Assembly Standing Committee on Emergency Management

We're going to wait for members. One of the things we do is serve on multiple committees, and I know there's a couple of people in conflicts. So give us a few minutes and we'll get started. We're going to give people a few minutes to get here. Thank you there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

More.

All right. Good morning. Thank you all for being here today. This is the meeting of the Emergency Management Committee. And today we are going to have a hearing in regards to active and mass shootings in the state of California. So I think it's important that we not mince words.

We know that gun violence is an epidemic in our country, but sadly, California is not immune. And during COVID 19 in the United States, we saw a surge of mass shootings and gun violence unlike anything before.

So it's really important that we have these conversations proactively and make sure that we know what the best practices are and what the best responses are. So I'm going to give a little background data with some statistics.

We know that at the end of the day, no matter how low the statistics are, statistics don't matter in the wake of an emergency. In 2025 alone, 40,000 people were injured by gun violence in this country. That's more than 110 people per day.

It's easy to quote statistics the entire hearing, but even more importantly, it would take hours to read the names of people who have been maimed, killed, or injured by senseless violence. These are real people, people with lives, people who had families, who went to school, who went to work.

And some of these people went to grocery stores, went to birthday parties and never came home. People who left lives behind. Bullets took lives and left holes in our communities that we know will never heal. And so these are not far off problems. It's easy to say, this will never happen to me.

This could never happen to my family. This will never happen in my community because we're such a safe community. But these are not far off problems when we have a deadly epidemic, it could happen right in our own backyard. So we have some people in the room who have some lived experience.

As one of the people that will be presenting today and answering some of our questions is Sheriff Pat Withrow, who has experienced California's most recent, largest and deadliest shooting in the city of Stockton.

And so regardless to whether we are able to solve that crime, which I know that Department is working really hard to do, that we still need to address the fact that families and lives are forever changed.

And we need to take away whatever lessons we can, so that we do not have to face these horrific tragedies in our community.

While law enforcement works tirelessly to find perpetrators responsible and bring people to justice, we must understand how California can do a better job to prevent and respond to tragedies, but definitely do something before tragedies happen. In 2024, I said I wasn't going to quote a bunch of statistics, but here I am, right?

In 2024, we saw the second highest rate of active shooters in mass shooting incidents across the country. We were only behind Texas. When these tragedies occur, we rely on law enforcement agencies, emergency medical teams, and whoever is on the scene.

As far as first responders, as we have seen in many mass shootings, even a second's delay in those first response times can mean the difference between life or death. And while we may not be able to control every act of evil, we can certainly control how we respond and how we prepare.

So today we can address, we will address what can cause delays and how we can ensure that California is prepared to step up. And so I want to thank our presenters for being here today. I want to start by saying that we have some special guests.

We have Members of our Committee, but we also have Mr. Al Muratsuchi, who oversees our Higher Education Committee or Committee on Education. He is here today. And given the unfortunate and all too frequent, frequent overlap of the committee's jurisdiction when it comes to mass shootings, we appreciate him joining.

Would you like to provide any opening remarks, Mr. Muratsuchi? Assembly Member Muratsuchi. I'm sorry.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I, I just want to thank you for convening this important discussion, not only to address active and, and, and mass shooting situations in, in our communities in General, but, you know, as Chair of the Education Committee, I'm particularly interested in how our schools can work together with our law enforcement partners, our communities, to make sure that our school campuses are safe.

And so I very much look forward to hearing today's testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Assembly member Bennett, would you like to make any remarks?

I'd just like to thank you for pulling this important meeting together. Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, sir. So with that, we're just going to get into the meeting. If folks join, please don't feel disturbed. We have people that may be coming in and out throughout the day. We have two panels here today, so I'm going to start with our first panel.

And just as a reminder as you come up, we'll be holding questions to the end of any presentations. So first we're going to hear from Chief Jason Salazar, Chief of Visalia Police Department and the President of California Chiefs. We're also going to invite Sheriff Patrick Withrow. You can come take a seat at the table.

We have David Carlisle, Assistant Chief of University of Southern California Department of public safety, and Dr. Elizabeth Carreno-Diaz, Chief of Loyola Marymount Department of Public Safety. And the two college representatives are representing the California College and University Police Chiefs Association. So I want to thank you all for joining us here this morning.

And we welcome you to if you have presentations, we have. We don't have any that we need to put up. Okay. So we don't have any that we need to put up.

But we're here today clearly to learn about, you know, how we can be prepared as a state and, you know, what lessons we can learn from what you already know and maybe any tools or gaps that we need to look forward to addressing. So I want to thank you for being here.

And we will start with Chief Salazar.

Madam Chair, Members of the Committee, good morning and thank you for allowing us to present today on this critical issue. My name is Jason Salazar and I serve as President of the California Police Chiefs Association. Active and mass shooting incidents are among the most difficult and traumatic events first responders and communities can face.

While they are relatively rare compared to other violent crimes, their impact is immediate, devastating and long lasting on our communities. The FBI defines an active shooter as an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.

From 2020 to 2024, the FBI designated 223 active shooter incidents nationwide, a 70% increase compared with the previous five year period. In California, research by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that mass shootings, incidents in which multiple victims are shot in a single event, have also fluctuated over time.

The number of those incidents declined from 44 in 2024 to 28 in 2025. And while any reduction can be encouraging, California still experiences a mass shooting roughly every 10 days. But it is important to note that these incidents also occur within a broader public safety environment.

Statewide data shows that violent Crime remains nearly 10% higher than before the pandemic. Aggravated assaults, which involve serious physical attacks causing major injury, remain more than 20% higher than above than pre pandemic levels. Now, though overall property crime has declined, certain offenses remain elevated, such as vehicle theft and shoplifting.

I mention this because the same officers, dispatchers and investigators addressing these daily crimes must immediately shift to respond to a mass casualty event when one occurs. The operational lesson for law enforcement leaders is clear. Regardless of whether annual incident counts rise or fall.

Every community must be prepared for a high consequence event in which outcomes depend on training, speed, coordinated leadership, medical response, communication and sharing of information. When an active shooter incident begins, the priorities for first responders are straightforward and universally trained. The first priority is to stop the killing.

Officers are trained to move toward the immediate threat even with incomplete information because any delay can cost lives. The second priority is to stop the dying.

Once the threat is contained responders focus on life saving medical care, including controlling severe bleeding and moving victims to safety and the third priority is to stabilize the scene through coordinated command and control.

Law enforcement, fire departments and EMS services operate under the Incident Command System, a standardized nationwide framework for managing emergencies that establishes a clear chain of command and coordinated decision making across disciplines. In major incidents, leaders from multiple disciplines work together under a unified command model so all resources are directed toward the same objectives. Communication is essential.

Emergency dispatch centers must handle a sudden flood of calls, while commanders require accurate real time information. Public safety officials must also communicate clearly with the public to provide safety instructions, correct misinformation, and assist families seeking loved ones. Managing overloaded emergency lines, social media rumors, and conflicting reports is not an after the fact concern.

It directly affects responder safety and public behavior in real time. Thankfully, California benefits from strong partnerships among local, state and federal agencies. State resources provide personnel, equipment and logistical support across jurisdictions. Federal agencies such as the FBI and the Bureau of ATF and Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives provide investigative expertise, intelligence resources and specialized capabilities when appropriate.

These partnerships are strongest when they are built through planning and training long before an incident occurs. Modern technology is also changing how agencies respond to and investigate mass violence. Unmanned aircraft systems provide real time aerial views of a scene, allowing commanders to understand conditions without exposing officers to additional danger, and they also help in decreasing response times.

Advanced forensic tools can create detailed three dimensional models of crime scenes, and hyperspectral cameras can detect evidence such as blood, bodily fluids or fingerprints that may not be visible to the human eye and essential in the aftermath of such an incident.

Data analysis technologies can process vast amounts of information quickly to identify suspects, patterns and leads, and these tools improve both immediate response and long term accountability. However, technology alone cannot solve the challenges of these incidents. Several needs remain consistent across jurisdictions.

One of the most critical is interoperable communication, the ability for police, fire and emergency medical services and neighboring agencies to communicate seamlessly during a crisis. Completing the state's transition to a modern next generation 911 system, which will allow voice, text and data sharing across networks, is essential and unfortunately, we are years delayed in this effort.

Sustained funding for joint multidisciplinary training and realistic large scale exercises is also vital because many active shooter incidents end before specialized units arrive, leaving patrol officers as the decisive responders. Medical preparedness is equally important, including training and life saving techniques and ensuring access to equipment that can stop severe bleeding.

Rapid information sharing across agencies while protecting privacy and civil liberties is another key requirement, prevention is just as important as response. Many attackers display warning signs before an incident. Effective threat assessment requires cooperation among schools, workplaces, mental health professionals, families and law enforcement.

Early intervention can redirect individuals away from violence and toward help protecting both the individual and the community. And ultimately, the success of any response depends on relationships that are built and developed before an emergency occurs. Open communication among local, state and federal partners allows agencies to share intelligence, coordinate planning and build trust during a crisis.

It's that trust that leads to faster decisions, more efficient use of resources and clearer communication with the public. While we cannot eliminate every risk, we can reduce harm through preparation, coordination, training and sustained investment in the systems that support our first responders and the communities that we serve.

