Assembly Standing Committee on Revenue and Taxation

Oh, got it. So you have to go. You might never see him again.

We're gonna get started as a subcommittee. I want to go over a few ground rules and housekeeping items. I wanna say good afternoon and welcome to the hearing on the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Before we take up bills, I want to go over the agenda. I will be addressing a few housekeeping items.

First, I would like to remind the advocates to submit your letter one week prior to the hearing in order for your organizational position to be reflected to the bill analysis. I also want to remind everyone that the committee has a suspense file, and the details about the process are spelled out on the committee's rules and posted on our website.

In summary, bills with a revenue impact of more than a 150,000 will not be eligible for a vote immediately after their presentation and instead will be referred to our suspense file. To reiterate, if a bill increase or decrease revenue by more than a 150,000, it will be automatically referred to our suspense file.

This enables the committee to holistically consider the proposal before us and to better prioritize policy changes, which is especially important given that the projected budget conditions that we find ourselves into as a state. Accordingly, one bill on today's agenda is a suspense candidate.

And that would be file item number one, SB 288 by Mr. Senator Seyarto. And we don't have a, we don't... Oh, we do. Okay. Mr. Carrillo just walked in, so we do. I would ask our Committee Secretary, would you please call the roll to establish a quorum?

[Roll Call] We have a quorum.

A quorum has been established. We will now move to our first item on the agenda, SB 288. Senator Seyarto, would you please have a seat? And your witnesses are also invited to come join you.

And they're here.

And they're here. Okay. Sounds good. You may begin when ready. Again, this is file item number 1, SB 288. Begin when ready.

Alright. Thank you, Honorable Chair. I'm here to present SB 288, my other bill, to establish positive momentum for the committee today. I would like to thank the committee and stakeholders for their work on this measure. This bill contains provisions similar to those which were heard in the committee last year.

Prop 19, which passed in 2021, included a restriction on the transfer of family homes between parents and their children, particularly regarding the retention of the property's Proposition 13 protected tax base. Under Prop 19, a recipient must move into the home, claim it as their principal residence, and file for their basic homeowner exemption within one year of receiving the property.

Individuals who inherit a property that is held in probate have found themselves unable to possess the property under the one year timeline and have lost their Prop 13 protected tax valuation. This measure will clarify that Prop 19 calendar year for individuals who are undergoing probate process starts when the home is legally declared to be theirs.

While I understand this measure is being referred to the committee on, or the committee suspense file, at the appropriate time during suspense file action, I would ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Being that you have no witnesses in support, we'll move to the audience. Anyone wishing to speak in support of Senate Bill 288, would you please report the microphone? Your name, your organization, and this is support.

Scott Kaufman, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, in support.

Good afternoon. Larisa Mercado on behalf of the California Assessors Association in support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any primary witnesses in opposition to Senate Bill 288? We invite you to come take a seat at the table. This is primary witness in opposition. Hearing and seeing none. Anyone in the room wishing to register your opposition to Senate Bill 288? You have the same right. Hearing and seeing none. I'm gonna bring it to the committee. Mr. DeMaio.

I wanna thank Senator Seyarto for his leadership on this issue. Obviously, I did not support Prop 19. A lot of families have been hurt by Prop 19, but it currently is on the books. I think that in the interest of fairness and the original intent of Prop 19, the concept of the one year timeline would have begun when someone inherited the property. And here in probate, there may be a question.

And so the timeline should not start until probate finishes and the individual has achieved ownership. So this is consistent with Prop 19 in terms of the intent, and I would hope that we all can do the right thing and support it at the appropriate time on suspense. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any other questions from my colleagues on the dais? Seeing and hearing none. Mr. Seyarto, would you care to close?

No. I just simply ask that you consider this carefully when it comes up on suspense and cast a vote for for it at that time. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Again, this bill will be referred to our suspense file. Thank you very much. I know you have another item. We'll move quickly to that item.

That item-- File Item Number 2: SB 974, and you may present when ready. Do you have any witnesses you would like to invite?

No. I usually come witness-less, so.

Okay. You may proceed when ready.

All right. Thank you, honorable Chair and members. I'm here today to present SB 974, and I would like to start by thanking the committee staff for their work with my staff on this bill, and I will be accepting the committee amendments. The Legislature has ensured several times that administrative uncertainties and legal vagueness should not prevent individuals from meeting Prop 19 requirements.

