Assembly Standing Committee on Judiciary
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Welcome to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The rules for witness testimony are that each side will be allowed two main witnesses. Each witnesses will have approximately two minutes to testify in support of or opposition to the bill. Additional witnesses should state their names, organization, if any, and their position. As you proceed with witnesses and public comment, I want to make sure everyone understands the Committee has rules to ensure we maintain order to run a fair and efficient hearing.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I won't go through the whole list of the rules because I'm hoping that we won't need them, but if I need to, I will. I think we'll be okay with our first author. He's usually well behaved, and so I'll ask Assemblymember Wood, item 18, AB 3129. We do not have a quorum, so we'll go ahead and proceed as a Subcommitee.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Good morning. Is this on?
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
It should be on.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Is it-- Okay, I'm sorry. Thank you. Good morning Mr. Chair and Members. My thanks to your staff and for their work on the analysis and the amendments which I am accepting today. AB 3129, sponsored by Attorney General Rob Bonta, requires a private equity group or a hedge fund to provide written notice to and obtain written consent of the Attorney General prior to a change of control or acquisition of a healthcare facility or provider group.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
The amendments I accepted in Health Committee were to more clearly define the entities, health professionals, provider groups and healthcare facilities involved in acquisitions and changes of control by private equity or hedge funds covered by this legislation. The amendments I am accepting today more clearly define the terms private equity group and hedge fund. There is no question that trends in private equity ownership have rapidly increased across all almost all healthcare settings. It's been exponential.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
A study published in July of 2023 evaluating this trend drew from a database of 1778 studies, with 55 empirical research studies that evaluated private equity owned healthcare operations. Across the outcome measures, private equity ownership was most consistently associated with increased costs to patients or payers and had mixed to harmful impacts on quality. I don't know about you, but I'm interested in our state protecting patients before they pay more for less care or lesser quality of care, no matter what the statistics.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Colleagues, I hope you know of my work. For the past nine and a half years, it's all been about protecting patients and controlling healthcare costs. That's why I've been focused on this trend for the past several years. And as a healthcare provider, I'm especially protective of state law barring the corporate practice of medicine, ensuring that providers can practice without another entity telling them how to practice. This bill reinforces that. Private equity's first interest is in making a profit, period.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
The investors wouldn't risk it if they didn't think a profit would be made. We also know that timelines are short, often three to seven years. And we know that in order for them to make a profit, they look to lower costs for the entities as well as increase leverage, making them more attractive to future buyers. Is making something more efficient bad? No, it can be harmful by, for instance, reducing staff and limiting resources, or discontinuing services such as reproductive healthcare.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Private equity can take such a hold on an area that it reduces or eliminates competition, and that monopoly status can result in their ability to negotiate higher fees with plans because there is no other option. That does not save the consumer, whether that be a patient or an employer that provides healthcare coverage. This bill does not prevent these acquisitions and we can speak to the timelines for reviewing these acquisitions.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
They address more urgent reviews for those businesses at risk of immediate failure, as well as timelines for typical transactions. And to address preemptively the argument that the Office of Healthcare is the remedy, it is not. The AG's authority to review market transactions is rooted in DOJ's authority under antitrust laws. Antitrust laws promote vigorous competition and promote consumers and protect consumers from anticompetitive mergers and business practices to ensure that consumers have access to quality goods and services at competitive prices, and that businesses can compete on the merits of their work.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
OHCA only analyzes and issues reports on transactions that are likely to significantly impact market competition, the state's abilities to meet targets or affordability for consumers and purchasers. OHCA's reporting threshold is also higher and less likely to catch problematic transactions in the first place. There's a basic question here.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Given the results shown by many independent studies, not just one, that there are harmful outcomes, how can the opposition argue that these transactions should be happening without any review? These acquisitions are currently flying under the radar and continue to grow exponentially. And our AG should be involved to understand how it will affect patients competition and the cost of healthcare. So if not us, then who? And I beat my witness here, and so I'm going to fly solo and see what happens.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Assemblymember. Is there anyone here to speak in support of AB 3129? Sergeant, if we can have the microphone set up. Thank you.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Good morning Chair and Members. Bryant Miramontes with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jason Schmelzer
Person
Thank you Mr. Chair, Members. Jason Schmelzer, on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is anyone here in opposition to AB 3129?
- John Steinbrun
Person
Chair, Members of the Committee, my name is John--
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
If you could-- Sorry, if you could move the microphone closer. Thank you.
- John Steinbrun
Person
Thank you. My name is John Steinbrun. I'm the CEO of Children's Choice Dental Care. I'm respectfully opposed to AB 3129. As I discussed with Assemblymember Wood on March 12, we believe AB 3129 will cut off a critical source of funding to the detriment of California's healthcare. Children's Choice was founded in Sacramento in 2008 and has since expanded to 33 locations in California's underserved communities. We now have 64 dentists and nearly 700 employees. Each year, we help over 130,000 children with 306,000 dental visits.
- John Steinbrun
Person
86% of those kids are on Medi-Cal. 15 of our locations opened during the COVID-19 pandemic and provided emergency care to kids. In some counties, we've served over 50% of the population of children. We've been able to expand to 33 locations with funds we raised from private equity firm in 2018. We plan to open more clinics, but AB 3129 might limit our ability to raise additional capital. In my experience, private equity investors want to back a successful, growing business with a good reputation.
- John Steinbrun
Person
So that's a company that provides quality care, that complies with regulations and practice standards, and that gives patients a good experience so that they'll refer their friends. Soon it's going to be time for my company, Choice, to raise money to build more clinics. If private equity funds are not available, I don't know where the money's going to come from.
- John Steinbrun
Person
I'm afraid that AB 3129 will make it harder for Choice and other healthcare providers like it to grow, making it harder for us to provide access to care for needy kids. Therefore, I must respectfully request your no vote on AB 3129.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Lois Richardson
Person
Good morning. Thank you. I'm Lois Richardson, representing the California Hospital Association. Megan Loper is out sick today. We believe that patients deserve access to high quality healthcare, and these services depend on constant innovation and investment. For example, in Sacramento, UC Davis Medical Center recently opened a new physical rehabilitation hospital that was the result of a partnership between the University of California and private investment.
- Lois Richardson
Person
AB 3129 is unclear about when the Department of Justice must review transactions and gives it overly broad authority to deny or place onerous conditions on transactions. This slows or potentially completely deters much-needed investment in the healthcare delivery system. The bill's definition of change of control is also unclear, including the terms indirect control and sharing of control, where there even minor changes in government.
- Lois Richardson
Person
Unfortunately, the DOJ's existing authority over nonprofit hospital transactions has served as a barrier for investment and was one of the contributing factors that led to the closure of Madera Community Hospital. Access to all financial tools is critical, particularly in vulnerable communities where investments are needed to support under-researched providers so they can better serve their patients. As Dr. Wood mentioned, the Office of Healthcare Affordability currently has the authority to review the transactions covered by this bill.
- Lois Richardson
Person
OHCA is tasked with gathering data and studying the healthcare delivery system to thoughtfully and objectively review these transactions. The Attorney General's knowledge base is legal, whereas OHCA's knowledge base is the healthcare delivery system, data and objective analysis. Existing law prohibits transactions from closing until 60 days after OHCA publishes its final impact analysis, and this provides the DOJ time to exercise its additional authority to prosecute anti-competitive behavior. California has numerous policies that are designed to protect patients regardless of ownership.
- Lois Richardson
Person
For example, it was mentioned that private equity decreases staffing. California has nurse patient ratios that prevents decreasing of nurse staffing. At least five state departments conduct serious oversight of all points of care, including the bedside charting, billing, and even the billing facilities. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for your no vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 3129?
- Dennis Loper
Person
Dennis Loper, on behalf of United Hospital Association, in opposition.
- Marc Aprea
Person
Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee. Marc Aprea with Aprea & Co, here on behalf of the American Investment Council, in respectful opposition.
- Preston Young
Person
Thank you. Preston Young from the California Chamber of Commerce, here today in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Connie Delgado
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Connie Delgado, on behalf of Newport Healthcare, registering concerns. Thank you.
- Seth Bramble
Person
Mr. Chair. Seth Bramble here on behalf of the California Teachers Association. I apologize for being out of order. We are in strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
Katie Van Deynze with Health Access California, similar to Seth Bramble, also in strong support. Thank you. Sorry to be out of order.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in either opposition or support? I know we started right on time and some folks are still making their way through the metal detectors and such. Okay, bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments? Madam Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair. For clarification, what type of private investment would be acceptable to you in terms of the healthcare industry?
- Jim Wood
Legislator
That's a very interesting question. What I'm focusing on here is, are organized funds, private equity funds, venture capital funds, individual investments I have no issue with.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Okay, accept that response. Obviously, respectfully, individual funds, you have several business partners.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
I'm talking about individuals.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Individuals, excuse me. Individuals who a partnership of three business people, is that considered unacceptable or prohibited? How do you define-- That's what I'm trying to get at in a broader sense, how do you define an acceptable private investor, investment company or investment organization, investment partnership?
- Jim Wood
Legislator
This is that moment when I wish I had my technical support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
And if I could, Madam Vice Chair and Assemblymember Wood. This doesn't prevent investment from hedge funds, private equity groups. It's just, it's allowing the Attorney General to have the ability to take a look at it and consent to it because of the impacts that these funds have had in many cases in closing hospitals after extracting profit from certain areas.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Now, there's some hospitals, and I apologize if I'm jumping in here, but there are some hospitals that have thrived and done very well with investment from private equity, and that's great. Well, all we're saying is that or all Assemblymember Wood is saying, and I agree, is that there should be some level of accountability, an oversight. And a hedge fund or private equity investment, it's not like taking money out of ATM. The process takes usually several weeks or months anyway, at the very least.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
So it's allowing one more set of eyes on there to protect patients and protect communities.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I appreciate that clarification, Mr. Chair. My concern is it's just a chilling effect on private-- Private investment is the foundation of our American economy. Now, if there are controls in the market system of our economy, that if the direction and the market situation is not producing the desired results-- The desired results for an investor, whether it's a private equity company, a private partnership, or a hedge fund, is to grow, to be profitable, and to provide the value added services to ensure profitability and success.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
There are often other factors that drive the unfortunate demise. There's obviously, we know, we've discussed another legislation, the lack of Medicare reimbursement. We've tried to adjust that and get that on a better scale. So I think to suggest that hedge funds or private equity, or other large funds, as you described them, need to be under the additional purview of the Attorney General when we just have a law that's SB 154 from 2022, I guess I would say my opinion is to let that see if it's doing the desired corrections.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
And I hesitate to use the word controls of the marketplace, but that's essentially what this is. So I have concern, because I see this in other areas, is getting the government involved in how the private marketplace works. Health care is obviously paramount. We want our people healthy. We want the services world class.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
And if we're driving world class medical care in this country, it takes all forms of investors. So that's kind of where I'm landing on this. But I appreciate you advocating on behalf of healthcare, and I know that's your professional endeavor. I'm just concerned about the controls over investors in all forms of business, especially healthcare. So thank you.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
When you talk about SB 154, are you talking about OHCA?
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Yes.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
As I said in my statement, OHCA does not have any authority over these transactions. It's sort of like the horse is out of the barn. Oh, we missed it. So this is actually looking at a review in advance of a merger or an acquisition, and it's not saying you can't have it. And I would argue that. I'm sorry, venture capital, private equity, it is all about making money. It is not about consumers. It's not about protecting payers. And that's the concern that I have.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
And I would just-- As a comment in regards to the importance of investment to the American economy, I would contend that workers are the foundation of our American economy. And it's obviously important to have investment, but I think the bill is about oversight. I'm going to actually-- Actually, let's take quorum really quick now that everyone or most people are here. That's fantastic.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We have quorum. Thank you so much. I know that since we-- I think some of the witnesses may have been coming through the metal detector. If you would like to make any statements. We've already heard from opposition. I know it's kind of a weird order, but I think it's only fair. If you'd like to make any statement in support.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
Yes, sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Apologies for being late. Katie Van Deynze with Health Access California, the statewide healthcare consumer advocacy coalition. We're here in proud support of AB 3129. For 30 years, Attorney's General of both parties have had the authority to approve, deny, or approve with conditions, mergers related to nonprofit hospitals. And in those 30 years, 80% to 90% of those mergers have been approved, and mostly with conditions to protect consumers.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
And those conditions, what those have looked like have been to keep emergency rooms open, to keep labor and delivery services open, to keep more services open, to not hike up prices on consumers, to not end Medi-Cal Managed Care Contracts, to not close hospitals. And those are the types of conditions that we want for consumers to protect affordable care in the affected communities.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
And like you noted, Mr. Chair, this is to have the mergers go through a timely review process to look at the impacts for consumers. And as was noted by the author, the Office of Healthcare Affordability, they can review these transactions, but we want the Attorney General to have the authority now to protect consumers from negative impacts before they happen and to be able to look at what are the impacts of these private equity transactions. Thank you for the time.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
We really appreciate it and respectfully ask for your support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Tiffany Matthews
Person
Hi, good morning, Chair and Members. Tiffany Matthews, Deputy Attorney General and legislative advocate at the California Department of Justice. Here today on behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, who is a proud sponsor of AB 3129. And we thank Assemblymember Jim Wood for his leadership in addressing consolidation in our health care system.
- Tiffany Matthews
Person
AB 3129 authorizes the Attorney General and to review healthcare transactions involving private equity and hedge fund groups, and it also reinforces the bar on the corporate practice of medicine as it applies to the interference of private equity groups or hedge funds in the medical care of patients. The bill focuses on private equity for two main reasons.
- Tiffany Matthews
Person
The first is that the private equity business model, which is designed to buy an asset, maximize profits, and then sell that asset, has negative effects on California patients, providers and their communities. We are seeing staffing cuts, price hikes and consolidation, which all leads to reductions in access and quality of healthcare for Californians. The second main reason is the alarming pace at which this is happening. These private equity acquisitions have more than doubled in the past decades.
- Tiffany Matthews
Person
So AB 3129 would set up oversight over these transactions where the Attorney General would have review authority and be able to approve, deny, or approve with conditions these transactions, based on whether these transactions are in the public interest. Conditions, can be used to address potential effects of a transaction on access or availability of care in California communities and potential anti-competitive effects in the healthcare market. This review process is not an automatic denial of these transactions.
- Tiffany Matthews
Person
The oversight is to help ensure that Californians have access to affordable health care. And for these reasons, we respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Any questions or comments from Committee Members or any motions? Assemblymember Reyes.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
I want to thank Doctor Wood for bringing this. I think that at the center of all of this is to ensure that the transaction is in the public interest. When we're talking about hospitals, we're talking about schools, it has to be in the public interest. And I appreciate when we're talking about being able to make investments, we want people to invest here. We want this to be a good climate for investors to come and to see a great rate of return.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
But that cannot be our number one concern. The number one concern has got to be the public interest. And I think having this oversight, and as was mentioned in the testimony for the nonprofits, 80% to 90% are approved after review. And it's either an approval, a denial, or a conditional approval. And sometimes those conditional approvals are the best, because now you have your marching orders or the parameters under which you can establish this health facility. That's really important.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Again, it's what is in the public's interest that has to be at the top of our list. Mergers are fine. All of these things are fine. But if it's not in the public's interest, we've got to put the parameters around it.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
We have to find ways to make sure that in the end, the people who most need it, and in rural areas, when you have these mergers and they then sell, and the anti-competition issues that we're just discussing, these all have to be addressed. And I would rather have an expert from the AG's office look at this and determine what needs to be done to protect the public. So with that, I would move this bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Great. Is there a second? Any other further comment? I want to thank Assemblymember Wood for his many years of service and focus on protecting patients, protecting consumers. This is a bill and a long line of legislation you've authored over many years, and you should be proud of your work. This right here is critically important. We certainly see it.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I see it in San Jose with one particular company that shut down the women's health center, prenatal, neonatal, all that in East San Jose during the pandemic. Then in the other hospital by San Jose, moved to shut down the psychiatric beds, and now, in the process shutting down the only trauma center in East San Jose. Not because there's not a demand, there's a huge demand, but because it's not enough of a profit center for them. So I think this is fair. It does not stop investment.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
It just puts the same kind of oversight that nonprofit hospitals have to go through as well. And as mentioned, 90% of them go through, and we want them to go through. We want this investment. But the investment shouldn't be solely for the purpose of seeking profit. If these are, this is an investment into hospitals, that's a public good. We want to make sure that it's providing the services that are being promised when these investments are made. Or new wing is opened, those are great things.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
But at the end of the day, we want to make sure that they're not just being used to kind of take profit out of the community and then shut them down after. The community is now relying on that service after many, many years. And so I think this is a fair, balanced and reasonable piece of legislation that allows our Attorney General to have that oversight abilities. I want to thank Senator Wood, I want to thank Attorney General Rob Bonta for bringing this forward.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Would you like to close?
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Thank you, Members. And thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, we started looking at healthcare consolidation years ago. The Attorney General's Office did in particular, and really over concerns over Sutter Health and their acquisition and subsequent market dominance over healthcare in Northern California, which has led to the fact that we pay almost twice as much for health care in Northern California than we do in Southern California. The Attorney General intervened in that.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
There was a lawsuit and a settlement where Sutter agreed to pay $500 plus million in settlement, without admitting any wrongdoing. And subsequently, we had been working to try to find a way over time, to draw more attention to this ability to acquire entities and create market dominance. And so this bill actually focuses on smaller entities that are kind of flying under the radar, the small ones.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
And so if you gather up enough, suddenly you have the ability to dominate a market area, and with that leverage, you can command higher rates from payers. And that's what this is all about. And if it's for the good of consumers, then great. If it's providing more services and more access, then great. I have no issue with that. But if it's not, we should know.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
And if it looks like it's going to lead to things like the loss of access to reproductive care for women, I am-- I'm sorry, there are so many red flags here, you know, I don't even know where to go. So I appreciate the opposition and their concerns. Happen to disagree. This isn't about new entities that are striving to build something new. This is about the acquisition of other entities. So thank you for your attention and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Call the roll on AB 3129, please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Motion's due pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll call].
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place that on call. Thank you.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
File item one, AB 1825, Assemblymember Muratsuchi.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Good morning, Mister Chair and Members of the Committee. I think I was 1 minute late for file number one, but thank you for taking up Assembly Bill 1825, the California Freedom to Read Act. So last year, I, like many Americans across the country, I was listening to an NPR show that was talking about the nationwide movement on book banning, and it was a California or it was a national freedom to read week that the American Library Association was sponsoring.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
And, you know, they discussed this alarming trend that's been happening not only across the country, but especially here in the State of California, where there's been a 65% increase in the number of book challenges across the country, the highest ever recorded by the American Library Association. So last fall, after I listened to this NPR show, I reached out to the ACLU, and I reached out to the American Library Association, and we worked very closely to draft the first draft of this Bill that we are presenting today, the California Freedom to Read Act.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
This is a Bill that seeks to put the decision as to what books to acquire and to provide and in what manner to provide to librarians rather than to small, vocal minorities that we've seen in our state and communities like Huntington Beach, like Fresno, where they have attempted to ban books because of their content. We know that, as your analysis points out, the right to read, the right to receive information, is a fundamental part of the First Amendment.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
And so this Bill seeks to align the law, this Bill, with, of course, the Constitution, the First Amendment, while at the same time making sure that we allow communities to be able to raise concerns with their librarians to, to leave to the judgment of professional librarians in terms of how to display books that are age appropriate, that are developmentally appropriate. And so I'm proud to present this Bill here today. Here, I believe, just was able to make it past those metal detectors. Cynthia Valencia with the ACLU, and also Craig Pulsipher with Equality California.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
Good morning. My name is Cynthia Valencia. I am a Legislative Advocate with the ACLU California Action, and up until very recently, I've been a resident of Huntington Beach for the past 13 years and a public library cardholder here to support AB 1825, The Freedom to Read Act. Public libraries are a cornerstone of our communities, ensuring that people, regardless of age, income, education, race, or geographic location, have free and open access to information so they can meaningfully engage in civic life.
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
They are also bound by the First Amendment, and we, excuse me, we must protect the fundamental right of access to diverse and inclusive information at our public libraries. Thank you. Assemblymember Muratsuchi for introducing legislation that would prohibit public libraries from refusing to procure books in a manner that would discriminate against or exclude materials based on race, nationality, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, disability, political affiliation, or socioeconomic status. Over the past year, more than 3000 books have been banned in libraries across America.
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
These books disproportionately feature stories about LGBTQ plus communities, people of color, and historically marginalized communities. Book bans to this effect are not only discriminatory, they are a violation of people's First Amendment right of access to information. Politically motivated censorship has no place in California. We have seen local municipalities introduce legislation that aim to restrict access to library books and materials protected by the First Amendment.
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
People who use libraries, including young people, have a right not just to express themselves, but to learn from a diverse range of materials, including library books, by and about LGBTQ and BIPOC communities. We commend librarians who have rejected these censorship campaigns. We must protect the fundamental First Amendment right of access to diverse and inclusive information at our public libraries, and we urge you to vote yes for AB 1825.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Craig Pulsipher
Person
Good morning, Chair and Members. Craig Pulsipher on behalf of Equality California. Proud to be here in support of AB 1825 to ensure that our public libraries remain committed to intellectual diversity and grant all Californians to see their own - the ability to see their own stories and communities reflected in the books they read. As we've seen in recent years, California is not immune from growing efforts to suppress free expression and intellectual freedom.
- Craig Pulsipher
Person
National campaigns to restrict the freedom to read, learn, and think are coming to our state, resulting in harmful policies like recent attempts to ban books that reference LGBTQ civil rights leader Harvey Milk, or speak truthfully about race and systemic racism in the US. According to a recent Pan America report, books that include diverse characters, primarily characters of color and LGBTQ characters, were overwhelmingly the subject of book bans, and at the same time, most book bans primarily target female, people of color, and LGBTQ authors.
- Craig Pulsipher
Person
We've also seen an uptick in bans that weaponize alarming rhetoric and misleadingly characterize books as age inappropriate or obscene to censor materials that humanize LGBTQ people and experiences. These policies all contribute to the current spike in bans targeting LGBTQ people, leading the American Library Association to report that the majority of books challenged since 2021 drew complaints because of their LGBTQ content.
- Craig Pulsipher
Person
AB 1825 is an important and timely measure that will protect intellectual freedom in California by requiring public libraries to have written policies on the selection and use of library materials and prohibit excluding materials in a way that discriminates against LGBTQ people, people of color and other groups. Very appreciative of the Assemblymember bringing this Bill forward and respectfully urge your I vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank for you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 1825?
- Chynell Freeman
Person
Hello, Board. Chynell Freeman, on behalf of the League of Women Voters of California strongly supports this Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 1825?
- Christina Di Caro
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members. I'm Christina DiCaro, lobbyist for the California Library Association. As the analysis notes, CLA currently has an opposed unless amended position on the Bill in print. But I want to sincerely thank the author, his staff, Tom Clark of your staff, for working with CLA so diligently in a manner that it addresses our issues of concern.
- Christina Di Caro
Person
The Committee analysis is absolutely excellent and it lays out our major issues, the private right of action and then tying things to the ALA Bill of Rights. These two issues are being stricken from the Bill and we are so grateful to the author for that commitment.
- Christina Di Caro
Person
The final major piece is just trying to shape the development of the library collection policies in a way that's comfortable for the libraries and does not get into the granular decisions and put those in the hands of citizen groups and other mechanisms. But I do think we can get there. The engagement between CLA and Mr. Muratsuchi has been incredibly positive and productive over the last few weeks. We want to thank him for his help, his leadership on this incredibly complex issue. So thank you very much.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 1825? All right, let's bring it back. And as we bring it back to the Committee, Assemblymember Muratsuchi, do you accept the Committee amendments?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Yes, I do.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Any other questions, comments, motions? We have a motion and a second and no other comment. Thank you so much, Assemblymember, for bringing this forward. It's the kind of thing we wish you didn't have to do. But we do need folks in our Legislature to lead on issues like this to protect our community and especially places that are so special to us, like our libraries. So thank you. Would you like to close?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Respectfully asked for an aye vote. Thank you very much.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Madam Secretary. Take roll on AB 1825, please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Motion is due pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Can I just ask you a question?
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Yeah.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
So you are working on the amendments?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Yes. I want to make it clear that I'm fully committed to, you know, my original intent was, you know, to have a bill supported by the ACLU and the librarians, you know, to make sure that we were addressing the first amendment issues while at the same time making sure that it's workable for the librarians. As you heard from the lobbyists, you know, I think we've addressed the most significant issues that they flagged and we're continuing to work together to make sure. Thank you very much.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, thank you. That Bill is out.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
But we still have to hear the Bill. I'm just putting that out there for folks. It was heard twice in a different Committee, and now we'll bring it back to Assemblymember Muratsuchi.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Thank you very much, Mister Chair. As you just indicated, this Bill just passed out of the Natural Resources Committee yesterday where the environmental concerns were addressed. And here the Bill originally had a private cause of action, but that was taken out to be replaced with administrative penalties. And so.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
But just real quickly, this Bill arises out of a coastal resort in my district, the Terranea in Rancho Palace Verdes, and it highlighted, UNITE HERE conducted a study together with environmental voters that highlighted the tremendous environmental impacts of these major coastal resorts on the surrounding coast, on the surrounding sensitive environmental ecosystems.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
And so this Bill seeks to support the efforts of the Coastal Commission to ensure that major coastal resorts, which are defined as resorts with 300 or more rooms, together with a golf course within a coastal zone, that they comply with the environmental protections that we need to make sure that we have to protect our coast. Addressing issues like fertilizer use, like pesticide use, like single use plastic use.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
This Bill would require the resorts to submit a compliance audit and through this, amendments taken in the Natural Resources Committee, impose administrative penalties for failure to comply with these requirements. The measure also adopts anti retaliation whistleblower protections to protect workers who cooperate with the resorts Auditor. Here to testify in support of the Bill is representatives from UNITE HERE.
- Andy Seymour
Person
Hi, good afternoon, or, sorry, good morning. Honorable Chair Kalra and the Committee Members. My name is Andy Seymour. I'm a researcher with UNITE HERE Local 11, representing over 32,000 hotel and food service workers in Southern California. We're also the sponsor of AB 3192. So we want to recognize Committee staff for their hard work preparing the Committee analysis for AB 3192. The Bill improves the enforcement rules that major coastal resorts are already supposed to follow by moving enforcement from a solely complaint based system to an audit based system.
- Andy Seymour
Person
The Bill also reduces the use of synthetic pesticides and single use plastics in close proximity to sensitive coastal habitats. So one of the properties that would be covered by the Bill is the Terranea, and Rancho Palos Verdes has already mentioned. We have provided you with a report issued by UNITE HERE Local 11 Sunrise Movement Los Angeles, also, California Environmental Voters titled 'How Green is the Terranea?'.
- Andy Seymour
Person
As reviewed in the report, data indicates that between 2017 and 2021, the Terranea, which features a nine hole golf course, used 43 different types of pesticides, herbicides or plant growth regulators, including one whose safety data sheet states that the chemical is, quote, very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects. End quote. So we have taken an amendment to move all enforcement mechanisms, including those related to non compliance with audit requirements and whistleblower protections, to administrative penalties.
- Andy Seymour
Person
In 2016, 3 employees at the Shore Hotel in Santa Monica alleged that management of the Shore Hotel illegally terminated them. All three of these employees had testified at the California Coastal Commission about issues at the hotel in the months preceding their termination. Because hospitality workers are one group most likely to witness environmental problems at a major coastal resort, AB 3192 includes important protections for whistleblowers. So we're proud to stand with Assemblymember Muratsuchi as the author of this Bill and respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Amy Hindsheik
Person
Honorable Chair and Members. So sorry. Fatima Iqbal-Zubair is on a bus trying to get here right now, so I'm just gonna read what she would have said. So I'm Amy Hindsheik and I'm representing right now Fatima Iqbal-Zubair from - the Legislative Affairs Manager for California Environmental Voters. Our organization co authored the report titled 'How Green is the Terranea?' with UNITE HERE Local 11 and Sunrise Movement Los Angeles, which illustrates the deep need for AB 3192.
- Amy Hindsheik
Person
Authored by Assemblymember Muratsuchi. California's coast is the site of some of the world's most treasured and sensitive habitats. Yet portions of the coast are occupied by large golf resorts like the Terranea Resort, located along an environmentally sensitive stretch of the Pacific Ocean. As reviewed in the report, Terranea prominently marks itself as eco friendly, but the report suggests Terranea's public claims of environmental benefits and priorities may be overstated.
- Amy Hindsheik
Person
The Terranea's claims regarding its efforts to improve wildlife habitats may be undermined by a disturbing record of raccoons and other mammals being trapped at the resort by commercial trappers. The resort and the golf course's operation has also coincided with a drop in the estimated local population of a sensitive bird species, the coastal cactus wren. The resort also has allegedly used single use plastic beverage bottles for banquet events and allegedly has not consistently segregated recyclable plastics and food waste from the resort's ordinary garbage prior to collection. We have taken an amendment to move all enforcement mechanisms, including for the use of pesticides and plastics, to administrative penalties. This amendment represents a significant compromise by environmental groups. For these reasons and many more, we respectfully request your aye vote on AB 3192. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 3192.
