Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the May 13th, 2026 Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing. We have 196 bills to consider this morning as part of our regular order hearing. Before we begin, I have a few housekeeping notes to cover. I'd like to thank-- I don't know what just happened there.

Can you guys hear me? Okay. That was weird. Before we begin, I have a few housekeeping notes to cover. I'd like to thank Assembly Member Ellis for filling in for Assembly Member Dixon on the committee today.

Hello, Mr. Ellis. Thank you for joining us. And to thank Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan for filling in for Assembly Member Arambula today. We encourage the public to provide a written testimony before the hearing by visiting the committee website at apro.assembly.ca.gov. Please note that any written testimony submitted to the committee is considered public comment and may be read into the record or reprinted.

The hearing room is open for attendance. All are encouraged to watch the hearing from its livestream on the Assembly's website. We will accept public comment on any bill placed on the Suspense File by the committee today and for which the author waived presentation before the close of the regular order hearing. Testimony on any such bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, and position on the bill. The committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony.

As you came into the hearing room today, the sergeants directed your attentions to the rules for public attendance and participation, which were posted outside the door. I encourage all members to follow the rules. Let's establish a quorum.

[Roll call].

We have a quorum. Great. With that, I would like to dispense with the Consent Calendar. We will take up bills on the Consent Calendar in two motions. The first motion is do pass to Consent, applies to bills that enjoy unanimous support in this committee and are eligible for Assembly floor's Consent Calendar consistent with Assembly rules. Do we have a motion for this? Motion and a second. Secretary.

The following bills are all Assembly Bills: 2039, Petrie-Norris, 2065, Petrie-Norris, 2175, Garcia, 2181, Petrie-Norris, 2298, Irwin, 2324, Jeff Gonzales, 2429, Blanca Rubio, 2523, Fong, 2524, Gipson, 2618, Connolly, 2719, Petrie-Norris, and 2795, Committee on Banking and Finance.

Those bills are out on an A roll call. The second motion, do pass, applies to bills that also enjoy unanimous support in this committee but are not eligible for the Assembly floor Consent Calendar consistent with Assembly rules. Do we have a motion on this? We have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary?

Consent Calendar part two: 1619, Valencia, 2010, Soria, 2012, Hoover, 2024, Nguyen, 2059, Wilson, 2089, Ward, 2113, McKinnor, 2172, Gipson, 2185, Quirk-Silva, 2273, Bains, 2440, Muratsuchi, 2496, Solache, and 2613, Sharp-Collins.

Those bills are out on an A roll call. Okay. We will now move on to authors. Ms. Rodriguez, you are up and you are presenting AB 2641. You can begin when you're ready.

Thank you, madam chair and members, for allowing me to present AB 2641. A b AB 2641 extends a sales tax exemption for individuals who repurchase their own property from a pawnbroker. This is a simple fairness measure that prevents double taxation. When someone is reclaiming their own property, they have already paid tax sales tax at the time of the original purchase. Without this bill, they would be taxed again on the same item.

This is not a new policy. This legislation addressed this this legislature addressed this issue in 2021, and AB 2641 simply extends existing law. This bill is narrowly tailored and applies only to the original owner while requiring proof that the sales tax was already paid. There is no opposition and this policy has worked without issue under current law. This measure has also received no no votes.

AB 2641 is about maintaining fairness in the tax system and protecting consumers. With me here to testify is Albert Torrico with the California Pawnbrokers Association.

You can begin when you're ready.

Good morning, madam chair, members of the committee. Alberto Turico on behalf of the California Association of Pawnbrokers. As noted by the author, this is this is the third iteration of this bill and five year extension as required by the revenue tax committee. And also as noted in the analysis, very limited cost to the general fund. Respectfully ask for an eye vote. Thank you.

Great. Any other folks in support? Any primary witnesses in opposition? Anyone else in opposition? Okay. We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Thank you. The motion is do passed. That is out on an A roll call. Mister Ward, you are up next.

You're presenting AB 2525.

Well, thank you, and good morning, Madam Chair and members. I'm pleased to present AB 2525, which would expedite the rehabilitation and modernization of facilities within Mission Bay Park in the City of San Diego by providing a narrow exemption from the state's Surplus Lands Act for lands that are legally dedicated as parkland and restricted to recreational, maritime, and visitor serving commercial uses as specified in this bill, the state deed, and the city charter.

Assembly Appropriations analysis indicates that 2525 would have minor and absorbable costs to HCD. With that, I have Moira Topp, here on behalf of the City of San Diego, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Moira Topp, here on behalf of San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria. We are the sponsors of the measure, as the Assembly Member noted. This is a unique exemption that we're requesting. The City of San Diego is strongly supportive of the Surplus Land Act.

