Senate Floor

Good afternoon, everyone. Senate will come to order if the secretary please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Members a Quorum is present. Would the Members and our guests beyond the rail and in the gallery please rise? We will be led in prayer this afternoon by our Chaplain Sister Michelle Gorman after which please remain standing. We will be led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag by Senator Newman.

So let us consider the blessings of our humanness as we ponder Rumi's poem the Guest House this being human is a guest house. Every morning a new arrival a joy, a depression, a meanness some momentary awareness comes as an unexpected visitor welcome and entertain them all even if they are a crowd of sorrows who violently sweep your house empty of its furniture still, treat each guest honorably.

They may be clearing you out for some new Delight the negative thought, the shame, the malice meet them at the door laughing and invite them in. Be grateful for whatever comes because each has been sent as a guide from beyond loving. God help us to be alert for those unexpected visitors of negativity may their appearance not cause us to lose our composure and our gracious desire to bring peace and love to our world. Amen.

Colleagues, please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag.

Thank you, Senator Newman thank you, Sister Gorman for those wonderful, kind words that you shared with us today. Members, before we begin our session, let me just give you a little bit of the run of the show today we're obviously doing all things budget and budget trailer bills. So the plan is to have 10 bills Assembly bills be considered here in the chamber at first while Senate bills are being considered in the Assembly and then we'll do the big switch.

If those bills get off the floor, they'll come back over here in a supplemental file. We'll have the opportunity to debate them and decide their fate after that. So with that, we're going to move to our agenda. We'll begin with privileges of the floor I see none. We'll move to messages from the Governor. They will be deemed read. Messages from the Assembly will be deemed read. Reports of Committee will be deemed read and amendments adopted under motions, resolutions and notices. We'd recognize Senator Mcguire.

Thank you so much. Mr. President, at the request of the author would like to remove AB 98 file item 173 from the consent calendar and place it on inactive

Desk will so note. Recognize Senator Skinner. For what purpose do you rise?

To make a motion. Members, I move to suspend the Senate rules as they relate to Assembly bills 102, 103, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121, 127, 128, 130 and 134.

So Senator Skinner is moving to suspend the Senate rules for the budget bills that are on second reading. I recognize Senator Niello.

Mr. President, I've had friends who have observed our process when I was in the Assembly and since. And they asked me, why does the majority party waive the rules? And my answer is because they can. To quote Ronald Reagan from a great presidential debate one time, there you go again, waiving the rules. I will just reference to you my many previous comments over the last few weeks about our budget process generally. And so it goes. I urge a no vote.

All right, this is a procedural motion. Motion is to suspend the rules for budget bills that are on second reading. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 v. Eight, the rules are suspended. Members, we're going to next turn to consideration of the daily file second reading file, please read.

Senate Concurrent resolution 72. Assembly Bill 56, 285, 298, 314, 373 984.

Without Objection. The second reading file will be deemed read. Members, we're going to now move to Senate third reading. Senate third reading. We're going to begin with file number 78. File item 78. This is Assembly Bill 102. The budget chair seems ready. And Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 102 by Assembly Member Ting an act relating to the state budget and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Budget Bill.

Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. And Members, I'm very pleased to present AB 102, which is the Budget Bill junior amending. The budget act passed by both our houses on June 15. Specifically, AB 102 makes a variety of amendments to the 2023 Budget Act. And let me highlight a couple of those. It shifts over $1 billion in current and planned General Fund. From General Fund grants to a bond measure for community college, affordable housing programs, student housing.

It restores $598.2 million General Fund to our state coastal conservancy for purposes of climate resiliency. And it extends the timelines for expenditure. It provides $432,000,000 to our California Energy Commission for equitable building decarbonization. And it provides $550,000,000 of the GGRF or the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for the zero emission vehicle package.

And on our MediCal program, to help ensure that we can increase rates to providers, it provides 7.2 billion from the Managed care enrollment funded with the managed care organization provider tax which you will hear me many times today refer to as the MCO Tax. But let me be clear that MCO tax is not a tax on any individual Californian but rather one on our managed care operations.

And it transfers 1 billion to the medical provider payment Reserve Fund to support investments in the medical program and to address the critical need for childcare that so many of our families depend on. And unfortunately due to the pandemic so many of our childcare operators had to close. It includes $1.4 million to supplement childcare reimbursement rates so that hopefully we will see many more of those childcare facilities reopen and we can see addressing this shortage for that critical childcare need.

It also includes legislative intent to fund a 6th round of the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention program funding That's the HHAP program and accelerates the disbursement of the remaining funds from HHAP from prior years. It also appropriates 360.6 million public buildings construction fund and shifts $20 million of the General Fund to capital outlay for infrastructure improvements at San Quentin, for a rehabilitation center on the grounds and to address the crisis.

That a number of our transit agencies financial crisis that they are facing due to ridership drops as a result of the pandemic that have still not recovered. It appropriates 2 billion to the California State Transportation Agency for the population based transit and inner city rail capital program That's called the TRCP. But we won't use the acronym. We'll just stick to that population formula and $410,000,000 for the zero emission transit capital program.

And it allows those funds which we previously approved in last year's budget which were originally for capital only. It allows our regional transportation planning agencies the ability some flexibility to allow those raiders in most critical need to use some portion of those funds for operations. It also makes a variety of other technical changes and with that Members I ask for your aye vote.

Okay, Members, discussion or debate. Discussion or debate I recognize. Senator from Sacramento.

Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, Members, I promise I will not raise my mic on every Bill on the agenda today. That could be an applause line, I suspect, but there are for at least us in the minority and I suspect a lot here. There are many things in this budget to like. There are many things in this budget for me anyway, to dislike. I've said before, I don't have to like everything in a budget to vote for the budget.

But one thing I do know about public sector budgeting that I learned early on through my hearings when I was on the local Board of Supervisors is the easiest way to balance a budget is just assume more revenue. And that, I fear, is what we have here, as the Ledge analyst has opined, and I think that is good authority for us. The revenue estimates that we have are literally billions of dollars more than what the Leg Analyst believes is realistic, number one.

If that's true, we are out of balance now. And when tax receipts come in in October, we have no idea whether they're going to equal what we think or not. But the trend during this year would suggest that it just might not be. And we have no contingency in the budget for that eventuality. So I would urge a no vote.

Senator from Beaver. You recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members, I too, like my colleague from Fair Oaks, is not going to raise my mic on every single Bill on the budget. But I would like to take this opportunity to talk to the budget as a whole. It's amazing to me that California can go from an $108,000,000,000 surplus to a $31 billion deficit in one year.

Now, as I mentioned in the previous budget committees that we had that you cannot have a budget at all unless you have a private business and private individuals pay a tax first. None of us in this room would be able to cash the checks that we get to be a Legislator if it wasn't for private property and private taxes to be paid first in this budget. What we're simply doing is balancing it by cost shifting.

We're shifting money, as the Senator from Berkeley talked about, in bonds. We are taking GGRF funds and we're shifting them around to help balance this budget. There are not one single thing except for three or four items that I will mention in this budget that helps a business stay in California. The original taxpayers. Just this morning on my way into the office, I heard on KPRA that one third of San Francisco's properties are vacant.

Maybe That's why there's no folks riding the transit to San Francisco, because there's people leaving there and there's no jobs. Or it may just be the fact that they don't feel safe on the transit system. Those who do as business were getting a windfall are those people who are highly connected to the Governor or the likes. And those people are in Hollywood. They're getting a tax break to make sure that they are allowed to keep producing films and entertainment here in California.

If you're a clean energy provider, you're getting tax breaks. No other business in California that I'm aware of is getting any tax breaks here in California. And I want to talk yesterday the Senator from Los Angeles talked a lot about disadvantaged and equality in our Committee hearing. And I'd like to just give you some statistics about why Californians have a hard time and especially if you're Low income or disadvantaged living in California. Here's some statistics residential electric rates are 73% higher than the national average.

Gasoline 36% higher than the national average. Cost to build a home 40% higher than the national average. Mortgages per month 51% higher than the national average. Rent per month, 47% higher than the national average. Homeowners and renters insurance 23% higher than the national average. Real estate taxes 46% higher than the national average. Car insurance per year, 35% higher than the national average. This one will really blow your mind. Home prices 91% higher than the national average.

Rate of homelessness per 10,000 people 144% higher than the national average. Members, I submit to you that the reason that we have equality income is not simply just minimum wage, which I think there is a wage differences that we need to balance. But it's all those reasons I just stated. We are in most cases almost 50% higher cost of living in California than there are in other states. If you want to help a disadvantaged person in California, you simply cannot just raise their pay.

You must lower their cost of living. This budget doesn't do anything to lower the cost of living. It quite frankly, takes taxpayers money and tries to subsidize those people who are low income and equality disadvantaged. For example, our clean energy goals, like offshore wind, are going to cost 30 cents per kilowatt more. Now we have the first year of a downturn budget and we're seeing the cautious.

But Members, as my friend from Santa Clarita mentioned in a hearing a few weeks ago that he was going to leave California after he is done in this Legislature. Well, I want to submit to you that I came to this legislative body to help protect the future generations in California. Not just my own, who's been here for 92 years providing food and fiber for Californians and Americans, but for my sons and daughters to be able to stay in California.

If we do not address the cost of living in California because of our policies, we will never balance out California. And so I'm not leaving. I want to just go on record to say that this is the first year in the next seven years between now and 2030. We have extremely high goals to not be able to have a combustible engine car sold in California to meet our goals for climate.

But at the same time, Members, we must balance out the ability for Californians to afford to live in California if we want a future in California. So those are my comments across the board. There are things in this budget that I'm absolutely going to vote for as we go through these budget bills. But I just want to let you know that if we don't address these issues, Members, in the next seven years, I don't want to say, I told you so. I won't be here.

Maybe somebody from my family will be here to be able to articulate those concerns I have with this budget. But for the future of California, we must address the high cost of living. For those reasons, I won't be supporting all of this budget, but pieces of it I will. And I will refrain from speaking on every single Bill to give you a break today. I appreciate your attention, and thank you.

Thank you, Senator. I want to recognize the Senator from San Francisco.

Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, I rise in support of the budget. I want to thank the budget chair and the Pro Tem and their teams for putting together a very strong budget in a very challenging year. And this budget protects so many critical priorities around education and health care and our social safety net and investment in solutions to homelessness. There are many, many good things.

I want to focus on one area where we have taken a step in this budget, but the work is not done, and that is the future of public transportation in California. And I want to focus particularly on the future of public transportation in the Bay Area. This budget allocates $1.1 billion that can be used for transit operations to deal with the fiscal cliff. The fact that transit ridership is not where it was before. The Pandemic. The pandemic decimated ridership. Ridership is coming back.

It is increasing, but not quickly enough. In terms of the timing of losing and the end of federal funds, federal rescue funds for transit. And without additional funding to bridge the gap in terms of the gradual recovery of these systems, we will see a collapse of public transportation service, particularly in the Bay Area. Our transit systems have told us what will happen if we do not make sure that they have the funding that they need to bridge their finances until they recover.

BART has told us that we very well may see the end of weekend BART service, the end of nighttime BART service, the elimination of an entire line in my city. Muni has told us that they may have to eliminate 15 entire bus lines. And what happens if this service is eliminated? Some people say, let's just hold them accountable and make them tighten their belts. It's not about the transit systems.

It's about our constituents and whether they can get to work, whether seniors can get to the senior center, whether CSU students can actually get to school. That's what it's about. It's about whether people can get around. Not everyone owns a car. Not everyone can afford a car. And we sure as heck don't want every single Californian only in a car because That's a disaster for traffic and congestion, not to mention climate. It is in the interest of the State of California to have robust public transportation.

There's been a narrative, a false narrative, that our public transportation systems and I'm going to focus in the Bay Area. That's what I know best. That our Bay Area public transportation systems. Somehow no one is riding them because no one feels safe. That is absolutely untrue. 400,000 people a day board muni today. 400,000. It's not the 600,000 that it was before the pandemic, but it's at two thirds and it is climbing back towards pre pandemic levels.

BART has had a tougher time, but almost 200,000 people a day are boarding BART today. Almost 200,000 people are boarding BART today. Despite all of its challenges, in 2022, more than 41 million trips were taken on BART. Over 41 million trips on BART in 2022. So anyone who tells you that no one's riding transit anymore, no one's using it, everyone's just working in their bedroom, no one ever has to commute anymore. No one uses transit. That is untrue.

And if we allow these systems to collapse, we are royally screwing all of those millions of people who rely on these systems. And we're also harming the drivers who are going to have to contend with a lot more traffic in the Bay Area over the next five years. Our transit systems are short $2.5 billion in operating funds. The budget that we are approving for the Bay Area allocates by formula about 400 million over the next four years. So that leaves a huge gap.

I am so grateful to our leadership and our budget chair for making sure that we are getting those funds because it started at zero and the sky is not the limit, unfortunately. And our leadership did the very, very best they could and in the Assembly too, to get from zero to at least something reasonable.

But we have more work to do in the Legislature and we have more work to do back home in the Bay Area to make sure we support these systems and don't let them fall apart. I'm committed to that. And I want to thank everyone for prioritizing transit in the budget this year. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. The floor is to the Senator from Santa Cruz who needs a microphone. Sound check.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. Some of the discussion has been at a high level, and so I would like to talk in the same terms of this is a high level because we are approving a big budget that covers so much ground. And there was concern raised about the fact that there was such a big surplus last year and there's a deficit this year. It is not the makings of legislators or human beings. It is the underlying system.

80% of our tax revenue comes from either personal income tax or sales tax. That has been what has gone on for decades, and it overperforms in good times, it underperforms in bad times, and that is exactly why we are where we are. Except if I were giving this speech when I was in the Assembly 15 years ago and I was the budget chair, I would be giving a different speech because we had no reserves. We literally had no reserves.

We had a huge amount of debt and we had a two thirds budget requirement that inhibited addressing those problems in a way that they fixed them. So over 10 years ago, we moved to a simple majority budget. In 2014, the Governor spearheaded a rainy day fund. And I would submit that both of those things together is the reason why we have fiscal soundness right now in this budget and in the state.

We have $37.5 billion with this budget in reserves that never happened before. And they are not being dipped into with this budget because last year there was the prudence to put as much of it into one time money of the excess surplus as was possible and a bunch in reserves. We were able to move forward some of that one time money. We were able to do different things. That doesn't allow fundamental cuts to the level of programs in California.

And it's both a function of the leadership over the last decade and those two ballot measures and a function of the prudence last year in putting things in one time money. And I would also argue that this is a budget for investment. This does invest in a way that redounds to all Californians whether you're lower income or upper income, whether you are in a disadvantaged community, whether you are a business. Our investment in education is profound.

It is profound in the sense that if you look at the last three years, we've had over a 25% increase in K through 14. It has, as I have said before, moved us from the bottom 10% of per capita spending in the states in education to the top third. And that is something that produces people, that fuel the businesses and deal with the job shortage. And part of that education budget is higher education housing.

I had the misfortune to read this morning that my home area has moved to number one in the rental market costs in the United States. This budget, and part of it is that in a small community, the University of California only houses half its students and then drops 10,000 on a community that is under 60,000 people and we have the people from Silicon Valley with their money coming over.

We have housing taken out because it's such a desirable place that people rent it on short term rentals rather than long term rentals. This budget contains 624 units of housing for our local community college and University of California that is phenomenal on the population base and provides an investment that will deal with housing in a very good way. We are addressing not just education, but housing, healthcare. We have heard about the MCO tax.

I think if you have the long view of the budget, this has got to be the first time in recent memory that there will out of this MCO tax, come any increase in MediCal rates. They just have not been increased significantly over time. This budget does that. Healthcare makes a difference and when we invest in transit, just as the previous speaker said, and continue our investment of Proposition 1 and the roads that the voters approved in 2018, that is a business investment.

And so if you look at where business flourishes is where there's good investments in education, good investment in transits and road, good investments in healthcare. And that is what we are doing in a stable way with a large Reserve in this budget. It will make a fundamental difference and That's why I am going to be pleased to support AB 102 and I ask everybody else to do the same.

Thank you Senator, any further discussion or debate? Any further discussion or debate, Senator from San Diego.

Thank you Mr. President. And like my colleagues from Fair Oaks and Beaver, this is likely to be the only time I'm going to raise my mic today. And I don't think I've ever been upstaged by a jackhammer, but it's about to happen, I'm sure. Look, I am thrilled, colleagues, to stand in support of what I think is incredibly great work. I'm very proud of what we've accomplished in this budget. I appreciate my colleague from Santa Cruz talking about the reserves.

This Senate perspective in terms of the budget proposals was not to touch those reserves and in fact to increase the reserves because we know that we have to be very careful about next year and the year after. But it is a budget that protects our progress.

I believe that across the board, whether it's investments in education, as others have said, health care, the environment, our safety net programs, I do have to say I'm a little bit frustrated by the fallacy that this budget does nothing for business. I would argue this budget is a win for business. We know that a supported and educated workforce is critical.

It's critical to maintaining our competitiveness in this economy and meeting the needs of employees and businesses, which is why we made huge investments in programs and education. I'm not going to go through it again. Mentioned childcare, mentioned all of the levels of education. I don't know about you, but when I'm home in my communities and I go to town halls, education is the number one thing I hear about all the time.

Particularly when we saw the Delta and the cut from the time when you were a budget chair and my colleague from Fair Oaks were in the Assembly and we saw good education funding and then we saw it take a dive and now we've worked our way back. Important. You know, I really don't think we should be making a statement that it's business versus actual people. I just don't think we should pit those two against each other. It's not how the real world works.

In addition to that, when we talk about those actual people we're trying to help, we expanded training opportunities for caregivers of seniors, our fastest growing population in this state that we have got to figure out how we're going to address in meaningful real ways, if only because most of us in this room are approaching that age. Well, not all of you. I'm sorry, I'm only speaking to a few of us. It updates the Development Services Rate Study to protect all providers ability to earn incentive payments.

That's a structural change that we need to do that affects real people. $120,000,000 in business grant program in addition to our tax credit program that allows businesses to locate or expand in California. So again, I think we are looking at the broad array of stakeholders in California. We know that a healthy workforce is a productive workforce.

Which brings me to what many of us consider a legislative victory, which is to buy down the cost of health care, which you mentioned to my colleague from Santa Cruz, to buy down the cost of health care for middle class families. This budget maintains our commitment to them and it provides that $165,000,000 from penalty funds to lower Covered California copays and deductibles a first. That's significant. We also are investing in energy reliability, streamlining clean energy projects. We have to be committed to innovation.

California is the state that is committed to innovation and technology. This budget has hundreds of investments throughout the state for our communities, things our local communities and constituents told us that they needed, whether it's infrastructure or critical programs or community clinics, on and on and on. We found a way to do some of that as well.

One of the top issues continuing to impact our state and businesses, especially those in downtown areas, both in big cities and small, of course, is the commitment you've already heard towards the homeless and to try to address the issue of increasing homelessness. Whether we're talking about money directly to our cities, our counties, our continuums of care, or whether we go into the mental health arena and talk about all of the investment over the last several years, That's an incredible investment in people and infrastructure.

For me, our economy has not done its job. If the people are living in poverty. Which is why I'm proud that this budget continues to invest in programs that directly help individuals and families most in need. I've heard many of our stories. We come from those communities. We come from those families. It makes permanent the 10% increase in cowworks grants. It establishes a pilot program to raise the monthly minimum food benefit to $50, and it makes improvements to EBT card security. We have a large population.

We're always going to grapple with issues of how to protect resources for those working families. And so, to protect CalFresh and CalWorks families from that kind of theft, approves the creation of a new summer food benefit program for our kids. Increases the SSI benefits for older and disabled Californians. Extends and expands a child pilot project to help fresh California grown fruits and vegetables to more CalFresh households. Fresh vegetables.

And this budget makes a direct investment to approve the film tax credit, something that I know people can argue over, whether it benefits California or not. But it is iconic and it creates jobs. It restores $1.25 billion of climate investments. It provides $5.1 billion in flexible funds for transit. My colleague from San Francisco talked about that, and That's directly to help constituents, the riders.

