Senate Standing Committee on Rules

Okay, the Senate Committee on Rules will come to order. Good afternoon, everyone. And we in the Senate continue to welcome the public in person and via our teleconference service.

We're holding our committee hearing in the O Street Building in room 2200 for individuals who wish to provide public comment via the teleconference service. The participant toll free number and access code are posted on our committee website and will be displayed on the screen right now and a few other times throughout the hearing. Today's participant number is 877-226-8163 and the access code is 753-2581.

And also, on behalf of our incredible court reporter, I ask all speakers, my colleagues included, and witnesses alike, to speak slowly and clearly and do not talk over each other. I'll add that one. Before we begin the agenda, we need to establish a quorum. So, colleagues, you'll have to turn your mic on for roll call. And every time that we vote madam Secretary, will you please call the roll?

Laird here. Ochoa bogh here. Smallwood-Cuevas here. Grove here. Atkins here. Quorum.

Quorum is present. Thank you, colleagues. And for the public, I will. And people here today let you know that we have multiple committees going on at the same time. We have colleagues who have to present bills in committees. So you may see us coming and going. I assure you, it's because they are working elsewhere. And two of my colleagues are actually serving on health committee at the same time they're here. So we will do the best we can and we always manage to pull it off. So I just want to let you understand why people leave. It isn't out of disrespect for the current person being confirmed. It has everything to do with our workload.

So we're going to dispense with some items, if we can, before we get to Governor's appointees who are required to appear. I am going to take up item number two, and I have some splits, vote splits. So here is the motion I would ask one of my colleagues to make under item two.

Governor's appointees not required to appear, I would add items to E, F, and G and request a motion.

So moved.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Madam Secretary. Call the roll.

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

Five to zero. Thank you. I would entertain a motion on item 2D,

So move.

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

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogh, no. Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Grove, no. Atkins, aye. Three to two.

So moved.

Three to two. Thank you. I would ask for a motion on Bill referrals item three.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Call the roll.

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

Thank you. And the last item is floor acknowledgments we have one: item four.

I would move it.

Thank you.

I'm really excited about the dairy princess coming and visiting.

Thank you for that comment, Senator Laird. I'm sure that Senator Neelo will be thrilled to hear that you have ...

Can we call the role Madam Secretary?

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

Five to zero. Thank you. So I'm going to call up our first appointment, and that is for the Member of the Workers Compensation Board. And that would be Ms. Natalie. I'm going to try to get your name right. Thank you and welcome.

Thank you.

I will ask if you would like to make some opening comments, acknowledge anyone you would like, and then after your opening comments, we'll go right to Members of the committee for questions and comments. Welcome.

It looks like it is on. Okay, madam...thank you so much. And Members of the committee, thank you so much for having me.

I want to thank you for your time and also for your service and everything you do for our state. I am honored to be appointed as a commissioner of the Workers' compensation Appeal Board, and I thank Governor Newsom for his trust in my service in this role. I did want to extend just a few words of thank you and gratitude first, for my husband and my children, their infinite love and support always, to my parents for their undying dedication and fight to assure their children could thrive as first generation Americans.

But today, above all, I really want to thank my fellow commissioners at the Workers Compensation Appeal Board, all the attorneys, the chair, and the staff for welcoming me with such open arms. They are an incredible group of professionals with extraordinary intellect and above all, a passion for what they do and for serving the people of California. And I'm very humbled to work side by side with them. So I wanted to extend that gratitude for them. And with that, I will close my opening remarks.

Well thank you very much. And I think, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, I might start with you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I don't have very many questions for the nominee today. I just want to thank her for her work and service, particularly around worker protections, and I know she has great expertise in that area. And so I do not have questions for this nominee.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you. So, just a couple of pretty easy comments and questions on that, and it has to do with the reform caseload and backlogs on this. You provided the committee an update on the backlog of cases pending at the board, some dating back to 2017. And the questions are as follows: what actions is the board taking to resolve the case backlog, some of which have been pending for several years? And two, are these backlog cases, what is considered a grant for study, or are they a separate category?

Okay, so I will take that question in a couple of parts. I do have some updated numbers, and at any time, of course, we can provide updated numbers on where we are with cases that are over 60 days. These are cases that were granted for study, therefore an action was taken on them. They were deemed to have enough evidence and information that they merit a deeper look. And so they were granted for study. But a final decision hasn't been rendered yet.

So I have updated numbers. They are better than the numbers that I provided in my responses. So that's good. There's some positive movement. In terms of what the board is doing: The Workers Compensation Appeal Board has struggled with the same backlog issues that many of its sister agencies deal with. So hiring issues, challenges with hiring, a lot of retirements turnover.

And it's a very small team. So we're talking about a team of about 30 individuals, maybe a little more. Seven commissioners, of which we only have six, about twelve to 15 attorneys. And then there's three slots for deputy commissioners and staff. And so if you think about the workload, the annual workload, we get about between anywhere between I'm looking, thinking about the historical numbers, 23 to 2900 cases a year. This team is working nonstop around the clock to get these processed.

But with all of the challenges, hiring, bringing people up to speed, turnover, and because of the depth that is required in the decisions that are rendered by the board, they have to be quality decisions. They have to describe all of the evidence and the reasoning behind the decisions. There is actually a statutory mandate for quality decisions, not just any decision.

You're talking about a quantity versus quality issue here. So right now, the board has moved several processes electronically, which has been fantastic. A lot of our deliberation work happens electronically now, versus actual paper files being pushed around, an office. That has streamlined things. The attorneys who help us draft decisions, that's also electronic, so we can review consistently the work that's occurring and move those cases faster.

Hiring has been going pretty well, as far as I understand from the chair. But there is a process of bringing people up to speed. Workers compensation is massive. The legislation is very big, the statutes, the regulations. And so while you get very qualified individuals in the position, they still have to sometimes learn this area of law. And that takes time.

They also have to learn procedurally what constitutes a good written decision. Bringing people up to speed takes time as well. So those are the things that have been taking place there's always the tracking of the cases as well. There has also been work with EMS, which is the electronic management system, and I believe there has been commitments under the budget to help create that system from more of a repository, which it sort of is today a repository, to an actual case management system that helps us process easier. And so there's both IT and hiring efforts being made at this time.

