Assembly Standing Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, and Tourism

Well, good morning. I want to welcome you to this morning's hearing of the Assembly Arts Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports and tourism for Tuesday, April 22. We have seven items on our agenda today. And one item is on consent. That will be item number seven, AB644. Each Bill can have two main witnesses in support and opposition.

And each main witness gets two minutes each. I invite you to feel free to submit written testimony through the position portal on the Committee's website. This will become part of the official record of the Bill. Our hearing room this morning will be open for attendance of the hearing.

And we are in room 444 at the state Capitol, all encouraged to watch the hearing from its live stream on the Assembly's website. For those who are attending in person, please know that conduct that disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes that orderly conduct of the hearing is prohibited.

And with that we will be able to get on with our first Bill. I think we have an author present. We have an author on Committee. At least we are going to operate as a Subcommitee. I think we're just shy of a quorum right now. And so, Ms. Mckinnor, if you would like to choose a Bill. Great. We will begin with item number two. This is AB 749. And when you and your witnesses are situated, you may begin your testimony. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. AB 749 aims to address the long standing inequities in youth sports by establishing a Blue Ribbon Commission to develop a framework for equitable access to quality sport programs across California. Despite the well documented physical, mental, and academic benefits of youth sports, participation remains unequal.

According to the 2024 Play Equity Report, only 47% of Black youth and 45% of Latino youth participate in structured sports programs, compared to 59% of white youth. These disparities are driven by financial barriers, fragmented program quality, outdated physical education standards, and the lack of a coordinated statewide strategy.

AB 749 directs the California Health and Human Services Agency to convene a Blue Ribbon Commission to study these challenges and make recommendations for a centralized entity to oversee youth sports. This includes evaluating statewide coaching certification, modernizing PE standards, and creating equitable funding models to reduce financial barriers for families. This bill is about more than just sports. It's about ensuring every child in California has the opportunity to thrive regardless of race, income, or geography. And today I have two witnesses, and you guys can begin.

Thank you, Assembly Member McKinnor. Thank you, Chair Ward and Vice Chair Lackey and to the Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to speak in strong support of AB749, the Youth Sports Act for All. My name is Renata Simril, and I'm President of the Play Equity Fund, a nonprofit committed to ensuring that all youth have access to the transformational power of sport, play, and and physical activity. As was mentioned, today, California lacks a centralized entity to oversee youth sports.

No single body to ensure safety, fair access, and positive development experiences for all children. While there are laws addressing concussion protocols and player safety, the overall system is fragmented. And for far too many families, quality youth sports are simply out of reach due to the disjointed, unmonitored, pay to play youth sports landscape.

And According to the LA84 Foundation's 2024 California Play Equity Report, nearly 2/3 of California parents report struggling to afford the cost of sports for their children. This is more than just a financial barrier to health, mental well being, and opportunity.

Research shows that youth who participates in sports are less likely to drop out of school and more likely to attend college. And AB 749 is a bold and necessary step to bring together experts, educators, public health leaders, community organization, and coaches to design a statewide, comprehensive, and coordinated youth sports system.

And as California prepares to host the World Cup, Olympic Games, and other major sporting events over the next five years, we have a powerful opportunity to lead. The US remains one of the only developed countries without a national youth sports department or commission. California can set the standard. So we urge your support of AB 749 so that all youth in California have a fair chance to thrive and become life ready through sports. Thank you.

Great. Thank you both for your testimony. Are there any other members of the public here? Oh, did I miss one? Sorry.

No, no problem. Thank you. No, it's awkward to see a former Laker in Sacramento, so I appreciate the opportunity.

You're very welcome here.

Thank you, Chair Ward, Vice Chair Lackey, and the entire Committee, for the opportunity to speak in support of AB 749, the Youth Sports for All Act. My name is Derek Fisher. I'm a former professional basketball player, current high school basketball coach, and forever dad, as long as my kids want to call me dad.

I am here to express my strong and unwavering support for AB 749. Youth sports is one of the most powerful tools we have to give children the leadership skills and healthy habits they need to be successful and contributing community members. The power of youth sport is well documented.

I've seen many children improve their grades, improve attendance, heal from trauma, and develop positive social skills, all because of their positive experiences in youth sports. Despite the well documented benefits of youth sports, access to quality youth sports in California remains deeply fragmented.

The pay to play models of community sports programs have sidelined many families that can't afford the high cost of youth sport, the travel, and equipment expenses. Also, the hyper competitive and win at all cost environments of our current youth sports are not conducive to the positive development of that we all know sport can provide our youth.

AB 749 is a critical step forward to ensuring fair access to youth sport for all Californians and will be critical to establishing unified coaching and safety standards for our young athletes as they rely on sport to be a safe haven and place to grow, heal, and develop. I urge an aye vote for AB 749 and its potential to create a California where all youth can access the benefits of sport, play, and physical activity. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. With that, I'm going to ask anybody in the members of the public who wish to register support position to go ahead and line up at the microphone. Okay. They want to come inside. While they're coming inside, we're going to take a brief pause and ask Madam Secretary to call the roll to establish a quorum.

[Roll Call]

And we have a quorum. And with that, we'll see if any members of the public who wish to register a position of support. Name, organization, and your position, please.

Thank you everybody. Robert Marcus, Positive Coaching Alliance. I'd like to register my support.

Thank you.

Morning. Robert Hand. I work for Oakland Unified School District's Expanded Learning Office, and I support.

Thank you.

I'm Gabriella Rones. I'm a student athlete at Cal State LA.

Thank you.

I don't think the mic's on.

Mic's not on.

Good morning, everybody. My name is Liliana Marques. I'm a student... I'm a student at Cal Poly.

One second. We'll ask you to pause if we're going to do a mic check really quick. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Okay, please proceed.

Good morning, everybody. My name is Liliana Marques, and I'm a student athlete at Cal Poly Pomona, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Madison Dwelley with Political Solutions on behalf of Nike in support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Armon Harvey, Positive Coaching Alliance, Sports Equity Coalition San Diego, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Jonte Berry here with Positive Coaching Alliance. I own House of Pancakes in San Diego. And I also, as well, support this bill.

I'll see you when I go home. Thank you.

Marlon Gardinera, Sports Equity Task Force, San Diego. Also head football coach at Scripps Ranch High School in support of AB 749.

Thank you.

Christopher Reed, Center for Healing and Justice through Sport. I support this bill.

Thank you.

Nathan Jackson, Oakland Unified School District PE specialist, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Adam Ziegler, CEO of ANTS Sports, America's Next Talented Stars. I support this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. Jeff Harper-Harris, head boys basketball coach at Lincoln High School in San Diego and part of San Diego PCA, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Chen Kong-Wick, Oakland Unified School District, co-founder of Oakland Sports Equity Task Force. We say yes to sports and yes to the bill.

Thank you.

Troy Selvey with California AfterSchool Network, and we are in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. Nicholas Williams, San Francisco Parks and Recreation, San Francisco Sports Equity Coalition. We are in 100% support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Shannon Luff from Positive Coaching Alliance and the San Francisco Youth Sports Equity Coalition. We're in large support of this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. Isaiah Ene at Granite Bay High School, and we say yes to sports.

Good morning. Darnell Turner, Granite Bay High School, and we say yes in support to sports.

Thank you.

Keith Tapuosi, Granite Bay, and we say yes to sports.

Thank you.

Cindy Lederer, retired physical educator, Legislative Chair for the California Association on Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. We are 100% in support, and we represent educators all over the state.

Thank you.

Good morning. Dillon Juniel, former student athlete, Sacramento State. And yes, we say yes to sports.

Thank you.

Hello. Eli Mirza, former Division 1 athlete at Eastern Illinois, and we say yes to sports.

Thank you.

Rudy Reyes with the Anti-Recidivism Coalition in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Scott Budnick, Anti-Recidivism Coalition, passionate support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Jim Revis, member of the public, in support.

Thank you. Seeing nobody else wishing to register support, we have no opposition registered on file. But to check, is there anybody here that wishes to testify or register support of opposition? All right, seeing none. We'll turn back to the Committee Members for discussion. Ms. Quirk-Silva.

This is such a great way to start the morning to talk about equity in sports. And I first want to commend the author and the supporters. I want to give a shout out to a fan, basketball fan. Yes, myself. But this means a lot to me because 40 years ago, or actually 50 years ago, because I am 62 years old, and came from a family of 10. And my mom really wanted me to learn to swim.

And there weren't a lot of opportunities in my neighborhood. And this city actually built an Olympic sized pool, and I was able to start to swim. I swam all through junior high and high school and into college. I was a horrible swimmer, by the way, and I never won a race, but I stayed on the team.

And of course, all the things that happen with sports, from getting up early, working hard, staying on a team, losing, having teammates, all the John Wooden concepts that come out when you're on a team, is really the only reason I sit here today. The only reason. Because had I not swam, I wouldn't have gone to college.

I didn't get a scholarship. But going to higher ed, I was the first in my family. So I'm passionate about it. Also, we know the costs and the opportunities just keep escalating. We know that even in my own City of Fullerton, for a young boy to play baseball or any of the sports sometimes can be $200 for a family. So if you have a family of two or three, which many families do, they have to make a choice. Does somebody play? Do they all not play?

