Assembly Standing Committee on Insurance

Good morning, Madam Chair and members, I'm pleased to present AB 621. Today. When a public safety officer, like a firefighter or peace officer, falls in the line of duty, it can leave an irreparable hole in their communities. The surviving families of those fallen officers must quickly adapt to the sudden loss of their loved one while facing many newfound challenges, including a significant impact to their finances.

Generally, both the California Workers Compensation System and the public Employee Retirement system provide financial benefit for the survivors of those tragedies. However, while the families of local public safety officers may receive these benefits, the families of certain classes of state public safety officers, including firefighters and peace officers, are not allowed to receive both. AB 621 addresses this inequity between local and state by allowing a variety of state public safety officers, including the firefighters and peace officers who are currently excluded, to receive both benefits.

I think speaking first today in support of this bill is Meagan Subers, representing the California Professional Firefighters.

Thank you, Madam Chair Members. Meagan Subers. On behalf of the California Professional Firefighters, we are proud to sponsor this bill and appreciate the author bringing it forward in deference to our local, Local 2881 that is also here representing our state firefighters. I will defer my time to Terry McHale, but would just express our support for this bill and ask for your aye vote at the right time.

Madam Chair, Terry McHale with Aaron Reed and Associates representing CAL FIRE Local 2881. Pleased to be here with Assemblywoman Irwin and obviously with CAL FIRE. CAL FIRE is not only the largest fire Department in the United States, it is the largest fire Department in North America. And there is this oddity from the 1959 Survivors act that has continued that does not allow a state firefighter to take advantage of both workers comp and CalPERS with an online duty death.

The consequence is that families not only lose the firefighter they love, they also lose security. They lose financial ability to plan for the future. It doesn't make sense. Obviously, I would not say that CAL FIRE firefighters are any braver than any other firefighter. You have to be courageous to do their job, but they're no less. Certainly, and it makes sense to support this Bill, to vote for this Bill, and to move this bill forward so thank you, Assemblymember Irwin, and thank you, members of the committee.

Thank you. Do we have any other witnesses in support?

Thank you, Madam Chair, Members and staff. Mitch Steiger with California Labor Federation also in support.

Okay, do we have any opposition to this bill? Okay. Seeing none. We are operating as a subcommitee, so as soon as we have a quorum, we'll call the role. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay, next, we're ready for Assemblywoman Rivas to take up AB 970.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. I want to start by thanking Claire for her work on this analysis. California's most vulnerable communities disproportionately suffer from the impacts of climate change. Extreme weather, such as from atmospheric storms or extreme heat events, brings the potential for the loss of life and property. Oftentimes, low income individuals, homeowners, renters and small businesses have the most to lose because they do not have the resources, such as insurance, to financially recuperate.

AB 970 rectifies this by closing insurance protection gaps to ensure that communities have the tools for resiliency in future weather events. Additionally, AB 970 establishes six pilot projects where vulnerable and disadvantaged communities from the Bay Area to the US Mexico border will receive $1 million grants for pilot projects protecting residents from flooding and heat waves. From the Department of Insurance. In 2017, California experienced the largest and most destructive wildfire season in its history, with 9000 wildfires reported and 1.2 million acres burned as a result. Former Senator, now Insurance Commissioner, Ricardo Lara authored SB 30, which convened a climate insurance working group to identify and assess mechanisms that promote and create incentives to reduce the risk of climate change, particularly for vulnerable communities. In 2021, I authored AB 2238 which took recommendations from the Climate Insurance Working group and established the development of a statewide heat ranking process.

AB 970 builds on the progress made in AB 2238 in achieving the goals of the Climate Insurance Working Group to ensure that insurance protection gaps are filled to build resilient communities. Today, I have with me to provide testimony Mike Peterson, deputy insurance Commissioner on Climate and Sustainability.