We've used it multiple times since its enactment, and we think this is a very narrowly drawn amendment as the Assembly Member noted. There are no negligible-- or there are negligible fiscal impacts to the bill. On behalf of the mayor, we do appreciate your support today. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional folks in support? Any primary or other witnesses in opposition? Okay. We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions? Nope? Motion? We have a motion and a second. Great. Would you like to close?

Thank you. Respectfully request your aye vote.

Great. The motion's do pass. That's out on an A roll call. We will now go to Mr. Alvarez. And you are presenting two bills, AB 1732 and AB 2433. You can begin when you're ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll begin with 1732, and this is the Student Faculty Housing Opportunity Act. Obviously, California's great home to the greatest universities in the world, I believe, and I think you would agree with that, but we have a problem with student housing, which we've heard about quite a bit, and we've attempted to do a lot around.

The LAO has estimated that 7% of UC students and 11% of CSU students face housing instability, and that number grows to 25% for community college students. So this bill would address the issue that has bogged down housing in many ways and that this Legislature has really championed, which is through CEQA litigation in-- from 2018 to 2023, a total of seven projects at the University of California were stalled due to CEQA lawsuits. AB 1732 will-- attempts to minimize that.

We're hoping that we align the rules for CEQA streamlining as was done with AB 130. We accidentally left out universities and colleges as we did good work to try and address this issue with cities and counties, and so this bill attempts to correct that. I'd like to introduce or give opportunity to Kate Rodgers, who's Chair and Policy Director of the Student Homes Coalition to share a few words.

Good morning, Chair and members. Good morning, Chair and members. Kate Rodgers from the Student Homes Coalition. We're proud to sponsor AB 1732 to exempt UC, CSU, and community college housing projects from CEQA. So simply put, this bill will strengthen California's higher education system and California's economy.

We'll be able to build more units for students, faculty, and staff faster and more affordably. We will be able to alleviate student homelessness, increase access to higher education, and retain our world-class faculty, staff, and researchers, and we can do it all while saving state dollars. AB 1732 was a win for education, a win for housing, and a win for California. I'd like to thank our authors, Assembly Member Alvarez, and of course, Chair Wicks, for your leadership on the issue. Thank you, and I respectfully request your aye vote. Happy to answer any technical questions.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to express support? Any primary witnesses in opposition--or sorry--support? Great. Oh. Sorry, one second. Could we get the mic to work there? Okay. There you go.

Thank you, Chair and members. Karen Stout, here on behalf of California YIMBY, in support. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Raymond Contreras with Lighthouse Public Affairs, on behalf of the San Diego Housing Commission, SPUR, and Abundant Housing Los Angeles, in strong support.

Hello. My name is Neely, a student of UC Santa Barbara. On behalf of the UCSA, we strongly support this bill.

Thank you. Any primary or other witnesses in opposition? Great. Any questions? Nope? Do we have a motion? And a second. Would you like to close, Mr. Alvarez?

Thank you, and-- thank you, and I wanna thank the UC Student Association, the Faculty Association, School Employees Association all in support, and ask you to do the same. Thank you.

Great. The motion is do pass as amended to modify the tribal consultation requirement, and that is out on an A roll call with Ms. Pellerin not voting. Thank you.

Thank you.

And you can move on now to your second bill, AB 2433.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm excited to present a second housing bill to you all, AB 2433: Affordable Homes Bonus Law. Just a few facts that I wanna share with you. Thanks to the sponsor's work, Circulate, we've identified that the Bonus Law has entitled more than 140,000 homes across California since 2021 at no additional cost to taxpayers, and it's been the most successful housing policy combined in producing housing for Californians.

But HCD's Housing Element reporting shows that over a quarter of projects that are eligible for this bonus law, which would create more housing, are not using the program. Density Bonus is being used to create mostly rental housing, so this is focused a lot on for-sale opportunities, and we hope that you support the work that we're doing to increase homeownership opportunities through this bill and continue to support the Density Bonus Bill, which has been so successful. I'd like to turn it over to Colin Parent, Chief Executive at the-- and General Counsel at Circulate Planning & Policy, the bill sponsor.

Thank you very much, Assembly Member Alvarez. My name is Colin Parent. I'm the CEO and General Counsel of Circulate Planning & Policy, the lead co-sponsor for this bill. I shared with you all a little handout.

It's got an excerpt of a graphic from a report that we published earlier this year called Win-Win Bonus that documents the impact of Bonus Law in California, and as the Assembly Member shared, you can see by the numbers that HCD tracks it is by far the most impactful housing policy that this Legislature has adopted in the last five years.

It's been very, very important to-- to as the Chair is often saying, she wants to see more, you know, groundbreakings and bill signings, and this is a great tool that's accomplishing that.

AB 2433 does a variety of things, all with a purpose of allowing more homes to take advantage of the successful policy so that we can create the more affordable homes that we need in California. So we're really grateful for the opportunity to partner with our co-sponsors and with this author, and look forward to the committee's support. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions? Sorry. Any other support in the room? Name, organization, and position.