More teams are doing scholarships. But it simply is an economic issue. And we must understand that when we engage students, children, especially at a young age, their trajectory is going to be much different than those who are not engaged. So I applaud the author. I asked to be a joint author. Wink, wink, right off the bat here. And I move this bill.

Thank you, Ms. Quirk-Silva. Assembly Member Elhawary.

I am really excited to see just incredible leaders in this space. When we think about equity in our communities, I represent South Central LA. We know that our community members often can't play sports because they can't afford it or don't have access to sports because we don't have enough money to put into our parks. We don't even have enough parks, enough green spaces.

So the opportunities here, especially when we think about the Olympics, all these young people who are dreaming of participating and competing on the highest levels here in California, in Los Angeles, and in San Francisco, where they are doing this huge thing on this international stage that our young people who live in those communities also deserve to have those opportunities. Those same opportunities to one day be able to compete on those levels if they want, or to become leaders.

Like my colleague just said. Yesterday, I heard that 84% of women in leadership positions at Fortune 500 companies or in elected positions in all levels of leadership have played a sport. The fact that sports impact us so much, especially as women, to have the opportunity to develop the confidence to be able to be here.

I did drill team for most of my career, most of my childhood and it totally impacted my life. And this is so powerful, so important and we're so grateful, especially as we think about uplifting equity at a time where it's being dismantled at the federal level in so many ways. We have to continue to center, especially our black and brown youth. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Elhawary. And Vice Chair.

And I'd like to be a co-author.

Vice Chair Alanis.

Or Lackey, either one.

I am so sorry, Mr. Lackey. It was the last Committee I was in. He was the Vice Chair. I need more coffee. Vice Chair Lackey.

Well, I hate to be the tempering voice because we all see the value of youth sports. That's not, it's not a debate. But here's my concern. This bill seems to perpetuate the very issue it's attempting to solve. By creating an oversight commission, it's going to increase the difficulty to recruit coaches.

It's also going to increase the cost because to operate a commission, it's not free. So someone's going to have to recover the cost. And I'm worried about that. It seems to me like, and I know it's all well intentioned, we all want the benefit of youth sports no matter where you grow up.

I will tell you that my father, the only reason he stayed in high school at all, because he was raised with a single mother and had nothing. I mean nothing. He smoked at the age of 9 years old to quench his hunger. And anyways, I don't want to get into my own personal life, but I will just tell you that no one is more committed to youth sports than me because I personally benefited, my family's benefited from it.

But I worry. I worry that this commission is going to make it harder, make it harder for people that live in communities that have really good people, but they don't have the means, they don't have the understanding of how to comply. And I'm worried about that. It seems like when you create this kind of regulatory structure, not everybody benefits from that.

And I worry about the other side, the unintended consequence. And so I'm not convinced this is the best pathway to solve the problem that you guys are trying to address because it's very worthy to support that. But I'm not so sure that we're there. And so I'll just probably be laying off, and we'll see by the time it gets to the floor. If you can convince me that it doesn't create that, that obstacle, then I'll be happy to support it.

May I respond to that please?

Perhaps during the close or if you want to defer to your witness, I will. Okay, thank you. Because I'm just going to go ahead and close up right now. Seeing no other Members wishing to comment, I do want to thank the author first for galvanizing a very robust level of community support.

We see that on the record, and we see that, that we're able to make it their way to the state capitol here today. Clearly a need here to, you know, add on to a lot of the ways that we have been, as a Legislature, helping to make sports more accessible and safe.

And we recognize that we've been doing that for organized youth sports through CIF, through the NCAA, and through various school based athletic programs with some oversight. But we need that similar system for non school based youth sports organizations as well. I know that you want to be able to create the commission to be able to help study some of the ways to be able to regulate some of those programs so that we leagues and coaches are following protocols and safety training requirements.

But they also are going to be able to focus on improvements to disparities in the quality and availability of programs and look how to foster safe, supportive, and inclusive environments for all youth sports across California, which is incredibly laudable goals. Very much support the bill here today, and I invite you to close.

Thank you. And I'm going to head a little bit of my time over to one of them.

Yes. And I'll be quick. And Vice Chair Lackey, I very much appreciate your comments and your measured approach. And Assembly Member McKinnor, if I might speak for her for a moment, is really intending to have a wide table for us to have a platform to have a conversation of how we create a centralized body to make sure that the memory of your father, quite frankly, is brought to the conversation of how we can ensure all kids have access to sport as a pathway.

And I just leave the commission with one factor of unintended consequences of not having a centralized entity. California has the highest obesity rate related costs in the US, the highest related obesity cost in the US at $15.2 billion. If the State of California BMI was reduced by just 5%, California would save $81.7 billion in related healthcare cost. And so I think the opportunity for us to study the creation of a centralized body will save California money.

Yes, because this is a study bill. This is to do the study on the commission. And I would just like to say that my son grew up a huge Laker fan, and he played from five years old. It helped him become a straight A student because of the discipline of sports. So sports is like huge for young men in my community.

Not only did he make really good grades in school, he went on to attend Menlo College, play basketball there. And he's now a very successful, I'm going to call him a tech pro because that's what he tell me he is. He's very successful. And I do believe it was his sports and what sports taught him, the discipline that it taught him, the work ethic that it taught him. And so today I ask for my colleagues' aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. McKinnor. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Action is do pass to the Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

We currently have five votes with one Member not voting. We'll hold the roll open for other Members. It will be out. And I want to thank you for your presentation today and thank you for being here. Thank you. Thank you. We'll go back and file order to Assemblymember Gabriel, who is here for his Bill AB 549.

But before he presents, I'd like to entertain a motion for our consent agenda moved by Assembly, second by Assembly Members of Burr. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Consent Calendar with its one item, AB 644 has six votes and we'll be out. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members.

And with that, back to item number one. Assent. Member Gabriel, when you are ready, you may begin presentation.

Thank you very much. Mr. Chair and colleagues, I'm pleased today to present AB549, a measure that will ensure that safety and security are priority paradise. When California hosts some of the biggest sporting events in the world, including the 2026 FIFA World cup, the 2027 Super Bowl, and the 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games.

These events present a unique opportunity to boost our economy, generate millions in state and local tax revenue, and further enhance California's global brand. At the same time, these events also require enhanced security coordination to ensure the safety of attendees, athletes and our local communities.

AB549 will accomplish this goal by establishing a framework for interagency coordination, ensuring that state and local agencies as well as host committees are aligned in their efforts to provide the highest level of security while also reducing the risk of human trafficking, racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination.

Ensuring the highest levels of coordination is appropriate given the noticeable instances of violence at major international sporting events, including the attacks in New Orleans prior to the Sugar bowl earlier this year.

While we always hope for a safe and peaceful event, AB549 ensures that California is prepared for any incident, whether it be a natural disaster, a medical emergency or a security threat, so that we can deliver the best possible events on the global stage.

This Bill is supported by a coalition that includes the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment Commission, the Bay Area Host Committee, the California Travel Association, the California Hotel and Lodging Association, and the California Police Chiefs Association.

And while I don't have Dee Fish here with me, I am very pleased to have Amelia Zamani on behalf of the California Travel Association and Keshav Kumar on behalf of the Bay Area Host Committee. Thank you and respectfully request your aye vote thank you.

Witnesses, you may have up to two minutes each.

Thank you. Good morning Chair and Members My name is Amelia Zamani. I'm with the California Travel Association. We are the advocacy organization for the state's travel and tourism industry. My Members include destinations, lodging, attractions, transportation companies and others for whom travel and tourism is important.

According to our partners at Visit California travelers infused $156.4 billion into our economy last year, which supported 1.2 million jobs and generated 12.61.0 billion billion 1.0 in local and state taxes. We anticipate that these numbers will increase as California hosts several international sporting events in the next few years.

These mega events that the Assembly Member mentioned represent more than just sporting competitions. They're investments in California's economic future, workforce development and international reputation. While the next few years will showcase everything we love about California our world class venues, vibrant cities, beautiful landscapes, they will also bring increased scrutiny.

It is critical that with the world's eyes on California, we ensure the safety and security of our visitors, workers and residents. AB549 develops a framework for interagency coordination to ensure that these international sporting events are safe for everyone involved and that the only memories people leave California with are happy ones.

The positive attention we garner from these games will hopefully inspire many years of new and return Visits from around the globe. For these reasons and more, we ask for your support this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair and Members. My name is Keshav Kumar, representing the Bay Area Host Committee. Today the Bay Area Host Committee is the regional Sports Commission preparing the Bay Area to successfully host the 2026 FIFA World Cup. We'll have six matches in Levi's Stadium and eight matches down at SoFi.

I want to begin by thanking Assemblymember Gabriel for his leadership in authoring AB549. Both the Bay Area Host Committee and the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment Commission are proud to support this Bill because we believe that delivering world class events must go hand in hand with protecting public safety and promoting community well being.

