BILLS TO HEAR AND SO I AM GOING
TO OUR.
SORT OF SET THE GROUND RULES
FOR US HERE WE ARE GOING TO. TRY
TO MOVE THIS HEARING ALONG THERE
HAS BEEN AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF
WORK
DON.
ONE SEES BILLS CAME TO
COMMITTEE OF THE STAFF HAS BEEN
WORKING. DILIGENTLY AND SO WE
ARE. GOING TO.
LIMIT.
THE.
.
THE.
HEARINGS
TWO MINUTES EACH TO TWO
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. THEN WE
WILL.
ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD
WITH THEIR NAME AND AFFILIATION
ONLY PLEASE THEM OR IN SUPPORT.
AND THEN TWO WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. AND THEN THOSE ALSO
IN OPPOSE WILL BE PERMITTED TO.
OUR INVITED I SHOULD SAY TO COME
UP TO THE.
PODIUM AND GIVE THEIR NAME AND
AFFILIATION AND OPPOSITION ONLY.
WE ARE I'M GOING TO TRY TO KEEP
A VERY TIGHT LEASH ON THE TWO
MINUTE.
THE TIMEFRAME FOR EACH PERSON
AND I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE
BUT.
WE'VE GOT THIRTY TWO WE HAVE
THIRTY BILLS.
TO HEAR TODAY FORTUNATELY WITH
THE GOOD WORK. ALL OF OUR.
.
COMMITTEE STAFF WE HAVE A TEN OF
THEM ON PROPOSED CONSENT SO
BEFORE I IDENTIFY THOSE I THINK
WE HAVE A QUORUM SO LET'S GO
AHEAD. MADAM SECRETARY AND
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
JACKSON HERE JACKSON HERE
MORLOCK. MORE LIKE HERE ANDERSON
HERTZBERG PLANNING. HERE MONNING
HERE STERN WIECKOWSKI THERE
WIECKOWSKI HERE.
A QUORUM IS PRESENT OUT WE HAVE
TEN ITEMS ON THE PROPOSED
CONSENT CALENDARS FOLLOWS SO IF
YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAKER OBSERVE
ON THESE ITEMS. WERE VERY HAPPY
TO HAVE YOU BUT YOU DON'T NEED
TO STAY BECAUSE THE ITEMS WILL
BE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. FILE
ITEM SIX S. B. NINE OH FOUR BY
SENATOR WHITE KOWSKI WITH
AMENDMENTS FILE ITEM SEVEN S. B.
NINE TWENTY. SENATOR CANNELLA
WITH AMENDMENTS FILE ITEM EIGHT
S. B. NINE TWENTY FIVE BY
SENATOR BAIL. FILE ITEM ELEVEN
S. B. NINE EIGHTY ONE BY SENATOR
DODD. FILE ITEM SEVENTEEN S. B.
TEN SEVENTY SEVEN BY SENATOR
WILK FILE ITEM TWENTY S. B.
ELEVEN NINETY SIX BY SENATOR
JACKSON FILE ITEM TWENTY FIVE S.
B. TWELVE SEVENTY FOUR. BY
SENATOR MCGUIRE FILE ITEM TWENTY
SIX S. B. THIRTEEN OH FVE BY
SENATOR GLAZER WITH AMENDMENTS.
AND.
FILE ITEM TWENTY SEVEN S. B.
THIRTEEN EIGHTY ONE SENATOR
NIELSEN WITH AMENDMENTS.
AND THEN FILE ITEM THIRTY S. B.
FIFTEEN HUNDRED OUT OF THAT IS.
THE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS
AFFAIRS. THEM OF THE TIME IS
APPROPRIATE ACTUALLY IT'S A GOOD
TIME TO MOVE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR WE HAVE A MOTION BY
SENATOR MORLOCK MADAME SECRETARY
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON. HIGH JACKSON I AM MORE
LOCK.
MORE LIKE AYE ANDERSON
HERTZBERG.
MINING.
MONNING AYE STERN WIECKOWSKI AYE
WIECKOWSKI AYE ALREADY NOW.
LEADS.
WE JUST. WE JUST DISPENSED WITH
A THIRD OF THE CALENDAR RATE.
OF.
I HAVE A DISTINCT FEELING WE'RE
NOT GOING TO MOVE THE REST ARE
QUITE THIS QUICKLY. POP BUT WE
WILL PROCEED NOW TO TODAY'S
AGENDA THE MEASURES ARE HEARD IN
FILE ORDER HOWEVER I WILL BE
TAKING UP.
MY MEASURE S. B. EIGHT TWENTY
SIX.
AT TWO PM APPARENTLY WE'VE GOT
ABOUT FIFTY PEOPLE HERE SO WE'RE
GOING TO.
CALL THAT IN A SPECIAL ORDER.
AGAIN TWO MINUTES.
WITNESSES
AND IF THE.
PRESENTERS COULD BUY JUST A
FOCUS ON THE HIGHLIGHTS.
THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED AS
WELL SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO AND
I WOULD ASK IT'S VERY DIFFICULT
TO HEAR IN THIS HEARING ROOM.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO COME IN AND
NOW PLEASE DO SO QUICKLY BECAUSE
THE NOISE IN THE HALLWAYS
MAGNIFIED MAKES VERY DIFFICULT
TO HEAR IN HERE. SO WITH THAT
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH FILE
ITEM ONE S. B. EIGHT EIGHTEEN BY
SENATOR BELL. GOOD MORNING OR
GOOD AFTERNOON SENATOR BELL.
PLEASE PROCEED.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS SO I PRESENT
PLEASED TO PRESENT THOUGH IT'S
BE IT ONE EIGHT THIS IS THE.
CALIFORNIA HOMEOWNERS BILLS OF
RIGHTS.
AND NOW THE FIRST BILL OF RIGHTS
WAS SIGNED INTO LAW.
BY GOVERNOR BROWN IN TWENTY
TWELVE.
AND MOST OF YOU VOTED FOR THOSE
BILLS BACK IN THOSE DAYS.
AND WE SHOULD NOT FORGET THOSE
TIME. THAT TIME SOME OF OUR
NEIGHBORS
HAVE NOT RECOVERED FROM THAT
TIME.
THESE LAWS ARE NOT JUST ABOUT.
ECONOMIC.
COST THERE'S ABOUT.
IT.
UNFAIR MORTGAGE SERVICING THAT
MADE UP IN THIS IMPOSSIBLE FOR
STRUGGLING HOMEOWNERS TO GET
HELP.
THE LAWS.
PROVIDE IN THIS BILL.
SOME COMMON SENSE PROTECTIONS
INFORMATION AND NOTIFICATION OF
REAL OPPORTUNITY TO BE REVIEWED
FOR ASSISTANCE BEFORE
FORECLOSURE. AND A WAY TO GET
SERVICES SERVICERS ERRORS
CORRECTED.
AND I CONSISTENT POINT OF
CONTACT HAD TO SERVICER.
THESE LAWS GAVE HOMEOWNERS THE
BUILDINGS TO POSTPONE A
FORECLOSURE INTERNET IF THE
SERVICER FAILED TO FOLLOW THE
RULES.
AND THEY GAVE SERVICERS THE
ABILITY TO CORRECT ERRORS.
AND THAT PROCEED FOR WORK
FORWARD IT WITH THAT IF OF
FORECLOSURE WAS ACTUALLY MORE.
THE LEGISLATURE SPENT THREE
YEARS TRYING TO PASS.
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS WERE
HOMEOWNERS SPACING.
UNFAIR FORECLOSURE. HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF CALIFORNIANS LOST
THEIR HOMES BEFORE THE BILL'S
ACTUALLY PASSED THE BILL HAD OF
POWERFUL AND WEALTHY OPPONENTS.
FIVE YEAR SUNSETS WERE ADDED TO
THIS ARE ORIGINAL BILL. AND THIS
PAST JANUARY.
.
MANY OF US US STARTEDA DOUBT TO
GET CONCERNED.
ABOUT OUR CONSTITUENTS THE
SUNSETS PAST JANUARY FIRST.
OF THIS YEAR.
NOW.
IT'S TO ME.
VERY IMPORTANT.
THAT.
I POINT OUT A COUPLE THINGS
REGARDING THIS BILL.
IT WILL ACTUALLY RESTORE.
THE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED
HOMEOWNERS BILLS OF RIGHTS.
WE WILL HAVE A.
.
FILE LAW THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH
THE LAW THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED.
I AM NOT HERE A HEARD A SINGLE
GOOD REASON WHY THEY SHOULD NOT
BE RESTORED.
THE OPPONENTS REPRESENT.
OF THIS BILL REPRESENTS.
THE INDUSTRY'S ALLOW.
THESE FOR THIS FORECLOSURE
CRISIS TO TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN.
THEY FOUGHT AGAINST THE REGIONAL
BILL.
BY.
MAKING CHAIR OVERBLOWN CLAIMS IN
R. THEY'RE DOING SO AGAIN ON
THIS BILL.
THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS HAVE
CONTINUED TO PEER IN THE NEWS
FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES.
AND JUST LAST MONTH THE CITY OF
SACRAMENTO FOR EXAMPLE SUED.
WELLS FARGO FOR DISCRIMINATORY
DISCRIMINATORY. MORTGAGE LENDING
PRACTICES.
.
IF YOU'RE CUT OUT YOUR HOME
CALIFORNIA. WHICH IS OUR LOCAL
IT'S OUR STATE PROGRAM TO
PROTECT CALIFORNIANS RECEIVED
OVER TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND THREE
HUNDRED APPLICATION.
FOR FOR FOR FINANCIALLY
DISTRESSED HOMEOWNERS AND TWENTY
SEVENTEEN ALONE SO SO THAT
MEMBERS THERE THERE IS A.
.
A DEMAND FOR THIS LAW TWENTY
SEVEN THOUSAND PEOPLE. APPLIED
LECTURE FOR KEY FOR THE PROGRAM
TO ASSIST THEM TO KEEP THEIR
HOMES.
AND I URGE YOU TO CONTINUE THE
HOMEOWNER BILL OF RIGHTS.
IT'S A MODEST BILL IT SIMPLY
BRING THIS BACK TO THE STANDARD
WE ACTUALLY HAD JUST A FEW
MONTHS AGO.
WE CAN'T JUST WAIT AROUND FOR
ANOTHER CRISIS.
OR OR SHE LAWS CHANGING IN
SOCCER AND AND.
Y. IN WASHINGTON DC THAT COULD
STRIP AWAY HOMEOWNER
PROTECTIONS.
WE NEED TO BE PROACTIVE AND MAKE
SURE VULNERABLE HOMEOWNERS
HAVE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE WHEN
THEY NEED THEM I URGE AYE VOTE
WE HAVE MEMBERS.
WITNESSES.
VERY GOOD THANK YOU CENTER BELL
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE GO AHEAD WHOEVER'S LIKE
TO START.
ALREADY THANK YOU VERY MUCH I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO.
BE HEARD HERE TODAY MY NAME IS
LISA SAID CAN. I AM WITH THE
NATIONAL HOUSING LOT PROJECT
BASED IN SAN FRANCISCO.
OUR MISSION IS TO.
ADVANCE.
HOME.
HOMEOWNERSHIP AND JUSTICE FOR
LOW INCOME TENANTS
AND HOMEOWNERS.
I COME TO YOU HAVING.
SORT OF BEEN IN THE TRENCHES
THROUGH THE FORECLOSURE CRISIS
THROUGH THE ORIGINAL.
HOMEOWNER BILL OF RIGHTS UMF
STRUGGLE
BY THAT TOOK THREE YEARS BEFORE
WE ACTUALLY GOT THE LAWS PASSED
IN THE FORM THAT THEY WERE. AND.
AS SENATOR BILL SAID WHAT WE'RE
ASKING FOR IN THIS BILL IS
INCREDIBLY MODEST AND I THINK
THAT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FACTS IN THE%
HISTORY HERE YOU WILL SEE THAT
WHILE THE.
PROVISIONS THAT WERE ASKING TO
RESTORE TO THE HOMEOWNER BILL OF
RIGHTS.
REALLY ARE GOING TO.
HAVE VERY LITTLE AFFECTED LITTLE
COST ON THE SERVICE OUR SIDE
GIVEN THAT THESE ARE THE LOTS
THEY WERE COMPLYING WITH UNTIL
JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO FOR. FIVE
YEARS.
THEY ARE OF ENORMOUS BENEFIT TO
HOMEOWNERS.
JUST TO SINGLE OUT A FEW OF THE
PROVISIONS WERE TRYING TO
RESTORE BECAUSE THEY DO DIMINISH
WITHOUT THESE PROVISIONS WE. THE
HOMEOWNERS ABILITY TO GET A
COMPLETE AND MEANINGFUL REVIEW.
OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE
THE HOME BEFORE FORECLOSURE IS
IS DIMINISHED QUITE A BIT. I'M.
AND I THINK THIS WILL GIVE YOU
AN IDEA OF JUST HOW MODEST.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE IS?
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO RESTORE THE
PROVISION FOR EXAMPLE THAT.
THE SERVICER WHEN RECEIVING AN
APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE
PROVIDES A BORROWER WITH.
LETTER ACKNOWLEDGING THAT
RECEIVE THE APPLICATION AND
INFORMING THEM IN WRITING OF ANY
ITEMS THAT ARE MISSING TO MAKE
IT A COMPLETE APPLICATION
WITHOUT THAT THE BORROWER HAS
NO.
RECORD OF WHAT WAS ASKED FOR ARE
NOT IN THAT
YOU CAN BECOME AN ISSUE LATER.
AND HAS NO WAY OF REALLY
KNOWING CLEARLY.
WHAT THEY NEED TO PROVIDE OUGHT
BECAUSE OFTEN THE INFORMATION
HONESTLY GIVE IN ON THE PHONE
AND I HAVE SPENT MANY HOURS ON
THE PHONE WITH COULD SERVICERS
IS INCONSISTENT CAN INACCURATE?
APPRECIATED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT NEXT WITNESS TWO MINUTES OF
AFTERNOON RONALD COLMAN HERE ON
BEHALF OF CLICK THE CALIFORNIA
LOW INCOME CONSUMER COALITION WE
ARE HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF SB
EIGHT ONE EIGHT WE APPRECIATE
THE AUTHOR FOR HIS LEADERSHIP.
THESE PROTECTIONS OUTLINED
PREVIOUSLY BY MY COLLEAGUE
COLLEAGUE GAVE HOMEOWNERS A
FIGHTING CHANCE TO SAVE THEIR
MOST VALUABLE ASSET THEIR FAMILY
HOME CALIFORNIA WAS GROUND ZERO
FOR FORECLOSURE CRISIS BUT THAT
WAS THE BAY AREA SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA THE CENTRAL COAST. ON
THROUGHOUT THE STATE THERE ARE
NUMBER OF WELL DOCUMENTED
REPORTS FROM THE CENTER FOR
RESPONSIBLE LENDING AND OTHERS
THAT SHOW THAT CALIFORNIANS WERE
ACTUALLY STEERED INTO SOME OF
THESE BAD PRODUCTS AND RIPPED
OFF. AS THEY WERE ENTERING INTO
THESE AGREEMENTS WHICH
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR FAMILIES
ARE OFTEN TARGETED BY LOAN
ORIGINATORS AND STEERED SALONS
WITH THOSE RISKY FEATURES WITHIN
THE SUBPRIME MARKET EVEN THOUGH
THEY ACTUALLY QUALIFIED. FOR.
PRIME LOANS BASED ON THEIR
ACTUAL CREDIT SCORE WE KNOW THE
SAME COMMUNITIES WERE OFTEN EVEN
TARGETED BECAUSE OF THE
PERCEPTION OF LIMITED ENGLISH
PROFICIENCY WHICH WE'VE SEEN IN
IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES AFTER
THOUSANDS OF CALIFORNIANS HAVE
LOST THEIR HOMES THE STATE
FINALLY TOOK ACTION IN TWENTY
TWELVE. TO STOP THE BLEEDING ON
THE GROUND AND IT WORKED CLICK
OF THE COALITION OF MOSTLY LEGAL
SERVICES PROVIDERS WITH
ATTORNEYS WHO SPECIALIZE IN
CONSUMER PROTECTION UP CASES
CERTAINLY DURING THE CRISIS ARE
ATTORNEYS HAD LARGE NUMBERS OF
CLIENTS. WHERE THEY WERE HAVING
A LOT OF TROUBLE WORKING WITH
THEIR SERVICES SERVICES WERE
LOSING DOCUMENTS LEFT AND RIGHT
FAMILY SUFFERED THROUGH A MAZE
OF THE PROCESS? THEY WORK GIVEN
ACCURATE RELIABLE ARE NECESSARY
INFORMATION TO ACTUALLY BE IN
THE PROCESS AND DO THE RIGHT
THINGS IN ORDER TO SAVE THEIR
HOMES WHAT DID THIS MEAN
FAMILIES WENT HOMELESS HOMES AND
NEIGHBORHOODS WERE LEFT EMPTY
EMPTY AND BLIGHT PLAGUED ALL OF
OUR COMMUNITIES. ONCE THE TWENTY
TWELVE BILL WAS IMPLEMENTED OUR
ATTORNEY SIDE THAT THE BARRIERS
IMPEDIMENTS THAT MANY OF THE
S. FAMILY SPACE
SIMPLY THING. TO EXIST.
CALIFORNIA CAN'T AFFORD TO LET
FAMILIES AND UP HOMELESS AS WE
KNOW THAT THERE IS A PROVEN
TRACK THAT WORKS WE SHOULD NOT
LET FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
DECIDE HOW THEY WISH TO BE
REGULATED IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. FAMILIES FACING
FORECLOSURE DESERVE A FAIR
CHANCE TO SAVE THEIR HOMES AND
WE BELIEVE S. B. EIGHT ONE EIGHT
ABSOLUTELY DOES THAT FOR THOSE
REASONS WE ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT IF YOU'D PLEASE STEP UP
TO THE MICROPHONE. AND GIVE US
YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION ONLY
PLEASE.
THE NAME IS JEFFREY TORTILLA
THAN ADVOCATE.
SENATOR JACKSON HOME.
WITH A MILLION PLUS OF
CALIFORNIA CITIZENS SENIORS ARE
IN SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION.
POWELL A SENIOR ORGANIZATION IN
SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION
CALIFORNIA DISABILITY RIGHTS IS
ALSO SUPPORT OF THIS
ORGANIZATION. AND ADVOCATING
POLICE WHEN CAN WE CAN DO THIS
IS A VERY IMPORTANT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE FAMILY RASH EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF CAL PER AGAINST ON
SUPPORT OF THE SPELL THANK YOU
THANK YOU.
THAT'S A REALLY MICHAEL
MCLAUGHLIN VOLUNTEER WITH AARP.
COPIES.
THANK YOU SIR.
RALPH FIENNES HOMEOWNER FROM
OAKLAND STRONG SUPPORT VERY GOOD
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT ROTH
ARMY WITH THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY
GENERAL HAVEA WITH SARAH IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
SUSAN MARTIN DEL ON BEHALF OF
CONSUMERS UNION AS WELL AS THE
MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
MICHAEL YOUNG WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION ALSO
HERE SUPPORT. THANK YOU CAN WE
TURN THIS UP A LITTLE BIT YOU
KNOW THAT NOISES JUST MAKE IT A
LITTLE BIT HARD TO HEAR. THANK
YOU THAT THE ATTACK OF THE
CONSUMER ATTORNEYS OF
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT THANK YOU.
BUT AT THE CAN LAWS ON BEHALF OF
THE SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
ALEXANDER EARNED HIM WITH THE
WESTERN CENTER ON LAW AND
POVERTY AND STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
ONLY FILL US ON HALF THE CENTER
FOR RESPONSIBLE LENDING IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
PETER LIEBERMAN A PRIVATE
ATTORNEY REPRESENTING SOME OF.
OUR WORKERS WHO.
HELLO. ORGAN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
TWO WITNESSES WANTED TO COME UP
HERE MISS BLOW.
RIGHT.
GOOD AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE.
MADAM TURN SENATORSKEVIN GOAL
TO THE CALIFORNIA BANKERS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION.
WE'D LIKE TO ACHIEVE ACOMPROMISE
ON THIS MATTER WE
THINK THAT THERE'S A PATH TO
ACHIEVE COMMON GROUND.
PAGE ONE UNDERSCORE THE WE'RE
NOT REFLEXIVELY OPPOSE TO SOME
FORM OF REINSTATEMENT COVER WE
DO THINK A MORE SURGICAL
APPROACH OUGHT TO BE TAKEN.
THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF
INTERVENING FACTS THAT HAVE
HAPPENED SINCE THE TWENTY
TWELVE.
CONSIDERATION OF THE HOMEOWNER
BILL OF RIGHTS. AND IT'S TWENTY
THIRTEEN ENACTMENT. WE'VE SEEN
NATIONAL MORTGAGE SERVICING
STANDARDS ADOPTED WE'VE ALSO
SEEN. CHANGES TO UNDERWRITING
CRITERIA THROUGH THE ABILITY TO
REPAY RULE IN THE QUALIFIED
MORTGAGE RULES.
I THINK THE SIMPLE ARGUMENT THAT
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT THE
SITUATION WE WERE IN.
IN TWENTY TWELVE IS NOT THE SAME
SITUATION THAT WE FIND OURSELVES
IN AND TWENTY EIGHTEEN TWENTY
NINETEEN. TO OR ASKING FOR IS TO
TRY TO IDENTIFY WHAT WE THINK
ARE THE GAPS.
IN CALIFORNIA LAW GIVEN WHAT IS
BEING DONE. AND TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT IF THERE'S A WAY WE'D LIKE
TO SOLVE PROBLEMS IF THERE ARE
PROBLEMS. BUT WE'RE ALSO VERY
MINDFUL OF MAKING SURE THAT
THERE AREN'T TOO MANY LAYERED
REQUIREMENTS.
ON MORTGAGE.
UNDERWRITING ON MORTGAGE
SERVICING THAT CREATE. OF
COMPLICATIONS AND UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES WITH WHAT WITH
RESPECT TO ACCESS TO CREDIT.
THE FACT THAT THE PROVISIONS
EXPIRED.
THAT WAS INTENTIONAL. AND IT
WAS THE PLAN THAT THERE WOULD BE
CERTAIN PROVISIONS THAT WOULD BE
A LAW FOR FIVE YEARS.
IT WAS INTENDED TO GET THROUGH
AN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE
AND THE VIEW OF THE LEGISLATURE
WAS BY THAT BY THE TIME WE GOT
TO JANUARY ONE TWENTY EIGHTEEN.
THAT WE WOULD BE THROUGH THAT
EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE.
IN CALIFORNIA LAW THERE
CONTINUES TO BE KEY PROTECTIONS.
WE WERE PART OF THE CONFERENCE
COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS YES WE
REMAIN OPPOSED AND I'M HAPPY TO
GOING TO REASONS WHY WE WE WERE.
BUT ULTIMATELY THE CONFERENCE
COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO SOLVE
FOR THE ISSUE OF DUAL TRACKING.
THEY WERE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR
THAT CIRCUMSTANCE WERE
NEGOTIATIONS MIGHT BE OCCURRING
WITH RESPECT TO FORECLOSURE
PREVENTION ALTERNATIVES WHILE
THE NON JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE
PROCESS WAS PROCEEDING.
VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS MIGHT
BELOW DONE BEHALF THE UNITED
TRUSTEES ASSOCIATION OUR MEMBERS
ARE TRUSTEES IN FRONT NON
JUDICIAL FORECLOSURES UNDER THE
CIVIL CODE.
CALIFORNIA ALLOWS FORECLOSURES
WITHOUT COURT ACTION BUT IT MUST
STRICTLY COMPLY WITH THE PERSON
PROCEDURES IN CALIFORNIA CIVIL
CODE WHERE YOU HAVE A WRONGFUL
FORECLOSURE ACTION SO OUR PEOPLE
WERE IMPLEMENTING THE HOMEOWNERS
BILL OF RIGHTS AS IT REGIONALLY
ENACTED. RETOOL TO.
.
REACT WHEN THOSE SECTION SUNSET
IT AND NOW THE PROPOSAL IS TO
BRING THEM BACK WE.
POSE A WE PLEDGE TO WORK WITH
SENATOR BELL TO IDENTIFY THOSE
PROBLEMS AND ALSO SUGGEST SOME
AREAS THAT WE THINK THE BILL
COULD BE IMPROVED AND ONE OF
THEM IS. ABOUT A PROBLEM WITH
THE VERY LAST MINUTE REQUESTS
FOR LOAN MODIFICATION. I HAVE
TWICE A.
PROMISED
BUT MS HOMES FROM THE AUTHORS
OFFICE OUR SUGGESTIONS AND I'D
ABJECT WE FAILED SO FAR TO GIVER
THOSE SUGGESTIONS JUST BY PRESS
OF BUSINESS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR
THAT WE WILL MAKE OUR
SUGGESTIONS TO SENATOR BELT. WE
THINK THIS CAN BE RESOLVED A
COLLABORATIVELY.
AND I PLEDGE TO DO THAT THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF THERE
WERE OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION ARE THEIR WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION.
IF YOU WOULD TO A.
PLAN TO COME ON FORWARD AS
QUICKLY AS SHE CAN.
I'M VERY.
MATHIS CIVIL JUSTICE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA IN
OPPOSITION THANK YOU.
THEY'RE BUILT ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION PART LET'S BRING IT
BACK TO THE DYESS ANY COMMENTS
QUESTIONS
SENATOR MOORE LA. THINK MANAGER
CENTER BELT.
THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT THIS
WAS TO BE TEMPORARY FOR FIVE
YEARS AND.
BUT IT WOULD HAVE A. A SUNSET
AND.
YOU AND I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS
ABOUT HOW NOTHING IS TEMPORARY
BUT I. JUST WONDER CAN.
WAS IT WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL
INTENTION Y. WE.
GOING BEYOND THE FIVE YEARS.
WELL RATHER THAN GOING TO THE
ORIGINAL IT INTENT WANTED TO
TELL US WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE
MOVING FORWARD I THINK THAT'S
PROBABLY THE QUESTION YEAH.
TWENTY SEVEN THOUSAND.
OF APPLICANTS THAT ARE ARE.
PROGRAM WE HAVE LAST YEAR I MEAN
IT'S THE PROBLEMS NOT GOING
AWAY.
HE'S STILL HERE.
IS YES IT IS LESS THAN WHAT IT.
WAS PRIOR TO THIS LAWS BEEN
ESTABLISHED WRITERS GO.
BUT I HAVE TO SAY THE US MAYBE
THE LOG WAS WORKING.
AND THAT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF
CASES.
BUT THEY'RE STILL TWENTY SEVEN
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED.
CASES.
SO THE PROBLEM HASN'T GONE AWAY
YES.
THIS LAW WAS CREATED BY A
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE.
WHICH IS.
NOT THE NORMAL LEGISLATIVE
PROFITS IT'S A.
IT'S A IT'S A KIND OF.
.
BUT AGREED UPON COMPROMISE.
AND SO IN ORDER TO GET THE BILL.
APPROVED.
YEAH AT LEAST.
THERE WAS THE FIVE YEAR LIMIT
ON IT.
THE OPPONENTS OF THIS BILL NEVER
SUPPORTED.
EITHER THAT THE THE ORIGINAL
BILL OR THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
BILL STATED SUPPORT ANY OF THESE
THINGS.
HAD A KNOW.
TO ME TO ME.
IT WAS SIMPLY AN EXPEDIA THAT.
.
A MEASURE TO PASS THE BILL AT
THAT TIME. AND OF COURSE WE'RE
GONNA HAVE TO REVIEW IT AFTER
FIVE YEARS ONE SHOULD DO THAT.
YES THIS BILL.
SHOULD BE CONTINUED
INDEFINITELY.
I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T LIKE.
TERM LIMITED.
LEGISLATION IT'S A BAD BILL
INTRODUCED A BILL TO GET RID OF
IT.
ALRIGHT SO.
THAT'S THAT'S THE THAT'S ANSWER
QUESTIONING UNDERTAKING THANK
YOU CENTER BELL OTHER OTHER
QUESTIONS.
CENTER WIECKOWSKI FALL BY
SOONER MONNING.
THE QUESTION THE I DID. RACING
THE UNCERTAINTY OF OF THIS LOVE
LETTER OF REGULATION HAVE YOU
LOOKED INTO PERHAPS.
IT'S TIME FOR US TO LOOK AT THE
NON JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE LAWS IN
GENERAL AND THAT YOU KNOW WE
ARBITRARILY ALLOWED. BANKS TO
FORECLOSE ON PEOPLE'S PROPERTY
INSTEAD OF USING THE COURTS
BECAUSE WE WANT TO STREAMLINE IT
AND AND HAVE. AND MAKE IT EASY
FOR THEM AND GIVE THE
COMPLICATED WORLD THAT WE'RE AND
WHO DO YOU THINK THAT MAYBE
THAT'S. THAT CITY.
YOU IT'S TIME TO LOOK AT THE
NINETY DAY TEETH KNOWS THE
DEFAULT THE TWENTY ONE DAY
NOTICES SALE THE MONTH MESSAGES
OF WHAT. CONSTITUTED A DEFAULT
IS THAT.
IS THAT RIGHT FOR. YOUR
ATTENTION BAHAR TENSION.
THANKS FOR THROWING THAT BOMB
OUT THERE.
.
HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU'RE
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS ON THAT
SUBJECT I I? TO ME TO ME.
IT'S ALWAYS RIGHT TO LOOK AT.
LEGISLATION ON ON FOR CLOSER
CENTER BECAUSE IT IS INDEED A
PROBLEM. IS SEVEN IF YOU WANT TO
WORK WITH US ON WE'D BE HAPPY
TO.
THANK YOU FOR US IN THE HOUSING
COMMITTEE I'D BE HAPPY TO WORK
WITH YOU THINK OTHER PEOPLE
MIGHT HAVE RESPONSE ABOUT THAT.
QUITS LET'S LEAVE THAT FOR NOW
IT'S NOT AS IN THE BILL.
SENATOR MONNING THANK YOU MADAM
CHAIR.
.
HE'S GOT A LOS REPLANT MY
DISTRICT WAS PARTICULARLY HIT I
DON'T THINK ANY DISTRICT WAS
ESCAPED THE FORECLOSURE CRISIS.
IN JUST THE ONE ELEMENT THE
SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT I
ATTENDED COMMUNITY FORUMS
TOWN-HALLS. PEOPLE TRYING TO
CONNECT
WITH THEIR LENDING INSTITUTION
EVERY TIME THEY MADE A CALL IT
WAS STARTING FROM SCRATCH THEY
COULDN'T THERE WAS NO
CONTINUITY.
SEC SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT SO I
AM TO BE SUPPORTIVE TODAY I DID
HERE MISTER BELOW EXPRESS
WELLING THIS TO WORK WITH YOU
AND SO I HOPE.
I KNOW SENATOR BILL YEAR. YOUR
DOORS OPEN.
INSIDE JUST ENCOURAGE THAT
CONTINUED WORK BUT I'M I I
THINK.
WE CAN'T HAVE TOO MUCH
PROTECTION. FOR CONSUMERS
ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE STATISTICS
YOU SHARE OF TWENTY SEVEN
THOUSAND.
STILL FACING FORECLOSURE THAT
SOME MOTION MADAM CHAIR
THINKING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH LAWS AND I
ALSO WANT TO. THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS THE FACT THAT THE
THIS IS ALMOST A YEAR TOO LATE
BECAUSE THERE ARE AS YOU
MENTIONED SO MANY PEOPLE OUT
THERE SO STILL STRUGGLING.
AND.
NO HEAVEN FORBID WE HAVE ANOTHER
FORECLOSURE CRISIS.
BY HOPE THAT YOU WILL ALSO
CONSIDER SOME OF THE.
.
OPTIONS THAT WILL FRANKLY
EXPAND THESE PROTECTIONS ARE NO
FOOD MENTION ABOUT RELYING ON
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IT'S HARD
TODAY.
TO HAVE BE CONFIDENT IN RELYING
ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR
MUCH OF ANYTHING. AT THIS POINT
ESPECIALLY I NOTED TODAY THAT.
THAT.
THIS ADMINISTRATION'S
WITHDRAWING OR FOR
BOB PROHIBITING THE USE OF
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.
SO GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE
GOING TO TRY TO DO NEXT AND I
THINK CALIFORNIA HAS TO CONTINUE
TO. STAY IN THE LEAD ON THESE
ISSUES AND SO I THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND. HOPE
THAT.
YOU CONTINUE THE DISCUSSIONS
RECOGNIZING THEIR SOME PEOPLE
JUST DON'T WANT TO BE REGULATED
IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM.
EVEN WHEN THEIR HANDS HAVE BEEN
CAUGHT. SQUARELY IN THE COOKIE
JAR SO I KNOW YOU WILL LOCK.
WORK HARD TO TO PROTECT THE
PUBLIC IN THIS IN AND DAY WITH
THAT I KNOW WE HAVE A MOTION.
AND THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON AYE JACKSON I AM MORE
LOCK.
MORE LIKE NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG
MONNING AYE MONNING AYE STERN
WIECKOWSKI.
AYE WIECKOWSKI AYE OR THAT THE
BILL HAS THREE VOTES WILL PLACE
ON CALL THANK YOU SENATOR BILL.
HILL I KNOW DO YOU HAVE A COUPLE
BILLS UP THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE
SOME
TIME WE IT.
A SPECIAL SETTING.
IF THAT WOULD BE EXCEPT
THE BILL MY APOLOGIES.
BOB BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO A
AND MADE A COMMITMENT TO THE
DEAR SO WOMEN WERE HERE SO IF
YOU WOULDN'T MIND.
AND ALL HAND THE GAVEL OVER TO
THE VICE
CHAIR.
AND AT THIS POINT TIME I'D LIKE
TO CALL.
OF FILE ITEM.
FINISH.
FILE ITEM FOR WHICH IS.
S. B. EIGHT TO SAY
.
SECOND.
AND.
INTERJECTION YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR. OF
IF THIS. BUT THIS POINT.
I KNOW THAT MY STAFF HAS MY
MATERIALS AND IS STUCK OUTSIDE
BUT I THINK I. DO HAVE A FAIRLY
GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF THE
MEASURE AND.
IF SHE'S ABLE TO THEIR IT IS
EXCUSE ME JUST SECOND. I FIGURED
IF I TAP DANCE ENOUGH I COULD.
HELLO.
NUMBER EIGHT.
DIDN'T.
TAKE.
YOU HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
CORD.
QUITE A FEW I RESPECTFULLY ASK.
ALRIGHT THIS IS OUR S. B. EIGHT
TWENTY SIX WHICH I BELIEVE SPOT
IS A VERY EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO
REQUIRING. THAT WE SEE MORE
WOMEN DIRECTORS ON THE BOARDS OF
ITALY HELD CORPORATIONS IN
CALIFORNIA.
WE KNOW THE CALIFORNIA WOMEN
MAKE UP FIFTY TWO PERCENT OF OUR
STATE'S POPULATION. BUT ONLY
APPROXIMATELY TWENTY EIGHT
PERCENT OF THE DIRECTORS OF OUR
PUBLIC CORPORATIONS AND THAT
INCLUDES NONPROFIT BOARDS WHERE
WE GENERALLY TEND TO SEE MORE
WOMEN SO. IN THE IN THE PROFIT
ORIENTED.
BOARDS IN CALIFORNIA THE NUMBER
IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS BUT EVEN
WITH TWENTY EIGHT ESSENTIALLY.
SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE STATE'S
CORPORATIONS ARE OPERATING
WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THE
EXPERIENCE PERSPECTIVE IN TOOLS
THAT WOMEN BRING WITH THEM. TO
THE CORPORATE SETTING. RESEARCH
CLEARLY SHOWS THAT BOARDS WITH
WOMEN MEMBERS PERFORM BETTER IN
THE MARKETPLACE. BY HAVING SUCH
LOW PARTICIPATION RATES FOR
WOMEN IN CALIFORNIA'S CORPORATE
LEADERSHIP RANKS WE EFFECTIVELY
INHIBIT OUR OWN ECONOMIC
PERFORMANCE AS A STATE.
OTHER NATIONS HAVE PREVIOUSLY
ACKNOWLEDGED THE FINANCIAL
BENEFITS AND ACTUALLY REQUIRE A
PERCENTAGE OF BOARD MEMBERSHIP
TO BE FEMALE. THUS REPRESENTING
THAT EXPERIENCE EXPERTISE IN
WOMEN THAT HALF THE POPULATION
BRINGS TO THE TABLE. AS WOMEN
MAKE UP MORE THAN SEVENTY
PERCENT OF CONSUMERS OF THESE
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES THAT
THESE.
BUSINESSES DEVELOP. THE FEMALE
PERSPECTIVE LOGICALLY PROVIDES
AN ECONOMIC BENEFIT FOR
CORPORATIONS AND HAS CLEARLY
BEEN PROVEN TO DO SUCH. THIS
MEASURE TAKES THE FIRST STEP
TOWARDS CLOSING THE GENDER GAP.
EIGHT.
SBA TWENTY SIX INCREASES GENDER
DIVERSITY ON CORPORATE BOARDS BY
REQUIRING THAT EACH PUBLIC KEY
COOLEY PUBLICLY HELD
CORPORATION.
ACCORDING CALIFORNIA TO HAVE AT
LEAST ONE WOMAN ON ITS BOARD OF
DIRECTORS BY THE END OF TWENTY
NINETEEN. BEGINNING IN TWENTY
TWENTY ONE THE BILL REQUIRES A
MINIMUM OF TWO DIRECTORS ON
BOARDS WITH FIVE DIRECTORS AND
AT LEAST THREE WOMEN ON BOARDS
WITH SIX DIRECTORS OR MORE. NOW
THE RESEARCHERS ABUNDANT AS
MENTIONED THE.
THERE'S A TWENTY SIXTEEN
MCKINSEY AND COMPANY STUDY THAT
REVEALED NATIONWIDE THE
COMPANIES WHERE WOMEN ARE MOST
STRONGLY REPRESENTED. AT BOARD
IN TOP MANAGEMENT LEVELS ARE
ALSO BUSINESSES THAT PERFORMED
THE BEST IN TERMS OF
PROFITABILITY PRODUCTIVITY
INNOVATION GOVERNANCE AND BETTER
FOR. BETTER PERFORMANCE AND WORK
FORCE ENGAGEMENT THE MCKINSEY
STUDY ALSO FOUND THAT COMPANIES
WITH THREE OR MORE WOMEN IN
SENIOR MANAGEMENT POSITIONS
SCORED HIGHER ON AVERAGE ON THE
ORGANIZATION PROPOSE.
PERFORMANCE PROFILE THING
COMPANIES WITH NO WOMEN ON
BOARDS OR IN THE EXECUTIVE RANKS
NOW.
I TRIED A SOFTER APPROACH
SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO ADDRESS THE
SHORTFALL. BY AUTHORED A
RESOLUTION BACK IN TWENTY
THIRTEEN CALLED THIS YEAR SIXTY
TWO THAT URGED.
JUST URGED BY TWENTY SEVENTEEN
THAT EACH PUBLIC COMPANY
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF WOMEN ON
THEIR BOARDS TWO ONE TWO OR
THREE DEPENDING UPON THE SIZE OF
THE BOARD. CALIFORNIA WAS THE
FIRST STATE TO ADOPT THIS TYPE
OF RESOLUTION AND FIVE OTHER
STATES ACTUALLY HAVE FOLLOWED
SINCE THEN. HOWEVER AT THE END
OF TWENTY SIXTEEN FEWER THAN
TWENTY PERCENT OF THE RUSSELL
THREE THOUSAND COMPANIES
HEADQUARTERED IN CALIFORNIA. HAD
THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF WOMEN
DIRECTORS CALLED FOR IN THE
RESOLUTION IT WAS UP BY ONE OR
TWO PERCENT FROM WHAT WE'VE HAD
PRIOR TO THE.
GENTLE SOFT TOUCH OF URGING
COMPANIES TO PROCEED SO.
THIS IS OF A SOMETHING THAT.
O. OBVIOUSLY NEEDS A LITTLE
FIRMER TOUCH
AND THAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS
BILL NOW THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
RAISES THE ISSUE OF EQUAL
PROTECTION CONSIDERATIONS AND
STRICT SCRUTINY. WE HAVE A AN
ATTORNEY WITH US TODAY.
TO DISCUSS THAT ISSUE BUT. WE
BELIEVE THIS BILL.
OF ME TO SET SCRIPT A STRICT
SCRUTINY TEST.
YOU SEE IN THE FINDINGS AND
DECORATIONS A LONG LIST OF
EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN
UNDERTAKEN OVER MANY YEARS TO
GET MORE WOMEN ON CORPORATE
BOARDS INCLUDING.
SUCH THINGS IS ACTUALLY EVEN
CREATING A REGISTRY WE HEARD
INITIALLY AS WE HEAR IN SO MANY
PROFESSIONS ARE NO WOMEN
QUALIFIED TO DO THIS WELL IN
NINETEEN EIGHTY SIX. A REGISTRY
WAS PREPARED.
OF WOMEN WHO WERE CLEARLY IG
EXTRAORDINARILY QUALIFIED TO
SERVE ON THESE BOARDS AND
COMMISSION WE USED TO HEAR THAT
A ONE I PRACTICE LAW WELL THERE
WERE NO WOMEN QUALIFIED TO BE
JUDGES. AND OF COURSE.
WE KNOW THAT THAT NOT TO BE
TRUE AND AS WE HAVE THANKS TO
THE PROACTIVE EFFORTS OF THE
GOVERNOR TO PUT MORE WOMEN ON
THE BENCH WE HAVE SEEN THESE
WOMEN SHINE. AND CERTAINLY
PERFORM AS WELL IF NOT BETTER
THAN THEIR MALE COUNTERPARTS.
INTO IT I WON'T GO INTO ANY
FURTHER DETAIL ON THE
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES I THINK
THEY'RE FAIRLY WELL DISCUSSED.
AREA IN THE ANALYSIS.
IT AT THETHE.
COMMITTEE ALSO RAISES SAY.
ARTICLE ONE SECTION EIGHT OF
OUR STATE CONSTITUTION AND
PROPPED UP TO A NINE ISSUE WHICH
OF COURSE.
DOESN'T PLAY HERE BECAUSE WE'RE
NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT.
WHICH IS WHERE OF PROPOSITION
NINE COMES IN WE ARE SIMPLY.
ADDRESSING THE PRIVATE SECTOR
CORPORATIONS THAT ARE PUBLICLY
TRADED BUT ARE NOT PUBLIC. OF
EMPLOYERS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION OR
PUBLIC CONTRACTING. AND LAST OF
THE OPPONENTS.
IN THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
REFERENCE TO THE INTERNAL.
AFFAIRS DOCTRINE.
WE POINT
TO COOK CALIFORNIA CORPORATIONS
COULD I BELIEVE OUR EXPERT
WITNESS WILL TALK ABOUT THAT.
.
INTO THE I THINK WE FULLY IS SHE
WILL FULL ADDRESS THAT THE ISSUE
AS WELL. WE DO KNOW THAT.
.
THE TIME HAS COME FOR US TO
START BEING MORE PROACTIVE IT'S
GOOD FOR BUSINESS IT'S GOOD FOR
OUR ECONOMY OVERALL AND IT'S
GOOD TO HAVE WOMEN. IN THE
BOARDROOM BECAUSE AFTER ALL WE
DO HOLD UP AT LEAST HALF THE
SKY.
AND WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
INVITE MY TWO WITNESSES TO.
TWO MINUTES EACH COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE BETTY BURKE MCCREE DARE
WHO IS THE CEO OF BURKE RUMOR
CLAYTON RETAINED EXECUTIVE
SEARCH IN LOS ANGELES. AND CEO
OF THE NATIONAL ORGAN OF
ORGANIZATION CALLED TWENTY
TWENTY WOMEN ON BOARDS A
RESEARCH AND PUBLIC EDUCATION
CAMPAIGN. CAMPAIGN TO ACHIEVE
TWENTY PERCENT A PUBLIC COMPANY
BOARDS SHE TELL BY WOMEN OF ALL
ETHNIC BACKGROUNDS
SHE'S ALSO THE AUTHOR OF THE
BOOK THE BOARD GAME AND PASS
STATEWIDE PRESIDENT. OF THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN
BUSINESS OWNERS HEARING
CALIFORNIA AND ALSO DON HOW HE
HOW GIGI. HOA WHO IS AN EXPERT A
ON THOUGHT LEADERSHIP IN
CORPORATE BOARD GOVERNANCE AND
THE PROMOTION OF WOMEN IN
LEADERSHIP SHE'S REGISTERED IN
HOUSE COUNSEL FOR THE MIRCORP
ISN'T MIRCORP.
PER CORE FAMILY OF COMPANIES ONE
OF THE LARGEST MINORITY OWNED
COMPANIES IN CALIFORNIA. SHE IS
ACTING HERE IN HER CAPACITY AS
LEGAL COUNSEL FROM KNOB BELOW.
AND TESTIFYING A IN THAT
CAPACITY.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR.
SO I'M BETSY GOOD AFTERNOON
THANK YOU FOR HEARING US AND I
WANTED TO THANK OF THE SENATOR
AND THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
DOING SUCH A THOROUGH AND AN
ANALYSIS OF OUR BILL S. B. EIGHT
TWENTY SIX WHICH. PROPOSES TO
ADD A SEAT TO CORPORATE BOARDS
AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR
A WOMAN. AND A THE TWO SEATS ARE
THREE DEPENDING UPON THE SIZE OF
THE BOARD THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS
THAT THE TO TO DEAL WITH FEED A
LACK OF OPEN SEATS THAT OCCUR.
CORPORATE BOARD SEATS AS YOU MAY
KNOW AND I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I
AM IN THE.
THE REALM OF EXECUTIVE SEARCHES
FOR A ORGANIZATIONS FOR
CORPORATIONS CORPORATE BOARD
SEATS RARELY COME OPEN. THEIR
REELECTED EVERY YEAR BUT THEY
RARELY COME OPEN SO DEALING WITH
THE LACK OF SEATS IS WHAT WE'RE
ADDRESSING HERE. THAT CORPORATE
BOARDS COULD ADD A SEAT WHEN
THEY CHOOSE TO TO ADD A WOMAN
AND TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN THE
PIPELINE IS OVERFLOWING WITH
WOMEN CANDIDATES. OF OUR C. E.
O.'S WHO ARE EXPERIENCED
CORPORATE EXECUTIVES WHO ARE
WELL QUALIFIED TO SERVE ON
CORPORATE BOARDS BUT THE LACK OF
SEATS IS OUR PROBLEM. THEREFORE
OF A CREATIVE APPROACH TO AT
LEAST ADDRESS THE FOUR HUNDRED
AND SIXTY SOME COMPANIES THAT
ARE IN THE RUSSELL THREE
THOUSAND THAT ARE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA HEADQUARTERED IN
CALIFORNIA EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY
BE INCORPORATED ELSEWHERE. AND
THIS WOULD BE A REMARKABLE
CHANGE OF AT LEAST A HUNDRED AND
TWENTY FIVE SEATS IN THE YEAR
TWO. TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN.
LISTS DON'T WORK I CAN SHARE
WITH YOU FROM THE EXECUTIVE
SEARCH BUSINESSES AND
CORPORATIONS WITH BOARD MEMBERS.
AND NOMINEE PEOPLE THEY KNOW
THEY DON'T LOOK AT LIST THEY
DON'T WANT STRANGERS THEY WANT
PEOPLE THEY KNOW AND.
WOULD BAIT FEEL COMFORTABLE
WITHIN THE BOARD GAMES A LIST
STONE WORK. AND CORPORATE
POSITIONS ARE PAID THEIR PAID
ANNUAL SALARIES OF CASH AND
STOCK SO THE. CORPORATE
DIRECTORS WHO HAPPEN TO HAVE
THOSE POSITIONS DON'T WANT TO
GIVE ALL THOSE POSITIONS UP.
SO THAT'S WHY ARE BROUGH
APPROACHES TO ADD UP A SEAT AND
IN YOUR.
ANALYSIS PAGE FIFTEEN SECTION
THREE THE ABILITY TO COMPLY IS
DEFINITELY THERE SORRY MISTER
CHAIRMAN I WILL FINISH THAT WE
CAN HEAR THAT IS VERY STRICT
ABOUT YET SHOWS TONIGHT DON'T
WANNA LET HER DOWN.
HERE TO. HELP WELL I JUST WANTED
TO ADD THAT IN GIN YOUR ANALYSIS
THAT THE ABILITY TO COMPLY.
IS EASILY ACCOMPLISHED IN TWO
THOUSAND NINETEEN BECAUSE BOARDS
CAN.
ELECT TO ADD A SEAT CHANGE OUR
BYLAWS MID YEAR AND VOTE ON IT
AT THE END OF THE YEAR. SO I
THINK I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT
IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO AND THAT WE
WILL BE THE FIRST STATE IN THE
NATION TO DO SO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH HOPE THANK
YOU BETSY PARTON BE SO INFORMAL.
SO NOW DON YOU GET THAT THIRTY
SECONDS.
THANK YOU.
SIMPLY PUT.
PASSING EIGHT TWO SIX.
AND.
TAKING A FURTHER STEP IN GENDER
PARITY. WILL PROTECT THE
ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE FIFTH
LARGEST ECONOMY. I'M GOING TO
START WITH AN INTRODUCTORY
COMMENT TO PICK UP ON WHAT HAS
BEEN PREVIOUSLY SAID AS TO WHY
PUBLIC POLICY DEMANDS THAT WE
ADOPT S. B. EIGHT TWO SIX. AND
ADDRESS WAS THREE POINT WHY
PUBLIC POLICY ALSO DEMANDS THAT
THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DOCTOR AND
I'M DOES NOT TRUMP IN THIS
PARTICULAR BILL.
INTO START THOUGH I DO WANT TO
RECOGNIZE THE VISION OF OUR
CHAIR FOR WHAT SHE HAS DONE TO
PROMOTE GENDER PARITY AND TO
PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
CONTINUE PIGGYBACK ON A TOPIC
ABOUT GLOBAL COMPANIES IF WE GO
TO THE SEC THE SEC HAS
IDENTIFIED THE LACK OF WOMEN ON
BOARDS AS A VERY. URGENT PROBLEM
ONE IN WHICH IS URGENT BECAUSE
DIRECTORS ARE THE GATEKEEPERS OF
OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND WE NEED
TO ACCORD THIS CHALLENGE WITH
THE URGENCY TO WHICH IT DESERVES
AND AS THE CHAIR HAS SAID THERE
HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF
INITIATIVES. THAT HAVE NOT
GOTTEN US OR HAVE MOVED THE
NEEDLE.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOW GO TO THE
INTERNAL AFFAIRS DOCTOR AND AND
PUBLIC POLICY.
CALIFORNIA HAS A LONG. HISTORY.
OF REGULATING CORPORATIONS
INTERNAL AFFAIRS THAT OPERATE
WITHIN OUR BORDERS BUT HAD
INCORPORATED ELSEWHERE.
THIS TYPE OF REGULATION STEMS
FROM THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FROM
EIGHTEEN SEVENTY NINE AND HAS
BEEN IMBEDDED IN OUR STATES
SUBSEQUENT STATUTORY. AND COMMON
LAW WHERE PUBLIC POLICY DEMANDS
THAT IT GO FORWARD WHERE CONDUCT
IN QUESTION IMPLICATES A
BROADER.
PUBLIC INTEREST AND WHERE
THERE'S A VITAL STATE WIDE
INTEREST.
THANK YOU MS HOW GIGI APPRECIATE
YOUR TESTIMONY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
NNOVA YOU COULD COME ONE AT A
TIME TO JUST SAY YOUR NAME YOUR
ORGANIZATION THAT YOUR SUPPORT
OF.
MY NAME IS AND STAINS I AM
PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN BUSINESS
OWNERS FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. AND I'M ALSO
PRESIDENT OF SINCE THE AGENT
WHICH IS A MARKETING FIRM HERE
IN SACRAMENTO ND I AM IN
SUPPORT AND AND DEEPLY GRATEFUL
FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE ISSUE AND
SHE'S HERE ONE WEEK AFTER HAVING
BEEN IN A VERY SERIOUS BICYCLE
ACCIDENT IN ORDER TO BE HERE
TODAY. I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT
OUT.
HI AMY PRODUCT ON I'M THE
PRINCIPLE OF BRODERBUND
CONSULTING AND COACHING AND
APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT SBA
TWENTY SIX.
GOOD AFTERNOON HELD A KENNEDY
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT OF
NOVEL CALIFORNIAN PRESIDENT OF
IMPACT TRISTATE CDC IN EXTREMELY
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BILL.
BUT FIGURE.
SAID. DR TREES ASHBY CO DYNHAM
CONSULTING ALSO A PRESIDENT NOT
GO AND I BELIEVE IN ORANGE
COUNTY.
MEGAN RIOS RIOS'S ICAO. NAM VOTE
BAKERSFIELD I SUPPORT THIS THANK
YOU.
BEYOND A MONEY TEDIUM METERING
SYSTEMS FROM VENTURA. AND
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC POLICY FOR
NUMBER CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT.
MELISSA GRIM SHOP ARGOSY รณ
MOMS WISELY OF CALIFORNIA AND
FROM NATIONAL CYSTISCIDAE
ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN BUSINESS
OWNERS AND FOR.
MY NAME IS EMILY SAID BAIRD HIM
A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
SAN DIEGO AND SENATOR ANDERSON
IS MY.
SENATOR AND I AND HERE IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL IT ALSO
SERVED AS THIS HAVE
MATTER EXPERT ON BOARD
COMPOSITION FOR THE BILL TIMES.
FULLER RUSSELL JONES I'M A BOARD
MEMBER OF NOVEL CALIFORNIA AND
ALSO SAN FRANCISCO THINKING.
YES FLAT ACCOMPANY PUSH FOR THE
ON.
THEN YOU CAN YOU'RE IN SUPPORT.
HI CYNTHIA TREVINO BUSINESS
OWNER IN SAN DIEGO IN SUPPORT OF
SB EIGHT TWENTY SIX AND I'M ON
THE BOARD OF THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN BUSINESS
OWNERS FOR THREE YEARS. AND I'VE
BEEN A BUSINESS OWNER WOMEN
BUSINESS OWNER FOR EIGHTEEN
YEARS.
MY NAME IS LYNN LAMBRECHT I'M
THE FOUNDER THE LIVING PLANNER
AND I AM A BOARD MEMBER OF NAPO
AND SAN DIEGO.
HI KATHY VAN AUSTIN MBM STRATEGY
GROUP ON BEHALF OF CMG CLEAVER
OUT OF SAN JOSE IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
HI MY NAME IS ELAINE WHOLESALE
THEM PRESENT HOLLOW FEW
CREATIVE.
AND I'M ALSO PRESIDENT OF NOT
VENTURA COUNTY AND I AM IN TOTAL
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
HOW MANY MAKAROVA AND THAT A CEO
AND FOUNDER OF HOLDS ME BY
DYNAMICS LOCATED IN SANTA CLARA?
I MEAN FUND EQUIVOCAL SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
PREDATORS XIN AND I'VE BEEN IN
THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY THIRTY
FIVE YEARS AND DIDN'T FOR A
COUNTY IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
OF THE ABA. SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON I'M DAWN DIRE
PRESIDENT OF DIRE SHE IN GROUP
FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS IN VENTURA
AND I AM IN FULL SUPPORT.
HI AMBER WALLACE PRESIDENT OF
NOVEL SANTA BARBARA AND CEO
DOWAGER DESIGNS IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
HELLO I'M BILLY FRANCIS I'M A
CALIFORNIA LICENSED MARRIAGE AND
FAMILY THERAPY IN BUSINESS SINCE
NINETEEN NINETY THREE. FOREMAN
BUSINESS OWNER FROM SAN DIEGO
CALIFORNIA.
HI I AM HILLARY CLINTON THE
FOUNDER OF CONTINUE DESIGN A
MARKETING BASED IN LOS ANGELES
AND ALSO IMMEDIATE PAST
PRESIDENT OF NOT A LOS ANGELES.
I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT SB A EIGHT
TWENTY SIX AND THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON SHE NAY ROURKE
PRESIDENT OF REDWOOD RESOURCES
IN LOS ANGELES AND ALSO
PRESIDENT OF NOVEL LA AND WE
SUPPORT AB A TWENTIES SPK TWENTY
SIX.
HI MY NAME IS MARY LYNN BAKER
AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OWNER OF
D. H. CASTERS LOCATED IN ONTARIO
CALIFORNIA. WE'VE BEEN IN
BUSINESS FOR OVER TWENTY FIVE
YEARS AND WE DO GLOBAL BUSINESS
AND WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL.
GOOD AFTERNOON KELLY HAVE SIGH
HE A MINIMUM NOBLE MEMBER OF SAN
DIEGO CHAPTER AND OF THAT SEE
OFF BY IS AN ECONOMY IN SUPPORT
OF THIS.
LOW JANET GOLD STING CEO GENET
BRAS IN LOS ANGELES MEMBER OF
NOVEL AND I SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON I'M DOCTOR DIANE
GARGA I'M FOUNDER AND OWNER OF
DG CAN
TING
A BUSINESS IT'S BEEN A.
FOR TEN YEARS AND I SUPPORT
THIS BILL.
HELLO SUMMARY WAITED SUMMER
SUPPORT BUT.
OWNER OF PLAN THE WORLD OUT OF
SAN DIEGO AND AS FOR.
MIA COULD YOU PLAN THE WORLD
SANTIAGO AND I'M IN SUPPORT.
HELLO DENIER MARRINSON WITH PLAN
THE WORLD SENIOR CALIFORNIAN I
SUPPORT THE BILL THINKING.
TO BE TO TLK ABOUT CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS OF CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT.
I MEAN ELAINE NORLAND PRESIDENT
AND OWNER OF A CONE SUN BICU
DO TRACK
CONTROLLED ALL OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA.
AND I'M ALSO PRESIDENT ELECT OF
IT BUT NOT BOTH FOR INLAND
EMPIRE AND THINGS.
HERE SUPPORT.
GARCIA.
I OWN GARCIA REAL DEEP FOR THE
LAST FIFTY FIVE YEARS.
AND I SUPPORT YOUR BILL ON HUMAN
SACRAMENTO MUCH HARDER BEEN
THERE OF THE SACRAMENTO.
SOME OF THE FUGITIVE WOMEN.
HAPPY TO CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION
OF. SALT HIRING PERFECT PRESENT
FOR GOBBLED TO. FIND A SUPPORTER
BUILD THINKING.
ONLY SHANKS RESIDENT OF PLEASANT
HILL CALIFORNIA AND MEMBER OF
NOVEL IN IN STRONG RISK.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS
JENNIFER FREEBURG AND THE
PRESIDENT OF ELEVATIONS
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT I'M A
WOMAN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE I'M
FROM SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA AND I
SUPPORT. THIS BILL.
MY NAME IS SIMONE VIENEN I'M
HERE FROM SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA
VIA BUSINESS ON THE FOR IT
THOUGHT EIGHTEEN YEARS I'M HERE
JUST.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR. VICE
CHAIR LAURIE CAMERA SMALL
BUSINESS CALIFORNIANS STRONG
SUPPORT.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE FROM NOT
BOW IN SUPPORT.
DON'T MESS WITH THE PEOPLE FROM
KNOW ABOUT THEIR.
THEY'RE GREAT ORGANIZATION
GREAT ORGAN.
DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
JENNIFER FOR ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND WE ARE OPPOSED SB TWENTY
SIX.
UP ARE CONCERNS WITH SB TWENTY
SIX OUR THAT IT ONLY FOCUS ON
ONE ASPECT OF DIVERSITY WE HAVE
COMPANIES WHO ARE ENGAGING IN.
ROBUST DIVERSITY PRACTICES TO
MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE ENGAGING
IN.
DIVERSITY ACROSS ALL.
SECTORS INCLUDING DIFFERENT BOB
PROTECTED CLASSIFICATIONS IN
THIS BILL BASICALLY ELEVATES
ONLY ONE PROTECT CLASSIFICATION
OVERALL OTHER SO FOR IN THE
SITUATION WHICH WERE CONSIDERING
A NEW BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND WE
HAVE. A POTENTIALCANDIDATES WHO
ARE NOT FEMALE BUT NONE THE LESS
FIT OTHER DIVERSITY
QUALIFICATIONS ARE CRITERIA THAT
WE'RE LOOKING FOR THIS BILL
BASICALLY MANDATES THAT WE HIRED
THE WOMAN ABOVE ANYBODY ELSE WE
MAY BE FULFILLING FOR PURPOSES
OF DIVERSITY. SWEEP CONCERNS
WITH THAT ASPECT OF IT WE ALSO
HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE EXTENT
THAT IT WOULD DISPLACING
EXISTING MEMBER SUBJECT THEM TO
REMOVAL OF THE SHAREHOLDERS AND
THE DIRECTORS WARRANT.
ACCEPTING OF ADDING NEW SEATS
ON TO THE BILL WHICH AS I
CONTEMPLATED THAT THE.
IT IF THERE WAS NO.
.
IF THERE IS NO DIRECTOR THAT WAS
GOING TO BE REMOVED THAT YOU
WOULD HAVE TO ADD ADDITIONAL
SEATS AND IF WE DON'T GET THAT
APPROVAL THROUGH THE BY LAWS OR
THE DIRECTORS THEN THERE WOULD
HAVE TO BE SOME TYPE OF REMOVAL
IN ORDER TO SATISFY THIS QUOTE
US WE. HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT
WE ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ME
APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS I'M
POINTING THAT OUT WITH CONCERNS
ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS WE
HAVE THE EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS.
THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION WE
HAVE SEE CONSTITUTION THAT'S
EQUAL PROTECTION WILL HAVE A
PROVISION IN OUR STATE
CONSTITUTION THAT SAYS NOBODY'S
PROFESSION VOCATION OR SERVICES
SHALL BE BASED UPON.
THANKS PROTECT CLASSIFICATIONS
INCLUDING GENDER AND SO WE DON'T
KNOW HOW BASICALLY WE CAN BE IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THIS BILL AND
NOT VIOLATE THE FEDERAL
CONSTITUTION OR THE STATE
CONSTITUTION WE ALSO HAVE OUR
CIVIL RIGHTS LAW HERE IN
CALIFORNIA THAT AGAIN ALSO
SPECIFIES. THAT YOU CANNOT
PROVIDE ANY PREFERENTIAL
TREATMENT BASED UPON CERTAIN
CLASSIFICATIONS INCLUDING GENDER
SO WE HAVE CONCERNS ON THAT
ASPECT.
AND I ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE THE
ANNOUNCES POINTING OUT WITH
REGARDS TO THE DIFFERENT
SCRUTINISE IT IS SUBJECTTO
STRICT STRICT SCRUTINY WHICH IS
THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SCRUTINY
THAT A COURT CAN GIVE ON A BILL
WITH REGARDS TO THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF IT. AND WE
DON'T SUSPECT THAT THIS BILL
WOULD BE ABLE TO PASS THAT THAT
TEST BUT.
OF COURSE I'M SURE THAT WILL BE
DISPUTED BY THE PROPONENTS THE
LAST PART ABOUT THE NTERNAL
AFFAIRS DOCTRINE ON THE NOW
SUPPLANTS OUT THAT WE HAVE
CALIFORNIA CORPORATIONS CODE
SECTION TWO ONE ONE FIVE THAT
DICTATES ALL OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS
FOR CORPORATIONS.
THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DOCTOR IF I
MAY UM SAYS THAT IF YOU ARE
BASED AND ARE INCORPORATED IN
ONE STATE THAT I THE LAW OF THE
STATE THAT STATE LAW DICTATES
YOUR INTERNAL AFFAIRS FOR THAT
CORPORATION BECAUSE THEY
BASICALLY DIDN'T WANT TO
CORPORATION THAT'S DOING
BUSINESS IN MULTIPLE STATES
BEING. SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT
CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS FOR
PURPOSES OF THEIR INTERNAL
AFFAIRS NOW THE CORPORATE THEY
POINTED OUT IN THE ANALYSIS THAT
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION CODE
SECTION TWO ONE ONE FIVE.
BECAUSE IT LIST OF OUR
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INTERNAL
AFFAIRS OF A CORPORATION BUT
WHAT THEY DIDN'T POINT OUT ISN'T
SUBDIVISION SEAT APPROPRIATIONS
CODE SECTION TWO ONE ONE FIVE
EXEMPTS ANY CORPORATION THAT HAS
SHARES ON THE NASDAQ OR ON THE
STOCK EXCHANGE AND SO BASICALLY
EVERY PUBLICLY TRADED
CORPORATION THAT. THEY'RE
REFERRING TO IN THIS BILL WOULD
BE EXEMPTED FROM CALIFORNIA
CORPORATION TWO ONE ONE FIVE AND
SO THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DOCTOR
DOES APPLY. AND WOULD SUBJECT
THESE CORPORATIONS TO.
CONFLICTING MEASURES WITH
REGARDS TO THE STATE IN WHICH
THEY'RE INCORPORATED WITH AND
THIS CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENT FOR
THOSE REASONS WE ARE OPPOSED.
THANK YOU.
SINCE I'M BEING INFORMAL THANK
YOU JENNIFER PROBLEM FROM ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SINCE WE USE MORE THAN TWO
MINUTES YOU'RE WELCOME TO USE
THE MICROPHONE AND.
YOU'RE ALL COOKED THE CALIFORNIA
MANUFACTURERS AND TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION WE MUST OPPOSE THIS
BILL.
IMPOSING A GENDER QUOTA ON
MANUFACTURERS FORCE THEM.
BETWEEN COMPLYING WITH THE
CONSTITUTION FEDERAL LAW WE'RE
FACING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
FINES.
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES.
OUR TRADE DID GOOD LINE UP.
THERE THOMAS A SLOW DICKENS
JENSEN ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF
BY HOW COMMON OPPOSITION FOR THE
REASONS PREVIOUSLY STATED THANK.
THANK YOU.
I THINK THAT'S ALL OF OUR
WITNESS IN OPPOSITION COLLEAGUES
ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS.
SERVICE SENATOR WHITE HOUSE SKIN
IN SENATOR HERTZBERG.
I JUST
READ IN THE ARTICLE IN THE
ECONOMIST FROM FEBRUARY THAT
TALKS ABOUT THE GENDER QUOTAS
THAT HE EUROPEANS HAVE PLACED
IN NORWAY AND SPAIN AND ALL
THAT.
