Assembly Standing Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, and Tourism

Good morning, Tom. Good morning. morning. Good morning. I'd like to welcome you all to today's hearing of the Assembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports and Tourism. Any absent members should be making their way to hear As always, each bill will have up to two main witnesses in support and opposition, and each witness would receive up to two minutes to present. For those still wishing to do so, written testimony can be submitted through the position portal on the committee's website.

And for those attending in person, conduct which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited. I wanna thank you. And at this time, madam secretary, will you please establish a quorum?

[Roll Call]

Thank you. And we have a quorum, but yet we do not yet have an author. So we'll wait for that. And, just an announcement for staff right now, if, we have more than a ten minute gap waiting for authors right now, we will be adjourning this committee. We all have places to be, and you have options to be able to have somebody else present your bill as well too. But we're not gonna keep the committee members waiting longer than necessary.

We have our first author, our fellow committee member, Assembly member Mckinnor, who's here to present item number one, AB 2112 and miss McKinnor when you are situated and ready you may begin your presentation.

Hello. Good morning, thank you guys for waiting. Apologize for the tardiness.

Mister chair and members, AB 2113 addresses a growing public safety gap as the use of drones become more widespread across California. Large ticketed entertainment events such as concerts, festivals and sporting events often bring tens of thousands of people into dense confined spaces, especially in my district.

In these environments, unauthorized drones activity poses real risks, including potential, injury to attendees, disruption of operations and interference with the emergency response efforts.

While the Federal Government regulates airspace, it is not always positioned to respond quickly to drone activity occurring directly above these events. Local law enforcement is responsible for on the ground safety, yet current law does not provide clear, enforceable authority to address this specific issue.

AB 2113 responds to this gap by establishing a clear and straightforward rule that prohibits the operation of a drone within a 400 foot radius of a ticketed entertainment event held at an outdoor venue capable of accommodating a thousand or more attendees.

The bill creates a simple inf infraction with a $500 fine, strengthening deterrence while remaining practical to enforce. Importantly, AB 2113 is narrowly tailored.

It focuses solely on the physical operation of drones in close proximity to large crowds and does not expand surveillance authority to implicate personal privacy. The bill also includes a common six exemption for authorized operators, including those with event organized consent, venue employees and utility workers.

By providing a clear statutory framework, AB 2113 empowers local authorities to respond effectively, enhances crowd safety and ensures California is prepared to safely host major events that are central to our economy and cultural life. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. My witness with me today is Josh Stevens from GLAADNATION. Thank you.

Chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to address you guys today. My name is Josh Stevens. I'm the senior manager of government affairs for Live Nation and we are proud cosponsors of AB 2113.

I'm here today speaking in favor of it as a necessary and significant improvement on public safety regulations for live outdoor events and the large crowds they attract. Last year alone, we welcomed over a 150,000,000 fans to Live Nation events across 54,000 concerts.

Modern technology such as drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles prevent a new present a new challenge for public safety at large events such as the ones we put on. This bill would be a meaningful step to solving that challenge.

Recreational drone usage has increased substantially over the last five years, more than a 160% since 2019 according to the FAA and our operational experience reflects that. Drone incursions have become more common in all types of events from small outdoor concerts to large multi day festivals.

Despite that, regulatory guidelines have not kept up to this new trend and leave event organizers and our law enforcement partners vulnerable to potential bad actors.

Federal guidelines and processes are unfortunately currently inconsistent for event organizers and rarely apply to any but the largest of events such as the Super Bowl or World Cup matches that will start next month in the Bay Area and Los Angeles.

While there have been efforts to improve the situation and streamline the temporary flight restriction process, also known as TFRs, these haven't yet led to consistent meaningful change.

We alone hosted a thousand events in 2025 with 10,000 or more attendees that did not meet the qualifications for FAA TFR's to prevent drone usage above those large crowds.

As a result, new state law remains the best option to helping event organizers keep attendees safe and to give law enforcement agencies the regulations they need to take action against unauthorized drone users.

To be clear, we believe in a layered approach to this issue, one that includes state and federal frameworks that work together to protect the largest events as that is the best possible solution for public safety.

We will continue to work extensively with the FAA and Congress as part of a larger coalition of cities and public input safety agencies to improve their processes. We hope California will do its part with this bill and look forward to working with you on it. Thank you.

Great, thank you. Right on the nose. Are there any other members of the public wishing to state a position of support? Please oppose approach the microphone.

Mister chair and members, Scott Governor Baffin, San Francisco 49ers, in support.

Mister chair members, Eli Garcia with a late support for the bottle rock concert.

Thank you. I see no other members of the public. Are there any members, of the public here in opposition? We have none on file.

Mister chair, I'm Sabrina Lockhart with the California Attractions and Parks Association. We actually have a support if amended. If the bill, includes amusement parks, we appreciate the author's leadership in this space.

