Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

First, I'd like to thank Assemblymember Friedman for filling in for Assemblymember Grayson on this in this committee today, although she's not here and other members are not here as well. If they'd like to come join Appropriations Committee, that'd be great. So we could establish quorum.

Also AB 20066 Reyes, AB 2433, Quirk-Silva, and AB 2897 Connolly have been put over to the May 152024 hearing. We encourage the public to provide written testimony before the hearing by visiting the committee website at apro.assembly.ca.gov

Please note that any written testimony submitted to the committee is considered public comment and may be read into the record or reprinted. The hearing room is open for attendance. All are encouraged to watch the hearing from its live stream on the assembly's website at assembly.ca.gov/todaysevents.

We encourage the public to monitor the committee's website for updates. We will accept public comment on any bill placed on the suspense file by the committee today and for which the author waived presentation before the close of the regular order hearing.

Testimony on any such bill will be limited to statement, sorry, statement of name, organization, if any, and position on the bill. The committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total.

As you came into the hearing room today, the sergeants directed your attention to the rules 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 please observe those rules.

Please be aware that violations of these rules or other violations of general courtesy or decorum may be subject may subject you to removal or other enforcement processes. I think. Do we have enough for quorum? We do not. Okay. We're going to start as a subcommittee and hopefully colleagues will join so we can establish quorum.

We will deal with the consent calendar when we have. Oh, I think we may have enough for quorum. Let's take. I think we have enough. Okay.

[Roll Call]

Great. We have a quorum. Okay. Now we'd love to dispense with the consent calendar. We have a motion motion in a second. Madam Secretary, would you please read the consent calendar?

All room bills are ABs.

1790 Connolly, 1913 Addis, 1938 Gallagher, 2081 Davies, 20115 Haney, 20117 Joe Patterson, 2137 Quirk-Silva, 2164 Berman, 2174 Aguiar Curry, 21921 Carrillo, 2194 Joe Patterson, 2207 Reyes, 2228 Villapudua, 2243 Wicks, 2299 Flora, 2340 Bonta 2350 Hoover, 2367 Lee, 2373 Rendon, 2403 Bonta, 2424 Schiavo, 2430 Alvarez, 2434 Grayson, 2443 Juan Carrillo, 2453 Villapudua, 25331 Carrillo, 2567 Mathis, 2589 Joe Patterson, 2597 Ward, 2608 Gabriel, 2681 Weber, 2688 Berman, 2803 Valencia, 2832 Ward, 2843 Petrie Norris, 2865 Wendy Carrillo, 2885 Bauer Kahan, 2909 Santiago, 20914 Bonta, 2935 Maienschein, 2939 Rendon, 2961 Addis, 2962 Papan, 2987 Ortega, 2992 Stephanie Wynn, 3010 Bauer Kahan, 3030 Calderon, 3035 Pelerin, 3054 Berman, 3122 Kalra, 3184 Berman, 3220 Papan, 3223 Wilson, 3227 Alvarez, 3229 Lee, 3235 Bryan, 3240 Calderon, 3258 Bryan, 3261 Mike Fong, 3276 Ramos, 3286 Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection, 3290 Committee on Higher Education, and 2570 Joe Patterson.

Consent with amendments [Roll Call] \

Consent calendar is adopted we'll let folks add on.

I think we have a couple people still coming. We'll do the suspense calendar later. Let's now go to bills being presented. I think first up is Mr. Jones-Sawyer. So you're already sitting here ready to go. I believe you are presenting 2136? Is that right? Great.

And 3120.

Thank you.

AB 2136 Drug Checking Services, Chair and Members, I am proud to present AB 2136 which clarifies the legality of accessing and providing drug checking services in California. Researchers and community organizations throughout the state are offering to analyze small samples of drugs to reveal their components, including any traces of fentanyl.

Unfortunately, drug testing and analyzing for substance users is technically prohibited. This Bill clarifies the legality of assessing and providing drug checking services and providing legal, criminal and administrative protections for providers and participants.

AB 2136 has no significant state costs and can result in possible future cost savings to the courts and counties by reducing or eliminating future prosecutions and convictions for drug checking services. I'm going to let my witness allow them to introduce themselves.

Great. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Thuy Do and I'm with the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center and a proud fellow of the Solis Policy Institute at Women's Foundation California, we're sponsors of this measure. Firstly, we acknowledge and appreciate the Committee consultant for the analysis.

The Bill has a nominal cost saving the State Medical Dollars under the provisions of Section 17,000 of the Wellness and Institutions Code AB 2136 is a proactive measure to address healthcare needs through a cost saving means.

It is a pipeline for people to make safe decisions and receive the right access to healthcare treatment services and wrap around services with referrals that they need. Thank you so much.

Madam Chair and Members, Mike Carroll with the. I'm the retired policy Director for the Western Center on Law and Poverty, and I'm here today also in support of this Bill on behalf of the Women's Foundation of California, we urge and aye vote, thank you.

