Assembly Standing Committee on Governmental Organization

Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to governmental organizations. I will go ahead and get the meeting started at 1:35. Sergeants can you please call the absent Members And I do see our first Bill is Mr. Ramos and he is not here. So item number two is Haney. AB 342. Mr. Haney, we are starting as a Subcommitee because we don't have quorum.

Should I start? Thank you Madam Chair and Members. I want to start by thanking you and your staff and accepting the Committee amendments. This Bill will now have a five year sunset as well as a study that looks at the impacts of this as well as a slightly delayed implementation.

I think those are all great amendments and I appreciate it. AB 342 is a bipartisan pro business, pro local control Bill that allows local governments to create hospitality zones, areas of cities, often in downtowns where there is a focus on supporting businesses and attracting visitors, residents and tourists.

Within these zones, cities will be authorized to permit specific venues at their discretion to extend their last call times to 4am solely on Fridays, Saturdays and on official state holidays. Many of California's downtowns are struggling to return to pre pandemic activity and many are recovering at slower rates than cities across the country.

California is also experiencing a decline in hosting large conventions in recent years, with some events relocating to other states. Convention center events have the potential to generate close to $587 million, making their relocation a devastating setback to the local economy. Tourism spending in the Bay Area generally hasn't returned to pre pandemic levels.

Hotel revenue is down and the possibility of a national economic downturn could only further hurt our economy and tourism industry. Under current law, cities and downtowns are limited in their ability to attract tourists and support businesses.

It is crucial for our cities to think beyond the standard nine to five business hours and instead broaden their appeal to bring people into the city and support a more diverse set of businesses.

As the state prepares to host five major worldwide events over the next three years, cities need every tool to be able to capitalize on this moment. We have the super bowl next year, the super bowl the following year, the World Cup, the Olympics.

All of these events require us to welcome millions of visitors and to ensure that our businesses and our economy can benefit. AB342 will allow but not require the creation of hospitality zones that local governments have full control over.

They can determine which areas can they can extend within this and I want to emphasize that this will only be for Friday, Saturdays and official state holidays.

The Bill requires that local governments consider factors such as public safety, transportation accommodations, proximity of convention centers, cultural, historic and economic appropriateness of the zone and it allows local governments to create special events hospitality zones as well.

For some of those events that I mentioned, a 4am last call allows a more staggered closing time for businesses in a hospitality zone and a more consistent flow of people returning home from venues through the night and can help to mitigate safety concerns. As I said, this is a pro business, pro local government measure.

It doesn't require anyone to do anything, but gives them the flexibility to be able to support the economic needs of their communities.

It is narrower than some of the previous iterations and and because of that, as I've said to many of you, this Bill has a neutral position from the California Association of Highway Patrolmen and I appreciate their partnership.

We have a large coalition in support from all over the state, the California Chamber of Commerce, the chambers from Long Long Beach, West Hollywood, Los Angeles, the California Hotel and Lodging Association, the Teamsters, Uber Lyft and many, many others who want to see this opportunity for their cities.

With me to testify in support of the Bill is A.J. rocito from the California Hotel and Lodging Association and Chris McKelly on behalf of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce and the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce.

Good afternoon Madam Chair and Committee Members. My name is Aj Rossitto and I'm appearing on behalf of the California Hotel and Lodging Association in support of Assembly Bill 342. This measure would create hospitality zones enabling local governments to better compete for tourism against other domestic and international markets.

Broadly speaking, California's tourism industry drives $150 billion in travel related spending, generates $12 billion in state and local tax revenue, and employs 1.2 million Californians. As with any business, California's tourism industry, both in aggregate and and individual components, competes with other tourism markets around the world.

Part of that competition relies upon legislative action which ensures local businesses have the flexibility they need to meet and exceed evolving guest demands and expectations. In major markets across the US and internationally, alcohol sales are permitted for up to 24 hours.

Within these markets, local controls exist to manage consumption in accordance with local values and to maintain safe environments. However, in California, this flexibility is absent, much to the disappointment of leisure business and leisure tourists.

While many factors play into the selection of a destination to visit, the establishment of a well managed hospitality or entertainment zone can be an influential factor. AB342 solves this issue by creating a rigorous framework for the development of those hospitality zones and incentivizing adoption of that framework through extended hours opportunities.

Hotels located in cities which rely upon their reputation as 24 hour cities to attract international visitors also have an emergency opportunity. Specifically, several several urban markets are set to host large events in the coming years, each of which offers the cities unique opportunities to demonstrate renewed experiences to an international audience.

While the direct travel demand impacts of the events are unclear, the opportunity to showcase the regions provides a real forward looking benefit. Implementation of hospital or hospitality zones as proposed by AB342 would help facilitate that benefit.

We believe that this measure offers a balanced pathway to help California tours and destinations remain competitive and attract visitors from around the world. For these reasons. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair Chris Micheli on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. We're excited by AB342 and appreciate the Assemblyman's authorship of this measure.

You know, LA is set to host three big events, eight of the 14 World Cup games next summer, the 2027 Super Bowl and of course the summer 2028 Olympics and Paralympics. And we want to ensure a thriving downtown Los Angeles.

We think that AB342 will definitely revitalize the nighttime and weekend economy downtown and hopefully will help us realize the full potential of our urban core and renew the vitality of downtown Los Angeles. It also we expect it will help us attract more major conventions and other events, particularly at the downtown Los Angeles Convention Center.

And hopefully a Bill like this will help us strengthen our hospitality and tourism ecosystems benefiting the hotels and restaurants throughout the Los Angeles region to ensure that we continue to be a world class destination for these world class events. So we would appreciate your support and aye vote on this measure. Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you.

Any witnesses in support in the audience.

Thank you Madam Chair and Members. Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association and strong support.

Amelia Zamani on behalf of the California Travel Association and strong support.

Maddie Hyatt, California Civil Liberties Advocacy and strong support.

Dylan Hoffman on behalf of the California Arts Advocates in support.

Laura Bennett on behalf of Uber in support.

Timothy Burr on behalf of Lyft in support. Thank you.

Keshav Kumar with the Bay Area Host Committee and the six World Cup matches. We'll have in the Bay in 26. In strong support.

Madam Chair. Members Alex Torres on behalf of the sponsor of the California Nightlife Association. Also on behalf of the Bay Area Council representing 340 employers in the Bay Area and also on behalf of the National Independent Venue Association representing independent brick and mortar music venues and festivals in California. Thank you.

Ben Bliman, owner, operator of Harrington's Bar. And Grill in San Francisco and the. President of the board of California Nightlife Association in support. Thank you.