Madam Chair, Members, on behalf of the California Police Chiefs association, thank you for your attention to this very important issue, for your commitment to public safety, and I'm happy to answer any questions after the presentations.

Thank you, Chief Salazar, for that very informative presentation. Next we're going to hear from, I call him the best sheriff in California, but we're going to hear from Sheriff Patrick Withrow of the San Joaquin County Sheriff's Office. And if you have any, if you have staff that would like to join you, please let us know.

But we're going to hear from Chair Pat Withrow.

Madam Chair, thank you. Members of the Assembly here assembled here today, really appreciate the opportunity to be here. The Chief really covered it very, very well. So I think I'll just touch on since I had the most recent mass shooting here in San Joaquin county that borders with Stockton where This occurred on November 29th.

We had a mass shooting at a birthday party at about, I think it was three in the afternoon when gang members showed up and began shooting at a young birthday party in a hall. And we had 17 injuries and four deaths, three of which were below the age of 14.

We had many things that the chief just spoke about. We had trouble finding the location because victims are traumatized trying to give a location, not really sure where they're at, unfamiliar with. It had nothing to do with the officers that were responding.

We had a great joint effort Between Stockton PD, California Highway Patrol, the sheriff's office, everyone responding at one time, just about every police agency in the county responded to help. But oftentimes that happens. We get misinformation, we show it up at the wrong location and then get directed over to it.

And I'd like to address some of the things that were mentioned in the chief's opening statements about causes and what's bringing, as you said, our numbers up in California. We're the highest around and yet we work so hard on trying to limit the amount of guns in people's hands.

And, and one of the things he mentioned on was prevention and early intervention.

And we're finding through our investigation and our mass shooting, as I'm sure it is in others, is that we're starting to lose the key part of early intervention and prevention with many of the well intentioned and well meaning laws that are being passed in our state that are starting to tie the hand of law enforcement officials.

And you know, I've been doing this for almost 40 years now and I've never had somebody flag me down and say, hey, I have a drug problem, I want help. Hey, I'm off my mental health meds, can you please help me get the help that I need?

Hey, I don't have a family, support that I need at home or we're economically challenged, we need help. Where I've come across all these individuals and where we've helped many hundreds of thousands of people is that it's early intervention with law enforcement. When we start changing the laws where crimes and people aren't held responsible for minor crimes.

And I understand the reasoning behind it and how well intentioned it is, but that's our opportunity to intervene, to find out what's going on with young people and families. And when we just say, zero, okay, we're not going to hold you accountable for retail theft or stealing this time or for the drugs that you have on you.

We're missing an opportunity to change people's lives for the positive. And I can tell you in our shooting, gang related gangs on the inside of this birthday party and gangs shooting from the outside in at them, killing innocent people who were friends from school that came to a child's birthday party.

And I can tell you that all of them had multiple long records of opportunities for us to intervene and change this behavior early on before now they get to a point where they don't care about children's lives, where they literally say I don't care.

They, they shot at me while my kids were in the car, and now I'm gonna shoot back at them. And so these are opportunities.

And we need to make sure that if we're gonna be changing laws and moving in that direction that we have been moving, that you need to work closely with your partners, your partners at the State Chiefs and at the Sheriff's association and at PORAC.

And we at those associations try and get involved as much as we can and interact with you.

But we know we do not have the time or the clout that a lot of the organizations who are pushing leniency and with, again, with good intentions, but they don't understand that what they're causing is actually more damage than good when this happens.

I think a perfect example it didn't have to do with mass shootings was Sheriff Cooper yesterday talking about the early release of an elderly gentleman who violently kidnapped and raped the three young children.

And now we're going to let him out by a law that was passed that a judge couldn't stop because we didn't have all the information and think it all the way through. And so we've got to take our blame for not.

For not being there and fighting harder, which we try and do as much as we can, but we can't do it full time. We're out on the street, we're working, our staffs are out there working. So we're doing our best, but we need to look at these type of laws.

When it comes to laws having to do with human trafficking, gun charges, drug charges, auto theft, which seems like a minor crime, but it's so impactful for people. And literally now gang members, auto theft is almost like having to rent a car.

They steal a car and they stage them around the county and the cities so that another gang member, they can go, oh, go over to this street and grab that car and go do your drive by. They're literally doing that because they know they're not held accountable when we chase them and arrest them. And a lot of.

A lot of departments don't even chase anymore because it's a property crime. My Department does. We continue to chase. We do it as safely as possible. We shut them down when they get too crazy. But we chase people because when we stop people from minor violations, even infractions on vehicles that people aren't held accountable for anymore.

Those are our opportunities. And I can't tell you the thousands of guns we take off the street for pulling somebody over for having expired registration or no light on their license plate or whatever it is we're not out there trying to hassle people.

We're out there trying to get early intervention in crimes and stop people from even going further down that path or to stop them in the midst of what they're doing now. And so I just, I hope that we can impress upon you the importance of us having an opportunity, us, the courts.

And I think we do a fantastic job in the courts now, offering diversion sometimes and things like that. But it has to be, you have to trust the judges and you have to trust the DA's that they'll charge.

The ones the people that really need are going to need the help and help change to get forced into drug rehab, to get forced to be back on their psych meds. And I really believe that is the reason we in California are seeing an uptick on this. Because we're allowing it.

We're allowing it because we're not taking the opportunities that we're being given by law enforcement to intervene early. And I can tell you, I've watched the videos my officers that responded that day on that scene and the most of my staff now are younger officers.

The department's starting to turn over and we're hiring as much as we can and the pain and the panic in their voices, seeing children and families laying on the ground and, and then the aftermath of that, of knowing, man, I know a lot of those gang members and we could have stopped this early on.

And so that's the thing I really wanted to bring to your attention on this. And I know we got questions later and I'll address some more of it then, but it's well intentioned people that are actually doing more harm than good.

And if we can even go back and talk with our PORAC and chiefs and sheriffs and find out, hey, how, how can we amend some of the things that we did to really start to intervene early and stop these things from happening.

So again I thank you for the opportunity to be here today and we'll obviously answer any questions that you have for me.

Thank you for that, Sheriff. Finally we're going to hear from Dr. Carlisle and Dr. Elizabeth Carreno-Diaz representing the California College and University Police Chiefs Association.

I guess I'll begin. My name is David Carlisle. I'm an assistant chief with the University of Southern California Department of Public Safety, also a Member of CCUPPA California College and University Police Chiefs Association.

What I'd like to do is briefly kind of explain the background on what colleges and universities have done in general to prepare for active shooter.

I remember back in 2007 there was the mass shooting at Virginia Tech and that caused universities and colleges across the country to evaluate how they were prepared to deal with such an outrageous event. What we quickly noticed was we did not have mass notification systems to warn our students, faculty and staff. And what that led to.

And USC has elected to use a service that allows us to send out emergency text messages and I'm talking 100,000 in a matter of one or two minutes to warn our campus community. So emergency notification systems were extremely important of what do you do to get the word out?

There are other universities that have chosen to use message boards, loudspeaker systems, posting on social media. But we found that the text messaging currently is the best way to get a warning out quickly to our campus community. We also saw a need for training. What do we do to train our students, faculty and staff?

How would you react in the event of an active shooter on campus? Generally, there's an accepted protocol called run, hide, fight. First of all, run. If there's a safe escape route, take it. Don't take your belongings with you, Grab your friends and get out.

If that's not possible, hide, lock the door, turn off the lights, shut down your cell phones, wait for help. And thirdly, if there is no other alternative, do whatever it takes. Use any means to protect yourself.

So at USC we've developed a short video where we ask all of our students, faculty and staff to watch this training video. And we also do presentations and what we found and these chiefs would know and sheriffs that under periods of stress, particularly police officers, you tend to do what you train to do without thinking.

We want to educate our campus community about what to do and what we want particularly our faculty to do is think ahead of time of what would I do? Because we had a false report of an active shooter on campus. It was a very turned out to be a very realistic drill and test of our systems.

And the students looked to the professor, what do we do? And so we want our professors to know, run, hide or fight. Universities always or have generally looked at access control for buildings, how to lock down a classroom quickly. We have a vast camera surveillance network at USC.

Modern technology is a lot of camera systems have AI technology that we really are useful in identifying threats. Of course there's always security and understand there's a difference between public universities and private universities. Cal State universities, University of California have police departments.

Departments like USC have non peace officer public safety departments, although we have a very large robust public safety Department and our officers attend the LAPD Academy. They're not peace officers, which places some limits on us. Nonetheless, we put security at all the entrances to campus, we have the camera technology.

But it's really important to be proactive in doing that training. Something that has developed just in my career was an emphasis on threat assessment. We have an entire team dedicated to measuring and assessing threats against the university. What we find really valuable and we assign a full time person is to mine social media.

We give them special software to mine social media sites to look for any threats from organizations or individuals against the university. And you may be surprised, but these gentlemen know that quite often these people who are considering committing an act of violence like active shooter will write about it on social media and post it.

So we spend a lot of time evaluating anything that could threaten our university. And that's a trend we see more and more is developing proactive threat assessment teams on campuses. You mentioned mental health.

One of the biggest challenges we face at USC and I see it in other large cities and talking my colleagues in campus law enforcement is the number of unhoused who are tend to commit criminal acts but are mentally disordered. And we see them over and over again.

