Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

Good morning. We'd like to call to order the Appropriations Committee hearing for July twelveth. We are here today to consider 44 bills on part of our regularly ordered hearing. Before we begin, we'd like to cover a few items. First, I'd like to thank Assembly Member Bonta for filling in for Assembly Member Calderon, and she will be on her way to join us in the Committee today. Let's also welcome Assemblymember Soria as a new Member of the Committee, and we'll make sure when she gets here, we'll give her a special shout out.

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 for 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 bills on any Bill placed on the suspense filed by the Committee today and for which the author weighed presentation before the close of the regularly ordered hearing. Testimony on any such Bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization and affiliation, if any 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 for 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 or decorum may subject you to removal or other enforcement processes. With that, we will turn to see if we have a quorum.

It doesn't appear at this moment that we do. And so we'll move to the hearings on the bills that we have before us. We have one Bill from Senator Grove. We're in sign in order and she is the first to sign in. And it's on a suspense Bill. I don't see her present.

And so we'll move to Senator Glazer SCR 47. Your Bill enjoys a due pass. Welcome.

An SDR 47 to provide long overdue recognition to our late Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird. This concurrent resolution would recognize Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird's important contribution to California by naming a portion of the Capitol's Rose Garden after her. The Peace Plaza within the State Capitol World Peace Rose Garden.

Under this Bill would be known as the Chief Justice rose Elizabeth Bird's Justice for All Plaza Chief Justice Bird accomplished many firsts for women in law over the course of her career. She was the first female law clerk for the Nevada State Supreme Court. She was the first female deputy public defender in Santa Clara County.

She was the first female cabinet Member for a California Governor, then Governor Jerry Brown. She was the first female chair of the Judicial Council, and she was the first female Chief Justice of California. Yet there is still no public recognition of her career long dedication to public service in our state's judicial system, and, of course, her impressive accomplishments of breaking through the glass ceiling for women in law.

As stated in the committee analysis, this resolution would have minimal impacts on the state budget and are absorbable by the Department of General Services. With me today is Sylvia Villalobos, President and co-creator of the International World Peace Rose Garden to testify in support.

Welcome.

Guess it's on. Good morning, everyone. And thank you, Senator Glazer, for having me here. My name, as was stated, is Sylvia Villalobos, and I'm co creator of International World Peace Rose Gardens. And we created the State Capitol Garden. Here the World Peace Rose Garden.

And I just want to lend my support to this endeavor to honor the Chief Justice Rose Bird. We're happy to have her in the garden. And I just wanted to say that we went through rigorous vetting in the beginning, that we work closely with the historic State Capitol Commission to make sure that everything in the garden is protecting the architectural integrity of the state capital.

So we're happy to share our context with you in that process so that we make sure that our newest addition is in keeping with the historic integrity. So my understanding is that it's very minimal cost to the state to do this, and we are happy to give our support and our references so we can make that process that much easier. So, anyway, thank you very much for having me, and we do support this project.

Well, thank you for being here. We appreciate your presentation. Department of Finance? Do you have a file?

Good morning, Chair Holden and Appropriations Committee Members. Millie Yen with Department of Finance. We have no file on this.

Okay, we'll turn to the public. Is there anyone in the public that would like to add their comments of support either in favor or opposed? Seeing none, we'll come back to the committee. Okay, well, we'll do comments, and then we'll establish a quorum. If we see no comments, then we'll turn to establish a quorum and take action on your Bill.

Holden.

Here.

Dolly. Bryan? Bonta?

Here.

Wendy Carillo? Dixon? Fong? Hart? Lowenthal? Mathis? Papan? Pellerin? Sanchez? Soria? Weber? Wilson?

Quorum being established. A motion is in order. Pellerin moved. Fong second. Senator, certainly give you an opportunity to close. Let me just say that what a long overdue and fitting recognition for the late Supreme Court Justice. And you listed out a lot of firsts, and that's quite a roll call, and maybe we can do more than just the Rose Garden as we go forward, but this is a fitting first start to a storied career. So thank you for your recognition. If you have any closing comments?

