIOSITY DRIVEN
RESEARCH AT UNIVERSITIES HAS LED
TO CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES AND
GPS, MRIS AND THE INTERNET.
CALIFORNIA'S UNIVERSITIES, IN
PARTICULAR, HAVE BEEN PIVOTAL IN
DEVELOPING NEW TECHNOLOGIES,
INCLUDING AI. HOWEVER, AI HAS
CREATED A SHIFT IN WHERE
RESEARCH INTO TECHNOLOGY IS
OCCURRING. THE LATEST AI MODELS
REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT
IN COMPUTE POWER AND ACCESS TO
QUALITY DATA SET, WHICH AT THE
MOMENT ONLY PRIVATE COMPANIES
HAVE THE RESOURCES TO OBTAIN.
OUR LATEST AI INDEX REPORT
SHOWED THAT IN 2017, IT COST
GOOGLE $930 TO TRAIN ITS
TRANSFORMER MODEL, WHILE FIVE
YEARS LATER IT COST NEARLY 200
MILLION TO TRAIN. ITS LATEST
MODEL, GEMINI ULTRA. THIS TREND
RISKS CONCENTRATING THE FUTURE
OF AI IN THE HANDS OF A FEW
WELL-RESOURCED PLAYERS. WHILE
INDUSTRY RESEARCH IS ONE NEEDED
PERSPECTIVE, EXPANDING THE
CAPACITY OF ACADEMIC
INSTITUTIONS TO CONDUCT AI
RESEARCH IS VITAL FOR ENSURING
THAT AI BENEFITS ALL OF
HUMANITY. THIS IS WHY STANFORD
AI HAS CHAMPIONED FOR PUBLIC
INVESTMENT IN AI RESEARCH SINCE
OUR INCEPTION FIVE YEARS AGO,
INCLUDING ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL,
NATIONAL AI RESEARCH RESOURCE
FOR NHÀ, A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN
ACADEMIA, GOVERNMENT, CIVIL
SOCIETY AND INDUSTRY TO EXPAND
EQUITABLE ACCESS TO
COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND TRAINING
RESOURCES FOR RESEARCHERS. WHILE
THE FEDERAL EFFORTS ARE
IMPORTANT, MORE PUBLIC
INVESTMENT IS NEEDED.
CALIFORNIA, HOME TO FOUR OF THE
TOP TEN NATIONAL UNIVERSITIES IN
RESEARCH SPENDING, IS UNIQUELY
POSITIONED TO LEAD IN PUBLIC
INVESTMENT IN AI RESEARCH.
CRITICAL INVESTMENT FROM THE
STATE HOLDS THE POTENTIAL TO
CATALYZE EVEN MORE AI RESEARCH
HERE. FOR THIS REASON, STANFORD
SUPPORTS SB 893, SENATOR
PADILLA'S PROPOSAL TO CREATE A
CALIFORNIA AI RESEARCH HUB. THIS
BILL WOULD DIRECT THE STATE
GOVERNMENT TO MAKE ESSENTIAL
INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING PROVIDING
COMPUTE POWER AND GREATER ACCESS
TO STATE. STATE DATA FOR
RESEARCHERS. IT RECOGNIZED
CALIFORNIA'S STRENGTH AND IS A
POSITIVE STEP TOWARD STEP
TOWARDS ENSURING CALIFORNIA
CONTINUES TO LEAD IN DEVELOPING
RESPONSIBLE AI. I'M HOPEFUL. I'M
HOPEFUL THE COMMITTEE WILL MOVE
THIS PROPOSAL FORWARD. THANK YOU
. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. CATHERINE
BRACY, TECH EQUITY COLLABORATIVE
AND SPORT, DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET AND SUPPORT.
NAOMI VIDANA, ON BEHALF OF THE
COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATIONS
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. WE'RE
PLEASED TO SUPPORT THE BILL IN
PRINT, BUT WE ARE REVIEWING THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE LISTED IN
THE ANALYSIS. THANK YOU. MARIO
GUERRERO, ON BEHALF OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? NO.
LOOK AT THAT. GOOD WORK, MR.
PADILLA, SEEING NO OPPOSITION,
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS.
ANY QUESTIONS? CONCERNS
COMMENTS? YEAH. MISS DIXON, I
THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BILL,
AND I WILL SUPPORT IT. SO THANK
YOU. SENATOR, QUICK QUESTION OF
THE CHAIR. OH, WE'RE ALL
EXPERIENCING MANY AI RELATED
PIECES OF LEGISLATION. CAN WE
LOOK AT THIS IN A WHOLE? I THINK
THIS IS A HOLISTIC TYPE BILL, SO
I'M SUPPORTIVE. BUT THERE ARE SO
MANY PIECES OF THIS. MAYBE WE
COULD TALK ABOUT AN INFORMATION
SESSION ONCE WE SEE ALL THESE
BILLS ARE OVERLAPPING,
DUPLICATIVE OR MAYBE NOT. I
MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF US
SITTING IN THIS ROOM EXCEPT FOR
THIS GENTLEMAN HERE FROM
STANFORD KNOWS EXACTLY. WHAT
WERE THE PIECES THAT WE ARE
INDEPENDENT, INDIVIDUALLY
ASSESSING AND GOOD OR BAD. AND
SO, AGAIN, IN THE SPIRIT OF
TECHNOLOGY, THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT WE I BELIEVE WE ALL NEED TO
UNDERSTAND BETTER. YEAH. AND I
HOPE WE CAN BE PE INFORMED. I
MEAN, THIS IS EXCELLENT. AND
THIS IS A GOOD BILL. I HAVEN'T
SEEN ANOTHER THIS LIKE ANOTHER
BILL LIKE THIS FOR THE RESEARCH.
LOVES YOUR BILL, MR. PADILLA. OH
MY GOODNESS. SO I JUST WONDER IF
THAT MAKES ANY SENSE. AS AS WE
GO FORWARD, HOW DO WE GROUP THEM
TOGETHER. AND SO WE ADDRESS THE
SIMILARITIES. YEAH I APPRECIATE
THE QUESTION. IT'S A REALLY
IMPORTANT ONE. AND I WILL, TAKE
A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE,
AS I'VE DONE BEFORE, AND GIVE A
HUGE SHOUT OUT TO COMMITTEE
STAFF, BOTH ON THIS COMMITTEE,
SLATER AND JOSH, BUT ALSO
CHRISTIAN IN SENATE JUDICIARY,
WHO IS FOCUSED AS WELL ON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
LEGISLATION, WHO WE HAVE BEEN IN
CONSTANT CONTACT WITH. AND AS
THE BILLS SORT OF GET TO THEIR
FINAL STAGE, WHICH IS WHERE WE
ARE IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS,
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS
HAPPENING, IN COORDINATION WITH
THE SENATE IS FIGURING OUT, FOR
EXAMPLE, FROM A REGULATORY
PERSPECTIVE, THEY ALL STARTED
OUT IN DIFFERENT AGENCIES, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND THAT DOESN'T MAKE A
TON OF SENSE TO YOUR POINT. AND
SO WE ARE WORKING HARD AS
COMMITTEES TO MAKE SURE WE'RE
LINING THEM ALL UP IN WAYS THAT
MAKE SENSE, THAT THERE'S NOT
OVERLAP, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT,
AS FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAD THREE
WATER MARKING BILLS THAT MOVED
THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE. I WANT
TO GIVE A HUGE SHOUT OUT TO OUR
STAFF, WHO WORKED REALLY HARD TO
MAKE SURE THEY WERE CONSISTENT
AND ALIGNED, BECAUSE THAT IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO THE
INNOVATION THAT IS HAPPENING
THAT I THINK ALL OF US SUPPORT,
ALTHOUGH WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE
OUR COMMUNITY SAFE, AND ANOTHER
SENATE, KUDOS. HERE I AM, AN
ASSEMBLY MEMBER GIVING LOTS OF
SENATE KUDOS TO SENATOR WIENER,
WHOSE BILL THAT WE HEARD LAST
WEEK. 1047 ALSO INCLUDES
ACADEMIC AND ACADEMIC HUB IN A
DIFFERENT WAY. SO NOT
INCONSISTENT WITH THIS ONE, BUT
ALSO FOCUSED ON HOW WE USE UC
BERKELEY TO CREATE INNOVATION AS
WELL. AND SO THERE ARE A COUPLE
BILLS THAT DO THIS SIMILAR PIECE
FOCUSED IN DIFFERENT AREAS, BUT
WE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO ALL
OF THAT, MAKING SURE THEY LINE
UP, MAKING SURE CALIFORNIA IS
DRIVING THIS BUS IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION. AND I KNOW THAT THE
GOVERNOR WOULD EXPECT NO LESS.
AND WHEN THEY GET TO HIS DESK,
IF THEY ARE NOT IN SUCH
CONDITION, WE WOULD NOT EXPECT
GOOD RESULTS. SO THAT'S THE
GOAL. YEAH. OH YEAH. MISS
ORTEGA, TO YOUR, ASSEMBLYMEMBER
DIXON, TO YOUR POINT, IN TERMS
OF HAVING INFORMATION AND
INFORMATION SESSION, I WOULD
LIKE TO OFFER ONE THAT IS GOING
TO BE HAPPENING JOINTLY WITH
LABOR COMMITTEE AND PRIVACY
COMMITTEE JUST TO TALK ABOUT
LABOR AND TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT
WE'RE SEEING IN THE WORKFORCE
AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO HAVE AN
IMPACT ON THE BILLS TODAY AND IN
THE FUTURE. SO WHEN WE COME BACK
INTO SESSION, WE HAVE A LITTLE
BIT MORE INFORMATION TO GO ON,
AND MAYBE REVISIT SOME OF THIS
STUFF THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN
THIS COMMITTEE. AND THAT. AND
THAT'S AUGUST 7TH, JUST TO
FINISH THE. YEAH. AND WE'VE DONE
TWO. ONE WAS A GENERAL
INFORMATIONAL HEARING THAT WAS
FOCUSED MOSTLY ACTUALLY ON
ACADEMICS, WHICH I THINK WAS
GREAT BECAUSE IT WAS A REAL DEEP
DIVE INTO I, I KNOW THE SENATE
DID THE SAME IN MR. DODD'S
COMMITTEE, AND WE ALSO DID ONE
WITH THE ENTERTAINMENT COMMITTEE
ON THE EFFECTS IN THE
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. BUT IT'S
SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO
DO BECAUSE IT'S A VERY WE ARE
NOT EXPERTS IN ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE. I'LL SAY FOR
MYSELF AND WE DO NEED TO KNOW
ENOUGH TO GET THIS RIGHT. SO I
APPRECIATE THE INQUIRY, AND ALL
THE LOVE FOR YOUR BILL IN THE
INQUIRY, MR. PADILLA, ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? YEAH. MR.
PATTERSON, I SUSPECT WE'LL HAVE,
CONFLICTING LANGUAGE WE MIGHT
HAVE TO WORK ON WHEN WE'RE BOTH
ON THE FLOOR, BECAUSE I HAVE
LEGISLATION THAT CAME THROUGH
THIS COMMITTEE ON, THE USE OF
PRIVATE INFORMATION BY
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, ACTUALLY,
THE INFORMATION PRACTICES ACT IS
REFERENCED IN THERE. SO WE'LL,
LOOKING FORWARD IF WE HAVE TO
WORK TOGETHER TO FIGURING THOSE
OUT WHEN, GETS TO THE FLOOR,
HOPEFULLY, KNOCK ON WOOD, BOTH
OF THEM. SO GREAT. SEEING NO
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS. MR. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR,
AND MEMBERS, FOR THE
CONVERSATION. I I DO AS WELL.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER HOPE THE SAME.
AND I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE. OKAY. WE DO HAVE A
I THINK WE GOT A QUORUM WHILE I
WAS GONE. OH, SO WE NEED A
MOTION. MOTION? MISS DIXON MOVES
AND MISS ORTEGA. SECONDS CALL
THE ROLL. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, SB
893 BY SENATOR PADILLA. THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS IS AMENDED
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN HI. KHN. AYE.
PATTERSON. PATTERSON AYE. BRIAN.
DIXON. DIXON. AYE ERWIN. HOOVER.
LOWENTHAL. ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE.
WARD. WICKS. WILSON FOUR. WE
HAVE FOUR, SO WE'LL PUT IT ON
CALL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS, WE
WILL MOVE TO YOUR NEXT BILL.
EIGHT NINE SB 892, WHEN YOU'RE
READY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, I WANT TO
BEGIN BY THANKING YOU AND YOUR
STAFF FOR WORKING WITH US ON
THIS BILL, BY INDICATING THAT I
WILL ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING, I THINK, THAT WE
BOTH HAVE, THAT WE WILL CONTINUE
WORKING TOGETHER CLOSELY AND
WOULD LOVE TO WORK SIDE BY SIDE
WITH YOU ON DRAFTING TO ADDRESS
TWO CRITICAL PIECES, THE
DEFINITIONS UTILIZED IN ON THIS
BILL, SO THAT IT BETTER ALIGNS
WITH THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE
ORDER AND DELAYING THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROCUREMENT
STANDARD. AFTER THE ADOPTION OF
REGULATIONS BY THE PRIVACY
AGENCY OR OF ADOPTION OF THE
STATEWIDE FRAMEWORK. THESE TWO
POINTS ARE CRITICAL. I THINK WE
AGREE, AS WE SEEK TO DEVELOP A
STANDARD THAT SAFEGUARDS AND
PROTECTS THE RISKS ASSOCIATED
WITH TECHNOLOGY, WHILE ALSO
ENSURING THAT THE STANDARDS WE
DEVELOP ARE ACTUALLY
IMPLEMENTABLE. AND I APPRECIATE
YOUR AGREEMENT TO DO SO. MADAM
CHAIR. THANK YOU, SB 892, AS
PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED, REQUIRES
THE DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY TO
DEVELOP AND ADOPT REGULATIONS TO
CREATE A PROCUREMENT STANDARD
FOR THE ACQUISITION OF AUTOMATED
DECISION MAKING TOOLS.
SPECIFICALLY. FIRST, IT WOULD
REQUIRE THE DEVELOPMENT AND
ADOPTION OF PROCUREMENT STANDARD
THAT INCLUDES RISK ASSESSMENT,
APPROPRIATE RISK CONTROLS AND
EQUITY ASSESSMENT, AND ADVERSE
INCIDENT MONITORING. WHEN
PROCURING SUCH SYSTEMS. SECOND,
IT WOULD REQUIRE ENGAGEMENT AND
CONSULTATION WITH THE DIVERSITY
OF STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING THOSE
MOST AFFECTED BY GOVERNMENT USE
OF THESE SYSTEMS, SUCH AS PUBLIC
TRUST AND SAFETY EXPERTS.
COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS,
CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS, WORKERS
AND ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS. AS YOU
WELL KNOW, AI TECHNOLOGY THAT IS
PROCURED AND DEPLOYED
RESPONSIBLY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY
TO REVOLUTIONIZE NOT JUST HOW WE
ADMINISTER GOVERNMENT SERVICES,
BUT ALSO OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY.
THIS TECHNOLOGY CAN ALSO POSE
SIGNIFICANT RISKS TO THE SAFETY,
PRIVACY AND CIVIL RIGHTS OF
CALIFORNIANS, ESPECIALLY WHEN
THE TECHNOLOGY IS USED TO ASSIST
OR REPLACE HUMAN DECISION MAKING
IN CRITICAL SECTORS SUCH AS
HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT AND HEALTH
CARE. IN ORDER TO DEPLOY
AUTOMATED DECISION MAKING TOOLS
RESPONSIBLY, IT IS CRITICAL THAT
WE DILIGENTLY ANALYZE THE RISKS
OF THESE SYSTEMS POSED PRIOR TO
THEIR DEPLOYMENT, PROCUREMENT,
AND DEPLOYMENT. AS THE
APPLICATIONS OF THESE SYSTEMS
WILL BE VARIED, THE RISK
ASSESSMENT AND SUBSEQUENT RISK
CONTROLS MUST BE TAILORED AND BE
UNIQUE TO THE TECHNOLOGY. IN
QUESTION. THIS STEP IS A
CRITICAL STEP AS WE DETERMINE
WHAT AI PRODUCTS ARE SAFE FOR
GOVERNMENT USE. NOT ONLY WILL
THIS STRICT SCRUTINY PROTECT THE
STATE FROM LIABILITY, BUT IT
WILL ALSO HELP ASSURE THE PUBLIC
THAT THE TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN
ASSESSED WITH THEIR SAFETY IN
MIND. INDEED, WE NEED TO
IMPLEMENT THESE RISK ASSESSMENT
TESTS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AS
ISSUES WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY HAVE
ALREADY OCCURRED IN 2022, AND LÀ
REPORT FOUND THAT CALIFORNIA'S
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT PROCURED AN AUTOMATED
REVIEW SOFTWARE THAT FLAGGED 1.1
MILLION CLAIMS AS FRAUDULENT,
MEANING WORKERS STOPPED
RECEIVING THEIR BENEFITS
CRITICAL TO THEMSELVES AND TO
THEIR FAMILIES. ULTIMATELY, AS
YOU WELL KNOW, MORE THAN HALF OF
THESE CLAIMS WERE CONFIRMED AS
ILLEGITIMATE, AS LEGITIMATE.
EXCUSE ME? THIS THE HARDSHIP
THAT THESE ERRONEOUS FLAGS
CREATED COULD HAVE BEEN FORESEEN
AND AVOIDED THROUGH THE PROPER
RISK ASSESSMENT PRIOR BEFORE IT
WAS GRANTED ACCESS TO CONTROL, A
LIFELINE TO MILLIONS OF
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES BY ENACTING
SAFEGUARDS PROPOSED IN 8.92,
CALIFORNIA CAN SET A NATIONAL
STANDARD THAT DRIVES DRIVES
INNOVATION OF AI TECH AND
SERVICES WHILE PROTECTING THE
PUBLIC FROM RISKS POSED BY
AUTOMATED DECISION MAKING
SYSTEMS. I'M PLEASED TO WELCOME
WITH ME CATHERINE BRACY, CEO AND
CO-FOUNDER OF TECH EQUITY
COLLABORATIVE. THANK YOU,
SENATOR PADILLA AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, FOR INVITING ME
TO SPEAK ABOUT SB 892 AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF SETTING STANDARDS
FOR PUBLIC SECTOR PROCUREMENT OF
AI SYSTEMS. I'M CATHERINE BRACY,
FOUNDER AND CEO OF TECH EQUITY.
TECH EQUITY IS A RESEARCH AND
POLICY ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION
FOCUSED ON ENSURING THAT TECH IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR BUILDING
PROSPERITY FOR ALL, AND IS HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE HARMS IT
CREATES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
WE'RE PROUD TO SUPPORT SB 892 TO
ENSURE THAT AS CALIFORNIA
CONSIDERS THE ADOPTION OF AI
SYSTEMS, WE ESTABLISH COMMON
SENSE GUARDRAILS AROUND THE USE
OF THIS TECHNOLOGY. THE STATE
GOVERNMENT IS RIGHTLY FOCUSED ON
REDUCING BACKLOGS AND IMPROVING
SERVICES FOR OUR COMMUNITIES.
TECHNOLOGY CAN BE A USEFUL AND
IMPORTANT TOOL TO ACHIEVE THOSE
EFFICIENCIES. AS MISS DIXON SAID
EARLIER. BUT WE ALSO THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO LEARN FROM SEVERAL
EXAMPLES WHERE THE RAPID
ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY, OFTEN
WITHOUT SERIOUS INPUT FROM
PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS AND
COMMUNITIES, CREATED MASSIVE
DELAYS, WRONGFUL DENIALS AND
PROBLEMS THAT NEGATIVELY
IMPACTED CONSTITUENTS SEEKING
SERVICES, LEAVING TAXPAYERS TO
BEAR THE BRUNT OF FIXING THESE
COSTLY MISTAKES. SENATOR PADILLA
MENTIONED THE ISSUES WITH THE
SYSTEM THAT EDD EMPLOYED,
FLAGGING OVER HALF OF THE
RECIPIENTS INACCURATELY AS
FRAUDULENT. THIS EXPERIENCE WAS
NOT ISOLATED TO CALIFORNIA. THE
SAME ALGORITHM HAS BEEN SOLD TO
42 STATES, AND IS NOW THE
SUBJECT OF A COMPLAINT FILED AT
THE FTC. WITHOUT THE GUARDRAILS
THAT SB 892 PROVIDES, CALIFORNIA
MAY BE TAKING A STEP BACKWARD IN
THE QUALITY OF SERVICE DELIVERY
WHEN USING AI. WHAT
DISTINGUISHES THE PUBLIC SECTOR
FROM PRIVATE ACTORS WHO DEVELOP
AND SELL THIS TECHNOLOGY IS THAT
THE PUBLIC SECTOR IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR PROVIDING SERVICES TO
EVERYONE AND ENSURING THAT THOSE
SERVICES ARE PROVISIONED SAFELY
AND FAIRLY. THAT'S WHY IT IS
COMMON THAT WE HAVE SPECIFIC AND
HEIGHTENED PROCUREMENT STANDARDS
FOR PUBLIC CONTRACTS. PEOPLE
COUNT ON THE STATE IN SOME OF
THE MOST DIFFICULT MOMENTS OF
THEIR LIVES. THE PUBLIC'S TRUST
IN GOVERNMENT'S ABILITY TO
DELIVER THESE CRITICAL SERVICES
HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IMPORTANT.
SB 892 RECOGNIZES THIS REALITY
AND RECOGNIZES CALIFORNIA'S
ABILITY TO SET A WORLD LEADING
STANDARD FOR THE USE OF AI
SYSTEMS IN EMERGING TECHNOLOGY
AND HIGH RISK ENVIRONMENTS. FOR
THESE REASONS, WE ASK YOUR AI
VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT OF SB 892? GOOD
AFTERNOON, DANNY KENDALL KAISER,
ON BEHALF OF THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. HI, YACHTY WITH
OAKLAND PRIVACY AND SUPPORT.
RACHEL BHAGWAT WITH ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION. WE'RE Tê
SUPPORT OF AMENDED POSITION.
THANK YOU. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION
TO THIS BILL? HERE WE COME.
SORRY IT'S OKAY. YOU'RE ON A
ROLL TODAY. YEAH, I'M GONNA DO
MY BEST IMPERSONATION OF ME
TODAY, BUT I AM MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS COURTNEY JENSEN. AND ON
BEHALF OF TECH CA TECH, SIA'S
MEMBERS SPAN FROM SMALL
BUSINESSES TO GLOBAL ONES THAT
CONTRACT WITH STATE FOR VARIOUS
IT RELATED PROJECTS. PRIOR TO
THIS COMMITTEE, TECH CA DID NOT
HAVE A FORMAL POSITION ON SB 892
AND HAD PROVIDED THE AUTHOR'S
OFFICE WITH SOME FEEDBACK ON THE
RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN
REGULATIONS AND STATE
CONTRACTING OF ADT. WE DID NOT
OPPOSE THE SETTING OF STANDARDS.
UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS BEGINNING
ON PAGE NINE, WE WILL NOW BE
MOVING INTO AN OPPOSED POSITION.
WE APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THAT
THE AUTHOR STARTED WITH AND THE
AGREEMENT WITH COMMITTEE TO
CONTINUE DISCUSSING THE
PROCUREMENT BAN IN THIS BILL AND
THE BROAD DEFINITIONS AND THE
COMMITMENT TO CONTINUING TO
WORK. WE ARE SPECIFICALLY
CONCERNED ABOUT THE BROAD
DEFINITION OF ADT AND THE
AMENDMENT BANNING BANNING THE
STATE FROM PROCURING BROADLY
DEFINED ADT UNTIL REGULATIONS
ARE COMPLETED BY THE PRIVACY
AGENCY, ENFORCING CDC
REGULATIONS TO ESSENTIALLY
MIRROR PRIVACY AGENCY
REGULATIONS. THIS MEANS THAT IF
THE BILL WERE TO PASS, THE STATE
WOULD NOT COULD NOT PROCURE
TECHNOLOGY THAT TODAY IS MAKING
GOVERNMENT MORE EFFICIENT, AND
IT IS ALLOWING AGENCIES AND
DEPARTMENTS TO RESPOND TO YOUR
CONSTITUENTS IN A FASTER, MORE
ACCURATE MANNER. THIS BAN
PRESUPPOSES THAT ANY PROCUREMENT
OF ADT IS CONCERNING, WHICH IS
SIMPLY NOT TRUE. THE LANGUAGE
ALSO MAKES IT UNCLEAR IF AN ADT
CONTRACT PREVIOUSLY ENTERED INTO
BY THE STATE COULD BE RENEWED
PRIOR TO REGULATIONS BEING
COMPLETED. THE AMENDMENTS WILL
STOP PROCUREMENT OF ADT PROJECTS
FOR THE STATE FOR AT LEAST A
YEAR, PROBABLY LONGER GIVEN THE
HISTORICAL DELAYS AND
REGULATIONS OF THE PRIVACY
AGENCY. THE ADDITION OF THE
PRIVACY AGENCY AND REQUIRING,
YOU KNOW, SOME MIRRORING OF ADT
REGULATIONS WITH THE AGENCY IS
ALSO INCREDIBLY CONCERNING.
PRIVACY AGENCY IS AN INDEPENDENT
CONSUMER PRIVACY AGENCY FOCUSED
ON PRIVATE BUSINESS INTERACTION
WITH CONSUMERS. THEY ARE NOT AN
EXPERT ON STATE PROCUREMENT, AND
TO NOW PUT THEM IN A POSITION OF
SOMEHOW OVERSEEING OR REGULATING
STATE PROCUREMENT OF 80 IS
CONFUSING. AGENCIES AND
DEPARTMENTS AND BUSINESSES
CONTRACTING WITH THE STATE ARE
USED TO WORKING WITH DGS, GOV
OPS, K¾T REGULATIONS AND
GUIDELINES. WE OFTEN INTERACT
WITH THESE AGENCIES AND
DEPARTMENTS TO ENSURE
APPROPRIATE AND SAFE
CONTRACTING. SO WE STRONGLY URGE
THIS COMMITTEE TO RECONSIDER
THOSE AMENDMENTS. APPRECIATE THE
COMMITMENT TO CONTINUING TO WORK
TOGETHER AND BELIEVE THERE IS A
TIME AND A PLACE THAT THESE ADT
PROJECTS NEED TO CONTINUE MOVING
FORWARD IN APPROPRIATE AND SAFE
WAYS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE USING
TECHNOLOGY THAT IS TO THE
BENEFIT OF CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUENTS. SO THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
LARA BENNETT, ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
SENATOR PADILLA, WE DID NOT HAVE
A POSITION ON THE FORMER BILL IN
PRINT, BUT LIKE TECH CA WITH THE
AMENDMENTS TAKEN IN COMMITTEE
TODAY, WE DO HAVE TO TAKE AN
OPPOSED POSITION, WE WANT TO
AGAIN ALIGN OUR COMMENTS WITH
TECH CA. WE HAVE CONCERNS IN OUR
THAT WE'RE ADDRESSED IN 2930 AS
IT RELATES TO THE DEFINITIONS OF
CONSEQUENTIAL DECISIONS, ADT AND
SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR. THOSE DO
PULL OVER TO THIS BILL WITH THAT
ALIGNMENT. I WANT TO ALSO KIND
OF BACK UP THE STATEMENT BY
COURTNEY THAT SAYS THAT WE'VE
BEEN WAITING FOR REGULATIONS BY
THE PRIVACY AGENCY SINCE JULY
1ST OF 2022. WE ARE CONCERNED
THAT THIS ALIGNMENT WITH, WITH
THOSE REGULATIONS WILL FURTHER
DELAY THOSE REGULATIONS AND ALSO
HAVE K¾T ALIGN THE REGULATIONS.
AS COURTNEY SAID, IT COULD BE
OVER A YEAR TO DO THAT. WE JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN
STILL DO PROCUREMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE SAFETY IN MIND, AND WE
OPPOSE YOUR BILL. ANYONE ELSE
HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL?
WAIT. HOLD ON. THERE YOU GO.
DYLAN HOFFMAN ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET, APOLOGIES FOR THE LATE
OPPOSITION ALIGNED. MY COMMENTS
WITH TEXEA AND CAL CHAMBER IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
FURTHER OPPOSITION, WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE DÍAS. QUESTIONS?
COMMENTS CONCERNS. SEEING NONE,
SO I THINK I MEAN, I WILL SAY
ONE POINT JUST TO HIGHLIGHT
WHICH IS THE PRIVACY AGENCY HAS
ALREADY RELEASED DRAFT
REGULATORY REGULATIONS. THIS
BILL WILL NOT BECOME LAW IF ALL
GOES WELL UNTIL JANUARY. AND WE
ANTICIPATE THOSE REGULATIONS
BEING FINALIZED. THEY WERE
SUPPOSED TO BE LATE SPRING, SO
THEY'RE COMING RELATIVELY SOON,
WHICH IS WHY WE FELT CONFIDENT
THAT THIS WAS NOT SOME NEW
REGULATORY SETUP THAT WE'RE
BEGINNING. ACTUALLY, IT'S
SOMETHING THAT IS WELL INTO THE
PROGRESS FOR THOSE WHO ARE
TRACKING THE PRIVACY AGENCY,
WHICH I KNOW THE OPPOSITION IS,
SINCE WE'VE DISCUSSED IT. SO I
THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING
TO NOTE ABOUT WANTING TO ALIGN
WITH THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THE
GOAL OF THE PRIVACY AGENCY
REGULATIONS IS TO PROTECT
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS, WHICH IS
WHAT WE AS A GOVERNMENT SHOULD
BE DOING WITH OUR PURCHASING OF
ADTS AS WELL. SO I APPRECIATE
THE ALIGNMENT THAT'S HAPPENING
HERE, AND WITH THAT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. AND MEMBERS,
AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE, I
THINK IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT,
AND TO GET IT RIGHT AND TO
ADDRESS THE DELIVERY OF
GOVERNMENT SAFEGUARDS AND
SERVICES AND OPERATIONS IN THIS
SPACE. THAT SAID, I ALSO LOOK
FORWARD AND APPRECIATE THE
CHAIR'S WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE
DIRECTLY ON TRYING TO CONTINUE
DIALOG ON THESE TWO POINTS OF
CONCERN. IN TERMS OF THE
DRAFTING, I WILL NOTE, AND PROUD
OF THE FACT THAT HERE BEFORE
THIS, THIS BILL HAS HAD ENJOYED
WIDE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND NO
OPPOSITION, SO I'M HOPING THAT
WE CAN CONTINUE WORKING FORWARD
AND GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN
DO WE CAN IMPLEMENT A POLICY
THAT BENEFITS AND PROTECTS ALL
CALIFORNIANS. AND WITH THAT, I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. GREAT. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? SECOND MOTION AND A
SECOND. LET'S CALL THE ROLL.
ITEM NUMBER THREE SB 892 BY
SENATOR PADILLA. THE MOTION IS
TO PASS, AS AMENDED, TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. B¢O
KHN. AYE. KHN. AYE. PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. NOT VOTING. BRIAN.
DIXON DIXON. NOT VOTING. IRWIN
HOOVER. LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA ORTEGA. AYE. WARD.
WICKS. AYE AYE. BIXEL. AYE.
WILSON THANK YOU. MR. IT IS ON
CALL. WE NEED MORE MEMBERS.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS
MR. UMBERG AND I HAVE HEARD YOU
HAVE ALREADY MOVED THROUGH 50
BILLS IN YOUR COMMITTEE, SIR. SO
YOU SET A STANDARD FOR THE REST
OF US TO FOLLOW. KNOW WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE TRYING TO
COMPETE FOR THE MOST
UNCOMFORTABLE HEARING ROOM. AND
OH, I'M WINNING. NO, YOU DON'T
WIN. YOU GOT TO COME SEE US AND
YOU'LL SEE. MR. LOWENTHAL, MR.
LOWENTHAL WAS THERE. HE KNOWS
HOW UNCOMFORTABLE THAT HEARING
ROOM IS. SO, A COUPLE OTHER
COMMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE, MADAM
CHAIR. AND FOR THE ASSISTANCE OF
THE EVER TALENTED, EXTREMELY
WELL EDUCATED JOSH TOSNEY FOR
HIS HELP ON OUR BILL. HERE'S
WHAT THIS IS SB 918 FOR ANYONE
WATCHING IT IS SB 918. YES. YES
SB NINE TÊ. IT REQUIRES SOCIAL
MEDIA PLATFORMS TO HAVE A
TELEPHONE HOTLINE AVAILABLE AT
ALL TIMES FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES TO MAKE A TIMELY
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION. IT ALSO
COMPELS SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
TO COMPEL TO COMPLY WITH SEARCH
WARRANTS WITHIN 72 HOURS. IF A
SEARCH WARRANT IS PROVIDED, THE
PLATFORM BY LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY AND THE SUBJECT OF THE
SEARCH WARRANT HAS AN ACCOUNT ON
THE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS. AND
HERE'S WHY. HERE'S WHY. THIS IS
SO IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE WHEN
THERE'S AN INJURY, A FATALITY,
GOD FORBID, A FATALITY IN
CONNECTION WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, A
CRIME. AND IN PARTICULAR, A
POISONING, A DRUG POISONING OR
OVERDOSE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
CAN ACT QUICKLY TO DO TWO
THINGS. ONE, TO FIND AND
POTENTIALLY ARREST THE
PERPETRATOR, BUT ALSO TO PREVENT
ADDITIONAL HARM SO THAT IF
THERE'S A PERSON WHO'S
DISTRIBUTING, FOR EXAMPLE,
OXYCODONE, THAT'S LACED WITH
FENTANYL, WE WANT TO STOP THAT
RIGHT AWAY. AND SO THAT'S THE
PURPOSE. THE PURPOSE IS, IS SO
THAT THEY ARE ATTENTIVE AND SO
THEY RESPOND, HERE WITH ME
ACTUALLY, SADLY, IS MR. SAMUEL
CHAPMAN OF THE OF THE PARENT
COLLECTIVE, MR. CHAPMAN HAS A,
HIS OWN PERSONAL NARRATIVE AS TO
WHY THIS BILL IS SO IMPORTANT.
