Senate Standing Committee on Rules

So the Senate Committee on Rules will come to order. Good afternoon the Senate continues to welcome the public in person. Was I already going too fast? Sorry. Okay. To welcome the public in person at Teleconference Services, we're holding our committee hearing in Room 2200 in the O Street Building.

As Vice Chair of the Committee on Rules, I'm presiding as Chair Atkins is absent today, and we are pleased to have Senator Roth joining us as well. With all that being said, let's turn to today's business. For individuals or people wishing to participate in the public comment via teleconference.

Their participant toll-free number will be displayed on the screen. The number is 877-226-8163 and the access code to that line is 736283 or 42834. Also, on behalf of the court reporter, which I just got shushed just recently, if you just didn't catch that it was a self.

On behalf of our wonderful court reporter, I ask everyone, my colleagues and witnesses alike, to speak slowly and clearly. If you don't, we will interrupt you and have you slow down and so that she can make sure she gets every word. So I know we have a quorum. We're going to take roll.

Yes, we need to take the quorum call.

Okay, so we'll take the quorum call, and then we're waiting on one more Member to arrive.

Madam Secretary.

Laird. Laird here. Ochoa Bogh. Roth? here. Roth here. Smallwood-Cuevas? Here. Smallwood-Cuevas? Here. Grove? Here. Grove, here.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. I should have said that. You guys need to make sure my colleagues need to make sure you turn on your microphone when you vote on every Bill or speak up. If there's no objections, I'd like to take up first on today's agenda governor's appointments not required to appear.

Which are Items 2E through H.

Anybody requesting a split?

We are requesting a split. So it'd be two E, and then it would be G and H in one motion. E, G and H in one motion. Yes, sir.

Then I would so move.

Thank you, sir.

Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Laird, aye. Laird. Ochoa Bogh. Roth, aye. Roth. aye. Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye.

So that Bill is on call or that motion is on call, and then.

And then Two F is the remaining one?

Yes, sir.

I would move two F.

Thank you, sir. Madam secretary.

Laird, aye. Laird. aye. Ochoa Bogh Roth. Aye. Roth. aye, Smallwood-Cuevas? Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Grove? No. Grove no. Three to-one on call.

We'll place that item on call as well. Until Senator Ochoa Bogh arrives. I'll entertain a motion on reference to item of bills to committees.

So move.

Thank you, Senator.

Madam Secretary.

Laird, aye. Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogh? Roth. Aye. Roth. aye. Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove? Grove aye.

Thank you. I'd also like to take a motion on item four.

Senator Grove would like to have a floor introduction on Thursday's floor introduction and would request-fully ask for your aye vote.

Oh, this is really going to be hard, but I'll move it anyway.

Madam Secretary.

Laird? Aye. Laird aye. Ochoa Bogh. Roth aye. Roth. aye. Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Grove? Aye. Grove aye. with zero on-call.

So we leave those items on call and now we will move to the governor's appointees required to appear. Item one A is the appointment of Joseph Carpucca? Capurro. I apologize if you would like to introduce anyone as you come up here and give us your opening remarks and comments and then we'll go straight to the dais for questions.

Good afternoon, Senators, and thank you. My wife did not come with me today because she's babysitting, so I can't introduce her. She may be viewing. I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak to you with regard to my appointment to the Appeals Board.

I'd also like to express my appreciation to Governor Newsom for the appointment and I'd like to thank all those who wrote letters in support of my appointment to the Governor's office, most particularly the California Apps Attorneys Association and the many labor organizations who supported my appointment.

I also want to acknowledge the congratulatory messages I received from several members of the worker's compensation defense community. My entire practice has been as an applicant's attorney and I was very proud that many prominent Members of the defense community sent congratulations on my appointment.

I've been pursuing this appointment for ten years, but in reality, I've been preparing for this position from the earliest days of my 40-plus-year career representing disabled workers. I didn't go to law school to become a workers compensation attorney. Very few people do.

But I stumbled into this unique area of the law when I took a part time legal assistant position in a worker's compensation office to help pay for law school in short order, I knew I had found my calling. An early mentor encouraged me to focus on published case law and asked that I provide a case law report on a monthly basis to a lunch meeting of the local attorneys in the San Jose area.

It took little time to establish my reputation as a case law scholar. As a result of that, I was approached by the California Apps Attorney Association to provide a recent case law presentation at their twice-yearly convention, as well as asked to serve as co-chair of their Amicus Curiae Committee. With regard to the case law panel, I must have been doing something right because they asked me back 66 times over the next 35 years.

As Amicus co-chair, I was privileged to participate in most of the major appellate court decisions involving workers compensation. Oftentimes. I served as lead amicus counsel for call, including in the case of Stevens versus WCAB, which involved an unsuccessful constitutional challenge to the independent medical review process adopted in 2012, and the case of Milpitas Unified School District versus WCAB. Kuzman, which provided guidance on establishing accurate permanent disability ratings under the 2005 statutory changes adopting the AMA Guides for Rating Impairment, fifth edition.

That decision was of such significance that the Legislature codified the case by name when it further modified the applicable labor code section in 2012. It's my hope to lend my experience to WCAB and the larger workers compensation community to work collaboratively with my fellow commissioners and our exceptional staff to issue well-reasoned, balanced decisions rooted in the constitutional mandate to accomplish substantial justice in all cases, expeditiously, inexpensively, and without encumbrance of any character.

My experience so far has been inspiring and joyful, and I look forward to the opportunity to serve the people of California. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Capurro. We'll bring it back to the dais, and I'll start on this side with Senator Roth.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Congratulations, Mr. Capurro.

Thank you.

I'm just curious. A few years ago, we did some legislation having to do with rebuttable presumptions involving illness or disease associated with COVID What impact has COVID had on the workload at the board and or at the ALJ or trial?

The WCAB is seeing some COVID cases, but fewer than what were initially expected. And we actually had a judicial session on COVID just yesterday where we discussed some of the issues that are going to be coming before us or have come before us. So it's there, but it's not really a significant percentage of our caseload at this point.

Have there been or are you anticipating any unique issues other than the ones that we've tried to identify in the Legislature associated with COVID.

I wouldn't say unique, but particular to disease processes. There are other cases. In the 40s, there were a number of cases involving flu endemic. There are cases involving valley fever and West Nile virus which would involve similar issues as COVID cases. So exposure obviously is a big thing.

The applicant would be required to prove that there was a work exposure that resulted in COVID, and then there would be a back and forth with regard to presenting evidence that might suggest that that wasn't really the source.

Switching gears, our resource material suggests that a backlog exists somewhere in the system. And so the first question is, is there a backlog of cases at the board level or the trial ALJ level or both?

So what you're referring to are cases at the board level, at the commissioner level, where a final decision hasn't issued within the 60-day statutory period? The statute says we must act within 60 days, not issue a final decision. And there are many cases that it's simply not possible that we're going to get a decision out in 60 days.

So I cringe a little bit at the term of backlog. There are a number of cases that have been in or at the board longer than one should reasonably expect them to be there. I would say that in complex cases, to expect us to get a decision out in more than six months or in less than six months I'm sorry is unrealistic, given the amount of research, deliberation, review of record that has to go on before we can issue a reasonable decision or a reasoned decision.

But there are a number of cases that are well beyond that six month period. And I can tell you that it's been my experience that every single person at the board is prioritizing those cases and doing everything we can to get them out and to reduce that backlog of cases that are more than six months old.

I'm trying to get an idea of what the scope of the nature and scope of the problem is, what percentage of cases aye acted on within 60 days?

They're all acted on within 60 days.

Then maybe we need to change the statute, and I'd like your suggestion on that at some point. Then what percentage of cases are decided within 60 days?

I don't have that specific number. I gave the staff the numbers of how many cases are more than 60 days out. Most of those are within the majority of those are within the last year. There are cases that are out from 2020. 2020 and earlier, but those numbers are much less.

And has there been any analysis inside the board to determine the root cause of the inability to decide with finality a case within 60 days or 120 days, whatever the timeline is?

There are a number of factors. We don't control our caseload. Unlike going to a civil appellate court where you file with that court. Our reconsiderations are filed at the district. Then the judge has 15 days to act, either rescind their decision, modify their decision, or write a report and recommendation to us as to what the judge recommends we do with the appeal or the reconsideration request. So that knocks 15 days off right away.

That counts against your 60 days.

That counts against our 60 days. There are glitches in the electronic case management system so that cases can sometimes not get through the pipeline to us. And sometimes those delays aye very significant. Then there's simply having enough people to do the work that needs to be done in terms of issuing the processes. There's a deliberation working with an attorney to prepare a draft decision that's reviewed.

In complex cases, it's often difficult to get that out within even three months, so that tends to build up the backlog. There were complications with COVID Prior to COVID, I wasn't there at the board, but everything was done in paper, and there had to be a major effort to convert to all electronic filings.

And the process of doing that obviously caused significant delay. So prior to COVID, they had their backlog down, if you want to call it a backlog down to about 250 cases, but now we're back over 400, I think even close to 600. And a lot of that is due to the switch over from a paper process to an electronic process. So there are other factors, but we could spend all day talking about them.

Well, on that subject, has the board done an analysis in writing as to the process itself, the timeline that it takes to issue decisions with recommendations as to what needs to happen.

In terms of recommendations that would likely come from the Division of Workers Compensation, not from the Workers Compensation Appeals Board? We are a judicial body, an administrative judicial body, but we are a judicial body.

Has such a report issued from the Division or Department?

No, I do not believe I'm not aware of a report.

Obviously, staffing issues are a budget problem, but they have to be identified by someone in order for the Legislature to get involved. So there is that issue. But the process issues that you've identified tied to the 60 day timeline, which, as I understand you, is in the Labor Code.

