Senate Select Committee on Infrastructure Streamlining and Workforce Equity

Good morning. Thank you all for taking time out of your busy schedule. On behalf of the Senate Select Committee on Infrastructure Streamlining, and Workforce Equity, we welcome you to this critical hearing focused on the Governor and Legislature's infrastructure policy proposals. This morning's hearing will be focused on the five policy bills, the five policy bills that will be advancing in the Senate next Wednesday. The Assembly is tracking a bit quicker, but it will be heard next Wednesday on this infrastructure package.

Would like to be able to do a quick rundown of how we're going to advance today's hearing and how we're going to break up each of the policy proposals that will be in front of us. First and foremost, we're going to hear about fully protected species reform. That is going to be Senate Bill 147. That is Senator Ashby. We'll hear from the Administration on each of these proposals.

We're then going to hear on progressive design Bill contracting for Caltrans and Job order contracting for Caltrans, along with the National Environmental Policy Act extension. That Bill is now Senate Bill 146. Senator Gonzalez and Assemblymember Friedman. We'll then hear about direct contracting authority for the I 15 wildlife crossings and modernization for Caltrans environmental mitigation process. That Bill is Senate Bill 145, authored by Senator Newman and assemblywoman Friedman.

Next, this morning, we'll hear about equity in high road labor standards, that is, in Bill Senate Bill 150, authored by Senator Derazzo Smallwood, cuevas Gonzalez, Cortesi, and Assemblywoman Lou Rivas. And finally, ladies and gentlemen, we will then hear about CEQA, judicial streamlining reform, CEQA, administrative record reform, and the extension of Senate Bill Seven that is now in Bill SB 149, authored by Senator Caballero and Becker would like to bring your attention. We have slightly revised agendas that are in the back to my right.

Each of the Members have those revised agendas. And for each of you who are here in the hearing, thank you for being here, by the way. And the slightly revised agendas reflecting the Bill numbers are in the back of the room. All right, before we get any further, we'd like to be able to take the role Mr. Consultant, good morning. Can you please call the role of the Select Committee?

Senator Mcguire.

Here.

Senator Mcguire here. Senator Allen. Senator Becker. Senator Caballero. Senator Gonzalez. Senator Grove.

Here.

Senator Grove here. Senator Limon. Senator Min.

Here.

Senator Min here. Senator Skinner. Senator Wilk?

Present.

Senator Wilk here.

Mr. Consultant, if you want to just call our two Members that just came in.

Senator Caballero?

Present.

Senator Caballero here. Senator Becker?

Here.

Senator Becker here.

Thank you so much, Mr. Consultant. I want to take a moment also to be able to thank the Senators who were part of the working group that was appointed by the President, Pro Tim of the Senate and who are at this dais. They have all put in tremendous time, effort and energy to enhance this policy proposal. We want to say thank you so much for the hard work. To each of the Senators, to the leadership of Governor Newsom, and of course, to the Assembly.

I think today, California is proving to the rest of the nation that we can tackle our long term green energy needs, protect our environment, and move our economy forward while ensuring our most vulnerable communities are lifted up. As many on this dice have said, we must move with urgency to help modernize our energy, water and transportation infrastructure while protecting our keystone environmental policies. We also want to take a moment to thank our partners in the Assembly for their focus and hard work.

We are especially grateful to Assemblywoman Bauer-Kahan, Assemblywoman Rivas, Assemblyman Billy Epudwa and, of course, to Speaker Rinden. We want to acknowledge the work of the Governor and his incredibly capable team. To Dana Williamson. To Ms. Bauma. To Christine. To Rhonda. We want to say thank you to Anne Patterson, to Goldman for all of their work over these past many months. We truly appreciate your effort and partnership, and it's nice to see Goldman not on Zoom today. So, my goodness, it's good to see you.

This is the second hearing that we've had here in the Senate on these policy proposals. Chairman of Natural Resources held an extensive hearing approximately three weeks ago. We're grateful for his leadership and focus on this and the Senators who are on this dais have had literally dozens upon dozens of meetings with stakeholders in the previous month on all issues surrounding the proposal, along with receiving very blunt and honest feedback about each of the policies.

All right, we're going to be taking public comment at the end of today's agenda for folks who are watching online and would like to better participate. We welcome your testimony. As always. There is a toll free number. We're going to encourage you to call. It's 888-808-6929. That access code is 736-2834.

Again, we welcome folks here in room 2200 and those who are going to be calling online, we'd like to now open it up to any of the Members of the Select Committee who have an opening comment. Again, we want to say thank you so much to each of the Senators of the Working Group. We want to say thank you so much to Senator Grove and Senator Wilk, who are here with us here today, having a bipartisan conversation.

Who would like to be able to have some brief opening remarks, please? Senator Becker.

Thank you. I just want to thank you, Senator Mcguire. Thank everyone on the working group. We just had a presentation, Senator Cavillier and I, over at the National Resources and the Assembly. That went well. And as part of that, we shared that we've known now for decades that we do have to move quickly to counteract and eliminate the worst effects of climate change. And so the challenge before us has always been to how to build clean faster.

And for a long time the technologies weren't there, but now they are, from solar to wind to energy storage, to geothermal. And the question is now, how do we move as fast as possible? I think under SB 100, they said we need 130 gigawatts of clean energy, another 50 gigawatts of solar of storage, and we got to figure out, while protecting the environment, how do we build faster and put these resources and now tap into both our own state resources and the federal resources.

So appreciate the spirit of that. And the group looking at balancing all of that as we look to build clean faster while still having those protections and feel that this is a really important start. And just thank my colleagues, Henry Becker.

Thank you for your incredible work. We'd like to be able to see if there are any other Members who would like to be able to comment, have any opening comments prior to us kicking off today's meeting. All right, last thing I'm just going to say is we'd like to be able to acknowledge by name each of the Senators who were on the working group and thank them once again for their work. Senator Lamone. Senator Becker. Senator Caballero. Senator Min. Senator Skinner. Senator Gonzalez. Senator Allen.

We would not be here without each of you, your leadership, your hard work, your effort, your energy, and candidly, your late night tenacity. So we are truly appreciative of each and every one of you. So without further ado, Members, we are going to be turning it over first and foremost to be able to cover all issues of the package. We're going to start with fully protected species. I intentionally did not mention these two individuals earlier when I was thanking the administrative team.

Want to say thank you so much to Gayle Miller and to Director Bonham from California Department of Fish and Wildlife for their incredible work on this and for bringing this forward for your partnership. And let's just be honest, the collaboration that we've had over these past many weeks, we've had some tough conversations. We've been able to work through the issues and we're truly appreciative to Ms. Miller and of course the Director Bonham for all their work.

We're going to kick it off on Senate Bill 147, and That's fully protected species. Ms. Miller.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'll turn it over to Director Bonham. Just again to express huge gratitude to the Senate and the Assembly and from three weeks ago, Senator Min, when we were sitting here. We have a stronger package that does accomplish all of the goals that Senator McGuire spoke to. Building a clean future for California, protecting the environment, lifting up our communities, and recognizing the challenges ahead to modernize all that we need to do in order to meet the state's goals. So I think I won't belabor the pieces.

Obviously, you see each of the pieces of the package that we came to you with three weeks ago. We have the alternative project delivery methods and just a huge amount of gratitude to Mr. Tolifson and the Transportation Agency team that are here. Expedited environmental review. You'll hear a lot about that this afternoon with Mr. Kelsey, who will be here from the Natural Resources Agency and then the permit streamlining.

So each of these will make an incredible difference, as you will start to see, because we will continue to collaborate in this all of government approach that the Governor announced in his Executive order. We will absolutely continue to partner with you and make sure you know all of the pieces and how we are building literally the progress that you've all asked to see in an equitable way while creating jobs.

So I certainly don't want to belabor this, but again, I think we know that it took a huge team to get this through. Very grateful that you were willing to work on such an expedited timeline and have no doubt that this will make a huge difference in terms of meeting our goals. So with that, if I may turn it over to Mr. Bonham to start with, SB 147. Thank you, Senator.

Thank you so much, Ms. Miller. I appreciate it. Mr. Director, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Gayle. And Chair. Vice Chair. Committee Members. I personally think two of the most overlooked words in the English language are thank you. And I want to respond with a similar thank you to you. Leadership in both chambers, the administration's team, the Governor himself. We're in a better place today because of that engagement and that leadership. So thank you. I want to focus in on Senate Bill 147, which is an urgency measure, and is about one of the proposals from the governor's infrastructure package.

And what this proposal will do is reconcile the fully protected species statutes with the California Endangered Species Act, both of which are in the Fish and Game Code. Reconciliation is an important word for me. It's about harmonization. It's not a word that is about confusion, conflict, or duplication. It's about harmonization.

So this Bill will reconcile a series of lists that are in our code about fully protected species with the California Endangered Species Act for specific categories of projects so that we can actually permit them, but subject to conditions that ensure species conservation. So my three top line points I want you to hear me make today are this structure is different than what we debated three weeks ago. It's different. It's not the same.

This structure is based on clear legislative precedent, things you've already done before in this space. And it represents a three party agreement, which itself is the embodiment of California showing we can tackle difficult issues head on together. Here's the background. In the 1960s and body, the California Legislature designated 37 animals as fully protected.

This was before the federal Endangered Species Act, and it was before the California Endangered Species Act were passed in 1984, the California Legislature created the California Endangered Species Act, which lays out a comprehensive statutory regime to protect animals and plants that our sister Commission may designate as threatened or endangered. So we have two structures, separate lists, two laws.

This Bill brings them together by allowing our Department to authorize a permit for what we call take, which is impact of an animal that has been previously designated as fully protected. Why is this needed? We have two challenges. On one hand, the California Endangered Species Act does allow our Department to authorize projects, to permit projects that are otherwise lawful, that have an incidental impact on a species. We do that through permitting.