And the bigger problem is that incarceration is not an option and it doesn't solve the problem. So mental health resources would be very helpful for us in addressing what is a growing problem. Further, in order to prepare for the hopefully an event that never happens is we collaborate. Private universities collaborate with local law enforcement.

At USC where we collaborate very closely with the LAPD twice a year we do active shooter drills. They're very realistic high stress drills where we have volunteers in moulage they call where they're dressed up to have very realistic wounds.

And we work and we practice an immediate response with our officers blended with LAPD and tactics to address any active shooters theft. Because even though our security officers, they're armed and academy trained, are not peace officers, they're duty bound to address the threat. And so we make those partnerships before we need them.

We do these very realistic drills. We have the fire department there, we have the university departments there and we go through these live action drills so that when it happens, and I mentioned we tend to do under pressure and stress what we train to do. We are prepared.

So we have a very comprehensive program to address active shooter prevention, threat assessment, mental health assessment are critical. And our relationship with local law enforcement is also critical.

Good morning Madam Chair. Thank you so very much for having us here.

I just wanted to touch a little bit on some of the gaps and on the education side as I'm sure on the municipal and state side our goal is always to stay on the prevention side of this topic and some of the areas that we see where there may be gaps that we can potentially fill and I'll echo some of Chief Salazar statements are in the area of threat assessment and information sharing.

As the sheriff mentioned wayfinding some of the ways that are some of the ways that education operates vary significantly from that of municipal in that it's not uncommon for us to refer to a building as Tudor hall or VDA or Doheny while our local law enforcement partners don't wayfind like that. Right. They look for addresses.

So I certainly think that on the physical side there's an opportunity for us to continue training so that our municipal partners do become familiar with our campuses.

To Chief Carlisle's statement there certainly is a vast difference between private universities and public universities not just in training and status but to Chief Salazar's comments is also in information sharing. So I certainly think that threat assessment is an area for growth.

So we want to, want to thank you all for. Yes, there you go. I want to thank you all for the presentations and for the information. I think there's a lot of different themes that are overlapping. So with that, I'm going to bring it to our Members for questions.

I think we have an opportunity to inform, um, the, the state and the community in regards to some of the things that you all talked about by digging deeper. So did anyone. Did you have any questions? Assembly Member I do. It's kind of a combination comment and question.

The comment will help, I think, set the question up. But Sheriff Winthro, I really appreciate your comments about wanting to have contacts at. And law enforcement contacts can be a way to divert particularly young people, catch them early, etc.

And I recognize that what's happening with police departments across the state is we have a lot of people my age retiring out and we have a lot of young people coming in. And those young people coming in are, I think, very open to the kind of policing that you're describing.

What's the focus being on the contacts, et cetera? We have this, the challenge that we have. And I think you have to ask yourself why. Why do we get the legislation that is frustrating you? Right. And the reason we've gotten that legislation.

My father was a police officer for 20 years, a big city police Department, long time ago. And I, you know, I was able to witness both the good and the bad in terms of what was going on in big city police departments. And we have big cities in California and we have people that have been impacted.

And so there are far more police officers that take the professional approach that you're talking about there to try to use the inner interactions to get people straightened out and figure out who are, who are all the people that are saveable and try to get them saved before we, we go to the, to the next level.

But it is, it only takes a few incidents of inappropriate professional police behavior to then trigger the, zero, the police are targeting us. It's. They're doing it for discriminatory reasons. They're.

That, that sense of police hostility in a community instead of police being partners in a community is what is, has generated these, these, these legislative laws that come in front of us and enforces us. And so then, then Mr. Carlisle here pointed out that from his perspective, incarceration isn't the solution.

These are behavioral health problems, and we have this problem. And I know it's true in your county, like it's true in our county and Ventura County. You, you're the biggest behavioral health hospital in your area.

So police work is, I think, if not the most challenging job in California, it's certainly one of the most challenging jobs to try to get right, because you don't have the resources to do the behavioral health that you need. You don't have the resources for the social. That sort of interactions that you need.

You do have these interactions, and if you could have more sort of resources and ability to do something with that. But inevitably, a lot of people just get locked up with inadequate. Not that there isn't a good faith attempt, but inadequate behavioral resources.

And so then you have Mr. Carlisle here sort of saying, hey, that that's not going to be the solution. We have a frustrating problem. And so my question is, what is your perception of the professional police officers that are veterans like yourself, ability to instill this important new pers.

I shouldn't say new, but greater sense of urgency that police departments have to become partners and not viewed as hostile sort of people in the community.

Because inevitably, when we're on the floor of the Assembly, those are the comments and those are the arguments that are made to me when I'm sitting there trying to say, look, I'm just trying to get this right. What's the right thing going forward? And past abuse can't be the only thing I'm looking at.

But it has to be something because it's part of the equation, it's part of the public's perception out there. So I'm. I'm going to end it with this. I've spent 25 years as a teacher, and nobody was more ticked off about unprofessional teachers than professional teachers.

And I know nobody's more ticked off about unprofessional police behavior than professional police officers. But I don't have enough of a sense I'm not there enough to know who's winning this battle as we make this transition.

Because I know that back when I was growing up in the 60s and the 70s in Indianapolis, we weren't winning the battle as much as we should at the Police Department of the professionals. But I know there's a big effort to try to change that. I'd love to have your perspective on that.

Well, thank you, sir. I appreciate the question. And you're dead on. You're dead on. There used to be a thought, and it was just pervasive in law enforcement that our job was just to lock them up and get the bad guys and lock them up and throw away the key.

And I know that that is thrown at us now over and over again.

But I can tell you, having been here a long time, I've got the hairline to prove it that myself, my attitude from when I came in in 1987 and being, you know, I was just a street cop, canine handler, SWAT Member, the whole thing, and my job was to go out and catch bad guys and protect my citizens and what happened after that, whatever.

And now I've watched this evolve over the years to. You're exactly right. Where as more newer generations and myself evolve and change and our training through post evolves and trains and adapts and the understanding that none of us feel that lock them up and throw away the key is the answer anymore.

I can tell you that from traveling up and down the state, working with hundreds of thousands of officers and the other 57 sheriffs in our state, that here in California, everyone has bought into and understands that the way we're going to fix this is changing behaviors.

And the best way we can do that is catching them when they're young and making sure as they're coming up through the school systems and the interactions with us that they understand that the police are there to help.

And I can tell you in our community that we do not have a whole lot of a population that thinks we're the bad guys. We're very fortunate. And that change has come to San Joaquin county. And that's a credit to all the police agencies in our county and to the sheriff's office and the California Hyatt Patrol.

And I think it's that way in many communities now. You don't see the mass protests in many, many of our communities, in some of the big cities you do, but you don't see them in our communities, most of the communities in California. And that's because we have taken on that challenge and I carry it on through.

And most other sheriffs do also, if they have the funding to do so, into our jail facilities because the state is closing so many of their facilities. All those people are now coming to the county jails. We're not getting any of the money we need to help us support that. Jails are built to house people.

County jails are built to house people for one year or less. Now we're housing people for 10 years or less or more. And. But we're all putting new reentry type programs in to change their behavior, to give them the opportunity to change their lives before going back out on the streets. And we're having amazing success.

I have a program called M3 where I've with partnered, partnered with all our unions and associations, our building trades in our community and we're giving them those skills while they're in there. We're teaching them so they can go out and immediately become an intern and get good paying jobs.

We're teaching them, we're getting them credential to drive forklifts so they can work at the many of the warehouses that are coming. And the courts are doing the same thing.

They're looking at each of this in the diversion courts, whether it's for veterans or for drug abuse or for mental health abuse is just amazing that is offered out there.

But the judges need to, you need to trust the judges that we appoint to have free reign to say okay, this one's been given enough opportunities and clearly there's going to be a threat to society. But all these folks are clearly on the road to changing their behavior and we're going to continue to encourage that.

And I know that it often takes time and time again. I just spoke at a reentry thing the other day at lunchtime on Friday and talked about how I can't tell you how many times that I've rearrested a guy for drugs or whatever it is.

And I keep encouraging him and I know my officers do this because this is what we preach and I know the other departments do too keep encouraging, hey, I know you fell off the wagon or you this but you know, it didn't stick this last time but maybe it will again.

And so I truly believe that is changing and I would truly like to make sure that you're looking at California who are the best trained law enforcement officials in the world. The post standards that we have, the requirements that we go through are just amazing.

The mental health backgrounds, everything we do ensure there's always a few bad apples that slip through the cracks and we get rid of them as quickly as we can. And I pay the price for that. The lawsuits that I get from bad cops and things like that.

But 99% of the guys are out there trying to do the right thing. And we hope that you look at the behavior of the California law enforcement officials and don't throw us in with a bunch of other people who are not as well trained.

And I respect, I'm a Member of major county sheriffs across, I'm a Member of that. And so I fly across the country and speak with sheriffs from all over this, this nation. And our training is far and above and our requirements are far and above others.

And so I hope you take that into consideration when we're looking at which way we're going to fall on that. And then engage with us. We will try and engage with you. If we haven't reached out, please reach out to us and we'd be more than happy to engage with you guys. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Awesome. Thank you. Thank you for that. Assembly Member. I'm going to kind of move into kind of the question of standardization across the state. First of all, do are, is there like a standardization when it comes to training that campus police get across the state of California? There are standard protocols that are in place.

Yes and no. Okay. Okay. As I mentioned University of California, I'll use a comparison usc ucla.

