Senate Standing Committee on Rules

Thank you. The Senate rules. Can you hear it? The Senate Rules Committee. The Senate Committee on Rules will come to order. We're going to begin today's agenda with establishing a quorum. Can we please call the rule?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. We've established quorum. If there are no objections, I'd like to take up first on today's agenda. Governor's appointments not required to appear. Starting with item 2C. The appointment of Peter Briar t As a Member of the Southern Low Level Radioactive Waste Commission. I'll entertain a motion. We have Vice Chair Grove, who made the motion.

Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] Four votes.

All right, we have a 40. And we'll leave that on call. The next item is governor's appointments not required to appear. Item 2 D. Young Ping Chen, M.D. Ph.D. For the Acupuncture board. Thank you. We have a motion by Senator. By Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

What are we on?

[Roll Call] Five to zero.

Thank you. So that item is approved. Five, zero. Next we have item for governor's appointments not required to appear. Item 2 E. Wynn Francisco Kim for the acupuncture board. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you. We have a motion by Senator Laird. Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] All right, thank you.

That Item is approved. 30. Next we have item. Governor's appointments not required to appear. Item 2 F. Gregory Ling for the acupuncture board. Thank you. Senator Grove has made a motion.

Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] Five to zero. All right, that is out.

Five, zero. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear. Item 2 G. Roy Mather for Board of Pilot Commissioners for Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo and Susan. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you. We have a motion by Vice Chair Grove. Please call the roll.

[Roll Call]. 5v0.

All right, that is 5,0. And the last item is for governors appointments not required to appear. Item 2 H. Davina Hurt, J.D. for the California Water Commission to thank you. The motion was made by Senator Laird. Can we please Call the Roll?

[Roll Call] Three to two.

All right, that item is approved. Three to two. Next, we're going to move on to Bill referrals. I would like to take item three, reference to bills to committees. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you. That motion was made by Vice Chair Grove.

Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] Five to zero.

All right, that is approved. Five to zero. Next, we're going to move on to. Next. On the agenda, we have items 4 and 5. Rule waiver request to suspend SR55 by Senator Archuleta to allow a guest to be on the Senate floor during session on Monday, March 16th.

And for Senator Laird to allow a guest to be on the Senate floor during session on Monday, March 23rd.

Am I separated? Joking. I'm not serious. So move.

Thank you. We have a motion by Vice Chair Grove. And can we please call the roll for that?

[Roll Call] Five to zero.

Maybe someday.

Thank you. Those items are approved. Five to zero. Our final items before we return to Governor appointees are items 6 through 18. Floor acknowledgments. I'll entertain a motion. We have Vice Chair Grove who has made a motion. Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] Five to zero.

All right, that is 5-0.

And if it is okay with everybody, I'd like to go back to item 2C. Which is Governor's appointments not required to appear. Starting with item 2C. Appointment of Peter Briarty as a Member of the Southern Low Level Radioactive Waste Commission. Just to do add ons. If we could call the roll again on that.

[Roll Call] Five to zero. All right. Perfect.

So with that, we will return to Governor appoints me Appointees required to appear. We're going to start with item 1A. The appointment of Lillian Corral as a Member of the California Community College's Board of Governors. You are welcome to come up.

Ms. Corral, you have the opportunity to provide one to two minutes for your opening testimony to the Committee. In your opening, you're welcome to introduce any guests that you may have here. And we will be keeping time and prompting. Prompting you when you get close to that time. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair Limon. Vice Chair Grove and Members of the Senate Rules Committee. I'm deeply grateful to the Governor Newsom for this appointment and for your consideration of me. I want to first start by expressing my thanks to Chancellor Christian and all of the Chancellor's office staff and my board colleagues who have already welcomed me so generously.

And I just would like to acknowledge my family, my mom, Carmen Amparo, my son Luca and daughter Nina, who are here with me today. My name is Lillian Corral and I am a Colombian born immigrant, a first generation college graduate, and a mother raising two young children here in California.

I say that not as biography, but because I know firsthand what it means for a family to see higher education as the difference between two very different futures. In my professional life, I work at the intersection of technology, AI and the public good.

And when I look at the landscape right now, I think a lot about young people, the 14 to 24 year olds who are coming of age in this moment. The 14 year old today will be 24 in 10 years, facing a higher education and labor market that looks nothing like today's.

And the 24 year old today will be 34 and will have either adjusted to the rapid changes that both AI and economic transformation are bringing or will not have, and those diverging paths are actually being set right now.

There is no system for me that is better positioned than the California community colleges to make sure that whatever those young people are wearing, whatever their circumstance, that there is a path available to them that leads somewhere real.

And as you all know, that's not just the story of young people, as there are individuals out there already who didn't find a career pathway after high school, whose industries are shifting or whose roles no longer exist. And again, it is at our community colleges where their next chapter lives.

I have lived in California for most of my life, and I am more from here than from where I was born in. And as this world is rapidly transforming, I'm just grateful for the opportunity to bring my experience, my commitment to the state and to our public institutions to creatively tackling a lot of these challenges.

Look forward to your questions. Thank you.

Members, any questions or comments? All right, we're going to go ahead and begin with Senator Reyes.

Thank you and welcome. I do have a question. Just generally speaking, what are your thoughts about offering bachelor's degrees at the community college level?

As you know, last year, and I think the year before Assemblymember Soria introduced legislation last year, a few of us joined her on AB 1400 to offer a bachelor's degree in nursing for Those community colleges that were offering nursing degrees, but now to offer bachelor's degrees. Generally speaking, what are your thoughts on bachelor's degrees from community colleges?

Yeah, well, I've been hearing a lot about this topic over the last six to eight months that I've been on the board.

And a lot of what we, as you all know, a lot of what we are really working towards is ensuring that every student that comes through our system ends up with a livable wage and a job opportunity.

And what we are often hearing is that especially throughout the state, in different regions, that a lot of the workforce needs do require moving beyond an accreditation and into certain very specific bachelor's degrees.

