Senate Standing Committee on Rules

Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the July 9th edition of the Senate Rules Committee. We truly appreciate each and every one of you for being here today. A couple of housekeeping items and then we're going to call the roll. We are going to welcome up Ms. Morrison. If Ms. Morrison please come forward here.

And as Ms. Morrison comes forward, we're going to take the role. Plus we're going to get through some of our administrative Items. We'll have Ms. Morrison, and then we'll then call up our representatives, including the chair from the State Water Resources Control Board. Again, welcome, ladies and gentlemen.

We're grateful that each of you are here and thank you for your patience as we get the hearing started. Jossi, who is our amazing secretary of the Committee. We have a broken microphone. That is why there is an awkward distance. So, Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Thank you so much, Madam Secretary. As each of you know, it is a busy time here in the California Legislature. There are going to be Members in and out of Committee today because we have committees that are not at all trying to be rude. But folks will be in and out having to take votes.

I will be out for about 10 minutes around 2 o' clock. I'll then turn the gavel over to Madam Vice Chair. Ladies and gentlemen, now that a quorum has been established, let's get into our agenda and allow Senator Laird to go take votes in another Committee. We are going to start under Governor. Appointees not required to appear.

These are items 2D through K. Items 2D through K. Discussion, debate and or a motion so moved. Sir, we have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Last call for discussion or debate hearing. Seeing none. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Three, zero vote. We're going to leave that on call. Thank you so much to the Committee Members. We're now going to be moving on to bill referrals. This is item number three on today's agend a discussion. Debate will also welcome a motion. We have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Final call for discussion or debate hearing.

Seeing none. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Three votes 3 0 vote. We're going to put that item on call. If you've been worried about floor acknowledgments, we got it ready for you now. So under floor Acknowledgments Items 4 through 7, we have a MOT. My goodness. A motion by Madam Vice Chair. Any discussion or debate hearing? Seeing none. Madam Secretary.

Can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

That's a 3 0 vote. We're going to put that item on call. All right, we're now going to be turning our attention to Dr. Morrison. Good afternoon. Thank you so much. Thanks for putting up with us and getting through our administrative part of today's agenda. Dr. Morrison is here as Director of Department of Pesticide Regulation.

Madam Director, just a quick run of show if it works for you. You have three minutes. I'll give you a 30 second prompt. As you get close to the three minutes after that, we're going to turn it over to the Committee for discussion, debate, share any concerns. We'll then open it up for public comment.

During your opening, we invite you to acknowledge any family, friends who are here or those who are watching to make sure that you acknowledge them at that time. Doctor, it's great to see you. Thank you so much. The floor is yours.

Great. Thank you and good afternoon. Pro Tem Mcguire and Senators, it is an honor and a privilege to be appointed as Director of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and to be here before you today. I want to recognize my family, friends and colleagues who are here.

In particular my husband David, my son Isaac, and my mom Barbara, for all their support. I also want to thank my friends, family and colleagues who are watching virtually including the dedicated teams at Cal EPA and DPR.

My state service career has focused on blending my deep value of service with my passion for science to protect the people who live and work in California. Since joining DPR in 2018 and particularly in the last couple of years as Chief Deputy Director, I have worked to implement our vision of advancing safer, effective and sustainable pest management.

And this is necessary to protect the health and well being of workers and community Members to support a stable, economically viable and healthy food supply in California and to protect and preserve our ecosystems, environment and infrastructure. DPR is in a transitional period.

We are one year post DPR securing significant personnel and fiscal resources to meet the Department's statutory and programmatic requirements.

As Director, I am committed to continuing to advance our mission and vision and specifically am focused on goals to advance sustainable pest management approaches to implement a science based process for reviewing and identifying higher risk pesticides, their alternatives and related mitigation measures, improve pesticide registration timelines, enforce safe pesticide use, improve worker safety and expand environmental programs.

To best serve those most impacted by pesticide use. To be successful in these goals, I am committed to working with transparency and integrity, focusing on opportunities to collaborate and improve on existing programs and ensure accountability for our work and our outcomes.

I look forward to taking on the responsibilities of this position as we work to advance the pest management that is safe, effective, and sustainable for all Californians. Thank you for considering my appointments and I'm happy to take your questions.

Thank you so much, Madam Director. It is wonderful to have Isaac and David and your mom here. My gosh, Barbara, you must be so proud. It's great to have you here. Thank you. Now I get emotional talking about my family as well, so I love it. Thank you so much.

What we're going to do is we're going to open it up for questions, comments from Committee. We're going to start to my right with the majority leader.

Thank you, Dr. Morrison. Thank you for. Can you hear me okay. Sometimes I can't hear myself.

I can hear you, but I'm not sure the sounds on.

Okay, well, I can project as well. So very nice to see you and really also as the protein mentioned, really great to see your family too. It's really nice to see the little ones watching democracy in action. Okay, so first question and thank you for your service.

What did you gain from the public workshop about the reevaluation process? And did you feel like there was a balance in the. In the process? How did you feel about that?

Sure. So we had a public hearing about, well, a public meeting about a month and a half ago to solicit feedback on our new prioritization process and really looking to create a Committee that is scientifically based and also represents a diverse range of different viewpoints to be able to best inform and provide information to.

The Department found that it was really helpful to be able to get feedback on approach, how we think about the workloads associated with our processes as well as how we best consider membership on selecting that Committee.

So we're still kind of finalizing our approaches based on that workshop and are expecting to move forward this coming quarter in soliciting Members to staff that Committee.

Great. Do you envision any other type of process that could employ a more balanced public engagement opportunity for folks, or do you envision something else that you're not doing currently?

Well, I think that we were intending as a part of that workshop to both have opportunities for people to provide verbal comment as well as written comments to the Department in review. We've also been hosting a number of just smaller meetings, conversations with folks to get more one on one feedback on the process.

I'm certainly happy to hear feedback on other elements where people feel like they would like more discussion on that process, but really see that as being a critical element for us to have better transparency in our process as well as better visibility into the work we're doing.

And I want to say thank you. Because I actually do. I am the nerd that gets your emails constantly. I just got one, I think just not too long ago I probably heard me talking to you. And so the Department is very communicative and I love the English and the Spanish, the various languages, which is really helpful.