Perfect. That's great to know and thank you so much for the insight and I'm just going to want it to limit it to two questions, but just as a follow up. What can we do better in order to really create a pipeline for people to be able to be qualified and be ready more readily available to take those positions, especially the vacancies and on the turnaround be able to be ready to go in there? What can we do as a system to improve that component?

That is a great question. It is not one that I'm extremely prepared to answer because I don't serve as the Chair of the Board. And so these administrative processes are not issues that I work on day to day. I'm working much more on the cases I have thoughts about our HR system is complex, but it's not impossible to navigate. And the same sort of solutions that the Department of Industrial Relations has taken to fill a lot of attorney positions could be mechanisms, and probably are mechanisms, that our chair has been taking to create better pipelines into these roles.

We have seen, especially in the attorney positions, we have seen individuals come from other state agencies who have served as attorneys in other state agencies. And that's very valuable because they understand the system and they understand state government. They do not necessarily have the expertise in workers comp yet.

So that's sort of the challenge. But I think all of the typical procedures that you would take to try to create better pipelines, whether it's creating different steps within the attorney position so that they can grow in the job, whether it's connecting with law schools, whether it's connecting with the workers compensation community when jobs are posted, which I know they do, all of those things would be really important to try to create that pipeline. And I know these are coveted jobs.

So people, they know that working at the Workers Compensation Appeal Board is a fantastic place to work. It's just meeting those qualifications that often are put in place by HR.

Are these conversations are being had overall within the Department in order to be prepared with the proper trained staff to come into place?

Oh sure, yeah, these conversations between the Chair and the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. So administratively the Board falls under DIR, the Department of Industrial Relations, so the Board receives the support from the Department, but it also has to follow the procedures. So it benefits from sort of the innovations and the new things that the Department is working on, and it also has to fall in line with the procedures that DIR sets in order to comply with CalHR.

Those conversations absolutely are happening all the time, and they happen more at the level of the chair with the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Yes.

Thank you Senator. Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that.

How are you?

Hi Senator.

Good. It's good to see you in person.

Good to see you. I worked with you quite often in your previous capacity. I think you are very qualified and very fair and balanced when it comes to any issue that you've handled, especially that I've brought to you. And so I think it's in your character. So I don't think that you would be more leaning towards employees or employers. I think you're well balanced and you look at the facts and make decisions.

I do have one question, though, if you don't mind. In your written responses to the Rules Committee, you talked about how the WCAB has not seen any real cases on AB Five, and how that's affected because it's kind of still tied up in litigation. Do you anticipate or they're in discovery or the trial stage? Is that still the case? That question. And then do you think that you'll hear a group of them and make an En Bac decision, or what's your thoughts on AB Five and how that will be affected?

Sure. So I think the first thing that's really important to state is, I mean, it's obvious to everyone here we are dealing with appealed cases, so they first have to go through the workers compensation system, through the division of Workers Compensation, and the trials at that level. Sometimes parties will mediate and they'll settle before it even goes to a trial. Sometimes you have years of trials and issues that evolve over time, and we can never predict which cases are going to make it to an appeal or not.

And so, as such, we don't track cases by topic. That said, we do have a sense of what comes in and what doesn't. I personally have not received on my desk for review any AB Five cases. I've only been here six months. I haven't received any misclassification cases. It's very hard to know if we're going to get a flurry of these cases once they make their way through trial.

Misclassification has always been an issue, and prior to AB Five, when any of those cases came up in appeal, and that was the main issue at hand, we would apply the Borrello factors. If we receive a case in the near future where the injury occurred while an individual is providing a service after July 1, 2020, which is when AB Five took effect for the workers compensation system, then we would apply the ABC test. And if a person's exempted, because AB Five exempts a lot of positions, then we would apply the Borrello.

So we have a very clear understanding of which factors we would apply to any misclassification case. And it really depends on the timing.

Great. No, I appreciate that answer. And like I said, there is no doubt in my mind that you will follow a process, make the right decisions, regardless of personal opinion. I've seen that in you when I worked with you before, and I look forward to your confirmation.

Oh, thank you so much, Senator. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Senator Laird.

Thank you. Welcome to the committee. We confirmed you once before and had lengthy conversations, and so I feel like your general level of competence has been established. We're good. And my colleagues asked a couple of the things I was going to ask. So there's just one remaining question.

That is in your answers, you talked about possibly expecting more cases out of the pandemic. Where does that stand and why did you think that? And do you think that's still going to happen if it hasn't?

Again, it is always hard to predict because we never know what cases, once they go through a trial, will actually be appealed for reconsideration or a removal of a case, which is what we look at. However, I did want to reiterate some stats. So the California Workers Compensation Institute, and this is something that my prior colleagues also, I think, referenced in their hearings.

While we don't track cases by topic, the Division of Workers Compensation has a lot more information. And the Institute calculated that about 17.3% of all claims filed between March 2020 and July 2022 were COVID related. That's 17.3. It was almost over 200,000 cases that were filed in that short time frame. So by reasoning, you would expect that we are going to receive more COVID cases because there were that many filed and it was a large amount. I have seen some COVID cases already come across my portfolio for review.

Most of them at this time are issues about whether the injury was caused in the workplace. So they're either trying to talk about the rebuttal of the presumptions or the presumptions weren't in place for that time frame. And so there's a lot of argument about whether the COVID occurred out of employment, arising out of employment and while on the job.

That is what we are seeing now. And I suspect because it takes many years for these cases to get through trials, that's what we will see in the medium term. I think in the longer term, we will start seeing more appeals potentially around the long term impacts of COVID on health and whether they lead to permanent disabilities.

And this is where a lot of just the science and the medical community is still developing sort of the theories of the virus and also the evidence around what it does cause and what it does not cause. So I suspect that will be more prevalent long term, but not in the medium term.

And it just occurs to me when you talk, there's another subject I should ask about, and that is in 2019, the Legislature adopted a Bill about a rebuttable presumption for public safety employees. Are you seeing any cases getting to you as a result of let me see. I'm trying to think it's for post traumatic stress.

In the interest of full disclosure. Okay.

I just want you not to talk over each other for our court report.

I apologize.

Go ahead, Senator.

I was just going to say I am doing the extension of the sunset. Got the Bill out of committee this morning, and it occurred to me that I should ask if any of those cases have reached you.

I have not seen any yet. And again, it doesn't mean that they won't come through later on.

Thank you. It started four years ago or three years ago. So they probably would be filtering to you if there's going to be a large volume. But that's neither here nor there. That's just an observation. Thank you.