And so, for example, I was just hearing a lot about the cybersecurity needs and demands of a region of our state and the desire to be able to kind of to partner with the community college system to start to provide those bachelor degrees locally.

It is my belief that this is actually beneficial for the state of California, for that region, for the students.

And so, while I understand that it is a complex issue, and I'm just starting to really navigate a lot of the different questions that it raises about the entire higher ed system and how the various segments interact with each other around this bachelor's accreditation process, what I will say is it does feel to me like if we are trying to ensure that individuals are connected to jobs, and if those jobs require bachelor's certifications and degrees that are provided locally, then I think that that's a win for the local economy, that's a win for our higher education system, and that's a win for the state.

Thank you.

Senator Laird.

Thank you, and thanks for meeting with me. And I'm sorry that our TSA system was jammed around the block, so you had to run up the stairs and were out of breath when you. Yes. Meeting. We talked about a few things, and let me just ask about them.

And one is that I think you said that two weeks after your appointment, you went to your first meeting and it was about the Vision 2030. And the Vision 2030 process is to close achievement gaps at the community college system.

How do you feel that's progressing and what would you bring to that in sort of trying to help address that issue of achievement gaps?

Yeah. Yes. I shared that this role is definitely a deep dive into the. The very. A very deep end of the pool of community college and higher ed. And so I dove in and I was one very.

Just really, as a Californian, very proud of all of the work that I think has been done to really put forth the Vision 2030 together. And then also I thought that the July revise in particular, because a lot of my work focuses on digital infrastructure.

I was very excited to see how much we are paying attention to things like data and the interoperability and the exchange of information. Information across our various segments so that students.

So that we can see if students are succeeding or see where they are not and then be able to actually, you know, make the changes we need as systems to ensure their success in terms of, you know, the progress that we're making.

To me, it feels like one of the critical markers of success is that we have enrollment and we have high and increasing enrollment numbers.

And so I've read, and I've understood that we have, obviously during the pandemic, that was a really big issue for our system, but that we have actually turned the tide on enrollment and have increasing enrollment, and in particular, I think with college student age population that we care about, you know, we're seeing a lot of uptick in veterans.

We're seeing in African American, Latino students. We're seeing a lot of increasing numbers in CT programs. And so I think on all accounts, what I would say is we want to see increasing numbers of students, and we want to. And that, to me, is a marker of success.

There are other areas where we're also seeing increases in what is described as the throughput of, like, students being able to get through their math and their English classes and being able to see greater numbers of, you know, ADT eligible students so that they can transition into the CSU system.

So I think all of those are good signs That I think that we are making progress. But I think once I shared with you, for me, success means knowing that at the end of the day they complete their education and they are connected to a job.

And in some ways that's where again, I'm heartened to see that we are spending time thinking about the data and the digital infrastructure because that's how we will know if we've achieved success.

And I see the investment, I see the way that the system is trying to put all of those pieces together to design a very user friendly system, both for the student, for the faculty, and then to be able to really set the system up so that we can see where students are falling off and then trying to mitigate that drop if there is.

And so with that data, I think we can definitely feel success.

Excuse me for interrupting. I thought you were done. It's so you've been there eight months, you understand what the data is. You start to have a grasp of how to transfer the data to discernible actions on behalf of the board and the Administration to actually close the achievement gaps.

I think it's, I mean, I'm sorry, it's your question that we are using the data right now to close the achievement gap?

No, you talked mostly in your answer about data. So. Yes. So how do you use the data? What practical, tangible steps do you take using the data to then close the achievement gaps?

I think, yes, what I'm saying is, I think that we see a lot of measures of success that are moving us towards the Vision 2030 goals.

And what I am suggesting is that I think a lot of the investment that we are making in data and digital infrastructure will help us actually be able to measure that success in real quantifiable ways.

But in a way, you see, you're just talking about the data that tells you and then measuring the success. What actions do you actually take to create the success as a board?

Yeah, I think a lot of the data would allow us to see if there are particular places where students are dropping off. For example, if there are certain accreditation requirements that you see there is continuous drop off, then you can actually start to perhaps provide more detailed or more, you know, wraparound supports in those spaces.

I think you could also start to see a lot of trends in which students may or may be dropping out of the system or not, and then be able to again, tailor or design supports to be able to ensure that they are, that we don't allow that trend to continue.

I think the data can also allow us to understand, to be able to actually even go to a particular population and actually say, well, what is the reason why you are dropping off?

And understand if it's the curriculum or if it's things like you and I discussed, like basic needs that they have that are impacting their ability to maintain their education, or perhaps it's the relevance of the material. Right. To me, I think a lot of that information helps us course. Correct.

And what I was just suggesting is that I think that those investments are critical.

And in addition to all of the other points of success that we're seeing, I would say that that's another part of the investment that makes me feel like if we're going to get to Vision 2030, that we will know that because we will have much more of the information and the ability to really see how systems are.

Students are navigating across our system successfully.

Okay, thank you very much.

Senator Grove.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Good afternoon. I just have a few questions mainly on your background and a couple of questions regarding the college itself.

But how will your work at Newell America, your previous and where you are now or where you were, shape your approach to digital access, data privacy, student safety, and nonpartisan government and California community college boards like it's nonpartisan, but I just was curious about that.

Yeah. My work at New America centers on the impact that technology has on technology and democracy. But really, I would say society at large. Right. We're trying to ensure that technology enhances the public good and advances our public interests and our public values, things like, as you described, privacy and security.

I think that what that most tangibly provides me in this particular role is having a clear understanding about how do we ensure we are leveraging the best of technology and at the same time ensuring that there is safety and security in the way that we use it so that our students feel like their data is not being misused or used against them as an example, in negative or punitive ways.

I mean, I think that that's. That's just a basic sort of principle of the way that we think about privacy and security. But a lot of my work really has focused around government innovation, really thinking about how we.

How government institutions, public institutions, really leverage a lot of this technology to make it easier for the public to navigate what are often very complicated or very bureaucratic systems.