My last question is do pesticide manufacturers or farmers have input in what pesticides chemicals you re evaluate?

So we provide notice and certainly solicit information from manufacturers growers. I think that's very important as we are looking to set up the prioritization Committee. We are not intending to have manufacturers as a part of that. We see that as a conflict of interest relative to moving forward.

But do think that there's a role for growers, those who use products to be able to provide that information, similarly to wanting to have scientifically informed community perspectives and others. I think that's an important element of balance.

Great. Well, thank you so much for your service again and appreciate you answering those questions.

Thank you, Senator. Thank you so much. Madam Majority Leader. We're going to turn it over to my left now and turn over to the Vice Chair.

Thank you. Thank you Mr. Pro Tem. Thank you for spending time with me and meeting with me yesterday. It was really enlightening and I, I love just like the next individual that will come up, you guys are not obstructionists. You really are trying to do everything you can to help facilitate and make things work.

And I appreciate that for both of you and so thank you for meeting with me. I'll go over a couple of the things that we talked about yesterday specifically about how DPR will ensure that there is effective and affordable alternatives for farmers. Obviously top three food producing counties in the world.

I want to make sure that as we change into these new technologies, like I checked out the laser stuff that's very good when the plant is very young, but once it has flavor foliage above ground, it doesn't work.

So how do we like, how do you balance making sure that we get rid of the stuff that's really bad but still have something affordable and something that is available on the market.

Great, thank you. Senator Groven appreciated our meeting yesterday as well. I think as we're thinking about alternatives. There's a couple of different pieces that we're looking at here.

One is ensuring that our registration processes are efficient and timely to be able to go through the really critical human health and environmental evaluations to allow for registration and use of lower risk alternatives. That's something we've been spending a lot of dedicated time toward improving and reducing backlogs and see that as an important avenue.

We also work around investments for research and development into new alternatives within our grants programs and are always really interested in supporting innovative new technologies to be able to think about non pesticides as a way to control pests within the state.

Thank you. And then can you just describe for the record what we talked about yesterday, how you work with local agricultural commissioners in the local area because they're more familiar with on the ground and can give guidance and you're very open to their guidance.

And not that they ever tell you what to do, but you're very open to when they say, gosh, that just won't work, but this could work and you're very open to that. Could you talk about how you work with different commissioners around the state?

Sure. So as a part of the broader pesticide enforcement program, our boots on the ground enforcement are the local county agricultural commissioners who are going out and doing inspections investigations throughout the state.

We serve in both a support and oversight role for the county agricultural commissioners, so work closely as a part of providing training, working in consultation on statewide requirements to understand enforceability at the local level as we go through that process and so work both individually with counties on local issues as well as with the Association as a whole as we look at statewide matters.

Thank you. Well, thank you. Thank you, Senator Pro Tem.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Madam Vice Chair, any additional discussion or debate at this time? All right. What we're going to do is we're going to open it up for any public comment. We're going to welcome anyone and everyone we are in the support category.

If you'd like to be able to step forward in support of Madam Director, if you could, please do so now. Hey. Hey. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chair members Taylor Triffo. And please bear with me. I'm going to read off a relatively. Long list of support.

California Agricultural Aircraft Association, Olive Growers Council, California Apple, Blueberry, Avocado, Olive Oil, Date and Rice Commissions, California Cotton Ginners and Growers Association, Western Tree Net Association, California Citrus Mutual, California Fresh Fruit Association, Western Plant Health Association and California Association of Pest Control Advisors. In strong support.

Thank you. So much. Good to see you, Taylor. Appreciate you being here. Welcome first last name and organization.

Nice to see you. Mr. Pro Tem Members. Chris Reardon, California Farm Bureau. We're here to lend our strong support for Karen Morrison to be Director of DPR. I've had the good fortune of working with Karen since she joined the Department.

We found her open minded and she works with a broad coalition of people and she listens and she works particularly with her as Senator Grove's interests are her county Ag Commissioner, which is important to us because as you know, many of our members work every day with their commissioners around the state.

So we're very glad to support her here today and look forward to her confirmation. Thanks so much, Mr. Reardon. Hey. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Pro Tem Mcguire Committee Members. Jeff Sickinger with KPO Public Affairs. On behalf of the Western Growers here to respectfully request the Committee confirm Dr. Morrison as the next Director of DPR. And we look forward to working with her in that capacity.

Thank you so much, Jeff. Appreciate you being here. We're going to see if there's anyone else in support. If you could please step forward at this time. Last call. We're now going to welcome anyone who may be opposed. If you can you please step forward at this time. Looking for opposition. Last call.

We're going to bring it back to Committee to be able to see if there's any additional discussion or debate. Debate or. We'll also take a motion.

So moved. Let's move the com to the full Senate.

We have a motion by Madame Vice Chair. Last call. For discussion or debate hearing scene Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

That's currently a 3 0 vote. I'm going to go out on a limb. I think we're going to get 4 and 5. But would you please give a round of applause to Director Morrison. Next stop will be the Senate Floor. Thank you so much. And thank you to your family as well.

It's an honor that you are here and thank you for your service to the people of California.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. We're going to take a 32nd recess. 32nd recess. In that time we're going to bring up chair Esquivel and board Member Morgan. If you could please come forward. 32nd recess. Sam.

Alright, ladies and gentlemen of committee, we are back. We want to welcome our next panel. We have the chair of the State Water Resources Control Board up here for appointment. That is Chair Esquivel. Good afternoon. And then we have board member Morgan. Good afternoon.

We welcome you also up for appointment from the State Water Resources Control Board. We're going to start with the chair, then we're going to roll to the board Member. Quick run of show, very similar to what we just did with Dr. Morrison.

Number one, each of you will have three minutes to be able to provide comment and testimony. During that time, we invite you to acknowledge any individuals, family, friends who are here in the room or maybe watching online.

We're then going to turn it over to our vice chair and to the committee for any questions, comments, sharing any concerns. After we've done that, we're going to open it up for public comment. Those who may be in support, those who may be opposed. And then we'll have final discussion or debate. Each of you have three minutes.

