Senate Standing Committee on Rules

The Senate Committee on Rules will come to order. Good afternoon. The Senate continues to welcome the public participation in both in-person via teleconference service. We're holding our committee hearing at the O Street Building in room 2200. As the vice chair of the Committee on Rules, I'm presiding over Chair Atkins's absence today, and we're pleased to have Senator Roth joining us as our substitute. With that being said, let's get to today's business. For individuals wishing to provide public comment via the teleconference service, I'm going to stop. Should that be on? Does that mean the public can't watch? Oh, just the monitors. Okay. Apologize. Thank you.

We continue to offer public comment via the teleconference service. The participant toll-free number and access code is posted on the committee website and will be displayed on the screen. Today's participant number is 877-226-8163. That's 877-226-8163, and the access code is 2951899. Also, on behalf of our wonderful court reporter, I will ask all speakers, colleagues, and witnesses alike to speak slowly and clearly. If I need to interrupt you, to have you slow down, I will do so. And I'm sure she will interrupt me if I go too fast. Before we begin today's agenda, let's establish a quorum. A reminder, members, that you'll need to turn on your microphones when you are asked to represent yourself present or here and every time you vote. Secretary, can you please call the roll?

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

Thank you. A quorum has been established. If there's no objections, I'd like to first take up today's agenda, governor's appointees not required to appear. Do any members wish to separate out anything from items two, D, E, or F?

Madam Chair seeing none, I would move items two, D, E, and F.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Madam Secretary, will you call the roll?

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

Thank you. That item was approved five to zero. Next, I'd like to take up item number three reference to bills to committee.

So move.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Madam Secretary.

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

That item has passed five to zero. Next on our agenda we have item number four, committee appointments. Appointing Senator Allen to the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies.

So move.

I paused. You're the one that normally jumps in front of me.

Thank you, sir.

Senator Laird. Thank you, Madam Secretary.

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

That item is approved five to zero. Moving right along, items five through 17 are the reauthorization and creation of select committees for the 2023-2024 session.

I would so move.

Thank you, Senator Laird. You'd think we rehearse this. Madam Secretary.

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

Next, item 18 is the subcommittee ratification for the Transportation Subcommittee on LOSSAN Rail Corridor Resiliency.

So move.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Madam Secretary.

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

Thank you, colleagues. Our final items before we go to governor's appointees are items 19 through 23, which are floor acknowledgments for this next week.

I would move them.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Madam Secretary.

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

Thank you, colleagues. We will now go to governor's appointees required to appear. Item One A is the appointment of Joseph W. Tyler as the director of Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Welcome, Director Tyler. Please go ahead once you take your seat and feel free to introduce yourself or anyone with you and make your opening comments. And after your introduction, we'll go straight to my colleagues for questions.

Make sure this is on.

Yes.

All right. Perfect. Thank you and good afternoon to members of the Rules Committee. My name is Joe Tyler. I am the director and fire chief of Cal Fire. With me today is my mother in the room, Norma Tyler, sitting in the back corner, my father, Joe, my girlfriend Stephanie, as well as our chief deputy director of Cal Fire, Chris Anthony, in the corner as well behind us, and the deputy director of legislation, Monika Giebitz I appreciate them accompanying me today in this moment of getting an opportunity to speak before you all.

It is an honor to be able to speak before the Rules Committee for consideration of confirmation as the director of Cal Fire. 33 years during my 33rd fire year with Cal Fire has been a career for me, starting in Shasta County, moving my way to Riverside, back to El Dorado County, and then into Sacramento, where we really garnered and brought together the operations of the department. And not just in fire suppression, but across all functions, Office of State Fire Marshal, our support staff, and our natural resource protection through resource management. It is an honor to be able to be considered to support the women and men of Cal Fire, to be accountable to the Legislature and the administration, and to be accountable to the public. I look forward to taking your questions today and hope that I can answer them appropriately for you.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Tyler, very much. Director Tyler, I'll start on to my right with Ms. Smallwood-Cuevas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I wanted to thank you, Mr. Tyler, for meeting with our office. It was wonderful to meet with you. We had a very robust and long conversation. During our discussion, you really talked about the significance and priority of recruitment and why in your 33 years, you've come to understand why it's so important to retain a diverse workforce at Cal Fire. And that really I was really impressed with some of those stories and experiences and some of the work that you had done in that area. But you did acknowledge that due to vacancies and extreme climate-driven events, it's been very tough to recruit from all communities and to have an equitable and fully representative workforce. And that kind of deep recruitment has to increase.

And now with restrictions being lifted, there may be more opportunities for that. I think we also talked about how that diversity really looks at those folks who are in our incarcerate system, folks who join fire crews and step into the line of literally fire to support our firefighting efforts when we have wildfires who are coming from our state prisons. And you talked about how you're trying to build a pathway into higher paying jobs and high-road career opportunities for those kinds of individuals. Can you detail some of the efforts that Cal Fire has done, in that regard to really elevate that underrepresented population and particularly looking at vulnerable communities and those who have done the rehabilitation and now are ready to come and reenter into our communities? Can you share more on that?

Thank you for your question. So at Cal Fire, we recognize that we need to better diversify the department and through focused recruitment retention efforts, having a workforce, secession and planning unit, and having and driving the interest of our management and supervisors at Cal Fire is really driving our focus on expanding that diversity. First and foremost was an opportunity to acknowledge that Cal Fire needs to do a better job.

Diversifying that is consistent with the demographics of the state of California. And we recognize is a question that you and I discussed that only 1.7% right now of our workforce identify as African American. Now, we do know that we have 11.6% of our workforce that identify as multiple races as well, but we recognize through that number alone that we must do a better job.

Overall, we know that 40% of our workforce are from a minority demographic, but still we can do better. So as we dive into and we look at some of the options and opportunities that we have had, and we put into place, we start really looking at where we can be more efficient and where we can remove barriers.

Where we can remove internal barriers and some of those internal barriers were expecting a firefighter position to have a higher minimum level of training than many of our firefighters on incarcerated firefighter hand crews in the California Conservation Corps and our California Military Department. So we as a team looked at realigning our training standards. And what does that do? That opens up an opportunity for our workforce that are coming out of those organizations or that are available, that have put their lives on the line doing the exact same work as our paid employees.

An opportunity to transition into Cal Fire using those same training standards. That has afforded us an opportunity to transition California National Guard members into Cal Fire's workforce. Almost 400 California Conservation Corps core members into Cal Fire as well. You talked about the pathway for our formerly incarcerated individuals. The Ventura Training Center was personal for me as my former position as the deputy director of fire protection.

And we built that min the community of Camarillo in Ventura County, where we've had 327 participants thus far, go through that program. And we aye finding pathways, whether it be within Cal Fire, other fire departments or other private opportunities, private business opportunities to find a pathway for them as well. In addition, we discussed a pathway for young women to enter or find interest in Cal Fire as well through what we call Camp Cinder, two programs that started in 2022, one in Shasta County in the rural community communities in and around that area, and another located in San Luis Obispo. And we hope that we can further expand those programs farther than just those two opportunities alone.

Great. And during our conversation, we also talked about the partnerships in the role of pre-apprenticeship and particularly those pre-apprenticeships that are operating in partnership with nonprofit organizations that have relationships to vulnerable communities, but also really strong relationships with various firefighting networks and agencies. And I wanted to follow up on that conversation. Just how you're thinking about using apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs to fill the vacancies and diversity gaps in the workforce. You talked about some of the partners that you have. I thought that was a very exciting network of organizations and how you're adding more. Please share a little bit about how you're seeing pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship as a pathway into these opportunities.

Thank you. I appreciate that as well. So through grant opportunities, workforce development here is just one example of that. There is the Forestry and Fire Recruitment Program is a nonprofit organization located in the south part of the state. This is a nonprofit that was put together by formerly incarcerated individuals and others who have joined this program to do and provide opportunities for training and pathways into not only the fire service, but it's important not to refer specifically to fire, but fuels reduction.

