Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

Good morning. Good morning. Hi, everyone. Okay. Welcome to the July 2, 2025 Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing. We have 25 bills to consider this morning as part of of our regular order hearing. Before we begin, I have a few housekeeping notes to cover. First, I'd like to thank ascending Member Aguar Curry for joining us today.

Thank you for coming. She's filling in for Assembly Member Fong on the Committee today. I'd also like to thank Assembly Member Nguyen, who I think is coming, for filling in for Assembly Member Coloza on the Committee today. And Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez will be absent for today's hearing.

We encourage the public to provide written testimony before the hearing by visiting the Committee [email protected] Please note that any written testimony submitted to the Committee is considered public comment and may be read into the record or reprinted. The hearing room is open for attendance. We encourage everyone to watch the hearing from its live stream on the website.

We will accepting public comment on any Bill placed on the suspense file by the Committee today and for which the author waived presentation before the close of the regular order hearing. The testimony on any such Bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization and position on the Bill.

We will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total. As you came in, you saw the rules. We expect everyone to participate and be kind and respectful to each other. And if you violate those rules, I have the authority to remove you from this hearing. But I suspect everyone will be in their best behavior. With that, we'd like to establish a quorum.

[Roll Call]

We have a quorum. Great. Let's take up this consent calendar. Do we have a motion? Great. We have a motion and a second. Sorry, I forgot. We have two parts to the consent calendar.

The first motion is do passed to the consent applies to the bills that enjoy unanimous support in this Committee and are eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar consistent with Assembly rules. Do we have a motion for this? Yes, we have a motion and a second.

[Roll Call]

Those are out on an A roll call on the second motion do pass. Applies to bills that enjoy unanimous support in this Committee but are not eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar consistent with Assembly rules. We have a motion on this in.

A second consent calendar part two. Motions do pass. Senate Bill 87, Seattle 250, Ochobog, 412 Limon, 443, Rubio, 683 Cortese and 734 Caballero. That's out on a roll call.

And with that I see we have Mr. Laird step up to play. And we expect you to behave. Mr. Laird. And you are presenting SB 391. You can begin.

Thank you very much. And I'm sorry Assembly Member Fong isn't here because it got out of his Committee without any no votes. And I'm sure he would have been the backstop.

This Bill would result in significant cost savings by providing authority to the California Community College Chancellor's Office to impose reasonable fees or charges on research partners seeking access to data from the Chancellor's office. The office currently spends a significant amount of time between 750 and 1260 hours per year.

And data requests can take anywhere from a few weeks to multiple years to complete. It's common practice for other departments, such as the Department of Education. Cradle to career, they have the authority to charge fees for data requests. But as a state agency, the Chancellor's office isn't. We've worked with the opposition.

I believe we've come to an agreement on amendments that will remove their opposition. And with me today to answer any technical questions is Dr. Linda Vesk as the Assistant Vice Chancellor for State and Federal Federal Relations for the California Community College Chancellor's Office. With that, at the appropriate time, I would respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you. You can. Would you like to testify or just here for technical. Great. Okay, great. Do we have additional folks in support? Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition?

Thank you. Mr. Chair Toni Triguero. On behalf of the California Teachers Association, we want to acknowledge publicly our work with the Senator and thank him for the latest set of amendments and remove our opposition. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Any additional folks wish to express opposition or any tweeners? We have a motion. A second. Would you like to close?

I thank the CTA for our work in them removing their opposition and getting to the amendments. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Laird. That is out on an A roll call. With Ms. Dixon and Mr. Todd not voting, I guess I can do. Okay. I will present for Ms. Caballero.

All right, Ms. Chair, you're presenting SB 251. You may begin.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair and Members. SB 251, as amended, would appropriate a little over 1.2 million from the General Fund to the Attorney General to pay three specific claims against the state. The Bill also includes an urgency clause.

SB251 is one of the several annual bills authored by the chair of either the Senate Appropriations Committee or the Assembly Appropriations Committee to provide appropriation authority for legal settlements approved by by the Department of Justice and Finance.

Along with me here today to answer questions for the Committee is Justin Rausa, Deputy Director of Legislative Fiscal Policy, California Department of Justice. We also have the technical witnesses available as needed. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Good morning, Madam Vice Chair. Honorable Members of the Committee want to appreciate the opportunity to discuss SB 251 with you today on behalf of the sponsor, Attorney General Rob Bonta. We appreciate Chair Wicks and Senator Caballero for partnering with us again.

I'd just like to emphasize that these settlements were entered into lawfully by the state upon advice of counsel and our binding state obligations. The technical experts with me today are Deputy Attorneys General Jerry Yen and Supervising Deputy Attorney General John Echeverria, in case you have any questions.

We're happy to answer any questions and want to appreciate the chief consultant for the detailed Bill analysis. With that, we respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Do we have any other folks that. Would like to express support?

Good morning, Madam Vice Chair. Millie Yan with Department of Finance. I'm here to confirm that Finance approved the payments for these three settlements specified in the Bill, totaling 1.2 million, and the Administration supports this Bill. Thank you.

Do we have anyone wishing to express opposition? Do we have a motion and a second? Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Wonderful. This Bill is out. Republicans not voting in. The measure is out.

If anyone sees Senators Blakespear, Limone or Menjivar, please request their attendance in the Appropriations Committee. Okay. I'd like to dispense with the suspense calendar. Madam Secretary, would you please read the suspense calendar?

[Suspense Calendar]

While we're waiting for authors we'll do public comment on suspense bills. Okay, so let's. Okay. Open up the hearing to comment by Members of the public on any Bill not presented in Committee today. Please be sure to limit your comments to your name, organization, if any, position on the Bill. Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair.

