Senate Floor

Secretary will call the roll.

[Roll Call]

A quorum is present. Members, guests, will you please rise? Before we proceed with the prayer and the flag to pledge allegiance this afternoon, with a heavy heart, let us all observe a moment of silence for Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse at the Minneapolis VA Hospital whose life was tragically taken too soon.

Alex was someone who spent his life caring for people like me, for veterans, and serving his community. His parents described him as a good man who wanted to make a difference in this world. Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the loved ones and the people of Minneapolis. May you rest in peace. Thank you.

We'll be led in prayer as we welcome back for the 2026 year. Our own Chaplain, Sister Michelle Gorman. After which, please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Let us remember that we are always in God's presence. God of the past, present, and future. You have told us through our sacred scriptures that you have called us by our name, Isaiah. You hold our tears in a flask, Psalms 56. And that our lives are worth more than many sparrows, Mathew.

Grant us the grace to value all persons for their presence, their gifts, their contributions to the ongoing evolution of our civilizations. Banish from our hearts all fear, prejudice, arrogance and all that would prevent us from appreciating the beauty of all you have created. We ask this in your name. Amen.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

Under privileges of the floor. I'd like to take this time to recognize 3 different guests we have here today. On behalf of the pro tem, please help me welcome the UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Institute fellows that are here on the right side of the gallery. Welcome to the California State Senate. This fellow, Bruin, welcomes you. On behalf of Senator Reyes.

Please help me welcome a delegation from her district representing the San Bernardino Community College and the San Bernardino Valley College as they celebrate 100 years of service to the Inland Empire.

To the left side in the gallery include representatives from the Board of Trustees, including our very own Senator's husband, Trustee Frank Reyes, the honorary 41st Senator for the past couple of months. We also want to thank the rest of the advocates and representatives from community colleges from across California that are here on their lobby days.

Lastly, on behalf of Pro Tem Limón, please help us welcome former Assemblymember Salas, who is here with guests Dr. Steven Bloomberg, Chancellor, Kern Community College District, and Norma Rojas, Associate Vice Chancellor, Public Affairs and Development from the Kern Community College District. Messages from the Governor will be deemed read. Messages from the Assembly will be deemed read.

Reports of Committee will be deemed read and amendments adopted. Moving on to motions, resolutions, and notices. Motion to approve Senate Journals. Without objection. The Senate Journals for January 20, 2026, through January 22, 2026, will be approved as corrected by the Minute Clerk. Seeing no other motion under this section.

Moving into now introduction and first reading of bills, which will be deemed read. Moving into consideration of the daily file, we have File Items 1 through 11 on the second reading. File Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 239. 99 with amendments. 288 with amendments. 381 with amendments.

Second reading will be deemed read. Senator Laird is ready to go. We have two items under Governor's appointments. That's File Items 61 and 62. Senator Laird, please begin.

Thank you very much, Madam President. File Item 61 is the confirmation of Dr. Hernando Garzon as Chief Medical Officer at the Emergency Medical Services Authority. He's an emergency room physician whose career has spanned the local, state, federal, and international levels. When he was appointed, he had already been acting as Chief Medical Officer since 2021.

Prior to that, he spent 15 years as Medical Director for the Sacramento County Emergency Medical Services Agency. He was approved by the Rules Committee on January 14th. I respectfully asked for an aye vote.

I see no discussion on this appointment. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 39. No's, 0. The appointment is confirmed in. Senator Laird. Fire item 62.

Thank you very much, Madam President. Final Item 62 is the confirmation of Stephanie Weldon as Deputy Director of the Office of Health Equity, the Department of Public Health. Prior to this position, she served as Chief Operations Officer for the United Indian Health Services.

She also previously served as Director of the Office of Tribal Affairs at the Department of Social Services. She was approved by the Rules Committee on January 14th. I respectfully asked for an aye vote.

No mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

[Roll Call]

Ayes 39. Noes 0. The appointment is confirmed in. All right, colleagues, we are moving to the Senate third reading. We have our list to go through. We're asking if the floor team tells you you are coming up to please hurry back to your seats so you're ready to present on your Bill.

The first three up are fire items 74 75 and 76. Senator Allen, kick us off under third reading before the Secretary will read.

Senate Bill 799 by Senator Allen an act relating to joint powers.

Senator Allen.

Thank you so much, Madam President and Members, SB 1444, back from 2022, authorized the establishment of a South Bay regional Housing Trust, the Joint Powers Authority. The intention of the housing trust was to fund the planning and construction of affordable housing, receive public and private financing and funds, the authorization issuance of bonds.

So that trust is now currently under the process of being established, but we've come to understand that we need some certain revisions to the original authorizing statute that would help make the trust operate more effectively. So this Bill does just that. It acts some flexibility to the timing of appointing the chair and the vice chair.

That allows for alternates to participate in meetings. It ensures that the Housing Trust board Members are selected pursuant to their joint powers agreement. The Bill has no opposition and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

See no mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 39. Noes 0. The measure passes. Senator Cortese, you're up with file item 75.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 33 by Senator Cortese, an act relating to public contracts.

Thank you, Madam President and Senators, I rise to present SB33 a Bill that will help permanently ensure that contractors working on public projects receive fair and timely payments. The Bill would codify the claim resolution process as a permanent solution to alleviate strain on contractors and expedite the vital infrastructure work that needs to be completed across the state.

In doing so, we're protecting small businesses and workers as well as ensuring accountability in California's construction industry. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Member.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 39. Noes 0. The measure passes. Secretary, please read file item 76. The Senator is ready.

Senate Bill 222 by Senator Wiener and act relating to housing.

Senator Wiener.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues at rise to present Senate Bill 222, the Heat Pump Access Act SP222 will make cost saving heat pump, water heater and HVAC installations faster, simpler and more affordable by streamlining the permitting process.

Heat pumps are a highly efficient zero pollution option for HVAC systems and water heaters that make heating and cooling homes cleaner, safer and more affordable. Heat pumps are so energy efficient that they reduce electricity use for heating by up to 75% and allow customers across the state to experience significantly lower energy bills.

Replacing a fossil fuel HVAC, HVAC or water pump system with a heat pump eliminates harmful pollutants that it also eliminates harmful pollutants that these systems release into homes, thus improving the health of Californians and slashing climate emissions dramatically.

Streamlining permitting for heat pumps is critical to ensuring that California can meet the targets set by Governor Newsom of installing 6 million heat pumps by 2030 and thus helping us achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.

The current permitting process for heat pumps is incredibly fragmented and confusing, excessive requirements around plan checking and can add thousands of dollars in costs. This bill tackles these issues by creating a simplified process for heat pump installations, standardizing permitting fees and allowing for a more seamless inspection process.

It is co sponsored by the Building Decarbonization Coalition, SPUR and the Bay Area Air District. It has support for both environmental groups and from labor, specifically the pipe trades and sheet metal workers. And I respectfully ask for an Aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. Third.

Rubio, Aye to No.

Ayes, 29. Noes, 8. The measure passes. Senator Padilla, you have file item 78.

Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 300 by Senator Padilla an act relating to artificial intelligence.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Members arise today to present SB 300. Last year, our Legislature passed SB 243, the first of its kind in the nation to set safety standards for artificial intelligence chatbots in the nation.