Of course. Thank you Senator.

My colleagues asked the questions that I would have asked, so I appreciate that. Let me just ask, are you good, Senator Ochoa Bogh? Okay.

We're trying to implement a two question rule to see if we can be more time efficient. But when it allows and we have extra time, we go further than that. So I just want to check with my colleagues, and I also agree with Madam Vice Chair in terms of your work and the fact that we've confirmed you before we've had conversations.

So I just want to say thank you for your service. Now, having said that, we're going to go to Members of the public. So we are going to start right here in room 2200. But let me go ahead and have them put up the participant toll free number again, if they would. 877-226-8163 access code 753-2581. Because after public comment here in the room, we will go to teleconference. So let me ask if there are people here in room 2200 that would like to speak in support. In support.

Okay. Seeing no one approach the mic, let me see if we have anyone here who would like to speak in opposition in room 2200. Also seeing no one, it's a good thing we put that number up.

Let me welcome our moderator for the teleconference.

Thank you. Madam Chair. For those who wish to speak, please press one, then zero. Press one, then zero at this time.

Thank you. And as they're teeing up, let me remind those who will be speaking to give your name, your organization, if any you represent, and your position of support or opposition. Madam

Chair, no one has signaled that they wish to speak.

Okay thank you very much. We'll be back with you shortly. Let me bring it back to the committee Members. Madam Vice Chair has made the motion to move the confirmation. Madam Secretary, will you please call the rolled?

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

Five to zero. Congratulations. We will move this on to the Senate for full confirmation.

Great. Thank you so much, everyone.

Let me ask our court reporter continue on. Great. Thank you. Have a good rest of your day. So our next appointment would be the Honorable Isador Hall. Let me say Dr. Hall for the Agriculture Labor Relations Board. Welcome. And we have seen you before, so, you know, and plus, you've had one person ahead of you, so, you know, we're going to invite you to make opening comments. Thank anyone you would like.

Thank you.

We'll go right up here for questions. And it's good to see you.

Likewise, thank you. Madam Senator, President, and the Members of this esteemed Senate Rules Committee. Thank you for allowing me to come before you yet again for this confirmation. I also want to thank the Governor and his fine staff for the work that they've done to advance this confirmation forward. And also I'd like to thank my team Members over at ALRB who are exceptional. The board Members are exceptional.

The legal counsel is exceptional. The support staff is exceptional. And those who are doing the hard work out in the community, I want to thank them as well for giving me an opportunity to represent them. And so with that, thank you all so much, and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you so much. And because I'm still thinking someone may have to leave. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, we're going to let you go first again.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and. So good to see you Mr. Hall thank you for all the work that you do here in our communities. Thank you. This is such an important sector, the history of farm work, the links to colonialism, to slavery. And it continues to be one of the most brutal, toughest jobs where folks have so little dignity and respect, and we're continuing to fix that.

My question is, and I have sort of two questions in one given sort of the changes in the industry and also in the folks who are doing this work, in terms of who's coming to help feed our families, what type of engagement is happening now at ALRB to really reach those farm workers from such a diverse background? And how closely are you all working with the Labor Commissioner's office? I'm thinking, for example, who is doing a really targeted effort to educate those workers on their rights and are using and partnering with all kinds of different community based organizations in that effort? I just am curious.

The certifications have gone down. What is the ALRB doing to reach those workers and to make sure that they have the opportunity to organize.

Thank you, Senator, great question. We are excited that we have seen and witnessed an uptick in our engagement activities. We have, and I don't know if you all are privy to the strategic plan that we just adopted at ALRB, which talks about the outreach and the community outreach that we are doing with not just our office, but also to your point? Other departments here in the state of California, cross sectional intersectional. Departments strategically going out, doing outreach to the communities, to those who feel, for whatever reason, they're unheard or don't have a voice. We're also working with community based organizations in the community to get the message out.

We're also on using social media platforms to do that. We're using radio to do that. We're going far and beyond the call of duty to make sure that there is a strategic plan to outreach to every corner of the state of California where these workers are. And we're not just outreaching to the workers, we're also outreaching and having engagement with the growers as well, because it takes all of us to make California move.

You mentioned the social media and I recall just the language challenges may have access to social media, may not. When you say working with those organizations, is it through strategic partnerships with them?

Absolutely, strategic partnerships, yes. Thank you, Senator.

Thank you very much. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And welcome, Dr. Hall, pleasure to have you here. I had a question with regards to the new Farm Worker Union election process. The question. In what ways do you expect the new Car Check process to affect the workload of the ALRB? And number two, if the Car check program results in additional Farm Worker Union representatives, as its proponents intend, how will this affect the role of the ALRB and its operations?

Well, we do expect an uptick in organizations and certifications. Obviously, as a result of AB 2183 and the cannabis movement as well. We're going to see a lot of uptick in organizing, certifications, so forth and so on. How would that impact us? Obviously, our workload is going to increase. Are we prepared for that? Absolutely.

Thank you to this board, to this Senate, to the Senate and the Assembly and the Governor for signing a budget that allowed for us to add extra positions to be able to accommodate the uptick in certifications and all of the things that that will bring, because we probably have some complaints and so forth and so on. We have had, and because of the uptick in the budget monies that you provided us, we were able to handle some of the backlog that we've had in past and bring that to fore. So we're upticked, we're ready to go, and we're staffed up. Thank you.

Okay, Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you. Can I have their time? Hi, my friend.

Senator, it's good to see you.

Good to see you. Good to see you. I can say you're missed. So I do have a series of questions. I mean, I think you're an incredible person, but I have a large agricultural community that definitely has some concerns and questions with the ALRB, which you're being appointed to the board. So I have a lot of questions to ask you that they've sent to me.

I do want to do a couple of follow up questions. A question that was asked about the piece of legislation that was passed to allow car check. I do know that statistically and the numbers that are out there is that the California farms have dropped union activity drastically.

I think the board oversees maybe one to two elections a year and having that low of an impact, what do you see? It's statistically zero when you do the numbers because it falls within the margin of error for union activity or union certifications in the Central Valley. What do you see as the board's role moving forward? Do you still see it as overseeing the election process, like the mission statement first says, or do you see it going in a different direction, like enforcement or other avenues?