Chris Micheli here on behalf of Humboldt Redwood Company in support of Senator Caballero's SB88 biomass. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Great. Thank you. Anyone else like to do General comment? Anyone have recipes they want to share? You know, jokes? Okay. Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.

Good morning, Chair and Members. My name is Domingo Ramirez. Commenting on behalf of Eric Guerra, chair of the Sacramento Valley Air Pollution Control Council and California Air Resources Board Member in support of SB 88, Caballero. Great. Thank you.

Anyone else? Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Tangipa, for coming. I want to go back to SB 251, Caballero that is out with Republicans not voting. With Mr. Tangipa voting aye, we have Ms. Blakespear. Thank you. With your bright colors. Yeah. Come up here. Okay. You are presenting SB477. You can begin when you're ready. Feel free to take a breath.

I'm so sorry to keep you waiting. I know how frustrating it is to be sitting here when you have no authors, so I appreciate your patience. I'm here on Bill 477, SB477. And thank you, Chair and colleagues.

This Bill would clarify language in the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, which is called feha, so that the Civil Rights Department can more effectively investigate and prosecute discrimination, harassment, and other civil rights violations. Since it was enacted in 1959, FEHA has protected Californians from workplace and housing discrimination and harassment based on various protected characteristics.

Those include race, religion, disability, gender, reproductive health, decision making, and veteran status. Under feha, the Civil Rights Department, or crd, investigates thousands of complaints every year. However, current law creates challenges, including strict deadlines to complete an investigation, even when all parties agree that more time is needed.

Federal and state law also use different terms to describe cases where discrimination happens to more than one person. To better protect the rights of fellow Californians, CRD must be empowered to work as efficiently as possible.

SB 477 would resolve administrative inefficiencies and statutory inconsistencies by allowing CRD to toll deadlines when parties agree, updating the definition of group or class complaints, extending the deadline for a complainant to file a case in court during CRD's appeal process, and finally allowing CRD to file a Civil action alleging housing discrimination in any county it has an office.

In order to align with existing state law for employment discrimination, defendants would retain the right to transfer venue after the case is filed. CRD believes these changes would have a positive fiscal impact, ultimately saving taxpayers money and strengthening our commitment to our California values. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any witnesses to testify in support? No. Any witnesses in opposition? Any questions from Committee? We have a motion. A second. Would you like to close?

Yes. Thank you. Given the current federal administration's targeting of marginalized groups, it's critical that we lead in protecting the civil rights of all Californians. SB477 will equip the CRD with tools to more efficiently investigate, mediate and prosecute civil rights violations. And I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Great. That is out on AB roll call. Okay. Thank you so much. And I will be presenting Ms. Limone's Bill.

Ms. Chair presenting SB831. You may proceed when ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Madam Vice Chair, and Members. SB 831 clarifies the scope of current law by including in the definition of geological hazards certain geological conditions that may occur in relation to to natural disasters and climate change. As the effects of climate change become more apparent, hazards such as mineral hazards, post-fire debris flow substance, and inland and coastland erosion may be clarified as potential dangers to life and property under the definition.

Updating statutes along with removing obsolete and redundant references to acknowledge the exacerbating influence of climate change stressors on geological hazards ensures that the state has more clarity on on when and where to focus vital resources to better plan for hazards in the future. With me here, I will let my witness self introduce, and would respectfully ask for an aye vote when the time is right.

Chair, Members of the Committee. Adam Harper with the California Construction and Industrial Materials Association in support of SB 831. The bill enables us to benefit from the knowledge and expertise that is already resident within government by clarifying the essential duties of the California Geological Survey.

The survey provides invaluable services to the state, such as post-fire slope stability analysis, where the survey gets on the ground quickly after fires, identifying slopes and hillsides that need to be stabilized. This bill would also enable the survey to leverage that knowledge gained from doing post-fire stability work to inform pre-fire land clearance discussions.

A smart idea. The survey also already does extensive work identifying and mapping areas of the state which have geologic and mineral hazards. SB 831 prudently also allows our state's geologic experts to provide input on such hazards in relation to natural disasters and climate change. CalCIMA strongly supports SB 831 and asks for your aye vote. Thank you.

Department of Finance, would you like to testify?

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. We have no file.

Do we have anyone else in support? Any witnesses in opposition? We have a motion and a second. Okay. Any comments from the Committee? Would you like to close?

On behalf of Senator Limón, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

SB 831 is out with Republicans not voting.

Senator Menjivar, you get the gold star for being here at 9:00 AM. You can—you are presenting SB 450, closing us out. Oh, can you turn on the mic?

Yep, yep. Short and sweet. Community Members, SB 450 is looking to just clarify and reaffirm California's long-standing jurisdiction for adoption proceedings including confirmatory adoptions. I ran from the Capitol. I apologize.

For, in cases of individuals, couples who no longer live in California, move to a different state, but their kid was born here in California, to ensure that the protections they have in California, they don't need—they can use the same proceedings and protections here to clarify their parental role in a different state.

Also, requires all legal parents to be listed on the adoption order to ensure there's no confusion, because sometimes when you adopt, they assume that the other parent is giving up the parental rights. But when we think about stepparents, we think about LGBQ-plus couples, they're not giving up the parental rights, they're just adding on another parent to the adoption records.

As the analysis states, this Bill has no significant state cost and Judicial Council reports minor and absorbable costs. Respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Thank you. Any folks wish to express support?

Craig Pulsar on behalf of Equality California, Our Family Coalition, and Academy of California Adoption—ART—Lawyers, all proud co-sponsors in strong support.

Great. Any folks wish to express opposition? Okay. Any questions from Committee? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you for your time. Respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Great. That is out on a B roll call with Mr. Tangipa and Mr. Ta not voting. Thank you, Senator. And with that we are adjourned.