And so I think that lens of innovation and almost like trying to think about what is the data that we have within our institutions, what's the data that's available across, you know, different ecosystems, and how do we use it to understand who we're trying to serve and then help to design services in a way that really meets their need.

I think that's really where my experience brings to, brings value into this, this role.

So in your own thought or your own opinion, when weighing that out, technology advances, where we're going in the future versus privacy and making sure data is protected versus safety and security of the students, what comes first?

Well, safety and security are always number one. Right. We need to. No one is going to approach their education in a positive way if they don't feel safe and secure, both physically in the environment that they're walking into or even digitally in the systems that they use. So I think obviously safety and security, security is first.

And I think when you look at the second order of that would be obviously privacy. You can't ensure safety and security if there isn't a modicum of privacy.

And there are many ways in which we can ensure privacy while still being able to use a lot of the information and the data available within our systems to innovate or to serve our client population better. And then I think the third one you mentioned is innovation. And I would say innovation always comes last.

And it's really on top of, on top of that foundation of privacy, security and safety.

Right, okay, thank you. I appreciate that comment that safety and security would be first, you know, because our kids and our students, they're not hanging out at malls anymore. No. Behind those devices. And there are a lot of evil people behind those devices as well. Yes.

We want to make sure that our kids are safe, especially if the, if the community college or any education system is moving forward to that and allowing kids online like they are. We need to make sure they're protected during the time that they're at school too. Yeah, that's why I asked you that question.

How is the community college preventing financial aid fraud like ghost students? What's the process? I know there was a big audit that showed that there was a tremendous amount of fraud with ghost students. And so how are you addressing that so it doesn't get. Continue to happen?

Yeah. So yes, and I would just say on the privacy and security. As a mother of a six and a four year old, I think about this very, very often. So thank you for making that. No, thank you for making. Acknowledging that. Something I really think about and on the board as well.

We've thought a lot, especially through the AI work that we've been advancing on the front. Obviously a lot of this happened before my tenure and so I'VE been trying to understand, learn a little bit about what the audit has shared. In particular, what I would say is it is my understanding that actually now we have 0.21%.

So the rate at which we think of fraud within the system, it is not zero, which is not great, but it is a very, very small amount. It is 0.21% of the applications. And the system has really tried to do what I would describe as the three pronged approach, right, Ensuring that we have better identity verification systems.

So we started one with a partnership with ID Me and then have now expanded that to connect to the DMV identity system. So that's probably the best identity management system within the state to be able to verify identity.

We are also investing in AI tools that help us look at patterns within the application process so that we can detect fraud more easily.

And then we are also using other like spam or bot filters to be able to investing and being able to adapt quickly because obviously a lot of these actors are changing their moves as they are recognizing that we are being more effective.

And then the last piece I would say is throughout all of that, we do ensure that there is a human in the loop because one of the things the Board of Governors made clear is that what they don't want a lot of this to do is to accidentally exclude students who are eligible for financial aid.

And so with all of that in place, we feel like we are doing, I think, a really good, a pretty good job at being able to contain a lot of the threat.

It is not zero, but it is an amount that I think we continue to decrease every year and I think continue to look forward to any more, whether it's through audits or other mechanisms, feedback on how to improve that system.

So unless the auditor is wrong or unless the information on the audit is incorrect, it's not 0.31, it's 31%.

I will definitely, I mean, I can definitely follow up, but it is my under that my understanding is 0.21%. So I can definitely follow up.

Follow up with me is 31 to 34% of all applicants from the California community Colleges were deemed fraudulent in the audit.

I believe. Well, let me get back to you. But I believe that what I understand that to be is just that one in three is actually caught. So it may be an attempt, but it is not a successful attempt. But let me get back to you on that because I don't want to miss speak on that.

Thank you, Senator Jones.

Thank you. I did want to. Well, first of all, thank you for being willing to do this job. This is of all the appointments that we make, the folks that come forward for the community college and the other per diem positions. It's more work than you're financially rewarded for.

So I know you get a personal reward out of doing it. And the community college system is actually very important to me. Myself and all three of my kids have graduated from our local community colleges.

My kids, two of my kids were able to graduate from San Diego state with only $11,000 in student debt because they went to two years first at the community college and then transferred. So this system is very important to me. I do have some concerns.

Senator Grove alluded to one of them, but I want to be a little bit more specific on the New America organization. They're very vocal in fighting against age verification for online, for children being online. And look, I know that that's a, you know, a tricky situation.

We've had lots of bills, you know, legislation come through the Capitol by various authors trying to get that right. And we probably, you know, still have some work to do. Other states and other countries have taken what I think we could maybe agree are some extreme measures to protect kids.

I would rather take, I would rather err on the side of extreme measures to protect the kids rather than not protect them. But I am concerned that the organization you work for is very vocal in not supporting age verification. So can you speak to that and how you're going to reconcile that with your position?

You know, some of these, some of your students are minors. Yeah. On these college campuses.

Yeah. I would just clarify our organization's position. In particular, our Open Technology Institute is not taking the position that it's against age verification. I think the challenge has been that the way in which legislation has been drafted would try to verify age. It's what we have found one not technically feasible without essentially disclosing every American's identity.

And in addition to that, a lot of the legislation has really failed to address how that, how when your identity is disclosed through these platforms, in which systems or which, which third party providers would actually ensure that your identity and then where you have navigated online that that information is actually secure. So I just want to clarify.

We very much believe that children should be safe online and we very much believe that there are different legislations out, different pieces of legislation out there do that. In particular, there is. There have been several attempts at the national level to pass comprehensive privacy legislation that would make demonstrable improvements towards ensuring that all Americans are safe.

Online, including children. We just have found that a lot of the legislation that's been proposed, the way that it is set up, would essentially, you know, endanger the privacy of every sing, you know, every single American who uses a lot of these platforms. And so for that reason that the Open Technology Institute has taken that position.

But I think to my role here within the system, I think as a steward of the. Of the system, I would say that, as I said to Senator Grove, privacy and security are critical for us. We do want to.