This is a vital first step towards regulating a technology that has the capacity to cause irreversible harm to users, particularly those in crisis and children. Since this issue was first brought to the Legislature, a growing body of research has examined the prevalence of chatbots exposing minors to sexually explicit content, using this sensitive subject matter to increase engagement.

Instead of protecting against and preventing this kind of manipulation, operators instead often lean into it as an attempt to maximize usage. Indeed, as an example, leaked internal documents from Meta confirm that their own risk standards say it's permissible for their bots to engage in sensual and inappropriate conversations with minors.

OpenAI announced the impending rollout of ChatGPT's new erotica feature, and Elon Musk Grok has created non consensual sexual deepfakes of users, including minors. As we learn more about the possible harms caused by this rapidly evolving technology, it's imperative that we continue to build on existing protections and strengthen the protections currently in place. Even the tech industry agrees.

As a Salesforce CEO recently was quoted calling chatbots and I quote, suicide coaches. SB300 would further strengthen regulations of SB243 by broadening existing law. In this Bill, operators would be required to prevent a chatbot from exposing a minor to sexually explicit material of any kind or encouraging the facilitation of such content.

Last year, we took an incredibly important step towards ensuring the safety of users engaging with AI Chatbots. We must, however, continue this work in a rapidly evolving landscape. And this would build on existing regulations. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Becker, you're recognized.

Thank you. I just want to thank my colleague from San Diego for his tremendous leadership in this space. I rise as someone who's had a friend suffer fatal harm and commit fatal harm with the encouragement of a chatbot.

And, you know, it's just been a tremendous shock and tremendous grief for everyone who knew him, knew the family, for everyone involved. And it gives me another reason to focus on this area. And I was proud to joint author the Bill that we all passed last year and strongly urge an aye vote today.

Thanks, Senator Grove.

Thank you, Madam President. I, too, rise in support of this Bill. You know, obviously, I worked on human trafficking for several years in order to protect children in the State of California.

And meeting with organizations like untrafficked, the FBI and the Centers for Child Protection and other organizations that we met with, and specifically just recently with untrafficked roadblocks, and I'm going to call it out, is one of the most horrible things that you could have your child be on.

They said it is the number one recruitment for child sex trafficking that comes from the FBI and also from other a lot of Attorney Generals in the United States. And it's very disheartening to think that we have access to those things or our children have access to those programs. And.

And I applaud the author's Bill bringing it forward. There's a lot more work in this space that has to be done because there is a very dark, dark world behind the screen of what our children look at every single day. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no further discussion. Senator Padilla, you may close.

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 38. Noes 0. We're going to do a quick U-turn right now. Back to motions and resolutions. Senator Archuleta, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise because there is a letter at the desk regarding Senate Bill 694, and I'm moving to withdraw the Bill from the Senate Rules Committee to the Senate floor pursuant to Senate Rule 28, and for it to be taken up without reference to file.

Senator, Seyarto on this matter. You're recognized.

Thank you. I urge Senators to vote no or abstain on this motion on the grounds that this is short notice. This is an important Bill that I believe should travel through the normal process and not be taken up with one hour of notice. Thank you.

Colleagues, Senator Archuleta is asking for an aye to withdraw SB694 and take up without reference to the file. Senator Seyarto is asking for a no vote. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 29. Noes 9. Senate Bill 694 has been withdrawn from the Committee on Rules ordered to the floor, and will be taken up without reference to the file.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 694 by Senator Archuleta an act relating to unfair business practices.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise to present Senate Bill 694, which strengthens California's commitment to protecting veterans from exploitation in the federal claims process. More importantly, it reaffirms our responsibility to ensure that veterans are not misled, manipulated, or taken advantage of when seeking the benefits they have earned through military service.

This Bill is a parody with federal law prohibiting and preparing, presenting or prosecuting claims for benefits unless accredited pursuant to federal law. It should be noted that federal law does not allow for the charging of fees, even for accredited agents and lawyers, for the preparation of initial claims for benefits.

And this Bill follows the federal law in that respect. This federal law requiring accreditation is the foundation of this Bill.

The key principle that the military and veterans community seek to uphold in California law that charge in a fee for preparation or assistance with veterans benefits claims should appropriately be reserved for those authorized under federal law to do so.

The Bill also strengthens state law by increasing penalties for persons that obtain unauthorized access to veterans data on VA computer systems, which is a practice that unscrupulous actors often engage in. It would also prohibit the charging of fees that exceed what a VA accredited attorney or claims agent could legally charge to assist a veteran with benefits claims.

As a proud veteran, the Chair of the Senate Military and Veterans Committee and the father of two active duty paratroopers, I am committed personally and professionally to protecting our military community from exploitation.

My staff and I have worked with industry, veterans, service organizations and key stakeholders to explore whether the state could establish a pathway for accreditation or certification for these companies offering services to veterans.

We took a hard look at whether such a system could be implemented by the state level and after countless conversations and careful evaluations, one thing became clear. It would be against federal law due to the state's current limitations and legal boundaries. The state simply does not have the jurisdiction or resources to create an accreditation framework.

We owe it to our veterans to stand with them and to protect them from being taken advantage of while navigating the benefits they've earned. This is not about politics, it's about doing what's right. Making millions of dollars on the back of our veterans is wrong. They've earned their benefits. They deserve their benefits.

These companies have no formal training in the VA system and operate outside federal law and play by that different set of rules without any accountability or oversight. These companies charge a fee for their services equal to five times the increase of the veterans monthly benefits.

For a veteran going from 0 to 100% rating, the increase in benefits could be as much as $4,500 a month. That means for nonprofit consulting company they could I'm sorry, for a profit consulting company they could walk away with over $22,000 for less than 10 hours of work.

In some cases, consultants can pocket as much as $30,000 through tactics such as holding on to the claim for months before filing so they can take their cut from the substantial back pay that the VA eventually awards the veteran. A whistleblower lawsuit from one of these companies former employee claims the company's business practices are filled with fraud and deceit and cheating the Federal Government out of millions of dollars.

Another lawsuit filed by a veterans alleges the company preys on disabled veterans by unfairly and deceptively taking tens of millions of dollars of the disability benefits in the violation of federal law, according to the lawsuit.

The former employee alleged the employees with no medical background interviewed veterans and quickly asserted and assessed which health issues would be listed on their forms. Employees changed scores on depression self evaluations if they felt the score was too low, sometimes without the veterans knowledge. Applicants were coached to look tired and shabby for appointments with VA medical examiners.

They were advised not to shave, told their told the veterans to bring a cane if they have one, a wheelchair if they have one. Employees were instructed to tell prospective customers that VA could not be trusted to deal with their veterans fairly.

Misrepresentation may have to be made after the after the reason and the reason for these taxes, according to the former employee. It was simple money, profit and gain for the company while putting the veteran in legal jeopardy.

In 2023, ClaimShark companies charged approximately $477 million for veterans, active duty military personnel and their families, according to data collected by the Federal Trade Commission.

Senate Bill 694 stands for the principle that any business operating in the arena of providing assistance to veterans in filing a claim for VA benefits should have to play by the same set of rules.

They should be required to adhere to the professional and ethical standards set by the Veterans Administration and they should be accountable to not exist outside of the protections provided by the VA Accreditation and oversight, including fee caps.