AND I WOULD ASK FOR AN
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY. YES. AND
JUST BEFORE WE MOVE ON, SENATOR,
ARE YOU ACCEPTING? WE ACCEPT ALL
THE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. I KNEW YOUR GLOWING REMARKS
ABOUT JOSH MUST MEAN. YES. YES.
I WAS HOPING HE WASN'T HERE SO
HIS HEAD WOULD SWELL, BUT IT WAS
UNAVOIDABLE. SO THANK YOU, SIR.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. YES. HI.
THANK YOU. THIS IS MY SON,
SAMMY. HE PASSED AWAY AT 16. HE
WAS ON SNAPCHAT AND THE
ALGORITHM DROVE A DRUG DEALER TO
HIM, OFFERED HIM A COUNTERFEIT
DRUG, SAID THAT HE DELIVERED AT
THE BOTTOM, AND THE LETHAL DOSE
WAS DELIVERED TO OUR HOUSE LIKE
A PIZZA. AFTER WE WERE ASLEEP,
WE FOUND OUR SON DEAD ON THE
FLOOR. THE NEXT DAY, TRIED TO
RESUSCITATE HIM AND FAILED. THE
EMTS CAME AND THE FIREMEN, AND
THEY FAILED. THEN THE CORONER
AND THE POLICE, AND WE SAID TO
THE POLICE, LET'S CALL SNAPCHAT
AND FIND OUT ABOUT THIS PROFILE
AND GO ARREST THIS PERSON. WE
WERE IN SANTA MONICA AT THE
TIME, WHICH IS THE SAME POLICE
FORCE THAT SNAPCHAT HAS BECAUSE
THEY'RE IN SANTA MONICA. AND
DETECTIVE PAUL NOW OF THE SANTA
MONICA POLICE FORCE, TOLD ME
THAT THEY DON'T BOTHER CALLING
ANYMORE BECAUSE SNAPCHAT DOESN'T
RETURN THEIR CALLS AND DOESN'T
HELP WITH THESE CRIMES. AND
THAT'S WHY THIS BILL IS SO
IMPORTANT. HE TOLD US A FAMILY
OF A DEAD CHILD, THAT THEY'D BE
BACK IN THREE MONTHS WHEN THE
TOXICOLOGY REPORT CAME BACK, IF
IT SHOWED ANYTHING. AND THAT WAS
THE WAY OUR CASE HAD TO BE
HANDLED, BECAUSE THE INFORMATION
THAT WAS NEEDED IS ON A PLATFORM
THAT DOESN'T COOPERATE. I SINCE
FOUND OUT FROM OTHER PARENTS IN
MY SITUATION THAT THIS IS THE
CASE WITH LOCAL POLICE ALL OVER
THE COUNTRY, AND THAT SNAPCHAT
AND OTHER PLATFORMS THROW UP
HURDLES. THEY DO NOT HELP THE
POLICE, AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS
SO IMPORTANT FOR PARENTS LIKE
ME, WHO HAVE LOST A CHILD. WERE
HAVING OUR SUBPOENAS DELAYED OR
KICKED BACK FOR MISSING A MIDDLE
INITIAL. THE PROTECTIONS
AFFORDED THESE PLATFORMS UNDER
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND SECTION
233 OF THE COMMUNICATIONS
DECENCY ACT SHOULD NOT EXTEND TO
FRUSTRATING LAW ENFORCEMENT
EFFORTS. THIS BILL SHOULD NOT
EVEN BE NECESSARY, BUT IT IS,
AND CALIFORNIA IS LEADING THE
WAY IN TECHNOLOGY AND HAS A
SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO OUR
CITIZENS TO KEEP THEM SAFE FROM
ANY DANGERS. OUR COMPANIES MAY
BE FACILITATING. WE ARE ALSO
LEADING THE WAY IN FENTANYL
POISONING, AND SOCIAL MEDIA IS
THE MAIN DELIVERY MECHANISM FOR
THAT. THE LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH
IN THE UNITED STATES FOR OUR
YOUNG PEOPLE. PARENTS LIKE ME
HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE WORST
HUMAN EXPERIENCE LOSING A CHILD.
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES MUST TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR FACILITATING
LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES AND
RETURNING VALID SUBPOENAS
PROMPTLY. I WANT TO THANK THE
ASSEMBLY FOR HEARING SAMMY'S
STORY, AND FOR MAKING THE LIVES
OF THOSE HARMED BY SOCIAL MEDIA
A LITTLE BIT EASIER. THANK YOU
FOR TELLING US. SAMMY'S STORY,
ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL NAME ORGANIZATION AND
POSITION? I KNOW IT'S UNORTHODOX
, BUT I'M HERE TO BACK SAM UP
AND LARA AND THEIR FAMILY
CARRIED SAMMY'S LAW. WE'RE GOING
TO GET THAT DONE IN THE FUTURE.
BUT SENATOR UMBERG IS MAKING A
HUGE STRIDE HERE. SO
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU, SENATOR MARK BERKMAN
WITH THE ORGANIZATION FOR SOCIAL
MEDIA SAFETY AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU, SEEING NO ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT IN THE ROOM. OPPOSITION.
COME ON UP. WHEN YOU'RE READY.
MR. OVER HERE. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. COMMITTEE MEMBERS DYLAN
HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF TECHNET,
WE ARE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO
SB 918 AND FULLY UNDERSTAND AND
APPRECIATE THE IMPETUS FOR THIS
BILL. I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM
THAT, OUR ASSOCIATION, OUR
MEMBERS HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY
HARD TO COME UP AND CRAFT
SOLUTIONS. WE WORKED ON ONE ONE
SUCH BILL LAST YEAR, AB 1027. WE
WANT TO CONTINUE TO. YEAH.
SORRY. APOLOGIES. IS THAT BETTER
? YEAH. THANK YOU, WE'VE WORKED
ON A NUMBER OF, OF BILLS BEFORE
THIS LEGISLATURE, THIS COMMITTEE
TO TRY TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM,
JUST TO RESTATE AB 1027 LAST
YEAR, WE WORKED VERY DILIGENTLY
WITH THE AUTHOR TO PRESERVE MORE
INFORMATION RELATED TO, FENTANYL
RELATED AND DRUG RELATED CONTENT
, TO ENSURE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
WAS ABLE TO ACCESS THAT TYPE OF
INFORMATION SO THAT THEY COULD
HAVE MORE SUCCESSFUL
PROSECUTIONS. HOWEVER, WE'RE
CONCERNED WITH THIS BILL AND THE
REQUIREMENT TO, COMPLY WITH
THESE REQUESTS WITHIN 72 HOURS.
WE BELIEVE THAT, THAT COULD
POTENTIALLY WEAKEN USER PRIVACY,
COULD COMPROMISE THE SECURITY OF
USERS DATA, BUT ALSO REPRESENTS
A CONCERNING WEAKENING OF DUE
PROCESS SPECIFICALLY FOR SOCIAL
MEDIA USERS, SO FIRST AND
FOREMOST, OUR PLATFORMS DO
COMPLY WITH WITH LEGAL PROCESS
WHEN THEY'RE SERVED WITH
SUBPOENAS, WITH SEARCH WARRANTS.
BUT PRIOR TO COMPLYING,
PLATFORMS VERIFY THAT THIS
PROCESS THEY'VE RECEIVED IS
VALID. THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS AND
CONTROL OF THE INFORMATION THAT
IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS, OF THE
WARRANT OR PROCESS, AND IN SOME
CASES, PROVIDE REQUIRED NOTICE
TO THE USER. WE BELIEVE THAT 72
HOUR TIMELINE IN THIS BILL
OVEREMPHASIZES COMPLIANCE,
RATHER THAN VALIDATING AND
ENSURING THAT USERS AND THEIR
INFORMATION IS PROTECTED, DUE TO
THEIR SIZE, MANY PLATFORMS DO
RECEIVE A NUMBER OF THESE TYPES
OF REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
ACROSS MANY JURISDICTIONS IN
THIS COUNTRY, AND SO SB 918
WOULD CREATE A SEPARATE DUE
PROCESS, RIGHT? FOR OUR USERS
THAN FOR USERS OF ANY OTHER
ONLINE PLATFORM. FURTHERMORE, WE
FULLY AGREE WITH THE INTENT TO
CREATE A SYSTEM AND AN EASE OF
USE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, WE
BELIEVE OUR PLATFORMS ARE
ALREADY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A
CONTACT PROCESS AS REQUIRED BY
PENAL CODE SECTION 1540 6.4. SO
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL'S
REQUIREMENTS AROUND A TELEPHONE
NUMBER IN PARTICULAR ARE A
LITTLE BIT REDUNDANT, BUT I
BELIEVE THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT WE
CAN CONTINUE TO, RESOLVE. AND SO
UNDER CAL ACPA, WE BELIEVE OUR
PLATFORMS ALREADY FALL UNDER
THAT REQUIREMENT. AND SO MANY
PLATFORMS DO HAVE AN ONLINE
PORTAL WHERE LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN
REACH OUT TO OUR PLATFORMS
DIRECTLY, RECEIVE RESPONSES,
SERVE PROCESS THROUGH THAT THAT
PORTAL, AND SEEK TO OBTAIN THAT
INFORMATION. THAT WAY. SO FOR
THOSE REASONS, WE ARE
REGRETTABLY AND RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED TO SB 918. THANK YOU.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. HELLO, CHAIR
AND MEMBERS, MY NAME IS RACHEL
BHAGWAT. I'M A LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE AT ACLU CALIFORNIA
ACTION, I WANT TO THANK THE
SENATOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD. AND THANK YOU FOR
SHARING YOUR FAMILY'S STORY. WE
DO SHARE CONCERNS WITH THIS BILL
WITH TECHNET, PEOPLE OF ALL AGES
RELY ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
FOR EVERYTHING FROM ACCESSING
INFORMATION AND CONNECTING WITH
OTHERS TO SEEKING INFORMATION ON
SENSITIVE TOPICS LIKE GENDER
AFFIRMING CARE OR ABORTION, TO
PAYING FOR GOODS, USING
TRANSPORTATION, GETTING WORK
DONE AND SPEAKING OUT ABOUT
ISSUES OF THE DAY. THE VAST
STORES OF INFO THAT SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS HOLD ABOUT PEOPLE ARE
SUBJECT TO SOME OF THE STRONGEST
PRIVACY PROTECTIONS UNDER THE
LAW, AND FOR GOOD REASON. RULES
THAT ACCELERATE THE HANDING OVER
OF THIS PRIVATE INFORMATION TO
THE GOVERNMENT DO RAISE
CONCERNS. THIS BILL ADDS STRICT
TIME LIMITS FOR RESPONDING TO
GOVERNMENT REQUESTS, BUT
ENSURING THAT PEOPLE'S RIGHTS
ARE PROTECTED TAKES TIME. WHEN A
PLATFORM RECEIVES A SEARCH
WARRANT, THEY MUST CAREFULLY
REVIEW THE WARRANT, PERFORM A
REASONABLE SEARCH FOR RESPONSIVE
MATERIAL AND UNDERSTAND THE
SCOPE OF THOSE RECORDS IN ORDER
TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE WARRANT
IS TAILORED AS LAW REQUIRES. THE
PLATFORM SHOULD ALSO NOTIFY THE
TARGET OF THE SEARCH TO ALLOW
THE PERSON TO TAKE ACTION TO
PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS. THE
PLATFORM WILL NEED TO ENSURE
THAT THE WARRANT DOES NOT COVER
INFORMATION. THE LEGISLATURE HAS
SAID SHOULD NOT BE SHARED OUT OF
STATE, SUCH AS INFO ABOUT
SOMEONE SEEKING OR PROVIDING
ABORTIONS OR GENDER AFFIRMING
CARE. THE PLATFORM MIGHT ALSO
COMMUNICATE WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT
ABOUT THE SCOPE AND BREADTH OF
THE WARRANT, AND SEEK AND OBTAIN
LEGAL ADVICE FROM COUNSEL
REGARDING THE BREADTH OF THE
SEARCH WARRANT. IT MIGHT ALSO BE
NECESSARY FOR THE PLATFORM OR
THE TARGET OF THE WARRANT TO
SEEK RELIEF IN COURT, TO VOID OR
MODIFY THAT WARRANT. ALL THESE
STEPS CANNOT BE COMPLETED IF THE
PLATFORM MUST RESPOND WITHIN 72
HOURS, AND FOR THAT REASON, WE
ARE OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? CHAIR
MEMBERS. AUSTIN, HERE WITH ON
BEHALF OF THE INTERNET WORKS
ASSOCIATION, WE'RE STILL
OPPOSED, BUT APPRECIATE THE
AMENDMENTS. IT'S DEFINITELY
MOVING THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
SEEING NO FURTHER OPPOSITION,
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DÍAS.
I JUST WANT TO START BY SAYING
THAT I JUST CONTINUE HEARING
AFTER HEARING TO BE PERPLEXED BY
THE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES WHO
PUT OUT ADS SAYING THAT THEY
WANT REGULATION, THAT THEY COME
IN AND OPPOSE THE MOST BASIC OF
LAWS THAT ARE PUT FORWARD. AND
AS SOMEONE WHO USED TO REPRESENT
CORPORATIONS IN CRIMINAL
ACTIONS, I KNOW THAT MOST FOLKS
DON'T EVEN GET 72 HOURS THAT
THEY SHOW UP WITH THE WARRANT
AND THEY GET WHAT THEY WANT. AND
SO 72 HOURS, WHEN YOU HAVE OVER
A MILLION USERS, YOU HAVE
LAWYERS ON SPEED DIAL, AND YOU
CAN GET THOSE ANSWERS AND YOU
CAN GET THEM THE INFORMATION TO
SAVE MORE LIVES. I REALLY,
REALLY URGE THE TECH INDUSTRY TO
STEP UP AND TO ACTUALLY START TO
BE OUR PARTNERS IN PROTECTING
OUR COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE WHAT
SENATOR UMBERG IS PROPOSING HERE
IS EMINENTLY REASONABLE. AND IF
YOU CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, I JUST
DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK
ANYMORE. KIDS LIKE SAMI ARE
DYING AND HE'S ASKING YOU TO
RESPOND TO A SEARCH WARRANT,
WHICH, LET ME BE CLEAR, REQUIRES
A JUDGE TO SIGN ON TO WITH
PROBABLE CAUSE. SO ALL OF THOSE
CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED BY THE
PROCESSES ALREADY IN EXISTENCE
TO GET THE WARRANT IN THE FIRST
PLACE. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT
OVER TO MR. LOWENTHAL, FIRST OF
ALL, I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING FORTH SUCH AN
IMPORTANT BILL, SUCH A
THOUGHTFUL BILL. THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING I CAN SAY IS TO
YOU, SIR. I'M SO SORRY FOR YOUR
LOSS. I KNOW HOW HARD IT MUST BE
FOR YOUR FAMILY TO LIVE THROUGH
IT, MUCH LESS TO STAND IN FRONT
OF COMPLETE STRANGERS AND TALK
ABOUT YOUR STORY. BUT SUFFICE TO
SAY, TELLING THIS STORY IS
MAKING AN IMPACT. IT CERTAINLY
GIVES ENERGY TO THE AUTHOR AND
ALL OF US WHO KNOW THIS IS THE
RIGHT THING TO DO. SO THANK YOU
FOR GIVING US THAT STRENGTH AND
THANK YOU TO SAMI AS WELL. THANK
YOU, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE
AUTHOR BEFORE I PROVIDE ANY
COMMENTS. THE QUESTION IS, IS,
IS, THE, THE CONCERN OF THE
ACLU? THE MOST SALIENT CONCERN
THAT I HEARD WAS THIS 72 HOUR
WINDOW, IS THE RESPONSE THAT HAS
TO TAKE PLACE WITH THE 72 HOUR
WINDOW. IS THAT A DEFINITIVE
RESPONSE OR CAN IT BE ANY
RESPONSE WHATSOEVER? WHAT IS
THAT RESPONSE NEED TO BE? THAT'S
A GREAT QUESTION, TYPICALLY THE
RESPONSE TO A SEARCH WARRANT HAS
TO BE COMPLETE. SO YES, IF THEY
SIMPLY DON'T USE WHAT WOULD BE A
GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO DO A
SEARCH, THEN THEY WOULD NOT BE
IN COMPLIANCE. AND, AND
THEORETICALLY, THERE COULD BE
GREATER ENFORCEMENT ACTION. BUT
ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO
MENTION IS THAT THERE'S THIS NEW
TOOL CALLED ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE. AND IT'S, YOU
KNOW, SOMETHING VERY STRANGE TO
THE TECH INDUSTRY, APPARENTLY.
I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT, BUT WHAT
WHAT WHAT WHEN YOU SAY YOU NEED
TO ANALYZE A SEARCH WARRANT, I
MEAN, AS AS THE CHAIR POINTED
OUT, YOU CAN ANALYZE A SEARCH
WARRANT FAIRLY QUICKLY AND WITH
ARTIFICIAL AND I'M NOT ACTUALLY,
I'M PRONE TO SARCASM. I'M NOT
BEING SARCASTIC RIGHT NOW WITH
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, YOU CAN
TRAIN THE MODEL. YOU CAN TRAIN
THE MODEL TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE
THE NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS FOR A
SEARCH WARRANT. AND YOU CAN
LITERALLY FEED THAT SEARCH
WARRANT IN AND SEE IF THAT MEETS
THE CRITERIA THAT'S BEEN TRAINED
UPON. AND YOU CAN EVEN ANALYZE
THE FACTS TO SEE WHETHER THE
FACTS GO WITH THE LAW AND GET AN
OUTPUT. NOW I DON'T KNOW. I'M
NOT SOPHISTICATED ENOUGH TO KNOW
WHETHER 72 HOURS IS SUFFICIENT.
WE'VE BEEN WRESTLING WITH THAT.
WE'VE CHOSEN 72 HOURS, FRANKLY,
BECAUSE IT SEEMED REASONABLE, AS
THE CHAIR POINTS OUT, TO THAT,
THAT BUSINESSES, WHEN THEY GET A
SEARCH WARRANT, THEY COMPLY
IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE THEY GET
FOLKS THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN THEIR
PREMISES AND PRODUCING THINGS
AND A SUBPOENA DEPENDENT UPON
WHAT KIND OF SUBPOENA AND WHAT
THE TIMELINES ARE. USUALLY CAN
BE COMPLIED WITH FAIRLY EASILY
NOW OR QUICKLY, ESPECIALLY IF
YOUR BUSINESS IS TECHNOLOGY. SO
I HAVE CONFIDENCE. I HAVE
CONFIDENCE IN OUR TECH INDUSTRY.
I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE WAY WE
DEVELOP ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
THAT WE CAN DO THE JOB THAT'S
REQUIRED. NOW. ONE OTHER
COMPONENT OF THE BILL IS THAT
THERE BE A HUMAN AND I KNOW THAT
SOUNDS A LITTLE 1980 ISH, THAT
YOU'RE BEING AN ACTUAL HUMAN,
BUT ANY OF US WHO'VE EVER TRIED
TO CALL A PLATFORM CAN CAN
ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT IT TAKES
SOMETIMES A LOT MÐI WE ALL VIEW
OUR JOB THROUGH THE PRISM OF
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. MY WIFE HAD
A PROBLEM WITH ONE OF THE
PLATFORMS LAST FRIDAY. SHE'S
STILL WAITING FOR A CALL BACK.
TODAY IS TUESDAY, SO THAT'S WHY
I INCLUDED A HUMAN IN THIS
EQUATION SO THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
CAN ACTUALLY TALK TO A HUMAN AND
ASK THAT HUMAN TO DO WHATEVER IS
NECESSARY TO BE ABLE TO COMPLY.
SO I KNOW THAT'S MORE THAN YOU'D
ASK FOR. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LOWENTHAL, I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS CONCERNING MR.
CHAPMAN'S PASSION, AND TAKING
THAT PASSION AND TURNING IT INTO
POSITIVE OUTCOME. YEAH. I'D LIKE
TO, FIRST RESPOND TO WHAT YOU
HAD TO SAY AND THEN THEN MAKE MY
OVERALL COMMENTS, IF THAT'S
OKAY, FIRST OF ALL, I WAS THE
PRESIDENT OF
FREECONFERENCECALL.COM 40
MILLION MONTHLY USERS. WE HAD
ALL THE TIME SEARCH WARRANTS.
AND SO FORTH, BROUGHT TO OUR
ATTENTION BASED ON CALLS, A LOT
OF ISSUES AROUND TERRORISM, A
LOT OF ISSUES, WHERE LAW
ENFORCEMENT NEEDED TO KNOW
PRECISELY WHO WAS ON CALLS, SO
FORTH. WE HAD NO PROBLEM TURNING
THOSE AROUND IN SHORT ORDER
WITHOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.
FOR AN ENTITY OF THAT SIZE,
INCLUDING CALL DETAIL RECORDS
AND THE LIKE. AND I DON'T SEE
THIS BEING PROBLEMATIC FOR THE
INDUSTRY WHATSOEVER, NOW I'M
GOING TO MAKE MY COMMENTS. SO,
ACTUALLY, I TAKE THAT BACK. THE
FIRST THING I'M GOING TO DO IS
COMMEND DYLAN. AND BOTH THE
OPPOSITION FOR THE VERY, VERY
DIFFICULT JOBS THAT YOU HAVE AND
STANDING UP FOR SOMETHING THAT
CAN THAT ALL OF US EMOTIONALLY
CONNECT WITH AND ALL OF US CAN
IDENTIFY WITH AS IT RELATES TO
TRAGEDY GOING ON IN OUR
COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S WHY THE
CHAIR IS SO EMPHATIC ABOUT WHY
IT'S SO IMPORTANT FOR INDUSTRY
TO STAND UP TO THIS, BECAUSE IT
AFFECTS ALL OF US. NOW, THERE'S
A RECURRING THEME THAT WE HEAR
OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WHICH IS
THE WALL THAT TECH IS PUTTING UP
, WHETHER IT'S LAW ENFORCEMENT,
WHETHER IT'S CYBER BULLYING,
WHETHER WHATEVER THE ISSUE IS
HAS TO COME DOWN, PERIOD, I WAS
ABLE TO SAY THIS IN THE
CHAIRMAN'S COMMITTEE ONLY AN
HOUR AGO OR TWO HOURS AGO WHEN
PRESENTING A SIMILAR TYPE OF
BILL THAT HAD TO DO WITH HARM
CAUSED TO CHILDREN AND HAVING
SCHOOL OFFICIALS, A SCHOOL
PSYCHOLOGIST BEING ABLE TO
ESCALATE THINGS, AS IT RELATES
TO SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS AND
HAVING A HUMAN RESPONSE WITHIN A
CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, THE
COSTS ARE DE MINIMIS. THE
CONTACT CENTER THAT COULD BE
EMPLOYED FOR THIS COULD ACTUALLY
BE THE CONTACT CENTER FOR ALL OF
THESE BILLS THAT WE'RE SEEING
SIMULTANEOUSLY, THE AMOUNT OF
PROFIT THAT BIG TECH IS MAKING
IS UNBELIEVABLE, IF YOU WILL, IF
YOU WILL ALLOW ME FOR ONE QUICK
MOMENT, META MADE A MADE A
PROFIT LAST YEAR. META MADE $39
BILLION IN PROFIT IN 2023, WHICH
IS A 69% INCREASE FROM THE YEAR
BEFORE. ALPHABET. GOOGLE, WHICH
OPERATES YOUTUBE, WHICH IS ALSO,
PART OF THIS, MADE $42 BILLION
LAST YEAR IN PROFIT. A 40%
INCREASE FROM THE YEAR BEFORE.
SORRY, DYLAN, DON'T MEAN TO BE
DIRECTING THIS ALL AT YOU. WHAT
I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THIS ISN'T
GOING TO AFFECT SHAREHOLDER
VALUE. THIS IS GOING TO PROVIDE
AN UNBELIEVABLE AMOUNT OF RELIEF
TO COMMUNITIES IN A GREAT DEAL
OF PAIN. COMMUNITIES WHOSE
RESIDENTS ARE BEING MONETIZED
EVERY TIME THEY GO ONLINE. WE
DEMAND A RESPONSE. THAT'S THAT'S
THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE LEVEL
OF PAIN. AND DIFFICULTY THAT YOU
HEAR FROM THIS FAMILY. AND ANY
FAMILY THAT GETS THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE, MR.
MISTER CHAIRMAN, I HOPE THAT YOU
WOULD CONSIDER ME TO BE A
COAUTHOR ON THIS BILL. VERY
PROUD TO SUPPORT IN COMMITTEE
TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
THINK MISS DIXON AND THEN MISS
ORTEGA. THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU.
CHAIR. THANK YOU. SENATOR. I
CERTAINLY MY HEART GOES OUT TO
YOU, AND YOU'RE HERE TO FIGHT
THE FIGHT. AND YOUR SON'S NAME.
AND, WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY PARENTS
HERE IN SACRAMENTO AT VARIOUS
HEARINGS AND PRESS CONFERENCES
FIGHTING FOR CHANGES IN OUR LAWS
TO ENSURE THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE
SAFE. AND I COMMEND YOU FOR
BEING HERE AND ADVOCATING FOR
YOUR SON AND, SENATOR, THANK
YOU. THANK YOU FOR CARRYING THIS
BILL AND OTHER BILLS RELATED TO
PUBLIC SAFETY. FRANKLY, IN OUR
COMMUNITY DID THIS GO THROUGH
PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE SENATE, NO.
MAYBE THAT'S GOOD. SO I COMMEND
YOU. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THESE
HEINOUS, FACTORS THAT ARE
AFFECTING OUR CHILDREN ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AND ELSEWHERE RELATED TO
FENTANYL, RELATED TO DRUGS THAT
ARE ILLEGAL, ILLICIT, THAT ARE
FED INTO THE ILLICIT DRUG
MARKET. SO I COMMEND YOU,
SENATOR, FOR FIGHTING THIS GOOD
FIGHT. I DO NOTICE, PROUDLY,
THAT OUR ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT IS BEHIND THIS. I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY LAW
ENFORCEMENT HERE TO, SUPPORT.
I'M SURE THEY ARE SUPPORT,
SUPPORTIVE OF JUST THE
CHALLENGES TO GET A SEARCH
WARRANT. AND JUST AS THE CHAIR
SAID, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A
JUDGE AT ANY 24 SEVEN TO APPROVE
A SEARCH WARRANT, I THINK 72
HOURS IS GENEROUS. IT SHOULD BE
INSTANTANEOUS. WHEN YOU HAVE A
GRIEVING FAMILY, FAMILY OF THE
VICTIM TRYING TO, GET SOME
ANSWERS QUICKLY. BUT IN ANY
EVENT, I TAKE IT FROM THE
NEWPORT BEACH POLICE AND A LOT
OF ORANGE COUNTY POLICE
DEPARTMENTS ARE IN SUPPORT. SO
THANK YOU. I COMMEND YOU FOR
DOING THIS. AND OF COURSE I WILL
SUPPORT IT. I'D LOVE TO BE A
COAUTHOR AS WELL. THANK YOU,
MISS ORTEGA. I ALSO WANTED TO
THANK YOU, AND SAM AND SENATOR,
FOR BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD.
I ACTUALLY SAT ON THE FENTANYL
OVERSIGHT HEARING COMMITTEE
SEVERAL SEVERAL OF THEM. I
ACTUALLY HAD A BILL REALLY
FOCUSED ON YOUTH, AND ACCESS TO
FENTANYL AND SAVING LIVES. AND
THROUGH THOSE HEARINGS, THERE
WAS ONE QUOTE THAT STOOD OUT TO
ME. AND I STILL THINK ABOUT IT
EVERY NIGHT, WHICH IS DRUG
DEALERS ARE TODAY, ARE NOT THOSE
THAT WE KNEW OF THE 80S OR 90S,
THE DRUG DEALERS OF TODAY ARE ON
OUR SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS, AND
THEY'RE KILLING OUR CHILDREN
WITH TEMPORARY AND DISAPPEARING
POSTS. HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO
FIND THEM? AND SO I REALLY
COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING THIS ON
AS A WAY TO MODERNIZE HOW WE GO
AFTER DRUG DEALERS AS WE TRY TO
PLAY CATCH UP WITH NOT JUST AI
OR SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT EVEN OUR
CELL PHONES AND KNOWING WHAT WE
KNOW NOW, WHICH WE WOULD HAVE
DONE BEFORE WHEN IT COMES TO OUR
CHILDREN. SO I WANT TO THANK YOU
WOULD ALSO LOVE TO BE ON AND ON
AS A COAUTHOR. AND THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE. THANK YOU, MISS
ORTEGA. MR. VICE CHAIR. GREAT.
THANK YOU, SENATOR UMBERG
APPRECIATE, THIS LEGISLATION,
AND ALSO, VERY SORRY FOR YOUR
LOSS, SIR. AND THANK YOU FOR THE
COMMENTS YOU SHARED WITH ME UP
HERE. YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T KNOW
WHAT I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT
I HAD NO IDEA WHAT FENTANYL WAS
FOR 2019 WHEN I WAS MAYOR OF
ROCKLAND. AND ONE OF MY
NEIGHBORS, ZACH DIDIER. DIED
FROM FENTANYL POISONING. AND
UNFORTUNATELY, I'VE MET, TOO
MANY VICTIMS OF FENTANYL
POISONING SINCE THAT TIME, AND
ALMOST TALK WITH ONE OF THEM ON
A DAILY BASIS OVER SOMETHING
THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. AND YOU
KNOW, IT'S NOT SOMETHING I ENJOY
AT ALL. AND BUT, YOU KNOW, I CAN
ADVOCATE FOR YOU OR ANY OF THEM,
YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN A
TOP PRIORITY OF MINE, YOU KNOW,
BUT THE PATTERN THAT WE DO SEE
IN MY DISTRICT, AND I'M ALWAYS
CAREFUL TO JUST SAY THAT, LOOK,
IT'S ALL THE RESPONSIBILITY.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THIS
COMMITTEE ON OTHER BILLS. I
MEAN, THE RESPONSIBILITY ISN'T
ENTIRELY ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORM, BUT IT DEFINITELY IS A
TOOL THAT THE DRUG DEALERS ARE
USING TO TRAFFIC THIS INTO THE
COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, THESE WE
OBVIOUSLY KNOW PEOPLE WHO ARE
DYING OF DRUGS IN THE STREETS
AND THINGS. AND THAT'S REALLY IN
THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES IF THEY'RE
INVESTIGATED AT ALL, YOU KNOW,
THERE THERE'S GOING THERE'S NO
IMPEDIMENT TO CONTINUING THAT
INVESTIGATION. THERE'S PEOPLE TO
TALK TO. THERE'S YOU KNOW, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THERE
THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT DYNAMICS,
BUT, I MEAN, THE PEOPLE IN MY
COMMUNITY DYING FROM FENTANYL
ARE DYING FROM GETTING IT,
OBTAINING IT ONLINE. I MEAN,
THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF THE
SITUATION. AND I THINK, YOU
KNOW, MY ACTUALLY, I'VE SHARED
THIS BEFORE UP HERE. MR.
LOWENTHAL, IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD
IT, YOU'RE GOING TO LEARN
SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT MY FAMILY.
MY COUSIN PASSED AWAY FROM
FENTANYL POISONING AS WELL,
YOUNG MAN. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE TO I THINK IT'S IT IS KIND
OF CRAZY TO ME TO THINK THAT IF
THERE'S AN INVESTIGATION, I
THINK 72 HOURS, HONESTLY, IS
PRETTY GENEROUS. I MEAN, IF THE
POLICE SHOW UP AT MY DOOR WITH A
SEARCH WARRANT, YOU KNOW, I
DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO BE
LIKE, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW,
GIVE ME 72 HOURS AND I'LL GET
BACK TO YOU, RIGHT? I MEAN,
THEY'RE GOING TO THEY'RE GOING
TO COME IN AND START
INVESTIGATING. SO, SO I THINK 72
HOURS IS A PRETTY REASONABLE
STANDARD TO START TURNING THINGS
OVER, YOU KNOW, AND I HOPE
JUDGES WILL USE DISCRETION LIKE
WE ASK THEM TO DO RIGHT NOW. AND
THEY'RE ALL SEARCH WARRANTS. SO.
AND IS THE CHAIRMAN ARE YOU
STILL CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE? I AT LEAST UNTIL THE
END OF THE WEEK. OKAY. THAT'S
GOOD. I WAS APPOINTED TO THE
ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND
I HAVE THAT MUCH MORE RESPECT
FOR YOU AFTER TODAY. SO, BUT
ANYWAYS, YOU KNOW, I THINK, THE
DOWNSIDE TO WHAT'S GOING ON
RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK WE'RE,
WE'RE SEEING THE FRUSTRATION
FROM OUR CHAIR IS THAT WE DO
HAVE A LOT OF THESE SORTS OF
BILLS COMING THROUGH. AND I
THINK WE DO NEED, I THINK, A
MORE GLOBAL APPROACH ON HOW
WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS AND WORK
WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES, ON, YOU
KNOW, WHAT IS THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY. BUT WHAT'S MY
RESPONSIBILITY AS A PARENT AS
WELL? RIGHT. AND BUT THESE
DISAPPEARING MESSAGES, THINGS
LIKE THAT, I MEAN, IT'S CRAZY.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF
CRAZY THINGS GOING ON OUT THERE.
SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE
BILL. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THE TIME
COMES TO ADD COAUTHORS, IF YOU'D
HAVE ME, I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE
TO BE ON AS A COAUTHOR. AND I
REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE
DOING IN THIS AVENUE AS WELL ON
FENTANYL, JUST GLOBALLY ON ALL
SORTS OF ISSUES. IT'S REALLY 110
PEOPLE ARE DYING EVERY WEEK FROM
FENTANYL, SOME OF THEM FROM
OVER, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE FENTANYL
USERS, YOU KNOW, BUT THEY
DESERVE HELP. AND TREATMENT AS
MUCH AS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING
POISONED FROM OBTAINING IT
ONLINE. BUT THANK YOU AND LOOK
FORWARD TO SUPPORTING IT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. MEMBER PATTERSON,
COULD I INTERJECT ONE, PLEASE?
SO IF I IF I CAN ASK MADAM
CHAIR, MR. CHAPMAN HAS TO LEAVE
FOR THE AIRPORT. I'M INFORMED.
SO IF THERE'S QUESTIONS FOR MR.
CHAPMAN, PERHAPS IF WE COULD
DIRECT THOSE QUESTIONS NOW SO
THAT HE COULD DEPART, THAT WOULD
BE GREAT. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW
THAT THERE'S ANY MORE QUESTIONS
FOR MR. CHAPMAN, I'LL JUST
REITERATE WHAT MY COLLEAGUE
SAID, WHICH IS SUCH GRATITUDE.
I'M A MOTHER MYSELF, AS ARE MANY
OF THE PEOPLE ON THE DAIS. AND
THE IDEA OF LOSING A CHILD IS
ALL OF OUR WORST NIGHTMARE. AND
YOU'RE TURNING THAT LOSS INTO
SAVING OTHER KIDS LIVES. AND I
KNOW SAMMY WOULD BE SO PROUD OF
YOU AND SO GRATEFUL. AND WE ALL
ARE. SO THANK YOU, SIR, FOR
BEING HERE, I ALSO WANT TO
CLARIFY ONE OTHER POINT, WHICH
IS IF A SEARCH WARRANT IS
OVERBROAD, WHICH AT TIMES THEY
ARE. I MEAN, THE TRUTH IS JUDGES
DON'T ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT.
THAT'S THE JOB OF THE LAWYERS IS
TO GO BACK TO THE JUDGE AND
ARGUE THE BREADTH OF THE SEARCH
WARRANT TO GET IT NARROWED. THE
72 HOURS WILL ABSOLUTELY GIVE
THESE ATTORNEYS THE TIME TO DO
THAT. THIS IS WHAT LAWYERS DO
EVERY DAY, ALL DAY. THEY DO IT
WELL. THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS THAT
REPRESENT THESE COMPANIES DO IT
EXCEPTIONALLY WELL BECAUSE THESE
ARE, HIGH PAID LAWYERS,
GENERALLY SPEAKING. AND SO I
JUST AM CONFIDENT, AGAIN, HAVING
PRACTICED IN THIS AREA OF LAW,
THAT WHAT IS BEING PROVIDED HERE
IS NOT OVERBURDENSOME, THAT IT
IS ABSOLUTELY WITHIN AND WILL
PROTECT THE USERS THAT THE
COMPANIES WANT TO PROTECT FROM
OVERBROAD WARRANTS, WHICH IS
SOMETHING THAT I APPRECIATE YOU
GUYS ADVOCATING FOR. I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT, AND I KNOW THE
SENATOR AGREES TO OUR CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM HAS TO WORK, AND
PART OF THAT IS PROTECTING
PEOPLE FROM OVERBROAD OR
UNNECESSARY WARRANTS. BUT AGAIN,
THERE'S PROCESSES TO DO THAT.
THEY WILL HAVE TIME TO DO THAT.
USUALLY IT IS DONE MUCH FASTER
THAN 72 HOURS IN MY EXPERIENCE.
AND JUDGES ARE ON CALL TO DO
THIS. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. SO,
SO I APPRECIATE THIS BILL
GREATLY BECAUSE I THINK, I MEAN,
IT'S SO SIMPLE. THE BILL STARTS
WITH, YOU NEED A PHONE. YOU'RE
GOING TO ANSWER, RIGHT? AGAIN, I
MEAN, A WEB PORTAL THAT GOD
KNOWS WHERE IN THE ETHER THOSE
REQUESTS GO ISN'T THE SAME AS
HAVING SOMEONE THAT POLICE
OFFICERS CAN ACTUALLY TALK TO
GET ANSWERS WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE
OTHER KIDS COULD DIE FROM A
BATCH OF FENTANYL THAT IS BEING
DELIVERED ACROSS SANTA MONICA.
LIKE THAT IS AN URGENT CRISIS
THAT NEEDS ACTION, AND THIS
ENABLES THEM TO DO IT. SO I
REALLY APPRECIATE IT, AND WITH
THAT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE,
SENATOR? YES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AND THANK YOU,
MR. CHAPMAN, AS I SAID AT THE
OUTSET, THIS HAS TOUCHED SO MANY
PEOPLE'S LIVES. AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PASSION AND TAKING THAT
PASSION AND TURNING IT INTO A
POSITIVE FOR SO MANY PEOPLE, SO
I APPRECIATE THAT. NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, I WAS A BIT FLIPPANT
AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS
HEARING, AND I WANT TO ECHO THE
COMMENTS OF ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LOWENTHAL. IT IS TOUGH. IT IS
TOUGH TO COME AND IMPOSE
SOMETHING LIKE THIS. WHERE THE
CHALLENGES ARE TECHNICAL, BUT I
DO BELIEVE WE CAN MEET THOSE
TECHNICAL CHALLENGES IN A FORMER
LIFE, I WAS A FEDERAL
PROSECUTOR, ACTUALLY QUITE
FAMILIAR WITH SEARCH WARRANTS
AND SUBPOENAS. AND INDEED, IF A
SEARCH WARRANT IS OVERBROAD, IF
YOU GET A SEARCH WARRANT AND YOU
ARE FILL IN THE BLANK PLATFORM
THAT SAYS, PLEASE PRODUCE ALL
MESSAGES RELATED TO DRUGS, THAT
IS ON ITS FACE, OVERBROAD. AND
THERE ARE REMEDIES EVEN IF YOU
DON'T PROACTIVELY SEEK A REMEDY,
IF YOU TRY TO ENFORCE A SEARCH
WARRANT OR YOU TRY TO ENFORCE A
SUBPOENA THAT SAYS, PLEASE
PRODUCE ALL MESSAGES RELATED TO
DRUGS, THE COURT IS NOT GOING TO
HOLD THAT PLATFORM IN CONTEMPT.
AND SO THERE ARE VARIOUS SAFETY
MECHANISMS THAT ARE BUILT INTO
OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, TO
THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S OTHER
ISSUES THAT WE CAN RESOLVE,
TECHNICALLY, I DO WANT THIS TO
BE USEFUL. I DO WANT THIS TO BE
ABLE TO BE USED BY THE PLATFORMS
AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE. I
WELCOME OTHER COMMENTS, I'VE
HEARD LOTS OF COMMENTS ABOUT
REQUIRING A HUMAN BEING TO BE
AVAILABLE AND THAT THAT'S
ARCHAIC. I'M GOING TO KEEP IT,
SO WITH THAT, I URGE, AND I
VOTE. THANK YOU. SENATOR, DO WE
HAVE A MOTION? MOTION AND A
SECOND, LET'S CALL THE ROLL.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, SB 918 BY
SENATOR UMBERG. MOTION IS DUE
PASSED AS AMENDED BY BAUER-KAHAN
I KHN. AYE PATTERSON.
PATTERSON. I BRIAN. DIXON.
DIXON. AYE. ERWIN ERWIN. AYE.
HOOVER. LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA. I WARD.
WARD I. WICKS WILSON. THANK YOU,
SENATOR SKINNER, YOU ARE NEXT ON
OUR AGENDA. Ó THAT HAD SEVEN
THAT IS OUT. BUT WE WILL LEAVE
IT OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS.
THANK YOU. SENATOR. IF NOTHING
ELSE, THE HEAT WILL MAKE US MOVE
FASTER IN HERE. HI, SENATOR.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLUS THAT I
HAVE TO GO BACK AND SHARE MY
COMMITTEE. SENATOR SKINNER'S SB
976. GREAT. APPRECIATE BEING
ABLE TO PRESENT THIS BILL. AND
I'LL START WITH, AS STATED IN
THE ANALYSIS, I'M TAKING
AUTHOR'S AMENDMENTS THAT CLARIFY
THAT THE PARENTS CONTROL OVER
THE CHILD'S ACCESS TO THE
PLATFORM IS LIMITED TO SOLELY
THE ACCESS OF THE ADDICTIVE
FEED, AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN
A MINUTE. SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE
PARENTAL CONTROL IN THIS MEASURE
IS ONLY ABOUT THE DEFAULTS THAT
THIS MEASURE REQUIRES. UNDER SB
976, PARENTS CANNOT RESTRICT,
FOR EXAMPLE, A MINOR'S ACCESS TO
CONTENT THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED
IN OR TO DIRECT MESSAGES, OR
THEIR ABILITY TO SEARCH FOR
SPECIFIC RESOURCES. SUPPORT
SERVICES YOU NAME, SO I JUST
WANT TO CLARIFY THOSE AUTHORS
AMENDMENTS. I'M TAKING. AND THEN
LET ME GET TO THE HEART OF THE
BILL, SB 976 RESPONDS TO THE
CONCERNS OF PARENTS, SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS, COUNTY
SUPERINTENDENTS, PEDIATRICIANS,
EVEN THE US SURGEON GENERAL, AND
MANY MORE TO ADDRESS THE WELL
DOCUMENTED HARMS THAT SOCIAL
MEDIA HAS ON OUR CHILDREN. SB
976. AS I INDICATED, DOES NOT
REGULATE CONTENT, BUT RATHER IT
IS FOCUSED ON THE ADDICTIVE
FEATURES THAT ARE EMBEDDED IN
THESE PLATFORMS. AND I WILL READ
FROM THE LA TIMES EDITORIAL
BOARD'S, PIECE WHERE THEY APTLY
STATED THAT THE ALGORITHMS ARE
DESIGNED TO FEED USERS A STEADY
STREAM OF CONTENT THAT THE USER
DOESN'T ASK FOR, BUT IS DESIGNED
TO KEEP THE USER ON THE APP,
WHICH IS WHY THE ALGORITHMS ARE
CALLED ADDICTIVE. AND AS WE KNOW
, CHILDREN HAVE MUCH LESS
IMPULSE CONTROL. WE HOPE THAT AS
WE MATURE AS ADULTS, WE HAVE
MORE. WE KNOW THAT SOME ADULTS
ARE ALSO ADDICTIVE TO ADDICTED
TO THESE PLATFORMS, BUT FOR
CHILDREN IT IS HIGHER. SO WHAT
SB 976 DOES IS REQUIRE SOCIAL
MEDIA PLATFORMS TO HAVE AS A
DEFAULT SETTING FOR ALL USERS
UNDER THE AGE OF 18. NO
ADDICTIVE FEEDS. SO IN EFFECT
IT'S GOING BACK TO WHAT WE MIGHT
CALL FACEBOOK 101, WHERE THE
FEEDS WERE CHRONOLOGICAL. NO
NOTIFICATIONS DURING SCHOOL
HOURS AND BETWEEN THE TIME THAT
WE WOULD ALL REASONABLY AGREE
THAT CHILDREN SHOULD BE ASLEEP,
WHICH IS BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND 6
A.M. ON SCHOOL DAYS, AND EXPANDS
CHILDREN'S PRIVACY BY MAKING A
MINOR'S ACCOUNT PRIVATE AS A
DEFAULT SETTING. IT IS ONLY
THESE DEFAULTS THAT PARENTS CAN
CHOOSE TO OVERRIDE, NOT ANY
CONTENT OR OTHER ACTIVITY THAT
THEIR CHILD MAY CHOOSE TO HAVE
ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS.
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES HAVE BEEN
UNWILLING TO VOLUNTARILY CHANGE
THEIR PRACTICES, AND WHEN THEY
WON'T ACT, IT IS OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT TO PROTECT
OUR CHILDREN. NOW, LET ME
INTRODUCE MY WITNESSES. DOROTHY
JOHNSON, WHO IS FROM THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS AND ANTHONY LIU,
WHO'S THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL FROM CALIFORNIA'S
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. THANK
YOU. TWO MINUTES EACH WHEN
YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. MEMBERS. DOROTHY JOHNSON,
ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
AND THE MORE THAN 18,000
EDUCATION LEADERS SERVING
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND
THE STUDENTS. AND AS A STUDENT
FIRST ORGANIZATION, WE ARE
PLEASED TO SERVE AS CO-SPONSORS
OF SENATE BILL 976. OUR SUPPORT
FOR THE MEASURE STEMS FROM THE
NEED FOR A SAFER ONLINE
ENVIRONMENT IN ORDER TO UPLIFT
STUDENTS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND
ACADEMIC SUCCESSES. IT ALSO
STEMS FROM THE NEED TO ENSURE
OUR EDUCATORS CAN FULFILL THEIR
RESPONSIBILITIES TO STUDENTS AND
UNFORTUNATELY, THE IMPACT OF
SOCIAL MEDIA WELL DOCUMENTED IS
ALSO CLEARLY SEEN DAILY AND
REPORTED AS A GROWING CONCERN
FOR OUR SCHOOL LEADERS. FURTHER,
THE FRUSTRATION AMONG PARENTS
WHO TURN TO SCHOOLS AND
EDUCATORS FOR HELP CANNOT BE
UNDERSTATED OR OVERSTATED.
RATHER SCHOOLS ARE AUTHORIZED
UNDER CURRENT LAW TO REGULATE
THE USE OF A STUDENT'S
SMARTPHONE AND ON CAMPUS HOURS
AND DURING CERTAIN SCHOOL
SPONSORED EVENTS, THIS HELPS
SOMEWHAT, BUT IT REALLY DOES NOT
ADDRESS THIS CONSTANT FEED OF
INFORMATION COMING TO THEM
OFTEN. NOT REQUESTED. THE STATE
HAS MADE REAL INVESTMENTS IN
CHILDREN'S BEHAVIORAL HEALTH,
INCLUDING SCHOOL FOCUSED
SERVICES LIKE CERTIFIED WELLNESS
COACHES ON CAMPUS, IN ADDITION
TO LOCALLY DRIVEN INITIATIVES.
AND SO WHILE WE WORK TO TREAT
THE SYMPTOMS, WE SHOULD ALSO BE
LOOKING AT THE CAUSE. GIVEN ALL
OF THE CHALLENGES FACING TODAY'S
STUDENTS, BOTH ON AND OFF
CAMPUS, WE BELIEVE TOOLS THAT
HELP ENHANCE FOCUS, DISCOURAGE
DISRUPTION AND OTHER HELP CAN BE
IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR
YOUNG LEARNERS FOR IMMEDIATE AND
LONG TERM WELL-BEING, AND WE
WANT TO REALLY EXTEND OUR
APPRECIATION TO THE SENATOR FOR
HER LEADERSHIP ON THIS. AND
REQUEST WE REQUEST, REQUEST WE
ASK FOR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. HI GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANTHONY LIU
WITH CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
ROB BONTA IS A PROUD CO-SPONSOR
OF THIS BILL. THIS BILL IS A
LARGER IT'S PART OF A LARGER
EFFORT TO CREATE A SAFER ONLINE
ENVIRONMENT FOR CALIFORNIA KIDS,
WHERE SAFETY AND MENTAL HEALTH
PROTECTIONS ARE PROVIDED BY
DEFAULT. AND TO ENSURE THAT
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS OBTAIN
PARENTAL CONSENT BEFORE EXPOSING
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS TO
ADDICTIVE FEATURES. WE THANK
SENATOR SKINNER FOR AUTHORING
AND ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AND PUBLIC
HEALTH ADVOCATES FOR
CO-SPONSORING WITH US THIS
TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT
LEGISLATION TO PROTECT
CALIFORNIA CHILDREN. SO I'D LIKE
TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT 976 DOES.
976 IS A BILL ABOUT ALGORITHMIC
DELIVERY OF USER CREATED
CONTENT. KIDS CAN STILL SEARCH
FOR AND FOLLOW USER CREATED
CONTENT. PLATFORMS CAN USE
ALGORITHMIC DELIVERY OF THEIR
OWN CONTENT OR CONTENT PRODUCED
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHERS,
INCLUDING CONTENT TO HELP
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES. 976
EXPLICITLY PROTECTS WITHIN THE
DEFINITION OF ADDICTIVE FEED, A
MINOR'S ABILITY TO SEARCH FOR OR
FOLLOW WHATEVER CONTENT OR
CONTENT CREATORS THEY WANT.
THAT'S UNDER 2720 7,000.5 A1 AND
A3. IT PROTECTS A MINOR'S
ABILITY TO DIRECTLY MESSAGE AND
COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH OTHERS
USERS. THAT'S UNDER 27,000 POINT
5A4. THE BILL PROTECTS A MINOR'S
IDENTITY BY LIMITING THE USE OF
ANY INFORMATION COLLECTED FOR
THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING A
USER'S AGE, AND REQUIRES IT TO
BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY AFTER IT
IS USED. THUS, 2020 7001 B THE
BILL PROTECTS A MINOR'S RIGHT TO
PRIVACY UNDER 27,003 A WHICH
SAYS THAT THE BILL CANNOT
REQUIRE THE OPERATOR OF THE
PLATFORM TO GIVE A PARENT ANY
ADDITIONAL OR SPECIAL ACCESS TO,
OR CONTROL OVER THE DATA OF THE
CHILD. IT PROTECTS PUBLIC
HEALTH, EDUCATION, SUPPORTING
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES. IT
PROTECTS THE ABILITY OF A
PLATFORM TO DO CONTENT
MODERATION TO COMBAT ONLINE HATE
UNDER 27 03B SO IN SHORT, I KNOW
MY TIME IS RUNNING OUT HERE. I
THINK THIS IS A VERY MUCH A
NEEDED BILL. IT PROTECTS YOUTH
AGAINST THE MOST HARMFUL ASPECTS
OF SOCIAL MEDIA. THE ADDICTIVE
FEED, THE INFINITE SCROLL. AND
IT DOES NOTHING TO LIMIT YOUTH
ACCESS TO PEOPLE AND COMMUNITY
OR INFORMATION. SO WE URGE YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THIS
BILL? MARK BERKMAN WITH THE
ORGANIZATION FOR SOCIAL MEDIA
SAFETY AND SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBERS. OSAMA
MOGHADAM, ON BEHALF OF PUBLIC
HEALTH ADVOCATES, ONE OF THE
CO-SPONSORS FOR THE BILL IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ON AYAKA MEETS WITH LOS ANGELES
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, CARLY
STELZER WITH COMMON SENSE MEDIA
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
TYLER RINDI WITH THE CALIFORNIA
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL? WELCOME BACK, DYLAN.
SWITCH SEATS. KEEP IT
INTERESTING. MAYBE IT'LL GO
BETTER IN THIS ONE, GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAD A CLOSE
ENOUGH. DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF
OF TECHNET, WE ARE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED TO SB 976. AND AGAIN,
VERY MUCH AGREE WITH THE INTENT
AROUND THIS BILL. AND WANT TO
NOTE THAT OUR COMPANIES HAVE
BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF
CREATING NEW FEATURES, SETTING
NEW DEFAULTS, NEW TOOLS TO
PROVIDE PARENTS WITH GREATER
CONTROL OVER THEIR CHILD'S
SOCIAL MEDIA EXPERIENCE AND OUR
MEMBERS ALREADY PROVIDE MANY OF
THE DEFAULTS AND OPTIONS THAT
THIS BILL CONTEMPLATES. HOWEVER,
WE DO TAKE ISSUE WITH THE
PROHIBITIONS ON USING AN
ALGORITHMIC FEED. UNLESS A USER
CAN PROVE THEY ARE NOT A MINOR
OR IF THEY ARE A MINOR, IF THEIR
PARENT CONSENTS FIRST, THE
ASSUMPTION THAT A CHRONOLOGICAL
FEED IS INHERENTLY SAFE AND AN
ALGORITHMIC FEED IS INHERENTLY
HARMFUL IS MISGUIDED. AN
ALGORITHMIC FEED SHOWS USERS
INFORMATION AND POSTS FROM THEIR
FRIENDS, FAMILY, AND THEIR
INTERESTS. WITH 95 MILLION POSTS
SHARED ON INSTAGRAM EVERY DAY
AND 500 HOURS OF VIDEO UPLOADED
TO YOUTUBE EVERY MINUTE,
ALGORITHMS ORDER AND MAKE SENSE
OF THE IMMENSE VOLUME OF USER
GENERATED CONTENT ON THE
INTERNET. THEY DETERMINE HOW
CONTENT IS PRIORITIZED,
RECOMMENDED AND DISPLAYED TO
USERS. IT ALSO HELPS INSURERS
ENSURE THAT USERS RECEIVE HIGH
QUALITY, DEVELOPMENTALLY
APPROPRIATE CONTENT BY
DEPRIORITIZING OR REMOVING
INAPPROPRIATE CONTENT FOR
EXAMPLE, SOME PLATFORMS USE
ALGORITHMS TO HELP NUDGE USERS
BACK TOWARDS SAFER CONTENT. IF A
USER IS CLICKING ON AND VIEWING
CONTENT THAT GLORIFIES EATING
DISORDERS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE
ALGORITHM WILL DEPRIORITIZE OR
HIDE THAT CONTENT FROM THEIR
FEED AND INSTEAD RECOMMEND
HEALTHY EATING HABITS OR BODY
POSITIVITY CONTENT THAT'S NOT
POSSIBLE WITH A CHRONOLOGICAL
FEED. CHRONOLOGICAL FEEDS, ON
THE OTHER HAND, CAN BE GAMED BY
BAD ACTORS OR CAN BURY RELEVANT
INFORMATION IN FAVOR OF ACCOUNTS
THAT POST CONTINUOUSLY. IT'S NOT
CLEAR AT ALL THAT PROHIBITING
ALGORITHMICALLY CURATED FEEDS
FOR MINORS WOULD MEANINGFULLY
PROTECT THEM. NEXT, OUR LETTER
MORE FULLY DISCUSSES THE
CONTINUED ISSUES WITH AGE
VERIFICATION AND PARENTAL
CONSENT. OBVIOUSLY PUSHING OUT
THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE. I THINK
IS HELPFUL, BUT THIS BILL ALSO
DIRECTLY IMPACTS THE SPEECH
RIGHTS OF PLATFORMS BY MANDATING
A CHRONOLOGICAL FEED BY DEFAULT.
WE'VE CONSISTENTLY MADE THE
ARGUMENT IN THIS COMMITTEE AND
OTHERS THAT PLATFORMS EDITORIAL
DECISIONS AND HOW THEY MODERATE,
DISPLAY, PRIORITIZE, AND
RECOMMEND CONTENT IS ALL
PROTECTED. FIRST AMENDMENT
EXPRESSIVE CONDUCT. YESTERDAY IN
THE NETCHOICE DECISION, THE
SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMED THAT
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS HAVE
FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED
EDITORIAL DISCRETION TO CURATE
SPEECH ON THEIR PLATFORMS,
INCLUDING AND PARTICULARLY BY
USING ALGORITHMS. WHILE THAT
DECISION IS NON-BINDING, IT DOES
GIVE A PRETTY A PRETTY CLEAR
INDICATION OF WHAT A MAJORITY OF
THE COURT THINK ABOUT STATE
REGULATIONS OF EXPRESSIVE
CONDUCT, SUCH AS IS BEING
PROPOSED IN THIS BILL. AND AS WE
HAVE FROM THE BEGINNING, WE'RE
MORE THAN WILLING TO DISCUSS
POLICY ALTERNATIVES THAT RESPECT
THESE FIRST AMENDMENT PRINCIPLES
AND WORK TOGETHER TO ADDRESS THE
GOALS THAT THE AUTHOR HAS WORKED
TO ACHIEVE FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
AND FOR THOSE REASONS, WE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE SB 976.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY
ADDITIONAL OPPOSITION IN THE
ROOM? NAME ORGANIZATION.
OPPOSITION. DANNY KENDALL KAISER
ON BEHALF OF THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. THANK YOU
. RACHEL BOGERT WITH ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION AS WELL. I'M WAITING
FOR SOMEONE TO SHOW UP AND SAY
DISRESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. I AM
NOT GOING TO START THAT TRAIN.
OKAY. THANKS, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. COURTNEY JENSEN, ON
BEHALF OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA, IN
OPPOSITION, THANK YOU, NHÀ AND
WE PADRONE, ON BEHALF OF THE
COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATIONS
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION,
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. ROBERT
SINGLETON WITH CHAMBER OF
PROGRESS. ALSO RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. LARA BENNETT FOR
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. SEEING
NO FURTHER OPPOSITION, WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS, MR.
WARD. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
THANK YOU, SENATOR, FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD AS A PARENT, I
FULLY APPRECIATE WHAT WE ARE
TRYING TO DO HERE. MY CHILDREN
ARE NOT YET, BUT VERY SOON ARE
PROBABLY GOING TO BE, VERY
INTERESTED IN SOCIAL MEDIA
ACCESS. I KNOW IT'S COMING,
HEADING INTO FIFTH GRADE, WE'RE
HOLDING OUT AND WE'RE DOING OUR
BEST TO REDIRECT. BUT SO I GUESS
THE FIRST QUESTION GENERALLY IS,
YOU KNOW, THE BILL CENTRALLY IS
TRYING TO BE ABLE TO,
POTENTIALLY AND IMPORTANTLY,
MOVE MINOR USERS TOWARDS
CHRONOLOGICAL AS OPPOSED TO
ALGORITHMIC BASED, FEED
DISTRIBUTION AND THEN THE
ALLOWANCE OF NOTIFICATIONS. BUT,
YOU KNOW, OPPOSITION IS
ASSERTING THAT THERE'S NO
EVIDENCE THAT A CHRONOLOGICAL
ORDER IS NO MORE OR LESS
ADDICTIVE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO GET AT HERE AND WHAT
EVIDENCE ARE YOU HAVING THAT
THIS CHANGE CAN BE HELPFUL FROM
A MENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVE?
WELL, WE COULD CONSIDER THIS AS
THAT. WHAT IT'S DOING IS
ALLOWING THE MINOR TO DETERMINE
THEIR CONTENT, BECAUSE THE
CHRONOLOGICAL FEED IS WHAT THEY
CHOOSE AND WHO THEY LIKE AND WHO
THEY SEARCH FOR, VERSUS THE
ALGORITHMIC FEED, WHICH BY BASED
ON THE ALGORITHM, SENDS THEM
WHAT THE ALGORITHM THINKS THEY
SHOULD BE INTERESTED IN OR AS IS
WHEN WELL DOCUMENTED, WILL KEEP
THEIR EYES ON THE PLATFORM. YOU
NOTICE THAT WHEN YOU SIGN UP FOR
ANY OF THESE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO
PAY A FEE YET. THESE ARE VERY
BIG BUSINESSES. HOW IS IT THAT
THEY MAKE THEIR MONEY FROM ADS?
OF COURSE. WHY WOULD AN
ADVERTISER PAY THEM THE MONEY
THAT THEY MAKE? BECAUSE EYES ON
THE PLATFORM. SO IF YOU CAN IN
EFFECT ADDICT THE USER AND CAUSE
THEM TO HAVE THEIR EYES ON THE
PLATFORM, THE MORE EYES THE
LONGER THE MORE HOURS THEN YOU
SELL ADS. NOW THIS DOES NOT,
ELIMINATE THEIR ABILITY TO SELL
ADS, BUT IT PUTS REASONABLE
PROTECTIONS ON OUR KIDS ON THAT
ABILITY THAT THEIR INABILITY FOR
THAT IMPULSE CONTROL. BUT IT
ALSO GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO
SEARCH FOR, FOLLOW, LIKE, OR
FIND WHATEVER CONTENT THEY WANT.
BUT THEY'RE STILL EVEN IN A
CHRONOLOGICAL SYSTEM. I REMEMBER
FACEBOOK GENERATION ONE, AND YOU
CAN STILL HAVE ADS. YOU COULD.
YES THERE WILL STILL BE ADS.
ABSOLUTELY CONTENT TO. I FORGET
IF YOU CAN HAVE A TOGGLE OR A
TRIGGER THAT YOU KNOW, ONLY
ALLOWS YOU TO BE ABLE TO SEE OR
THAT, YOU KNOW, ADS THAT
ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE PREFERRED
THAT, THAT I WANT TO FOLLOW, WHO
I WANT TO FOLLOW. RIGHT. RATHER
THAN GET, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING
THAT WAS SORT OF LIKE THAT. BUT
THERE STILL IS THERE A MECHANISM
COULD OPPOSITION MAYBE RESPOND
FROM A TECH STANDPOINT? LET ME
JUST ADD ADDITIONALLY, I MEAN,
OBVIOUSLY WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT
THESE ADDICTIVE FEEDS, RIGHT?
BUT WE'RE ALSO THE DEFAULTS
LIMIT THE NUMBER OF HOURS,
BECAUSE THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE
AMOUNT OF HOURS THAT OUR
CHILDREN SPEND. AND I'VE HAD
THIS ISSUE, THE PARENT CAN
OVERRIDE THAT LIMITATION ON
HOURS. BUT IT ALSO HAS THOSE
DEFAULTS. I'VE HAD THIS ISSUE
WITH OTHER ONES TOO, AND WE'RE
THINKING ABOUT AGE VERIFICATION
ISSUES AND HOW THERE MIGHT NOT
BE A WORKAROUND, HOW SOMEONE MAY
NOT BE ABLE TO JUST SIGN UP FOR
AN ACCOUNT WITH A NEW GMAIL AND
BE ABLE TO SAY THAT THEY WERE
BORN IN A YEAR THAT MAKES THEM
18 YEARS OLD, WHAT IS THAT? IS
THAT EMBEDDED IN HERE, TOO, THAT
THERE ARE SO THERE ARE THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE WOULD
HAVE WOULD, SO THIS IS ONE OF
THESE INTERESTING DEBATES AND,
CERTAINLY, THERE'S GOOD EVIDENCE
THAT OUR PLATFORMS KNOW A LOT
ABOUT US WITHOUT EVEN OUR GIVING
THAT INFORMATION DIRECTLY IN
TERMS OF THE INFORMATION, WHICH
IS HOW THEY CAN TARGET AND HOW
THEY SELL THE ADS. HOWEVER,
SINCE THERE HAS BEEN RAISED
ISSUES ABOUT, WELL, MAYBE
WHATEVER THE BILL DOES HAVE THE
ABILITY FOR THE AG'S OFFICE TO
DEVELOP REGULATIONS IN THAT
REGARD. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU
WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT OR. YEAH,
THE BILL, THE BILL DOES REQUIRE
US TO DO A RULEMAKING AROUND AGE
ASSURANCE AND IF I UNDERSTAND
YOUR QUESTION, YOU'RE YOU'RE
ASKING HOW DOES THAT TECHNOLOGY
WORK OR HOW WHERE YEAH, HOW IS
THERE ARE WE TRYING TO YOU KNOW,
LEGISLATE SOMETHING THAT, YOU
KNOW, THERE'S MAYBE AN EASY
WORKAROUND FOR A USER. HOPEFULLY
THE REGULATIONS WILL HELP US
THERE, BUT I, KNOW WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. I, I GUESS
I FIND IT I HAVE A VERY LARGE
SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE PLATFORMS.
ANY CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE THE
INABILITY TO HAVE WITHIN VERY,
VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY, VERY CLOSE
ACCURACY. WHAT THE AGE AND
PROFILE OF THE USER IS. GIVEN
THAT THEIR TARGETS AND THEIR ADS
ARE TARGETED ON THE BASIS OF THE
PROFILE OF THOSE USERS, THE
PROFILE, I COULD JUST SAY I'M 18
YEARS OLD, EVEN THOUGH I'M 14.
THE, WELL GO AHEAD. WELL, I WANT
TO SAY SO. AGE ASSURANCE IS AN
AREA WHERE THERE'S BEEN
SIGNIFICANT TECHNOLOGICAL SPEAK
A LITTLE LOUDER, PLEASE. AGE.
YEAH. GO AHEAD, AGE ASSURANCE IS
AN AREA WHERE THERE'S BEEN A LOT
OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT
OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND
THAT CONTINUES TO ACCELERATE IN
THE US AND IN EUROPE AND OTHER
COUNTRIES. RIGHT AND THIS BILL
ANTICIPATES AND CREATES AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR INNOVATION. AND
WE EXPECT THAT OPTIONS FOR AGE
ASSURANCE AS WELL AS OUR
REGULATIONS, WHICH ARE IN THE
BILL RELATED TO AGE ASSURANCE,
ARE GOING TO EVOLVE OVER TIME
AND BE INFORMED BY, YOU KNOW,
PUBLIC COMMENT AND DEVELOPS AND
TECHNOLOGY. SO WE WOULD EXPECT
THAT AGE INSURANCE, YOU KNOW, I
CAN'T PREDICT EXACTLY HOW IT'S
GOING TO TURN OUT, BUT WE WOULD
EXPECT THAT IT WOULD INCLUDE
ENSURING THAT COMPANIES THAT
ALREADY KNOW OR HAVE REASON TO
BELIEVE THAT A USER IS A MINOR
ACT ON THAT INFORMATION, AS
OPPOSED TO FEIGNING IGNORANCE,
WHICH IS WHAT IS SO OFTEN THE
CASE NOW. AND YOU KNOW, THEIR
PENALTY. THEN ON THE COMPANY, IF
THEY ARE NOT DOING DILIGENCE, I
GUESS, TO LOOK FOR, IMPROPERLY.