Well we are dictated by an act that tells us exactly what we can and can do as a board. I know during COVID there was a decrease in activity. We have had three elections so far in the cannabis industry, and we expect to have more.

Even then, we still have 30 plus thousand farm workers there that still have to be protected every single day that this board oversees or overlooks. So I don't think our work will decrease as long as we have agriculture in California. Nor do I believe that elections will decrease because a because of AB 2183.

That makes it easier for a certification process to move forward, and because in 2018, we passed cannabis to legalize cannabis, and that falls under agriculture. We also see and know we're going to see an extreme uptick in elections there as well.

But I would think that you see your role as a board Member at the ALRB to be balanced. Right. It's not about unionizing the farm workers, because there are farm workers out there that don't want to be unionized and they want a decertification process. So do you see your role on both sides?

Absolutely. Regardless of whether you're unionized or not, every worker in California has rights and they must be protected. And as a Member of this board, it's our responsibility to make sure that we do that. Regardless of who you are, the color of your skin, whether you're in a labor union or not, we have a responsibility. You are an employee. You're being employed here in the state of California, and you have rights. And we have a responsibility to make sure that we're balanced with that.

Okay. And then I want to just give you a little bit of background and I want to ask a specific question. Last year we had the confirmation of General counsel Montgomery who came before us for confirmation.

I asked her a series of questions about the grown farm worker vote. Right. Why questions and I'm not going to go into it with you, but she was the General counsel for the ALRB and I asked her a series of know why did it take five years? Why did you decertify the first two elections? Why did you make the farm workers continue to go through the process? Why did you bring legislation up here to the building to try to make it easier for the UFW? I mean I went through this whole series of questions and after five years and the vote was 90 ten to decertify the UFW.

It was victory and justice for the farm workers after the ballots had been locked up for five years and they weren't counted, which the board was a part of during that time. And then the last question I ask her is, was the Garcia case elevated to filing a complaint without any investigation whatsoever just to try to decertify the election? And she said no. And since then we've had an attorney that used to work at the board come to me and say that was not true, there was no investigation, it was his case and that he was told to elevate that instantly to be used as a mechanism to decertify the election.

Was the board aware of that in any way, shape or form?

Well you know, there is a firewall between the board and the general counsel. We do not get involved in how cases are elevated to the general counsel. I'd like to believe that her answer was correct. She has never given me any reason to believe that she's dishonest. I know her as an honest general counsel but we do not get involved in that area. There's a firewall between the legal counsel, general counsel and the board.

I was not aware of that. I didn't know if the board would be engaged in that.

We have nothing to do with that.

And that's why I asked that question. Thank you for that. I know that you said in your comments to my colleague from Los Angeles.

That. You want to make sure that individuals have a voice even in the uptick in the rise of union certifications. And I just want your commitment on behalf of my farmers, right, top three food producing counties in the state.

I just want your commitment on my farm workers. And my farmer side is that if the employees don't want to unionize they shouldn't be forced to unionize. And I just want your commitment that as a board Member of the ALRB you're going to be balanced in that approach.

It should be about protecting the farm workers rights. There were 5000 farm workers that fought for five years that did not want a unionized contract. To be honest with you, they fought you guys, maybe not the board, but the ALRB.

They fought the Administration at that time, the Brown Administration. They fought the legislative process, the DIR, you know, Christine Baker was there, the Department of Industrial Relations. They fought everybody, and they stayed persistent. And finally, justice was served. But I don't want any of my farmworkers to ever have to go through that again.

Senator Grove. I don't want you to have to call me either. I know. So you have my commitment to that I'd like to believe, and I've been honored to have, the confirmation of this board twice and without any incident of reconfirmation. And that's because I am a well balanced person, seeing both sides of the coin, if you will. And I'm governed by a statute, and I'm governed by the law. And that's how we adjudicate, and we adjudicate accordingly. So you have my 100% commitment to that.

I know that, and I knew that, but I just needed to put it on the record. I appreciate those people watching on TV going, ask him.

I appreciate that.

I appreciate you. I look forward to your confirmation.

Thank you, Senator.

Senator Laird.

Thank you. And thanks for the time to meet. And a lot of things have been asked. And I think one thing I would ask to drill down a little more on is you mentioned cannabis and it's what do you see of sort of the growth of that industry or development and growth of that regulated industry and how cases are coming to you now, or how you expect them to?

Well, we don't know what we don't know, Senator. But what we do know is that there is a rising of cannabis farms, if you will, all across California. And as those come, we have seen three elections so far in such a small and short amount of time. So if in such a short time we have already had three, you can only imagine what that's going to be like possibly over the next 3, 4, 5, 6 years. And so do I believe that there's going to be an uptick? I honestly do.

To what extent, I can't tell you, but I do believe that there will be an uptick in that. Okay.

And then I'm sorry, because Senator Grove walked out, because the other question I was going to ask you is when we met, you said you were surprised at how much you learned since you were appointed, and you've learned, traveling around the state, these issues, how would you describe it.

It's been an amazing thing. Black boy from Compton, urban community. I remember when I was first being appointed to this board, there was an individual approach, says, what does a black boy from Compton know about farm-working? And I said that Compton was known for farming for years and still have farmland in Compton, and that's real.

But since then, I made a commitment, and I think, Senator Atkins, you were there when I made a commitment to go to every corner of the state and visit the farms. And I did that, and I met with the farm owners, and I met the growers, and I met with community based organizations, and it was the most amazing wonder ever thinking I didn't need to learn anything more than what I knew. I learned that I had a lot to learn.

And since that time, I have been visiting the farms and the growers every quarter, making sure that I'm out there learning more to be able to advocate and have a well balanced perspective moving forward. This committee, this board is one of the, outside of being a Member of the Senate, this board is one of the most humbling boards that I perhaps been a Member of because it allows me to see individuals who want to be self actualized finding themselves and appreciating the talents that they have.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. And our vice chair had to go to Health Committee, but she will be back, and we'll vote as we get to that point. I only have one question, because my colleagues pretty much hit all of the really top of mind issues. What role do you have in the new Human Trafficking, Exploitation Assessment and Response Team? Heart, I guess, as it's called, Unit. Does that have any relationship to the work that you're doing?

No ma'am. Senator. Other than if we see something, we say something. We have only had one call and a random call where we actually referred that person to a position of assistance, but we are not involved in that. However, just as any citizen, if you see something, you say something.