Good morning. Kate Rodgers, on behalf of the Student Homes Coalition, in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Raymond Contreras with Lighthouse Public Affairs, on behalf of SPUR, a proud co-sponsor, Abundant Housing Los Angeles, Fieldstead, Habitat for Humanity, and San Diego Housing Commission, in strong support.

Great. Any folks in opposition? Okay. Any questions? No? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you. Appreciate your aye vote on this bill. Thank you.

Appreciate it. And thank you for your work in the space, Mr. Alvarez. It is, as noted, the most effective way we're getting a lot more housing that our communities critically need, and I'm happy to move the bill out as a co-author, so I just appreciate your work. And the motion is do pass, and that is out on an A roll call.

And Mister or Miss Pellerin is not voting. Thank you.

Mr. Gonzales, you are next. Ready to go.

And you are presenting AB 2055.

You can begin when you're ready.

Good morning, Chair and members. I'm pleased to present AB 2055, a common sense public safety measure that updates California's Boating Laws, closes enforcement gaps and aligns our statutes with federal standards and existing vehicle laws. California's waterways are enjoyed by millions of residents and visitors each year from recreational boating to water sports and commercial operations. These activities are an important part of our economy and quality of life. But with that activity comes responsibility, and our laws must keep pace with modern safety needs.

AB 2055 addresses several outdated provisions and statutes that currently limit law enforcement's ability to protect the public and respond effectively when accidents occur. For example, under current law, peace officers may issue citations following vehicle accidents when they have reasonable cause to believe a violation contributed to the crash, even if the violation did not occur in their presence. However, there's no comparable authority for boating accidents, which creates an enforcement gap and reduces accountability for unsafe operation on our waterways.

This bill simply brings boating enforcement in line with vehicle law by allowing train peace officers to issue citations following boating accidents when violations are identified. That change improves accountability and supports safer behavior on the water.

AB 2055 also addresses a clear safety issue involving swimmers. Current law requires the display of a ski flag when a skier is down, but regulations prevent using that same flag to warn of swimmers in the water even though the risk to safety is just as real. This bill expands ski flag requirements to include situations where swimmers are present, improving visibility, and helping prevent tragic accidents. Another important component of AB 2055 ensures California law aligns with federal standards for four hire vessels.

Today, California defines a four hire vessel as one carrying more than three paying passengers, while federal US Coast Guard standards apply to vessels carrying even a single paying passenger.

This inconsistency creates confusion and may allow operators to avoid appropriate licensing requirement. AB 2055 resolves the conflict by aligning State Law with Federal expectations and strengthening safety oversight. The bill also updates vessel registration requirements were permissible under federal law so that law enforcement officers can access accurate vessel ownership information through existing law enforcement systems. That capability is critical during investigations, enforcement actions, and emergency responses when timely identification can make all the difference.

Finally, AB 2055 aligns voting under the influence, also I'd like to call buoy enforcement with existing DUI laws by limiting pretrial diversion in serious cases.

Driving under the influence on the road and operating a vessel under the influence on the water, both post serious risks, and our laws should treat those offenses with the same level of seriousness and consistency. Members, AB 2055 is about modernization, consistency, and public safety. It strengthens enforcement tools, corrects outdated statutory conflicts, and improves protections for Californians who use our waterways.

Importantly, any costs incurred by the DMV as a result of this measure are fully recoverable through existing registration and renewal fees, and cost to the courts have been found to be unlikely to become significant. With me today is Cory Salzillo on behalf of the California State Sheriffs Association who can speak further to the practical importance of these changes and how they will support officers in the field.

Good morning, Madam chair and members. Cory Salzillo on behalf of the California State Sheriffs Association, proud to sponsor AB 2055. I'm not sure I could say it better or more succinctly than the author did. So I'll simply say that this, bill again addresses gaps in enforcement authority, modernizes outdated statutes, and brings conformity between State and Federal Maritime Law. And any fiscal impacts, as per the analysis, should be minimal.

Happy to answer any questions, but law enforcement appreciates your support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional folks in the room wish to express support? Any primary or other opposition? We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you, Madam chair and members, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. The motion is do pass, and it is out on a A roll call with Mr. Ta not voting. Thank you. Mr. Ramos, you are up next, and you are presenting AB 1579, and you can begin when you're ready.

Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. Today, I'm presenting AB 1579, which aims to expand the current Children's Crisis Pilot Program to include additional CDSS-approved crisis residential models. At its inception, the Children's Crisis Pilot Program was set to build a comprehensive, replicable crisis continuation system for our youth with the highest needs. But today, that vision remains out of reach.

In practice, not a single agency in the State of California has been able to successfully set up a Children's Crisis Residential Program, effectively stalling the development of crisis continuums. AB 1579 seeks to address this issue by increasing access through flexible, functional, equivalent clinical appropriate residential options. We are asking for flexibility with purpose, not a compromise on quality.

