Senate Standing Committee on Rules

Okay. The Senate Committee on Rules will come to order. Let me say good afternoon to everyone. The Senate continues to welcome the public in person and also via the Teleconference service. We're holding our committee hearing in the O Street building in room 2200.

For individuals wishing to provide public comment via the Teleconference service. The participant toll free number and access code is posted on our committee website and it will be displayed on the screen a number of times today. Right now it's up, and that number is 877-226-8163 and the access code is 736-2834.

And on behalf of our court reporter, I would ask all speakers, my colleagues and witnesses alike, to speak slowly and clearly. If we need to slow you down or have you repeat something, we will ask. But it is for that purpose so that we can record the testimony.

Before we begin today's agenda, we need to establish a quorum and a reminder to my colleagues. You'll need to turn on your microphones for the roll call and every time that you vote. And with that, Madam Secretary, will you please call the role?

Here.

Here.

Grove here. Atkins?

Laird.

Laird here. Ochoa Bogh?

Here.

Atkins here.

Smallwood-Cuevas here. Grove?

Here.

Here.

Ochoa Bogh here. Smallwood - Cuevas?

Thank you. I don't often do this because I don't always have this information, but I'm aware that it is John Waldi's birthday today.

And oh good. He didn't leave. He gets to be embarrassed as we wish him a happy birthday. And so thrilled you could join us for this Rules Committee meeting on your birthday. And we're not going to sing, Madam Vice Chair. That would be over the top, even for the rest of us to have to endure.

If there are no objections, I'm going to dispense with some items that we can dispense with quickly. I'd like to take up first on today's agenda the Governor's appointees not required to appear.

And I'm going to separate one out at the request of a Member of the Committee. So I would entertain a motion on item 2. Governor's appointees not required to appear D and E. Those are two members of the state athletic commission. D and E. And then G is to the Seismic Safety Commission.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Madam Secretary will you call the roll?

Aye.

Laird?

Laird aye. Ochoa Bogh?

Aye.

Ochoa Bogh aye. Smallwood-Cuevas?.

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove?

Aye.

Grove, aye. Atkins?

Aye.

Atkins aye.

5 to 0. Thank you, colleagues. I would entertain a motion on item 2-F that is a Member of the Boating and Waterways Commission. A motion.

So move.

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

Aye.

Laird?

Laird aye.

No,

Ochoa Bogh?

Ochoa Bogh, no. Smallwood-Cuevas?

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove?

No.

Grove, no. Atkins?

Aye.

Atkins aye.

3 to 2, colleagues. Thank you.

I would take a motion on item 3, reference of bills to committee. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Call the roll.

Laird

Laird aye.

Aye.

Ochoa Bogh?

Aye.

Ochoa Bogh aye, Smallwood-Cuevas?

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove?

Aye.

Grove aye Atkins?

Atkins aye. 5 to 0.

5 - 0 thank you.

We'll now take up item 4 and 5 together, unless I'm asked to do it separately, but the next items are 4 and 5.

This is about retired annuitants to allow Kip Lipper and Bob Ruffner to return to the Senate as retired annuitants prior to the passage of the 180 day from the date of their retirement.

So move.

Yes but may I ask a question?

Yes Madam Vice Chair.

Can i get a copy of the Policy for Retired and Units? I know that they go through rules within 6 months and afterwards, but afterwards, is there a policy do we have in place?

We do, and the Secretary of the Senate can make sure that you get that ASAP.

Thank you.

I made the motion

Senator Laird made the motion. Madam Secretary, will you please do you want it before we vote?

Thank you. Okay, madam you made did you make the motion?

Madam Secretary, will you please call the roll?

Aye

Laird aye, Ochoa Bogh?

Laird?

Ochoa Bogh aye. Smallwood-Cuevas?

Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove?

Aye.

Aye.

Grove aye Atkins?

Aye.

Atkins aye.

Thank you very much.

We have a number of floor acknowledgments. It would be item 6 through 10, so take a look. I would entertain a motion on that.

I would move item 6 through 10.

Okay. Thank you Senator Laird. Making sure people are looking. Okay, Madam Secretary, will you please call the role?

Aye.

Laird?

Smallwood-Cuevas?

Aye.

Laird aye Ochoa Bogh? Ochoa Bogh aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas aye Grove?

Aye.

Grove aye Atkins?

Atkins aye.

Colleagues, thanks so much. We will now return to governor's appointees required to appear. And we're going to start with item 1-A, and that would be I will invite up Yana Garcia, JD. This is for Secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency. We want to say welcome to you.

And as you come up and get situated, please take your time. Invite you to acknowledge anyone you would like that might be with you or that you want to acknowledge or thank, and then make some opening comments. And then we'll go right to Members of the committee for questions and our comments. So welcome.

Am I on?

You are.

Great.

Perfect.

Thank you. I will just acknowledge my husband, who's here with me. We thought about bringing our 16 month old, but we thought against that at the last minute. Could have been a little bit more entertaining for all of you.

Babies upstage us all the time.

Well, I didn't want her to upstage me.

Very good.

Thank you so much for the time. First and foremost, Madam Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee, not only for the questions that you sent, which I very much appreciated, but also specifically for taking the time to connect over the past couple of weeks.

I've really enjoyed the time spent and enjoyed hearing from you all, appreciated the concerns that you raised, which I share concerns for our state facing a number of challenges.

And I do appreciate the opportunity to tell you a little bit more about me and how I got here, which I think in some ways is a story you've probably heard before. I'm an attorney. I've worked in government. I worked closely with and advised two secretaries before me, and I've focused my career on environmental law and regulation.

There may be also some things about me that you have not seen. I am only the second woman to be appointed to this role, and I'm the first Latina. I'm a lifelong Californian. I'm an Oakland girl by upbringing, and I still live there today. I am a second generation Chicana with family that spans from the Bay Area to Los Angeles and Mexico.

My community, my family, my friends, neighbors, chosen family are artists, they're educators, small business owners. They work in health, some in energy, many in social services. And at the end of the day, they like me are everyday Californians.

Now, what I bring to this job, which as you all know very well, is more than a job, is a dedication to achieving outcomes that work for all Californians.

Over the past three years, we saw on top of the health and economic impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic, raging wildfires with lingering smoke impacts sparing almost no community across our state.

We've seen drought followed by extreme rainfall and storms, showing us that these are unpredictable times, unprecedented times. And we face some extraordinary challenges, the scale of which can be overwhelming.

And I bring a deep dedication to breaking down complex challenges into solvable pieces. The challenges we face have been decades in the making. I know we are not going to solve these overnight.

And yet Californians deserve an urgent response and solutions that make meaningful progress in getting us where we need to be in a way that makes changes in their day to day lives. They also deserve meaningful partnership and a seat at the table as we approach the decisions that affect their lives.

Now Madam Vice Chair and Senator Ochoa Bogh. I appreciated the conversations we had about the importance of accounting for all impacts, intended and unintended, from our transition away from fossil fuels. I know that we agree that the climate crisis deserves our urgent attention.

And while we are well on the path to rapid deployment of zero emission vehicles across the transportation sector as we move forward, you have my commitment to bringing diverse perspectives to the table and to always examining who may not be reflected in our decision making so that we can bring them in.

I put forward the same commitment to our transition away from some of the more toxic pesticide products used not only in the agricultural sector, but in our urban communities as well. And of course, to our development of solutions to address the very real challenges we face in managing waste.

At the end of the day, I'm an ordinary person in a rather extraordinary role and I do bring some extraordinary experience.

I've experienced government and regulation from multiple standpoints that inform my unique perspective to the job of being CalEPA secretary as a regulator and enforcer of the law from within CalEPA and from within the independent branch of government at the Attorney General's office, as well as from the standpoint of an advocate.

I have dealt with the many pieces of the puzzle we need to pull together and solve our toughest challenges. As I take this on, I know that our partnership will be critical to gathering what pieces may remain and I look forward to tackling the issues before us with each and every one of you and your colleagues and most importantly, your constituents upon your confirmation.

Thank you again for the time and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you very much and welcome to your husband for joining you today. Let me start Senator Laird with you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I really enjoyed our meeting and thank you for your willingness to serve in a job that occasionally could be thankless. I appreciate that. And I have a couple of questions and we in General talked about them, but I thought it would be good to draw them out here.

And one is I served on a board in the agency in a past life which wasn't even a secretary, which Senator Grove will point out in a moment. But the thing was that you have a unique structure and we talked about it with regard to the Air board and the Water board, which is they are independent boards.

And yet you are the cabinet secretary expected to have some responsiveness from agencies that are in your agency but are in fact governed by independent boards.

How do you navigate that in trying to deal with your priorities or the governor's priorities or implementing various things that the Legislature might pass?

Thanks for this question. First and foremost, I want to say that as a Californian, I very much appreciate the importance of the independence of our boards.

The transparency and accountability that comes from that independence is extraordinarily important. And I think what binds us together is an interest in seeing real outcomes on the ground and implementing an agenda around achieving real policy outcomes.

And a couple of the ways in which we do this at CalEPA on a practical level is one, I have very consistent touch points with our board chairs.

We obviously share the experience and role of being governor's appointees and needing to implement and coalesce around a shared agenda to preserve and enhance the environment and protect environmental quality, as well as protecting communities.

Coalescing around those shared goals and ensuring that we are developing metrics to show our success, metrics that show us where we still need to make progress, is critically important.

And ensuring that we use the public space of their board hearings, their interactions with all stakeholders to vet out issues as they arise, to vet out the ways in which we need to refine our approach is very important to me.

So I would say that I use their independence to the benefit of achieving our agenda and make sure that we are centered around the North Star of achieving good environmental outcomes for all.

I appreciate that. Let me just say, I worked for a Governor who was driven crazy by that independence. So I appreciate the steps that you are making in that regard. That was very good.

The other question I wanted to ask is actually in your departments on the other side of the ledger, and that is two in particular, but the Department of Toxic Substance Control and to some extent the Department of Pesticides have had their issues in recent years in terms of being together, being responsive, not having a backlog.

So on the other side of the ledger, how do you work with them to help them address those issues in a way that gets them up to speed?