Do we have any other additional folks wish to express support? Name, organization and position?

Policy Alliance. A proud co sponsor.

Great. Any witnesses in opposition? Okay, we'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Okay. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Great. That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out on AB roll call with Miss Calderon and Mister Ta. Not voting.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. And now, if you'd like to present AB 3123.

I would love to. Chair and Members, I present AB 3123, which seeks to ensure that the ethics law that govern elected officials statewide apply equally. Excuse me. To the Los Angeles Metro Board of Directors. Today, LA Metro is still subject to a 30 year old law that imposes specific standards on board members regarding contract decisions and campaign contributions from contractors that can significantly differ from all other electives.

This has made it difficult for LA Metro to comply with the most recent ethics standards California has set in place. The bill has no potential minor absorbable costs to the state. With me in support of this bill is Chris McKayley on behalf of the LA Metro.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Chris McKayley on behalf of LA Metro. Thank you to the author for carrying the measure on our behalf. We think in addition to the minor absorbable cost to FPPC, there will be some minor cost savings to LA Metro itself. And thank your consultant for the thorough analysis and ask for your aye vote as the sponsor of the bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Any additional folks wish to express support? Any opposition? Bring it back to Committee. We have two motions in a second. Okay with that, Mr. Jones-Sawyer, it enjoys a do pass and it's out on a B roll call.

Thank you.

Next up we have Mr. Bennett, who is presenting AB 2079.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. AB 2079 is sponsored by the Department of Water Resources. It will help protect our drinking water and will help reduce the risk of land subsidence. As the bill of appropriations analysis notes, this bill has minor and absorbable cost. And with me today to provide technical assistance is Casey Shenkey on behalf of the Department of Water Resources.

Would you like to express any testimony?

Just that, yes, we are sponsoring the bill. We do acknowledge that the cost that we see to it would be minor, absorbable for us.

Okay, thank you. Any additional folks in the room wish to express support? Any folks in opposition? Okay, we'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? Oh, we do have opposition.

I'm still not quick enough.

Voice your opinion? Yes.

Clifton Wilson, on behalf of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District, the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors, and the Solano County Board of Supervisors, all in opposition. Thank you.

Thank you. You just got to walk faster, you know. We're moving quick.

Brenda Bass with the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition. We think there are more than insignificant costs.

Okay.

Gail Delihant with Western Growers Association in opposition. Thank you.

Good morning. Noelle Cremers with Wine Institute, in opposition.

Good morning. Alex Biering with the California Farm Bureau. Like Cal Chamber, we think that there are some additional costs here, but appreciate all of DWR's work on this and their openness.

Good morning. Andrea Abergel with the California Municipal Utilities Association. We're opposed unless amended.

Good morning, Chair and Members. Lilly Mackay, on behalf of United Water Conservation District, in opposition. Thanks.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Kendra Daijogo with the Gualco Group. On behalf of the Kern County Water Agency, Kings County, Kings River Conservation District, Modesto Irrigation District, and California Association of Wine Grape Growers. Opposed unless amended.

Thank you. Any questions from Committee Members? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Thank you. And this enjoys a do pass recommendation, and it is out on a B roll call. And next we have Ms. Bauer-Kahan, who I believe is presenting two bills, AB 1836 and AB 2877.

Yes, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. First, I'll present AB 1836. This bill allows deceased performers the right not to be reanimated without their consent of their will or their estate. The cost to the state will be minor and absorbable, low, just court costs. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Any folks wish to express support?

Shane Gusman on behalf of SagAftra, the sponsor, and in support of the bill.

Any witnesses in opposition?

Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Steve Cruz, on behalf of the Motion Picture Association. We're currently opposition, but working very closely with the author to resolve remaining issues around statutory exemptions in the bill for expressive arts to ensure that they're truly protected. And hopefully we'll get there as the bill moves to the floor. Thank you.

Thank you. Any. We'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? Okay, do we have a motion? Motion and a second. And Ms. Bauer-Kahan, that is out with Republicans not voting. Do pass recommendation.

Okay. Now, I'll present AB 2877, a measure which simply restricts the ability of companies to train AI systems using the personal data of children. The cost here are expected to be minor and absorbable by the California Privacy Protection Agency. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Any folks wish to express support?

Good morning. Jordan Curley on behalf of Common Sense Media, proud sponsors in support.

Great. Any witnesses in opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? Motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

That is out. Enjoys a do pass recommendation. Out on an A roll call.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. And we will go to Ms. Rubio next. And she is presenting AB 2735.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members, for the opportunity to present AB 2735, which would provide an alternative insurance option for our state's water providers. This explicitly permissive bill allows a water corporation to join a JPA for the purpose of insurance risk pooling in response to the current instability of the insurance market.

This would allow lower rates from a reduced insurance cost while taking pressure of the already jeopardized fair plan. This has received unanimous bipartisan support, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Any folks wish to express support?