AND THE AND THE ARTICLE TALKS
ABOUT THE JERK REPORTERS AT
QUOTAS FOR THE BOARD LEVEL HAVE
DONE LITTLE TO BOOST THE
PERFORMANCE OF THE CORPORATIONS.
FOR TO HELP WOMEN LOWER DOWN
FACE HAD TEN YEARS OF
CITY OF QUOTAS IN IN NORWAY THEY
FOUND THAT THE QUARTERS HEAD AND
A RE FROM THE ARTICLE NO AFFECT.
ON THE REPRESENTATION OF WOMENIN
SENIOR MANAGEMENT IN THE FIRM
WORD APPLIED TO GENDER PAY GAP
SHRUNK FOR THE GOLDEN SKIRTS TO
WOMEN IN THE CORPORATE BOARD BUT
IN NORWAY JUST SEVEN PERCENT THE
LARGEST. FIRMS HAVE FEMALE
BOSSES IN FRANCE IT WAS A PALTRY
TWO PERCENT. ARE COMPARED TO
THE.
STILL MISERABLE AMERICA QUOTA
FREE WHICH AT FIVE PERCENT SO I
THINK I SEE.
THE OTHER SIDE THE I WILL TALK
ABOUT THE TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT I
THINK THAT THERE'S AN
ANTICIPATION THAT IF YOU HAVE
WOMEN IN THE BOARDROOM. IT'LL
TRICKLE DOWN TO MANAGEMENT AND.
THAT WOMEN IN THE GET IN THE
OFFICES.
TEN YEARS OF STUDY OF REPORT
FROM THE EUROPEANS
SAYING THAT AIN'T SO.
SO I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION
WILL CREDIT SUIS DID A REPORT
THE DEMONSTRATED THE GREATER
PROFITABILITY IN THE ITEMS THAT
I HAD INDICATED.
IT'S THOSE GREATER PROFICIENCY
WHETHER WAS IN PROFITABILITY
WHETHER IT WAS IN PERFORMANCE.
WHETHER IT WAS HE IN.
INNOVATION GOVERNANCE
AND WORKFORCE ENGAGEMENT NOW.
THAT ALSO QUOTE WHAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT HERE IS OPENING UP
THE BOARD ROOMS WE HAVE TO OPEN
UP THE BOARD ROOM RIGHT NOW IT'S
BASICALLY ALL.
WELL ON THE STE DIMINISH A
FIFTEEN PERCENT I MEAN THE
NUMBERS ARE JUST EXTRAORDINARY
THE THE LACK OF REPRESENTATION
BY WOMEN. BUT WHAT WE FIND IS
THAT ONE WOMAN.
OPENS THAT DOOR BUT IT'S THE
CRITICAL MASS SO THAT WHEN YOU
HAVE COMPANIES.
WHERE YOU HAVE TO THREE OR FOUR
WOMEN ON A BOARD I AND IT'S THE
SAME THING THAT HAPPENED HERE IN
THE LEGISLATURE WHEN YOU DEVELOP
A CRITICAL MASS WHERE YOU HAVE
MORE THAN ONE WOMAN THAT ONE
WOMAN IS SORT OF THE?
OFTENTIMES CONSIDERED THE.
FOCUS THE TOKEN WOMAN BUT YOU
GET TWO OR THREE OR FOUR WOMEN
AND THEY COME TOGETHER.
OF FREQUENTLY EGG. TO FOCUS ON
ISSUES OF COMMONALITY WHICH THEY
THEN BRING TO THE BOARD SO FOR
EXAMPLE.
IF WE HAD.
IF WE HAD HAD A IN THE MIRAMAX
COMPANY OR THE WEINSTEIN COMPANY
IF WE'D HAD WOMEN ON THAT BOARD.
WEINSTEIN WOULD NOT OF GOTTEN
AWAY WITH THAT ATROCIOUS
BEHAVIOR THAT HE WAS ABLE TO GET
AWAY WITH IN OTHER WORDS YOU
BRING THAT DIFFERENT LIFE
EXPERIENCE TO THE BOARDROOM. AND
IT DOESN'T FACT HAVE SIGNIFICANT
IMPACTS ON THE PROFITABILITY OF
A COMPANY WHEN YOU HAVE A.
THE SIGNIFICANT.
OF MEANINGFUL REPRESENTATION
THERE ARE CHANGES TO DO OCCUR
WE'VE SEEN THAT WITH THE.
FOR THE CRITICS WE SHOULD AND
THERE WAS ANOTHER. ARTICLE IN
XENA CAN SEE REPORT AND WE'VE
ALSO SEEN ARTICLES IF I MAY
ABOUT THE EUROPEAN COME THE
COUNTRY'S. OTHER ARTICLES A TO
THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT
IMPROVEMENT SO I'M FINE DAY BY
DAY ALL THAT ECONOMIST STORY
DIDN'T BELIEVE IT BY HAVING THE
SAME NEED THE RESEARCH EVIDENCE
OF HAVING MORE WOMEN ON PORTS IS
CHANGING DECISION MAKING THAT'S
JUST NOT TRUE. TELL EXACTLY WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING IS GOING TO HAPPEN
WELL THEY'RE SAYING TEN YEARS IS
I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT YOU TO
THE MCKENZIE REPORT.
WHICH.
WHICH IS CLEARLY CONTRARY TO
THAT AND ALSO I THINK UNIVERSITY
CALIFORNIA DAVIS HAS DONE A
NUMBER OF. STUDIES OF THIS.
ISSUE IS WELL SO I GUESS.
REASONABLE PEOPLE CAN DIFFER BUT
WE'RE LOOKING OUT OF THE FACT
THAT THERE ARE OTHER COUNTRIES
IN THE WORLD REQUIRE THOSE AND
THEIR PROFITABILITY HAS GONE UP
BY THE THAT DATA THAT DAT I
DON'T BELIEVE IT CAN BE REFUTED.
OR HAS BEEN CHALLENGED SEEING
COMPANIES A PRETTY
REPUTABLE ORGANIZATION AS.
AS HIS SO WELL JPMORGAN
BLACKROCK INSTEAD OF LIFE I
GUESS IT'S THEY'RE THE CONCERN
AND AGAIN IN THIS TO TRICKLE
DOWN THE FACT IS THAT THEY'RE
PUZZLED AFTER TEN YEARS THAT
THESE QUOTAS IN THE CORPORATE
BOARD HAVE NO DISCERNABLE
BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON WOMEN. AT
THE LOWER LEVEL OF THE CORPORATE
HIERARCHY MAYONNAISE THIS IS
AGAIN I I DIDN'T DO THE STUDY
I'M WELL I LOOK AT IT OR ILL
THINK WE CAN.
AGREED THAT WE THEIR THEIR
DIFFERENT STUDIES AND I'D LIKE
TO PERCENT OF LIKE TO HAVE YOU
LOOK AT THE OTHER ONE STATE
REFUTE THAT.
I'D ALSO.
IF YOU TALK WITH SOME PEOPLE A
WOMEN WHO ARE ON BOARDS JUST THE
EXPERIENCE THAT WE BRING TO THE
TABLE IS VERY VERY DIFFERENT I'M
REMINDED OF THE.
.
BUT WHEN THE.
.
BUT SANDBURG.
รณ SHARON CHERYL CHERYL TALKED
ABOUT BEING A MEMBER OF THE
BOARD OF.
FACEBOOK.
OR GOOGLE OR ONE OF THOSE
BEFORE SHE WENT TO IS ONE OF
THOSE FEW WOMEN ON. ON A
CORPORATE A BIG CORPORATE BOARD.
WAS WAS PREGNANT AND WAS COMING
BACK TO THE COMPANY TO ATTEND A
BOARD MEETING OR A MEETING OF
HIGHER EXECUTIVES AND I COULDN'T
FIND A PARKING PLACE AND HAD TO
PARK WAY OUT IN THE BACK OF THE.
PARKING FACILITY WATER WAY INTO
THE MEETING SAT DOWN AND SAID
WHAT THIS COMPANY NEEDS IS
PREGNANCY PARKING.
AND THE NEXT DAY THERE WAS
PREGNANCY PARKING NOW I SUBMIT
TO YOU I DON'T KNOW TOO MANY MEN
WHO WOULD COME UP WITH THAT IDEA
AND YET THERE ARE WOMEN IN THE
WORKFORCE TODAY WHO ARE.
NEEDING THOSE SERVICES ITS ACT
KIND OF LIFE EXPERIENCE THAT WE
DO NOT SEE.
IN THE BOARD ROOMS AND THAT
EXPERIENCE ALSO COMES INTO IN
PERMEATES INTO THE WHOLE CULTURE
SO THAT WE SEE A GREATER
APPRECIATION AND OFTEN GREATER
POLICIES. THAT IMPACT THE FACT
THAT THERE ARE MORE WOMEN IN THE
WORKFORCE TODAY THAT WOMEN TEND
TO BE THE CARETAKERS AND THAT
ISSUES AFFECTING. OF FAMILY
LEAVE FOR EXAMPLE A NEW PARENT
LEAVE FOR DEALING WITH THE SICK
A PARENT OR THE NEED TO HAVE
SOME LEVELS OF FLEXIBILITY IN
THE WORKFORCE. ARE THOSE THINGS
THAT COME NOT JUST BOTTOM UP BUT
TALK DOWN WHEN WE HAVE WOMEN IN
THE BOARDROOM I GUESS THEY WERE
SAYING THAT THAT WHEN YOU LOOK
AT CORPORATE LAYOFFS THERE'S NO
DISCERNIBLE DIFFERENCE WHETHER
YOU HAVE A WOMAN ON THE BOARD.
IF YOU GO TO LAY PEOPLE OFF
THERE'S NOT THERE'S THAT THE IT
LEASE IN NORWAY AND SPAIN AND
THESE EUROPEAN COMPANIES THE END
THOUGH LOUSY NEWS IT HAS TO BE
DELIVERED TO PEOPLE AND THAT
CORPORATION. IS THE SAME LOUSY
NEWS.
LET'S.
YOU KNOW BAD NEWS IS BAD NEWS
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT BAD NEWS
WHICH IS TALKING ABOUT PUTTING
WOMEN ON THE. ON THESE BOARDS IN
ORDE TO ROUTE IT TO PROPERLY
REPRESENT FIFTY TWO PERCENT OF
THE POPULATION AND THESE ARE
QUALIFIED.
QUALIFIED WOMEN AND WE HAVE SEEN
MOVEMENT IN OTHER COUNTRIES AND
I WOULD HAVE TO RESPECTFULLY
DISAGREE WITH THAT ECONOMISTS
REPORT WHICH I HAVEN'T. READ BUT
AS I SAID THERE ARE OTHER VERY
REPUTABLE REPORTS. THAT BECAUSE
THAT THE THAT CONTRADICT THAT
AND I KNOW WE HAVE OUR EXPERT
HERE WHO PROBABLY CAN ANSWER
THIS BETTER THAN I.
IN ONE.
I DON'T THINK IF YOU WOULD LIKE
I CAN GIVE YOU A FEW DETAILS ON
ON CONTRARY REPORTS IF THAT
WOULD BE HELPFUL. BUDGET THERE
ARE. WE NEED THAT.
FIND HER ADDITION SHARK'S OKAY
SO AND SO THERE ARE EIGHT
SEVERAL STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN
DONE THAT HAVE SHOWN THAT WOMEN
IN THE WARDROOM DO MAKE A
DISCERNABLE DIFFERENCE
ESPECIALLY IN THE U. S. MARKET
THE CAPITAL MARKETS IN DECISION
MAKING AT THE CORPORATE LEVEL
MAY BE DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT.
COUNTRIES.
BUT. THE AND SEVERAL OF THEM
ARE MENTIONED IN THE BILL BUT
WHEN SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES THE
ISSUE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP IN
TERMS OF. THE DECISION MAKING
AND DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENS IN
THE BOARDROOM AND THAT IS DONE
BY THE CONFERENCE BOARD AND
ANOTHER ONE FOCUSES SPECIFICALLY
ON ON THE. THE TIPPING POINT OF
HAVING THREE OR MORE WOMEN IN
THE WORD TO MEAN THAT IS DONE BY
MSE AYE SO WE HAVE WHO CAN SEE.
AND THE CONFERENCE BOARD MST AYE
CREDIT SUISSE AND NUMEROUS
ACADEMIC STUDIES THAT TIME. THEY
WILL GET INTO THE TO TIME THANK
YOU CENTER HERTZBERG.
YEAH I'VE IT BEEN FORTUNATE IN
MY LIFE TO HAVE. MANY STRONG
WOMEN IN MY FAMILY WHO HAVE
SERVED IN ONE CAPACITY OR
ANOTHER ON THE BOARDS OF
DIRECTORS OF THE LARGEST
CORPORATIONS IN AMERICA.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT IMPACT
IT'S HAD WITH RESPECT TO
EMPLOYMENT BUT I TELL YOU I'VE
SEEN. THE GOOD OF THE IMPACT HAS
BEEN EXTRAORDINARY.
NO QUESTION ABOUT IT THE IN IN
BIG COMPANIES AND ASKING
QUESTIONS OTHER PEOPLE WOULDN'T
ASK ANY TIME YOU HAVE A DIVERSE
POINT OF VIEW BUT. I JUST WHAT I
WANT TO ASK HIM TO PUT YOUR
LAWYER HAD ON AND AND AND IS A
CONSTITUTIONALIST.
THE QUESTION HERE WE WE HOLD THE
POWER OF GOVERNMENT
AND THE QUESTION IS WHEN IS IT
APPROPRIATE FOR GOVERNMENT TO
MAKE THESE DECISIONS.
FIRST.
DIRECTORS ARE DETERMINED BY
CORPORATIONS THEY'RE DETERMINED
BY SHAREHOLDERS.
IF I CHOSE THAT I HAD A THOUSAND
CHAIR OF A MILLION SHARES OF
STOCK OF OF GENERAL MOTORS AND I
CHOSE MY REPRESENTATIVE FOR MY
SHARES TO BE SENATOR JACKSON.
YOU'RE MY REPRESENTATIVE OR I
COULD CHOOSE SENATOR MORLOCK.
P. THAT THERE'S NO ABILITY.
FROM THAT STANDPOINT IT SEEMS TO
ME BECAUSE SHAREHOLDERS
DETERMINE ONE OF MY RELATIVES
WAS CHOSEN BY SHAREHOLDERS OF
BOTH UNION.
OF A CORPORATION WHO SAID WE
WANT THIS PERSON HAPPEN TO BE A
FEMALE.
WHICH WAS A GOOD THING.
CHAU AYE AYE AYE FIRST RAISE
THAT QUESTION.
THE SECOND QUESTION WHICH REALLY
BOUGHT WHICH REALLY CONCERNS ME
IN THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE I
GREW UP THINKING ABOUT THIS MY
WHOLE LIFE.
IS WHAT IF IT'S AFRICAN
AMERICANS
WHAT IF IT'S NOT THE NOTES WE
WANT MORE LATINOS ON THE BOARD
WE SELL TO A MARKET THAT
INVOLVES SUCH AND SUCH WHAT IS
THAT LOOK LIKE.
I DON'T REALLY ANSWER THE
QUESTION WITH TYPE I POSED TO
YOU IS THE AUTHORED A VERY
COMPETENT LAWYER TO ASK YOU WHEN
YOU BALANCE IT BECAUSE I'M SURE%
YOU'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT. IS NO
QUESTION THAT THERE'S A VALUE TO
IT BUT THE QUESTION IS AS A
POWER OF GOVERNMENT WHAT DO WE
HAVE THE RIGHT.
TO TELL PRIVATE THAT WE COULD
TELL SOMEBODY YOU CAN'T NOT
SERVE SOMEBODY TO COUNTER
BECAUSE IT'S PREJUDICE WE CAN DO
ALL SORTS OF THINGS BUT THIS IS
SOMEBODY WHO'S. YES TO PUBLICLY
TRADED BUSINESS. OKAY FINE.
THAT'S A REAL GOOD DEAL AND I
DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS ABOUT THE
INTERNAL STUFF BUT I'M I'M
REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON THE.
KIND OF A WHO MAKES A SELECTION
BECAUSE THE BOARD DOESN'T ITS
SHAREHOLDERS THEY CHOOSE IN THE
CORPORATE STRUCTURE NOT OF ITS
PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY THEY
CHOOSE A DIRECTORS. THE COULD BE
PROXIES ARE SOMEBODY WHO'S A CEO
WHAT SOME POWER TO TRY TO PUSH
PEOPLE AROUND BUT ULTIMATELY
SHAREHOLDERS VOTE THAT'S WHO
DIRECTORS ELECTED. AND THE
SECOND IS THE ISSUE THE LARGER
ISSUE OF.
WHAT DO YOU TELL OTHER GROUPS
THAT BRING VALUE AND IDEA ISN'T
DIFFER?
BACK GIVES ALL OF WHICH HAVE
EXTRAORDINARY VALUE.
TO THE TABLE WHEN WE AS A
GOVERNMENT SAY WE'RE ONLY GONNA
SELECT ONE CLASS OF PEOPLE.
VALUABLE NONE THE LESS BECAUSE
I'VE BEEN THERE BUT I JUST
WANTED TO KNOW YOUR ANALYSIS ON
WILL THERE CLASSES FIFTY TWO
PERCENT OF THE POPULATION OUT OF
WHICH IS NOT REALLY A CLASS IN
MY OPINION WHAT IT IS CROSS IN
THE CONSTITUTION THAT WELL HERE.
WELL WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
HERE IS THE IS THE FACT THAT WE
HAVE A. WE USED AS POLICY MAKERS
CAN MAKE POLICY WE HAVE HAD A
HISTORIC SEALING. A WHAT A
BARRIER A WALL WHICH HAS BEEN
IMPENETRABLE TO WOMEN.
AND WHETHER IT'S THE
SHAREHOLDERS OR WHETHER IT'S
OTHER TRADITIONS FATHER
TRADITIONS.
DOWN IN.
IN THE U. S. OPEN IS PLAYED
WHERE SIT DOWN IN AUGUSTA IN
AUGUSTA.
THERE THERE WERE NEVER ANY WOMEN
MEMBERS OF THE CAST
A PRIVATE CLUB.
THEY THERE WERE.
TO BE THE JEWS EITHER THEY'RE
NEVER THE EXACTLY AND AND SO.
THERE COMES A POINT IS A MATTER
POLICY WE WE WE HAVE TO SAY
THERE IS DE FACTO DISCRIMINATION
GOING ON. AND THAT'S WHAT WE
HAVE IN THE BOARD ROOM WE HAVE
THE FACT OF DISCRIMINATION WE
HAVE TRIED WE TRIED WITH THE
REGISTRY IN THE EIGHTIES WE
TRIED WITH A GENTLE URGING WOULD
I'M NOT SURE YOU IN THE ROOM
WHEN I TALKED ABOUT HOW IN
TWENTY THIRTEEN I DID A.
RESOLUTON HERE IN THE SENATE.
BURGEONING CALIFORNIA'S.
TOP CORPORATIONS PUBLICLY
TRADED BY THE DOES THAT HAVE
THEIR ROB PRIMARY HEADQUARTERS
IN CALIFORNIA URGING THEM TO ADD
MORE WOMEN TO THEIR BOARDS O
DIRECTORS. THEY BASICALLY TOLD
US TO GO POUND SAND BECAUSE WE
LOOK THREE FOUR YEARS LATER WE
HAD THE TICKER AND GONE UP MAYBE
ONE PERCENT TO FIFTEEN PERCENT
FAT CALIFORNIA. HAS A LOWER
PERCENTAGE.
OF.
WOMEN.
ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL
ACCORD ACCORDING TO THE RUSSELL
THREE THOUSAND FIFTEEN POINT
FIVE PERCENT ABOARD SHE TELL BY
WOMEN ANYA AROUND THE COUNTRY
IT'S SIXTEEN POINT TWO PERCENT
NOT THAT THAT'S VERY IMPRESSIVE.
SO. WE AS POLICY MAKERS.
I THINK HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY
TO TRY TO BREAK OPEN THOSE THOSE
IMPENETRABLE WALLS OF
DISCRIMINATION WE DID THAT WITH
MICHAEL PAY BILL BACK THREE
YEARS AGO HOW IS IT WE CAN TELL
COMPANIES WHAT TO DO WELL WHEN
THEY'RE DISCRIMINATING ON THE
BASIS OF GENDER. THAT IS AN
UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION AND SO
WHAT WE SIMPLY SAID IS YOU'VE
GOT TO TREAT US EQUALLY. AND WE
ARE HERE ON THIS SITUATION WHEN
IT COMES TO ADDING A BOARD SEAT
IT DOESN'T SAY WE'RE GOING TO
KICK ANY MEN OFF DOESN'T SY
THAT AT ALL. IT SAYS IF WE DON'T
HAVE AN OPENING WHERE THERE'S
POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A WOMAN ON
WE'RE GOING TO ADD A SEAT SO YOU
GOING TO ADD TO SEE TO A BOARD
OF FIVE YOU CAN HAVE SIGNAL
ELECTED THERE WHO'S GONNA LIKE
THAT DIRECTOR.
WELL YOU. THAT MOST OF THE
DIRECTOR SAID I SEE YOU GET
THOSE PERSPECTIVES THE
PROSPECTUSES IN THE MAIL. YOU
KNOW THERE HUNDRED PAGES AND
THEY'RE ALL IN IN.
PEOPLE THAT GET THE ELECT
PROSPECTUSES ARE ONLY THE
SHAREHOLDERS I UNDERSTAND BUT
BUT IF THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION
USUALLY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE
BY THE BOARD ITSELF ON WHO TO
BRING IN ON BOARD FISHERMEN CUT
JUST BUT WHAT ABOUT SAID THAT
THAT'S FAIR THAT'S FAIR. I'M
JUST I'M TRYING TO PUT MONEY.
I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE HELD ON
CONSTITUTION IF YOU'RE GOING TO
DO IT MY THOUGHT IS DONE THEN
THE IDEA IS TO MAKE THE
RECOMMENDATION BUT HOW DO YOU
ENFORCE.
FORCE WE HAVE A BROAD VARIETY OF
SHAREHOLDERS NUMBER ONE.
TO MAKE THAT DECISION IF YOU
WANNA PLAY PROXIES IMMIGRANT
NATIONS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE
LAW IS DONE THE FOLLOWING ONE WE
SAY WHEN IT'S A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACT WE HAVE MAYBE WE BEES.
WE SAY WE'LL GIVE A PREFERENCE
IF PUTS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT TO
WOMEN OWNED BUSINESSES TO BE
ABLE TO GET THAT BUSINESS
BECAUSE WE THINK THAT'S
IMPORTANT THAT'S OUR GOVERNMENT
ROLE.
WE DO TAX CREDITS WE DO ALL
SORTS OF INCENTIVES THE QUESTION
I'M TRYING TO FRAME IS NOT THE
POLICY QUESTION THAT'S NOT THE
ISSUE IN TRYING TO FRAME I'M
ONLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. HOW
DO WE DO IT IN A PERMISSIBLE WAY
WELL AGAIN I THINK WHAT WE'VE
DONE IS AND THERE THIS WAS
RAISED IN THE ANALYSIS WE'VE
GIVEN THE HISTORY OF THIS YOU
KNOW FOR HOW MANY YEARS HAVE
COMPANIES BEEN? ALMOST
EXCLUSIVELY CONTROLLED BY MEN.
AND IT'S THIS SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE OF THE REPUBLIC
AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO
BREAK THAT GLASS CEILING THERE
WERE CLAY UGH CLAIMS AND I DON'T
KNOW IF YOU WERE HERE WHEN I
MENTION THAT WAS THE SAME EXCUSE
TO USE ON THE BENCH. BRUNO WOMEN
QUALIFIED TO BE JUDGES BOMB AND
WE KNOW THAT ISN'T TRUE AND SO
WHAT WE'VE DONE IN NINETEEN
EIGHTY SIX WHO PREPARED OF
REGISTRY OF EXTRAORDINARILY
QUALIFIED WOMEN WHO COULD BE
SELECTED TO BE ON BOARDS AND
YET.
BECAUSE THIS IS BASICALLY A
LITTLE BOYS. NETWORK.
WE ARE TRYING TO DO THAT AND IN
A WAY THAT IS CONSTITUTION WE
TRIED OTHER MEANS THOSE HAVEN'T
WORKED OUT WE HAVE TRIED TO.
TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM WITH.
รณ ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS THAT
HAS WORKED THE AND THIS BILL
AGAIN I THINK METALLICA AND
ABOUT THIS BILL IS WE'RE NOT
KICKING ANYBODY OFF ABOARD. EVEN
THOUGH SO MANY THESE FELLOWS WHO
ON BOARDS ARE THE SON IN LAW OF
THE.
GUY WANTS MOST OF THE SHARES I
MEAN ARGUABLY ARE THEY QUALIFIED
NOT NECESSARILY. IS THE OWNER IF
THE SON IN LAW WELL I UNDERSTAND
THAT YOU THAT YOU. QUIET YOUR
OWN BUSINESS BLOOD BUT WHAT WE
ARE SAYING IS THAT YOU HAVE TO
DO IN A FAIR WAY AND IT HAS TO
YOU CAN'T DISCRIMINATE THE IS
IT'S NOT PART OF WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS A COUNTRY. THAT
IS SO YOU CANNOTDISCRIMINATE ON
THE BASIS OF THAT THE AD.
THESE ARE ALL MEN NOW IF IF UP
POPS WANTS TO PUT HIS DAUGHTER
ON IT AND ALL THAT'S WHY WE'RE
NOT SAYING WE'RE NOT SAYING WHAT
YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO IN TERMS
OF WHO YOU ULTIMATELY SELECT.
BUT YOU NEED TO HAVE MORE WOMEN
ON YOUR BOARDS WE KNOW IT'S
BETTER FOR THE COMPANY AND I
WOULD SUBMIT IF THERE WERE A
DISCLOSURES MADE AT THE TIME FOR
TEMPE SAY YOU KNOW WE'RE TRYING
TO ADD MORE WOMEN TO THE BOARD.
HERE'S A SELECTION OF FOR ALL
FOUR FIVE WOMEN TO TO FILL THIS
AT LEAST THIS ONE SEAT HERE'S
WHAT THEY'VE DNE SOME OF THEM
WILL BLOW YOUR SOCKS OFF WITH
THE THAT THE COMPETENCY THEY'VE
GOT. AND ALL BY THE WAY THE
RESEARCH SHOWS THAT THESE
COMPANIES ARE MORE PROFITABLE
WE'RE GONNA MAKE MORE MONEY THE
SHAREHOLDER RETURN ON INVESTMENT
IT'S GOING TO BE GREATER BY
WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU IS IF YOU
JUST START OPENING THOSE GATES.
YOU'RE GOING TO GET MORE AND
MORE WOMEN ON THESE BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS.
OR I SHOULD TAKE BOARDS OF
DIRECTORS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
ACHIEVE HERE.
SENATE JACKSONWOULD YOU PLEASE
BE A LITTLE MORE PASSIONATE
ABOUT THIS BILL.
GIVEN THE OTHER QUESTION SENATOR
HERTZBERG.
SENATOR STERN ANY QUESTIONS
CONCERNS.
CENTER JACKSON MAY I ASK IF YOU
QUICKLY CERTAINLY SOONER PLEASE
BE PASSIONATE.
I'LL DO MY BEST AYE AYE.
.
WE WERE USING.
NOT GO HERE WE DO WE GET THEM
SO I I.
I'M TRIED TO AS OFTEN AS I COULD
TO GO TO THE FORMER CORPORATE
DIRECTORS NORGE COUNTY AND. THEY
HAVE AN ANNUAL DINNER IN THE
HONOR.
DIRECTORS
AND THAT'S A PHENOMENAL NIGHT
THESE ARE JUST INCREDIBLY IN
COPPOLA'S PEOPLE. AND I'M
SITTING HERE LISTENING TO THIS
GOOD ROBUST DEBATE WITH THE
SENATOR HERTZBERG AND. AND IT
ALMOST SEEMS IT'S IT'S WHAT'S
WHAT'S THE SCALE OF THE
CORPORATION. AND YOU'RE FOCUSED
ON PUBLICLY TRADED OR ARE THEY
CLOSELY HELD A FAMILY OWNED.
PUBLICLY TRADED JUST PUBLICLY
TRADED RESO THAN HIS QUESTIONS
ARE REALLY.
RIGHT ON THE MARKS ARE YOU GONNA
HAVE A BALLOT THAT SAYS.
SELECT THESE INDIVIDUALS TO
SERVE ON THE BOARD AND THEN YOU
HAVE A SEPARATE CATEGORY AND OR
AND SELECT FROM THESE WOMEN TO
SERVE ON THE BOARD CUT HOW WOULD
YOU.
NO THAT'S NOT WHAT'S INTENDED
BUT WITH THAT A BIT AWAY FROM
THE EXECUTIVE SEARCH BUSINESS I
CAN SHARE WITH YOU THAT ALL OF
OUR COLLEAGUES ARE GIVEN AN
ASSIGNMENT OF A LIST.
OF.
SIX CANDIDATES THAT NOMINATING
COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD ALREADY
NOTES THEY ALREADY FEEL COME
THE BULL MOSTLY WITH GUYS
SOMETIMES WITH WOMEN WHO ARE ON
THE LIST.
THE SEARCH COMMITTEE AND SEARCH
FIRM WHETHER IT'S A KORN FERRY
OR HYBRID COULD STRUGGLE SPENCER
STUART A BURGER MARK CLAYTON MY
FIRM WERE TOLD TO VENT THOSE
CANDIDATES FIND OUT WHAT THEIR
BOARD HISTORY IS WHAT THEIR
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARE. WE
WANT INDEPENDENT NOT NOT SON IN
LAWS OF LOVE OF MAJOR
SHAREHOLDERS BUT INDEPENDENT
VOTERS. SO THEN WE WE VET THE
AND WE GIVE THAT LIST WITH THE
VETTING REPORT BACK TO THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE. THEY DO
THEIR OWN INTERVIEWS THERE'S
NEVER A PUBLIC LIST LIVES NEVER
OF A RUDY WILL ALSO THAT'S HOW
IT HAPPENS. AND THERE'S THE
ACTIVISION HOLDERS MIGHT COME IN
WITH A SLATE OF.
OF DIRECTORS OR CANDIDATES BUT
THEY CAN BE VOTED DOWN BY THE.
AS HAPPENED WITH A. CRACK
FOODS SO IT'S IT'S THE
DOMINATING COMMITTEE OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT COMES UP
WITH THE NOMINATIONS AND IF
THEY'RE NOT NOMINATING WOMEN
BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW ANYBODY
THEY'VE SAID THAT TO ME WE DON'T
KNOW ANY WOMEN THAT IF THEY
NOMINATED WONDER TOUR FOR TEN
WOMEN. WERE NOT VOTED ON YOU BE
HAPPY OR NOT FULL THEY WOULD
VOTE ONE ON BECAUSE WE WOULD
HAVE THIS BILL.
WELL OKAY CONSIDER HERTZBERG
WATCHING WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE TO
THE UNITED LEFT IN PART I I DO
KNOW THAT PROCESS AND. I DEALT
WITH BEFORE BUT BUT WOULDN'T YOU
HAVE TO THE NOTIFY A JUST
THINKING ABOUT FAIRNESS TO ALL
PARTIES WE OFTEN. YOU KNOW TO SO
MUCH OF WHAT HAPPENS IN
GOVERNMENT IS THERE'S BECOMES AN
ISSUE WHATEVER THE ISSUES AND
ALWAYS LEGITIMATE YOU KNOW
WHATEVER THE ISSUE IS. AND AND
THE KEY IS IS TO IS TO THINK
THESE THINGS THROUGH AT EVERY
LEVEL WOULD YOU HAVE TO GIVE
NOTICE TO THE SHAREHOLDERS THAT
IF THEY VOTED FOR A MAN THAT
THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THESE.
THE IN LIEU OF A WOMAN IT IF
THEY MADE A DECISION IF I'M A
SHAREHOLDER OF A COMPANY IF
YOU'RE A SHAREHOLDER OF A
COMPANY YOU CHOSE. EVEN THOUGH
THERE WAS A WOMAN YOU CITY
THOUGHT THAT CENTER MORLOCK WAS
A MORE QUALIFIED PERSON THAT
THERE WAS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE
CORPORATION THAT YOU WOULD YOU
WANT TO GIVE NOTICE.
TO THE SHAREHOLDERS THAT THERE'S
GONNA HAVE TO PAY TRIPLE DAMAGES
AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS ARE
GONNA HAVE TO PAY. BASED UPON
THE AVERAGE SALARY IT TO THIS
GOVERNMENT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS IF
THEY MADE THAT CHOICE TO NOT BE
A FAIR. OAK AND NOT TRY I'M JUST
ASKING HONEST QUESTIONS DON'T
YOU THINK THAT THEY NEED TO KNOW
I MEAN IT'S FAIR TELLEMENT
SPAWNING.
WELL I I THINK.
I THINK GROWERS WHO IS
SUGGESTING IS THAT THE THAT THE
SHAREHOLDERS WOULD BE IT WOULD
BE ADVISED THAT THE LAW
REQUIRES.
THAT ONE OF THE SIX SELECTED
LET'S SAY IT'S A OR ONE OF THE
FIVE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WILL
TO THEIR HAVING THEIR THEIR
ANNUALLY RENEWING. AND.
THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE
ADDING A SEAT BECAUSE ALONG
CALIFORNIA REQUIRES THAT YOU
HAVE AT LEAST ONE WOMAN OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS. AND THEN YOU
ADVICE PART OF THE REASON THAT
THE LOG SINCE I'D BE HAPPY TO
BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE MORE
PROFITABLE HERE'S YOUR DIVIDENDS
OR WHAT HAVE YOU ARE LIKELY TO
BE GREATER. OF BECAUSE YOU HAVE
WOMEN ON YOUR BOARD.
AND IMPROPER WE COULD EVEN
INDULGE HIM DIE SAYING AND IF
YOU HAVE A CRITICAL MASS OF
WOMEN THE LIKELIHOOD IS THAT
THE.
PROFITABILITY WILL BE EVEN
GREATER BOB BUT I THINK WHAT WE
NEED TO DO IS WE KNOW WHAT WE'VE
GOT NOW TRUST IS NOT WORKING.
IRAQ HUDSON AND AND I THINK IN
THIS CASE WE CAN CERTAINLY.
OF FASHION SOMETHING THAT GIVES
NOTICE.
AS TO WHY WE ARE SEEKING TO
HAVE A WOMAN APPOINT A OF THE
SELECTED AND. FRANKLY I THINK
THAT THAT WOULD.
PROBABLY BE IT MAKES SOME SENSE
TO ADD THAT THE.
AND THE SHAREHOLDERS AT THE
ANNUAL SHAREHOLDER MEETING WHEN
THEY VOTE THEIR PROXIES ARE NOT
VOTING FOR A CHOICE
THEY ARE GIVEN THE LIST AND THAT
WITH THE LOS WOULD INCLUDE THE
ONE WOMAN. OR THAT THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE HAS DECIDED
IS THE ONE THEY ARE ARE PUTTING
FORWARD SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF
YES OR NO. SAME THING IF IT WERE
AN ACTIVIST SLATE THE THE
SHAREHOLDERS THAN ABOUT OF. THAT
VOTE MOST OF THEM JUST VOTE YES
AT THE ANNUAL MEETING BUT YOU
CAN ALSO ADD THAT WOMAN IN A MID
YEAR YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT
UNTIL THE ANNUAL MEETING YOU
JUST HAVE APPROVED AT THE ANNUAL
MEETING. AND THESE AREN'TFAMILY
HELD COMPANIES THESE ARE THESE
ARE PUBLICLY PUBLICLY OWNED AND
SO.
THAT THE PROCESS THAT THAT WE
SEE IN MOST OF THESE PUBLICLY
OWNED COMPANY SAYS HERE
CREATURES WHO WITH THE BOARD
RECOMMENDS HERE'S OUR SLATE. AND
THAT'S USUALLY THE END OF IT.
IF IF WE WANT TO HAVE AN
EXPLANATION OF WHY WE'RE ADDING
A LITTLE A WOMAN TO I'D BE HAPPY
TO DO THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT.
IT ADDS VALUE AND I THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THE PUBLIC ONCE THEY
KNOW THAT WOULD BE HAVING I MEAN
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE WHERE
SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE CONSUMERS
ARE WOMEN. AND THAT THERE IS
BEING PASSIONATE AGAIN I KNOW I
JUST IN THIS FORGET SUCH A I I I
GUESS. I GUESS PART OF THE
FRUSTRATIONS WE'VE BEEN TRYING
TO WE'VE BEEN HOPING FOR TWO
HUNDRED YEARS THAT PEOPLE WOULD
SEE THE LIGHT WE WOULD START
SEEING A BETTER BALANCE. A IN IN
THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND IN.
WHEN IT COMES TO.
EQUAL PAY WHICH WOULD NOW HAVE
HOPEFULLY BUT.
YOU KNOW THIS IS.
AN OPPORTUNITY I THINK TO STE
TO BREAK THROUGH THAT GLASS
CEILING ONCE AND FOR ALL BECAUSE
WE'VE GOT SOME EXTRAORDINARY
WOMEN OUT THERE AND I THINK
WHEN.
OUR MALE COUNTERPARTS SEE THAT
YOU KNOW THAT WE DON'T BRING
COOKIES TO THE BOARD ROOM WE
BRING GREAT IDEAS AND SUDDENLY.
THEN THE IT BECOMES TOOL WAS THE
BIG DEAL IN THE FIRST PLACE.
BUT WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE
AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO IT
NICELY AND IT HASN'T WORKED.
LITTLE PLEASE PRETTY PLEASE WITH
A CHERRY ON TOP THAT HASN'T
WORKED THOUGH MS BURKE HAMMER
BURKE AMERICAN NUCLEAR. THAT YOU
ANSWER MY QUESTIONS SO THANK YOU
IT'S A SLATE AND THAT IS THAT
HELPED. HIM THAT YOU WOULD HAVE
A WOMAN OR TO WORK THREE ON THE
SLATE AND. THAT WOULD BREAK A
CAPTURED SO THANK YOU.
SENATOR MINING HAS A QUESTION.
OR DO A POOR.
ACTUALLY I THINK ONE OF MY
QUESTIONS WAS ANSWERED ABOUT THE
VOTING.
ISSUE AND I JUST WANTED TO.
PURSE
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD AND FOR HER
CONTINUED.
ADVOCACY IN TERMS OF TRYING TO
BRIDGE THESE GAPS THAT ARE WELL.
DOCUMENTED.
.
DISCRIMINATION IN IN. IN OUR
SYSTEM.
AND WE'VE SEEN IT WITH WAGES
WE'VE SEEN WITH OTHER TYPES OF
TREATMENT.
I JUST WANT TO ALIGN MYSELF
THOUGH ALSO WAS SENATOR
HERTZBERG BECAUSE THE SPIRIT OF
HIS QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW
THAT YOU'RE HEARING IT THAT WAY.
IS HOW TO PROTECT THIS FROM
CONSTITUTIONAL ATTACK HAVE. HOW
HOW CAN YOU BEST
YEAH?
PROTECTED FROM LEGAL CHALLENGE
TERM AND.
I GUESS. MY QUESTION WOULD BE.
WHY DID YOU DECIDE ON THIS CLASS
OF CORPORATION?
FOR THE FOCUS TO THE BILL WHAT
ABOUT NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
WHAT ABOUT SCHOOL BOARDS WHAT
ABOUT. LEGISLATIVE SEATS IN THE
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE HOME.
IF HE'S STILL SEPARATE INCIDENT
THAT WOULD LEAD TO THOSE TYPES
OF REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF.
FORMULAS FOR.
GENDER EQUALITY IN IN OTHER
LEADERSHIP BODIES I THINK PART
OF THE REASON THAT AT LEAST FOR
ME AND AND CERTAINLY I COULD ASK
MY THE SPONSORS OF THE BILL IS
THAT. THE BUSINESS WORLD IS ONE
WHERE WE'VE JUST HAD SO LITTLE.
OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE THAT NEEDLE.
AND THERE SEEMS TO BE REALLY.
IT IT'S IT AGAIN THE ANALOGY TO
THE AUGUSTA GOLF COURSE IT'S
THAT IT THAT WE JUST DON'T WANT
TO AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WIN SO
WE'RE NOT GOING TO.
AND YET THE BUSINESS WORLD AYE
IS A PLACE WHERE IT'S.
SO MUCH OF THE WAY THIS COUNTRY
OPERATES HIS FOCUS SOME
BUSINESS.
AND AND AND IT THAT IT IS WHAT
IT IS THAT'S FINE BUT WE HAVE
NOT. OVERCOME THE CHALLENGES
ASSOCIATED WITH A TOTAL MALE
CONTROLLED BUSINESS MINDSET AND
WE THINK THAT IT'S ABOUT TIME
THAT WE BROUGHT. A QUALIFIED
WOMEN TO SIT AT THAT TABLE
THAT'S AN IMPORTANT TABLE A LOT
OF DECISIONS ARE MADE A LOT OF
THE POLICIES. OF THE COUNTRY.
COME OUT OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
AND FROM MY PERSPECTIVE I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE THAT THAT SECTOR OF
RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A
CHANGING WORLD WHEN IT COMES TO
WORK. AND FAMILIES AND THAT WE
HAVE WOMEN AT THE TABLE WHO ARE
RESPONSIVE TO THAT AND CAN HELP
US MAKE THOSE ADVANCES THANK YOU
AND I THINK YOU'VE MADE THAT.
.
VERY CLEAR AND AGAIN I IN THE
INTEREST OF TIME I WANT TO TURN
BACK THE CHAIR SO ANYTHING
FURTHER THROUGH THE CHAIR. AND I
DO WANNA JUST APOLOGIZE I DIDN'T
HEAR PROPONENTS OR UP.
I HAD TO BE OUT OF THE ROOM FOR
AWHILE. ON IT BUT I DO
APPRECIATE TIA.
OBJECTIVES OF THIS AND THEM AND
THINK AS IT MOVES FORWARD TO
SCAN IN THE LEGAL. RAMIFICATIONS
ARE CRITICAL TO.
MOVE SOCIETY IN A DIRECTION
THAT.
.
WE CAN DO LEGALLY IN WITHSTAND
CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE THANK
YOU MISTER CHAIR.
SENATOR MINING.
.
MAYBE MISS HIGH GIGI YOU COULD
ANSWER THIS QUESTION FOR ME. IF
CALIFORNIA
THE FIRST STATE TO DO THIS IN
ITS.
TO LITTLE COMPLICATED AND IT'S A
REQUIREMENT THAT THE PRINCIPAL
EXECUTIVE OFFICES ARE LOCATED IN
CALIFORNIA WHAT IS THE RISK. OF
THOSE CORPORATIONS RELOCATING OR
CAN THEY.
THERE WILL BE NO RISK.
FOR THEM RELOCATING A CITY IT
WILL BE A BENEFIT. ABOUT FOR THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS GOING TO
BOARD COMPOSITION.
OKAY. I'M.
MADAM.
SENATOR JACKSON'S.
.
THERE BEEN A COUPLE OF WORDS
USED EVEN USED ONE YOURSELF A
FEW WORDS ONE WAS QUOTA ANOTHER
ONE WAS.
TOKEN AND WE ALSO HAD MANDATE
TIME.
I'M TRYING TO GET TO A POINT
WHERE WE HAVE A BILL. THAT
ENCOURAGES CORPORATE BOARDS.
TO A POINT.
QUALIFIED WOMEN BECAUSE THEY
WANT TO.
NOT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO AND I'M
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW
WEAK WE GET THERE. SO THAT
EVERYBODY WINS AND OF THAT THERE
WAS WITH THE MY INITIAL OF
RESOLUTION DID IN THAT WHEN HE
THIRTEEN WE TRY TO ENCOURAGE
COMPANIES.
BUT FRANKLY YOU KNOW WE STILL
HAVE SORT OF OF A PATRIARCHAL
VIEW.
AND.
WE HAVE.
CHALLENGES TO TRY TO.
BREAK THAT GLASS CEILING WIN
THEM WE HAVE OF.
THE THE POWER. BY ENTITY IT IS.
ALL MALE. AND WANTS TO KEEP IT
THAT WAY THEY LIKE.
AS WAS MENTIONED THEY THEY
THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH EACH
OTHER AND WE HAD THAT SAME
ARGUMENT WHEN IT CAME TO THE
BENCH.
TWENTY YEARS AGO WHEN WHEN I WAS
WONDERING WHY WE DIDN'T HAVE
MORE WOMEN ON THE BAND.
THE GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH
EACH OTHER. AND AS A RESULT
THERE IS A DISCRIMINATION THERE
IS A CEILING AND WOMEN HAVEN'T
BEEN ABLE TO PENETRATE DEBT
CEILING.
BY ASKING BY URGING BY
ENCOURAGING IT JUST HASN'T
HAPPENED AND SO AS MUCH AS THAT
WAS MY FIRST EFFORT AND AS MUCH
AS AS WE LOOK AT THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY WITH THE
STRICT SCRUTINY. WHIP TO
DEMONSTRATE ITS VERY NARROW
FOCUS AND DAD.
WE'VE TRIED OTHER METHODS TO
GET TO THE SAME RESULT AND WE
HAVE WE STARTED WITH A REGISTRY
JUST TOOK FOR AVAILABILITY WE
THEN WENT TO OF RESOLUTION TO
PURGE. CORPORATE BOARDS TO DO
THIS AND THE ANSWER IS BEEN GO
POUND SAND. AND SO ON THE BASIS
THAT THE THESE ARE
DISCRIMINATORY SITUATIONS THAT
EXIST WE ARE NOT TRYING TO
REPLACEMENT ON A BOARD. BY AND I
THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL
COMPONENT IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL
ISSUE THE ISSUE WE ARE SIMPLY
ADDING A POSITION.
THAT WILL BE FILLED BY A WOMAN.
SO EVEN THESE BOARDS THERE STILL
IF WE ADD A POSITION ONE SIXTH
IS CERTAINLY NOT THE MAJORITY WE
ARE NOT REDUCING THE MALE
CONSTRUCT WE'RE JUST ADDING A
WOMAN.
WE REPRESENT FIFTY TWO PERCENT
OF POPULATION USY GET PASSION
ABOUT THIS WHY ARE WE NOT IN THE
BOARD ROOMS.
IS BECAUSE WHEN ARE QUALIFIED
WE'RE IMMINENTLY QUALIFIED.
BUT WHAT WE HAVE IS A OF THE
HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION THAT
UNLESS WE BLASTED OPEN SADLY IS
NOT GOING TO CHANGE.
AND I KNOW YOU CAN TAKE THAT AS
YOUR CLOSING STATEMENT DO I HAVE
A.
A MOTION OF. NO WAY YEAH WELL
GAY HIGHEST CENTER HERTZBERG.
SIMPLY TRYING TO
WE GOT A. KICK TO HER.
WITH THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE
PEOPLE PASSED UP.
THE WHOLE.
IT IS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF THE
FORCE.
AT THAT.
IT'S YOUR JOB HERE TO ASK HARD.
IN I AND I APPRECIATE THE
QUESTIONS AND I AND I WILL
CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS SITE I
BELIEVE THAT WE COULD PASS A
CONSTITUTIONAL MUSTER YOU KNOW
THE ANSWER IS. IT'LL BE BROUGHT
UP IN THE COURTS IF NOT BUT WE
ARE CONSCIOUS OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES AND WE
ARE WORKING VERY HARD TO MEET
THEM AND HOPE THAT WE WILL BE
ABLE TO DO SO. BUT IT IS A IT
IS.
I THINK IMPORTANT THAT WE BUT WE
I HAVE AS I SAID I'VE TRIED TO
RAISE THE ISSUE AND PUT A
SPOTLIGHT ON IT. IT HASN'T
REALLY BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.
IT SO I THINK NOW WE HAVE TO OF
FORCED THE ISSUE FURTHER I THINK
IT WILL IMPACT A LOT OF WHAT
GOES ON IN CORPORATE AMERICA I
THINK WILL AFFECT THE. BEHAVIORS
OF A A LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
IN THE WORKPLACE I THINK WILL
HELP CHANGE THE WORK FORCE TO BE
MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE TWENTY
FIRST CENTURY IN WHICH WE NOW.
SEE WORK IN LIFE BEING VERY
DIFFERENTLY DEFINED THAN THEY
WERE FIFTY YEARS AGO. AND SO ARE
YOU I WOULD JUST I GUESS AT THAT
POINT ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU SENATOR JACKSON
BECAUSE OF THOSE CONCERNS I HAVE
SOME DIFFICULTY I'M STILL HERE
FOR THAT HAVE TO.
BECAUSE IT'S A COMMENT.
FOR THAT MADAM CLERK COULD YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASSED THE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS JACKSON
AYE JACKSON I AM MORE LOCK.
MORLOCK NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG AYE MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN. WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI AYE.
FOUR FOUR ONE SO IT'S OUT. IT
WILL KEEP THE ROLL-ON.
YEAH IT'S ON THE
LITTLE DO RULE OPEN COUNTRY.
THAT TAKES US TO SENATOR HILL
SENATE BILL EIGHT ONE NINE WILL
KEEP THE BALL ROLLING AND.
DON'T HIT ME WITH.
SENATOR LET'S JUST TAKE A MINUTE
TO CLEAR THE ROOM REVIEW THANK
YOU FOLKS APPEAR
TO.
GO BACK TO FILE ORDER FOR. THE
FILE. NUMBER TWO S. B. EIGHT
NINETEEN SENATOR HILL. GOOD
AFTERNOON THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INDULGENCE MUCH PRINCIPALLY TO
DO ABOUT HIM CHAIR WAS VERY IN
AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION. I
HAVE TWO VERY SIMPLE BILL SCOTT
THERE TO WHAT WE'VE JUST GONE
THROUGH. IT BE EIGHT NINETEEN
INSURERS CALIFORNIA'S RATE
PAYERS DON'T PAY FOR UTILITIES
NEGLIGENT BEHAVIOR. THIS BILL
ACHIEVE SIMPLY.
BY CODIFYING P. UC PRACTICE
MANDATING THAT FINES PENALTIES
OR UNINSURED EXPENSES RESULTING
FROM NEGLIGENT BEHAVIOR ARE NOT
RECOVERABLE IN RATES.
WHO PAYS FOR DAMAGES SHOULD BE
BASED ON A UTILITIES CONDUCT?
IF YOU SEE DETERMINES THEY ACTED
REASONABLY RATEPAYERS WILL COVER
THE COST.
BUT IF THE P. USULLY DETERMINES
UTILITY ACTED UNREASONABLY OR
IMPRUDENTLY RATEPAYERS SHOULD
NOT PAY.
THIS IS A CENTRAL AND
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE
COMMISSION BY VOTING FOR THIS
MEASURE YOU'LL BE VOTING FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY AND REPAIR
PROTECTION ARE FRANKLY HAS FROM
AYE BUT MEMBERS.
SENATOR HILL OF ANY WITNESSES
HERE IN SUPPORT.
OR YOU HEAR IN NEUTRALITY. IN
STRONG NEUTRALITY. ALRIGHT.
WHAT INTO A OAK WHAT'D YOU COME
FORWARD AND THEN WE'LL HAVE
OPPOSITION?
BUT GO AHEAD ON THE STRONGLY
NEUTRAL POSITION.
VERY GOOD. I'M NOT.
BILL BENTON BILL MANNHEIM FROM
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
COMPANY.
ABOUT A MONTH AGO PRESIDENT
PICKER FROM THE PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION CAME BEFORE THE
LEGISLATURE.
AND ASKED FOR FORTY IN A BILL.
TO GIVE IT OUT TO GIVE THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION THE
DISCRETION TO DO A MORE NUANCED
ASSESSMENT OF REASONABLENESS.
AND THIS BILL IN THE SECOND PART
OF IT ACCOMPLISHES THAT
OBJECTIVE AND IN THAT SENSE PGA
ANY IS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT
THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE SITUATION AS PART OF THE
PRUDENCE REVIEW.
HOWEVER WE ARE CONCERNED
WITH A FLAW IN THE WORDING OF
THE FIRST PART OF THE BILL.
THE FIRST PART OF THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE. THE WOULD REQUIRE THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
STILL DISALLOW COSTS ASSOCIATED
WITH DAMAGE CAUSED BY UTILITIES
PLANT.
IF IN ANY WAY GOT UTILITY PLANT
WAS UNREAL REASONABLY OPERATED
MAINTAINED.
CONSTRUCTED.
THE PROBLEM IS THERE'S NO.
I ARE MET FOR A CAUSAL LINK
BETWEEN THAT THE THE
UNREASONABLE ACT AND THE DAMAGE
THAT'S ACTUALLY CAUSED SO
FOREXAMPLE WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT
TO
PUT LITTLE HIGH VOLTAGE SIGN
ON EVERY POLL.
THAT'S A REQUIREMENT.
BUT IN AN EXAMPLE WHERE P.
JEANNIE FAILED TO PUT THAT SIGN
ON AND IF A HUNDRED MILE AN HOUR
WIND KNOCKS
TREE INTO A LINE STARTING A
FIRE.
THIS BILL WOULD SAY THERE WAS AN
UNREASONABLE ACT WE MUST
DISALLOW COSTS SO THE FLAW IN
THE BILL IS THERE IS NO CAUSAL
APPROXIMATE BECAUSE CONNECTION.
IT CAN BE SIMPLY FIXED WE'D BEEN
IN CONTACT WITH THE AUTHOR SIDE.
OFFICE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO REPORT
THEIR COMMUNAL WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT THAT BUT IT THANK
YOU VERY MUCH AND I UNDERSTAND
THAT YOU WANT TO RESPOND QUICKLY
THAT I I THINK YOU NEWS REQUEST
IS REASONABLE AND WE'RE WORKING
TO SERVE BURGER LANGUAGE TO SO
THEY CAN. THANK YOU WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. ALRIGHT VERY GOOD YOU
NAME IT ATTACK OF THE CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS OF CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT GLORY THANK YOU OTHER
WITNESSES AND SPORT.
I'M NOT SURE I'M SOMETHING CLICK
HERE MAY HAVE OF NOT STERN AND
IT'S BEHALF OF TURN SUPPORT THE
BILL.
VERY GOOD. ALRIGHT OPPOSITION.
IT'S REALLY OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL.
SENATOR IF YOU LIKE TO MAKE A
QUICK CHO CLOSE WITH.
CENTER MORE LUCK HAS QUESTION.
FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM P.
GENIA COULD STILL YOU COULD COME
BACK TO THE MICROPHONE I. I'M
JUST.
TRYING TO STRIKE THIS BALANCE
BETWEEN.
POOR MANAGEMENT RATEPAYERS
PAYING FOR THE MISTAKE OR
SHAREHOLDERS PAYING FOR THE
MISTAKE. AND SO IS THIS BILL
HITTING.
THAT EQUILIBRIUM.
I OTHER THAN THE FLAW THAT I'VE.
POINTED OUT.
I THINK THIS BILL GIVES THE
COMMISSION THE DISCRETION THAT
THEY'VE ASKED FOR. TO EVALUATE
ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES
AROUND EVENT INDETERMINATE THE
UTILITIES CONDUCT WAS REASONABLE
OR NOT. AND IF THEY CONCLUDE THE
UTILITIES CONDUCT WAS NOT
REASONABLE TO HOLD.
UTILITY SHAREHOLDERS
ACCOUNTABLE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU MANAGER.
OR THAT IT.
SINCE MANY OF THE QUESTIONS
ALRIGHT.
THERE'S A MOTION BY SENATOR
MINING THE SENATOR HILL IS
ASKING FOR AN AYE VOTE PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL.
AND THE MOTION IS TO PASSED THE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
JACKSON I JACKSON I AM MORE
LOCK.
MORE LIKE AYE ANDERSON
HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG AYE MONNING. MONNING
AYE STERN. WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI
AYE.
THE BILL HAS OF FIVE VOTES WE
WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN.
AND YOUR NEXT BILL SENATOR HILL
IS. FILE ITEM.
TWENTY NINE.
S. B. FOURTEEN TWENTY SEVEN.
PLEASE THANK YOU DE THANK YOU
VERY MUCH MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS.
THAT'S ME FOURTEEN TWENTY SEVEN
WOULD PROTECT VETERANS AND
MILITARY PERSONNEL FROM HOUSING
DISCRIMINATION ENSURE THAT
LANDLORDS CONNECTED I HOMELESS
VETERANS HOUSING BASED SOLELY ON
THEFACT. THAT THEY RECEIVE A
RENTAL ASSISTANCE VOUCHERS US
VETERANS AND THOSE CURRENTLY
SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES ARE
PROTECTED FROM EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION BY CALIFORNIA
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
THAT.%
HOWEVER THE LAW DOES NOT
SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED VETERANS
OR MILITARY PERSONNEL AMONG
THOSE WHO ARE PROTECTED FROM
HOUSING DISCRIMINATION. ALMOST
EVERY OTHER PROTECTED CLASS IN
THAT FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
ACT IS PROTECTED IT BOTH
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
DISCRIMINATION STATUTES.
S. B. FOURTEEN TWENTY SEVEN
WOULD ADDRESS THIS GAP BY ADDING
VETERANS AND MILITARY PERSONNEL
AS A PROTECTED CLASS IN STATUTES
RELATED TO HOUSING
DISCRIMINATION.
VETERANS AND MILITARY PERSONNEL
FACE SIGNIFICANT HOUSING
CHALLENGES
CALIFORNIA HAS THE LARGEST
NUMBER OF VETERANS EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS.
I AT NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED
AND TWELVE REPRESENTING TWENTY
FOUR PERCENT OF THE NATIONAL
HOMELESS VETERAN POPULATION.
A LARGE NUMBER OF DISPLACED AND
AT RISK VETERANS LIVE WITH THE
LINGERING EFFECTS OF
PTSD AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE WHICH
ARE COMPOUNDED BY A LACK OF
FAMILY. AND SOCIAL SUPPORT
NETWORKS
VETERANS ARE FIFTY PERCENT MORE
LIKELY TO BECOME HOMELESS THAN
OTHER AMERICANS ADDITIONALLY
MINORITY VETERANS HAVE AN EVEN
GREATER CHANCE OF ENDING UP ON
THE STREETS. OR IN A HOMELESS
SHELTER.
VETERANS AND MILITARY PERSONNEL
ALREADY FACE SIGNIFICANT HOUSING
CHALLENGES THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE
TO WORRY ABOUT BEING
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST WHEN
TRYING TO FIND A HOME FOR
THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
THAT'S EFORE TING TWENTY SEVEN
WILL ENSURE OUR HEROES ARE NOT
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN HOUSING
AND ARE NOT DENIED HOUSING
BECAUSE OF HOW THEY PAY THEIR
RENT.
THANK YOU MEMBERS.
THANK YOU WITNESSES SINCE
SUPPORT GOOD AFTERNOON YOU HAVE
TWO MINUTES THANK YOU GOOD
AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS GREG HAYES HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF BED PRINT SERVICE
AGENCIES. AND SAY I CONSORTIUM
OF SIX.
VETERANS SERVICE AGENCIES THAT
WORK IN CONCERT
TO SERVE THE MENTAL HEALTH
HOUSING AND WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF VETERANS IN
CALIFORNIA.
ANNUALLY SUPPLYING MORE THAN
FOURTEEN THOUSAND VETERANS.
WITH HOUSING AND OTHER SERVICES
FOUR THOUSAND.
WITH JOB TRAINING AND SERVING
NEARLY NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND
MEALS EVERY YEAR THESE VETERANS.
THE SENATE AND DID A GREAT JOB
TALKING ABOUT.
THE POTENTIAL CHALLENGES FACED
BY VETERANS.
THEY RECEIVED THESE BASH
HOUSING.
VOUCHERS TO GET HOUSING AND ARE
OFTEN FACED.
WITH BEING TURNED AWAY AT THE
DOOR THIS WAS AN ANECDOTAL
PROBLEM UNTIL THERE WAS A STING
DONE IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
TO LOOK AT THIS VERY PROBLEM.
AND IN THAT STAYING THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE THERE.
SENT OUT LETTERS TO FIFTY
RANDOM LANDLORDS SEEKING.
TO I'VE BEEN POSING AS VETERANS
IS SEEKING HOUSING HIGH AND.
MANY OF THEM WERE JUST FLAT OUT
DENIED.%
SAYING WE DON'T ACCEPT THOSE
HOUSING VOUCHERS HERE IT IS AN
EXAMPLE OF THE PROBLEM FACED
EVERYDAY BY THESE VETERANS AND
THE WAY OUR ASSOCIATION WORKS.
IT IS ONCE A VETERAN IS IN THE
HOUSE HAIR IN HOUSING SITUATION
WE THEN PROVIDE THE MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES AND WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES TO MAKE THEM
A CONTRIBUTING MEMBER OF
SOCIETY.
WE IF YOU DON'T ADDRESS THE
HOUSING SITUATION AND THAT WE'RE
TRYING TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES
TO VETERANS WHO WERE LIVING ON
THE STREET IT DOESN'T WORK. AND
SO ALL OF THE OTHER SERVICES
PROVIDED FALL FLAT THIS IS THE
FIRST THE PRIMARY THING THAT HAS
TO BE ADDRESSED IN ORDER PROVIDE
THE REST OF THE SERVICES SO.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION
OF THIS IMPORTANT MEASURE.
THANK YOU AND I THINK THIS IS A
STORY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE. THE OTHER WAYS HOMELESS WHO
HAVE ISSUES YOU'VE GOT A. GOOD
TO GET THEM STABLE IN A IN A
PLACE AND THEN THE SERVICES WILL
ASSIST THEM IN WITHOUT THAT. AND
WE WON'T SEE MUCH SUCCESS WITH
WITH THESE FOLKS OR ANY OF OUR
HOMELESS POPULATION AND.
CERTAINLY OUR MILITARY SHOULD
NOT BE RENDERED HOMELESS BY
VIRTUE OF THEIR SERVICE THANK
YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
PLEASE IF YOU'D STEP FORWARD TO
THE MICROPHONE NAME AND
AFFILIATION PLEASE.
HI TIFFANI PULLEYBLANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
HOW ARE YOU?
GOOD AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES
PLEASE
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS SHAUN TO PAY CAN ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION WE ARE
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED. WE
CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND. AND
APPRECIATE THE SENATOR'S INTENT
WITH THE LEGISLATION
I THINK OUR MEMBERS FEEL VERY
STRONGLY THAT AT SOME POINT TO
ENSURE THE NOT JUST VETERANS
WITH VOUCHERS BUT ALSO OTHERS
THE DOCTORS HAVE ACCESS TO.
QUALITY HOUSING.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO
UNDERSTAND THAT. PROPERTY OWNERS
HAVE A FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO
ACCEPT AND INSTEAD OF A VOUCHER.
SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE RENT
IS GUARANTEED SO THEY WOULD
THEIR LOOK THE BEST TENANT WHEN
IT COMES TO REQUIRING HILLS
RECEIVING RENT. I THINK THE
CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE IS WITH
THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES IN THE
SECTION EIGHT PROGRAM ITSELF. IS
A FEDERAL PROGRAM THAT IS
ROUTINELY CUT AT THE STATE LEVEL
THEIR STAFFING ISSUES THERE'S
FUNDING ISSUES AND LOCAL HOUSING
AUTHORITY SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO
ADMINISTER THESE PROGRAMS
EFFECTIVELY. FOR PROPERTY OWNERS
HAS THE ANALYSIS POINTED OUT
THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS A
PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO DO BEFORE
THEY CAN ACCEPT ATTENDED WITHOUT
YOUR ANY TEN WITHOUT SHIRTS. AND
THESE THINGS TAKE SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF TIME ITS CONTRACTUAL
YET HAVE AN INSPECTION THERE'S A
LOT OF PAPERWORK INVOLVED. AND.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT DROUGHT THAT
PROCESS WHICH TAKES ANYWHERE
FROM BEST CASE SCENARIO COUPLE
WEEKS THE LIKELY A MONTH. THAT
UNIT IS SITTING EMPTY
SO IN ORDER FOR A.
LANDLORD TO TAKE ATTENDANCE
THAT HAVE TO FIRST GO THROUGH
ALL THESE PROCESSES THAT CAN BE
PROVED PROVED THE FEDERAL LAW
DOESN'T REQUIRE ALLOW THEM TO BE
PRE APPROVED. SO HAVING
SITUATION WHERE.
FOR EXAMPLE IN THE THIS BILL
ATTENDED WITH A VOUCHER.
VETERANS AND WHEN THE DOCTOR
COMES IN SOLID FIRST FOLLOWED
THEN BY A TENANT WITH A MARKET
RATE. THAT OWNER IS REQUIRED TO
TAKE THE FIRST QUALIFIED
APPLICANTS AND SO THEN THEY HAVE
TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
ALL THE WHILE THE UNIVERSITY
EMPTY AND DR LAMBERT IS NOT
GETTING ANY REVENUE BUT SAUCE TO
PAY THEIR BILLS SO AGAIN FOR US
IT'S NOT THE TENANT IT'S REALLY
THE PROCESS WE CAN MAKE IT SO.
THAT THAT PROCESS IS QUICKER
AREA AN OWNER WOULD BE IN SENATE
MY SAID TAKE SECTION EIGHT AND
BE ABLE TO.
BE ABLE TO AFFORD.
STAYING IN BUSINESS SO I FOR
THOSE REASONS WE ARE OPPOSE
UNLESS AMENDED.
THANK YOU OTHER OTHER WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION.
A GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR
ENDS AND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
ARE CREAM GREASY ON BEHALF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS. ALSO IN OPPOSE WAS HIM
IN THAT POSITION FOR THE REASONS
PREVIOUSLY STATED AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOU KNOW
VOTE THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION BRING IT
BACK TO THE DYESS ANY QUESTIONS
SENATOR HERTZBERG.
WE JUST JUST REALLY COMMENT BUT
I BELIEVE IT WAS LAST YEAR THE
BEFORE I DON'T RECALL MADAM
CHAIR. WHEN CENTER LENO HAD A
MEASURE DEALING WITH.
SECTION EIGHT HOUSING. AND I
RAISE THE SAME ISSUE TODAY THAT
I RAISED THE TIME AND I'VE REYES
WITH THE AUTHOR.