This Bill does not prevent individuals from working in the profession of assisting veterans with VA benefit claims so long as they are VA accredited to operate under the VA's rules. In fact, if passed today and signed by the Governor, the Bill would not be implemented until January of 2027.

Unaccredited companies should have a year to become accredited to continue serving veterans. For those companies that choose not to get accredited, veterans using their services would have a year to transition to accredited agents.

Senate Bill 694 is co sponsored by the Attorney General and has support from a broad coalition including California State Association of Counties, California association of County Veterans Service Officers, the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, AMVETS, AARP, PORAC, SEIU, and the Federation of Labor Unions Members. We have a real opportunity right now to protect veterans from exploitation. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Senator McGuire.

Thank you so much, Madam President. I'm grateful for the opportunity to rise in support of SB694.

I want to take a moment to say thank you to Senator Archuleta, Assemblywoman Schiavo, and of course to our Judiciary Chair for the work that went into this and to Madam Pro Tem who has spent enormous amount of time on this issue over the past many months.

This Bill, something very similar, was originally introduced in the United States House of Representatives. The Bill made its way through the US House of Representatives successfully and ultimately died on the US Senate floor. One of the biggest champions for this issue is Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi.

And last year she was deeply engaged on this Bill here in the state and she has sent in a statement and would request Madam President permission to read without objection, Speaker Emeritus Pelosi says that no one who served in uniform or behind the uniform should be made a profit should make a profit by pay to play predatory services.

She goes on to say she looks forward to the swift enactment of this legislation so that California can finally have the tools it needs to rein in bad actors and send a signal to Congress that they must work with Democrats in a bipartisan manner to enact a federal solution to for this issue nationwide. Members.

The bottom line of this Bill it's about that was the statement from Speaker Emerita. Now, in my own words, I firmly believe that this Bill is about getting veterans every dollar that they deserve.

And I want to take a moment to say thank you to the many Members on this floor who served this country in the United States military. As as Senator Archuleta pointed out, this Bill has diverse support and a clear mission to protect those who protected our country. And I would urge an aye vote on SB694.

Senator Durazo.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise in support of Senate Bill 694 to protect our veterans from abuses. And I would thank the author for his really hard work over this last year to make that really clear.

This Bill simply creates parity between state and federal law, ensuring that anyone who assists our veterans in accessing their benefits is accredited and operating above board. It seems really simple. This Bill ensures that everyone who wants to assist veterans in applying for the benefits is playing by the same rules.

For those simple reasons, I'm proud to support SB 694 and our veterans.

Senator Jones.

Thank you, Madam President. Members commenting on this Bill really is causing me some consternation because I highly respect the author of this Bill and his service to our country. And as I've shared with him, I appreciate him. I love him. I don't like the Bill.

And so I would like for all of us as I comment on the Bill to recognize that my comments are directed specifically to the Bill. I believe that this Bill takes us in a very bad direction when it comes to protecting veterans in California.

And I'm going to speak maybe a little bit from a personal perspective on this, as I've shared on this floor before. My grandfather served in World War II. He enlisted into the Army Air Corps when the Army Air Corps became the Air Force. Continued his service in the Air Force, retired from the Air force in the 60s.

He was a POW in World War II, survived 18 months in a Japanese prison camp, was awarded the Purple Heart, among other many other medals. My grandfather, or my father served in the Air Force during Vietnam, had some hearing issues as a result of his service there.

Both my grandfather and my father had the opportunity to take advantage of services provided to veterans. My grandfather through the VA and my father through a private contractor. So I can speak from both sides of this issue. I believe as their descendant. My grandfather was the commander of the VA in Prescott, Arizona.

He was awarded Volunteer of the Year many multiple years as his service to the VA hospital. Over 20,000 hours of volunteer service in that one VA hospital. I represent, and those of us from San Diego represent the largest veteran community in the country, maybe the world.

And I'm hearing from my constituents every week and every month on this issue. And they're asking us not to support this Bill. They're asking us to come up with a solution because I agree with the author. There is a problem, I disagree with the author.

In the bludgeoning sledgehammer that we're using in the service of veterans to remove the opportunity that they have to seek services under their own free will and determine how they want to pay for those services if it becomes necessary to pay for those services.

Ladies and gentlemen, in our own state, we allow the DMV, our own Department of Motor Vehicles.

When California citizens become so frustrated with the DMV, they can go to a private contractor, AAA, there's outlets in Strip malls where you can go take care of your registration, go take care of your driver's license, go take care of your proof of insurance if you need to do that.

And today in California, veterans have that same opportunity when they run into roadblocks with the official government system currently in California have the option of looking for a contractor, looking for help to get the services that they need.

Back to my father, he was out of the military for 20 years before a friend came to him and said, hey, you're having hearing problems. You should go talk to this friend of mine who is a contractor and see if they can help you get the help that you need.

And as a result of that, my father was able to get a hearing aid, get proven that his hearing loss was as a result of his service 25 years prior to that, and for the rest of his life was able to have top notch hearing care, top notch hearing aids, top notch quality care, because he used somebody outside of the government system to do that.

Ladies and gentlemen. There's a problem. Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we can come up with a solution for that problem. This is not that solution. Please vote no.

Senator Grove.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As the first female veteran that's ever served on this legislative floor, I am frankly tired of somebody saying that if I don't support this Bill, I don't support veterans. It's an outright lie. That is not true in any way, shape or form.

But that's what's been said to me and anybody, any of us, including the author of this Bill and the people that are speaking in favor or against it, who put their hand in the air to swear to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic, we have some type of bond with other veterans who made that same oath.

And I can tell you that just because we did that, I think there's six of us on this floor, five of us that have done this.

Just because we did that does not give anyone the right to take away our choice to get benefits or increased benefits and make a decision to go outside of the government system where we cannot get services. A lot of times, and again, it's not do, it's because we don't fund our VSOs.

They are understaffed and I get that. But if we are not going to fund them and we're going to not make sure that there is a government entity to protect our United States Military veterans, then we should allow them the choice to go outside of the VSOs and outside of veteran services.

No one is making them go to these organizations. I had conversations with veterans from both sides of the of the spectrum on this Bill. I've had conversations where I have people in the VSOs are saying, look, we're doing our best, but we're backlogged. We have this. We've helped. I have a chart here, San Diego, Los Angeles.

They're really good at providing services. A lot of other places in the state are not because I'm assuming funding and the volume of veterans that they serve in their communities. To deny a Korea War veteran that I had a conversation with that waited 12 years for an increase in his benefits because he had Agent Orange After Effects.

After Effects and he had worked with his local VSO, he had worked with two accredited organizations that were helping him with this process. And he went to one of the veterans facilities like a VFW and one of his friends goes, I got $800 increase.

And I talked to this guy and he went to that organization and in eight months, eight months, he got an increase for his benefits. If that, that Korea war veteran would have got his benefits 12 years prior to. He would have had substantial resources every month to make the bills that he had in his lifetime.

This process to warf this Bill to the floor as important as this Bill is, and it should say something to all of you that there are Democrats and there are Republicans that are in the veterans caucus and there are. We are divided. The caucus itself is divided.

And to warf this Bill to the floor and take it up for a vote and just process it out and deny California United States military veterans the opportunity to access outside services when they can't get the results they need from government services is completely, in my mind, absurd. It really is.