That is only possible through a strong partnership between the state and local governments. The World Cup will bring hundreds of thousands of tourists to our state, but some will attempt to exploit others through the Games.

As a means, AB 549 provides the framework we need to take proactive, coordinated action aligning state agencies, local governments, law enforcement and community partners to prevent trafficking, improve victim identification and strengthen trauma informed responses. We respectfully ask for your support.

Thank you very much. Are there other Members of the public here wishing to register a position of support?

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Members Awet Kidane, representing the Los Angeles Rams on behalf of the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment Commission want to echo the words and sentiment of my colleague Mr. Kumar and definitely thank the author for understanding the intricacies of these interagency agreements. I appreciate you.

Thank you. Seeing no other Members wishing to register a position. Are there any witnesses in opposition? Seeing nobody approaching the dais. Any Members of the public here wishing to register a statement of opposition? Okay. Seeing none. We'll turn that back to our Committee Members and we'll begin with Senate Member Elhawary.

Thank you so much to the author and the witnesses. I think the intent of the Bill is so incredibly important, especially in communities like ours. South Central will actually be at the center of a lot of the sports games, whether it be the Olympics or the World Cup, et cetera.

And we know how much human trafficking really is increased during these mega sporting events. So I think that piece is really important and I definitely. I think that intent is incredibly important. But I think what's also has happened and we've seen in the past, in the 1984 Olympics, we saw the militarization of the LAPD.

We saw over policing. We saw mass incarceration really skyrocket during that time, especially for black and brown youth in our communities.

And So I was wondering if there are any measures or any thoughts around how to really kind of start to ensure that that's not happening as we think about these kind of larger security measures that need to be put in place.

Yeah, I really. I really appreciate that comment and the sentiment there. And, you know, I think we always have an opportunity to learn from mistakes we've made in the past and do things better. And as someone who was three years old during the 1984 Games, I think that there's a lot of lessons for us to take away. And I know that people have written about that and raised that issue.

And so I think our goal here is to, as the witnesses talked about, bring together community partners, bring together the local governments that are going to do this work, the private sector folks, and try to think about how do we put our best foot forward on the global stage in a way that works for the residents of the communities, the people that are going to come and tour our beautiful state, and the athletes that are going to come and be part of that.

And so I think the best way to do that is to get everybody together. And part of the reason we've written into this that we will explicitly think about issues like racism and sexism and how what we're doing might impact some of our more vulnerable communities.

And we know, unfortunately, that we've had those issues both in terms of communities being impacted and also with racism and sexism and homophobia in sport. And we've seen that, unfortunately, in the sport that I love in soccer, we've seen that we've had issues in our own backyard with LAFC and some of their fans.

So I think by writing that into it and by trying to be intentional and have those conversations with community, with government, with multiple levels of local and state government, and then also with stakeholders, we can hopefully deliver the best possible game on the global stage.

Thank you. I think I'll just add one more question. Just as we think about, especially given the entities that will be a part of really being thoughtful around the security measures, in particular, recognizing the federal Administration and where we are there, recognizing that Homeland Security is going to be a part of this, as well as the US Secret Service, and just all the ways that we're seeing folks who are being wrongfully deported and detained and disappeared, and I think the extent to which we're thoughtful about really both working with because we have to, but also being able to really kind of put those kind of stops in place in a real way are really important.

Have you all thought about those pieces. And I think what you shared earlier is really helpful. But I think in that those collaboration pieces, especially given who's there, I think that's another excellent point, assemblymember.

And I think that's another reason to me why it's so important that California is part of this so that we can lead with our values, so that we're not just referring to others who may want to do things in a different way, but making sure that we, you know, we have our own laws and policies and our values that are reflective in those laws and policies.

And so I think to make sure that we're at the table, State of California coordinating with local partners who I think in many cases, you know, the Bay Area and Los Angeles are going to share our values.

I think it's really important that we're there to make sure that we're executing in the games that is going to work to again show our best foot on the global stage, but also deliver a game consistent with our values.

Thank you, that's hugely helpful. And earlier I talked about the human trafficking piece. Figueroa Corridor in our district as well as the western corridor a few blocks away are some of the just kind of central locations where sex trafficking is currently happening, human trafficking.

And so thank you for the work that you're doing and for bringing this forward. Really appreciate you.

Thank you. Thank you. So we have a motion by Assembly Member McKinnor, second by Assembly Member Elhawary. Any other Members wishing to speak or Vice Chair Lackey.

Yeah, first of all, I'd actually like to be a co author for this thing. If that's permissible, we'd be pleased to have you because here's the reality, I think, excuse me, very few people really understand the epidemic of what you're trying to prevent here. This human trafficking thing is so explosive.

Very few people really understand the level of abuse that this is actually causing. And I am, I'm just thrilled to see that this world stage prevents not only good people, it prevents people that are very hurtful that will make a profit at others expense. And so we need to take this seriously.

And this proves that we're sensitive to preventing victims. It's not only managing a misconduct, but it's preventing it. That is the best solution and that is what this is focused on. A very proud to see that it's actually happening at the state level. It's very reassuring for me.

And there's always law enforcement concerns and those concerns are legitimate. But let's not let it get in the way of doing the right thing. And preventing victims. And so I'm very thankful that you have the guts to take this on, and I welcome it. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Seeing no other Members wishing to comment, I want to thank Senator Gabriel for bringing this forward. Coming from San Diego and serving on local government there as well.

We were really educated strongly about, in our case, Comic Con and the influx of visitors that we had, but also the increased incidence of human trafficking experiences there.

And so that awareness as local officials and working, of course, that is very much a San Diego centric event, really helped provide that interagency cooperation that was both deterring the incidences from happening in the first place, assisting any victims that were identified, providing the education as well, while we were making sure that we were enforcing our laws.

So to know that we have these very wonderful but huge events that are coming statewide, I think, you know, brings all the reason why we must advance this Bill, to provide that statewide interagency coordination to make sure that these events are enjoyable and safe, but are also not targets or magnets for this horrible activity that perpetrators would try to bring into our communities. And with that, I invite you to close.

Yeah. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank all of my colleagues for the helpful and thoughtful comments. And I'll just say, the eyes of the world are going to be on California in a very significant way for three years in a row. And we want to make sure we put the best foot forward.

We think we have a lot to show the world. Hopefully, people are going to come and enjoy themselves, as the witness says, and then continue to come back and continue to visit our beautiful state. And with that, we'll respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Please call the roll.

AB549 is due. Pass is amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Ward. Aye. Ward. Aye. Lackey. Aye. Lackey. Aye. El Hawari. Aye. Elhori. Aye. Gonzalez. McKenna. McKenna. McKenna. Aye. Ortega. Aye. Ortega, Aye. Quirk Silva. Aye. Quirk Silva. Aye. Valencia. Zabur. Zabur, aye.

Thank you. At the moment, we have seven votes. That Bill will be out. We'll hold the roll open for absent Members. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next, we have one Non Committee Member that is with us right now to present his Bill. So I'm gonna go down to item number 45.

This is AB 1291 by Assembly Member Lee. And when you are situated and ready, along with your witnesses, you may begin your presentation.

All right, I'll. I'll just get started first then. Thank you, Mr. Chair and colleagues. First, I'd like to thank the Chair and his staff for working with me on this Bill and I will accept the amendments described on page 6 of the Committee analysis.

My intentions with this Bill before and after the amendments is to try to improve the buying experience for consumers trying to go to concerts, sporting events, and other live entertainment.

Purchasing event tickets for these events is often confusing and stressful for people who in turn are more likely to seek tickets through overpriced secondary sellers, fraudulent sellers, or simply give up altogether. With the amendments, this Bill will require ticket sellers to electronically deliver proof of purchase to a customer immediately upon purchase.

In addition, that proof of purchase may be used to gain entry to the venue if the person cannot access their ticket for reasons not their fault. In order to gain entry, the proof of purchase must be linked to a ticket for the event and that ticket cannot have been used.

The Bill will not solve the many anti consumer problems that many people see with their ticket seller industry. It won't make getting into Beyonce any easier. It won't reduce the confusion about how many tickets are being offered and at what prices.

What this Bill will do is add a modicum of certainty to people when they buy their tickets so that they aren't going to receive their tickets until right up until before the event. Then they then they know that they will be able to get into the venue if something goes wrong with that ticket delivery.

With me testified today in support of AB1291 is Ruben Guerra, the chair of the Latin Business Association, and Robert Herrell with the Consumer Federation of California.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Robert Herrell. I'm the Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California speaking in support of the Bill. Couple things I'd just like to briefly go over. Number one, the context here is important.

I have in my hand here 128-page lawsuit by the Federal Government and now 39 of the 50 states plus DC, so 40 entities, asserting anti competitive antitrust behavior by Live Nation Entertainment, which owns Ticketmaster. So the reason that we're here and we're here a few weeks ago is because you have a monopoly in this marketplace.

And I don't want that ever to be lost on the Members of the Committee because it's a really important context for this. I will speak very briefly to the Bill as currently in print and then pivot over if that's okay with the chair. We think that consumers receiving tickets in a timely fashion is really important.