Okay.

Usc, actually a much bigger Department in personnel, a larger geographic area that we're responsible for. UCLA is a state university taxpayer funded.

They are authorized by California law to have a police Department so they meet the training standards for peace officers in California regulated by the Peace Officer Standards of Training, the post agency that regulates law enforcement in California at usc.

Being private, while our officers at our choice and in agreement with Los Angeles Police Department attend the same training academy, we go through same background check for hiring officers and a four month field training program. While we choose to do that, we are regulated as a private university security Department called Public Safety by the Bureau.

Of Security Investigative Services Bureau.

Yes. BSIS. Okay. Which is a part of the Department of Consumer affairs which regulates security guards. And there is an initial training on arrest and control. I think the total training to become licensed and to get a gun card is 40 hours where our officers attend the academy. 800 plus hours plus training hours.

But the renewing requirements for a officer at our Department to carry a gun and to patrol our campus and our campus property is minimal.

Speaking on behalf of our association, we would like to see those discrepancies addressed for particularly for campus law enforcement who are acting in the same role as a peace officer as our colleagues across town at ucla. Yet we don't have the same authority, we don't have the same training standards although we choose to adhere.

And we don't quite frankly have the same equipment to address an active shooter. So there could be some answers to that that we would like to explore.

I thank you for that. And that's what we're here today to find out what those gaps are.

Madam Chair, if I could just add to that. We have the University of Pacific and Delta College in the city of Stockton. As a matter of fact, the gentleman with me today, the deputy with Me today had worked at the University of Pacific.

I might also add other things that they need is like to be covered under workman's comp and things like that. The same way that peace officers are, they go out, they put themselves in danger, they put themselves between kids and people who want to come on the campuses and do hard.

And yet if they're injured on the job, they don't get those type of same protections. So they absolutely should. And then I would also like to speak for our firefighters and our EMS partners who they're responding to these horrible conditions also. And yet the firefighters, we lost one in Stockton who was shot responding to a fire.

And they can't afford or don't get funding for bulletproof vests. And I know we do fundraisers in our county for them, nonprofits too, to try and help them get those. So any funding you can do for all our partners to make sure they have the safety equipment, whether it's ems, firefighters or the.

All the schools that don't get the same type of funding or protections that people who are going through the Post Academy, that would be great also.

Madam Chair, thank you for a question on that. Do you have an idea of what percentage of people out there don't have funding for bulletproof vest?

I would have to, you know, get with my partners at all our local fire agencies, but I know that they struggle. They struggle to get that. And I know that in the city of Lodi, they do fundraisers for their, for their fire Department.

So I imagine most of them don't even, you know, a lot of times there'll be a structure fire and they're not sure what caused it, so they have to sit back and wait until law enforcement gets there and tries to make it safe for them.

And if they had that type of equipment, I know it's an investment, but it's.

It's a great investment to get them the protections they need and know they would have been able to go in earlier on my mass shooting had they have that type of equipment because we had to wait a significant amount of time, my officers carrying young children and bodies out to them because we didn't know how many other people in that place were going to keep shooting until we could get enough officers on scene and clear it and secure it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Sheriff. Yes, ma'. Am. Absolutely. Your question specifically was, is there standardized training for campus police?

Yes.

I just want to make note of in the campus setting specifically for some of the private universities or all of the private universities, we have departments of public safety, not police. So for many of us, we don't have armed officers. I just wanted to make that distinction.

Okay, so to be clear, that means if there is an incident on campus, which we see, a lot of the incidents that take place are on campus campuses, you'll have to wait for armed law enforcement to arrive.

Is that, is that my understanding correctly, or is that you have security guards that may be armed, but you don't have armed officers?

On the response side, we would certainly be waiting for our municipal partners to make entry and ultimately neutralize the threat. We would deploy other items such as our emergency notification system, giving people instructions as to what to do. We would initiate our run hide fight protocol.

But for the response, we would be heavily dependent on our municipal partners.

But there are private universities, usc, Stanford, University of Pacific that are armed officers, but they are under the training standards of bsis.

Right. Thank you. And that is a disparity that we were asked to look into. So we are taking copious notes. So thank you for that. Going to move forward to protocols for active and mass shooter events. Are they frequently reviewed and updated and tested? I do appreciate. I heard something about drills.

Are those drills with the students included or are those just drills that the staff have in maybe not wanting to alarm the students?

Yes. So per Clery on the education side, Per Clery on the higher education side, Per Clery, we are mandated to host one annual drill. I do believe they vary based on institution. So some of us may have full scale drills, some of us may have more of a tabletop opportunity.

I know at my institution, our emergency management Department, just last week, we participated in the annual drill for active threat. And that's an opportunity for us to test our communication system.

Okay, awesome. And do you collaborate with the local law enforcement and other folks that you would need to interact with in a real situation as part of the drill for more of our full scale drills, we certainly do with our municipal partners. Yes. Awesome. Thank you. Okay. And I'm going to move forward.

This question will apply to all, but just let me know who wants to address this. What action does each stakeholder take following a mass or active shooting event to identify improvement opportunities and corrective plans? Like for us here, this is what this is about.

But you know, out in the real world where you're, you know, responding to these things after the dust is settled, are there corrective or improvement plans that are put in place and if anyone can address that, I'd appreciate that, Madam Chair.

I'll take a stab at it. But I would go back even to your prior question. When you talk about drills, there's no real mandate or regular requirement for any agency to conduct a drill or even active shooter training.

I know you're going to hear from POST and I think in the next panel, but active shooter training was only just recently implemented into the basic, basic academy. And while many agencies do engage in active shooter training, it's not a mandated training.

And so you're going to have, I think, a very wide spectrum of responses in terms of what agencies or what types of drills, particularly multidisciplinary drills that occur is going to vary from agency to agency. I know our agency does multidisciplinary drills every year. We run trainings every year with active shooter training.

But there are other, smaller agencies that can be a real challenge to conduct a scale of that size or a drill of that size. So you'll see, I think, a disparity as to what happens there which will then impact, you know, how the aftermath of it and how it's debriefed.

I know in our agencies and within our community, we hold EOC drills and some part of that is the after action for, say, a multidisciplinary response to an active shooter. We run that with fire and EMS annually. So you'll see that. But I think you're going to see that it varies, quite frankly, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

And that is one of the challenges I think we have in effectively responding to active shooter response. And, you know, the theme of mental health keeps coming up. Mental health will need to be a key component of that. And it's again, having the right types of resources.

But in the aftermath of that, and I think we heard from the sheriff too, the availability of mental health resources to assist the first responders who were there, also the victims and, and the witnesses of the crime that occurred as well, is essential to any sort of after action, to whether it's a drill or the Madam, may I response.

Yeah, I'll get that. The sheriff next and then you. You'll be next.

Yeah, I was just gonna piggyback on that. Yes, most law enforcement agencies do after action plans not only just on a mass shooting or major incidents, but the minor ones too. And we try and learn, and not just from the ones that we go through ourselves.

Most agencies, when we see something that has happened across the country, we all share debriefs from these across the country with each other and certainly across the state, most agencies do a complete debrief in writing, share it across to all law enforcement agencies so that we learn from other incidents, because hopefully, and most likely you won't have one in your area, but you have to learn from all the other ones and make sure that we learn from each mistake made and benefit from that and then.

And then be ready for it if it comes to our area. Thank you.

I just wanted to make a point of clarification. We're speaking from a perspective of a college or university, and colleges and universities are bound by federal law known as the Jean Cleary County.

NAPA Safety act, which mandates one, that we have an emergency notification system and mandates other things like emergency exercises. So we're operating in some cases under federal law requiring us that is not applicable to sheriffs and municipal police departments.

Thank you for that clarification. That that definitely makes a difference. And one of the things Chief Salazar mentioned was the need for interoperable communications. And there was also the discussion of joint interdisciplinary training. Are there any good examples of that anywhere in the state that we've seen that happening?

In regards to the joint interdisciplinary training, I think that is a very important thing that you talked about, the fact that the people bringing, waiting for the special teams to come in, further delays and so cross training could be very helpful. Is there, are there any examples that we can look to?

I can tell you in the. A few years back and they're very expensive to put on, but we did a full county wide recreation of an active shooter at the University of Pacific.

This is several years back where we had fire, Ems, the hospitals ready for mass casualties, law enforcement from across the county and our state partners that are local there that put on a mass training just like that, where the students became actors and they were literally being carried out and triaged and everything on site.

And it was a massive event. But you can only imagine how much that costs and overtime and things like that. So we do do that every now and then.

We more often do it on smaller scales where we get a particular school or campus and clear it with all the neighbors and then put on an exercise where we respond, we're dispatched, we respond. There's students acting as people sheltering in place or injured and. And we do a lot of those type of trainings.

Thank you for that, Madam Chair. I can say I know at our agency we do annually a drill that includes police, fire, EMS and the school district. But our county Office of Vets, so the Tulare County Office of Education also developed a program.

It's called ActiveNet and it's a response type system to an active shooter or a mass casualty type event, particularly for schools that they develop. So it's a software that kind of facilitates response.

So there's a number of different components to the ActiveNet software, but through the county office of ED and the active Net program that they have, they have been hosting on an annual basis a larger county wide kind of scale drill, if you will, with regards to active shooters. So it involves multi agency law enforcement.

