Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

Good morning. We'd like to call to order the regular scheduled hearing of the Assembly Appropriations Committee for August 23. Today, we will have 124 bills to consider this morning as part of our regular ordered hearing. Before I begin, I'd like to make a few Housekeeping notes. First. Assembly Member McCarty will be filling in for Assemblymember Lowenthal on the committee today. We encourage the public to provide written testimony before the hearing by visiting the Committee website at apro.assembly.ca.gov.

Please note that any written testimony submitted to the Committee is considered public comment and may be read into the record or reprinted. The hearing room is now open for attendance. All are encouraged to watch the hearing from its stream on the Assembly website at Assembly CA gov today's events. We encourage the public to monitor the Committee website for updates.

We will accept public comment on any Bill placed on the suspense file by the Committee today, and for which the author weighed presentation before the close of the regular ordered hearing. Testimony on any such Bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, and position on the Bill. The Committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total.

As you came into the hearing room today, the Sergeants directed your attention to the rules of public attendance and participation which were posted outside the door. I encourage Members of the public who are in attendance to be aware of and observe those rules. Please be aware that violations of these rules or other violations of General courtesy or decorum may subject you to removal or other enforcement processes. With that, I see we do not have a quorum just yet, but we will begin as a subcommittee.

And the first on our sign in order is Assemblymember Smallwood-Cuevas, and you're presenting SB 497. And that enjoys a do pass.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Assembly Members. I am pleased to present SB 497, which would ensure that workers who are brave enough to report a violation of their rights under the Labor Code or Equal Pay Act are protected from retaliation by their employer. We have so many important laws that we've put on the books as the Legislature to protect workers, but they're only as good as a worker's ability to access them.

Adding this protection to the Labor Code will allow the Labor Commissioner to identify retaliation more quickly and hold employers accountable when and if there is a violation of the law. And we know there is a backlog in these types of cases, and this Bill will help to expedite that. According to the Labor Commissioner, Department of Justice, and the Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis, the costs of this Bill are minor and absorbable. With me today is Jessica Stender, who is a co-sponsor with Equal Rights Advocates to answer any technical questions you might have.

Thank you. Department of Finance.

Good morning, Chair Holden, Vice Chair Dahle, and Members of the Committee. Millie Yan with Department of Finance. We have no file on this Bill.

Thank you. We'll now turn to the public. If there's anyone in the public that would like to testify or not testify so much as to present your support or opposition to the Bill.

Good morning, Assembly Members. Dallas Fowler from the California Coalition for Worker Power. We are 30 worker centers across California standing in strong support and a co sponsor of SB 497.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, Members, Mariko Yoshihara, on behalf of the California Employment Lawyers Association and Stronger California Advocates Network in strong support.

Thank you. We're seeing no one else from the public who would like to speak on the matter. We are still looking for at least one, do we have a, okay, if you'll allow us, we'll set a quorum and then we'll continue. Madam Clerk, please call the roll to set the quorum here.

Dahle? Brian? Calderon? Carillo? Dixon? Fong? Hart? McCarty? Mathis? Papan? Pellerin? Sanchez? Soria? Weber? Wilson? Papan, here.

We have a quorum. We will bring it back to the committee. Are there any questions of the author on the Bill? Seeing none. Is there a motion moved by Pellerin, second by heart? Senator, you can close well, with that.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. It's do pass and it's out on a b roll call. Thank you. Senator Cortese. SB 740. Recommendation do pass.

Thank you. Chair Holden and Members. I appreciate the opportunity to present Senate Bill 740 to you today. SB 740 extends the skilled and trained workforce requirements, which are now applicable to petroleum refineries, to additional industrial facilities, including commercial facilities for hydrogen, biofuels and carbon dioxide capture. As with petroleum refineries, as was set forth in the past Bill, Senate Bill 54, the skilled and trained workforce requirements will apply to contractors, contractors performing onsite work at these facilities.