We see now the monopoly waiting until literally just before a show. I can tell you, I have a personal example. My daughter went through kind of a K-pop phase and I got tickets to see Blackpink a couple years ago and they were darn expensive tickets, let me tell you.

And you know, you get the tickets very late. And then two days before the concert, my daughter came down with COVID. And I will tell you, Oracle Park, which is owned by the Giants, made it almost impossible for me to do anything with those tickets. I wound up giving them away, which was like a $500 hit.

So the point being that there's a thumb on the scale here far too often by the monopoly and the entities who, in fairness, a lot of these independent venues, they don't have a choice. I think I mentioned that the last time I was before this Committee. So the transparency provisions are really important.

So as the Bill gets modified and moves through the process, that transparency is important. In many cases consumers need to know, "Am I wasting my time?" Remember, 95% of shows don't sell out, but those that do, so many of those tickets are held back by the monopoly, by the venue, by the artist, that there's hardly anything left for the average consumer. And so refresh for you.

One sentence to summarize, please.

Okay, thank you very much. And I would just note, if you look at the opposition to the Bill, it's a boatload of sports teams. All those sports teams have deals with secondary market players, every single one of them.

Thank you very much for your testimony and your second witness.

Good morning, my name is Dr. Ruben Guerra and I'm the Chairman of the Latin Business Association. For more than 50 years, our organization has helped support small Latino-owned business develop the tools and networks they need to be competitive and successful.

Most businesses have to compete for customers, resulting in more consumer choice, more competitive prices, and better service. But when you are a monopoly like Ticketmaster, you're able to block competition, resulting in a worse customer experience and higher prices.

Today, fans pay immediately for their tickets, but Ticketmaster often doesn't deliver fans tickets until days or sometimes hours before an event. These delays discourage consumers from using a competitor service and ensure that tickets are resold on Ticketmaster's resale platform, further strengthening their monopoly. And ultimately that's why they do it.

To increase their market share more into resale to the detriment of consumers and small businesses. AB 1291 could require tickets to be delivered within 24 hours of purchase so fans can receive tickets without long delays, confusion or forced reliance on Ticketmaster. I urge an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Are there other Members of the public wishing to register a statement of support? So you can line up at the microphone. And we're looking for names, organizations and your position.

Steffanie O'Keefe, President of American Federation of Musicians Local 47 in Los Angeles in opposition to the Bill.

Okay. We're looking for support statements, but we'll register that statement of opposition. Thank you. Next.

Hi. Good morning. Michael Saragosa, on behalf of Central Valley Latino Elected Officials Coalition and the Central Valley Yemeni Society, as well as Central Valley Si Se Puede in support. Thank you.

Yeah, my name is Tecoy Porter. I am President of the National Action Network Sacramento Chapter, and we are in support of this Bill.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nora Canetti, on behalf of Hispanic 100. I support. Thank you.

Good morning, Chair and Committee Members. My name is Anthony Butler Torres on behalf of the California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce. In support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Erin Niemela, on behalf of StubHub, also in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning Chair and Members. My name is Diana Ordaz Charington, President of the Multicultural Business Alliance, and we support.

Thank you. See no other Members of the public wishing to register a position. Are there witnesses in opposition for the Bill? Up to two witnesses. And when you're situated, you can go ahead and provide your testimony.

Chair and Members, thank you so much. Alex Torres with Brownstein on behalf of the National Independent Venue Association of California. We represent over 500 independent brick and mortar venues and festival promoters in the state.

I want to be clear that the notion that independent venues don't have a choice when it comes to dealing with Ticketmaster and Live Nation, that's just not. That's fundamentally not true. But I do want to thank the author for the work on the Bill. Committee staff, yourself, Mr. Chair, for the work here.

I want to start a little bit about the practice of delayed release, which is independent venue's biggest tool against ticket scalping.

What that does is it delays the release of the barcode for the ticket until showtime, 24 hours before the showtime, to prevent secondary platforms from mimicking, faking, or otherwise reproducing the ticket and then selling it on multiple platforms. That is our single greatest tool to protect the small businesses as independent venues.

We are on the front line of dealing with the consumer that has been defrauded or deceived by these secondary market platforms. And I really appreciate the author's intention here, and I understand the desire to make sure that there's some sort of validity. Most of our venues send receipts already and again, we don't use Ticketmaster.

We're using other platforms that cater to our independent venues. This isn't a Ticketmaster or Live Nation issue. What we're trying to do is prevent the secondary market from taking our inventory and selling it at 100%, 200% face value or selling that same barcode on three different platforms.

So the first person to show up to the venue gets in. The other three are out of luck and we're the ones who have to deal with that at our rope lines every day. So I want to be clear, this is not about taking Master Live Nation's thumb on the scale.

This is about the small businesses that have very limited tools to to be able to combat the industrial-scale scalping that is going on in the market right now and helping to combat the crisis of confidence that consumers are facing when it comes to being able to buy a ticket for a show.

So we have to review the amendments, want to see that in print, but appreciate the author's willingness to work with us and want to express our support, our opposition for the Bill in print, but our support for the author's continued conversations here. So thank you.

Thank you.

Chair and Members, Andrew Govenar on behalf of the San Francisco 49ers, the Los Angeles Dodgers, the San Francisco Giants, the Oakland A's, Los Angeles Angels and San Diego Padres in opposition.

Part of the problem here is we're not even sure which Bill we're actually debating today because the Bill in print is not what the Bill and the author have actually are proposing to be accepting as amendments.

The amendments they're accepting are actually from a Bill that was amended in the Senate last year that died on the Senate Floor, a Kevin McCarty Bill that had to do with proof of purchase to get into a venue. We do give receipts when we sell a ticket that a purchaser has bought.

But to be able to use proof of purchase as the only means to get into a venue is a problem. If we sell you the ticket and you have a proof of purchase, you can come to the box office, we can verify and know and let you in.

But if somebody else from any other platform has a proof of purchase, comes to our stadium and comes to the ticketing gate and says they want to get in, how would we be know that ticket hasn't been used and why would we let you in?

So it's not only a matter of proving the proof of purchase, but also security. And what Alex said too is also resonating, which is what happens if you sell the ticket 10 times and now you have 10 proofs of purchases that come to the front gate. How do you know that that ticket's actually verified?

We believe the Bill should be held, it should be put over until we actually have a Bill in print, until we have an analysis that actually focuses on the Bill.

But we shouldn't burden our venues, which are already dealing with crowds and people coming to the gate, to simply use proof of purchase as a means to get into our facility. So for those reasons, we oppose the measure.

Thank you. Are there other members of the public here in wish to have a statement of opposition?

Tim Lynch, on behalf of the Golden State Warriors. We are opposed to the Bill in print and we are opposed to the proposed amendments. Thank you.

Good morning. Jordan Curley, on behalf of the Music Artists Coalition, we're also opposed.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Awet Kidane, representing the Los Angeles Rams and the Los Angeles Clippers in opposition of the Bill in print and the amended version. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Gabriel Docto. I'm a member of the National Independent Venue Association, California Chapter. We're currently in opposition of the Bill as it's written, but look forward to working with the authority to make some comprehensive amendments.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Qiana Conley Akinro. I'm the Senior Executive Director at the Los Angeles chapter of the Recording Academy. Home of the Grammys. I'm here on behalf of the Recording Academy, best known for our Grammy Awards, but also a membership organization that represents thousands of artists, performers and other individuals in the music community, including more than 4,500 Members here in California. On behalf of the Recording Academy, we oppose AB1291 as is currently written. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Tara Khonsari, Manager of Government affairs and Public Policy at SAG-AFTRA, in opposition of the Bill as written. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no other members of the public wishing to register a statement, we can turn this back to Committee Member conversations. And before we do that, I just want to do again so we all know what we are talking about. Maybe afford the author one more chance to be able to talk about what is moving, what is being presented here today for Committee discussion. That we are.

We have agreed over the recess to be stripping the contents of the Bill and replacing that with the amendments found on page six of the analysis for further, further deliberation should this get out of Committee today. Assembly Member Quirk-Silva.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I was going to ask the author or his witnesses to speak to the opposition. This is a piece of legislation that has been discussed many times. If we look on page 6 and 7, you can see all the various types of policy that have been brought forward over the last handful of years.

I in fact, was chair of this Committee a few years back, two or three years when this issue has come up and it has not been solved.

And so I would say at this point I'm definitely going to listen to the comments, but I really want, and we asked of this when I was a chair of the Committee as well. And even I remember distinctively bringing people together, many of the opposition and supporters, to try to get to a place.

And we have yet to achieve that. And you can see a long list of esteemed colleagues have done, so I appreciate you for working in this space again, but there's gotta be some type of movement here in order for us to have a win win. There certainly are.

I'm not going to talk about the Angels because I support the Dodgers. No, just joking. Just make it a little light here. Does it all have to be so heavy? But you know, we're talking about entertainment and venues in California, which is part of our economic engine.

So I want to see this get to a place where we can have a win-win. So just again, if you can speak to the opposition in your comments.