That's correct. The Labor Code requires the board to act within 60 days upon a petition for reconsideration.

It sounds to me then that that Labor Code section or sect, those sections need to be reopened and some adjustment made to account for delays that are not associated with processing at the board level itself.

The only thing I would say in that regard is when the emergency regulations came in with regard to COVID, the time period for the board to act was essentially doubled as a result of those emergency regulations. And for cases that were coming into the system during that period of emergency regulation, after the electronic system was set up, those cases were going out in a much more timely basis. So when the board had 120 days to act. It was getting its decisions out for the most, except in the most complicated or complex cases,

Which suggests to me that we need to revisit what's in the statute to make it a realistic timeline. Otherwise, if you bust it 80% of the time, then what good is the time standard?

So that's kind of above my pay grade to make that recommendation. But obviously that's the case. And I would say, with regard to staffing, it's not strictly just a budget issue. As with many of the state agencies, we have budgeted positions that are not being that have not been filled.

We're short one commissioner, we are short one deputy commissioner. We are short attorneys, we are short other staff people that are budgeted positions, and there is a real effort going on to try to fill those positions.

I'd ask if anybody's done an analysis as to the reason why there's difficulty in filling them. Is it pay?

I can't speak to that. I don't know the motivation. My pay honestly, I don't care about my pay. As a result of my career. I'm well established.

I don't want to put you in a bad position via the Administration. It's something we'll have to look into because obviously, we want an efficient process when we're dealing with injured workers and the adjudication of benefit claims, and we want cases decided expeditiously, and we want people min seats doing work so we can meet the time standards.

We need reasonable time standards that we can measure against to assess whether we need to do more. And I think you've identified some issues that this Legislature needs to explore. And if it's in statute, that's what we do. If it's in regulation, that's what somebody else is going to have to do with some perhaps prompting from us.

Let me just move on quickly, Madam Chair, if I may, and ask just another quick series of questions on workers comp reforms. It was prior to my time in this Legislature, but I think in 2012, as a practitioner, I'm sure you were at the ground level experiencing these reforms where we dealt with independent medical review, the institution of that independent Bill review, some changes to the lien filing requirements, medical provider networks. How have these reforms been working in terms of the workers compensation process?

I think in terms of the employer perspective, carrier perspective, they're working quite well. I think if you look at any of the studies, the savings that the employer community and the carrillo community realized out of that reform and the 2004 reform are significantly more than what was anticipated by the Legislature. Personally, from my perspective, for my clients, there is now a real struggle to obtain prompt and complete medical care.

Associated with which of the items I mentioned.

Or others with regard to Bill review. That just takes that process out of the adjudication side, and that's probably that is helpful in terms of keeping our calendar moving. But in terms of independent medical review, the ability for an injured worker, particularly an unrepresented injured worker, to manage that process is extremely difficult.

And in what respect?

So treatment can be authorized under the medical treatment utilization schedule, but an injured worker generally does not have access to that schedule. Their doctor will, but the injured worker won't. And it will be difficult for them to determine when an insurance company says, no, this treatment is outside the medical treatment utilization schedule, they won't be able to determine whether that's the case or not.

And so it's difficult and then the board has very limited jurisdiction in addressing independent medical review issues. We can only find that there was a mistake and send it back for yet another independent medical review. We do not haney the authority under legislation to actually determine that the treating doctor's analysis is superior to the independent medical doctor's analysis. As to the need for care.

How does the process work with respect to an injured worker attempting to obtain approval for treatment or procedure or a medication or pharmaceutical?

In most cases, the injured worker's treating physician will have to submit what's called an RFA, a request for authorization that is received by the carrier who has two options. One to approve the treatment or to submit the treatment to a medical reviewer, a utilization review physician hired by the insurance company to look at the relevant records and make a determination of whether that treatment request is consistent with the medical treatment utilization schedule or entitled to an exception to that schedule.

There's strict time limits in which the insurance company has to act on that. That determination is then served upon the injured worker and if they have representation, their attorney and the treating doctor. And then there's a time period in which you can the doctor has two options, basically.

One, they can ask us for a second review from the insurance company or the case can go to independent medical review and the applicant, the applicant's attorney or the doctor can request that independent medical review.

That then goes to an anonymous doctor who reviews those records that the insurance companies send. The applicant has a right also to send records, but not an obligation. The carrier has an obligation to send records to the independent medical review doctor. That doctor then has to issue a decision within a certain period of time either upholding what the insurance company's utilization review physician determined or overturning it.

If it's overturned, the treatment is provided. If it's upheld, the applicant's only recourse is to come to the board and say the independent medical review doctor made some kind of mistake that is not of a medical determination nature, which then allows the board to say that's not a valid independent medical review. It needs to go through independent medical review again.

How long does that process generally take?

If you meet all the time limits, it can be fairly quick, six months. But I recently reviewed a case yeah, that's fairly quick. The Legislature adopted that process because the alternative process of the parties going to what's called an agreed medical evaluator or a qualified medical evaluator took much longer than six months.

But I recently reviewed an independent medical review case where the process had been going on for more than a year. And one of the arguments that the insurance company raised was that independent medical review determinations are only valid for a year after a year. During that year, the doctor cannot resubmit a request for the same treatment absent identifying a change of circumstance.

Once a year is up, the doctor can just resubmit. And one of the arguments that the insurance company was making was that, well, since the year is up, the board has no jurisdiction to decide that the independent medical review made a wrong decision based upon facts that don't require medical expertise. So it can get absurd at times.

So this is not just for an initial treatment or procedure after the filing of a claim or an initial prescription or authorization for a medication. This could be a subsequent renewal of a medication.

Correct.

Or a subsequent follow up to a procedure during the pendency of a claim.

That is correct.

There's one case, called Patterson, which, if it's a continuing care request, no change of circumstance, that care is excluded from utilization review. But that's not the case with medication. A board decision earlier, before I was on the board, decided that medication needs to be treated on a different basis, and every medication renewal is subject to utilization review.

So if you're an injured worker and a physician has prescribed a particular medication for you, obviously it's a medication you need. You could be in a situation where you're spending some time without access to that medication in this system.

I can give you a specific example from my own practice.

Correct.

I had a client who had a knee injury, a knee surgery, had a blood clot, thrombosis resulting from that surgery, and needed Coumadin. Every time his Coumadin prescription was written by the doctor, it went to utilization review. And it was literally about 50. 50% of the time. 50% of the time the carrier would just authorize it, and 50% of the time they would deny it.

And when denied, the patient lost access to the cumulative.

Correct.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, testimony.

Look forward to your confirmation.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And thank you, Senator Roth, Senator Laird.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I know we were asked to limit our questions, and Senator Roth just asked every single thing I was going to ask, and I thought I had a limited purview to work with. So we are good. You answered them very satisfactorily.

Thank you.

And I think I just have first, thank you for your willingness to serve. I appreciate that. And the only random question I have is will you have anything that's left over from your legal practice that will cause you to have to recuse yourself from some cases when you serve?

Yes, but probably less than most. I had been winding my practice down for quite some time. I've turned my active cases over to a former partner mine, and I would have to recuse myself from those cases also because I do a fair amount of consulting with other attorneys in the community.

There are some cases that are outside of my practice where I have basically too much familiarity with the case, and I would have to recuse myself in those cases. But unlike an attorney who might have worked for an insurance company, which I never did, or a public entity, I won't have a problem in those cases. Those can come to me. So I don't expect that I will often have to recuse myself.

Thank you very much. And let me just say that one of the awkward moments we have in interviewing people is that you haven't had a chance to serve for very long yet. And then we ask you to be accountable for every single thing that's gone on before you've been there. So I think you've responded very well to the questions about what's going on. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Laird, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for joining us today. We had a wonderful conversation with you and your colleague, Mr. Razo, who I'm understanding is out ill today and not with us, but really appreciated your history and connection to this work as an applicant's attorney.

And though you can't bring that experience into the cases that you will be looking at in this new role, I was impressed about the ways in which you are helping to educate the field in terms of making sure that the workers comp community understands the expectation and can meet those expectations that will allow those cases to move forward more quickly in a more expedited way.

And that's really what the questions I wanted to come back to a little bit today because we talked a bit, really appreciated Senator Roth questions about timelines and backlogs and delays. We talked about that as well. But I wanted you to share a little bit about, from the applicant's point of view, that delay and that timeline.

And sometimes it's like going into this dark vortex of silence where workers who are in this process feel stuck and they are not getting the medication, they're not getting the care, they're not getting the movement that they need. Can you tell the committee how parties currently engage with the board and possible new ideas where you can communicate better with those parties?

So currently the process is if your case is on study, you can write to the board and ask about the status. Let me first say that with regard to the frustration, it's important to understand that when a case jones up to the board for reconsideration the local district office loses control of that case. They can't take any more action.

And unlike a civil case where you go to a jury or a judge and get a decision and that's the end of your case. Workers compensation cases go on and on and on and on. You may have a medical award, your condition may deteriorate, you may develop new problems. And if there are disputes over those, as long as your case is on reconsideration, they cannot be addressed at the trial level they just wait until the decision is issued.

And one of the things that we do at the board is when we get a letter that says, hey, my client now is back on temporary disability, is no longer again temporarily out of work and needs to get temporary disability and the carrier is not agreeing to pay for it.

That case will basically go to the top of the stack and we will try to get it out as quickly as possible. But it is frustrating and not only to injured workers, but to employers too. These cases hang on, they want them resolved, and they can't be resolved while the cases are sitting up at reconsideration.

