Assembly Floor

Addis? Aguiar-Curry? Alanis? Alvarez? Arambula? Bains? Bauer-Kahan? Bennett? Berman? Boerner? Bonta? Bryan? Calderon? Juan Carrillo? Wendy Carrillo? Cervantes? Chen? Connolly? Dahle? Davies? Dixon? Essayli? Flora? Mike Fong? Vince Fong? Friedman? Gabriel? Gallagher? Garcia? Gipson? Grayson? Haney? Hart? Holden? Hoover? Irwin? Jackson?

Jones-Sawyer? Kalra? Lackey? Lee? Low? Lowenthal? Maienschein? Mathis? McCarty? McKinnor? Muratsuchi? Nguyen? Ortega? Pacheco? Papan? Jim Patterson? Joe Patterson? Pellerin? Petrie-Norris? Quirk-Silva? Ramos? Reyes? Luz Rivas? Robert Rivas? Rodriguez? Rubio? Sanchez? Santiago? Shiavo? Soria? Ta? Ting? Valencia? Villapudua? Waldron? Wallis? Ward? Weber? Wicks? Wilson? Wood? Zbur? Mr. Speaker?

Members, a quorum is present. We ask our guests and our visitors in the gallery and in the rear of the chamber to please stand for today's prayer and pledge. Today's prayer will be offered by our Assembly chaplain, Imam Yasir Khan. Imam, sir.

In the name of God, the most gracious, the most merciful, almighty God, give each of us the opportunity and courage to reach within ourselves so that as we strive to achieve our highest potential, our entire society will be blessed as well. May this be God's will. Amen.

We ask that you remain standing for the nation's pledge. Please join Assembly Member Papan as she leads us in the flag salute.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance on this fine last House of Origin day. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. You may be seated. Reading of the previous day's journal.

Assembly Chamber, Sacramento, Wednesday, May 17th, 2023. The Assembly met at 7:00 a.m. The Honorable Juan Carrillo, Assembly Member 39th District presiding, Chief Clerk Sue Parker at the desk, Reading Clerk David A. Bowman reading. Roll call: the following replaced one in the morning roll call. Addis? Aguiar-Curry? Alanis? Alvarez? Arambula? Bains? Bauer-Kahan? Bennett? Boerner? Bryan? Calderon? Juan Carrillo? Wendy Carrillo? Chen? Connolly? Dahle? Davies? Dixon? Essayli? Flora? Mike Fong? Vince Fong? Gabriel? Gallagher? Garcia? Gipson? Grayson? Haney? Hart? Holden? Hoover? Irwin? Jackson? Jones-Sawyer? Kalra?

Ms. Reyes moves and Mr. Flora seconds, and the reading of the previous day's journal will be dispensed with. Presentations and petitions, there are none. Introduction and references of bills will be deferred. Reports of Committees will be deemed read and amendments deemed adopted. Messages from the governor, there are none. Messages from the Senate, there are none. Moving to motions and resolutions. There are no absences for the day, and Majority Leader Reyes, you are recognized for your procedural motions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. I move to suspend Assembly Rule 69 to allow Assembly Member Haney to present AB 1286, Item Eight for passage today.

And Mr. Flora, you are recognized on the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We object and ask for a roll call vote.

Very well. Ms. Reyes moves, Mr. Gipson seconds that we suspend the rules. This is a procedural motion. Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 41; noes 13. Motion carries. And Ms. Reyes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the request of the author, please move Item 48: AB 747, McCarty to the inactive file.

Clerk will note. Members, we are moving to business on the Daily File. We'll begin with File Item Three. This is AB 499. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 499 by Assembly Member Luz Rivas, an act relating to public contracts.

And Assemblywoman Rivas, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present AB 499 which would authorize LA Metro to use job order contracting as a project delivery method for small maintenance projects at their properties. The bill has received bipartisan support. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Rivas. And seeing no Members wishing to speak on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 50; noes zero. The bill's passed. Next, we'll take up File Item 24. This is AB 1448.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1448 by Assembly Member Wallis, an act relating to cannabis.

And Assembly Member Wallis, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. AB 1448 will enhance local enforcement mechanisms for unlicensed cannabis activities. It's sponsored by RCRC and supported by local government and cannabis organizations. It has no no votes and no opposition. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Wallis. Seeing no Members wishing to speak on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes: 52; noes: zero. The bill is passed. Next by Mr. Kalra. This is File Item Four: AB 1726.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1726 by Assembly Member Kalra, an act relating to crimes.

And Mr. Kalra, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. AB 1726 simply clarifies that the record clearing provisions enacted under SB 357 and SB 239 are workable for immigration purposes. Under federal law, deportation proceedings can still be based on a vacated conviction unless the reason is due to a legal or procedural defect at the time it was entered. This mean that in cases where state law does not explicitly use certain language, a conviction will remain for immigration purposes even though the state erased it.

As such, immigrant populations are subjected to a two-tiered system where they unfairly face additional consequences, such as deportation for convictions based on outdated laws and are denied the relief they are entitled to. AB 1726 corrects this oversight and ensures everyone has full access to the post-conviction relief as was intended by the Legislature. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Kalra, and seeing no Members wishing to be addressed on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Mr. Kalra moves the call. Next we'll take up File Item Five. This is AB 1119.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1119 by Assembly Member Wicks, an act relating to civil actions.

And Assembly Member Wicks, you may open on the bill.

...Association...for low income indigenous Californians. Indigenous Californians especially to report to...debt collectors...their assets... to report issue with...which is truly necessarily. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Wicks. Seeing no other Members wishing to be addressed on this bill, Clerk will open roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes: 41; noes: 12. Bill's passed. Next, Mr. Haney. This is File Item Six: AB 572.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 572 by Assembly Member Haney, an act relating to common interest developments.

And Assembly Member Haney, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. AB 572 caps annual Homeowner Association fee increases at five percent for below-market-rate homeowners to prohibit exorbitant HOA fee increases which push low income and middle income homeowners into foreclosing on their homes. I want to note that I've amended the bill to only impact HOAs with governing documents signed after January 1st, 2024. That amendment removed almost all of the opposition groups, including the California Association of Realtors, California Bankers Association, and the California Association of Community Managers.

BMR homeownership programs target first-time homebuyers who are low and moderate income. Homebuyers have to go through a rigorous verification process to show they are eligible and their mortgage rate can only be a third of their monthly income. These units are often in mixed income buildings with monthly HOA fees. Current law caps HOA fee increases at 20 percent regardless of if homeowners are in below-market-rate units or not.

In some instances, this is causing the HOA fees for below-market-rate owners to increase so rapidly that is becoming more than their entire monthly mortgage payment. This cap of five percent is intended to balance affordability and stability. It is only for future buildings and future HOAs, and this is to make sure that these very important first-time homebuyer programs actually work and can continue to be affordable and so people can stay in their homes.

Again, we've removed nearly all of the opposition, all of the major opposition has gone to neutral, and this is an important way to balance affordability to ensure people can stay in their homes in future buildings. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Haney, and seeing no Members wishing to speak on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes: 44; noes: 12. Bill is passed. We're going to pass temporarily on File Items Seven and Eight, bringing us to Ms. Friedman: File Item Nine. This is AB 6. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 6 by Assembly Member Friedman, an act relating to transportation.

Assembly Member Friedman, you may open on the bill.

Good morning, Mr. Speaker and Members. AB 6 makes good governance changes in the SB 375 process by requiring CARB to set regional GHG targets. We have been in very productive conversations with state holders in opposition about this Bill. However, the Bill is not going to be ready to move this year. We want to make sure that when we come back we have something that you all can support. What we're asking for is a courtesy aye vote to move it to the Senate.

We're going to park it for a year, continue our stakeholder discussions over the summer and into next year. With that, I would request an aye vote so we can keep this important conversation continuing. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Friedman. Seeing no Members wishing to discuss this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote.

Ms. Friedman. Ms. Friedman moves the call.

Members, we're going to move on to item number 10, AB 1465. The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1465 by Assembly Member Wicks, an act related to air pollution.

Assembly Member Wicks, you may open on your Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. AB 1465 increases the civil penalty ceiling for state air quality violations that occur at refineries. If the discharge contains one or more toxic air contaminants, refinery flaring can result in shelter in place notifications, school closures, and a surge of visits to healthcare facilities for medical care. I've spoken to a number of you about this Bill. I've had very recent conversations with opposition. I have agreed to expand this Bill to include all Title V facilities.

And we're going to continue conversations that I actually think hopefully we can get into a neutral place in the Senate. I think this is an important Bill because we do have air contaminants. I have refineries in my district that have flaring want to move the Bill forward today. We'll continue to work with the opposition. We are landing this in a better place, I think, and would respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote, all those votes who desire to vote, all those votes who desire to vote. Assembly Member Wicks moves the call. We are going to move on to item number 11, AB 1485.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1485 by Assemblymember Haney and others.

Assembly Member Haney, you may open on your bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. Over the last few years, the California Legislature has made responding to the state's housing crisis a top priority. As you all know, we have passed numerous laws requiring local governments to follow the state's affordable housing goals and actually build housing. Unfortunately, some local governments and others have not followed state laws and have ignored these important housing requirements enacted by this legislature.

Attorney General Rob Banta has made housing law enforcement a top priority for the DOJ taking legal action to prosecute housing law violators. But in order for the Attorney General to represent the state's interests in cases filed by third parties, the DOJ is currently required to petition the court for the ability to intervene.

This requirement delays housing from being built and in some cases makes it so that the Attorney General can't represent us and the people of California in these important matters to strengthen the state's ability to enforce our housing laws and goals. AB 1485 grants the Attorney General and HCD the automatic right to intervene in pending housing cases filed by third parties.

It is important to note that the Attorney General already has this authority in enforcing environmental laws, and this will make sure that the people of California are at the table and that the law is actually followed and enforced. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 42, noes 13. The bill is passed. Members, we're going to jump forward to item number 37, AB 16 Four.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1604 by Assemblymember Bonta and accolades in the charter schools.

Assembly Member Bonta, you may open on your bill.

Thank you Madam Speaker and members, I am proud to present AB 1604, a bill I introduced in response to the State Auditor's report on the Charter School Facility grant program. Last year, former Assemblymember Education Chair O'Donnell and I requested an audit of the Charter School Facility Grant program and the California School Financing Authority Conduit Revenue Bond program.