SET UP ACCOUNTS. IN OTHER WORDS,
IF SOMEBODY IS SIGNING UP AND
PURPORTS TO BE 18 YEARS OLD,
WE'RE SAYING THAT THE SYSTEM
GENERALLY WOULD FIGURE OUT
THROUGH OBSERVATION THAT, YOU
KNOW, THEY'RE PROBABLY ACTUALLY
14 YEARS OLD. AND SO IS THERE
LIABILITY FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO
SHIFT THEM OVER TO A MINOR
ACCOUNT? I JUST WONDER HOW THIS
WORKS, THIS IS NOT YOU'RE ASKING
WHAT THE BILL PROVIDES ON THIS.
NOW, I DON'T I DON'T QUITE
UNDERSTAND. IT'S HARD. AND I
HAVE A SECOND, SECOND LINE OF
QUESTIONING HERE, TOO, BUT IT'S
HARD FOR ME TO, YOU KNOW, ENSURE
THAT WE ARE ABLE TO GET TO THE
OUTCOME THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO
HAVE, WHICH I AGREE WITH FOR
GENERALLY THE PROTECTIONS THAT
WE WANT TO HAVE FOR YOUTH WHO
ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE ADDICTIVE
NATURE, TO ANSWER THE QUESTION
ABOUT. SO THE BILL DOES NOT
SPECIFY CERTAIN PENALTIES.
HOWEVER, THE BILL WOULD THESE
THE REGULATIONS THAT WOULD BE
DEVELOPED WOULD FALL UNDER THE
UNFAIR COMPETITION. WE GIVE ME
THAT THAT EXACT NAME, THE UNFAIR
COMPETITION LAW, THE UNFAIR
COMPETITION LAW, WHICH IN ITSELF
HAS PENALTIES ASSOCIATED. SO
ONCE THE AG'S OFFICE DEVELOPS
THE REGULATIONS, IT POTENTIALLY
IF THERE WERE VIOLATIONS OF
THOSE REGULATIONS, THEN IT WOULD
FALL UNDER THAT, THAT LAW. OKAY.
SO LET'S SAY JUMPING AHEAD THAT
WE HAD WORKED OUT ALL THESE FROM
AN IMPLEMENTATION STANDPOINT, A
REGULATORY STANDPOINT THAT
BETTER GUARANTEED THAT WE WERE,
YOU KNOW, ASSURED OF THE
VALIDITY OF WHO THE USER IS AND
WHAT AGE THEY ARE. SO NOW WE
KNOW WHO THE MINORS ARE AND THEY
WOULD NEED PARENTAL CONSENT.
WHAT HAPPENS IN A, YOU KNOW,
MIXED HOUSEHOLD WHERE THERE'S,
YOU KNOW, PARENTS THAT DISAGREE
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT
TO ALLOW FOR AN ALGORITHMIC
VERSUS A CHRONOLOGICAL OR WHAT
WHAT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PARENTS
DISAGREE. GO AHEAD. WELL, I
WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW,
THERE'S LOTS OF LAWS THAT ARE
ALREADY ON THE BOOKS THAT
REQUIRE ONLINE OPERATORS TO
OBTAIN VERIFIABLE PARENTAL
CONSENT WHEN DEALING WITH CHILD
USERS. SO FEDERAL COPPA DOES
THAT RIGHT NOW. SO THIS IS NOT A
NEW ISSUE THAT'S BEEN CREATED BY
THIS BILL. TO THE EXTENT THAT
COMPANIES ARE JUST ASKING THE
QUESTION HERE TODAY, WHAT
HAPPENS? DOES ONE PARENT VERIFY
THAT THEY'RE THE PARENT. AND
THEN, YOU KNOW, THE KID GOES TO
THE MORE FAVORABLE PARENT AND
SAYS, YOU KNOW, I WANT YOU TO
ACTUALLY GO IN THERE AND VERIFY
AND OVERRIDE IT. WHAT HAPPENS IN
THESE SCENARIOS? WELL, THE BILL
DOESN'T PROVIDE THAT. NOW, I
WOULD SAY THIS, YOU KNOW,
PARENTAL CONSENT IS A COMMON
CONCEPT ALREADY. RIGHT. AND SO
WE DON'T GENERALLY REQUIRE
PEOPLE, PARENTS TO CARRY AROUND
A VERIFICATION THAT THEY'RE WITH
A BIRTH CERTIFICATE OR SOMETHING
FOR ALL KINDS OF OTHER THINGS
THAT YOU DO IN LIFE WHERE
PARENTAL CONSENT IS REQUIRED.
RIGHT. WE DON'T DO THAT NOW. SO
ALL I CAN SAY IS, YOU KNOW, THE
BILL REQUIRES RULEMAKING ON THIS
SUBJECT. DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S
GOING TO SHAKE OUT. BUT, YOU
KNOW, THESE ARE RARE. I DON'T
THINK THAT WE ARE GETTING INTO
ENGINEERING HOW TO PROVE THIS.
YOU KNOW, WHICH PARENT HAS THE
REAL CONSENT ISSUE WITH THIS
BILL? THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WILL
BE PART OF THE RULEMAKING, BUT
IT'S NOT A NEW ISSUE. AS MY MAIN
POINT. THERE'S LOTS YOU CAN
RAISE THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.
AND I RAISE THAT QUESTION
BECAUSE IT LEADS INTO WHAT I
KNOW THE CHAIR HAS SEEN AS AN
OPPOSITION POINT FROM THE TREVOR
PROJECT AND OTHER GROUPS,
ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE IMPORTANT
TO ME AS THEY ARE TO YOU AS
WELL. AND I'M REALLY TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERN. I KNOW
THEY'RE NOT HERE. TO BE ABLE TO
BETTER, EXPRESS AND ANSWER THAT
QUESTION, BUT, BUT YOU CARE
ABOUT THESE ISSUES TOO. AND SO
WHEN YOU HAVE LGBTQ YOUTH THAT
ARE TRYING TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS
CONTENT, I GUESS, TO BE ABLE TO
FIND COMMUNITY, TO BE ABLE TO
FIND RESOURCE, AND A PARENT
MIGHT DISAGREE, YOU KNOW,
POTENTIALLY AN ALGORITHMIC
SITUATION COULD IN A POSITIVE
WAY HELP TO EXPAND. LIKE,
ORGANIZATIONS OR OTHER
RESOURCES, RIGHT? THAT YOU KNOW,
THAT MAY KIND OF FIT, YOU KNOW,
THEIR, THEIR EXPERIENCE AND
THEIR THEIR, THEIR INTEREST, AND
PARENTS MAY NOT DISAGREE, MAY,
MAY DISAGREE ON WHETHER OR NOT
THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO, BE ABLE
TO HAVE THAT, THAT TRIGGER THAT
ALLOWS THEM THAT, THAT, THAT
EXPERIENCE. AND SO I YOU KNOW,
I'M AGAIN, VERY SUPPORTIVE. AND
I WILL VOTE TO BE CLEAR ON ON
THE BILL HERE TODAY. BUT I'M
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU'VE
APPRECIATED WHAT THE OPPOSITION
POINT COULD BE AND WHY THIS BILL
IS WHY THEY'RE STATING IT
INCORRECTLY. WELL, THEIR CONCERN
AND AGAIN, I AM NOT THEM, BUT I
CAN SAY THAT THE CONCERN IS
ABOUT CONTENT. AND THIS BILL
DOES NOT GIVE THE PARENTS
CONTROL OVER CONTENT. RIGHT. IT
STILL LEAVES THE CONTENT TO THE
CHILD. NOW, I AM SURE THERE ARE
PEOPLE THAT FEEL THAT EVEN THE
CONTENT SHOULD BE CONTROLLED. I
AM NOT OF THAT OPINION, BUT WHAT
THIS DOES IS JUST THE AND THE
ONLY THING THE PARENT CAN
OVERRIDE IS THAT DEFAULT. SO THE
PARENT COULD ALLOW FOR EXAMPLE,
THE ALGORITHMIC FEEDS. RIGHT THE
DEFAULT UNDER THE BILL IS THAT
THE MINOR WOULD NOT RECEIVE SUCH
ALGORITHMIC FEEDS, THE ADDICTIVE
FEEDS. BUT THE PARENT COULD
CHOOSE TO ALLOW THAT, BUT THIS
CHILD WOULD STILL OR THE MINOR
WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO LIKE TO
SEARCH, TO CONNECT WITH ANY,
GROUP'S CONTENT THAT THEY
CHOOSE. THANK YOU. AND I JUST
WANTED TO GIVE THE OPPOSITION
ANY CHANCE TO RESPOND TO SOME OF
THE LINE OF QUESTIONING OR
POINTS THAT I WAS RAISING. YEAH.
NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. AND
THROUGH THE CHAIR, I, I THINK
THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE SORT OF
GRAPPLING WITH AND WHICH
ADMITTEDLY IS NOT A NEW ONE, BUT
STILL A VERY DIFFICULT ONE IS
HOW DO YOU AGE VERIFY AND HOW DO
YOU, DETERMINE WHO IS AND IS NOT
A MINOR ON ON THE INTERNET, IT'S
A COMPLEX ISSUE. IT'S ONE THAT
OUR PLATFORMS ARE CONTRIBUTING
TO TECHNOLOGICALLY TO TRY TO
FIX, AND PROVIDE SOME OF THAT,
THAT TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTION, THE
SENATOR IS CORRECT. WE ARE ABLE
TO, ESTIMATE AGES, IT'S USUALLY
A RANGE. BUT HOWEVER, IT'S FAR
MORE ACCURATE TO BE ABLE TO SAY,
OKAY, THIS USER IS A 60 YEAR OLD
AND THEY'RE CLEARLY NOT A 15
YEAR OLD VERSUS THIS IS A 15 OR
A 16 YEAR OLD, OR THIS IS A 17
OR AN 18 YEAR OLD. AND THEN
WHERE TO DETERMINE THE LINE OF
OKAY, WELL, THEY GET A, A
CHRONOLOGICAL FEED OR THEY HAVE
TO HAVE THESE MORE RESTRICTIVE
TIME OF DAY. RESTRICTIONS.
THAT'S WHERE IT BECOMES A
DIFFICULTY. SO COMBINED WITH THE
PENALTIES, COMBINED WITH THE
THREAT OF A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION, OUR PLATFORMS ARE GOING
TO SAY, OKAY, WE NEED TO KNOW.
WE NEED TO KNOW WHETHER THAT 17
YEAR OLD IS ACTUALLY A 17 YEAR
OLD OR WHETHER THEY'RE AN 18
YEAR OLD, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT
TO MAKE A MISTAKE HERE. WE DON'T
WANT TO BE SUBJECT TO THOSE
PENALTIES, AND SO HOW DO YOU DO
THAT? YOU COLLECT GOVERNMENT ID
THAT COMES WITH ITS OWN SORT OF
ACCESS ISSUES AS WELL,
COLLECTION OF MORE PERSONAL
INFORMATION. SO OUR, OUR
INDUSTRY IS TRYING TO COME UP
WITH SOME OF THESE SOLUTIONS
THAT ARE MORE PRIVACY PROTECTIVE
SO THAT USERS FEEL COMFORTABLE
WHEN THEY ARE SHARING
INFORMATION WITH US, THAT IT
STAYS PRIVATE, THAT THEY DON'T
FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE TO GIVE UP A
GOVERNMENT ID JUST TO GET ON,
YOU KNOW, SOCIAL MEDIA IN ORDER
TO LOOK AT WHATEVER VIDEO OR CAT
MEMES OR WHATEVER ELSE IT IS,
COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR FRIENDS,
BUT IT CONTINUES TO BE AN ISSUE.
AND THERE ARE EASY WORKAROUNDS,
AND THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY OF IT,
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, UTAH PASSED A
PRETTY RESTRICTIVE AGE
VERIFICATION LAW AROUND SITES.
THE AMOUNT OF SEARCHES FOR VPNS
FOR VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORKS,
WHICH IS A WAY TO SORT OF GET
AROUND THAT, TO SAY, OKAY, I'M
NOT IN UTAH ANYMORE. I'M IN IT
LOOKS LIKE ONLINE, YOU'RE IN
ANOTHER STATE, SOARED THROUGH
THE ROOF. IN THE SUBSEQUENT
DAYS, WEEKS AND MONTHS
AFTERWARDS, WE SEE KIDS ARE VERY
SAVVY. THEY'RE ABLE TO GET
AROUND THESE THINGS, QUITE
EASILY BECAUSE THE TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY ISN'T THERE TO DO THAT
YET. SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE
CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO
GRAPPLE WITH. AND SO WHEN YOU
PUT PENALTIES THAT THE BILL
THROUGH OTHER SECTIONS OF THE
BNP CODE WOULD APPLY, IT MAKES
IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO SORT
OF SAY WITH THAT CERTAINTY, Ó
OUR OUR AGE RANGE IS ACCURATE
WITHOUT THEN COLLECTING MORE
INFORMATION. THAT'S THE POINT
THAT WE TRY TO MAKE, IS, YOU
KNOW, JUST BY THE WAY OF THE
PRACTICALITY OF THIS, THAT'S
THAT'S HOW YOU WOULD ASSURE
SOMEBODY THAT THEY ARE WHO THEY
SAY THEY ARE. THEY ARE HOW OLD
THEY SAY THEY ARE. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. ALTHOUGH I'LL NOTE
THAT THE AGE ASSURANCE
REGULATIONS THAT THE BILL
DICTATES, IF FOLLOWED BY THE
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANY, WOULD
SATISFY THEIR OBLIGATION. THAT'S
WHY THE SENATOR HAS PUT IT IN
THERE. AND I THINK IS REALLY
CRITICAL TO WHAT SHE'S DOING
HERE, BECAUSE THE AGE ASSURANCE
WILL BE SET OUT VIA THESE
REGULATIONS, SUCH THAT IT WILL
BE CLEAR HOW TO FOLLOW THAT AND
NOT NEED TO INVADE THE PRIVACY
IN ORDER TO DO THAT. SO I THINK
THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ADDITION, I
THINK MR. LOWENTHAL WAS NEXT,
THANK YOU, SENATOR, FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD. I BELIEVE I'M
ALREADY LISTED AS COAUTHOR ON
THIS BILL. I WANT TO,
ACKNOWLEDGE THE EFFORTS OF THE
OPPOSITION AND HOW CHALLENGING
IT IS FOR YOU, YOU KNOW, IT'S
REALLY TOUGH, EVERYBODY, WHEN
COMPANIES MANAGEMENT, ESPECIALLY
THOSE THAT ARE PUBLIC COMPANIES,
ARE UNDER THE PRESSURE TO
MAXIMIZE SHAREHOLDER VALUE IN
EVERY QUARTER TO BE SHOWING
BETTER RESULTS THAN THE QUARTER
BEFORE. AND AS THE SENATOR HAS
POINTED OUT, THE WAY THAT THAT
THESE COMPANIES ARE MONETIZING
AND INCREASING QUARTER AFTER
QUARTER ISN'T JUST INCREASE
GROWTH OF USERS, BUT IT'S
MAXIMIZING THE AMOUNT OF TIME
THAT THE USERS ARE SPENDING
ONLINE. AND HOW RICH THE DATA IS
ACTUALLY, THAT'S BEING, SOLD.
INCLUDING THAT OF OUR YOUTH. AND
SO I REALLY WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THE TOUGH PLACE THAT TECH IS IN.
AND IT'S NATURAL FOR TECH TO BE
PRESENTING, OPPOSITION ON
SOMETHING LIKE THIS. BUT TRUTH
BE TOLD, IS I'D BE SUPPORTING
THIS BILL WHETHER OR NOT THESE
ALGORITHMS WERE ADDICTIVE OR
NOT. YOU SEE, HAVING CONTROL
OVER WHAT CONTENT IS PRESENTED
DELIBERATELY TO YOUTH MEANS THAT
YOUR AFFIRMATIVELY AND
DELIBERATELY CHANGING THEIR
EVOLUTION. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT
RIGHT. SO WHEN BRAINS ARE
DEVELOPING THE MOST AT IN OUR
BODIES, WHICH IS WHEN WE'RE
GROWING UP TO BE PRESENTED VERY,
VERY SPECIFIC INFORMATION,
THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE USER'S
CHOOSING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
MAXIMIZING SHAREHOLDER VALUE AND
NOT NECESSARILY FOR THE GROWTH,
POSITIVE EVOLUTION OF THAT
INDIVIDUAL, I BELIEVE, IS
LEADING TO HORRIFIC MENTAL
HEALTH OUTCOMES. THE SENATOR
DIDN'T POINT ANY OF THESE OUT,
BUT I WILL IF YOU DON'T MIND. WE
HAVE A 62% INCREASE IN YOUTH
SUICIDE. SINCE 2011. THAT'S
REALLY HEAVY. WE HAVE, 22% OF
CURRENT HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
CONSIDERING SUICIDE. CDC FOUND
THAT NEARLY 30% OF US TEEN GIRLS
SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED TAKING
THEIR OWN LIVES IN THE LAST
YEAR. AND NOW I WILL SHARE A
STORY FROM MY OWN FAMILY. SO, I
HAVE THREE DAUGHTERS. ONE OF
THEM WAS, DEALING WITH BODY
IMAGE ISSUES, AND THAT HAPPENED
AT SCHOOL WHERE KIDS, ACCORDING
TO THE EDUCATORS THAT I'M CLOSE
WITH, ARE TALKING ABOUT EACH
OTHER'S BODIES NOW MORE THAN
EVER. AND, IT WASN'T THE SAME
KIDS BULLYING. IT WOULD BE
DIFFERENT KIDS TALKING TO MY
DAUGHTER ABOUT HER BODY. AND
THERE WAS A CUMULATIVE EFFECT
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. AND LO AND
BEHOLD, WE, CAUGHT HER THROWING
UP, IN THE EARLY PARTS OF A,
EATING DISORDER. WE HAD GONE TO
THE SCHOOL AND ADMINISTRATORS TO
SPEAK ABOUT THIS ISSUE, THEY HAD
NO TEACHING MOMENT ASSOCIATED
WITH ANY OF THIS, THERE WERE
VERY INTERESTED IN GETTING HER
MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT THAT SHE
NEEDED, WHICH I CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE, BUT THERE WAS NO
TEACHING MOMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
IT. AND, THE FIRST BILL, MY
FIRST DAY, I GOT SWORN IN, I
INTRODUCED AB TEN, WHICH WAS
HAVING SCHOOLS, MAKING SURE
DISTRICTS HAVE POLICY AND
CURRICULA AROUND BODY SHAMING.
BUT THAT WAS ACTUALLY A DIRECT
RESPONSE TO THE ALGORITHMS. AND
THE REASON THAT I KNOW THAT IS
BECAUSE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS
HAPPENED, THE PEDIATRICIANS THAT
WE SPOKE WITH SAID, ARE YOU
LOOKING AT HER PHONE? AND ARE
YOU UNDERSTANDING THE ALGORITHMS
AND THE CONTENT THAT'S BEING
PRESENTED? AND SO I DID THAT
IMMEDIATELY. AND SCROLLING
THROUGH IMAGE AFTER IMAGE WERE
ABOUT BODIES. WOMEN'S BODIES,
YOUNG WOMEN'S BODIES. THE
SEXUALIZATION OF THE IMAGES OF
THOSE BODIES. FOR SOMEBODY WHO
IS NOT MATURE ENOUGH AND
DEVELOPED ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
MARKETING, WHAT'S PERFECT,
WHAT'S IMPERFECT, AND I WATCHED
BEFORE ME THE GENESIS OF AN
EATING DISORDER, WHICH IS ALSO
UP, BY THE WAY, A SIMILAR AMOUNT
SINCE 2011. WE SHOULD HAVE OUR
CHILDREN EVOLVING IN WAYS, AND
WE SHOULD BE INTENTIONAL ABOUT
THEIR EVOLUTION AND BE FOCUSED
ON THEIR WELLNESS IN ANY
ENVIRONMENT THAT THEY'RE IN,
WHETHER THEY'RE IN SCHOOL,
WHETHER THEY'RE IN CAMP, WHETHER
IT'S THE MOTION PICTURE
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA GIVING US
GUIDELINES ON WHAT DIFFERENT
FILMS ARE AND WHETHER THEY'RE
AGE APPROPRIATE OR NOT. AND THE
SAME GOES ONLINE. IT REALLY,
REALLY DOES. WE'RE JUST GOING TO
HAVE MORE AND MORE BILLS THAT
KEEP POINTING TO THIS. YOU KNOW,
I'M GOING TO BE OFFERING THEM
UNTIL WE HAVE AN INCREASE IN
MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR OUR
KIDS, BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE'S A
DIRECT NEXUS TO THIS. I'M SO
EXCITED FOR THIS BILL TO BECOME
LAW AND SO EXCITED TO ASSESS AND
UNDERSTAND THE DATA ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS. THIS IS ONE OF THE
MOST IMPORTANT PIECES OF
LEGISLATION THAT WE CAN VOTE ON
IN OUR TIME HERE. SO THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. MISS DIXON, THE VICE
CHAIR. THANK YOU, SENATOR
SKINNER. I'M I THINK I'M
SUPPORTIVE. I'VE JUST
QUESTIONING. MAYBE THIS IS TOO
SIMPLE, BUT JUST TO RESTATE WHAT
YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO HERE IS
THAT ADS THAT POP UP ON A
ADOLESCENT, A MINOR'S, USE OF
THE COMPUTER. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO CONTROL, CORRECT. WHAT
DOES DOES AN AD BLOCKER DO THE
SAME THING? CAN'T A PARENT
SIMPLY GO INTO THEIR CHILD'S
COMPUTER? AND I DO AD BLOCKER,
AND THE DATA SAYS THAT THEY'VE
JUST SAVED ME 35 MILLION ADS A
YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO,
I MEAN, THERE ARE MILLIONS AND
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF ADS. SO
WOULDN'T AN AD BLOCKER WORK? AND
THE NEXT QUESTION NUMBER ONE,
QUESTION NUMBER TWO, I DON'T
UNDERSTAND THE PARENTS ROLE
HERE. ARE YOU I KNOW THE BILL
SAYS IT'S LIMITING TO THIS
PORTION. I JUST WANT YOU TO
CLARIFY FOR ME WHAT YOU JUST
DEFINE WHAT THE PARENT'S ROLE IS
IN ALL OF THIS. CERTAINLY. SO ON
THE FEEDS, IT'S NOT JUST ADS.
THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY ADS ARE PART
OF THE FEEDS, BUT THERE'S OTHER
FEEDS. AND WHAT THIS BILL WOULD
DO AS A DEFAULT IS YOU WOULD
ONLY RECEIVE FEEDS YOU. THE
MINOR WOULD ONLY RECEIVE FEEDS
RELATED TO CONTENT THAT YOU
SEARCHED OR, OR LIKES THAT YOU
MADE. SO IT WOULD BE BASED ON
YOU VERSUS ON WHAT THE ALGORITHM
PREDETERMINED THEN ON THE
PARENTAL CONTROL. SO THE BILL
CREATES THESE DEFAULTS FOR MINOR
USERS. THE DEFAULTS BEING THE
NON USE OF ADDICTIVE FEEDS. THE
NO NOTIFICATIONS DURING SCHOOL
HOURS, THE NO NOTIFICATIONS
DURING MIDNIGHT AND 6 A.M, AND A
COUPLE OF OTHER DEFAULTS LIKE
THAT PRIVACY SETTINGS AND THE
PARENT COULD OVERRIDE THOSE
DEFAULTS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE
PARENT WANTED THE MINOR TO
RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS YOU KNOW,
ALL DAY OR OR TO HAVE THE SOCIAL
MEDIA EXPERIENCE THE SAME AS THE
PARENT. THEY COULD OVERRIDE THAT
. SO THOSE ARE THE PARENTAL
CONTROLS THAT ARE ALLOWED. OKAY
SO BACK TO THE ADS OR THE
UNWANTED MATERIAL. SO WILL THE
ALL ALGORITHM LIKE IT COULD I'D
LIKE TO SIGN UP FOR THAT
ALGORITHM. I MEAN THAT I DON'T
GET ALL THESE ADS WHEN WE ALL
WANT THAT. AND I GET IT FROM A
PLATFORM STANDPOINT. THAT'S
THEIR REVENUE BASE. I MEAN, THAT
IS THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
THAT'S WHY. MR. LOWENTHAL
REPORTED ON THEIR QUARTERLY
PROFITS. IT'S COMING LARGELY
FROM ADVERTISING AND SO I'M NOT
AGAINST ADVERTISING, BUT IF
WE'RE TRYING TO CONTROL THE ADS
AREN'T THERE, OR I GUESS THE
BOTTOM LINE ISN'T THERE ALREADY
EXISTING TECHNOLOGY. WE DON'T
NEED A LAW TO DO THIS, JUST
ENCOURAGE PARENTS TO AD BLOCK ON
THEIR TECHNOLOGY FOR ADS, BUT
NOT FOR THE OTHER CONTENT. AND
JUST, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW
MANY OF US, MANY OF US USE
SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT I STOPPED
USING A NUMBER OF PLATFORMS
BECAUSE FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I
COULDN'T FIGURE OUT I'M LIKE,
WHAT THE HELL IS THIS STUFF
POPPING UP, RIGHT? I AGREE, NO,
I DIDN'T LOOK FOR THIS. I DIDN'T
ASK FOR THIS GROUP TO INVITE ME
INTO THEIR GROUP OR THIS. THESE
ARE ALL THINGS LIKE. LIKE WHAT?
AND IT WAS CLEARLY THE
ALGORITHMS THAT DECIDED THAT
THESE ARE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE
SENT TO ME. BUT I USE ADBLOCKERS
AND I DON'T GET THOSE KIND OF
ADS, SO I DON'T GET SO WELL
ANYWAY. AND THIS IS WHAT THE,
THE, THE ELIMINATION OF THE
ADDICTIVE FEEDS WOULD ALLOW ONLY
THE CONTENT OR LIKES OR
INFORMATION THAT YOU YOURSELF
WERE SEEKING OR YOU, THE MINOR
WAS SEEKING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BUT I THINK
IF I CAN JUST A POINT OF
CLARIFICATION, I DON'T THINK
IT'S JUST PAID CONTENT. CORRECT.
RIGHT IT'S ALL ADDICTIVE
CONTENT, WHICH IS NOT THE AD
BLOCKERS WOULDN'T GET AT JUST.
YES, THAT'S MY QUESTION. YEAH
GREAT, MR. VICE CHAIR. GREAT.
THANK YOU, AND, YOU KNOW, I
THINK, BEING ON THIS COMMITTEE
FOR A WHILE, WE, I THINK WE'VE
DETERMINED WE'RE ALL IN, SIMILAR
INTERESTS IN TRYING TO PREVENT,
YOU KNOW, CHILDREN FROM BEING
HARMED ONLINE. AND, JUST A
COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO NOTE,
UNLIKE, I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE
CONCERNS, UNLIKE, MAYBE, PERHAPS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, I, I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT MY CHILDREN HAVE A
RIGHT TO PRIVACY, PERIOD, SO
THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN AN
INTERESTING JUST DISCUSSION ON
ALL SORTS OF POLICIES THAT COME
THROUGH HERE. BUT BUT THE ONE
THING THAT I DO AM, I THINK
HAVING, BEING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
WITHOUT ALGORITHMS, IN WHICH WE
KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CRUMMY
CONTENT OUT THERE, I MEAN, YOU
KNOW, SOMETIMES IT'S SOMETIMES
IT'S FED TO ME FOR ONE REASON OR
ANOTHER. BUT BUT I THINK THE
WHOLE POINT IS TO GIVE ME ALSO
JUST THE FACT THAT THEY WANT TO
GIVE YOU THE STUFF YOU WANT TO
SEE, ALSO, IT SHOULD ALSO MEAN
AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THERE'S
A NECESSARILY A GOOD JOB DOING
THIS, BUT I, I HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE FEED SHOWING PEOPLE
THINGS THAT YOU SHOULD SEE, AND
I THINK THIS WAS POINTED OUT IN
ONE OF THE OPPOSITION LETTERS,
BUT, BUT JUST I THINK A COUPLE
OF YEARS AGO OR WHATNOT, MY
COLLEAGUE WHO SITS ON THIS
COMMITTEE WITH ME, AUTHORED
THAT, APPROPRIATE DESIGN CODE,
WHICH I MIGHT POINT OUT THAT THE
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES OPPOSE
THAT. BUT BUT I BELIEVE IT'S
BEING USED AS A REASON TO OPPOSE
THIS MEASURE, BUT IT ACTUALLY
MAKES SENSE TO ME, WHICH IS I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE STUFF
THAT MY CHILDREN ARE GETTING
THROUGH AN ALGORITHM ARE
ACTUALLY APPROPRIATE FOR THEM TO
SEE. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S
POSSIBLE WITHOUT A CURATION OF
SORTS. AND SO THAT'S WHAT
CONCERNS ME ABOUT THIS BILL. I'M
I'M HAPPY TO HEAR A RESPONSE TO
THAT. OBVIOUSLY BUT I AM
CONCERNED WITH, WITH EXACTLY
THAT, THAT THERE, THAT, THAT
WE'RE NOT ALLOWING THE ALGORITHM
TO SHOW THIS STUFF THAT THEY
SHOULD ACTUALLY SEE. AND BY THE
WAY, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT
ONE THING. I DO THINK THAT AND
I'VE SAID THIS UP HERE BEFORE, I
DO THINK THERE COULD BE MORE
WORK DONE ON AND MORE
RESPONSIBILITY ON WHAT THE AGE
OF THE PEOPLE USING SOCIAL MEDIA
ARE. AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT. BUT IN TERMS OF
FEEDING MY NOW NINE AND 11 YEAR
OLD DAUGHTER, WHICH BY THE OR
THEY'RE NOT ON SOCIAL MEDIA, BY
THE WAY, AND HOPEFULLY, WON'T BE
FOR A WHILE. BUT WHEN THEY DO
MAKE THAT CHOICE, I WANT THEM TO
GET APPROPRIATE MATERIAL. AND SO
I JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT YOU
THOUGHT ABOUT THAT. WELL, AND
YOU WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO
SO IF THE BILL PASSES. AND I
THINK WE'VE HAD A VERY ROBUST
DISCUSSION ON IT. SO I DON'T
WANT TO REPEAT WHAT'S BEEN SAID,
BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF THAT
IS THE PREFERENCE OF YOU, YOU
OBVIOUSLY IF THIS BILL SUCCEEDS
AND IS LAW, YOU WOULD HAVE THE
RIGHT TO OVERRIDE AND LET THEM
HAVE THE, ALGORITHMS OR, OR WHAT
IS VERY WELL DOCUMENTED. THE
ADDICTIVE FEED ALGORITHMS. WELL,
I'M NOT EVEN SURE HOW TIKTOK
WOULD WORK UNDER THIS, THIS THIS
LEGISLATION, BUT YES,
UNFORTUNATELY, MY DAUGHTER DOES
WATCH TOO MUCH YOUTUBE, BUT SHE
ENJOYS IT. I MEAN, ACTUALLY, SHE
FINDS CONTENT THAT SHE LIKES AND
LEARNS STUFF FROM IT. SO BUT, I
JUST THINK SHE SPENDS TOO MUCH
TIME, AND I DO LOCK IT DOWN.
THEY DO HAVE THE CONTROLS FOR ME
TO LOCK IT DOWN AND ALL THOSE
SORTS OF THINGS, BUT. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
ADDITIONAL MEMBERS SEEKING
RECOGNITION, SENATOR, I TOO,
WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED TO KHÓ AS
A COAUTHOR, IF YOU'LL HAVE ME, I
THINK THIS IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT WORK, AND I KNOW THE
AGE APPROPRIATE DESIGN BILL WAS
MENTIONED, WHICH WAS INCREDIBLE
WORK BY MISS WICKS, WHICH IS
CAUGHT UP IN COURT BECAUSE THE I
BELIEVE THE SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES HAVE SUED AND IT IS
STALLED. SO WE CONTINUE TO DO
OUR BEST TO PROTECT KIDS ONLINE.
AND, THEY WILL PUT UP A LOT OF
BARRIERS, BUT WE WILL CONTINUE
TO TRY BECAUSE PROTECTING OUR
KIDS SHOULD BE OUR NUMBER ONE
PRIORITY. AND AS THE MOM OF NOW
TEENAGERS, I KNOW FIRSTHAND WHAT
THIS LOOKS LIKE AND IT'S, IT'S
SHOCKING. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE
THEY'RE CREATING A PRODUCT THAT
IS INTENDED TO ADDICT OUR
CHILDREN, AND IT IS HARMING
THEM. AND WE'RE SEEING THAT. AND
I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE
LEARNED THAT CIGARETTES WERE
ADDICTIVE AND HARMFUL, WE TOOK
SERIOUS ACTION. AND I TO BE
FRANK, I THINK THE SAME IS
NEEDED HERE. AND I THINK THIS
THE US SURGEON GENERAL MADE THAT
STATEMENT ABOUT A WEEK AGO. AND
HE COULDN'T BE MORE RIGHT. SO I
APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
THIS SPACE. AND WITH THAT, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU. I
THAT IS A GREAT ANALOGY AROUND
THE TOBACCO COMPANIES AND THE
APPROPRIATE RESPONSE. AND I ALSO
APPRECIATE, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
LOWENTHAL'S VERY CLEAR CITATION
OF LEGITIMATE STATISTICS ON THE
INCREASE IN SUICIDES AND AMONGST
OUR TEENS AND, AND, EATING
DISORDERS AND OTHER MENTAL
HEALTH PROBLEMS. AND I THINK THE
INTENT OF THIS BILL AND THE
INTENT OF ALL OF THE SUPPORTERS
OF IT AND MYSELF AND THOSE OF
YOU, I HOPE, WHO WILL VOTE FOR
IT AND I ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE IS
TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. THANK
YOU. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE
BILL? THE BILL SECOND, MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
ITEM NUMBER 11, SB 976 BY
SENATOR SKINNER. THE MOTION IS
DUE. PASS AS AMENDED TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
BAUER-KAHAN I KHN. AYE.
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. NOT
VOTING. BRIAN. DIXON DIXON. NOT
VOTING. IRWIN IRWIN. AYE.