And to warf it to the floor without a proper discussion and allow this to go through the policy committees to have the vote and have our voices heard, except for in a rushed environment. And we all know that, that all of this is for theatrics.

We all know that if you've worked it to the floor, you have the votes to get it off this floor. And that we are going to deny California veterans the ability to go outside of government run entities.

My colleague, Senator Jones mentioned the DMV and I'm not saying that our VSOs are as bad as the DMV, but my colleague, that is my colleague from the Bay Area who is working on a Bill. The DMV is awful. We all know it.

We probably have constituent services that ring off the hook for the DMV and to get things processed. I'm not saying our VSOs are like as bad as the DMV, but you can go outside of the DMV, like my colleague said, to be able to get access or help that you need.

You have a United States military veteran, World War II. He talked about his dad being there. His dad was able to go get those benefits outside of government services. You casting a vote for this, casting a vote for this Bill is denying California United States military veterans.

Why not move if you're a veteran and go, you know, leave your home state, go to Oregon, go to Wyoming, go to Tennessee.

Why don't you go to another state where they allow you to have these benefits, get benefits and then come back to California but then you guys would see that and you'd probably pass a lot and not allow them to do that. We are denying veterans the right to access help if they can't get it.

There is a Bill over on the Assembly and we've been trying to say, hey, let's do a compromise on this Bill. Adds $45 million at appropriation for VSOs because they are underfunded. It doesn't allow you to get a veteran to go after a veteran straight out of their service. You have to wait a year.

So at least the VSOs will have a year to reach out to these veterans and say, hey, let us help you get your benefits. And then they can go to outside services. There's restrictions. They have to get a certificate, they have to comply with certain rules. But no, it's a ban. It's all or nothing.

So I stand on this floor as United States military veteran serving at Headquarters Company 5th Corps in Frankfurt, Germany. And I tell you that to deny a military veteran the right to access benefits when they can't get help from government is wrong.

And it really saddens me that they fight to protect your right to be able to do that and now you're taking that away from them. I respectfully ask for a no vote.

Senator Reyes.

Thank you. Madam Speaker, I too rise in support of this Bill. I do want to thank the author, Senator Archuleta and from the Chair of the Veterans Committee here, I'd like to also thank Assemblymember Schiavo, Chair of the Veterans Committee.

In the Assembly during Committee hearings we received text messages and calls from both Congressman Takano Prior, Chair of the Veterans Committee, US Congress, as well as Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. My uncle who served, who enlisted during Vietnam because all of his friends.

Had been drafted, was exposed to a number of things, but he was a permanent legal resident during his time of service. We did not know he was not a US Citizen because he developed a number of issues. We finally went to the San Bernardino County Veterans Administration.

They interviewed him, they fought for him and they were able to win all the benefits he was entitled to receive. My brother in law who was drafted during Vietnam was exposed to Agent Orange and it wasn't until late in his treatment when we realized what the problem was. He'd been hospitalized, had surgeries.

We went to the San Bernardino County VA Veterans Administration. They also interviewed him, asked all the questions and were able to get the benefits for him. I want to pause for a moment and I want to thank all of those who have served our country because you've made this such a great country.

A lot of what we fight for, a lot of what we talk about is here on the floor is thanks to what you fought for our liberties, our America. During our hearing, one of the questions that came up was about those veterans who had pending cases with these companies. What about them?

They've already paid, they've already signed their contracts. And so that cat that caused pause for many of us. The authors have now changed it so that it does not take effect until January 1st of 2027. There had been a request for six months. We now are talking about over a year.

And during this year, it is my hope that all of those pending cases with these agencies, with these for profit agencies will be resolved. And the second thing, that during this time they will also apply, go through the appropriate steps so that they can be licensed and continue to serve our veterans.

My colleague, also a veteran, Senator Grove, is someone who has fought for veterans. And so her words are extremely important. As a veteran, I think that finding ways to make sure that we take care of our veterans is important.

And I appreciate the efforts that were made by the author to make sure there was a time period between the time it was signed into law and the time that that it became and. And when it would be, it would go into effect. Thank you, Senator.

That is time for our veterans to have the agencies that they have hired to take care of what they were hired for. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Senator Stern. It's gonna wait.

Thank you. Appreciate the debate. I'm in an uncomfortable spot of being between a lot of righteous people disagreeing over just how to serve people who have served us. Do appreciate the author's work on this and we've had a number of very helpful conversations.

I thought maybe worth asking a question just because I heard in the opening remarks what I thought was a pathway to actually resolve a lot of these issues that I think we're going to be facing during this year of implementation.

Others may disagree and feel that fatally flawed, but I actually think there's a way to have an integrated approach to a number of these services. So if I may, Madam President, a question of the author.

Would the author take a question?

I will be addressing the questions at my close, if you don't mind.

Not at this time. You may pose your question and he will include in his closing. Okay.

My two questions are does your bill obviate the pathway through a formed accreditation process at the state or federal level for high integrity disability benefits companies to continue providing services without interruption, provided those reforms occur during this one year phase in period? So that's the one. I hope I get a yes on that.

And then the other question is if those reforms aren't undertaken in that year. And this is where I do trust in the author, but I'm wondering if he can commit to reassessing the risks of diminished access to assistance, including resources, but also in terms of these accreditation pathways based on the assessments by relevant agencies.

So do appreciate the author's consideration.

And the answer is yes and yes. And I'll address it a little further at close.

Senator Umberg.

Well, thank you Madam President and colleagues. This is an issue that's near and dear to many of our hearts. I want to begin by discussing where we agree. First, thank you to my colleague from Pico Rivera for your leadership, for being a champion for veterans.

I've had a front row seat to see your passion, your dedication and your desire to assist veterans. It is a tribute to you and your spouse that your children have followed in your footsteps. Obviously inspired by your service would be that our leaders all over the country would emulate your family's dedication to our country's defense.

We agree on that. We also agree that the veterans disability system is difficult, cumbersome and very, very time consuming. We also agree that veterans who are disabled are dramatically undercompensated. Do you know what? I'm not going to ask this question to the author. I know he knows the answer.

A veteran who is 100% disabled, their benefit is a little over $3,900 a month. That's for someone who is 100% disabled. That is atrocious. But that's not where probably, well, a huge number of vets, the vast majority don't hit 100% disability. We also agree that the process with the VA is adversarial.

In other words, you don't just submit your application and then they send you a check. You submit your disability form and ask for benefits. And then you engage in a process that sometimes is very, very difficult, sometimes is very, very challenging. Now, some of us have talked about our family Members who are Members of the military.

And again I commend our friend here from Pico Riviera. In my own family, between my wife and I, we have over 60 years of military service, nine years outside the country, five overseas tours. My sister in law was severely injured during her service, so severely injured that she applied and she used a VSO. And guess what?

Because of that experience she became a VSO. And she did a masterful job for thousands of veterans, including my own family. We talked about our relatives. My father in law flew combat missions in World War II, Korea and Vietnam. And in fact, because of Agent Orange, he contracted Amyloidosis and died.

He went through the process and he got his letter confirming his disability benefits one month after he died, one month after he died after 30 years of service. Now here's the situation. This is an adversarial situation. And there are bad actors. There are bad actors who were engaged.

Now there are 5,000 claimants, 5,000 claims that are currently pending that are being advocated by those who are basically paid. And I don't doubt that there are some out there who are rogue operators, but there are some who are not. In fact, I would suggest there are many who are not.