So currently that's about the only way there's communication between the parties and the board. And that's partly because we aye judicial officers and we can't have ex hart communication with people. We can't have people bringing new evidence to us. And so that's very limited and all of that's handled by the deputies. The commissioners do not have direct contact with the parties. When such an inquiry is made, should there be a different way to do it? That's again above my pay scale.

But I will say that the board has initiated a mediation program where if a case is up and it looks like it's going to be a difficult case to get out, the parties are offered the opportunity, it's completely voluntary on their part to work with three of our judges.

A couple are annuanced, one is an active judge to go to mediation. And that mediation process has been extremely successful in resolving the issue at hand and then getting the case back into process.

And you also mentioned the guidance that you're helping the ALJs to utilize and to understand. Can you share more about the ways in which you're communicating and providing that kind of guidance?

Well first, with regard to specific cases, our decision may provide direction to the judge as to what we're looking for them to do. And secondly, the DWC has a judge's training program, and certainly the commissioners are more than willing to participate on an invitation from the DWC to discuss that.

And then generally the commissioners will go on into the workers compensation community and do presentations. I recently with several other Members did a presentation at the California Epic Attorney Association convention in January. Three of us, was supposed to be four of us, but Mr. Razo, Commissioner Razo, can't participate. We'll be speaking at a division of workers compensation program on Friday.

So we are all willing to go out min the community and give them perspective oftentimes that we will feature ayes that have been before us and let them know about trends or the orientation of the board as to those issues.

Thank you for that. And I think that education also is a way of helping.

Can I also say, my boss told me to say this. When we go out into the community, we also encourage people to fill those vacant spots at the WCAB.

Yeah, and I think all of those things help us get to the point of not having a situation where injured workers and employers don't know where the process is and when it's going to come to some resolution. And certainly manpower is a big part of that.

I have going to just sort of shift a little bit to this question about chronic exposure. I've had a lot of conversations with firefighters, for example, who've come to my office sharing the impacts of being first responders and some of the traumatic events that are associated with that.

And a few years back there was a Bill by one of our colleagues in the Senate to create rebuttable presumption that PTSD experienced by first responders is part of work related experiences and really shifted the burden of proof to the employer right to show that the mental health condition was not work related.

Have you seen any of these cases where employers attempted to circumvent that rebuttable presumption? And what are some of the ways that the board can again help clarify flora employers this process and how they should be following and complying with those rules?

The simple answer is yes. They try to avoid the rebuttal presumption when they can, and it's an evidentiary standard. They have to bring evidence that's sufficient to overcome the presumption that the Legislature created on behalf of many public safety positions.

One of the battles is trying to decide whether the person actually falls within the presumption or not. That's something that comes to the board. So that's one way the employer will say, no, this person, for instance, isn't really a custodial peace officer, so they shouldn't get those presumptions that apply in that situation. And again, it's a factual determination that first is dealt with at the trial level and then if it comes up to us, we have to look at it.

And I know that in some cases where there's a significant panel decision or an en banc decision, it helps to solidify that legislation. Right. To your knowledge, has there been one associated with the rebuttable presumption in the PTSD protections?

I have not deliberated on one and I couldn't off the top of my head cite the one that's been decided. Sorry.

But the role of en banc, I want to make sure that when you have those kinds of decisions, they help another tool of education right for the field.

Correct.

In your sense, is there a sense that you will pull one of those cases and make this an en banc decision that can solidify that legislative presumption?

So I have not participated in an en banc decision as of yet, but those kind of things are discussed in judicial session as to whether there's an issue that would really be helpful in which to issue an en banc decision and then the decision of which case is appropriate to use as that template is always on our mind. So we may have a case that comes in front of us that raises the issue, but for some reason it really is not appropriate for an en banc decision. And same with the significant panel decisions. They don't have binding effect like the en banc decisions have, but they do indicate that that's the current thinking of the board.

Well, I appreciate that, and I know that's a process, but at that level of solidifying I think would go a long way to informing the workers comp field. So just appreciate that you allen haney that authority and we'll look to see if those decisions are made. My next question has to do with another industry that is now protected in the workers comp space and that's domestic work. Domestic workers now when defined as full time are protected through workers comp.

I wonder, are you aware of any cases that have come before the appeals border? Is there, again another en banc decision that has occurred in that space? We know that this is a group of workers who often is difficult to recognize what their rights are, having challenges getting access to those rights as it comes to filing workers comp. So just again, have you seen these decisions come before you and is there a significant panel decision that has come out?

I don't believe that there's a significant panel decision on that issue and certainly not an en banc but it is a very difficult class of workers that came out wrong. There are lots of difficulties surrounding that class of workers from misclassification to wage issues. And wage issues are important in workers compensation because benefits are paid as a percentage of the average weekly wage.

There are actions I don't know how to put this softly. There are actions that employers may take that aye abusive and people don't recognize those often as a work injury but they aye and so those claims go unreported at least within the workers compensation system. So yes, there are a lot of issues surrounding domestic workers and whether the board decides to issue an en banc or a significant panel regarding any of those issues, that would be a collaborative effort of the board.

Thank you very much for your answers and looking forward to your confirmation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As Senator Laird stated, Senator Roth was very thorough and actually had some of my questions that I was going to follow through. So I'm good. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Ochoa Bogh. Sir, again, we're all giving credit to Senator Roth because we let him go first because he's the attorney. But I do have a couple of questions that I want to clarify to make sure that I heard them correctly.

When Senator Roth was asking you questions, you stated something to the effect when you were addressing the AME and QME process. Did I hear you correctly that that takes longer than the IMR process?

So before the independent of the reasons the independent medical review process was adopted was the assertion that the QME/AME process simply took too long to resolve disputes over medical treatment. And so there are very strict time limits to the UR/IMR process that did not exist with regard to the QME process.

There's a lot of fudging that goes on with regard to those time limits. Carriers deny that they receive the RFA counting of days in terms of those time limits gets blurred.

But yes, generally, if you go to a qualified medical evaluation and they issue an opinion and one side or the other wants to depose that doctor, and then there needs to be supplemental review of additional records, that process could take years. It also could take a very short period of time if the doctor does an adequate job and the parties provide them what the doctor needs are needed to make the decision. But that was a legislative determination that the QME process was taking too long on issues of medical treatment.

I understand that. And I guess I think that the legislation was well intended. I think the intent was, we hear these findings that you're looking at years, and, maybe, that was the onset of just some special cases, and everybody jumped them up into that years process, and then legislation was passed that required you guys to act within a certain time frame.

In just your opinion, do you think that requiring you to act on every specific case within a certain time frame delays the process of in cases that could get out in an earlier time frame and get taken care of?

You're talking about the board's time limitation. I will tell you that if a case can be decided fairly quickly on basically well-established principles, that case can turn in a matter of days the draft decision that is presented by the attorney, to the panelists, the three commissioners who are reviewing the case, that can be generated in less than a week in many cases.

And I've seen that already in some of my cases where within a day or two after I've deliberated, being the third commissioner to deliberate on the case, and we're all in agreement, and it's an easy, straightforward issue, those decisions are out.

Okay. All right, well, thank you. I appreciate you asking or answering those questions. And I appreciate you holding your ground with Senator Roth. You did very well. Yeah, I really do appreciate that.

I've done it with Supreme Court Justices, so I put you guys on basically the same level.

Well, thank you.

Now we're going to go to public comment on this appointment. A reminder for witnesses wishing to participate via the teleconference line. The participant toll free number is 877-226-8163. And the access code is 736-2834.

We're going to start in room 2200, and we'll go to in persons, individuals wishing to testify in support of this nominee.

Good afternoon, Madam Vice Chair, Senators. Alberto Torrico on behalf of the United Food and Commercial Workers, Western States Council and the State Collection Probation organizations in support of the nomination. I think it was obvious Mr. Capurro's knowledge of workers compensation, not just the substance law, but also the potential problems in the system. And we're all very optimistic that he's going to try to bring some of those along and try to expedite medical treatment for injured workers. Thank you very much.

Thank you sir. Next witness.

Madam Vice Chair, Senators. Jason Marcus with the California Applicants Attorneys Association, past President of the organization and current legislative chair, here to request your confirmation of Mr. Capurro. Mr. Capurro is one of the brightest legal minds that I've ever known in my entire career as an attorney, both through CA and watching other work that he's done, as I think Jones of you said, or maybe he himself said, he is a scholar.

His work on the amicus committee with the applicant's attorneys and his arguments before appellate courts and supreme courts I think have uniquely qualified him for this job. We are proud of the work that Joe has done, and I believe that him being on the board will be a welcome addition to the workers compensation community. So we ask for your confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Seeing no other witnesses approaching the microphone in support. We'll go to witnesses in opposition seeing none. Moderator we're going to come to you on the teleconference line, and please know that the teleconference line will take both opposition and support. So please state your name, and if you're in support or in opposition of this nominee, thank you for your support or opposition, you may press one, then zero. Thank you.

Again. That is one and then zero. And we have no one on the phone.

Ma'am. Thank you, madam. Moderator we will be back with you shortly. I'll bring it back to the Dias, move the confirmation. Thank you, Senator Roth. Madam Secretary.

Laird, Laird Aye. Ochoa bogh, Ochoa Bogh Aye. Roth, Roth Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas, Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Grove, Grove Aye. Five to zero.

Well, congratulations, sir. Your nomination will go to the full Senate floor.

Great. Thank you very much.

We are going to dispense with some items that need to be taken care of. Madam Secretary, will you please call the Grove on items 2 E, G and H under the governor's appointments not required to appear.

Ochoa Bogh. Ochoa Bogh, aye.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. And next, will you please call the roll on item 2 F?