Good morning, Chair and Members. Kaitlyn Johnson with Political Solutions on behalf of California Water Association. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional witnesses in opposition? Okay, we'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Okay. Would you like to close, Ms. Rubio?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out on a B, sorry, an A roll call. Thank you. We have Mr. Alvarez up next. You are presenting AB 1886.

Thank you, Madam Chair and colleagues. I'm here to present Assembly Bill 1886. Assembly Bill 1886 clarifies that HCD determines whether a local housing element is in compliance with the housing element law, and that if a project is submitted during this period of non compliance, it is eligible for a builder's remedy, regardless of whether the city reaches compliance before it is approved.

1886 is a good governance bill that doesn't establish new law or new tool, but it clarifies an existing one that the Legislature approved well over 30 years ago. AB 1886 is written to provide certainty and clear up the ambiguity in the law.

With AB 1886, it will be clear that the builder's remedy can and should be used as intended to build more housing in cities that are not doing their part in solving the state's housing crisis by not enacting a housing element. As the analysis points out, the costs of this bill are minor and observable. And thank you for your time and respectfully asked for an aye vote.

Thank you. And you have a witness here to testify?

Good morning. Nick Camarotta, on behalf of the California Building Industry Association, co-sponsor of the bill. Happy to support it. Just simply to point out that builder's remedy projects are at least 20% affordable units included in them.

There's nothing about a builder's remedy project that exempts them from CEQA, and that both of the provisions or the points made in the bill are the current opinion of HCD, the Attorney General, and a court in Southern California. Actually, several courts. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Additional folks in support of the bill?

Anya Lawler, on behalf of the Public interest Law Project and the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, in support.

Good morning. Mark Stivers, with the California Housing Partnership, in support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Karen Stout, on behalf of SPUR as well as You Be Action in support.

Great. Any witnesses in opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. Any? Oh, we've got opposition.

Ethan Nagler, on behalf of the city of Corona, opposed. And on behalf of the city of Rancho Cucamonga, opposed unless amended. Thank you.

Okay, we will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you very much.

I'd love to add myself as a co-author to your bill. Thank you. And obviously, I'm doing a bill in the space as well, so appreciate your good work in the housing space, Mr. Alvarez. And with that, it enjoys a do pass recommendation, Republicans not voting.

Thank you.

Thank you. We will now move on to Ms. Quirk-Silva. And you are presenting AB 2023, correct?

Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair and colleagues. Assembly Bill 2023 creates parity in the housing element review process. The housing element must be timely and reflect the community's plan to address their share of the region's housing needs.

Once the Department of Housing agrees a local housing element complies with the law, the housing element has a rebuttable presumption of validity. This means that HCD's finding of compliance receives deference in court, and any party challenging the element has a higher bar to meet to prove that HCD was incorrect.

However, there is no equivalent provision if a city or county does not meet the requirements set by HCD or does not take any action regarding its adopted housing element. This oversight undermines the state's effort to ensure that all jurisdictions adopt and enforce robust, legally compliant housing elements.

While the majority of California jurisdictions do adopt housing elements that HCD deems compliant, there are exceptions. As stated in the Committee analysis, AB 2023 has minor observable costs, but its impact will enhance the fact that we all have a part in addressing the state's housing crisis. With me today to answer any questions from the Committee is Anya Lawler, legislative advocate with the Public Interest Law Project. Press the button.

Anya Lawler with the Public Interest Law Project. Also on behalf of the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, two of the sponsors of the bill. Here in support and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Additional folks wish to express support?

Mark Stivers again with the California Housing Partnership in support.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? Appreciate the hustle.

Ethan Nagler, on behalf of the city of Rancho Cucamonga. Opposed unless amended. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. We'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? Motion and a second? Great. Would you like to close?

Respectfully asked for an aye vote.

Thank you. That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out on a B roll call with Ms. Sanchez not voting. Thank you, Ms. Quirk-Silva.

And wanted to also just go back to AB 2079, Mr. Bennet. Mr. Villapudua is not voting on that bill. But it enjoys a do pass recommendation with B roll with Mr. Villapudua not voting. Thank you. Oh, and Ms. Quirk-Silva, you have. Oh, that bill got put over to next week.

2433? Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. And we have Ms. Schiavo next. You're presenting AB 2015 and AB 3074.

Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Thank you for the opportunity to present AB 2015 to you today. I will keep this brief. AB 2015 aims to improve the nurse faculty approval process by allowing nurses to apply directly to the board for approval, making credentials portable.

This helps to increase the RN training pipeline and address our RN crisis, shortage crisis. As the analysis points out, the approval process will have no cost impact to the board. Additionally, the only registered opposition is moved to neutral due to amends taken in business and professions. Joining me is Marissa Clark, chief of legislative affairs for the Board of Registered Nurses.

Good morning, Chair and Members. Marissa Clark, proud sponsor of the bill, Board of Registered Nursing. Really just trying to improve upon our current faculty approval process for all involved and do not anticipate any cost for it.

