JUDICIARY PERFECT TIMING WELCOME
SENATOR RAWSON.
I KNOW YOU'VE HAD NOTHING ELSE
TO DO TODAY SO.
WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE HERE -- WE
NEED ONE MORE PERSON FOR QUORUM
SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND START AS
A SUB.
AND INTERRUPT IF WE MAY.
AS SOON AS WE'RE ABLE TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
WE DO HAVE TEN ITEMS ON PROPOSED
CONSENT TODAY -- THEY ARE FILE
ITEM SIX AB TWO FIFTY THREE BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER STONE MARK STONE.
FILE ITEM TEN AB FIVE FIFTY
EIGHT BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
PETRIE-NORRIS.
FILE ITEM FIFTEEN A. B. NINE
NINETY ONE BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
GALLAGHER FILE ITEM SEVENTEEN AB
ELEVEN THIRTY TWO BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER GABRIEL.
FILE ITEM TWENTY FIVE A. B..
FIFTEEN SEVENTY THREE BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER HOLDEN WITH
AMENDMENTS.
FILE ITEM TWENTY SIX A. B.
SIXTEEN SIXTY FIVE BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHAU FILE ITEM TWENTY
EIGHT AB SEVENTEEN THIRTY FIVE
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER BAUER KAHAN.
FILE ITEM TWENTY NINE AB
EIGHTEEN THIRTEEN BIAS -- THE
ASSEMBLY INSURANCE COMMITTEE
FILE ITEM THIRTY AB EIGHTEEN
EIGHTEEN BY THE ASSEMBLY
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WITH
AMENDMENTS.
AND FILE ITEM THIRTY ONE AB
EIGHTEEN NINETEEN BY THE
ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
TEN BILLS ON A PROPOSED CONSENT.
AS A RESULT OF THE GREAT.
AS WELL WE HAVE TO GET ESTABLISH
A QUORUM BUT AS A RESULT OF THE
GREAT WORK OF COMMITTEE STAFF
THANK YOU -- LET'S GO AHEAD AND
ESTABLISH A QUORUM AND THEN
WE'LL MOVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
JACKSON HERE JACKSON HERE
BORDERS.
JUST HERE TO RUSSELL.
WE'RE ALSO HERE GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ HERE JONES MONNING
STERN UMBERG Y. CASKEY WHAT MY
CASKEY HERE.
NUMBER HERE ALL RIGHT WE WE HAVE
A QUORUM.
AND THERE IS A MOTION ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR MADAM SECRETARY
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL JACKSON HI
JACKSON AYE BORDERS.
GORGEOUS I DO RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES.
MONNING STERN UMBERG.
NUMBER OF IOWA CASKEY RECOUNTS
THE AYE ALL RIGHT -- WE WILL
LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS.
SO FOLKS IF YOU WERE HERE ON ANY
OF THOSE ITEMS I CHOSE LIVE --
LISTED AND WITH THAT WE JUST
VOTED ON YOU'RE MORE THAN
WELCOME TO STAY BUT THEY'RE NOT
GOING TO BE HEARD TODAY THEY'VE
ALREADY BEEN HEARD --
ESSENTIALLY THROUGH THE CONSENT
CALENDAR [inaudible]
AND OF YOUR AGAIN INVITED TO
STAY IF YOU ARE GOING TO LEAVE
PLEASE AND AS YOU DO LEAVE AFTER
YOUR ITEM IS HEARD.
PLEASE IF YOU WOULD LEAVE THE
ROOM AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN
BECAUSE THE NOISE FROM THE HALL
CAN BE DEAFENING.
MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO OUR A TO
BE ABLE TO CONCENTRATE
[inaudible]
SO -- WE WILL GO AHEAD WITH
TODAY'S AGENDA.
THE MEASURES IN THIS COMMITTEE
ARE HEARD IN FILE ORDER -- I'D
LIKE TO ASK FOR EACH MEMBER THAT
THERE BE TWO MAIN WITNESSES TWO
MINUTES EACH. FOR SUPPORT AND
THEN WE WILL ASK.
ANY ADDITIONAL INDIVIDUALS IN
SUPPORT TO PLEASE COME UP TO THE
MICROPHONE -- OVER HERE IN THE
CORNER AND GIVE YOUR NAME
AFFILIATION AND INDICATE THAT
YOU ARE IN SUPPORT.
WE WILL THEN GO AHEAD AND ASK
THE OPPOSITION TO GIVE THEIR
NAME AFFILIATION AND INDICATE
THEIR OPPOSITION OR IN ANY
INSTANCE IF YOU'RE NEUTRAL --
YOU CAN INDICATE THAT OF AND
THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND BRING
THE MATTER BACK TO THE DIE IS
FOR DISCUSSION -- AND THEN WE
WILL VOTE ON EACH ITEM AS THEY
ARE PRESENTED SO -- THE FIRST
MEASURE THERE WE WILL BE HEARING
TODAY IS FILE ITEM ONE A. B.
THIRTY TWO BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER
BONTA IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME ON
OFTEN PRESENT [inaudible]
GOOD AFTERNOON [inaudible]
GOOD AFTERNOON.
FORESHORES THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR THANK YOU COLLEAGUES
THANK YOU STAFF FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT AB.
THIRTY TO TODAY AB THIRTY TWO
PROHIBITS THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION FOR ME NEWMAN OR
ENTERING INTO.
A CONTRACT WITH A FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE PRISON FACILITY
BEGINNING ON JANUARY FIRST.
TWENTY TWENTY AND WILL
COMPLETELY PHASE OUT THEIR USE
BY.
TWENTY TWENTY EIGHT SB THIRTY
TWO WAS RECENTLY AMENDED. TO
EXPAND THAT BAN TO THE USE OF
FOR PROFIT PRIVATE DETENTION
FACILITIES GENERALLY.
THIS INCLUDES THOSE FOR FOR
PROFIT DETENTION FACILITIES.
THAT HOUSE IMMIGRANT SUBJECT TO
CIVIL ATTENTION AS WELL AS OTHER
POPULATIONS THE REALITY IS THAT
FOR PROFIT PRIVATE PRISONS.
AS A FOR PROFIT CORPORATIONS
HAVE A FIDUCIARY DUTY. TO
MAXIMIZE THEIR PROFITS FOR THEIR
SHAREHOLDERS AS A RESULT.
MAXIMIZING PROFITS OFTEN COMES
AT THE EXPENSE OF DISINVESTMENT
IN CALIFORNIANS.
IN MY VIEW OF THE THIS FIDUCIARY
DUTY IS IN CONFLICT WITH
INVESTMENT IN REHABILITATION OF
PEOPLE.
THE REDUCTION OF RECIDIVISM
RATES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF
SAFE AND HEALTHY CONDITIONS OF
CONFINEMENT.
IT ALSO CONFLICTS WITH OUR
VALUES AS A STATE AND OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE
WELFARE AND WELL BEING.
OF OUR REIDENTS FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE DETENTION FACILITIES
HAVE REPEATEDLY FAILED.
WITH DOCUMENTED HUMAN RIGHTS
ABUSES INCLUDING INADEQUATE
MEDICAL CARE AND ACCESS AT THIS
MOMENT IN HISTORY IN THE FACE OF
SHAMEFUL ABUSES WE NEED TO TAKE
STRONG ACTION. TO DEFEND OUR
VALUES OF RACIAL JUSTICE ND
COMMON HUMANITY.
IT'S CLEAR THE GOALS OF OUR
GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT THOSE WHO
LIVE IN THE STATE AND GIVE THEM
A CHANCE TO SUCCEED.
IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE
GOALS OF THESE CORPORATIONS TO
MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE
LOCKING UP CALIFORNIANS.
CONTRACTING WITH FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE PRISONS WAS IT I WAS
ORIGINALLY A TEMPORARY SOLUTION
TO ADDRESS THE SEVERE PROBLEM OF
INMATE OVERCROWDING. TO COMPLY
WITH A FEDERAL COURT ORDER TO
REDUCE THE PRISON POPULATION TWO
HUNDRED THIRTY SEVEN POINT 5% OF
DESIGN CAPACITY.
AD TO AVOID THE EARLY RELEASE
OF INMATES AS A RESULT OF VOTER
INITIATIVES LIKE PROP 47-57.
THERE HAS BEEN A DECLINE IN THE
INMATE POPULATION THAT ALLOWS
FOR THE TRANSFER OF INMATES FROM
PRIVATE. TO PUBLIC FACILITIES AS
OF MAY TWENTY NINETEEN
CALIFORNIA'S IT MAY POP
POPULATION WAS AT A HUNDRED AND
THIRTY FOUR POINT 8% OF DESIGN
CAPACITY WHICH FALLS UNDER.
THE COURT ORDERED POPULATION CAP
NOW THAT WERE UNDER THE CAP.
AND SEEN A DOWNWARD TREND IT IS
TIME FOR CALIFORNIA TO ESTABLISH
A SENSIBLE TIME LINE TO PHASE
OUT THE USE OF FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE PRISONS.
AB THIRTY TWO WILL BEGIN TO RE
DIRECT OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM TO INVEST IN AND
PRIORITIZE EFFECTIVELY ABILITY
THE BILL TATIAN PROGRAMS.
WHICH WILL MINIMIZE RECIDIVISM
RATES AND MAXIMIZE SUCCESS. FOR
INMATES UPON THE RE ENTRY INTO
SOCIETY.
AND IT WILL HELP ENSURE SAFE AND
HEALTHY CONDITIONS OF
CONFINEMENT FOR CALIFORNIANS
WITH A. B. THIRTY TWO WE
RECOGNIZE THAT OUR STATE'S
COMMITMENT. TO ITS PEOPLE SHOULD
NOT BE LIMITED TO STATE PRISONS
BUT SHOULD EXTEND TO PROTECT
EVERY CALIFORNIAN WHO IS IN THE
CUSTODY OF A CORPORATION RUNNING
A FOR PROFIT DETENTION FACILITY.
WE NEED TO DO MORE. TO PROTECT
OUR PEOPLE AND INVEST IN THEIR
SUCCESS AB THIRTY TWO AS AMENDED
SET US DOWN THAT PATH.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT
TODAY I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR
AYE VOTE WITH ME HERE TODAY TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF AB THIRTY
TWO IS PROFESSOR BILL HANG.
FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF SAN
FRANCISCO SCHOOL OF LAW AS WELL
AS RYAN SHERMAN WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION
CO SPONSOR OF AB.
THIRTY TWO GOOD AFTERNOON YOU
HAVE TWO MINUTES IF YOU WOULD
THANK YOU CHAIR OF AYE AYE AYE
WIDER THAT I AM PROFESSOR OF LAW
AT UNIVERSITY SAN FRANCISCO AND
AND EMERITUS AT UC DAVIS WERE I
TAUGHT.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND
IMMIGRATION.
LAW ALSO I JUST THOUGHT I'D
MENTION THAT I'M ALSO POOR THE
FLOORS INSPECTION TEAM THAT IS
INSPECTED SITES AROUND THE
COUNTRY.
AND MOST RECENTLY I WAS PART OF
THE TEAM THAT INSPECTED AND HIS
EXPOSE WHAT'S GOING ON AND CLINT --
WORLDS AT TWO WEEKS AGO.
I WAS ASKED TO TALK ABOUT THE
POTENTIAL FEDERAL CHALLENGE TO
A. B..
THIRTY TWO AND UNDER THE
SUPREMACY CLAUSE THE WHAT WE
MIGHT EXPECT A CHALLENGE ON THE
BASIS OF PRE EMPTION AND THE
BASES OF THE INNER GOVERNMENTAL
IMMUNITIES CLAUSE.
IN MY OPINION A. B. THIRTY TWO
WITH WOULD WITHSTAND THOSE
CHALLENGES.
PREEMPTION.
WOULD NOT HOLD BECAUSE THIS IS
NOT AN ATTEMPT TO REGULATE
IMMIGRANTS WHO CAN BE DEPORTED
WHO WHO CAN BE ADMITTED.
SO IT'S NOT A FEEL PREVENTION
PROBLEM THERE'S NO CONFLICT IT
DOESN'T BAR ICE FROM HAVING ITS
OWN FACILITIES IN CALIFORNIA.
AND ALSO THERE'S NOT BEEN AN
EXPRESSION BY CONGRESS IN THE
END AND THE IMMIGRATION AND
NATIONALITY ACT.
THAT THE DEFINITELY SAYS THAT
THEY MUST HAVE PRIVATE PRISON
PARTNERS IN ORDER TO DO ITS WORK
SO THERE'S NOT AN EXPRESSION
THAT WOULD YOU WOULD BE A
PROBLEM.
INTER GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITIES
DOCTRINE IS ABOUT DISCRIMINATION
DOES THIS DISCRIMINATE AGAINST
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE
SHORT ANSWER IS CLEARLY NO IT
THIS IS ABOUT REGULATING PRIVATE
PRISON COMPANIES.
AND YES IT WILL AFFECT.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN TERMS
OF ICE ATTENTION BUT IT ALSO
AFFECTS THIS STATE AUTHORITIES
AS WELL SO BECAUSE IT EVEN
HANDEDLY AFFECTS BOTH STATE AND
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
ACTORS IN MY VIEW THERE'S NOT A
PROBLEM WITH THE INTERN AND
RETENTION GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY
STOCKTON AND FINALLY THERE'S A
CONTRACT CLAUSE POTENTIAL WHICH
IS VERY.
IT WEEK IF RAISED -- THE STATE
CANNOT INTERFERE WITH CONTRACTS
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AND PRIVATE ACTORS AND THERE'S A
PROVISION IN SB THIRTY TO THE
SPECIFICALLY SAYS.
ANY EXISTING CONTRACT IS NOT
INTERFERED WITH AND IS ALLOWED
TO AND AT ITS DURATION THANK YOU
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
PLEASE.
THE MANAGER MEMBERS RANCHER WITH
THE RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S
ASSOCIATION -- PRO CO SPONSORS
OF AB -- THIRTY TWO PRIVATE FOR
PROFIT PRISONS AND DETENTION
CENTERS ARE ANATHEMA TO
CALIFORNIA VALUES ESPECIALLY IN
LIGHT OF THE ALMOST DAILY NEWS
ACCOUNTS OF THE HORSE WITHIN
THESE PRIVATE FOR PROFIT.
FACILITIES AND ON A PERSONAL
NOTE I'D LIKE TO SEND PRECISION
TO YOU MADAM CHAIR FOR
CONSISTENT CONCERN ABOUT AN
ADVOCACY IN OPPOSITION.
TO THE USE OF PRIVATE FOR PROFIT
PRISON CORPORATIONS IT WAS JUST
OVER TWENTY YEARS AGO WHEN YOUR
FRIEND INTRODUCED AND YOU CO
AUTHORED LEGISLATION TO PLACE
STRINGENT RESTRICTIONS ON THE
PRIVATE PRISON INDUSTRY IN OUR
STATE.
A. B. TWELVE POINT TWO BY FORMER
CENTER.
SHE LOOKED YOU'LL.
THE BILL SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED
BY LEGISLATURE AND SIGNED INTO
LAW.
SB THIRTY TWO WILL END THE
RENEWAL OF CONTRACTS FOR FOR
PROFIT PRISONS.
AND DETENTION FACILITIES BY
PHASING OUT THERE USE OVER THE
NEXT FEW YEARS.
SB THIRTY TWO WILL ALSO HELP RE
DIRECT ARE JUST SYSTEM THE VALUE
IN PRIORITIZE EFFECTIVE
REHABILITATION PROGRAMS WHICH
WILL IDEALLY REDUCE RECIDIVISM.
AND MAXIMIZE THE OPPORTUNITIES
FOR SUCCESS FOR INMATES UPON THE
RE ENTRY TO SOCIETY.
JUST A MOMENT PLEASE.
INCARCERATION IS ONE OF THE MOST
FUNDAMENTAL OF GOVERNMENT
OPERATIONS AS INHERENTLY
GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTION THERE
SHOULD NEVER BE ANY TYPE OF
PRIVATIZATION THE COURTS
CORRECTIONS LAW ENFORCEMENT.
CANCEL THE TENSION IF THE
GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO LOCK UP
PEOPLE THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF
SHOULD BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED AND
NOT HAVE THE FUNCTION DELEGATED
TO THE LOWEST COMPETITIVE BETTER.
WE MUST ASK OURSELVES WHO SHOULD
BE IN CHARGE OF INCARCERATING
PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA.
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
OR MAKE PRISONS INCORPORATED.
OR THE YOU UNITED STATES
IMMIGRATION CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT.
OR ACNE CIVIL DETENTION LLC. FOR
PROFIT PRIVATE PRISONS DETENTION
CORPORATIONS OPERATE SOME OF THE
MOST TROUBLED AND IN HUMANE
INCARCERATION FACILITIES IN OUR
NATION.
ASSAULTS ON STAFF AND ON THE CAR
SERRATED A CURRENT RATES 40%
HIGHER.
THAN A CURRENT PUBLIC FACILITIES
THESE COMPANIES HAVE POR
SCREENING EXTREMELY LAX HIRING
STANDARDS RESULTING IN
REPEATEDLY HIRING CONVICTED
FELONS INCLUDING SEX OFFENDERS.
TO OVERSEE THEIR CHARGES THE
EMPLOYEES IF YOU COULD WRAP UP
IN SEARCHLIGHT OF ALL THOSE VERY
KIND WORDS EARLY ON I LET YOU
TALK A LITTLE ON THE IN THE
EXTRA TIME IT JUST.
FEELS CLOSE.
WE BE VERY MUCH OPPOSED PRIVATE
PRISONS AND WE ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT THANK THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT IF
YOU'D LIKE TO STAND UP AND GO TO
THE MICROPHONE AT OF THE FROM
WHERE YOU ARE THE RIGHT HAND
SIDE OF THE OF THE COMMITTEE
HEARING ROOM.
FOR NAME AND AFFILIATION PLEASE
MY NAME IS VALVING FROM ASIAN
AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE
CALIFORNIA AND WE SUPPORT AB.
THIRTY TWO THANK YOU.
HELEN ROSS THOUSAND FROM SEIU
LOCAL ONE THOUSAND WERE IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MOLLY BYNUM UW ASKED ME THIRTY
NINE THIRTY HERE IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
ELLEN CHAPMAN FROM INDIVISIBLE
SACRAMENTO AND INDIVISIBLE
SACRAMENTO STATE STRONG IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MARIO GUERRERO ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
JULIE CHAPMAN WITH INDIVISIBLE
SACRAMENTO AND INDIVISIBLE
CALIFORNIA STATE STRONG AND A
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
HI GUYS ON HERE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA CLUB DIFFERENTLY AND
JUSTICE IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU MARK HAS FROM THE
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER
HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
THIS.
REGIONAL BANKS WITHIN OFFICE OF
PUBLIC POLICY CALIFORNIANS
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
ISRAEL VIA WITH ME BOND SALINAS
MONTEREY COUNTY IN STRONG
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
HELLO BUT ALAS ON BEHALF OF THE
STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION A SPONSOR OF THIS
BILL AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
TAMARA TOOK OUT ON BEHALF OF THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
CORPORATE OR THE CALIFORNIA
YOUTH JUSTICE LANCE I'M FROM
OAKLAND HAVE FAMILY THAT CENTRO
IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
NUMBER FORTY SYLLABLE DEALING
WITH A LOT AYE.
APPLE YET AT THE LAKE.
THANK YOU MY NAME IS LAURIE
SAILING COME FROM LODI
CALIFORNIA AND I'M IS FROM
SUPPORT OF AB.
THIRTY TWO OF TRANSLATING.
MY NAME IS IT CELL AND I HAVE
FAMILY IN PALMDALE CALIFORNIA
AND HE SAID CALIFORNIA'S AND
TELL SERVICES GO HEY CAN I AM
SAN FRANCISCO AND I'M HERE IN
TERMS SUPPORT OF AB THIRTY TWO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
NWS FROM PANGEA LEGAL SERVICES
IN SAN FRANCISCO IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
NO I BOTTOM ALL REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL
ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU GONZALEZ REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR
IMMIGRANT JUSTICE WHICH INCLUDES
CENTRAL CLOSE CENTRAL VALLEY AND
THE BAY AREA IN EMPHATIC SUPPORT
THINKING.
THANK YOU.
CHECK OF REGULAR THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORK
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MY NAME IS HANNIBAL ANTENNA WITH
THE CALIFORNIA MARKET USE
JUSTICE LIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP
FROM SAN DIEGO TO CINEMA I
COUNTY IN STRONG SUPPORT OF AB
[inaudible]
THIRTY TWO THANK YOU.
NANCY NANCY YES CAMPAIGNER FOR
CODE PINK MEMBERSHIP THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA A REPRESENTING SAMMER
FOUND MARIN COUNTY STRONG
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
ANNUAL SCHLEGEL FOR THE ARE SEEN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
UNLIKE THE GOLDMAN FROM
EDUCATORS FOR MIKE AND JUSTICE
IN VERY STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
THE NUMBER OF OUR LOPEZ BINGO
THAT IS FROM CALIFORNIA EVEN UP
WAY OUT OF A LOT OF IT AND DAY
THOSE IS COMING IS DOING ON
CENTER THE TENNESSEE ON THEY MY
NAME IS ROSA LOPEZ AND FROM.
WHICH IN CALIFORNIA I'M HERE IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF AB THIRTY TWO
AND I WAS ALSO DETAINED AT THE
RICHMOND FACILITY.
THANK YOU.
ALUMINUM READ THEN IT AB IN WHAT
BUT YEAH.
ARE THEY THINK THEY THOSE.
HELLO MY NAME IS A NAY THEN I'M
ALSO SUPPORTING AB -- THIRTY TWO
HELLO EVERYONE MY NAME IS GET IT
AS SUCH AS I'M FROM SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA I'M HERE ALSO STRONG
SUPPORT AB THREE TWO THANK YOU
THANK YOU YOU GOT ERIC PONCE UC
BERKELEY STUDENT AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
REALLY SCHOBER I AM A SACRAMENTO
CITIZEN AND A STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
I'LL SEND DATA ST PAUL LUTHERAN
CHURCH A LOT I STRONG SUPPORTER.
THANK YOU.
HIS INTERNET FROM STOCKTON
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
ALICIA LET MEN FROM SACRAMENTO
CALIFORNIA STRONG SUPPORTER
BECAUSE BABY SHOULD NEVER AVE
TO SLEEP ON THANK YOU FLOORS
THANK YOU THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THE NUMBER EGGMAN FROM STOCKTON
CALIFORNIA STRONGLY SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
JOHN FISKE FROM FAIR OAKS
CALIFORNIA I STRONGLY SUPPORT A.
B. THIRTY TWO THANK YOU.
LIZZY LEASE STUDENT AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
JOSE REYES UC BERKELEY STUDENTS
RESIDENT OF CALEXICO CALIFORNIA
AND STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
OUR MOTHER OF UC BERKELEY
STUDENT IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
ACTOR JIMENEZ STRONG SUPPORTER
FROM CINEMA COUNTY CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU.
LEVY ON OFFER FROM CINEMA COUNTY
IN A STRONG SUPPORTER THANK YOU.
CHRIS FOR SIGNS ON BEHALF OF
CHIRLA THE CALL THIS REMAIN AND
RIGHTS IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
REVEREND EVERLY WITH DIRECTOR OF
INTERFAITH MOVEMENT FOR HUMAN
INTEGRITY WITH CONGREGATIONS
ACROSS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIANS
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
GALA CAN ALSO WITH INTERFAITH
MOVEMENT FOR HUMAN INTEGRITY AND
A MEMBER OF POINT OF THIS UNITED
METHODIST CHURCH IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MARY VIVIAN HANSON HOLY SPIRIT
CATHOLIC CHURCH BERKELEY
CALIFORNIA WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY
SUPPORT THIS BILL THANK YOU.
MARIO LOYOLA CHIEF MERRY
MADELINE'S CATHOLIC CHURCH WE
TOTALLY SUPPORT THIS BILL THANK
YOU THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT A COUPLE POOR PEOPLE'S
CAMPAIGN STRONG SUPPORT THANK
YOU THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS CAITLIN
VEGA FOR THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION KAREN SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
RENEE BAYARDO SEIU CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT THANK YOU -- CHILD
DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
BUT THE RIVER MINISTER CIVIL
RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS ON
SUPPORT OF HIS BILL.
THANK YOU SIR.
ANYONE ELSE HERE IN SUPPORT.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION.
IS THE OPPOSITION OUTSIDE OR
LET'S GIVE HIM A MOMENT TO COME
IN.
THE AT WITH ALL THAT SUPPORT
THEY MIGHT BE WELL OFF STAYING
OUTSIDE BUT WILL LET HIM COME ON
IN.
HERE IS A ONE BRAVE MAN IN A
WHITE SUIT WHICH MAKES IT EVEN
BRAVER -- WE DO HAVE A MOTION BY
CENTER Y. CASKEY BUT LET'S SAY
HERE THE OPPOSITION GOOD
AFTERNOON TWO MINUTES PLEASE.%
AFTER MANAGER MEMBERS COURCELLES
OVER HERE ON BEHALF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION -- RESPECTFULLY IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL OUR
CONCERN IS NOT ABOUT PRIVATE
PRISONS ARE THE PROPRIETY OF THE
USE THEREOF -- OUR ISSUE IS THAT
THERE ARE SORT OF LIMITED
OPTIONS WHEN IT COMES TO
INCARCERATING OR DEALING WITH
OFFENDERS WHO HAVE COMMITTED
CRIMES.
AND THE THE FEAR WE HAVE IS THAT.
BY TAKING A TOOL BOX OR TAKING
TWO OUT OF THE TOOL BOX.
THE PRISON SYSTEM WILL BE LEFT
WITH FEW OPTIONS WHEN IT COMES
TO CROWDING.
THE STATISTICS WE'VE HEARD THE
THE BUFFER AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS
ABOUT SEVENTEEN HUNDRED INMATES
MEANING.
THAT IF THE POPULATION OF THE
PRISON SYSTEM INCREASES BY ABOUT.
ONE TO ONE POINT 2% WE WILL BE
AT THE FEDERALLY MANDATED CAP.
WHICH MEANS INMATES GET RELEASED
SHARES HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT
INMATES GETTING RELEASED AND NOT
HAVING THAT TOOL TO HELP MANAGE
POPULATION AT THE STATE PRISON
SYSTEM.
OUR SECONDARY AND OTHER CONCERN
IS THAT -- WE HAVE SEEN THE
IMPACTS OF REALIGNMENT ON COUNTY
JAILS -- AND THIS IS NOT A
COMPLAIN ABOUT REALIGNMENT
CERTAINLY A BUT UNDERSTANDING
THAT -- THE AUTHOR AND
PROPONENTS HAVE HAVE ALLUDED TO
THE FACT THAT THERE MAY BE -- ON
USE JAIL BEDS CURRENTLY AROUND
THE STATE AND THAT THAT --
SHOULD BE USED AS AN ALTERNATIVE
TO HOUSING FOLKS WHO WOULD MIGHT
OTHERWISE BE HOUSED IN A PRIVATE
PRISON.
INSURES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
FACT THAT IF THAT BECOMES A
REALITY THAT -- THAT WILL
INCREASE PRESSURE ON THE COUNTY
JAIL SYSTEM -- WITHOUT RESOURCES
LIKELY -- AND WILL EXACERBATE
THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE ALREADY
FACE IN COUNTY JAILS WHO ARE
HOUSING OFFENDERS -- WHO USED TO
SERVE SIXTY OR -- NINETY HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS SURF HEY HOUSING
THEM FOR THREE FIVE TEN YEARS AT
A TIME BECAUSEOF REALIGNMENT
AND SO AGAIN BECAUSE OF THOSE
CONCERNS NOT A STORY ABOUT
PRIVATE PRISONS GOOD PRIVATE
PRISONS BAD.
BY TAKING A TWO OUT OF THE TOOL
BOX AND INCREASING PRESSURE ON
COUNTY -- RESOURCES THAT'S THE
BASIS OF OUR OPPOSITION
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN OVER
THANK YOU THANK YOU APPRECIATE
THAT ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SEEING AND HEARING
NONE LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE
DíAS -- I DO WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR REMINDING ME I GOT IT I HAVE
I THINK HISTORICALLY BEEN
OPPOSED TO THE NOTION OF A
PRIVATE PRISON.
PRISONS HAVE TO BE TRANSPARENT
THERE HOUSING PEOPLE.
FOR OFTENTIMES SERIOUS CRIMES
THESE ARE NOT NECESSARILY
WONDERFUL FOLKS BUT THEY ARE
HUMAN BEINGS AND THEY'RE
ENTITLED TO AND WE THE PUBLIC
ARE ENTITLED TO HAVE.
TRANSPARENCY.
IN THE PRISON SYSTEM AND TO MAKE
SURE THAT PRISONERS ARE.
BEING CARED FOR APPROPRIATELY
WITH BASIC LEVELS OF HUMAN
DIGNITY AND AS ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BONTA YOU POINTED OUT THAT --
THERE THERE ISN'T THAT KIND OF
SUNSHINE.
IN OUR PRIVATE PRISONS AND THE
MOTIVATION FOR THEM IS VERY
DIFFERENT BECAUSE AS PRIVATE
ENTERPRISES THEIR GOAL IS TO
MAXIMIZE PROFIT.
OF NOT NECESSARILY TO MAXIMIZE
REHABILITATION WHICH IS ACTUALLY
ALSO BEEN A PROBLEM IN OUR
PUBLIC PRISONS BUT SOMETHING
THAT WERE WORKING ON TO TRY TO
IMPROVE -- I ALSO WANT TO THANK
YOU.
FOR YOUR CONTINUED LEADERSHIP
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BONTA IN ALSO
TRYING TO ABOLISH.
FOR A PROFIT PRISONS AND TO IT'S
THIS MEASURES BEFORE COMMITTED
BECAUSE OF THE RECENT AMENDMENTS
THAT YOU TOOK TO BAN. FOR PROFIT
CIVIL INCARCERATION IN OUR STATE.
I THINK -- THERE IT MAY VERY
WELL BE A A CHALLENGE BY THIS
CURRENT ADMINISTRATION ON A ONE
OF WE EVER DONE ANYTHING IN
CALIFORNIA THEY HAVEN'T
CHALLENGED BUT I THINK THAT.
OF A ROBUST CONSTITUTION
ANALYSIS IS SO ALSO PROVIDED FOR
IN OUR COMMITTEE ANALYSIS AS
WELL AS YOUR OBSERVATIONS AND I
SUSPECT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
WILL LOSE.
IT IF -- IF THEY CHOOSE TO SUE
THE STATE I THINK THIS BILL IS
ADDRESSING ALL PRIVATE PRISONS.
AND WE HAVE HAD A CONCERTED
EFFORT IS MATTER OF PUBLIC
POLICY THANKS TO MY GOOD FRIEND
AND FORMER COLLEAGUE SENATOR
KEWL -- TO REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE
UPON THEM AND TO THE OPPOSITION --
MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN FIND
OTHER TOOLS IN THE TOOL BOX AND
HOPEFULLY -- FIND WAYS -- TO TO
BETTER ADDRESS AND HOPEFULLY
REDUCE THE RATES OF PEOPLE IN
PRISON -- GOING FORWARD AS WELL
SO -- THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS AND
WE DO HAVE A MOTION IS OR ANYONE
ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
OF WILL START WITH US SENATOR
DRAWS A WIN AND A SENATOR JONES --
I TOO WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
AND A FEW WOULD ALLOW ME TO BE A
CO AUTHOR I WOULD.
LOVE TO HAVE THAT BE HONORED
THANK YOU -- I MEAN SO MANY
THINGS HAVE ALREADY BEEN SAID I
JUST WANT TO ADD TO THAT THAT --
WE HAVE FOUND ON THE ON THE OF
FACILITIES THAT WERE CONTRACTED
OUT ON THE IMMIGRATION DETENTION --
THAT MANY TIMES AND THESE ARE
OFFICIAL REPORTS BY EITHER --
COMBINATION OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL AND THE DISABILITY
RIGHTS -- CALIFORNIA IS THAT
MANY OF THE CITIES AND COUNTIES.
CONTRACT THEM OUT TO PRIVATE
ENTITIES AND THIS SORT OF
ABSOLVE THEMSELVES OF ANY
RESPONSIBILITY.
NO OVERSIGHT -- NO STANDARDS NO
EFFORT TO ENFORCE A STANDARD
JUST OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF MIND
AND THEY SELL IT ON THE IDEA
THAT SOMEHOW THEY'RE GOING TO
SAVE MONEY AND THAT REALLY
DOESN'T HAPPEN EITHER.
IS NO ADVANTAGE OF AND FRANKLY
IF THERE'S A WAY.
IF THERE'S PROFIT.
THAT MONEY SHOULD BE USED. FOR
THE WELL BEING OF THOSE
INCARCERATED AND FOR THOSE WHO
SERVE THE INCARCERATED AND
PROGRAM SO -- I AM VERY VERY
STRONGLY IN SUPPORT AND I
APPRECIATE THE WITNESSES AND AND
ALL THAT YOU DO IN PARTICULAR.
THEIR RECITE SHERIFF'S A YOU
COME WITH THE POINT OF VIEW OF
NOT ONLY THOSE WHO SERVE AND DO
THE SERVICE BUT ALSO YOU'RE
WATCHING OUT FOR THE PEOPLE
INSIDE SO THANK YOU ALL VERY
MUCH THANK YOU THANK YOU.
SENATOR JONES.
IT'S A JUST A QUICK QUESTION I
AM VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE
AMOUNT OF WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
BUT I MISSED A NEXUS ON ONE OF
THE COMMENTS.
THAT ONE OF THE WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT SAID THAT -- SHE DID
WANT TO SEE BABY SLEEPING ON
CONCRETE.
AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT WHAT THAT
HAD TO DO WITH THE BILL IF YOU
CAN EXPLAIN THAT PLEASE.
SORRY NOT NOT MY COMMENT SO NOT --
DON'T HAVE THE A FULL LINE OF
SIGHT ON WHAT WAS THE INTENTION
OF THAT COMMENT MADE BY A MEMBER
OF THE PUBLIC BUT I I I WILL SAY
THAT I THOUGHT MAYBE AS PART
ORGANIZED.
WITNESS TESTIMONY SOAKING THANK
YOU FOR THE FIRST TIME AS YOU
DID.
CENTER.
ALL RIGHT US SING NO OTHER
QUESTIONS ASSEMBLY MEMBER BONTA
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
[inaudible]
I FIRST ONE TO SAY THE TWENTY
ANALYSIS WAS ABSOLUTELY
OUTSTANDING AND I JUST WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR THAT -- IT WAS
COMPREHENSIVE IT WAS INCREDIBLY
THOUGHTFUL WAS INCREDIBLY
INSIGHTFUL AND I CAN'T SAY
ENOUGH ABOUT IT SO SO THANK YOU
FOR THAT CONTRIBUTION ON ON ON
THIS ISSUE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT
TO ME AND AND TO MANY OF US.
FUNNY I TO SAY I THINK THE
APPROACH IN THIS BILL IS
CONSISTENT WITH OUR VALUES AS A
STATE.
WITH WITH WITH WITH STANDING UP
FOR PEOPLE ON DEFENDING THEM.
MAKING SURE THAT THEY LIVE IN
OUR WITH WHEN THEY'RE DETAINED
THERE AND DIGNIFIED DECENT.
CUT COMPASSIONATE -- SAFE.
CONDITIONS AND IN THIS BILL
REALLY HAS IDENTIFIED -- WHAT
WHAT WE ALL THAT IS THOUGHT TO
BE TRUE WHICH IS THAT FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE COMPANIES WITH A PROFIT
SEEKING INCENTIVE ARE GOING TO
BE THE BEST AT AT INVESTING IN
IN OUR PEOPLE MAKING SURE THAT
THEY SUCCEED?
AND THE DATA SHOWS THAT THE
REPORT AFTER REPORT MANY OF THEM
IDENTIFIED CLEARLY IN IN THE
ANALYSIS SHOWING THAT -- THE
OUTCOMES ARE EXACTLY WHAT WE
MADE EXPECTED THEM TO BE THAT
THAT THAT OPERATIONAL COSTS ARE.
ARE ARE ARE CUT ODD CORNERS ARE
CUT COSTS ARE CUT -- LONGER IF
THERE'S LONGER STAYS IN FOR
PROFIT PRIVATE PRISONS THAT.
A AND AND FACILITIES THAT THE OB
THESE ARE BUSINESSES THAT THRIVE
ON MORE AND MORE MASS
INCARCERATION WEREN'T PRESENT OF
CALIFORNIANS MEDICAL CARE -- THE
ACCESS TO THAT IS IS LAST THERE
ARE MORE SALTS.
BETWEEN PRISONERS IN FOR PROFIT
PRIVATE FACILITIES AND AND THE
LIST GOES ON SO WE CAN DO BETTER
WE MUST DO BETTER A. B. THIRTY
TO HELP US DO THAT.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK DR BOTH THANK
YOU THANK YOU WOULD YOU -- MA'AM
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
IN THE MOTION IS -- DO PASSED TO
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY -- PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL FILE ITEM NUMBER
ONE A. B. THIRTY TWO JACKSON HI
JACKSON AYE PORCHES.
RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES.
JONES NO MONNING STERN UMBERG.
NUMBER OF IOWA CASKEY BY KASKI
AYE.
THE THE BILL HAS FIVE VOTES WE
WILL HOLD THE ROLE OPEN FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS THANK YOU SO MUCH
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR THANK YOU
COLLEAGUES THANK YOU STAFF.
OF MOVING RIGHT ALONG TO FILE
ITEM NUMBER. TWO FOR UP BY MY
FRIEND ASSEMBLY MEMBER VOEPEL.
I THINK WE SAW THIS BILL LAST
YEAR.
GOOD AFTERNOON AFTERNOON ALWAYS
LOVE THOSE TIES WHICH ONE IS
THAT IS SET FOR THE FOURTH OF
JULY [inaudible]
VERY NICE.
OUR LET'S WAIT IF YOU WOULD JUST
A SECOND SO THAT WE CAN CLEAR
THE ROOM AND BE ABLE TO HEAR.
SAYS FILE ITEM.
TO CHAIR MEMBERS TODAY I HAVE
THE PLEASURE PRESIDING AB ONE
SIXTY A BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW
THE PRIVATE SECTOR THE ABILITY
TO ENACT A VOLUNTARY VETERANS
PREFERENCE PROGRAM IN HIRING.
THE VOLUNTARY VETERANS
PREFERENCES RECOGNIZE ENJOYED
AMONG THE PUBLIC SECTOR HOWEVER
THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN CALIFORNIA
IS LIMITED TO ONLY VIETNAM WAR
ERA VETERANS.
WHEN EXERCISING OR VOLUNTARY
VETERANS PREFERENCE AB ONE SIXTY
SIMPLY REVISES AN OUTDATED
OVERSIGHT BY ALLOWING THE
PRIVATE SECTOR TO EXERCISE OUR
VOLUNTARY VETERANS PREFERENCE TO
ALL VETERANS WITH THE GENERAL OR
HONORABLE DISCHARGE?
REGARDLESS OF THE ERA IN WHICH
THEY SERVE. THIRTY SEVEN STATES
HAVE VOLUNTARY VETERANS
PREFERENCE.
THE VOLUNTARY VETERANS
PREFERENCE.
AND THIS IS ANOTHER AMENDMENT WE
PUT ON BEING VERY SENSITIVE TO
THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY [inaudible]
THIS AMENDMENT.
WOULD NOT BECOME OPERATIVE UNTIL
THE PROHIBITION AGAINST
TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS FROM
SERVING IN THE U. S. ARMED
FORCES UNDER FEDERAL LAW IS
RESCINDED.
YOU CAN READ BETWEEN THE LINES
ON THAT. ONE FOR THESE REASONS
MEMBERS I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR IPHONE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ARE THERE
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN THE
SUPPORT.
JUST BRIEFLY MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
RANGER WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION AB ONE
SIXTY WILL HELP OUR VETERANS TO
OBTAIN EMPLOYMENT IN BOTH OF OUR
MEMBERS.