AB 1579 ensures counties can fully utilize available funding, move forward with viable models, and build the crisis response systems our youth need today, and what was envisioned when the state set forth a commitment to fund this pilot to ensure that our youth are being taken care of in the State of California. With me to testify on this bill today is Ken Berrick, President and CEO of Just Advocates.

Good morning, Chair Wicks and--

Oh. Just turn your mic on, please.

The button. That one. There we go. Sorry about that. Good morning, Chair Wicks and members of the committee. I'm Ken Berrick. I am the CEO of Just Advocates and formerly the CEO of Seneca Family of Agencies, which is one of the largest children-serving agencies in the state, and we were one of the original sponsors of the legislation to create these important crisis continuums to help divert young people that were in acute crisis from hospitals and to serve them in our communities.

We made a technical error in the original drafting and the terminology to limit the highest needs facilities to crisis residential CCRPs as opposed to a broader continuum. This seeks to resolve this. The alternatives that we are proposing will be as intensive and no more restrictive and provide an important alternative. Not a single county in the State of California has been able to implement the crisis residential programs, and this will allow these important pilots to continue and to serve young people with no cost to the state.

Thank you, Mr. Berrick, for your testimony and for being such a good constituent of mine. Anyone else wish to express support?

Clifton Wilson, on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco as well as Fresno County, both in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Any primary or other witnesses in opposition? Okay. We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Mr. Ramos?

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, committee. I ask for an aye vote.

Great. The motion is do pass. That's out on an A roll call. Thank you. And Mr. Tangipa is joining us now, so thank you. And with that, the vote on AB 2433 is out on an A roll call with Ms. Pellerin not voting and Mr. Tangipa not voting. Thank you. And Mr. Garcia, you are up next. And you're presenting AB 2139. You can begin when you're ready. Oh, and turn your mic on. Thanks.

Good morning, Madam chair and members. Thank you for the opportunity to present this legislation. AB 2139 is a District Bill that proposes a targeted amendment to the Surplus Land Act, creating a practical pathway needed to bring a professional soccer team to the Inman Empire. The Inman Empire is one of the fastest growing regions in California and notably the largest metropolitan area in the nation without a major professional sports team.

This proposal represents a significant opportunity for economic development, regional identity, and community investment, not just for the Inland Empire, but for the entire State of California.

This effort directly advances the Inland Empire Caucus goal of securing its fair share of state investment. It carries significant potential to drive community development and economic activity and presents a very unique opportunity with potential to provide generational benefits to my community. And the analysis estimates minor and absorbable cost to HCD. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Any primary or other witnesses in support? Any primary or other opposition? Okay. We'll bring it back to committee.

Any questions? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote for the Inland Empire.

Great. The motion is do pass and that is out on a roll call. With Ms. Sharp-Collins not voting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Carrillo, you are next. And you are presenting AB 2041. And you can begin when you're ready.

Good morning, Madam chair and members. Thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 2041. AB 2041 seeks to build upon existing life saving work to help Californians when they're experiencing a critical public health need. We reached an agreement with all opposition to amend this bill so that it will only require public safety agencies that weren't in compliance at the start of this year to report their status and compliance to their local EMS agency by 01/31/2027.

While these changes haven't been made as committee amendments, today, we have committed to doing so at the next available opportunity.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any, primary witnesses or other witnesses in support?

Diego Amaro on behalf of the California Ambulance Association in support.

Great. Any primary or other witnesses in opposition? Okay. We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Great. Would you like to close, Mister Carrillo?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote Madam chair and members. Thank you.

Great. The motion is do passed. That is out with Republicans not voting with Mister Ellis voting aye. Thank you.

Miss Aguiar-Curry, you are up next. And you are presenting AB 196, and you can begin when you're ready.

AB 1973. What did I say? Did I say something else? Oh. Oh, yeah. It's not 1906. 1973.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives, and physician assistants, also known as advanced practice clinicians, or APCs, receive extensive education and training. However, current law puts outdated limits on what these providers can do, meaning patients lose access to care. AB 1973 updates state law to allow APCs to practice to the full extent of their training and proven competency. The bill ensures that patients can access quality reproductive care when they need it. Per the committee analysis, this bill has no estimated cost to the state. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

You can begin when you're ready.

Thank you. Good morning. Angela Pontes, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California as a co-sponsor in strong support. This bill modernizes California law by removing outdated restrictions that prevent trained advanced practice clinicians from providing procedural abortion care to the extent of their scope. The evidence is clear. Abortion care is safe, and appropriately trained APCs can provide this care with the same safety, quality, and patient satisfaction as physicians. We ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. And other folks who wish to register support?

Clifton Wilson, on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco, in support. Thank you.

Kathy Mossburg, on behalf of Essential Access Health, in support.

Hello, again, Chair and members. Karen Stout, here on behalf of the California Nurse-Midwives Association as well as the Black Women for Wellness Action Project, sponsors in support. Thank you.