Eddie Navarrete with the Independent Hospitality Coalition Los Angeles in support. I've also been asked to voice the support of BISFED, Los Angeles County, the Central City Association, West Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, the Venice Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Los Angeles Historic Bid Mulvaney's, Midtown Sacramento, Tabala Rasa, Silver Lake Los Angeles Barrow Henry's Silver Lake Los Angeles Footseed Cypress park LA here's looking at you in Koreatown Los Angeles LA Sorted Pizza Chinatown Downtown Laita Downtown Los Angeles 7 Grand Bar, Downtown Los Angeles and also our one year 100 year old Kohl's French Dip in Downtown LA. Thank you.

Anthony Schlander, Anthony Presents and Cal nightlife in full support.

Bob Simpson, local business owner, Townie Malt Mash Parkside Davis, Member of Downtown Sacramento Partnership and Kyle Knights in full support. Thank you. Thank you.

Julio Marmal Townies strong support.

My name is Gabriel Docto. I'm co founder of the San Francisco Venue Coalition as well as chapter leader for the National Independent Venue Association and Director of Operations at August hall in San Francisco in full support.

Thank you.

Chris Rosa on behalf of Silicon Valley Leadership Group in support.

Thank you. Any anyone else in support? Okay, main witnesses in opposition please come up. Thank you. You all have two minutes each.

Good afternoon Madam Chair, Members of the Governmental Organizational Committee. My name is Raul Verdugo, I live in Los Angeles and I am Director of Advocacy with Alcohol justice. We oppose AB 342 alcoholic beverages, hours of Sale hospitality zones because it threatens to undermine our successful statewide uniform 2am last call service.

This public policy has served California for 90 years, mitigating devastating alcohol related harms, supporting law enforcement and reducing excessive drinking throughout the state. It has given our communities a sense of security and stability. We cannot afford to lose. AB 342 poses a significant threat.

While presenting a measure of local control, its language allows any city or county to designate itself as an entire zone. This provision has already led to dissatisfaction in world class cities like Chicago and New York. These cities have experienced increased violence and DWI crashes, straining local law enforcement resources. We cannot afford to let this happen to California.

This Bill fails to address a critical aspect, public safety. It lacks sufficient protocols to ensure our safety such as cordoned off or demarcated locations, mandated DUI checkpoints or local city and or county facilitated sobering centers. In the wake of the pandemic, we have seen a significant surge in DUI fatalities with a staggering 19,335 deaths across the state.

Should AB 342 happen, this number could rise even further. California alcohol legislation, like tobacco legislation, should be predicated on the fact that while no one denies anyone access to alcohol for sale or otherwise, California law should seek a balance. To preserve the lives of those who choose not to drink, we ask that you please vote no on this Bill.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Members Fred Jones, on behalf of California Council on Alcohol Problems, which is led by pastors dealing with issues dealing with alcoholism. We are also a Member of the California Alcohol Policy alliance, statewide group of mostly grassroots organizations concerned about the impacts of alcohol in their local communities. We oppose the Leno bills.

We oppose the Wiener bills. We're here to oppose Assemblymember Haney's Bill. In all due respect, we are very concerned about extending last call into the morning commute hours. Even on weekends, people work Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. We think this law, the last call, which most states have, serve our state and our communities well.

We also think, even though it's ironic that this is one of six bills that have come before you in the last eight or nine years, that this Bill in particular is premature given last year this body, the Assembly, that is, but also the GO Committee and the Legislature and Governor has passed a trial run, a very unique trial run in one specific venue which the Governor in his signing message, which is reflected in your analysis, ask the CHP to do an analysis of the impact of that later closing hour.

Let's see what that says before we open this up statewide. It's a rare opportunity to have that pilot program and see its real world impact because before you pass something statewide. So for those many reasons, we object to this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Any Members of the audience in opposition, please come up. State your name and position.

Hello. Isabella Argueta with the Health Officers Association Of California in opposition. Thank you.

Assembly Member Tom Lackey from the 34th Assembly District. I oppose this certainly deadly Bill.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Devin Ford, on behalf of TCB holdings in opposition.

Thank you. Any others? In opposition. Thank you. Bringing it back up to the Committee. Questions from our Committee hearing? None. Let's see. Assembly Member, you may close.

Thank you so much again to you, Madam Chair, and, and to the Committee. And you know, we'll continue to. To work with folks, but I think you heard from the business community all across the state how much they need this and how much desire there is to be able to have this opportunity. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Assemblymember Haney. I will be supporting your Bill today with the inclusion of the amendments detailed in the analysis and the continuation of specified provisions from previous bills that this Committee has supported. The the implementation date has been changed to June 12026. As long as the regulations are implemented.

I I do recognize the potential economic and tourism benefits this legislation offers, particularly to California's nightlife and hospitality industry. However, it is important imperative to ensure that the proper safeguards are in place to address critical public safety concerns associated with extended alcohol service hours.

I appreciate that the Bill incorporates strict oversight measures, enhance law enforcement input to mitigate potential risk, mechanisms for community feedback, transportation planning, and ongoing evaluation methods. Balancing economic growth and public safety is essential. I do believe that your Bill represents an important effort to strike this balance between economic benefit and public safety.

I do appreciate the hours of conversation that we have had trying to hash out this particular balance and I know that it is important to our hospitality folks and it is also important to our public safety community.

However, I believe that we have done everything possible to make sure that we did place those safeguards so that we can protect public the public safety by not allowing it to be indefinite, just Fridays and Saturdays on holidays, but also making sure that our public, our law enforcement is involved and engaged to make sure that that all of these rules are followed.

So with that, since we do not have a quorum, we will hold the the voting until we have a we can establish a quorum. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. Next I have I saw Assembly Member Patel is here. Item number three welcome. You may begin as soon as you're ready.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. Today I'm happy to present AB684 to the Committee. This Bill aims to enhance transparency in higher education by making the University of California Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools meetings subject to the Bagley Keene Open meetings Act.

On July 7, 2023 UC Bohrs decided that Data Science would no longer be an acceptable substitute for Algebra 2 in UC Undergraduate Admissions.

In further meetings, the UC boards revised the definition of advanced mathematics, requiring all K12 districts, charter schools and private schools to resubmit their math courses for evaluation to ensure that they meet UC standards for Algebra 2 content or the new Advanced Mathematics definition.

This decision was extremely difficult for public schools and schools around California to quickly adjust to because many classes for the upcoming school year were already selected by summer.

The possibility of students getting rejected due to no fault of their own, but because a class they took in high school no longer met A through G requirements is very concerning to me. Unlike the UC Regents UC Boards is not bound by the Bagley Keene act, meaning their meetings are closed to the public.

Minutes produced by UC Boards, which are often altered after release, indicate that decisions frequently made by UC faculty do not conform to the course content standards and frameworks set by the State Board of education for K12 courses. The UC holds constitutional autonomy and is the only public higher education institution operating free from Executive or legislative control.

As a public trust entity, it must adhere to the Bagley Keene Open Meetings act, obliging it to conduct open meetings that allow public stakeholder and policymaker engagement regarding its decisions. Contrary to claims made during the joint oversight hearing, UC Boards indeed makes unilateral admissions decisions without public consultation.