And that sort to be able to find opportunities and pathways forward. Now much like we talked about as well and go back to what I said earlier was an entry-level firefighter needs to get into Cal Fire is really 219 hours of training. So we reevaluated that. Reevaluated that and realized that all of our partner pathways were requiring 80 hours of training. So what do we do? We evaluate, we've readjusted our training requirements to 80 hours. That allows the pathway for Ventura Training Center participants, California Conservation Corps core members, California Military Department to transition into Cal Fire.

Now, likewise, through the Cal-JAC program and the Department of Labor, we do have apprenticeship programs for our firefighter too. Our engineer in office, state fire marshal classifications that provide ongoing training that is available to individuals as they enter the workforce in Cal Fire.

Appreciate that. And I want to say our office looks forward to continuing to work with you around that 1.1% and connecting you with partners statewide that can support your efforts there. My final question is we talked about Cal Fire recently awarding 30 grants to applicants serving thousands of individuals to train them in fire, the fuel treatment, firefighting, forestry.

Most of the funded projects benefit disadvantaged communities, which is really exciting for me to hear where these programs are located and the Forestry and Fire Recruitment Program, the FFRP that provides the career support and training for those who have already received fire training while incarcerated.

It was wonderful to hear about that program. How are you working to increase your workforce outreach and particularly those individuals who are participating or who could be a pool to participating in the FFRP? Can you model some of your work on the Forestry and Fire Recruitment Program as an opportunity for increasing overall diversity?

So as part of the workforce development grant opportunities, in the last budget cycle, $2 million were awarded to that program. We have continued to stay in contact and work together with the program on how to advance and serve the underserved communities and underrepresented individuals as a pathway in. Likewise, we talked about grant opportunities that provide pathways as well on the resource management side through urban and community forestry and schoolyard greening, those are some of those grant opportunities going forward that are really focusing largely across the state of California.

But we know we have a lot of interest in areas like the LA Unified School District. So our resource management staff are working closely with all interested parties across the state for those opportunities. Likewise, to your point of modeling something similar, that takes me back to what the Forestry and Fire Recruitment Program is doing to much like the Ventura Training Center program, that we're providing those opportunities as well. And we are in discussions as we originally modeled this, it was to take opportunities of those that were formerly incarcerated on firefighting hand crews, those that had worked on institution fire engines in some of our institutions across the state.

And then our last was finding an opportunity to be able to provide that same training opportunity to our female formerly incarcerated firefighters that we had had across the state. But we had to build upon the infrastructure that was available in Ventura to do that. Now there are opportunities and we are in discussions with our state partners on how do we expand the footprint of Ventura and provide larger opportunities?

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

Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome. In October 2020, the State Personnel Board compliance review of Cal Fire identified sexual harassment training was not provided for all supervisors. What is the status of Cal Fire staff having completed the mandatory sexual harassment training for management and non-management staff?

Thank you for your question. I'm going to start by recognizing, as the director and dire chief of Cal Fire that I am ultimately responsible for the conduct of all of our employees. In preparation for this subject coming up, we had provided direction to our Equal Employment Opportunity Office, which staffs with a stellar group of individuals to be able to pull those statistics for us. What we have found is we have a glitch within our software program, Vector Solutions, to be able to pull those.

And right now they are pulling those one by one by one to pull that data. What I can assure you is I saved just about every email and I went back in time in 2020, and there was a clear, driven direction followed up again and again by the EEO staff to ensure that we met the requirements in 2020. And I am confident that that office ensured that we were met that requirement as well.

Ultimately, at the end of the day, and coincidentally, Cal Fire, not because of a complaint or otherwise, is currently under audit by the State Personnel Board for sexual harassment training. So this is yet another reason that they are pulling them one by one by one right now. So I can't give you a definitive answer to your question, other than I promise you that our employees will be compliant with sexual harassment and Equal Opportunity Employment training, and we will be able to provide that response sooner than later.

Thank you. Given the past history of the department, what efforts have you done to change the culture at the department and establish a harassment-free work zone?

Thank you for your question as well. So when I came to Sacramento at the end of 2014, Cal Fire had several items in which we were noticeably in the media for issues related to employee misconduct. That was actually from then Director Pimlot, my recruitment into Sacramento. In fact, I was assigned to our training center to deconstruct that training center and rebuild it to what it is today. Now, in any organization. Are we perfect? Absolutely not.

I can tell you across the board of right now, as of January, 7200 employees, our professional standards program or a program that was put together to address misconduct as well as provide opportunities for training, investigate just over 1% of our employees at any one time for any type of misconduct. After those occurred, several factors were put in place by then Director Pimlot, followed by Director Porter, and ongoing by my commitment to make sure that our employees are held accountable and know what their expectations are.

So, as part of that, we had, as I said, built the Professional Standards Program, which is fully staffed. And again, it is not only for the investigation of misconduct, but provide opportunities of training for our employees to prevent misconduct. As an example, we've entered into, over the last year, actually last two years, over $5 million contract with a third party, Ken Blanchard Company, to provide new and updated situational and servant leadership training to our managers and supervisors. For their ability to better manage, mentor and supervise our employees and to be able to provide opportunities to our employees to be able to avoid that type of misconduct in the future.

We continue to grow upon our Equal Employment Opportunity Office as well and provide training opportunities to our employees consistently. It is my expectation that our employees will be accountable to their actions and will avoid those instances in which discrimination, harassment of any type, and sexual harassment specifically occur.

Thank you.

In 2020, my area experienced the El Durazo Fire, and the Rendon is still working to recover.

However, the recent storms have caused significant mudslides due to the barren land that has been treated.

What role can Cal Fire play in helping the areas impacted by the 2020 El Dorado Fire to address current mudslides, but also prepare the area to prevent future ones? Are there grants available to help locals receive the hillside and do the preemptive work?

I appreciate that question.

In 2020, we had not only the El Dorado Fire, but a portion of the El Dorado Fire also burned upon the footprint of the Apple Fire.

And, of course, after both of those fires, Cal Fire took the opportunity with the California Geological Service to go in and evaluate the soil and burn severity areas through a watershed emergency response team.

They formulated a report after that was over, and they presented that report through various forms, community meetings, and otherwise post-2020 on how to mitigate and address the impacts of the potential of soil instability.

Now, we saw in 2021 and again in 2022, some significant impacts of soil instability and mudslides.

And certainly, the community of Oak Glen was impacted heavily in that most recent mudslide.

In fact, Cal Fire facilities, the Oak Glen Conservation Camp, was also impacted as part of that.

Now, to your question specifically: Are there grant opportunities? Certainly, through forest health and reforestation, we have grant opportunities as well.

Now, talking to my staff, we know and was published that the thought of simply receding grass on barren land gives a perception of stability of the soil.

But we need to do more.

We continue to need to address clearing out culverts, continuing to utilize K-rails that were emplaced and put in place to divert sediment being moved, and then finding other native revegetation efforts to be able to stabilize that-

-soil as well.

Now, that fire burned across two of our counties and two of our operational units, both Riverside and San Bernardino units; both of them have a workforce available and Conservation Camp and firefighter hand crews that are available as well to be able to assist those communities.

Okay.

And then I have a last question.

Do you believe there needs to be better relationships between Cal Fire and other agencies in forest and brush management? There seems to be a perception of territorialism.

I have heard that before.

So, let me first start by suggesting that no one agency - local, state, federal, tribal, or private entities - can address both the climate and wildfire crisis across California.

We have to work together.

We have to work collaboratively.

And as I have said before, not one of those agencies are capable of mitigating a catastrophe or emergency by themselves as well.

So, we build those relationships at all levels of government and with our private and nonprofit partners to be able to collaborate and build upon many of those items -

- you talked about.

As an example, the Administration provided direction that built the Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force.

That Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force is built of local, state, federal, tribal, and private partnerships, and they meet every quarter to be able to move forward. Now the regional forester for the Forest Service Region Five -

- and Secretary Crowfoot from the Natural Resource Agency chair that committee, myself, and other federal and local partners sit as part of the Executive committee.

And as part of that, an action plan was put forward in 2021, and implementation strategies by 2022 on how do we address fuels reduction, forced resilience, and the wildfire crisis across California.

I will commit to continue to build those relationships across all levels of government and with our private partners.

As I mentioned, starting yes, I have heard that before, and that is not what I want to hear moving forward.

So, I have committed through our executive team, our regions, and our unit chiefs across the state that they will continue to build our partnerships with all parties.