- Sara Flocks
Person
Mister Chair and Members. Sara Flocks, California Labor Federation, in support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 3192? Yeah, feel free to come up.
- Armand Feliciano
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair and Members. Armand Feliciano, on behalf of the California Hotel Lodging Association, we appreciate the author's amendments. However, CHLA remains opposed for a couple of reasons. Number one, as pointed out in the analysis, there's ample protections for situations that AB 3192 is trying to address. You have the California Coastal Commission, you have the Department of Pesticides Regulations.
- Armand Feliciano
Person
Two regulators are overseeing this situations that AB 3192 is purportedly trying to address. Second, the expansion of the laws of the anti retaliation laws and whistleblower. You're correct, it is for employees, but it also expands it to job applicants. So that is kind of a - I'm not a labor lawyer, but you can imagine that the losses that may come out of it or the penalties may come out if somebody doesn't get a job because they were part of an audit. Third, it's worth reiterating, and I want to be careful to use the word, it appears to unfairly target a small set of businesses in California. For those reasons, we remain opposed. Thank you.
- Adam Regele
Person
Thank you. Good morning. Chair and Members of the Committee, Adam Regele with the California Chamber of Commerce. In respectful opposition. We continue to struggle with the intent of this Bill. Going after just six resorts along the coast. There are thousands of different land uses, from universities to public parks, all along our beautiful coastlines.
- Adam Regele
Person
And we are not aware of any violations that would precipitate the need for a Bill that targets just six resorts, many of which are environmental leaders who win awards every year for environmental sustainability. The Terranea is 102 acre site. They only use 25% of the land. The rest of it is all preserved. There's no known violations that we're aware of of The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, The Safe Water Drinking Act, The Federal Clean Water Act.
- Adam Regele
Person
We're not aware of violations of the NPDS permits. This is a heavily regulated area of California. Single use plastic packaging, specifically, the bottles are recycled at 76%. If you don't believe that the stewards of these institutions have environmental sustainability, they definitely have a drive to ensure that they have beautiful resorts to attract business. So they have every need and desire to actually collect and recycle these bottles. And so we're not finding single use bottles all over the Terranea or other resorts.
- Adam Regele
Person
We find that to be a mischaracterization, in fact, just false statements, candidly. And we believe that this Bill is unfairly and potentially unconstitutional to target six when we're not aware as to why they're being treated differently from the rest of all land uses along the coast. And for those reasons, we must remain respectfully opposed, although we do appreciate the private right of action being eliminated. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 3192?
- Emellia Zamani
Person
Emellia Zamani with the California Travel Association in opposition.
- Max Perry
Person
Max Perry on behalf of the Pest Control Operators of California, also in opposition.
- Beverly Yu
Person
Beverly Yu on behalf of the International Bottled Water Association, respectfully oppose this Bill. Thank you.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Dennis Albiani on behalf of American Beverage Association as well as several agricultural organizations such as California Seed Association. In opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jennifer Roe
Person
Jennifer Roe with the Automatic Vendors Council, also in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Taylor Roschen, on behalf of Western Plant Health, Crop Life America, and RISE in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Chris Micheli
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair. Chris Micheli, on behalf of Niagara Bottling, in respectful opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Matthew Sutton
Person
Good morning. Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association, in opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you. I just want. I mean, I heard this yesterday, Natural Resources.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
A few hours ago.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Another day, another Bill. So I just wanted to point out that, I mean, I raised serious concerns with the natural resources implications of the Bill, but that's not the jurisdiction of this Committee. And so, you know, the PRA being removed obviously makes what is in this Committee's jurisdiction basically, as I see it, null and void. And the constitutional concerns. I mean, I asked this question yesterday, but one of the.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Because my concern really was we didn't go far enough with the environmental protections, which I know is not the opposition's concern. But, you know, I did actually feel like the author's response that these are, you know, plastics right on our coast, putting at risk, you know, the wildlife on California's beautiful coastal communities. And obviously the impact of that is gonna be more significant at larger resorts than at a smaller facility, did satisfy me from a constitutional perspective, and I hope a court would find the same. So I think for purposes of the jurisdiction here today, there isn't much left. And with that, I'll be happy to support it.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Is that a motion?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Oh, yes.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay. We have a motion. A second. And any other further. Yes. Senator Pacheco.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
I had a question, and I know opposition brought this up, but I did. And I know we talked about this, but there's only six resorts that are being singled out. Why only six resorts? Why not other land uses? Why aren't we looking at other, other resorts and other land uses?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Yes, thank you for the question. I mean, we're not targeting any resorts. What we're doing here is identifying, you know, major coastal resorts that have the biggest environmental impact on their surrounding environment. And so, you know, the Bill, it doesn't identify any resorts by name. It just defines major coastal resorts as resorts that have 300 or more hotel rooms that operate a golf course. I mean, it's pretty simple and straightforward. And I think there's. Yeah.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
The intent is to focus on the biggest coastal resorts that use the most fertilizers, pesticides. I mean, we know, and golf courses are very intensive land uses as far as the use of chemicals. And so having that type of intensive land use right on the coast, you know, I mean, for folks that have lived in Palos Verdes, you know, you know how beautiful and pristine that coast is. And so the intent of this Bill is to focus on the major coastal resorts, not on any particular resorts.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
And is there evidence of, like, golf courses, like, just not, not just resorts, but maybe also golf courses that may be culprits? And the second question would be, is there evidence of these resorts being culprits?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Yes, I think it's well documented that golf courses use a tremendous amount of fertilizers and pesticides. But I do want to emphasize that because we heard, and, you know, I've been meeting with opposition, and I will continue to meet with opposition to address the concerns, but with the last round of amendments to allow golf courses to use non organic pesticides where there are no organic alternatives, as well as some other amendments that we took, the Golf Course Superintendents Association, the Southern California Golf Association, and the California Alliance for Golf, they have removed their opposition to the Bill.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. And Assemblymember Reyes.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Just, I appreciated your comment at the very beginning that had the discussion happened earlier, we wouldn't even be hearing this Bill, just as my colleague has said. So I think, again, for the purposes of this particular Committee, this is, there's no reason to oppose for this Committee. The other committees can continue to hear all of the other issues, but thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. And to that point, I believe, given how small of a time window we had. Senator Muratsuchi, I believe that there are amendments that Natural Resources had asked you to take that didn't have time to process there that are here before us today. So would you accept those amendments?
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Yes, I do.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much. And I think it's an example. I think this is one of many examples where our staff turns things over, like, literally in hours. And so I want to commend Nick and our entire staff, and of all Committee staff, frankly, for doing this time and again, especially during this very, very busy time. And so this is one of those examples where we couldn't pull the Bill because you remove private right of action.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
But the good thing is that we are getting some work done in the sense of getting those Natural Resources amendments approved today so this Bill can continue forward if it gets the votes. So, again, thank you so much Assemblymember Muratsuchi for your work on this. Would you like to close.
- Al Muratsuchi
Legislator
Respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much, Madam Secretary, if you could take a roll call on AB 3192.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due passed as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call].
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay, that Bill is out. Thank you. Oh, actually, we need one more, but we still have a couple more folks yet to vote, so we'll put that on call. Thank you. All right, up next, we have Assemblymember Bonta. Item four, 2239. Yeah, AB 2239. That's correct. Item four. Whenever you're ready.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Alright, up next we have Assemblymember Bonta. Item 4, 2239.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Yeah. AB 2239. That's correct. Whenever you're ready.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I want to start by thanking the Chair and Committee for working so actively and diligently with my office on this legislation. I accept the Committee amendments, which address the opposition's concerns regarding an enforcement mechanism, remove income level as a basis for liability, and articulates a remedy that includes and addresses the declared need from the opposition for a safe harbor.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
AB 2239 addresses a critical issue in our digital age, ensuring equitable access to broadband internet services for all Californians. As you will hear from my witnesses, Californians that live in areas with predominantly low-income residents and people-of-color are disproportionately disconnected.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
In light of the increasing reliance on digital technologies for education, work, health care, and communication, it is imperative that we prevent digital discrimination and promote fairness and access to essential services here in California. In order to be able to do this, AB 2239 does several things. First, it adopts the FCC's definition of digital discrimination, which establishes a clear definition for digital discrimination of access. This definition provides a framework for identifying and addressing discriminatory practices and broadband internet provision.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
In addition, AB 2239 expressly prohibits internet service providers from engaging in digital discrimination of access, which is defined as policies or practices that disparately or differentially impact consumers access based on factors such as race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. Here to testify is Paul Goodman, legal counsel at the Center for Accessible Technology, and Oscar Magaña, Senior Programs Officer from EveryoneOn.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
Good morning, honorable Members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Oscar Magaña. I am a former educator, having educated students students in Los Angeles for over 18 years. But currently I serve as the Senior Programs Manager in Los Angeles County at EveryoneOn and I am deeply committed to ending the digital divide in California.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
I stand before you in my professional capacity, but as a product of Southeast Los Angeles, where I personally experience the challenges and frustrations of digital inequity. Today, I am here to advocate for the passage of AB 2239, a bill crucial to eliminating digital discrimination in our state through the stories of our community members who continue to struggle with this issue.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
As a team member of a nationwide nonprofit that works in digital inclusion, we are helping to end the digital divide through our Digital Connections Program, which teaches foundational digital skills to adult participants. Most of our participants are women-of-color. All of our participants are from underserved communities. And they often share their stories with us. For example, I want to tell you a story of Maria from Bell Gardens in Assembly District 62. Maria is not just a statistic.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
She is a mother whose two sons serve in the US Navy. Her sons, who have been serving our country for a couple of years now, one of them is currently deployed on an aircraft carrier. The other one recently got assigned to a submarine and will be on that submarine until April of 2025. The only way that Maria gets to see her sons is through video calls.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
Despite paying $70 a month for high speed internet, she often experiences such poor service quality that she frequently cannot connect with her sons. Unreliable internet speed is not just an inconvenience for their family, it's a heart-wrenching situation that impacts her ability to maintain that crucial emotional bond with her family and directly affects her sons' morale while serving our country.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
Similarly, in Southgate, the LA Times yesterday published the story of Claudia Aleman, a mother of three daughters, ages 11, 17, and 21, who often has to struggle with making the tough choice of what services or what resources she's going to have to pay for on a monthly basis.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
If you can just wrap up your comments, please. Thank you.
- Oscar Magaña
Person
So AB 2239 is not just another bill. It's a solution. It addresses these injustices head on by defining digital discrimination in access in our civil rights code, focusing on outcomes rather than intent. And I am here to ask that you strongly support the passage of AB 2239.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Paul Goodman
Person
Good morning. Chair Kalra. Members of the Committee, my name is Paul Goodman. I'm an attorney with the Center for Accessible Technology. We advocate on behalf of people with disabilities. My specialty is broadband and antitrust policy.
- Paul Goodman
Person
Prior to being at C. for A.T., I worked at Greenlining Institute, where I did the same work advocating on behalf of communities of color. Before that, I was a law professor who taught legal research and writing. And it's kind of this saying that goes around that says when you're in law school and you read a legal decision, you think the law is the most important thing at that decision. When you become an attorney, it's the facts that are the most important thing in the decision.
- Paul Goodman
Person
And I think that's really the fact here, specifically when you're looking at the FCC's digital discrimination order, because the digital discrimination order made the explicit factual finding that ISP's current business practices perpetuate the discriminatory effects of digital redlining that began back in the 40s. That is a factual finding that will remain upheld on appeal regardless of how the legal analysis shakes out. And to me, that really changes the equation from should we do anything about this? To what should the State of California do about this?
- Paul Goodman
Person
And really at the center of this issue is a really straightforward question: who has the power to make the decision whether communities, rich or poor, black or white, rural or urban, are worthy enough to get high speed broadband? And the FCC's order explicitly says it is not the purview of providers to make that decision. California has the solid legal footing, the expertise, and most importantly, the public demand for equitable access to high speed broadband. And I respectfully ask for your support on AB 2239.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in support of AB 2239?
- Maddie Ribble
Person
Good morning. Maddie Ribble with the Children's Partnership, a co-sponsor and in strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Oracio Gonzalez
Person
Oracio Gonzalez on behalf of Next Gen California co-sponsor and in strong support as well.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Georgia Savage
Person
Hi. Georgia Savage here with California Alliance for Digital Equity and strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Patrick Messac
Person
Patrick Messac, Director of Oakland Undivided in strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Tracy Rosenberg
Person
Tracy Rosenberg speaking on behalf of Media Alliance in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Stephanie Hernandez
Person
Stephanie Hernandez, Partnership for Los Angeles Schools. Strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Leah Driscoll
Person
Leah Driscoll from the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools in strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 2239?
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
Good morning, Chair, Members of Committee. Amanda Gualderama with Cal Broadband. We would like to thank the author, Chair and Committee staff for their work on AB 2239. We want to acknowledge the significance of removing income level from the digital discrimination of access definition. Our member companies have consistently provided low-cost service offerings to income eligible populations. With the significant threat of the affordable connectivity program not being refunded by Congress, the continued ability of our companies to offer these service offerings is critical.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
We thank the author, the Chair and Committee staff for their amendment to remedy this unintended threat. Are legal counsel is reviewing the Bill as proposed to be amended pursuant to the Committee analysis, but we do have continuing concerns. AB 2239 is still inconsistent with the Supreme Court precedent stating that a disparate impact standard must encompass any legitimate business decision, not just those based on feasibility.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
Even in the FCC rule, it is noted that as a baseline, the FCC interprets the categories of technical and economic feasibility broadly to encompass any legitimate business impediment, and this should be included in AB 2239 as well. Also, while the Committee's analysis focuses on network build out, the Bill still appears to cover potentially numerous non-deployment factors such as service quality, network management, customer service, and contractual terms.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
Although the Committee analysis predicts that broadband providers would only be subject to liability if they deviate from the previously-approved deployment plans in a discriminatory manner, we are concerned that the actual legal risk is much broader. The FCC also notes the high cost and resource intensive nature of reviewing and assessing existing deployed infrastructure, and thus expressly states that the rule is prospective, which should be added to AB 2239.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
Lastly, we would highlight that the FCC deems projects approved by the government, such as the BEAD program, to have a presumption of compliance. The Bill does not, which would lead to unintended consequences of discouraging participation in the federally-funded grant programs. Again, we appreciate the work of the author, Chair and Committee staff, and while issues remain, we look forward to continued conversations. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Pam Loomis
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Pam Loomis and I am testifying in opposition to AB 2239 today on behalf of the small telephone companies that are members of the California Communications Association. These small companies have been serving some of the most remote and rugged areas of the state for over 100 years. They operate broadband capable networks in sparsely populated historic communities and they incrementally upgrade these networks as they can.
- Pam Loomis
Person
Because their customers want access to the internet, they have created affiliates to provide broadband service, often at an economic loss. These companies have been at the forefront of closing the digital divide in rural California, and thanks in large part to public funding from both the federal and the state government for high-cost support. We are a testament to the benefits of using a public-private partnership approach to closing the digital divide rather than the punitive approach of AB 2239.
- Pam Loomis
Person
This Bill would expose us to costly litigation and enforcement actions by the attorney general and local public prosecutors. It will chill investment and increase the cost of doing business, which will ultimately be borne by our customers. We absolutely support affordable broadband for all. We would ask the Legislature to help us achieve this through reducing regulatory and permitting burdens and reforming the lifeline program to allow low-income customers to apply the credit to their broadband service. The members of CalCom are already struggling financially.
- Pam Loomis
Person
They cannot afford the approach of AB 2239 and respectfully ask for your no vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 2239?
- Ben Golombek
Person
Ben Golombek on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Yolanda Benson
Person
Yolanda Benson, representing US telecom, the Broadband Association, also in opposition to 2239.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jonathan Arambel
Person
Jonathan Arambel on behalf of CTIA, the trade association for the wireless industry, also in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Roxanne Gould
Person
Roxanne Gould representing The Wireless Infrastructure Association, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. I'll bring it back to Committee for any questions. Comments? Madam Vice Chair?
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you, Chair. I was particularly taken with the provider of the rural services. I just want to stipulate that I don't believe that all people who have difficulty accessing broadband are necessarily income-impaired or in lower economic regions. I live in the coastal zone and I cannot get broadband on a high speed basis and I've been dealing with certain telephone companies for years, over 10 years, while they're upgrading, upgrading, upgrading.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
And I know this is going on across the state and especially in the rural areas as well as the urban areas. It's new technology, new technology coming faster, faster, faster. So I resist the notion that it's discriminatory because I'm not in your targeted area, but economically, but from a geographic point-of-view, and I don't have quality high-speed service and I've called the provider multiple times, I've changed providers, and it's just a matter of being, particularly in my case, in the coastal zone, and the liars are underground and they get flooded and all this kind of thing.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
So I am taken with your comment because it's really writ large on larger issues where we see a problem, we put on another regulation, we inhibit investment and the problem just gets worse. So before we jump into this, FCC is looking at it and they are still working through a solution, I just would say let's, and the Federal Government regulates a lot of this. I would say let's just wait and get that accomplished. But to plow more regulations, more regulations, more regulations.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
At some point people say the heck with it. But anyway, it's not just in lower communities. I wish I had better broadband. So I sympathize.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
It sounds like our Vice Chair has some issues with her provider. She can take that up. She can take that up after the meeting, I suppose. And I'll give you some backup for that. Assemblymember Reyes.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
I really appreciate the goal of the legislation to ensure the fair and equitable deployment of broadband access across California. That should be a goal for all of us. And making sure that internet providers do not engage in digital discrimination. And I think that this is important to begin to provide the parameters and the definitions that the providers would need to determine whether or not there is discrimination. There are comments made by the opposition I think that some things that are included, like customer service quality.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
And from your testimony, it's clear that the conversations continue with the author and I'm glad to hear that. With our small providers, I think that's where the biggest issue is in making sure that it doesn't have a chilling effect. And I know that because of the author, this is something, this is conversation that will continue because we absolutely need the smaller providers also, and we need to make sure that we do reach everybody and it's going to take all of the providers to do that.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
But I think that the goal of making sure that everybody has broadband, that's the important goal here, and making sure that we all do everything that we have to do. And you talked about private-public partnerships, but that doesn't preclude also having the parameters that we need to make sure that as we provide the service that we're sure that there is a discrimination.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
And I feel bad for my colleague, but I'm sure that even as things were happening to her, she never felt that she was being discriminated against. And yet we have areas within the inner city where many in the community do absolutely feel that they are being discriminated against, that the services are being, investments are being used in other areas, and I'm talking about government investments, in other areas rather than in those areas that most need it.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
And maybe it isn't discrimination, but when you are the recipient of it and you've had these things happen to you because of where you live, because of the color of your skin, because of so many issues, you can't help but think that this is one of the issues, too. I think it is important that we at least continue this conversation, and I think that having this particular author, Assemblymember Bonta, is important because the conversations will continue, as was mentioned by the opposition. So with that, I would move the Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there a second? A second. Okay. And as we continue the conversation here, I just want to note that there's been more than just conversation with the opposition. If you look at pages 6 and 7 analysis, I just want to point out some significant amendments were taken by the author. She can certainly elaborate on that if she chooses, but, you know, there's been a lot of movement here. A lot of hard work on both sides has happened.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
And so it's been, and I just pointed out, it's not just been conversation. There's actually been very constructive movement that I think has satisfied some of the concerns. There are still other concerns, but I think it really shows that the author is making a strong effort here while maintaining the principles of the Bill. Assemblymember Bauer-Khan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you. I just want to start by pointing out that the Bill does have an exemption for issues that are genuine, issues of technical or economic feasibility, which I think addresses some of what the Vice Chair had said earlier with flooding and the like. Those I think would qualify as technical issues, I imagine.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so I think, you know, I just wanted to say thank you to the author and to Committee staff, as always, because, as many of you know, I was a regulatory lawyer operating in local, state and federal regulatory schemes, and it is not easy to do that. And I think that the author has gone a long way in addressing my major concern, which was inconsistency in state and federal law that made it hard for industry to comply.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I think the author and the Committee have continued to move towards ensuring consistency in law so that this is possible, so that we can protect people from discrimination in a way that allows broadband to continue to expand, because that is ultimately her goal, is to have broadband in every single community. That's what this Bill is aiming to do.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And this is the second conversation we're having today where there's a question, and I thought my colleague said it so beautifully earlier about our primary obligation being the public interest, and often it is these companies interest to maximize the bottom line, and that is your job. I don't criticize that. It is the reality of what you are there to do.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
But we, Assemblymember Bonta specifically in this case, is here to look out for the communities and where profit may not be as maximized in communities that are low-income or the like. We need to make sure that our state dollars are being equally used to provide access to a service now that has become critical to education, to employment, to the everyday things that people need to succeed in our communities. And I think that's what this Bill does.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And having an additional enforcement means to ensure non-discrimination is only a good thing. And so, you know, I just want to thank the author for working hard on this Bill, for getting to a place where I feel incredibly comfortable supporting it. And I know she will continue to work on it because that's what she does. But with that, I'm happy to support it today.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Bryan.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I want to thank the author for bringing this forward. There's no one else in this building I would trust to navigate this conversation as efficiently and as effectively as you are doing it. I represent parts of the Beverly Hills and the Crenshaw corridor. And I can tell you that access to the internet is different. Quality in internet is different. If you apply for internet and you just put in the differences between those two zip codes, the range of options come out differently.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
There's a lot of work to do in this space to make sure that those differences are not rooted in anything that's discriminatory. And I think that's something that is not just shared in South LA, in parts of my district, but also in Oakland and other places across the state, even pieces of the coastal zone. And so I want to thank the author for her efforts to address this, not just in this Bill, but holistically, as we have these broadband, last mile and middle mile conversations. Thank you. And I will be voting yes.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Connolly.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Thank you, Chair. Also wanted to really thank the author for the work that's gone into this, the goals. It is part of a broader conversation. Trying to kind of better understand the impact a bill like this could have, practically speaking. So if someone can talk a little bit about what kind of cases would fall under this Bill if enacted.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
Sure. I think one is that, just to clarify, we did not include in the statute any private right of action, which I think is very important. We concentrated the prosecution, the ability for public prosecutors to be able to bring suit a kind of case scenario. A scenario would be a community that is largely Latino.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
That quite frankly, has many of the community members have taken advantage of the lower cost service that many ISP providers offer for income-qualified individuals experience a difference in either speed, reliability or quality of service. And still kind of as a broad swath know that there is something going on in their community related to either deployment or kind of the full scale of the infrastructure deployment to begin with.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
They would essentially come forward and seek to either have their district attorney, their city attorney, or their attorney general file suit against the ISP provider, who would then be required to, through injunctive relief, remedy that situation. And we can.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah, absolutely. And then a follow-up.
- Paul Goodman
Person
Thank you. I'm sorry I can't look directly at you while I'm speaking. I just want to point out the FCC order actually has a safe harbor. I know that opponents of the Bill have complained about a lack of safe harbor, but that safe harbor actually says if you are participating in a program that gives you federal funding to provide broadband service and you are complying with those programs rules, we assume you are, you are, we presume you're not discriminating.
- Paul Goodman
Person
So I think complaints that, oh no, we can't participate in lifeline or we'll be afraid to take funding for that, don't capture the whole story.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah. Just as a follow-up, and you kind of touched on this, Assemblymember, what role do local governments play in ensuring that there is no digital discrimination in the access?
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
I think as was indicated in the analysis, many of the deployment decisions and infrastructure development decisions are functionally a public-private partnership, right? There are permits that need to be gotten in order for an ISP provider to be able to provide that service for infrastructure to be able to be built. So governments, local governments at the municipal and county-level are, quite frankly, intimately involved in the overall opportunity to have any particular ISP provider existing in a particular locality. That's one role that they play.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
And ultimately, as Assemblymember Bauer-Khan shared, we have an opportunity for local and county-level providers indicate, or agents indicate when they see that that deployment is resulting in a disparate impact for particular swaths of their subpopulations within their purview.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assemblymember Pacheco.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
Thank you. I first wanted just to clarify that Bell Gardens is in the 64th Assembly District, in my Assembly District. But I do appreciate that the author has been working on a lot of amendments and has been putting a lot of work on this Bill. I know opposition has concerns and I know the intent of this Bill is just to make sure that there's universal broadband, and everybody's able to connect to the internet.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
This is very important, as you heard just from the testimony in Bell Gardens, people need reliable internet. They need affordable, reliable internet. So I think this is important, but I would like to see some of the concerns of opposition being addressed, because I'm sure they care about making sure that everybody has reliable internet. That's something that we all care about. And so I'm hopeful that with continued dialogue, this Bill will be perfected even more than it already has.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
And I really commend all the work that you've done. You've done a lot of work. So I will be an aye today, but I would like to see more of it refined so that I can hopefully support it also on the floor. But thank you so much for bringing this Bill forward.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Members, for this conversation. It's an important one. I really want to commend the author for all the work that she and her staff have done in working with the opposition and trying to address as many of their concerns as possible. And I know those conversations will continue. And next year we can work on the Diane Dixon Equitable Access Act. But for now, maybe Haney can offer that one. Would you like to close?
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
Thank you so much, chair. And again, I really want to thank this Committee and the CNC Committee that actually had an opportunity to help shape this Bill. AB 2239 is an incredibly crucial step towards promoting equity and fairness and access to broadband internet service across California. I authored a Bill last year, two years ago, that identified an opportunity to have California engage in a digital equity plan.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
We've focused a lot of the once-in-a-lifetime funding that the Federal Government is providing to the State of California and the State of California can be issuing to really ensure that we have an opportunity to provide equitable access for everybody.
- Mia Bonta
Legislator
The reality is that this focus for AB 2239 is, is to understand what happens when, even despite our best intents, those of the ISP providers, we still have an impact that leads to many people not having what essentially is now an essential service and, quite frankly, a civil right around being able to have equitable access to broadband internet service. With that, I respectfully request your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Madam Secretary, if we can call the roll on AB 2239, please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
That Bill is out. And up next, item 6, AB 2297. Assemblymember Friedman.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right. Thank you for your patience, Assembly Member Friedman. AB 2297 you may proceed whenever you're ready.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Thank you, Mister Chair and Members. AB 2297 strengthens the Patient's Protections Act under the Hospital Fair Pricing Act. The Bill prohibits hospitals and debt collectors from placing liens on property and ensures that patients can apply for charity care and financial assistance at any time. The Bill builds on the work we did in 2021 with my Bill, AB 1020. As you'll hear, we're hearing with. We are working with both the California Hospital Association and the California Association of Collectors to address their concerns.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
This Bill came out from stories we were hearing of people who, under the law, already in California, should have been offered charity care by hospitals and instead were not told their options. And we fixed that a couple of years ago in legislation. But unfortunately, we're still hearing that sometimes patients don't find out about the ability to apply for charity care until sometimes years later they're sick when they're leaving the hospital. Sometimes they're just not capable of understanding the information.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Sometimes the information's not given to them in a language that they understand. This will allow them to go back later and apply for that care without any kind of a time limit. And in addition, the last thing that we want is somebody who has medical debt having their property taken from them. You know, maybe they had one apartment that they owned that was their nest egg. That was what they were planning on retiring on.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And all of a sudden, just because they can't pay a hospital Bill, which, by the way, nobody chooses to have a hospital Bill, you know, this isn't like, zero, I just decided to go and have a heart attack last week. So to have a debt collector go and, you know, basically take their belongings just doesn't seem in keeping with California values. With that, I'd like to turn to my witnesses. I have someone from Western Center on Law and Poverty and Legal Services of Northern California.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Linda Nguy
Person
Good morning. Linda Nguy with Western Center on Law and Poverty, proud sponsors of AB 2297 which would prohibit the use of home liens in the collection of unpaid hospital bills from financially qualified patients. Hospitals are currently prohibited from placing loans on a patient's primary residence, but one way this has gotten around is debt collectors are allowed to place liens on a patient's home to collect unpaid hospital bills. Unfortunately, property liens are regularly used to collect unpaid patient debt.
- Linda Nguy
Person
A review of assessor data found that LA County alone had over 140 property liens, primarily primary residents, were placed in 2023 due to medical debt. In addition, the Bill would eliminate asset consideration in financial assistance determination to align with current Medi-Cal eligibility rules to simplify the financial assistance application process and help protect Californian savings from being depleted when seeking medical care. Californians need their savings to prevent poverty in retirement in older age.
- Linda Nguy
Person
As of 2019, 7.4 million Californians aged 25 to 64 do not have access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan, and nearly half of California's private sector workers have no retirement savings at all. Finally, the Bill would clarify that hospitals must review financial assistance eligibility at any time and prohibit application deadlines for financial assistance. This Bill provides much-needed relief from large hospital bills for low and moderate-income Californians and passed out of Assembly. Health with bipartisan support. Uge your aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ted Mumford
Person
Hello. My name is Ted Mumford. I'm an attorney at the Legal Services in Northern California. We're a nonprofit legal aid law firm, and I represent individuals, low-income individuals, in 32 counties across California. I specialize in healthcare access issues, and my team, we see hundreds of medical debt cases every year. So I'm going to talk about three of those cases where.