WHO I HOLD IN HIGH REGARD AND
WHICH HAN?
IT IS THE PROCESS BECAUSE THE
THE THE THE IN MY JUDGMENT IS IN
MY EXPERIENCE IN LIFE HAS BEEN.
THAT THE REASON PEOPLE
DISCRIMINATE IT'S NOT BECAUSE
THEY DON'T WANT TO VETERAN OR
SOMEBODY WAS SECTION EIGHT.
THE PROBLEM ONEROUS ASPECTS OF
THE PROGRAM I THINK THE
REGULATIONS WERE TWELVE HUNDRED
PAGES. THE THAT THE THE THE
GARDEN YOU SIGNED UP TO YOU YOU
SIGN OF TEN OR FIFTEEN YEAR
CONTRACT FOR YOU NOT TO GO FOR
SECTION EIGHT. AND AND NORMALLY
GET PAID THE FIRST OF THE MONTH
SO YOU CAN PAY YOUR MORTGAGE ON
THE BUILDING ON THE FIFTEENTH.
BUT SOMETIMES A FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TAKES SIX MONTHS TO
PAY YOU OR IF THEY SAY IF
SOMEBODY SAID TO THE SPECTRUM A
PAID THE SPECTRES AND SHOW UP.
IT IT BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE TO
MANAGE YOUR SMALL A PARTICULAR
SMALL BUSINESSES SO LOOK I I
THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE
CHALLENGE THAT WE ALWAYS FACE IN
GOVERNMENT WE WE ARE HERE. WITH
EXTRAORDINARILY NOBLE CAUSE
WITH THAT UNBELIEVABLY HORRIBLE
SITUATION WHERE VETERANS WHO
WERE OUT HERE SERVE THIS COUNTRY
AND CAN'T GET HOUSING WE HAVE A
GOVERNMENT PROGRAM THAT CAN'T
FIX IT. AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO
IT ALMOST SEEMED LIKE A LOT SO
I'M JUST TRYING TO WORK WORRY
ABOUT THE MECHANICS.
THE GOAL IS LAUDABLE WE HAVE TO
FIX IT I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT
THE PROCESS TO FIX IT. DOESN'T
REALLY ACHIEVE IT AND CAUSES THE
UNDERLYING PROBLEM
BUT DID THE OFFICE GOOD
COMMITTED CONVERSATIONS THAT
WOULD WORK TOGETHER ON THIS BT
SO I'M CERTAINLY GOING TO
SUPPORT THIS TODAY. BUT I JUST
ONLY RAISE IT BECAUSE I JUST
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US AS A
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH IN EACH ONE
OF THESE MEASURES TO SCRUB THIS
STUFF. AND MAKE IT AS GOOD AS WE
CAN AND TO AND TO UNDERSTAND
THAT OFTEN OUR MOTIVATIONS ARE
GREAT BUT THE PROCESS OF THESE
THIS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROCESS
IS SO HORRIBLE AND IF YOU
REMEMBER THAT DEBATE WAS YOUR
CAN I DO. HEARING AND I JUST
WANT TO SHARE THAT WITH THE
COMMITTEE COURSE WE CAN'T TOO
MUCH BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AT THIS POINT BUT CERTAINLY WE
CAN WITHIN OUR OWN STATE AND.
ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE IS
WHEN WE SET UP THESE. PROGRAMS
AND SET REGULATIONS AND SO FORTH
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE ENOUGH PERSONNEL SO THAT
THEY CAN IMPLEMENT THESE THINGS
AND DO IT IN A TIMELY FASHION
AND I.
I SHARE THAT CONCERN BECAUSE IT
IS BY SECTION EIGHT HOUSING DOES
HAVE ON THE.
SORT OF. THE PHILOSOPHICAL IS A
VERY GOOD BOTH IN TERMS OF
PROVIDING HOUSING AND THE
ABILITY TO GET TO BE SURE THAT
YOU'RE GONNA GET RENT BUT. THE
OTHER. OF THE YOU KNOW
CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE
CAN MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT SO I
I THINK WE ALL APPRECIATE THAT
AND CERTAINLY.
IT'S MY HOPE THAT WE CAN.
TRY TO ENCOURAGE BETTER
COMPLIANCE BECAUSE IT'S A VERY
IMPORTANT PROGRAM AND TO
APPRECIATE THOSE CONCERNED
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. YEAH THAT
THE STAFF REPORT.
POINTS ON THE FIRST PAGE THAT
WE'VE REDUCED. VETERANS HOMELESS
POPULATION BY HALF
SO SOMETHING WHILE IT'S A LARGE
NUMBER IT'S STILL SOMETHING'S
GOING.
GREG WITH THAT MY QUESTION WAS
CAN WE LISTA REQUIREMENTS ON
PAGE EIGHT THAT.
THE.
HAD VASH LEASE REQUIREMENTS
THERE'S NO SIZE.
PICKED UP AND THAT THE BILL I
MEAN YOU COULD HAVE ONE UNIT AND
YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH.
SOME PEOPLE WOULD SAY THE
ONEROUS.
PLANNING IN SPEND SPECTRUM.
SIDE INFORMATION SESSION AND IF
YOU JUST GOT ONE UNIT I DON'T
KNOW WHICH WHICH IS DIFFERENT
FROM PEOPLE OTHER. THE APARTMENT
OWNERS AND THE REAL APARTMENT
OWNERS THAT HAPPENED AND I WAS
WONDERING. IS AT THEM I JUST
MAKING STUFF UP OR IS THERE.
BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO WORK. YOU
KNOW YOU DO WANT TO WORK AND.
IN THIS IS WHAT THE OPPONENTS
HAVE SAID ABOUT THE SECTION
EIGHT PROCESS THAT IS OWNERSHIP
SUCH SIMILAR TO WHAT SENATOR
HERTZBERG IS MENTIONED.
BUT TO A YOU KNOW I'M SURE.
THERE MAY BE SOME EXAGGERATION
IN HERE BUT IT DOES TAKE A
LITTLE LONGER IT DOES TAKE SOME
INSPECTIONS AND IT DOES TAKE
SOME TIME WHETHER IT'S TWO WEEKS
THREE WEEKS OR A MONTH.
IT IS A LITTLE.
EXTRA BURDEN ON THAT PERSON BUT
TO PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE.
THE CALIFORNIA THERE ARE ABOUT
FIVE OF ABOUT SIX MILLION RENTAL
UNITS SIX MILLION RENTAL UNITS.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THE CAO
THE THE THE VETERANS THE HIDE.
BASH PROGRAM WITH THE VETERAN.
A SECTION EIGHT VOUCHERS AS
THEY WOULD HAVE IN CALIFORNIA
SIX MILLION HOUSING UNITS
ONE THOUSAND NINETY FOUR
VOUCHERS TOTAL. FOR THE ENTIRE
STATE.
ONE THOUSAND NINETY SIX VOUCHERS
FOR THE STATE SO WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT A SMALL AMOUNT WHAT I LOOK
AT AND I HAVE A GREAT DEAL
RESPECT FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF
SEA XIN BECAUSE. THEY'VE DONE A
GREAT JOB OF.
TRYING TO BUILDING GETS MORE
HOUSING IN CALIFORNIA INTERNET
BUT YOU KNOW THERE WERE TIMES
THAT I REMEMBER NOT THAT LONG
AGO WHEN.
APARTMENT OWNERS IN LAND WHICH
WERE HUNGRY FOR SECTION EIGHT
VOUCHERS THEY COULDN'T GET
ENOUGH OF REFINED.
AND NOW TODAY WHEN WE HAVE MANY
OF SENATOR LENO'S BILL BEFORE.
BUT I'M NOT GOING THERE WITH
THIS I'M HUSSEIN BECAUSE OF THIS
PROTECTED CLASS WERE TRYING TO
DEVELOP THAT THAT CLASS SHOULD
BE ABLE TO USE THOSE VOUCHERS
THE ONE THOUSAND OF THEM.
THAT YOU KNOW IT'S IT'S YOU
KNOW IT'S FAIR PLAY IN THAT.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO NOT JUST
TAKE ON THE ONE HAND BUT GIVE A
LITTLE ON THE OTHER THAT'S MY.
MY GOAL REGARDS TO THIS BILL AND
THE ONE THOUSAND NINETY SIX
TRUE I'M I'M I'M.
VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR
STATUSES.
POOR PEOPLE PURSUE THEIR STATUS
IS VETERANS I MEAN I'M I'M I'M
LOOKING AT THE PEOPLE THAT TO
QUALIFY FOR THIS ARE. POOR
THAT'S THAT THAT'S THE CONCERN
PAD THAT I HAVE TO POUR IN
BETTER CAL. RIGHT VERSUS JUST
REGULAR POOR WHO DON'T GET THE
SUPPORT OF SERVICES IN SECTION
EIGHT SO WE GO AROUND AND AROUND
I JUST.
ALRIGHT THANK YOU YOU.
SENATOR MONNING.
THANK YOU ADS HAD A
CLARIFICATION QUESTION.
BY INCLUDING VETERANS AS A
PROTECTED CLASS IN THE FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT.
WOULD THIS BILL ALSO EXTEND
PROTECTION TO THEM VIS A VIS OF
EMPLOYMENT THAT WOULD AND OTHER
WORDS BE ILLEGAL FOR AN
EMPLOYER.
TO. DISCRIMINATE AGAINST A
VETERAN HAS A REASON FOR NOT
HIRING.
I. LIKE IT REPAIRS THAT LIVE
MAYBE THE COMMITTEE KNOWS.
I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
HOUSING HERE'S WELL BUT IT'S IN
THE FAIR PLAY BUT HOW ABOUT IF
YOU INCLUDE THEM I MIGHT IN THE
FE H. F. ME HK. THAT'S
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
INCIPIENT CLUED VETERANS.
AS PROTECTED
CLASS ALONG WITH OTHER PROTECTED
CLASSES. I. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO
THIS I JUST WANT I JUST WANT
UNDERSTANDS THIS LIMITED TO
HOUSING OR WITH THIS ALSO.
CREATE PROTECTION IN OREGON
PROTECTED.
FOR EMPLOYMENT THIS JUST ADDS
HOUSING TO THAT THANK YOU FOR
THE CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S WHEN I WANTED TO KNOW
QUIETNESS SEEING NO OTHER
QUESTIONS SHOWS SENATOR HILL
WHICH YOU LIKE PROGRESS TRIBAL
MEMBERS I THINK THAT THE. THE
NEED IS THERE. THE THE.
EXPENSE AND COST IS.
IS IS VERY LITTLE COMPARED TO
THE BENEFITS THAT WE CAN DERIVE
FROM A VERY GOOD. PART THE
MOTION IS TO PASSED THE SENATE
APPROACH IS OUR MOTION.
WELL.
MOVE BY SENATOR MONNING PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON BY JACKSON I AM MORE
LOCK.
ANDERSON. HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG
AYE MONNING. AYE MONNING AYE
STERN WIECKOWSKI. WIECKOWSKI AYE
ART THAT BILL HAS FOUR VOTES
WILL KEEP IT ON CALL THANK YOU
SENATOR HILL. NEXT UP WE HAVE A
SENATOR DODD HERE.
YOU ARE. SKIPPING OVER A NUMBER
OF OTHERS WELL DONE.
FILE ITEM FOURTEEN.
THERE IS I THINK YOU HAVE TO
ITEMS.
FILE ITEM FOURTEEN AND EIGHTEEN
CHOI STAR WITH FOURTEEN FIRST
VERY GOOD.
ONE SECOND.
A I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOCK UP OF
A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS THAT THE
SERGEANTS GOVERNOR PASSED SO.
NOW.
HE MEANT.
HI.
GIVEN THIS IS TRIPLE REFERRED WE
DIDN'T WE THERE'S A SUMMARY OF
THE MARKUPS IN THE ANALYSIS.
TO ACTUALLY.
THIS WAS.
GET THEM OUT.
CAN APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK IN
THE SYNAGOGUE GOOD AFTERNOON AND
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE.
OKAY.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
OF BEFORE I BEGIN I'D LIKE TO
THANK YOUR CONSOLES FOR WORKING
WITH MY STAFF TO CRAFT THE
AMENDMENTS WHICH.
.
WE THINK A DEADLY CLARIFIES
PROVISIONS OF REMOVES CONFLICTS
IN THE LEGISLATION THE
AMENDMENT'S DELINEATED IN THE
ANALYSIS IMPROVE THE BILL AND I
ACCEPT THEM AS AUTHORS
AMENDMENTS.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF NINE NINE
EIGHT IS A MEASURE THAT WILL
HELP ENSURE THAT CALIFORNIA'S
POLICY ON THE HUMAN RIGHT TO SAY
FOR AFFORDABLE DRINKING WATER.
IS ACHIEVED.
THE COST OF DRINKING WATER IS
GOING UP STATEWIDE THE COST
INCREASED OVER SIXTY SIX
PERCENT.
BETWEEN TWO THOUSAND SEVEN TO
TWO THOUSAND FIFTEEN.
MOST WATER AGENCIES WORK REALLY
HARD TO KEEP THEI SYSTEM COSTS
UNDER CONTROL BUT FACTORS LIKE
AGING INFRASTRUCTURE MORE
STRINGENT WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS IN THE EFFECTS OF
WATER CONSERVATION ON REVENUE.
PUSH COSTS EVEN HIGHER.
ELEVEN OF CALIFORNIA'S LARGEST
UTILITY FOUND THAT OF THE TWENTY
SEVEN MILLION PEOPLE IN THEIR
SERVICE AREAS MORE THAN FIVE
POINT FIVE MILLION ARE IMPACTED
BY WATER AFFORDABILITY. AND COST
OF LIVING ISSUES.
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS OUR
HARDEST HIT RISING WATER RATES
HAVE RESULTED IN HIGHER
DELINQUENCY RATES ON WATER BILLS
WHICH IN TURN LEADS.
TWO MORE WATER SERVICE SHUT
OFFS.
LOTS OF WATER SERVICE CAN HAVE
DIRE HEALTH AND SAFETY
CONSEQUENCES ON VULNERABLE
INDIVIDUALS ESPECIALLY THE
ELDERLY.
SICK DISABLED IN INFANTS.
WHILE THERE ARE CONSISTENT LIFE
WHY PROGRAMS FOR PEOPLE HAVING
DIFFICULTY PAYING THEIR ELECTRIC
GAS AND TELEPHONE BILLS THERE'S
ONLY A PATCHWORK SAID OF LOCAL
POLICIES. ARE DEALING WITH WATER
BILL DELINQUENCIES ESTABLISHING
A STATEWIDE STRUCTURE TO HELP
VULNERABLE AND OR LOW INCOME
WATER RATEPAYERS CHO.
WITH INCREASING WATER RATES WILL
REDUCE DIFFICULT TRADE OFFS
FAMILIES HAVE TO MAKE.
IMPROVE HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR
MANY INDIVIDUALS.
THAT'S BE NINE NINE EIGHT SIX TO
PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE AND
LOW INCOME RESIDENTS WHO FACE
TERMINATION THEIR WATER SERVICE.
IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS.
HE REQUIRES PUBLISHED WATER
AGENCY POLICIES FOR DEFERRED
PAYMENTS.
ALTERNATE PAYMENT PLANS AND
APPEALS.
IT REQUIRES WAITING PERIODS
BEFORE TERMINATING SERVICE AND
REQUIREMENT FOR CONTRACTING
CONTACT THE EXCUSE ME THE
REPAIR.
IT LIMITS DISCONTINUATION IN THE
EVENT OF A LIFE AND SAFETY
PROBLEM OR SEVERE ECONOMIC
HARDSHIP PROVIDED THE REPAIR
COMPLIES WITH CERTAIN
CONDITIONS.
AND THE BILL LIMITS FEES FOR
RECONNECTING SERVICE FOR LOW
INCOME RATEPAYERS.
THE BILL HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN
AMENDED TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
RAISED BY WATER AGENCIES AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
I BELIEVE THE BILL ADDRESSES THE
OPPONENTS CONCERNS OVER PROP TWO
EIGHTEEN CONFLICT.
IT MAKES CLEAR THE WATER AGENCY
CAN EVENTUALLY COLLECT.
ON THE REPAIRS DEBT.
THE AMENDMENTS I'M ACCEPTING
TODAY SHOULD NARROW THE
OUTSTANDING ISSUES EVEN FURTHER.
S. B. NINE NINE EIGHT IT'S AN
IMPORTANT MEASURE TO PROVIDE
SOME BASIC PROTECTIONS TO
HOUSEHOLDS WITH VULNERABLE
OCCUPANTS.
IT TO ENSURE OUR HUMAN RIGHT TO
SAY FOR AFFORDABLE WATER IS UP
HEALTH.
THANK YOU SENATOR FIRST WITNESS.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
I'M ALEXANDER HARM THEM WITH THE
WESTERN CENTER ON LAW AND
POVERTY CUTER EXPRESS OUR
SUPPORT FOR S. B. NINE NINE
EIGHT.
WHILE MOST CUSTOMERS NEVER
EXPERIENCE WATER SHUT OFF FOR
THE LOW INCOME AND VULNERABLE
TENANTS WE REPRESENT A SHUT OFF
CAN HAVE DIRE CONSEQUENCES FOR
EVERY ASPECT OF THEIR LIVES.
I SHUT OFF CAN THREATEN PHYSICAL
AND MENTAL HEALTH FOOD SECURITY
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT HOUSING
SUBSIDIES.
THE ABILITY TO GET AND MAINTAIN
A JOBBER PERFORMANCE SCHOOL. AND
CAN THREATEN FAMILY AND
COMMUNITY COHESION.
FOR EXAMPLE IS A LEGAL AID
ATTORNEY I REPRESENTED A LOW
INCOME MOTHER OF THREE HAS WATER
WAS SHUT OFF WHEN HER LANDLORD
FAILED TO PAY THE BILL FOR HER
ENTIRE APARTMENT BUILDING
DESPITE. CHARGING TENANTS
MONTHLY FOR WATER.
IN WHILE ATTEMPTING TO RESOLVE
THAT SITUATION WITH HER LANDLORD
THE COUNTY STARTED THREATENING
TO REMOVE HER CHILDREN FROM THE
HOME DUE TO THE LACK OF RUNNING
WATER AND SO THIS.
MOTHER WAS FORCED THE EVENTUALLY
TO CHOOSE BETWEEN HER HOUSING
RIGHTS AND HER FAMILY STABILITY.
AND EVENTUALLY DID VACATE HER
HOME WITHOUT RESOLVING THE
SITUATION.
THAT'S BEEN NINE NINE EIGHT
WOULD ADDRESS SITUATIONS LIKE
THIS BY PROTECTING VULNERABLE
FAMILIES.
AND THOSE WHOSE HEALTH MAY BE
IMPACTED REQUIRING WRITTEN
POLICIES AND LANGUAGE ACCESS AND
INCLUDING OPTIONS FOR RESOLVING
DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS.
THIS BILL BRINGS US CLOSER TO
MAKING TO HUMAN RIGHTS WATER OF
REALITY FOR VULNERABLE FAMILIES
AND WE URGE YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS
BILL THINKING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
MY NAME IS DEBBIE YOURS I'M WITH
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. A INCH
HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE SPELL.
COMMITTEE WATER CENTER BURKE
CENTER ALL CALIFORNIANS HAVE
ACCESS TO SAFE CLEAN AND
AFFORDABLE DRINKING WATER.
A SENTIMENT THAT WE KNOW THAT
THE LEGISLATURE SHARES IS WELL
AS IN TWENTY TWELVE. CALIFORNIA
BECAME THE FIRST STATE TO PASS
THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER.
TODAY WITH INCREASING STRESSES
ON WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
WATER RATES ARE RISING FASTER
THAN EVER FASTER THAN IN EVEN
INCOME LEVELS ARE RISING.
THIS LEADS TO MORE MORE HOMES
BEING UNABLE TO PAY THEIR WATER
BILLS.
UNFORTUNATELY CAMINO WATER
CENTER AND MANY OF OUR ALLIES
WORKING WITH LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES KNOW FAR TOO MANY
HOMES THAT TO MAKE REALLY HARD
CHOICES ABOUT HOW TO CONTINUE TO
PAY FOR THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF
THEIR HOME.
SOMETIMES FAMILIES ARE HAVE TO
FORCED TO CHOOSE BETWEEN PAYING
FOR MEDICAL CARE AND HEALTHY
FOOD FOR THEIR FAMILIES. AND
PAYING THEIR WATER BILLS.
HOWEVER SOMETIMES EVEN MAKING IS
HARD CHOICES IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO
CONTINUE TO PAY THE BILLS.
A FAMILY MEMBER COULD BECOME
SERIOUSLY OVER THE MAIN INCOME
EARNER CAN LOSE THAT CAN EITHER
LOSE THEIR JOB OR PASS AWAY.
LEAVING HOMES.
MORE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR BILLS
THAN EVER BEFORE.
PORTABLE POPULATIONS DESERVE
THEIR ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS SP
NINE NINE EIGHT WILL DO JUST
THAT.
S. B. NINE NINE EIGHT PUTS THEM
PLEASE COMMONSENSE PROTECTIONS
FOR HOMES FACING BEING COMPETE.
IMPENDING WATER DISCONNECTION
AND REQUIRES A REASONABLE
PAYMENT PLAN AND. AND REDUCE OUR
WE'VE JUST CONNECTION FEES FEES
THAT HOMES ALREADY PAY THE
STRUGGLING TO PAY THEIR WATER
BILLS ARE UNLIKELY TO BE ABLE
TO.
PAY.
IF CALIFORNIA TRULY WANTS TO
ENSURE THAT ALL CALIFORNIANS
HAVE ACCESS HUMAN RIGHTS WATER
AS YOU KNOW I NAY NEED IS A STEP
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT PLEASE COME
AND GO TO THE MICROPHONE AND
STATE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION
PLEASE.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MARIAN
WARMER DAMAGE RURAL COUNTY
REPRESENTATIVES OF CALIFORNIA
WHERE IN SUPPORT OF THE MEASURE
THANK YOU.
I KIND OF JUST STICK OF
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT THANK YOU
THANK YOU.
ENTER MEMBERS KEVIN BAKER FOR
THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION CALIFORNIA ALSO AND.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NO I BY NO REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL
ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
REBECCA MARKETS REPRESENTING
FOOD AND WATER WATCH AND
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES SAY IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
I'M WENDY REQUEST WITH THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES.
WHO REPRESENTS OVER FOUR HUNDRED
THIRTY PUBLIC WATER AGENCIES
UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SERVING AS THE BACKBONE OF
RESPONSIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE
WATER DEVELOPMENT DELIVERING
CALIFORNIA?
WERE PART OF AN OPPOSING LET'S
AMENDED COALITION THAT'S BEEN
PRO ACTIVELY NEGOTIATING
LANGUAGE WITH AUTHOR HIS
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR SINCE
FEBRUARY. WE WANT TO AGAIN THANK
THEM FOR ACCEPTING A FIRST WAVE
OF SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS TO
BEGIN TO ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS.
PROP TWO EIGHTEEN CONTAINS A
COST OF SERVICE PROVISION THAT
DOES NOT ALLOW PUBLIC AGENCIES
LIKE CITIES AND WATER DISTRICTS.
TO CHARGE CUSTOMERS MORE THAN
THE SERVICE ACTUALLY COSTS
THERE'S ALSO A PROHIBITION ON
COST SHIFTING CHARGING ONE SET
OF CUSTOMERS MORE SO THAN
ANOTHER SET OF CUSTOMERS CAN PAY
LESS.
CURRENT CAPS ON THE RECONNECTION
FEES ARE AN EXAMPLE OF POTENTIAL
COUGHS
COST SHIFTING THAT ARE AT ODDS
WITH PROP TWO EIGHTEEN. WE
UNDERSTAND THAT SOME MAY VIEW
THIS BILL AS ONE WAY TO DEAL
WITH THE SYMPTOM OF A LARGER
ISSUE OF WATER AFFORDABILITY TO
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES.
SEE SOLUTIONS LIKE SCA FOUR
AUTHORED BY SENATOR HERTZBERG
WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE LOCAL
PUBLIC AGENCIES
THE ABILITY TO OFFER VOLUNTARY
LIFELINE RATES TO LOW INCOME
CUSTOMERS.
AS A MORE COMPREHENSIVE WAY TO
DEAL WITH THE ROOT OF THE
CHALLENGE BY AMENDING THE
CONSTITUTION. SOME OF OUR
MEMBERS WATER DISTRICTS ARE
ALREADY ENGAGED IN PROVIDING
VOLUNTARY LOW INCOME WATER
SERVICE WHERE THEY HAVE OTHER.
NON RAPIER REVENUE AVAILABLE
UNFORTUNATELY AGENCIES THAT
DON'T HAVE OTHER REVENUE JUST
DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO PROVIDE
ALTERNATIVE LIFELINE WATER
RATES.
THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER ALSO
CONTAINS A KEY PROVISION THAT
REQUIRES AN IMPLEMENTATION THAT
IT SHALL NOT INFRINGE ON THE
RIGHTS OR RESPONSIBILITIES OF
ANY.
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM THIS
LANGUAGE WAS NOT AN
AFTERTHOUGHT.
IT WAS EXPLICITLY INCLUDED AS
PART OF A RESPONSIBLE VISION OF
THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER. SO
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO
POSITIVELY WORK WITH OUR
COALITION PARTNERS AND THE
AUTHOR TO TRY TO CONTINUE TO
ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS WE
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
COMMENT. AT BECAUSE SEVERAL
FOLKS ARE MULTI TASKING OTHER
COMMITTEES I ALSO LIKE TO STATE
FOR THE RECORD OPPOSITION FROM
THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
IN THE CALIFORNIA WATER SISSIES
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ARE THERE ARE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION WHO ARE
HERE AND NOT OTHERWISE
MULTITASKING.
FOR MULTITASKING NONE THE LESS
SINGLE TASKING HERE TODAY MADAM
CHAIR ON BEHALF OF TIME GILBERT
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
MUNICIPAL.
UTILITIES ASSOCIATION ALSO
OPPOSE FOR THE SAME REASONS
ARTICULATED PREVIOUSLY AND TO
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN
THUS FAR THANKS THANK YOU VERY
MUCH OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. FIRST DIVERSE FOR
THE MISS BUT WATER DISTRICT OF
ORANGE COUNTY IN OPPOSITION
THANK YOU.
I'M ROBIN WITH THE REGIONAL
WATER AUTHORITY OF SACRAMENTOWE
SHARE THE CONCERNS ARTICULATED
BY A QUICK FIX.
THANK YOU.
AFTERNOON.
ROSANNA CAMACHO MAY HAVE A CITY
OF LIVERMORE ALSO IMPOSE
AUSTIN'S A. LOT LESS MINUSCULE
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT THANK YOU ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
ALRIGHT.
IT HAPPENED THE DICE DO WE HAVE
QUESTIONS SENATOR WHITE HOUSE
KING.
CAN YOU POINT ME TO THE YOU SAID
THAT YOU TAKING AMENDMENTS THAT
WILL EVENTUALLY ALLOW FOR THE
WATER DISTRICTS
TO.
COLLECT PONDERED ON THEIR DEBT
WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM
SHIFTING.
I'M.
SHOCKED THAT OPPOSITION WOULD
SUGGEST THAT A DELAY ON PAYMENT
IS SOMEHOW GREATER BECAUSE THESE
WATER DISTRICTS TO GO BELLY UP
IF THAT'S THE IF THAT'S WHAT'S.
BUT IT CAN YOU SHOW ME WHERE BUT
AMENDMENT ARE WE DEALING WITH
WERE SET LANGUAGE BECAUSE
BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF
YOU'VE TAKEN AT A SIMPLE BLADE
THEY CAN COLLECT ALL THEIR DEBT.
AND THERE IS NO PROP TO EIGHTEEN
PROBLEM THERE'S NOT EVEN A SMELL
OF PROP TWO EIGHTEEN.
BUT IT'S WORSE LANGUAGE WHERE
WE'RE LOOKING FOR THAT RIGHT
NOW.
.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR A? FIVE
I'VE ASKED MY. STAFF WHO.
PROBABLY SADLY NOSES WAY TO
WEALTH.
TO JUST POINT OUT THE PROVISION.
WE'RE NOT ACTION.
HE DIDN'T STATE. PRODUCTION
COULDN'T. IN WHILE.
OKAY ALRIGHT.
LISTEN.
JOINT TO INDICATE WHAT WOULD YOU
INDICATE WHERE ON THE.
AMENDMENTS.
THE MOCK UP THE SHOES SPEECH TEN
OF TWENTY SEVEN ON THE MOCK UP
VERY.
SO IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO LOOK
AT THAT. ANYTHING ALRIGHT SO.
.
JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS FROM THE
WILL TO ACCEPT A.
IT'S A THAT MOTION IN JUST A
MOMENT.
THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS AND
THANK YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO
BE FLEXIBLE AND CLEARLY THIS IS
A FIRST SET OF AMENDMENTS.
.
A MINOR CITIES THE BILL
IMPRINTED STRIP SOME OF THE
SAFEGUARDS ODD THAT. THE EVEN AS
IT ADDED OTHER SO THAT'S PART OF
WHAT IT THESE AMENDMENTS TO.
I THINK WE JUST THE NEED TO
FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT ACCESS TO
WATER IS A MAJOR HEALTH HAZARD
AND WHILE. I THINK THE
OPPOSITION HAD PREVIOUSLY
INDICATED THEY WANTED MORE DATA
I THINK TO HAVE A MECHANISM SO
THAT PEOPLE CAN CONTINUE TO
SECURE.
OF THAT FUNDAMENTAL A ACCESS TO
WATER WHILE THOSE OTHER ISSUES
HAVE BEEN RESOLVED IS IMPORTANT.
I WONDER THOUGH.
.
THE WATER BOARD IS ONLY GIVEN A
QUITE LIMITED OVERSIGHT IN THIS
BILL HAVE YOU CONSIDERED OR ARE
YOU CONSIDERING POSSIBLY
EXPANDING THAT OVERSIGHT TO
COVER ALL. OF THE NEW SAFEGUARDS
ARE NOT JUST THE MAINTENANCE OF
A POLICY.
THEY HAVE.
AND WHERE WE ARE DISCUSSING WHAT
THE WATER BOARD.
BUT THEY HAVE NOT.
PULLED A SHIITE IF THEY'RE
COMFORTABLE WITH THE.
.
YEAH THE PROPOSAL ABOUT YET.
ALRIGHT WELL. AND ONE OTHER
QUESTION AND NO SOONER MONNING
COM.
HOW OFTEN DO ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
KICKED IN?
TO REDUCE UNPAID WATER BILLS
AND IT AND IT IS A COMMON OR ARE
YOU BASICALLY REALLY JUST
SAYING.
BY YOUR OPTION IS TO DELAY
PAYMENT AROUND AYE AMORTIZED BUT
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY.
THE WHOLE WORKS
WELL. THERE IS A LOT LIKE IT'S
SAID MY.
REMARKS AS A PATCH.
WORK OUT YOUR QUILT OF.
REGULATIONS AND SOME WATER
AGENCIES ARE DOING A VERY VERY
GOOD JOB ON THIS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BUT IT'S
PATCHWORK ADD.
.
OF THEIR OF THEIR NUMBER
DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT YES THEY
GET TO THE POINT WHERE I.
I'D.
THERE WERE THERE PASSED IN THE
WATER THE WATER IS SHUT OFF
AND THAT'S WHAT WE FELT THAT IT
STATE WIDE.
NO POLICY IN THIS NATURE WOULD
BE BENEFICIAL.
FOR FOR CONSUMERS
VERY GOOD THANK YOU SENATOR
MONNING.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR VERY
BRIEFLY I I JUST WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD THE.
AS YOU ARTICULATED.
CALIFORNIA HAS ESTABLISHED THE
RIGHT CLEAN SAFE DRINKING WATER
AS A HUMAN RIGHT.
IN THE CLASS OF PEOPLE THAT YOU
IDENTIFYING IN.
FURTHER.
HIGHLIGHTED IN THE AMENDMENTS.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CLASS OF
FOLKS THAT LIVE IN POVERTY AND
OFTEN IN DEEP POVERTY.
WHERE?
NOT HAVING THE RESOURCES TO PAY
WATER BILL.
CAN LEAD TO A SHUT OFF CAN LEAD
TO. PUBLIC HEALTH CONSEQUENCES
MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES SO IN
ADDITION TO THE HUMAN RIGHT.
OF SAFE CLEAN DRINKING WATER.
THERE'S THE COMMENSURATE HEALTH
ISSUES RELATED THAT WERE
ARTICULATED. BY THE AUTHOR SO I
JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD I KNOW
YOU'RE COMMITTED TO CONTINUING
TO WORK ON IT WAS. WITH THE
OPPONENTS SPENT THANK YOU MADAM
CHAIR VERY GOOD THANK YOU.
.
I THINK WERE ABOUT DONE UP HERE
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE I JUST
APPRECIATE.
HE ALL THAT.
LOOK AT WITH THE FIRST THIS
TRIPLE REFERRED AS YOU DID HEDGE
AS YOU KNOW THE FIRST HEARING WE
HAD PEOPLE OUT THE DOOR ABOUT
VERY HEARTENED BY THE FACT THAT
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO.
REMOVE A LOT OF OPPOSITION AND
I THINK.
THE CONSOLE HERETOFORE OTHER
HELP IN THIS REGARD AND EVEN I
THE FINAL THING I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO SAY IS THAT WHILE
THE OPPOSITION TALKS ABOUT.
YOU KNOW THE PROBLEMS THAT THIS.
BRIA BRINGS FOR THAT THEY ALSO
AT THE LAST HEARING BROUGHT
FORWARD THAT. THE FACT THE CLASS
THE PEOPLE THAT WERE TALKING
ABOUT IN THE TYPES OF PEOPLE
THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR A
SHOT OFF. IS REALLY A VERY VERY
SMALL.
YOU A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR
CUSTOMER BASE SO I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AYE VOTE. FOR GOOD
THERE'S A MOTION BY THE SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI THE MOTION IS TO PASS
AS AMENDMENT TWO AS AMENDED TO
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. JACKSON AYE
JACKSON AYE MORE LOCK.
MORE LIKE NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG.
MORNING. MONNING AYE STERN
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI AYE.
WORRIED YOU HAVE THREE VOTES
WORKPLACE SAID ON CALL.
AND THEN WE HAVE A.
FILE ITEM EIGHTEEN S. B. ELEVEN
TWENTY ONE.
OWN PERSONAL INFORMATION.
LET'S JUST WAIT A SECOND WHY
PEOPLE LEAVE.
ALRIGHT.
THANK YOU SENATOR DODD IF YOU'D
LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND PROCEED
WITH THIS IS FILE ITEM EIGHTEEN.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE I'D FIRST LIKE TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR
THEIR WORK ON THIS BILL. AND I
WILL WILL EXCUSE ME BE ACCEPTING
THE AMENDMENT ON PAGE EIGHT.
OF THE ANALYSIS S. B. ELEVEN
TWENTY ONE IS A COMMON SENSE
MEASURE TO HELP PROTECT
CONSUMERS. FROM FUTURE DATA
BREACHES AND PUNISH COMPANIES
THAT FAIL TO PROPERLY PROTECT
DATA.
LAST YEAR THE EQUIFAX BREACH
AFFECTED A HUNDRED AND FORTY
FIVE POINT FIVE MILLION U. S.
CONSUMERS FORTY FOUR PERCENT OF
THE POPULATION AND THAT IS A
STAGGERING STATISTIC. IT WAS THE
LARGEST THEFT OF SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBERS IN HISTORY.
THE BREACH WAS NOT LIMITED JUST
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS FOR MANY
CONSUMERS IT ALSO INCLUDED BIRTH
DATES NAMES ADDRESSES DRIVER'S
LICENSE NUMBERS. AND CREDIT CARD
NUMBERS.
EQUIFAX ADMITTED TO CONGRESS OF
THE BREACH WAS BECAUSE
BY HUMAN AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ERRORS.
THAT RESULTED IN ITS FAILURE TO.
PATCH KNOWN SECURITY
VULNERABILITIES.
WHICH MEANS THAT IT'S ENTIRELY
POSSIBLE FOR THIS BREACH OF
HISTORIC PROPORTIONS WAS.
ENTIRELY AVOIDABLE.
IT REACHES LEAD TO IDENTITY
THEFT A PROBLEM THAT.
HAS IMPACTED SEVENTEEN POINT SIX
MILLION AMERICANS.
AND FRANKLY I'M ONE OF THOSE
SEVENTEEN POINT SIX MILLION
AMERICANS.
THE INFORMATION BREACHING THE
EQUIFAX CASE WENT BEYOND JUST
CREDIT NUMBERS CREDIT CARD
NUMBERS IT INCLUDED PERMANENT
PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION.
THIS IS ESPECIALLY PROBLEMATIC
BECAUSE THE FAT THEFT OF STATIC
INFORMATION LIKE THIS PUTS
CONSUMERS AT RISK FOR THE REST
OF THEIR LIVES.
FOR IDENTITY THEFT INCLUDING
FICTITIOUS FINE UP FINANCIAL
ACCOUNTS OPEN IN THEIR NAMES
PHONY LOANS TAX RETURN FRAUD.
BANK ACCOUNT AND CREDIT CARD
SCHEMES AND DATA FOR SALE ON THE
DARK WEB.
THIS BILL MODERNIZES THE LAW
FIRST IT CHANGES CUSTOMER TO
CONSUMER TO CAPTURE MODERN
PRACTICES WERE GROUPS LIKE
EQUIFAX GATHER OUR DATA. WITHOUT
EVER BEING THEIR CUSTOMER.
SECOND IT PROVIDES DAMAGES WERE
COMPANY WHEN A COMPANY DOESN'T
TAKE A REASONABLE SECURITY
MEASURE. AND FAILS TO NOTIFY
CUSTOMERS OF A BREACH.
NOW WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR
PERFECTION WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS
THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO
MAINTAIN SENSITIVE. INFORMATION
YOU MUST TAKE A REASONABLE YOU
BEST TAKE REASONABLE MEASURES TO
PROPERLY SECURE THAT DATA IN
WILL YOU DON'T DO THAT.
BUT WE CONSEQUENCES.
EQUIFAX HOLDS US ALL OF US TO
THE HIGHEST STANDARD WHEN THEY
EVALUATE IN JUDGE US ON OUR
CREDIT.
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HOLD THEM
ACCOUNTABLE AS WELL.
WITH ME TO TESTIFY TODAY IN
SUPPORT OUR EMILY A RUSH WITH
CALPERS AND TIM BLOOD OF THE
CONSUMER ATTORNEYS.
PRETTY GOOD GOOD AFTERNOON TWO
MINUTES EACH IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
THANK YOU
I'M MY NAME'S EMILY RASH I'M THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CALPERS
THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC INTEREST
RESEARCH GROUP. HERE IS A CO
SPONSOR OF THE BILL.
I'M LIKE I'M SURE ALL OF YOUR
DISTRICT OFFICES.
WE FIELDED A NUMBER OF CALLS
FROM OUR MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS.
LAST FALL AFTER THE EQUIFAX
DATA BREACH WONDERING WHAT THEY
COULD DO TO PROTECT THEMSELVES
ALMOND THEIR IDENTITY IN THE
WAKE OF THE BREACH.
LAST WEEK WE WERE HERE TALKING
ABOUT THAT WE ASK A COUPLE
QUESTIONS FIRST.
WHAT TOOLS DO CONSUMERS NEED TO
PROTECT THEMSELVES AND THERE IS
A BILL LAST WEEK BY SENATOR HILL
THAT THIS?
COMMITTEE HEARD ON TO GIVE
CONSUMERS A FREE AND EASY CREDIT
FREEZE. BUT OF COURSE WE'RE NOT
JUST ASKING WHAT TOOLS CAN WE
GIVE CONSUMERS PROTECT
THEMSELVES AFTER A DATA BREACH
BUT WHAT CAN WE DO TO PREVENT
THE NEXT LINE AND THAT'S REALLY
WHAT THIS BILL IS ALL ABOUT AND
WHY. WE DECIDED TO GET AND SO
INVOLVED IN THIS ISSUE. IDENTITY
THEFT IS STILL WITH US THIRD.
MOST COMPLAINED ABOUT ISSUE TO
THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION BY
CONSUMERS. AUNTS AND.
IT INDICATES THAT PROTECT TAXED
OUT OF REACH SENATOR DODD
ALREADY NOTED. TIME IT APPEARS
THAT IT WAS.
ENTIRELY PREVENTABLE AND.
DO YOU MAINLY TO THE COMPANY NOT
INSTALLING A REGULAR SECURITY
PATCHES SO MUCH OF WHAT WE'RE
ALL FAMILIAR WITH DOING FOR OUR
OWN HOME COMPUTERS.
BUT AND FORTUNATELY IN EQUIFAX
ISN'T ALONE AND ISN'T IT
ISOLATED INCIDENT WE'VE SEEN A
NUMBER OF DATA BREACHES OVER THE
LAST SEVERAL YEARS ON FOLKS MAY
REMEMBER THAT TARGET DATA BREACH
SEVENTY MILLION CUSTOMERS
AFFECTED. ON DECEMBER TWENTY
THIRTEEN AT THE HEIGHT OF THE
HOLIDAY SEASON I'M IN THAT CASE
IT APPEARS THAT HACKERS ACCESS
TO INFORMATION. THROUGH A THIRD
PARTY PAYMENT PROCESSOR AND
THERE'S A SECURITY FLAW AND THAT
THAT THEY WERE THEN ABLE TO
ACCESS ARM BAR. ON PERSONAL
INFORMATION UNFORTUNATELY HOME
DEPOT HAD A SIMILAR FAILURE
FAILURE THE NEXT YEAR AFFECTING
THIRTY FIVE FIFTY MILLION
CUSTOMERS. THERE IS ALSO THE
ANTHEM DATA BREACH WITH AT LEAST
SEVENTY EIGHT MILLION IMPAIR THE
AIMS OF SECURITY NUMBERS
BIRTHDATES AND OTHER PERSONAL
INFORMATION AND EXPOSING TWENTY
FIFTEEN.
THE YAHOO DT OF REACH WITH AT
LEAST THREE BILLION ACCOUNTS
COMPROMISE IN TWENTY THIRTEEN.
AND THAT EBAY AND OUT OF REACH
FOR THE HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE
MILLION USERS NAMES ADDRESSES
BIRTHDAYS AND PASSWORD
COMPROMISED IN TWENTY FOURTEEN.
SO THE LIST GOES ON AND ON IN
FACT THAT TOURNEY GENERAL I'M
HAS ON BURKE STEEP REPORTS ON
SIX HUNDRED FIFTY SEVEN DATA
BREACHES BETWEEN TWENTY TWELVE
AND TWENTY FIFTEEN THANK YOU.
THE NEXT WITNESS PLACE THANK YOU
I'M.
MY NAME IS TIMOTHY BLOOD NOT
FROM SAN DIEGO MY CONSUMER
ATTORNEY OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF
DIRECTORS MEMBER.
AND I'VE LITIGATED NUMBER OF
DATA BREACH CASES.
TIME SUCCESSFULLY OFTENTIMES NOT
SUCCESSFULLY BECAUSE DATA BREACH
CASES ARE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT
TO LITIGATE THERE SOMETHING OF A
OF A ROUND PEG IN A SQUARE HOLE.
CALIFORNIA HAS TRADITIONALLY
BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF DATA
PROTECTION.
THE EXISTING LAW THAT WERE
SEEKING TO AMEND ACTUALLY HAS
VERY GOOD BONES BUT IT IS GROWN
STALE OVERTIME AS.
THE GROWTH OF BIG DATA AND
ADVANCES IN INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY HAVE REALLY TAKEN
OVER THIS AREA.
THE EQUIFAX
CASE I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT
BACKDROP IT IS AFFECTED. ONE
HALF OF CALIFORNIA ADULTS ONE
HALF.
AND YET.
THE PRIMARY PURPOSE STATUTE
PROTECTING THE INTENDED TO
PROTECT CONSUMER RECORDS IN THE
EVENT OF A BREACH.
DOESN'T APPLY TO THOSE PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN WHOSE DATE HAS
BEEN STOLEN AS A RESULT OF THE
EQUIFAX DATA BREACH. OF ON THAT
THE BILL AND I WILL GET TO
QUICKLY BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S BEEN
A VERY LONG DAY THE BILL THAT'S
TWO VERY IMPORTANT THINGS THE
FIRST THING IT DOES IT CHANGES.
CUSTOMER TO CONSUMER THAT
REFLECTS THE SIMPLE REALITY
TODAY.
NONE OF US WHOSE INFORMATION
WAS TAKEN IN THE EQUIFAX BREACH
OUR CUSTOMERS OF EQUIFAX THEIR
CUSTOMERS ARE BANKS FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS AND BECAUSE THEY'RE
NOW DATA AGGREGATOR.
PRIMARILY.
OTHER BUSINESSES THAT THEY USE
FOR MARKETING.
THE OTHER THING THAT.
THAT THE BILL DOES IS IT
RECOGNIZES ON THE REAL HARM THE
MONETARY HARM.
THAT PEOPLE SUFFER THE MOMENT A
DATA BREACH OCCURS AND I WAS
VERY HAPPY TO SEE ACTUALLY THAT
THE OPPOSITION THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE LETTER. BOMB FULLY
RECOGNIZE THAT WHEN PLAYED
BREACH OCCURS TWO THINGS HAVE TO
OCCUR NUMBER ONE THE CONSUMER
NEEDS TO BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED
NOT EVENTUALLY NOTIFIED THE
PROMPTLY NOTIFIED. AND SECOND
AND AGAIN THIS IS THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE WERE IN FULL AGREEMENT
WITH US WITH THEM SECOND THING
THAT HAS TO HAPPEN. IS THAT THE
CONSUMERS MUST TAKE PROACTIVE
STEPS TO PROTECT THEIR DATA THEY
MUST TO CONSPIRE CREDIT FREEZES
THEY MUST BY THE TYPE OF
CONSUMER ARE.
CREDIT PROTECTION CREDIT
MONITORING TOOLS THAT ARE OUT
THERE. THEY DON'T SOLVE THE
PROBLEM BUT THEY HELP PROTECT
AGAINST SOMEBODY WANTS IT BECOME
A VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT FROM
NOW. THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES
WHEN I'M AT A RAPID UP THE
QUESTION THEN BECOMES WHO PAYS
FOR THAT TIME AND EXPENSE IF YOU
WERE TO BUY EQUIFAX'S CONSUMER
PROTECTION.
PACKAGE IT COSTS OVER TWO
HUNDRED DOLLARS A YEAR.
IT COSTS OVER A THOUSAND DOLLARS
FOR FIVE YEARS UNIVERSAL
SECURITY NOT NUMBERS TAKEN OR
YOUR MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME IS
TAKEN THOSE THINGS DON'T CHANGE
YOU WILL NEED THAT PROTECTION
FOR MUCH LONGER THAN FIVE YEARS
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
DIFFUSED STEP FOUR WOULD NAME
AND AFFILIATION ONLY THANK YOU
SUMMING UP THE CORPORATE OF THE
PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARINGHOUSE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
NOT YOUR HERNANDEZ A BEHALF THE
CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT THANK YOU.
JESSICA BARTLETT A WESTERN
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
NO I BOTTOM ALL REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL
ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
VIN BAKER AMERICAN CIVIL
LIBERTIES UNION OF CALIFORNIA
ALSO IN SPORT THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
HAVE.
AND WILL HAVE TO MAKE ROOM FOR.
GOOD AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES
TEACHER FEWER.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS MY NAME IS SARAH BOOT
I'M TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF
FOR YOU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN
OPPOSITION TO SB ELEVEN TWENTY
ONE.
IT'S CLEAR THAT DATA BREACHES
HAVE BECOME PREVALENT AS CYBER
CRIMINALS HAVE BECOME MORE
SOPHISTICATED AND MORE
AGGRESSIVE. SOMETHING NEEDS TO
BE DONE BUT THE DRASTIC
EXPANSION OF CIVIL LIABILITY
PROPOSED BY S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY
ONE WILL NOT PREVENT THIS CAR.
INSTEAD IT WILL CREATE NEW
VICTIMS THAT ARE TARGET OF
SHAKEDOWN LAWSUITS.
BY AMENDING TITLE ONE POINT
EIGHT ONE THIS BILL IS SO BROAD
IT ENSNARES COMPANIES OF
VIRTUALLY ANY TYPE AND SIZE
INCLUDING NON PROFITS.
SO THAT NO ONE WOULD BE SAFE
FROM THE THREAT OF A SUIT.
S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE CREATES
A NEW PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
FOR CONSUMERS THAT DOES NOT
REQUIRE SHOWING OF ANY INJURY.
WHAT'S MORE CONSUMER WOULD NOT
EVEN HAVE TO SHOW THEIR DATA HAD
ACTUALLY BEEN BREACHED IN ORDER
TO BRING A LAWSUIT. THE BILL
WOULD ALSO IMPOSE A MINIMUM OF
TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS AND A
MAXIMUM ONE THOUSAND DOLLAR.
IT
THE AMOUNT IN STATUTORY DAMAGES
PER CONSUMER BREACH.
WELL EVEN A SINGLE DATA BREACH
COULD TRIGGER A LAWSUIT UNDER
THIS BILL.
SMALLEST DATA BREACH DEEMED
SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO REQUIRE
REPORTING COULD BRING AS MUCH AS
HALF A MILLION DOLLARS JUST IN
CIVIL PENALTIES WITHOUT THE
SHOWING OF ANY HARM.
THUS AWARDS OF DAMAGES UNDER S.
B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE WOULD BE
STAGGERING ENOUGH TO PUT
COMPANIES OUT OF BUSINESS.
FACED WITH A RISK OF SUCH
MASSIVE DAMAGES COMPANIES WOULD
BE LEVERAGED INTO IMMEDIATE
SETTLEMENT REGARDLESS OF THE
STRENGTH OF THEIR DEFENSE.
SO THE IDEA THAT THIS BILL WILL
ONLY IMPACT BAD ACTORS IS SIMPLY
NOT TRUE.
THE BARRAGE OF LAWSUITS THAT
WILL FOLLOW S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY
ONE WON'T HELP CONSUMERS COULD
ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS WORSE.
S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE IS
ADOPTED
MOST CONSUMERS WHOSE DATA WAS
EXPOSED WOULD BE ROLLED INTO AN
EARLY CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
FOR STATUTORY DAMAGES.
EVEN THOUGH THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS PROPOSED BY S. B.
ELEVEN TWENTY ONE IS FOUR YEARS
AFTER THE DISCOVERY OF HARM.
SO IF THEIR IDENTITY IS LATER
STOLEN IN THE.
SIGNIFICANT DAMAGES THEY WILL
NOT HAVE RECOURSE.
MOREOVER THE PUNITIVE NATURE OF
S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE GOES
AGAINST LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF
CALIFORNIA'S NOTIFICATION LAW
WHICH IS WRITTEN TO INCENTIVIZE
FAST AND ACCURATE REPORTING OF
BREACHES. TO HELP CONSUMERS
PREVENT IDENTITY THEFT.
FINALLY COMPANIES HAVE
SIGNIFICANT INCENTIVES TO AVOID
DATA BREACHES THE AUDIT RESULT
IN LAWSUITS AND THEIR OTHERWISE
VERY EXPENSIVE.
ACCORDING TO TWENTY SEVENTEEN
STUDY BY THE POKEMON INSTITUTE
THE AVERAGE COST OF A DATA
BREACH TO ACCOMPANY IS THREE
POINT SIX TWO MILLION DOLLARS
APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED AND
FIFTY DOLLARS PER BREACH. AMONG
OTHER THINGS THIS COST INCLUDES
LOTS OF CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS
COSTS IDENTIFYING CONTINUE TO
PREACH TO NOTIFY CUSTOMERS
PROVIDE THEM WITH IDENTITY
PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND MUCH
MORE.
THANK YOU.
CHAIR AND SENATORS JOHN DOHERTY
ON BEHALF OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE
SITUATION A CALIFORNIA. BUT IT'S
CLEAR TO US THAT THE SENATOR HAS
IDENTIFIED A TIMELY AND
IMPORTANT ISSUE TO BE TALKING
ABOUT.
THAT ARE.
AS NEWSPAPERS ARE REPLETE WITH
STORIES OF DATA BREACHES THAT
HAPPEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
AND THE PUBLIC IS JUSTIFIABLY
CONCERNED OVER ON THAT ISSUE I
WILL I WILL SAY THAT IN TWENTY
FIFTEEN.
THEY ATTORNEY GENERAL REPORT
INDICATES THAT AS MANY AS THREE
FIFTHS OF OUR POPULATION WERE
IMPACTED SO.
THIS IS NOT ONLY CONCERNING.
TO.
THAT SPOT
THE BILL IT'S CONCERNING TO THE.
INSERTED PEOPLE WHO'VE HAD
THEIR.
AT SIX
ATTACKED AND IT'S ESPECIALLY A
PROBLEM FOR SMALL BUSINESSES
FROM RECENT OF REPORTS SHOW
THAT.
FORTY THREE PERCENT OF THESE
ATTACKS ARE GOING AFTER SMALL
BUSINESSES. AND A RECENT
NATIONAL CYBER SECURITY ALLIANCE
STUDY FOUND THAT.
THE PERCENT OF SMALL BUSINESSES
DO NOT SURVIVE SIX MONTHS AFTER
CYBERSECURITY ATTACK. THAT'S NOT
SURPRISING GIVEN THE IN THE
NUMBERS ABOUT.
COST TO RESPOND TO A DATA BREACH
OF AND SO WE HAVE A PROBLEM AND
WE KNOW THAT AND WE NEED A
SOLUTION. ON HOWEVER IN THIS
CASE THE ADAGE THAT WHEN THE
ONLY TOOL YOU HAVE IS A HAMMER
EVERYTHING STARTS TO LOOK LIKE A
NAIL.
PRETTY APPROPRIATE.
WE ARE MAKING IT EASIER TO SUE
IS NOT ALWAYS THE ANSWER ON TO
OUR.
STATES PROBLEMS IT'S A COMPLEX
ISSUE WE HAVE VICTIMS ON BOTH
SIDE OF THIS. LET'S NOT FORGET
THAT IT'S A CYBER CRIME TO GO
AFTER AND TRY AND REACH THESE.
INCIDENTS AT IT AND THE THE
PEOPLE THAT ARE BEING BREACH OUR
GO FROM THE VERY SOPHISTICATED
TO THE VERY.
SIMPLE ON AS DO THE ATTACKERS
SO WHAT WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT IS
THAT S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE IS
A BLUNT INSTRUMENT. ON IT'S NOT
GONNA SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS.
NOR PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT CONSUMER
BENEFITS COME WITH TWENTY THREE
DIFFERENT CLASS ACTION SUITS
FILED AGAINST EQUIFAX THE THREAT
OF LITIGATION IS CLEAR AND
PRESENT. A IT'S A BLUNT
INSTRUMENT BECAUSE IT APPLIES TO
EVERY PRIVATE ENTITY IN THE
STATE I TOOK A QUICK LOOK AT THE
FOLKS THAT WERE REPORTING DATA
BREACHES AT WILL FOR THE AG. THE
OF THE AUTISM LEARNING PARTNERS
A ASSOCIATION OF THE CALIFORNIA
COLLEGE OF ARTS HE OF THE SANTA
CRUZ BIOTECHNOLOGY AND
INCORPORATED YOU HAVE THE LOS
ANGELES PHILHARMONIC. ARE YOU
ALSO GOING TO FIND THE CSU
FRESNO AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND GAME'S ON THAT LIST
HOWEVER THIS BILL DOESN'T
ACTUALLY ADDRESS.
PUBLIC DATA LOSS TO IT'S ALSO A
BLUNT INSTRUMENT BECAUSE IT
DOESN'T DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN
THE SENSITIVITY OF THE DATA SO
I'M GOING TO.
IT WITH THOSE.
POINTS AND ENCOURAGE THAT
LEGISLATORS WORK ON FINDING A
ACTUAL TRUE SOLUTION OF CYBER
CRME EPIDEMIC AND RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR ANOTHER.
YOU VERY MUCH DO I HAVE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
AMY IRVING ON THE CALIFORNIA
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION.
MISTER CHAIRPERSON KAYLEE ON
BEHALF OF THE COMPUTING
TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
IN OPPOSITION.
CHAIR MEMBERS FROST BUCKLEY A
BATH FLINTRIDGE ARE ACTION POST.
GOULD CALIFORNIA
KERR'S IN OPPOSITE.
SIGNIFICANT US ON BEHALF OF THE
RETAIL INDUSTRY LEADERS
ASSOCIATION AND UP.
WEARING GREEN LIGHT ON BEHALF OF
THE
FOR NAY KEEP ON
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATE.
THERE THOMAS LOADED INSTANCE
ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF ADVANCE
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION
ALSO KNOWN AS AFTER THE MATCH.
FLORA BENNETT WITH TECHNO IN
OPPOSITION.
BUT SHARELL COOK WITH CALIFORNIA
MANUFACTURES AND TECHNOLOGY SO
SHE'S XIN IN A IN OPPOSITION.
JOHN DINNER BUT WE HAVE TO THE
DATA AND MARKETING ASSOCIATION
IN OPPOSITION.
MARGARET CLAD SEEN ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
OF THE CALIFORNIA THREE BANKS
NETWORK IN OPPOSITION.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE IN
OPPOSITION.
MISTER STERN WOULD YOU PLEASE
JUST GO TO THE MICROPHONE.
THIS.
GREAT TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR
MY COLLEAGUES.
SOONER MONEY.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR IN JUST.
FOR THE AUTHOR YOUR WITNESS.
WAS POINTED OUT BY THE
OPPOSITION THAT YOUR BILL DOES
NOT PROTECT FROM.
DOES NOT INCLUDE.
PUBLIC INSTITUTION VICTIMS OF
CYBER CRIME ON.
USER RECENT NEEDS LIMITED TO.
PRIVATE MARKET CONSUMERS.
GOT IT DIDN'T CLEANED IT UP WE
DIDN'T MAKE MANY AMENDMENTS TO
THE EXISTING LOSS OF THE
EXISTING LAWS WHAT THE EXISTE
STUNNED THAT GAS.
ROOM I DON'T THINK THE
OPPOSITION WAS ENCOURAGING THAT
EXPANSION VIETNAM.
SHOULD THE BILL BE AMENDED ISSUE
MOVE FORWARD IT MIGHT BE
SOMETHING.
TO CONSIDER IN TERMS OF.
.
THE CYBER CRIME AS WAS POINTED
OUT IS NOT LIMITED SELF.
TO.
TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR SOON SHE
AT THAT.
THINK IT'S IN A MINING.
ANY CENTER STERN.
THANK YOU I'M SORRY FOR MISSING
THE PRESENTATION OR WE AFTER
OPPOSITION AND YOUR CLOTHES.
SO.
IF YOU ARE TO COVER THIS I DO
APOLOGIZE SCOPE WISE.
EXPANDING TO A CONSUMER AND AND
WHAT'S ENTAILED HERE SORT OF
WITT WHAT LIMITS ON THIS.
HAVE EVER YOUR TO TALK THROUGH
THE SORT OF PARAMETERS.
IT DIDN'T GO A LITTLE BIT IT
WHAT IT DOES I MEAN I THINK
EQUIFAX THE EQUIFAX CASE IS A
GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS. SO IF
YOU'RE A CUSTOMER OF EQUIFAX AND
A DATA BREACH OCCURRED YOU
COULD.
USE IT'S USUALLY NOT VERY
EFFECTIVE.
THIS BILL TO SUE EQUIFAX IF
YOU'RE A CUSTOMER IF YOU'RE A
CONSUMER. YOU CANNOT PAY AND THE
ONLY REASON IS THAT THE GROUP
LAW HAS GROWN STALE OVERTIME.
THAT USED TO BE THAT OF THE
PEOPLE WHO HAD.
PERSONAL INFORMATION WERE
BUSINESSES WHO HAD A A THE
CUSTOMER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
WITH THE PERSON. TODAY IT IS A
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WORLD WITH
DATA AGGREGATORS.
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION OF
CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES
LIKE.
EQUIFAX SO THAT'S A REALISTIC
THAT EXAMPLE I'M THINKING OF.
A VARIETY OF OTHER EXAMPLES I'M
OF FACEBOOK USER. I CONSUMED
SONY MOVIES.
.
THE AYE I READ THE SACRAMENTO
BEE ALL THREE ENTITIES HAVE HAD
BREACHES.
OF SOME SORT OVER THE LAST THREE
FOUR YEARS.
MY ARE DIDN'T WOULD THOSE
BREACHES ALSO QUALIFY WHERE WE'D
BE HOLDING LIABLE SACRAMENTO BEE
FOR BREACH OF THE VOTER FILE.
.
FACEBOOK FOR ANY ANY CONSUMER OR
USER OF THAT IS EVERY SINGLE
BREACH THERE AND ALSO YOU KNOW
TAKE SONY FOR EXAMPLE THE WAY
THERE ISN'T NECESSARILY A
CONSUMER BUT. HOW WEIRD IS IT IN
THIS WELL YOU AT SO?
AS SO ALL OF THOSE ARE COVERED
BY EXISTING LAW AND AND THESE
AMENDMENTS WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT
OTHER THAN THE CONSUMER VERSUS
CUSTOMER ISSUE. SO TAKE FOR
EXAMPLE OF THE SACRAMENTO BEE.
VOTER FILES THOSE ARE PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE EXISTING LAW ALREADY
EXCLUDES THOSE LAWS SO THE
SACRAMENTO BEE WOULD NOT BE
LIABLE. UNDER EXISTING LAW OR
FOR AS AMENDED.
FACEBOOK.
THEY MIGHT BE LIABLE.
REMEMBERED THE TRIGGER FOR
LIABILITY IT IN LESS YOU DON'T
BOTHER NOTIFYING PEOPLE PURSUANT
TO THE STATUTE THE TRIGGER FOR
LIABILITY IS NOT ANY DATA
BREACH.
IT'S WHEN THAT THE COMPANY THAT
WAS PREACHED FAILED TO TAKE
REASONABLE SECURITY MEASURES
UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SO SMALL
BUSINESS THE PEOPLE AT THE PART
ABOUT SMALL BUSINESSES. MOST
SMALL BUSINESSES USE OFF THE
SHELF SOFTWARE.
pTHE SELF WAS SHOT OFF THE SHELF
SOFTWARE IS FANTASTIC.
BECAUSE THOSE DEVELOPERS ARE
ALWAYS PROVIDING SECURITY
UPDATES AND IF YOU DO IF YOU.
KEEP TRACK OF YOUR SECURITY
UPDATES AND YOU YOU UPDATE YOUR
YOUR SOFTWARE YOU COMPLIED WITH
THE LAW THERE'S GOING TO BE NO
LIABILITY USE IT MIGHT.
HE DID USE THE WORD MIGHT APPLY
TO FACEBOOK WINNING I NEED TO
KNOW THAT BEFORE VOTING ON THIS
BILL. COULD BE IN ORDER TO GO UP
ON THIS BUT I NEED TO KNOW THE
SCOPE. BECAUSE I GET THE EQUIFAX
EXAMPLE BUT ARE WE TALKING
MCCARTY REGION RATING AGENCIES
ARE WE TALKING TO THE ENTIRE
INTERNET HERE WELL IN IT NO WE
WOULD BE IT WOULD NOT MAYBE A
PUBLICLY AVAILABLE WATER BUT
THERE'S P. AYE AYE. ON A NUMBER
OF WEBSITES WE ALL USE
SO.
IT WOULD BE AND IT WOULD BE ANY
COMPANY WHERE THERE IS A DATA
BREACH.
AND THEY ACTED UNREASONABLY IN
IN ACTING TO PROTECT THAT
INFORMATION.
AND IT'S PERSONAL INFORMATION
BUT FOUGHT WITHIN THE MEANING OF
STATURE TO RE ADJUST THE BREACH
ITSELF SO THE FAILURE DIDN'T TO
WILL THERE'S ALWAYS AN INJURY IT
IF THERE IS A BREACH OF YOUR
INFORMATION THERE IS ALWAYS AN
INJURY AND AND THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS
WELL. IF THERE'S A BREACH PEOPLE
THEY CAN LOOK AT THE AYE AYE BUT
YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE CHAMBERS
LETTER THEY SPELL OUT BETTER
THAN WE DID FRANKLY. THAT IN THE
EVENT OF A BREACH
YOU MUST BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED
AND YOU IN THE CONSUMER MUST
TAKE STEPS AND THOSE STEPS COST
MONEY AND TAKE TIME. IT IN THE
MORNING ISN'T WHAT I'M VOTING A
SO SO.
HE DOES PROBABLY THIS BILL WOULD
PROBABLY APPLY TO ALL ALL OF
FACEBOOK.
GOOGLE.
DE ANY PC USE OF THE INTERNET
WHERE PI I IS BEING COLLECTED
ANY AYE BUSY INTERNET ACCESS
PURE ISPS ARE COLLECTING THAT
INFORMATION SO. BUSY ANY ACCESS
TO THE INTERNET AND THE
INFORMATION WAS NOT.
PROTECTED SO FOR EXAMPLE.
THE STATE ACTORS IT WITH IT IS
THAT REASONABLE MEASURE SO YES
RIGHT YET THE ALREADY HAS IS IF
THEY DON'T TAKE REASONABLE
MEASURES.
TO PROTECT THEIR CUSTOMERS
CONSUMER.
THEN YES THERE THERE IS
LIABILITY. AND HOW HOW BROAD
WOULD THAT LIABILITY P. SAY'S SO
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FACEBOOK
USERS THERE ARE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA BUT.
EVERY SINGLE AND I MEAN. THERE'S
AN INJURY TO EACH AND EVERY.
USER IT THE WAY THIS IS
STRUCTURED IT WOULD ARTS THING
WOULD SAY EVERYONE STEMMING
BABIES OUT OF START ON FACEBOOK
BUT.
THE THIRTY MILLION CALIFORNIANS
ARE ON IT
THIRD THIRTY MILLION.
BREACHES THEN SO THIRTY MILLION
SEPARATE INFRACTIONS OR OF SORRY
NOT NOT INFRACTIONS GOES BEYOND
THAT BUT THIRTY MILLION SEPARATE
ACTIONS. ALL OF WHICH HAVE THOSE
THOSE MEN OF MEDICAL
INFORMATION.