We'll start with the Department of Toxic Substances Control. I think, as you all saw, the Board of Environmental Safety Members coming into that role, stepping into what is a very new role for them within the Department, provides us an opportunity to create a public facing space and in many ways, a sort of check on the work of the Department.

A space where the Department can receive input from all stakeholders on the approach that it's taking to cleanups, the approach it's taking to permit appeals to financial assurances. And that's been really important and very helpful as they undertake meaningful change.

I don't mean to discount the challenges that we face in the waste sector. I think that the role that the board can play is very important. And I maintain a very direct relationship with Meredith, with Dr. Williams in her role as Director for the Department of Pesticide Regulation.

Likewise, they are undertaking a good amount of change. I think what we know now about the toxicity in many known chemicals that are used in pesticide products shows us that we have to transition away to safer alternatives.

And that has forced the Department into a process to also hear from all stakeholders, to also bring everyone to the table through work groups and other spaces where they're having challenging conversations, but necessary conversations about where we want to go over the next few decades in pulling some of the more toxic pesticide products from conventional use.

And I think what we'll see is a good amount of process change, institutional change, but ideally real pollution reduction on the ground both in the hazardous waste sector and in the pesticide space.

Thank you very much. I really appreciate the response to both questions.

Thank you. Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, thank you very much for all the time you spent with me yesterday. I know it was probably a grueling hour and 20 minutes in my office. But I do appreciate the time that you gave me.

I know we talked at length about several subject matters, a couple that I was asked to ask you on behalf of other Members, which I won't bring up today.

But I appreciate all your responses that you gave me, and I appreciate what appeared to be your empathy with some of the situations that we face and some of the comments that you made in your opening remarks. Real outcomes on the ground.

Whose ground? Ours, Ecuadors, Columbia's. We talked about foreign transports of oil. We talked about hazardous waste being shipped out to other states.

So if it's not on our ground and it's on Arizona and Texas' ground, does that make it better? We talked about all those things and then you mentioned on the North Star, good environmental focus on the North Star and good environmental outcomes for all.

So just based on your opening comments and the comments that are the questions that we asked yesterday, or I asked you yesterday just to have them on the record, my colleagues hear this all the time.

We import oil from Ecuador, mainly over 50% of that product that California purchases. And I know this is not in your complete purview, but I asked you questions about the Air Resources Ward. It's 27 million metric tons to bring a ship here.

In order for us to use the oil that we consume as Californians, we're consuming it. But the CalEPA or CARB only records the usage or the emissions output from these ships within the twelve mile radius of the shoreline of California, but not in federal waters.

And you were going to research that and get back to me. Were you able to do that or do I need to give is there more time and you can provide that to my office later, at a later date?

To the specific question on the emissions from ships, I think we would like to provide you a better answer, a more specific answer. But I will say that in the process that the Air Resources Board is undertaking to examine the low carbon fuel standard as an example.

We have long used this standard to ensure that the overall emissions from fuels that are used in the state of California imported and produced here meet a global standard. Something meet a standard where the emissions from the full supply chain, from the full production of that fuel are accounted for.

And I do want to note, as I'm sure you all heard from the Air Resources Board this morning, we are holding workshops in the spring for the low carbon fuel standard.

I think many of these issues can be vetted out in that space and are looking for ways always to account for emissions that we may otherwise be missing through this standard and otherwise.

Thank you very much. And then I guess the second question that I have is what work is being done to ensure California's waste is just not shifted to another state.

We had an appointment last month that we discussed this and is there a plan within the Department of Substance Control to resolve this issue and what timeline if there is one for Hazardous Waste Management Plan moving forward? Because when we had the other conferee here last month, she made a statement that and I don't recall her name, do you guys? Department of Toxic Substances.

Anyways, but she made the statement that we get rid of over 50% of our produced waste here and we ship it to other states. So I'm just curious if there's a reason why and is there a plan that keep it more here. So we just don't ship our waste that we can we're consuming and producing it, but it's like it's NIMBYism at best to me.

We just don't keep it. We don't produce oil here under the safest, restrictest environmental quality processes. We get it from countries that just abuse. We abuse the environment and labor and then again with our waste it's NIMBYism. We ship it someplace else.

So is there a plan to make sure that we address that issue or not?

We talked about this a little bit yesterday as well and I appreciate the conversation. Very relevant. First, just for some context, even in the non hazardous waste context, we produce currently more than one ton of trash for every Californian per year.

We have a major problem there, to put it mildly, that finds its root in our consumption and the solutions that we have to build require multiple standpoints, multiple actors and multiple players. And I just want to put out there that this will be something that we will be solving over the years to come.

In the hazardous waste context, the number of hazardous waste facilities in our state and this is a good thing, have gone down since the 80's and 90's and we should be proud of that. To the point on whether this is sorta of NIMBYism that we have environmental protections here in the state of California.

I think under no circumstances should we compromise the environmental protections that we have here. We want to see those in other states as well. And I am as unsatisfied, I think as many of you are, that we are currently shipping out as much waste as we are. That is not what we want to be doing.

There is a hazardous waste management plan that the Department is working on that will be released imminently, will be sent to the Board of Environmental safety and will be an iterative document per statute is due in 2025.

But I would like to see that timeline tightened given where we are and what that management plan will do is really break up how we are producing hazardous waste where we are citing it what the capacity of our current hazardous waste facilities truly is.

And we hope we'll have some input on what the mitigation packages what the mitigation measures are that we are okay with to be able to treat our hazardous waste in state.

Again, I am as unsatisfied as you with the issue of us shipping out our hazardous waste. I want us to be able to treat that hazardous waste here. And I know that DTSC shares that priority. That is an Administration priority and we will be looking to do that through a planning process in the months to come.

Thank you. And I know it's a top of the news cycle because of the stuff that happened in Palestine. And we do ship it. I think we do a lot of rail and transportation on trucks. But I appreciate you at least putting that to the forefront to making sure that we do address that issue because again, I use the word NIMBYism.

We produce it here and then we dispose of it in other states and the transportation and the exposure that we have transporting that from state to state. So thank you very much and thank you again for your gracious time yesterday.

Of course. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Vice Chair, Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Such a pleasure to see you today. I thoroughly enjoyed our conversation yesterday and I think we were going to be longtime friends too, with regards to the issues. And I very grateful for the life experience that you're bringing to the table and the insight that you are bringing forth and the considerations.

I'm grateful for the conversations. I see we had very similar conversations as with Senator Grove, with the questions she asked and the concerns that she has.

I'm just going to for the record, and I know we discussed it a little bit yesterday with the vision, the administration's vision for the environment and being at the forefront of leadership on that end and working with the groups that you have as an attorney, which, by the way, so proud of you. So proud of Latina here.

I'm so proud of your accomplishments, quite the role model, for sure, for many of our youth. But I wanted to know in this capacity, you've come from a background of activism and have participated in quite a bit of lawsuits that have impacted much of issues that impact our region.

But in this role, in this capacity, you are now representing all Californians, not just one industry, one in goal, one advocacy group, but now you have the responsibility of how these laws or this plan, this vision impacts all Californians.

So for the record, and I know you stated in your opening remarks, how do you plan on engaging all of all stakeholders and creating the communications, the lines, just the collaboration in general to be able to hear from these folks? Because that's the hardest part, I think, for people who have been in advocacy groups who are now in a role where now your responsibility or fiduciary duties also to represent their interests and allow them to have a voice at the table.

How do you plan on mitigating those relationships, fostering those relationships and conversations so that you can have a holistic balance, perspective and ideas, views in your role?

Thank you for the question, of course.

First and foremost, to Senator Laird's question on the role of our boards and the role of the public interface, from a transparency and accountability standpoint, I do rely very much on our regulatory processes, our public input involved in those processes, the processes of our boards and departments to bring in the perspectives from the diverse array of stakeholders across our state.

That is extraordinarily important to me. That is sort of foundational to much of the work that we do. In addition to that, I've dedicated much of my early career in particular to really advocating for those who did not have a seat at decision making tables to that point. And that informs the way that I see our decision making processes, still.

If I am in a space in which there is no business perspective or there is no perspective from a particular industry who may play a role in us developing the solution, I will be equally concerned with bringing their perspective in to developing the solutions that we need to face our challenges, as I have been to bringing in the voices of those who have otherwise been absent from our decision making.

I know that so many players are critical to us developing the policy implementation strategies that we need. And frankly, from even an efficiency standpoint, bringing people in as early as we can and as often as we can gives us better solutions down the line.

I'm a firm believer in the value of diversity, of perspectives, of representation and you have my word that I will be focused on making sure that we have diverse perspectives across all of our decision making points.

Thank you. I have no doubt that you're going to put your whole heart and effort and skill sets on to this role and I wish you much, much success in this role.

Thank you. Thanks.

Thank you Senator. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And it's an honor to see you here today, Ms. Garcia. Was a wonderful conversation with you. Really respect your work, your journey, and that you're bringing that holistic point of view to this very important role. I have no doubt that diversity, representation and equity will be a priority in all that you do and the decision making that must take place.

We talked a little bit during our discussion, I just wanted to raise it here with my colleagues cause I think it's really important, two points for us to connect on. And one, in my district, we have a number of small business recycling firms that are really feeling that pressure and that squeeze.

One in terms of what's happening on the global markets, in terms of folks not wanting to buy our recycling goods, and on the other hand, just our way of reimbursing those companies. Those two things are not adding up in a way for these businesses to really be able to not just thrive, but to survive in this moment.

And you know, we know that there's been this investment in the Office of Innovation to bring the circular economy to vulnerable communities and to make it work for them both in a sustainability way, environmentally, but economically.

So can you talk about sort of the macro and micro issues related to the circular economy? And as the EPA Secretary in this role, how would you tackle this thing that is both central to the state's goals but also has this global implication that we have to always balance? Can you share your approach around this issue?

Sure. So CalRecycle has a very important role to play in this space. And one of the things that I've been in direct conversations with our Director Wagoner about since I started, is really thinking about how we can build in more consistent evaluation points to assess the processing payments, which are payments given based on the cost of recycling and something that makes a really big difference for low income Californians, for extremely low income Californians.