I just want to clarify that Bill does not affect in house work at the facility, in house employees. This Bill will keep communities and workers safe. The manufacturing of chemicals like the ones identified in SB 740 is inherently dangerous work. Exposure to these chemicals can be extremely hazardous for a workforce untrained in their impacts. Historically, the state has chosen to use a skilled and trained workforce in high risk environments, industrial environments like this.

The Bill, as I said, was modeled after a very, very successful Senate Bill 54. That Bill was signing to law in large part because of the vulnerabilities exposed after the Richmond Refinery Fire and the resulting community and legislative concerns. Since the passage of Senate Bill 54, there has been no such fire or explosions. And that is due in large part, we believe, to the training in the skilled and trained workforce.

As with any other industry, industrial maintenance and construction should require an adequately skilled workforce equipped to prevent and reduce the risk of fires, explosions, noxious air, solvents or other substances and any and all adequate industrial protections to protect surrounding communities. With me to testify today, we have Rudy Gonzalez from the San Francisco Building Trades Council and Tommy Faavea from Carson, California, IBEW Local Eleven. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good morning, Chair Holden and fellow appropriations committee Members. My name is Tommy Faavae I represent IBEW Local Eleven in Los Angeles. I live in Carson, raised my family in Carson, worked around a lot of the industrial sites in Carson. I worked non union in the refineries. I know how it is when working in those type of environment and seeing a lot of the untrained workforce coming in from other states like Louisiana, New Mexico, Arizona.

And those workers taking advantage of the investment and then taking it back to their communities was a detriment to the local contractors and local workforce where we didn't really see the investment stay in the community. I've been with IBW Local Eleven for 25 years, and I've seen the refineries evolve. Having the skilled and trained workforce in place, having apprenticeship programs in place goes a long way when it comes to working in these type of environment, skilled, trained apprentices working in these type of facilities.

SB 54, we've seen when it was adopted and approved, we've seen a lot of good things come out of it. We like to see SB, the expansion of 740 with hydrogen and carbon capture and other facilities being added. We urge the Appropriations Committee to move this forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Your next witness.

Thank you, honorable Chair, Members. Rudy Gonzalez, San Francisco Building Trades, here in support of SB 740. This is a generational opportunity for us to really put and lean into a just transition that is not devoid, or that it's not ignoring the workers. But importantly for this matter, this is about safety. And I echo what my brother Tommy said about the workers and the rigorous training standards. But those training standards affect loss of life and safety issues, not just for the workers, but for our surrounding communities.

And so when we explore a green transition to meet our crisis, to really lean in to what our climate demands of us from a policy perspective, you all have an amazing opportunity to not just take heed from workers and working class people, but really to sync up with the Biden-Harris Administration and enormous investment opportunities for carbon capture for other clean technologies. And we don't have to think about this in the abstract or the hypothetical.

We have over a decade of policy implemented by this body of safe and rigorous training demands that have proven safe, that have proven effective, and we can transition a workforce, a contractor base, and apprenticeship opportunities for those workers in green technology spaces. We respectfully urge an aye vote thank you.

Appreciate your testimony, both of you. We'll turn to the Department of Finance.

No file. Thank you.

Hey. We'll move to the public comment. Is there anyone that would like to speak in favor or in opposition to the proposal in front of us?

Mr. Chairman and Members, Scott Wetch on behalf of the State Association of Electrical Workers, on behalf of the California Coalition of Utility Employees, the California State Pipe Trades Council, the Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers and the Elevator Constructors Union in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, Members, Theo Pahos, representing the Calpine Corporations. We are opposed unless amended. We are all in on signing agreements with our union partners. We've done that now in five different agreements up and down the state for a number of decarbonization projects. We are 100% behind labor. We simply want an amendment that says if you sign a PLA and an MLA and we're signing both, that we're compliant with these sections of the Bill. It is something that they regularly do and other pieces of legislation.