Okay, thank you. We're going to go ahead and go to Members of the public. So, again, right here in room 2200. Want to see if there are folks who are here in support. Please feel free to come forward. Okay, seeing no one approaching the microphone, let me see if there's anyone in room 2200 that would like to speak in opposition. Okay, seeing no one, let me go back to our moderator. But let us put the number up there again. 877-226-8163. And the access code is 753-2581. Mr. Moderator. Welcome back.

You. Thank you, Madam Chair. If there is anyone who would like to provide public comments, please press 10 at this time.

And Madam Chair, we have no comments in queue.

Thank you, Mr. Moderator. We're making you work very hard today. We will be back with you in a few moments. Colleagues, let me bring it back. Senator Laird.

I would move the confirmation.

Thank you very much. We have a motion, madam Secretary, we please call the roll.

Laird aye. Ochoa Bogh aye. Smallwood-Ceuvas aye. Grove. Atkins aye. On call.

And we will leave that on call so Senator Grove can add on.

Thank you. Senators. Thank you. Likewise.

Okay, we're going to go ahead and go to our last appointee who has been waiting patiently. Let me welcome up the Chief Deputy Director of the Department of Rehabilitation, Mr. Victor Duron, and say welcome to you and thank you again for your patience. Invite you to make opening comments, acknowledge anyone you would like and then we'll go right to committee Members. Welcome.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair and Members of the committee. I also want to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Governor Newsom and the leadership at the Health and Human Services Agency for entrusting me to serve in this position, to the incredible team at the Department of Rehabilitation and to my friends and family watching at home. I've dedicated my entire career to serving historically marginalized communities, from providing direct services in the field and working my way up to Executive leadership roles.

So when I reflect on Governor Newsom's vision of a California, for all I know that the Dor has a uniquely pivotal role to play. Because when it comes to diversity, equity and inclusion, disability is the intersectional identity. Virtually all of us at some point in our life will either require a disability or experience a temporarily disabling condition. And that is why it's my great honor to advance the work of the DOR. And I welcome this opportunity to take your questions.

Well thank you. And still anticipating that the Senator may have to leave with the graciousness of my colleagues. Let Senator Smallwood-Cuevas go ahead.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And to my colleagues, I'm liking this. I just wanted to say thank you. It was wonderful to meet with you in advance and to hear just your passion for this area and how long you've worked in this field and the vision for DOR. The one aspect of our conversation, there were so many, but the one I wanted to focus on today was the work that you're doing to really think about the relationship of our high vacancy rates here at the state of California and the work that you're doing to ensure that all folks have access to jobs and careers. So could you share a little bit more what we talked about, what steps the DOR is taking to work with CalHR.

What are some of the exciting innovations that you're doing around the civil service space? And particularly for this population of workers and then also answer both what the internal and external perspectives are in terms of how do we engage communities to know these jobs are here, but also how do we internally make sure that there's proper access.

Absolutely, thank you so much for the question, Senator. It's so good to see you again. There's a number of fronts through which we're approaching this issue, and we're in a unique time right now. The labor market is unusually tight. The competition for talent is greater than ever, and I do believe that there is a powerful, untapped pool of talent in the disabilities community. So there's a number of ways that the Department of Rehabilitation is approaching this from a programmatic direct services perspective, one of the innovative approaches that we're taking is our career counselors, known as vocational rehabilitation counselors have traditionally been structured by geographic areas.

So you'll have a team in Santa Barbara, in San Diego. Some are assigned by disability type. However, one of the things that we're doing is establishing sector strategy teams. In other words, instead of having a team focused on a geographic area or a disability type, a team focused on allied health careers, biotech careers. And one of the teams that we're standing up that I'm so excited about is a civil service sector team that's going to work with individuals with disabilities who are specifically interested in civil service and help them navigate that process. Recognizing, as we all do, that the bureaucratic process that gateway to admission to state civil service is not always intuitive.

And as I've shared with folks, I don't think I know anyone in civil service who did not get in without a sherpa, without someone in their life, somebody who already was familiar with state civil service and could guide them through the process. And so I want us to be that for the disability community at a higher level. Director Xavier and I are personally talking to the leadership across the different departments and offering the Department of Rehabilitation Services consulting on all matters from reasonable accommodation, disability etiquette, cultural awareness, anything that folks may be interested in learning about to make their workspace friendlier for people with disabilities and to set up people with disabilities for success in any number of jobs.

We are also looking at launching a project that's going to reimagine how we market the civil service positions. And I will sometimes joke that I don't think I've ever met any little boy or girl who's looked up at their parent and said, when I grow up, I want to be an associate administrative, governmental specialist, level three. Right.

These classifications, they have this sort of bureaucratic meaning to us, but how do we help communities understand what it really means that this classification is you're going to help people, and here's how you're going to help people, or you're going to make your society a little better, and here's how you're going to do that right. And lastly, I would just want to acknowledge the Legislature for your partnership in working towards removing the sunset for the state internship program, which is an alternative pathway to employment for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities that allows the state to bring people with the most significant disabilities on, have them go through an internship process, and then through that process be eligible for civil service.

Thank you so much for sharing that. And I look forward I think that is a model that we can replicate in a lot of different agencies and ways of being really intentional about how we address the state's workforce and bring our best to the opportunity of public service. So thank you for that and I look forward to your confirmation.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you very much. Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Hello Mr. Duron. It's such a pleasure to see you, and I greatly enjoyed our conversation. I'm so excited to have had the opportunity to meet you and look forward to our collaborations. Really quickly, I have two questions, and I am so excited with everything you mentioned. As you know, I've been working with our communities with disabilities within my district and here legislatively, and they're a big part of my heart. All right.

So the questions I have for you is the Department is six years into providing services for students with disabilities. What has been the employment outcome for students in the program, particularly those who do not attend college? And the follow up question is, what is the Department doing for youth in foster care and the juvenile justice system?

Thank you for your questions, and this hits on topics that are so near and dear to me. One of the things that we talk about is there's the services, there's the programs, but first there's the culture shift, there's a culture change. And as I've been traveling through the state and visiting with our regional leadership, one of the things that I've been really impressing on them is, yes, our student services, which start at age 16, are powerful, they're important, but build those relationships with the organizations and the systems that serve younger people.

