Assembly Standing Committee on Human Services

Good morning. I call this hearing of the Assembly Committee on Human Services to order. I'd like to start today's hearing by welcoming assembly member Alanis who will be filling in for vice chair Castillo. Once we have established quorum, we have nine measures on the agenda, two of which are on consent. Please note that we limit testimony to two witnesses in support and two witnesses in opposition.

Each witness has two minutes to testify. All additional witnesses will be limited to stating their name, organization, if they represent one, and their position on the bill. I also want to note that we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the committee's website. Lastly, we'd like to address disruptions during the hearing. Conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes.

The orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited. If disruptive behavior occurs today, you will be removed from the hearing by the assembly sergeants. Now for a little housekeeping. The Assembly Rules Committee has determined that file item number one, SB 479, also falls within jurisdiction of the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection. Should the bill pass out of this committee, it will be referred to the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection.

The Assembly Rules Committee has also determined that file item number three, SB 902, Grayson, also falls within jurisdiction of the Assembly Committee on Education. Should the bills pass out of this committee, refer to the Assembly Committee on Education. And I see that both those authors are here today. Since we don't have yet a quorum, we're gonna do, a subcommittee hearing and and respect for the senators who are here on time, we'll start with file item number one, SB 479 by Arguin.

And so you may come up to present when you're ready. And I hope that extra referral was not a surprise to you, Senator. But

when we added Oakland, I think that's what triggered the referral to privacy. But that's fine.

Alright. You can begin whenever you're ready.

Well, thank you very much, mister chair, members of the committee. It's my pleasure to present SB 479, which is sponsored by the city of Berkeley, which I was proud to represent as a council member and mayor for sixteen years. This bill will allow three cities designated as local health jurisdictions to implement homeless response multidisciplinary teams and share specified information across different teams and departments. Additionally, SB 479 was amended to allow the city of Oakland to deploy multidisciplinary teams at their discretion.

To provide context in 2020, the legislature authorized counties to form multidisciplinary response teams to address homelessness with the goal of aligning housing, treatment, and services.

These teams have been deployed in many jurisdictions and are proven and effective way to provide services and housing to our unsheltered community. The statute also authorized the ability to communicate specified information about unsheltered residents between housing, behavioral health, and service teams to enhance the continuity of care and to facilitate better housing and service outcomes. There are currently three local health jurisdictions or LHJ's in California, City Of Berkeley, City Of Pasadena, and the City Of Long Beach.

Currently, the City Of Berkeley is the only city operating its own multidisciplinary response team through its L H J. However, we do have support from the city of Pasadena, and this bill would give them the authorization as well, if it's signed to law.

These teams have been successful at decreasing unsheltered homelessness and reducing incampemts. Because the statute only authorizes counties to share specified information across teams, Berkeley's teams have been working in silos, unable to communicate about an individual's mental health needs when the housing team is looking to place someone into permanent housing. This unfortunately has led to situations where individuals were not provided the correct intervention because response teams were unable to talk to each other about the individual's previous case history and potential needs.

As the city of Oakland looks to the future and deploying multidisciplinary teams, the same barriers would arise due to the inability of teams to share vital information amongst each other. I understand that concerns have been raised on this bill by Oakland privacy.

My office has met with opposition on several occasions to discuss their concerns and have discussed potential amendments to the bill if this bill was moved forward. SB 479 is a focus bill that will allow city based LHJ multiple disciplinary teams and the city of Oakland to have the same ability to share information across departments as do counties. This is a small change that will go a long way to facilitate targeted interventions and better outcomes and improve the state's response to unsheltered homelessness.

With me to testify and support the bill is Scott Gilman, the director of Berkeley's Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services, and Peter Redeux, the the manager of neighborhood services for the city of Berkeley.

Alright. Thank you. Two minutes each, please.

Thank you, Senator. My my name is Scott Gilman. I am the director of housing community services, at Berkeley. That includes mental health teams as well as public health teams. I also am responsible for below market rate housing.

We have staff currently that that go out to encampments and and work with homeless individuals, and they are completely hamstrung. We've had situations where where we know the individual may be dangerous. We know the individual may not be dangerous. We know the individual will never work in that housing complex because of x, y, and z, and and we're bound by confidentiality laws and not able to not able to share that information.

As Senator Arregine said, state law allows counties, multidisciplinary teams to share information between one another about their residents and encampments.

City teams currently are not permitted to do so under state law. In Berkeley, I've had service teams that have tried to coordinate care, but the existing limitations are often too too exhausting to share information that would benefit the homeless individuals. In some cases, city staff have gone to the canvas to offer individuals care currently under the mental health system, but lacking the shared information, these city staff are confronted by hostile individuals at times.

And and and the bottom line is they could have made better informed choices or help that individual achieve housing in a much more productive way with a much greater chance of success. Housing teams unarmed with information that mental health teams have have placed individuals in the housing only to have them to compensate.