So the issue here is whether we're going to be unique. This will be a unique situation. Unique to any, any industry ever in California. What we're saying is we have made a legislative determination that you're all bad, that you're all rogue, that you're all operating illegally, that you're all trying to rip off veterans.

That's what we're going to determine, that you're all bad. And not only are you all bad, you will remain bad forever because you can't get certified. This crazy system with the federal accreditation which says you can't be certified or accredited if you charge. By the way, the Federal Government is not preempting state law.

The legislation doesn't preempt state law. Number one, and number two, it is completely non enforced. Completely non enforced. So here we are. Here we are with a situation we're going to outlaw entire industry.

We're going to say to you, veteran, you know what, I don't know if you are too stupid or too vulnerable or your judgment is so poor you can't choose yourself. I can't choose. I cannot choose to pay for someone to assist me with my benefits. This is unique. Can you imagine? This is like the workers comp system.

Can you imagine if someone was injured in the workplace who's a union member and the union says, we're going to provide you representation because that's what you deserve, we're going to provide you representation. You say, you know what, I'd rather go and pay for someone to represent me.

You say, oh, no, no, I'm sorry, you cannot do that. You may not do that. You may not choose your own representative because we're going to give you a representative. Just like if you're charged with a crime, if you're charged with a crime, you're afforded a public defender.

If you can't afford private defense counsel, can you imagine if we as a government said, I'm sorry, all criminal defense counsel are by definition bad. Therefore you must accept your public defender. You have no choice. We've made a decision for you because you are too poor, too dumb, too vulnerable. Now. This bill.

Well, let me address some of the misinformation and some of the vitriol that has been spread concerning this bill. It does not enhance VSOs, nor does the opposition detract from VSOs. I think we all in this room agree that VSOs provide a very important service to our veterans.

I think we can all agree that a veteran should not be forced to pay. A veteran should be given an opportunity to go to vso, vfw, wherever to seek free assistance. But this is different.

Here's what I don't understand, and I've had this conversation with the Secretary of Veterans affairs here, is that we license and accredit over a hundred professions here in California. We license and accredit horse farriers because we're worried about horses. I got it. We should worry about horses and we want them to be accredited.

We could accredit, license, certify those who assist veterans in the application process. By the way, the initial application is the critical, critical part of the process. If you don't list it, you're not getting it. If you happen to have forgotten or the VSO didn't ask you about an injury that you suffered in basic training.

Too late, too late, too late. It's a critical part of the process. So in my conversation with the secretary, she explained she's in opposition. She explained why she's in opposition because, among other things, VSOs are trained, in essence, certified. My question to her was, okay, we've got the course, we've got the certification process.

Okay, open it up, charge, charge, whatever it costs, charge $2,000 per applicant, and allow folks to be certified here in California so that we have confidence that those who are assisting veterans do have the right experience, do have the right education to assist veterans. We could do that. We could do that.

But instead, we are creating a system unlike any other where you may not choose your representative. Now, can you imagine? Can you imagine? Also, besides the workers comp exam, if you're injured, you're entitled to VA treatment at the hospital. At a VA hospital, say, you know what? I'm sorry, you may not go to a private doctor.

You must go to the VA hospital. Because we find that doctors who treat veterans for whatever reason aren't doing so to the standard that we. That we have basically employed. Or if you're buying a house, VA veterans have a benefit.

To buy a house that we say you must go to a real estate broker that we choose, you may not choose your own real estate broker. And that's what we're doing here.

Now, there is room, as my friend from Los Angeles pointed out, there is room for us to create a system, to create a system where we protect veterans and allow them to elect someone that they trust and respect to represent them.

So, unfortunately, and it saddens me, it saddens me to be urging a no vote, but I think this is so important, not just for the immediate situation, but for the future, that we actually say as a body that we're going to protect veterans in a way that gives them the choice, that gives them the opportunity to choose whomever they wish to seek what they justly deserve.

And with that, I sadly urge a no vote.

Senator Wahab.

Thank you. Today I rise not because, you know, I'm a veteran, but because I do have family that have served in the United States army, more specifically three tours in Afghanistan.

And when you have conversations, you know, at dinner with loved ones that have actually served this country and specifically are in difficult situations and have outcomes because of the fact that they were combat veterans, it actually sheds a lot of light of why our federal system is so broken.

And I want to highlight that, because these individuals from all over the United States Sign up because they want a better future, because they want to serve this country, because they want to have a brighter life for themselves and their families.

And sometimes what we have been seeing is that they are completely ignored by the Federal Government and systems that are designed specifically to help them.

But with this particular bill, and I want to thank the author who also served this country for bringing this forward, because there have been people in our district that have reached out specifically about this bill. And what we've heard is some arguments against the bill says it limits veterans choice.

Yet this bill actually protects veterans from predatory claim sharks who charge thousands of service fees that are legally available for free to veterans. Some people will argue that veterans prefer private consultants instead of government or nonprofit assistance. Yet veterans may still choose a private help, but only from VA accredited providers who meet federal training and ethics standards.

You know, the example that was given to me is there are dentists that will pull out your teeth in a garage. But we have standards here, right? And we need to make sure that there are safeguards that protect the most vulnerable. Sure, cheap and fast may be an option, but again, we have standards now.

We've also heard about the increased claim of backlogs if people only rely on the VA's opportunity. But predatory actors do not reduce VA backlogs. Many submit improper or incomplete claims that actually increase delays. We also know that veterans benefits are earned federal entitlements, not profit opportunities. And so consumer protection outweighs private business interests.

We also know that this bill closes loopholes used to rebrand illegal claims assistance as consulting while still charging prohibited fees. What they are doing is already against the law. And that is why we are saying that the federal law as well as the state law that we are trying to push actually makes everything come even.

SB 694 aligns California law with existing federal VA accreditation rules. It does not create new bureaucracy. And many veterans are misled to believe fees are required due to deceptive marketing and hidden contracts, removing informed consent and much more.

So this bill largely prioritizes, again, the veteran that has served this nation make sure that those bad actors are held accountable. And it does have teeth, because the Attorney General can go after these bad actors. With that said, again, I want to thank both authors for bringing this bill forward and prioritizing our veterans.

I respectfully ask for an Aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Archuleta. You may close.

Thank you. I'd like to begin by thanking the other side of the aisle and this side of the aisle, because it is a time when we stand up to speak United for our Veterans and United for California. Today. We're talking about the veterans right now.

Earlier this morning, we were talking about issues pertaining to other states and other issues. But it is California that's leading the way. And I'd like to think that California is leading the way to protect our veterans and issues that were raised. Of course, all of us are concerned about service to our veterans. We mentioned the DMV.

Well, guess what? Anyone who does that has got to be accredited through the state of California. You just can't open up a shop and say, I'm going to help people with their DMV issue. It's got to be accredited. This is a foundation here. It's the federal law that we're dealing with. Just trying to bring the parity.

And when it's all said and done, as I said, if the Governor does sign it, God willing, he will all the way to 2027 and there will be time for accreditation.

Those good actors, those good actors who've done a great job for our veterans, I'm sure they'll step up for accreditation and those others will run out the door because then they'll have to open up their books. They'll be looked at and they will be accredited. With who?