While the Board of Equalization has issued guidance regarding what qualifies as a trust under Prop 19, the Legislature can remove any uncertainty by explicitly naming special needs trusts. Individuals who otherwise would inherit a property but cannot due to the requirements of a special needs trust should not lose their Prop 19 exclusion. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Anyone in the room wishing to speak in support of this measure, name, organization, and this is support.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jean Hurst, here today on behalf of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in support.

Thank you very much.

Scott Kaufman, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association in support.

Thank you. Seeing no one else, any primary opposition to this measure? Primary opposition? Hearing and seeing no one coming forward, anyone in the room wishing to speak in opposition, name, organization. And this is opposition.

Seeing none, bring it back to the dais. Any members wishing to-- okay. It's been moved by Mr.-- oh, it's been properly moved by Ms. Sanchez-- seconded by Ms. Sanchez, and he's already indicated he will be accepting the amendments. Madam Secretary, would you please call-- oh, I'm sorry. Just forgive me. Mr. Seyarto, would you like to close?

I simply ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. We ask this-- Madam Secretary, would you please call the roll?

The motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll call]. That bill passes; five / zero.

That bill is out; five / zero. We'll keep the roll open for absent members. Thank you very much. File Item Number Three: SB 575. Mr. Senator Laird, come on down. I love the hat.

Thank you. And I appreciate the waiver to be able to wear it in Assembly hearings. Mr. Chair, I'm here about Senate Bill 575, which reestablishes the Sea Otter Voluntary Contribution Fund, allowing California taxpayers to voluntarily support sea otter conservation through a voluntary tax return donations. I authored the bill that originally created this in 2006, and since that time, there have been millions of dollars that have gone to research and protection to both the Coastal Conservancy and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Unfortunately, the fund fell below its minimum contribution in 2024 and then was not allowed to be in the tax form in 2025. This bill restores the Sea Otter Voluntary Contribution Fund till 2023. This support is essential to protecting sea otters in California coasts from the impacts that deal with them. It doesn't impose any tax increase. All contributions remain strictly voluntary. With me today is Pamela Flick, the California Program Director for the Defenders of Wildlife, and at the appropriate time, I would respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you very much, and welcome. You have two minutes.

Thank you so much. Good afternoon, committee members. My name is Pamela Flick. I'm the California Program Director for Defenders of Wildlife. As a sponsor of SB 575, I respectfully urge your support.

Southern sea otters are among California's most beloved critters. As keystone species, they maintain the balance necessary for healthy kelp forests and help sustain these vibrant nearshore ecosystems. Thanks in large part to the California Sea Otter VCF, our sea otter populations are rebounding. But even with a population hovering around 3,000 individuals, recovery remains a challenge.

Ongoing threats include shark predation, oil spills, entanglement in nets, plastic, and fishing lines, toxic algal blooms, waterborne pathogens, habitat loss, and boat strikes. The VCF has collected over $5 million since its creation and has made a meaningful difference in the path to sea otter recovery through state Coastal Conservancy restoration grants and public education efforts.

Further, the Department of Fish and Wildlife relies on funding from this program to conduct sea otter conservation science, population counts, and investigation into the causes of sea otter deaths. Facing economic uncertainty and reductions in federal funding for wildlife conservation, much of the important sea otter research and restoration work will be at risk without this essential funding pot. So that this critical funding source continues well into the future, we strongly urge your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak in support of this measure, SB 575, would you please come forward with your name, organization, and this is support.

Asha Sharma, on behalf of Sierra Club California in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Karla Garibay Garcia, on behalf of Monterey Bay Aquarium and Surfrider Foundation in support.

Thank you.

Marisa Rodriguez, on behalf of Planning and Conservation League, Defenders of Wildlife, and Resource Renewal Institute. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Primary opposition to this measure, would you please come forward if you're in the room? Hearing and seeing none, anyone in the room wishing just to speak in opposition of this measure, you have the same right. Hearing and seeing none, we're gonna bring you back to the dais. Ms. McKinnor.

Yes. I'd like to thank the author for bringing this bill. I had an opportunity maybe two years ago to go and visit and see all the sea otters, and it was a great experience. So we really need this because they also-- we could figure out if something bad is going on in the ocean with our fish and our food, and I'm a seafood lover so I need to make sure that the shrimp and the crabs and lobsters are okay too. And so this is a-- I support this bill, the sea otters are adorable, and it's much needed. Thank you.

And this bill is a vote item, so I will need a motion at the appropriate time. Yes.

