Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

All are encouraged to watch the hearing from its live stream on the Assembly's website. Assembly.ca.gov/todaysevents. We encourage the public to monitor the Committee's website for updates. We will accept public comment on any bills placed on the suspense file by the Committee today for which the author waived presentation before the close of regular order hearing. Testimony on any such Bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, in position on the Bill.

The Committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total. As you came into the hearing room today, the sergeants directed your attention to the rules for public attendance and participation which were posted outside the door. I encourage Members of the public who are in attendance to be aware of and observe those rules. Please be aware that violations of these rules or other violations of General courtesy or decorum may subject you to removal or other enforcement processes.

I would like to establish a quorum, but I don't think we have enough people. So we will start as a Subcommitee, and if you are on the Appropriations Committee and watching this hearing, you are welcome to come join the hearing so that we can kick this thing off. You know who you are. My colleagues. I will take the consent calendar up once we have established quorum. We'll do that later. And we will do the suspense calendar later at the end as well.

So we're looking for Members of the Committee to come join the Committee. We are also looking for authors. If you are presenting a Bill in Committee today, looks like we have a couple who have signed up here, Assemblymembers. Reggie joins Sawyer. Let's see, who else do we have? Corey Jackson, Assemblymember Akilah Weber. Oh, Assemblymember Ortega. You all have signed up to present bills.

You are welcome to come do so as a Subcommitee and we will establish quorum as soon as we have critical mass. And with that we will hold until people show up. All right, thank you. Okay. Thank you. Mister Grayson, Miss Pellerin. We have enough people here to establish quorum and with that, Madam Secretary.

[Roll Call]

We have a quorum and with that we have a consent calendar. Do we have a motion? We have a motion. A second. Madam Secretary.

Following bills are ABs, 1784 Pellerin, 1788 Quirk-Silva, 1862 Vince Fong, 1876 Jackson, 1929 McKinnor, 1936 Cervantes, 1943 Weber, 1957 Wilson, 1978 Vince Fong, 2062 Grayson, 2069 Gallagher, 2072 Weber, 2091 Grayson, 2094 Vince Fong, 2098 Garcia, 2143 Connolly, 2176 Berman, 2199 Berman, 2246 Ramos, 2276 Wood, 2389 Lowenthal, 2455 Gabriel, 2531 Bryan, 2620 Bains, 2624 Waldron, 2664 Bryan, 2694 Ward, 2708 Jim Patterson, 2725 Blanca Rubio, 2743 Pacheco, 2779 Petrie-Norris, 2842 Papan, 2876 Berman, 2886 Aguiar-Curry, 2904 Quirk-Silva, 2922 Garcia, 2948 Ramos, 2951 Cervantes, 3004 Mike Fong, 3234 Ortega, 3265 Bryan, 3285 Committee on Governmental Organization ACR, 169 Kalra, and 3007 Hoover.

Consent with amendments. [Roll Call]

Consent calendars adopted the consent calendars adopted will let folks add on. And with that, Miss Ortega, would you like to come present? I believe you are up on AB 2705.

Good morning Madam Chair and Members. I am proud to present AB 2705, which will ensure that the labor Commissioner has time to recover unpaid wages for workers who are subject to wage theft on public work projects. Under existing law, when the labor Commissioner finds a violation of prevailing wage requirements on a project, the labor Commissioner has 18 months to determine the amount of fines and penalties to be assessed, but only six months to sue the company that bonded the project.

This inconsistency in the two statutes of limitations means that the labor Commissioner could be in the middle of an assessment and run out of time to recover stolen wages owed to workers. The Committee analysis states that the Bill will have a negligible cost to the labor Commissioner's office, and although it's unclear how many new actions will be filed, the magnitude of such actions is likely small.

Thank you. Do we have any witnesses in support? Any witnesses in opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion. A second. And Mister Ortega, that enjoys a do pass recommendation, it's out on a A-roll call. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mister Jackson, would you like to present. We have you presenting AB 1799, I believe.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Committee Members. AB 1799 seeks to require the state public health officer to include the impact of racism on public health in their annual written report to the Governor and the Legislature on the State of public health in California. Per the analysis of this Committee, this Bill has negligible state cost. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mister Jackson. Any witnesses in the room wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. Do we have a motion? And a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Okay. I forgot to ask Miss Ortega if she'd like to close. But I got the message. That is out on AB roll call with Mister Ta. Not voting. Thank you. And with that, Miss Weber, would you like to present. You are presenting AB 2058.