Thank you and good morning, chair Calderon, vice chair and members of the committee. I am Mike Peterson and I serve as the Deputy Commissioner for Climate and Sustainability at the California Department of Insurance. As the sponsor for AB 970, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara would like to thank Assembly Member Rivas for her leadership in authoring this important measure that will strengthen community resilience across our state by establishing climate insurance pilot projects and a grant program at the Department of Insurance to support projects that improve risk communication community risk reduction and test new insurance concepts.

As climate impacts accelerate, vulnerable communities that have historically been uninsured or underinsured will face challenges from the acute impacts and also from the lack of timely resources to rebound. Insurance plays a critical role in community resilience, but less than 2% of households have flood insurance statewide, and the impacts of heat waves and sea level rise largely lack any insurance coverage. This means that costs fall on households and local and state governments.

Without new tools for resilience, communities are likely to face lingering financial impacts, exacerbating inequity. AB 970 will help close in California's insurance protection gaps by developing climate insurance pilot projects, which is a key recommendation of Commissioner Lara's climate insurance report, a first of its kind set of 40 recommendations published in 2021.

The pilot projects proposed in AB 970 will demonstrate how local jurisdictions can reduce the climate insurance, the insurance protection gap of their residents and integrate nature based solutions to reduce future losses, thereby increasing community resilience. Examples of potential pilot projects include community wide flood and extreme heat insurance, approaches that combine risk reduction and assistance to vulnerable residents and ensuring nature based solutions like urban forests that provide cooling and public health benefits. California has been a global leader on climate policy, including emission reductions and climate adaptation.

Insurance as part of climate resilience is an area where we need to continue to be a leader, developing new ways to protect our most vulnerable communities, invest in nature, and support recovery after disasters. I respectfully request your aye vote on AB 970, and happy to help with any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, so we're going to establish a quorum. Please call the role.

[Roll Call]

We have a quorum. Okay, thank you. And we're going to take a moment to adopt the Committee rules. We're going to consider seven bills. Four of these bills are recommended for consent, and aye just want to note that Assemblywoman Dixon is filling in for Assemblyman Vince Fong. So thank you having.

[Roll Call]

Okay, committee rules are adopted. Okay, next we're going to consider the consent calendar. The following items are consent

Consent calendar is item number one, AB451 Calderon. Item number two, AB489 Calderon. Number three, AB 1389, Wendy Carrillo. Number five, file item five, AB 337 Jim Patterson.

Do we have a motion? Okay, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Okay, next, I want to go back to the assemblywoman Irwins bill, AB 621. Do we have a motion? Second. Thank you. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Thank you for your patience. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Do we have any additional support or opposition public comment? This is for AB 970.

Madam Chair Members. John Norwood, on behalf of the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California. Apparently, we didn't get our letter in quite quick enough, but our members sell insurance throughout California in every community. As we've previously testified, there is a crisis developing in the state in affordability and availability of insurance. Think these types of pilot programs that look at resiliency in communities will help address those areas, and for that reason, we support the Bill. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Hi, Samantha Samuelsen for Audubon California in support.

Marquis King Mason with Environmental Voters in full support. Thank you.

Okay, I'll bring it back to the Committee. Do you have any questions for the author? Okay, Assemblyman Valencia.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and good morning Assemblymember Rivas and Deputy Insurance Commissioner. Recently, the Committee held an informational meeting that raised questions about California's current prohibition against the use of climate catastrophe models by homeowners insurers, for rate making. We learned that California is the only state in the nation that does not allow for such models. Would this pilot program benefit from catastrophic models? And it sounds like the intent of this Bill is to replicate or mimic some of what's already in place in other states.

So just out of curiosity, if there is similarities between the two or if one would benefit from the other, I.

I will ask the Deputy Insurance Commissioner to respond.

Thanks for the question. These pilot projects are focused locally, and so local risk assessment, local risk reduction is more the emphasis of these pilots rather than sort of a statewide insurance approach. And so I think through those local risk assessments, we may learn data and important things, but they're separate issues at this stage.

Thank you. And just for my educational purpose, is there differences in the fire threats throughout the state, or is it brush, forestry? Or why is it specific to local communities?