Move the bill.

Well, one moment. We wanna have-- Senator Laird, would you like to add any closing remarks?

Assembly Member McKinnor gave a great close. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much.

Do it for the teddy bears of the sea.

It's been moved. It's been properly moved and seconded by Ms. Sanchez, Vice Chair. Thank you very much. This is a-- motion is do pass to the Committee on Appropriation. Ms. Highland, would you please call the roll, please?

[Roll call]. Oh, the motion is do pass to Appropriations. [Roll call]. It passes; five to zero.

That bill is out. We'll keep the roll open.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Chair and committee. Senator Arreguín. File Item Number Four: SB 762. Senator, you may-- you have witnesses?

Yes.

Okay.

They're approaching.

Move the bill.

Well--

Great. Yes. Great. Thank you very much. Senator, you may start when ready.

Well, thank you very much, mister chair, members. My pleasure to present bill 762, a bill that responds to the growing fiscal pressures facing local governments across California, including Santa Cruz County, Santa Barbara County, the cities of Santa Maria, Santa Rosa, Rona Park, and two communities in my own district, the city of Hercules and the city of San Pablo. College, cities and counties are facing growing fiscal pressures driven by significant health care and public safety cuts in addition to rising costs and infrastructure needs.

This is largely driven by the recent, passage of HR 1, which, has resulted in significant impacts to counties and cities throughout the state of California. Due to counties and cities' legal mandate to administer social programs, local governments are faced with difficult decisions of diverting money from other public services or finding ways to stretch very limited general fund dollars to cover these essential needs.

This means many of our local governments are having to eliminate critical safety net programs that our constituents rely on, whether it's needing help to buy groceries, or making sure that kids and families have access to medical care. Many local jurisdictions are urgently pursuing a variety of strategies to balance their budgets, including freezing vacant positions and finding ways to trim their budgets, outside of maintaining essential services.

Senate bill 762 would authorize several local governments to seek voter approval for a transaction in use tax in their respective jurisdictions, something the legislature has done on numerous occasions in the past. I wanna emphasize that this bill does not impose any tax, rather it allows the respective cities and counties to put a measure on the ballot where voters will ultimately decide the voters will ultimately decide whether this tax will be adopted or not.

With me to testify in support of SB 762 is Chris Kelley, the mayor of the city of Hercules, and Jean Hurst representing the counties of Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara.

Thank you very much, Senator. You witnessed you have two minutes each. So whoever wants to go first, please proceed.

Thank you. Good afternoon, chair Gibson and members of the Assembly Revenue and Tax Committee. My name is Chris Kelley, and I'm the mayor of the city of Hercules. I wanna thank Senator Eric Gwin for his leadership on this effort. SB 762 is a thoughtful balanced measure that provides limited statutory flexibility for certain cities including Hercules to seek voter approval for a local transaction and use tax above the current statewide cap.

Importantly, this bill does not impose a tax increase. It just allows our voters to decide for themselves if more locally controlled revenue is necessary to meet our needs. Hercules is a city of 26,000 people. We are a low property tax city. And like many California cities, we're facing real financial pressures driven by inflation, aging infrastructure, deferred maintenance, and rising public safety costs.

Hercules has already taken corrective action. Some years ago, we laid off 40% of our staff. We froze positions, reduced spending, and we pursued operational efficiency. Despite these belt tightening measures, our structural budgets challenges do remain. Without added fiscal flexibility, cities like Hercules will be forced to make more difficult decisions.

These involve service reductions, delayed capital improvements, and diminished emergency response. So SB 672762 offers us a responsible solution. It allows our residents to determine if additional locally controlled revenue is needed to preserve our public safety, maintain infrastructure, and support long term fiscal sustainability. Again, SB 762 lets communities have the ability to address our own needs through local voter approval. SB 762 provides a measured voter driven pathway for cities to address those needs.

For all of these reasons, the city of Hercules respectfully urges your aye vote on SB 762.

Thank you very much. Next witness.

Thank you, mister chair members. Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the county of Santa Cruz as well, as the county of Santa Barbara to respectfully request your aye vote on SB 762. Speaking for Santa Cruz County, like many other communities across the state, the county is struggling to maintain access to critical health care hospital and food assistance services in light of the significant reductions by the Federal Government including included in HR 1.

