Senate Floor

Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

A quorum is present. Would the members and our guests beyond the rail and in the gallery please rise? We will be led in prayer this morning by our guest chaplain, Chaplain Sharondalyn DuPree, after which please remain standing for the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chaplain.

I invite you to join me each in your own way as we enter a moment of prayer or mindful presence. Creator God, source of hope and peace, as this week comes to its close, may we carry the peace of our discoveries and collaborations into our conversations, decisions, and into the responsibilities that await. The heart of Laozi's peace prayer reminds us, if there is to be peace in the world, there must be peace in the nations.

If there is to be peace in the nations, there must be peace in the cities.

If there is to be peace in the cities, there must be peace between neighbors. If there is to be peace between neighbors, there must be peace in the home. If there is to be peace in the home, there must be peace in the heart. This peace we carry forward. Shalom and amen.

Please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Privileges of the floor, there are none. Messages from the Governor will be deemed read. Messages from the Assembly will be deemed read. Reports of committees will be deemed read.

Amendments will be adopted. Motions, resolutions, and notions. Members, it is our honor today to be able to introduce some guests up in the gallery, the Consul General of Chile and the Chilean delegation. Let's welcome them to the California Senate. Now, we will go to motions, resolutions, and notices pursuant to Senate Rule 291.10B.

The following bills are referred to the Committee on Rules, Item 24, AB 1156. Pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10D, the following bills will—are referred to the Committee on Rules, Item 47, SB 685, Item 205, SB 1423. Senator Laird?

Thank you, Mister President. Members, I move that measures reported by the Budget and Fiscal Review Committee on Sunday and Monday, August 30th and August 31st, be given a second reading upon being reported and ordered to third reading.

Senator Seyarto, you are recognized.

I—we object to the motion and request a roll call vote.

Secretary, please read. Secretary, call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator—excuse me. Real quick.

Senator Laird, you are asking for an aye vote. Senator Seyarto, you are asking for a no vote. Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 29. Noes, 9. The motion carries. Under motions, resolutions, and notices, any—Senator Wahab, you are recognized. Senator Wahab, you are unrecognized.

Senator Valladares, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. Pursuant to Senate Rule 28, I move to withdraw SR 138, a resolution condemning the platform of the Democratic Socialists of America from the Rules Committee and be brought to the floor for a debate and vote.

Am I...?

Senator Valladares.

Correct. Let me be clear about what this is and isn't. This is not...

You're making the motion right now.

I'm making the motion and would like to offer my comments on the merits of bringing—of warping this resolution.

It's a motion and not a warp, so the comments are limited to the procedure itself and not the actual—to withdraw. So, the procedure to withdraw.

So, not to the merits of the need.

Not the merits of the bill, but the merits to the procedure for the motion to withdraw.

Yeah. So, let me be clear about why it is important to bring this to the floor. It's not about the Democratic Party. Most Democrats in this chamber don't belong to the DSA and don't share this plot.

Okay. This is about the merits of the bill. So, we're talking about the procedure. So, that's...

Yep.

Thank you, Mister President. I respectfully ask for a vote on this measure.

Thank you so much, Senator Valladares. Senator Ashby, you are recognized.

Yes. I ask that we reject the motion.

Secretary, Senator Valladares is asking for an aye vote. Senator Majority Leader Ashby is asking for a no vote. Secretary, please call roll. Senator...

I just.

Strickland.

I just wanna be clear what the motion is. The motion is to reject the motion or lay it on the table? I just wanna—again, we're voting, so I wanna know specifically what we're voting on and what that motion was.

Senator Ashby, would you like to clarify what your motion is?

It is my understanding that the Senator from Southern California has made a motion to withdraw, and I am requesting that we reject her motion to withdraw.

Do you mean to say you object her motion?

Yes.

Okay.

Senator Valladares, what is your point of order?

So, it's my understanding that Rule 35 only requires that I can find my remarks to the question before the house, and the content of the resolution is the question before us.

That, that's, that's actually not the case. The content or the, the question before the house is the procedure to withdraw, not the bill itself.

Okay. Thank you.

So, with that, Senator Valladares is asking for an aye vote on the motion to withdraw, and Senator Ashby is asking for a no vote on her objection on, on the motion to withdraw. Once again, Senator Valladares is asking for an aye vote on the motion to withdraw, and Senator Ashby is asking for a no vote on that motion to withdraw. Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes—or ayes, 9, noes, 29. The motion fails. Moving on to consideration of the daily file that is before us today. Second reading file, secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2597, 2760, 1881, 2221, 2024.

Second reading file will be deemed read. Members, we are moving to the Assembly third reading. We will begin with Item 179, AB 282, secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 282 by Assemblymember Pellerin, an act relating to elections and declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately.

Senator Wahab, you are recognized for item 179 AB 282.

Thank you. Colleagues, I'm here today to present AB 282 on behalf of Assemblymember Pellerin. This year in California and Georgia, conspiracy theorists have undermined certified election results and attempted to seize ballots and election records in the name of false voter fraud allegations.

AB 282 seeks to prevent threats to our elections by preventing any attempts to seize ballots, election records, and certified voting technology before our election results are certified.

Specifically, this bill will make it a felony to seize, cause, or assist in the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified by the elections official, punishable up to three years in prison.

With increasing threats to the integrity of our state administered elections, California must ensure that every lawfully cast vote can be counted and that will, and that the will of both Republicans and Democratic voters is respected. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Senator Seyarto, you are recognized.

I thank you, Mister president. We saw this in a committee and I had the same concerns. Essentially, we're taking up our time solving a problem that doesn't exist. This has never happened in California in the history of our elections, and I doubt that it's gonna happen going forward. We're talking about seizing ballots prior to them being certified.

And if we're going to solve, if we're gonna continue to bring bills to the floor that solve problems that don't exist, we'll be here till Christmas Eve, not till Monday night. So, I urge a no vote and let's get back to business on problems that do exist.

Seeing no further mics raised for discussion or debate. Senator, you may close.

Appreciate everyone's dialogue. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Secretary, please call absent member.

[roll call]

Ayes 29, Nos 10 on the urgency. Ayes 29, Nos 10 on the measure. It passes.