Ochoa Bogh, Ochoa Bogh No. Three to two,

that motion that is passed. And for three to two and then, Madam Secretary, 2 F was a separate one. Next. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on item 3, reference to bills for committee.

Ochoa Bogh, Ochoa Bogh Aye. five to zero.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. That motion passed. Five to zero. Our final item is the floor acknowledgments tomorrow. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Ochoa Bogh, Ochao Bogh Aye. Five to Zero.

Five to zero.

Can I get you to vote no on that.

You're not allowed to talk today. I'm in charge.

She's been waiting to say that for so long.

Do we need to take a break? Yes. We are going to take a five minute break for our court reporter, and we'll be back shortly.

Now, time to take up items one B and one C, the appointments of Members of the Lottery Commission. And they are Tiffany Alvidras and also Anthony J Grayson Ambach, PhD. Please come forward.

So welcome to both of you. Please take a few minutes to do your introductions, introduce anyone who is here with you or any comments that you would like to make to the dias. And then we'll bring it back to the ayes for questions and follow that same protocol.

Hopefully, Senator Roth will not be asking you very many questions.

We try not to haze in the Senate, but apparently the hazing is going on here.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon.

Let's make sure that's on.

There we go.

There we go. Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam Vice Chair and Members. I'm Tiffany Alvidrez. So I'm excited to be here before you today as I seek my Senate confirmation to the California State Lottery Commission. I'd like to thank my sister, who is here, min person, and supports me.

In all things, all the time. I'm really appreciative of her back there. I'd also like to thank issue baby. I'd also like to thank my mother, as well as my partner, who, along with my colleagues at Instacart, are watching online. But a special acknowledgment to my colleague, Kat Holden, who lives in the Pacific Northwest but flew in to offer her in person support.

So I'm very appreciative of that. I'm also very appreciative of Governor Newsom for appointing me as a public Member to the Lottery Commission and for giving me the ability to leverage my background to help the Lottery fulfill its mission to provide supplemental funding to public education in California.

I'm a proud product of California public school systems k through 12 my community college experiences, and as a transfer student to complete my four year undergraduate degree at a UC, which ultimately led me into a career in public service. Prior to my recent work in the private sector, I enjoyed a 25 year career that encompassed all aspects of state government and culminated in a senior staff position in the California State Legislature.

I have a wellrounded understanding of government procurement and contracts and direct experience working in the hierarchy of state government. I see my role on the Lottery Commission as one of oversight and governance to support the Director and assess the overall direction and strategy of the business, to advocate for comprehensive explanations on the processes used to make decisions, to ensure they aye defensible and present the best possible ability to maximize implementation of the mission.

While being a good steward of resources, I know what it means to thread the needle of public perception versus the actual function or purpose of a governmental entity. An example could be stern in what the public may think the Lottery does versus what it actually does. The Lottery does more than just make lucky winners.

It provides supplemental funding for California public schools and education systems. I'm approaching the end of my first year on the Commission, and I'm particularly proud of the thoroughness I see from the Department in their decision making processes and their willingness to consider all options.

I look forward to fulfilling my commitment to service by ensuring the Lottery is a pellerin organization, that everything we do is about our mission, and to expand the public's understanding of the Lottery. Again, thank you for the opportunity to be with you today, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Ms. Alvidrez. We appreciate that comment. I'm sorry, Commissioner Alvidrez. I'm sorry. I should have said commissioner. I apologize. And then so Commissioner Garrison-Engbrect right.

Engbrect

Engbrect

Thank you.

Thank you. You are next, sir.

Thank you. Madam Chair. Grove and Senators, I'm honored to be with you today to discuss my appointment to the California State Lottery. I'd like to take mathis time to introduce my husband, Richard Tomayo, and of course, Grove, my close friend, Philip Goodwin.

Thank you for joining me today. For your ongoing support. I wood acknowledge the Executive Director of Equality California, Tony the staff at the Victory Fund, and Alice Kessler for their continued support and encouragement. I wood also like to acknowledge my colleagues at the University of California who tirelessly work to support public education min the state educating over 280,000 students.

I'd like to recognize incredible efforts, in particular at UC Merced, a campus where over 60% of students identify as first generation and 70% are pell grant eligible, truly demonstrating the value of education and its impact on the communities in Central Valley.

I'm grateful to Governor Newsom for my appointment to the California Lottery Commission and allowing me to utilize my background experience in education to support the Lottery's mission to supplement to provide supplemental funding to California's public schools and colleges. Education has been central to my life. Growing up in the Midwest, education was my way to learn about the world around me and support my personal development.

It was teachers and administrators who helped to form me and allow me to be my most authentic self. A mixed race gay, son of immigrants, and a first generation college student. Now, as a university administrator and educator, I'm proud to honor those who paved the way for me and work towards creating an inclusive educational space and removing barriers so our Scholars can thrive.

I have seen the direct benefits of education and educational opportunities and the profound impacts they haney on our Scholars and their communities that go far beyond the classroom and the campus. I understand how critically important supplemental funding can be for public education and have seen how the funding can enrich the student's academic journey and support student success.

As a Lottery Commissioner, I will bring my experience to help bridge connections in the education community so that the Department can better highlight how enhancement dollars benefit schools around the state. I'll also support business proposals that will grow funding for education and aim to build a healthy and robust organization.

I'm honored to serve the state of California in this capacity and support the Lottery's mission to maximize supplemental funding to public education in the state of California. I'm grateful for your time today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I'll bring it back to the dias for questions, and I will start on this side with Senator Smallwood Quavas.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And I wanted to say it's wonderful to be here with you both this afternoon. I had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Alvidrez, and it was a wonderful conversation. And after hearing your introduction, I feel like the Lottery has hit the lottery.

They've got two amazing nominees before us today. My first question, and I wanted to pose this to Ms. Alvidrez first, because I felt like our conversation in terms of that balance between the prize of winnings for those ticket holders and the prize of quality funding, funding for quality education, there's always that balance that the lottery plays. And you had such a wonderful response to that.

And so I wanted to see if you could talk a little bit more with me about what goes into that decision making and how you, as a commissioner, feel empowered to really oversee and advise in terms of if there is a need for change in the percentage of those resources that go to education versus to the prize money.

It's always I shared with you, having worked in community and min my own home, the conversation around the table, the lottery is part of the conversation at my family table. And where does that haney go right in terms of education? So I would love for you to share that comment and I think you called it the sweet spot in our conversation. So I wanted you to share that with us today.

Certainly. Thank you very much for the question. So when referencing the sweet spot that I talked about, I talked about the study that was conducted to determine wahab the optimum amount would be for the lottery to move to the California public school systems for education.

And that sweet spot they determined was a percentage of between 65% and 67% of the revenues from cash prizes, from prices in General. And so what I'm proud to say is that the lottery has never exceeded that percentage. So we keep it within that range, which is the amount of revenues that come in, including unclaimed prize money to some degree, minus administrative expenses, and then the rest of that is pushed out to our education system. And so that's the sweet spot that I was referring to, which is that optimum percentage that was identified in which we are maximizing the distribution of lottery funds.

Yeah, and I appreciated you sharing that. And for me it was an education and how that decision has been made and how it's tracked. And I think in your opening statement you said something about being able to communicate more to the public, how that investment is happening and where it happens and how the grove that the lottery plays in that.

And Mr. Engbrecht, I really appreciated your comments and I wanted to just recognize the diversity and inclusion that has even presented here before us in this hearing process. But I know over the last several years there have been challenges that the lottery has had in terms of leadership and that there's been new leadership that has a mission driven approach now at the lottery, that we are now seeing the fruits of that labor.

And I wonder, as the Director continues to implement these changes to maintain the integrity of lottery, to also ensure that it is uplifting diversity, equity and inclusion, can you talk to me about what commissioners can do to support that? And how, do you see the board's, the Commission's role in helping staff and leadership to operationalize that mission in a long term, systemic way?

Yeah, thank you so much for the question. And I appreciate your acknowledgment of the diversity here during our confirmation hearing. I think one of the major elements for me is for the commission to continue to affirm the lottery's mission.

Both in our meetings as we talk about both sales, revenue generation, transfer of funds to education, but also as we demonstrate that to the Executive team and as they work to convey that to the rest of the staff, including our retail vendors and other community partners that we work with.

Yes. Thank you so much. You reminded me of that earlier, so thank you. I didn't catch that.

I'm not as good as pro TEM and watching ina's aye contact, so I apologize. Please slow down.

Thank you. One of the major elements that has been brought in by this new Executive team is the Mission Visions Values Project. And looking at ways they can continue to engage staff, one for the benefit of their employment, but also their satisfaction in their grove and also to think about new ways to provide communication mechanisms that allow them to be heard, seen and valued within the lottery.

I think I've been able to see this directly as a commissioner by being included in those communications. So we get to see internal communications that go out to the team that both highlights the work that's happening day in and day out, but also special highlights for long term serving staff.

We just had a staff Member retire from a lifelong of service over 40 years, I believe, or 37 years since the lottery's formation, and also to highlight areas for staff engagement, including open forums in ways that they can continue to have their voices heard. For me, that all leads to the fulfillment of those DEI efforts that staff aye co participants in co creating these elements that are going to affirm not only the lottery's mission, but affirm their work within that system and to enhance the diversity that comes with a diverse staff.

More recently, I was able to see communication of even advertising current openings and encouraging team Members to encourage their families, extended families and social networks to apply again, I think as we engage them in those conversations, it's one way to invite people that look, feel and love like them into our work community.

I appreciate that. I mean, just from the conversation that was in the previous hearing discussion. Vacancies right. How do you bring folks to the workspace is often that invitation and where folks can feel heard included and that their voices and their work matter. So I really appreciate that response. Thank you.