Moreover, UC Boards can alter admissions conditions by changing which courses are deemed approved A through G. Any modification to A through G requirements should involve public feedback and be implemented in a manner that permits high schools to adjust their courses accordingly.

Abrupt changes implemented without notice severely hinder a high school student's ability to qualify as a UC applicant. Such changes are essentially marginalizing students who would benefit from a UC education. Here to testify on the measure is Aditi Hariharan, President of the UC Student Association and I respectfully ask for your aye vote thank you.

Thank you. You have two minutes.

Hi. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. Thank you for having me. My name is Aditi Hariharan and I'm the President of the UC Student Association which represents all UC undergrads. And I want to thank Dr. Patel for authoring AB684 which will bring transparency to the UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools, also known as Boers.

The importance of shared governance, consultation with students and stakeholders, and accessibility and decision making processes has been extremely important, especially with our advocacy to ensure all people have access to higher education with incredibly prominent challenges to students lives and situations over the past five years alone, such as Covid, racial and social injustice, college access and attainment gaps, budget cuts, and much more.

Meeting students where they're at is crucial. AB684 holds our UC Admissions Board accountable to holding open meetings, especially in the democratic decision making of changes to admissions criteria that would have drastic implications for certain students over others if decisions are made hastily or without transparency.

This would foster greater engagement from stakeholders when changes to high school admissions or A through G requirements are being considered and allow for better designed policies that serve all students more fairly and equitably.

While A through G is common knowledge among education experts, many high school students do not fully understand the steps needed in order to be UC eligible through no fault of their own barriers, such as some schools not offering the necessary courses for students to meet their full A through G requirements, schools struggling to Fund students courses adequately in high school, and admissions being a complicated system for folks who are unfamiliar with higher ed to navigate, especially first generation or immigrant students.

Studies also show that only 44% of Black high school graduates in 2023-24 were supported to complete A through G. And moving this goalpost would only increase the gaps that many students already face to their college going potential.

On behalf of UCSA and the prospective students seeking the opportunity to attend one of the campuses of California's amazing higher ed, we respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Any Members of the audience and support. Okay. Seeing none. Anyone in opposition? Seeing none. I'll bring it back up to the Committee for any questions, comments. We don't have quorum yet.

Thank you for bringing this Bill forward. Appreciate the efforts and the testimony that you share with us. A real thing. A real thing. I experienced some of that many years ago when I went to college. But I know that that is also a real thing happening right now.

So thank you, Assembly Mayor Patel, for bringing this and thank you for sharing your personal experience. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Okay, Assembly Member Patel, you may close.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote when the time is appropriate.

Thank you. Okay. We'll continue with Assembly Member Addis. Thank you. You may begin.

Well, thank you, Chair. You. You have two dons on the up here testifying today, but I'm here to present AB1008, which will make a modest increase to the number of alcohol licenses available in San Luis Obispo county to account for the significant growth in tourism.

On sale General eating place licenses authorize the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption on a licensed premise. And these licenses are commonly used by businesses including restaurants, hotels and resorts. An existing law limits the number of on sale General licenses that may be issued in a county based on population growth.

And while San Luis Obispo county growth does not justify the issuance of new licenses, tourism activity in the county is substantial and has now surpassed 7 million visitors a year, which is huge for San Luis Obispo County. Actually, an increase in the number of tourism related businesses like hotels and restaurants is creating demand for additional licenses.

But unfortunately we have not had any new licenses since 2014, preventing existing restaurants from expanding their offerings. So AB1008 will allow alcohol and Beverage Control to issue up to 10 new on sale General licenses in Slo County with up to five new licenses per year.

And joining me today to testify as a close friend and colleague, San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg.

Thank you. You have two minutes. Welcome.

Thank you. Thank you very much. It's good to see everyone. On behalf of San Luis Obispo County, I want to thank Assembly Member Addis for bringing this legislation forward and to all of you for hearing our story, which is, you know, probably a common story somewhat, but yeah, it's been quite a while. We.

3,000 new hotel rooms coming online in the next so New Years and again, seven and a half million visitors. We are a population of over only 280,000 people, but we have seven and a half million visitors that are looking for opportunities. And we have new resorts coming.

And even for the small businesses, this is a really important piece. This is a revenue driver. We have more distilleries coming online. And so all of this comes into play right now and we just appreciate the attention to the matter. I think that's. That's pretty much it. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Any other witnesses in support?

EzraH Chaaban, on behalf of the California Distillers Association in support and thanking the author for carrying this legislation. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other Members in support? Okay. Anyone in opposition? Okay. Seeing none. Any questions or comments from the Committee? Seeing none. Assemblymember, you may close.

Yes, I just want to say that in addition to prevent price spike on the secondary market. Licenses under this Bill may not be sold or transferred for a price greater than the original fee and that this will drive job growth, generate tax revenue, and encourage continued development in our tourism economy. And with that would like to ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. We don't have a quorum, so when it's we have a quorum, we'll go ahead and vote on the measure. Thank you, Assembly Member Hart. Assemblymember, you may start when you're ready.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm pleased to present AB 1039, a Bill to require state agencies to provide nonprofit organizations up to 25% of funds in advance for all new contracts and grants.

With the passage of my Bill, AB590 in 2023, we paved the way for fair and equitable access to state grants and contracts by allowing advance payments for up to 25% of total awarded funds.

This critical reform addressed cash flow issues for many nonprofits that struggle with the state's reimbursement model, reducing financial strain as nonprofits continue to provide services. In CAL FIRE's advance payment report to the Legislature, the agency found that advance payments for the Forest Health and Wildfire Prevention Grants program were were essential in funding fire prevention projects.

Some grantees reported that they would have been unable to afford to Fund the work without these advances. While many state agencies have implemented advance pay, many others have not. This can deter under resourced organizations from even applying for state funded projects due to the lack of upfront capital.

The nonprofits who do apply must either take on high interest loans to cover startup costs or delay or scale back their programs. AB 1039 addresses this by requiring that state agencies offer up to 25% of all new grants and contracts in advance pay.

The Bill will also require the existing state grant portal to list these advanced pay opportunities in the amounts available. Transparency and advance pay offerings will provide consistency and allow more organizations to apply for funding. By providing more opportunities for advanced pay, AB 1039 reaffirms California's commitment to supporting its nonprofit partners and strengthening our communities.

There is no opposition to this legislation and speaking in support of the Bill is Danielle Batista, Policy Director of United Ways of California, and Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey, CEO of California Behavioral Health Association.

Thank you. You each have two minutes. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, Chair Rubio and Members. I'm Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey, CEO of the California Behavioral Health Association. We are a diverse statewide advocacy organization representing mental health and substance use disorder clinics across the state.

State including nonprofits Our Members collectively serve 2 million Californians with behavioral health needs in your district. CBHA's Members contract with state and local agencies to support healthcare services for communities in needs. So our Members know firsthand the positive impact and the financial stability of advance pay when partnering with government.