And here's the kicker we're doing all of this without raising taxes and without dipping into our reserves, as we've said, and helping to keep California prepared in case of a downturn under. I'm going to say our collective leadership with a laser focus on responsible budgeting. Our economy has surged, surpassing almost every state in GDP growth. Right now, California is on the cusp of becoming the fourth largest economy in the world. And That's remarkable. And while we have challenges to face, That's why we have legislation.

That's why we have continued oversight. That's why we have as we finish this, we're going to start looking forward to see what we can do to address these challenges. We have challenges, but we also have creative abilities to solve those problems.

So when you look at all California is doing, both for our economy and for the people in our state, the employers, the workers, the folks struggling to get back into the workforce, students who will be the next generation to help our state reach new heights, it's clear we're protecting our progress now and for years to come.

And finally, I'm just going to say these achievements couldn't have been reached without the fierce dedication of our budget chair, without the hard work of our budget Subcommitee chairs, without all of the Budget Committee Members, and, of course, without our budget staff. They've been on the front lines through tough conversations and crunch numbers until the wee hours of the morning. And I am not kidding when I say that.

And yet they navigated it with the grace and determination and with the best of intentions for all Californians. So I want to thank you for that. As I look at our budget care colleagues. I'm proud of what we've been able to achieve this coming year, and I'm proud of all that we are able to accomplish as a result of what I consider very responsible budgeting. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Senator. All debate having ceased. Senator from Berkeley, you may close.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members and I want to thank the Pro Tem particularly for a very eloquent close. I was very proud and pleased to be able to shepherd this process and have would express all of the benefits that she communicated and others on the floor. But I will leave it with I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Please open the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 32 no, six. The measure is adopted. Members, we're going to move next to file item 79. This is Assembly Bill 103. Assembly Bill 103. I'll turn the floor over to the Senator from Berkeley. Please read, Clark, please read. Thank you.

Assembly Bill 103 by Assembly Member team an act relating to the state budget and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately. Budget Bill

Thank you so much, Mr. President. Member so this Budget Bill junior amends the Budget Act to ensure that there are actions in the 2021 and 22 budget acts that conform to the budget package of 2023. And the specific highlights include $343.1 million of funding that was already included in the Department of Education Budget Act of 2022 for childcare rate increases to conform them to this 23 budget package.

The education trailer Bill that we will take up soon, and it provides 60 million in greenhouse gas reduction funds to the California Energy Commission for the Equitable building decarbonization, along with a variety of other technical and other changes. With that, I ask for your aye vote.

Discussion or debate? Discussion and debate. Members any discussion or debate? Seeing none. Clerk please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Measure carries 32 to seven Members. We're going to move next to file item 82. File item 82. This is Assembly Bill 116. See that the budget chair is ready.

Assembly Bill 116 by Assembly Member team an act relating to early childcare and education and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Senator, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much. Mr. President, Members, I'm particularly pleased to present AB 116, which addresses the childcare issues and is the Childcare Trailer Bill. This was a priority of, among others, the Women's Caucus. And I know many of you. And what this Bill does is enacts permanent family fee reform across all childcare and state preschool programs to ensure that our childcare, for those families who need it most, stays affordable.

It also ensures that families below 75% of state median income will pay no fee for subsidized childcare and families at or above 75% state median income will pay fees capped at 1% of their monthly income. We took early action to waive family fees for childcare through September 30 of this year. And this new family fee structure cased in this Bill will take effect on October 1 of this year.

Additionally, this Bill makes statutory changes to implement the $1.4 billion General Fund appropriation to supplement the reimbursement rates. And as I mentioned in my opening, we have many large providers, small family daycare providers and others that close their doors because they could not afford to continue to offer childcare. And their closing their doors has affected families that depend on childcare to be able to go to work.

And so this adjustment of rates, which we expect will occur over time, is still being negotiated and subject to collective bargaining, will help reopen those facilities and ensure that the childcare so many families in California depend on continues to be able to be provided. And finally, it provides a temporary extension of the hold harmless policies for childcare providers. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Discussion and debate. Senator from Sacramento.

Thank you very much. I just rise in support of this Bill and feel that it's important that somebody stand on this floor and thank the Women's Caucus and the Senator from Santa Barbara and the Senator from Berkeley for working so hard on this issue. Millions of families are in gratitude to you. Thank you. I urge an aye vote.

Any further discussion on this matter? Further discussion? Seeing none. Senator Skinner. You may close.

I ask for your aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 34 to four, the measure carries. We're going to move next to file item 85. File item 85. This is Assembly Bill 119. The budget chair is ready. Clerk please read.

Assembly Bill 118 by Assembly Member Ting an act relating to health and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Senator Skinner.

Thank you, Mr. President. Member AB 118 is the trailer Bill that enacts the MCO the Managed Care Operations tax as I referenced in my opening statement. And it assesses the tax on managed care organizations to support medical investments to ensure...

1 second. Hold on.

All right, Members, we're going to do a little rewind there, where, again, I'll repeat on file item 85. This is Assembly Bill 119. Assembly Bill 119. If the Clerk would please read.

Assembly Bill 119 by Assembly Member Ting an act relating to MediCal and declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately. Yeah, because we said he said you.

You all right, Members, thank you for your patience. We're again on item 85. The Clerk has read the measure. We'll go to our Budget Chair to present. Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Does the Clerk need to need to read the measure? He did. Okay, excellent. All right, once again, so AB 119. Members, this is the Bill that enacts the Managed Care Operations Enrollment Organization Enrollment Tax, as I referenced in my opening statement. And what it does is, with that assessing of a tax on the managed care organizations, it allows us to support our medical investments, to increase provider rates, and to support the General Fund shortfall and ensure a balanced budget.

It would be in effect from April 1, 2023 to December 31, 2026. The revenue from the tax, as I mentioned, would be deposited in the Managed Care Enrollment Fund, and it would be used again to increase managed care rates to support the non federal share of existing managed care payments to our MediCal program. It transfers funds to the MediCal Provider Payment Reserve Fund to support the investments in the medical program implemented in the Health Omnibus Trailer Bill, which was SB and AB 118. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, any further discussion on this matter? Any further discussion? Senator Caballero.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I want to thank the Chair, as well as the Budget Chair, as well as all of the organizations that came together to support this tax. This will fundamentally help us change how we do health care by lifting up the opportunities for individuals that are dependent on Medi Cal to be able to get reimbursed for the services that they need, which means that we can provide more access to healthcare services all over the state.

Additionally, this helps to Fund the Distressed Hospital Loan Program, which is critically important to save the 17 or 18 hospitals that were projected to have fiscal problems and to end up in bankruptcy by the end of next year. So I respectfully ask for your support on this budget. Very, very important budget measure.

Thank you. The Senator from Merced. We'll recognize the Senator from Bakersfield.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the beginning of this year, we faced a healthcare crisis with one of our hospitals, Madera Closing, which created a huge impact on healthcare services in the Central Valley. There are two financially distressed hospitals in my district. A lot of things contributed to our state's rural hospitals, including the expansion of medical for all previously that we expanded to previously uncovered populations, and the reimbursement rates that haven't been changed in almost 25 years to providers.

Again, I've said it before and I'll say it again today, that when you get reimbursed for a service that costs you a dollar and you get less than 65 or $0.70, it's a pathway to bankruptcy. A lot of things have contributed to this situation, and this agreement that we have before us on AB 119 file item 85 has reasons to support it and reasons to oppose it.

But I believe that balance, the balance that it creates for providing reimbursement rates and quality health care to those that need it, specifically our poorest populations in the Central Valley, those that receive the MediCal, is a reason to support it. This year, while 75% of the revenue will go to the budget deficit, $1.0 billion will go to improved provider reimbursement rates, and other rate increases won't happen until 2025.

But that's because we have to align ourselves with a federal filing, and we can't submit a new filing until next year, which will allow us to allow more providers to have higher rate increases for Medi Cal in future years.

I hope that the healthcare systems that we have here in the State of California will be able to hold on for that long, especially our financially distressed hospitals, and that future budget deficits won't have this money be robbed and put into the General Fund, and it will go to where we've voted it to go for today.

I realize there's no binding authority in that, but I'm taking the Governor and the staff and the budget chair at their word that they really want to make sure that these medical reimbursement rates are there to treat the patients and provide for the doctors that provide these services to our most vulnerable population. I do have some things that I don't like about it, obviously. For example, an optometrist who provides medical patients or poor children with glasses costs about $45 to do a pre eye exam.

They get reimbursed $7. They're not included in this reimbursement increase. It's frustrating that a lot of providers that provide these services for primary care and some just wellness care are not included in these rate increases. That's the same for other providers. I'm so grateful that not only was the $150,000,000 added for the financially distressed hospital Bill that my colleague from Madera and Salinas with Redistricting, she's probably from all over the central part of the state.

She worked very, very hard and held countless meetings and invited all of us to participate in that process. And we met with every single stakeholder to find out how we could make this happen. And an emergency piece of legislation passed to give our hospitals access to a grant or loan program. The total in that pot was $150,000,000. And I'm very grateful that there's another additional $150,000,000 going to our hospitals now because we realize that it wasn't enough money for that $150,000,000.

I also appreciate that in this there's $50 million to assist rural hospitals with their seismic safety compliance. I realize That's just a very small amount, but it's something, and it's something that we've never had in the past. I can tell you that having one of the worst earthquakes in California just recently in the last few years, that happened in Ridge Crestronia area.

The Governor even went out to my rural community to visit the old building part of the hospital with the new building part attached that met all the oshpod safety seismic requirements. They had to move everybody from the new part of the hospital into the old part of the hospital without those safety requirements because it was the only one that was structurally sound to be able to treat patients. So I think we should offer more off ramps.

But I'm grateful for the $50 million that will assist us in providing for those seismic safety compliance issues that we face as our hospitals continue to struggle with funding that I wish we could extend the seismic deadline. I wish there could be off ramps, like I said, but I understand that we can only get so much in a budget. Ask I do want to bring up the issue of the majority party's fixation on abortion providers.