But on the other hand, the fully protected species list prohibit any permitting, prohibit any take of one of those 37 species. So you have two things going on which aren't always compatible. So there's no facilitating permitting of projects. There's a challenging situation for project proponents because if they proceed, they take on a potential risk around planning, designing, and accountability. Your structure, your proposal, the Bill in front of you, reconciles those things, and it fits your legislative precedent.

Over about the last decade, the Legislature has itself amended the California Endangered Species Act about 8910 times to carve out very specific projects from the fully protected species list and give our Department the ability to permit those projects. So Senate Bill 147 takes that construct and now creates carve outs for specific categories of projects, while maintaining the fully protected species statutes and the CISA statutes, and creates the reconciliation, the harmony.

Here's what it would authorize Senate Bill 147 our Department would be able to issue a permit using the permit structure in the California Endangered Species Act. We would be able to require avoidance, minimization, full mitigation of impacts. We would be required to ensure additional measures to conserve the species using the standards set forth in the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act.

We would be subject to oversight by this body, regular reporting on all the data related to who sought a permit, the conditions issued and covered in the permit, the likely extent of impact subject to the permit, and a whole host of other data reporting responsibilities. This Bill will require monitoring to be baked into the approval, adaptive management to be baked into the approval, and adjustment through amendment, if effectiveness monitoring shows we need to course correct through permit amendment.

Of course, this approach in Senate Bill 147 requires a permit application fee, which is already an existing component in CISA. This is a better approach because of your leadership, and here's how it follows precedent. The Bill itself names the precise categories of projects for which this authority would exist, and it narrowly tailors them to projects essential for California's future, the maintenance, repair, or improvement to projects for the StateWater project, including existing infrastructure undertaken by the Department of Water Resources.

Think California aqueduct repair because of land subsidence or aqueduct repair to deal with flood fighting. A real urgent issue today. Second category the maintenance, repair or improvement of critical regional or local water agency infrastructure. We know this is urgent and real because this body itself has already done a specific carve out on this issue for those types of projects in Southern California previously transportation project including any associated habitat, connectivity and wildlife crossing project undertaken by a state, regional or local agency.

Importantly, that does not increase highway or street capacity for automobile or truck travel. Fourth, a wind project subject to certain conditions. Fifth, a solar photovoltaic project subject to certain conditions. And lastly, Senate Bill 147 does not apply to the design or construction of through delta water conveyance, nor the design or construction of ocean desalination projects. The totality of this package. And by the way, the Bill proposes to remove the American peregrine Falcon, the brown pelican and the thick tailed chub as fully protected species.

And there's a scientific rationale. Both the falcon and the pelican were subsequently put on the Endangered Species Act by our Commission and then after scientific analysis, determined to have been recovered and removed from the Cecil list, whereas the thick tailed chub is believed by the scientists to be extirpated, which isn't extinction, but means not present in California.

So with all of these things, the provisions of the Bill, sunset at the end of 2033, and your leadership, the Governor's leadership, the Assembly's leadership, is putting California in a better place to do what we need to do, balancing our values, ensuring faster permitting, while protecting our environment. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Mr. Director. Again, what we're going to do after each of these subject areas, we're going to open it up for questions and comments from the Senators on the dais. And of course, we'll be taking public comment at the end of the hearing. We'd like to better see if any of the Senators have any questions or comments on this issue. We're going to start with Senator Grove and then go to Senator Men. Good morning.

Good morning. Thank you. Thank you for that information. Our side of the Iowa was not included in the briefings or the working group. And then to participate in the hearing is definitely an honor so that we can bring our concerns and questions. If you look at my voting record, I am not somebody who the Sierra Club Environmental Defense Fund or any of those organizations support in any way, shape or form.

But I have a huge concern about this Bill, specifically when it comes to the bald eagle or golden eagle. There's an AP article that just recently was printed that says a wind company and their wind turbines are paying, I believe, $35 million for 150 bald or golden eagles that have been killed because of the wind turbines. It's an Associated Press article and it's dated in 2023. I don't remember the number or the month, but I can pull it up is the golden eagle.

Because according to the Calm Matters article That's sitting on the chair's desk June 20 eigth, the golden eagle and the bald eagle will be excluded from the endangered species list as a protected under these rules. So if a solar company or a wind company wants to get a take permit, they'll have permission to kill the bald eagle or the golden eagle. Is that true? The Calm Matters article, true or not true?

Senator, if I can reframe your question and narrow it in on what I think you'd like me to talk about right now, those two eagles are designated as fully protected species, correct? But it's also true within the fishing game code. There are several other provisions that are applicable to raptors and eagles in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

It's also the case that on the federal front, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act arguably preempts a lot of the space and is the primary permitting structure to deal with eagle issues related to development. So, under Senate Bill 147, the opportunity would exist for our Department to permit a project which we otherwise could not if it were just a fully protected species. But the permitting in itself allows the Department to require developers to avoid the impact.

To begin with, avoidance is a smart strategy for developers, because if you avoid the impact, you're reducing your risk. The second thing this proposal will allow our Department to do is to require parties to minimize the impact. That, too, is a smart strategy for developers. You can often reduce your development risk by focusing in on avoidance and minimization and shrink your mitigation responsibility. But this proposal would allow the Department to approve a project which may cause take subject to those binding commitments for avoidance, minimization mitigation.

So, just so that we're clear, and the public is clear, can I read something really fast to you? Is that okay, Mr. Chair? Please. Thank you. My glasses for that. Sorry. SB 147. This is an AP article printed today. Calm Matters article printed today, June 29, 2023. SB 147 would allow projects to receive permits to kill certain wildlife species that are classified as fully protected. 37 species, including the golden eagle, greater sand, hill, crane, bighorn sheep, et cetera.

And then you go back to the Calm Matters article that says 150 eagles have already been killed by wind turbines. There's penalties associated with that under current structure. But with 147 just a simple and I realize I didn't go to college and I barely graduated high school, but just a simple explanation. Will this allow your Department to issue take permits to kill the bald or golden eagle?

Only after we've required developers to do other things first, and subject to this Legislature's requirement that on an annual basis, we report back on everything that happens under any individual permit, including the measures we required the compliance with the measures, the take associated with any approval, and that That's data coming back to this body annually.

So wind turbines are often in the pathway of bird migration, right, to garner as much wind capability to produce green energy. With these wind turbines, we have several in the Tahibi Mountain area. Some of the largest wind turbines in the state are in my district and then some that aren't in my district, I guess. What's the mitigation standards that you're going to require for these developers to minimize?

And again, I can't believe I'm standing up here advocating for the Environmental Defense Fund, but it's just interesting to me that, again, and we weren't part of this, we would have had these conversations earlier, a few weeks. But I guess my real concern is the golden eagle or the bald eagle to have a take permit to be able to kill them. We've lost 150 since we put the wind turbines up in California.

We have a litigation process going on through one company where there's criminal charges filed against the wind company. Will that mitigate all of those criminal charges for this take permit as well?

Senator, I will not comment on any separate enforcement proceeding for which I don't have the facts in front of me about and may not involve my Department at all, not knowing your reference. But I would say that I appreciate your defense of the eagles, an important species, and I would leave to our Department scientist and any project proponent, scientist, the very understood dialogue to determine mitigation ratios and permit conditions. Your questions speak to the challenge our Department has everywhere in California every day.

We're in the middle of energy, housing, roads, water and development everywhere. At the same hand, we have the greatest biodiversity of any nation in these United States, and we are often criticized for being too environmentally protective or too development friendly on the very same permit. In case the point of this Bill is to position the state to be able to get better conservation benefit for species.

Right now, under fully protected species structure, the Department cannot require anyone to avoid an impact, cannot require anyone to minimize an impact, and cannot require anyone to mitigate an impact. This proposal would allow us to do all those things which I would argue creates a greater conservation uplift while also creating a permit pathway for critical infrastructure That's narrowly tailored around important categories.

Well, I don't doubt one bit, sir. You have one of the most difficult jobs in the State of California, specifically with new energy development That's coming forward and the areas in which they have to be placed in order to be productive, whether it's solar panels in the desert and you have to mitigate issues, I don't doubt one bit that you have a very difficult job. And like I said, I just read this as we were sitting here. We got the language on this infrastructure package.

We weren't allowed to participate within the last three weeks. This is all brand new to myself and my colleague at the end of the dais. And so I appreciate you asking that question. It just surprised me that the Golden Eagle was on a take permit. So thank you, sir, and I appreciate your balancing act that you have to do on a daily basis. One question that I'd like to just ask again, and somewhat unrelated to this. Are you the individual who picked highway 14 and 58 for the Joshua Tree? Is that you?

Senator, with respect, I'd love to pick this up offline, but it's a non issue.

Okay. It is. That's good.

It's absolutely a non issue. I know Senator Wilk has the same question.

No, I don't. I actually want to defend you because we bring it on. We've never met in person, so I didn't know, but we've talked a lot on the phone and I think you're very balanced in measure and competing various varying interests. I have nothing but the highest regard for you. I didn't like the decision, but I have the highest regard for you personally.

So I'd be fine walking over this afternoon or at your earliest convenience to talk about why the boundary issue and a separate thing is a non issue.

I appreciate that and I appreciate the Chair's indulgence, but just even your response right there saying it's a non issue, that means the world. So thank you, sir, for that, and I apologize for throwing that in the middle of that, but this is the first time I've ever had you before me.

I love the succulents.

Oh, dear Lord. There we go.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Senator Grove. And I just want to be clear that item is not in front of the Select Committee here today, but is on a separate track. But no, please. Very, very grateful to Senator Grove. So, ladies and gentlemen of the Committee, I'd like to turn it over to Chairman of Natural Resources.

Thank you. And I just want to thank Ms. Miller and Director Bonham for all the work that you've done as well as staff who I don't think has been appropriately acknowledged for just all the hard work that went into this. This has changed a lot in the last three weeks and this particular Bill has moved a lot and really appreciate that.