DAMAGES I MEAN BREAK A COMPANY
IF IF THE PERSONAL INFORMATION
IS DEFINED BY EXISTING LAW IS IS
TAKEN.
AND THE COMPANY DID NOT TAKE
ADEQUATE MEASURES TO PROTECT
THAT DATA BEFOREHAND.
THEN THE ANSWER IS YES NOW HOW
IT WORKS OUT IN PRACTICE IS.
NO ONE CAN POINT TO.
ANY ANY SITUATION WHERE
COMPANIES HAVE ACTUALLY GONE
BANKRUPT THERE ARE PARALLEL
STATUTES INCLUDING MEDICAL
INFORMATION THAT CALIFORNIA LAW
HAS IT IS EXISTING AND IN
CALIFORNIA LAW FOR A NUMBER OF
YEARS. BANKRUPTCIES DON'T OCCUR
NOBODY IS THAT IT IS NOBODY
WANTS TO BANKRUPT A COMPANY WHAT
THEY WANT ASSIST IS TO IS TO
MAKE SURE THEIR DATA IS SECURE.
SO IN IN PRACTICE IN THEORY YES
IN PRACTICE NO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN
THAT WAY NOW I WILL SAY AND
PEOPLE CAN CERTAINLY DIFFER ON
THIS IF YOU ARE IF YOU ARE
COLLECTING. AND ESPECIALLY
PROFITING AND COLLECTING.
REALLY SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION AND YOU'RE NOT
TAKING GOOD CARE OF IT THAT'S A
HUGE PROBLEM THAT COMPANY REALLY
SHOULDN'T PROBABLY BE AND
BUSINESS WHERE THEY SHOULD
CERTAINLY PROBABLY CHANGE THEIR
BUSINESS PRACTICES. BUT THESE
HAVE DRAMATIC CONSEQUENCES AND
WHAT WE WILL SEE IN TIME TEN
YEARS FROM NOW WE'RE GONNA LOOK
BACK AT THIS TIME IN OUR HISTORY
AND LOOK AT THE WAY DATE IS
USED.
AND IT'S GOING TO LOOK QUAINT
COMPARED TO HOW DATE IS GOING TO
BE USED IN THE FUTURE THIS IS A
PROBLEM THAT S GOING TO BE
INCREASING NOT DECREASING OVER
TIME. ONE LAST QUESTION THANK
YOU FOR THE INDULGENCE MISTER
CHAIRMAN.
.
NEGLIGENCE IS ALREADY COVERED
UNDER EXISTING LAW THE SO SO
BREAKDOWN FOR ME THEN.
YOU'RE SAYING THOSE WHO ARE
ACTING REASONABLY WELL IF YOU'RE
YOU'RE BEING NEGLIGENT RIGHT NOW
LIKE IF EQUIFAX WAS NEGLIGENT IN
THEIR MANAGEMENT TO DATE MEANS
THEY'RE CURRENTLY. LIABLE ARE
THEY NOT MEAN.
YOU THEY ARE NOT LIABLE BECAUSE
THEY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHOSE
INFORMATION WAS TAKEN ARE NOT.
FIVE CUSTOMERS THEIR CONSUMERS
WHEN OUR CUSTOMERS.
THAT SAID THAT ONE OF THE
CHANGES IS CHANGING CUSTOMER THE
LAW BEING APPLE WILL TO ALL
CONSUMERS NOT JUST CUSTOMERS IS
THIS GO BEYOND A NEGLIGENCE
STANDARD YOU NEED TO ACT
NEGLIGENTLY UNDER THIS BILL IN
ORDER TO BE. LIABLE THE STANDARD
THE STANDARD OF CARE DOES NOT
CHANGE AT ALL BY THIS BILL
THERE'S NO OF THIS THESE
AMENDMENTS DO NOT AFFECT THE
STANDARD OF CARE YOU STILL HAVE
TO BE NEGLIGENT. IN ORDER TO BE
VIOLATIVE OF.
YES THIS OKAY.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN.
THROUGH THE CHAIR BUDGET TOOK TO
THE CENTER YOU YOU HEARD THE.
YOU WERE IN HERE LONG ENOUGH I
THINK TO HEAR SOME OF THE
OPPOSITION.
I I THINK IT'S IT'S IT'S SAFE
FOR ME TO SAY THAT.
WE HAD OUR FIRST VISIT FROM THE
OPPOSITION THIS MORNING.
WE HAD OUR FOR THE ONE AND ONLY
OR ONE OR TWO OF THE ONLY
LETTERS IN OUR OFFICE THIS WEEK.
MONDAY OR TUESDAY TODAY'S
TUESDAY.
I THINK IT IS STILL RIGHT.
BUT ANY RATE.
THIS DISASSEMBLY AND THAT.
YOU KNOW I TAKE SOME OF THE
CONCERNS VERY VERY SERIOUSLY AND
I BELIEVE THAT AS THIS BILL
MOVES FORWARD.
THEY'LL BE OPPORTUNITIES TO FINE
TUNE THIS TO TAKE SOME OF THE
REALLY SIGNIFICANT.
YOUR CONCERNS
YOU OUT OF PLAY LIKE I'D DONE
WITH A NUMBER OF BILLS THAT SO
FAR THIS YEAR.
I HAVE A MUM MOTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
SOONER DOT I JUST MAYBE YOU.
AND YOU HAVE. YOUR WITNESS TO
WITH YOU JUST TWO QUICK
QUESTIONS I OR MY CONCERN IS.
WE CREATE.
BILLS TO HELP PEOPLE OUT WE HAVE
THE.
.
EIGHTY EIGHT.
AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT AND
NOW I'VE GOT BUSINESSES UP AND
DOWN THE STATE BEING.
SENT LETTERS TO SETTLE PURPORT
THOUSAND BECAUSE YOU'RE MERE
SHOULD BE ONE MORE IN TIRED
CENTER.
WELL WHAT IT. HE WE ALSO HAD AT
THE ROCK WHO'S GOING AFTER ALL
KINDS OF
YOU KNOW.
PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES WHEN
THEY'RE PRESSURES WENT DOWN AND
AND SO I. I I I JUST WANT SOME
ASSURANCE THAT THIS IS NOT GONNA
BE.
UNDER A DOOR THAT OPENS FOR MORE
THAT KIND OF AYE AYE DAVID HE
ABSOLUTELY AYE AYE FRANKLY IT
VERY MUCH SHARE YOUR CONCERNS
ABOUT.
ABUSIVE EDA LITIGATION AND I'VE
WORKED ON BILLS TO TRY TO CURB
THAT I I THINK IT'S OUTRAGEOUS
WHAT HAPPENS IT'S AN ABUSE OF
WHAT IS OTHERWISE A GOOD BILL.
THIS DOES NOT DO THAT BECAUSE
THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT CAN SUE ARE
THE PEOPLE WHOSE DATA HAS BEEN
TAKEN OR REASONABLY BELIEVED TO
HAVE BEEN TAKEN AND THE REASON
WHY IT'S REASONABLY BELIEVED
IT'S BECAUSE. IF YOU STICK A
THUMB DRIVE INTO A HARD DRIVE
AND TAKE AND.
.
BAD COMPANIES DON'T BOTHER
KEEPING TRACK OF DON'T HAVE THE
SOFTWARE IN PLACE TO DETECT WHAT
TYPE OF INFORMATION GETS TAKEN
OUT SO SOMETIMES YOU HAVE A
SITUATION WHERE IT'S NOT QUITE
CLEAR WHAT IT FROM IT MASON WAS
TAKEN. EQUIFAX FOR EXAMPLE WE
STILL HAVE NOT TOLD PEOPLE
EXACTLY WHAT TYPE OF INFORMATION
HAS BEEN TAKEN FOR SPECIFIC
PEOPLE WHICH IS A HUGE PROBLEM.
.
AND IT MAY BE THAT IT'S THAT
THAT INFORMATION FOR EQUIFAX I'M
SO SECURITY NUMBERS MAY HAVE
BEEN TAKEN FOR PEOPLE AND
REGIONAL PERSON COULD CERTAINLY
ESTABLISH THAT. EXPERT BRIGGS
EXPERTS EXISTS TO BE ABLE TO
ANALYZE THAT BUT THIS IS
CERTAINLY NOT AND AN ABUSIVE
EIGHTY EIGHT TYPE STATUTE.
Q. WE HAVE A MOTION BY SITTER
WHITE CAO SKI. AND UNLESS YOU
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS WERE READY
THEIR VOTE PRICE.
FAST FOOD NICK NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS ALRIGHT.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED TO SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. JACKSON
AYE JACKSON AYE MORE LOCK.
MORE LIKE NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG.
MONNING AYE MONNING AYE STERN.
WIECKOWSKI. WIECKOWSKI I'VE READ
THAT HAS THREE VOTES A WILL
PLACEMAT ON CALL THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
FIXED.
OKAY.
SENATOR LARA IF YOU'D LIKE TO
PROCEED MY UNDERSTANDING ISSUE
AND.
SENATOR ROTH HAVE COME TO AN
ACCOMMODATION.
AND WE HAVE A LOVE FILE ITEM
TWENTY EIGHT S. B. FOURTEEN OH
TWO GOOD AFTERNOON SENATOR LAR
THANK YOUTHANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
AND MEMBERS.
THIS HAS BEEN.
ISSUE I'VE WANTED TO ADDRESS
FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW THERE HAS
BEEN MANY ATTEMPTS.
TO ADDRESS THEM IS CRAFTED WITH
CLASSIFICATION OF EXPLOITED PORT
TRUCK DRIVERS.
BUT DUE TO ITS VULNERABLE.
HE'S VULNERABLE DRIVERS.
STILL LACKING APPROPRIATE
PROTECTIONS
WELL NO SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS ARE
PRETTY SUGGESTED IN THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS.
I I AM FULLY COMMITTED TO
ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS RAISED
AND THE ANALYSIS BY THE
STAKEHOLDERS.
IF S. B. FOURTEEN LEAD TO
PROBLEMS FOR TODAY WILL CONTINUE
TO WORK WITH ALL SIDES TO GIVE
ADDITIONAL. CLARITY FOR TO
RETAILERS AND TRUCKING COMPANIES
WHILE PROTECTING OUR AYE
WORKERS.
LET ME GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT
MEMBERS FOR WHY S. B. FOURTEEN
OH TWO IS NEEDED. CALIFORNIA
PORTS AS WE KNOW OUR POWERHOUSE
DRIVING OUR ECONOMY AND
CONNECTING US TO THE WORLD.
MORE THAN FORTY PERCENT OF THE
U. S. SHIPPING CONTAINER TRAFFIC
FLOWS THROUGH THE PORT OF LA
LONG BEACH AND OAKLAND.
TO ME THAT TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS
MEN AND WOMEN WHO HALL THESE
CARGO CONTAINERS
AWAY FROM OUR PORTS HAVE SOME OF
THE HARDEST JOBS IN AMERICA.
MORE THAN A DECADE OF COURT
RULINGS
MEDIA STORIES. INTO
THE REPORTS HAVE REVEALED RAN
PENN LABOR VIOLATIONS
IN THE PORT TRUCKING INDUSTRY.
REPORTING BY THE U. BY USA TODAY
REVEALED THAT SOME TRUCK
DRIVERS.
OWING SO MUCH MONEY TO THE
COMPANY THAT THEY'RE WORKING.
CHILLY FOR FREE.
THE STATE LABOR COMMISSIONER HAS
WON MORE THAN FORTY FIVE MILLION
DOLLARS.
JUDGMENTS FOR MORE THAN FOUR
HUNDRED DRIVERS.
NO HIGHER COURT HAS OVERTURNED
ANY OF THESE AWARDS.
PEEL.
YET THESE JUDGMENTS RARELY
MATERIALIZE AND WORKERS ARE
RARELY MADE WHOLE.
S. B. FOURTEEN WILL TO WILL
CLEAN UP OUR PORT TRUCKING
INDUSTRY ONCE AND FOR ALL.
THE BILL WILL ORDER THE DIVISION
OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT
TO CREATE A LIST OF COMPANIES
WITH FINAL JUDGMENTS FOR LABOR
VIOLATIONS INCLUDING WAIT STAFF.
FAILURE TO PAY TAXES ACNE LEGAL
DEDUCTIONS
THE COMPANIES ON THIS LIST HAVE
EXHAUSTED THEIR APPEALS BUT THEY
REFUSE TO CONTINUE TO PAY
DRIVERS WHAT THEY ARE RIGHTFULLY
OWED. FIFTY FOUR TO GO TO WILL
ALLOW CALIFORNIA.
TO HOLD RETAIL COMPANIES AND
SHIP PLANNERS.
LIABLE ONLY WHEN AND ONLY WHEN
THEY HIRE TRUCKING COMPANIES ON
THIS LIST.
THAT MAY BE VERY CLEAR TESTING
FOURTEEN LOW TO IT'S NOT
AUTOMATIC LIABILITY.
A TRUCKING COMPANY NEEDS DUE
PROCESS AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PAY WHAT IT OWED BEFORE IT
APPEARS ON ANY LIST. HEFTY
FOURTEEN WILL TOO COMES IN ONLY
WHEN A COMPANY HAS EXHAUSTED ITS
APPEALS. AND IT'S STILL REFUSING
TO SATISFY ITS OBLIGATIONS TO
WORKERS.
MEMBERS I THINK THIS IS A.
A FAIR APPROACH HAS SOMETHING
THAT COULD.
TRANSFORM.
THE CARGO INDUSTRY AND
PARTICULARLY FOR OUR POOR TRUCK
DRIVERS WITH THAT I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE.
GO TO WITNESSES PLEASE TWO
MINUTES EACH.
I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND WE'RE
TRYING TO STICK TO THIS COMPOSED
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF CASES A LOT
OF CASES.
A LOT OF OF BILLS LEFT BEFORE WE
END TONIGHT SO IF YOU GO AHEAD
TWO MINUTES SIR. YES THANK YOU
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
A DISTINGUISHED COMMITTEE
MEMBERS MY NAME IS JEFF TERREL
ON THE PRESIDENT OF TOLL GLOBAL
LOGISTICS AMERICA'S. AND I'M
HERE TO OFFER SUPPORT. FOR S. B.
FORTINO TO INTRODUCED BY SENATOR
RICARDO LARA.
SO TOLL OPERATES A COMPREHENSIVE
GLOBAL LOGISTICS NETWORK ACROSS
TWELVE HUNDRED LOCATIONS IN MORE
THAN FIFTY COUNTRIES.
WE'RE LEADING PROVIDER OF
INTEGRATED SUPPLY CHAIN
SOLUTIONS
TO THE NORTH AMERICAN MARKET AND
WE HAVE OVER FORTY THOUSAND
EMPLOYEES WORLDWIDE.
TO PROVIDE A DIVERSE RANGE OF.
TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS
SOLUTIONS COVERING ROAD AIR SEA
AND RAIL TO HELP OUR CUSTOMERS
BEST MEET THEIR GLOBAL SUPPLY
CHAIN NEEDS.
AROUND THE GLOBE TOLL RECOGNIZES
OUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET IS OUR
EMPLOYEES AND WE TAKE THE SAME
APPROACH HERE IN THE UNITED
STATES.
WE'VE OPERATED IN THE PORT
TRUCKING MARKET AT THE PORTS OF
LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH FOR
OVER TEN YEARS.
CURRENTLY WE EMPLOY EIGHTY
DRIVERS BUT WE STRIVE TO
SIGNIFICANTLY GROW OUR BUSINESS
AND ARE WILLING TO INVEST
TO SUPPORT OUR CUSTOMERS GROWTH
PLANS.
CONSISTENT WITH OUR CORPORATE
VALUES.
WE OPERATE AN ASSET BASED
BUSINESS MODEL WITH EMPLOYEE
DRIVERS IN PORTRAY EDGE.
WE HAVE ALSO ADOPTED A SET OF
GLOBAL PRINCIPLES THAT INCLUDES
WORKING COOPERATIVELY WITH LABOR
UNIONS AND THE COUNTRIES WHERE
WE OPERATE. IN THE UNITED STATES
WE DEVELOPED A CONSTRUCTIVE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TEAMSTERS.
THE DRAINAGE MARKET IS EXTREMELY
COMPETITIVE AS THEIR AN
ESTIMATED EIGHT HUNDRED TRUCKING
COMPANIES OPERATING AT THE LA
LONG BEACH PORTS MAKE IT IT A
CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENT UNDER
NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE COMPETITIVE CHALLENGES WE
FACE ARE MADE EVEN MORE
DIFFICULT WHEN TOLL MUST COMPETE
WITH THE VAST ARRAY OF TRUCKING
COMPANIES. THAT DO NOT ABIDE BY
THE SAME RULES.
UNFORTUNATELY IT SEEMS THAT MANY
OF THE COMPANIES WE COMPETE
AGAINST
OPERATE UNDER AN INDEPENDENT
CONTRACTOR BUSINESS MODEL THAT
RUNS AFOUL OF CALIFORNIA LABOR
LAWS. RESULTING IN UNACCEPTABLE
WORKING CONDITIONS FOR MANY PORT
DRIVERS WHO CANNOT EARN A LIVING
WAGE.
IT IS DISHEARTENING THAT THERE
SEEMS TO BE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS
FOR THE DRAINAGE INDUSTRY TO
ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE.
WITH CALIFORNIA'S LABOR LAWS
THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU NEXT
WITNESS PLEASE.
THANKYOU THERE ARE GOOD
AFTERNOON THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK CLAIMS
DAVID. I'M A LAWYER WITH THE
NATURAL SOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL
NRDC IN LOS ANGELES.
WE SUPPORT THIS BILL FOR AIR
QUALITY PURPOSES AND LET ME
EXPLAIN BRIEFLY WHY FEED
SO OF LA AND LONG BEACH ARE SOME
OF THE LARGEST POLLUTERS IN THE
REGION AND WE HAVE THE WORST
SMOG IN UNITED STATES. THE
WORST%
THOSE ON SITUATION WERE NUMBER
ONE ON THAT ONE OF THE REASONS
FOR THAT IS THAT DIESEL TRUCKS
THAT DRIVE AROUND THE FOR THE
TRIP THE FREIGHT ROUTES IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. WE HAD A
CLEAN TRUCK PLAN ENACTED IN TWO
THOUSAND EIGHT BUT I YOU KNOW
TEN YEARS AGO ON CLIENTS LIKE
WHEN YOU BUY A NEW CAR AFTER
WHILE. THINK STOP WORKING AND
YOU NEED TO REPAIR THINGS AND
GET A BACK OPERATION THAT'S THE
SAME WITH THE EMISSION CONTROL
SYSTEMS FOR SOPHISTICATED ONCE
ON THESE DIESEL TRUCKS.
BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT ECONOMIC
MODEL THE DRIVERS OFTEN DON'T
HAVE THE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO
MAINTAIN THOSE TRUCKS THE WAY
THEY OUGHT TO. HIM OF RESULTS
FROM THAT IS THE THE SMOG THE
YOU SEE A LOT OF THE SMOG THE
UC.
CONSUMER CALIFORNIA SO OUR
POSITION ON THIS IS THAT IT'S
IT'S IF IT WORKS RIGHT THE WAY I
THINK IT WILL ITALY'S MARKET
FORCES
TO BRING THE TRUCKING FLEET UP
TO THE POINT WHERE THE DRIVERS
CAN AFFORD. TO MAINTAIN THEIR
RUCKS
SO THAT THE EMISSIONS CONTROL
SYSTEMS WORK AND WILL BE BETTER
OFF FOR THAT AND THAT IS WHY IN
OUR DC SUPPORTS THIS BILL. THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
VERY BRIEFLY YEAH MADAM CHAIR
VERY BROAD AND THE AFTER
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC
AFFAIRS COUNCIL. WITH ME MAKE
JUST ONE POINT ONLY. THAT.
THE OUR JOINT LIABILITY THAT
HAPPENS UNDER THIS BILL ONLY
HAPPENS.
AND WHEN.
CARRIER IS ON THIS LIST BECAUSE
THEY THEY'VE THEY'VE HAVE A
JUDGMENT THAT THEY HAVE
SATISFIED. OR SHIPPER HIRES THAT
CARRIER EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ON
THE LIST.
AND THEN THE CARRIER
SUBSEQUENTLY VIOLATES THE RIGHTS
OF THE DRIVERS WHEN THEY'RE
HAULING FREIGHT ON BEHALF OF
THAT SHIPPER.
SO NO.
SHIPPER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND EVER
HAS TO HAVE
JOINT LIABILITY
IT'S SIMPLY CONSECTETUER LIST
I'LL GO TO ANOTHER TRUCKING
COMPANY.
FOR THIS BILL WILL BE SELF
ENFORCING AND WILL CLEAR UP THE
MESS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THANK YOU THANK YOU OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. YOU MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS MICHAEL YOUNG
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION ROSELYN THE
COSPONSORED THE BILL ITS
LEGISLATION CAN BE REALLY
IMPORTANT WOULD NOW WASTE THAT
THE MISS CLASSIFICATION FOR THE
PORT TRUCK PARKED. PORTRAIT
DRIVERS AND WE ARE DRIVE OF
THANK YOU THANK YOU OTHER
WITNESSES NAME AND AFFILIATION
ONLY PLEASE BARBARA BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF LONG BEACH IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU
OTHER WITNESSES AND SUPPORT IF
YOU PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
I AM FATHER WILLIAM CONNOR A
CATHOLIC PRIEST OF THE
ARCHDIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES I AM
IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU
SO MUCH NEXT WITNESS PLEASE.
NICCOLO DELUDE HERE WE HAVE
OAKLAND MAYOR LIBBY SHAFT IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU THANK
YOU.
MY NAME IS DANIEL ON THE SECOND
WHEN A NUMBER OF ONE OF THEM IS
CLASSIFIED COURT TRUCK DRIVERS
AND I SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK
YOU SIR.
MY KNEES ARE RENOWNED FOR
EXAMPLE DRIVE BUT I AM SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL THANK YOU.
I AM THE MEANWHILE ON THE
FEDERAL GRAY VERY LONG.
SO CALIFORNIA I SUPPORTED BUT
THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS ONE THAT ARE IN THAT
WILL FOR CHINA AND WANT SAN
DIEGO AND I SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS HARDER HIM IOTA I AM
A WORKOUT DEL BOY FOR THE LAST
THIRTY YEARS. AND AND I KNOW
WHAT OTHER MISTER LARA TOOK
ABOUT. AND NOW I I AM AYE AYE
CHEAPER DRIVE RIGHT NOW AND I AM
I ENJOYING.
NOT DUH DUH I UNION CONTRACT
WITHOUT ALL THE BENEFITS THANK
YOU SIR.
HI MY NAME IS ONE IS THAT THEY
ALSO BORDER IT'S THE FOURTEENTH
ZERO TWO.
THANK YOU.
HI MY NAME IS A HUMMING OF
MODEL.
ON THE TRUCK DAVID FOR A DVD
FROM SAN DIEGO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
MY NAME IS WE YEAH WE GOT A
SIERRA. AND SUPPORT.
THESE MEALS. THANK YOU SIR.
GOOD AFTERNOON OR GOOD EVENING
I'M PAST ACCUSE HIM ARE WE.
FROM
CLERGY AND LAY DE UNITED FOR
ECONOMIC JUSTICE.
AN ORGANIZATION THAT WAS STARTED
BY REVEREND JAMES LAWSON.
STRATEGIES FOR DR KING'S
NONVIOLENT MOVEMENT I SUPPORT.
BILL THANK YOU SIR.
MYERS MICHAEL RAZA WITHOUT
TEAMSTERS LOCAL TWENTY TEN AND I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU SIR ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
I MEAN I'M IS JESSICA DURHAM FOR
THE LOS ANGELES LANCER NO
ECONOMY AND I ALSO STRONGLY
SUPPORT THIS.
THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
TO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION IF YOU'D PLEASE COME
FORWARD LET'S GO MAKE WAY FOR.
POLICE TO THESE FOLKS IF THERE
ARE TO NOTE JUST ONE.
THE NEXT YEAR.
GOOD AFTERNOON. THAT IN ITS
PLACE MADAM CHAIR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS DEREK SAUER SENIOR VICE
PRESIDENT GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT
AFFAIRS FOR THE CALIFORNIA
TRUCKING ASSOCIATION TESTIFYING
IN OPPOSITION OF S. B. FORTINO
TO. HOWEVER I DO WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE WE HAVE HAD
PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH
THE SENATOR AND THE SPONSORS OF
THE BILL REGARDING OUR CONCERNS.
IT'S TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN
THE D. LSE IS CONCLUDED OWNER
OPERATORS WERE EMPLOYEES EVEN
WHERE THE DRIVER HIRE THEIR OWN
EMPLOYEES TO DRIVE THEIR TRUCK.
THE DRIVER TESTIFIED THAT HE
VIEWED HIMSELF.
AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR THE
DRIVER HAD COMPLETE THE TAUGHT
ME TO WORK FOR OTHER COMPANIES
AND DID SO. AND WHERE THE D. L.
AS HE HAD PREVIOUSLY FOUND
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS
FOR THAT SAME OPERATION.
CTA'S EVEN SEEN EXAMPLES OF
WHERE DECISIONS LEVIED BY THE
DEAL AS HE DOES NOT CITE THE
COMPANY IN QUESTION ESSENTIALLY
USES A PREVIOUS DECISION AND
DOES EVEN CHANGE THE COMPANY
NAME. TO THE CORRECT ONE.
THIS PROCESS IS FUNDAMENTALLY
FLAWED SHOULD NOT PROVIDE THE
BASIS TO SIGN JOINT LIABILITY
FOR PORTRAITS CUSTOMERS.
THE DE LSE LIST PROPOSED BY THIS
BILL WILL LITERALLY PUT
COMPANIES OUT OF BUSINESS.
IN THE BILL'S CURRENT FORM. YOU
CAN BE POSTED ON THIS LIST
DESPITE HAVING LEGAL AVENUES TO
APPEAL AVAILABLE.
CURRENTLY THERE'S NO PROCESS FOR
GETTING OFF THE LIST THERE IS NO
PROTECTION FOR COMPANIES WHO
HAVE MISTAKENLY PLACED ON THE
LIST.
AND EXPERIENCE WHAT MAYBE HARM
THEY CANNOT RECOVER FROM.
WE CONTINUE WE HOPE TO CONTINUE
THE DIALOGUE WITH THE BILL'S
SPONSOR AN AUTHOR TO FIND A
REASONABLE PATH FORWARD THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. BURKE
BLACKBURN HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
WESTERN STATES TRUCKING
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION AS A
SPELL WOULD HAVE A CHILLING
EFFECT ON THE USE OF.
SMALL EMERGING TRUCKING
BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION PLEASE
NAME AND AFFILIATION.
ANOTHER GONZALEZ ON BEHALF OF
THE RETAIL INDUSTRY LEADERS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION THANK
YOU.
JOHN CABOT TECH ON BEHALF OF THE
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
INDEPENDENT BUSINESS CALIFORNIA
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU SIR.
BRIAN LITTLE CALIFORNIA FARM
BUREAU FEDERATION OPPOSITION.
LIKE THAT TIE.
HERE. REX TIME TO HAVE A
CALIFORNIA'S PROPERTY
ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU.
FIVE IN ALL TOMORROW BEHALF
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
IN OPPOSITION THINKING.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
ANY QUESTIONS.
FROM THE DIETS.
AND YOU WERE. ALRIGHT.
SO.
MIGHT BE WE HAVE A MOTION I
JUST WANNA THANK YOU SENATOR
LARA THIS A VERY CREATIVE
APPROACH TO DEALING WITH THE
PROBLEM THE CHIP SHOULDN'T YEARS
YOU SIR.
CLEARLY FOLKS WHO WORK HARD AND.
NOT TO MAKE ANY MONEY AT IT
BECAUSE OF THE.
BAD ACTORS I I WOULD I WOULD
THINK THAT THE.
EVERYONE WOULD WANT TO TIGHTEN
UP THE THE RULES TWO THAT
PROVIDE THIS AND I DO.
I DO UNDERSTAND IS THERE SOME
CONCERN ABOUT THE JOINT
LIABILITY BUT I THINK THAT.
YOUR COMMENTS OF MISTER BRYDEN
TO HIM PRETTY WELL ADDRESS THAT.
.
AND I KNOW THE AUTHORED
SPONSORED HAVE COMMITTED TO
INCORPORATING THE AMENDMENTS
SUGGESTED IN THE IN OUR LIST
ANALYSIS TO TIGHTEN UP THE BILL
AND I HAVE. EVERY CONFIDENCE
THAT EVERYONE WILL BE WORKING
GOOD FAITH ON THIS TO. ENSURE
THE BILL IS REFINED TO GET TO.
A RESOLUTION OF THIS REALLY THE
INSIDIOUS PROBLEM THE CHEST
TAKES ADVANTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE WORKING HARD JUST TRYING TO.
MACON SMEATON AND MAKE A LIVING
SO.
WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION OF
BY SENATOR MINING THE MOTION IS
A DO PASSED THE SENATE LABOR AND
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS.
MADAM SECTOR PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
JACKSON AYE JACKSON I AM MORE
LOCK.
MORE LIKE NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG.
MONNING.
YES.
HERTZBERG AYE. MONNING AYE
MONNING AYE STERN.
LIKE ASKING.
REGULATORY MEMBERS THANK YOU
VERY MUCH WE'LL KEEP THAT THE
BILL ON CALL YOU HAVE THREE
VOTES YOU NEED ONE MORE. AND
BEFORE WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK
BECAUSE SENATOR HERTZBERG WAS SO
DELICATE IN HIS INQUIRY
REGARDING MY BILL.
THE DOES HAVE A WITNESS WHO'S
ABOUT TO LEAVE AND SO WE ARE
GONNA LET HIM HAVE.
.
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT FILE
ITEM TWELVE INSERTED THE.
TEN SIXTEEN TEN SIXTEEN.
THIS.
FILE ITEM SIX
MY APOLOGIES.
BECAUSE.
FILE ITEMS
STEEN.
.
S. B. TEN TWELVE
S. B. TEN TWELVE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
HABITAT.
STILL EVEN I APPRECIATE VERY
MUCH TAKING THIS OUT OF ORDER.
I'LL MAKE IT AS QUICK AS
COMMITTEE SO DESIRES.
I HAVE COME BACK TO GOVERNMENT
AFTER LEAVING FOR A NUMBER OF
YEARS MADAM CHAIR THAT YOU KNOW.
WITH ONE LARGE.
MISSION.
JUSTICE.
TRY TO WORK ON THE JUDICIAL
BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT AND EVERY
WAY POP
SYMBOL TO MAKE IT BETTER FASTER
SMARTER AND FAIRER.
WE DID SEVEN BILLS INVOLVING
TRAFFIC TICKETS AND FEES AND
FINES AND HURT PEOPLE.
WE'RE DOING BAIL REFORM NOW THAT
TRYING TO FIX THE SYSTEM.
AND THIS MEASURE THAT YOU HAVE
BEFORE YOU IS AN EFFORT TO TRY
TO DEAL WITH CASES SMALL CASES.
FOR THE LEGAL FEES ARE TALKS
IF IT OFTEN PEOPLE ARE DENYING
JUSTICE.
EXPERT A JURY TRIAL SYSTEM FOR
CASES UNDER FIFTY THE UNDER
TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND. AND WE'RE
RAISING IT TO FOR
TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS.
COORDINATION WITH THE COMMISSION
ON THE FUTURE OF CALIFORNIA'S
COURT SYSTEM WHICH CAME OUT WITH
THIS REPORT. IN TWO THOUSAND
SEVENTEEN.
HE'S I CAN GET YOU MORE DETAILS
LET MISTER CAP ATTACK TALK
ABOUT IT. BUT THE NOTION IS THIS
IS JUST ONE OF MANY STEPS WANTED
ULTIMATELY BE ABLE TO KIOSKS FOR
SMALL CLAIMS COURT FACED
I'M TO APPEAR IN COURT. AND MAKE
EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO
HAVE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM LESS
COSTLY MORE ACCESSIBLE. AND MORE
AVAILABLE TO ALL PEOPLE AND MORE
FAIR
SKEPTA.
THANK YOU BRING CAPITA FORMER
PRESIDENT OF CONSUMER TERRY'S
CALIFORNIA.
CURRENTLY ALSO MEMBER THE
JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL
COMMITTEE.
THOUGHT THANK YOU VERY MUCH I
KNOW I LIMITED ON TIME HERE I
WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT
NOW IS THE COURTS ARE STARTING
TO SLOWLY GET REFUNDED IT'S TIME
FOR US TO TURN OUR ATTENTION TO
HOW WE CAN MAKE COURTS. MORE
ACCESSIBLE FOR LITIGANTS AND
MORE COST EFFICIENT IN THE
PROCESS
HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE
FOR MANY MANY YEARS MANY DECADES
PUBLIC LONG BEFORE I WAS A
LAWYER. THELIMITS OF CALIFORNIA
WERE SET AT TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND
DOLLARS FOR WHAT WAS THEN.
DOWN MUNICIPAL COURT
JURISDICTION TODAY LIMITED COURT
JURISDICTION LET'S START BY
RAISING THAT TO FIFTY THOUSAND
DOLLARS SO PEOPLE THAT HAVE.
DISPUTES REAL DISPUTES OR REAL
WORLD DISPUTES
COULD HAVE BEEN LITIGATED AND
NOT COST A HUNDRED THOUSAND
DOLLARS TO LITIGATE A FIFTY
THOUSAND DOLLAR DISPUTE THIS IS
NOT A SMALL CLAIMS MATTER WE'RE
NOT TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE
LIMITATIONS FOR SMALL CLAIMS
COURT. WERE SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT
LIMITED JURISDICTION I AGREE
WITH SENATOR HERTZBERG WE ARE
LOOKING AS A GROUP OF THE
JUDICIAL COUNCIL.
THE COMMISSION ON FUTURES THE.
CONSUMER ATTORNEYS ARE ALL
LOOKING AT WAYS TO MAKE
LITIGATION MORE COST EFFICIENT
FOR ALL CALIFORNIANS AND THIS IS
THE VERY FIRST STEP WE HAVE TO
CONTINUE TO GO IN THIS
DIRECTION.
WE NEED
FIND A WAY TO MAKE CASES BOTH
TECHNICAL LOGICALLY ADVANCED
MOVING FOR THE SYSTEM AS QUICKLY
AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE BOUGHT IT
EXPENSIVE FOR BOTH PLAINTIFFS
AND DEFENDANTS ANALYTIC IN SOME
CASES.
AND LETS FACE IT NOT ONE SIZE
FITS ALL IN LITIGATION
THERE ARE BIG CASES THERE ARE
LITTLE CASES IN THEIR MID SIZE
CASES LET'S BE IN THIS RESPECT
GOLDILOCKS AND FIND. THE RIGHT
WAY FOR EACH CASE TO BE
LITIGATED THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AGAIN MADAM CHAIR BECAUSE AT ONE
THING THAT I WANTED TO SAY I'M
OPENING FOR GONE.
BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME
SENSITIVITY FROM A CALIFORNIA
EMPLOYER MILLERS ASSOCIATION AS
TO RELATES ATTORNEY'S FEES. AND
HOW THIS MIGHT ADVERSELY IMPACT
SMALLER CASES
UPON THAT ARE SMALLER EMPLOYMENT
CASES AND I ICE JUST TELL THE
COMMITTEE. TO AND TO THE
ASSOCIATION COMMITTED TO WORK
WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE WE DEAL
WITH THEIR ISSUES.
THANK YOU I THINK THAT MAKES
SENSE FOR CHINA. AS YOU POINT
OUT THAT THE.
COSTS OF LITIGATION HAVE GONE UP
ENORMOUSLY BUT WE HAVE AN
INCREASE THE.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO
BRING THOSE CASES AT THE.
MORE MODEST LEVEL SO I I
APPRECIATE YOUR TESTIMONY AND
APPRECIATE YOUR BRINGING THIS
BILL.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT.
ANY OTHER WAY ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITE IT OPPOSITION OR IN.
FIRM NEUTRALITY.
I THINK YOU MADAM CHAIR BUY
AMERICA AS YOU ARE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION THANK YOU SENATOR
HERTZBERG.
.
AS AS YOU MENTIONED WE DO HAVE
SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THIS
WOULD IMPACT SMALLER.
FEE HOW GLAZER CASES IN
PARTICULAR BUT I APPRECIATE
WORKING WITH AUTHORS OFFICE IN
THE COMMITTEE AND THE SPONSORS
ON ON THIS BILL THINK.
AND I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS
WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT
THERE BE SOME ARE AND I BELIEVE
THERE WILL BE UP TO NEEDS AND
RESOLUTION OF THAT PROBLEM ANY
QUESTIONS. MOTION BY SENATOR
MONNING.
ANY ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE
DYESS.
CSUS.
ALRIGHT SEEING NONE THE MOTION
IS THE DO PASSED TO THE SENATE
FLOOR. MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL THIS IS FILE ITEM.
STEEN S. B. TEN TWELVE.
JACKSON AYE AYE JACKSON I AM
MORE LOCK.
ANDERSON.
OR LOCK NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG
AYE HERTZBERG AYE MONNING AYE
MONNING AYE STERN. STERN AYE
WIECKOWSKI.
RIGHT THAT BILL HAS A.
FOUR VOTES AND WE WILL LEAVE IT
ON CALL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS
SENATOR ROTH YOU WERE GRACIOUS
TO.
LET SENATOR HILL GOAL BEFORE YOU
IN. WITHIN A.
BACK IN THE QUEUE.
EGGMAN ANSWER MEMBERS IF WE
COULD TAKE US SENATE BILL TWELVE
THIRTY EIGHT FIRST I HAVE A
WITNESS WHO MAY NEED TO AMERICA.
THAT'S.
COLLEAGUE SETS FILE ITEM TWENTY
THREE.
S. B. TWELVE THIRTY EIGHT.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR GOOD
AFTERNOON THANK YOU WELL I'LL BE
BRIEF
THE BILL IS DESIGNED TO ENSURE
BASICALLY THE PATIENTS HAVE THE
RIGHT TO RETRIEVE AND PRESERVE
THE MEDICAL RECORDS IF THEY
DECIDE TO DO SO. SPECIFICALLY
THE BILL SAYS THAT HEALTH CARE
PROVIDERS MUST SEND A SINGLE
NOTICE. VIA EMAIL.
OR OPPOSED.
TWO LETTERS SOME PATIENTS LAST
KNOWN ADDRESS NOTE OF NOTIFYING
THE PATIENT OR PATIENTS THAT
THEIR PERSONAL HEALTH CARE
RECORD WILL BE DESTROYED IF IT
IS GOING TO BE DESTROYED. AND
WIN AND THEN ALLOW THE PATIENT
THE OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN A COPY
BEFORE THE RECORDS ARE
DESTROYED.
I HAVE WITH ME TODAY MISTER
ALLEN BOYD AS SOON SOME PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE WITH THIS
IN HER ISSUE.
TO PROVIDE SOME VERY VERY BRIEF.
TESTIMONY WITH YOUR PERMISSION
THANK YOU SERVE TWO MINUTE
TYPICALLY CHAIR UPON I'M ALAN
GOING IT'S PRIVATE CITIZEN FROM
LAGUNA BEACH AND SUPPORT.
CURRENT LAW GIVES PATIENTS THE
RIGHT TO OBTAIN THEIR MEDICAL
RECORDS.
THAT ASSUMES THE RECORDS EXIST
IN THE FIRST PLACE. MOST PEOPLE
DON'T EVEN THINK OF THEIR
MEDICAL RECORDS UNTIL THEY GET
SICK.
AND MOST ARE SHOCKED TO LEARN
THAT DOCTORS CAN FREELY SHRED
THEIR RECORDS WITHOUT GVING
THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN
THEM.
FOR THEY ARE SHREDDED.
SUCH DESTRUCTION OF PATIENTS
MEDICAL RECORDS IS FUNDAMENTALLY
UNFAIR AND UNETHICAL. IN A
RECENT EMAIL TO ME DR DENNIS AB
LIANA CHAIR OF THE AMA COUNCIL
ON ETHICAL JUDICIAL AFFAIRS
WROTE I QUOTE.
THE A. M. A. RECOMMENDS
ZETIAN'S RETAIN OLD RECORDS
AGAINST POSSIBLE FUTURE NEEDS.
AND TAKE PROACTIVE STEPS
TO HELP PATIENTS OBTAIN. OR
TRANSFER RECORDS WHEN PHYSICIANS
AND MEDICAL PRACTICE.
IN THE CASE OF CANCER THE
BIGGEST FEAR CANCER PATIENTS
HAVE IS THEIR CANCER WILL RECUR.
THE SECOND BIGGEST FEAR MUST BE
IF THE CANCER RECURS THE DOCTORS
WON'T KNOW HOW TO TREAT IT.
WITHOUT THE RECORDS DOCTORS MAY
NOT KNOW. THIS BECAME THE LIVING
NIGHTMARE MY WIFE AND I FACED
MY WIFE FACED AND SUFFERED WITH
BREAST CANCER TWICE OVER A
FOURTEEN YEAR PERIOD. WHEN SHE
WAS STRICKEN THE SECOND TIME I
TRY TO RETRIEVE HER ORIGINAL
TUMOR SLIDES AND RADIATION
RECORDS. TO LEARN WHETHER HER
CANCER WAS NEW A RECURRENT.
AND WHETHER SHE WAS A CANDIDATE
FOR RADIATION FOR MORE
RADIATION.
AS WE REGRETTABLY LEARNED THE
SLIDES HAD BEEN DESTROYED.
AND THE RADIATION RECORDS WERE
MISSING.
IN THE MAD RUSH TO TREAT DOCTORS
RECOMMEND IN MY WIFE.
RADIATED AGAIN.
BUT WITHOUT THE RADIATION
RECORDS THERE WAS NO WAY OF
KNOWING WHETHER SHE HAD REACHED
THE LIFETIME MAXIMUM DOSE FOR
RADIATION FROM TREATING THE
FIRST CANCER. RADIATION AS WE
KNOW CAN BE BOTH A CURE AND A
DEADLY CURSE.
IT WAS PURE CHANCE THAT MY
WIFE'S
TUMOR SLIDES WERE DESTROYED. BUT
HER RADIATION RECORDS WERE
FOUND.
WHAT CHANCE IS NOT HOW WE SHOULD
BE RUNNING HEALTHCARE IN
CALIFORNIA THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME?
YOU VERY MUCH OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT IF YOU PLEASE STEP FOR
WITH YOUR NAME ANDAFFILIATION.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS DELORES
DURAN FLORES WITH THE CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
WERE ALSO HERE IN SUPPORT THANK
YOU OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
FATHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
ARE YOU IN SUPPORTER.
ALRIGHT NO NO PROBLEM I KNOW
IT'S CRAZY OUT THERE SO GO AHEAD
MICHAEL YOUNG WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION WERE
ALSO HERE IN SUPPORT. THANKYOU
SO MUCH. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR A. NEEDS
ARE NOT THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION CURRENTLY OPPOSE
MUST AMENDED TO S. B. TWELVE
THIRTY EIGHT.
AS THE BILL CREATES AN EXCESS
ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATIVE
BURDEN THAT WILL INCREASE THE
COST OF PROVIDING HEALTH CARE
FOR MINIMAL BENEFIT BERLIN
SMALLER PROVIDERS ESPECIALLY
SIMPLY WILL NOT HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO COMPLY.
SEE MY RIGHT SEEM A RECOGNIZES
THE DESIRE TO ENSURE PATIENTS
ARE AWARE OF MEDICAL PRIVACY AND
MEDICAL RECORD LAWS HOWEVER WE
ALSO WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE DO
NOT CREATE ADDITIONAL
CONFLICTING PROPHECIES ON THE
TOP OF EXISTING PROPHECIES THAT
RT SERVE THIS PURPOSE.
ADEQUATE PRIVACY LAWS ARE
CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY SINCE THE
LAST TIME THIS BILL WAS
INTRODUCED IN TWO THOUSAND EIGHT
SOME PIECES OF THE BILL FOR
INSTANCE OUR CURRENT LAW NOW.
IN ADDITION WE'RE ENTERING INTO
A NEW ERA OF RECORD STORES THAT
LARGELY NEGATE THE NEED FOR SUCH
NOTICES AS REQUIRED BY THE BELL
IS THE OVERALL HEALTH CARE
SYSTEM CHANGES HOW RECORDS ARE
STORED AND MAINTAIN CHANGED. FOR
INSTANCE WHILE RECENT AMENDMENTS
ATTEMPT TO EXEMPT YOU EACH ARE
SYSTEMS THAT STAR RECORDS
INDEFINITELY THAT DOESN'T
ADDRESS ALL THE POTENTIAL
OPERATIONAL ISSUES OF COMPLYING
WITH A SPELL FOR INSTANCE. WHO
ACTUALLY HAS CONTROL OVER THESE
RECORDS THE POSITION IN THE
FACILITY AND HUGE OUR VENDOR?
AND THAT AMENDMENT MOST
CERTAINLY DOES NOT PROVIDE
CLARITY TO THE NUMBER OF
PROVIDERS IT EXCLUDES IN
ADDITION PHYSICIANS MAY NOT
NECESSARILY BE KEEPING RECORDS
AND DEFINITELY BUT THEY DID
SWITCH TO AN HR SYSTEM AND DOING
SO. NOTIFIED PATIENTS AT EACH
VISIT ABOUT HOW TO PICK UP THE
RECORDS UNDER THIS BILL THOUGH
THEY WOULD NOW BE OUT OF
COMPLIANCE AND HAVE TO NOTIFY
AGAIN. MANY PHYSICIANS ALSO USE
A CLOUD BASED EHR THAT IS
MAINTAINED BY A VENDOR THAT SETS
THEIR OWN RECORD RETENTION
POLICY.
WE HAVING KNOWLEDGE UNDERLYING
CONCERN RAISED BY THE BILL
RELATED TO MAKING SURE THAT
PATIENTS ARE AWARE OF THE.
BEEN RECEIVED NOTICE OF
RETENTION PERIODS FOR RECORDS
AND I'VE OFFERED TO WORK WITH
THE AUTHOR ON THAT ARE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE IT AND WHERE
THE OPERATIONAL CONCERNS ARE
HUTTON'S REMAINS RELATED TO THE
ADDITIONAL NOTICE PRIOR TO
DESTROYING RECORDS IN THE BELL.
EVEN THE PREVIOUS BILL THIS BILL
IS MODELED AFTER ALLOWED
FLEXIBILITY IN THAT REGARD BY
APPLYING THE REQUIREMENT ONLY TO
THOSE RECORDS. ONLY TO THOSE
THAT DESTROYED RECORDS SOONER
THAN THE PREVIOUS NOTICE AND
STAYED HOWEVER AS WE TOLD THIRTY
EIGHT IS NOT MERE THAT LANGUAGE
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT
WITNESS.
I'M LIZ ALLAN THAT I'M
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH INFORMATION ASSOCIATION.
WHICH HAS NINE THOUSAND MEMBERS
WHO WORK WITH MEDICAL RCORDS IN
ALL. ODD DIFFERENT FACILITIES
ACROSS THE STATE A WE ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.
OUR PRIMARY CONCERNS.
REGARD THE.
WHAT AMY MENTIONED ABOUT HAVING
TO NOTIFY THE PATIENTS?
BEFORE RECORDS ARE DESTROYED.
THEIR POTENTIAL BREACHES OF
PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION IF
YOU'RE SENDING HIM TO OLD
ADDRESSES.
AND THERE MAY BE ISSUES WITH
SPOUSAL ABUSE OR. OTHER THINGS.
ALSO IT'S AN EXCESSIVE
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN TO TRY TO
CONTACT HUNDREDS IF NOT
THOUSANDS OF OLD PATIENTS.
KA PRIOR TO DESTRUCTION.
FARM ONE OF OUR MAIN CONCERNS
IS THE LACK OF STANDARDIZED
MEDICAL RECORD RETENTION LAWS
THERE ARE LAWS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA BET COVER HOSPITALS
AND SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
BUT THEY DO NOT COVER INDIVIDUAL
PHYSICIAN.
AND TIME. AND THAT CREATES A
PROBLEM WITH THIS.
ALSO AS AMY MENTIONED THE PAPER
AND VERSUS ELECTRONIC RECORDS
MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO.
DETERMINE WHAT IS THE LEGAL
RECORD AND WHAT INFORMATION CAN
BE.
PROVIDED TO THE PATIENT.
SO I BECAUSE OF THAT AND.
AND OTHER ISSUES.
.
THAT CALIFORNIA HEALTH
INFORMATION ASSOCIATION ARE
OPPOSES SP TWELVE THIRTY EIGHT
AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN WE
HAVE. TRIED TO CONTACT US
SENATOR ROTH TO WORK AND
AMENDMENTS WITH THIS AND HAVE
NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET ANY
FEEDBACK FROM HIM ON THAT.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF THEIR
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
BRING IT TO THE DYESS SENATOR
MONNING.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR I
HEARD THIS ON JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE AND WE HAD A.
FULL CONVERSATION THERE.
HEALTH CLINICS.
IN HEALTH COMMITTEE WHAT I SAY.
I'M SANCTUARY AND JUDICIARY
SMELLING THE.
WE DID HEAR AND HEALTH
COMMITTEE.
A QUESTION FOR THE AUTHOR.
WE ARE IN THIS PROCESS OF
CONVERTING FROM PAPER RECORDS TO
ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS WITH
THIS BILL COVER.
ALSO DISPOSITION OF.
ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS IF
THE.
THE DOCTOR WAS PLANNING TO
CHANGE COMPUTER SYSTEMS SIR.
DUMB NAM OLD RECORDS FROM THEIR
COMPUTER AS WITH.
CENTER AS WITH HIP OF THIS BILL
COVERS BOTH PAPER AND ELECTRONIC
RECORDS THE. GUN EXCEPTION THAT
WAS MADE AT THE REQUEST OF THE
HEALTH COMMITTEE IS IF THE
ELECTRONIC REP RECORDS.
ARE BEING KEPT TO IN PERPETUITY
THEN THE RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM
ITSELF.
IS EXEMPT FROM THE FROM THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL IN OTHER
WORDS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO
DESTROY THEM AND DON'T WORRY
ABOUT ANY PORTION OF THIS
PARTICULAR BILL. THANK YOU. IN
BASED ON THE WITNESS WHO
TESTIFIED IN SUPPORT.
.
YOU KNOW ONE OF THE.
PRINCIPLES OF THE PRACTICE OF
MEDICINE IS DO NO HARM AND IF
GETTING RID OF A PATIENT'S
MEDICAL RECORDS CAN IN ANY WAY.
JEOPARDIZE THE FUTURE HEALTH OR
MEDICAL TREATMENT OF THAT
PATIENT I WOULD THINK WE SHOULD
AIR ON THE SIDE OF DOING NO HARM
IN PROTECTING THE PATIENT'S.
ABILITY TO GET THERE I KNOW THE
OPPOSITION RAISED THE CONCERN
ALSO IN HEALTH COMMITTEE.
OF SOME POTENTIAL VIOLATION OF
OUR PRIVACY IF YOU SEND RECORDS
TO THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS. I
THINK.
THE AUTHORED ADDRESSED AND HE
MAY WANT TO ADDRESS IT FURTHER
BUT.
THE TRIGGER COULD SIMPLY BE A
POSTCARD NOTICE OR AN EMAIL
NOTICE TO THE PATIENT TO CONTACT
THE OFFICE IF THEY WANT TO
PURSUE THEIR MINUTE MEDICAL
RECORDS. AND I THINK TO THE
EXTENT THAT THAT'S PERCEIVED AS
POTENTIALLY BREACHING. PRIVACY
OR HIP THAT WE NEED A BALANCE
THAT THE PATIENTS.
INTEREST IN HAVING ACCESS TO
THOSE RECORDS BEFORE THEIR NAM.
BEFORE THEY'RE DESTROYED IS
PARAMOUNT ON IT DOES SOUND LIKE
THE OPPONENTS SOME. ARE PREPARED
TO FURTHER DISCUSS WITH THE
AUTHOR NUMB. MY I'M SURE THE
AUTHOR WOULD BE WILLING TO DO
THAT.
I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION
TO ๒ญผPORT
THINKING.
OTHER QUESTIONS SENATOR MORE
LAW.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR A SINNER
RAFA YOU WILLING TO WORK WITH
YOUR. I ABSOLUTELY I DON'T
COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE
COMMENT ABOUT MY OFFICE THAT
CERTAINLY.
IN THE SIX YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN
HERE THAT'S NOT THE REPUTATION
THAT I HAVE BEEN THE THIRD HOUSE
AND IT'S NOT THE REPUTATION I
HAVE AMONG MY COLLEAGUES HERE I.
QUESTION WHETHER THAT IN FACT
OCCURRED BUT CERTAINLY IF IT DID
OCCUR. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN
BE REMEDIED IMMEDIATELY AND WILL
BE
I'M.
WEEKLY WILLING TO WORK WITH.
POSITION ON THIS BILL OR ANY
OTHER BILL THE ISSUE REALLY IS.
DOES IT DOES THERE NEED TO BE A
NOTIFICATION
SENT TO A PATIENT.
BEFORE THE RECORDS WERE
DESTROYED SUFFICIENTLY IN
ADVANCE AND THEY DICTATE WHETHER
IT'S A YEAR TWO YEARS FIVE YEARS
OR SIXTY ONE DAYS.
BECAUSE THE NOTIFICATION HAFTED
SHOULD IT BE DELIVERED TO THE
PATIENTS OF THE PATIENT HAS.
NOTICE OF THE DESTRUCTION ON A
TIMELY BASIS AND THE ABILITY TO
RETRIEVE THE RECORDS AND.
THAT MAY BE AN ISSUE WHERE WE
HAVE SOME.
DISCONTINUING DISAGREEMENT AND
IT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO BRIDGE
THE GAP BUT I'M CERTAINLY
WILLING.
I TRIED TO DO THAT BUT IT I DO
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
PATIENTS WHO HAVE RECORDS.
WHO FRANKLY FOR YOU KNOW WHEN
YOU CHANGE MEDICAL PROVIDERS AND
IF IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS?
YOU ALWAYS UNLESS YOU'RE
REMINDED BY YOUR CURRENT%
PROVIDER DO YOU THINK ABOUT
GOING BACK TO YOUR FORMER
PHYSICIAN'S OFFICE.
AND ASKING FOR A TRANSFER OF
THOSE RECORDS
AND IF YOU DON'T THINK ABOUT IT
AND IF DIVERT RECORD RETENTION
DATE PASSES AND THE PHYSICIAN
HAPPENS TO HAVE PAPER RECORDS
THAT ARE NOT RETAIN
ELECTRONICALLY IN PERPETUITY.
THAN WHEN YOU GO BACK YOU MAY
FIND THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY
MEDICAL RECORDS AND THAT'S THE
ISSUE WE HAVE TO ADDRESS AND WE
NEED TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT DOES
NOT CAUSE UNDUE DIFFICULTY OR
HARDSHIP TO OUR MEDICAL.
COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE VALUE OUR
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS
WHAT THEY DO FOR ALL OF US AND
AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY STAY IN THE BUSINESS SO TO
SPEAK.
IN THIS IN THIS SO UNDERSERVED
HEALTH CARE STATE THAT WE HAVE.
IF YOU THINK THAT WAS AN
EXCELLENT CLOSE DON'T DON'T YOU
WELL I JUST WANT TO ADD
SOMETHING.
.
YEAH I KNOW IN THE PRACTICE OF
LAW YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO
GIVE A CLIENT BACK THEIR FILES.
AND GO WE DID THAT. YEARS AGO
AND IT'S
SORT OF A PAIN IN THE NECK BUT
THAT'S ALL IT IS IT'S NOT.
OVERLY CUMBERSOME A BURDENSOME
WE'VE.
GET SOME NOTICE EITHER PHONE
NUMBER OF LAST KNOWN ADDRESS
THAT.
HA THE TEN YEARS OF PASSED IN
THESE ARE USUALLY CASES THAT ARE
DEAD OR IN THE DOOR NOW.
NOT SOMETHING THAT COULD RISE UP
AGAIN ALTHOUGH YOU NEVER KNOW
BUT GIVE NOTICE.
GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY COME
PICK UP THEIR FILE.
AND THAT'S THE END OF THAT AND
I CHOOSE TO. SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN
THROUGH THE EXPERIENCE THAT YOUR
WIFE WENT THROUGH I AND I KNOW
THE TERROR.
IF YOU DON'T.
KNOW WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
BECAUSE SOMEHOW OR OTHER THAT
INFORMATION WAS EITHER LOST OR.
DESTROYED AND YOU KNOW IT'S JUST
YOUR LIFE YOU'RE. TALKING ABOUT
SO. I THINK ON BALANCE THE THE
BURDEN REALLY ISN'T.
THAT GREED ON THE PHYSICIAN OR
THE HOSPITAL MEAN IF YOU GONNA
GET RID OF RECORDS TELL PEOPLE
YOU ARE AND. AND LET'S GIVE THEM
THE OPPORTUNITY TO TO HOLD ON TO
THEM I CAN THINK OF A HUNDRED
DIFFERENT. EXAMPLES IN THE
MEDICAL HEALTH.
A WORLD WHERE THE INFORMATION
THAT YOU KNOW.
.
IT BECOMES OR CONTENT CONTINUES
TO BE RELEVANT WHETHER YOU
EXPECTED TO BE OR NOT SO. I JUST
THINK IN THE BALANCING AND I
KNOW THAT SENATOR ROTH IS
SOMEONE WHO'S A REASONABLE
PERSON AND I DO HOPE YOU
CONTINUE WORKING WITH HIM.
BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT FILL. US WITH THAT WE
HAVE A MOTION THE MOTION IS TO
PASS THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL JACKSON I JACKSON AYE A
MORE LOT. MORE LOCK AYE ANDERSON
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG AYE
MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI. WIECKOWSKI
AYE.
ALRIGHT SAID BILL HAS CHAU SIX
VOTES WE WILL KEEP IT ON CALL
FOR. THE ABSENT MEMBERS THANK
YOU SENATOR. AND WE HAVE ONE
MORE. OF THE I BELIEVE IT'S.
FILE ITEM THIRTY ONE THIS IS A
RESOLUTION.
CALIFORNIA LAW REVISIONS
COMMISSION.
BUT I THINK VENTURE OF MEMBERS.
AS YOU KNOW OR MAY KNOW SINCE
NINETEEN FIFTY THREE ACTUALLY
THE CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION.
COMMISSION.
HAS BEEN STUDYING TOPICS HAVE
BEEN HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE
LEGISLATURE EITHER THROUGH
RESOLUTION OR STATUTE.
AND AT LEAST ONCE PER REGULAR
SESSION THE LEGISLATURE
CONSIDERS A CONCURRENT
RESOLUTION. THAT SETS OUT A
CALENDAR OF TOPICS AUTHORIZED
FOR STUDY OR CONTINUED STUDY.
ABOUT THE COMMISSION THAT'S
EXACTLY WHAT THIS SERVE AS
SENIOR NINETY ONE DOES IT RENEWS
THE COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY TO
CONVICT CONTINUE TO CONDUCT FOR
HIS STUDIES OF THOSE STUDIES.
ACTUALLY ARE THE CALENDAR OF
TOPICS AUTHORIZED IN TWO
THOUSAND SIXTEEN BY. A ACR ONE
FORTY EIGHT WITH ONE ADDITION
AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE.
A DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCE
CONTROL.
BRAND HERE THIRD PAPER DE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LAW
REVIEW COMMISSION IS HERE WITH
ME TO ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS.
MADAM CHAIR SENATORS TIME BRIAN
EBERT I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE
CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION
COMMISSION. AND AS THE SENATOR
SAID I'M JUST HERE DOWN HERE
HELP ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU
HAVE TO DO.
THIS IS SORT OF A. KIND OF A.
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW I GUESS
WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO SAY TO
HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
CHAIR SENATORS.
MY NAME'S RUN KELLEY I'VE BEEN A
MEDIATOR IN CALIFORNIA FOR MORE
THAN THREE DECADES NOW.
FOR ALL OF THAT TIME.
DISPUTANTS IN CALIFORNIA HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO CHOOSE.
TO ENGAGE IN CONFIDENTIAL
MEDIATION WHERE THEY KNEW THEY
WERE TALKING OFF THE RECORD.
WITH PEOPLE THEY WERE IN A FIGHT
WITH.
IN EFFORT TO COME TO A VOLUNTARY
RESOLUTION OF THEIR DISPUTE.
ON THE UNDERLYING POLICY ISSUE.
I HOPE YOU'LL AT LEAST TAKE A
LOOK AT THE MATERIALS WHICH
LIST.
THIRTY TWO OF THIRTY THREE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE GONE ON
RECORD IN THE COURSE OF.
THE MEDIATION.
STUDY THAT THE LAW REVISION
COMMISSION HAS DONE.
IT'S A VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION.
OR THE COMMISSION HAS INVITED
PUBLIC COMMENT.
PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF HAVE TRAVELED
ALL AROUND THE STATE OF ATTENDED
TWENTY TWO STRAIGHT COMMISSION
MEETINGS.
A.
THIRTY TWO THIRTY THREE
ORGANIZATIONS ON RECORD HAVE
SAID IN ESSENCE.
WE THINK YOU'RE TAKING THE WRONG
APPROACH HERE WE'D LIKE YOU TO
TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH.
AND THE COMMISSION IN ITS WISDOM
HAS DECIDED.
NOT TO HEED THAT REQUESTS. THIS
IS A REALLY REALLY UNUSUAL
SITUATION AND THAT'S WHY I'VE
BEEN ASKED.
THAT YOU.
ASK A SENATOR. THE AUTHOR TO
DELETE SECTION TWENTY THREE.
I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE THE
LEGISLATURE IN THIS UNUSUAL
CIRCUMSTANCE TO SAY.
PLEASE DON'T DO ANY MORE WORK ON
THIS STUDY. YOU'VE DONE YOUR
FINAL RECOMMENDATION WE DON'T
LIKE THE LEGISLATION INTO
FORMALLY REJECTED BUT I THINK
IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO HAPPEN.
I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU
WOULD AT LEAST ASSN SENATOR.
WHETHER HE'S WILLING TO DELETE
SECTION TWENTY THREE IN THIS
VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION THAT YOU
FACE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
VERY MUCH OTHER ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
BRING IT BACK TO THE DYESS.
SING NO QUESTIONS SENATOR
MONNING.
THINK THINKING MADAM CHAIR IN
SOME.
I'M I APPRECIATE THE PERSPECTIVE
ADVANCED BY MISTER KELLY ON THE
WHOLE.
ASSESSMENT OF MEDIATION I WOULD
JOIN IN ASKING THE AUTHOR TO
CONSIDER LOOKING AT THAT I DO
LOOK AT THIS BILL IS A BROADER.
COMPREHENSIVE AUTHORIZATION OF
THE CONTINUED WORK.
OF THE COMMISSION WHICH I
SUPPORT NO BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL TODAY. I DID FOLLOW CLOSELY
THE. EXHAUSTIVE EFFORT LOOKING
IT CONFIDENTIALITY MEDIATION LA
AS A MEDIATOR MYSELF.
UNDERSTOOD THE. INTERESTS OF
BOTH SIDES.
AND I THINK AN OVERWHELMING.
PERCENTAGE OF THE MEDIATION
COMMUNITY FELT THAT PIERCING THE
CLOCK CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS
TO OPEN THE DOOR FOR MALPRACTICE
ACTIONS WOULD. WE WOULD LOSE THE
UTILITY THAT WE GAIN BY HAVING
CONFIDENTIALITY IN MEDIATION.
SO I SEE THE CONNECTION WITH THE
REFERENCE IN SECTION TWENTY
THREE. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL BUT I WOULD URGE THE AUTHOR
TO REVIEW MAYBE WITH THE
COMMISSION.
IN THE THE PROCESS THAT. WAS AN
EXHAUSTIVE PROCESS IN.
HAS NOT RESULTED IN.
.
PURSUIT OF REFORM.
IN THE LEGISLATURE.
.
WITH RESPECT TO CONFIDENTIALITY
IN MEDIATION SO. WITH THAT MADAM
CHAIR I AM PREPARED TO MOVE THE
BILL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
BUT I THINK WHAT WE HAVE IS A.
BUT OVER ARCHING. BILL TO
AUTHORIZE THE ON GOING WORK OF
THE COMMISSION AND WE HAVEN'T
HAD IT WITH THAT WITHIN. A
SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THIS.
CONTROVERSY ONLY ISSUE OF.
THE CONFIDENTIALITY ISSUE IN
MEDIATION.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SENATOR PROMOTING ONE
RESPONSE THAT SENATOR ROTH MADAM
CHAIR IF I MAY.
LOOK I'M NOT HERE PREPARED TO
DEBATE THE MERITS OR DEMERITS OF
AN ISSUE THAT THE COMMISSION
STUDIED.
YOU KNOW WE S. THE LAW REVIEW
COMMISSION HAVE BEEN DOING IT
FOR WHAT.
SIXTY YEARS OVER.
TO TAKE A LOOK AT CERTAIN ISSUES
THAT WE IDENTIFY OR THAT OTHERS
IDENTIFY THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED
AT SOME.
EXISTING STATUTES TO SEE IF THEY
STILL WORK AND OTHER ISSUES SAID
MAYBE WE NEED STATUTES TO DEAL
WITH. I SUSPECT THAT OBVIOUSLY
THIS MEDIATION CONFIDENTIALITY
ISSUE WAS A VERY CONTROVERSIAL
ONE. OF THEM BACK WHEN I STILL
RECEIVES OF AND I SHOULD NOTE
FOR DECADES I'VE BEEN A CUSTOMER
OF THE MEDIATION BUSINESS SO I'M
NOT UNFAMILIAR WITH.
WITH MEDIATION IN THE CIVIL
ARENA.
BUT FOR REFERS QUITE SOME TIME
I WAS READING ARTICLE AFTER
ARTICLE IN THE LOS ANGELES DAILY
JOURNAL ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES OF
THE LAW REVISION COMMISSION
THE FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE THAT I
NEVER PAID ATTENTION.
TO THE DAILY JOURNAL AND SO LARA
VISION COMMISSIONER NICHOLS IN
THERE SO OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A
VERY CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC BUT
LIKE I WOULD SUSPECT THAT IT'S
NOT THE FIRST.
CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC THAT THE
CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION
COMMISSION HAS TACKLED SINCE
NINETEEN FIFTY THREE. WE ASK IT
TO TAKE A LOOK IN THE TWO
STUDIES.