I'll give you a 30 second prompt. I am not at all trying to be rude. I have a quick 10 minute at 2 o' clock and I will be back. During that time I will turn it over to Madam Vice Chair. Mr. Chair, it's really good to see you always. Thank you as well.

The floor is yours. You have three minutes.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Pro Tem Mcguire. Senators, it's great to be here and an honor to be here before you. I'm joined today by my spouse Brian Ste and my parents Frank and Norma Esquivel.

My nephew Elijah and his friend Kian also want to give thanks and acknowledgement to friends and family that are watching and also my colleagues at the State Water Sources Control Board. Very fortunate here to be before you again.

It's hard to believe this is now actually the third time I've been before the senate for confirmation before the State Board and that it's been eight years since I've been on the board. Six years here as chair and it's certainly been an eventful time. I'm proud of the work that the Water Boards have done.

We have between flood, between drought, responding to Covid, wildfires, all these threats to ultimately our water resources within the state have continued to respond.

I'm incredibly proud of the work that we've done around drinking water where we've been able to reduce the number of Californians that don't have access to clean water from 1.6 Californians to about 800,000 today. We know and that was Just in the last five years.

We know we still have a lot of work to do on that front. Importantly as well, proud of the work that we've been able to do in administering water rights these last years.

As we know, as we went through another, we did something pretty historic here within the state and administer water rights at a scale and scope that was needed to protect stored water, to protect the interests of senior water right holders, but importantly, cities and communities.

So proud of the work that we've been able to do there and proud ultimately of the continued emphasis and the culture at the State Water Board of openness, of transparency and of dealing with very difficult decisions often and circumstances, oftentimes, you know, dealing with communities, communities that haven't had access to clean water for decades and here needing to continue to be open and listening to the communities that we represent.

So proud of the work that we've done so far. Know that we have a lot of challenges still.

Yet before us we have aging infrastructure, we have climate extremes that continue to put pressures on our water resources and also have emerging contaminants of concern that continue to keep affordability center minded for the state board and proud to be able to continue to work. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

The Esquivel family is in the house here today, so thank you so much. It's really good to see you. I appreciate it. I know I have a couple comments and questions in just a moment, but before we do, just want to welcome board Member Morgan here tonight, this afternoon.

Thank you so much, Madam Board Member, for your service to the people of California. The floor is yours. You have three minutes. I'll give you a 30 second prompt.

Thank you. Good afternoon pro tem and and senators, it is truly an honor to appear before you today. I am here today with my stepfather Kent, who is a retired veteran, and my son Xavier, an energetic fourth grader who loves to spend time with family and friends.

My mother, Beverly, a small business owner celebrating over 25 years in business here in Sacramento, is unfortunately able to make it today. And she is- she is our family rock. And without her sacrifices as a young single mother, I would not be sitting in front of you here today.

But also like to recognize and thank my colleagues, my friends and other family members who are here. And also watching water quality has truly been a passion of mine for over 30 years now. When I look back, my interest began in elementary school when I first learned about the water cycle.

That interest continued to grow throughout high school and became a passion of mine in college when I decided to become a civil engineer and focus on water quality. I knew as a civil engineer I can give back to my community

through my technical knowledge. I would be able to provide clean drinking water to communities in need and treat wastewater prior to entering the environment. This knowledge has grounded me as a board member. It is a foundation that I work from with the Water Boards.

Our foundation that we work from from our staff providing the technical and scientific knowledge and then as board members us taking a look from the policy and wider perspective. It has been an honor to work for all Californians to be able to meet with and listen to community members.

To be on the ground to truly gain a broader understanding of the needs throughout our state. To through- To collaborate with all. To to really to go out to meet with our stakeholders through a collaborative process. This is how I've been able to balance my decisions to learn and grow as a board member.

I am truly honored to have been able to serve this past four years. And there has not been a day that goes by that I don't think about my son, his friends and other the next generation is why I truly love to do this job. To be able to continue to grow.

To give back and to look at that next generation and to ensure that they have the same California that I grew up with that they are able to also enjoy it in the same ways. I thank you for your time today and I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.

Board member. Thank you so much. Appreciate your testimony and it is so good that Xavier is here. My goodness. And you have to be so proud. Yes. Yeah. Fourth grader. I bet. Always on the move.

Oh yes, yes.

Trying to keep him to know they're still.

We have snacks in the back if you need it. So it's all good. I have a TK or going about to go into TK so I can only imagine. So very cool to have him here. Thank you so much. We're going to turn over to Madam Vice Chair for questions, comments please. Yeah. If it's all right.

Madam Vice Chair. Perfect. Thank you so much. And don't typically take the lead. So thank you.

And just because have a meeting and first of all I want to say thank you to Madam Board Member and to the chair for your work and let's just be honest, one of the toughest jobs here in the state dealing with all issues of water.

And there are a variety of opinions that you have to deal with each and every day. And very grateful for your balance on that, Mr. Chair we had an opportunity to be able to sit down. I want to take a moment to acknowledge the chair if there is a challenge, no matter how tough you show up.

And I can't tell you how grateful I am and I know so many members of the legislature are that you don't hide behind living breathing in the capitol. You go out to where the challenges are and work to fix.

You're also a bridge builder and that means you have to work with all sides and folks of political stripes. And what you are grounded on is wanting to put people first and greatly appreciate that. And we've been able to work through quite a few issues within the Russian River watershed over the years in your tenure as chair.

And the latest, and I do want to acknowledge your staff has been wonderful. And we hosted a meeting on the north coast talking about the latest winery order that's come through. And one of the items that has shared is a one size fits all approach, whether it's this issue or others, just doesn't work right.

What may work in the valley or work within Southern California doesn't work within Northern California or the north coast. And we can say vice versa. 30,000 foot. Mr. Chair, your thoughts on that the one size fits all approach?

And I don't want to get into specifics in regards to the winery order as we've been able to do that here earlier. And I know we'll continue our conversations as we discuss, but can you just comment on it in general, please?