We fear that without this protection, we go forward and we leave ourselves liable both civilly and criminally. And as we move forward to build these projects, we get loans. We have to show our partners whether it's the federal government because we are receiving the grants they talked about or whether it's the banks, we have to show them a pathway to compliance. And we don't think this Bill does that. So we very much urge our partners here, those that we've signed agreements, to take, an amendment that gives us the liability protection so we can go and construct these plants and employ their guys. Thank you.

Thank you. I've seen no one else who would like to address us on this issue. We'll turn to the committee. Any questions or comments? Seconded by Fong and there's a question by the vice chair.

Senator, have you considered the amendments that were just spoken about or referred to?

The request from Calpine? Yes, and we're continuing to talk to them as the State Building Trades Council. There's not a PLA requirement in the Bill, which I think the vast majority of folks actually like because it's just keeping it simple, skilled and trained. And so it gets difficult, as we all know, with legislation to come in and try to put a provision in just for one particular entity.

But we're taking a look at obviously the agreement is the understanding is that in some sense they're sort of going above and beyond with the PLA. We hope at the end of the day that we can just come to an understanding that there really isn't going to be impact to them in any negative way here. But again, down the stretch here, we'll keep talking to them. We didn't expect the opposition. We got it recently and we're just trying to work through that PLA issue without impacting anybody else.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mathis.

Senator, I just want to thank you for your work on this. It's always tough to thread the needle and to get everybody there and you've done I think a very remarkable job on this. And like you just said, you're trying to get there with a little bit of opposition that's left, but ensuring that we have skilled and trained, especially on these projects that are moving forward with building out, as mentioned, hydrogen and these other things. This is the direction we need to go, and we need to make sure that this work is done correctly as we build the 21st infrastructure that we need. So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Thank you. Senator, we appreciate your presentation, and we know that you're a Member who works very diligently to address as many of the issues as you possibly can. And we appreciate your response to the last question. Is there anything that you would like to do or say to close today?

Well, I appreciate the question and allowing us to get on the record the commitment to keep working on that opposition issue. That, of course, is very specific to Calpine, and we appreciate them very, I think I'm appreciative of the members' comments regarding our effort here. Of course, we've been talking about just transition. Just transition.

And as we get into these spaces where energy is shifting into different types and modalities, if you will, I think it's important to carry over our workforce standards, especially when they bring greater safety to these industrial areas. This is, of course, industrial has nothing to do with some of the other debates we've had in the Legislature about skilled and trained in another space like housing. This is an area where it's been very effective. And we only know that thanks to our predecessors who got SB 54 adopted earlier. Thank you. And we would respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. It's out on a do pass, a roll call. Congratulations. Senator Min, SB 704 recommendation do pass. Please, floor is yours. Going to have to?

Yes. All right. Good morning, Members of the committee. Today I'm presenting SB 704, which amends the Coastal Act to move outdated oil and gas policies and adds policies promoting offshore wind energy development. As you know, the Coastal Act provides for the regulation of development in our state's coastal zone and includes policies to protect environmentally sensitive areas and to address equity concerns and adverse impacts raised by development.

When the Coastal Act was enacted in the 1970s, a loophole was created that allowed oil and gas development, refineries and petrochemical facilities to circumvent environmental protection standards that were otherwise applied to all other projects. This loophole, known as the Industrial Override provision, is obviously severely outdated and perpetrates 1970s statewide energy goals that are inconsonant with our goals of today.

50 years later, while we are promoting new things like offshore wind, new oil and gas development is inconsistent with the state's efforts to decarbonize our economy and achieve net zero carbon emissions. SB 704 would close the industrial override loophole for new oil and gas development while allowing existing facilities to continue to be repaired and maintained and allowing for low carbon upgrades to refineries. SB 704 takes the thumb off the scale that exists for the benefit of the oil industry.