As Chair of Natural Resources, we are obviously trying to strike a balance here between deploying rapidly clean energy infrastructure, other infrastructure that will help us decarbonize our economy and meet our climate goals that we desperately need to do, but trying to balance that with the competing goal of protecting biodiversity and wildlife. We are facing an extinction crisis here in California and across the globe. And I think this hits the right balance.

I know there will be people who feel like it goes too far in one direction or the other, but I think this is a very thoughtful Bill. I did have a question for you and it relates in particular to deployment and implementation. And the question is how many personnel years are you expecting if you've actually done the math yet for this all to be implemented? And is that included in the budget?

Because I noted that we had 40 personnel years related to climate related permitting that was specifically in the budget. Is that part of this or is that separate and do we need additional budget allocations to deploy this great question?

First answer is the Department will internalize dealing with this proposal. It's important enough for us to do that. Second, you are right that the budget that is en route to kind of enrolled and chaptered in all the technicalities includes an increase of 40 positions to our Department.

Meant for permitting, associated with primarily water and energy. I think that'll give us an uplift. Those positions went through the process predating this proposal. So there's some efficiencies to be gained internally. But we take on the task of implementing Senate Bill 147.

And I think a very positive component of the Bill I have not described yet is in about about one year you require in the Bill that the Department come back with a full plan on how we will complete the science to assess the status of these 37 species, which frankly has been an omission to date. Right.

You don't know. We don't know. They were put on this list in the 60s. So That's an important component of this Bill. And I think it factors into part of your question as well.

And maybe just a broader question is that, the statement you just made about internalizing the cost true of the larger trailer Bill package and the other items like I 15 crossing and all that.

We are 150% committed to I 15, having been one of the signatories to the Memorandum of Understanding. And we're doing everything in the world to complete this package.

That was the end of the I 15. That was which will be described in a moment.

Exactly. And I think there's an extensive conversation on that about who's responsible, how it's going to be paid for, timeline in which it's going to be paid for, who's going to be managing. So it will be a good conversation. I really appreciate Senator Min previewing that because that was a big issue for the Senate and I'm grateful to the Members who are here today for their leadership on that. Senator Min, please. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to turn it over to our Budget Chair, Chair Skinner. Good morning.

Thanks very much, Chair Mcguire, Sub Chair Mcguire. Anyway, I appreciate the presentation. A couple of comments on the 147, the Bill before us. I do appreciate that both the Desalination projects and the Delta conveyance are not included in this. So I want to acknowledge the Administration for their willingness to work with us on those. And to our colleague, Senator Grove.

You raised some very important issues. And these like, I don't want to use sort of cliches, but it is this balancing act. And I previous to being on the Legislature, I served on the East Bay Regional Park District Board, and we had public lands that we on the Altamont Pass. So we were one of the earliest to allow for wind turbines on public lands and the design of wind turbines at the time. And they were actually installed, I think, well before the year 2000.

And the Altamont Pass is in the hawk migratory the flyway. We then found that there was quite a lot of Golden Eagle kills as a result. It's not just the Tehachapi's. And so we had to once the contract with that particular wind, that company, we had to depurpose those and use a completely different technology that was designed, hopefully, to avoid them.

Now, I have not been tracking it carefully to know whether, in fact, the new technology that we used and the spacing that was then, in fact, avoided. And it's and I'm not saying that good or bad, I'm just saying that as we pursue any of these types of projects, we don't always know, even if we've studied it, even if there's been the environmental impact report, we can't always predict until it's actually on the ground what impact it's having.

So I think the language was carefully designed that, yes, there can be some taking as a result of different species or individuals. Not a whole species by any means. No, no. And we may experience, once some of our projects are built, that we will have to adjust them, that we may have to redesign, we may experience that. So I think I'm more kind of expressing just an eyes wide open. Even when we are as careful as we can be, we can still confront these.

But I really appreciate you're paying attention to it because it is very important and interestingly, once we replaced the ones that were ostensibly in the path of the Golden Eagle, we then found the much taller ones were killing off bats. And bats, of course, are very important pollinators, and we have a pollinator crisis because of bees. And again, did we know that? No. So we're going to learn as we go and we hopefully are going to be wise enough to adjust.

And with that, I appreciate all the work that was done on this.

Thank you so much, Senator Skinner. And I think Senator Skinner is also in the conversations, along with the group focus on a sunset as well, which would allow us to be able to adjust, if need be, on some of these bills as well.

Thank you very much for reminding me of that.

No, absolutely. And grateful to the work of Senator Skinner. I'm going to turn it over to the Director in just a moment, but I'd like to go to Senator Caballero. Then we'll go to the Director.

Well, I just want to appreciate what the information that Senator Skinner just presented, because I think one of the challenges that we have in terms of our balancing act is understanding that everything we do has a consequence and the consequences have to be weighed against each other. And when we ignore the consequences, That's when we get in trouble.

So it's one of the reasons that I push and I pay for pushing it alternative fuels and alternative ways for us to get energy, because one solution is not the perfect solution. And solar and wind have detrimental impacts on the environment. There is nothing that doesn't have detrimental impacts on the environment. And what we're seeing now is that these big solar arrays are very confusing to birds who think that they're water features in the environment and we're burning up birds. So we got to be careful.

And I think we're going to need a whole variety of solutions for us to meet our energy needs. And so I want to emphasize that because I think what we're doing here is really important, but there are further discussions that are going to be needed so that we're doing everything possible to make sure that all of the wildlife that we have is appreciated.

Because solar rays also disrupt the wildlife corridors and bugs are part of that wildlife corridor, and so are critters like snakes and lizards and turtles, which are out in the desert and are poorly appreciated as part of the food system for the predators that are out there, like coyotes and eagles and birds that need protection as well.

So I just put that out there and I thank my colleague, because I think we do have to acknowledge that there's a take of a lot of other things that we just don't think so fondly about. So. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for letting me say a couple.

No, it's a really good point. Thank you so much, Senator Caballero, for those and for all your work on this as well. Before we turn it back for final comments from the Director, we'd like to go to see if there's any additional comments from the panel, from the Senators here today on this specific issue. Mr. Director, please, if you'd like to close on this.

Senator Skinner and Caballero and other Members, thank you. Which is where I started. This proposal, that's a three party agreement, is better. It keeps the fully protected species statute, doesn't repeal it.

Allows for deliberate permitting through CEQA, for narrowly defined sets of projects subject to annual reporting and engagement with you, and allows us to learn and adjust. It has a sunset. And also the Bill requires us to include in any permits the ability to monitor, adapt, and amend over the course of the next implementation period. Those are all smart policies.

And we end up with a reconciliation between different statutes in the Fishing Game Code, while also preserving specific statutes like Fishing Game 3503 and 3513, which provide added protection to eagles and raptors. So for all those reasons, I'm just hopeful we don't have another hearing on this proposal and eventually many of us can go take a quick summer break, but we wouldn't be here but for y'all's leadership. So thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. Director and to Ms. Miller, as always, really grateful. I think this final word on this issue is under this current Bill that we have in front of us here today, the Legislature sets the standards so species are protected and recovered. In previous iteration prior, species would be killed and developers would simply be punished. So I think it's a really important focus that Senator Grove had and really appreciate Senator Grove, advancing that here today because it was an important point that she was making.

Mr. Director, thank you so much. Ladies and gentlemen of the Select Committee we're now going to be moving on to several items focusing in the transportation space. We're going to welcome Mark Tollefson, the Undersecretary for the State Transportation Agency, to please come forward. We also have the Assistant Deputy Director at Caltrans, Danny Yost, with us today.

We're going to be focusing on progressive design Bill contracting authority for the Department of Transportation and the Department of Water Resources, job order contracting for Caltrans and the extension of the National Environmental Policy Act. That's all under SB 146. I want to take a moment to be able to acknowledge Senator Gonzalez, who is with us here today. She has been a leader in this body on all issues of climate, as well as protecting the environment, and grateful for your authorship of this and for your focus.

And of course, as Chairwoman of Transportation as well, she wears many hats and we're grateful for her tenacity. We're also going to hear from them about direct contracting authority on the I 15 wildlife corridors. We're going to talk about reform and enhancements to the environmental mitigation policies for Caltrans, and that was led by Mr. Newman. And then we'll also be hearing about workforce equity and infrastructure, which was a top priority for this Senate.

And we want to say thank you to Senator Durazo, Smallwood-Cuevas, Gonzalez and Cortese for their leadership on that. So without further ado, we're going to turn it over to the undersecretary and the Deputy Director. But first, we're going to have opening comments from Ms. Miller from the Governor's Office. Ms. Miller.

Thank you, Senator. And Senators. As we said, it takes a huge number of people to get something like this done. So to. Mr. Yost and Mr. Tollefson under the direction of Secretary Omashak. And we are just incredibly grateful. So I think, Mr. Chair, you know better than anyone how these alternative delivery methods can reduce the amount of time it takes to build any of these public works projects. As you'll hear, we've reduced broadband alone from 33 months to 11 months.

But correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Tollefson. So I think these are the types of projects that are just really important that we get done faster. And I think the Transportation Agency will speak to why these are so incredibly significant in terms of building. And we also know how precious your time is. So we will try and move quickly and look forward to your questions. Thank you.

Mr. Undersecretary, this start with Senate Bill 146.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. I'm really happy to be here to present on the Bill. Before I get started, I just did want to kind of reiterate the comments of Ms. Miller and Director Bonham. Just really appreciate the collaboration from the Senate and the Assembly on helping to develop such an impactful package here.

And I think from a transportation perspective, before I dive into the proposals, I just really wanted to indicate how important this is, particularly as a signal to our federal partners to show that we here in California are ready. To take advantage of the billions of dollars that are available not only through the IHA, but the Inflation Reduction Act, in addition to the cost avoidance that we'll see with respect to the time savings associated with a number of these proposals that I'll talk about.