Chair Holden, thank you. Many people may not know that I was a spokesperson for the Chief Justice those many, many years ago, and this is long overdue. Let me just acknowledge the partnership with the Women Lawyers of California in this work, as well as the Members of the Legislative Women's Caucus, many of whom are here co authors of the Bill as well. So thank you. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Fantastic. The Bill is out. A roll call with Mathis not voting

Senator Limone. SB 728. Joys of Dupas.

Good morning. Thank you, chair and Members. SB 728 transitions, but not bans the state away from using the sale, but not the use or distribution of plastic gift cards by January 1st of 2027 towards more environmentally sustainable gift card options that are already readily available at many retailers.

More than 3.4 billion gift cards were sold in the United States in 2021, according to Beyond Plastics. And yes, that was one year of billions that were used. The vast majority of gift cards are made from a polyvinyl chloride plastic, also known as PVC, considered to be one of the single most environmentally damaging of all the plastics.

Plastic gift cards are difficult to recycle, and many local recycling centers do not accept PVC gift cards due to their small and thin size interacting poorly with recycling machinery. So plastic gift cards intended for recycling may end up in the landfill. Many businesses already offer more environmentally friendly gift card options now, and most businesses actually don't make their own gift cards.

They outsource that to manufacturers. In April, Mastercard announced plans to remove the first use of PVC from all their payment cards, including gift cards for sustainable materials, including recycled biosourced plastics, in the near future by 2028. I do have samples of what we are talking about.

The samples I have, and I'm happy to pass them out, are the environmentally friendly gift cards that most people think are going to feel like paper. So, with your permission, I'm happy to pass those around so people can feel them and they can see that they still feel like a real gift card. Today, I would have had here Miho from the Surf Rider Foundation, but regrettably, she is not yet here.

But I respectfully ask for an I vote.

Okay, very good. Thank you. Department of Finance.

Thank you. No file.

Okay, we'll turn to the public. Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak in favor of the Bill or opposed to the Bill? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the committee. Are there any questions or comments on behalf of the committee? Is there a motion? Okay, we've got a motion and a second from Vanta.

First of all, thank you for presenting the Bill. You're consistent in making sure that we're doing the right thing on all fronts and environmental. And I just like to give you an opportunity to make any closing comments.

Thanks.

Many businesses are already transitioning. You'll see here in the samples, too, It's a lot of the large businesses. The small businesses don't tend to make their own gift cards, they outsource. So we also feel that by having an implementation date of 2027, it allows for that transition. Just to be clear, if you yourself have one of those cards, you get to use it.

This is only the sale. You get to use it as long as there is an amount or money on that card. So this doesn't have an overnight shift.

It's just really incentivizing and moving for the manufacturers to transition to these gift cards that are already on the market. So with that, I respectfully ask for an I vote.

Well, thank you. The Bill is out on a b roll call with Soria, not voting.

Thank you.

Okay, Senator Rubio, you're here to present Senate Bill 626, and it does have a due pass.

Good morning, everyone. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of this committee. Today I'm happy to present before you SB 626, which prohibits smoking tobacco products in all California hotels and motel rooms.

SB 626 is a critical Bill. It will protect the ability of Californian hospitality workers to work in a safe, healthy environment. We know that we've done a lot of work as it pertains to keeping smoke away from families and children. However, there's a loophole that still allows Members of hospitality workers to be exposed to secondhand smoke.

Study after study has shown that designated smoking areas, air cleaning, filtering practices, and ventilation systems do not fully eliminate the risk of smoke exposure. Implementing a comprehensive ban on indoor smoking in California is the only measure to protect people in the workplace. Going smoke free would also result in lower cleaning maintenance expenses, lower insurance premiums, and lower labor costs, not to mention the quality of life for those working in that industry.

