Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations

The Senate Committee on Appropriations will now come to order. We're meeting Today in room 2200 of the O Street building. We have been notified that Senator Dawley will not be in attendance today. We have 38 measures remaining on today's agenda. We will be taking a vote on one item, AB 379 by Assemblymember Schultz.

The remaining bills will have a motion to the suspense file. The authors for all of the suspense measure on today's agenda have waived presentation. What this means is they will not show up and present the Bill as usual. However, we will be taking testimony from the public on every single item.

Before we begin, I want to remind any witnesses to limit their testimony to the fiscal aspects of the Bill. That's what this Committee focuses on. Please refrain from lengthy policy discussions and repeating prior testimony in your comments. Before we begin today's hearing on the measures before us, let's establish a quorum. Madam Assistant, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

A quorum has been established. Now we can move on to the business of the day. First up, for the one do pass Bill. When the Assembly Member shows up on that, we'll take that up out of order. But right now we're going to start with the first item on the agenda, which is AB 64.

And I don't see the Senator, the Assembly Member. So you may just want to call it to my attention when he shows up because I. I'm going to move. We'll start with AB 64 by Assembly Member Pacheco. Assemblymember Pacheco has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition?

Seeing none? The Finance Department. And my apologies, I did not identify you as from the Finance Department. We appreciate you being here today.

No problem, Madam Chair. And good morning. Christian Beltran with the Department of Finance. No file on this one, Madam Chair.

Very good. Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee, we will. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection. AB 64 rule. Move to suspense. AB 343 by Assemblymember Pacheco, who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition, Department of Finance.

The Department of Finance is neutral on the Bill, but notes that it is possible that this Bill could lead to more legal action to prosecute violators of this Bill and depending on the number of infractions, the state could incur Additional costs due to increased caseload and courtroom operating costs.

Finance notes that the courts do not typically receive funding on a workload basis. Therefore, unless this particular caseload becomes significant and can be documented, it is likely to be absorbed.

Thank you very much. See no comments or questions. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection. AB343 will move to suspense. AB352 by Assemblymember Pacheco. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition, Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file.

Candidate without objection. AB 352 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB 86 by Assemblymember Berner. Assemblymember Berner has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support. How about in opposition Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no comments or questions from the Committee. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection. AB86 will move to suspense AB399 by Assembly Member Berner. Anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection.

AB399 will move to suspense AB258 by Assembly Member Connolly. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? Welcome.

Good morning, Madam Chair, Members of the Committee. Louie Brown here today on behalf of Western Fairs Association and the California Fairs Alliance. AB258 makes a minor increase in the allocation for fares. If the increase is approved, it would take the annual allocation for fares from roughly 4 million to probably between 10 and 12 million.

This is far short of the resources that are needed for the California Fair Network. And if the Bill were to take effect, it would not take effect till the fiscal year 27-28, which we believe gives plenty of time for us to adjust and prepare accordingly for that.

On behalf of Western Fairs Association, the California Fairs alliance, we ask for an aye vote when it comes off suspense. Hopefully.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support about anyone in opposition, Department of Finance. No. File this saying no questions or comments. Sorry,

Oh, great. Thank you. Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection. AB258 will move to suspense. So what we're going to do is move on to AB379 by Assembly Member Schultz. Welcome to the Committee. You're up.

Good morning, Madam Chair and esteemed Committee Members. I'm pleased to be with you all today to discuss Assembly Bill 379. I note that I'm joined by one of our authors, Assemblymember Krell. Some others may show up as well.

In brief summary, AB379 would authorize felony punishment for the solicitation of any minor by an adult more than 3 years of age than the minor, as well as a misdemeanor treatment for loitering with intent to prove purchase commercial sex.

It provides critical new tools for prosecutors, establishes a survivor support fund to aid victims, and includes tougher penalties for those who deliberately look the other way on trafficking. Together, these changes will help communities working to end human trafficking and protect our vulnerable youth. I want to thank the Committee for the Thoughtful analysis.

Certainly there are costs that will be borne in the execution of this change in law. However, I would submit that from my years of experience, and I'm assuming that Ms. Krell would say something very similar, there is a real cost to human trafficking and exploitation in our community.

So while there are costs in terms of detection and enforcement and sentencing, we also have to balance that with the trade off and real costs of the lives that are impacted by this catastrophic, this plague that is very much alive in our society.

With me today, or should be with me today, but I'm not sure I see them in the room so I'll do my best. But we had invited Sacramento County District Attorney Tin Ho and Visalia Police Chief Jason Salazar, President of the California Police Chiefs Association. I'm not seeing any response. So with that I'll respectfully submit and ask for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support?