In addition to the acceleration projects, we're also really excited about the workforce components that we'll talk about in later bills. So with that, I will briefly go over each of the proposals if we can.

Mr. Secretary, why don't we start with 146, pause, see if there's questions, comments from the Senators, and we'll move on to Senate 145 on I-15. Mr. Secretary. Thank you.

So, SB 146 includes three proposals from the Governor's infrastructure package. The first one I'll talk about is job order contracting. So this proposal authorizes Caltrans to use job order contracting procurement method until December 31, 2033, and allows job order contracting to be used for highway maintenance projects, safety repairs, facility repairs, active transportation, and the installation of stormwater pollution control devices. The Bill does prohibit the Department from using job order contracting on projects that add vehicular travel lanes.

And it also requires Caltrans to establish a procedure to pre qualify job order contractors for projects. The use of job order contracting is a more efficient and cost effective means of procurement for short duration and repetitive type projects, accelerating a typical procurement of anywhere from six to nine months to a matter of weeks. The second proposal that I'll talk about is Progressive Design Build.

So this proposal authorizes the Department of Water Resources, as well as Caltrans, to use progressive design build contracts for eight projects, each for which the estimated price exceeds 25 million, until that authority expires on December 31, 2033. So this innovative strategy can reduce project delivery costs and shortened schedules by as much as a year. Key here to this proposal is that it does exclude projects pertaining to the design or the construction of delta conveyance facilities or seawater desalinization projects from using progressive design build authority.

It also requires the Department of Water Resources and Caltrans by January 1, 2034, to submit a report to the Legislature detailing Progressive design build project metrics, as well as a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of this procurement method to save time as well as reduce costs. And lastly, the final proposal as part of SB 146 is related to NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act.

So this proposal extends the provisions under existing law that authorize the Secretary of Transportation to assume the responsibility for any railroad, public transportation, or multimodal project under the Federal NEPA from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2033. It authorizes the Secretary, consistent with the requirements of any MOU between the state and federal government upon the request of a local or regional agency to assume NEPA responsibilities for any railroad, local, public transportation, or multimodal project implemented by that requesting agency until December 31, 2033.

It also requires reporting to the transportation policy committees of the Legislature regarding which local or regional agencies requested that the Secretary assume that authority. It clarifies that the delegation of this authority does not in any way change the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA. And in addition, the proposal will preserve the state's federal authority and authorize CalSTA to assume the responsibility for local rail, public transportation, and multimodal projects with that, happy to take any questions.

Thank you so much. We're going to open it up to Senators on SB 146. Let's start with the author. And we're going to turn over to Senator Gonzalez and we're going to go to Senator Wilk. Please, Madam Chair.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so very much for this. And this is the collaboration we absolutely needed. I know I just saw Mr. Yost in our meeting here, and I would say that absolutely, it does provide additional assurances. I think it absolutely puts the market signals out there for our local governments, of course, for our builders, developers, as well as our labor friends in labor, and as well as to the federal government that we're derisking these projects.

We're getting things done in an efficient manner and we mean business, and that California will build and we will do things and we will continue to do these routine projects in a way that makes more sense. I know that this has been used in broadband and something that is very important to the majority leader and myself, which has been great, and I think you'd mentioned this, expedited it by how many what was the...

33 to 11, right? 33 months to 11 months.

33 months to 11 months, which is significant, as well as for clean California as well on the job order contracting. So I'd like to say thank you for this partnership. There had been a question in Committee about the eight projects for DWR and eight projects for Caltrans. I know that it's kind of difficult to say for the progressive design build, what that could be now, but any examples that we can kind of look forward to and think about to give the public more understanding around this.

Yeah. Thank you, Senator. And I'll take that first question and may turn it over to my colleague Danny Yos as well. But it is difficult for us to identify the specific projects that will be a part of that eight. But typically these will be more complex projects. They will all be projects that are consistent with our Climate Action Plan for transportation infrastructure.

I think one example of a project that we are considering at this point would be the Coronado Bridge suicide barrier That's a project that could definitely benefit from using this authority. But I will turn it over to Mr. Yost to see if he has any additional comments.

Thank you, Legislative Director for Caltrans, Danny Yost here. And I would just add briefly that we're looking at our long lead list of projects in the state Highway Operations Protection Program as strong candidates for this authority and as described where there's technical complexity or just delivery issues, that we could really use the designer and contractor on board to help us in the design of that contract.

Great.

Well, thank you very much. We look forward to this. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your leadership, Senator. We now, like, turn over to Senator Wilk.

Hey, good morning. Good morning. And I have no questions about the bald eagle, so you can relax.

I appreciate the appointment to this Committee. As mentioned by my colleague from Bakersfield, I got my packet last night at 5:30. So this is how I spent my night reading this. A lot of this is the first time. So there's a question about the progressive design build. So my understanding is, from reading what I have, that it's $25 million for Caltrans or DWR to use authority under this legislation.

There we go.

I also have an article that I pulled up last night from Engineering News Record dated August 24, 2021. They're showing that four out of 10 design build projects for highway bridges, rails, transit, and tunnels, the contractors have failed to cover their costs. And just through the grapevine, I've heard that Caltrans is currently experiencing a lower number of bids than the Department has expected. Normally about three-ish.

So I'm curious on what criteria the Department will use to determine which projects to use the design build authority authorized in SB 146. And secondly, with a relatively low number of current bids on projects in the industry apparently losing money on these jobs, what guarantees are there that the state will attract quality bids willing and capable of bidding and actually delivering on these large projects?

Thank you, Senator, for that question. So what you're noticing is there's an evolution in the construction industry to move towards a different model of progressive design build that builds on the best of what we have in alternative contract delivery. And so what this does is actually reduces risk for both the contractor and for Caltrans and other sorts of agencies procuring these contracts because we would be able to integrate design changes as issues come up in the design before we finalize the work package.

So it's kind of a two step process where we bring somebody on board potentially earlier in the project than we can under design build to help us design the project. Once we have more confidence in the design than to negotiate a reasonable price. If we can't negotiate a reasonable price, then we could go on to other contract delivery methods. And so that would be the guarantee there'd be a guaranteed maximum price on each construction work package that then we would move forward on.

So that provides more flexibility for both the state and it reduces the risk for the contractor as well. In terms of criteria, certainly these sorts of issues would be the things that we're looking at, the technical complexity, the ability to deliver and take advantage of, the acceleration. That's what we'd really be looking for. And then to be able to reduce the cost and the risk.

All right, great. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much, Senator Wilk. We'd like to be able to see if we have additional questions, comments on Senator Gonzalez's Bill at this time. All right. Hearing none. We're now going to be moving on to the issue of direct contracting authority for the I-15 wildlife crossings, some changes in enhancements in the environmental mitigation for Caltrans, and this is on Senate Bill 145, Senator Newman. Mr. Undersecretary, the floor is yours, sir.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

So SB 145 includes two additional Administration proposals. The first is direct contracting authority for the I-15 wildlife crossings. So this proposal would allow Caltrans to enter into an enforceable contract with Brightline West to develop, design, and construct three wildlife crossings as part of their project in the median of Interstate 15. So this would be consistent with the February agreement between Caltrans Department of Fish and Wildlife as well as Brightline.

It would require Caltrans to consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and with entities with expertise in the development, design, and construction of these crossings as part of the development, design, and construction of the structures. Entering into an agreement with Brightline West would avoid costly conflicts between the state and the railroad, allowing coordination of all aspects of the design and construction, saving taxpayers dollars as well as time delays. The other proposal is related to accelerating environmental mitigation for transportation.

So this proposal implements several recommendations from the AB 1282 Transportation Permitting Task Force. In that report, it allows Caltrans to directly purchase environmental mitigation, make advanced payments on mitigation credits, and create an expedited procurement process for other situations. The proposal would also authorize Caltrans with the authority to transfer property and endowments to fulfill mitigation requirements. And with that, we're happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much. We'd like to go to see if we have any questions or comments. Senator Wilk, please take it away.

No questions, just a comment. Now, this is the type of policies that I like to see. This goes through my district. It's going to accelerate, by accelerating these projects it's going to help our climate goals.

It's going to improve the quality of life of so many Members, because it's not just this, but there's going to be commuter rail from Hisperia down to the Inland Empire as well, hopefully long term, from Palmdale over to, mine said Victorville, but it's actually Apple Valley Station, which should tie into the high speed rail that ever happens. And so this is great. I was really happy last night when I was reading this that we're doing this because this is going to benefit a lot of people.

So I really appreciate you guys doing this. So thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator Wilk, we're going to turn it over to Senator Limon. I just want to acknowledge Senator Limon for her fantastic work over these past many weeks. Truly appreciate you. The floor is yours.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair, and thank you. Good to see you all again. So just some clarification in kind of expansion on this. There's been some discussion and certainly this was part of our discussions related to timeline and if this version would help us meet an efficient timeline, but also if it would be helpful in ensuring that some of the desired commitments like the wildlife crossing and others, we'd be able to accomplish.

So can you tell me, just broadly how this version of what we have in front of us is going to be helpful in meeting timelines and making sure that the project is done and completed, but also ensuring some of our commitments to balance this particular project with some of the issues that have come up related to wildlife crossings and so forth?

Yeah, thank you for that and appreciate the question. And what I will say is that this particular proposal will actually allow us to take that next step from the MOU that we had all agreed upon back in February to actually turn that into an enforceable agreement with Brightline. So that will be key to ensuring that we can actually get these crossings done and can also make sure that all of our partners are at the table collaborating on the design and construction concurrently.

Whereas if both entities, Caltrans was doing this separately, that would lead to potential conflicts and additional costs. With respect to the overall crossings itself, we will talk a little bit about the mitigation components, but that is something that gets built in to this where Caltrans will absolutely maintain the structures associated that with it. And we'll also kind of work with partners to ensure that the habitat surrounding that structure gets addressed as well.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Senator Moon. We're going to turn over to Senator Min.