TO FLESH OUT THE ISSUE BOTH PRO
AND CON AND TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION IN THE FORM OF A
REPORT.
IF THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED
IN THE RECOMMENDATION IS
SOMETHING THAT A PARTICULAR
LEGISLATE TOUR OR THE
LEGISLATURE VIEW IS APPROPRIATE
TO FIX OR DO. AND SOMEONE PICKS
UP SET UP DOES A BILL.
AND PUSHES OF BILLS OR ATTEMPTS
TO PUT
THE BILL THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE
AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME WE CAN
HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT
WHETHER. THE LAW REVISION
COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION IS A
RIGHT WAY TO GO THE WRONG WAY TO
GO. THAT OBVIOUSLY HASN'T
HAPPENED HERE THERE'S NO
INDICATION THAT IT WILL SO.
THIS SIMPLY IN ESSENCE RE
AUTHORIZES THE LAW REVISION
COMMISSION AND ITS CHARTER WHICH
IS TO STUDY ISSUES WHETHER
THEY'RE CONTROVERSIAL OR NON
CONTROVERSIAL. AND TO RENDER A
REPORT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION
WHETHER IT'S A GOOD ONE OR A BAD
ONE. IT'S STILL THE JOB OF THE
LAW REVISION COMMISSION TO DO SO
BUT THE BUT OF COURSE.
SENATOR I'LL. CONSIDER YOUR
REQUEST AND
AND DID AND TRY TO FIGURE THIS
THING THANK YOU SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI I
JUST WANTED TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR INCLUDING A DTS SEES
INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANELS I
REQUEST FOR. THAT THIS THE
STATUTE DID AFFECTS OUR TOPICS
TOXIC SUBSTANCE WE HAD HEARINGS
AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IT WAS
SET. UP THEIR MANY
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF
THAT BUT THE ONE ON THE.
THIS ONE IS VERY VERY IMPORTANT
THESE AND GET IN THE HIGHLIGHTS
IN THE.
.
TOP OF THE FULL THE NEWSPAPER
BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THANK
YOU.
HOW MOVED?
ALRIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION.
SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS ON
THIS RESOLUTION THE RESOLUTION
IS.
MOTION IS TO PASSED THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS MADAM SECRETARY
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON AYE JACKSON AYE MORE
LOOK. MORE LIKE I ANDERSON
HERTZBERG.
IT'S BIRD I AM MONNING NINE
MONNING AYE STERN. STERN AYE
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI AYE.
SIX
CLEARLY THE BOOK VOTE THAT BILL
HAS SIX VOTES WILL LEAVE IT ON
CALL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS THEY
BENCHER MEMBERS AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR ACCOMMODATION.
THANK YOU SIR.
ALRIGHT WE HAVE SENATOR GLAZER.
AND SENATOR GLAZER HAVE AS A
FILE ITEM TWENTY TWO.
S. B. TWELVE SIXTEEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON SENATOR.
VOIGTS BOY JUST ONE MOMENT WHILE
WE GET.
TAKING.
GOOD AFTERNOON SENATOR GLAZER
AND TO YOUR WITNESSES.
TWO MINUTES.
CENTER GLAZER OF THE FLOOR IS
YOURS.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS.
THE SENATE BILL TWELVE SIXTEEN
CLARIFY STATE LAW.
AND APPLIES NEW STANDARDS TO
ENSURE THE CHARTER SCHOOL BOARD
MEETINGS ARE OPEN.
AND THE RECORDS ARE ACCESSIBLE
TO THE PUBLIC.
CURRENT LAW IS UNCLEAR ABOUT THE
STATE'S OPEN MEETING LAWS IN THE
PUBLIC RECORD ACT.
AS THEY APPLY TO CHARTER
SCHOOLS.
THE ORIGINAL LAW THAT CREATED
CHARTER SCHOOLS EXEMPTED THEM
FROM OTHER STATE LAWS AND
REGULATIONS
EXCEPT WHEN SPECIFICALLY NOTED.
THE LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL HAS A
PINE THAT THESE LAWS DO APPLY.
BUT NO STATUTE SAYS THAT THEY
DO.
THIS LEAD TO CONFUSION MANY
CHARTER SCHOOLS APPLY THESE LAWS
VOLUNTARILY SOME DO NOT.
AND ALL ARE LEFT WONDERING WHAT
RULES GOVERN THEIR PRACTICE.
THIS BILL WOULD AND THAT
CONFUSION.
PAUL CHARTER SCHOOL RECORDS WILL
BE OPEN TO INSPECTION OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT.
PAUL CHARTER SCHOOL GOVERNING
BOARD MEETINGS
THE B. SUBJECTS THE STATE. OPEN
MEETING LAWS THAT. RALPH M.
BROWN ACT IN THE BAGLEY KEENE
ACT.
IN ADDITION S. B. TWELVE SIXTEEN
WOULD EXPAND THE OPEN MEETING
OBLIGATION.
BY REQUIRING CHARTER SCHOOL
NETWORKS THAT HAVE SCHOOLS IN
MORE THAN ONE DISTRICT.
THE TELECONFERENCE THEIR
MEANINGS AND EVERY DISTRICT IN
WHICH THEY RUN A SCHOOL.
AS BE TWELVE SIXTEEN ALSO
APPLIES NEW OPEN MEETING
REQUIREMENTS TO BOARDS THAT RUN
A CHARTER SCHOOL. BUT ALSO
MANAGE ACTIVITIES UNRELATED TO
THE OPERATION OF THE SCHOOL.
IN THESE CASES ANY MEETING AT
WHICH CHARTER SCHOOL BUSINESSES
DISCUSS.
WOULD HAVE TO BE FULLY NOTICED
AND PUBLIC UNDER THE OPEN
MEETING LIES.
LAST YEAR AND IN JANUARY OF.
THIS YEAR THIS COMMITTEE
CONSIDERED SP EIGHT OH SIX.
THIS BILL SOUGHT TO ADD THESE
TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS TO
CHARTER SCHOOLS WILL ALSO
ADDRESSING. THE MUCH MORE
COMPLEX ISSUE OF CONFLICT OF
INTEREST
OUR CHARTER SCHOOL GOVERNING
BOARDS.
S. B. TWELVE SIXTEEN DEALS ONLY
WITH THE TRANSPARENCY ISSUE.
A CONFLICT OF INTEREST SSUE HAS
RESULTED IN REPEATED STALEMATE
IN THE LEGISLATURE AND WITH THE
GOVERNOR.
I'M HOPING HOWEVER THAT WE CAN
FIND COMMON GROUND IN THE LESS
COMPLICATED ISSUE.
A PUBLIC RECORDS AND OPEN
MEETINGS.
THIS BILL WOULD ADD NEEDED
ACCOUNTABILITY WHILE PRESERVING
THE ABILITY TO EXPERIMENT AND
INNOVATE
THAT MAKES CHARTER SCHOOLS SUCH
AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR PUBLIC
EDUCATION SYSTEM.
WITHIN HERE TODAY IS RICARDO
SOTO THE CHIEF COUNSEL OF THE
CALIFORNIA.
CHARTER SCHOOL ASSOCIATION AND
DOMINIC TOMORROW REPRESENTING
THE CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOL
ASSOCIATION AND HE ALSO SERVES
ON THE BOARD OF A LOCAL CHARTER
SCHOOL.
OF MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS
DOMINIC TOMORROW HERE BEHALF OF
HIKES COVERAGE
SCHOOLS HAS CREATION. COME HOME
MAKE MY POINTS VERY BRIEF I
WANTED TO WELL HAD. TIES TO
UNDERSCORE.
SIGNIFICANCE OF APPLYING THESE
ACTS TO CHARTER SCHOOLS
OF IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T
BELIEVE HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE OR
IS HABITABLE NOW OTHER THERE'S
DEBATE ABOUT THAT. SECOND HOW
ONE UNDERSCORE THAT.
VIRTUALLY ALL CHARTER SCHOOLS IN
THE STATE TODAY AS A BEST
PRACTICE FOLLOW THE BROWN ACT.
AND UTILIZE THESE OF
TRANSPARENCY IN OPEN MEETING
LAWS AS A BEST PRACTICE IN THEIR
ONGOING DELIBERATIONS HAN SCHOOL
BUSINESS. AND LASTLY. TO KNOW
THAT THE
ST NATURE OF THIS BILL VERSES
THE BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN BEFORE
THIS COMMITTEE BEFORE. AND THAT
IT'S A PARED BACK VERSION AS
SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE HE'S.
IT MORE EASILY TACKLED BY THE
COMMITTEE AND HERE AS A POLICY
MATTER. HOW WE BELIEVE THE
TRANSPARENCIES
POURTANT WE BELIEVE THAT ACCESS
TO THE BOARD IS IMPORTANT FOR?
EIGHT YEARS HAD PARENTS AND
EMPLOYEES OF THE SCHOOL. AND
THEREFORE WE SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE.
GOOD AFTERNOON VOLUNTARY NO GO
AHEAD THANK YOU VERY MUCH GOOD
AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS MY NAME IS RICARDO
SALUDO AND I AND THE GENERAL
COUNSEL. NOT FOR THE CALIFORNIA
CHARTER SCHOOL SENSATION
PRIOR TO JOINING CC SA I SERVED
AS PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY. FOR CIVIL RIGHTS IN
THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
ISSUES OF EDUCATION EQUITY IN
ACCESS FOR STUDENTS AND PARENTS
HAVE BEEN A DRIVING FORCE
THROUGHOUT MY CAREER. AND AM
PLEASED THAT SEES HERE SAY
SPONSORING THIS MEASURE TO
IMPROVE PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY OF
CHARTER SCHOOLS. I WOULD LIKE TO
ADDRESS THE NEED FOR THIS BILL
AND SOME OF THE SPECIFIC
ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS THAT ARE
INCLUDED IN THAT. DESPITE
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S OPINION
SEVERAL COURT CASES SUGGEST THAT
THE APPLICATION OF THESE CODES
TO CHARTER SCHOOLS IS NOT
SETTLED LA.
IN FACT IT MOST COURT RULINGS
ADDRESSING THE QUESTION OF
WHETHER CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE
PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ENTITIES. THE
COURTS HAVE RULED CHARTERS ARE
NOT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS
ARE BENEFITS OF OTHER PUBLIC
ENTITIES. MOST RECENTLY THE LOS
ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT RULED
THAT A CHARTER SCHOOL IS NOT
SUBJECT TO THE BROWN ACT AND
SUGGESTED A CHARRED. A CHARTER
ALSO MAY NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE
BROWN ACT THE VERY SAME LAWS
THAT ARE THE SUBJECT OF THIS
BILL.
WE DISAGREE WITH THAT.
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS THAT
SUGGESTED S. B. TWELVE SIXTEEN
WOULD CREATE CARVE OUT FOR
EXCEPTIONS.
WE ONLY SEEK
SOME SPECIFIC CLARIFICATION SO
LINE THESE LOTS WITH THE
EXISTING AND LEGAL OPERATING
STRUCTURES OF CHARTERS. THAT
OPERATE STATEWIDE UNDER THE
NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS BECAUSE.
THE FACT IS THAT THE VAST
MAJORITY OF CHARTER SCHOOLS
ALREADY COMPLY WITH THE BROWN
AND PUBLIC RECORDS ACTS. CAN DO
SO WITHOUT ANY QUESTION.
HOWEVER SOME CHARTERS.
POWER FOR SOME CHARTERS THE LAW
DOES NOT PROVIDE CLARITY ON HOW
AND WHERE THEY SHOULD CONDUCT
THEIR MEETINGS BECAUSE THEY
OPERATE THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE MORE
CLARITY ON THAT ISSUE. CURRENTLY
THE BROWN EXPLICITLY ADDRESSES
THE MEETING LOCATION FOR
STATEWIDE PUBLIC JOINT POWERS
AUTHORITIES. AND ONLY REQUIRES
THAT THE BOARD MEETINGS.
BE HELD WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF
AT LEAST ONE OF THE MEMBERS.
WHAT WHILE THAT MAY BE OKAY FOR
A GPA WE DO NOT THINK THAT IS
ENOUGH FOR PUBLIC CHARTER
SCHOOLS? THEREFORE WE ADDED A
NEW REQUIREMENT FOR CHARTERS
THAT OPERATE STATEWIDE.
THE MOST THAT YOU CAN YOU OF
ABOUT FIFTEEN SECONDS OVER SO
CLOSE AT A PLACE I WILL.
.
WE BELIEVE THAT REQUIRING A
TELECONFERENCES EXCEEDS WHAT IS.
.
WHAT IS REQUIRED OF ANY OTHER
PUBLIC AGENCY AND WE QUIRK
REQUESTED TO SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF
FUTURE STEP FOR WITH YOUR NAME
AND AFFILIATION PLEASE? STAR
APPEAL ARE NOT TAKING TIME TO
HEAR ON BEHALF OF THE BROWN A
BAND OF MISSION INDIANS AND WE
ARE PREPARED TO MOVE TO SUPPORT.
AND TO DO THE AMENDMENTS THAT
WERE TAKEN IN AS SENATE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE AND THAT ARE
VERY CLEARLY LAID OUT ON PAGE
NINE OF THE ANALYSIS THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION OTHER ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF
YOU'D.
GIVE THEM A CHANCE PLEASE AND.
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE BUT AFTERNOON.
MADAM TURN SENATOR SETH GRABBED
HIM BEHALF THE CALIFORNIA
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
RESPECTFULLY IN OPPOSITION. TO
US SENATE BILL TWELVE SIXTEEN AS
WAS MENTIONED AND OF LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL WHO CONFIRMS THAT
CHARTER SCHOOLS MUST COMPLY
CURRENTLY WITH THE BROWN ACT
WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT.
WITH THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT
WITH GOVERNMENT CODE TEN NINETY
WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
AND THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL
HAS NO PROTECTIONS IN IT FOR
AGAINST SELF DEALING NO
PROTECTIONS IN IT AGAINST.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE
PRIOR VERSIONS HAVE HAD.
EVEN AFTER YOU KNOW JUST A
MONTH AGO A REPORT WAS RELEASED
DOCUMENTING MORE THAN A HUNDRED
FORTY NINE MILLION DOLLARS OF
WASTE FRAUD AND ABUSE IN
CALIFORNIA'S CHARTER SCHOOL
ENVIRONMENT. ALONE THIS PROPOSAL
HAS CARVE OUTS TO THE BROWN ACT
FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS HAS COME
ABOUT.
TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT FOR
CHARTER SCHOOLS AND WE OPPOSE
ALL THOSE CAR ABOUT TO
EXCEPTIONS WHICH WILL ONLY
SERVE.
TO WEAKEN TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY IN CALIFORNIA'S
CHARTER SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT.
BRIEF EXAMPLE WE JUST UNIONIZED
CALIFORNIA VIRTUAL ACADEMY THIS
IS JUST TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT THIS
BILL WOULD ALLOW. OF THE YOUR
UNIX SYSTEM HAS FIFTEEN THOUSAND
KIDS.
STATE WHY.
IT'S AN ONLINE ENVIRONMENT WITH
SEVEN HUNDRED TEACHERS THEY HAVE
ELEVEN CHARTER SCHOOL PETITIONS
SO THE HAVE CHARTER PETITIONS
AND SO NO MIGHT HAVE CHARTER
PETITIONS IN LA AND SAN DIEGO
EACH CHARTER PETITION LIFTS ITS
OWN GOVERNING BOARD. IF THEY
WANT TO OPERATE IN SAN DIEGO THE
HAVE A GOVERNING BOARD MEETING
IN SAN DIEGO IF THEY WANT TO
OPERATE AND SO NO MIGHT HAVE A
MEETING THERE. BUT WHAT THIS
BILL WOULD PERMIT IS THAT YOU
COULD HAVE A GOVERNING BOARD
MEETING IN CINEMA AND YOU COULD
TELL A CONFERENCE IN THE
COMMUNITY DOWN IN SAN DIEGO FIVE
HUNDRED MILES AWAY THIS IS BAD
POLICY IT'S NOT A. BY A
STRUCTURE THAT WE IN THE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD ALLOW.
IT ALSO FLIES VERY MUCH IN THE
FACE OF WHAT CHARTER SCHOOLS
WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA WHICH WAS INTENDED TO
BE. LOCALLY DRIVEN INNOVATION
THAT IS NOT LOCALLY DRIVEN
INNOVATION TO HAVE A GOVERNING
BOARD MEETING INCIDENT
AND TO TELL THE CONFERENCE IN
THE COMMITTEE AND SAN DIEGO I'M
NOT EVEN SURE THAT THEY WOULD BE
PAYING ATTENTION. TO WHAT FOLKS
IN SAN DIEGO HAD TO SAY WE ARE
AT YOUR OPPOSITION.
BUT AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS STILL ARE STRAND FLOORS
WITH THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION WE ARE
ALSO IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL
AND LIKE OUR COLLEAGUE WE TO
BELIEVE THAT THESE. LAWS
CURRENTLY APPLY TO CHARTER
SCHOOLS AND IF THEY DON'T WE WE
BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD.
IT'S ABOUT ENSURING THAT THE
PUBLIC APPEARANCE.
STUDENTS AND OUR MEMBERS HAVE
ACCESS TO THESE BOARD MEETINGS
AND THE RECORDS. OF BUT IN THE
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE WE
DID GET A REQUEST FROM THE CHAIR
TO SIT DOWN WITH THE AUTHOR AND
THE SPONSORS AND. TRYING TO WORK
OUT AMENDMENTS THAT WE COULD
LIVE WITH. ON THIS BILL WE SAT
DOWN AND GAVE A GOOD FAITH
EFFORT BUT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO
REACH. A MUTUAL AGREEMENT ON
THIS BILL UP IN THIS IS US ALONE
CSEA ALONE BUT ONE OF THOSE.
AMENDMENTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE
SAT WE WOULD HAVE WANTED WAS
THAT THE CHARTER SCHOOL. THEY.
THAT REQUIRES THE CHARTER
SCHOOLS TO HAVE THEIR IN PERSON
MEETING AND EVERY LOCATION THAT
THEY HAVE A CHARTER SCHOOL.
SO AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO
DO THAT AT LEAST ANNUALLY SO
THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO GO AND SEE FACE
TO FACE THEIR BOARD MEETINGS.
AND IT AND THE TELECONFERENCING
WOULD BE MANDATORY FOR ALL OTHER
LOCATIONS IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN
ACTUAL SITE. AND IT WOULD HAVE
TO ALSO HAVE GIVEN YOU KNOW TAKE
INPUT FROM PEOPLE SO IT.
IT THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO HAVE
ACCESS TO THE. BOARD AGENDAS AND
ALL ITEMS. A SO THAT'S WHAT WE
TRY TO WORK OUT AND WE DID NOT
COME UP WITH AN AGREEMENT THERE
INSTEAD THAT UP THE OUT THE
SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL ACTUALLY
SUGGESTED. AN AMENDMENT THAT WE
COULD NOT LIVE WITHOUT WAS TO
GIVE CHARTERS THE OPTION TO
COMPLY WITH THE THROUGH THE
BROWN ACT. FOR OUR BAGLEY KEENE
AND WE COMPLETELY OPPOSE THAT.
PROPOSAL SO WE DID GIVE IT A
GOOD FAITH EFFORT. AND.
AS SUCH WE ASK YOU TO OPPOSES.
THINK THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
THEIR OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION IF YOU'D PLEASE STEP
FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE NAME
AND AFFILIATION ONLY PLACE.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MY
NAME IS TRISTEN BROWN OF THE
CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
TEACHERS IN STRONG OPPOSITION
THANK YOU THANK YOU SIR.
WHEN CHAIR MEMBERS MICHAEL YOUNG
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION WERE ALSO STRONGLY
OPPOSED.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
RIGHT SEEING NONE LET'S BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE ANY
QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
SENATOR HERTZBERG.
.
VERSIONS OF PORTIONS OF THIS
BILL CAME BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE
TWICE BEFORE. AND I IN SUPPORT
OF.
AND THE TEN NINETY I THINK IT'S
SKINNY DOWN NOW SO TO SPEAK. IN
TERMS OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
AND I I DO THINK THAT ANY TIME
WE SPENT WITH BAGLEY KEENE OR
THE ISSUE ABOUT THEM BROWN ACT.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION IF
ALLEGE COUNCIL MAKES AN OPINION
AND SOMEBODY HAS A DIFFERENT
OPINION WHO CARES IF YOU
CODIFIED.
I DON'T A PROBLEM WITH THAT I
DON'T THINK THAT'S A THAT'S A
BIG ISSUE SOME TO BE SUPPORTING
THIS BILL TODAY WITH EGGMAN ONE
ADMONITION.
AND THAT IS I DO THINK THAT.
THERE'S A VALUE JUST LIKE
SITTING IN THIS COMMITTEE TODAY
I THINK THE OPPOSITION MAKES A
POINT.
WHEN YOU CAN LOOK AT SOMEBODY IN
THE EYE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO
ARGUE A POINT IT'S IMPORTANT NOW
WE HAVE. EXAMPLES OF THE LAW ALL
OVER THE PLACE WHERE WE ALLOW
TELECONFERENCES
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND SUFFER
LIKE THAT. AND THAT'S THAT'S
ALSO WHY IS IT ITS VALUE FOR
THERE'S A CONVENIENCE TO IT BUT
I. THINK HAVING ONCE A YEAR IS
NOT AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST I
THINK THAT.
THAT.
YOU CERTAINLY EFFORTS THAT BEEN
A FOOT IN THIS REGARD SHOULD
CONTINUE TO TRY TO FIGURE A WAY
TO SOLVE THAT BUT BY AND LARGE
IT'S BEEN A FIGHT THAT'S BEEN
AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. I THINK
THAT YOU THEIR THIS DOWN
SUFFICIENTLY SO I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS MEASURE TODAY
WITH THE ADMONITION THAT I I
JUST PROVIDED.
SO A GUEST THANK YOU SIR. BEFORE
WE GET TO SENATOR STERN.
.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE FOCUS
ON THE ISSUES THAT ARE.
TRAMAINE TO OUR COMMITTEE.
SO BOMB.
IT AYE AYE SENATOR KNOWLEDGE YOU
SPEAKING THAN I DID THEN I WANT
TO SHARE JUST A PERSPECTIVE
BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS WHOLE
BATTLE BETWEEN THE CHARTER
SCHOOLS. AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
HAS REALLY. I THINK TOWARD THE
EDUCATION COMMUNITY PART AND I
KNOW GARY HART VERY WELL HE'S MY
PREDECESSOR. AND I KNOW WHAT HE
INTENDED WHEN HE OF.
INTRODUCED THE CHARTER SCHOOL
LAWS IDEA PROGRAM FOR CHARTER
SCHOOLS AND IT WAS HE WANTED TO
ENCOURAGE INNOVATION. WITHIN THE
CURRICULUM WITHIN THE CONTEXT
ALL OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM.
AND.
I GUESS IF I MAY UM.
SO ARE LOOK IT DIFFERENCE IN
CURRICULUM LOCALLY DRIVEN AND
INNOVATION I THINK THAT WAS
STATED THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT.
CHARTER SCHOOLS WERE SUPPOSED TO
DO.
NOW WE HEAR WELL WERE NOT
SUBJECT TO THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
RECORDS ACT THE RALPH BROWN AND
BAGLEY KEENE OPEN MEETING AT
MEETINGS ACT THE POLITICAL
REFORM ACT OF NINETEEN SEVENTY
FOUR. IN THE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST PROVISIONS THAT BEGIN A
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION TEN
NINETY.
.
RESPECTFULLY ARE LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL DISAGREES. I CERTAINLY
DON'T THINK IT WAS THE INTENT
SPIRIT OF THIS LAW WHEN IT
PASSED TO ALLOW THESE PUBLICLY.
HAD DRIVEN SCHOOLS TO AVOID
THESE VERY STRONG PRINCIPLES OF
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.
SO.
THE LEDGE COUNCIL IS OUR
ATTORNEY.
IS THE DOES.
OF FEEL AND I THINK THAT THAT
ACCURATELY THAT.
THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE
WILLING TO DO IS ALREADY THE LAW
SO THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE
BILL BEFORE US.
AND.
.
YOUR BILL PURPORTS TO APPLY THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT TO CHARTER
SCHOOLS ONLY AS TO THEIR
OPERATIONS I DON'T KNOW WHAT
THAT MEANS AND. IT ALSO REPORTS
OF REPORTS TO PLY THE BROWN ACT
ALL CHARTER SCHOOLS EXCEPT THOSE
FEW CHARTER SCHOOLS.
THAT ARE OPERATED BY AN ENTITY
GOVERNED BY BAGLEY KEENE. IN
WHICH CASE BAGLEY KEENE WOULD
APPLY.
BUT THE BILL IS WRITTEN.
IS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY AS TO
PREVENT THE MEANINGFUL
PARTICIPATION OF PARENTS AND
STUDENTS WHEN A GOVERNING BODY
OF THE CHARTER SCHOOL OPERATES
IN MULTIPLE DISTRICTS WHICH IS
WHAT WE JUST HEARD. YOU'D HAVE
PARENTS AND CHILDREN
TELECONFERENCING IN MEETINGS
AND.
.
IS AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT I
BELIEVE A CONVERSATION I HAD
WITH A SENATOR STERN ONE OF THE
THINGS WE LIKE TO USE MAKE SURE
THAT OUR SCHOOL BOARDS HERE IS
LOUD AND CLEAR.
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE
TEACHING OUR CHILDREN WELL AND
THE OF FACE TO FACE MEETING
SOMETIMES TO GET ALL
CONTENTIOUS.
BUT THEY'RE VERY IMMEDIATE AND
VERY PRESENT AND THAT'S WHAT
PUBLIC EDUCATION TO PRODUCT
PUBLIC CHILDREN OUR PUBLIC
SCHOOLS ARE PUBLIC PARENTS.
AND CHARTER SCHOOLS LIKE
TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS
RECEIVE PUBLIC FUNDS.
THEIR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND.
SOME OF THE PUBLIC CHARTER
SCHOOLS I KNOW ARE FABULOUS AND
SOME OF THEM ARE TERRIBLE. A AND
THAT'S KINDA LIKE THE PUBLIC
SCHOOL SYSTEM SO AGAIN IF THIS
WAS THE EFFORT TO HAVE GREATER
INNOVATION IN. GAME CURRICULUM
AND.
TO TRY TO DO SOME DARING THINGS
OUTSIDE THE NORMAL CONTEXT ALL
PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND EDUCATIONAL SECTIONS OF
THE EDUCATION CODE. BUT TO NOW
SAY WELL WE DON'T HAVE TO GOVERN
OURSELVES THE SAME WAY YOU DO
WHEN OUR TIME A CONTINENT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT GOVERNANCE AND.
I THINK THAT.
.
STUDENTS OF THE CHARTER SCHOOLS
REALLY HAVE A STAKE IN ALL THE
DISCUSSIONS THAT GO ON AND AGAIN
SINCE THEY ARE PUBLICLY FUNDED
TAXPAYERS. HAVE A STRONG
INTEREST IN THE DISCUSSIONS AND
DECISIONS THAT ARE BEING MADE
AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD.
EXAMPLES OF EXPOSES IF YOU WILL
BECAUSE WE DON'T NECESSARILY
HAVE THAT TRANSPARENCY HUNDRED
PLUS MILLION DOLLARS OF FUNDING
THAT HAS BEEN MISUSED BY CHARTER
SCHOOLS NOT ALL OF THEM. AGAINST
SOME OF THEM ARE TERRIFIC BUT
SOME OF THE MARTIN THAT'S WHAT
TRANSPARENCY IS ALL BUT SENATOR
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHAKE YOUR
HEAD THAT WAY YOU CHOOSE I
DIDN'T SHAKE MY HEAD WHEN YOU
WERE SPEAKING AND I DON'T
APPRECIATE THAT SIR. ACTUALLY
LEFT THE ROOM BY THE WAY WHEN I
WAS SPEAKING I LEFT THE ROOM TO
VOTE IN THE NEXT COMMITTEE BUT
THAT REALLY ISN'T RELEVANT TO
YOU SIR.
SO.
AT ANY RATE.
.
I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO REALLY
FOCUS ON WHAT IS THE GOAL OF
THESE.
SCHOOLS AND MAKE SURE THEY MEET
THEIR GOAL AND DON'T END UP
TAKING PUBLIC FUNDS AND USING
THEM FOR PURPOSES THAT TAKE THEM
OUT OF THE PUBLIC BROWN.
AND CERTAINLY SO THE PARENTS
DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO.
TO PARTICIPATE SO.
.
I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE IN OUR
MINOR SAYING SHE REFUSED TO TAKE
THE AMENDMENTS.
THAT WOULD.
PROVIDE THE CHARTER SCHOOLS A A
MEETINGS TAKE PLACE IS CLOSE TO
THE CHARTER SCHOOL IS POSSIBLE.
I THINK THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT
PROBLEM AND.
OF FOR THE OTHER REASONS I
STATED I JUST THINK WE ARE
RUNNING A FIELD OF WHAT.
THE PROMISE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS.
WAS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE
I BELIEVE CREATED BY TEACHERS.
AND BY PARENTS AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMUNITY AND THAT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING ANDI SEE. THESE.
SCHOOLS GOING FAR AFIELD OF
THAT AND CERTAINLY IF THE PUBLIC
FUNDS ARE GOING TO BE USED THE
PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW
WHAT'S GOING ON. THE PEOPLE WANT
A PRIVATE SCHOOLS I SUPPORT
THOSE TOO BUT THOSE SHOULD BE
FUNDED AS PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND
NOT WITH TAXPAYER MONEY SO.
IDEA.
I APPRECIATE THAT YES WE'VE
HEARD THIS BILL SEVERAL TIMES WE
HAVE.
VOTED IT DOWN SEVERAL TIMES I
THINK GRANTED IT'S NARROWER BUT
I TRIPS TO THINK OF THIS
CAPTURES THE ESSENCE OF WHAT OF
THESE THE SCHOOLS I CAN BE. AND
SHOULD BE AND.
I BELIEVE THAT IT AGAIN MOVES
US AWAY. FROM THE BASIC FUNCTION
WHAT THE SCHOOLS WERE SUPPOSED
TO DO AND THAT THE I JUST WANTED
TO SHARE THAT. BUT I'M GOING TO
VOTE AGAINST IT I KNOW THIS
ISN'T PROMOTE JEWISH ISSUE. OF
BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE HAVE A
DIFFERENT VISION OF WHAT THE
SCHOOLS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE
THAT'S MY VISION OF IT AND I
JUST. OF I FEEL OBVIOUSLY
STRONGLY THAT THAT WE REALLY
NEED TO KEEP THE FOCUS KEEP THE
EYE ON THE BALL WITCHES CITIES
ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RUN BY
PARENTS STUDENTS THE COMMUNITY.
BOBBY INNOVATIVE AND BE A SORT
OF A IN A SENSE DIRECT DEMOCRACY
WHERE PARENTS HAVE THE ABILITY
TO PARTICIPATE ARE. HIGH IN A
CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE SCHOOL
ITSELF.
SENATOR STERN.
YOU MADAM CHAIR.
.
QUESTION.
FOR THE AUTHOR JUST IN TERMS OF
ANOTHER WAS A.
DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS GEOGRAPHIC
LOCATION ISSUE IN EDUCATION
COMMITTEE. I WANT TO GET YOUR
SENSE OF.
WHERE YOU SORT OF WORKED FROM
SINCE THAT LAST COMMITTEE ON
THIS BECAUSE I?
I WOULD SAY I'M YOU KNOW I'M I
CAN'T SUPPORT THE BILL IN ITS
CURRENT FORM BUT I AM INTERESTED
IN THIS NOTION OF TRYING TO
SETTLE THIS. IS IN PERSON ISSUE.
THE TELECONFERENCING THING JUST
SEEMS INHERENTLY UNSATISFYING
AND NOT REALLY. ADEQUATE VENUE
FOR TAKING THAT HE AYE I
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE VERY
LARGE SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO THAT
HAVE SIMILAR CONSTRUCTS I'M SURE
GOING TO BRING THAT UP BUT I. I.
I JUST WANT TO GET A SENSE FROM
YOU TRACK HOW MUCH FURTHER HAVE
YOU GONE ARE IS THERE STILL AN
OPENNESS TO TO SORT OF.
THAT AMENDMENT THAT WAS
REFERRED TO IN TERMS OF
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OR TRY TO
FIND SOME WAY JUST WANT TO GET
YOUR THOUGHTS THERE.
NOT TO THE CHAIR THANK YOU
SENATOR STERN AND.
I I I'VE FOR SALE I WANT TO SAY
APPRECIATED THE ENGAGEMENT BY
CSEA AND. I THOUGHT THAT WE HAD
A LOT OF CONSTRUCTIVE
CONVERSATIONS I THINK THAT WE
ARE VERY CLOSE.
TO AGREEMENT.
THREE POINTS THAT WERE MADE.
BY THE.
THE.
WITNESS WERE ACCESS TO BOARD
AGENDAS WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH
THAT A TELECONFERENCE MANDATORY.
AND OTHER SITES NO PROBLEM WITH
THAT AND THE LAST POINT BEING IN
PERSON IN EVERY LOCATION
ANNUALLY.
AND IT WAS IN THAT RESPECT THAT
WE TRIED TO FIND COMMON GROUND
AND I THINK AND I AM OPEN TO
FIND YOU NAY ACCOMMODATION ON
THAT POINT.
WHEN THE BROWN ACT WAS CREATED
IT DIDN'T ENVISIONED.
THESE.
ENTITIES WITH MULTI
JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA.
AND. SO THE THE APPLICATION OF
IT AYE IS A CHALLENGE BUT
NOTHING IN THE ACT REQUIRED
THAT.
THAT THERE BE A.
IN PERSON MEETING IN EVERY
LOCATION THAT'S NOT A
REQUIREMENT.
IF THE BOARD MEMBERS NOT
PRESENT AT WHERE THAT BOARD SITE
IS AND PUBLICLY NOTICE THERE'S A
REQUIREMENT ABOUT TELECONFERENCE
AND HAVING PUBLIC ACCESS.
BUT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
DEALING WITH TODAY WAS NOT
ENVISIONED WASN'T UP IT WASN'T
AND IT WASN'T IN PLACE
SO I AM VERY OPEN TO THE IDEA.
OF TRYING TO FIND SOME WAY TO.
UP PROVIDE THAT BOARD ACCESS
TO THE VARIOUS COMMUNITIES IN
WHICH CHARTERS OPERATE A NOW HOW
CAN WE GET THE RIGHT THINK WE
CAN COME UP WITH SOME ARE. SOME
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE REASONABLE
OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR I
THINK THE PROBLEM WHERE WE HAD A
DIFFERENCE WAS THAT. THE VERY
PRESCRIPTIVE EVERY LOCATION
ANNUALLY.
IT'S LIKE REQUIRING THE
LEGISLATURE TO HAVE A MEETING IN
EVERY TOWN IN CALIFORNIA WITH
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO. OF THE
STATE UNIVERSITIES REQUIREMENT
OF TWENTY THREE MEETINGS IN
EVERY CAMPUS LOCATION
OR EVEN A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
REQUIRING THAT THEY HAVE A
MEETING IN EVERY CITY WOULD IT
BE BETTER. OF COURSE IT WOULD BE
BECAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU THAT
THAT FACE TO FACE IS ALWAYS THE
BEST INTERACTION BUT THEY'RE
PRACTICALITIES THAT WE HAVE TO
DEAL WITH THOSE THE LEGISLATURE
ALWAYS MEETING HERE IN
SACRAMENTO. FOR THE MOST PART
AND THE SAME FOR OTHER ENTITIES
IN STATE SO YES I'M VERY OPEN TO
COMING UP WITH A WITH A
REASONABLE CONSTRUCT.
ABOUT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN
DIFFERENT LOCATIONS
SENATE VOTE EXCUSE ME SENATOR WE
HAVE AS HIS CA WANTS TO RESPOND.
WOULD YOU GO FOR IT YES WE MET
AT LANE AND THAT WAS OUR BOTTOM
LINE.
WE WENT A WE CAME A LONG WAY ON
THIS AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE
MOVEMENT ON THAT WE DON'T
BELIEVE. THAT SCHOOL DISTRICTS
ARE LIKE CITIES AND COUNTIES OF
THE STATE THERE'RE A SCHOOL
DISTRICT LIKE ANY OTHER SCHOOL
DISTRICT IN THEY SHOULD HAVE TO
COMPLY WITH THE SAME LAWS. WE
THINK WHAT WE DEAD IT WE WENT AS
FAR AS WE COULD AND WE DON'T
WE'RE NOT GOING TO SIT DOWN AGO
SHE'D ANYTHING ANY FURTHER WE
THINK WE DID IT IN GOOD FAITH
AND WE COULDN'T GET THEIR FAITH.
THEY REJECTED ARMAND.
SENATOR STERN.
SO. SCREAM YOU MENTION THIS
EVOLUTION OF.
THE CHARTER SCHOOL.
MOVEMENT INTO SOMETHING THAT
WASN'T ANTICIPATED WHEN THE
CHARTER SCHOOLS ACT WAS
INITIALLY PASSED.
WE DO THINK IT'S.
IT'S OUR JOB TO ACCOMMODATE THAT
CHANGE OR IS IT THEIR JOB TO IT
HERE TO OUR LAW I MEAN I I SORT
OF LOOK AT IT DID THESE CHARTER
MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS YES
THEY'VE EVOLVED OUT OF.
THIS SORT OF OPEN THIS IN
STATUTE ABOUT THAT THERE
STATEWIDE ORGANIZATION BUT.
I DID I DID I I TEND TO AGREE
WITH CA CA HERE THAT.
THE BORDER SUIT IS NOT A GREAT
MODEL TO TELL PEOPLE SAY. OH
DON'T DON'T YOU IN THE SAME
ACCESS YOU TO YOUR SUPERVISOR
THAT PEOPLE ARE VERY SATISFIED
WITH THAT ESPECIALLY FOR A
PARENT OR EMPLOYEE.
.
YEAH. THAT'S A TOUGH ONE TO
SWALLOW SO.
WE ARE BY HEARING FROM YOU SHE
CLOSED OFF STILL TO TO THAT C.
S. C. A. AMENDMENT AND. NO SORT
OF COUNTER BUT SENATOR SIR I I
WOULD BE WILLING TO OF REQUIRES
A PART OF THIS LEGISLATION.
THAT A CHARTER.
BOARD.
THAT HAS MULTI JURISDICTIONS
DISS SCHOOLS IN MULTI
JURISDICTIONS REQUIRE THAT THEY
MEET.
ANNUALLY IN THAT GET IN THE
DISTRICTS WHERE THEY HAVE THE
LARGEST OF THE POPULATION.
SO THAT THERE IS A LEAST A DE
EIGHT TO LOCATION ROTATION WHERE
THE STUDENTS ARE WITH THE
GREATEST NUMBER STUDENTS ARE
SERVED AND I THINK. I AM
INTERESTED A PRAGMATIC
RESOLUTION OF THIS.
I DON'T THINK THAT A A A A
ROTATION EVERY EVERY SCHOOL
DISTRICT IN THE COURSE OF THE
YEAR IT'S ARBITRARY I DON'T
THINK IT'S IT'S PRACTICAL.
LOOK IT'S NOT EASY TO START A
CHARTER SCHOOL. AND.
AT FOR THOSE ENTITIES THAT HAVE
COME TOGETHER TO CREATE THEM AND
TO PUT THEM OUT IN COMMUNITIES
AND AND THE PEOPLE VOTE WITH
THEIR FEET THEY VOTE WITH THE
ADMISSION OF THEIR KIDS. THIS IS
A VOLUNTARY CHOICE THAT PEOPLE
ARE MAKING.
I JOIN.
THESE CHARTER SCHOOLS AS THEY
AYE AYE APPEAR IN THEIR
COMMUNITY. SO THEY'RE DOING THAT
BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE A PART
OF THAT INNOVATION AND THAT
PRACTICE.
AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE
SATISFIED THAT THERE IN THAT
THEIR ENGAGEMENT WITH THE BOARD
AYE IS ADEQUATE OR THEY WOULDN'T
BE ANSWERING THEIR KID INTO THAT
SCHOOL. NEVER THE LESS I THINK
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION I THINK
IT'S UP TO US TO TRY TO FIND
COMMON GROUND AND THE BALANCE
THOSE ISSUES AND I THINK THAT'S
WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO WITH THIS
LEGISLATION WE'VE HAD THIS PROXY
FIGHT FOR A LONG LONG TIME. IT'S
VERY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE IS THE
CHAIR IS INDICATED AND THERE'S A
LOT OF A GARBAGE THAT'S THROWN
ALL ON ALL SIDES AND IT'S NOT
FAIR. WE'RE TRYING TO PUT
SOMETHING IN THE LAW THAT HAS
STANDARDS AND VALUES THAT WE ALL
HAVE ABOUT OPENNESS OF MEETINGS
AND A PUBLIC RECORDS.
AND WE HAVE OTHER CONFLICTS
SIGNED CONFLICT OF INTEREST
WHICH UNFORTUNATELY GOT PUT BACK
INTO THE RECORD TODAY EVEN
THOUGH THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO
DO WITH THAT. AND IT SHOULD BE
WORKED ON BUT WE KNOW IT WAS
POISONOUS TO THE ABILITY TO GET
WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET DONE
HERE THE LOWER HANGING FRUITS.
OF THE OPEN MEETINGS AND OPEN
RECORDS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO.
CAN I JUST SAY AT.
I'M COMMITTED TO RESOLVING THIS
TO. AND WHILE I CAN'T SUPPORT
THE BILL IN ITS FORM TODAY I DO
WANT TO MAKE A COMMITMENT THOUGH
THAT.
ON RESOLVING THIS ISSUE WHICH I
I'VE I FRANKLY THINK CCA'S.
OFFER WAS.
WAS FAIR.
BUT IF WE CAN'T RESOLVE THAT
HEARING COMMITTEE TODAY.
I AM NOT WILLING TO LET THIS
THIS ISSUE JUST REST BECAUSE I
DON'T THINK THE STATUS QUO IS
TENABLE AND FRANKLY I. I KNOW WE
SHOULDN'T BE ENCOURAGING
LITIGATION IN THE LEGISLATURE
BUT.
A GIVEN THE OPINION OF LEDGE
COUNCIL A SUPERIOR COURT
DECISION I STILL THINK THAT
MIGHT BE HEALTHY ACTUALLY GET
SOME KIND A DECLARATORY ORDER OR
SOME APPEAL OF WHATEVER
SPENDING.
WHATEVER GOD DECIDED SPIRIT
COURT ACTUALLY SETTLE THIS IT
SEEMS LIKE THE PREMISE WE CAN'T
EVEN AGREE ON THE PREMISE BUT.
.
IT IS SHORT OF THAT.
I'M I'M STILL. A.
I WANT TO PUT IN THE LEG WORK TO
GETTING THIS DONE IT.
THE TWO MOST POPULOUS DISTRICTS.
IT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE THEN
WHAT OF SMALL SCHOOLS RIGHT BACK
WE GOT ACCOMMODATE THE SMALL
SCHOOLS AND I DON'T WANT TO
DISCRIMINATE JUST. BASED ON YOUR
SIZE DOESN'T MAKE YOU MORE.
SUSCEPTIBLE THAT ARE YOU SHOULD
MAKE IT MORE ACCEPTABLE TO
PARENTS AND NOT THAT I%
APPRECIATE HOW FAR YOU'RE TRYING
TO GO AHEAD THAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO COME A WAYS I JUST.
.
YEAH I CAN'T I CAN'T BE THERE
WITH YOU AT THIS MOMENT BUT.
I DO WANNA SEE RESOLVED AND I
APPRECIATE.
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES HILL STEPPING
UP AND TRY TO PUT SOME
CONSTRUCTIVE ON THE TABLE TRYING
TO GET THIS RESULT.
THANK YOU SENATOR I THINK AN
IMPORTANT FACTOR TO IS THAT IT'S
ALSO WE NEED TO GIVE ACCESS TO
THE TAXPAYER REMEMBER THESE ARE
STILL PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THEY
ARE. TAXPAYER MONEY GOES INTO
THEM SO IT'S FUN IS THERE IS SO
LONG AS THEY ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO
PARTICIPATE AS WELL.
AND STUDENTS AND PARENTS OF
COURSE SO. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU
RESOLVE THAT OF APPRECIATE THE
CONCERNS OF THEIR ANY OTHER
STATEMENT SIR.
WE HAVE A MOTION THE.
THE MOTION IS DO PASS AS
AMENDED.
THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN IN.
OR.
A PROPOSED IN EDUCATION WERE
TAKEN HERE. AND THE MOTIONS TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. JACKSON KNOW JACKSON NO
MORE LOCK MORE LAKAI ANDERSON.
HERTZBERG HERTZBERG AYE MONNING.
MONNING NO STERN.
WIECKOWSKI.
I THINK THE VOTERS TO TO TO WILL
LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR OF
ABSENT MEMBERS WILL TAKE ONE
MORE VOTE ON THAT THANK YOU VERY
MUCH
.
RIGHT I BELIEVE SENATOR GALGIANI
WAS HERE FISHY OUTS IN THE HOME
IN THE HALL.
WHAT?
REPORTER.
LIFTING CALLS IN SENATE
TRANSPORTATION AND SO THERE'LL
BE SOME.
OF THOSE REGISTERED WHATEVER YOU
YOU'VE GOT TO MORE BILLS. FAR
WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND DO ONE
OF YOUR BILLS AND THEN WHEN THE
OTHER FOLKS
COME IN WILL.
YOU PICK.
WHILE POLICE YOU.
BOTTOM.
JUST WANNA LEAVE WE KNOW IT'S
GETTING CLOSE TO DINNER TIME.
ALL RIGHT HOOK TO THE
BILL THAT'S FILE ITEM FIFTEEN S.
B. A THOUSAND AND ONE.
GOOD AFTERNOON SENATOR.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
IT YOU HAVE A LITTLE.
HETERO TOOK A WILL BE WAS
SUPPOSED TO BE YOUR USUAL LA.
WILL ROLL ARE.
THERE WAS A THING ON BOB
HERTZBERG BUT. QUE.
SO.
CUT TO THE CHASE GIVEN THE
LATENESS OF THE DAY. WHAT
THEY'RE OF THREE MILLION PEOPLE
WHO LONG ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA
ACCOUNTS AROUND THE WORLD?
AND WHAT'S WE'VE LEARNED
PARTICULARLY AND WITH RECENT
TIMES THE RUSSIANS WHO BEEN
INDICTED DOT.
A NUMBER OF OTHER STORIES THAT
WE SEE ALL OVER THE PLACE IS
THAT THERE'S THESE THINGS THESE
ROBOTS WEEK COLUMN BOX THAT
IMPERSONATE PEOPLE. BUT ALL OVER
THE INTERNET. BUT SOMETIMES THEY
ARE THERE IN THE FORM IN THE OF
A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT SOMETIMES
THERE. BUT WE WE SEEN IN THE
PRIVATE SECTOR WHERE SOMEBODY'S
A OF A MOVIE STAR OR AN ATHLETE
NAY WHEN THEY GO TO A COMPANY.
AND THEY SAY HELP ME BUILD MY
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM IT TURNS
OUT THEY SAY OH GUY WE GOT TWO
HUNDRED THOUSAND FOLLOWERS. BUT
ONLY TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND REAL
PEOPLE AT SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND
OUR* BUT WE SEEN CERTAINLY
IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
FROM OTHER COUNTRIES TRYING TO
INFLUENCE OUR ELECTION. IN
POLITICS THE WE JUST SAW IN THE
PARKLAND SHOOTING A NETWORK OF
SIX HUNDRED RUSSIA LINK WHAT'S.
PUSHING INFLAMMATORY BOTH PRO
AND CON GUN CONTROL MESSAGE
LITERALLY WITHIN HOURS NONE WERE
PEOPLE ALL WERE MASQUERADING AS
PEOPLE WE SEEN COMPANIES THAT.
WHEN YOU GET OUT THERE AND
THEY'RE DOING IT IN THE AYE
INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING AND THEY
SAY WELL WE'RE VALUING THE
COMPANY BECAUSE WE GOT SO MANY
MILLION FOLLOWERS WHEN IN FACT
THEY DON'T. WE KNOW FOR MARK
ZUCKERBERG TESTIMONY THE OTHER
DAY IN CONGRESS
THE IDIOT SIXTEEN MILLION
PEOPLE.
IN HIS SYSTEM THAT ARE PROBABLY
BOTS AND FORTY EIGHT MILLION
TWITTER FOR.
ALL THINGS THAT ARE BOTS
SO WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO
WE'VE GOT THIS VERY DIFFICULT
CHALLENGE IT ON EBAY IN TERMS OF
OF THE LAW BECAUSE SOME OF THE
STUFF'S COMING FROM BULGARIA OR
RUSSIA. AND HOW DO WE CONTROL
THIS
HOW DO WE CONTROL THIS IN
CALIFORNIA.
WHAT DO WE DO WHAT'S REASONABLE
WHAT REALLY WORKS IT'S A BIG
PROBLEM? IT ALL REALLY TRYING TO
DO WITH THIS MEASURE IS
BASICALLY DO A BETTY CROCKER
SEAL OF APPROVAL BASICALLY. THAT
SAYS THIS IS A BAR
SO THAT HALF THE ROOM HAS NO
IDEA WHICH I HARD OVERNIGHT
STUFF IN A COACH'S CHINA WANT US
TO SAY. BY COD TAKES THAT YOU
KNOW WE GOT IT.
SO YOU THE CHAIR THAT'S ON THE
MATTERS
SO YOU GUYS.
BUT MY POINT IS THAT.
THAT WE ARE SOME KIND OF DEAL
WHICH IS THIS IS A LOT.
RIGHT AND THAT MAKES IT ILLEGAL
IT'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION I'D
TELL YOU RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT
BECAUSE THE LAW BECAUSE WE'RE
DEALING IN HIS VERY DIFFICULT
WORLD OF THE INTERNET.
BUT IT'S A
STEP IT'S IMPORTANT FIRST STEP
BUT I THINK IT ALSO SENDS A
MESSAGEIS AROUND.
THE REST OF THE COUNTRY AND THE
REST OF THE WORLD OF TAKING A
RESPONSIBLE APPROACH OF
IDENTIFYING SOMETHING'S A BY.
MAKING IT ILLEGAL TO TO TO AT
LEAST WRONGFULLY UTILIZE THESE
THINGS AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE TWITTER. AND
FACEBOOK ARE HERE THEY CONTROL A
GIGANTIC I DON'T HAVE THE
NUMBERS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ME
BECAUSE I'M NOT USING MY NOTES
BUT THE POINT IS. A HUGE
pPERCENTAGE OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA
MARKET SO IF WE COULD JUST GET
JURISDICTION OVER THOSE TWO.
ENTITIES IT WILL GO A LONG WAY.
BEGINNING TO GET TROOPS IN THIS
WHOLE PROCESS WHAT YOU SEE HERE
WHERE THAT WENT OVER THERE I
CAN'T SEE THAT FAR.
BUT IN ANY EVENT I CAN'T EITHER
WHAT I DID KANA FOR FUN YOU KNOW
THIS IS.
COLLEGES FOR THE THAT THAT THAT
THAT THE HUMOR OF IT THE BILL AS
SP ONE ZERO ZERO ONE ONES AND
ZEROS. AND WE PUT TOGETHER BY
HERTZBERG AND THOSE ARE WHAT
YOU'LL SEE THERE UNDER THE BOT
ACT OF TWO THOUSAND AND
EIGHTEEN.
HIS WE ACTUALLY PUT TAP AT THE
SCORE BOUGHT UNDERSCORE
HERTZBERG AND WE GENERATED BOTS
THAT HE INDICATED THAT WE WERE
ALL BOUGHT AND PUT STUFF OUT. IN
THE WOODS OF THE.
INTERNET IF YOU WILL JUST
DEMONSTRATE THE POINT AND LET
PEOPLE PUT US WHAT.
THE INTERNET OF THINGS YES THE
INTERNET.
THAT KIND OF THING SO THAT'S
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO
HERE.
SO AGAIN IT'S NOT A PERFECT BILL
DOESN'T SOLVE ALL PROBLEMS
BUT THE NOTION THAT IS WE NEED
TO TAKE A FIRST STEP IN THIS
VERY VERY COMPLICATED AREA. OF
TRYING TO DEAL WITH THIS FAKERY
THAT HAS.
OVERTAKING ARE THE HEADS.
HEARING ON THIS OVER TO SAMANTHA
CORBETT TO GIVE YOU THE REAL
DETAILS LIMIT PERHAPS IN A
FUTURE LIFE YOU CONSIDER
VOICEOVER.
ALRIGHT VERY GOOD TO WITNESSES
PLEASE TWO MINUTES EACH.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS WE EXPAND
THE CORPSMAN ON BEHALF OF COMMON
SENSE MEDIA I'D LIKE TO THINK
THE AUTHOR TO STOP FOR ALL THE
WORK IN ORDER FOR THE REST OF MY
TIME TO XIN PRESTON WITH COMMON
SENSE MEDIA. MARINE IRWIN IS
GONNA START US OFF.
I THINK YOU MADAM CHAIR FOR
HAVING ME TODAY MY NAME IS
MAUREEN IRWIN I AM HERE
REPRESENTING MYSELF.
BUT FOR OVER A YEAR I WROTE A
COLUMN FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO
EXAMINER.
I'VE BEEN OF POLITICAL
CONSULTANT FOR ALMOST TWENTY
YEARS AND I BECAME INTERESTED IN
THE ISSUE BECAUSE AS HE
MENTIONED. SAN FRANCISCO AND THE
BAY AREA IS THE NEXUS OF SO MANY
OF THESE COMPANIES. OF THE
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS.
AND I WRITE ABOUT IT FOR QUITE
AWHILE AND I INITIALLY BECAME
INTERESTED IN THE ISSUE OUT OF
ASTROTURFING WHICH MANY OF YOU
KNOW IS FAKE. GRASSROOTS SUPPORT
OR OPPOSITION OFTENTIMES FOR A
POLITICAL CAUSE WHERE A PERSON
OR A COMPANY AND I SORT OF DOVE
INTO THAT ANGLE AND WHAT I
DISCOVERED UNDERNEATH IS MUCH
MORE INSIDIOUS. AND WE HAVE
TROLL FARMS IN RUSSIA THAT ARE
PUTTING FORTH THESE AUTOMATED
ACCOUNTS AND IT'S CRITICAL I
THINK TO KNOW THAT THESE ARE NOT
PEOPLE. YOU'RE GONNA HEAR PEOPLE
MAKE ARGUMENTS ABOUT FIRST
AMENDMENT I DON'T THINK THE
FIRST AMENDMENT APPLIES TO ONES
AND ZEROS. SO.
BUT AGAIN THESE BOTS WE HAVE
AMOUNTS TO THEIR OUT THERE THEY
OFTENTIMES BULLY HARASSED THEY
PROMOTE DISINFORMATION. THERE'S
A LOT OF HATRED ON SOME VERY
VILE CONFIDENT THAT GETS
PROPAGATED OFTENTIMES YOU HAVE
THESE THESE BIG ACCOUNTS THAT
ARE SORT OF HIGHPROFILE AND
THEN YOU HAVE THESE BOT NETWORKS
THAT AMPLIFY THE MESSAGE AND
AGAIN THESE ARE AUTOMATED.
ACCOUNTS THEIR FAKE THEY'RE NOT
REAL PEOPLE SO AGAIN I AM HERE
TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THIS AND I
AM A VERY MUCH APPLY DIRECTLY.
VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
SENATOR MY NAME IS SEAN PRESTON
FOR THREE YEARS I WORK FOR
COMMONSENSE NOW BUT FOR THREE
YEARS I HAD THE HONOR OF SERVING
AS A DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS
FOR THE CALIFORNIA JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT. WELL THERE I WORKED
EXTENSIVELY ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND
HUMAN TRAFFICKING ISSUES AND
WHAT I WANT TO TELL YOU SENATORS
TODAY. IS THAT IN SOME COUNTRIES
AROUND THE WORLD THIS MALICIOUS
DECEITFUL USE OF BUT IS VERY
TIED UP WITH HUMAN RIGHTS
PROBLEMS.
VERY BRIEFLY MEXICO IN TWENTY
TWELVE THEY HAD ELECTION THE
RULING PARTY WAS REELECTED
THROUGH THE HELP OF FIFTY
THOUSAND BOTS PROGRAMMED TO
OVERWHELM ANY OPPOSITION THE
HEAD INCLUDING TARGETING
JOURNALISTS INCLUDING TRYING TO
SHUT DOWN THE VOICES OF
INDIGENOUS AN AFRICAN PEOPLE IN
MEXICO. IT GOT WORSE IN MEXICO
IN TWENTY FOURTEEN AND FORTY
THREE STUDENTS WERE KILLED IT
AYE AYE Z. NOT BY. THAT SAME BUT
NETWORK WENT TO OVERWHELM THE
VOICES OF THE FAMILY IN THE
JOURNALISTS.
IN KENYA I WANNA READ VERY
BRIEFLY A.
ONE PARAGRAPH FROM A KENYAN
JOURNALISTS IN LARRY MODE TO
WELL PUBLISHED IN THE WASHINGTON
POST ON MARCH FIFTEENTH OF THIS
YEAR. I'M A RELATIVELY PROMINENT
JOURNALIST IN KENYA WITH MORE
THAN A MILLION FOLLOWERS ON
TWITTER. MY EXPERIENCE ON THE
PLATFORM HAS BEEN THE OST
DEGRADING OF MY CAREER. BOTS
HAVE POISONED THE PUBLIC
DISCOURSE IN AFRICA WHERE
TWITTER PAYS LITTLE TO NO
ATTENTION.
INCLUDING IN SOUTH AFRICA AND IN
KENYA'S TWO PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTIONS IN TWENTY SEVENTEEN.
AND FINALLY I JUST WANT TO TAKE
THE REST OF MY TIME TO REMEMBER
THE HUNG UP PEOPLE. OF MYANMAR
UP PROBABLY THE WORST CASE OF
ETHNIC CLEANSING IN OTHER THAN
BOSNIA AND RWANDA BOTS WERE NOT
THE MAIN CAUSE OF THAT
SITUATION.
BE PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT ROLE
JUST AS A BIT OF BACKGROUND IN
MYANMAR IN TWENTY FOURTEEN POINT
FIVE PERCENT OF THE POPULATION
WAS ONLINE.
EIGHTEEN MONTHS LATER IT WAS ONE
OF FACEBOOK'S LARGEST CLIENTS IN
ALL OF SOUTHEAST ASIA IT BECAME
A CASE WHERE. THE BUDDHIST
MAJORITY GOT A MAJORITY OF THEIR
NEWS FROM FACEBOOK OFTENTIMES
THROUGH BOX AND THEY BECAME
CONVINCED THAT THE MUSLIM
MINORITY WAS ALREADY AT WAR
ATTACKING THEM. THIS IS A
TERRIBLE HUMAN RIGHTS PROBLEM
AND I I REQUEST YOUR I POD.
I'M OUT OF TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT IF YOU
WHICH HAS COME TO THE MIKE WITH
NAME AND AFFILIATION.
ALRIGHT THANK YOU SIR.
WE'RE DOING BOTS AND NOT PEOPLE
THEY STAYS THERE ANY BOX IN
SUPPORT.
ALRIGHT ARE THERE ANY PEOPLE IN
OPPOSITION.
HIGH FLOODS.
MAKE ROOM FOR. TWO IF WE HAVE
ONE ONE WITNESS WE COULD SHOWS
CLEAR ONE CHAIR.
BUT ISSUE ANY OTHER SHOW TAKING
THE AMENDMENTS YES I WAS GOING
TO. RUN GUESS AMENDMENTS SO AS
PROPOSED IN THE ANALYSIS FOR
SPAM RIGHT.
VERY GOOD TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE.
WHAT TAKE OUT LONG MADAM CHAIR
AYE SARAH BOOT TESTIFYING TAMMY
HALF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE OUR POSITIONS OPPOSE
UNLESS AMENDED? BUT I WANT TO
START OUT BY THINKING SENATOR
HERTZBERG A STAFF FOR WORKING
WITH US ON THIS BILL. AND WE HAD
A LOT OF PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSIONS
WITH HIS STAFF AND WE'VE COME TO
AN AGREEMENT IN CONCEPT ON MANY
ASPECTS OF THE BILL THAT WERE
CONCERNING TO US. AT THIS POINT
WE FEEL CONFIDENT THAT WE'LL BE
ABLE TO FINALIZE ANY OUTSTANDING
ISSUES WITH THE AUTHOR AND AND
AND REMOVE OUR OPPOSITION COME
AT THAT TIME.
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS GOOD
AFTERNOON MISTER CHAIR JUST AS
ALL WE HAVE ATTACK THAT WOULD
JUST LIKE TO ASSOCIATE OR
COMMENTS WITHOUT OF SARA'S
INTAKE THE SPONSOR IN THE OFFICE
AND WORKING WITH US AND
HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THERE VERY
SOON. THANK YOU.
THE WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION OR
IN MOVING TOWARD NEUTRALITY YEAR
WHAT HAVE YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON
THINK THAT OPTION KEVIN MCKINLEY
WITH INTERNET ASSOCIATION ECHO
THE SENTIMENTS AND. DONE GOOD
WORK WITH THE OFTEN THE SPONSOR
AND LOOK FORWARD TO COMPLETING.
THE PROCESS THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR CHRIS MCKAY WE ON
BEHALF OF THE COMPUTING
TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
SAME.
FOR GOOD ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
ALRIGHT SEEING NONE LET'S BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
YOU KNOW THIS WHOLE SITUATION
WITH BOXES REALLY GETTING.
EXTRAORDINARILY SCARY SAW THE
IMPACT IT HAD ON OUR ELECTIONS.
THE FACT THAT. YOU DON'T KNOW
WHO'S REAL AND WHO ISN'T AND YET
THIS FAKE NEWS AND THEY'VE. DONE
STUDIES I DON'T KNOW I THINK WAS
IN THE ANALYSIS THE REFERENCE
THE FACT THAT. FAKE NEWS TENDS
TO GET FAR MORE ATTENTION AND.
ACTIVITY AND THE BOTS THAT FEED
ALL THAT A REALLY UNDERMINING OF
THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN THIS
COUNTRY AND CERTAINLY IT
APPARENTLY AROUND THE WORLD DOES
AS WELL SO. WE CERTAINLY DON'T
NEED ARMIES OF BOTS TO FURTHER
DERAIL OF OUR DEMOCRACY SO I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS BILL
I THINK IT'S A STEP A GREAT
STEP.
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND JOB.
WITH THE AMENDMENTS TO TIGHTEN
UP THE DEFINITIONS AN
APPLICATION NIGHT OF THE BILL I
THINK IT'S A. GOOD COMMONSENSE
RESPONSE I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU
THOUGH WHAT. OURS THE SOME OF
THE MET WHAT ARE SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT YOU BELIEVE YOU'RE
CLOSE TO RESOLVING BECAUSE I
DON'T SEE THIS BILL WEEKEND.
ANY FURTHER THAN. THE
COURTHOUSE REALLY ARE YOU KNOW
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO HERE
IS THE IDEA OF THESE ELECTRONIC.
THINGS THAT ARE TRYING TO
IMITATE PEOPLE THERE'S ALL SORTS
OF OTHER AUTOMATED THINGS IN
BUSINESS
WILL THEY NOTIFY IF YOUR
ACCOUNTS OVERDRAWN OR NOTIFY YOU
VERY SO THINGS IT'S A PART OF IT
BUT I'VE SEEN.
IT'S TIGHTENING UP THOSE
DEFINITIONS THAT DON'T AT ALL
GET TO THE ISSUE OF DECEPTION
WITH THIS BILL IS TRYING TO GET
TO IS WHERE WHERE PEOPLE ARE
MASS WHERE WERE. WHERE THINGS
ARE MASQUERADING AS PEOPLE
NUMBER ONE AND ITS DECEPTION AND
THE SECOND THING IS WHERE THE
PERSON KNOWS TO COMMUNICATING
WITH THE MACHINE IN SOME FORM
AND APPROVES IT IN A VERY CLEAR
AND CONSPICUOUS WAY? IT'S IT
DOESN'T IT DOESN'T IT IT'S
REALLY KIND OF DEALING WITH A
TECHNOLOGICAL CHALLENGES THAT
WE'RE FACING IN TRYING TO YOU
KNOW DEAL WITH THIS NEW FRONTIER
IF YOU WILL. THE UNDERLYING
ESSENCE OF THE MEASURE IS IS
WHAT IT IS AND I I WOULD I'M NOT
MOVING OFF OF THAT.
PRETTY GOOD HANK YOU ACT THE
SENATOR WOULD STERN DID YOU HAVE
A QUESTION.
I DID I APPRECIATE TO THIS SORT
OF.
TAILORED FOCUS YOU'RE TAKING ON
GOING AFTER THAT DECEPTIVELY.
I COMMEND YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD YOU KNOW I DON'T THINK
THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
ANTICIPATED.
HOW CHEAP AND VOLUMINOUS SPEECH
WOULD BECOME?
WAY BACK THEN YOU KNOW YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT AN ERA WHERE. THE
TO WRITE A PAMPHLET. AND
CIRCULATED YOU KNOW WE DON'T
EVEN KNOW THAT.
THE CIVIL WAR HAD ENDED FOR
MONTHS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE
COUNTRY.
THE NEXT STEP BUT MISTER SIR IF
I MAY IS TO EXTEND NOT JUST TO
AVOID COMPUTERS FROM BE HAVING A
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT. BUT
FROM-CORPORATIONS HAVING A FIRST
AMENDMENT RIGHT.
THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. THAT
WOULD NEVER HAPPEN LOTS ARE NOT
PEOPLE AND CORPORATION AHEAD OF
THE BILL.
I DON'T A LIKE I DECISION THE
SUPREME COURT.
THEY'LL COME AND HANG OUT OF IT
SO THERE ARE NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS THERE IS A MOTION IS
OUR MOTION BY SENATOR STERN THE
MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED TO
SENATE APPROVES PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. JACKSON AYE JACKSON I AM
MORE LOCK.
ANDERSON.
ANDERSON NO HERTZBERG AYE
HERTZBERG AYE MONNING. MONNING
AYE STERN. STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI.
HI BUT GOSTEI. MORATORIUM.
THANK YOU THAT.