With the people across the street that may not care for veterans. Or they'll be accredited by the VA and all of us. And yes, there'll be a pathway here in California. And I will support that as soon as we go ahead and establish. This is the law, federal law, VA law.

That's why the Attorney General has signed on as a co author. That's why the support is from the Attorney General, the Secretary of Veterans affairs, the VA, and every single veterans organization I can think of that I'm a Member of. Amvets, VFW, Vietnam Veterans of America, you name it, I am part of it.

And when I said earlier that I'm doing this on a personal level, no doubt, because my two sons that I said were paratroopers, they've got seven deployments under their belt, three bronze stars, and they are the veterans that we will be coming home.

As a matter of fact, my oldest son, Brandon will be coming home to California in June and he will have fulfilled his obligation to the United States Army. He'll be part of a California veteran. And when he comes home, I want him to participate with the VA program.

Accredited individuals, whether it be Ambats or whomever it might be, that's what we're looking for. So I will say this is not limiting their choices, but opening up their choices to good, qualified professionals that are accredited. And the capacity that we're going to see, we're going to open up the doors.

We're knocking on doors that say, hey, VA, there's issues with you, and California is recognizing it. And if we could go ahead and make a statement here in California, maybe it'll resonate all through the United States that the VA has to step up a little bit more. And that's the bottom line.

So I will tell you, it's simply having everyone play the rules, the rules of law. And that's the point. This is the rule of law. So with that, I ask your Aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 20. Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 25. No, 6. The measure passes. The Assembly Members are concurred in. I apologize. Senator Becker, you are up with file item 80.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 457 by Senator Becker an act relating to land use.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. This Bill expands opportunities for community land trusts and gives cities a clearer, more workable path to meeting the arena obligations. The California Housing partnership estimates that 222,000 affordable units are now at high or very high risk of converting to market rate. About half of the units already lost were in high opportunity neighborhoods.

With strong schools and good jobs. Community land trusts are one of the strongest tools we have to stop this. Preserving naturally occurring affordable housing is central to meeting the fair housing goals embedded in our housing element law. However, smaller cities often can't afford to write a large check to emission driven Community Land Trust.

This Bill affirms that non-monetary support is a valid and actionable way for cities to comply. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Member.

[Roll Call]

Colleagues, we are in the Senate floor all week. This is not our first rodeo. Asking that you please be here present to vote. Ayes39. Noes 0. The measure passes item 81. Senator Arreguin.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 479 by Senator Arreguin, an act relating to homelessness.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, I rise to present Senate Bill 479, which will allow three cities designated as local health jurisdictions, which are the City of Berkeley, Long Beach, and Pasadena, to implement homeless response multidisciplinary teams and share specified information across different teams and departments.

In 2020, we authorized counties to form multidisciplinary response teams to share information to better align housing, treatment, and services. However, we did not extend that authorization to cities. This Bill is a focus Bill which will allow city-based local health jurisdiction multiple disciplinary teams that have the same ability to share information across departments.

This will ensure that we can better facilitate targeted interventions and better outcomes for unsheltered residents. This already is happening in the City of Berkeley. It may happen to other local health jurisdictions. We want to give that authorization so we can have better coordination and better delivery of housing and services.

There are already protections in existing law for confidentiality and privacy and this Bill would continue those protections. And for those reasons, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. I see no mics up. This item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? Ayes 39. Noes 0. The measure passes. Senator Cabaldon, you have filed item 84.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 719 by Senator Cabaldon an act relating to artificial intelligence.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. This Bill simply extends the census data on a report. Two years ago, the Legislature enacted legislation that provides for an annual report on high risk automated decision systems. The first report came back and said we don't have any yet. And therefore we're not learning anything.

And so this simply shifts the end of the report date to match that gap in the data. Otherwise, a technical non-controversial Bill, ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Colleagues, this item is also eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? Wonderful. Ayes 39 Noes 0. The measure passes. Senator Wahab. File item 85.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 722 by Senator Wahab an act relating to land use and declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately.

Senator Wahab.

Thank you. Members, as many of you know, mobile homes are vital natural occurring source of affordable housing. And to battle the ongoing housing crisis we need to be preserving every housing unit possible.

SB 722 does that by ensuring residents of mobile home parks are as equally protected by adding them to the anti demolition protections consistent with other land use bills passed by the Legislature. Half of the 10 largest mobile home parks in California are in my district.

And three of those are in Sunnyvale, including the largest mobile home park in the state with 900 spaces. And all three will be vulnerable to redevelopment.

Without these exemptions that Senator Wiener and I agreed to last year, thousands of people in my district, women, seniors, veterans and families could lose their homes if we do not reinstate the protections they originally had.

That doesn't even include the mobile home parks across the state that are vulnerable because they are within a quarter or half a mile of a train, light rail or bus rapid transit system. These are constituents, neighbors, family and friends. And the damage this mistake can cause, if not fixed, will be irreparable to these communities.

We have a duty to make sure that our laws uplift people, not push them out. And we must act with urgency to prevent the actual harm this oversight will create. This Bill has received unanimous bipartisan support throughout the process. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

This item also enjoys unanimous roll call if there's no objection. It also has an urgency clause and requires 27 votes. Seeing no objection on the urgency Ayes 39 Noes 0 the measure passes. Senator Allen, you have file item 86. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 832 by Senator Allen, an act relating to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy.

Senator Allen.

Thank you so much Madam President. This Bill would update the statute for the Upper Los Angeles river and Tributaries Working Group to reflect the ongoing nature of their work and adjust the membership of the working group to ensure appropriate representation.

It would codify a requirement to meet at least once per year as opposed to twice a year as currently required to evaluate and report on progress implementing the River Right vitalization plan, as well as propose potential amendments to the plan.

Also, after some shifts to the city council boundaries in the last redistricting cycle, the working group membership no longer includes the LA City council Member with the most miles of the upper LA river in their actual district.

So this Bill would add an additional seat to the working group and specific and sorry specify one seat has to be filled by the city council Member with the greatest number of upper LA river miles in order to improve representation of the appropriate council districts. The Bill has no opposition and I respect f my vote.

Thank you. Senator. Another item with the unanimous roll call recommendation are eligible. Seeing no objection. Ayes 39. Noes 0, measure passes. Senator Umberg, you have two bills up. File item 98 and file item 99.

Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 342 by Senator Umberg an act relating to professions and vocations.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President and colleagues. This is a simple Bill that I believe has no opposition.

What this Bill does is simply says that if you're a licensed contractor and your license has lapsed for a certain period of time, that you need not forfeit the entirety of the contract, only forfeit that portion for which you are unlicensed. I urge an aye vote.

I think Archuleta is speaking against this one.

Senator Grove.

I wasn't going to speak on this Bill, but I want. I just recently went through something with the constituent that this Bill would significantly help.

We had an individual who was a proprietor of an electricity electric contracting company who died suddenly, 53 years old, I think, and it took about 65 days to get the license back into the son who had been working in the business for a long time.

And so I appreciate the Bill because they were scared to death that they were going to lose everything. And he would be, this now 20 year old is going to be the sole provider for his family who his brother is in a wheelchair.

And so this is a Bill that would be significantly helpful to people that have these catastrophic situations and respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Umberg, you may now close.

Thank you. I urge an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

This item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? Ayes 39. Noes 0 measure passes. Secretary, please read file item 99.