Good morning Chair and Members. I'm here to present AB 2058, a Bill on medical devices. AB 2058 requires a medical device manufacturer to include a disclosure on the device or its package materials on the known limitations of its effectiveness of the device due to certain characteristics of the patient, including, but not limited to, age, color, gender or race. The Bill has received bipartisan support and has minor absorbable costs to the Department of Public Health. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Miss Weber. Any witnesses like to express support? Any opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Great. Would you like to close?

Great. That enjoys a do pass Recommendation is out on a roll call with Mister Ta, not voting. Thank you. And I believe we have some Members of the Committee who have bills to present. Mister Grayson, would you like to go? And you are presenting AB 2017.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. Assembly Bill 2017 will hope to prevent fee creep in the banking industry by prohibiting state-chartered financial institutions from charging a non-sufficient fund or NSF fee to a consumer for a transaction declined instantaneously or near instantaneously.

The bill simply codifies in the state law a rule proposed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which in January ordered to--will proactively set regulations to protect consumers from abusive practices, as noted in the Committee analysis. AB 2017 is expected to have absorbable costs. With me here today, if there are questions or anything through the Chair, we do have a witness.

Thank you. And witnesses like to express support?

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Robert Herrell with the Consumer Federation of California. We're the sponsors of the measure. We'll just note that these are fees on declined transactions so the transaction doesn't actually go through. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other additional witnesses in support? Any witnesses in opposition? Bring it back to Committee. We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Well, I like this bill, Mr. Grayson. Good bill. Enjoys a do pass recommendation, and it is out with Republicans not voting. Ms. Pellerin, would you like to present? You are presenting AB 3221.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members, AB 3221 will make common sense updates to the Knox King act in order to improve the Department of Managed Healthcare's ability to enforce these laws and remove procedural hurdles to efficient and effective enforcement. AB 3221 stipulates that health plans must furnish records to DMHC in a digitally searchable format when possible. This simple change will reduce the amount of time and effort that Department staff spend reviewing records and locating relevant information when conducting surveys and investigations.

Furthermore, the Bill also empowers DMHC's Director to penalize plans if they fail to respond to records requests fully or in a timely manner. It will also make it easier for the Department to seek judicial relief on a consumer's behalf by allowing the Department to do so through an administrative law hearing, rather than through our overburdened superior courts, as is currently required.

Finally, the Bill provides clear direction that when DMHC uncovers health plan violations during the survey process, they can take enforcement action immediately. The Bill has minor and observable costs to the Department of Managed Healthcare. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Miss Pellerin. And any folks in the room wish to express support, please name, organization and position.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Dylan Elliott. On behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists, proud co-sponsor, as well as the California Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in support. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Any additional folks? Any folks with Schicks press opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Great. This enjoys a do passs recommendations. It's out on an a roll call.

Thank you so much.

Miss Calderon, would you like to present AB 2260.

Good morning, chair and Members. The Assembly Insurance Committee held several oversight hearings within the last year on the California Fair Plan, and the information from these hearings helped craft this bill. As the Fair Plan returns to its stated purpose of insurer of last resort, AB 2260 will require the Fair Plan to provide a report to the relevant policy committees that includes important specified information.

Additionally, the measure requires an agent who is a policyholder in the fair plan prior to the renewal to attempt to move the policy back into the admitted market. This bill is a worthwhile investment to help the Legislature determine whether the insurance market is stabilizing. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

And does your witness want to testify?

My consultant, just for technical questions, if there are any.

Thank you. Okay, great. Any folks in the room wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? We will bring it back to committee. Lots of motions in seconds. It's a popular one, Miss Calderon, that enjoys do pass recommendations out on an A roll call.

Thank you.

We are waiting for authors to come present. Assemblymembers Petrie Norris, Assemblymember Bryan for Mr. Kalra, Assemblymember Jones-Sawyer, Assemblymember Friedman, and Assemblymember Addis, and Assemblymember Bonta, if she's able. Oh, there is Assemblymember Laura Friedman. I believe you are presenting AB 1868. You've got your coffee and you're ready to go, but you're going to wing it and you're going to do great. We all have faith in you.

I was walking into the building and they said they're looking for authors, so I came straight here. But thank you so much for taking us, Madam Chair. This bill is a third of a series of bills that I've done with Habitat for Humanity.

This is a bill to try to open up more opportunities for home buying for low income people in California. To remedy an issue that's a problem in some of our communities, whereby when, and I'm going to let my witness, of course, talk about this, but basically in many counties, because when you're doing a project that's low income for sale project, you have got to make sure that the entity that is getting the mortgage doesn't have the taxing burden of that nonprofit, which is, you know, it's a larger entity, rather.

