Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

Good morning. We'd like to welcome you to the April 19 Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing. We have 190 bills to consider this morning as a part of our regular ordered hearing, but before we begin, I have a few housekeeping notes to cover. We encourage the public to provide written testimony before the hearing by visiting the Committee website at apro Assembly CA Gov. Please note that any written testimony submitted to the Committee is considered public comment and may be read into the record or reprinted.

The hearing room is open to attendance. All are encouraged to watch the hearing from its stream on the Assembly website at Assembly ca Gov. Today's events we encourage the public to monitor the Committee's website for updates. We will accept public comment on any Bill placed on the suspense file by the Committee today and for which the author weigh. Presentation before the close of the regular ordered hearing.

Testimony on such any such Bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, and position on the Bill. The Committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total. As you came into the hearing room today, the sergeants directed your attention to the rules of public attendance and participation which were posted outside the door. I encourage Members of the public who are in attendance to be aware of and observe those rules.

Please be aware that violations of these rules or other violations of General courtesy of decorum may subject you to removal or other enforcement processes. I see that at this particular point we do not have a quorum. I will call on the Members who are on their way here to help us establish that quorum. But as we wait for the quorum to take place, we'll proceed as a Subcommitee of the Appropriations Committee, and we'll move to items that are before us to take up in public hearing.

The first is Assembly Member Quirk-Silva. You were the first to okay then. We welcome Assembly Members Zbur AB 1335. This enjoys a do pass. Welcome.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to present AB 1330 today and to thank our sponsor, abundant housing Los Angeles. We've also been working with Calcogs and the Building Industry Association on some amendments to address some late technical concerns they raise, and we feel confident that we'll be able to work those out.

As you may already know, the Sustainable Community Strategies program, or SCS, is a local planning process that encourages more housing near transit to reduce our reliance on cars. AB 1335 strengthens the SCS program by aligning the program with the regional housing needs allocation, or RHNA process. Currently, the assumptions and information used to develop the SES are different from the assumptions that cities and counties use for their RHNA process. As a result, this discrepancy has led to an underestimation of housing need for certain areas.

The end result of the Bill is that more of the RHNA housing allocation would be located in scs areas. Therefore, along transit AB 1335 ensures that the same assumptions are used for the SES and the RHNA processes. One area where the Bill may incur a modest amount of local government staff time, may incur a modest amount of local government staff time, and therefore a fiscally responsible cost is aligning these two sets of information.

The cost of doing nothing is significantly more than the cost of aligning the scs and the arena. This Bill will make it easier for cities and counties to implement the SES and create more housing near transit. AB 1335 will also result in valuable information about the efficacy of the SES program and creates transparency around local progress towards sustainable development.

Another area where the Bill could possibly create a modest cost is in the SCS reporting for local staff to use an hour or two of time once a year. We believe that the public transparency around SCS progress is worth this fiscally responsible cost. We won't have primary testimony today, but with me to assist with technical questions is Amy Hines Sheikh, on behalf of our sponsor, abundant housing La.

Thank you, thank you and welcome to you. We'll turn to the public. Is there anyone here to speak in favor of AB 1335? Seeing none, we'll take opposition. Seeing no opposition, we'll turn to the Committee. Any comments? Questions? Yes.

Thank you, assemblyman. Thank you, chair. Many of you know I'm wearing my local government hat when I ask these questions. So my understanding is that when the Legislature created scs, it added explicit assurances that local governments. That two local governments.

That nothing in SCS and an SCS regulates the use of land or shall be interpreted as superseding the exercise of the land use authority of cities and counties within the region, or shall require a city or county's land use policies and regulations, including its General plan, to be consistent with SCS. I don't understand the contradiction.

So the SCS program was a program that was imposed by state law and requires local jurisdictions to create a sustainable communities plan that's consistent with the air plan.

Right. Correct.

All this Bill does is it basically says that the RHNA process and there are housing allocations that come out of the SCS program that the local jurisdictions themselves put together, right?

Yes.

There's a RHNA process also that sets housing allocations for each local jurisdiction.

Yes.

