Senate Standing Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development

Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development will come to order. Good morning. Senate continues to welcome the public in person and via the teleconference service.

So for individuals wishing to provide public comment via the Teleconference service, the participant number today is 877-226-8216 and the access code is 6217161-621-7161 we're holding our Committee hearing in our 1021 street location, so all Members of the Business and Professions Committee please report to room 2100 so we can establish a quorum and begin to vote on bills as they come before us. We have 11 bills on today's agenda. There's one measure proposed for consent. It's file item number three, AB 826.

We will establish a quorum when we are able to do so. In the meantime, we're going to take two measures out of order. Mr. Holden's item number six and item number seven. Mr. Holden, AB 1204, Contractors. Proceed when ready.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 124 Bill aimed at addressing the issue of employees being misclassified as independent contractors in the construction industry. Despite efforts by the Labor Commissioner, the labor movement and high road contractors to adhere to labor law, the problem of misclassification remains rampant in the industry, with low road contractors putting their profits above employee benefits like workers compensation, insurance and rest breaks.

The misuse of independent contractors allows these low road contractors to underbid law-abiding contractors and ignore state labor law requirements, creating unsafe workplaces for employees and leaving workers responsible for finding remedies to be paid properly. AB 124 seeks to limit the number of independent contractors working under a single subcontractor or subcontract, helping to curb employee misclassification and ensure accurate certified payroll reports while decreasing the likelihood of project abandonment.

The Bill does not affect legitimate subcontracting relationships where employers properly classified themselves as such and their workers as employees. I understand that the Committee had some concerns as to whether this Bill should be limited to large scale construction projects, should this Bill move forward. Today, I commit to work with the Committee and Senate Labor Public Employment and Retirement Committee to address the concerns.

Testifying in support of AB 124 is Mike West with the State Building Construction Trades Council of California and Mike Greenlee with International Union of Painters and Ally Trades, who will share how employee misclassification affect their lives. I respectfully ask for your aye voet.

Thank you, Mr. West, Mr. Greenley, please proceed.

Good morning, Chair, Members of the Committee, My name is Mike Greenley. I'm with the Painters and Allied Trades District Count 16 currently the Political and Communications Director, Briar I was an organizer and lead organizer for nine years and have been in the trades for 29 years total. During my role as an organizer, I've visited hundreds upon hundreds of job sites.

And on more and more of these job sites, we find that we are running into specially licensed contractors that have been awarded a project who in turn have subcontracted labor out to tier two or tier three subcontractors who misclassify their workers to pay lower rates or classify their workers as independent contractors.

I have one example here with me of a recent project in Davis where it was warned to a company where they stated on their notice of award that they will not perform any work or employ any personnel on the project. They then, in turn subcontracted the work out to four other subcontractors, where most, in turn were classified as sole proprietors.

I've been on projects where there were as many as 10 workers on a job site claiming to be independent contractors or sole proprietors, all the while working under one tier subcontractor, under one bid, under one scope of work, and while receiving direction from one foreman. At this point, these workers are no longer independent contractors, they're employees.

AB 124 is a great step in the right direction when it comes to battling some of the bad actors we are encountering with subcontractors that are knowingly and willingly committing violations at the expense of workers to make a profit. Thank you for your time, and I.

Ask you for your support. Thank you, sir. Next, please.

Mr. Chairman, Members Mike West, on behalf of the State Building Construction Trades Council of California, to briefly expand upon what Mr. Greenley said. The problem isn't unique to the painters and allied trades. Those examples are identical to issues that many of the other trades face in the building trades. Amendments taken in the Assembly identify that General contractors are not specialty contractors, and the Bill does not prevent a specialty contractor from contracting with other specialty contractors, one sole proprietor and others that do have employees.

I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thanks for coming down. Any other supporters here in Room 2100, please step forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Members, Bob Jerome. On behalf of the Painters and Allied Trades District Council 36, which is everything south of Bakersfield, and for the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades out of Hanover, Maryland, we respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, sir. Any other supporters in Room 2100? Seeing none, let's turn to opposition, lead or otherwise. Any opposition to this measure in Room 2100 seeing none. Let's move to the teleconference service. Moderator if you would, please prompt any individuals waiting to provide testimony on the teleconference line, either in support or in opposition to AB 1204, if.

You would like to provide public comment in support or opposition to AB 124, please press 1 and 0 at this time. And we have no comments at this time. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moderator let's bring the matter back to my colleagues on the dais. Colleagues, any questions or comments?

Senator Archuleta yes, thank you, Assembly Member, for bringing this forward. I didn't realize it reached this proportion that it's gotten this bad. But obviously, without this, we're not truly protecting the labor force that are out there working, trying to provide for their families and trying to get a good, decent pay and do the right thing. And so I think it's so important that we do that.

And I'm hoping that this blossoms into the other trades and unions and everyone else, that we've got to make sure that our workers are well taken care of, well paid workmen's comp and everything else. And safety on the job is so important, and this is part of it. So when it's appropriate, I'd like to move the Bill. Thank you. Congratulations.

Thank you, Senator. Architect and Member Holden, would you like to close respect? zero, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to miss you. Senator Niello.

Thank you. One of your witnesses stated, I thought I heard something to the contrary, but it appears to me that, as written, the Bill would be a problem for small business owners where the owner is the only worker within the business, and this Bill would appear to provide the same restriction that is applied more broadly by the Bill.

Is that the case?

One of the things that I made comment on initially was when the Committee had some questions around large scale development or projects and should maybe be confined in that way. I think what we're saying is that there's protections and distinctions that have been made in the Bill to create clear separation. But to the extent that we need to do some additional amending to make it crystal clear, we're prepared. And also definitions of large projects might be helpful.

And that's what we're making the commitment to the Committee to do.

My question doesn't have to do with the size of the project. It has to do with specialty contractors that may be a sole proprietorship, and he or she is the only person performing the work, regardless of the size of job.

Thank you for the question. If a sole proprietor is being contracted, say, by a homeowner or by the General contractor. There's no restriction. The Bill in the first line talks about a specialty contractor subbing to other sea licensed contractors. They are allowed one sole proprietor, so another sole proprietor, and the rest would have employees to curb rampant misclassification.

So specifically, one sole proprietor would be allowed, but not more than one hired.

By one specialty contractor. But again, AB licensed contractor can write as many subcontractors as they choose to individual sole proprietors. Or, say, a homeowner that wants to write contracts to sole proprietors, that's fine. It's just from a tier one sub, a specialty contractor, to other specialty contrActors. There's one sole proprietor allowed, and the others would have to have employees.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Niello, any other questions or comments? Senator Eggman?

Thank you. My apologies for being late. And maybe you've already answered this, Assembly Member. So what problem are we trying to solve? What's the problem that we're trying to solve here?

Well, we're trying to make sure that the contractors that are being brought onto projects aren't classified in a certain way or misclassified. That puts them in a position where there could be those employees or those contractors who are union contractors are not being squeezed out of the opportunities.

And this is happening?

Yeah, it is surprising that it's happening at the rate that it is, but it is happening.

I'd like to give you an example. So, Mr. Greenley represents painters and allied trades, floor covering contractors. One contractor will be awarded a project. They have no intention of hiring any employEes. They might purchase 10,000 yards of carpet. Then they would line up a whole slew of sole proprietor independent contractors, and it'd be like a race to the bottom. What will you do the work for? Right down the line, and then it gets converted to work by the yard instead of by the hour.

And so this whole group of people aren't being paid payroll taxes on and everything else. So it's kind of a shell game. Instead of hiring employees, they line up a bunch of sole proprietors to avoid having to pay what the state requires if they were classified as employees.

Okay. And there's enough workers to do all of the work?

Yeah. This Bill doesn't change the scope of the project, the hours, or anything else. It just limits the number of independent contractors or sole proprietors to one being hired by another C licensed contractor, and then the rest would have to have employees to curb the issue that I explained.

Okay.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no other hands in the air now, Assembly Member Holden would you like.

To close Spectrey, Lassery? I vote.

Okay. Let's establish a quorum first.

Roth. Here. Roth. Here. Gwen. Gwen. Here. Alvarada, Gill. Alvarada, Gill. Here. Archuleta. Here. Archuleta. Here. Ashby. Becker. Dodd. Eggman. Eggman. Here. Glazer, Niello. Niello. Here. Smallwood, Quavis. Smallwood, Quavis. Here. Wahab Wilk.