Thank you.

Senator Laird?

Excuse me.

Former Secretary of Natural Resources.

Thank you.

She actually stole the first thing I was going to say because I was going to say we have worked together in prior incarnations, and I will not name them because she will, but she already did.

And I think your choice by the Governor was a good one, given my experience with you.

And I appreciated the chance to meet with you and talk about a number of issues that are in front of Cal Fire now.

And I thought, even though I know the answers, I would walk you through a few of them because I think they speak to what's going on at Cal Fire and they speak to your individual competence on the issue.

And the first one, which I needed to get updated on, is we had worked together on helicopter acquisition because there had been a fleet that was decades old.

And during the time the budget got better, they were entirely replaced.

And you were instrumental in that, and it was painful at times, but there have been some development.

So why don't you give us an update on the acquisition of helicopters and where they stand- where it stands?

Senator Laird, thank you for the question.

So, yes, what an interesting, unique, challenging, yet rewarding process this has been through.

And I must start by thanking the legislature and the administration for their support of the helicopter acquisition. Post 2003 Cedar Fire, a Blue Ribbon Commission report was put together as part of the Blue Ribbon Commission report. It suggested that Cal Fire replace its aging fleet.

This was in 2003-2004, its aging fleet of UH-1 "Super Huey" helicopters that were capable of flying during the day.

As we continued forward, as we continued through budget challenges over the years, it finally took an opportunity under your leadership as the former Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to finally be able to purchase the first next-generation helicopter for Cal Fire.

Now, again, that was a painful process where competitive bid processes went out several times, were canceled several times, because either nobody bid on the contract or only one.

And so we would have to go back and evaluate the statement of work in the contract.

At the end of the day, an award went to Air Methods United Rotorcraft for the acquisition of 12 S-70i Blackhawk helicopters.

Now, when retrofitted into firefighting helicopters, they're commonly referred to as Firehawk helicopters.

So you may hear us, and you may hear me talk about those interchangeably.

The other goal of providing a safer and more efficient helicopter, as identified in the Blue Ribbon Commission report, was to ensure that our firefighters that were fighting with these aircraft were not flying in a single-engine helicopter.

So it was two engines, they flew faster and were more capable of a payload.

The payload of water going from 324 gallons in a bucket to 1000 gallons in a tank make a significant difference, and then, likewise, was moving forward to be able to fly the helicopters at night.

So where are we at today? We have purchased and have in our possession eleven of the twelve helicopters.

We fly ten on a daily basis. Two are for reserve opportunities. We also fly through a cooperative agreement with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department; one helicopter there as well.

So eleven of the twelve are in our possession.

The 12th will be in our possession here in the next month and then again through the current year's budget act, there was an opportunity to provide funding and purchase four additional Blackhawk helicopters under the same contract that will provide depth and surge capacity to be able to fly those helicopters.

And it also recognizes that flying the helicopters throughout the night increases maintenance and keeps them all in service.

I'm proud to say that through training and through the work of our aviation staff, that in 2022 was the first time that Cal Fire officially flew night missions with those helicopters.

We flew on the Oak Fire, the Fairview Fire, the Electra Fire, and the Mosquito Fire.

And in 2023, we will enter into this fire year, flying two 24 hours a day.

One located in Riverside at our Hemet Ryan Air Attack Base, and the other one located at Vina, north of Chico into Tehama County.

As the pilots and the crews become more efficient, we will begin flying more of those helicopters at night with our partners.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate that.

And Senator Smallwood-Cuevas asked a lot of what I was going to ask about recruitment.

But there is one remaining question, and that is that the seasonal firefighters are limited in time, and we have had fire seasons lately that have no end.

And you run up against the civil service rule that they're supposed to go out the door because, in the old days, the fire season would really end, and that's not happening.

And so you've had to either make adjustments or seek adjustments to compensate for that.

What's the status of that? What have you done to try to make sure that we don't have fires raging and having to send people out the door at the same time?

No, I appreciate that question.

So, not only for our existing staff, but through your commitment, we have also added 33 firefighter hand crews.

In addition to that, 32 California Conservation Corps hand crews.

Just as a caveat, but specifically to that, those 33 firefighter hand crews are staffed nine months a year.

Because of exactly your question; a temporary authorized appointment can only work for nine months a year.

Now, we are capable in this fire year, in this changing wildfire environment, to be able to request emergency authority to extend those nine-month limitations by two 30-day periods before we have to separate the employees by at least 30 days.

Now, in those areas of the state of California in which we see the fire year more of a year-round issue.

Although we know that fires can occur anywhere in the state, they are much more prevalent; where we see in the south half of the southern portion of the state being San Bernardino, San Luis, Riverside, and San Diego.

So what do the managers do there? What they have done is keeping their apparatus and their equipment fully staffed.

They have had to go into platoon hiring opportunities where they may hire a portion for six months, and then they may bring, three months later, another portion.

Now, that increases the training requirements of the support staff to be able to do that.

In the ratification of the bargaining Unit Eight memorandum of understanding here.

Most recently, one of the requirements was the formation between management and labor of a joint Labor Management Committee to address several items.

That includes classifications, work weeks, and duty schedules.

And it is within that JLMC that we expect them to also have this discussion of how do we overcome and reduce the barrier of a nine-month firefighter.

And if there's ever a time when some flexibility is required from the legislature, I hope you will let us know so that we can take any appropriate action because it's very important we not be sending people out the door in the middle of a firestorm.

And then, to follow up on a question from Senator Ochoa Bogh, I know that the legislature gave you direction in 2021; to that point, the goals for fuel prevention or prescribed fire were goals that you set, and there was no required disclosure or public place that you could go.

And the legislature that year gave you goals, required public disclosure and a way to do that so it wasn't left up to the newspapers and created a committee that either was the one you referenced or was folded into it to adaptively manage this.

And I was just going to ask if you had anything you want to add in addition to what you said about how that's working and how you think having the goals and transmitting how you're meeting the goals is working for you.

Thank you.

So, globally, there is a million-acre strategy for the state of California to try to achieve.

And that million-acre strategy is 500,000 acres would be the responsibility of our federal partners, and the other 500,000 acres would be the responsibility of our private, local, and state partners.

Of that 500,000 acres, 100,000 acres minimum is the responsibility of Cal Fire.

But just because we hit 100,000 acres doesn't mean that we shouldn't continue, which is our expectation of our staff as well.

I'm proud in this that for the last three years, we have met a minimum of the 100,000 acre goal.

Now, by 2025, it's expected of us to also be able to conduct 50,000 acres of prescribed fire.

And so this is a culture shift of the department going back to culture as well; is through budget reductions and additions over the year.

We went from a very robust vegetation management program to a focus on fire and fire prevention to a focus of where we need to be to turn the corner on this wildfire crisis to be able to address the resource management needs as well.

And so we do that much, as I discussed earlier, with this wildfire and forest resilience task force that is led by Director Patrick Wright, along with staff that we have there as well.

And this work is phenomenal moving forward in providing transparency.

Now to put a plug for the task force.

Everything is transparent on the task force website at "wildfiretasforce.org", where you can see both the task force action plan, you can see the 2022 implementation strategies, you can see the funding plan, and you can see an air table that really shows the progress of the 99 actionable items that the task force is working on.

Again, the task force is interagency and multidisciplinary.

Now, the question that you asked also comes to transparency: where is the funding, and where are the work occurring on the ground? And so in July of 2022, Cal Fire took an opportunity to release publicly, through a public viewer, a program that we call CalMAPPER that can be found on our public-facing website, where anybody can go to CalMAPPER and see where the work on the ground is actually happening.

Now, the committee continues to work on an ability to expand that, to include treatment efforts that are going on on all levels of state government, to provide more transparency across.

And let me ask one - I was going to quit, but let me ask one follow-up question to that, and that is when the Great Recession happened in 2009 or 2010, the number of firefighters on every unit was reduced by one, and the entire forest management unit was sent out the door.

So there literally was no sort of people that had been working there historically on forest health and other things.

And since the budget came back, that has been reconstructed.

So given what you just said, they're obviously involved in that.

How does it work to have to reconstruct a unit after all the institutional memory went out the door? How is that working over time?

