Senate Floor

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

A quorum present. Colleagues, if you could kindly return to our seats and please rise. And with the guests beyond the railing, please rise. This morning, we'll be led in prayer by our our guest, Chaplain, Reverend Jason Benzie, after which please remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.

Let us pray. God of all nations and peoples, with the pieces of our broken dreams, with unfinished resolves, and fragments of love, we give thanks for the good we have been able to accomplish. Affect our wills, capture our imaginations for all that faith makes possible. Help us to be just, loving, merciful, grateful, and compassionate. Free us from envy, cruelty, violence, boasting, prejudice, scapegoating, and malice towards anyone. Help us to be loving as you are, loving God. Namaste. Thanks be to God. Amen.

Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance There are no privileges of the floor. Messages from the governor will be deemed read. Messages from the Assembly will be deemed read. Reports of committee will be deemed read and amendments adopted.

Would any member wish to be recognized under motions, resolutions, and notices? Senator Laird.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I request unanimous consent to submit a letter to the journal for Senate bill 577, which was passed yesterday. The letter has been properly, reviewed and approved.

Without objection, the desk is noted. Any other member wish to be recognized under motions, resolutions, and notices? Senator McNerney.

Thank you madam president. I request unanimous consent for a letter to be printed in the journal regarding SB 947. This letter has been approved by the leadership and the secretary.

Thank you, Senator. That desk is noted. Without objection. Moving into the meat of our day, our long, long day, consideration of the daily file. We're gonna start off with governor's appointments. We have file item one, two, three, four, and five. Senator Gomez Reyes is in charge of this section. Senator.

Thank you, madam president and members. File item number 1 is a confirmation of Rusty Reyes for appointment to the University of California Board of Regents. After serving in the State Assembly, he was the director of the Department of Parks and Recreation. Since 2002, he has been a managing partner at the firm California...

Senator, your show is gonna have to wait for a little bit. We are gonna come back to governor's appointments. We're gonna start with Assembly third reading. File number 45, Senator Rubio. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2727 by Assemblymember Nguyen, an act relating to corrections.

Support support, Senator.

Thank you, madam president. I rise to present Assembly Bill AB 2727 on behalf of Assemblymember Nguyen to this bill is about protecting our children, families, and communities from violent sex offenders who will still pose a large security risk when they are released. This bill simply encourages, something that's really important that individuals undergo sexual dangerousness screening and make sure that we ask the right questions before we release them and put, victims in harm's way.

And with that, I ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senators, if we can establish unanimous roll call, I need everybody on the floor. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 37. No, 0. The measure passes. Senator Durazo with file item 46. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1331 by Assemblymember Elhawary, an act relating to employment.

Senator. Thank you, madam president. Today, I rise to present AB 1331 by Assemblymember Elhawary. As recently amended, AB 1331 will prohibit employers from using high-tech AI powered surveillance technology to monitor workers while they are in the restroom. Our current labor and privacy laws prohibit audio and visual surveillance in workplace restrooms.

But with the rise of AI, employers now have access to technologies that go far beyond the traditional cameras and microphones. Tools such as heat sensors and wearable trackers can collect all sorts of information about workers throughout the workday, yet these technologies remain largely unregulated. There must be a clear boundary when it comes to the privacy of workers in the restroom. Workers deserve to know that when they enter a bathroom at work, they can do so with basic expectation of privacy and dignity.

For these reasons, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. I see no discussion on this matter. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent members.

[Roll Call]

Aye is 28. No is 5. That measure passes. Senator Stern, you have filed item 48. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 179 by Assemblymember Lowenthal, and that relates to business.

Senator Stern.

Thank you, madam president. I rise to present AB 179 on behalf of Assemblymember Lowenthal. This takes an approach, a pretty simple one. If social media platform is designed to be addictive, children 16 should not be exposed to those particular features.

This bill prohibits covered social media companies, platforms from providing addictive features to users 16 including addictive feeds, autoplay and other features designed to maximize engagement and encourage compulsive use. The bill also establishes the safety advisory commission to advise on the implementation and emerging online safety issues. This bill takes a targeted evidence based approach that recognizes that pediatricians, what pediatricians and neuroscientists already know. Younger adolescents are uniquely susceptible to manipulative engagement systems.

Internal documents and testimony from major technology companies show that engagement maximizing features are intentionally designed to keep our users online long.

Internal company documents, independent scientific research and recent jury verdicts as recently as last week, settlement that you all may be aware of all point to the same conclusion, that children 16 are uniquely vulnerable to these designs. The mental health impacts are also clear. Studies consistently associate problematic social media use with anxiety, depression, sleep disorders, psychological distress, poor performance reviews in academic settings, and many other serious serious problems. These consequences show up in classrooms, homes, communities.

The question before us is not whether children should have access to technology or whether they should be allowed to use social media ban that access.

To be clear again, this bill does not ban access to these platforms. The question is whether platforms themselves should be allowed to give children 16 access to these particular product design features that are specifically designed to keep them engaged for as long as possible, to keep those eyes on the screen. AB 1709 says they should not.

The targeted evidence based safeguard that focuses on product design, not speech, and on protecting children in an age when they are particularly vulnerable to these engagement systems, respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. No mics up on the matter. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent member.

Cabaldon.

Ayes, 39. No, 0. That measure passes. Senator Perez with file item 49. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1871 by Assemblymember Fong, an act relating to pupil instruction.

Senator.

Madam president and members, I rise to present AB 1871 on behalf of Assemblymember Fong. AB 1871 proposes reforms to the college and career access pathways dual enrollment program to remove barriers and expand participation. In 2015, the CCAP dual enrollment program was established to expand access to higher education for high school students and allow them to take college courses at their school sites, easing logistical barriers.

AB 1871 will ensure more equitable access to dual enrollment opportunities for all students by addressing those barriers, including removing the requirement that the school principal approve a student's CCAP application, streamlining the application process so that a student competes completes only one application for the duration of their attendance at a community college, and eliminating the four community college courses per term limit to give students flexibility and meeting the current 15 unit cap on dual enrollment courses.

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Alright, senators. We're gonna try to establish unanimous roll call here. If all senators could return, secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Great. We did it. Thank you, senators. Ayes, 39. No, 0.

That measure passes. Senator Stern with fire item 50. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2493 by Assemblymember Petrie-Norris, an act relating to electricity.

Senator.

Thank you, madam president. AB 2493 establishes an enforceable accountability measure to eliminate interconnection backlogs that we know are making our rate payers bear the burden for lost federal tax benefits in the range of billions. Every month of delay that we do not interconnect this clean energy that would otherwise be eligible for federal tax credits continues not only our our fossil fuel dependence and boost makes electricity cost go higher, but it also further destabilizes our utility sector that is under incredible stress at this very moment.

The permitting deadlines are real. Large IOUs and transmission owners, but now may under this must under this legislation file to begin permitting within one year of CAISO approval with some good cause extensions.

This focus on starting not finishing, fewer than 6% of projects currently require a CPUC permit. We also, under this measure, would establish a transmission development monitor to track the progress for large projects, as well as mandatory remedial action where within ninety days, the PUC would have to require utilities and transmission owners to address problems identified by audits, including reallocating resources, sharing equipment, and expediting keep preconstruction work.

Return on equity consequences are significant. Utility or transmission owners record could in in under this legislation be considered in a cost of capital proceeding creating a financial consequence for pure performance or for poor performance. We all want our utilities to be doing more, to interconnect clean energy, to keep our bills low, to manage wildfire risks, but they can't do everything at the same time and keep our credit stable.

This this measure will push them on accountability, but we should bear in mind that we are at a very precarious moment in the state's energy history. This accountability along with our other measures will be critical for delivering the the grid Californians need, but we have to do our part as well.

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

No mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes, 29. Noes, 10. That measure passes. Senator Valladares, you have filed item. Senator Valladares? You have file item 32, support support.

Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 1560 by Senate member Tangipa, an act relating to the political reform act of 1974.

Senator.

Thank you, madam president. Members, today I rise to present AB 1560 by Assemblymember Tangipa. AB 1660 is a simple good governance measure. The bill prohibits individuals convicted of a serious public corruption crime from serving as lobbyists for twelve years following their conviction.