Each local community has their own particular risk, and so there are differences, some of them. Communities certainly learn from each other, and there are overarching factors. But I think in this case, we're really trying to focus on what can we do on a community wide basis in a particular locality, and then how can that inform other pilot projects throughout the state?

Do we have any other questions for the author? Okay, seeing none, we have a motion and a second. No, we don't have a second. Thank you. Please call the roll

File item number six, AB 970 motion is due past two appropriations. [Roll Call]

The chair supports this measure, and the motion is do pass to appropriations. Thank you, Ms. Rivas. Assemblywoman Weber, whenever you're ready to present on AB 699, please come up. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. I want to start by thanking the chair and committee staff for the thoughtful conversations leading up to this hearing. I'm here to present AB 699, which would expand presumptive coverage for hernia, pneumonia, heart trouble, cancer, tuberculosis, bloodborne infection disease, MRSA, meningitis related disease and illnesses or injury related to post traumatic stress disorder or exposure to biochemical substances to a full time San Diego lifeguard employed by the City of San Diego Fire Rescue Department and working in the boating Safety unit. San Diego lifeguards are highly trained in water rescue and are also marine firefighters that combat shipboard, vessel and marina fires. This job exposes San Diego lifeguards to a considerable degree of hazardous risk through exposure to chemicals and materials that frequently ignite during firefighting. San Diego lifeguards also perform swift water and flood rescues, making them an indispensable asset to the city, county and state.

The presumptions included in AB 699 are already included. For the City of San Diego firefighters that work on land. This bill will provide the same coverage for lifeguards that also practice fire suppression. This Bill is about equity and ensuring that individuals participating in the same firefighting activities have the same protections under workers compensation law. In California, there are only 59 lifeguards employed by the City of San Diego. So we're talking about a very small number of elite individuals.

This bill has support from San Diego City Council members Raul Campillo LaCava and von Wilpert, the Teamsters California Nurses Association and the California Labor Federation. With me here to testify. I have Shane Gusman, Director of the California Teachers Teamsters Public Affairs Council, and Connor Robbins, a lifeguard sergeant with the City of San Diego Fire Rescue Department Lifeguard Division.

Madam Chair, members of the committee, Shane Gusman on behalf of the California Teamsters Public Affairs. Council, I'll be very brief. I first just want to thank the committee and in particular the staff for working with us for about three years as we discussed this Bill and came up with this proposal. Currently, the lifeguards in the boating safety unit get five of these presumptions in collective bargaining. This only would extend a few more, and it's very important for equity reasons for them to get this.

They shouldn't have to give up things that their fellow peace officers and firefighters don't have to give up in collective bargaining to get these comp protections. So with that, I'll turn it over to our witness from the lifeguards.

Thank you. Honorable assembly members, thank you for considering AB 699. I'm Connor Robbins and I currently serve as a lifeguard sergeant within the City of San Diego Fire Rescue Department, of which I've been a part of for the last 13 years. I'm here today as the chief steward of Teamsters Local 911, representing San Diego city guards. I'd like to express how important the passing of this bill is.

The 59 lifeguards who work out of the boating safety unit are both peace officers and maritime firefighters. Although California law provides presumptive coverages for most firefighters and peace officers, these lifeguards are not covered. The boating safety unit lifeguards have some current presumptions, like we stated, but the additional ones that we would receive from this bill are related to heart trouble and cancer. These lifeguards are exposed to a variety of environments that are known to or suspected to cause ailments that I just mentioned.

You may be familiar with the phrase ACCF, which is type of foam widely used in maritime firefighting. It's extremely effective in fighting fires, but it's also widely known as a firefighter killer because of its carcinogenic properties. Now, for the sake of time, I won't list off every example of hazardous exposures that lifeguards experience, but I'll share a quick story. 11 days ago, lifeguards working the 24 hours shift at the boating safety unit were suddenly awoken around midnight.