We requested this audit after we learned that the grant program funds intended for the payment of rent and lease expenses by charter schools were, in a significant number of cases, paid to related party subsidiaries of charter schools to pay off bonds on educational facilities. In February, the auditor released findings confirming what we believed. The California School Finance Authority is administering these programs with fidelity to existing law, but existing law is inadequate to protect public funds and preserve public infrastructure.

The auditor proposed several recommendations to strengthen the administration of this program. AB 1604 enacts several recommendations issued by the state auditor. First, the bill would ensure that local students are prioritized for admission to charter schools receiving these grants, reinforcing the program's goal of serving low-income communities. Second, this bill would enhance conflict of interest review in line with the auditor's recommendations, by requiring the California School Finance Authority to update its regulations and conduct an annual spot check on random sample of grant program recipients.

Third, the auditor recommended strengthening state laws to prevent negative impacts from charter school closures. To achieve this, amendments taken and proposed in part by the Education Committee would require an entity managing a charter school that has closed and which has received substantial funding from Prop. 98 to give first right to purchase or lease that property at cost to another educational provider, including another charter school.

On Tuesday, based on conversations with the opposition for several weeks, I amended this bill to add even more robust protections to ensure that the private bondholders who finance these facilities in all circumstances paid what they are due in order to address these concerns around the bond market signals. These proposed reforms promote transparency, accountability and responsible use of Prop. 98 taxpayer dollars to ensure that our investments in educational infrastructure benefit students today and future generations of students to come. I respectfully request your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. Assemblymember Bonta moves the call. We are going to go back onto file order and go with file item number 13 AB 1533.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1533 by the Committee on Utilities and Energy, an act relating to electricity, declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately.

Assembly Member Garcia, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Colleagues. I rise to present AB 1533, the Utilities and Energy Committee's omnibus code cleanup measure. This bill clarifies reporting requirements and provides Code Cleanup, including provisions related to the extension of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant that was passed last year with overwhelming support due to the reliability issues. This bill still has some work to be done. There are some concerns regarding this cleanup language.

We are focused on working with the stakeholders in the Senate and the Administration who the agreement for Diablo Canyon was a three-party agreement. So with that, I'm committed to continue working on this matter and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Member Jim Patterson.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. As Vice Chair of Utility and Energy, I rise in support of this bill. I was not present due to an illness when the vote was taken in Committee, but I want my colleagues to know that I support it as well. I ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes: 56; noes: zero on the urgency. Ayes: 56; noes: zero. The bill is passed. Moving on to Item Number--we're going to pass on Item Number 17: AB 61. Moving on to Item Number 19: AB 520.

The clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 520 by Assemblymember Santiago with accolades for employment.

Assemblymember Santiago, you may open on your bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. AB 520 would deter public entities from contracting property, services and companies who commit wage theft by holding public entities joint liability for wage theft violations to provide access for conduct, workplace health, safety and worker training. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The clerk will close the roll. Ayes 44, noes eight. The bill is passed. Moving on to item number 20 AB 656.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 656 by Assembly Member McCarty and others, an act relating to public postsecondary education.

Assembly Member McCarty, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill would allow our California State University, the workhorse of higher education in California to expand doctoral degree options. We know that CSU is the most diverse as far as ethnically, economically, and academically in the nation. They don't offer nearly as many as doctoral degrees as University of California, who, by the way, do not oppose this bill. This would increase doctoral options for CSU students, help our economy throughout California, and help expand higher education access as well. Ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes: 57; noes: one. The bill is passed. We are going to go back onto Item Number Seven. We're going to go back onto Item Number Eight: AB 1286.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1286 by Assembly Member Haney, an act relating to pharmacy.

Assembly Member Haney, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. AB 1286 is an important patient and worker protection bill. It establishes first in the nation protections from life-threatening medication errors at understaffed and unsafe pharmacies. The bill requires mandatory reporting of all medication errors to a third party entity approved by the California State Board of Pharmacy. It also addresses the inadequate staffing and unsafe working conditions in many community chain pharmacies that can lead to medication errors.

Chain pharmacies and the pharmacists who work for them are instrumental in delivering care to Californians, yet alarming medication errors in this setting have recently been made public, including errors that have led to hospitalization or death. There have also been reports of unsanitary conditions in these pharmacies, including vermin infestations, insufficient staffing, unsanitary conditions, or lack of autonomy to make clinical decisions in the best interest of the patient can lead to an increase in medication errors.

Unfortunately, there is no requirement under current law for pharmacies to track medication errors or to consider the pharmacy working conditions that lead to medication errors. Therefore, medication errors are widely underreported and unknown while having detrimental effects on patients. To stop dangerous pharmacies, AB 1286 will require mandatory reporting of medication errors to allow for robust evaluation of the causes of medication errors. It also gives licensed pharmacy staff autonomy over their working conditions so that they can better provide patient care.

I want to make it very clear that we have narrowed the closure piece of this bill to only conditions that meet the highest standard of the threat of death, illness, or irreparable harm to patients or staff. Only the part of the pharmacy that is impacted by that very high standard will be affected, and they have to reopen immediately. No one should be working under those conditions, and patients should not be receiving care if the threat of illness, death, or irreparable harm is present.

But I also want to say that these amendments do not address all of the opposition's concerns, and I'm fully committed to narrowing it even further as this moves forward. We received some language that was circulated this week where we didn't have the opportunity to fully resolve this with the opposition. You have my commitment, and I've heard from many of you to make sure that we do not close pharmacies, that we keep them open, and that we also make sure that these dangerous conditions are addressed.

We believe we can do that and come to an agreement with the opposition based on some of the language that is now circulating, and with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote and the opportunity to move forward this important worker and patient protection bill.

Assembly Member Pellerin, you are recognized.

Thank you. Good morning. I am supporting AB 1286 today thanks to the author's commitment to continue to work with the opposition to ensure safeguards to prevent pharmacies from unnecessarily closing because patient access to medication is critical and can literally mean life or death. So thank you to the author for continuing to work with the opposition.

Seeing no others wishing to comment on this bill, Assembly Member Haney, anything else you'd like to add?

Thank you so much. Again, thank you to my colleagues, and we want to move this forward. There's a lot in this bill that is critically important for patient and worker protection. It will be a landmark bill to protect our residents from medication error. We want to keep pharmacies open. This bill is supported by the Pharmacist Association, who of course, want to keep pharmacies open. It's supported by the independent pharmacies.

It only affects chain pharmacies, and we are committed to working with them even further to address that piece of the bill, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote to be able to move this bill forward.

Thank you, Assembly Member Haney. The Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes: 43; noes: seven. The bill is passed. We are going to go back onto file order and go--Members, we're going to lift the call on File Item Number Nine: AB 6. The Clerk will post. The Clerk will close the roll.

Ayes 43, noes 15. The bill is passed. Now we will go back onto file order and go with file item number 22, AB 938 the clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 938 by Assemblymember Muratsuchi and others accolades in education finance.

Assemblymember Muratsuchi may open on your Bill.

Thank you very much. Members, today I rise to present Assembly Bill 938 to close the wage gap for teachers and essential school staff. Schools across the state are facing a workforce crisis, with many teachers and school employees unable to afford to live in the communities that they work in. In particular, there's a growing wage gap between teachers and comparably educated college graduates in other fields. Data shows that teachers earn 23.5% less than their similarly educated peers.

Nearly two thirds of young adults surveyed recently cited pay as one of the top three reasons why they were not interested in teaching. We need to close this wage gap to get more young people to aspire to become educators. This bill will also require school districts to report their progress in closing the wage gap every year for the next seven years. In countries such as Finland, Australia, Canada and Singapore, teachers are paid competitive salaries.

In these countries, teacher salaries are commensurate with other fields like engineering, law and business. The bottom line is, if we want world class schools, we need to pay teachers and essential school staff what they deserve. I respectfully ask for you aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote, the Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 48 noes zero the bill is passed. We are going to move to item number 25, AB 64.

The Clerk will read

Assembly Bill 1463 by Assembly Member Lowenthal and others. Napoleon personal information.

Assembly Member Lowenthal, you may open on your Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. Proud to rise in support of AB 1463 in 2019, the California State Auditor declared that legislative action is necessary to protect California's privacy rights and had several recommendations. However, in three years, nothing has happened. And now, with other states proposing laws that are now focusing on out of state visitors seeking reproductive and gender affirming medical care, it is vital that we implement privacy measures regarding Automatic License Plate readers, or ALPRs. AB 1463 does three things to ensure privacy for everyone.

Number one, it requires the public agencies operating ALPRs to perform an annual compliance audit, as recommended by the State Auditor. Two, it purges geolocation data not associated with the investigation of any crime after 30 days. This is recommended by the state's leading ALPR supplier, Flock Safety, and in line with the California State Auditor recommendation to limit retention to the shortest possible time. And number three, it forbids the sharing of geolocation data with out of state and federal agencies without a valid court order subpoena warrant.

ALPRs are just one of the most powerful surveillance tools, tools that out of state police and antiabortion groups have available to them. There is no uniform ordinance or rule on how long law enforcement can keep this data. Right now, it ranges from 14 days to as long as they want. I should also point out other states are grappling with this. Some states purge the data after a few hours by law, and others hold it for longer. Just an example of how dangerous it is right now.

For people seeking reproductive care. The State of South Carolina introduced legislation that could subject women who have had abortions to the death penalty. And for those in this body that think that no one would share data with states like these. In January, January of this year, it was discovered that the Vallejo Police Department was allowing access to out of state law enforcement agencies in states like Arizona, Kansas, Texas, all states hostile to women seeking reproductive care and LGBTQ plus communities.

We must protect Californians in state, out of state residents seeking reproductive and gender firming medical care in California. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill. I'm sorry. Assembly Member Essayli.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, I rise in support today of this Bill. I spoke on it in Committee. I do not believe in a police state, and I do not believe in a surveillance state. And there should be some appropriate limits on the ability to collect and retain our private information or information of our whereabouts and locations. The problem, though, is that law enforcement has not yet proposed what the reasonable amount of time to hold this is. This Bill proposes 30 days.