If someone has abused the public's trust through bribery, embezzlement of public money, extortion, or theft of public money, they should not immediately be able to turn around and get it and get paid to influence government. AB 1560 creates a reasonable period of accountability and helps protect the integrity of the legislative process. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

This item is eligible for a unanimous roll call. Any objection? Ayes, 39. No, 0. That measure passes. Senator Allen with file item 47.

Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2440 by Assemblymember Muratsuchi, an act relating to pupil instruction.

Senator Allen.

Thank you, madam president, members. This, has to do with arts and music in schools. Prop 28, which, was approved by the voters in 2022, represented a major step forward in expanding access to arts and music education and for students across our state. But as the local education agencies have begun implementation, it's become clear that additional clarity is needed to ensure that these funds are actually being used effectively and consistent consistently. There's been so much confusion.

The Department of Education has recommended that each LEA, quote, seek guidance from their legal counsel. Great. So, we're we're now, with this bill, seeking to reduce some of the confusion by explicitly allowing LEAs to pool resources, giving our smaller districts a practical path to deliver high quality arts education.

The bill also, gives some clear guidance based on input from the fiscal crisis and management assistance team on the supplement not supplant requirement, that ensures that seeks to ensure that that Prop 28 funds add to existing ongoing investments, not replace them while aligning with state standards and guidance. This approach seeks to give schools clarity, supports compliance, helps protect a stable baseline of funding for arts and music education.

It's about making sure the promise of the of Prop 28 is implemented consistently and reaches students throughout the state of California. It's supported by our PTA, our county superintendents, CTA. This has no registrar position, and I respectfully ask for an I vote.

This item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? Seeing none. Ayes, 39. No, 0.

That measure passes. Secretary, please read file item 35 for the senator again.

Assembly Bill 1680 by Assemblymember of Calderon, an act relating to insurance.

Senator Allen also has support support.

Alright. This bill strengthens accountability by requiring the FAIR plan to take corrective actions following operational violations found by the Department of Insurance. It also allows the insurance commission to adjust policy limits to better fit the needs of Californians. We know that we depend on the FAIR Plan to fill insurance gaps, but we also depend on the FAIR Plan to be transparent, accountable, and responsive. I wanna thank, Senator Calderon, Chair Calderon, for her work on this issue.

This bill aims to improve on all three of those factors, and I respectfully ask for an I vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics up, secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 39, no zero. That measure passes. Senator Becker, you have filed item 38. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2204 by Assemblymember Gabriel, an act relating to prisons.

Senator.

Thank you, madam president. I rise to present AB 2204. This bill would expand access to organized sports in California correctional facilities. Sports can promote improved physical fitness, mental health, and in correctional settings, research has shown that sports programming, thank you, can reduce disciplinary incidents and lower the likelihood that individuals will reoffend.

Also note there's lots of good movies about sports in incarcerated settings. AB 2204 builds on this principle by increasing access to organized sports by directing CDCR to develop a policy on sports programming, by establishing the Second Chance Sports Fund of still take the expansion of programming. The legislation would help ensure that more incarcerated Californians have the opportunity to participate in sports, improving health and well-being at CDCR facilities, and strengthening rebuild of outcomes across the state. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Colleagues, this item item is eligible for unanimous roll call. Any objection? Ayes, 39. No, 0. I'd like to welcome a special guest. We have the Dahle Duo here. Senator Brian Dahle has joined us today. Keep an eye on him so he doesn't do a vote when Dahle is called. Alright.

Senator Cortese with file item 39. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2059 by Assemblymember Wilson, an act relating to environmental quality.

Senator.

Oh, thank you, madam president and senators. I rise to present Assembly Bill 2059 by Assemblymember Wilson. AB 2059 is a targeted fix to how vehicle miles traveled, as we call it, VMT analysis and mitigation is applied to rural transportation projects. The fix is necessary because current VMT mitigation has created unintended consequences, something I think most of us are aware of.

Counties across the state face VMT mitigation that is costly, complex, and unlikely to meaningfully reduce emissions, with those costs depleting limited state and local transportation funding sources.

The bill strikes a balance. It was amended to reflect negotiations with the Senate EQ committee and the administration, And those amendments lower the BMT threshold from 80 to 70% in addition to a sunset with a defined window. The bill has no registered opposition, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Grove, you're recognized.

Thank you, madam president. Just a brief comment. I know it's a support support bill, but I just wanna praise the author for taking the amendments. A lot of times, a lot of you don't take in consideration rural communities and how legislation disproportionately affects them and and Assemblymember Wilson did. And I just wanna say thank you for making these adjustments, taking the amendments, and make sure that rural California is not left behind.

Thank you.

This item is eligible. Sorry, Senator Cortese, please close.

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Any objection to applying the unanimous roll call? Ayes 39, noes zero. That measure passes. Senator Perez with file item 40.

That is AB 2065. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 2065 by Senator Petrie-Norris and accolades to public utilities.

Senator.

Madam President and colleagues, AB 2065 penalizes careless or fraudulent accounting practices by finding investor owned utilities if they recover ineligible costs from rate payers. California rate payers should trust that utility bills accurately reflect the true cost of reliable service. The CPUC reviews utility charges through general rate cases, complex processes with tens of thousands of pages that can take 18 plus months. Given the volume, the CPC and consumer advocates can closely review only a fraction of the information. When utilities recover prohibited costs, the typical consequence is simply returning the money.

A 2023 state auditor report found utilities charged rate payers for disallowing cost including lobbying, personal entertainment, and disproportionate executive overhead. AB 2065 establishes graduated penalties. No penalty if the utility identifies and fixes the prohibited recovery before regulators or others raise the issue. One time penalty if the utility fails to self correct regardless of whether it was an error or lack of reasonable diligence. Three times penalty for 2 or more instances within 5 years or sustained bad practice across reporting periods.

Thank you and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

I see no mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent members.

[Roll Call]

Aye is 29. Noes 8. The measure passes. We're going to file item 36, AB 2564. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 2564, by Assemblymember Ward, an act relating to consumer protection.

Senator Wiener.

Thank you, Madam President. I'm rising to present AB 2564 on behalf of Assemblymember Ward. Right now, colleagues, companies are using, thank you, Madam President. Right now, corporations are using personally identifiable information, collected on consumers, such as their age, their gender, their marital status, their geolocation, or online search history to adjust the price of goods based off of their perceived willingness to pay, and this can jack up the price.

This is all happening without you even knowing it, leaving you with no ability to negotiate or control what price you see at checkout.

At a time when prices for basic necessities are rising across the board, it's more critical than ever to ensure that people are not being unfairly charged higher prices due to their actual, or perceived, characteristics. Let's be clear. This practice hits hardest on lower-income individuals and those with limited shopping options or limited time to shop around. Last year, an investigation by Consumer Reports revealed that grocers created detailed profiles on shoppers based on inferences from data collected through loyalty programs and purchase and search histories.

In January 2025, the Federal Trade Commission released a preliminary study indicating a wide range of personal data being used to set individualized consumer prices.

Unfortunately, with the change in administration, it seems that the FTC and the Federal Government in general have abandoned this issue, yielding to large corporations. Right now, legislatures across the country are waking up to this issue. Over 30 bills have been introduced this year alone in both red states and blue states, and Congress has started to take notice, holding hearings on the issue led by both Democrats and Republicans.

California has always been a leader in consumer protection, and we must ensure that we are not left behind at the expense of our constituents. AB 2564 will put a stop to this practice to ensure consumers are protected from predatory and discriminatory practices designed to maximize consumer spending.

On Friday, the office submitted a letter to the journal and distributed that letter to clarify legislative intent around recent amendments. These amendments provide additional exemptions to ease implementation and reduce liability. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Okay. We got a couple mics on this matter. We're gonna start off with Senator Blakespear.

Okay. Thank you, Madam President. I rise in strong support of this bill, and I'm gonna start with an example. A new dad goes online to look for thermometers because he thinks his baby might have a fever. His search pulls up a list of baby thermometers, but they're more expensive than he expected.

In fact, they're a lot more expensive than the ones he looked at yesterday. Advertisers know that this new dad is scared and sleep-deprived, that he looked at thermometers in the middle of the night and that he searched for baby fever online as he was very worried about his child. Advertisers can use information like this to hike their prices as high as they can and as high as you will bear. That is the reality of surveillance pricing.

This might sound like science fiction, but it's actually already happening.