Madam Chair, Brendan Repicky, on behalf of TEACH: Training in Early Abortion for Comprehensive Healthcare. We're a co-sponsor.

Great. Any opposition in the room, primary or otherwise? We will bring it back to committee. Any questions or comments? We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Great. Thank you, Ms. Aguiar-Curry, for doing this bill and for your work in this space. I love this bill. I'd love to be added as a joint author if you'd have me. And with that, the motion's do pass. It's out on a B roll call.

Thank you.

Miss Ortega, you lucked out. You are up, and you are presenting AB 1929, and you can begin when you're ready.

Thank you, Madam chair and members of the committee for allowing me to present AB 1929 today which is a Latino Caucus Priority Bill. AB 1929 requires health plans to disclose all the investments they make with the subsidies and patient premiums they receive, including investments in for Profit Prisons and Immigrant Detention Centers. The analysis notes low cost in the tens of thousands to the Department of Insurance and minor and absorbable cost to the Department of Managed Health Care in Covered California.

The public deserves to know where their Health Care Dollars are being spent and if they are being being used to subsidize these for profit centers of human suffering. Here to answer any technical questions is Eric Robles with the United Nurses Association of California.

Thank you. And you can oh, you're answering technical questions. Anything else you wanna say about the bill?

No.

Okay. Any other support in the room? Any primary or other opposition? Great. We'll bring it back to committee.

Any questions?

Nope.

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Miss Ortega?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

That's on call, and we have some folks that need to return to committee. So, thank you.

Thank you.

Mister Gallagher, you are up next. You are presenting AB 2700.

Oh, it's for presentation only. You can present 2700, AB 2700.

Thank you, Madam chair, members. For the opportunity to present AB 2700, a bill that directly tackles California's electricity affordability crisis while ensuring fair, timely compensation for victims of utility caused wildfires, all without shifting any new cost onto ratepayers. AB 2700 does two really simple things. One, is it gets savings for rate payers based on things that we already know about, things that have already been reported about.

Just last year in 2025, we received a report from the CPUC identifying many different things we could do to reduce rates. And so based on that and also other reports that have come through, 2700 orders and directs the PUC to come back with the report, giving concrete ways to go about doing that 30% reduction rates.

So it's a very easy thing to do. The other thing, that it requires is looking at how we ensure that victims are compensated. As many of you know, many victims of wildfire prior to 2019 have not received their full compensation from those wildfires. So for the Camp Fire, for example, in my district and the Tubbs Fire, have not received full compensation for losses they received on a utility caused wildfire. And only about 70% is what came out of the PG&E victim's trust.

And so this would ensure that, you know, now that, you know PG&E has come out of bankruptcy, you know is in a profitable place that it ensures that they fully compensate their victims of those fires with no impact to ratepayers. And we know this can be done too because in 2024, PG&E's profits were over $2,000,000,000.

And so as they move forward and there's mechanisms at the PUC that could be identified to ensure that, they end up fully compensating that last 30%. So these things are, you know, not too hard to ask. I think they're actually pretty easy to do, and we would, you know, ask for your support in this common sense led legislation, that do does two very righteous things, lowers our utility rates at a time that we really need it, and ensures that victims are compensated.

I do just really quickly, I mean, I think that it was Department of Finance says it's $11,000,000 cost, because they would need 22 positions. I mean, guys, I think we can all agree that's ridiculous, that they would need 22 positions to do something that has already been identified. We know what the issues are. We know what, the cost ineffective programs are. A lot of this work's already been done.

We just wanna come back with recommendations to do this and then ensure mechanisms to recover from victims. So I'm not sure where that number is coming from, but it should not require that. And I don't think this would be nearly as costly as they're laying out. But even if that was the cost, it would certainly be well worth it for people who need relief right now, you know from their utility bills.

And so, anyway, I would ask for your support for this.

I really would hope that this would come off as suspense and be able to move forward, you know as it's an important issue to all of us. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for Mister Gallagher? Okay. Well, thank you for your presentation today.

Anyone else wanna opine?

Yep.

Support or oppose?

Clifton Wilson on behalf of the Butte County Board of Supervisors in support, and just wanna say thank you for highlighting the impacts to fire survivors overall. Thank you.

Yes.

Summer Hughes, victim of a PG&E caused wildfire and strongly support the bill.

Will Abrams, a wildfire survivor from the 2017 PG&E Tubbs Fire in strong support.

James Carroll, survivor from the Camp Fire 2018 on behalf of the other people that can be here from Paradise, Yankee Hill, Concow. Thank you.

Cheryl Spradling, Paradise Wildflower survivor. This is my home. I support fully and please we can't do it without you. Thank you so much.

Susan Nesta, survivor of the Camp Fire 2018. Thank you.

Sydney Robinson, survivor from the 2018 Camp Fire, Utility Wildfire Survivors Coalition. And we need this because not just skyrocketing utility costs, but also utility companies keep walking away from their promises they made to us.