Thank you both.

Thank you, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Your biographies are pretty impressive and so is your level of education. Kudos to both of you for pursuing such a level of exceptional academic excellence. So congratulations on that and thank you for your willingness to serve. I did not have the opportunity to sit down and speak with both of you low I wish I had made time for that.

But with that, I'm kind of curious. I was reading that there were some concerns with regards to an audit that was completed in 2020, I believe, is that correct?

It might be our most recent audit that happened in 2019.

2019, okay, so maybe the concern was brought up in 2020. Perhaps. I was just kind of curious because I had a note here and I know that you discussed earlier with the proportion of the lottery being spent and what that sweet spot. So I appreciate that.

But there was a note here and I just wanted to hear your thoughts on it which stated that the lottery has not followed state law which requires it to increase its funding for education in proportion to its increase in net revenue. As a result, in fiscal year 2017 and 2018, the lottery failed to provide 36 million in funding for education.

I know you had mentioned that you had a new study that talked about the sweet spot, but do you find any other concerns with how the processes I know you explained that you are confident in it. But on the critical side of the analytical part, do either of you have any concerns with where the system could go a little better in providing that funding for or even the Administration cost of maintaining the lottery? Your thoughts on that? Thank

you very much for the question. I'd have to start by saying I don't have any concerns. I think the lottery is functioning at its maximum capacity according to statute. The lottery doesn't have the capacity to really affect those distribution.

Numbers, that sweet spot that I referred to really speaks to optimization of what comes in versus what goes out and that percentage that is in accordance with statute. So from my perspective, I think the lottery is functioning at its maximum capacity to be able to push out the maximum amount of supplemental funding. With that said, there are always spaces for improvement.

I believe that there's always a need for you to consistently assess and reevaluate and ensure that the programs and services that you are managing are functioning as they're designed to function. So there's always room for improvement. But I do believe that the lottery is functioning in accordance with its mission and statute.

So I'll let you answer as well. And then I would love to have as a follow up, I'm going to try to stay within two questions. Some of the recommendations that you may have within that, within your responses moving forward, how we can make those improvements. I'll let you think a bit.

I'll affirm that I also believe that the lottery is running at an optimal level of efficiency. And with that being said, I do think that part of our role as commissioners is to provide opportunities for constant evaluation improvement.

And so in addition to our regular briefings and board meetings, it is important for us to be apprised of any information that might come up from the Executive team to ensure consistency of operations and that we're doing everything in our capacity to ensure that we are being effective in our operations.

This includes reviewing and making decisions on large contracts, making sure that we're having appropriate information regarding staffing levels and the optimization of the staff that we need to operate the lottery. A more recent example of that is at a recent board meeting, we did vote to increase staffing to increase optimization. And part of that was a pretty detailed employment study of what that wood look like for them to achieve their goals.

I'll share that it was very conservative and that as far as operations is lean and effective, I think one thing that I think aids in that is that there also caps to operational spending and that allows us to hit that sweet spot. And so the money that goes back into the operations or day to day operations of the lottery is capped. I think that helps us to make some good financial decisions and finding that sweet spot min the total distribution of funds to the state of California.

Can. I say plus one only because he hit on the educational piece. And my perspective would be that it's consistent reviews, which I know are being done by the Director. I know those consistent reviews are being done by the Executive team. There are quarterly reviews that are being done by both of those entities as well as the State Controller's office.

So there's plenty of oversight that is being leveled in addition to our commission role, who's providing oversight and governance. And so I hope that is an acceptable answer.

I will take that.

And one last very easy question for both of you. Has the commission forecast how the recession might affect the lottery and the monies that aye going to be coming through and going to our schools?

So unaudited? At this moment, we're projected to hit and exceed our $8 billion target revenue, with over $2 billion being allocated to public education in the state of California. The first time in our history, but 22 consecutive years of a billion plus dollars being allocated to public education as supplemental funds.

And I think from our most recent review of our financials, we're hitting our target markets and our target sales. We'll be happy to provide additional sales information after the fact that would be helpful.

Perfect. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you. Senator Ochoa Bogh, thank you both for being here. But I just have a couple of questions, if that's okay. Commissioner Alvidrez, in your responses to the Rules Committee, you mentioned that you want to transform and modernize the lottery.

What do you view those changes would be? And if you have any obstacles that you think you might encounter, what do you think those might be?

Thank you for that question. When I think of modernization, I think of technology. I think of education. And from a technology perspective, I think of upgrading systems. I think of self service kiosks, which I know that the lottery is exploring as it relates to our retailers.

When I think of education, I think of the consumer experience as well as the retailer experience, streamlining that experience so that there's more ease of use, not only in play, but in payouts, making that experience so that it feels a bit more intuitive.

When I think of modernization, I think of that. I also think when I think of modernization, a bit on access and expansion, I think about how the lottery seeks to reinvigorate retailers with adding to our network Walmart Supercenters, which will add 200 more brick and mortar retailers to the network.

And so when I think of modernization, I think of access, expansion and technology.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate that. Really, I really do. And then Commissioner Grayson Engbrecht in your written responses to the Rules committee.

You wanted to ensure transparency, in operations, and then the California State Lottery that maintains fairness and integrity. Are you concerned about transparency and fairness and integrity? Is that why you respond? I'm just curious about that. To me, that I took that as a very interesting response, so I'm just curious about that.

And then I also wanted to know what recommendations that you might put in place or recommend to address those issues.

Yeah. Thank you so much. for the question. I think, in looking at the current business operation plans, one of the significant goals is to support a positive, mission centric narrative, the lottery.

And so when I think about transparency and ensuring fair play and responsible play, I think I also lump it in with the public perception of the lottery and who plays where the funding goes, how it's supporting our students in the state of California in education.

I think for my role as commissioner is to continue that. So not necessarily thank you. I can actually hear my husband also whispering this much, but to continue. On. The trajectory of being transparent in our communications and including our current staff, our Executive team and the General public, I think is really important to make sure that we ensure that.

Thank you. I understand that you talk fast. I think fast talkers lose their train of thought. If they talk slow, I get shushed. So thank you very much for answering all of our questions. We're going to go to public comment.

We should get to this side. Oh, I guess I really did try to get you guys off. Thank you, Senator Laird.

She threw us off by saying she was the one being shot. Actually, it mostly went with the questions I was interested being asked, and I want to make a comment and give you a chance just to add to one answer. And the comment is, I chair the Education Budget Subcommittee and I know Senator Roth did it before.

Maybe this happened to him. At least two or three times a year, I am speaking to some group and somebody raises their hand and says, I thought the lottery was going to completely Fund education. And because there was that ad campaign out when it ran, there is that view out there among some people to this day. And I find I always have to put it out.

And it's interesting because that was a private thing. That was the private people running the campaign. It wasn't any public person making that claim on behalf of state government. So I feel obligated to bring it up just because people are watching and there's somebody out there that might have just heard it, that needed to hear it.

And I think to give you a chance to add, hopefully I'm not speaking too fast. Bothof you have interesting backgrounds that really intersect with education. And I know you were chief of staff to the chair of the Budget Committee who was in the middle of every education thing that was going on at the time. And your whole career has been directly in education.

How will you bring your experience with education to how you look at this job? And it didn't get quite asked that directly, but I think that would be an interesting perspective for us to have from both of you.

I don't think I'd bring my experience per se as it relates to education in as much as I'd bring experience as it relates to government, government function, public perception. You raised an interesting point about the public's perception of what the lottery does.

I think I mentioned that in my opening remarks where what people think we do versus what we actually do. And I think that is an area actually where we could probably do more. Right. It's part of that educating the public as to what the lottery does.

Especially when you think about these large payouts, when you think about prizes, when you think about how on fire people really are for the lottery and the games, there is some work to be done about where that money goes. Stories to be told, testimonials to be shared, videos to be shared about who the beneficiaries are of that money and how it's being allocated. And I see my role as a commissioner in ensuring those pieces.

Thank you.

And I think from my perspective as an educator, it's continue to affirm the California's mission in providing supplemental funding. And when we talk about that as a commission, it's in some ways the bells and whistles that make learning fun.

And so I think that we've been able to see the direct benefits in Winters, California in providing additional science textbooks and experiments for our students in the classroom at Long Beach City College and supporting nurse practitioner and dental hygienist support and allowing them to directly learn on the systems that they'll be using in the hospitals and dentist office.

I think that for me personally, we all benefit when we have trained nurses, dental hygienists, we have trained educators, and we have students who are invigorated and excited about learning that we are able to captivate our minds invigorate our imaginations and build a community that really is thriving.

And so I think part of my grove in education and the connections I have across the state is to continue to tell that story. I think from your story and sharing with a larger audience, I think that sometimes is misinterpreted. And so even since my commission appointment, to be able to share, and this is what the lottery does is really important to me.

Thank you. I really appreciate both of your sponsors, and I also appreciate the fact that you said your spouse was trying to whisper, and if he does seminars on how a spouse should whisper really out loud, I have a client. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Senator Roth.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Given the fact that I've apparently exhausted allotment of questions for the next six months of rule hearings, I won't have any. But I do want to thank you both for agreeing to serve extraordinarily well qualified. I look forward and in fact, am delighted to support your confirmation.

Thank you, Senator Roth.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Roth. Now we will go to public comment as a reminder for witnesses wishing to provide comment via the telephone on a participant. Toll free number is 8772-6661 or excuse me, 8163. And the participant number is 736-2834. But we'll start with those in support of each one of these individuals.

Anyone wishing to testify, in, room 2200. For the support, please come to microphone. State your name and your position, please.