Yeah, I'll just speak very briefly, then I'll turn over to my witnesses, talk a little bit about the current Bill in print. But you know, the intention of this Bill in general is to give more certainty and confidence to the consumer.

Right now, as it stands, if you are an average consumer, you know, I'm taking over this legacy from Assemblymember McCarty, our former colleague and now current mayor Sacramento, because we both had an experience in the similar situation where we didn't have, where the purchase wasn't certainty enough because there's so much uncertainty in the process.

Just because you spent $500, $1,000 should be enough for a consumer to say, okay, I have a ticket. But there's so many hoops and hurdles, uncertainties that sometimes not until game time, you know that you don't even have it.

And just to be clear, the new Bill about proof of purchase and certainty of receipt applies to the primary sellers. So whether it be through Ticketmaster or the primary venue and secondary. So if I were to buy off a secondary market as well, they also need to give me the same kind of purchase, sorry, proof of purchase.

And so it's about giving more certainty to consumers. So I'm gonna give it over to my witness to talk a little bit about the Bill in print too.

Very briefly through the chair. Two points. Assemblymember Quirk-Silva. One, well, as an Orange County initial citizen as well, I won't tell anybody that you're in Fullerton, but a Dodger fan. There may be repercussions. Right. But two things. One, agree with you completely about coming together. CFC has been trying for years.

In fact, ironically, there's more progress being made, though it hasn't crossed the finish line at the national level, at the federal level than there has been at in California. There is the Ticket Act on the Hill right now.

There was actually what we refer to as a Four Corners agreement on Capitol Hill with all four caucuses in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House. That was actually part of the bigger continuing resolution last December that unfortunately got blown up by Elon Musk for unrelated content.

So a whole bunch of content fell to the cutting room floor, including agreement on a wide range of issues. Not a be-all end-all, but significant agreement among all the warring factions. And so we'd love to get back to that place. And so I'll just leave it at that.

That we have been trying very hard to try to come to some consensus, but it is very challenging as you see in the analysis, Bill after Bill after Bill in this space.

Thank you. Assemblymember Elhawary, unless Ms. Quirk-Silva, are you done with. Okay, great. Assemblymember Elhawary, thank you so much.

That I think the intent of this Bill is incredibly important. And I think the piece around the monopoly, like we really have to center given how, you know, even as we're thinking about affordability for our for Californians overall and just how we continue to fight back against monopolies.

But I think something that one of the witnesses said that I just wanted to better understand. Excuse me. One of the opposition witnesses said that I want to better understand from the author and the witnesses in support is the piece around secondary markets and potentially having 10 proof of purchases. And then a secondary question is just around the independent venues and the extent to which you have and are willing to work together.

I think very briefly, Assemblymember Ellawari, we agree with NIVA, for example, which is why there's been agreements like I just mentioned on Capitol Hill on some of these issues. Any entity that's going to spoof a site and pretend it's one of their venues, that's wrong. They shouldn't have to be the police of people who got defrauded.

Like I said 95% of these shows don't sell out. Right. The whole Beyonce, Taylor Swift tier, it's really its own stratosphere. And maybe there ought to be slightly different rules for that level. But most shows, you walk up to the box office and you can usually get tickets. So we agree with NIVA on that.

And that's one of the issues where we think real progress can be made when you're, whether you're talking about speculative ticketing or other things, there is some common ground here. So I'll just, I'll try to leave that with a hopeful note.

What about, what about the piece around the. Like, you could get, like, for every person that sells it, you have a new proof of purchase.

Yeah. Because that language isn't in print. I saw, I mean, I was going to comment, but ran out of time. That point in the analysis. I think that you want to be very careful there because I'm sympathetic to the fear of multiple proofs of purchase. Right.

Having said that, I think there's a way to deal with that if people come together in good faith.

Thank you.

I don't know.

You can ask a question.

Would you like to speak to that as well?

Thank you. And thank you, Chair. I appreciate it. When the Assembly Member opened up, he said he's accepting the amendments that were recommended in the analysis that deal with proof of purchase. He said that's going to be the Bill. And yet seems that there's this discussion over the Bill in print versus the Bill that's going to be in print. And that's the problem.

The Bill that's in print, it's our understanding from the proponents and the author, is not going to be the Bill that will be in print if it passes out of this Committee. The Bill that would be in print, if it passes out of this Committee, would strictly deal with proof of purchase, not 24 hours.

And by the way, the Bill in print we're opposed to as well for a whole host of reasons. We sell tickets all the time, season tickets that we don't give you the ticket immediately we sell in advance. So our point is, are we debating the Bill that's going to be amended, which is the proof of purchase?

If we do, then it gets to your point and your question, which we appreciate and thank you. Which is we cannot simply use proof of purchase to get in when it hasn't been sold by our venue. Baseball, by the way, has baseball.com which sells tickets. We are not Ticketmaster.

So this thing that it's about Ticketmaster versus the secondary market. We feel like we're caught in the middle of collateral damage. Yes, The San Francisco 49ers use Ticketmaster.

Every team and every baseball team in California uses baseball.com so this illusion that it's about Ticketmaster to be the ruse that we somehow pass this Bill, when in fact the Bill will deal with proof of purchase.

And the proof of purchase language that was in Kevin McCarty's Bill, which was amended in the Senate, it was not heard in this Committee, died in the Senate because of all the issues we bring up, which is if we sell you the ticket from the primary vendor, you can come to the box office and we will give you access to that ticket because we can actually do a connection between the receipt and the proof of purchase and the ticket that it's connected to.

But if you buy it from andrewgovenar.com and you come with a proof of purchase to the gate, how do we know that that ticket is actually a verifiable sold ticket? And we appreciate what the Assemblymember said when they did. They did get a fraudulent ticket when they went to Europe off the secondary market.

There's nothing we can do about it. But we shouldn't be expected to let somebody into a venue with a receipt, because we don't even know if that receipt is verifiable. Maybe it's a fake receipt, maybe it was sold 10 times. And so we do give the receipt, which is what the part of the Bill does.

But we're just. It's convoluted as to what we're actually debating here today, because the Bill that's in print is not what the author accepted going forward.

Can I just make a quick parliamentary procedure kind of clarification on this? It's. This Bill is triple referred, so of course, it's a standard practice of ours to keep amending the bills throughout the process. And I am accepting the amendments that will be reflected in the Privacy Committee next, but that will be Committee two out of three.

Okay. And then just to be clear, and so that there is no confusion that we are debating what the Bill would be with the Committee amendments as analyzed that the author has agreed to take.

And so that is sort of the context of the discussion that we are looking, should it earn the votes to be able to pass out this Committee today, and to the author's point, would be able to go to Consumer Privacy, Consumer Protection Committee through their jurisdiction, as well as Judiciary through their jurisdiction. Back to Ms. McKinnor.

Yes. Well, I thank the author for bringing this Bill because I actually really, really love going to sports games. I have the Clippers and the Rams in my district. But we have our own apps, by the way, so Northern California, you guys gotta get on board because we have our own Hollywood Park apps.

I just had to make it a little lighter, but I just wanna really see you guys work together. I think that we could come up with solutions when we work together. And so it's evidently a problem because we've had too many authors try to come along and work this since 2013.

And so what I would like to see before I leave this building in 10 years is that you guys have actually really sat down and come here with a solution. Not just opposing and supporting, but actually sit down and talk and trust one another to come up with a solution that works for the consumer.

So today I will be supporting this Bill. And I know, I trust, I trust that the author will work with everybody to try to come to a solution. And that's what we have to have, you guys, is trust with each other, that we want to take care of the consumer. Thank you.

Thank you. Assemblymember Zbur.

So I actually have read the book letters on both sides and actually do have some concerns about the issues that the opposition has raised. You know, just, you know, we all, we all approach this to a certain extent from personal experience. And, and I know, you know, language is thrown around about Ticketmaster being a horrible monopoly.

That's not my experience, frankly. My experience is that I usually go to Ticketmaster because that's the place I can get unscalped tickets. And I know I'm going to actually be able to get a good ticket there. And I'm always really worried about the secondary market.

And so, you know, and, the opposition letters raise concerns for me about restricting things that allow that prevent more scalping from taking place. People buying up big chunks of tickets and then basically holding them for periods of time, inflating the prices and then selling them on the secondary market.

And I'm really worried about this Bill actually not addressing that issue. So, you know, what is the reason why, for example, and I'll ask both sides, Los Angeles Dodgers can't go to StubHub to sell their tickets or to some other. Some other seller to sell the initial, you know, to have the direct relationship.

Through the Chair very briefly, I would just note that Mr. Zbur, it's a great question. I, along with some other folks, are partners in the A's. They're here for three years before they head to Vegas. The A's literally tell you, hey, if you can't use your ticket, go to, I think it's SeatGeek they have a deal with.

They all but encourage me and push me over to do that. So the other thing I would just note very briefly is Ticketmaster is the largest player in the secondary market. Also.

Now, in fairness to Ticketmaster, who I really shouldn't be overly fair to, but in fairness, in the modicum of good grace that we've heard from the other Members of the Committee, they will say, well, we created our secondary market as a response to the other folks in the secondary market, and there's probably a grain of truth to that, but they are the biggest player in the secondary market as well.