The dispatcher reported that multiple migrant boats had capsized on a beach near La Jolla and that people were in the water. That night, San Diego was covered in dense fog. The water was cold, and the tide was high. Lifeguards immediately responded and arrived to what was an unthinkable scene. The two boats had capsized off a beach that sits below 300 foot cliffs and stretches on for miles.

The tide was so high that the ocean extended all the way up to the base of the cliffs, making the beach inaccessible by vehicle. Lifeguards responded by boat and on foot. They waded through gasoline filled ocean through the boat debris in hopes of saving lives. These guards did everything they could to give these people a chance at life, but sadly, they found and recovered eight migrants who had already perished.

These lifeguards respond to many types of emergencies, but incidents like this expose lifeguards to polluted waters, sudden sleep interruptions, both of which are linked to heart trouble and cancers. I can't thank you enough for considering this bill. I strongly believe that passing this will give peace of mind to all involved, and ultimately, it's the right thing to do for these lifeguards. Thanks.

Thank you. Mr. Robbins, do we have any witnesses in opposition? No. Okay. Is there any additional support?

Thank you. Mitch Steiger with California Labor Federation. Go in support. I guess I'm doing this now.

Thank you, Madam Chair Members. Meagan Subers, on behalf of the California Professional Firefighters in support.

Thank you. I'll bring it back to the Committee. Are there any questions? Someone did.

Thank you. Chair. Curiously, in your research and putting this together, did you find any other cities who have lifeguard operations, obviously, that don't include these additional diseases?

The particular boating safety unit that this bill affects is the only unit like it in the world. So if you see folks doing the same sort of activities in other parts of California, they're working for the fire department, they're firefighters. Everywhere else in the world, they do the same thing.

And I am supportive of the bill. It's just that coming from a city where I represented, those lifeguards were part of the fire department. And so there was never any debate in terms of those covered. Just, you've made compelling points today. I just want to be sure that we're protecting our lifeguards in the State of California. So that's where I'm coming from. So thank you very much.

Yes. I want to thank the member for bringing this very important bill forward. We got to do everything and everything we can to protect our first responders out there. And with that said, last year I was out and toured the department, and I heard firsthand from some of the lifeguards and the challenges and uniqueness, what they do. So I'm glad we have this bill forward, and hopefully it gets out. I look forward to supporting it. Thank you.

And I also want to thank you for this. I spent 10 years of my youth as a mortician and I dealt with families that would come and try to bury their loved ones after a tragedy, an accident or a death. And a lot of times they weren't financially able to do that. So the burial fees, death benefit, I don't think you understand how beneficial that will be because the three most traumatic things or stressful things you could ever have is buying a home, getting married and a death.

And we never really prepare for when a loved one or a family Member passes on to the next. Even if I asked everyone here, have they picked out their funeral arrangements? Probably no one. Only me. Two of us have done that. And so I'm glad you have that provision in there, because we really do not think about how to take care of the families, as you were saying, after something tragic happened. So thank you for doing that, especially for our first responders, because we need to just do more when things happen.

Any other questions? Assemblymember Gipson.

Thank you very much. First of all, I want to align my comments with the previous speakers. I think it's a good bill. I know this unit. I'm a scuba diver myself, so I enjoy the water. And I know that these individuals are absolutely uniquely equipped to do the work that they're doing. And again, what my colleagues say, we should be protecting our first responders. And this unit rises that elevation, and I support it. And thank you very much for having the vision to bring it before us.

Thank you. Okay, we have a first and a second motion. So, secretary, please call the roll.

File item number seven. AB 699 Weber. Motion is do pass to appropriations. [Roll Call]

Thank you, Ms. Weber.

Okay, now we're going to go back over some of the bills that we brought up earlier to make sure we have everybody.

So a Committee rules. [Roll Call]

Okay, thank you. We're going to leave the roll open for about 10 minutes. So, anyone knows where Mr. Berman is, ask him to please come to the Insurance Committee.

Welcome.

Thank you, sorry I'm late.

Committee rules. [Roll Call]

Thank you. The Insurance Committee is adjourned.