And we have heard loud and clear that the state is not able to completely backfill these losses, leaving our local hospitals, clinics, and other supportive services at risk of severe cuts. The county of Santa Cruz is the safety net for those communities that are traditionally the most disproportionately impacted by budget reductions.

SB 762 offers the opportunity to continue to protect those in our communities who need the most assistance. Just some quick facts that we wanted to share. In Santa Cruz, 83,000 people in the county are enrolled in Medi Cal. Nearly 43% of births in the county are covered by Medi Cal. 31,000 residents receive CalFresh benefits each month, and more than 20,000 households rely on food assistance.

These figures illustrate the scale of services that help residents meet basic needs and maintain stability in a high cost region. As a result, we would like the opportunity to ask our voters to con consider options to help maintain access to important safety net programs in our community and respectfully request your aye vote on SB 762 on behalf of the counties of Santa Cruz as well as Santa Barbara. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I don't even have to say it. You're already here. So any and the anyone in the room wishes to speak in support of this, please line up. This is I need your name, your organization, and this is in support only. Please proceed.

Lori Ann Farrell, interim city manager, city of Santa Rosa. We've cut $25,000,000 including 82 positions, nine police officers, and 24 firefighters. Please support the bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Rita Xavier, the city of San Pablo, vice mayor, chair and members.

No. Ma'am, just your name, your organization, and support. That's all we have time for.

City of San Pablo, vice mayor. I support. We support.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Yulia Carter, assistant city manager, City of Pacifica. Please support this bill.

Thank you very much.

Katie Namara on behalf of the town of Los Gatos in support.

Thank you.

Emily Sanborn with the city of Rohnert Park in gratitude and support.

Thank you.

Mister chair and members, Terry Brandon on behalf of SEIU California in support of local control. We urge your high vote. Thank you. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair, members of the committee. Marcela Piedras, City of Rohnert Park . Please support the bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. John Krieg, Santa Rosa chief of police, strongly in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Connor Gusman on behalf of Teamsters California in support.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Molly Mala representing Central California Alliance for Health and support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Honorable chair Nicola De Luca, I got four me twos. San Pablo Police Officers Association, Los Altos Police Officers Association, Pacifica Police Officers Association, and then the operating engineers local three out of San Pablo in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Chair and members, Carlin Shelby on behalf of the cities of Palo Alto, Los Altos, and San Gabriel in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Primary primary witnesses in in opposition, would you please come forward? Hearing and seeing none. Anyone in the room wishing to express opposition, to Senate bill 762, would you please come and take a seat at the table? You wanna do it from right there?

Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association in opposition.

Thank you very much. Anyone in the room wishing to express opposition, name, organization? And this is opposition. You have the same right. Hearing and seeing none, I'm gonna bring it to the dais.

Mister DeMaio.

I sometimes sound like a broken record, but I do believe that since we do have so many local elected officials here, you need to hear this. Your constituents are hurting. They're struggling. Now is not the time to raise taxes. Now is the time to do what every struggling family, every struggling small business has had to do, tighten the belt.

And to hear, you know, the rationale as to why we need to increase taxes, it's always someone else's fault that did it to us. Like to see your budget. I'll sharpen the pencil. We can balance it without burdening families. That is your job.

That is all of our jobs. Easy way is to say, well, I have a problem. Let's go ahead and put it on someone else. You say that, well, the voters get to decide. I've seen your deceptive ballot language.

It is appalling. It's not a fair presentation. And so I I I sit here and I have to express the voice of the voiceless, the struggling taxpayers out there who cannot afford more and who are looking to you to do your job and live within your means. Today, you may not agree with this voice, but you at least heard it.

Miss McKinnor?

Yes. Thank you guys so much for coming and speaking with us, and thanks to the Senator. When you talked about 40% layoffs, you're talking about working families. You're talking about people who go to work every day, work hard, work for government. The pay is not always high.

I used to work for government. I'm a retiree, but I love my job, and I love serving people. And so I did it. And so to see those 40% layoffs is heartbreaking, and we don't wanna see anymore. We're having the same problem in Los Angeles, and we just did the same thing.

We're also talking about funding the police and the firefighters. The best way to defund the police is for us to loot not have money there to pay them. And so we know that when people something happens, an emergency happens, we wanna call our firefighters. We wanna call our police officers. We're also looking at Medi Cal, making sure that we could keep our clinics open, that we could serve serve people and that they can have health care.