Target, JetBlue, Lyft, Uber, Instacart, and others have been caught doing this. Walmart has already patented several types of surveillance pricing. These technologies are not being patented and developed to save us, consumers, money. The main focus of conversations and the opposition to this bill is about discounts. And the reality is that companies have offered discounts and sales and coupons for most of modern history without surveillance pricing.

AB 2564 will not stop them. What will stop is companies using information that they've bought or gathered about us to set customized prices that can be inflated and then artificially discounted. Any arbitrary inflated "standard price" that a business sets could then be used to create different "discounts" for different people that are still based on how much the business thinks they can bear to pay. Think about your own life.

How desperate are you to buy that plane ticket to see a relative who's on hospice?

How desperate are you to get that rideshare home, in the middle of the night, from a sketchy area? Or how desperate are you to buy that thermometer for your sick baby? I urge and I vote on this because this is becoming the norm and we should intervene to stop it. Thank you.

Senator McNerney.

Thank you, Madam President, distinguished colleagues. Surveillance pricing, although not new, has gone high-tech, and we are now getting different prices based on how much a company thinks they can squeeze out of us, and that especially applies to those least able to afford it. That's why AB 2564 is so important. It brings back fairness by prohibiting prices that are secretly adjusted to how much a company thinks that somebody is willing to pay.

All this is happening to give us a price that can be very different from what someone else sees, and these prices are not in our favor.

They are costing our constituents potentially thousands of dollars per year, money that maybe many of them do not have. Surveillance pricing is one reason why massive amounts of data out there is so valuable. And we must take steps, such as AB 2564, to protect our constituents from data-driven abuse. Well, the opposition to this says, well, it's gonna give people an opportunity to buy things below what they would normally be able to pay.

And so, let's take an example of a young mother, maybe, a single mother that needs diapers or formula.

She's drawn in by a price that is designed to get her in there, and then they jack up prices for everything else that she may buy. And I think that's exactly the kind of thing that I'm worried about in addition to what Senator, from Encinitas, thank you, said. Any rate, this is, I appreciate Assemblymember Ward for bringing this tough topic up, and I respectively ask for an aye vote.

Senator Cabaldon, you're recognized on this issue.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise in opposition to this bill and profound opposition, to it. The problems that have been outlined both by the floor manager, and my colleagues who've already spoken on this, are very real. The challenges of surveillance pricing and highly sophisticated algorithms being used to set random prices, tailored prices that are intended to take advantage of consumers' willingness to pay, are a very real problem, and they need to be addressed. This bill could have done that.

But instead, this bill has a different answer to the question that all of Americans and all of California is asking. Why are grocery prices so high? Why is the cost of everything up? Except we know the answer to that. The answer is tariffs.

The answer is raids that have causing, the cost of labor to go up or goods not to be produced at all. Poll after poll after poll after poll showed that Americans know exactly why the price of retail goods and groceries have been going out of control. And this bill instead offers the theory that the real problem is discounts, that if we just got rid of discounts, that suddenly, somehow, the price of retail goods and food would go down.

And I appreciate, as the Chair of the Privacy Committee, I appreciate folks who are questioned whether or not we are all, capable of grappling with what corporate America and others are throwing at us. I understand that.

But I also know when I'm in my own district, at the Rotary Club or at the at the childcare center, that people feel like they're living in a rigged economy, and the price of everything is out of control. And all they know is that their strategies, their club card, their discounts, that's how they are making it work.

That's how they are holding their lives together, and that's how they feel like they have some control, some control in an economy that feels completely out of their hands. So this bill, many, many, many times, I know many folks on this floor have said, hey, could you just have it not apply to discounts?

Could we go after surveillance pricing, algorithmic pricing, and not have it bar discounts? Unfortunately, those amendments were not taken, and this bill does, unless you have a lobbyist to come here and get a special exemption for your discount, it does bar discounts that are based on shopping practices and other things that Californians depend on. This is an issue that needs to be tackled. I wish we had a clean bill that did not sacrifice California's discounts in favor of trying to tackle it.

We need a solution here, but it cannot come at the price of so many of our constituents that know that this is important.

Let me say one other thing, and that is that, the polling on this specific issue is quite instructive, because if you've looked at the support and opposition, you'll have seen polling that sounds exactly the same and yet opposite. For the folks who are in support of this, they said, hey, 70% of Americans believe that we need to tackle surveillance pricing, because when asked about whether corporations should be using algorithms to set prices and raise them, 70% of Californians, of Americans say no.

Those same 70% though, if you say, should you tackle surveillance pricing even if it means getting rid of discounts, 70% of Californians, of Americans, say do not do that. No. I don't support eliminating discounts because they also report that discounts are the most critical for low income and working-class Americans and Californians that depend on them.

So I would strongly support legislation that was clean and that tackled the very real problem of surveillance pricing. This is not the answer to that. It instead erases the ability of small and medium-sized retailers to offer discounts and especially of Californians to be able to take control of their own economic destiny in a rigged economy and use discounts that work for them. I urge a no vote.

Senator Rubio, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam President, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate. I'd like to align my comments with, Senator from Sacramento. This is an issue that we've been trying to navigate for a few weeks now, and I do agree with the intent of the bill. I strongly agree with the intent of the bill. I do support the goal that stopping price gouging and price spiking, based on personal data, needs to stop.

And I think everyone on this floor is very clear on that. A company should not be able to determine that I am desperate for a product, have fewer shopping choices, and that I'm willing to pay more, and so they spike my, the price of my item. But we cannot begin with the assumption that every individualized discount is somehow rigged and predatory. And that is the concern that I brought personally to the author and asked to address very specifically.

There is an enormous difference between using someone's personal information to increase what they pay and using a loyalty or a promotional program that us, as consumers, opt into.

My biggest concern is low-income Californians has already been stated by the great Senator of Sacramento. Families in my community stretch every dollar as much as they can. They use grocery loyalty programs, digital coupons, rewards programs, membership discounts, and targeted promotions because to them, three, four, five dollars makes all the difference in the world. That's the difference between their child going to school with money for food or not, or any other necessity. And again, those 5 dollars makes a big difference.

Affordability has to be the test here in this bill. If a retailer secretly determines that a consumer has fewer alternatives and therefore can be charged 6 instead of 4 dollars, we all on this floor want to stop them. No questions asked. But I specifically asked the author to draw a clear line around the harm we are trying to prevent. Surveillance being used for price gouging, price spiking, and discriminatory markups.

That needs to stop. I don't believe the current language gives me the clarity I had asked for around discounts. The legislature shouldn't solve one affordability affordability problem, and then we create another. And this bill has that potential. The people most capable of absorbing the loss of a discount are not the people I'm worried about.

I'm worried about the senior on a fixed income, the single mother that needs to buy groceries, and families living paycheck to paycheck. Again, I had urged the author to please clarify the discounts, and the bill was not clarified. So therefore, I strongly oppose this bill. Thank you.

Seeing no other member wishing to, provide their input, Senator Wiener, you may now close.

Thank you very much, Madam President. I appreciate the debate, colleagues. First of all, this bill does not ban discounts or loyalty, programs. And so I think that, opposition argument to it is being profoundly, overstated. I also, while I agree with my colleague from West Sacramento that tariffs and other issues, of course, contribute to the increase of cost of groceries and other items, these are not mutually exclusive things.

Two things can be true. Yes. Overall costs are going up because of the policies of this administration, And large corporations are using extreme manipulation to jack up people's costs, because they have surveilled all of your data and what you're searching for and and who you are and where you are and who you're perceived to be. Because they know, this person will pay twice as much.

So we're gonna charge them twice as much, and we think they'll do it because they're desperate or they're in a rush or whatever the case may be.

And so two things can be true, and there can be multiple causes for why the cost of living is so damn high. This is not a crazy bill. This is a very reasonable bill, and it's similar to legislation passed in New Jersey and Connecticut, one that's been passed by the New York legislature that's on the governor's desk, and this is aligned with what other states are doing, and it would be a shame for California to fall behind.

We should be in the lead on protecting consumers from corporate predation and not falling behind. And because we know, bottom line, Republicans, Democrats, and everyone in between have a perception that the system is rigged against them, that corporations are gouging them and screwing them, and the government is allowing it to happen.

And there is some real truth to that. Let's make that not true and pass this bill today. I ask for an aye vote.

