Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations

Appropriations will now come to order. We are meeting in Today in room 112 of the state Capitol. And I believe we're. We're going to start as a Subcommitee, so. zero, we have a quorum. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

We have a quorum. So good evening to everyone and thank you for being here today. We have five late moving bills on the agenda. These measures have all had thorough hearings on the policy merits. Our job here in the Appropriations Committee is to consider the state fiscal impacts.

What that means is that what does it cost to do these bills? So we're not going to be engaging in lengthy policy discussions or broader debates about the facts or the considerations of the case. That's not what we do in the Appropriations Committee.

So as always, as I do at the outset of the hearing, I want to remind any witnesses that are here to speak on these measures to limit their testimony to the fiscal aspects, in other words, the money aspects of the bills before us today.

What we'd like to do is start with Assemblymember Zbur, who is here on 715. And again. There we go. We're being efficient with the paper here, right? AB 715. Educational equity discrimination, Anti Semitism prevention. Welcome. And the floor is yours.

Let me just start off by saying what we're going to do here tonight is we're going to present the fiscal aspects of the bill. There will be 1, 2 witnesses, two.

Authors and one witness.

Two authors and one witness. And you're welcome to come. The witness is welcome to come to the front and then we'll make room for any opposition. Two oppositions. The opposition. The witnesses have two minutes each. And then after that, if you'd like to make a comment, you're welcome to come to the mic.

And this is the me too. We're not going to get into lengthy policy decisions. It's going to be #Metoo. Listen carefully to what the witnesses have to say about the fiscal aspects. Assemblymember Zbur. And we'll also hear from the Department of Finance on this as well. You know, this year has been very strange.

I just have to say, it has been very strange. So welcome to the Senate. Assemblymembers, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members, today I'm proud to present AB 715 together with my joint author, Assemblymember Dawn Addis this bill is sponsored by the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California and is the only priority bill for the Jewish Caucus this year.

Jewish students across our state are being bullied, harassed and intimidated simply because of who they are. These are not isolated incidents. They are becoming more frequent and widespread and not a week goes by that I don't hear about more incidents for my constituents.

There's been a massive 893% increase in anti Semitic hate crimes in the United States over the past 10 years and California schools are not immune from this. When communities are fighting discrimination, the Legislature has always acted quickly and decisively to protect them.

AB 715 builds on that work by acknowledging that Jewish students are facing an acute problem while also fighting discrimination against all communities.

Now, to get to the costs, I'm proud to say that this landmark Bill creates an Office of Civil Rights which will include multiple coordinators who will serve and benefit not only the Jewish community, but also the communities we must protect under our anti discrimination laws.

These coordinators will focus on assessing discrimination that's occurring in schools, providing recommendations to the Legislature, the Governor and the school districts, and providing our educators and administrators with the tools they need to uplift our students. I'll say that one of the anti discrimination prevention creators and the office is created by this Bill.

Other anti discrimination prevention coordinators will be created by another Bill that is being advanced by Senators Gonzalez and Weber Pearson. This is no small endeavor and will require an investment from the State of California. But fighting bigotry and hate is always worth the investment. We cannot put a price tag on the safety of our students.

Creating a safe, affirming and inclusive learning environment is worth the investment. Providing our educators and administrators with the education and guidance to prevent and address discrimination is always worth the investment. And providing our students with a quality education that's free from bias and discrimination, including anti Semitism, is worth the investment. This Bill should not be controversial.

It's about the bill is about the values we all share. Safety, dignity and equality for all our students. We we have a responsibility to make sure that every child in California can attend a school that is safe, respectful and affirming.

While this bill will not affix everything overnight or undo the harm that's already been done is the first step towards better prevention and protection for the Jewish community and other vulnerable communities as well. Now I'll turn it over to my joint author, Assemblymember Addis, to provide additional information on what the bill will do.

Welcome Assemblymember.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. I also want to thank staff as well as my partner in crime, the lead author, Assembly Member Zbur, and our advocates, our witness, Department of Finance, and everyone who has gone through almost two years of bringing this Bill before you.

And I'll say that I come to this work as a former teacher. I spent the first 21 years of my career in public education as a teacher, a teacher leader, a union Member, a site and local Executive, union board Member. And during that time, I taught hundreds of students.

There were students with special needs and neurotypical students, primary English speakers and English learners, students in poverty and those from wealth backgrounds, as well as students who are housed and students who weren't.

And what I know to be true is that every time I walked onto a school campus or into a classroom, I was there for one thing. And it was to ensure that students left their time with me having learned.

And what the data says about learning is that it happens best when students have a trusted adult in the school and that they are in an environment or classroom or school community that is safe, supportive, welcoming and affirming. And so we have that in this Bill.

And one of the most important pieces that's in front of you is the antisemitism coordinator in the Office of Civil Rights. And that person, that antisemitism coordinator, will be helping teachers better understand antisemitism and create the kinds of environments that students can live in, that students can learn best in.

And so, through a fiscal lens, I do want to echo the comments made by my joint author from Assembly Members Zabur, that truly no cost should be too high to make sure that our students are safe and welcomed and affirmed in school.

AB 715 is really about ensuring that every student, Jewish students and others have the best learning environment that the Golden State can offer them. And so I'm deeply grateful for your body for taking time to listen to us today.

And I know that together we'll be able to ensure that every school district is a welcoming and affirming place for California's Jewish students. And with that, I will turn it over to our witness, David Bocarzli, the Executive Director of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California.

Welcome. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Chair and Members. My name is David Bocarzli, the Executive Director of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, or JPAC. Here is a proud sponsor of AB 715. Anti Semitism in California has more than tripled over the last decade, making the Jewish community the second most targeted group in the state.

Incidents in our schools are rising at equally alarming rates. And yesterday in Senate Education, we heard heartbreaking testimony from a San Lorenzo Valley student whose classmates taped a Nazi flag to his back. Across the state, Jewish students are left with an impossible choice. Hide their identity or risk becoming a target.

AB 715 is a proactive solution to this growing problem. It sets clear standards, offers education for school personnel, and creates accountability. So anti Semitism is treated like any other form of hate, seriously and consistently. The modest cost of guidance and compliance pales in comparison to the far greater cost of inaction.

Those costs are measured not only in the resources required to respond to incidents, but also in the deeper moral toll of a divided society. By addressing hate in our education system, we take the most effective and financially sound step to prevent it from festering in all aspects of society.

As the Federal Government retreats from its responsibility, most notably by closing the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights in San Francisco, it is all the more critical that California step up and the Legislature has repeatedly confirmed that this is a worthy investment.

The California vs Hate initiative, which funds community based services, mental health supports, inclusive educational campaigns, and more. The State Fund that with $10 million this body has invested $300 million in security for at risk nonprofits over the last five years. We passed $160 million, a $160 million API equity budget.

We invested $25 million in legal aid for targeted immigrant communities. And of course, we passed AB5, authored by Assemblymember Zbur, to create a safer school environment for LGBTQ individuals, with an estimated cost there of around $10 million. When communities are in need, the state steps up to support them.

The Jewish community is proud to have supported many of those initiatives. And at a time of great need for our community, AB 715 continues that model. And even at the high end, the Committee analysis puts the cost for this bill lower than any of the examples I just named.