- Ted Mumford
Person
Here's some examples of cases where the Hospital Fair Pricing Act had holes in it that allowed the hospitals to deny my clients charity care applications.
- Ted Mumford
Person
So the first is I had a client who's a single mother and the survivor of domestic violence, whose abuser was hiding her bills, her medical debt bills, all the court filings that were filed against her to collect on that debt, and she didn't find out that she was being sued by the hospital and that a judgment was entered in against her until years later and her tax intercept or her tax return was being intercepted. She applied for charity care.
- Ted Mumford
Person
The hospital denied it because it was past their arbitrary deadline. Second client is a retired low-income couple who would have been eligible when they went to hospital 10 years ago, but didn't apply because they didn't know about it. Home lien was placed against their home and they diligently paid $100 a month, every single month until the pandemic came and they lost their job. At that point, they contacted us and we helped them apply for charity care. Again, that application was denied.
- Ted Mumford
Person
And the third example I have is a Low income father of two who was homeless at the time, but he received care from the hospital. He didn't get the bills because he was homeless and didn't have an address. And then he found out years later when he has two kids, he has a job, that his wages are being garnished because he didn't know about this Bill, there was a judgement entered and he tried applied for charity care with our help at that point.
- Ted Mumford
Person
And again, that application was denied. In each of these cases, these were people who contacted us after being sued. They applied for charity care, hospital denied it, and then in court, the hospital argued that the existing law allows the hospital to deny charity care applications at any time because they can decide when there's an application deadline and when there's not. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2297?
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Good morning, Chair Kalra and Committee Members. Brian Maramantes with AFSCME California in support.
- Lizzie Cootsona
Person
Good morning. Lizzie Cootsona here on behalf of the California State Association of Psychiatrists in support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Marvin Pineda
Person
Marvin Pineda, on behalf of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society in support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
Cynthia Valencia, ACLU California Action, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Katelin Van Deynze
Person
Katie Van Deynze with Health Access California in strong support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Eric Harris
Person
Eric Harris, Disability Rights California, strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 2297? All right, we'll bring it back. Oh, yes.
- Vanessa Gonzalez
Person
Vanessa Gonzalez with the California Hospital Association here with an opposed unless amended position. Appreciate the ongoing discussions we've been having with the author and sponsors, and I look forward to continuing the discussions to address our concerns. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else in opposition to AB 2297? Bring it back to Committee. Assembly Member McKinnor.
- Tina Mckinnor
Legislator
Yes. Good morning, and thank you to the author for bringing this Bill. This is extremely important for our communities. No one should have to lose their home, especially if you get a person who's elderly, who's paid for their home for almost 28 years, 29 years, get sick and then lose their home. No one should lose their home because they got sick. And so I love this Bill. I moved the Bill and I would like to be a co-author. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. And is there a second? Okay, we have a second. Any other question or comment? Yes, I want to second those comments. I appreciate you bringing this Bill forward. The reality is that the number one demographic population entering into homelessness is our elderly population. And the number one reason is medical debt or medical incident that occurs, and it really puts them underwater. And so I appreciate you for recognizing that, not just for our elderly, but for all Californians.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I would like to also be added as a co-author and would you like to close?
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
I appreciate the support and I think we need to do better for people that are vulnerable. With that. I would request an aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much. Madam Secretary, if you'd take the roll on AB 2297 please?
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass to Appropriations. [Roll call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay, we'll place that on call. Needs one more vote. Thank you.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
And then item 10. AB 2552.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Good morning, Chair and Committee Members. Mister chair, I want to thank you and your Committee staff for all of your hard work on this Bill. I will be accepting the suggested Committee amendments as laid out in the analysis. Exposure to anticoagulants can result in both lethal and sublethal effects on non-target wildlife, including severe skin disease and decreased immune system response.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
With your permission, I would like to pass these photos around the dais if you want to take a look and pass them on to see what we are talking about. Anybody who's seen a bobcat or a coyote wandering around California with what looks like Mange has probably, almost certainly seen an animal suffering from poison, from eating a rat who was poisoned with anticoagulant rodenticide. The animal that you're seeing is dying, usually or very, very sick.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
They are bleeding out internally because of anticoagulants which permeate up through the food chain and don't dissipate out of that target animal. AB 2552 adds to work we have done in California to add the two remaining first-generation anticoagulant rodenticides known as FGARs, chlorophacinone and warfarin to the existing rodenticide moratorium to better protect wildlife from unintestinal rodenticide poisonings while maintaining exceptions. And this is important for its use to protect public health, water supplies, and agriculture.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
It also requires that the Department of Pesticide Regulation enact stronger permanent restrictions on efgars to limit unintended wildlife poisonings while making chlorosis, chlorophacinone and warfarin a restricted material so that your average Joe can't buy it at Home Depot. You know, it's one thing for a professional pesticide operator to purchase this, but not for anybody to buy it over the Internet.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Anticoagulant rhodenicides, because of their widespread use, continue to result in unreasonable number of public health incidents with over 3,000 human poisonings in 2021 alone, 2,300 of those involving children under six years old, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers. So even if you're not moved by those photos, I hope you're moved by poisoned children and yes, the US EPA is undergoing its periodic review of rodenticides. But unfortunately, the process is too slow and behind schedule.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
One of my witnesses will expand on the data taken from the 2023 CDFW necropsis, which highlights continued poisoning of wildlife from coagulant antirodenicides, including the two last remaining FGARs this Bill seeks to address. So while opposition will get up and say, we already have these bans, we know, and we're going to hear from data that what we have still out there in the rodenticide arena is still leading to widespread poisonings.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
The other thing that's really ironic is that rodenticides actually are counterproductive to what they're trying to do, which is rodent control, because the better way to control rodents is by having predators that are out there in nature attacking them. And rodenticide kills any animal that eats a rat. So what it's doing is it's killing the hawks, it's killing the bobcats, it's killing the coyotes, the animals that would otherwise be keeping those rodent controls in check.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And we know that because studies have tested the anticoagulants against better predator, you know, allowing the predators to do their job. And guess what wins the predators. Testifying in support this morning is Doctor Rebecca Gooley, a Smith fellow and postdoc at UC Davis, and Jonathan Evans, Environmental Health Legal Director and senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. With that, I would respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
Okay. Good morning, chair and Committee Members. My name is Doctor Rebecca Gooley. I am a conservation scientist looking at the impacts of rodenticides in California wildlife. The California Ecosystem Protection Act of 2020 restricted the use of second-generation anticoagulants. However, necropsies performed by CDFW in 2023 showed that over 73% of wildlife are still testing positive for second-generation anticoagulants and over 57% tested positive for first-generation anticoagulants, including chlorophastanone and warfarin, the poisons addressed in this Bill.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
The endangered San Joaquin kit fox was among those with high exposure to both first and second-generation rodenticides. And when these poisons don't directly kill individuals, they make them sick and weak. The sublethal impacts of anticoagulants have been associated with thermoregulatory dysfunction, increased parasite and pathogen load, reduced egg hatching, and lowered fledgling success. Wildlife have a right to not be poisoned.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
Providing protected buffer zones around their natural resources is a well-established and scientifically backed management practice, and one that in this case allows habitat and home range for wildlife that is free from poison. While concern has been raised that the remaining rodenticides have no antidote, we'd like to make it clear that no rodenticide should be used around children or pets, and that for wildlife poisoned with anticoagulants, it's really difficult to save them even with an antidote. The use of anticoagulants are also a public health concern.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
In a 2021 study by Murray and Sanchez, it was found that poisoned rats were significantly more likely to be infected with leptospira, the non poisoned rats, and this can be passed to humans. Fertility control successfully reduces rodent populations, but it does not disrupt their immune system. Further alternatives include hawks and owls. A two-year-long study in Ventura County found that installing raptor perches and owl boxes was more successful and less expensive than poisons in controlling ground squirrels.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
This Bill will help keep moving California to a more biodiverse and compassionate future. Thank you.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Thank you. Good morning. Chair Kalra, and Members of the Committee, my name is Jonathan Evans, the environmental health legal Director at the Center for Biological Diversity. Anticoagulant rodenticides, including those covered by the Poison-Free Wildlife Act, are some of the most scientifically studied and widespread wildlife poisons. Anticoagulants have a unique mode of toxicity that makes them particularly lethal to other animals on the food web because they bioaccumulate and create a cumulative body burden in wildlife as they go higher up the food chain.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
That's why we see this widespread poisoning. As Doctor Gooley alluded to, the most recent data from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife show that the wildlife poisonings are widespread. Over 88% of birds of prey, like hawks and owls, are testing positive. Over 86% of bobcats, including the majority of mountain lions, are testing positive. The Poison Free Wildlife Act works stepwise with previous bills to add the remaining anticoagulants to the moratoriums of AB 1788 and AB 1322 to reduce the cumulative threats to non-target wildlife.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
And the Legislature needs to act because, unfortunately, our regulatory agencies have failed us. Some of the rodenticides that are covered by this Bill have been in revaluation for over five years. We see DPR are not acting in that sense, and that's not unique to anticoagulants. DPR has had chlorpicrin, a World War I nerve gas, in reevaluation for over 23 years. So we need the Legislature to act.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Importantly, we don't need these dangerous rodenticides safer, cost-effective alternatives are readily available, necessary, and frequently used in pest control. Sealing buildings and eliminating food and water sources are a necessary first step. Fertility control has proven highly effective in reducing rodent populations and is already in use by municipal governments in California. And lethal road and control strategies that involve snap traps and electric traps can then be implemented.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
And importantly, there are over 100 different rodenticide products that still would be available and don't pose as great of a threat to wildlife if this Bill passes. So we have our opposition agricultural community say that we won't be able to use rodenticides if a portion of this wildlife buffer area is enacted. That's not the case. There's still plenty of alternatives out there. We request an aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2552?
- Sosan Madanat
Person
Good morning Chair and Members of the Committee Sosan Madanat, W Strategies, here on behalf of Animal Legal Defense Fund, a proud co-sponsor of the Bill. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Lizzie Cootsona
Person
Lizzie Cootsona here on behalf of the California Product Stewardship Council and the Humane Society of the United States, in support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Patrick Moran
Person
Mister Chair and Members Pat Moran with Aaron Read and Associates representing the California Association of Professional Scientists in support. Thank you.
- Paul Gonsalves
Person
Mister Chair and Members of the Committee, Paul Gonsalvez on behalf of the City of Thousand Oaks in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Nickolaus Sackett
Person
Committee, Nickolaus Sackett for Social Compassion in Legislation in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jennifer Fearing
Person
Good morning. Jennifer Fearing on behalf of San Diego Humane Society and our affiliate, Project Wildlife. which is the state's largest native wildlife rehabilitator. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
Stockton Animals Save and Some Bunny to Love Small Animal Rescue in support of this Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Carla Cabral
Person
Good morning. Carla Cabral, 16 year research scientist and emergency room veterinary technician in strong support of this Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Nicholas Mazzotti
Person
Good morning, Chair and Members. Nicholas Mazzotti on behalf of Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District, in support of the Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 2552?
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Good morning Mister Chair and Members Taylor Roschen on behalf of the Rodenticide Task Force in a series of agricultural associations in opposition. We'd like to thank the Committee and the author for taking the amendments to the Bill regarding the private right of action. Certainly an improvement on the Bill in print, but we're still opposed based on a series of factors. Firstly, we believe we have robust administrative penalties for the illegal sale, use, and possession of pesticides. So imposing additional civil penalties we feel is unnecessary inclusion.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
More so, the analysis suggests that the author is working on a series of amendments for the public to notify state and local attorneys about potential violations. We already have procedures in place for reporting use violations, including with County Ag Commissioners, DPR, and the Structural Pest Licensing Board. They are best equipped to handle and verify pesticidal complaints rather than inundating local attorneys.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We don't know what this language will look like, what the process will entail, what the evidentiary standard will be, and what the workload will be, and as such, we encourage the Committee to ask for the Bill back and review this new language when and if it is included. Secondly, we object to the Bill based on an abdication of the process in place by DPR.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
DPR has a procedure to review impacts, including on non-target species, and when legitimate information is presented, DPR is obligated to mitigate or cancel products altogether. Ironically, we agree that the Department doesn't act quickly enough in some form or fashion. But rather than obligate them to review the data and issue a determination to the Legislature and a public by a particular date, which has been done on rodenticides and by Members on this Committee in Legislation.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
AB 2552 bans the products outright, and there is not an agricultural exemption. We believe our agencies are best suited to opine on science, and it is the Legislature's purview to direct them to do so. Finally, I just want to note this is the fifth Bill this year debating individual or groups of active ingredients, arguing the state is not moving fast enough to protect the public or the environment.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Though it is not the purview of this Committee, if we keep legislating products away without ensuring that there are alternatives, or at least a process to register alternatives, we will forever be in a feedback loop of an under-resourced department met with concerns they're not moving quickly enough to review products and product safety, followed by legislation to remove their Fund sources and do the work that the Department and the public expects to be done. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Blair Smith
Person
Thank you, Chair and Members, my name is Blair Smith. I'm the Director of Technical and Quality Assurance for Clark Pest Control, a company here in the state, and a Member of PCOC, the Pest Control Operators of California. Now, as my colleague mentioned, rodenticides are a crucial tool for agricultural production in the state, and that's not just on the farm, but throughout the food chain from farm to fork. Now, Clark Pest Control is one of many companies in the state that services large audited food processing facilities.
- Blair Smith
Person
Using anticoagulant rodenticides at these places is currently allowed under the exemptions put in place by previous bills, but of course, this would change those for customers of ours who lie within a 2500-foot buffer zone of these wildlife habitat areas. Now, examples that come to my mind of customers. This would impact our Sacramento Valley rice operators produce processors in the Salinas Valley and countless wineries throughout the state. And it's important to note that these are tools in a comprehensive road management plan.
- Blair Smith
Person
Many of the alternatives that were previously mentioned are things that we are integrated into our programs and are actively working to reduce the presence of, you know, of these actives and use them responsibly. To touch on the private right of action piece, this Bill maintains civil liability and allows the Attorney General to bring action by request of multiple agencies, whether that's DFW, DPR and others. But it fails to answer other key questions about how this would really work.
- Blair Smith
Person
So, for example, is the city prosecutor required to respond to these requests? Can they refuse, and if so, what happens? And are any minimum requirements of evidence required to be met, you know, before these claims are brought forth to just prevent an influx of frivolous claims? So, as was also mentioned, there are existing ways for pesticide enforcement and regulation through DPR and through our county ag commissioners. These mechanisms should be maintained and improved before creating new pathways. So for those reasons, I urge a no vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 2552?
- Erin Norwood
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair and Members. Erin Norwood, on behalf of the Allman Alliance, also in opposition. Thank you.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Dennis Albiani on behalf of the California Grain and Feed Association, California Seed, several other ag organizations in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Chris Reardon on behalf of the California Farm Bureau, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Skyler Wonnacott
Person
Skyler Wonnacott on behalf of the California Business Properties Association in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Margie Lee
Person
Margie Lee on behalf of the California League of Food Producers, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
Ashley Hoffman on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce. We will be removing our opposition in light of the amendments removing the private right of action. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Dean Talley
Person
Dean Talley with the California Manufacturers and Technology Association respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jason Bryant
Person
Jason Bryant on behalf of the California Cattlemen's Association. We're in opposition as well.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Bring this back to Committee. Any questions, comments, or motions? Anyone? Anyone? Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I mean, since you asked three times, Mister Chair. So, you know, first of all, I want to acknowledge your leadership in this space. This is my first time hearing this in Judiciary, but I heard it on ESTM like different bills you've done in this space many times. And I think your dedication to California's wildlife, both in this regard and others, is obviously incredibly impactful. So I want to thank you I know that in past iterations of similar work. So this Bill is obviously different.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
You have done certain things to allow for agricultural use. I don't believe that's happening in this Bill.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
OH, agriculture is exempt.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Oh, it is.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
What they're concerned about is that there is a 2,500-foot buffer. If you're next to a designated wildlife zone, being a park. So not just open space, you have to be a wildlife zone as designated by a city by the state. So it has to be a wildlife habitat area.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Got it. Super helpful. Thank you.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
The rest of agriculture is exempt.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Yeah, and it's only the 2,500ft. It's not like the rest of your farm. It's that area.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Any other questions or comments? Do we have a motion? We have a motion. Is there a second? And we have a second. Okay, so we have a motion and a second. I also want to thank you, Assembly MemnerFriedman, for your leadership in this space. I appreciate your work with opposition and taking amendments that have clearly removed some of the opposition. I know you'll continue to work on this Bill as it moves forward. Hopefully, it does have a do pass to appropriations recommendation. Would you like to close?
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
I just want to clarify one thing. First of all, we will continue to work on the language about enforcement. Of course, we'll talk to the opposition about that. The reason that came about is that one of our urban city attorneys asked to be included so that they could do enforcement because they don't have another agency to help them. And the enforcement is not against somebody using the pesticide who sells an illegal pesticide, a pesticide that's banned. So I want to clarify that.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
With that, I would request an aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. If you take roll call on AB 2552. please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place that bill on call. Needs a couple more votes. Up next, item seven, AB 2404, Lee. In the meantime, can we have a motion on the consent calendar, please? We have a motion and a second. Take roll call on the consent calendar.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place the consent calendar on call. Need one more vote for that one. Thank you for your patience, Assemblymember Lee. You may begin whenever you're ready.
- Alex Lee
Legislator
Good morning, Mr. Chair and colleagues. This bill, AB 2404, will protect public sector workers' rights to honor other unions picket lines during a strike. The right to collectively bargain and strike are fundamental democratic rights of all Americans. The National Labor Relations Act gives private sector employees the right to strike and further specifies that nothing in the act can interfere with or impede or diminish in any way the right to strike or to affect limitations or qualifications on that right.
- Alex Lee
Legislator
Like federal law, California has enacted laws giving public sector workers the right to strike. The Public Employment Relations Board has affirmed that public sector employees have the statutorily protected right to strike and that public employees that go on strike are protected from discipline by employer for participation. AB 2404 declares that public employees may demonstrate solidarity with other public employees by honoring a strike or refusing to enter the premises or perform work for a public employer engaged in a primary strike.
- Alex Lee
Legislator
The right to honor a picket line is not just a democratic right. It is a matter of conscience for many Californians. It is a choice that people make according to what they believe is morally correct. In light of recent employer actions, California needs to ensure public employees' right to honor and support strikes. I'm respectfully asking for your aye vote.
- Alex Lee
Legislator
And speaking in support today, I have Neal Sweeney, who is Co-President of UAW 4811, the union representing nearly 50,000 academic workers at UC, and Ivan Fernandez with California Labor Federation.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Neal Sweeney
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. As Assembly Member Lee said, my name is Neal Sweeney. I'm Co-President of UAW 4811, representing about 50,000 economic workers at the University of California. I'm a proud co-sponsor. This bill is about giving individual workers the right to personally choose to stand in solidarity with their coworkers without being disciplined or fired, and the right to honor their own moral compasses.
- Neal Sweeney
Person
In late 2022, four bargaining units of my union went on strike together over UC's unfair labor practices and bad faith bargaining. We felt solidarity from every corner of the labor movement, including UPS Teamsters, who have the contractual right to respect picket lines and turn their trucks around. However, we also experienced firsthand the moral injury that is caused when public employers do not respect the First Amendment rights of workers to abide by their conscience and honor a picket line.
- Neal Sweeney
Person
When two of the four bargaining units settled their contracts after about a month on strike, individual members of those units were forced to cross the picket lines of the other two units who remained on strike for about two more weeks. By pitting workers against workers, this created a hostile work environment. Members of every other union at the University of California were also forced to cross the picket line or face discipline, forcing them to act against their conscience.
- Neal Sweeney
Person
AB 2404 will protect the right to honor picket lines as an essential right for all public employees and enshrine this First Amendment freedom into California law. It will also encourage good faith negotiations and speedy resolutions so that workers can get back to the work they want to do, serving the people of California. I respectfully urge you to vote aye on this bill. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Juan Fernandez with the California Labor Federation, proud co-sponsor of AB 2404, a bill that, as mentioned, will protect a public employee's right to honor a picket line during a labor strike. As highlighted by my colleague representing UAW 4811, AB 2404 serves as a direct response to the UC-wide UAW strikes that occurred at the end of 2022. During this period, UC workers represented by other campus unions were unable to honor their colleagues' picket lines.
- Juan Fernandez
Person
In addition to not being forced into hostile work environments by crossing strike lines, workers should not have to compromise their rights and ability to act according to their conscience in order to avoid disciplinary actions from their employers. While protecting workers across the state, AB 2404 does not compel any worker to go on strike, but rather protects their individual rights to respect a picket line.
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Deciding to go on strike--deciding to respect a picket line is an extremely challenging decision, especially for public servants who care deeply about their work, and that decision is not made any easier by this bill. AB 2404 is about giving an individual worker the right to personally choose to stand in solidarity with their coworkers without being disciplined or fired, and their right to honor their own moral compass. And for these reasons, we respectfully urge your aye vote at the appropriate time. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Do we have anyone else in the audience? Support of AB 2404?
- Coby Pizzotti
Person
Mr. Chair and Members, Coby Pizzotti with the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians, also in support.
- Shane Gusman
Person
Mr. Chair and Members, Shane Gusman, on behalf of the Teamsters, the Amalgamated Transit Union, and the Machinists, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Chris Myers
Person
Chris Myers with the California School Employees Association, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
Sandra Barreiro from SEIU California, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Brian Miramontes with AFSCME California, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Louie Costa
Person
Mr. Chair and Members, Louis Costa with SMART Transportation Division, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Patrick Moran
Person
Mr. Chair and Members, Pat Moran with Aaron Read and Associates, representing the California Association of Professional Scientists, UAW, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Seth Bramble
Person
Seth Bramble, speaking on behalf of the California Teachers Association, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 2404?
- Sarah Dukett
Person
Good morning, Chair, Committee Members. Sarah Dukett, on behalf of the Rural County Representatives of California. Our concerns with AB 2404 are consistent with the issues raised in response to last year's AB 504, which this is a reintroduction of, and is also reflected in the vetoed message by Governor Newsom stating, 'unfortunately, this bill is overly broad in scope and impact. The bill has the potential to seriously disrupt or even halt the delivery of critical services, particularly in places where the public services are co-located.'
- Sarah Dukett
Person
'This could have significant negative impacts on a variety of government functions, including provisions of services in a rural community where co-location is common and accessibility of a variety of safety net programs for millions of Californians.' In rural communities, it's common to see co-location of government services. For example, most of our courts and our counties have co-located services. I have a remote health care district that also has county public health and social services co-located.
- Sarah Dukett
Person
I have a campus where we have a public library, a county museum, and the community colleges, or a really remote coastal city where we have co-location of planning and building services with the county because they're anywhere from two to four hours away from the county seat. Public employers that bargained in good faith and have an approved MOU agreement should not be penalized for sharing a business space with another government employer.
- Sarah Dukett
Person
Without additional amendments to address co-located agencies, our communities may be left without needed services. Shutting down non-struck agencies for sympathy strikes is an extreme approach that goes well beyond what is allowed for primary strikes and risks the public's health and safety. For these reasons, RCRC is opposed. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Johnnie Pina
Person
Good morning, Chair and Members. Johnnie Pina with the League of California Cities, here today in respectful opposition of 2404. State law governing collective bargaining are in place to ensure a fair process for both public employees and public entities. AB 2404 would upend the current bargaining process, which allows striking only in specified limited circumstances and would pose a serious problem for public agencies that are providing essential public services.
- Johnnie Pina
Person
This bill would allow those who have not gone through the negotiation process to now refuse to work simply because another bargaining unit is engaging in striking. Allowing any public employee with limited exception to join a striking bargaining unit in which that employee is not a member could lead to severe workforce stoppage. Local MOU provisions around striking and sympathy striking ensure local government can provide critical services.
- Johnnie Pina
Person
The no strike provisions in local contracts have been agreed to by both parties in good faith, often due to critical nature of the employees' jobs. As local agencies, we have a statutory responsibility to provide services to our communities throughout the state. This bill jeopardizes the delivery of those services and undermines the collective bargaining process. For those reasons, we're opposed, but look forward to continue the discussions. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 2404?
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Kalyn Dean, California State Association of Counties, in respectful opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Lizzie Cootsona
Person
Lizzie Cootsona, here on behalf of Prism, in respectful opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Aaron Avery
Person
Good morning. Aaron Avery, California Special Districts Association, respectfully opposed, also on behalf of the Association of California Healthcare Districts. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jean Hurst
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Jean Hurst, on behalf of the Urban Counties of California, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. I'll bring this back to Committee for any questions, comments, or motions. Sure. Madam Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I want to be certainly respectful of the existing laws, but I just want to ask a clarifying question. So if there is a strike by one bargaining unit on proximity or on the same premises of a school, so the teachers would strike, be allowed to participate in a friendly strike as well? Stop work stoppage, teachers? That's my specific question.
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Yes, this bill does apply to all public employees with those exempted in the bill that we worked with last year with stakeholders, so currently those who are not included under the bill are certain peace officers and firefighters. But yes, teachers are covered.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
So the risk to our students, our children who have been through so much through the pandemic and lost their presence in the classroom, and here's the risk to their continued presence. That concerns me.
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Just to clarify, teachers can strike now.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I'm sorry?
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Teachers can strike now.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
No, I know, but this would be some other unit and they're striking in sympathy. So it's not directly affecting their collective bargaining agreement, it's someone else's or adjacency, and so in sympathy, as I understand your bill, then the teachers would be permitted to strike. Is that correct? Okay, thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assembly Member Bryan.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I'm just curious, what does 'some peace officers' mean?
- Juan Fernandez
Person
Yeah. So last year we included certain--like Highway Patrol from last year, and we can get you specifics on the types of peace officers that are exempt.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Prison guards, local law enforcement, sheriff's departments?
- Juan Fernandez
Person
We can, we can give you the specifics on it.
- Tina Mckinnor
Legislator
Move the bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Is there a second?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Second.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We have a motion and a second. All right. Thank you for bringing this bill forward. I know it's been a journey for it and hopefully it'll continue to move forward. Would you like to close?
- Alex Lee
Legislator
I look forward to continuing this bill and discussions with all the stakeholders involved. Again, this is about the democratic and worker right to honor strikes, especially when you're on the--especially with your fellow workers, so look forward to continuing those conversations and we'll continue conversation with the Governor's Office. Of course, this was a bill that was carried by Assembly Member Reyes last year and was vetoed, but we'll continue to move forward the conversation. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Oh, yeah. Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I have a question. Just because of the question asked, my understanding of the bill was that the sympathy strike would have to be at this work site, so the teacher would only not be able to work if it was, say, a classified employee at their work site, for example?
- Alex Lee
Legislator
That is correct.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Okay, thank you.
- Alex Lee
Legislator
That's how I understood the question, too.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Sorry to--
- Alex Lee
Legislator
Respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call].
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Mister Chair, you said 2187?
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Yes.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Thank you. Mister Chair and colleagues, I'm here to present AB 2187 a Bill that will establish a statewide office of tenant rights and protections. The responsibilities for the office are simple and common sense. Create and maintain an up to date, language inclusive list of our state's tenant rights and protections.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
As the Committee analysis aptly points out, the only state entity with a responsibility to publish any kind of guide is the Department of Real Estate, which in 2022 released a 150 page guide to tenants and landlords rights and responsibilities. Despite the length of this guide, it's already outdated. It does not mention the state's new security deposit cap, nor does it mention the updates to our state's just cause eviction statuses.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Already this year, there have been numerous proposals on pet policies for rentals and caps on rental application fees. Our state is the home to 17 million renters, myself included. 54% of our largest city, Los Angeles residents are renters. Many of these renters are non English speaking. I'm proud to say that California has strong renters protections, but as we continue to pass laws to ensure that rent is affordable and residents aren't unjustly evicted. We need to make sure renters know about those protections.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Currently, nonprofits and tenant rights advocacy organizations are forced to shoulder to the burden of supporting and educating our state's renters. It's time that the state steps in to share that weight and that responsibility. This is especially relevant as we see the growth of app based lease agreements on sites such as Zillow and apartments.com, which issue a disclaimer that the provisions of their lease agreements may not be up to date with state laws.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Here with me to testify in support of the Bill are Jesus Paco Estrada and Sebastian Ruiz from Power California Action.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
Good morning, Members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. I appreciate and thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of AB 2187 that would establish the Office of Tenants and Rights and Protections with the primary goal to educate tenants on their rights. My name is Jesus Paco Estrada and I'm a first generation Mexican American from South Central Los Angeles in my fourth year at Loyola Marymount University.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
I'm here today on an early Tuesday morning, just a week before finals, representing Power California Action, and most importantly, representing the voices of young people all across our beautiful state. In a recent youth poll conducted by Power California Action, youth across California identified the housing crisis as the most pressing issue impacting our generation. Nine out of 10 younger Californians support policies that make housing more affordable and protect renters. For a moment, bless you. I'd like to share a little of my own story and experience.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
When I turned 10, my family was forced to move from Southgate to South Central due to the rising rent costs. For over 20 years, my father worked at Farmer John's as a meat processor, barely making minimum wage. After his company left Los Angeles, he was left with work injuries in his legs, but he has not allowed that to stop him from supporting our family. Working as a security guard. For families like mine, we can't afford the luxury of doing otherwise. That is why I'm here today.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
For far too long have our families suffered due to the high cost of housing and the creeping fear of eviction. For young people like me, we want to protect our families, but are unsure of what the future will bring. Advancing AB 2187 will create the Office of Tenant Rights and Protections, charged with educating tenants on the rights and protections available to them. Renters should not have to maneuver the system alone.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
Today, I call on you as representatives of this great state to pass a legislation that will make sure tenants and landlords know what they can access and easy read to list of their rights and responsibilities. This will bring us one step closer to creating more supportive and more equitable future for families. Thank you for your time and consideration.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Sebastian Ruiz
Person
Hello, my name is Sebastian Cranio Ruiz and I'm a power advocate at Power California Action. I was raised in Running Park, California. AB 2187 is a very important Bill for me and the 44% of Californians who rent. I have lived in an apartment for the better part of my life. Thankfully for my family, our landlords have been understanding and our contracts have been easy to understand. We have a strong understanding of our rights as tenants.