I'm not sure that 30 days is the right date. I think it might be a little longer. CHP I saw noted in their letters that 60 days is their policy. So I would just encourage the law enforcement community to engage on this Bill and come up with what the right balance is. But there needs to be some safeguards. So with that, I'll be supporting it today, but I look forward to continued work on this.

Thank you.

Assembly Member Lowenthal, would you like to close?

I simply am very proud that this Bill does have bipartisan support. And I want to thank my colleague from Riverside County for his comments, as well as all the Members of the Privacy Committee for their tremendous independent, bipartisan thinking in resolving this issue and all issues. I respectfully ask for your I vote.

Seeing no other is wishing to speak on this Bill. The Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote.

Assembly Member Lowenthal moves the call. We are going to now go to Item Number 26: AB 1470. The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1470 by Assembly Member Quirk-Silva, an act relating to Medi-Cal.

Assembly Member Quirk-Silva, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. AB 1470 focuses on the mass of amount of forms that must be completed for mental and behavioral health services under Medi-Cal. AB 1470 addresses a long standing issue of excessive paperwork that has hindered providers from focusing on patient outcomes. Our vulnerable workforce suffers as clinicians are leaving the sector because they are spending more time on endless paperwork versus spending time with patients. This is a support support. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote, and the Clerk will close the roll. Ayes: 55; noes: zero. The bill is passed. Moving on to Item Number 27: AB 1487. The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1487 by Assembly Member Santiago, an act relating to public health.

The public health Assembly Member Santiago, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to present 1487 of which established the Transgender Gender Nonconforming Intersex TGI reentry Fund. Upon appropriation, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 45, no zero. The Bill is passed. Moving on to item number 28, AB 1500.

The Clerk will read Assembly Bill 1500 by Assembly Member Irwin and others stackland taxation, declare leaders to the Europe to take effect immediately.

Assembly Member Irwin, you may open the Bill.

Good morning, Madam Speaker. I rise to present AB 1500 which will give the Wolsey and campfire victims an additional three years to rebuild and retain their base year property tax values from before the fires. Rebuilding after a wildfire is a difficult task and these fire victims deserve a fair chance at rebuilding their lives. This Bill is unopposed and has bipartisan support. And I would like to thank my co author from Nicholas, who represents the town of paradise. Thank you.

And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll all those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. And the Clerk will close the roll ayes 63, no, zero. On the urgency Aye 63, no, zero. The Bill is passed. Moving on to item number 209153. And the Clerk will read Assembly Bill.

153 by Assembly Member Lee and others accolade and approval attendance.

Assembly Member Lee, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. This Bill ensures that students can attend religious retreats at an excuse absence of school. This Bill extends religious retreat excuse absence from 4 hours to full day. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote all those votes who desire to vote, the Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 55, no, zero. The Bill is passed. Moving on to item number 30, AB 158.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1508 by Assembly Member Ramos, an act related to housing.

Assembly Member Ramos, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today I present AB 1508, a Bill that creates a statewide housing plan to increase first time home ownership in California. This is a support support Bill. I ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this support support Bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote, the Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 64, no zero, the Bill is passed. Moving on to item number 31, AB 1511. The Clerk will read

Assembly Bill 1511 by Assembly Member Santiago, an act related to state government.

Assembly Member Santiago, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This Bill would establish the ethnic media program that promotes ethnic media and encourages collaboration between state departments and ethnic media outlets. Respectfully, ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll all those votes who desire to vote, all those votes who desire to vote, all those votes who desire to vote, and the Clerk will close the roll aye 57, no, zero. The Bill is passed. Moving on to item number 32, AB 1512.

The Clerk will read Assembly Bill 1512 by Assembly Member Brian and others napoleon to foster care.

Assembly Member Brian, you may open the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and colleagues in California right now, when you lose one of your parents, you are due survivor benefits from the Federal Government SSI benefits, money they paid in to Social Security that they won't draw back for our children in foster care. The counties become the payee. Some of them are not applying for these benefits. Many others are applying for them, but they're not making sure those resources get to the young people. They're treating it like a revenue stream.

It's nearly $50 million a year in federal benefits for children in foster care who have lost their parents. That is not going to them. What this Bill does is what many other states, Maryland, Illinois, Nebraska, have decided is that those resources belong to the young people who have lost their parents. This would delegate those resources to be used specifically for their well being and the leftover remaining to be held in an account for them. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no others, Mr. Patterson.

Yes. I just wanted to thank you, Madam Speaker. I just wanted to rise in support of this. This is a great example of things that our state has been doing to mess with kids in the foster care program. And I commend my colleague over there on a great piece of legislation. I look forward to supporting it.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on this Bill, the Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. I 63, no, zero. The Bill is passed. We are going to lift the call on file item number 10, AB 1465. The Clerk will post. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 4041, noes 13. The Bill is passed.

We're going to move to file item number 46, AB 252. The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 252 by Assembly Member Holden, an act related to collegiate athletes.

Assembly Member Holden, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and good afternoon, Members. Assembly Bill 252 is an extremely comprehensive Bill that will provide basic protections and fair income that our college athletes deserve. This Bill creates a state program paid by college athletic revenue to identify and enforce safety standards across all divisions, certify college athletic athlete agents, ensure transparency in recruiting and enforce the act. AB 252 provides whistleblower protection and mandatory reporting of suspected safety violations.

It ensures that athletes at colleges with high athletic revenues are not stuck with sports related medical expenses. It establishes NC 2A Division One athlete compensation that uses new athletic revenue new revenue to incentivize degree completion. Athletes would need to graduate to receive compensation, suspends any D1 or Division One athletic Director for cutting a sport mitigates academic suffering from high school athlete athletic time demands with a six year scholarship, protects funding for all sports and requires Title IX compliance, transparency.

Members, I understand that there was concern the current language in the Bill may have created some unintended consequences as it relates to Title IX and women's sports. Yesterday, I had an opportunity and a privilege of working with Members of the Women's Caucus to create amendments that not only addresses their concerns, but also strengthens the Bill and creates a first in the nation piece of legislation that acknowledges this year's 50th anniversary of Title Nine.

The proposed amendments would allow California to become the first state in our union to establish a college athlete Degree Completion Fund that distributes the new revenue equally between male and female college athletes, irrespective of the sport. Members, this is truly equal pay for women. California would become the first state to strengthen Title IX by requiring colleges and universities to evaluate and publish its compliance of Title IX on a website.

The Bill allows our colleges and universities to use additional funds to ensure that nonrevenue generating sports, such as our Olympic sports, are maintained and can receive additional funding without counting it as revenue to be directed to the Degree Completion Fund. In addition, an additional amendment would prohibit Division I colleges from cutting any sport or funding for athletic scholarships. Finally, this Bill will allow the California State Legislature and Californians the opportunity to set and enforce safety standards, including the prevention of sexual abuse.

While I understand the NC2A has put out guidelines that they want to explore in 2024 around this area, the fact of the matter is that guidelines are not law, and the NC2A does not enforce guidelines. Moreover, NC2A guidelines fail woefully short of this Bill. This Bill gives California an opportunity to guarantee our college athletes crucial protection and fair compensation that generations of athletes in our state have been denied.

I also want to correct some misinformation that is making its way around concerning this Bill. The myth is that this Bill requires all colleges in California to compensate their athletes. Members, there are 658 colleges and universities that operate in our state. This Bill focuses on only 26 schools which have volunteered to compete in the NC2A, Division One, and are the colleges with the highest athlete athletic revenue. Of the 26 Division One colleges, only nine are CSU schools and seven are UCS Members.

If you stand for equal pay for women and protecting college athletes from sexual abuse, if you stand for health and safety of college athletes, if you stand for fair athlete compensation while preserving all sports and increasing graduation rates, and if you stand for strengthening Title IX to help end discrimination against female college athletes, then vote aye on AB 252. I ask you not to ignore the physical, academic and economic exploitation of college athletes. I ask you not turn your back on California college athletes. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members, I have had extensive conversations with the author, and I want to thank him for engaging in those conversations openly and with an open mind. Many of us on this floor are former athletes. It was our experience on the sports field, in pools, wherever we competed, that taught us the skills that got us through life. Many of us parents are watching our kids get those skills.

So I think a lot of us, if not all of us, understand the value of being an athlete. We also know that even today, women athletes do not get their fair shake. Title IX took women athletes to a place that I think women at the time never dreamed possible. A place where women could compete in equal numbers to men but we still know that women's locker rooms aren't as nice. We don't get the same treatment, the same facilities. There still isn't equity.

And so the conversations that I had the privilege of engaging in with the author were, how do we use this Bill to move women forward? How do we use this Bill to ensure that the status quo isn't good enough, but we take a step towards equity.

And in those conversations, which happened over a shorter period of time than I think the author and I would have liked, the author committed to me that he would not only ensure protection of Title IX in its importance, ensuring that these excess funds would come after Title IX compliance. But in addition, the excess funds would be clearly defined as equally split for men and women. This might actually be the first time we see equal pay for women. There aren't many places where that's true, y'all.

And that's really important. I know the language is not there. Even the amendments we've seen don't get us all the way there. I know there are concerns about language that say market rate. As most of us know, market rate for women is lower than market rate for men. And so I just wanted to pose a question to the author. So I just wanted to hear it from you again.

I know that you've committed to me, but that you will continue to work on the language to ensure not only equity in Title IX coming before all excess funds, but that that excess funds go exactly equally to men and women, with no exception. And nobody's going to define market rate for women in a way that is lower than men.

Thank you. Yes. Not only that, I think what my commitment was was to strike from the Bill references to market rate. And that relates to a mechanism for setting out the revenue, because it is clear that there is a potential for that to play disproportionately with certain sports and maybe certain gender of sports. And so it was my commitment to take that out of the Bill.

And the amendments that I read that I indicated were part of our conversation focusing on parity excess revenue that comes in would be distributed amongst all genders and all sports, and that we would make that commitment to you here again today.

Yeah. Thank you. So today I'll be supporting the Bill. And I know that another concern we had, which the author also ensured would be addressed, was that it wouldn't cut funds from sport programs. I know as a former college athlete, he wants to see those sports programs continue to thrive with inflation and all. And so we will see those programs thrive. We will see Title IX complied with, and we will finally see an example where perhaps women will actually get equal pay for equal work.