We have a quorum. The Bill has been moved by Senator Archuleta. The motion is do pass to Senate. Labor, public Employment and Retirement. Please call the roll.

Roth? Aye. Roth? Aye Nguyen? Alvarado-Gill? Aye. Alvarado-Gill, aye. Archuleta? Aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby? Becker? Dodd? Eggman? Eggman? Aye. Glazer? Niello? Smallwood - Quavas? Aye. Smallwood-Quavis, aye. Wahob? Wilk?

Bill has five votes. We'll hold the Roll open for absent Members. Sir, your next item is item number seven. AB 1244, Private security services.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. AB 1244, a Bill that would require a qualified manager under a private investigator act and Private Security Services act to hold a current and valid qualified manager certificate issued by the Director of Consumer Affairs. According to the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, there have been a number of instances where the Bureau has cited multiple companies because of the behavior of a single qualified manager who moves from company to company.

Though through the Administration process, the bureau can discipline the company, but not the qualified manager individually. So the person responsible for the conduct that led to the formal discipline of the company is able to move on to another company without a record of the discipline. My office has had conversations with BSIS and the California Association of Licensed Investigators to address some of their concerns that were raised in the Assembly.

The latest version of the amendment should address their concerns, and I hope to have those amendments reflected in the Bill should this Bill leave the Committee today. With me is Kelly Jensen, representing the California Association of Licensed Security Agency Guards and Associates. I respectfully ask for your vote.

Mr. Jensen.

Hi, Senator. Chairman and Members, Kelly Jensen, representing CalSAG, the security guard industry. We've had the pleasure of working with Mr. Holden over the last three years on bills to increase standards on our industry. We take pride in having some of the strongest regulations in the country for security guards. This is another step in that right direction, and we respectfully ask for your support of the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, please.

Good morning, chair Members. My name is Francis Kohler. I'm the past President and current Government Affairs Chair of the California Association of Licensed Investigators. We've been working with Assembly Member Holden and this Bill, first of all, requires a PI to be a qualified manager, and secondly, to ensure that a private investigator is required to get a QM license or qualified manager license only if they are a second one only if they are mentoring a non employee to gain their experience.

And third, that the certificate associated with the qualified manager license will be renewed or expired every two years, along with the license and with those, we support the Bill. We're working out a few technical areas, but we thank Assemblymember Holden for working with us.

Thank you very much, ma'am. Any other supporters in Room 2100? Seeing none, let's turn to opposition, lead or otherwise. Any opponents in Room 2100 that wish to provide comments? Seeing none, let's move to the teleconference service. Moderator if you'd please prompt any individuals waiting to testify, either in support or in opposition to Assembly Bill 1244, we'll take them now.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 1244, please press 1 and 0 at this time. And, Mr. Chair, there are no comments at this time.

Thank you. Bring the matter back to the Deus and my colleagues. Senator Archuleta, you're up.

Okay, thank you. The term qualified manager and licensing thereof. And the reason for that is because the companies always seem to get blamed. But under the leadership of this qualified manager, obviously issues have taken place that, as you said, they were perhaps his fault, and he moves on to the next company. Well, are you going to be able to bond and secure something? Because if there was something, there was a damage of some sort, misrepresentation, anything that went wrong, and there's damages.

Is this individual going to be insured, bonded, some way to protect the client that was hurt in his lack of duty or performance?

If I could ask Kelly Jensen to respond to the specifics of the reason.

I asked is just because he's now licensed, qualified, but that doesn't do anything for the parties that were hurt because of his negligence.

Yes, Senator, the purpose of the Bill is to make sure that these people have the experience to not fail. Right. In your instance, I think, is a good one. We haven't really thought about it from some type of monetary commitment other than the company is a good one.

We can have that discussion with the author and with BSIS, but generally what we're trying to do is make sure that these people have the right type of experience, know the pitfalls of managing a company with so many employees. So the first step would be to make sure they have the appropriate experience, which this Bill intends to Do.

Well, I would think an amendment at the next step, next level is, again, protect those who've been served. And it's got to be some financial strength in there, either bonding insurance, something, or else what's it for? Granted, he's qualified to lead and direct, but there's a problem, and I think you need to look into that.

It's a fair question.

Yes, Senator, I can't speak for the Private Security act, but I certainly can speak for the private investigators, which states that the person that's being mentored, the non employee being mentored, and the QM certificate holder will have share equal liability. So I think that covers the situation that you're talking about. Private security may have something else.

We'll look into it more. We'll have more conversations with the industry so we can fine tune the point.

Very good. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Alvarado-Gil.

Thank you. I just wanted to get a little bit more detail about the renewal process, the fees and the exam. Who would be making those decisions, whether somebody is qualified? Is it simply completing the hours and allotment or how are we measuring this?

It would be, as I understand it, the hours of completion and how that would be determined by the amount of time that they're spending on the job and being trained for this qualification.

Would it be a formal apprenticeship or is it simply completing a time card of 2000 hours? How do we know that they're qualified?

Yes, I understand, Senator. I can only speak for, again, for private investigators. But in California, you have to serve 6000 hours, which are a combination of maybe education, bachelor's, say, for example, gets two years, but then they would have to actually work 4000 more hours or without that, they'd have to work 6000 hours. And that qualifies them to take a state exam that they have to pass before they can qualify for getting a QM and a certificate.

So what other industries would this QM certificate apply to?

Well, I think in terms of. Kelly, did you want to.

The Bill specifically just deals with security guards who, this is on top of their other requirements to become a security guard. So this Bill just applies to private investigators and security guards.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Any other questions, comments? Seeing no other hands up in the air, Assembly Member Holden, would you like to close?

Thank you. I appreciate the Committee working with us on this. I think it's important that we're trying to make sure that these individuals who move around, there is some protection built in. I think we've got a sense of it today that there's clarity in terms of. We want to make sure that there's accountability, and to the extent that there's other levels of protection that we can explore, we're happy to do that. So I appreciate the input and I respectfully ask for your, aye vote.

Thank you, sir. Do we have a motion on AB 1244? Motion moved by Senator Archuleta. The motion is do pass as amended to Senate appropriations. Please call the roll.

Roth, aye. Min. Alvarado-Gill, aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby, Becker. Dodd. Eggman, aye. Glazer. Niello, Aye. Smallwood Quevas, aye. Wahob. Wilk.

Bill has six votes. We'll hold roll open for absent Members. Thank you, sir. Assembly Member Patterson. You've been extraordinarily patient. Item number two, Assembly Bill 633.

And thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. AB 633 is before you. It offers retiring nurses a reduced fee to keep their license active. And it seems, particularly at this time, when nurses are in such short supply, we want to ensure that all willing and able registered nurses are eligible to serve their communities even after they've retired.

AB 633 will allow a retired nurse to renew their license or a reduced fee so that they may offer their services at a voluntary capacity, either on a regular basis or in emergency situations. The State of California already offers this benefit to other healthcare professionals. The medical board allows retired doctors to renew their licenses at reduced fees, and the dental board offers the same benefit to retired dentists. We have worked with the Board of Registered Nurses to ensure clarity in the bill's language.

I know there was some concern about that, but the board and my office are working with it. And if it is as unclear as maybe some of the people in the Committee might thought it was, we're not sure of that. But as we work through it, we're glad to have the Nursing Board, which has really helped us in crafting the Bill, clean up slight ambiguities. The bills enjoyed bipartisan support, no opposition, and I ask for your aye vote..

The individuals who testified in support of the Bill before the Assembly are not here today because of the holiday. And so we'll let the Bill speak for itself and the recommendation of your staff.

Thank you, sir. Any supporters here in the room? Room 2100? Please step forward. Seeing no supporters, let's move to any witnesses in opposition, lead or otherwise any witnesses in opposition in the room 2100, please step forward. Seeing none, let's turn to the teleconference service. Moderator, please prompt any individuals waiting to testify in support or in opposition to AB 633. If there are any, we'll take them now.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 633, please press one, then zero at this time.

Great. Let's bring the matter back to the dais. Colleagues, any comments or questions? Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

As the daughter of a retired nurse who gives me an ear full every time she has to pay her renewal fee because she continues to volunteer and to use her great expertise and skill. I'm really appreciative of this Bill and will go a long way to helping us with the shortage that we have, too, with the care that nurses provide. So just want to say I support the Bill, and when ready, so move that Bill forward.