- Sebastian Ruiz
Person
I, like many others my age, see ourselves more than likely having to rent for at least a few years, if not the majority of our lives. Even then, when a major part of the population rents, most of us do not know our renters rights.
- Sebastian Ruiz
Person
So to be able to see all of our rights online in a simple way to help us be informed of what is already the law that would allow many renters to stop landlords from taking advantage of them because they do not know their rights. This is a well known problem as I've seen many friends live in inhabitable units and their landlords make them pay to fix issues that the landlord should pay for.
- Sebastian Ruiz
Person
I've seen wrongful landlord no sorry, I've seen wrongful evictions where the tenant thinks they cannot do anything about it. A very bad case, showing how this can get out of hand is a friend of mine, Chizu. Chizu was living with mold, leaks and cracks from the ceiling and cockroaches. His landlord was willingly neglectful and because he didn't know his rights as a tenant, he got taken advantage of.
- Sebastian Ruiz
Person
He has had to resort to legal hope in order to get through this. This situation should have never happened in the first place. Going through this process, he wished he knew what his rights were. This would have helped him so much in the situation. It is the government's duty to inform and protect renters rights and for these many reasons, I hope you will all be able to support this Bill and to continue supporting it as it moves through the Legislature. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in support of AB 2187?
- Margaret Dimatio
Person
Good morning. Margaret Dimatio, housing policy attorney at Legal Aid of Sonoma County, in strong support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Karen Stout
Person
Hello. Karen Stout here on behalf of Power California Action, as well as the San Diego Housing Commission, we're in strong support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is everyone here in opposition AB 2187?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
You coming all the way up.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Just take a seat on each side of Assemblymember Bryan over there.
- Pat Brown
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Pat Brown with Aaron Reed and Associates representing the Southern California Rental Housing Association. Bottom line, we think creating this would be redundant. There are already ample places where tenants can go to see their rights, whether it's www.courts.org, tenants rights, DOJ tenants rights, BCSH tenants rights, along with local government sites you can go to and find out your tenants rights there.
- Pat Brown
Person
If we're going to spend money to establish this, we'd prefer to see the money go to rental assistance where my client property owners are kept whole and tenants are kept in their housing. So that's why we're opposed to the Bill. Appreciate it. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ronald Kingston
Person
Good morning Mister Chair, Members of the Committee, Ron Kingston. I represent two regional apartment associations, apartment association in Orange County and the East Bay Rental Housing Association. The author is correct. The advice and direction has been provided innumerable times by the State of California to the Bill provides no guarantee that this booklet would be updated quarterly, annually, every two years, five years, three. There are a number of local laws that intersect and affect landlord tenant law. This Bill does not affect that, nor can it.
- Ronald Kingston
Person
It's not realistic. So we have a robust history starting with 1998 and every two years the state booklet is published and updated. Why do we need a State Department as an alternative? Just direct the State of California to update its existing booklet. That is the absolute perfect solution. And for these and many other reasons, we urge a No vote. Thank you so much.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 2187?
- Katherine Bell Alves
Person
Good morning. Kate Bell, on behalf of the California Rental Housing Association and AAGLA, in respectful opposition.
- Caitlin Vega
Person
Mister Chair. Apologies for going out of order. California Labor Federation, Caitlin Vega for the California Labor Federation here in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Haney.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
Thank you to the author for your leadership. And I'm a co-author of this, so of course I'm supportive of it. I also want to wish the witness the best of luck with his finals. Thank you for being here. Both of you. Both of you. So, you know, one of the things that I hear a lot about from property managers, from landlords is how much the law is changing.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
And sometimes that is given as a reason of concern for some of the things that we're doing here. And we are constantly trying to adapt our protections and rights so that they're responsive to the needs of both tenants and landlords. And it does seem, and just even in the analysis, it's very concerning that as we make these changes that they're not provided in a way that people can access them, they're not updated regularly.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
I actually, there's a lot that I would agree with around what one of the opponents said around how do we make sure that even if we created this office, that the information was provided in an accessible way and is updated regularly? And how are you ensuring that that's the case in this legislation?
- Matt Haney
Legislator
Right now, if you are a tenant, or if you're a landlord and you're trying to figure out what the law is, it is very difficult to figure out, and you might find yourself in the depths of some guide that some nonprofit has put up that is old or is not necessarily right for you.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
And I think that actually the result of that is that you have more conflict and you have more confusion and you have maybe tenants who might have otherwise been able to follow the law but didn't understand what it was, maybe would have responded in the right way, or followed certain policies, but didn't know what it was, and vice versa.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
So I think that this actually providing this kind of information in a clearer way, transparent way, an updated way, actually helps both landlords and tenants avoid conflicts and avoid litigation and those kind of things.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
But I do, I am sympathetic to the view that why isn't the right way to do this, simply to have the folks who are tasked with it now, to some degree, the Department of Real Estate, the courts, etcetera, why not keep it with them and have maybe some more clearer prescriptions around how to provide this information and update it? Why do we need a new office?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Yeah, to be clear, I know the structure of government can be confusing for folks, but this would be an office that exists inside of a Department. In the same way, the Attorney General has many different offices inside the Attorney General's Office. Essentially, a Department would then outline a key set of employees dedicated towards the framework of the Office of Tenant Rights and Protection so that they can't be diverted to other tasks when it's convenient.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
We saw during the pandemic that that was a convenient time for the state to repurpose some of the workforce in a Department, to create an updated guide because we were all under stay at home orders, but that isn't statutorily required in perpetuity. And that's what we're trying to establish here. Permanency that allows for both tenants and landlords to be able to go to a government-backed, accessible, updated public place to find out what their rights responsibilities are, are for all of the reasons that you mentioned.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
The office is under which departments?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
That. CRD.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Civil Rights Department.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
Okay, thank you.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
The Department of Real Estate has done a fantastic job, but when we look at the landscape of all of the different departments, that's what our team is still having conversations about, where the best place to house this, so that it doesn't take away from too many of the responsibilities the Department already has.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you. I agree with a lot of what was said by my colleague from San Francisco. I think one of the things we talk about a lot when it comes to these tenant rights bills, this is the small landlords who don't know the way the law works and don't have big departments to help advise them. Big landlords can handle it. They got the lawyers and the experts. But I do think so.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I guess one request I'm happy to support the Bill today is that I also think the Bill should specify that the office should list the tenant or the landlord's obligations. Right. It says to list the tenants rights, but I also think it should specify the landlord's obligations so that the landlords can go. Because I think a lot of landlords that violate the rights of tenants do so unknowingly. Not all.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
You are obviously talking about egregious examples, but we also want to make sure that the landlords are aware of what their obligations are. So I think specifying that, so this is a place where both parties can go and get the information and everyone can be. I think that would further protect tenants. Not all, obviously, but some.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I also want to make sure, and it wasn't clear to me, but maybe this is, that it is really important in the Bay Area, obviously, and San Francisco being a good example, cities go or counties go further. And it is important to me that if this is where everyone goes, they actually are aware that their rights may be even beyond what the state provides, so that they don't stop here and they know to go look one step further.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Potentially, maybe we could list the jurisdictions where one should do that, just so people do have a one stop shop to find out where all their rights are. So just a couple suggestions, but I think it's a great Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I think that is a fantastic suggestion, and I think the responsibility is really important. I had a situation a couple years ago when we were leaving a place, moving to another place where a landlord took our security deposit and cited for painting. And we thought to ourselves, that doesn't seem like something you can take our security deposit for. And how do we know and how do we find out?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
And like, I'm already a Member of the Legislature at this point, and I'm struggling figuring out where to find out whether you can take it for painting. After consulting my wonderful team to compile a list of important tenant protections that we could do a guide for our district, we did find out that it was useful for me personally in finding out that you can't actually take somebody's security deposit for normal wear and tear and painting. And we sent that law to our landlord.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
But that shouldn't be the process that landlords have to go. And they weren't trying to be malicious. This is like a great landlord too, somebody who wasn't trying to do more than they were supposed to, just inadvertently did because they didn't know their responsibilities and we didn't know our rights. So I think you're absolutely right, and the regional variation is definitely something we can work through.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Madam Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you, Mister Chair. Assembly Member Bryan, I know your heart is always in the right place. I've never questioned that you always want to do the right thing. My question to respond to Assemblymember Haney, though, when you say that there's so many laws and regulations and where does one go? I have a simple solution. Let's stop passing so many laws. That is a solution. There have been over by rough count.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I just consulted with my guide here, over 10 new laws in the last two years, perhaps, and I'm not questioning the justification or the validity of those laws, but the overwhelming laws affecting landlords and property management to me, are a cause for concern from a business standpoint. How could anybody keep up with it? But I know with the young people, the young college students and younger, they do not lack for an ability to find answers to questions.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Just curiously, did you Google renters tenant rights and what did you find? I'm just curious.
- Jesus Estrada
Person
Did not Google Renter's tenant protection rights through Power California Action? We conducted a youth poll and that's where we gathered most of our information, and also just through the housing rights advocacy that we've been involved with.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
So I see, just looking here in an analysis, the judicial branch, California courts, has information. The Department of Real Estate, as you mentioned, the Civil Rights Department, the State Bar. I think at the minimum it could be consolidated.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I think that's a great idea, potentially in an Office of Tenant Rights and Protections.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
But I would say, does it really need to go? Are we talking discrimination or just getting answers to common renter questions? Could it go to the Department of Consumer Affairs, for example?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Well, and I think, similar to your thinking, there's a reason we didn't offer to house this in the Department of Justice. Right. This actually isn't to force super stringent regulation or scary regulation. It is about providing information. It is about consolidating all of these avenues where information is not required to be regularly updated and therefore is not so that tenants and landlords have a place that is reliable, that we have put into statute to be updated regularly as we continue to do our work.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I know, I just. Civil Rights sounds just a lot more.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Sounds a bit scary.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Anyway, thank you for what you're doing. I have to scoot over to another Committee.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right. Any other comment? Do we have a motion? We have a motion and a second. Thank you so much, Assemblymember for bringing this forward and your continued advocacy for tenants and tenants' protections. And I do think this will be an opportunity to consolidate all the information so that not just tenants but landlords can benefit as well, so that we reduce confusion. Would you like to close?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I think it's. As my colleague from the Bay Area and Chair of our Renters Caucus explained earlier, it's a difficult time, both for tenants and for landlords. And that confusion hurts well-meaning and good-intentioned landlords and tenants both. It leads to unnecessary litigation where rights or protections have been violated, not even for malice or bad intent. Also leaves tenants feeling vulnerable and alone in complex situations where their entire livelihood is at stake. And these protections are largely created to protect that livelihood.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
But if you don't know them, you fall vulnerable to financial insecurity, housing insecurity, and at the most extreme situations, losing your housing. We've got to do better. We've got to make sure folks are educated in a language inclusive way. The state has a responsibility here. It's not okay that we've shifted so much of the burden to the nonprofit and the community-based community who does a fantastic job. This is in the public interest, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Madam Secretary, take roll on AB 2187.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due pass to appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We'll place that on call and we'll get back to your next one a little bit later, if we could. We have some non-Committee Members are here, so I'd like to go to item eight, AB 2049, Assemblymember Ward.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. I want to start by thanking the Committee for your engagement and the staff for their hard work on this bill. And I present AB 2489 really just on the fundamental principle civil service jobs are the backbone of both a strong middle class and responsible, effective local government. Public workers are skilled professionals who are highly qualified to fill these jobs and are dedicated to civil service, often for their full careers.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
For various reasons, contracting out of government jobs has been steadily rising over the decades. Now, typically, this is done to address budgetary problems, but what we've observed is that, when these jobs exit the government employment rolls, they rarely return. Public works are the expectation of taxpayers and constituents. Ongoing public functions are best addressed with a right sized workforce to meet those demands of use.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
With contracting out over time, the government's institutional talent pool is inherently diminished and both risks the public outcomes because of barriers to accountability and hurts the worker because they are no longer entitled to government pay rates and other benefits. And a troubling trend that has become a part of contracting is the lack of parity of qualifications. Every civil service job has stated education and experience requirements, for example, that are in alignment with their pay scales.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Contracted jobs often will ask for lesser qualifications to do the same job that the government has historically been doing. This creates an imbalance and, unfortunately, it pits civil service employees against contracted employees. Civil service employees become undercut by less skilled contracted hires while also having to compete with them on a lower pay scale. Government, however, is responsible for the work getting done.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Maintaining a pattern of reliance on private workers reduces accountability, creates a layer of reporting and delays, directs public dollars to support management, compensation, and company profit at the expense of workers, and less assurance that the work deliverable would be satisfactorily performed, leaving the government and its taxpayers holding the bag. Partnerships with private partners can be positive and present good opportunities for public value in in supplementary or complimentary situations. There are many examples of this, and AB 2489 doesn't impede this longstanding relationship. This bill simply says that if there were job classifications currently or recently performed by public employees, let's make sure that we aren't reducing our qualifications or creating a less qualified standard to perform the public's interests.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
To address some of the noted concerns, I presented author's amendments in this Committee that will exempt contracting from the requirements of the bill in emergency situations, and I'm aware of additional comments coming in by local government and nonprofit organizations, and we'll continue to work with them on some of their concerns. With me in support of this bill today, I have Sandra Barreiro, the Government Relations Advocate for SEIU and Bryant Miramontes, the Legislative Advocate AFSCME.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee Members. Bryant Miramontes with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, proud co-sponsor of AB 2489. I'm here to speak about the intent of the bill. AB 2489 is about ensuring public services through accountable public contracting practices. This bill simply states three things. Civil service jobs have clear qualifications requirements set by local agencies, which are established for a variety of reasons.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
If private contractors are going to receive taxpayer dollars to to provide specific services that a local agency's civil service workers are or were recently providing, they need to meet the minimum qualifications required by that agency. And three, before beginning to contract out, local agencies are to notify bargaining units in advance, which we have agreed to waive in certain emergencies, as the Assembly Member have noted.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
This bill is not about requiring that contractors meet any specific requirements not expected of public sector workers performing the same functions, and it's not about penalizing any particular contractor. This is about reinvesting in the public sector workforce and ensuring that local agencies stand by the qualifications requirements that they set to ensure quality public service delivery. With that said, we want to make this workable and have been engaging with the opposition and are putting in a good faith effort and to ensure that their decision, their concerns are addressed as well. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
Thank you. Sandra Barreiro on behalf of SEIU California, we are co-sponsors of this bill. Civil service or merit systems were developed in response to public outcry over cronyism and nepotism in government hiring. They exist to ensure that the most qualified candidates for a job are selected, and part of that goal is establishing minimum qualifications. Some of the concerns raised by the opposition give the impression that local governments contract for services to get around minimum qualifications.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
But if minimum qualifications for a job are not appropriate, the local governments, as the employer, can put the work into changing them. As far as background checks, most would agree that for some positions, like positions that require driving or interacting with children, they are necessary for everyone's safety. But for other positions, local governments have full discretion to assess criminal history and make a decision on whether it actually impacts job fitness. Other things like lived experience can also be included as a minimum qualification.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
So this bill is limited to bargaining unit work, which is defined in an MOU, because one, employers have the ability to directly hire for these positions and two, in civil service systems, bargaining unit job qualifications were specifically designed to ensure a qualified workforce. And if a contractor is performing bargaining unit work, the public is generally going to assume and trust that contractors are equally qualified. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2489?
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
Ivan Fernández, California Labor Federation, proud co-sponsor. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Chris Myers
Person
Chris Myers with the California School Employees Association in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is anyone here in opposition to AB 2489?
- Jean Hurst
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair and Members. I'm Jean Hearst on behalf of the California, excuse me, the Urban Counties of California, an Association of the state's largest 14 counties who provide services to about 80% of the California population on behalf of the state and local governments. I'm here today to express our opposition to AB 2489. I want to begin by making clear that the current public sector workforce crisis is the number one challenge facing counties.
- Jean Hurst
Person
This crisis directly impacts our capacity and ability to address the multiple crises of the day and eventually undermines trust in government, which we know we can ill afford. In addition, California's local agencies have been significantly challenged to do more in our communities to more effectively address the crises and challenges of our time, including behavioral health, homelessness, and the impacts of climate change to serve individuals in need in a more equitable, culturally aware manner that provides better results.
- Jean Hurst
Person
At the same time, we're facing a perfect storm of workforce challenges. The Baby Boomers have reached retirement age and are leaving the workplace en masse. The great resignation has taken hold, and we lack a pipeline supply of trained new workers to meet the needs of our communities. Compounding that challenge is a chronic and sustained underinvestment in funding local government programs and services.
- Jean Hurst
Person
In fact, most of the resources that the local agencies have received from the state and Federal Governments over the past few years have been one-time in nature. The state repeatedly acknowledges that one-time revenues should be spent on one-time expenditures in its own budgeting. Local agencies, of course, must do the same. AB 2489 is an unnecessary and inflexible proposal that will not assist local agencies in hiring and keeping a public sector workforce that can meet the needs of our communities.
- Jean Hurst
Person
It will not improve services, reduce costs, or protect public employees. Specific provisions require local agencies to notify the relevant employee organization its determination to begin a procurement process by the governing body 10 months prior to contract for special services unless there is an emergency as proposed, to be defined from our perspective exceptionally narrowly. Even with this amended definition, this remains an infeasible obligation as we are unaware of the need for a procurement process 10 months prior.
- Jean Hurst
Person
We obviously have other concerns with the measure and remain opposed to the Bill at this point. Thank you.
- Jeff Green
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair, Members. Jeff Green, the CEO of the California Association of Nonprofits. It's a policy alliance of more than 10,000 member organizations statewide. We do not have a formal position at this time, but we do have strong concerns about AB 2489 which are shared by many other nonprofits working to strengthen our partnerships with government across the state. As drafted 2489 appears to cover a broad and as of yet unclear scope of service types and job functions.
- Jeff Green
Person
And governments, of course, partner with nonprofits for many reasons. But we are unaware of any evidence or data suggesting that nonprofit workers are less qualified than public workers or that different hiring qualifications by nonprofits result in inadequate services or pose some danger to public health. AB 2489 appears to imply this, and the Bill imposes requirements that contractors, quote, meet, or exceed the background check and educational attainment criteria that local governments have chosen to require for the same work.
- Jeff Green
Person
Whereas the nonprofit workforce strives to provide opportunities to people that are excluded by certain historical hiring requirements to increase cultural competence, lift up voices of those who have the lived experience of the very problems that we're tasked to confront. Many nonprofits have re-examined these hiring criteria and have been shown to reinforce inequalities and create barriers for justice-impacted individuals, in particular. Some of which actually contribute to the high vacancy rates that we know local governments and other sectors are experiencing.
- Jeff Green
Person
And we would not want to retreat from those practices to qualify as contracted partners with government at any level, as we want to continue to hire for members of historically marginalized communities. It's also unclear how nonprofit employees would meet or exceed the proposed assessment exams or performance standards required in the Bill. And finally2489 could result in delay to reduce critical levels of critical services. While we appreciate the intent of the emergency exemption being added by the Bill, thank you for that.
- Jeff Green
Person
It is still, as drafted too narrow, and we prefer to find a path forward that ensures robust public employment, improves the quality, the ability of nonprofits to serve as partners with government, and continues to ensure quality services to Californians who are, in fact, counting on both public and nonprofit sectors to work together on their behalf. So at this time, we must register just our concerns. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 2489?
- Darby Kernan
Person
Mister Chair, Darby Kernan on behalf of Meals on Wheels California we're concerned with this Bill. We don't have formal opposition yet, but are very concerned about the impact.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Taylor Roschen on behalf of the American Council of Engineering Companies in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Michael Robson
Person
Mike Robson on behalf of the American Staffing Association, the California Staffing Professionals, opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Kayln Dean on behalf of the California State Association of Counties, as well as the County Behavioral Health Directors Association, the County Health Executives of California, and the County Welfare Directors Association, in respectful opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
Good morning. Ashley Hoffman on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce, respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Dorothy Johnson
Person
Good morning. Dorothy Johnson on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators, respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Johnnie Pina
Person
Johnny Pena with the League of California Cities in respectful opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Sarah Dukett
Person
Sarah Dukett on behalf of the Rural County Representatives of California, respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Aaron Avery
Person
Aaron Avery with the California Special Districts Association, respectfully opposed. Also on behalf of the Association of California Healthcare Districts and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Alyssa Silhi
Person
And Alyssa Silhi on behalf of the California Association of Recreation and Park Districts, also opposed. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. I'll bring it back to Committee. Any questions, comments or motions? Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you, Assembly Member, for this Bill. So, a couple things. I want to start by the criminal background check. I know that there's been some discussion about that and its effect on people who are trying to reintegrate into society, which I don't think would be your intent. So I want you to touch on that first. Or your sponsor.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
There was actually the recent law or the recent act and the name escapes me. But essentially now. What?
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
Yes. So now employers, including public employers, cannot perform a background check until they have made a job offer. And then they are required to make an assessment on whether or not any sort of criminal history actually impacts job performance. So it is on the employers. So the employers do have flexibility to decide whether or not someone is still qualified.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Ban the Box.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
But I think on behalf of city, as somebody who was a council member prior to this job, you know, I think I'm mindful that, you know, we've got to be very thoughtful about the information that comes in there. You wouldn't want somebody who was a violent, previous violent felon, for example, possibly out there working on jobs that interface with sensitive populations.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
All, again, information that I think that needs to come in after that job offer is finalized to be able to decide whether or not this is still going to be a very strong fit. That said, I think our public sector has demonstrated a very strong commitment to the outreach and the recruitment to be able to support members of our community that have historically disadvantaged. And the record is still ongoing today.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yeah. So I just want to make sure we hone in on that point, because I do think we have done a lot as a Legislature to make sure that jobs that are appropriate for people who've been formally incarcerated are available to them. So, I just want to make sure that that's something that's still in the conversation. And then I guess so, as you know, the author and I have spoken about, I've done a lot of work, specifically in the behavioral health realm.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Now, I know this applies beyond that, but in that situation, we are, as a state, re-envisioning how we support people in mental health crisis or along the entire mental health care continuum. And in doing so, we're reimagining what those teams look like. And a huge piece of that that I think has been really positive for people in the behavioral health system is the addition of peers, which is a relatively, in many counties, new phenomenon.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And, you know, I think it's something we are trying to integrate because it is something that lived experience really matters to people who are getting care.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so one concern I had, which I did convey to the author, and it was a little unclear to me, and so I'm just bringing it up again, is that where a county is reimagining the way they support community members, specifically in the behavioral health realm, if traditionally you had had all social workers supporting people and now you've decided that isn't actually the best way to serve the community.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I want this team to have diverse backgrounds, if you will, that we allow for counties to re-envision that support system and not be sort of required to live with old requirements, because now that was what was, but it isn't what we want the future to look like. And this isn't in a situation where we're talking about, we're doing that just to contract out. We're doing it because it's in the best interest of our communities.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so, I guess that was a circumstance where I think we need to balance what's in the best interest of the communities as it relates to those qualifications and what's happened. Now, I know there's an emergency, so exemptions. So, where you, for example, couldn't hire social workers, it would allow for the hiring of other folks. But I don't mean just where there isn't the availability, but where we decided a different team is the appropriate thing for communities.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so I just want to make sure that is something that as this Bill moves forward, we're paying attention to and we're working with. I know, I heard the County Behavioral Health Specialists were here. I think they're the ones who best know this system and know where it's going, especially in counties to like LA, San Diego, Contra Costa, and others that are really leading in this revolution around how we care for people.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So it's just a concern, but one that I wanted to raise because it's important to me and I think to our communities. I don't know if you want to add anything.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Thank you for raising that concern for the time to discuss this beforehand. Had a chance to look into the issue and under my understanding, this would not be captured, for your example, under AB 2489 for the reasons that if there was, first of all, a new model, you mentioned a reimagined sort of teamwork that's going to involve different jobs, different classifications, different approaches, the peer workers. Right?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
That are coming in as a part of a complimentary way to be able to perform some of this work weren't public employees beforehand. That wasn't a job classification or a specialty that was actually subsumed within the public sector. And furthermore, the Bill does require that we would be consulting with the effective bargaining units to be able to determine whether or not that work was currently or recently performed by some of the agency's employees.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
So, a specialist, like you're describing, was not represented by those bargaining units ahead of time. So that's where we can comfortably say that it wouldn't be captured by AB 2489.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Right. But I would think that if you had a situation now where all the behavioral health was being done by represented social workers, let's say, right? And now you're trying to diversify that team, and the budget's not growing right now, y'all, so you don't have new money to spend on these additional workers, then I guess my concern would be you could argue that that work had been done by this classification, by this qualification, and even though we now have decided we need other classifications of qualifications within the same budget.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Right? I mean, and again, I'm not replacing, to be honest, there are plenty of openings in the social work space, so it's not like you're firing someone. Every single county has openings in this regard. And so. But to the extent that now we've decided we want to fill those positions with a different model, I guess that wouldn't apply to what you said, but maybe a misunderstanding.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
There is some nuance. Right? You know, SEIU also represents behavioral health workers, and I think so if there was a dispute, then it would be, the burden would be on the union to file a grievance, and then there would have to be a determination made eventually by an arbitrator if there was ever a concern that there were duties being performed that were previously performed by the bargaining unit members.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
But with something like the example you used where it's specifically a peer position, then, you know, to my knowledge, there's no current employees that would fit that description.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Got it. Okay. So, I mean, I could see a dispute there where there's no employee, but it's a job your workers currently, arguably have that function. I mean, I guess. I think there's some nuance there that, and that's why I asked the question and didn't just say it because I think it's not clear to me, to be honest with you, that this Bill at this point would allow for that reimagining. And I think it's really, really important, especially in the behavioral health space right now.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I know you represent these workers, and they are working around the clock and doing, I mean, really kudos to every behavioral health worker right now. The mental health crisis is absolutely real. And I know our counties are throwing everything they can and so are the workers who do this job day in and day out. And I just want to make sure we're giving them the space to meet the communities where they are.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I know it's not something you guys would stand in the way of. So I just want to make sure as this Bill moves forward that that's something that we make sure we pay attention to. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assembly Member Connolly.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Thanks. Also appreciate the work that's gone into it. And really the goal. I think we all agree, delivering high-caliber services to the public, but a few questions and these have kind of been touched on, but maybe to delve a little bit more, the first being the definition of emergency and how that would play out. It sounds like right now it certainly covers natural disasters, situations where there's kind of an immediate action required to a threat of serious harm. What about if there's a serious situation?