I just had a quick question for you. My understanding is that at this point in time, it's not clear in the language of the trailer Bill whether the wildlife crossings will be built at the same time as the actual high speed rail lines. And just wanted to see if that was something you're willing to commit to today.

So That's something where I will say that this allows us to enter into that enforceable agreement. That agreement will solidify that timeline associated with the project. So absolutely we are kind of willing to commit to completing the structures. We have reserved funding with our team at Caltrans for this purpose, also working with our partners at Department of Fish and Wildlife, as well as Brightline's commitment to doing the design work associated with the project. So this absolutely does include that commitment to getting these structures done.

So just so I understand what you said correctly, this language gives you the authority to do that, and we have the commitment from you that you will exercise that authority.

That is right.

Thank you so much, Mr. Min. Very grateful. We'd like to be able to see with the Senators if there's any additional conversation or debate on this issue. Okay, thank you. And I'll look to Ms. Miller on this. I actually think where Mr. Min was going, based off of the direction where Mr. Min and the remainder of the Senators strengthens that agreement to ensure that we're looking at timeline, budget, who's responsible, et cetera, as spelled out. But Ms. Miller, please. I don't want to put words in your mouth.

No, That's exactly right. So once we go from an MOU to the enforceable contract, everything you just mentioned is actually what allows us to be able to execute exactly as you're saying with the authority.

No. Thank you so much, Ms. Miller. I appreciate your work on that. And again, want to say thank you to Mr. Min for his leadership on this. We are going to go to our final Bill under the issue of transportation, and this is on Senate Bill 150, which is authored by Senator Durazo, Smallwood-Cuevas, Gonzalez, Cortese, and co authored by Assemblywoman Luz Rivas. This is on workforce equity and infrastructure. Mr. Undersecretary, take it away.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, this proposal, which is part of SB 150, requires the State Labor and Workforce Development Agency, government Operations Agency, and CalSTA to convene a stakeholder process and provide input and recommendations to establish terms to be included as material part of a contract, including measurable results, to ensure that the investments maximize benefits to marginalized and disadvantaged communities.

Additionally, it authorizes our state agencies, beginning January 1, 2026, to enter into or require project labor agreements for projects with aggregate construction costs over $35 million only if the agreement includes provisions to address community benefits. This includes partnerships with existing high road construction careers programs, local hire goals, or coordination with programs that utilize job fairs for construction, apprenticeship, or preapprintorship programs, with the goal of promoting employment and training opportunities for veterans and individuals who reside in economically disadvantaged areas.

And then, finally, the Bill Requires Caltrans Reserve a minimum of $50 million from federal funds through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to be allocated over four years to support high road construction career programs that provide a range of supportive services and career placement assistance to underserved and underrepresented populations. These funds will come from formula allocations from federal transportation programs which promote the use of these funds for this purpose. And with that, we're happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much. We're going to first go to see if we have questions or comments from the Senators. And then I'd like to be able to invite Ms. Durazo, Senator Durazo, to be able to come to the podium in just a moment, but I want to see if there's any questions or comments from Senators. Mr. Wilk, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I got this last night, so I did the best work I could in terms of getting myself educated. So I actually have a question that comes from a business in my district, so I'm going to just read it to you. So, I have an engineering construction company, again, located in my district. This particular company works for Caltrans as a subcontractor. Specifically, they are environmentally friendly company that removes the top part of highways, recycles that material, and uses it either directly on that project or saves it for another project. They are an all union employer and are subject to several master labor agreements.

An experienced operator for their company earns $61 an hour in wages. The company also pays the workers union $30.79 an hour in health and welfare benefits. So That's an effective wage of $91 an hour. These wages, as well as all procedures for setting labor grievances and disputes, are all negotiated between the labor union and employers contained in the master labor agreements. And I think this Legislature has had a history of honoring privately negotiated labor agreements between organized labor and union employers.

But as I read this, SB 150 supplants in the negotiated MLAs enforces compliance with the PLA. So I'm wondering why this proposal does this, because I think we should be protecting negotiated labor agreements and not supplanting them. So just want to know what the thought process. One, am I right? And if I am right, why?

Please, Mr. Yost.

Thank you, Senator, for that question. So this language would require that community workforce agreements be or community benefit agreements be included in any project labor agreements, and that's an authority that currently exists today. And so this would add a component to project labor agreements.

Thank you. And what we're going to do with the Select Committee we're going to invite Mr. Diaz to be able to come to the podium, please, Mr. Diaz. On this issue, this has been a Senate priority to be able to answer the question, please, from Senator Wilk. Mr. Diaz, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Senators. Senator Wilk, I think to answer your question with regards to the contractor in your district, this Bill does not mandate anything new in law. It authorizes as a condition for project labor agreements that are already in existing law above 35,000,000. One condition that would be set for the type of hiring that could happen and the type of community benefits, including hiring veterans and other targeted groups.

And so in that sense, all parties would have to agree to it, including the contractor as well.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Senator Wilk, for that. Thank you, Mr. Diaz. We're going to go to Senator Skinner, and then we're going to turn it over to Senator Skinner. Then we'll turn it over to Senator Durazo and welcome her to the Select Committee. Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Thank you again. Appreciate that we were able to incorporate many of these things in these actions. And, I mean, we've already started with the whole premise of this. We're trying to maximize our ability to use not only our state infrastructure dollars that we have been approving both in last year's budget, primarily in last year's, but then this federal money That's coming to us.

But as we do so, we want to make sure that the Chips Act, the Infrastructure Act, and the and I always forget the words for the IAGA funds that they need to be maximized in our communities. And I'm expressing this partly on behalf of Senator Gonzalez, who worked very hard on this and had to leave.

And of course, we have a number of other colleagues who weren't in the working group, but who were very clear to us who were on it to make sure that these were incorporated. And Senator Durazo, who's here in the room is one of those, amongst others. And we know that there's a whole lot of job creation That's going to result from this work. And we also know there's some shortages in our workforces.

And yet at the same time that we both are creating jobs and we have these workforce shortages, some of our folks that have the lowest wage jobs or in communities that haven't benefited from job growth are still not it's like we have low unemployment, but we still have a lot of constituents who have not benefited.

And part of these measures that we put in here are to help ensure that those underrepresented communities and those communities that tend to be stuck in Low wage jobs or higher experience of unemployment are actually benefiting from that. So I really want to thank everyone for pulling this together and working out these agreements. And to those Senators I mentioned, Gonzalez, Durazo, Smallwood-Cuevas, Cortese, for working so hard in addition to everybody here. So thank you.

Recognition well deserved. Thank you so much, Senator Skinner, for that. We're going to welcome an individual who needs no introduction. She has dedicated her life to lift up those who are in our most vulnerable communities in fighting for working families. And That's Senator Durazo. And just want to acknowledge Senator Durazo. We would not be having this discussion. Senate Bill 150 would not be in front of us without her amazing work working with Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, Senator Gonzalez and Senator Cortese. We're grateful.

The accolades can go on forever, truly. And we're truly appreciative of your hard work. Senator Durazo, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Well, I came to thank you because all of you individually and as a group played a major role. I want to thank your tenacity of sticking with this, just sticking with this because even though we have talked about this for several years, it just had to be put on the table as highly important and competitive with all the other things colleague this morning said on the floor. Something about we have to move people towards self sufficiency.

Well, self sufficiency doesn't happen without a good job, without knowing that in your future you will have access to that good job. So I want to also thank the Administration, the Governor, everyone who worked on this Administration, the leadership of both houses. This is a major step forward. It is not right now in the shape to actually now tomorrow implement it. A lot of work has to be done still. But the spirit of it is just phenomenal.

And the spirit of it, of how to get there is phenomenal because we will include and take the advice of experts and activists and we'll go from having this be implemented here and there in scattered way, not only with state funds, but with local funds, as we have in Los Angeles. We will be able to do this statewide. So I came to thank you all and really greatly appreciate on behalf of so many people who are going to benefit from it so gracias.

Thank you so much, Senator Durazo. And we are truly appreciative that you're here today. I'm going to turn over to Senator Limon. Please, Senator Limon.

Thank you. And I think there's a lot of things to go. I mean, certainly there was incredible leadership, but one thing that hasn't been said about this is that we are the first state that is going to go above and beyond. And I think that that should be noted and also recognized that we have this language thanks to the Senators who fought day in, day out to kind of craft language.

But we're also leading the way in demonstrating that it is important to have good jobs, but it's equally important to ensure that the good jobs are going to communities that have not had access to some of these good jobs. So I really just wanted to go on record in saying that we are, as a state, going above and beyond what other states are doing. And I'm grateful for the leadership of Senator Durazo, Gonzalez, Cortese and Smallwood-Cuevas for ensuring that we lead the way.

Thank you so much Senator Limon. On the issue of transportation, 146, 145 and 150, we'd like to be able to see if there's any additional closing comments, questions or concerns from the Senators at the dais. Hearing and seeing none, we want to say thank you to the undersecretary. Thank you so much to the Deputy Director. We're grateful that both of you are here. Thank you so much, gentlemen.

We're going to be having one more panel, and That's going to be with Chris Calfie, special counselor to the California Natural Resources Agency. As Mr. Calfie makes his way up, we're saying thank you a lot today because it's been an all hands on deck effort over the past many weeks to be able to enhance and improve this measure.

We want to take a moment to say thank you to several critical staff who are here in the room today from the Senate and from the Pro Tim's office. We wouldn't be here today without Kip Lipper. We're grateful to Kimberly Rodriguez, to James Barbara, Cesar Diaz, Nick Hardeman, so many of the policy staff, whether it's from environmental quality, natural resources, transportation, it was an all hands on deck effort and an enormous amount of work went into this package. And we cannot say thank you enough to the amazing staff team that we are so blessed to work with each and every day here in the Senate. We're really grateful.