Senators, we are gonna be going through the roll call three times. As a reminder, no, reconsiderations are offered today. You cannot switch an aye to, you cannot come from an aye and a no, to a layoff, just a reminder. Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen. Alvarado-Gil. Archuleta. Arreguin. Ashby, aye. Becker. Blakespear, aye. Cabaldon, no. Caballero, no. Cervantes.

Choi. Cortese, aye. Dahle. Durazo, aye. Gonzalez, aye.

Grayson. Grove. Hurtado. Jones. Laird, aye.

Limon, aye. McGuire.

McNerney, aye. Menjivar, no. Niello, no.

Ochoa Bogh, no. Padilla, aye.

Perez. Reyes, aye. Richardson. Rubio, no.

Seyarto, no. Smallwood-Cuevas. Stern.

Strickland. Umberg. Valladares, no. Wahab. Weber Pierson. Wiener, aye.

Please call the absent members.

Allen, aye. Alvarado-Gil. Archuleta. Arreguin. Becker. Cervantes. Choi. Dahle, no. Grayson. Grove. Hurtado. Jones, no. McGuire, aye. Perez, aye. Richardson. Smallwood-Cuevas. Stern. Strickland, no. Umberg. Wahab, aye. Weber Pierson, aye.

Please call the absent members.

Alvarado-Gil, no. Archuleta. Arreguin. Becker. Cervantes, aye. Choi. Grayson, aye. Grove, no. Hurtado. Richardson. Smallwood-Cuevas, aye. Stern. Umberg.

Senator Wiener. Senator Wiener moves the call. Alright, colleagues. This is our lunch break. We have one hour. Please remain in the building.

If all senators can meet in the Maddy Lounge, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thank you so much.

The Senate is back in session. Secretary, please call the absent members, and we're gonna open the wrong file item 36.

Archuleta. Arreguin. Becker. Aye. Choi.

Hurtado. Richardson. Richardson, aye. Stern.

Umberg.

Ayes 22, Noes 14. That measure passes. Moving into motions and resolutions, I have Senator Grayson who'd like to be recognized.

Thank you, madam president. I request unanimous consent for a letter to be printed in the journal relating to SB 1208. This letter has been approved by leadership and the secretary.

Without objection, the desk will note. Any other member wish to be recognized under Senator Allen?

I request unanimous consent for a letter to present printed in the journal relating to SB 615. It's been approved by leadership and the secretary.

Without objection, the desk has noted. Seeing no other mics up, we're gonna move into unfinished business. Start up with Senator Allen on file item eight, SB 615. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 615 by Senator Allen, an act related to vehicle traction batteries.

Senator Allen.

S B 615 codifies specific industry agreed upon labeling requirements for vehicle traction batteries under the oversight of CARB, who already have expertise in electric vehicle batteries as a first step toward ensuring safe and proper proper management of these end of life products. I respect for your ask for my vote.

I see no mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen? Aye. Alvarado-Gil? No. Archuleta?

Aye. Aye. Ashby? Alright. Becker.

Alright. Blake Spear. Alright. Cabaldon. Alright.

Caballero. Alright. Cervantes. Alright. Choi.

No Cortesi. Alright. Dali. No Durazo. Gonzales.

Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove. No, Hurtado. Aye, Jones. No, Laird.

Aye, Limon. Aye, McGuire. McClurney. Aye, Menjivar. Aye, Nilo.

No. Padilla. Aye, Perez. Aye, Reyes. Richardson.

I Rubio. I Seattle. No. Small. I Stern.

I Strickland. No. Umberg. I Volodares. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. No.

Ayes 29, Noes 10, Assembly amendments are concurrent. And Senator Padilla with file item nine. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 903 by Senator Padilla, Accuenating Healing Arts.

Senator. Very much, madam president, members rise to percent nine zero three, which is back for concurrence, amends in the Assembly, make technical changes, clarified scope, and ensure that AI can be utilized to increase clinical capacity as long as the licensed professional maintains review and approval responsibilities. Respectfully ask for aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Stern. Aye. Strickland. Aye. Umberg. Aye. Valladares. Aye. Wahab. Aye. Weber Pierson. Aye. Wiener. Aye.

Allen. Aye. Alvarado-Gil. Aye. Archuleta. Aye. Arreguin. Aye. Ashby. Aye. Becker. Aye. Blakespear. Aye. Cabaldon. Aye. Caballero. Aye. Cervantes. Aye. Choi. Aye. Cortese. Aye. Dahle. Aye. Durazo. Aye. Gonzalez. Aye. Grayson. Aye.

Grove. Aye. Hurtado. Aye. Jones. Aye. Laird. Aye. Limon. McGuire. Aye. McNerney. Aye. Menjivar. Aye. Niello. Aye. Ochoa Bogh. Aye. Padilla. Aye. Perez. Aye. Reyes. Aye. Richardson. Aye. Rubio. Aye. Seyarto. Aye. Smallwood-Cuevas. Aye.

Aye. Limon.

Friendly reminder, it's an aye, not a yes. Aye is 40. No, zero. The Assembly amendments are concurrent in. Senator Archuleta is ready to go.

Secretary, please read file item 10.

Senate bill 907 by Senator Archuleta, an related o driving offenses.

Senator. Thank you, madam president. I'd like to wish everyone a good week, the rest of the year, and thank you so much for all the support you've given me, with the bills pertaining to DUI. But once again, good afternoon, madam president, members. Today, I'm presenting Senate Bill 907, back on concurrence.

907 strengthens California DUI enforcement and sentencing laws for repeat offenders. Assembly amendments heavily narrowed the bill to only the watch and warning and hit and run provisions. Senate bill 907 now includes two provisions that will protect California families from drunk drivers, improve road safety, hold repeat serial offenders accountable, and prevent future tragedies from occurring. The first provision, bronze law, would mandate Watson advisements in situations where a DUI is pleaded down to any other charge, including a hit and run.

After receiving a Watson warning, an individual who drives drunk again and kills someone faces second degree murder charges.

In addition to bronze law, Senate bill 907 goes after repeat serial offenders with increased punishment for hit and run if the driver has a recent DUI, a prior DUI conviction. Repeat offenders know that they are able to take advantage of our laws surrounding hit and runs and understand that they benefit from running away from their crime if they are impaired. Stop and repeat drunk drivers is not a partisan issue. It is a family issue.

I was inspired to run this bill following the killing of my granddaughter, Samantha.

And I wanna thank you all for your support in getting SB 907 across the finish line. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Arreguin.

Thank you, madam president. I just wanna take this opportunity to to thank and to congratulate the Senator Pampico Rivera for carrying this important legislation, which is inspired by the grief that his family has endured, that so many families have endured in California because of the issues of impaired and drunk driving that have taken the lives of so many Californians. This is an important reform for our state. This is gonna save lives, and I respectfully ask for a nigh vote in SB 907.

Senator Archuleta, you may now close. Oh, Senator Allen, you're recognized first.

President. Thank you, madam president. I I also want to, just recognize the, the tragedy experienced by our colleague. There's another terrible incident in my district, with unfortunately very similar circumstances and these were young lives that were snuffed out. I had the opportunity to go to the funeral.

The love for this young woman was extraordinary as it was for a young gentleman in Manhattan Beach. He was struck down, his family having lost their home in the Palisades fire moved down to the South Bay and he was just crossing the street late at night, when, again, someone who had had a prior conviction, got again behind the wheel heavily intoxicated and then killed somebody.

So I think I speak on behalf of all of us when our hearts go out to the Archuleta family and you've done her legacy a real service by bringing this bill forward. I ask for that vote.

Senator Jones, you're recognized.

Thank you, madam president and members. I also rise in support of SB 907 for our good colleague from Pico Rivera, Senator Bob Archuleta and his family. And thank you for the presentation on the floor. Just to remind us of the severity of these offenses and the responsibility that we have to respond appropriately, which I think, this bill definitely moves in that direction. Madam president, may I have, permission to read, momentarily, please?

I see no objection.

I just wanted to read what the California Association of Highway Patrolmen say about SB 907. SB 907 increases penalties for hit and run offenses committed by drivers with a recent history of impaired or dangerous driving, and it strengthens the court advisement that puts repeat offenders on notice of the consequences of future fatal DUI. Together, these changes give prosecutors and courts better tools to hold serial offenders accountable and to deter the conduct that endangers Californians on our roads.