Thank you for that. Thank you for the motion, Senator. Colleagues, any other questions or comments? I see no other hands up. Assembly Member Patterson, would you like to close?

Well, I appreciate the Senator making my close. With that, I ask for your support, please.

Okay. Colleagues, the Bill has been moved by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. The motion is do passed to Senate appropriations. Please call the roll.

Aye.

Roth?

Roth, aye. Nguyen?

Aye.

Nguyen, aye. Alvarado-Gill?

Alvarado-Gill, aye. Archuleta?

Aye.

Aye.

Archuleta, aye. Ashby? Becker? Dodd? Eggman?

Aye.

Eggman, aye. Glazer? Niello?

Niello, aye. Smallwood-Cuevas?

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Wahab? Wilk?

Aye.

Bill has seven votes. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Item number four. Assembly Member Low AB 996. Proceed when ready.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and colleagues. Thank you for allowing me to present Assembly 996, which focuses on the conflict of interest and the Department of Consumer affairs with respect to continuing education. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Okay. Any witnesses in support in room 2100? Witnesses in support of Assembly Bill 996 seeing none. Let's turn to witnesses in opposition. Leader. Otherwise, opposition witnesses to Assembly Bill 996 in room 2100 seeing none. Let's move to the teleconference service. Moderator if you would, please prompt anyone waiting to testify either in support or opposition to this measure, we will take them now.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 996, please press 1, then 0 at this time. Mr. Chair, we have no comment.

Thank you. Moderator, colleagues, questions or comments? Senator Alvarado-Gil.

Hi, Assembly Member. Hello. Good morning. Good morning. I was hoping that you can speak a little bit to the opposition, particularly around the opportunity for experts in their field to provide continuing education expertise to students using their own tools or their own manuals or their own textbooks. For me, it seems like that would be a positive thing, is getting that education from the expert but talk to me a little bit about your view on this opposition.

Sure. I also feel the same and would acknowledge that there is a sense of expertise. This focuses on the conflict of interest disclosure. So simply just disclosing for the public interest while also understanding that there is great validity to the expertise of an individual in their field. But if there's a financial interest for the public interest to simply be disclosed so that individual still could participate, it would be up to the governing entity under the Department of Consumer Affairs.

As you know, this issue came about during the sunset hearings with respect to acknowledging the potential conflict of interest, while it's also still relying on the expertise. So again, it does not prevent the expertise of an individual, but simply allows for the disclosure for Members of the public to be aware of the relationship that that individual provider has.

So what would the disclosure look like? So when somebody is signing up for a class, for example, there would be a disclaimer or something saying that the expertise of the presenter would be receiving income due to use of a.

Sure. That's the legislative intent behind this. As you know, the Bill provides that the governing entity comes up with the mechanisms on the disclosures commensurate with the current existing disclosures that they would be forced and compelled to also disclose as well.

Okay. And where have you seen this be a problem? Where's that pattern?

Yes, staff had brought this up to me with respect to the sunset hearings that we've had. And so under the Department of Consumer affairs, this has been an issue then, perhaps just simply for the disclosure, for helping to ensure that we have additional sense of trust with respect to the continuing education and also our providers and.

Our licensees, one industry over another or just kind of broad.

I have not specifically heard myself, but I know that it's something that I know within the Department of Consumer affairs, we generally like to look at conflicts of interest in preventing them as well. We don't want to speak to target one particular.

Just wondering if there's bad actors out. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Sure.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no other hands, Assembly Member, would you like to close?

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Again, this simply requires the conflicts of interest to be closed at the beginning of the continuing education course and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, sir. We need a motion. Senator Archuleta moves the Bill. The motion is do passed to Senate appropriations. Please call the roll.

Roth, aye. Min, Aye. Alverado-Gil, aye, Archuleta, aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Dodd. Eggman. Glazer. Niello, Aye. Smallwood Quevas, Aye. Wahob. Wilk.

Bill has 7 votes. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members. Thank you, sir. Semi Member Culra, you're going to be presenting two bills. Why don't we start with item number one? Is that good enough? AB 502 food delivery platforms you're presenting for Assembly Member Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing me to present AB 502 as mentioned on behalf of Assembly. Alex Lee. In the pandemic economy, many businesses had to pivot to food delivery services to survive. And it is important to ensure that all parties involved have clear information to make decisions that best suit their needs. AB 1444 will prohibit platforms like Yelp from listing third party phone numbers under businesses to charge referral commissions on forwarded calls, ensuring that only phone numbers that go directly to the restaurant are listed.

It also requires the listing website to clearly and conspicuously disclose if an order will result in an additional cost paid to a party other than the restaurant. This proposal will protect our small businesses from unscrupulous charges and allow consumers to know exactly where their money is going. The Bill has no opposition. Respectfully ask for your. I vote.

Thank you, sir. Witnesses in support here in room 2100. Witnesses in support of Assembly Bill 50 Two. Seeing there's no formal witness in support.

I was just seeing if anybody else wanted to come in and back you up here, sir. Any witnesses in opposition to Assembly Bill 50? Two. Seeing none. Let's turn to the teleconference service moderator. Let's check to see if any individuals have signed up to testify either in support or in opposition to the measure. We'll take them now.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 502, please press one, then zero at this time. And Mr. Chair, we have no comments.

Thank you. Bringing the matter back to the Deus. Colleagues, any questions or comments? Seeing none. On my left, on my right. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Assembly Member, would you like to close?

I would like to ask for. your aye vote.

Do we have a motion on Assembly Bill 502? Senator Archuleta, you are the man today. The motion is do passed to the Senate Floor. Please call the roll.

Roth, aye. Min, Aye. Alvarado-Gil, aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Dodd. Eggman, aye. Glazer. NIello, aye. Smallwood Cuevas. Wahob. Wilk

Bill has 8 votes. We'll hold the row open for absent Members. Moving to your item number 8, AB 1210, sodium nitrate.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. AB 1210 requires labeling on sodium nitrite above 10% purity, stating it could be fatal if ingested, and that its recommended treatment is intravenous methylene blue. Sodium nitrite is a chemical compound with no household use in high purity amounts, but has grown in popularity recently, unfortunately, as a suicide method. When ingested, this chemical prevents the blood from carrying oxygen and can cause an agonizing death in as little as 20 minutes.compared to 2018.

Compared to 2018, 2021 saw a 253% increase in self poisoning with nitrites and nitrates and a 166% increase in fatalities. The ease of ordering sodium nitride has made it a popular option amongst teenagers and other young people, leading to multiple lawsuits against Amazon. One case filed in California, which has since moved to federal court in Washington, accuses the company of facilitating the suicides of a 17 year old and 27 year old.

Another California suit accuses the company of enabling the suicides of a 16 year old and a 17 year old. Some platforms, like Etsy and Ebay, have since made commitments not to sell the product. While methylene blue is a highly effective treatment for sodium nitrite poisoning, it is relatively unknown. By creating more awareness of methylene blue, AB 1210 gives consumers and medical professionals the information they need to quickly treat sodium nitrite poisonings and increase the likelihood of saving lives.

Warning labels on shipping packages can also alert parents and other household members to a potential suicide attempt and allow them to intervene so their family member or friend can seek appropriate mental health assistance. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, sir. Let's move to any individuals here in Room 2100 who wish to testify in support of this measure. Seeing none, let's talk about witnesses in opposition, lead or otherwise. Any individuals in opposition. Seeing none, let's move to the teleconference service. Moderator if you would please prompt any individuals wishing to testify, either in support or in opposition to Assembly Bill 1210, we'll move forward with them.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 1210, please press one, then zero at this time. And Mr. Chair, we have no comments.

Thank you, Moderator. Let's bring the matter back to the dais and my colleagues. Colleagues, questions? Comments? Senator Archuleta.

Yeah, thank you, Assembly Member, for bringing this forward. Extremely important. My concern, obviously, is anytime a child, teenager, anyone, gets a hold of a substance that can take their lives like that, are these teenagers, kids are they using it in another way to get high on. Tell me about that. I can understand about the suicide, but what else can they be using it for?