AND THE OR FAMILY HAVE MILITARY
VETERANS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND
WE PROBABLY SUPPORT EFFORTS YOU.
SEEK TO HELP THESE.
BETTER SERVE OUR COUNTRY.
RESPECT LAST NIGHT VOTE THANK
THANK YOU OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
HI KELLY MAY DOUGLAS WITH THE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE IN SUPPORT [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A FEW WISHES WE COULD
TALK WITH THE SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE ABOUT IT WILL STICK
AROUND [inaudible]
ALL RIGHT.
ANY WITNESSES HERE IN OPPOSITION.
RIGHT.
EXCUSE ME QUICK ARE YOU HERE IN
OPPOSITION OUR GOOD AFTERNOON
TWO MINUTES EACH PLEASE GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIRMANMEMBERS TAMMY
MARTIN ON BEHALF OF EQUALITY
CALIFORNIA.
AND WE DO APPRECIATE THE INTENT
BEHIND THIS BILL AND APPLAUD
EFFORTS TO ENSURE EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR VETERANS.
HOWEVER WE ARE HERE TODAY AND
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION BECAUSE
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
STRATEGY AND THE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES OF THE BILL.
WHICH SETS A SLIPPERY PRECEDENT
BY GIVING PREFERENCE TO ONE
GROUP AREADY PROTECTED BY THE
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT
AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER
MARGINALIZED GROUPS PROTECTED BY
FEET HIGH.
SUCH AS LGBTQ PEOPLE AND WOMEN
GROUPS THAT ALSO FACE HIGH RATES
OF WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION
EMPLOYMENT ETCETERA UNEMPLOYMENT
ETCETERA.
AND DENNIS DON'T TELL WHICH
BANNED PEOPLE FROM SERVING BASED
ON THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION WAS
ONLY LIFTED IN AT TWO THOUSAND
ELEVEN AND THE BAN ON
TRANSGENDER SERVICE MEMBERS
REMAINS IN EFFECT.
AND EVEN IF THAT WERE TO BE
LIFTED TOMORROW THE SYSTEMIC AND
HISTORIC MARGINALIZATION WOULD
NOT BE REMEDIED OVERNIGHT.
AND THIS BILL WOULD LIKELY
COMPOUNDED THE DISCRIMINATION
THAT LGBTQ PEOPLE ALREADY FACE.
ALSO WE SEE THAT WOMEN WOULD IN
PRACTICE BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.
ACCORDING TO THE US DEPARTMENT
OF VETERANS AFFAIRS IN TWO
THOUSAND SEVENTEEN ONLY AT NINE
POINT 4% OF VETERANS NATIONWIDE
OR WOMEN.
AND THAT NUMBER WAS SLIGHTLY
LOWER IN CALIFORNIA AT EIGHT
POINT 5% SO WE RECOGNIZE THE
NEED TO IMPROVE EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR VETERANS BUT
FOR THESE REASONS WE MUST
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE THE BILL
TODAY.
THANK YOU.
REMOTE THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF
THE NEXT WITNESSES IN OP IN
OPPOSITION PLEASE.
ENTER MEMBERS KEVIN BACON FROM
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF CALIFORNIA WE ALSO SHARE THE
CONCERNS OF A QUALITY CALIFORNIA.
MILITARY VETERAN STATUS IS
PROTECTED STATUS UNDER FEE HOW
UNLIKE IT IN MOST STATES.
IT IS INDEED -- AND USUAL
PROPOSITION TWO SELECT ONE GROUP
OF FOR THE OF WHO'S A STATUS IS
PROTECTED.
AND GRANT THEM PREFERENTIAL
TREATMENT OVER EVERY OTHER GROUP
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WERE CAN
COINCIDENCE THAT APPROACH AS A
WAY OF ADDRESSING EMPLOYMENT
PROBLEMS FOR ANY OTHER --
PROTECTED GROUP THERE ARE
SERIOUS -- CONCERNS ABOUT THE
CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES THAT
VETERANS FACE WE HAVE OFFERED TO
WORK WITH MISTER VOEPEL -- AND
HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH A
VETERAN COMMUNITIES AT THE ACLU.
WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS
IS THE APPROPRIATE POLICY
PRESCRIPTION IT REALLY DOES
LOCKED IN THE DISCRIMINATION
THAT QUALITY CALIFORNIA -- WAS
JUST SPEAKING TO AND WE HAS THE
COMMITTEE TO STAY CONSISTENT
WITH THEIR VIEW ON THIS AND AND
CONTINUE.
TO RESIST WHAT IS ATTEMPTING BUT
NOT -- A DEFECTIVE SOLUTION
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ARE THERE OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF SO
PLEASE COME STEP UP TO THE
MICROPHONE WITH YOUR NAME AND
AFFILIATION PLEASE.
AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS CAN
WEIGHING ON BEHALF CALIFORNIAN
PLUMBING LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR OPPOSITION
THANK YOU THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
RIGHT WE DO HAVE A MOTION BY
SENATOR BORCHERS -- ASSEMBLY
MEMBER VOEPEL I RESPECT AND
ADMIRE YOUR DEDICATION TO THE
PEOPLE.
WHO SERVE THIS COUNTRY IN THE
ARMED FORCES?
I REMEMBER BACK AT THE END OF
THE VIETNAM WAR WHERE WE DID
GIVE PREFERENCE POINTS I WAS
LIVING IN LOS ANGELES AT THE
TIME AND WHAT WE DISCOVERED WITH
THOSE PREFERENCE POINTS.
IS THAT IT.
RATED AN IMPOSSIBLE OBSTACLE FOR
WOMEN AT THAT TIME IN PARTICULAR
WHO WERE A AND UNDERSERVED ARE
UNDER REPRESENTED I SHOULD SAY A
GROUP WHEN IT CAME TO GOVERNMENT
SERVICE -- THIS OF COURSE
APPLIES TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR AS
WELL.
AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER
REALLY CAUGHT UP IN SO -- I
CAN'T SUPPORT BILLS THAT
AUTHORIZED GIVING A PREFERENCE
TO A POPULATION THAT IS.
APPROXIMATELY 90% MALE.
AND A POPULATION THAT HAS
HISTORICALLY EXCLUDED THE LGBTQ
COMMUNITY.
AND CONTINUES TO EXCLUDE
TRANSGENDER PEOPLE NOW I
APPRECIATE YOUR TAKING THAT
AMENDMENT BUT I THINK AS WAS
ARTICULATED THAT IS NOT GOING TO
SOLVE.
THE PROBLEM -- IN A NEARLY
SIMILAR BILL FAILED IN THIS
COMMITTEE LAST YEAR -- BUT OF
THE THE BILL CREATES A
PREFERENCE FOR ONE PROTECTED
GROUP OVER ANOTHER AND THAT
HISTORICALLY FACES BARRIERS TO
EMPLOYMENT WERE FIGHTING HARD
NOW TO LIFT THOSE BARRIERS. FOR
WOMEN ARE FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR
THIS PUTS THE THUMB BACK ON IT.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS FOR A GROUP OF
THAT I HIGHLY RESPECT.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE ARE
ALREADY PROTECTIONS THEY ARE AND
AGAIN I I CHOSE STUFF I THINK
THAT THEPOLICY IS A WRONG ONE
WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY OTHER
GROUPS THAT ALSO.
ARE FIGHTING HARD TO TO GAIN
THAT LEVEL OF EQUALITY OF
OPPORTUNITY THAT THIS BILL WILL.
CREATE -- IT IN GREATER MEASURE
FOR ONE GROUP OVER ANOTHER SO --
SENATOR UMBERG I KNOW YOU WANTED
TO BE RECOGNIZED AND THEN IF
THERE'S ANYONE ELSE WILL.
A AND CENTER ON BURKE FALL BY AS
SENATOR JONES.
I'M I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS SO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER VOEPEL -- AT THE
CONTEST I HAVE A BIAS IN FAVOR
OF VETERANS IS SO STRONG I
MARRIED A VETERAN -- AND SHE IS
ALWAYS OUTRANK ME ONLY BECAUSE
SHE'S SMARTER AND A BETTER
LEADER -- BUT IF I TODAY
ADVERTISE IN NEWSPAPERS SAID I
HAVE A PREFERENCE FOR HIRING
VETERANS WHAT WOULD BE THE
CONSEQUENCE [inaudible]
SENATOR.
THE VETERAN COMMUNITY AS YOU
PROBABLY WELL KNOW IS NOT MADE
UP OF 16218% [inaudible]
WOMEN.
AND GROWING DRAMATICALLY -- THE
CONSEQUENCE IN THIRTY SEVEN
OTHER STATES.
HAS BEEN NO IMPACT WHATSOEVER --
BUT HERE LET ME MAYBE I SHOULD
DRESS TO THE OPPOSITION WHAT
WOULD BE THE CONSEQUENCE TODAY
IF IF I SIMPLY PUT AN AD IN
NEWSPAPERS SAID I HAVE A
PREFERENCE FOR VETERANS.
ETCETERA CAVENDER COMMITTED
CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION I THINK
THE CONSEQUENCES THAT THAT WOULD
NOT PROTECT YOU WITH THAT.
PREFERENCE WAS BEING USED -- TO
GRANT OF SPECIAL TREATMENT TO
THAT GROUP AT AS A WAY OF
DISCRIMINATING AGAINST WOMEN OF
PEOPLE OF COLOR AND OTHER
PROTECTED CLASSES.
SO YOU COULD YOU COULD HAVE A
VETERANS PREFERENCE BUT IF YOUR
EXERCISE THAT PREFERENCE IN A
WAY THAT DISCRIMINATES.
AGAINST ANOTHER PROTECTED CLASS
YOU WOULD BE POTENTIALLY SUBJECT
TO LIABILITY FOR THAT
DISCRIMINATION THIS BILL WOULD.
REMOVE ANY -- PROTECTION FOR
THOSE OTHER GROUPS.
OKAY IT AND I ASSUME BY YOUR
COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD THINK WE
SHOULD RISKS AND ANY PREFERENCE
AND AND GOVERNMENTAL HIRING ALSO
FOR VETERANS.
THAT THAT BILL ISN'T BEFORE A
SLIGHT BUT LET'S NOT.
LET LET'S SAY I'M A BUT I'M
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE THE
LOGIC SO WELL.
I I THINK THAT AGAIN LET'S FOCUS
ON THE BILL BEFORE US AND IT IF
SOMEONE WANTS TO BRING THAT
OTHER BILL RIGHT NOW THEREIS A
PREFERENCE IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
FOR A IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR THAT
VETERANS TO GET ADDITIONAL
PREFERENCE -- AND THE BILL HERE
IS TO TRY TO CREATE THAT ALSO
FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR AS
COMPARED TO TAKING THAT
PREFERENCE IN GETTING RID OF IT
ON ALL LEVELS SO.
I THINK THAT THE AGAIN.
I WOULD APPRECIATE GIVEN OUR
CALENDAR TODAY WE FOCUS ON THE
BILL'S AT HAND -- BUT LET ME ASK
THE QUESTION THE OPPOSITION IF
FOR EXAMPLE THIS BILL SAID
DISABLED VETERANS WOULD THAT
MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO THE
OPPOSITION. TO EITHER A SO YOU
ARE QUALITY CALIFORNIA.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD CENTER
AND BUT I'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT
THAT MORE BUT MY MY FIRST
REACTION IS THAT I'M I'M NOT
SURE THAT YOU YOU WANT TO GO
DOWN THAT ROAD ANY MORE THAN YOU
WANT TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD.
I MEAN I I THINK THERE IS A
QUALITY TO SO FOR EXAMPLE IF I
EVER TIES AND SAID I WANT.
A QUALIFIED CANDIDATE IS A
COLLEGE EDUCATION.
RIGHT I COULD THERE'S NO PROBLEM
WITH THAT BUT IF I SAID I WANT
SOMEONE THAT HAS EXPERIENCE IN
AN ORGANIZED ENVIRONMENT WHERE
THE MISSION TRANSCENDS SELF
RIGHT.
BY SAID THAT.
AND IN SAID THAT THAT WOULD THAT
WOULD DISTINGUISH AN ANNEX
IDENTIFY VETERANS THAT WOULD BE.
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE THAT WOULD
BE ILLEGAL [inaudible]
WELL. FOR THE CHERRY IT'S IF I
MAY.
ANY PREFERENCE FOR A JOB RELATED
SKILLS OR ABILITIES IS CERTAINLY
APPROPRIATE NON DISCRIMINATORY.
OKAY SO IF THIS BILL SAID THAT.
WELL I'LL I'LL I'LL STOP THE
HYPOTHETICALS -- OKAY OKAY THANK
YOU IT AS SENATOR JONES -- I
JUST WANNA APPLIED THE AUTHOR
FOR HIS TENACITY.
IN THIS -- PROJECT AND AND ONE
MORE TIME -- YOU KNOW THE BILL'S
OBVIOUSLY FAMILIAR TO ME.
AS I THINK I BROUGHT UP FOR A
COUPLE YEARS AGO AND ICE SIT
HERE TODAY ONE MORE TIME
FLABBERGASTED AT THE OPPOSITION.
THERE ARE I'M REALLY EACH AND
AND I'VE ADVISED AS I'VE.
THE BILL THEN.
ORDER THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER TO
WHEN HE'S KAREN IT LAST YEAR YOU
KNOW IT REALLY TRYING TO WRAP MY
HEAD AROUND THE OPPOSITION ON
THIS AND I I'M I'M REALLY HAVING
A HARD TIME JOHN A NEXUS BETWEEN
THE ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION IN
THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE OF THIS
PARTICULAR BILL.
AND THAT -- THE EXAMPLES THAT
HAVE.
BEEN GIVEN IN THE PEOPLE THAT
THIS MIGHT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ARE
ALREADY PROTECTED CLASSES --
AGAINST -- DISCRIMINATION.
AND THIS BILL IS INCLUSIVE OF
ALL OF THOSE CLASSES ARE
PROTECTED -- PEOPLE.
BECAUSE ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE CAN
BE VETERANS -- IN IT YOU KNOW
THEN THAT THE ADDITIONAL
ARGUMENT THAT I THINK IN SUPPORT
OF THIS.
IS VETERANS ARE UNIQUE CLASS OF
AMERICAN CITIZENS IN THAT.
THEY HAVE GIVEN THE U. S.
GOVERNMENT AND BY EXTENSION OF
THAT ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM A
BLANK CHECK.
UP TO AND INCLUDING THE PRICE OF
THEIR LIFE.
NO OTHER PROTECTED CLASS OR
UNPROTECTED CLASS OF AMERICAN
CITIZEN -- OR RESIDENT FOR THAT
MATTER.
IS HAS DONE THAT AND SO.
I REALLY DON'T.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME GRASPING
THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES
OPPOSITION. TO THIS PARTICULAR
BILL THIS VERY SIMPLY WRITTEN.
VERY INCLUSIVE OF THE VERY
PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN ARGUED.
THAT IMPACTS AND AND INCLUDES.
WHAT I CALL WHAT I CONSIDER A
VERY?
PECULIAR SPECIAL CLASS OF
AMERICAN RESIDENT THAT HAS
OFFERED THEIR LIFE IN SUPPORT OF
OURS SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THANK YOU I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL.
I I THINK IT'S RATHER CLEAR.
THERE'S SOME OF US WHO WANT TO
GIVE EVERYBODY EQUAL FOOTING.
WE ALREADY HAVE BETTER ANSWERS A
PROTECTED CLASS.
IF YOU'RE BORN A WOMAN.
YOU HAVE HISTORICALLY SUFFER
DISCRIMINATION IN HIRING.
IT HAS IMPACTED YOUR FAMILY IS
IMPACTED OTHERS -- AND SO WHICH
IS GOING TO HAVE TO I THINK
DISAGREE ON THAT IF YOU CAN RAP
YOUR HEAD AROUND THAT SENATOR
STERN.
MADAM CHAIR AND I THINK THANK
YOU SUMMER FOR NOT AGREEING THE
BILL BUT YOUR SERVICE -- CAN I
JUST NEED OF A LITTLE TECHNICAL
CLARITY HERE SO.
WITH THE IF.
IF THIS BILL BECAME LAW WOULD IT
OPERATE THE SAME WAY THE
VETERANS PREFERENCE DOES IN THE
CURRENT FOR FOR FOR STATE
SERVICE IN OTHER WORDS. FOR BOTH --
A VETERAN AS WELL AS THEIR WIDOW
WIDOWER -- OR SPOUSE.
OR IS IT JUST FOR THE THE
VETERAN THEMSELVES.
BUT MAYBE YOU KNOW THE CHAIR
POSITION KNOWS I WILL THE WAY
THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IT'S FOR
VETERANS WITH HONORABLE OR
GENERAL DISCHARGE.
AND THERE WAS ANOTHER AMENDMENT
MADE LAST YEAR FOR THE LGBT.
COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST
CHARGE WITH GENERAL DISCHARGES
FOR YEARS THAT WAS AN INJUSTICE
SO THIS HELPS. FIVE DEAD AND
JUSTICE IN ALSO. FOR A LIST OF
RECRUITS 43% OF MEN AND 56% OF
WOMEN ARE HISPANIC OR RACIAL.
MINORITY THE MILITARY FOLKS HAS
CHANGED DRAMATICALLY FAR MORE
DIVERSE SO.
I WOULD ASKS A QUESTION. TO THE
OPPOSITION.
IF IT WAS A PROTECTED CLASS THAT
WAS A VETERAN WOULD THAT BE
VIOLATING.
ALL RIGHT THANK YOU A DID YOU
HAVE ANY. THIRTY FROM OPPOSITION
DO YOU DO ON THOUGH IT JUST
TECHNICALLY SPEAKING YOU.
WOULD THERE BE DISCRETION TO
APPLY THESE VETERANS PREFERENCE
ALSO DO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR OR
OR OR SPOUSE.
OR IS IT THE WAY THAT THEY DO
YOU READ THE TEXT LIMITED
STRICTLY TO THE THAT THE ACT
THAT INDIVIDUAL THEMSELVES.
I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORKS
FOR THE FOR THIS SORT OF STATE
COROLLARY HERE -- I I DON'T HAVE
WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO
QUESTION SENATOR STERN BUT I I'D
I DON'T READ IT.
THIS IS CERTAINLY TO EXTEND TO
FAMILY MEMBERS.
I THINK THE QUESTION IS.
WHO WHO'S IN THIS PROTECTED
CLASSES IN THIS PREFERRED GROUP
THAT AND WHO'S BEEN EXCLUDED
TRADITIONALLY DESPITE WHAT THE
REPRESENTATION MAY BE NOW WE'VE
GOT A HISTORY OF THE LAST? FIFTY
YEARS AT LEAST THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE STILL IN THE WORK FORCE.
THE SHOW IF IF I MAY THE FOUR
CORNERS OF THE BILL WHICH I
THINK OR WHAT YOU BASE IT ON
DOES NOT GIVE EXT DOES NOT
EXTEND THE RGHT TO ANYONE OTHER
THAN THE VETERAN.
WHO IS RECEIVED AN HONORABLE OR
A GENERAL DISCHARGE?
EDIT I I GET THAT BUT I'M I'M
SAYING IT.
IS THE WAY THIS THE CODE IS
CURRENTLY STRUCTURED. FOR THE
FOR STATE HIRING PREFERENCES.
IS THAT ALSO FREEZE THE SAME WAY
AS THIS IN IN OTHER WILL THERE
BE DISCRETION WHAT YOU HAVE TO
MAKE THAT CLEAR IN ORDER
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ALLOWS
THE LEGISLATURE'S.
IDENTIFIED HIM PAGE. NINE TO
PROVIDE CIVIL SERVICE HIRING
PREFERENCES FOR VETERANS AND
THEIR SURVIVING SPOUSES --
CURRENTLY THERE IS A VETERANS
PREFERENCE FOR SOME STATE DROPS
SO THERE IS VETERANS PREFERENCE
THAT EXIST AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT
VETERANS PREFERENCE.
IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT THAT WE
ARE NOW UP 218% OF WOMEN IN THE
MILITARY WE ARE STILL WOMEN ARE
STILL IN THE VAST MINORITY.
THE ISSUE HERE THE POLICY ISSUE
IS ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE
ESSENTIALLY TO PERPETUATE.
THAT DISCRIMINATION BY PUTTING
THEIR FROM ON THE EMPLOYMENT
SCALE BY ALLOWING ADDITIONAL
PREFERENCE OF FOR VETERANS TO
THE DETRIMENT OF OTHERS WHO
MIGHT OTHERWISE BE MORE
QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION IN
THOSE OTHERS WOULD BE WOMEN.
AND PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO WE KNOW
ARE NOT EQUALLY REPRESENTED IN
THE WORK FORCE.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR JUST IF
YOU'LL INDULGE ME ONE LAST
QUESTION THE AUTHOR IS THERE.
ARE YOU OPEN AT ALL TO JUST
MIRRORING WHAT THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION SAYS AS SHE JUST
DESCRIBE THE THE VETERANS AND
THEIR SURVIVING SPOUSE.
I WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT YES.
OKAY WE'VE AMENDED THIS ABOUT
FOUR TIMES ALREADY OKAY.
SENATOR UMBERG ARM AND IN
SENATOR -- MADAM CHAIR A I
UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT OF VIEW --
THINGS ARE CHANGING VERY QUICKLY
RECENT CLASS OF WEST POINT
GRADUATES HAD A PHENOMENAL.
INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF WOMEN
WHO GRADUATED.
THE PROPORTION OF AFRICAN
AMERICANS AND PEOPLE OF COLOR IN
THE MILITARY FAR EXCEEDS THE
GENERAL POPULATION.
AND THUS AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO
THE EXTENT HAT THERE'S SOME
SORT OF REFERENCE IN THE PRIVATE
SECTOR THAT IS ANALOGOUS THE
PREFERENCE IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR.
YOU ARE ACTUALLY.
YOUR ACTUALLY HELPING THOSE OF
COLOR -- AS MY FINAL COUNT THANK
YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH IS THERE
ANY OTHER COMMENTS [inaudible]
SENATOR GONZALEZ.
TH -- I TO JUST WANT TO SAY
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD -- I'M A LITTLE STUCK
HERE AS WELL BECAUSE I DO FEEL --
THAT YOU KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN
POPULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
SEVERELY UNDER REPRESENTED IN
SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE VETERAN --
GROUPS AND SO I HOPE -- THAT YOU
KNOW IN THIS NEXT ITERATION
WHATEVER -- COMES ABOUT TODAY
THAT YOU KNOW YOU WILL CONTINUE
WORKING WITH EQUALITY CALIFORNIA
AND HOPEFULLY ACLU IN SOME OF
THE OPPOSITION.
TO HOPEFULLY GET THIS THIS RIGHT --
THE NEXT TIME AROUND SO
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS.
MARCHING IN HEARING NONE WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE YES MA'AM.
I CHAU CLOSED RELATIVELY FAST SO
I'D LIKE TO PUT THIS IN SCALE.
IN 201-617-0007 HUNDRED AND
TWENTY NINE RECRUITS ACROSS FIVE
BRANCHES JOIN THE MILITARY OUT
OF CALIFORNIA.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH THIS
BILL?
IS THESE KIDS AND I WILL CALL
THEM KIDS THEIR BRAVE MEN AND
WOMEN BUT TO ME THEIR KIDS WHEN
THEY GET OUT. 80% OF THEM WERE
LISTED MANY ONLY HAVE A HIGH
SCHOOL EDUCATION.
THEY'VE GOT TO DO THREE MAIN
THINGS.
GET A JOB.
GO TO SCHOOL STAY OFF DRUGS AND
ALCOHOL [inaudible]
THAT'S CRITICAL. FOR THIS CLASS
OF PEOPLE THEY NEED TO HAVE A
FAIR CHANCE AND ONCE AGAIN A
GREAT AMOUNT INCLUDING SEVENTEEN
POINT 3%.
OR AFRICAN AMERICAN OR HISPANIC
OR WOMEN.
SO EVERYTHING'S CHANGED
DRAMATICALLY [inaudible]
AND THEY NEED THE HELP TO KEEP
THEM OUT OF THE HOMELESS CAMPS.
AND ALSO THE AVERAGE OF TWENTY
VETERANS DIE BY SUICIDE EVERY
DAY.
BECAUSE OF HOPELESSNESS SO
THAT'S MY PLEA FOR A RESPECTFUL
PLEAD FOR A AYE VOTE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER I'D LET ME JUST
ADD THAT I THINK THE REASON THAT
THEY COMMIT SUICIDE IS MORE TO
DO WITH THE LACK OF A CARE AFTER
THEY RETURNED FROM DEPLOYMENT --
AND THAT'S MY HOPE THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND
VETERANS AFFAIRS WILL RECOGNIZE
THAT.
THESE FOLKS DESERVE A LOT BETTER
WHEN IT COMES TO DEALING WITH
THE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES
ASSOCIATED.
WITH THEIR SERVICE I DON'T THINK
THAT THE ADVANCING THIS JOB
ISSUE PERSONALLY -- TO THE
DETRIMENT OF OTHERS -- IS REALLY
THE PROBLEM.
THE PROBLEM REALLY IS THAT WE
DON'T CARE FOR OUR VETERANS AND
THEIR NEEDS WHEN THEY GET BACK
FROM FROM THEIR SERVICE BUT THAT
BEING SAID WE DO HAVE A MOTION.
AND A MADAM SCRETARY THE MOTION
IS TO PASS.
A TO SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO AB ONE SIXTY JACKSON
NO JACKSON NO BORDERS.
OR DECIDE TO RUSSELL GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ NO JONES.
JONES I'M MONNING.
STERN.
STERN AYE AMBERG UMBERG IOWA
CASKEY [inaudible]
ORDER.
TO THE BILL HAS FOUR VOTES WILL
PLACE IT ON CALL THANK YOU SO
MUCH ADAM CHAIR IF I MAY.
INJECTOR QUICK JUST IN CASE THE
BILL FALLS SHORT AND ONLY NEEDS
ONE MORE VOTE SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL
GET IT -- BUT IF IT DOES FALL
SHORT CAN WE OFFER THE AUTHOR
RECONSIDERATION YOU CAN ALWAYS
ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION THANK
YOU.
ARE YOU ASKING FOR
RECONSIDERATION.
AS A LOST YET OKAY WELL I JUST
WANNA MAKE SURE.
I DON'T YOU HAVE TO COME BACK IF.
YOU WON'T HAVE TO COME BACK I
LIKE YOUR OPTIMISM THEM THANK
YOU [inaudible]
YEAH.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER GONZALEZ YOU HAVE
A SERIES OF BILLS I'VE GOT TO GO
RUN AND VOTE ON NATCHER IN --
PUBLIC SAFETY I HOPE THAT'S
WHERE I'M HEADED -- SO I'M GOING
TO HAND THE GAVEL OVER TO THE
VICE CHAIR TO START AND I SHOULD
BE BACK SHORTLY MY APOLOGIES
THAT'S OKAY.
WHICH ONE RESTORING WITH.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S -- GOOD
AFTERNOON I THINK WERE -- IN THE
PREFERENCE WAITING FOR THE NOISE
TODAY DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
BUT WE ARE -- WE'RE GOING TO
VITAL ON FILE ITEM NUMBER THREE
EIGHT BEES -- ONE SEVENTY
ASSEMBLY WOMAN -- GONZALEZ THE
FLOOR IS YOURS -- THANK YOU
MISTER VICE CHAIR AB ONE SEVENTY
SIX TO PROTECT OUR VULNERABLE
LOW WAGE WORKERS WHO ARE OFTEN
WOMEN WOMEN OF COLOR IMMIGRANTS
AND WERE IN MOST NEED PROTECTION
FROM SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE
WORKPLACE.
THE TREND WE'VE SEEN ESPECIALLY
THE JANITORIAL IN HOTEL
HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES HAS BEEN
TOWARD OUTSOURCING WORK TO
STAFFING AGENCIES.
THESE WORKERS MAY GO TO WORK
EACH DAY AT THE SAME LOCATION
WHEN THE UNIFORM OF THE OFFICE
OR HOTEL THEIR CLEAN IN
REPORTING TO MANAGERS ON SITE.
HOWEVER THESE CONTRACTING
COMPANIES AND HOTELS ARE NOT
BEING HELD.
RESPONSIBLE ONE SEXUAL RAM.
HARASSMENT HAPPENS ON THEIR
WATCH TO THEIR WORKERS WHAT IS
RESULTED FROM THIS LACK OF
ACCOUNTABILITY ARE HORROR
STORIES OF ABUSES IN THE
WORKPLACE PERPETUATED BY THE
SAME ACTORS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
THIS BILL WAS INSPIRED BY
STORIES SANDERS HIS GET OFF A
HOTEL WORKER WHO BRAVELY CAME
FORWARD TO TELL HER STORY BEING
SEXUALLY HARASSED ON THE JOB.
AB ONE SEVENTY WOULD ENSURE THAT
CONTRACT WORKERS LIKE SANDRA CAN
SEEK RECOURSE FROM BOTH THEIR
DIRECT EMPLOYER AND THE
CONTRACTING EMPLOYER IF THEY ARE
EXPERIENCED ANY FORM OF
HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE THIS BILL IS
TO REQUIRE EMPLOYERS TO TAKE
IMMEDIATE AND APPROPRIATE
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO STOP THE
HARASSMENT PREVENT FURTHER HARM.
BY REQUIRING EMPLOYERS TO SHARE
CIVIL LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
CIVIL LIABILITY WORKERS WILL BE
MORE POWER TO HOLD THEIR
WORKPLACES ACCOUNTABLE AND HAVE
THEIR COMPLAINTS TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
HAVE A NUMBER OF WITNESSES HERE
TODAY.
THANK YOU OF FOR THOSE -- AND
TWO WITNESSES -- OR ONE I GIVE
YOU TO PLEASE THE STATE YOUR
NAME AND AND AND KEEP IS TWO
MINUTES.
I'LL BE TRANSLATING SO MAYBE I
THINK THE LITTLE.
ONE WHEN I WITH ME NUMBER FOR
SOMEONE IN NOT TALKING MORE TO
COME MY WAY AND THEY BY MATT
BEFORE TRY TO PUBLISH BUT WITH
CALIFORNIA.
THE RENT THE PROXY I'M A
PRODUCTION AMOUNT THEY ALL
CHINA'S FROM UP IN FEDERAL COURT
IN RANCHO BUT WITH THE
CALIFORNIA.
MY NAME IS ROSA MORENO I WORKED
AS A HOUSEKEEPER AT THE TERRAN A
RESORT IN RANCHO PALOS VERDES
CALIFORNIA FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS.
IT'S AN EXPENSIVE RESORT IN
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CALIFORNIA.
MEANT THE THROW HOWEVER I EAT
THE WAY BY DEFENSE BUT
INTERESTING COME WITH A MALE
FRIEND DOUG IF THAT CAN SING
BECAUSE IF WE CANNOT MEET THE
FULL LIST ON THE TRACKER FOR
FALLING ASLEEP BUT FIELD WITH.
WHILE WORKING THERE I HAD
VARIOUS UNCOMFORTABLE
EXPERIENCES A FACE THE RISK OF
GAS EXPOSING THEMSELVES TO ME
WHEN I WORKED ALONE IN THEIR
ROOMS.
ME TOO BUT REFERRED TO PUT ME
SOMEONE BEHIND THE THE FIVE
O'CLOCK AT THE COMING FIGHTERS
ON THE BUS MAN WHOSE JOB IT WAS
TO PROVIDE LINEN AND OTHER ITEMS.
THAT WE HOUSEKEEPERS NEED TO
PERFORM OUR WORK.
NO HUNTSMAN OFFICIAL I'M
RETURNING FROM ONE TO FIVE WITH
THE FEE ON THE FIFTH ELEMENT
TAKEN ON PLAN ACCOUNT BUT
REQUIRED BY IF SCHOOLS YES OFTEN
COME WITH.
THE CURRENT ADDRESS THE NEED TO
LAY INTO ME TALKING ABOUT WHEN I
WITH THE CM.
THE HOUSE MAN WOULD WATCH AS
WELL WE CLEAN ROOMS AND
ESPECIALLY WHILE WE WERE BENDING
OVER TO PICK UP TOWELS OR MAKE
BEDS THEY WOULD COME BEHIND ME
QUIETLY WHILE I WAS CLEANING
ROOMS.
FIFTH AT THE NECK ACHE WITH ARMY
PUTTING SEE MOTHER ME ON BROKE
ON THE MISSION COMMON THOUGHT IS
IN A PROPOSED TO ME BECAUSE I'M
NOT FROM HERE.
DOES HE HAVE IT THEN THE FOCAL
PILOT THING GO THROUGH A LOCAL.
LAW FIRM TO FAVOR A PROFOUND IN
MINNETONKA MINNESOTA MY FEATHER
THING THE FIFTY THURMOND.
I ALWAYS FELT LIKE I HAD TO
WATCH OVER MY SHOULDER WHEN THEY
MADE INAPPROPRIATE COMMENTS TO
ME AND ASK ME OUT I WOULD SAY GO
AWAY.
DON'T YOU SEE THAT I'M BUSY AND
I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR YOU MEN
WOULD LEAVE BUT THEY WOULD SAY
THAT I SHOULD NOT CALL THEM
LATER IF I NEEDED SOMETHING IT
MAKES ME ANGRY TO THINK ABOUT IT.
THE SUPPORT TO NOT MENTAL THEIR
SUPERVISOR ALLEGEDLY HARASSED
THEM.
THE QUICKEST FOUND THAT OUT THEN
WAS GOOD LUCK ALSO SIX FAR FOR
THAT BUT THE THE AND GOT SO THE
MONICA IT YET TAKE A WITH A K.
YEAH BECAUSE A LOT OF ON
PHYSICAL BUT WE THOUGHT.
IT FROM THIS ALL RIGHT HERE WE
LOOK AT LEAST SIMPLICITY
RECURSOS BECAUSE PLAN MUCH.
AFTER SANDRA REPORTED SEXUAL
HARASSMENT SHE WAS FIRED AND
MONICA'S CASE SHE SAYS THAT
AFTER SHE REFUSED HER
SUPERVISORS ADVANCES HE CHANGED
HER SCHEDULE WHICH MADE IT
IMPOSSIBLE FOR HER TO TAKE CARE
OF HER CHILDREN AT NIGHT.
ARE THE WAY TO THE PUT INTO THE
NISSAN THE MONICA IT WAS FOUR
THIRTY OUR CONDUCT THAT I'M OUT
THAT IF THEY WILL NOT CONSENT
BUT FROM MY YOUNGER LIFT OF HER
LOTUS SILICON CHIP A HUNK OF THE
AND OF COURSE THE METHOD THAT
AMERICAN TOOK A SYMPATHETIC BUT
THAT.
THAT A MAN.
BUT REMEMBER THEY TOOK HIM UP
THE MANY WONDERFUL COLLECTION
PROCESS AND BUT UNLIKE ME CENTER
AND MONICA AND THEIR SUPERVISOR
WORKED AT TURNING THROUGH A
STAFFING AGENCY AND EVEN THOUGH
THE AGENCY WORKERS WORK EVERY
DAY AND ATTORNEYS KITCHENS ALONG
SIDE TURNING AS DIRECT EMPLOYEES.
THE TERRAN ASSET THEY HAVE
NOTHING TO DO WITH SANDERS CASE
CORD.
TO MADISON ALSO CUSTOMER PERCENT
THOUGH THAN PHYSICAL SO SIX ON
YOUR BACK ON THE PERFECT PARTNER
PROPIOS INTERNET.
BONTA THAT OUR CUSTOMER CAN
CHECK ONE PROCEED LIKE BEFORE
MANY TIMES WELL NOT LATE AB
EIGHT SIMPLE TO THINK BUT BY
LATE THE FOUNDER.
WORK ON THE REST ARE QUESTION
NOT HIS TACKLE SOME TO PLANT
LEVINSON PROCESSING ACOSTA THINK
PRACTICE OF FINDING WHAT MUST IT
WOULD OF SEVERAL OF US HAVE COME
FORWARD WITH ALLEGATIONS OF
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND OTHER.
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AT THE TERRAN
ANNA BOTH AGENCY WORKERS AND
DIRECT EMPLOYEES WE ALL NEED A
BEAT ONE SEVENTY SANDRA'S Là
BECAUSE WHEN AGENCY WORKERS LIKE
SANDRA CAN HOLD COMPANIES
ACCOUNTABLE FOR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT WE WILL AS WERE -- I
APOLOGIZE.
THESE IF YOU COULD TO KEEP IT TO
TWO MINUTES.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS CAITLIN
VEGA FOR THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION HERE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL.
AND THE ISSUE THAT WERE FOCUSED
ON AND THIS BILL IS THE USE OF
BASICALLY PERMIT TEN OUTSIDE
THIRD PARTIES TO PROVIDE WORKERS
TO DO THE DATED A REGULAR WORK
OF THE BUSINESS.
ON WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS THAT
OFTENTIMES THIS ARRANGEMENT IS
USED TO SHIELD.
THE COMPANY -- FROM LIABILITY
FOR WHAT HAPPENS TO WORKERS I'M
AT THE HAND BY THE HANDS OF THE
CONTRACTORS.
AND WE DID A BILL SEVERAL YEARS
AGO TO SAY.
IF THESE ARE YOUR REGULAR
WORKERS DOING THE REGULAR FOR
PORK UP YOUR BUSINESS YOU
SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO USE A THIRD
PARTY CONTRACTOR LABOR
CONTRACTOR TO SHIELD YOU FROM
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR WELL
BEING.
AND THAT BILL EXTENDED TO WAGES --
WORKERS COMP AND HEALTH AND
SAFETY IT DID NOT EXTEND TO
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND WHAT WE'VE
RECOGNIZED IS THAT THE SAME
PATTERN EXISTS WHEN THE
COMPANY'S NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE
THEY LOOK THE OTHER WAY THEY
ALLOW THE CONTRACTOR TO DO WHAT
THEY DO.
OFTENTIMES SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
VERY MUCH INTERTWINED WITH OTHER
KINDS OF WORK SITE ABUSES IT'S A
WAY OF DEMEANING WOMEN AND AND
MEN AND MAKING THEM FEEL --
INTIMIDATED AND AFRAID TO COME
FORWARD AND SO WE THINK IT'S
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO EXTEND
THE SAME PROTECTIONS.
THIS DOES ENSURE THAT THE THE
MASTER EMPLOYER THE CLIENT
EMPLOYER HAS NOTICED THAT
VIOLATIONS ARE GOING ON IT IS
ULTIMATELY THEIR RESPONSIBILITY
WHEN PEOPLE WORKERS ARE DOING
WORK ON THEIR PROMISES. TO
ENSURE THAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
NOT GOING ON AND AS YOU CAN SEE
IN MANY CASES IT IS RAMPANT
ACROSS THE BOARD -- AND WE THINK
THAT THIS BILL WILL SOLVE UP FOR
A LOT OF THAT BY HOLDING THE
COMPANY ACCOUNTABLE THANK YOU
THANK YOU.
TARA MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT
ANY MEMBER HE PUBLIC WISHING TO
COMMENT IF YOU COULD PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME AFFILIATION AND
POSITION THANK YOU.
ALI'S AGO REPRESENTING AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN
IN SUPPORT.
STEVEN WEBER ASKED ME CALIFORNIA
IN SUPPORT.
YOUR TO BE AN ATTACK ARE THE
CONSUMER ATTORNEYS OF
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT.
AND MY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA WOMEN LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT.
ERIN O'NEILL MULLIN BURKE ON
BEHALF OF PORK EQUITY IN SUPPORT.
MEGAN SUPERS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS IN THE CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS AND
SUPPORT.
MICHELLE CAST OF THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION
ALSO SUPPORT.
RIGHT NOW SOME OF THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ALSO SUPPORT.