Privacy and security is something that I take very seriously and that I, you know, when we have heard about various AI pilots within the system, it's one of the things that, you know, I always ask about and I always think about, because I do.

I'm also very aware that a lot of the new technologies and the new tools are still very much on the cutting edge and that we don't know how a lot of these technologies really do respond to children, and that there are people out there on the Internet who are really taking advantage of a lot of the ways in which, you know, a lot of the technology is set up to be able to, you know, target not just children, but a lot of vulnerable populations.

And so it is something I think very critically about. But I would just say I do believe that we care very much about privacy and we care very much about verification. We just think it needs to be done in ways that are actually technically feasible.

And oftentimes, just the legislation that's in front of us doesn't actually do the job.

Okay, thank you. And I'll look forward to continued conversation on that front, because we do have a lot of work here in California to get to that point of where it makes sense. I do have some concerns about.

You've written two articles, and I'll just address both at the same time, because I'm sure the response can be applied to both. You wrote an article titled Trump's TikTok and the Growing State of Authoritarianism. What's happening with Tik? And here's the quote.

What's happening with TikTok in America parallels what journalist Maria Ressa described as happening to the media in the Philippines. Broadcast licenses quietly transferred to Administration allies, which I'm sure none of us want that to happen. And then the second one, the second article is TikTok goes MAGA question mark.

Lilian Coral on the deeper stakes of the TikTok deal rather than. Here's the quote. Rather than depoliticizing TikTok, the deal risks deepening suspicions that this is less about safeguarding data and more about consolidating influence. You know, those comments to me seem very strident and not open minded.

The you're going to have students on your campuses that are going to take a strong political disagreement with where I think these, where these comments are alluding to. More importantly than that, there has been bipartisan agreement in the Legislature here in California that there are challenges with TikTok.

Many of us Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature several years ago shut down our TikTok accounts until we can get, you know, have some, some confidence that the Chinese communist government is not operating tick tock and impacting Americans lives.

So you know, I'm deeply concerned about those comments and those thoughts that you've authored and I wanted to give you a chance to respond to that, those concerns.

Thank you. I appreciate the concern and I would just emphasize that while I hear the concern, we are a nonpartisan think tank and a lot of what we have spent over the three year now debate plus debate on TikTok is really trying to one, advance privacy and security for all Americans.

And we believe that there are different ways that the US government can approach that.

And as the TikTok legislation continued and was passed by Congress, the Senate, signed by President Biden and as it went through the Supreme Court and then the divestiture happened, there were also articles I wrote about, you know, there are, you know, five key criteria for how to ensure that the outcome of that really is to the best interest of all Americans.

And so unfortunately what we have seen is just not, you know, there is, you know, what we have seen in the, in the aftermath of it is the management of a divestiture that does raise concerns about the independence of the platform.

And I think like all of us, like many of us, we would want our social media platforms to be independent places where Americans are able to express themselves free from any state actor, whether it's China or anybody else across the world or at all.

So I think one of the things that I'm really mindful of when I'm looking at a lot of these things is is there independence and openness and freedom of expression within our social media landscape? And if there isn't, then those are the kinds of things that we really look out for and call out.

And that's irregardless of party because as you might see even further back than this Administration, you know, I was vocal about the fact that it was President Biden who actually signed that legislation and we did not agree that that approach actually was the best way for it.

So we are nonpartisan in the sense that we stand for privacy and security and an open web. And regardless of party, we will continue to advocate for that.

And I appreciate that and thank you for your answer.

And I would encourage you that, you know, maybe if you get confirmed that, you know, you come back at this topic with a more centrist view on it, maybe following the lead of the Legislature here in California, because I do believe that the Legislature here in California is actually setting a good tone on this.

We haven't solved the problem, but at least the tone is more palatable to more Californians than maybe where you originally started from.

I appreciate that.

Thank you. I just have a follow up question based on the conversation you were just having with Senator Grove or Senator Jones. Sorry, Senator Jones, I apologize. You focused a lot on security like you focused a lot not on security, but on, you know, protection of privacy. You've written letters, you've.

Senator Grove.

The organization advocates or disapproves of legislation that will curtail certain things that I see in my viewpoint would protect students and children. And then you're focusing on the security of an individual, on keeping their identity safe, their information safe. Like for that reason, you know, I was just looking up on Roblox, for example. Right.

Just, you know, just for example. And I look at all the stuff that happens. At what point does that organization that you represent that talks about a free Internet and controlled by any state or, you know, you made a comment about the Internet being controlled. They want to free from any state agency participating in that.

You want a free website or free web is what you said.

Yeah, well, what I meant there in response to the TikTok comment is we want a social media. We want a social media environment that the, that is free from manipulation from any particular state. Right.

The question around manipulation would be one thing, but to have a free media out there and the social media that isn't. I mean, obviously you can't. When you're watching television, you don't have commercials enticing young kids to go do things they shouldn't be doing.

You don't have commercials coming on TV that show explicit sexual activity that you want in front of your children. I mean, it's controlled. There's a reason why the state gets involved in legislation has passed. Yeah, you're opposed to that. That's what I got from.

No, no, no, no, no, no, not at all. We. When? No, not at all. We. I mean, we, we actually suffer, I think, from just a lack of, frankly like basic rules of the road around a lot of our social media.

And I think that that's part of the challenge that we have, right, that we don't have, you know, things like, you know, comprehensive, you know, federal privacy legislation that would really address a lot of the issues and concerns. So no, I do believe that there is.

We definitely need privacy guardrails and legislation and we definitely need to be able to protect our children from the kinds of media or even targeting that is happening on these platforms. There is no question about that.

I think there are ways in which there are definitely rules, legislation, and our organization has been very active in ensuring that we are trying to advance those kinds of rules so that we can ensure that all children are safe. I definitely, I definitely wholeheartedly believe that.

Did you now your organization, my understanding is you oppose facial recognition.