At this purity level there is no other use. There's no household use. It's really for industrial and commercial use. And that's really what the issue is, is that online and other platforms, unfortunately, oftentimes there becomes patterns of suicide. And I think they're sharing with one another that this is a potential method and there really is no other application for its usage, including in getting high. It's really just being used as a method of suicide, unfortunately.

Wow. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for bringing it forward. I definitely would love to move it at appropriate time.

Thank you, Senator Archuleta, colleagues, any other questions, comments, concerns? Okay, Assembly Member, would you like to close?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This Bill does have no opposition. I appreciate the comments of Senator Archuleta and I also appreciate my colleague Assembly Member Connolly, who has a partner Bill of sorts. I think you're going to learn a little bit more about how tragic this issue is for our young people. And respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, sir. The Bill has been moved by Senator Archuleta. The motion is due passed to Senate Judiciary. Please call the roll.

Roth? Aye. Roth, aye. Nguyen? Aye. Nguyen, aye. Alvarado-Gil? Aye. Alvarado-Gil, aye. Archuleta? Aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby? Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker? Dodd? Eggman? Aye. Eggman, aye. Glazer? Niello? Aye. Niello, aye. Smallwood-Cuevas? Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Wahab? Wilk?

Bill has 8 votes. Will hold the roll open for absent Members. Assembly Member Connolly. Assembly Bill 110 Nine, item number Five.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I'm pleased to present AB 119 today, which we will be looking to officially name Tyler's law. And I appreciate Assemblymember Chora for his work in this space, as well as being a joint author of this Bill. AB 119 will restrict the online sale of the chemical known as sodium nitrite to miners and cap security, at which the product is allowed to be sold at 10%.

Just five years ago, sodium nitrite was a relatively unknown substance, an inorganic compound usually used for curing meats. Unfortunately, sodium nitrite has recently been capturing nationwide headlines as it has become an item frequently used by teenagers to take their own lives. Tyler Mullman, a bright 17 year old from San Jose, was one of these teenagers. In 2021, Tyler was preparing to graduate from high school.

He excelled in academics, loved playing the drums in his school's high school marching band, and also competed in a roller hockey league. Like many young people, Tyler also went through challenging times that affected his mental health. Directed to Sodium nitrite by online forums, Tyler was able to easily and cheaply purchase a highly pure form of the chemical from an online marketplace.

His parents, who are with me here today, share a similar story with hundreds of families throughout the country who have found their children after purchasing and ingesting fatal amounts of sodium nitrite that they bought from online retailers. The reason that sodium nitrite stands out as a particularly dangerous substance is because there is no real world application for it in concentrations of purity above 10%. At Low levels of purity 10% and below, sodium nitrite is commonly used as a food preservative.

However, consuming the compound in high levels of purity can cause fatal poisoning. As Assembly Member Kalra noted, poison control centers throughout the country have reported a 253% increase in self poisoning with nitrites and a 166% increase in fatalities in 2021 in comparison to 2018. Ignoring this danger, major online retailers have been selling sodium nitrite in their platforms at levels of purity up to 99%, which can make it as deadly as cyanide if ingested.

Because a chemical can be easily purchased in highly pure forms and delivered directly to an individual's residence, it has become a tragically frequent method of committing suicide. AB 119 tackles this issue by prohibiting online retailers from selling sodium nitrite to miners and restricting its sale in concentrations greater than 10% to a person over 18 years of age. The Bill also specifies that retailers and online marketplaces must implement an effective age verification system and includes an exemption for legitimate business entities.

With me to testify today in support are Jeff Mullman and Cindy Cruz, Tyler's parents, and Carrie Goldberg, a nationally recognized victim rights attorney. And with that, I'd like to ask Jeff and Cindy if they would speak at this time.

Thank you for joining us. Please proceed.

Hello. My name is Cindy, and I'm here to talk about the importance of getting this Bill passed so that sodium nitrite will not be able to get into the hands of minors. On May 25, 2021, my 17 year old son, Tyler took his life by ingesting sodium nitrate purchased from Amazon. As a parent, I never would have suspected that such a harmful poison could so easily be purchased online, especially from Amazon, a trusted source from where most of us purchase many of our everyday household items.

Without my knowledge, my son created his own account at Amazon and purchased Sodium nitrite. How can a potentially lethal substance be sold to anyone, much less minors? Learning that this chemical was sold to my son in its commercial grade of 99%, was never questioned by Amazon. It's difficult to comprehend how sodium nitrite is so easily accessible to minors, more accessible than cigarettes and alcohol. I miss mysElf.

I miss his gentle nature, his kindness, compassion, empathy, his big eyes, the beauty mark on his lip, his smart wit, his wicked intelligence. And discussing his theories, ideas about the world, his music, drums and piano. It kills me that I won't be able to get here, be able to hear any more of his music. I will miss not hearing his voice, just recently lowered it as he began his journey into adulthood. I missed the everyday things.

Seeing his smile, our little squabbles, our sushi dates, going to the beach, buying shoes. I will miss not being able to see all he would have accomplished. He was so talented and gifted. I am beyond sad that I will not be able to see what he would have become. There are no words to describe the feeling of loss for a mother who has lost a child. If you are a parent, imagine losing a part of yourself. A part of your heart is gone.

Life will never be the same. Let's please make it harder for our kids to purchase sodium nitrate, which statistics show is becoming a growing method of suicide among children and teens. As Tyler's mother, I feel it is my duty to share my sorrow so we can work on getting this law passed. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

On May 21 or 25th, 2021, Cindy and I arrived home after eating out. Tyler stayed behind because 17 year olds are not always thrilled to dine out with their parents. We brought him some leftovers, and Cindy went to Tyler's room to tell him, but his door was locked and he was not answering. And we thought maybe he was asleep with headphones on because that had happened in the past, but still worried.

I got a key and opened the door, but it was hard to open because he was lying just behind it. And I yelled to Cindy to dial 911, and I did CPR until the paramedics arrived. And later we learned he had not ingested what would normally even be a lethal amount. But it was enough. And maybe if he was not provided such an available option by Amazon, who knew at the time that people were purchasing sodium nitrate for suicide, it never would have.

Now, I know parents always think their kids are special, but Tyler was really something. He was identified as a math prodigy in third grade, and they sent him to Fries Institute to take special courses. He played the drums, and before he passed, his band was preparing for their first performance. His rock band. He was a really skilled athlete. He played on the very best travel team in Northern California in also. And he was a star on our high school team as well.

But he just loved to play. He loved to play goalie, too, and he'd go down to the rink, just be there all weekend, playing game after game after game for any team that needed a goalie. He was a very introverted kid, and honestly, I had no idea how many friends he had until his memorial. And so many kids showed up and spoke, and the school sent us an entire box of letters from kids.

One of my favorite memories of Tyler was we were playing a high school game and we were losing, and we lost a lot of that time because our team was really young and we were playing against seniors and juniors and the whole team was mad. And Tyler was on the bench. He looked at everybody and said, you know, let's just go score a bunch of goals and have. I mean, he really liked to win, but he just loved to play more than anything. He's the youngest of four boys and is missed greatly by his brothers and all of us.

Thank you both. We're sorry for your loss.

Yes, ma'am. Good morning. My name is Kerry Goldberg. I'm a lawyer. It's my honor and privilege to be the lawyer for Tyler Mullman's family, who is the namesake of this Bill, as well as the lawyer for Christian Schmidt and Meredith Mitchell, whose sons also passed away from Sodium Nitrite that they purchased online. In early 2021, I was retained by a heartbroken mom whose son had purchased sodium nitrite off of Amazon, had it prime delivered, and died a couple of days later. That was December 2020.

In April 2021, I sent Amazon's General counsel a letter telling them that there was a problem, that these suicide message boards that children during the pandemic were discovering were glorifying suicide and specifically leading people to Amazon's website to purchase sodium nitrite. I asked them to please remove the product. To my horror, they hired outside counsel, who told me that there is no duty for them to stop selling a product that is not illegal. I said, it is actually illegal to aid and assist in suicide.

And you can go to the product page and you can see all of the comments from parents saying, this product has killed my child. And you can see on the product page that other products are recommended to be used with it, like Tagamet, to prevent vomiting. And this book, the Peaceful Pill Handbook, Amazon Edition, which has an entire chapter about how to die by suicide. We found that online retailers don't care and that they consider this to be no different than rope, knives or Drano.