THE BILL HAS OF. FIVE FIVE TWO
ONE AND CENTER MORE LIQUIDS HERE
SO IS HEADED NOT VOTING. CARDS
FOR THAT WE HAVE EVERYBODY
VOTING ON THAT THE BILL IS ABOUT
FIVE TO ONE AND ONE ABSTENTION.
WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO NOW IS
SENATOR GALGIANI WAS HERE THAT
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO SENATOR
WIENER AND THEN SENATOR SKINNER?
SO WE'RE GOING TO SHOW GO.
BRIEFLY OUT OF ORDER SINCE
SENATOR GALGIANI YOU'VE BEEN
HERE FOR A BIT.
WAITING PATIENTLY.
THE FUNDS AND THAT IS FILE ITEM
TWENTY FOUR S. B. TWELVE FORTY
NINE.
THANK YOU MA'AM CHAIR MEMBERS
I'D LIKE TO PRESENT S. B. TWELVE
FORTY NINE WHICH PROHIBITS THE
SALE FOR PROMOTIONAL GIVEAWAY OF
ANY COSMETIC PRODUCT IN
CALIFORNIA. THAT HAS BEEN TESTED
ON ANIMALS AFTER JANUARY FIRST
TWENTY TWENTY WITH VERY LIMITED
EXCEPTIONS THAT I WILL OUTLINE
SHORTLY.
AS YOU MAY KNOW.
HIS RECENT ARE YOU GOING TO BE
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS.
THERE WERE PROPOSED.
YES.
OKAY SO YOU'RE ACCEPTING AS
AUTHORS MMC MOMENTS IN A
PROPOSED IN THE HOUSES THANK
YOU.
AS YOU MAY KNOW CALIFORNIA HAS
HAD A LONG HISTORY OVER EIGHTEEN
YEARS OF PROHIBITING.
TESTING
COSMETIC PRODUCTS.
TWO THOUSAND FOR EXAMPLE
CALIFORNIA WAS THE FIRST STATE
TO BAN THE PRACTICE OF USING
ANIMALS PROTESTING COSMETICS
HOWEVER THE LOS STAYED SILENT
ABOUT THEIR IMPORTATION AND
SALE.
JUST FOUR YEARS AGO THE SENATE
UNANIMOUSLY AND THE ASSEMBLY
PASSED SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION
TWENTY TWO BY SENATOR BLOCK
URGING CONGRESS TO PASS THE
HUMANE COSMETICS ACT.
THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE SALE
COSMETICS TESTED ON ANIMALS
NATIONWIDE.
S. G. ARE TWENTY TWO RECEIVED
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT WITH MANY
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE VOTING
IN FAVOR OF IT.
EVEN WITH OVER TWO HUNDRED FIFTY
COSMETIC COMPANIES IN SUPPORT OF
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION CONGRESS
HAS NOT.
DID SO TODAY I'M ASKING THIS
COMMITTEE TO DO WHAT WE HAVE
NORMALLY DONE WHEN CONGRESS DOES
NOT ACT
AND THAT IS FOR CALIFORNIA TO
MOVE FORWARD AND LEAD.
WHILE IT MAY SEEM THAT
CALIFORNIA IS ON THE LEADING
EDGE
IN FACT WE ARE ACTUALLY
FOLLOWING THE LEAD OF THIRTY
FIVE OTHER COUNTRIES THROUGHOUT
THE WORLD. THAT HAVE ALREADY
BANNED THE SALE OF COSMETIC
PRODUCTS TESTED ON ANIMALS
COUNTRIES AS DIVERSE AS BULGARIA
INDIA ISRAEL ESTONIA GERMANY
FRANCE.
ITALY ENGLAND AND EVEN THE TINY
ISLAND OF MALTA HAVE ALL BANNED
THE SALE COSMETICS TESTED ON
ANIMALS.
S. B. TWELVE FORTY NINE SIMPLY
BRINGS CALIFORNIA'S HUMANE
STANDARDS IN LINE WITH THE
WORLD'S HIGHEST.
S. B. TWELVE FORTY NINE ALLOWS
TO EXCEPTIONS TO THE BAN WHERE
ANIMAL TESTED COSMETICS WOULD
STILL BE ALLOWED THE FIRST IS IN
THE EVENT THAT THE FEDERAL DRUG
ADMINISTRATION ORDERED THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT TOXIC
SUBSTANCE CONTROL. REQUIRES
TESTING AND THERE ARE NO
ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE.
SECOND EXEMPTION ALLOWS ANIMAL
TESTING TO COMPLY WITH A FORMAL
REQUEST OF A FOREIGN REGULATORY
AUTHORITY. BUT THIS SICK
EXEMPTION WILL SUNSET UNDER THIS
BILL AS OF JANUARY FIRST TWENTY
TWENTY THREE.
AFTER THAT DATE CALIFORNIA
CONSUMERS CAN WITH GREAT
CONFIDENCE TO KNOW THAT THE
COSMETIC PRODUCTS THAT THEY
PURCHASE ARE NO LONGER PRETTY
PRODUCED THROUGH THE UNNECESSARY
PAINFUL. AND VERY AWFUL AND
AVOIDABLE ANIMAL TESTS HERE WITH
ME TODAY ARE REPRESENTATIVES OF
THE BILL'S SPONSOR. AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE.
THANK YOU SENATOR MODE A
GALGIANI TWO WITNESSES.
TWO MINUTES EACH AND ALL THE
REST THE WITNESSES.
WILL BE ASKED TO GO TO THE
MICROCHIPS TO.
IDENTIFY THEMSELVES IN THEIR
AFFILIATION AND THEIR POSITION.
VERY GOOD TO MINUTES THANK YOU
GOOD AFTERNOON SENATORS MY NAME
IS HILARY PICKLES AND I AM HERE
TODAY REPRESENTING THE LUSH
COSMETICS INCORPORATED ARE
UNITED STATES RETAIL BUSINESS.
AND LUSH COSMETICS LIMITED OUR
CANADIAN RETAIL AND
MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU INTO
SENATOR GALGIANI FOR HER
LEADERSHIP TO AND ANIMAL TESTING
FOR COSMETICS IN CALIFORNIA.
WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE
SUPPORTING BILL S. B. TWELVE
FORTY NINE MANUFACTURING AND
SELLING CRUELTY FREE COSMETICS
AND TRANSPARENCY INTO OUR SUPPLY
CHAIN HAVE BEEN CORE VALUES
SINCE THE INCEPTION OF LIVES IN
NORTH AMERICA MORE THAN TWENTY
YEARS AGO. THOSE VALUES HAVE
ALLOWED US TO GROW OUR BUSINESS
EXPONENTIALLY OVER THE LAST TWO
DECADES WE CURRENTLY HAVE OVER
TWO HUNDRED JOBS IN NORTH
AMERICA FORTY OF WHICH ARE
LOCATED HERE IN CALIFORNIA. AND
MORE THAN FIFTY STORES ACROSS
CANADA. LAST YEAR WE SAW MORE
THAN FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE COME
INTO OUR BRICK AND MORTAR SHOPS
IN NORTH AMERICA THIRTY FOUR
MILLION UNIQUE VISITORS TO OUR
WEBSITES AND OVER SIX POINT FIVE
MILLION FOLLOWERS ACROSS THAT IN
SOCIAL MEDIA CHANNELS.
WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT
CREATING CRUELTY FREE PRODUCTS
HAS CONTRIBUTED GREATLY TO OUR
GROWTH AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO
DO SO IN THE FUTURE. AND WE ARE
NOT ALONE MORE THAN SIX HUNDRED
NORTH AMERICAN COSMETICS BRANDS
WHO ARE CERTIFIED AS CRUELTY
FREE ARE CURRENTLY DOING
SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS IN NORTH
AMERICA.
AT LUSH WE WROTE OUR NON ANIMAL
TESTING POLICY TO EXCLUDE
SUPPLIERS NOT JUST TESTING ON
ANIMALS FOR COSMETIC PURPOSES
BUT FOR TESTING FOR ANY PURPOSE.
OUR POLICY ALSO EXCLUDES ANIMAL
TESTING CARRIED OUT ANYWHERE IN
THE WORLD TO ELIMINATE THE
DANGER OF OFF SHORE TESTING.
SO WE'RE HERE TO SAY THAT
COSMETIC COMPANIES CAN BE
SUCCESSFUL WITHOUT ANIMAL
TESTING AND THAT ISSUES
SURROUNDING TESTING CAN BE
WORKED OUT WITH SUPPLIERS.
THE PUBLIC AND ORGANIZATIONS
LIKE LAST CAN APPLY PRESSURE BUT
IT IS GOVERNMENT THAT PROVIDES
THE PACE THAT IT'S TIME TO ADD
CALIFORNIA TO THAT LIST OF
ANIMAL TESTS THREE COUNTRIES AND
PASSED THE CALIFORNIA CRUELTY
FREE COSMETICS ACT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT
WITNESS.
WE TAKE. HI MY NAME IS CHRISTY
SULLIVAN TOXICOLOGISTS A
CALIFORNIA RESIDENT AND THE VICE
PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH POLICY OF
THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR
RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE.
IN NINETEEN FORTY FOR A TEST
CALLED THE DRAYS RABBIT I TOSS
WAS CREATED.
THIS TEST INVOLVES PLACING
CHEMICALS IN RESTRAIN RABBIT'S
EYES FOR TWENTY FOUR HOURS.
AND THE ANIMALS ARE OBSERVED FOR
SIGNS OF AYE DAMAGE.
IF THE TEST SUBSTANCE IS A
PRESSURIZED AEROSOL THE RABBIT
SIZE ARE HELD OPEN IN THE
PRODUCT IS SPRAYED DIRECTLY INTO
THE AYE FROM ABOUT FOUR INCHES
AWAY.
DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY
RABBITS EXPERIENCE PAIN REDNESS
SWELLING DISCHARGE AND EVEN
BLINDNESS. RABBITS WERE
ORIGINALLY CHOSEN BECAUSE THEY
DO NOT PRODUCE TEARS UNLIKE
HUMANS THEY CANNOT WASH THE
PRODUCT ON OF THEIR EYES.
FORTUNATELY NON ANIMAL TEST
METHODS BASED ON HUMAN CORNEAL
SKIN IMMUNE CELLS ANOTHER HUMAN
CELLS AND TISSUES WIDELY
AVAILABLE TO USE IN PLACE OF
THIS AND OTHER TYPES.
IN FACT NON ANIMAL METHODS FOR
SKIN ALLERGY PERFORM BETTER.
AND ARE MORE ACCURATE THAN THE
ORIGINAL ANIMAL TYPES.
DESPITE THIS PROGRESS ANIMAL
TESTING INCLUDING THE JURY'S
TASK CONTINUES.
IT IS ESTIMATED THAT AROUND FOUR
HUNDRED THOUSAND ANIMALS ARE
KILLED WORLDWIDE EACH YEAR TO
TEST COSMETICS OR COSMETIC
INGREDIENTS.
IN MY EXPERIENCE MANUFACTURERS
CONDUCT ANIMAL TESTING FOR A
NUMBER OF REASONS INCLUDING
INSTITUTIONAL RESISTANCE
LIABILITY PROTECTION REGULATORY
EXPEDIENCY. LABELING OR LEGAL
REQUIREMENTS
POLICY INITIATIVES LIKE THIS
BILL.
ARE NEEDED TO ENSURE THE
COSMETICS AND PERSONAL CARE
PRODUCTS SOLD IN CALIFORNIA ARE
NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS FOR ANY
REASON.
MORE THAN THIRTY FIVE COUNTRIES
HAVE ALREADY ENACTED
RESTRICTIONS ARE BANDS ON THE
TESTING OF COSMETICS OR ON THE
MARKING OF ANIMAL TESTING
COSMETICS CITIZENS UNDERSTAND
ANIMAL SHOULDN'T SUFFER FOR THE
NEW US WRINKLE CREAM OR SHAMPOO
SENT.
AND THIS BILL CREATES THAT
BEAUTIFUL FUTURE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT IF
YOU WOULD COME TO THE MICROPHONE
GIVE YOUR NAME. AFFILIATION.
AND THEN WE WILL GO TO THE
OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
BONTA CONGRESSMAN BEHALF OF
CRUELTY FREE INTERNATIONAL IN
SUPPORT THINKING.
ADAM THURMAN RESOLVE SONY'S A
FELONIES GROUP ON BEHALF OF A
VOICE FOR CHOICE ETHICS IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU SIR.
IT A CLEAR EXECUTIVE PRODUCER OF
THE NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY GIMME
SHELTER.
FOUNDER OF PEACE FOR ANIMALS
AND WORLD ANIMAL NEWS IN
SUPPORT.
WE WANT CRUELTY FREE PRODUCTS
THESE ANIMALS ARE TORTURED.
THANK YOU MA'AM.
ON WHICH HE SAID A AND ON THE
CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND
ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS
EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM CAN
RELATE TO PAIN AND SUFFERING I
ASKED YOU DON'T TURN A BLIND
AYE.
AND AND VOTE FOR THIS BILL
PLEASE THANK YOU.
HI JUDIE MANCUSO LAGUNA BEACH
CALIFORNIA SPONSORED THE BILL
SOCIAL COMPASSION AND
LEGISLATION AND WE ARE JR AYE
VOTE THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
GOOD AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES EACH
PLEASE THAT AFTERNOON.
FROM HERE ON CHAIR MA'AM MEMBERS
MEDIALLY ON BEHALF OF THE
PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS COUNCIL
WE REPRESENT THE PERSONAL CARE
AND COSMETICS INDUSTRY.
REPRESENTING SMALL MEDIUM AND
LARGE MANUFACTURERS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA MANY OF WHICH ARE
BASED HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
WE ARE REGRETTABLY IN OPPOSITION
TO THIS BILL.
AND WE REALLY COULD HAVE AND
SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN SUPPORT
TODAY.
PER THE AUTHORS STATEMENT.
HER GOAL IS TO ALIGN THIS BILL
WITH THE STANDARDS THAT HAVE
BEEN SET FORTH IN COUNTRIES
ACROSS THE WORLD.
AND WE AGREE WE SUPPORT.
STOPPING ANIMAL TESTING. IN FACT
WHEN WE WERE APPROACHED BY THE
AUTHOR IN THE SPONSOR SEVERAL
MONTHS AGO ABOUT THIS BILL.
SHE.
PROPOSED TO US THAT SHE WANTED
TO MODEL IT OFF OF THE EUROPEAN
UNION.
WE SUPPORT THAT WE BROUGHT HER
THAT EUROPEAN UNION AND
UNFORTUNATELY THE GOAL POSTS HAS
BEEN MOVED.
A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANT
TO MENTION BEFORE I GET INTO
SOME OF OUR ISSUES WITH THE BILL
IS THAT.
THE COSMETICS INDUSTRY HAS LED
THE WAY IN REDUCING ANIMAL
TESTING.
FOR THIRTY YEARS WE'VE BEEN A
LEADER IN THE SPACE ACTIVELY
TRYING TO FIND ALTERNATIVE
METHODS TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE
ANIMAL TESTING FOR COSMETICS.
WE'VE INVESTED HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE LAST
FEW DECADES AND WE'RE PROUD THAT
WE'VE CREATED. WE ACTUALLY HAD
THE INITIAL GRANT THAT CREATED
THE JOHNS HOPKINS SCHOOL FOR
ALTERNATIVE METHODS.
IN ORDER TO REDUCE ANIMAL
TESTING AROUND THE WORLD.
THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE
AUTHOR LIKE AS MENTIONED BEFORE
WAS TO ALIGN THIS BILL WITH THE
EUROPEAN UNION HOWEVER WE HAVE
GONE OFF TRACK FROM THAT AND
SPONSORS. WANT MORE.
WHAT THEY WANT IN THIS BILL IN
OUR PRIMARY CONCERN INDUCTION
AND MANY OTHER THINGS IS THAT
THEY WANT TO REMOVE SOMETHING
CALLED SO CALLED CHINA
EXEMPTION?
IN THE E. YOU FOR EXAMPLE.
THEY CONSIDER THIS AND THEY HAVE
AN EXEMPTION CALLED THE.
CHINA EXEMPTION WHICH ALLOWS
FOR MANUFACTURERS. TO AND SELL
PRODUCTS IN COUNTRIES THAT
REQUIRE ANIMAL TESTING CHINA IS
THE PRIMARY EXAMPLE.
THEY REQUIRE MANUFACTURERS WHO
WANT TO SELL PRODUCTS IN THEIR
COUNTRY TO ANIMAL TESTS AND
LOGISTICS OF THIS.
YOUR PASTOR TWO MINUTES I'LL
GIVE YOU ABOUT FIVE MORE SECONDS
TO WRAP UP SO YOU MENTIONED
CHINA EXEMPTION IS OR ANYTHING
ELSE THAT YOU OPPOSED TO THE ONE
I JUST HIGHLIGHT.
THAT PUTS MANUFACTURES IN THE
UNTENABLE POSITION ONCE THE
BILLS MONTHS THAT PROVISION
SUNSETS
TO CHOOSE BETWEEN SELLING IN THE
REST OF THE WORLD OR CHINA. BUT
IT WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT
ON SMALL MANUFACTURERS THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. SIX WITNESS TWO
MINUTES PLEASE. ARTICLE CAN
UNITS FROM BEHALF OF THE
HOUSEHOLD AND COMMERCIAL
PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS
THE INTERNATIONAL FRAGRANCE
ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA
EDITION DEMAND HIS COMMENTS I
JUST ONE OUT ANOTHER VERY LARGE
CONCERNED. ABOUT THE WAY THE
BILL IS STRUCTURED IT WOULD BAN
OR.
PUT A PRODUCT THAT IS SOLD IN
CALIFORNIA IN.
VIOLATION OF THE LAW IF ANY
COMPONENT OF ANY INGREDIENT IS
TESTED BY ANYONE FOR ANY REASON.
ANYWHERE.
IN THE WORLD SO ESSENTIALLY.
STATE AND ALL TO SAY THERE'S A
NUMBER OF REASONS WHY PRODUCTS
ARE TESTED ON ANIMALS THAT ARE
COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THE
COSMETIC INDUSTRY BUT THERE
COULD BE OVERLAP WITH
INGREDIENTS ARE USED IN
COSMETICS FOR EXAMPLE PESTICIDES
ARE REQUIRED TO BE TAUGHT SAID.
UP BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND
THE.
DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE
REGULATION THIS INCLUDES
CLEANING PRODUCTS SUCH AS
DISINFECTANTS MANY OF THESE
PRODUCTS HAVE FRAGRANCES THE LOT
OF THOSE INGREDIENTS WOULD
OVERLAP WITH COSMETICS. ON
ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS THEY'RE
TESTING CHEMICALS ALL THE TIME
ON RODENTS TO TEST FOR
CARCINOGENICITY REPRODUCTIVE AND
DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY AGAIN
THIS BILL IF NOT AN ACADEMIC
INSTITUTION OF A GOVERNMENT.
REQUIRES THAT TESTING OR
ASTRONAUT TESTING BE DONE
INDEPENDENTLY OF THE COSMETICS
INDUSTRY. THOSE INGREDIENTS ARE
NOW IN VIOLATION OF THIS LAW
THOSE PRODUCTS WOULD HAVE TO BE
PULLED OR WOULD BE SUFFER FROM
ENFORCEMENT. SOME OF THE OTHER
CONSEQUENCES THE JUST THINKING
ABOUT MY TESTIMONY THING IN THIS
BILL SO I DIDN'T BRING IT UP.
EARLIER BUT ONCE THE TRAININGS
OPTION EXPIRES IF MANUFACTURE A
CHOOSES I'M GOING REALLY
CALIFORNIA I'M GONNA SELL IN
CHINA. MANUFACTURE BEES LIKE I'M
GONNA SPEAKS ON.
CALIFORNIA NOT ANIMAL TESTS.
ONCE THAT MANUFACTURE
TECHNICALLY HAS TESTED DOT
PRODUCT ANY OF THOSE INGREDIENTS
THAT OVERLAP TO THE PRODUCT IN
CALIFORNIA THOSE ARE NOW IN
VIOLATION.
SO THERE'S A LOT.
TO BE THOUGHT OF ALSO ON HOW IT
WOULD INCREASE HAZARDOUS WASTE
SO ANY PRODUCT COSMETIC PRODUCT
THAT'S ALSO AN OTC YEAR HAS A
DRUG FACT THAT INCLUDES ANYTHING
WITH SUNSCREEN AND IT.
AUTOMATICALLY WHEN TAKEN OFF THE
SHELF FOR IS WASTED HAS TO BE
TREATED AS MEDICAL WASTE
I KNOW FOR A FACT OF THE BILL
IT'S A LIVE IN TRYING TO CHANGE
FOR FOUR YEARS. SO THIS WILL
INCREASE HAZARDOUS WAY HE'S.
SO Q. THOSE REASONS AND MANY
OTHERS WE OPPOSE AND WE COULD
ALSO SUPPORT THE EUROPEAN UNION
MODEL THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY
MUCH OF THEIR ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF YOU'D
STEP FORWARD.
GIVE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION
PLEASE THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS DAWN KEPT HIM HAVE TO
CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURES AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION WOULD
ALIGN OUR COMMENTS WITH THE
OPPOSITION TO KICK YOU VERY
MUCH.
MARGARET GLASSY ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
INCOMES AS WELL THANK YOU.
RAINY PARKING HAVE AMERICAN CAN
THIS COUNSELING AS A COURTESY
THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE IN OPPOSITION THANK
YOU.
TOM JACOB ON BEHALF OF CHEMICAL
INDUSTRY COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA
REGRETTABLY OPPOSED CHEN. SORRY
THAT WE COULDN'T REACH AGREEMENT
ON THE U..
STANDARDS THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
FOR LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE
DIET SHINY QUESTIONS.
ISRAELIS VOTED NO WHAT'S THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS BILL AND
BRUISES BILL.
I GUESS THAT.
OKAY.
I THINK THEIR WIN OVER
EVERYBODY'S HEAD.
ALRIGHT THE SENATOR WIECKOWSKI
I GUESS I HAVE A CONCERN THAT
THE OPPOSITION HAS REYES HE GOT
TO PEOPLE CAN MANUFACTURE SOME
CALIFORNIA MAKING ESSENTIALLY
THE SAME.
INGREDIENTS THE SAME COSMETICS
THE CHINA EXCEPTION LAPSES
WHETHER IT'S A FORMAL
REQUIREMENT OR NON FORMAL
REQUIREMENT.
ONE MANUFACTURE GOES SO GOES TO
CHINA STARTS PRODUCING THAT
INGREDIENT IS NOW TRIGGERED TIP
MAKES THE THE PERSON IS TRYING
TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
.
IN VIOLATION.
IT SEEMS TO BE A BIG PROBLEM.
SO.
IF I CAN ANSWER OF.
HILARY WITH WHY SHE HAD TO GO
CATCH HER FLIGHT WE DIDN'T
ANTICIPATE YOUR LONG DAY. AND.
WHAT THEY DO IS THEY CONTRACT
WITH THEIR SUPPLIER AND SHE
MENTIONED THAT THAT THEY HAVE A
CONTRACT THAT IS IN PLACE? THAT
TALKS ABOUT THE GOALS OF THEIR
COMPANY AND SO THIS DOES NOT
COME UP FOR THEM BECAUSE IT'S
SOMETHING THAT IT IS AN
AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE.
SO IT'S IT'S A NON ISSUE BECAUSE
IT'S A DEAL THAT THEY HAVE WITH
THEIR SUPPLIERS.
THE RICHIE SAYING THAT AFTER
TWENTY TWENTY THREE.
WHEN THE THE SUNSET. GOES OFF
AND IT'S THE SAME NGREDIENTS AT
LEAST THAT'S HOW I READ THE
STAFF REPORTED ITS ANY OF THESE
INGREDIENTS AND LESS IT'S THE T.
S. C. OR FTA ARE THERE SOME.
GOVERNMENT ENTITY DOING IT JUST
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
THERE'S A. AND YOU WANT TO COVER
WELL.
THE BILL IS FORWARD LOOKING AS
YOU CAN SEE SO THERE ARE
CURRENTLY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
INGREDIENTS ON THE MARKET THAT
WOULD ALREADY BE ALLOWED.
WE THINK THAT THAT THAT THE
SITUATION THAT IS IDENTIFIED
WOULD BE SO UNLIKELY.
TO HAPPEN BUT. IT.
IT WITH A SPECIALLY WHEN
COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT AS I
HAVE SEEN IN TOXICOLOGY THERE
ARE MORE AND MORE ALTERNATIVES
BEING ACCEPTED. AND SO THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT SOMETHING WOULD.
YOU KNOW SIX OR SEVEN YEARS FROM
NOW STILL HAVE TO BE TESTED ON
ANIMALS IS FAIRLY LOW. IT BUT I
GUESS THE EUROPEANS
DECIDED THAT THAT WAS APPROVED
CHAIR HE'S IF THAT. WHILE THE
OPPORTUNITY MILD EXAMPLE
OCCURRED YOU NOT GONNA PUNISH
THE PERSON WHO'S OPERATING IN
CALIFORNIA OR IN EUROPEAN UNION
AND THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT
TESTING THEIR PRODUCTS BUT THAT
INGREDIENT. IS BEING TESTED
THAT'S THE TRIGGER THAT THAT
THIS SEEMS TO BE.
THE MORE FULLY UNFAIR FOR THE
PERSON WHO'S TRYING TO COMPLY
WITH THIS LAW THAT JUST HAPPENS
HAVE AN INGREDIENT THAT.
SOMEBODY WENT TO CHINA AND IS
SET TESTING ANIMALS ON IT. LET'S
JUST SO THAT CHINA IS SO
THERE'S.
THERE WAS FIRST OF ALL THAT THE
IN THE ANALYSIS IS.
THERE THE COMMITTEE DID ASK FOR
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THIS CHINA
EXEMPTION AND THE OPPOSITION WAS
ON ABLE TO PRESENT THAT IN
ENGLISH ARE IN ANY. FASHION SO
WE HAVE TO GO OFF OF WHAT WE'VE
HEARD AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS
THERE'S FOR ANIMAL TEST IN CHINA
THAT ARE REQUIRED. AND LESS YOU
MANUFACTURE IN CHINA THEN NAY
WAY THAT TWO OF THOSE TESTS HAVE
BEEN.
APPROVED AS NINE ANIMAL TEST SO
WHERE THE CHINESE ARE GOING IS
AWAY FROM ANIMAL TESTING SO WHEN
WE LOOK FORWARD TO TAT THREE
YEARS FROM NOW THAT THIS GETS
IMPLEMENTED. AND WITH ALL THE
INGREDIENTS THAT ARE OUT THERE
NOW AND ALL THE INGREDIENTS TO
CALM.
AND CHINA COULD BE. THEIR LAST
TWO TESTS COULD BE DONE AWAY
WITH AND THAT'S THIS WOULD BE A
COMPLETE NON ISSUE THE WHOLE
WORLD IS GOING IN THIS
DIRECTION.
SORRY VERY GOOD ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS I ALSO WANT TO MENTION
A LITTLE FRUSTRATION WE WERE
TOLD THERE SAYS CHINA AND.
.
EXEMPTION OR THAT THEY'RE THE
EACH YOU KNOW DOCUMENTS IN
CHINESE.
WE WERE NEVER GIVEN THE ED
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE
THAT WITH ALL THE MONEY THAT
THIS INDUSTRY GENERATES WITH ALL
OF THE LEGAL.
THE PEOPLE POWER IT HAS THAT
THEY COULDN'T ACTUALLY TRANSLATE
THIS FOR US AND AND THAT'S THE
KIND OF THING THAT.
REALLY I THINK CREATES HOME
SERIES CREDIBILITY GAP SO.
I AM GOING TO TAKE THE POSITION
THIS ISN'T EVEN A PROBLEM
BECAUSE WE HAVE NO PROOF THAT IT
IS OTHER THAN IN CHINESE AND.
AND THE INDUSTRY REFUSE TO
PROVIDE US
TELLING US THAT COULDN'T DO IT
AND I JUST THINK THAT IS JUST.
JUST REALLY A FAR FETCHED.
VERY DIFFICULT TO AN
EXPLANATION.
SO I'M GONNA JUST IT BIG ASSUME
THAT THAT CHINA PROBLEM DOESN'T
EXIST BECAUSE WE GET WE HAVE NO
PROOF OF IT THINKING AND THEY'VE
REFUSED TO GIVE US THAT PROVE.
BUT THAT BEING SAID.
WOULD YOU RESPOND OF SENATOR TO
THE QUESTION ABOUT THE EUROPEAN
UNION ISSUE.
AND I DO AND WHY YOU ARE I HAVE
MOVED THIS FURTHER. AND I DON'T
CHANGE TOO WRONG THING BUT IT
SEEMED TO BE IS SORT OF A THREAT
A CONSISTENT THEME THAT THEY
WERE CONCERNED THAT. THEY AGREED
TO EVERYTHING WOULD BE IN
AGREEMENT WITH THE FOLLOWING THE
EUROPEAN UNION PROCESS BUT THAT
YOU HAVE MOVED THE.
THE NEEDLE TOO FAR FROM THAT.
IF YOU WOULD.
I'M Y. THINK LOOK WHAT WE SEE
WORLDWIDE IS THAT MOST OF THE
ANIMAL TESTING THAT TAKES PLACE.
IS PART OF THIS LOOPHOLE. WITHIN
THE YEAR BILL.
SO.
A BILL THAT DIDN'T TAKE THAT
INTO ACCOUNT AND THAT DIDN'T
MOVE THE BALL.
THE FORWARD IN AND IS MORE
PROGRESSIVE.
.
WOULDN'T HAVE AS AND THE FACT
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO WE'RE
BASICALLY WE'RE SAYING IS THE E.
YOU.
COULD SITUATION CONTRACT
WHATEVER IT DID SAID RULING OR
ITS THAT I ALLOWED THIS TO CHINA
EXEMPTION OKAY SO IT IT ALLOWS A
TRYING EXEMPTION YOU'RE SAYING
THAT THAT CREATES A HUGE HOLE.
AND EFFECTIVELY NEUTRALIZES THE
IMPACTS OF THE BILL ARE OR OF
THE EFFORT OKAY THINK THAT'S
WHAT ALL HE NEEDED TO KNOW.
SENATOR MOYLAN THANK YOU ACT I
THINK YOU ACCESS
SURE BUT MAYBE WE GET A RESPONSE
BECAUSE. IT IS THE CRITICAL
POINT IS THIS HE YOU EXEMPTION
AND TRYING TO. UNDERSTAND THAT I
GREW. UP SURE I DON'T SPEAK FOR.
PC PC BUT.
I WILL SAY IT WE DON'T LOOK AT
IT AS A AS A LOOPHOLE AYE IF YOU
CHOOSE TO SELL INTO CHINA YOU
ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE YOUR
PRODUCT TO THE CHINESE
GOVERNMENT THE CHINESE
GOVERNMENT. HAS IT TESTED BY A
LAB NOT THE MANUFACTURE. AND
THEN WE DO NOT YOU TAKE THAT
DATA WE CANNOT TAKE THAT DATA
AND USE IT TO SUBSTANTIATE OUR
PRODUCT FOR SALE IN THE EEO. SO
DISC TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
SYSTEMS WE COMPLY WITH THE U. WE
MEET THEIR REGULATION WE SELL
OUR PRODUCTS THERE IF WE DECIDE
TO TAKE THAT SME PRODUCT AND
SELL INTO CHINA WE FOLLOW THEIR
RULES. AND WE DO IT WE ARE
REQUIRED TO DO IN CHINA.
THERE YOU GO YOU'RE GIVEN A
CHOICE THEN YOU THEATER SOUND.
OR YOU CAN SELL IN CHINA.
UNDER THIS BILL AND YOU CAN'T.
DO BOTH WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO
ABOUT HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT THE
ECONOMICS OF EITHER DECISION
ARE.
I DON'T I CAN JUST SAY THAT
CHINA IS A MUCH BIGGER MARKET IN
CALIFORNIA YEAH. AND IT MAY GET
SOME TARIFFS AND SO WE'LL NEVER
KNOW WHETHER IT'S GOING TO WORK
OR NOT SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT
THE. KIND OF PROBLEMATIC NATURE
OF TRYING TO DO THAT ANALYSIS AT
THE MOMENT BUT CAN YOU RESPOND
TO THAT IS THAT AN ACCURATE
STATEMENT THERE BE TWO DIFFERENT
SYSTEMS YOU COULD SELL. EITHER
IN CALIFORNIA. WITH WITH NON
ANIMAL PRODUCTS OR YOU HAVE TO
SELL IN CHINA WITH ANIMAL
PRODUCT OF WITH ANIMAL TESTING
I'M NOT QUITE SURE I UNDERSTAND
THAT DISTINCTION.
I'M NOT A MANUFACTURER IN STOCK
BUT THERE COULD BE OTHER
POTENTIAL WAYS TO AVOID THE
SITUATION.
WHAT IS THE SITUATION WHY IS IT
EITHER OR MAKE IT BUT IT'S NOT
KNOWN OFTEN WHEN* HIM RIGHT
HERE IT? WHITE WORDY SAY IT'S AN
EITHER OR SITUATION WELL UNDER
THIS BILL I THINK IT WOULD BE
CREATE AN EITHER OR SITUATION
THE OTHER OPTION IS TO
MANUFACTURE WITH IN CHINA. SO
THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ANIMAL
TESTS THAT IS HOW THEY'VE SET UP
THEIR SYSTEM. TO INCENTIVIZE
MANUFACTURING WITHIN THE COUNTRY
VERSES IMPORTING. THEY'VE SAID
IF YOU. MANUFACTURE HERE EACH
NOT ANIMAL HOUSE IF YOU'RE
IMPORTING A PRODUCT YOU HAVE TO
ANIMAL HOUSE.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY PROOF OF
THAT.
IS THAT THE CHINA DOCUMENTATION
THAT WE CAN'T SEEM TO GET
TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH.
BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY
SENSE YOU KNOW I THINK ANOTHER
SOLUTION IS TO HAVE DIFFERENT
KINDS OF PRODUCTS SO YOU WOULD
HAVE PRODUCTS THAT YOU'VE
DECIDED ARE FOR IN THE MARKET IN
CHINA. AND PRODUCTS FOR THE REST
OF THE ENTIRE WORLD WHICH IS
FROM MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION
WHICH IS WHAT SHE SAID ACTUALLY.
I SORRY UNDERSTOOD OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS SENATORS
STIR.
THANKS.
.
LOOK I I'M I'M SENSITIVE TO THE
THE BUYING THAT. MANUFACTURES
MAY FIND THEMSELVES IN HERE BUT.
I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE BILL
TODAY. BECAUSE.
WE DIDN'T PUT.
OURSELVES IN THIS SITUATION THE
CHINESE GVERNMENT IS TRYING TO
PLAY. TRADE WAR GAMES WITH OUR
IN STATE MANUFACTURERS.
BUT.
ANIMAL CRUELTY SHOULDN'T BE THE
PRICE OF ADMISSION THERE
SO THE FACT THAT THEY'VE SET UP
THIS PARADIGM WHERE YOU HAVE TO
CHOOSE.
I KNOW THAT THE PASSAGES BILL IS
PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TO PROP THE
PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
AND OTHERS TO GET TO GO TO THE
CHINESE GOVERNMENT TO SAY YOU'RE
PUTTING US IN A SPOT BUT.
OUR STATE GOVERNMENT DIDN'T COME
UP WITH IS EXEMPTION IN THE U.
S. GOVERNMENT DIDN'T COME OVER
THIS EXEMPTION SO. YOU KNOW
THAT'S MY CHALLENGE ALL THAT
SAID. I AM SENSITIVE TO THE TO
THE ECONOMIC BURDENS OF HAVING
TO MAKE TWO KINDS OF PRODUCTS.
BUT WE'VE GOT A LEAD IN THIS
STATE I MEAN THAT'S THAT'S OUR
DUTY HERE SO I I APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING THE BILL FOR TO BUT I I
I DO. IF THERE'S
IF THERE'S ANY WAY IT GOES THE
BILL MOVES FORWARD FOR FOUR
SCENES HE A OR PERSONAL CARE
PRODUCTS IS TO GET US MORE
DOCUMENTATION ON THIS CHINESE
ISSUE AND TRY TO ACTUALLY. IF WE
CAN ADVOCATE EVEN TO OUR FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT OR TO THE STATE
DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY STARTING
GAUGE AT A HIGHER LEVEL IN THIS
I I'M I'M ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED
TO DOING THAT AND. IF IT MEANS
YOU KNOW. TAKING A TRIP OUT TO
CHINA AND HIM WITH WITH THE
AUTHOR THE BILL AND START TO
WORK ON THIS ISSUE AND HIGHLIGHT
THIS.
THIS SORT OF ONE UNTENABLE BIND
THERE TRY TO PUT OUR
MANUFACTURES AND I'M I'M HAPPY
TO DO THAT SO WITH THAT I'D MOVE
THE BILL BREAK IT AND I'D LIKE
TO POINT OUT WE DID ASK FOR
THESE REGULATIONS.
THAT WE GOT A FIVE HUNDRED PAGE
DOCUMENT ALL IN CHINESE. AND WE
WERE TOLD WAS GOING TO COST
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO
TRANSLATE IT. TOUCHES SMELLS
VERY BAD TO ME.
IF THIS REALLY IS A PROBLEM AND
IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE
LOGICALLY UNLESS IT SHOWS.
PLAYING TRADE GAMES AND WHAT
HAVE YOU BUT I WOULD LIKE TO
INVITE.
IF YOU IF YOU ACTUALLY HAVE BY
DOCUMENTATION THAT IS LEGIBLE
ANNA A COMPREHENSIBLE IN ENGLISH
THAT SUPPORTS THEIR POSITION I
THINK THAT. MANY OF US WOULD BE
VERY OPEN TO TRYING TO RESOLVE
IT BUT WITHOUT THAT.
WE KEVIN A MOTION BY TO MOVE
THE BILL OF THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. JACKSON AYE JACKSON AYE
MORE LOCK.
ANDERSON. ANDERSON NO HERTZBERG
HERTZBERG AYE MONNING. MONNING
AYE STERN STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI AYE FIVE TO ONE THAT
BILL IS OUT.
THE MOTION BY SENATOR STERN OF
THE BILL IS OUT AND.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAINST
LET'S SEE A SENATOR HUESO.
DURING.
AND I
THE WINDOW YOU KNOW WHICH I GIVE
YOU A WAY TO GET MORE.
THERE'S NOTHING.
NUMBER THREE AFRAID OF
EVERYTHING WHICH HAD WHEN.
HUESO CENTER HUESO I THINK IT
SENATOR WIENERS TURN MY
APOLOGIES.
ARE YOU OKAY ALRIGHT SENATOR
HUESO.
GREAT SENATE HUESO GO AHEAD
TYPE.
FILE ITEM NINETEEN.
BUT HAVING BEEN IN CHAIR GOOD
EVENING SENATOR HUESO EVENING
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS.
AND I'M GONNA.
THE PREVIOUS MY COMMENTS.
JUST OUT AND UNDERSTANDING.
THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THIS
CAN
IT'S HERE TODAY I.
I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC.
TOUGH OF ALL I I WANT TO.
A STATE THAT I'M COMMITTED TO
WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE STAFF TO
CRAFT.
THE AMENDMENTS NECESSARY TO MEET
THE CONCERNS ARTICULATED PAGE
NINE.
SO A A YOU ARE ACCEPTING THOSE
AS AUTHORS YES I AM ITEMS HAVE.
AND I JUST SPOKE ONE A STATE
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT BILL THAT
GETS TO.
KIDDING ACCESS TO TO JUSTICE
FOR EVERYONE IN CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA'S WE KNOW IS WAS ONE
OF THE MOST DIVERSE STATES IN
THE COUNTRY. FOUGHT WITH PEOPLE
IN OUR POPULATION TO SPEAK OVER
TWO HUNDRED TWENTY LANGUAGES.
ABOUT FORTY FOUR PERCENT OF
CALIFORNIANS.
SPEAK A LANGUAGE OTHER THAN
ENGLISH AT HOME AS A PRIMARY
LANGUAGE.
AND THAT GETS TO HOW DO YOU LIKE
IT JUSTICE IN OUR COURT SYSTEM
IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN THE DIALOGUE IN A
COURTROOM ENVIRONMENT.
THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE A
TRANSLATION SERVICES AT THE.
SMALL CLAIMS LEVEL THAT MAKES US
SMALL CLAIM OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THE
COURT TO APPOINT A CERTIFIED
CORPORATE REGISTERED INTERPRETER
AT ALL AUTHORIZES COURTS.
TWO POINT CERTIFIED REGISTERED
INTERPRETERS AND SMUGGLING
PROCEEDINGS.
IT PROVIDES JUDICIAL OFFICERS
WITH DISCRETION TO ALLOW
LITIGANT TO OPT FOR THE USE OF A
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER IF AN
ATTEMPT TO SECURE A CERTIFIED
REGISTERED MORE PROVISIONALLY
QUALIFIED INTERPRETED HER IS
NOT.
ACCESS FULL AND ALSO ESTABLISHES
STANDARDS BY WHICH TEMPORARY
INTERPRETERS
COULD BE UTILIZED TO SMALL CLAIM
PROCEEDINGS. WE HAVE WITH US.
AVAILABLE TRUST ANSWER
QUESTIONS BUT WE HAVE AND THE
LEVON BAUM.
REPRESENTING THE JUD JUDICIAL
COUNCIL CALIFORNIA LEXI HOWARD
THE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OF
CALIFORNIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION.
AND OF COURSE WE ARE WE ARE
WORKING WITH OUR SUPREME COURSE
JUSTICE TINO QUAY AT ON THIS
BILL AND THESE ARE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE COME
OUT OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL. FOR
HOW TO IMPROVE ACCESS
TO TO JUSTICE AND STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU CENTER
HUESO.
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH
PLACE I'LL BE BRIEF AND EVEN
BOMB ON BEHALF OF THE JUDICIAL
COUNCIL THANK YOU SENATOR HUESO.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
THE COUNCIL IS PROUD TO SPONSOR
S. B. ELEVEN FIFTY FIVE AND
HERE'S WHY. THE BILL DOES THREE
THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT AT
THEM AND THAT MOVES THE BRANCH
AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CLOSER TO COURT SYSTEM WHERE
EVERYONE WITH THE LANGUAGE NEED.
CAN BE CONFIDENT THEY WILL HAVE
JUSTICE IN A LANGUAGE THEY CAN
UNDERSTAND.
FIRST UNDER THE BILL SMALL
CLAIMS WILL BE CORRECTLY
CONSIDERED COURT PROCEEDINGS
UNDER THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
SECOND UNDER THE BILL THE COURT
WOULD CLEARLY BE PERMITTED TO
APPOINT A CERTIFIED OR
REGISTERED INTERPRETER. RATHER
THAN AS THE LAW CURRENTLY STANDS
APPOINTING ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL
NOT AN ATTORNEY TO HELP THE
PARTY WITH INTERPRETER NEEDS.
AND THIRD UNDER THE BILL IF THE
COURT FINDS THAT A CERTIFIED OR
REGISTERED OR PROVISIONALLY
QUALIFIED INTERPRETER IS NOT
AVAILABLE IN THE NEEDED
LANGUAGE.
THE COURT ANALYTIC GET WILL HAVE
OPTIONS
PERHAPS DUE LEYVA PROCEEDING
UNTIL QUALIFIED INTERPRETERS
LOCATED. PERHAPS OF THE LEAD
AGAIN IS TIRED OF DELAYED
HEARINGS ALLOW THE USE OF
ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL AS A
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER AS IS THE
CASE UNDER EXISTING LAW.
AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY
WHEN WE CAN PROVIDE QUALIFY.
LANGUAGE ACCESS SERVICES IN ALL
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS WHICH IS
THE SECOND OF EIGHT GOALS IN OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN FOR LANGUAGE
ACCESS IN THE CALIFORNIA CODE
CHORDS.
ADOPTED BY THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL
IN JANUARY TWENTY FIFTEEN.
WE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR
ATTENTION TO THIS ISSUE AND THE
WILLINGNESS OF SENATOR WESO AND
OTHERS TO EMBRACE QUALITY
PROGRESS.
ALONG THE WAY THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
NEXT WITNESS GOOD EVIDENCE A
GOOD EVENING. MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS LEXI HOWARD ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA JUDGES
ASSOCIATION WE APPRECIATE
SENATOR WESSELS EFFORTS IN THIS
AREA. WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF
EFFORTS TO.
GIVE ACCESS TO JUSTICE THROUGH
LANGUAGE ACCESS WE UNDERSTAND
THE PEOPLE WHO CAN'T PARTICIPATE
IN THE JUSTICE PROCESS. BECAUSE
OF LANGUAGE BARRIERS ARE.
DENIED ACCESS AND WE'RE
SYMPATHETIC WE WANT TO MOVE THIS
FROM A. TEAR EIGHT AND THE
INTERPRETER.
SORT OF HIERARCHY TO SOMETHING
THAT GETS MORE PRACTICAL RESULTS
WE RECOGNIZE IT'S NOT PERFECT
WERE TRYING TO MOVE IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION TO INCREASE ACCESS.
WITHOUT WEEK RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THINK YOU
VERY MUCH.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. ANY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
ALRIGHT SEEING NONE WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON OR GOOD EVENING
AGAIN TO GET THEIR RIGHTS COULD
GOOD EVENING TO WITNESSES PLEASE
TWO MINUTES EACH THANK YOU TO BE
VERY BRIEF.
BUT I'M CERTAIN BAKER FOR THE
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
CALIFORNIA A TRYING TO SQUAREMY
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE BILL WITH
THE PRESENTATION I JUST HEARD
BECAUSE IT ALL. SOUNDED VERY
GOOD PROVISION OF INTERPRETERS
TO PEOPLE WHO NEED THEM IN SMALL
CLAIMS PROCEEDINGS. AND YET
THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY. I DON'T
THINK WHAT THE BILL DOES. AND
THAT'S THE INTER THAT'S TO
READING. OF LANGUAGE OF RIGHTS
ADVOCATES IMMIGRANTS RIGHTS
ADVOCATE CIVIL RIGHTS ADVOCATES
AND THE INTERPRETERS UNION SO
YOU'LL HEAR FROM SOME FOLKS
TODAY. SO THE SHORT VERSION OF
WHAT I WANT TO TELL YOU IS THAT
THE.
STATE AND FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS
LAWS. REQUIRE THE COURT
INTERPRETERS BE PROVIDED.
IN EVERY PROCEEDING.
WE'RE.
WITHOUT ADMITS IT'S NOT
OPTIONAL.
JUDICIAL COUNCIL POLICY
CURRENTLY AGREES WITH THAT RULE
IN MOST COURTS ARE CURRENTLY
PROVIDING INTERPRETERS OVER
EIGHTY PERCENT OF THE COURTS.
EXCEPT FOR A SMALL HANDFUL ARE
ARE A HANDFUL OF SMALL COURTS.
FOUND THIS BILL UNFORTUNATELY
SAYS THAT INTERPRETERS ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED AND IF
THEY ARE PROVIDED IT DOESN'T
HAVE TO BE SOMEONE WHO'S
QUALIFIED. UNFORTUNATELY THINK
THAT BILL WOULD REVERSE THE
PROGRESS THAT THE JUDICIAL
COUNCIL HAS MADE UNDER THE
LEADERSHIP OF JUSTICE QUITE ARE.
I'M A PRIVILEGE TO SERVE ON THAT
A TASK FORCE. ADAM AND THE TASK
FORCE HAS INDEED BEEN MAKING
PROGRESS
AROUND.
BUT THE. THE LAW IS VERY CLEAR.
THAT AND TROOPERS ARE REQUIRED
THEY ARE NOT AS THIS BILL WOULD
SAY OPTIONAL OR DISCRETIONARY.
AND THAT IT IS A QUALIFY
CONTRIBUTOR WHO MUST BE PROVIDED
NOT.
BUT ON A TEMPORARY INTERPRETER
AND. THIS DEFINITION OF
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER ARM PIT.
WOULD NOT FIT YOUR AYE I THINK
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT AN
INTERPRETER IS.
AND THE SAME WAY THAT THIS
COMMITTEE STRUGGLES TO
UNDERSTAND AND DOT DOCUMENT IN
CHINESE AND THAT TOO AROUND TOO
CRAFT RESEMBLE POLITICS. THE
COURTS NEED INTERPRETERS TO
UNDERSTAND.
IN THOSE SECURE.
APPRECIATE TEST ONE NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE EIGHTEEN MADAM CHAIR AND
SENATORS MY NAME IS JANET COULD
TAKE MUCH CERTIFIED COURT
INTERPRETER WITH THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
I'M ALSO REPRESENTING HERE
CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
INTERPRETERS CINDY INTERPRETER
KILLED OF AMERICA. I ALSO SIT ON
THE LANGUAGE TAX WINDOWS
ACTUALLY PART OF ALL THREE INTO
A LANGUAGE TAXES WHEN THEY SIT
ON THE TASK FORCE AND ALSO ON
THE. INTERPRETERS.
EQUIPPED FOR CALIFORNIA.
THE COUNCIL OF INTERPRETER THE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND I
ACTUALLY WAS PART OF THE AUTHOR
READ THE WHOLE PHRASE TEMPERING
INTERPRETER AND THE WAY THE BLL
IS WRITTEN DOES NOT REFLECT ITS
REPORT REGIONAL INTENT. NOW A
LOT OF THE ABOVE.
LITIGANTS THAT COULD SMALL
CLAIMS ARE VERY OF OUR PEOPLE
THAT ARE INDIGENT THAT REALLY
CANNOT AFFORD TOURNEY SO THEY
USED THAT OUTLET TO ACTUALLY
FIND SOME TYPE OF JUSTICE.
AND NOT ALL BLOWING OR GIVING
THEM THE DISK OF THAT COURT
DISCRETION TO JUST APPOINT A
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER WILL
ACTUALLY. RESULT IN A
MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
OFTENTIMES I UNDERSTAND THE
COURTS THE JUDGES HAVE A HIGH
IMPACT CALENDAR THEY WERE SWORN
TO GET CASES MOVING.
THERE IS ALREADY A REMEDY.
CALIFORNIA COURTS ALREADY
EMPLOYS OVER NINE HUNDRED INTER.
EMPLOYEES PLUS ANOTHER NINE
HUNDRED INTERPRETERS THAT ARE
AVAILABLE TO CONTRACT AND
USUALLY THERE'S ABOUT THIRTY
TOOK TO TEN CONTRACTED. TOWARD
IF NOT MORE.
MANY LITIGANTS ARE MORE THAN
WILLING TO WAIT.
A COUPLE HOURS COMBAT. THE GUN
IN THE AFTERNOON SO THEY CAN
HAVE THEIR CASE WITH THE
CERTIFIED INTERPRETER. A
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER HOWEVER IS
A NON INTERPRET STUNNING NON
PROFESSION IS JUST SOMEBODY WHO
HAS SOME TYPE OF BI LINGUAL
SKILLS. ALISON UNCERTIFIED
INTERPRET I CAN TELL YOU.
SMALL CLAIMS AS POLLY THE MOST
CHALLENGING.
OF A BOOK CAPILLARY FOR EVEN
CERTIFIED INTERPRETERS
WE CAN'T LET AGAINST BETTER
SPECIALIST LIKE IN PLUMBING IN
MECHANICS ELECTRICIANS COULD WE
GIVEN FREE OF VOCABULARY
SOMETIMES EVEN INTERPRETERS.
HAVE TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING WHAT
THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY EVEN IN
THEIR IN IN THEIR NATIVE
LANGUAGE JUST TO GET A GRASP ON
IT I CAN JUST IMAGINE ENOUGH
ACTUALLY WITNESSED THE TROUBLE.
THAT SOME NON INTERPERSONAL IN
THIS CASE THERE BEING LABELED AS
TEMPER INTERPERSONAL HALF.
NOW THE ORIGINAL INTENT FOR
INTERPRETING INTERPRETERS WAS
JUST FOR A BRIEF ROUTINE MATTER
WAS ONLY TO CONTINUE THE CASE
OUT TO GET AN INTERPRETER FOR
RARE AND EXOTIC LANGUAGES. BUT
NOT FOR THE LANGUAGES THAT WE
ALREADY HALF THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF YOU
COME FORWARD NAME AND
AFFILIATION PLEASE.
AND TO AN INNOVATION ACTIVISM
JUST CALIFORNIAN OPPOSITION
THANK YOU.
TREVORROW WITH A MILD OF THE
MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE
AND EDUCATIONAL FUND IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION HURT
LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE
DIETS.
ANY QUESTIONS.
SENATOR MONNING.
I JUST LIKE TO GIVE THE AUTHOR
IN YOUR SUPPORT AN OPPORTUNITY
TO RESPOND TO THAT.
THESE DIFFERENCES AS I HEAR THE
OPPOSITION.
SMALL CLAIMS LITIGANTS CURRENTLY
HAVE A RIGHT TO A CERTIFIED.
CORD INTERPRETER BEING PROVIDED.
AND.
IF WE UNDERSTAND THEIR
INTERPRETATION OF YOUR BILL.
IT IT WOULD POTENTIALLY A ROAD
THAT.
LEVEL OF COMPETENCY
INTERPRETATION.
ALLOWING A TEMPORARY INTERPRETER
AGNES AB TWENTY HERE AND AND WE
ARE FOCUSING IN IN THE SMALL
CLAIMS ARENA IN ON THIS BILL AND
FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND THERE
ARE.
A THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THERE
AND NOR NOR THEY PROVIDED AND
WE'RE.
THAT'S THE REASON I TOOK ON THIS
BILL.
TO TO FOCUS AT PROVIDING THAT
SERVICE IN THE SMALL CLAIMS
ARENA WHICH IS NOT.
CURRENTLY.
WHERE IT'S BEEN PROVIDED?
AND IF I IF YOU WOULD. GET SURE
SO TO TO ADD ON TO WHAT THE
SENATOR SAID.
CURRENTLY UNDER THE CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE IF A COURT
DETERMINES THAT A PARTY DOES NOT
SPEAKER UNDERSTAND ENGLISH
SUFFICIENTLY TO COMPREHEND THE
PROCEEDINGS OR GIVE TESTIMONY.
AND NEEDS ASSISTANCE IN SO DOING
THE COURT MAY APPOINT AN
INTERPRETER TO INTERPRET FOR
THAT PARTY.
EXCUSE ME THAT'S OUR
RECOMMENDATION THAT COMPREHENDED
PROCEEDINGS OR GIVE TESTIMONY
THE COURT MAY PERMIT ANOTHER
INDIVIDUAL OTHER THAN AN
ATTORNEY TO ASSIST THE PARTY
WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO
TAKE OUT. ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL
OTHER THAN AN ATTORNEY HOW WE
WANT TO INSERT THE LANGUAGE MAY
APPOINT AN INTERPRETER FOR THAT
PARTY THROUGH ANNA CLARIFY THAT
ACTUALLY THIS IS WHAT THE COURT
SHOULD BE DOING.
WHAT IF IT'S WOULD YOU BE
COMFORTABLE FOR THE SAID?
APPOINTED A CERTIFIED ATTORNEY.
WELL.
.
SO THE IDEA IS THAT NOT WOULD
STAND SO THE NEXT SECTION THAT
WE WANT TO ADD IS IF THE COURT
MAKES A FINDING THAT A CERTIFIED
OR REGISTERED COURT INTERPRETER.
OR AN INTERPRETER PROVISIONALLY
QUALIFIED IS NOT AVAILABLE AT
THE FIRST HEARING THE CASE THE
COURT MAY CONSIDER POSTPONING SO
I
THE PRESUMPTION IS. THE COURT
WOULD ALWAYS LOOK FOR A
CERTIFIED OR REGISTERED ABOARD
PROVISIONALLY QUALIFIED
INTERPRETER.
pCOURT LIKE LOS ANGELES WHERE
WHERE I PRACTICE MANY YEARS AGO.
THERE ARE MANY INTERPRETERS BUT
IN A SMALL COURT LIKE ALPINE ARE
MODOC OR CENTER. THEY MAY HAVE
LESS ACCESS AND SO WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS PROVIDE A WAY
BETWEEN THE BENCH AND THE
LITIGANTS SINCE THERE AREN'T
ATTORNEYS IN THOSE CASES. TO
ADDRESS NEEDS AND BE.
FAIR.
AND I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF THAT
THE CONCERN IS.
DO YOU A ROAD TO THE RIGHT OF
THE NON ENGLISH SPEAKER.
BY HAVING A FAMILY MEMBER.
DESIGNATED OR SOMEBODY WHO'S
NOT.
QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE THEM FULL.
COMPETENT HER PETITION. BUT I'M
I'M CURIOUS DOES THE COMMITTEE
KNOW IF
SMALL CLAIMS LITIGANTS.
IF THERE'S A REQUIREMENT TO
PROVIDE. INTERPRETATION THERE IS
NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME THAT'S
WHAT WHAT THIS BILL IS TRYING TO
DO. I BELIEVE CONTRARY TO.
WHAT?
IS IS POSITED HERE AND PERHAPS
WERE MISUNDERSTANDING BUT WHAT
DID MY UNDERSTANDING IS I THINK
IT'S FAIRLY.
ACCURATE.
IS THAT RIGHT NOW LITIGANTS IN
SMALL CLAIMS COURTS DO NOT HAVE
THE RIGHT TO HAVE. A A YEAH IN
INTERPRETER COURT APPOINTED.
COMPASS YOU.
BUDGET WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO
DO IS TO CREATE THAT GIVE THE
COURT DISCRETION.
TO APPOINT TO EITHER AN
INTERPRETER OR SOMEONE AS A
TEMPORARY INTERPRETER AND THAT'S
WHERE THE DISCUSSION IS GOING
TEMPORARY BECAUSE. AS WAS
POINTED OUT THERE ARE AREAS
WHERE WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT
OF INTERPRETERS AND THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF LANGUAGES THAT ARE NOT
THE PRIMARY. LANGUAGES THE WHERE
THERE MAY NOT BE.
SOMEONE AVAILABLE SO RATHER THAN
JUST
CONTINUE THE MATTER IN HOPES
THAT THEY COULD FIND SOMEONE.
TRYING TO SET UP A PROCESS
WHERE WE CAN EXPAND WHAT WHAT IS
POSSIBLE. CA AND TRY TO
ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE WHERE THEY'RE
JUST SIMPLY ARE NOT INTERPRETERS
THAT SPEAK THAT LANGUAGE.
I APPRECIATE THAT AND I THINK
THAT'S.
THE NOBLE OBJECTIVE OF THE
AUTHOR ON.
I'M WONDERING.
HAVE THERE BEEN EFFORTS
TO REQUIRED TO MANDATE.
CORD PROVIDED INTERPRETERS FOR
SMALL CLAIMS LITIGANTS.
SAME USER HAVE WE TRIED THAT
LEGISLATIVELY.
I DON'T THINK WELL I THINK THERE
ARE TWO REASONS DOESN'T
NECESSARILY WORK ONE IS BECAUSE.
THE COURT SIR DON'T HAVE THE
RESOURCES AND THEY'VE. BEEN
THERE SO THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO DO
IT. AND THE SECOND IS THERE'S A
REAL ARGUMENT ABOUT WHETHER
THERE ARE PEOPLE AVAILABLE WHO
WOULD QUALIFY IN SOME OF THESE.
OTHER LANGUAGES IF YOU DID
REQUIRE IT AND PAID FOR IT.
YOU COULD SCHEDULE THE CALENDAR
TO ACCOMMODATE SO THE PERSON
DOESN'T COME AND GET TOLD
THERE'S NO INTERPRETER YOU
SCHEDULE IT WHEN THE
INTERPRETERS CANNABIS NEVER AND
THE THAT.
THAT THING IT'S EVENTUALLY AND
AS A STATE WERE HAVING A HARD
TIME KEEPING.
OUR COURTS OR OPEN TO BEGIN WITH
SO WE WANT WE WANT TO TRY TO
FIND.
ARE REASONABLE PATH WAY TO
ENSURE THAT PEOPLE THAT DO GET
INTO A COURTROOM SETTING.
I HAVE SOME KIND OF
INTERPRETATION AVAILABLE AND AND
WERE TRYING TO MAKE IT AS HIGH
QUALITY AS POSSIBLE BY MAKING A
REQUIREMENT THAT YOU CAN'T JUST
WALK IN ONE DAY SAY I'M AN
INTERPRETER.
YOU HAVE TO OF OTHERS THERE'S A
THERE'S A PROCESS TO ESTABLISH
YOURSELF. AS AN INTERPRETER AND
THE COURTS WOULD DO THAT. THANK
YOU THINK YOU'RE.
CRIED ANY OTHER QUESTIONS SEEN
NON IS OUR MOTION.
ALRIGHT MOTION BY SENATOR
MONNING.
A WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
SENATOR HUESO. UP.
YOU KNOW THERE THERE'S NO DOUBT
THAT THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE
DONE IN THIS AREA WE DO NEED
MORE PROFESSIONAL. INTERPRETERS
TO BE CERTIFIED IN MORE
LANGUAGES AND. AND MORE FUNDING
TO BECOME AVAILABLE TO FUND OUR
COURTS THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT
THAT.
BUT THIS IS A.
A BILL THAT WORKS IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION THAT WILL GET US TO A
BETTER PLACE.
AND AND WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING TO
MOVE OUR STATE BETTER DIRECTION
AND I HOPE I CAN COUNTY SUPPORT
FOR THE SUPPORT MEASURE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH THE MOTION
IS DO PASS AS AMENDED TO SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. JACKSON AYE JACKSON AYE
MORLOCK.
BLOCK AYE ANDERSON. ANDERSON AYE
HERTZBERG.
MONNING. MONNING AYE STERN.
ARE STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI.
LIKELY. BILL HAS FIVE VOTES BUT
WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN
THANK YOU SENATOR HUESO AND NOW
SENATOR WIENER.
AND SENATOR WIENER YOU HAVE A
COUPLE ITEMS WHY DON'T WE START
WITH THE HALF.
WITH C. THE EASY ONE.
FILE ITEM THREE.
S. B..
A TWENTY TWO AND I'M BEING
FACETIOUS.
I'M.
MATTER IF WE.
BUT MY LET'S WAIT JUST A SECOND
CENTER TELL THE PEOPLE EVEN WE
CAN
.
UPON RECONSIDERATION WHO WILL
START WITH THE SHORTER. OF
BILLS.
WHICH IS FILE ITEM THIRTEEN.
AND.
THAT FEEL.
IT IS S. B. NINE NINE. CO.
VERY GOOD SENATOR PLEASE PROCEED
AND WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH.
IF YOU WOULD.
A GOOD EVENING.
I THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. AND.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
I'M HERE DON'T START PRESENTING.
SP NINE NINETY.
TIES TO NINE NINE B. WILL HELP
ENSURE THAT I AYETRANSGENDER
AYE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN
CUSTODY OF. THE DEPARTMENT OF.
CORRECTIONS OR IN COUNTY JAIL.
WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO.
THEIR GENDER IDENTITY.
FOR FIRST NAME GENDER PRONOUN AN
HONORIFIC AND REQUIRE THAT THOSE
BE USED BY FACILITIES STAFF.
THAT'S TWO NINE NINE D. ALL SO.
WILL REQUIRE THAT INCARCERATED
INDIVIDUALS.
WHO ARE PLACED FOR MORE THAN
FIVE DAYS?
IN A SETTING OTHER THAN THE
GENERAL POPULATION I'M.
I DO TO THAT PERSON BEING AT
RISK FOR SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION OR
OTHER FORMS OF HARASSMENT.
TO ENSURE THEY HAVE EQUAL ACCESS
TO PROGRAMMING WORK
OPPORTUNITIES.
THAT SAME AS ARE PROVIDED TO
INDIVIDUALS IN THE GENERAL
POPULATION IN OTHER WORDS PEOPLE
WHO WERE PLACED IN SOLITARY OR
OTHER SEPARATE.
SEGREGATED ENVIRONMENT BY NOT TO
DO THEIR OWN.
CONDUCT LA RECEIVE EQUAL ACCESS
TO SERVICES.
BUT TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS DO
NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY AYE IN OUR PRISON
JAIL SYSTEM.
TO AFFIRM THEIR GENDER IDENTITY.
THEIR PREFERRED FIRST NAME AND
SO FORTH.
MY CURRENT LAW DOES NOT HAVE ANY
REQUIREMENT THAT PEOPLE BE
REFERRED TO.
BY THEIR CORRECT SIDE GENDER
AND MEAN.
VISTA MEANS OF DIGNITY ANY
RACES THE AUTHENTIC IDENTITY OF
TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS.
THE I IN ADDITION.
LGBT
SCOTT PEOPLE AND WHO ARE
INCARCERATED IN PARTICULARLY.
TRANSGENDER PEOPLE WHO ARE
INCARCERATED TIME ARE ADDED
DRAMATICALLY HIGHER RISK OF.
VICTIMIZATION SEXUAL ASSAULT
OTHER FORMS OF ASSAULT THAN THE
GENERAL POPULATION UP BECAUSE OF
THAT HIGH IN RISK NON.
TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS IN
PARTICULAR BOMB ARE FREQUENTLY.
PLACED INTO A SEGREGATED
ENVIRONMENTS SUCH A SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT.
FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION AS A
RESULT THEY DO NOT RCEIVE
ACCESS. TO SERVICES BECAUSE WE
WANT PEOPLE WHO ARE INCARCERATED
OUGHT TO.
HAVE ACCESS TO EDUCATIONAL AND
JOB AND OTHER HEALTH OTHER
SERVICES.
AS PART OF THE REHABILITATION
PROCESS AND THEIR OFTEN DENIED
THOSE SERVICES.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I IF
YOU ARE SEGREGATED UP FOR YOUR
OWN PROTECTION YOU CAN ACCESS
LEGAL SERVICES.
COLLEAGUES SP NINE NINE THE IS
AN IMPORTANT CIVIL RIGHTS A BILL
FOR A COMMUNITY AND I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. AYE WITH ME TODAY
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL ARE OUR CURRENT GREEN WHO'S
A POLICY COORDINATOR AT THE
TRENDS IN THE LAW CENTER. AND
JOE MICHAEL THE LEGISLATIVE
MANAGER AT EQUALITY CALIFORNIA I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE.