Yeah, I appreciate the question. You know, as you know and I think folks know, the Water Boards are structured with nine regional water quality control boards. And it's because of that variety that you identified that we're structured that way so as those local considerations can really be taken in.

That being said, the State Board will sometimes take actions around what are known as General orders that apply to the entire state. And they are difficult to your point because we have such varieties across the state.

There are sometimes efficiencies that can be made in our programs by having a general order, having a statewide approach, if you will. But importantly, it's always a balance and we do our best to ensure that there isn't even when there is a general order, a one size fits all approach.

Importantly as well, you know, the minute we adopt a new regulation or take. That vote, the real work begins. And so much of our work is on the implementation side as well.

And so I appreciate you tracking and here helping bridge to challenges folks are having with implementation of either that order or other orders that are out there. And glad to make sure that we're sitting down with folks and understanding the flexibility we can provide and importantly, that we're keeping the outcomes in mind.

You know, we try our best to not dictate how people achieve a compliance, letting people kind of pick their path, if you will. But really keeping in mind the outcomes that we're looking in common can help kind of create some just creative thinking sometimes in how we approach things.

But I really appreciate here the mind toward making sure that we're implementing correctly because again, once that vote is taken, that's not where the work stops and actually where it oftentimes really begins as we move forward.

Yeah, 100%. And I'll just, and I'll turn it over to the vice chair on this is that I think that you take a look across the state, there's probably, there's less than a dozen.

And I don't mean this in any disrespect, mega producers when it comes to the issue of wine and the discharge that they have versus what an average winery in Sonoma county, which is 10,000 cases or less, very small, family owned, candidly, the standards can't be the same. Right. One, it's just the volume is not nearly the same.

Two, the margins and the cost to be able to comply is also very difficult for a Gallo, for example, or a Jackson Family Wines versus a small family winery that has 10,000 cases or less.

And what I appreciate in what the chair has done literally sent staff to go meet right on the ground on the north coast in Mendocino and Sonoma counties to talk about what could potentially work. And I'm very grateful for that.

And I appreciate, as I said in our meeting, where I really feel your passion comes out is problem solving and on the ground. And I just, I look forward to resolving this issue here in the coming months. So we don't see a one size fits all approach. And I'll let you have final word on this.

I really appreciate that. And we're here to work with you on it and look forward to figuring out how we can ensure that we have successful implementation of these and important regs. So thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to turn it over to Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Pro Tem. Senator Gonzalez, I'm sorry, he's turned over me because he's leaving. Sorry. Problem. Right. Or did I misread that? Okay.

Okay. Wasn't sure if you had questions, but thank you. And I too want to thank you, Chair Esquivel, for your time today. Lots of questions and good to meet you formally, board Member Morgan and thank you both for your service and glad your families are here as well. As we had discussed.

Representative of Southeast Los Angeles, Cudahy Maywood, who are no strangers to the issues of water Cudahy as I've described. And I always like to make sure that everyone knows Cudahy is about 22,800 residents, almost 6,000 housing households and medium incomes are about $25,000 or less per household.

96% Latino communities that are residing there oftentimes just in the whole LA region. This is a region that feels very, very neglected. So we start from that space. They have been dealing in the City of Cudahy with awful issues related to exceeded amounts of manganese. As you know, the tract 349, which we all know too well.

And we spoke at length about the different remedies and I appreciate your office getting back so very quickly in the various remedies. You know, this had been going on since 2002 for track 349 with the exceedant.

So it's been 23 years now where mostly residents of Cudahy, when they open, when they try to take a shower, brown water comes through the shower head. And again, high levels of manganese, which is really, really tough for them. How do you just in general, bigger question.

So we're not getting into all of the super details, but given the older mutual water systems in urban areas, how they're operating and how they are or not operating in the best interest of customers, including following open meeting laws, providing safe drinking water and being responsive to their customers, how are you ensuring some of those issues are being attended to?

How we can. I can ask both of you.

Great.

Well, did you want to take this first board Member Morgan or I can take, I'll say, you know, generally incredibly proud that we here in the State of California in 2012 passed a human right to water.

And that was because community members that to your point, have similarly been suffering under a lack of access to clean water for decades, were pushing for action. And that passage of the human right to water in 2012 was a first step since that obviously the division of drinking water was transferred over to the state board in 2014.

The Safe and Affordable Fund was passed in 2019. And so what we now have are more resources, actual resources, to be able to begin to address what are a number of small failing systems throughout the state. And I know a lot of folks think of the Central Valley and rural communities.

Oftentimes when we think of a lack of access because we have a number of them across the state.

But to your point, this is also an urban issue where we have, because of the way communities were developed and the history of small systems sort of developing first do have a number of smaller systems in urbanized areas that are these pockets and haven't had prior to 2019 the resources to really help.

And what's made the difference is technical assistance. Oftentimes these small failing systems, to your point, don't have the capacity or oftentimes, you know, their boards aren't meeting or have a hard time on the governance side and so have a hard time actually getting to the heart of their issue.

And so the technical assistance that we've been able to provide is creating those pathways for long term solutions. And consolidation is one of those important ones. And I know that we're here actively working with track 349. There's a potential consolidation that may happen with track 180 which is another mutual in the area.

But there may be other service providers as well that can step up and help be part of the solution. So we're eager to continue the work.

I know there is a scheduled community meeting later this summer, but you know, in general and again universally, the tools that we now have are really that technical assistance that create that pipeline of solutions so that folks are ready for say, construction out there.

And thank you for that. And this is sort of the impetus of why I drafted and created SB 403 to ensure that there were smaller water systems, a consolidation process, especially if they were at risk, not even getting to the point of failure, which really speaks to the communities that I represent.

And so I appreciate you mentioning that. And I know these particular tracks are going through that process now. There will be a, a community process in person, public meeting in various languages, sanitary survey and field Inspection of tract 349 in particular this summer. And so I appreciate your attention to this.

Again, these members of the community have felt like there's been just no opportunity for them to be included in the governance of these mutual companies.

And on top of that, I want to thank you both because the monitoring of tract 349 has also included now the City of Cudahy being provided monthly progress reports which had never been done before, engaging with the City of Cudahy directly to ensure transparency and local input so they can give our mutual residents information in both English and in Spanish.