Thank you. Any additional folks wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? Okay, we will bring it back to Committee. We have a motion and a second. And would you like to close?

Respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. And that enjoys a do pass recommendation. It is out on a B roll call with Mr. Patterson not voting.

And would you like to present AB 3074?

Yes, please. Madam Chair and Members, I'm grateful for the opportunity to present AB 3074 to you today. It would prohibit all public k to 12 schools in the State of California from using culturally insensitive Native American terms for schools or athletic names, mascots, or nicknames.

The appropriations analysis indicates this bill has minor costs. As a student athlete, I know how much pride in team spirit comes with mascots. Yet for far too long, some mascots have instead had a huge negative effect on students whose cultures and likeness are used as mascots. And I have a witness here to speak as well.

Thank you.

Hi. Good morning, Chair and Members. My name is Julia Estrada. I'm an alumni of Hart High School, a Native American myself, and I'm here to speak in support of AB 3074. As I went through the process in Assembly Member Schiavo's district to retire my former high school's Indian mascot, so I directly know the fiscal impact of that.

And most of the changes are miniscule. Changing the name of a yearbook, the name of the school newspaper, etcetera. And of course, the cost can vary per school depending on what type of memorabilia the administration puts out on a yearly basis. But it's a simple change that Native American peoples have been asking for for over 60 years. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Any additional witnesses and support?

Good morning, Chair and Members. Sam Nasher, on behalf of the Los Angeles County Office of Education in support.

Great. Thank you very much. Any witnesses in opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. We have motion and a second. Ms. Schiavo, would you like to close?

Respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. And that is out with a do pass recommendation with Republicans not voting. Thank you. And I know we are looking for authors here. If you are presenting in appropriations, and you are one of our colleagues, please feel free and come present your bill. And with that we will open up the consent calendar for folks to add on.

[Roll Call]

Thank you.

Okay. We will go now to Committee Members who are presenting their bills. We have Mister Aramula ready and waiting right there. It's like you've done this before.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. AB 2543 allows eligible business owners, including DaCA entrepreneurs, to register their business as a certified small business with the state, regardless of immigration status. This will allow them to continue to contribute to their local communities and to the state's economy. The analysis indicates no fiscal impact to the DGs. And I respectfully ask it for an aye vote.

Thank you. Do you have any witnesses in support? Any. Any folks in the room wish to express support? Any witnesses in opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. That enjoys a do pass recommendation that is out on AB roll call. We will go to Mister Bryan. Are you ready to present AB 2684? Actually presenting for yourself this time.

Good morning, Madam Chair and colleagues. I'm here to present AB 2684 a Bill that will require city and counties to account for extreme heat in their local hazard mitigation and safety plans.

This Bill has no cost, as stated in the Committee analysis, no cost to the state planning for extreme heat and hazard mitigation plans is important because it will allow these local jurisdictions to then draw down crucial federal funding, which is an important thing to look at as we're dealing with our own state budget crisis. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mister Bryan. Any witnesses in support? Any witnesses or folks which express opposition? Okay, we'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions? A motion and a second. Would you like to close? Great. That enjoys a dupass recommendation. It's out on AB roll call. With Miss Sanchez voting aye and Mister Ta not voting.

And with that, Miss Friedman, would you like to present your Bill? AB 1889 and AB 2297. Oh, sorry. I just. Sorry, Jane. We'll go to you next. I just saw you.

Thank you Madam Chair and Members. AB 1889 requires that local governments consider and minimize impacts to wildlife movement and habitat connectivity as part of the conservation element of their general plan.

In consultation with state and local agencies, this Bill will allow municipalities to have the benefit of our state agencies in helping them as they plan for wildlife migration. This will of course decrease the amount of times that constituents have to go through what mine have been going through to try to evacuate bears from their neighborhoods.

It'll hopefully help with the collisions that we have between mountain lions and deer on our roads. So this is meant to, as cities go forward to plan that if they have migrating animals, they find ways of planning around them and mitigating that impact. And with that, I have a witness today, Mari Galloway from the California Program Director with Wildlands Network, one of our sponsors.

Good morning, Chair Wicks and Members of the Committee, thank you for providing the opportunity to speak in support of AB 1889, the to Roam act. My name is Mari Galloway and I direct Wildlands Networks California program, where I collaborate with various stakeholders to promote wildlife connectivity across the state.

AB 1889 is critical to promote better local planning to preserve California's biodiversity. Though California has many protected areas, we're learning that wildlife still need room to roam between protected areas to find food, shelter, and mates and adapt to climate change.

Both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and state and federal 30 by 30 initiatives recognize that protecting and enhancing wildlife connectivity through preserving and reconnecting fragmented habitats is a foundational strategy to combat the climate and biodiversity crisis.

In addition, AB 1889 facilitates long term planning for development in areas that minimize conflict with wildlife, considering wildlife movement until not considering wildlife movement until the end of the process, unnecessarily setting up conflicts and even litigation between city developers and communities.