Assembly Member Blanca Rubio. You are recognized.

Thank you. I rise in hesitation of this Bill. I've heard from a lot of the UCS about the problems that they have with this Bill. So I guess the fundamental question for them is the Bill still forces the universities, especially public institutions, to dig into their limited finances and use institutional funds if needed, to subsidize degree completion funds. This means universities would have to find the money somewhere.

When we're in a State of a deficit and you know what's happening to the universities, there was an article about trying to increase tuition because there's not enough funds. Where are the universities going to get these funds? And I would like that addressed. I will not be supporting the Bill today, but I know that my colleague from Arlinda is willing to work with that.

But I would like to be able to get to a place where we're supporting it with a commitment of where are we going to find the money? We're in a budget crisis right now. Again, the article that came out said that the UCS are going to raise tuition because they're trying to fill the gap. If that's where we are, this particular issue is not a priority. So if we implement this Bill, where is that money going to come from? So that's my major concern.

There's other things that my colleague addressed, but for me, my colleges and universities are already struggling. And so with this Bill, the money is not there. Plus, I am concerned that the women's sports are going to be left behind.

Thank you. I will tell you, and again, what you've described is in the Bill, we're only talking about Division One programs, Division One schools. So that's 26 out of 658 universities and colleges in California. We've made it clear in the Bill that the baseline to operate from is from the 21-22 calendar year because that's when we saw the greatest number of revenue coming into the state.

So for the Degree completion Fund to have any revenue to go into it, it would have to be excess above that level. Now, as you pointed out, there's a $31 billion deficit that we're dealing with this year. So with that in place, it's highly unlikely that there will be any excess revenue for the degree completion Fund.

So there would be actually no money that would go into the degree completion Fund because of that very point, only excess above a certain baseline that was established at the time when our revenue was at a higher place. But additional language is certainly open to further clarifying that. But that's what the Bill currently calls out.

Leader Gallagher. You are recognized.

Yeah. Thank you, Madam Speaker. And Members. I'm very concerned about this Bill. And to me, I think it's an example of just classic government overreach. Now, this body historically, a couple of years ago, in a bipartisan way, allowed for image, name and likeness to pay college athletes where their image, their name, their likeness is being used. That was groundbreaking. I think that was the right thing to do.

And now, only two years in, we're trying to micromanage how this works at our universities and our athletic programs. And we're creating a whole new bureaucracy that's going to dictate. For instance, that half of the revenues I mean, how do we even come to that number that half of the revenues have to go here and now have new amendments that are showing up or being talked about.

They're not even in the Bill yet, so it's hard to even analyze what those actually do and what we're hearing from the universities. And this is my fear, but it's not just my fear. It's what the athletic departments are telling us is that this micromanagement, this sort of dictating from on high, how this should be done, is going to lead to less athletic opportunities for people. And I feel like we are going too far down this road. College sports are supposed to be amateur.

They are supposed to be about the love of the sport. And now we're going down and starting to dictate how people should be paid and what should be paid from on high. When I would say, look, the people in this body, very well meaning, knowledgeable people, but don't run athletic programs at colleges and don't know the ins and outs of how to make that all work and ensure that you have viable, sustainable programs.

At the end of the day, I want opportunities for our young people to compete, to be part of a team at a college, whether that's a money making opportunity or not. It's about that. It's about everything that you get from playing a team sport. It's also a voluntary decision to decide whether or not to play collegiate sports. It is additional obligations and it's tough. I've known a lot of college athletes.

It's not easy to do, but it's something they do because they love the sport that they play. And we're hearing from the people who do this that this could lead to those sports that don't get as much attention, that don't make as much revenue going away, that it could mean less opportunities for women athletes. We should be listening to that instead of hastily just passing this through today, passing over to the Senate, and hoping that some changes are going to get made.

That's not the right way for us to go about policy. And I quite frankly myself, I don't think that's what we should be doing at this point in time. Let's allow these athletic programs to carry out the image, name and likeness authority that we've given them and let's see how that's working out before we start creating another bureaucracy to dictate how this should work and maybe do, I think, very likely do more harm than good. I urge a no vote. Thank you.

Dr. Weber. You're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have questions for the author

Without objection.

Thank you. So I'm sitting here listening to the debate, and now I'm getting very confused about the Bill. So can you please explain again what this degree completion Fund is, what the purpose of it is? And I don't know if you have any numbers or any thoughts of how many students would be realistically utilizing these funds.

Thank you. The degree completion Fund is designed to help those student athletes, quite frankly, who are there under scholarship, but could be injured or hurt or harmed in some way while they're competing. A lot of times, injuries happen while you're in practice, and those particular individuals have the potential of losing their scholarship. There are instances I can tell you about my time in college. I saw it. We see it today where an athlete loves the sport. They're there as a student athlete.

And this Bill is to create protection for student athletes. There are universities who have abused, have had coaches abusing players. We've seen it. It's been in the headlines. Student athletes are putting it on the line. And yes, they have to compete in school, but they also have to compete on the playing field or on the court. And at the end of the day, the universities are making billions, coaches are making tens of millions.

And it only seems appropriate, given the fact that sometimes these young people may not be able to get to the finish line on their academic side dealing with health issues, mental health issues, and other issues, that there should be a degree completion Fund in place to allow those individual students to be able to finish. If they aren't able to finish on the court, they're able to at least get their degree. And that's where these funds were designed for.

And in terms of actual numbers, we'll have to pull some together for you. I don't have.

Thank you. So essentially what you're saying is that these are student athletes who've gotten an athletic scholarship, who may have been injured and now no longer have their athletic scholarship, but these funds are to allow them to complete their college degree so that they don't essentially lose out on not only not being able to play sports anymore, but also lose out on their educational opportunities as well.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

If I could and with the amendments that we're talking about that we're taking is to make sure in that degree completion Fund, it is parity. So even if you have football and basketball that are generating all of the income, nothing changes as far as that income being made available for the operation of all sports. The degree completion Fund is the piece that goes beyond and creates parity between men and women's athletes so that they have the equal amount that would be made available to all athletes.

Seeing no others wishing to speak on the Bill. Mr. Holden, would you like to close?

Madam Speaker, I think I would close with aligning myself with an individual who my values don't always align with, someone who addressed this very issue through a court case in 2021. Austin versus the NC2A antitrust case. The US. Supreme Court ruled 90 that the NC2A athlete compensation rules violate federal antitrust law.

In his concurring opinion, conservative US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated, the bottom line is that the NC2A and its Member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenue for our colleges every year. Those enormous sums of money flow to seemingly everyone except the student athlete. College presidents, athletic directors, coaches, conference commissioners, and the NC2A executives take in 6 and 7 figure salaries.

Colleges build lavish new facilities, but the student athlete who generates the revenues, many of whom are African American and from lower income backgrounds, end up with little or nothing. It is not clear how the NC2A can legally defend its remaining compensation rules. AB 252 would end these remaining compensation rules, which disproportionately harm college athletes and likely violate antitrust laws in a way that preserves all sports and abides. By Title IX, I respectfully ask for your I vote.

The Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. All those votes who desire to vote. Mr. Holden moves the call. We are going to now move on to item number 47, AB 524.

The Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 524 by Assembly Member Wicks, an act relating to employment.

Assembly Member Wicks, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. AB 524 would prohibit discrimination against family caregivers at work. In other words, the bill prohibits employers from treating a worker adversely based on assumptions or stereotypes based on their family caregiving responsibilities. The bill simply requires that workplace policies do not discriminate against people because they are family caregivers. It does not require employers to give parents or family caregivers any special treatment or accommodation.

Bias against caregivers generally stems from an assumption about how caregivers will act, such as that mothers will prioritize their family over work, or fathers should not take time off to care for their children. These assumptions affect personnel decisions, including getting furloughed, terminated, hired and promoted, and in doing such, they harm families. This type of discrimination affects employees at every income level, race, gender, and industry.

Working moms, though, are more likely to experience this type of discrimination with low wage workers and particularly people of color being disproportionately impacted. 70 percent of working moms say they have faced this type of discrimination. This bill would ensure that that doesn't happen anymore. This is already law in Alaska, Delaware, Minnesota, New York, and over 200 jurisdictions around the country. Nearly one-third of American workforce is already covered by a caregiver anti-discrimination law, and it's time for California to catch up.

I've been working diligently with the opposition over the last couple of months trying to narrow definition and to ensure that we don't have any unintended consequences of this bill, but the fact of the matter is, we know that this type of discrimination exists. We also know that when employers are educated about this bias, they don't do it, and that's what this bill is ultimately about. It's to ensure that our employers are educated around the bias that exists.

People should be judged based on their output, the quality of their work, not what their family caregiving responsibilities are. Please stand with me and dozens of women's rights organizations, organizations that advocate for families and children, including the California Women's Law Center, the Child Care Law Center, Women's Foundation of California, NARAL, Equal Rights Advocates, Legal Aid at Work, and many other organizations, and respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Wicks, and seeing no Members wishing to speak on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes: 41; noes: 13. The bill's passed. We are going to go back in file to Mr. Gallagher. This is File Item 33: AB 1517.

Clerk will read

Assembly Bill 1517 by Assembly River Gallagher and others knack late in special education.

Leader Gallagher, you may open on the Bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present AB 1517, which would codify the technical assistance and support provided to local education agencies by their special education Local Plan Areas, or SELPAs. For over 40 years, SELPAs have collaborated with the California Department of Education to offer programs, services and assistance to students with disabilities, their families, and local education agencies.

However, there is currently no statutory requirement that school districts that school districts consult with their SELPAs when determining specific actions to support outcomes for students with disabilities. AB 1517 would guarantee the interests of these students are sufficiently represented by specifically requiring SELPAs to be part of that technical assistance team. This Bill ensures that all students, regardless of their abilities, have access to a high quality education. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for your I vote. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher.

Seeing no Members wishing to discuss this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote, Clerk will close roll. Tally the votes. Aye 60, no, zero. The bills passed. Next file, item 34. This is AB 1519.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1519 by Assembly River Bains and others stack late new vehicles, semi Bains. You may open on the Bill.