And I know that that is exactly what the author is gearing for in this legislation. I appreciate the sentiments from all the senators that have shared both in committee and on the floor in this issue and ask all of us unanimously to vote aye on SB 907.

Seeing no other mic, Senator Toledo, you may now close.

Madam president, if you allow me to close by saying thank you to all of you, I can't begin to tell you how touched we were, my family, at the church in Montebello that holds a thousand people, it was filled filled. Every row to the door had an entire row of highway patrolmen, an entire row of Montebello Police Department, an entire row of the LA County Sheriff. People came in from across the state. Many of you were there. And we are family.

That's what it told me. As we complete our year and we go back and we come back home, Hope to God we all come back safe, our families are safe, but we never know, because these things that happened because of drunk drivers, it's not us. Ninety nine point nine percent of the time, it's someone who's impaired.

And it is time that we here in California, our senators, our Assembly members, stand up together, united, that we are going to tell the nation that California is not gonna take it anymore. We're gonna protect our children, our seniors, our veterans, everyone in California, and we're gonna stop this terrible, terrible tragedies that happened from driving.

And with that, madam president, I thank you, and I urge you to vote yes on Senate bill 907. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen? Aye. Alvarado-Gil? Aye. Archuleta.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Ashby. Aye.

Becker. Aye. Blaisepeer. Aye. Caballero.

Aye. Cervantes. Aye. Choi. Aye.

Cortesi. Aye. Dali. Aye, Durazo. Aye, Gonzales.

Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove. Aye, Portado. Aye, Jones. Aye, Laird.

Aye, Limon. Maguire? Aye. McLerney? Aye.

Manjubar? Aye. Nilo? Stern? Aye.

Strickland? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Ayes 38. No zero. The Assembly amendments are concurred in. Senator McNerney with file item 11. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 947 by Senator McNerney and accruing to employment.

Senator.

Thank you, madam president, distinguished colleagues. SB 947, the no robo bosses act no robo bosses act of 2026 is back on concurrence. Assembly amendments remove the private right of action. That was a stumbling block for a lot of folks. It removes the independent contractors, another stumbling block for, basically, a different set of folks.

It removes the prohibition on predictive behavior analysis. And, basically, we wanna make sure that human beings are in the loop. AI is fine, in the workplace, in a lot of situations, it's fine. But we wanna make sure that human beings make the final decisions or have say in the final decision. That's what this bill does.

I approve Aye, with respect, ask for an aye vote.

Secretary, call the roll.

McGuire. Aye. McNerney. Aye. Menjivar. Aye. Niello. No. Ochoa Bogh. No. Padilla. Aye. Perez. Aye. Reyes. Aye. Richardson. Aye. Rubio. Aye. Seyarto. No.

Smallwood-Cuevas. Stern. Aye. Strickland. No. Umberg. Aye. Valladares. No. Wahab. Aye. Weber Pierson. Aye. Wiener. Aye.

Cervantes. Aye. Choi. No. Cortese. Aye. Dahle. No. Durazo. Aye. Gonzalez. Aye. Grayson. Aye. Grove. No. Hurtado. Aye. Jones. No. Laird. Aye. Limon.

Allen. Aye. Alvarado-Gil. No. Archuleta. Aye. Arreguin. Aye. Ashby. Aye. Becker. Aye. Blakespear. Aye. Cabaldon. Aye. Caballero. Aye.

Please call the absent members.

Limon, Smallwood-Cuevas.

Ayes, ayes twenty eight, Noes ten, Assembly members are concurred in. Before we go on to the next measure, I would like to give a welcome to Senator Gonzales' husband, Adam Carrillo, is here with us today, joining us. His definition of fun. Hi, Adam. Hi.

Okay. Senator Becker Senator Grove, for what purpose do you rise?

Point of personal privilege.

Senator Grove? Senator Gonzalez has been supporting Saleno's law.

Just saying.

Senator Grove, you're out of order. Senator Becker, you are recognized for file item 12. Secretary, please read.

Senator bill 1009 by Senator Becker and Accolade to juveniles.

Senator.

Thank you. SB 1009 is back in concurrence. The Assembly amendments removed the changes to evidentiary standard. This removed the juvenile court judges of California's opposition. I respectfully ask for a nigh vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[ROLL CALL]

Ayes, 25. No's, 11. The Assembly amendments are concurred, and Senator Harabedian is ready. Secretary, please refile item 13.

Senate bill 1087 by Senator Cabaldon, an act related to transportation.

Senator.

Thank you, madam president. SB 1087 is the comprehensive monetization of SB 375, the groundbreaking climate, land use, air quality legislation by Senator Steinberg from, 2008. I just simply highlight the Assembly amendments, implement the final recommendations of the working group comprised of environmental and EJ, into transportation construction industry, the housing and YIMBY advocates, and everyone else with one exception I wanna highlight simply because there is late opposition to the bill.

And the reason is is that we were unable to take the amendments that that opposition wanted because they were a guaranteed veto, and that's simply not that wouldn't work. But I wanna be very clear, the bill in no way imposes any new costs or delays on housing development.

It gives CARB no more authority over local governments. In fact, it imposes new accountability and guardrails and time lanes on them. It does it accounts for housing elements for the first time in the SB 375 process. It does not create a new carbon neutral or net zero requirement, and it adds additional meaningful stakeholder engagement and transparency.

That's why virtually everyone that works in this space, transportation, air quality, environmental justice, local governments, regional government regional agencies are all strongly supportive of the bill and I would urge an aye vote on concurrence in Assembly amendments.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen. Hi. Alvarado-Gil. No. Archuleta.

Hi. Hi. Hi. Ashby. Hi.

Becker. Aye, Blake Spear. Aye, Cabaldon. Aye, Caballero. Aye, Cervantes.

Aye, Choi. No Cortesi. Aye, Dali. Aye, Durazo. Aye, Gonzales.

Aye, Grayson. Grove. No, Hurtado. Aye, Jones. No, Laird.

Aye, Limon. Aye, McGuire. Aye, McNearney. Aye, Menjivar. Aye, Nilo.

No. No. Padilla. Aye, Perez. Reyes.

Aye, Richardson. Rubio. Aye, Seattle. No. Small.

Aye, Stern. Aye, Strickland. No, Humbert. Aye, Volodares. No, Wahab.

Aye, Weber Pearson. Aye, Weiner. Aye. Perez. Richardson, aye.

Grace, aye.

Ayes, 31. Noes, nine. The Assembly amendments are concurred in. Senator Cortese, file item 14, SB 1246. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1246 by Senator Cortese an act related to vehicles.

Senator.

Yeah. Thank you, madam president, colleagues. SB 1246 is a critical public safety measure that prepares autonomous vehicle companies to quickly, retrieve their solid AVs when they obstruct traffic or first responder operations. Amendments made in the Assembly increase coordination with local governments, provide more flexibility for AV companies to contract local towing providers, and delay implementation until July 2028. SB 1246 is sponsored by SEIU and supported by our firefighters, police, chiefs, and the League of Cities.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Senator Weidner, you're recognized.

Thank you, madam president. I wanna thank the author. I did not support this bill when it was on this floor for house of origin. A lot of work has gone into it and I really appreciate the author working on this to make sure that, AVs can function and that they're functioning in a way that is safe, and that does not clog up, streets. And I think that this really, strikes the right balance, and I'll be supporting it.

Sir Cortese, you may now close.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen. Hi. Avarado Gill. Hi. Hi.

Archuleta. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi.

Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi.

Aye, Becker. Aye, Blake Spear. Aye, Cabaldon. Aye, Caballero. Aye, Cervantes.

Aye, Choi Cortesi. Aye, Dali. Durazo. Aye, Gonzales, Aye, Grayson, Aye, Grove. No.

Hurtado. Aye, Jones. No Laird. Aye, Limon. Maguire.

Aye, McLerney. Menjivar. Aye, Nilo. No. Aye, Rubio.

Aye, Seattle. No. Smallwood Cuevas. Aye, Stern. Strickland.

No. Humbert. Aye. Aye. Volodares?

No. Wahab? Aye. Weber Pearson? Aye.