It needs to, they really, the appraisers need to look at the taxing ability of the person who, the low income person who's buying the property. And in many counties, that's exactly what they're doing. But in some counties, they're not. They're looking instead at the entity that's guaranteeing the loan. It's basically taking the second mortgage, which is often a city.

So I'm going to let my witness give you the actual more technical explanation for all of this, but with that, I would request an aye vote. This is a bill, as far as I know, with no opposition.

Good morning, Chair and Committee Members. Thank you for the opportunity to share with you today. My name is Debbie Arakel and I'm the Executive Director with Habitat for Humanity California and I'm here representing the views of our habitat affiliate statewide, operating and serving in 42 counties.

And we're honored to sponsor AB 1868 at habitats across California. We have built thousands of homes and we have, and we're in the process of building hundreds more. These are entry level, deed restricted homes to own.

Habit home buyers earn 30% to 80% of the area median income and we're proud to share that 83% of our habitat homeowners are black, indigenous, and people of color. Habitat is uniquely positioned in this homeownership space.

As a builder, a developer and a mortgage lender, we've had situations when property taxes were assessed with minimal consideration to the affordability and the deed restrictions for affordability placed on the properties. This results in over assessed values with much higher property taxes than estimated.

Rather than being proportional to the first mortgage, this requires a mortgage reduction in order to keep the home buyers monthly payments affordable. This burdens Habitat for Humanity, negatively impacting our budgets and leaving less funding to build more homes for homeownership.

This important bill codifies a best practice administered in many counties, and supports the assessor's commitment to consistent and uniform approaches to assessing deed restricted properties.

As a 501 C3 nonprofit affordable home builder and lender, we're honored to sponsor AB 1868 and join Assemblymember Laura Friedman to achieve equitable property taxation on affordable owner occupied homes. I'm grateful to the Chair and the Committee for your thoughtful consideration, and I urge an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. We are grateful for your work as well. With that, are there any additional folks which express support? Any witnesses in opposition? I believe we have a motion in a second, is that right? Yes. Okay with that, Ms. Friedman, this enjoys a do pass recommendations out on a roll call. Thank you. And we are looking. And we'll let folks add on to the consent calendar. Madam Secretary.

[Roll Call]

And we are looking for authors. Mr. Jones-Sawyer, Mr. Bryan for Mr. Kalra, Ms. Petrie Norris, Ms. Addis, Ms. Bonta. If anyone knows where they are, feel free to send them here.

Great. Mister Bryan is here and he will be presenting two bills today. One for Mister Kalra AB 2288 and one for Miss Bonta, AB 1991. Whichever you prefer to go first, Mister Bryan.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We're going to start with Miss Bonta, AB 1991. Good morning, Madam Chair and colleagues. The Legislature has enacted various scholarship and loan forgiveness programs that encourage healthcare providers to work in underserved areas in exchange for the financial assistance or loan forgiveness. However, we currently do not have data on how long they continue to work in underserved areas after the financial assistance ends. This Bill simply requires healing art boards that regulate healthcare providers to require, rather than request certain provider data.

Most importantly, the national provider identifier number which will provide HCAI with the data necessary to assess whether or not the programs are working as intended. I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Thank you. And would you like to testify as well?

He's on the next Bill.

Next Bill. Got it. Great. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Are there any folks in the room like to express support?

Youssef Miller, North County Equity and Justice Coalition in support.

Thank you very much. Any folks like to express opposition? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Mister Bryan, on behalf of Miss Bonta, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Great. That is enjoys a do pass recommendation. It is out on an a roll call. All right, now you will be presenting AB 2288 for Mister Kalra.

Oh my. Good morning Madam Chair and Members. AB 2288 would allow courts to order injunctive relief in a PAGA claim. Since 2004, PAGA has served as a critical enforcement tool for California's labor laws. Recognizing that reality, the state's labor enforcement agencies often lack the resource to investigate and take action against every violation.

PAGA remains one of the only tools workers have to remedy violations of their rights, and AB 228 will help ensure they see comprehensive, meaningful relief from unlawful workplace practices. As stated in the Committee's analysis, this Bill has likely no significant state cost. Mister Kalra, respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And would you like to present.

Good morning Chair and Members. Good morning Chair and Members. George Parampathu speaking on behalf of the California Labor Federation, we're proud to co-sponsor AB 2288 which will strengthen PAGA by empowering workers to use injunctive relief to order employers to stop their legal practices. This simple change will make PaGa more effective at no additional cost to the state. In fact, AB 2288 will raise revenue and reduce costs.