And one thing that we've done that I hope will make a difference because we've seen such price fluctuation over the past few years in particular, is increase the touch points; the times in which we are able to reassess those payments rather than doing them on an annual basis, doing them more quarterly. Particularly where we're seeing Patterson of fluctuation. And we're hoping that that will make a difference.

We also are seeing models on the ground across the state, particularly in places like Los Angeles, that are showing us that locally we can meet our 75% recycling rate by 2030 target. This is a target that statewide seems overwhelming, but at the local level is something that we're seeing is doable.

And granted, not everything that works in LA works everywhere else. We know that just as the case in the Bay Area and everywhere really. But what we're seeing in Los Angeles is giving us a lot of hope for how we can meet our targets. And I think we need to continue to be committed to making sure that we're assessing those processing payments in a way that honors the role that they play for low income communities across our state.

For the Deputy Director of the Office of Innovation and standing up that office, I actually want to say here we could use some support. I think we have advertised the position three times and we need good candidates.

So to the extent you all have thoughts on who good candidates might be, maybe staff we can poach, constituents, anyone that you think would be good, please feel free to let us know and show them the information. And if we can follow up with that for each and every one of you.

We'll definitely be in touch on that. And I appreciate the update about us meeting those goals. And this is one of those areas of work where we see so many of our residents having to use this as an opportunity of bridging their ability to make it to the next month in terms of their ability to have food on the table, pay their rent.

So I'm glad to see that it's working. How do we make it work stronger? My last question has to do similar to this triple bottom line of racial equity and economic equity and environmental equity.

And we talked a lot about the importance of the changing economies. We talked about the ways in which our community is about to make the shift, the state leading the way, where we see us moving into this green economy, new jobs, new opportunities.

And we also know that there are workers that are going to need to transition into those new jobs. And at the same time, there are certain communities that have been skipped over in other industrial shifts, economic shifts, particularly black and brown immigrant women.

And we talked a lot about the framework for how we begin to set a standard for setting goals in workforce that really mirror our environmental goals as a state.

And I wanted to hear more about how you see the EPA helping to facilitate that workforce transition to ensure that those folks, and certainly my communities, are still reeling from the industrial shift to the service shift and that we're talking about 40 years later right.

How do we ensure that those communities that are overburdened, often with environmental injustice and economic inequities, how do we center them in this transition? And what role can you play in supporting bringing this new green workforce online?

And I appreciated the conversation we had about this and really appreciate your interest in this area. This is an important piece of not just our environmental agenda, but the importance of having institutions that reflect our state.

So first, in terms of the transition and bringing in workers and labor, the lessons that I learned coming up specifically in the environmental justice movement, really inform the way that I approach particularly some of the intersections around worker safety and workers rights and environmental safety and pollution reduction.

And we don't often talk about the successes that we've had in this space, but we have successful examples of coalition building and policy design and implementation with steel workers and environmental justice communities and residents around enhancing chemical safety protocols and reducing pollution burdens, particularly in refinery communities.

And I think we have to learn from those more learn from those examples as we tackle some of the work that we're doing around pesticides, for example, and really understanding how we bring along the agricultural sector, how we continue to support regional and local economies and center workers rights and worker protection worker health and safety as we do so. In terms of bringing in a workforce that really represents the state of California.

In my previous role as Deputy Secretary for the Environmental Protection Agency, I did a lot of work with what is called the Government Alliance for Racial Equity developing plans through which we wood improve our recruitment strategies, improve the training that our staff receive to be able to bring in diverse candidates and retain diverse candidates.

You know, this is something that we have a lot of progress to make. This is an area in which we have a lot of progress to make. And part of it is being out in community and understanding how our investment in wastewater infrastructure, sanitation, some of the charging infrastructure that we will have will lead to jobs and understanding what those jobs are.

What are the training partnerships that are associated with those? How can we make that all a part of our environmental strategy? It must be. And so I'm very interested, just intellectually and as a person in those strategies. And I know that I share that interest with many of our board chairs and with our board Members, with my directors. And I look forward to certainly partnering with all of you.

And I know that the lessons learned within each and every one of your districts in terms of where things are going well with Workforce transition, where they're not, obviously, workforce is not within our purview, but to the extent that we are building a new way to think about the sustainability of our economic growth and our local and regional economies, we want to be able to understand how we are stimulating job growth as well, and economic health.

Well, thank you so much for that response. And yes, looking forward to working with you on that. I think we've invested and continue to move toward our benchmarks and goals around sustainability.

And to see you working closely with unions and community based organization and workforce partners to ensure that we are creating a new economy that is both high road and good jobs and also bring all of those communities that we need to bring along with us is really exciting. So thank you so much.

Senator, thank you. I only had one area that I wanted to kind of get your thoughts on in an update. And of course, you won't be surprised to hear I want a little bit of information on Exide and the issue there with the community. Certainly residents are very frustrated and there's not a lot of trust between, I think, the community and the regulator.

Thank you.

There have been articles on it. Obviously it's closer to Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, but she knew I was going to focus on this. So would like to know the administration's plan to restore unspent funds for the parkway cleanup or otherwise augment available funding to accelerate the cleanup and address the community concerns about recontamination.

Obviously, I don't want to repeat the article because I feel like you're quite familiar with some of the issues and how is it? Maybe just give me an update from your perspective and if I have a specific question, I'll come back to it.

Sure. For transparency's sake and just disclosure, one of the earliest matters that I dealt with as a young attorney was actually Exide. Back then, I worked at Communities for a Better Environment and advocated for the shutdown of this facility. And it continues to be the unfortunate gift that keeps giving and I think one of the most egregious examples of an environmental injustice. We can all agree on that.

In terms of the recent coverage from the LA Times, the data points that we've now become aware of, I just want to say that this, the data that has come out, has given us pause and is a cause for concern.

The contract process is actually underway right now for a renewal of the contract, which frankly gives us an opportunity to reevaluate how we are approaching the new contract and what types of community protections and input we can incorporate into that process.

And so that's something that we are working on actively right now, thinking about how we address community concerns about lead that may be left on their properties, recontamination, many of the issues that have come up.

We fully intend to deal with that through the next contracting process as well as through potentially additional sampling, although we're trying to determine what that might look like in the months to come.

In terms of augmented funds, we are also actively pursuing funds to address the parkways cleanup. And this is an issue that we have also been in close communication with the LA County Board of Supervisors about as well as US EPA. And I will just say for now, we intend to use additional funds that we have and then see what we need to seek from there to address the parkways cleanup.

Appreciate it. So this is likely an item that you're going to continue to get questions about regardless of a confirmation process. I think a number of members, regardless of where we represent, have concerns about the broader issues of how we address things like that.

Obviously you're well familiar given the multiple sides you've participated in, but existing residents who maybe are not satisfied if it looks like there's still contamination above levels of acceptability, hopefully we are going to address that issue, understanding how frustrated they must be. You obviously personally can understand given your history and background.

So more questions probably to come on that issue just so that we feel like, well, we want a successful outcome given what those residents have lived through.

I appreciate that.

Okay, thank you. I appreciate it. If anything further from colleagues, we will go ahead and go to members of the public who would like to weigh in. We're going to start right here in room 2200 for those who wish to speak in support.

We have a microphone and I would ask for your name, your organization you represent, and your support or opposition. We have a number of other panels and so it really is going to be I support her, I oppose her. Hopefully not, not a descriptive, if you possibly can. So please come on up and welcome and thank you for sitting through our questions in this process. Welcome.

Thank you. Christina Scaringe, with the Center for Biological Diversity in Support.

Thank you. Next witness. Welcome.

Good afternoon. Bill Magavern with the Coalition for Clean Air. We support Secretary Garcia's confirmation.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members. Victoria Rome with the Natural Resources Defense Council in support.

Thank you.

Hello. Melanie Morelos on behalf of the Greenlining Institute and also Alvaro Sanchez, our VP of Policy in support.

Thank you.

Melissa Romero with California Environmental Voters in strong support of Secretary Garcia's confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Teresa Bui with Pacific Environment in strong support of Secretary Garcia's confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Nick Lapis with Californians Against Waste. And I've also been asked to express the support of California Communities Against Toxins. Thank you.

Thank you for that welcome.

Good afternoon. Kyle Jones with Community Water Center and also on behalf of Clean Water Action in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon. Raquel Mason with the California Environmental Justice Alliance and CEJA Action in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Katelyn Roedner Sutter with Environmental Defense Fund in strong support.

Thank you.

Jordan Wells on behalf of the National Stewardship Action Council in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you

Phoebe Seaton with Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability in strong support.

Thank you very much. Other speakers, thank you. Okay, we will now in room 2200 go to those who might be in opposition. Okay, seeing no one approach for opposition, we will go to the teleconference system. And for those who wish to testify via teleconference. And this would be anyone who wants to speak in support or opposition.

So as we welcome our moderator to tee us up, welcome, moderator.

Sorry. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. If you wish to speak in opposition or in favor, please press one and then zero. You'll be given your line. Our first one comes from line 24. Please go ahead.

Yes, hi. I'm Linda from Lincoln, California. I strongly oppose.

Thank you. Next witness. And as a reminder, your name, your organization, if any, and your position, go ahead.

Next one comes from line 22. Please go ahead.

Yes, my name is Stephanie and the last name is Swayla, and I oppose this completely. Thank you.

Thank you so much for calling. Next witness.

Line eleven, please go ahead. Eleven, your line is open. We'll move on to line 35. Please go ahead.

Hi. My name is Linda Rich, Claude County, and I'm in strong opposition to this person.

Thank you ma'am, for calling. Next witness.

We'll go to line 30. Please go ahead.

Oh, yeah, hey, this is Michael Joseph. Of, the people don't need government authority and I strongly

Strongly support or oppose

disagree with this. Got it.

Disagree, got it.

Yeah, all the above.

Okay, thank you so much, sir.

Enjoy yourself.

Next witness.

Line 18, please go ahead. 18, your line is open.

Oh, I oppose completely.

Janice [inaudible]. I am the Heavenly Father from God. The Dark Occultist.

Your name?