We're grateful to the Chairs of the Black, Latino and AAPI Caucuses for co authoring this measure and standing with us in solidarity. Yes, this legislation contains pieces specific to addressing the unique hate that is anti Semitism. And sometimes a specific problem requires a specific solution.

But we know that hate targeting any group is interconnected, and AB 715 also includes protections that will apply to other vulnerable groups too. Importantly, we're committed to continuing this collective anti hate work.

Together with Senator Gonzalez's SB48, the new office of Civil Rights created by this bill will include coordinators to combat hate motivated by race, ethnic, ethnicity, religion, gender and LGBTQ identity. I'm proud that JPAC is also supporting that bill. California has led in protection in protecting vulnerable students before and we can do so again here.

On behalf of more than 70 Jewish organizations from across the state, the largest Jewish coalition ever to back a California bill, I respectfully ask for your Aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And thank you for sticking to the time. I appreciate it. Now I'd like to ask anybody that'd like to join as a MeToo to please come forward. The mic is right here. You can line up. Welcome. You may proceed.

Thank you very much. Madam Chair. I am Mark Levine, former Assembly Member, former Chair of the Legislative Jewish Caucus and co founder of the Legislative Jewish Caucus. I am in support of this bill, proudly representing the Anti Defamation League. Thank you.

Thank you very much for being here. Good to see you. Yeah, it's a really hot mic. You're fine. You won't need to move it.

Oh, thank you. I'm Doreen Castleman. I'm the President of the Jewish Democratic Club of the Bay Area, Northern California Council of Jewish Democratic Clubs, California Jewish Democrats and delegate for AD23. The costs that have been there.

I assume you're in support because we're just doing the #Metoos. Okay. No, no cost related. No further testimony.

In support. In total support. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much for being here tonight.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. Don Gilbert. On behalf of my children and grandchildren and strong support. The schools are the Committee canary in the coal mine. If we can't send our kids there safely, we got to look somewhere else. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Lovis Kellerman. I'm a retired teacher in California and. I'm very concerned about anti Semitism in. The schools and I'm support of the bill.

Thank you so much.

Madam Chair. Cliff Berg here on behalf of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee, representing over 50 statewide and regional organizations, as well as the Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, in strong support of this legislation.

Thank you very much.

Joe Kastler. They/Them pronouns. I'm with the Sacramento Jewish Community Relations Council in strong support. Thank you very much.

Good evening. My name is Lori Nalangan and I'm. In strong support of this bill. I live in Fair Oaks and I'm concerned for my children. Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, I'm Ada Ross from Sacramento. I'm a daughter of two Holocaust survivors who barely survived severe antisemitism. I'm concerned about my grandkids who are now in the public system and I strongly support this measure. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Jocelyn Herman. I am Vice Chair of the Jewish Community Relations Council here for the Greater Sacramento region. On behalf of JCRC and myself, we are strongly in support of this Bill. Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Clary Schumann. I'm part of the Jewish Community Relations Council and the Sacramento Countering Anti Semitism Committee. I'm the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors, a parent of kids in K through 12 schools, and I strongly support this.

Thank you.

Bruce Palmer, Jewish Federation of the Sacramento Region and the Jewish Democratic Club of Sacramento in strong support of AB 715. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Danny Portman. I live here in Midtown. I'm affiliated with Congregation B' Nai Israel. My family's been going through an anti Semitic hate crime and I support AB115. Thank you very much.

Thank you for being here.

Hi, my name is Brett Coder. I am a parent of a child in the Davis Joint Unified School District. I also live in Orangevale and I'm a proud ally of the Jewish community and I support this bill.

Thank you.

Good evening. I'm Miller Saltzman with JPAC and here representing the 70 organizations in strong support of AB 715. 30 Years after adoption.

Thank you very much. There's no more. No more testimony. We've taken the.

They're all organizations, Madam Chair.

I'm sorry. Oh, there are all organizations. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. Go ahead.

Thank you.

30 years after adoption Los Angeles, Agadath Israel of California, American Jewish Committee California, Anti Defamation League, B' Nai David Judea Congregation, Bay Area Jewish Labor Committee, Beverly Hills Synagogue, Board of Rabbis of Southern California, California Jewish Democrats.

California Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Congregation Beth AMI, Congregation Beth Shalom, Democrats for Israel Los Angeles, Democrats for Israel Orange County, Hadassah, Hillel of Stanford, Hillel of San Diego, Hillel of San Luis Obispo, Holocaust Museum Los Angeles, Israeli American Council.

JCC Federation of San Luis Obispo, JCRC Bay Area, JCRC of Greater Santa Barbara, JCRC of the Sacramento Region, Jewish Center for Justice, Jewish Community Action Network, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Jewish Democratic Club of Marin, Jewish Democratic Coalition of the Bay Area.

Jewish Family and Children's Service, Long Beach and Orange Counties, Jewish Family and Children's Service of San Francisco Peninsula, Marin, Sonoma Counties, Jewish Family Service of the Desert, Jewish Family Service Los Angeles, Jewish Federation Bay Area, Jewish Federation Los Angeles.

Jewish Federation of Greater Santa Barbara, Jewish Federation of Orange County, Jewish Federation of Palm Springs in the Desert, Jewish Federation of San Diego, Jewish Federation of the Greater San Gabriel and Pomona Valleys, Jewish Federation of the Sacramento Region, Jewish Federation of Ventura County.

Jewish Free Loan Association, Jewish Long Beach, Jewish Partisan Educational Foundation, Jewish Silicon Valley, Jewish 4 veterinarians of the United States, Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, Kehilat Israel Congregation, Mosaic Law Congregation, National Council of Jewish Women San Francisco.

Northern California Council of Jewish Democratic Clubs, Orthodox Union Progressive Zionists of California, Rabbi Jacob Pressman Academy, Raoul Wallenberg Jewish Democratic Club, San Francisco Hillel, Santa Barbara Hillel, Santa Monica College, Jewish Affinity Group, Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Stand with Us, Teach Coalition, Temple Judea, Valley Beth Shalom, Young Israel of Century City, EULA High School and Zionist Movement. Thank you.

Thank you very much. You saved us from everybody having to fly up here. Thank you. Anyone else in support? Okay, we're going to move into opposition. Anyone? The two witnesses in opposition want to welcome you.

And I want to thank the sergeants for asking if they could turn off the equipment while we're trying to get through our hearing, so appreciate that very much. Welcome, sir.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members. Carlos Machado with the California School Board Association. So CSBA, we share the author's commitment to combating discrimination. AB 715 introduces a series of complex mandates without providing necessary state support to implement them.

There's three areas that I want to focus on in terms of the impacts it'll have on LEAs, both school districts and County Offices of Education. The first area is the bill's requirement to immediately remove entire instructional materials deemed noncompliant rather than allowing targeted edits.

This will force districts to discard valuable resources and invest in costly replacements outside of the normal schedule for replacing those instructional materials. Additionally, the heightened risk of complaints and investigations will drive up legal expenses, compliance monitoring, curriculum development costs, all which strain already limited local budgets.