And what this does is it basically says that you need to use the same population estimates for both of the programs so that the numbers are more consistent.

Yes, it's the population projections that are provided between the regional governments and the Department of Finance. So those numbers should match each other.

I actually recall going through the RHNA process. These were some of the communities that I represent that those numbers did not match. Anyway, there were inconsistencies in terms of what methodology. Okay, that's fine. So thank you very much.

And the one thing I'll say is that where the divergences are more than, I think, 1.5%, it triggers this, and it requires a discussion to try to align the numbers.

I see. Okay. All right. Thank you very much.

Seeing no other comments from Members of the Committee, we will take up the Bill and take action on it once we get a quorum. We have one more to go to get to that quorum. Magic number. So thank you for your presentation.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

Of course. And we'll also put the call out there for authors to pay us a visit. Assembly Member Quirksilva. So, Assembly Member, if you can pause for just a moment, I think we do have a quorum. We're still short. Okay. We're still a little short. So you're here to present AB 446. And that also enjoys the do pass.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. I'm happy to be here to present cursive writing. Kind of old school, new school. I know some people love cursive writing, and others are like, why the heck would we have a Bill for this? But as a teacher for 30 years, I feel the importance of this skill is not only in writing, but there have been numerous research studies over the decade looking at the benefits of students learning cursive writing.

Research has demonstrated that the benefits of learning cursive include sensory motor integration skills, facilitate reading acquisition in young children, effect on functional brain development, enhance memory and receiving of new information, and provide the brain with optimal conditions for learning. But the real reason that I've brought this Bill forward is equity. We might think, what does equity have to do with cursive writing?

Now more than ever, we see that many of us, and I would assume most of you up there, know how to do cursive writing, but it's not just doing it, it's reading it. Whereas we have historical documents, letters from families, other material like that, that if you don't know how to read cursive writing you really have no access to. Now, more and more, it's really up to the school or the teacher themselves to decide to introduce cursive writing.

I know for sure I have four young adults from the age 26 to 33, and they all know cursive writing. But many of our younger friends say that their own children have not been introduced to cursive writing and don't know how to do it. So with that, I am pretty insistent on it as a teacher for 30 years. I'll just end with a Jerry Brown, Governor Jerry Brown, quote, some of you worked under him as I did.

And he said, why aren't you bringing this Bill forward? And he said, if you bring it forward, I'll sign it. And he indeed then took out a piece of paper and then showed me how great his cursive writing was. So with that, I would hope that you would support this Bill.

Thank you very much for that. We'll take witnesses or those to speak in support of this Bill. Seeing none. Yes. Okay.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. It's a pleasure to see you today. Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education. And we're in strong support of the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Opposition seeing none. We'll come back to the Committee. Are there any comments, questions, critiques? Assembly Member Weber, good morning.

Thank you so much for presenting this Bill. I really hadn't thought about the equity piece until you just mentioned it right now. My boys went to a private Montessori school and they taught them cursive handwriting at that point. And when you mention that, and I think about all of the kids that didn't go to a private preschool or a private elementary school, it is an equity piece. So thank you so much for bringing this, and I look forward to supporting it.

Thank you. Well, seeing no other comments, we're still waiting for one more to get to a quorum. But let me just say that I remember as an elementary school student, we'd have the Alphabet at the very top of the board and it would have cursive as a part of how to write the various letters. And so growing up as clearly you have, and learning how and the importance of cursive writing, I think that this is a wonderful Bill.

I look at the handwriting of my adult kids who, they show me their signature and I can't read it. I have no idea. They claim that it's their thing and everyone knows, but I don't. I like to try to see and understand what I'm reading incursive, and I think that's an important skill set to have. So when we have the quorum in place, we'll take up the Bill on a vote. And we thank you for the presentation this morning.

Thank you, Members.

Thank you. Assembly Member Lee, you have two bills, AB 604 and 664.

Morning, Mr. Chair Members. I want to thank you for your time today and thank your staff for their work on AB 664. This Bill requires domestic well owners to ensure that tenants of rental properties served solely by their wells have access to safe drinking water. The requirement is triggered only if a well owner declines to participate in a drinking water system consolidation or extension of service.