We appreciate her willingness to continue to work with us and the committee staff for outlining our concerns in the analysis. We like these events, we welcome thousands of guests every day.

Unlike these events, we have rides. So if an unauthorized drone were to strike a ride, that can cause serious injury. Last year, when Congress reauthorized FAA FAA, they designated us as critical infrastructure, the same as national landmarks and energy grids.

So we hope to keep the conversation going and hope that those amendments are made before it reaches the floor. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, chair members. Jose Torres with TechNet. We are in a oppose unless amended position. Apologize for getting in our letter late but just wanted to highlight.

We appreciate the author and their office for their work on this bill. Understanding the intent of the bill and the significance significance of that, to be clear, our concern is to ensure that we don't inadvertently limit the use of a growing technology and valid commercial uses.

That being said, understanding that the provision of a drone would be 400 feet within an outdoor ticketed venue but in very much urban stadiums.

This would mean that the neighbors to these stadiums wouldn't be able to use a drone for valid commercial reasons, whether it be using a drone to look at the structural aspects of a building during the day.

Such as, the various hotels across from Petco Park or if a realtor wants to use a drone to record an apartment across the street and wants to highlight the experience at outside of the venue, that would be prohibited during a game or a ticket event. Other than that appreciate the author but thank you for your time.

We'll take a look at that that that letter when it comes in. Turning it back to committee, any members' comments? Assemblymember Gonzales.

To my esteemed colleague, I have Coachella stage coach and in the future, head trip. We also have BNP Paribas within the region.

So drones are very normal piece of drones and flyovers are very peace and I understand the necessity of protecting large crowds, especially in light of the tactics, techniques and procedures that we're seeing live with the Russia /Ukraine conflict and being that was my bailiwick in a pro former life. I can understand that.

My question to this is with respect to the drone, whatever drone that is. Right? The unauthorized because authorized are okay. What's the way in which to that we're going to hold these folks accountable?

Right? Jerome flies over. How do you find the person? How are we going to do that?

So it's a great question and mitigation and prevention are two very different things and certainly, under current regulatory frameworks require very different authorizations and approaches, trainings for law enforcement, not to mention equipment.

This is certainly a fantastic first step to prohibiting and it gives law enforcement as representative pointed out, there's currently no justification to tell someone they can't do something and to get them to stop, which this would authorize.

There's probably a more involved process that would have to take place on the mitigation front and there's been a substantial amount of work done on that ahead of the World Cup starting next month.

There's been a federal task force that I believe the FBI has led, with police departments that are going to be hosting those games, training, equipment, funding for all that has been led, federally, not so much on the state side.

Again, a layered approach is important here and you've certainly struck that there's more to do but this is an important first step.

Finally, one of the challenges that we have to overcome and that is that there is an evolving technology with respect and I don't want to get too deep into the proprietary and confidential stuff that law enforcement has to deal with.

there are unfortunately regulations that we have that don't allow us to come to completely mitigate drone operations because of the technology and where it comes from.

There are regulations currently in place that don't allow us to stop these types of things. I'd be more than willing to talk with the author about this and help out in any way that I can and I appreciate what you're doing, especially for for my community where we see half a million people on a weekend for for different festivals.

For that, I'll be in support.

Thank you, mister Gonzales. To Assembly member Elhawary.

I just want to appreciate the author for this bill. I was at Coachella this weekend, hence the teal hair but it was a really good opportunity to actually see the infrastructure specifically related to how to keep folks safe and looking at the command center, they talked about this bill.

They talked about the importance of what they often see and how it's impacting them.

They specifically mentioned your name and and it was, I think, really important to hear, to be a part of it, to see what was going on, to feel the experience and to recognize how much it can become a safety concern if we don't do something. So really grateful that you brought this bill in. Looking forward to supporting it today.

Great to hear that I was a celebrity at the at the event. I love that.

Just a quick com comment regarding the opposition. It's not often that we get opposition that says we're opposed to the bill because we want to be included.

I definitely appreciate it as I have all the, well two of the major theme parks in my district but I do understand that that can happen at a separate bill and so I'll be supporting this bill and I think the bill was moved.

Elle worry? Great. Any other member questions or comments? Miss McKitter, I want to thank you for bringing forward AB 2113. I think it's a common sense solution that really satisfies a couple of issues.

One and foremost, the safety concerns that we have, for this unauthorized use when we have a large congregation for both especially for the attendees but also for our law enforcement and the performers there as well.

I agree, it's great when you are introducing a subject that we're thinking a little bit more broadly. Obviously, a lot of our theme parks and a lot of other places sort of satisfy the same conditions. We've got a large congregation of the public and we want to think about the spaces as well.