LIZ SORENSON WITH CW A DISTRICT
NINE ALSO IN SUPPORT AND FOR THE
SAKE OF TIME IM GONNAHAVE MY
FOLKS STAND UP PLEASE AND
SUPPORTING THESE ARE ALL OUR CW
A MEMBERS IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU -- MISTER CHAIR
MEMBERS MAP BROAD WITH THE
TEAMSTERS UNITE HERE IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU THANK YOU ANY OTHER
MEMBER THE PUBLIC WISHING TO
COMMENT.
ALRIGHT MOVING ON TO FOLKS
WISHING TO VOICE OPPOSITION DO
WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES.
WE SHOULD EXPRESS OPPOSITION.
ONCE YOU GRAVITY RIGHT OVER HERE.
YOU PLEASE KEEP IT TO TWO
MINUTES THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
MEMBERS BENEFIT COME OUT FOR THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND WERE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO
THIS BILL -- WHICH ESTABLISHES
AUTOMATIC JOINT LIABILITY FOR
CLIENT EMPLOYERS FOR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT IF THE LABOR
CONTRACTORS LIABLE.
WE ACTUALLY THINK THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS DID A VERY GOOD JOB ON
THIS POINT AND CLARIFIED THAT
THIS IS IN FACT AN AUTOMATIC
JOINT LIABILITY BILL.
I THINK THERE'D BEEN SOME MONEY
IN OF THE WATERS OF THAT POINT A
PRIOR CONVERSATIONS BUT THIS
COMMITTEE AND ALSO SAYS THAT IS
RIGHT ON AND IT STATES -- IF THE
LABOR CONTRACTORS LIABLE FOR THE
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT IN THE
CLIENT EMPLOYERS AUTOMATICALLY
LIABLE FOR THAT WORKPLACE
HARASSMENT.
AS WELL AND THAT'S THE NATURE OF
ARE CONCERNED WE DON'T WE THINK
THERE ARE SITUATIONS THAT WE CAN
ALL ENVISIONED WHERE PROBABLY
MAKES SENSE TO HOLD THE LINE
PLAYER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LABOR
CONTRACTORS.
ACTIVITIES WHERE THERE'S THE
REQUISITE LEVEL OF OF CONTROLLER
KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE SITUATION
BUT WE CAN PROBABLY ALSO IMAGINE
SITUATIONS WHERE.
THE CLIENT EMPLOYER HAS NO
KNOWLEDGE OR NO CONTROL OF THE
SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACTIVITY
OCCURRING.
AND WE THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE --
TO HOLD THEM AUTOMATICALLY
LIABLE IN THAT SITUATION.
AND I JUST WANT TO DIRECT THE
COMMITTEE TO PAGE FIVE OF THE
ANALYSIS WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT
HOW THE SCENARIO WILL PLAY OUT --
AND IT SAYS UNDER THIS BILL THE
CLIENT EMPLOYERS JOINTLY LIABLE
FOR WORKPLACE HARASSMENT.
THAT THE LABOR CONTRACTOR KNEW
OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT EVEN
IF THE CLIENT EMPLOYER ITSELF
DID NOT HAVE ACTUAL OR
CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE.
ABOUT THEIR HARASSMENT.
THUS IF THE LABOR CONTRACTOR
DIRECTLY HARASSED WORKER
SUPPLIED BY THE LABOR
CONTRACTORS IN THE PLANE OF
WHERE WOULD BE JOINTLY LIABLE
WITH THE LABOR CONTRACTOR FOR
THAT HARASSMENT.
EVEN IF THE CLIENT EMPLOYER DID
NOT KNOW ABOUT IT WHEN IT
OCCURRED.
SIMILARLY IF ONE WORKER SUPPLIED
BY THE LABOR CONTRACTOR FOR US
ANOTHER WORKER SUPPLIED BY THE
LABOR CONTRACTOR.
AND THE LABOR CONTRACTOR KNEW OR
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE
HARASSMENT BUT DID NOT TAKE
ACTION TO STOP IT.
THEN THE CLIENT EMPLOYER WOULD
BE JOINTLY LIABLE WITH THE LABOR
CONTRACTOR FOR THAT HARASSMENT.
EVEN IF THE CLIENT EMPLOYER
ITSELF DID NOT KNOW WHAT WAS
GOING ON IN TIME.
SO AGAIN WE THINK IT'S
INAPPROPRIATE TO AUTOMATICALLY
HOLD DECLINE EMPLOYER LIABLE IN
THAT SITUATION AND WE THINK THE
COMMON LAW TEST WITH LOOKS AT
THE LEVEL OF CONTROL IS THE IS
THE BEST BALANCE OF OF
APPORTIONING LIABILITY IN
SITUATION.
AND FINALLY THE ALE THE ONLY
OTHER POINT I WANTED TO MAKE IS.
THE EXISTING JOINT LIABILITY
SECTION LABOR CODE TWENTY TEN
POINT THREE WHICH EXTEND
LIABILITY TO WAGES AND WORKERS
COMP -- THOSE ARE MORE
OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE -- THE
MANAGER OF THAT BILL WAS VOTE
YOUR CONTRACTORS I THINK THAT'S
EASIER TO DO WHEN IT COMES TO
WAGES AND WORKERS COMPENSATION
YOU CAN VERIFY WORKERS
COMPENSATION COVERAGE BY MAKING
A PHONE CALL.
YOU CAN DO A PAIR AUDIT.
WE DON'T BELIEVE THE TYPES OF
ISSUES RELATED TO SEXUAL
HARASSMENT ARE NECESSARILY AS
OBJECTIVE FIVE LEAVE VERIFY
VERIFIABLE BY A LABOR CONTRA
ARIGHT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU OF THOSE WITH ANY
MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO
COMMENT -- IN OPPOSITION.
IF YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD STATE
YOUR NAME.
AFFILIATION AND POSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON MATTHEW ALL OF
WESTERN GROWERS ASSOCIATION OF
WE WOULD ALIGN OUR A A POSITION
WITH THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE
CHAMBER [inaudible]
YOU.
KATIE HANSON WITH THE CALIFORNIA
RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION WERE HERE
IN OPPOSITION AS WELL.
BRIAN LITTLE CALIFORNIA FARM
BUREAU FEDERATION FOR THE
REASONS STATED BY MY COLLEAGUE
FROM CAL CHAMBER IN OPPOSITION
THANK YOU.
THE CALL RICE CALIFORNIA
MANUFACTURES AND TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION ALSO POST.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER MEMBER THE
PUBLIC WISHING TO COMMENT IN
OPPOSITION SEEING NONE BRING IT
BACK TO THE DAIS.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD -- YES
CENTER AKOWSKI.
THANK YOU I AM.
ON PAGE SIX AND SEVEN OF OUR
ANALYSIS WE TALKED ABOUT --
WHO'S EXEMPT IN NINETY
UNDERSTAND THE EMPLOYERS WHO
HAVE LESS THAN -- TWENTY FIVE
EMPLOYEES ARE VERY LARGE
EMPLOYERS THAT HAVE ONLY FIVE A
CONTRACTORS BUT THERE'S CARVE
OUTS.
FOR COMMUNITY NONPROFITS LABOR
ORGANIZATIONS AND APPRENTICESHIP
GROUPS WHITE WITH THE SEC
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT IN THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES NOT RISE TO THE
SAME LOCATION AS THE OTHER.
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT THAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO STAMP OUT.
IT THAT WAS THAT WAS TAKEN FROM
THE LABOR CODE ON ON OUR WAGE
ISSUES AND WORKERS COMP ISSUES
ONE THE REASONS IS -- AND LET'S
TAKE LIKE.
A HIRING HALL FOR EXAMPLE --
THAT IS DISTRIBUTING THEIR
WORKERS TO A PLACE OF BUSINESS
IS MAYBE THAT THE ACTUAL --
EMPLOYEE WHO MIGHT BE THE ACTUAL
PLAY RECORD LIKE THE PAYROLL
SERVICES.
IT NOTES IS NOT ON SITE THEY'RE
NOT.
PARTICIPATING IN ANY WAY IT'S
JUST A UNIQUE RELATIONSHIP AND
WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT WITH --
WITH THE CONSULTANT ABOUT
WHETHER WE NEEDED TO TRANSFER
BUT WE WE HAVE GONE BACK AND
FORTH BETWEEN THE LABOR CODE IF
YOU HAVE WITH US WELL TO BE
HONEST AND IT'S BEEN TOUGH -- TO
EVERY EVERY TIME WE PUT IT
SOMEWHERE THE OPPOSITION SAYS IT
DOESN'T BELONG THERE -- BUT WE
HAD WORK WE DECIDED TO STICK
WITH THE HAT DESPITE MY BELIEF
THAT IT SHOULD BE IN LABOR CODE
BUT IF IT'S THE LABOR CODE.
THE DEFINITIONS FOR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE
TRANSFERRED TO LABOR CODE SO WE
SETTLED ON FEE HAT AND WE TRIED
TO TAKE ALL OF THE SECTIONS THAT.
MATCHED THE THE STRICT LIABILITY
OR THE JOINT LIABILITY IN THE
LABOR CODE AND PUT IT INTO THE
HUNDRED THE SECTION SO THAT'S
WHY THOSE ARE THERE ANY KIND OF
A REAL EXAMPLE IN IN A REASONING --
WE'RE WILLING TO CONTINUE TO
WORK ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S
APPROPRIATE IN THIS SITUATION.
FOR ALL THOSE EXEMPTIONS
[inaudible]
IN.
MADAM CHAIR A GUEST OF THE
FOLLOW UP TO THE OBJECTION ABOUT.
THE SUGGESTION THAT YOU HAVE NO
CONTROL OVER THE CONTRACTED
FOLKS IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND I
GUESS YOU KNOW I SEE A AS AN
CREATION SEEN OTHERS DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF CONTROL.
BUT IT IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE
JOINT LIABILITY IF FACTUALLY
THERE WERE NO CONTROL THAT WOULD
AFFECT.
A CREW TO THE THE EMPLOYER YOU
HAVE A THERE IS CONTROL THOUGH
THAT THE SITUATION BY WHICH
THESE OF THESE EMPLOYERS ARE
JOINTLY LIABLE -- WAS ACTUALLY
TAKEN FROM THESE OTHER SITUATION
SO YOUR ON SITE YOU'RE DOING THE
WORK OF THEIR THEIR ON SITE AS
WELL -- AND THEIR NUMBER THINGS
THE EMPLOYER CAN DO TO ENSURE
THAT THEY'RE NOT HIRING BAD
CONTRACTORS THAT THEIR ENSURING
THAT THEIR CONTRACTORS ACTUALLY
TEACHING ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT
AND HOLDING THEM TO A STANDARD.
THIS IS TO ENSURE IT WHAT WE
HAVE BEEN SEEN IS.
IS MASTER EMPLOYERS WHO
BASICALLY SAY THIS IS NOT MY
PROBLEM IT IS YOUR PROBLEM
THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO HOLD
THEM LIABLE THAN TO HOLD THEM
JOINTLY LIABLE IN THE SITUATION
WHEN IT COMES TO SEXUAL
HARASSMENT.
THERE'S A WHOLE VARIETY OF OF OF
WAYS THAT THAT CAN BE DONE WHAT
WE CAN'T HAVE CONTINUE TO BE
DONE IS THE TERROR NAY ARE SOME
OTHER.
BIG ENTITY CONTRACTING WITH A
CONTRACTOR THAT CONTRACTOR GETS
SUED RIGHTFULLY FOR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT.
THING THEY GO UNDER IF YOU WELL --
MAYBE DECLARE BANKRUPTCY -- AND
THEN COME BACK AS A NEW
CONTRACTOR AND THE MASTER
PLAYERS AS WELL THIS IS OUR
PROBLEM YOU KNOW WE HAVE NO
RESPONSIBILITY HERE IT IS WE'RE
SAYING SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS
DIFFERENT IF THESE EMPLOYEES.
BY THE WAY THEY'RE WORKING AT
YOUR RESORT WEARING YOUR UNIFORM
A LOT OF THEM DON'T EVEN KNOW
THAT THEY'RE BEING EMPLOYED BY
SOMEBODY ELSE YOU HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY AS WELL.
THANK YOU OF SENATOR BORCHERS.
VENTURE -- FOLLOWING UP ON MY
COLLEAGUES -- QUESTION.
I TOO WAS KIND OF TROUBLED WITH
THE IDEA OF LABOR CONTRACTORS --
IN THE CARVE OUT SAID NGUYEN
ALONG WITH THEM INCLUDING THE
MOTION PICTURE SERVICES.
AT A TABLE SERVICE.
THE MOTION PICTURE HEY ROLE
SERVICES AND IT SAYS HERE THAT
IF IT.
SATISFIES ONE OF THE CRITERIA.
AND THAT IS THAT THEY ARE
SIGNATORY TO A COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENT
[inaudible]
IS THAT.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
NONTRADITIONAL LABOR CONTRACTORS
OF YOUR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
PAYROLL SERVICE.
THE WAY WE AND SHORE -- QUITE
FRANKLY OF OTHER BILLS TO DEAL
WITH THIS NOW THE WAY WE ENSURE
THAT -- THESE FORMERLY WHAT WE
THOUGHT OF IS KIND OF GIG
WORKERS ARE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES AND
NOT -- CONTRACTED JUST
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS IS YOU
HAVE TO HAVE AN EMPLOYER OF
RECORD AND PAYROLL SERVICE
BASICALLY ACTS AS THAT BUT THEY
IN NO WAY HAVE CONTROL OVER --
THE WORKPLACE OF THAT WORKER SO
IT IS -- A UNIQUE SITUATION BY
WHICH YOU KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE --
I TRUST IN A UNION -- THAT THEY
ARE ABLE TO REMAIN EMPLOYEES AND
YET BE WORKING FOR A MULTIPLE
DIFFERENT.
EMPLOYERS IF YOU WILL EVERY DAY
HE DIFFERENT EMPLOYERS IF IN --
IT WORKS SO WE CAN TELL OVER
LIVE THAT THIS HAPPENS -- IT'S
THE WAY IT'S BEEN CONSTRUCTED SO
YOU CAN'T HOLD THE PAYROLL
SERVICE WHO IS NOT AT THE PLACE
OF BUSINESS WHO IS NOT.
HAVING ANY INTERACTION BUT
PROVIDING THE WORK FORCE IN THE
PAYROLL AND TAKING OUT THE TAXES
AND DOES THAT MAKE SENSE I'M
TRYING TO MAKE -- IF ANYONE CAN
CHIME IN WITH THE NAME WHAT WAS
THE NAME OF THE THE COURT
DECISION ON IS.
THAT SAID OR DONE THAT THAT'S I
HAVE ANOTHER BILL I'M NOT AND
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THE
MOVEMENT OF A THROUGH THAT --
THROUGH THAT CASE LAW IS THAT
INDIVIDUALS ON EVEN IF THEY'RE
PART TIME CONTRACT -- TâM.
WOULD FALL UNDER THE CATEGORY OF
EMPLOYEE.
HOW DOES THAT BEAR OUT WITH THE
IDEA THAT?
I ANY INTERMEDIARY WOOD.
THE SITUATION JOINT LIABILITY
WITH THE EMPLOYER.
THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE CONCEPTS --
AND IN SOME WAYS I COULD GIVE
YOU THIS EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW IT IS
IN COURT DEFENDING AGAINST -- OF
RAPE CHARGES -- THAT THEY HAVE
NO CONTROL OVER BECAUSE THEIR
DRIVER THEY SAY IS A SEPARATE
BUSINESS SO IN SOME WAYS WE'RE
TRYING TO FIX THAT RIGHT WE'RE
TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THERE SOME
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPANY.
THAT UNDER THEIR MISGUIDED.
BELIEF THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING
THE LAW THEY THEY ARE A MASTER
COMPANY A CONTRACTING WITH THESE
WORKERS THESE WORKERS -- THESE
CONTRACTED WORKERS RAPE SOMEBODY
AND THEY'RE SAYING WE HAVE NO
RESPONSIBILITY -- ONE OF THE
EASIEST WAYS TO FIX THIS IS TO
BE CLEAR THAT THOSE ARE WORKERS
OF THE COMPANY.
IF THEY WERE USING A TEMPORARY
AGENCY HOWEVER WE HAVE TO BE
MORE CLEAR THAT THAT TEMPER
AGENT TEMPORARY AGENCY.
BUT THEY STILL WERE RESPONSIBLE.
OKAY SO IS THAT MAKES SENSE THIS
IS LIKE A LOT OF LABOR LAW THAT
CROSS.
HIS TOGETHER I'D BE HAPPY TO SIT
DOWN WITH YOU AND AND IT'S LIKE
ALMOST A DIAGRAM RIGHT I'M
TRYING I'M TRYING TO APPRECIATE
THE COMPLEXITY MORE IMPORTANTLY
I'M TRYING.
TO CONTEMPLATE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES.
AND I WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT
WE'RE NOT IN A SITUATION WHERE.
BY THIS LEGISLATION -- CREATING
JOINT LIABILITY THAT EAT THAT
THIS IS NOT OUR FOR CLOSING --
THE THE CONTRACTING OUT OF LABOR
MAKING CERTAIN THAT EVERYTHING
IS DONE IN HOUSE BY VIRTUE
MAKING EVERYONE AN EMPLOYEE.
AND THAT IN THIS GIG ECONOMY
COULD BE TERRIBLY DANGEROUS --
IN THAT IS OF OF CONCERN BUT ALL
A LEAVE MY FINAL COMMENTS HERE.
THAT THE IDEA OF AN EMPLOYER.
OR A PRINCIPLE ENTITY
CONTRACTING WITH AN INTERMEDIARY
FOR SERVICE IS BEING --
PERFORMED BY -- ANOTHER PARTY.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS THAT
IS THE CASE LAW NOT SUFFICIENT
ENOUGH THAT IF IN INDIVIDUALS
HIRED -- AND HAS A SEXUAL
PREDATORY A CRIMINAL RECORD.
THAT THEY COULD NOT -- ASSUME
LIABILITY HERB PROJECT LIABILITY
ON TO THE ENTITY THAT HIRED --
THE THERE'S NOT ONLY I MEAN
THAT'S A UNIQUE CASE BUT THAT
THAT'S NOT ALWAYS A SITUATION
IT'S NOT THAT THEY HAVE A
PREDATORY BEHAVIOR IT'S THAT.
I'M QUITE FRANKLY AND AND WE SEE
THIS IN A LOT OF IMMIGRANT WORK
FORCES -- MANY OF THE WORKERS
DON'T KNOW THE LAW AND WE'RE
TRYING TO FIX THAT WE'VE WE'VE
HAD BILLS -- IN THE PAST TO FIX
IT WITH FARMWORKERS AND WITH
JANITORS BECAUSE BOTH THE WORKER
AND THE SUPERVISORS WHO ARE
OFTEN I'M IMMIGRANTS THEMSELVES
DON'T.
KNOW OUR LAWS ARE NOT TRAINED IN
SEXUAL HARASSMENT LAWS IN THESE
CONTRACTORS USE THESE WORKERS
BECAUSE THEY'RE CHEAPER QUITE
FRANKLY HAVE.
OF LEGISLATION THAT MANDATES
THAT -- THAT TYPE OF EDUCATION.
WE WE HAVE BEEN AND FACT OVER
THE LAST FEW YEARS PASSING THAT
TYPE.
OF LET'S JUST NOT A NEW ISSUE
WHAT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE
ADDING SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN
LIABILITY.
IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT OF TOTAL
FINISH UP IN ALL FINISH UP WITH
THIS IF YOU THE IF YOU JUST LET
ME FINISH.
IT'S NOT A NEW CONCEPT.
AND THIS IS JUST SIMPLY ADDING
AN ADDITIONAL.
AREA OF REQUIREMENT FOR
COMPANIES THAT UP THAT TO HAVE.
RESPONSIBILITY NOW IN LIABILITY
NOW -- FOR OTHER KINDS OF
CONDUCT.
DAD ARE VIEWED TO TO VIOLATE
CALIFORNIA POLICY IN CALIFORNIA
LAW.
I'M NOT CERTAIN I UNDERSTOOD
UNDERSTOOD THAT WHEN I WHEN I
HEAR LEGISLATORS SAY THE WORD
JUST.
I IMMEDIATELY HAVE EVER REACTION
LEGISLATION PUT FORWARD FOR A
VARIETY OF REASONS WHEN IT'S
SIMPLE AND IT DENOTES SOMETHING
IT'S JUST.
THIS IS CONSEQUENTIAL SORRY JAZZ
SO WHAT WHAT DID I USE JUST IN
WHAT CONTEXT I USE JUST NOT YOU
OKAY I'M SORRY -- AND ALL IN ALL
IN ALL IN HERE I THINK THE IDEA
OF EDUCATION I THINK IS
IMPORTANT I THINK THAT THAT BAD
ACTORS HAVE BEEN.
BROUGHT INTO THE WORK FORCE AND
THE YOU KNOW COVER MY EYES IN
AND COVER MY EARS ATTITUDE DOES
EXIST IT DOES.
I JUST DON'T THINK THAT I'M
CONCERNED THAT THIS OVER EXTENDS
IN CREATING JOINT LIABILITY
ACROSS THE BOARD.
IS IS IS OVERBROAD I'D LIKE TO
SEE IT REFINED OUT KNOW EXACTLY
HOW AT THIS POINT BUT THAT THAT
THAT'S MY CONCERN THANK YOU NEXT
OF SENATOR DORADO.
THANK YOU TO THE AUTHOR OF FOR
BRINGING THIS UP AND ON BEHALF
OF SO MANY WORKERS IN MANY
INDUSTRIES.
AWARE THIS IS AN ISSUE -- AND
IT'S TOO BAD THAT AFTER MANY
YEARS.
OF THIS ISSUE BEING BROUGHT TO
THE FOREFRONT IN INDUSTRY AFTER
INDUSTRY.
YOU WOULD THINK THAT EMPLOYERS
WHO DO HIRE CONTRACTORS.
WOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD
JUST ASSUME THAT RESPONSIBILITY
SO TO HEAR.
IN THE CASE OF THE TERROR NAY UP
ABOUT THIS SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND
THE COMPANY.
NOT WANTING TO TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR FOR THE
MEN AND WOMEN WHO WORK FOR THEM
DAY IN AND DAY OUT -- I THINK IS
IS -- IS REALLY TERRIBLE ALSO
ADDING A SEXUAL HARASSMENT TO
THAT LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY
COMES ONLY BECAUSE THEY REFUSE
TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.
I WOULD BE THE LAST ONE TO SAY
LET'S LEGISLATE ON THAT IF YOU
TOOK RESPONSIBILITY AND IS THE
LAST THING IS -- RETALIATION ARE
IS FOR ANY EMPLOYEE WHO STANDS
UP FOR THESE ISSUES ESPECIALLY
SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
PRIMARILY BY WOMEN IS SOMETHING
THAT -- IS DONE THROUGH A
SUBCONTRACTOR.
SO IF YOU STAND UP AND YOU SAY
SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT YOUR
RESPONSE WHAT'S GOING ON THE
CONTRACTOR WON'T THANK YOU BACK
THAT'S IT YOU'RE DONE.
SO -- I THINK FOR ALL THOSE
REASONS -- I GREATLY APPRECIATE
THE AUTHORS -- CONTINUOUS EFFORT
TO BRING THIS TO EVERYBODY'S
ATTENTION THANK YOU AND ART WE
HAVE A MOTION -- WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE.
I JUST CLOSE WITH -- WITH DUE
RESPECT TO THE TO THE SENATOR
WHO HAVEN'T HAD CHANCE TO SIT
DOWN WITH -- PRIOR TO THIS.
I THINK WE HAVE A FUNDAMENTALLY
DIFFERENT VIEW OF OF AN
EMPLOYER'S RESPONSIBILITY AND
THE EMPLOYERS THAT ARE -- IN AND
YOU'LL SEE IT THROUGHOUT MY
BILLS IN THIS COMMITTEE QUITE
FRANKLY BUT THE THE CORPORATE
ACTORS WHO -- CONTINUE TO FIND
WAYS TO NOT BE RESPONSIBLE --
FOR WORKERS THAT ARE DOING.
THAT THEIR BUSINESS THAT THEY'RE
PROFITING OFF OF HAS GOT US TO A
POINT WHERE WE HAVE TO CREATE
LAWS TO ENSURE ON THAT THOSE
WORKERS ARE PROTECTED THAT
TAXPAYERS ARE PROTECTED -- AND
THAT WE CAN RUN AN ORDERLY WAY
SO THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH
CONTRACTING OUT IN IN THE CASE
THAT -- THAT HAPPENED THAT
FORCED ME TO BRING THIS BILL
FORWARD THIS.
THE DISHWASHER SHE COMPLAINED TO
THE RESORT SHE COMPLAINED TO THE
EMPLOYER THE MASTER EMPLOYER AND
THEY SAID IT'S NOT OUR PROBLEM.
YES THAT'S NOT YOU'RE NOT OUR
WORKER EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS RIGHT
THERE THAT YOU WORK FOR US YOU
DON'T WORK FOR US THERE'S
NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT
WITH THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO
STOP THAT INTO AB LIABILITY AND
SO -- I IT'S NOT LOTS OF NEVER
PERFECT AND WE'RE ALWAYS AIMING
UNFORTUNATELY THE WORST ACTORS
BUT THIS ONE THIS CASES WE HAVE
TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT I
RESPECT LAST FROM ABOUT THANK
YOU MADAM SECRETARY.
THERE IS A MOTION -- DISHES TO
PASS TO THE SENATE FLOOR PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL.
JACKSON HEIGHTS JACKSON AYE
BORDERS.
WE'RE JUST NOTED RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES.
MONNING STERN STERN I BURKE.
BY KELSEY.
KELSEY I WRITE THE BILL HAS A
FIVE VOTES WE WILL HOLD THE ROLE
OPEN AND A MOVING ON QUICKLY.
OTHER -- FILE ITEM OF FOUR IS AB --
ONE SEVENTY ONE THANK YOU MADAM
CHAIR ONE SEVENTY ONE THAT IS
ANOTHER BILL WE'VE BEEN BROUGHT
FORWARD BEFORE AGAIN -- LAST
YEAR WHEN WE DID I'M LISTENING
TOWARDS BASICALLY THROUGHOUT THE
STATE ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD --
THE MOST FROM WOMEN WHO DID NOT
WANT TO FILE A LAWSUIT.
WAS THAT THEY WERE AFRAID -- TO
EVEN TELL THEIR SUPERVISOR
EMPLOYER THAT THEY HAD BEEN
SEXUALLY HARASSED IN ONCE SOME.
SOME SORT OF CHANGE BECAUSE THEY
WOULD BE RETALIATED AGAINST IF
YOU FILE A LAWSUIT YOU DO HAVE
PROTECTIONS AGAINST RETALIATION
BUT IF YOU SIMPLY HAVE NO DESIRE
TO FILE A LAWSUIT MAYBE BECAUSE
YOUR IMMIGRATION STATUS MAYBE
BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW A LAWYER.
YOU DON'T REALLY CARE YOU JUST
WANT THE DISHWASHER TO OR
WHOEVER IT IS TO QUIT.
BUT IN YOU TELL YOUR YOUR
SUPERVISOR IN THEY SWITCH YOUR
SCHEDULE OR THEY FIRE YOU --
THAT'S THAT'S NOT OKAY FOR THIS
WOULD WOULD BE A PRESUMPTION
RETALIATION IF WITHIN NINETY
DAYS OF NOTIFYING A SUPERVISOR --
ANYTHING NEGATIVELY HAPPENS TO
YOU THAT IT WOULD BE A
PRESUMPTION OF RETALIATION FOR
THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT --
DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
TWO MINUTES PLEASE MADAM MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS CAITLIN VEGA
FOR THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION AS YOU WELL KNOW MOST
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA ARE OUT
WELL WHICH MEANS THEY CAN BE
FIRED ANY TIME. FOR ANY REASON
AND THAT IS WHY WORKERS ARE SO
AFRAID TO COME FORWARD AND
REPORT ABUSES ON THE JOB BECAUSE
THEY CAN BE FIRED THE NEXT DAY
BECAUSE THE BOSS SAYS THEY DON'T
LOOK PROFESSIONAL ENOUGH BECAUSE
THE BOSSES THEY DIDN'T GET THERE
WHEN THEY WANTED THEM TO THEY
DIDN'T.
HAVE THE RIGHT ATTITUDE
LITERALLY.
ALMOST EVERY REASON EXCEPT THOSE
PROHIBITED BY LAW WHICH ARE
ABOUT SIX SO -- IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT THAT WE ENCOURAGE
WORKERS TO COME FORWARD.
IN ALMOST EVERY CASE AND YOU
WILL HEAR THEM DAY AFTER DAY.
ONE WOMAN IS NOT THE ONLY VICTIM
BUT IF WOMEN ARE SCARED URBAN
WOMEN OR MEN ARE SCARED TO COME
FORWARD AND REPORT RETALIATION
IT IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN TO
OTHERS IT'S MORE LIKELY TO BE
WIDESPREAD PERVASIVE ONGOING.
AND PROTECTIVE USERS THE POINT
HERE IS THAT A WORKER SHOULD BE
ABLE TO COME FORWARD OF COURSE
IF THEY HAVE LEGITIMATELY DONE
SOMETHING WRONG THEY CAN BE
FIRED THAT'S WHY THE PRESUMPTION
IS REBUTTABLE.
THE BURDEN IS ON THE PERSON WITH
POWER THE EMPLOYER TO
DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ACTUALLY
DID SOMETHING BAD THANK YOU
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT AND I MIGHT INDICATE
THAT WE DO HAVE FORM PAGES.
THIRTEEN TO SEVENTEEN A MOCK UP
OF AMENDMENTS THAT I UNDERSTAND
YOU WILL BE TAKING IN LABOR
SECRETARY VERY GOOD.
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT PLEASE NAME
AND AFFILIATION.
THE BEING ATTACK OR THE CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS OF CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MEGAN SUPERS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS IN THE CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
I ALWAYS AGO REPRESENTING
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
UNIVERSITY WOMEN IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
AND MY NUMBER HAVE THE
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
TAKE A BREAK A NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORK
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
CHRISTINE SMITH CALIFORNIA
PARTNER STEPPED ON THE MYSTIC
VIOLENCE IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
ERIN UNTIL MULLIN BURKE OF THE
HAVE A FORK EQUITY IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
RIGHT NOW SOME OF THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
SHOP CAST OF THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION
ALSO SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MAP OUT FOR THE TEAMSTERS UNITE
HERE -- A. T. U. MACHINISTS IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY
MUCH ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
AND IF YOU WOULD ADDRESS THE
AMENDED VERSION THAT IS GOING TO
BE TAKEN THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL
TO US THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS IN MINUTES PLEASE THAT
HAVE BEEN COMING UP THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
RESPECTFULLY POSED TO THE BILL.
AT WE DO GREATLY APPRECIATE THE
CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS WE WE
THINK THEY'RE IMPORTANT
CLARIFICATIONS -- BUT WE DO
STILL HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE
BILL -- OUR FUNDAMENTAL CONCERN
YOU KNOW WE WERE JUST FUN REALLY
CONCERNED WITH -- AS STATUTORY
SALAS MEN OF REBUTTABLE
PRESUMPTION.
AGAINST OF LIABILITY AGAINST
EMPLOYERS THERE'S A FEW EXAMPLES
IN THE CODE ALREADY BUT WE
TRADITIONALLY OPPOSED
STATUTORILY CREATING --
PRESUMPTIONS OF LIABILITY.
AND WE WOULD NOTE THAT LAST
YEAR'S AB THIRTY EIGHTY ONE HAD
A THIRTY DAY.
REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AND THAT
BILL WAS VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR
THIS BILL HAS A NINETY DAY
REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION SO IT'S
MUCH LONGER THAN LAST YEAR'S
BILL.
OUR FUNDAMENTAL CONCERN THOUGH
IS WITH THE CREATION OF OR THE
INCORPORATION OF SEXUAL
HARASSMENT LAW INTO THE LABOR
CODE.
WE THINK SUCH HARASSMENT IS A
BODY OF LAW IS IN THE GOVERNMENT
CODE -- IT MINISTER THAN
ENFORCED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING AND
WE HAVE CONCERNS WHEN YOU PUT
ALL ENTIRE BODY OF LAW INTO THE
LABOR CODE.
ENFORCED BY DIFFERENT AGENCY
THAT'S THAT'S GONNA RESULT AN
INCONSISTENCY -- AND CONFUSION.
THE PREVIOUS BILL WE SPOKE ABOUT
WAS A SEXUAL HARASSMENT MEASURE
THAT BILL AS THE AUTHOR
INDICATED WAS CONTAINED IN FIFA
THIS INCORPORATES SEXUAL
HARASSMENT PROVISIONS INTO THE
LABOR CODE.
WHICH WE THINK IS INAPPROPRIATE.
AT LAST YEAR'S BILL AB THIRTY
EIGHTY ONE ATTEMPTED TO ADD THE
SAME PROVISIONS TO THE LABOR
CODE.
AND THE GOVERNOR -- NOTED IN HIS
VETO NILES -- MESSAGE MOST OF
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL ARE
CONTAINING CURRENT LAW AREN'T
AREN'T ARE THERE FOR UNNECESSARY --
AND ADDITIONALLY IN TWENTY
SEVENTEEN AB FIVE SIXTY NINE
ATTEMPTED TO ADD PROVISIONS TO
THE LABOR CODE REGARDING
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH.
AS SUCH DISCRIMINATION OR SCREAM
NATION CLAIMS ARE ALREADY WITHIN
THE PURVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING AND
THE GOVERNOR SIMILARLY VETO THAT
BILL AND STATED I BELIEVE THESE
TYPES OF CLAIMS SHOULD REMAIN.
WITH IT WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR
EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING -- SO FOR
SIMILAR REASONS WE BELIEVE IT'S
INAPPROPRIATE TO INCORPORATE
THESE THESE PROVISIONS IN THE
LABOR CODE AND THEN FINALLY IN
PUTTING IT IN LABOR CODE YOU'VE
OF COURSE RAISE THE SPECTER OF
PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL CLAIMS
UNDER PAGA -- AND SO WE HAVE
CONCERNS THAT -- THAT'S A
NECESSARY FEE HOW ALREADY ALLOWS
VICTIMS WHO ARE -- PREVAILED
SEXUAL HARASSMENT RETALIATION
SUITS TO THE PINK IN
COMPENSATORY DAMAGES INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF.
DECLARATORY RELIEF PUNITIVE
DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY'S FEES SO
WE DON'T SEE THE REASON TO CRANK
LIKE A LIABILITY IN THE LABOR
CUTTING FOR THOSE REASONS WERE
POST THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHERS
IN OPPOSITION.
PLEASE STEP FORWARD IF YOU WOULD
NAME AND AFFILIATION PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON BROWN LITTLE
CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU
FEDERATION FOR THE REASONS
STATED BY CAL CHAMBER IN
OPPOSITION THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
THE CALL RICE CALIFORNIA
MANUFACTURES AND TECHNOLOGY
ASSOCIATION ALSO POST THANK YOU.
EIGHTY HANSON WITH THE
CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT
ASSOCIATION WERE OPPOSED AS WELL
THANK YOU.
MICHAEL CORPORATE ON BEHALF TO
SEE SEC ACCESS INSURANCE WITH
FORTY IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
BRING THIS BACK TO THE DYESS
SENATOR WHITE HOUSE SKI.
CURRENTLY WHEN THE BURDEN OF
PROOF IS ON THE EMPLOYEE IS THE
STANDARD CLEAR AND CONVINCING
EVIDENCE.
IS THAT THE CURRENT STANDARD YES
I BELIEVE SO OKAY.
AND NEVER BEEN ASKED THE
QUESTION I HAVE A QUESTION IN
BUT I I BELIEVE.
WAS ANYTHING ELSE NO THAT'S ALL
ALL RIGHT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
COMMENTS ALL RIGHT WE HAVE A DO
WE HAVE A MOTION.
I WAS WILL WILL OUT.
CENTER GONZALEZ. TO MAKE THAT
MOTION TO LEARN TO BE A LITTLE
QUICKER AS SHE GETS LOW MORE.
HERE ARE AYE AYE AYE ONE
HAPPENING AGAIN -- FOR FOR
BRINGING THIS THIS --
LEGISLATION I MEAN AND IT JUST
MAKES SENSE TO EXTEND THE SAME
PROTECTIONS WE'VE DONE FOR
VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
STALKING ELDER ABUSE SEXUAL
ASSAULT.
I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT --
THAT WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS
IS A CULTURE SHIFT WE'RE NOT
GONNA ALLOW THIS BEHAVIOR
ANYMORE -- I THINK IT GOES BACK
TO CERTAINLY PREVIEW.
OF PREDATES ME IN IF THE DATES
TO ME AS WELL THEN IT'S BEEN
GOING ON TOO LONG.
FOR THE NEXT GENERATION COMING
FORWARD AND WE REALLY DO NEED.
TO HOLD THOSE ACCOUNTABLE WHO
HAVE THE ABILITY AND THE POWER
TO TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES SO I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL.
AND WE REALLY DO NEED TO CREATE
A CULTURE SHIFT AROUND HERE AND
CERTAINLY LAST YEAR WITH ME TO
LEGISLATION AND I THINK WE ALL
WORK TOGETHER TO A TIGHT KNIT SO
THAT IT'S LEGITIMATELY --
SIGNIFICANT AND BALANCED A AND
NOW WE JUST HAVE TO ENFORCE IT
OFF IN THE WORKPLACE SO WITH
THAT WE HAVE A MOTION AND THE
MOTION IS TO PASS -- WITH
AMENDMENTS TO BE TAKEN IN LABOR --
PLEASE SIR CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER FOUR AB ONE
SEVEN ONE JACKSON AYE JACKSON
AYE BORCHERS TO RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I JONES MONNING STERN
UMBERG CASKEY.
I KELSEY AYE.
ALL RIGHT THE BILL HAS FOUR
VOTES.
WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN -- I
SEE SEVERAL MEMBERS ABSENCE SO
WE WILL KEEP THAT ROLE OPEN A.
B. M. TWO EIGHTEEN FILE ITEM
FIVE IS YOUR LAST ITEM I KNOW
YOU HAVE A FEW MORE -- YOU'RE
GOING TO BE HERE.
YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE WILL GET
HER SLEEPING BAG YEAH.
ALL RIGHT HE'S REALLY QUICK
LET'S GO FOR IT BEFORE YOU LIKE
IT LET'S DO IT AGAIN ARE HIGH
I'LL ITEM FOR A FILE ITEM FIVE
PLEASE.
COLLEAGUES.
GOOD AFTERNOON THE FLOOR IS
YOURS.
THANK YOU.
I'M AB TWO EIGHTEEN WOULD EXTEND
THE CIVIL STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
FOR VICTIMS OF CHILDHOOD SEXUAL
ASSAULT FROM AGE TWENTY SIX TO
AGE FORTY IN CASES OF DEFLATE.
DELAYED DISCOVERY FROM THREE
YEARS AFTER -- TWO FIVE I JUST
YOU KNOW YOU YOU HAVE SEEN THIS
BEFORE WE WE'VE -- THIS EXACT
BILL IN AND ALTHOUGH DID FOR IT
AND I'M SO THERE'S ONLY ONE
THING I WANT TO ADD BECAUSE IT.
I KEEP GETTING ALL THESE STORIES
FROM VICTIMS AND WE CAN'T FIND A
WAY. TO TO PROVIDE THEM A VOICE
ENOUGH AND SO I'M JUST GOING TO
READ ONE OF ARMS TODAY A WOMAN
SHE'S HERE TODAY HER NAME IS
DEANNA HAMPTON.
SHE LOST HER SON TREVOR AFTER HE
WAS SEXUALLY ABUSED BY A PRIEST
WHO HAD KNOWN HISTORY OF
INAPPROPRIATE INTERACTIONS.
TREVOR WAS SEXUALLY ABUSED BY A
PRIEST WHEN HE WAS BETWEEN TEN
TO TWELVE YEARS OLD THAT PRIEST
HAD ALREADY BEEN PRESCRIBED
LEAVE IN PSYCHIATRIC TREATMENT
BEFORE HE WAS MOVED TO TRAVERSE
PERISH.