HI MY NAME IS KAREN GREEN ARE
YOU SHE HER HERS PRONOUNCE IN
THE POLICY CORNER TRANSMITTAL
CENTER AND I GOT APPEAR READY TO
TALK FOR AN HOUR ABOUT REQUIRING
TRAINS PEOPLE IN CORPORATE
BOARDS BUT I GUESS THE SOUNDS
PRETTY GOOD TO A HOT. AND.
YEAH SO WE DO A LOT OF WORK WITH
TRANS FOLKS WHO ARE INCARCERATED
AND AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE
WORK THAT THE LEGISLATURE DID
LAST YEAR I WAS IN ABOUT THREE
TEN.
MAKING NAME CHANGES
ENTERTAINERS MORE ACCESSIBLE TO
FOLKS ARE INCARCERATED. ITEM AND
THE WORK THAT POSTED LAST YEAR
WAS AND WHAT WENT ANY NINE.
ALONG ON BINARY GENDER MARKERS
ON ON IDENTITY DOCUMENTS THAT WE
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT STEPS
I MEAN WE'D LIKE TO CONTINUE
THAT WORK WITH YOU THIS YEAR I'M
TO RECOGNIZE IN A FIRM I HAD THE
DIGNITY OF INCARCERATED TRANS
PEOPLE ONCE MORE.
AND SO THERE'D THERE TOO COMMON
ISSUES THAT WE DEAL WITH WE
TALKED WITH OUR TRANS FOLKS ARE
INCARCERATED I'M SO ONE IS STAFF
NOT YOU CAN THAT WHILE MR DURING
THEM.
ON PURPOSE CALLING THEM BY
THEIR OLD NAMES ON PURPOSE.
I'M OR ACCIDENTALLY SOMETIMES
BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A POLICY FOR
THEM TO TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
I'M IT'S OF THIS BILL HELPS WITH
THAT AND. AND THEN ALSO TRANS
FOLKS ARE OFTEN PLACED IN
SOLITARY CONFINEMENT OR OTHER
SITUATIONS FOR THEIR OWN
PROTECTION. I'M AND I SENATOR
WINNER SIDE AND AS A RESULT LOSE
ACCESS TO EDUCATION PROGRAMMING.
AND OTHER PROGRAMMING THAT.
WHICH NOT ONLY.
PREPARES THEM FOR RELEASE IT
FOR BEING SUCCESSFUL UPON
REENTRY I'M BUT ALSO LETS THEM
WORK TOWARDS PASS RELEASE IN
MANY CASES AS WELL. AND WE THINK
IT'S VERY VERY IMPORTANT TO
RECOGNIZE TRANCE PEOPLE'S VALID
IDENTITIES.
IN CALIFORNIA'S BEEN A LEADER
HERE WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO
CONTINUE THAT TREND HERE.
AND HELPED TO FOSTER A
RESPECTFUL ENVIRONMENT THAT'S
CONDUCIVE TO REHABILITATION. AND
IT'S REALLY UNFAIR TO.
DOUBLY PENALIZE TRANS PEOPLE.
BECAUSE WE ARE FAILING TO
KEEPING THEM SAFE.
BY HAVING THESE KIND OF PAT ON
CONSEQUENCES IN TERMS OF NOT
BEING ABLE TO ACCESS SERVICES OR
OR BEING. MISS GENDER CONSTANTLY
SO I.
ASK YOUR PEOPLE PASSAGE AND
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING SENATORS AND JOE
MICHAEL FOR EQUALITY CALIFORNIA
WHERE PROUD TO BE A CO SPONSOR
OF THIS BILL AND WHERE ALSO
HAPPY TO STAGE THE CO
SPONSORSHIP OF LAMBDA LEGAL WHO
WERE NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY.
AND THE BILL HAS A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF SUPPORT I'VE FROM A
NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT
WERE ALSO NOT ABLE TO BE HERE
ARE ABLE TO STATUS LATE SO.
.
pTIME AND ALSO STATE AND OUR
THANKS FOR SENATOR WIENER
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND FOR
THIS COMMITTEES GREAT ANALYSIS
AND URGE YOUR SUPPORT THIEVING
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
Q. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
JERRY MEMBERS KEVIN BACK
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF CALIFORNIANS PART.
BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND SPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
WELL THAT'S NICE ALRIGHT THERE'S
A MOTION OF BY SENATOR Y. KOWSKI
ANY QUESTIONS NOTHING. ALRIGHT
DOES SOONER WIENER LOOKS LIKE
YOU.
WE HAVE A WINNER HERE SO WITHOUT
ANY FURTHER ADO THE MOTION IS TO
PASS THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. JACKSON AYE JACKSON AYE
MORLOCK.
MORE LIKE AYE ANDERSON ANDERSON
AYE HERTZBERG.
MONNING. MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI AYE
WIECKOWSKI AYE.
FIX TO POSE ZERO WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE OPEN THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THOUGH SENATOR.
ALRIGHT WILL NOW GO TO FILE ITEM
THREE.
CHOOSE.
.
S. B. EIGHT TWENTY TO THE FUNDS
CAN BE JUSTICE MOVEMENT OWNING
GUNS ON YOUR LIPS TO GOD'S EARS
SO IT WOULD BE NICE.
GOOD EVENING SENATOR WOULD YOU
LIKE TO GO AHEAD OF US.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MADAM
CHAIR.
WRITTEN.
LA I KNOW ONE OF THANK YOU AND
YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF FOR WORKING
WITH US AND FOR THE EXCELLENT
ANALYSIS OF THE BILL.
AND I WANT I'M I WILL ACCEPT
THE COMMITTEES BUT SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS HAS ALSO REQUESTED BY
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SO.
WE APPRECIATE THAT.
THOSE WOULD BE TAKEN AS AUTHORS
AMENDMENT THAT'S CORRECT VERY
GOOD THANK YOU I'M.
SO I'M ERA AS BE A TWENTY TWO
COLLEAGUES ESTABLISHES A STRONG
NET NEUTRALITY REQUIREMENT
CALIFORNIA.
BY.
BANNING SIDE PRACTICES BY
INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS STEP
LAW COURSE SLOW ACCESS TO
WEBSITES OR DISCRIMINATE AMONG
WEB SITES OR APPLICATIONS.
BECAUSE SPECIFICALLY THE BILL
PER BAND SIZED PIECE FROM
VIOLATING. LA THE THREE BRIGHT
LINE RULES OF NO BLOCKING.
NO THROTTLING OR SLOWING TENDO
PAID PRIORITIZATION.
BOTH WHERE THE CONTENT IS
DELIVERED TO THE CONSUMER.
AND ALSO AT THE POINT OF
INTERCONNECTION WERE A BUSINESS
PROVIDING CONTENT ORGANIZATION
PROVIDING CONTENT BANNERS LA THE
SYSTEM. HAS TO TWENTY TWO
CREATES A COHERENT AND
ENFORCEABLE BRIGHT LINE RULES OF
FOR OFFERING ZERO RATED
SERVICES.
AND BROADBAND SERVICES WITH
DIFFERING LEVELS OF QUALITY OF
SERVICE.
BUT A BRIGHT LINE RULES IN THIS
BILL CLEARLY DESCRIBE WHAT IS
LEGAL AND WHAT IS PROHIBITED.
AND ALLOW FOR THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OR
POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS ON A CASE
BY CASE BASIS.
THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME CONCERN
ABOUT HAVING THE CPUC BY
INVOLVES BY AND WE THE BILL AS
AMENDED IN THE LAST COMMITTEE.
TO REMOVE THE THE CPUC ENTIRELY.
UPON ADDITIONALLY.
THE BILL PROHIBITS THE STATE
FROM SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY
OFFER BROADBAND CONTRACTS WITH
THE ISP HAS VIOLATED OF THE
PARAMETERS OF THIS NET
NEUTRALITY LEGISLATION.
IF THE PUBLIC IS PAYING FOR
BROADBAND SERVICE
THE THREE SHE RECEIVED A PRODUCT
THAT HERE'S A LOT TODAY TROLLEY.
FUNDAMENTALLY THIS BILL IS
ABOUT.
NOT ALLOWING HIGHEST PEAS TO
PICK WINNERS AND LOSERS ON THE
INTERNET.
OR FORCING CUSTOMERS TO USE ONLY
FAVORITE SERVICES.
DE ICED TEAS ARE AN ON RAMP AN
OFF RAMP TO THE INTERNET.
IT'S NOT ABOUT THEM DECIDING
WHICH WEBSITE GOING TO BE EASIER
HARD TO ACCESS. OR.
TRYING TO PUSH PEOPLE INTO
CERTAIN PRODUCTS BUT NOT OTHERS.
FOUND A FREE AND OPEN INTERNET
MEANS THAT WE.
GOT TO THE SIDE WHAT WEBSITES WE
GO TO. NOT A BROADBAND PROVIDER.
HA WITH WITHOUT STRONG THAT
NEUTRALITY PROTECTIONS WE
SERIOUSLY RISK IN INTERNET
MANIPULATED BY ISPS FOR ECONOMIC
GETTING.
SLOW LANES AND FAST LANES
PENDING ON HOW MUCH A WEBSITE
PAYS ECONOMIC INDUCEMENTS TO USE
AN ISP'S OWN SERVICES OVER
COMPETITORS.
WE NEED TO AVOID THESE PRACTICES
AND WE NEED LEGAL PROTECTIONS TO
DO SO. AS YOU WILL RECALL LAST
DECEMBER.
THE FCC LA REVERSED THE TWENTY
FIFTEEN OBAMA OF EUROPE RULES ON
NET NEUTRALITY.
NO THIS ACTION DID NOT TEST
REVOKED THE TWENTY FIFTEEN OBAMA
FCC RULES. PRODUCTION OAK
LIBERATED ALL FCC JURISDICTION.
OVER NET NEUTRALITY ISSUES GOING
BACK FIFTEEN YEARS EVEN BEFORE
PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS IN OFFICE
THE FCC HAD RULES. TO PROTECT
NET NEUTRALITY. THE FCC. ERASED
ALL DIE AND REMOVED ITSELF
ENTIRELY FROM OVERSEEING OF
THESE PROTECTIONS. SIZE ABOUT
WHY IT'S UP TO US AS A STEADY
COULD STEP IN AND FILL THE VOID
TO PROTECT CONSUMERS AND
BUSINESSES. IN CALIFORNIA.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR A ABOUT
FIVE MONTHS NOW.
WOULDN'T WORKING WITH ACADEMICS
BUSINESS LEADERS ISPS.
FCC COMMISSIONERS.
ADVOCATES BROUGHT PEOPLE FROM
AROUND THE STATE. GOT TO CRAFT A
BILL THAT PROTECTS FREE SPEECH
THAT PROTECTS OUR BUSINESSES AND
RESIDENTS.
I AM THAT ENSURES AN OPEN
INTERNET.
AND WE BELIEVE THIS BILL.
IS COMPREHENSIVE
AND WILL DO THE JOB.
I THOUGHT I WANNA KNOW DIE I
KNOW THAT I.
THE TELECOMS A CABLE COMPANIES
HAVE BEEN.
INDICATING
STILL SOMEHOW BECAUSE WHILE THE
BEYOND THE TWENTY FIFTEEN ORDER
THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
COM WE ARE NOT THE FCC AND WE
HAVE TO REGULATE IN A DIFFERENT
WAY. THE FCC BECAUSE THE TWENTY
FIFTEEN ROLE MAYBE FCC.
I GLOBAL YOU STILL UTILITY STYLE
REGULATOR. BY. THE FCC ORDER
COULD DO MORE ON A CASE BY CASE
BASIS FOR EXAMPLE ZERO RATING
HAPPENED INTERCONNECTION ISSUES
OF THOSE WERE PART OF THE TWENTY
FIFTEEN ORDER. BUT IT WAS MORE
CASE BY CASE.
BECAUSE WE ARE NOT CREATING. A
COMPREHENSIVE UTILITY STYLE
REGULATOR WE NEED TO HAVE CLEAR
RULES AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE
DONE A LOT IN THIS BILL.
.
BECAUSE OF WHAT I WANTED SERVICE
STRESS THAT NET NEUTRALITY IS
ONE OF THOSE.
INCREDIBLE ISSUES WHERE IT'S NOT
A PARTISAN ISSUE.
BUT IT'S VERY VERY VERY CLEAR
WHAT CALIFORNIANS WONDER THERE'S
ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
OVERWHELMINGLY CALIFORNIANS AND
PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY.
BUT THEY DON'T WANT TELECOMS AND
CABLE COMPANIES
DECIDING WHAT WEB TRAFFIC IT'S
GONNA MOVE FASTER SLOW OR WHERE
YOU CAN GO OR HOW EASY IT'S
GOING TO BE. TO GET THERE.
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS
EVERYONE IT'S OFF THE CHARTS
CALIFORNIANS WANT US TO DO OUR
JOB TO PROTECT THE INTERNET AND
TO PROTECT ACCESS BY CONSUMERS.
AND BUSINESSES AND THAT'S WHAT
THIS BILL A IS A BALLOT.
YOU KNOW THAT WHAT THE FCC DID.
IT WAS REALLY REPREHENSIBLE.
AFTER DECADES OF WORK.
SITE TO BUILD STRONG PROTECTIONS
OF FOR CONSUMERS AND BUSINESSES
ACCESS THE INTERNET.
A DONALD TRUMP TOOK OFFICE AND
LIKE A WRECKING BALL THEY JUST
ERASED EVERYTHING CREATED A
COMPLETE VOID.
THE AND WE HAVE A RESPONSE
ABILITY.
TO FILL THAT VOID AND TO PROTECT
OUR STATE.
.
HER COLLEAGUES SIDE THIS DATED
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE.
TYPING THIS IS A GOOD BILL.
WE'RE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH A
BROAD SPECTRUM OF STAKEHOLDERS
I'VE HAD AN OPEN DOOR.
TO THE INDUSTRY OPPOSING.
THE BILL I'M BEATING A GUY AND
I BELIEVE TOMORROW.
WITH THE WITH THE CABLE
ASSOCIATION WILL CONTINUE HOW TO
WORK WITH SUPPORTERS AND
OPPONENTS. OF THE BILL IS
GETTING VERY VERY STRONG SUPPORT
INCLUDING THREE TOM WHEELER.
WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FCC
THAT ISSUE THE TWENTY FIFTEEN
ORDER? FIVE CHAIRMAN WE'LL WITH
CHAIRMAN WE'LL THERE WOULD NOT
BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL IF YOU
DIDN'T THINK ABOUT.
IT FILLS THE VOID CASA
COLLEAGUES ARE I ASK FOR YOUR I
GO AND WITH ME TODAY.
ON ARE BARBARA BENSHI VIC รณ
WHO IS A OF A STANFORD LAW
PROFESSOR.
AND THE DIRECTOR OF STANFORD
CENTER FOR INTERNET AND SOCIETY.
SHE IS A.
PR COMPUTER SCIENCE OFFICER
AMONG OTHER THINGS FIVE INCHES
TO WORKING ON THIS ISSUE OFFER
DECADE SHE IS ONE OF THE
FOREMOST EXPERTS. IN THE COUNTRY
AYE SHE GETS TWO MINUTES TODAY
DOTS IT'S A LOT MORE IF ANYONE'S
INTERESTED IN TALKING TO HER AYE
SHE WILL. WE WILL LIVE WITH NO
ONE TO SPEAK FOR HER BUT I THINK
I CAN SAY CHAU MAKE HERSELF.
AVAILABLE TO AND ALL ALSO WITH
US TODAY AS HOLLY BOARD MEN FROM
ADT SECURITY SERVICES.
WE HAVE BUSINESS SUPPORT.
SOME BUSINESS.
THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE
QUIETLY SUPPORTIVE A SUMMER
WILLING TO STEP OUT INCLUDING
FOR EXAMPLE YOU WILL HEAR.
COMCAST HAS A COMPETITOR
PRODUCTS THE DUTIES OF THEIR
PEOPLE IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY
WHO ARE VERY VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT. THINGS LIKE ZERO RATING
AND OTHER ANTI COMPETITIVE
PRACTICES SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK
YOUR AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APOLOGIZE
BUT IT'S GOING TO BE WE'RE GOING
TO GO WITH TWO MINUTES EACH SO
WHOEVER'S LIKE TO PROCEED FIRST.
MADAM CHAIR SENATORS THANK YOU
FOR INVITING ME TO TESTIFY
TODAY.
MY NAME IS BOB REFERENCE YOU
THINK I'M A PROFESSOR AT
STANFORD LAW SCHOOL AND AS SOON
AS A WIN A SET THE DIRECTOR OF
THE CENTER. FOR INTENSIFIED HE
THERE I'M A LAWYER AND I ALSO
HAVE A PHD IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
AND A FEW BOOKING ON NET
NEUTRALITY FOR SEVENTEEN YEARS.
VERY SEC'S TWENTY TEN AND
TWENTY FIFTEEN OPEN INTERNET
TROLLS RELIED HEAVILY ON MY
WORK.
AS DID THE INDIAN AND CANADIAN
ORDERS ON ZERO RATING AND THE
EUROPEAN UNION'S NET NEUTRALITY
GUIDELINES.
TODAY. YOU HAVE AN AMAZING
OPPORTUNITY.
YOU CAN BRING BACK NET
NEUTRALITY TO CALIFORNIA. AND
RESTORE THE IMPORTANT
PROTECTIONS THAT THE FCC VOTED
TO ELIMINATE IN DECEMBER.
THAT'S EASIER SAID THAN DONE.
THESE. ARE THE TWENTY FIFTEEN
OPEN INTERNET RULES. AND THIS
IT'S A THREE HUNDRED PAGE OPEN
INTERNET ORDER THAT ADOPTED
THESE RULES.
MOST STATE LEVEL EFFORTS LIKE
SENATOR DE LEON'S SIMPLY COPIED
SOME ALL OF THESE RULES FROM
THIS.
BUT THAT MISSES ALL OF THE
IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS THAT THE
FCC INCLUDED HERE.
BY CONTRAST THIS BILL WAS
CAREFULLY CRAFTED TO INCLUDE
BOTH THE TWENTY FIFTEEN RULES.
AND THE IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS
FROM THE TEXTS OF THE TWENTY
FIFTEEN WATER. AND THAT'S WHAT
MAKES IT SO SPECIAL. IT'S THE
ONLY STATE LEVEL BILL THAT
COMPREHENSIVELY RESTORE US ALL
OF THE TWENTY FIFTEEN NET
NEUTRALITY PROTECTION.
THAT'S WHY IT'S WIDELY VIEWED AS
A NET NEUTRALITY MODEL BILL.
AND THAT'S WHY IT FCC CHAIRMAN
TOM WHEELER WHO THE TRUE THE
ROLE TO TWENTY FIFTEEN ORDER
SUPPORTS THIS BILL.
TODAY IF THE INTERNET IS A SPACE
WHERE EVERY CALIFORNIAN. NO
MATTER THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN
OR THE SIZE OF THE WALLETS HAS
AN EQUAL CHANCE OF REACHING
PEOPLE ON LINE.
IT'S A SPACE WHERE WE THE PEOPLE
NOT A TNT OUR COMCAST
DETERMINE WHAT SUCCEEDS IN OUR
ECONOMY I HOPE YOU WILL VOTE TO
KEEP IT
THAT WAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE THANK YOU MY NAME IS
HOLLY BOARD MEN AND THE HEAD OF
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS FOR ADT
SECURITY SERVICES. THE LARGEST
ELECTRONIC SECURITY COMPANY IN
NORTH AMERICA.
THE BEST MAJORITY OF THE
ELECTRONIC SECURITY INDUSTRY
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE. THAT IS
ACTUALLY COMPRISED OF SMALL
BUSINESSES INCLUDING OVER FOUR
THOUSAND. LICENSED ALARM
COMPANIES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA SO WE HAVE ABOUT A
QUARTER OF THE MARKET. THE REST
OF THE MARKET IS COMPRISED OF
THE SMALL BUSINESSES. WHEN YOU
THINK ABOUT THAT NEUTRALITY EDT
IS PROBABLY NOT THE FIRST
COMPANY THAT COMES TO MIND. BUT.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT MOST
OF OUR DATA SIGNALS ACTUALLY
TRAVEL ACROSS CUSTOMER PROVIDED
BROADBAND INTERNET ALLIANCE IN
MANY OF THESE BROADBAND INTERNET
LINES.
I CARRIER SIGNALS ARE OWNED AND
OPERATED BY COMPANIES THAT OFFER
COMPETING ALARM BUSINESSES.
WE THINK THIS GIVES THEM THE
INCENTIVE AND THE ABILITY IF
THEY SO CHOOSE TO BLOCK WERE
THROTTLE COMPETING ALARM
PROVIDERS DATA.
THERE'S ALSO A LITTLE INCENTIVE
FOR THESE PROVIDERS TO RESTORE
SERVICE BUT MAY HAVE BEEN
INADVERTENTLY BLOCKED OR
THROTTLED.
PUBLIC SAFETY AND LIFESAVING
SERVICES INCLUDING HOME ALARM
SYSTEM SCHOOL IN BUSINESS
SECURITY DISASTER ALERT SIGNAL
SHOULD BE ABLE TO TRAVEL ACROSS
THE BROADBAND NETWORK. WITHOUT
THREAT OF BLOCKING THROTTLING
WHAT THE PRIORITIZATION.
SMALL PACKETS OF ALARM DATA CAN
TRAVEL OVER TRADITIONAL COPPER
LINES OR OVER CELLULAR NETWORKS.
BUT BROADBAND SERVICES GENERALLY
REQUIRED FOR ENHANCED SERVICES
SO THESE ARE THE SERVICES THAT
ALLOW YOU TO VIEW SECURITY AND
SURVEILLANCE FOOTAGE ON YOUR
PHONE OR FROM A REMOTE LOCATION.
REMOTELY ARM AND DISARM YOUR
SYSTEM LOCK AND UNLOCK YOUR
DOOR.
WHITE IS THIS MATTER SO IN
CALIFORNIA THERE ARE NUMBER OF
MUNICIPALITIES PUTTING SAN JOSE
MODESTO STOCKTON IN CHICO. THAT
HAVE SOMETHING CALLED VERIFIED
RESPONSE FOR THE POLICE TO THE
FIRE DEPARTMENTS WILL NOT
RESPOND TO AN ALARM SIGNAL
UNLESS SOMEONE HAS OBSERVED
EITHER ON THE GROUND. OR OVER A
VIDEO CAMERA THAT AN EMERGENCY
IS TAKING PLACE SO IF SOMEONE
SECURITY CAMERA WERE TO BE
BLOCKED A THROTTLED IN SOME WAY
COULD SLOW OR.
COST SOMEONE THEIR EMERGENCY
RESPONSE EITHER FIRE OR POLICE.
THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS
ARE NOT MERELY THEORETICAL
ACADEMIC
BROADBAND PROVIDERS HAVE BLOCKED
EIGHTY TEASE DATA IN THE PAST
PREVENTING ENTITIES CUSTOMERS
FROM USING THEIR ENHANCE
MONITORING FEATURES. SUCH AS
REMOTE OPERATION OF THEIR VIDEO
SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS SO.
IT UT A RICO IN TWO THOUSAND
AND FIVE BEFORE THE. NET
NEUTRALITY FLAWS WHEN TO AFFECT
OUR SIGNALS WERE BLOCKED THERE'S
SOME BACK AND FORTH. IT TOOK TWO
AND A HALF MONTHS TO RESTORE
SERVICE WE HAD TO STOP SELLING
OUR SERVICE IN PORTO RICO FOR
TWO. UNTIL THIS WAS RESOLVED BUT
AFTER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH THE
GOOD I THINK THE POINT IS MADE.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT IF
YOU'D LIKE TO COME FOR WITH NAME
AND AFFILIATION PLEASE.
DEFINITELY NOT SIR HERNANDEZ ON
BEHALF OF THE CONSUMER
FEDERATION OF CALIFORNIA. TURN
THE GREEN LINING INSTITUTE THE
COMMUNICATION WORKERS OF AMERICA
DISTRICT NINE AND ALSO ON BEHALF
OF CALPERS GOLAN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
HELLO GOOD EVENING MADAM CHAIR
AND MEMBERS ARE CREAM GREASY ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
SOME OF THE CORPORATE ON BEHALF
OF PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING HOUSE
COMMON SENSE KIDS ACTION AND THE
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
IN SUPPORT.
THE QUEUE. MANAGER KEVIN BAKER
FROM THEIR CONSERVE LIBERTIES
UNION OF CALIFORNIAN IT'S OVER
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND MEMBERS
ALSO IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
MICHAEL YOUNG WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION
ROSSIER SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHRIS
RESPONSE WHICH OF THE COALITION
FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
GIVING A TALK ABOUT CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS INVOICES FOR PROGRESS
IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU.
RONALD COLEMAN ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA LOW INCOME CONSUMER
COALITION ALSO HERE IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU THANK YOU.
ST MARTIN DEL MAY HAVE CONSUMERS
YOU'D ALSO IN STRONG SUPPORT
FIGURE VERY MUCH SENATOR. THANK
YOU.
SELENA PRIOR SEIU IN SUPPORT.
CRISTINA CAHILL I INDIVISIBLE
CALIFORNIA STATE STRONG
REPRESENTING COALITION OF
GRASSROOTS GROUPS THAT WERE IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
JUST BIRTH LOW WESTERN CENTER ON
LAW AND POVERTY IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
CHARLES HARVEY WITH THE OFFICE
OF ATTORNEY GENERAL HAVE IT WAS
THERE AND SUPPORT AND WE
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT THE COURT
CONTIUE WORK OF THE AUTHOR.
THANK YOU.
ELLEN CHAPLAIN WITH INDIVISIBLE
SACRAMENTO WE STAND IN STRONG
SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
DOUG TRIED WELL. INDIVIDUAL
SACRAMENTO STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
BRIAN SINGLE CEO AND COFOUNDER
OF CONTEXTUALLY A START UP IT
WAS ONLY MADE POSSIBLE BECAUSE
OF NET NEUTRALITY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
APART WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
THE QUESTION OF THE QUESTION.
GOOD EVENING.
MEMBERS THANK YOU VERY WELCOME
TWO MINUTES EACH IF YOU WOULD
GET IT WE'VE BEEN HEARING THAT
ALL DAY. MY NAME'S BILL DIVIDE I
REPRESENT A T. THANKS FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TOUCH JUST
CHECKING BY THE WAY JUST
CHECKING TO MAKE SURE YOU'VE
BEEN PAYING INTO. THIS THING I'M
SURE I KNOW YOU WANTED US TO
COME AND TESTIFY IN THE PASSOVER
THRILLED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
THAT CAN I CAN ONLY IMAGINE.
A. T. AND T. SUPPORTS OPEN
INTERNET. WE DO NOT BLOCK
WEBSITES WE DO NOT CENSOR ONLINE
CONTENT WE DO NOT DEGRADE
INTERNET TRAFFIC.
THESE COMMITMENTS ARE PUBLISHED
ON OUR WEBSITE THERE ENFORCEABLE
BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS
WELL AS THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY
GENERAL. YET WE OPPOSE A TWENTY
TWO. ALTHOUGH THE PROPONENTS OF
THE BILL STATED THE BILL SIMPLY
CODIFIES THE TWO THOUSAND
FIFTEEN FCC ORDER WE BEG TO
DISAGREE. IN FACT THE NUMBER OF
S. B. EIGHT TWENTY TWOS PROPOSED
REQUIREMENTS WERE REJECTED
OUTRIGHT.
BY THE WHEELER FCC OR SET ASIDE
FOR FURTHER REVIEW FOR EXAMPLE.
THIS BILL PROVIDES FOR NO WAIVER
PROCESS FOR THE PRIORITIZATION
OF TRAFFIC. BANDS WIRELESS ZERO
RATING IN MANY CIRCUMSTANCES IT
OPENS THE EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION PRACTICES IT
DISALLOWS BENEFICIAL NETWORK
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND FINALLY
IT GIVES THE PUBLIC AGENCIES
HERE IN CALIFORNIA THROUGH THE
PROCUREMENT PROCESS.
AUTHORITY OVER BROADBAND TO BOTH
INTERPRET AND ENFORCE NET
NEUTRALITY ON BOTH STATE AND
LOCAL CONTRACTING. EVERY SINGLE
AGENCY WILL HAVE AN OPINION AND
REVIEW OF NET NEUTRALITY AND IT
GOES BEYOND THAT.
THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THIS
BILL IS BUILT UPON SPECULATION
THAT SOMEBODY SOMEWHERE SOMETIME
IN THE FUTURE.
MIGHT VIOLATE NET NEUTRALITY
RULES
DESPITE THE EXISTING AUTHORITY
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
I WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF
PREEMPTION FOR A MOMENT
THE FCC'S AUTHORITY TO PREEMPT
STATE REGULATION IS WELL
ESTABLISHED.
THE LAST FOUR ADMINISTRATION
STARTING WITH BILL CLINTON. ALL
RECOGNIZE THAT THE INTERNET IS
AN INTERSTATE SERVICE INCOME AND
INCLUDES FEDERAL PREEMPTION
ORDERS.
IN THERE NET NEUTRALITY ORDERS
THAT WAS IN THE OBAMA FCC RULES
AS WELL FINALLY THE FCC DID NOT
ABANDON ITS AUTHORITY.
TO PREEMPT STATE REGULATION OF
THE INTERNET RATHER IT MOVE NET
NEUTRALITY OUT OF TITLE TO.
BACK TO TITLE ONE WHICH HAD BEEN
THE GOVERNING TITLE OF THE
INTERNET.
SINCE THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
IN NINETEEN NINETY SIX.
LET ME CONCLUDE BY SAYING THIS
BILL IS ANTI COMPETITIVE AND
ANTI CONSUMER IT WILL DRIVE UP
CONSTITUENTS BILLS FOR INTERNET
SERVICE IT'LL PROHIBIT. POPULAR
FREE DATA PROGRAMS AND FINALLY.
IT WILL INCREASE LITIGATION
COSTS CREATE DELAY IN
INNOVATION.
AND I WILL STOP MADAM CHAIRMAN
THANK YOU THANK YOU AND I GAVE
YOU AN EXTRA THIRTY SECONDS
BECAUSE YOU'RE OLDER THAN I AM.
WHO?
VERY VERY.
I FIGURED FOR THE THIRTY SECONDS
YOU WILL HIT THANK YOU VERY MUCH
YOUR ALL TO HECK PARA
APPRECIATE.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS THANK
NEXT WITNESS MADAM CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS CAROLINE MCINTYRE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CABLE
AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
ASSOCIATION. OPPOSED TO S. B.
EIGHT TWENTY EIGHT TWENTY TWO.
I WANTED SAID STATE FOR THE
RECORD OUR MEMBERS CLEARLY
SUPPORT IN OPEN AND A NAP BUT
THAT IS NOT WHAT S. B. TO TO.
WILL IN FACT TWO I ALSO WANT TO
POINT OUT THAT DESPITE THE
REFERENCES MAIN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS TO NEWSPAPER STORIES
THAT SUGGESTS VARIOUS. ACTIVITY
AS A VIOLATION OF NET NEUTRALITY
WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY SUCH
VIOLATIONS THAT WOULD WARRANT
THIS LEGISLATION.
SO BASICALLY WE'RE HERE TODAY
DEBATING THE ISSUE OVER WITH THE
ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE FCC. AYE TO
REPEAL THE TWENTY FIFTEEN OPEN
INTERNET ORDER AND THE FCC'S
ADOPTION OF THE RESTORING
INTERNET TIME RESTORING INTERNET
FREEDOM ACT.
LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT THE ACTION
THAT WAS TAKEN DESPITE THE
REPEATED DISTORTIONS AND THE
MISS CHARACTERIZATIONS TO THE
CONTRARY THE F. C. C.'S ACTIONS
TO. REGULATE BROADBAND AS AN
INFORMATION SERVICE IS NOT THE
END OF THE OPEN INTERNET AND
WILL NOT UNDERMINE THE
ENFORCEABLE PRINCIPLES. OF NET
NEUTRALITY.
I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BOTH OF
THOSE ORDERS THE TWENTY FIFTEEN
ORDER THAT WAS AUTHORED BY
CHAIRMAN WE THERE WHO WHEELER
WHO'S BEEN CITED HERE TODAY. AND
THE TWENTY SEVENTEEN ORDER
EXPLICITLY PREEMPT STATES FROM
REGULATING THE INTERNET
INCONSISTENT WITH THE FEDERAL
REGULATORY OBJECTIVES.
SPECIFICALLY THE TWENTY FIFTEEN
ORDER THE FCC REAFFIRMED THE
LONGSTANDING CONCLUSION THAT
BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS
SERVICE IS JURISDICTION ONLY
INTERSTATE FOR THE REGULATORY
PURPOSES AND STATE IF THEIR FIRM
INTENTION TO EXERCISE THEIR
PREEMPTION AUTHORITY TO PRECLUDE
STATES.
FROM THEM IMPOSING OBLIGATIONS
ON BROADBAND SERVICE THAT ARE
INCONSISTENT WITH A CAREFULLY
TAILORED REGULATORY SCHEME THEY
ADOPTED IN THE ORDER.
AND WHILE THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
SITES FROM AN ARTICLE WRITTEN BY
PROFESSOR VAN SHELLAC ABS AT
STANFORD UNIVERSITY AND ASSERTS.
THAT THE FCC HAS DELIBERATELY
REMOVED ALL OF ITS A SOURCES OF
AUTHORITY THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO
ADOPT NET NEUTRALITY PROTECTIONS
AND THEREFORE DOES NOT HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO PREVENT THE STATE'S
IN DOING SO THAT IS INCORRECT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU GUICHARD
GET YOUR POINT ALRIGHT.
ALRIGHT LET'S.
AND.
BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY COME BACK
WITH QUESTIONS AUTHORITY.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION PLACE.
IF YOU'D STEP FOR WITH YOUR NAME
AND AFFILIATION.
JONATHAN AIR BOWL BEHALF OF CT I
A THE NATIONAL TRADE ASSOCIATE
FOR THE WIRELESS INDUSTRY ALSO
OPPOSITION THINKING.
JOHN DIRTY WITH THE CIVIL
JUSTICE SUCH USE IN CALIFORNIA
WORD ABOUT THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION IN OPPOSITION THINKING.
HAVE YOU PERSONALLY ON BEHALF OF
VERIZON IN OPPOSITION ACU.
GOOD EVENING JUST AS ALL BE HAVE
A TECHNO THANK YOU FOR REMOVING
THE P. YOU SEE.
BUT WAS SUBSEQUENT SINCE THE
CONCERNS INTERSIL PUBLISHED.
THANKS VERY MUCH.
JACKIE CAN THE PRINTER
COMMUNICATIONS RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE.
THANK YOU.
ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE
CALIFORNIA COMMUNICATIONS
ASSOCIATION OPPOSED.
I KEEP. BUT I CAN MCFETRIDGE ON
BEHALF OF CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS
OPPOSED. THE KISSER.
MARGARET CLUTCHING ABAFT COMCAST
POSE AND ALSO BEAUSE THEY ARE
UNABLE TO BE HERE AT THIS LATE
HOUR.
ALSO POST ON BEHALF THE CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE
THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING CHRISTY WE SOME
BEHALF OF T. MOBILE IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING PINSKY'S ME BRENDA
PALOMINO BEHALF SPRINT ALSO IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU MA'AM.
WHERE TOP ON BEHALF OF ORANGE
COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL IN
OPPOSITION THE QUEUE?
HIM LIMITS ON BEHALF A
CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN OP.
OPPOSITION SEEING NONE WILL
BRING IT TO THE DIET SENATOR
HURTS FOR.
HE I HATE TO BE THE GUY WHO
ALWAYS.
THOSE THE YOU KNOW WHAT THE
PUNCH BOWL. BUT I'M A IT'S AN
AYE TO SAME QUESTIONS I ASKED OF
THE CHAIR EARLIER I AM A
CONSTITUTIONALIST.
I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ABOUT TITLE
THIS YEAR TITLED OUT OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ABOUT WHAT
GOOD WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
DID HERE THERE WE SPENT THE LAST
TWO YEARS IN THIS BODY.
DOING ALL SORTS OF THINGS.
CHANGING WHAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT DID.
THE QUESTION IS WE HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO PROTECT THE FOLKS
IN CALIFORNIA.
AND FROM MY STANDPOINT THAT YOU
KNOW LOOK IT'S EASY FOR US IN
THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
TO OVER REACH.
IN TRYING TO DO SOMETHING
WHATEVER THAT SOMETHING IS.
IN MY JUDGMENT AND I KNOW WHAT
SAID SOMEWHAT DE.
BECAUSE I IT'S EASY TO JUST SAY
GREAT GREAT GREAT BUT MY POINT
IS THAT.
YOU NEED TO NARROWLY CRAFT
THINGS
IN THE WAY THAT YOU WANT TO WIN
I DON'T DEFINE SUCCESS AS
GETTING A BILL PASSED.
GET IT SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR OF
SUCCESS IS HAVING AN ENFORCEABLE
LAW.
NOW MAYBE SOME OF US THE
PROFESSOR IS WHEN OUR LAST
COMMITTEE.
FOR THAT JUNE UNIVERSITY IN THE
BAY AREA.
WE LOSE IF WOULD YOU YOURSELF
SAY THAT BUT. NOT ANY OF IT HA
HA HA HA. YOU KNOW SHE HAS AN
OPINION.
ABOUT WHAT THE CONSTITUTION
MEANS THAT SHE MAY BE RIGHT.
THAT TO ME THE BALANCE IN THIS
SENATOR WIENER. YOU USE I MEAN
IT'S IT'S IT IS THIS CAN YOU
CRAFT THIS NARROW ENOUGH. THAT
YOU ACHIEVE THE PROTECTIONS
WITHOUT RISKING.
IT BEING OVERTURNED BY THE
COURT.
AND I THINK THAT YOU ACHIEVE ORG
BY A COMMISSION YOU DUDE SHE THE
GREATEST BENEFIT IN THAT REGARD.
BECAUSE.
WE HAVE PRINCIPLES WE CAN LOOK
ATTHE IDEA OF THE STATE AS A
REGULATOR VERSUS THE STATE AS.
ARE A MARKET PARTICIPANT THERE'S
A STUNNING GUIDANCE I REFERRED
THE LAST COMMITTEE AND I CAN GO
BACK TO IT AGAIN. OF ALL THE
HOMEWORK YOU MADE ME DO IT
MISTER BUSH SHOOTING MADE ME DO.
A FEW OTHER PEOPLE MADE ME DO
READING ALL THIS COCKAMAMIE
CASES.
BUT ALL I'M SUGGESTING IS THE
STATE DOES HAVE A CERTAINLY
CLEARER ABILITY ONE COULD ARGUE
THAT YOU GO AFTER SOMEBODY FOR
THROTTLING ALL OF THEIR FANCY
WORDS NOW UNDER SEVENTY TWO
HUNDRED OF FALSE ADVERTISING. IF
THESE OF THESE BAD THINGS HAVE
SOME ON THE WEBSITE AND SAY WE
DON'T DO IT. ANY AGE YOU'RE
ANYBODY COME ALONG ARE WE ARE TO
COME ALONG AND
SET SOME ALREADY BECAUSE
ALLIANCE.
WE WOULD HAVE THAT POWER WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO DO I THINK
SENATOR WIENER ELEGANTLY AND.
YOU KNOW YOU WHAT YOU'RE TAKING
ON TOUGH STUFF LEGAL HIGH TECH
FRAZIER LOT.
ALL I'M JUST SUGGESTING IN THIS
THING IS THAT. AS YOU LOOK EACH
ONE OF THESE AND MEASURE THEM A
LOT OF THE STUFF YOU'RE ADDING
IN THIS STUFF THAT YOU ARGUE
THAT SOUNDS REALLY GOOD TO US IN
THIS CHAMBER.
THAT WE COULD DO. HAS TO BE
MEASURED AGAINST A VERY
CONSERVATIVE.
ANALYSIS UP SUPREMACY CLAUSE
COMMERCE CLAUSE DORMANT COMMERCE
CLAUSE ALL OF THOSE THINGS AND
THERE'S JUST A TONIC CASE
AUTHORITY. THAT I FIND ITS
GUIDANCE I KNOW WE GOT A QUICK
ANSWER LAST TIME AROUND. THAT I
DIDN'T RESPOND TO IN THE LAST
COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT DIDN'T
AGREE WITH THAT BUT I I'M JUST
SUGGESTING. THAT AND VERY NARROW
CONSTRUCT GET YOU A LONG WAY
DOWN THE ROAD UNTIL. THE
ADMINISTRATION CHANGES IN
WASHINGTON AND THERE CAN BE A
FEDERAL POLICY WHICH YOU CAN GET
THE GREAT THE HIGHEST
PROBABILITY OF THE GREATEST
PROTECTION. OF FOLKS IN
CALIFORNIA.
I I JUST I SHARE THAT WITH YOU
AND I SHOULD YOU IN PRIVATELY
AND. IN ADDITION THAT THERE'S A
LOT OF MEAT HERE.
I JUST THINK WERE.
OVER EXPANSIVE.
ARE. THROUGH THE CHAIR.
YES.
.
QUESTION BUT THE BUG TICKET GUY
I THINK YOU GET FOR JUST ABOUT
AND PERHAPS IF YOU WANT TO HAVE
YOUR. OF THE THE WITNESS FROM
THE JUNIOR UNIVERSITY IN. THE
NORTH TO ANSWER I'M SURE THAT
IT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION AND I
THINK IT WAS WHAT WAS ALSO
RAISED IN THE OPPOSITION IS THE
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION SO. WHY
DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND ANSWER
THAT SENATOR AND WHEN WE CAN WAS
HERE WITNESSES WHERE IT IS LAW
YOU SEE HERE SO?
?
SO AYE SIR HERTZBERG AYE I
APPRECIATE THAT AND WE HAVE
SPOKEN AND I APPRECIATE YOU ARE
NOT I DO UNION. DOES AND WE WE
WE THINK WE HAVE CRAFTED A BILL
THAT IS LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE WE
DON'T BELIEVE THAT TE FCC HAS
OF THE POWER. TIED TO PREEMPT.
STATES FROM ACTING PARTICULARLY
IN LIGHT OF THEIR OBLITERATION
OF THEIR OWN. YOU KNOW AND A BIT
OF GLITTERY THEMSELVES FROM FROM
THE THIS SPACE ENTIRELY AND THEN
BUT.
NOW THERE.
ACCORDING TO A PREAMP CONGRESS
HAS NEVER PREEMPTED US
FOR DOING THIS OF CONGRESS AS I
MENTIONED LAST WEEK CONGRESS
PASSED THE LAW WE WOULD HAVE A
TOUGHER. UPHILL BATTLE.
AND IN TERMS OF THE
CONSTITUTION ISSUES WHEN BELIEVE
ACROSS THE LAW THAT WILL
WITHSTAND CONSTITUTIONAL
CHALLENGE.
I CAN I GUARANTEE THAT I KNOW I
KNOW I'VE AFTER FIFTEEN YEARS OF
PRACTICING LAW BEFORE SELECTED
OFFICE I LEARNED MANY TIMES
NEVER TO PREDICT WHAT THE COURT
IS GOING TO. DO EVER.
ALL WE CAN DO IS CRAFT
SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE IS
DEFENSIBLE WE BELIEVE IT IS A WE
KNOW THAT THE INNOCENT IS NOT A
CRITICISM THEY WILL. NO MATTER
WHAT WE DO WHETHER WE PASS
SOMETHING MUCH MORE NARROW THAT
WE'RE DOING NOW OR. PASSWORD
WHAT IS BEFORE US BOBBY WILL SUE
THEY DON'T WANT TO SET ANY ROLE
SATA CRITICISM THAT'S THEIR
POSITION THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT
IN THE WORLD TO SEE WHOEVER
SUPPORT OUR AND THAT'S FINE.
TIME THE COURTS WILL WORK IT OUT
THE WE BELIEVE THIS IS
DEFENSIBLE IN A. PRESS PROFESSOR
CAN ELABORATE.
YEAH SO CLEARLY WE HAVE HAD THIS
SHORT EXCHANGE BEFORE AND I'D BE
VERY HAPPY TO TO MEET WITH YOU
ONE ON ONE AND HAVE A FOR THE
DISCUSSION OF THAT.
BUT FOR EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE
COMMITTEE.
THE CASE LAW I AM I BELIEVE
THIS BILL IS ON FIRM LEGAL
GROUND WITH RESPECT TO THE
PREEMPTION.
ALL THE CASE LAW SHOWS VERY
CLEARLY THAT AN AGENCY OR WHEN
THE HOUSE AUTHORITIES TO
PREEMPT.
IF IT DOES HAVE AUTHORITY TO
REGULATE AND THAT'S THE KEY
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
PREEMPTION THE TWENTY FIFTEEN
ORDER. WITH THE FCC HOT VERY
CLEARLY AND THAT WAS UPHELD BY
THE COURT. DID HAVE AUTHORITY TO
DOGMA NEUTRALITY RULES AND AS A
RESULT WAS FIRMLY IN ITS RIGHT
TO PRE AND THE STATE'S.
FROM ADOPTING NET NEUTRALITY
RULES.
CURTIS. APOLOGIZE IT LOOKED
LETTER ANTS WAS LOOKING UP BY MY
GLASS AND
ZERO HIT COULD HIT.
GO AHEAD COOPER SO TWENTY
SEVENTEEN IS VERY DIFFERENT IN
TWENTY SEVENTEEN THE FCC
SYSTEMATIC MAGICALLY DISMANTLED
ALL OF ITS SOURCES OF AUTHORITY
THAT WOULD ALLOW TO DOT NET
NEUTRALITY RULES.
THEY GOT RID OF TITLE TO THAT
WAS A FROM SOCIAL PATHOLOGY THEY
GOT RID OF SECTION SEVEN NO SIX.
WHICH IN TWENTY FOURTEEN THE
VERIZON COURT HAD SAID THOUGHTS
OF FLOW AS SOURCE OF REGULATORY
POWER OVER THE AYE IS PEACE.
AND THE ONLY THING THAT'S LEFT
THIS TITLE ONE. UNFORTUNATELY
SAD DOES NOT GIVE THE FCC
AUTHORITY TO DOT NET NEUTRALITY
RULES AS WE'VE KNOWN SINCE
TWENTY TEN. WHEN THE DC CIRCUIT
STRUCK DOWN THE FCC'S ORDER
AGAINST CALM BECAUSE.
FOR INTERFERING WITH P. TO BE A
FIGHT SHARING APPLICATIONS FOR
LACK OF AUTHORITY SAYING VERY
CLEARLY.
COULD YOU AT CC DO NOT HAVE AND
STORY AUTHORITY TO DOT NET
NEUTRALITY REGULATIONS ON A
TITLE ONE AND THAT'S WHY THE FCC
IN ITS OWN ORDER AND TWENTY
SEVENTEEN CONCLUDES AND SAYS.
YOU KNOW WE ARE NOT JUST
DETERMINING THAT OUT ADOPTING
NET NEUTRALITY IS BAD POLICY.
EVEN IF WE WANTED TO WE NOW HAVE
NO AUTHORITY LEFT TO DO THIS
AND SO.
CASELOADS CLEA I'D BE HAPPY TO
EXPLAIN MORE IF YOU WANT TO SO I
THINK AT THIS POINT I THINK
SENATOR IT'S ALMOST SEVEN
O'CLOCK THIS OF FASCINATING
DISCUSSION AND IT WAS
FASCINATING FEW HOURS GOES WELL
PERHAPS WE CAN CONTINUE. I THINK
WHAT WE'RE GONNA END UP SEEING
HERE IS IF IN FACT THIS DOES
BECOME THE LONG CALIFORNIA IT'LL
BE CHALLENGED AND WILL HAVE A
VERY INTERESTING COURT BATTLE IN
AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE
KEY ISSUES THAT I'M HEARING. IN
THE OBJECTIONS FROM THE
OPPOSITION IS THAT THERE IS OF
THE CONSTITUTIONALLY WERE
PREEMPTED YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE
NOT I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO
RESOLVE THAT HERE ONIGHT. SO.
IT IF SENATOR WHITE CASKET OF
ANOTHER QUESTION ON ANOTHER
ISSUE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT I DON'T
THINK WE ARE GONNA MAKE PROGRESS
ON THAT OTHER THAN TO AGREE TO
DISAGREE.
A BETTER YOU START OFF ONE PRONG
THOUGH BLOCKING ONE* NO
THROTTLING THE OTHER NO PAID
INTERCONNECTION AND. YOU KNOW
THE IT'S PROVIDERS LIKE. NETFLIX
THEY PAY NOW FOR THAT WHY WOULD
YOU NOT JUST NOT HAVE
DISCRIMINATION PURSES WILL IT
ELIMINATION THAT THAT IS
DISCRIMINATION AND SO I KNOW THE
ICE PEOPLE SO YOU KNOW.
THAT NETFLIX IN SOME IT WAS AS
HAPPY PARTNERSHIP AND THEY
DECIDED THEY WANTED TO HELP US.
BOB BILL DOWN SO GRAPHICS PAID
MY UNDERSTANDING.
IS I I DON'T THINK THAT FOX WAS
SO THRILLED.
WHEN THEY WERE.
HAVING ISSUES REACHING THEIR
CUSTOMERS NETFLIX WENT THROUGH A
VERY VERY DIFFICULT TIME. AND
THEY ULTIMATELY.
.
CRY I CRY UNCLE. ARE SAID UNCLE
WHERE THE PRISONS AND PATTER
PAIN. LA AND NETFLIX BECAUSE
THEY HAVE A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY
THEY CAN DO THAT. A LOT OF
COMPANIES CAN'T.
FIVE AND SO WHEN YOU START
LEVELING. DOT PAPERED IS A SENSE
AT THE POINT OF INTERCONNECTION
YOU WANT TO REACH YOUR
CUSTOMERS.
YOU NEED TO PASS
MONEY.
DOT DOT CAN BECOME VERY
PROBLEMATIC HIGHER AND SO I I
GET THE THAT PRIVATIZATION THAT
SO I SAID DON'T DISCRIMINATE BUT
DD LEE SAY OKAY THIS IS THE FEE.
NEXT FLICK CUCKOO LOU WHATEVER
IT IS AND THAT'S WHAT YOU PAY
WHATEVER CARRIER IT IS AND IT'S.
EQUALIZER WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU
DON'T PAY IT.
SAME THING WHEN THEY DON'T PAY
WHEN I GO THE MOVIES DON'T GET
IN.
I GUESS I DON'T.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A
COMPETITIVE MARKET AND THEY'RE
JUST ANOTHER ELEMENT OF IT NOT
THAT THEY'RE NOT BUT AT LEAST
IT'S NOT AGAIN YOU ZERO LET'S
LET'S NOT HAVE A.
ALRIGHT HE THINKS OF THE YOUR
QUESTION IS WHAT HAPPENS IF.
IF YOU.
THEY CHARGE YOU'RE SAYING WITH
AND THEY DON'T PAY IT AND
THERE'S NO ACCESS AND IS THAT IT
GET. YOUR EGO SO I QUICKLY AND
THEN I WENT THE PROFESSOR TO. TO
ANSWER.
DIED DE DIED IT'S NOT
COMPETITIVE BECAUSE IF NETFLIX
IS TRYING TO REACH ME AND I'VE
TO GO ISP YOU GO TO THAT I OF
SPEED OR YOU DON'T REACH ME AS A
CONSUMER AT ALL. ABOUT DYING THE
PROFESSOR CAN GIVE US. AN ANSWER
TO THAT VERY BRIEFLY AND THEN
WILL ALLOW OVERS BUT WHAT WILL I
TELL YOU WHAT WHY DON'T YOU
RESPOND RIGHT NOW IN. AND THEN
WE CAN PERHAPS HAVE THE.
PROFESSOR BUT AGAIN IT'S TOO
LATE TO GET INTO A FASCINATING.
IT'S KIND OF CONSTITUTIONAL
ISSUE BUT GO AHEAD AND RESPOND
TO THAT IF YOU WOULD THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR THE INTERCONNECTION
MARKET AND THAT IS IN FACT WHAT
WE'RE DISCUSSING IS IN FACT A
VERY COMPETITIVE MARKET THEIR
NUMEROUS PROVIDERS OUT THERE. IN
IT IS ABOUT HAVING A CONTENT
DELIVERY SYSTEM AVAILABLE TO A
PARTICULAR AXE PROVIDER THAT
WANTS TO LOOTED TO MOVE LARGE
VOLUMES OF TRAFFIC.
AND I I MEAN THERE'S A WHOLE LOT
MORE DISCUSSION THAT COULD GO
INTO BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT
BY HIS BILL PROHIBITING. ISPS
FROM ENTERING INTO
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS WITH
EDGE PROVIDERS SAYS THAT THAT IS
SIMPLY GOING TO CUT SHIP THAT
COST TO CONSUMERS.
AND DRIVE UP THE COSTS THAT
CONSUMERS PAY IN ORDER TO
RECEIVE INTERNET SERVICE. AS
OPPOSED TO HAVING THAT COSTS
PAID BY EDGE PROVIDERS WHO HAVE
ENTERED INTO AGREEMENTS TO PAY
THAT TODAY NO ONE'S HOLDING A
GUN TO THEIR HEAD THERE'S
NUMEROUS PROVIDERS OUT THERE.
THAT MARKET IS VERY COMPETITIVE
CASE SO WE'LL LET THAT GET INTO
A BRIEF ANSWER FROM THE
PROFESSOR AND THEN WE'LL MOVE
ON.
THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE
THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GOING TO
SOLVE THIS CHALLENGE TODAY. BOB
BUT IT'S. AN IMPORTANT
CONVERSATION I THINK WE'VE KINDA
MAXED IT OUT TO THE EXTENT WE
CAN IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO JUST
BRIEFLY RESPOND TO THAT.
TENANTS ANT TO CLARIFY WHAT THE
BILL ACTUALLY DOES SO FOR THE
POINT OF INTO CONNECTION. THE
BILL DOES NOT TAKE A POSITION ON
WHETHER THESE KINDS OF
AGREEMENTS SHOULD BE ALLOWED OR
NOT.
INSTEAD AS THE FCC DID AND
THAT'S TWENTY FIFTEEN ORDER. THE
BAY TO KEEP GIVES THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF THE CHANCE TO REVIEW
INTERCONNECTION PRACTICES CASE
BY CASE. TO DETERMINE WHETHER
THEY CIRCUMVENT THE BOLTS NET
NEUTRALITY PROTECTION.
SO THE BILL DOES NOT ON ITS FACE
SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT THIS
KIND OF AGREEMENT CANNOT CANNOT
SAY.
AND BECAUSE THE RESULTS OF WE
ARE NOT CHANGING THE REGIME
COMPARED TO WHAT IT WAS LIKE AND
TWENTY FIFTY. THE BILL DOES
INCLUDE AS PART OF THE NET
NEUTRALITY PROTECTION A SO
CALLED BAN ON CHARGES FOR ACCESS
TO USERS I'M WHAT'S THAT MEANS
MEANS THAT. IF I AM A WEBSITE OF
A SMALL BUSINESS SO YELP OF
WHATEVER. TOTALLY UNRELATED TO
INTO CONNECTION.
MY INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER
KANSEI TO THAT WEBSITE IF YOU DO
NOT PAY ME YOU WILL NOT BE
VISIBLE TO MY INTENSE OF ITS
CUSTOMERS.
DODD HAS BEEN PROHIBITED BY THE
F. C. C.'S ORDERS SINCE TWENTY
TEN. AND THE FCC REPEATED THAT
PROHIBITION IN TWENTY FIFTEEN AS
A SUBSET OF BLOCKING.
AND SO I THINK THERE IS SOME
CONFUSION AROUND THAT ARE KIND
OF PROHIBITION. AND THEN THE
INTERCONNECTION RULES THOUGHT OF
READING EACH JUST A BAN ON
CIRCUMVENTING THE NET NEUTRALITY
RULES AT THE POINT WHERE DATA IS
AND DOES THE NETWORK AND DOT
SWEETIE CRITICAL.
BECAUSE THE TWENTY TEN RULED
SWISS OUGHT NOT TO APPLY TO THE
POINT OF INTO CONNECTION. AND
THAT'S WHAT CREATED ALL THESE
PROBLEMS WHERE IF SO IF THE EDGE
PROVIDERS WOULD BE HERE TODAY
THEY WOULD SAY THAT CALM BECAUSE
EIGHTEEN T. AND THE OTHER LARGE
EYES PIECE DELIBERATELY THAT.
ALL THE CONNECTIONS INTO THEIR
NETWORK CONGESTED ORDER TO
MOTIVATE COMPANIES WITH MONEY TO
PAY FOR I'M CONGESTED AND TO
CONNECT
FOR GOOD I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU
THE LAST WORD AND THEN WE ARE
GOING TO CLOSE ADAM CHAIRMAN.
FROM THE.
UTILITIES COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
THIS BILL WOULD PROHIBIT
AGREEMENTS IN THE ABSENCE OF
AGREEMENTS COSTS FOR NETWORK
UPGRADES COULD EITHER BE
ABSORBED BY THE ISPS. OR PASSED
ON TO CONSUMERS IN THE LONG TERM
ABSENCE OF A MECHANISM TO PAY
FOR INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES BY
THOSE THAT ATTACH.
WILL INCREASE COST PRESSURES ON
CONSUMERS UNQUOTE THAT'S OTHER
UTILITIES COMMITTEE ANALYSIS IN
FACT IT DOES PROHIBIT PAYMENTS.
THANK YOU SIR.
SENATOR WINNER WILL ASSUME STERN
DID YOU WANTTO LOOK AT A FEW
QUESTIONS.
I KNOW IT'S LATE ISN'T IS LATE
ARE A COUPLE QUESTIONS REVIEW
TWO QUESTIONS FOR IN THOSE.
.
TWENTY GET SOME FACTS STRAIGHT
HERE SO WOULD THIS BILL
PROHIBIT.
THE NET FLIX COM CAST
CONTRACT OR NOT IN YOUR VIEW
PROFESSOR.
THOUGHT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IT'S
A WHERE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ARGUING THAT CASE BY CASE DOES
IT PROHIBIT THAT CONTRACT.
HE SAID. IF THE BILL IF THE
AGREEMENT IN FACT.
IT IS A FEE ON.
.
JUST TRANSPORTING DATA TO AND
FROM.
THE END USER OVER THE AXIS
NETWORK THEN. AS AN ATTORNEY
GENERAL I MIGHT LOOK AT THAT AND
SAY THAT'S A CIRCUMVENTION ON
THE BAN ON AXIS.
BUGS DOT.
IS A QUESTION.
HUESO WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY IN
DISAGREEMENT HERE THAT.
WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM EIGHTEEN
TEA? DID ANALYSIS SAID IT WOULD
PROHIBIT THAT YOU'RE SAYING IT
ALSO PROHIBITS THOSE ACCESS FEES
BUT YOU DID. BUT YOU IN YOUR
VIEW THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
MAKING THAT DETERMINATION IN
CASE BY GO SO THAT'S THAT'S ONE
POINT BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT
WAYS IN WHICH YU CAN STRUCTURE
PAID INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS
SO FOR EXAMPLE IF. YOU AND I
ENTERED AND TOOK INTO CONNECTION
AGREEMENT AND WE SAY WE TAKE
TURNS PAYING FOR UPGRADING THE
CAPACITY BETWEEN OUR NETWORKS.
DODD WOULD INVOLVE PAYMENTS BUT
THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH AN
ANNUAL CHARITY ROOTS IF YOU HAVE
A NETWORK I MEAN NETFLIX DOESN'T
HAPPEN THAT WAY ONET SUCK THAT
NETFLIX COUNTS AS AN
INTERCONNECTING PARTY BECAUSE
IT.
IT BRINGS ITS DATA RIGHT TO THE
DOORSTEPS OF THE ICE P. AND THEN
THERE IS A MOMENT WHERE. NETFLIX
NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE ENDS AND
THE ICE PICKS INFRASTRUCTURE
BEGINS AND THEY HAVE
THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO
AND THERE IS A QUESTION OF WHO
PAYS. FOR UPGRADING THAT
CONNECTION X. QUESTION.
SO OTHER QUESTION THAT WE DO WE
TALKED ABOUT THIS
ZERO RATING CON CONTEXT WHICH
IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS AGREEMENT
THAT.
YOU ARE THERE IS THAT THERE'S
NO.
NO CONSIDERATION OR MONETARY
ALLOWANCES IT WHATSOEVER THAT.
THAT THE AUTHORS CAN SEEM THAT
IS CLEAR THAT WE WOULD BAR THAT
KIND OF.
THAT CONSIDERATION FROM FROM
BEING ALLOWED. YOU TO GET IT HAS
TO BE APPLICATION AGNOSTIC I
THINK IT RIGHT THERE. IF YOU'VE
ZERO RATING THAT YOU KNOW AND
YEAH EXACTLY AND.
IF YOU HAVE. IF YOU HAVE TO SAY
ALL ANYONE WITH THE GAMING
SERVICE CAN COME ON ROCKET.
TO BE DISCRIMINATED OR IF FAR.
FROM MIDNIGHT TO FIVE A.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE TO USE
YOUR DATA. ON THEIR VARIOUS
KINDS ZERO RATING.
THAT ARE NOT ANTI COMPETITIVE.
BUT OF COMCAST SAYS.
IF YOU USE OUR SECURITY SERVICES
DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST YOUR DATA.
IF YOU USE A DUTY. THAT DOES
COUNTING INSERTED A THAT IS ANTI
COMPETITIVE MONOPOLISTIC
BEHAVIOR.
THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED EXCUSE
MY VOICE SO VERY LAST QUESTION
SENATOR BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TO
WRAP UP.
BUT IT WILL.
I'D LIKE TO GET AN OPINION FROM
WHAT WHAT THE IMPACT OF BARRING
ON THAT SECOND QUESTION NOT MY
THIRD WITH THE IMPACT OF BARRING
THAT KIND OF.
CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WOULD BE
FROM THE INDUSTRY'S PERSPECTIVE
WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE
CONSUMER MARKETPLACE ON. EITHER
AND EIGHTY T. PRODUCT OR BUYING
A VERIZON CELL PHONE WITH BUILT
IN WHATEVER NETFLIX THAT SHOULD
TO HIRING ARE YOU GET THE LAST
WORD AND IT'LL BE QUICK A WE
BELIEVE EIGHT EIGHT TWENTY TWO
ACTUALLY CREATES AN OUTRIGHT BAN
ON MOST WIRELESS READING
PROGRAMS NOW THESE ARE NEW.
INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS AT VARIOUS
WIRELESS COMPANIES USE THAT ARE
NON DISCRIMINATORY ANY COMPANY
CAN ENGAGE BUT IT'S A
DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR SO I T.
MOBILE MAY PROMOTE THEIR SERVICE
BY OFFERING NEXT FLICKS. THESE
ARE FREE DATA PLANS YOU CAN
WATCH ALL THE MOVIES ALL THE
TELEVISION YOU WANT ON YOUR
DEVICE AND NOT. INVOLVE ANY OF
YOUR DATA CAPS IN THAT PROCESS
THAT'S A PROMOTIONAL ITEM IT'S
AN ITEM THAT'S EXTRAORDINARILY
POPULAR WITH CONSUMERS IN
CALIFORNIA TODAY WE HAVE
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF
CUSTOMERS PURCHASING THESE KINDS
OF SERVICES. VERY POSITIVE VERY
PRO CONSUMER IF YOU BAN IT.
THEN THE CONSUMER GETS NONE OF
THAT BENEFIT.
THEY AND THEY HAVE THE CHOICE.
VERY GOOD THANK YOU THANK YOU
SENATOR CENTER WE'RE GONNA STOP
NOW IF WE COULD NOT SENATOR
WE'RE GOING TO STOP NOW WENT
SENATE I AM.
SENATOR BOB.
SENATOR WIENER WHICH YOU LIKE
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE.
SENATOR QUESTION.
SENATOR.
IT WAS WORTH.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANSWERS
TO ALL THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS
COMPLICATED ISSUE RIGHT NOW.
ASK A QUESTION QUICKLY.
BUT WE ARE BET ABOUT THAT WILL
BE IT ALRIGHT I'M THE ONE WHO'S
IN THE GOVERNOR'S DINNER SO I I
AM AWARE OF HOW LATE IT IS SO.
.
POINT OF REGULATION HERE. SO NOW
WE HAVE BEEN ATTORNEY GENERAL
SORT IN THE DRIVER SEAT WHICH
ACTUALLY I LIKE THAT FRAMEWORK
AND I LIKE THE THE EVOLUTION OF
THIS BILL TO REALLY PUT THE AG
SQUARELY IN THAT POSITION AND I
LIKE THAT THEY'RE DOING SOME
CASE BY CASE EVALUATION.
BUT THEN UNDERNEATH THAT.
DG ES ON THE PROCUREMENT SIDE
AND AND THE CLR A UNDERNEATH
THAT.
WHY ISN'T IT ENOUGH IN IN YOUR
VIEW TO JUST HAVE THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL RUNNING THIS IS OPPOSED
TO SORT OF? NEEDING THAT THAT
ADDITIONAL STEP FOR FOR D. G. S.
ON ON THE PROCUREMENT CIDER OR
RELYING ON SORT OF.
TRIAL ATTORNEYS AND HOW THIS YOU
KNOW THIS SORT OF SEE THAT HIS.
IS A G. NOT SUFFICIENT AND AND
OR OR DO WE REALLY NEED I THINK
HAS TO BE DONE ARE.
I THINK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT THE STATE THE SIZE OF
CALIFORNIA.
THAT WHATEVER WE ARE THE FIFTH
OR SIXTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE
WORLD FORTY MILLION.
PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING HAVING.
PRODUCTS STRONG ENFORCEMENT A
DIVERSITY OF ENFORCEMENT IS A
GOOD THING. I I WILL SAY THAT
BEFORE THIS AMENDMENT TODAY OF
THE INDUSTRY AND ARE WELL LAST
HEARING BEFORE THAT WERE
ASSERTING THAT THAT THE BILL DID
CREATE PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
SO BY THAT AND THAT WAS OUR
INTERPRETATION OF. WHAT THAT
EFFECTIVELY DID PROVIDE THAT?
AND SO.
THE INDUSTRY HAS STATED THAT
FROM THE BEGINNING IT'S BEEN IN
THERE.