No. There are some technical challenges with a lot of these facial recognition tools and a lot of these age verification tools that we don't oppose. But we have research is the fact that they often fail to actually work. And so if we want to.

What we want to actually do is we would like to be able to advance legislation that would protect children. And what we are arguing is that we need to be able to have a lot of the technical tools that work to be able to do well.

What happened? I'm just curious because this is a hot topic going through this building. We have a Committee hearing next week regarding everybody that's involved in this process. And a big issue that we have is people are going, well, we instituted facial recognition. Well, it said I was 35 years old. That's not adequate.

It said a 10 year old was 15 years old.

Exactly.

So I guess my question is, what's your solution for that? Because we do have a major problem with our kids not being protected on these sites.

Yeah, well, I mean, I think there are different ways to approach it. I think there are components of various privacy legislation, bills out there that have tried to keep saying privacy.

And I don't hear you talking about security of our kids. That's bothering me a lot.

So I apologize. That's bothering. In order to ensure the safety and security of our kids. A lot of the components, A lot of the discussion around how to ensure security of our kids has been done through the mechanisms of privacy legislation.

It's not meant to place privacy at the, you know, as the top tier over security, but it's just meant to say that that's been the mechanism through which a lot of the work to try to create more governance around These social media platforms has emerged over the last 5, 10 years.

There are a lot of, you know, I can definitely get. What we could do is actually provide you more specific information about what the Open Technology Institute and some of the programs that work under my purview are recommending.

Well, we have what we have suggested or what we have done in various reports which I don't have, you know, top of mind right now.

But what they have looked at are different approaches that other countries have taken to ensure, for example, like Australia, to ensure that the right kinds of tools are used so that they more adequately identify a children.

Is the Australia the 16 year old can be on the platform till you're 16.

Yeah, there's both an age component, but there's also what kinds of tools you're using to ensure that that child is actually 13 or 16, et cetera.

We have not said that we are, but what we have elevated is that a lot of the age verification strategies that have been put forth probably could easily get kids, could easily get around that and or could misflag individuals.

And so the question is, are we setting up the right way to ensure the safety of children or are we just pushing a way forward that has flaws, that has flaws within it that our researchers have found have concerns or flaws.

So I just want to stress that it's not being against age verification, it's wanting to ensure we have the right and the most successful age verification system in place. Thank you. And I can definitely follow up, Senator, with information about that.

Thank you, Madam President. Sorry, just a quick clarifying question. What's the difference between the New America Organization and the Open Technology Institute?

So New America is a nonpartisan think tank. We work in five issue areas. One of them is technology and democracy. Within the Technology and Democracy portfolio is the Open Technology Institute. And their work is really focused around technology policy.

15 years history of really advancing security, privacy, all of the addressing the digital divide, doing excellent work, really trying to advance the public interest.

Thank you. Ms. Perel, I'm going to ask you just a little bit more about your role, you know, as a trustee and Senator Reyes mentioned a little bit related to the Baccloriot programs and that are offered or not offered through our community college system.

And one of the things that I find to be true is that very often legislators will tell you where they're at by the bills that they introduce.

And certainly if you see over time that there are patterns of an increased number of bills in a particular subject matter area, that that's probably a reflection of, you know, where Members are at. And certainly the example that was given was related to the nursing program. But I think that there are other examples to look at.

And so I'm just wondering if you can speak more to your ideas as a trustee to kind of shift from the view of how we educate students as a competition rather than a partnership. And maybe if you can tell me more about that.

Yeah, I mean, I think it strikes me as I've been listening a lot to conversation around both the baccalaureate program as well as some of the dual enrollment, the dual enrollment opportunities, et cetera, that oftentimes we are thinking a lot about it in those sort of competitive terms. And I sort of think a lot about.

As I was saying earlier, I was struck by the 6.8 million students that we know of, at least in California, who have a high school degree and no higher ed education. We know that we are graduating at least 400 to 500,000 high school students a year.

We also know our capacity rates at all segments of the higher Ed Continuum. And so it seems to me like we have way more opportunity to way more students, more demand and more need in our state than we actually are currently have the capacity to on the baccalaureate program. And so to me it's like as opposed.

So I very much agree that I don't think we need. It should not be seen as a competition as much as it is.

What's the opportunity to help train and accredit and connect all of these students to employment opportunities as quickly as possible as opposed to thinking about it from the sort of, you know, competition perspective of who's got which student at what point or are we all competing for that same one student when there's clearly so many out there that actually would, I mean, would benefit, would stand to benefit from our system being able to serve them.

So I don't know if I'm addressing your question exactly, but to me it just seems like there's a ton of opportunity here to be able to more dynamically outreach to students, to be able to create more targeted pathways, apprenticeship programs, especially regionally.

If we understand all of the workforce needs and the employment needs, why not try to create a lot of that dynamic programming and make sure we serve all of that untapped population or be able to try and move them. Right. I think if they can connect to other parts of the system across the state, that's great.

I think what I'm also hearing a lot about is that there are a lot of place bound students. And so in some ways what I am trying to keep an eye on is I understand the baccalaureate program. There's a lot of dynamics there.

But it just seems to me like if we can try and create opportunity within these regions to serve those students that are place bound, there's a ton there and there's an opportunity for us to fill a lot of workforce gaps and needs that we know exist.

So I will say, and maybe just to add to this is that the Legislature has seen an increase in the number of bills that would allow for more, not less, baccalaureate programs right at the community college. And so certainly that has been a difficult piece for all of our other segments to kind of grapple with.

And I hope that in your role there is an openness to continue to work with our other systems to figure out how to get to a yes. And I understand position point is a yes is starting. Yes. Yes. The work that's needed to happen with our other segments is also critically important. Yeah.

To be figure out how we get to a yes more. You know, where there are areas, there's a lot of places in our state where there's just deserts, there's desert institutions.

And I know that several of us have them here where it turns out like that, you know, we agree with like the community college is the only place they're going to get something. But it does take work with, you know, working with our CSU and UC system on that.