Going smoke free is critically important, and seven other states have already done it. It's time California follows suit. SB 626, according to the committee's own analysis, brings only minor and absorbable cost to the Division of Occupational Safety Health for all benefits it will bring to California hospitality workers.

I do have a witness, Amy Hines.

I'm not sure.

If we're not here, I'm just going to have to respectfully defer to you and say I asked for an I vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Finance.

Thank you. We are neutral on this Bill, noting that it does involve minor and absorbable. Costs to the state.

Thank you. I think we have a couple of witnesses or those in the public that would like to lend their support, or opposition.

Chair and Members Autumn Ogden-Smith with The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. Here in strong support.

Tim Gibbs on behalf of the American Lung Association. As well as my colleagues at the American Heart Association.

Thank you. Anyone else that would like to speak either in favor or opposition? Seeing none, we'll come back to the committee. Are there any comments, questions, motion and a second Member? Would you like to close?

Thank you. Just hospitality workers. Thank you. They need a healthy environment to work in. With that, I say thank you.

Okay, this is due pass, Republicans not voting, and Assembly Member Dixon and I. Thank you. So we had one Senator who wanted to speak on a suspense item. Senator Grove. We'll wait for her to get here for a little bit, and in the meantime, we'll move to the consent calendar. Madam Secretary, please read the consent calendar.

SB 91 Umberg. SB 256 Dodd. SB 269 Laird. SB 432 Cortese. SB 446 Wilk. SB 459 Rubio.

SB. 461 Wahab. SB. 469 Allen. SB. 630 Dodd. SB. 667 Dodd. SB 756 Laird. SB 780 Alvarado-Gill. SB 86 Committee on Education.

Thank you. Is there a motion on the consent calendar? It's been moved. Wilson seconded by Lowenthal.

Call the roll.

Holden. I. Holden, I. Dolly. I. Dolly, I Brian. Fonta. Fonta, I. Wendy Koreo. Koreo, I. Dixon. Dixon, I. Fong. Fong, I. Heart. Heart, I. Lowenthal. Lowenthal, I. Mathis. Mathis, I. Pappin. Pappin, I. Pellerin. Pellerin, I Sanchez. Sanchez, I. Soria. Soria, I. Weber. Weber, I. Wilson. Wilson, I.

The consent calendar is adopted. We'll keep that open for absent matters. To add on, we'll now move to the Suspense file.

We'll dispense with the Suspense file. Madam Secretary, please read the suspense calendar.

SB-15 Grove. SB-16 Smallwood-Cuevas. SB-17 Caballero. SB-45 Roth. SB-60 Umberg. SB-236 Jones. SB-246 Ochoa Bogh. SB-260 Menjivar. SB-264 Niello. SB-365 Wiener. SB-384 Bradford. SB-404 Wahab. SB-450 Atkins. SB-464 Wahab. SB-465 Wahab. SB-476 Limón. SB-498 Gonzalez. SB-534 Padilla. SB-597 Glazer. SB-644 Glazer. SB-722 Ochoa Bogh. SB-723 Durazo. SB-731 Ashby. SB-769 Gonzalez. SB-770 Wiener. SB-824 Ashby. SB-842 Jones. SB-848 Rubio.

The suspense file is adopted. I will now move to public comment on the items that were before us today, either in suspense or consent. Is there anyone here that would like to comment on any item that was on their agenda?

Good morning. Janice Stanford. On behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, in support of SB 450. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no other Members from the public that would like to speak you were timing that really well. We'll now turn to Senator Grove, who had a Bill.

That's on suspense. SB 15.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning. Sorry. So. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Californians consume 1.8 million barrels of oil every single day. That's roughly 522,000,000 barrels a year.

But only a fraction of that is produced last year in California by Californian for Californians, by Californians, for Californians. The rest of it was imported mostly from foreign countries and transported here on huge tanker ships. The amount that Californians spend on imported oil is enormous.