HOOVER. LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE WARD.
WARD. AYE. WIX. WIX AYE. WILSON
THE BILL HAS SIX SEVEN WHO NEED
SIX. SO IT'S OUT. BUT WE'LL
LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. AND SENATOR BECKER HAS
BEEN SO KIND AS TO LET SENATOR
STERN GO NEXT. THANK YOU,
SENATOR BECKER. I APPRECIATE THE
PACING. YOU'RE GETTING YOUR
STEPS IN, AND I THINK THE AIR
MAY HAVE TURNED ON. AM I THE
ONLY ONE WHO FEELS THAT? NO.
OKAY. COOLER THAN THE SENATE.
YEAH. IT'S GOOD. IT'S GETTING
BETTER IN HERE. SOMEBODY CALLED
OSHA, SENATOR STERN WILL BE
PRESENTING SB 1283 WHEN HE'S
READY, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
MEMBERS, SB 1283 WOULD
EXPLICITLY GRANT OUR SCHOOL
DISTRICTS THE ABILITY TO LIMIT
OR RESTRICT THE USE OF SOCIAL
MEDIA ON CAMPUS. YOU'VE BEEN
HEARING ALL DAY ABOUT THE ILLS,
THIS IS REALLY ABOUT TOOLS AND
MAKING SURE OUR DISTRICTS, HAVE
EVERY CLARITY AND LAW THAT THEY
CAN MOVE FORWARD, THERE HAVE
BEEN AMENDMENTS THAT WE ACCEPTED
OR WE ARE ACCEPTING IN THIS
COMMITTEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
FURTHER REFINING WITH THE
CHAIR'S ASSISTANCE. THAT, RAISED
SOME ISSUES THAT I THINK SOME OF
THE OPPOSITION WILL NOTE, BUT AT
BOTTOM, IT GETS INTO
CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN A SCHOOL
DISTRICT WERE TO ALLOW SOCIAL
MEDIA TO BE USED ON CAMPUS, HOW
DO YOU DEAL WITH THOSE INSTANCES
WHEN, A STUDENT IS PUBLISHING A
FIGHT PAGE OR A STUDENT IS BEING
BULLIED, HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE
THAT IN PURSUING THAT INCIDENT
AND TRYING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM
OF IT, THAT YOU DON'T
INADVERTENTLY OUT, THE GENDER OR
GENDER IDENTITY OF A STUDENT OR
ANOTHER KIND OF PROTECTED CLASS,
SO I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE,
THE WORK, WITH BOTH THE
COMMITTEE CHAIR AND WITH THE
HEAD OF THE LGBTQ CAUCUS, THIS
MORNING, SUMMER WARD ON, FURTHER
AMENDING THE BILL IN ADDITION TO
WHAT'S SPECIFIED IN THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS TO ENSURE
THAT, THERE IS A DUAL
NOTIFICATION PROVISION WHEN YOU
ARE BEING NOTIFIED OF YOUR
RIGHTS UNDER THE ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT, THAT
THE STUDENT DOESN'T FIND OUT
AFTER THE PARENT DOES, THAT
THERE'S AN ISSUE, AND WE THINK
THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
CLARIFICATION SO THAT, STUDENTS
ARE GIVEN EQUAL FOOTING IN THIS
ENDEAVOR AND NOT SORT OF, LEFT
IN THE DARK WHILE THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT COMMUNICATES DIRECTLY
WITH THE PARENTS WITHOUT ANY,
ABILITY FOR THE STUDENTS HAVE,
ANY NOTICE OF THEIR OWN RIGHTS
UNDER FERPA, SECOND, WE'RE GOING
TO CLARIFY THAT THE DISCLOSURE
AND CONSENT MUST BE PER THE
INDIVIDUAL BY THE INDIVIDUAL
WHO'S BEEN, ACCUSED OF THE CYBER
BULLYING, HARASSMENT OR
SUSPECTED ACTIVITY, IN OTHER
WORDS, THAT THERE'S NOT GOING TO
BE SORT OF BLANKET CONSENT
SOUGHT FROM SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR
ALL STUDENTS PRIVACY RIGHTS TO
BE WAIVED. BUT THAT IF YOU'RE
THE ONE WHO IS BEING ACCUSED OF,
BULLYING AND OTHER STUDENT
BEATING UP ANOTHER STUDENT
ATTACKING A STUDENT, THAT THAT
WILL BE SORT OF CONSTRAINING THE
INQUIRY OF THAT INCIDENT AND
THAT IT WILL BE THAT CONSENT,
THE PARENTAL CONSENT SORT, WILL
BE LIMITED TO, YOUR SUSPECTED
ACTIVITY. NOT EVERYONE'S WE
DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A DRAGNET
FOR SURVEILLANCE OF STUDENTS IN
OUR SCHOOLS. THAT'S REALLY NOT
THE INTENT, THIRD, WE WANT TO BE
CLEAR THAT WE'RE LIMITING, THAT
CONSENT TO JUST THE DURATION OF
THE INVESTIGATION OF A SPECIFIC
INCIDENT. SO THIS IS NOT BLANKET
CONSENT THAT LASTS ALL YEAR. THE
MEN'S ALREADY MADE CLEAR THAT
THAT THAT ANY CONSENT WOULD,
WOULD SORT OF LAPSE AT THE END
OF A YEAR. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO
BE RENEWED. BUT WE'VE EVEN
REFINED THAT FURTHER. IT'S NOT A
WHOLE YEAR CATCH ALL WE'RE
SAYING, JUST IN THE SCOPE OF
THAT INCIDENT. AND SO WE REALLY
HOPE AGAIN THERE WE CAN NARROW
THE SCOPE AND THEN LASTLY, WE'RE
GOING TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE
CONFIDENTIALITY THAT SENSITIVE
INFORMATION RELATED TO GENDER,
GENDER IDENTITY AND THE LIKE,
BUT JUST TO CIRCLE BACK AND
BEFORE I CLOSE, HOPEFULLY NONE
OF THESE SITUATIONS ARE
NECESSARY BECAUSE HOPEFULLY
STUDENTS DO NOT HAVE THAT
SMARTPHONE IN THEIR HAND AT
SCHOOL AND THAT THEY ARE NOT ON
SNAPCHAT AT SCHOOL, AND THAT WE
LIBERATE TEACHERS FROM HAVING TO
POLICE THEIR STUDENTS BEHAVIOR
AND MAKE IT MUCH SIMPLER TO BE A
STUDENT ON CAMPUS. YOU CAN JUST
DO YOUR THING, THERE MAY BE
SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT DECIDE WE
WANT TO HAVE SOCIAL MEDIA ON OUR
CAMPUS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO US.
AND IN THAT CASE, THEY'VE GOT TO
OPERATE WITHIN THESE GUARDRAILS
WE'VE LAID OUT. BUT WE THINK THE
MUCH SIMPLER PATH AND ONE WE
HOPE THAT LAYS ACROSS THE STATE,
WILL GO DOWN, ARE JUST THE
SIMPLE BLANKET RESTRICTION, BUT
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS AND
GET INTO COLLOQUY AND
CLARIFICATION AS NECESSARY, BUT
I'LL JUST LET MY LEAD WITNESSES
SAY A BRIEF PIECE. I KNOW SOME
MEMBERS HAVE TO GO, SO I'M
COGNIZANT OF TIME, TOO. THANK
YOU, SENATOR, TWO MINUTES EACH.
WHEN YOU'RE READY. UNLESS IF YOU
WANT YOU WANT. GO AHEAD. OKAY,
I'LL DO IT. I'LL DO IT. HELLO.
MY NAME IS MARK BERKMAN. I'M THE
CEO OF THE ORGANIZATION FOR
SOCIAL MEDIA SAFETY, THE LEADING
CONSUMER PROTECTION ORGANIZATION
FOCUSED EXCLUSIVELY ON SOCIAL
MEDIA. I WANT TO THANK SENATOR
STERN FOR AUTHORING SB 1283,
WHICH WILL ENSURE THE PHYSICAL
AND MENTAL WELL-BEING OF
CALIFORNIA STUDENTS BY FINALLY
ENABLING SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO
LIMIT STUDENT SOCIAL MEDIA USE
DURING THE SCHOOL DAY. IF THE
DISTRICT SO CHOOSES. WE ARE
PROUD TO SPONSOR THIS BILL. THIS
LEGISLATION IS INCREDIBLY
TIMELY, AS JUST THE OTHER WEEK
THE SURGEON GENERAL CALLED FOR
WARNING LABELS ON SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS, ADVISING PARENTS THAT
USING THE PLATFORMS MIGHT HARM
ADOLESCENTS MENTAL HEALTH. AS
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AS AN
ORGANIZATION THAT WORKS WITH K
THROUGH 12 SCHOOLS ACROSS THE
STATE ON SOCIAL MEDIA SAFETY, WE
KNOW WELL THAT STUDENT SOCIAL
MEDIA USE DURING THE SCHOOL DAY
IS LEADING TO SIGNIFICANT
ADDITIONAL TIME SPENT ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AND NEGATIVELY IMPACTING
LEARNING AND CAMPUS CLIMATE IN
OUR OWN RESEARCH AND PARTNERSHIP
WITH THE UCLA SCHOOL OF
EDUCATION, INCLUDING OVER 14,000
TEENS, A STAGGERING 53%
SELF-REPORTED USING SOCIAL MEDIA
FOR MORE THAN FIVE HOURS DAILY.
THAT IS A LOT OF TIME, AND IN
THAT TIME, OUR CHILDREN ARE
BEING HARMED. A BREATHTAKING 46%
OF TEENS SELF-REPORT BEING A
VICTIM OF CYBERBULLYING.
CYBERBULLYING VICTIMS ARE ABOUT
TWO AND A HALF TIMES MORE LIKELY
TO ATTEMPT SUICIDE. A STUDY
CONDUCTED AMONG 14 YEAR OLDS
FOUND THAT INCREASED SOCIAL
MEDIA USE CORRELATED WITH POOR
SLEEP HARASSMENT, LOWER
SELF-ESTEEM, NEGATIVE BODY
IMAGE, AND HIGHER RATES OF
DEPRESSION. THESE FINDINGS,
AMONG MANY, MANY OTHERS,
INDICATE REAL, ONGOING HARM FROM
SOCIAL MEDIA HARM THAT COULD BE
SUBSTANTIALLY MITIGATED BY
REDUCING TIME ON SOCIAL MEDIA
DURING THE SCHOOL DAY, AND
HAVING OUR STUDENTS FOCUS ON
LEARNING. WE ARE PROUD
CALIFORNIA IS LEADING THE WAY.
THE ORGANIZATION FOR SOCIAL
MEDIA SAFETY STANDS IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON,
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
PATRICIA RUCKER, AND I'M HERE
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION. I'D ALSO
LIKE TO THANK SENATOR STERN FOR
THE WORK BEING DONE ON THIS
BILL. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THE WORK
THAT THEY'VE DONE TO DEVELOP
AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE
OF PRIVACY. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME
BEGIN BY SAYING, AS A HIGH
SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER BACK IN
THE 20TH CENTURY, MY GREATEST
CONCERN WAS TO STOP STUDENTS WHO
WERE PASSING HANDWRITTEN NOTES
IN CLASS THAT SAID, DO YOU LIKE
ME? OR CAN YOU BE MY FRIEND? SO
TODAY, STUDENTS DO HAVE SOCIAL
MEDIA IN SCHOOL. THEY ARE
BRINGING THEIR CELL PHONES TO
SCHOOL AND THEY ARE USING THOSE
PHONES TO SEND NOTES MORE
SERIOUS AND OF GREATER CONCERN
THAN A HANDWRITTEN NOTE ASKING,
DO YOU LIKE ME? AND WILL YOU BE
MY FRIEND? FOR THE TEACHERS IN
ALL OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS AND
SOMEWHERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ALL OF THE HORROR
STORIES THAT YOU HAVE HEARD
CONCERNING SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE
DATA REPRESENTED IN THE
STATISTICS, MY COLLEAGUE AND
FRIEND HERE GAVE TO YOU IS
DEFINITELY TRUE. BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY FOR THE TEACHERS IN
OUR CLASSROOM, THERE IS A NEED
TO BALANCE THE PERSONAL AND
PRIVATE RIGHTS OF STUDENTS WITH
THE VERY URGENT AND HIGHLY
PRIORITIZED NEEDS OF SCHOOLS TO
HAVE ORDER TO PROVIDE
INSTRUCTION, TO MAKE SURE THAT
INSTRUCTION PROCEEDS IN AN
ORDERLY WAY, AND THAT WHEN
STUDENTS COME TO SCHOOL, THAT
SCHOOL CAN HAPPEN NOT ONLY FOR
STUDENTS WHO HAVE THAT SOCIAL
MEDIA IN THEIR POCKETS, BUT FOR
STUDENTS WHO HAVE AND ARE
AFFECTED BY IT WHEN THEY LEAVE
THEIR CAMPUS. THESE AMENDMENTS
GO IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION. MY
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SCHOOL
SAFETY AND SCHOOL MANAGEMENT
STUDIED THESE AMENDMENTS
FEVERISHLY, WITH GREAT INTENT
AND WITH CONCERTED INTEREST, AND
WE DO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE
GOING IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION.
THERE IS THIS NEEDLING CONCERN
ABOUT HOW DO YOU BALANCE THE
PRIVACY RIGHTS OF STUDENTS, THE
PUBLIC CONCERN OF PARENTS FOR
WHAT IS REPORTED, AND THE
OVERARCHING RESPONSIBILITY OF
DISTRICTS TO DELIVER INSTRUCTION
AND TRAINING FOR STUDENTS IN A
SAFE WAY? HOW DO YOU BALANCE ALL
OF THOSE COMPETING NEEDS THAT
THESE PARTICULAR AMENDMENTS ARE
ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS? WE, THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION,
URGE YOU TO CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION AND TO LET THESE
AMENDMENTS GO THROUGH TO SUPPORT
THE WORK OF THE POLICY AND THE
INTENT OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE WILL
NOW MOVE TO ADDITIONAL SUPPORT
FOR THIS MEASURE. LARA BENNETT
WITH CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE IN SUPPORT. LOOK AT
YOU. LOOK AT THAT. SHOCKING ME,
DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF
TECHNET IN SUPPORT. THANKS AND
THAT FEEL GOOD. YES, IT FEELS
GOOD TO SUPPORT THE BILL. PAMELA
GIBBS, REPRESENTING THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION AND WOULD LIKE TO
THANK THE AUTHOR. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. SORRY IT'S BEEN A
LONG WEEK, Y'ALL. I'LL TRY TO
BEHAVE, GREAT. ANYONE HERE? OH,
WAIT. PLEASE. MITCH STEIGER WITH
CFT, A UNION OF EDUCATORS AND
CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS ALSO IN
SUPPORT. OKAY, YES, WE HAVE
OPPOSITION. COME ON UP.
HELLO, CHAIR AND MEMBERS, MY
NAME IS RACHEL BHAGWAT. I'M A
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE AT ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION. I WANT TO
START BY APPRECIATING SENATOR
STERN FOR HIS INTENTIONS ON THIS
BILL, AND HOW COLLABORATIVE HIS
OFFICE HAS BEEN ON THIS
THROUGHOUT SESSION. HOWEVER, WE
ARE DEEPLY TROUBLED BY THE
AMENDMENTS IN THE PRIVACY
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. WE'VE NOT
SEEN ANY FURTHER AMENDMENTS OR
LANGUAGE THAT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN
DISCUSSED TODAY. SO I HAVE TO
REACT TO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN
PRINT IN THE ANALYSIS. THIS
BILL'S INTENTION IS SIMPLE, BUT
WE FEEL IT'S DEVOLVING INTO A
MESSY TANGLE OF SURVEILLANCE.
THE SENATE AMENDMENTS THAT WE
COLLABORATED ON WITH THE
SENATOR'S OFFICE MEANT TO ENSURE
THAT STUDENTS KNEW THEIR RIGHTS
TO REFUSE A DEVICE SEARCH AND
CONSULT A PARENT OR ATTORNEY,
EMPHASIZING STUDENTS RIGHT OF
REFUSAL WAS CRITICAL TO AVOID
POTENTIAL CAL ACPA VIOLATIONS
AND PROTECT AGAINST PUTTING
STUDENTS AT RISK IF THEIR
PERSONAL INFO WAS OBTAINED
WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. LIKE FOR
EXAMPLE, SCHOOLS KNOWING IF THEY
WERE ACCESSING LGBTQ RESOURCES
OR REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES.
ASSEMBLY, EDUCATION AND PRIVACY
COMMITTEES RAISED CONCERNS THAT
SOME STUDENTS COULD BE COERCED
OR RETALIATED AGAINST FOR
REFUSING. THOSE ARE VALID
CONCERNS, BUT THE NEW AMENDMENTS
APPROACH, OR THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS AMENDMENTS APPROACH TO
RESOLVE THIS IS ALARMING. IF
THIS COMMITTEE PASSES THE BILL,
AS AMENDED IN THE ANALYSIS, WE
WILL HAVE REMOVED STUDENTS
ENTIRELY FROM CONVERSATIONS
AROUND THEIR OWN INFORMATION AND
PRIVACY. NOTIFICATION IS NOT
ENOUGH. WE NEED CONSENT FROM
STUDENTS. THE NEW LANGUAGE WOULD
REQUIRE PARENTS AND GUARDIANS TO
CONSENT TO REFUSE FOR THEIR
CHILD'S DEVICE TO BE SEARCHED,
INCLUDING THROUGH CONSENT
LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE BURIED IN
A STACK OF SCHOOL FORMS. AND,
YOU KNOW, COULD, WELL, I THINK,
NO LONGER LAST UP TO ONE SCHOOL
YEAR. MINORS WOULD NOT HAVE A
RIGHT TO REFUSE A SEARCH OF
THEIR OWN DEVICE FOR THEIR OWN
REASONS. THEY'D BE SIMPLY BE
INFORMED IF THEIR PARENTS SIGN
AWAY THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY.
REMOVING MINOR CONSENT IS AN
UNNECESSARY CHANGE. IF PARENT
CONSENT IS IMPORTANT TO PROTECT
YOUNG CHILDREN, THEN THE RIGHT
SOLUTION IS DUAL CONSENT, WHICH
WOULD BLOCK A SEARCH IF EITHER A
PARENT OR A STUDENT REFUSES, OR
BOTH. LOOK A SCHOOL. RIFLING
THROUGH A STUDENT'S PHONE
WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT IS
DANGEROUS. WE APPRECIATE THE
ATTEMPTS TO PUT GUARDRAILS
AROUND FORCED OUTING AND
CONFIDENTIALITY, BUT THOSE
THINGS DON'T FIX THE PROBLEM. IF
WE DENY STUDENTS THE RIGHT TO
PROTECT THEIR OWN PRIVATE
INFORMATION. IF AN EDUCATOR
LOOKS THROUGH SUZY'S PHONE AND
LEARNS THAT SHE'S GAY OR HAD AN
ABORTION, OR GOT DIAGNOSED WITH
BIPOLAR DISORDER, THEY CAN'T
UNKNOW THAT. NO, NO MATTER IF
THE LAW SAYS THEY CAN'T DO
ANYTHING WITH IT. AND SOME WILL
FIND A WAY TO DO SOMETHING WITH
IT AT THIS POINT, WITH THESE
AMENDMENTS, WE RESPECTFULLY URGE
THE SENATOR AND THIS COMMITTEE
TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL AND
ALLOW THE SMARTPHONE REGULATION
LANGUAGE IN CURRENT STATUTE TO
ACHIEVE THE PURPOSE. SENATOR
STERN SEEKS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL? PLEASE COME FORWARD
. YES. HELLO, DANNY. KENDALL
KAISER WITH THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FRONTIER FOUNDATION
WOULD ALIGN OUR POSITION WITH
THE ACLU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
OKAY, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A
SECOND, BUT APPARENTLY THERE'S
NOT, SO SEEING NO ADDITIONAL
FOLKS IN THE ROOM, WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE DÍAS. MR. WARD.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND I
WANTED TO START BY THANKING
CERTAINLY THE AUTHOR, YOUR
STAFF, COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE
CHAIRWOMAN FOR, DIVING DEEP INTO
FIGURING OUT HOW THIS MIGHT PLAY
OUT IN REALITY, THE SIMPLE
SOLUTION WOULD BE TO JUST MORE
BROADLY, YOU KNOW, WORK ON
SMARTPHONE POLICIES. I KNOW
ANOTHER BILL IS DOING THAT, AND
I BELIEVE LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS
WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT AS
WELL, SO THAT THIS ISN'T AN
ISSUE IN AN EDUCATIONAL AND
ENVIRONMENT, BUT WHERE THERE IS
YOUR BILL OR ANY LOCAL
ALLOWANCES TO BE ABLE TO
REGULATE, I GUESS SOCIAL MEDIA
ACCESS AND CONTENT, YOU KNOW,
RAISES SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AS A
LEGISLATURE JUST RECENTLY AS
WELL. AND WHAT, A VERY WIDE
RANGING OUTCOMES COULD BE
THROUGH SOME OF THOSE LOCAL
POLICIES IS WHAT YOUR YOUR BILL
IS TRYING TO BE ABLE TO REIN IN,
RIGHT, WHAT THEY DO OR WHAT THEY
CAN'T DO, UNDER WHAT
CIRCUMSTANCES THEY WOULD BE ABLE
TO LOOK AT INFORMATION. BECAUSE
I DO BELIEVE AND I SHARE, A LOT
OF THE VERY, YOU KNOW, VERY
FUNDAMENTAL CONCERNS AS WELL,
THAT THE OPPOSITION IS RAISING
HERE TODAY. AND TRYING TO MAKE
SURE THAT THERE AREN'T THE
EVENTUAL OUTCOMES FOR VULNERABLE
STUDENTS THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT,
THAT, NEED A SENSE OF PRIVACY,
RESPONSE, MEET, IN, RATIONALLY,
I GUESS, TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT
THEM, IS SOMETHING THAT'S
IMPORTANT TO ME. AND SO AS WE'RE
SORT OF THREADING ALL THIS HERE
TOO, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I TRIED TO
MAYBE GET AWAY FROM LANGUAGE AND
STATUTE AND SORT OF REALLY TRY
TO PAINT THIS IN A REAL WORLD
SCENARIO. RIGHT, WHAT HAPPENS IF
YOU HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL, AND I
KNOW THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
AGAIN, TIE THIS TOWARDS, YOU
KNOW, AN INCIDENT, RIGHT, WHERE
A SCHOOL NEEDS TO FIND OUT MORE
INFORMATION THAT IS TIED TO
BULLYING, CYBER CYBER BULLYING
OR HARASSMENT OR AN ALTERCATION.
RIGHT. AND SOME OF THAT
INFORMATION, CAN BE FOUND
THROUGH, CONVERSATIONS. EMBEDDED
IN A SMARTPHONE OR ON, ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AND, YOU KNOW, I WAS ALSO
TRYING TO THINK ABOUT THIS, YOU
KNOW, BEFORE WE HAD, SMARTPHONES
AND SOCIAL MEDIA, AND INCIDENCES
LIKE A BACKPACK. RIGHT. YOU KNOW
WHAT? IF THERE WAS A NOTE THAT
SOMEBODY HAD PASSED AND WHAT IS
THE STUDENT'S RIGHT TO PRIVACY?
IF THAT NOTE IS EMBEDDED WITHIN
THEIR BACKPACK, AND WOULD THEY
BE ABLE TO SUBJECT TO CONCERT,
TO A SEARCH? AND REALLY JUST
TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT. I
GUESS, WITH, LAWS THAT WE HAVE
ADOPTED OVER THE YEARS. AND NOW
APPLYING THAT HERE TOWARDS,
TOWARDS THIS AS WELL, NOT EASY
TO DO GIVEN SOME OF THE NUANCES
OF SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT I THINK
THAT WE'RE WE'RE GETTING THERE,
AND SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, TYING
EVERYTHING BACK TO, I THINK IT'S
A SUBDIVISION B, BUT, YOU KNOW,
IN SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT
ARE THERE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE
REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WHERE THERE IS AN INCIDENT THAT
THAT IS REALLY THE TRIGGER AND
SORT OF THE CENTERING, ISSUE,
FOR WHICH A, SEARCHING FOR
INFORMATION IS, IS REALLY TRYING
TO FIND MORE INFORMATION TO
FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES. WHERE THERE
IS, EVIDENCE THAT THAT NEEDS TO
BE CONSIDERED ON WHICH AN ACTION
WOULD BE BASED. AND THE
DISCOVERY OF THAT INFORMATION
AND WHO GETS TO KNOW THAT ALSO
ENGENDERS A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER
VERY DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS. I
DO BELIEVE, AS THE COMMITTEE
STAFF HAS WORKED REALLY HARD TO
ENSURE THAT THAT IS RELEGATED
SPECIFICALLY TOWARDS SCHOOL.
OFFICIALS AND NOT SHARED WITH
OTHERS IS IMPORTANT PROTECTION
THAT IS IN THERE, UNLESS
REQUIRED TO DO SO BY STATE AND
FEDERAL LAW. SOME OF THE SAME
ALLOWANCES THAT WE'VE GIVEN.
WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT MY BILL
LAST WEEK THAT, YOU KNOW, IF FOR
SOME REASON AN ISSUE THAT A
MANDATED REPORTER WAS SUBJECT
TO, IS A PART OF THIS
CONVERSATION HERE, THEN, OF
COURSE, THAT NEEDS TO BE SHARED
WITH A BROADER RANGE OF
APPROPRIATE INDIVIDUALS AND
POTENTIALLY INCLUDING THOSE
PARENTS. NOW, WHERE PARENTAL
CONSENT, IS REQUIRED OR IS AN
OPTION, I GUESS, IN TANDEM WITH
A POTENTIAL DUAL, CONSENT
OPTION, I THINK IS A, AN
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION TO TEASE
OUT, SO I'M REALLY THANKFUL FOR
THE CRITICAL WORK THAT THE
AUTHOR HAS BEEN THINKING ABOUT
TO TRY TO MAKE THIS RIGHT,
BECAUSE WHAT WE, AS I WAS
THINKING ABOUT SCENARIOS THAT
TODAY'S LANGUAGE COULD, POSSIBLY
ALLOW, YOU KNOW, AS IT IS RIGHT
NOW WITH THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND ABSENT ANY FUTURE
AMENDMENTS, AN INDIVIDUAL THAT,
YOU KNOW, WAS WRESTLING WITH,
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE GAY OR
MAYBE HAD VISITED, LIKE THE
TREVOR PROJECT'S WEBSITE OR
LOCAL, LGBT RESOURCE CENTER OR
SOMETHING, RIGHT ON THEIR
SMARTPHONE, AND THEN WAS
INVOLVED WITH AN INCIDENT OF
BULLYING. SO TRIGGER IS THERE,
THERE'S ACCESS BECAUSE A PARENT
OR SOMEBODY HAD ACTUALLY
CONSENTED OR HAD HAD
PRE-AUTHORIZED THAT, YOU KNOW,
THEIR, THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA COULD
BE, DISCOVERABLE. SO NOW WE'RE
GOING IN THERE AND WE'RE LOOKING
THROUGH THAT FEED AND THEY
DISCOVER THIS INFORMATION. IT
MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT TO
THAT INCIDENT OF BULLYING.
RIGHT. BUT NOW TO YOUR POINT,
THEY KNOW ABOUT THAT. SO IS THAT
SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE
SHARED? I WOULD ARGUE, NOT BY
DEFAULT. THAT'S THAT, THAT THAT
PRESENTS A VERY RISKY AND A VERY
DANGEROUS SITUATION. AND IT IS
SEPARATE FROM THE ENTIRE THE
ORIGIN INCIDENT. RIGHT. THAT,
YOU KNOW, IS, IS THE NECESSITY
OF THIS POLICY THAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO WORK ON. SO, I GUESS
TO COLLEAGUES, I'VE, YOU KNOW,
BEEN THROUGH THIS BILL MULTIPLE
TIMES AND REALLY TRIED TO RUN
THESE SCENARIOS ABOUT YOU KNOW,
WHETHER OR NOT A UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE COULD HAPPEN THAT
WOULD INFRINGE UPON OR OFFEND OR
RISK, SOMEBODY WHO MIGHT BE
SUBJECT TO THIS. AND I THINK
THAT WE'RE GETTING THERE BECAUSE
I BELIEVE THE AUTHOR ALSO HAD I
ALMOST SAW A LIGHT BULB GO OFF
THAT YOU DON'T WANT THAT EITHER.
RIGHT. AND SO WE'VE WORKED
REALLY CLOSELY ON MAYBE SOME,
SOME DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THAT
ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET AT A
FEW THINGS, ONE, REFINING SOME
OF THE LANGUAGE ABOUT SENSITIVE
INFORMATION DISCOVERED RELATED
TO THE INCIDENT BUT IS RELEVANT
TO LGBTQ IDENTITY WITHIN
SUBDIVISION F LANGUAGE ABOUT
SENSITIVE LANGUAGE DISCOVERED
NOT RELATED TO THE INCIDENT
WITHIN PROPOSED SUBDIVISION Â
STUDENTS THAT ARE BEING ABLE TO
CONSENT IF THEY ARE THE VICTIM
OR THE BYSTANDER. PROPOSE A
SUBDIVISION B TWO AND LANGUAGE
CLARIFYING THE DISCLOSURE AND
CONSENT PROVIDED MUST MUST BE
PER THE INDIVIDUAL CASE OF CYBER
BULLYING. AS I STATED EARLIER,
AND SO WE'RE GOING TO WORK, I
THINK, ON REFINING SOME OF THAT
LANGUAGE. I THINK WE AGREE IN
CONCEPT OF WHERE WE WANT TO BE
ABLE TO GO, ALTHOUGH WE WANT TO
WORK WITH THE CHAIR AS WELL TO
MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING THAT, IS,
OUTSIDE OF, I THINK HER, POINTS
OF VIEW AS WELL ABOUT WHAT IS
WHAT IS THE RIGHT OUTCOME HERE.
AND SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE, I'M,
YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY HAPPY TO
MOVE AND SUPPORT, THE WORK
THAT'S BEEN DONE HERE TODAY, AND
WITH YOUR AGREEMENT AS WELL,
WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON THESE
AND TOGETHER, FOR POTENTIAL
FLOOR AMENDMENTS, YOU HAVE MY
AGREEMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
AND I WANT TO THANK MR. WARD FOR
HIS PARTNERSHIP ON THIS. I
THINK, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE WAS
RAISED WITH US LAST WEEK OF THE
CONCERNS OF THE CAUCUS, WHICH I
THINK WAS REALLY CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND.
AND YOUR PARTNERSHIP HAS BEEN
REALLY IMPORTANT IN HELPING US
ADDRESS THAT. SO I APPRECIATE IT
BECAUSE I KNOW YOU AS A PARENT
LIKE ME, DON'T WANT OUR KIDS ON
SOCIAL MEDIA AT SCHOOL AND SO
HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THAT GOAL? AND
ALSO, PROTECT THE LGBTQ PLUS
YOUTH, WHICH I KNOW IS A SHARED
VISION WITH THE AUTHOR, YEAH.
MR. RYAN, NO, I MEAN, ONE OF THE
MORE THOUGHTFUL AUTHORS IN THE
OTHER HOUSE. AND SO, CONFIDENT
AND HOPEFUL THAT CONVERSATIONS
WILL CONTINUE. I ALSO WANT TO BE
CLEAR. I THINK THEY SHOULD
CONTINUE, I THINK THIS IS A
VERY, I, I HATE THE TERM
SLIPPERY SLOPE. I HATE THE TERM
POISON PILL. I'M DONE WITH THESE
THINGS THAT WE OFTEN SAY, BUT I
CAN'T THINK OF SOMETHING BETTER
IN THIS MOMENT THAN A SLIPPERY
SLOPE, I CAN SEE INSTANCES WHERE
CHILDREN WHO HAVE THEIR PHONES
SEARCHED ON SCHOOL GROUNDS NOW
MIGHT FEEL STIGMATIZED AND GOING
TO SCHOOL AGAIN. AND HAVING
THEIR PRIVACY AND EVADE, INVADED
IN SUCH A WAY. I THINK IT'S
COMPLICATED, BUT I UNDERSTAND
THE ROOT OF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING
AT. I ALSO DO THINK THAT THERE'S
JUST I DON'T KNOW, I COULD SEE
MANY WAYS THAT THIS COULD BE
DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU
DON'T SHARE WITH THIRD PARTIES
UNLESS YOU HAVE TO. SO WHAT IF,
LIKE, A PARENT GIVES CONSENT?
BUT THEN I'M LOOKING THROUGH THE
PHONE, I SEE THE PARENT SAID,
YOU KNOW, YOU BETTER BE HOME BY
A CERTAIN TIME OR I'M GOING TO
BEAT YOU. AND NOW I GOT TO
REPORT IT TO CHILD WELFARE
BECAUSE I'M A MANDATED REPORTER,
AND I'VE NOW SEEN THAT THIS, YOU
KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I JUST THERE'S
A LOT TO UN UNPACK HERE. THAT,
THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE
YOU CONTINUE TO DO. BUT I ALSO
HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE THAT YOU
WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. YOU HAVE
MY VOTE TODAY, AND THANK YOU FOR
ALWAYS TAKING ON THE IMPORTANT
THINGS. TOO MUCH CONFIDENCE IN
ME. I'M GOING TO TRY. I'LL TRY
TO MAKE YOU. YEAH. YOUR VOTE
COUNT HERE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR. BRIAN. SEEING NO OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE MR. STERN? YEAH,
WE KNOW THIS. THERE ARE NOT JUST
ONE SLIPPERY SLOPES. MAYBE LIKE
A SLIPPERY MOUNTAIN HERE. HOW
ABOUT THAT OF JUST. OH, THIS
THING IS A PANDORA'S BOX, AND
IT'S POISONING OUR KIDS. AND I
APPRECIATE THE TECH INDUSTRY
FROM RECOGNIZING THAT IT DOES
NOT BELONG IN THE HANDS OF KIDS
WHEN THEY'RE AT SCHOOL. FINALLY
GETTING THE YES ON ONE PIECE OF
THIS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TURN
THIS SCHOOLS INTO SURVEILLANCE
STATE. WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN
OUTING STUDENTS. WE DON'T WANT
THIS TO BE A SORT OF ACCUSATORY
AND, DOUBTING, YOU KNOW, A SORT
OF A SUSPICION Ã ENVIRONMENT OF
SUSPICION. I DO THINK GETTING
THE SMARTPHONE, MAYBE ADDING
DUMB PHONES TO SCHOOLS AND MAYBE
JUST NOT HAVING SMARTPHONES AT
ALL IN THERE COULD MAKE A LOT OF
SENSE. BUT I'LL TELL YOU, I JUST
I APPRECIATE THE TRUST OF THE
COMMITTEE, AND WE HOPE TO BRING
YOU SOME WORK PRODUCT HERE.