But the difference is that sodium nitrite has no household use. And less than two weeks after Amazon's council told me that they had no duty to stop selling it, a 17-year-old from San Jose, California, created an Amazon account. Amazon sold him sodium nitrite and tagged that the algorithm had recommended. He mixed it one teaspoon with water. He drank a little bit of it, and when his parents came back from ordering Chinese food, as you heard from Cindy and Jeff, he was gone.

We estimate that an online retailer's revenue from one unit, which they sell for about $20, is $2.39, and that their profit is pennies. And yet they refuse to stop selling it. We now have lawsuits in court filed for six families whose children all purchased sodium nitrite from Amazon. And we have almost two dozen more lawsuits to file, including on behalf of the families for Christian's son and Meredith's son.

At this point, we've heard from 60 families, and my law firm has heard from 60 families all over the country whose children, spouses, siblings purchased and died from ingesting sodium nitrite. And in most cases, the person regretted it. They immediately ran and told their parent, or they tried to make themselves vomit, or they called 911 themselves. But this is an incredibly lethal, incredibly fast-moving product. And like Assembly member Cauldron said, there is an antidote. But the labeling doesn't say anything about that.

The labels call it an irritant. They don't say anything about how actually you will die if you ingest it. They say if you ingest this, call 911. There's no chance anybody can be saved by the time it takes an ambulance to come. But experts say that the number one way to prevent suicide is with means reduction. And that's what this Bill does, and I'm grateful for it. This is going to be the leading Bill in this country.

I think it's the first criminal Bill, and it's going to be very effective in deterring sales to children and to adults alike. There's a very big difference between sodium nitrite that's used as a food preservative at six or 10% concentrate versus what our clients have purchased, which is 99% pure, no household use. So I deeply appreciate the leadership by Assembly Member Connolly and Assembly Member Cauldron and the incredible bravery of my clients to come here today.

And I thank all of you for your time as well.

Thank you for joining us. Are there any other witnesses in support of the measure here in room 2100? Please step forward at this point. Well, let me let you start.

Good morning. My name is Meredith Mitchell. This is my son Aidan. The last time I saw and hugged my son Aidan was August 2, 2020, when I dropped him off at the airport so he could fly back to his father's house and start his junior year at Altoloma High School. I remember hugging him and telling him how proud I was of him and the young man he was growing into.

And I was so excited for all the wonderful things he was going to accomplish on his life. On August 13, I received a call from his father. Aidan had killed himself. His father had come home early from work to take him to school to pick up his books and found him slumped over in his bed. I was in Colorado. I arrived at their house the next day.

Aidan's body had already been taken to the morgue, and I was not allowed to see him until after the autopsy. I went into his room. Sitting on his dresser was a container two pounds of due to energy, 99% pure food grade sodium nitrite. Next to the container were multiple cups and spoons. In his trash can was receipt for the product, $21.18, purchased from Amazon Marketplace on August 5, the same day he started school.

He had created an account on Amazon as a minor and placed his order. Amazon delivered it right to his door, no question asked. Aidan was 16. Immediately, I Googled sodium nitrite suicide, and a website popped up. The title, simple step by step instructions. There are many ways to commit suicide by sodium nitrite. The following is an easy, quick, and pain free recipe. The four step states. Drink the solution. Relax on a bed, a couch, or a reclining chair.

The site goes on to describe how peaceful and minimally distressing this method was. It provided links to websites on where to purchase, what to take to prevent any vomiting or nausea, and how to cover your tracks so that nobody can trace the manufacturer so that they don't get in trouble. Aiden left a note. In that note, he stated, it is truly a pleasure to have found a method as peaceful as the one I am trying today. Aiden didn't like pain. He was all about comfort.

He never would have done anything that would have hurt himself. I understand that any product can cause harm if used inappropriately. But this one in particular, though it may not be the manufacturer's intention, has been marketed as a cheap and easy way to kill oneself. All over the internet, in chat rooms, on Reddit, all accessible by our children. Not only. Sorry, not only is it cheap and easy to find, but can be delivered right to your door without anyone signing for it.

I never did get to see my son after that. The sodium nitrite had mummified his body. The funeral home said that there was nothing that they could do, and they strongly suggested I do not look at him as he did not look anything like the photos I had given him. His skin was gray and falling off his skull. His lips were black. An image that haunts me every moment of every day.

Please help us stop this trend from continuing to grow and gain traction among our children. Thank you for your time.

We're so sorry for your loss. Thank you for joining us, ma'am.

I was told I have a minute, so I streamed it down and I'm going to read it. My name is Christian Schmidt. My son Tyler took his own life using sodium nitrate he bought online in December 2020. Tyler was a beautiful soul who made me laugh and smile his entire young life. He loved art and was extremely gifted at it, had a love of natural science and fascination for all types of creatures.

He was capable of great compassion. He gave the most incredible bear hugs, and I miss him more than you can imagine every single day. He would have turned 18. Last week, Tyler was just 15 when he easily purchased sodium nitride online from a large online website. He did not have to enter or show any proof of age on the same website. There is advertisement for a bottle of wine. It cannot be ordered without proof of legal age. Upon delivery.

A coworker ordered a bar collar from the same website and received a call to verify the size of his dog to ensure the shot collar wouldn't harm his dog. It is beyond my comprehension that there are more safeguards for A bottle of wine or a dog bark collar than there are for the purchase of sodium nitrite. This Bill can help save lives, help other families from experience the pain and loss of my family lives with. Please pass this Bill. Thank you.

I've streamed it down to a minute, but I'm going to take, like, 30 more seconds. You all might be parents. You all might be sisters. You're human beings. I sit on the bench kind of like that as a Park Commissioner and always wonder, what can I do to help my community? Like I think all of you guys want to do. Help your community. Please pass this law. It's just common sense.

My parents shouldn't have to go online and see all these reviews in the world of AI and algorithms to not understand that this shouldn't be as easily accessible for a child. It needs to be passed. So please take the stand and do that.

Thank you for joining us. We're also sorry for your loss. Any other witnesses in support? Here in room 2100.

Hi, everyone. I am a friend of Meredith. I knew Aidan when he was young. He was a sweet, kind boy. You've all heard lots of really moving testimony. We all know that suicide rates are rising, especially among young people and what we sometimes forget. What stood out the most to me at the tragic funeral for a teenage boy that I knew was the effect on his friends that these events reverberate throughout the community and have a cyclical effect. Aiden's friends were now at a funeral of their friend.

They were left with less emotional support than they had prior. They were left thinking about suicide in a more real way than they might have before. Suicide tears a hole in a community. And this is not the only way to commit suicide. But it is increasingly common. It is increasingly popular, it is incredibly accessible online, and it's rising, both accidental.

A recent study published in the National Institute of Health on Sodium Nitrate Intoxication and Deaths looked at it and estimates over 700,000 deaths annually from sodium nitrate poisoning, either intentional or accidental, and the vast majority of those are children, the highest rates being suicides among teens and people in their 20 S. I don't think there's any opposition, but I did want to just take the opportunity to share my support and how vital I think this is.

Thank you for joining us. Any other witnesses either in support or in opposition to the measure here in room 2100. Name, affiliation and position on the hi.

My name is Shelley Schmidt. I am Tyler Schmidt's stepmother. My husband is Christian Schmidt. I'm a retired deputy. I served 21 years in law enforcement. It is beyond my comprehension how something like this can be sold to minors when alcohol, tobacco, even driving a car requires some kind of license or age verification or certification. We know suicide is on the uprise.

We found out after Tyler passed that he had gone on suicide websites, chat rooms, and had found that sodium nitrite was a painless way to end his life. If there had been an age verification, he would not have been able to actually receive that product. And if he did, it wouldn't have been so easy. It was so easy for him to get this. His mother and stepfather had no idea that he had created this online website, as well as the other Tyler's parents.

He had purchased this online on Amazon, and it's easily delivered to their house. And if you're a teenager, you're home sometimes before your parents, you're able to get that mail before they are, there had been some kind of age verification. I believe all our children would be here or would not have been able to take these moves so easily. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Let's move to the teleconference service now. Moderator if you would, please prompt any individuals waiting to testify, either in support or in opposition to this measure, we will proceed with their testimony. Now, if you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 119, please press one. Then zero at this time. It and Mr. Chair, we have no comment. Thank you. Moderator let's bring the matter back to the dais and my colleagues for any questions or comments.