I don't want to make this a pro life or a pro choice vote, because That's just a mute or dead issue on this floor, but I think it should be a financial, fiscally responsible, sound decision. We spend about $50 million to have a handful of hospitals to be able to provide services to everyone in the State of California, but we have about $290,000,000 that go to Planned Parenthoods and the abortion providers, 200 million. Sorry. And then there's an additional $90 million in increases because of this MCO tax.

Colleagues there are 40 million people in the State of California. And again, not making it a pro life or pro choice issue because like I said, it's a moot point on this floor. But a fiscally sound responsibility issue that we have as legislators is that you have $290,000,000 going to abortion providers and $150,000,000 going to hospitals. 50% of the population, women. There is a possibility that they will need an abortion provider one day.

Most of them, a lot of them are outside of childbearing birth age. Some of them are not ever going to have an abortion. So there's a smaller percentage of individuals that would access that. And we're providing them a huge amount of money. But I can pretty much guarantee you that everybody, including everybody, male, female, regardless of age, will need a hospital or a Doctor one day.

And we didn't adequately provide for our hospitals or our doctors, but I can tell you that overwhelmingly this Bill saves two of my hospitals in my district. And I thank my colleague from Merced who worked with this. I thank the governor's office for providing us the resources that we needed to make sure that these hospitals didn't go under, because when you're in a rural area and you have a hospital that goes under, it's 120 miles to the next hospital.

It's not like down the street where you have multiple hospitals in the same city. It's 120 miles to the next hospital. God forbid you have to survive a stroke or a heart attack to get to that next location. So with all that said, with the negatives in this Bill, I think the not being responsible on some of the fiscal issues, I respectfully ask for an aye vote on this Bill.

And I think the budget chair, the Senate Pro Tem, and specifically my colleague from Merced, who actually worked on this MCO tax. And I also want to thank the plans. They came to the table. This MCO tax will tax our healthcare plans, but it allows us to draw down a substantial amount of money from the federal government to be able to increase provider rates so that we can make sure that our most vulnerable in society are taken care of.

With our medical provider rates going up again, there are a lot of medical providers that are struggling to stay afloat to provide services to this most vulnerable population. But I think this is a really healthy, good start. And again, I want to thank all those people that participated in that, because the two hospitals that I have that would have gone under and not had services in fairly large communities are going to be saved because of this MCO Tax and the way that it was structured. So thank you very much and respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Senator, any further discussion on this matter? Further discussion? Seeing none. Senator from Berkeley, you may close.

Ask for your aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 35 to zero, the measure carries. Members, we're going to move next to file item number 86. File item 86. This is Assembly Bill 120. The budget chair is ready. Clerk, please read.

Assembly Bill 120 by Assembly Member Ting an act relating to Human Services and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget Bill.

Senator, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. Members, AB 120 is the Human Services trailer Bill that makes various actions to implement our budget. And among those things, it requires our Department of Social Services and the Department of Education to maximize participation in the new summer EBT program, which provides food to our kids during summer months when school's out.

And what this particular action also does is help ensure that the state can access up to 400 million in federal funds that would otherwise be left on the table and thus that many of our kids not fed because schools out. This Bill also implements a 3.6% grant increase to Cowworks and an 8.6 increase to our State Supplemental Payment, or SSP, benefits. It makes permanent the 10% CalWorks grant increase that we approved last year on a temporary basis.

And it prevents cuts to CalWorks the next year because it's ongoing, thus supporting our lowest income families with children. It creates the CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot program to raise benefits for people receiving the lowest CalFresh benefit. It extends the California Fruit and Vegetable EBT Pilot Project, which provides matching dollars when you purchase fruits and vegetables with an EBT card.

It extends the CalFresh Safe Drinking Water I mean, the CalFresh Safe Drinking Water Pilot program improves access to in home supportive services for children with disabilities and provides a housing supplement for foster youth in supervised independent living placements. So to put it into regular speak, to help them pay rent. So, what I would say about this particular trailer Bill and it actually applies to many others, but in particular this one, that responsible budgeting has many facets.

So beyond the fact that the budget Bill that we adopted earlier includes the largest Reserve that California has yet had, actions like the ones I just referenced in this Bill also have an economic benefit. Whether it's increasing funds to our Cal Works families or expanding minimum CalFresh benefits or giving those foster youth the ability to pay rent, all of those help ensure that we do not contribute to future deficits. And let me give you a specific example.

Every $1 spent on food produces a $1.80 in economic activity. 1 billion invested in food creates 14,000 jobs throughout the economy. Each one of the programs mentioned in here has economic multiplier benefit effects beyond the individual benefits to the beneficiaries who receive it. With that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Assembly Bill 120 is on the floor for discussion. Senator from Sacramento.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the conclusion of yesterday's budget session, a colleague said to me, you voted against Human Services. How can you vote against Human Services? And my answer is I didn't vote against Human Services. I voted against that proposal. I have supported Human Services programs and enhancements of Human Services programs in the past. I have also not supported them in the past. And the reason for that is always because I didn't think we can afford it.

And as I've stated before, we have a balanced budget on paper. And so therefore, one could conclude we can afford these enhancements in Human Services, but we can't. Our revenues are not going to come in as this budget predicts. We may even have more of a shortfall after October 15, as I have indicated before. And so that is why I can't support this. I am not opposed to human services. I'm opposed to enhancing expenses when we can't afford it. And I'd also like to point out that this Bill also includes an extremely unfair increase in the IHSS County collective bargaining penalty.

Thank you to the Senator from Fair Oaks. I misidentified you earlier. I apologize for that. Any further discussion on this matter? Seeing none. Senator Skinner. You may close.

Thank you, Mr. President. While I could not have predicted the specific remarks that our colleague from Fair Oaks would make, I hope that my references to how this Bill is actually a benefit for us economically would address the considerations he made regarding fears of contributing to our budget shortfall. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

All debate having ceased, Clerk, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to six, the measure carries Members, we're about 25% through our workload today. 25%. I want to thank everyone for their patience. We have the drum section from the symphony so plain, and that does require some patience and understanding. So with that, we're going to move to our 6th item on our agenda today. This is file item 87, Assembly Bill 121.

Assembly Bill 121 by Assembly Member Ting an act relating to Developmental Services and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Senator from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. Members, the AB 121 is our trailer Bill for the Developmental Services. And among other things, it does extending the remote meeting options and the suspension of family fees for those who are served by Regional Centers. It ensures that children with developmental disabilities are not improperly denied behavioral therapy. It permanently extends the LEAP program, which provides people with developmental disabilities a pathway to state jobs.

It creates an employment First Office under the Health and Human Services Agency to enhance integrated employment opportunities for those with developmental disabilities. And it adjusts our Developmental Services rate models to reflect increases in the minimum wage. And with that, Members, I ask for your I vote.

Members, discussion or debate? Discussion and debate. Senator from Bakersfield is recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President, I rise in very strong support of file item 87 AB 121 and for all the reasons that the esteemed budget chair mentioned, but especially not just the issue that individuals or children under five could be treated or diagnosed for even non visible disabilities. But they're in there.

I think a few of the biggest things are is that when they have an automatic increase in minimum wage, these developmental service providers would have to come back up here and fight and fight and fight for rate increases to cover that increase. Which isn't just the increase on the wage, the wage only goes up $0.50, but between taxes, liability insurance and workers comp, it might go up a $1.25.

So that would restrict a lot of these entities providing these services to the most vulnerable people in our society, those with developmental disabilities. It would impact their ability to provide services. So I think with that being in there as an automatic rate adjustment to accommodate that is just a huge issue. The family fee program that is going to continue, I think that's a huge issue. I hated, hated, hated.

A few years ago, we did the sub minimum wage Bill because a lot of my developmental individuals in my community, that population worked, right? So if they got an assessment and they could do 50% of what they would consider an average person could do, then they got 50% of the wages and then they got two people to do the job of one person. But that created some type of esteem and character to be able to go to work every day.

And I remember a somewhat high functioning, middle to high functioning down syndrome young man came to me and he goes, Santa Grove, I go to work today. I go to work today. And he had his lunchbox and he was so excited. Now he is someone that his mom and dad know that he'll never function outside of the care facility. He has to have care continually because he's just developmentally disabled. But he had a job and it was a job that he could do.

And so to take that job away from him, like a lot of these jobs were being replaced because they had to pay him, the sub minimum wage disappeared. That was really a sad time because he lost his job and a lot of that population did lose their job. And now that we're realizing that that was probably not a good measure, we're not correcting that measure, but we are at least subsidizing the wages so that the employers would still have the ability to pay the minimum wage.

Even though it's not the sub minimum wage based on the productivity of the person, but they'll get the regular minimum wage, but there'll be a subsidizing for employers so that they don't lose revenue by hiring somebody who can't actually functionally do the job. And so those are all good things in this Bill. And I would just respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you to the Senator from Bakersfield. Any further discussion? Members, any further discussion? Seeing no microphones up, Senator from Berkeley, you may close.

Thank you. Appreciate the additional explanation that our colleague from Bakersfield provided. And with that, I ask for your I vote.

Senator has closed. Secretary, please call the roll Allen.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 40 to zero, the measure carries. We'll move next to file item 93. 93. Members, this is Assembly Bill 127.

Assembly Bill 127 by Assembly Member team an act relating to state government and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Budget Chair Skinner, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Members or Mr. President. AB 127 is the General government trailer Bill, which, among other things, authorizes DGS to assist local jurisdictions with delivery of an installation of emergency sleeping cabins, ensuring that they adhere to the housing first principles and are focused on moving people into permanent housing. It also requires parity in speed capacity for middle mile broadband infrastructure, and adjusts the timeline for public notification of those projects.

It requires prioritization of broadband grant funding to public housing developments, and extends the sunset dates for various small business programs grant programs, including, but not limited to the California Venues Grant program and the Nonprofit Arts grant program. And with that, I ask for your I vote.

Members, any discussion on this item? Assembly Bill 127. Any discussion? Seeing no microphones up, secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to seven, the measure carries. We'll move next to file item 94. File item 94. This is Assembly Bill 128. Budget chair is ready. Clerk, please read.

Assembly Bill 128, Committee on Budget enact relating to cannabis and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately be related to the budget.

Budget chair Skinner, the floor is yours.

So I am now addressing SB 128?

That's correct. Excuse me, Assembly Bill 128.