Board Member Morgan, do you have any other thoughts on the issue of this? You obviously said in your opening about the issue of safe and affordable drinking water. And maybe I'll pivot to the affordable side as folks are seeing the brown water coming out of their faucets and not at their showerheads.

How do you contemplate this space of affordability now? Feeling like, why am I paying for this? Why are rates going up? And it's very complicated. But I'll let you answer that and look forward to working with you on this.

Yes, thank you. So I'll first start with, you know. Looking back at brown water, manganese and it being what we look at is a secondary contaminant.

And so just as you're speaking to senator, looking at systems that are at risk, our division of drinking water has really been looking at manganese and taking that, just taking that step back and saying, you know, this is a concern and how do we raise an uplift and make sure that we are addressing manganese also?

And so they have been working at just that, looking at manganese, addressing it. And it's something that will be coming to the board, I believe, later this year and bringing that forward of, you know, manganese. We cannot continue to look at it as we have in the past and allow it to be, allow residents to receive groundwater.

It's not. Okay. So that is one angle. And that to me also goes towards the affordability of residents receiving water that they're not going to drink. It's not going to happen.

And then also looking back at the Sativa Water district, that's one that I worked on when I was staff and it was the first administrative project for the Water Board and taking that, looking at it and the lessons learned from it, using those lessons learned and rolling those into our program, making those a regular part of our program, stable and making sure that we look at all of the other communities in urban, the other urban communities that are expressing similar water quality issues and moving those forward to make sure that we are able to provide safe and affordable drinking water to all of the communities.

So it is a high priority. It is. We are looking at multiple ways of addressing it. So not just it's not a one pronged approach, it's a multi pronged approach and it's definitely a high priority for the board.

Thank you. And I will just say, you know, obviously Los Angeles has a very long history with mutual water companies.

And in the southeast Los Angeles region, as you both know, as we've been depicting that, it's been a struggle to again, get some information, have cities become part of the governance and have influence when these mutual water companies are actually providing water for the rest of these to the city, but with no.

Really with no understanding of what's behind closed doors, really, in some cases. One last question for you both. If you both want to answer, one of you is fine.

Any other pieces of legislation you think would be helpful related to this issue that I'm discussing and how can we become more engaged with you, especially from the Los Angeles perspective? As you mentioned, the Central Valley, we talk about a lot. Absolutely lots of water issues there.

We often sometimes don't talk about the urban issue and how dire it is. Talking about it now, and I hope everyone realizes it's. It's real. But please let me know, like, what else can we do and what can I do to support you all either through legislation or just continued coordination?

I really appreciate that offer and just appreciate all the work you have done to your point, you know, in helping us get at risk systems as part of our consolidation authorities. That was huge.

I think it speaks to just the great relationship we continue to have with the legislature, both with division of drinking water even coming to the board to begin with, but importantly the authorities that we've been given additional funding. I appreciate the question. I'll definitely mull on it.

And you know, it has been just a really productive relationship and very thankful for the continued conversation that we have with the legislature and connecting with the many specific projects that are in folks's district. So thank you for that leadership, senator.

Thank you. Yeah, I'll just also thank you for your leadership and your raising the awareness around all the communities within Southeast Los Angeles. I could think of many. I've been to Maywood several times and there are several others within the. Within the area. And so the continued awareness around it and the continued collaboration is much appreciation appreciated.

Thank you both again for your service. I'll certainly invite you back to Cudahane and to Maywood to. To introduce you to more residents. And they'd love to hear from you both. Most certainly. Thank you.

Thank you, senator. Thank you.

Senator Gonzalez, Senator Laird.

Thank you very much. And thanks to both of you for taking the time to meet. I really appreciated it.

I don't feel the need to go over everything we talked about in meetings, but a couple of things, and Senator Gonzalez was talking about the consolidation and I know with San Lucas, we, we have been working together and I know you have actually you joined me at a community meeting in San Lucas.

So I know you've been out there and that is very important. That one is a tough community and they're on the edge of having no clean, safe drinking water. And it's a disadvantaged community and we have to move that forward.

And I know that the bond and other things allowed it, but, but I thought I'd give you a chance and I apologize because I missed your opening statements and maybe I'm asking you to redo it. But with the chair at least, could you talk about the progress that has been made in the clean drinking water program?

Because I think when it got transferred to you, there was 1.6 million Californians without clean, safe drinking water. Where is that now? And how do you see that progressing over time?

I really appreciate the question, Senator. And actually when the program was transferred in 2014, we didn't know how many Californians were without access to clean water. It was a huge part of the program coming over.

And the work that we've done is actually just having better information and a more real time check, if you will, on when systems are coming out of compliance, who's coming back in. So there's so much of the success of the program which has brought us in 2019 then from 1.6 million Californians to today to about 800,850.

There's a dashboard, it tracks it daily. And what we've certainly come to understand and new but now know with data, is that it's a dynamic situation out there. We have a number of at risk systems that are coming, are potentially candidates, if you will, for systems that will come out of compliance no longer meet standards.

And so it's a bit of a treadmill we're on. So as we address systems, we have additional systems coming on. But since 2019, since the safe and Affordable Fund was passed and we first had this first real program, definitive program to address this issue, we've done again gone from 1.6 million Californians to 800,000.

We've done 140 consolidations and brought 300 systems back into compliance. So 300 systems since 2019 have been brought into compliance. There's still another 300 out there. Some of those are carryovers, some of those are folks that have come on since 2019 and so just incredibly proud of the progress.

There's no other state in the nation that even tracks this data, understands the scope and scale of their challenge, and has made the headway that we have these last years.

And one of the things you just mentioned, I thought I'd ask you to follow up on because it's interesting. It never would occur to me that it would go up after having gone down and it go.

And I know when I had the chloride spill in my Assembly District, the readings would change in one month somebody would be on background to the next month they would be in a contaminated position. And then it might go back, depending on how the underground plume was moving or behaving.

So how is it that it goes up or it fluctuates? What are the things behind that?

It really depends on the system. To your point, it may be that they're dependent on groundwater and there's a plume that's moving in or out of the direct influence of the well. And so coming in and out of compliance, it could be a pump failure.