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
It's not quite as time-sensitive as saying immediate, but something along the lines of a waterline repair that needs to get done within a few months of discovering a major issue. Perhaps the public staff is short-staffed at the moment or does not have that particular expertise. How would that situation be handled?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
I would take a stab and just say we already kind of have that as municipality, municipalities are addressing an infrastructure need that's imminent. There is the ability to perform the work and then say through CEQA exemptions, be able to tie up the loose ends on the back end. So, it would, I think there are existing processes that I'm happy to work on, that definition of an emergency or imminent emergency that makes sure that we're not being too narrow.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Great. I would recommend that. 10 months in terms of the amount of notice, why that time period? Why not three months, four months?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
So, we actually use precedent by Assembly Member Kalra from AB 96 that addressed a similar issue with regard to transit agency operators that was enacted last year. It's something I'm open to conversation to see if that's a time period that is most reasonable without and revisiting that with respect to our chair, to be able to make sure that our mutual goals are met.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Great. And then are there particular categories of employment or jobs that are a particular concern we're seeing that are being contracted out or the implications of it? The question is, why not tailor this Bill to those jobs, if that's the case that are most likely to be contracted out?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
I'll defer to my sponsors.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
Well, for SEIU, it's that we see contracting out happening across all jobs and all levels of government right now. So that's why we decided that it would make sense to make it pretty broad. I don't know if you.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Similarly. AFSCME, we represent local counties, special district workers, and it's the exact same thing. Across the board, the work is getting contracted out, and this is about assuring accountability over that.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
And I would just respond that, I know sometimes we do work here at the Capitol that is very narrow to a certain condition, and there's good reasons to be able to do that. But, you know, I started off my opening presentation really trying to center this conversation on a principle, right?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
That, you know, we're seeing a pattern across the board that we are having contracted work that was previously held by a public employee. And so this Bill aims to be able to level, to set a standard for when it would apply or not apply going forward.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Great. And then final issue, we're hearing from some nonprofits, and we certainly all value the work that they do in our community communities. Are those discussions ongoing to try to meet some of those issues that are being raised?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
They can. They certainly will be. I know we had, I think, six days since this bill's last hearing last week, probably two business days up here at the Capitol. So, this was kind of back-to-back, but with the potential for a number of steps ahead of us, I certainly look forward to working with them throughout the springtime and summer to make sure.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Again, I stated in my opening, I'm not interested in, I think, subverting our productive and helpful relationship that we've always had for decades, where we are adding value, where we are supplementing or complementing the work that's done by public agencies. That's something that we want to get right in our definitions.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Any other comments or any motions? We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a motion and a second. Thank you, Assembly Member Ward, for bringing this forward. And just to clarify, you do accept the Committee amendments?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Yes, I think they were author amendments.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I'm not sure. Just to make sure.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
I am accepting amendments.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Thank you. And some of those amendments also create an emergency exception to the requirement as well, on top of what was just discussed in terms of urgent matters. So thank you so much for bringing this forward. Would you like to close?
- Chris Ward
Legislator
Yes, thank you. Appreciate the discussion today and the opportunity to consider the merits of this Bill. I think it would be important to really essentially level the playing field, to make sure that we're supporting our public workforce. And I agree we have a public workforce crisis. We've got a lot of reasons, that is, some of those are within our own municipalities, to be able to sort of process improve, to hire faster and be able to attract better.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
But it shouldn't come at. The default, shouldn't be that we are deciding that we are somehow going to let go of these jobs, these good middle-class jobs, forever, and end up in this vicious cycle. And I saw that happening pretty regularly in my own time on city council, which is why I wanted to engage on this issue. I heard a lot that we agreed on with the opposition as well, I think, just principally.
- Chris Ward
Legislator
And so, I look forward to working with you and many of your coalition partners as well, to try to get these issues right. I think that a lot of I'll just, without getting into a whole lot of detail, I'll respectfully ask for the committees aye vote on this. But, you know, my commitment is there to be able to continue to work with opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank. If you could take a roll call vote, please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place that on call. Okay. All right. Up next, item 11, AB 2557, Ortega. And I want to do just a progress check. We've been at work for almost 3 hours and we've completed nine items out of 20.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We have this room until 01:00 p.m. And we have 11 items left. So we have 2 hours to complete the 11 items. There are questions you can get resolved offline with our colleagues. Please feel free to do that. But if we don't complete by 01:00 p.m. We do not have a room assigned in the afternoon because none are available. We have very limited options, which means we're probably gonna have to come back tonight if we don't finish by 01:00 p.m. Okay.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assemblymember Ortega, you have AB 2557.
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
Thank you. Member. Thank you Chair and Members. With that warning, I will make sure to keep my comments brief. Thank you for the opportunity to present AB 2557 today. I would like to begin by accepting the Committee amendments which will remove the 10-month notice requirement and remove the ability to withhold payment from a contractor, two of the main concerns brought to us by the opposition.
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
This Bill is about transparency and results so that we can make informed decisions about who we contract with. I want to make something clear. I am not in any way, shape or form trying to punish anyone. I simply want to know the outcomes of the programs that are taxpayers payers are funding. This Bill does not, again, does not prevent any local government from contracting out for services.
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
Members, I don't know about you, but every time I see a headline or an article that comes out that says that we are failing to track our spending when it comes to results, whether it's homelessness or other issues, I'm embarrassed because it is ultimately our decision and how we spend our dollars and it's up to us to be held accountable. And that is what my Bill does. It simply asks for information, data that should be collected regardless.
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
Unfortunately, you know, I continue to hear mischaracterizations of this Bill. And again, I love our nonprofits. If it wasn't for our nonprofit community in the area in which I grew up, I would not be here before you as an Assembly Member. So, you know, it's something that I want to continue to working with in terms of the opposition.
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
But to testify with me today is Bryant Miramontes with AFSCME California and Ivan Fernandez with the California Labor Federation and Sandra Barrero, if you have any other additional technical questions. So I will pass it over to our witnesses.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Good morning again. Bryant Miramontes with AFSCME California, proud co-sponsor of the Bill, AB 2557 establishes reporting requirements for private contractors who perform local agency employees work. The reports are with an uptick of an array of contractors being caught misusing taxpayer dollars. The existing reporting practices are simply not working.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
The reports are intended to contain information that all contractors should already be tracking for public contracts, for example, how much they're paying their workers and whether they are engaged with subcontractors, how much of the work they're doing, and how much of the money they're actually spending on services. This Bill is not about penalizing the good actors. It's about accountability and transparency of public service delivery and public service quality as well.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
We are aware of the opposition's concern to the Bill, and we've been continuing to work to address their issues. And we see this as a common sense tracking measure that will ensure quality service delivery and mitigate the degradation of public sector work. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
Thank you Mister Chair and Members of the Committee, Ivan Fernandez with the California Labor Federation, a proud co-sponsor of AB 2557 which as stated, is a Bill that will require private companies to provide, that provide services for local governments, services that were previously performed by bargaining unit workers to submit reports detailing as what has already been mentioned. Public sector jobs were once considered the backbone of the middle class and that was said today because it's very much true.
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
But decades of low funding and government austerity have led to the decline of these stable jobs. Today, governments contract public services such as substance abuse treatment and health services to a variety of service providers who are not held to the same performance standards that public agencies and their workers are held to.
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
Not only does contracting out lead to the elimination of long term middle class career opportunities, especially for women and BIPOC individuals, but this practice has at times led to the degradation of services that communities rely on, very crucial services. The current process of local governments approving and reapproving contracts needs improvement. Contractor mismanagement has led to the decline of services and the misuse of taxpayer dollars.
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
Given the fiscal environment that we are in and the need to ensure every dollar is spent effectively, AB 2557 creates fair accountability measures and increases transparency on contracts between private service providers and local governments. And for these reasons, we respectfully urge your aye vote at the appropriate time. Thank you.
- Sandra Barreiro
Person
Sandra Barreiro on behalf of SEIU we are co-sponsors. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in support of AB 2537?
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Chris Myers
Person
Chris Myers with the California School of Employees Association in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone here in opposition to AB 2537?
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Good morning. Chair and Members, Kalyn Dean, legislative advocate with the California State Association of Counties, the voice of all 58 counties. We are respectfully opposed to AB 2557. Even with the Committee's amendments, we have serious concerns.
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Requiring a contractor to submit quarterly reports every 90 days and contractors for temporary services to submit every month and requiring an audit by an independent auditor to monitor performance requiring the contractor to ultimately absorb the costs for the audit and taking up time to present the audit during a public session of the Board of Supervisors and tying the hands of the board to not be able to renew or extend a contract before receiving and evaluating the audit report is burdensome, inflexible and impractical.
- Kalyn Dean
Person
On top of that, the requirement for the reports to include personal identifiable information by the contractors that is then subject to the California Public Records Act is deeply concerning. Counties already experienced safety concerns for county employees, now AB 2557, will require contractors to potentially put their own employees in a similar situation. These provisions would undoubtedly deter nonprofit providers, community based organizations and other private service providers from engaging with counties and other local agencies.
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Counties provide vital public programs and services and partner with the state to act as the safety net for millions of Californians. We are concerned that AB 2557 creates a de facto prohibition on local agency service contracts. Counties are constantly challenged by the state to do more to partner more. Counties are committed to providing services on behalf of the state and to be accountable to the public for the resources that we are responsible for managing.
- Kalyn Dean
Person
Efforts like 2557 tie the hands of local agencies in their most basic administrative function. Also, it's important to note for the Committee that this Bill and Assemblymember Ward's AB 2489 amend the same section of the law. That means that the requirements of this measure exist in those of AB 2489, making contracting even less workable for local agencies. On behalf of counties, we respectfully ask for your no vote today. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jeff Green
Person
Good morning again, Mister Chair and Members. Jeff Green, CEO of California Association of Nonprofits and while we don't yet have a formal position on this Bill, we are joined by many nonprofits concerned with AB 2557. We appreciate the author's proposed amendments and striking the provisions that would have allowed certain individuals to direct local governments not to pay for work already completed.
- Jeff Green
Person
Unfortunately, for details detailed in our letters and in the Committee analysis, we remain troubled by some of the consequences that could result from enactment of this Bill. Governments turned to nonprofits to help deliver critical services of all kinds, as you know, from juvenile justice, support, domestic violence, animal welfare, human services of various types. And we have a long and proven track record providing quality, cost effective, linguistically appropriate, culturally competent services that are trusted by and deeply connected to communities here of all types.
- Jeff Green
Person
Californians trust nonprofits to deliver. AB 2557 as drafted covers a wide range of yet unclear scope of services and job functions, potentially exposes sensitive information, as mentioned, about nonprofit workers, potentially in violation of some privacy laws, requires new reports that are largely duplicative of those already appearing in many contracts. Creates significant new risks, uncertainty and compliance costs for the nonprofits themselves, all without identifying a funding source. A robust nonprofit sector complements a strong public sector, has for decades, and both benefit from a more collaboration.
- Jeff Green
Person
And I'll point out one in Los Angeles. Civic leaders, nonprofit providers, public employee unions, work together to develop a framework that's part of a ballot measure headed to this November's ballot that would raise more than $1.0 billion annually supporting homeless services and affordable housing construction.
- Jeff Green
Person
Again, we would prefer to find a path forward that ensures robust public employment, improves the ability of nonprofits to serve as partners to government, and continues to ensure quality services for Californians who are counting on both the public and nonprofit sectors to work together on their behalf. This time, we must register these concerns.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 2557?
- Darby Kernan
Person
Mister Chair, Darby Kernan for Meals on Wheels California. We remain concerned with this measure as well. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Taylor Rosen on behalf of the American Council of Engineering Companies, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
Good morning. Ashley Hoffman. On behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce, respectfully opposed. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Sarah Dukett
Person
Sarah Dukett on behalf of the Rural County Representatives of California, respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Darby Kernan
Person
Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the Urban Counties of California, as well as my colleagues at the County Health Executives Association of California, the County Welfare Directors Association, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Dorothy Johnson
Person
Good morning. Dorothy Johnson on behalf of the Association California School Administrators, respectfully opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Aaron Avery
Person
Good morning. Aaron Avery with the California Special Districts Association, respectfully opposed. Also on behalf of the Association of California Healthcare Districts and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Johnnie Pina
Person
Johnnie Pina with the League of California Cities in respectful opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Alyssa Silhi
Person
Alyssa Silhi on behalf of the California Association of Recreation and Park Districts, also respectfully opposed. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Michael Robson
Person
Good morning. Mike Robeson on behalf of the California Staffing Professionals and the American Staffing Association, opposed.
- Patrick Moran
Person
Mister Chair and Members, sorry for being late, but Pat Maran, Aaron Reed and Associates representing the Orange County Employees Association were in strong support of the Bill. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. All right, I'll bring this back to Committee for any questions, comments or motions. Okay, there's a motion and a second. Madam Vice Chair,
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I'll talk fast. I'm concerned about this Bill. I appreciate your noble intent. I'm assuming that I'll make that stipulation. I don't know where this is headed. We're trying to make life, the management, the operation of nonprofits so difficult by having to comply with one more. One more. One more regulation by the State of California.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I myself have served on a number of nonprofit boards for the last 30 years. United Way in Los Angeles and Orange County, and YMCA in Los Angeles and Orange County, and KCET in Los Angeles and Orange County. I see they run as businesses. They comply with state laws, labor laws, all the necessary requirements of operating a nonprofit business. But now to impose more onerous requirements on the hiring practices, or every month and every quarter.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I think you're trying to just make it life so difficult for nonprofits and then turn it over to the government to provide those social services. I don't know. I'm not. I'm just saying it's very troublesome to me to impose these kind of regulations and onerous requirements where there's not a problem on nonprofits. I see business. Business can defend itself, and I am certainly pro business on these kinds of things.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
But for nonprofits who don't have the wherewithal to fight this type of over regulation, that's very concerning, not only for this Bill, but this generally what this is really all about. So I'm a no, obviously, but I'm more concerned about what this portends for the future in California. What are we trying to do to business? What are we trying to do to nonprofits? What are we trying to do?
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
As I said earlier, to property owners, it's very concerning that the government is the only provider of services of the last resort. I staunchly am opposed to that notion, and I will be voting no. Thank you.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yeah. I just want to point out the Bill does not apply to everyone who's providing services to our communities. It only applies to those that are providing functions that currently are, in the last 10 years, were performed by public union employees.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So this is specifically crafted to deal with where those jobs are going elsewhere. And my guess is that the author, although she can speak for herself, would have no such concerns if the nonprofits were providing the same wages and benefits that our counties are, which they are not. And so there is a real problem here that she's trying to address. And I'll keep it brief, but say with that, I was happy to move the Bill and support it.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Well, the Bill's been moved and seconded. Appreciate, Assemblymember Ortega, for working with our Committee staff and accepting amendments. But ultimately, the underlying principles are important, having come from local government, have definitely seen perils of outsourcing when they're otherwise union work without the proper guardrails. So with that, would you like to close?
- Liz Ortega
Legislator
I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due pass as amended to appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place it on call. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
This is item 14, AB-2794.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and colleagues. Today I'm here to present AB-2794 a Bill that would create the Antidisplacement Commercial Property Acquisition Program for California. When we think of gentrification and displacement, we often think of residential tenants. But we forget often about our mom-and-pop businesses. Our local barber shops, our go-to vegan soul food spots, the dry cleaner who cleans our suits every day. All are valuable are being priced out and evicted as well.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
These businesses have been parts of our communities for years and even decades in some cases. Not only do they contribute to the culture and vibrancy of the neighborhoods they serve, they also contribute significantly to the local and state economy. According to a 2023 report from the California Office of Small Business Advocate, minority owned small businesses contributed 192.8 billion in economic output, more than the annual GDP of 18 United States.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
It generated 28.7 million in tax revenue, and they supported nearly two and a half million jobs here in California. Despite their economic contributions to our state, small businesses and particularly minority owned small businesses are struggling in a post pandemic world. More than 40% of pandemic-induced business closers were for black businesses. In recognition of these hardships, the incredible City of San Jose, where small businesses have struggled with displacement since before the pandemic, established the Community Stabilization and Opportunity Pathways Fund to stabilize local small businesses.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
According to a study by UC Berkeley, businesses that own the property where they operate their businesses are less vulnerable to displacement. However, the study showed that only one third of businesses are owner occupied, and within that one third, many are owner occupied because they are childcare providers or art teachers operating out of their homes.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
AB-2794 directs GO-Biz to establish the Anti Displacement Commercial Property Program, which would provide low-interest loans to nonprofits or land trusts to purchase commercial property in areas that are vulnerable to displacement. It builds off the residential Community Land Trust model, a proven method for reducing displacement and preserving affordability. Here to testify in support of this Bill is Robbie Lee, the CEO for Black Owned and Operated Community Land Trust, and Prophet Walker, the Founder of Treehouse Co-Living.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Robbie Lee
Person
Mr. Chair and honorable Members of the Committee. My name is Robbie Lee and I'm the Interim CEO of Black Owned and Operated Community Land Trust, serving Lamont Park Community, where we tirelessly support and uplift our local communities, concentrating our efforts on those most vulnerable to economic disparities and gentrification. Many communities in Los Angeles County and so many others throughout our state are experiencing a crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic exasperated an already dire situation for our small business owners, resulting in unpaid commercial rents estimated between $993 million and $2.3 billion.
- Robbie Lee
Person
These businesses, many led by women and BIPOC individuals, are not just commercial entities, but cultural institutions that hold our communities together. They provide essential jobs, services, and serve as a foundation for the cultural identity of many of our neighborhoods. AB-2794 proposes a visionary solution through low-interest loans to community-based acquisition partners. This will enable the purchase of commercial property in areas at risk of gentrification, thereby ensuring these businesses can continue to operate and thrive.
- Robbie Lee
Person
By focusing on preserving businesses owned by BIPOC and women individuals, the Bill not only addresses economic inequalities, but also serves as a model for sustainable and equitable community development. As California prepares to host major international events, including the upcoming Los Angeles Games, Olympic Games in 2028, the economic spotlight will inevitably shine on our Golden State.
- Robbie Lee
Person
While such events promise sustainable and substantial economic benefits estimated over $11 billion and bringing over 79,000 jobs to the area, they can also accelerate urban development pressures that can lead to displacement of cultural communities. AB-2794 is crucial in this context as it aims to fortify communities against these pressures, ensuring that benefits of hosting global events will be equitably shared.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Prophet Walker
Person
Thank you Mr. Chair and honorable Members of the Committee. My name is Prophet Walker. I'm the Chair of the Board of Black Owned and Operated Community Land Trust. My day job actually is a developer, I know very well the impacts that thoughtless development can have on our communities. I also grew up in South LA and Watts. I grew up watching my parents see their only way possibly out is through small businesses and uplifting themselves.
- Prophet Walker
Person
I had the beautiful benefit of coming to the Leimert Park Community, which actually is a hub of black and local small businesses. And while the businesses were attempting to thrive, a larger force of economic uplift was happening and people were afraid. In fact, a building that was for sale for half a million dollars, literally three years ago, was up for sale for six and a half million dollars.
- Prophet Walker
Person
In my world, the only way to make that pencil is to displace every existing tenant, remove them, uplift the building and displace folks. Through a Bill with the County of Los Angeles, we were able to pass a $14 million measure that allowed for nonprofits and land trusts to acquire commercial assets such that small businesses and artisans could stay there. This Bill further reinforces this measure and gives nonprofits and local community Members a pathway to actually buy and own their businesses and remain stabilized. So I ask for your support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB-2794?
- Skyler Wonnacott
Person
Skyler Wonnacott with California Business Properties Association. In support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB-2794? Any questions, comments, or motions from the Committee? We have a motion and we have a second. I do want to thank you for bringing this forward. We've been, oftentimes we're reactionary to gentrification. This is a uniquely proactive Bill. And I know you know what you were doing when you mentioned vegan soul food, which I have enjoyed in South LA in the past. And so I would love to be added as a co-author.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Would you like to close?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Absolutely. I wasn't even thinking about our lunches. Simply wholesome. No, I mean, this Bill was inspired for me, walking through Leimert Park. Napoli Natural is a business there. It's doing almost 2 million in gross sales on a month-to-month lease. Those are the conditions in communities all across California. And we have to do our part to step in and fight back against that kind of displacement. There's definitely a role for private equity and venture capital in the banking industry.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
But we also know those same communities that are vulnerable to displacement are also vulnerable to being boxed out of those kinds of capital investments. This is an opportunity for the state to make money and do what is right. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Take a roll call on AB-2794 please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do-pass to appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, that Bill is out. Thank you, Assemblymember Brian.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, I'd like to start by thanking your Committee staff, Manuela, for working with my staff on this bill. As you may know, silicosis is a type of pulmonary fibrosis, a lung disease resulting from breathing in tiny bits of silica, a common mineral found in quartz, sand, and many other rock types. However, artificial stone is dangerous due to its high silica concentration and harmful polymer resins, dyes, and other binding materials to form a slab.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Workers who cut, grind, polish, and drill artificial stone are at the highest risk of contracting silicosis due to the overexposure and high levels of silica used to make products like artificial stone countertops. Workers who breathe in silica particles can develop silicosis. This is an incurable, progressive disease that causes severe and fatal health effects, with over 60% of reported cases in the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles. The California Department of Public Health has identified approximately 95 countertop workers with silicosis.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Between 2019 and 2022, 52 artificial stone workers were diagnosed with silicosis, 51 of whom were immigrants from Mexico and Central America. The median age of diagnosis is 45. However, I have constituents who are diagnosed with silicosis, and they are as young as 27. Some patients have to put on oxygen and lose the ability to work and provide for their families. In severe cases, a lung transplant may be an option for some patients. However, a lung transplant can cost over $1 million.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Additionally, patients on the lung transplant list rarely live long enough to receive the lung transplant. If a person does receive the transplant, it only prolongs a person's life for an average of 10 years. There is no cure for silicosis. My sponsor, the State Building and Construction Trades Council, whom you will hear from today, has been sounding alarms of silicosis with Cal/OSHA far before it became public knowledge. Unfortunately, silicosis cases in California have increased significantly under the watchful eye of our state regulators.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
My district is at the center of this global epidemic. Latino workers are not dispensable. A silicosis diagnosis is a death sentence. We appreciate state regulators issuing emergency temporary standards this December. However, these standards do not go far enough to protect workers. AB 3043 establishes a system for tracking artificial stone to ensure fabrication shops implement the state's temporary standards and encourage state enforcement.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Additionally, this bill will codify the prohibition of dry cutting of artificial stones, create a licensure program for fabrication shops, require all workers to undergo a training program, and require the Department of Industrial Relations and Cal/OSHA to report on the effectiveness of the emergency temporary standards and future adopted standards. I have taken a number of author amendments to address the concerns raised by the opposition. Additionally, the stone industry, which we will hear from today, will support AB 3043 with the removal of the prevailing wage language.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
I made a commitment in Assembly Labor Committee that the prevailing wage language will come out in the next Committee. Today, I have Keith Dunn representing the State Building and Construction Trades Council and Glenn Farrell representing the Silica Safety Coalition as witnesses in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Keith Dunn
Person
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Sometimes we have difficult bills to discuss today. I hope to make it very easy for you. There's two things you need to know. Number one, silicosis is always fatal. Number two, silicosis is 100% preventable. We're going to be working with industry to set up guidelines and structures so that we can save lives. This should be an easy vote for all of you. It's a bipartisan bill out of the first committee. I ask for your support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Glenn Farrel
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Glenn Farrel with GF Advocacy on behalf of the Silica Safety Coalition. It's a coalition comprised of stone manufacturers, distributors, fabricators, trade associations. I just want to say at the outset, just kind of echo my colleague, that the Silica Safety Coalition strongly supports the prioritization of statutory and regulatory oversight and enforcement of occupational safety and health requirements that protect employees from silicosis.
- Glenn Farrel
Person
We concur completely that silicosis is entirely preventable with some of the standards and practices that are outlined in AB 3043 regarding the prohibition on use of dry methods and the required use of effective wet methods and a number of other best management practices. We really want to express our appreciation to the author, to the sponsors, and her staff for the work and the engagement over the past several months on this bill. We're really proud to support the bill today.
- Glenn Farrel
Person
And I will just say, just for the record, and I know the author has already stated, as a sponsor, we're interested in an ongoing engagement to kind of shape the training provisions to make sure that it's an effective training program to protect workers. So we look forward to that continued engagement and happy to support today.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 3043?
- Andrea Liebenbaum
Person
Good morning. Andi Liebenbaum on behalf of the County of Los Angeles in proud support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ivan Fernandez
Person
Ivan Fernandez, California Labor Federation, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Kirk Kimmelshue
Person
Kirk Kimmelshue for the Engineered Stone Manufacturers Association, AStA Worldwide, also in a support position. I want to thank the author and her team for the work on the remaining items.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jeffrey Sievers
Person
Jeff Sievers on behalf of the Cosentino Group, also want to thank the author and their staff for all the help and work, in support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 3043? All right, bring it back to the Committee. Any motions, comments, questions? We have a motion. Do we have a second? All right, we have a motion and a second. I want to thank the author for her work with the opposition. It's incredibly important, as was mentioned by the witnesses, it's literally to save lives. And I think both industry workers can come together and remove these unnecessary harms and ultimately death from our community. And so I want to thank you for bringing this forward. Would you like to close?
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you said, this is a great example of an issue where we were able to bring labor and industry together to save lives. And I'd like to thank my team for spending hours bringing this coalition together and coming to this agreement. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Take roll call on AB 3043, please.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place that on... We'll place that on call.
- Luz Rivas
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assemblymember Connally. Item nine, AB-2539. All right, whenever you're ready.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Thank you, Chair and Members. Would like to begin by thanking the Committee and staff, as always, for their work and input on this Bill. I will be accepting the Committee amendments. AB-2539 would allow residents of mobile home parks the time necessary to organize and the opportunity to purchase their park when an owner is interested in selling. Mobile homes are one of the last forms of naturally occurring affordable housing in California. These parks house an estimated 363,000 Californians.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
In recent years, investment firms and corporations nationwide have begun buying up mobile home parks. Many vulnerable residents, like seniors or people with disabilities who live on fixed incomes, cannot afford the rent spikes that are now commonplace when park ownership switches from an individual park owner to corporate ownership. Not owning the land their home sits on effectively traps homeowners and forces them to pay endlessly rising rents at the discretion of the park owner or abandon their home.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Since moving it, is either financially or physically impossible, as most homes are not actually able to be relocated. AB-2539 builds on an existing resource at no cost to the state by allowing residents to secure their own long-term housing affordability and stability. By purchasing the park and controlling future rent increases, it can help address the growing issue of displacement and loss of affordable housing options, particularly for vulnerable populations like fixed-income seniors.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Additionally, owning the park incentivizes residents to invest in repairs and upgrades, whereas corporate owners or investors have little incentive to make the capital improvement so many parks need. To address this crisis as several states have passed some form of right-to-first refusal law with success as is being recommended through this law. Under the current Mobile Home Residency Law, or MRL, a park owner is required to give an existing resident organization a minimum of 30 days' notice of their intent to sell.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
AB-2539 as amended, would provide a longer minimum notice period of 120 days to, among other things, give residents the time needed to form a resident organization for purposes of purchasing the park and would create a right of first refusal for a resident organization to make an offer to purchase a park within that 120 day time period.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
The park owner must engage in good faith negotiations with the resident organization and would be prohibited from negotiating with or accepting an offer from another party until the 120 day period has elapsed. I appreciate the Committee and staff for their work and input on this Bill. Most notably, we'll continue to work on their language to incorporate the Committee's suggestions in the analysis, including on a reopener provision making the content requirement of the notice more robust, and further clarifying enforcement provisions for violation of this Bill.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
We are working on language that would adequately address each of those issues, so I will now pass it off to my witnesses, Margaret DeMatteo, representing Legal Aid of Sonoma County, the bill's sponsor, and Michelle Moning, mobile home owner and Member of the Golden State Manufactured Home Owners League.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
Good morning, Chair Kara Honorable Committee Members, thank you for your time and a special thanks to staff who worked very hard on the analysis and the amendments here. My name is Margaret DeMatteo. I'm the Housing Policy Attorney with Legal Aid of Sonoma County. Our housing team represents mobile home owners in Sonoma County facing eviction, foreclosures, harassment, discrimination, and more. We also work with the Tenants Union who organize parks.
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
The Sonoma County Tenants Union. Mobile homes offer a chance for low-income folks to own a home and set down routes into a community. Parks are often referred to as the last naturally occurring affordable housing. If we don't pass AB-2539 and other laws to protect these parks, their affordability will continue to wane.
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
And even as we sit here in Petaluma, the residents of Littlewoods Mobile Home Park are undergoing a four-day arbitration, where the corporate owner, Harmony Communities, has imposed a $350 rent increase on a park full of primarily monolingual, Spanish-speaking families, working families. So they would have been here to testify if they had not been in that. So I wish some luck. So that being said, you know, I just want to acknowledge that protecting and preserving existing affordable housing is a well-established government interest.
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
It costs the state nothing. A seller can obtain fair market value and residents gain stable ground. So I would ask that you please pass AB-2539 so residents can get a stake in their future while avoiding displacement. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Michelle Moning
Person
Good morning. My name is Michelle Moning. I'm actually a mobile home owner. One as Assemblyman referred to many thousands. I am a Member of the Golden State Manufactured Home Owners League and GSMOL is a resident-based organization. Very much in support of his Bill, GSMOL for over 60 years has advocated for seniors on fixed incomes and moderate-income to low-income Californians who live in mobile homes. We own our homes, but we rent the land that they sit on.
- Michelle Moning
Person
They're not actually mobile, as most of you obviously know. We can't just pick them up and move them. But I'd like to share a personal experience. My park of 319 homes was owned and operated by a same family and management company for over 42 years. In August of 2021, it was sold to an out-of-state corporation that has acquired 78 mobile home parks nationwide. 33 of those are here in California.
- Michelle Moning
Person
None of us homeowners even knew the that the park was for sale, let alone sold. And we heard about the new ownership after the fact the deal was done. A prospective buyer in my park now will pay 3 to $400 more in lot rent than the seller is paying. That 30% to 40% spike in space rent is not only a deterrent for buyers, but it's a seller's nightmare. We can't afford to have another mobile home park shut down.