It was the Clerk read AB. I mean, the Clerk read SB.

Let's correct that. If we could have the Clerk read the item one more time.

Assembly Bill 128, Committee on Budget an act relating to Cannabis and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members AB 1. Excuse me? SB 128. It is AB, even though he read SB again. Okay, great. Cool. were correct now.

We'll rewind and start again. Budget chair. Skinner.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, AB 128 is the cannabis trailer Bill. It makes technical changes to adhere federal requirements when our Department of Cannabis Control does a criminal background check. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

All right, further discussion on this item, Assembly Bill 128. Assembly Bill 128. Any discussion? Members? People are pretty excited about this one. Senator Skinner, we're going to take that as your close.

Yes.

Call the roll, please.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 40, no, zero. The measure carries. We're going to move next to file item nine. This is Assembly Bill 130. Assembly Bill 130. That's file item 96. I said that incorrectly. Item 96. AB 130. Senators ready?

Assembly Bill 130 Committee on Budget an act relating to Employment and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Senator from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. Members. AB 130 is the labor and employment trailer Bill. It eliminates the inoperative and repeal dates for the Domestic Worker and Employer Education and Outreach Program, which makes then this program permanent. It also includes roughly $1.65 billion one time Prop 2 debt repayment funding as a supplemental pension payment towards our state plan's unfunded liabilities. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, discussion and debate on this item. Assembly Bill 130, any discussion or debate? Seeing none, the Clerk please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to three. The measure carries. We're moving next to file item 100. File item 100. This is Assembly Bill 134. Budget chair is ready. If the Clerk please read.

Assembly Bill 134 Committee on Budget an act relating to Public Safety and Making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately, Bill related to the budget.

Senator, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, AB 134, as stated, is the trailer Bill related to public safety. This Bill specifically repeals criminal administrative fees related to record sealing and post conviction remedies. It improves family visitation opportunities at our state prison facilities. It includes legislative intent to address the large unused capacity at our state prisons to enable future savings that may be used for rehabilitation and other purposes.

It facilitates rehabilitative reforms at San Quentin with a new rehabilitation center at that facility, and makes statutory changes to facilitate the closure of our Division of Juvenile Justice and clarify the secure youth track commitments that the Legislature has made at the local level. In summary, the Bill makes significant changes to promote public safety by expanding debt free justice and promoting rehabilitation and family connection within our prison system. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Discussion or debate on this. I see the Senator from Bieber you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, I rise in opposition. We heard in the Committee hearings about facts, and we do have, quite frankly, many beds at the state level prison systems that are vacant. And That's not because we don't have crime in California. It's because we've actually changed the laws. Proposition 47 and 57 makes a rape of an unconscious woman not a felony. And so if it's not a felony, you don't go to prison.

On top of that, we had AB 109 early on, which many years ago, I think it was 12 or 13 years ago, AB 109 came through and took those prisoners from state facilities into local facilities at the local level. So I just want to set the record straight that we don't have crime if you dumb down crime and make crime not punishable. So I want to make sure that you understand that we will have a lot of open beds if we have no punishment for crime. And for that reason, I will not be supporting AB 134.

Thank you, Senator. Recognizing the Senator from Los Angeles.

Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to point out one small thing. I've mentioned in other hearings that because of this Bill, family visitation will allow visitors to bring in person will be allowed to bring baby food and snacks, diapers, breast milk and pumping supplies, personal items and toys and homework.

It's kind of embarrassing that it would take a Bill like this for us to vote on and go through the whole process to allow families to be able to take that in their visits to their loved ones. So I want to stand. Up and thank all the moms and grandmas who fought so much to make sure that something as simple as this will bring so much dignity to their visits with their loved ones. And thank the budget staff for working so hard on this. Thank you.

Thank you. Senator, any further discussion on this measure? Seeing no further discussion, Senator Skinner, you may close.

Thank you. And I appreciate our colleague from Los Angeles expanding on that. Can you imagine for most visitors, a full day of travel? And if you were bringing babies or toddlers that you would not be able to have any supplies for them? It is absurd. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Clerk please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to eight, the measure carries Members, we've made great progress today in moving through these budget bills. We're waiting on just a couple of bills from the Assembly still to be completed. Now, some have suggested that our work here in the Senate is the greatest show on earth. The greatest show on Earth. And with any great show, you have to have an intermission. So we're going to take a brief intermission. I'd ask the Members to please not leave the Capitol. We're going to reconvene, at least the plan is to reconvene back here at 240 it 40 minutes after 02:00 to finish our business. And with that, the Senate is in recess. \

Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, we're coming back to order. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, can we get your attention, please? Members of the Senate, we have a very special guest that has decided to join us here. A very special guest, former Senator Mimi Walters is here in the House. The Senator from Laguna, Nigel. Is that correct? Very good. We want to identify you correctly on the floor. Welcome back to the Senate.

Okay, Members, we are going to hear one more Assembly Bill, and then we're going to hear a few of the Senate bills that have come back for concurrence. Okay, if you want to follow along here. So the Bill that we're going to hear now is file item 84. This is Assembly Bill 118. Follow along here, file item 84, Assembly Bill 118. That's not the supplemental file that we're going to go to next. Checking to see if our budget chair is ready on that. She is ready. If the Clerk would please read.

Assembly Bill 118 by the Assembly Committee on Budget an act relating to Health and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

Senator Skinner from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much, Mr. President, Members, AB 118 is our health omnibus trailer Bill. It implements the medical provider reimbursement rates that I mentioned when I referenced the managed care organization tax in an earlier trailer Bill.

And those investments include the loans for our distressed hospitals, the support for our small and rural hospitals, ability to meet their seismic compliance obligations, the healthcare workforce development investments and the medical reimbursement rate increases for primary care, specialty care, community and outpatient care, family planning and women's health emergency services, emergency transportation, meaning ambulances, public hospitals and behavioral health.

And as our Pro Tem referenced in her comments on the budget Bill, overall, this trailer Bill is the one that enacts the permanent revenues to ensure that our Covered California insurance plans stay affordable for Californians who buy their insurance through Covered California. It also deletes obsolete code references related to the Medi Cal asset limit for eligibility, and authorizes the transfer of opioid settlement funds from the Attorney General to the Department of Healthcare Services to Fund programs to address opioid and fentanyl overdoses.

And finally, it updates the statute related to implementation of California's newly 988 suicide and crisis lifeline. A lifeline that was established through legislation by our Legislature. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

The Senator from Berkeley has placed Assembly Bill 118 on the floor. Is there any discussion on this matter? Any further discussion? Seeing no microphones up the Clerk, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 34 to two, the measure carries all right Members, we're now going to move to the supplemental file. Supplemental file. Everyone should have available that supplemental file number one on your desk. And we're going to begin with file item 175. This is Senate Bill 114. Senator is prepared Clerk, please read.

Senate Bill 114 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act related to Education Finance and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

The Senator from Emeryville adjacent Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Excellent, Mr. President. Members, SB 114 is the Tk through 12 education trailer Bill and most significantly, it protects and fully funds the discretionary Local Control Funding Formula and funds an 8.22% COLA. For that, it protects and fully funds ongoing programs including our universal school meals, our school transportation and expanded learning. Additionally, the measure provides an additional ongoing 80 million for county operated court and community schools and an additional ongoing 12 million for county offices of education to provide technical assistance to our school districts. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, discussion on this matter, discussion or debate? The Senator from Burbank. Senator Portantino, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, though I am extremely excited that we were able to have a significant COLA and fully fund significant parts of our education budget, one item in this Bill has me particularly excited, and that is it includes mandatory Dyslexia screening for our earliest school students. As you know, when we catch these issues early in a student's academic life, particularly in first grade, we can actually provide them help.

We can accurately identify where their early literacy challenges are and we can better educate them for the long run. And so, as you know, this has been a passion of mine for the past several years. I know the Governor has also shared the passion and I want to give compliments to the Governor and his staff and team for working so collaboratively to make this happen and to make sure it gets funded and in the budget.

And I'm just extremely excited that it's happening finally and thank everyone who worked on it, the broad coalition of educators and advocates who came together to make sure that this was in the budget. And so I just want to compliment our budget team and our staff and everybody for making sure it's here. And also, again, to give props to the Governor for making sure it's in the budget. And with that urge, and I vote on SB 114.

Thank you, Senator. Want to recognize now the Senator from Yucaipa, Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'm standing here before you and my colleagues in support of AB 114, I had the privilege to sit on budget one with our very eloquent and generous and kind with his time, Senator Laird, or should I say our Senator from Santa Cruz. I apologize for that, Ms. ... . But I do want to say what a privilege it is to be on this Committee and be able to hear the concerns that we have in education in California.

And as mentioned earlier by one of my colleagues from San Diego, was the fact that one of the top priorities throughout, as we hold town halls throughout my district, is education. And seeing many of the allocations that we have with regards to funding for education, I'm very grateful to be able to sit in the Committee and see the allocations that we have provided in this Bill. With that, I would like to ask for a vote and happy to support this Bill today.

Thank you, Senator. Any further debate on this matter? Any further debate? Seeing none. Senator Skinner from Berkeley. You may close.

Ask for your aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 36 to zero, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. Members, we're going to move next to file item 176. This is Senate Bill 115. Clerk, please read.

Senator Skinner, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, SB 115 is the Proposition 28 trailer Bill. And one highlight that I'll make that I think many of you will be pleased about is that the voters passed Proposition 28 last November to guarantee arts and music funding for our schools. And this Bill makes technical and clarifying changes so that it can be implemented by the Department of Education. It also appropriates 148,000 for the maintenance and support of the local control and Accountability Plan etemplate. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Any discussion or debate on this matter? Any discussion or debate? Seeing none. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 40 to zero, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. We're going to move next to file item 177, the Senate Bill number 117.

Senate Bill 117 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relating to post secondary education and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, SB 117 is our Higher Education Trailer Bill, which you'll be happy to hear approves the next round of grants to our UC, CSU and community colleges to enable them to build much needed student housing. It also includes 200 million in this year's budget and 300 million annually up until 2028-29 for a revolving loan Fund for that student housing. But it's expanded so that they could also be used to build affordable faculty and staff housing, as well as student housing.