Let's go to the chair of the Environmental Quality Committee, Mr. Allen, for any comment on this specific issue. Then we'll turn it over to Mr. Kelsey. Yeah. Since you are mentioning staff, I want to give a very special shout out to Brynn, who's here from Senate Environmental Quality, who just hit the ground running, brand new on our Committee, and incredible amount of work related to this Bill and a couple of the others as well.

So I just want to tip my hat to you and all the staff, but particularly to you, Brynn, for your hard work on this. Brynn has not slept for the last three weeks, so we're really grateful, really happy that you highlighted that. Thank you, Senator Allen, and for your leadership as well. We're truly appreciative. Ladies and gentlemen of the Select Committee, we're now going to be moving on to the issue of natural resources.

We're going to be focusing on Senate Bill 149 that is authored by Senator Caballero and Senator Becker. We're going to be focusing on the California and Environmental Quality Act. On judicial streamlining, we're going to be talking about CEQA administrative judicial reform, as well as the extension of Senate Bill Seven, which was originally authored by our very own President Pro Tem Tony Atkins. So, without further ado, we're going to turn it over to Mr. Calfee and then we'll start our conversation with Ms. Caballero and Mr. Becker. Mr. Calfee, good to see you. Thank you so much for being here.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Senators, for the opportunity to be here. I am Chris Calfee. I'm special counsel for the California Natural Resources Agency. In the spirit of streamlining, I'll keep my opening comments brief to make sure there's plenty of time for questions. As the Chair mentioned, we're here talking about the CEQA proposals in Senate Bill 149. The Bill contains three primary components designed to make the CEQA litigation process more efficient.

The first component addresses the required contents and process for assembling the administrative record. The administrative record contains all of the evidence that a judge would use to determine whether an agency complied with CEQA. Specifically, this Bill would exclude from the record communications that are either irrelevant to the project, or are privileged communications or are exempt from the Public Records Act.

Second, this Bill would also provide for the lead agency to secure the ability to prepare the administrative record, provided that it agrees to pay for all of the costs. We expect that both of those changes will significantly speed up the process of assembling the administrative record so that cases can move on to the merits.

The second primary component of SB 149 is to extend sunsets that currently exist in Senate Bill Seven, providing for streamlined judicial review for environmental leadership projects, extending that sunset from 2026 to 2034. The final component would expand eligibility for judicial streamlining to include certain low carbon transportation, clean energy, semiconductor manufacturing, and climate resilient water projects. This component is modeled on SB Seven and to reduce litigation timelines to resolve cases within 270 days if feasible.

Over the past few weeks, the proposal has been refined and strengthened in several notable ways, including it was expanded to include groundwater projects pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. It excludes the Delta Conveyance project as well as ocean desalination projects. It also includes several provisions specifically addressing greenhouse gas emissions from each of the project types and provisions to ensure the impacts to disadvantaged communities are mitigated to the extent feasible. That's my very brief description of the Bill. Look forward to any questions that the Committee may have.

Thank you so much, Mr. Calfee. We're going to open it up first and foremost to the authors of Senate Bill 149. Mr. Calfee, thank you for all your work. Grateful to you. We're going to turn it over to Ms. Caballero and then to Mr. Becker. Senator Caballero, floor is yours.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I think an excellent job was done in terms of the explanation. Let me just say that this Bill is based on bills that we've passed that do exactly the same thing in other circumstances, mostly for very large projects that the state has set as priority.

So I'm really happy that we're here, but I just need to say that we put some belts and suspenders on it, if you will, that create some clarity in terms of creating the administrative record, and it also in terms of making sure that it has the highest environmental standards, that it includes projects that have the highest environmental standard. And I'm proud of the way that the Bill ended up working out, but I think this is really critically important.

We've got to be able to show that we can get the environmental review done. And I'm going to emphasize that this does not in any way change CEQA. It allows the whole CEQA process to remain intact. It's an expedited judicial review. And so given the additions to it, I think it is a really good Bill and will fundamentally help us to move some of these projects faster.

And just Senator Caballero, just want to acknowledge you because this has been a passion of yours your entire time in the Legislature and really grateful for your leadership, your collaboration and your hard work. This would not be here without you. So just want to say thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And it's the honest to God truth and want to turn it over to Senator Becker who is a joint author on this issue. And Senator Becker continues to remind us that we can't ever go against our values on the environment, but then also continue to remain competitive with the rest of the nation on green energy and economic development. Want to turn it over to Senator Becker who has helped lead the way. Please.

Thank you. And thank my colleague, Senator Caballero for her remarks and her work on this. As mentioned, we do have to figure out how to build clean faster. We have about five gigawatts of storage installed today. We've got about 28 gigawatts of total installed clean energy capacity, at least for Kaiso, about 16 in solar, eight in wind.

As I mentioned earlier, the SB 100 report estimates we need about 130 gigawatts of new generation and about 50 gigawatts of storage compared to the numbers I mentioned earlier, 28 that we've built in our entire, I think, history of a state and five gigawatts of storage. So we've got a massive amount, we need a massive amount of transmission to be able to move that clean energy around the state. And again, I think this is an important step forward in saying, okay, how can we do this?

How can we speed up this clean energy infrastructure while still making sure that we protect the environment that we all love here in California and for the reason many of us either moved here or have decided to stay here and take advantage of our great state and our great outdoors. So I appreciate all the work that's been done and look forward to any further discussions and continue work in this area. Thank you, sir.

Senator Becker, thank you for helping lead this working group on these very specific issues. And we would not be here without you today in your keen focus in making sure that we all are moving forward. Just like you said, we got to build clean and move towards a more sustainable future and really appreciate your leadership, sir. Thank you so much. We're going to turn it over to Senator Limon.

Thank you. I just want to recognize that this combination of the judicial streamlining and administrative records was probably among the hardest to land on, to agree on. I think that we will hear in public, certainly from some, that this does not go far enough and I think we will hear from others that it goes too far.

And I think that it's just an important recognition that for something like CEQA, and certainly my voting record would indicate that that is something that I believe is important to the State of California. It was something that was not done lightly, but was done with a lot of intention, a lot of conversation. And I think that it's important to go publicly and ensure that the public understands that a lot of thought and energy and language wordsmithing was done in order to try to find a place.

I know, I mean it came down to commas, but it was that important. And I want the public to know that no matter where they think we've landed on this, the amount of energy, time and thought that was put into this particular one and not that a lot of time and energy wasn't put in others, it certainly was. But this was one of the most difficult ones to really try to find a place where we would land.

And so I think it's important that that go on record because nothing that is coming forward was done lightly or without thought and energy. And some of the experts really in the Legislature with the Administration to help us think through how do you get to a place where some of this is being approved in a faster wave, but continue to protect disadvantaged communities and communities that also have issues and who have a history of knowing that the laws haven't all worked in their favor? So That's all. I just want to go on record, this was a really hard one.

Dozens upon dozens of hours. In particular, these first two items. And grateful to the Senators, grateful to the Administration, the Assembly for going through it. And Senator is absolutely right. Came down to commas. So I want to see if Senator Wilk, if you have any items, I think for Senator Wilk. Senator Allen, do you have any items on this, please? No. Thank you so much. Any other Members on this specific issue? Hearing, seeing none. Mr. Calfee. Ms. Miller, would you like to close on Senate Bill 149, please?

I'll just close with a thank you. Echoing everything that you've heard from my colleagues and also folks on the dais. Really appreciate all of the sincere collaboration. In my view, speaking only for myself, what we see before us does reflect California's values, and I think we can all be proud of that. So thank you.

And I would just add that I think the entire package that you heard today, Senators, will make the state stronger, make us build faster, and reach our goals faster, all while protecting the environment, protecting our communities, and increasing equity and jobs. So incredibly grateful for the partnership and how very, very hard everyone worked. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you so much. We're going to keep Ms. Miller here at the table. We're going to say thank you to Mr. Calfee. And we're going to be moving into our public comment portion of today's hearing. We're going to be taking comment in two ways today. First and foremost, we'll go to individuals who are here today in room 2200.

We're going to ask those who are going to be speaking to be able to keep their comments to about a minute, and we'll let you know when we're getting close to that time. We're then going to be opening up our phone lines here today, and we're going to welcome any and all to be able to comment via our teleconference system. It's 877-226-8163. Again, we welcome your calls, your comments today, 877-226-8163. The access code is currently on your screen, and we look forward to hearing from you.

If you could please start queuing up now. All right, let's kick it off. We welcome those who are here to public comment. If you can give us your first and last and organization, the floor is yours. You have a minute. Thank you so much for being here.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members Beth Olhasso on behalf of Water reuse California and Inland Empire Utilities Agency in support of SB 149. Thank you very much.

Good to see you, Beth. Thank you so much.

Good afternoon, chair and Members of the Committee. Adam Regele on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce. I'll keep it brief. Wanted to thank the Senate, the Administration, and everyone who's been involved in the package. California Chamber of Commerce supports it entirely and appreciate all the work. Thank you. Good to see Adam. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members.

Alex Torres here, Director of State Government Relations of the Bay Area Council, representing over 300 employers in the nine county Bay Area. I want to say thank you to yourselves, the entire Legislature, the Administration, for all the hard work that went into this. This is an expression of our shared values to encourage our economic vitality, protect our environment, get these projects done, and, of course, protect those communities that need the most protection. Proud to support you today. Thank you Mr. Torres. Thank you so much.

Hey, good afternoon.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members. Jason Ikerd on behalf of the California Municipal Utilities Association. Just want to express their serious appreciation for all the effort that brought this package together, and in particular, SB 146, 147, and 149, which have the potential to really accelerate critical water and energy infrastructure projects. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Martin Rodosovich on behalf of Santa Clara Valley Water District, we're a support for SB 146 and a support, if amended, for SB 149. We'd like to thank the authors for their effort. We would like to see eligibility expanded for water storage investment projects, as well as inclusion of Anderson Dam, which is a high priority project as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Give our best to Mr. Bell. Thank you.