The bill would also increase the risk of liability for school districts and County Offices of Education by creating vague standards for violations. With respect to educators, this could occur as a result of them discussing perspectives that could be construed as advocacy, personal opinion bias, or partisanship in the eyes of a complaint, a complainant.

It also increases school leaders' liability for allegedly having a reason to know a material was used in the classroom that a parent finds objectionable. We're concerned that these increase the litigation costs and legal costs associated with any types of complaints and also compliance issues that would result from them.

AB 715 places a heavy financial burden on local educational agencies without offering the front-end support needed to meet its demands. We urge you to consider a more balanced approach, one that promotes equity, inclusion, while preserving academic freedom and fiscal stability. We stand ready, and CSBA and its members are committed to ending discrimination. Unfortunately, we are opposed to AB 750 in its current form.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair and Senators. Seth Bramble for the California Teachers Association to speak in opposition to Assembly Bill 715. As a teachers' union, we recognize the connection between creating a world that's safe and just for all, and academic freedom, the ability of educators to ensure that instruction includes perspectives and materials that reflect the cultural and ethnic diversity of all of California's students.

There are obvious costs associated with establishing an Office of Civil Rights, but I wanted to flag four additional costs this bill will create that were mentioned in the analysis as unknown lawsuit litigation costs. First, our Constitution ensures equal protection under the law. Offering extra protections to some but not all fails this standard. This proposal and its companion bill add protections, but not universally.

For instance, the disability community is excluded. Additionally, there are coordinators for combating religious discrimination and anti-semitism, creating overlapping protections for certain groups. A legal challenge to this law could result in costs to the state. Second, this bill exposes educators and schools to lawsuits driven by political agendas, adding significant costs.

As Carlos mentioned, it prohibits advocacy, personal opinion, or partisanship in instruction, but the vague language creates uncertainty. For example, does displaying a United Farm Workers flag or sharing one's pronouns as a transgender teacher count as advocacy? Such ambiguity may lead educators to avoid sensitive topics, depriving students of an inclusive education.

The unclear definitions of terms like advocacy and personal opinion invite debate and could result in attacks on teachers, further increasing costs for the state. Third, the language of the bill includes a 2023 anti-semitism white paper from the Biden Administration, but this document discusses all other aspects of society, about topics like housing discrimination, not just education, and referring to the entirety of the document as the foundation of schools' obligation to identify, respond to, prevent, and counter anti-semitism increases legal risk for school districts.

Finally, there is a cost to the public trust and to good policy-making in rushing this bill and bypassing the Judiciary Committee. You're faced with a decision today that could have far-reaching consequences for our communities, our economies, and our future, and we urge your no vote.

Thank you very much. Thank you for sticking to the two minutes as well. Now I'd like to invite anybody that would like to testify in opposition to please come forward. State your name for the record. And again, these are the #MeToos.

Thank you. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Thank you, Senate Appropriations Committee members. My name is Dina Saba. I'm a Palestinian American, Chris--Orthodox Christian, daughter of a survivor of the 1948 Nakba, an immigrant, born a stateless refugee, founder of the Arab Film Festival, president of the Democrats for Palestinian Rights Bay Area Club, board member of the Arab American Cultural Center of Silicon Valley, and a graduate of the California public school system. Prioritize funding for public schools and I strongly oppose this bill.

Thank you very much for being here tonight.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members. Tristan Brown of CFT, A Union of Educators and Classified Professionals, here in respectful opposition but still remain committed to working with the authors and sponsors on this. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, members of the committee. My name is Conrad Crump. I'm with Disability Rights California. While we are not formally opposed to the measure, we do have some concerns with the costs associated with the development of this office as well as a lack of public input and conversations going into the creation of it. Thank you very much. Happy to work with the author's office as well.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. JP Hanna, on behalf of the California Nurses Association. We're in opposition, aligning our comments with our union brothers, sisters, and siblings, and I've also been asked to provide #MeToo opposition on behalf of ACLU California Action. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening. My name is Alyssa Kang. I'm a community and political organizer with California Nurses Association and also a resident of Sacramento, California--excuse me--Sacramento, California. I strongly oppose this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello. My name is Maya Steinhart. I'm a special education teacher, Jewish special education teacher here in Sacramento, I'm a member of Jewish Voice for Peace, and I have a list of over 100 organizations in opposition to this bill. Sorry.

California Coalition to Defend Public Education, Ground Game LA, John George Democratic Club, Justice Teams Network, Muslim American Alliance, Luther Burbank Education Association, ADC, VietRISE, UC Student Association, California Latino School Boards Association, as we heard, Association of Raza Educators, Coalition for Liberated Ethnic Studies, Rethinking Schools.

Asian Pacific Environmental Network, UAW Local 2320, AROC Action, CARE California, CARE Action, Collective for Inclusive Education, JVP Action, La Raza Community Resource Center, Quit, Justice Teams Network, CURB, Arab American Civic Council, Dolores Huerta Foundation, Black Lives Matter, FAEAC, JVP South Bay, JVP Sacramento, JVP Santa Barbara, JVP San Diego, JVP Bay Area, IfNotNow.

Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, Hindus for Human Rights, Alliance of South Asians Taking Action, Democrats for Palestinian Rights Bay Area, Anti Police-Terror Project, Showing Up for Racial Justice Bay Area, Progressive Democrats of America, Beyt Tikkun, Surge SF, AFSC, DSA Santa Barbara, DSA Sacramento, DSA San Francisco, Mount Diablo Peace and Justice Center, East Bay Democratic Socialists of America, Jewish Educators Against Actual Anti-Semitism Network. What was it?

UCLA Undergraduate Students Association, Berkeley Unified School Board Jewish Parents for Collective Liberation, Taxpayers Against Genocide, 1021 Members for Palestine, Arab American Cultural Center Silicon Valley, Campbell Coalition, Feel the Bern San Fernando Valley, Muslims and Friends Phone Bank, San Jose Peace and Justice Center, Wellstone Progressive Democrats of Sacramento, San Jose Nikkei Resisters, Yolo for Palestinian Justice, Muslim American Alliance, CODEPINK Central Coast.

CODEPINK Sacramento, Critical Resistance, Wellstone Democratic Renewal, Vigil4Gaza, Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace, Davis Jews for Davis, Democrats for Justice in Palestine, Anti-Eviction Mapping Project, AFSC, OCESA, Kehilla Community Synagogue, Northridge Individual, Indivisible California, Filipina Igniting Empowerment for Reimagining California Collective, Fair Chance Project, Majdal, US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action.

South Bay Indigenous Solidarity, United Liberation Front for Palestine, Sacramento Regional Coalition for Palestinian Rights, CalSTRS Divest, NorCal Sabeel, BAY-Peace: Better Alternative for Youths, Bay Resistance, Islamophobia Study Center at Berkeley, California, Defending Rights and Dissents, Rabbis for Ceasefire, Shomeret Shalom, Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism, Pride at the Pier, Students for Quality Education, Sacramento State, Los Altos for Racial Equality, Ramallah Club of San Jose, Fight for the Future, Empower Change, SGV Progressive Alliance, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, Black Parallel School Board, Asian American Liberation Network, NorCal Resist, Humboldt for Palestine, PSR Sacramento, and the CNA--thank you.

Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Hi. I'm Ann Wolf from Richmond, California, here on behalf of BUSD Jewish Parents for Collective Liberation, Jewish Voice for Peace, and I'm also a proud member of SEIU 1021, the mother of a thriving Jewish California public school student who has been in the public schools from K all the way through--K through 12 and is off to UC for college, who is very proud of his Jewish identity and is thriving, and I oppose this bill.

Thank you very much. Congratulations.

Hello, and thank you for having me. My name is Syeda Rubina Inamdar. I'm from Fremont, California. I represent Muslim Democrats and Friends, and I represent my family, my two little children who are proud members of our public school system, and I'm a graduate of our public school system, and I strongly oppose this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. Eric Paredes with the California Faculty Association, on behalf of our 29,000 members who work in the California State University System. We are in opposition to this bill and I've also been asked to give #MeToo on behalf of CARE California, who's also in opposition to the bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Margaret Okuizumi. All the major educational organizations are opposed to the bill. In addition to the ones already mentioned, I just want to highlight with the California Coalition to Defend Public Education, the Association of California School Administrators, the California Latino School Boards Association, the Council of UC Faculty Associations, California County Superintendents.

I've been asked to give #MeToos also for the Progressive Delegates Network, Alameda County Progressive Democrats, and California Democrats for Justice in Palestine.

Thank you.

Good evening. I'm Jason Mansour. I'm a senior at Sacramento State University. I'm with Students for Justice in Palestine and Students for Quality Education, and I strongly oppose.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Michael Lee-Chang. I'm a Korean American student at Sacramento State and a proud member of SEIU 2579, Unit 15. On behalf of Students for Quality Education at CSU Sacramento, we oppose this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. I am Haku Kahoano, an East Asian American student at Sac State University and part of SQE and SJP. I am here to say I strongly oppose this bill.

Thank you.

Good evening. Juliana Fredman. I am the daughter and granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. I am the mother of two children, one who is still in K-12 public education and one who just went to college. I am also the aunt of seven nieces and nephews who are in various stages of the California public schools, all Jewish also. I am a member of Beyt Tikkun Synagogue, JVP, and Berkeley Families for Collective Liberation, and I strongly oppose this bill.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name's Wendy Greenfield. I've been a proud social justice activist since elementary school trying to integrate my all-White neighborhood. I taught in public elementary schools for over 30 years, always spending my own money for my class.

I was a member of the California Teachers Association and organized for the Dolores Huerta Foundation and presently for Jewish Voice for Peace, and I strongly, strongly share their opposition to this bill. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Anyone else in opposition? There is a do pass motion. We'll go to the Department of Finance.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members. Christian Beltran with the Department of Finance. Just here to express that the department doesn't have a specific position on the bill but just wanting to emphasize what's already noted in the analysis that the current budget bill juniors, AB 105 and SB 105, does have a control section 92, which authorizes the Director of Finance to augment the amount of any appropriation for any state department or agency from the General Fund to provide personnel and other resources necessary to implement this bill as well as SB 48. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Bringing the matter back to the committee. Senator Wahab.

Thank you. One, I just want to thank everybody for their #MeToos and their testimony here. I just wanted to give an opportunity for the authors to be transparent in from what I understand that there is going to be be some effort on cleanup language in regards to some of the concerns that were raised by our teachers and some of the other community members. If you guys would like to elaborate a little bit more?

Very briefly. Extremely briefly. This is Finance. I do appreciate that question. This has to do with fiscal, and we do have a motion, so...

I think what we can say is there is a provision in the bill that actually came from a UTLA contract with LAUSD that has become an issue of that the Policy Committee has asked us to continue working with the education stakeholders and the Education Committee, and we've committed to working with them again on some cleanup of that provision.

Thank you, and I do want to highlight from a fiscal standpoint, we have seen data where hate is on the rise, anti-semitism particularly, as well as obviously Islamophobia and some of the other hate speech that we've seen, including a person like Kanye West selling swastika t-shirts, right?

I also believe the investment in regards to a more vigorous effort for hate in our schools. No child should feel bullied or harassed for who they are, what they represent, and I will also say I do share the concerns of some of the opposition as well, because as much as I support this, I still think that it has further work and that is why I am very grateful to the Legislative Jewish Caucus for committing to more work on this bill as we move forward next year. With that, respectfully, I will be abstaining today. Thank you.

Senator Richardson.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I also want to thank everyone for coming out not only tonight but for last night as well for expressing your opinion. That's what makes us different is the democracy that we have in this country. That being said, this is--we're here in Appropriations.

It's our job to view this proposal based upon the cost, and I will tell you that the cost is consistent. I personally had a bill this year that was moving forward, you know, for teachers and educators to provide education regarding slavery. So many of us here or our colleagues have brought forward similar measures to want to make sure that the true history is being taught.

That being said, fiscally, I would say that unfortunately we're seeing a rise of discrimination of many groups, and I look forward to this office including and covering, which is why they have coordinators in different positions to cover all forms of discrimination that we're being faced, but in true form to legislation, it's important.

We have to start somewhere, and I believe that the Jewish Caucus and those that are involved have worked diligently. I can say, as a member of the CLBC that have been included in these meetings, they've been extensive, and I look forward to us beginning this process, and ultimately, the goal is that by educating, we can eliminate discrimination and hate of all forms and this is our step of that process.

I did have one question I wanted to ask. One of the witnesses said--actually two questions--one of the witnesses said there would be a high cost of removing the materials and I thought I saw that there would be an annual review starting in 2027, which is more than a year from now, and then actual tracking and reporting would begin in September of 2027. So when, what is the plan in terms of actual implementation over a time period so we can clarify?

So on the last question, some parts of the bill will become effective, you know, at the beginning of the year, obviously, but the reporting under the bill, which is actually requires gathering information from the California School Board and having it reviewed, the first reports don't take place until the dates in the bill, which would be in 2027.

But does the legislation call for the removal of materials?

On that one, on the first question on that, the legislation requires that portions of the materials that actually may be problematic and biased need to be removed quickly. I will say that the problems that are happening in the school districts are not occurring in paper textbooks.

So it's not like you--I mean, textbooks are already reviewed generally, so it's not like it's, it's not the textbooks that are the problem; it's really materials that teachers may bring in the classroom like news articles, other kinds of things, and those would be--so that's really where the, what this would actually get at and I don't think there's any cost related to that. If there's something in a--but it doesn't require full removal of a textbook; it requires removal of portions of materials that may be creating bias.

If I could, I see that Mr. Machado has a response and so maybe if you could--you're an administrator, you're part of the administration, so can you answer that question?

Sure. So just for clarification, school board--we represent school boards, so generally, LEAs do have a cycle for updating textbooks and instructional materials. We're concerned that as the language is currently drafted that it would require the removal of some of those materials that might be found to be in violation.

It doesn't seem to give the flexibility to just extract the parts that are, you know, that are perceived as being, you know, that would violate the bill. So we're concerned that because of the immediate removal, that doesn't give the district the time to replace those during the current term and also it would obviously result in additional costs for the LEA outside of the normal updating process for instructional materials.

So that might be something that needs to be looked at as well just to put on the list of things to consider, some kind of flexibility to be able--if it's in fact in textbooks or in printed material that if they're ordering printed material that it be, that there be--look at the cycles because I don't know what the material that may have caused the problems to be but I think that's an issue that at least we should be aware of.