Oil today, if it's priced at $70 a barrel and if it holds till the end of the year, then Californians will pay more than $36.5 billion a year just on the raw cost of the oil that we consume every single day. That's a lot of money that goes to countries like Ecuador, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Truly, today's state policies, the current policies, and the energy policies that we have don't make very much sense.

With foreign imports, we've canceled California's energy security, and we put it in the hands of actively hostile nations to this state. They don't have the same human rights considerations that we have here in California. They don't have the same labor rights, and they definitely don't have the same environmental rights.

The top five countries that we do business with in this state to meet Californian's demand is 75% of the oil that we import, which is about 640,000 barrels a day, or 233,000,000 barrels a year. These countries are Iraq, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, and Colombia. Currently, California's number one source, and the number two source of foreign crude oil is Ecuador.

It just went from number one to number two just recently. It's been strongly criticized by environmental and indigenous groups for its practice of clear cutting and bulldozing down the Amazon rainforest. For the top six countries that we import oil from.

They actively are destroying the most biodiverse ecosystem on the planet because they don't adhere to the same strict environmental policies that we control out of this building when we produce oil here in California. One state. This state, California, imports half of the crude oil that's produced in Ecuador. 53% of Ecuadorian oil that's produced bulldozing down the Amazon rainforest and invasive intrusion on indigenous Indian tribes in that area and contaminating the water supply that they have because they have no environmental protections in Ecuador, is produced in Ecuador and brought to this state.

And we purchased 53% of Ecuador's oil production. California's decision to import rather than produce oil here means that we're financing more than just the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Just last February, an indigenous leader in Ecuador was murdered.

The killing is believed to be linked to the community's fight to block Ecuador state owned oil company from expanding and drilling in his tribal region. Saudi Arabia and Iraq are annually highlighted in the US state Department for the deplorable human rights violations in these two countries.

Senator, I just want to kind of bring you to the fact that we only have a few more minutes and we're going to wrap up. So if you can bring your comments to a close.

Sure. We import about 50 million barrels of oil in Saudi Arabia from Saudi Arabia. And if you are a Member of the LGBTQ community, it's punishable by death in that country.

Women cannot drive and they cannot vote. And this state sends that country $3.5 billion every single year, again, just to meet the demand that we have here in California. California's demand on oil has not gone down even with all the green energy technology that's been in place.

And we are continuing a transition. The transition is not getting us off of oil. The transition is getting us off of domestically produced oil. And we import oil from other countries. If you go to vesselfinder.com, you can track these vessels leaving those countries coming to us. They also manipulate the price.

We don't track the millions of metric tons of carbon that comes from point of destination to point of origin, or point of origin to point of destination from these countries. This Bill requires that to be posted on the website. These ships that come from these countries come to our twelve mile out of our radius in our coastline, and we only track the oil emissions or the carbon emissions from the twelve mile point of origin from that point of 12 miles out.

If you look at the tracking on vesselfinder.com, you can track these vessels. They circle out across our coastline 12 miles away, and then when the price goes up, they beeline it to our shoreline to sell oil to us that we need desperately every day for a higher price. This Bill will highlight some of that.

It'll calculate and show the true numbers of the oil production and the carbon emissions to bring us oil here. And I would just like to show a few photos if I could. It would just take 1 second to do.

Senator, first of all, the Bill is on suspense.

Yes.

Consideration to give you the opportunity to make a statement or two, and we've given you a lot of latitude. We've wrapping up our meeting, so we appreciate your presentation, but we are going to if you don't mind, we're going to need to move forward. Your Bill will be considered under the suspense hearing process.

And thank you for being here today to share your thoughts on your Bill. The committee has heard your thoughts, and they'll be taken into consideration as we move to the suspense.

I thank you very much for the limited time that I had. I appreciate that. Thank you.

We're going to conclude this meeting first, again, thanking Assemblymember Bonta for filling in today, and Assembly Member Soria for being our new Member on the committee. Welcome. And if there are no other comments from the committee, meeting is adjourned.