By declining participate, well owners essentially decline access to technical systems and funding that the State Water Board already provides to support consolidation process and improve water quality and disadvantaged communities. Because the requirement applies to well owners, there are no anticipated costs. Estate, as noted in the Committee's analysis. And I have with me today Abraham Mendoza from the community water center. And one more guest, I suppose.

Yes. Good morning, chair and Members. My name is Roger Johnson on behalf of...I'm sorry.

Well, if you've already presented on 664, let's just continue. I just called you up that you have two bills, 604 and 664. So you took 664. Continue. Well, let's finish with 664.

Apologies for that, Mr. Chair. Abraham Mendoza, on behalf of the community water center, we are proud co sponsors of AB 664. By Assembly Member Lee, along with leadership council for justice and accountability, are partners on this Bill. 10 years ago, the State of California passed the human rights of water, recognizing that all communities deserve access to safe, clean drinking water.

And AB 664 really continues this process by helping to ensure that renters reliant on contaminated or at risk domestic wells are not left behind. These are primarily in rural communities where our organizations operate providing direct aid and technical assistance to communities dealing with groundwater contamination issues as well as issues with dry domestic wells. This Bill continues just to advance the progress. The state is moving on this issue and we ask for your support in this measure.

Thank you. Is there anyone here to speak in favor of AB 664 opposed to 664? Okay, we'll bring it back to the Committee. Any comments, questions on AB 664? Seeing none, once we have a quorum, we'll take up the vote on your Bill. Thank you. So AB 604 was pulled from the consent. So that might be where they're a little. zero, I see some confusion. So you're going to be presenting on now AB 604?

Yes. Thank you, chair. And I'm sorry about the mix up. Bill numbers are so close to one another in that sense. So I'm presenting AB 604. Thank you. Currently, AB 1061 from last year prohibits mobile home park management from charging tenants for their sub metered watered service beyond charges paid by management directly to the water services provider in a reasonable administrative fee. That Bill, AB 1061 of the last session, was signed and passed into law.

This Bill, AB 604, clarifies the scope of AB 1061 to explicitly include all mobile home residents, including all the same caps on water service charges, charge fees. These charges may include nebulous services such as customer charges or service charges that far exceed the charges billed at the park by this serving water utility. The CPUC anticipates this Bill results in negligible costs, and with that, I'd like to introduce my witness in support, Roger Johnson, the chair of the GSMol legislative action team.

Good morning, chair and Members. My name is Roger Johnson. On behalf of GSMoL, we are in support of AB 604. The Legislature already voted to protect consumers of water in other submetered circumstances from these same excessive charges. And the Legislature just voted over a year ago to protect mobile home consumers in a similar way, AB 604 is about clarifying what park owners believe still exists, but does not. We ask for your consideration and thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that like to speak either in favor or opposed to AB 64?

Thank you. Mr. Chair, Members, my name is Chris Wasaki with WMA and as this is a fiscal Committee, I won't rehash our policy arguments, but we definitely believe that 604 will discourage water conservation. The rates, set at 475 per space, were established under a Lois Wilk Bill in SB seven. That was several years ago. It allowed for CPI adjustments. If AB 1061 took those adjustments in place, the fee would be much higher today. We also believe that AB 604, Usurps, CPUC authority. These are water experts.

This Bill went through housing. It's not a water Committee. We think this Bill should basically go through a water housing Committee policy debate. And for those reasons, we oppose AB 604. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no one else who would like to speak from the public, we will now establish a quorum and then we'll continue with the conversation. Madam Secretary, call the roll.

[Roll call].

Quorum being established, we will now continue our conversation on AB 604. Are there any Members of the Committee that have any questions on this particular Bill in motion? This is out on a B roll call. Yes, we do need a motion. It's been moved and seconded.

Thank you.

B roll call. Let's see. Ms. Rivas, if you would like to join us. You're here to present on AB 587. I'm sorry. 285.

Yes.

Okay. I saw Rivas. I didn't look at the first initial.