Current law puts people living outside encampments and caregivers in danger and is a disservice to the people struggling through homelessness. Senate bill 479 is, is a simple bill that closes this loophole in the law and will allow the city of Berkeley for the first time to provide full wrap around services to our residents. I urge, a yes vote on this bill. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Next witness, please.

Good afternoon, chair, committee members. Thank you very much for the opportunity. My name is Peter Radu. As neighborhood services manager, I oversee homeless policy and encampment management for the city of Berkeley. The city Of Berkeley has the second highest homeless population in Alameda County behind only Oakland.

One of the most challenging features of our encampment population and our our unsheltered population is that it is disproportionately disabled and vulnerable relative to the rest of the county. In Berkeley, ninety three percent of people self report a mental health disability compared to thirty five percent countywide. Similarly, seventy nine percent self report a substance use disorder compared to twenty nine percent countywide.

This is the exact population that the Senator and the director were talking about that would benefit the most from this type of need to know data and information sharing across service providers. That for the first time, SB 479 would allow for cities like Berkeley.

In fact, it's been my and my team's experience that our failure to allow for this type of critical coordination at the city level is one of the main reasons that some of our most vulnerable residents remain on our streets. Simply put, there are many people in Berkeley right now that have an oar, but none of us can be certain that we're rowing the boat in the same direction. This bill can fix that.

Increasingly across our state, cities are the level of government where real action to address unsheltered, seriously mentally ill homelessness is happening. Cities like Berkeley have repeatedly proven that when given the appropriate tools from the state, we can and we do measurably reduce encampment homelessness.

Since 2022, Berkeley's reduced unsheltered homelessness by more than 40%. Imagine how much farther we could go with the kind of no cost reform, common sense reform that is proposed in SB 479. I respectfully urge your yes vote and appreciate the opportunity to be before you. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who wishes to find support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone. Your name and organization, please.

Mister chair and members, Rand Martin on behalf of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. And we this bill is gonna be really helpful to our whole, whole person model of care, for people with HIV. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kendra Begley on behalf of the city of Pasadena in support.

Good afternoon. Binuwa Kamala on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California chapter in strong support.

Thank you. And do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Do we have any members of the public who should testify in opposition to the bill? Please come up to the microphone. Seeing none, I will bring it back to the committee for any questions or comments.

We don't yet have a quorum, so we can't make any motions. Alright. Seeing none, I'm going to invite the author to close.

Respectfully ask your aye vote.

Alright. Thank you. Well, I really appreciate you working with this committee, Senator, and I do appreciate you vouching for your cities. I think this is an effective way to facilitate more cooperation to serve those who need these services. So, I am recommending an aye vote with this, and should it pass out today, it'll go to the privacy committee.

So, we will take it up when we have quorum. Thank you.

Thank you, mister chair.

Alright. Next, let's go to file a number three, SB 902 by Senator Grayson. Alright, Senator. Whenever you're ready, you may begin.

Good afternoon, honorable chair and members. I am pleased to present to you SB 902, a bill that would specify that a signature required by the Child Care and Development Services Act may be satisfied by an electronic signature in compliance with the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act. Families accessing subsidized childcare vouchers must submit multiple forms throughout the year. Paper based processes requiring printing, mailing, and hand delivering documents, which can be burdensome for parents juggling multiple jobs and caring for young children.

Currently, the law does not or does recognize digital and electronic signatures.

However, the childcare and development services act does not explicitly authorize current electronic options for both signage and for storage. So SB 902 would update subsidized childcare paperwork practices by recognizing current technology that best supports the needs of families where they are at.

However, this bill does preserve the option for families, providers, and contractors to continue using paper documents if they so prefer and desire. So with that, I would like to let my witnesses, self introduce, through the chair.

Alright. Thank you very much. Two minutes of two minutes, please.

Good afternoon, Chair Lee and members of the Assembly Human Services Committee. My name is Robin Altamirano. I am a parent of three children, including a daughter with complex medical needs and a former elementary school educator. SB 902 recognizes the realities family space and removes unnecessary barriers to accessing childcare services. Requiring a wet signature may seem simple, but it often means printing forms, signing them by hand, scanning them, and then mailing or uploading them.

For busy families, especially those in rural communities or facing unexpected challenges, those extra steps can create significant hardships. When my daughter was just two months old, she was unexpectedly hospitalized for more than two weeks. At the same time, my oldest son had just started transitional kindergarten. The hospital was forty five minutes away from both our home and his school, and I needed to work quickly with the school district to arrange transportation so we could continue attending school and childcare while I stayed at my daughter's bedside.

I was able to complete the necessary paperwork electronically from my phone while sitting in the hospital.

Had a wet signature been required, I would have needed to leave my daughter and drive for nearly an hour each way just to sign documents during an already overwhelming family crisis. Because of my daughter's medical needs, I regularly complete forms from my phone while managing appointments, treatments, and caregiving responsibilities. When electronic signatures are accepted, it reduces stress, saves time, and allows me to focus on my children instead of paperwork. Families already use electronic signatures for health care, housing, and education documents.

SB 902 simply brings childcare paperwork into alignment with those common practices and makes it easier for families to access the services they need.