Madam Chair, may I add just sort of a real-life example of why I think this is incredibly, incredibly unlikely? That--

If it is, I'm good.

Yeah, incredibly unlikely, and I'll just give you an example of a trope that was used in a school district. It was a material a teacher brought in themselves, a trope of the puppeteer, the Jewish puppeteer, you know, the person behind the puppet controlling everything. There's all these tropes and it was simply one piece of paper as part of, you know, a whole set of lesson plans, and so in that situation, you'd be removing that piece of paper with that image on it.

I don't see a cost to the school district. Very, very, very unlikely that materials, textbooks, those kinds of things, wholesale purchases that classrooms or schools do, would ever have something like that because there's such a strong vetting process already for adopted materials and for whole sets of materials.

Thank you. Finally, when I was in elementary school, I was first called a mulatto at school and I read it in a school book, so that's why I'm supporting this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Seyarto.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a couple questions. I'm trying to get my--we're going to spend some money or not, and so the question is, are we spending money? And the position of--I'm trying to get the position of the educators. To me, this isn't a union issue where everybody piles on. It's a union issue.

You're very relevant, and so are you because you are in the classrooms and you're teaching people and you're developing curriculum and approving curriculum. Is the problem that there is no problem and we don't need to spend money on fixing it or is the problem it's too complex to undo and will cost too much money to undo? Because if you're saying there's not a problem, what's that? Is there a problem or is there not a problem that needs to be addressed?

And as Carlos mentioned for the School Boards Association, I would say also for the Teachers Association that we're committed to combating anti-semitism in all forms. The example that Assembly Member Addis just gave where there was a piece of paper would currently be unlawful to subject students to that kind of discrimination right now.

So that's a function of the statutory scheme we have on the books right now, but there are proposals here that suggest that, you know, I gave the example of, I have--I'm a union member and I have a Farm Worker flag, United Farm Worker flag on my wall, and I'm teaching California history.

Is that going to be politicized in this moment? We have a moment where there are some folks with political interests who are coming into schools with a political agenda and the outcome of that may well be litigation about stuff that, you know, is just the normal course of business of being a professional educator. So that's our concern.

I think the example that was raised is covered under current law and I think this bill puts in some new pieces that could have a dramatic impact. There is also a proposal that I didn't mention in the bill suggesting that we can't have instruction that is not factually accurate, you know, like, that's like a book of fiction.

That's like me reading fiction in an English language arts class. So there's dramatic proposals here that I think will have a cost and unintended consequences, but with respect to the example that was provided, I think that's covered under current law, and as I said, we're totally committed to fighting discrimination in all forms everywhere that we see it.

Do you see an anti-semitic problem in our schools?

I see discrimination of all students in our schools, including Jewish students, and I feel like that we lead California Teachers Association in fighting for justice, safe environments for our kids, safe learning environments. It's a high priority for our organization.

And I understand that, but sometimes there's a wane, you know, there's a rise and wane of different forms of discrimination. Back when I was in school, we had a lot of racial discrimination. Wasn't as much anti-semitism or it wasn't as visible. Nowadays, anti-semitism is pretty visible.

I've had students in my office talking about it, telling me what's going on. That bothers me, and if our answer to an effort to try to ensure that at least the instructional materials aren't biased in some way in contributing to that environment is we don't want to spend the money, well, I'm willing to spend the money on this end because we need to.

We need to help you create the type of environment for all students, not just Jewish students, but all students, where the curriculum that is being offered, no matter where it comes from, is not threatening to them and it teaches an accurate portrayal of history.

We have all kinds of bills doing that, and so I don't see this bill as being that much different. If there weren't a problem, we wouldn't be here, and that's my angst I have here is we're sitting here with a real tight budget and we do need--but there are things, if there are problems that we are having of this nature, well, that's money well spent.

We're spending all kinds of money on other stuff that is not nearly as important as getting right as this is. So I appreciate you guys coming in. I appreciate all your testimony. Thank you.

Senator Cabaldon.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and as a member of the Senate Education Committee, I appreciate the, this sixth, the sixth hour of the hearings on this and all the folks who made the, made the trek, not just in the two hearings, but you know, this has been a lively, contentious issue, you know, all year, all year long and the civic engagement has been very strong and for the most part, very intense but civil, and very much appreciate that.

And I also want to emphasize in the Policy Committee, the commit--because I want to get the words right--we did not ask for or receive a commitment that we would continue to work together and that there'd be stakeholders coming together but there will be cleanup legislation to address these issues. There will absolutely be cleanup legislation next year to address these issues, particularly but not exclusively, but particularly the factually accurate language.

So just want to re-emphasize that because it's important that we get that part right, and I'll stick to the fiscal issues because I think they--well, it's our mandate, but also because they're very important. I'm a freshman.

I've only seen this the language that's in the budget bill trailer junior maybe twice this year, and for things like fire, you know, sort of like natural emergencies that required a very large delegation of power from this legislature to the administration.

The budget bill, as is noted in the analysis and as the Department of Finance noted, makes an unlimited appropriation for this bill with no limit. Any amount is appropriated and that means that we have to pay attention to what that's going to be.

And I'm extremely uncomfortable both from a constitutional--but also that we don't have unlimited money to make sure that we get the, that we get the dollars right-sized here and that we get, that we have clear commitments about what the exact expectations are because I think the--and there's two of the, two dimensions of this, obviously. One is the local district dimension, which is, doesn't, is not subject to that language--that only applies to the state agency portion of the bill--but the, but the witnesses are largely correct, right?

These things do--even identifying one piece of paper that you pull out is not--that specific act of seeing the piece of paper and pulling it out of the classroom, that is, that's simple. It's the complaint gets filed.

It had, you know, the clerk, the attendance clerk in the front office has to take it and find, figure out, well, I've never seen one of these before, where does that go? The vice principal looks at it. I think that's the assistant principal that's supposed to handle this. Okay, now it gets to the principal.

These things, if you've ever worked in an actual school, these things require much more effort than is apparent, and then of course, the, the general counsel for the school district starts getting involved. And so there is no simple thing that are, that are in these, that are in these chains of processes.

And you know, in my district, Moms for Liberty and 500 other organizations are doing, are using the laws that we have created already to protect, you know, Latino and Black and API and Native American and LGBT students and women in order to either accomplish nefarious ends or at least to tie up and harass the local districts and school boards.

And there's no--when we create tools for the right reasons, we have to account for the possibility, and in this case, the likelihood that they will also be abused, and the procedures in here will make sure that that abuse will only go so far but those, but those procedures require lots of school board meetings and hearings and potential litigation. So I do worry about the costs at the, at the local level to, to the districts and they, that's, there's no appropriation for that, right?

That, that will simply come out of the Proposition 98 allocation that supports all of public education in California, and so while I agree with the, with the Senator from Murrieta that this is important and we should be spending resources on it, we should be, we should do that with all open eyes about what the, you know, where that's coming from at the local level.