Thank you, speaker and Members. AB 1519 is a support support Bill encourages drivers to get their catalytic converters marked with their vehicle's vin by making it a misdemeanor to remove the marking. This Bill also imposes a misdemeanor for possessing three or more catalytic converters which. Have had their Vin markings removed. Over the last five years, catalytic converter thefts have increased more than tenfold, and California leads the nation accounting for more than 30% of all claims filed with State Farm.

Marking a catalytic converter with a vehicle's Vin is a best practice recommended by law enforcement agencies throughout the country, as well as the borough of automotive repair. Under current law, there is no penalty for removing a Vin marking on a catalytic converter, and there is no penalty for being in possession of a catalytic converter that has had its Vin marking removed. The result is that even if a driver gets their catalytic converter marked, law enforcement are just as likely to be able to prosecute the crime.

AB 1519 solves this problem and has received unanimous bipartisan support throughout the Committee process. Thankfully, I respect an aye vote.

Thank you, Dr. Baines. And seeing no Members wishing to be addressed on this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote, Clerk will close roll, tally the votes. Aye 60, no. Zero. The Bill is passed. Next. This is file item 35, AB 1524.

Assembly Bill 1524 by Assembly Member Lowenthal and others, napoleon of post secondary education.

Clerk will read

As a Member Lowenthal, you may open on the Bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members, I'm pleased to present AB 1524. This support support Bill is part of my package to curtail the crisis on roofing. As you may recall, spoke about test strips, test coasters to be available at bars and clubs in the state. This is the same thing to be made available for college students on campuses throughout the State of California. Respectfully ask for your I vote. Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal.

Seeing no Members wishing to address this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close roll, tally the votes. aye 66, no. Zero. The bills pass. Next. This is file item 38, AB 81756.

AB 1756, Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1756 by the Committee on Judiciary and Appalachian State Government.

Assemblymember Maienschein, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Assembly. Bill 1756 is the Judiciary Committee civil law omnibus. Bill this Bill contains numerous minor updates to various code section, and I respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Maienschein. Seeing no members wishing to speak on this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote, Clerk will close roll, tally the votes. Ayes 65, nos zero. The bill is passed.

Next file item 39. AB 1758. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1758 by the Committee on Judiciary an act relating to the courts.

Assemblymember Maienschein, you may open on this Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Under the California Public Records Act, public agencies are prohibited from charging a fee to copy a public record in an electronic format that is more than the direct cost of producing the copy. AB 1758 clarifies the law regarding public access to electronic court records and takes an important step towards ensuring Californians receive equal access to justice by preventing burdensome costs and fees when attempting to access the courts. I respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Maienschein and CEO Members wishing to discuss this Bill. Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Aye 64, no zero. The bill's pass. Next, we're going to go back to pick up an item for Mr. McCarty. This is file item 23, AB 1192. Clerk will read.

Assembly Rule 1192 by Assembly Member McCarty, an accolade in kindergarten.

And Assembly McCarty, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a measure related to early education. We know early education matters so much in California helping address school readiness, helping improve outcomes for individuals to have better economic mobility and success in life, and actually addresses criminal justice. People who have a quality early education experience are less likely end up in the criminal justice system. Two years ago, we implemented for the first time in California Universal Transitional Kindergarten. This Bill strengthens that program and clarifies one omission in the first draft. This Bill does three things. One, there is some confusion about the summer babies eligibility for kids who are born the summer months. So some school districts have implemented for all four year olds. Some have asked for some clarification whether this would apply to kids who are born the summer. So this addresses that technical issue. Secondly, as school districts are implementing this, we're finding all throughout California there are some challenges finding people to serve as the staff, not just teachers, but the paraprofessionals. This would delay implementation of the new ratios for two years, helping districts ramp up these programs and make sure they work for all of California. And lastly, this would ensure that those paraprofessionals receive education from the school districts to make sure they get their credentials. This is a bigger piece of the early education puzzle. We know that tk is also in tandem with childcare, which we know is our top priority in the budget, which our budget chair from San Francisco is working on. So we will see our investments in that when we take up the budget next week. But this is an important piece to move forward the early education expansion in California. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McCarty. And assembly member Aguiar-Curry, you're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. As Vice Chair of the Legislative Women's Caucus, I respectfully rise to express concerns about AB 1192. The women in this legislature were supportive of the budget proposal from our caucus, placing childcare as our first priority.The author and that assembly leadership joined in making childcare the assembly's one priority leading up to the Governor's May revision, something for which I am extremely grateful. However, the May revision continued to delay a new mythology that reflects the actual costs provided by one time wage increases for workers, underfunded reimbursement rates, and cut slots for a childcare system that is on the brink of collapse. While I appreciate the intent of this proposal, even a minor expansion of TK will exasperate conditions by which our childcare providers are dangling by a thread. Families will have an even more difficult time assessing and affording the care that they need if the program expansion is further accelerated. Without the Assembly joining the Senate and winning the day on child care rates, mythology worker pay and family fees will further risk shutting down facilities entirely when we're already lost 30% of our workers and providers. Given these circumstances, I most respectfully cannot support this Bill until the budget also includes desperately needed relief for our childcare system. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Aguiar-Curry. And seeing no other members wishing to address this Bill. Mr. Mccarty, anything further to close? Very well. Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 41, noes 15. The bill is passed.

We are back to File Item 40. This is AB 1763. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1763 by the Committee on Agriculture, an act relating to food and agriculture.

Assembly Member Rivas, you may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So this legislation seeks to eliminate the January 1st, 2025 repeal date of the California Department of Food and Agriculture's Fruit, Nuts, and Vegetable Standardization Program. This program has existed for over 100 years, provides the minimum standards for quality, size, maturity, and consistency in packaging and labeling. The Legislature has extended the program five times in the past. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Rivas, and seeing no Members wishing to be addressed on this bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes: 66; noes: zero. The bill is passed. Next, this is File Item 41: AB 1765. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1765 by the Committee on Revenue and Taxation in appelate taxation.

Assemblymember Irwin, you may open on the bill.

That's on now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased to present AB 1765 today on behalf of the Rev and Tax Committee. AB 1765 contains two taxpayer friendly proposals drafted by the Franchise Tax Board with technical modifications. The FTB expects these changes to increase taxpayer compliance, improve accounts receivable collections, and reduce taxpayer burden. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Irwin. Seeing no members wishing to address this bill, clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes aye 67, no zero. The bill is passed. Next, file item 42. This is AB 1769.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1769 by the Committee on Governmental Organization an act relating to gambling.

Senator Santiago, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Bill is the annual Assembly GO Bill that makes technical, clarifying, and conforming non-controversial changes. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Santiago. Seeing no Members wishing to address this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote Mr. Valencia. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes ayes 63, no, zero. The bills pass. Next, Mr. Santiago, we'll go to file item 49.

This is AB 861. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 861 by Assemblymember Santiago an act relating to hazardous waste.

And Mr. Santiago, you may open on this Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Bill aims to create trust, accountability, and transparency between contractors and community members in regards to the excite led cleanup in my district. Thank you. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Santiago. Seeing no Members wishing to speak on this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote, Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 62, no, zero.

The bills pass. Next. This is file item 50, AB 1163. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1163 by Assemblymember Luz Rivas, an act relating to data collection.

Assemblywoman Rivas, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you. Mr. Speaker and Members, I rise to present AB 1163, a Bill that seeks to reduce wellbeing disparities for LGBTQ communities. Specifically, AB 1163 would amend the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Disparities Reduction Act to require additional state entities to collect voluntary selfidentification information pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity.

As we enter into Pride Month, let us reflect on ways we can empower and support our LGBTQ Plus communities. To our LGBTQ plus Californians. We see you, we hear you. And we will continue to work on promoting equity and inclusion in our state. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Rivas. Seeing no Members wishing to address this Bill, Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote, all those vote who desire to vote, Clerk will close roll, tally the votes. Ayes 54, no, zero. The Bill is passed. Members, I have a brief announcement from our IT team. Some roll call votes are displaying incorrectly on your tablets.

The data center staff are working on the issue, but the votes have been accurately recorded in the voting system and are correctly displayed at the vote kiosks. If you need to see an accurate roll call on the bills, please use the kiosks or see staff at the Assembly desk. Next, Ms. Wicks, we will take up file item number seven. This is AB 886.

Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 886 by Assembly Wicks, an act related to civil law.

Assembly Wicks, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members. A thriving, diverse press is the backbone of a healthy and vibrant democracy. When newsrooms are full, the public reaps those rewards. And communities without local journalism suffer consequences, from declining civic engagement and lower voter turnout, to higher taxes and increased corruption. And I know many of you come from local government, and you've seen this with your own eyes. When your meetings are not covered, when the public's not informed about the work that you do, it impacts our democracy.

And over the last 10 years, we've lost 100 papers in California, 100 publishers. There's been a massive decline in the health of the newsrooms across this country and in California. And that is why I've authored AB 886 to require tech platforms to participate in arbitration with journalism publishers, to settle upon a fair amount of compensation.

In return for advertising revenue, platforms are collecting because they feature journalists content. Publishers deserve to be paid a journalism usage fee relative to how much of their content is featured on a specific platform. And we put provisions in this Bill to ensure that 70% of those funds go to the journalists to ensure that the newsrooms are full. We've worked very carefully with the unions who represent journalists to ensure that there's transparency around these funds. And I'm sure you've heard critiques about this Bill.

Oh, this is going to make the hedge Fund papers richer. I'm not interested in a debate between Rupert Murdoch and Mark Zuckerberg. What I'm interested in is ensuring that our local publishers, our local papers, have a robust newsroom to hold people like us our feet to the fire. Free press is in our constitution, and it is at risk right now. That is what this Bill is about.

The California Journalism Preservation Act will not save journalism, but it will provide a support for news outlets and journalists at a moment when the stakes could not be higher. I have worked very collaboratively with the opposition on this Bill. And some of you may have seen one of the companies said yesterday they won't allow news on their platform if this Bill passes. They want to take their ball and go home. In the face of regulation, they want to censor journalists.

To me, this is an empty threat because these are companies that have made billions and billions and billions of dollars while our newsrooms are shutting down across the State of California. And I know that this Bill is still a work in progress. I've talked to many, well, all of you, about this Bill. I've talked to my colleagues about ethnic media, black media, tribal press, Japanese press, and I want to make sure they have a seat at the table. They are important voices in their community.