Looking to my left, seeing no hands, looking to my right, I see three, Senator Ashby, Senator Eggman, and Senator Alvarado-Gil. So let's start with Senator Ashby.

Thank you very much. First of all, at the appropriate time, I'm happy to move the Bill. Second of all, make my comments really brief. You're right, it's not the only way to commit suicide, but it is one that we can do something about. I want to thank the Assembly Members for bringing the Bill forward. And I really want to thank the families.

I have kids the same age as your kids, and I can't imagine how hard it would be to stand on the other side of that plexiglass, holding their picture, asking a bunch of people up here to care about their lives. But I want you to know that we do and that your bravery makes a real difference. And I thank you for giving us the opportunity to act on this today by being here on behalf of your kids. Appreciate you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Eggman.

Thank you. And thank you, Senator Ben, for bringing this forward. It sounds like both of you have a little bit to do to be able to co join these bills in some kind of way, because I think whatever piece of policy it isn't as much the issue as the topic and the mission.

And I also just want to thank you for having the courage to speak in your loved one's memory and to actually take action and do something, because I know that does bring some level of peace.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Alvarado-Gil, I want to thank. The families for coming in today and sharing your story and introducing us to your beautiful children. Anytime we have a Bill that we have to name after a child, I tend to ask myself as a mother, what could we have done differently? How could we have prevented this? And oftentimes we look at ourselves and say, did I do something wrong? And I just want to reiterate that there's nothing, absolutely nothing that the parents in this room did in this situation.

This is completely put on a system that failed you and failed your children and this law. Thank you, Assembly Member Connolly and Assembly Member Kalra, for bringing this forward, because without a legislative act, it is very difficult to encourage a business as big as online retailers to do what's right. And so it saddens me that it takes a legislative act to save more lives because we should have had this to save the lives of all your children.

So I just want to honor the memories of your children and thank you for being here today. And I believe that those in front of you, we will do what's right to protect future kids. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

Like my colleagues, I want to just say to the parents, thank you for sharing your stories and educating us on this issue and the authors for all of your work. It just also reveals what the pandemic has done to young people and, and our children, our teens in particular, and how important mental health support and services need to be accessible and not deadly. Chemical compounds that will take their lives.

So I just wanted to say to the parents, thank you for that education and for your advocacy. And I hope as this moves forward, it brings a little bit of peace to know that we'll be protecting other children from this very dangerous relationship between the chemical compound and the companies that are selling them without restriction. So I'm happy to support this Bill when the moment's right.

Can I say one other thing, Ross?

It is absolutely infuriating to me that your legal counsel reached out on behalf of another child an entire month before your son made the same order from an organization that should have taken notice from your attorney. I will spend the rest of this week praying that your legal counsel finds as much success as I believe you're going to find in the California State Legislature.

Thank you, Senator Archuleta.

Thank you so much. And, of course, condolences to the families. As a father of five, I just couldn't imagine losing any one of my children or any parent losing a child. But I thank Both Assembly Members for bringing this forward, and I hope they carry it across this nation because of the fact that we always say California is first. Well, let's be first in saving lives. Let's be first in ringing that bell of tragedy that's happening to our young.

And so mental health, as my colleague know that mental health is such an issue here. And the thing is, sometimes parents don't even know that there's issues. So when your kids are playing ball and hockey and tennis and involved with the schools and everything else, and you think everything is so perfect and yet there's something bleeding inside that we'll never know. So I think we've got work to do, more counselors in the schools, more involvement with our mental health experts, with our teenagers.

But this is a big step forward. And I know everyone on this dyess is going to continue fighting with you and for you. And I just thank you for bringing this forward. And I think now that we can see that you can cry forever or you can fight forever, and I think this is what you parents are doing, you're going to fight forever to see that not another single child is lost as yours were. And I thank you. God bless you. And Godspeed to all of you.

Thank you, Senator Nguyen.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank our two Assembly Members for bringing this forward and just to the family. I have two young boys. I've a 10 year and a 12. I can't imagine what you're going through. But what I want to say is thank you. Because you're saving the future. You're saving our children, that anything can happen in the future. And so we just want to thank you.

And we're here, we're all on the same page, and we want to make sure that future children, and I know we can't save yours, but what you're doing is those you're saving thousands of children in the future. And we appreciate that.

Thank you. Senator Niello.

I'm sure when you were approached with the problem that exists, you're probably looking at various ways to try to address it. Did you consider trying to do Something about these, use whatever adjective might be appropriate, websites offering advice as to how to kill oneself?

We have not tackled that issue yet. That's a broad issue that I know a number of our colleagues are looking at the detrimental impacts of what is available online, particularly in time periods like the pandemic in the aftermath. So I think that's certainly worthy of something to look at.

There probably would be potential free speech implications, but I would think that might rise to the level of crying fire in a crowded movie theater. It's highly troubling. This whole issue is highly troubling. I share the frustrated remarks that Senator Ashby made, and I actually regret that we have to cast an aye vote for this Bill. Regret because this shouldn't be a situation in the first place, but certainly I support your Bill.

Thank you, Senator Niello. Senate Member, would you like to close?

Thank you, Chair. And really wanted to thank you, colleagues for the expressions you put forward today. And I share in your really thanks to the parents and the families for your courage in coming forward. We can't even imagine what you've been going through, but you are going to make a difference for other families and Carrie, for your great legal work. As you said, let's keep California in the lead in protecting our kids. That's something we can do concretely. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, sir. We have a motion on the Bill by Senator Ashby. The motion is do passed to the Senate Floor. Please call the roll.

Roth? Aye. Roth, aye. Nguyen? Aye. Nguyen, aye. Alvarado-Gil? Aye. Alvarado-Gil, aye. Archuleta? Aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby? Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker? Dodd?Eggman? Eggman, aye. Glazer? Niello? Aye. Niello, aye. Smallwood-Cuevas? Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Wahab? Wilk?

We have eight votes. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members. Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Next up, file item number nine. Assembly Member Nguyen AB 1646. Proceed. When ready?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Not sure how I'm supposed to go up after that. That's going to be tough to follow. Thank you again for this opportunity. What we're seeing today, and what I want you to imagine is that when you see a medical professional, or when you're ill and you see medical professional, you want to make sure that you see one that is fully trained, well trained, experienced, and is able to answer all of your questions.

As a woman, when we see our OB-GYN, we want the exact same thing. But what's happening now is that in states that are banning abortion, they're making it difficult for medical students and residents to complete their residency and be fully trained. Fully and adequately trained. A great example would be the State of Texas, the biggest state who banned abortion, but yet they are the largest OB-GYN residency program. That means that all of those medical students that are completing their residency there are not being fully trained.

We're very fortunate here in California that we allow such types of rotations, and what this Bill will do will allow for those that are in the states that have banned abortion to come here in our State of California and be able to complete up to 90 days of rotation and be able to be fully, properly and adequately trained. With me here today are two witnesses. Dr. Bria Peacock, who is a resident physician at UCSF, and Molly Robson, VP of Government affairs for Planned Parenthood.

Doctor, please proceed.

Hi. Good morning, Chair Roth and Members. My name is Dr. Bria Peacock, and I'm an OB-GYN resident physician at UCSF. I'm here today in support of Assembly Bill 1646, which will allow for medical residents to participate in guest rotations in California. I reign from the State of Georgia, where five generations of my family have grown, survived, and thrived. In Georgia, I obtained my doctorate of Medicine Degree and plan to return to practice as an OB-GYN after residency.

75% of our counties do not have an OB-GYN, and we face labor and delivery departments being closed down by the dozens. I specifically came to California for my OB-GYN residency training because I knew I would get excellent abortion training. With my family being from a region that is limited in healthcare, I have witnessed the patients, specifically Black women, walk in the hospital with hope and joys of expanding their families or the despair of miscarriage, seeking care and not walk out.

The lack of this training is life altering. The procedure often used for abortion is performed almost daily in our emergency departments and labor and delivery units as a tool to stop patients from hemorrhaging, for miscarriages, for postpartum hemorrhage, et cetera. When the tool is not a part of our training, thousands of people's lives are at risk.

Abortion bans are impacting almost half of all OB-GYN residents across the country. Meaning that half of all OB-GYN residents are unable to be fully trained in cases relevant to their specialty in their state. As I develop my expertise here in California with the plan to return to provide full spectrum reproductive care to the people of Georgia, I can't help but strongly express the need for abortion training in all states.