- Michelle Moning
Person
In a real estate game that deals us out. When a park owner decides to sell the park, we should have a fair chance to look into the possibility of pooling our money to buy it. We just need a little more time to see if purchasing the land under our homes would be doable. Thank you for your consideration.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB-2539?
- Danielle Kando-Kaiser
Person
Dani Kando-Kaiser on behalf of the California Low Income Consumer Coalition. In support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Linda Nye
Person
Linda Nye. Mobile home resident. In support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Eric Harris
Person
Eric Harris. Disability Rights California. In support
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Beverly Purcell
Person
In support. Beverly Purcell, GSMOL Member and homeowner. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Joseph Nye
Person
Joseph Nye. In support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB-2539?
- Christopher Wysocki
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Christopher Wysocki at WMA and I want to thank the Committee for its indulgence and allowing us to turn over our collective opposition time to Dan Rudderow, who is one of California's leading attorneys specializing in the MRL Law.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. I am honored to be asked by WMA to testify today. I have been a practicing attorney for the past 30 years and for the past 18 years, I have specialized in mobile home law.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
Before I discuss constitutional issues, I would like to point out that it's really questionable whether this Bill is even needed. As it was mentioned in the worku. In California, there are already 183 parks containing almost 34,000 mobile home spaces and 1,300 rv spaces, which are today owned by park residents. That's almost 10% of the total mobile home park spaces in the state. In addition, there are currently 70 mobile home parks for sale in the state right now, which resident groups may purchase if they choose.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
Finally, it should be noted that parks are being bought and sold every day. In just the past three years, some 114 parks have been sold in California. Turning to the constitutional issues, while constitutional law is always evolving, the specific question as to whether a right of first refusal legislatively given to the park residents is constitutional or not is something that was decided and resolved some four decades ago.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
For the past 41 years, it has been the law of the land in California that a right of first refusal legislatively given to park residents is unconstitutional. Under the Fifth Amendment takings clause of the United States Constitution, as well as under our California Constitution, an interest in property includes many rights, such as the right to possess property, to use property, and dispose of property.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
In 1983, the court in Gregory v. City of San Juan Capistrano, held that a right of first refusal given to the residents was unconstitutional because it takes away the park owner's right to dispose and sell of his property or her property to a person of his choosing. The Gregory court also recognized that separate and apart from the constitutional right to dispose of one's property, the right of first refusal itself is also a constitutionally protected property right.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
When a law such as AB-2539 is passed, the property owner can no longer sell this right of first refusal because it's been taken by the government and granted to the residents. Government surely can take private property by way of eminent domain, but the taking must be for a public use. In the Gregory case, the government argued that the public use was advanced because they were giving the residents an ability to afford to residents a measure of control over their living situation.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
The court held that this did not constitute a public use sufficient to make the law constitutional. Similarly, here, the sponsors of this Bill are advancing that this law would foster resilient communities, preserve affordable housing, and empower residents in the decision making process. As the court in Gregory explained, these type of public benefit arguments, securing affordable housing do not convert the private use of the option by the residents to a public use under the Constitution.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
In its simplest terms, a law such as AB-2539 is simply taking a property interest away from a private person, namely the park owner, and giving it to another private person, namely the residence. That is what makes it unconstitutional. Finally, yes, the Gregory case was decided 41 years ago, but it remains the law in California and in all of that time, it has not been challenged or changed. Thank you for your attention.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you very much. Anyone else here in opposition to AB-2539?
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Trent Smith, on behalf of the California Mobile Home Park Owners Alliance, also in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Katherine Bell Alves
Person
Kate Bell, on behalf of the Cabrillo Management Corporation, CALRHA, and AAGLA. In respectful opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. We'll bring it back to Committee for any questions, comments, or motions. We have a motion and a second. Yes, Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you for your comments. Just to clarify, you mentioned there were 114 mobile home parks sold. How many of those were sold to Home Owner Association?
- Christopher Wysocki
Person
I don't have that readily available at the moment.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
114. Okay. So the process is working where they're bought by the residents and it wasn't necessary to have an enforced right or first refusal time period. Is it 120 days?
- Dan Rudderow
Person
Correct. There are organizations out there to help residents, like Resident-Owned Parks, you might have heard of, ROP, and they are up and down the State of California. And these organizations help residents who want to purchase the park to get together, get the financing, figure out what the cost is and buy the park.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
And that happens.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
And that happens in ROP. Some of the statistics that was in the legislative analysis, I think came from ROP, from their organization, them out there helping residents. So the point, the first point obviously in our presentation is that this law is not necessary because residents are getting the help from organizations to buy parks if they so wish.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay. Thank you very much.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you. As I was listening to these arguments, I have to say, I remember voting on quite a few right-of-referral refusal bills in the housing space. And I don't recall ever being afraid they were unconstitutional. And I think the analysis does a good job of explaining the Penn Central test in talking about what a takings actually is. And if there's no, if we're allowing for them to fully appreciate their economic interest, then that doesn't constitute a takings.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
But I do have a concern with this Bill as drafted because it isn't clear for me how you would define the value of the property such that we are ensuring the property owners do get the full economic value of their property. They're not allowed to negotiate with another party under the Bill. And so how do you determine what the value of it is? Right?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I mean, one way to do it is to allow for an open market, to allow for bids to come in and then say to the folks, okay, this was the top bid, you can match it, which I think is a fair way to do it ensures the economic interest is protected. And I don't see in the Bill any way that we're ensuring of that, which I do actually think the constitutional test would require. So can you weigh in on that?
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah, I think that's a legitimate point. I think our understanding is that issue was also flagged by the Committee analysis. It's something we would take up around what right of first refusal actually means and is defined as. So I think we need more clarification around that and that's something we're working on. Would respectfully disagree with the legal analysis. Gregory is distinguishable. Moreover, it was decided before Penn Central. So I think the operative test now would be the Penn Central test by the US Supreme Court.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
And that is something that, like the analysis, I believe we would withstand. But that having been said, I think there some more clarification is in order around that.
- Dan Rudderow
Person
Just a quick response.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
It's up to the chair.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Yeah, go ahead.
- Christopher Wysocki
Person
Just a real quick response. I don't think Penn Central was decided in 1978. I believe Gregory was decided afterwards in 1983. So I don't think it was decided before.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yeah, I do think. Kudos to our wonderful consultant, who does a good job of laying out why Penn Central is the appropriate test. But so I'm a little bit torn because I do think it's really important. You have banned the negotiation with other parties which was concerning to me, because I do think that will lead to the best decision of what the value is, and you can still provide the right of first refusal if you allow for that.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So I'm concerned about how it's laid out here, but I actually appreciate what you're trying to do, and I do think we should give these folks the right of first refusal again on the actual value that can be sought by the landowner. And so I hope that by the time it gets to the floor, we see that clarification.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Do you have anything to add to that?
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
Yeah, one thing about Penn Central, though, I would just say that it's commonly been noted in other cases that the Gregory case, if they had applied the correct standard, the Penn Central standard, that it would have come out differently. And also really importantly, the significant government interest that we have here, which was laid out very well in the Bill analysis, far exceeds the government interest that was noted in Gregory, which was merely that residents have more control over their housing. That's not what we're asking for.
- Margaret Dematteo
Person
We're asking for this because we're in a housing crisis that far exceeds the housing crisis 40 years ago. With seniors being the fastest growing group of folks facing homelessness for the first time and also the majority of the residents in mobile home parks. So protecting that housing at a cost that doesn't cost the state is a significant government interest.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. I do appreciate when we actually argue case law in here. It's kind of fun and it is a fine balance because you definitely want to move things quickly for the sake of the owner to be able to get some resolution. But at the same time, I understand the point of getting the opportunity to get other bids in there. It is a complex issue. I'm confident the author will be able to negotiate the complexities.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I am a co-author on the Bill and recommend an aye vote on it. Would you like to close Assemblymember Connolly?
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Really appreciate the ongoing conversation and would respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. If you can take roll call on AB-2539 please
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do-passed amended to appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We'll place that on call.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Up next, we have item 12. AB 2655, Berman. We have a motion and a second. Before Assembly Member Berman even took a seat. He has a motion in a second.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Thank you, colleagues. I'd like to start by thanking Committee staff for identifying areas needing work, including greater clarity between when something is blocked versus labeled, better defining election process and raising the bar on citizen suits. I look forward to working with the Committee to address these issues. I'm also happy to take the amendments on pages 9 and 10. And I thank the staff on the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee for suggesting definitional amendments to align this Bill with others in the AI space.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Five years ago, I authored the first election deepfake bill in the nation. To be honest, by the time that was signed into law, it was already too weak, and it's only gotten weaker since then. Just a few short years after that Bill passed, the technology is better, cheaper, and widely accessible. As a result, we're seeing deepfakes used to undermine elections across the globe and here in America and California.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
As technology changes, so too must our laws, and there's too much at stake to rely on nonbinding and voluntary agreements to police election deepfakes. Therefore, I'm authoring AB 2655 to protect election integrity by regulating the online spread of disinformation and deepfakes meant to influence an election with today's sophisticated deepfakes, voters may not know what images, audio, or video they can trust. This deceptive and hyper-realistic content can undermine faith in election integrity.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Accordingly, AB 2655 would, for a limited period of time before and after an election, require large online platforms if they know or should know that the content meets the test in the Bill. To restrict the distribution of materially deceptive and digitally altered or created images, audio, or video meant to influence an election. For less harmful, yet still materially deceptive and modified content, the Bill would require the platforms to label other AI-created or modified election disinformation meant to influence.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
In both instances, the Bill does not demand perfection. What it says is that platforms must act if they know, or should know, using best available tools, that the content meets the test in the Bill. Platforms can't bury their head in the sand, but if they don't know, then there's no obligation. The Bill protects against false speech that has been intentionally manipulated to deceive and done with malice. This is defamation and an exception to the First Amendment.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Additionally, it is important to note that in order to comply with Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the Bill does not provide for any monetary penalty against online platforms. Instead, the only penalty is that a court will order the platforms to do what the Bill requires. I realize that this Bill is attempting to legislate in an arena where technology and the law are fast evolving, and that can be challenging on many levels.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
I can't promise that the Bill will survive a First Amendment or Section 230 court challenge. I do commit to continuing to make amendments to improve the Bill, to try to guard against that. But the Bill is crafted to give us the best chance to survive a strict scrutiny review. But the reality is that doing nothing isn't an option. Therefore, I respectfully request an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
Chair and Members. I'm Leora Gershenzon with the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy, a project of California Common Cause. As elected officials, you are all keenly aware of the threats posed by AI-generated election deepfakes. Today's Washington Post there's a headline that reads, AI deepfakes threaten to upend global elections. No one can stop them. We can't just be in that position.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
AB 2655 strikes the right balance by banning, for a strictly limited time around elections, the online spread of the worst deepfakes intended to deceive voters and influence elections. Videos, images, and audio showing candidates, election officials, or voting apparatus doing or saying something they did not do or say. The Bill also requires other fake content regarding elections to be labeled as such, again. for a limited period of time around the elections.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
The Bill only applies to the largest online platforms with the greatest reach of potential election disinformation and the deepest pockets to help find, to help determine what is and isn't AI-generated fake content. Assembly Member Berman has worked diligently to ensure that AB 2655's approach is narrowly tailored and does not extend to opinions or controversial statements. It only seeks at peak elections time to stop the use of demonstrably false content hurled at political leaders in an effort to disrupt our fair elections.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
The Bill is respectful of the First Amendment by serving a compelling government interest, protecting our free and fair elections, and by being narrowly tailored to address that compelling interest in terms of time, subject matter, and requiring malice. It also limits remedies because there are no financial penalties because of Section 230. I would like to end very quickly with a quote from that article in the Washington Post from Senator Klobuchar, which said, let's not stand on the sidelines with our elections while our elections get screwed up.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
This is like a hair-on-fire moment. This is not a let's wait and see. Let's wait three years and see how it goes moment.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- David Harris
Person
Chair and Members. My name is David Harris and I'm a senior policy advisor to PSYT IT. I'm also a chancellor's public scholar at UC Berkeley, where I've been teaching since 2015. I teach classes including Civic Technology and AI Ethics for Leaders. My students and I go over all of the ways that technology can play a role in our democracy. I also previously worked for close to five years on civic integrity, social impact, and responsible AI at Facebook and Meta.
- David Harris
Person
I have advised the European Union, the White House and NATO on AI and the role that it plays in democracy. This Bill only applies to the largest online platforms with the greatest reach for potential election misinformation, and it is fully implementable today. Based on tools that these companies already possess for dealing with illegal content, such as child sexual abuse material or terrorist content, they could apply the same systems, techniques, procedures, and processes that they use for that type of content to managing deepfakes in elections.
- David Harris
Person
This Bill is narrow and in a narrow way makes certain types of content impermissible. Now, some of these companies will suggest that these requirements can't be met, but they are already generally subject to similar requirements under the European Union's Digital Services Act and the recently released guidelines that the EU has released about elections and how that, the Digital Services Act, applies to elections.
- David Harris
Person
Furthermore, 20 of the biggest tech companies involved committed at the Munich Security Conference in February to something called the AI elections accord, where they already promised to develop and implement technology to mitigate risks related to deceptive AI election content.
- David Harris
Person
The problem is that none of their commitments made in Munich are binding or have any timelines associated with them, and they cannot be held accountable. That's why this Bill, AB 2655 is what we need to assure that the tech companies live up to the promises that they have already made.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2655?
- Chanel Freeman
Person
Chanel Freeman, on behalf of the League of Women Voters of California in strong support.
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Bryant Miramontes with AFSCME California in support.
- Eric Harris
Person
Eric Harris, Disability Rights California, in support.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Do we have any speakers in opposition? Please come forward.
- Khara Boender
Person
Thank you, Madam Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Khara Boender, testifying on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association in respectful opposition to AB 2655. CCIA is an international, not for profit trade association with about two dozen members from a range of communications and technology firms.
- Khara Boender
Person
CCIA and its members take seriously the impact deceptive content may have on elections, and many of our members are working to implement tools to better detect and label AI generated content. Using a combination of AI and human review, they moderate content in violation of their terms of service, including content that is illegal and potentially harmful. But the tools that are currently available are not always reliable or accurate.
- Khara Boender
Person
Just as spam filters sometimes mislabel legitimate emails. And while such technology is evolving, so are the means for bad actors to evade such detection. Because covered platforms are not privy to the intent and context for which a piece of content is used, they could inadvertently over block or over label content. This could result in user frustration and suppression of political speech. Political speech was at the core of why our First Amendment was established, and it is critical to maintain those protections.
- Khara Boender
Person
Responsibility for labeling AI generated election content and liability for the deceptive content should rest with the entity that puts forth such material, the one that is most aware of the intent and context for which the content was created and shared. We also have concerns about the breadth of the bill. While it establishes defined time periods surrounding elections and election processes for newly established prohibitions and requirements, it is unclear when an election's process starts. Further, the bill does not specify which elections or where.
- Khara Boender
Person
And while the bill exempts satire and parody, it is unclear who gets to decide what constitutes those uses. Faced with individual users seeking injunctive relief merely if they disagree with a covered platform's decision regarding reported content, a service may choose to prohibit all digitally altered content, cutting off many valuable and helpful uses. These tools can be used by campaigns to reach voters with high quality content at lower costs or to translate speech into multiple languages. I'll wrap up there. Appreciate your time today in consideration of our comments, and welcome any questions.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you. Go ahead.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, and Mr. Chair, as he walks in. Jose Torres with TechNet. We are respectfully opposed to AB 2655. I echo the concerns of my colleague from CCIA and want to emphasize this bill requires online platforms to make determinations about truth and falsity in an impossible way. Instances where content and or information is clearly true or clearly false are not norm.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
Far more often, content falls into a middle ground where it requires time and effect intensive investigation to determine whether to determine whether something is true or false. Investigative journalists have challenges with fact checking even the most high profile races or candidates. It is difficult enough for a platform to know whether something is false as it relates to a presidential candidate or a high profile federal race, and this is simply impossible for races lower down on the ticket.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
A platform cannot accurately adjudicate reports on those types of content and will instead resort to over removing information in order to avoid liability and the penalties in this bill. Removing information that is only suspected of being false is clearly not a good outcome. And then for these reasons, we are respectfully opposed. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to AB 2655?
- Cynthia Valencia
Person
Cynthia Valencia with the ACLU California Action in opposition due to First Amendment concerns.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Tracy Rosenberg
Person
Tracy Rosenberg on behalf of Oakland Privacy. We still have a couple of concerns. We thank the Committee for the amendments. We'll be checking them out. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. All right. We'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions? Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Hi. I know. So I have to start by saying thank you for your leadership in the elections arena. As we heard earlier about a different subject matter, there's no one I trust more to shepherd a bill of this magnitude through the Legislature. But I do have some questions because I agree, I think we all agree that strict scrutiny would be applied.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I don't think, I know I don't have any question that there is a strong governmental interest, so that we don't need to discuss. So the question then to me is is this narrowly tailored in a sufficient way as to both pass scrutiny and to protect the First Amendment? I am a believer the First Amendment has immense value.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so one of the things that I actually think was valuable in the analysis was citing two year prior law, and so we could compare some of the differences in the way this was drafted. And there were some changes in the way this was drafted that raised concerns for me. And I'll say the first one is that any California resident can bring this case. I do think when we as candidates challenge speech, there is a, we are held to account by the voters. Right.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
We are responsible to them, and they can take it out on us at the ballot box. Whereas if we have sort of a third party out there challenging this, I think it is concerning to me that you would have a lot more spurious challenges and ones potentially that are not intended to go after what is truly deceptive speech. So I was curious about that. Do you want me to do all my questions? Theres quite a few. Okay. Then the question is also on the standard, right.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
The analysis talks about having a clear and convincing standard versus just the likelihood of success on the merits for the injunctive relief. I do think the higher standard given, again, that we need to narrowly tailor this to ensure that we are not looking at some case that might win, but instead something where there is clear and convincing evidence that it falls under the statute makes sense. So I don't know if you want to address that.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
But then as I looked at the question of what was deceptive material, what would fall under this, I found the definition of that incredibly broad. In the prior statute that you authored, it used a reasonable person standard to decide whether something was potentially viewed as inauthentic. So the reasonable person that would view it, I have it right here. It said that would have falsely appeared to be a reasonable person, to be inauthentic, would falsely appear to be authentic to a reasonable person.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And here we have, you know, the authenticity question even has, or that otherwise generates an inauthentic image. That is anything that is created using Gen AI. So now anything that is created using Gen AI would have an inauthentic image and would fall under this. And then it says that, you know, that contains a false portrayal of any of the following in candidate. You know, what they said or did, which is what you said.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And I was thinking about that and I thought, well, you know, we have a colleague and some allege that she had tried to allow for infanticide in California. I would argue that's not what she did. She would argue that's not what she did. But it's a fair argument in the public sphere. The First Amendment would protect whether what she did was or was not. I think that is protected First Amendment speech. But arguably somebody could go and say, that's not what I did. And we would be...
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Oh, no
- Marc Berman
Legislator
It's all right. We're good.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And we would be in a space where we have...
- Marc Berman
Legislator
I have faith.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Last call.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I thought it was the, I thought it was the AI shutting us down. David can tell us if that's possible. So I guess my concern is that that is so broadly drafted that ads or communications that are meant to attack things that we arguably did but maybe we think we didn't do, would then be under subject to this 36 hours and taken down. And I just think that there are much stricter standards we could put on this to make sure we are talking about what I think you're actually trying to get at.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Right, which is where people are actually being deceived to believe something, someone said something, a speech that looks authentic and a reasonable person would think that Joe Biden gave that speech, not a communication that is arguably an ad saying we did something using an inauthentic image because AI generated it, which I think is much past the point of what you are trying to regulate here. And I think the definitions don't just capture the stuff we're talking about, which is misinformation, disinformation, but goes beyond that to political speech that I think I would hope all of us would want to protect. So I guess if you want to address that.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Yeah, no, thank you very much for the points. Thank you for the conversations that we've had in the past 18 hours. Let me first say for the first two issues that you raised, we are actively investigating what makes sense and actively discussing with stakeholders, with opponents, with the sponsors, with interested legislators, and actively looking at whether or not we should narrow who can bring suit or who can bring a complaint, actively looking at a lot of other components of the bill.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
So needless to say, everything is still very much up for discussion and would love to continue those discussions with you. I'd love to continue those discussions with the opposition to try to make sure that, at the end of the day, if this bill is signed into law, that it is as narrowly tailored as possible. Because like you said, that's critically important to the bill, you know, surviving in the court. I'm going to defer to the experts on some of the specific language and what we still have and what we've changed. But, you know, this is very much a work in progress.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
Yes, we did. We absolutely did not take out the false portrayal. So there's language on page five that says this is under the definition of digitally manipulated speech. False portrayal means the content would cause a reasonable person to have a fundamentally different impression or understanding of the content than if the person would have seen the authentic image. So it still keeps that same provision of false portrayal that was in the original Berman bill.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
But isn't that an or? Isn't that one of the options?
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
No, no, no. It's a requirement. A. You have to have under two. You have to have that. So false portrayal is a key part of this. So, in fact, we had discussions about taking that out and did not because that's clear. It has to be deceptive. So it has to be false. It has to be digitally manipulated, and it has to be false to, it has to deceive a person. And it isn't just the same like, you, infanticide. You cause this. But if there was a picture of the Member actually murdering a child, that would be, that would fall under this bill. Not just saying this author did a bill that included.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Right. But the reasonable person only has to have a fundamentally different understanding or impression of the content or... It doesn't feel like the reasonable person has to believe that it is authentic. That is not how I read this. Is that how you read it?
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
Yes, because it has to appear authentic. We can tighten up the language. I mean, as the Assembly Member said, is this perfect language? It isn't. There's a lot more process to go through and there are definitely ways we can tighten this. But there are key things, which is that it is digitally manipulated. It is false. It is intended to deceive, the person who the original content producer intended to deceive. It does deceive people. And that it's intended falsely to influence the election.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Right. So I see a reasonable person under false betrayal. My problem is you don't have a reasonable person under the authenticity question. That's my issue.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
So you want...
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So I want. I think that the reasonable person has to believe this is authentic. Not just that it... Cause there you have an or it otherwise generates an inauthentic image. And so I think that I want someone to be viewing this to believe this is an authentic image. And I think that the way this is drafted with all of those requirements, the false portrayal, again, I think that a lot of the way people portray us, we would argue was false.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I just, I mean, you know, that is what. And we have to accept that. We are public officials. That is part of the First Amendment protections. And so I also think that the image needs to be one such that, again, the viewer believes this is an authentic speech, it's an authentic image, et cetera.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Totally appreciate the point. Absolutely.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Assembly Member Bryan.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I'll be quick. Mr. Berman, when you brought this bill to me, I remember your pitch pretty well.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
I remember your response.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
It's supported by the Sheriff, it's opposed by the ACLU, and it may violate the First Amendment, but...
- Marc Berman
Legislator
You're paraphrasing.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
But similar to my colleague from the Bay Area, all of your past work in this space, when a bill analysis cites your own past work, it speaks to your dedication to the issue and your willingness and ability to navigate complex policy conversations like this one. And I think this is one of those conversations that needs to continue. So happy to give you a courtesy aye vote today, and looking forward to seeing where you ultimately take this work.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Appreciate it.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, do we have a motion in a second? Assembly Member Connolly.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
A couple quick questions. And yeah, I appreciate that sentiment as well. One question that was raised is why does it only target large platforms?
- Marc Berman
Legislator
I think we're trying to target the biggest risk, and the biggest risk, the biggest risk and the platforms that have the resources and the technological ability to be able to determine what content would apply. So I'll defer... At a high level, that's the reasoning. But defer to the experts to dive into the details a little bit.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
In the ideal world, we would cover every single platform. But again, what we are asking of the platform to do does they've got to use state of the art tools. The largest platforms have the capacity. The largest platforms also have the largest reach. So if you're trying to stop disinformation, we're never going to fully stop it. And by the way, I'm sorry I didn't mention, we're not trying to stop misinformation. That actually is much more allowable under the First Amendment.
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
It's the disinformation, it's the absolutely false context. So we're trying to go where the greatest tools are and not run into... It's impossible for these smaller startups. We are pro-innovation. We don't want to stop the tools that are needed to do this.
- David Harris
Person
If I could add, we chose to go for the larger platforms, actually, as a bit of a compromise. We looked at the way that the European Union defined very large online platforms and we actually went lower than that. They were looking at platforms that have more than 45 million, or 10% of the EU population approximately, as users. We went for a 1 million number within California, proportionately smaller. We didn't go lower than that because we do want to recognize that this is work. This has costs associated with it that are incidental to companies that are bringing in billions of dollars each quarter, but that are significant for small startups, and we wanted to acknowledge that.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
And who decides whether something has been modified? Is it actually like an algorithm that does that, or is it people? What's that rigorous process?
- Marc Berman
Legislator
I'm going to defer to David, but algorithms, and then maybe backed up by people.
- David Harris
Person
Yeah, exactly. As is the case with almost all types of content moderation currently, there are two ways that a piece of content that can be enqueued for a moderation decision. One is in an automated fashion where an algorithm or AI system detects that something might contain child sexual abuse material, detects that it might contain a known false statement that has been previously fact checked, or detects that it is repeat of content that has been taken down before of any type.
- David Harris
Person
And so that can be done algorithmically. There are situations where an algorithm might also generate a unclear response and queue that automatically for a human reviewer. And then there are also ways that, if content passes through the algorithmic methods, it could still be reported by anyone, yourself included, through any platform's tools for reporting content. And then there's a possibility that you would have an algorithmic assessment or an AI assessment after the human reports. And that could, depending on how it unfolds, go back to a human actual reviewer. And there are in many of the platforms, multiple layers of human review that can be appealed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I was just going to ask if we can start to wrap up. We have a lot of bills going through. So quickly, and quick, quick response, please.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Final quick question. So, and following up on that. The way the bill is currently set up is if an individual disagrees, quote unquote, with a platform response, a private lawsuit is possible. So I'm trying to get a sense of, that sounds like kind of opening the floodgates potentially to litigation. But how is that envisioned? How is that going to play out realistically?
- Leora Gershenzon
Person
I mean, the Assembly Member has already discussed looking at ways to limit that, including who may bring the lawsuit and raising the standard from preponderance of the evidence to potentially clear and convincing. The penalty against the platforms. There's our litigation. These are lawsuits. So it's not that they're so easy, but there's no monetary penalties. So because of Section 230, they pay nothing. If they lose, the court will order them to simply do something that they hadn't done. So they will. They are simply ordered to comply with the law. There are no monetary penalties.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Well, I'm glad to hear though that there's further discussion about how to refine that.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
There is, absolutely.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. There is a motion already, and so would you like to close Assembly Member Berman?
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Respectful ask for an aye vote. I appreciate the conversation.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do passes amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, that will be placed on call.
- Marc Berman
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, so it's another check.
- Committee Secretary
Person
We have a vote change. Dixon, no to not voting.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay. All right. Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan, we have less than an hour to do six bills. If we can. If we can't, we're gonna have to come back either tonight or at some other moment sometime to finish these bills this week.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I won't ask any questions this time, so it'll go faster. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, I'm proud to present AB 2930. Oh, and I'll be accepting the Committee amendments. Proud to present AB 2930. I want to thank the Committee for their very thorough analysis. It was incredibly well done. I appreciate it. As noted, it was modeled after President Biden's AI Bill of Rights. And AB 2930 is incredibly, incredibly simple, although the opposition would disagree.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And what it does is it says that these automated decision tools, which are in our life, they're making decisions for us in every aspect of our life, but especially in the most consequential decisions, housing, healthcare, lending, need to be tested before they're deployed on Californians. We're asking companies to do a very simple thing, which, by the way, a lot of the good actors in this space are already doing. Do an impact assessment.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Ensure there's no bias in these tools prior to handing them over to someone to be deployed, or prior to deploying them directly to consumers. And what that is going to do is it is going to ensure that we don't have discrimination in these tools in our most consequential spaces. But in the exciting future that I think, hopefully we can have. As a woman, I know this firsthand. We can see the elimination of bias in areas where we know there has been bias for far too long.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
But in order for that to be true, we cannot put in datasets that have historical discriminatory data in them. And we've seen example after example of that. Science in 2019 had a study that showed that a clinical algorithm used across hospitals for determining patient care was racially biased against black patients. In this case, the algorithm used healthcare spending as a proxy for health needs and falsely concluded that black patients were healthier than equally sick white patients, depriving black patients from needed high-risk care.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
This is just one example. We've seen it. To Amazon's credit, they tested an employment tool they were going to use, found that it had bias against women in the tech space because their data showed that there weren't as many women tech workers, which we know to be the case. They didn't deploy it. But that's what we want. We want it to be tested and only deployed when we know it's going to do good and not harm.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
With me today as a technical witness is David Evan Harris. To talk a little bit about these tools and how they work.