Moving to unfinished business,. Item 36, SB 1255. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 1255 by Senator Reyes, an act relating to post-secondary education.

Senator Reyes, you are recognized for amendments.

Thank you, Mister President. I rise to present SB 1255, which is back on concurrence. SB 1255 would establish a state-level Hispanic Serving Institution, HSI designation, to recognize institutions of higher education that excel in educating and serving all students, especially Latino students. Amendments of the Assembly remove the eligibility requirement of enrolling at least 25% Latino and Hispanic students and instead focus on Latino data disaggregation, culturally responsive coursework, research initiatives, and intersegmental collaboration. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, senators. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 28. Senator Reyes moves the call. Moving to Item 37, SB 873. Senator—or secretary—please read.

Senate Bill 873 by Senator Reyes, an act relating to courts.

Senator Reyes, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president, members. I rise to present SB 873, ISAT of courts, which is back for concurrence. This bill will protect the legal process for all in California by preventing indiscriminate arrest by ICE agents in and around the grounds of a courthouse. Assembly amendments incorporate feedback from the Attorney General's Office and Judicial Counsel. This bill is also a Latino Caucus priority.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Reyes moves the call.

Members, we are moving to item 39, SB 989. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 989 by Senator Blakespear, an act relating to courts.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Colleagues, I rise to present SB 989 for concurrence. SB 989 expands access to care court by reducing barriers to petitions that can make it difficult for first responders to initiate the process themselves. Specifically, SB 989 allows first responders to request that county behavioral health agencies review and file care petitions for individuals they believe may qualify.

The Assembly amendments make clarifying changes. SB 989 will help connect more Californians with serious mental illness to the care they need. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call the roll.

[roll call]

Senator Blakespear moves the call. We are moving to item 43, SB 9969. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 969 by Senator Reyes, an act relating to weights and measures.

Senator Reyes, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. I rise to present SB 969, which is back on concurrence. This bill was amended in the Assembly to update the regulatory framework for EV charging accuracy testing at the division of measurement standards within the California Department of Food and Agriculture. Amendments remove unnecessary barriers to installing and operating new charging stations across California while ensuring that our counties retain their authority to test chargers at their discretion.

The bill is a product of a series of negotiations between stakeholders, including with the county sealers who are now who are now neutral.

This bill has no remaining opposition and has enjoyed bipartisan support. I respectfully request your aye vote on this important measure.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

Ayes 39, noes zero. The measure passes. Item 48, SB 954. Secretary, please read.

[Roll Call]

Senate Bill 954 by Senator Blakespear, an act relating to environmental quality.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise to present SB 954, which is back on concurrence and addresses the commitment to clean up the CEQA exemptions passed through the budget act last year in SB 131. Amendments taken in the Assembly narrow the bill by removing all provisions related to housing in SB 954 and narrow the scope of the environmental guardrails on the advanced manufacturing CEQA exemption.

Specifically, the amendments remove the requirement that projects be cited in heavy industrial zones and removes the requirement that projects be certified as environmental and labor leaders by the Governor before getting a CEQA exemption, among other changes.

SB 954 still retains many important guardrails, including setbacks from sensitive receptors like daycares and homes, a requirement that projects be LEED eligible, and high roads labor standards.

SB 954 meets the promise of cleanup on SB 131 and provides a path forward to streamline CEQA for manufacturing while retaining important protections for workers, the environment, and communities. I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate,. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[roll call]

Ayes 28, Nos 10. The measure passes.

Item 49, SB 1140. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1140 by Senator Ashby an act relating to pupil safety.

Senator Ashby, you are recognized.

Thank you, presiding officer. I rise to present SB 1140 back on concurrence. The bill was amended to strike provisions of the bill relating to school safety plans and now requires local educational agencies to ensure that contracts for any construction projects take place during school hours include security provisions that limit unauthorized access to school grounds. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate, everyone is on the floor. We have an opportunity to establish unanimous roll call. So secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Noes zero. The measure passes. Item 51, SB 331. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 331 by Senator Menjivar, an act related to health care coverage.

Senator Menjivar, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. Colleagues, SB 331 is the third iteration of my attempt to let California kids hear. I think this is the year that we're finally gonna get to the finish line. As you know, if, if—by law, you have to let a parent know when their kid is born that they're hard of hearing or, or absolutely have complete hearing loss, but there's no ability for them to get that covered.

SB 331 will allow anyone under the age of 21 to get hearing aids through their large enrollment plans. Respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, this item is eligible for unanimous roll call, without objection. Seeing and hearing no objection. Ayes, 40. Noes, zero. The measure passes. Item 58, SB 1388.

I'm sorry. Moving back to Item 52. Item 52, SB 526. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 526 by Senator Perez an act relating to health facilities.

Senator Perez, you are recognized for SB 526 when you are ready.

Thank you, Mister president and members. SB 526 is back on concurrence and it is a entirely new bill. SB 526 would allow licensed affiliates clinics to utilize the CDPH fast tracked licensing process when opening a new health center, relocating an existing one or changing management. In 2010, CDPH implemented a clinic affiliate expedited licensure process to consolidate paperwork and ensure a seamless transition of operations.

But unfortunately, this expedited process is not currently accessible for clinics licensed before 2010, even if those clinics are in good standing.

An example of how this impacts long standing clinics includes planned parenthood, Pasadena, and San Gabriel Valley. Despite providing critical health care in the SGV for more than one hundred years, they cannot use this expedited process to establish a new flagship health center. SB 526 simply clarifies that clinics licensed prior to the establishment of the expedited process still qualify for fast tracked licensure. Let me be clear.

This bill applies to all clinics that utilize the health affiliates model, not just Planned Parenthood, and a clinic would still need to meet all the other requirements of the expedited licensure process to qualify.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Perez moves a call. We are moving to item 58, SB 1388. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1388 by Senator Durazo an act relating to housing developers.

Senator Durazo, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. SB 1388 in its new version establishes the affordable housing risk reduction program to address rising insurance costs and support our efforts in producing and preserving affordable housing. The amendments adopted in the Assembly focus the bill on providing affordable housing providers technical assistance to help reduce their insurance costs and support them in pursuing alternative insurance models. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your concurrence with the Assembly amendments.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Durazo moves a call. We are moving to item 59, SB 420. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 420 by Senator Padilla, an act relating to taxation.