So like Visalia Police and the Tulare County Sheriff's Office, multi agency fire response, EMS response, hospital, county office of ED, school districts. So we've been doing those annually with them as well and using their program to facilitate that drill.

And we heard from the schools building names, that's actually A part of ActiveNet's program is where they developed a standardized numbering system for school sites so that if you went to any school site in Tulare County, you would know exactly where building A1 is or building E3 is.

You know, I might not know the name of the building, but if in a response we can say it's occurring at Building E3, law enforcement is going to know exactly where to go. So that has actually been very beneficial in our area and I think is a good model for some of what's available.

Awesome. Thank you for that. And so I just have a kind of final question, and then after that, I'll give everyone, like, one minute to give, you know, any additional thoughts or feedback based on maybe questions. We did not ask that you probably wish we did.

But the final question is in regards regards to more of the interoperable communications and wayfinding, and that's about the. The goal for the next generation 911 system. Would something like that solve the issue of locating a scene where victims potentially incorrectly describe their location?

Do we think that that is something that could be helpful in a situation or solve something like that?

I think one of the tools that NextGen 911 will provide is the ability to share, you know, text information with dispatchers or video that can be shared and then shared with first responders.

So you may have a call that's coming from a victim that can't articulate necessarily what their location is, but be able to send a video or a picture of where they are. That could certainly help responders in responding quicker.

So in terms of interoperability, next gen 911 will certainly kind of help to facilitate a better multidisciplinary response, but then also give us tools, that type of information that we don't have now that would allow us to have a better response and have more information at the tips of our fingers.

Thank you for that. Okay, so as a matter as we wrap up, I'm gonna start with Dr. Carlisle and then we'll make our way over to the sheriff. So we'll go with Dr. Carlisle, Dr. Carreno- Diaz, Chief Salazar, and Chief Withro.

Is there anything else that we didn't talk about that you think would be helpful as we look to be proactive and responsive?

I think I've spoken my piece Ma'am. Okay, defer to Dr. Carreno. Thank you.

I am just very grateful that Koepka was given an opportunity to be here today to represent our K12 and our higher ed partners in the future. I would certainly love an opportunity to explore threat assessment and how we can partner with our municipal partners to keep things on the prevention side, which is

where we would love to stay.

Thank you.

I just could clues kind of with three quick themes. But you know, in addressing mass shootings, minimizing the prevalence of mass shootings, mental health resources, red flag laws and information sharing between agencies, reducing injuries and fatalities. And some of the themes you already heard, protective gear for fire and EMS in these situations. Seconds. Seconds equals lives.

And if you can get that sort of assistance in from firemen as sooner even trauma kits that are available to law enforcement, those aren't readily available across our profession, but the more that they have available to them to render aid right away saves lives.

And then access to technology and information that can expedite the response, whether that's unmanned aerial systems, camera systems, whatever it is, to direct first responders more rapidly to where the threat is. Again saves lives and then in the immediate ongoing harm done to those affected by the mass shootings afterwards.

And that's a coordinated after action response, including mental health and facilitating effective communications reunification. Thank you for your time today.

Thank you, Chief. Chief?

Yes, Madam Chair. Thank you so much again for, for the invitation and it's an honor being here today. I would kind of echo that. The big push would be fun. Funding. I know it's tough now for the state too, but funding's the big thing for us. And the cheapest things we can invest in is new technology.

There's just amazing new technology out there. And things like Axon Fuses is a camera system that we have purchased, but it's very expensive for us. We have 16 that they've given us that we can give to schools.

It's just a box that plugs in, hooks up their cameras so that in an emergency situation we can pop on their cameras in the school. Now, believe it or not, I get some pushback from the schools about this because they think Big Brother is going to be watching. And I tell them we don't have time to watch.

We don't want to see kids on their cell phones. We just turn it on if something bad happens. And you guys let us know when something bad happens. So technology is the big thing, as the chief mentioned, and that's a great investment.

And any type of things that come that way, if they're going to be mandated on us or the schools, we absolutely have to have funding behind us because it's the unfunded mandates that are killing us. So any help that you guys can be along those lines would be great.

And again, thank you for allowing me to be here.

Awesome. Well, we thank you all for participating. And we're not just here to talk about this issue. We have our chief consultant taking copious notes because we're going to go back and look to see what we can do to enhance California's responsiveness and preparation.

So things like the threat assessments were heard, things like the intersection between previous criminal behavior or mental health and those who evolve into being the offenders, all of those things were heard. And so we do appreciate you all for being here and taking part.

And we look forward to presenting some information as time moves on regarding what we can do for this. So thank you for being here.

Thank you. Okay.

All right, so we're going to move to our next panel. So we're going to move really quickly to the statewide role in preparedness, prevention and response efforts. So we're going to invite Donald O'Keefe, the chief of Law Enforcement branch of the Office of Emergency Services. And we're going to also invite Ms. Rosenberger and Carrie Holler.

Sorry, yes. Kimberly Rosenberger from the Government affairs division of the Department of Education and Carrie Holler from the Bureau of Basic Training on the Commission of Peace Officer Standards and Training, POST. Easier to say. And I'm forgetting someone. I'm sorry. Dr. Hernando Garzon, the Chief Medical Officer of the Emergency Medical Services Authority.

Authority, which is also known as EMSA. So, first of all, thank you for your patience. I know you all have been patient this afternoon, so we really do appreciate you for being here. I'm just going to kind of jump in with the introductions.

First we'll hear from Donald o', Keefe, chief of Law Enforcement branch of the Office of Emergency Services. Welcome. And you floor is yours.

Thank you. Chair Ransom and Committee Members. My name is Don O' Keefe and I am the Chief of Law Enforcement for the Governor's Office of Emergency Services. I also serve as the statewide law enforcement and mass fatality coordinator. I come before you at 46 years in City, county, federal and now state law enforcement.

The Calais Law enforcement branch coordinates with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies in response to incidents and needs throughout the state of California and beyond, working directly with the 58 county sheriffs, three over 330 city police chiefs and chiefs from the CSU, the UC systems, and private universities.

The Law Enforcement Branch provides guidance personnel and critical resources for agencies to successfully and efficiently manage events occurring throughout the state. The California Law Enforcement Coroner Search and Rescue mutual aid programs are a top priority for the branch of Cal oes.

Cal OES also works to prevent active shooter or I'm sorry, active mass shooting events Focusing on Risk Reduction and training in July 2022, we launched the Reduce the Risk Initiative as a statewide outreach and education effort focused on preventing gun violence before it occurs.

The campaign educates Californians about the state's nine types of protective orders designed to create time and space for intervention, support services and de escalation during moments of crisis. Gun violence restraining orders, also known as GVROs, are exceptionally effective, allowing courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others.

While mass shootings represent less than 1% of foreign deaths, the GVROs have been used in California to help prevent dozens of threatened mass violence incidents. Research and statewide data demonstrate that approximately 40% of GVROs issued in California have involved individuals at risk of suicide during that time. At this date, no suicides occurred while those orders were active.

Cal OEST conducted a statewide study to determine awareness and understanding of protective orders among Californians. Only 30% of the Californians were aware of GVROs, but 77% said they consider filing a restraining order if needed.

The Reduce the Risk Initiative always focus on increasing public awareness, expanding training for law enforcement and community professionals, and improving access to protect protection orders resources through online tools and local partnership.

This includes focusing on key strategies that include implementing extreme Risk protection Orders, also known as ERPOs and Red Flag laws to temporarily remove firearms from dangerous individuals. Supporting programs like the Active Violence Emergency Response Training or also known as AVERT that prepare individuals to recognize warning signs and respond efficiently and effectively during high stress situations.

Providing comprehensive active shooter awareness guidance documents to help identify at risk individuals before something happens. By empowering trusted community Members to recognize warning signs and take lawful protected actions, CAL OAS aims to strengthen California's broader approach to violence prevention and community safety. We encourage everyone to visit our reducetherisk.com I'm sorry.ca.gov to learn more about these vital resources.

I want to talk a little bit about preparedness and response. In addition to the Reduce the Risk, CAL OS focuses efforts to prevent active and mass shootings with planning, training and response efforts. These include developing comprehensive statewide emergency emergency plans, providing specialized training, conducting exercises, and offering public school, public the public school and workplace guidance.

We also promote the Run Hide Fight protocol on how to respond to an active threat which increases survival rates during incidents. We work to assist schools and public agencies in creating comprehensive school safety plans and tactical response plans.

These serve to secure facilities and protect individuals during an incident and include emergency evacuation, the buddy system and strategies while incorporating individuals with disabilities or other access and functional needs.

CAL OS also works with law enforcement and first responders on tabletops or simulated exercise to practice coordinated responses to active shooter situation, including immediate action to confront a shooter.

We work to facilitate interagency cooperation while offering resources to local jurisdiction jurisdictions through the Standardized Emergency Management System, also known as sims and supporting long term recovery for victim families and survivors. CAL OS also utilized the unified command structure between police and fire.

Unified Command brings law enforcement, fire, Ems and others together to manage an incident, ensure rapid treatment of victims and coordinate through sims.

In addition, where local resource are overwhelmed, the Cal OES Law Branch sworn personnel facilitate the Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Plan which we've had in existence since 1960 to ensure a coordinated and multi agency response after an incident. Cal OES aids in the recovery process which can involve mental health services and community support.