Until that can be guaranteed, this Bill is vital to those in all states to continue to get life saving care. I am proud to be here in support of AB 1646 and respectfully urge your support on this Bill today. Thank you.

Thank you, Doctor. Next, please.

Good afternoon. I'm Molly Robson with Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. We represent the seven Planned Parenthood Affiliates in the state who operate over 110 health centers in California and provide over 1.3 million patient visits annually. We are co sponsoring AB 1646 to ensure that medical residents who reside in or who are in residency programs in other states outside of California are able to come here for training in ACGME certified training sites.

For OB-GYNs, family physicians and other healthcare providers, the inability to be trained in abortion will only create more barriers to patient access in the years to come for patients experiencing pregnancy loss or seeking an abortion. This Bill will ensure that we open the door to medical residents outside of California who are seeking training they may be unable to get in their state due to hostile laws. Respectfully urge your support on this measure, and I'm available if there's any questions.

Thank you very much. Any other supporters here in room 2100? Name, affiliation and position on the Bill, please.

Hi there. Tiffany Matthews on behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, in support. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Next, please.

Hello. Matt Lege on behalf of SEIU California and our interns and residents and proud support.

Thank you. Any other supporters in the room?

Hello. Genesis Gonzalez. On behalf of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis, in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, let's move to witnesses in opposition, lead or otherwise. Any opposition? Witnesses in room 2100 seeing none, let's turn to the teleconference service moderator. If you would please prompt any individuals waiting to testify, either in support or in opposition to this measure, we will take them now.

And if you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 1646, please press 10 at this time. And we have a comment from line 12, please. Go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Members, this is Erin Evans. On behalf of NARAL Pro Choice California and the California Nurse Midwives Association, both in support. Thanks.

Thank you. Next, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members. Dennis Cuevas-Romero with the California Health Plus advocate in strong support of the Bill.

Thank you. Next, please.

Aaron Bone with the Medical Board of California in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, please.

Mr. Chair. There are no further comments at this time.

Thank you. Let's bring the matter back to the dais and my colleagues for comments or questions. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

I just want to thank the author for bringing this Bill, really, about educating our medical profession staff, particularly around the issues of maternal health. And in the black community, we see women dying disproportionately. So through maternal health conditions that too often folks are not trained and skilled to recognize what's happened and to treat it when that treatment needs to be delivered. So I happily move this Bill forward when the time is right.

And thank you again for bringing this to ensure that we're saving lives through trained professionals across this country.

Thank you, Senator.

Thanks, Senator. Senator Ashby.

I want to say that I'm proud of my regional partner, Assemblywoman Nguyen. She's spent her whole life fighting to help people, and this is no different than the work she's been doing for many years before she ever entered the Capitol space. Really proud of you, Assembly Member Nguyen. Good job.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Seeing none. Assembly Member, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Okay. We have a motion on AB 1646 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. The motion is do passed to Senate Appropriations. Please call the roll.

[Roll call vote]

Vote is 6 to 3. Hold the roll open for absent Members. Thank you, ma'am. Looking for authors, Member Pacheco, item number 10. AB 1700:17 seven. Health professionals and facilities. Please proceed when ready.

You. Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Today I have the pleasure of presenting AB 177, which would ensure that all providers under the Healing arts license are protected from hostile laws in other states with regard to their licensure and protect providers, staff privileging in the hospital setting unfortunately, today, abortion providers and those who seek abortion are under attack, as well as those who provide and seek other services, such as gender affirming care.

However, one of the most important things we can do is to ensure that these services are accessible here in California and to ensure that the providers offering this care can continue offering it without fear. With me today to testify in support is Dr. Tanya Basu, Director of Abortion and sedation at Planned Parenthood Northern California. And also here to answer any technical questions is Molly Robson, Vice President of government affairs at Planned Parenthood and affiliates of California.

Doctor, please proceed.

Good afternoon, Chair Roth and Members. My name is Dr. Tanya Basu and I'm a board certified OBGYN and the Director of Abortion and Sedation Care at Planned Parenthood, as well as a volunteer clinical faculty at University of California, San Francisco. I am here today in strong support of Assembly Bill 17 Seven, which will expand the protection of health care providers in California from hostile laws that ban abortion and gender affirming care in other states.

Since the Dobbs decision almost a year ago this week, people still ask me, do you ever worry about your license or going to jail when you provide abortion care to someone coming from a state where abortion is banned? The short answer is no, I don't, and I shouldn't. I have gone through years of training to provide evidencebased medical care to anyone who comes to the clinic or hospital I work, regardless of which state they live in.

But the truth is, the long answer is much more nuanced and complex. Protection of our health care force is crucial not only to ensure access of essential health care services to those fleeing their states for this care, but for Californians as well. At Planned Parenthood Northern California, we serve 20 Northern California counties with 17 health centers and a telehealth Department. Many of our patients reside in some of the most rural parts of the state.

We are a safety net provider for many who are unable to access health care elsewhere. Since Dobbs, my colleagues and I continue to watch the growing number of states across the country enact bans on essential health care services like abortion and gender affirming care. States banning these services have added language that criminalize providers like myself and put clinical entities we work for at risk for licensure suspension. What many don't know is that providers like me do not work in a bubble.

We provide care in a larger healthcare ecosystem, which includes clinics. We have medical privileges at teaching hospitals, training future physicians and Clinicians. We work on labor and delivery units and clinics. If our privileges and clinics and hospitals are compromised. None of us can provide the care that many of us dedicated our lives to do. So that many of our communities rely on us for.

I am proud to be here in support of AB 177 and respectfully urge your support on this Bill today so that me and my colleagues can continue to safely do our jobs without fear. Thank you for your time

Thank you, Doctor. Any other witnesses in support here in the hearing room 2100? Position, affiliation and affiliation? Name, position? Statement of the Bill, whatever. Thank you, please.

Molly Robeson, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. We're proudly sponsoring the Bill in support. Thank you.

Thank you for joining us. Any other support witnesses? Name, affiliation, position on the Bill?

Alexis Rodriguez of the California Medical Association, in support.

Thank you. Next, please.

Hello again. Genesis Gonzalez. On behalf of Lieutenant Governor Lenny Kolakis, in support.

Thank you. Any other support witnesses? Now let's turn to witnesses in opposition, lead or otherwise. Any opposition witnesses in the hearing room 2100? Seeing none, let's turn to the teleconference service moderator. If you would, please prompt anyone on the line who wishes to testify either in support or in opposition to this measure, we'll proceed with them.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 1707, please Press 10 at this time. And line 12, please. Go ahead.

This is Aaron Evans. On behalf of the California Nurse Midwives Association and NARAL Pro Choice California, in support.

Next, please. Line 11.

Aaron Bone with the Medical Board of California in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, please. Mr. Chair. There are no further comments at this time.

Thank you. Moderator. Back to the desk, colleagues. Any comments or questions? Senator Smallwood Cuevas.

I just want to thank the author for bringing this Bill. It's a worker protection Bill, and at every level, we need to make sure that those who are giving great service, that they're protected in their work and in their workplace. So I want to thank you for bringing this Bill, and I'm happy to move the Bill when there's an opportunity.

Thank you, ma'am. Seeing no other hands up Assembly Member, would you like to close?

Yes. Thank you. And thank you all for this opportunity to present. This Bill has received bipartisan support, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. We have a motion on AB 1707. The Bill has been moved by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. The motion is do passed to Senate Judiciary. Please call the roll.

Roth, aye. Min. Alverado-Gil, aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Dodd. Eggman, Aye. Glazer, aye. Niello, no. Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Wahob. Wilk.

The vote is 7 to 1. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, ma'am. File item number 11. Assembly Member Waldron, please proceed when ready.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Committee Members, I am here to present AB 1741, co sponsored by Quest Diagnostics and the California Clinical Laboratory Association, addressing the clinical laboratory workforce shortage and streamlining the process for licensure. The clinical lab industry is facing a workforce shortage, especially with clinical laboratory scientists. The state has recognized this problem with the California Department of Public Health establishing a workgroup that was tasked to understand the specific problem and propose solutions.