Senator Padilla, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Colleagues rise to present amendments taken up by the Assembly replaced this bill with completely new content. This bill addresses organizations tied to private immigration detention centers cannot claim charitable tax status and be exempted from local property taxes solely because they are organized nonprofits.

A recent investigation in my district revealed that the Brawley Community Foundation, a nonprofit organization that owns an ICE detention facility in Imperial County, avoided paying at least $6,000,000 in property taxes through California's welfare exemption.

Although the foundation claimed to support community development, much of its activity and revenue are connected to the Imperial Regional Detention Facility, which is operated as a private for profit prison contractor.

Forcing local residents to subsidize these facilities with charitable property tax exemptions at the expense of local schools, local services betrays the community and the non profits, and the community and efforts they claim to serve. This bill closes that loophole in our rev and tax code. It protects ratepayers from having to subsidize operations such as ICE detention.

This has received broad bipartisan support and no opposition respectfully. Ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mic raise for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Padilla moves the call. We are moving to Item 67, SB 938. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 938 by Senator Menjivar, an act relating to peace officers.

Senator Menjivar, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. Colleagues, when I first presented SB 938 in house of origin, I gave a commitment on the floor because I wasn't able to amend that this bill was gonna look completely different. Originally, I was asking to ban any individual who worked in federal immigration services under Homeland Security from being unable to be a local law enforcement. Today, what you see is that we are now removing their ability to request a waiver of their basic course.

That means that if they wanna do a lateral move into our local law enforcement here in California, they have to go through the basic course provided by POST. We removed the date of, of when this, when this bill was gonna be tracking those that are gonna be local law enforcement. I think this is a very common sense.

We want them to have this a bill we want them to have the same kind of training that any of our local law enforcements go through so that they can also have the trust of the community. Respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Senator Seyarto, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. I rise in opposition to SB 938. Interfering with the ability of local agencies in California to hire the personnel and recruit the personnel that they need to fill their ranks is—should be—up to them, and as far as the training is concerned, they're perfectly capable of determining whether somebody from another state or somebody from another agency has the necessary training that they are—that is needed to comply with California POST requirements.

So, for those reasons, I oppose this bill and would recommend a no vote.

Senator Menjivar, would you like to close?

I think it's very important we look at this as an equity issue. We wanna make sure everyone has the adequate training that we, as legislators, have deemed is, is necessary for our local law enforcement officers to be working on our streets.

This is about ensuring that no one has an upper hand, especially when those certain individuals have become immigration officers with literally just thirty days of training, and then they get a gun and go out in the streets with no other additional training that our local law enforcement get, this—which is why this bill is very important. Respectfully asking for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Menjivar moves the call. Item 73, AB 1974. Secretary, please read.

Assembly bill 1974 by Assembly member Stefani an act relating to firearms.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. Members, I rise to present AB 1974 by Assembly member Stefani. AB 1974 gives Californians a safe voluntary option to temporarily store a firearm when keeping it at home is no longer the safest choice. When someone is experiencing a mental health crisis or another difficult moment, access to a firearm can mean the difference between life and death.

This bill establishes a statewide framework for law enforcement agencies that choose to offer voluntary firearms storage programs, ensuring firearms are handled, stored, and returned safely and consistently.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Blakespear moves a call. Moving to item 87AB19917. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1917 by Assembly of Avila Farias, an act relating to school employees.

Senator Reyes, you are recognized for AB 917.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise to present AB 917 on behalf of Assemblymember Avila Farias. AB 917 will ensure that deserving educators and school employees in all school districts and county offices of education have an opportunity to achieve permanent employment status.

This bill would require local education agencies to grant permanent status to certificated employees in school districts and counties with an average daily attendance of less than 250. This is already a requirement for schools with an average daily attendance of more than 250.

Due process for teachers plays a critical role in protecting against racial discrimination by requiring fair and impartial procedures for employment decisions. AB 917 will help attract and retain potential educators, provide them with career stability, and diversify California's education workforce. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, senators. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Reyes moves the call. We are moving to item 123, AB 216. Oh, I I'm rushing ahead of time. Please resume with roll call.

[roll call]

Now Senator Reyes moves the call. We are moving to item 123, AB 2179. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2179 by Assemblymember Patel, an act relating to restraining orders.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized for AB 2179.

Thank you, Mister president. Members, I rise to present AB 2179 by Assemblymember Patel, which allows workplace violence restraining order petitions to be filed electronically and allows parties and witnesses to appear remotely at court hearings.

The bill also allows employers to seek a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of an entire workplace when a threat is directed at the work site, helping protect all employees from workplace violence.

Today, Californians seeking other types of restraining orders, such as domestic violence, civil harassment, elder abuse, and gun violence restraining orders already have access to these tools. But individuals seeking protection from workplace violence are still required to travel to court in person to file paperwork or participate in hearings.

This bill aligns workplace violence restraining orders with existing restraining order processes and improves access to justice. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no further discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Blakespear moves a call. Moving to 130, AB 1841. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1841 by Assemblymember Ramos, an act relating to state holidays.

Senator Richardson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president and members. I rise on behalf of Assemblymember Ramos to present AB 1841 that would make the 4th Friday of September Native American Day and would authorize it as a paid holiday. AB 1841 is not simply about adding another paid holiday to the calendar. It's about acknowledging true history of California and giving recognition to the original people of these lands.

California is home to the largest Native American population in the nation with a 109 federally recognized tribes, each with their own unique original land area, history, and culture.

Native American Day provides us with an opportunity to honor

Excuse me. My apologies for interrupting you. There seems to be amendments pending on this particular bill. So perhaps for now, we're going to skip this bill.

I'd love an opportunity to speak further on their behalf. Thank you.

You will have that opportunity come your way. Members, moving to the next item 141, AB 605. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 605 by Assemblymember Muratsuchi an act relating to employment.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized once again for AB 605.