My name is Tina Resler, from the Camp Fire in Paradise, California. Please pass AB 2700. Thank you.

Good morning. Zeke Aquila from the Tubbs Fire. I support AB 2700. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Tanya Aquila. I am a 2017 Tubbs Fire survivor. In behalf of my children and my family, I'm in strong support of this.

Hello. My name is Barbara Barling. I am a wildfire survivor from Tubbs Fire in 2017, and I'm in strong support of this. Thank you.

Hi. Sally Weber, family survivor of the 2017 Tubbs Fire. This has been a 9 bad homework assignment, so please support AB 2700. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Doreen Zimmerman. I am a survivor of the PG&E Wildfire Camp Fire, and I've also worked on the Butte Fire from Calaveras County that was back in 2015. Those people are still waiting for fair and just compensation. I'm also here for the people who've passed away during this time. I ask for your strong support in passing AB 2700. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Troy Donaldson. I'm a a Camp Fire survivor, and I just urge your support in this bill. Thank you.

My name is Ken Class, and I'm a survivor of the Camp Fire. I'm here in supporting of the 84 people who died in the Camp Fire that they need the support of AB 2700. Last night, the Town Council of Paradise passed a resolution supporting Assemblyman Gallagher's Bill and the c-oauthors of the bill. Thank you very much for your support.

Thank you. Thank you for presenting, Mister Gallagher. And I also just wanna thank everyone who came to register their own opinions on this and support for it and for just sympathy and empathy for everything that you all have gone through. And, it means a lot to us that you've come all the way to Sacramento to let us know how you feel about this bill today. So thank you very much for coming.

Mister Fong, you are presenting next. AB 1809.

Good morning, Madam chair, members. Assembly Bill 1809 removes the sunset providing authorization for School Districts and Community College Districts to use Job Order Contracting. The Legislature has extended the sunset four times and there are no new costs. Here to testify in support is Sasha Horowitz of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

You can begin when you're ready.

Current members, Sasha Horowitz, Los Angeles Unified School District. We're pleased to present AB 1809 which removed the sunset on Job Order Contracting for Schools and Community Colleges. The original Job Order Contracting Law was enacted in 2004 as an LAUSD Pilot. JOG is an optional cost effective procedure for bidding public works projects known for accelerating completion, reducing costs, and contracting complexity while following all competitive building laws. These contracts are paid for locally and do not have any state costs.

We respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Anyone else in the room wish to express support? Any opposition, primary or otherwise?

Okay. We'll bring it back to committee.

Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Mister Fong?

I certainly ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. The motion is do pass, and it's out on a B roll call with Mister Hoover voting aye. Thank you. Next up, we'll do Mister Vontes visiting us from the Senate.

Welcome back to the People's House.

You are presenting, SB 73. You can begin when you're ready. And if you could turn your mic on too.

Thank you, Madam chair, Members. I'm here to present Senate Bill 73 today. California's election systems are facing increasing threats. SB 73 strengthens protections against interference and intimidation. This bill extends existing prohibitions on deploying law enforcement at voting locations or election offices.

This bill also strengthens ballot security by making it a felony to unlawfully remove voted ballots from a, from the custody of a County Registrar while allowing civil enforcement by the Secretary of State and the Attorney General as well as County Registrars. The bill further prohibits unauthorized access to voting machines at or voting voter roles by law enforcement without a Court Order.

The committee analysis notes potential DOJ and Attorney General costs, Although DOJ already provides guidance to County Registrars and the goal of the bill is deterrence and prevention, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Any primary or other witnesses in support? Any opposition?

We will bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Miss Cervantes?

Respectfully ask for a aye vote.

Great. The motions do pass. That is out on a B roll call with Mister Hoover not voting. And god speed over the next 24 hours.

And now we will move on to Mister Gonzales.

And you're gonna be presenting, AB 2418. And then you're presenting for Mister Harabedian, AB 1970.

Alrighty. Thank you, Madam chair and members. First, I would like, the committee staff to thank them for their work on this bill and the Chair for being a coauthor of this bill. I am pleased to present AB 2418, which will streamline commercial building permit applications by creating timelines for plan reviews and inspections all for a third party plan checker to be used if there's an excessive delay. As the committee analysis notes, there are eligible excuse me.

Negligible. What? Why can't I pronounce that? There are state costs and local agencies that will have their costs offset by savings from the use of a third party plan checkers. My office and I have been engaging with the Cal Cities and CSAC on the bill and have been in conversations, and I'll be making amendments to address their concerns at the next opportunity.

This morning, primary witness in support is Skyler Wonnacott with the California Business Properties Association, CBPA. Take it away.