Senate Bill 490 by Senator Umberg an act relating to public health.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President and Members. There's a challenge here in California concerning unlicensed treatment facilities and the enforcement of of the law in relationship to unlicensed treatment facilities. What this Bill does is this allows, if DHCS approves of it, a locality to go in with their approval.

DHCS's approval to provide an inspection to see if they're abiding by the law and if they are not, a report to DCHS, urge an Aye vote.

Also eligible for unanimous roll call. No objection. Ayes 39. Noes 0 measure passes. Senator Cabaldon, you have file item 108. SB 828. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 828 by Senator Cabaldon an act relating to fireworks.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Last summer, a massive explosion in a fire unlicensed, unpermitted fireworks factory in my district in the small Town of Esparto took the lives of seven residents, not only in my own community of Stockton and San Francisco and elsewhere in Northern California. And it never should have happened.

The facility had, the operator had a state license, and for that state license to be issued, they had to verify that they had a permit to store explosives and fireworks in that facility. They had no such permit.

There were many other failures of state, regional and local government that allowed that tragedy to happen that we must stop from happening again. But one of the clearest lessons from the very beginning of this investigation was that there is no handoff of verification of this information.

So what SB 828 does simply requires that there be the data transfer shake that you have to. When you say you're applying for a state permit, you need to validate, attach your local zoning and permit, and vice versa. And that those two agencies have the ability then and the responsibility to share that data.

This is the beginning in both in all of the committees in this House, every single Member of the Committee that said something about this Bill said we need to be doing more. And I could not agree more much more is to come.

There are investigations by the District Attorney, by the State Farm Marshal, and many others. Many of the great gaps in state and federal law and implementation have been documented by an outstanding series in the Sacramento Bee. So much more needs to be done. But this is an essential first step in order to close that gap.

So folks cannot pretend to be licensed when they apply locally and pretend to be permitted when they apply at the state level, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

See no mics up for discussion. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Please call the oh. Ayes 39. Noes 0, and the measure passes. Senator. Dr. Weber Pierson. File item 110.

Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 849 by Senator Weber Pierson, an act relating to professions and vocations.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Senators, I rise here to present SB849, a Bill that addresses physician sexual misconduct. This Bill builds on AB 1636, which removed the medical board's discretion to reinstate a physician or surgeon who lost their license due to sexual misconduct with the patient.

More recently, articles about sexual misconduct within the medical industry brought this issue to the forefront once again. In those articles and further discussions, we discovered that the original Bill did not include explicit reference to license renewals.

SB849 clarifies that a physician or surgeon who has committed specified sexual offenses against a patient cannot petition the board for license renewal. This ensures that every aspect of the licensure process is captured. And I respectfully asked for an aye vote on SB849. I see no mics up for discussion.

This item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Will almost be eligible. Ayes 39. Any objection for utilizing unanimous roll call? Ayes 39. Noes, 0. The measure passes center press file item one. You have file item 106. Secretary, please read SB742.

Senate Bill 742 by Senator Perez an act relating to electricity.

Senator.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam President. SB 742 is a reintroduction of a Bill I brought forward last year, SB 256. This is a Bill in direct response to the fires that took the community of Altadena last year, on January 7th, that so many of you have become familiar with.

For those of you that have been following along with the discussion happening in media and in the investigation that's been happening, the LA Times has heavily covered that. The focus of the investigation is on decommissioned lines, transmission lines located just north of the community of Altadena.

These decommissioned lines went unused for 54 years, and there had been many talks prior to actually take these lines down. Back in the early 2000s, the CPUC discussed making a permanent rule to remove these lines and begin assessing decommissioned lines throughout the state.

Unfortunately, that rule ended up getting watered down to a working group and no action was taken. Unfortunately, the Eaton fire was not the first fire that was caused by decommissioned lines. This is actually the second fire. There was a fire up here in Northern California that was also caused by similar equipment.

This is about fire mitigation at the end of the day and making sure that the residents of Altadena, my community Members, receive justice. Unfortunately, when this Bill was held in appropriations in the Assembly last year, many of my residents were incredibly upset. You had Altadena residents who gathered to write op eds.

The Los Angeles Times covered that this Bill was killed. The New York Times covered that this Bill was held because it is so important for the community of Altadena to get justice for what happened. And so for fire resiliency for the community at Altadena, I urge an aye vote on SB742. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 39. Noes 0. The measure passes. Senator Umberg, file item 69. Secretary, please read SB 96.

Senate Bill 96 by Senator Umberg an act relating to streaming services.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President and Members. This is another Bill sponsored by Samantha Keller, the infant daughter of my legislative Director, who was awakened when advertisements that were broadcast many times above the ambient level awakened her and disturbed her parents. That was for streaming services.

This Bill applies to other social media, music and podcasts that dramatically amplify their advertisements. I urge an aye vote.

Item's eligible for unanimous roll call. I see no objection. Ayes 39. Noes 0 measure passes. Senator Wiener, you have file item 83, SB677. Secretary, please read

Senate Bill 677 by Senator Wiener an act relating to land use.

Senator.

Thank you very much. Madam President, this is a very small, technical and clarifying Cleanup Bill for SB 79 from last year. Through agreement with the Senate Housing and Local Government Committee chairs, we significantly narrowed the scope of the Bill, removing probably 98% of the Bill.

We did this with the understanding that I will be introducing a fresh SB79 cleanup vehicle for the normal legislative process. This retains a typo correction in one of the definitions and a clarification of another definition. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 24, Noes 10. The measure passes. Senator Padilla is ready to go. Secretary, please read file item 93.

Senate Bill 58, by Senator Padilla, an act relating to air pollution.

Thank you. Madam President. I'm rise to present SB58. Hydrogen sulfide is a colorless, highly toxic gas with a strong odor, detectable in very low concentrations and is formed during bacterial decomposition of human and animal waste and we are learning now, also other contaminants.

Senator.

The standard for hydrogen sulfide was adopted in 1969 for the purpose of nuisance and odor control. This standard was again reviewed in 1981, nearly 50 years ago, and was not changed and has not been reviewed since.

In my district, two hot spots of hydrogen sulfide have been identified in the Tijuana River Valley and at the Salton Sea Community. Researchers have monitored these areas and have found that monitoring procedures are currently insufficient with respect to the concentrations being found.

Our current framework for Hydrogen sulfide does not take into account the unique circumstances present in these locations. This has created confusion over the appropriate way to respond to limit exposure and protect public health. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide has been associated with many symptoms including respiratory and gastrointestinal issues, headaches, fatigue, nausea, skin irritation and respiratory irritation.

They also often disproportionately affect vulnerable and environmentally overburdened communities, including low income households and immigrant communities. Latino and tribal populations in areas already experiencing elevated levels of respiratory and other health conditions which just exacerbate those circumstances. In the Salton Sea region alone, pediatric hospitalization rate for asthma related symptoms is double that the rest of the state.

These communities need intervention in a 21st century since now this Bill seeks to protect public health and all Californians by strengthening our ability to detect and respond to hydrogen sulfide releases. This Bill has received bipartisan support, has received no votes, and respectfully asked for an aye vote.

Item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? I 39 no 0 measure passes. Senator Cabaldon, take us Home Secretary, please read file item 77.