And we have publications large and small across the state who are supporting this Bill. The LA Blade, the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle. Small publications, large publications, because they want to ensure that they can do their job. This is going to continue to be a work in progress. But a free press is foundational to democracy. And right now, our democracy needs it now more than ever. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Assembly Member Lowenthal, you are recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. I just want to say how proud I am of my colleague from Oakland to bring this forward. If we think about the foundations of our democracy, if we think about the history of the Internet over the last few decades, all of you may remember the challenges with music and Napster and downloading digital content and how those fields were able to get their arms around intellectual property on the Internet protecting those things.

We saw that with all different types of content in the Internet, but for whatever reason, it didn't go all the way to newsrooms. And my colleague from Oakland is absolutely correct. While we see these mega giant tech outfits gain in the billions and billions and billions of dollars, we see our local newsrooms eviscerated. And it's tough to be a Member of the Assembly without having a vibrant local press. It's very, very difficult.

And the only way that we can change that is by standing up for local journalism and not have their content being stolen, because that's what's happening today. I'm very proud to stand up for this. I also recognize that this is a work in progress, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Member Essayli. You are recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise as a co author of AB 886.

The very First Amendment to our Constitution protects the right to a free press. It's no mistake that that's in the First Amendment, our Founding Fathers understood the importance of a free and vibrant press to hold the government, to hold us accountable, and to keep citizens informed. Our republic does not work if citizens are in the dark about what's happening in their own government. Take a look around. How many reporters do you see here right now?

We hardly have any press that covers the work that we do, that covers the works that we do in Committee. The people need to know what's happening in government, and they cannot do that unless there is a free press. Today, our free press marketplace is completely out of balance. Newsrooms continue to reduce the number of journalists they employ, and we've seen the quality of local and robust journalism decline.

Part of this problem, not all of it, but part of it, is the misappropriation of their intellectual property by big tech operators. In our Internet age, information is power and data is valuable. Google makes about $300 billion a year. Facebook makes about $120 billion a year. Those are astronomical numbers. I'm not offended by large profit. I welcome large profit. It's a bedrock of our capitalistic economy. What offends me is the refusal to compensate those whose work product is being used for financial gain.

I want to talk for a minute about why journalism is so valuable on the Internet. Most of us go to one or two websites to get information. A lot of us go to one. And it's important that when we seek information on a particular platform, that we have reliable, credible information that's given to us in return. Journalists are out there doing the work. They vet the information. They vet the facts, they get the interviews, and they prepare a work product.

Companies like Google take that work product, summarize it, and spit it back to you on their platform, often disincentivizing people from ever visiting their website or monetizing their content. That's a reality. Google needs this information because how else do you distinguish between a random reddit review and a journalistic piece of work? And they know that those news products are more valuable because they're more credible and reliable. And I want to be clear. I do not support corporate welfare. I do not.

But I also do not support unjust enrichment. And if you're taking other people's work product and you're financially benefiting from it, you must compensate them for it. I want to just briefly mention what this Bill does and doesn't do and what the intent is. The intent is to provide a forum in which both sides can present their arguments and what the value of the news content is on these platforms. We are not predictating what that value is, what fee, if any, should be paid.

It simply provides a forum and an avenue to make those arguments and to be compensated. It is not a tax. A tax is money that goes to the government. This does not come to the government. This provides one party an opportunity to be compensated for their work product. Just as if anyone took something from you, you have the ability to go to court and be compensated. I'll just end with this. This is a complicated issue. It's not simple.

And I appreciate the author's willingness to engage on this and to get it right and to continue that process, because I do think it's important to get it right and to be fair. This will continue to be a work in progress. Just because something is complicated and hard does not mean we shouldn't do it. We need to engage on this. It's very important to our republic. It's very important to democracy.

And at the end of the day, nobody's above the law, not even big tech. I urge an aye support. Thank you.

Assembly Member Muratsuchi, you are recognized on the Bill.

Thank you very. Is it working? Okay. Thank you very much. I rise in support of the Bill because I trust the author. I trust that she will do the right thing. But I do have concerns about the Bill. I was reviewing who's in support and who's in opposition.

And one of the opposition letters is from CalMatters. And CalMatters is making the point that this Bill runs the risk of favoring large newspapers over small newspapers, and not to mention the growing movement toward nonprofit media outlets. I completely support the intent to make sure that we have a strong and robust free press, not only our large dailies, but also our nonprofit media, our ethnic media. And so, for the sake of moving this forward, I will vote for the Bill.

I trust and ask the author to continue to make sure that all media is supported.

Assembly Member Papan, you are recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. So I think that the goal of this Bill is noble indeed, and I concur with the remarks that came before me. Local newspapers are essential to our democracy. Shout out to the San Mateo Daily Journal before I PROCEED. But in any event, they are essential. And I said this in Committee, because I saw this Bill in two committees as the only Greek on the floor. My people invented democracy. I take it very seriously. It runs through my veins.

But I really think the devil's in the details on this. So I am going to support it today. But we've talked at length and I have talked at length with the author about not all tech is created equal. The arbitration provisions from the legal standpoint, I think haven't been fully baked. With all due respect. And I hate when people say with all due respect, but you get what I'm saying.

And I applaud the idea that you want to see this money go into the hands of reporters because that's who is woefully underpaid in this equation. I don't care which outlet they work for. So I think the devil is going to be in the details. I'm all supported today, but we got to crank through and get some of this stuff really worked out.

But I do applaud the goal and I applaud everyone here today who said this coverage of us is essential to what we do and the transparency to what we do. So we'll get through it. But I'm looking forward to the details.

Thanks. Assembly Member Wendy Carrillo, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. As a former journalist and as a lifetime Member of NAHJ, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and former broadcaster, I just want to thank the journalists who are always present and in the room to cover our stories. They're in the back here. Thank you all so much for the work that you do. Our photographers, the Associated Press, who's also here present in this body and ensuring that the work that we do is covered.

As someone that I graduated from USC in '09 with my master's degree in Journalism and Political science at a time in which more than 500 newspapers across the country shut down, not the best time to get a graduate degree in journalism, but that has been the reality of the profession for quite some time. Given new technologies, emerging technologies, and how technology has really taken a big role in how news and journalism is consumed.

I think it's important to understand that in order for us to have a free and equal democracy, we must ensure that the opportunities for government oversight is available and there. And I just want to also give big thanks to all the journalism students at this moment who have a need and desire to cover government.

It is incredibly difficult to do in this day and age when the salaries aren't great, when you get paid $50 an article that takes you 5 hours to write, it is something for us to look at and consider. And I know that from experience, I couldn't make a living after I graduated from grad school and during that time that I was trying to really do the work that I had intended to do and I had studied. And so it is an incredibly difficult space.

The Internet has played a role in how we consume media, whether it's social media, whether it's other platforms, whether it's the continued copy paste of articles that get spread all across the Internet without the actual author and the journalists or the contributor being paid for financially and compensated for it. I know that there's still a lot of things that need to be ironed out, and I trust the author to be able to get us there in that.

And with that, I respectfully request and I vote on AB 886. Thank you.

Assembly Member Joe Patterson. You're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you very much. I want to say I appreciate my colleague from Oakland for reaching out to me very early on this and how hard she's worked on this and she's taken into account a lot of the comments and things that have been brought up. And I too believe that journalists should be paid. They're sitting back there watching tweeting, hopefully. We talked a little bit in Committee about different platforms using the content created by people differently.

Some platform might straight up scrape information from an article directly and then that stops people from clicking through. And then other platforms, people might actually the newspapers themselves and the writers themselves might post it on a platform. And I just wanted to ask the author a question. Thank you.

I know you've taken amendments sort of in that regard and I think maybe you still might be working on that, but I just wanted to see what your intent was for sort of differentiating when people are voluntarily putting their information on a particular platform. And thanks again for all the work you've done on this measure.

Thanks. I'll answer in my close.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. And Assembly Member Flora. You're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sadly, I rise in opposition to 886 and my opposition really comes from one thing for us, this is unprecedented. For us to allow private arbitration to redistribute funds from one business to another is a precedent that I don't know if we should cross on this floor. So I would just ask all of us, if we are okay with that, if we're okay with that redistribution of funds, what industry is next? Just think about that.

If we're okay with doing it to the journalistic industry and though the journalists absolutely should be paid, what industry's next? This is a bad precedent and I request a no vote.

Thank you, Mr. Flora. And Senator Boerner, you're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you so much. And I have a question for the author. My sister is a lifelong journalist and so I have a deep respect for the trade and I see what's happened. She worked for many newspapers in California and New York over the years. She's been a freelance journalist for years.

My worry is this is actually not the funds that are going back to these large publishers are not going to actually go back to the journalists. That's the first question. Second question is what prevents this Fund from actually funding misinformation just as well as it funds the San Diego Union Tribune? You know you're watching and three, how do we ensure that?

You know in my mind this is the equivalent of like back in the old days I had a newspaper subscription, I took my newsletter and I went know my little knitting circle and I showed an article to a friend. That's what we normally do back in the old days. Right now we have online, I'm sharing something maybe about me, maybe about my daughter online.

How are we differentiating what is just sharing like we would in the old days, a newspaper that maybe my friend didn't buy and what we're doing. So those are three questions and if you can ask them before your close that would be great.

Thank you. Ms. Boerner. Senator Bauer-Kahan, you are recognized on the bill.

Thank you Mr. Speaker and Members, I rise in support of AB 886 and I do so because I heard the comments from our colleague about the redistribution of funds. But I want to be clear that in my understanding of the way our society works, when someone creates something, when someone works, we also believe they get paid for that work, that they are the one that benefits from that work. That is a long standing value and belief for me and I believe for California and our nation.

And so what we have seen with the rise of technology is the ability to take work that is created by these journalists, that they pour their blood, sweat and tears into and profit off of it through the attention, economy and searches and the like and not pay those journalists or those companies, those entities that have created the work in the original instance.

And I know there's a lot pending in the courts as it relates to the questions of copyright, especially with these new AI tools that will completely take those works, reprint them and not even tell you where they come from, which is a whole new area that's even more problematic. But what I think we're trying to do here is say when you create work, when you do that we value it and we're going to ensure that these new technologies do so as well.