AB 1889 also gives cities tools to make development safer for wildlife when they are near corridors, such as incorporating wildlife friendly fencing, lighting, and clustering development. By considering wildlife connectivity early in the process, developers can make informed decisions leading to safer environments for both humans and wildlife.

AB 1889 is feasible with recent amendments extending the implementation from 2026 to 2022 and removing requirements for local governments to adopt a new element in their General plan in order to ease implementation. Finally, AB 1889 advances existing state policies.

The Safe Roads and Wildlife Protection act requires Caltrans to include wildlife crossings, where appropriate, on new or expanded roads and highways. This policy will help local governments coordinate with Caltrans to ensure that planned crossings don't become unusable.

I want to extend my gratitude to the Legislature and Governor Newsom for their invaluable investments in policies to connect California's landscapes through protecting wildlife corridors and building crossings. Please protect and enhance the value of these successes, and please vote.

Thank you. Any additional folks wish to express support?

Good morning. I'm Elizabeth Rosemay. I am a hunter and I very seriously support this Bill. Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. Christina Scaringe at the Center for Biological Diversity and strong support.

Thank you very much. Any folks wish to express opposition, we'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

I don't think this Bill has any opposition, I have to request an aye vote.

Great. Thank you. This enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out on AB roll call with Mister Villapudua not voting. Thank you. And would you like to present AB 2297?

Yes. Thank you. Medical debt is still a significant driver of bankruptcy in the State of California. And racial inequities are a big part of this. Over a third of Californians report having medical debt, and hospital debt alone makes up over 70% of all medical debt. In 2006, California created the Hospital Fair Pricing act to protect patients.

Many of you will recall our recent updates to the act, including my Bill 1020. While the protections we put in law are beginning to work, we're also learning of areas where we have to strengthen our code. AB 2297 clarifies that hospitals must review applications for charity care or discounted care without arbitrary deadlines.

It prohibits the use of liens on people's property to collect unpaid medical bills from financially eligible patients. Because we still have people losing their houses over medical debt when they're supposed to be offered charity care. And it eliminates the consideration of assets and eligibility, consistent with current Medi Cal rules.

It's important to remember that these patient protections apply only to uninsured and underinsured patients with an income under 400% of the federal poverty line. So we're talking about people who didn't get sick out of any choice of their own, and who can't afford to pay their bills.

For patients with limited resources, medical debt can be devastating, putting them at risk of housing instability and financial ruin. We've heard of people who lost work, lost their jobs over medical debt. As noted in the analysis, the cost to strengthen patient protections is minimal. Testifying in support today is Linda Nguy from the Western Center of Law on Law and Poverty.

Good morning. Linda Nguy with Western Center on Law and Poverty, proud cosponsor of AB 2297 which provides important consumer protections for low and moderate-income families against medical debt that are legal aid advocates are still reporting at minor and absorbable cost to the state. Urge your support. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional folks wish to express support?

Clifton Wilson. Clifton Wilson. On behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists, in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? We'll bring it back to Committee. We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close? Thank you. Okay. Thank you. And that enjoys a do pass recommendation? It's out on AB roll call with Mister Patterson and Mister Ta not voting. Next we'll go to Mister Gallagher.

You are presenting AB 2750 I believe.

Move the Bill.

We have a motion.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to present on AB 2750. It's an important Bill. It is a district Bill. I have this Rio Bravo biomass facility in my district, and we had legislation that passed last year that allowed for the reauthorization of these biomass plants under the bioram agreements.

Unfortunately, what happened here was the county actually put themselves out of attainment voluntarily, for reasons that nothing to do with Rio Bravo and its emissions, but rather for them to help reclassify their plans on meeting attainment.

Nothing in this Bill would take away from that, or take away from the community or the area of meeting attainment for their clean air goals, but it would save a very vital biomass plant that is in my district. We currently do actually meet attainment goals when you look at the emissions in the region. And so I would ask for your support for this important measure for my district. Thank you.

Thank you. Julie Malinowski-Ball on behalf of the California Biomass Energy Alliance, California has about 100 million bone-dried tons of forest material in the waste that we just don't know what to do with.

I'm here to report to you today that the bioram program is doing exactly as it was supposed to do when it was set up. It was supposed to get, the harder to get, the more expensive, but, but the more environmentally beneficial to move it out of the forest material at high volumes. This Bill keeps that program whole. So we support.

Thank you, thank you very much. Any additional folks wish to express support.

Madam Chair. Chris Micheli, on behalf of Humboldt Redwood Company, in support of the Bill.

Good morning. Megan Murray, on behalf of IHI in strong support.

Thank you. Anyone wish to express opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? I know we have a motion. Do we have a second? zero, we do have a second. Okay, great. Would you like to close?

Disastrous, aye vote. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. That enjoys a do pass. Recommendations out on an a roll call we have Mister Zbur. Up next, you are presenting AB 20917.