Thank you. Melissa Cortez, on behalf of the California Wind Energy Association, in support of SB 149. We want to thank everybody who worked on that measure and ask that this body continue to look at ways to expedite these types of projects. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Good to see you. Hey, good afternoon.

Hey, good afternoon. Mr. Chair and Members. Michael Pimentel, Executive Director of the California Transit Association, representing 220 Member organizations across the state, all the transit and rail agencies that run through your districts. Just here today to voice our strong support for the full package of bills that are before you today. Want to show particular thanks and appreciation to the Administration and the Legislature for SB 145 and SB 149.

Those are the two bills that will provide particular benefit and impact to public transit and rail projects across the state. Help them accelerate in their project delivery, deliver environmental benefits, job benefits sooner to your districts. Thank you.

Michael has been busy over the past many weeks, so thank you so much. It's good to see you, sir. Hey, good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. James Thuerwachter with the California State Council of Laborers. Want to also express our gratitude to the Administration and to the Legislature for the entire package here That's been proposed and adopted or in the process. And so specifically, SB 150, we're really excited to see the High Road Careers program That's going to undoubtedly support and complement our self funded apprenticeship programs by increasing the pool of qualified applicants on transit and transportation projects. So we look forward to continuing that partnership. Thank you.

Thank you for being here today. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, chair, Members of the Committee, Neal Desai with the National Parks Conservation Association, also giving comment for Defenders of Wildlife regarding SB 145. Thank you so much for all of your work to address some of the problems and improve that Bill. I really appreciate the question from Senator Min about the clarity, because the Bill doesn't somehow, in the process, the language is left out that these crossings are built at the same time of the rail project. That's essential. Every party agrees.

I think the Administration officials agreed. So I think we have a straightforward path to just get that clarified in legislation, hopefully later on the session. Really appreciate your work to resolve this problem and get this done right. So we'd be very much supportive of getting that cleaned up, ensuring that this clarity is reflected in law. And thank you for your work.

Neil, thank you so much for being here, for your comments today. It's good to see you. Have a good weekend. Hey, good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Chair and Members, Tricia Geringer with Agricultural Council of California, representing farmers and farmer owned businesses from throughout the state in strong support of the infrastructure package and all the work that you and your staff have done, particularly as it relates to advancing water infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Geringer. What's up Micheli.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Chris Micheli on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, and we appreciate the work of the Administration and the Legislature and support the governor's package in todo. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. Micheli. Hey, good afternoon.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Members. Matt Cremins on behalf of the California Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers here today in strong support. I wanted to extend our thanks to all you for all the hard work that went into this. Thank you.

Good to see you, Cremens. Thank you. Good afternoon.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Todd Bloomstine representing the Southern California Contractors Association. We are supportive of the package as well. We do have some concerns with regards to the PLA provisions. SCCA Members are all union contractors, and when they win a PLA job That's covered, a project That's covered with a PLA, that PLA governs our labor agreements.

So the labor agreements that we've negotiated with the unions take a backseat to that PLA. So we'd like to have further conversations on a way to protect the negotiated master labor agreements. Happy to chat with anyone interested, but nonetheless, thank you to the Administration for all the. Work they did on this package. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Good to see you. Thank you for being here. Hey. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Erin Woolley. On behalf of Sierra Club California. We really appreciate all the work That's been done on this package, specifically with SB 147. We do have some remaining questions with how it'll be applied to specific projects, but we do appreciate how it's been narrowed. And with SB 149, the new language is in a better place. But to truly tackle the urgency of the climate crisis, we have to adequately invest in resource permitting agencies and local jurisdictions and not unnecessarily deregulate.

There are a few provisions in the Bill that we have remaining concerns about, and we'll be submitting a letter later today with more specifics on that. But, again, really appreciate the work That's been done and how this has been improved.

Thank you to the Sierra Clubs for their direct engagement in all this as well. We're really grateful. Thank you. How you doing? Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Thank you, Chair and Members, Raquel Mason here on behalf of the California Environmental Justice Alliance, Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability and Communities for a Better Environment. Again, like everyone super appreciative of all the hard work on this and all your advocacy.

We continue to have concerns relating to SB 149 and how the Administration will be able to have the authority to certify projects and what that can mean for disadvantaged communities and how it'll interact with the disadvantaged community protections that are in the Bill that we're really grateful for. And also just acknowledge that it's still challenging to fully assess the impacts on disadvantaged communities without a full list of what projects are under consideration. But again, thank you all for all your work on this. Appreciate it.

Thank you so much, Raquel, for being here today. It's good to see you. Hey, how you doing?

Is it morning or good afternoon? Good afternoon. So, Kim Delfino, representing Defenders of Wildlife and the California Native Plant Society, appreciate Mr. Desai's comments on the Brightline trailer Bill and look forward to trying to work through just the cleanup on that. Just want to echo the thank you to the Senate negotiation team and the staff, who I know spent many long hours. The proposals were significantly improved due to your engagement. And so we very much appreciate all of that hard work.

We do appreciate that we would remove our opposition to the bills. We would echo some of the concerns that were raised previously by the Sierra Club and Seha and Leadership Council. And we would just also say that we really look forward to actually having an open and transparent conversation about how to do better, build better, while protecting the environment in a policy hearing setting. But do appreciate the work that was done on this package and hope everyone enjoys their break when we finally get to it.

There we go. Ms. Delphino, thank you for your direct engagement in being so sincere all throughout this process. We're grateful. Thank you so much. We'd like to be able to do a last call here in room 2200. Last call here in room 2200 of any other individual who would like to be able to step forward to be able to provide comment to the Select Committee. All right, hearing seeing none. We're going to be going to our live line now.

I want to remind folks who are calling in and or would like to call in, the phone number is 877-226-8163. That access code is on your screen now. We're going to say good afternoon to the moderator. Good afternoon, moderator. Let's check in to see how many folks we have on the line. If you could please shout that out to the Committee now.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. We have at least six callers who've called in for the call. And for those of you who wish to make a comment, please press one, then zero. At this time, press one, then zero.

Thank you so much. Mr. Moderator. Mr. Moderator, when you are prepared, let's go to our first caller, please.

We're going to go to line 16. Your line is now open. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Jaime Minor on behalf of Intersect Power Eastern Municipal Water District in Santa Margarita water district in support of the package, in particular SB 149. Thank you so much for all the hard work on this.

Thank you so much, Jamie, very much. Next caller, please. Mr. Moderator.

Line 15, your line is now open.

Good afternoon, this is Gail Delihant with Western Growers Association, and I too want to thank everyone for the hard work on this package, and we are in support of the package, especially SB 147 and SB 149.

Thank you so much. Good to hear your voice, Gail. Thank you for your direct communication with the Senate Working Group. We truly appreciate that. Let's go to our next caller, please.

Line 13, your line is now open.

Good afternoon. This is Zach Lou, the coalition manager for the California Green New Deal Coalition. I'm calling in to express our support for SB 150 and appreciation for including equity and high road labor standards in the infrastructure package.

We had found that equity priorities were sorely lacking before the inclusion of this policy and appreciate the work to get this included. We are still discouraged to see the lack of attention to justice 40 and ensuring we're using federal funds to invest in the most disadvantaged communities. But we are in strong support of the high road labor standards, high road construction careers, and community benefits that have been included here. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your phone call. We're grateful that you called in today. Let's go to our next caller, please.

Line 11, your line is now open.

Hello. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Nika Tanaka. I am speaking from Blue Green Alliance I am calling into support on SB 150. We want to elevate the federal government's labor standards of raising job quality and making high road jobs accessible to all our communities, because That's how California does things. Thank you.

Hey, thank you so much, Nika. Have a wonderful fourth. Appreciate your phone call. Let's go to our next caller, please.

Line 12, your line is open.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Kiana Valentine on behalf of Transportation California, the statewide transportation construction industry who build, repair and maintain our multimodal transportation network, calling in strong support for the entire package today. Just want to register our gratitude for the administration's leadership as well as the Legislature's partnership and collaboration to make this package of improvements reality. Thank you very much.

Good to hear your voice, Ms. Valentine. Thank you so much, Mr. Moderator. Let's do a quick check in to see how many callers we have on the line.

Mr. Chair, we have one more person in queue to talk.

Thank you so much. Let's go to our next caller, please.

Line 17, your line is now open.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Senators. Adam Quinonez on behalf of the Association of California Water Agencies in strong support of the package. Want to really thank the Administration and the Legislature for all of the hard work on this over the last couple of weeks. It's really going to help, certainly from the water perspective, move the needle on some of these critical water infrastructure projects that are needed to address climate change. So thank you again.

Adam, Thank you so much. Excuse me. For all those who are on the phone. This is going to be our last call for our liveline testimony. This is going to be our last call for our liveline testimony. If you would like to be able to provide comment here today to the Select Committee, we invite you to enter the access code 982-0658. The toll free number is going to be on your screen here shortly. That is your toll free number to be able to call in. This is our last call for our liveline testimony. Mr. Moderator, if you could please do last call. And these will be our final representatives on our live line.

And ladies and gentlemen, we are now going to have our final call. For anyone who wishes to comment at this time, please press one, then zero.

Mr. Chair, we have one more person who signaled that they wish to speak. Just a moment, please.

Thank you so much. Once we are done with those who are on the live line with us, which we're grateful that they're hanging with us, we're going to go to closing comments from each of the Senators. Mr. Moderator, please. For our next caller.

We're going to go to line 18. Line 18, your line is now open.

Hi, good afternoon. Aaron Norwood. On behalf of the Almond Alliance. As an early supporter of the governor's infrastructure package, we are thrilled to see this actually come to fruition. We want to thank the Infrastructure Stream Mining and Workforce Equity Group for all of their hard work on this. And thank you, again, urgent support.

Thank you so much, Aaron. Appreciate that. Let's go to our next caller. Mr. Moderator.

Mr. Chair, there is no one else to signal. They wish to speak.