It also promotes offshore wind energy by enacting Coastal Act policies to encourage and facilitate the deployment of offshore wind. SBS 704 ensures, and this is from my staff, that wind is at the back of offshore wind projects. We have negotiated with opposition and taken amendments. They're now neutral, and there is no opposition to the Bill. The Bill has received solid support through its policy committees, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Department of Finance.

Thank you. No file.

Thank you. We'll turn to the public. Is there anyone that would like to speak in support or opposition? Name, organization, if any.

Izzy Swindler with Shaw Yoder Antwih Schmelzer and Lange on behalf of Humboldt County Board of Supervisors in strong support. Thank you.

Seeing no other. We'll bring it back to the committee. Is there comments or questions? Seeing none. Senator, you may close.

I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Thank you. This is . . . so this has been moved by Hart. Is there a second? Pellerin. Thank you, sir. Do pass. It's out on a b roll call with Dixon and Mathis. Aye vote. You're good. Senator Gonzalez. SB 674. Good morning.

Okay. I think I'm in the Senate already. Sorry about that. Mr. Chair and Members, I am here today to present SB 674, which will create statewide standards for the existing refinery fence line and community air monitoring program. In the last six years, since the program launched, there have been serious deficiencies in implementation that are depriving fence line communities of information. They need to make informed decisions about their health and well being.

Specifically, real time alerts are not being sent, fence line data is not available online, dangerous pollutants are not being monitored, and some refineries have even been exempted from the program altogether. 674 will address these shortcomings and create a statewide standard for the refinery fence line program to ensure the necessary pollutants are measured and that best practices and technologies are deployed. Additionally, the program has been in effect since 2020, AB 1647, which was the previous version.

Therefore, many refineries already have the necessary infrastructure in place, and for too long, many of our communities have been impacted. They need greater transparency, and that's why we're here today. So testifying in support. I have Erica Martinez, a policy advocate with Earthjustice, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Welcome. Your microphone.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Members of the committee. My name is Erica Martinez with Earthjustice, which is the co-sponsor of SB 674 in partnership with East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice. We appreciate the committee's analysis and agree the Bill has no state cost. SB 674 makes necessary changes to ensure better compliance with the core pillars of the fence line monitoring law, public health data collection, monitoring and accountability.

While air districts and refineries are indeed different throughout the state, there remain important commonalities that are central to the successful implementation of the law. Moreover, we believe the Bill preserves the fiscal framework of the current statute and continues to allow all stakeholders to negotiate at the local level for a robust program that fits the needs of the community. For example, the Bill identifies 18 pollutants the program should be tracking. The Bill also sets out the expectation that monitors should cover the perimeter of the refinery.

Likewise, though, the Bill also provides a process for air districts to explain why it might exclude one of those pollutants at the local level. The Bill also has language that provides for those instances where it does not make sense to place monitors completely around the refinery. The Bill acknowledges that the program will be most successful when there is a partnership at the local level that works for stakeholders.

The Bill also leverages the veracity of data collection with additional auditing and making data more accessible, which becomes part of the story that communities tell regulators when they describe their experiences living in those communities. For all those reasons, we urge your support of this Bill, and we thank the Senator for authoring the legislation. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate your testimony. Department of Finance.

Thank you. No file.

Thank you. Members of the public that would like to speak in favor or in opposition.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Zach Leary on behalf of the Western States Petroleum Association. We remain opposed unless amended to SB 674 as in print. And the draft amendments that we've seen. I think I just want to highlight two big issues that were mentioned by the supporters. One, the Bill requires the entire perimeter of the fence line of each refinery to be monitored unless it's infeasible. There's a big difference between infeasible and unnecessary.

We think that that decision should be made at the local level with the air districts in consultation with the refinery and the community input. And then second, I'll add the Bill as in print, has refineries now going to be responsible to pay for other facilities monitors that are not co owned or controlled by the refinery. We think this is an unnecessary cost and could likely increase the cost of refining gasoline here in California. We respectfully ask for your no vote.