Thank you, Chair Lee and members of the committee for your time today. I respectfully ask for an aye vote on SB 902.

Alright. Thank you. Next witness, please.

Chairman Lee and members, thank you for this great opportunity to testify. My name is Zhiwen Tan, founder and the CEO of MCT Technology and Care Connect. We provide software to many childcare agencies and their learning programs across California. I'm here in support of, SB 902. SB 902 is now creating a new technology requirement for programs and the families.

It simply give childcare agency and same flexibility and the legal clarity that family already experienced in health care, education, banking, real estate, and in many other industry and sectors. Today, paper signature can slow down eligibility, access to child care for parents, delay provider payments, and create unnecessary burdens for working parents. Families may have to print, scan, mail, physically sign, hand deliver just to keep childcare moving. From a technology perspective, electronic signature can be implemented safely and with accountability.

A signer can be verified through the secure portal.

Electronic signature can be implemented through that same verify phone number and email address already on record. The sign record can include the signers identity, signature time, document version, and a full audit trail. When anytime document is changed, such electronic signature can be invalidated right away. In many cases, that gives agency more accountability than paper format because the agency can see who sign it, when the signature is done, where the signature is done, and what document was signed. SB 902 preserves the paper option also.

It simply gives the agency a clear option to to serve family better and a faster while keeping accountability. For these reasons, I respectfully ask for your yes vote.

Alright. Thank you. Before we continue, now we have a quorum. Let's just oh, let's establish a quorum. So madam secretary, please call the roll to establish quorum.

[Roll Call]

Great. Do we have a third witness? Or

McKenzie Richardson on behalf of Thriving Families California Foundation, proud sponsor. Just here for technical assistance.

Great. Okay. Thank you. Now are there members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone.

One second.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Jeannette Carpenter, proud cosponsor here on behalf of Child Action in strong support. Thanks.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Jillian Keegan on behalf of the California Community Action Partnership Association and our statewide membership net membership network in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward. Seeing none, I'm gonna bring it back to committee for any questions or comments.

Alright. I'll invite the Senator to close then.

Thank you so much. I respectfully ask when I vote.

Thank you, Senator. And thank you for bringing the bill forward. It's one of those small common sense things in everyday lives, but it's one of those things that I we work very hard to make sure we're modernizing our state government, so I think it's a very welcome bill. I am having an I recommendation this bill. Madam secretary, please call oh, actually, we need a second on the motion.

Second. Okay.

The bill the bill has been moved by Senator Jackson, seconded by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez. Madam Secretary, please call the roll for SB 902.

File item three, SB 902. The motion is do passed to the Assembly Education Committee. [Roll Call]

Four to zero. We will keep that role open for EFSA members. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And now we'll go to file item number four, SB 1025 by Senator Hurtado.

Senator Hurtado, whenever you're ready.

Good afternoon, Mister chair, members. Today, I present SB 1025, which establishes the Office of Food Security and Affordability. In the Central Valley, we all know very well that poverty does not discriminate. And we also know that every day in California, there are parents working full time jobs that still have to worry about how they will put food on the table for their children.

There are seniors choosing between groceries and medication and college students skipping meals while trying to earn a degree.

The reality is that many of these Californians qualify for assistance, but the system can be difficult, fragmented, and confusing. Families are often sent from one agency to another, filling out multiple applications while trying to figure out where to turn for help.

This is a reality for many Californians. California invest billions of dollars in Food Assistance Programs, and SB 25 helps make sure those investments are working as efficiently as possible by connecting programs, reducing duplication, and putting families at the center of the process.

SB 25 is about making government, work better for all Californians that it, that it serves. It creates a dedicated office focused on bringing agencies together, improving coordination, and ensuring families can access support with unnecessary barriers.

This bill will strengthen outreach efforts, identify communities that are being left behind and support local food banks and community partners and ensure that resources reach the people who need them the most because no Californian should go hungry because they cannot figure out which door to knock on for help.

And today, I have with Kelly Lowery, I think I pronounced his last name correctly, Executive Director for Community Action Partnership of Current to testify in support.

Alright. Two minutes, please.

Good afternoon, Chairman Lee and members. My name is Kelly Lowery, and I serve with the CAPK Food Bank in Kern County, one of California's hunger relief organizations. We distribute more than 1,500,000 pounds of food each month, supporting more than 50,000 families experiencing some of the highest levels of food insecurity in our state.

I'm here as a sponsor of SB 1025. The charitable food system in California is not the responsibility of any single department, program, or organization. It is influenced by housing costs, wages, transportation, health care, agriculture, emergency food systems, and public benefit programs. Yet our response remains fragmented.

At the local level, we often find ourselves trying to coordinate across multiple state agencies, private affiliations, and local partnerships that each play a very critical role, but without a unified strategy connecting those efforts together. SB 1025 addresses that challenge by establishing an Office of Food Security and Affordability and directing the development of a statewide food security strategy.

It creates a place where data, policy, program, administration, and community expertise can come together to identify gaps, coordinate solutions, and measure outcomes.