Weiner? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. A Joy, Dally, Limon, Machalbo, Stern.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

I 28 and o seven. The Assembly members are concurrent in Senate Senator Durazo with file item 15. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 1342 by Senator Durazo and accolades to criminal records.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, Madam President. I rise to present SB 1342, a technical critical fix to improve the implementation of California's automatic record clearance laws, which is back for a concurrence vote. Current law already establishes who qualifies for eligibility for automatic record clearance if they meet certain criteria, including not having pending charges. This bill offers practical targeted procedural changes that ensure the laws we have already passed function as the legislature intended, ensures that eligible individuals benefit from the state's clearance process. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Please call the absent members.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 26. Noes 11. The Assembly amendments are concurrent. Senator Cervantes for file item 16. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1360 by Senator Cervantes, enagling into elections.

Amendments taken in the Assembly make implementation changes and clarification to make the bill more workable for the secretary of State and county registrars.

Senator.

Thank you. Madam president, I rise to present Senate bill 1360 for concurrence and Assembly amendments. The bill is part of the California Voting Rights Act of 2026.

Secretary, please call the roll.

As a result, the California Association of Clerks and Election Officials are now in neutral position. Respectfully ask for a nice vote.

Digital Democracy CA Senators: Allen. Aye. Alvarado-Gil. Aye. Archuleta. Aye. Arreguin. Aye. Ashby. Aye. Becker. Aye. Blakespear. Aye. Cabaldon. Aye. Caballero. Aye. Cervantes. Aye. Choi. Aye. Cortese. Aye. Dahle. Aye. Durazo. Aye. Gonzalez. Aye. Grayson. Aye. Grove. Hurtado. Aye. Jones. Laird. Aye. Limon. McGuire. Aye. McNerney. Aye. Menjivar. Aye. Niello. Ochoa Bogh. Aye. Padilla. Perez. Aye. Reyes. Aye. Richardson. Aye. Rubio. Aye. Seyarto. Smallwood-Cuevas. Aye. Stern. Aye. Strickland. Umberg. Aye. Valladares. Wahab. Aye. Weber Pierson. Aye. Wiener. Aye.

Please call the absent members.

Grove? Aye. Jones? Limon? Nilo?

Padilla, aye. Seyarto, Strickland, Valladares.

Ayes 34, nos zero. The Assembly amendments were concurred in. Senator Reyes, for file item 17. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1369 by Senator Reyes an act related to elections.

Senator. Thank you, madam president. I rise to present SB 1369, which is back on concurrence. SB 1369 establishes safeguards for California's judicial recall process while preserving voters' constitutional rights. Assembly amendments restore the time periods in existing law for circulating petitions to recall superior court judges in jurisdictions of fewer than 50,000 registered voters and establishes a one hundred and twenty day petition circulation period for jurisdictions of 50,000 or more registered voters.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Secretary, please call the roll.

Alan. Aye, Arvada Gill. No. Archuleta. Aye, Arreguin.

Aye, Ashby. Aye, Becker. Blake Spear. Aye, Cabaldon. Aye, Caballero.

Aye, Cervantes. Aye, Choi. No Cortesi. Aye, Dali. No Durazo.

Aye, Gonzales. Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove. No, Hurtado. Aye, Jones.

No, Laird. Aye, Limon. McGuire. Aye, McNearney. Aye, Menjivar.

Aye, Nilo. No, Ochoa Bog. No, Padilla. Aye, Perez. I Reyes.

Aye Richardson. Aye Rubio. Aye see Arto. No. Small wood Cuevas.

Aye Stern. Aye Strickland. No. Umbrick. Aye Volodares.

What have? Aye. Weber Pearson. Aye. Weiner.

Aye.

Please call the absent members.

Becker. Aye. Aye. Limon Volodares.

Ayes twenty nine, Noes nine. The Assembly members are concurred in. Senator Gonzales. Secretary, please re file item 18.

Senate bill 423 by Senator Gonzales an act related to public records.

Senator. Thank you, madam president and members. I rise today to present Senate bill 423, which was a gut and amend. This will require local agencies to release audio recordings and other records related to calls for emergency services from private detention facilities. In the past two years, the population of private detention facilities in California has surged significantly with one facility's population rising to over 220%.

Conditions we know are horrendous, over 600 children in our detention center, sexual violence, and of course, we've got a hunger strike going on at Adelanto, which is unfortunate. When journalists and reporters attempted to obtain records about reported incidents at these facilities through the Public Records Act, they faced severe pushback from law enforcement citing vague investigatory records exemptions despite there being no active investigations.

S B 423 would make disclosure mandatory for calls for calls from private detention facilities unless it would substantially interfere with an active investigation being conducted by the agency receiving the request. I respectfully ask for your aye vote on SB 423 to instill more transparency at our detention facilities.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen. Aye, Alvarado-Gil. No. Archuleta. Aye, Arteguin.

Aye, Ashby. Aye, Becker. Aye, Blakesphere. Aye, Cabaldin. Caballero.

Aye, Cervantes. Cabaldon. Aye, Cervantes. Aye, Choi. No, Cortesi.

Aye, Dali. No, Durazo. Aye, Gonzales. Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove.

No, Ortello. Aye, Jones. No, Laird. Aye, Limon. Aye, McGuire.

Aye, McClurney. Aye, Menjivar. Aye, Nilo. No, Ochoa Bog. No, Padilla.

Aye, Perez. I Reyes. I Richardson. I Rubio. I Seattle.

No Smallwood Cuevas. I Stern. I Strickland. No. Umbrigg?

Aye. Volodares? No. Wahab? Aye.

Weber Pearson? Aye. Weiner? Aye.

Ayes 30, Noes 10. The Assembly amendments are concurred in. Senator Allen, you file item 19. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 715 by Senator Allen in lack relating to elections.

Senator.

This bill gives candidates five additional days for a more reasonable opportunity to identify inaccuracy and pursue challenges associated with ballot designations. After extensive feedback from the secretary of state and local election officials, the bill also compensates for this change in the election calendar by shifting some additional deadlines in statute. This is all about trying to make sure there's ample time for people to explore and challenge and make sure that we have accurate ballot designations on the ballot, and I respect your support.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Aye, Allen. Aye, Alvarado-Gil. Aye, Archuleta. Aye, Arreguin. Aye, Ashby. Aye, Becker. Aye, Blakespear. Aye, Cabaldon. Aye, Caballero. Aye, Cervantes. Aye, Choi. Aye, Cortese. Aye, Dahle.

Aye, Durazo. Aye, Gonzales. Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove. Aye, Hurtado. Aye, Jones. Aye, Laird. Aye, Limon. Aye, McGuire. Aye, McNerney. Aye, Menjivar. Niello. Aye, Ochoa Bogh. Aye, Padilla. Aye, Perez. Aye, Reyes. Aye, Richardson. Aye, Rubio. Aye, Seyarto. Aye Smallwood Cuevas. Aye, Stern.

Aye, Strickland. Aye, Umburg. Aye, Valladares. Aye, Wahab. Aye, Weber Pearson. Aye, Weiner. Aye.

Aye is 39. No zero. Some amendments are concurred in. Senator Perez, file item 20. SB 877.

Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 877 by Senator Perez an act related to insurance.

Senator. Thank you, madam president and members. I rise to present SB 877, which is back on concurrence. Amendments taken in the Assembly remove the phrase in any way from the bill and are technical and clarifying in nature. I respectfully ask for

an Aye vote. Any objection to applying the unanimous roll call? Ayes? 39. No zeros.

Some amendments are concurred in. Senator Reyes, file item 21. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 1130 by Senator Reyes, accolade to privacy.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise to present SB 1130, which is back on concurrence. This bill updates California's privacy laws to address the rapid rise of wearable recording technology such as smart glasses. Assembly amendments require that these devices, require these devices to have a recording indicator by 2028, exempt peace officer body cameras and other communication devices used by employees, and generally exempt assistive technology such as hearing aids from this bill. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 29. Noes 10. Assembly amendments are concurred in. Senator Allen, file item 22. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill 1180 by Senator Allen an act related to solid waste.

Senator.

Thank you, members. This bill delineates the expenditure of a particular fund that has already been established. It has nothing to do with the implementation of SB 54. It's the way that this particular fund with regards to the mitigation of plastic pollution will be, expended. With the you know, there there were no guidelines set out in the original legislation and with an investment of this size, the legislature has a responsibility to provide clear direction on how these dollars are spent.

That's exactly what this bill does, and I respect for us when I vote.