Dennis Albiani on behalf of Global Clean Energy. This Bill is drafted what we believe is unnecessarily broad and what it's going to do is increase costs for enforcement, for entities that they didn't intend to go after, both at the air district as well as on the state side. By having that, it's pulling in entities like ourselves.

We are a renewable biodiesel company that will be converting a brownfield refinery that is over ten years old, never has had any of the monitoring equipment required by this law over the previous law. Excuse me. And that's about a $2 million cost. We're getting started. We're going to start producing by the end of the year in Bakersfield. And so by converting this brownfield we're pulled, which is a refinery that's been mothballed, we're pulled under this provisions.

If we had built a brand new facility out in the farmland, then we would not be under these monitoring requirements. So I think this has been drafted overly broad for us, but also for some of the other folks in the industries that asphalt and some other entities that are getting pulled under this. So we would recommend that this Bill be narrowed and focused. And we've had some amendments that we've brought around. We appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. Let me just also say that we've allowed some latitude for the first two speakers who obviously testified a little bit there in regards to their position, which is fine. It would be helpful to the committee and also to the chair if we could get pre notice for those who want to actually have testimony in support or opposition. It will help, at least in terms of our managing the flow of this meeting. Everyone else name, organization.

Chair Members Mike Monaghan on behalf of State Building Trades. We are opposed unless amended. I think there's a path forward. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, Jeff Sievers, on behalf of the California Asphalt Pavement Association, representing the three companies that produce asphalt in the state. And we remain opposed unless amended. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Suzanne Hume. I'm the educational Director and founder of Clean Earth 4 Kids, standing in strong support of this Bill. I am joined by California Nurses for Environmental, Health and Justice, FACTS, Moms Advocating for Sustainability, Grandparents for a Future, North County Climate Change Alliance and many others. This is a very important Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the committee. Are there any questions, comments, motion?

Senator, so from some of the opposition testimony, have you considered the amendments specifically for the facilities that are repurposing that have been put under this Bill?

Of course, we're still working with the opposition. We've been working with them since day one. And, in fact, we are going to be taking some additional amendments on the Assembly floor to whittle down the definition of refinery and making it consistent with a definition that has already been passed by the Assembly on a Buffy Wicks Bill, which was AB 1465. So we'll continue working with them. Short answer. Thank you.

I see no one else that would like to speak. Is there a motion moved by Hart, seconded by Weber? Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Do pass out on a B roll call. Is Senator Umberg here? He's not? Then we will turn to Senator Archuleta. SB 806, recommendations, do pass. Welcome. Your microphone. There you go

Good morning, Mr. Chair and committee members. I'm here to present Senate Bill 806. It's a cleanup bill to last year's Senate Bill 1111. It's called the Rick Best Safety Act because of the tragedy that happened to the Best family and the loss of Mr. Best. And, which requires the loss of the large trash containers. When we were kids, we called them dipsy dumpsters. Remember that? Well, these large trash containers can be very hazardous on dark alleys and roads.

And so this bill is here to place reflective markers on these large containers. And Senate Bill 806 makes minor changes to the location of the reflective tapes that go around the containers, and it strengthens the enforcement of Senate Bill 1111, which does not create any state cost. And so with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Department of Finance?

Thank you, no file.

Appreciate that. Anyone from the public that would like to speak in favor or opposition to the bill? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the committee. Is there a motion? Sanchez, second by Papan. Senator, you may be closed.

Again, I respectfully ask for aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Do pass out on a B roll call. Thank you. We're going to move until we're waiting for Senator Umberg, but we will now move to the consent calendar to take up the consent calendar. Madam Clerk, read the consent calendar.

SB 35 Umberg, SB 38 Laird, SB 78 Glazer, SB 247 Wilk, SB 332 Cortese, SB 388 Archuletta, SB 420 Becker, SB 621 Caballero, SB 632 Caballero, SB 658 McGuire, SB 746 Eggman, SB 837 Archuletta, SB 844 Jones, SB 890 Committee on Governance and Finance, SB 891 Committee on Transportation.