That is extremely important. So saying tighten up your purse straps and throwing people off of Medi Cal is not an answer here. Not in California. Also, when we look at the food stamp, when we talk about CalFresh and SNAP, we're talking about people not having food to eat. And so we don't tighten our purse straps on that either.

We wanna make sure that people are not dying because they're not they don't have health care and they don't have food. And so with that, I extremely support you guys, and I thank you ladies for coming and speaking with us, and I support the bill.

Thank you very much. K. Well, let me just say as chair, I align my comments with, miss McKinnor. I know we just did this in Los Angeles County because we have a real issue in Los Angeles County, and we're still tabulating the votes right now in terms of measure in Los Angeles County. We have to do something doing nothing is not an option, and I wanna commend the Senator for taking on this this task.

Thank you very much for your leadership, for your resilience, for your boldness. Again, with the lack of resources coming in from Washington DC, policy makers and leaders who've been elected, this is what you have to do. You're asking your residents by putting something on the ballot, asking them to see whether they wanna do this or not. And this is what democracy looks like. And you're asking them, if they say yes, then you will put the resources to good use.

If they say no, you will also understand that no. But you're giving them the opportunity to at least weigh in, and this is what democracy looks like. And so I support, this Senator for, one, listening to the call of the voices of the elected official who represent and have your hand on the pulse of the community. And so with that, Senator, would you wish would you wish to close?

Well, thank you, mister chair, for those comments. I think Assemblymember McKinnor made my closing for me very well. But I'll just say that these counties and cities are not coming to you asking for this authorization as a first resort. This is a last resort Sure. After finding ways to find efficiencies, freeze vacant positions, cut from their budgets, but yet they're facing challenges.

Deferred maintenance for infrastructure, the need to fund public safety services, police and fire, and the impact of HR 1 on providing essential health care and social services to people throughout the state of California. I wish we were in the situation where we needed to do this, but I wanna give the voters of the two cities in my district and the counties and cities that are in this bill the opportunity to consider whether to approve a tax increase.

Sacramento is not imposing it on these counties and cities is giving the voters a choice to make their own decision inside their own future to make sure we have robust services and can fund public safety. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Just wanna remind members this is a a vote item. However, because of the additional urgency clause, we would have to by the rules committee, we will have to adopt the urgency first. So I will entertain a motion first on the urgency. So I need a Move bill.

Move bill.

The urgency. It's been it's been moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Second by, miss Quirk Silva.

So please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Great. Thank you. So the the motion carries, and we already have a, a motion made by Carrillo, Miss Carrillo, and a second by McKennor on the, original motion of the bill. And then now it's this motion is do passed as amended to the assembly committee on local government, with the urgency. It's already been motion by mister Carrillo and second by McKennor.

Madam secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do passes amended to local government. [Roll Call]

That bill passes. We will to two. The role of for absent members. Thank you very much. Thank you.

File item number 5, SB 999, Weber Pierson. Welcome to the Revenue and Taxation Committee, Dr. Weber Pierson. You have witnesses? Okay. Senators, no Senators bring witnesses. It's okay. You may begin when ready. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Good afternoon, colleagues. I wanna thank you for the opportunity to present SB 999. SB 999 delays the annual publication date of the health minimum essential coverage individual mandate report from March to June 1 so that the report will be more complete and capture relevant data from those taxpayers who file by October 14 deadline.

Currently, the Franchise Tax Board is required to annually report specified data on penalty payments and state financial subsidy reconciliations related to the minimum essential coverage individual mandate, but more complete data can help policymakers and the public understand how the health insurance mandate and state subsidy reconciliation are working. I respectfully ask for an aye vote on SB 999.

Thank you very much. Being that she doesn't have any witnesses, anyone in the room wishing to speak in support of SB 999, please come forward. Name, organization, and this is support.

Chair. Christine Smith, Health Access California, in support.

Thank you very much. Any primary opposition to this measure, please come forward. Hearing and seeing none. Anyone in the room wish to speak in opposition? Okay. So I guess I know the answer to the second one too. Bring it back to the dais. Anyone wishing to ask any questions of the author on this measure? Hearing and seeing none. Senator, do you wish to close?

SB 999 is intended to simply extend existing requirement for the Franchise Tax Board to publish the health care minimum essential coverage individual mandate from March 1 to June 1. And with that, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. This bill is a vote item, Members, so I will entertain a motion. It's been moved by Ms. Quirk-Silva, second by Ms. McKinnor. The motion is do pass to the Assembly Committee, the Appropriation Committee. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call] That bill passes five to one.