This need has become even more urgent as significant federal changes, policy changes shift additional responsibility to states and local communities. Food banks, counties, schools, nonprofits, health care systems, farmers, and community organizations are all adapting to rapidly change this rapidly changing environment.

California needs a coordinated approach that helps us plan ahead rather than simply react to crisis or changes from the federal administration. SB 1025 does not create another food program. It creates the structure necessary to make existing investments work better together.

It helps ensure that decisions are informed by data, guided by stakeholders, and aligned around measurable goals. For those of us working on the front lines every day, the question is not whether California has organizations committing to addressing hunger. We do, and they all do a really great job.

The question is whether we have a coordinated system capable of meeting the scale and the complexity of the challenge before us. SB 1025 helps build that system, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote today. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you very much. Now do we have members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone.

Good afternoon, Mister chair and members. Jessica Dawn, the University of California in support.

Bindu Mukhamala on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California chapter in strong support.

Amanda Kirchner on behalf of County Welfare Directors in support.

Alright. Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill?

Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward.

Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the committee.

I think I heard a motion earlier.

Second.

Alright. I'll invite the Senator to close if you have a close.

Thank you. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Well, thank you. The bill has been probably moved by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez and seconded by Elhawary. I do think this bill is really important because, you know, California is the breadbasket of the nation, if not the world, and we have far too many people who starve within, you know, a stone's throw of orchards and fields.

So it's important that we have dedicated food security office. I'm recommending an aye vote, and may secretary please call the roll on this bill.

File item four, SB 1025. The motion is do passed to the Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact Committee.

[roll call]

Four to zero, that bill is out. We'll leave the roll open for absent members. Next, we'll go to file number five, SB 1030, by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and colleagues. I am proud to present SB 1030, which is a legislative Women's Caucus priority. Many of the—California's public assistance laws were enacted in the 1960s and have remained in statute, not because they make sense, but because they just haven't been meaningfully updated. And, historically, the man in the house rule was disproportionately applied to black women, women of color, reflecting a broader racialized system of surveillance and negative stereotypes and narratives, and we know that was embedded in some of our early welfare policies.

We're finally trying to address this outdated provision here today with 1030, which repeals the outdated CalWORKs "Man in the house" rule, which can strip a family of aid simply because an unrelated man lives in the home. California already requires families to report every dollar that comes into the household. This rule adds nothing. It just gives the state a reason to cut off families, who are barely, barely getting by, and in this era of national hostility, we know some of these old rules could be activated and really do more harm to our families.

And so, California must act to modernize this provision. Our families are already carrying the weight of rising rent, grocery costs, economic uncertainty, and the last thing California should do is make it harder for mothers to put food on the table and a roof over their families' heads. Nearly 90% of CalWORKs heads of household were women in 2022, and black and brown households account for the majority of those. This rule has deeply, as I mentioned, racist and sexist history, built on surveillance and control.

SB 1030 will repeal that and put California on the right side of history. And with me today to provide testimony is Rebecca Gonzales, with the Western Center on Law and Poverty, and Amanda Kirchner, with the California Wealth Air Directors Association.

Alright. Thank you. Two minutes each. Witness, please.

Great. Hello. My name is Rebecca Gonzales, Senior Policy Advocate with the Western Center on Law and Poverty. The Western Center is a cosponsor of SB 1030 as part of the Reimagine CalWORKs Coalition. Our coalition has worked to make CalWORKs more family supporting a less punitive program.

We believe SB 1030, which eliminates the old man of the house law, is consistent with these principles. The man of the house law is an outdated, misogynistic policy that incorporate—incorporates—racist and sexist assumptions about people who receive CalWORKs. The old law was based on the presumption that mothers receiving cash benefits were trying to fraudulently claim benefits if an unrelated adult male lived in the household, even though an unrelated adult male is not legally required to support the family.

It also stemmed from outdated social mores, which disapproved of a couple who cohabitated without being married. This policy is a remnant from the old AFDC program whereby states enacted laws which require the unrelated adult male to complete welfare forms under penalty of perjury.

If the partner did not complete the form, the CalWORKS benefits were stopped for the entire family. States implemented these rules to restrict welfare eligible—eligibility—and enforce morality, often cutting off aid if a mother was dating, even if the man did not support the children. These policies were used to police the households of particularly black women.

This provision, which is not required by federal law, presumed cohabiting men were substitute parents, regardless of financial contribution, and this was deemed unconstitutional in King v. Smith and further restricted by Lewis v. Martin. Current law already requires that when anybody, including an unrelated adult male, gives money to a CalWORKs recipient, it must be reported to the county.

It is then subject to the regular budgeting rules, including reduction of the CalWORKs benefit. Therefore, this policy is not only outdated, but also redundant of current law. SB 1030 will simplify the CalWORKs program and eliminate an administrative burden for counties. We also believe it is important that California repeals outdated, unneeded laws that are based on racist and sexist presumptions of human behavior, and we ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Next witness, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I am Alexis Rodriguez, on behalf of the County Welfare Directors Association, in support of SB 1030, which would repeal the CalWORKs unrelated adult male rule. Counties have shared in the goal of ensuring that the CalWORKs program is accessible to families in crisis and provides the financial assistance and supports that are needed to improve outcomes across generations.