Is there a motion? Moved by Dr weber seconded by the Vice Chair? Roll call on the motion.

Holden aye, Dahle aye, Bryan. Calderon aye. Carrillo aye. Dixon aye. Fong aye. Hart aye. McCarty. Mathis aye. Papan aye. Pellerin. Sanchez aye. Soria aye. Weber aye. Wilson aye.

Consent calendar is adopted. We'll now move to the Suspense file. Dispose of the suspense file.

ACA 1 Aguirakuri, SB 3 Dodd, SB 4 Wiener, SB 27 Durazo, SB 30 Umberg, SB 43 Eggman, SB 48 Becker, SB 49 Becker, SB 51 Bradford, SB 52 Durazo. SB 74 Dodd. SB 76 Wiener, SB 77 Umberg, SB 88 Skinner, SB 96 Portantino, SB 97 Wiener, SB 231 Hertado. SB 233 Skinner, SB, 238 Wiener, SB 257 Portantino. SB 274 Skinner, SB 283 Ochoa Bogh, SB 286 McGuire, SB 296 Dodd.

SB 302 Stern, SB 309 Cortese, SB 310 Dodd, SB 322 Becker, SB 323 Portantino, SB 324 Limon, SB 328 Dodd, SB 336 Umberg, SB 345 Skinner, SB 348 Skinner, SB 363 Eggman, SB 394 Gonzalez, SB 410 Becker, SB 419 Roth, SB 423 Wiener, SB 427 Portantino, SB 434 Min, SB 441 Bradford, SB 444 Newman,

SB 470 Alvarado-Gill, SB 474 Becker, SB 485 Becker, SB 487 Atkins, SB 493 Min, SB 500 McGuire, SB 502 Allen, SB 509 Portantino, SB 511 Blakespear, SB 516 Skinner, SB 520 Seyarto. Excuse me. SB 531 Ochoa Bogh, SB 541 Menjivar, SB 558 Rubio, SB 565 Caballero, SB 569 Glazer, SB 570 Becker, SB 577 Hertado,

SB 578 Ashby, SB 582 Becker, SB 583 Padilla, SB 586 Eggman, SB 598 Skinner, SB 619 Padilla, SB 627 Smallwood-Cuevas, SB 635 Menjivar, SB 640 Portantino, SB 641 Roth, SB 650 Dodd, SB 664 Stern, SB 673 Bradford, SB 677 Blakespear, SB 686 Durazo, SB 694 Eggman, SB 695 Gonzalez, SB 696 Portantino, SB 700 Bradford, SB 714 Durazo, SB 717 Stern, SB 724 Glazer, SB 729 Menjivar, SB 734 Rubio, SB 745 Cortese SB 747 Caballero,

SB 755 Becker, SB 757 Archuleta, SB 760 Newman, SB 795 Stern, SB 797 Padilla, SB 800 Caballero, SB 805 Portantino, SB 815 Roth, SB 822 Durazo SB 830 Smallwood-Cuevas, SB 847 Dahle, SB 856 Glazer, SB 864 Smallwood-Cuevas. SB 873 Bradford, SB 889 Committee on Governance and Finance.

The suspense file is adopted. We'll move back to our presentation. Senator Umberg, you have two bills, SB 34 and SB 229. We'll take 34 first.

Sure. Thank you Mr. Chair, members. Apparently I'm the last person, so I'm going to cut my presentation down to 30 minutes. That's a joke. Before you-

I knew you were joking.

All right. So both these bills, they evolve out of the same situation in Anaheim, California, concerning the sale of Anaheim Stadium. What occurred was that the former mayor and other city officials conspired with the Angels to sell the stadium for $200-300 million less than its fair market value. They actually were notified that when they were attempting to sell the stadium, that they were in violation of Surplus Lands Act.