It's great to be back. Nice digs. Commissioner Ricardo Lara. It's great to be back home. I'm here to support both amazing candidates.

But talk about Commissioner Alvarez, who is a dear friend and as you've already heard, plays a pivotal role in her service in the commission and proud of the work that we've been able to do and is really a sister in equity and justice.

And as a former Member of this esteemed committee, I would highly recommend that you vote to support both these candidates. But proud of the work that Tiffany's done already to modernize the commission. And on behalf of Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who couldn't be here, she also sends her extensor of warm regards and says to please do this. So thank you again, and it's a great honor to be here on behalf of my friend Commissioner Avid. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner, very much. And welcome back. Next.

Thank you. And good afternoon. Madam Chair and senators. My name is Pamela Gibbs, and I'm here representing myself today on behalf of Commissioner Alvidrez recommendation and confirmation for the California State Lottery Commission. I have known Commissioner Alvidrez for more than two and a half decades, and I've had the pleasure of working with her on education issues in my capacity as an education advocate.

During that time, we have worked together on issues serving at. Promise students, women and girls, and all of California's children in her capacity as working on Budget Committee staff and just really working throughout numerous positions in the state Capitol.

During my time in that position, before my work in education, Ms.Alvidrez and I worked in the Capitol Building for both the Governor's office and as co-workers in the state Legislature. And I tell you, we have had many times where we've relied on one another, we've relied on each other's expertise, we've supported one another.

So we have a personal relationship as well. One thing I can say about Ms. Alvidrez is her experience in government has just overshadowed allen of the opportunities I've had to work with her. She has a deep knowledge of how things operate and would be a wonderful commissioner in continuing her work on the Commission.

Another thing I wanted to share with you is that Commissioner Alvidrez has been a hardworking, dedicated, public cervantes for many years, and that is something that is so important to represent in the state Capitol Building and state government offices. You can't find anyone more true to her position and her service. Lastly, I would like to share that if you have worked with Commissioner Alvidrez, you know, she's very direct, very effective, but she also has compassion and is a caring individual.

And for those reasons, I strongly urge your support for her position and confirmation to the California State Lottery. Thank you very much for your time and opportunity to join her family and colleagues in support.

Thank you. Thank you very much. A reminder is to state your name and provide support or opposition thank you. Or support in this case. Thank you. Ma'am, you're next.

Hi, Madam Chair and Members. My name is Brandi Wolf. I'm currently the statewide policy and research Director for SCIU Local 2015. I'll slow down, but I am here today in my capacity as a professional colleague to Ms Alvidrez. I think it's only fitting we're here on International Women's Day for me to support the confirmation of one of the most fiercely loyal women that I know.

I first met Tiffany in the summer of 2008 when we were both staffed to then Assembly Member Kurt Price. And throughout her tenure in the Legislature, and in particular her decade of service as Chief of Staff to Holly Mitchell, Tiffany really demonstrated an innate ability to navigate the complexities of the California state budget.

Those of us in this line of work know that consensus building can be somewhat challenging at times, and Tiffany is really a pro at that. Her experience at all levels of state government as well as in the private sector will serve the Commission so that it may fulfill its duty to approve the budget and business plans in order to achieve the lottery's mission. For the last 15 years, I've had the honor to know and work with Tiffany.

The Lottery Commission strives to ensure integrity, security, fairness, and transparency in the operation and Administration of the lottery. And there are really few that conduct themselves with the level of integrity, fairness, and transparency that Tiffany does. So I am confident she'll uphold those values of the Commission to the highest degree. And I think it's only fair to add that Tiffany is also an incredible mother to four children that have been and are in the public school system.

They are four of the most incredible human beings, and that is a testament to her fierce advocacy for their education. So it's for all of those reasons. That I support her confirmation. Thank you.

Next, please. Holly Fraumeni DeJesus at Lighthouse Public Affairs. And I'm echoing all the comments and respect that he wishes to keep it short in support of Commissioner Alvidz. Also, two decades of professional and personal relationships couldn't support a better commissioner.

Thank you, ma'am. Yes, sir.

Thank you, Senator. Good afternoon. Alberto Toriko. Not on behalf of any clients, just for myself in support of the confirmation of Commissioner Abidesh. I've met her and I worked with her when she was Chief of Staff to Senator Holly Mitchell, that is to say, as a public cervantes.

And I think that the qualities that she demonstrated in my interaction with her always were always her graciousness, not only with her time roth her wisdom and her counsel. So I strongly support the nomination.

Thank you, sir. Seeing no others coming to the microphone for support. We'll take witnesses in opposition. Seeing none, we'll go to the Moderator.

Madam Moderator, if you're still there, we'd like you to open lines in support or opposition of either of the individuals before us.

If you would like to queue up for support or opposition, you may press one and zero at this time. At this time, there's no one in queue.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Do any of the Members have any additional comments or questions? I have a motion when there's time.

You have a motion. I'm going to take a chance here and I'm going to I move that.

We confirm both of the nominees that are in front of us.

Thank you. Thank you. Senator Laird. Madam Secretary.

Laird, Laird Aye. Ochoa bogh, Ochoa Bogh Aye. Roth, Roth Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas, Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Grove, Grove Aye. 5-0

Thank you. It's a five to zero vote. Both of your confirmations go to the Senate floor for full Senate vote. And do we need to take a little bit of a break? Just 2 minutes. Thank you very much.

This is off the record confirmation, but I do have a question. You're a very intelligent, wonderful woman, and I just loved reading your background. And one of the things I saw in your background was that you were the California State Senate Fellows Selection Committee and you were a Member.

We have a conference that's coming before us in just a few minutes. Who chose to be in the Assembly Fellow coro program. That's what I was thinking. I was just wondering I was going to get your opinion, and your facial expression showed it all. Thank you.

You did it very diplomatically. No words, just facial.

Thank you, ma'am. Okay.

But okay. Look. So, Madam Pro Tem has left me in charge. This committee is getting out of hand. But yes, since you are my colleague on the Senate, for my favorite.

No, I just want to just say full support of our appointment it and she's a great individual. I've known her for 14 years and just a consummate professional. I'd be honored to see her there. And she has full support not only of me, but the Legislative Black Caucus as well.

Thank you, Senator Bradford.

Thank you. Congratulations, ma'am. Congratulations, sir.

All right, thank you. Madam Chair, Members of the committee, Michael Gunning. I can't tell you how thankful I am for this opportunity and very excited about this appointment.

The opportunity to continue to be of service to the State of California, the retirees and Members of CalSTRS, including my 93-year-old mother who is a 25 year teacher from LAUSD. Speaking of Monica Gunning, as I said, is a 25 year veteran. With me is also my wife, Kelly Wilson, my daughter Elon's back there, my brother Mark and our friend Zita Alcantara.

Before I begin, I have to Senator to give thanks to the Rules Committee. I think some of you know that I was recently left the CBIA and joined Lighthouse Public Affairs as their Chief Strategy Officer. And when the committee asked for the questions, I just thought I could knock it out.

I didn't fully appreciate low much changing jobs was going to impact me. So I have to give thanks to you, the staff specifically Lisa, Anita, Nita-Marie and Marina. Thank you guys. And of course thanks to the Governor for this great appointment.

Before every CalSTRS meeting, we watch a video the highlights of a teacher or retiree a Member of CalSTRS in addition to my mom. These videos are a great reminder and affirm to us why this role is so important. Preserving the retirement security for California's educators. I must admit I'm very excited about this appointment.

My background in finance investments, housing policy, insurance, community development finance in California has prepared me well for this position. What I did not expect was how much I'm going to enjoy this role. I think I've had the benefit of an excellent onboarding session both with the executive leadership team, the investment team, and board consultants.

In September I had a wonderful chance to attend the University of Toronto Rotman School of Management, which is pension fund school. Believe it or not, there's such a thing as pension fund school.

And when you're up there with South Africa, the Netherlands, Canada, Bahrain, you just realize the importance role of this position and role. And it really helped me see how important this was and how excited I was to get this appointment finally, I've been there eight months and there's a lot to learn. As much as I know there's still a lot to learn. So go easy on me. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Gunning.

I will start the questions on the dais with Ms. Smallwood-Cuavas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And it's very good to meet you and excited for your confirmation today. I'm always excited to talk to folks who are in the stirs and purse system because as a Senator, I realized who here to the State Senate that I don't have a pension and how important that is.

I was in the housing informational hearing and they were talking about one of the fastest growing homeless populations is among black seniors. And part of that calculation is just not having access to good hobs that provided real security and safety net in retirement. So I just want to say the work that you are embarking on is so very important.

And also as a person that's advocated for workers to have voice and to be unionized and to have access to a pension, I'm often struck in the ways that those dollars are being used to reinvest in community, to invest in building up our financial and developmental strength. As LA county and certainly as a state.

I also realized that there's a war on environmental and social governance factors that as CalSTRS and other boards having investment beliefs, having guiding principles is often under attack. And I really appreciate CalSTRS establishing an investment belief framework and acknowledging that ESG can bring long term benefits to investors and build a sustainable community both economically and environmentally and having already divested from tobacco and firearms.

So as people talk about divestment and reduction in carbon footprints, what will you look at when determining appropriate fiduciary responsibility and oversight for the CalSTRS investments?

Thank you Senator, great question and a couple of really neat thoughts you brought up there.

And what I was struck by is one of our investments with SoLA, which is in South Los Angeles, 61st in Avalon, which is a minority developer who's building housing there. So a great way that STRS has invested one in minority developers but also trying to create housing and provide housing.