Not because we're going to provide employment services to a ten year old, to a five year old, but because here's a very powerful question that I often ask folks to think about how old were you the first time somebody asked you, what do you want to be when you grow up? And think about who gets asked that question and who doesn't get asked that question? And what impact does it have on a little boy and a little girl to never get asked that question or have people asking them that question their whole lives and in that expressing their faith that they can be whatever they want when they grow up. So our student services, I'm so glad that we're providing those, and we need to reach down further upstream and make sure that we're pushing for that culture shift that's through our partnerships, but through direct services. I will be happy to come back with our specific numbers on where we're at with employment outcomes, but I know that we have been dedicating significant resources on that front.

In fact, I'm proud to say that while this transition to student service has been a challenge for vocational rehabilitation programs across the nation the Department of Rehabilitation in California not only are we leading and fully dedicating all of the required resources to student services. We're going to the federal government and saying, hey, all of those states that aren't fully utilizing their funds, we're going to raise our hand. We're going to take those funds and we're going to go above the minimum requirement for providing these services.

And I'll share a couple of ways how to speak to your question. Director Xavier and I have personally been meeting with the Director of the recently established Office of Youth and Community Restoration. And we have set aside significant funds to make sure that these youth in the juvenile justice system are getting career experiences and career counseling early on, even while they're still in justice engaged, so that when they exit that system, they are employment ready and they have a future ahead of them.

We are also working with our regional leadership, recognizing that the relationships happen often at the local level. So working with the county, foster youth systems and providing those services early on embedding colocating our services and those are just a couple of the ways, but absolutely, I could not agree with you more. And the further upstream that we go, the ripple effect over the lifetime of somebody when they receive these services early on is just incalculable.

Thank you, Mr. Duron for the feedback that you gave today. And as you move forward, I'm very excited for your confirmation and your passion and your expertise, everything that I think we need to serve in that capacity. So I wish you the very best.

Thank you so much, Senator.

Thank you. Do you mind if I ask a follow up? Just while we're on this topic, how likely do you think it is we would be successful in getting another state's unused funds and what is that process and how could we be helpful in that?

Thank you for that question. We have been successful in pursuing additional funds from the Federal Rehabilitation Services Administration. And in fact, I want to thank the Legislature because in the most recent budget you've supported additional reimbursement authority that will allow us to continue pursuing these funds for the next three fiscal years.

Thank you very much, Senator Laird.

Thank you very much. And let me ask you a quick and easy question first. If a state Senator called and wanted to meet with you or get a call return from you, would you do it?

Absolutely in a heartbeat. And I would welcome the opportunity.

Just to clear that up at the beginning. And then the other thing I thought I'd ask is people asked about some of the things. Senator Durazo had a Bill that relates to sub minimum wage and it kicks in, I think, 2025. What impact do you think that Bill will have on people with disabilities that you work with in the Department?

Senator, this topic is top of mind for me, and in fact, it is one of my top priorities. I am establishing additional senior management resources within the Department of Rehabilitation to create additional capacity that's going to focus exactly on this issue. We are developing a strike team at the highest levels of our leadership in partnership with the Department of Developmental Services and leadership at the Health and Human Services Agency.

We will be partnering with the State Council on Developmental Disabilities and are partnering with the Department of Industrial Relations because we want to make sure that when 2025 comes, nobody experiences that as a cliff and everyone well before that period has services and a transition plan. One of the most challenging elements of this issue has been getting our arms around the data. Those of you who have been in some of the other hearings related to sub minimum wage know that that has been really difficult.

And I'm really proud of the DOR team that has found some new ways to work with our partners at Department of Industrial Relations and look at some of the other labor agency data. And we can say with a pretty high degree of confidence that at this juncture we're talking about just a little over 3000 individuals who are still in sub minimum wage settings. We have the resources to provide individualized services to every single one of those 3000 people. And it is my intent that we will do so so that well before sub minimum wage ends, everyone has a path to competitive, integrated employment.

So just a quick follow up to understand, because a lot of the first part of your answer was the process and how you're going to address this. And right at the end you got to how you might address this. Is your intent to make sure that to the best of your ability, nobody's disadvantaged by this change? Is that what you were saying?

Oh no, my intent is that people will be advantaged by it. My intent is that when this change happens, every single one of those individuals will not just be made whole, but they will be better off than they were before. And I am meeting monthly with the team that is working on this until sub minimum wage phases out. And in that meeting, I want to know what's happening with all 3000 of those individuals.

Oh, it'll be fun to work for you. Okay, well, thank you very much. I appreciate your responses.

Thank you, Senator. I don't have questions because my colleagues asked the areas that I wanted. But I was just so impressed by your responses to Senator Ochoa Bogh and your passion came out and then I had to look back at your resume, which I had already done, but in my review. But you spent a lot of time with the Department of Rehabilitation. So a short hiatus at the Interagency Council on Homelessness. But I have to say I am just impressed with your passion and clearly you have the experience to take things to the next level.

And so I'm thrilled to support you and I don't have questions, but now that my colleague, Madam Vice Chair is back, I hate to put you on the spot, but we're now up to you.

Thank you.

So welcome back.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. I do apologize. I'm bouncing between two committees and I had to run upstairs or downstairs---upstairs really fast. I do have a couple of questions. I'm concerned about the lack of--first welcome.

Welcome. And thank you for wanting to take this position. But I do have a couple of concerns about the employment opportunities within the IDD area. So I have a Bakersfield Arc in my community and I'm extremely worried.

I was grateful that there was a backfill in the budget to address the split employment or the reduction of minimum wage for individuals with IDD, I was very grateful that that was backfilled because I was concerned about those individuals in that population losing their jobs. And it bothered me because I have some individuals that were so excited to go to work back then, they used to rate them on their disability and if they did 50% of the work, they got 50% of the pay or 75%, 75% of the pay.

So I'm excited that that was backfilled. But I do have problems and I think that they used to employ people using 14 C at the Bakersfield Arc and now that's moved away because of the draws of Bill actually that I just talked about. And they had about 22,000 people there that were IDD and under that 14 C in 2016 and now from 22,000 down to less than 4000.

So I think having a job regardless of who you are, and I realize that pay is very important benefits and all those things, but for individuals in this population that I'll use Sam as an example. Sam lost his job because it would take him almost 6 hours to stock a shelf at Albertson's. And that's just the vegetable shelf because he made sure every can was perfect and he would line it up know, and he did such a great job.

But Albertson's, they need somebody to stock their shelves. And so he did go and get a proportion of a wage. But he went to work every day and he took his lunchbox and he made friends and he talked to people.