Thank you. Thank you very much for calling in. Mr. Moderator next witness.

Next one is line 36. Please go ahead.

I'm calling to represent myself and the millions of people in California who are not interested in a communist globalist.

I think that was opposition. Thank you. Next witness, please.

There are currently no others in the queue, Madam Chair.

Mr. Moderator, thank you so much. We will be back with you shortly. Appreciate your assistance. Let me come back to members of the committee. I appreciate all the witnesses in support and opposition.

Just For, my colleagues, we had not gotten anything in writing in opposition in advance, so I still believe it's important to hear from members of the public, and obviously, a lot of individuals called who have personal opinions. I didn't hear any representation of organizations, but we appreciate hearing from those in support and opposition.

We do take that seriously. With that, colleagues a motion or comments or further comments or questions or a motion? Senator Laird? Well,

Well, I would make the comment that I thought the candidate has been incredibly responsive to the questions and responsive to the issues that have been raised, both in our private meetings and public meetings and will serve us very well. And I'm pleased to move the confirmation of Yana Garcia as secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Senator Laird, thank you so much. Okay, colleagues. Madam Secretary, will you please call the role?

Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogh? Not voting. Ochoa Bogh, not voting. Smallwood-Cuavas? Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Grove? Not voting. Grove, not voting. Atkins? Aye. Atkins aye. Three to zero.

Three to zero. This will be moved on to the full Senate for confirmation, and we appreciate you're being here today and your thoughtful responses to our difficult questions.

Thank you.

Thank you. Congratulations.

Thanks.

We are going to take a five minute break as we switch over. And thank you all for your patience in being here today.

We'll be back in five minutes.

I will invite and thank you for your patience, by the way. I will invite you to introduce yourself, give any thanks or acknowledgments you would like to, opening comments and then we'll go right into comments and questions from the committee. Welcome.

Great. Thank you so much for the opportunity. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. I'm honored to be here today to be considered as a California Surgeon General. I want to thank my mother, Natalie and husband and son Jim and Jimmy for their love and support. I also want to thank Governor Newsom and Secretary Ghaly for this appointment and the opportunity to serve the people of California.

I believe healthcare is a fundamental right and I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to be the voice highlighting the work the Governor's office, the California Health and Human Services Agency and its departments are doing to provide this right to millions of Californians.

I bring decades of experience to this roll. This includes 17 years in local and state government, most recently at the California Department of Public Health. And prior to that, as Director for Reproductive Health for the Los Angeles County Public Health Department.

I have more than 30 years of experience as a practicing physician in obstetrics and gynecology. Personally, as a Latina and native Spanish speaker, I represent the 40% of Californians. My story is similar to many Californians. I was raised by a single mother immigrant from Mexico who would work up to three jobs to provide the best education and support she could afford.

And she taught me that the values of hard work, resilience and problem solving is something that we all do. These experiences have provided the formal education as well as the lived experience in understanding the power of California's investments. All of these can make a difference in health and equity and all of the opportunities for all Californians.

Finally, I want to express my gratitude to the Governor's office and the California Health and Human Services Agency and its departments and offices. I am incredibly privileged to work with so many dedicated public servants and unsung heroes who are committed and work tirelessly to support the health and well being of Californians.

That concludes my opening remarks and I'm happy to answer questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Dr. Ramos.

Senator Laird, want to go ahead and kick us off again?

Thank you very much.

And I appreciated the fact that we had to zoom and I apologize for how quick it was, but it was good.

And let me ask one thing that we talked about there, because the Surgeon General is sort of like a General without a direct army, you are by yourself and so low do you envision the role as a surgeon General without operational direction of a health Department? What's your vision for that roll?

Well, actually I have the partnership of all of our sister agencies and that includes the Department of Healthcare Services, the Public Health Department, all of the local public health organizations as well as the communities themselves, the public health departments.

So all of these together, I want to be able to elevate what the recommendations are, what the policy is, what programs are available and to amplify the work that they're doing to Californians throughout the state.

At the same time, I'm also able to be the voice when I go and I speak locally to various organizations, schools, communities to bring back information on the programs that are working at the local level because we're not able to be successful without the input from the locals as to what programs are working for a specific community and be able to operationalize what the state is wanting to do.

So in many ways you're saying that while you might not have line authority over people, you take information that they have and try to reflect it out and you travel the state and do things and try to reflect what you learn in is that basically it.

So what I'm saying is that I'm a partner.

I'm a partner for all

the sister agencies.

No, I get the partner.

I get the partner.

It's just that you don't haney line authority over the people you're partners with. And so really what I heard you say is it's about information going back and forth that reflecting it to the public, reflecting it into the departments.

It's very similar to what a physician has influence with their patients. You give the information, you give the recommendations and you hope that you're actually helping the patient. So I think if you're going to make the analogy of General without an army, sometimes that's what physicians are put in that situation.

We hope that providing the information to our patients will encourage them to make the best decision for themselves.

And so that's where

And then one thing, maybe for the second question that you sort of mentioned in our meeting, I'm not going to get it right, but you're going to tell us.

It was as if you said it's as if you're talking to one specific patient and sort of telling your mom what the facts are or whatever it is. Do you see that also as your role?

Well, yes. So when I took care of patients, I tried to empower patients by educating them on what the health issues are and providing the information that will help them understand their disease process, understand the consequences of their actions, whether or not they took medication, whether or not they came back for an appointment.

And so by providing that baseline information, the whole spectrum of care and potential consequences, my hope was that they would make that best decision for themselves. And I think that is really what physicians and healthcare providers want to do in general, is really provide the best options for the person that's in front of them.

And California has programs that are allowing us to really provide that support to the entire state through all of the medical programs, through the initiatives that are ranging from mental health investments to initiatives that are expanding the Medi-Cal coverage for one year postpartum after having had a baby to now people who are up to 50 years old that qualify for Medi-Cal.

So the hope is that providing that information for them, they will make the best health care decisions for themselves. And that's what I do. So I do that in Spanish as well. And to be able to provide the messaging in simple terms that folks can understand, that is one of my goals.

Because I can tell you, when I listen to some of the medical segments in Spanish, when I watch television, I oftentimes get confused and I think, wow, the terminology that they're using is very complicated. And I am a simple person, simple mind, and that's the terminology that I want to relay and the messages to the public.

Thank you very much. I appreciate your responsiveness.

Thank you, Senator Laird, madam Vice Chair.

Thank you very much Madam Chair. Welcome. I'm sorry I didn't have time to meet with you. I do just have a couple of questions for you, though.

In January of this year, the court struck down AB 2098, which the Governor signed into law to penalize doctors that what he calls spread disinformation or misinformation about COVID. The court said that the bill violated free speech rights of doctors.

You being appointed to the top doctor position in the state of California as the state's top medical doctor, do you support speech restrictions on medical providers?

I think the information that we need to focus on is that, and you mentioned the bill that was specific to COVID. And this just is something that is much broader just in terms of health information. This is something that the National Surgeon General has actually touched on and that is misinformation.

We want to be able to provide the best and the most accurate information based upon the data and evidence that we have available to us. And that is going to be changing depending upon the situation, depending upon the health condition that we are addressing.

So in terms of supporting free speech, free speech is something that is critically important. But the thing that we have to realize is that oftentimes the information that we provide is based upon the current evidence and the current data that we have. Now that could change. We may find out more information and so that information is going to be changing.

So I think it's critically important to look at the bigger picture and to say, yes, we would love to be able to be the primary source of information. But unfortunately, the limited amount of research that is sometimes available, limits what we can say. So that is something to keep in mind.

I can tell you that as a physician, there are many unknowns. And when patients used to say, well, what is the exact information? And that is unfortunately something that is not always 100% accurate. Medicine is an art. It is not a science. There is no black and white.

And that's the beauty of being a physician, being able to recognize the fact that depending upon your health condition, depending upon your health condition, everything that surrounds you in your environment, the recommendation is going to be very different.

And that's why it's important to have those conversations between the physician and the patient, because we want the conversation to be specific to that person.

Thank you. Thank you for your response.

But do you support speech restrictions by medical professionals or should medical professionals have the ability to have those conversations with their patients and really feel like they have addressed the issue? I'm not a doctor, okay? So I'm just asking you, being the top doctor, you guys take an oath first to do no harm.

So if a doctor says that after seeing this patient, getting the data from this patient, every patient is different, everybody's different.

But if a doctor that you've been seeing for a time period says, I think this is the best treatment going forward, I know it's not what's being said out there in the public on a regular basis, but this is the best path forward for you, regardless of what it is. That's what I'm wanting to know.

You're going to take this top position.

Do you favor, this bill actually restricted doctors from being able to speak what they believed. So do you support restricting medical provider's speech or doctor's speech?

So, I support what is happening inside that exam room. And I don't know. So I wish I could tell you that I knew what was happening inside that exam room, but then that's where the patient's ultimate decision to heed or not to heed that recommendation comes into play.

And we all know that many times patients will go on the internet and they will Google much more information and we don't know the source. And so that's where I think as a top doctor, I can make the recommendations of if you're going to be looking for information on the internet, these are the trusted sites.

And now we're getting a lot of the internet sites actually being vetted. These are the places where you can get accurate information so that you can make the appropriate decision. This is something in general, so for all health decisions.

So that's what I would support is directing the public to be able to go to the trusted sites so that they can make the best decision for themselves after getting the accurate information that they need.

Well, since you responded that way, would you consider providing counseling services from Crisis Pregnancy Sitters, a trusted site? Someone who wants to allow somebody to give them the opportunity to keep the baby that they find themselves pregnant with? Would that be considered a trusted site?

So, that is a very complex question that unfortunately has a lot more, it's not as straightforward to be able to answer. So in terms of.

I don't mean to interrupt you, but to disagree with you. I mean, we're all about giving people information, and so why would you not give them information on both sides of that particular issue as well? I know what side you're on and I know you know what side I'm on.

Why wouldn't we be fair, balanced and give a patient both sides of that information? This is access to reproductive health care. There's an abortion helmet located at this place. If you find yourself in a situation where you want that, we don't want to restrict that care. California is not going to do that. There's a constitutional amendment.

Slow down.