You know, many of our systems are, you know, are don't have redundancy in their system, are dependent on the wells that they have, the infrastructure they have. So if a pump blows out, if a well fails, then they stop being able to serve water as well. It can sometimes be managerial.

The issues with the systems are complex and it's not always just one thing. And the managerial, technical and financial ability of the system is oftentimes a leading factor, if you will, for a system before it falls out of compliance, they stop being able to do testing or their board doesn't meet regularly.

So there's a lot of indicators, if you will, out there for systems that are struggling and or reasons why systems have come out of compliance.

And let me just ask board Member Morgan if you have anything you'd like to add on the subject, given the fact that we've pretty much completely covered it.

I think that we've covered it.

Okay, just wanted to give you a chance then on another subject. First let me say something because I know with the chair and our meeting was quick, I didn't get a chance to be bring this up. I have one small community in the district that is being fined by you for not having a satisfactory system.

Well, they're in the middle of the construction, so they're doing it and yet they're getting fined while the construction is going on. And this is a community of 1800 people or something. And so just to clarify, you don't have any flexibility on those fines. Right.

You are obligated, even when somebody is marching down the path to construct a system to do it.

Yeah, I believe those are minimum penalties that are being assessed on the system. And I believe the system you're speaking of, the challenge was that they were previously considered a disadvantaged community by the median household income of the community or the system, and it is no longer. And so once it was no longer, that's when then.

And we have flexibility for systems that are, are serving disadvantaged communities or disadvantaged communities on those penalties. If you're not, then we don't have that discretion. That's a little bit crazy. Yeah, they fell into a hole for sure.

Also because, you know, I represent a bunch of disadvantaged communities where they happen to also be commuter communities increasingly and not the role that they were. And that knocks them out.

But they, for all intents and purposes, are still, if you're 1800 people and trying to do a 30 or 40 or $50 million project, it is, it is just prohibitive.

So I might want to work with you legislative proposal or something that allows the fines to go toward the project if there's a way to clearly demonstrate that that's not a dodge somehow. So appreciate that. And then lastly, I don't think we could go hearing without asking about the Delta.

So you are, you've been doing the Delta Control Plan for a long time. What's the status? How do you see that going?

What do you think the future is for that? The board adopted the Lower San Joaquin components of the Bay Delta Water Quality Control plan update in 2018. And since then we've been working on and have released a staff report and a draft program implementation, as it's called, for the Sacramento and Delta components.

It is a huge priority of the board to get that work completed. And so looking forward to continuing to get that across the finish line. This Administration, for sure.

Okay, that's good to know because I know we were trying to get it across the finish line in the last Administration. So I'm glad that that's.

I often say that the last time the Bay Delta plan was significantly updated was in the mid-90s when I was in middle school. And I know there's a lot of middle schoolers out there that if potentially are coming to the board sometime in the future, would really like to work on some other things.

Well, we don't want to talk about where we were in the 1990s.

And then maybe since Borden, you know, board Member Morgan didn't get to say much and all that, why don't you talk a little bit, just as a singular question, about the fact that you fill the engineer slot and how you feel, what responsibility does that put on you in the deliberations as things go through the waterboard?

Sure. Thank you for the question, Senator. It is an interesting role. Definitely. I feel that as the civil engineer and as an engineer, for taking a look at something that comes in front of the board that's coming.

And through our briefings, it really I take a look at the not just the bigger picture, but also as the through the development.

If there is perhaps a, I'm going to say a technical red flag or there's a technical question for me to ask that question, to bring it to staff's attention, to receive a satisfactory answer on that technical question, to make sure that we have that strong scientific foundation.

And then we layer on the policy and the social economic on top of that strong foundation. And so it is really just that last check point.

It is not up to me to do the actual technical work or to dive in on the technical pieces, but just as that final gut check to make sure that our foundation doesn't have any cracks before we layer on our policy decisions on top of it.

Thank you. And then I missed the opening. Did you both introduce family Members that are here? We did, yes. And do you have a spouse and parents? Yes. Yes. A nephew. Oh, a nephew. Great. Well, because I thought I could see your father there. Yes.

When I was at an event with your father pass that I will not name, I said something and you said about your father, well, he's much older and I have to tell you, we're the same age. And that was really an edgy comment on his part.

So it's great for all of you to be here of both families. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you. Senator Laird, I just have a few questions I want to thank you. I echo the Senate pro tem's Comments about you, Mr. Chair. Your willingness to solve tough problems, engage your staff and I, you know, just get shit done. Sorry.

You're just like, this is you just make stuff happen and very difficult things that people have worked with or worked through for years trying to navigate the system. And you just make things happen. And I really appreciate you for that. I have a couple of questions.

I have a couple of questions that came in from the district as people are watching this, this hearing, but one of the questions is consolidation is hard in mountainous areas because of the distance to water sources. How is that being handled?

Because many of these water districts are getting water from self help for years and self help was designed for that. But these are. It's going on 767 years. How do you propose to consolidate these districts for viable, clean, safe drinking water in these mountainous communities? And what's the plan for that else?

I can start with Director Morgan or I can start with the chair, whichever you prefer.

Board Member, if you would like to go.

Sure. So yeah, that is a difficulty when whether in mountainous areas or other more rural areas and there is not a system close by for consolidation is taking a look at other and it may not be a physical consolidation, maybe it's a managerial consolidation.

And so it's looking at the other alternatives, taking that step back, taking a look. And physical consolidation is not going to be the solution for all. It may be looking at managerial consolidation where you bring in and just as the chair was speaking to earlier, that technical, managerial and financial.

And so looking at all of those elements and seeing what is needed for the system.

And so there's times where we can do perhaps a managerial consolidation where we can bring in the technical expertise and the managerial expertise to bring them to where they become solvent and they're able to then run a system where we can then provide safe and affordable water to not only that rural community, perhaps a couple of rural communities, and where they are sharing some of those resources across the communities so that it does become affordable.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Yeah, the board Member has it completely right. And I'll note Self help is an incredible ally and collaborator with the Water Boards. I think we all recall in 20122016 drought, how flat footed so many of us were caught by the number of dry wells and the inability to really address things as they were happening.