It has been an interesting process, and again, it goes back to recognizing that some of the forest health and resource management work was deferred and put our forest environment really into a position that we have to change where we're going to be able to turn the corner.

We cannot respond our way out of the wildfire crisis in California.

To your point, I have an excellent executive team and a department leadership team that are really focusing on rebuilding that resource management program, and in some areas, we've had some challenges.

Those challenges include finding recruitment and retention efforts among our resource management staff.

A seasonal going into the resource management pathway of Cal Fire starts as a seasonal forestry aid; the first permanent position is a forestry technician.

So, we expanded the forestry technician classification to provide opportunities for people to find an entry-level pathway without a registered professional forester license to build their interest and experience in resource management.

That then goes into a forestry assistant one and two.

And then the first classification requiring license is the Forester I classification.

What we found was due to various impacts of wages and compensation that nobody was promoting beyond the Forester I classification.

So recently, working with the administration, CalHR, and Cal Fire, we were able to move that door in that blockade and that pathway through differentials to be able to find opportunities for people to promote into the Forester II, Forester III series that are the leadership of resource management positions in the department.

There's a positive impact going on right now.

I'm glad to see that efforts have made positive change and we'll continue to build the program.

Your answers have been really helpful.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Senator.

Senator Roth.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

On the area of forest management, just to get some clarity, how would you grade our efforts to expand the use of prescribed burns and other beneficial fire? And just a follow-up: if there are obstacles to doing so, what are they, and how would you eliminate them?

I appreciate the question.

So there was really, as I described, a million-acre strategy and really an effort to address not only prescribed fire but cultural burning.

And so an action plan came out, a strategic plan came out here in the last two years, and it was a strategic plan for the use of prescribed fire and cultural burning.

This goes back to Cal Fire's responsibility, at minimum, to be able to implement 50,000 acres of prescribed fire by 2025.

Now, what I found was going from a time in the early 90s when we were doing vegetation management nearly year-round, regardless of fire season, through various reductions that had to happen and then the rebuilding of the organization.

I find that we have managers and supervisors who are supporting the initiative of putting more prescribed fire on the ground.

And through our direction, through my direction, getting to better understand, know, and work with the indigenous tribes of California to be able to work together to better understand what the meaning of cultural burning even was.

For the purposes of foraging and sustenance and basket weaving materials are important.

We took opportunities to fly and make our way up to Hoopa, where we spent time with some of our partners to try to foster and build those relationships.

And I say that we're turning the corner because I'm going to give you an example of 2022.

Though Mother Nature supported us well in 2022, it was the first time in the middle of a fire season or a fire year that we saw from September 18, for the next 45 days, our employees, with their partners, put over 14,200 acres of fire, good fire, on the ground for the purposes of fuels reduction.

Now, that is short of our 50,000-acre goal by 2025.

Right now, we're just under 18,000.

But it shows me a shift in the support following the vision of the department to ensure that we're increasing the pace and scale of prescribed fire and cultural burning.

So is that a C plus, or...

You ask it? I would tell you right now that we are probably in a range of a C, but we will be improving.

Are there obstacles that we can - to that if I missed them - just if you could quickly restate? Are there obstacles to that that we can help eliminate?

So, we are working closely with the indigenous tribes specifically for cultural burning to understand what the obstacles between the organizations are and I believe that we are moving forward with our cultural practitioners working together.

We also provided a workforce development grant to an agency called Fire Forward that is putting fire on the ground as well, good fire, for those purposes.

To the extent that maybe you're going to get to this, but to the extent that a prescribed fire or prescribed burn is different than cultural burning, are there obstacles to that where you're not having to work with the tribal nations?

So, I don't have that exact answer right at the moment.

What I will promise you is that we are making a definitive effort to look at two landscape-level prescribed fire events, specifically one in Butte County and one in Shasta County.

Those are just two off the top of my head.

And we are having those unit level and region managers work through the process to identify what the barriers are of igniting and through prescribed fire fong the effort of 2000-5000 acres of burning at any one time there to provide a report back to the executive team, and then we will truly know what our barriers are.

I'm sure my colleagues on the Rules Committee would enjoy receiving that report when you get it.

Fine.

Different subject: pay compatibility.

How would you evaluate the pay compatibility of Cal Fire visa vis the other fire agencies in the state?

So, the fire agencies across the state, we are a diverse organization geographically.

And so when we look at that, we recognize that we are made up across the state of truly firefighters who are volunteer firefighters who are doing this free of charge with the required training that is equal to that of a paid firefighter.

They have to be trained the same.

We have combination departments across the state of California that are made up of a mixture of paid and volunteer firefighters.

And then we have career organizations that are primarily paid fire departments.

So to answer that question, it is truly across the board of what shift schedules are and what compensation is.

What I can tell you is that Cal Fire currently works its firefighters on a 72-hour work week, whereas most of its municipal and related professional fire service organizations are working 56 hours of work.

But through the efforts of the administration and the legislature, you have ratified or helped them ratify an MOU that puts in place the reduction from a 72-hour work week to a 66-hour work.

On or about November 1, 2024, to be able to address those issues.

And on an hour-by-hour hourly pay comparison between Cal Fire full-time regular employees versus a full-time regular employee in a local fire agency comparability?

If you looked at base salary alone, you would see an inequity, however, extended duty. However, the compensation provided to our firefighters brings up some of that inequity.

Fixing the shift problem will fix some of that inequity, and Cal Fire, specifically, compared to our municipal partners, is part of the challenge for our federal firefighters as well, as they are compensated less than our state partners.

And I know someone else asked a question about recruitment, but does that pay in equity, whatever it is, impact your ability to recruit?

So, at this point, unlike some of the reports that we have seen in our federal partners, for our entry-level firefighter organization, we generally have sufficient applications coming in for our seasonal firefighter position.

Where we find struggles within the organization are largely in classifications that we have across the state that are related to paramedics.

Paramedics, because many of the paramedic programs took a pause during the pandemic, and that created a workforce shortage for paramedics specifically.

And the other area I described already was in our resource management ranks.

So, we continue to work towards resolving those issues.

Since the paramedic force tends to directly impact our constituents when they have a health challenge, is there a plan in place, a specific written plan to try to open the pipeline and boost recruitment on the paramedic and other health-related classifications?

So, the paramedic problem is not just specific to Cal Fire but across the fire service as a whole. As for the written plan, I would suggest to you that I do not have a written plan, but I will promise you that I have given direction to our EMS program to be able to look into opportunities to provide an in-house program.

The other item I will tell you is that through a cooperative relationship through the Moreno Valley Community College and their new public safety training center that was just dedicated recently and I had an opportunity to be there is affording opportunities for workforce development, grant opportunities, and otherwise for our firefighters to be able to go to this program while continuing to work to build capacity of paramedics within.

Good.

My colleague from Santa Cruz was talking about aviation and that's sort of a subject I appreciate.

Some time ago, I thought I read or heard that Cal Fire was in the process of acquiring some surplus Department of Defense C-130 fixed-wing aircraft to assist with firefighting efforts.

If my recollection is correct, what's the status of that?

Thank you.

It is a work in progress, but to summarize, it was authorized for the transition of seven C-130 aircraft through the National Defense Authorization Act from the United States Coast Guard to Cal Fire.

Now, the United States Air Force was the holder of the airworthiness certificate, and it was to hold the federal contract that was available with a supplier to be able to put retardant delivery systems into those aircraft and convert them to air tankers at the point that the United States Air Force was feeling the airworthiness and had run what's called a grid, a grid test for the interagency air tanker board.

They would then transition those aircraft to Cal Fire through supply chain issues, through disagreements of a federal contract.

We continue to work closely with the United States Air Force and their supplier to try to find opportunities to unclog the log jam on the federal side to be able to ensure that those retardant delivery systems are put in place min those aircraft.

All seven of the -

So, we're waiting for the MAF system to be available to plug in the back end.

So, similar to the MAF system.

Yes.

All seven of those aircraft are sitting actually at McClellan right now.

Five of the seven are actually already painted in Cal Fire colors, with the other two on their way.

It is important that we resolve this before September of 2024 when the United States Coast Guard sunsets their C-130 Hercules model aircraft program.