Good morning, Madam Chair Members. I'm here to present AB 20917 which is about gun violence restraining orders related to hate based violence.

AB 20917 updates and refines California's nation leading gun violence restraining order law to draw the civil court's attention to a broader set of risk factors in a court's analysis of whether temporary access to firearms should be restricted, the Committee analysis correctly notes that there are two key pieces of this Bill, both of which bring an extremely small fiscal impact.

First, the Bill spotlights additional risk factors for a court to consider in evaluating a GVRO petition. AB 20917 merely highlights specific factors that should play a role in that analysis, like whether there's evidence of stalking or evidence of threats of violence against particular groups, or evidence that a person violated an extreme risk protection order in a different state.

This Bill seeks to make it easier for civil court judges to have a more complete list of potentially relevant factors in front of them when analyzing a GVRO petition. If the Bill works as intended, it's possible that courts may spend some additional minutes considering the types of evidence listed in the AB 20917 but the cost from such analysis will be minor.

Second, the Bill clarifies that criminal history information already maintained by the Department of Justice may be released by two city attorneys or county counsel for the purposes of seeking a GVRO. These costs will also be minor and indeed may streamline the process through which city attorneys and county council represent local law enforcement.

In seeking GVROs, city attorneys and county council will access the criminal history information through their local law enforcement agencies, all of whom already have access. California courts must stay alert to the importance of considering threats of haste-based violence and threats of political violence when temporarily restricting access to guns, thereby preventing needless deaths and potentially saving lives.

When the warning signs are there and we see someone threaten violence because of hate or extremist ideology, we must use the tools necessary to prevent tragedy. AB 20917 is sponsored by Everytown for gun safety and co sponsored by the San Francisco City Attorney's office. I ask for your aye vote at the appropriate time.

And with me today is Rebekah Krell, Director of Policy and Legislative Affairs from the San Francisco City Attorney's Office, to provide additional information and assist with questions.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good morning, Rebekah.

Thanks. Thank you. Good morning. Rebekah Krell from the San Francisco City attorney's office. I want to thank the author for his leadership and Everytown for gun safety, for their sponsorship, and say thank you to Chair Wicks and Members of the Committee for Considering this Bill today, and happy to do my best to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Any additional folks in the room wish to express support?

Morning, Chair and Members Laura Lane, on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, co-sponsor of the Bill in support.

Thank you. Anyone wish to express opposition?

I'm Elizabeth Rosemay. I'm a two time violent crime survivor, and I have a CCW, and as already stated, I hunt I am opposed to this.

Thank you. We'll bring it back to Committee for any questions. Do we have a motion? Motion and a second. Would you like to close? Mister Zbur?

Thank you. Respectfully asked for your aye vote.

Thank you. That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It is out with Republicans not voting.

Thank you.

And we have Mister Valencia next. And then Mister Lowenthal and Miss McKinnor after that. Mister Valencia, you are presenting something. Move the Bill 2447.

I am presenting something.

You are presenting something?

Yes, Madam Chair and Members, AB 2447 will require that the CSU disclose specific data on their contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, investments, and any expenditure from a reserve account by July 1, 2026. Reporting this data will provide a better understanding of how the CSU's spending compares to their reserves, surpluses and investments, and operating budgets.

Greater transparency of these dollars will ensure that they are appropriately investing in students, faculty, staff, and of course, being fiscally responsible. Government transparency and fiscal efficiency is one of my top priorities, and I think this is a good step when it comes to the CSU system. So respectfully ask for a yes vote.

Thank you. Any folks wish to express support?

Priscilla Kudos here on behalf of the California Faculty Association, proud co-sponsors of the Bill and proud support.

Thank you. Anyone in opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. I think we had a motion and we have a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for a yes vote.

Thank you.

Thank you. Enjoys a do pass recommendation, that is out on an a roll call. We have Mister Lowenthal up next. You are also presenting something. Let's see. AB 3143.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members, I am pleased to present AB 3143, which prevents an employer from prohibiting or implementing a policy to prohibit an employee of a restaurant from receiving any gratuity that is paid, given to or left for an employee by a patron. As noted in the Committee analysis, cost to the state should be absorbable.

As a matter of fact, I opine that the state will gain money out of this because tipping is reportable income.

By allowing for tipping in all restaurants, AB 3143 allows food service employees to earn supplemental income and takes an important step towards closing the wage gap experienced by underserved and marginalized communities who are disproportionately represented in these low-wage jobs in the food service industry.

This is a common sense measure, long overdue in order to create parity for all food service workers in the restaurant industry.

Thank you. Anyone wish to express support? Any opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. We have a motion and a second. And would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal. That enjoys a do-pass recommendation. That is out with Republicans not voting. Thank you. And now we have Miss Mckinnor. You are presenting two bills, I believe. AB-2780 and AB-3206.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm here to present AB-2780 which will require carriers of passengers to notify and coordinate with the local jurisdictions regarding the disembarkation of 10 or more passengers who are likely to seek emergency shelter. As the analysis states, this Bill does not have a direct state cost. I respect.