This may not be the right vehicle for that but I'll leave it to your discretion to be able to have those conversations going forward and decide how to further that conversation if it's possible this year.

I also acknowledge as well as the we referenced in the Coachella example. It's not just a safety issue and everything. We also have increasing use of authorized drones as a part of a performance and so any conflict with those, could be disastrous.

Certainly a big safety issue in and of itself but one that also would very be very disruptive to the rights of that performance.

Appreciate you bringing this bill here forward today as I've done before in committee. I'm happy to support the bill and would invite you to close.

Yes. I will thank thank the chair, the staff and the members of this committee. I will continue to work with opposition to get this bill right. We know we have to be safe and secure. We have all of our big major events coming up, along with everything that we do, every year like Stagecoach.

I want to get an invitation to go out there. I've been hearing that it's a really good, event and so we want to make sure that that our folks are safe and sound and so with that, I'll ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, madam secretary. Please call the roll.

AB 2113. The motion is do passed to the assembly committee on appropriations.[ROLL CALL]

Alright. Good morning mister chair and colleagues. I am pleased today to present AB 2492, a measure that will ensure safety and security are prioritized when California hosts some of the biggest sporting events in the world, including the 2027 Super Bowl and 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic games.

These events present a unique opportunity to boost our economy, generate millions in state and local tax revenue and further strengthen California's global brand.

At the same time, these events also require enhanced security coordination to ensure the safety of attendees, athletes and our local communities.

AB 2492 will accomplish this goal by establishing a framework for interagency coordination, ensuring that state and local agencies as well as host committees are aligned in their efforts to provide the highest level of security while also reducing the risk of human trafficking, racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination

Ensuring the highest levels of coordination is appropriate given notable instances of violence at major international sporting events, including the attacks in New Orleans prior to the Sugar Bowl just last year.

While we always hope for a safe and peaceful event, AB 2492 ensures that California is prepared for any incident, whether it be a natural disaster, a medical emergency, or a security threat so that we can deliver the best possible events on the global stage.

This bill is supported by a coalition that includes the Los Angeles Super Bowl Host Committee, the California Travel Association, the California Hotel Lodging Association and the California Police Chiefs Association.

Very pleased to have with me today to testify in support of the bill, Amelia Zimani, on behalf of the California Travel Association. Thank you and respectfully request an aye vote.

Good morning, chair and members. Thank you Assemblymember Gabriel for having me here again. As he said, I'm Amelia Zimani, the director of government affairs and public policy with the California Travel Association.

Our members include destinations, lodging, attractions and more across the state of California. Obviously, we have a lot of major events coming both this summer and in the future, the subject of this bill.

These are more than just a sporting moment, obviously. It's a huge boon for our economic future, workforce development and our international reputation. According to a recent US travel association survey about the World Cup coming this summer, one third of international visitors plan to stay more than two weeks compared with 9% of typical international travelers and they spend more.

International travelers for the World Cup are expected to spend 67% more than their last main vacation and domestic travelers are going to matches outside of their home area are also expected to spend more. While the next few years will showcase everything we love about California, they will also bring increased increased scrutiny.

It's critical that with the world's eyes on California, we ensure the safety and security of our visitors, workers, and residents. According to the same US travel association survey I mentioned earlier, personal safety emerged as travelers top concern, reflecting a shift in priorities and increased sensitivity to safety and US policies that influence travel decisions.

This is unlikely to change before Super Bowl sixty one in winter 2027 or the Olympics and Paralympics in summer 2028.

This bill develops a framework for interagency coordination to ensure these international sporting events are safe for everyone involved and the only memories people leave California with are happy ones. The positive attention we garner from these games will hopefully result in many years of return visits from around the globe. We respectfully request your, aye vote for 2492.

Thank you very much. Are there any other members of the public, wishing to state a position of support? Seeing none. Is anybody here to, offer a opposition statement for presentation? Seeing none, any members of the public wishing to have a position of opposition? Okay. Seeing none, we'll turn this back to committee member questions and comments. Moved by mister Gonzales.

Second by miss Quirk Silva. Well, mister Gabriel, I want to thank you for bringing this bill forward as well. Obviously we have a lot of wonderful events coming up that are going to be on the global stage when we think about the Super Bowl, the Olympic and the Paralympic games.

I think this requires the highest level of attention by the state to make sure that we are well coordinated between all the agencies that are responsible. I appreciate you've expanded this bill as well, not just to include the event facilities themselves, but also the watch parties.

Opportunity for those that can't get ticketed for a game to also participate in the festivities and the liveliness that we have around these events but importantly as well to really connect them to communities and make sure that we're highlighting the the broad fabric that we have here across the state of California.

So I know this is going to place us in a position as best as possible to be as secure as possible for these important events coming up and I invite you to close.