And I'm confident on our teams that that's going to occur.

The other bonus that occurs, if -

You need any help, you just should let us know.

Absolutely.

The other bonus, Senator Grove, is the C-130 program reopened the Fresno Air Attack base, and we've been able to fly contract aircraft and an air tactical platform out of there while we're waiting for the C-130s to arrive.

Thank you for the response.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yes, sir.

Because that was five years ago that Senator Feinstein got those and they were supposed to be retrofitted so they would transfer not in their raw form, but in a flight ready form for Cal Fire. That just seems like an awfully long time for that not to happen. And think my colleague was incredibly polite. But now, as of yesterday, Senator Feinstein won't be there and she'd be the one that I think would be the enforcer. So I think we would be happy to work with her if there needs to be some kicking involved in this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Smallwood-Cuevas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I just had a follow up question on Senator Laird's initial line of questions and really appreciate your response about the joint labor management that is now in place and looking at issues of pay equity in terms of paid and the volunteer organizations. And I had to speak to a group of crew members who are close to my heart, many that I've met in my district who were incarcerated, people who were so proud of helping our state get through some tough fire seasons. And one of the things that really is disturbing is the way in which those men and women are paid. I think it's something like $2.90 to $5 an hour for those incarcerated people in fire crews. And it's unclear why that is. And I wanted to get a sense of two parts to this. One is how are we really transitioning those workers into a pathway into the fire service, especially when we saw that the conservation camp program was operating at about 40% of total capacity with 37 of 152 budgeted fire crew fire crews available for statewide response? So that's far less, even though we know those folks make up about a third of our firefighting workforce. So one, when we have so few of those slots budgeted, it puts our fighting fighting capacity at a disadvantage. So that's one part. And then the second part is are we able to offer higher wages to those workers, those incarcerated people? And is it CDCR that does that or is it Cal Fire who could help set that rate? How does that work? So, two part question.

So to answer your latter question, we have an interagency agreement and very long partnership with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. And we continue to work closely with CDCR to be able to address the ongoing challenges of available resources for firefighting efforts. And it is an ongoing discussion there. It's important to note, and specifically I told you I would address the pay issue first, was our incarcerated firefighters that we have in our conservation camps are paid in, two pathways. One is through CDCR min, which, based on their position on a crew or based on their position in a conservation camp, receive a daily wage. And then should that hand crew be dispatched to an emergency, then they also enact an emergency pay that is paid through the emergency fund as billed by CDCR to Cal Fire. We have talked long and hard about ways in which we can continue to improve the compensation of those employees, and we know that they continue to be a concern and a challenge. I don't have a specific answer for you today other than I have committees formed to address issues like this. Specifically to the staffing available for Department of Corrections rehabilitation hand crews in cooperation with Cal Fire, we recognize that the population that we have available to train has had some declines, but during the fall winter months, many times we'll find ourselves in situations where our incarcerated firefighters have to go back to an institution for health care or otherwise. And so we do see a drop from time to time. But moving forward, we do recognize, and I think the Legislature and the Administration has also recognized that we have to look for alternatives. And so when I mentioned earlier about being able to build the 33 firefighter handcrews, the 32 California Conservation Corps handcrews, and the 14 Military Department handcrews, this is an alternative pathway that is a commitment to make sure that we have the firefighting hand crews across the state that we need.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, for your follow up question. Thank you, Director Tyler, for meeting with me yesterday. I really did appreciate the opportunity to get to visit with you. Mr. Tyler, Stephanie, you must be very proud. Thank you for being here to support Director Tyler's confirmation hearing. I have a couple of questions, one I asked you yesterday, but we do want to get it on the record. Senator, excuse me, Assembly Member Gallagher was very concerned about dashboards and dashboards being available to the public, and I know there's one dashboard available to the public. When do you expect the second dashboard to be available?

So the first dashboard to clarify is what we discussed earlier as CalMAPPER can be found on the Cal Fire website. The second dashboard is a work in progress by the Wildfire and Force Resilience Task Force, and this is the potential dashboard that would show the other work across agencies in the state of California. And then looking forward to an interagency dashboard that really looks at all the work that's being done by all entities across California. I reached out to Director Patrick Wright, and his response back to me is that it'll be discussed at our March 30 meeting on a pathway forward for that to occur.

Thank you, sir. I have a couple of follow up questions. You mentioned in your response statement to Senator Smallwood-Cuevas that you've had long hard discussions with CDCR regarding rates for hand crews and fire crews that are currently incarcerated or second chancers. What are the results of those conversations?

So we found here, it was probably a year or two ago where CDCR had increased their daily rate of pay to conservation camp firefighters that were available there. At this point, we have not yet increased the funding of the emergency worker rate, and that is something that we still continue to discuss.

Thank you. I'm sure, like my colleague, not speaking for Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, but I think we both believe that the best solution to poverty is a job, and that job needs to be a decent wage. I want to ask you, do you track recidivism rates for those that come out of the in-custody CDCR programs? And then I guess this question first. What's the percentage of those individuals that have a pathway to full time employment as a firefighter, frontline firefighter with benefits and everything that you guys get, what's the pathway and what's the percentage of people that actually move into those positions?

So first part of your question pathway.

To that position, is there a pathway? And the second one is what's the percentage of those individuals that actually work while incarcerated on these crews getting trained and helping and assist with the fires, what's their percentage of full time employment?

Okay, and I remembered what your first question specifically was as well. Was, does Cal Fire track recidivism, because the incarcerated individuals are the responsibility of either DAPO or California Department of Corrections Rehabilitation, specifically Cal Fire is not tracking recidivism ayes as a Cal Fire agency. Specifically to pathways forward for those who put their lives on the line through fuels reduction and firefighting efforts from incarcerated from our Conservation Camp program, this is really where we built in the opportunity for the Ventura Training Center as a pathway to be able to move forward. So much education was being provided and work experience was being provided to these incarcerated firefighters that we saw that there was no real good pathway for those individuals to find a pathway into the fire service. So that was the creation of the Ventura Training Center. And 327 participants have gone through the Ventura Training Center. Off the memory, off the top of my head, it's in the neighborhood of 160 from that program have entered into the Fire Service with Cal Fire, others with our Forest Service partners. And that is, again, taking into consideration their work experience and the training that they've received there to be able to make that pathway move forward.

Thank you. I appreciate that follow up on those questions. I talked to you yesterday for a considerable length of time regarding the severity areas and the maps that were calculated. You did mention, because I do have a lot of constituents that are very concerned about their house being listed in a high severity area, we talked about the reasons why it's very hard to get insurance and if you can get insurance, then it's very costly and very expensive. Most people can't afford it. You said there was roughly how many days left in the public comment period?

At this point, public comment period was extended by 60 days and the closure of that public comment period is April 4.

So is there still an opportunity for individuals to have their voice heard that are very concerned about this new maps on the severity areas?

There absolutely is a method for their voices to be heard. So far we have done 59 in-person public workshops across the state in each of the counties to be able to address the fire hazard severity zone maps, varying levels of attendance at each one of those across the state. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a pathway for public comment. And so for those viewers and flora your constituents again going to Cal Fire's public workshop, clicking on the toolbar that says programs dropping down to the office of the State Fire Marshal, which is leading this initiative, opens up right in the first bullet in the first section, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, provides Q and A provides pathways for public comment. Once we receive those public comments, then the fire scientists in the academia that put this together are going to go back, they're going to evaluate every public comment that has come forward, see where they need to adjust before anything is finalized.

Thank you. Do you think there's a potential that Cal Fire would reevaluate some of those areas or is that something that's not determined by you?

So what I think we are going to have to find is that while we recognize the concerns and a 14.6% change in fire hazard severity zones across the environment in the state responsibility area, it's really going to take likely somebody recognizing and being able to challenge the scientists and the scientific and academia work that put these together. Now, it's important to note that the last time fire Hazard Severity Zone maps were published was in 2007, we're now in 2023, and we recognize that over these years the environment has changed and the severity across California has changed. So it really is no surprise to me that we did see some changes in fire hazard severity zones. It's also important because this question has come up and you've addressed it here, is that there is significant concern that the fire hazard severity zone maps that identify hazards will change the possibility of a person being able to attain homeowners insurance. Now a commitment from working closely with the California Department of Insurance and being able to be found on that public facing website in the same location, is a question and answer document from the California Department of Insurance that really talks about the difference of the fire hazard severity zones identifying hazards, and our insurance industry evaluating on risk. And those are two distinctly separate items.