So we're urging your support of this measure today so that nonprofits can focus on delivering high quality services to needy Californians without the burden of taking on additional financial risk to launch programs and services. Advance pay has been proven to help reduce the expense and the stigma associated with contracting with states, especially for smaller, less resource entities.

According to a recent study by the Little Health Hoover Commission, 58% of nonprofits said that full or partial payment upfront would most help their organization apply for and manage grants and contract payments. 40% of nonprofits said that concerns about payment timing were a reason that they chose to not even apply for state government contracts and grants.

It doesn't have to be this way. Advance payment is a proven way to improve the non nonprofit sector's effective partnership with the state. State and right now, demand for non profit services is only increasing, especially as our Members experience looming threats that target vulnerable populations supported by non profits every day.

So we really would love for you all to help give non profits the tools that they need to thrive and assist them each year. Advanced payment is. It should be a right. It's a simple solution and we request your support of this important measure. Thank you. Thank you.

And before we continue, I would like to establish quorum before we lose. Folks, as you all know, everybody's running around today, so Madam Secretary, can you call the roll on the quorum?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. You have two minutes. Continue to continue, please.

Hi. Good afternoon, Chair Rubio and Members. My name is Danielle Bautista and I'm the Policy Director at United Ways of California, a nonprofit that advances the health, education and financial security of local communities alongside our 28 local United Ways throughout the state via our programs and policy.

We are also a proud Member of Cal Nonprofits statewide policy alliance of more than 10,000 organizations. United Ways California is also to support AB 1039 by Assemblymember Hart.

This Bill is necessary to support nonprofits because many state grants and contracts remain as assemblymember mentioned reimbursement based two years after the enactment of AB590 which authorized advanced pay practices but did not mandate them. And this means that the state's current advance pay policy lacks uniformity and consistency in implementation across all state agencies.

We can do better and nonprofits deserve better. AdvancePay is a simple and proven way to ensure nonprofits can secure a reasonable percentage of contracted funds up front. Under AB 1039, advance pay will be mandated for all new state grant and contract opportunities with nonprofits and tribes starting January 1st of 2026.

AB 1039 increases equity and for nonprofits and ensures they can better serve local communities. And now more than ever, we need to strengthen the essential partnership between state and nonprofits in our mutual efforts to deliver the highest quality services to the people of California.

As folks know, the Federal Administration is targeting the nonprofit sector, our funding, our right to operate and ultimately vulnerable people and places that we serve. It is critical now that the state unlock access to state to these resources.

AB 1039 is part of the California Contracting Equity Initiative and since late 2022, Cal nonprofits and more than 550 nonprofits and community leaders have continued calling for leveling the playing field for nonprofit partnerships with state government. Improving how state government contracts with nonprofits should be a top priority. I urge your yes on AB 1039 and thank Assemblymember Hart for his continued leadership and support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Moved by Assemblymember Soria, second by Assemblymember Fong. Those in the audience in support, please come up.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Members Jennifer FearingSacramento Advocate for the California Association of Nonprofits. Pleased to be a sponsor of this measure.

Also want to convey the support of our firm's clients, Community alliance with Family Farmers, the Green Lining Institute and I was asked to share the support of the League of California Community Foundations and the Richmond Community Foundation.

Thank you.

Rachel Mueller on behalf of my three clients and I was asked to provide support for four others. Clients included Cameo Network, Rural Community Assistance Corporation, Self Help Enterprises in support. Also in support CalPride, Juma Ventures, Micro Enterprise Collaborative of Inland Southern California, Pathpoint. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Members Rebecca Marcus representing Leading Age California in support. I've also been asked to speak in support by the following organizations, Chrysalis Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative, Meals on Wheels Orange County, Radiant Health and MOVE Santa Barbara. Thank you. Thank you.

Good afternoon Madam Chair and Members. Dylan Hoffman on behalf of California Arts Advocates and Support.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Jorge Cruz with The California Behavioral Health Association and support.

Thank you. Anyone in opposition? Okay, seeing none. I'll bring it up to the Committee. Any questions or comments, Assembly Member Sorria?

I just want to thank the author for this piece of legislation. I think that as expressed by those here that are your witnesses, it is critical that our small, especially our small nonprofits, do have the advanced people payment. I know that many of the small nonprofits always struggle with cash flow.

And having this advanced payment will help these small nonprofits, who are also doing critical work, actually be able to compete for some of these dollars and be able to provide some critical services to communities, especially communities like mine, that are much more underserved and rural. And there's few nonprofits.

And so I know sometimes that becomes a challenge and a barrier for them applying because they have to provide the service up front without getting paid. And so I know that's been an issue in my district that has been extremely important for the limited non profits that we have. So thank you for this legislation. Would love to.

Today we'll be supporting. I would love to be added as a co author if there's a chance. Thank you.

Absolutely. We'll make that happen. Thank you.

Any other comments? Okay, we have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, can you call the roll, please?

[Roll Call]

Okay, that has enough votes, but we'll leave the roll open for added Members. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Then before we continue, we'll go ahead and vote. I need a motion on the consent calendar and a second. I have a motion by Assembly Member Soria. Seconded by Assembly Member Pacheco. Madam Secretary, can you call the roll on the consent calendar?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. The consent calendar has enough votes, but we'll leave the roll open for absent Members. Assembly Member Ramos, can you present item 1, AB221? This Bill maintains support. Support. Thank you, Assemblymember Ramos. You may begin as soon as you're ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Today I'm presenting AB 221, which streamlines the existing Tribal Nations Grant Fund process to provide annual equal distribution grants to all federally recognized tribes that are limited or non gaming.

From the year 2000 to 2024, gaming tribes have contributed more than 1.8 billion in revenue sharing trust Fund payments to eligible limited or non gaming tribes. However, the current process has struggled to provide the consistent broad funding needed to sustain tribal government programs and services.

With this Bill, eligible non gaming and limited gaming tribes who apply will receive annual equal grants of $600,000 or at least 85% of the money available in the Fund. These grants would allow for tribal governments to Fund effective self governance, economic development and other vital tribal programs and services.

I believe that it is important to emphasize that the monies in the Fund are paid by tribes for the purposes of assisting other federally recognized tribes. With me today to testify in support of AB221 is Erica Schintz, Chairwoman of the Cahuilla Band of Indians, and Mike Lopez, Vice Chair of Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians and C. Niga, Vice Chair. Also here for technical support if needed, is Michelle Lee and Susan Jensen.

Thank you. And you each have two minutes.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Chairman Rubio and honorable Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony and strong support of Assembly Bill 221 by Assembly Member James Ramos. My name is Erica Schenck and I serve as a Chairwoman of the Cahuilla Band of Indians in DeAnza, California.