- David Harris
Person
Chair and Members of the Committee, it's good to see you again so soon. I'm here now in my capacity as an individual acting as a technical expert to speak about AB 2930. For context, as I mentioned before, I've been teaching at UC Berkeley since 2015, where AI has been a regular topic in my curricula.
- David Harris
Person
In my AI ethics for leaders course, my students and I read about the White House's blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, which is a foundational document informing the bill before us. I was also an employee of Facebook and Meta from 2018 to 2023 on a number of teams, including responsible AI.
- David Harris
Person
During this period, the company was sued by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development for facilitating housing discrimination in its ads, targeting, and delivery tools, impact assessments are a bedrock, critical tool for ensuring that AI benefits all people in fair and equitable ways. Without impact assessments, regulators cannot tell if a company is being careful in how it uses AI. They cannot tell how much of a role AI plays in the company's products.
- David Harris
Person
They can't tell what factors are involved or not involved in making decisions, and they can't understand even what components of a decision are algorithmically determined. Many companies simply don't know exactly what their AI systems do or how they work. This is a broader problem with AI. It's an incredibly powerful tool, and we don't know how it works. A senior Executive at OpenAI, the maker of Chat, GPT, recently likened building AI to alchemy.
- David Harris
Person
When deciding who gets a mortgage, a job, or healthcare, I am not comfortable with resorting to a tool that is akin to alchemy. While AI companies may not know how their systems work, they do know at least one thing for certain about AI, that it can increase their profits and bring in investment. Where discrimination is a possible outcome of AI, there's an incentive today to avoid knowing about it, to simply avoid putting their products under scrutiny, to look away from potential harms.
- David Harris
Person
Requiring impact assessments changes the incentives and rightly forces developers and deployers of automated decision tools to proactively look for discriminatory outcomes of their products. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2930?
- Mariko Yoshihara
Person
Mariko Yoshihara on behalf of the California Employment Lawyers Association and Tech Equity, we have a support if amended position. Just want to thank the author and her staff for working with us and continuing to have these conversations. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is anyone here in opposition?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Come on up. There's lots of seats for you. I appreciate it.
- Ronak Daylami
Person
Thank you. Chair and Members Ronak Daylami with Cal Chamber respectfully in strong opposition to AB 2930 as it is in print. We thank the author for engaging with us on this bill, dating back to AB 331 last year, especially because we are largely aligned in her goal in principle, bias and discrimination are serious problems, and our member companies want to be part of the solution.
- Ronak Daylami
Person
When it comes to how to solve for the problem of bias in the context of ADTs, we don't object to impact assessments. As you have pointed out, we use them quite frequently. So what we do urge is a measured approach to avoid overregulation, which can undermine the utility and future improvement of these tools that contribute in many valuable ways to society. Critically, they can actually help reduce some of the bias and discrimination we have historically seen result from human decision-makers. Over regulation this context therefore risks having the opposite outcome intended.
- Ronak Daylami
Person
While our concerns are rather extensive, our members have identified five issues that apply uniformly across all industries and regardless of the context in which the tools are applied, understanding, of course, that there are other priorities that may exist that are industry-specific. First, the scope of the bill is, for lack of a better word, enormous.
- Ronak Daylami
Person
The breadth and vagueness of terms such as algorithmic discrimination, consequential decision, substantial factors sweep in all kinds of ADT businesses of all sizes, across every single industry, not just for high-risk ADT, but low-risk as well. It makes compliance with this bill incredibly challenging. To be clear, algorithmic discrimination is discrimination. Even under the status quo, protections don't hinge on whether technology is used or what type, and we're very concerned about operating as though they do.
- Ronak Daylami
Person
The creation of a new construct for a simple type of for a single type of technology that is totally divorced from existing anti-discrimination laws that have long provided clear guidance to businesses as to what is unlawful will inevitably cause confusion. We also have concerns about the notice provisions and the requirement to allow consumers to effectively opt-out, as well as other issues in our letter. So we were starting.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition here in 930?
- Carmen-Nicole Cox
Person
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Carmen Nicole Cox on behalf of ACLU California Action, appreciate the engagement with the author. We are opposed unless amended.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Good afternoon. Sarah Pollo Moo with the California Retailers Association in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Traci Stevens
Person
Good afternoon. Tracy Stevens on behalf of the California Financial Services Association and we will keep our remarks under the chamber. Thank you.
- Stephanie Morwell
Person
Stephanie Morwell on behalf of the Consumer Technology Association, apologies for getting our letter in late, but we are opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Margaret Gladstein
Person
Margaret Gladstein here on behalf of the California Community Banking Network, opposition
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Vanessa Lugo
Person
Vanessa Lugo on behalf of California Bankers Association in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Vanessa Chavez
Person
Vanessa Chavez with the California Association of Realtors here in opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Naomi Padron
Person
Good afternoon. Naomi Padron on behalf of the California Credit Union League in respectful opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Khara Boender
Person
Good afternoon. Kara Bunder with the Computer and Communications Industry Association in respectful opposition. Too many syllables.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
All right. Good afternoon. Jose with TechNet in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. All right. We'll bring it back to. Is there a motion or any comments, Assemblymember Connolly.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Quick comment and appreciate the work on this, or question, rather, how does this interact with existing anti-discrimination laws? So FIHA, unrelac, most notably. And what discrimination is not covered by those two that this bill now protects against theoretically?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yeah. So again, thank you to Committee for an excellent analysis which helped clarify this. So FIHA, as you know, and actually as the bill now clarifies and, you know, the opposition also acknowledges, although I'll be honest, the case law is all over the place about when you have one of these tools, who is on the hook? Is it the developer or the deployer? And courts are trying to figure that out.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And so we are in this sort of weird gray zone where it isn't clear who is responsible for the discrimination in these cases. But I do hope courts will get that right because it is important that someone is responsible for their discrimination. But it does. We have clarified that the existing civil rights laws are absolutely still in effect, as noted by the opposition.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So all of your traditional protections would still be in place, although there are things such as education, healthcare, etcetera, insurance, financial services noted in the analysis that those state statutes don't cover. But I think that one of the things that I want to highlight on that is that, you know, when you're a woman and it becomes clear that an employer of some size is not hiring women in equal numbers, it takes a lot of women not getting the job before that comes to light.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And a lot of women have been harmed. And I know the same is true for communities, color, and other protected classes, is that in the current regime, you have to wait for a lot of harm to occur for our civil rights laws to come into play. And so what is exciting about this is that in addition to those remedies, which, as I said, we're clarifying, are absolutely still in place, this puts an onus on these developers to say, okay, we're going to try to prevent that.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Now, there may still be a case where we get to that point and a civil rights case comes to pass. But hopefully by putting these impact assessments in an obligatory fashion and ensuring that we're not deploying discriminatory tools, we will prevent some of that, which I know, you know, I believe I heard the opposition say is absolutely something that they want to do, too, which is why so many of the good actors already do these impact assessments.
- David Harris
Person
Could I?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Oh, sure. I guess it's up to the Chair.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Very, very, very quickly, if you can.
- David Harris
Person
Assemblymember Connolly, if you're an employee of a company that deploys AI systems or develops them today and you suspect that something might be wrong, that there might be discrimination, you may not be able to get permission from your bosses or from your employer to actually study where that is the case, whether that's the case under current law, this law would actually give you the opportunity as an employee trying to do good to investigate that.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Assemblymember Bryan.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Thank you. I just wanted to raise up some of the concerns from the opposition that this doesn't just happen in the private sector and hiring decisions. We actually have many public uses of kind of these algorithmic decision-making models. I'm definitely thinking of predictive policing models. I'm thinking of doing different types of risk assessment tools, things in the child welfare system that are emerging. So definitely wanna make sure that those remain part of this conversation and be on the table.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Cause I think you're doing something that's profound and important, and I don't think we should let our civic institutions off the hook from these kinds of automated decision-making discrimination cases as well.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yeah, and it does. So the bill does include all of those applications as consequential decisions, to your point. They are definitely consequential. We've had conversations. I know that's a concern of the ACLU, but perhaps others as well. And one of their concerns, we actually thought the bill already did, which was they're concerned about already deployed models. I had believed the bill covered already deployed models. So if that's unclear, we're absolutely happy to clarify that.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And we're continuing to talk to them about other ways of doing this, because to your point, all consequential decisions in our lives, this should be the bare minimum of what happens. So those conversations will absolutely continue.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, thank you. Do we have a motion and a second. Assemblymember Pacheco.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
To the author. I know this is something that you're working on, and I just want to commend you for all the work that you're doing. I know there's continuing conversations happening and you're making amendments, and I know you're going to be working with opposition. So I'm looking forward to seeing the outcome of this bill once it gets to the floor. I will be supporting it today. Just look forward to the final results.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Thank you so much. Yeah.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there a motion and a second. Is there a second? All right, there's a motion and a second. Thank you so much, Senator Bauer-Kahan, for your work on this. Would you like to close?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Yes. I just want to reiterate what our colleagues said, which is we are looking forward to seeing amendments from the chamber, but have started working with the Association specifically to try to drive into the issues, issues that each identified individually. Because I said, this is something that a lot of companies are already doing. So we think this is actually a good step in the right direction for AI that we can all come to consensus on. And I look forward to that moment. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay, we'll place them on call. Assemblymember Wicks. Maybe 3211. Oh, yeah, I just. We'll just keep ordering. The plan is to do this one Assemblymember Gibson's bill and then my bill, and I think that will keep moving. See how many we can do.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know you all are up against time constraints, so hopefully this won't take too long. Many thanks to the Committee staff for their thoughtful considerations of the legal questions raised around AB 3211.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
I do a lot of tech work, obviously, in this space, and the reasons for that, largely, are because of my girls. I have a three-year-old and a seven-year-old, and I want to make sure we're creating a really safe environment for them. I fully recognize the benefit of AI and generative AI, and I think it will provide unprecedented growth in California, in our economy, also new careers, also things that we haven't even imagined yet, and I'm excited about that growth, but I also want to make sure we're putting forth the right guardrails and safety measures to ensure that there's real trust with these products.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
As some of you may have read, undressing apps are rampant now in many of our schools. It allows users to create deepfakes of nonconsensual pornographic images for underage kids and others, also adults. Creating convincing deepfakes takes less than 20 minutes and costs about a dollar. Fakes threatened to flood social media and other large platforms online, and women and girls are particularly vulnerable and have experienced harm in at least three of California's middle and high schools to date.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
There's also concerns around deepfakes with regard to elections. I know that's something many of us care about, making sure we have a lot of transparency around the messages that we put out into the world and how we are projected and how we are perceived on our social media platforms.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
As policymakers, we need to ensure that media consumers are better able to discern what is real from what is fake. AB 3211 presents three ways to do this: one: require all content from GenAI to be labeled 'fake,' two: require all content from cameras and other recording devices to be labeled 'real,' and third: require all online platforms to display these labels.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
I was honored to have bipartisan support in the Privacy Committee and think that speaks to the rare opportunity that we have together, Democrats and Republicans, to really meet this moment, an opportunity to protect the trustworthiness of what we see and maintain California's embrace of technology as it innovates, but also to provide safety and security.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
With me here to testify--and I told him not to leave his seat because he was just here on behalf of Rebecca Bauer-Kahan as well--is David Evan Harris, formerly of Meta and currently faculty at UC Berkeley. We have Riley McCormack, President and CEO of Digimarc Corporation, and also available for legal clarification is Ken Wang with CITED, and respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- David Harris
Person
Chair and Members of the Committee, it's an honor to be able to speak with you again and convey to you my strong support of AB 3211, the California provenance, authenticity, and watermarking standards. I'm here today, right now, in my capacity as a Senior Policy Advisor to CITED, the California Initiative for Tech and Democracy. This is the newest project of California Common Cause, and it came together to seek state level solutions to the threats that disinformation, artificial intelligence, deepfakes, and other emerging technologies pose to democracy and our elections.
- David Harris
Person
We're proud to sponsor AB 3211. AI is a powerful tool that can bring great benefits to people, but it also, if not governed judiciously, has the power to cause great harm. This is why so many AI CEO's have called themselves for regulation of AI. You've already heard about the harms that can be caused by AI-generated, nonconsensual intimate imagery and child sexual abuse material. Misinformation campaigns can be supercharged by AI.
- David Harris
Person
We're familiar with these campaigns from the 2016 efforts by Russia to interfere in our elections through social media. The Department of Homeland Security has already warned that China, Russia, and Iran are likely to use generative AI to target our elections. Watermarking is the best tool available to allow us to identify what content is produced by AI and what content is authentic. AB 3211 requires that AI companies make good on promises to add watermarking features to their AI systems.
- David Harris
Person
These promises were first made in the White House Voluntary Commitments on AI last July, and again at the Munich Security Conference's AI Elections Accord from this February. Given that it's already been nine months since the White House AI commitments were made and we've seen little progress, I believe that we have no other option than to legally require that companies take on this responsibility and protect our information environment, our children, and our democracy.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Riley McCormack
Person
Chair and Members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, the tools and technology to enable the key provisions of AB 3211 exist, and have been widely deployed for years, globally, and on a massive scale. Moreover, these tools can be deployed to any device where digital content is created or deployed via familiar software delivery methods, including the common over-the-air updates with which we are all so familiar, allowing compliance with the provisions of AB 3211 to be measured in months, not years.
- Riley McCormack
Person
I am the CEO of Digimarc, a product digitization company that pioneered digital watermarking technology nearly 30 years ago. The original application of our technology was to protect the copyrights of creators and inventors at the advent of another technology revolution, the Internet.
- Riley McCormack
Person
Since then, our technology has been deployed at a global scale many times over by both the public and private sectors to not only help ensure the rights of creators and inventors are protected, but also to ensure the authenticity and trustworthiness of physical and digital assets worldwide. Most notably, our technology has been trusted by a consortium of the world's central banks to protect global currencies for over 25 years.
- Riley McCormack
Person
Given our long history with digital watermarking across industries and sectors, we have proven insight into how this powerful technology could be applied to address the pressing issues upon which this Committee is focused. This would allow California to yet again lead the way on important global matters and ensure the delivery of the safer, fairer, and more authentic Internet we all deserve.
- Riley McCormack
Person
Digimark believes the potential for innovation and growth offered by AI is unrivaled, but the power of AI must be thoughtfully regulated, as failure to do so will have serious ramifications for generations to come.
- Riley McCormack
Person
Leaders around the world have an important task ahead of them in working to find the right balance for regulating this revolutionary technology, and solutions such as digital watermarking that can both promote innovation and protect against misuse must be seized. On behalf of everyone at Digimarc, I thank the Committee for the invitation to be here today. It is no surprise that this leaders in Sacramento are the vanguard of this important conversation. I welcome and look forward to answering your questions.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of this bill?
- Bryant Miramontes
Person
Brian Miramontes with AFSCME California, in support.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 3211?
- Khara Boender
Person
Good afternoon, again, Chair Kalra, Members of the Committee. My name is Khara Boender, testifying on behalf of CCIA, in respectful opposition to AB 3211. While we understand lawmakers' interest in mitigating potential harms associated with AI-generated synthetic content, as amended, the bill still raises several concerns. Many of our members are working to implement tools to better detect and label AI-generated content, but the tools that are available are not always reliable or accurate.
- Khara Boender
Person
There are also significant shortcomings to watermarks and carry the potential to counterproductively also erode trust. A false positive for reality providence is far worse than a false negative for AI providence. Fake material being treated as real is generally worse than real material being treated as faked, for example, the nonconsensual, sexually explicit images that were referenced earlier. We understand that the author is open to discussing the bill's enforcement regime, particularly the high penalties for violations.
- Khara Boender
Person
CCIA believes this is especially important given acknowledgement of the shortcomings of providence technology's current abilities and imperfections. We agree with the Committee's analysis that at present, these are unreasonable penalties. Further, the bill raises questions about how to effectively watermark AI-generated text or voice responses. For example, commonly used voice assistants produce AI-generated voice responses but cannot watermark those voice responses. We also suggest that the bill be targeted to high-risk cases.
- Khara Boender
Person
Responsible digital services are proactively implementing safeguards to swiftly remove illegal or dangerous content like AI-generated images depicting CSAM. However, this is different than the broader context as hashing values are used to help identify and remove such materials. By persistently addressing well-defined and agreed upon risks, platforms foster an environment conducive to harm mitigation without impeding the innovation ecosystem, but this also helps guard against counterproductive, unintended consequences.
- Khara Boender
Person
There are the risks of notification fatigue or banner blindness, and this has been prevalent with website operators' attempts to comply with the EU's website cookie disclosure requirements, which show that overly broad disclosure obligations can be highly disruptive while providing limited consumer safety benefits. On behalf of CCIA, I appreciate your consideration of these comments.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
All right. Good afternoon, Chair and Members, once again. Jose Torres with TechNet. We are respectfully opposed to AB 3211. We agree with the intent of the bill to create greater trust in user-generated content online by fostering the adoption of content provenance, verifications, and watermarks. We are still reviewing the amendments and appreciate that some of the more problematic requirements for online platforms do intrude on users' privacy have been struck. We still believe that there are a number of issues to resolve.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
We look forward to providing more substantive feedback and working with the author to offer amendments. However, as in print, this bill presents a multitude of issues and requires platforms to comply with technically infeasible and impossible standards. First, while we understand the desire to regulate an emerging technology, this is an area that would benefit from federal standards and regulation rather than a state by state approach.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
Many of our companies and platforms are at the forefront of developing content provenance and watermarking technology, which is still in its early stages. As a general note, content provenance and watermarking is still incredibly unreliable and in many cases, easy to break. Researchers at the University of Maryland were able to break all of the currently available watermarking methods. Some can be avoided by simply cropping, resizing, or screenshotting an image.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
More concerning, more researchers--these researchers were able to insert fake watermarks and credentials into images, creating false positives. Any bill on this topic should account for this unreliability, especially when considering the overly punitive fine structure. If laws exceed the industry's technological capabilities, consumers might place too much trust and credence in watermarks, making them more susceptible to bad actors' attempts to deceive. As it relates to this bill, AB 3211 enacts requirements for a technology that is still under development and rapidly evolving.
- Jose Torres Casillas
Person
For example, there isn't a system that can watermark text, making the bill's requirements to do so impossible to comply with. For these reasons, we are respectfully opposed at this time, but look forward to continuing the conversations with the author.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 3211?
- Ronak Daylami
Person
Ronak Daylami, with Cal Chamber, align our comments with the other opposition. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Any comments or any motions? Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Okay. And Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I'll be brief. So I want to thank Assemblymember Wicks for her work on this bill. I think this is critically important. We heard it in privacy and we really talked about the value of making sure that we identify these images, et cetera. And I think that I had a meeting recently with the EU where we were talking about how this is really going to shift the market, that the more the EU and California move towards requiring this, that the technology will come to pass.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
We can create the internet. We can definitely create watermarks. So I really appreciate your work on this. I've discussed with you that I think we need to work on which agency is in charge to make sure it's the right one. Department of Technology doesn't do this right now. So I have a concern about that. But I know you'll continue to work on that. With that, I'm happy to support it.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Madam Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
I'll make a quick comment. As we discussed this, I guess it was a week ago and long meeting in privacy, and I voted yes. I will vote yes today. But as I told the author, we're still not there yet. You know, you've got a lot of work to do. We haven't even defined many of these terms in real life. We've defined them, but we've not seen them work. So it's important that California could lead the way on this and change the marketplace. But I want to support, I do support the interests of those who are opposed, but we do need to find a solution here that works for all. So thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Yeah, I just want to appreciate, show appreciation for the author. This is incredibly complicated like many of the AI bills are. I also want to show appreciation to our privacy chair and her staff, working with judiciary staff. A lot of these bills are bouncing back and forth. And so as much as we can create some symmetry, the better. Would you like to close?
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
Sure. Thank you. And to Miss Bauer-Kahan's comments and thank you for all your work and privacy, committee. We are working to identify the appropriate regulatory agency and also with that, committed to discussing penalties and making sure they actually really align. And so there's a lot of openness there on that and welcome feedback, genuinely welcome feedback from any of the trade associations or companies themselves. We've yet to receive any red lines, and the door is wide open. So I would love to continue our conversation.
- Buffy Wicks
Legislator
I actually think there's a lot that aligns us here, both Democrats and Republicans, but also advocates in industry. And I think we can actually land this plan in a way that will benefit our constituents, which is who we care most about. So with that respect, we ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, that bill is out. Up next, Assemblymember Gipson. And after that, I'll take my bill. And we're just going to keep on moving. Yeah. Then Reyes. We'll get it done.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
We have a motion and a second. Go ahead, Assembly Member Gipson.
- Mike Gipson
Legislator
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Members. It's been a trying day today. I want to thank you for allowing me to meet very briefly to present Assembly Bill 2862, which seeks to require licensing boards to prioritize African American applications or applicants seeking occupational license, especially those who are descendants from a person enslaved in the United States.
- Mike Gipson
Legislator
Assembly Bill 2862 will serve as a four year pilot program to test the effectiveness of expediting professional licensures for these populations. With me to provide supporting testimony, this is, in fact, a Legislative Black Caucus priority as part of a Reparations Package. I have Mr. Darryl Lucien here representing the representing the 40 Acres Conservation, who will self introduce, but also speak in support of this bill.
- Darryl Lucien
Person
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. Honored to be here in support of this measure. We write in support of this measure I think primarily because of a lot of the work that we're doing this very day. 40 Acre Conservation League is the state's first black led land conservancy.
- Darryl Lucien
Person
And with the help of the Legislature, through the state budget and through additional grant funding that has been received from other agencies, we are embarking on a combination of ecological restoration of an area, a former timber land site owned by a timber company, and also trying to do a lot of place making to ensure that people of color find these spaces, that have long been considered uncomfortable spaces, more accommodating.
- Darryl Lucien
Person
When we have gone about putting together the team that we're using, we rely on a number of licensed professionals, registered professional foresters, excuse me, geologists, hydrogeologists, many professionals I didn't know existed. Frankly, we're in the process of hiring these individuals, and we would be remiss if we didn't, as an organization led by people of color, look to create opportunities for licensed professionals who look like us, who have a common sense of belonging or beginnings. And it's become very apparent that we can search high and low.
- Darryl Lucien
Person
Sometimes we're just not in these spaces. And we believe it's important for the State of California to find ways to prioritize us getting into these spaces that we're just not commonly found in. And so we appreciate Mr. Gipson, and not just him, but the entire California Legislative Black Caucus's effort on this endeavor. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2862? Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 2862?
- Andrew Quinio
Person
Morning. Good morning, Chairman Kalra. Honorable Members of this Committee, thank you all for your time. My name is Andrew Quinio, and I'm an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, the nation's leading public interest law firm that's dedicated to upholding equality and opportunity for all. The US and California Constitutions prevent the government from treating individuals differently based on race. This is exactly what AB 2862 does.
- Andrew Quinio
Person
When governments treat people differently based on race, it is meant to be a very rare exception, subject to very narrow restrictions. There are over 2 million hardworking Californians who must apply for permission to work for over 200 occupations from one of the state's bureaus and boards here in California. By passing AB 2862, you'll be telling these hardworking Californians that their spot in line in order to get a license will be dependent on their race. That is plainly unconstitutional.
- Andrew Quinio
Person
Last summer's Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard laid out very clear ground rules for when the government may use race to treat people differently. The government may only use race to treat people differently in order to remedy specific instances of past discrimination. Therefore, this Legislature must identify among the 38 boards and bureaus under the DCA what specific policies, practices, procedures are specifically discriminating to disallow individuals of certain races from getting licenses. If there are such policies, they should be rooted out.
- Andrew Quinio
Person
The Supreme Court also laid out the fact that the Legislature must give good faith consideration to race neutral, workable alternatives. Now, the Reparations Task Force did set forth a race neutral alternative. To the extent that any individual with a criminal background cannot obtain a license because of that background, the task force recommended that the amount of time be reduced or eliminated that a criminal background be held against a person seeking a license. Ultimately, California workers deserve much better, a more constitutional, constitutional and lawful licensing process. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 2862? Okay, we'll bring it back to Committee. There is a motion on the floor. Thank you, Assembly Member Gipson, bringing this forward. Would you like to close?
- Mike Gipson
Legislator
Thank you very much. Respectfully ask for the Committee's aye vote in this regard. Thank you very much for your time.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you so much.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Do pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
All right, we'll place that on call.
- Mike Gipson
Legislator
Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Madam Chair. AB 2288 would allow courts to order injunctive relief in a PAGA claim. By adding injunctions to the court's toolbox, this bill would ensure employers comply with state law and are taking proactive steps to remedy their unlawful conduct moving forward. Since 2004, PAGA has served as a critical enforcement tool of California's labor laws.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Madam Chair. AB2288 would allow courts to order injunctive relief in a PAGA claim. By adding injunctions to the courts' toolbox, this bill would ensure employers comply with state law and are taking proactive steps to remedy their unlawful conduct moving forward. Since 2004, PAGA has served as the critical enforcement tool of California's labor laws, recognizing the reality that the state's labor enforcement agencies often lack the resources to investigate and take action against every violation.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Under existing law, PAGA enables aggrieved employees to enforce the California Labor Code by pursuing lawsuits against employers to recover civil penalties for violations of state law. PAGA cases are most often filed to address serious labor code violations and enforce fundamental labor rights such as overtime, minimum wage, and sick leave.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
For example, a February 2024 report by the UCLA Labor Center highlighted nearly 600,000 workers in California experienced a wage violation totaling almost $2 billion in losses annually. However, only 2% of those lost wages are actually recovered by the Labor Commissioner's wage claim process. In addition to limited public enforcement resources, the increased use of forced arbitration clauses has prevented aggrieved workers from filing individual or class action lawsuits against their employer or even pursuing individual wage adjudication claims through the Labor Commissioner.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Researchers estimate that as high as 80% of private sector non-union workers are subject to these clauses. Frequently leaving PAGA is their only option for recourse. Under the current PAGA statute, while an aggrieved employee may win their case and the employer is fine, the existing law does not ensure that the worker will not have to face the same violation they sued over moving forward. Given the constraints imposed by forced arbitration, the lack of enforcement resources, remedies like injunctive relief need to be available to strengthen PAGA's effectiveness.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
An injunction is an order requiring an individual to refrain from a particular act, which may be granted and enforced by the courts. In the context of PAGA, injunctive relief would enable courts to order employers to make meaningful changes in the workplace.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
For example, an employer fails to provide workers with paid sick days, the court could order an injunction requiring the employer to establish a lawful paid sick day policy. AB 2288 builds upon PAGA's role as a vital tool to enforce workers' rights by allowing courts to order injunctive relief in a PAGA claim. I've met with the opposition and hope to continue working together to find a path moving forward.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
PAGA remains one of the only tools workers have to remedy violations of their rights, and this Bill would help ensure they see comprehensive, meaningful relief to unlawful workplace practices. With me testifying in support I have Veronica Melendez with the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation and Tia Koonse, Legal Policy Research Manager with the UCLA Labor Center.
- Veronica Melendez
Person
Good afternoon. My name is Veronica Melendez and I am the Litigation Director for California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation. CRLA Foundation was one of the original sponsors of PAGA in 2003. Then, as now, we overwhelmingly serve undocumented farmworkers and other low-wage workers. Farmworkers employed by unlicensed contractors sometimes are not paid their wages and they disappear and the workers cannot get their wages back.
- Veronica Melendez
Person
We also have workers with other employers who do not receive overtime, compliant rest meal periods, and wage statements, and retaliation is a very real situation for workers. For them, it means losing their job. It means that they cannot put food on the table and they cannot keep a roof over their heads. And making a complaint can lead to termination.
- Veronica Melendez
Person
Undocumented workers are uniquely vulnerable because they are aware that their abusive employers can report them to ICE and they can lose their job, and they can also basically no longer be with their families. PAGA's representative cause of action provides a unique mechanism, the only mechanism that deters and also provides a remedy for these undocumented farm workers when they're unable to bring those when they themselves, because of retaliation, they're not willing to come forward.
- Veronica Melendez
Person
PAGA provides for workforce enforcement and provides an incentive for employers to comply with all labor laws for all employees. PAGA allows one single employer to stand in the shoes of the labor Commissioner and hold violators accountable for violations committed against all employees and not just the worker that stepped up. Injunctive relief is necessary because employers that are failing to comply with basic labor rights should not be able to simply continue business as usual after they've paid a penalty.
- Veronica Melendez
Person
Instead, when one worker steps into the shoes of the Labor Commissioner, that should result in actual changes for the worker and their working conditions, and that should be a tool that should be available for the courts to use. Thank you.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you. Did you want to speak? Go ahead.
- Tia Koonse
Person
Good morning, Assembly Members. We have five minutes left of it. My name is Tia Koonse. I'm the researcher who wrote this report. I've written the last couple reports that have come out from UCLA about Paga.
- Tia Koonse
Person
I'm here to be your data geek. You can ask me any questions about how many claims get filed and what they're for. But what we found essentially, is that PAGA is one of the pillars of enforcement in our state. So, if you experience violation, you can do one of three things. You can go to the Labor Commissioner, you can find a lawyer to sue in court.