With injunctive relief, workers will be able to rein in the underground economy, which cost the state an estimated $10 billion a year in uncollected tax revenue. At the same time, when crooked employers are required to provide the state's basic pay, sick leave and occupational safety protections, thousands of workers will be able to thrive without enrolling in our state safety net programs. AB 2288 will increase labor law compliance and help the state balance its budget. For these reasons, we ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional witnesses and support?

Youssef Miller, North County Equity and Justice Coalition and activist, San Diego in support.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition?

Good morning Madam Chair Members. Ashley Hoffman, on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition of the state labor workforce development agency has said that a substantial majority of pocket cases brought by plaintiff attorneys have failed to protect the interests of both the state and workers. Our fiscal concern is that by expanding paga, we are inviting further abuse of this law, which will burden our already overly burdened courts.

And under a recent court decision, if the PAGA plaintiff were to lose in court, the State of California is actually now responsible for paying the cost of the prevailing party. Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. Marlon Lahar, on behalf of the California Restaurant Association in opposition thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Chris McKaley on behalf of the Los Angeles area of Chamber of Commerce, in respectful opposition to Mister Cholera's Bill.

Madam Chair. Darby Kernan, on behalf of Rediff and Leadingage California in opposition. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions? And do we have a motion? We have a motion. Mister Haney, a second Mister Arambula that enjoys a do pass Recommendation. It is out on AB roll call with Mister Villapudua not voting. Thank you. Let's see here. We are looking for Miss Petrie Norris, Mister Jones-Sawyer, and Miss Addis to come present.

And we will take or take votes on the consent calendar again.

[Roll Call]

Okay, the consent calendar is out. While we're waiting for authors, we will dispense with the suspense calendar. Madam Secretary, would you please read the suspense calendar?

[Second Reading]

The suspense calendar is deemed approved, and with that, let's see here. Ms. Addis, would you like to come present AB 2847?

Well, thank you, Chair and Members. Today I'm here to present AB 2847, the Ratepayer Transparency and Accountability Act. It's no secret that energy rates are skyrocketing, impacting real people across California. In just three years, residential electricity rates have increased 63 percent for PG&E customers and 52 percent for SoCal Edison customers. We know that families are struggling to pay their monthly bills, and with no end in sight, I would say all of us are left wondering just how high these bills will climb.

So it's time for us to provide relief. Residents of our state deserve to know two things: what to expect when they open their monthly energy bill, and that all of the costs included in their bill are fair and reasonable. Having this information can, in turn, lower costs for ratepayers. Under current law, California utility customers pay for utility infrastructure costs through our rates.

And typically, when utilities request permission to make capital project expenditures and recover costs from ratepayers, they are only required to provide information about the list cost of the asset and the impact on rates in the short term. This leaves California ratepayers in the dark without important information about how these choices will impact rates in the future years. So AB 2487 shines a light on the long-term impacts of utility choices.

It will require utilities to provide information about long-term cost of capital expenses upfront when making their case to the PUC. And this will ensure that the Commission, ratepayer advocates, and hardworking Californians have the information they need to determine whether utilities should be allowed to pass these costs along to customers.

According to the Committee analysis, the bill will have only minor additional cost to the CPUC, if any, to receive estimates from the investor-owned utilities. Joining me today to testify in support is Ignacio Hernandez from the Utility Reform Network.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. Ignacio Hernandez, on behalf of the Utility Reform Network. Return. We're the sponsors of the bill. I'll only add that we think it's critical to provide all information, even the cost and outyears to the CPUC when utilities are asking for financing of capital projects. It's information that they should have internally when they've decided to pursue this type of financing and long-term cost of assets, and so we just ask that information be provided.

Quick example: there was a recent application for the Ventura Compressor Modernization Project which was listed as a cost of about 570 million dollars, but over the life of the asset is actually closer to two billion dollars, the cost to ratepayers, and so that's the type of information that we think needs to be provided on the front end. And so we ask for your support.

Thank you very much. Any additional folks in the room wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? Do we have a motion? Motion and a second. And with that, would you like to close?

Just that I respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you, Miss Addis. This enjoys a do pass recommendations out on a B roll call. Thank you. And Miss Petrie-Norris, you are up. You are presenting AB 2292. And if you are Mr. Jones-Sawyer, you are next in line and you are our last author to present. So we would love for you to come to the committee hearing because I have a feeling Miss Petrie-Norris is going to go relatively quickly.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Pleased to join you today to present AB 2292 which removes a duplicate requirement that the California Public Utilities Commission consider a no wires alternative when permitting prospective transmission projects. In order to achieve our clean energy goals, we need to increase transmission across the State of California by 350% by 2045. Today, transmission projects are taking between 10 and 14 years to permit and get done. The reality is like, we're not going to hit our goals if we don't change that.