SHOULD THIS THING HIT THE FLOOR
AND IDEALLY BY THE TIME IT HITS
THE APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR'S DESK,
THAT IS WORTHY OF ALL YOUR
SUPPORT AND THAT WE ADDRESS SOME
OF THESE CENTRAL CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION AS WELL. SO WITH
THAT, YOU HAVE MY COMMITMENT,
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU. SENATOR, WE HAVE A
MOTION AND A SECOND. WE'LL CALL
THE ROLL ITEM NUMBER 17, SB 1283
BY SENATOR STERN. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED BY
BAUER-KAHAN. I BAUER-KAHAN I
PATTERSON. BRIAN I BRIAN I DIXON
. DIXON. NOT VOTING. IRWIN
IRWIN. I HOOVER. LOWENTHAL
LOWENTHAL. I ORTEGA. ORTEGA. I
WARD. WARD I. WICKS WICKS. I.
WILSON. WILSON. NOT VOTING
SEVEN. THAT BILL HAS SEVEN. IT
IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO. MR. MAN
COME UP. WE'RE JUST GOING TO
OPEN THE ROLL ON TWO BILLS
BEFORE YOU GO. SO WE'RE GOING TO
OPEN THE ROLL FOR ABSENT MEMBERS
ON SB 893. PADILLA. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
SB 893, THE VOTE IS FOUR ZERO.
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
BRIAN I BRIAN, I IRWIN SB EIGHT.
PADILLA. OH I IRWIN I HOOVER.
LOWENTHAL. I LOWENTHAL I WARD.
WARD I WICKS. WICKS I WILSON I
WILL OPEN SB 893 I THINK I OH
SORRY WILSON I AND THEN WE'LL
OPEN THE ROLL ON SB. OH WHAT IS
THE COLUMN THAT IS TEN ZERO TEN
ZERO. THAT BILL IS OUT AND WE
WILL LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS, WE WILL OPEN THE
ROLL ON SB 918. UMBERG. MADAM
SECRETARY, THE VOTE IS SEVEN
ZERO. CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
VOTING AYE. BRIAN. BRIAN AYE.
HOOVER WILK. WICKS. AYE WILSON.
UMBERG SB 918 AND I. WILSON.
AYE. YEAH. PERFECT. OKAY I HAVE
FUN. GREAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INDULGENCE. WE HAD TO GET HER
VOTES ON THE RECORD AND NOW WE
WILL TAKE UP SB 1394. MR. MAN.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I WOULD LIKE
TO START BY JUST NOTING THAT WE
WILL BE ACCEPTING THE PROPOSED
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS, AND I WANT
TO THANK THE CHAIR AND HER STAFF
FOR COLLABORATING WITH US ON
THIS BILL. SB 1394 ENHANCES
PROTECTION FOR ABUSE SURVIVORS
BY REGULATING THE USE OF
CONNECTED VEHICLE SERVICES.
CURRENTLY, WHEN ABUSE SURVIVORS
RECEIVE COURT ORDERS OF
POSSESSION OR OWNERSHIP OF A
VEHICLE, VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS
STATE THAT THEY ARE UNWILLING OR
UNABLE TO DISABLE DRIVERS.
ABUSERS ACCESS TO THE SURVIVORS
VEHICLE. THIS MEASURE WOULD
REQUIRE THAT VEHICLE
MANUFACTURERS DISABLE AND
ABUSERS ACCESS TO SUCH
TECHNOLOGY WITHIN A DRIVER'S REQUEST, WITH
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION SUCH AS
PROOF OF LEGAL POSSESSION OF A
VEHICLE OR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
RESTRAINING ORDER THAT AWARDS
VEHICULAR POSSESSION AT THE.
AFTER NEGOTIATING WITH THE CHAIR
AND HER STAFF. RECOGNIZING THE
NEED FOR SOME SURVIVORS TO
IMMEDIATELY FLEE. THIS BILL ALSO
PUTS IN PLACE A PROCESS, IF
TECHNOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE, FOR A
DRIVER TO DISCONNECT THE
CONNECTED VEHICLE SERVICE FROM
INSIDE THE CAR, BALANCING THE
PROTECTION OF SURVIVORS WHILE
ALSO RECOGNIZING THE POTENTIAL
FOR THIS TO BE WEAPONIZED. THE
CONNECTED VEHICLE SERVICE WOULD
REMAIN DISABLED FOR 48 HOURS,
DURING WHICH TIME A SURVIVOR
WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION FOR THE
SERVICE TO REMAIN DISABLED.
OBVIOUSLY, AS VEHICLES BECOME
INCREASINGLY APP CONNECTED,
ABUSIVE PARTNERS CAN USE THIS
TECHNOLOGY TO TRACK, SURVEIL,
STALK, HARASS AND INTIMIDATE
SURVIVORS. SO SUCH REMOTE ACCESS
OFTEN OCCURS WITHOUT THE
SURVIVORS KNOWLEDGE, MAKING IT
IMPERATIVE TO COUNTER THE MISUSE
OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES. SB 1394
SETS FORTH A CLEAR PROCESS FOR A
SURVIVOR TO REQUEST TERMINATION
OF CONNECTED VEHICLE SERVICE AND
SAFEGUARD SURVIVORS FROM
TECHNOLOGICAL ABUSE. CONSISTENT
WITH CALIFORNIA'S DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE PROTECTIONS. I
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF OTHER BILLS ON THIS
SAME ISSUE, AND WE'RE COMMITTED
TO CONTINUING DISCUSSIONS ON
THIS ISSUE DURING THE SUMMER
RECESS WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE. MY
BETTER HALF, PROFESSOR JANE
STOVER, DIRECTOR OF THE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE CLINIC AT UC IRVINE
SCHOOL OF LAW. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. DO YOU HAVE
PERMISSION? OKAY. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
JANE STOVER, AND I'M HONORED TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF SB 1394 ON
BEHALF OF UCI LAW. DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE CLINICS CLIENTS. AS A
BILL CO-SPONSOR WITH END TAB,
WHICH STANDS FOR END TECHNOLOGY
ENABLED ABUSE OVER THE LAST
YEAR, SPONSORS OF SB 1394 WORKED
WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES TO
REPORT ALARMING WAYS IN WHICH
VEHICLE APPS ARE BEING
WEAPONIZED BY ABUSIVE PARTNERS
TO SURVEIL, STALK AND INTIMIDATE
SURVIVORS BY STARTING AND
STOPPING ENGINES, SUMMONING A
CAR TO THEM, RECORDING AUDIO AND
VIDEO, AND EVEN TURNING OFF
ELECTRIC CHARGING CASE EXAMPLES
FROM A BILL. COSPONSORS INCLUDE
A WOMAN IN THE BAY AREA WHOSE
HUSBAND USED THE TESLA APP TO
MONITOR HIS WIFE'S LOCATION,
UNLOCKED, UNLOCK HER CAR DOORS
WHILE IN PUBLIC PARKING SPACES,
AND PLACE A WEAPON IN THE
VEHICLE. DESPITE HAVING A
RESTRAINING ORDER THAT GRANTED
HER SOLE POSSESSION OF THE
VEHICLE, TESLA REFUSED TO
DISABLE THE HUSBAND'S ACCESS TO
THE VEHICLE. APP FEATURES. DUE
TO HIS CO-OWNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA WOMAN. RECENTLY, HER
RESTRAINED, ABUSIVE PARTNER SHUT
OFF HER ABILITY TO CHARGE HER
ELECTRIC CAR EXCEPT WHILE AT HER
OWN HOME ADDRESS. FINALLY,
ANOTHER CLIENT DESCRIBED
VISITATION EXCHANGES AT WHICH
SHE WOULD BRING THE COUPLE'S
CHILD IN. HER EX WOULD LOCK HER
OUT OF THE CAR SHE'D JUST DRIVEN
THERE, LEAVING HER STRANDED.
WE'VE CAREFULLY DESIGNED SB 1394
TO 1 PROTECT SURVIVOR SAFETY BY
LEGALLY REQUIRING MANUFACTURERS
TO RAPIDLY TERMINATE AN ABUSER'S
REMOTE APP, CONNECTED ACCESS TO
A VEHICLE TWO. ACCOUNT FOR
PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR MY CLINIC'S
CLIENTS, THEIR GREATEST ASSET IS
USUALLY THEIR CAR, AND IT'S
THEIR LIFELINE TO SAFETY. SO AS
A LAW PROFESSOR, MYSELF AND YOU
AS LAWMAKERS, WE'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT ALL OF THE PROPERTY RIGHTS
INVOLVED HERE. AND THEN THREE,
SAFEGUARD AGAINST AN ABUSIVE
PARTNER MAKING FALSE CLAIMS OR
WRONGFULLY DISCONNECTING A
SURVIVORS VEHICLE ACCESS. HENCE,
THERE'S A TIMELINE AND REQUISITE
PROOF UNIQUELY IN SB 1394.
FIRST, WITH THE AUTOMATIC
DISCONNECT THAT THIS COMMITTEE
SOUGHT, THE INITIAL PROOF OF
ABUSE FILED WITHIN 48 HOURS, AND
VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS REQUIRED
TO SEVER THAT ACCESS WITHIN ONE
DAY. IF THE AUTOMATIC DISCONNECT
IS NOT TECHNOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE,
FOLLOWED BY PROOF OF LEGAL
POSSESSION OR EXCLUSIVE USE
WITHIN 30 DAYS FOR THAT LONGER
TERM DISCONNECT. IN CONCLUSION,
SB 1394 HAS THE SUPPORT OF A
STRONG STATEWIDE COALITION OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, PRIVACY, TECH
AND LEGAL AGENCIES, AND SB 1394
ISN'T JUST ABOUT EMERGING
TECHNOLOGY, IT'S ABOUT SAFETY,
PRIVACY AND THE RIGHT TO LIVE
AND DRIVE FREE FROM FEAR. WE
RESPECTFULLY URGE YOUR AYE VOTE
THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, NAME AND
AFFILIATION, PLEASE? YACHTY WITH
OAKLAND PRIVACY AND SUPPORT. DAN
FILLS OUT ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA VICTIMS ALLIANCE IN
SUPPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON,
DANIELLE OR DANNY KENDALL KAISER
ON BEHALF OF THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION. WE ARE A
SUPPORT, IF AMENDED POSITION. WE
HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
IMMEDIACY LANGUAGE THAT WAS PUT
IN AS COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS, BUT
WE VERY MUCH LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION.
THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY
PRIMARY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 30S I'M
JUST JOKING. WHOA IT'S NOT THAT
LATE, MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, JOHN MOFFATT, ON
BEHALF OF THE ALLIANCE FOR
AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, YOU KNOW,
I JUST WANT TO START BY SAYING
IT'S WE'VE HAD A LOT OF
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SENATOR'S
OFFICE AND THE SPONSORS OF THE
BILL OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF
WEEKS, VERY GOOD, VERY REWARDING
CONVERSATIONS. I CAN'T THINK OF
ANYTHING THAT THAT WAS SAID THAT
THAT WE DON'T THAT WE DON'T
AGREE WITH, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM
OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE THINK IT'S
VERY IMPORTANT THAT, YOU KNOW,
RECOGNIZING THERE ARE THREE
BILLS OUT THERE THAT USED TO ALL
APPROACH THIS IN VERY DIFFERENT
WAYS. NOW, THERE ARE ALL
STARTING TO APPROACH IT IN THE
SAME WAY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW,
NOW THAT WE CAN GET TO THE POINT
WHERE WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION
OVER THE SUMMER RECESS ABOUT HOW
DO WE TAKE THESE THREE BILLS,
GET TO ONE THING THAT WORKS
WHERE THE DOCUMENTATION IS, IS
THERE, THAT THE BILLS ACCURATELY
REFLECT THE TECHNOLOGY THAT IS
AVAILABLE AND WHAT ISN'T, AND
ALSO AND THEN LASTLY, YOU KNOW,
FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE
RECOGNIZE THE ROLE THAT WE HAVE
IN THIS SPACE. AND AND, YOU KNOW
, IF, IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THE
LEGISLATURE AND THESE LAWS TO
WANT US TO ON THE SIDE OF
PROTECTING SURVIVORS, WE'RE MORE
THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT. BUT WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO
WAYWARD ABUSER OR SOMEONE ELSE
WHO WANTS TO COME SUE US AFTER
WE, YOU KNOW, AFTER WE TAKE
THOSE ACTIONS. AND SO I THINK
ALL THINGS THAT, THAT WE'VE
DISCUSSED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL
WEEKS WITH BOTH THE COMMITTEE AS
WELL AS THE AUTHOR AND THE
SPONSORS AND, WE LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUING THAT CONVERSATION
OVER THE SUMMER RECESS AND
GETTING DOWN TO ONE CONCEPT THAT
THAT CAN WORK FOR EVERYBODY AND,
AND THAT WE CAN IMPLEMENT AND BE
A PART OF THE SOLUTION ON THIS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION, MR.
VICE CHAIR ROBERT HARRELL WITH
THE CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIA, WE HAVE NO POSITION
ON THIS BILL. WOULD JUST LIKE TO
NOTE, HAVING WORKED WITH THE
AUTHOR ON A WIDE RANGE OF ISSUES
THE PAST FEW YEARS, CONSUMER
FEDERATION CALIFORNIA IS THE
SPONSOR OF THE WEBER BILL, WHICH
WAS ONE OF THE OTHER BILLS IN
THIS AREA THAT WE'RE COMMITTED
TO WORKING THIS OUT BETWEEN THIS
BILL, SENATOR MIN'S BILL AND
THERE'S ALSO SENATOR ASHBY'S
BILL, SB 1000, WHICH I THINK
THIS COMMITTEE HEARD TWO WEEKS
AGO FROM MY MEMORY, SERVES ME
CORRECTLY. IT FEELS LIKE THE
COMMITTEE'S APPROACH HAS
MODIFIED, EVOLVED. I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE RIGHT WORD IS A LITTLE
BIT ON THIS, BUT WE'RE COMMITTED
TO WORKING THIS OUT, WITH ALL
THE OTHER AUTHORS, AND ON THE
BILLS AND SO I JUST THOUGHT IT
WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMITTEE
TO HEAR THAT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES
THERE'S BILLS HEADING TOWARDS A
CAR CRASH AND BEHIND THE SCENES,
EVERYBODY'S ROOTING FOR OR
AGAINST THE CAR CRASH. SO THAT'S
NOT GOING TO HAPPEN HERE, PUN
INTENDED. SINCE WE'RE DEALING
WITH VEHICLE PRIVACY, THAT WE'RE
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THIS
WITH THE OTHER AUTHORS AND, AND
ORGANIZATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHERS? ALL RIGHT, I'LL
TURN IT BACK UP HERE TO MY
COLLEAGUES. ANY QUESTIONS? MISS
DIXON, SENATOR MIN, YOU HAVE
EXCELLENT WITNESSES. THANK YOU.
APPRECIATE IT. MUCH BETTER THAN
I AM. I APPRECIATE, AND THIS. I
KNOW THAT THIS IS YOUR AREA OF
EMPHASIS, COULD YOU GIVE ME A
LITTLE HISTORY? ON WHAT I
COULDN'T REALLY HEAR IF THERE
WAS DATA THAT REALLY SUPPORTS
THIS, BUT GIVE ME A LITTLE
BACKGROUND OF CONTEXT FOR WHY
YOU'RE, HELPING ON THIS BILL.
YEAH. SO I'VE BEEN TEACHING
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE LAW CLINICS
FOR 20 YEARS NOW. YOU HAVE
FOCUSED YOUR RESEARCH. YOU'RE AN
EXPERT, I KNOW THAT. OH, NO,
THANK YOU. AND HAVE ADVISED THE
BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ON
TECHNOLOGY ENABLED ABUSE ISSUES
AS WELL. OUR CO-SPONSOR AND TAB
HAS. AND SO OVER THE YEARS,
WE'VE SEEN HOW ABUSE HAS EVOLVED
IN TERMS OF ALL OF THE THINGS
THAT MAKE OUR LIVES EASIER.
ALSO, THINGS THAT CAN BE
WEAPONIZED. AND SO THROUGHOUT MY
PRACTICE, THEN I'M INCREASINGLY
SEEING THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY.
SEVERAL OF THE EXAMPLES THAT I
GAVE. SO WE HAVE THESE DIFFERENT
DOCUMENTED EXAMPLES AS REPORTED
NOW IN THE NEW YORK TIMES AND
REUTERS. IT'S HARD TO COME UP
WITH SPECIFIC STATISTICS, AND
SOMETIMES INDIVIDUALS DON'T EVEN
KNOW THAT THEY'RE BEING TRACKED.
RIGHT. AS WE THINK ABOUT ALL OF
THE DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGY, BUT WE
KNOW THIS IS A PERVASIVE ISSUE
AND ONE TO REALLY THEN THINK
ABOUT ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENTS
THAT WE'RE CREATING, HOW THEY
COULD BE WEAPONIZED. AND SO
THAT'S ALSO MY CONCERN IN TERMS
OF TRYING TO GET THE EXACTLY THE
RIGHT FIT HERE IN TERMS OF
REQUISITE PROOF, NOT WANTING FOR
MY CLIENTS TO HAVE THEIR ACCESS
TO A CAR TERMINATED FOR A WEEK
AT A TIME JUST BASED ON
ATTESTATION, FOR EXAMPLE. AND SO
FIGURING OUT WHAT IS THAT
REQUISITE PROOF TO BE ABLE TO
OFFER. SO YOU SEE THE LIST OF
ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT,
INCLUDING CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP
TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SOME
DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGY AGENCIES,
DIFFERENT LEGAL, ETC, THAT ARE
COMING TOGETHER IN SUPPORT OF
THIS APPROACH. BUT DO WE HAVE
DATA THAT SHOWS HOW MANY VICTIMS
ARE FROM IF IT WAS PROLONGED OR
THE CAR DEALERS DIDN'T
DISCONNECT THE GPA WITH THE
AUTOMATIC TECHNOLOGY? AND WE
HAVE HUNDREDS OF EXAMPLES. AND
SO WE DO HAVE HUNDREDS OF
DIFFERENT CASES. BUT IN TERMS OF
SAYING HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY'RE
HAVING TO APPROACH THIS RIGHT
NOW, SURVIVOR BY SURVIVOR,
APPROACHING A VEHICLE
MANUFACTURER AND EVEN WITH COURT
ORDERS CURRENTLY WHO ARE THEN
SAYING NO, THAT PERSON STILL IS
ON JOINT TITLE FOR EXAMPLE. AND
IF I MIGHT JUST INTERJECT, IS IT
CORRECT? I'M GOING TO DEFER TO
MY WITNESS, BUT I JUST WANT TO
REFRAME THIS. I DON'T BELIEVE
AND I COULD BE WRONG, THAT THAT
RIGHT NOW THERE'S LIKE A
STANDARD WAY TO TRACK THIS TYPE
OF DATA BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A
STANDARD REPORT FOR WHEN THIS
HAPPENS. SO IT'S NECESSARILY
ANECDOTAL. IS THAT CORRECT OKAY
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND WE KNOW IT
HAPPENS. WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW
OFTEN IT HAPPENS BECAUSE IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE SEE ABOUT
ANECDOTALLY. OKAY. WELL THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR PURSUING THIS.
GOOD GOOD. NICE TO SEE YOU. BYE
BYE TO SEE YOU TOO. THANK YOU.
GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL
RIGHT, WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR. AYE,
VOTE. PERFECT. YOU'VE CONVINCED
ME WITH THAT. SO WE HAVE A
MOTION. OH SECOND, WE HAVE A
MOTION. AND A SECOND. SO WOULD
YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE? ITEM
NUMBER 21, SB 1394 BY SENATOR
MEN. THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS AS
AMENDED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. BAUER-KAHAN
PATTERSON. PATTERSON. I, BRIAN.
DIXON. DIXON. AYE ERWIN. ERWIN.
AYE. HOOVER. LOWENTHAL
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA. WARD
WICKS. WILSON. HIGH. WILSON. AYE
THANK YOU. FIVE. YES. WE'LL LET
YOU GO, IT'S FIVE ZERO. WE'LL
LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. GOOD JOB LEGISLATING.
FOR. ALL RIGHT. SENATOR BECKER,
I FEEL LIKE I'VE SEEN YOU A LOT
TODAY. YEAH, ARE YOU DOING AN SB
1223? YES, I AM PERFECT. ALL
RIGHT, WELL, WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY, WE'RE READY FOR YOU. FOR
ONE HERE. YEAH. CAN YOU TELL
WHAT I'M THINKING RIGHT NOW? NO,
NO, YOU'RE CONFUSED. THANK YOU.
THAT WAS A JOKE. OH SORRY. OH,
NO RIGHTS JOKE. IT'S A GOOD ONE.
YEAH. GOOD ONE. THAT'S RIGHT.
THANK YOU. MEMBERS, NO. IT'S
BEEN A LONG DAY AND A LOT TO GO
THROUGH, THIS BILL IS ONE THAT,
YOU KNOW, IF WE REALLY DID IT
JUSTICE, YOU WOULD SORT OF FEEL
THAT KIND OF HAIR STANDING UP IN
YOUR NECK AND YOU'RE THINKING,
WOW, IS THIS REALLY HAPPENING?
IS THIS SCIENCE FICTION, BUT I'M
HERE TO TELL YOU THAT THAT IT'S
NOT. AND THAT THIS IS NECESSARY,
THIS BILL, THE CALIFORNIA NEURAL
RIGHTS ACT, AMENDS THE
CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PRIVACY ACT
TO ENHANCE PROTECTIONS FOR
CALIFORNIA'S NEURAL DATA, YOU
MAY HAVE HEARD OF NEURALINK.
THAT WAS THE ELON MUSK COMPANY.
IMPLANTS A CHIP, IN SOMEONE'S
BRAIN THAT SENDS A SIGNAL AND
TRANSMITS THEM TO COMPUTER,
ENABLING CONTROL OF THE COMPUTER
THROUGH USER'S THOUGHTS,
ACTUALLY, DEVICES LIKE THAT ARE
COVERED BY THE CALIFORNIA
PRIVACY ACT. THEY'RE CONSIDERED
MEDICAL DEVICES. HOWEVER,
THERE'S A CLASS OF DEVICES NOW
THAT ARE, NOT COVERED THAT ARE
NONINVASIVE. I JUST HAVE A
VIDEO. I SENT IT TO A COUPLE OF
YOU, ON YOUTUBE OF A COMPANY IN
AUSTRALIA DEMONSTRATING THOUGHT
TO TEXT, THOUGHT TO TEXT. AND
IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, FULLY
ACCURATE TODAY. IT'S ABOUT 40 TO
60% ACCURATE. TODAY THIS
COMPANY'S TECHNOLOGY. BUT YOU
CAN IMAGINE WHAT'S COMING IN A
COUPLE OF YEARS. AND AS WE'LL
HEAR FROM OUR EXPERTS, THE THEY
CAN ALREADY WITH, YOU KNOW,
COMPANIES THAT HAVE DATABASES OF
LOTS AND LOTS OF SCANS, WITH
TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TODAY CAN
TELL SOMEBODY IF SOMEONE HAS
MOST PSYCHIATRIC CONDITIONS,
EVEN INDICATIONS THEY CAN TELL
IF SOMEONE HAS ALZHEIMER'S. AND
RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, THERE'S JUST
NO PRIVACY WITH THIS DATA. THERE
ARE SOME OF THESE COMPANIES HAVE
LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS OF, SCANS
OF PEOPLE'S BRAINS. THERE'S
ABOUT 30 PRODUCTS ON THE MARKET
TODAY, AGAIN, THAT ARE
NONINVASIVE NEUROTECHNOLOGY AND
ARE NOT, REGULATED. AND, AGAIN,
LEFT UNCHECKED, THESE THESE
COMPANIES CAN HAVE COMPILE
MASSIVE DATABASES OF THESE KINDS
OF BRAIN IMAGES AND HAVE TWO
GREAT WITNESSES TODAY. ONE, WHEN
I HAD IN THE SENATE JUDICIARY,
IT WAS ONE OF THE LEADING
NEUROSCIENCES IN THE WORLD. RAFA
AND HE SAID HE HAD HIS SORT OF
HIS LIKE OPPENHEIMER MOMENT WAS
WHEN HE REALIZED HE WAS NOT ONLY
READING THE THOUGHTS OF MICE,
BUT ACTUALLY COULD IMPLANT
THOUGHTS INTO MICE. AGAIN, THIS
IS NOT SCIENCE FICTION. IF YOU
TALK TO A LEADER IN NEUROSCIENCE
NEUROSCIENTISTS AND YOU TALK TO
OUR WITNESSES, THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT'S AVAILABLE IN THE LABS,
HAPPENING IN THE LABS TODAY, AND
THIS IS A CHANCE FOR CALIFORNIA
TO GET OUT IN FRONT BY DEFINING
NEURAL DATA AND CLASSIFYING
NEURAL DATA SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
CONSUMER PRIVACY ACT. SO WITH ME
TODAY, I HAVE SEAN PYZDROWSKI,
WHO'S A BOARD CERTIFIED
NEUROLOGIST, NEUROLOGIST AND
MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE NEURO
RIGHTS FOUNDATION, AND JARED
GENSER, WHO IS AN INTERNATIONAL
HUMAN RIGHTS ATTORNEY AND
CO-FOUNDER OF THE NEURO RIGHTS
FOUNDATION. THANK YOU. GREAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BRINGING
THIS INTERESTING BILL, WE HAVE
TWO MINUTES EACH. THANK YOU.
YEAH, WELL, THANK YOU, SENATOR.
THANK YOU. SENATOR THANK YOU,
COMMITTEE CHAIRS AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SEAN
PYZDROWSKI, AND I'M A CLINICAL
NEUROLOGIST, MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF
THE NEURO NEURO RIGHTS
FOUNDATION. I'M HERE TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 1223,
I LEARNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE. I
WAS APPROACHED BY, SOMEBODY IN
OUR RESEARCH OFFICE ABOUT A
PROJECT USING ONE OF THESE
CONSUMER DEVICES TO DO MEDICAL
GRADE RESEARCH, AND THAT KIND OF
STRUCK ME AS SOMEWHAT ODD THAT,
YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD HAVE DEVICES
ON THE CONSUMER MARKET THAT
WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO ANYONE
THAT I COULD THEN IN TURN, DO
MEDICAL GRADE RESEARCH WITH. AND
SO THAT WAS KIND OF MY ENTRY
POINT, AND SO WHAT ARE WE
TALKING ABOUT WITH THESE
CONSUMER DEVICES? WELL, MOST OF
THEM ARE WEARABLE, HEADBANDS
WITH EEG SENSORS WITH THE SAME
CAPABILITY TO COLLECT THE SAME
BRAINWAVES THAT I MIGHT IN A
RESEARCH STUDY. SOME EVEN ALLOW
YOU TO CONTROL YOUR COMPUTER
WITH YOUR MIND WITH A BRAIN
COMPUTER INTERFACE. AND THIS IS
VERY EARLY STAGES. AND SO WE'RE
KIND OF TALKING ABOUT
ANALOGOUSLY TO KIND OF LIKE THE
EARLY STAGES OF THE INTERNET,
LIKE THE DIAL UP PHASE OF THE
INTERNET WHERE ANYONE CAN SORT
OF HAVE THESE DEVICES, BUT JUST
BECOMING MORE AND MORE
SOPHISTICATED, OVER TIME, MOST
OF THESE DEVICES ARE MARKETED
FOR THINGS LIKE WELLNESS AND
MOOD TO IMPROVE YOUR SLEEP. AND
FOR THESE TYPES OF INDICATIONS,
BUT IF YOU CAN SEE WHERE THINGS
ARE HEADED, AS THE SENATOR
MENTIONED, 40% ACCURACY THOUGHT
TO TEXT WITH THE SAME KIND OF,
MEDICAL GRADE EEG DATA WITH
THESE DEVICES IN A COUPLE OF
YEARS, WE'RE PROBABLY TALKING 80
TO 90. AND SO WHILE I SEE THE
PROMISE OF THESE DEVICES AND HOW
THEY'RE GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE
HEALTHCARE AND CHANGE SOCIETY
AND JUST FUNDAMENTALLY ALTER
WHAT IT MEANS, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE
A BRAIN, I'M ALSO HERE AS A
PATIENT ADVOCATE, AND NEARLY
HALF OF THESE COMPANIES, WITHIN
THIS CONSUMER MARKET, ARE
LOCATED IN CALIFORNIA, THERE ARE
7 MILLION CALIFORNIANS WITH
ANXIETY, 3 MILLION WITH
DEPRESSION, HALF A MILLION WITH
OCD, 175,000 WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA.
YOU GET THE PICTURE. THESE ARE
ALL PEOPLE AT RISK IF THEY WERE
TO PURCHASE ONE OF THESE
DEVICES. AND I TAKE CARE OF
PATIENTS ALL THE TIME WHO HAVE
THESE KIND OF CONDITIONS, AND
THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO COME TO
ME AND KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GETTING
INTO WHEN THEY'RE GIVING AWAY
SOME OF THIS MOST SENSITIVE DATA
THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY GIVE
AWAY TO ANYONE. AND SO, WHILE WE
NEUROLOGISTS TEND TO BE A LITTLE
CEREBRAL, YOU KNOW, NOT TO MAKE
A PUN OR ANYTHING, BUT I WANT TO
SPEAK TO YOU FROM THE HEART
TODAY, TO SUPPORT SENATE BILL
1223, BECAUSE IT PROVIDES A
COMMON SENSE SOLUTION TO THE
THESE, YOU KNOW, THIS CATEGORY
OF DATA THAT'S FALLING OUTSIDE
OF CURRENT PROTECTIONS. AND
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TESTIFY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
THANKS SO MUCH, ASSEMBLYMAN AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, MY
NAME IS JARED GENSER. I'M AN
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
LAWYER, THOUGH I'M BEST KNOWN
FOR MY WORK FOR POLITICAL
PRISONERS AROUND THE WORLD, I'VE
BEEN SPENDING THE LAST FOUR
YEARS WORKING, INTENSELY TO TRY
TO ADDRESS EMERGING TECHNOLOGY,
LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS, TO
UNDERSTAND THE RISKS ASSOCIATED
WITH CONSUMER NEUROTECHNOLOGIES.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND
THAT THE REGULATORY LANDSCAPE
WITHIN WHICH THESE DEVICES
OPERATE AS NOTED, YOU HAVE, YOU
KNOW, A BRAIN, YOU HAVE BRAIN
COMPUTER INTERFACES THAT ARE
IMPLANTABLE IN THE HUMAN BRAIN
THAT ARE ALREADY REGULATED AS
MEDICAL DEVICES AND COVERED
UNDER HIPAA AND CALIFORNIA STATE
PRIVACY LAWS. BUT WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HERE ARE 30
CONSUMER NEUROTECH PRODUCTS THAT
ARE AVAILABLE TODAY THAT ARE ALL
DOWNLOADING MEDICAL GRADE NEURAL
DATA FROM GIGABYTES TO TERABYTES
OF THAT DATA, ONE OF THE
COMPANIES, ONE OF THE LARGEST
COMPANIES, FOR EXAMPLE, SAYS IT
HAS 100,000,000 HOURS OF A
PERSON'S BRAIN SCAN AND THE
PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT OUR,
OUR ORGANIZATION, THE NEURAL
RIGHTS FOUNDATION, PUBLISHED A
STUDY IN APRIL, WHICH I THINK
HAS BEEN CIRCULATED. AND YOU CAN
SEE AS WELL WHERE WE LOOKED AT
THE USER AGREEMENTS ACROSS THOSE
30 COMPANIES. AND WHAT WE FOUND
WAS BENCHMARKING THEM AGAINST
GLOBAL STANDARDS, INCLUDING THE
CCPA, WAS THAT THERE WAS A
DRAMATIC, GAP BETWEEN, THE
PRIVACY RIGHTS GIVEN TO USERS OF
THESE DEVICES AND WHAT MIGHT BE
REQUIRED BY LAW. AND THIS IS
OBVIOUSLY INCREDIBLY WORRYING
BECAUSE 29 OUT OF THESE 30
COMPANIES ARE BASICALLY
HARVESTING MASSIVE QUANTITIES OF
NEURAL DATA THAT CAN BE USED
RIGHT NOW FOR A WIDE ARRAY OF
PURPOSES, SIMPLY THE EEG
SCANNERS THAT ARE MEDICAL GRADE
THAT YOU USE IN THESE DEVICES
CAN BE USED AS THE SENATOR SAID.