I'm sorry, I'm going to bring up my witness.

Press the button to turn your mic on.

Thank you.

There we go.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. My name is Cynthia Gómez, Deputy Director of State Policy and Advocacy with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, CHIRLA. CHIRLA is proud to co-sponsor AB-2780 and are thankful for the leadership of Assemblymember Mckinnor.

In 2022, the State of Texas began sending buses of newly arrived immigrants to democratically controlled states, using vulnerable immigrants to advance an anti-immigrant narrative. In anticipation of Texas sending buses to California, CHIRLA established the Los Angeles Welcomes Collective.

The collective is a partnership between ally organizations in the City and County of Los Angeles to welcome immigrants with dignity and respect. The LA Welcomes Collective works to support newly arrived immigrants by coordinating food, water, and clothing for immigrants, coordinating medical screenings, preliminary case management and legal support, and support with family reunification.

Without advance notice, coordinating the support becomes incredibly challenging. AB-2780 which requires motor carriers transporting ten or more individuals in need of emergency services to provide an advance 24 hours notice to the destination, would not have significant fiscal impacts for the state, but would ensure that local governments and nonprofits have a sufficient amount of time to ensure newly arrived immigrants are welcomed with care and dignity.

We thank you for your consideration of this Bill and ask for your support.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to express support in the room?

Hello, Keelin Lowney, on behalf of Insurance Commissioner Riccaro Lara and the California Department of Insurance. We are proud co-sponsors of this Bill and ask for your support. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone wish to express opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion. A second. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. And that enjoys a do pass recommendation. It's out on a roll call with Mr. Ta not voting. And AB-3206, please.

Yes. I'm here to present AB 3206, which would authorize the Intuit Dome in Inglewood. To offer after alcohol sales under limited circumstances with the sunset of 2030.

As the analysis states, the cost of this Bill will be an absorbable amount since it is one per mint and the potential revenue from the permit application and renewal fees will offset the cost that ABC will have to spend. And with me here today is Awet Kidane, representing the Intuit dome.

Good morning.

I apologize. Good morning, Madam Chair, Members of the Committee. Awet Kidane with Lang, Hansen, Giroux & Kidane, representing Murphy's Bowl. I want to thank the author for carrying the Bill, thank the policy Committee for the amendments that add guardrails and want to echo what the author mention and underscore that these are minor and absorbable costs. And here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to express support? Any opposition? Wait, we have a question from Mister Bryan.

Yeah, I just want to know if either the author or the sponsors checked in with the Lakers about this.

Well, the Clippers are okay. I just want to answer that way.

Well said, Miss Mckinnor.

Any other questions from Committee Members? Great. And we do have a motion. zero, we need a motion. Motion and a second. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Miss Mckinnor. That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It is out with Republicans not voting, with Miss Sanchez voting no and Mr. Ta voting aye. Okay, we will go to Mr. Haney. You are here. Would you like to present AB-3068 as well as the Bill you're presenting for Mr. Manchine? AB-2971.

All right, so 3068 first. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. AB-3068 will accelerate office-to-housing conversion projects by creating a pathway for by right ministerial approval of office conversion projects. Ensuring more predictability and fewer barriers in an already difficult building process.

Will also provide flexibility to ensure that historic buildings are more economically feasible for conversion so that we can preserve our buildings for housing while making sure our cities diverse characteristics are kept intact. The Bill has minor and observable cost to the state.

And with me today, I have Steven Stenzler who represents the Bay Area Council, who will provide a quick testimony.

Good morning, Madam Chair Members. Steven Sensler with Brownstein on behalf of the Bay Area Council, here today in strong support of AB-3068. The council represents over 320 of the largest employers in the nine-county Bay Area and is focused on increasing the economic competitiveness of the regional.

As the Committee is well aware, the cost of housing is one of the largest impediments for business as they seek to attract and retain talent in the Bay Area, and by providing a streamlined and cost effective process for converting existing housing infrastructure, existing office infrastructure, into much needed housing.

The Bill is a critically important tool in the toolbox as we seek to address our housing affordability crisis. As the author noted, the costs are minor and absorbable, but the impact on the Bay Area economy, and by extension the California economy, will be outsized. And for that reason, we are in strong support for your support today.

Thank you very much. Any additional folks wish to express support?

Good morning. Karen Stout here, on behalf of SPUR and UB Action, We're in support.

Thank you.

Alex Schwarz with Brownstein, on behalf of the Housing Action Coalition. In support.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? Okay, bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion. Second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask your aye vote.

Great, and I'd love to be added on as a co-author, Mr. Haney.

Would be my honor.

And that is out enjoys a do passs recommendation. Out with AB roll call with Mister Ta. Not voting. And now you can present AB 2238.

Thank you Madam Chair and Members, I'm presenting AB 2971 on behalf of Mister Maienschein.