That bill is out, five to one. We'll keep the roll open for absent Members. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

File item number 6, SB 1073, Smallwood-Cuevas. Welcome. Do you have any witnesses? Oh, wonderful. Hello. You may begin when ready.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon, colleagues. I am proud to present to you today SB 1073. And I want to start by thanking the Chair and your hardworking committee staff for their support in getting us through this process, and we are very happy to accept the committee's amendments.

I'm proud to present this bill because it provides California taxpayers a voluntary opportunity to support the preservation and long term sustainability of one of California's only and first black historic cultural districts. My district, South Central Los Angeles, is home to one of the largest black populations in California.

It has long been a center of black culture, black history, black politics, black community, black art, with historically significant concentrations of black residents whose artistic and civic contributions have helped shape Los Angeles and the state for generations.

Notable landmarks like the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, which hosted the 1932 and 84 Summer Olympic games, stand as enduring reminders of the historic and cultural legacy and symbol of the city itself.

The historic cultural, the historic South Los Angeles Black Cultural District lifts up the legendary cultural centers like the Crenshaw Corridor, Leimert Park, Central Avenue, where murals and public art reflect the deep rooted tradition of creativity, activism, and cultural expression that continues to shape Los Angeles and the world.

Recognizing this legacy, the California Arts Council voted to officially designate this area as the Historic South Los Angeles Black Cultural District to formally acknowledge the profound contributions of black Angelenos to the City of Los Angeles and the state of California. This is one of the first state designated and recognized black cultural districts in California.

We hope it will not be the last. And at a time when the federal administration is actively trying to erase black history and undermine cultural diversity, we need these wins. That is why SB 1073 is so important to us now.

This bill allows Californians to make voluntary contributions through their personal income tax return to directly support the Historic South Los Angeles Black Cultural District. We also know this is critically important now, as the state is facing tremendous budgetary constraints.

And we know one of the things that has been dramatically cut back this year in the governor's budget has been our arts and culture programs. So we don't want our institutions to be further dismantled, to be further harmed by not having adequate resources to operate.

So this is a chance for California to give residents the opportunity to support their own, and at the same time, be prepared to the state to kick in when our budget situation is better so that we will have ample resources to hold on to our treasures. With me today to testify is our great director, Julie. Julie, why am I forgetting your last name, Julie?

Baker. Julie Baker, who has been a champion on this issue of our arts and culture, cultural districts, and ensuring that they're fully funded here. She leads the California Arts Foundation and is the sponsor of this bill.

Yes. You have two minutes. Thank you very much, and welcome.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Chair Gipson and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Julie Baker, and I'm the CEO of California Arts Advocates. We are proud to serve as a sponsor of SB 1073.

By establishing a voluntary tax contribution fund for the Historic South Los Angeles Black Cultural District, SB 1073 provides a targeted, community centered solution to ensure this vital piece of our living cultural heritage is preserved, celebrated, and sustained for future generations. We believe this voluntary model can be a powerful tool for other districts across our state to tap into the generosity of Californians who wanna invest directly in the identity of their local communities.

However, while we advocate for this specific mechanism, I must be clear about the broader landscape of the California cultural district program. 2015, the state passed AB 819, which directed the Arts Council to create a cultural districts program. The 22-23 California budget appropriated $30 million over three years to the program, but 20 million was swept back into the general fund in the 23-24 budget.

The 10 million that was left went to the 14 pilot districts to be expended over three years, which ends this month. This program is growing. We now have 24 state designated cultural districts spanning urban, rural, and Coastal California. Yet despite their profound cultural and economic significance, these districts currently have zero dedicated state funding or staff attached to them. The contrast is stark.

Texas, for example, has 50 cultural districts and allocates $12 million to their program. In California, our cultural districts are proven catalyst for economic vitality. From Little Tokyo to the town of Truckee, we have seen time and time again that state investment functions as catalytic capital, leveraging every dollar into additional foundations, grants, private partnerships, and local government contracts.

These districts boost local pride, reinforce neighborhood identity, prevent artist displacement, and support our creative workforce. We see SB 1073 as an important model, but it cannot be the only tool in our box.

Dedicated ongoing state appropriation for the entire cultural districts program remains essential, and we look to the future and prepare for the global sporting events coming to California in 2028, we need to ensure that the infrastructure of our cultural districts, the very soul of our state, is adequately resourced.