Senator Grove, you're recognized.

Thank you, madam president. I rise in opposition of concurrence. SB 54 requires audits on companies to pay into this fund every year. Books are open, numbers are checked. It's all made public, it's all exposed.

But SB 1180 audits no one who spends that money. No audit, no clawback, no regulations, no report back from the legislature, and 35% of any of this grant money goes to overhead At the rate of guarantee, writes its own application. And state administration and 40 two state administration and 45 on every dollar goes before anyone cleans up anything. On $5,000,000,000, that's 1.5 $1,750,000,000 that no one has to explain.

The only oversight in this bill is a sentence carrying the secrete saying that the secretary may ask for guarantees or grantees for information.

That's a may on $5,000,000,000. Maybe they'll ask for information. That's not good stewards of taxpayer dollars. And the Assembly made it worse. They struck up her award limit in research spending and exempted state agencies from what was left.

The fund to clean up plastic excuse me, the fund to clean up plastic pollution, and they made it easier to spend the money by studying it. Members, SB 54 will cost California families, all of the people that we represent, roughly $948 to 1,373 a year, and it'll cost California's economy $78,000,000,000 nearly four times CalRecycle's own $21,000,000,000 estimate when the bill originally passed. That state figures that state's figures does not survive scrutiny.

92% of the 53,300,000,000 in claims benefits is inputted into a value a damage valuation, and theoretical harm avoided, not money saved, not revenue earned, that every dollar that every that every that researches in California that reaches every California household will be paying for this. All of the people that we all stand up and say affordability is an issue for us.

We're gonna increase their cost by almost $1,000 a year. The PFAS component of this bill, benefits are double counted against regulations and legislature already credited when they enacted AB 1200. They strip out imputed accounting benefits and that collapses, leaving California families with 4 figure annual bill on the top of high gas prices, utility prices, the cost of living, and the burden on business is no more defensible. Circular Action Alliance, the producer responsibly organization for a state itself selected an administrator program.

This is administrator selected by the previous legislation submitted in 2026, a plan seeking exemptions for 56 categories of packaging because they know it can't be implemented.

That's not a request for flexibility at the margins. That's the administrator of s p 54 directed by the legislation that says it's in writing the statute cannot be implemented. Businesses large enough to secure an exemption will have lobbyists up here securing exemption. Independent groceries, family dairies, regional processors, and small manufacturers will not. They will raise prices and they'll or they'll close, and Californians will pay either way.

SB 54 needs a overhaul, not another built in layer on top of it. We're asking Californians to carry the cost. This size is ridiculous, especially in the affordability crisis we have in this state. The last the least we owe is the proof where the money is being spent.

SB 1180 that we are seeing today, along with the amendments taken in the Assembly, does not require any any oversight for this money that's been being spent in its billions of taxpayer dollars and respectfully ask for a no vote.

Senator Valadares, you're recognized.

Thank you, madam president. I also rise in respectful opposition. And I understand the intent here. We all want less plastic pollution, and if money is collected for mitigation, Californians should expect it actually mitigate plastic pollution. But we are talking about $5,000,000,000 here.

And this bill significantly expands who can receive grants, and it allows up to 35% of an award to go to indirect costs. And my concerns are are pretty simple. It's it's where are the guardrails? California has learned our lesson before. During the pandemic, we spent billions of dollars on fraudulent EDD payments.

They went out the door and years later, we've still struggled to recover that money. So I do have a question for the author.

Will the author take a question?

Yeah. Given what happened at EDD, why would we create another multi billion dollar program without clearly spelling out what happens when money is misused? Where in this bill is there a mechanism for an audit grantee to audit a grantee to claw back misspent funds or to prohibit a bad actor from receiving another grant?

Through the presiding officer.

Yeah. I mean, all the same kinds of protections associated with public funds would apply here. This is something that will be administrated by by Cowher Cycle. But and and anybody, you know, anybody who wants to to call for an audit, you know, with with good reason associated with the with any kind of evidence of missed expenditure is would be welcome to do it, and as as we've seen with all sorts of governmental programs.

Thank you, doctor. Senator.

Yeah. Like, this actually creates yeah.

Sorry. On the senator's time.

If if the Senator would like to add more, absolutely.

Would are you are you asking a follow-up question to the Senator?

I I would, like the Senator to clear to

finish his thought. The recent this fund exists regardless. This bill actually creates, direction on how to spend the money. So it it you know, while I understand it doesn't go as far as you may like on on on auditing every dollar at all, you know, as a trigger, it provides a lot more clarity as to expenditures than current law provides.

So Back in your time, Senator.

My understanding is that there are no guardrails in any of the language and I have serious concerns because we are again talking about $5,000,000,000 That is real money, especially when we just had to raise nearly $14,000,000,000 in new taxes. And right now, at the end of the day, you know, this there's no guarantee that this program is really gonna mitigate plastic pollution. There is no guarantee that, or what we do know I should say, is that business doesn't just absorb this.

It's gonna be passed on to the people of California. And Californians are already struggling.

You know, we hear it every day on this floor. They're struggling to pay for groceries, to, you know, pay for rent. And I I am just concerned that there are no guardrails. This is gonna create additional costs that frankly the the families in my district cannot absorb.

I respectfully urge no vote. Seeing no other mics. Senator Allen, you may now close.

Yeah. I I appreciate the feedback. I I I gotta come bring you language in the bill so you could see that, the bill includes caps on things like indirect costs, the same kind of language that we put into bonds. Let me just say, voting no on this bill doesn't prevent the money from being collected. Voting no means that there's no accountability or oversight.

This fund already exists. So with that, I respect for you guys for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Alan. Aye, Alvarado-Gil. No, Archuleta. Aye, again. Aye, Ashby.

Aye, Becker. Blaise Aye. Aye, Cabaldon. Aye, Caballero. Cervantes.

Aye, Troy. No, Cortesi. Aye, Deli. No Turazo. Aye, Gonzalez.

Aye, Grayson. Aye, Grove. No, Hurtado. Jones. No, Laird.

Aye, Limon. Maguire, Aye McNearney, Aye Menjivar, Aye Nilo, no Ochoa Bog, no Padilla,Aye Perez, Aye Reyes, Aye Richardson, Aye Rubio, Seyarto, No. Small wood cuervas. Aye, Stern. Aye, Strickland.

No, Humbert. Aye, Baladares. No, Wahab. Aye, Weber Pearson. Aye, Weiner.

Aye. Archulet, aye.

Please call absent members.

Becker? Aye. Caballero? Martado? Limon?

Ayes, 27. Noes 10 Assembly members are concurred in. We are going back to on, to Assembly third reading for file item 37. Senator Padilla. Secretary, please read.

Senate bill.... Assembly bill 664 by Assemblymember Alvarez and acclimating to Community Colleges.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise to present AB 664 on behalf of Assemblymember Alvarez. To address an unmet need, this bill authorizes California Community Colleges Chancellor to allow Southwestern Community College District to offer four workplace aligned baccalaureate degree programs in forensic sciences, allied health education and leadership, interaction design and teaching English to speakers of other languages, respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Any objection to applying the unanimous roll call? Ayes, 39. Noes zero. Measure passes. Senator Cabaldon, file item 42.

Secretary, please read.

Assembly to go 904 by Assembly member Agar Curry, and accrediting to recycling.

Senator. Thank you, madam president. AB 904 is the periodic legislation necessary to continue to improve and make more effective the carpet recycling, law here in California, which is a long standing, statute to improve recycling. It does it has been of limited effectiveness. This bill incorporates a variety of changes with stakeholder learning point in order to continue to improve implementation. I urge an aye vote.

Any objection to applying the unanimous roll call? Ayes, 39. No zero. Measure passes. Secretary secretary, please refile item 43.

I'll send the bill 2694 by Senate member Alvarez, inaccruiting to public post secondary education.

Senator. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam president. AB 2694 is part of a two bill package with SB 960, a bill I authored that this house advanced, earlier this year, to do a couple of things.

First is to assure that community colleges through emerging baccalaureate programs that have proven in many cases to be a success can help to meet the needs of workforce development and economic development in in the communities that they serve and to provide opportunities for young and old Californians to be able to access emerging, jobs. Secondly, though, we've experienced some challenges in the implementation of this law over the last fifteen years and a lot of fighting and bickering and blood and warring between the institutions.