Within 90 days of an incident, local, state and county agencies are required to submit an after action report to Cal OES for review to improve future response. All of our efforts are supported by the California Specialized Training Institute, also known as CSTI in San Luis Obispo, which offers courses on emergency management and preparedness.

Slide to talk a little bit about the Grants the Cal OES administers both the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program and the Federal Nonprofit Security Grant Program to help nonprofit organizations at risk of violent attacks strengthen their security and their preparedness.

These programs support schools, community centers, clinics, and places of worship by funding physical security enhancements including reinforced doors and gates, lighting and alarm systems, security personnel, and safety training. Both programs are designated to reduce vulnerability to targeted violence by supporting prevention and preparedness measures before an incident occurs.

In fiscal year 2025, the state program received approximately 1200 applications requesting more than $226 million, demonstrating continued demand for security investments among nonprofit organizations across California.

For fiscal year 2025, California State Nonprofit Security Grant includes a $76 million available for nonprofit applicants, while the Federal Nonprofit Security Grant program offered for California's totals $26.2 million available for sub recipients.

In addition to the traditional facility security projects, the state program includes funding dedicated to organizations that support other at risk nonprofits through vulnerability assessments, security training, mass notification systems, monitoring capabilities, and emergency equipment. CalAWest has completed the competitive review process for the federal grant and submitted ranked applications to Fema where these announcements should be made in March.

Together, these programs represent a critical component of California's strategy to strengthen community preparedness, protect vulnerable institutions, and reduce the risk of targeted violence. CAL OAS remains committed to preventing active shooting violence and focusing on risk reduction, training and directly supporting our communities. With that, Madam Chair, that concludes my prepared comments and I'm prepared to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you. We'll reserve comments for the end. With that, we're going to move forward to Ms. Kimberly Rosenberger with the Government Affairs Division of the Department of Education.

Thank you for having me today. We're proud of our comprehensive statutory framework in California. It's one of the most comprehensive in the nation. It requires school safety planning, emergency preparedness, student wellness. The Education Code requires annual safety planning, regulates armed assailant drills, and integrates violence prevention, behavioral health and school climate strategies.

California Department of Education provides guidance, technical assistance and statewide resources to support local education agencies in meeting these statutory requirements. Adoption and implementation of school safety plans remains local responsibilities. That's important to a lot of the questions we're asked. We'll continue to address because in California our education system is from the ground up.

There is a variety of need at the local level, which is why we have comprehensive plans, but we don't have a standardized plan for each school district. So there's top down consistency. But overall we try to provide flexibility so that the schools can address their needs as they see fit. So we have statutory mandates.

We have a summary of our requirements that I can go over, which includes annual adoption and board approval of their comprehensive school safety plan by March 1st. We just updated that in response to Ayes last year. And the plans must address procedures involving armed individuals and criminal incidents.

Active shooter drills are strictly regulated to prevent trauma, which also allows for parents to opt out of those drills. Cde we publish our best practice guidance, but we don't approve local safety plans. And that's probably the where the rubber hits the pavement. I might be mixing my idioms, but we have oversight. But the compliance portion is lacking.

So for us to make sure that there's fidelity in the compliance to make sure that they're meeting those statutory requirements, there's definitely a gap. So on our end, we try to make sure that we provide webinars, professional learning, we have no cost trainings to build local capacity to respond to emergency safety issues and provide equitable access.

We also have resources and technical assistance. We have comprehensive school safety planning. We have school climate and violence prevention, teen dating abuse preventions, child abuse prevention. And then we have federal and state grant resources. Those are grant based. So again, the locals have to be the ones to apply for them and we can provide technical assistance.

And then most importantly, we have school based health and medical programs because we do think one of the things in the education level that we should be focused on is early prevention and the mental health crisis. We are still seeing numbers post Covid that are moving in the upward trend despite additional resources to help support our students.

I think there's one thing we could focus on and education could really beat the drum on is getting those additional resources for mental health services and early intervention.

That's where we see the greatest need and also flagging that it is really difficult to do full test runs because the impact on students and the reality, especially for our younger students, is they don't necessarily understand the difference between a drill and real life. And the ripple effect of that can be traumatic and have its own issues.

And secondly, how to respond in an emergency scenario. We have the best laid plans, but they're going to vary depending on what the issue is. So we have that requirement that they reassess and they reevaluate annually and that they work with, you know, with their local police, with emergency services.

But again, there is flexibility which we think is beneficial, but there isn't a shall a mandate. So that local flexibility is there and then the compliance has a bit of a gap.

So those are kind of the top down things that I would highlight and I'm happy to go into any of the mandatory programs or additional training we have. There's a lot and I can share that afterwards too.

Just if it's for edification of all of the resources we have out there and you can share them with your district. But there, there's a lot and they're comprehensive. So we try to make sure that there's awareness of that and continue those webinars so that they can use the resources we have to implement into their own plans.

Thank you. We'll definitely have questions after. Thank you so much. So next we're going to move to our next presenter which is Kerry Holler with the Bureau of the Basic Training Bureau Commission on the POST, Peace Officer Standards and Training. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members of this Committee. As stated, my name is Carrie Haller. I serve as the Bureau Chief of the Basic Training Bureau for the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training or referred to as POST.

I thank you for the opportunity to testify at this morning's hearing post is a regulatory agency established in 1959 to set the minimum selection and training standards for law enforcement agencies and their personnel. Currently, over 600 law enforcement agencies participate in the program and just over 100,000 peace officers and public safety dispatchers fall under Post.

This week, POST, in collaboration with the California Office of Emergency Services is hosting a two day conference conference titled Crisis Management and Command conference for over 200 law enforcement executives and crisis coordinators.

This conference will include training by current and former law enforcement leaders who have experienced large scale hazards pertaining to active shooter events, fires, mass evacuations, just to name a few of the topics. The conference geared to assist in planning, coordination and policy development. It's being delivered to California mutual aid regions 23 and 4.

Currently there are 41 basic training academies in the state. Approximately 7,000 new recruits are scheduled to graduate this year from what we refer to as the police academy effective April 1st of this year. Post has mandated that each of these recruits receive a minimum of 16 hours of standardized active shooter training.

This training was created to give recruits an understanding and basic foundational knowledge of what constitutes an active shooter event, how to respond the instructor and discuss with the recruits their responsibilities which provides them with a uniform statewide response standard should they encounter an event as once they get to their agency.

Recruits are required to participate in learning activities which have them respond to a simulated event both as a solo officer and as a team. Because most active shooter events frequently involve multi agency responses. For our public safety dispatchers Basic Course this is a course that's required within 12 months of their employment.

They are given instruction on how to effectively carry out their duties and responsibilities as a dispatcher, what actions to take in the event of an active shooter. For ongoing training for existing peace officers and public safety dispatchers, it's generally conducted at the local or region regional level. So I think this was mentioned before by Chief Salazar.

Some agencies they'll conduct active shooter training on their designated training days or some regions will hold a regional training day where multiple agencies and entities will come together to train. These are typically not POST certified and just done on that level. POST does certify an active shooter response course which has 40 presenters in the state.

However, this course does not have standardized curriculum. We do see that there are common themes in the training so how to respond tactically. They go over the use of force and the use of force policies, formation zones, team movement and first aid.

This training will include scenarios where the officers are responding to an active shooter call for service. At this time I want to thank you for allowing Post to participate in this panel and allowing me to provide the testimony. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you so much, Ms. Haller. With that, we're going to hear from Dr. Hernando Garzon, Chief Medical Officer of IMSA.

Thank you madam Chair and Committee Members. My name is Hernando Garzon. I am a 30 year career practicing emergency medicine physician and for the last four years I have served as the Chief Medical Officer for the state EMS authority. Prior to that I was also the Sacramento County EMS medical Director for 1214 years before that.

So I have local experience and background as well. I want to focus on three areas for my comments. One is sort of the overall structure of the State EMS Authority or EMSA as you mentioned. The other one is EMSA's role in emergency management and response.

And then the third comments area of commons specifically around terrorism training and our responsibility defining that standard. So the MSAC came into being as a Department after the passage of the ems act in 1980, which is part of the California Health and Safety Code. And that act gave us a two tiered system of EMS governance.

So at the local level we have 34 different local EMS agencies, each of which has an EMS administrator and a local medical Director that set local policy and right field care protocols essentially for the paramedics.

And then at the statewide level we have the state EMS authority which essentially writes regulations based on the statute for essentially the framework of the EMS system statewide. One of the statutory responsibilities for EMSA is our participation and response in the public health and medical emergency response system.

So EMSA is one of 12 departments under the Health and Human Services Agency and with our sister Department, California Department of Public Health.

So CDPH and EMSA are responsible for the public health and medical emergency operation plan essentially and writing it and implementing it when we need to is part of a response to any disaster that includes has a health and medical need.

And so of course we partner with OES and many other entities and we essentially look at the health and medical component of the response. Another the third area of my comments are specifically around the terrorism training.

So there was an amendment in 2015 to the statute that made EMSA responsible for defining the training standard for terrorism response for all first responders. And so first responders would be law enforcement, firefighters that are not already EMS personnel and then EMS personnel are also first responders. So, so we wrote that into our regulations.

We have a defined training standard for the medical component of terrorism response, which includes active shooter in our regulations. And those are incorporated into training programs for EMS personnel at EMS training schools. But in addition, that's also the component, the medical component based on our regulations. It's what's included in.