SO I I DO BELIEVE THAT HAVING
DIVERSITY OF ENFORCEMENT IS A IS
A GOOD THING. I ALSO JUST WANT
TO SAY IN TERMS OF ZERO RATING
HAVING IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IS IT IS A
RELATIVELY NEW THING. IS IF YOU
IN WHAT MR DEVINE WAS REFERRING
TO A BELIEVE IT IS INTENSELY
ANTI COMPETITIVE. IT'S SAYING IF
YOU USE OUR PRODUCT OR THE
PRODUCT THE PIT SO MUCH MONEY
STOCK ACCOUNTING ANSWERED DATA.
IF YOU USE ANY OTHER PRODUCTS
YOU GONNA TO PAY DATA LOT FOR
YOU OR ME THAT MIGHT BE OKAY
WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT IF I'M A.
LOW INCOME PERSON TO MY KID KEEP
SOME OF THEM HAVE A LOT OF MONEY
TO PAY FOR THAT EXTRA DATA SIGH
DOT TO REAL PROBLEM. AND THAT
WILL ALLOW THE ICE KEYS AGAIN TO
DECIDE WINNERS AND LOSERS DEL
DECIDE WHICH PRODUCTS ARE
WINNERS BECAUSE THERE'S NO DATA
ASSOCIATED WITH THEM AND WHICH
PRODUCTS ARE LOSERS AND THAT'S
NOT WHAT WE WANT. DIED THAT'S AT
THE HEART OF WHAT NO NEUTRALITY
HAS COME RIGHT WE'RE GOING TO
TAKE THAT AS YOUR CLOTHES. AND.
OBVIOUSLY THEY'LL BE MORE
DISCUSSIONS THIS IS SO I THANK
YOU FOR. BRINGING THIS TO SEE
THIS BILL BECAUSE IT'S CLEARLY.
CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE.
BUT IT'S NOT WHEN WE'RE GOING
TO TOTALLY RESOLVED TODAY AND I
WILL.
I AM SURE THAT AS THE BILL
MOVES FORWARD IF IT DOES. THAT
WE WILL.
HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS ON EACH
OF THESE IMPORTANT ISSUE SO WITH
THAT IS OUR MOTION.
YEAH MOVE BY SENATOR MONNING.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
TO THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. JACKSON
AYE JACKSON I AM MORE LOCK MORE
LIKE NO ANDERSON.
ANDERSON NO HERTZBERG.
MONNING.
MONNING EYES STERN.
STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI.
I WIECKOWSKI AYE.
HERTZBERG AYE. ALRIGHT OF THE
BILL. IS OUT FIVE TO TO THANK
YOU ALL AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
THE CONTINUATION OF THIS
DISCUSSION.
BACK ON THE SHIP SENATOR SKINNER
YOU ARE UP NEXT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
YES.
IT'S WAY JUSTICE
MORE PEOPLE.
NINE.
HE SAID.
I CAN'T WORKS OF YOU.
THAT'S ONLY SHE THE WAY SHE'S.
TYLER ALRIGHT WHERE.
WHICH IS ANOTHER SET.
BELIEVE.
NO IT'S A SENATOR.
ALRIGHTY LET'S SO WE'VE GOT A
FEW MORE BILLS HERE.
SENATOR SKINNER THIS IS S. B.
NINE TO.
WE ALLOWED TO.
THIS IS TWO MINUTES EACH
SKINNER THE FLOORS HERE.
SO MUCH THAT I'M CHAIRING
MEMBERS.
FIRST THANK YOU FOR THE
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS I AM I
TAKING THOSE.
AND.
IT ENSURES THAT THE COUNTY
HUMAN SERVICES.
DISTRIBUTES
STAFF
ST GENERAL INFO ABOUT RIGHTS NOT
LEGAL ADVICE.
BASICALLY VERY BRIEFLY WHAT MY
BILL DOES IS ENSURE THAT RIGHT
NOW WE HAVE WORK REQUIREMENTS IF
YOU ARE A CAL WORKS OR A
CALIPHATE SNAP RECIPIENT. QUE
AND WE KNOW THAT MOST OF THOSE
CAL FRESH AND.
CAL WORKS ARE IN LOW WAGE JOBS
AND SOMETIMES IN THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE IN ANY JOB.
YOU CAN HAVE.
YOU CAN EXPERIENCE SEXUAL
HARASSMENT WERE YOU COULD HAVE
YOUR RIGHTS VIOLATED BUT OF
COURSE
FOLKS LIKE THIS WHEN THEY HAVE A
REQUIREMENT TO WORK OUR VIEW
USUALLY AFRAID O REPORT OR FEEL
THAT THEY CAN'T LEAVE A HOSTILE
WORK ENVIRONMENT. BECAUSE THEY
WOULD LOSE THEIR BENEFITS
SO WHAT SB NINE TWO SIX DOES IS
PROTECT THOSE BENEFITS SHOULD
THEY HAVE TO LEAVE DUE TO THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES FROM THAT JOB. AND
IT HELPS OUR COUNTY SOCIAL
SERVICE AGENCIES. AND MAKE SURE
IT THAT THOSE WORKERS ARE
INFORMED OF THIS TYPE OF RATE
AND I WILL TURN NOW TO.
JESSICA MARTHA LOW FROM THE
WESTERN CENTER IS.
TESTING IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE JUST
GOT MARTHA WITH THE WESTERN
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY WHERE
SPONSOR IN SUPPORT OF THE SPELL.
DESPITE THE RHETORIC THAT COMES
OUT OF WASHINGTON DC THAT'S NOT
PROGRAM DOES HAVE WORK
REQUIREMENTS IT HAS SEVERAL WORK
REQUIREMENTS AND THOSE
REQUIREMENTS KEEP PEOPLE FROM
GETTING. A FEDERAL FOOD
ASSISTANCE THAT COWARDS PROGRAM
THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED TWENTY
YEARS AGO NOW ALSO PUTS SEVERAL
WORK REQUIREMENTS ON.
CAO WORKS RECIPIENTS AND.
WILL ELIMINATE AID FROM AN
ADULT IN THE PROGRAM IF THEY DO
NOT COMPLY WITH THOSE WORK
REQUIREMENTS.
AND ONE OF THE WORK REQUIREMENTS
RESULTS IN PEOPLE KEEPING JOBS.
.
THE AT BECAUSE THE EVEN UP
BECAUSE THEY'RE AFRAID THAT THEY
COULD LOSE THEIR BENEFITS.
EVEN THOUGH.
THEIR WORKPLACE RIGHTS HAVE
BEEN VIOLATED.
SOMETIMES BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY
AREN'T AWARE OF THE WORKPLACE
RATES A YOU'D BE SURPRISED ABOUT
HOW MANY LOW INCOME PEOPLE DON'T
KNOW.
WHAT WAGE THAT'S LOOK LIKE AND
WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM AND THEY
DON'T KNOW ABOUT HAVE PAID SICK
DAYS AND THE RIGHTS THAT THEY
HAVE UNDER THOSE PROVISIONS?
?
AND SO THEY STAY AT THE
WORKPLACE EVEN THOUGH THOSE
THOSE RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED.
IF THEY VOLUNTARILY LEAVE THE
WORKER CAN DETERMINE THAT THEIR.
EXEMPT FROM THAT REQUIREMENT
BUT THAT'S AT THE CHURCH OPTION
OF THE WORKER SO WHAT THIS BILL
DOES NINE TWO SIX ISN'T SIMPLY
SAY ESTABLISHES IN LAW. THAT.
GOOD BECAUSE SHALL BE EX AB
LIST WHEN.
WHEN IT WORKPLACE RIGHTS HAD
BEEN VIOLATED AND IF THE
RECIPIENT OR APPLICANT DISCLOSES
AT THE WORKPLACE RIGHT HAS BEEN
VIOLATED. THEY SHALL BE INFORMED
GENERALLY WITH THE AMENDMENT
FROM THE COMMITTEE.
OF THEIR RIGHTS TO FILE A
COMPLAINT AGAINST THE EMPLOYER.
WE ARE REALLY. GRATEFUL OF FOR
THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS BILL
AND HOPEFUL FOR YOUR AYE VOTES
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT WITNESS PLEASE.
GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS SELENA
PRIOR AND I REPRESENT
ELIGIBILITY WORKERS THROUGH SEIU
STATE COUNCIL. I'M I'M HERE TO
SHARE MY SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL
AND CLARIFY ISSUES RELATING TO
THE VERIFICATION OF COULD CAUSE
DETERMINATION.
FIRST LET ME SAY THAT CAL WORKS
AND CAL FRESH PROGRAMS ARE
INCREASINGLY WORKERS SUPPORT
PROGRAMS THIS IS BECAUSE ALMOST
EIGHTY PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE
POOR. HAVE EARNINGS FROM WORK
AND CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE TO
SECURE STE TO SECURE WAGES TO
PAY FOR BASIC NEEDS IN
CALIFORNIA WHERE THE COST OF
LIVING IS VERY HIGH. OUR
ELIGIBILITY WORKERS STRUGGLE TO
KEEP UP WITH OUR CASELOAD AND
ENSURE QUALITY CONTROL TO ENSURE
THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROGRAM
STILL WE DO OUR JOB AND THESE
PROGRAMS HAVE SOME OF THE LOWER
STE ERROR RATES OF ANY
GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS WE ARE VERY
PROUD OF THIS WORK. CLARIFYING
RULES AND SIMPLIFY VERIFICATION
PROCESS HE'S HELPLESS TO ACHIEVE
BOTH A PROGRAM THAT SERVES ITS
PURPOSE OF PREVENTING HARM TO
LOW INCOME FAMILIES WITH
CHILDREN AND MAINTAINING PROGRAM
INTEGRITY. THAT'S BEEN NINE TWO
SIX SUPPORTS THESE GOALS BY
SIMPLY CODIFYING THE DEFINITION
OF GOOD BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES
WHEN IT CONCERNS EITHER A
VIOLATION. OF A WORKER RIGHT
ALREADY IN LAW OR UNPREDICTABLE
SCHEDULES THAT.
UNDERMINE THE ABILITY OF A
FAMILY TO MEET THE WELFARE TO
WORK RULES ARE SNAP WORK
REQUIREMENT. THE ABILITY TO
PROVIDE GOOD BECAUSE IN THE
SITUATIONS. ALREADY EXISTS UNDER
WORKER DISCRETION BUT WE KNOW
OUR WORKERS ARE VERY BUSY AND
UNLESS PROMPTED MIGHT NOT THINK
TO ASK AN APPLICANT OR RECIPIENT
IF THE REASON THEY LEFT WORK WAS
A RESULT OF ONE OF THESE
WORKPLACE RELATED REASONS. WE
APPRECIATE THAT S. B. NINE TWO
SIX DOES NOT UNDULY BURDEN OUR
WORKERS WITH EXTRA PAPERWORK BUT
STILL ALLOWS US TO PREVENT
FURTHER HARM FROM A LOW INCOME
WORKER. WHO IS LEFT THAT JOB
VOLUNTARILY ONLY BECAUSE THEIR
WORKER RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED
WHERE THEY COULDN'T GET THE
OUTSOURCING NEEDED TO COMPLY
WITH THE WORK?
WITH WORK AND CHILDCARE
OBLIGATIONS
WE ALSO BELIEVE S. B. NINE TWO
SIX WILL HELP US TO IMPROVE
AWARENESS OF WORKER RIGHTS MANY
OF THEM SECURED WITH HARD FOUGHT
CAMPAIGNS LED BY THESE VERY
WORKERS THEMSELVES. AND HOW TO
FILE AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT WITH
THE APPROPRIATE STATE OR FEDERAL
AUTHORITIES THIS WILL ONLY HELP
TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL ECONOMIC
SECURITY OF LOW INCOME WORKERS
THANK YOU VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
IF YOU PLEASE STEP FOR WITH YOUR
NAME AND AFFILIATION.
MICHELLE STOP ARENSKY CHILDREN'S
DEFENSE FUND CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SORRY TING IN HEARING NONE WILL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
ANY COMMENTS QUESTIONS.
WE HAVE A MOTION I WANNA THANK
YOU FOR ALSO FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL I JUST WONDER. DO YOU HAVE
ANY STATISTICS ON HOW OFTEN
VICTIMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT. DO
IN FACT STAY IN THEIR JOBS WHERE
THEY'RE BEING HARASSED CHIPS TO
MAINTAIN THEIR ELIGIBILITY HAS
HE BEEN ANY. RESEARCH DONE ON
THAT.
I'M SORRY COULD YOU I DON'T
THINK THERE'S RESEARCH THAT.
THERE'S ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE BUT
I%
DON'T THINK WE HAVE DATA THAT
WOULD GIVE US THE SPECIFIC
NUMBER OF HOW MANY OF THESE
BENEFICIARIES. MAY HAVE
EXPERIENCED THAT ON THE JOB AND
STATE IN THE JOB I THINK IT.
MIGHT BE HELPFUL GOING FORWARD
AS WE SEE THIS EFFORT TO REALLY.
PUT
SUNSHINE ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN
THE WORKFORCE. IF WE COULD TRY
TO FIND SOME DATA TO DO THAT
BECAUSE I THINK ABOUT IT WOULD
BE HELPFUL TO. TO KNOW. HOW THAT
IS WORKING AND AS HOPEFULLY BE
ABLE TO ADDRESS IT IF WE CAN'T
AT THAT TIME? SO WITH THAT.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR VOTE
SOUNDS GOOD ALRIGHT THERE'S A
MOTION THE MOTION IS.
DO PASS AS AMENDED TO SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
JACKSON AYE JACKSON AYE MORE
LOCK.
ANDERSON.
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG AYE
MORNING.
MONNING AYE STERN. STERN AYE
WIECKOWSKI AYE AYE WIECKOWSKI
AYE.
FOR THE LOVE BILL HAS FIVE VOTES
WE WILL LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS THANK YOU SENATOR
SKINNER AND NOW YOU ALSO HAVE A.
FILE ITEM TWELVE S. B. NINE
EIGHTY FOUR. STATE BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS.
TIME THANK YOU SO MUCH MADAM
CHAIR SO. EARLIER I BELIEVE.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS IN THIS
COMMITTEE THAT.
TO CHEER HERSELF HAS A BILL S.
B. EIGHT TO IX WASN'T HEARD IN
THIS COMMITTEE YES WESTCHASE SO.
YOU KNOW WHAT THAT BILL DID
WHICH WAS.
TO HELP GET.
MORE WOMEN ON OUR PRIVATE
SECTOR.
OR CORPORATE BOARDS
SO YEAH I'M CALIFORNIA OBVIOUSLY
HAS BEEN WORKING VERY MUCH TO BE
A LEADER IN GENDER EQUITY WE DID
BRILLIANT UP PAY EQUITY BILL
THANK YOU. THE CHAIR. AND.
THIS BILL IS TRAINS SQUARELY
CEMENT OUR LEADERSHIP AND NOT
SPACE BY ENSURING THAT OUR
APPOINTED STATE BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS HAVE A. DAY HALF
THEIR MEMBERSHIP BE FEMALE.
RIGHT NOW GOVERNOR BROWN'S
APPOINTMENT MEAT DOT MORE LESS
AND BUT WHO KNOWS THE FUTURE
GOVERNOR WOULD OR NOT BUT
BECAUSE WE ARE HOPE WE EXPECT
THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO DO BETTER.
WE WANT TO DEMONSTRATE OUR
LEADERSHIP I'VE TAKEN FROM THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT TO POST THE
MAKE UP OF BOARDS ON THE
GOVERNOR'S WEBSITE INSTEAD OF ON
SECRETARY OF STATE. BUT I ALSO
WILL BE WILLING TO AMEND MY BILL
TO CONFORM IT TO THE RATIOS THAT
WERE IN THE CHAIR SPILL IN S. B.
EIGHT TWO SIX.
BECAUSE YOU ED RATIOS BASED ON
THE NUMBER AND THERE WERE HAS
BEEN.
LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS RAISED
AROUND LIKE IF YOU HAVE A BOARD
OF ONLY THREE PEOPLE IN THAT
KIND OF THING SO. I'M MORE I'M
VERY HAPPY TO HAVE A TWO MEN
MIGHT BILL TO CONFORM TO THE
SIMILAR RATIOS AS THE TEARS
BILL.
AND WITH THAT.
I'LL TURN TO MY WITNESS INTO A
SUPPORT ROLE DEMAND.
GOOD EVENING THANK YOU MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE MY NAME IS OLGA MAC ON
THE PHONE THERE ARE WOMEN SERVE
ON BOARDS.
A MOMENT THAT ENCOURAGES
FORTUNE FIVE HUNDRED COMPANIES
TO BUILD LIVERS BOARDS WE HAVE
BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH
SPONSOR OF THIS BILL EQUAL
RIGHTS ADVOCATES.
I HAVE WRITTEN A BOOK AND
REGULARLY SPEAK RIGHT AND
TRAINED PROFESSIONALS ABOUT
BOARD SERVICES.
GOVERNOR BROWN HAS RECENTLY
EMPLOYED AND APPOINTED ME TO THE
CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION
COMMISSION.
THOUGH THIS IT SHOULD DOES NOT
ADDRESS BOTS RUSSIANS ARE AYE
SPECIES WITH A VERY IMPORTANT
ISSUE LET ME JUST BECAUSE THE
BENEFITS FROM WOMAN TO SERVE ON
ON ON GOVERNMENT BOARDS TO GIVE
THEM LEADERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES.
WHICH MAKES THIS BILL VERY
IMPORTANT ONE GOVERNMENT SERVICE
OFTEN GARNERS PUBLIC WAS ABILITY
AND MAY PROVIDE A LOT OF
RECOGNITION THAT HELPS WITH
CAREER OPPORTUNITIES TOO MANY
GOVERNMENT BOARDS TOUCH
SUBSTANTIVE AREAS OF LAW
BUSINESS AND COMMUNITY. AND
THAT'S PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY TO
LEARN SUBSIDY OF SKILLS AND TO
NETWORK.
THREE SERVING ON GOVERNMENT
BOARDS CAN PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES
TO INCREASE LEADERSHIP BUDGET
AND MANAGEMENT SKILLS FOR
SERVICE ON GOVERNMENT BOARDS
HELPS TO BUILD A REPUTATION OF
INTEGRITY AND AFFIX. BECAUSE
MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT BOARDS ARE
ULTIMATELY ACCOUNTABLE TO
PUBLIC.
FINALLY WOMEN WITH PROPER
OUTCOME COMPRISE MORE THAN FIFTY
PERCENT OF THE POPULATION THIS
IS WHY THE PERCENTAGE REPORTING
OF THIS BILL IS CRUCIAL.
IT ENSURES THAT WE PROGRESS
TOWARD PARITY INTENTIONALLY AND
ACTUALLY ACHIEVE SUCCESS.
IN CONCLUSION LET ME LEVY WAS
TWO NUMBERS THAT. THAT ARE
KEEPING UP WITH NIGHT ACCORDING
TO THE UNITED STATES GOT OUR
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
IT WILL TAKE FORTY TWO HUNDRED
YEARSTO REACH PARITY ON
CORPORATE BOARDS. LET ME PUT IT
IN PERSPECTIVE I HAVE A SIX YEAR
OLD DAUGHTER SHE WILL BE FORTY
SIX TWO HUNDRED AND SIX ONE THE
REAP REACH PARITY IN THE UNITED
STATES.
SO THERE'S ONLY VERY SLIM CHANCE
THAT EVEN MY YOUNGEST CHILD WILL
WILL SEE PARITY WAS IN HER
CAREER OR LIFE TIME. THIS BILL
IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
AND TO SHOW THE REST OF THE
NATION WORLD ON CORPORATE
AMERICA HOW INCLUSION IS DONE
RIGHT AND MORE IMPORTANTLY HOW
IT IS DONE IN OUR LIFETIME. FOR
THIS REASON WE STRONGLY SUPPORT
AS BEING NINE EIGHT FOUR AND I
URGE YOU AYE VOTES THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SENATOR MONNING THE BILL IS
SILENT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION
DATE THERE BECAUSE THERE WAS AN
IMPLEMENTATION DATE ON THE.
CHAIRS SO I KNOW WE'RE GONNA GET
THE DATA AND TO REPURPOSE ON THE
GOVERNMENT'S WEBSITE BUT.
AND WHEN WOULD THAT EXISTS REYES
THAT IS.
THIS HAD HAPPENED JANUARY FIRST
QUARTER YOU KNOW NEXT YEAR SO
THAT MAY BE. SOMETHING THAT THEY
PAY APPRECIATE NEEDS SUGGESTION
WE WILL PUT A DATE AND EFFECTIVE
DATE AND. MY OTHER ONE IT JUST
ON THE FLY SAY BUT WERE WE WILL
TAKE THAT POINT AND.
IS A GOOD ECOMMENDATION AND
MODIFY THE BILL AS IT MOVES
FORWARD IF IT'S FORTUNATE TO DO
SO. THANK YOU SENATOR MONNING IN
THAT WAS MY QUESTION TOO BUT
JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON
IMPLEMENTATION AS OPPOSED TO
JUST.
WHEREVER THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE
IS. THEIR MAIN WANNABE SOME.
NEXUS TO AS BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS ARE AT MEMBER SOME
OF THEM HAVE. LONG ROTATIONS.
LINE WHERE THEY DON'T ARMS
TERMS IN RATE TERMS ARE OFTEN
STAGGERED SUCH ANYWAY IT'S IF WE
WOULDN'T NECESSARILY WANT TO
HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING
REMOVED WE'D WANT TO HAVE IT
PHASED IN TWO OKAY SO ILLOGICAL
OPPRESSION OF THE MECHANICS YOU
RIGHT. HAD PRECIADO YES
FORGIVENESS SENATOR HERTZBERG IN
THE CLARITY WITH RESPECT TO BY
THE CHAIRS BILL. THE USER'S AT
LIKE ONE BOARD PERSON BY THIS
DATE WHEN UP TO PLAYING ALL
THREE PEOPLE THIS AND HOW IT
WORKS IN THIS. COMING AGAIN
PRIVATE SECTORS COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT AND GOVERNMENT.
SEEMS TO ME. I DON'T AS TO HOW
THAT WOULD WORK YOU WANT TO GET
TO FIFTY PERCENT MOST OF ITS
FIFTY PERCENT NOW BUT YOU WANT
TO GET THERE. AND ALSO OF COURSE
WHEN YOU SAY MINIMAL FIFTY
PERCENT MOST BOARDS OUGHT
NUMBERS SO IT REQUIRES A
MAJORITY RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW YOU DEAL WITH THAT
BUT I DIDN'T PUT ITS WERE ASIO
QUESTION. THAT'S WHY I'M IN TO
AMEND IT WITH THE RATIOS THAT
THE CHAIR HAS IN HER BILL
BECAUSE IT ADDRESSES THOSE OUGHT
OTHERS RATIONS AND TRY TO GET.
HIGH THING IT'S ONE IN FIVE TWO
AND SIX THREE IN.
GOVERNOR MORE OKAY. AND I THINK
TO THE DIFFERENCE TO IS HERE WE
HAVE THAT THERE IS AN AUTOMATIC
CHANGE OVER THE PROBLEM WITH
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS IS THOSE
GUYS GET ON AND THEY'RE THERE
FOR LIFE. HERE WITH THERE IS A
TURNOVER AND SOMETIMES IT'S
POLYGONAL BASED UPON WHOSE AND
SO I THINK IT CAN BE DONE AND
CERTAINLY I'M HAPPY TO. THINK
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT AND. IT
DOES HAVE A LOT OF PARALLELS TO
THE T THE PRIOR BILL THIS IS
THE PUBLIC SECTOR THOSE OF THEIR
OTHER CHALLENGES THE OPPORTUNITY
GET THERE QUICKER.
YOU YOU MAY BE WITH YOU.
SENATOR STERN ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS HERE ORATOR STIR.
LET ME PUT A SENATOR HERTZBERG
FOR A QUICK SECOND AND JUST ASK
YOU TO COMMENT ON SOME OF THESE
OTHER CONSTITUTIONALITY
QUESTIONS AND THE. THERE'S A
PARTY ANALYSIS DOCUMENT SECTION
EIGHT ARTICLE ONE.
AND.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE USING THE
SAME SORT OF TOOLS THAT
JACKSON'S BILL WAS USING TO
AVOID THAT SORT OF GENDER BASED
DISCRIMINATION OR FOR HOW TO.
GET AROUND THE JUST DON'T YOUR
COMMENTS THERE.
.
WE. IN TALKING TO LEDGE COUNCIL
THEY RAISED THAT WOULD.
THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY IN AND
WE TRIED TO.
FOR DAY DRAFTED IT.
EXCUSE ME.
IN A WAY THAT THEY HOPED ADDRESS
TO THAT ADDRESS THAT ISSUE BUT.
.
THE COMMITTEE ALSO. REQUESTED
THAT WE TAKE THE MEMO WHICH I'VE
ACCEPTED THAT WOULD.
ALLOW THAT GIVES A PORTION OF
THE BILL AS DRAFTED WERE TO BE.
YES THAT THE REMAINING PARTS
WERE CORRECT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE
UPHELD.
VERY GOOD GUESS.
BECAUSE WHEN REYES AS WE MOVE
FORWARD.
IN THIS IS FRAMED. WITH BINARY
GENDER IDENTIFICATION.
AND HOW DO YOU ADDRESS.
HOME IT IS NOT AYE NEARING. WE
COULDN'T COLLEGES I SHOULD HAVE
ASKED TO ANSWER THROUGH THE
CHAIR.
.
WE TOOK THE AMENDMENT. AND.
.
WHICH COMMITTEE.
EMILY SPACING OUT.
IN A PREVIOUS COMMITTEE THAT
WOULD DEFINE. THAT THE GENDER
WAS SELF DEFINED.
SO THAT WE ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE
OF THE BINARY GENDER ISSUES.
WHAT'S
IT'S AN INTERESTING POINT. YEAH.
VIA.
RIGHT RIGHT. YEAH I THINK THAT'S
THAT'S HELPFUL.
AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO FIVE I
DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA FIND A
HUGE NUMBER OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHERE THIS OCCURRED TAKES PLACE
BUT RECOGNIZING THE NON BINARY.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THERE THAT
WE'RE.
REALIZING IS THAT IS.
IN EXISTENCE IF NOT PREVALENT IN
SOME. COMMUNITIES THAT CERTAINLY
WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR REPRESENTATION
THAT WILL.
AND IT COULD KIND OF GO BEYOND
THE FILM.
THE CURRENT THE. SORT OF WALL OF
OF MALE CONTROL.
PROTECT. WE HAVE A MOTION O.
EXCELLENT THANK YOU A ANY OTHER
COMMENTS WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE.
I APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND
BURGER ALL THE AMENDMENTS
EXCELLENT THANK YOU OF. THE
MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED TO
SENATE APPROACH IN THERE WILL BE
OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT I THINK
THAT YOU'LL BE TAKING THEIR REPS
REFLECTED IN THIS DISCUSSION.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. JACKSON
AYE JACKSON AYE MORLOCK.
SELECT NO ANDERSON.
HERTZBERG HERTZBERG AYE MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN STERN AYE
WIECKOWSKI AYE WIECKOWSKI AYE
ALRIGHT OF FIVE TWO ONE A WE
WILL HOLD THE ROLE OPEN.
FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS AND I
THINK THAT TAKES CARE OF YOUR
BILLS THANK YOU VERY MUCH I
THINK SENATOR HERTZBERG IS UP
NEXT.
THE PAST.
THURMOND.
OKAY.
ALRIGHT.
THANK YOU.
MEDICARE MEMBERS ALL MAKE THIS
QUICK. FOUND.
YOU DON'T SEE ME DOING A LOT OF
STUFF IN THE HEALTHCARE SPACE. A
PART IN MY FIRST BILL THERE THAT
THE OTHER DAY.
AND.
THIS IS ONE WHERE I WAS BUT I'M
LOOKING AT THIS IN THE CONTEXT
OF TRYING TO DEAL WITH. SOME
LEVEL OF EFFICIENCIES AND
THOUGHTFUL DELIVERIES
OF SERVICES WHEN SOMEONE DIALS
NINE ONE ONE THEY ALWAYS HAVE TO
GO TO THE E. R. EACH OF US I'M
SURE HAVE ANECDOTAL EXPERIENCES
WITH THEIR FAMILIES WHEN YOU GO
TO ANY ARTIST IS JAMMED UP WITH
FOLKS. AND IT'S PROBLEMATIC
SO WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN THIS
THIS IS STILL A WORK IN
PROGRESS.
I NEED TO FOCUS A LOT MORE TIME
AND ATTENTION ON THIS PERSONALLY
BUT THE THE IDEA OF DEALING WITH
THESE NINE ONE ONE CALLS
FIGURING OUT HOW TO CREATE A
SYSTEM. WHERE IN THIS BILL WE
PUT TOGETHER A COMMITTEE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE?
PA.
OF FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO SIT DOWN
AND TRY TO DEVELOP THESE
PROTOCOLS WITH HOW TO MAKE THIS
THING REALLY WORK WITHOUT WAS
MAKING PROFESSIONALFOLKS. WHO
ARE
TENDING TO PEOPLE IN THAT DO NOT
ADDRESS MAKING HEALTHCARE WORSE
THAN WHEN YOU ARE THE WISE? AND
THE OTHER HAND SEEING IF THIS IS
ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR FOR THE
SYSTEM TO WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY
AND EFFECTIVELY. AS IT RELATES
TO THIS COMMITTEE ARM THE
IMMUNITY OF LIABILITY ISSUES ARE
THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE.
AND.
THEIR EXTENDED TO NINE FORTY
FOURS PROVISION AND DON'T EXPAND
THE IMMUNITY THAT ALREADY EXISTS
UNDER EMERGENCY SERVICES SYSTEMS
AND PREHOSPITAL MARGINAL CARE
PERSONNEL LACK FIREFIGHTERS
POLICE OFFICERS EMTS REGISTERED
NURSES. AND THE LIKE SO THAT
DOESN'T CHANGE A STANDARD THE
QUESTION IS IS WE PUT THIS BOARD
TOGETHER COMMITTEE PARAMEDICS.
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
WE WE EXTEND ARE THAT THAT
ELEMENT NOT SO BELIEVE WHY THE
MATTER WAS REFERRED TO TO THIS
COMMITTEE WE HAD A FULL HEARING.
IN THE IN THE PROCESS IN THE IN
HEALTH CARE COMMITTEE.
PARTY VERY GOOD THANK YOU FOR
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH
PLACER MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
CHRISSY BAUM ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS.
APPEARS TO BE SPONSORS OF THIS
MEASURE IT'S ONE OF THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR ITS WORK.
RECOGNIZES THE SIGNIFICANT
POLICY DISCUSSION.
THE SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE
VOTED A LOT OF THE.
CONCERNS AND HEALTH RELATED AND
OF COURSE AS MENTIONED BY THE
AUTHOR ALL TAKE A CUE FROM HIM
TO BE QUICK THE RELIABILITY
ISSUES THAT I THINK. WITH A
COMMITTEE CONSULTANT HAS MADE
CLEAR THAT ONLY EXTEND TO THESE
CAMINO COMMITTEE PARAMEDICSWHEN
THEY'RE PROVIDING. EMERGENCY
SERVICES WHICH IS THE CURRENT
CITADEL LA FREE IN TEEPEES AND
DOES NOT EXTEND SIMILAR
LIABILITY PROTECTIONS ARE
IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY. FOR THE
NON TRANSPORT NON EMERGENT
SERVICES OF THAT ARE CONTAINED
IN THIS BILL.
I'D I THINK WE HAVE A CHRONIC
INSIGNIFICANT ISSUE THIS IS A
FORWARD THINKING BILL.
TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE AND TRY
TO GET PATIENTS IS OF THE
SERVICES THEY NEED AT THE RIGHT
TIME. I THINK THAT ONE FINAL
THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT THIS
IS JUST ABOUT.
PROVIDING SERVICES DOES NOT
EXIST NOW WHICH IS TO
EFFECTIVELY CONNECT PEOPLE WITH
THE SERVICES THEY NEED NOT
REPLACE THOSE SERVICE PROVIDERS
BUT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE
CONNECTED WITH THEM SO. WITH
THAT WE CONTINUE WORK THEIR
OPPOSITION AND REQUEST YOUR AYE
VOTE.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
MANAGER TIM AND REPRESENT THE
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF AMERICAN
BECAUSE NUMBERS EFFICIENCY AND
WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF SB NINE
FORTY FOUR. A WE'VE BEEN
INVOLVED IN DISCUSSION RUN
COMMITTEE PARAMUS AND GOING BACK
TO TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN WHEN
THE PILOT PROGRAMS WERE FIRST
CREATED AND WE'VE ACTUALLY
ESPRESSO NUMBER CONCERNS IN THE
QUESTION IS. WHAT IS THE RIGHT
AMOUNT OF EXPANSION OF SCOPE FOR
PARAMEDICS WHEN MAKING
DETERMINATIONS IN THE FIELD
WHERE TO TRANSPORT INDIVIDUALS
ON THE SYSTEM TODAY EVERYONE
GOES EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS OF
THERE IS A? THIS ASSESSMENT BY A
PARAMEDIC THE BACKSTOP IS ALWAYS
EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT BUT AT THE
SAME TIME WE WANT TO BE OPEN TO
THE IDEA OF MAYBE LOOKING AT
DOING THINGS DIFFERENT AND
ARMORS HE MEDICAL SERVICE
SYSTEM.
WE ALL KNOW OUR E. OURS ARE
OVERCROWDED WE WANT TO BE OPEN
TO NEW APPROACHES TO IT. AS
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS.
COMMUNITY PARA MEDICINE TOPIC
WE BASICALLY HAD FOUR PRINCIPLES
THAT WE THINK ARE DRESSED IN S.
B. NINE FORTY FOUR ONE IS THAT
WHATEVER MOVES FORWARD IS
TIGHTLY.
.
SET UP TO MODEL THE PILOTS THAT
WERE TESTED SO SOMETHING WAS
TESTED IT WAS PROVEN TO BE SAFE
AND THAT'S WHAT WE THINK SHOULD
MOVE FORWARD IN LAW. WE ALSO
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THEY
HAD THE BILL ALSO INCLUDE NON
DISCRIMINATORY COME ASPECTS
WHICH MEANS THAT ALL PATIENTS
ARE TREATED THE SAME. AS YOU
KNOW IN TALA WITCHES EMERGENCY
MEDICAL TREATMENT LABOR ACT SAYS
THAT ANYONE WHO COMES IN THE
MERCY DEPARTMENT IS TREATED
REGARDS THEIR ABILITY TO PAY
THEIR AGE ETHNICITY. THOSE
PROVISIONS WE THINK ARE
IMPORTANT TO BE INCLUDED IN HERE
SO IT'S NOT A SITUATION WHERE
SIMPLY DRUNK PATIENTS OR
PATIENTS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS ARE
BEING TRANSFERRED TO THESE
ALTERNATE DESTINATIONS.
WERE ALSO.
.
IT WAS IMPORTANT US THAT THERE
BE SOME DATA COLLECTION ASPECTS
BE INCLUDED IN THE BILL WHICH SB
NINE FORTY FOUR DOES
SO WITH THESE PROVISIONS BEING
INCLUDE IN THE BUILT IN PRINT
TODAY. WE JUST RECENTLY MOVED TO
A SPOT.
THANK YOU VERY GOOD THANK YOU
OTHER WITNESSES SINCE PORT.
CURRENT WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
MADAM CHAIR STEPHANIE ROBERSON
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
NURSES ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING
OVER HUNDRED THOUSAND REGISTERED
NURSE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
WE VIGOROUSLY OPPOSE THIS BILL
AS WE BELIEVE THREATENS PUBLIC
SAFETY BY AUTHORIZING USE OF
FIRE IN HAMLET'S PARAMEDICS TO
PROVIDE HEALTH CARE SERVICES
CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY LICENSED
PROFESSIONALS. THE BILL WE
BELIEVE IS NOT ONLY DANGEROUS
BUT IT GIVES FALSE HOPE TO
COMMUNITIES THAT PRIVATE
AMBULANCE COMPANIES AND FIRE
DEPARTMENTS CAN PROVIDE BOTH
CONTINUITY OF CARE HIGH QUALITY
HEALTH SERVICES. IN ADDITION TO
THEIR TRADITIONAL YOU MUST ROLES
FIGHTING FIRES RESPONDING TO
EMERGENCIES ETCETERA. MS
ADDRESSES THERE DELAYS AND
IMPACTS ON THE EMS SYSTEM IN
THEIR VERY OWN REPORT. IN THE
STATE THAT READINESS AND MAXIMUM
RESPONSE TIME IS THE MISSION OF
PRIVATE AMBULANCE COMPANIES THAT
WERE STILL ASKING WHY THESE
EMPLOYERS ARE FOCUSED ON. USING
THEIR STAFF TO PERFORM SERVICES
THAT WILL NO DIE NO DOUBT DIVERT
FOR THAT GOAL. TO ILLUSTRATE
THIS POINT THE SAN DIEGO FREE
ONE NINE ONE ONE PROJECT HAD TO
STOP AND ROLLING THE PATIENTS IN
THE PILOT. TURNED OVER THEIR
EXISTING CLIENTS BE CASE MANAGED
BY LICENSING HEALTHCARE
PROFESSIONALS THAT ALL HAPPENED
BECAUSE THE PARAMEDICS AND
TRAINEES WERE STRETCHED WAY TOO
THIN DO IN THEIR PRIMARY JOBS.
AS OFFERING. CASE MANAGEMENT
SERVICES TO FREQUENT NINE ONE
ONE CALLERS AND THEY WERE NOT
ABLE TO MEET THEIR CONTRACTED
NINE ONE ONE RESPONSE
BENCHMARKS.
WE'RE STILL HAVING SIGNIFICANT
PROBLEMS OBTAINING THE RAW DATA
THAT WE CAN'T EVEN EVALUATE THE
SECOND DATA REPORT. WE'VE BEEN
GETTING THE RUN AROUND FROM
VARIOUS AGENCIES AND.
I WOULD BE REMISS TO NOTE THAT
THE CURRENT MEDICINE PROJECT
MANAGER OF AMSA. IS THAT OR WAS
A FORMER CEO OF NMR WEST ONE OF
THE LEADING PRIVATE AMBULANCE
COMPANIES THE ALSO IMPORTANT TO
NOTE OVER EIGHTY ONE PERCENT OF
STATE AMBULANCES ARE OPERATED BY
THESE PRIVATE FIRMS. AND WE
BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A BIG
PUBLIC VERSUS.
PRIVATE TURF FIGHT BUT SHOULD
NOT BE WAGED ON OUR PATIENTS IS
NOT ABOUT PATIENT SAFETY.
I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT THE
SPONSORS WOULD SUPPORT THIS BILL
IF IT WAS SPONSORED BY AND MARK
ONLY AND THE PRIVATES DID ALL
THE WORK SO I THINK WE REALLY
NEED TO CONSIDER HIS IN THIS
BILL. WE'VE ALSO LEARNED THAT
THE EMS MEETING GUY LAST MONTH
THEY'RE CURRENTLY CONSIDERING A
PROTOCOL THE ANTHEM BLUE CROSS
WILL REIMBURSE AMBULANCE
PROVIDERS THAT DO NOT TRANSPORT
PATIENTS TO THE HOSPITAL. SO IN
CLOSING AND I NEED TO WRAP UP WE
BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL CREATES A
TWO TIERED HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.
NINETY NINE PIECE PATIENTS
DIVERTED FROM THE PRIVATE
HOSPITALS PARTICIPATING IN THE
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH STANISLAW
PROJECT TO ALTERNATE
DESTINATIONS WERE MEDI CAL ONLY
INCH UNDER INSURED PATIENTS.
NONE OF THESE PATIENTS WITH
PRIVATE INSURANCE WERE DIVERTED
FROM THE ER.
SO I'VE GIVEN YOU A LIST OF
DIFFERENT PATIENT OUTCOMES SO I
CAN CUT MY TESTIMONY THANK YOU
VERY MUCH THANK YOU MEASURE.
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF
YOU COME FROM.
THANK YOU PETER CALLISON ON
BEHALF OF TO CLIENTS THE FIRST
OF THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION
FOR HEALTH SERVICES AT HOME.
WHICH ARE HOME HEALTH AGENCIES
WILL ASSOCIATE THEIR CONCERNS
WITH THE NURSES CONCERNS.
ANOTHER CLIENT WITH OPPOSITION
IS THE CALIFORNIA HOSPICE AND
PALLIATIVE CARE ASSOCIATION THEY
HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SET OF
CONCERNS HAVE SHARED IT WITH THE
AUTHORS OFFICE.
THE PILOT PROGRAM THAT WAS
CONDUCTED IN VENTURA COUNTY.
THERE WERE TO HOSPICE PROGRAMS
IT'S THE HOSPICE ASSOCIATIONS
UNDERSTANDING THAT PARTICIPATED
THERE WERE SIXTEEN HOSPICE
PROGRAMS IN VENTURA COUNTY THAT
DECLINE TO PARTICIPATE BECAUSE
THEY FELT THAT HOSPICE WAS NOT
THE RIGHT. SORT OF PROGRAM TO
HAVE A NON HOSPICE PERSONNEL.
PARTICIPATE IN HOSPICES A
CAPITATED BENEFIT IT'S LIKE A
MANAGE CARE PLAN FOR THE
TERMINALLY ILL AND SO THEY ARE
AT RISK FOR ALL OF THE COSTS
THAT ARE INCURRED FOR THE CARE
OF THE TERMINALLY ILL. THEY FEEL
THAT THERE IS CONCERN ON BOTH
THE LIABILITY SIDE AND IN TERMS
OF THE WAY THEY OPERATE THAT
WISHED THEIR POSITION AS OPPOSED
LESS AMENDED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION ALRIGHT
WELL MANTRA BEFORE THE QUESTIONS
COME BECAUSE I KNOW QUESTIONS
GONNA COME I JUST WANT TO SHARE.
THAT I MET WITH THE OPPOSITION
EARLIER I PROMISED TO MEET WITH
THEM WEEKS AGO AND I GOT TOO
BUSY AND I MIGHT DIDN'T DO WHAT
I SAID I WAS GONNA DO. A MEETING
TOMORROW WITH THE FIREFIGHTERS
AND I'M A PUT AS MUCH MUSCLE TO
THIS GLISTENING TO THESE THINGS
TO FIGURE OUT. IF IS IS WHAT YOU
KNOW HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS THING
WORK IN A IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY
THAT'S GOOD FOR PUBLIC SAFETY
GOOD FOR PUBLIC HEALTH. AND.
FIGURES IT OUT SO I HAVEN'T I
HAVEN'T PUT ENOUGH IN IT ELBOW
GREASE INTO IT YET SO I
APOLOGIZE TO THAT APPRECIATE
APPRECIATE QUESTION OF THIS
HOUSE. WHERE THIS IS A BIG
DISCUSSION AND ARE HARD?
TECHNICAL JURISDICTION HERE'S A
LIABILITY ISSUE I ONLY READ AND
I'M TOLD THAT THERE WAS A LARGE
DISCUSSION IN HEALTH I THINK
PART OF THE PROBLEM THAT I IF I
MEAN THEN I'LL OPEN IT FOR
OTHERS IS.
THAT BIG BEGIN ALL THE DATA.
WE'RE TRYING TO WORK OFTEN DATA
AND IT SEEMS THAT THAT THERE'S
NOT AN AGREEMENT ON WHAT THE
DATA SAYS SO I THINK. IN TERMS
OF THE BEST APPROACH TO THIS IF
WE COULD CUT THROUGH AND GET
SOME ACTUAL INFORMATION WHETHER
THIS DOES SET UP A TWO TIER
SYSTEM WHETHER THERE'S A WAY WE
CAN PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH. A
WHILE AT THE SAME TIME OF
RECOGNIZING THAT IN OUR
HEALTHCARE SYSTEM TODAY WE HAVE
ENORMOUS CHALLENGES. BUT FOR US
TECHNICALLY ARE ONLY ISSUES A
LIABILITY AND THAT DISCUSSION IS
SOMEWHAT LIMITED TO WHETHER OR
NOT.
IT'S AN EMERGENCY VERSUS A NON
EMERGENCY.
A PROGRAM BECAUSE LIABILITIES
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO BUT
I WILL I WILL HOPE WE'VE TALKED
TO.
ALL DIFFERENT SIDES OF AN OF
FALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
HAVE BUT. THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO.
REALLY DO TRY TO DO WELL AND DO
GOOD ND I HOPE THAT THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN RESOLVE
SO WITH THAT IF THERE ARE ANY.
QUESTIONS OF SENATOR MONEY.
BUT I DO THINK FOR THIS
COMMITTEE THE LIABILITY QUESTION
IS PARAMOUNT.
WE DID DISCUSS THIS IN HEALTH.
.
I DO HAVE THE CONCERNS ME ON
LIABILITY ABOUT A TWO TIER
SYSTEM OF. OF THIS BEING USED
ONCE YOU DETERMINE SOMEBODY
SPACE SORCERER LACK THERE OF OF.
MOVING THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
.
BUT.
I HEAR THE AUTHORS COMMITMENT TO
CONTINUE MEETING I'M GONNA BE
SUPPORTIVE THIS EVENING. BUT I'M
GONNA RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SEE
HOW. HAVE THESE ISSUES GET
ADDRESSED HAS THIS THINGS MOVE
WE WE ACTUALLY HAVEN'T BEEN
MEMBERS SO WE HAVE WERE PUT IN
THE PROTOCOLS. BECAUSE I
OBVIOUSLY TWO TIER SYSTEM IS NOT
SOMETHING I WANTED TO WRITE ANY
STRETCHED IMAGINATION.
SO IT'S ON YOUR RADAR I LOOK
FORWARD TO SEEING YA THE PRODUCT
OF YOUR LABORS WHAT. THINK YOU
AND I WOULD SHARE THAT TOO I I'M
GOING TO SUPPORT THIS GOING
FORWARD NOW BUT LOOK LET'S SEE
WHAT WE COME UP WITH POSITION.
THINK THERE MIGHT BE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR SWEET SPOT BUT
AS FAR AS OUR RESPONSIBILITY
HERE RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT IT'S
SOMEWHAT LIMITED. SENATOR
MORLOCK QUEUE MANAGER I JUST
WANNA CONFIRM WHO WORK WORDS TO
CALIFORNIA AMBULANCE ASSOCIATION
NOW ON THIS BILL.
THEY STILL OPPOSED.
BUT WITH ORDER MISSION I BELIEVE
THEY'RE STILL OPPOSE YOU MAY BE
JUST TIME THEM OUT TONIGHT.
AND SO THERE WERE REALLY CLEAR
A SENATOR HERTZBERG YOU TAKING
THE AMENDMENTS THAT TO WORK AT
EMANATE OUT OF THE HEALTH
COMMITTEE YOU TAKING THOSE
AMENDMENTS HERE.
I WASN'T THAT THIS IS THAT THE
MOTION WILL BE DO PASS. BY AS
AMENDED AND I'M JUST CONFIRMING
YOU'VE TAKEN ALL THOSE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PROPOSED IN
HEALTH YOU ARE TAKING THEM HERE.
VERY GOOD OKAY.
.
ANYBODY ELSE KNOW ALRIGHT
SENATOR HERTZBERG A VERY BRIEF
CLOSE IF YOU WOULD.
PARTY.
.
THERE'S A MOTION BY SOONER Y.
KOWSKI DO PASS AS AMENDED TO
SENATOR PROBES.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON I JACKSON I AM MORE LOCK
MORE LIKE NO ANDERSON HERTZBERG
AYE HERTZBERG AYE MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN. STERN AYE
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI AYE.
ALRIGHT THE BILL HAS OF FIVE
VOTES FIGHT TO ONE WE WILL HOLD
THE ROLE OPEN.
WE HAVE ONE MORE BILL IT'S A
BILL OF MIND OPPOSITION HAS BEEN
REMOVED SO THEY SHOULDN'T TAKE
VERY LONG. AT WHICH POINT WE ARE
GOING TO.
OPEN THE ROLE A AND FOR ALL
THOSE VOTES THAT WERE MISSED
WILL DO IT ONE TIME SO.
IF ANY OF THE ABSENT MEMBERS
WHO ARE.
A SENATORANDERSON IF YOU DO
WISH TO VOTE IF YOU WOULD COME
DOWN. WE SHOULD BE READY TO LIFT
THE ROLES VERY SHORTLY
.
GOOD EVENING.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THIS
BILL IS A VERY BASIC BILL IT
JUST SIMPLY SAYS IF A CONTRACT
WAS NEGOTIATED A PARTICULAR
LANGUAGE IN THE DOCUMENTS WERE
SUPPLIED IN THAT LANGUAGE. IF
YOU ARE GOING TO RE NEGOTIATE A
MORTGAGE LOAN OR EXTEND CREDIT.
AND IF THE AGREEMENT
NEGOTIATIONS WERE ORIGINALLY
DONE IN SPANISH CHINESE TAGALOG
VIETNAMESE FOR KOREAN THE FIVE
MOST USED LANGUAGES IN
CALIFORNIA OTHER THAN ENGLISH.
ACCORDING TO THE LATEST CENSUS
THAT THIS THE DOCUMENTS THAT
REFLECT THAT.
GREEN NEGOTIATION OR EXTENSION
WILL ALSO BE IN THE SAME
LANGUAGE AS YOU'VE NEGOTIATED
BOTH THE CONTRACT AND THE RE
NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT.
I'D LIKE TO.
THAT INDICATE THAT I'VE
RECEIVED A LETTER TODAY FROM THE
ORGANIZATIONS ORIGINALLY APART
WERE OPPOSED TO THE BILL.
INCLUDING THE CALIFORNIA BANKERS
ASSOCIATION IN THE CHAMBER THEY
FORMALLY REMOVED THEIR
OPPOSITION WITH THE AMENDMENTS
THAT I TOOK IN BANKING AND
FINANCE. WE NOW HAVE NO KNOWN
OPPOSITION. BECAUSE THAT IS THE
GRAPH MEN OF THE BILL.
THE.
THAT BASICALLY THE DOCUMENTS
ARE GOING TO BE PREPARED BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS
OVERSIGHT.
THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE WORK ON
THIS.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THEM BY JUNE
THIRTIETH THAT GOING TO GIVE
THE.
THE VERY AND.
LENDING INSTITUTIONS UP TO SIX
MONTHS TO GET HIM ON THEIR
WEBSITES GET READY AND GET HIM
OUT. AND.
IN THAT REGARD.
WE'RE GOING TO BE CONSISTENT
AND LET PEOPLE WHO NEGOTIATED
SOMETHING BE ABLE TO MEMORIALIZE
IT IN WRITING IN A LANGUAGE THEY
UNDERSTAND WITH THAT I WOULD ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE.
BASICALLY.
I THINK IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL
WEREN'T NO.
PREEMPTION WHEN HE HOOKED OKAY
GREAT OKAY DO WE HAVE ANY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT. YES RONALD
COLMAN HERE WE HAVE A CLICK THE
CALIFORNIA LOW ICOME CONSUMER
COALITION ACCORDING TO
CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY
CENTER FORTY PERCENT OF OUR
STATE'S POPULATION IS MADE UP OF
IMMIGRANTS. THEY HAVE A VARYING
DEGREE OF ENGLISH PROFICIENCY
OFTENTIMES THERE ARE BUSINESS
MATTERS THAT ARE NEGOTIATED
AIMED AT THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE
MOST OFTEN AS YOU HEARD THIS
HAPPENS WITH SPANISH CHINESE
TAGALOG VIETNAMESE AND KOREAN.
HOW WIN IT THIS HAPPENS WITH THE
MORTGAGE LOAN DOCUMENTS
CERTAINLY EXISTING LAW COVERS
THE TRANSLATIONS AND PEOPLE GET
DOCUMENTS IN THAT LANGUAGE THAT
WAS NEGOTIATED?
IS THAT IN WHICH THEY
NEGOTIATED THEIR THEIR MORTGAGE
LOAN CERTAINLY WE JUST WANT TO
EXTEND THESE PROTECTIONS FOR
CONSUMERS TO MORTGAGE LOAN
MODIFICATIONS IT IS VERY
IMPORTANT FOR THESE CONSUMERS TO
KNOW. ABOUT WHAT IS IN THESE
DOCUMENTS SO THAT THEY CAN SAVE
THEIR HOMES AND WE ASK FOR YOUR
AYE VOTE THANK YOU.
POLICING LUIS I'M WITH CENTER
FOR RESPONSIBLE LENDING IN
STRONG SUPPORT.
CHRIS OUR SONS OF THE TRUTH OF
THE COALITION FOR HUMANE
IMMIGRANT RIGHTS IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
EVERYBODY SO WELL TRAINED ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
I.
I DON'T SEE ANY WITNESSES
OPPOSITION SO QUESTIONS TO MY
COLLEAGUES GET IN YOUR MIND IT
QUICK QUESTION.
IS THE WRITTEN CONTRACT HAVE TO
WE PROVIDED IN THE LANGUAGE
TALKS NEGOTIATED IN YES.
YEAH BECAUSE THAT WAS ESTABLISH
FOR CAR DEALS AND YEARS AGO.
NEGOTIATED AND NON SPANISH.
IT HAND AMONG ENGLISH CONTRACT
ABSOLUTELY TO THIS WOULD GO TO.
THOSE FIVE MAJOR LANGUAGES IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS
OVERSIGHT IS GOING TO PREPARE
THOSE DOCUMENTS
SO THAT.
YOU KNOW THEY WERE BASICALLY
THE STANDARD FORM OF
RENEGOTIATION SO THAT THE
INDIVIDUAL ACTUALLY WILL BE
SIGNING A DOCUMENT IN A LANGUAGE
THEY UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD
REFLECT THE NEGOTIATION THAT
TOOK PLACE IN THAT LANGUAGE
THANK YOU.
I HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE THE BILL
AS AMENDED ASMUND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
MADAM CLERK PLEASE TAKE THE
ROLE.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
TO SENATE APPROPRIATIONS JACKSON
AYE JACKSON AYE MORLOCK AYE
MORLOCK AYE ANDERSON.
HERTZBERG HERTZBERG AYE MONNING.
AYE MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN AYE WIECKOWSKI. MCCASKEY
I.
TO ME. PASSES SIX ZERO.
AND WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR FEW
MORE SECONDS.
AND MANAGE.
TO MAKE AN ACCOMMODATION TO
SENATOR MORLOCK WHO GETS THE
AWARD FOR SITTING IN HIS CHAIR
OF THE LONGEST OF ANY ONE.
BUT HE DID MISS FILE ITEM NINE
SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH
THAT.
.
SOME OF THE MONEY WE'RE GONNA
START WITH NUMBER NINE THEN
WE'LL GO BACK OVERALL FROM BUT
SENATOR MORE LIKE HAS BEEN HERE
THE ENTIRE TIME AND I THINK.
THAT THAT GROUP THAT IF THERE'S
A REWARD FOR THEM.
THAT THE AND THAT'S FILE ITEM
NINE ALRIGHT LET'S GO A START
WITH FILE ITEM KNOWING MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SENATOR
ANDERSON IS. NOT IN HIS OFFICE
IN IS NOT RESPONDED TO OR
NUMEROUS INQUIRY SO WE ARE JUST
GOING TO GO THROUGH THE WORLD.
ALRIGHT FILE ITEM NINE PLEASE SO
THAT THE MOTION IS. A DO PASS AS
AMENDED TO SENATE APPROACH THE
VOTE COUNT IS FIVE A TWO ZERO
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
PER LOCK. MORE LUCK NO ANDERSON.
ALRIGHT THAT BILL IS FIVE TWO
ONE.
NOW WE'RE GOING TO START OFF
AGAIN AT FILE ITEM ONE.
ALRIGHT LOOKS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.
THERE YOU MAY BE ABLE TO GET TO
THE DESERT.
NOW. YOU DON'T FROM SO SORRY.
ALRIGHT.
.
FILE ITEM ONE DO PASSED THE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS THIS IS.
SENATE THE SENATE BILLS SB
EIGHT ONE EIGHT PLEASE.
A CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON HERTZBERG AYE HERTZBERG
AYE STERN.
STERN I AM FIVE TWO ONE THAT
BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM NUMBER TWO
SENATOR HILLS S. B. EIGHT
NINETEEN. THE VOTE COUNT IS FIVE
TWO ZERO. A DO PASSED THE SENATE
APPROACH PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS.
ANDERSON.
STERN.
STERN I SIX TO ZERO THAT BILL IS
OUT FILE ITEM THREE S. B. A
TWENTY TWO SENATOR WIENER THAT
BILL IS ACTUALLY OUT FIVE TO
TWO.
FILE ITEM. OF FOR S. B. NINE I
EIGHT TWENTY SIX BY JACKSON. OF
THE VOTE COUNT IS FOUR TO ONE
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON STERN.
STERN I'M BY TO ONE THAT BILL IS
OUT NEXT IS FILE ITEM FIVE S. B.
A TWENTY NINE SENATOR WIENER.
HELLO I'M SORRY.
APPARENTLY SENATOR ANDERSON'S
WALKING IN RIGHT NOW ALRIGHT.
WHICH KEEP LET'S JUST KEEP GOING
VERY GOOD ALRIGHT A NUMBER FIVE
WAS PULLED THANK YOU SHOW.
FILE ITEM.
SIX WAS CONSENT SEVEN WAS
CONTAINED EIGHT FILE ITEM NINE
WHICH OUSTED.
WHICH HOSTED FILE ITEM NINE WILL
DO FILE ITEM TEN IT'S WILL BE
NINETY.
WE DID FILE ITEM NO.
IS THAT AWAITING CALL WE DIDN'T
DO WE CALL IT.
BOOKS AND.
MY CHEST ITEM NINE.
QUIRK OKAY STOPPED AFTER I'D
BEEN AWARE ONLY GET HARDER.
I WAS ANNOUNCES.
ALRIGHT WELL IT WILL GO BACK
AGAIN TO GO BACK IN INTO ALL
THOSE.
FILE ITEM.
A. TEN TEN IS A. NINE FORTY FOUR
LEADS TO THAT NAY WILL DO THE
CONSENT CALENDAR FILE ITEM TEN.
S. B. NINE FORTY FOR THE THE.
THAT BILL IS.
GO AHEAD DO IT CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS PLEASE ANDERSON.
ANDERSON I OR AT SIX TWO ONE
THAT BILL IS OUT LOOKS TO THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. COMPRISED OF
ITEM SIX SEVEN EIGHT.
ELEVEN.
.
SEVENTEEN.
TWENTY.
TWENTY FIVE TWENTY SIX TWENTY
SEVEN AND THIRTY.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
ANDERSON ANDERSON AYE HERTZBERG
HERTZBERG AYE STERN. STERN AYE
SEVEN THIS YEAR THE CONSENT
CALENDARS OUT. OF FILE ITEM
TWELVE S. B. NINE EIGHTY FOUR
SENATOR SKINNER. PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON. ANDERSON NO FIVE TO TO
THAT BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM
THIRTEEN S. B. NINE NINETY
SENATOR WIENERS BUILT. A PLEASE
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG AYE SEVEN
ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM
FOURTEEN S. B. NINE NINE EIGHT
BY SENATOR DODD.
THE VOTE COUNT IS THREE TWO ONE
THE CHAIR VOTING AYE PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT MEMBERS ANDERSON.
ANDERSON NO HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG
AYE STERN.
FOR.
FORTY TWO THAT BILL IS OUT. FILE
ITEM FIFTEEN SB ONE THOUSAND ONE
SENATOR HERTZBERG THE VOTE COUNT
IS WHAT WE CALL THE VOTE COUNT
LOOK CAN WE. OPEN THAT REOPEN
THE ROLE FOR.
DOWN WITHOUT.
ALRIGHT WITHOUT OBJECTION WE THE
PRIOR SITTER. รณ. WITHOUT
OBJECTION WITH RECONSIDERATION
THE PREVIOUS ROLL CALL.
IS.
VACATED AND WE WILL KNOW LET ME
WRITE THAT. IT'S ALRIGHT WE'RE
GONNA WHICH A SECOND ALL RIGHT.
HERE FILE ITEM OF SIXTEEN.
WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THAT ITEM
FILE ITEM SIXTEEN.
THE VOTE COUNT IS.
FOUR TO ONE THAT IS SO CENTER
HERTZBERG TEN TWELVE LOW COUNT
FORTY ONE PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS ANDERSON.
NO NO ANDERSON NO WHITE HOUSE
KING BY WIECKOWSKI IRATE FIVE TO
TO THAT BILL IS OUT. FILE ITEM
EIGHTEEN.
S. B. ELEVEN TWENTY ONE BY
SENATOR DODD THE VOTE COUNT IS
THREE TO ONE SURE VOTING ART
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
HENDERSON ANDERSON NO HERTZBERG
HERTZBERG AYE STERN.
STERN AYE. FIVE TO TO THAT BILL
IS OUT NEXT IS NUMBER NINETEEN
S. B. ELEVEN FIFTY.
FIFTY FIVE FIVE FIFTY YES FIFTY
FIVE CHOOSE ME SENATE HUESO
SPILL THE VOTE COUNT IS FIVE TWO
ZERO PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG
GUYS LIKE HOUSE HE.
SIX TO ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT
NEXT IS FILE ITEM TWENTY ONE S.
B..
TWELVE OR ONE JACKSON PLEASE
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON.
ANDERSON EVAN THIS HERO THAT
BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM TWENTY TWO
S. B. TWELVE SIXTEEN SENATOR
GLAZERS CHARTER SCHOOL BILL. THE
VOTE COUNT IS CURRENTLY TO TO
TO.
SURE VOTING NO PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS ANDERSON.
ANDERSON I'M.
STERN.
WIECKOWSKI.
ALRIGHT THE BILL FAILS THREE
VOTES THE TO TO. RECONSIDERATION
IS REQUESTED IN GRANTED FILE
ITEM TWENTY THREE. S. B. TWELVE
THIRTY EIGHT BY SENATOR ROTH
THE VOTE COUNT IS SIX TWO ZERO
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON. ANDERSON NOW ALRIGHT
SIX TWO ONE THAT BILL IS OUT
NEXT IS FILE ITEM TWENTY FOUR.
CENTER GALGIANI TWELVE FORTY
NINE PLEASE CALL THE.
ABSENT MEMBERS I'M SORRY THAT.
OF THE CENTER MORRELL CAN
ALREADY VOTED ON THAT OUR RIGHTS
TO THAT BILL IS ODDS OF FIVE TO
ONE. FILE ITEM.
.
TWENTY EIGHT SENATOR LARS S. B.
FOURTEEN OH TO PLEASE CALL OF
THE VOTE COUNT IS THREE TO ONE
CHAIR VOTING I PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. ANDERSON.
ANDERSON NO STERN.
WIECKOWSKI AYE WIECKOWSKI AYE
FORTY TWO THAT BILL IS OUT FILE
ITEM TWENTY NINE SP FOURTEEN
TWENTY SEVEN SENATOR HILL. THE
VOTE COUNT IS OF FOR HIS HERO
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
BARLACH.
ANDERSON. ANDERSON AYE STERN.
SERVICES.
THISIS FILE ITEM TWENTY NINE. I.
AYE STERN AYE SIX TO ZERO THAT
BILL IS OUT. AND.
FINALLY SENATOR ROTH'S.
IF SHE. NINETY ONE.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
VOTE COUNTED SIX TO ZERO
ANDERSON.
ANDERSON AYE.
SO.
SEVEN TWO ZERO THEIR PILLOWS OUT
NOW WE MAY HAVE TO CHEST OF.
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
WITH THREE CONSIDERATION WE'RE
GOING TO REPEN THE ROLL ON THE
ITEMS THAT SENATOR ANDERSON
MISSED.
SUDDENLY.
THEY KNOW THAT MEANS EVERYONE
WHO'S VOTED TO.
CAN. YOU CAN LEAVE AND IT'S
JUST THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH I
WAS A. POSITIVE DEL TERRY.
I HOPE THAT WAY ISN'T DESERT
PUBLIC.
POST AT SOME OF ECONOMY HIGH.
CALLING WELL YOU ARE YOU GOING
TO VOTE FIRST GAYHEART LET'S GO
LET'S GO OF BACK TO FILE ITEM.
ONE.
.
THE VOTE COUNT IS FIVE TWO ONE
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
ANDERSON. ANDERSON NO FIVE TO TO
THAT BILL IS OUT.
NEXT IS OF FILE ITEM TO S. B.
EIGHT NINETEEN THE VOTE COUNT
HIS SX TO ZERO PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS.
ANDERSON ANDERSON AYE. SEVEN TWO
ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT. NEXT IS
FILE ITEM THREE.
THAT BILL IS ALREADY OUT FIVE
TO TWO. EVERYONE HAVING VOTED OF
THE SAME IS TRUE WITH FILE ITEM
BOB SORRY NO FILE ITEM FOR FIVE
TO THE ONE PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS ANDERSON.
ANDERSON NO I'VE TO TO THAT BILL
IS OUT.
NEXT WE HAVE.
FILE ITEM NINE IT'S BEEN NINE
TWENTY SIX THE VOTE COUNT IS
FIVE TWO ONE PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS ANDERSON.
NO
ANDERSON NO FIVE TO TO THEIR
BILL IS OUT.
.
HE SAID IT. BY SHARING REQUEST
I.
YOU ALONE.
WE DIDN'T ARE. THAT. I DID NOT
CAN WE DID NOT COACH ALRIGHT SO
WITHOUT OBJECTION PULLED ON.
HOLD ON ONE SECOND MY SCRIPT IS
HERE WITHOUT OBJECTION WITH
THREE CONSIDERATION WE'RE GOING
TO REOPEN. THE ROLE ON FILE
ITEM.
TWENTY EIGHT S. B. FORTINO TO
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
STERN. STERN AYE FIVE TO DO THAT
BILL IS OUT HERE.
HE'S.
I POSTED A LONG COAT.
STATE FOR US BECAUSE. WE'D HAVE
TO.
ONE NEVER IS JULIE. I THINK
WOULD HAVE TO GET YEAH THAT'S
TOO LATE WOULD HAVE TO EVERYBODY
BUT WE GOT WE GOT MOST. OF.
PUBLICLY VERY.
GOOD BREAKFAST.
SO I. APPRECIATE.
THAT'S OKAY.
ALRIGHT THANK YOU OKAY.
THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL OF OUR
ITEMS.
THEREFORE THANK YOU TO THE STAFF
FOR AN OUTSTANDING JOB ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE AISLE. WE ARE
ADJOURNED