Thank you, Mister President. Members, I rise to present AB 605, which addresses refinery staffing shortages and worker safety by establishing a refinery staffing task force. Closures and long term idling in California's refineries are leading to significant staffing shortages. These shortages are causing workers to work grueling schedules, often ten to twelve hours a day, six days a week, which is impacting their performance, causing further retention problems, and increasing the likelihood of accidents. The increased risk is not limited to refinery employees.

Nearby communities, many of which are disadvantaged, are at greater risk as well. AB 605 by Assembly mayor Assembly member Muratsuchi addresses this increased risk by establishing a 14 member refinery staffing task force tasked with developing strategies to ensure maximum employee retention. This task force will bring together workers, industry experts, and other key stakeholders to identify practical solutions to staffing challenges and strengthen safety at our refineries. AB 605 ensures that our workers and surrounding communities are protected from injury and other damage damages.

I respectfully, urge your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Blakespear moves the call. Item 146, AB 1983. Secretary, please read.

Assembly bill 1983 by Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, an act relating to continuing care contracts.

Senator Laird.

Thank you, Mister President. Assembly bill 1983 allows continuing care retirement communities to use a sequential order method when repaying entrance fees to residents or their states, providing a more predictable, transparent, and orderly process for residents and their family. Their support on both sides, I respectfully ask for an iPhone.

Thank you, senators. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Laird moves the call. We are moving to Item 148, AB 2573. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 2573 by Assemblymember Sharp-Collins, an act relating to elections.

Senator Doctor Weber Pierson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. I am pleased to present AB 2773 on behalf of Assemblymember Sharp-Collins. Last year, the Legislature passed AB 1392 with the goal to strengthen protections for elected individuals. However, as counties began implementing AB 1392, they encountered practical and administrative questions.

AB 2573 clarifies and streamlines the implementation of California's confidential voter registration program by expanding eligibility, establishing clear procedures and timelines for maintaining confidential status, ensuring secure voting options, allowing immediate family members to participate, and preserving the existing journalist exemption.

At its core, this measure strengthens our democracy by allowing individuals to serve without unnecessary exposure to personal risk while preserving secure and reliable access to the ballot. AB 2573 closes implementation gaps and ensures confidential voter protections are applied consistently across counties. Amendments clarify the information available for disclosure. Respectfully ask for an aye vote on AB 2573.

Thank you, senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Doctor Weber Pierson moves the call. Item 155, AB 2770. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2770 by Assembly member Alvarez, an act relating to state property.

Senator Jones, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president and members. AB 2770 is a very interesting bill that has been a lot of work between Assembly member Alvarez, myself, and the San Pascual Band of Mission Indians and some state agencies. AB 2770 transfers approximately 3.6 acres within the San Pascual Battlefield State Park to the San Pascual Band of Mission Indians at no cost.

The property includes a tribal cemetery and holds significant cultural and spiritual importance to the San Pascual people. Following the transfer, the tribe plans to invest the in the property and reopen it as a public park that honors and shares its history and culture.

AB 2770 returns culturally significant land to the San Pascual Band while providing for its continued stewardship and public use. I ask for your aye vote on AB 2770.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Jones moves a call. Item 156, AB 1039. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1039 by a Assemblymember Hart, an act relating to state government.

Senator McNerney, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Distinguished colleagues, I'm pleased to present AB 1039 on behalf of Assembly member Greg Hart, a bill that requires state agencies to provide not small nonprofit organizations 25% of funds in the grant in advance of all new contracts and grants. A lack of advance pay can deter under resourced organizations from applying for state funded projects.

The non profits who do apply must currently either take on high interest loans to cover up startup costs or deploy or scale back their programs. AB 1039 addresses this by requiring advanced payment of up to 25% of funds for new grants and contracts.

Amendments were taken in the Senate to narrow this bill to apply only grants to under a 150,000 to contracts under under 50,000, to provide an opt and to provide an opt out for agencies and create a a unified framework for agencies to follow. This is a good bill for non for small nonprofits. Everyone's district, benefits from nonprofits, so I do ask for an aye vote on this.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call the roll.

[roll call]

Senator McNerney moves the call. Item 158, AB 1815. Secretary, please read.

Assembly bill 1815 by Assembly member Wicks, an act relating to housing.

Senator Wiener, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Colleagues, I rise to present AB 1815 on behalf of Assembly member Wicks. This bill is a result of her work as Chair of the Select Committee on Housing construction innovation. AB 1815 creates a standardization or creates standardization for factory built housing needs by prohibiting local jurisdictions from imposing or enforcing building standards that exceed the state minimum building standards on factory built housing structures.

The bill maintains a clear pathway for local communities to impose standards necessary for health and safety. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Weiner moves the call. Item 170, AB 540. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 540 by Assemblymember Connolly, an act relating to civil actions.

Senator Laird, you are recognized.

Thank you very much, Mister President. AB 540 clarifies issues related to economic—to electronic service—lawyer referral services, and creates a voluntary first look procedure, which allows sensitive records to be reviewed for privacy and relevance before they are provided. There's support on both sides. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator, and seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Laird moves the call. Members, give us one minute. Please stay on the floor. Okay. Give us five one minutes, but please stay on the floor.

The Senate will be in recess for just a few minutes. Please stay on the floor. Members, we are going to lift the call on items. So, if you can make your way back to the floor for votes, we are lifting the call on items today, right now. Members, we are lifting the call on file item 36 SB 1255.

Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 30, nos 10. Amendments are concurred in item 37. Lifting call on SB 873. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 30, nos 10. The amendments are concurred in. Lifting call on item 39, SB 989. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 40, nos zero. Amendments are concurred in. Lifting call on item 52, SB 526. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Members, please stay on the floor for these votes.

Ayes, 39. Nos, zero. Amendments are concurred in. Lifting call on item 58 SB 1388. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 30, nos 10. Amendments are concurred in. Lift and call on item 59, SB 420. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 32, nos zero. Amendments are concurred in. Moving lifting call on item 67, SB 938. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 30, nos 10. Amendments are concurred in. Lift and call on item 73, AB 1974. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 36, nos three. The measure passes. Lifting call on a item 87, AB 917.

Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 25, nos 13. The measure passes. Lift and call on item 123, AB 2179. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 40, nos zero. The measure passes. Left and call on item 141, AB 605. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 29, nos 11. The measure passes. Moving to lifting call on item 146, AB 1983. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Aye 40, nos zero. The measure passes. Lift and call on item 148, AB 2573. Secretary, call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 35, nos zero. The measure passes. Lift and call on item 155, AB 2770. Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 40, nos zero. The measure passes. Lifting call on item 156, AB 1815. Secretary call absent members.

Ayes 40. Nos zero. The measure passes. Lifting call on item 170, AB 540.

[Roll Call]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 39. Nos zero. The measure passes. Give us one minute, please.

Members, we are printing some documents, and give us just one minute, and we need everybody on the floor to wrap this up strong. The Senate will reconvene in thirty seconds. All members to the floor. Members, we are going to start back at unfinished business. Item 55, SB 804.

Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 804 by Senator Archuleta, an act relating to pipeline safety.

Senator Archuleta, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President. I rise to present Senate Bill 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, which is back on concurrence. This bill tasks the Office of the State Fire Marshal to establish hydrogen pipeline safety standards and requires the California Public Utilities Commission to recommend to the legislature a regulatory framework for pipelines carrying blends of hydrogen. Assembly amendments ensure that the Office of the State Fire Marshal has clear authority, appropriate enforcement tools, and a fee structure sufficient to administer this new hydrogen pipeline safety program.

And with that, I ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion and debate, secretary, please call roll.

[Roll Call]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[roll call]

Ayes 38. Nos,0. Amendments are concurred in.

We are going to quickly move to special consent calendar since we have everybody on the floor. Is there anybody that would like to remove an item from the consent calendar?

Seeing none. Secretary, please call the roll. Please read.

Senate Bill 661,1046, 329, 891, 991, 1208, 1276, 626, 944, 1167, 1271, 1445, and Senate Resolution 140.

Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Aye 39, no 0. On item 180, Aye 39, no 0. On the remaining items of the consent special consent calendar.

Members, we are moving to item 60, SB 675. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 675 by Senator Padilla, an act relating to the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District.

Senator Padilla, you are recognized.

Thank you very much, Mister President and colleagues. I rise to present—this bill content is presented for the first time. This bill would restructure the Board of Imperial County Air Pollution Control District to increase the board membership to include five elected city reps, six public members with backgrounds in agricultural labor environmental justice special districts in public health. This would require the district to post information related to air permits on a public wet—website—in order to afford greater, greater public access and information.

Imperial County continuously deals with some of the worst air quality in the state.

The American Lung Association states one of 20 counties in the nation to receive an F grade in all three measures of pollution—ozone, short-term particle pollution, excuse me, and year-round particle pollution. With reductions in the Lower Colorado River Basin, the Salton Sea is shrinking, exposing the toxic lakebed containing pesticides, fertilizer, DDT, and heavy metals, which contribute to dangerous dust storms in the area. This area also has one of the highest childhood asthma hospitalization rates in the state, nearly twice as high as the state average.

Given the unique environmental circumstances in this county, this bill closely mirrors a change made to the San Diego Air Pollution Control District seven years ago, creating broader representation on this critical public board and ensuring the right expertise, the right community representation, are present to deal with these critical issues. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Senator Padilla moves call. Item 90, AB 1602. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1602 by Senator Blanca Rubio, an act relating to Foster Youth.

Senator Arreguin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise to present AB 162 on behalf of Assembly member Rubio. AB 162 establishes a state watch child welfare disaster response fund and authorizes the California Department of Social Services to quickly distribute emergency assistance to counties when a state or local disaster is declared.

This bill is no registered opposition and has enjoyed bipartisan support and is also a legislative Women's Caucus priority bill. Thank you and respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call the roll.

[roll call]

Senator Arreguin moves the call. Item 95, AB 2142. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 2142 by Assemblymember Garcia, an act relating to classified employees.

Senator Smallwood Cuevas, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Good morning, colleagues. I rise on behalf of Assembly member Garcia to present AB 2142. This is a short term. Employees are being hired and kept on longer than what is considered short term with no proper classification.

Some examples include employees kept as short term employees for ten years or more without access to basic benefits such as sick time or sick leave. AB 2142 ensures that employees hired as short term where the work is repeatedly done for longer than 75% of the school year are given the benefits and protections they are entitled to as permanent staff. With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Senator Smallwood Cuevas moves a call. Item 99, AB 1870.

What about 96? 96.

Members, we are moving to item 96 AB 2551. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2551 by Assemblymember Elhawary, an act relating to public postsecondary education.

Senator Perez, you are recognized.

Good morning, Mister President. I rise to present AB 2551 on behalf of Assemblymember Elhawary, which would increase transparency and uplift student voices through two requirements.

First, the CSU will be required, and the UC will be requested to hold at least two student hearings giving feedback on content-neutral time, place, manner policies affecting their right to participate in expressive activities on campus.

Second, it would require demographic data collection on students with TPM violations and their punishments promoting transparency and ensuring TPM's fair enforcement and let me be clear: this bill does not repeal TPM policies.

This is about data collection to make sure these policies and punishments are being equally enforced and making sure that students' voices are heard. We've heard from students who have raised concerns, as well as from the author herself.

My office worked directly with the author's office on working through some of these amendments to make sure that we were gathering data to better understand these concerns. Our goal is to protect all students, and to do so, we must ensure policies surrounding students' expression are transparent, accountable, and enforced equitably.

Students of color report experiencing violent arrest at peaceful protest, targeted disciplinary actions, and bureaucratic barriers that suppress their right to protest, leading many student organizers to fear severe repercussions and reprisal.

As a former student activist, I care deeply about empowering all students and protecting their abilities to organize and advocate. Through data collection and student hearings, this bill helps ensure the equitable and consistent enforcement of TPM policy. I respectfully ask your aye vote at the appropriate time.

Senator Gonzalez, you are rec- oh, Senator Becker, you are recognized.

Thank you. If you have a student at a UC or, as I do at a CSU, you knew that student life is vibrant. The protests and rallies are alive and well and an essential part. Now the system-wide standardization of time, place, and manner restrictions, we can debate whether we want them, we don't want them.