And so that's really important to me because I think this population has a place in society just like all of us and I think there's some accommodations that need to be met. So what's your take on making sure that again, we passed a piece of legislation that devastated these jobs, and back in the day we passed a piece of legislation, I think with Wesley Chesborough that said it was going to be an employment first. So all of those things, I guess my main concern, and to give you that background is how do we get this population back up to 22,000 people in my community of work and less than 4000 when employers can't pay a higher wage for somebody who does 25% of the work. So what's your suggestion? Because I think it creates value in their lives. How do we fix that?

Thank you, Senator. Well, first I want to really appreciate that in your question you're centering the person oftentimes in these policy discussions it can feel a little bit abstract and it's so valuable to always recenter the focus on the individual that's going to be impacted by the decisions that are being made. I also want to appreciate your recognition of the intangible value of employment.

Of course there's the paycheck, there's the upward mobility and access to a pathway out of poverty, but there's social connectedness, a sense of purpose, something to focus one's energy on, a sense of pride and all of those things are intangible and incredibly valuable. And so I appreciate and applaud you for know as I was sharing with Senator Laird, this is an issue that's top of mind for me and I am dedicating additional resources and partnering with the Department of Developmental Services. And leadership at the Health and Human Services Agency to make sure that we are identifying every single one of those individuals who will be impacted by the phase out of sub minimum wage and provide wraparound employment services that are tailored to their individual needs, with recognizing that, with the law being what it currently is, we want to make sure that when 2025 arrives, that all of those individuals are transitioning from a job to a job with competitive, integrated employment, not from a job to the couch. Right. And that sense of purpose and that sense of meaning is intact. And I want to recognize that this is a mammoth cultural shift.

It is not going to be without its challenges. Just like nearly 100 years ago when sub minimum wage sheltered workshops were first established, that was an incredible shift and there were people at the time who felt that the individuals with the most significant disabilities would not be able to work under any circumstances. But we made that shift and that was the best thinking we had at the moment.

So I see this as an opportunity to again make strides forward. And to your point, the individuals that you speak of, not only are their lives enriched by work, but the lives of those around them are enriched by their presence. And so one of the intangible benefits of competitive integrated employment we often focus on the competitive, on the wage part, but there's the integrated part.

And how much does it change a person's life and a person's perspective to work side by side with someone who sees the world really differently than them? In this case, because of a significant disability. Right? And how that has enriched your life and likewise enriches the lives of others.

I really appreciate that response. I do want you to tell me, or just elaborate like integrated employment, because this is where I see it. We had sub minimum wage. It sounds like a horrible topic, but you had your analysis of the ability that you have in this population and maybe one job that paid minimum wage took two people and the wage was split. And then one person elevated, they redetermined them and then they got 75%. And then maybe as they developed their skill set, they got the full wage and we had upward mobility in this.

But now those jobs are eliminated. So I guess to make it simple, how do I get Sam's job back and what is integrated employment services or those like Sam, how do I get his job back and those like Sam in this population when we have a Bill that destroyed all of these jobs?

Well, first thing I would say is I would be happy to connect Sam to our services and your office is welcome to reach out. And that goes for everyone. I absolutely would welcome the opportunity.

But what would some of those services look like? And to answer your question in the most realistic terms, what does it look like for that job to re emerge in this competitive integrated form? Some of the strategies that we're looking at, and in fact, we recently prevailed in acquiring a competitive grant from the federal government specifically to test strategies working with people with the most significant disabilities and what are the best strategies to transition them into competitive integrated employment. But what are some of the things that that might look like and some of the resources we provide? We can provide job coaches, individuals who at no cost to the employer can provide individualized support to the employee and help coach them and train them and develop them and help even just pick them up a little bit when they're feeling down on the job. We have services that help us reimagine the way that a job is established.

So an employer, for example, might have four identical positions and vacancies, right? And they each do five tasks. Can we work with businesses to reimagine that and know this one task? This is something that if you cobbled it together, is a full time job that Sam can do. Right.

Sam might not be able to do tasks A-B-C and D, but he's brilliant at task F. And what if he did task F for everyone, instead of just for instead of trying to do all the different tasks of the one job. And then we also have on-the-job training and learning experiences.

So providing these individuals an opportunity, again at no cost to the employer to practice being on the job. And sometimes that exposure is that first step, right? We recognize that the other half of the equation for employment is the employer. It's the business.

There has to be a business that's willing to make a job offer. And if we're able to provide services and help support the cost of bringing someone on for a number of months, that helps change the business model a little bit, right? So maybe it doesn't make sense if I hire someone, I need them to be productive today.

I'm spending good money on that individual, and I may not have five months of ramp up time to offer them, but if some of those costs are being offset, that might change things a little bit. And this person who might not be able to do the job in the first week, in the first month, in month four and month five, lo and behold, you might find a really different person. And I say that from firsthand experience working with some individuals with multiple significant disabilities, who one person I'm thinking of in particular, I remember they would cry the first few weeks on the job.

They would just cry from just sheer nerves. And working with them today, different human being. And partly because of some of the things that you spoke to, that sense of belonging, connectedness, interaction, purpose, structure in life.

I appreciate that and I know that you are not, but I am on a time schedule because of the application that we have in rules. But who pays for that mentor, that person that comes for competitive integrative employment, which I still don't know the definite what is that like? What is that? Who pays for that person? You said the employer does not.

So the Department of Rehabilitation has funds to support a portion of that and the Department of Developmental Services has funds to pick up where the DOR leaves off.

I'm just confused and I apologize. 22,000 people had a job. They were going to work. They had all of those things. They had family at work, they had birthday parties at work, they had awards, top shelves, whatever the position was. They had all that forklift.

I had a guy that drove a forklift. Get out of his way, but he drove a forklift. He was real safe. But he had a mission, right? He knew where to go and how to do it. And again, I don't want the public to think I'm just trying to get Sam a job because there are hundreds of thousands of Sams in this state that lost their job or are losing their job. So you say that there's this person that the Department pays for.

Why don't we just leave the money in the employment program so that these individuals could have work and have a job? And that self esteem and that. Garrett, "I go to work today," and he's got his you know. Stacy, she's a greeter at Walmart in a wheelchair with, like, a trach thing, and her caregiver stood right there with her, but she said hello to everybody, and that was so important in her life, and now that job is gone. So I realize that there are people in this building that want everybody to make above minimum wage, but in this particular population, employers have to make a decision.