Senate Bill 299 by Senator Cabaldon an act relating to environmental quality.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. As a result of our work last year on CEQA, we now have a very strange situation with respect to childcare in California. If you want to build a child care center in an industrial zone or in a commercial zone, you are exempt from CEQA.

If you want to build it in a residential zone where most families are, then your CEQA fully applies. This is an oversight from last year. It has real world consequences. In my own district, for example, in Napa County, one of the premier child care operators lost her lease, needed to find a new location. She found one.

There is an old church property that is zoned residential in a residential neighborhood and it has no environmental issues. But she had to file all the. She had to verify all the things that were not the case at the site. And then she was met with an onslaught of threats and litigation.

And what have you related to CEQA? I mentioned this because she was a highly capable applicant. She had won millions of dollars in state and federal grants for the project in a residential neighborhood, again, a church that had closed down for lack of parishioners, with parking, everything that you would want in the neighborhood.

She finally had to give up a year and a half later and her child care center lost its lease and closed down. If she had gone down to Napa County and said, well, how about the industrial zone next door? She would have faced none of that.

So this Bill simply seeks to remedy that and make it clear that yes, childcare, where most people want it, near either their work is good, but also near home, is something that we're trying to encourage. And keep in mind the property already had to have been zoned for residential use. That is an action fully subject to CEQA.

And it had to have been in the general plan for residential use. Otherwise it couldn't have been zoned that way. That's also fully subject to CEQA. So this Bill presents no risk of any of being placed on an old landfill or any other kind of negative consequences.

I do want to emphasize this is clearly not the only challenge from last year's package that needs to be resolved. And there were good faith commitments that were made as part of the overall CEQA reform that continue to need to occur. I'm fully personally committed to being a part of that.

This is deeply connected with that efforts as well, and we will be fully aligned as we go forward. But this specific slice, we need to make more child care slots available.

We need to make it easier to open and we need to make it easier to open in your neighborhood than it is in an industrial zone miles away. I ask for an aye vote.

Senator Valladares.

Thank you, Madam President. So Members, I rise in support of SB 299. As a former child care provider myself, I can tell you that the hardest part of running a daycare center is actually not caring for the children. It's often navigating the red tape.

Every year I saw it in my child care center. The costs pile up. Regulations that require legal experts, that require HR consultants and compliance specialists. Costs that small providers really can't absorb. These are often women owned, Latina owned small businesses who simply want to provide a safe, loving care in their community.

For parents, the cost is already insane. I know a lot of you on this floor. Quite a few of you on this floor have little ones. In California, child care can run anywhere from 15,000 to $20,000 per year per child. And that's if you can even find a slot.

During COVID, many family care homes and facilities were shuttered, and they never reopened. At that same time, this body, with my support, passed Universal TK. That also pulled workers out of the private care workforce, making an already fragile system even more competitive and constrained.

The result, fewer providers, fewer slots, and higher price for higher prices for parents. Families don't need child care across town. We're just trying to get by. Let's be real parents, we're just trying to get by on a daily basis by being parents, let alone having to think about traveling across town. The cost of childcare.

We don't need to stress out. We need more slots. This Bill is common sense, and let me just tell you, I'll end on this. Our family child care center also closed. Our lease was expired, and we looked around town for over a year to try and find a facility that met the state requirements.

You need 75 square feet of outdoor space per child, 35 square feet of indoor space for per child. Let me just tell you, finding those types of facilities are few and far between. This is a simple Bill that we need because moms need us, dads need us, we need more child care slots. And once again, affordability matters.

Access to childcare matters. I want to thank the author for presenting this Bill and respectfully ask for Aye vote.

Senator Niello.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise in support of this Bill also, and then some. I would agree with what my colleague from Santa Clarita said with regard to red tape. That particular concept could be applied to just about any business operating in California.

But more specifically, with regard to this Bill and as to how it relates to the California Environmental Quality Act, we have exceptions and exceptions and exceptions and exceptions and exceptions. I think you get my point. This screams for an overall reform of CEQA to eliminate the weaponization of that frankly useful act.

More broadly, a very simple reform of CEQA to just have complete transparency as to who it is that is pursuing the action against the proposed development, number one, and number two, require that the action taken to oppose the development be completed in a reasonable period of time.

There have been repeated attempts to put proposals like that forth in this Legislature and have failed continually. And yet we still have proposals, individual proposals, again and again. Okay, I won't do that again. But on this Bill, I will support it.

Senator Strickland

I would like to concur with my Senator from Fair Oaks, and I want to thank the author for bringing this measure forward. My colleague from Yolo, in his remarks, he mentioned it would be easier to open these daycare centers and open for business. And I couldn't agree more.

I think we need to cut the red tape in California, but not only for daycare centers, but we need to do that for all of our industries across the state of California. You know, when people talk about the affordability crisis here in California, a lot of it is, you know, you talk about home buying. Home buying.

There was a development project going out in Huntington beach in my district that took over 10 years to get through the checks of what you need to do, CEQA being a big part of it.

I think, you know, when we talk about affordability, if we're able to streamline the process for a lot of our businesses, not just the daycare sector, but across this economy, we need to do that.

Members, if we want to lower the price for homes, for example, for our first-time home buyers, this is one of the things that we need to talk about. I know a lot of the members here don't want to discuss CEQA reform because it's hard work to do.

But at the end of the day, Members, if you do support this Bill, which I do, and I do, commend my colleague from Yolo for bringing this forward. I think we do need to have a serious discussion. A serious discussion. It'll be hard, but, you know, a lot of things worthwhile are worth doing that are hard.

And we need to work together collectively, because if we really want to dive really into the affordability crisis, CEQA reform should be on the top of that list.

Not an easy lift, I know, for a lot of us with different coalitions at different parts of our districts, but it is a discussion because we continue to come to this floor, ask for exemption, exemption on an industry, and we say, okay, that's great for that industry, but let's look at the whole economy in California and see what we can do to roll up our sleeves to have real CEQA reform.

Not just exemption in different areas in the sector, but real CEQA reform in order that we can fight for the affordability crisis to make things easier for our constituents. So it makes it easier for them to buy, for example, that first home here in California instead of going to a state like Arizona, Florida, or Idaho.

Thank you so much. Urge your Aye support on this measure. And I again thank my colleague from Yolo for bringing this important measure forward.

Thank you, Senator Cabaldon. You may now close.

Thank you, Madam President. Urge an aye vote on this very narrowly tailored Bill with respect to simply cleaning up the CEQA exemption that has already been passed for childcare, both from last year's package and from Senator Skinner's legislation in the past that extended by right approvals for family daycare.

This is a small cleanup and as has been noted, it is part of an overall set of CEA policies that will be emerging from the entire Legislature. But this is the first step on this issue. Urge an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 39 Noes 0 the measure passes. Moving on to consent second day we have items 114 through 117. Would anyone wish to pull any of these items from the consent? Seeing none. Secretary, please read all of them.

Senate Bill 308, 546, 575 and Senate Bill 700.

Please call the roll on the first item and apply the roll to all of the items.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent Member.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 39 Noes 0, the consent calendar passes is approved.

Madam Pro Tem. The desk is clear.

Thank you, Members. We did pretty well today, so hopefully. We will keep this pace. Our next floor session is scheduled for. Tuesday, January 12th, 27th at 10 am. Have a good night.

The Senate is adjourned. We will reconvene on Tuesday, January 27, 2026, at 10 am.