However, the CalWORKs UAM Policy is an ugly remnants of the aid to families with dependent children era, which created this additional requirement for households with an unrelated adult in the home. This policy requires this additional disclosure form, a contribution requirement of the male, and then a potential fraud referral if he's not contributing enough, although he's not required to by law.

At the county level, this extra form is duplicative. The same information of household composition, how much they make, how much expenses, everyone's contributing, are you getting benefits from any other county or state resources is already collected and then verified in our intake and redetermination through the SARS 7 form. Any money reported is subject to the regular budgeting rules that determine the client's benefit amount.

So, in practice, this extra form creates unnecessary administrative work for counties without adding any new information to the case because it's already collected on the first form that every family has to fill out.

SB 1030 would then treat this living arrangement as any other and rely on the county standard intake and redetermination and fraud tools that applies to every other case. So, we thank Senator Smallwood-Cuevas and her leadership on this issue, and we urge your support for SB 1030. Thank you.

Thank you. Now, do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to microphone.

Huesay Turner with the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, proud co-sponsor, in strong support.

Hello. Genesis Gonzales, on behalf of Lieutenant Governor Lenny Kounalakis, in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Darby Kernan, on behalf of End Child Poverty California, in support. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Kendra Begley, on behalf of the City of Glendale, in support.

Good afternoon, chair and members. Jonathan Munoz, on behalf of First Life Los Angeles, in strong support of the bill, and we thank the author.

Hello. Binuwa Kamala, on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California's Chapter, in strong support.

Hello. Josh Wright, with the California Association of Food Banks, in support.

Thank you. Now, do we have any witnesses in opposition? Any members of the public wishing to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward. Seeing none. I'm bringing it back to the committee for questions, or comments, or motions. Alright.

Well, I'm gonna invite the author to close then.

Well, I wanna thank you all very much and and for the witnesses for their testimony today. This is about California doing the right thing and giving our mothers and our families the power to control their own lives. This bill is about fairness, dignity, and ensuring that we don't push families deeper into poverty with old, outdated rules and laws. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

I wanna thank the Senator for bringing this bill forward. I mean, to say the least, this is a very outdated surveillance strategy. I think in too often in previous decades and eras and unfortunately, even today, that our welfare programs are meant to uplift people or other ways means to police and surveil people of color and poor families.

So, this is an important, small, yet very significant, change that I don't think people appreciate enough in the larger world, but this is really important, and I'm glad you're taking on this issue. It does, of course, enjoy an aye recommendation for my—from me.

The bill is moved by Assemblymember Jackson and seconded by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

That bill's out four to zero. We'll keep the roll open for absent members.

Thank you. Alright. We're looking for authors. So if you are senators Gonzalez, Caballero, or McNerney, this would be a great time to come.

But can I get a motion for file item number one since we had that presentation, but no motions? Yeah. Alright. File item number one is by Assembly over Elhawary, seconded by Celeste Rodriguez. This enjoys an eye recommendation. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Four to zero. That bill's out. And does someone wanna move the consent calendar? Alright. The consent calendar has been moved and seconded. Madam secretary, please call the roll on the consent calendar.

[Roll Call]

Four to zero. That consent calendar is out. I see that Senator Gonzales is here. So she would like to come up and present file item number seven, 1077.

Thank you, Mister Chair and members. I'm here today to present a Senate Bill 1077, which will prepare California for future government shutdowns by requiring the California Department of Social Services to create a communications and contingency plan for disruptions to CalFresh benefits. On 10/01/2025, we all know that the Federal Government shut down for forty three days, leaving over 5,000,000 Californians without access to their full CalFresh benefits for the month of November.

And during the shutdown, ongoing lawsuits and court rulings created uncertainty around the availability and timeliness of benefit disbursements and California had no visible path to fill the gap, due to the lack of lack of infrastructure. So this, bill will strengthen coordination and communication during federal shutdowns, requiring CDSS to create a plan that addresses misinformation, shares resources, and provides regular updates to recipients and stakeholders.

With me to testify in support is Yesenia Robancho from End Child Poverty California.

Thank you.

Two minutes, please.

Hello Chair and members. Yesenia Robancho with End Child Poverty California; proud to be here as sponsors of this important legislation. As Senator Gonzales already shared, on 10/01/2025, our CalFresh households would, essentially, did not know where their food was going to come as a result of this Federal Government shutdown, and that forced CDSS counties, local stakeholders, or even our food banks into a position of having to come up with a rapid response on how to ensure our CalFresh households were aware that this was even happening.

And also in the scenario that are some of the households no longer were going to receive their November benefits, though, that at the time that they were expecting to receive benefits, connecting them over to a food bank that could fill in the gap while, you know, their CalFresh benefits were on hold.