AND AS DOCTOR BRZOZOWSKI SAID,
TO IDENTIFY LOTS OF DIFFERENT
BRAIN DISEASES. AND, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY INCREDIBLY
SENSITIVE INFORMATION, AND YOU
KNOW WHAT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
IS ENORMOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS AND
COMPANIES THAT WANT TO SELL
THEIR PRODUCTS INTO THE
CALIFORNIA MARKET. AND WHAT
WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS
BRINGING THAT DATA, WITHIN THE
FRAMEWORK OF THE CCPA, JUST
LASTLY, I'LL CONCLUDE BY SAYING
THAT THE REASON WHY IT IS NOT
COVERED TODAY IS BECAUSE NEURAL
DATA IS ELECTRICAL IN
ORIENTATION. NOT, BIOLOGICAL,
NOT BIOMETRIC, AND NOT GENETIC.
AND THE CCPA COVERS, OF COURSE,
BIOMETRIC INFORMATION AS WELL AS
GENETIC INFORMATION, BUT IT
ACTUALLY UNINTENTIONALLY HAS
THIS MAJOR LOOPHOLE, LIKE ALL
OTHER STATE PRIVACY LAWS. THAT
DOES NOT COVER THIS KIND OF
MEDICAL GRADE NEURAL DATA BEING
GATHERED BY CONSUMER DEVICES.
COLORADO IS THE FIRST STATE TO
PASS AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR
PRIVACY LAW, THAT WAS SIGNED
ONLY A FEW MONTHS BACK. AND
OBVIOUSLY, CALIFORNIA IS THE
MOST IMPORTANT STATE IN THE
COUNTRY WHEN IT COMES TO
PROACTIVELY ADDRESSING THESE
ISSUES, GIVEN HOW RAPIDLY THE
TECHNOLOGY IS ADVANCING. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER,
WITNESSES? METOOS GEORGE SOROS
WITH THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT? THANK
YOU. GREAT THANKS. YACHTY WITH
OAKLAND PRIVACY AND SUPPORT.
OKAY. ARE THERE ANY, PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET. AND WE ARE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED, UNLESS
AMENDED TO SB 1223. FIRST, I
JUST WANT TO STATE, CLEARLY, OUR
MEMBER COMPANIES PLACE A HIGH
PRIORITY ON CONSUMER PRIVACY.
WE'RE FULLY COMMITTED TO
SECURING PRIVACY AND SECURITY
FOR OUR CONSUMERS. WE COMPLY
FULLY WITH THE CCPA, MANY OF THE
OTHER STATES THAT HAVE PASSED
COMPREHENSIVE DATA PRIVACY LAWS,
GDPR, MANY PRIVACY STANDARDS
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. OUR
COMPANIES ENGAGE IN IN WIDE
PRACTICES TO PROVIDE CONSUMERS
WITH NOTICE AS WELL AS CHOICES
AND CONTROL OVER THEIR DATA. WE
ALSO FULLY BELIEVE THAT THESE
LAWS NEED TO ADAPT WITH CHANGING
TECHNOLOGIES AND HAVE NO ISSUE
WITH THE INTENT TO PROVIDE
GREATER PROTECTIONS FOR DEVICES
THAT HAVE DIRECT CONNECTIONS OR
MEASURE BRAINWAVES TO DECODE
THOUGHTS. WE DO HAVE A CONCERN
ABOUT THE BREADTH OF
TECHNOLOGIES THAT COULD BE
INCLUDED UNDER THE DEFINITIONS
OF NEURAL DATA. WE'VE SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS TO TAILOR THEM TO
TECHNOLOGIES THAT DIRECTLY
MEASURE BRAIN ACTIVITY. WE ARE
CURRENTLY REVIEWING THE
AMENDMENTS AND EVALUATING THEM
TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY
ADEQUATELY ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS,
AND HOPE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
THAT FEEDBACK DIRECTLY TO THE
AUTHOR AND TO THIS COMMITTEE AS
WELL. BUT AS WE'RE LOOKING AT
THE BILL AS CURRENTLY IN PRINT,
WE WANT TO ADD JUST A LITTLE
MORE FULLY EXPLAIN OUR
AMENDMENTS. WE WANT TO MAINTAIN
THE FOCUS OF THIS BILL TO THE
RISKIEST KINDS OF INFORMATION,
INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRAIN
ITSELF. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING
THAT WE ALL AGREE ON AND WE
DON'T. BUT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO
DO IS UNINTENTIONALLY STIFLE
OTHER KINDS OF LOW RISK,
BENEFICIAL TECHNOLOGIES, WE
THINK THAT BEING OVERINCLUSIVE
IN THIS WAY IS ALSO UNLIKELY TO
BENEFIT CONSUMERS, AS IT WILL
LIKELY RESULT IN MORE
INFORMATION BEING CLASSIFIED AS
NEURAL DATA THAT ISN'T TRULY
NEURAL DATA, CAUSING CONSUMERS
WHO RECEIVE A NOTICE OF THE
COLLECTION TO BELIEVE MUCH MORE
SENSITIVE INFORMATION IS BEING
GATHERED THAN ACTUALLY IS. SO
IMAGINE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE
BUYING A FITNESS WEARABLE OR
HEADPHONES THAT HAVE SPATIAL
AUDIO, AND THE COMPANY HAS TO
DISCLOSE THAT IT'S COLLECTING
NEURAL DATA, I DON'T THINK YOU
WOULD BUY THAT PRODUCT IF IT'S
NOT ACTUALLY COLLECTING THAT
THAT INFORMATION. AND SO THAT'S
WHERE OUR AMENDMENTS, AND OUR
INTEREST LIE, AND AS I
MENTIONED, WE'RE CONTINUING TO
REVIEW THE AMENDMENTS AND WE'LL
EVALUATE THEM. IN THE IN, IN DUE
COURSE. SO FOR THOSE REASONS,
WE'RE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED
UNLESS AMENDED TO SB 1223. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
GOOD AFTERNOON. NAOMI PEDRONI
WITH THE COMPUTER AND
COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE AN OPPOSED
UNLESS AMENDED POSITION ALSO AND
WOULD ECHO THE COMMENTS OF
TECHNET. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO OTHERS,
I'LL BRING IT BACK UP HERE. ANY
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM MY
COLLEAGUES, MISS IRWIN? YEAH, I
GOT THE VIDEO THAT YOU SENT, AND
IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE SCIENCE
FICTION. THE TECHNOLOGY IS
MOVING. SO INCREDIBLY FAST. AND
I THINK AS AMERICANS, WELL AS
THE REST OF THE WORLD, WE'RE
REALLY FAR BEHIND IN PROTECTING
THAT SENSITIVE INFORMATION. SO I
DO REALLY APPRECIATE YOU MOVING
AHEAD AND MAKING SURE TO
CLASSIFY THIS NEURAL DATA
APPROPRIATELY, FOR ONCE IN TIME,
BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S
WIDESPREAD YET THAT YOU CAN
THINK AND ACTUALLY HAVE ALL YOUR
THOUGHTS. TRANSLATED. BUT I DO
APPRECIATE WHAT THE OPPOSITION
IS SAYING. MAKE SURE TO, TO
NARROW THE BILL, TO NOT INCLUDE
KIND OF THESE, THESE OTHER
POTENTIAL, FUTURE INNOVATIONS.
SO, APPRECIATE ALL YOUR WORK ON
THIS ISSUE. THANK THANK YOU. ANY
OTHERS? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE,
IS THERE A MOTION? IS A MOTION.
AND A SECOND, GREAT. WOULD YOU
LIKE A DO A CLOSING STATEMENT?
YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY, FIRST OF
ALL, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR ITS ANALYSIS, FOR
ITS VERY IN-DEPTH, THOROUGH, AND
ALSO, HUMOROUS ANALYSIS LEADING
OFF WITH THE PINK FLOYD, THE
TRIAL, QUOTE THERE. SO, ANYWAY,
JUST, IT'S JUST A GREAT HAS A
CHANCE TO THOROUGHLY READ
THROUGH IT WITH ALL THE BILLS
GOING ON. IT'S A GREAT ANALYSIS,
APPRECIATE THE WITNESSES HAVE
TRAVELED FROM FROM, NEAR AND
FAR. TO, TO BE HERE BECAUSE WE
THINK THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.
AND TO YOUR POINT, ACTUALLY, THE
COUNTRY OF CHILE IS LOOKING AT
PUTTING THIS INTO THEIR
CONSTITUTION, ACTUALLY, NEURAL
RIGHTS INTO THEIR CONSTITUTION.
SO DO COMMIT TO CONTINUING TO
WORK WITH. AND I DO APPRECIATE,
TECHNET IN THE OPPOSITION. YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
THEM. LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING
TO DO THAT. AND, WITH, WITH
THAT. I KNOW IT'S A LONG NIGHT.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AYE
VOTE. PERFECT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND,
TAKING ROLL. ALL RIGHT. ITEM
NUMBER 13, SB 1223, BY SENATOR
BECKER. THE MOTION IS DUE. PASS
TO APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
B¢O. BAUER-KAHAN. PATTERSON.
PATTERSON AYE. BRIAN. DIXON.
DIXON. AYE. IRWIN. IRWIN. AYE.
HOOVER LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL.
AYE. ORTEGA WARD. WICKS. WILSON
WILSON. AYE FIVE. ALL RIGHT.
THAT'S FIVE ZERO. NEED SOME
MORE? BUT WE'LL LEAVE IT. WE'LL
LEAVE IT OPEN. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
SENATOR THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. WELL WE'RE GOING TO. BREAK
. ALL RIGHT, SENATOR WAHAB, ARE
YOU DOING AN SB 981? YES ALL
RIGHT. PERFECT, WELL, WE'RE
READY WHENEVER YOU ARE READY.
THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES AND
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. I ACCEPT
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND
THANK COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
WORKING WITH ME. SB 981 REQUIRES
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO
PROVIDE CALIFORNIANS WITH A
REPORTING MECHANISM FOR DIGITAL
IDENTITY THEFT, WHICH IS DEFINED
BY THIS BILL AS DIGITIZED,
SEXUALLY EXPLICIT IMAGES OR
VIDEOS THAT ARE POSTED WITHOUT
THE CONSENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS. SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS. WE NEED TO RESPOND TO
REPORTS OF DIGITAL IDENTITY
THEFT, PROVIDE TIMELY UPDATES TO
REPORTERS, AND DETERMINE IF THE
REPORTED CONTENT CONSTITUTES
DIGITAL IDENTITY THEFT. AS
DEFINED BY THIS BILL, SB 981
ENSURES THAT REPORTED CONTENT IS
TEMPORARILY BLOCKED UNTIL A
DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY
THE PLATFORM, AND IF IT IS FOUND
TO BE A FORM OF DIGITAL IDENTITY
THEFT, THE CONTENT WILL BE
IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM THE
PLATFORM, PREVENTING FURTHER
HARM AND EXPLOITATION. THIS BILL
IS ESPECIALLY SIGNIFICANT FOR
YOUNG WOMEN WHO ARE
DISPROPORTIONATELY TARGETED BY
UNAUTHORIZED, DIGITIZED,
SEXUALLY EXPLICIT IMAGES. SB 981
IS A FIRST STEP IN DEFINING AND
REFORMING DIGITAL IDENTITY
THEFT, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
RETURNING TO THIS COMMITTEE IN
THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE CYCLE AND
WORKING WITH YOUR COMMITTEE
STAFF WITH ROBUST LEGISLATION
BUILDING UPON THIS BILL, I DO
WANT TO INTRODUCE TWO OF MY
WITNESSES, DANIEL. I'M GONNA
MESS IT UP. I DO IT EVERY TIME.
RIGHT, PHYLLIS SATO WITH THE LA
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND
DYLAN HOFFMAN WITH TECHNET.
PERFECT. THANK YOU. YOU EACH
HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANKS, MISTER
CHAIR MEMBERS, AS THE SENATOR
INDICATED, THIS IS A GROWING
PROBLEM. AS THE BOTH THE QUALITY
AND THE AVAILABILITY OF THIS
COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE
THESE DEEPFAKE, IDENTITY THEFT
IMAGES BECOME MORE AND MORE
AVAILABLE. WE ARE SEEING
LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
OF VICTIMS, IN A RECENT,
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, FROM TWO
YEARS AGO, THAT ONE
INVESTIGATION UNCOVERED OVER
100,000 VICTIMS, DEEPFAKE
TECHNOLOGY TO DO THESE TYPES OF,
DIRTY TRICKS. THERE'S BEEN A LOT
OF TALK ABOUT THE POLITICAL
DANGERS THAT THIS POSE, BUT THE
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN
OVERWHELMINGLY THAT THE VAST
MAJORITY OF THIS TECHNOLOGY IS
USED TO TARGET WOMEN. RESEARCH
HAS CONSISTENTLY FOUND THAT
ABOUT 90 TO 95% OF THE DEEPFAKE
IMAGES ONLINE ARE OF
NON-CONSENSUAL, AND THAT ABOUT
90% OF THAT IS OF WOMEN. HARM
CAUSED BY THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY
IS WELL KNOWN. THE VICTIMS ARE
AT RISK FOR BOTH NEGATIVE SHORT
AND LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES DUE
TO THE TRAUMA OF FEAR,
INSTABILITY, INTERRUPTED
RELATIONSHIP ATTACHMENTS THAT
HAVE CAUSED THAT. THIS CAUSES
GRIEF AND, FEAR OF SUBSEQUENT
VICTIMIZATION. THIS RESULTS IN
VICTIMS SUFFERING FROM PTSD,
CHRONIC HEALTH PROBLEMS, MENTAL
ILLNESS, SUBSTANCE ABUSE, AND
SOME OF THE VICTIMS, HAVE
DIFFICULTIES MAINTAINING THEIR
ACADEMIC AND EMPLOYMENT STATUS,
AND IN THE WORST CASES,
UNFORTUNATELY, IN LOS ANGELES
COUNTY, WE'VE SEEN SEVERAL
VICTIMS WHO HAVE ULTIMATELY
COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE OF THE
MENTAL HEALTH, TRAUMA THAT THIS
HAS CAUSED. AS THE SENATOR
INDICATED, THIS BILL WILL JUST
REQUIRE THE SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS TO TEMPORARILY BLOCK,
ACCESS TO THESE IMAGES. IT'LL
LET THE VICTIMS, NOT HAVE THAT
FEAR THAT THESE IMAGES ARE JUST
GOING TO GET DUPLICATED AND
REPRODUCED ON SITE AFTER SITE.
RIGHT NOW, THE LEGAL SYSTEM
DOESN'T PROVIDE MUCH IN WAY OF
REMEDIES FOR THE VAST MAJORITY
OF THESE CASES IN THE CIVIL LAW.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, IN THE
CRIMINAL CASE, YOU KNOW, THESE
CASES, DEPENDING ON THE EXTENT
OF THE CASE, CAN TAKE MONTHS. IF
NOT YEARS TO ADJUDICATE. SO THE
VICTIMS ARE LEFT WITHOUT
REMEDIES IN A TIMELY FASHION. SO
THAT'S THE REASON WE ARE PROUD
TO SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIR. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, DYLAN HOFFMAN
AND PROUD SUPPORT OF SB 981. OUR
COMPANIES ARE STRONGLY
SUPPORTIVE OF THE AUTHOR'S
EFFORTS TO ERADICATE ONLINE SEX
TRAFFICKING, THE DISTRIBUTION OF
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL, AND
NON-CONSENSUAL INTIMATE IMAGERY
WERE ALSO WANT TO COMMEND HER ON
HER EFFORTS ON SB 933 SB 926,
BOTH OF WHICH ARE ON CONSENT
TODAY. WE ALSO PROUDLY SUPPORT
BOTH OF THOSE BILLS AS WELL, OUR
PLATFORMS HAVE BEEN AT THE
FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPING NEW
TECHNOLOGIES TO HELP AID IN THE
DETECTION AND REMOVAL OF
DEEPFAKE CONTENT, OFTEN BEFORE
IT HAS EVEN BEEN VIEWED BY A
USER, THEY ALSO HAVE STRONG
POLICIES AGAINST THE POSTING AND
DISTRIBUTION OF THIS TERRIBLE
TYPE OF CONTENT, WHICH CAN HAVE
SIGNIFICANT ONLINE AND OFFLINE
HARMS. AS WAS MENTIONED, MANY
PLATFORMS UTILIZE AUTOMATED
SYSTEMS TO HELP IN THIS
DETECTION AND REMOVAL. HOWEVER,
IT IS ALSO INDUSTRY STANDARD TO
PROVIDE A MECHANISM TO ALLOW
USERS TO REPORT CONTENT THAT
VIOLATES PLATFORMS, TERMS OF
SERVICE OR COMMUNITY GUIDELINES,
INCLUDING DIGITAL IDENTITY
THEFT. NON-CONSENSUAL INTIMATE
IMAGERY. AS HAS BEEN DESCRIBED
TODAY. SO WE BELIEVE SB NINE 981
SETS A REASONABLE STANDARD FOR
THAT REPORTING MECHANISM, WHICH
WILL HELP USERS HAVE A GREATER
CERTAINTY THAT THEIR REPORT HAS
BEEN RECEIVED AND IS BEING
ADDRESSED, AND FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE ARE PROUD TO SUPPORT
SB 981. THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? MOVED BY
MR. LOWENTHAL? GOOD AFTERNOON,
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS. RYAN
SHERMAN WITH RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S
ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
RESERVE PEACE OFFICERS, DEPUTY
SHERIFFS OF PLACER, MONTEREY
COUNTY, AND THE PEACE OFFICER
ASSOCIATIONS OF CITIES OF
ARCADIA, BURBANK, CLAREMONT,
CORONA, CULVER CITY, FULLERTON,
MARIETTA, NEWPORT BEACH, NOVATO,
PALOS VERDES, POMONA, RIVERSIDE,
SANTA ANA, AND UPLAND. THE LÀ
SCHOOL POLICE ASSOCIATION, THE
LÀ SCHOOL, POLICE MANAGEMENT
ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
COALITION OF SCHOOL SAFETY
PROFESSIONALS ALL IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT?
I'M JUST JOKING. OKAY ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? ALL RIGHT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
THEY WENT UP, MAYBE WENT HOME
OR. NO OPPOSITION. OF COURSE,
BRING IT BACK UP HERE. ANY, ANY
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT
. OH, SURE. YES. ISN'T THERE
ANOTHER BILL IDENTICAL TO THIS,
OR HAVE YOU COMBINED FORCES
WASN'T THERE ONE AN ASSEMBLY
BILL, WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR
COLLEAGUES. I BELIEVE WE ARE
JOINT AUTHORS OR COAUTHORS OF
EACH OTHER'S EFFORTS. IT'S IN
TWO DIFFERENT HOUSES. THEY ARE
COMPLEMENTARY. OKAY AND I WILL
SAY THAT OUR ENTIRE YOU KNOW,
DIGITAL PACKAGE HAS BEEN
ENDORSED BY THE LA DA AS WELL.
AND, OF COURSE, THE COPS SUPPORT
A LOT OF MY WORK. RIGHT. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THANKS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. YOU'RE JUST. OKAY.
GREAT. IS THERE A SECOND? ALL
RIGHT. GREAT. WE HAVE A MOTION
AND A SECOND, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
MAKE A CLOSING STATEMENT? I
APPRECIATE IT, I DO PLAN ON
EXPANDING IN THIS, AREA. AS A
BAY AREA REPRESENTATIVE AND MORE
SPECIFICALLY, A REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE SILICON VALLEY. WE DO
NEED TO ACTUALLY ENFORCE A LOT
OF LAWS IN THE DIGITAL SPACE. SO
THANK YOU. AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE. PERFECT.
THANK YOU. WOULD YOU MIND TAKING
THE ROLL, PLEASE? ITEM NUMBER
NINE SB 981 BY SENATOR WAHAB.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED BY C¢M PATTERSON.
PATTERSON I BRIAN DIXON I'M
SORRY. OH BRIAN I'M SORRY. BRIAN
I DIXON. DIXON I IRWIN. IRWIN I
HOOVER. LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL I Ó
ORTEGA. WARD WICKS. WILSON.
WILSON I. THAT BILL HAS SIX
VOTES. IT IS OUT, BUT WE'LL
LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN. SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. MUCH.
DO WE DO? YES. HI PERFECT.
TRYING THIS AGAIN. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO
ACTUALLY RUN THROUGH THE OTHER
BILLS REAL QUICK TO GET SOME
OUT, OR SHOULD WE. WELL, SENATOR
LEHMAN'S HERE. WE'LL WE'LL DO
THAT. WE HAVEN'T REALLY HIT
QUORUM, YOU KNOW, SIX VOTES ON
ANY BILLS YET. SO I WAS GOING TO
OPEN THEM UP FOR THE OTHERS. BUT
SINCE YOU'RE HERE, WE'LL GO
AHEAD. AND YOU GOT SB 1220. IS
THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
PERFECT. WELL, WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. SO. SO. OKAY, THANK YOU.
I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND,
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF. YEAH. SO IF
WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND, I'M GOING TO GO STRAIGHT
TO WITNESSES, SO REAL QUICK,
BECAUSE FOLKS HAD TO GO, SO
TODAY IN SUPPORT OF SB 1220, WE
HAVE, YVONNE FERNANDEZ WITH THE
LABOR FEDERATION AND SCARLETT
GURROLA, AN ELIGIBILITY WORKER
FROM SAN DIEGO COUNTY, TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT OF SB 1220. I GIVE
YOU A LOT OF KUDOS FOR JUST
MOVING THE WITNESSES, BUT DO YOU
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS?
YES SORRY. YES. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. DO YOU ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU'LL HAVE, TWO MINUTES
EACH. THANK YOU. PERFECT THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, YVONNE FERNANDEZ
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION, PROUD CO-SPONSOR OF
SB 1220, A BILL THAT WILL
PROTECT CALL CENTER WORKERS AND
THE PUBLIC BY PUTTING GUARDRAILS
ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE AT PUBLIC BENEFIT
CALL CENTERS. THE EXPONENTIAL
GROWTH OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE WILL IMPACT EVERY
INDUSTRY AND WORKER ACROSS
CALIFORNIA AS A TOOL, AI CAN
SUPPORT WORKERS. HOWEVER,
WITHOUT THE PROPER GUARDRAILS,
AI CAN BE USED TO EXPLOIT THE
SKILL AND REPLACE THEM, HARMING
NOT ONLY THE WORKERS, BUT IN THE
CASE OF SB 1220, THE STATE AND
THE RESIDENTS. OVERALL, SB 1220
DOES NOT BAN THE USE OF AI, BUT
RATHER ENSURES THAT THE IMPACT
ON WORKERS BE CONSIDERED BEFORE
THESE TECHNOLOGIES ARE USED IN
THE WORKPLACE. SB 1220 HAS TWO
MAIN PROVISIONS. FIRST, SB 1220
PROHIBITS THE STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS FROM USING AI TO
AUTOMATE OR ELIMINATE THE
ESSENTIAL CORE JOB FUNCTIONS OF
PUBLIC BENEFIT CALL CENTER
WORKERS. UNDER THE BILL, PUBLIC
BENEFIT PROGRAMS INCLUDE THOSE
SUCH AS CALWORKS, EDD, CALFRESH,
AND MEDI-CAL. ESSENTIALLY,
PROGRAMS THAT SERVE OUR MOST
VULNERABLE CALIFORNIANS. THE
SECOND PROVISION OF SB 1220
REQUIRES AN AGENCY TO PROVIDE
NOTICE TO WORKERS AND THE
PUBLIC. IF THE CALL CENTER
UTILIZES AN AI SYSTEM THAT
IMPACTS THE CORE JOB FUNCTIONS
OF THESE WORKERS, SB 1220
CREATES GUARDRAILS FOR WORKERS
AND ENSURES AI IS USED AS A TOOL
FOR CALL CENTER WORKERS TO
INCREASE EFFICIENCY,
PRODUCTIVITY, AND EFFECTIVENESS
WHEN RESPONDING TO CALLERS IN
NEED OF SUPPORT. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY URGE
YOUR AYE VOTE AT THE APPROPRIATE
TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. HI.
GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE, MY NAME IS CARLY
GURROLA AND I AM A SUPERVISING
HUMAN SERVICES SPECIALIST IN SAN
DIEGO COUNTY AND A PROUD MEMBER
OF SEIU LOCAL 221, MY TEAM, THE
TEAM THAT I SUPERVISE IS, THE
TEAM THAT I SUPERVISE IS THE
ONES THAT DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY
FOR CALWORKS, CALFRESH,
MEDI-CAL, AND GENERAL RELIEF, WE
MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO TRY AND
SERVE THE COMMUNITY. THIS IMPACT
OF THE CALL CENTER. WELL, THIS
IMPACT TO THE CALL CENTER IS
GOING TO CREATE A LOT OF JOB
LOSS. OUR COMMUNITY REALLY
NEEDS, OUR HUMAN HAND TO BE
PLACED INTO THESE SYSTEMS. RIGHT
NOW, WE HAVE A PARTIAL
INTEGRATED AI SYSTEM, COLOSSUS,
AND WE JUST WENT LIVE, A YEAR
AGO, JULY 1ST. IT'S PARTIAL, AND
I SAY IT'S PARTIAL BECAUSE IN
THE CONVERSION PROCESS, ALL
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF CASES
WERE SUPPOSED TO CONVERT, AND
THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE
MINIMAL, IMPACT ON IT RIGHT NOW,
AS WE SPEAK, MY TEAM AND ALL OF
US THERE IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY ARE
HAVING TO TROUBLESHOOT LENGTHY
AMOUNT OF TIMES TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE RESULTS IN THE SYSTEM
ARE CORRECT. THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT AN AI CAN'T CAPTURE, AND
THAT'S WHAT IT'S DOING RIGHT
NOW. THE AI IS BASICALLY GOING
IN LOOKING AT THE DATA, AND IT
ONLY CAPTURES WHAT THE FORMULA
SAYS. BUT ANYTHING BEYOND THE
FORMULA, ANYTHING THAT IS A
LITTLE STRAIGHT, THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT ONLY THE HUMAN
EYE CAN CATCH. AND WE DO THIS ON
A DAILY BASIS. WE ENSURE THAT
CALIFORNIANS HAVE THE BENEFITS.
THIS IS A VULNERABLE POPULATION
AND WE TAKE EVERY PRIDE IN
ENSURING THAT OUR COMMUNITY
RECEIVES ALL OF THE BENEFITS
THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO
RECEIVE, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT AI
IS A NEW TECHNOLOGY, BUT IT'S
NOT A, HOW DO I CALL IT? IT'S
NOT A MAGIC PILL. IT'S NOT GOING
TO SOLVE ALL THE ISSUES, IT
MIGHT BE A TEMPORARY BANDAGE AND
IT MIGHT HELP IN SOME WAYS, BUT
IT WILL NOT DO WHAT THE HUMAN
HAND, THE HUMAN EYE, THE HUMAN
BRAIN CAN DO. AND THAT SAYS A
LOT. THAT SAYS A LOT TO OUR
COMMUNITY. WHEN I HAVE WHEN I
HAVE CUSTOMERS COMING IN BECAUSE
THE SYSTEM DIDN'T DO SOMETHING
THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO, AND
THEY'RE COMING TO ME CRYING,
THEY'RE COMING TO ME BECAUSE
THEY'RE THEY LOST BENEFITS,
THEY'RE HUNGRY, THEY DON'T HAVE
MEDICAL. YOU KNOW, BENEFITS. WE
ARE THERE TO ACT IMMEDIATELY. WE
CAN GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE
INFORMATION IN THE SYSTEM. WE
CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT
INITIAL TRANSACTION TO HAVE IT
DONE. NOW THAT'S SOMETHING I
CANNOT DO. WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO
DO. SO. THE EMPATHY A COMPUTER
DOES NOT HAVE SYMPATHY OR
EMPATHY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
COMING TO US AND THEY ARE IN
NEED. I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE TO
ASK YOU TO WRAP IT UP. PLEASE SO
ON BEHALF OF SEIU TWO, TWO ONE
AND THE ENTIRE SEIU, STATE
COUNCIL, I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT
SB 1220, AND LET'S THINK SMART.
THANK YOU. YOU MADE YOUR POINT
VERY WELL. WE APPRECIATE IT.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
SOMEBODY ELSE? THOSE ARE THE TWO
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT,
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT? IGNACIO HERNANDEZ,
ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNICATION
WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT
NINE, IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION? ALL
RIGHT. QUESTIONS? COMMENTS FROM
THE Þ. YEAH HOW MANY? THANK YOU.
GREG HERNER, ON BEHALF OF 201
SAN DIEGO, WE ARE STATED IN
OPPOSITION, BUT WE WANT TO SAY
THAT WITH THE AMENDMENTS, WE'RE
GOING TO BE MOVING TO A SUPPORT.
A LOT OF THE STATEMENTS HERE
THAT WERE MADE, WE'RE VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF, WE THINK AI HAS
ITS USES, BUT THEY ARE LIMITED
IN CERTAIN AREAS. AND YOU DO
NEED THAT PERSON TO PERSON
INTERACTION. SO WE REALLY
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR AND SEIU
IS WORKING WITH US, AND WE'RE
VERY PLEASED TO BE AS SOON AS WE
SEE IT IN PRINT, WE'VE BEEN
WEAVING TO SUPPORT ON THIS BILL,
GOT LOTS OF SUPPORT THERE.
ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BRIAN. A SECOND
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER LOWENTHAL. DO
YOU HAVE A COMMENT? ALL RIGHT.
SENATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. CAN WE DO A
ROLL CALL, PLEASE? ITEM NUMBER
16, SB 1220 BY SENATOR LIMÓN.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS, AS
AMENDED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. B¢O KHN. PATTERSON.
BRIAN BRIAN. AYE. DIXON OPPOSED.
NO. DIXON. NO IRWIN. I IRWIN. I.
HOOVER LOWENTHAL. LOWENTHAL. I.
ORTEGA WARD. WICKS. WILSON. HIGH
WILSON. AYE. THAT BILL HAS FOUR
VOTES AND WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLL
OPEN. GREAT. THANK YOU. CAN WE
MOVE THROUGH AND, DO ADS,
PLEASE, FOR, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WILSON AND BRIAN? MAYBE I MISSED
A FEW. THANK YOU. FOR THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. BAUER-KAHAN.
BRIAN CONSENT CALENDAR. BRIAN I
HOOVER. WILSON WILSON. I NINE
ZERO, SB 532 BY SENATOR WIENER.
THE VOTE IS SEVEN ZERO. VICE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. BARA KHN
BRIAN. BRIAN. AYE. HOOVER
WILSON. WILSON. AYE. NINE ZERO
SB 785. THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO.
B¢O KHN. PATTERSON. HOOVER
WILSON. WE PASS AND I'LL GUESS,
AND BRIAN. FOR SB 785. BRIAN AYE
. OKAY. SIX ZERO. THAT BILL IS
OUT. OKAY SHE'S NOT. SHE'S BEEN
I'M GOING TO PASS UNTIL WE DO IT
AGAIN ON THE FINAL. YOU'LL GET
ME ON THE FINAL? YES. YOU WANT
ME TO KEEP GOING OR SHOULD WE,
ARE YOU LEAVING? ALL RIGHT, ALL
RIGHT, I WILL BE JOINING YOU IN
A MOMENT, BUT DO YOU WANT ME TO
DO. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND
THEN I WILL BE SO. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY ASSEMBLY, ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
I MEAN, SENATOR ALLEN, SENATOR
ALLEN, HAPPY TO BE PART OF BOTH
BODIES, GOOD AFTERNOON, MY
FELLOW MEMBERS, ACTUALLY. GOOD
EVENING. I SUPPOSE AT THIS
POINT, SO MOST OF YOU KNOW, THE
PICTURESQUE, ICONIC. WE PAUSE
FOR A MINUTE. JUST FOR THE
RECORD, IF YOU CAN READ THE BILL
OR SB 1297. OH, YEAH. SO SB 1297
BY SENATOR ALLEN. SO THE WIDE
OPEN PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY IS
ONE OF THE MOST FAMOUS AND
PICTURESQUE ROADWAYS IN THE
WORLD. IT DRAWS MILLIONS OF
VISITORS TO THE SMALL BEACH CITY
OF MALIBU EVERY YEAR. BUT EVERY
COUPLE OF MONTHS, THE COMMUNITY
IS DEVASTATED BY ANOTHER FATAL
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT, WITH MULTIPLE
SERIOUS CRASHES OCCURRING IN
BETWEEN NEAR MISSES OVER AND
OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AND, YOU
KNOW, RECENTLY, THOUGH CERTAINLY
NOT MOST RECENTLY, ON THE
EVENING OF OCTOBER 17TH, 2023, A
YOUNG MAN SPEEDING AT 104 MILES
AN HOUR ON THE PCH IN MALIBU
LOST CONTROL OF HIS VEHICLE,
KILLED FOUR PEPPERDINE
UNIVERSITY STUDENTS STANDING ON
THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, YOUNG
WOMEN AT THE AT THE HEAD OF
THEIR LIVES, WHO NEVER MADE IT
OUT OF OUT OF UNIVERSITY,
BECAUSE OF THIS TRAGIC, TRAGIC
EXAMPLE OF OVER OVER SPEEDING
SINCE 2010, 60 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
KILLED IN VEHICLE ACCIDENTS
ALONG THE SAME BEAUTIFUL BUT
EXCEEDINGLY DANGEROUS STRETCH OF
HIGHWAY, CRASH DATA FROM THE LA
COUNTY SHERIFF REPORTS 127
PROPERTY COLLISIONS, 93 INJURY
COLLISIONS, SEVEN DEATHS IN 2023
ALONE. AND, YOU KNOW, A PRIMARY
FACTOR IN ALL OF THESE INCIDENTS
WAS HIGH VEHICLE SPEED. THE CITY
HAS JUST OVER 10,000 PEOPLE, BUT
IT'S, YOU KNOW, IN THE TOP 25,
SMALL CITIES WITH THE WORST
CRASH FATALITY RATES IN THE
COUNTRY. AND WE KNOW THAT ONE
PROVEN WAY TO SLOW DRIVERS DOWN
IS TO USE AUTOMATED SPEED CAMERA
ENFORCEMENT. THE NTSB, THE
CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL,
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
HAVE ALL RECOMMENDED USING SPEED
CAMERAS TO ENFORCE SPEED LIMITS.