Then at the state level, sort of similarly, the six positions--I know that our chair, having been a secretary of a cabinet agency and knows this quite well--six positions does not buy that much when you're talking about the director of the Office of Civil Rights, the director, the anti-semitism coordinator, four other people, one of whom is an admin supporting the director and the coordinator.

Another is handling the travel requests and all the other things that state agencies are required--they're down to like two people doing the actual work, and the bill contemplates that these two offices will be providing technical assistance at the request of the department, the State Board, every single school district, teachers, administrators, school board members, and other school staff independently.

It will simultaneously be consulting with the AG, with the Department of Education, with the State Board of Education--if you have any experience in state government, consultation and coordination and collaboration and working groups are a nontrivial amount of money and time being spent--that it will engage with communities throughout California, that it will make it available, make itself available to every district, it will involve itself in appeals.

These are not two people responsibilities, and so, I, you know, the, I supported the bill yesterday in the Policy Committee because I believe the policy is correct with the, with the, with the cleanup that will be necessary but I'm deeply concerned about the potential for an unlimited appropriation without a commitment from whether it's the administration or the, or the authors that we are--what exactly is the scope here?

And if the commitment is the request that's going to be made inside the Department of Finance to the governor will be no more than $5 million or $6 million, I'm good. I just, I'm not comfortable with a bill that could, if you implemented every one of its provisions immediately in its full-blown thing and Moms for Liberty and everything else, all that happened--it could cost $100 million--I'm not comfortable with that.

And so for me that's a critical part of the equation because the normal process is either we or the Budget Committee would assess, is this the right amount of spending, and in this case neither we nor the Budget Committee is doing that.

And then lastly, I'll just say on that point, because I chair the Budget Subcommittee that oversees state operations and the, what would be these two, the new Office of Civil Rights and the anti-semitism coordinator, just to emphasize, you know, we'll be asking, we will be holding hearings on this to determine, you know, both its effectiveness or the fidelity to the commitments that have been made and also to make sure that our spending matches our capacity as well as our commitment to the policy issue.

So I'm not, I mean, because of this budget maneuver, I'm not able to support the bill in Appropriations today. On the floor, I'll be looking to understand, to understand how to be assured that the actual bill to the state that we will be paying that not--that we are not, that we are not approving will be within an envelope and whether that's from the, as I say, from the administration or from the authors. That would be important because I do believe in the bill, but on a pure fiscal basis, I don't think--I cannot vote for the bill in this unconstrained form.

So let me just say that, well, let me do that because I really agree with much that's been said, but let me start off by saying that I think if we took a poll in this room that everyone would agree that hate has no place in our society and that we want people to treat us with respect.

And I'm not asking that you love me; I just want to be treated with respect, and the number of times that I haven't in my life makes this a sensitive issue with me. There are all kinds of biases that we have, and it's gotten better over time, but when I am treated disrespectfully because people think I'm just a short Latina that doesn't know anything, it really pisses me off.

Let me be real honest with you. They don't know anything about me, and so don't make assumptions about who you're dealing with. So we all want to be treated with respect. It's a question of how we get there and how do we teach our children and what's the infrastructure in place to be able to capture when either the teaching is incorrect or the way it's being portrayed is not up to a standard that we believe is appropriate for Californians.

And so let me just--so that being said, I really want to commend the authors. They've been working on this for years, and the work that they did ran into opposition with the Latino Caucus, with the Black Caucus, the API Caucus, and so there's no perfect solution.

I think this is--on the policy, I think you're going in the right direction and I think we need to add all the different groups that have been discriminated against as part of the solution, but that having been said, this is the Fiscal Committee, and the language here--basically the way we do budgets is that the governor proposes a budget, and then the, we hold hearings to determine whether that budget's appropriate, and then it gets negotiated.

And my good friend, Senator Cabaldon, sits on that subcommittee that would look at this kind of commitment of resources, and do I think we need to commit resources? Absolutely. There's just no question about it. For hate crimes against Jewish people--see, I told you it's been a weird year--for it to have gone up three times over the past ten years is absolutely unacceptable and so we need to spend money on it.

But to change the system so that without any discussion with the legislature, the governor and the Department of Finance can spend whatever money needs to be spent is okay when you have an emergency situation that needs to be handled; it's not when you're building a department or you're building an agency and then you're creating positions, because once you hire people, you're not going to lay anybody off.

That's not the way we do business. So I want to second--I'm going to support the bill, it's the right thing to do, but that language gave me pause. It's strange enough so that it's--I get it. We're trying to set up an office and make it work, but I really do think that there have to be more controls, and so we'll continue to discuss this. So we have a motion. If it's okay with everyone, I'd like to allow a very short close and then we'll vote.

Thank you so much. I just wanted to just respond to a couple of the concerns. So the first one is that there are some tools for legislative oversight. I know one of those tools is actually Senate confirmation on the, on the head of the Office of Civil Rights and the anti-semitism coordinator, so you are going to have--the Senate will have oversight over these expenditures before they--

Yeah, but see that doesn't have anything to do with our committee today. I understand, but you know, you're going beyond what we're--

And then the second thing also to say is in terms of the issues related to potential liability, the bill creates preventative approaches through the Office of Civil Rights, and I think, arguably, educating and helping school districts should reduce potential liability rather than add to it, and of course, in reducing that liability, we're also helping kids. So I think that's all I'd have to say. I don't know if you have anything else you'd like to add.

No, I just--

If you want a yes vote, I suggest you just finish because you've heard--I think--

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. I do appreciate that. Please call the roll. The motion is do pass. Do pass to the, to the Senate Floor.

[Roll call].

The vote is 4 to 1. We're going to leave the roll open for the absent Members. Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here. Really appreciate it. Very good testimony testimony today. So. Yes. Assemblymember Ortega, you're up. I tried. I told Wick she didn't need to show up. We better. We better call that would AB596.

If I could ask anybody that would like to talk to please go outside. We'll give it a minute. I think it'll be quieter. Okay. Assemblymember Ortega, the floor is yours.

Good evening, Madam Chair and Members. As a short Latina myself, I would never underestimate you and share your sentiment. Thank you for the opportunity to present AB596 today. AB596 will allow voters to make more informed decisions and understand which entities have paid to put a Proposition on the ballot. This Bill is narrowly tailored and carefully crafted version of AB AB 1188.

I worked extensively with clean money and leadership of both houses to draft good policy that we can all agree on. For the purposes of talking about appropriations, I've narrowed my comments to just talk about questions we've received. In terms of the ballot length and cost.

The Bill allows for the Secretary of State to abbreviate any words and to reduce the font size. To save paper and reduce costs, California expects their ballot to provide the basic information they need to make decisions. For this reason, we've done it. We've narrowed it so much that it's only the top three.

Funders have given discretion to the Secretary of State to narrow the Bill even more in terms of the names who are listed on the ballot. This Bill simply puts that information on the top part of the ballot. And with testifying with me today is Trent Lange, the President and Executive Director of California Clean Money Campaign. And Ivan Fernandez with the California Federation of Labor.

Welcome. Hello, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. Ivan Fernandez with the California Federation of Labor Unions, proud sponsor of AB 5596 a Bill that will streamline election transparency. I want to note that this Bill only applies to initiatives and referendums that. Qualify for the election.