WHEN TREVOR WAS NINETEEN HE
ATTEMPTED SUICIDE MEANWHILE A
CIVIL ACTION WAS BEING BROUGHT
AGAINST THE PRIEST FOR SEXUAL
ABUSE OF ANOTHER BOY?
TREVOR WAS STILL TRYING TO HEAL
HIMSELF FROM THE SHAME AND ANGER
AND LET ALONE GO TO COURT THREAD
PROCESS AT THAT TIME.
THE PRIESTS WHO SEXUALLY ABUSE
TREVOR NEVER WAS HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT HE DID TO
TREVOR BECAUSE TREVOR DIED.
BEFORE THE CASE COULD BE
COMPLETELY DEAD TRAGICALLY THE
STORY OF SEXUAL ABUSE WHEN THERE
IS EVIDENCE THAT THOSE IN POWER
NEW OF THE RISK AND PUT CHILDREN
IN DANGER ANYWAY IS ALL TOO
COMMON -- WE KNOW THIS IS A
PROBLEM WE KNOW THIS KIT WILL
CONTINUE TO BE A PROBLEM TO
PEOPLE ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND
I RESPECTFULLY I'M I'M HAVE SOME
WITNESSES HERE TODAY AND WE WILL
NEVER BE ABLE TO DO JUSTICE TO
ALL THE VICTIMS STORIES.
THANK YOU IF YOU WOULD THE MORE
THAN TWO MINUTES A PIECE.
GOOD AFTERNOON AFTERNOON MY NAME
IS TO WELL CAST X. I WAS BORN
AND RAISED IN SANTA ANA AND
STILL LIVE IN ORANGE COUNTY.
I AM AN ADVOCATE FOR OTHER ADULT
SURVIVORS OF CHILD SEXUAL
ASSAULT LIKE MYSELF.
I BECOME ONE OF THE LEADING
NATIONAL SPOKES PEOPLE ON BEHALF
OF VICTIMS.
AS A TEENAGER I WAS SEXUALLY
ASSAULTED BY THE CHOIR DIRECTOR
AT MY HIGH SCHOOL IN SANTA ANA.
HE DELIBERATELY TARGETED ME
BECAUSE I WAS VULNERABLE.
HE KNEW I WAS POWERLESS.
I HAD SPENT TIME IN A
PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL FOR SUICIDE
ATTEMPT.
MY MOTHER WAS AN ALCOHOLIC MY
FATHER WAS IN DENIAL.
I YEARNED FOR MENTORSHIP AND A
STRONG ADULT FIGURE IN MY LIFE.
I DID NOT YOU'RE IN FOR AN ADULT
TO SEXUALLY ASSAULT ME.
DURING THE TWO YEARS HE TARGETED
ME I WAS THE SUBJECT OF REPEATED
SEXUAL ASSAULT AND RAPE ON
SCHOOL PROPERTY IN ELSEWHERE.
BY THE TIME I GRADUATED HIGH
SCHOOL I WAS PREGNANT AND HAD A
SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE.
UNLIKE MOST VICTIMS I LIVE WITH
CRIPPLING SHAME AND SECRECY FOR
MORE THAN A DECADE.
I'M NOT A FAMOUS PERSON.
I'M NOT A MOVIE STAR AND I'M NOT
A GYMNAST I'M NOT A C. E. O. OR
CELEBRITY.
BUT IT IS NO LESS ON ME WHEN I
HARVEY WEINSTEIN OR A ROY MOORE
OR LARRY NASSER CUT A SWATH OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT ACROSS OUR MOST
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS.
IT IS NO LESS ON ME TO STAND
HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY AND SAY
THAT OUR LAW MUST CHANGE.
WE HAVE SEEN A COMPLETE SHIFT IN
OUR CULTURE WHEN IT COMES TO HOW
WE VIEW CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT.
IT IS TIME THAT THE LAW IT
KNOWLEDGES THAT CULTURAL SHIFT.
I ASK YOU FOR YOUR AYE VOTE
TODAY THANK YOU.
VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS PLEASE.
TWO MINUTES IF YOU WOULD.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MY
NAME IS MIKE FINNIGAN AND I'M
HERE FOR THE VICTIM POLICY
INSTITUTE ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS THANK YOU.
VERY GOOD OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT OF FEED STEP UP TO THE
MICROPHONE NAME AND AFFILIATION
PLEASE.
HELLO MY NAME IS DEANNA HAMPTON
AND I AM TREVOR MARTIN'S MOTHER.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
THE ATTACKER THE CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS OF CALIFORNIANS
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
I ALWAYS ABOUT REPRESENTING
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
UNIVERSITY WOMEN AND SPORT THANK
YOU.
ERIN ON YOUR MULLIN BURKE ON
BEHALF OF WORK EQUITY AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK OF REGULAR NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORK
THANK YOU. FIFTY ON FOR THE ZERO
ABUSE PROJECT STRONGLY IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU SIR.
NEXT WITNESS THIS SORENSEN
COMMUNICATION WORKERS OF AMERICA
DISTRICT NINE IN SUPPORT THANK
YOU THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON GOOD AFTERNOON
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
MY NAME IS MARK PERRIN'S I'M
HERE TODAY APPEARING ON BEHALF
OF THE AMERICAN TORT REFORM
ASSOCIATION.
ADDRESS A BROAD BASED COALITION.
OF SMALL LARGE COMPANIES
ASSOCIATIONS NON PROFITS
MUNICIPALITIES.
THAT SEEK FAIRNESS AND
PREDICTABILITY IN THE CIVIL
JUSTICE SYSTEM.
AFTER SUPPORTS PROTECTING
CHILDREN AND PUNISHING CRIMINAL
WRONGDOING.
AND SAID WHY SEXUAL ABUSE OF
ANYBODY ESPECIALLY CHILD.
IS INTOLERABLE.
MY WIFE AND I HAVE FOUR YOUNG
CHILDREN WERE CARE GIVER TO HIGH
SCHOOL.
SENIOR.
ACTORS DIVERSE MEMBERSHIP
[inaudible]
I'M.
AS ADDRESSES ITS DIVERSE
MEMBERSHIPS ONOFRE MY REMARKS
TODAY IN A BROADER CONTEXT AND
THEN DISCUSS WHY.
ASSEMBLY BILL TWO EIGHTEEN IS
EXTREME EVEN COMPARED TO WHAT
OTHER STATES HAVE DONE WHEN
THEY'VE MADE CHANGES TO THEIR
STATURE LIMITATIONS. FOR
CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE CASES.
BY ITS NATURE TORT LITIGATION
AND OFTEN INVOLVES PEOPLE WHO
DESERVE OUR EMPATHY -- YEARS
HEARD A VERY COMPELLING STORY.
IT'S HARD. FOR YOUR HEART NOT TO
GO OUT TO SOMEBODY LIKE THAT.
VICTIMS OF CHILDHOOD SEXUAL
ASSAULT CERTAINLY DESERVE
[inaudible]
OUR EMPATHY.
AND OUR EAR.
SO IT IS A WOMAN WHO SUFFERS.
A REPRODUCTIVE HARM FROM A
DEFECTIVE PRODUCT.
AN ELDERLY VETERANS WHO DIES
IMMEDIATELY ALMA FROM ASBESTOS
EXPOSURE.
OUR PERSON WHO'S RENDERED
QUADRIPLEGIC ARTIST HAS
DISFIGURING BURNS AS A RESULT OF
ANOTHER'S NEGLIGENT OPERATION.
OF A MOTOR VEHICLE.
BEING A TORT LAWYER I'VE SEEN
ALL OF THESE TYPES.
OF CONDITIONS AND YET FOR ALL OF
THESE TYPES OF CASES NOT
WITHSTANDING THE TERRIBLE
TRAGEDY SUFFERED BY THOSE
INVOLVED.
WE HAVE A RULE OF LAW.
WE HAVE A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
THAT DOES SET TIME LIMITS ON THE
FILING LAWSUITS.
AS FORMER GOVERNOR BROWN
EXPLAINING VETOING LEGISLATION
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THIS
LESS THAN A YEAR AGO.
ALL JURISDICTIONS HAVE SEEN FIT
TO BAR ACTIONS AFTER ALAPSE OF
YEARS.
THE REASON FOR THIS PART
UNIVERSAL PRACTICE IS OF
FAIRNESS.
THERE COMES A TIME WHEN AN
INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION
SHOULD BE SECURE.
IN THE REASONABLE EXPECTATION
THAT PASSED TAX ARE INDEED IN
THE PAST AND NOT SUBJECT TO
FURTHER LAWSUIT THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS PLEASE MADAM CHAIR
AND MEMBERS FAITH BORDERS WITH
CALIFORNIA ADVOCATES ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITIES AND
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO AB.
TWO EIGHTEEN UNLESS IT'S AMENDED
TO INCLUDE AGGRESSIVE EFFECTIVE
PREVENTION MEASURES TO ACCOMPANY
ROBUST AND FAIR VICTIM
COMPENSATION WE APPLY THE
AUTHOR'S INTENT AND ARE FULLY
COMMITTED TO CONTINUALLY
CREATING.
A SAFE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT FOR
ALL CHILDREN WE ABSOLUTELY
SUPPORT THE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
OF PERPETRATORS I RECOGNIZE THE
NEED FOR FAIR VICTIM
COMPENSATION.
AB TWO EIGHTEEN IS WRITTEN IS
DOING MORE HARM BY CREATING
STRICT LIABILITY FOR SCHOOLS
REGARDLESS OF KNOWLEDGE.
OF ORDER REASONABLE STEPS TAKEN
TO SAFEGUARD CHILDREN FORCING
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PAYMENTS
FROM TODAY'S SCHOOLS FOR CLAIMS
THAT HAVE NO FISCAL RESERVES
THAT WERE THE RESULT OF
EMPLOYEES AND ADMINISTRATORS
LONG GONE.
INCREASING LITIGATION COSTS BY
FOR THREE YEARS ALLOWING THE RE
OPENING OF ALL TIME BARRED CASES
TO BE ISSUED.
AWARDS THAT NOW INCLUDE TRIPLE
DAMAGES FOR COVER UPS WITH
ATTORNEYS COLLECTING 4260% OF
SETTLEMENTS.
LIMITING NEEDED ACCESS AND
REINSURANCE OPTIONS THROUGH
SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED RATES
HEART CAPS EXCLUSIONS LIMITS ON
COVERAGE AND STRICTER
UNDERWRITING POTENTIALLY LEAVING
STUDENTS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
WITHOUT COVERAGE AND EXPOSED TO
THE DIRECT COST OF THESE CLAIMS.
RISK POOLING JBS ARE NOT
INSURANCE THEIR SELF FUNDED TO
FILL THE GAPS IN LIABILITY THAT
INSURANCE COMPANIES DON'T COVER
AND THEY'RE NONPROFIT PUBLIC
ENTITIES THAT PAY FOR THE COST
OF CLAIMS TO SCHOOL BUDGETS AND
TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
THESE GPAS SERVER THE VAST
MAJORITY OF SCHOOLS AND OTHER
PUBLIC ENTITIES IN CALIFORNIA.
AND HAVE SINCE NINETEEN SEVENTY
FOUR WHEN MOST INSURANCE
COMPANIES WERE UNWILLING TO
PROVIDE INSURANCE PRODUCTS TO
PUBLIC AGENCIES OR IT WAS
EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE AND PROVIDED
VERY LITTLE ESSENTIAL COVERAGE
WERE HEADED TOWARDS THAT STEAM
ENVIRONMENT NOW AND WE MAY SOON
FIND THAT OUR SCHOOLS.
ARE LEFT WITHOUT ESSENTIAL
COVERAGE THAT INSURANCE
COMPANIES PROVIDE.
AB TWO EIGHTEEN WILL MAKE IT
IMPOSSIBLE FOR EMPLOYERS TO
EFFECTIVELY DEFEND AGAINST
CLAIMS THAT ARE DECADES OLD WHEN
EVIDENCE IS LIKELY GONE
WITNESSES HAVE MOVED -- PASSED
AWAY AND THERE'S BEEN A TURNOVER
IN STAFF THE REALITY IS A
DIVERSION OF FUNDING INTENDED
FOR EDUCATION. FOR THE STUDENTS
AND SERVING COMMUNITIES TO
FINANCIALLY INCREASED LEGAL
COSTS WHETHER OR NOT THE CLAIM
IS VALID.
A FUTURE A CHILD'S FUTURE
DEPENDS ON A SAFE ENVIRONMENT
AND ON A GOOD EDUCATION PLEASE
OPPOSE THE SPELL UNLESS IT'S
AMENDED TO ENSURE BOTH.
PIERRE TESTIMONY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION IF YOU PLEASE STEP UP
YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION PLEASE.
RON REYNOLDS CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF PRIVATE SCHOOL
ORGANIZATIONS.
OUR ASSOCIATION MAINTAINS AN
OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED POSITION
THANK YOU.
I DON'T CARE MEMBERS JOHN
NORWOOD ON BEHALF THE
INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS AND
BROKERS ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA
OR OPPOSE THANK YOU THANK YOU.
ELIZABETH THAT'S CANNELLA THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
BUSINESS OFFICIALS WE ALSO HAVE
AN OPPOSE UNLESS THE MINUTE
POSITION THANK THANK YOU. FOR
PRESS ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS WERE ALSO
HAVING A BECAUSE UNLESS AMENDED
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY MONEY I CANNOT
ON BEHALF OF SCHOOLS ACCEPT
LIABILITY FUND ALSO PENINSULA
CEMENT AT THANK YOU THANK YOU.
WHEN WILSON BEHALF THE SCHOOLS
INSURANCE AUTHORITY -- WERE
OPPOSED ONLY BECAUSE OF LACK OF
PREVENTION BECAUSE THE FISCAL
CLANKING BECAUSE THANK YOU.
NEXT WITNESS.
GOOD AFTERNOON SURE NUMBER
SURELY DOWN THE HAVE THE
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL VERSUS YUSHIN
OPPOSE MUST AMENDED THANK YOU IS
THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES HERE
IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT BRING IT BACK TO THE
DYESS -- LET ME JUST START BY
SAYING THIS IS THIS IS PRETTY
DRACONIAN [inaudible]
BUT YOU KNOW I WAS JUST
LISTENING I WAS THINKING THAT OF
THE CASE OF THE YOUNG BOY WHO.
HAD BEEN SEXUALLY ABUSED AND
ULTIMATELY -- ENDED HIS LIFE.
I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY STORES
I'VE HEARD OF YOUNG -- YOUNG
BOYS AND GIRLS YOUNG MEN AND
WOMEN.
WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO THIS DAY
AND HOPEFULLY WON'T END UP DOING
THAT BUT THE?
THE INCIDENCE OF THIS KIND OF
ABUSE IS TRUST.
HARD TO GET ONE'S ARMS AROUND IT
IS JUST -- IT'S TRAGIC AND
THAT'S ABOUT AS MILD THE WORDS I
CAN USE AND SO -- I THINK WE ARE
AND WE IN THIS COMMITTEE HAVE
BEEN RELUCTANT TO EXPAND STATURE
TO LIMITATIONS BECAUSE THERE'S A
REASON THAT WE HAVE THEM.
THINGS ARE FRESHER IN PEOPLE'S
MINDS TO TETRA BUT WE DO KNOW
WHEN IT COMES TO THIS KIND OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT SEXUAL ABUSE.
THAT PEOPLE TEND TO TRY TO BURY
IT DEEP UNTIL SOMETHING AT SOME
POINT IN TIME AND WE DON'T
NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT.
OR WHY OR HOW IT'S INVOKED AGAIN.
ARE THEY OUT OF THE EFFORT TO
COME TO TERMS WITH THIS REALLY
DOES REQUIRE THAT WE PROVIDE
THAT OPPORTUNITY TO THESE
VICTIMS -- I KNOW THE CONCERNS
AND I HAVE DISCUSSES WITH MY OWN
SCHOOL A COMMUNITY THAT THAT
SHARES THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
INDUSTRY ABOUT THE COSTS -- AND
THE FACT THAT THE OSTENSIBLY
THERE'S REALLY NOTHING HERE TO
DO PREVENTION I THINK THERE ARE
A LOT OF BILLS OUT THERE WE JUST
HEARD A COUPLE -- I KNOW I'VE
DONE SOME HOPEFULLY THERE IS A
LOT OF PREVENTION OUT THERE AND
IF THE SCHOOLS DON'T KNOW ABOUT
IT YET GO BACK AND READ ALL THE
VARIOUS.
LAWS THAT WE PUT INTO EFFECT
LAST YEAR -- AND OVER THE COURSE
OF TIME TO DEAL WITH PREVENTION
THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR CANNOT BE
TOLERATED SO -- THE THE LENGTH
OF THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD I
WOULD NOTE -- THE CONNECTICUT
PROVIDES.
NEARLY AN ADDITIONAL DECADE
BEYOND -- TO WHAT IS SET BY THIS
BILL AND THAT MASSACHUSETTS EVEN
MORE.
ARE CLEARLY MAKING A POLICY
DETERMINATION THAT THE AGREE
JUST US I THINK OF WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT AND I APPRECIATE
THE ATTORNEY COMING IN
REFERENCING ALL THE INSTANCES
WHERE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO
COME.
AND REDRESS GRIEVANCES -- FOR
FOR BEHAVIOR AND AND NEGLIGENCE
AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF OF
HARMON DISTRESS -- BUT THE
EGREGIOUS NOUS OF THESE ACTS
SPECIAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO
DISTINGUISH THAT FROM SOME OF
THESE OTHER INSTANCES SO.
WITH THAT I THINK WAS A
GENTLEMAN BACK THERE WHO --
INDICATED THE ENLISTED SOME OF
THE THE LITANY OF ISSUES WHERE
NOW I GUESS IT WAS YOU SIR --
AND THEIR THEIR SIGNIFICANT BUT
I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A
STATEMENT HERE WE NEED TO
PROTECT OUR CHILDREN.
FROM WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE IN
GOING FORWARD WITH THAT SENATOR
WHITE HOUSE [inaudible]
ON WE HAVE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR
OPENING OF STATUES LIMITATIONS.
THIS I'M COMMUTE.
DIRECTLY -- EXPLAINED TO ME WE
HAVE THE EMPLOYER WHO KNEW AND
THAT'S SEEMS TO CLEAR
JUSTIFICATION IN AND SHOULD HAVE
KNOWN IN THE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.
LEGAL THEORY IS RATHER NEW TESTS
THIRTY FORTY YEARS AGO I DON'T
THINK AT LEAST WITH REGARD TO
SEXUAL ASSAULT THIS IS NOT
BATTERY DISS ASSAULT.
THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT HOW.
THERE HAS TO BE A WRONG FOR
NEGLIGENT ACT AND SO OBVIOUSLY
TIME MAKES THESE CLAIMS HARD BUT
IT MAKES IT HARD ON THE
PLAINTIFF HAS WELL I MEAN THE
PLAINTIFF HAS TO THERE'S NO
PRESUMPTION HERE.
PLAINTIFF HAS TO SHOW THAT THERE
WAS A NEGLIGENT OR WRONGFUL ACT --
THAT THAT FORCE THE INSTITUTION
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN -- THE CASES
WE'VE SEEN -- IT'S IT'S PRETTY
CLEAR IT'S FIVE GIRLS COMING IN
ABOUT THE SAME GYM TEACHER THAT
DID THE SAME -- INAPPROPRIATE
ACTIONS TOWARDS THEM THAT THAT'S
AS CLEAR AS IT CAN BE --
OBVIOUSLY I IT RELIES ON
EVIDENCE NOT EVIDENCE IF IT'S
ESPECIALLY OLD IS GONNA BE HARD
TO COME BY BUT IT'S THE
PLAINTIFF WHO HAS TO PROVE THE
CASE NOT THE DEFENDANT.
ON MANTRA JUST I'M JUST SAYING
THE STANDARD OF PROOF THIRTY
YEARS AGO WASN'T THEY SHOULDN'T
HAVE KNOWN I MEAN IT WAS IF YOU
DO GET THE LIABILITY I I CAN SEE
THAT.
THE PROOF PROBLEMS BUT THIRTY
FIVE YEARS AGO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN
WAS NOT.
ARE YOU WEREN'T LIABLE FOR YOU
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN -- IF YOU WERE
NEGLIGENT IS A THEORY.
I'M IN THE SALT I MEAN BECAUSE
AGAIN IT WAS JUST.
IT MIGHT BE A DISTINCTION
BETWEEN A BAD SEXUAL BATTERY AND
THE SEXUAL ASSAULT.
SO FOR THE EMPLOYERS IT'S ALWAYS
BEEN.
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN AS ALWAYS BEEN
PART OF THE NEGLIGENCE STANDARD
SO THE FIRST TIME THAT THAN
ANYTHING CHANGED AND THAT.
WAS A AND SB SEVENTEEN SEVENTY
NINE THE BILL BACK IN TWO
THOUSAND THREE BUT GENERALLY
[inaudible]
ANY NEGLIGENCE.
CAN BE KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN
GOING BACK.
I ASK BECAUSE IN THE BILL.
THERE'S NO QUESTION PENDING
THERE'S NO QUESTION PENDING A
SENATOR WHAT CASKEY.
THE REVIVAL THE THE STANDARD ONE
YEAR REVIVAL VERSUS THE THREE
YEAR REVIVAL -- I DON'T REMEMBER
LAST YEAR'S BILL I'M I AN ACT
THAT IF THEY HAD THE THREE YEAR
REVIVAL I THOUGHT THEY DID OKAY
SO THAT THE REGIONAL BELL HAD A
ONE YEAR REVIVAL AND WHAT WE
HAVE FOUND -- SINCE AND IS
THERE'S A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY
A IN A YEAR SOMEBODY EVEN WHO
HAS COME TO TERMS WITH THE FACT
THAT THIS HAPPENED -- IF YOU
LOOK AT THE CLAIMS YOU'LL SEE --
GIVE AN EXTRA IT IS SPECIFICALLY
THE CLAIMS AGAINST THE CHURCH A
LACK OF PLAINTIFFS WHO WERE A
SPANISH SPEAKING THERE'S A
REASON FOR THAT I MEAN THAT BY
THE TIME IT ACTUALLY GETS TO
POTENTIAL PLAINTIFFS -- THE
UNDERSTANDING COMING TO TERMS
WITH THAT ONE YEAR WAS PRIOR TO
ALL OF THE MEDIA ATTENTION
THAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO THE
SUBJECTS SENSE AS SPOTLIGHT AND
EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WITH THAT
WE'VE SEEN WE WERE.
WE LET IT SO QUICKLY -- THAT
THAT ONE YEAR REALLY DIDN'T
PROVIDE A A NUMBER OF THE
VICTIMS TO COME FORWARD AND AND
RECOGNIZE AND BE ABLE.
TO ACCESS JUSTICE.
MANAGER FACT BECAUSE THIS
REDUCES.
TALK ABOUT WE SHOULD BE VERY
STINGY IS LEGISLATORS ABOUT
OPENING UP THE STATUE
LIMITATIONS AND BE VERY NARROW
SO WISTER EVIDENCE I MEAN I GET
YOU AYE WHEN YOUR WINDOW IT'S
WHEN YOU'RE WHEN THERE WAS FOR
EVIDENCE THAT SAID.
THE DO YOU FOUNDER HIT THE OTHER
REPORTS HAVE SAID THAT.
IT HAPPENS AT FOURTEEN MONTHS OR
EIGHTEEN MONTHS AGO I REALIZE WE
GIVE EVERYBODY MORE TIME THERE'S
MORE LAWSUITS THAT'S WELL IN WAR
WE'RE WE'RE LEARNING EVERY DAY
MORE ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF
CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ASSAULT AND THE
FACT THAT WHAT IT.
WHEN PEOPLE ACTUALLY COME TO
TERMS WITH -- THAT HAVING
HAPPENED AND SO AS IT YOU KNOW
EXPOSURE ACCEPTANCE -- AND AND
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY
WHO HAS -- TO ESPECIALLY IN THE
CASE OF THE CHURCH I HEY I'M NOT
THIS ISN'T A CHURCH BELL BUT YOU
KNOW A LOT OF THE THE THINGS WE
KNOW ABOUT OUR BECAUSE OF THE
ABUSE IN THE CHURCH -- YOU HAVE
FOLKS WHO HAVE TO FIRST COME TO
TERMS -- WITH WHY THEIR LIFE IS
FALLING APART.
AND COME TO TERMS WITH THE FACT
ADMITTING TO THEMSELVES THAT
THIS HAPPENED ADMITTING TO A A
PROFESSIONAL THAT THIS HAPPENED --
COMING TO TERMS WITH THEIR
CHURCH THEIR FAMILY AND SEEKING
OUT AN ATTORNEY AND FILING A
LAWSUIT -- THAT MAY SEEM LIKE --
YOU COULD DO THAT IN A YEAR OR
WHEN WE COMPARED AGAINST OTHER
TOWARDS.
WELL YOU KNOW WE WE HAVE STATURE
LIMITATIONS WE HAVE THESE RULES
BUT WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT SEX
CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ASSAULT AS IT
IS DIFFERENT THE WAY PEOPLE DEAL
WITH IT IS DIFFERENT.
AND AND LESS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
VICTIMS THEMSELVES I I THINK
IT'S HARD.
TO TO UNDERSTAND HOW SOMEBODY
COULD.
COMPLETELY.
AT BARRY DOT FROM EVEN
THEMSELVESAND AND AND NOT BE
ABLE TO AT EVER SPEAK THOSE
WORDS -- AND THEN COME ABOUT AS
LIFE HAS CHANGED AND OUR
ACCEPTANCE OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED
IS CHANGED TO BE ABLE TO COME
FORWARD.
THIS IS ANOTHER WORDS THIS IS A
UNIQUE CASE THAT FOLLOW AT RKO.
WORRIED OF WILL ACCEPT THAT AS
YOUR CLOSES THEIR MOTION.
SO MOVED MADAM SECRETARY -- THE
MOTION IS TO PASS. TO SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER FIVE AB TWO
EIGHTEEN JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BURGESS TO RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES MONNING STERN UMBERG WAY
CASKEY.
I KASKI I RIGHT OF FOUR VOTES.
WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN WE
WILL NOW GO.
TO FILE ITEM.
ELEVEN I CAN I CAN UNDERSTAND
WHERE THERE ARE NO.
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS BEHIND YOU YOU
STILL HAVE A COUPLE MORE BILLS
HERE.
FILE ITEM [inaudible]
ELEVEN OKAY -- FLOOR IS YOURS
OPPONENTS I'M AB.
FIVE EIGHTY NINE AB FIVE EIGHTY
NINE PROHIBITS EMPLOYER FROM
IMPOSES PENALTIES FROM
WITHHOLDING AND EMPLOYEES
IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS AND
ESTABLISHES A WORKERS BILL OF
RIGHTS REGARDING THE FREEDOM OF
MOVEMENT AND PAYMENT OF WAGES.
WE KNOW -- THAT IN PARTICULAR I
IMMIGRANTS ARE SUBJECT -- TO A
VARIETY OF THAT A PROBLEMS IN
THE WORKPLACE BUT ONE OF THE
MOST EGREGIOUS ONES ARE --
DOCUMENT SERVITUDE THAT'S
BASICALLY WHAT EMPLOYER.
IS NOT HONEST WITH A WORKER THEY
COULD BE HERE ON A V. SAID THEY
COULD HAVE A GREEN CARD THEY
THEY THEY COULD BE HERE WITHOUT
AN IMMIGRATION STATUS.
AND THEY WERE IN THE WITHHOLD
THOSE DOCUMENTS AND AND OFTEN
TELL -- AND IMMIGRANT THAT THEY
CAN'T TRAVEL FREELY AROUND
BECAUSE OF IT WE ALSO HAVE
INDICATIONS OF WHEN I'M AN
EMPLOYER FORCES.
IN IMMIGRANT TO LIVE IN A
CERTAIN SPOT IN ORDER TO CONTROL
ALL THEIR MOTIONS AND THIS WOULD
JUST ENSURE THAT -- AS BASICALLY
A FEDERALIZED IMPLEMENT IN STATE
LAW SO THAT IT BECOMES A LAW
THAT OUR OUR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
CAN -- CAN GO OUT AND PURSUE AND
ENSURE THAT.
BASICALLY THIS THIS KIND OF A
MODERN DAY SLAVERY AS AND IT
DOESN'T CONTINUE.
THE HEAD THANK YOU. TWO MINUTES
PLEASE MORNING MADAM CHAIR
SENATORS MY NAME'S MARTIN DOYLE
AND I'M IT.
DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY WITH
THE SAN DIEGO DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I THINK THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
IS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB
EXPLAINING THE PROBLEM AND AND
THE CITATIONS THE STUDIES ARE
ARE VERY ADEQUATE.
AS A PROTECT PRACTITIONER I ONE
EXPLAIN WHY THIS IS NOT TO PUT
IT IF.
AND HOW THIS WOULD APPLY IN OUR
COURTS.
WE HAVE A LABOR TRAFFICKING
STATUTE AS I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE --
WHERE WE PUNISH EGREGIOUS
CONDUCT WHERE THERE IS A
SUBSTANTIAL DEPRIVATION OF HUMAN
LIBERTY WITH LENGTHY PRISON
TERMS OF FIVE TO TWELVE YEARS
THIS WOULD CREATE A MISDEMEANOR
WITH THE CIVIL ABATEMENT SCHEME
AND A HALF THE CIVIL PENALTY?
FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WHO READ TEN
SOMEBODY'S DOCUMENTS WITH THE
INTENT. TO DEPRIVE THEM OF ANY
RIGHT THEY HAVE UNDER OUR STATE
LAW THAT EXPLAINS WHY IT'S NOT
DUPLICATIVE OF FEDERAL LAW.
AND WHY IT'S AN EFFECTIVE TOOL
IN DISCOURAGING THAT PRACTICE.
OF WE THINK THAT AS BEING MODERN
PROSECUTORS IT IS NOT JUST OUR
JOB TO TO TERROR AND ABATE THIS
CONDUCT BUT ALSO TO EDUCATE.
AND THAT'S WHY THE WORKER BILL
OF RIGHTS IS INCLUDED IN HERE
WHEN SOMEBODY ENTERS INTO AN
EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR BOTH PARTIES TO BE
ADVISED OF THEIR RIGHTS AND
RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THAT
CONTRACT.
AND THAT PART OF THE BILL I
THINK WE'LL DO THAT.
THAT'S WHY THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE URGES YOUR
SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
IF YOU'D STEP FORWARD PLEASE.
FURTHER SEPTEMBER HERE ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION CERTAINLY THE
EXPLOITATION OF WORKERS IS
INHUMANE WE URGE YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
CAITLYN VEGA FOR THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION ALSO HERE IN
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
THE SHOW CAST OF THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES AND NATIONALLY IN ALSO
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THEY HAVE RARE NATIONAL SAYS HIS
SOCIAL WORK CALIFORNIA CHAPTER
IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU VERY
MUCH ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
END UP THE I'D LIKE TO ASK THE
SERGEANT WITH US THE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER GONZALEZ HAS ONE MORE
BILL.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT ONE HAS
ANY OPPOSITION SO IF YOU WOULD
LET SOME OF THE OTHER AUTHORS NO
AND IF ANY OF THEM ARE LISTENING.
TO PLEASE COME ON DOWN.
WE'VE GOT TO MANY OTHER ITEMS ON
CALENDAR WE WOULD LIKE TO GET
OUT OF HERE SOMETIME THIS
EVENING SIR.
THANK YOU ALL RIGHT -- WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON I'M CHAIR MEMBERS --
NAME IS ROB -- TREE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN YOUR POST -- EIGHTY FIVE
EIGHTY NINE BEFORE I BEFORE I GO
INTO THE DETAILS I WOULD LIKE TO
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR WORKING
WITH US IN A COUPLE OF SMALL
DETAILS INCLUDING.
WE'RE GOING TO BILL OF RIGHTS
PROVISIONS WHICH WE WERE HELPFUL
WE'RE WE'RE GLAD TO CLEAN UP AND
CLARIFY THE BILL THAT WE REMAIN
OPPOSED -- WE ARE NOT OPPOSED OF
COURSE IN A SUPPORT FOR LABOR
TRAFFICKING WE ARE OPPOSED --
FOR THE REASONS WHICH GOVERNOR
BROWN LAID OUT IN HIS BECAUSE
THEY'VE BEEN LAST YEAR.
THAT THE THIS IS A SERIOUS
PROBLEM THIS IS ALSO AN
OBLIGATION WHICH APPLY TO EVERY
SINGLE BUSINESS ACROSS THE STATE
REGARDLESS OF THEIR HISTORY OR
THE CONDUCT.
AND WE'VE YOU THOSE OBLIGATIONS
AS AS BURDENSOME TO BUSINESSES --
BUT AGAIN WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO
THE CORE CONCERNS WHICH IS
PROTECTING -- AND WITHOUT IT WE
JUST SPOKE OF THE AUTHR BRIEFLY
ABOUT WHETHER WE CAN DO
DIFFERENT LOCATIONS WE DON'T SEE
AMENDMENTS THEY CAN FIX IT BUT
IF.
WE ARE HAPPY TO KEEP TALKING IF
WE CAN'T I WILL TAKE MORE TIME
THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
OUR SEEING NONE OF ANY QUESTIONS
FROM THE DIET CENTER WHITE HOUSE
GEAR PARTICULARLY ACTIVE TODAY.
WE I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT
POLICE WHILE PULLING WHICH IS IN
THE BILL OF RIGHTS RIGHT WASN'T
CLEAR BERMAN DAD AND DO WE KNOW
THE LESS I SAID UNKNOWN WHAT THE
LANGUAGE IS FAR.
THE THE LANGUAGES DOUBTLESS YES
OKAY.
I'D ALREADY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS.
MOTION BY SENATOR DRAWS SO --
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BILL.
THIS IS REALLY JUST A FORM OF
MODERN SLAVERY TAKE AWAY
PEOPLE'S [inaudible]
INFORMATION AND IT PREVENT THEM
FROM HAVING ACCESS TO THEIR
SOCKS THERE'S JUST NO EXCUSE FOR
THAT.
NO EXCUSE FOR THAT SO
HOPE PERHAPS THE CHAMBER WILL
THINK ABOUT IT IN THAT CONTEXT
THERE'S JUST NO EXCUSE FOR
ANYBODY DOING THAT TO ANYONE
ELSE TAKING THEIR INFORMATION --
AND SO UP.
WITH THAT -- OF WE HAVE A MOTION
AND THE MOTION IS TO PASS THE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
MA'AM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL FILE ITEM NUMBER EIGHTEEN
A. B. FIVE EIGHT NINE JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BORDERS TO RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I'D
JONES MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN NUMBER Y.
CASKEY.
MICHAEL SKI I WRITE THAT BILL
HAS FIVE VOTES BUT WE WILL LEAVE
THE ROLE OPEN THE LAST ITEM FOR
ASSEMBLY MEMBER GONZALEZ IN THE
GONZALEZ SHOW.
TODAY IN THE SENATE JUDICIARY IS
AB SIX SIX EIGHT I JUST WANT TO
KNOW THAT I'M I'VE LASTED
THROUGH FOR BILLS WHERE EVERY
TIME YOU SAY GONZALEZ I HAVEN'T
SAID I A AS DESPITE MY IMPULSE.
TO WE'RE GETTING USED TO THE
CAUCUS GONZALEZ -- THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR I AB SIX SIX EIGHT
WOULD PROTECT IMMIGRANTS IN ALL
CALIFORNIANS FROM CIVIL REST AT
A COURTHOUSE WHEN THE
INDIVIDUALS ATTENDING A COURT
PROCEEDING OR HAS LEGAL BUSINESS
IN THE COURTHOUSE -- YOU'VE SEEN
THIS BILL BEFORE I SO I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
ABROAD TO RECALL MAY HAVE THE
CALIFORNIA APPLICANT ATTORNEY
ASSOCIATION SPONSORS OF THE BILL.
OUR OUR MEMBER OUR ATTORNEYS
REPRESENT INJURED WORKERS THE
WORKERS COMPENSATION SYSTEM.
PROBABLY REPRESENT THE MOST
UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS OF ANY
LEGAL ORGANIZATION THE COUNTRY --
WE HAVE SEEN THESE CHALLENGES WE
HAVE SEEN ICE AGENTS IN OF
COURTHOUSE AS WE HAVE SEEN ICE
AGENTS IN.
OF STATE BUILDINGS INCLUDING
WORKERS DURING THEIR WORKERS
COMPENSATION HEARING SO WITHIN
THIS IMPORTANT STEP TO PROTECT
INTEGRITY OF OF THESE RIGHTS
THANK YOU THANK YOU OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
AS FOR SIGNS OF A CHIRLA THE
CALL THIS REMAIN IMMIGRANT
RIGHTS PROBABLY BE A SPONSOR
THIS PIECE LEGISLATION.
SINCE THE NINETEEN NINETIES
CHIRLA AS A ONE EIGHT HUNDRED
NUMBER WHICH HAS RECEIVED DOZENS
OF CALLS FOR WORKERS RIGHTS
VIOLATIONS REFERRAL SERVICES IN
ADDITION WE KNOW YOUR RIGHTS
AMONG OTHER THINGS.
SINCE THE ELECTION OF PRESIDENT
TRUMP IMMIGRANT MEMBERS FROM THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS FROM --
IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES HAVE
CALLED TO ASK US IF WE COULD
ACCOMPANY THEM TO THE COURTHOUSE
I ASKED ABOUT THE RIGHTS INSIDE
OF A COURTHOUSE.
ASK THEM IF AN ATTORNEY WOULD
REPRESENT I'M JUST TO PAY A
TICKET OUR FEE.
AND ASKED THEM IF CHAIR THAT
WOULD TAKE ON THEIR CASE --
SOLELY TO TO REPRESENT A BECAUSE
THEY'RE FEARFUL OF GOING TO THE
COURTHOUSE THIS IS WHY WE ASK
FOR THIS OUR BODY -- TO YOUR AYE
VOTE ON SIX SIX EIGHT THANK YOU
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT NAME
AND AFFILIATION PLEASE OUR CAST
OF THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION ALSO IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INITIALS
OFFICIALS WERE COVERING CHAPTER
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MAP PROPER THE TEAMSTERS IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
CHRISTINE SMITH CALIFORNIA
PARTNERSHIPS AND THE MYSTIC
VIOLENCE IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THE MARTEL GOT ON BEHALF OF THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
CAITLYN VEGA FOR THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION IN SUPPORT
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
AND WHEN FOR CALIFORNIA
EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU WE RECEIVE NO
OPPOSITION BUT WILL GIVE A CALL
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE.
SEEING AND HEARING NONE BRING IT
BACK TO THE DíAS SENATOR Y.
CASKEY.
MAKE A REQUEST VENTURE THAT THAT --
THE PRACTICING THE BAR
UNDERSTANDS THAT THAT INCLUDES.
US PROCESSES SERVICE TO CIVIL
LITIGANTS IN THE COURTHOUSE AND
I THINK THAT A LOT OF LAWYERS
ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS COMMON
LAW PRACTICE THAT WHEN
SOMEBODY'S APPEARING AT ONE CASE
YOU DON'T SHOW UP IN SUBPOENA
THEM OR GIVE THEM.
OR SERVE THEM WITH PAPERS.
PARTICULARLY IN THE FAMILY LAW.
ARENA -- THAT THE PEOPLE GET HIT
THAT THAT WOULD SOMEHOW BE --
COMMUNICATED TO THE TO THE BAR
SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THE
MOVEMENT THE IMPACT THAT THIS.
ARE THE BEST PRACTICES.
WELL HOPEFULLY THE BARS
LISTENING IN THAT THEY WILL
RESPOND ACCORDINGLY -- IT'S
APPRECIATE THAT AND CERTAINLY
THE CHIEF MADE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
OBSERVED.
AND HAS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS
URGE THAT WE ALLOW OUR JUDICIAL
PROCESS.