Sorry. I'm sorry. I know I'm your worst enemy. I apologize.

And on the flip side of that, if you have a desire to keep your baby, then you can go to a crisis pregnancy center. I mean, crisis pregnancy centers were required under law to provide issues on abortion services. Do you think that information should be equally given or just one sided? Especially when you just said you're going to direct people to different sites?

So, you can actually go to our website, Office of Surgeon General because reproductive health is one of my areas of focus, and being reproductive health, it looks at the whole life course. So from before becoming pregnant to trying to plan your pregnancy, and for those who have to, as you mentioned, are looking to seek to have an abortion, all of those resources are there.

So if you want to keep the pregnancy, then there is information there for you to be able to obtain prenatal care. If you don't have any medical coverage, Medi-Cal will be available once you are pregnant. So all of that information is there.

So I do support all of the information that is going to help a person who does become pregnant or wants to become pregnant to help them be the healthiest that they can be when that time is right for them.

So absolutely. Providing all of the information across the lifespan is critically important for all patients.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

And I just have one final question. I know we were going to, I have one final question.

You mentioned Medi-Cal patients. I represent a district that is disproportionately affected by Medi-Cal right. We have 67% of our constituents, my constituents are on Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal reimbursement rates haven't been raised since 2000. It is very hard for us to retain providers, meaning doctors and providing surgeons in the Central Valley.

In the Central Valley, we have hospitals closing I believe my colleague, Senator Caballero had Madera Hospital closed. Hazel Hawkins. I know Kaweah Delta is, what, 30 days out, cash flow. We're going to lose 360 beds. It's a huge issue.

Do you see a solution from a doctor's perspective? You have to get paid for the patients you see, as a doctor, you need to do that.

If you have a negative balance reimbursement rate, do you see a solution on trying to fix that piece of our medical or coverage? Because it is something that's destroying our healthcare system. And I'm just curious about your thoughts.

Yeah so Grove you just described something that is very complex, that is more than just the care in the hospital. That is more than just the care that's given by the prenatal care provider. It's care that really should be there, and it is there for many before they even become pregnant. So that it is lifeline.

I apologize, ma'am. I'm not talking about just abortion or pregnancy care. I'm talking about heart attack care, stroke care, just general access to health care. We're losing hospitals. And what I'm hearing is and providers, and I'm hearing that it's because of the medical reimbursement rate. I believe doctors should be compensated for the work that they do, regardless of the care that's provided.

So do you see a solution, as the top doctor in the state of California, about trying to figure out how to fix this piece of our medical system where doctors are adequately reimbursed for treating? We passed a law that says healthcare for all, Medi-Cal for all, and we've expanded our coverage and access, but the reimbursement is not there, and it's costing us. They're going bankrupt.

It's not a business plan. You can't cost somebody a dollar to treat and get reimbursed $0.50. It's a bankruptcy plan. So I guess my question is that do you have thoughts on that? In all Health Care. Not just reproductive care, but all health care? Yeah.

Yeah. My thought is that this, requires a systemic change.

Okay.

And this is something that is outside of my scope, and really it is something more that is under the Department of Healthcare Services. And what you described is very real. And I can really empathize with the shortages and the lack of care that is happening. But it really is more than just the reimbursement to the physician. It really is broader in terms of a systemic change of how we are going to be prioritizing prevention.

And I think our focus while we're trying to identify the solution for the reimbursement should be on prevention and really focusing on the programs that we do have in California right now that are focusing on prevention.

The CalAIM, which is the Medi-Cal reimagining it and really changing the structure and the reimbursement for really providing equitable care, providing more whole person care is one of those ways that we're moving towards that.

But before we get to that final outcome, we really need to focus and promote the prevention health that is out there. And that's where my office, that's where my voice can help elevate the programs that are available and can focus on the prevention.

If we prevent disease, we can hopefully slow down and mitigate all of the chronic conditions that lead people to be hospitalized to seek more health care because they're not being cared for throughout the time. So prevention is one area where we have funding right now, where we have programs that we can elevate and I can help elevate.

And more importantly, while the CalAIM is being implemented and other solutions are being looked into, hopefully all of this together, we will get to a position where it would be more equitable for everyone.

Thank you. Thank you very much for using your position to be able to do that preemptive care. So I appreciate that. Thank you, ma'am, for answering my questions.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. I'm going to go ahead to Senator Smallwood-Cuevas because I know this Senator said she defers her questions to Senator Grove.

Well, here we go.

I want to make sure nobody thinks I'm overlooking our good Senator.

Sure. Well, I just want to say congratulations, and I appreciated your thorough responses and the questionnaire. I really have no additional questions for you. I'm excited that you're here before us and I look forward to the confirmation.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Senator.

I think the one question that I would have, and let me just say I appreciate your focus on women's reproductive health very much and your experience in that arena.

The question I have really has to do with your being the second California Surgeon General was that your predecessor was an expert, renowned expert in the subject of ACEs. And I understood from some of the information we got from you that this is an area you want to continue to focus on. So I thought maybe I would ask you to take a minute and make comments on that.

Sure. Thank you for the opportunity to highlight so as you mentioned, the adverse childhood experiences or ACEs.

Thank you for doing that. I just realized I said ACE and I should have said it. Thank you, Doctor.

Yeah. Is an area that was codified into the position. And so as I was reading up on it and studying, I realized, wow, this is an upstream opportunity for us to improve the health care of California throughout every age group.

And by that I mean that if we address the adverse childhood experiences which fall into three category of abuse, neglect, some type of disruption on the household, whether it is incarceration, whether it's divorce, whether it's separation, if we address this by the time, before a child is 18 years old, we have the opportunity to decrease mental health disorders by 44%.

Now, we are all hearing the intense impact of mental health disorders that COVID has really pulled the curtain on for all of us. And if we can decrease it by 44% by just addressing those adverse childhood experiences, that's fantastic. We can also decrease substance abuse by 33%, smoking by 24% just by addressing those adverse childhood experiences.

And so when, I was thinking about it and trying to analyze, well, why is it? Well, if we stop to think about it, if we have negative experiences when we're young, what do we try to do? We try to self medicate, right? And that could be by using drugs, that could be by smoking, drinking alcohol.

And that just leads you on the whole cascade of a negative life trajectory in terms of health. But if we address this early on, we have an opportunity to mitigate that. So my office is continuing the work that was started by the first Surgeon General. And in particular, we're participating in the Children Youth Behavioral Health Initiative.

We have two big projects that we're focusing on. One is developing a curriculum for teachers that is going to help inform them of what impact these traumatic experiences can have on a child from zero to 12th grade.

And that's really important to think about because we know that there can be mental brain changes, learning disabilities can all be impacted by negative adverse childhood experiences. So we're working on that.

And the other is a statewide campaign specifically focusing on the LGBTQ+, rural communities, African American, Hispanic, American Indian, the people that are oftentimes, the communities oftentimes overlooked to educate them on what are adverse childhood experiences and what can you do and how can it impact you.

Because we know that if adverse childhood experiences continue on, like I said, you can have mental health disorders. But more importantly to realize is that 50% of children will be diagnosed with a mental health disorder by age 14.

So if we can mitigate that early on, we are setting ourselves, for a healthier community. 75% of mental health disorders are diagnosed by the age of 24 years old. So this Children Youth Behavioral Health Initiative is fantastic because it reaches all the way up to age 25.

So my office is really thrilled to be partnering with all of the other partners on the Children Youth Behavioral Health Initiative in bringing awareness of what we can do to address these adverse childhood experiences in terms of helping not only healthcare providers, but social workers.

We're working with UCLA and UCSF through an organization called UCAAN and they have developed an adverse childhood, and ACEs aware curriculum that you can get certified to be able to screen.

So in terms of reimbursement if a healthcare provider and you don't have to be a pediatrician, you can be an internal medicine, social worker, nurse practitioner, screens for adverse childhood experiences, you can bill Medi-Cal for $29.

So really getting compensated for the work screening that is being done so that we can identify early on the needs and help mitigate and put our kids in a more positive, lifelong health trajectory.

Well, thank you for that. I appreciate your tying in the Children's Behavioral Health Initiative. That is an incredible thing that the Administration really brought forward, and the integration of all of this is important. So it was good to hear your perspective on that.

Yes. Vice Chair.

Thank you. Just a clarification.

You said UCAAN. I'd like to look at that.

Is it Y-O-U can or U can?

It's U-C-A-A-N. I apologize.

That's okay.

Yes

Thank you very much.

Very good. Thank you.

With that, we're going to go ahead and go to Members of the public, and we are going to start here again in room 2200. But it occurs to me I should ask staff to put up the toll free number, again for those that might want to call in. 877-226-8163. And that access code is 736-2834. And with that, welcome name, organization, if any, and your support position.

Got it. Ryan Spencer on behalf of the California Medical Association and the American College of OBGYN's, District 9, in strong support of Dr. Ramos. Thank you.

Thank you. Next witness. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Michelle Gibbons with the County Health Executives Association, representing local health departments across California in support.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Rebecca Alcantar with Altamid Health Services, the largest HQC in California, in strong support of Dr. Ramos. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Others in support? Okay, let me stay here in room 2200. Anyone in opposition? Anyone in opposition? Okay, seeing none, we're going to go back to our moderator and welcome him back. And we will be taking anyone in who wishes to speak via teleconference in support or opposition. And individuals will need to give their name, their organization, if any, they represent, and their position of support or opposition only. No further comments beyond that.

Mr. Moderator. Welcome back.

Of course, our first one comes from line 42. Please go ahead.

Hi, there. My name is Nicole. I'm from Placer county. I've been a nurse for 28 years. I'm a mom of three, a grandmother of two. I am currently in the healthcare field, and I stand in strong opposition to this candidate.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Next one comes from line 43. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon. Andrea Rivera with the California Pan Ethnic Health Network in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Next one is line 44. Please go ahead.

Yes, hi. This is, can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you. Go ahead.

Great. My name is Shereena. I'm calling from Placer County. I'm a mother of three, a child with learning disabilities and mental illness, and I was allowed

Ma'am, you're breaking up. Okay, I got that you're in opposition. Thank you so much. Next witness.