And in the other place that I'm going to just talk a little bit about is we've seen an increase over the years on dual enrollment.

And dual enrollment has been something that I think has been embraced across the state and I think it has grown significantly over the last six years, something by the tune of like 75% over the last six years.

And so just curious if you can speak to your vision on dual enrollment and what that continues to look like for the community college system.

Yeah, well, I think that's the dual enrollment is exactly, you know, building off the previous question, another point where I think collaboration across the various segments is going to be so critical. But I think, I mean in terms of dual enrollment, in terms of my vision, I mean, I think again, I'm just learning and tapping into it.

But as I've heard stories, for example, even just in Kern County, right. About the success they've had to be able to start to do STEM focused dual enrollment program and the fact that then it's been able to reduce absenteeism in the high school by like 90%.

I mean, these are sort of dramatic stories that Tell us that there is like a winning, that there's a winning recipe there. And so for me, I think I'm still early on in my tenure, so I don't know that. I don't know if I have a particular vision for dual enrollment per se.

But what I would say is it feels to me like we're starting to. I hear these stories of success and I think there's a ton of opportunity there to continue to expand that work.

I think particularly in areas as you've described, whether it's, you know, we heard a lot about the rural north where, you know, folks are having to travel hundreds of miles across, you know, mountains to be able to get to their community college.

There are opportunities for us to collaborate with the K through 12 system to be able to expand these dual enrollment opportunities. I think we will just. It creates greater pathways to more equitable access for students.

And I think, you know, in a lot of these communities, I think it just can open up to just the possibility for students where, you know, if you're just tight, I would just.

If you're just tied to completing your high school degree and then trying to figure out in many of these deserts where to go next, I would feel that that would just be limiting. So for me, dual enrollment seems like a great.

I'm hearing the stories of success and I think it would just be a great opportunity to continue to expand, especially in parts of our state where we know that there are educational limitations just by virtue of, of whether it's geography or just less access.

Final question for you is if you could think about the community college staff. One of the things that we've seen is that just over a third of the staff are the faculty are full time employees. And so can you speak a little bit to some the of.

Of the conversations that have happened related to how many full time faculty Members we have versus part time and just your overall thoughts?

Yeah, I do think, yeah, I mean I've heard a lot about one wanting to both increase the permanent staff and a lot of those decisions are at the local level.

So I, I've read a bit about how the board obviously is trying to incentivize a lot of programs, trying to ensure that there's things like mentorship that really allow not just hiring, but the retaining of staff. So making sure that we have the supports in place.

And I think in particular what I would say there is, I think we've also heard a lot about. We had a great presentation about a partnership we have with the HBCUs where we are both preparing students and then transferring them into the HBCU system.

But then a lot of them, obviously many of them actually end up coming back and becoming faculty or administrators within our system.

So I think that the system is definitely trying and trying to incentivize a lot of ways in which we can increase full time faculty and in which we can think about obviously the diversity of that faculty so that it's representative of the student body. And so that I think is really a great opportunity.

Myself, I'm adjunct at a university in Southern California and I just think that there is the value of that. I think one, the value of adjuncts is amazing. We all add to the richness of our universities because we're able to bring in just a lot of direct on the job experience that is critical.

But obviously it's really through a strong full time faculty that these universities thrive. The board I think has done, you know, has continued to try to incentivize and promote that. And obviously it will come down to the individual districts. And I think that there are ways that we are also trying to monitor some of this.

But at the. And so I think that's. I would just say that from a stewardship and from a governance perspective, we will continue to obviously advocate for our system to expand the number of full time.

Thank you. All right, seeing no other questions or comments from Members on the dais, I'm going to welcome individuals who are here to make public comment. Please come forward. If you are here in support, please feel free to come forward and step up and speak. Seeing none. Any Members of the public here in opposition, please come forward.

You're welcome to speak. All right, seen none. We're going to bring it back and I will entertain a motion if there is one. Thank you to Senator Reyes who has made the motion and we'll go ahead and call the roll.

[Roll Call] Three to zero.

Thank you. The appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with three I votes. Thank you very much, Ms. Corral. All right, next we are going to turn to governor's appointee required to appear Item 1B. The appointment of Paul Tupi as Director of Department of Alcohol Beverage Control.

Thank you, Mr. Tupy. Director Tupy, you'll have the opportunity to provide one to two minutes for your opening testimony to the Committee. In your opening, you're welcome to introduce any guests that you may have here or that are watching, and we'll keep you apprised of the time. Please feel free to begin.

Well, good afternoon, Honorable Chair and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear in front of you today. I'd like to take a moment to recognize my wife, Kara, who is here in attendance, and my daughters, Issa and Abby, and my son Nathan, who are watching virtually.

Also present is ABC staff past and present who are in attendance today. I'm truly honored to be sitting before you to be considered for this appointment. When I began my career in public service 27 years ago as a peace officer with the Eagan Police Department, I never imagined I'd be sitting here today.

During my first week as a patrol officer in Eagan, one of my captains pulled me aside and told me that the badge I had been given was a sacred symbol of the public's trust. A trust that is easily tarnished and slow to repair. His parting words to me were simple, don't tarnish the badge.

Leave it better than you received it. Those words have guided me throughout my career. From my time serving communities as a police officer in Eakin, Minnesota, to my experiences the past 16 years as California ABC Peace Officer, my focus has remained the same. Building public trust and working in partnerships with communities to solve problems.

Public trust has always been at the center of that work. My vision for ABC is that we continue to strengthen that trust with industry Members, with our local law enforcement and government partners, and with communities we serve. As Director, I'm committed to this three pronged mission.

ABC will support economic growth by issuing licenses in a timely, clear and dependable manner for businesses working to open their doors. At the same time, we will be responsive to our communities, including addressing irresponsible operators that create public safety or quality of life issues to prevent issues before they arise.

We will prioritize licensee education through training and other resources that support good business practices. And when alcohol related tragedies do occur, ABC will be there to support those communities and families and hold those responsible accountable. I am grateful to the Governor for this appointment and feel honored to lead such a great organization.