TO CONDUCT BE CONDUCTED WITHOUT.
WITHOUT THE THREAT OF
INTIMIDATION.
IN ORDER FOR IT TO DO ITS JOB
APPROPRIATELY SO WE DO HAVE A
SENATOR RUSSELL DID YOU HAVE A
QUESTION OR DO YOU WANT TO MOVE
THE BILL.
I WANT TO MOVE THE BILL BUT JUST
JUST THE THOUGHT THAT -- FOLKS
WHO WERE MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE
REQUIRED TO SHOW UP A LOT OF
TIMES IF IS UNLAWFUL DETAINER
GOVERNOR'S BANKRUPTCY IF THERE'S
SHALL SUPPORT WHATEVER.
WHATEVER THE ISSUES ARE TO THINK
THAT YOU WOULD BE FEARFUL AND
YOU COULD SUBJECT YOURSELF. TO
WORSE OF BY NOT SHOWING UP IN
MAKING THAT MATH CHOICE BETWEEN
HAVING TO SHOW FOR SOME JUDICIAL
PROCEEDING OR RUN THE RISK.
AND THAT'S A REALLY REALLY BIG
DISSERVICE TO OUR ENTIRE
COMMUNITY THAT PEOPLE BE AFRAID.
TO THE FOLLOW WHAT ARE THE RULES
AND LAWS OF THIS COUNTRY SO
THANK YOU ASSEMBLY MEMBER
GONZALEZ.
ALRIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE I'LL JUST ADD
TO THAT IF YOU'RE A A WITNESS TO
A CRIME.
YOU KNOW AND SO THAT YOU THINK
ABOUT IT.
AS THEIR MANY ATTORNEYS ON HERE
BUT ANY OF US WHO WOULD BE
VICTIMS WOULD WANT TO WIN AS TO
WHAT TO BE ABLE TO SHOW UP
WHETHER OR NOT THAT THEY HAD A
IMMIGRATION STATUS WHERE THEY
FELT COMFORTABLE DOING SO SAM.
IRONICALLY IT HAS A CHILLING
EFFECT ON JUSTICE RATHER THAN A
CONSISTING OF FACT SO WE HAVE A
MOTION TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS MADAM SECTOR
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWELVE AB SIX
SIX EIGHT JACKSON HI JACKSON AYE
BORDERS DO RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
NUMBER BY CASKEY.
BUT HEALTHY AYE ALRIGHT THE BILL
HAS FIVE VOTES -- AND WE WILL
LOVE HOLD THE ROLE OPENED THANK
YOU THANK YOU.
FOR ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND SALAS.
THE MEMBER KALRA UNIX STOP ON
OUR FILE FILE ITEM NINE WE DON'T
HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
FONG HERE OR ASSEMBLY MEMBER
DAILY SO WE WILL GO AHEAD --
FILE ITEM.
NINE ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
KALRA AS BILL WE STARTED ON THIS
A COUPLE WEEKS AGO THIS IS A
BEFORE.
ONE EIGHT AND SINCE THEN THERE'S
BEEN SOME WORK DONE ON IT SO.
THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MADAM CHAIR
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY PRESENTED
BEFORE EIGHTEEN ONCE AGAIN.
A TO THE COMMITTEE OF COURSE I
DID PREVIOUSLY PRESENT ON THIS
WILL LIKE.
TO GIVE A BRIEF.
PRESENTATION AB FOR EIGHTEEN
WILL EXTEND THE EVIDENCE FOR
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
BETWEEN EMPLOYEES.
AND THEIR UNION AGENT
REPRESENTATIVE WHICH IS CRITICAL
IN TODAY'S WORKING WORLD TO
ENSURE THAT SENSITIVE
COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN A WORKER
AND HIS OR HER YOU UNION AGENT
REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL.
UNION OF OR SORRY PRIVILEGES AN
EXCLUSIONARY RULE OF EVIDENCE
THAT PROTECTS CERTAIN CLASS OF
INDICATIONS FROM DISCLOSURE TO
OPPOSING PARTIES FROM ENTRY INTO
EVIDENCE OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
THE RATIONALE IS THAT ALTHOUGH
CERTAIN INFORMATION MAY BE
RELEVANT IT IS NONETHELESS
EXCLUDED BECAUSE OF OVER WRITING
SOCIAL INTERESTS.
IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING.
THERE OR CONCERNS RACE WHICH I
BELIEVE THESE A MAN'S HELP TO
ADDRESS I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR.
THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
TREMENDOUS WORK ON THIS AS WELL
AS WORKING WITH MY STAFF FROM
WITH OUR SPONSOR.
I UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERNS
AROUND THE TOPICS EDUCATIONAL
TRAINING FOR PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATIONS UNTIL
REPRESENTATIONS.
REGARDING TRAINING UNION AGENTS
ARE HIGHLY TRAINED BOTH THE
LEGALITIES AND COMPLEXITIES OF
THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENTS AND THE EMPLOYMENT
PROTECTIONS THIS INCLUDES HOW TO
SERVE.
REPRESENT AND HANDLE SENSITIVE
GRIEVANCES.
THIS PROPOSAL BECOME A REGULAR
PART OF THESE EFFORTS.
REGARDING DAHLE REPRESENTATION
IN CASES WHERE A GRIEVANCE MAN
VOTE TO SEPARATE EMPLOYEES IS A
STANDARD OR PRO PRACTICE THAT
EACH EMPLOYEE IS ASSIGNED A
SEPARATE UNION REPRESENTATIVE.
TO ENSURE THERE'S NO CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AND THE BEST INTERESTS
OF BOTH A REPRESENTED
INDIVIDUALLY.
IN ADDITION THIS IS THE THIS
POLICY -- THIS PRIVILEGE IS
ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED ILLINOIS
AND MARYLAND WHICH IS HELP TO
FURTHER PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE
RIGHTS OF WORKERS.
BY ALLOWING EVIDENTIARY
PRIVILEGE TO WORKERS AND UNION
REPRESENTATIVES WE CAN HELP TO
ENSURE THAT WORKER RIGHTS ARE
NOT UNDERMINED.
ME IN SUPPORT IS TONY SINGLE.
A LABOR ATTORNEY AT PROCTOR
SINGLE AND GREEN STONE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF
WITNESSES TWO MINUTES EACH OF
YOU WOULD BETTER JOB REPAIR
BIRDS WERE JUST INTRODUCING OUR
GENERAL COUNSEL MY NAME IS BRIAN
NELSON FROM THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE.
COUNTY MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES WE'RE
PLEASED TO BE ONE OF THE MANY
LABOR CO SPONSORS OF THIS
CRITICAL PIECE OF LEGISLATION --
AND WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE TONY
SINGLE FROM AUTHOR FIGURING
THANK YOU TWO MINUTES IF YOU
WOULD SIR.
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS -- THANK
YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE
TODAY I WASN'T WITH YOU LAST
TIME -- I I I WANNA MAKE THREE
QUICK COMMENTS ABOUT THE BILL
FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE LABOR
PRACTITIONER WHOSE PRACTICE IT
INTO WITH THESE ISSUES LITIGATED
THESE ISSUES MANY TIMES.
MOST UNIONS PROVIDE EMPLOYEE
REPRESENTATION THROUGH NON
ATTORNEYS.
THEY USE ELECTED OFFICERS OR
BUSINESS STAFF REPRESENTATIVE
SOME OF THE FINEST ADVOCATES --
I'VE KNOWN ARE NON UNION LADY
UNION REPRESENTATIVES THAT
REPRESENT EMPLOYEES IN A WIDE
VARIETY OF SETTINGS GRIEVANCES
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE HEARINGS
AND DUE PROCESS HEARINGS.
OF MANY DIFFERENT TYPES THE
REPRESENTATION IS GOVERNED.
BY LEGAL RULES AND OBLIGATIONS A
LEGAL DOCTRINE KNOWN AS THE DUTY.
OF FAIR REPRESENTATION.
BUT UNDER CURRENT CALIFORNIA LAW
WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE IS ANY
ABILITY. TO ENGAGE IN PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE
EMPLOYEES THEY ARE LEGALLY
OBLIGATED TO REPRESENT.
THIS IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH SUCH
CASE PREPARATION INVOLVES
FREQUENTLY CONFIDENTIAL FAX IN
STRATEGIC CONCERNS.
OF YOU KNOW A AND R. SUCH THAT
THE REPRESENTED MEMBER
REASONABLY BELIEVES THAT THE
COMMUNICATIONS ARE CONFIDENTIAL.
TWENTY TWO THIS IS A FAIRNESS
ISSUE THERE IS CURRENTLY NO
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
BECAUSE EMPLOYERS ARE MUCH MORE
LIKELY TO BE REPRESENTED BY
ATTORNEYS.
IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR THERE'S
CITY ATTORNEYS AND COUNTY
COUNCILS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR --
THAT THERE ARE MANAGEMENT
LAWYERS UNION BUSINESS AGENTS
HANDLE CASES AGAINST EMPLOYER
ATTORNEYS ALL THE TIME.
IT IS NOT FAIR THAT ONLY ONE
SIDE HAS THE PAIR HAS HAS THE
ABILITY TO PREPARE FOR THE
HEARING THROUGH CONFIDENTIAL
COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE
REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES.
FINALLY BRIEFLY THERE'S BEEN A
SUGGESTION THAT THIS BILL WOULD
INHIBIT WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS.
THIS IS A COMPLETE RED HERRING.
AB FOR EIGHTEEN ONLY PROTECTS
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS IT
DOESN'T MAKE YOU PREVENT THE
DISCLOSURE OF FACTS OR PREVENT
AN EMPLOYER'S ABILITY TO
INVESTIGATE FAX THINKING WE ASK
FOR YOUR ARRIVAL THANK YOU VERY
MUCH OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
IF YOU TO STEP FORWARD YOUR NAME
AND AFFILIATION PLEASE.
SEPTEMBER HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
IN STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
CAITLYN VEGA FOR THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION A CO SPONSOR OF
THE BILL THANK YOU THANK YOU.
STEVE BAKER WITH THEIR TRADE
ASSOCIATES FOR THE PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS IN CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT IN SUPPORT THANK YOU.
MICHELLE CAST OF THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION A
CO SPONSOR NASRI AYE VOTE THANK
YOU THANK YOU.
IN TURN MEMBERS PACMAN WITH
THEIR IT ERIN READING ASSOCIATES
OPENING THE ORANGE COUNTY
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIRMAN
CONSUMERS ON BEHALF OF THE
WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA WEST IN
THE CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
MARIO GUERRERO ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION
CO SPONSOR.
THANK YOU.
COULD BE PROVIDED WITH
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
PSYCHIATRIC TO TECHNICIANS IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU.
DOWNLOAD THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ALSO IN
SUPPORT [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THEY ARE JACKSON OF THE
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION IN
STRONG SUPPORT THANK YOU ARE
THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. TWO
MINUTES EACH GOOD AFTERNOON.
GOOD AFTERNOON SURE MEMBERS HAD
BEEN HUTCHINGS WITH REPRESENTING
THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL.
I KNOW.
A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WE DISCUSSED
THIS MEASURE THERE IS OUR BEST --
CONVERSATION FROM MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
BRING UP SEVERAL -- ISSUES --
WITH THE BILL NONE OF WHICH HAVE
BEEN -- REALLY DIRECTLY RESOLVED
IN A LANGUAGE THAT IS PRESENTED
TODAY -- THEY'RE STILL A
CONFLICT BETWEEN UNION MEMBERS
AND BETWEEN THE BARGAINING UNIT
AND THE GROUP AS A WHOLE WHAT
WAS WHAT WAS STATED -- BY THE
FOLKS WHO ARE SUPPORTING THIS
MEASURE -- I I ABOUT THE IDEA TO
DO TO DO THE A REPRESENTATIVE
FOR REPRESENTATION THAT IS.
OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THIS
MEASURE -- THERE ARE YOU KNOW
THE ISSUES REGARDING PROPER
TRAINING CERTIFICATION --
LICENSING REQUIREMENTS --
THERE'S NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
SANCTIONS OR BY FOR VIOLATION OF
SAID PRIVILEGE -- THE AND YOU
KNOW IT AS THE AS A GOVERNOR
BROWN INDICATED IN HIS VETO
MESSAGE IN WEEKS CONTINUED TO
AGREE.
THIS WOULD STILL INHIBIT THE
ABILITY FOR A PUBLICATION SEE TO
CONDUCT ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS AND
SO -- THE WITH THAT WE WE STILL
REMAIN OPPOSED TO THE MEASURE
THANK YOU THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS
IT AFTER YOU MADAM CHAIR LET
MEMBERS LEASE OVER THERE WITH
CAL CHAMBER.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PRIMARY ISSUES
AS OUTLINED BY MY COLLEAGUE AT
THE LEAGUE OF CITIES MANY OF
WHICH WERE REYES THE LAST TIME
THE COMMITTEE HEARD THIS BILL.
THE FIRST IS UNLIKE THE OTHER
PRIVILEGES BOTH UNION
REPRESENTATIVE AND THE EMPLOYEE
HERE ARE THE HOLDER OF THE
PRIVILEGE WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED
ATTORNEY OR PHYSICIAN PRIVILEGES
THE CLIENTS USE THAT ATTORNEY OR
DOCTOR HOWEVER HERE THE UNION
REPRESENTATIVE CAN DISCLOSE
WHERE IT SEES FIT.
IN ANY LAWSUIT WEAVING THE
EMPLOYEES EXPECTED PRIVILEGES
DISS STATED INTENT OF THE BILL
NO AMENDMENTS WERE MADE ON THIS
ISSUE AFTER THE LAST COMMITTEE.
THIS IS RELATED TO THE SECOND
POINT IN THAT THERE'S NO
PROVISION FOR HOW TO POLICE THIS
PRIVILEGE FOR LAWYERS AND
DOCTORS AND MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONALS ARE HIGHLY
REGULATED THEY CAN BE HOLDEN TO
BEFORE COURT.
OR BEFORE REGULATORY BODY IF
THEY VIOLATE THE PRIVILEGE AT
MINIMUM IF THE UNION
REPRESENTATIVE WILL ALSO BE THE
HOLDER OF THE PRIVILEGE THERE
MUST BE SOME A MECHANISM FOR
PROTECTION AGAINST VIOLATING THE
EXPECTATIONS OF CONFIDENTIALITY.
NO AMENDMENTS WERE MADE ON THE
BILL SINCE THE LAST COMMITTEE
RAISE THIS ISSUE.
THE ONLY A MOMENT MADE AFTER THE
LAST IMPORTANT DEBATE IS
COMMITTEE WAS UNRELATED TO THESE
ISSUES IT IS TRUE THAT THE
PRIVILEGE ULTIMATELY APPLIES IN
A LEGAL PROCEEDING HOWEVER
PARTIES TO A PRIVILEGE MUST
CONTINUALLY ASSERT THE PRIVILEGE
IN ORDER TO PRESERVE IT. FOR THE
ULTIMATE LITIGATION.
THE AMENDMENTS MADE NOT CHANGES
ISSUE AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT
TO THE PROPONENTS THE POLICIES
THAT WERE CITED TODAY IN SUPPORT
OF THIS ARE NOT CODIFIED IN THIS
BILL.
IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THE
MOST OF THE PRIVILEGE IS
CURRENTLY IN STATURE THE RESULT
OF DECADES OF COURT
INTERPRETATION WHICH A THAN
CODIFIED INTO STATUTE.
THERE IS A REASON THE OTHER
PRIVILEGES IN CALIFORNIA ARE SO
SIMILAR AND IT'S CONCERNING THAT
THIS PRIVILEGE AND AS CURRENTLY
DRAFTED IS LACKING IN
SIMILARITIES.
THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT WITHOUT
AMENDMENTS TO AT LEAST ADDRESS
THESE MERRICK MAJOR POLICY
CONCERNS IT WILL TAKE DECADES OF
LITIGATION FOR CALIFORNIA COACH
COURTS TO ESTABLISH TE PROPER
SCOPE.
EXTENT AND REPERCUSSIONS OF THIS
PRIVILEGE FOR THESE REASONS
OTHERS CAL CHAMBER CONTINUES TO
OPPOSE IT BEFORE.
EIGHTEEN THANK YOU.
YOU KNOW FOR THOSE OF
ADVERTISEMENTS ON TV FOR
MEDICATIONS AND THEY RUN THEM
THROUGH VERY QUICKLY SO THEY CAN
GET IN ALL THEIR DISCLAIMERS.
YOU SHOULD UP FOR THAT BECAUSE I
ONLY GOT TO MARRY IMPRESSIVE.
ALL RIGHT -- OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION PLEASE.
VIEW COULD COME FORWARD PLEASE.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR JEAN
HEARSE HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE URBAN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
CESSATION OF CALIFORNIA
HEALTHCARE DISTRICTS IN
OPPOSITION THANK YOU.
AFTERNOON JEFF NEAL WITH
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES ALSO POSED THANK YOU.
AND I'M SURE MIKE BELOW COULD
PASSABLE JUSTICE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA OPPOSE THANK YOU VERY
MUCH ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
THANK GOD I WAS ASKED TO ALSO
REGISTRADAS ISSUE FOR THE
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS
ASSOCIATION THERE ARE UNABLE TO
BE HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ALRIGHT
LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE DIET
SEEING NO OTHER SENATOR WHITE
HOUSE SKI -- MANAGER I'M LOOKING
AT THAT SECTION ONE FORTY EIGHT
IS UNDER ARTICLE NINE POINT FIVE
UNION AGENT SLASH REPRESENTED
PURPOSE WORKER IN THIS THIS IS
THE LAST SENTENCE IN SUBSECTION
A BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THE S. THIS TALISMAN OF THE HEAD.
COMMUNICATIONS AS A
REPRESENTATIVE EMPLOYEE OR
REPRESENT A FORMER EMPLOYEE ALSO
HAS A PRIVILEGE TO PREVENT
ANOTHER PERSON.
FROM DISCLOSING IN CONNECTION
WITH SUCH A PROCEEDING A
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
BETWEEN THAT EMPLOYEE AND THE
UNION AGENT THAT IS PRIVILEGE
PURSUANT TO THE SECTION.
WHO'S THAT OTHER PERSON THE
OTHER PERSON.
I'M SORRY THE OTHER PERSON IS
SOMEBODY WITHIN THE PRIVILEGE.
IT IT COULD BE THAT THE
PRIVILEGE WAS MADE -- TO UNION
REPRESENTATIVES IT COULD BE THAT
THERE WAS A CLERICAL PERSON
INVOLVED IN FORWARD IN AN EMAIL.
IT THIS THIS SAME DOCTRINE EXIST
IN THE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE
WHERE DISCLOSURE TO CERTAIN
OTHERS DON'T DON'T WAVE
PRIVILEGE AND IT TRACKS WITH
THAT LANGUAGE PARDON IT TRACKS
WITH THAT LANGUAGE IS A TUNING
IS IT.
WHEN I READ IT GIVEN THAT?
QUESTIONS WE HAVE LAST TIME IT
LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A BREACH OF
THE PRIVILEGE OR OR BREACH OF
THE CONFIDENCE OF CONFIDENCE
THAT NORMALLY WOULD.
EVAPORATE THE PRIVILEGE SO IT
HAS TO BE ANOTHER PERSON WITH
YOU TALKING A TRANSLATOR
EMPLOYEE SOMEBODY WHO'S WHO'S.
WITH THAT -- QUESTION THAT I HAD
ON THE DIS INTERESTED NESS
BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER PRIVILEGES
THAT WE HAPPEN AND WE HAVE A
DISINTERESTED DOCTOR PATIENT AND
ABUSE COUNSELOR THIS IS THIS.
JOINT PRIVILEGE IS HOW BY BY
PEOPLE THAT WILL NOT HAVE A
DISINTEREST IN PRESERVE PERVERT.
PRESERVING THE PRIVILEGE -- AND
I'M WONDERING WHAT SAFEGUARDS WE
HAVE FOR THAT THAT IT'S NOT
GONNA BE MISUE.
LET ME ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WHY
THEY'RE THE PRIVILEGES HELD BY
BOTH THE UNION -- AND THE
INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE.
IN AN ATTORNEY CLIENT.
SITUATION BE ATTORNEY HAS ONE
CLIENT AND THERE'S A PRIVILEGE
AND THE CLIENT IS THE HOLDER OF
THE PRIVILEGE.
IN A UNION SITUATION IT IS VERY
FREQUENT THAT UNIONS REPRESENT
THE COLLECTIVE.
THEY MAD THEY MAY INVESTIGATE.
GRIEVANCES AND HAVE CONFIDENTIAL
COMMUNICATIONS FROM MULTIPLE
EMPLOYEES.
BUT THE UNION MADE. TO THE
GRIEVANCE OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
LAWSUIT.
A IN ITS OWN RIGHT.
AND THAT'S WHY THEY WOULD THE
THAT BOTH THE UNION AND THE
INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE HAVE TO BE
THE HOLDER.
OF THE PRIVILEGE BECAUSE
SOMETIMES.
THE V. EMPLOYEE MAKING THE
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION ISN'T
PART OF THE SUBSEQUENT LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
MADAM CHAIR BECAUSE NORMALLY WE
WON ALL THAT INFORMATION TO GO
BEFORE THE JUDGE IN BEFORE THE
THE PERSON MAKING THAT DECISION
YOU KNOW WE ARE STINGY ABOUT
CARVING OUT.
EVIDENCE THAT WE DON'T LET AND
BECAUSE OF THE THE PARTICULAR
NATURE OF IT SO I GUESS THE
QUESTION I HAVE IS FOR THE UNION
RAP.
THEY COLLECT ALL THESE
CONFIDENCES FROM VARIOUS PEOPLE
THAT THE MEAN I HAVE ONE ONE ONE
ONE ONE THEY COLLECT THEM -- I I
GUESS HOW DO WE CONTROL THAT
WHETHER THE CONDITIONS THAT YOU
KNOW WE MONITOR IT OR OR POLICE
IT.
WILL BUT AGAIN IT GETS BACK TO
THE DISTINCTION I MADE BEFORE
ABOUT FAX.
IN STRATEGY WHAT IS PRIVILEGED
AS A STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION.
BETWEEN THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE
AND THE EMPLOYEE HOW TO PRESENT
A CASE.
WHAT THE FACTS ARE THE UNION HAS
TO PASSED BRING FACTS FORWARD TO
PROVE THE CASE AFTER THAT WHAT
SHOULDN'T BE OPEN IS?
IT IS THE ADVICE THE UNION
REPRESENTATIVES ADVICE OR
STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION TO THE
EMPLOYEE.
THAT IS THAT VERY ANALOGOUS TO
THE ATTORNEY SO THAT MAKES ME
FEEL BETTER I MEAN THE ADVICE IS
OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A STRATEGY
VERSUS SOME.
WORKPLACE ACTIVITY THAT THERE'S
TELLING A SECRET AND IN YOU'RE
NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL EVEN THOUGH.
IT MAY BE. FOR A BUT OTHER
PUBLIC POLICY REASONS.
DESIRABLE TO HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED
TO THAT BECAUSE I SEE IT.
AS A LAWYER WERE SORT OF LIMITED
WHEN YOU DO DEFENSE WORK AND
THINGS LIKE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND
WHY YOU WHY YOU ARE NOT GOING TO
DISCLOSE THAT THAT PERSON AS SHE
TRIED TO CREATE A DEFENSE.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU OTHER
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
SENATOR BORCHERS.
FOLLOWING UP -- ON THE COMMENTS
MADE BY THE FOLKS WHO HAVE
EXPRESSED OPPOSITION.
OR CONCERNS IN THE LAST HEARING.
SO WHAT IT HAS SUBSTANTIVELY
CHANGED IN IN YOUR OPINION.
FROM -- THE PEACE LEGISLATION
THAT WE REVIEWED A COUPLE WEEKS
BACK TO WHERE IT IS NOW.
I'M SORRY THROUGH THE CHAIR --
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR -- IT IN
OUR ASSESSMENT THE ONLY
SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT THAT WAS
ADOPTED WAS TO TRY AND CLARIFY
THAT THIS THAT THIS PRIVILEGE --
APPLIES TO ONLY A A A PRECEDING
BY THE THE PRECEDING THE
DEFINITION OF OF OF PROCEEDING --
IN OUR IN OUR ASSESSMENT -- IS
NOT CLEARLY DEFINED THERE SOME
AMBIGUITY APART FROM THAT.
AT ALL OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT
WERE BROUGHT UP BY THE MEMBERS%
OF THE COMMITTEE WITH REGARDS TO
TRAINING WITH REGARD TO
CERTIFICATION AND I HOW YOU
SERVE TWO MASTERS BEING THE
BARGAINING UNIT IN THE EMPLOYEE
NONE OF THOSE ISSUES -- WERE
ADDRESSED -- BYE BYE THESE
AMENDMENTS.
OKAY -- I PROBABLY DON'T NEED TO
GO THROUGH SOME OF THE CONCERNS
THAT WERE RAISED -- BEFORE OTHER
THAN.
AT A CURSORY LEVEL I THINK.
PRIVILEGE IN OUR IN OUR LEGAL
SYSTEM IS NOR IS NORMALLY BEEN
AFFORDED TO VERY SPECIAL
RELATIONSHIPS.
AND THOSE GO ABOUT WITH
CERTIFICATION OF OUR TRAINING
CONTINUING LEE -- EDUCATION
WHETHER IT'S MEDICAL OR OR OR
LEGAL.
AND SO I'VE ALWAYS BEEN OLDER
RELUCTANT TO EXPAND UPON THAT
TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP.
ABSENT -- TRULY COMPELLING NEEDS.
AND I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO
CREATE A BROADER.
A SET OF PROTECTIONS IN
PRIVILEGES.
THAT GO BEYOND WHAT ALREADY
EXISTS BETWEEN A LAWYER AND
CLIENT AND THE DOCTOR AND
PATIENT PRIEST PENITENT -- I'M
JUST TRYING TO I DON'T THINK
I'VE COME TO TERMS WITH THE IDEA
THAT THERE IS SUCH A COMPELLING
NEED.
THAT PRIVILEGE SHOULD EXIST ON
THE SITUATION.
AND THAT SHOULD BE HELD.
ON BY BOTH SETS OF PARTIES --
AND WE'VE HEARD THE EXAMPLE OF
THE LEGAL BUT ALSO ON TOP OF THE
COULD THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST I
THINK THE SATISFYING
[inaudible]
MULTIPLE INTERESTS.
IS.
COULD VERY WELL CREATE A CONE.
OF INFORMATION.
SO INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY HELPING
THE INDIVIDUALS.
IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY OR
THE COLLECTIVE AS A WHOLE I
THINK IT IS PRONE TO CREATE A
SILO.
OF INFORMATION.
AND THE CIRCULATION OF WHICH
ROOM AND THE PROSPECT OF THAT
REMAINS UNKNOWN AND FRANKLY
THING DANGEROUS.
WE'RE INFORMATION CAN BE HELD
WITHIN A CONFINED ENVIRONMENT --
IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE -- I
THINK THE LAST TIME THERE WAS A
THERE WAS CONCERN AND HAVE A
GREAT DEAL OF RESPECT -- FOR ALL
YOUR EFFORTS I THINK
PHILOSOPHICALLY WERE LOOKING AT
DIFFERENT THINGS AND I FULLY
APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD -- NOT ONE
A LOOK BACK AND AT THE THE
TWENTY NINETEEN LEGISLATIVE
CYCLE AND I THINK THAT WE
CREATED A NEW BRAND OF PRIVILEGE
BECAUSE IT'S ONLY A MATTER TIME.
BEFORE THERE'S A MANAGEMENT IN
EMPLOYEE REQUEST FOR PRIVILEGE.
BETWEEN YOU KNOW UNCERTIFIED
COUNSELORS IN THOSE WHO RECEIVE
COUNSELING PRIVILEGE I MEAN THIS
IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT I DON'T
THINK THAT WE SHOULD -- EMBARK
UPON BECAUSE THEY WILL COME UP
WITH COMPELLING REASONS NOT
UNLIKE THE ONES THAT YOU'VE COME
UP WITH -- IN THE COURSE OF OF
THE DISCUSSION HERE -- I'M SORRY
JUST WON'T BE IN A POSITION TO
TO SUPPORT THIS AND I THINK IT
IT WILL END UP BEING SOMETHING
THAT WE REGRET.
DOWN THE ROAD COURSE WE ALWAYS
HAVE THE ABILITY HERE WE CALL A
POLITELY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
AND IF THERE ARE ANY I'M SURE
THAT THERE WILL BE FOLLOW UP
LEGISLATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
SENATOR TO RUSSELL.
AND THEN FALL BY SENATOR UMBERG
[inaudible]
YES -- HAVING SPENT A LOT OF
TIME IN MY LIFE AROUND.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN WORK
PLACES THAT HAVE COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING -- IT JUST SEEMS LIKE
A NO BRAINER TO ME.
ON THE PRACTICAL SIDE HERE YOU
HAVE.
EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE A
REPRESENTATIVE THAT THEY GO TO
FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. TO
NEGOTIATE THEIR AGREEMENT THEIR
WAGES AND WORKING CONDITIONS AND
ALL THAT BUT ALSO TO GO TO THE
UNION TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT
SOLUTIONS.
AND TRY TO SOLVE ISSUES THAT
COME UP.
SOMETIMES OF THE EMPLOYER
SOMETIMES WITH OTHER WITH CALM
PLACE.
IT'S A VERY PRACTICAL SIDE OF OF
LIFE IN THE WORKPLACE TO BE ABLE
TO SAY YEAH WHATEVER YOU SAY TO
ME.
DON'T WORRY IT'S NOT GONNA BE.
FED OUTSIDE OF THIS ROOM IS
REALLY IMPORTANT. TO THAT
WORKPLACE AND TO KNOW THAT YOU
CAN TALK TO SOMEONE TALK TO YOU
UNION.
AGENT AND BE ABLE -- TO HAVE
THAT PROTECTION OF WHAT YOU SAY
AND THERE'S A RESPONSIBILITY FOR
THE WHOLE WORKPLACE.
THERE'S IT IS SPECIAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE EMPLOYER
WITH MANAGERS WITH SUPERVISORS
WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES THERE'S ALL
SORTS OF THINGS AT STAKE HERE.
AND SO I THINK THERE'S A REALLY
PRACTICAL FIED.
THAT NEEDS TO BE.
UNDERSTOOD AS FAR AS WHY WOULD
YOU WANT TO PROTECT THOSE KINDS
OF CONVERSATIONS SO.
IT MAY BE TOO MUCH TO TRY TO GET
BUT IT IS VERY SIMPLE YOU GO TO
SOMEONE BECAUSE YOU WANT TO
CONFIDE IN THEM.
ABOUT WHATEVER IS GOING ON IN
THE WORKPLACE YOU EXPECT THERE
TO BE CONFIDENTIALITY THANK YOU
THANK YOU SENATOR UMBERG -- I I
THINK THIS IS A RATHER PROFOUND
CHANGE IN THE LAW THAT TYPICALLY
WHEN WE ACCORDING TO FORD --
SPECIAL STATUS OF PRIVILEGE
USUALLY DOES COME WITH OTHER
QUALIFICATIONS WHETHER IT'S
SPECIAL TRAINING OR WHETHER
SPECIAL STATUS WHATEVER IT MAY
BE.
AND THIS IS EVEN MORE UNUSUAL
BECAUSE THE PRIVILEGE IS GOING
TO BE HELD BY BOTH THE
ORGANIZATION AS WELL AS BY THE
INDIVIDUAL.
AND EVEN MORE UNIQUE BECAUSE THE
PERSON WHO RECEIVES THAT
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION I
THINK IS AN OBLIGATION NOT JUST
TO THE INDIVIDUAL.
WHO'S COMMUNICATING BUT ALSO TO
OTHERS IN THE ORGANIZATION AND I
RAISE THIS BEFORE WITH RESPECT
TO HARM TO OTHER CO WORKERS.
IN SOME PLACES SO FOR EXAMPLE IF
YOU LOOK AT UNIVERSITY
CALIFORNIA VERSUS SUPERIOR COURT
UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA HAD A
SPECIAL.
RESPONSIBILITY CONCERNING HEALTH
AND WELFARE OF OTHER STUDENTS
THE SAME THING WITH RESPECT TO
PSYCHIATRISTS MAYBE PSYCHOLOGIST
BUT CERTAINLY PSYCHIATRISTS WHO
HAVE A DUTY TO WARN I TALKED
LAST TIME ABOUT PERHAPS.
SOME SORT OF A DUTY I UNDERSTAND
WHY -- IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT COMMUNICATIONS
AND REGARDING REGARDING
NEGOTIATION THOSE KINDS OF
INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS BE KEPT
CONFIDENTIAL AND NOT ALLOW THE
OTHER SIDE BASICALLY GAIN ACCESS.
BUT BUT AS I EXPRESSED CONCERN.
OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS ABOUT.
COMMUNICATIONS THAT REFLECT
SOMEONE'S INTEREST IN PERHAPS
DOING HARM TO ANOTHER COWORKER
THAT IS A CONCERN OF MINE IN
THAT THAT PARTICULAR IN THIS
CONTEXT.
AND IT'S NOT UNUSUAL
CIRCUMSTANCE IT I MEAN IT DOES
HAPPEN THE CO WORKERS BOTH
HARASS AND AND COMMIT WRONGFUL
ACCESS TO OTHER COWORKERS.
AND SO ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS
THAT I PROPOSED -- A COUPLE DAYS
AGO THEN AGAIN YESTERDAY WAS WAS
STRIKING -- ON THE LAST PAGE OF
THE BILL UNDER SECTION TEN FORTY
EIGHT POINT -- TWO WHERE IT
READS THERE IS NO PRIVILEGE
UNDER THIS ARTICLE IF THE UNION
AGENT REASON WE BELIEVE THAT.
DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFIDENTIAL
COMMUNICATION IS NECESSARY TO
PREVENT A CRIMINAL ACT PERIOD IN
STRIKING THE REMAINDER OF THE
SENTENCE SEC SENATOR.
WITH AS A POLICY HERE WE DON'T
NEGOTIATE AMENDMENTS.
ARE DURING THE HEARING -- SO --
I KNOW THAT THAT IS SOMETHING
PERHAPS YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT
AMONG THE OTHER.
CONCERNS HAD BEEN EXPRESSED IN
YOUR CLOTHES BUT WE'RE NOT GOING
TO NEGOTIATE THAT HERE -- WILL
WE HAVE WAY TOO MUCH ON OUR
PLATE TODAY AND SEVENTY BILLS
NEXT WEEK SO AND HERE YEAH ALL
I'M DOING IS I'M I'M ASKING
WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GOING TO
CONSIDER IT IF THEY REJECTED IT.
THEN THAT'S THAT'S MY QUESTION
AND I'VE ASKED HIM IF HE WOULD
HE IF HE WOULD INDICATE THAT IN
HIS CLOTHES BUT I DON'T WANT TO
HAVE A COLLOQUY ON IF IF YOU
WOULD JUST GO AHEAD.
AS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS AND
HOPEFULLY IN YOUR CLOTHES YOU
WILL RESPOND TO SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED
HERE TODAY -- SO -- LET'S GO
AHEAD AND AND WE'LL HAVE HIM
ANSWER THAT US IN HIS CLOTHES
AND IT WITHOUT ANY.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS WATER INTO.
A WILL WILL LOOKS.
ON THEM.
EXCEPT THE MOTION IF THERE IS.
ONE SO MOVED BY SENATOR ALSO IF
YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE.
THANK YOU MADAM JOURNAL ALL
START OFF -- IF I COULD WITH THE
THE QUESTIONS ON RUBBER THAT
ABSOLUTELY WE'RE OPEN TO
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATIONS ON
THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE -- AND
WOULD BE HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU --
IT THIS BILL YES TO THE
COMMITTEE -- TO GIVE TO THAT
CONVERSATION SPECIFIC TO THAT
REQUEST -- BUT I THINK IT'S A
DEFICIT THAT WE CAN WORK ON TO
BUT TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE -- AND
YOU KNOW I I THINK THAT THE
THERE DEFINITELY IS.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS DO WE
BELIEVE THERE'S A ESPECIALLY
GIVEN THE CURRENT -- CONDITIONS
WERE IN AND HAVE BEEN FOR A LONG
TIME -- IN TERMS OF THE WILLING
AWAY OF WHAT WORKERS RIGHTS AND
THE ABILITY.
OF WORKERS TO BE PROPERLY
REPRESENTED -- IS THERE AN
OVERRIDING SOCIAL INTEREST TO
LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD -- IN
THIS PARTICULAR CASE -- IN TO
ENSURE THAT FOR EXAMPLE WHEN I
WAS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SAN
JOSE WE HAVE CLOSE SESSION
HEARINGS.
OVER PERSONAL MATTERS OR UNION
MATTERS ARE VOTING WHATEVER
MIGHT BE.
AND WE HAD OUR CITY ATTORNEY
REPORT TO US AND I WAS ALL IN
CONFIDENCE -- AND THAT'S THAT'S
A GREAT POINT THAT WE HAVE TO
RECOGNIZE THAT THESE WORKERS
DON'T HAVE EASY AND QUICK ACCESS
TO A LAWYER BUT THEY DO HAVE
ACCESS. TO THEIR UNION
REPRESENTATIVE AND THAT
COMMUNICATION IS ONE THAT -- WE
CAN HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION
AS TO WHETHER IT'S A SPECIAL ONE
THAT SHOULD BE PROTECTED I
CERTAINLY BELIEVE THAT IT IS ONE
THAT SHOULD BE PROTECTED -- AND
I THINK UNIONS ARE ACCUSTOMED
REPRESENTING MANY MANY PEOPLE
AND AND UNDERSTAND COMPLEX AND
HOW TO RESOLVE THAT -- BUT AS IT
APPLIES TO A PROTECTING A
COMMUNICATIONS IN CIVIL ACTIONS
I THINK THAT IT'S A COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT ISSUE.
AND ONE THAT WE SHOULD BE
PROTECT ABOVE AND SO
UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE MIGHT
BE SOME PHILOSOPHICAL
DIFFERENCES I WOULD RAISE
RESPECTFULLY ASK WHEN I BOUGHT
AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK.
THE CHAIR AND HER STAFF AND AS
WELL AS THE OTHER CENTERS WHO
TOOK THE TIME BUDGET FOR FURTHER
QUESTIONS SOME OF THE CONCERNS
THAT ABOUT THE BILL THANK YOU.
THANK YOU WE DO HAVE A MOTION
THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO THE
SENATE FLOOR.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL FILE ITEM NUMBER NINE A
BEFORE EIGHTEEN JACKSON LIKE
JACKSON AYE BORDERS. FOR JUST NO
TO RUSSELL RUSSELL I GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ I JONES.
JONES NO MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN [inaudible]
I'M BURKE.
NUMBER OF IOWA CASKEY.
WHITE HOUSE SKI I ALL RIGHT THE
BILL HAS. SIX SIXTY TWO WILL
HOLD ROLE OPEN FOR THE APPS
MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR A YOUR TESTIMONY
HERE WE WILL GO TO FILE ITEM
SEVEN AB TWO EIGHTY NINE BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER FONG.
BUT IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND WAITING
JUST A MOMENT SHOWING CLEAR THE
THE HALL IN THE NOISE
[inaudible]
RIGHT [inaudible]
VERY GOOD.
ON FILE ITEM SEVEN AB TWO EIGHTY
NINE ASSEMBLY MEMBER FONG THE
FLOOR IS YOURS.
BUT THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS.
IS MY PLEASURE TODAY TO PRESENT
AB TWO EIGHTY NINE WHICH IS
STILL IN THE AUTHOR WITH
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LORENA GONZALEZ.
WHAT THE LEGISLATURE PASSED THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC REX RECORDS
ACT IN NINETEEN SIXTY EIGHT
EIGHT STATED ACCESS TO
INFORMATION CONCERNING THE
CONDUCT OF THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS
IS A FUNDAMENTAL AND NECESSARY
RIGHT OF EVERY PERSON IN THIS
STATE?