We urge an aye vote on SB 1073 to support the South LA Black Cultural District, and we ask this committee to work with us to restore sustained dedicated funding for the entire statewide network of California cultural districts. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone in the room wishing to speak in support of this measure, 1073, please come forward. Your name, organization, and this is support.

Good afternoon. Jasmin Asher. I'm representing the Greater Sacramento Urban League, and we are in proud support.

Thank you very much. Primary opposition to this measure, please come take a seat at the table. No one is here for that. Wanna bring it back to the committee. Yes, Ms. Quirk-Silva.

I wanna appreciate the Senator for bringing this forward and, of course, the CEO, as we have had many conversations of the value of arts and the contribution in California. I remember when the Senator, I think, was just elected maybe by a few months, and we had a meeting exactly about California cultural arts districts.

And she asked how do we expand this, and they certainly have been expanded from 14 to 24. And yet funding is kind of the key that we are missing. But I appreciate this voluntary model, as we know that it isn't the entire type of funding we need to seek, but it certainly is something that could begin a process.

And one of the things now being here for more than a decade is I call it slivers of legislation, which means we want this or this. But sometimes you get this, and depending on the budget, it goes up and down. And so there will be more to come in some future time or maybe even this year. We'll see. But the point is that you're doing something now that is concrete while you are moving forward.

So I certainly appreciate this and appreciate that you've been focused and you're making progress on something that's very important to you, but not just to you, to your community and the cultural art district, the black cultural art district. So with that, I do move the bill.

Okay. Thank you very much. Anyone else? I just want to say, add my voice to the choir as well, I wanna thank you for your commitment, your drive in this space. Certainly, you've woken up other communities in this space, namely my community, my district.

Who will also debate you vigorously as it relates to the historic, the historic history and the Watts community where everything started in 1965 and other areas as well. But it's good. It's really good that you have gone down this path. I just wanna commend you and congratulate and elevate the work that you're doing in the space.

It's so much needed, and just really appreciate your hard work. And appreciate my colleague because she chaired the Arts and Entertainment, Sports and Tourism and was given that kind of history that you've been on this journey for a long time. And certainly appreciate your work in this space. And also looking at this particular way in terms of of getting funding. So I appreciate that work. So with that, if you wish to close, please do so.

Well, I wanna thank you, Mr. Chair, for your comments. And I will say that South LA and Watts, we are brothers and sisters. Richness has no boundaries, and certainly there's a lot of important, rich black cultural history in Southern California and particularly in our in our county.

I wanna thank, the great Assembly Member, Sharon Quirk-Silva, for her leadership in the arts and culture space because she didn't withhold information. She shared the information in terms of how do you get your communities to be recognized and how does this rich cultural experience create this amazing tapestry that is California.

That's what we are fighting to preserve. We need state resources for this, but we are also saying that residents can also have some self determination by supporting SB 1073. So with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. This, Members, this is this bill is a vote item, and the Senator has already accepted the amendments and it's already been moved and seconded. So the motion is do pass to the Arts Committee as amended. So I would ask Madam Secretary, would you please call the roll as amended?

The motion is do pass as amended to Arts, Entertainment, Sports, and Tourism Committee. [Roll Call] That bill is out.

That bill is out. Thank you very much.

I need to get Ms. Quirk-Silva on some bills and Ms...

So we're we're gonna go back to the

I can start at the beginning.

Yeah. We're gonna go back to the beginning for the members to add on. Madam secretary, when you're ready.

SB 575, and that is item number three. Quirk Silva.

Aye.

Quirk Silva, Aye, Rodriguez.

Excuse me?

What bill was that?

Rodriguez, Aye. I know. Okay. It's coming up, David.

SB 575 item number 3, Laird.

Aye.

Item number 2, SB 974 on the absentees, Quirk Silva.

Quirk Silva, Aye. Rodriguez.

Rodriguez, Aye. On item number 4, SB 762, on the absentee is Rodriguez?

Aye.

Aye.

Not voting.

Rodriguez not voting. Item number 5, SB 999, absentees, Michelle Rodriguez.

Michelle Rodriguez, Aye. Sure. Just a minute. Let me make go through one more time. The change for miss Sanchez?

Aye.

AB 999.

AB 999.

Aye to no. That's it.

Thank you.

Is that affected Shane? The

No. Because she couldn't change her vote.

Okay.

Did change it. Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

It's five to two. Okay.

Great. Anything else?

That was just suspense.

Revenue taxation committee stands adjourned.