Our next one is line 45. Please go ahead.

Yep

Yes. My name is Linda Becker. I'm in Placer County. I am strongly opposed to Diane Ramos. I feel she's done crimes against humanity.

Thank you, ma'am, we've got your position of opposition. Thank you so much for calling. Next witness.

The next one is line 22. Please go ahead. 22, your line is open. We will then move on to line 36. Please go ahead.

Hi. Am I line 36? The phones have been complicated.

Yes. Thank you. We've got you. Go ahead. Give us your name organization. Go ahead.

So support or opposition? Support

Great. Well, my name is Andrea Hedstrom, and my organization is I don't have one because government is about people, not special interests,

We oppose that she supports the shot. We oppose all of this, the charade.

Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. In opposition, I have you recorded. Next witness, please.

Our next one is line 11. Please go ahead.

Buenas tardes, chair and esteemed members. My name is Seciah Aquino, and I serve as Executive Director at the Latino Coalition for Healthy California. We strongly support [inaudible] and her historic appointment.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Our next one is line 21. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon. My name is Wenonah Valentine. I am Executive Director of iDREAM for Racial Health Equity, and I strongly support Dr. Diana Ramos.

Thank you so much. Next witness, please.

Our next one is line 32. Please go ahead.

Yes, I'm Dr. Elena Rios, President of the National Hispanic Medical Association. We strongly support and very proud of Dr. Diana Ramos.

Thank you very much. Next witness, please.

The next one is line 51. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Tia am the mother of three special needs kids, and I strongly oppose this nomination.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Our next one is line 46. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Rachel Catan, Member of Stand Up Sacramento County and Attendance USED for Freedom. And I strongly oppose this candidate.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Our next one comes from line 27. Please go ahead.

You know what, we shouldn't need to register our opposition.

Next. Mr. Moderator next witness, please.

Someone has queued up one moment while they're giving their line number.

Our next one comes from line 52. Please go ahead.

Hello. This is Michael Joseph with who owns your body Jones, does it who own your body. If you own your body, then that makes you a slave organization. And I don't support this candidate or any other anti-freedom type person. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Other witnesses, Mr. Moderator?

Of course. We do have one from line 45. Please go ahead.

Yes, I just want you to know, I oppose this and I live in Placer County. I oppose this candidate completely. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Next witness.

There are currently no more in the queue.

Mr. Moderator, thank you so much. We will be back with you a little later in our hearing. We so appreciate your help. Okay, let me bring it back to Members of the Committee for a motion. Okay. That is a motion from Senator Smallwood-Cuevas and Madam Secretary, call the roll.

Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogh? Not voting. Ochoa Bogh, not voting. Smallwood-Cuavas? Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas aye. Grove? Not voting. Grove, not voting. Atkins? Aye. Atkins, aye. Three to zero.

So that is three to zero. We will move your confirmation on to the full Senate for confirmation, actually, and thank you for your time today. We appreciate your thoughtful responses and your patience. Thank you.

Best of luck. You we're going to take, we're going to take five minutes, and we will be right back for the last panel. And let me just say to Dr. Lugo, thank you so much for your patience. We'll have you have an opportunity to get ready to be up next. We'll be back in a few minutes.

Okay. Let me give everyone a heads up that we will start again.

Okay. Thank you, everyone. We will continue, now, to our final appointment for today. That would be item 1C and the appointment of Adonia E. Lugo. Excuse me, Dr. Adonia Lugo, as member of the Transportation Commission -- let me welcome you and thank you for your patience. I'm going to invite you to do the same as the others before us today. Feel free to introduce yourself, acknowledge anyone that you would like, make opening comments. Then we'll go right to the committee for comments and questions. And with that, welcome.

Thank you so much, Chair Atkins. Just one correction there -- Adonia. I think I didn't manage to get the phonetic spelling just right. Staff did reach out for that, so I feel like I didn't write it out quite right. Adonia Lugo.

I think it's me. It's always me.

Well, with a name like mine, you're accustomed to communicating the correct pronunciation a few times, so no worries at all.

I'll just call you doctor.

That works.

Dr. Lugo.

Okay.

Thank you.

Well, I appreciate all the committee members taking the time to engage with me over the past few months around some of your questions, and inviting me here, today, to be part of your process. I am following in the wake of, I think, some remarkable appointees today, and so I won't take up any more of our time with preamble about me, except to say I'm an anthropologist. And I feel like anthropologists don't often end up in these kinds of roles. So that's a little exciting for me. And I'm very appreciative to my husband, Ben, for staying with our two-year old daughter, Josie, at home in LA today, so I could be here.

Wonderful. Well, I'm going to go ahead and start on the other side of the dais for this appointment -- and Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and good to see you again, Dr. Lugo. I really enjoyed our conversation yesterday and seeing your little one at home, during our discussion. One of the things I really appreciate is your emphasis and area of discipline around equity and ways to apply that, and particularly in this framework of transportation. It's an intersectionality, in terms of race and class and transit access, that is very important to my constituents. And we talked a little bit about this, and so I want to sort of bring it back up again, because Caltrans is one of those agencies that has so much impact, but also resource rich. And it's also one of those agencies that my constituents feel they don't have sufficient representation in. And I cannot tell you how many times I have gotten calls looking at highway projects, roadway projects -- and saying, "I don't see anyone who looks like me, as a woman who looks like me, as an African American," on these projects.

And so I want us to sort of, kind of explore a little bit about the ways in which Caltrans -- when a project is presented to the CTC for funding, just how do you really ensure that those resources get to underserved communities? Oftentimes there's this, right, this mismatch in terms of jobs, good jobs, and in terms of minority-owned, women-owned businesses. So I'd like to hear about -- what do you think are the checks and balances around that and what kind of mechanisms of enforcement do you think the CTC can employ to ensure that the money is going where it should be, and particularly in an equitable way?

Yeah. Thank you, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, for that question and for just your general awareness that there is a need for accountability and evaluation within the processes we have, to ensure that resources are going to where we say we would like them to go. And a couple of things here. One is: at the Transportation Commission, we don't have a role, in terms of deciding who Caltrans contracts with. However, our meetings, where we make allocations of funding and approve spending are open to the public. Every item that we vote on is something -- just as you all are way more familiar with, than me -- something where public comment is welcome.

And so I wonder if there might be an opportunity for more engagement within the CTC meeting space, around these issues, when it comes to the commission approving Caltrans-funded projects. So that's one avenue. Another avenue that is important and that I'm still learning about is: the funding that comes into Caltrans through the Federal Highways Administration is something that we hear about at every commission meeting from our liaison with FHWA. And I think that there is questioning that commissioners can bring into that meeting space to ask how FHWA is evaluating outcomes for the funding that they're sending to Caltrans.

Are programs that are oriented toward equity meeting their goals? Are they seeing, not just contracts signed, but actually the work happening in the ways that they're supposed to? So that's something I can be bringing up in future CTC meetings when we hear from our Federal Highways Administration liaison. And then another area of, I think, really good opportunity that is opening up, just starting this month is: there was an Interagency Transportation Equity Advisory Council that was established this fall, that is going to be offering some advice and joint meeting with the CTC and Caltrans. And CalSTA, the state transportation agency. And CTC, as a commissioner on the Transportation Commission -- I'm learning that there are parameters, there are boundaries to how we relate to Caltrans.

And for the new members of our EAC, I think there's an opportunity to provide some direction and point to ways that work across the agencies could be happening. So, for example, if the Interagency Equity Advisory Committee decides that focus on DBE programs, or things of that nature, should be a priority, then I think that they can be kind of bringing it into the wheelhouse of the CTC more. I also think that it's clear that the CTC's authority really comes from legislators, such as yourselves. And so I think there is a fair amount of -- if there should be more of a focus on a particular issue area, then having that made into statute would be a way to bring focus in. So I think there's a number of avenues to be working on, bringing this important issue into the space of the CTC more, and I hope to be in support of that work.

I really appreciate that because one of the things that I've seen, in working in communities that have been advocating, and particularly building workforce around public transit projects, is the bottom-up approach. And really, I appreciated our discussion around grassroots activism and the ways of bringing those networks of organization and expertise to the table to help inform the decisions that need to be made.

And I'm curious about how the CTC and you, personally, form those kinds of partnerships that represent such a broad spectrum of folks who are most impacted and also on the ground with these issues, every day, and bringing them into the world of transportation, where they can have some influence on priorities and decision making. And when you talk a little bit about your response -- I want to go back to the transparency, too -- because, in some of these partnerships, what has come out is the need to actually invest in embedded personnel, in contracts that can actually be on the ground in monitoring and evaluating the inclusion of communities into these projects.

And so, share with me the approach to how you think the CTC can build these kinds of partnerships that help increase transparency and the outcomes, collective outcomes for community. And please share your personal experience with building those kinds of partnerships.

Yeah, I guess to start with personal experience. So my background, as a researcher in cultural anthropology, has focused on learning about lived experiences of transportation, that maybe aren't making their way into the transportation planning and policy process. So my entry point was bicycles. Studying bicycling in Los Angeles -- kind of an unusual thing. LA is known as this car culture capital. And in 2008, when I was developing my dissertation project as a student at UC Irvine -- I was also a bike commuter -- and I started to notice that the people who I was seeing, out using bicycles, could kind of fall into two rough categories. One was people like myself who were saying, "Oh, I care about the climate and I need exercise, so I'm going to ride a bicycle." And I had choices, I could get around in other ways.

And then there was this other group of people who were riding bicycles because it's a cheap way to get around. And what I was curious about, looking, again, at culture, was, what do we think about people who ride bicycles? And what can we do to, maybe, change the perception of who's riding bikes and why they're doing it? Because I could see that in Southern California, where I was born and raised and where I was doing my dissertation work, we have, in terms of weather, this great landscape for active transportation. But in terms of culture, we tend to look down on getting around outside of a car. That's just the reality of it. And so even though we have, in Los Angeles, a very extensive transit network and all these people who are getting around walking and biking, the city didn't really think of itself as a capital for those kinds of transportation.