There are a number of courses that are put on by post and essentially law enforcement entities called tems, Tactical Emergency Medical Support. And so these are training courses that are intended for law enforcement and EMS personnel and essentially include those medical components of response to active shooter and terrorism.

Thank you. So thank you all for very informative presentations. I'm going to start. My first question is going to be to Dr. Gardner on how would you say that California is doing as far as ensuring the integration of law enforcement with EMSA and EMS in response to the training?

Thank you for your question. So there's Committee, there's state level Committee collaboration that happens on larger topic issues like that training curriculum, for example, but then the implementation happens at the local level and that can vary tremendously of how active the work is between relevant stakeholders like law enforcement and EMS and fire.

In some local areas, they get together more often than others. As I mentioned, the TEMS program, some local, some counties have very robust TEMS programs where there are a lot of medics trained, where they go out with SWAT teams to do high risk warrant services or respond to active shooter events.

And then some counties don't have that at all, largely because of funding to a large extent. So I think there is some variability with how much coordination happens around Ems, fire and law enforcement co training for these terrorist events.

And is there a standardized or suggested standardization of continuing education and continued training for this interaction or this integrated training?

Not in, not for EMS personnel. We have the training standard for initial training, but not continuing education. Thank you for that.

I'm going to open it up. Did you have any questions before I go for it?

Thank you. A question for. Is it Mr. O'Keefe? Yes. Yes. Thank you. So I was not able to hear the testimony of the local law enforcement from a Cal OES perspective.

You know, before law enforcement, like I'm focused on school shooting situations before any law enforcement can arrive at a school site, oftentimes the school resource officers are the first line of defense.

But there are some school districts that are choosing to either not hire sworn peace officers as school resource officers or not having the school resource officers carrying firearms from a school shooting, you know, preparedness perspective.

From Cal oes's perspective, do you have any thoughts as to whether or not having armed SROs on school sites helps or hurts in terms of School shooting preparedness.

Well, I'll first answer that question from my previous position as a Police Chief of the city, Half Moon Bay. And I was an extreme advocate for school resource officers. I believe that they're essential to the schools and it, it is just not from a law enforcement perspective. The school resource officer becomes part of that community.

I had a small community. Everybody knew my school resource officer. They were able to. The. The chief of the Sheriff's Point. They was small enough that they were able to pick out when they or they would hear things and we could get ahead of. We had problem kids.

Luckily, we never had a school shooting while I was there. But I'm a very large proponent of that. And I think we got to take away the mystique of they're there to just enforce the law. School resource officers do more than just that. In fact, I would say 80% of their job is not even that.

It's maintaining those relationships from a state level. You know, just about all of the departments, people I interact with definitely want to have a school resource officer program. As you say, the pushback sometimes is the schools.

And I think we should, at a state level be pushing that as, you know, as a best practice to have those officers there because I think they're indispensable.

Yeah. And I would agree that we need to have, you know, some level of security personnel, safety personnel on school sites. I think the question is whether they should be armed or not.

zero, yeah, well, you know, I think that's an interesting one. I have not really looked at that. I certainly think they could be unarmed. I think if it's going to be a law enforcement officer, I'm not sure exactly how that would go over, certainly with unions and everything else, by not having them armed.

Of course, when that active shooter comes in, they're not going to be able to take immediate action.

Okay.

I think that's the big downside for it.

All right. Ms. Rosenberger, does the Department of education have a position on whether school resource officers should be armed or not?

Well, school resource officers are currently not state mandated. It's a local decision. I think the value add of school resource officers or community coordinators or their ilk are similar things to what was identified.

It's they get to know the kids, they know the community, they know where the problem areas are and their training should be on de escalation and resources.

So I would say focusing on that and putting additional state dollars into ensuring that there's someone that is a community coordinator or a school resource officer to the fact that they know the community and school the students to early intervene would probably net the best benefit versus arming them.

All right. And that's a good segue for Ms. Is it Haller?

Yes.

Yes. Can you describe the training curriculum for school resource officers as far as post is concerned, especially, you know, trainings related to de escalation or mental health crises?

So there is a campus law enforcement course that they have to take. It's a 40 hour course. I believe they have two years to take it. The curriculum does cover those topics. I don't believe it covers the active shooter.

It's a little out of my purview, but it does talk about de escalation and things that a campus law enforcement officer would encounter when they're working.

What about dealing with mental health crises?

I'm not familiar with it. I can get that information and get back to you on that course specifically. All right, thank you.

Thank you, Chair Marsucci. So my next question. Thank you. Is for Ms. Holler. It's in regards to the new post training. You mentioned that there'll be 16 hours of standardized active shooter training and that's for. Is that for all new recruiters?

Yeah. So any recruits that go through that basic academy, we also have what we call modular format courses. So there is some of that curriculum. So we have the regular basic course, which is that full academy. It's basically broken down into three sections. We call it module three, module two and module one.

And it goes in that order. So there was some training in module two, there's six hours. In module two, it goes over the classroom portion and then it actually has them do a learning activity that responds to an active shooter event in a group. And then in module one, they do that full 16 hours.

So anyone going through those courses are mandated to get that training before they graduate from the academy.

And are there going to be, are there any efforts for A continuing education or B, to find a way to those who are not new recruits who've maybe been on the job for a while, is there any plan to ensure that they also received this training or have access to it?

So there are courses that they can take. Some of their agencies put it on. It's not mandated that they take it, but an agency could request to be a presenter of the course.

There is not standardized curriculum in the academy, but it is something that we would have people look at to make sure that they're covering topics that we feel should be covered. We do have a bureau that is going to be working on guidelines. This year. So those are, it's in the early stages.

They're going to have to get a group of subject matter experts and then once they put that together, that will be an available resource for agencies also.

Awesome. Thank you for that. That's very helpful. So my next question is going to be for Chief O'Keefe in regards to, you talked about the planning, training and response, the specialized training, and it sounds like there is coordination.

Do you think there should or could be, or maybe you're satisfied with the training coordination that involves schools, churches, law enforcement and first responders? Do we feel that this is happening often enough? Is it robust enough?

Are there any thoughts about how we make sure that the places where people congregate and are oftentimes targets of these mass shootings? Any thoughts about how we are better prepared in those spaces and places?

Well, I think it's constant preparedness training, you know, looking at best practices. You know, every, when you do have an active shooting with mass fatality, you know, people are looking at what worked, what didn't work. I do believe that.

And again, I'm not on the, you know, the street level anymore, but I, you know, I'm not sure there's that coordination between those groups that you were talking about on frequent basis. Maybe in some communities but not others. I always concern myself.

We're concerned also about, you know, our communities that, you know, are underserved, especially when you look at smaller counties or where they don't have the resources to, to the, to these sort of things, but they're still susceptible to a mass shooting event that could happen.

So I, I think more can be done on it, but I think it's something we need to get together as collectively as a, as a group.

And I say that with law enforcement, fire, schools, everything else to make sure there's, there's, if there is something more we can do then, then we should be, we should be asking for it.

Awesome. Thank you for that. Okay. Ms. Rosenberger, you had, you, you spoke very honestly and earnestly about the concern about traumatizing the students, you know, with active shooter training. And I think that's a very important, you know, thing that we should definitely bring up when we're talking about training.

When we think about that, are there other ways or other trainings that are taking place that exist for the schools as training models could effectively address access and, you know, to the schools and to the students. We want to be able to know, like, I know that we want to make sure we don't traumatize the Students.

But what are we doing for like the teachers and other folks who would be standing in the gap?

Right. So just to go over everything we. An inclusion of our disaster procedures. Armed. We have armed assailant response procedures. We also have teacher notification, discrimination and harassment policies, safe ingress and egress, and child abuse reporting procedures. On top of that, we have restrictions around the drill.

So there are drills, I want to be clear, but there's safeguards attached to them. There's prohibit. Prohibit prohibition of stimulated gunfire, prohibition of role playing attackers or theatrical props. And then there's also the parent notification I mentioned with opt out and then post drill mental health resources, and those aren't limited to students.

So there are additional resources in the case of an actual and also simulated attack.

That's very helpful. Okay, awesome. And we're going to be wrapping up shortly. And then it's very similar to how we allow the first panel. We'll ask you to. I see. We ask them to, you know, kind of give their own input. I'm going to defer to my colleague, Chair Marsucci. You had a question?

Thank you. Please give me the signal when we need to wrap up. That's fine. But. Chief o', Keefe, you know, there's a growing movement to restrict or ban access to smartphones on school grounds. Does that raise any concerns for you in terms of campus preparedness to active shooter situations on school campuses?

Well, I think obviously it's going to take away the ability for people to report if something is happening on the campus. If a student sees something or a. And I assume. Is this. Does this include teachers as well? Is this total ban?

No, this is for students. Students.

You know, I think that's a. That's a real tough question because, you know, I know that I'm sure the education side, they would sure love to get rid of them because it inhibits or gets in the way of their. Of the what their learning process. I don't know if I have a definite answer on that.

I do think that the pro part of it would be, yes, you probably have more students that were paying attention the other side of it when there is an emergency. Now, if you have the best, you know, video system, you know, school resources and everything else, but, you know, a lot of campuses aren't that way.