It makes current and former foster youth who attend our higher education systems the first students in California to achieve debt free college by some adjustments that are made to the middle class scholarship and the Student Success Completion Grant.

And it funds an expansion of nursing programs and Bachelor of Science nursing partnerships through our community college system so that we can maintain the next generation of registered nurses, which, as we all know, we have a nurse shortage right now, and it supports one time and ongoing investments at our community colleges. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, discussion or debate? SB 117. Pleased to recognize the Senator from Fair Oaks Adjacent. Senator Ashby Love Fair Oaks.

Thank you very much. Senate Bill 117, the higher education trailer Bill has something very important to me included in it. So I'd like to rise to say a few quick words. With the passage of this Bill, foster youth in California will be the first demographic in our state to achieve debt free college. Foster youth are, by definition housing insecure and this instability makes it extremely difficult to attend higher education. Over 50% of the people experiencing homelessness on our streets identify as former foster youth.

This is a way to go back in time and help those in the future preventing them from experiencing homelessness. As you know and I have shared with this group before, over 90% of foster youth in high school, when asked, will tell you that they would like to attend a four year University, but less than 4% actually get the opportunity to do so. Completion of a four year degree, while a major milestone, does not mark the end of a foster youth scholar's journey, but rather the beginning.

Senate Bill 117 will make this a reality for so many more foster youth. I want to thank Madam Budget Chair and I want to thank the Subcommitee for Chair One for carefully shepherding this through. Dozens of you agreed to co author this Bill with me. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you so much. And to my principal coauthor, our Majority Leader, thank you for trusting a first year with this Bill.

It's extremely powerful to stand on the shoulders of so many people who have come through the Legislature to get us to this point. And I'm very honored to help get us across the finish line to help foster youth become the first with debt free college. I rise today to urge an aye vote and to express my deepest heartfelt gratitude to this Legislature.

Thank you to the Senator from Sacramento. I see the Senator from Yukaipa, Senator Ochoa Bogh, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. I want to share the same positive highlights that my colleagues have mentioned. But in addition to that, I want to highlight the fact that through this Bill, I'm rising in support for this Bill. By the way, an urgent aye vote.

But also with that, I just want to really thank the Committee and the chair and everybody, the powers that be, that made it possible so that we could allow for our universities, CSUs, UCs and community colleges to be able to have a 0% interest loans for the qualifying schools for construction of affordable housing projects. As you know from coming from a real estate background, as a realtor, I know that housing in California is extremely unaffordable, as mentioned by my colleague from Bieber earlier today.

And when we invest in housing, especially when it comes to our colleges, it has a less of an economic impact on our local communities for those residents in those areas. So the investment in our colleges for their housing goes a long way in creating more affordable housing for everyone in the State of California. With that as other items mentioned by my colleagues and others not mentioned here today, I really want to urge an I vote on this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Let's next recognize the Senator from Bakersfield.

I briefly rise in support. I wish all bills were like this. Affordable housing for our students, wanting to go to college, foster care, youth, getting the college education for free, which, again, if you know anything about foster youth, they don't do anything to get in the position that they're in. It's their parents issue. And so just making sure that they have an opportunity and more dollars for nursing students so they could go back out into the communities and serve the people that need health care. We need those people. This is a good Bill. Please vote aye.

Thank you. Senator Grove. Any further discussion? Seeing none. Senator Skinner. You may close.

Thank you. I ask for an aye vote.

Clerk please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

40 to zero, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. We're going to turn the page now to file item 178. This is Senate Bill Number 122. Clerk, please read.

Senate Bill 122 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, an act relating to public resources and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget budget.

Chair, the floor is yours.

Mr. President Members SB 122 is the Resources trailer Bill. Among other things, it helps those who've faced difficulties paying their water Bill by directing the Water Resources Control Board's rearrange payment program to allow local agencies to account for arrearages owed for a time period extended to December 31, 2022, and moving the sunset on the program to July 1, 2026. It also requires our Department of Water Resources to develop a dam, safety and climate resilience.

Local assistance program specifies the intent of the Legislature and the Administration to conduct an assessment of offshore wind energy, state permitting needs so that the outcomes of that assessment may be considered as part of a future budget. And it provides various protections and mitigation requirements for the taking of a Western Joshua Tree. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Senator Skinner, any further discussion on this matter? Discussion on this matter? Senate Bill 122. I see the Senator from Menlo Park. Senator Becker.

Thank you. Mr. President as we start a series of resources and energy bills. I just want to make a few General comments on these topics. This is my first year as Chair of Sub Two, and I want to thank the Members, I want to thank the Committee staff and thank all who gave us input. We started this work among some of the worst storms and floods that we've seen in our state in some time, with tremendous impacts across the state and across many of our districts.

And I'm proud that this budget overall has significant funding both for resources and to continue our progress towards our climate goals. In the Budget Subcommitee, we work to ensure that our investments in a clean and green economy were not impacted by the budget deficit. We've seen that, if anything, we need to accelerate our time frame. Beside everything we've done here in California, we've only reduced emissions about 1% a year. We know we have to move much faster, and this budget allows us to do that.

It preserves critical funding for core environmental and clean energy projects while protecting the progress we've made towards addressing the catastrophic damage from climate change. A few things were highlighted by our leader and our budget chair. $547,000,000 to make it easier for residents to electrify their homes for cleaner indoor air quality, 550,000,000 in funding the transportation transition to clean vehicles, 25 million to continue transitioning our state operations to net zero and our large buildings to net zero. Just highlight a couple of other quick things.

On short term climate pollutants. On methane, California is the first globally to provide 25 million in incentives for feed additives to reduce emissions from livestock. And we're holding polluters accountable by implementing the windfall profit tax. We're also investing historic $2.2 billion for wildfire prevention, suppression, and flood response. So, once again, I want to thank the staff and all the Members and thank our budget chair for steering us through this process and proud to support the series of bills coming forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. I want to recognize the Senator from Santa Clarita. Senator Wilk.

I want to thank the Lafayette adjacent presiding officer. Unfortunately, I have to rise to oppose SB 122. I'm going to try to not go into the weeds or down the rabbit hole, but this is one of the challenges of why so many people get frustrated. The budget chair mentioned the Joshua Tree policy. This should be going through a Policy Committee, not through a trailer Bill just on its own, without any notice.

A number of years ago, we had the Fish and Wildlife say that the Western Joshua Tree is endangered. Well, there's anywhere between nine to 12 million western Joshua Trees in the Greater Mojave Desert. I don't think that it is endangered, and if it is, there is measured ways that we can most of my communities are already protecting it, but we're moving this through. And it said it's a so called compromise. Both my counties were not consulted.

I have six out of seven of my cities are in this area. They were not consulted. Every developer I talked to was not consulted. The Governor did consult with the solar industry, but I think That's all he consulted with. And this is just really bad policy and it's really going to undermine our climate goals. We are not going to be able to build houses. We are not going to be able to build facilities. And most of these people already are super commuters.

Three out of my seven cities are what's called supercommuters, meaning 75 miles a day or more. And this is going to actually just to check off a box to say that we've supported solar. We're going to cause a lot more ecological damage than we would have ever done if we had done this in a measured way through a thoughtful legislative process. I do want to thank the governor's staff.

We were able to put together a bicameral, bipartisan group of legislators to meet with the Governor staff and I think they were open to some of our suggestions. But honestly, by the time we got there, I think it was just too far down the road and we've got to take our jobs more seriously. This is going to adversely affect 4 million Californians and I don't know anybody that had a voice in deciding this policy. So with that, I'm going to have to oppose today's Bill.

Thank you, Senator. Next going to go to the Senator from Bakersfield, Senator Grove.

Thank you, Mr. President. I too rise in opposition of this Bill for several reasons. One, I do understand that my colleagues Bill from Menlo Park on the feed additives for dairy cows were added into this Bill as the individual in this state. And on this floor that represents the number one dairy producing county in the entire nation, Tulare County, where they produce milk products, but they also have processing facilities, stuff that your constituents eat or drink all the time.

Milk, ice cream, cheese, those kinds of things. My dairy industry is not interested in a food additive. The claims that were made in this piece of legislation or that my colleague from Menlo's Parks legislation is that cows produce methane, which causes cancer, which dairy farmers don't live as long. I have dairy farmers that are over 100 years old and they are fourth generation grandchildren and great grandchildren are taking care of the dairy farm.

I understand that my colleague in Menlo Park does not have one dairy in his district. So I would appreciate it if you guys would focus on your districts and what's good for your district and leave mine alone. First, That's the first thing.

The second thing is I'd like to align my colleagues, my comments with my colleague that just spoke of the previous speaker, the bill's provision regarding the Western Joshua Tree and the Conservation Act that extremely hostile to Kern County and San Bernardino County run counter to any science. Today, there's up to 9.8 million Joshua trees in the State of California in the growing area in a landmass that is larger than Connecticut, the State of Connecticut.

This is so plentiful that the federal government President, Joe Biden, refuses to put it as an endangered species under the hypothetical concern that the Joshua Tree could be impacted. And it's not even a tree. It's a succulent. Okay? So the Succulent could be, at some point, impacted by climate change. This Bill would significantly expand protections to this Succulent while slowing down the development and significantly increasing fees to landowners.

The most impacted people will be again, in my district, the average median income is roughly $50,000 a year. It's going to cost them $2,500 if they have a Joshua Tree in their front yard, not to mention the little tiny stems on a Succulent that grow out, That's an additional $150 per plant. And there's probably about 30 to 40 of those that grow out of the bottom of that plant.

So a person that makes $50,000 a year, primary black and brown communities in this area that are saving every dollar that they can to benefit their children and their college education and their way of life will be damaged by this piece of legislation. If you make $50,000 a year and you got two Joshua trees in your front yard, That's $5,000 plus $150 per stem to get it removed. It's ridiculous.

There's no scientific criteria for justifying the western Joshua Tree be put under the California Endangered Species Act. Again, reference the federal government and Joe Biden. This Bill is a power grab by the environmentalists. That's all it is. It's going to be an extraordinarily large funding source for, you know, I'm just going to be real.