And so I was just curious: why is that? And the answers that I learned over the years led me away from looking at bicycles, specifically, and thinking more broadly about mobility and how our modes of transportation are symbolic, right? The way that we travel sends other messages about how we're doing in life. How successful are you? Are you making enough that you can, really, drive a nice car? Or, that kind of messaging happens in bicycling, too. Are you riding a really nice bike? Are, you riding a kind of beater bike. And I was just really fascinated to learn that many of the organizations that do advocacy around sustainable transportation, were tending to choose messaging that had to do with raising the profile of people who were riding bikes or walking or using public transit, who had other options.

And wanting to make these into modes of choice, as opposed to coming from a place of saying, "There's all these people who can't afford to participate in car culture and we should be making the ways that they get around easier because they're also people and they're dealing with a lot of struggle and poverty and things going on in their lives."

And so, seeing that contrast led me to, you know, not only be a part of groups that were advocating for, you know, biking, walking, all that sustainable transportation stuff, but also to help form groups of people who were excited about promoting those ways of getting around -- but were also concerned about what felt like exclusion, of different communities and a diversity of people, in the social movements for promoting sustainable transportation. So I guess what I'm saying is: the work that I've done for the past 15 years has tended to be both -- given me access to a lot of different grassroots organizations focused on transportation.

But I've also helped to start a number of projects related to promoting sustainable transportation in Los Angeles and some national networks. So I feel, on a personal level, I have privileged access to groups and leaders who have a clear insight into what's happening on the ground, that might not be making its way up into the process. For the commission -- so this Interagency Equity Advisory Committee, or EAC, that was established in the fall, was the product of a several years long process of doing listening sessions where CTC and Caltrans, and I believe CalSTA as well, had been hosting -- mostly on Zoom because of the times -- opportunities for community members, in different parts of the state, to share what transportation challenges they were facing.

And so our staff did a tremendous amount of relationship building, through that process, in terms of working with organizations in different regions to facilitate those listening sessions and then, of course, getting to hear from the people who came and told their stories. And so, that fed into the process of recruiting applicants for the EAC. So the way I see it, the commission is in an unprecedented position to be moving forward around equity, in partnership with a lot of folks around the state, who are on the front lines of seeing how transportation and sustainable transportation need to be rolling out, bringing everyone along.

So just to be sure I'm getting the answer to the question: how will you ensure that their voices are heard in that process?

Well as a commissioner, I'm very interested in elevating both the perspectives that I'm aware of because of my own work as a participant in transportation advocacy in the past and as a researcher in transportation -- and I also have been working with commission staff, who are facilitating this EAC, and also learning what we can do to be advocating for more of a focus on equity at Caltrans. I also try to make an effort, when we are meeting as a commission, to bring up ways that equity might be relevant to agenda items, where that isn't something that's being highlighted, and then requesting further information from staff.

But I do think there is -- something I would love to take on is: creating more spaces where members of the public can interface with the CTC annual process and cycle. Because as a commission, we are constantly running calls for applications from different agencies for transportation projects, according to a whole bunch of different categories. Then we also update guidelines for those funding programs, on a regular basis. And it's a lot of information for me, as someone who got the privilege of getting onboarded as a commissioner when I was appointed last spring.

For members of the public, I think it is a very daunting task to really be able to engage with the work that the commission is doing. And I think that there's a really good opportunity, especially with the kind of digital communications technology we have at our fingertips now, to be just creating more meeting spaces, or info sessions, where people can come in and learn what it is CTC does and where there are opportunities for the region where they live, or the way that they're impacted by transportation, to come into our process a little more.

I appreciate that and certainly there could be a lot of opportunities and information, but if folks aren't able to access it and process it and engage with it, particularly through partnerships with credible organizations that they know and trust, it's as if that information didn't exist. So I appreciate your innovative thoughts around how we actually bridge that divide. And looking at the other members of the commission, you are the only one that has a background in equity. And I think we -- going beyond sort of the knowledge and the research -- how do we actually make sure that we're seeing the action, that we're seeing the implementation? And I mean that we can no longer approve projects that doesn't have equity and does not have an evaluation measurement embedded in it, so that all communities can participate in the opportunities that come with our transit.

And there are a lot of lessons learned on that and looking forward to working with you, in any capacity, to ensure that we institutionalize and operationalize equity in this space, particularly as we see the infrastructure resources coming in from the federal government, all of the climate change investments that are also going to be coming in, into this arena of transportation. We want to make sure those folks who are hardest hit and underserved and disinvested in have an opportunity to participate. So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Hello, Dr. Lugo. Pleasure to see you once again. And thank you so much for your time with our Zoom meeting. We really appreciated our conversations. I just want to recap some of the questions, or the discussions, that we had while we were together, earlier this week, with regards to understanding the fact that California is very diverse in its needs, based on the topography, the demographics, and so forth. So in your role on the commission thus far, what have been the efforts that you've made to learn more about the distinct and unique needs of the different parts of California, and how that impacts the need for the type and the quantity infrastructure in different capacities?

Yeah, I did very much appreciate you taking the time to meet with me, Senator, given the impacts in your district right now, related to weather. So thank you for that. And I was really glad to see that those students who were stranded up at the science camps made it down safely. So, good news. Yes. So in my time on the commission, so far, I definitely have learned from commission staff that there is a lot of attention given to making sure that our programs are implemented in a way that is not one-size-fits-all, given the diversity within the state, different regions having different needs for infrastructure.

And what I've seen is: there has -- is -- a lot of work that the staff does on the back end to partner with agencies or groups of agencies who are applying for project funding, to provide technical assistance so that they're able to make their applications successful. So I feel confident that there is a good understanding within the commission's operations around the diversity of our state.

And some of the stuff that you brought up in our conversation, earlier this week, highlighted the complex ecosystem of transportation in our state, where we have people who maybe are looking for affordable opportunities to own homes and they're finding those far from where they're finding opportunities to work. Right? And so I think these kinds of challenges both speak to the need for a coordinated approach, right -- makes sense that we're trying to figure this stuff at a state level -- but at the same time, it speaks to the different needs that regions might have, based on who's providing housing, who's providing jobs. And I know that there is a lot of attention going to economic development and the growth of new industries, or industries that have been expanding because of the pandemic, such as shipping and inland ports and things like that.

So I, as a commissioner, have seen a lot of good work, on the part of the commission staff, to accommodate that diversity. And I also have seen, in commission meetings, many agency staff take advantage of the opportunity to come and provide public comment and participate in meetings with commissioners. And I'm very interested in outreach from local or regional agencies who want to share their perspective. So, you told me you were going to get people reaching out. I look forward to that. It has been easier to meet with groups that either have the staff, to be proactive in that way, or whatnot -- like I mentioned, the Central Coast Coalition as an example. But I think that, given the differences across regions in the state, it'll be great to be hearing from groups in the Inland Empire as well.

Thank you so much for that. And I will be reaching out for sure. There was another question with regards to -- something that I think it's mostly a comment for me -- but perhaps, you're more than welcome to give any feedback. But I've also been aware that, due to some of the funding that's been allocated for infrastructure, sometimes does not meet the needs of the topography for the Inland Empire, meaning, of course, we talked about earlier the unique needs for the Inland Empire, which is exponentially growing.

But some of the grant funding that comes for transportation caters to high density areas, which the Inland Empire is not necessarily uniquely designed in that manner, at this point. And so they're at a disadvantage for receiving some of this grant funding for infrastructure. So something that I just want to plant in your heart, is to kind of look into that grant funding and how it actually disproportionately impacts the Inland Empire, because it's not suited to meet the needs of that particular grant funding that has to do with infrastructure. So if you could please look into that and see if that allocation formula, requirements for grant funding, can accommodate all types of needs and communities within our state. That would also be incredibly helpful on your part. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Madam Vice Chair?

Thank you. I am very intrigued by you. I am sitting here going, "I regret not taking that appointment yesterday," and I wish I would have canceled something else to make time, to spend time with you. I don't know. I don't have a college degree. I don't have any of that stuff. But I feel like I have an ability to, I don't know, listen to someone's heart and listen to their comments and kind of perceive where they're going. And I'm very intrigued by you, in a very positive way. I have a lot of people that sit before me on this committee and they have a desired outcome, either by leadership, or whatever, that they need to achieve.

And then I feel like they want to adjust or not answer questions, or whatever, based on trying to achieve that outcome, that may not be factually available to do. But listening to what you just responded to with my two colleagues, I really feel, number one: you know your stuff. It's totally inappropriate question, but did you graduate from high school when you were six? You're very smart. I mean, you know your stuff. And I think that you really would look at the information presented. I mean, just your bicycle scenario, right? You would really look at, and do a deep dive -- that takes a lot of patience and a lot of thoughtfulness and thinking outside the box and not just one way -- and you would do a deep dive and really solve a problem, even if it didn't meet the narrative that's out there.

She forewarned you she was an anthropologist. I just want to-

-Yeah, you did. Okay. I had to google it.

Nobody knows, right? Dinosaurs?

Yeah. I'm like, what?

It means I get to wear colorful clothes when appearing in front of formal bodies such as this. That's what being an anthropologist is.

Obviously, like I said, I think that you would be able to look at a situation or look at -- whether it's transportation, whether it's oil and gas, whether it's bicycles in the street of Los Angeles, whether it's the perception of someone on a bicycle being poor and not rich, or whatever -- I think you would look at that and you could actually do a deep dive and provide factual information that gives you a real result that's truthful, and not a desired outcome that you pre-perceive to be true. Does that make sense?

It does, and that would be my goal, absolutely. I think that within the field of transportation, all the experts and all the practitioners are people. Right. And what I've learned through my research is, as people, we hold our beliefs dear, and sometimes that ends up shaping the kinds of expert knowledge and facts that we produce. And I think that when we're up against the kinds of challenges we are, like what we have in our state and with climate change and the legacy of not living up to the promise of our representative democracy and all that, I do make an effort to-

-And this is something I've had to learn with practice, as part of the training of being an anthropologist -- trying to ensure that my views, which are there, are not the thing that I'm trying to advance -- what I'm trying to advance is collective understanding. From my standpoint, including more people's experiences and perspectives and diverse views is a scientific project. The more data, the more kinds of data that we have to take into account, the more reliable outcomes we're going to get. And I think that transportation has been a fascinating field in which to do that kind of work. But I appreciate -- yes, that would be my goal, to be able to participate in this space, coming from that kind of, I don't know what you want to call it, scholarly or idealistic scientific approach.