So I think that there will probably be a lot of. I would think there's a lot of cases where students have been the first ones to report, you know, an active shooter or suspicious person. So that's a tough question for me to answer one way or another. I see pros and cons to it.

Okay, thank you. And then, Ms. Rosenberger, I have a Bill on this topic. But, you know, every year schools are required to update their comprehensive school safety plans over time. You know, the bad habits of the Legislature is that we, you know, keep adding new requirements to these school safety plans.

And so I've been hearing from local education agencies that the school safety plans are becoming unworkable, kind of similar to what we hear.

From the, from the local control accountability plans. What is the Department of Education sharing focusing on best practices while making sure that these school safety plans are workable for school districts?

Yeah, I mean, I think we've heard the same. I know we worked with you on a sponsor legislation to expand it, but it's one of those things that I think the avenue for it, the fact that it's updated, that it engages the community and other partners for the buy in, is the value added, the school safety plan.

So it's always walking that fine line. The thing we've heard most from schools is that these mandates often come without resources. So they're expanding the plan. They're supposed to have additional technical assistance. And we do our own part where we help, we create plans, we do webinars.

In response, including most recent legislation that augmented the school safety plan, we put out a webinar and additional technical assistance for people to mirror best practices when they adopt their new school safety plan.

So we do have those resources at the state level, but there is a resource issue at the local level with the need for the experts or the people that are supposed to be implementing it often kind of falls on one catch all person at the school that's responsible for all of those kind of trainings.

And similarly at the state level, you know, I had commented, the compliance is always the thing that ends up getting cut at appropriations. So we can ask for them, we can audit them. We did that for the most recent school safety plan.

Out of our own resources, we have requested everyone's updated school safety plan to review and assess. But that is very labor intensive and often comes without resources. So we usually have to do it on a scattered approach to try to identify what those plans look like and update our policies and assistance.

So we try to be mindful and look at what's there to provide updated resources. But again, since it's so locally driven, there is a large variety of what those reports are inclusive of and how comprehensive they are. And there's. There isn't kind of the matching compliance need at the top level.

Okay, and speaking of limited resources, I should know this, but are school districts required to have an active shooter drill, you know, a minimum like once a year or more?

I know that they have to have a plan that includes training and drills. I'm not certain if they have to have an actual staged one. And I can get back to you on that information.

All right, thank you.

Okay, so I promise we, we literally only have a few more minutes. So Ms. Rosenberger, when we talk about the. The gaps with the oversight, Are we seeing that people are just not completing the reports, just not complying, or is it that we don't get the. The level of information that we're requesting for?

I'd like to know a little bit more about, like, what we can do to get the fidelity, because I think that's the only way we'll be able to clearly understand what we're working with and know how we make the system stronger.

So a bit of it is we don't know. You know, we have them, have the reports, they are required, but there isn't the teeth for us to investigate each school district and make sure their annual report looks appropriate, looks as comprehensive as needed.

One of the things in last year's legislation where we augmented the school safety plan, we did require it to be included under the audit resources. Not all plans, not all guidance at the state level has the ability for us to audit it. Got it.

So that was something that we did expand our capability on, and that's why we're doing. We opened a portal and requested, as March one approaches, all schools to then send over their school safety compliance plan to us.

There was past legislation maybe five years ago that required them to update their school safety plans, and we didn't have the data on whether they did or didn't do it. But the feedback we were getting when we tried to get them to enhance it was, well, we didn't do it last time.

So we had to create kind of a window, a buffer window for them to get their school safety plans up to date. Even though they should have already had something incorporated into their school safety plan and they were just kind of enhancing it, a lot of them had not done it.

And that comes down to our ability for us to audit all of these school districts, whether it's LEAs, but it's. The LEAs require it, and then the schools themselves can tailor it to their needs. So it's a lot of reports that we would have to review, and that's

a lot of manpower, lots of variants, and you'll probably have to maybe pull a certain portion of them, do like a little sample audit or something like that. So it sounds like you went from an honor system to a trust but verify system where we really want to see that people are doing it. Okay, got it. Okay.

So the. I want to kind of switch the role of Cal OES and Department of Education with the safety plans. Should we look at requiring, in your opinion, should we look at, like, a requirement of reviewing the school safety plans? I guess that would be for chief.

You know, hopefully it wouldn't have to be a requirement. I mean, Cal OES is always available to review. We review all sorts of emergency plans. To me, I think it makes good business sense to have another set of eyes take a look at it, whether or not it's mandated.

You know, I don't want to put you in the spot on that, whether or not you want to be mandated to do it. But you know, it does ensure that it will get done if it is.

And you're not putting me on the spot because the mandates would come from them. Yes, exactly.

And then there'll be no money. Right. But there is the, the concep of maybe auditing a certain percentage. Right. And just kind of like randomize, just to kind of get an idea of that, of, you know, how big of an issue we need to address. So thank you. I appreciate you all for that.

And I guess this is my final question regarding Cal OES facilitated exercises and the frequency are these full scale tabletop exercises and how frequent do you feel like the frequency is enough when it comes to the facilitated exercises done by Cal OES?

Well, they're different types. There could be full scale exercises, just tabletops. We don't come in and tell folks what to do. We are the ones that they come to to help facilitate these exercises through our CSTI and our Office of Planning and Preparedness. They involved in this all the time.

My branch is available to assist local law enforcement agencies to work with their plans. And I just look at, you know, anything we look at, we have to look at. And OES looks at things as all hazards. And so we prepare for all hazards.

So a lot of what we're talking right now with active shooter can be used for, let's say an earthquake and getting people knowing how to evacuate, things of that nature.

Awesome. Thank you.

I do have an update on the question you asked earlier about the requirement for active shooter drills. Yes, they are not required, but they can choose to do so. But if they do, they must meet the requirements I listed off where there's the protections in place, the shooting and props and such.

Awesome. Thank you. Thank you for expediting the response to that question. So that concludes all of our formal questions with this. We'll give you all one minute if you'd like to wrap up and make any final statements.

And then we're going to allow any one Member of the public, if they wanted to make a comment, a brief moment to do so. And so with that, I will start with Chief O'Keefe.

Thank you very much for inviting Cal OES. I really think this is a very important topic. I'm very appreciative that you brought this forward. I just want to just kind of accent a few of what my colleagues have said, you know, Chief Salazar and Sheriff Woodrup, that there is a human aspect to this for first responders.

And I don't know whether or not that is always covered. And I think we have to understand that, you know, there is, there is. You know, you're going to have this stress that's going to stay with you for a long time.

So I encourage the Committee to look at that as well for first responders, all first responders going to these, to these active situations. So, you know, unfortunately, I don't think this is going to go away, this type of thing. I would hope it would. I just think we need to continue to be prepared.

We need to communicate, collaborate, cooperate with all public safety because, you know, our kids are our greatest resource, so. Especially when in dealing with school shootings. But that's all I have. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chief.

I just want to echo the same thing. The more that we can prevent, I think the better the outcomes are. And so much of it comes down to mental health resources.

I think one of the best things we did was expand some of our whole child so they're getting supports around the clock and we've included behavioral health in that. But it's not, you know, leveling up at the level we would like and getting the resources out at the same time.

So I think that there's always a gap between the need and we're seeing an increase in the demand. So it's hard to balance as we do expand our resources. The demand just keeps growing, but also is really about, I don't know about mandating because you can force people to do homework is never the best outcome.

But awareness and greater assistance in getting out the training and technical assistance. And we'll keep doing our webinars, but I think there is a partnership that we would be interested in and expanding those resources so that schools know what's available. Because a lot of us are all working with unfunded mandates.

And so we try to group, you know, share the cost and put out those resources.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

I don't. I just want to echo what they say. And I mean, training is very important and Post takes that very seriously. We do offer officers other training that isn't mandated, but it touches on, you know, I think crisis intervention, mental health, use of force, stuff like that that officers do have access to.

And then I just want to say thank you for letting Post be part of this panel.

Thank you, Dr. Garzon.

Thank you for inviting EMSA to participate. And I have no other comments.

Thank you. Awesome. Thank you all for being here. And with that, is there any member from the public that would like to speak?

Chair, I'll be brief. Doug Subers, on behalf of the California Professional Firefighters, really appreciate the discussion today. I was watching the hearing and it caused me to want to share some work that the CPF has done over time. Time.

CPF is the co sponsor of the California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Committee and the Office of the State Fire Marshal is the management sponsor of that organization. Over several years, we have partnered with the Office of Emergency Services with grants to perform unified response to violent incident training. So we have done in person training.

We have asynchronous training that is available to the 197 participating departments within the Cal Jack and other agencies. And we have done large scale mass casualty trainings. There was one at Delval Training center in Los Angeles county that simulated a school shooting incident.

There was another large training at the Rose Bowl that part of the Rose Bowl staff and security participated in. And then fire Department and law enforcement agencies from Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena, South Pasadena, San Marino and San Gabriel.

And they were really, you know, good opportunities for all of the participating agencies in a response to come together and simulate an event to make it more effective and more efficient should one happen.

Obviously we never want these mass casualty events to occur, but they are something we'd love to partner on more resources to deliver those trainings in the future. Thank you.

Thank you. Awesome. Okay. Well, hearing and seeing no one else, I'd like to thank our, our co Chair, Mr. Muratsuchi from the Education Committee. And I want to thank all of our panelists and everyone who was interested. With that being said, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.