Over 5,000,000 Californians rely on CalFresh benefits to meet their basic needs. Disruption in benefits means hungry children and families. It also acts as an economic shock to our local food economies that depend on CalFresh households buying groceries at their local grocers, bodegas, or even their corner stores. So, we know California is the state's state's largest anti hunger and anti poverty program, and every dollar in CalFresh benefits generates $1.54 back into our local economy.

So, not only does the Federal Government shutdown again, introduce hunger to our children and families, it also disrupts our economy.

And so, SB 1077 will prepare California for potential future government shutdowns by requiring CDSS to create a strategic communications plan that will include a public web page that will inform our CalFresh recipients of when an expected federal shutdown may occur. It will also require CDSS to develop the capacity to distribute state funded benefits to CalFresh recipients during future Federal Government shutdowns. And so with that, we really, look forward to having your support on this important piece of legislation. Thank you.

Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who should testify in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone.

Good afternoon. Serena Scott on behalf of the League of California Cities in support. Thank you.

Bindu Kamala on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter, in strong support.

Keely O'Brien with the Western Center on Law and Poverty, in strong support.

Alexis Rodriguez with the County Welfare Directors Association, in support. Thank you.

Josh Wright with the California Association of Foodbanks, in strong support.

Okay. Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who should testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward. Seeing none; I'll bring it back to committee for any questions or comments. Assembly Rodriguez?

Assemblymember Rodriguez, I think you have to turn on your microphone.

I move the measure forward. Thank you.

Can you repeat what you asked or something?

Oh, I wanted to thank you for bringing this measure forward and ask to be a co-author

Oh, okay.

If you'd have me and move the item.

Great. Alright. I'll invite the author to close.

I just respectfully asked for an aye vote, and I thank you so much for being here as well. Appreciate your time.

Thank you. Well, I appreciate you bringing the bill forward. I I think it's really important because during the last government shutdown, the record-long Republican shutdown, so many people were out in the cold without access to food. And even though Californians pay through their federal taxes a billion dollars a month for these federal benefits so that we're not being dispersed, I think it's important that we stay prepared for the inevitable. If another shutdown - they can't reach their own deal within their own party, so I think it's important.

Okay. I am recommending an aye vote for this bill. It has been properly moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, please call the roll on this bill.

File item seven, SB 1077: the motion is do passed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. [Roll Call].

That bill's out: four to zero. We'll keep the roll open for absence members. Alright. Two more bills from file names eight and nine if those authors are available.

No, but you saw me get all excited. I was like, what?

We're making a lot of good progress. We were like, damn it done.

Yeah. Someone call Cabalero.

It's funny watching the senators like, you have no comments? And I'm like, no. We don't feel like we have to talk about everything. Thank you.

Alright. Senator Caballero, you may come up to present, file number 9 1201 when you're ready. Thank you for joining us, Senator. Whenever you're ready, you may begin.

Thank you, very much Mr Chair

Thank you,

Thank you for the opportunity to present SB 1194. This bill would codify the immigration legal fellowship pro project, which has proven to be a successful model to expand access to immigration legal services in some of the most underserved regions of the state. The fellowship began as a pilot project in 2019 in the response to the federal administration as it pursued repress repressive immigration enforcement, creating fear and confusion for many immigrant families and children across California.

While access to immigration council and legal services has been limited limited, the environment created under the administration magnified the severity of the issue and demonstrated the clear need for trusted legal services and community based support to assist individuals navigating navigating the complex immigration process. The fellowship was designed to increase the number of qualified immigration attorneys who could defend California residents against deportation and family separation.

The fir the first fellowship cohort cohort was deployed in 2021, and the program has not only created a sustainable immigration attorney pipeline in areas hardest hit by the administration's immigration rates, but has also strengthened trust in public institutions and ensured individuals receive accurate legal representation during some of the most critical moments of their lives. The fellowship has provided legal representation services to nearly 2,500 individuals across 39 counties.

Local organizations who have hosted fellows have gained the requisite builds on a successful model and ensures that California is prepared to safeguard the immigrant community and provide ongoing access to legal support in the face of of the federal administration that has shown a blatant disregard for the rule of law. And part of the challenge here is that we have funded services through the one California program.

And that program, when it was established, was set up to be able to provide support for individuals that had been providing legal services for three years or more for organizations.

And for the most part, because the Federal Government, many years past, reduced the number of federal immigration courts. Many of them disappeared, like, for example, in San Jose and some of the outlying areas. It it concentrated the one California concentrated those monies in the big cities. And so there was there were no services between LA and and San Jose, and no services in the Central Valley almost at all.

And so this program has really provided an opportunity to get service it, fellows placed in in rural and smaller communities where legal representation matters.

It's not enough to come in and say, I'm gonna do a a know your legal right workshop. That's great. Now I know what my legal rights are, but if I can't defend myself when I when I need it, then, yeah, it it's pretty meaningless. And this fellowship has been tremendously important in creating that pipeline. So it gives me great pleasure to introduce Jackie Gonzales, co executive director of immigrant defense advocates, to provide, any to answer any technical questions you might have.

Did you also wanna provide testimony or just for

I I can or I can answer questions.