That was a different story here in this last turn of the drought. And it was because of agencies and nonprofits like Self Help that have allowed us to be able to at least spend the funds so that they can be there as first line defense.

And so they're incredible partners and just wanted to give a shout out to them and very thankful for the work that they've done in the interim side and even on the long term side.

And as the board Member said, when you know, physical consolidation, which is always our first kind of priority when it comes to addressing a system isn't possible. There's managerial consolidation, there's other flavors of regionalization, ultimately that can happen.

And I know that a number of agencies like say Placer County Water Agency or say Coachella Valley Water Agency have really done that work to think, okay, how do I regionalize and look across and say, are there systems around us that we can bring into the fold and do better by?

Thank you. I have another question that came in from a farmer. Obviously farmers are worried about the surface water and they're worried about, you know, SGMA and you know, NGSPs and things like that. Specifically in Kern and Tulare county where we have the top 33 food producing counties in the world. Just an inside thing. Sorry.

Yeah, because I have 7, 8 and 9.

He doesn't have the top three. But. So I guess the issue is that the questions that some of these farmers have is that what actions is the board taking to ensure that California's water resources are being used efficiently and to support the state's agricultural needs to secure the public food and fiber supply?

Especially considering that approximately 11 million acre feet of water flow to the Pacific Ocean through the delta every year, far exceeding the environmental requirements. So anybody want to take. Mr. Chair?

Yeah, I appreciate that question. And you know, I. Prior to coming to the state board, I'm very fortunate.

I worked for Senator Boxer for a time and ag was one of my portfolios and so fortunate to have been exposed to the communities across the state, the various commodities and know its importance ultimately, you know, for myself even wouldn't be here, but for agriculture.

My grandparents worked in ag and so know that there are a lot of pressures out there. Water, labor, trade, these are all putting incredible pressures, I know, on our ag community and especially smaller growers. So here at the state board say we'll just take a slice and look at the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

I feel that we've been very balanced in our approach, really giving folks at the local level that opportunity to demonstrate the leadership needed to continue to move through that process. We have about currently six basins that have been referred to the board. Kern is one of those there.

We continued our probationary hearing giving them more time to address those final issues within their groundwater sustainability plans. And so, you know, for me it's been about making sure that we provide folks the best opportunity, but be clear on the outcomes we're looking for.

That's the same whether it's water quality work we're doing, whether it's administering water rights, whether it's here managing or fulfilling our role with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. So I do my best to do what we're called to do in our mission to balance those needs. But we have imbalances. And while I appreciate the.

The numbers around the amount of water that flows out the delta, if you know that's kind of taking a yearly average, what you see is there are really big storms that happen in the winters that we don't necessarily have the infrastructure completed to capture.

But what we have done at the State Board is prioritize temporary groundwater permits so that folks can get water recharging to help balance, to help accomplish the goals of sgma, but continue to manage our resources as best we can.

Pull water from the system when it's available during those wetter times, but when it's dry, as in our Mediterranean climate, make sure that we have protections throughout that year. So I think what we need to continue to do is ensure that we're striking that right balance, Moving water when it's available, but importantly, maintaining protections.

And here, the update of the Bay Delta plan is an important moment where the Endangered Species Act, I think folks that have tracked water know, dictates so much of the discussion around water management and. And the Central Valley Project and the state water project.

This opportunity with the water quality control plan update is to get us away from just that floor of the Endangered Species Act and really figure out how we look at the system as a whole and start to better balance these many competing needs.

Because I know there's a lot of pressures on our growers, know there's ultimately harm in our ag communities. The same goes for fishing communities as well and others that depend upon this balance in the state. So I do my best to really listen.

And I know that these are incredibly fraught discussions, sometimes a lot of passion, But I think we can make our way through it if we continue to try to listen best to each other and recognize that we have to live within the limits mother nature is providing us.

And I think that that's what we're trying best to do is be sustainable for the future of the state.

I appreciate that. And I appreciate. I've sat on this Committee for six years, governor's appointments, and I have. I have interviewed people that say, nope, it's just that's the way it is and that's what we have to do. That's the letter of this. And you do operate a little different than that in a really good way.

Like it says, you will go into probation and you will do this, or if you don't have this done.

But you do recognize that when just like Curran was 95% there, why take it over if they could work out the last 5%, if you gave them a month or a couple months to do it and they are working towards that.

So a lot of people that are confirmed in these committees are very, you know, black and white.

And you do operate in a gray area that still is in a good way, that still allows progress to move forward and to make sure that we have, you know, clean drinking water, but that we make sure that we have a sustainable yield, that we also can grow food.

I mean, you, you are very balanced in that and I have so appreciated working with you in, in my region. Regarding that, Director Morgan, did you want to say something?

I believe the chair has covered it.

Yes. Thank you. Well, we'll welcome back the Senate pro Tem. I look forward to both of your confirmations and congratulations. You have your spouse and your dad and your ma. Everybody's here, so congratulations to that as well.

Sorry. Thank you so much, Madam Vice Chair, and appreciate you taking over. Thank you. All right. We have heard from our Committee Members, each of our Committee Members, and I do know that we need to add Mr. Jones here. He's still in insurance Committee.

But what we'd like to be able to do now is open it up for anyone who would like to be able to speak in some support. We're looking for testimony in support.

Going to ask you to please provide your first and last name, your organization, and we're going to respectfully request each individual keep their comments to 30 seconds. Capitolo is here. How you doing? It's so nice to see you. The floor is yours.

Thank you. Jennifer Capitolo, on behalf of the California Water Association, we're in strong support of. The reappointment of President Esivel and board Member Morgan. I will just say when the drinking water functions moved over from the Department. Of Public Health to the Water Board. We were all extremely worried and I. Don'T know the colloquium ecro.

That's where I am now. I thought it was going to be. Awful and I was really worried that the public health functions of the water. Board were going to be lost moving over to this other state agency. But it has been a whole life changing experience. It's much better than it was before President Esquivel's leadership.