I hope the FBI is following this because the bottom line is that the funding source for these Joshua trees ends up in this state building That's administered down to other environmental groups to continue horrible policy that affects negatively. The constituents that we have in this state needs to really be addressed because the constituents that are affected by this horrible piece of legislation is also those that pay taxes. The boundary line changes.

The individual who suggested the boundary lines, and I'm assuming it's the Department of Fish and Wildlife the individual who did these boundary lines is either ignorant or he is geographically unintelligent. Let's just put it that way. There is not one Joshua Tree on the Tejon Ranch. And to take an intersection on a freeway, which includes the Tahoe Ranch in this boundary line for a taking is ridiculous. You can't have a taking if there is no Joshua Tree on the property.

But to include this is just an end run for the Center for Biological Diversity to be able to file a lawsuit and circumvent all the good work that Tejon Ranch has done on those beautiful outlet malls and those shovel ready projects at the top of the grapevine where all of you pass if you drive through the state on 99. According to the language in 1927.3, it's my understanding that there is no Joshua Tree listed as endangered and there is no take. I guess this would be a question of the author. I apologize, Mr. President. Question of the author.

Senator Skinner, would you like to take a question?

I will. However, I am not sure that I can.

You can always answer it in a close. Let's have the question asked and you can decide how you want to answer it, if at all. Senator Grove, what is your question?

My question is, according to the language in 1927, three paragraph D, it's my understanding that there are no Joshua trees listed as endangered and that there is a no take. And if there is a no take, then boundaries shouldn't matter. So, in other words, if you don't have a Joshua Tree on the good Senator Archuleta's property, there shouldn't be a take or a purpose for funding that.

Senator Grove, what is the question?

The question is, is there a take if there are no Joshua trees on the property?

Senator Skinner, would you like to answer that?

I had a very logical answer to the question, but I thought, how could it be a logical answer? Because then it wouldn't have to be a question. And apologies for saying it that way, but as you just pointed out, if there is no take of the Joshua Tree, then there will be no impact of that provision.

All right. Thank you, Senator.

That's the response that I wanted I wanted it on public record that if there is no, even though Tejon Ranch is including in the boundary lines, if there's nothing to take, they wouldn't be incorporated into some long, drawn out lawsuit and there wouldn't be a take provision because it is common sense. But the way the Bill is written, just for my colleagues information, the way the Bill is written, it includes Tejon Ranch. And again, there is not one Joshua Tree or succulent on Tejon Ranch property.

Again, this is a horrible provision. It negatively impacts a lot of constituents in my district and over in the desert area. There are 9.8 million of these succulents continuing to grow larger than the capacity or the State of Connecticut respectfully ask for a no vote.

Thank you. Senator Grove, any further discussion or debate on this measure? Discussion or debate? Seeing none. Senator Skinner. You may close.

Thank you. Members. I ask for your aye vote.

All right, Members, this is SB 122. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 31 to eight, the Assembly Amendments are concurred in. Members, we're going to move next to file item 179. This is SB 123.

Senate Bill 123 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relating to energy and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Member, a SB 123 is the Energy Trailer Bill, and among other things, it makes some changes to the level two electrical vehicle charging stations to enhance the EV charging capabilities. It limits our California Public Utilities Commission self generation incentive Program to only cover Low income customers when they are using General Fund monies for that S chip program. Allows the Department of Water Resources to reimburse electrical corporations for energy imports procured on behalf of all California electric customers to October 31, 2023.

Allows connecting zero carbon or renewable resources behind the meter to meet the existing mandate of 100% zero carbon by December 31, 2035, and increases salaries for the five Members of the California Energy Commission by 5% per year over the next three years. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, Senate Bill 123 is on the floor for discussion. Any discussion or debate any discussion or debate seeing none, the Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to zero, the Assembly Amendments are concurred in. We're going to move now to file item 180. This is Senate Bill 125.

Senate Bill 125 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relating to transportation and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator Skinner of Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members. The SB 125 Transportation Trailer Bill requires the transportation agency to develop and administer an accountability program for regional transit planning agencies to receive funds through two of our programs the Population Based Transit and Inner City Rail and Capital. Program and the Zero Emission Transit Capital Program, but specifically to give them flexibility for operations. And establishes the Transit Transformation Task Force to develop recommendations to grow transit ridership.

It limits Caltrans from charging any selfhelp counties more than 10% for Administration indirect cost recovery, and requires Caltrans to submit a report to the Legislature and the LAO summarizing the outcomes of its encampment. Coordinators and with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Senator Skinner has placed Senate Bill 125 on the floor. Any discussion or further debates any discussion or debate? Seeing none. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to seven, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. We're going to move now to file item 181. Members, this is Senate Bill 131.

Senate Bill 131 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relating to taxation and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Bill relates to the budget.

Senator from Berkeley, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members. SB. 131 is the Taxation Trailer Bill. It amends the new employment credit to provide additional support for hiring for semiconductor development and manufacturing, lithium manufacturing and electronic aviation industries. It approves a proposal to subject the incomplete non Grand Tour trusts to the California income tax, with an exception for trusts with specified charitable distributions. It excludes from gross income for any qualified taxpayer money they received in settlements associated with the 2019 Kincaid Fire or the 2020 Zogg fire. And it makes a variety of technical changes to tax related programs. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Members, further discussion or debate on this matter? Further discussion or debate? Senator Siarto, is that a hand up there? All right, we're going to just note that as unintelligible and we'll go on from there. All right, Members, this is Senate Bill 131 to concurrent Assembly amendments. Any further discussion? Seeing none of the Secretary call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to eight, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. Members, we're on the downhill slide here. We're going to move to file item 182. This is Senate Bill 132. The Clerk please read Senate Bill 132 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review and accolade to the motion picture and television industry and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget. Senator Skinner, you're on camera.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members SB 132 is the film tax credit trailer Bill or formerly called the California Motion Picture and Television Production Tax Credit Trailer Bill and what this Bill does is expands the authority of the California Film Commission to allocate and for qualified taxpayers to claim the tax credit for an additional five years, starting in 25-26. Authorized at $330,000,000 per year, it makes the new credit refundable, thereby allowing taxpayers with insufficient tax liability the ability to make use of it.

And it provides for an increase of 4% of the credit amount for those applications who complete a Diversity Work Plan and complete Work Plan goals. It strengthens reporting on the use of the credit as well as outcomes of the Diversity Work Plan component. It increases the amount provided to the Career Pathways program from an amount equal to .25% to .5%, but also allows for future increases and increases that require reporting.

It includes an additional Member on the Board who is a diversity, equity and inclusion expert employed in the motion picture and television industry and makes various changes to the current authorized version of the credit and the California Sound Stage filming tax credit. It establishes the Safety on Productions pilot program. And with that, Members, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Skinner. We have five Members asking to speak on this issue. I would just note that there are a number of Assembly Committees that are waiting for Senate authors. So with that, we're going to begin with Senator Portantino followed by Senator Cortese, Durazzo Padilla and Wilk. Senator Portantino.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I rise in strong support of SB 132 and I would like to compliment in particular the budget staff, the Governor's Office, my colleague from Northern California, and my colleague from Southern California. There has been so much collaboration and so much focus on making sure that our production tax credit gets extended.

As you know, last year I had SB 485, which would have extended it for five years, and the Governor's Office inquired about the possibility of including it in the budget early in the process, and of course, took that opportunity. And I want to give a shout out to the Governor and his team for making sure that we had this in the January budget, the May revised budget, and then today's budget.

It is critical that we keep California's golden film industry in the state and let me give you a couple of statistics. Since 2015, we have had $21.8 billion in economic output directly associated with keeping these film jobs in California. It's touched 110,000 individual jobs. It's created $7.7 billion in wages and generated $960,000,000 in tax revenue. Those are staggering statistics which makes this program have significant economic sense and benefit to the taxpayers of California by investing their hard earned money in creating more union jobs.

Specifically, this Bill, as others will speak to, deals with the diversity in that industry. There are accountability measures embedded in this trailer Bill which are important. I know my colleague from Northern California was passionate about set safety, and again, the set safety provision is in this. And I want to give a shout out and props to him for making sure that we had that dealt with as well. So, obviously, this is a statewide benefit because keeping these jobs here protects those jobs.

And then, as the chair of the Budget Committee mentioned, there are also provisions in SB 132 which refine the construction tax credit. The life cycle of a Soundstage is 100 years. And so last year, we passed a tax credit to build more Soundstages. Those soundstages are under construction. And think about that, 100 years more of union jobs creating filmed entertainment being constructed by union jobs. And again, SB 132 helps refine our current construction tax credit. So, again, I strongly support SB 132 and compliment all those involved in getting it to this point.

We'll turn next to the Senator from San Jose, Senator Cortese, it's your turn in the spotlight. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. I, too rise in support of AB 132 and first want to thank our Pro Tem and of course, our budget chair and my colleague from San Diego, Subcommitee chair, all of whom exerted leadership, to make sure that this came together and happened in the way that it did. As my colleague from Burbank just said, a lot of people came together on this legislation, including he and I, who in effect, have been working on provisions of this.

And the parts that I'll focus on here very briefly, the set safety issues going back months and months, almost two years. Now. As many of you know, the negotiation over a Bill protecting workers in motion picture industry started after the tragic death of a cinematographer by the name of Helena on the Rust film set, which was a California production film in New Mexico. Like most tragic incidents, a series of missteps led to that accident.

That's not to say that it might not have happened, but had multiple safeguards, any one of which could have been followed to prevent it, it may have been prevented. Right after that accident, meetings commenced with the Motion Picture Association and ..., the union that represents workers in the entertainment industry, the Directors Guild of America, were also part of those discussions. And they became a Bill sponsor early on in our research, we noticed that no bills, no legislation had been passed to protect workers in film productions.

This came as a surprise because in addition to firearms, lots of TV and film productions use sophisticated pyrotechnics, as we all know, and of course, stunts involving heavy machinery and again, firearms and ammunition. Hollywood experts get it right 999 times out of 1000. But sometimes accidents happen. And those accidents can and do injure hardworking people who are supporting their families.

At one point, while we were drafting the Bill known as SB 735, I visited film productions at Universal and Warner Bros. To see exactly how they worked. The fact of the matter is, those top studios already employ the best safety protocols in the nation. But those practices weren't trickling down to the rest of the industry. The Bill, SB 735, was intended to scale up those best practices. It ultimately was joint authored by myself and the Senator from Burbank.