I do realize, and I believe my constituents also realize that they're two distinctly separated or two separate items. But the concern and the reality on the ground is, because this new severity plan is out there, there are a lot more homes that are listed as a hazard and therefore the insurance company is not willing to address the risk. And so people are either going to have to go without homeowners insurance or if they could afford, I mean, I just don't think it's even available if they can afford it.

Sure.

So that's the concern that a lot of people, specifically up in the Big Creek Huntington Lake area, Shaver Lake area in my northern part of the district are very concerned about. And so I just wanted to make sure I brought that to your attention. Is there any other comments before we go to public comment? Good. So we're going to go to our public comment on our nominee and we'll start in room 2200. A reminder for witnesses wishing to provide comment via telephone. The participant toll free number is 877-266-8163 and the access code is 295-1899. So we'll welcome public comment at this time in support of Director Tyler.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Members of the committee. Paul Mason with the Pacific Forest Trust. We're one of those many nonprofit partners that works with the Department. And we very much enjoyed our experiences working with Director Tyler and the Executive team since he's taken over and just wanted to express our support today. So thank you.

Thank you, sir. And that was a perfect example of how we would like things done.

Very good. John Anderson with Humboldt Mendocino Redwood Company. Since the Chief has come on board, he spent a lot of time on the forestry or natural resources side of the Department and given a lot of direction for some of the issues we've had there. And being one of the largest timber landowners in the state, very much appreciate fire protection side and his leadership there. So for those reasons, we fully support his confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you. Next witness.

Andrea Howell with Sierra Pacific Industries, an integrated forest products company in California. And we're pleased to support the confirmation for Joe Tyler.

Thank you. Next witness.

George Gentry, senior Vice President, California Forestry Association. We're proud to support this nomination because Chief Tyler's demonstrated the highest qualities of leadership, we look forward to working with him. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next witness.

Good afternoon, Valencia Goldsworthy. I'm the forest policy Director for Green Diamond Resource Company on the north coast. Green Diamond supports the confirmation of Director Tyler. Thank you.

Thank you. We're going to do things a little bit differently, seeing no other witnesses in support. Are there any witnesses in opposition to this confirmation that are in room 2200? Seeing no one approaching the microphone, we're going to go to the teleconference line. The teleconference line will be anyone in support or opposition. Moderator, if you would please prompt any individuals waiting to speak in support or opposition. You can begin as soon as the first one is keyed up.

Thank you. If you are in support or opposition to Mathis Bill, please press one followed by zero. One followed by zero. Madam Chair, nobody is queuing up at this time.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator. We'll be back with you on the next conference. We'll now bring it back to the dais.

I would be pleased to move the confirmation of Joe Tyler as Cal Fire chief.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Laird. Madam Secretary, can you please call the role?

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

It's a 5-0 vote. Congratulations. We'll be moving your confirmation to the full Senate floor for a full Senate vote.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

I appreciate it.

How are we doing? Do you want to continue? I'm on to break. We're going to take a ten minute. I apologize, we're going to take a five minute break and give our court reporter a chance to rest her hands.

So welcome back. We will now move to item one B, the appointment of Gail Willis as a Member of the State Personnel Board.

Dr. Willis, welcome.

Thank you.

As you go ahead and take your seat, please introduce yourself, and you're welcome to introduce anyone here who's accompanying you. And we'll receive your opening comments before we bring it back to the dais.

Okay, well, good afternoon to all of you. My name is Dr. Gail Willis, and it is a distinct honor to come before Mathis distinguished body. First of all, I'd like to thank the Senate Rules Chair, Senator Grove and the Senate Rules Committee for considering my appointment.

Additionally, I would like to thank Governor Gavin Newson for appointing me to the State Personnel Board, just to name a few of my qualifications.

I have a doctorate degree in educational leadership, administration and public policy.

I have been an educator and community activist for approximately 27 years, and I am accustomed to resolving issues objectively.

I have partnered with many elected officials on a local, state, and federal level regarding issues in our community.

For example, I have served on former congresswoman Karen Bassett's distinguished Advisory Council.

I have worked with former Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones on the Insurance Diversity Initiative, which focused on supplier diversity throughout the state of California, giving minority businesses access to contracts with insurance companies.

In fact, Kaiser received an award in 2015. Also, I worked on the $15 minimum wage as well. And there are also some educational policies that I worked on, SB 488, which focuses on rigorous instruction that is meaningful to students. Today, I have accompanying me Attorney and President Robert Brown.

He is President of the University of West Los Angeles Law and Business school. And then I have Peter Streit, who is the investment officer of the California Department of Insurance. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Willis.

We'll bring it back to the dais for questions. I'll start to my left with Senator Roth.

Well, thank you, Madam Chair. Congratulations, Doctor.

Thank you.

I was a little concerned when I read our notes, and of course, I think it also appeared somewhere in the newspaper, and it's been referenced in prior questions from the dais by my colleagues.

The departmental compliance with statutory requirements for ethics training and sexual harassment training within departments of the State of California.

And of course, my understanding is it's the board's responsibility to do these compliance reviews.

But what action should be taken at this point? And does the board have a role in that? And if not, who does?

Well, actually, that would be a CalHR responsibility. We can make suggestions, and you're right, it has been a sincere concern.

In fact, when we were discussing the fact that they were not in compliance, it was shocking to me because due to the fact with LA Unified School District, we have to do our mandated training and if we don't, we do not get paid.

So it's just appalling to me that the state employees are not complying. Maybe that's one thing that could be considered, even though some people might think that might be going too far, but maybe let them know if you don't complete these mandated trainings that you will not get paid until they're done because it's crucial in the workforce development.

Does the board have a pride? Notice the reviews are conducted on a three year cycle. Does the board have any authority to conduct follow-up evaluations once you've issued a compliance review report?

Yes, we can follow up. Yeah, it is on a three year bains well, basically it's a cycle. One to three years. It's done according to a cycle on a three-year basis. But, yes, we can follow up to see if certain departments, if the training, if the employees are actually completing the training, and we can make suggestions to HR, CalHR.

And does the board have authority when you find a systemic failure, which this apparently seems to be to me, 26 departments one, 20 departments in another.

Does the board have authority to change the review cycle to follow up in a formal way more frequently with those departments who have, that have failed to meet the requirements of the law?

That would be a CalHR responsibility primarily to follow up with the departments. We work cohesively with CalHR, we make suggestions to CalHR, but it's their responsibility to follow up with the individual department heads.

I guess my colleagues here may need to follow up with CalHR. But let me just thank you for doing your job over at the State Personnel Board to do the compliance audits. Thank you.

Thank you for your question.

Thank you, Senator Roth. Senator Laird.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your willingness to serve. I was just going to ask a couple of questions that came out of the strategic plan, and one had to do with, it specifically mentioned simplifying rules to make hiring more efficient. How are you going to do that or what progress is made toward that piece in the strategic plan?

Well, we have a more diverse workforce. For instance, we have 17% Asian, 61% white, 11.9% black, Latino 3.4%, disabled 20.3%. I mean, there's still improvements that need to be made min that capacity, but the progress is there.

Well, in many ways, you're talking about diversity.

It is great to hear that, and I suspect you might hear more about it as the questions go down.

That's always an issue,

Just an educated guess, but a part of this is about actually simplifying the process. for hiring and I know how cumbersome it is. I mean, I experienced it in a prior incarnation where it's like, it was going to take the rest of your natural life to fill a position and you would have something you needed to do now.

And I have a feeling that-

So you're saying that-

Oversee the process for simplifying hiring and how would you-

in terms of hiring new applicants?

Yes

Well I can tell you, the website can be streamlined a bit. I know for a fact that people who want to apply for a state job when they go on the website they're taken here, there, it's a little cumbersome for them.

Is there anyone min the room 2200 for opposition to this nominee appointee? Lee no one.

So we have suggested that the website be simplified and to be rectified so it could be user friendly for the applicant and the applicant won't be discouraged because there's so many excellent state jobs out there. And so that is an issue.