I am honored to offer this testimony not only on behalf of my tribe, but also on behalf of the Tribal Alliance of Sovereign Indian Nations, which I proudly represent today. TASIN is an Association of Southern California tribal governments and is pleased and proud to co sponsor AB221 alongside the California Nation's Indian Gaming Association.

The legislation before you is the result of extensive consultation and dialogue among tribal leaders. Statewide conversations focus on how to strengthen the Tribal Nation Grant Fund and ensure it fulfills its promise to California's non gaming and limited gaming tribes.

As Chairwoman of a revenue sharing trust Fund eligible tribe, I can speak firsthand to the importance of these funds. We apply these critical dollars across a range of essential tribal government programs that support our people and preserve our sovereignty and cultural heritage.

It is important to note that the TNGF is funded entirely by contributions from gaming tribes for the sole purp of benefiting other federally recognized tribes that do not operate or operate only limited gaming facilities. AB221 would strengthen this commitment by providing annual distributions of approximately 600,000 per eligible tribe or 85% of the available Fund.

In addition to increasing support, this Bill includes several key reforms that will enhance fairness, flexibility and effectiveness. AB 221 expands eligibility to include revenues divert from Class 3 gaming secretarial procedures ensuring EAL. I'm sorry equal treatment of tribes operating under federal process Establishes two distinct grant types Pacific Distribution Grants thank you.

Good afternoon Chairman Rubio, Vice Chairman Davies and Members of the Committee. My name is Mike Lopez. I have the honor of serving as Vice Chairman of the California Nation's Indian Gaming Association, also known as CNIGA, as well as Vice Chair of the San Ynez Band of Chumash Indians in Santa Barbara County.

On behalf of the 54 federally recognized Member tribes of the California Nation Association, I'm here to voice strong support for AB221. This important legislation, co sponsored by Sinaga and the Tribal alliance of Sovereign Indian nations will assist non gaming and limited gaming tribes by providing increased financial consistency and stability.

AB221 is a result of hard earned consensus among tribal leaders. This Bill will streamline the existing Tribal Nation Grant Fund process to provide annual equal distribution grants to all federally recognized tribes that are either non gaming or operate fewer than 350 Class 3 gaming devices.

Under AB221, eligible tribes would receive annual equal grants of $600,000 or at least 85% of the money's available in the Fund. This would augment the existing 1.1 million distribution from the revenue serving Trust Fund, an amount which has not increased in over a quarter of a century.

Guaranteed revenue will also create increased financial stability for tribal projects going forward. Consistent income as opposed to one time grants can be better used for leverage and lending institutions for tribal government projects. Thus, AB221 is not a handout but rather a vital instrument to create wealth and opportunity among a greater number of tribes.

My tribe has been paying has been a payee into the Revenue Sharing Trust Fund as well as Tanjif TNGF since inception. We are proud of the contributions made to provide eligible tribes with vital resources that assist in building strong tribal governments. The Sanya Ynez Chumash Indian stands behind this commitment along with the 54 Member tribes of CNIGA. For these reasons we respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Okay, any other. Any Members in the audience and support, please come up. State your name and position, please.

Pilar Quintana here for the Barona Band of Mission Indians in support, thank you.

Kris Anderson, California Chamber of Commerce and support. Thank you.

Paula Treat on behalf of Pechanga Tejone and the Calusa Indian tribes in support, thank you.

Frank Molina on behalf of ... Nation in support, thank you.

Alex Alanis on behalf of the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake in support, thank you.

On behalf of the Yurok tribe in support, thank you. Thank you.

Nick Brokaw here on behalf of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Madam Chair ... here on behalf of the Pechanga Band Luiseno Indians in support.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Pam Lopez on behalf of the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachio Cuts tribe and the Tule river tribe in support. Thank you.

Andrew. Governor. On behalf of the Moronga Band of Mission Indians in support, thank you. Assembly Member Gonzalez on behalf of the 12 sovereign nations and as a Chinao Tyo in support, thank you.

Thank you. Anyone in opposition? Okay. Seeing none. Questions or comments by the Committee? Assembly Member Bryan,

Are you taking co authors?

Yes, sir.

Thank you, sir. Move the Bill.

There was already a motion by Assembly Member Soria. And Assembly Member second by Pacheco. Any questions or comments?

I also wanted to see if I could add myself as a co author. I think this is a great piece of legislation. I want to thank Assembly Member Ramos for bringing this forward. I think similar to even our previous Bill that we just heard. I think this is a great way to help these tribes. So proud to support it today.

Thank you.

Thank you. Assembly Member Sanchez.

I too would like to be added as a co author.

Thank you.

I too would like to be added as a co author. Thank you. A

Thank you so much. Madam Chair, I too would like to be added. Thank you.

Assembly Member Dixon and Assembly Member Davies. Got it.

Why wasn't this Bill on consent? Madam Chair, can I also be added as a joint author?

Who else? Did we get Everybody, Madam Chair.

Me too. Mr. Ramos.

Who is that? Michelle Rodriguez.

Okay, well, anyone that does not want to be added, please. Thank you. Mr. Ramos. With that you may close.

Well, thank you so much and the Members for joining on as co authors and a joint author. It means so much to be able to move forward with this venue to ensure that that the different funds are reaching the tribes that are deeply in need. I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

We have 14 votes and we will leave the roll open for added Members. So the Bill is out. Thank you. I see. Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez. Please come up. Thank you. Assemblymember, you may begin as soon as you're ready. Have a motion by Assembly Member Wallis, a second by Assembly Member Sanchez.

I'll make this brief. Good afternoon, Chair Rubio and Members of the Committee. As a proud Marine Corps veteran, I'm proud to present AB795, which would establish the California Commission on the United States Semi Quincentennial to plan and coordinate commemorations of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution.

I believe our state should be leading the nation in highlighting the achievements and progress our nation has made Its nearly 250 years. The California spirit is the American spirit. Californians innovation, entrepreneurship and progress are the drivers that have helped shape our entire nation.

This is an opportunity for us to come together in a bipartisan MANNER to celebrate 250 years of the outstanding achievements of the American people. By establishing this Commission, we can bring Californians of diverse backgrounds to the table to highlight the history of our great nation and reflect on America's founding principles of liberty, equality and democracy. Thank you for your consideration. I am joined today by Dennis Revell, who can answer any technical questions that you might have.

Thank you. If you have any comments, you have two minutes.

Yes. Good afternoon, Chair Rubio. Vice Chair Davies. Dennis Revell. And I'm proud to be here on behalf of our client, TNT Fireworks, a co sponsor of AB795. I'm also here as someone who has spent decades working on civic and public engagement initiatives throughout California. AB795 establishes the California Commission on the United States Semi Quincentennial.

A temporary, independent and entirely privately funded Commission to plan and coordinate our state's participation in the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. We view this Bill not as ceremonial but as structural.

It gives California what more than 42 other states already have, a dedicated nonpartisan body to ensure that Americans America 250 is celebrated locally, inclusively and transparently. At the recommendation the State Treasurer's Office, AB 795 was recently amended to provide even greater fiscal safeguards.