Thank you. Chair and Members. Moira Topp here on behalf of San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Genevieve Schweitzer on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kunalakis as a proud co sponsor in support. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good morning. Marjorie Saylor with the Survivor Leader Network of San Diego, San Diego County District Attorney's Office, Rights for Girls out of D.C., Demand Abolition or I'm sorry, the California Coalition Against Demand and Sexual Exploitation, Space International, 3 strands Global Foundation, Survivor Advisory Board, all in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Madam Chair. Members, on behalf of Bakersfield Mayor Karen Goh and the City of Carlsbad, in strong support. Thank you.

Helen Taylor, Vice President of IMPACT at the national anti trafficking organization Exodus Cry, Standing with survivors in strong support.

Thank you.

Emerald Rubio, survivor, Human Trafficking Panel with Love Never Fails, founder of Step Free. Marriage and Family Therapy and holder of Healing Circles for survivors of sexual trauma and Strong support.

Thank you very much.

Molly Sheehan with the California Catholic Conference in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Vanessa Durazo, founder and Executive Director of Love Never Fails and strong support.

Ashley Faison, founder and Executive Director of Diamond Collective and representing the Sex Trade Survivor Caucus in strong support.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support but in opposition?

Good morning, Madam Chair and Committee. My name is Ann Block and I'm a senior Staff Attorney with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, or ILRC. The ILRC is a national nonprofit that provides critical support at the intersection of criminal and immigration law through legal analysis, policy work training and technical assistance.

I myself have almost 40 years of experience working in that space and experience working with immigrant survivors of crime, including sex crimes. I'm also a Davis resident and constituent of Senator Cabaldon. The ILRC respectfully opposes AB379 because the Bill would subject more people to traumatic ICE arrest, detention and deportation.

We live in a time when the Trump Administration is turning the government into a weapon against the people. ICE is disappearing our neighbors, devastating our workplaces, arresting political opponents.

Ma'am if you could focus on the fiscal aspects of the Bill. I do apologize. We can't re litigate, if you will, the policy committees. This is the fiscal.

I understand. Thank you, Madam Chair. There are going to be significant costs in terms of ICE detention and families being separated in California, families going on welfare because of that. That's happening right now. And it would happen even more if this Bill passes.

We understand the important need to support survivors of sex trafficking, especially minors, which is a significant part of our work as well. But we need to ensure that people aren't being funneled into Ayes custody, which is going to increase cost significantly over the State of California and especially for California families.

Just to say, just to let you know, the immigration consequences of this Bill include the probable loss of DACA or DREAMER status, which will affect employers throughout California and their employees as well.

It will trigger mandatory ICE detention, inadmissibility and deportability grounds, both for those applying for permanent residency and those potentially who already have legal permanent resident status. This is an example. Let me give you an example of a story. A 30 year old DACA recipient, . Yes, it will have. It does have.

The fiscal aspects of it. It sounds cruel, but that's what this Committee looks at. So if you could focus on the fiscal, I would.

Okay, say someone who's a DACA recipient, 30 years old, a farm worker, we'll call him Jose, assisting his farm labor contractor, which is an important part of California business and California economy, to recruit other workers. This happens all the time in California.

Jose drives by an area frequented by sex workers unknowingly and gestures to pedestrians in attempt to ask them if they need work. Officer is nearby. Jose is arrested under this new provision and pleads to misdemeanor as a result, loses his DACA status, loses employment. Employer loses their employee. He's placed in Ayes detention removal proceedings and deported.

Or Guadalupe victim of trafficking herself is seen talking to other sex workers on behalf of her own trafficker who is coercing her to do that. Convicted, thrown into Ayes detention and becomes deportable. Also separated from her family, losing whatever job or employment she has. This is why ILRC strongly opposes AB379.

The Bill adds yet another offense that is extremely vague and broad and which will result in Ayes detention, separation of families, loss of employment and employers loss of employment employees. So we urge a no vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good morning. My name is Maxine Dugan. I'm with the Erotic Service Providers Legal Education and Research Project. I'm a currently working prostitute of 30 plus years and pretty much plan on working as a prostitute for another 30 plus more. Our group opposes this Bill because of its fiscal irresponsibility.

It has in many cases under the courts, under the probation, a bunch of costs that are unknown.

So when you're trying to balance the public's safety with trying to bring justice for human trafficking victims, we have to look at the overbroad language of recriminalizing, loitering with the intent to commit a commercial sex act which will sweep up a larger group of people which will have a large fiscal impact on the courts and on the diversion programs.