I would like to request a meeting with you, even though we didn't have it before the confirmation hearing. If you would grant me that, I would really appreciate it.

Absolutely. I would very much welcome that.

Thank you. I had an abstain on this, but I'm going to support you because I think you're somebody that's going to really do the right thing based on science and data that affects all cultures and all communities, whether they're here or abroad, or whether they're black, brown, yellow, white, it doesn't matter. I think that you'll do the right thing for society and for whatever's making me think that, I have no idea. But I'm very intrigued by you. So thank you for being here today.

I can't believe they're only going to pay you $100 per meeting. Your brain is worth more than that. But maybe we could do something about that, too.

Thank you.

I think the Vice Chair is now turning to you to go next, Senator Laird.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I don't think you understand what a momentous moment just happened here. So appreciate it. And when you're in your study of the development behavior of humans, we'll probably all want to get your download about Caltrans and that will be a fun moment. My colleagues covered most things and I have one. And I apologize for not being able to meet with you, but I know this came up in the staff meeting. And it has to do with, in essence, disaster funding or, what happens with the transportation system in disasters. Because in the nine atmospheric rivers, we had amazing series of things.

And part of it is that some of the places in my home county and, of course, Big Sur that flooded and really disrupted the transportation system, was because we had bridges and roads that were designed in another climate. And in particular, in my hometown, when we had the 100-year storm -- and I was just on the city council decades ago -- we lifted all the bridges, and so they arc over the river. Because in that storm, we had 75-foot redwood trees battered down our main bridge in town, and so we did that.

But what didn't -- Caltrans did not lift the Highway 1 bridge -- that is the first bridge the river hits when it hits town. And it was closed for two days in the first or second storm, while they took all the debris out. And then in the next storms, the debris reaccumulated and the neighborhood flooded there. And it is really -- now it weighs. So in the transportation funding system, if you want to upgrade a bridge for safety, you have to not do a highway widening somewhere. It competes against existing things. And we are going to have more and more and more of this, whether it's Highway 37 and across the North San Francisco Bay, which is going to take a billion and a half, if it's going to be saved, and there are other places. So have you given any thought, as a member of the Transportation Commission, about how you'll integrate, sort of, the needs that are coming from the changing climate into how we develop transportation?

Yeah, well, I appreciate the insight from your district. And my best friend happens to live in Felton, and so her family was evacuated due to the wildfires in 2020 and then almost evacuated last month, due to flooding. And so I've gotten to witness through their experience-

-Your friend is very lucky because there was at least one neighborhood that was completely destroyed, in that area, in the floods.

Yeah, you're on the front lines and you're representing people who are losing their homes. And I think that what we've seen at the commission, just the evidence around the way that our transportation system needs to be resilient, both when disasters are occurring and people need to be able to move quickly. But also, as you're saying, proactively planning for the changes in the existing environment, that's something that has come up frequently. I was part of the process of doing some emergency decision making around the railroad tracks down south of where I grew up in Orange County, down in the San Clemente area, which are on shoreline that is being eroded.

And so multiple times in the last few years, they've had to close down those railroads. And so I got to witness, through the commission, what it looked like to do an emergency allocation and authorize. But this very topic came up among the commissioners. What can we do to plan in advance? Why aren't we working now to make the changes that are going to make our infrastructure more resilient, instead of having to do this emergency response kind of thing? We are thinking about it and we're talking about it. And I think that on the optimistic side, I feel like there are plenty of jobs that are going to be involved in needing to make the upgrades and the changes to infrastructure in our existing system.

But in addition to disaster resilience and being able to move people quickly when needed, the -- something that strikes close to home for me, having grown up in San Juan Capistrano, right near PCH -- there's this routine thing of people being killed crossing that highway. It's just a part of life down there. And years ago, I got onto -- you meet some interesting people in the bicycle world. That's one thing that's kept me in transportation, is I meet a lot of very fun personalities, but one of these personalities years ago-

-That's another place where I wouldn't mind hearing your anthropological-

Yeah, right? Yeah, we can talk about that in another venue. But some local advocate in Laguna Beach started including me, years ago in -- you could call them rants or you could call them information updates -- around what's happening with bicycling in his city. And every so often I get an email that's about somebody being killed on PCH, a bicyclist or a pedestrian. And for us to just accept this as the state of normal on our state highway system is, I think, regrettable.

I know the hour is late, so let me thank you for your answer and say the important thing was putting it on your radar screen so that you're ready. And I know that some of my colleagues were asking questions before it got here, about equity. And if you look at where the neighborhoods were flooded, it was a mobile home park. It was a childcare center. It was an affordable housing, multi-unit project. It was a real equity issue about who was taking the hit when these bridges weren't dealt with. And so it's not just climate, but it is equity as well. And so, I just would hope in the discussions, you'll just note the concern from here and make sure that you reflect it into that. And so I thank you for your willingness to serve for $100 a meeting, and I look forward to supporting you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Well, there's a lesson in that statement, from both the vice chair and Senator Laird, in terms of the extent of work that you contribute. I mean, we have an appointment to the CTC. She also has a commitment to equity and any number of things. But I think I agree with my colleagues, the amount of work that you do to serve -- and the CTC is a highly sought after appointment, actually, when you consider the amount of work. But it really is about, also, setting guidelines and the way that money is allocated across the state. And all these issues, whether we're talking active transportation, various mobility issues, and every part of the state is really different.

And so when you talk about PC Highway and San Juan Capistrano, versus various parts, you become an expert, if you're able to be on CTC enough to kind of -- and you've been there since April, but obviously you've come with some real experience and desire to do this work. I will say I might have one question -- because the colleagues have asked a lot of questions and I don't need a response, but I will emphasize what I've heard from years, related to Caltrans and funding and transportation funding, as it relates to contracting, procurement and diversity.

Women, small businesses, women, other protected classes who don't have access to be able to compete for some of this work. So I'm glad that that's important. The one question I might have related to that is: local agencies that may not have the capacity when crafting programs or responding to the ATP process, the application process, being burdensome and costly. And so when you have agencies at the local level, who aren't able to participate because they just don't have the wherewithal or capacity, do you feel maybe it is -- now the CTC considers the local agency capacity when crafting those program guidelines? That was one question that I was asked to consider.

That's a great question. I think that I would have to consult with commission staff to get a more detailed answer. But what I do know is, they really treat the application process as a kind of technical assistance opportunity, and they work with applicants who maybe aren't successful one year, to get the project ready for future years. So I know there's attention to what kind of capacity or previous experience a local agency might be bringing in, but I can definitely follow up to get some more specifics around -- what do we do to ensure that local agencies who don't have that capacity are still able to be competitive.

I appreciate that. I think if we've heard it a few times from agencies, then there needs to be some focus and attention to -- what do we do to help them be able to compete for these very precious dollars. Lastly, I would just say, again, twice today, this will be the second time I have said, that this administration has been really good about changing kind of the construct -- and I'm looking at ... as I say this to carry the message back -- of what a board looks like. And I think there has been, in terms of different ways of thinking, and let me just be -- in age and ability to broaden the diversity in different ways, including more youthful and a different approach to transportation.

Which is why I think you're getting some of the comments that you're getting, from Dr. Lugo, which is: we're looking at transportation differently and this administration has brought on new voices and new thoughts, which is making the whole of CTC operate differently. So I appreciate that. And I think all of the comments my colleagues have made about really putting on your radar screen some of the things we hear will be received in the way that we intend it, which is help us -- hear us, help us do a better job by all of our constituents. So I appreciate that. This has been an enjoyable conversation. I agree with the vice chair.

We're going to go ahead and go to members of the public. And let me start right here in Room 2200 with folks who wish to speak in support. How do you know I was going to say support? I might have started with -- no, I'm kidding. Come back. Yes. I wasn't going to call him out by name.

No, I think he's done a blog about support lines and the history of them and what's happened. Yeah.

Our court reporter is going to kill me after this, for not better controlling ourselves and talking over each other. But okay. In support -- name, organization, if any, and position of support. Welcome.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Chris McKaley on behalf of the Los Angeles County Transportation Authority. And just one quick remark: that we see Dr. Lugo's deep commitment to transit expansion, with particular concern for our transit-dependent residents, and the impacts of environmental justice on those modes of transportation. We urge your support, Madam pro Tem. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam pro Tem. Todd Bloomstein, representing the Southern California Contractors Association in support of Dr. Lugo's confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you. Hi. Welcome.

Sofia Rafikova with the Coalition for Clean Air in strong support.

Thank you very much. Others in support? Okay, we're going to go ahead -- anyone here in opposition? Okay. Mr. Moderator, welcome back. Let me welcome you back and ask you to tee up those who wish to speak in support or opposition?

Of course. Ladies and gentlemen, once again, if you wish to queue up, please press 1-0.

There are currently none in the queue.

Okay, thank you very much. And Madam Vice Chair has gone on the mic quickly, do you wish to make a motion, or-

-Absolutely make a motion to have Ms. Adonia Lugo -- Dr. Adonia, yes -- confirmed.

Thank you. Okay, Madam Secretary, please call the role.

Laird. Aye. Ochoa Bogh. Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas. Aye. Grove. Aye. Atkins. Aye. 5-0.

5-0. Congratulations. We thank you for your conversation today. Mr. Moderator, if you're still listening, I forgot to thank you. Thank you so much for your help today. We will forward this on to the full Senate for confirmation. And again, we thank you for the conversation today.

Thank you so much.

Congratulations. Okay, this concludes our agenda today. I want to thank my colleagues for the thoughtful questions and the work today. I also want to thank all the individuals who participated in public testimony. If you were not able to testify today, please submit your comments or suggestions, in writing, to the Rules Committee, or visit our website for instructions. Your comments and suggestions really are important to us, and we want to include that testimony in our official hearing records. So thank you to everyone, for your patience and cooperation. Our Senate Committee on Rules is now adjourned.