The semi quincentennial Fund will be held by the state treasurer, but all financial oversight and certification of sufficient funds will rest with the state controller. And the Commission can only activate if enough private and federal dollars are raised with no General Fund impact whatsoever.

We also commend Governor Newsom and first partner Siebel Newsom for launching California 175 Initiative. That effort is important and AB 795 is designed to complement, not duplicate, their work. The Governor's Working Group is an Executive initiative focused largely on agency coordination.

AB795 creates a statutory public facing Commission that includes legislative appointees, nonprofits and private sector partners to amplify California's voice and ensure grassroots engagement across every region. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other Members of the public in support? Caseing? None. Anyone in opposition? Okay, no opposition. Bringing it back up to the Committee as Assembly Member Soria.

Thank you. Madam Chair. I just had a question to the author and maybe a consideration. Thank you for bringing this piece of legislation forward. I think many of us up here have already supported a previous version. I know it's been attempted before. Given the short timeline. Have you considered maybe putting an urgency clause?

Because if this Bill goes into effect and you're successful getting it out of Appropriations Committee, which seems where the Bill has gone stuck before, essentially you'll have six months to have something put together. Since I think the celebration is in 2026. Right.

So I would just strongly urge you that if you are successful with the legislation that you add some urgency. That way it could be implemented sooner and you have more time. So just. Just a point to. To make and a suggestion, but I'm happy to support today this Bill.

Thank you. I'll definitely put that in.

Okay. Any other comments or questions? Okay. Hearing none. We have a motion in a second. Madam Secretary, can you call the roll?

[Roll call]

The Bill has 13 votes. It gets out. But we'll leave the roll open for additional Members. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez.

Thank you. Assembly Member, you may begin as soon as you're ready.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you. Madam Chair and Members, I'm pleased to present Assembly Bill 828 which would create a new original neighborhood restricted special on sale General alcohol license. These license would be issued by the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control specifically to restaurants located within designated census tracts in the City of Los Angeles.

I want to thank the Committee for their Diligent work on on this Bill and I am proud to accept the Committee amendments. Under current state law, ABC is limited to issuing only one new on sale General license per 2,000 residents in each county.

Once those limits are met, the only way to obtain a license is to purchase the one. Purchase one on the open market where prices are driven up significantly due to limited supply and overwhelming demand. When new licenses do become available, they're awarded through a lottery system.

And even if a business is fortunate enough to win the the license will still cost around $20,000. In Los Angeles, purchasing a license on the open market can cost more than $200,000, not including broker free fees which typically add another 10% onto the 200,000 alone.

These costs don't include the time, the time consuming and expensive local permitting process. Conditional units permits can cost upwards to $20,000 and often take up to a year to even get that approval, delaying restaurants ability to even open and generate the revenue that's much needed, especially hiring for folks as well.

The current state licensing structure fails to consider the size and scale of LA's tourism economy. Since 2020, tourism has steadily increased. In 2023 alone, Los Angeles welcomed 49.1 million visitors.

These numbers will not only grow, but they will continue to grow as Los Angeles prepares to host major national and international events including the 2026 FIFA World cup, the 2026 NBR All Star Game, the 2026 U. S Women's Open and the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

AB 828 tackles the dual challenges of cost and access by authorizing the ABC to issue up to 12 new neighborhood restricted licenses per year starting in 2026 until a total of only 40 have been issued.

This Bill will offer much needed relief to restaurants, support economic development and provide small businesses, especially especially minority owned restaurants in historic neighborhoods like Koreatown, Little Tokyo, Chinatown, Historic Filipino Town, PICO Union and Boyle Heights. With a critical opportunity to grow and to thrive.

With me this afternoon to provide testimony and support is Eddie Navarrette with the Independent hospitality coalition and Mr. Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association.

Thank you. You each have two Minutes.

I'm Eddie Navarrette with the Independent Hospitality Coalition serving as Executive Director speaking for a very diverse community of neighborhood restaurants, cafes and similar establishments throughout the Los Angeles County landscape.

Post pandemic businesses have been faced with some of their largest challenges from increased costs on everything, environmental challenges and layers upon layers of outdated policies that have limited the resiliency of our community. These layers of limitation create barriers for our underserved communities, making the American dream less attainable.

AB828 will deliver opportunities to our community by providing more liquor license supply through a localized priority drawing process Currently in Los Angeles. If you are a business, no matter your size, obtaining a liquor license can cost you up to 40,000 just in local entitlements including professional fees.

Then if you aren't one of the one of the 25 winners of the priority drawing or liquor license lottery, you will need to enter into a tumultuous, risky purchase agreement with a desperate closing restaurant and a liquor licensed broker that if the transaction goes through, will cost you up to $150,000.

150,000 plus local entitlements does not support equity within the small business community nor is it conducive to stabilizing or incentivizing our local economic ecosystems.

The census tracts outlined in AB828 are targeted to help incentivize much needed economic growth that will help revitalize areas like our downtown Chinatown, Koreatown, Filipino Town, important areas that will support tourism for a world class city that is Los Angeles. On behalf of small business owners, local chambers and community associations, we look forward to your aye vote.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Madam Chair Members, Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association also here in support of the legislation. Our restaurants in Los Angeles County have had more hardship than the rest of the state. There's no question, as you heard from me before, restaurants everywhere are on precarious landscape.

And I think, you know, certainly when it goes back to the pandemic, many Los Angeles County restaurants are reeling back from the pandemic. We had the most severe closures of any jurisdiction there. We've seen a hollowing out of the downtown cores. Obviously the writers strike, the disastrous fires, a number of things continue to plague the Los Angeles restaurant community.

In terms of foot traffic. All of this has driven foot traffic down. So I think this Bill is one of several measures that is focused and looking to try to restore some of that vibrancy we've seen in downtown Kors and beyond in this case.

And I think, you know, while these licenses can be transferred within the Same district. This is really going to help get at that over inflated secondary market cost that as Mr. Navarretti suggested, gets in the way of access. It's an economic barrier.

And the restaurant community is super, super proud of being the most diverse employer in the country and certainly in this state. And if we remove those economic barriers to those alcohol licenses, it'll be one of several steps to help restore economic vitality to these areas we care so much about. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other Members of the public in support? Okay. Anyone in opposition? Okay, I'll bring it back up to our Committee. Any questions? Comments? Assemblymember Davies?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to say thank you for bringing this Bill forward. I know how tough it is in the hospitality industry and restaurant industry and especially when you're looking at the overhead and the.

The profit margin is almost 1% that this will definitely help new owners have that opportunity because it really is so expensive when you get into the license. So I'd love to be co author and great job. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments? Assembly Member Pacheco?

I would second that and would love to be added as a co author. Thank you.

Okay, I need a motion and a second.

Mr. Bryan, I think made the.

Did we have it?