Sorry. Yes, AB 2971. Sorry about that.

Classified school employees are the people who keep our schools running smoothly, from serving meals to cleaning classrooms. Currently, there are no clear guidelines on how many classified staff Members schools need.

AB 2971 adds community colleges to an existing workgroup to help to have better conversations about how many staff Members schools need to keep students safe and supported. According to the analysis, this bill's fiscal effect is likely minor and is absorbable in one time General Fund costs for CDE. Thank you. And respectfully ask for an aye vote on behalf of Mister Maienschein.

Thank you. Anyone wish to express support? Any opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. We have a motion by Mister Fong. Second okay, would you like to close?

Respectfully asked for an aye vote. Thank you.

Great. That enjoys a do pass recommendation. It is out on a B roll call with Mister Patterson and Mister Ta not voting. And we now have Mister Fong presenting for Mister Low.

Good morning Madam Chair and Members. I am pleased to present Assembly Bill 2238 today on behalf of Assembly or Low. Assembly Bill 2238 would add the State Treasurer and the Director of the California Department of Tax and fee Administration to the Franchise Tax Board.

Currently, the Franchise Tax Board has three Members, the comptroller, the Director of finance, and a chair of the Board of Equalization. As a state's banker, cash and asset manager, and debt issuer, the treasurer should be involved in decisions affecting state revenues, especially given the state's budget deficit. This Bill has minor fiscal impact.

With me today is Patrick Henning, Chief Deputy Treasurer. On behalf of our state treasurer, Fiona Ma.

Good morning Commissioners Madam Chair, on behalf of the California State treasurer of Fiona Matt, we urge your support of this measure. It's a simple measure just to add the treasurer to the largest tax collector in the state. As the state's money manager, we invest dollars daily, making sure that we have plenty of money to spend on the money flow, as well as making sure that we invest the state's dollars responsibly into the future.

This measure will allow us to see the dollars that are coming into the state clearer than before and make sure that those investments are invested wisely. Thank you and we urge your support.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to express support? Any opposition? We will bring it back to Committee. Any questions? We have a motion, a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

I respect the ask for your aye vote.

Thank you that enjoys a do pass recommendations out on a B roll call.

Thank you.

Okay with that, I believe we are done with bills presenting being presented today. I'd like to dispense with the suspense calendar. Madam Secretary, would you please read the suspense calendar?

[Suspense Calendar]

Okay, the suspense calendar is deemed approved. We will now go to public comment. Want to open the hearing to comment by Members of the public on any bills not presented in Committee today? Please be sure to limit your comments to your name, organization, and your position on the Bill. If there's anyone in the room like to state this, please approach the microphone.

Madam Chair and Members Greg Cook representing Northern California Power Agency in support of AB 1834. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Members Oscar Sandoval with the Center for Healthy Communities in strong support of AB 2150.

Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Kent Leacock with Mainspring Energy in support of AB 1921. Thank you.

Mark Stivers of the California Housing Partnership in opposition to both AB 3186 Petrie-Norris and AB 3190 Haney. When we increase costs to affordable housing developers, those developers simply need to ask the state for more subsidy. And so both those bills create significant cost pressure on the General Fund.

Thank you.

Graciela Castillo-Krings here on behalf of the California Housing Consortium, just echoing what my colleague said. Very concerned about and have strong opposition against AB 3190 and 3186. Thank you.

Good morning. Christina Scaringe with the Center for Biological Diversity in Strong Support and proud sponsor of AB 3233. I've also been asked to note support for AB 3233 from 350 Bay Area Action protect Monterey County NextGen California Physicians for Social Responsibility LA and stand LA and that's it. Thank you.

Good morning. Vanessa Cajina with KP Public Affairs on behalf of Vision y Compromiso, the statewide network of promotoras and community health workers, proud sponsors of AB 3149 and ask for your consideration when the time is appropriate. Thank you.

Hello. Sarah Dukett on behalf of the Rural County Representatives of California, the California State Association of Counties in the Urban Counties of California, California in opposition to AB 2404. Lee sympathy strike striking AB 2557 Ortega local contracting and AB 2751 Haney employer communications. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Aaron Avery with the California Special Districts Association, also on behalf of the League of California Cities, respectfully opposed to AB 2557 AB 2404, and AB 2751. Thank you.

Good morning, chair and Members. Valerie Johnson with the Campaign for College Opportunity in support of AB 1780 and AB 2057. Thank you.

My apologies, Christina Scaringe from the Center for Biological Diversity. Again, I also need to note opposition to AB 3238. Thank you.

I'm Elizabeth Rosemay. I'm a two time violent crime survivor. I have a cCW and I hunt. And so I am opposing. 2907-2519 it looks like. 2518-3064 I'm also opposed. 2827. I'm supporting.

Thank you, madam.

Chair Members Joe Devine with Platinum Advisors on behalf of ABM, in opposition to 2364. Thank you.

Thank you. And with that, our meeting is adjourned.