Certainly, the UC and the CSU feel they've been very helpful for having consistency across the campuses. With respect to the author, this bill was a gut and amend based on argument that's not supported by the facts. So first, it was that students receiving felonies because of time, place, and manner restrictions.

That turned out to not be the case. Of course, someone who commits assault or serves property damage, they can face criminal charges, but that has nothing to do with time, place, and manner restrictions.

Then it was said, oh, they're being spelled for time, place, and matter restrictions. Turned out that was not the case, either. So, I think this was a gut in a man that was really rushed.

Even just now, I was just talking to the author, saying, oh, we'll be able to tell by campuses how things are being treated. Actually, the bill doesn't say that. It's just going to be, I just confirmed with the CSU- it would just be a lump sum, and they're not by federal law; they're not allowed to report anything less than 10 people. Anything less than 10 has an asterisk.

So, they're trying to figure out how they would bucket these violations. They already report on the number of them, but they really don't know. Basically, everything's going to be asterisked because you can't, again, unless there's 10 types of a certain violation by a certain ethnicity, by a certain gender; they won't be able to report it.

So, it's really not well thought through, this bill, which is why I will be abstaining today. I think we can come back next year and have a conversation about these restrictions and whether they're helpful on campuses or not helpful.

We can absolutely have that debate. Otherwise, the real data is, are they giving, are they being implemented consistently? We're not going to get that from this for sure. So, again, happy to come back next year, have the debate about, you know, that's what our body does. Or any one member can certainly do that and explore, and get different points of view.

But this was a rush gut, of an amend that was unfortunately not well thought through and very confident it was built to you know, as it is now, even just a study, to come back with a bill next year to do it. So, let's just have that debate next year. I will be abstaining from this bill here today. Thank you.

Senator Stern, you are recognized.

Thank you.

Senator Gonzalez, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister President and members. I rise in very strong support of AB 2551, and I thank my colleague from Los Angeles in both the Assembly and my Senate colleague here for, from Pasadena for bringing this forward.

I appreciate the author's willingness, and I do hear my friend and good colleague from San Mateo about the concerns. Certainly, understand those.

She has been willing to listen to the opposition's concerns so much so, that we do have a floor alert by Jewish California that expresses their neutral position because of how much work she's put in.

In fact, the diversity caucus has held a forum of students, student voices, that go to our campus that are on our campuses every single day, hearing directly from them and their perspective because their voices matter too.

This bill allows students to have that transparency for student policies that they feel too are inequitable. The bill serves as a transparency measure and nothing more.

It opens the process by doing a couple of things, holding an open forum to gather student feedback on content neutral, time, place, and manner or the TPM restrictions and their enforcement, and report annually on student conduct violations related to campus protests and what disciplines have been administered.

This is not and should not be a binary choice but certainly should have a lot more discussion. I agree with my colleagues that it absolutely should. But we have done many gut and amends on education policy. The diversity caucuses have been steadfast in coming together to collaborate on gut and amend policy, and you know what? It's not always perfect.

I agree. But with ongoing discussions and commitments to engage respectfully, and to ensure that we get this right for all of our students regardless of who they are and where they come from and what they look like, then I think would be better off.

And this is certainly a step in the right direction to ensure the safety and protection of all California students. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Stern, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise in unfortunate opposition to this measure. We're at a moment of relative calm here in California on issues that have torn our campuses apart, that have torn our caucuses apart, that have divided us along racial and ethnic and religious lines.

Yet here we are going to reignite that fire on our higher ed campuses and here in these chambers, it's a deeply unfortunate situation. Due respect to my colleague from Long Beach, this has not been a consultation or a collaboration with the Jewish caucus by any means.

I have had conversations and I do appreciate the author's outreach, but what we're going to endeavor into here is a study, that won't even last the full course of a term on campus, to gather a skewed dataset, to then already have a plan in mind to undo our work.

Look no further than the, I guess you can call them not the sponsors, but the sponsors of this measure, who are actively advocating, not just to undo the safety measures we have on campuses to make sure that Jewish students feel safe.

But to litmus test any candidate in the state of California that believes that Israel has a right to exist and to somehow make that a disqualifier from being a Democrat. It is a sad and divisive state of affairs. I think this study will only, further exacerbate that divide.

I did request of the author, and I guess the answer is no, to actually just allow that study to last a full term of a school year. Now it will only go from January to June. The only issues that would be reported in this study is whether, the Jewish caucuses bill negatively impacts minorities of other races and genders.

It is inherently designed to sort of impugn our work there, whereas the entire intent of that legislation was actually to restore calm and unity, and vibrancy to our campuses so that when we are protesting the president's actions or an ICE walkout that people feel together again.

That students feel like their free-speech rights are honored, but that they can also walk to class wearing a Kipa or a Magen David on their neck and not feel like they're going to get beat up.

Unfortunately, this this bill is going to further exacerbate that process if the bill had, for example, looked at the number of permits issued and the number of permits denied.

Looked at the distinctions between the implementation of our legislation and the implementation of time, place, and manner, which precedes any legislation we passed in these chambers, which is an underlying constitutional right that may be being misused on UC campuses or on CSU campuses or either.

This bill unfortunately doesn't make those distinctions, and so for that reason, I unfortunately oppose.

Senator doctor Weber Pierson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise in support of AB 2551, and I understand the concerns about a gut and amend. We all dislike gut and amend, but we all also do gut and amend. When I look at this bill, I see two things, really.

It's a report that's already done, that asked for data to be disaggregated by race and gender, and we are a body that always ask for this kind of information.

This is this is nothing new. We had a debate yesterday around ACA7 and the importance of actually being able to look at people's race and gender because we understand that things are different, based on race and gender at time.

Then, oh, holding open forums on college campuses, which honestly is nothing new. The first time I actually heard about the legislature engaging in doing open forums on college campuses, was when my mom was in the Assembly, and she had a select committee on campus climate.

She started it. She chaired it, and the purpose was to go around and talk to college students and investigate, address, prevent bias incidences, discrimination, and hate crimes across California's public higher institution system. So, I don't see anything in this bill that is alarming, but I do have a question for the author.

Will the author take your question?

Certainly.