And now somebody making their first movie on a Low budget production can keep their own colleagues safe with the best protections in the nation. And this negotiation, as I said, took almost two years. But throughout it all, the Motion Picture Association and ... shared a commitment to protect their workers. And with that, California will continue to be the entertainment capital of the world for the next century and beyond. Thank you, Mr. President. I urge and aye vote thank you.

The Senator from San Jose. Members jumping the gun a little bit to let you know that Senate Judiciary is going to be meeting this evening. They have 35 bills. The good news is that dinner will be served. The bad news is that midnight snacks have also been prepared. I know with an original script. We have the Senator from Los Angeles. Senator Durazzo with an original script.

Thank you, Mr. President. This film tax credit is a great success. In fact, it's so successful, we can do more. The program is oversubscribed. And for those who say, look at business leaving the state, leaving the state. In a few years, 16 TV series relocated back to California, contributing over $2 billion. This is what we are doing keeping and attracting even more filming. So it's a smart investment for our tax dollars. People earn high wages and benefits. Small businesses flourish.

There's a strong commitment for people who have been underrepresented when production achieves the goals of their diversity work plan. I want to thank also Senator Padilla from San Diego for his leadership. And also Senator from my colleague from Los Angeles, Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, because she worked extremely hard to make sure that the issue of underrepresentation in that industry was addressed. Thank you.

Thank you to the Senator from Los Angeles. The speaker's list has grown longer. We have Senator Padilla, Wilk, Rubio and Jones. We're next going to go to the esteemed Senator from San Diego, Senator Padilla.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I also rise in support of SB 132. And first want to extend my thanks to the budget staff and to all of my colleagues want to also acknowledge one more time I think the solid progress there remains yet to be done on commitments to production diversity. With some specificity and measurements and also to the solid project progress that has been made and will continue to need to be made in production site safety.

Just to shed a little specifics on the benefits that we continue to support with our actions here today. Between 2015 and 2020, the 2.0 edition of this program, 169 film and television projects were awarded credits. Under the program, they supported 110,000 good union middle class jobs and generated almost 22 billion in economic output for the State of California. Every dollar from the .. program allocated to film and television productions increased labor employment by $8.60.

The state's GDP by $16.14, generated 24 and 40 of economic activity and returned a $1.07 to state and local governments in the first two and a half years of the 30 program. The Film Commission reports that over 100 film and television productions are projected to spend 6.2 billion in California, including 2.1 billion in qualified wages.

They will create and retain almost 20,000 middle class union jobs for Californians and more than 9000 Californians will be employed in these productions as actors, as they will film in many parts of California outside of Los Angeles region. This will also include Inyo Kern, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura counties. For these and many other reasons, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Members. There are no extras here on the floor of the Senate. We're going to go to one of our main characters, Senator Wilk.

Thank you, Mr. Maraga. Adjacent President. I too rise in support of SB 132. I want to thank everybody from the Governor's office of Pro Tem to the Budget Chair and her team for putting this together. Another thing I think we need to do is really understand the role that our Pro Tem has played in this movement. When I came up here 11 years ago, the film tax credit was only $100 million and it was a straight lottery, not based upon merit at all.

And we were having runaway production. I have no idea how the Pro Tem convinced Jerry Brown, the cheapest man I ever met, to move it from 100 million to 330,000,000. And I can't wait to read her book one day. And I hope in your kiss all that story is in there. Kiss and tell. How about that being rough on me? Anyway, and I agree with everything That's been shared in terms of the economics, but really this is a quality of life issue.

When I was running back in 2012, I had a bunch of meet and greets in people's homes and invariably there was somebody there and their spouse was out of state because they were filming out of state. I remember having in Castaic a woman crying on my shoulder because her husband film cameraman had not filmed a movie in California in six years. I remember having a documentary Director who was gone six months the prior year and missed his daughter's first birthday.

So this really is about quality of life but as good as this is, we need to do more. Case example Georgia, which is really one of our rivals now a decade ago they had six sound stages and our Senator who's Glendale adjacent, mentioned that these are 100 year investments. 10 years ago, six stages, today they have 65 the film tax credit Georgia, $1 billion a year. And if we look at all the economic studies that I've seen, these more than pay for themselves.

So I would hope that this body next year and the Governor next year would look at greatly expanding that because as well as we're doing, we could do even better. And with that, strongly support SB 132.

Thank you Senator Wilk, want to turn next to the star of Baldwin Hills. Senator Rubio, although it is Baldwin Park, just wanted to make that clarification is. There no Hills there? There's no hills, no script.

That's why we need a script. Thank you Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen of the Senate. Today I rise in strong support of SB 132. I just want to highlight and share, I don't want to take time just reiterating everything that everyone else said but I wanted to speak to besides the good paying jobs and besides know, making sure that we continue to have good jobs here in California.

I did want to speak on behalf of the actors, directors, grips, stage, set designers and everyone else that works on production. It is a quality of life issue and many of them spoke to us directly as we were navigating this Bill and this issue is how they had to be away from their families and how grueling it was when they had to go overseas. And I think it was already stated by my colleague that they go sometimes even a year without seeing their families.

And we know how important it is to keep families together and I could only imagine but I do know that sometimes we don't think of the small economic benefits to local communities. I used to be a vice principal at a school where my school was being used for a film production. And even our neighbors got paid for their parking spaces and just blocking the street. And so anyhow, as small as it is, everyone benefits. And we want to keep production here.

We want to keep families together and our good paying jobs here. So thank you to everyone that worked on this, we really appreciate it and again, I urge a strong support for SB 132.

Thank you to the Senator from Baldwin Parks, although Hills would be nice too, to his close friends and families, family, ladies and gentlemen, he is known as the Indiana Jones of the Senate. Senator Jones.

My friends call me Dr. Jones, by the way, and that's probably going to stick. Thank you. Mr. President and Members, I want to rise in agreement and support of SB 132 and agree with our colleagues from Burbank and Los Angeles that saying the overwhelming praises of this concept. And just share with all of us that just envision with me for a minute a better California when we do this concept of tax incentives because they work for all of California and multiple industries.

Maybe the 700,000 people that have moved away from California in the last couple of years will also move back and join us again as Californians. I urge an aye vote on SB 132.

Thank you very much. Senator Jones. Not seeing any further mics up. Looks like this show may be over. Senator Skinner, you may close this out. Very succinct. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 37 to zero, the Assembly amendments are concurred in. Members, we're going to go to our last budget Bill that we have pending before us today.

File item 183, SB 133 turn to the star of Berkeley, Senator Skinner.

Mr. President, Members, let me briefly run the credit.

Senator Skinner, I apologize, must read. It's a long day and you've shown great stamina today. Appreciate that. I like to ask the Clerk to read the measure.

Senate Bill 133 by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relaing to courts and making an appropriation, therefore, to take effect immediately Bill related to the budget.

I got so excited here. Senator Skinner.

And Mr. President, Members, let me briefly run the credits as I present this last trailer Bill. And that is the credits to our budget sub chairs, our budget staff, all of the not just the chairs, but all of the Members of that Committee, everyone who even Members that were not part of the Budget Committee. Had input in this as well as the staff who worked so hard and that staff in the Budget Committee and the Pro Tem's office.

And of course, it is a three party. This budget represents a negotiation between three parties. So I thank all of the folks from the other house and from the Administration and the Governor for working on this and producing the set of bills and budget that we have voted on today with this last one, SB 133 which is the Court Trailer Bill which creates a loan repayment assistance program to strengthen recruitment and retention of legal aid attorneys.

It also extends remote court proceedings for certain civil and juvenile matters until January 1, 2026. It clarifies attorney requirements in cases with claims under the Racial Justice Act and includes other needed statutory changes. And again, with great appreciation to everyone who worked on this, I ask for your aye vote. And I don't mean just who worked on this trailer Bill, but all of it. And with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Budget Chair Skinner. Discussion or debate? Discussion or debate? Senator from Orange County. Senator Umberg, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, one of the things I tell my staff is we don't want to peak too early. And this clearly is an effort not to peak too early because remote access expires on Friday. And so I want to thank the Chief Justice Guerrero, Jessica Divincenza, judicial Counsel staff Saskia, Kim, Corey, Jasperson, Tracy Kenny, and Sharon Riley for their effort to make sure that remote access does not expire with respect to civil proceedings on Friday. It's critically important.

There's been a survey done, and over 90% report positive results from remote access. It provides access to those who are indigent. And lastly, it also provides that court reporters must be in the courtroom whenever testimony, evidence is being adduced and prohibits them from actually reporting remotely urge an aye vote.

Any further discussion or debate on this measure? Further discussion seen none. Senator Skinner, would you like to close?

I ask for this final aye vote.

Senator Skinner, thanks for your great work on the budget. The Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

On a vote of 32 to eight to eight, the Assembly Amendments excuse me, Members. On a vote of 32 to eight, the Assembly Amendments are concurred in. We're going to move to motions and resolutions. Members, just a couple of items before we can close our session today. Under motions and resolutions. Want to recognize Senator Jones.

Thank you, Mr. President. Request of the author. Please remove file item 32, Assembly Bill 256, from the consent calendar.

The desk will note we're going to move now to Committee announcements. We have three Committee announcements. We'll begin with Senator Wahab?

Thank you. Public Safety Committee will reconvene in about 15 minutes in room 2200. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Gonzalez.

Senate Transportation Committee will convene after session and room 1200.

Finally, the Midnight Assembly organized by Senator Umberg.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. Yes. We have 35 bills to consider in Senate Judiciary. We will commence 10 minutes after adjournment, room 2100

If there is no other business before the Senate. The real star of our show, Senator Atkins, the desk is clear. Senator Atkins from the Senate Pro Tem's desk.

Thank you, Mr. President. Also known as the Executive producer. So to my fellow thespians, the time has come for the red curtain to close on this overexposed production, so I look forward to the reviews. And with that, our next floor session is scheduled for Thursday, June 29, 2023, at 09:00 a.m..

The Senate will be adjourned. We'll next reconvening on Thursday, June 29, at 09:00 a.m.. Members. Thank you.