It was one of the things that struck me in the onboarding the most is how much STRS is consistently nominated as one of the great places to work. And so not only from the investment side, but from how the operation works in terms of diversity, equity and inclusion and environmental safety, sustainability it's throughout the whole organization.

And I think as you said, as a fiduciaries, our obligation is most importantly to make sure that those billion-dollar-a-month payments go to the pensioners. And I think for us the lens that's the most important thing. And of course, reaching full funding by 46.

I feel like Chris Ailman told me something that sticks with me all the time, that climate change is important to him because how we go from fossil to renewables impacts investments. And so it's a constant thing we look at and it's a constant thing to consider.

And I think as a board member, that's part of my job and I think we all look at that as well with the lens, of course, preserving and making sure we have those monies, but also thinking about the future.

And just a quick follow-up question to that. And this is something that concerns me living in a community that is still struggling from the first industrial shift into the service economy and the prevalence of low-wage, unregulated de-unionized working conditions.

When you're looking at these investments, do you see a potential for really embedding fair labor standards by certain industries or companies to make sure that in many ways we're maintaining the reinvestment right into these programs? Because when you have quality, as teachers are able to grove their pensions, that means more opportunities to invest. How do we make sure that we are embedding labor standards, from your view by certain industries at your level?

Yeah, I think it's difficult and I'm not sure how we can I think that the bottom line is the investment safe? Is it sound? Does it return money back to the system. So difficult to see how we can be involved in labor standards when fiduciarily it's primarily the return and is it a safe and sound investment. So I'm not sure I see a way a pathway there.

Well, the funds from STRS obviously comes from those workers who do have high standards that are in regulated sectors that are investing their funds for pension retirement. And in our communities we want to see that kind of investment happening across the board that actually ensures the fiduciary sustainability of the investment system overall.

So I just think that's something to consider ways that we can think about labor standards so that it's not just STRS standing alone, but we have an economy that has these kinds of investments happening that help all workers to rise. So I appreciate that answer and review my other question that I have.

I wonder how do you, as being at the STRS level, think about the decrease in active teachers? As folks are retiring, less folks are coming in certainly teachers. Their pay though it's the most important job there is, unfortunately is not competitive a lot of the private sector employment that we see happening.

So in your role, do you see board members such as yourself and others playing a role in trying to stern that tide? How do we address the numbers of teachers who are leaving that field so that we can continue to keep the stern growing and thriving?

Yeah, great question, Senator. I think a lot of industries have experienced loss. This morning on NPR they were talking about food service workers who've left and have left those jobs for other jones better high paying jobs.

I think the thing that really troubles me though is the decrease in enrollment of students. I think the loss of students and where they going, if it's private or they're not going or going to work, is really the thing that in the long run will impact even more because less students means less need for teachers and so on and so forth.

So that's probably top of mind to me actually, I think we've seen numbers for teachers in the system come back to pre pandemic levels. So at least for STRS, we've seen some of those teachers come back and they are there. So I think for me, obviously it's a great profession, raised two boys, as my mom would say.

We want to encourage them to come back. I think they have. But I am more worried about where the students are going and what are we going to do about the decreased enrollments.

Well, I appreciate that and I know we see some of the teachers returning back to the classroom. Certainly I think it's more projected the forecast in terms of students, particularly in our CSU's and UC, seeing this as an industry for careers, as careers and to thrive.

And that's where as we look forward in future decades, we want to make sure that we are thinking about ways to stem that tide and to bring more folks into this profession. In your role, I'm sure that will come up more as active the decrease in active teachers come up in ways that the board can.

And I certainly particularly community college level, I'm glad you pointed it out and would certainly like to talk with you more about what we can do or what the system could do to increase those numbers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome, Mr. Gunning. And thank you, very grateful that you have accepted this appointment. I just have one question for you, and that is what is your view with regards to how the future baby boomer retirement and the continued decline of K-12 enrollment will affect the pension fund? And if you want to follow that up, how will inflation what do you think the inflation will have on the impact of CalSTRS being able to pay out to our teachers that are in retirement?

Boy, those are good ones. Great questions. And I think we touched on with Senator Smallwood-Cuevas that the decrease in students is concerning. Right? And so what does that mean for STRS because it will impact the ability to pay pensions if we have less students, less teachers, less money is coming in, less investment money.

So there is an impact and there's no way around it. It is a concern. And I think, Senator, that's why it's top of mind to me, because it will ultimately impact how much money comes in to pay the pensioners.

The way the dynamic works is from the teachers, it's a third and then two-thirds come from investments. And that's how we're able to raise the dollars to pay pension benefits. So I don't know if I have an answer, but I know it's something as a board we're looking at.

And that's why it's top of in for me in terms of inflation. I think the best way to think about that is at STRS They're long term investors so we look out on the horizon. So while inflation is here, we get that and in fact, perhaps it thought, but really as a long-term investor, you ride the waves, right? You plan for that you look out forward and so you're less concerned about immediate changes in the market as much as where you are long-term.

Now, that being said, I am proud to say that Chris Ailman and the investment staff created an inflation hedge. They purposely bought an investment that would offset any inflation losses. And so I'm proud to say that STRS made money as inflation has gone up because of that investment. You never know if it was going to come back.

No one thought inflation would be here like it was. But I think thanks to the investment staff and all the professionals, the wonderful professionals who run that department, they had the forward thinking to purchase that hedge, that investment. And so for us, inflation, it's still ongoing, obviously we heard that this week, but it at least softened the impact of the past year for us.

Okay, and I think that one last part of that question. I would love to hear your thoughts on the baby boomer retirement and the impact that will have on CalSTRS.

And by that you mean teacher boomers who are retiring? Who want to retire. If what you're implying is that costs are going to go up to the system, is that because folks are retiring early? Is that where you're going with this or thinking about it? Yeah, it's a function. I think a lot of us decided to change careers because of the pandemic and do something different.

But as I suggested earlier, I think we are at least seeing some of teachers at least returning to the system in the same levels they were before the pandemic. So I'm not quite sure we're seeing early retirements from boomers yet that are impacting. So I'm not sure it's an issue for us right now.

Okay, perfect, thank you. You're the expert now.

I don't know about the expert. I got a lot of good people behind me.

Right, thank you. Senator Ochoa Bogh. Senator Laird.

Thank you very much. And I do have a 98-year-old mother who is a STRS recipient who probably is even watching this, hearing and ting to make sure that you're going to deal with a fiscally sound system. And I appreciate you meeting with me. A lot of the things I wanted to ask about have been asked.

So let me just ask one question that's a little further or different than Senator Ochoa Bogh and it's the fiscal sustainability has been targeted for, I want to say 2048-49. And the factors that were raised in her question are factors that could cause that to work or not work.

And so the real question for me is, are, we on path for 2048 and 49, and everything that was mentioned is something that might threaten the path or has been accounted for in the path to get to 2048-49? And could you just comment on whether you think we're on track to do that?

Sure, Thank you, Senator. The goal is 46 and it's full funding by 46. Interestingly, we're a year behind. So the last numbers we have are as of June of 2021. And in May we'll hear where we are for June of 22.

Always a concern. I think from that report, they thought we were still on the path to full funding by 46, but we are $90 billion short of that. And so thinking about that, that's why I go back to long term investors and I think the investment parameters that we as a board approve and as I shared in our meeting, just this last week, we had the meeting where as board members, we set the investment threshold.

And it's important how much we want the system to make overall. And if we're off on that, it means pensioners have to pay more or school districts pay more to it, or if we're too high and we don't meet those goals, the same impact happens.

I feel very confident that the long term view and long term strategy we have will help us meet that goal by 46. Even with inflation and some of the retirements we're seeing, or lack of students, I think the long-term view we're going to be okay.

Okay, just one comment, then I'm done, because we talked about this. And I've had three different meetings because of my education budget grove in the last week that included presidents of community colleges. And one of them in particular said currently they're at 21% of payroll or something to retirement, and they were 8% at the time that these reforms started. And so the pressure on the budget is, if I'm quoting right, what was told me.

So the pressure on the budget has been high in this period, and we can talk about how we think sustainability is coming and where it is, but then they turn around and say to us, the Legislature, you're not funding us at a level that's keeping pace with the increased retirement costs. And so I think that is a thing.

And I'm looking past the Vice Chair, two other Members of the Education Budget Subcommittee, and so I think they will all be hearing it as well. But that's the tough thing. We have a schedule to get there, but it means that districts or other people have to really stretch in a way that min this particular budget. With it being down, they're not going to get a lot of extra money.

Last year, they were able to absorb the cost because of what was coming extra out of the budget. But just as a comment to note, thank you for your willingness to serve. Thank you for meeting with me. I look forward to supporting your confirmation.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you, Senator Laird, Senator Roth.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Gunning. Congratulations. Since I'm out of questions, you're in luck.

Come on, General.

But I do have a comment. I was pleased to hear the word fiduciary in relation to our ESG investment policies as it pertains to the investment Fund. From my perspective, investments have to make financial sense regardless, given the fact that we or you are investing other people's money, people who are depending on an investment return at the end of the rainbow.

And hopefully it's a rainbow in many cases. The ESG investments that we discuss in this building or in the building across the street wilk make sense in terms of maximizing returns for those employees who are depending on retirements, at least in the long run.

In some cases, they will not. And that's an analysis that I'm confident that you and your colleagues on the board will make with your investment advisors. And I'd urge you to engage in that task seriously because the decisions you make today may not be realized, as you know, for decades to come. We won't be here to have to deal with those consequences, but the employees, retired employees, will be. So thank you for agreeing to serve and to take on what I think is an awesome responsibility. And awesome may not be in a positive.

I know, right? Thank you, Senator,

But we appreciate your service, and I look forward to supporting your confirmation.