Thank you. So, I've heard that the study, I guess, is going to end in June? It's a six-month study or something?

When we made amendments and my consultants made amendments, there was no end date, to my understanding that we put around when the study would end, that it would only last for six months.

So, and there's nothing reflective of that in the bill. If there needs to be clarity around that given to the UC system and the CSU system, my office is happy to have that conversation given that I Chair the Senate education committee, but that is not something that's currently reflected there.

This is, I'll be honest with you, the first time this concern's being raised to me. Obviously, I'm not the author of this bill, but happy to clarify that understanding with our institutions.

Thank you for that. If we, at some point, could get clarification because I don't see anything in the bill that specifically states anything in June. I see the open forms must be done by 12/31/2027, but I rise in support.

I think being able to listen to all of our students on our campuses getting better, well informed data by aggregating it, disaggregating it, by gender and race. I don't think that leads to anything but just more information for everyone to have. So, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president, and I align my comments with a good Senator from San Diego, and I rise in support of AB 2551. I appreciate the ongoing discussion. Complex issues are not easy to fix.

I want to say when we talk about my colleague, from San Fernando Valley talked about, the issue of undoing work, I think about all of the work that has gone into things like decarcerating, our prisons, having fair criminal justice legislation, and seeing all of the victories.

Then, you know, once I came into the legislature, seeing what happened with Prop 36 and how we're creating new felonies, how we're creating crimes of poverty now, and even trying to increase folks up to a third strike on poverty crimes. This this is a place where we will continue to interrogate complex issues.

This is an this is an opportunity, I think for diversity caucuses and all members in this chamber, to look at data and let data evidence help us drive our solutions. So, I stand in support of this bill today. I think our college campuses have served as a catalyst for social change and through protest movements, civil rights.

So many of our advances be it ethnic studies, international human rights, LGBTQ rights, women rights. The college campuses are the places where these robust discussions and enlightenment happen, and students should know what the rules are, how those rules are applied, and whether they are being enforced fairly and consistently.

And I think that's what AB 2551 is, it helps us get closer to the truth and closer to solutions that uplift and unite us all, and with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Wahab, you are recognized.

Thank you. When the original bill was brought forward, SB 1287, I did have concerns about how this was going to be implemented and potentially the risks to students who are still trying to discover how to use their voice, what opinions they have, how they want to protest, and much more.

I want to be very clear. I fully support, all the efforts in this, state legislature that has fought against hate of all kinds, whether it be antisemitism, whether it be, you know, racism, sexism, and much more. But I also want to highlight that there's a lot of misinformation about this very simple bill.

This bill is about data. One of the concepts I really just want to highlight is AB 2551 does not repeal campus safety protections or eliminate time, place, and manner rules. Campus safety protections or eliminate time, place, and manner rules.

The current bill preserves protections against violence, harassment, intimidation, discrimination, and interference with educational access. It adds transparency about how protest related discipline is imposed and gives students one opportunity to provide feedback on how existing rules are enforced.

This was the commentary we had on the Senate floor two years ago. The Senator that brought this bill forward, you know, the entire concern was the enforcement piece for me, implementation and enforcement.

So, just to be clear, as people are stating that AB 2551 weakens, SB 1287 and campus safety protections, it does not take away those protections at all. People say it undermines the time, place, and manner restrictions. It does not.

Safety rules remain and accountability is added. Opposition states that this will allow disruptive protests to interfere with classes and other students. These those prohibitions remain explicitly in statute. The question about AB 2551 asks is different. When students violate protest rules, are comparable violations producing comparable consequences?

That is our main concern. Right? We do not want to punish a kid who literally is just voicing their concern and yes, may or should, could be disciplined, but are they equal? Are we ruining the lives of some of these students? Are we, doing anything egregious?

That needs to be studied, and opposition states there is no evidence that the current system is a problem, but we should not have to choose between assumptions. We should have data. That is one of the reasons why so many of our issues that we're working on today are systemic because people just assume that everything works because the law was written perfectly. No.

Even from the beginning, there was a lot of opposition, but there is an imbalance of power and voices and much more, and students are not in these rooms to kind of highlight what is the reality on the ground at these campuses. Student forums will put pressure on universities to weaken their rules is one of the things oppositions says.

The reality is students receive no veto power. Right? Universities retain their authority to establish and enforce laws on campus, and the forum provision then sunsets on 01/01/2028. So, I will just highlight that, I think that there's a lot of concern, and especially when it threatens Jewish students and rollbacks of protections against antisemitism.

But the reality is that the Jewish California actually withdrew its opposition and moved to neutral. I want to be very, very clear about that. Jewish California withdrew its opposition and moved to neutral. So, protecting Jewish students from antisemitism and ensuring that all students receive fair, consistent treatment under campus rules, are compatible goals.

Again, I've said it many, many times, this is not a zero-sum game. We have to protect all students regardless of faith, regardless of, identity, and much more. So, I really want to thank the author for working hard on this.

I also just want to say that this is a sensitive issue that many people feel very tied to, but this is the right thing to do, is to gather data and also make the most appropriate decision. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Becker, you have two minutes left.

Thank you. Just want to rise quickly. I think they went to neutral because this isn't going to tell us anything, and I just feel like we have a responsibility to sort of call that out. I mean, we're talking of 460,000 students in our CSU system in 2025. My data says we have 201 violations because they already report violations.

So, we disaggregate that by race and gender, by type of violation. What are we going to get? 71 violations, my understanding, out of 300,000, UC students. So again, they can't report anything less than 10 by federal law in a category. So, we're going to have 10 people of a certain race, of a certain ethnicity, that committed a certain violation.

So, it's a lot of it's much to do about nothing. It's unfortunately just not well thought through. I think we should have done this in consultation with the CSU. I just got off the phone with them. They don't know how they're implementing this, how they would implement it.

We really need more time. So, it's not a bad thing. Nothing bad is going to happen. I just have a feeling that we really need to call something out when it's rushed, and that's why I will be personally abstaining from this bill today. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mites raised for further discussion or debate. Senator, would you like to close?

Certainly. I've appreciate hearing the discussion from my colleagues, the concerns that have been raised. The author's done a tremendous amount of work on this issue. She raised this to me after hearing directly from students that felt like they had faced unfair punishment as a result of their activism on campuses.