It really has been a notable transformation of the agency and how they regulate drinking water utilities. I had a few more comments to say, but I will keep it to 30 seconds. And very much in support of the reappointment here.

It's good to see you. Thank you so much. Hi, good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Senators Tim Carmichael with the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance. Our organization has had many years working with both of these Water Board Members. I personally have had the opportunity to work with them for the last three years.

I want to highlight they're both incredibly knowledgeable, they're incredibly dedicated, and I think just as importantly to our membership, they are accessible, they are open to hearing and engaging with different constituencies with different perspectives on whatever issue is before them. And.

And I can tell you that is not always the case with our state environmental boards, regulatory boards, and it is greatly appreciated about both of these Members and we strongly support their confirmation.

Thank you so much. Good to see you. Hey. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Jamie Minor, on behalf of Monterey 1 water Eastern Municipal Water District, as well as the California Stormwater Quality Association, we. We are pleased to support both Chair Esquivel and Director Morgan. I think you can hear the passion in their voices, but you can also see it out in the field when they're meeting with local managers.

I think just yesterday Director Morgan was down in Riverside County touring innovative projects down there, seeing what these leaders are doing on the ground, learning best practices and bringing it back to the board. Chair Escobel never misses an opportunity to also learn from these leaders. And I think they both fight to ensure that these.

These leaders have the tools they need to manage water in a resilient way. I think you said it best. Problem solvers, transparent. And we are pleased to support their confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you so much. It's good to see you. Welcome back.

Hello. Good afternoon again. Taylor Triffo, on behalf of the California. Walnut Commission, California Rice Commission and California Citrus Mutual, and strong support of both the reappointments. Thank you.

Is that chicken on your laptop? It is. All right. I like it. Good stuff.

Oh, my gosh. Show her your screensaver.

Oh, yeah. I do have my favorite chicken. I have Martha right here, so. There we go. It's good stuff. Welcome.

Hello. Good afternoon. Jasmine Vaya, on behalf of Northern California Water Association in strong support of both confirmations.

Thank you. Do you have a chicken photo you'd like to show or. She's like, I am out and gone. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Pro Tem and Senators. No chicken with me today. Like to test? I'm sorry? I'm here on behalf of the California Municipal Utilities Association and Rancho California Water District in strong support of both appointees. In particular, we've worked over the years on some really tough issues with the chair. And just as the Vice Chair. And you, Mr.

Pro Tem, have described him as exactly our experience. Experience and we're happy to support both nominations. Thanks.

Thank you so much. It's good to see you.

Hi. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Beth Olhasso. While I do represent the California Poultry Federation, watch out. I'm not here for them today, unfortunately. I am here for Water Reuse California and Inland Empire Utilities Agency in strong support of both Chair Esquivel and Board Member Morgan.

My colleagues have mentioned a lot of the reasons why we are here in strong support. Whether it's geeking out, talking about wastewater. Treatment with Board Member Morgan, or trying. To figure out how to do the. Most we can with not enough funds with Chair Esquivel. We appreciate their constant willingness to meet with us.

Their direction to staff, to collaborate, I think has been very, very important over. The last few years and we look. Forward to working with them in the future. Thanks so much for your time. Thank you.

Good to see you. Hi, Good afternoon. Hi. Good afternoon, Committee Members. My name is Stephen Pang with the Association of California Water Agencies. We strongly support Chair Esquivel and board Member Morgan's confirmation. I think like we've heard from so. Many folks, we've always appreciated their engagement with ACWA and other interested parties.

We appreciate their leadership on these, these really complex and nuanced policy issues. And then finally, like we've also heard from other folks, we really appreciate their commitment to developing, providing balanced and forward thinking solutions for the variety of water related challenges that we face in California. But both today and in the future. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Good to see you. Hi, good afternoon.

Hello. Sarah Brennan with the Wideman Group here in support on behalf of California Water Service. We appreciate all the work, the appointees. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you. We're going to do a last call, last call for those who may be in support. If you could please come forward at this time. Last call for support. Now I'm going to open it up for those who may be opposed. If you could please advance the microphone.

At this time, we're going to do a last call for opposition, seeing no one rise. We're now going to come back to Committee, final discussion, debate. We'll also take a motion for both.

Appointees so moved, sir, to make them both appointees go to the full Senate Floor for a vote.

We have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

5-0 vote. Final vote. We are closing the roll. If we can please give a warm welcome to our Almost conferred. Appointees to the board wave one more stop to the Senate Floor. Round of applause for the chair and appointments. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Appreciate you.

We're going to take a 32nd recess, y'all, to be able to take pictures with the board Member in the chair and then we're going to be going into closed Executive session. We appreciate each and every one of you. Yep.

We're going to lift calls in just a moment, but we're going to let folks head on out of the room.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to be going into Executive closed session in just a moment, but what we're going to do is we're going to add on to our votes. So what we're going to do is we're going to start from our from the top of the agenda, work our way down the agenda.

Ladies and gentlemen, here we go. Let's start with Governor appointees not required to appear. The current vote is 3,0. Madam Secretary, can you please follow the. UPS questions on a couple of those? Oh good. All right. Oh dear. Got some comedy coming from Leader Jones. All right. To cut off debate. All right, nice.

Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Five votes, 5, 0 vote. Final vote. We're closing the roll. We're now going to be moving on to bill referrals. The current vote is 30. Madam Secretary, can you please go call the absent Members?

[Roll Call]

Five votes, 5, 0 vote. Final vote. We're closing the roll. We're now moving on to floor acknowledgments. Current vote is 30. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Five votes, 5, 0 vote. Final vote. We're now closing the roll. We're moving on to Governor appointees. This vote is for Director Morrison of the Department of Pesticide Regulation is 3-0. Can we please call the absent Members?

[Roll Call]

Five votes, 5-0 vote. Final vote. We're closing the roll. And we were full 50 vote on the State Water Resources Control Board. We're now going to We've completed our public business for today. Thank you everybody for your cooperation. We're going to be adjourning the public public statement.

The Senate Rules Committee will be convening into Executive closed session. We're going to take just a couple minutes. Folks are going to clear the room and we'll be adjourning now and going into closed session.