So I've bought primary tickets. I like Assemblymember McKinnor, love to go to shows, love to go to games, love to go to concerts. I've bought primary. I've occasionally bought secondary. In some cases, I do way better. There's a price point where I just will drop out, as is many other people. So.

But I do think that I share the concern, which is why I think seeing it in print and seeing if it can be worked on is important in terms of proof of purchase. I'm not unsympathetic to the concern there.

And I would just say that I know last Committee hearing, you did get a Bill out that was addressing about the speculative ticketing in the secondary market moreso. This is more about the specific consumer experience. And as the Bill is changing, we're going to continue to work with all sides on this.

To the chair, please. Yes, I would just add, as much as we appreciate, you know, Mr. Herrell's comments on NIVA, a majority of our venues do not use Ticketmaster. There are a lot of other ticketing providers, primary providers that we utilize. Our biggest problem in the ticketing space and the consumer problem is the secondary market.

And so this Bill, Mr. Lee has expressed, this is about certainty for the consumer experience. But just this two weeks ago or so, the supporters and proponents of the Bill opposed a Bill banning speculative ticketing, which is selling a ticket they don't have that. There's no, there's no certainty in that.

So I just want to note that, that, you know, this is kind of the, the lock we're in right now, and that's the challenge.

So did you want to say something?

Yeah, I just, I just wanted to say that listening to, on the business side about duplicating tickets, honestly, this shouldn't even be an excuse these days with the technology, with AI, I mean, you should be able to get a good secure system that you're not able to print 10 tickets, you know, of the same ticket. So I think that's kind of a, not a good excuse.

To the, to the Member.

Yeah. So is this, is this going to Judiciary Committee?

This is triple referred right now. It goes to Privacy next and then Judiciary supposedly. Okay, so it's triple.

You know, I have, I have concerns about the Bill. I'm going to vote and follow the Chair's recommendation today, but in part because I'm going to have some more time to hopefully engage with you. I didn't have some time to do this beforehand and really sort of talk to both sides and understand this a little bit better.

Absolutely. And I do appreciate that. It's just going to be a very lightning fast two more committees and we'll hopefully get to you in this third one soon. Could I ask, could I let the.

Okay. Thanks. Yes. Mr. Zbur, first of all, it remains to be seen whether if, when the Bill gets amended to prohibit or to allow for proof of receipt, that it actually will be triple referred to Judish. So it could just go to Privacy next week, which means it wouldn't go to Judish. There's a good chance it won't.

Sure.

So this may be your only chance to see it. And again, I can't stress enough if the author is accepting amendments that will be in print that deal with proof of purchase as a way to get into a venue.

If it's an authorized seller that offers a proof of receipt, we can let you in, whether that is the primary seller or the person we have an agreement with. And so if it's not a proof of purchase that comes from someone we're authorized, we have no way to verify, regardless of the technology.

And so you may not see this again because in all likelihood it could only be double referred. And so we would ask, look, we are working with Assemblymember Bryan on his Bill. We worked with Senator Caballero on her Bill last year. We worked with Assemblymember Laura Friedman on her Bill. We work with Assemblymember Wicks.

So we are collaborating and working, but as the sports teams, we feel like we're caught again in collateral damage between the consumer groups and others.

So anyway, we ask it to be.

Referred to Judish or not, it still.

Is referred to Judiciary at the moment.

Let me, and let me, let me intervene. That, of course, would be decision for the Rules Committee and for a floor vote of the full Assembly as well,

I would believe, and again this is for others to decide, that there is some scope of jurisdiction within the Judiciary Committee because we are dealing with legally, legal contracts or other constructs that are here that would need review. So TBD on that. But as we know right now, there is a triple referral signed to this Bill. Anything further?

Thank you, Assemblymember Ortega.

You know, I will be supporting this Bill today. I just want the opposition to clarify the fact that there is no more Oakland A's. They have left our city. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Ortega. Okay. I want to thank Members for the discussion here today. I want to thank the author as well for continuing to work in this space. He's not alone.

There are a number of other Assemblymembers and Senators that have been taking a keen interest and to try to be able to really get at the heart of what we need to accomplish here and is to find that common agreement that is going to be able to help protect that consumer and provide them some certainties and guarantees that they are not being sold fraudulent activity, that they're going to be able to, on the heels of making investments, to travel, to be able to go to set up arrangements that they are going to be honored that kind of agreement.

And I know former Assemblymember McCarty's efforts in this space, you know, did meet some of those technical challenges that deserve further conversations.

And while the Bill and print to date coming before Committee also had its spate of technical challenges as well, that I thought made it a lot more prohibitive to be able to find that area of agreement. This is a good idea.

This is a good area to be able to satisfy what we are trying to be able to do in the interest of consumer protections, not to say that there aren't bona fide technical issues that do need to be worked out.

And so I know that we have a passionate author here that is committed to be able to continue to work with all parties here to try to find those areas of agreement. And again, he's not alone.

There's going to be several other Assemblymembers that want to raise this as a key issue because we haven't solved it yet. And too many individuals, families out there are being left outside in the cold, outside that stadium, not being able to enjoy the opportunity that they thought that they had bought into.

Requiring some kind of proof of purchase that is linked to a bona fide ticket, I think, is a good framework to be able to start to have that conversation and work out some of those technical details and then working to see what requirements to, in order to be able to honor something there so that somebody isn't left outside in the cold is something that I know we want to be able to work closely with the actual venue providers as well.

And the author will continue to do that. We don't have that much time. We don't have a lot of runway here. But it's the chance that we have right now to keep a Bill in motion to be able to have those conversations.

And I know that the author will prioritize this Bill as well and strongly recommend an aye vote to be able to allow the opportunity for those conversations to be heard. So Assemblymember Lee, would you like to close on the Bill?

Yes. Thank you so much. Assemblymember Ward for your Committee and your help on this Bill. I definitely appreciate the conversation today from the Committee Members and even the opposition.

I do think it is universal experience and frustration that you see so many attempts and so many consumers who invest a lot of heartache and a lot of effort and a lot of money into seeing the big Beyonce, Taylor Swift, or even a small, smaller local artist.

And when there's sometimes that frustration or that uncertainty that comes with it, that's really what this Bill is trying to address, and that's the core of it. And I hope we can work together as a coalition to figure out that universal.

Trying to ameliorate the universal experience where people invest a lot of emotion and energy and money into this experience. And that's why I continue to crack at it and a long list of authors to continue to crack at this issue. And it will be worked on in the successful committees.

And I really do think that this is about really putting common sense, basic consumer protections in place. And again, I want to thank the chair and the committees for discussion today. And I will be humbly asking for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Secretary please call the roll.

[ROLL CALL]

That Bill currently has four aye votes with and one no vote with two Members not voting. It will be on call for absent Members. Thank you.

And with that, we are back on file. Next is Assembly Member Zbur. That will be taking up item number three, I believe it was. Yes, I. Number three. This is Assembly Bill 1138.

Thank you, Mr. Zbur. When you're ready, you may begin your presentation.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. I'd like to start by turning it over to my two joint authors, Assembly Member Bryan and Assembly Member Quirk-Silva.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm proud to co-present Assembly Bill 1138, which strengthens and modernizes the California Film and Television Tax Credit Program, a proven tool that has supported tens of thousands of jobs, driven billions in economic activity, and helped define California as the global leader in entertainment. The motion picture industry is a cornerstone of California's economy and our identity.

And I'm going to go off script. Do you get the pun here? And just say we know that California is iconic for our movie and film industry. We know that not only do people have memories from their childhood of some of their most treasured memories of Hollywood, and we also know that what happens in Hollywood is good for California. This tax credit is simply an attempt to say, we want you to stay here in California, we want you to film here in California, and we want to keep these jobs here in California. As simple as that is.

We know the impacts in the industry over the last handful of years, from the pandemic to the fires, and that this is an important step in California's history to retain an industry that has been many times, by other states and countries, there have been attempts to lure them from California, and those attempts have been successful. So with this tax credit, it is our framework to say we want you here, we want you filming here, we want to see your families here, and we want that investment in California. And with that, I am asking for support for AB 1138.

Thank you. Assembly Member Bryan.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and colleagues. I've never joined, I've never come into a joint presentation before, but that's how important this is. In my district, I'm proud to represent Fox Studios, Sony Studios, Amazon Studios, but I'm even more proud to be the home of SAG-AFTRA's headquarters, a number of IATSE workers, Teamsters, Laborers, and communities that deserve to have their stories told. The entertainment industry was birthed out of California.

This tax credit is incredibly necessary and important, but it's not some sort of corporate tax credit. What it is is it's an investment in workers. This is about paying people to get back to work who have helped tell some of the most important stories in our country and in our world. That's why they're being lured away by global competition in Vancouver, in Toronto, in London. It's why other states are trying to steal our jobs. Georgia, we see you. And we have to fight to keep them here.

And I'm proud to join Assembly Member Zbur, Assembly Member Quirk-Silva, Assembly Member McKinnor, and so many others who are in this fight trying to do what we can to make sure that this industry both represents our state, holds the values of our state, but puts people back to work. This is an investment in Californians, and I stand strongly for that investment and respectfully ask your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Bryan. Assembly Member Zbur, have anything further to add?