As the Assembly Member has noted, we have taken numerous steps to ensure the additional language added to the ballot via. AB596 may be abbreviated and shortened to. Reduce the burden on election clerks.

This is an important measure to protect the ability of state and local governments to generate much needed revenue, especially as we've seen the threat of measures to take that ability away. The benefit of election transparency outweighs the. Cost of harmful ballot measures. And for these reasons, I urge your aye vote. Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair. And Members. Trent Lang, President of the California Clean Money Campaign, speaking in strong support of AB596. Thank you to Assemblymember Ortega and the Sponsor for working with us closely on the language we were proud to sponsor.

The California DISCLOSE act bills to require clear disclosure of the top three funders on ballot measure ads and initiative petitions. AB596 extends the disclose act to ensure voters know who paid to qualify statewide initiatives and referendums by adding top funders of petition to qualify the ballot measure to the ballot label so every voter sees who paid to put it there.

As analysis points out, AB596 will add a little bit of length to the General election ballots that have statewide initiatives or referendums on them. However, a lot of care has been taken to ensure that it takes as little extra space as possible.

First, AB596 directs the Secretary of State to shorten contributor names in specified ways, abbreviating and removing unnecessary words. For example, PGE Corporation and Affiliated Entities becomes just PGE and California Labor Federation AFL CIO becomes just CA Labor Fed. Our analysis of recent initiative contributors shows these rules shorten long names by over half.

So AB 596 will typically only add about 125 characters for each ballot measure, which means only about a 10 to 15% increase over the current length of titles and summaries on the ballot. As mentioned, it also allows registrars to reduce the font size of the top funders if necessary.

Because of this, in many cases, no extra ballot sheets will be needed at all. With these protections, AB 596 will show every voter this crucial information they need to make better decisions while using as little additional space on the ballot as possible. We therefore respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone who would like to add on as a me too want to invite you to please come forward. Seeing no one, how about anyone in opposition, please come forward and take a seat. Welcome.

Good evening. My name is Alexis Rodriguez with the California Chamber of Commerce here testifying in respectful opposition to AB596. This Bill would require the top three contributors of more than $100,000 to campaign committees seeking to qualify, initiative or referendum to be listed on the ballot.

While we support a transparent electoral process, we believe that AB 596 will negatively impact the integrity and the efficiency of the process. AB596 only requires disclosures of the top funders supporting a measure's qualification. This creates an opportunity to mislead voters and potentially paint an incomplete picture of who is for and against a measure.

By including detailed contributor information, AB596 would significantly lengthen the ballot by directing attention away from the policy. Research shows from the center of the Civic Design shows that voters faced with long and confusing ballot language are more likely to skip these questions, which could undermine voter participation and their understanding directly counteracting the bill's intended goals.

Cal Chamber reads AB596 as too similar to AB 1188, which was held on the Assembly suspense file earlier this year. AB 1188 was estimated to cost tens of millions of dollars per election. In recent years, there has been significant reform as it relates to signature gathering. AB596 would result in a fundamental change of the ballot process.

From our perspective, this type of reform should not be rushed. For these reasons, we respectfully urge a no vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Madam Chair Members. Rob Grossglauser representing the California Association of Clerks and Elections Officials. Respectfully in opposition to the measures pertinent to this Committee, we are opposed due to significant costs that are unfunded by counties. These costs are related to the ballot paper ballot design, translation, proofing, printing, mailing and processing.

Cost estimates range from 119,000 in Yolo County, 209,000 Sonoma, to over 500,000 in Fresno and likely over $1.0 million in counties such as Contra Costa and Orange County.

The analysis comments on the Voter Information Guide and that Voter Information Guide contains detailed information about state measures and referenda and it's provided to every voter and it's on the Secretary of State's website. So we may encourage. We'd like to encourage the Committee to consider if that's a more effective option.

We do appreciate greatly the author and the sponsors for engaging with us in the past iterations of this measure and we appreciate their creativity in trying to address our our cost concerns. One of those, for example, is the 8.0 font and potentially moving it downward. We are Concerned that that would likely raise readability and accessibility issues.

So likely it's not going to be an option that we can utilize to try to decrease the cost. But we do thank them for trying to be creative there. And it's for these reasons that we respectfully are opposed and ask you to hold the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone here that would like to testify as a Me To in opposition.

With Full Moon strategies on behalf of GGR? Glad. Faulty government relations. Representing the California alliance for Family Owned Businesses in opposition.

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

No file. Madam Chair

Thank you very much. Bringing it back to the Committee for questions concerns Senator Cabaldon.

With the standard Disclaimer that a vote in this Committee is not a. It's not a commitment to vote that way on the floor. I would move the Bill.

Thank you very much. The motion is do pass. Senator Seyarto

Call me confused, but today we just passed a Bill and I'm talking about the. I, I am concerned about the cost because we just passed a Bill that said they don't want information on the ballot because it clutters up the ballot.

And this is information on how much something costs because it's found elsewhere and they want it. It's already in the voters guide. So that's a way of not spending money on that. And this has the top 10 in different locations.

So I'm not sure why we would spend a bunch of money to do exactly what was voted off the floor today by my colleagues that does exactly opposite of what this Bill would be doing. So I am not inclined to spend this kind of money on this kind of effort.

Very good. Okay. We have a do pass motion. I guess the question that I would ask is the concerns that were raised by the clerks and the elections officials.

I mean, I look at it and it's not that much money, but it seems as if the clerks and the recorders are saying that it's going to cost significantly more. So can one of the witnesses talk about that issue? Because I think it's better to have more information rather than less.

As a voter and quite frankly, people want to know who's funding this, right?

Yeah, I can attempt to answer that. I don't know when they did those analyses. AB 1188 definitely required a lot more text on the ballot than this did. It had both supporters and opponents and it didn't have any of this of the name shortening that this Bill has. So. So.

Our analysis shows this would take up less than a third as much as AB 1188 would only 125 characters. It's 10 to 15% extra. We do think in many cases it won't even add a ballot sheet. In some cases it will. And there will be costs there and then there's the translations cost.

But we've attempted to make it as minimal as possible for this very important information for voters to see.

Thank you very much. Well, we do have a motion. Please. Yes, I'll allow you to close. Thank you. Madam Chair, respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you very much. Please call the roll. The motion is due. Pass to the Senate Floor.

[Roll Call]

The vote is 3 to 2. 3 to 0. Oh, there were no's. No, no, no. I'm sorry. They were nos. I apologize. See.

No, I'm good. Three to two. And we'll leave the roll open for the missing Members. Thank you very much. We're going to move on to Assembly Member Hadwick AB870.

We can't catch her. We try to go with you guys.

I know it's, you know. Welcome. So we'll just hold. Yes. So the floor is yours. Welcome.

Thank you. Madam Chair and Members. I would like to first thank the chair and the Committee staff for working collaboratively. Collaboratively with my staff on this critical issue for my district. I sincerely appreciate your help.

I'm proud to be here today advocating for Alpine County, the state's smallest county with a population of only 1200. Every county in the state administers a California Children's services program which provides medically necessary services to sick and disabled low income students and children. This is.

There is only one nurse in Alpine County to care for these children and when the nurse is not available, the program is unable to function. In this case, AB 870 would allow Alpine County to contract with a neighboring county to run this program.