It's your it's your prerogative to do so.

Or any hopes and dreams you wanna share?

I'll provide

Brief. Less than two minutes just because I don't think assembly member Jackson has heard about this fellowship enough enough. He could do my testimony at this point, I think. I I literally could. Yeah.

So one of the most pressing issues before our state over the last year is how best to navigate the uncertainty and harm being caused by federal immigration policies. And I would say that while the intensity has increased these challenges, they are not new. Seven years ago, under the first Trump administration, I stood before the same legislature to help pitch the fellowship. It's the first state sponsored program to increase removal defense representation for residents of our state. At its core was a very simple premise.

Access to due process and quality legal defense should not depend on income or ZIP code. As a practicing attorney at that time, I can still vividly remember how far people would drive from the Central Valley just to talk to me at a nonprofit in Oakland. Five hours. When the stakes are so high, but quality legal services so scant for many people, that would be the only way to get an honest assessment of their case, and if extremely lucky, pro bono representation for the duration.

As you've seen over the last year, immigrants remain vulnerable to arbitrary arrest, inhumane detention, and deportation without due process.

Immigration law is one of the most complex and rapidly changing areas of the law, yet individuals are not guaranteed access to counsel even when the consequences mean family separation, prolonged detention, and exile. As the Senator has mentioned, this need is especially urgent in underserved parts of the region that have long been legal deserts where the concentration of immigrants is high and enforcement is the worst. Since 2021, the fellowship, as the Senator mentioned, has served over two 2,500 families.

Many the design of the fellowship was really intended to not just provide services, but increase long term capacity in these regions. I'm very proud to say that 70% of the fellows that have participated in this program have successfully transitioned into full time immigration or public interest attorney roles in their respective regions.

Today, when an individual or family needs urgent legal assistance in a deportation case or when there is a rate or unexpected enforcement action in a remote community, we are much better prepared than we otherwise would have been thanks to this fellowship. This is the kind of impact that is possible when California invests in people and institutions and not just short term fixes. For these reasons, I urge your support of SB 1194.

Thanks. Bye. Alright. Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill?

Yesenia Rapancho with End Child Poverty in California in support.

bindu mukhamala on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, California chapter in strong support.

David Berger on behalf of California attorney general who's a sponsor of this bill in support.

Alright. Thank you. Now do I have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward.

David Samayoa, policy in terms of the Mesa Verde Group on behalf of Cadisen, in support.

Seeing none, I'm gonna bring it back to the committee for questions, comments, motions, assembly member Rodriguez.

I wanna

Go ahead.

thank you for bringing this forward. I know that as we've all worked really hard in the legislature to invest in protections and more capacity, this kept rising up to the top of the discussion. And the fact that we have a big gap, especially in the Central Valley, and the need to do deeper investments and support, and this really responds to that call and supports fill that gap. So thank you for bringing it forward, and I'd like to move it forward.

Yeah. Okay.

Alright. I'll invite the author to close.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator, for bringing the book forward. I would also ask to be joining you as a coauthor on this bill. It's so important to build out our legal infrastructure. If we truly are a nation of laws, immigration laws are no different. It should be abdicated through the courts and legal system and boring paperwork, not kidnapping people on the street or putting them in prisons.

So I think it's really important just to create a legal framework and infrastructure so people actually have a fair shot. Yes. As a principal coauthor too. I would like to

be a principal coauthor. Absolutely. Thank you. The bill has been properly moved and seconded by Assemblyman Celeste Rodriguez and seconded by Assemblyman El Hawari. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

File item eight, SB 1194. The motion is to pass to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Lee?

Aye.

Lee, aye. Alanis Calderon? El Huari?

Aye.

El Huari, aye. Jackson?

Aye.

Jackson, aye. Rodriguez? Aye. Rodriguez, aye. Tongapaw?

No. Tongapaw, no.

That bill's out. Four to one. We'll leave the role open for absent members. I think we're thank you. Senator McNerney, would you like to present s v nine oh, sorry.

File number nine, SB 1201?

What? I would like to do that.

You may begin when you're ready.

That's fine. Good afternoon, Chair Lee, Vice Chair Castillo, distinguished members of the committee. I'm here to present SB 1201, the No Hungry Heroes Act. This is a righteous and feel good bill. For the background, HR 1 created large cuts in food assistance.

These federal cuts specifically impact vulnerable veterans. Many veterans rely on CalFresh to feed their families. SB 1201 helps protect veterans from these cuts by directing the state to request waivers from HR 1. SB 1201 also ensures that every veteran who applies for benefits is connected to a county service veterans officer. With with me here today, the testimony is Jim Zimmer on behalf of the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers and Josh Wright on behalf of the California Association of Food Banks.

Jim?

Thank you, Senator, and good afternoon, chair Lee and committee members. My name is Jim Zenner. I serve as the Legislative Chair for the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers. I'm a social worker and an army vet myself. When service members leave military service, we step into a civilian job market that often does not recognize our exceptional leadership and ability.