Great point.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Roth I do have a couple of questions. I echo my colleague's comments. Senator Roth, it is a great responsibility, and you do it for zero pay. And that is truly extraordinarily generous public service on where your heart comes from.

I do want to point out that even in the conversations that you've had with my colleagues here on the dais you referenced, possibly a $90 billion budget deficit. It's important that you take a fiduciary responsibility to make sure you make good investments. And it should be on a financial return, number one.

Number one, everything else is secondary or third or fourth or fifth down the line, regardless of what agendas or what people are wanting you to do based on other criteria that they perceive being one of the most important things. And I agree that all of that plays into a place in some or most all of the policy that goes for this building or anything.

But I think your number one responsibility is to make sure that you have a pot of goals, like my colleague said at the end of the rainbow, so that those teachers that worked in their career, like your mom or Senator Laird's mom, you have an obligation to make sure that their money is still ongoing.

I am very, very concerned about the decline enrollment. It's 1.8% on top of, what, 2.6% for 2021? I think COVID with kids being at home some parents saw that this public school system isn't working for me and these kids are going elsewhere without these students in school, which is 120,000 something last year and another 200 and something thousand the year before, that affects teachers retirement.

To my colleague Senator Ochoa Bogh's point when she referenced baby boomers, I think it's an analogy, I'm not putting words in her mouth, but do you see a problem that as the student enrollment declines and teacher hiring declines, there's less dollars going into the fund? And do you think that that might put you at a low, a higher deficit than the 90 million? And if so, tell us.

I know you have great financial skills, I really do. I know your background and you have incredible financial skills. What do you see, especially when you have people screaming about divestments? And I don't mean to keep convoluting stuff, but the San Francisco Chronicle stated that because of climate goals, divestment doesn't work in this particular situation because you need to invest places where you make money because people are depending on you to do that.

What are your thoughts about the calls to divest out of certain, let's just say, called fossil fuels? And what is your concern about the lack of students participating in the public school system now that could affect teacher retirement?

Thank you, Senator. Just great questions and top of mind to me. I have to start with of the things you learn is teachers don't get Social Security, right? Do you guys know that? Yeah. I didn't know that.

Oh, yeah.

My mom, because she worked for AT&T before she became a teacher, she gets a small check that of course doesn't matter because it's too small.

And my dad had to do a weird thing to get his 40th quarter after 35 years. I mean, he had to go off and do something to get him an extra quarter.

So the importance of the fiduciary role is constant for me, as I shared with Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. I think that's critical. If we're losing students, we're going to lose teachers and then it makes the job that much harder. I don't know if I have an answer here today because I don't think we know where all these kids have gone if they're at private school or not going or going in the workforce.

So I think it's something we certainly have to look at and think about. When I worked in the Missouri Treasurer's office, Wendell Bailey, who was the treasurer there, would often quote Will Rogers, who Laird? I'm more interested in the return of my money than the return on my money. Which is to say I want smart investments, right? I don't want to do things that's going to lose money here.

And so I believe that constantly. That's why I shared this thought about Chris Ailman looking at climate change and how that can affect economies and how that can infect our long-term investments. So, as I suggested, I think the fiduciary obligation is most important and that weighs on my mind all the time.

And while you guys have certainly emphasized the enormity of the role center off, I feel like I appreciate what you're saying and you can rest assured that for me, that is a priority.

Thank you.

My last question is and I give a brief comment about that with Miss Alvidrez who's worked in the building and participated in the Senate Fellow program. You participated in the Coral Fellowship program, which is an independent program outside the Senate. Is there any reason that you could give us that you didn't think the Senate program was good enough to asking for 30 night-employment?

Yeah, I know. Right, Senator. Well, I think I would be thank you for that because there's a wonderful program.

But I think Senator and Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who was also in the Coral Fellows program with me that year, would agree that it was a superior program to the Senate Fellows program. Sorry, Erica. But thank you.

Okay, thank you. We all love you. I've known you since 2010 when I got up here and you are one incredible, honest, hardworking, caring individual. And so I really do look forward to your confirmation. And we are going to move to public comment now. Thank you.

So we'll move to public comment. Those in the room in room 2200, please be ready to come to the microphone moderator. As a reminder, witnesses wishing to provide public comment via the participant toll free number, it's 877-226-8163 and the access code is 736834. We'll go to room 220 1st for support. You again. You've been here all day. I'm just teasing you.

I'm very happy to be here.

You go right ahead, sir.

Thank you.

Senators here in support of the nomination of Mr. Gunning. Going to date myself and Mr. Gunning a little bit here. We met in 2003 when I was running for the Assembly. And I'll just tell you that the thread that connects that time to this time, in my opinion, in my relationship with Mr. Gunning is his integrity. He says what he means. He means what he says when I was in office.

And now if you ask him a question, he'll give you a straight answer. If he doesn't know the answer, he'll tell you that. So I think that that's in addition to all of his qualifications that are obvious, I think that's what CalSTRS is the second largest pension fund in the world needs. Honest assessment, honest appraisal, honest answers to protect the very retirement that we've talked about. I, too, was shocked as chair of the Purse Committee to hear that teachers don't have Social Security and their pensions aren't that large.

I know the public will be shocked to hear that, but that's what it is. So I stand here in full support of the nomination and the confirmation of Mr. Gunning. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Next witness.

I was going to go leave so that I can go celebrate my sister, who I was here for, but I cannot leave without saying how much I strongly support Michael Gunning. My name is Tia Boatman Patterson longtime legislative staffer, and the past role that I played with Mr. Gunning before I went off to Washington, DC to work for the Administration was I was the Executive Director of the California Housing Finance Agency.

And Mr. Gunning and I started off as both board Members, and then I, later on, was appointed to be the Executive Director, and he served as the acting chair for several years. And with his leadership and guidance, we literally turned the California Housing Finance Agency around.

So if you think this man has a finance background and knows what he's doing, I can lean in and attest to that. I am a strong supporter of Mr. Gunning, and I hope you all will support him as well. Thank you.

Before you leave the microphone, are you Ms. Commissioner Alvidrez's sister?

Yes I am.

Would you please relay a message to her? And for the record, Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove was on the line at the teleconference. She left the congressional floor to make a statement in strong support of her confirmation hearing. And there was some type of glitch with the technical services that were offered today.

And Congresswoman Kamlager-Dove was not allowed to make those comments, but she has expressly told me she is completely disappointed in the teleconference.

She had much to say about Tiffany, and it is unacceptable that she was not allowed to comments. So please let your sister know that the Congresswoman was calling in from DC to affirm her confirmation.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator, and thank you all.

Thank you. Next witness.

Holly Fraumeni De Jesus with Lighthouse Public Affairs. I first met Michael Gunning when he was on the CalHFA Board and I was working on behalf of Habitat for Humanity.

And back then we started plotting to how to solve the housing crisis of California. Ten years ago. Still hasn't been solved, but I'm proud that he is now working side by side, day to day at Lighthouse Public Affairs, and I'm just proud to work with him and you can't find a more ethical and honest and intelligent and very responsible individual.

And I, too, have a mother that's a member of STRS at 76. So she has many more years to go, and I feel like putting it in his hands is the right place for it to be. So no pressure by all of us, but they are watching you for, our mother on behalf of room as well. So, please, I hope again support his confirmation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no other witnesses coming to the microphone in support, are there any witnesses in room 2200 in opposition? Seeing none. We had Madam Moderator. Then we had Mr. Moderator.

That's awesome.

So I'm just going to say, Moderator, we are coming back to you, and we are now taking positions of either support or opposition in the confirmation of Mr. Michael Gunning for the CalSTRS Board. Mr. Moderator, are you there?

Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to comment and support our opposition, you may press one and zero. At this time.At this time. There's no one in queue.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Can you confirm that? Because Alvarado has my congresswoman has my cell phone number, and I'm sure she would like to voice her opinion and support on this nominee as well. So can we confirm there's no one on the line?

Ladies and gentlemen, if you have comment, a public comment, please press one and zero.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator.

She's back on the floor. Somebody queuing up just. They disconnected, but it was her, right? It's Gunny.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Did they happen to call back?

Not yet.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator.

Having no one on the telephone lines that we can connect in support or opposition, I'll bring it back to the dais

I just wanted to make one comment, and I was so thrilled to hear all of the speakers. Madam Chair. And just one comment I wanted to make in response to the expertise and courage of folks who will be on the STRS board is hawkenning back to the years of the anti-retirement movement and those hard conversations that many in the financial investment community struggled with but broke through.

And there were some of the same questions about prudence and fiduciary responsibility, but we were able to make the right decision in that case. And the investments of pensioners continued to grow and thrive.

And so I'm excited about your leadership and the opportunity for us to weigh and balance our ethical responsibility and our prudence and fiduciary responsibility for change. So, Madam Chairwoman, thank you so much for that, allowing me a moment to just absolutely.

Thank you. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas Senator Roth, you made the motion?

I did.

Thank you, Senator Roth. Madam Secretary, please call the rolls.

Laird. Aye. Laird aye. Ochoa Bogh. Aye. Ochoa Bogh. aye. Roth. Aye. Roth aye. Smallwood-Cuevas. Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas Aye. Grove. Definitely aye. Grove aye.

Five to zero, we look forward to having your confirmation come up to the full Senate floor. And I anticipate it'd be a long Senate floor hearing, because all 40 Senators, I'm sure, will have a comment. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Thank all of you.

So that concludes our agenda for today. Your comments and suggestions are important to us and we want to include your testimony in the official records. Thank you everyone, for your patience and cooperation. The Senate Committee on Rules is now adjourned.