Mr. Moderator, I appreciate your work. Have a wonderful weekend. Happy 4 July to you. Let's bring it back to the Select Committee to be able to look at closing comments from each of the Members. We're going to start with Senator Limon.

Thank you. I want to start off by thanking our chair who's led the process and who has ensured that there has been voices that have been heard all throughout the entire process. I also want to say something about just generally, some of the folks that are not in this room.

For the folks that will spend time reading these proposals, there's a lot to be said about the fact that a lot of these proposals build on other bills with other authors who are not here in this room. And I think that That's meaningful because for the folks that say that this came from nowhere, actually, I think that there is evidence that we are building upon different things. One thing That's really noticeable is SB 7 by our ProTem Atkins that will be referenced in multiple places.

And I think it's important to recognize some of the prior work, because we didn't get here overnight. I think sometimes there's a misconception that the Legislature gets here overnight, and that when we're asked to tackle complicated problems that we're starting from zero. We are not. We have not been starting from zero in this process. Our Governor tasked us with trying to address a difficult problem that seemed overwhelming.

And we are now at a place where we have approached this with as much intention, thought, and deliberation as we can, as we were able to do this in a different way. I also want to recognize that the initial proposal looks different because there was a lot of different thought and energy put into ensuring that it was, again, something that we were given a directive, but that included representatives from many different counties in the state that might have a different approach.

So I think in the end, we have a product in front of us with more input, with more deliberation. But that really was a reflection of a difficult problem. I don't think this solves at all. I don't think these are the final conversations. But I do think that this was our best effort in ensuring that we don't leave difficult conversations to another day, another week, another month, or another year, or another governing body. And so I'm grateful for all the work that went into this.

Very grateful to every Member of this Committee. I wish that there were times where we had cameras so the public could see that the investment of time and energy and thought into this was so meaningful. And really, really, folks were trying at our best to deliver on a difficult problem. So thank you, everyone, for being involved.

Senator, well said. Truly grateful for your leadership on this and for literally the hundreds of hours that you've been putting in at all hours of the day and night. We are so appreciative of you. Thank you. Because you have strengthened this proposal, we'd like to be able to turn it over to the chairperson from Environmental Quality, Chair Allen. Any closing comments? Thank you so much. We would like to be able to go to our budget chair, Chair Skinner, if you have any closing comments.

Thank you. Excuse me, Mr. McGuire. So I think to Senator Limon's point, not that we want to relive this timeline, but I think the Governor announced his intention to have these as part of the budget package on or around May 19. And do forgive me if I'm off by a couple of days, okay? But the bills weren't yet in print.

So while the intention was expressed, we were not able, we being the collective the collective stakeholders, staff, Legislature, whatever, to begin to really digest and engage until they then were in print. And the Senate's own Natural Resources Committee and Senatorman's not here now, but they had the hearing maybe less than four weeks ago, three weeks ago. Three weeks ago.

So there was beginning to be the analysis and such. So I'm just kind of putting this into context. And this, of course, was being done at the same time that all stakeholders and staff were also negotiating the final budget, because, of course, under with the revenue forecasts and constitutional requirements. The May revised didn't even come out until right before the announcement around the infrastructure bills. So I only say this, that we could not have accomplished what we are accomplished today.

And I have to say, I was blown away by the public comment because initially there was so much angst, I suppose legitimately by many players about this, about the need to do this, and fear that there would not be adequate time for either stakeholders to really give their input or adjustments to be made. But I think listening to that public comment, there was acknowledgment of a few places that both need cleanup and that we're going to have to monitor.

And in the presentations and comments by both the Members and the Administration, there was the reflection that, yes, until some of these projects are actually built, we won't necessarily understand their impacts. And so we do have to be agile and able to respond if there are. But also, as was pointed out, there is that sunset to give us that ability to do that. So my real comment is I'm just extremely impressed. And back to Senator Limon's point.

We couldn't have done this had there not been the other things in statute, whether it is and all the other work that we have done both to acknowledge the need to protect disadvantaged communities because of the and when we use these words, there's all these terms but we're talking about communities that have had a disproportionate burden of environmental impact. And of course, while most all of these projects purpose is to address critical environmental problems, we know they can have an environmental impact.

And so while many of them won't even be built anywhere near around one of the communities or many of the communities that have had these disproportionate impacts, some might. But we wouldn't have been able to figure all that out and address all of that hadn't been the history already of the Legislature and the administration's engagement in acknowledging that or if we take the high road equity.

While Senator Durazo described, while she and others have been working very hard on this and felt frustrated that to date that except in various kind of very small places was it addressed that we were able to incorporate it into this package. And then as we again heard from the public comment, many of the stakeholders who were most fearful that this would just kind of bulldoze their concerns, it did not. And I just find it remarkable.

Now, of course, during the many hours we spent and I know that many of the stakeholders do appreciate that, but the public doesn't necessarily because so much of it was done on zooms and as negotiations occur. And this was not because anyone was hiding anything, but just because of the timeline we had to, but just people really need to know. It was an enormous amount of hours.

And I have to say to be able to now sit here and communicate what I have just communicated and hear from the public, I have to say that my own lack of sleep while I felt that we had done a good job in all of us had done a good job in negotiating and getting a final package. It wasn't until the public comment that it really affirmed for me that my lack of sleep may have been worth it.

And I am not the only one by any means. I mean the collective lack of sleep. So we've all thanked everyone involved, but I want to thank them again and I want to say that, yes, we will. As always in government, we must be continue to be diligent. Anything we pass, we know, can always need revisions or fixings over time. But this was a very good product. And thank goodness we had so much base to work from and that everyone was willing to put in the hours that we did so with that.

Thank you, Madam Budget Chair. Thank you so much. And I think the one item that the budget chair did not bring up is that she was also in the middle of all this, trying to land the budget on top of all issues of infrastructure. And Senator Skinner, you are so tenacious in your work and your commitment to the state. So thank you so much. We'd like to turn it over to Senator Caballero and Senator Becker, please, for closing comments.

Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, I'll be real brief. I want to make sure to thank the Governor for starting this. I want to thank the Pro Tem and the speaker for creating an opportunity for us to work with the two houses working together and also the Members of the Committee that really spent many, many hours meeting with all the different interest groups and making sure that their voices were heard on behalf of the entire state.

I just want to say that not everybody got what they wanted in this budget. I certainly did not. But That's part of a negotiation process is you have to be willing to meet somewhere in the middle. You have to give up something.

And I'm proud of us for being able to accomplish that because we're going to be able to really focus on projects that are going to make a difference in people's lives, that are going to be able to protect us from the worst ravages of climate change. And I mean that the flooding, the fires, the heat. There are some districts that feel it all, and my district is certainly one of them. And so we absolutely need to get projects moving and on time.

And the fact that there's federal funds available for us to be able to do that, it's critically important that we show the rest of the country that California can get things done and that we're not going to be delaying projects that are desperately needed. So I want to thank everybody for their hard work. And this really is the first step.

I think we're going to have to be back at this, looking at it very carefully to figure out what projects are we talking about, what projects did we miss, those kinds of things. So. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to say some closing remarks and I'm really pleased to be at this point today.

Thank you so much, Senator Caballero, for your fantastic work over these past many. Truly very, very grateful. We'd like to turn over to Senator Becker as Budget Sub-Chair.

Thank you. Yeah, I'll just add my thanks to Administration for all its hard work, to our Senate leadership, to you, Mr. Chair, and the whole Committee for these Efforts, and won't go back and talk about, I think, the bigger picture. I'll just say I do think these were very well thought through, debated in that quick time frame and excited about where we ended up and look forward to the continued efforts.

Thank you so much. Mr. Budget Sub-Chair. Very grateful. I'll just wrap it up right here and then just talk about next steps. First and foremost said it before, I'm going to say it again. Said at the beginning I'm going to say at the end all these Senators who are up at this dyess have dedicated themselves to be able to enhance and improve this policy package and cannot say thank you enough to each and every one of you for your amazing dedication and hard work.

And it is because of you that we are all here today and feel so grateful to work with you. And the reason why we are here today is because of our President Pro Tem, Tony Atkins. Tony Atkins focuses sincerely on the policy, brings in various opinions to be able to shape a policy that will work for all Californians and grateful for her vision of bringing this working group together. Exactly.

Look, there's been a lot of punditry over the last few weeks about winners or losers of this package. But the bottom line where the Governor, the Senate, and the Assembly have been unified is how do we move California forward? And this is how the process works. Whether the legislative branch brings forward a policy or the Governor brings forward a policy, we work together to be able to shape it, to make it as strong as possible to be able to move this state forward.

And candidly, I think we are here today with a stronger package. And we wouldn't have been here today without the vision of Governor Newsom. And we are grateful for the sincere engagement of the Governor himself and to his very capable staff, many of which are here today. Rhonda, we've hidden all pins from Ms. Pascal because she may poke her eye out if we continue to have meetings, but truly, we are grateful to each and every one of you and to the Assembly this process worked with.

And I mentioned all of our actually, the Senate staff here earlier as well, finally want to say that the engagement that has had has made this stronger. We've had dozens of meetings with groups who represent literally millions of Californians across the state. And I truly believe with this vote that will be taken on Wednesday in the Senate, California is going to be able to prove to the rest of the nation that we can tackle our long term energy needs.

We're gonna be able to protect our environment and move our economy forward, ensuring that our most vulnerable communities are lifted up, and this is what this package is going to represent. There's a lot more work to come. We are grateful for your time, effort, and energy for each of you who are here. And let's talk about next steps. The Senate will be taking this package of bills up on Wednesday afternoon on the Senate Floor. We encourage you all to continue to reach out.

The State Assembly will be taking this package up here this evening with an expectation that these bills will be sent to the governor's desk immediately after the Senate takes these up. God willing, we are moving these bills out of the House, which we will. And again, thank you to each and every one of you. We are now going to be adjourning our Select Committee. We're grateful to the amazing staff teams of all sides. Thank you so much, everybody. Thanks for joining us.