So I'm very disappointed that I still don't have an answer on what competitive integrated employment is. What does that mean?

So the competitive part is at above minimum wage and to the extent possible, at a wage that is competitive for somebody performing similar work. And then the integrated piece is not in a sheltered workshop or sort of off to the side only with other individuals with disabilities, but integrated amongst individuals of all abilities. Right. Speaking earlier to the value of that integration piece in particular, right, and the exposure to different types of people and the enriching benefit it has both for the individual with a disability and the coworkers that they get to work with.

Okay, so I know, Madam Chair, I'm sorry. So in 2013, 14, somewhere around in there, we did Wesley Chesborough, one of our esteemed colleagues, did a Bill that made Employment First as a top priority for this population. Okay.

Do you have any data to say that the numbers have improved? Because I would like you to contradict the data that I have that since we've passed Employment First, to be the number one priority before you go to classes, before you go to education, before you go to, I don't know, art camp, whatever it is, you have to have a job first. So that's part of that in 2013, is that correct? Or 14? I don't have okay. I think it's 13 or 14 somewhere around in there.

All the data that I see shows that the population has lost employment, having that as a priority in this population, and then with the piece of legislation on the sub minimum wage elimination, like I said, I gave you an example: 22,000 people, mainly because we had a I don't know what it's called, but it's like a trash separation thing.

And you could have 50 people on the line, and I'm only taking out brown paper, brown paper, brown paper, brown paper. I'm taking out color paper, color paper, color paper, plastic, plastic, plastic. So they could do that job. They got paid. They loved it. They took their breaks. They met with their friends. They rode the bus together. It was life. It was life. And now all of that's gone, I'm really I'm bothered by that. Like, really bothered by that.

That. And again, I don't want people to think that I'm just trying to get Sam and Garrett a job. I think there are hundreds of thousands of people out there that lost their job because of policies that were passed in this building. And frankly, I want to know how you're going to fix it.

Thank you. Senator. Well, first, I would be happy to provide your office with any technical assistance on any data that you would like to share. We would be happy to look at it and provide some analysis and see how we can provide additional information. To your point, I share your concern about what will happen with those individuals.

I share your concern about people who are not employed today. And when I look across the nation so it's not just in California we see that across the nation, over the last ten years at least, there has been a trend in the decline of sub minimum wage settings. We also know that in 2019, the Federal Commission on Civil Rights made a recommendation to the federal government to end sub minimum wage nationally.

And so part of my concern and part of my commitment on this issue is that we in California are going to take a proactive stance, recognizing that it is better to provide these services and support the transition to competitive integrated employment, proactively recognizing that this is the direction that the nation is going in and sharing your concern for the impact that that will have for people who are currently employed, thank you.

My last question is that are you working with SCIU or labor? And the reason why I asked that is because I know the Tahone Pass is in my district. They have a beautiful rest stop. They have the outlet mall that needs maintenance, all of that stuff. The CHP office up there and the rest stop area signed a contract with the Bakersfield Arc, again, and they got transportation up there. They took such good care because there is a heart in this population to do their very best every single day. There really is if you get to talk to them.

So they had the contract for, I believe, six months, and SCIU came in and forced them to go back to union labor for their rest stop. So all this I think there was 42 employees in this population that lost their job. Are you working with labor? I mean, no offense, but labor doesn't need every single job in this state and those that this population can do and are willing to do, and they did. They took such good care of this rest stop. They greeted people when they stopped. They're like, Hi, welcome to Tahone Rest stop.

Would you like the ladies bathroom, or can I direct you to the snacks? They were just so cool to go up there and stop because they do take pride in their jobs. So are you working with labor so that these jobs can come back? We have to employ this population.

To my knowledge, we haven't been engaged with organized labor on this issue in particular, but if your office has recommendations for partnerships that we should be looking at, we would welcome that.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair, for the leeway.

Thank you very much. Okay. I think you were the last speaker, so are you good? Thank you and I will repeat what I said before. Even after listening to the latest, I'm convinced of your commitment, compassion, and also your knowledge, your deep knowledge, firsthand of the clients and the services. So thank you.

Thank you. We're going to go to Members of the public who have been waiting. And let me ask if there's anyone that would like to speak in support right here in room 2200. Please feel free to come up to the mic if you want to speak. Okay, seeing no one, let me ask if there's anyone who would like to speak in opposition. Okay, again, seeing no one, we will go back to our moderator and welcome you to ask folks to tee up to speak in support or in opposition.

Thank you. Madam Chair, if you would like to provide public comment today, please press 10. And we do have someone queuing up and they're ready. We'll first hear from line 144. Please go ahead.

Yes, good afternoon. This is Eric Harris. Disability rights California. Strong support.

Thank you very much. Other speakers.

Madam Chair, there are no further comments at this time.

Thank you so much for your help today. We always appreciate the opportunity to have people who can speak via teleconference. Okay, let me come back into our committee and ask for a motion. Thank you. Senator Laird. Madam Secretary, will you please call the role?

Laird aye. Ochoa Bogh aye. Smallwood-Ceuvas. Grove aye. Atkins aye. On call.

We will leave that on call so Senator Smallwood-Cuevas can add on. And we congratulate you. Thank you for your service. We will move this on to the full Senate for confirmation.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Members of the committee, thank you.

Have a good rest of your day. And we will reach out on which item is it? Okay, let me go ahead. For the sake of the vice chair, who had to step out and go to the Health Committee, open the roll on item one B, and that would be the appointment of Dr. Isadore Hall.

Grove aye. Five to zero.

Five to zero. So that is out. And we will see if we might be able to get a hold of Senator Smallwood-Cuevas. I know she may be presenting a Bill. We're going to go ahead and close the roll on item one C. I'm sorry. Four to zero. So that will be forwarded to the full Senate for confirmation. With that, we are at the end of the agenda.

It concludes our agenda for today. So I want to thank everybody for participating in today's hearings. If you were not able to testify today, and you would like to, please submit your comments or suggestions in writing to the Rules Committee or visit our website for instructions.

Your comments and suggestions are important to us and we want to include your testimony in the official hearing records. And with that, let me thank all of my colleagues today for your patience, your cooperation and your work. The Senate Committee on Rules is now adjourned.