And that part of the law is very quite possibly unconstitutional. And in fact in this nicely written analysis could be written as a footnote in a brief in a court hearing to have this particular provision injuncted.

So I think that you can look at the $27 million that human trafficking victims are already getting under the Office of Emergency. Oh no, it's the Victims Compensation Fund. So you have to look at the balance here against all of these unknown costs against this unconstitutional Bill.

So that's why we urge your to send this Bill back to the drawing board and get some finite answers on some of these unknown costs before you consider passing it. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Sarah Whipple. I'm with the Sacramento Sex Workers Outreach Project and the Sidewalk Project representing street level sex workers and survivors of sex trafficking through on the Ground Services in Sacramento and LA County.

Obviously the Bill has real human costs, but there's also quite a significant cost, as you note in your report, to incarceration, both through counties, through the state, and also for individuals. Incarceration significantly disrupts community lives, prevents poor people from going to their jobs, participating in their communities, and it's a significant cost in already economically marginalized community. So both Sidewalk Project and SWOP Sacramento strongly urge you to oppose.

Thank you very much. Now we're on to the Me toos. If you could stick name identification and opposition.

Hello, Madam Chair. My name is Jess Torres. I'm with the Survivor Policy Coalition in strong opposition to this Bill. I'm also a survivor of human trafficking and nearly deported because of this crime as a minor. So I strongly urge you. Thank you.

Natasha Minskir, Smart Justice California. Strongly opposed unless amended.

Thank you very much.

Lila Chappelle, Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking. Opposed.

Thank you.

Good morning. Glenn Bacchus for Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Drug Policy Alliance in opposition.

Thank you.

George Parampathu on behalf of ACLU California Action in strong opposition.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. Tessa D'Arcangelew Ampersand on behalf of Turla. In strong opposition. Thank you.

Carmel Jud, Rising Worldwide and adamantly opposed. Thank you.

DeRenee Manuel and I do oppose AB379.

Good morning. I'm Antonia Crane, founder of Stripper Worker Center and Strippers United, along with Stop the Raids and my organizations. We strongly oppose. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hi. Reagan, representing the Sidewalk Project in Los Angeles, as well as the Stripper Co Op and equity strippers NoHo, which is the stripper union in Los Angeles. Strongly oppose unless amended.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in opposition? So I understand that the witness in support has now shown up.

That is correct, Madam Chair.

I'll give that witness an opportunity to make a statement. Since we allowed the opposition witnesses to testify, we are focusing on the fiscal aspects of the Bill.

Good morning and thank you, Chair and Members. I'm Chief Jason Salazar, President of the California Police Chiefs Association, which represents your 335 municipal chiefs throughout the state. On behalf of my colleagues, I'm here to convey our support for AB379 and the destructive fiscal impacts of human trafficking and child sex exploitation.

The underlying issues behind this legislation are unfortunately not new, but remain among the oldest and most insidious criminal acts that law enforcement encounters on sadly, a consistent basis. The psychological physical harm suffered by victims in these cases is hard to comprehend and strikes at our hearts, especially when we, many of us parents, encounter Children being victimized.

One of the greatest costs associated with our anti human trafficking operations is separating victims from the involved criminal acts.

I want to make clear to all of you that it is not our intent or our goal to criminalize the victims in these cases, but to rely on the laws and tools to leverage treatment and services for each individual in need. Ensuring that those exploited are themselves protected and secure is our mission. AB379 understands this balance.

Built with equal parts targeting, enforcement and prosecution alongside funding services for victims. Not only are the provisions of this Bill comprehensive but supportive of each other, focused on creating a significant impact. While there is much work to be done in this space, AB379 represents a meaningful advancement in the services to fight against human trafficking.

And for that reason, on behalf of the California Police Chiefs Association, I urge an aye vote. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you for being here. Bring it back to Department of Finance.

No file at this time, Madam Chair.

Very good. There is a motion. Are there any questions or concerns from the Committee saying none. This does. There is a do pass recommendation. We'll allow you to conclude.

Thank you very much. Madam Chair. Respectfully ask for your aye vote today.

Very good. Please call the roll. Actually I need a motion. Yes, that's right.

[Roll Call]

Thank you very much appreciate. Thank you all very much for being here today. I appreciate your participation. 6 to 0. The Bill is out. Going to move on to the next Bill on our agenda which is AB260 by Assemblymember Aguiar Curry. Give it just a minute.

Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support of 260? AB260. How about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So AB260 will move to suspend fence. We we are not going to be taking up AB301 by Assembly Member Chiavo.

We'll see that on another day. Potentially. Moving on. zero, it's 28.8. I'm sorry. Can't read my. Can't read stuff. Moving on to AB535 by Assembly Member Schiavo. Is there anyone here who would like to testify and support. How about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee.

This is a Suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB535 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB316 by Assemblymember Krell who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support how about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file.

Candidate without objection, AB316 will move to suspense. AB6 18 by Assemblymember Krell who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition Department of Finance? No file this is seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file.

Candidate without objection, AB618 will move to susp moving on to AB3 23 by Assemblymember Fong who has waived presentation. Anyone here in support? How about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB323 will move to suspense. AB731 by Assemblymember Fong.

Is there anyone here who would like to testify and support about in opposition Department of Finance? No file seeing no questions or comments. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB731 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB338 by Assemblymember Solache. Testimony in support.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Chris McKayley here on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce in support of the measure. As your able consultant has noted, there is money for workforce development in those two affected counties from the wildfires in the state budget. This bill would impose some additional costs on the state workforce development board.

We hope that with the budget allocation that this Committee would move the bill forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support? Anyone in opposition See no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate without objection, AB 338 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB 358 by Assemblymember Alvarez who has waived presentation. Anyone here in support? In opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB 358 will move to suspense. AB 833 by Assemblymember Alvarez. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? In opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

No questions or comments from the committee. Without objection, AB 833 will move to suspense. We took up AB 379, so we're moving on to AB 422 by Assemblymember Jackson who has waved presentation. Testimony in support? Testimony in opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

No questions from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate.

So without objection AB 422 will move to suspense. AB 538 by Assemblymember Berman who has waived presentation. Testimony in support? Testimony in opposition? Wasn't sure?

No, I was waiting for you. Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Kobe Pizotti on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga in opposition.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection, AB 538 will move to suspense. AB 543 by Assemblymember Gonzalez who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support?

Good morning. Tessa d' Arcangelew Ampersand on behalf of Smart Justice California in support.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support but in opposition? Department of Finance no file seeing no questions or comments. This is a suspense file. Candidate without objection. AB543 will move to suspense AB630 by Assemblymember M. Gonzalez. Testimony and support.

Thank you, Madam Chair Members on behalf of the cities of Vernon and the City of Bakersfield, we are in strong support support of this measure. Thank you.

Very good. Anyone else in support? How about in opposition the Department of Finance.

No file.

This is a suspense file. Candidate seeing no comment or questions from the committee. Is there any and seeing no opposition. AB 630 will move to suspense. AB 708 by Assemblymember Valencia has been made a two year bill. So we're moving on to AB 764 by Assemblymember Jay Gonzalez. Is there anyone who would like to testify in support?

How about in opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection, AB 763 will move to suspense. AB 787 by Assemblymember Papan.

Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? Anybody in opposition?Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection, AB 787 will move to suspense. AB 900 by Assemblymember Papan. Testimony in support? Testimony in opposition?

Department of Finance?

Seeing no questions or comments of concern by the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Is there any if there's no objection, AB 900 will move to suspense. AB 803 by Assemblymember Garcia who has waived presentation. Testimony in support? Testimony in opposition. Department of Finance

No file.

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee.

This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection. AB 803 will move to suspense. AB 845 by Assemblymember Arambula who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? Testify in opposition? Department of Finance.

Seeing no comments or questions from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection,

No file.

AB 845 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB 848 by Assemblymember Soria who has waived presentation. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the committee. This is a suspense file candidate. Without objection, AB 848 will move to suspense.

AB 859 by Assembly Member Macedo, testimony and support.

Good morning Madam Chair. Chris McKayley here on behalf of the Civil Justice Association of California. This measure was on consent and the two policy committees. I just draw your attention to the last line of your Committee's fiscal analysis that there are potential cost savings associated with this Bill as well if it deals with unmeritorious claims.

And for that reason we hope you'll pass it off as suspense. Thank you Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support. How about in opposition. Department of Finance? No file. See no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate without objection. AB 859 will move to suspense. Moving on to AB 913 by Assembly Member C. Rodriguez.

Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition? Department of Finance?

No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB 913 will move to suspense.

Moving on to AB 959 by Assemblymember Hadwick. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? In opposition? Department of Finance?

The Department of Finance is opposed to this Bill because it creates ongoing General Fund costs in the low to mid-hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Commission to review and approve new one-year internship programs at school districts and COEs which are not reflected in the state's current fiscal plan.