The city opted to pay a fine, which really wasn't a fine, because it was just moving money from one pot to another. What these two bills do: one is try to make sure that if there is a noted violation -- if, for example, the city doesn't put the land out to bid, HCD says you're in violation. Then they got to put the land out to bid and make sure that it complies with 25 percent affordable housing. That's one. That's SB 34.

And then SB 229 simply says, once you've struck a deal, city council has 14 days, basically, to examine the deal, allows the public to be able to weigh in. Currently, there are three individuals who have pleaded guilty, awaiting sentencing. I expect more. This simply adds, both the ability for HCD to stop this kind of collusive behavior that harms the taxpayers -- should actually increase revenue -- and add some transparency. And I urge an aye vote.

Thank you. Thank you for your brevity, but also bringing together the other issue as well. We'll turn to Department of Finance on SB 34. Is there file?

Yes, we do. We are neutral on this bill, noting minor and absorbable costs to HCD, and we do not anticipate a state reimbursable mandate from this bill.

Thank you. We'll now entertain comments from the public on SB 34. I will also roll in SB 229, if there is anyone here that would like to comment on that bill. And we'll just use your comments to apply to the bill when we bring it up. Okay. So there's a motion by Papan and a second by Calderon in support of SB 34. That is a do pass as amended. Are there any other questions or comments from the committee? Seeing none.

Senator, we appreciate your work on this, and certainly this is a local issue, but obviously has impact on some of the conversations that are happening around the Surplus Land Act. So we appreciate your addressing these issues and knowing that there's willingness to look at additional conversation on SB 229 possible amendments. So with that, you may close on SB 34.

Let me just note, this only applies in Orange County. I'm hopeful that one day we'll be able to close the loopholes around the state to prevent this kind of collusion. Urge an aye vote.

Thank you. The bill is do pass as amended. It's out on a B-roll call. That's on SB 34. You've pretty much given a presentation on 229. We'll turn to the Department of Finance. Is there a file on SB 229?

Thank you. We are neutral on this bill as well, with minor and absorbable costs to HCD. We do not anticipate a state reimbursable mandate.

Thank you. We'll turn to the same -- motion and second. Okay. Same on the motion and second. This is a do pass as amended. Is there a closing? Same-

Thank you. Urge an aye vote.

Thank you. It's out on a B-roll call. We will now turn to public comment on items -- on items -- well, before we do public comment, let's see if we need to add on for any members before we-

Bryan. McCarty. Pellerin.

We'll now turn to items that were not presented on today, but we'll entertain comments at this moment.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Chris McKaley on behalf of, first, the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce in support of Senator Weiner's housing development measures, SB 4 and 423; on behalf of Humboldt and Mendocino Redwood Companies in support of SB 310, Senator Dodd's prescribed fire liability; and lastly, on behalf of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, in support of Senator Min's transit operations -- transit operators bill dealing with harassment, SB 434. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, members. Bob Naylor, representing Fieldstead & Company. That's owned by Howard Ahmanson Jr., an Orange County philanthropist. He's in support of SB 4 by Weiner, and SB 423 by Weiner. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Gregory Kramer on behalf of Disability Rights California. We are in opposition to Senate Bill 43 by Senator, Eggman-

-in support of Senate Bill 77 by Senator Umberg; co-sponsors of Senate Bill 27, Skinner; in support of SB 323 Portantino; in support of SB 336, Umberg; in support of SB 474, Becker; in support of SB 635, Menjivar; in support of Senate Bill 686 by Durazo; in support of Senate Bill 760, Newman; and finally, in support of Senate Bill 805, Portantino. Thank you.

Good morning. Ryan Snow, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen in support of SB 757. Thank you,

Mr. Chair and members, Alex Torres with Brownstein, on behalf of a few clients. On behalf of the Housing Action Coalition, in support of ACA 1, SB 4, SB 423 and SB 410. On behalf of the Bay Area Council, in support of SB 76, SB 423, SB 420 and SB 434. And on behalf of the National Independent Venue Association of California, in support of SB 76 by Senator Weiner. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Louie Costa with the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, SMART-Transportation Division, and proud co-sponsors of SB 88, Skinner and SB 757, Archuleta. Thank you.