CURRENTLY STATE AGENCIES HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO SUBVERT THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT BY
CITING P. R. EXAMPLES EXEMPTIONS
AS THE BASIS FOR DENYING A
REQUEST.
EVEN THOUGH THE EXEMPTIONS
BAYSIDE HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH
THE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC
INFORMATION.
STATE AGENCIES ARE DOING THIS
BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE IS NO
APPEAL OPTIONS OPTION OTHER THAN
TO SUE THE AGENCY IN COURT WHICH
IS NOT FEASIBLE AND TOO COSTLY
FOR MANY IN THE PUBLIC.
AND THIS BILL ADDRESSES THIS
PROBLEM BY ESTABLISHING A BUT
THE PERSON WHO CAN UPON.
REQUEST A REVIEW THAT AND I'D
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST AND
SERVE AS AN INDEPENDENT REFEREE.
TO THE SIDE OF THE STATE AGENCY
HEY LEGITIMATE GROUNDS FOR
DENYING THE REQUEST.
AB TWO EIGHTY NINE ADDRESSES A
LOOPHOLE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT PROCESS SILICON SO THAT IT
CAN DO WHAT WAS INTENDED WHICH
IS TO BRING TRANSPARENCY.
FAIRNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY TO
STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE VERY
PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE. NINETEEN
OTHER STATES.
HAVE ADOPTED SOME FORM OF
INDEPENDENT REFEREE IN THIS
CAPACITY AND CALIFORNIA NEEDS TO
DO THE SAME WITH AB TWENTY NINE
CALIFORNIA HAS THE OPPORTUNITY
TO LEAD.
ON AN IMPORTANT BIPARTISAN
EFFORT TO BRING MORE
TRANSPARENCY TO OUR GOVERNMENT.
THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED UNANIMOUS
SUPPORT IN THE ASSEMBLY AND IS
SUPPORTED BY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLETS
STATEWIDE SUCH AS THE SAN DIEGO
UNION TRIBUNE.
THE LA DAILY NEWS AND WE'VE ALSO
RECEIVE EDITORIALS AND SUPPORT
IN THE LA TIMES THE SIMPSONS
CHRONICLE.
THIS BILL IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY
THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL LIBERTIES
ADVOCACY AND THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN
VOTERS WITH ME E
IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL IS WHEN
HE PROUD THE CALIFORNIA
NEWSPAPERS AS USUAL.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
AT THE CALIFORNIA NEWS
PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTS HUNDREDS OF COMMUNITY
NEWSPAPERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA WHO REY ON THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT IS
A CRUCIAL TOOL TO DO THEIR JOBS
REPORT THE NEWS.
AS WE SEE IT.
AB TWO EIGHTY NINE PROVIDES
THREE KEY BENEFITS THAT FURTHER
THE PURPOSES OF THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT AND THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PUBLIC
RECORDS IT'S IN TRYING.
TO IN ARTICLE ONE OF
CALIFORNIA'S CONSTITUTION FIRST
IT HELPS REDUCE THE BURDEN ON
THE JUDICIARY OF PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT CASES IN SITUATIONS WHERE.
A REQUEST -- USES THIS PROCESS
THAT COULD BYPASS THE JUDICIARY
AND RELIEVE THE CASE LOAD ON THE
COURT.
SECOND IT PROVIDES A REMEDY TO
ENFORCE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT THAT A
REQUEST -- WITHOUT MEANS MAY NOT
OTHERWISE HAVE AS WE KNOW OUR
RIGHT WITHOUT AND ACCESSIBLE
REMEDY.
IS NOT A VERY EFFECTIVE RIGHT AT
ALL AND WHILE THE USE OF THE
COURT SYSTEM CAN BE VERY
EFFECTIVE IT'S NOT SOMETHING
THAT'S ACCESSIBLE.
TO A SMALL COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER
OR AN INDIVIDUAL WATCHDOG.
BY ADDING THIS ADDITIONAL TOOL
INTO A REQUEST HERS TOOLBOX --
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO
HELP FOR THE PURPOSES OF THAT
RIGHT.
AND FINALLY IT ALSO PROVIDES A
BENEFIT EVEN TO THOSE WHO DON'T
DIRECTLY UTILIZE THE PROCESS
BECAUSE OF THE OPINIONS OF THESE
THIS ON BUT THE PERSON WOULD
BECOME PUBLIC AND BE COULD BE.
USED AS GUIDANCE BOTH FOR A
QUESTOR IS AS WELL AS PUBLIC
AGENCIES IN THE FUTURE -- AND SO
WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THE CONCEPT
OF THE BILL AND ARE HAPPY TO BE
HERE IN SUPPORT OF IT TODAY. TWO
OTHER OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT WILL BRING IT BACK TO
THE DIET SO I HAVE.
A APPRECIATE -- TO WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER YOU AND I'VE HAD
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT.
I TWO PAGES OF CONCERNS AND I
THINK THEY ARE EXPRESSED IN THE
ANALYSIS OF THE BILL.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEWSPAPERS
WOULD BE IN SUPPORT BECAUSE IT
ACTUALLY DOESN'T PROVIDE AN
OPPORTUNITY. FOR APPEAL BY THE
AGENCY AGAINST WHOM THE OR UPON
WHOM THE REQUEST IS MADE SO --
THERE ARE -- IS I READ THIS IN
AS WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS AND
STAFF HAS ANALYZED IT -- I THINK
THEY'RE JUST TOO MANY UNANSWERED
QUESTIONS IN UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES WHICH I'D LIKE TO
ARTICULATE -- BECAUSE WE HAVE
GIVEN THIS A VERY SERIOUS LOOK
AND WE UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE
THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT AND I BY
NO SPEAKING FOR MYSELF FROM
PROBABLY FOR EVERYONE HERE IS
MANY OF US LAWYERS AND ALL.
WE SUPPORT THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT WE DO NEED TO HAVE THAT
SUNSHINE.
BUT THIS BILL DRASTICALLY
CHANGES HOW THE C. P. R. A. IS
ENFORCED BY HAVING ONE
INDIVIDUAL.
MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF A
RECORD IS DISCLOSED DOUBLE UNDER
THE C. P. R. A. INSTEAD OF THE
COURTS.
WE'RE MOVING THE AUTHORITY THE
JURISDICTION AWAY FROM THE
COURTS THERE IS NO WAY. FOR A
STATE AGENCY TO APPEAL THE
DECISION OF THE ON BUDGET PERSON.
UNDER EXISTING LAW THE STATE
AGENCY CAN APPEAL A SUPERIOR
COURT DECISION REGARDING THE CPR
A THERE IS NO WAY A PERSON WHOSE
INFORMATION IS IMPLICATED BY THE
RECORDS. TO BE ABLE TO INTERVENE
TO ADVOCATE FOR THEIR PRIVACY
RIGHTS.
THE CONSEQUENCES HERE ARE GRAVE
ONCE PRIVATE INFORMATION IS
DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC IT
CANNOT BE TAKEN BACK.
IT CREATES A TWO TIER SYSTEM OF
ENFORCING RIGHTS UNDER THE CPR A
IT APPLIES EQUALLY TO STATE
AGENCIES -- THE SIXERS WITH THE
C. P. R. A APPLIES EQUALLY TO
STATE AGENCIES AND LOCAL
AGENCIES BUT THE BILL ONLY
APPLIES TO STATE AGENCIES -- I
WILL GO ON BECAUSE OR I CAN GO
ON I GUESS I SHOULD SAY BUT
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS -- LACK OF
ABILITY FOR BOTH SIDES TO APPEAL --
STATE AGENCIES OR IT APPLIES TO
THEM.
THE EXISTING LAW MAKES
DETERMINATIONS EXCLUSIVELY A
JUDICIAL FUNCTION.
WITH THE COURTS HAVE TO BALANCE
TO FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY AND
THE RIGHT OF PUBLIC ACCESS
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE SYSTEM
SET UP IS IT HOUSE.
THE OMBUDSMAN PERSON IS NOT
REQUIRED TO HAVE ANY JUDICIAL
EXPERIENCE OR EVEN BE A LICENSED
ATTORNEY.
SO IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT THE BILL IS
DOING IS THIS A NEW
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY OR NOT.
IS THE OMBUDSMAN'S -- BOARDS
PERSONS WE GOT TO FIND A BETTER
NAME FOR THIS BUT ANYWAY IS
THERE ARE ISSUING AN ADVISORY
OPINION BINDING DECISIONS --
THAT HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED WOULD
RULES OF EVIDENCE APPLY -- WE'RE
GIVING AUTHORITY HERE -- TO THE
STATE AUDITOR.
ARE TO BE THE ONE TO GONNA PLACE
THE AGENCY THERE THE STATE
AUDITOR'S SUBJECT TO THE C. P.
R. A. SO THERE'S POTENTIAL THAT
THE ON BLITZ PERSON WOULD HAVE
TO REVIEW A DECISION BY THE
STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO DENY
DISCLOSURE OF A PUBLIC RECORD.
LEADING TO A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST THE THE THE CONCERNS GO
ON AND ON WE WE'VE DISCUSSED
THEM I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ARE
LOOKING FOR A BETTER METHOD -- I
WOULD SUGGEST THAT WITH ALL
THOSE QUESTIONS THAT THIS BILL.
IS NOT RIGHT FOR PRIME TIME IT
HAS I THINK TOO MANY --
SIGNIFICANT ARE QUESTIONS
ASSOCIATED BOTH WITH THE PUBLIC
AND PRIVACY RIGHTS AS WELL AS
THAT BALANCING OF PUBLIC ACCESS
SO -- AGAIN I I I WOULD I WOULD
SAY WOULD LEAVE IT AT THAT I
WENT ON A LITTLE LONGER THAN I
EXPECTED BUT THERE ARE.
MANY MANY SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS MEASURE --
I WOULD ASK AND IT YOU KNOW YOU
YOU'RE HERE YOU WANT TO VOTE
THAT'S FINE -- I WOULD BE HAPPY
TO CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS -- GOING
FORWARD SO THAT WE COULD PERHAPS
ADDRESS.
SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS BUT
BASICALLY TAKING THOSE FROM THE
JUDICIARY AND PUTTING IT IN THE
HANDS OF ONE PERSON.
CREATE SOME VERY VERY SERIOUS
ISSUES IN AND OF ITSELF SO THOSE
ARE MY COMMENTS -- AND YES
SENATOR BORCHERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR WOMAN -- I
BELIEVE THAT FUNDAMENTAL IN OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.
THAT THE THAT ACCESS TO
INFORMATION IS KEY.
AND I THINK FOR YA AND THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT --
THE FEDERAL AND STATE RESPECTIVE
EQUIVALENTS.
IT IS ABSOLUTELY IN IMPERATIVE.
THAT WE DON'T OUR RELY ON A
FACELESS NAMELESS.
I EMPLOYEES BUREAUCRATS IF YOU
WILL MAKING DECISIONS.
OUR THAT FORCE INDIVIDUALS INTO
A LEGAL SYSTEM THAT WE ALL KNOW
AND HAVE HEARD ABOUT.
AT LEAST FOR THE THE COURSE OF
THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION ON HELD
BACK LOGGED IT IS AND HOW
DIFFICULT IT IS AND FOR THOSE
WHO ARE NOT FORTUNATE TO BE.
IN A FINANCIAL POSITION TO SEEK
REDRESS IN THE COURTS THAT THIS
IS PRECISELY I THINK WHAT WE
NEED.
WE NEEDED TO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL
RESPONSIBLE THAT CAN OVERSEE
THESE MATTERS IN A TIMELY
FASHION I THINK THIRTY DAYS.
MAY BE A BIT SHORT AND IT COMES
TO BUT I THINK IT'S ADMIRABLE --
I I THINK I WANT TO CLARIFY A
POINT I WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN I
UNDERSTAND THIS.
THAT IF THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH
AN OMBUDSMAN DECISION TO
DISCLOSE ARE NOT DISCLOSED.
THAT DOES THAT FOR CLOSE OF
PARTY'S ABILITY TO GO TO COURT
AND SEEK REDRESS NO ABSOLUTELY
NOT WE STILL PRESERVE THE RIGHT
FOR ANY PARTY TO GO TO THE
SUPREME COURT. TO TO TO SEEK
RELIEF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO
IS WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE AN
APPEALS PROCESS IN BETWEEN --
THE REJECTION AND A LAWSUIT.
ARE YOU GOING TO SAY THAT THE
ONLY RECOURSE YOU HAVE TO GET
INFORMATION THAT YOU AS A PUBLIC
PERSON DESERVES AND IS IN THE
CONSTITUTION AS YOU'RE RIGHT IS
THAT THE ONLY WAY YOU'RE GONNA
GET THE INFORMATION IS TO SUE
THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
AND THAT YOU NOW HAVE TO HAVE
THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT WE ARE
TRYING TO RE BALANCE THE CPR A
RIGHT NOW ALL OF YOU THE SCALES
ARE TIPPED COMPLETELY AGAINST
THE PUBLIC.
IT IS COMPLETELY ON THE SIDE OF
THE STATE AGENCIES AND SO AT
WHAT POINT CAN'T DO WE ALLOW IS
SOMEONE OF THE PUBLIC TO GET THE
INFORMATION OF WHY THE DECISION
WAS MADE BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
THE COMMITTEE ITSELF PRESENTED
AND MEN MINTS TO ALL THE
CONCERNS LISTED THE ANALYSES AND
WE ACCEPTED ALL OF THEM.
SO THE SO TO SAY THAT SOMEHOW
THESE ISSUES CANNOT BE ADDRESS
WE PROVIDE CLARITY TO SHOW THAT
APPEAL CAN GO THE SUPERIOR COURT
AND WHEN THAT AND THAT THEY WILL
COVER THE COSTS THAT THERE IS NO
LEGAL PRECEDENTS.
THAT THE BUT THE PERSON HAS TO
BE CHOSEN WITH EXPERTISE IN THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
AND THAT WE CLARIFY THAT THIS
REVIEW DOES NOT HAVE LEGAL
PRECEDENTS -- AND AND COULD MOVE
FORWARD SO.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS AT?
IF YOU CAN INDIVIDUAL ONCE THE
FOR SAID SEEK INFORMATION FROM A
STATE GOVERNMENT IS DAVID VERSUS
GOLIATH.
YOU ARE YOU GOING TELL ME THE
EIGHT INDIVIDUAL RIGHT NOW CAN
TAKE ON AND ASK FOR INFORMATION
THE STATE AGENCY AND THAT
THEY'RE GOING TO WIN.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS JUST
BALANCE THE SCALES WE DON'T WANT
TO BE TIPPED EITHER WAY BUT IF
WE CAN FIND ANY?
INDEPENDENT PERSON I'M I'M
WILLING TO LOOK AND WORK WITH
THE COMMITTEE AND WORK WITH ANY
MEMBER IF IT'S THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE IF IT'S THE THE
AUDITOR RIGHT NOW IS THAT AND TO
SEE RIGHT NOW.
AND RIGHT NOW IF WE AS WE DEBATE
BILLS.
A LOT OF THE BILLS WERE DEBATING
LEGISLATURE SAYS THAT IF YOU
NEED TO SEEK INFORMATION FROM
THE AGENCY WHAT DO THEY NEED TO
DO.
THEY NEED TO SEE A FILE A PUBLIC
RECORDS ACT.
WELL THEN HOW DOES SOMEONE DO
THAT IF THEY CAN'T GET ANY
RELIEF AND SO THAT'S WHAT OUR
BILL IS TRYING TO DO ME -- LET
ME GIVE YOU.
GIVE AN EXAMPLE HERE ME CAN
FLUSH IT OUT.
AN ENTITY FILES A FOIA REQUEST
OR PUBLIC RECORDS.
OUR REQUEST AND MY CONCERN IS
THAT IF THE STATE GOVERNMENT --
OR ANY OF ITS INSTRUMENTALITY
DISCLOSES THE DOCUMENT THAT FOR
EXAMPLE MIGHT HAVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION ON ME MYSELF
SECURITY NUMBER MY PASSPORT SO
ON AND SO FORTH.
DO I HAVE THE ABILITY TO WRITE A
LETTER TO THE OMBUDSMAN IN SAY.
HOWEVER YOU DECIDE THIS MY
OBJECTION IS THAT IT WILL REVEAL.
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT
MY IDENTITY SO IF IT IS.
IF IT IS DISCLOSED WILL YOU
PLEASE DIRECT THAT THAT
INFORMATION BE REDACTED IS THAT
CONTEMPLATED IN THIS.
WEEK WE'RE WILLING TO WORK THAT
OUT WE ACTUALLY IT TOOK
AMENDMENTS ADDRESS THAT THE BUT
THE PERSON DOESN'T MAKE THESE
DECISIONS IN A VACUUM THEY ARE
SEEKING INFORMATION FROM THE
INDIVIDUAL FROM THE NEWS OUTLET
FROM THE ORGANIZATION.
FROM THE STATE AGENCY SO BEFORE
BEFORE ANY INFORMATION IS MADE
PUBLIC ON ON ON A WEBSITE THAT
ALL THAT INFORMATION IS GOING TO
BE WORKED OUT IT'S NOT GOING TO
BE THIS FREE WHEELING PROCESS
WHERE ALL THE SEND THEM BUT IT'S
PERSON SAYS.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M GONNA MAKE A
DECISION AND I'M GONNA THROW
EVERYTHING ON ON ON THE WEB.
THIS IS A VERY CAREFUL PROCESS
AND SO WE WANT THE APPEALS
PROCESS TO BE TAKEN VERY
SERIOUSLY THIS IS NOT ONE YEAH
SO THIS IS WHY IT'S IMPORTANT ON
BUDGET AND SAYS I DON'T BELIEVE
THAT YOUR PASSPORT INFORMATION
IS CONFIDENTIAL AND I WILL
RELEASE A REPORT AND IT WILL.
BE AVAIL BEAT HIM BE MADE
AVAILABLE IN A PERIOD OF TIME ON
THE WEBSITE.
I THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
CHALLENGE THAT THROUGH THE
COURTS TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT DOES
NOT OCCUR ABSOLUTELY ART.
I'VE SEEN A LOT OF A LOT OF
BILLS IN THE COURSE OF THIS AND
COURSE OF THE SESSION.
THIS IS I THINK AT ITS HEART
BEATING HEART A BIPARTISAN ISSUE.
I MEAN IT REALLY IS I MEAN JUST
LOOK AT THE YOUR CO AUTHOR.
I THINK THAT IT'S IT'S ADMIRABLE --
I'VE CONSULTED WITH FOLKS IN --
IN THE MEDIA AND NEWSPAPERS.
THIS IS KEY THIS IS IMPORTANT
AND SUCH AS FOR THOSE THAT ARE
IN THE BUSINESS OF INFORMATION
BROKERING.
IT'S IT'S IT'S EVERY DAY
RESIDENTS OF CALIFORNIA CITIZENS
OF THE US SO I APPLAUD YOU FOR
TO FOR FOR MOVING THIS FORWARD.
I THINK THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE
NEED TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT DAVID
AND GOLIATH -- THAT ONE OF THEM
IS IS IS IS BROUGHT DOWN THE
SIDE AND AND I MIGHT MADE BY MAY
AND MAY I ADD OUT OF JUST QUIT
VERY QUICKLY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THAT ALL THE
INFORMATION THAT HAS COME OUT ON
WHETHER THE DMB AT THE REAL ID
THE MOTOR VOTER PROGRAM ALL THE
INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED THROUGH
THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT IN SOME
FORM OR FASHION.
BUT IT TOOK A LONG TIME
INNOVATIVE AND I'LL DEFER TO MY
MY YOU KNOW MY MY MY COLLEAGUE
HERE BUT YET.
ARE YOU YOU CAN'T SAY THAT A
NEWS OUTLET MUST SUE THE STATE
GOVERNMENT.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY AND REMEDY
TO GET INFORMATION THAT WE ALL
DESERVE TO KNOW.
SO I WANT TO JUST POINT OUT HERE
THAT THE STATEMENT THAT YOU'D
MADE EARLIER I DON'T BELIEVE IS
ACCURATE IT SAYS HERE -- YOU
INDICATED THERE WAS THE ABILITY
TO TO PROCEED IN THE SUPERIOR
COURT AT TO SEE IF THE ARM PUTS
PERSON AND A PERSON DETERMINES
THE STATE AGENCY.
IMPROPERLY DENIED DISCLOSURE THE
PUBLIC RECORD A RECORDS.
THE OMBUDSMAN SHALL REQUIRE THE
STATE AGENCY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
RECORDS OR RECORDS TO THE MEMBER
THE PUBLIC WHO SUBMITTED THE
REQUEST FOR REVIEW.
THAT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR EXCUSE
ME THAT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR AN
APPEAL NOW.
YOU ARE ALSO PUTTING IN THE
HANDS OF ONE PERSON.
THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THIS
DECISION.
I THINK WE ALL AGREE THERE HAS
TO BE GREATER TRANSPARENCY SO
THAT IS CLEARLY -- I THINK A
BIPARTISAN ISSUE IT IS THE WAY
WE GO ABOUT IT DO WE REALLY WANT
TO GIVE THE POWER TO MAKE THESE
DECISIONS TWO ONE HUMAN BEING.
PERIOD AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL
DOES SO -- I COULD GO THROUGH
THE LITANY OF OTHER PROBLEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH IT THE C. P. R.
A. TODAY ALLOWS FOR ATTORNEYS
FEES IF THAT PERSON WINS THE
CASE.
YOU USE IT AS ED THE EXAMPLE
THAT WAS GIVEN SOMEONE CAN SAY I
DON'T WANT MY INFORMATION BEING.
USED HOW ARE THEY GOING TO KNOW
WHAT'S EVEN BEING SOUGHT I MEAN
THERE ARE JUST TOO MANY ISSUES
HERE AND YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE
YEARS.
OF PRECEDENT AND PUT IT INTO
SOMETHING THAT IS TRULY NOT BAIT
AND I THINK IT IT CREATES A VERY.
DANGEROUS PRECEDENT TO PUT THIS
KIND OF POWER INSURANCE ONE
PERSON SITTING IN AN OFFICE.
WHERE THERE MAY VERY WELL BE A
CONFLICT OF INTEREST SO -- I AM
HAPPY TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH
YOU ON THIS BILL I DON'T SEE
WHERE -- WE NEED TO BE -- GOING
FOR WITH ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS
STILL UNANSWERED YOU INDICATED
YOU'D BE HAPPY TO CONTINUE
WORKING ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES
THIS IS A HUGE.
AND IT REQUIRES REAL
DELIBERATION SO THAT ALL PARTIES
TO THIS IS BALANCED AND ALL
PARTIES HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. TO
BE HEARD AND MADE THEIR CASE IN
A NONPARTISAN.
UNBIASED FASHION THAT'S WHERE
WE'VE USED THE COURTS UP UNTIL
NOW BUT TO CREATE THIS.
ON BOARDS PERSON WITH ALL THIS
POWER I THINK REALLY REQUIRES
THAT WE BE MORE CONTEMPLATE OF
THIS IS NOT THIS THIS BILL IS
NOT THE ANSWER CERTAINLY NOT AS
IT EXISTS TODAY IN MY OPINION
YES SENATOR MONNING.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
SO I APPLAUD YOUR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD.
I THINK WE ALL SHARE.
THE OBJECTIVE WHICH IS TO TRY TO
LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD AND
CREATE.
MORE EQUAL ACCESS TO PUBLIC
RECORDS INFORMATION.
BUT I SHARE.
MANY OF THE CONCERNS VOICED BY
THE CHAIR THE LIST OF QUESTIONS.
I THINK.
I'VE HEARD YOU ADDRESS SOME OF
THEM BUT MAYBE NOT ALL OF THEM
TODAY -- IS THE PERSON WHAT'S
THE PERSON'S TRAINING WHAT'S THE
PRESIDENT NATURE.
OF A RULING OR DECISION THEY
MIGHT MAKE.
SOME [inaudible]
IN THE I'M NOT PREPARED TO BE
SUPPORTIVE TODAY I AM PREPARED
TO SUPPORT THE CHAIR IN THE
COMMITTEE AND WORKING WITH YOU
AND YOUR CO AUTHOR -- TO TRY TO
ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS
IN CREATE A SYSTEM THAT IS.
PROTECTS THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.
OF OF ALL.
IN THAT DUE PROCESS YOU KNOW
WHEN YOU CAST IT AS AN
INDIVIDUAL WHO SEEKS ACCESS TO
PUBLIC RECORDS.
VERSUS.
A MONOLITHIC BUREAUCRACY WELL
SOME OF THE RECORDS WITHIN THAT
MONOLITHIC BUREAUCRACY MIGHT.
PRESENT PRIVACY CONCERNS FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL STATE EMPLOYEE OF
FRONTLINE.
EMPLOYEE AND SO THE BALANCING
ACT THAT THE COURT COURTS
CURRENTLY EXERCISE PROTECTING
THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.
THIS HAS TO BE IRON CLAD TO MAKE
SURE THAT THOSE DUE PROCESS
RIGHTS ARE INDEED PROTECTED SO.
I'M NOT PREPARED TO BE
SUPPORTIVE TODAY I AM PREPARED.
TO WORK WITH THE CHAIR IN THE
COMMITTEE IN THE AUTHORS. TO SEE
IF THERE'S A PATHWAY TO ACHIEVE
THIS OBJECTIVE THANK YOU THANK
YOU MISTER CENTER MONNING ANY
OTHER COMMENTS I'LL JUST SAY
THAT THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR FOR
THE ENOUGH. FOR THE DIALOGUE IN
THE QUESTIONS AND CERTAINLY -- I
I WILL LOOK I WANT TO WORK --
FOR FOR THE WORK WITH YOUR
COLLEAGUES IN YOURSELF. TO TO
FIND SOMETHING THAT WORKS AND I
BELIEVE THAT -- WE CAN ADD THAT
THE QUESTIONS IN THE CONCERNS
OUTLINED CAN BE EASILY ADDRESSED
NINETEEN STATES IN THE UNION
HAVE DONE THIS.
FROM ARIZONA TO NEW YORK AND AS
I'LL JUST CLOSE BY SAYING AS
THIS CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT
WROTE IN CBS VERSES BLOCK.
IMPLICIT IN A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
IS A NOTION THAT GOVERNMENT
SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS
ACTIONS.
IN ORDER TO VERIFY
ACCOUNTABILITY INDIVIDUALS MUST
HAVE ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT FILES
SUCH ACCESS PERMITS CHECKS
AGAINST ARE ARBITRARY EXERCISE
OF OFFICIAL POWER IN SECRECY IN
THE POLITICAL PROCESS.
THIS BILL SHOULD NOT STOP RIGHT
HERE IT PROVIDES TRANSPARENCY IN
A GIVES PUBLIC GREATER ACCESS I
PLEASE I URGE AND AND AND I
ABOUT.
THANK YOU IN RESPONSE TO THE
FACT THAT OTHER STATES HAVE DONE
IT SOME STATES HAVE BINDING --
THORNY OTHERS ONLY ADVISORY.
IT'S NOT CLEAR IF THE STATES
HAVE PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS THAT
ARE ANALOGOUS TO OUR C. P. R. A..
ESPECIALLY WITH REGARDTO THE
PERMISSIVE -- EXEMPTIONS -- BUT
I CERTAINLY -- EXCEPT YOUR
DESIRE TO KEEP WORKING ON THIS
SO I THINK THERE IS A A WAY TO
GET -- TO THAT IMPORTANT
BALANCING SO THAT THE
INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE WHILE
WE ALSO CAREFULLY CONSIDERED
PRIVACY RIGHTS I WANT TO COMMEND
YOU -- FOR BRINGING THIS ISSUE
FORWARD AND WHILE I WILL NOT
SUPPORT THIS NOW IN AND BELIEVE
THAT IT IS FAR TOO PREMATURE
WITH TOO MANY QUESTIONS AND THAT
IS MY RECOMMENDATION.
TO THE COMMITTEE -- I CERTAINLY
OF AM HAPPY TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH YOU BECAUSE I THINK TO THE
CAUSE HERE IS AN APPROPRIATE ONE
INTERNET AND ONE THAT WE I THINK
WE CAN ULTIMATELY GET TO BUT
THIS IS.
I THINK THIS IS NOT NOT IT SO
WITH THAT WE NEED A MOTION.
VERY GOOD WE HAVE A MOTION THE
MOTION IS.
A IS IT TO PASS FOR DO PASS AS
AMENDED.
ALRIGHT SO IT'S EMOTIONALLY
REPAIR MAINTENANCE.
I'M SORRY THAT WE WE WE ACCEPTED
THE CONTAMINANTS BUT THEY WERE
WITHDRAWN SO I I DON'T THE
MOTION IS TO PASS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
WHEN A CLARIFICATION
[inaudible]
SURE [inaudible]
YES.
WANT TO BE CLEAR.
YOU MENTIONED -- AND AMENDMENTS
WERE WITHDRAWN TO THE THE TICKET
WE WERE WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE THE COMMITTEE HAD MADE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE ACCEPTED AND
AND AS THE CHAIR -- I THINK WAY
SOME CONCERNS -- THOSE THOSE
AMENDMENTS WERE WERE WITHDRAWN --
YOU KNOW WHAT OF WHICH FOR THEM
TO BE INCLUDED I'M HAPPY TO AND
TO TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS LINE WE IT IT DOESN'T
IMPACT -- THERE ARE SO MANY
CONCERNS THAT WE'VE EXPRESSED IF
YOU WANT TO HAVE YOU WANT TO
ACCEPT THOSE AMENDMENTS -- AS
AUTHORS AMENDMENTS.
WE WE CAN CONTINUE TO VOTE ON
THIS AS A I'M SORRY.
ALL RIGHT SO THOSE AMENDMENTS IF
THIS BILL WERE TO PASS WOULD BE
TAKEN IN -- GEO IT COULD BE
TAKEN HERE SO THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
I'M SORRY.
IF THE MOTION IS TO PASS EXCUSE
ME DO PASSED -- TO TO GEO WHERE
THE AMENDMENTS WOULD BE TAKEN IF
THE BILL IS TO PASS.
FILE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AB TWO
EIGHT NINE JACKSON THOUGH
JACKSON NO BORDERS.
OR JUST I DO RUSSELL.
GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ NO JONES JONES I
MONNING.
MONEY NO STERN.
I'M BURKE WHITE HOUSE SKI. TO
THE THREE VOTES AND WE WILL
LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN THANK YOU
VERY MUCH IF IF IF I'M THAT MAY
REQUEST BECAUSE USUALLY YOU HAVE.
TO VOTE SERVO COUNTY IS TO OUR
EYES THREE KNOWS WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE AND EVERITT REQUEST
RECONSIDERATION OF COURSE THANK
YOU.
ALREADY FILE ITEM EIGHT ASSEMBLY
MEMBER DALY.
AB.
THREE FIFTY FIVE AND WITNESSES
TWO MINUTES TEACHER FEW WOULD WE
WOULD LIKE TO GET OUT OF HERE
SOMETIME TONIGHT TARGET.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS -- CURRENTLY THE VAST
MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA'S PUBLIC
TRANSIT AGENCIES ARE UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF THE PUBLIC
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD.
ALSO KNOWN AS HERB. FOR PUBLIC
AGENCIES NOT COVERED BY PER
LABOR DISPUTES ARE OFTEN
CONTESTED IN THE COURT ROOM
WHICH CAN BE COSTLY AND TIME
CONSUMING.
BY CONTRAST PURPOSE EXPERTISE IN
LABOR RELATIONS LAW OFFERS
EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES.
AN EXPEDITIOUS AND COST
EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE TO
ADJUDICATING WORKPLACE DISPUTES
THIS BILL SIMPLY ADDS THE ORANGE
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY.
TO THE LIST OF PUBLIC TRANSIT
AGENCIES ALREADY COVERED UNDER
PER.
WITH ME TODAY IS MATT BRODE
REPRESENTING THE TEAMSTERS UNION
WHO ARE SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL.
WELL.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS NO KNOWN
OPPOSITION SO IF YOU COULD KEEP
IT SHORT.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MAP ROUTE TO
THE TEAMSTERS I'M HERE TO ANSWER
ANY QUESTION THREE I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR I BET THANK
YOU.
THAT'S WHY WE LIKE IT ALL RIGHT
THOSE IN SUPPORT NAME AND
AFFILIATION PLEASE ADAM TEAR
MEMBERS SERRA FLOCKS CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
ATTENTION MEMBERS PAT RAN WITH
THEIR AND READING ASSOCIATES
REPRESENTING THE ORANGE COUNTY
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
THANK THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
SAYING NON WILL BRING IT BACK TO
THE DíAS FOR THEIR ANY
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
SEEING NONE.
A CENTER GONZALEZ MOVES.
AND THE THE MOTION IS TO PASS
THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
A PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT AB THREE
FIVE FIVE JACKSON HI JACKSON AYE
BORDERS [inaudible]
RUSSELL.
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I JONES.
JONES NO MONNING.
MONEY AYE STERN.
STERN I BURKE.
WHITE HOUSE SKI.
ALL RIGHT THE BILL HAS THE FOUR
VOTES AND WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLE
OF THANK YOU SO MUCH AT THE WOOD.
THANK YOU MAY GET YOUR CHANCE
RIGHT WHEN WE OPEN THE WALLS
AGAIN THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ALL RIGHT WE NOW ARE GOING TO
MOVE TO FILE ITEM THIRTEEN
ASSEMBLY MEMBER MAN TRYING TO
THIS IS.
AB.
EIGHT FIFTY NINE GOOD AFTERNOON
AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS -- I
WILL.
GO QUICKLY -- I THANK YOU.
IN LIGHT OF THE MOTION -- I'LL
JUST VERY BRIEFLY SUM UP OUT
WHEN A CHILD IS.
FOUND TO BE WITHIN THE
DEPENDENCY JURISDICTION THE
JUVENILE COURT THE STATE
UNDERTAKES A RESPONSIBILITY TO
MAKE ALL SIGNIFICANT PARENTAL
DECISIONS FOR CHILD.
AB EIGHT FIFTY NINE WILL REQUIRE
THE GIST JUDICIAL COUNCIL TO
CONDUCT A STUDY IN APPROPRIATE
CASES STANDARDS FOR JUDGES.
WHO JUDICATA JUVENILE DEPENDENCY
PROCEEDINGS THE BILL ALSO
REQUIRES THE DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES TO CONVENE A
STAKEHOLDER GROUP TO IDENTIFY
WAYS TO REDUCE WORKLOAD?
AND EXPEDITE CASE RESOLUTION
HERE WITH ME TO TESTIFY SAID
HOWARD ON BEHALF OF THE
CHILDREN'S ABBAS ADVOCACY
INSTITUTE GOOD AFTERNOON TWO
MINUTES PLEASE -- CARE JACKSON --
MEMBERS -- JUST VERY BRIEFLY
PURSUANT TO LAWS PASSED BY AND
GENERAL FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY
THIS LEGISLATURE.
PENDENCY COUNCIL RAISE OUR
CHILDREN ON OUR BEHALF SIXTY
THOUSAND OF THEM -- THEY HAVE A
COMPLETELY UNIQUE ROLE IN OUR
ENTIRE.
THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AS WELL AS
THE SYSTEM OF CHILD WELFARE --
WE CAN'T KNOW HOW WELL WE'RE
DOING. FOR THESE CHILDREN AND
LESS WE KNOW THIS KIND OF PRETTY
SPECIFIC INFORMATION AGAINST
WHICH TO BENCHMARK THEIR THEIR
DAILY WORK.
AND FOR THAT REASON ON THEIR
BEHALF RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AYE.
YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT OF FOOD PLEASE STEP
FORWARD.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MADISON
VALLEY ON BEHALF OF THE ALAMEDA
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANYONE ELSE OPPOSITION
I KNOW THERE WAS SOME LATE
OPPOSITION SUBMITTED BY THE
JUDICIAL COUNCILS ANYONE HERE ON
THAT.
PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THOUGH THAT
THIS CAME LATE FRIDAY NIGHT WELL
PAST THE DEADLINE -- AND REALLY
WOULD HAVE APPRECIATED THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE EXAMINED IT
MORE CAREFULLY -- BUT PLEASE GO
AHEAD -- TWO MINUTES AT THE MOST
PLEASE ANDY LEVON BOMB ON BEHALF
OF JUDICIAL COUNCIL --
ESSENTIALLY APPROPRIATE
CASELOADS STANDARDS. FOR JUDGES
SITTING INDEPENDENCE THE
PROCEEDINGS IS NOT INFORMATION
THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL HAS OF WAR
CAN GATHER -- WHAT WE CAN AND DO
PROVIDE THE LEGISLATURE EVERY
OTHER YEAR?
IS AN UPDATED JUDICIAL NEEDS
ASSESSMENT.
THIS ASSESSMENT QUANTIFIES THE
TOTAL NUMBER OF JUDICIAL
OFFICERS NEEDED IN EACH OF
CALIFORNIA'S FIFTY EIGHT COURTS.
BASED ON WORKLOAD MEASURE AND
THAT'S A THREE YEAR ROLLING
AVERAGE OF FILINGS AND CASE
WEIGHTS THAT ARE BASED ON A TIME
STUDY.
THAT TIME STUDY TELLS US THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF MINUTES A
JUDICIAL OFFICER PERFORMS TASKS
SO ON A GIVEN CASE TYPE.
SO WE CAN AND DO TELL THE
LEGISLATURE EVERY OTHER YEAR HOW
MANY JUDGES THE COURTS NEED
BASED ON HOW MUCH TIME JUDGES
SPEND ON THEIR CASES.
AND HOW MANY FILINGS THERE ARE.
WHAT WE DO NOT HAVE A WE CANNOT
SAY IS WHAT AN APPROPRIATE OR
PREFERRED STANDARD MIGHT BE?
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT
DEPENDENCY CASES AND THE FAMILY
IS IMPACTED BY THE INCREDIBLY
SERIOUS DECISIONS MADE IN
DEPENDENCY COURT.
DESERVE SUFFICIENT JUDICIAL
OFFICERS TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE
HAVE THEIR DAY IN COURT.
AND THE VERY SAME CAN BE SAID OF
PROBATE CASES AND THE
CONSERVATIVES IN CONSERVATORS
WHO ARE IN CRITICAL NEED OF
THEIR DAY IN COURT.
AND LIKEWISE FAMILIES UNDER
EVICTION NOTICE NEED TO HAVE
CONFIDENCE THAT THE COURT HAS
SUFFICIENT JUDGES SITTING IN
UNLAWFUL DETAINER ACTIONS TO
ENSURE JUSTICE.
PARENTS EMBROILED IN CHILD
CUSTODY DISPUTES EMPLOYEES
TRYING TO ENFORCE THEIR LABOR
RIGHTS.
AND MANY OTHERS ARE ALSO AS
DESERVING.
WE KNOW THAT THE LEGISLATURE
AGREES THAT ACCESS TO JUSTICE IS
CRITICAL WHICH IS THE REASON
THAT YOU FUNDED TWENTY FIVE NEW
TRIAL COURT JUDGESHIPS IN THIS
YEAR'S BUDGET.
THOSE TWENTY FIVE JUDGESHIPS AS
YOU KNOW ARE PART OF A REQUEST
FROM TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN FOR
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY JUDGESHIPS.
AND THANKS TO YOUR EFFORTS NOW
SEVENTY SEVEN OF THOSE ONE
HUNDRED AND FIFTY REQUESTED
JUDGESHIPS ARE FUNDED.
BUT THESE JUDICIAL POSITIONS DO
NOT INCLUDE THE NUMEROUS
CALENDAR PREFERENCES CURRENTLY
PENDING BEFORE THIS BODY OR
ACHING LINED INTO LAW THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION -- ALL RIGHT WILL
BRING IT BACK TO THE DíAS AS I
UNDERSTAND AND I'VE BEEN VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF THE JUDICIAL
COUNCIL FACT I SIT ON THE
JUDICIAL COUNCIL -- BUT HOW CAN
THIS STUDY ON ON ON CASELOAD TO
IT I MEAN YOU'RE INDICATING
THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN KEEP
TRACK OF THIS INFORMATION.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT.