The Commission estimates that the Bill will specifically result in ongoing General Fund cost of unknown but potentially significant amounts to review and approve an increased number of new one-year internship programs with approximately the thousand school districts and COEs, not excluding explicitly authorized to provide them.

Thank you very much. See no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection AB 959 will move to suspense. AB 978 by Assembly Member Hoover was moved pursuant to 28.8. So we'll move on to AB 992 by Assembly Member Irwin, who has waived presentation, testimony and support.

How about in opposition. Department of Finance? No file. seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate without objection AB 992 will move to suspense. AB 993 by Assembly Member Pellerin. AB 996 just checking to see if you're awake. Checking to see if I'm awake. AB 996.

Yes, ma'am, Kobe Pizotti.

Testimony in support.

Yes. Madam Chair and Senators, this again, Kobe Pizotti on behalf of the City of Carlsbad in strong support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in support, in opposition. Department of Finance, no file. Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file, candidate without objection AB 996 will move to suspense. AB 1045 by assembly member Avila Farias. Anyone in support. Testimony in opposition. The Department of Finance, No file.

Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file. Candidate AB 1045 will move to suspense. AB 1162 by Assembly member Bonta, who has waived presentations, testimony in support, testimony in opposition. Department of Finance, no problem. Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file. Candidate.

So without objection, AB 1162 will move to suspense. AB 1376 by Assembly member Bonta, who has waived presentation testimony in support, testimony in opposition. Department of Finance, no file. Seeing no questions or comments from the Committee.

This is a suspenseful candidate without objection AB 1376 will move to suspense. AB 1225 by assembly member Bennett, who has waived presentation. Testimony in support, testimony in opposition. Department of Finance, no file. This saying no questions or comments from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection, AB 1225 will move to suspense.

AB 1299 by Assembly Member Brian has been moved pursuant to 28.8. So we're moving on to AB 1309 by Assembly Member Flora who has waived presentation testimony in support, testimony in opposition. Department of Finance. No file. Okay, on this one. Yes, there is a comment from the Committee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I was watching the news this morning and I saw that they were talking about this particular bill.

And I thought it would be important to point out, number one, it's very important, wherever we can find the opportunity to properly pay people who are risking their lives and really, frankly, taking time away from their families.

We're talking about firefighters who typically have to go out on some of these fires, may have to leave a week's period of time, miss family time, miss their own personal issues. But what particularly caught my eye with the news was they were talking about the increase and they didn't seem to report the full story.

Which was the story was that we need to make sure that these firefighters are paid within line of other firefighters in the state.

So I just wanted to make sure to bring to the attention to the public that this proposed bill would require the state to pay BU8 firefighters within 15% of the average salary for corresponding ranks in the following 20 California fire departments. So it's really bringing them in line because they do provide somewhat of a different service.

It's making sure that they're receiving adequate pay.

Thank you. Very good. Any other comments from the Committee? Thank you for that comment. This is is a suspense file candidate, so without objection AB 1309 will move to suspense AB 1336 by Assemblymember Addis. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition Department of Finance?

Finance is opposed to this bill because it creates new costs not included in the 2025 Budget act and has the potential to create future cost pressures for DIR to sustain Administration of the program.

Specifically, DIR estimates that the cost to implement this bill to be in the millions of dollars annually, though DIR notes that precise workload and fiscal impact is unknown.

DIR anticipates that the required $5 million of one time transfer from the Workers Compensation Administration Revolving Fund to the new Climate Change Heat Injury and Death Fund would not be sufficient to support the cost of the new program created by the bill.

Additionally, Finance notes that this bill may be premature given other existing rulemaking and related activities that are already in process pursuant to prior legislation.

Very good seeing no comments or questions from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection AB 1336 will move to suspense. And finally AB 1381 by Assembly. Assemblymember Muratsuchi. Is there anyone here who would like to testify in support? How about in opposition Department of Finance?

The Department of Finance opposes this Bill because it creates significant General Fund cost pressures in the tens of millions of dollars not included in the state spending plan. Moreover, the Bill could create future significant General Fund cost pressures by preparing local educational agencies to develop demand for educational workforce housing construction without a dedicated funding source.

Thank you very much. Seeing no comments or questions from the Committee. This is a suspense file candidate. So without objection AB 1381 will move to suspense. And that ladies and gentlemen concludes our agenda for today. Want to thank everyone for participating in the hearing today.

We have now concluded the agenda and the meeting of the Senate Committee on Appropriations is adjourned.