My commitment to the Governor and to you is that I will not tarnish the badge and then I will do everything I can to leave it better than I received it. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to answering your questions today.

Thank you. Bring it to the Members. We'll start with advice for Grove.

Thank you. Thank you for being here this afternoon and I appreciate your service as the leader of the ABC or the Director. You mentioned traffic deaths or fatalities. Alcohol related traffic deaths in California now exceed, I think over 1300 a year.

And as you regulate the alcohol sales and licensing, how does the Department of Alcohol or ABC ensure that businesses are following the law? And what's the audit program?

Yeah, so we have a number of programs that seek to address overconsumption and also youth access to minors. As we'll see with the DUI and fatal crash accidents, minors are disproportionately represented in that group and have a high number.

So we have a variety of programs, one of them being our minor decoy program where we send minors into an ABC license platform location as a compliance check to ensure that they're not selling to minors. And all we're asking them to do is their job and check ID and not serve them alcohol.

The second one that we have is around our shoulder tap operations, which are where somebody minor stands outside a business and asks an adult if they'll buy them alcohol. Again, all it is is a compliance check. We just want them to say no and taking appropriate action when required.

And then of course we have our delivery decoy operations where with the pandemic we saw a lot more businesses engaging in delivery of alcohol. So we do a lot of compliance checks around that to ensure that those third party delivery companies aren't delivering alcohol to minors as well.

And then finally we have our trace program which is a targeted responsibility for alcohol connected emergencies.

And really that's when there is a fatal crash or a serious injury involving a minor or somebody that was an ABC licensed location in conjunction with the local agency or the chp, our folks are conducting an investigation to see where that person was served alcohol and if they were served when they were obviously intoxicated and shouldn't have been served, and then holding those folks accountable for those actions.

We also do a lot of partnering with local police departments and sheriff's offices across the state, providing them grant funding to be able to carry out some of these programs for us.

We train them on how to do it, we have staff work with them, but they do act as a force multiplier to allow us to cover more area of the state with those programs.

Thank you. In your opening statement, you said that you have the honor and you have the respect or the honor and the respect for the badge that you carry. And I think that's a testament of who you are as a person, just in your opening statement.

But also all of us on this side of the dais have sometimes the benefit and the grief of dealing with agencies because constituents have services that are needing to be taken care of.

And your leadership speaks volumes because every time I've contacted Abc, regardless of who I've talked to, we've never had to elevate that call to you because your staff is on it. They take care of it. They know what they're doing. They're accommodating.

They're accommodating within the parameters that they operate in, but they don't put up roadblocks and barriers to make sure that people are successful when they need those you guys to operate in those situations. And I can't say that for every agency, we usually hit roblox with different people that are. That are below the Director level.

And then we have to make a phone call the Director and the Director fixes the situation. In any of the times, in the 10 since I've been here, since 2010, anytime I've ever had to reach out to you, your staff is very incredibly qualified and very incredibly accommodating within the parameters. Right. Not breaking any of those.

And I think that speaks for your leadership that you allow them to do that. And it's not like a mother may I position. They don't have to. They can just do their job and do it well. And I think that comes from leadership. And so I look forward to your confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you. And then Senator Laird and then Senator Jones and then Senator Reyes.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you for the meeting. I felt like it was a. A nice, thoughtful discussion. And one of the things I asked you was you have come up all the way through the ranks and now you're the Director, and what are the pros and cons?

It's on one level, you know it well. You can able to do it on another level. How do you protect yourself from being blind against things that might need to be analyzed and changed? And you shouldn't take for granted just because you've been there the whole time. So how do you deal with that balance as Director?

Yeah, thank you for that question. So I'll say it's twofold. One is drawing on my experience as a local police officer years ago and cognizant of the fact that at the state level we can have a different perspective on things than at a local level. And that's good.

That we're seeing all different sides of the prism of the issue that we're looking at. And so for me, I. I do approach it from both end. I do see it from internally, the perspective of the different processes that are in place, as well as trying to implement the changes.

And a lot of that has to do with communication with our stakeholders, the community groups, hearing what the issues are for them and their communities and then looking to address those issues.

I'm really fortunate that we do have a really great staff at ABC that really wants to make the community a better place and to work with our stakeholders and try to honestly make the world a little bit better place and safer for folks on the road. Well.

Well, maybe to ask it another way. There's probably people in your agency that say we've always done it that way. How do you respond when that happens? And sort of trying to figure out whether that's something that needs to be looked at and not done the way it's always been done.

Yeah, I think is tackling it head on. Just because we've always done it doesn't make it the right thing.

And we use a lot of tools, surveys of our customers and the public to find out what kind of quality of work we're doing and how we can improve and so taking those tools seriously and implementing the requests that are in there where it's possible on our end.

And I think a lot of that involves communication, casting a vision as to where we're going, setting small goals along the way as to how to get to that endpoint and ensure that we're doing regular checks to see that we're getting there. Well, thank you, that's really helpful.

And then the other thing I wanted to ask about and we talked about in the meeting is there is a Fund that supports your Department. And for the last whatever it is, 15 or 20 years, the Fund hasn't been fully supporting the Department and there's had to be General Fund transfers to do it.

And obviously during COVID that was more pronounced sort of. How do you see that now? And how do you see the stability of the Department in relation to the Fund sort of in the next few years?

So we do have a funded balance at the moment. We're able to pay our bills, we're able to continue to provide the services at the level that our stakeholders and communities expect. That said, we do see that there are some issues that we're going to need to monitor along the way.

One of the issues that we're seeing is there's Trends in drinking based on alcohol consumption based on age. Younger generations aren't consuming and purchasing as much alcohol as older generations.

We're also seeing that there's been some impacts around world events in the economy with respect to the loss of the Canadian market for the industry and also around tariffs and material costs going up for some of our businesses involved.