Madam chair, Members, I'll be very brief. Skyler Wonnacott with the California Business Properties Association as well as the Building Owners and Managers Association of California. In NAAP, California, we're the proud sponsors of this bill. Has negligible state costs and no opposition, and we urge an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other witnesses in support or opposition? Okay. And we'll bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Thank you, Madam chair. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. That is motions do pass, and that's out on an A roll call. And you can begin AB 1970 on behalf of Mister Harabedian when you're ready.

Thank you, Madam chair Wicks and members on members of the committee for the opportunity to present AB 1970 on behalf of Assemblymember Harabedian. AB 1970 prohibits health plans and insurers from requiring step therapy or fail first protocols for medications treating serious mental illness and substance use disorders, allowing patients to access provider prescribed treatment without delay. CHPRB estimates approximately $50,000 in general fund costs associated with CalPERS premium increases, while DMHC anticipates minor and absorbable costs.

CDI estimates insurance, insurance fund cost of $11,000 in fiscal year 2026 through 2027 and $23,000 in fiscal year 2027 through 2028. And DHCS anticipates negligible, can't speak today, MediCal cost. This bill supports timely clinical appropriate care and helps prevent destabilization and worsening health outcomes that lead to increased state costs.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote on behalf of Mister Harabedian.

Thank you. Would you like to express support?

Clifton Wilson on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Any primary or other witnesses in opposition?

Okay. Well, we we will bring it back to committee. Any questions?

Nope. We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for aye vote.

Great. The motions do pass. That's out on an A roll call with Mister Tangipa not voting.

Miss Pacheco, would you like to go next?

You can begin when you're ready.

Good morning and thank you madam chair and members. Today, I present AB 2361. AB 2361 updates California law governing vicarious liability for peer to peer vehicle sharing platforms by aligning liability with fault while preserving strong insurance protection for injured parties. California is an outlier. No other state imposes uncapped vicarious liability for peer to peer vehicle sharing platforms.

AB 2361 ensures consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available. The bill brings California in line with other states by limiting liability default. AB 2361 will keep car sharing viable and affordable for hosts and users who rely on these platforms for income and for transportation. This bill has received no no votes and has bi part, bipartisan support, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Do we have any witnesses?

Nope.

Okay. Anyone in support or opposition? Seeing none, any comments from the committee? Yes. Got a motion. Second.

With that, that bill is out on an, a roll call.

Thank you.

Motion is do pass. Thank you. Kay. Madam chair, whenever you're ready. AB 1976.

Thank you, mister vice chair. I am presenting AB 1976. This will update and streamline the process for allowing bike and pedestrian related projects to be approved and developed more efficiently. There are no stated costs associated with this bill.

We're gonna be still working on amendments which we'll be taking on the floor as we're negotiating with a lot of different stakeholders. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Do we have any support or opposition? I have a motion and a second. With that, that is a do pass on a B roll call.

Great. Thank you.

Okay. And, just one housekeeping item on AB 1929, Miss Ortega's bill that is now out on a B roll call.

And Mister Hoover is gonna be presenting for Miss Johnson, AB 2110. And you can begin when you are ready.

Thank you, Madam chair. Presenting AB 2110 on behalf of Assemblywoman Johnson. This bill would authorize two or more local governments to form a tax increment financing district to finance the development of workforce housing for education, manufacturing, health care, and public safety personnel, on her behalf. I would respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. Any primary witnesses in support or other support or any opposition in the room?

Okay. We'll bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Mister Hoover?

Just ask for an aye vote. Thanks.

Great. The motion is do pass, and that is out on an A roll call. And perfect timing, Miss Stephanie, you are, I believe, the last number to present. And you are presenting AB 2146. You can begin when you're ready.

I was waiting for my glasses, so this could be iffy.

If you like to borrow mine, you can.

Okay.

Thank you, everyone. Madam chair and colleagues, today, I'm presenting AB 2146, the Direct Access to Supportive Housing Act. AB 2146 allows individuals to self-certify that they are homeless instead of forcing them to chase down paperwork that delays their path to housing. It recognizes that when someone has finally reached the top of the list, the system should be opening doors, not, not putting up more hurdles.

This bill also creates a practical backstop so that if a unit has been vacant for too long, providers can act to fill it.

As the staff analysis notes, there are minor and absorbable costs to the state's treasurer's office and to HCD. I do need these, sorry. The costs are low because this bill mostly asks state agencies to make small updates to systems they already have in place. At its core, AB 2146 is about removing unnecessary red tape so people can get housed faster.

No one should have to prove that they're homeless like this, and no home should be left empty while someone is still waiting for a place to live. Our state's housing funding is limited, and we try to make it go as far as possible. Moving people into supportive housing they need as quickly as we can reduces the cost in the system and results in more public benefit for the state's investment. And with me today is JT Harechmak with the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California.

Thank you. Good morning, chair and members. JT Harechmak with the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California in support of AB 2146. I represent nonprofit affordable housing developers from across the nine counties that make up the San Francisco Bay Area. AB 2146 creates no new program and appropriates no new funds.