Recent amendments incorporated technical feedback from the California Department of Healthcare Services and keyed the Bill fiscal. The Department estimates an ongoing General Fund cost of 78,000 to establish standards for the county to run another county's program.

However, only adopting regulations one time for a unique situation such as this suggests much lower costs indicating relatively minor one time costs. The Bill would bring immense relief to sick and disabled low income children in Alpine County and the families who depend on these life saving services. I respectfully ask your aye vote.

I do not have witnesses or any Opposition for this Bill. But I do have Jean Hurst representing Alpine County. If you have technical questions.

That you have no witnesses, there is a motion to move the Bill. And I'm assuming there's no questions or comments from the Committee. So let's call. I'll allow you to conclude. zero, you do have a witness. zero, my goodness. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to rush through it. The floor is yours.

I'm Jean Hurst, here today on behalf of the County of Alpine, with great appreciation for your support of this modest measure for the state's smallest county.

It's unbelievable that we need a Bill in order to allow this to happen. I was pretty shocked myself. So we do have a motion. Ah, Department of Finance. I'm just skipping everybody.

It's okay. No problem.

I knew that. You told me at the beginning, so. Yes, I did. I asked if there was any opposition. Okay. Yes, we can take the roll now. The motion is do passed to the Senate Floor.

[Roll Call]

That's five to zero. It's out. But we'll keep it open for the absent Members.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.

Assembly Member Wicks, AB940. Welcome. And I apologize for telling you you didn't need to be here in the.

Happy to be here always. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members. So AB940 is my favorite bipartisan Bill that I'm doing this year. It's the. My Quantum technology Bill. This Bill essentially directs Gobiz to develop an industry strategy for Quantum technology. Quantum.

As my joint author, Senator, Member Stan Ellis, who actually knows a lot about this because he actually built and ran a quantum company, says whoever owns Quantum owns the future. And so this is about us investing in this technology, which we think is going to be critical not just for California, but for the country.

We're in a pretty mad dash race with other nations to make sure that we're on the cutting edge here. Many states have already invested in this. This will essentially prioritize Quantum within gobiz, within their 13 regional jobs first initiatives, which is. Which was. The Jobs first initiative was actually created back when we had a lot of resources.

In 2021, we put $600 million to this. So this will fold into that. So that's why we don't think this is actually going to cost a lot, because we already have the infrastructure to support this it just says that Quantum should be prioritized within an existing program. So that is essentially it.

Go Biz already has this funding to undertake the work. It just needs to be prioritized. We've been working very closely with Go Biz. I think they're excited about the Bill. It's a bipartisan Bill. We think the costs will not be significant because of the fact that this already exists, the infrastructure already exists.

And with that would respectfully ask for an aye vote or to move it out of Committee.

Very good. And I have no witnesses. Is there anybody that would like to testify in support? How about in opposition seeing none? There is a motion of Department of Finance.

No file.

See, he told me at the beginning that he had no files on these. So we do have a motion. If there are no comments from the Committee.

This is a really important effort and it's an area where California has a lot of comparative advantage, but we are not marshaling it. And the State of California is not a strong enough partner there. And this is. It isn't Go Biz. And that's one of the agencies within the jurisdiction of my budget Subcommitee as well.

This case is different from the Bill we heard earlier in that there is money in AB 105 for this program as well, but it's not unlimited and it's a modest amount of money which we will need to continue to invest more in over time.

But it's a smart initial play and very much appreciate the author's leadership on this and strongly support it.

Very good. Would you like to close? Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Good. Closing. The motion is do passed to the Senate Floor. Thank you, Senator.

[Roll Call]

Four to zero. We'll leave the roll open for the absent Members. Thank you. Thank you very much. And finally, Assemblymember Fong. Thank you for your patience. AB 1098.

Good evening, Madam Chair Members. Thank you so much. Here to present AB 1098, which establishes the California Education Interagency Council, comprised of the heads of K12, higher education and workforce and labor agencies, along with the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. This Bill is one of the recommendations from the Governor's Master plan for career education.

The 2025-26 plan budget includes $1.5 million to establish this council together with AB 1098's companion Bill, Senate Bill S638, authored by Senator Padilla the council will help to ensure that our policies, programs and funding and agencies operate in a coordinated and strategic fashion so that our students are able to secure good paying jobs. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Do you have any witnesses that you'd like to test testify today? Is there anybody that would like to join on as a MeToo? Is there anybody in opposition? Anybody that wants to testify as a. Me too. Opposition sing. None. Department of Finance.

There's no file. There is a motion. The motion is do pass. Senator Seyarto.

No file.

Did you have a very similar Bill that got held? Because this seems to be like a process that we usually don't allow this particular Bill here. It's a two year Bill, I thought.

Thank you so much, Senator. Thank you so much, Senator. So this Bill would help establish their coordinating council. I'm just grateful for the opportunity to be here today and

understood. But there was another Bill you had. It was just like this, right. . Okay, I get it. Thank you.

I've had a coordinating body of bills over the years

The author knows how much I. How I feel about this Bill, but that I love him. I just. Just to point out there there is money in the budget for this council to begin its operations. It is only one and a half $1.0 million.

And the scope of what is proposed in both this Bill and in the companion Bill by Senator Padilla are far more than a million and a half dollars. So just as the Appropriations Committee, we should be aware that although there is funding currently, there will be, as Finance likes to say, very significant cost pressures with this Bill.

Because the cost of what is proposed is far more than the initial investment that's already been made. So. But with that I certainly support moving forward today.

You're absolutely right. I think part of the challenge at some point is for us to figure out how many councils we have, what their. Their job, the scope of their job description is because we have a lot of councils and some are more productive than others and some give us results that are different than others.

So I do agree with you.

I already gave an hour and a half speech about that in the policy Committee.

Yeah, well, we are thinking alike, so we'll allow you to conclude.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Members really appreciate the comments here today. Spectly asked for an aye vote.

Okay, the motion is do pass to the Senate Floor. No, I already did. Okay. Yeah, see, that's the one time I didn't forget. Sorry. It's okay.

[Roll Call]

Four to zero. We'll leave the roll open for the absent Members. Thank you very much for being here today. So we'll get our absent Members.

The Senate Committee on Appropriations will be in recess. We'll start with AB590 by Assemblymember Ortega. The elections ballot disclosure, please. 596. I'm sorry. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

The vote is 4 to 2. 4 to 2. That Bill is out. Moving on to AB 715 by Assemblymember Zbur. Educational Equity Discrimination. Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Four to one. That Bill is out. AB870 by Assemblymember Hadwick. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

That Bill is out. 6 to 0. AB 940 by Assemblymember Wicks.

[Roll Call]

We'll put that Bill back on call then. And finally, AB 1098 by Assembly Member Fong. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

That Bill is out. We'll leave that Bill open as well. For one more individual. The Senate Committee on Appropriations is in recess again.

Going back to AB 940. Assembly Member Wicks.

[Roll Call]

The vote is five to zero. That Bill is out. And AB 1098 by Assemblymember Fong.

[Roll Call]

That vote is five to zero. That Bill is out as well. That concludes the Senate Committee on Appropriations. We are adjourned. Thank you, Senator.