So we've seen the number of applications being fairly stagnant this past year, as opposed to a projected 1% growth which we usually budget for. So it's in that respect that we're.

We're really wanting to monitor our Fund level because we did have some projections around the continued growth of businesses that now that it's kind of stagnant, we are monitoring to see what that's going to hold.

But that said, we're still in a good position for the next couple of years with our Fund to be able to continue our operations as. As we always had.

Great. Thank you very much. And you seem steady at the helm, so I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Senator Jones, thank you.

Quick question, more out of curiosity. So there's not a right or wrong answer. You're pretty deep into your police career in Minnesota. What, what brought you to California? Okay to ask.

Yes, of course. My wife, we were. She was from out here, I was from there. And we started having kids and we wanted our kids to grow up around cousins and her brothers were having kids at the same time. So we made the move out here.

And there's no zero degree, not very many zero degree temperatures out here. That definitely helps. Yeah. I want to, I will underscore Senator Grove's comments too, regarding responsiveness. We reached out to, you know, one of the things that I'm very concerned about is how are my constituents when they're interacting with the government at whatever Department.

And so we reached out to some folks in San Diego and they all gave you raving reviews and thumbs up. So I'm looking forward to supporting you today. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Reyes.

Thank you. During COVID we found that lots of our restaurants were delivering not only food, but alcohol. I saw from the statistics that in 2020, violation rate was 79% where they would just drop off alcohol and food at the door. By 2021, it was 17%, 23, it was 9%.

I will tell you that last night my husband and I ordered from Sellens and yes, there was some alcohol involveD. And, and they asked for iD. No, it wasn't for me, but they did ask for the ID and it had to be included on there. And I really appreciated that.

My question is, how is that, how do you use that with other in your training? Because I see that there's lots of training that you do. How do you include that with your training that you do or that you require? Restaurants?

Yeah. So we offer some different training programs that are. One of them is our lead program which provides licensee education about checking IDs, how to check an ID, what the requirements are. And this is more for.

We call them off sale locations, but it's where you purchase alcohol and you don't drink it there, you consume it at home. And so that program is free. It provides a lot of good education for the businesses that are where you restaurants and bars where you would consume alcohol on site.

We have the responsible beverage service, which is a requirement for servers that they're checking IDs and ensuring that they're not selling to minors.

With respect to the delivery decoy piece, we did a lot of outreach around that to the third party delivery companies involved as well as to the the businesses themselves to try to educate them around the rules.

We held a lot of informational sessions and testing opportunities to see that people were following the rules and the industry responded very well. And that rate did significantly reduce and fairly quickly as well.

Significantly. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam pt. Thank you. And so thank you for the information for being here today. I have a question regarding some of the things that you may have seen just in terms of legislation that's come forward.

And I'm just curious your views on some of the ideas about extending last calls, cocktails to go open containers, entertainment zones. Just if you could speak broadly to, you know, your perspective, the department's perspective on some of that.

Yeah. So I'll say that my perspective has always been to be supportive of legislation that is passed and signed by the Governor. I can't comment on particular pending legislation, but certainly a couple of the pieces that you did mention, entertainment zones.

We've worked closely with local jurisdictions that are interested in having those to provide them information around that. And if they're looking for ways to better implement it or what other cities are doing, we're providing opportunity for them to connect with each other to find out what each city is doing. And we're also always looking to provide improvements.

I think one of the unique things about ABC is the connection to the local jurisdictions. We have 22 field offices. We're a very locally based state agency, which means that we have a lot of contact with, with local government, local police, Departments and local communities.

And I think hearing that across the state, when new pieces of legislation come out, enable us to kind of develop policies that take into account the whole of California and not just particular segments that may be louder than others.

Thank you. All right, seeing no additional questions, I'll welcome anybody who is here here in support of the appointee. Please come forward. State your name, your affiliation. Yes. Please come forward to the microphone.

Hi, good afternoon. Thank you very much. My name is Raul Verdugo, Program Manager for the California Alcohol Policy alliance and Alcohol Justice. I've had the privilege of working with ABC to bring together diverse stakeholders on responsible alcohol practices in California.

Through CAPA roundtable discussions that we've had, we've created a space for stakeholders to share perspectives and work constructively with ABC. I've been encouraged by Dr. Excuse me. Director Tupy's leadership since his appointment and look forward to continued collaboration on these important efforts. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Tim Schmelzer with Wine Institute. We've had the opportunity to meet with Director Tupy on several occasions. We've enjoyed his open door policy, had some good open discussions. We're at an interesting time in our industry and, you know, you're probably all aware these aren't the best of times.

And as a result, we may come up with some crazy ideas sometimes. And I appreciate the partnership we have with ABC, the open door to kind of make sure that we land in a place that keeps the public interest in mind when we, when we work on these issues.

And we respect and support very much the enforcement, forward attitude you have, too. So we very much encourage your support today. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Matthew Barding. I was the General Counsel with ABC until I retired last year. And I now represent Members of the alcoholic beverage industry. And I've known Paul a long time and you can do no better. So I strongly support his appointment as Director.

Thank you,

Madam Chair, Members of Committee, Chris Walker, on behalf of the California Craft Brewers Association. We're not having the best of times like the wine industry as well. Our big issue is continued access to market and a fair marketplace.

And that relies upon a strong ABC that enforces the laws, enforces trade practices, and we have the utmost confidence in this Director in carrying that forward and look forward to a long Administration with this, with this Director. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, seeing nobody else in support. If there is anybody here to speak in opposition of the appointee, please come forward. All right, see nobody else here or no one here in opposition. We're going to bring it back to the dais. If there are no additional questions or comments, I will take a motion.

I'd like to move the Comfrey to the full Senate floor for a vote.

Thank you very much. We have Vice Chair Grove making the motion. Can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call] Five to zero.

Thank you. The appointee has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation. Congratulations.

All right, so this brings us to the end of our public portion of the agenda. I want to thank everyone for joining us today and welcome all of those who have testified. We're going to wait a couple moments as we create clear the room for the Executive session to begin.