Yes. So first of all, I actually want to thank joint authors Assembly Member Bryan and Quirk-Silva. There's also an an army of folks that have been working on this in our Assembly caucus. Assembly Member Caloza and Gipson and Schultz and Harabedian and McKinnor.

We've all been learning about this industry and learning about how important it is and how we need to revive it. California's... And then of course there's the the joint bill on the on the Senate side led by Senator Allen, Menjivar, Stern, and Pérez. California's iconic film and television industry is in crisis.

1138 is a jobs bill, pure and simple. The hard working men and women and the small businesses who have built an industry that is intrinsic to California's identity are experiencing depression era levels of unemployment and business loss. Workers and small businesses who support the film and television industry are suffering from a quadruple whammy.

First, filming and production was brought to a near standstill because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Then came the entertainment industry strike, which hit our workers again. Then came the wildfires that devastated the Los Angeles area. And finally and most importantly, other states and countries who understand the value and importance of this industry, who understand that these are good jobs that people want.

Who understand that these jobs are not only uplift families but uplift whole communities have set their sights on luring these jobs out of California by adopting film tax credit programs and other incentives that make California's program not competitive, making many key productions no longer even apply for our program. Between 2022 and 2024, contributions to the Motion Picture Pension Plan dropped by approximately 30%, demonstrating a sharp decline in production in California and a drastic decline in union jobs.

And a report from Film LA just released in the last couple weeks shows that the decline in production is continuing even between last year and this year, highlighting that shoot days dropped by an additional 22% between the first quarter of 2024 and the first quarter of 2025. AB 1138 isn't about red carpets and premieres.

It's about writers, actors, accountants, production assistants, grips, camera operators, set and lighting designers, crew, costume designers, journey persons, carpenters, laborers. It's about helping workers who have been out of work for 6 months, 9 months, 18 months, and sometimes even longer.

It's about making sure that California families are able to maintain their health insurance and can avoid having to turn to unemployment benefits to pay their bills. It's about making sure that California workers are able to stay in California and are not forced to travel to places like Georgia or Canada or New Mexico to work in this industry.

And it's about ensuring that small businesses in California benefit from this industry as well. I'm grateful to Governor Newsom, who, as you know, has proposed to increase the state's incentive program from the current allocation of 330 million to 750 million per year beginning on July 1, 2025, and Assembly Member Quirk-Silva is leading the effort to analyze that program.

Unfortunately, increasing the size of the program alone is not sufficient to stem job losses that we are losing to other states and countries. The goal of AB 1138 is to modernize the California Film Tax Credit Program to ensure that California's program is competitive and helps retain and bring back high quality jobs.

AB 1138 is the product of careful negotiations between the Entertainment Union Coalition, a multi-union alliance representing more than 165,000 union entertainment workers, and the motion picture and television employers and other stakeholders to modernize that program.

Every change to the program, every single one that's embodied in this bill, was guided by the goal of bringing back jobs to California. And not only jobs, but the best jobs. Unlike other states' take tax credit programs, California's program is not a giveaway.

It's competitive based on job ratios, and the tax credit is not even extended until after the jobs are created and the spending has benefited our small businesses. 1138 raises the tax bait to be roughly equivalent to Georgia's credit program and to come closer to the programs in Canada, New York, and other countries.

The bill also expands the kinds of productions that qualify, again focusing on those that create and retain the most union jobs. We also wanted to make sure that the entire state benefits from this program. With the increase of the tax rate to 35% plus an additional 35% uplift for filming and production out of the Los Angeles zone, the program results in an incentive package that exceeds what is provided in most other jurisdiction. If the filming takes place out of Los Angeles, exceeds it.

On top of that, we've increased the allocations for independent productions from 26 million to 75 million. That's a 188% increase, understanding that many independent productions outside of Los Angeles film outside of Los Angeles and the tax credits for independents are fully transferable.

Last, the LA County Economic Development Corporation found that every tax credit dollar results in an economic output of $24 and $16 in domestic product, $8 and $6 in wages, and $1.07 in state and tax revenue. So this, this actually pays for itself in the long run.

And that's without all the multipliers when you look at the tourism industry and others. So with me today to testify in support of the bill, we have two witnesses. Rebecca Rhine, who's the Associate National Executive Director of the Directors Guild of America and President of the Entertainment Union Coalition, and Renata Ray, business representative for IATSE Local 44.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name's Rebecca Rhine. The EUC represents over 165,000 unionized entertainment industry workers in California. And right now nearly half of them are unemployed. Since the day Governor Newsom announced his intent to increase incentive funding in the budget, our guiding principle has been ensuring that this additional funding protects and preserves as many jobs as possible. So every suggestion and request about changing the program has been examined through that lens.

Many changes simply could not be included because of the negative impact they would have on getting more people back to work. These are not value judgments. It's about finding the balance between being competitive and maximizing jobs while preserving the program's core value.

The money goes to those projects that employ the most people in the unionized, benefited, middle class jobs that make up the qualified expenditures. This is a jobs bill for the working families in our industry. Here are the main changes we believe will rationalize the program, making it competitive and flexible while creating and preserving the most jobs for the most people. Raising the base credit allocation from 20 and 25% to 35 and 40%, with the highest percentage reserved for work outside of Los Angeles.

Expanding the types of programming eligible to reflect the increasing number of genres being wooed away by incentives elsewhere, again, while preserving the jobs ratio. Increasing the size of the indie production bucket and increasing the cap in recognition of the value and vibrancy those productions bring to the state. Doubling the opportunity to apply to the program and building in flexibility to align funding and demand. And reducing the amount of time a recurring series has to resume production or release their funding back into the program to be reallocated to new jobs.

In addition, on July 1st of this year, expanded training, reporting, and safety provisions that we advocated for in 2023 will go into effect. The EUC and our partners at the State Fed, California Federation of Labor, have always fought for this bill to reflect California values and serve workers, not corporations.

Thank you. If you have one concluding sentence.

Okay, Is everybody completely satisfied? No. In a world of unlimited time and money, we could figure out a way to meet everyone's needs. But that's not the world we live in. At this time and in this world, these changes give us a chance to save this industry in California, and we ask you to support this bill. Please don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Let's help middle class families and local vendors throughout the state. Your constituents who depend, who depend on you to hear their voices and take action on their benefit on their behalf.

Thank you. Bring your second witness, please.

Good morning to all. Thank you, Chair Ward, Vice Chair Lackey, and Committee Members, for an opportunity to speak for you today. Am I on? A little bit closer perhaps. You think I'd know this by now. In an effort to keep this a little light, believe it or not, my name is also Renata. I'm Renata Ray.

For the past 28 years, I've been a property craft member of IATSE Local 44 in Los Angeles. But a surprising number of people think I must be rich and famous like Tom Cruise. I am neither rich, I am neither famous. I am not Tom Cruise. I am here today representing both the 6,000 plus members of IATSE Local 44 and the 165,000 in the EUC, Entertainment Union Coalition. They are also not rich. They are not famous.

We are the thousands of artisans whose names whip by in the credit roll at the end of the movie. Not those that appear in huge letters and fade slowly at the beginning of the movie. We don't go to the award shows. We work the award shows. We don't walk the red carpet, we lay the red carpet. We are the middle class workers trying to keep a nine year old car running. We're parents trying to navigate childcare.

We are renters concerned that we will soon be priced out of our modest apartments and our modest neighborhoods. We are the sandwich generation, caretakers trying to balance the cost of health care, the rising cost of food in one of the most expensive cities in this country. We're not rich, we are not famous.

We are not the Tom Cruises. We're middle class workers fighting for our industry in California. Every day across this country people work for corporations run by billionaires. They don't share in the corporate in the corporation's wealth and they aren't advantaged by the corporations fame. They earn a wage and are just trying to make a living. We are no different. Passing the California film and television incentive will not serve billionaire corporations. This bill will preserve, replenish middle class jobs.

It is a long game jobs program with quantifiable return on investment that passed will serve the thousands of California based working class union members who aren't Tom Cruise but who work in the modest un-famous crafts up and down the credit roll who make, who help make the Tom Cruises of this industry. I am definitively Renata Ray. I thank you for your support of this bill.

Thank you very much. Are there other members of the public here that are wishing to register a position of support?

Emellia Zamani, California Travel Association, in support.

Thank you.

Molly Maula with Edelstein Gilbert Robson Smith on behalf of the Walt Disney Company in support.

Okay. Thank you, everybody. If we could have some quiet. I know there's a lot of activity in the room, but we'd like to be able to hear everybody get their position registered.

Samuel Chavoya, Local 44 set dresser. I support this bill.

Thank you.

Malakhi Simmons, IATSE Local 728, which is the craft of lighting, representing 3,000 members. I support this bill.

Thank you.

Morning, Mr. Chair. Chris Micheli on behalf of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce in support.

Thank you.