It's not that complicated and it will protect our free press. It is critically important and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you Ms. Bauer-Kahan. And Assembly Member Mathis, you're recognized on the Bill.

Members. This one's definitely an interesting one. And as somebody that likes to look back to some of the original thought thinkers when it comes to property rights to value, you got to look back at guys like John Locke in The Second Treaties of Government. Permission to read? Without objection. As so much as any one man can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils, so much he may by his labor, fix a property in whatever is beyond.

This is more than his share and belongs to others. So what does this mean? What is John Locke getting to, the originator of rights? John Locke also talked about putting the work in and going up and gathering something, and then that's something becoming yours. So this gets very interesting when we talk about big tech who actually owns the platform versus the labor and thought ideas put in by our press corps and the work that they do to put their stories together.

So what does it come down to? Who's making the money here? Who's profiting here and who should be? That's what we're really debating is the work, the research, the effort, the stories done by our press corps. Do they deserve value to that? Or does the big tech company who owns the platform deserve to profit off the work of others? That's what this Bill comes down to. Now, a lot of us don't necessarily like the press. Some of us have been beaten up by them.

Some of us, they've been good. That's the way politics goes. Thank God for Fourth house and keeping us honest. The other side of it, and we all hear stories about this, too. Big tech has algorithms. They're not open source. They don't tell us what they're throttling and what stories they're not throttling. What's up with that?

So as these things go out on these platforms, we get this question, and then we see the big threats out there in the news that they're going to pull it from the platform. It's their platform. If they want to do so, they can choose. So but the core of this is who's putting in the original work? And the original work is being done by the Press Corps. And this Bill goes to move the system to say, hey, this is their original thought.

They're the ones doing the background work. They're the ones doing this. There needs to be a balance and an equity of how this funding is given. And because of that, I'm going to support this Bill today, and I ask for you to do also. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mathis. And Assembly Member Hoover, you're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's not often that I rise in opposition to my seatmate, but sadly, I do have to rise in opposition to this Bill today. And the main reason is because I'm afraid that this Bill is going to have some serious, unintended consequences.

I absolutely agree with my colleagues who have spoken today on the importance of a free press, the importance that we are giving complete access to our media so that they can cover what we're doing and hold us accountable. Absolutely agree with that. I would really encourage everyone to read the CalMatters opposition letter to this Bill, specifically the section on incentives, because I think my concerns are really based in what incentives are we creating by passing this legislation today?

The first incentive that I'm very concerned about is that we are giving an incentive to tech companies to suppress and to throttle news stories by passing this Bill. And I do think it could have a very negative, unintended consequence where we're going to have less free press as a result of this Bill, less access to important stories.

The second incentive that concerns me is the incentive that we are giving by making this a revenue generator, by allowing media companies to actually generate revenue as a result of this, we are actually giving an incentive to print more articles and more stories. And what that's going to do, and they lay it out very well in their opposition letter, is it's going to give benefits to larger media companies and actually suppress the smaller ones that aren't able to do that, using AI and using other things.

And so for those reasons, I'm going to have to oppose today. I would urge a no vote, but I appreciate the author for continuing to work on this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hoover. And seeing no other Members wishing to be addressed on this Bill. Ms. Wicks, you may close.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members, thank you for the robust conversation. I also love that this issue is not a traditional Democrat versus Republican issue, but warrants, I think, a lot of independent thought as we try to get this right, and I want to get this right. I want to ensure that there are no unintended consequences. I work my bills. I work the policy. I work the politics. I pledge to I will continue to do that. I've read the opposition letter, the concerns about Clickbait. Guess what?

All of these publications are doing everything they can right now to get people on their site. Why would that change? They're already trying to do everything there. With regards to the retaliation concern by the platforms, we've put in antiretaliation language to ensure that that exact concern doesn't happen within the Bill. I know there were a number of questions. I think heard about how are we treating the companies differently?

We've put in language this past week to address that, to ensure that we're answering some of those questions. So I know that this is still a work in progress. But what I also know is that doing nothing is not an option. We have to keep this conversation going. Our newsrooms depend on it. Our democracy depends on it.

It is not a perfect product right now, but I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure when this lands on the governor's desk, it's going to be a robust Bill that does everything it can to ensure that our newsrooms are staffed, that our reporters are paid what they're worth, that we have a vibrant press to support this democracy, to hold our feet to the fire. And I would ask you.

To come along that journey with me and I will sit and meet with anyone who has questions or concerns and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 46, no 6, the bills pass. Next Members, we will take up file item two. This is AB 93 for reconsideration. The Clerk will read on reconsideration.

Assembly Bill 93 by Assembly Member Bryan an act relating to criminal law.

Mr. Bryan, you may open on reconsideration.

Respectfully ask for reconsideration.

Very well. Mr. Flora, for what purpose?

We object to the reconsideration. Ask for roll call vote.

Very well. Seeing, hearing, no further discussion. Mr. Bryan's asking for an aye vote. Mr. Flora is asking for a no vote on reconsideration. Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. This is on reconsideration only. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 49, nos 17. Reconsideration is granted. With that we will take up file item two, AB 93. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 93 by Assembly Member Bryan an act relating to criminal law.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. Back again with AB 93. I talked to all of you, most of you, anyone who wanted to talk about this Bill. It's an important Bill. We laid that out, we laid out the evidence. But policy making is not easy. We're also under some deadlines because of house of origin. But I went and put amendments in print and I have them for anybody who wants to read them.

Assembly Bryan, you may open on the Bill.

I've shared them all across the floor. The previous version of this Bill essentially banned consent searches that you would need a warrant first. We lowered that down to needing reasonable suspicion. The stop and frisk standard it matches parallel the exact policy Highway Patrol all of the sergeants who protect us were trained to use it's a compromise that was very hard for me personally for many reasons. But I think that's how policy making should work.

I don't know that the Bill is all the way where it needs to be because we have colleagues in the other House that we still have to work through. But I respectfully ask for your consideration to work on this in the next House and I would appreciate an aye vote.

Thank you. Mr. Bryan, and Mr. Hart, you're recognized on the Bill.

I appreciate the commitment of the author to work collaboratively to find a place to be successful with this Bill. I wasn't originally supportive because I had some concerns, but he has assured me that he is working diligently to make those changes. We don't have them today in print, but we're going to have them because I know that the author is a man of his word and I've worked closely with my local law enforcement agencies and the District Attorney in my district to make sure that their concerns are integrated into those amendments. And I'll be voting for the Bill today.

Thank you, Mr. Hart. And seeing no other Members wishing to address this Bill, anything further to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Clerk will open the roll. All those votes who desire to vote all those vote who desire to vote.

Mr. Brian moves the call. Next members, we will take up file item 51. This is AB 1544. Clerk will read.

Assembly Bill 1544 by Assemblymember Lackey and appellate in child abuse.

Assemblymember Lackey may open on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues.

I'm pleased to present AB 1544, which restores law enforcement's ability to enter data under the Child Abuse Central Index, otherwise known as CACI. It also moves over the grievance process from local law enforcement agencies to the Department of Justice. In the 1960s this database was originally developed as a reference point for investigations into child safety. In the 1980s, it began being used for screening purposes when authorizing individuals to have close contact with our children.

This dual purpose encompassed how social services and law enforcement provide child protective services. In 2007, due to litigation, the grievance process was developed for individuals to appeal their listings. This meant that those who were factually innocent could have their listing removed and be absolved of a state imposed stigma. In 2011, in an effort to limit liability, the legislature removed law enforcement's ability to enter data correctly into this index. It provided standards for inclusion and ordered specific removals.

This means that law enforcement has to send their reports to Social Services for them to enter into the CACI Index, and abusers outside of the home are often not listed in this index. The Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved my request to review this index, which uncovered more than half of the reports at the county level, which had failed to be entered into the statewide database.

It also provided that there were 28 day delays for entries which could allow someone who has abused children to be approved for screening in the intervening period. The acting auditor described the reporting process as cumbersome and error-prone. They also said that the unreliability of the database puts children at risk, and the flaws in the database means that those agencies cannot depend on the database to help protect children.

The DOJ has previously concluded that law enforcement reports are held to a higher standard because they are prepared for criminal prosecution instead of dependency cases. It's essential to have this information into this index. An improvement in the quality of data provides decision makers with the accurate, up to date and reliable information so that they can make the right decisions when it comes to child safety.

After we lost Gabriel Fernandez in my district, the Los Angeles County looked inward to see how we could avoid child tragedies in the future. The Blue Ribbon Commission recommended that we improve the coordination between social services and law enforcement. Since then, the Antelope Valley has continued to lose children. We lost Anthony Avalos, Noah Cuatro. We need to do better for our vulnerable children everybody.

CACI and our systems serving children have developed over time, and we need to continuously work to fill the cracks that these cases fall through with strength-based respect for all communities. I've included the provisions moving the grievance process over to the Department of Justice because I understand and acknowledge concerns raised by the opposition that individuals may not be comfortable challenging their listing with the chain of command for the agency where the report originated.

In conclusion, I'm committed to working with groups who are opposed to improve the notice and due process procedures associated with this index in the Second House. The status quo is not acceptable to anyone, and AB 1544 will allow us to improve the quality of data and provide improvements to due process. My office has been meeting with the opposition, will continue to do so as we develop amendments to ease their concern. And I ask for your support.

Thank you, Mr. Lackey. Assemblymember Villapudua you're recognized on the bill?

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, I rise today to strong support of AB 1554. We need to recognize the importance of inclusion of law enforcement to enter data of Child Abuse Directory to Child Abuse Central Index so that we can assure reports of child abuse do not get lost. Last year, the California State Auditor found that less than half of the 52,000 reports of child abuse that social workers substantiated were in Child Abuse Central Index.

To better protect our children, we need to streamline the process for sharing reports of child abuse. Colleagues, I respectfully ask for your support on AB 1554, endorsed by the Problem Solvers Caucus to ensure children are protected.

Thank you, Mr. Villapudua. If there's nothing further to close seeing no other members wishing to speak on the bill, clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 55. Nos zero. The bill's passed. Next. I'm prepared to lift the call on file item 25, AB 1463. Clerk will post. All those vote who desire to vote, clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 43, noes 13. Bills passed. Bonta.