WHAT IF I WASN'T CLEAR I
APOLOGIZE WHAT I MEANT TO SAY IS
THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE IN
THE WE PUT FORWARD IS BASED ON
INFORMATION OF EXISTING TIME
THAT JUDICIAL OFFICERS ARE
SPENDING ON IT DEPENDENCY CASES?
BUT A PREFERRED OR APPROPRIATE
NUMBER WE WE DON'T KNOW THAT WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT A BETTER NUMBER
WOULD BE FROM WHAT WE HAVE.
BUT WE DO PROVIDE A REPORT TO
THE LEGISLATURE EVERY OTHER YEAR
ON WITH THE JUDICIAL NEEDS ARE
SO LET ME ASK THE AUTHOR TO
RESPOND YEAH I I RESPOND TO A
FEW THINGS.
OUT ONE AT CHAIR WE ALSO TO WERE
DISAPPOINTED THIS MAN I CONSENT
IN EVERY COMMITTEE AND THEN TAKE
IT THIS WAY OPPOSITION FOR
ISSUES THAT. TO THE EXTENT THEY
EVEN EXISTED HAVE EXISTED ALL
ALONG THROUGH THE PROCESS
THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE THAT
TALKS ABOUT THAT THIS IS A STUDY
BILL IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT.
ASKING THEM TO DECIDE THE
APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF CASES OR
WHO SHOULD BE HEARING THEM I
THINK WHAT WE ALSO NEED TO
REMEMBER TO IS.
YOU KNOW WE AS A BODY THERE'S
OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AS A
BODY THAT THAT DOESN'T HAVE
ANYTHING TO DO WITH JUDICIAL
CASO THAT MAY COME OUT OF THIS.
THAT IS HELPFUL TO US IN
DECIDING FOR THIS VERY
VULNERABLE POPULATION THAT HAS
ISSUES AT THIS HAS NOTHING I
THINK WAS RAISED UNLAWFUL
DETAINER IS OR SOME OTHER AT AND
IN HERE ALL OF THEM.
THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS BILL
IS ABOUT.
THIS BILL IS ABOUT A VERY
VULNERABLE CLASS OF INDIVIDUALS
THAT ALL OF US IN.
THIS LEGISLATURE HAVE A VERY
SIGNIFICANT STAKE IN MAKING SURE
ARE HANDLED APPROPRIATELY AND
THIS IS A STUDY BILL THAT WILL
GO TO HELP IN ANY OF US PROVIDE
COME UP WITH CERTAINLY THIS
COMMITTEE TO HELP PROVIDE SOME
SOLUTIONS DOWN THE ROAD.
THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS
MOTION.
MOTION -- IT WILL TAKE THAT AS
YOUR CLOTHES THANK YOU.
OF THE MOTION IS A DO PASSED THE
SENATE HUMAN SERVICES AND
PERHAPS.
THAT YOUR CONCERNS CAN BE
FLUSHED OUT THEN OF FROM THE
JUDICIAL COUNCIL -- INDICT DO
APPRECIATE THIS BILL OF THE OUR
KIDS ARE ARE ARE MOST AT RISK
AND WE'VE GOT TO DO BETTER FOR
THEM SO.
I THINK THIS MIGHT BE HELPFUL
WAY AND I APPRECIATE AT THAT
POINT IN TIME YOU'LL THINK AYE
SIR TO SIT ON THAT COMMITTEE AS
WELL AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR
CONCERNS -- OF BETTER OUR TICKET
FOR BETTER EXPLAINED IN THE
CONTEXT WHAT THIS BILL TRIES TO
DO SO WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION.
DO PASSAGE. TO HUMAN SERVICES
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FILE ITEM
NUMBER THIRTEEN AB EIGHT FIVE
NINE JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BORDERS.
GORGEOUS I DO RUSSELL GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ I'D JONES JONES I
MONNING.
MONEY AYE STERN STERN I BURKE.
AMER IOWA CASKEY. SEVEN SEVEN
TWO ZERO WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OF
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT UP IS A
FILE ITEM FOURTEEN ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHAN.
WHO'S BEEN VERY PATIENT WAITING
HERE.
MANAGER THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
YOUR PATIENCE.
AB EIGHT SIXTY ONE ARE THERE ANY
WITNESSES HERE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT IT SO.
THE RULES HERE TO WITNESSES TWO
MINUTES EACH MAX THANK YOU FOR
SHORES ARGUMENT I'M SURE WANT TO
START BY THANKING YOUR AMAZING
STAFF THEY'VE ABSOLUTELY
FABULOUS.
WORTH EVEN FURTHER HELP
DISCUSSION ON THE BILL AB EIGHT
SIX ONE WILL HELP EXPEDITE THE
PROCESS FOR HOMELESS YOUTH.
FORMER WARDER DEPENDENCE AND
THOSE WERE PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AND
SERVED IN THE SYSTEM ARE TRYING
TO COME OUT OF THE SYSTEM AND
HAVE THE ATTENTION OF THE
DEPENDENCY COURT. FOR
HOMELESSNESS IS NOT A REASON TO
ENTER FOSTER CARE WE KNOW THAT
THERE CAN BE USED LIVING ON THE
STREETS.
BECAUSE IT IS SAFER THAN THE
HOME THEY CAME FROM.
THEIR LIVING ON THE STREETS IN
THEIR CARS AND BOUNCING FROM
SHELTER TO SHELTER WHEN THESE
MINERS REPORTS OF ABUSE OR
NEGLECT.
GO ON INVESTIGATED THEIR ONLY
OTHER OPTION IS SUBMITTED AN
AFFIDAVIT AS DELINEATED IN A
WILL FOR AN INSTITUTION CODE
SECTION.
THREE TWO NINE THIS OFTEN
TRIGGERS A FINAL TIME TO GET
SOCIAL WORKERS INVESTIGATE THEIR
CLAIM.
THIS PROCESS THAT I AM AMENDING
IS ALREADY A LAST RESORT
SCENARIO.
BUT WE AS A STATE SHOULD BE
DOING WHATEVER WE CAN PROVIDE
OUR CHILDREN WITH SAFETY SHELTER
AND A SPEEDY PROCESS.
AB EIGHT SIX ONE PRIORITIZE IS
USED FOR HOMELESS USE.
OF HIS REDUCE OR NEGLECT AND
HAVE FORMALLY BEEN INDEPENDENT
OF THE COURT REDUCING THE AMOUNT
OF TIME THE SOCIAL WORK IT HAS
TO FOLLOW.
AND COMMENCED APPENDICES
PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT FROM THREE
WEEKS TO TEN BUSINESS DAYS.
IN CASE WHEN THE SOCIAL WORKERS
TRIED TO DO NOTHING AFTER THOSE
TEN BUSINESS DAYS THE MINOR IN
THEIR COUNSEL ME SUBMIT A
PETITION TO THE COURT. FOR
REVIEW.
IF THAT STEP IS TAKEN THAN THIS
BILL GIVES THE CORD TO FOURTEEN
DAYS TO EITHER AFFIRM OR VERSE
THE SOCIAL WORKER'S DECISION.
THIS PROCESS IS ONLY USED AS A
LAST RESORT FOR YOUTH.
WHICH CALLS TO THE HOT ONE HAVE
NOT BEEN ACTED ON THESE ARE KIDS
TO HAVE CONTINUOUS MAKE CLAIMS
ABUSE OR NEGLECT.
AND ARE NOW CONSIDERED HOMELESS.
PLEASE HOME TODAY TO MAKE THIS
PROCESS FASTER FOR CHILDREN. FOR
MORE HERE WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL
IS CAMILLUS THE CALIFORNIA
COALITION FOR YEARS.
AND PALMER VOCALS FROM BAY AREA
LEGAL AID.
GOOD AFTERNOON THANK YOU VERY
MUCH TWO MINUTES PLEASE.
MY NAME IS PAUL REVIEW CALLED
SOME A STAFF ATTORNEY A BAY AREA
LEGAL AID AND I AM SPEAKING IN
SUPPORT OF AB EIGHT SIXTY ONE
WHICH PROPOSES A MODERATE
REDUCTION IN THE TIMELINE IN
WHICH THE CHILD WELFARE AGENCY
MUST INVADED.
INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD
ABUSE OR NEGLECT REGARDING THE
SMALL NUMBER OF HOMELESS OR
PREVIOUSLY SYSTEM INVOLVED YOUTH
WHO PETITION FOR AN
INVESTIGATION THROUGH THE FORMAL
PROCESS.
WE HAVE ASSISTED NUMEROUS
HOMELESS YOUTH AND SUBMITTING
REQUESTS FOR CHILD WELFARE
INVESTIGATIONS ALL BASED ON
ALLEGATIONS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED
TO LOCAL CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES
WHERE THE AGENCY EITHER NEVER
RESPONDED OR ELECTED NOT TO
INTERVENE.
I PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING CASE
EXAMPLES TO ILLUSTRATE THIS
ISSUE AN IMPORTANT TO BE
SHORTENED INVESTIGATORY TIMELINE
FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE YOUTH.
CASE A ALLEGATIONS OF PHYSICAL
pFAILING TO PROVIDE FOOD AND
KICKING YOU THOUGHT OF THE
FAMILY HOME WERE REPORTED TO THE
LOCAL CHILD WELFARE AGENCY ON AT
LEAST TWO OCCASIONS.
THE MINOR SUBMITTED AN
INVESTIGATION REQUEST THE AGENCY
WHICH RESPONDED TEN DAYS LATER
THAT THE ALLEGATIONS WERE
UNFOUNED AND NO PETITION WOULD
BE FILED.
THE MINOR THAN REQUESTED A
HEARING SIX WEEKS LATER
FOLLOWING TWO DAYS OF TESTIMONY
ON THE SAME ALLEGATIONS THE
AGENCY AGREED TO FILE A
DEPENDENCY PETITION. THIRTY
THREE DAYS LATER THE MINOR WAS
DECLARED A BIT A DEPENDENT.
CASE BE ALLEGATIONS OF PHYSICAL
ABUSE NEGLECT ON THE BASIS OF
FAILURE TO PROVIDE BASIC SUPPORT
WERE REPORTED TO THE LOCAL CHILD
WELFARE AGENCY ON THREE
OCCASIONS OVER TWO MONTHS.
THE MINOR THAN SUBMITTED
INVESTIGATION REQUEST TO THE
AGENCY AND DID NOT RECEIVE A
RESPONSE.
AFTER THREE WEEKS MINOR COUNCIL
REQUESTED A HEARING AT WHICH THE
AND THE AGENCY WAS ORDERED TO
FILE DEPENDENCY PETITION WHICH
THE TWELVE DAYS LATER.
THAT'S THE AGENCY WAS AWARE OF
ABUSE NEGLECT WITH THE
ALLEGATIONS FOR TWO MONTHS.
PRIOR TO RECEIVING THE CHILD'S
INVESTIGATION REQUEST AFTER
SUBMISSION OF WHICH TEN WEEKS
PASSED BEFORE THE MINOR BECAME
INDEPENDENT.
IN THESE CASES HIGHLIGHT TO
IMPORTANT ISSUES FIRST IT CAN
TAKE UP TO TWENTY ONE DAYS FOR A
YOUNG PERSON TO BE ABLE TO FILE
UNDER WORK THREE THIRTY ONE EVEN
WHERE NO DECISION IS MADE OR
INVESTIGATION COMPLETED.
AND SECOND WHEN YOUTH MUST
ULTIMATELY CHALLENGE THE
DECISION IT CAN TAKE ADDITIONAL
WEEKS OR MONTHS.
AS OF RIGHT NOW YOU CAN ONLY
REMAIN IN SHELTERS FOR TWENTY
ONE DAYS AND THE CURRENT
STRUCTURE DOES NOT PROVIDE
SUFFICIENT TIME TO COMPLETE THE
PROCESS.
EVEN IF EXTENDED WITH THE
CURRENTLY PROPOSED LEGISLATION
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE STILL WORKING
AGAINST THE CLOCK TO COMPLETE
THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
THE YOUNG LONGER A YOUNG PERSON
REMAINS IN SHELTER WAITING
INVESTIGATION THE MORE
DESTABILIZE THEY BECOME DUE TO
INCREASING PHYSICAL AND MENTAL
HEALTH CONCERNS TRANSPORTATION
LIMITATIONS THAT INTERFERE
SCHOOL ACT THANK YOU EDUCATIONAL
A QUEUE FOR TESTIMONY.
NEXT WITNESS PLEASE TWO MINUTES
PLEASE I CAN LOW'S REPRESENTING
THE CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR YOU
THREE REPRESENT A LOT OF THE
RUNAWAY AND HOMELESS YOUTH
SHELTERS IN THE STATE.
AND WHEN MINERS COME INTO FOR
OUR UNDERAGE SHELTERS ARE FOR
SCHOOLS TO TRYING TO FAMILY
REUNIFICATION TO WORK WITH THE
FAMILY TO RETURN THAT TWN.
HOME TO THEIR PARENTS AND WHEN
IT IS UNSAFE TO DO SO FOR THOSE
YOUTH AND WE WORK WITH.
EITHER FIGURE OUT WHAT THEIR
NEXT THERE'S AND SOMETIMES
DURING THAT OUR STAFF ARE
MANDATED REPORTERS AND WE MAKE
CALLS TO THE MINUTE A HOTLINE.
AND MAKE CLAIMS OF ABUSE AND WE
FILE THE REPORTS FREEBIES
NEGLECT AND SOMETIMES THEY GET
ON AN UNANSWERED WE'VE HAD AS
STORY AROUND THE YOUTH WE HAD
FIFTEEN TIMES WE CALLED.
THE HOTLINE FOR THEM THEY WERE
BEING MOLESTED BY THEIR MOMS
PARTNER -- BUT NEVER CAME OUT
THE YOUTH ENDED UP HAVING A
FIFTY ONE FIFTY AND THEN A BEING
TAKEN TO HOSPITAL.
IN THAT CASE IN THE SOCIAL
WORKER -- AT THE HOSPITAL WAS
ABLE TO BRING ON INVESTIGATION
THE SOCIAL WORKER DETERMINE THAT
THAT -- THAT IT WAS SAFE FOR HER
TO RETURN TO THE HOME AND THE
FAMILY ALLEGE THAT SHE HAD LET
ON THE MOMS PARTNER IN THAT CASE
THE YOUTH HOUSE THEN.
RETURNED BACK TO THE SHELTER AND
IS TRYING TO GO THROUGH THE
PROCESS OF A THREE TWENTY NINE
THESE ARE VERY VERY ONEROUS
CASES A VERY LAST RESORT.
WE REALLY WANT TO WORK THROUGH
THE HOT LINE PROCESS IS OUR
STAFF ARE MANDATED REPORTERS AND
THE OTHER QUESTION BECOMES IS
WHAT WE DO WHEN WE HAVE NOTHING
THAT'S HAPPENING TO THE MINUTE
REPORT.
SO -- THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
VERY MUCH OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT IF YOU'D STEP UP NAME
AND AFFILIATION PLEASE AT HOWARD
SENIOR COUNSEL AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF SAN DIEGO SCHOOL OF LOS
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY OF STUDENTS.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON. TWO MINUTES IF
YOU WOULD LADIES WOULD BE
SANTA'S ON BEHALF OF SEIU
CALIFORNIA -- WE REPRESENT
SOCIAL WORKERS IN ALL FIFTY
EIGHT COUNTIES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA -- IN LOS ANGELES
COUNTY FOR EXAMPLE WE FIELD
ELEVEN THOUSAND CALLS TO THE HOT
LINE EVERY SINGLE MONTH.
THE CONCERNS WE HAVE ABOUT THIS
MEASURE ARE.
SEVERAL FOLD THE FIRST OF WHICH
IS WE BELIEVE THAT THE SCOPE OF
THE PROBLEM HASN'T BEEN
ARTICULATED TO THE COMMITTEE
WHAT WE'VE HEARD THREE EXAMPLES
OF ANECDOTES.
ARM WE DO NOT HAVE A SHARED
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE AUTHOR
AND SUPPORTERS THAT THE PROBLEM
OF SOCIAL WORKERS NOT BEING
RESPONSIVE ACTUALLY EXISTS TO
THE CONTRARY MY SOCIAL WORKERS
TELL ME NOT ONLY ARE THEY
CONTINUALLY RESPONSIVE.
DEDICATED TO THEIR WORK BUT THEY
ALSO NEED THE ENTIRE TWENTY ONE
DAYS IN ORDER TO DO THE
INVESTIGATION AS REQUIRED UNDER
LAW.
THEY CANNOT GO TO COURT WITH A
PETITION RESPONSE UNLESS THEY
HAVE.
EVIDENCE EMANATING FROM THEIR
INVESTIGATION IN ORDER TO BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR RESPONSE.
ON SECONDLY THE CONCERN IS THAT
THE PROBLEM AS ARTICULATED WHICH
IS THE JUXTAPOSITION BETWEEN THE
TWENTY ONE DAY TIMELINE -- AFTER
WHICH YOU HAVE TO LEAVE HOMELESS
SHELTERS AND THE TWENTY ONE DAY
TIMELINE FOR MY SOCIAL WORKERS
TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND ON BUT THE
TO ONE ANOTHER THIS BILL DOESN'T
ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING
PROBLEM BECAUSE SOCIAL WORKERS --
WHEN THEY RESPOND WITHIN THE
TWENTY ONE DAY TIME FRAME EVEN
IF YOU WERE TO SET THERE WOULD
BE AN ADDITIONAL TIME FOR THE
COURT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE
ISSUE?
AND BECAUSE OF THAT.
UP ENDING THE TIME FRAME BY
WHICH SOCIAL WORKERS HAVE TO
RESPOND DOESN'T ACTUALLY GET AT
THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM FINALLY
AND THE DEEPEST CONCERN OF ALL
IS THIS SEEKS TO PRIORITIZE ONE
CLASS OF YOUTH INDIVIDUAL.
ABOVE ALL OTHERS REPLACING THE
JUDGMENT EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING
OF SOCIAL WORKERS WITH THIS
ARBITRARY TIME PRIME TIME FRAME.
BASED ON ALL WE KNOW THUS FAR
ANECDOTAL DATA SO FOR THOSE
REASONS WE ARE CONCERNED AND WE
WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE
CONVERSATIONS THANK YOU VERY
MUCH ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR JEAN
HEARST HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE COUNTY WELFARE DIRECTORS
ASSOCIATION NOT OPPOSED TO AB
SIXTY ONE BUT I AM SHARING
CONCERNS WITH THE BILL -- WE
HAVE REQUESTED AMENDMENTS THAT
ARE ALONG THE SAME LINES AS
MISSY INCHES NOTED EARLIER AND
CONTINUE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT
THE SHORTENING OF THE TIME
FRAMES OF THE BILL ALONG WITH
THE DEFINITION OF THE TARGET
GROUP. TO WHOM THE SHORTENED
TIME FRAMES APPLY A WE ALSO
SHARE THE WORKLOAD CONCERNS AS
YET HE WAS RAISED.
US SOCIAL WORKERS HAVE TO HAVE
SUFFICIENT TIME TO BE ABLE TO
ACTUALLY INVESTIGATE AND FIGURE
OUT WHETHER THEY CAN BUY LIKE
HE'S IN COURT.
AND SUPPORT THAT FAILING TO A
JUDGE THAT'S WHY WE'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT SHORTENING TIME LINES FOR
GROUP THAT WE FEEL IS OVERLY
BROAD IN THE BILL IS CURRENTLY
IN PRINT.
WORKING WITH THE SPONSORS AND ON
LANGUAGE TO NARROW THAT GROUP
BUT WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE -- YET
ON LANGUAGE AS TO HOW TO DO THAT --
WE'VE ENSURING LANGUAGE BACK AND
FORTH -- DILIGENTLY A AND HAVE
NOT YET COME TO AGREEMENT WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE AUTHOR
THE SPONSOR ORGANIZATIONS AND
SCA IT HOPEFULLY COME TO
AGREEMENT SOON.
WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT COUNTIES
ROUTINELY IGNORE THESE FILINGS
BUT OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT
VULNERABLE USED TO WAIT LONGER
THAN NECESSARY IF I WERE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THEIR PETITION SO WE'RE
COMMITTED TO FIGURING SOMETHING
OUT THAT WILL WORK OUT FOR
EVERYBODY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OF OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
NAME AND AFFILIATION PLEASE TAKE
A BREAK OR THE NATIONAL SAYS HIS.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL
WORK -- WE ARE NEUTRAL IN THE
BILL FOR THE REASONS STATED AND
APPRECIATE CONTENT TO WORK THE
AUTHOR TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE
THIS BILL WORK THANK YOU ANY
OTHER.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION OR
STRONG NEUTRALITY.
SEEING NONE LET'S BRING IT BACK
TO THE DYESS I AM.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR RAISING
THIS ISSUE THERE ARE CONCERNS
SOCIAL WORKERS OUR HEROES SHE
ROSE THEY DO AMAZING WORK UNDER
REALLY DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.
I WOULD JUST SIMPLY ASK YOU
CONTINUE TO WORK SOME OF THESE
CONCERNS HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED I
THINK ARE.
LEGITIMATE I THINK YOU KNOW THAT
TWO TIMING AND EVERYTHING BUT WE
KINDA DO BETTER. TO GET THESE
KIDS.
OF THROUGH THE PROCESS AND
PROTECT THEIR INTERESTS AND THEY
THEY ARE VERY VULNERABLE AND
THEY RELY UPON THE COURTS IN US.
TO TO HELP THEM THROUGH IT SO --
I THINK IT'S KIND OF A BIT OF A
BALANCING ACT AND I I DO
APPRECIATE THE OF SEIU IN THE
SOCIAL WORKERS AND AND ALL THOSE
WHO WHO ARE EXPRESSING CONCERNS
YOU KNOW WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THIS
WORKABLE THERE'S A WORKABILITY
ISSUE BUT I DO.
SENSE THAT EVERYBODY'S KIND OF
SEEKING THE SAME GOAL AND
GETTING CLOSER SO I WOULD -- I
COMMEND YOU IN WHICH IS SIMPLY
URGE AND I KNOW YOU ARE -- THAT
I JUST LIKE TO EXTRACT THAT
COMMITMENT FROM YOU YOU KEEP
WORKING ON THE BILL WITH THEM.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR ABSOLUTELY
IN FACT THE PAST -- IF YOU WILL
WEEKS WE'VE BEEN SEEING AND WITH
WHICH ON A DAILY BASIS WITH THE
OPPOSITION.
AND EVEN QUITE A FANTASTIC AND I
THINK WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO
FINDING A MIDDLE GROUND YOU HAVE
MY ASSURANCES THAT WILL CONTINUE
TO DO SO.
THE SHEET THAT OF SENATOR
MONNING.
THANK YOU AND IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING THIS BILL IS
SCHEDULED IF IT PASSES HERE TO
GO TO APPROPRIATIONS YES THERE
WOULD BE TIME FOR SOME CAN NEED
CONTINUED COORDINATION SO.
I AM GONNA BE SUPPORTIVE TODAY
AND WILL RESERVE THE RIGHT TO
SEE WHAT MIGHT COME TO US ON THE
FLOOR BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS.
I THANK YOU.
VERY GOOD ANY OTHER COMMENTS
MOTION.
WILL BY SENATOR MONNING WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE.
I'M ALWAYS WANTED THANK YOU SO
MUCH MADAM CHAIR YOURS FANTASTIC
STAFF FOR WORK WITH MYSELF AND
MY STAFF ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
OPPOSITION YOU HAVE MY SHORTS
AGAIN.
THE WILL WORK VERY CLOSELY TO
FIND AN APPROPRIATE TIME FRAME
AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND I HUMBLY
ASK FOR RIDE SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH ALRIGHT THE MOTION IS TO
PASS THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL FILE ITEM NUMBER FOURTEEN
AB EIGHT SIX ONE JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BORDERS [inaudible]
RUSSELL.
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I JONES JONES
I MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN STERN AYE ON
BURKE.
BY CASKEY.
ARE THE BILL HAS. FIVE VOTES
WILL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS.
FILE ITEM SIXTEEN ASSEMBLYMEMBER
LEVINE.
AB [inaudible]
ELEVEN THIRTY GOOD AFTERNOON.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS I'M GLAD TO SAY THAT AND
NOT GOOD EVENING HI FEAR THAT
YOU MAY BE HERE -- THAT LATE IT
IS A FEAR I THINK WE ALL SHARE --
YOU'RE FAMILIAR -- WITH DATA
BREACH -- ISSUES AND TO AB
ELEVEN THIRTY IS SPONSORED BY
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD
REQUIRE -- NOTIFICATION OF DATA
BREACHES -- FOR IT.
PERSONAL INFORMATION LIKE
PASSPORT NUMBERS AS WELL AS
BIOMETRIC DATA THESE ARE ALL --
THE TYPE OF NOTIFICATION ALREADY
EXISTS FOR SO MUCH -- SO MANY
OTHER NUMBERS AND SO MUCH OTHER
INFORMATION THAT WE GET FROM THE
GOVERNMENT -- WE EXPECT WHEN WE
GIVE OUR INFORMATION TO A
COMPANY THAT THEY DO REASONABLE
THINGS TO PROTECT IT.
AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE DOING THAT FOR OUR
PASSPORT NUMBERS AND FOR A
BIOMETRIC DATA AS WELL --
SEXUALLY AS FOR AN AYE VOTE I DO
HAVE TO EXPERT WITNESSES TO
PROVIDE TESTIMONY WITH ME.
TODAY -- WE'VE GOT ANTI LOU AND
STACY STRUCTURE WITH THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. NINE
AND TWO MINUTES IF YOU WOULD --
WE ARE BOTH PLANNING TO TESTIFY.
I KNOW YOU CAN'T AND I'M JUST
WONDERING YOU BOTH FROM THE AG'S
OFFICE IS.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO YOU HAVE TWO
MINUTES EACH [inaudible]
PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON I'M STACY SASSER
SUPERVISING DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL FOR THE PRIVACY UNIT AT
THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
THIS OPPORTUNITY.
TO DISCUSS AB ELEVEN THIRTY
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE TODAY.
IN RESPONSE TO LAST YEAR'S STAR
WOULD MARRY A BREACH IT BECAME
CLEAR THAT CALIFORNIA NEEDED TO
UPDATE ITS DATA BREACH
NOTIFICATION BILL AND REASONABLE
DATA SECURITY STATUTE.
IF THE BREACH DID NOT HAPPEN ON
A NATIONAL SCALE THE COMPANY
WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN OBLIGATED TO
ALERT CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS.
THAT THEIR PASSPORT AND TRAVEL
INFORMATION HAD BEEN ACCESSED.
BECAUSE OUR STATUTES HAVE NOT
KEPT PACE WITH OTHER STATES LAWS
MANDATING THIS REQUIREMENT.
FURTHER IDENTITY VERIFICATION IS
SHIFTING FROM THINGS YOU CARRY
ON YOU LIKE A CREDIT CARD OR A
DRIVER'S LICENSE OR THINGS YOU
KNOW LIKE A PASSPORT A PASSWORD.
TO WHAT YOU ARE AND PROTECTING
BIOMETRIC INFORMATION DATA THAT
IS CORE TO WHO WE PHYSICALLY ARE
MUST FALL WITHIN THE PROTECTION
OF THE STATUTES.
BOTH OF THESE DATA POINTS
GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID NUMBERS AND
YOUR BIOMETRIC INFORMATION ARE
EXACTLY THE KIND OF PERSONAL
INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE AN
HISTORICALLY HAVE BEEN COVERED.
BY REASONABLE SECURITY AND DATA
BREACH NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
AB ELEVEN THIRTY ALSO ENSURES
THAT THE THAT THE STATUTES
REMAIN CONSISTENT WHICH IS
CRITICAL FOR CONSUMERS AND
PLACES AN OBLIGATION ON
BUSINESSES TO PROACTIVELY
PROTECT THE STATE THESE DATA
POINTS WITH REASONABLE SECURITY.
AS WELL AS THE REQUIREMENT THAT
IF THE DATA IS BREACHED THE
BUSINESSES MUST NOTIFY THE
INDIVIDUAL SO THAT HE OR SHE CAN
TAKE STEPS. TO PROTECT
THEMSELVES FROM FRAUD IDENTITY
THEFT.
IT ALSO ENSURE THAT BUSINESSES
CAN COMPLY IF THE CREEK THE DATA
ENCRYPTION PROVIDES A SAFE
HARBOR WHICH FURTHER AT THAT
INCENTIVIZE IS THIS LEVEL OF
PROTECTION. FOR THIS REASON WE
WE SUPPORT AB ELEVEN THIRTY AND
HARMONIZING THESE CALIFORNIA
STATUTES WITH OTHER STATE
STATUTES WILL ENSURE THAT
CALIFORNIA REMAINS AT THE
FOREFRONT OF PROTECTING CONSUMER
PRIVACY THANK YOU. FOR MUCH TO
WISH TO TESTIFY YOU.
ALL RIGHT THAT'S FINE WITH ME
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT IF
YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP STATE YOUR
NAME AND AFFILIATION PLEASE.
MORE MAHONEY ON BEHALF OF
CONSUMER REPORTS IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
EMILY RUSCH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF CAL PARK IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
NANCY DRABBLE CONSUMER ATTORNEYS
OF CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT THANK
YOU.
SMITH THE KORAN ON BEHALF OF THE
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING HOUSE
AND COMMON SENSE KIDS ACTION IN
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON GOOD AFTERNOON
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS I SERRA BOOT
ON BEHALF OF CAL CHAMBER TO
BRIEFLY STATE -- AND OPPOSE
UNLESS AMENDED POSITION.
OFFERS I JUST WANT TO SAY WE-REALLY APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE A
REAL TO HAVE WITH THE AUTHOR AND
WITH A SPONSOR.
THEY WERE ABLE TO ADDRESS A LOT
OF OUR CONCERNS -- WE'RE
GRATEFUL FOR THE AMENDMENTS TO
ARTICULATE WITH PARTICULARITY
THE GOVERNMENT IDEAS ISSUE AND
TO APPROPRIATELY DEFINE THE
SCOPE OF BIOMETRIC DATA USED TO
AUTHENTICATE SOMEBODY -- TO BE
CLEAR WE DO NOT OPPOSE -- THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THIS BILL FOR%
NOTIFICATION OR FOR REASONABLE
SECURITY AND FRANKLY WE WOULD
NOT EVEN OPPOSE A NEW PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION WE JUST WANT TO
ARTICULATE FOR THE RECORD -- A
REMAINING CONCERNED THIS BILL IS
THE EXPANSION OF THE CALIFORNIA
CONSUMER PRIVACY ACT.
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION ON
BECAUSE IT'S INCREDIBLY ONEROUS
FOR BUSINESSES -- BECAUSE IT HAS.
NO REQUIREMENT FOR PROOF OF
INJURY AND CREATE SIGNIFICANT
MINIMUM STATUTORY DAMAGES THANK
YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
STEP FORWARD PLEASE.
BUT HAVING COME AFTER THE
NATIONAL PAYROLL REPORTING
CONSORTIUM IMPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON KIM DIMITRI
ATTACK THAT WE ALSO ECHO THE
SENTIMENTS OF CAL CHAMBER AND
ARE ALSO POISONOUS AMENDED.
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION RIGHT BRING IT BACK
TO THE DYESS DID YOU ONE I'M
SORRY.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S
BEEN HEARD.
ALL RIGHT NO OTHER OPPOSITION NO
NEUTRALITY ART WILL BRING IT
BACK TO THE DíAS OF THEIR ANY
QUESTIONS.
RIGHT I WANNA THANK YOU FOR
RAISING THIS ISSUE I WOULD LIKE
TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE -- AS YOU
MENTION -- WE WILL NOT BE THE
FIRST TIER.
OF BIOMETRICS AND ALL A WHOLE
NEW WORLD AND CERTAINLY DID YOU
ONE STATION.
YEAH ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU OF THE TERROR -- FOR
WE NEED TO WE NEED TO GET A
HANDLE ON THIS -- THIS ISSUE AS
WELL BECAUSE THAT IS AN
IDENTIFIER I DON'T THINK THERE'S
ANYTHING.
MORE OF A SPECIFIC AND AND
DRAMATIC THAN THAN ONE'S
PHYSICAL BIOMETRIC IDENTITY --
SO I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS --
IF YOU'D LIKE TO RESPONDED TO
THE OPPOSITION'S CONCERN --
PLEASE SO WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD
AND DO THAT.
YEAH WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH
MADAM CHAIR WE WILL BE AFTER
THIRTEEN STATES THAT ARE
PROTECTED PASS FOR INFORMATION
AND GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID -- WILL
BE AFTER TWELVE STATES THAT HAVE
DONE BIOMETRIC DATA -- WE HAVE
WORKED WITH ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS
WE HAVE TAKEN AMENDMENTS -- WE
WILL OF COURSE CONTINUE TO WORK
WITH THEM TO FIND COMMON GROUND --
BUT I THINK THAT WE'VE DONE --
SIGNIFICANT WORK -- TO TO TO
MEET -- THE WHAT WE MUST DO TO
PROTECT CALIFORNIANS.
THANK YOU OF THE CENTER STERN.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR -- JUST
GETTING MY HEAD AROUND THIS SO
CAN YOU HELP.
JUST WALK ME THROUGH WHAT'S
INCLUDING BIOMETRIC INFORMATION.
WHAT'S THE SORT OF SCOPE OF THAT
DATA SAID THEY'LL BIOMETRIC DATA
IS THE THAT THAT'S GENERATED
FROM THE MEASUREMENT OR ANALYSIS
OF HUMAN BODY CHARACTERISTICS
AND IT'S USED FOR THE PURPOSES
OF IDENTITY VERIFICATION -- SO
FINGERPRINT FACIAL RECOGNITION --
A SCAN OF YOUR IRIS -- THERE'S
OTHER WAYS IN WHICH YOU CAN USE
YOUR PHYSICAL BODY
CHARACTERISTICS THAT THAT OUR
OUR AND OUR SPECIFICALLY
TECHNICALLY ANALYZE -- IN ORDER
TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THAT
YOU ARE IN FACT HENRY STERN AND
NOT A DIFFERENT HAD RESTART.
IT AND SO AND YOUR SENATE CCPA
DOESN'T COVER THAT KIND OF
PERSONAL INFORMATION RIGHT NOW.
THE CPA COVERS BIOMETRIC DATA
THERE'S A SPECIFIC DEFINITION
THAT IS OFFERED TO FIND WITHIN
THE TAXES THE CPA -- BUT
BIOMETRIC DATA IS NOT COVERED IN
THE CONTEXT OF MANDATING
REASONABLE DATA SECURITY OR IN
THE CONTEXT OF BRIDGE
NOTIFICATION.
THE BIOMETRIC DATA IS A FORM OF
PERSONAL INFORMATION WITHIN THE
STATUTE.
WITH AN EASY PAY FOR THE TO THE
DEFINITION OF PERSONAL
INFORMATION.
INCLUDES BIOMETRIC DATA BUT THE
APPLICATION OF THE DATA BREACH
PROVISIONS WITHIN THE CCPA.
DON'T APPLY IN THIS SPECIFIC IN
IS BY A METRIC CONTEXT CORRECT
PERSONAL INFORMATION IN THE DATA
BREACH STATUTE AND THE
REASONABLE DATA SECURITY STATUTE
NEITHER INCLUDE BIOMETRIC
INFORMATION.
AND SO SO IN OTHER WORDS YOU
CAN'T YOU COULD OPT OUT OF
DISCLOSING YOUR YOUR YOUR
BIOMETRIC DATA AS SAY AS A SORT
OF USER THAT ON THE FRONT END
BUT THEN ON THE BACK AND AND A
BREACH INSTANCE NOW COMPANIES
WOULD BE LIABLE -- FOR HAVING
THAT KIND OF DATA SAID.
IF A COMPANY MAINTAINS BIOMETRIC
INFORMATION OR COLLECTS
INFORMATION AND THAT HAS BEEN
BREACHED UNDER SEVENTEEN NINETY
EIGHT POINT EIGHTY TWO INTO THE
BREACH OF ADVOCATION THEY HAVE
NO OBLIGATION TO REPORT THAT THE
BREACH HAS OCCURRED.
UNDER CCPA THAT'S THAT'S A
DIFFERENT SET OF RIGHTS THAT OUR
ARE IN ARE ARE MANDATED BY
STATUTE THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE
RIGHT TO DELETE.
OR THE RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF SALE.
THAT'S WHAT -- TCP CONTROLS
WHICH IS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT
FROM REQUIRING THE BUSINESSES
PROTECT AND SAFEGUARD THAT DATA
WITH REASONABLE DATA SECURITY OR
IN THE EVENT OF A BREACH NOTIFY.
THE INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS BEEN
AFFECTED SO FROM.
AROUND THE OPPOSITION STILL HERE
BUT SO WHAT WHAT'S THE CONCERN
THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE SOME
EXPANSION OF P. R. A. THROUGH
THE CHAIR PLEASE DO YOU MIND.
YEAH SORRY IF YOU LIKE TO
RESPOND.
THANK YOU MANAGER [inaudible]
JUST
JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE HERE
SO YOU YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT
MORE PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION IN
THESE BREACH INSTANCES WE THE
CONCERN WE HAVE IS THAT THE C.
CPI.
HE'S PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION IS
SO ONEROUS WERE HAS NO PROOF OF
INJURY AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT
BIOMETRIC DATA USED TO IDENTIFY
SOMEONE IN MOST CASES YOU'RE NOT
TALKING ABOUT LIKE THE ACTUAL
FINGERPRINT FOR EXAMPLE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A COMPANY
TAKEN A SCAN OF A FINGERPRINT
AND MAYBE THEY USE LIKE FIFTEEN
DATA POINTS ARE TWENTY DATA
POINTS THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE THE
SAME AS WHAT ANOTHER COMPANY
USES.
OR THE ANYONE IS GONNA KNOW WHAT
THOSE EVEN MEAN POTENTIALLY SO
IF THERE IS A BREACH IT'S FAR
LESS LIKELY THAT THAT KIND OF
DATA WOULD LEAD.
TO SOMEONE GETTING IDENTITY
STOLEN AND UNFORTUNATELY YOU
KNOW THAT IT'S SO IT'S A SAFER
ALTERNATIVE TO VERIFY SOMEONE'S
IDENTITY THAN SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBERS IT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT
TO ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES TO
PURSUE.
BUT UNDER THE C. C. P.'S PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION IN THE EVENT OF
A DATA BREACH THERE'S NO PROOF
OF INJURY REQUIRED.
SO EVEN IF YOU GO DOWN THE SAFER
ROUTE YOU GET THE BREACH NO
ONE'S BEEN INJURED YOU'RE STILL
GONNA GET SUED THE SAME IF YOU
HAD BEEN -- BREACH WITH A SOCIAL
SECURITY NUMBER TO IDENTIFY
SOMEONE SO THAT'S OUR CONCERN
WITH IT -- I LIKE I SAID THEY
ADDRESS MOST OF OUR ISSUES IN
THIS BILL BUT THAT'S THAT'S OUR
MAJOR CONCERN WITH THE EXPANSION
OF THE PRIDE REDUCTION.
DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT.
PLEASE PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I'M.
WITH THE CPA THE PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION IS ONLY TRIGGERED IN
THE EVENT THAT NON ENCRYPTED
INFORMATION HAS BEEN BREACHED.
AND THE SO IN THAT SENSE YOU
KNOW THAT WOULD THE END IS
INDUSTRY STANDARDS -- INSTRUCT
COMPANIES TO ENCRYPT BIOMETRIC
DATA AND SO IN IN TERMS OF THE
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST
BUSINESSES WHO EXPOSED NON
ENCRYPTED DATA WOULD BE TARGETED
AT BUSINESSES THAT DID NOT
IMPLEMENT THOSE REASONABLE
SECURITY MEASURES TO PROTECT
THAT DATA.