I do think that the legislature does have a responsibility to further explore that issue when it's being raised. I've heard these stories directly from students, and not just black and brown students, from white students as well.

When students are engaging in activism on their campuses, when it's for progressive issues and I know it has been raised already, Israel, Palestine. I'm talking about other progressive issues as well.

Being active on Black Lives Matters issues, protesting what's happening with the Federal Government, calling for an abolition to ICE. That they feel like they are facing unfair punishment and not being treated the same as maybe their counterparts when they are having activism on their campus for conservative events.

So, it is a worthy discussion for us to look at whether or not those policies are being applied fairly across the board. Now TPM is a policy that has existed prior to this bill that's been referenced a few times, the Glaser bill, and I want to be really clear about that because there seems to be some confusion about what TPM is.

This bill does nothing to touch TPM, to remove TPM. All it is looking at is the application of those policies and assessing the students that it's impacting. That data will better inform our decisions.

I understand there may be stakeholders outside of this building that might have opinions on TPM policies. That has nothing to do with this bill today and with the members that are in this legislature. It's our responsibility to review data, to review evidence, and to determine what our actions are going to be at the end of the day. So, with that, I will close.

I could sit here and give examples all day of somebody that was a student activist on campus, that used to sit in the middle of the President's Office with a gas mask on because they used to mace us for protesting student fee increases.

That there are a number of times that I've watched both the CSU and the UC use aggressive force on students. We watched UC Davis several years ago spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, to hide that they had maced students who were protesting student fee increases. So, these are things that have happened.

I recognize it makes folks uncomfortable to recognize that, but that is the reality and centering our students in these discussions is a worthy investment. I urge an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Please, secretary, please call roll.

[ROLL CALL]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[ROLL CALL]

Aye 22, Nos 12, the measure passes.

Moving to item 115, AB 1715. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1715 by Assembly member Schiavo, an act relating to public utilities.

Senator Stern, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. AB 1715 requires investor owned electric and gas utilities to report taxpayer funding greater than 1,000,000 that they've received or pursuing the CPUC and requires the commission to ensure any savings accrued or passed on to rate payers.

Also requires the PUC by January 2028 to annually submit a report outlining the number of grants and loans provided, source of those funds and anticipated rate payer savings, good governance and transparency bill and the authors removed all opposition, bipartisan support respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[roll call]

Aye's, 32. No's 5. The measure passes.

Moving to item 128, AB 2074. Secretary, please read.

Assembly bill 2074 by Assembly member Haney, an act relating to landuse

Senator Arreguin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. I rise to present AB 2074, the Downtown Revitalization Act, on behalf of Assemblymember Haney. AB 2074 addresses two overlapping challenges facing our state, alleviating our housing shortage and revitalizing our struggling downtowns.

AB 2074 creates a streamlined ministerial approval pathway for high rise, mixed income housing with strong labor standards in transit rich city centers. This bill just applies to seven cities, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, and San Jose, and would allow other cities to opt into the bill if they so choose.

AB 2074 also paves the way for innovative construction financing for much needed residential mixed use development. It will require the California Housing Finance Agency to publish a housing construction loan and financing study by early 2028 to inform future creative funding products.

In an unprecedented move, colleagues, this bill is cosponsored by California YIMBY and the State Building Trades. It's truly a pro housing and pro labor bills and is supported by our big city mayors.

AB 2074 will help bring residents and activity back to our downtowns, unlock innovative housing finance tools, and ensure that projects we are building are supported by high road jobs and a well paid construction workforce. So respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics raised for discussion or debate. Please call roll.

[roll call]

Secretary, please call absent member.

[roll call]

Ayes 40. No 0. The measure passes.

Moving to item 131, AB 2601.

Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2601 by Assembly member Lee, an act relating to land use.

Senator Arreguin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president, colleagues. I rise to present AB 2601 on behalf of Assemblymember Lee. This measure allows housing developers to apply for concurrent review projects that involve specific streamlining projects and lot splitting.

We passed a lot of bills that shorten timelines exempt housing projects of different types of local review and require ministerial approval. This bill seeks to complement those housing reforms by adding shot clocks and ensuring that we can have expedited review processes, allowing for concurrent review, a parcel map splits, and these housing projects can create efficiency in the development of new housing units.

This bill does not change who can pursue lot splits. It does not expand where lot splits can happen. It does not require local governments to approve for lot splits. This bill simply allows for more efficient mechanism to approve projects that involve multiple aspects that require approvals. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no microphones raised for discussion or debate. Secretary, please call roll.

[roll call]

Secretary, please call absent members.

[roll call]

Senator Arreguin moves the call.

We're moving to item 140, AB 2253. Secretary, please read.

A Senate bill 2253 by Assembly member Burner, and I connect to solid waste.

Senator Reyes, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mister president. Senators, I rise to present AB 2253 on behalf of Assemblymember Berner. AB 2253 would protect consumers from deceptive recycled content claims by requiring companies that advertise recycled content in their products to be honest about the amount of recycled material used. This is a truth in marketing bill. Currently, companies can use accounting methods to claim that their products contain recycled content when oftentimes it is lower than point 1%.

In our affordability crisis, Californians shouldn't be charged more for a product that claims to be green when it isn't. Furthermore, this practice undercuts the California companies that have invested billions of dollars in real recycling and product manufacturers that pay a premium for more sustainable materials. The author has been working with opposition and several organizations are now neutral or even support the measure. On behalf of Assembly member Burner, I respectfully request your aye vote.

Senator Blake Spear, you are recognized.

Yes. Thank you, Mister president and colleagues. I rise in support of this important bill, just to highlight that this really is a truth in marketing bill.

When you see a plastic water bottle or a plastic Pepsi bottle and it says a 100% recycled, you want to actually believe that it is a 100% recycled plastic and that the company is not recycling cardboard in a different arm of their business and then getting credit for it under a system called mass balance, and claiming that that plastic in that bottle is recycled. So this is a really important bill that attacks something that's happening right now in our system, and I urge your aye vote.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no other mics up for discussion or debate, Senator Reyes, would you like to close?