It modifies documentation standards applied to units the state has and will finance through the multifamily housing program, No Place Like Home, Homekey, and the tax credit programs. The paperwork burden being reduced, third party homelessness verification and housing history collection sits with my developer members and not with the state. HCD and TCAC monitor compliance through periodic sample audits, and the volume of that monitoring is unchanged by this bill. If anything, sampled files become marginally faster to verify when the standard is simplified.

Finally, the fiscal consideration actually runs in the state's favor here.

Every month, the state finance supportive housing unit sits vacant, a month of delayed return on California's capital investment and continued pressure on more expensive state funded interventions like interim housing, HAPP funded shelter, and emergency response. The 180 day provision for alternative referrals to CES reduces the vacancy loss and improves the return on the substantial investments the legislature has already made in support of housing. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Any additional folks in the room wish to express support or any opposition? Okay. We will bring it back to committee. Any questions?

We have a motion and a second. Would you like to close, Miss Stefani?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. The motion's do pass. That is out with Republicans not voting with Mr. Ellis voting aye, and Mr. Tangipa voting no. With that, I would like to dispense with the suspense calendar. Madam secretary, would you please read the suspense calendar?

1554, 1605, 1606, 1620, 1628, 1633, 1643, 1668, 1675, 1679, 1690, 1709, 1720, 1725, 1726, 1727, 1753, 1770, 1771, 1772, 1774, 1790, 1795, 1806, 1807, 1810, 1815, 1825, 1826, 1863, 1864, 1887, 1897, 1899, 1902, 1903, 1906, 1915, 1932, 1942, 1954, 1967, 1971, 1975, 1979, 1983, 1990, 1997, 2000, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2022, 2023, 2026, 2032, 2034, 2047, 2058, 2069, 2074, 2083, 2084, 2088, 2092, 2093, 2103, 2108, 2122, 2138, 2141, 2145, 2167, 2169, 2182, 2186, 2190, 2193, 2195, 2204, 2205, 2213, 2221, 2222, 2232, 2235, 2244, 2246, 2247, 2258, 2266, 2267, 2270, 2276, 2278, 2282, 2283, 2302, 2311, 2313, 2314, 2329, 2330, 2339, 2343, 2344, 2353, 2354, 2369, 2378, 2383, 2384, 2385, 2389, 2391, 2395, 2398, 2430, 2444, 2461, 2478, 2490, 2516, 2535, 2555, 2562, 2575, 2579, 2581, 2600, 2605, 2608, 2612, 2624, 2639, 2651, 2662, 2679, 2690, 2700, 2704, 2710, 2711, 2716, 2717, 2748, 2767, 2774, 2775, 2790, ACA 9, ACA 18, and Senate Bill 417.

The suspense calendar is deemed approved.

Okay. With that, I'd like to open up the hearing to comments made by members of the public on any bills not presented in committee today. Please limit your comments to name, organization, opinion, position on the bill.

Good morning, Madam chair. Chris McCauley on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. Two bills for support AB 2205 by Quirk Silva, Reinstating the New Employment Credit and opposing AB 1790 Connolly eliminating the Water's Edge Election. Thank you, Madam chair.

Chris Connor, representing the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association in opposition to AB 2034. Thank you.

Dennis Albiani on behalf of the American Beverage Association and Consumer Brands Association. We agree with the analysis on AB 2034, costing millions going on. We also would just like to add additional costs and discuss that very quickly.

We see that there's about a $10,000,000 cost just to set up the database and the program in that. So we would encourage that to be considered when this is considered to come off suspense.

We see a three we have an a study that shows a 3% increase in grocery costs that would cost each California about $310 a year. But because the state also purchases food for school for nutrition programs, for prisoners, for schools, that would cost approximately 57-70,000,000 if you use that analysis.

With that, we oppose AB 2034. Thank you. Bye now.

Katie Davey with Dairy Institute of California. In alignment with consumer brands comments about the costs of AB 2034, we are also in opposition to the bill. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam chair and members. Raymond Contreras with Light House Public Affairs on two bills. First, SB 417 Cabaldon, Habitat for Humanity remains opposed unless amended. The second bill, AB 1903 Wicks, as proud cosponsors, SPUR Habitat for Humanity California and California YIMBY as strong cosponsors and in support, Abundant Housing Los Angeles, Fieldstead, and San Diego Housing Commission support. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam chair and members. Jason Wright on behalf of the National Confectioners Association. We are also in opposition of AB 2034. Thank you.

Sarah Bridges on behalf of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association in opposition to the Water's Edge, AB 1790. Thank you.

Sorry. Dennis Albiani again on behalf of Family Business Association on 1790 Water's Edge. We oppose eliminating that option. Thank you.

Good morning, Chair and members. Danielle Kando-Kaiser on behalf of the California Tax Reform Association in strong support of AB 1790.

Thank you. And with that, we are meeting adjourned.