Next. I'm going to go to Miss Bonta. Majority Leader, you're recognized at your desk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the request of the authors, please move the following bills to the inactive file. Item 18, AB 83 Lee and item 36, AB 1595 Brian.

The Clerk will note, and Ms. Bonta. We will be moving to file item 21. This is AB 793. Clerk will read.

Assembly Rule 793 by Assembly Member Bonta and others accolade in privacy.

Senator Bonta, you may open on the Bill.

Thank you. Mr. and speaker and Members. I rise to present AB 793, the Stop Surveilling Our Bodies act. I first want to start by being very clear on the commitment I have made to work on this legislation.

Today I commit to clarifying the scope of the protections in this Bill to apply to reproductive health and gender affirming care only, and will be doing that in the Senate. To ensure the scope of this Bill still provides broad protections for people in need in care, for people considering care, and for people seeking information regarding their personal health and safety, I will be getting input from key stakeholders such as PPAC, Irwin Howe, and Equality California, and to ensure that this is workable for law enforcement.

I will also be working with the current opposition to make sure that this is a Bill that works for all, with the safety and protections of our LGBTQ siblings, and with the overall health and safety of women and others who can become pregnant on the line, we have to get this Bill right. As a Member who has led on reproductive health legislation, I am proud of our state being a safe haven for those seeking reproductive and gender affirming care.

The continued erosion of rights across the nation post Roe shows us, however, that our job is not done. Reverse demands can leave people who need reproductive or gender affirming care vulnerable to a digital surveillance apparatus that could be used against them. Reverse demands are particularly dangerous in a postural world.

A reverse demand can seek the identity of all people who are present at a particular location geofence demands, or who looked up a particular term search term engine in a search term engine keyword demands simply because where they were or what they searched for. To make this clear, a geofence demand can compel the disclosure of multiple people's identities just because they were at a particular place during a particular specific time frame, like near a reproductive health clinic.

A keyword demand can compel disclosure of the identity of anyone who has entered certain keywords into a search engine, like transgender hormone therapy. People in California have a fundamental constitutional right to privacy in their reproductive health decisions. It is time we make sure that reverse demands respect the privacy and are not tools that are manipulated to harm the very people we are providing a safe haven for.

Again, you have my commitment to ensure the scope of this legislation upholds California's commitment to be a sanctuary state for the nation by protecting people seeking or receiving information, support, or services related to reproductive health and gender affirming care. You'll be seeing amended legislation when this Bill comes back from the Senate Floor. Thank you. I respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you. Ms. Bonta and Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry, you're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members, I rise as a coauthor of AB 793 as Vice Chair of the Women's Caucus, I want to thank my colleague from Oakland for authoring this legislation, which is far more complex than it appears. I trust my friend's commitment to take seriously and address opponents'concerns, and I know she needs more time to work with the stakeholders that help the Women's Caucus craft thoughtful and meaningful reproductive health legislation to assure this Bill accomplishes its goal without unintended consequences.

AB 793 is part of the 2023 Legislative Women's Caucus and Future of Abortion Council's package of reproductive healthy, health priority bills. We continue to author legislation in this space because, as I have said before, we have made a long standing promise to be a refuge state for anyone seeking care, and we intend to keep it. Reverse demands can leave people who need reproductive or gender affirming care vulnerable.

They can reveal multiple people's identities just because, for example, they were near a reproductive health clinic, and they can be used to identify anyone who has entered a certain keywords into a search engine. While I truly understand the opponent's concerns that this appears too broad, abortion opponents in other states have classified abortion as murder and transgender care as child abuse. So it will take work to accomplish the bill's goals while preventing the mischaracterizations of women exercising their rights.

Again, I trust my colleague from Oakland's commitment, and I am proud co author on this historic legislation, and I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Curry. Assembly Member Dixon, you're recognized on the Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In respectful opposition. While I hear my colleague from Oakland's comments, I have not seen those amendments in writing, so I'm prepared to speak in opposition to the Bill as currently written. AB 793 will ban geofence warrants, which have been critical in solving hundreds of crimes, including serial killings, home invasion, robberies, and other violent and serious crimes. AB 793 is overly broad, as has been stated, and will have dire unintended consequences.

This Bill will ban all geofence and reverse keyword search warrants, not just those limited to reproductive health care or gender affirming care. Current law provides safeguards against intrusion on privacy. The US. Constitution, the Fourth Amendment, and California law currently protect against law enforcement overreach search warrants can only be issued if there is a probable cause of a crime. It is reasonable and only after review and approval by a neutral judge. Specific procedures must be followed in these situations.

In fact, AB 793 could increase the likelihood that innocent persons will be arrested and convicted. As was previously mentioned, geofence warrants can help eliminate persons as suspects and exonerate the innocent. In an era of increasing firearms related mass murders, AB 93 will unnecessarily prevent law enforcement from solving and thus preventing future mass shootings. AB 793 prohibits government entities from seeking or obtaining records or information capable of identifying persons who electronically searched or queried for a particular word or words.

This prohibition will hamstring investigations into smash and grab thefts, home invasion, burglaries orchestrated by transnational, organized crime, gangs, homicides, and more commonly, sexual offenses against children. AB 793 will make it more difficult to locate missing children and address the ongoing crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous women. If a child is kidnapped from a particular location by an unidentified person, obtaining reverse location data can help identify who was present or not present in the location at the time of kidnapping.

This may be the only way to make such an identification. AB 793, as currently written, will destroy critical law enforcement methods of combating the distribution and collection of child pornography and child abuse cases. To understand how geofence warrants are currently being used, it is important to recognize that the warrants involve a three step process. There is no identifying information of anyone given until the third stage of the warrant process, where the judge approves each warrant.

AB 793 goes much further than intended and will have grave impacts on the safety of our communities, and the Bill is unnecessary. Current law already protects reproductive health care access and gender affirming care. AB 1242 and SB 107, passed last year and signed into law, addressed these important issues. But that is really not my concern as much as the law enforcement aspect. And for these reasons, I respectfully urge you to oppose 793 if it were to be in its current form. So I wanted to get that on record. So. Thank you, Assembly Member Bonta.

Thank you, Ms. Dixon. And seeing no other Members wishing to speak on this Bill, Senator Bonta, you may close.

Thank you, Members. This Bill is one that we absolutely need to have in place if we actually want to be a sanctuary state. We have an opportunity now to ensure that, quite frankly, one of the things that inspired the American Revolution application of General warrants doesn't get applied here within the State of California.

We have an opportunity to, as I've said, and committed to again and again, narrowly scope this so that it focuses on gender affirming care and reproductive health rights to be able to ensure that we're actually operating as a sanctuary state. Law enforcement has a plethora of tools to be able to ensure that we bring people to justice. We do. And they're enacted every single day, as they have for 100 years.

The opportunity that we have now is to ensure that we operate as a sanctuary state and ensure that we have the ability to narrowly scope this Bill so that it has the ability to move forward. I'm asking for your support in continuing to be able to work this Bill. I commit to that. I am an author who does that consistently, and my commitment is one that I hope that you will take into consideration. With that, I respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Bonta. Clerk will open the roll. All those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. This will require 54.

Ms. Bonta moves the call. Members, I'm prepared to lift the call on file. Item four. AB 1726. Clerk will post all those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote.

Clerk will close roll, tally the votes. Ayes 41, no. 17 bills passed. Members, in the interest of time, I can entertain any vote changes. If anybody wish to make a vote change from the desk. Assembly Member Papan.

Thank you. Mr. Speaker. On 1726, I'd like to switch from a no to an aye.

Vote change. Assembly Member. Papan. Assembly Bill 1726 no to aye.

For a vote change. Assembly Member Aguiar Curry. From the majority leader's desk.

Assembly Member Aguiar Curry. AB 6, from aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Aguiar Curry. Assembly Bill 6, aye. To not voting.

And Ms. Dixon, from your desk. A vote change.

A vote change, please. AB 1192 from yes to abstain not voting. Thank you.

Vote change. Assembly Member Dixon. Assembly BIll 1192. Aye to not voting.

Mr. Hoover, from your desk. Vote change.

Thank you. Assemblymember Hoover. Vote change. File item 13 AB 1533. Aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Hoover. Assembly Bill 1533. Aye to not voting.

Mr. Hart, from your desk. Vote change. Mr. Hart.

Assembly Member Hart. Vote change. AB 572, from aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Hart. Assembly Bill 572. Aye to not voting.

Senator Sanchez, from your desk. Vote change.

Assembly Member Sanchez AB 9, aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Sanchez. Assembly Bill 9, aye to not voting.

Majority Leader Reyes, you're recognized for your announcement.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the request of the authors, please move the following bills to the inactive file. Item 16 AB 9, Muratsuchi. Item 17 AB 61. Bryan.

The Clerk will note, Members, I'm prepared to lift the call on another Bill. This will be file item 37 AB 16 four. Clerk will post all those vote who desire to vote. All those vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 42, no. 17. The bills passed.

Members, at this time I'm prepared to lift the call on file item 46 AB 252. Clerk will post all those vote who desire to vote.

Mr. Holden replaces the call.

Mr. Hart, you're recognized at your desk for a vote change.

Assemblyman Hart, AB 1544 from aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Hart. Assembly Bill 1544. Aye to not voting.

Members, at this time I am prepared to lift a call on file. Item two Clerk will post all those vote who desire to vote. The Clerk will close the roll. Ayes 38, noes 22. Measure fails. Thank you, everybody. Members, we are moving to announcements. While tomorrow would be the last day for considering bills on house of origin, because of your diligent work this week, we have been done one day early. Give yourselves a hand. The session schedule is as follows. Friday, June 2.

No check in session. No floor session. Monday, June 5. Floor session is at 01:00 P.m.. All other items remaining will be passed and retained. All motions shall be continued. Seeing and hearing no further business, I'm ready to entertain a motion to adjourn. Ms. Reyes moves Mr. Gallagher seconds. This house stands adjourned until Monday, June 5, at 01:00 P.m.. Have a great weekend. The quorum call is lifted.

Okay, vote change on AB 93. From aye to not voting.

Vote change. Assembly Member Jackson. Assembly Bill 1544 aye to not voting.