Well, I think you can just take it from us that we would love that, that part of the strategic or I'll speak for myself, I would love that part of the strategic plan to be implemented.

And the other question I was going to ask is, there's a similar thing in the strategic papan about reforming the classification system? And of course, one of the buzzwords these days, which makes me crazy, it says in the strategic plan, to create a nimble and evolving civil service system.

And I always think whenever Nimble is used, it's really implying that it's very unnimble right now.

And so how would you reform the classification system to better align with private sector jobs, which is what the strategic plan said it would prioritize?

Well we did classify some of the attorney positions, so some of them can move up, I guess, a level and get their salary increment. So we did reclassify those positions.

Do you see doing that for a broader number of positions? I mean, you did the attorneys.

Right, we did. Well, that's a start right?

Do you see just continuing down that path.

If necessary? Yes. Each situation is individualistic, so if it requires that, yes, I think that's definitely something positive that we have implemented. So I was glad about that.

Okay. Well, it's in the strategic plan, and I just hope you continue to pursue it.

Oh, absolutely.

For your willingness to serve and responding to my...

And thank you for your question, Senator.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome, Dr. Willis.

Thank you, Senator.

The most recent SPB report, the Legislature noted that 50% of the Department audited failed to meet the statutory requirements for sexual harassment training.

Did you address that one, Senator Roth?

No, I didn't.

Senator Roth okay.

But I don't know where that falls on the Nimble scale.

A point of order, no nimble or non-nimble is not a word. Okay.

A no-nonsense word right.

Audit failed to meet the statutory requirements for sexual harassment training. And aside from identifying this alarming statistic through the compliance reviews, does the SPB have any role in helping the departments meet their mandated sexual harassment trainings?

Again, we work with Cal HR, and that's actually under Cal HR's domain, we can make suggestions, and that's where our situation ends with that. But that's really a CalHR.

So they would be the ones responsible for trying to figure out how to holden these departments accountable.

Right. And again, we can make suggestions because we work with them. Cohesively and we can make suggestions about that.

Okay.

I have my own opinion about that.

That's all, doctor.

Thank you, Senator.

Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

Thank you, Madam Chair and it's so good to see you again.

It's wonderful to see you, Senator.

To see you again. I was following up on the Senator's nimbleness statement on CalHR.

You all work together, I see. I love it.

And mine was from working outside in community-based workforce development systems where we could see these jobs, we could see folks who were qualified to actually do those jobs. But there were so many barriers, and you mentioned the website.

Another barrier we saw is that the job would be in Los Angeles County, but the testing would be in Kern County. And these are lower income workers who don't have the resources to turn on a dime in a 24 hour, 48 hours notice to actually go to the testing.

So there was so much missed opportunity to invite all Californians to participate in these wonderful union, strong quality jobs

Absolutely.

That exist at the state. And I know you mentioned working closely with CalHR and that the board doesn't actually have the authority to implement and step in front of CalHR on these.

But I just wonder, as you hear and are in these conversations and knowing the employment needs and knowing the great opportunity, how do you see your role, in helping to advocate for these kinds of changes? I would love to hear your thoughts.

Oh my personal thoughts?

Yes.

No, absolutely. Through word of mouth, primarily letting people know that there are some jobs here for the state that people can apply for. In fact, it's funny that you mentioned that, Senator, that's happening also in the city of LA.

As you probably well know, there are jobs that people need to be aware of so they can apply for them, and through word of mouth letting people know that these jobs are available.

However, if the website is cumbersome, that's going to discourage them. We can let them know that these jobs are available, but once they get on the website, they might get discouraged.

So I think that needs to be revamped first in addition to letting people know through word of mouth about these jobs that are available for the state.

Because you're right, they are excellent jobs.

Thank you for that. And recently the state has kicked off and launched a number of apprenticeship pilot programs, which I'm really excited to see.

I think when you have partnerships that are helping to support apprenticeships, union, the workforce system and the entity in this case CalHR, that has the jobs, it just creates a level of collaboration and also a level of trained workers who really appreciate the type of contribution that they're making.

And there's such pride in skills and work ethic when folks are trained and really understand the craft, particularly in public sector, a space where there hasn't been these kinds of models before because of the civil service process.

And so I'm really excited to see the collaboration in the apprenticeships that are being done.

And I wonder in your view, and I know that the personnel board does not in any way have direct influence on these programs, but do you see a role of the personnel board in any context in either promoting or expanding these apprenticeship programs? And if so, how would you approach that?

Well, to your point, I think that apprenticeships, you're absolutely right. It's a workforce that involves a highly-skilled, I guess highly skilled jobs.

We do have a generation of 21st century practitioners and it is constantly expanding. And I do know that's something that the Governor is also supporting as well, the apprenticeships.

And I guess I can say that in terms of our role in supporting this, just, I guess letting them know that the importance of continuing to expand this area is crucial, especially to our future generation.

As you know, apprentice programs were taken out of the schools, they used to be in the schools years ago. And you're right, I think that having someone in a specialized field is crucial.

So all I can, I guess, primarily is just say that we can just support it through just verbally expressing the fact that we're encouraging the continued expansion of this program with CalHR, and hopefully we'll get more applicants to apply for this program.

Thank you, and just my last question and appreciate that you're right, bringing folks with the expertise connected with folks who can gain from that experience to make a stronger, more trained workforce is so important.

I just wondered, in particularly marginalized communities, how can we, websites are one way, but what are some other ways we can really spread the word and ensure that these opportunities are reaching communities.

Through community forums. That's one way of reaching having meetings in the community, letting people know about these jobs because I know that when we've had community forums in the past and they've talked about the positions that are available in the community, many people were unaware of these positions.

So I think that's one way, just having forms and spreading the word and different organizations as well can send information to their members. I know I get emails all the time regarding, in fact, every day regarding job openings.

Thank you for that. I look forward to learning and working more with you on those communities.

No, absolutely.

You know, organizations together, so appreciate that.

Oh, I love it. Yeah, I love partnering. That's my thing, partnering organizations.

Thank you Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, I appreciate the opportunity to ask you some questions. I know we weren't able to meet prior to that, and I do apologize.

I'd like to have you expand, if you could, when you said word of mouth or working with organizations like, what would be some examples of word of mouth? I mean, reaching individuals in Culver City would be different than reaching individuals in Bakersfield that would be eligible for these positions.

Right.

So examples of like, word of mouth or organizations that you've had the opportunity to partner with to get the word out, to fulfill the 17% hiring deficit.

Deficit, and its funny, you mentioned Culver City. One of my favorite places. Culver City has Culver City Democratic Club, and they also have a Culver City Chamber of Commerce. And so at those meetings, are letting people know about the job openings that are in the community and so forth.

But other organizations in Los Angeles, there are a lot of chamber organizations. We have Korean Chamber of Commerce whom I worked with before.

Latino Chamber of Commerce. Also we have democratic clubs such as New Frontier Democratic Club? And I know on a monthly basis that they do disseminate information about jobs in the various communities. So those are a few of the organizations that I'm aware of.

Thank you. And did I hear you right when you were given the statistics and I may not have the personnel you guys have 3% Latino and 24% disabled.

Right, I'm sorry, 20.3 tenths, and then Latino 3.4 tenths of a percent.

Yeah, and that's on the lower end of the spectrum and that's state personnel board workforce.

Okay.

Go ahead.

I'm sorry. I yield to you senator.

Go ahead. No, that's to you,

You mentioned the Democratic Club twice. Do you reach out to the Republican clubs as well?

No not really. I have not. I am a Democrat primarily, but well, let me just say some of the clubs, such as the Jonathan Club for instance, so let me take that back.

They do have Republicans there because I've met with the Jonathan Club as well, and yeah, a couple of my friends are Republicans there, so yes, I did.

Do you not think Republicans would make good employees?

No, I think that they would. I have friends who are Republicans.

Just asking for Republicans.

But no, the Jonathan Club also. The California club also has a few Republicans. And we've met, we've had roundtable discussions because we're working on the insurance diversity initiative. Yes.

Thank you. I am going to try to make it more interesting than my other colleagues because I love your personality.

Oh, thank you.