How you doing, Mr. Chair? Everybody, thank you. My name is Alex Aguilar. I'm the Business Manager for LiUNA Local 724 in Hollywood. And I strongly urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Scott Budnick, founder of the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, CEO of 1Community Films, in huge support.

Thank you.

Bob Denne, Business Representative, IATSE Local 729, motion picture set painters and sign writers, in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Jeanette Moreno King. I'm a supervising director in primetime animation series. I'm also the President of Animation Guild Local 839, IATSE. I represent 6,000 members, almost 50% who are unemployed right now. We highly support this bill. There's a talent drain going on. Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Jeremy Whalon. I'm a driver with Teamsters Local 399 in strong support of the bill.

Thank you.

Morning, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Ivan Fernández, California Labor Federation, in support.

Thank you.

Hi. My name is Tricia Rodrigo. I'm with IATSE Local 700, the Editors Guild. I've been a television editor for 20 years working on large scale unscripted network competition shows such as Survivor, the Amazing Race, and I humbly ask for your support to increase the tax credits for the entertainment industry to competitive levels. Thank you.

Tara Khonsari on behalf of SAG-AFTRA. We're in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Rudy Reyes, a member of Anti-Recidivism Coalition and a Local 728 Lighting Technicians Union, in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Hello. I'm Diana Wade, member of American Federation of Musicians Local 47, and I play the viola on film scores, and I'm in support of this bill.

Thank you.

Hi. I'm Courtney Franklin. I'm a 23 year member of the Directors Guild of America. I work as a first assistant director and a director, and I manage and create streamline logistics with crew and cast for telling stories that change people's lives. I also mentor young people in production. I'm strongly in support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, everybody. My name is David Alexander Rivas. I'm a Local 80 Grips, and I strongly support this bill.

Thank you.

My name is Marco Flores, Local 80, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Robert Lopez, Local Teamsters of 399, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Melissa Patack, Motion Picture Association, in support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Michael Walbrecht, Warner Brothers Discovery, in support of the bill.

Thank you.

Joanne Desmond, IATSE Local 16, San Francisco Bay Area, in strong support.

Thank you.

Phil Collins, autographs later. IATSE Local 80 grip, in strong support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Shelagh Wagener from the Writers Guild of America West in strong support of this bill. Thank you.

Terri Freedman, IATSE Local 80 craft service worker in film and TV. I'm from Concord, and I'm a part of a working class, middle class group of creatives who are just trying to make a living and support our local businesses and our communities. And I support this bill.

Thank you.

Rabeyah Khan, key assistant location manager, Teamsters Local 399, and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Stephanie O'Keefe, American Federation of Musicians Local 47, in strong support of this bill. And I also want to say that the Californians behind me know how to make magic.

Thank you.

Thank you, Committee. Tobey Bays. I'm the Business Agent for IATSE Local 44. I represent over 6,000 members, and with nearly 40% unemployment for well over a year now. Desperately supporting this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Jim Revis with IATSE Local 871, Script Accounting and Coordinators Union in Hollywood. All 3,000 of our members support this bill.

Thank you.

Alenis Balderrama with the Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 700, and we strongly support this bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Jason Selsor. I'm a 30 year member of IATSE. I was recently elected the Vice President of Local 80. I'm also a small business owner, Stage13 Rigging Rentals, and Lucasfilms rigging key grip. And I'm in support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Tiffany Phan on behalf of Sony Pictures Entertainment in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

DeJon Ellis Jr., Local 80 Business Manager representing 3500 grips, craft service, and medics supporting the bill. Thank you.

Brigitta Romanov, the Executive Director of the Costume Designers Guild, IATSE Local 892. I represent 1200 members, and I strongly support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Salim Allen, and it is my honor to be here. And I just want to say first and foremost, film production workers in Hollywood are struggling. There's a real crisis in Hollywood right now. Can I read a statement please?

No, I'm sorry. This is for position. Stating a position.

Okay. I strongly support AB 1138 and ask you guys to support it, please. Thank you.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Hi. Samantha Bempong with Make It Bay and representing the Out of Zone Coalition. Strongly support with out of zone amendments to make geographic equity built into the bill.

Thank you.

Hi. Collin Sutton with Galpin Rentals in Hollywood and Local 399 and IATSE and all of them, we support it. Strongly support this bill. So thank you.

Hi. Good morning. I'm Tisha Tell with Local 399 Hollywood Teamsters. I'm an Assistant Political Director and also a Business Agent representing location managers, and we are in strong support of this bill.

Thank you.

Hi. My name is James Kleverweis. I'm a member of the Directors Guild of America for 30 years. I'm a producer and unit production manager, and I urge you to support this bill.

Thank you.

Hi. Amy Lemisch, Public Policy with Netflix, here in support of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello. Anthony Rosario, second assistant camera, IATSE Local 600, in strong, strong support.

Thank you.

Hi. Rodji Munoz. I'm a Local 399 DOT compliance, and I strongly support this bill.

Thank you.

Hi, Committee. Lisa Gardner, Motion Picture Costumers Local 705. I don't know if you guys know there's a show about to shoot in prep set in Oakland that's going to shoot in Portland. I strongly support this bill. Please bring our work back.

Thank you.

Good morning. Shane Gusman on behalf of the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council in support.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Gabriel Docto. I'm with the Out of Zone Coalition. We strongly support this bill and are also looking forward to introducing amendments for Out of Zone equity.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Aaron Roberts, the founder and CEO of the Chula Vista Entertainment Complex and co-founder of the Out of Zone Coalition. We are in strong support of this bill and look forward to continuing discussion on Out of Zone amendments. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Hannah Wagner, a member of the Out of Zone Coalition, in full support of the bill. Looking forward to continuing discussions regarding Out of Zone equity.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Greg Campbell on behalf of Paramount Global in support of the bill.

Thank you.

Good morning. Laurie Johnson on behalf of Latino Film Institute in strong support.

Good morning. Heidi Nakamura representing IATSE Local 695, sound, video, and projection members in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Joe Aredas, IATSE Local 695, sound, video, projection. We appreciate your support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, everybody. I'm Kali Harrison. I am a Business Rep with Local 600, which is the International Cinematographers Guild. I'm also a card carrying member of the DGA, and I'm in strong support of this bill. Help us bring and spend our dollars here. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Bernard Fok. I'm here for EAP Creative, a Sacramento independent film company, and I'm in strong support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Micki Bursalyan, Local 600, the cinematographers and publicists. Thank you so much. Strong support.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Chuck Parker. I'm the National Executive Director of the Art Directors Guild, IATSE Local 800. We are in strong support of this bill, which will maintain our competitiveness on a world market.

Thank you.

Hello. I'm Marissa Bernstel. I'm a storyboard artist in animation and Executive Board Member for the Animation Guild Local 839, representing over 5,000 members working in animation. And we strongly support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi. I'm Susan Godfrey. I'm a member of the IATSE 839 Animation Guild. I am here in support of SB 630 and AB 1138, not as corporate subsidies, but as critical job protection bills. Thank you very much.

Hi. Greg Sowizdrzal, President of IATSE Local 122 in San Diego and Coachella Valley, and I strongly support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi. My name is Cheryl Eckert. I'm a hairstylist of 25 years and now the Business Representative of 706. I have witnessed firsthand of heartbreaking loss. Many losing their insurance...

Thank you. Do you have a statement or position? Okay. Thank you.

Thom Davis, President of the California IATSE Council, strong support.

Thank you.

Ed Duffy, Teamsters Local 399, in support. Strong support. Sorry.

Registered.

Good morning. Patrice Madrigal, Local 706, in strong support.

Thank you.

Good morning. Angela Moss, Local 706, strong support for commerce, community, and creativity.

Thank you.

Christian Castro with Teamsters Joint Council 42, representing nearly 100,000 members in Southern California. And we are in strong support.

Thank you very much. Are there any other members of the public here or outside the hearing room? Okay, seeing none. Are there any witnesses in opposition or in betweens?

Mr. Chair and Members, Adam Keigwin on behalf of the Association of Independent Commercial Producers. We are in a support if amended position provided that television commercial production is included, similar to nearly every other state. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to register a position of opposition? Okay, seeing none. We'll bring it back to Committee discussion. I'd like to take the prerogative to maybe kick this off and really thank the author and authors for your passion and dedication. This has been months in the making with a lot of important conversations.

And I want to thank a number of stakeholders as well who had a chance to meet with me, our Committee staff, and others to really walk through not just the evidence that these tax credits are able to afford, to be able to support great, good union jobs that we have here in the Golden State, but also the evidence that we have to reconcile with that we are in competition with other states and now other countries as well.

And the math is not mathing for California for a lot of reasons. And so we use tax credits as an opportunity to really try to level the playing field, to make sure that we are retaining and creating many of these good jobs here and that we're never losing onto something that is historically so Californian. Right.

This is a part of our identity as a state, a core industry here that we must continue to be able to preserve. And so I really appreciate a lot of the information and evidence and discussion that I've been able to be witness to over the recent months because we're talking real dollars here in a in a year that's very challenging to do so. So we've got this sort of operating forward now on a multi-pronged approach. You know, leading with Assembly Members of Zbur.