No problem. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, AB 285 seeks to make climate change a course requirement for grades one through 12 so that our future leaders can gain the knowledge they need to create a sustainable future. Students who are being educated about the impacts of climate change are clearly better prepared to fight for a better future. But not all children are being provided the opportunity to learn about climate change.

In 2010, the California State Board of Education adopted the Education and Environment initiative curriculum with the goal of increasing environmental literacy for California's k through 12 students. Additionally, three years after the adoption of the education and Environmental Initiative curriculum, California adopted the next generation science standards to include environmental issues as an option in elementary, middle and high school education.

California has certainly made some progress on advancing climate change literacy, but there remains much work to be done to teach these topics in our schools since the state's attempts to teach about climate change remain optional. According to the analysis from this Committee, AB 285 does not have any additional costs. If climate change education is mandated, reimbursement to local educational agencies will be funded through the K through 12 Mandate Block Grant.

In order to continue combating climate change, we have to start by educating our future leaders, and that starts with the students in our schools. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Are there any Members of the public that would like to comment in support or opposition to this Bill?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education, in support of the Bill and appreciate the fact that there's no additional costs.

Thank you. We'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions? Is there a motion been moved and seconded? This is out on a B roll call with Sanchez not voting.

Thank you.

Thank you. So why don't we do this? Why don't we go back and we'll take up for motion. AB 446. Quirk Silva. This enjoys a do pass. Moved by Weber. Second and bypassing. This is out on an a roll call. Zbur 1335, do pass motion. This is out on a broll call. Lee, AB. 664, do pass motion.

Okay. This is out with Republicans not voting. And Mathis is a... So this is out with Republicans not voting. And should Mr. Mathis show up, we know where he stands on that. Dr. Wood, you're presenting AB 952.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Members. AB 952 makes it easier for consumers and dentists to know who and where to turn to when they need help with the coverage denial or processing dental claims. Sometimes patients call the dental office the dental plan Department of managed Healthcare only to find out that their employer is responsible for their benefits as a self insured ERISA plan. Because it's an ERISA plan, consumers are subject to federal laws, not the rights in place for California regulated dental coverage.

We are currently engaged with the California Association of Dental Plans to try to address their operational concerns and find other methods of notifying their enrollees and contracted provider. As reflected in the Committee's analysis, AB 952 poses minor and absorbable costs to the state. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Members of the public who would like to comment in favor or opposition to this Bill.

Good morning. Chair and Members, Jessica Moran with the California Dental Association here today as the sponsors, in support and here, if any technical questions come up. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members. Matt Back, representing the California Association of Dental Plans. Mr. Wood said, we are, in conversations, we currently have an opposed unless amended position. Cautiously optimistic. We'll get there. Thanks.

Okay, we'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions, comments from the Committee? Is there a motion? Okay. This is out on an A roll call.

Thank you very much.

Let's move to the consent calendar. If we could, we'll entertain a motion on the consent calendar. Calderon motion second. Our Vice Chair seconds. Madam Clerk, can you read the consent calendar?

[Consent calendar reading].

It's been a motion. It's been seconded. We'll call the roll. On the roll call. Sorry, on the consent.

[Roll call].

10-0. The consent calendar is adopted. We'll leave the roll open for Members to add. We'll turn to Ms Carrillo. You'd like to present Assembly Member Garcia's Bill. AB 1395.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. On behalf of Assembly Member Eduardo Garcia, I'm here to present Assembly Bill 1395. This Bill will revise licensing requirements for doctors and dentists from the Mexico program. AB 1395 will require the medical board of California to issue a Mexico from pilot program, or MPP, license to an applicant who is otherwise eligible for this license without an itin or Social Security number. This Bill passed the business and professions Committee with bipartisan support and has no opposition. Respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public that like to speak in favor or opposition to AB 1395? Say none. Committee, is there any comments or questions on this Bill? This Bill is out on an A roll call.

Thank you.