SPEED CAMERAS ARE EVEN AN
AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURE UNDER THE
FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT, SO THIS
BILL SEEKS TO CREATE A SPEED
CAMERA PILOT PROGRAM FOR THE FOR
ONE LITTLE STRETCH OF HIGHWAY IN
THIS ONE PARTICULAR CITY. THAT'S
NEARLY IDENTICAL TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER FRIEDMAN'S,
LEGISLATION. AB 645 THE BILL HAS
ALL SORTS OF EQUITY AND PRIVACY
AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS THAT
ARE MODELED OFF OF THE BASICALLY
IDENTICAL TO LAST YEAR'S
LEGISLATION, INCLUDING ENHANCED
SIGNAGE WITH FLASHING BEACONS TO
WARN DRIVERS OF AUTOMATED SPEED
ENFORCEMENT, LOWERED FINES AND
DIVERSION PROGRAMS FOR LOW
INCOME DRIVERS, WARNING TICKETS
FOR A FIRST VIOLATION OF 11 TO
15MPH OVER THE SPEED LIMIT,
RESTRICTING PHOTOGRAPHS TO ONLY
THE REAR LICENSE PLATE OF A
VEHICLE PROHIBITING FACIAL
RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY,
ESTABLISHING RECORD RETENTION
AND DESTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS,
LIMITING THE USE OF PHOTOGRAPHIC
EVIDENCE, AND PROHIBITING THE
SHARING OF INFORMATION TO ANY
OTHER ENTITY. THERE ARE ACTUALLY
SOME ADDITIONAL STRENGTHENING,
PROTECTIONS IN THIS BILL, BUT
THIS IS ULTIMATELY ABOUT TRYING
TO SAVE SOME MORE LIVES. I MEAN,
IT'S UNBELIEVABLE. I MEAN, EVEN
SINCE WE INTRODUCED THIS BILL,
THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL DEATHS
ON THIS STRETCH OF HIGHWAY. SO
WE HAVE TO KEEP UPDATING OUR
MATERIALS AND TALKING POINTS,
WE'RE ASKING YOU TO HELP US IN,
IN PREVENTING MORE UNNECESSARY
DEATHS IN THIS SPECIAL PART OF
THE WORLD THAT ATTRACTS SO MANY
PEOPLE, NOT ONLY FROM AROUND THE
WORLD, BUT ESPECIALLY FROM OVER
THE SOUTHLAND, SO MANY, FAMILIES
FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS WHO
WANT TO SPEND A NICE DAY AT THE
BEACH THAT ARE DARTING ACROSS
THE ROAD, TRYING TO MAKE IT
SAFELY TO WHEREVER THEY'RE GOING
. AND, THIS IS AN EXCEEDINGLY
DANGEROUS PART OF ROAD. THERE'S
A LOT OF WORK TO, TO BE DONE. ON
RETHINKING, REIMAGINING THE
ROAD. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THIS
IS AN IMPORTANT STEP IN MAKING
IT A LITTLE SAFER. AND WITH
THAT, I HAVE MY YOUR COLLEAGUE,
OUR COLLEAGUE HERE WHO
REPRESENTS, THE ROADWAY AS WELL,
AND ALSO ALEXIS BROWN, WHO'S
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY
OF MALIBU. WELL, CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT ALONGSIDE SENATOR ALLEN
ON SB 1297. I'M PROUD TO BE A
PRINCIPLE COAUTHOR ON THIS BILL
AS SENATOR ALLEN MENTIONED, THE
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY IN OUR
DISTRICT IS AN ICONIC CORRIDOR
OFFERING INCREDIBLE VIEWS OF OUR
GORGEOUS COAST. BUT THE
CONSISTENT TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
THAT OCCUR OCCUR ALONG THIS
HIGHWAY OFTEN HAVE FATAL
CONSEQUENCES, ULTIMATELY
CULMINATING WITH THE DEATHS OF
FOUR PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY
STUDENTS WHO WERE STANDING ON
THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE RATES
AT WHICH INNOCENT PEOPLE DIE
ALONG THIS STRETCH OF HIGHWAY
DEMAND THAT WE, AS LEGISLATORS
TAKE MORE ACTION. THE SPEED
CAMERA PILOT PROGRAM, SB 1297,
WOULD CREATE OFFERS A PROVEN WAY
TO REDUCE DRIVER SPEED AND SAVE
LIVES FROM TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU, SENATOR
ALLEN AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER ERWIN
FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
INTRODUCING THIS LEGISLATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON. EVENING. RATHER,
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS ALEXIS BROWN, AND I'M
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF
MALIBU TO EXPRESS OUR STRONG
SUPPORT FOR THIS CRITICAL PIECE
OF LEGISLATION TO ENHANCE PUBLIC
SAFETY ON PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY.
OVER THE PAST DECADE, PCH HAS
BEEN MARRED BY 3345 TRAFFIC
COLLISIONS WITH SPEED IDENTIFIED
AS THE PRIMARY FACTOR.
TRAGICALLY, THESE INCIDENTS HAVE
RESULTED IN 60 FATALITIES,
INCLUDING THE DEVASTATING LOSS
OF FOUR PEPPERDINE STUDENTS ON
OCTOBER 17TH LAST YEAR. STRUCK
BY A DRIVER GOING OVER 100 MILES
AN HOUR THIS YEAR TO DATE, WE
HAVE SEEN 98 VEHICLE COLLISIONS,
LEAVING 52 PEOPLE INJURED AND
ONE DEAD, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
HAS ISSUED NEARLY 2500 SPEEDING
TICKETS WITH VEHICLE TRAFFIC
REACHING 40,000 ON NORMAL DAYS
AND 60,000 DURING PEAK SUMMER
MONTHS. IT IS EVIDENT THAT
URGENT MEASURES ARE NEEDED TO
ADDRESS THIS. SPEEDING ON THE
STATE HIGHWAY. THE SPEED CAMERA
PROGRAM IS A VITAL COMPONENT TO
THE CITY'S ALL OF THE ABOVE
STRATEGY THAT INCLUDES
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS,
INCREASED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS AIMED
AT CHANGING DRIVER BEHAVIOR. THE
PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF SPEED
CAMERAS AT CRITICAL POINTS ALONG
PCH WILL BE CONDUCTED WITH
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
THE PILOT WILL INCLUDE SPEED
FEEDBACK, SIGNS AND SIGNAGE
INDICATING THE PRESENCE OF
CAMERAS ALERTING DRIVERS BEFORE
ENTERING THE SPEED CAMERA ZONE.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROGRAM IS
TO DETER RECKLESS DRIVING AND
RACING ALONG WHAT HAS BEEN
LABELED BLOOD ALLEY. THE 21 MILE
STRETCH OF PCH IN MALIBU. SB
1297 INCLUDES THE SAME PRIVACY
PROTECTIONS AND OVERSIGHT
MECHANISMS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN
AB 645, WHICH PASSED THIS
COMMITTEE LAST YEAR. DATA
COLLECTED WILL REMAIN
CONFIDENTIAL AND ONLY ACCESS FOR
THE PURPOSE OF TRAFFIC
ENFORCEMENT. THESE CAMERAS ARE
DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO CAPTURE
THE REAR LICENSE PLATES OF
SPEEDING VEHICLES, NOT THE
DRIVERS OR PASSENGERS, AND THE
BILL PROHIBITS THE USE OF FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE FOR TENS OF
THOUSANDS THAT DRIVE PCH DAILY.
THIS BILL COULD MEAN FEWER
INJURIES AND SAVE LIVES. I THANK
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR
HEARING THIS TODAY, AND I URGE
YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS
BILL. MOVING ON TO MEMBERS,
MOVING ON TO MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO OFFER
ME TWO COMMENTS AND SUPPORT
NAME, ORGANIZATION AND POSITION.
YES, CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M DOUG
STEWART, MAYOR PRO TEM, CITY OF
MALIBU. AND WE WANT TO EXPRESS
OUR FULL SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL.
THANK YOU, DYLAN ELLIOTT, ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF WEST
HOLLYWOOD IN SUPPORT KURT
AUGUSTINE WITH THE ALLIANCE FOR
AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, BRANDON EP,
REPRESENTING SHERIFF ROBERT LUNA
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU SEAMUS
CITY LIGHTHOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS
ON BEHALF OF STREETS FOR ALL AND
BLUE LINE SOLUTIONS IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
FURTHER. NO, NO MORE. MOVING ON
TO, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
ARE IN OPPOSITION. I DON'T THINK
WE HAVE ANY ON FILE, BUT JUST IN
CASE, ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC WHO ARE TESTIFYING IN
OPPOSITION? OKAY. SEEING NONE
MOVING ON TO OUR QUICK
OPPOSITION, ME TWO'S NAME
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION.
RACHEL BOGERT WITH ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. MOVING BACK, MOVING
TO COMMITTEE TO SEE IF THERE'S
ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS OR
CONCERNS. BRIAN. YEAH SENATOR, I
HAVE HAD KIND OF DEEP CONCERNS
WITH THIS POLICY FRAMEWORK. MORE
BROADLY. I THINK IN MISS
FRIEDMAN'S BILL, I WAS AGAINST
IT. AND THEN SUPPORTED IT IN
DIFFERENT VERSIONS AS SHE TOOK
AMENDMENTS AND ALSO, I
UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITY, THE
COMPLEXITY OF THE SITUATION. I
DON'T REPRESENT PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY, BUT I DO REPRESENT, LA
BREA AND SLAWSON, WHICH IS A
TERRIFYING INTERSECTION ON A
DEEP HILL THAT'S RESULTED IN CAR
CRASHES AND DEATHS OF, YOU KNOW,
SIGNIFICANT FOLKS, FOR THE
SPEEDING AND THE WAY WE HAVE
DESIGNED THAT INTERSECTION. AND
SO, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A VOTE
TODAY, BUT I WANT TO CONTINUE TO
PROCESS WHAT THIS KIND OF A
POLICY FRAMEWORK MEANS AND WHAT
IT BUILDS OUT AND LEADS TO, I
THINK PART OF MY INITIAL CONCERN
IS, IS ALWAYS THE OVER
SURVEILLANCE AND THEN THE, YOU
KNOW, ADDITIONAL FORMS OF
POLICING. I APPRECIATE THE
MODELING, THE FEE STRUCTURE OFF
OF, YOU KNOW, REDUCED FINES FOR
LOW INCOME DRIVERS. I THINK IT'S
ALSO INTERESTING THAT WE'RE
BUILDING OFF OF LAST YEAR'S
LEGISLATION ALREADY A YEAR
LATER. AND LIKE I THINK THAT'S
HOW WE OFTEN DO THINGS IN THIS
BUILDING. AND SO I WANT TO
CAUTIOUSLY CONTINUE TO DEVELOP
MY OWN PERSONAL FEELINGS AROUND
THE SPACE. BUT BUT TODAY, I
SUPPORT YOU. AND ALSO FOR, YOU
KNOW, THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE
LOST LOVED ONES ON PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY, I HOPE THEY SEE THE
WORK THAT THEIR LEGISLATIVE
LEADERS ARE PUTTING IN TO, TO
TRY TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. THANK
YOU. CAN I JUST I WOULD LIKE TO
GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. I WOULD JUST
LIKE TO MENTION THAT OUR MEMBERS
OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
EXPRESSED SOME OF THE SAME
CONCERNS, THAT THERE WERE AREAS
WHERE THEY HAD VERY DANGEROUS
ROADWAYS. ALSO AND, THE CHAIR OF
THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
TALKED ABOUT THE MORE HOLISTIC
APPROACH THAT SHE WANTS TO TAKE
IN THE FALL. SO I WOULD HOPE SHE
HAS SOME COMMENTS. I WILL. THANK
YOU, LOOKING TO SEE IF THERE'S
ANY OTHER COMMENTS. THANK YOU.
THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A
SECOND? SECOND? THERE'S A MOTION
MADE BY LOWENTHAL, A SECOND BY
ORTEGA. MY COMMENTS WILL JUST
BE, THAT SIMILAR TO SENATOR
ALLEN IS NOT UNFAMILIAR WITH
WHAT THEY WILL BE AS NOTED AS,
CHAIR TRANSPORTATION. SEEING
THIS THROUGH MY COMMITTEE
WANTING THIS BILL TO BE A PART
OR THIS CONVERSATION TO BE A
PART OF THE GREATER CONVERSATION
HAVING WE'RE HAVING AROUND,
SPEED CAMERAS ON HIGHWAYS, I
THINK THE PRIVACY ISSUES STILL
REMAIN. AND THIS IS PRIVACY, AND
SO, AND SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE
DISCUSSED HOLISTICALLY, WHERE
THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON GETTING
AHEAD OF ANOTHER, ESPECIALLY AS
IT RELATES TO HIGHWAYS, WHICH IS
VERY DIFFERENT, THAN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, DESPITE
THIS FACT OF GOING THROUGH A
NEIGHBORHOOD AS, AS I HAVE THE
SAME THING IN MY COMMITTEE AND
MANY OTHERS, WITH THAT, THERE IS
A MOTION AND A SECOND, I AS
NOTED, I WOULDN'T I I'M KEEPING
WITH WHAT I DID IN
TRANSPORTATION WILL NOT BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY FOR
THAT REASON, STAYING FAITHFUL TO
THE OTHER GROUP THAT I PROMISED
TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS WITH
IN THE FALL WITH, AND SO GIVING
YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE
PRIOR TO, MADAM SECRETARY
CALLING THE ROLL. YEAH. NO, I
APPRECIATE APPRECIATE VERY MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR, AND JUST, YOU KNOW,
YOU KNOW, THIS OBVIOUSLY, BUT,
FOR THE FOR THE BENEFIT OF
EVERYONE ELSE WHO WASN'T THERE
IN TRANSPORTATION, WE'RE
CERTAINLY VERY COMMITTED TO,
WE'RE VERY COMMITTED TO
SUPPORTING THIS BROADER EFFORT
THAT WE HOPE COMES TOGETHER. AND
WE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW I'VE
EXPRESSED TO YOU SEVERAL TIMES,
AND I EXPRESSED IT AGAIN, WE'RE
WE CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE SURE
THIS FOLDS IN NICELY INTO THE
BROADER EFFORT. OF COURSE, WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIME FRAME
IS AND HOW WHETHER IT ALL COMES
TOGETHER. HOPEFULLY IT DOES, SO
WE'RE COMMITTED TO, BUT WE
CERTAINLY WE WANT TO SEE THIS
MOVE FORWARD. IT'S LITERALLY
PEOPLE DYING EVERY COUPLE OF
MONTHS. AND THAT DOESN'T EVEN
INCLUDE SOME OF THE HORRIFIC
INJURIES, SO WE REALLY DO WANT
TO GET THIS, GET THE SOLUTION
THERE RIGHT NOW. BUT I DO
REITERATE MY COMMITMENT TO YOU,
MADAM CHAIR, THAT WE, THAT WE
WILL WORK IN GOOD FAITH TO, TO
MAKE SURE THAT THIS, THIS
DOVETAILS NICELY WITH, WITH THE
BROADER EFFORTS THAT YOU HAVE
UNDERWAY WITH REGARDS TO THAT
OTHER NEGOTIATION AND WITH THAT.
BUT BUT IN THE SPIRIT OF SAVING
LIVES RIGHT NOW ON THIS
INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS STRETCH OF
HIGHWAY, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE. MADAM SECRETARY,
ITEM NUMBER 18, SB 1297 BY
SENATOR ALLEN. THE MOTION IS
DUE. PASS TO THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE. BAUER-KAHAN
PATTERSON, BRYAN. BRIAN. AYE.
DIXON DIXON. AYE. IRWIN. IRWIN.
AYE HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE.
LOWENTHAL LOWENTHAL. AYE.
ORTEGA. ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WICKS
WILSON. NO. WILSON. NO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. MEMBERS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THAT WAS 661. ALL
RIGHT. WE ARE WAITING FOR ONE
MORE MEMBER. AND THAT IS.
SENATOR ASHBY, SHE'S NEXT DOOR.
OH OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO CAN
WE CONTINUE WITH. WE'LL CONTINUE
WITH THE ROLL CALL. THE ADD ONS,
PLEASE. THEY SHOULD HAVE. I
THINK. I MEAN. ON THE ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR, BAUER-KAHAN.
HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE ON ITEM
NUMBER ONE, SB 532, THE VOTE IS
NINE ZERO. VICE CHAIR VOTING
AYE. B¢O KHN. HOOVER. HOOVER.
AYE. THAT'S TEN ZERO. SB 785, BY
SENATOR CABALLERO. THE VOTE IS
SIX ZERO. BAUER KHN PATTERSON.
HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE WILSON.
OKAY. SEVEN ZERO, ITEM NUMBER
THREE, SB 892. THE VOTE IS FOUR
ZERO, CHAIR VOTING AYE. BRIAN
BRIAN. AYE ERWIN. AYE. ERWIN.
AYE. HOOVER. I'M SORRY, I'M
SORRY. THIS IS SB 892 BY SENATOR
PADILLA. OH, YES. AYE. OKAY.
ERWIN. AYE. HOOVER HOOVER NOT
VOTING. WARD. WARD. AYE WILSON.
SEVEN ZERO. OKAY. THAT BILL IS
OUT. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. SB 893 BY
SENATOR PADILLA. VOTE IS TEN
ZERO. HOOVER AYE. HOOVER. AYE.
THAT ONE IS 11 ZERO SB ITEM
NUMBER SIX, SB 918 BY SENATOR
UMBERG. THE VOTE IS 10 TO 0.
HOOVER. HOOVER AYE. IT'S 11
ZERO. ITEM NUMBER NINE, SB 981,
BY SENATOR WAHAB. THE VOTE IS
SIX ZERO, VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
BAUER KHN HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE.
ORTEGA ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD
AYE. WICKS. 990. THAT BILL IS
OUT. ITEM NUMBER TEN SB 961 BY
SENATOR WIENER. THE VOTE IS 5 TO
2, VICE CHAIR VOTING NO. BAUER.
KHN BRIAN. BRIAN. AYE. HOOVER
HOOVER. NO. WILSON. SIX TWO.
THAT BILL IS OUT. ITEM NUMBER 11
SB 976 BY SENATOR SKINNER. THE
VOTE IS SIX ZERO. CHAIR VOTING
AYE, VICE CHAIR NOT VOTING.
BRIAN. BRIAN. AYE HOOVER. ITEM
11 SB 976 OKAY. HOOVER. NOT
VOTING. WILSON 770. THAT BILL IS
OUT. ITEM NUMBER 13 SB 1223 BY
SENATOR BECKER. THE VOTE IS FIVE
ZERO. VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
BAUER KHN BRIAN. BRIAN. AYE
HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE. ORTEGA
ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD AYE.
WICKS. I'M SORRY. THAT WAS NINE
ZERO. THAT BILL IS OUT. I WAS ON
CONSENT CALENDAR. YES I. ITEM
NUMBER 16, SB 1220 BY SENATOR
LIMÓN. THE VOTE IS FOUR ONE, BY
BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON. HOOVER SB
1220 NØ HOOVER. NÓ ORTEGA.
ORTEGA AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE. SIX
ONE I'M SORRY. SIX TWO. THAT
BILL IS OUT. SB OR ITEM NUMBER
17, SB 1283, BY SENATOR STERN.
THE VOTE IS SEVEN ZERO. CHAIR
VOTING AYE. PATTERSON. HOOVER
NOT HOOVER NOT VOTING. SEVEN
ZERO. ITEM NUMBER 18 SB 1297 BY
VÌ. SENATOR ALLEN. THE VOTE IS
SIX ONE. B¢O KHN PATTERSON.
WARD. WARD AYE. WICKS SEVEN ONE.
ITEM NUMBER 19 SB 13. OH, SORRY.
ITEM NUMBER 21 SB 1394 BY
SENATOR MIN. THE VOTE IS FIVE
ZERO. VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
BAUER KHN BRIAN. BRIAN AYE.
HOOVER. HOOVER. AYE. ORTEGA
ORTEGA. AYE. WARD. WARD. AYE
WICKS. THIS NINE ZERO. ITEM
NUMBER 22. ALL RIGHT. THAT THAT
BILL IS OUT. YES. WE'RE DONE.
GOOD AND DO YOU WANT TO JUST DO
THE LAST ONE BEFORE WE. OKAY,
ITEM NUMBER 22, SB 1446 BY
SENATOR SMALLWOOD CUEVAS. THE
VOTE IS FOUR TWO, WITH THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING NO. BAUER C¢M.
BRIAN. BRIAN AYE. HOOVER. NO.
HOOVER. NO WILSON. WILSON. AYE.
26362. SIX. THREE. SIX. SIX.
THREE. OKAY THAT IS SIX THREE,
THAT BILL IS OUT. SENATOR ASHBY,
WE ARE READY FOR YOU WITH, SB
1313. OUR LAST BILL. ALMOST,
ALMOST. RIGHT THANKS, COLLEAGUES
. I APPRECIATE THE LONG DAY THAT
YOU HAVE PUT IN ON MANY
COMMITTEES RUNNING BACK AND
FORTH. I AM HERE TO PRESENT SB
1313. IT IS A SAFE ROADS ACT. I
WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE STAFF WHO SHE'S
SITTING IN THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE THAT I AM SUPPOSED TO
BE IN RIGHT NOW. SO WE'RE, YOU
KNOW, SHIPS PASSING IN THE
NIGHT, I SUPPOSE I AM ACCEPTING
A SET OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS,
THE ONES THAT CAME FROM THE
COMMITTEE CHAIRWOMAN, SB 13. BUT
I WANT TO JUST SAY I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR STAFF. THERE ARE
THREE BILLS MOVING THROUGH THE
LEGISLATURE THAT ARE TRYING TO
BE MORPHED TOGETHER. SO GREAT
JOB TO YOUR STAFF. AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR HELP. SB 1313 ADDRESSES
THE MISUSE OF SAFETY TECHNOLOGY
AND VEHICLES, PARTICULARLY WITH
DRIVING ASSISTANCE AND
MONITORING SYSTEMS. THIS BILL
PROHIBITS INDIVIDUALS FROM
USING, PURCHASING, POSSESSING,
MANUFACTURING, SELLING OR
DISTRIBUTING DEVICES DESIGNED TO
INTERFERE WITH THE VEHICLES
SAFETY MONITORING SYSTEM.
VIOLATIONS WOULD CONSTITUTE
INFRACTIONS UNDER THE VEHICLE
CODE, WITH PENALTIES ESCALATING
FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. THE
ADVANCED ASSISTANCE AND DRIVING
ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS REQUIRE THE
FULL ATTENTION OF AN ENGAGED
DRIVER THEY'RE NOT READY FOR,
BEING CIRCUMVENTED.
UNFORTUNATELY DRIVERS ARE
CIRCUMVENTING THESE SAFETY
SYSTEMS THROUGH THE USE OF
AFTERMARKET DEVICES, MANY OF
WHICH ARE HOMEMADE TECHNIQUES.
EVERYTHING FROM HAIR CLIPS TO
BEANBAGS. ENTIRE ONLINE MARKETS
ARE DEDICATED TO SELLING WHAT
THEY CALL NAG REDUCTION DEVICES.
THEY'RE DESIGNED TO SIMULATE
DRIVER'S HANDS ON A WHEEL,
THEREBY CIRCUMVENTING THE
IMPORTANT SAFETY SYSTEMS IN YOUR
VEHICLE. SB 1313 ADDRESSES THIS
ISSUE, UPDATES CALIFORNIA
TRAFFIC LAWS TO KEEP PACE WITH
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES, AND SO I
WILL RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR.
I VOTE. I DO HAVE A WITNESS WITH
ME, KURT AUGUSTINE, WHO'S THE
SENIOR DIRECTOR OF STATE AFFAIRS
FOR THE ALLIANCE FOR AUTOMOTIVE
INNOVATION, MADAM CHAIR KURT
AUGUSTINE, THE ALLIANCE FOR
AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, THE
SENATOR COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT
BETTER, AND I'LL BE BRIEF ON
THAT. I SAID, WE ARE PROUD TO BE
THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL,
VEHICLES ARE DESIGNED WITH ALL
THESE SAFETY FEATURES, AND IT
WAS ACTUALLY QUITE SHOCKING TO
US WHEN WE LEARNED EARLIER THIS
YEAR THAT THERE WAS NO WAY FOR
LAW ENFORCEMENT TO PREVENT
ANYONE FROM OVERRIDING THESE
SAFETY DEVICES. SO WE THINK IT'S
AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. YOU'VE HEARD
A LOT OF SAFETY ISSUES ABOUT
VEHICLES IN THIS COMMITTEE
HEARING TODAY, AND WE BELIEVE
THIS IS ONE WAY TO HELP ENSURE
THAT OUR ROADS CONTINUE TO BE
MORE SAFE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT,
ANY OTHER FINALLY, THE ROOM IS
EMPTY. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT, LIZZY KUTSUNA HERE ON
BEHALF OF TESLA IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. HI, YARI. WITH
PIRACY, RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE.
UNLESS AMENDED POSITION. WE JUST
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
THEIR WORK ON AMENDING THE BILL
AND SEE IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY
TO STILL CONSIDER, THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE BROUGHT UP
ABOUT THE DRIVER MONITORING
DEVICE. SO THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? ALL RIGHT. I KNOW
EVERYBODY REALLY WANTS TO GET
OUT OF HERE, BUT, I WHEN I DRIVE
MY HUSBAND'S CAR, IT IS REALLY
AMAZING HOW MUCH THESE FEATURES
HELP YOU BECOME A SAFER DRIVER
FROM, YOU KNOW, IT IT STAYING IN
THE LANE, CONTROLLING YOUR
SPEED. BUT THE THING THAT I
FOUND, WELL, IT'S ALMOST A
LITTLE SPOOKY IS THE CAMERA THAT
WATCHES YOUR EYEBALLS AND THAT
IF YOU ARE LOOKING TOO LONG AT
THE RADIO OR OVER AT YOUR PHONE,
THAT THE CAR BEEPS. AND I THINK
WITH TESLA, IF YOU DO IT THREE
TIMES, YOU'RE PUNISHED AND THEN
YOU DON'T HAVE A AUTO DRIVER,
UNTIL YOU STOP. SO I THINK THIS
IS A GREAT BILL. I IT IS, IT'S
REALLY UNFORTUNATE THAT PEOPLE
ARE TRYING TO OVERRIDE THESE
NAGGING NAG DEVICES AS YOU CALL
THEM. AND SO WITH THAT, DO WE
HAVE, A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. WE
HAVE A MOTION BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
HOOVER, A SECOND BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WARD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. MADAM
SECRETARY, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ITEM NUMBER 19, SB
1313, BY SENATOR ASHBY. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
BY BAUER-KAHAN PATTERSON. BRIAN.
BRIAN. AYE. DIXON DIXON. AYE.
IRWIN. AYE. IRWIN. AYE HOOVER.
HOOVER. AYE. LOWENTHAL
LOWENTHAL. AYE. ORTEGA. ORTEGA.
AYE WARD. WARD. AYE. WICKS.
WILSON AYE. WILSON. AYE 990.
THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES IF YOU'RE
BORED, YOU CAN COME OVER TO
JUDICI WITH US. ARE YOU JUDICI
GO PAST NIGHT? I DON'T THINK SO,
BUT I THINK WE HAVE, LIKE,
THANKS FOR HIGHLIGHTING THAT.
YEAH, BUT THIS IS THIS. I WAS
GOING TO ADD ON. I, YOU KNOW, IF
YOU NEED SOME COAUTHORS, YOU
TELL HER, AMAYA, SHE WANTS TO BE
A COAUTHOR. I WILL ADD YOU
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S I WILL ADD IT
WITH, YEAH, IT'S A GOOD ONE.
YEAH. IT IS. THANK YOU. AND WE
ADDED YOU TO THE CANNABIS BILL,
TOO. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW IF. HAS EVERYBODY
HERE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE
WHOLE Þ? OKAY. IT'S FOR YOU,
MOLLY. SO, LIKE, USUALLY THEY
DON'T WANT ME. YES, I GOT. THANK
YOU GUYS. THANK YOU. OKAY. GOING
OVER THE VOTES, ITEM NUMBER TWO,
SB 785 VÌ BY SENATOR CABALLERO.
VOTES 70I DO, WILSON. SORRY,
WILSON. I OKAY, EIGHT ZERO. SB
ITEM NUMBER THREE, SB 892 BY
SENATOR PADILLA. THE VOTE IS
SEVEN ZERO. CHAIR, VOTING AYE,
WILSON. WILSON AYE. EIGHT ZERO.
ITEM NUMBER TEN SB 961 BY
SENATOR WIENER. THE VOTE IS SIX
TWO, VICE CHAIR VOTING NO,
WILSON. ITEM NUMBER TEN 961 961.
YES OKAY. THAT ONE IS SEVEN TWO,
ITEM NUMBER 11, SB 976 BY
SENATOR SKINNER. THE VOTE IS
SEVEN ZERO. CHAIR VOTING AYE.
WILSON NOT VOTING. WILSON NOT
VOTING SEVEN ZERO. STILL ITEM
NUMBER 13. WE GOT THAT ONE.
OKAY. WE HAVE ALL YOU HAVE YOU
FOR EVERYTHING. OKAY BECAUSE I
WAS HERE FOR THAT ONE. EVERY
BILL HAS PASSED. CORRECT OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. AND I ASSUME I NEED
TO STAY HERE. I DON'T I OH YEAH,
I THINK ARE YOU OKAY TODAY?
RECESS. OH I THINK PATTERSON HAS
GONE FOR THE DEGREE THAT HE.
YEAH OH, NO. I MEAN, I'M GOOD.
I'M ONE MEMBER, ONE MEMBER
STAYS. OKAY? YEAH, ONE MEMBER
HAS TO STAY IN THE ROOM. RIGHT.
WELL, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE
I'M JUST NEXT DOOR. I WAS
ASKING, OKAY. IT'S, IT'S OKAY.
UNLESS SHE'S GONE FOR THE NEXT
FEW HOURS. YEAH. SHE'S OUT THERE
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. ACTUALLY
FOR SPEAKER, I HAVE A. YEAH.
OKAY OKAY.
WE WILL RECONVENE THE HEARING
AND OPEN THE ROLL FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBER. THE CHAIR. OKAY MIKE ON,
WE ARE BACK HERE. THANK YOU. SO
MEMBER ERWIN, FOR YOUR
PARTNERSHIP. AND WE WILL OPEN
THE ROLL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBER.
ME OKAY. ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, BAUER-KAHAN I
BAUER-KAHAN. AYE. THAT'S 11 ZERO
SB 532. A VOTE IS TEN ZERO. B¢O
BAUER-KAHAN. AYE BAUER-KAHAN
AYE. THAT IS 11 ZERO. ITEM
NUMBER TWO, SB 785. THE VOTE IS
EIGHT ZERO. BAUER-KAHAN AYE.
BAUER-KAHAN AYE. THAT IS NINE
ZERO. ITEM NUMBER THREE, SB 892.
SENATOR BY SENATOR PADILLA. I'M
SORRY. THAT ONE. WE'RE DONE.
DONE DONE. SORRY ABOUT THAT.
ITEM NUMBER NINE SB 981 BY
SENATOR WAHAB. THE VOTE IS NINE
ZERO BY C¢M. AYE BAUER-KAHAN
AYE. VOTE IS TEN ZERO. ITEM
NUMBER TEN SB 961 BY SENATOR
WIENER. THE VOTE IS SEVEN THREE,
I HAD SAID SEVEN TWO EARLIER,
BUT, ASSEMBLY MEMBER HOOVER WAS
A NO, NOT NOT VOTING. SO IT'S
SEVEN THREE BAUER-KAHAN. AYE
KHN. AYE. THAT IS EIGHT THREE.
TWO. ITEM NUMBER 13. SB 1223 BY
ASSEMBLY BY SENATOR BECKER. THE
VOTE IS NINE ZERO. BAUER-KAHAN
AYE. BAUER-KAHAN AYE. THAT IS
TEN ZERO. ITEM NUMBER 16, SB
1220 BY SENATOR LIMÓN. THE VOTE
IS SIX TWO BY BAUER-KAHAN. AYE.
B¢O KHN AYE. VOTE IS SEVEN TWO.
ITEM NUMBER 17, SB 1283 BY
SENATOR. I'M SORRY. WE'RE DONE.
THAT ONE'S CLOSED. ITEM NUMBER
18, SB 1297 BY SENATOR ALAN. THE
VOTE IS SEVEN ONE. BAUER-KAHAN.
AYE. KHN. AYE THE VOTE IS EIGHT
ONE. ITEM NUMBER 19, SB 1313 BY
SENATOR ASHBY. THE VOTE IS EIGHT
ZERO. B¢O KHN. AYE. BAUER-KAHAN
AYE. THE VOTE IS NINE ZERO. ITEM
NUMBER 21, SB 1394 BY SENATOR
MINN. THE VOTE IS NINE ZERO, BY
BAUER-KAHAN. AYE KHN AYE. THE
VOTE IS TEN ZERO. ITEM NUMBER
22, SB 1446 BY SENATOR SMALLWOOD
. SMALLWOOD. CUEVAS. THE VOTE IS
SIX THREE BY BAUER-KAHAN. AYE.
KHN AYE. THE VOTE IS SEVEN
THREE. LET ME SAY THIS HEARING
IS ADJOURNED.
WHAT DID THEY DO? THEY SAID
THEY'RE IN THE OFFICE HAVING A
LEASE. MAIENSCHEIN I NEED TO
GREET YOU GUYS. THEY DIDN'T.
WELL, THEY. STIRRING ALL.