Among the Subcommittee's recommendations was to update California licensing requirements to allow unlicensed personnel that meet federal standards to assist licensed personnel in laboratories. This will allow laboratories to meet high testing demands while maintaining access to accurate care, which also opens access to patients and delivery for their treatments. These changes will address workforce shortages in labs, improve testing capacity, and create new jobs in the industry. We worked extensively in the Assembly to amend the Bill to address labor's concerns, which remove their opposition.

And I commit to continue working with the late opposition that I just saw this morning. Here to testify in support and answer any questions are representatives. We have Mike Robeson with Quest Diagnostics and Christy Foy with the Clinical Lab Association. Thank you.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, Mike Robeson here on behalf of Quest Diagnostics. As Assemblymember Waldron said, the Bill is pretty modest Bill and advances some things to help with the workforce shortage of lab personnel in California.

It clarifies some vague and conflicting standards between statute and regulations for lab personnel by creating a statutory reference for supervision and control, in addition to having direct and constant supervision of unlicensed personnel in the law, and most importantly, as the Assembly Member referenced, we're going to allow qualified unlicensed personnel to assist licensed personnel in lab operations and lab functions.

And essentially what we're doing here is we're freeing up the licensed personnel to do work that's more befitting their license and they're more relevant to standard of care and allowing routine tasks to be done by people who are qualified and trained to do those routine tasks. And that's essentially the Bill. You happy to answer any questions? It's a pretty modest Bill. You guys have actually passed much more substantive personnel standard legislation earlier this year relating to COVID testing. And so if there's questions. Happy to answer.

Thank you, sir. Next, please.

Good afternoon. Christy Foy, on behalf of the California Clinical Laboratory Association here also in strong support. And as it's been mentioned, this Bill will address those workforce shortages. And I just want to emphasize how important that is to maintaining the access to this testing by clinical laboratories. We've all experienced, obviously, everything that's gone on with COVID and other testing that needs to be continued.

And as we said, please to support this Bill because it does expand those activities that these personnel can perform under the supervision of the licensed personnel.

And as the Assembly Member mentioned, we've been working all year with the opposition, and so we've taken several amendments and really narrowed the focus of the Bill and very happy that in working with them, most of them, the majority have now removed their opposition, including the Teamsters, California Nurses Association, Engineers and Scientists of California, California Association of Medical Laboratory and California Labor Federation have all removed their opposition to the Bill.

And again, we're going to work with that late opposition that just still came in, but really want to keep this Bill moving forward so we can address these issues in the laboratories.

Thank you so much. Any other supporters here in Room 2100 seeing? None. Let's move to opposition leader otherwise.

Good afternoon, Matt Lege. On behalf of the 700,000 Members of SCIU California, we have been opposed to this Bill previously and really do want to recognize and appreciate the Assembly Member and the sponsor's work to amend the Bill and remove many of the oppositions. However, we still have some concerns with the Bill in print, and we did get it, admittedly, got the letter in late. My apologies.

Although the Bill was set relatively quickly, just a couple of the concerns that we have is really with the ability of adding reagents to the slides. As we're talking to our staff that are doing this Day in and Day out on the lab, if that procedure is messed up in any way, you could potentially contaminate 30, 40 slides and really impact patient care. And so that's a really serious patient Consideration. We want to make sure that at least folks there have a minimum level of training.

The majority are folks that are doing that have 40, 50 hours of training and then they go in to do the lab exams. Also importantly, the standards of care in terms of worker protections in the lab are constantly evolving in a good way to continue protect patients and workers, including the need to Don and Doff PPE to ensure that you're not exposed to COVID-19s or other potential harmful samples that they're dealing with.

So I'll just quickly close by saying I appreciate the Committee's time and the work that they're doing for this reason. Happy to continue the conversation with the Assembly Member, but just. We're respectfully opposed.

Thank you. Any other opposition witnesses in Room 2100? Seeing none, let's move to the teleconference service. Moderator, if you would, please prompt any individuals waiting on the line to testify, either in support or in opposition, we will take them now.

If you would like to testify in support or opposition to AB 1741, please press 10 at this time. Mr. Chair, we have no comments.

Fine. Let's bring the matter back to the Deus and my colleagues for questions or comments. Senator Glazer.

Thank you, Chair Roth. It's unlikely I have any concerns about this Bill, but anytime I see a private entity listed as a sponsor, it always raises a flag. So I would just want to double check that this Bill, and maybe I can ask. Staff doesn't provide any benefit for any particular entity. It provides it for industry wide. And I just want that clarification on the record. Chair Roth, could I have a consultant on your team?

Well, I think the question is, for the people sitting in the audience, are there any other labs out there that would benefit from this Bill?

Yeah, absolutely. Again, Christy Foy, on behalf of the Calfreyan Clinical Laboratory Association, and we are a statewide Association to which many different labs of Members, including hospital labs such as cedar cyanide and others that are also supporting the Bill.

Great. Thank you very much. Happy to support the Bill. Not a problem. Any other questions, comments, concerns? Seeing none. Semi Member Waldron, would you like to close?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. Hopefully you will accept this Bill today so we can continue to work on it. It's an issue that we need to address here in the state to open up more access to the results for patients so they can get their treatment sooner and also get more people into the workforce that are in the laboratories. So I urge your aye vote, and we look forward to working with the opposition.

Thank you. Do we have a motion? Well, Senator Glazer actually had his hand up, so I'm going to give him the honor. Senator Glazer moves the Bill and the motion is do passed to Senate appropriations. Please call the roll.

Roth, Aye. Nguyen, aye. Alverado-Gil, aye. Achuleta, aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Dodd, aye. Eggman, aye. Glazer, aye. Niello, aye. Smallwood-Cuevas. Wahob. Wilk, aye.

Bill has 10 votes and that Bill is out.

Thank you very much.

Let's now take the consent calendar. There's one measure proposed for consent. It's file item number three. AB 826. Chen, please call the roll.

Roth.

Aye.

Roth aye. Nguyen.

Aye.

Nguyen aye. Alvarado-Gil.

Aye.

Alvarado-Gil aye. Archuleta.

Aye.

Archuleta aye. Ashby.

Aye.

Ashby aye. Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Eggman.

Aye.

Eggman aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Niello.

Aye.

Niello aye. Smallwood-Cuevas.

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk aye.

Bill has 12 votes. Bill is. I mean, the consent calendar is out. Let's move to file item number one. AB 502 Lee. Current vote is eight to zero. Chair Voting aye.

Becker. Dodd.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk, aye.

Bill has 12 votes and that measure is out. Let's move to file item number two. AB 633 by Patterson. Current vote, 7 0. Chair voting aye.

Ashby.

Aye.

Ashby aye. Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk aye.

Bill has 12 votes. That measure is out. Item number four. AB 996 by Assembly Member Low and the measurer has seven votes. Chair voting aye.

Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Eggman. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk aye.

Will hold the roll open for absent Members. File item number five. That is AB 1109. Current vote is eight to zero. Chair voting aye.

Becker. Dodd.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk aye.

Vote 120. That measures out item number six. Assembly Bill by Holden. Current vote is 50. Chair voting aye.

Nguyen. Ashby.

Aye.

Ashby aye. Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Glazer aye. Niello. Wahab.

No.

Wilk no.

Current vote is nine to one. That measure is out. File item number seven. AB 1244 by Holden. Current vote, six to zero. Chair voting aye.

Nguyen. Ashby.

Aye.

Ashby aye. Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Not voting.

Current vote, 10 to zero. That measure is out. File item number eight. Kalra AB 1210, current vote, eight to zero. Chair voting, aye.

Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. Wilk.

Aye.

Wilk aye.

Current vote, 12 0. That measure is out. File item number nine. AB 1646 Nguyen. Current vote is six to three. Chair voting aye.

Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Glazer.

Aye.

Glazer aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye.

Current vote, nine to three. That measure is out. File item number 10. AB 1707. 1707, Pacheco. Current vote, seven to one. Chair voting aye.

Nguyen. Becker. Dodd.

Aye.

Dodd aye. Wahab.

Aye.

Wahab aye. And Wilk.

Final vote, 11 to 0. That matter is out. And this concludes the agenda of the Senate business, Professions and Economic Development Committee. Thanks to all who participated today. We are adjourned.

Current vote, nine to one. That measure is out. Give us just a minute. Call the roll on item number four. AB 996, Low. Current vote, 11 to zero. Chair voting aye. Call the absent Member.

Becker. Eggman.