This friction creates inevitable gaps in employment and financial stability. During this transition, food security is foundational. For many, processed foods are the only affordable options. For those of us who served in the armed forces, we know what it's like to rely on packaged processed meals ready or MREs. However, while we are familiar with processed foods, we cannot accept that for veterans impacted by changes to SNAP.

It is the only food they can afford. Access to fresh, nutritious food is critical for health, particularly for veterans managing service connected disabilities. Snap provides earned benefits that directly support a veteran's health and ability to build a civilian career. Recently, federal alterations to SNAP guidelines stripped away vital protections that accounted for this complex transition. This shift placed a severe burden on newly separated service members, those experiencing homelessness and veterans trying to feed young families.

SB 1201 provides a critical course correction by authorizing California to pursue federal waivers. This legislation restores a practical safety net and advocates to rethink how we calculate financial need. Right now, if a veteran spends money out of his or her pocket for professional certifications or travel for job interviews, the system treats those funds like available income. That math simply does not work for somebody trying to keep a roof over their head while securing a a career.

Finally, Senate Bill 1201 does something incredibly practical by connecting applicants directly to us County Veteran Service Officers, bringing CBS owes to the front of the process guarantees veterans receive guidance from advocates who share our back, share their background and understand exactly what it takes to get them back on their feet.

That is why we're we're the proud sponsor of SB 121 as the California Association of County VSOs. Thank you very much.

Last year on July 4, the Federal Government passed HR 1, which included the largest cuts to SNAP in California's CalFresh in the program's history. It cannot be overstated how important CalFresh is. Over 5,000,000 Californians rely on the food benefits they receive from CalFresh every month, and food banks cannot make up the difference. For every meal that we can provide, CalFresh provides nine.

These federal cuts impact people who are particularly vulnerable to food insecurity, including abuse and trafficking survivors, families with children, former foster youth, and veterans.

HR 1 added a three month time limit on veterans, which requires them to report twenty hours of work per week or lose benefits after three months. These requirements apply even if a veteran has children in their home, And there are no exemptions if the veteran is unhoused, has a less than 100% disability diagnosis, or is recently discharged. In California, an estimated 115,000 veteran families rely on the vital food benefits that CalFresh provides.

Recognizing these unique challenges that veterans face after service, SB 1201 does three things. It requests a federal waiver to exempt veterans from the CalFresh time limits if they are homeless, newly discharged, awaiting a disability determination, or if they have children.

It requires counties to give veterans who apply for benefits a direct referral to county veteran services officers who are best prepared to serve Americans who have served. And it ensures that the money veterans spend on job searching does not count against them being able to receive food assistance. Taking away food never helps anyone find a job, keep a job, or get more hours at a job, and making veterans hungry will never make us a better country.

The California Association of Food Banks has asked Congress to repeal the CalFresh - HR 1 CalFresh cuts. Until they do, the least that we can do is make sure that we're doing all that we in California can to protect veterans most at risk of going hungry.

For these reasons, we are proud to support SB 1201, and we urge an aye vote.

Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify and support?

Good afternoon. Darby Kernan with End Child Poverty California, in support. Thank you.

Bindu Mukkamala with the National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter, in strong support of SB 1201.

Good afternoon. Michelle Rubalcava with Nielsen Merksamer on behalf of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, in support.

Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition? Are there any questions from committee members?

Move the item.

The item has been moved by Assemblymember Lee and seconded by Assemblymember Elhawary. Oh, did you have comments? Assemblymember Tangipa, you're recognized. Did we say that here? Sorry.

That's on the floor.

Well, first and foremost, I do wanna thank some of the veterans groups that are here today. You know, while I disagree with some of the language in the bill and some of the partisan language, I agree with the policy. You know, I grew up in a veteran household, and I'm a Navy brat. And, you know, while we were going after a lot of our benefits, and my father was going after his disability rating, we were in section eight housing.

Living in a duplex right off of Elkhorn And Watt Avenue not too far from here.

And so we survived off a lot of these benefits, and I can still tell you that I have to take bus 93 to take me to Hillsdale and Palm, and I can go to the Wix store and the SNAP and EBT and utilize those benefits. And I think that veterans who fight for this country shouldn't have to fight for their benefits. And I think that's something that we can all agree and work on. So, thanks Senator for bringing this bill.

And if there are things that we could do to make sure that we're taking care of those who fought and willing to die for this country, I think that's okay on us to do. So, thank you.

Thank you, Assemblymember.

Would you like to close?

Well, as I said - excuse me; I'm a little dry today. It's a righteous bill. It deserves our consideration, and I ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. At a time when so many are losing access to food due to federal actions, we're grateful that you're moving this item forward to make sure our veterans have access to food. The Chair recommends an aye vote. We have a motion and a second. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

File item nine, SB 1201: the motion is do passed to the military and veterans affairs committee. [Roll Call].

Six to zero. That bill is out.

Alright. We are waiting for absent members to join us to add on to the role. But Alright. Madam secretary, can we go through the role for absent members?

[Roll Call]

Alright. Now I now adjourn this meeting of the Assembly Human Service Committee.