- Tia Koonse
Person
Good luck if you're a low wage worker, because your claim's not going to be high enough for anybody to be incentivized to take it. And 80% of you will have, in fact, signed a forced arbitration agreement preventing you from being able to bring that case. So, the third pillar is PAGA, essential to enforcement because the labor Commissioner cannot and will never have capacity to pose a credible threat of a compliance check in every single workplace. The labor agency resolves about 30,000 claims every year.
- Tia Koonse
Person
God bless them. They collect $40 million in unpaid wages every year. God bless them. That is, as the Assembly Member said, 2%. Only 2% of what we estimate workers actually lose due to wage theft. They conduct 570 investigations every year, on-the-ground workplace investigations every year. That's less than. And God knows that's difficult to do. Right? That's less than half a percent of California workplaces. So. we need PAGA in order to be able to get money back in workers' pockets.
- Tia Koonse
Person
And we need injunctive relief in order to be able to make changes that are permanent in that workplace going forward. Thank you so much for your time.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you. Any speaker? Speakers in opposition, please.
- Caitlin Vega
Person
In support.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Or support. Excuse me.
- Caitlin Vega
Person
It's been a long day. Madam Chair and Members, Caitlin Vega for the California Labor Federation, original co-sponsors of PAGA, and co-sponsors of this Bill in support.
- Lea-Ann Tratten
Person
Madam Chair and Members, Lea-Ann Tratten, Tratten Price, representing Consumer Attorneys of California, co-sponsor of the Bill. Thank you.
- Mariko Yoshihara
Person
Mariko Yoshihara, on behalf of the California Employment Lawyers Association and Equal Rights Advocates, in support.
- Danielle Kando-Kaiser
Person
Dani Kando-Kaiser, on behalf of the California Low-Income Consumer Coalition, in support.
- Shane Gusman
Person
Shane Gusman, on behalf of the Teamsters in support.
- Chris Myers
Person
Chris Myers on behalf of the California School Employees Association in support.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Okay, now do we have any speakers in opposition? Please come forward.
- Mark Loranger
Person
Good afternoon, Chairman, Madam Chairwoman, and Committee. Thanks for hanging in there. My name is Mark Loranger. I'm the President and CEO of Chrysalis. We're a nonprofit employment social enterprise, or ESC, that serves vulnerable workers by offering a job readiness program, individualized supportive services, and paid and transitional employment through four employment social enterprises. Chair Kalra, I know how much you care about workers, and you've seen the impact that the justice system has on the very people that we are here to serve.
- Mark Loranger
Person
At Chrysalis, we are pro-worker, mission-based organizations that support thousands of Californians that are trying to get back into the game of employment. We strongly support individual workers that need to receive the wages they've earned. But we fear that injunctive relief will harm employment, social enterprises, and other small businesses for technical violations that just end up increasing the settlement costs, because virtually none of these cases end up going to court. Now, at Chrysalis, we serve over 750 clients that earn paychecks every single week.
- Mark Loranger
Person
We pay above minimum wage. And in 2021, unfortunately, we had to settle a PAGA suit for about $700,000. However, recently we've been hit by another PAGA suit, this time, again, technical violations, timecard violations, and the plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars, millions of dollars that I don't have. And frankly, I don't know how we will pay.
- Mark Loranger
Person
PAGA is being abused by a small number of plaintiff's attorneys that are not serving PAGA the way it was intended to be served, which is to help the very workers that my agency is here to serve. I'm not saying that PAGA is bad. PAGA has a lot of good features. It is helping people that need it. But my fear is it is not being implemented and it is being abused to the detriment of the very folks that we're here to serve.
- Mark Loranger
Person
And frankly, adding this injunctive relief is just another tool in the plaintiff's toolbox to force settlements. I respectfully request that you vote no on this bill. Thank you.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you. Next.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
Good morning. Ashley Hoffman on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition. Unfortunately, stories like Mark's are not unique. What was once a well-intentioned law is now being manipulated, enriching attorneys at the expense of workers, businesses, and nonprofit organizations. These pseudo class actions have no procedural guardrails and they come with steep penalties.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
So, lawyers are incentivized to plead as many claims as possible, regardless of their validity, which is something that's actually been recognized in prior legislation passed by this Legislature in order to force these large settlements. And they know that these mere threats of these lawsuits is sufficient to compel an employer to settle rather than engage in the costly litigation. And PAGA is not just bad for employers or for nonprofits. It's also not working for workers.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
The LWDA itself in 2019 publicly stated in its budget change proposal that the vast majority of PAGA cases were not serving the interests of workers or the state that were being brought by these private plaintiff's attorneys. We also have state documents that show that workers are often receiving pennies. And so, when you compare that to the cases that are adjudicated by LWDA, they actually receive three times less.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
We've also heard from, honestly, dozens, maybe even hundreds of your constituents in our efforts on PAGAs about how this law is broken, and that they fear that AB 2288 actually makes a bad situation much worse. We feel that we need significant changes to create a better, fairer system, and we are concerned that AB 2288 invites more PAGA litigation by authorizing a court toward injunctive relief.
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
We feel the Bill is moving in the wrong direction, and now is the time to fix PAG, not extend it. Thank you.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Okay, thank you. Any comments in opposition?
- Darby Kernan
Person
Madam Chair, Darby Kernan, representing Roberts Enterprise Defense Fund, REDF, and Leading Age California, in opposition. Thank you.
- Sarah Pollo Moo
Person
Afternoon. Sarah Pollo Moo with the California Retailers Association, in opposition. I'm also here for the California Farm Bureau and Western Growers, in opposition.
- Naomi Padron
Person
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Naomi Padron, on behalf of the California Credit Union League, in respectful opposition.
- Chris Micheli
Person
Madam Chair. Chris Micheli, on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce in respectful opposition, and also on behalf of my colleague Yolanda Benson, her client, the California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, also in opposition. Thank you.
- Louis Brown Jr.
Person
Madam Chair. Louis Brown here today on behalf of the American Council of Engineering Companies and the California Grocers Association.
- Skyler Wonnacott
Person
Skyler Wonnacott, on behalf of the California Business Properties Association, in opposition.
- Jennifer Roe
Person
Good afternoon. Jennifer Roe, on behalf of the California Association of Health Facilities and California Goodwills, in opposition. Thank you.
- Emellia Zamani
Person
Emellia Zamani with the California Travel Association, in opposition.
- Hayden Tallman
Person
Hayden Tallman with the California Trucking Association, respectively, in opposition. Thanks.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Anthony Samson here, on behalf of the California New Car Dealers Association, in opposition.
- Natalie Boust
Person
Natalie Boust, on behalf of the California Business Roundtable, in opposition.
- Tracy Stephens
Person
Excuse me. Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Tracy Stephens, on behalf of the California Financial Services Association, also opposed.
- Timothy Taylor
Person
Good afternoon. Tim Taylor with the National Federation of Independent Business, in opposition. Thank you.
- Lizzie Cootsona
Person
Lizzie Cootsona here on behalf of Prism, in opposition. Thank you.
- Ryan Pierini
Person
Thank you, Chair and Members. Ryan Perini, on behalf of the California Automotive Wholesaler Association, in opposition. Thank you.
- Selena Hornback
Person
Selena Coppi Hornback with the California Assisted Living Association, in opposition.
- Annalee Augustine
Person
Chair and Members Annalee Augustine, on behalf of the Family Business Association of California, respectfully opposed. Thank you.
- Sabrina Lockhart
Person
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Sabrina Lockhart, on behalf of the California Association of Parks and Attractions. Thank you. In opposition.
- Cliff Costa
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Cliff Costa, on behalf of the California Employment Law Council, in respectful opposition. Thank you.
- Matthew Sutton
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association, in opposition.
- Dean Talley
Person
Dean Talley with the California Manufacturers and Technology Association. respectively opposed.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Oh, come back over up here for any Committee comments or questions. Yes.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I have a question. Okay. So, the Bill allows that whenever Labor and Workforce Development Agency can seek an injunction or declaratory relief, then private attorney general can do the same. I have to start by saying I love injunctive relief. I think it just makes people do what they were already supposed to do.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
So that part, let's put that aside, but declaratory relief, and I think this is what I'm struggling with, and I know we had a chance to talk about this, but then I went and read more about declaratory relief, and it didn't wholesale align with what you guys had said. So, my understanding of declaratory relief is when there's a controversy about what one's rights are, you can go in and you can seek declaratory relief to clarify your rights.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
And there has to be a controversy around the rights. So, in my mind that could happen when nobody has been wronged. But you disagree about what the workers' rights are? If I'm understanding that correctly, depending on the scope of the labor Commissioner's right to seek declaratory relief, that could lead to any more lawsuits. And so, I guess what I'm trying to understand is what is the scope of the labor Commissioner's right to seek declaratory relief?
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Because that would, I think, align with what we're allowing the private attorney generals to do.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan. I know we've had some conversation, we had some conversation with Committee staff, and I'm committed to working with you on the issue of declaratory relief, I think that the crux of this Bill is really the injunctive relief. And so, I'm confident we'll be able to get some resolution in addressing your concerns on declaratory relief because I don't think it's, again, the main driving force behind the Bill.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
Okay. I don't know if your witnesses want to add anything or. No, no more to add. Okay. Yeah. So that's my concern is I don't think injunctive relief will lead to many more lawsuits. I think it'll lead to better relief and often its damages are important, but injunctive relief actually helps people. So, I appreciate that. But I really do want to clarify that we don't have a slew of new lawsuits that are just about what people's rights are with nobody being harmed.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I think that would overburden the courts. I think it's unnecessary and I think it really would put too big a burden on business. So hopefully we can clarify that moving forward.
- Tia Koonse
Person
The only thing I would say in response is that it is important to know that PAGA cases are less than 1% of all the cases brought before Superior Court. So, I just want you guys to understand we're talking about. Oh, I'm so sorry.
- Tia Koonse
Person
I just wanted to say that Paga cases are actually less than 1% of all cases brought in the whole state in Superior Court. So we're not talking about the avalanche that I think the opposition may have indicated.
- Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Legislator
I would say for a small business one might be too many. So, I want it to be folks who have done wrong by their employees.
- Tia Koonse
Person
And follow the law.
- Tina Mckinnor
Legislator
I just, I thank the author for bringing this Bill forward and I'd love to be a co-author on this Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Thank you.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Any other Committee comments? Do we have a motion? Did you, did you make a motion? Oh. Any motion? Any second? Second by Miss McKinnor.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
I would respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Motions do pass to appropriations. [Roll call]
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
All right.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
That bill will be placed on call, and we'll go to item 13, AB 2754 Rendon. Which will be presented by Assembly Member. Maienschein. We have a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second? Wake up. Wake up. A second, all right. This is the Rendon Bill, AB 2754.
- Brian Maienschein
Legislator
Huh.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Okay. Whenever you're ready.
- Brian Maienschein
Legislator
Yeah. And thank you. And I also in light of trying to get this meeting concluded, I will be very brief.
- Brian Maienschein
Legislator
AB 2754 will provide greater employment protection to truck drivers across the state by ensuring companies that contract with motor carriers to ship containerized freight are held liable for any violations of labor law. The bill would also hold these companies liable for knowingly entering into contracts that do not pay enough for certain motor carriers to comply with state labor laws. It will push these companies to ensure that their contracts can satisfy all of their legal obligations to their workers. Here to speak in support of the bill is Shane Gusman on behalf of the Teamsters.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Brian Maienschein
Legislator
And Caitlin Vega with the Labor Federation. I thought so.
- Shane Gusman
Person
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I'll be very brief, given we're in a rush here. I'll just say that this particular practice in this particular industry. And just to be clear, we have agreed with the Trucking Association to limit the bill in the next committee to port drayage trucking and to also eliminate the section two of the bill. So we have come to an agreement that I think will get everybody there. This bill addresses misclassification, which in our ports, it's a problem that has existed for decades. Our hope is that, you know, with this particular bill, we get to a resolution.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you
- Caitlin Vega
Person
Mr. Chair and members, Caitlin Vega for the California Labor Federation. We know worker misclassification is widespread throughout the trucking industry, particularly in port trucking. And that holding those responsible that use companies that misclassify is the only way to really change working conditions. So here in strong support. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
AB Thank you. Anyone else here in support of AB 2074? Anyone here in opposition to AB 2074?
- Chris Shimoda
Person
Good afternoon, Chair Kalra members, Chris Shimoto with the California Trucking Association. In the interest of time, just will relay the same as Mr. Gusman, that we have an agreement in principle on amendments that will remove our opposition. These amendments will ensure that the sponsors' goals are met while protecting bona fide independent truckers who have made investments to comply with 5. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone else here in opposition to AB 2074?
- Ashley Hoffman
Person
Ashley Hoffman with Cal Chamber, just aligning our comments with CTA. We're reviewing the amendments and really appreciate the sponsors working with us. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Taylor Triffo
Person
Taylor Triffo, on behalf of Carmax, we'll review the amendments as well. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Dean Talley
Person
Dean Talley with the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, opposed.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. We'll bring it back to committee. We do have a motion on the table. Any other questions or comments? Thank you, Assemblymember, for stepping in here. Would you like to close?
- Brian Maienschein
Legislator
Thank you. Respectfully request an aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Great. Thank you so much.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Because that bills out. That bill's out. All right, let's go. We need to go through everything. Consent. Lift the call on consent calendar.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Thank you Mister chair Members, I'm presenting AB 2066, the Clean Coffee act, to ensure that Californians are provided with information regarding the use of methylene chloride, a known carcinogen in decaffeinating coffee. Specifically, this Bill requires clear labeling for any coffee product that has undergone decaffeination during methylation using methylene chloride and puts in place a civil penalty of $5,000 for the first violation and $10,000 for subsequent violations.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Methylene chloride has been used in many industrial products such as paint strippers, coating, and degreasing agents, in addition to being used now as a method for extracting caffeine from coffee beans. The opposition refers to a 1985 regulation put in place by the US Food and Drug Administration which permits the use of methylene chloride but does not allow it to exceed 10 parts per million in decaffeinated roasted coffee. However, almost 40 years later, we have more tools to better understand the impact of this chemical.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
In 2011 and 2020, the US Environmental Protection Agency has provided more recent toxicity information regarding safe levels of exposure. Their studies found lower estimates of safe levels of methylene chloride than what had been used in the FDA standard, approximately 10 times lower than what was used in the 1980s, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
In addition, the FDA considered a cup of coffee to be 5oz in 1985, and as we know, a cup of coffee is usually much larger today, ranging from 8oz to as large as 32oz. Better data on the impact of methylene chloride is why in 2023 the EPA banned the use of it in almost every industrial use, and this year a petition was filed with the Food and Drug Administration to ban methylene chloride from being used in food products.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
What is clear is that we cannot rely on information from the 1980s to evaluate what should be considered safe. When we have more recent scientific data, it is important to note that there are three ways to decaffeinate coffee. The direct solvent method, the Swiss water process or water process used by large coffee producers such as Pete's coffee and finally, the method used using methylene chloride. This means that consumers have options on how their coffee is decaffeinated, and they deserve to be informed.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Before I introduce my witnesses, I want to share that one of my primary motivations for carrying this Bill is to inform pregnant women when this particular substance, methylene chloride, is used to decaffeinate their cup of coffee. As we all know, women who are pregnant are often recommended to move from caffeinated coffee to decaf because of the impacts of caffeine on their pregnancy.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Unfortunately, methylene chloride is not only cancerous, but according to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment, this is a substance that can be passed from mother to child during pregnancy. Members, all consumers, but especially pregnant women, deserve to have this critical information in order to make a decision in their best interest. Here to testify in support of the Bill are Jennifer Tannehill on behalf of clean label Project and Susan Little, senior advocate at the environmental Working Group.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jennifer Tannehill
Person
Good afternoon chair Members Jennifer Tannehill on behalf of Clean Label Project I'll keep my comments short today. It's important to note there's a lack of regulatory clarity around methylene chloride. Given that it is largely used to decaffeinate beans outside of the country and that even industry cannot tell you consistently how much is left over after roasting, it's not surprising that the clean label project found varying levels of methylene chloride even within the same product.
- Jennifer Tannehill
Person
The Bill includes enforcement language that allows the Attorney General, city attorney, County Council, and District Attorney to bring action against persons or entities that violate the Bill with civil penalties from $5,000 up to $10,000. And this enforces language mirrors the language that was passed in AB 418, the Gabriel Bill, which prohibits food products with specific dyes and oils. Notably, alternative processes that do not use methylene chloride, are in use to decaffeinate coffee today, and clean label project respectfully requests your support. Thank you.
- Susan Little
Person
Good afternoon. My name is Susan Little and I represent the Environmental Working Group here in Sacramento. EWG rises in support of AB 2066 because we and many other public health organizations are not confident that the US Food and Drug Administration will take meaningful action to prevent consumers from consuming or warn them about food containing methylene chloride. The FDA has routinely failed to adequately oversee chemicals in the food supply.
- Susan Little
Person
The agency is not required to re review additives that it is approved or to act on any new scientific evidence of harm caused by those additives. The older studies the FDA relies on failed to reflect both modern toxicology and modern levels of consumption. As a result, many harmful chemicals, such as methylene chloride, remain in our food. The FDA did evaluate methylene chloride safety in the 1980s and based on that review, determined that methylene chloride is a carcinogen.
- Susan Little
Person
The FDA then prohibited its use in cosmetics, but, oddly, continued to allow it to be used in food while the FDA was allowing the public to consume methylene chloride. The EPA, on the other hand, set a strict public health goal of zero for methylene chloride in drinking water. And now the EPA has determined that methylene chloride is not safe for any consumer use. In addition to the EPA, numerous authoritative bodies across the United States and internationally say that methylene chloride is a carcinogen.
- Susan Little
Person
The chemical is also neurotoxic, can cause liver and kidney damage, and, in large quantities, death. So consuming even small amounts of methylene chloride is a risk. AB 2066 would require placement of a warning label on coffee that's been processed with methylene chloride. The label won't warn consumers about coffee. It will warn them about the possible presence of methylene chloride in coffee, and we'd ask that you support this Bill. Thank you. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Is there anyone else here in support of AB 2066?
- Karen Stout
Person
Good afternoon, Chair, Members. Karen Stout here on behalf of your Freedom for All, we're on strong support. Thank you.
- Nicholas Mazzotti
Person
Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair, Members. Nicholas Mazzoti, on behalf of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, in support of the Bill.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Anyone here in opposition to AB 2066.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Anthony Samson here on behalf of the National Coffee Association. NCA strongly opposes AB 2066 when this Legislature votes to require warning labels on products, I think that we can all agree that it should do so only if there's evidence to support it. But here, no such evidence exists. To be clear, there is absolutely no evidence, no data, no science linking European method decaf to negative health health outcomes.
- Anthony Samson
Person
There is, however, volumes of evidence, data in science showing just the opposite, that drinking coffee, including decaf, the majority of which is European method decaf, has significant health benefits. The World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society, the American Institute for Cancer Research, the World Cancer Research Fund, and California's own Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment have all determined that drinking coffee, both regular and decaf, decreases the risk of endometrial, liver and several other cancers and chronic diseases.
- Anthony Samson
Person
The sponsors of this measure also push a false narrative. The European method decaf presents a risk for pregnant women. The Assembly Health Committee chair rightfully debunked that claim, stating as follows, during last week's Assembly Health Committee hearing on the Bill, and I quote, I still have major concerns with the depiction of what so far has not been research based. There is no evidence to support that there is passage of methylene chloride through the drinking of decaffeinated coffee from pregnant individual to the fetus.
- Anthony Samson
Person
We just don't have the science to support that. And finally, the sponsors continue to rely on EPA's band of methylene chloride and consumer painstrippers as a basis for placing a warning on European method decaf. The Assembly Health Committee also rejected that argument, rightfully noting that comparing European method decaf to consumer paint strippers is entirely misleading for a variety of reasons that are grounded in scientific evidence.
- Anthony Samson
Person
In closing, the warning proposal before you by its very nature suggests that a health protective product, one that is associated with decreased risk of cancer, is unsafe. The warning would therefore mislead consumers into being concerned about consuming a product, this product, despite the overwhelming body of evidence suggesting that they should not. And for these reasons, I respectfully requested no vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you anyone else here to AB 2066?
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
American Chemistry Council in opposition
- Adam Regele
Person
Good afternoon Chair and Members. Adam Wrigley with the California Chamber of Commerce and respectful opposition thank you.
- Louis Brown Jr.
Person
Good afternoon. Louis Brown on behalf of the California Grocers Association in opposition thank you, thank you
- Matthew Sutton
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Matt Sutton with the California Restaurant Association in opposition thank you.
- Marjorie Lee
Person
Marjorie Lee, California League of Food Producers in opposition. Thank you.
- Jennifer Roe
Person
Good afternoon. Jennifer Rowe on behalf of the California Automatic Vendors Council in opposition thank you.
- Dean Talley
Person
Dean Teller of the California Manufacturing Technology Association. Respectfully opposed.
- Margaret Gladstein
Person
Thank you, Margaret Gladstein. On behalf of the California Retailers Association, in opposition.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Bring it back to Committee. We have a motion on table. Any further? Yeah. Senator Bryan.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I'll just be very quick. Definitely happy to give a courtesy vote today, but I've been reading more about coffee than I ever thought I would, and a little bit concerned about a warning label for something that is proving to have positive health benefits. I understand the FDA's process is dated, but I don't know if that necessarily means it's outdated when it's 10 parts per million. Even the witnesses did a sample study that had 17 different coffees tested, found zero trace of it in 10 of those 17.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
And in the seven that they did, it was even well under the FDA's 10 per millionth, most being under five per millionth. And so I think there's still some work to do here to understand this a little bit better. I know personally, I'm going to continue to do that work, but happy to give you a vote today, but definitely just wanted to raise that. I'm confused.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Madam Vice Chair.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Thank you, Chair. You were describing the process. So when in the process of the coffee beans and they're heated, is the chemical then dissipated through that process or reduced to a level that's insignificant?
- Anthony Samson
Person
So the beans are initially steamed so that the caffeine, sort of the pores of the caffeine are open, and then it's mixed with the mixture of water and methylene chloride. The methylene chloride attaches onto the caffeine, removes it from the bean, and only then are the beans then roasted.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Approximately, depending on the type of roast, 400 degrees fahrenheit, which, depending on the type of roast, is two to four times the evaporation point of methylene chloride, which is why, as the Assembly Member noted, most of the samples are non detached. And to the extent where you do see levels, they are very much trace levels.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
And then one further question I'll ask the author. Madam Assemblywoman, has the FDA received data on the health factors related to this? Is that currently pending? Are they going to be studying it since they last ruled on this about 40 years ago?
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Certainly I can respond to that. Susan Little with environmental working group EWG, was one of the co signers on the petition that was sent to the, to the FDA, asking for the FDA to delist methylene chloride and several other food additives as being able to be placed, put in food. Unfortunately, we have sent those types of petitions numerous times for other chemicals as well. Dozens of petitions, and to date, only I believe one has been acted on. So we don't anticipate that the FDA from taking any action anytime soon. And some of the petitions have languished for several decades.
- Diane Dixon
Legislator
Okay. Thank you very much.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you, Assemblymember Haney.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
Thank you. And I think the author's work on this, and I saw it in health, and I know there's been some changes to it since then. Two questions. One is what would the label say and how do you sort of envision this, and how is that going to be decided? It seems like there is certainly a difference of opinion on the actual dangers involved. And would the label speak to that, or would it just say it contains it?
- Matt Haney
Legislator
And sort of what consequence would that have for people? And then, sort of similar to the Vice Chair's point, it seems like there is a difference of opinion on and even potentially different assertions of what the research says around what the risk is here. And sort of how do we tie ourselves to an objective determination on this within science? It seems like normally that would be the FDA.
- Matt Haney
Legislator
And in this case, if the FDA is not going to make this determination, I understand the hesitation from some folks from making it ourselves, shouldn't there be some sort of authority that we are sort of connecting this determination around when we do a label or a warning?
- Susan Little
Person
Sure, I can respond to that, actually. So the FDA is the federal agency that governs food additives, and the EPA, however, governs all other uses of essentially consumer industrial uses of chemicals. And the EPA has been doing updates to its risk assessments for methylene chloride, and most recently did a complete update of that assessment and determined, as I had said, that no use, essentially no consumer uses should use methylene chloride and very few industrial uses.
- Susan Little
Person
And based on that assessment, they called out, I mean, I can get into it here, but all kinds of health effects associated with methylene chloride, including, based on ingestion studies, including tumors in rats and tumors, and ongoing, all these health effects, including tumors and whatnot. And they concluded that the EPA, this is a direct quote based on the evidence. EPA believes that cancer results in animal studies are relevant to humans based on their assessment of methylene chloride.
- Susan Little
Person
And again, the EPA had a while back already said that the public health goal for methylene chloride in drinking water is zero. And that's very similar. That's essentially the same public health goal for lead. Right?
- Susan Little
Person
So it's a very, the action they're proposing within their scope of authority is pretty, pretty, I wouldn't say I want to say, use the word extreme, but it's very. They're essentially saying that there shouldn't. Methylene chloride should not be used at all. And so we, that's why we're saying that, you know, we don't want to drink it either.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
The warning label that you asked about, would you. There is a question of whether it's just on the coffee itself or it's put there at the coffee shop, and that it's something that we will have to work through to make sure the consumer is the one that is advised of the potential. Because there are three ways to decaffeinate coffee. I think that is where the biggest issue is. When we don't know better, we don't do better, but we know better.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
We know that one of the ways that is being used to decaffeinate the coffee is using a known carcinogen. Are trace elements sufficient, is that okay to drink it? Because it's just a small amount. It's less than the 10 parts per million. In the study, the blind study that was done, there were some cups of coffee that were over 8000. So is 8000, then it's just below the 10,000. So is that okay?
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
I think that the person, the consumer has a right to know that there are three ways to decaffeinate coffee. This is one of the ways. My question was, which of the coffee companies don't use this? Which of them have used the water method? For instance, Pete's coffee, Dutch brothers, McDonald's, Folgers Temple. None of them use the methylene chloride way of decaffeinating coffee. The other question is, where in California are we decaffeinating coffee using methylene chloride? Nowhere in California.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
It's done outside of California and then imported to California. So the whole issue initially we had talked about banning methylene chloride. That isn't what this Bill is about. The amendments were taken in health. So that is just a warning so that that consumer can make an informed decision. Do I want to drink coffee that uses a methylene chloride way of decaffeinating or what? I prefer to choose a decaffeinated coffee that uses one of the other methods, including just water.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
And that is really what this is about. We need to be able to make an informed decision because there are great qualities to coffee. We all drink our coffee and nobody is going to take away coffee from those of us who consume it, even decaffeinated coffee. But we should be able to make that decision as to which decaffeinated cup of coffee we want to drink.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. In the comment, we have a motion. We have this Committee room for six more minutes.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
Okay, I will make this fast. And I wasn't going to ask a question, but back to the label component. Will it say this may cause cancer?
- Susan Little
Person
No. No, it just doesn't. It's been labeled. Excuse me, the label as stated in the Bill right now, just says, just warns the consumer that this product has been made with the use of methylene chloride.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
And I'm assuming most consumers probably wouldn't even understand what that even means. So I'm concerned about the confusion it would cause to the consumer.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Actually, that's a very good point, assemblymember, and I think that that's something that we need to look into. And I would certainly want to talk to the opposition about what the label should actually say and who the label, where the label is going to be placed. And in order to not have any confusion as to why we're talking just about methylene chloride, if more needs to be said, if we're talking about protecting the consumer, then we need to be intentional about what's put on there. Thank you.
- Blanca Pacheco
Legislator
Because that's one of my biggest concerns.
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Very good. And something we will absolutely address then. Thank you.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you. Thank you for bringing the Bill forward. Would you like to close?
- Eloise Gómez Reyes
Legislator
Yes. I do want to thank you Mister Chair and the Committee. And I also want to thank the opposition for their testimony. And as I mentioned, I do want to be clear that this is not about whether or not there's a health benefit to coffee. Coffee can have health benefits separate and distinct from the use of methylene chloride. And it's critical that we inform consumers so that they can make an informed decision about their own health and know what they. What they are drinking. With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
Thank you.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Due pass to Appropriations. [Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
That Bill is out. All right, we're gonna run through. To make for the easy. To make it easiest, we're gonna start with consent and go all the way through the order consent count, consent calendar.
- Committee Secretary
Person
Consent calendar. [Roll Call] Item three. AB 2187 Bryan's on call.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Ash Kalra
Legislator
And I think that should do it, right? Yes, you did vote on consent. I think that's it. That's it. Thank you, everyone. Thank you to chair Alex Lee for allowing us to stay here a few minutes later. So I appreciate chair Lee and the Human Services Committee staff. It thank you to our staff and Members and everyone for being here. We don't have to come back tonight. We are adjourned.
Committee Action:Passed
Next bill discussion: May 22, 2024
Previous bill discussion: April 10, 2024