We're looking for responsible ways to shorten those timelines. This is a small but important step that ensures we're not cutting any corners in terms of environmental or safety review. We're just removing a duplicate of requirement. So with that, I am pleased to be joined by Jan Smutny-Jones, who will provide a little more context.

Thank you very much. I'm Jan Smutny-Jones with the Independent Energy Producers Association, representing utility-scale renewables that need transmission to get to consumers. This bill removes a redundancy in the code. The issues that the code covers are already being picked up in the integrated resource plan at the PUC, as well as the transmission approval process at the California ISO. So this will help move along transmission approval process and avoid any sort of conflicts in the future to help us more timely meet our greenhouse gas goals, which are, as the Assembly member pointed out, rapidly approaching.

Great. We have a motion a second. Any additional folks in the room wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? Would you like to close?

I'll respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. That enjoys a do pass recommendations out on. It's out with Republicans not voting. Thank you so much. And last but not least, Mr. Jones-Sawyer, you're up to the plate. AB 3089.

Thank you Madam Chair and Members, today I present to you Assembly Bill 3089, which offers the State of California formal apology for perpetrating the harms of human chattel slavery, and creates a permanent memorial of that apology in the state capitol.

When California joined the union, it did it so, declaring itself as a territory free of slavery. Yet since its inception, every branch of California government has knowingly and intentionally perpetuated the harms of human enslavement and its lasting effects on black Californians.

California has contradicted its pledge time after time. If we are to maintain the positive momentum toward truth and reconciliation, this apology in the plaque shows the world that we honor our commitment to rectifying past wrongs. Committee estimates costs likely well below 150,000.

Thank you chair and colleagues. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Move the second.

I'm going to let Mr. Bryan move this one. Mr. Ramble can be the second. Do we have any additional witnesses or any, any witnesses wish to express support?

Youssef Miller with Clean Earth 4 Kids, North County Equity and Justice Coalition, Interfaith Coalition for Earth Justice, Activist San Diego, FACTS, Grandparents for Action Brighter Beginnings and Center for Environmental Health in support of this bill.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? We have a motion a second. And would you like to close, Mr. Jones-Sawyer?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote thank you.

That is enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out with Republicans not voting.

Thank you.

And with that, I'd like to open up the hearing to comments by members of the public on any bills not presented in Committee today. Please be sure to limit your comments to your name, organization, if any, and your position on the bill. If anyone wants to step up to the mic, now is your opportunity.

Madam Chair Chris McKaley, on behalf of Humboldt Redwood Company, in support of Doctor Wood's AB 2276 on timber harvest plans, thank you.

Morning, Madam Chair Members. Carl London, on behalf of the California Physical Therapy Association, in support of AB 2289 thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair Members. Tim Schuster with the American Chemistry Council, opposed to AB 2761 thank you.

Meg Snyder, Axiom Advisors, on behalf of the Vinyl Institute, opposed to AB 2761 Hart, thank you.

Chris Kahn, representing Nightingale Education Group in support of AB 2578 Flora, dealing with nursing education thank you.

Good morning. Marlon Lara, on behalf of the California Restaurant Association, in opposition to 2761 thank you.

Lee Mantebury, representing Election Integrity Project California, in opposition of AB 2050.

Jeanette Felt, also representing Election Integrity Project of California, in opposition of 2050.

Youssef Miller, on behalf of Clean Earth for Kids Interfaith Coalition for Earth Justice, Moms Demand Action, Grandparents for Action, opposed to AB 2091

And Clean Earth for Kids North County Equity, and Justice Coalition Facts, Grandparents for Action, Brighter Beginnings, and Activist San Diego, in support of AB 799, 1876, 1895, 1943, 1949, 1970, 1975, 2054, 2138, 2161, 2176, 2214, 2244, 2250, 2279, 2308, 2410, 2531, 2716, 2761, 2818, 3089, 3136, 3155, ACA 16 and California nurses for environmental health and justice supports AB 1866 2716, ACA 16, and 3155.

Environmental Working Group supports 2244, CA 16, 2761, 2716, 3155, and lastly, the Center for Health, Environmental Health for Environmental Health supports 1799, 1895, 1975, 19752, 2214, 2244, 2250, 2279, 2716, 2761, 3089, 3136, 3155, ACA 16, and again, I just want to make sure it was registered that we oppose 2091. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate that. And with that, we will conclude today's hearings. We are adjourned.