Good morning Chair and members. Vanessa Chavez with the California Association of Realtors, with an opposed unless amended position on ACA 1. Thank you.

Hello Chair and members. Karen Stout with Lighthouse Public Affairs. Speaking on behalf of a few clients here. We are in support of SB 423, speaking on behalf of SPUR, CivicWell, BuildCasa, Habitat for Humanity, California, Sand Hill Properties, Buckeye Properties and United Way of Greater Los Angeles. Also speaking in support of SB 4 on behalf of SPUR, CivicWell, Habitat for Humanity, California and United Way of Greater Los Angeles. And then I'm also speaking in support of ACA 1 on behalf of CivicWell, Habitat for Humanity, California, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Thank you.

Mr. Chair. Toni Trigueiro, on behalf of the California Teachers Association, here in opposition to SB 509 by Senator Portantino. Thank you.

Good morning Chair and members. Troy Polk, on behalf of the California Board of Psychology. We are in support of SB 805.

And the board has a support, if amended, position on SB 815. Thank you.

Good morning. Talia Dimato on behalf of California NORML, in support of SB 51, Bradford; SB 700, Bradford; and SB 302, Stern. Also for SB 51 on behalf of Stiiizy, also in support. Thank you.

Good morning Chair and members. Leslie Rodriguez on behalf of Housing Trust Silicon Valley in support of ACA 1, Aguiar-Curry and SB 4 and SB 423, Senator Weiner. Thank you.

Chair and members, Anna Mathews with the Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges, proud co-sponsors of SB 444, Newman. Thank you.

Good morning Chair and members, Kathleen Soriano on behalf of the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, in support of SB 635, Menjivar, and in support of SB 873, Bradford, on behalf of the Keck Medicine of the University of Southern California. Thank you.

Good morning Mr. Chair and members. Tim Madden, representing the Washington Township Healthcare District in Fremont, speaking in support of ACA 1, and also speaking on behalf of the California Society of Plastic Surgeons, the California Chapter of American Cardiology, and the California Rheumatology Alliance, all in support of SB 598. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Suzanne Hume, I'm the educational director and founder of CleanEarth4kids.org. So the following bills are supported by CleanEarth4kids.org: FACTS, Grandparents for Action, Moms Advocating Sustainability, North County Climate Change Alliance. So: SB 11, Menjivar; SB 30, Umberg; SB 48, Becker; SB 49, Becker; SB 233, Skinner; SB 283, Ochoa-Bogh; SB 4 -- I'm sorry -- 348, Skinner; SB 394, Gonzalez; SB 444, Newman; SB 511, Blakespear; SB 583, Padilla; SB 598, Skinner; SB 647, Gonzalez; SB 704, Min; SB 795, Stern.

And on behalf of California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice: SB 30, Umberg; SB 48, Becker; 49, Becker; SB 233, Skinner; SB 283, Ochoa-Bogh; SB 4 -- I'm sorry -- 348, Skinner; and SB 394, Gonzalez; SB 511, Blakespear; SB 647, Gonzalez; and SB 407. Thank you -- I'm sorry -- 704. Thank you.

Morning, Chair, panel. My name is Steve Cattolica. I represent the California Neurology Society and the California Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation in support of SB 598.

Good morning Chair and members. Brian Augusta, on behalf of the Rural Community Assistance Corporation and Self Help Enterprises, two of the co-sponsors of SB 336, which has the support of over 350 nonprofits, statewide. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to comment. Seeing none. So that concludes the public comment. We're going to allow for members to add on. I also want to make sure that we clear the record on Umberg 34, SB 34, and SB 229. Fong is not voting on both of those bills.

Brian. Aye. McCarty. Pellerin. Aye.

We are adjourned.

That was consent.