And this is an effort to try to bring that to an end, to move to a system that is based on clear criteria and definitions and guide and decision points and an independent evaluation of workforce needs, so that we can both end the fighting, but also bring these important programs to bear when they are the most needed and not take three or four years mounting them.

This package accomplishes that.

It is the result of many months of negotiation and discussion help led by this with the Senate Education Committee and our Chair, the Assembly Committee in Higher Education, myself and Assembly Member Alvarez, And importantly, for the first time in this issue, the governor's office, as most as many folks on this floor know, the governor's vetoed virtually every other bill on this topic, and this is the first time that we've been able to engage in productive conversation between the houses and the executive branch.

What this bill does is to significantly streamline the process for achieving community college bachelor's degrees where they make sense, to allow community colleges to, prepare work documentation of unmet workforce needs that is then independently verified by the state labor and workforce development secretary. And if they can document an unmet workforce need net of any existing bachelor's degree programs, then they can proceed with their program and no one can object.

So rather than waiting three years of back and forth and fighting, that they would be able to move their program forward far more quickly, it it retains and and fast tracks the existing review process as well, for for excuse me, for other cases that don't meet that labor and work workforce need, and it allows importantly regional duplication in those areas where even existing bachelor's degree programs cannot meet the need.

These are very important wins for, what SB 960 was proposing to do earlier this year when it went off this floor with a nearly unanimous, vote. And it will dramatically increase the the ability of community colleges to act quickly and effectively to deploy these programs. At the same time, the number one question about these programs has been, by members of this house and the governor and others who've who've been clear.

We need to make sure that community colleges remain focused on their primary mission, which is associate degrees, transfer, and workforce development certificates. This bill accomplishes that.

And if so the principal area that has been debated in these last few days has been a tiering system that is based on student outcomes in those in those fields. That everyone could offer a bachelor's degree if it's justified based on workforce needs, but you could offer more bachelor's degrees if you are achieving your, student outcomes on your existing primary missions. So there's something for everyone to love and something for everyone to not love so much in this package, but this is an important step forward.

This is the first time that we have a chance to bring some some some sanity and end the wars that have been plaguing this issue and to be able to make sure that our higher education system, all of it, can help to meet the needs of California's workforce, the region's workforce, and assure that community colleges can play continue to play an expanded role in accomplishing that. And with that, I would respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Gomez Reyes you're recognized.

Question for the author and I'd ask that he address it in his close. Number one is will, the author commit to revisiting the tier structure and labels that have been used? And second, will the will the author also ensure that the data that has been used to determine these tiers or these labels is shared with the community colleges to allow them the opportunity to then improve wherever the improvement is required.

Senator Perez, you're recognized.

Thank you so much. Madam president. I rise in support of AB 2694 and wanna commend both Senator Cabaldon as well as Assembly member Alvarez for their tremendous work in this space. For years, there have long been debates about allowing our community college districts to be able to offer baccalaureate degree programs.

We know that this is something that's been so necessary because of workforce needs and access issues all across the state, particularly in the Central Valley, in the Inland Empire, in the North Coast where it can oftentimes be hours until you get to your next CSU or UC campus.

This bill seeks to resolve that, but it also creates an important framework, to create guardrails, so that our community college institutions remain focused on their main goal and that is ensuring students are receiving their associate degrees and transferring in a timely manner. That is the core mission of our community college institutions. This bill allows them to expand on that mission while maintaining that focus. As the Chair of the Senate Education Committee, I urge an aye vote.

Senator Cabaldon, you may now close.

Thank you, Madam President. And and, an enormous gratitude to the Chair of the Senate Education Committee for her her work in crafting this proposal, but also continuing to fight to assure that we had really achieved student outcomes that are guaranteed to the students who need us the most.

Simply to the to the questions raised by Senator, the Senator from San Bernardino, I do wanna, commit we the the tiers themselves are an essential part of this framework, but the labels have created some questions and some anxiety about how they will be interpreted. And so I absolutely want to to to, commit that we will work on those labels to make sure that they don't they don't convey a ranking or something something potentially negative that is not intended.

And secondly, to assure that the data sources are clear and that those data every piece of them is available to each community college so that they can accomplish exactly what the Senator from San Bernardino says and and and focus their improvement efforts in those areas in order to continue to move up those tiers.

With that, I respectfully ask for aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Allan? Alvarado? Allan, aye. Alvarado-Gil? Archuleta.

Arreguin? Aye. Ashby.? Aye. Becker? Blakepear? Aye.

Cabaldon? Aye. Caballero? Aye. Cervantes? Choi? Cortesi? Aye.

Dahle? Aye. Durazo? Aye. Gonzales? Grayson? Grove?

Hurtado? Aye. Jones? Aye. Laird? Aye. Limon? Aye. McGuire. Aye.

McNerney? Aye. Menjivar? Aye. Niello? Aye. Ochoa Bogh? Aye. Padilla? Aye.

Perez? Aye. Reyes? Aye. Richardson? Aye. Rubio? Aye. Seyarto? Aye.

Smallwood-Cuevas? Aye. Stern? Sure, aye. Strickland? No.

Umberg? Aye. Valladares? Wahab? Aye. Weber Pierson? Weiner?

Archuleta, aye.

Please call the absent members.

Alvarado Gil? Becker? Aye. Cervantes?

Choi? Gonzales? Grayson? Grove? Valladares? Weber Pierson? Aye. Weiner? Aye. Grove, aye.

Aye's thirty three, Noes one, measure passes. Senator Caballero for file item 51, that's gonna be AB 1307, Avila Farias. Secretary, please read.

Assembly bill 1307 by Assemblymember Avila Farias and Equilink to Hemingartz.

Senator. Thank you, Miss Madam President. I rise to present AB 1307 on behalf of Assemblymember Avila Farias. This bill establishes a pilot program that allows 30 qualified dentists from Mexico to practice dentistry in clinic settings for three years in areas of California with a critical shortage of dentists. The bill is a cost neutral, equity driven solution and increases access to care without lowering standards.

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Seeing no mics up, any objection to applying the unanimous roll call? Ayes, 39. Noes zero. The measure passes. Senator Blakespear, file item 52.

That's AB 2047. We're having some technical difficulties. Give me a second, Senator Blakespear.

On file item 51, eyes 39, Noes zero. Secretary, please read file item 52.

Senate bill 2047 by Assembly member Bob Raheem an act related to firearms.

Senator

Senator. Thank you, madam president and colleagues. I rise today to present AB 2047 on behalf of Assembly member Bauer Kehann. Over many years, California has set the standard in taking an active role to protect our communities against gun violence. AB 2047 builds on prior legislation to address the newest firearm threat, three d printed weapons.

Since January of this year, there have been several three d printed gun busts and recoveries in California, including in San Jose, San Bernardino, and Santa Rosa. AB 2047 creates an upstream solution by requiring that all three-dimensional printers sold in California are equipped with firearm blocking features to prohibit the printing of dangerous gun parts. Amendments taken in the Senate have narrowed the bill, reduced cost to the Department of Justice, and removed criminal penalties from the bill.

AB 2047 is supported by a unique coalition of doctors, parents, law enforcement students, and Moms Demand Action advocates who may be with us here today. In closing, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 2047 to protect our communities from gun violence.

Secretary, please call the roll.

Allen. Aye, Avarado Gil. No, Archuleta. Aye, Arreguin. Aye, Ashby.

Aye, Becker. Aye, Blakespier. Aye, Caballero. Aye, Cervantes. Choi.

No Cortesi. Aye, Dali. No Durazo. Gonzales. Grayson.

Aye Grove, no Hurtado, Jones, no Laird, Aye Lemon, Maguire, Aye McNearney, Aye Menjivar, Aye Nilo, No. No. Aye, Perez. Reyes. Aye, Richardson.

Aye, Rubio. Aye, Seattle. No. Smallwood Cuevas. Stern.

Aye, Strickland. No. Umber. Aye, Volodares. No.

Wahab. Aye, Weber Pearson. Weiner?

Hold on. Senators, we're gonna go through the missing members. Secretary, please call the missing members.

Cabaldon? Cervantes? Aye. Turazo? Aye.

Gonzales? Aye. Hurtado? Aye. Limon Perez?

Aye. Aye. Weber Pearson? Weiner.

Weiner.