Okay, I'm sorry. Davies and Pacheco. Okay. I have a motion by Assembly Member Davies and a second by Pacheco. Thank you. Madam Secretary. Call the roll, please. Yep.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Members, AB 828 is more than a policy. It's a pledge to our neighbors, our dreamers and our risk takers who light up our evenings and feed our souls. It says we believe in you and that we've got your back.

Let's give our small businesses the room to breathe in our neighborhoods and the space to flourish. Together we will keep the heartbeat of Los Angeles County strong, steady. Thank you. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote and co authors.

Thank you. Madam Secretary. Can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. The the Bill gets out with 12 votes and we'll leave the roll open for additional Members. Thank you. I see. Assemblymember Hoover. Thank you. You may begin.

All good? All right. I appreciate the opportunity to present AB 1246. This Bill simply allows California craft distillers to sell 4.5 liters per customer instead of the current limit of 2.25 liters.

Currently, craft distillers cannot meet consumer demand for visitors due to a selling limit, the existing selling limit, or what is the equivalent of three bottles per person. In contrast, there are no purchasing limits at wineries, craft breweries, grocery stores, where distilled spirits can be sold in unlimited quantities.

Currently, direct to consumer shipping for craft distillers is set to sunset on January 1, 2026 which will significantly reduce the revenue for craft California craft distillers.

So we've introduced AB 1246, which will continue allowing these distilleries as small businesses to thrive by increasing the number of liters they can sell to each customer when purchasing at their tasting rooms. This Bill also addresses a technical issue related to brandy barrel storage.

AB 1246 will allow craft distillers brandy barrels to store for aging purposes, to take place at any winery, and to allow distillery distillers to sell 4.5 liters per customer instead of the existing limit as well. With me today is Ezra Chabon and Chris Stellar with the California Distillers Association. Craft Distillers Association. And I'll turn it over to them.

Thank you. You have two minutes each.

All right. Ezra Chaaban, on behalf of the California Distillers Association, I want to thank Committee staff for their thorough analysis, Madam Chair, for your continued support of the industry and Assemblymember Hoover for offering this really critical lifeline for the industry which has been struggling. This bill gives them the ability to meet consumer demand. I'll turn it over to Cris Steller, the Executive Director of our Association.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you, Madam Chair and the GO Committee. Cris Steller with the Amador Dry Diggings Distillery up in El Dorado Hills. And I'm the Executive Director of the California Distillers Association.

And we appreciate you looking at this issue because both, even though it doesn't seem like a big issue on the brandy barrel storage, it helps a lot of small wineries that are having a difficult time right now, as well as the distillers that do that work for them.

So by being able to move some of these products around during the years long aging process, it helps dramatically the increase in sales limits helps us in a number of different special situations that go on in our tasting rooms. So thank you.

Thank You. Any Members of the audience in support? Okay. Are there any primary witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Any Members of the public in opposition? Okay, I'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments by the Committee? Okay. I have a motion by Assemblymember Davis, a second by Assemblymember Wallis. You may close.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Secretary.

[Roll Call]

We only have 11 votes. The Bill is on call and we'll be calling absent Members, so thank you. Okay, Mr. Ta, perfect timing. Your turn to present.

Thank you very much.

Actually, Mr. Ta, before we have some Members that have to leave, can we just go through the. The votes and that way, get those out of the way so that we can continue? Thank you. Okay. Madam Secretary, can you open the roll, please?

[Roll Call]

Okay. For item number two. I need a motion and a second moved by Assembly Member Wallis.

[Roll Call]

Okay. That Bill has eight votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent. I'm sorry. The Bill is on call. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Okay, that Bill has it has the votes and we'll leave the roll open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

That Bill has 14 votes and we'll leave the roll open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Okay, the Bill has 15 votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members. For Assembly Member Addison's Bill, we need a motion in a second motion by Assembly Member Salache and a second by Assembly Member Berman.Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Okay, the Bill is out with 12 votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Okay, we'll leave the roll open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Okay, that Bill has 14 votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members. And that's it. Okay, Mr. Ta, Mr. Ta, your turn. And thank you for being patient.

Madam Chair. Those all for me that I missed earlier?

We have a couple that we have. We'll go back. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair, Member of the Committee. AB 1420 is a Bill that aim to improve the trends and management of state owned land. Currently, state agencies are required to report surplus land, but only if it's ready for sale.

This will expand the requirement by directing the Department of General Service to include all surplus and underutilized state land in their report regardless of whether they are current, plan to sell or repurpose it. It is a responsibility of the Legislature to ensure land taxpayer dollars are spent efficiently.

California is facing significant budget deficit in which surplus state land present an access that could bring in revenue or be repurposed to address the state housing rights. Additionally, public state owned land owned by the state does not generate any tax revenue and require Fund for maintenance.

By ensuring that all surplus and underutilized land is report AB 1420 give legislators a full picture of state access, allowing for more informed decision making. This Bill will help identify unnecessary properties and potentially create revenue opportunities, which is a top priority for our state. AB 1420 is a common sense approach that will unlock new potential for California.

I'd like to introduce Matty Hyatt with California Civil Liberties Advocacy to testify in support of this Bill. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Matty Hyatt from California Civil Liberties Advocacy. We are taking a civil liberty stand on this Bill. We are in strong support. We want to thank Assembly Member Ta for bringing this forward and Adam Bowman gis Leg Director for his hard work on this.

We see this as a critical accountability and transparency measure that goes beyond routine land audits. This Bill is about aligning California's underutilized public assets with our shared goals of economic recovery, affordable housing development and responsible governance. As an organization dedicated to advancing civil liberties. My mic's too high. I don't know if you guys can hear me.

As an organization dedicated to advancing civil liberties and taxpayer rights, CCLA supports this Bill because it corrects an avoidable blind spot in current state asset reporting. The Bill does not mandate action, but it gives the Legislature another tool to have a complete picture of public lands that are currently underused or not being utilized at all.

It closes a bureaucratic loophole. Current law requires agencies to report land only when it's required or when they're ready to dispose of it. So it kind of seems like a chicken or the egg thing.

They're ready to dispose of it, but the public doesn't know what to do with it if we don't, if we're not reporting it to the Legislature or to the public. So I also took a look at another angle on this. We have Executive order N0619.

Governor Newsom signed that, I think it was in 2019, to expand the land inventory available for assessment under California's affordable housing initiatives. So by expanding the reporting requirements, it will also enable the state to identify lands and properties that could be opened up for public use. So without further ado, I'm here to help answer any questions.

Housing rights, housing crisis. We see this as a small incremental step in helping further. At least give us the data we need to address those issues. Thank you.