I'm sorry, we have a motion. Mr. Lowenthal, Bill is out on an A roll call. Welcome, Mr. Ting. You're presenting AB 783? Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. AB 783 builds upon my Bill to require restrooms, single use restrooms in California to be open to everyone. Unfortunately, we haven't seen complete compliance, although we've seen a great number of businesses comply. We now are adding in a mechanism for enforcement as well as to inform building owners. That will go on whichever local agency is doing the permitting and the notifications. With that respect for an aye vote on maybe 793.

No witnesses today.

No witnesses.

Anyone to speak in favor or opposition to the Bill? Seeing none. Committee, any questions? It's been moved. It's been seconded. This Bill is out on a. Let's see. B. Roll call.

Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Mckinnor, welcome. You're here to present 1028, and that enjoys a do pass.

1028 will ensure that survivors of domestic and sexual violence have access to healthcare services by creating a survivor center trauma-informed approach and limit non consensual and potentially dangerous mandated reports to law enforcement. This Bill is unlikely to generate state costs and could result in cost savings for county jails. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Okay. Is there anyone here to speak in support or opposition? Lowenthal supports. Calderon seconds. No questions from Members. Your Bill is out on a B roll call with Weber not voting.

Thank you.

Thanks. Okay, we're looking for Mr. Rivas, but in there he is. Okay. No. Yeah. Welcome. AB 587.

AB 587. And so this legislation seeks to make a small but important clarification in state law regarding access to certified payroll records from public works projects. And specifically, this Bill simply clarifies that when a labor compliance entity detects a possible inaccuracy in an electronic certified payroll record, that they are entitled to review the hard copy of that record, which is the source material. This Bill does not impose any new reporting requirements on contractors and has a negligible fiscal impact to the state.

With me here to answer some questions is Matt Cremins, but respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

It's been moved. And second, Calderon.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Matt Cremins on behalf of the operating engineers, I will be brief. We are sponsors of the Bill. Happy to answer any questions or concerns.

Okay. Public comment? In support or opposition? Seeing none. Questions from the Committee? Seeing none. There's been a motion. A second. It's out on an. A roll call. Sure. We'll now give those Members who have not had an opportunity to vote on the consent calendar chance to do so. Madam Clerk.

[Roll call].

Okay, we are going to now move to the suspense file and dispense with the suspense file. Madam Clerk, please read the suspense file.

[Suspense file reading].

Thank you. The suspense file is deemed approved. We'll now move to items that before we go to public comment. If we have Members who need to add on to bills, we'll make our rounds here at another time. Mr. Mathis.

[Consent calendar].

And then we'll take up AB 664 that is out. And we will show Mathis not voting. I'm sorry, Mathis is an aye. Okay, we've for all Members who've already voted on all the items, we're now going to move to public comment. So you're free to go. And as I turn to public comment, is there anyone that would like to speak on any item that was brought before the Committee today? Either on consent or suspense, either in favor or opposed, this is your opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members Andrea Ball, on behalf of the Orange County Department of Education Dr. Almihara, Superintendent in support of AB 721 by Assembly Member of Valencia.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. And Members Gregory Kramer, on behalf of Disability Rights California with the following positions we're sponsoring. AB 222, Arambula, have concerns about AB 67 Muratsuchi. We have support for AB 438 Rubio AB 447 Arambula. AB 497. Quirk-Silva, AB 545 Pellerin. We're sponsoring AB 590 Hart. We support AB 619 Fong support. AB 626 Pellerin support and AB 860 Valencia support. AB 1085 Maienschein support. AB 1340 Garcia support. AB 1466 Weber support and AB 1536 Carrillo in support. Thank you.

Thank you. I see no other speakers. That concludes public comment. We are going to ask for a few Members to come in to add on to consent. That would be Dixon, Pellerin, and Wilson. And Assembly Member Brian has indicated he will not be attending the meeting today. Okay, we'll now take up the consent calendar for Members to add on to.

[Consent calendar].

Thank you. So we'll keep the roll open for another five minutes to allow the other two Members to come in and add on to consent. Madam Clerk will call the role on consent.

[Consent calendar].

Committee is going to adjourn. We have all our Members who are going to report in today. So the meeting is adjourned. Thank.