Yeah. Thank you very much, mister chair. Appreciate the very thoughtful comments. We know that the eyes of the world are going to be on Southern California and very specifically on miss McKenna's district, so we want to deliver the best possible product on the global stage and with that, I would respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you, madam secretary. Please call the roll.

AB 2492 [ROLL CALL]

Number two. This is AB 2130

Appreciate your witnesses here as well and when you are ready, you may begin.

Mister Haney also, if we could call mister Sabur and mister Lackey back to the committee room for closing out votes, I'd appreciate it at this time. Mister Haney.

Thank you, mister chair members. I want to thank, your staff for the work on this bill and accept the committee's amendments.

As you recall, I'm sure just a few years ago, we were able to expand the existing, retirement fund, which was available for boxers, to MMA fighters and as a part of that, we made some commitments to find ways to put revenue into that fund so we can support these folks who put their bodies on the line for this sport for their fans.

There are so many people in California who are fans of this sport, who attend these events, who watch them on TV but there are also many, many thousands of fighters and aspiring fighters, folks who want to be a part of this sport, it's a growing sport.

We now have, as you're here, a combat university here in Sacramento State. We're the biggest state for fights and for fighters and we should find ways to support these folks, including when they finish fighting.

That's what this bill would do. It will authorize the California State Athletic Commission to place sponsor logos on referee and official apparel at boxing and mixed martial arts events, which will help to create a new revenue stream and this will allow us to support more of these folks.

It will also be a practical and sustainable way to strengthen fire retirement benefits beyond what exists now, which is solely the the ticket prices, ticket, sales. With me to testify in support of the bill is Hector, Fajardo, director of operations at Combat U and commissioner Chris Gurel from the California State Athletic Commission.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you all for your time this morning. My name is Hector Fajardo. I'm the director of operations for Sacramento State University and also a current, MMA fighter in the state of California. I'd like to support this bill.

It speaks to me in a sense that this allows companies to vest in a pension fund and put money into something that's going to go back to the fighters that, I'm sure you've heard that as a combat sports practitioner, you leave a piece of yourself in the ring or in the cage.

So I think this movement would be awesome to give a little bit back to the fighters who maybe they don't go to the top highest level of the sport but they've spent their career in California give it shedding their blood, sweat, and tears in California and getting a little bit back, which I think is wonderful, to support such fighters that have spent, their time in the state.

It's also awesome because this bill also vets and, brings back, gives a little bit of a pension to fighters that have already spent that time, in California fighting and I support this bill greatly.

Especially as you know, serving over 500 students at Sacramento State University with aspirations, that wanna fight, that want to pursue this, this sport and knowing that California is leading the way and giving a little bit back and there is something after you finish your career. Thank you.

Thank you. Good

morning, chairman Ward. I want to thank you all for taking the time to consider this legislation. I think it's important to note that California is not only the only state in the country but the only location in the world that provides fighters with a retirement benefit and for those who are able to access these funds it can truly be life changing. These are funds they've earned.

Thanks to your support, when we extended those benefits to our mixed martial artist fighters, we don't have the funds right now to go back and honor those fighters, some of who are literally the folks who created the sport here in California and this will go a long way for else helping us extend that dignity of a retirement benefit to those fighters.

In addition, some of these funds will be used to help train our ring professionals, make sure they also have the support, to do the good jobs they do. So thank you again for your time and we look forward to your support.

Good morning. Tim Lynch on behalf of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, and we're in support of the bill.

Great. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public here wishing to issue a statement of support or a position of support?

Thank you.

Is there anybody here I have no opposition on file. Anybody wishing to offer a statement of opposition or state a position of opposition? Seeing none, we'll turn this back to committee member questions or comments. Seeing none, do I have a motion?

Second.

Move the bill by mister Gonzales and second by miss Elawari. And, mister Heaney, I wanna thank you for bringing this bill here forward. While it's an issue, an important one because you're rightfully recognizing.

I think a growing popularity of MMA and boxing and the opportunities for sponsorships for the athletic commission to be able to support fighters after they've really hung up their gloves. We want to be make sure that we're using the revenue to enhance any programs already in place without an impact to state funding.

So that's a win for all involved and these athletes we of course, recognize are an important aspect of California sports and entertainment industries. For all these reasons, I'm happy to support your bill today and invite you to close.

Thank you so much, chair and thank you, for those amendments and again, I should have underscore this. Does not rely on the state's general fund, will not increase ticket prices and will not raise taxes. This is a win win. This is the fastest growing sport in the world, and we're the biggest state for it.

If we can also be the best place for supporting these folks both when in the in the ring and when they're done fighting, That will also be something we can be very proud of and with that, respectfully ask for aye vote.

Thank you, mister Haney, for accepting those amendments. Madam secretary, please call the roll.[ROLL CALL]

[Roll Call]

That bill is also out nine zero. And with that, we are adjourned.