Any Members from the public in support? Okay. Any primary witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Any Members of the public in opposition? Okay, I'll bring it Back up to the Committee. Any questions? Comments? I have a motion by Assemblymember Dixon. A second by Assemblymember Wallace. Assemblymember Ta. You may close.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. That vote or that Bill has 13 vote tickets out and we will leave the roll open for absent Members. See Assemblymember Ortega. That will be our last Bill. Have a motion by Assembly Member Bryant. Second by Assemblymember Salache. Assemblymember Ortega, you may begin as soon as ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members for the opportunity to present AB957 today. AB957 is a vital and logical step towards forward in California's ongoing commitment to combat the devastating impacts of tobacco use. As a state, we've made significant progress by removing smoking rooms from restaurant, increasing age requirements, banning flavored tobacco products and more.

But our work is not finished. AB957 takes a targeted approach by removing tobacco products in licensed pharmacies across California. Pharmacies are not just any other corner store or retailer. Simply put, if we would find it unacceptable to sell cigarettes in a Doctor's office, it should be equally unacceptable to sell them in pharmacies.

I'd like to thank the chair and Committee staff for helping me propose author amendments that align the Bill with its original intent by prohibiting tobacco sales in retail locations that contain a pharmacy. The witnesses that I have Here today are Dr. Lisa Kroon from California, licensed pharmacist and Professor of clinical pharmacy at UCSF.

With me also is Dr. Robin Corelli, a California licensed pharmacy and a Professor of clinical pharmacy at ucsf. And to answer any technical questions you might have, is Timothy Gibbs, representing the the American Cancer Society.

Thank you. You each have two minutes.

Good afternoon, Chair Rubio and Committee Members. I'm Dr. Lisa Kroon.

Turn on your microphone, please.

Good afternoon, Chair Rubio and Committee Members. I'm Dr. Lisa Kroon, Professor at the UCSF School of Pharmacy and co Director of our Fontana Tobacco Treatment Center.

Today I'm speaking on my personal capacity as a pharmacist and Clinician pharmacies are an integral part of our healthcare infrastructure where patients go to get well, to get medications, to treat health conditions, and to receive health information and preventative services such as vaccinations.

In my opinion, there is no place in a setting that promotes health to also sell a product that unquestionably causes death and disease. In 2008, San Francisco became the first US city to adopt a tobacco free pharmacy. Law faculty at the UCSF School of Pharmacy played a leadership role.

We prepared a position statement in favor of banning tobacco sales in all pharmacies. And I provided testimony at that time as well. Much of this movement is coming from within our pharmacy profession. Our 62,000 Member American Pharmacists Association has issued a policy calling on pharmacies and places with pharmacies to stop selling tobacco products.

Further, our oath of the pharmacist includes a provision that says, I will embrace and advocate changes that improve health care. And that is why I'm here. Today, 90% of Americans live within five miles of a pharmacy. As the most success, the most accessible health care provider. We are actually providing smoking cessation services and furnish nicotine replacement therapy.

In closing, there was a time when gift shops and a hospital sold tobacco. Now one couldn't imagine this. I hope we can get to a time where we couldn't imagine that a pharmacy would sell tobacco. Thank you for your time and thank you, Assemblywoman Ortega.

Thank you. My name is Dr. Robin Corelli. I'm a licensed California pharmacist and Professor of clinical pharmacy at UCSF. I speak today on my own behalf to express strong support for this Bill. In addition to the points raised by Dr. Kroon, I want to emphasize California's extensive experience with tobacco free pharmacy policies.

Across the state, from unincorporated San Diego County to unincorporated Del Norte County, 65 local policies have been enacted by city councils and boards of supervisors to eliminate tobacco sales in pharmacies. These local actions demonstrate widespread support for such measures across diverse communities in our state.

Furthermore, other states, such as Massachusetts in 2018, New York in 2020, have successfully eliminated tobacco sales in all pharmacy practice locations statewide. These examples show that extending the Bill, the ban statewide, is not only feasible, but also reinforces the public health mission of pharmacies.

There's also sound legal precedent for this legislation ensuring a level playing field for all community pharmacy settings, whether Independence chains, big box stores, grocery stores. This promotes fairness and uniformity in our approach to public health. In conclusion, pharmacies and retail locations that contain pharmacies have no business Selling tobacco products.

It is inherently contradictory for pharmacies to dispense medications for cancer, heart and lung disease while simultaneously profiting from the sale of products that cause these conditions. I urge you to consider the significant impact of this Bill on public health and a healthier California. Thank you for your consideration and your aye vote.

Thank you. Any other others and support, please come up to the mic. Your name and position, please.

Thank you. Madam Chair Farrah McDade Ting on behalf of the County Health Executives Association of California in support.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Celine Chandler and I am a licensed California pharmacist. And strong support. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Sato Issa. I am an intern pharmacist from Sacramento, California in full support of this Bill.

Thank you. Hello. Eliza Tong, General internal medicine physician and strong support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kesa Bruce with the American Lung Association in support and also co sponsor. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Jamie Morgan, on behalf of the American Heart Association and strong support and proud co sponsor.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm ...on behalf of California Pharmacists Association and we are in support of the Bill.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Brent Liu. I'm a pharmacist as well as a Professor at the local nursing University. I'm in full support of the Bill. Thank you.

Hello, I'm Isaiah Saibaf and I'm an intern pharmacist and I'm in support of the Bill.

Good afternoon. My name is Sarah Abbasi, first year of Dr. Of pharmacy in California north state and I support this.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Mohammed Alaziz from Sacramento. I'm a first year student of California, no state, in pharmacy school and I support it.

Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is M. Silva, I live in Sacramento and I'm in support. Thank you.

Hey there. My name is Colin Meissner. I'm resident of Sacramento and I'm in support.

I'd like to register support for the American Cancer Cancer Action Network as well as the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.

Thank you. Any Members, any primary witnesses in opposition? Okay. Seeing none. Any Members of the public in opposition? Okay, I'll bring it back up to the Committee. Any questions or comments?

I just want to thank the author for bringing this common sense legislation. I imagine because it's common sense, that's why no opposition showed up today. But if you wouldn't sell tobacco products in a Doctor's office, you probably shouldn't sell them in a pharmacy. And I'm proud to support this Bill today.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Okay, I need a motion and a second. Oh, okay. Assembly Member Bryan had a motion and so had a second. Okay, thank you. Sorry about that. And Assembly Member or. I'm sorry, Madam Secretary, Excuse me. Can you make.

I do that all the time, too. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you,

[Roll Call]

Okay, the Bill has 14 votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members. Thank you. Okay. Madam Secretary, can you call the roll on the. For the absent Members?

[Roll Calls]

Okay, that Bill has 12 votes. We'll leave the roll open for absent Members

[Roll Call]

For. For ab684. We have 15 votes. 16 votes. 17. I'm sorry. 17 votes. We leave the open for absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Okay. The measure has gets out with 13 votes. We'll leave the roll open briefly for five more minutes. For. Oh, yes. For missing Members. Yes. You need to do the other ones. Thank you.

[Roll Call]

Okay, we'll go ahead and adjourn at 3:25pm mic check.