I am very interested in your solutions and opinions on how you can make sure that we meet our sexual harassment training expectations.

And I would be very interested in hearing that even though everybody else kind of shied away from it.

I know from what I said, yes, I am referring back to LA Unified School, we don't have that issue.

And so, for instance, we get our personal emails even if we're late, but we're on time because no one wants their pay affected by that.

I think in my personal opinion. I know people probably won't agree with this, but if you let people know that your pay will be affected if you do not complete the training that's required, not the optional training, but the training that's required, I think that they will take the training is that we have no issues.

We have the due date. We know it's due. I think it's November 15 of every year for the most part. So we know that. So we take it prior to I take mine prior, like in the summertime, I get it out the way. So we don't have that issue because that's what they do. And your pay can be affected.

I appreciate

and your credential.

Your teaching credential.

Yes, your teaching credential and your pay.

So there's kind of a carrot and a stick and it makes people attend the training that's required so that we can make sure we have a harassment free workplace.

Yes and now we have three mandated trainings now. The other training is optional, as I said, but and they're due different times during the year.

So does LA unified apply the same carrot-stick method with that's just a Lamont Irwin term from where I'm from.

So the carrot-stick method, does that apply to the other trainings as well?

Yes, all the mandated only because optionals is optional. It's your choice if you want to take it. But out of the all three, yes, and our director will send us emails about that.

Even if we're we'll just say if it's due two weeks from now, you have not taken this training, they want to make sure no, we don't have that issue at all.

Have you conveyed some of your concerns about the sexual harassment training deficiency with CalHR.

In terms of what my solutions would be, no, I have not. To be honest, no, I have not. I think in general I might have but no, not specifically. To answer your question,

I encourage you to do so. I'm very disturbed about the deficiency in the sexual harassment. You know we were part of the workplace conduct unit.

Senator Bates, my predecessor before, and Senator Fuller, they did that and it changed the culture with the Senate pro TEM on the way that the building operates now.

And I think it's as an employer in the real world, we've been doing it for decades, and we're required under law to make sure that our supervisors and our training, our leadership teams and now personnel are trained in sexual harassment training.

And now that we've implemented it in the building, I think the state agencies should follow suit.

And like my colleague Senator Ochoa Bogh brought up, it is concerning that there's a huge deficit in sexual harassment training specifically because I think women are disproportionately affected.

No offense men, women are a little bit more disproportionately affected.

And I don't understand why that deficit is occurring. Why is it that they don't want to take it? I don't understand it.

Well, you appear to be a no-nonsense person. I think you're going to solve that problem for all of us.

Everyone wants me to solve the problem. They put me on the what is it? Conflict resolution committee at my job. So I've been doing that for years.

Well, thank you. I don't have any other questions. I appreciate you being here. I'm going to go unless there's any more. Yes. Senator Ochoa Bogh. We'll go back to Senator Ochoa Bogh.

I do have just a couple of I guess it's more of a comment question, like to follow up with Senator Smallwood-Cuevas's question with regards to reaching out.

And also, Senator Grove, have you considered reaching out or have there been any efforts in reaching out with the availability of the jobs in the state to our community colleges, our Cal State and UCs? Because I think as the students are graduating and looking for opportunities, that would be a great resource or partnership.

Have you folks considered or done that in the past?

Well, you know, it's funny that you mentioned that. In fact, one of the State Personnel board employees, she was hired right out of college. Yeah So they are reaching the colleges. Maybe they need to do more of them, of it. And that's something I will mention.

Even though it's a CalHR thing, I can still make suggestions as a board member. I think that's an excellent suggestion. But I was just speaking with her today and she was telling me I was hired right out of college in 2020.

It could have been her just applying knowing not necessarily the college connecting. I just think that there would be a great partnership to have our State Department connected to our schools just to.

I think you're absolutely correct.

Make a pipeline available. And I know that many campuses hold job fairs.

Right. And so not just the universities, but also even community colleges.

Yes, community colleges. Universities. And our UCs would be a great resource along with our private schools as well. But it's a natural, organic collaboration, in my understanding.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

And then one last question. I apologize but one did come up here. Are you familiar with or have you folks done or the board done anything to ensure that the departments are aware of the responsibilities under the new nepotism policy,

Right, yes yes, because prior to, I believe July 2021, there was no policy in place. But yes, now we have a nepotism policy in place where I guess how do they define nepotism if you have a personal relationship with someone, if you're married, domestic partner, which is interesting, to me nepotism could occur even if you have a good friend.

So I'm wondering if that would fit into the nepotism policy that they've adopted now. So I thought about that after looking at that, I said, well, nepotism could occur with good friends.

Happens all the time, but nepotism is interesting concept. I think that like I said before. We all have unconscious biases, basically and there are times we don't even realize that we're doing.

We think we're being fair but of course we have a personal relationship with someone we're going to probably and it could be subconsciously favor that person over someone else.

We might think we're looking at a situation objectively, looking at the job situation, oh, well, this person's qualified because of this and that.

So that's something I think I would suggest if you have a personal friendship with someone not just related through blood or through marriage, I think it could go beyond that.

So my follow-up question would be has there been any efforts in trying to make sure that we provide training to our state departments on this to be able to comply with this policy, to understand it and to comply?

Well, the guidelines are right there, I guess in black and white about nepotism. Okay. I don't think we've had too much of a problem with that, at least not to my knowledge. But there is a policy in place and people are aware of it, the employees are aware of it.

I would just sort of just follow up with that with our sexual harassment laws. They're there. Written.

Should know them.

Everybody should know them,

But we're still making an effort to make sure that the training happens.

So in that line of thought, I would probably just recommend that perhaps we look into making sure that there is training available so that people are aware of it, know it, but also be able to have the opportunity to ask questions like the one you just had.

Right, absolutely. Excellent question, Senator. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Ochoa Bogh. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas did you have another comment or question? Senator Roth.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Doctor, I'm just curious, since the board conducts these cyclical reviews of Department personnel practices in the board's compliance review process, did the board determine whether the departments in question, the ones that failed to comply with the law? And there were several of them. Obviously.

I know.

Many of them. Did the board determine whether these departments had accountability measures available to deal with employees who failed to comply or supervisors who failed to comply. I guess it's a several part question.

Did the board determine whether accountability measures were applied and if so, what percentage of supervisors or employees were held accountable for failure to comply with the law?

Well, again, that would be a CalHR.

But I'm just talking about in your compliance review since the board is charged with reviewing departmental policies. So I would think that one of the elements of review in addition to determining whether the departments complied with the law, did the departments have personnel policies in place? One, to require compliance with the law, two, hold people accountable who failed to comply.

And three, while you're in there, like working on a car, did the board in this case determine whether those accountability measures were applied and what percentage of employees were held accountable or supervisors for failure to comply?

If I'm not mistaken, and I'm just saying from the top of my head, I thought it was 60% that had not complied.

65%. 26 departments failed to comply with the statutory requirements for ethics training. So with regard to those departments, did they have policies that required it? Did they have accountability measures embedded in their policies to deal with those who failed to comply?

That's the thing. We don't have accountability, and that's what we're talking about.

So not only you determined in the 26 that there were 26 who failed to conduct training, and of those 26, the 26 didn't have policies that required it.

When you say didn't have policies that required the training

or procedure, did the departments have a procedure?

No, they're required to do the training.

But you're saying in terms of accountability factor, if they don't take the training, what's the accountability factor there?

Well, if I were a Department manager, the state has a policy, we have law. The state obviously has to have a policy. Does the Department have a procedure to get the training done?

Not at this time. Yeah. In order to ensure the fact that they do take the training. That's what you're talking about? No, we don't at this time, and that's what we're talking about.

And then does the board determine, when you're looking at it, what action the department took?

Right, we can look at the action and we can, again, make suggestions to cal HR. We could do that, but that's what we're talking about, the accountability factor. They're not taking the training.

What is the accountability factor here?

Was this the first year that, I know you're new.

Yeah, I am new.

Maybe, you know, was this the first year that the board's report reflected a failure to comply?

I'm not sure about that.

That would be an interesting factoid.

Right, okay,

Well, thank you.

To see if it's something that's been continuous. Absolutely. Thank you, Senator.