AND SO IT'S ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC
INSTANCE IN WHICH NON ENCRYPTED
DATA HAS BEEN SUBJECT -- TO
EXFILTRATION EARTH AFTER ACCESS
UNDERSEA CPA.
RIGHT THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
ALL RIGHT -- ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
SEEING NONE WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE THE
QUESTIONS AND I'VE BEEN ABLE TO
GET DEEPER INTO THIS POLICY AND
HELP PROTECT -- CALIFORNIANS SO
THINK YOU'RE MUCH CENTERS FOR
SOME SPEC FULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE THANK YOU TO HAVE A MOTION.
SO MOVED BY SENATOR GONZALEZ THE
MOTION IS TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER SIXTEEN A. B.
ELEVEN THIRTY JACKSON BY JACKSON
AYE PORCHES.
RUSSELL.
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I JONES.
JON SNOW MONNING.
STERN STERN AYE ON BURKE.
WHAT CAL SKI?
WHITE HOUSE K ÁI RIGHT
THE BILL HAS. FOUR VOTES AND WE
WILL -- KEEP THE ROLE THANK YOU
SO MUCH THANK YOU VERY MUCH ON
INSURANCE SENATORS.
READY.
WE NOW HAVE -- I BELIEVE.
WE HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHILD
BUT THERE'S SOMEONE.
ALL RIGHT WE'RE GONNA LET THIS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEBER GOES FIRST
VERY SMART MOVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CHAU.
I LOVE MR CHOW ALL RIGHT THERE
YOU GO.
I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO SPEND
THE NIGHT HERE WITH YOU GUYS
YEAH WELL WE'RE HOPING NOT TO DO
THAT EITHER BUT MIRACLES DO
HAPPEN BUT MAYBE NOT TODAY SO.
A FILE ITEM TWENTY SEVEN
ASSEMBLY MEMBER -- WEBBER'S BILL --
IT IS AB SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE IS
SOME OPPOSITION BUT NO
AMENDMENTS SO ARE YOU MINUTES
FOR WITNESSES AND IF YOU WOULD
GO AHEAD THE THE FLOOR IS YOURS
MADAM ASSEMBLY MEMBER THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR AND MY NOTES SAY
GOOD MORNING BUT ANYWAY -- YOU
MIGHT.
I'M HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU AB
SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN THE
PROTECT CALIFORNIA CALL CENTER
JOB ACT.
CALL CENTERS ARE MAJOR ECONOMIC
FORCE IN THE U. S. REPRESENTING
ABOUT 3% OF OUR WORKFORCE.
YET THE NUMBER OF COMES BECAUSE
TO MY SERVICE CONTEXT CONTRACT
THàNH TEXANA JOBS HAS DECLINED
IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS BY.
FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND LARGELY
DUE TO OUTSOURCING AND LAYOFFS.
IT HAS BECOME ALL TOO COMMON FOR
CORPORATIONS TO REAP THE
BENEFITS OF STATE FUNDING AND
SUBSIDIES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
EXPORTING JOBS OVERSEAS.
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS THE
CORPORATIONS HAVE BENEFITTED
FROM MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
STATE SUBSIDIES WHILE FUNNELING
CALL CENTER JOBS OUT OF
CALIFORNIA.
THE SHUTDOWN OF JUST FIVE CALL
CENTERS FROM ONE COMPANY
RESULTED IN NEARLY A THOUSAND
MIDDLE CLASS JOBS LOST.
CORPORATION SHOULD BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR
OUTSOURCING AND TO CONTINUE
SUBSIDIZING CORPORATIONS THAT
EXPORT CALL CENTER JOBS ONLY
SERVE TO INCENTIVIZE THIS
BEHAVIOR.
BECAUSE OF THE JOB SHOULD BE
BASE TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT
THEY SERVE.
AB.
SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN WOULD
REQUIRE THAT EMPLOYERS SEEKING
TO RELOCATE CALL CENTERS JOBS IN
CALIFORNIA TO ANOTHER COUNTRY
GIVE THE LABOR COME COMMISSIONER
A HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAYS NOTICE.
IN ADDITION EMPLOYEE WHO EXPORTS
CALL CENTER JOBS OVERSEAS WOULD
BE PROHIBITED FROM RECEIVING ANY
STATE GRANTS GUARANTEED LOANS OR
TAX CREDITS FOR FIVE YEARS.
THIS BILL IS SPONSORED BY THE
COMMUNICATION WORKERS OF AMERICA
AND SUPPORTED BY THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION.
HERE IS PRETTY TODAY WITH --
WITH ME IS TOM RUNYON WHO'S VICE
PRESIDENT OF CW A DISTRICT NINE
A. ENDED MAYES YOU'LL HIT HER
NOT THIS ON BEHALF OF CW A
DISTRICT NOT.
THANK YOU GOOD EVENING TWO
MINUTES PLEASE OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE MY NAME
IS TOM RUNYON I AM THE VICE
PRESIDENT OF THE COMMUNICATION
WORKERS OF AMERICA DISTRICT.
NINE AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF
AB SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN AS WE
ARE SPONSORS OF THE BILL.
CALL CENTERS ARE IMPORTANT
ECONOMIC LIFELINE FOR MANY
COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
WITH TWO HUNDRED AND TEN
THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY
WORKERS WITHIN THE JOB TITLE
CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE
IN CALIFORNIA ALONE.
BUT THOUSANDS OF CALL CENTER
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS
THE COUNTRY HAVE LOST THEIR JOBS.
IN RECENT YEARS AS MAJOR
CORPORATIONS.
HAVE OFF SHORT CUSTOMER SERVICE
OPERATIONS OVERSEAS.
SINCE TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN FOR
EXAMPLE EIGHTEEN T. HAS CLOSE
CALL CENTERS IN ANAHEIM
BAKERSFIELD ATWATER SACRAMENTO.
OAKLAND AND EIGHTEEN T. IS
CERTAINLY REDUCE ITS WORKFORCE
IN SAN RAMON FRESNO SAN DIEGO
COMMERCE PASADENA ESCONDIDO AND
TORRANCE.
IN MAY OF TWO THOUSAND SEVENTEEN
SPECTRUM FORMALLY TIME WARNER
CABLE CLOSEST CALL CENTER IN
PALM DESERT.
LAYING OFF TWO HUNDRED WORKERS.
IN FEBRUARY OF TWO THOUSAND
FOURTEEN VERIZON WIRELESS CLOSE
ITS CALL CENTER IN IRVINE THAT
EMPLOYED OVER ONE THOUSAND
WORKERS.
IN OCTOBER OF TWO THOUSAND
SIXTEEN THE COMPANY CLOSED ITS
CALL CENTER IN RANCHO CORDOVA
ALSO LAYING OFF OVER ONE
THOUSAND MEMBERS.
EVEN WORKERS WHO WERE PART OF
STATE CONTRACTS PROVIDE CALL
CENTER WORK ARE LOSING THEIR
JOBS RIGHT NOW OUTSOURCING.
THIS TREND IS HARMED WORKING
FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES IN
CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS AMERICA.
WHILE ENDANGERING CONSUMER
SECURITY FOR EXAMPLE CALL
CENTERS IN COSTA RICA WERE HOME
TO A MASSIVE TELEMARKETING SCAM.
THAT DEFRAUDED THOUSANDS OF U.
S. CITIZENS MOST OVER THE AGE OF
FIFTY FIVE OF UPWARDS OF TWENTY
MILLION DOLLARS.
WITH NEW TAX PROVISIONS IN THE
TRUMP TAX BILL COMPANIES ARE
EVEN MORE LIKELY TO MOVE THEIR
CUSTOMER SERVICES WORK OVERSEAS
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
NEXT WITNESS PLEASE TWO MINUTES
YAK NASSER HERNANDEZ AND WE HAVE
THE COMMUNICATION WORKERS OF
AMERICA DISTRICT NINE I'M JUST
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON
THE BILL.
THANK YOU OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
HUGE STEP FORWARD.
LIZ SORENSON COMMUNICATION
WORKERS OF AMERICA OBVIOUSLY IN
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL I DO WANT
TO POINT OUT THAT A LOT OF OUR
MEMBERS WERE HERE AND I
APOLOGIZE THEY HAD TO LEAVE MANY
OUR PARENTS THAT HAD TO GO PICK
THEIR CHILDREN UP.
BUT THIS IS HOW IMPORTANT THIS
BILL IS TO US TO BE HERE ALL DAY
SO THANK YOU AND WE APPRECIATE
YOUR SUPPORT THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NICK OTHER WITNESSES PLEASE
MADAM CHAIR MEMBER SERAPH LOCKS
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
LABOR FEDERATION.
I AM ALSO INDEPENDENTLY HERE IN
SUPPORT THAT PROFESSIONAL STAFF
OF THE LABOR FEDERATION OUR
MEMBERS THE PACIFIC MEET MEDIA
GUILD CW WAY LOCAL THIRTY NINE
FIVE TWO ONE ALSO IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
[inaudible]
GOOD AFTERNOON.
GOOD EVENING MADAM CHAIR THE TWO
THOUGHT SIX O'CLOCK WAS OKAY
WHAT WELL I'M SURE WILL BE HERE
AT SIX O'CLOCK AS WELL SO EITHER
WAY.
GOOD GOOD DAY BUT I THINK IT ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE AND WE'RE AT
RESPECTFULLY POSTED THIS BILL I
THINK WE HAVE SOME FUNDAMENTAL
DISAGREEMENTS WITH THE OVERALL
APPROACH TAKEN BY THIS BILL.
WE THINK IF WE WANT TO KEEP JOBS
IN CALIFORNIA MORE PRODUCTIVE
CONVERSATION WOULD BE.
PERHAPS EXPLORING WAYS TO REDUCE
ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE REGULATORY
BURDEN -- ON BUSINESSES.
MOST IMPORTANTLY WE DO THINK
THAT THIS BILL MAKES IT UNLIKELY
THAT WILL EVER ACTUALLY ATTRACT
CALL CENTER JOBS TO CALIFORNIA --
I THINK A CALL CENTER WOULD BE
UNLIKELY TO RELOCATE TO
CALIFORNIA IF THIS LAWS ON THE
BOOKS KNOWING THAT IF THEY EVER
DECIDE TO RELOCATE -- THEY'LL BE
SUBJECT TO THE MEASURES IN THIS
BILL WE HAD SOME GOOD
CONVERSATIONS WITH AUTHORS
OFFICE IN THE SPONSOR -- ABOUT
SOME -- ISSUES AND THEY'VE TAKEN
SOME AMENDMENTS WHICH WE
APPRECIATE I JUST WANT TO BRING
A ONE ISSUE TO THE COMMITTEE'S
ATTENTION.
THERE'S AN EXISTING SECTION OF
THE PUBLIC CONTRACTS CODE
SECTION ONE TO ONE FORTY WHICH
WAS ADDED BY BRINGING A BILL IN
IN TWO THOUSAND TWELVE WHICH
REGULATES CERTAIN PUBLIC BENEFIT
PROGRAMS AND CALL CENTERS --
ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE BENEFIT
PROGRAMS THAT WORK HAS TO BE
PERFORMED IN CALIFORNIA.
THOSE -- PROVISIONS HAVE CERTAIN
EXCEPTIONS.
THE STATUTE ALSO SPECIFICALLY
SAYS THE LIMITATIONS DON'T APPLY
IF IT WOULD VIOLATE FEDERAL LAW
OR FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS -- AND
WE'RE NOT SURE HOW THIS BILL
RELATES TO THAT EXISTING
PROVISION OF LAW WHETHER IT
SUITS SUPERSEDES IT.
OR NOT WE THINK THAT SHOULD BE
CLARIFIED AND WE ALSO THINK --
SOME LANGUAGECOULD BE ADDED TO
THIS BILL SIMILAR TO THE
EXISTING PUBLIC CONTRACTS COULD
SECTION TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THIS
DOESN'T CONTRAVENE.
TRADE AGREEMENTS SO FOR THOSE
REASONS.
WERE UNFORTUNATELY OPPOSED IT
WILL CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE
WITH THE AUTHOR AND THE SPONSOR
ABOUT POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS THANK
YOU VERY MUCH OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
SEEING NONE WILL BRING IT BACK
TO THE DíAS -- ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WOULD YOU RESPOND OR THROUGH
YOUR WITNESSES RESPOND TO THOSE
CONCERNS I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN
WORKING WITH THEM AND I THINK
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BUILT.
MAKE A STATEMENT FOR CALIFORNIA
SO GOOD COULD YOU RESPOND TO
THOSE CONCERNS THANK YOU MADAM
CHAIR VERY QUICKLY -- ON THE
ISSUE OF HOW THIS BILL WOULD
INTERACT WITH THE CURRENT LAW
NOW WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT
THERE ARE IS LIMITED THE
DIFFERENCE BECAUSE WITH THIS
BILL -- LATE LAYS OUT AS FAR AS
SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
SOME OF THE CONTRACTS WITH THE
STATE WE'RELOOKING AT HOW THE
ROVER PLAY WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE HAVE THE STRONGEST
PROTECTION POSSIBLE -- BETWEEN
THOSE TWO LAWS SO WE ARE LOOKING
AT THAT ON THE ISSUE OF IN THE
LANGUAGE -- THAT WOULD NOT
VIOLATE ANY INTERNATIONAL
TREATIES OR FREE TRADE
AGREEMENTS -- THE WHERE BILLS
DRAFTED IT IT IT SIMPLY DOES NOT
PROHIBIT -- THE OFF SHORING --
OF JOBS IN CALIFORNIA SIMPLY
SAYS ELIGIBILITY FOR TO CERTAIN
TAX BENEFITS OR RESTRICTED SO WE
DON'T THINK THAT IT DOES WE'VE
HAD LAWYERS LOOK AT IT I SHOULD
MENTION THAT I BELIEVE NEW YORK
JUST PASS THIS I THINK -- TWO
WEEKS AGO NEVADA JUST PASSED A
VERSION -- ALABAMA A PAST
VERSION AND AND AND TWENTY
EIGHTEEN THE FIRST VERSION
CALIFORNIA'S PASSED.
BY PARTISAN IN LOUISIANA AND HAD
SOME OF THESE PROVISIONS SO IT'S
BEEN LOOKED OUT ACROSS THE
COUNTRY THEN THERE ABOUT TWENTY
OTHER STATES LOOKING AT RIGHT
NOW.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS.
SURE WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MOVE BY SENATOR TO SO -- IF
YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE WELL I THINK
CALIFORNIA SHOULD SUPPORT A CALL
CENTER WORKERS IN PRIORITIZE AND
PRIORITIZE CALIFORNIA GRANTS AND
SUBSIDIES TO CORPORATIONS.
THAT RETAIN THEIR CALL CENTERS
IN CALIFORNIA AND PROVIDE JOBS
TO CALIFORNIANS AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE.
THANK YOU OF THE MOTION IS TO
PASS THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY SEVEN AB
SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BORDERS TO RUSSELL
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I JONES MORNING.
MONEY AYE STERN.
UMBERG Y. CASKEY WHAT HAS HE AYE
RIGHT THE BILL HAS. FIVE VOTES
WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN
THANK YOU.
AND THIS IS FINE THIS IS FAR WE
DON'T TO THE CLAPPING THOUGH IN
THE NORMAL WAY THANK YOU ALL AND
THANKS FOR BEING HERE I KNOW
THIS IS.
A LITTLE LATE FOR MANY OF MANY
OF US ALL ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHAU
ALWAYS A GENTLEMAN -- WILL START
WITH FILE ITEM.
EIGHTEEN AB.
TWELVE OH TWO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH I'M AND I'M CHAIR AND
SENATORS SAW I'D LIKE TO START
OFF BY ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS
ARE REFLECTED IN THE ANALYSIS --
WHICH PROVIDES NECESSARY
COVERAGE FOR ENTITIES THAT MAY
NOT BE CAPTURE.
UNDER THE THREE EXEMPTIONS FOR
CREDIT REPORTING AGENCIES
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND ALSO --
INSURANCE ENTITIES THIS BILL AB
TWELVE OH TWO IS A
STRAIGHTFORWARD BILL TO ADDRESS
AN ISSUE THAT.
AFFECTS JUST ABOUT EVERY
CONSUMER IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA THAT IS THE BUYING
AND SELLING OF THEIR PERSONAL
INFORMATION.
LAST YEAR WE PASSED THE
CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PRIVACY
ACTOR CCPA WHICH ALLOWS
INDIVIDUALS TO MONITOR.
AND CONTROL HOW THE DATA IS
BEING YOU SOLD OR OTHERWISE
EXCHANGED HOWEVER MANY CONSUMERS
DON'T KNOW WHAT BUSINESSES ARE
HOLDING THEIR PERSONAL
INFORMATION.
AB TWELVE A TWO WILL REQUIRED
DATA BROKERS WHO ARE BUSINESSES
THAT BY AN OR SELL THE PERSONAL
INFORMATION OF CONSUMERS WITH
HOME THEY HAVE NO DIRECT
RELATIONSHIP. TO REGISTER WITH
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.
THIS WILL EMPOWER CONSUMERS TO
EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE
SEA CPA AND TO CONTROL THEIR
DATA WITHOUT I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR ARRIVAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH WITNESSES.
MAUREEN MAHONEY CONSUMER REPORTS
IN FULL SUPPORT UPON ADOPTION OF
THE MEN'S REFERENCE TODAY THANK
YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
YOU CAN COME TO THE IT
[inaudible]
FEEL FREE.
NEVER SHARE MARKET GLAD STEM
BEHALF OF DISCOVER ORG WE'RE
ACTUALLY NOT IN OPPOSITION WE'RE
TRYING TO WORK WITH THE AUTHOR
DISCOVER ORG IS A BUSINESS TO
BUSINESS.
CONTACT PROVIDER -- OUR
CONSUMERS PURCHASE INFORMATION
ABOUT BUSINESS PEOPLE TO PROMOTE
TO SAIL SELL.
PRODUCTS ARE GOODS OR SERVICES
TO THEM -- AB TWELVE OH TWO A WE
REQUEST THAT IT BE AMENDED TO
ALLOW THE THE DATA BROKER TO
PROVIDE NOTICES TO CONSUMER WHEN
THE DATA BROKER HAS THEIR
INFORMATION OR OUR CUSTOMERS
ACTUALLY PURCHASE IT WE THINK
THIS WILL REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF
NOTICES CONSUMERS GET AND WILL
BE.
CREATED A TURN KEY OPPORTUNITY
FOR CONSUMERS -- TO OPT OUT OF
THE SALE OF THEIR INFORMATION IF
THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO -- WE WE
WOULD BE WILLING TO PROVIDE
THESE NOTICES TO OUR CUSTOMERS
AND HONOR THE OPT OPT OUT FOR
WERE -- WHEN THEY COME TO US SO
WE THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A
CONSUMER FRIENDLY AND CONSISTENT
WITH THE TRANSPARENCY THE AUTHOR
SPEAKING -- WE WE HAVE BEEN IN
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AUTHOR
WERE HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN COME TO
AGREEMENT BUT THIS BUT WE THINK
IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE GOAL OF
CCPA.
AND WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR
COMPANIES TO COMPLY.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
NEUTRALITY OR OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT
I'M.
NOT AWARE OF IT I DON'T BELIEVE
IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER SO.
I CAN'T COMMENT ON IT BUT I LIKE
THE BILL THE WAY IT IS NOW THE
WAY YOU'VE -- AMENDED I
APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORT AND THE
WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE ON THIS
SITE -- THINK THAT THIS IS.
A BILL THAT'S GOING TO GIVE US
INFORMATION IN THE SPIRIT OF
CCPA THAT'S APPROPRIATE -- AND
THANK YOU FOR YOUR FOR YOUR WORK
ON IT AND THE WORKMANSHIP TAKEN.
ARM.
MOTION BY ENTER Y. KOWSKI ANY
COMMENTS.
ALL RIGHT THERE IS A MOTION. TO
LIKE TO CLOSE I ASKED HER IDOL
VERY GOOD THE MOTION IS DUE
PASSED TO SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
AS AMENDED SO WITH THAT --
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER EIGHTEEN A. B.
TWELVE OH TWO THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE BORDERS RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES MONNING.
MONNING EYES STERN AMBERG Y.
CASKEY LIKE HUSKY I ALRIGHT THAT.
THE BILL HAS FIVE VOTES WILL
LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN YOU HAVE ONE
OTHER ITEM WHICH IS A FILE ITEM
TWENTY AB.
TWELVE EIGHTY ONE THANK YOU VERY
MUCH AGAIN -- MADAM CHAIR AND
SENATORS I ALSO LIKE TO START
OFF BY ACCEPTING AS AUTHORS IN
IN AND OF THE IMMENSE -- LISTED
IN IT IN THE ANALYSIS -- WHICH
UPDATE -- WERE THE PHYSICAL
SIGNS PLACE AND WHAT INFORMATION
IS PROVIDED ON IT.
THIS BILL AB TWELVE EIGHTY ONE
WOULD INFORM CONSUMERS WITH A
POSTED SIGN.
THE CALIFORNIA BUSINESSES USING
FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY OR
F. R. T. WHICH IS THE
APPLICATION OF BIOMETRICS
SOFTWARE USED TO AUTOMATICALLY
IDENTIFY AN INDIVIDUAL FROM A
DIGITAL IMAGE OR VIDEO FRAMES.
OF THE TECHNOLOGY IS BECOMING
EVER MORE PRESENT THROUGHOUT
BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA AND
CONCERNS OF PRIVACY AND USE OF
THE INFORMATION ARE INCREASING.
IN FACT A NEW STUDY ALSO RAISES
BROADER QUESTIONS OF FAIRNESS
AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND RECORDS
THE MACHINE LEARNING.
ALGORITHMS THAT ARE THE
FOUNDATION OF F. F. R. T.
ESPECIALLY AT A TIME WHEN
INVESTING IN AND ADOPTION OF THE
TECHNOLOGY IS RAISING AHEAD OF
THE RECENT PUBLICATION DETAIL
HOW THE SECURITY MEASURES OF ONE
POP STAR INCLUDE.
F. R. T. TO CAPTURE THE PICTURES
ADDITIONALLY THE EXTENT AND
PREVALENCE OF RETAIL STORES
USING THIS TECHNOLOGY FOR
INCREASED MARKETABILITY IS
DISTURBING.
IT APPEARS THAT IN BOTH CASES
INDIVIDUALS WERE NOT INFORMED
THAT F. R. T. WAS BEING USED ON
THEM NOR WOULD THEY KNOW HOW
LONG THE INFORMATION IS HELD AND
HOW IT IS USED.
AB TWENTY ONE EIGHT EIGHT AB
EIGHT TWELVE EIGHTY ONE WAS
SIMPLY.
ON ME CONSUMERS AWARE OF WHICH
BUSINESSES ARE USING FACIAL
TECHNOLOGY I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR ARRIVAL.
WHICH WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
WE'D LIKE TO HOBBLE UP HERE.
I NEVER KNEW THE GAME OF GOLF
WAS SO DANGEROUS.
WELL.
I GUESS ALL RIGHT OF WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION TWO MINUTES PLEASE
ASK ME AT THE CORE BUT ON BEHALF
OF THE ACLU THE ELECTRONIC
FRONTIER FOUNDATION AND PRIVACY
RIGHTS CLEARING HOUSE WILL HAVE
TO FORGIVE ME I'LL BE DOING A
LITTLE MORE READING THAN I WOULD.
TYPICALLY PREFER I'M STANDING IN
FOR A COLLEAGUE WHO HAD TO LEAVE
ON THIS ISSUE -- WE DO HAVE A
FEW CAN BUT CONCERNS ABOUT THE
MEASURE -- AS AS MR CHOW RIGHT
FULLY ARTICULATED OF FACIAL
RECOGNITION IS -- PROLIFIC IN
ITS USE IN AN INCREASINGLY SO
OUR CONCERNS ARE THAT NUMBER ONE
POSTING A SIGN WOULD OFFER
LITTLE TO NO PROTECTION AGAINST
THE USE OF THIS POWERFUL
INTERESTS OF TECHNOLOGY -- WE'RE
CONCERNED SUCH SIGNS WOULD
LIKELY BECOME IS A BIG COULD
ASSENTED NOR DOES PROP SIXTY
FIVE NOTICES ARE NOW
PARTICULARLY WHEN CONSUMERS HAVE
NO EFFECTIVE WAY TO GUARD
AGAINST THE DANGERS OF FACIAL
RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY IS.
AT THE VERY LEAST.
ANY PRIVATE DEPLOYMENT OFFICIAL
RECOGNITION SHOULD REQUIRE THAT
CONSUMERS GIVE AFFIRMATIVE
CONSENT.
AS REQUIRED FOR EXAMPLE BY THE
ILLINOIS' BIOMETRIC INFORMATION
PRIVACY ACT MOREOVER CONSENT
MUST BE INFORMED IN ORDER TO BE
MEANINGFUL -- AB TWELVE EIGHTY
ONE IS WRITTEN PROVIDES NO
REQUIREMENT FOR THE CONSENT OF
THE NOTICE ASSUMING THAT OF
COURSE PEOPLE ACTUALLY READ IT.
AT A MINIMUM ANY SIGN SHOULD
NOTIFY THE CONSUMERS OF THE
FACTS AND RISKS THAT FACIAL
RECOGNITION ALLOWS THEM TO BE
TRACKED MONITORED AND THAT THEIR
FEES PRINT MAY BE SOLD TO OTHER
BUSINESSES AND GOVERNMENTS.
AND COMBINED WITH OTHER PERSONAL
INFORMATION. TO BUILD A
COMPREHENSIVE PROFILE OF WHO
THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DO IN
ADDITION FACIAL RECOGNITION
SYSTEMS WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH
LARGE DATABASES THAT ARE
TEMPTING TARGETS FOR COMPUTER
HACKERS.
AS DEMONSTRATED BY THE RECENT
BRIDGE OFFICIAL RECORD DID
RECOGNITION DATA COLLECTED BY
CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTIONS
EFFECTIVE REGULATION THEREFORE
WOULD REQUIRE STRICT LIMITS ON
HOW LONG THE DATA CAN BE
RETAINED AS WELL AS HOW IT CAN
BE USE OR SHARED.
FURTHER WE'RE CONCERNED THIS
BILL SIGNIFICANTLY BODIES IF NOT
UNDER CUTS THE TREATMENT A
BIOMETRIC DATA UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PROTECTION
ACT WHICH OF COURSE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHAO IS AN AUTHOR LAST
YEAR.
PRIMARILY BECAUSE IT IMPLIES
THAT POSTING A SIGN IS ALL OF
BUSINESS NEED DO WHEN IT USES
FACIAL RECOGNITION AND SUGGEST
THAT WHATEVER NOTICE THE SIGN
PROVIDES IS THE ONLY RIGHT A
CONSUMER HAS.
THANKFULLY THE CCPA IS SOMEWHAT
MORE PROTECTED BY PROVIDING
CONSUMERS THE RIGHT TO KNOW HOW
BIOMETRIC WILL BE USED AND OUR
SHARED ALONG WITH OTHER SUB AND
HAVE RIGHTS SUCH AS THE RIGHT TO
DELETE.
HOWEVER THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR
TESTS.
OF ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
BRING YOU BACK TO THE DíAS
CLEARLY -- YOU DON'T DISPROVE
THE LAWS FAR AS IT GOES BUT IT
DOESN'T GO VERY FAR AS FAR AS
YOU SEE IT AND I COULDN'T AGREE
WITH YOU MORE -- BUT IT IS A
START.
ABOUT AT THE MEAGER -- ONE THE
NOTION THAT -- THE BIOMETRIC.
DATA IS PROLIFIC I THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE ARE JUST STILL
TRYING TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND --
I DO HOPE THAT MOVING FORWARD WE
CAN STRENGTHEN THIS.
OF A LOCKED UP BUT IT IS A START
AND I WANNA THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
AT LEAST.
STARTING THIS AND I'M HOPING
THAT WE CAN HAVE FURTHER
COMMUNICATIONS BECAUSE THIS
ACTUALLY COULD BECOME.
A VERY SIGNIFICANT ISSUE IT'S MY
HOPE THAT THE CCPA A DOES EXPAND
UPON THIS BUT CERTAINLY. TO THE
EXTENT THAT IT DOES MOVE THE
BALL FORWARD A LITTLE BIT IT IT
DOES OFFER SOME BENEFIT.
AND I'M SURE THE CONVERSATIONS
WILL CONTINUE.
OF THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS
AGAIN I I'D LOVE TO SEE A
STRONGER BUT IT'S BETTER THAN
THAN.
THAN NOTHING AT THIS POINT -- SO
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS --
MOVE BY SENATOR DORADO ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE I
RESPECTFULLY ASK ARRIVAL THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU THE THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS -- PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY AB
TWELVE EIGHTY ONE JACKSON HI
JACKSON AYE PORGES RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN I'M BURKE
WHITE HUSKY.
I CASKEY AYE THE BILL HAS. FIVE
VOTER WILL HOLD THE ROLE OF THE
THANK YOU SO MUCH THANK YOU FOR
YOUR COURTESY -- TO PRIOR --
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS OF NEXT UP IS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER -- STONE AB
TWELVE SEVENTY THANK YOU FOR
YOUR PATIENCE.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
SENATORS.
THE BILL THAT CHANGES SLIGHTLY
THE CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT.
CURRENTLY [inaudible]
THE PRESS TAX BOARD ESTIMATES
THAT THERE IS A TAX GAP MEETING
ABOUT. TWENTY TO TWENTY FIVE
BILLION DOLLARS DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN WHAT'S OWED AND WHAT'S
COLLECTED.
UNDER THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS
BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL AND HAS
ALREADY RECOVERED ABOUT FOUR
BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF IT.
BUT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
USEFULNESS OF THE BECAUSE CLAIMS
ACTED MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE.
CLEANING IT UP AND ENCOURAGING
IT'S USED TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE
AND MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN.
CLOSE THAT TAX GAP THAT'S WITH
THIS BILL IS ALL ABOUT WE'VE
BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY.
WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE ON IT THERE'S BEEN SOME
CONCERN SAID THAT HAVE BEEN
RAISED THAT SEEM TO BE FAIRLY W.
LISTS CONCERNS ABOUT.
POTENTIALS FOR OTHER LAWSUITS OR
MISUSE OF THIS BUT WE THIRTY
NARROWLY CONSTRAINED IT.
SO THAT IT'S PRETTY THE
PROSECUTING AUTHORITY ATTORNEY
GENERAL AND OTHERS IN ITS IT IS
BASED ON A WHISTLE BLOWER.
THE FRANCHISE TAX BOARD IS GOING
TO GO AFTER NON TAX PAYERS BUT
IT'S THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT
HAS RESPONSIBILITY GO AFTER A
TAX PAYER.
WHERE THERE'S BEEN A
WHISTLEBLOWER SHOWING THAT THERE
ARE -- TAXES IN THOSE TAXES ARE
NOT BEING PAID THAT'S THE WHOLE
ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF THE FALSE
CLAIMS ACT.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE MATERIALITY STANDARD
MATCHES WITH A RECENT CALIFORNIA
COURT CASE AS OPPOSED TO WEAKER
STANDARDS TO SEEM TO BE
DEVELOPING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
THIS PROVIDES CLARITY AROUND THE
MATERIALITY STANDARD IT PROVIDES
THAT.
GIVES THE APPROPRIATE TOOLS FOR
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO BE ABLE
TO USE THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT
CLOSE AT TAX CAB.
AND ENSURE THAT THERE ARE NOT
FALSE CLAIMS BEING MADE AGAINST
THE GOVERNMENT THAT THE
GOVERNMENT THEN IS LOSING OUT ON
OF TAX AND FRANKLY OTHERWISE IT
WITH THAT I RESPECTFULLY ASK
YOUR AYE VOTE.
I DO HAVE SOME WITNESSES FROM
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE --
WE'VE BEEN WORKING AS A CLOSELY
WITH THEM SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE
THIS TOOL IS IS BENEFICIAL AS
POSSIBLE.
WITHOUT ASK YOUR ABOUT THANK YOU
TWO MINUTES EACH.
A GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS
ANTHONY LOU MY LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL TO
SERRA.
THE AG IS PLEASED TO SPONSOR AB
TWELVE SEVENTY AT THE CRITICAL
MEASURE. TO PROTECT PUBLIC
DOLLARS IN COMBAT FRAUD AGAINST
OUR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS --
I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS BUT I'D LIKE.
TO SEE THE REST OF MY TIME THE
SUPERVISING DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL VIC ACT.
THANK YOU TWO MINUTES SIR THANK
YOU.
MY NAME IS RICK AKRAM IS
SUPERVISING DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL IN THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S FALSE CLAIMS UNIT --
WE SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION
STRONGLY IT WILL STRENGTHEN OUR
ABILITY TO GET BACK MONEY FROM
THOSE WHO CHEAT THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND SHEET OUR
TAXPAYERS.
AND TO DETER OTHERS FROM TRYING
TO DO SO IN THE FUTURE -- THE
FALSE CLAIMS ACT HAS BEEN A VERY
EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR CIVIL LAW
ENFORCEMENT OUR UNIT HAS
RECOVERED WELL OVER A ONE AND A
HALF BILLION DOLLARS IS AND AND
AS YOU HEARD THE FALSE CLAIMS
ENFORCEMENT.
WHAT ACROSS THE TOURNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE IS RECOVERED
OVER FOUR BILLION DOLLARS -- AND
OUR WORK IS ENTIRELY FUNDED FROM
OUR RECOVERIES -- THIS MOMENT AS
YOU KNOW GIVES US THE AUTHORITY
TO PURSUE TAX FRAUD AND HELP TO
CLOSE THE TAX GAP THAT ASSEMBLY
MEMBER STONE DESCRIBED -- THIS
IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE FALSE
CLAIMS ACT MOTIVATES WHISTLE
BLOWERS TO COME FOR THERE'S A
LOT OF FRAUD AGAINST THE STATE
THAT WOULD NEVER BE DISK I'M
COVERED BT FOR WHISTLE BLOWERS
COMING FORWARD IN THIS
INCENTIVIZE THEM TO DO SO.
AND IT PROTECTS THEM WHEN THEY
DO REFER TAX THEM FOR
RETALIATION.
I IN FURTHER THIS BILL HAS BEEN
IN NARROWLY CRAFTED SO IT ONLY
PUNISHES ACTUAL TAX FRAUD.
THIS BILL DOES NOT PUNISH
INNOCENT MISTAKES IT DOES NOT
PUNISH PEOPLE WHO VIGOROUSLY --
VIGOROUSLY CONTEST THEIR TAX
BILLS BUT ARE HONEST ABOUT WITH
THE GOVERNMENT.
IT ONLY PUNISHES PEOPLE WHO
COMMIT TAX FRAUD AND THE WE
THEREFORE STRONGLY SUPPORTED
IT'S BEEN NEARLY DRAFTED WE ALSO.
DO NOT ANTICIPATE THAT THERE
WOULD BE SPUR AREAS PRIVATE
LAWSUITS BROUGHT -- NEW YORK HAS
A SIMILAR STATUTE THAT -- AND
THEY HAVE NOT HAD THAT PROBLEM
AND WE DO NOT EXPECTED HERE A
PLAINTIFF PRIVATE PLAINTIFF
BRING LOTS OF NOT THE TWENTY
GENERAL'S OFFICE BUT A PRIVATE
PLAINTIFFS DOING SO.
WOULD NEED TO ALLEGE WITH
SPECIFICITY.
THE ACTUAL FRAUD THERE'S BEEN
COMMITTED ACTUAL FACTUAL FALSE
STATEMENTS IN IF THEY CANNOT DO
SO THEY'RE THEY'RE LAWSUIT WILL
BE THROWN OUT IN SHORT ORDER
SELF.
NEW YORK HAS NO PROBLEM WITH
THAT WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT WE
WOULD EITHER THANK YOU VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE YOUR TESTIMONY ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS SERRA FLOCKS
CALIFORNIA LET CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION IN SUPPORT THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES THING NON
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
AND I MIGHT INDICATE THAT --
AMONG THE OPPOSITION IN ADVERT
AND WE LEFT OUT WAS THE A CAL A
CIVIL JUSTICE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA.
IN THEIR OPPOSITION AND I
BELIEVE YOU'RE HERE TO TESTIFY
ON THEIR BEHALF SO YES MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS THANK YOU FOR
THAT NOTATION MICHAEL LOAD ON
BEHALF THE CIVIL JUSTICE
ASSOCIATION.
WITH GREAT RESPECT FOR MISTER
STONE FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
AND FOR HIS REPRESENTATIVES BUT
THIS IS A PROFOUND.
ISSUE THAT GOES TO THE POWER AND
AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT AND
I THINK IT DESERVES SOME VERY
THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION AND SOME
MORE WORK.
AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE OF THE
AWESOME POWER OF THE FALSE
CLAIMS ACT.
THAT ACT PROVIDES FOR TROUBLE
DAMAGES.
ATTORNEY'S FEES -- IN THIS CASE
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES AND WHEN
EXTENDED TO TAX CASES -- I'VE.
I COULD BE WRONG HAVE BEEN WRONG
MANY MANY TIMES.
BUT I DON'T SEE THE LIMITATIONS
IN THE BILL TO TAX FRAUD.
AND I DON'T SEE LIMITATIONS IN
THE BILL TO WHISTLE BLOWERS THIS
THREATENS TO CONVERT REGULAR TAX
DISPUTES.
WHERE THERE IS A CREDIBLE
ARGUMENT ON BOTH SIDES FROM A
TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR
DISPUTE TO A SEVEN FIGURE
DISPUTE YOU HAVE TWO HUNDRED
THOUSAND DOLLARS IN DISPUTE?
YOU GET TREBLE DAMAGES ON TOP OF
THAT SO NOW YOU'RE.
TO EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND AND
YOU GET ATTORNEY'S FEES.
POSSIBLY DELEGATED TO A PRIVATE
LAWYER AND POSSIBLY TO A KEY
TâM PLAINTIFF.
SO THIS THREATENS TO TAKE A
REGULAR TAX DISPUTE.
INTO A FALSE CLAIMS ACT AND THE
QUESTION IS WHETHER THAT IS
PUTTING TOO MUCH AUTHORITY IN
THE POWER OF THE GOVERNMENT.
THE WHEN I WAS YOUNG WE TALKED
ABOUT ABUSIVE TAX SHELTERS AND
THE LINE BETWEEN A LEGITIMATE
TAX DISPUTE AND AN ABUSIVE TAX
SHELTER WAS WAS THERE CREDIBLE
AUTHORITY FOR THE POSITION TAKEN
BY THE TAXPAYER.
AND THAT AT LEAST OUGHT TO BE
INCORPORATED IT SEEMS TO ME INTO
THIS BILL SO UNTIL THOSE THINGS
ARE RESOLVED AND THERE ARE OTHER
ISSUES HERE OF RETROACTIVITY AND
OTHERS.
BUT WE WOULD ASK FOR A NO VOTE
AND ASK THAT WE CONTINUE HAVING
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE AUTHOR AND
SPONSORS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
MADAMCHAIR PAUL THAT FILLED THE
REPRESENTING THE MOTION PICTURE
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA AND WOULD
LIKE TO ASSOCIATE OURSELVES WITH
THE REMARKS OF MISTER BELOW.
AND I'M ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL
CONTRACTORS AND MIKE DID A GOOD
JOB OF OUTLINING WHAT THE
PROBLEMS ARE WITH THE TAX
PORTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS A LITTLE
BIT MORE ON THE EIGHT
MATERIALITY STANDARD -- AS WELL
AS A CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES --
THE MATERIALITY STANDARD.
TRYING NOT TO BE NEBULOUS HERE I
KNOW THAT -- CHAIRMAN STONE THIS
OF THESE ARGUMENTS WERE NEBULOUS
BUT WE BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE A
SIGNIFICANT ESPECIALLY AS THE
RATE RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION.
CLAIMS AND THESE ARE --
SITUATIONS TO WHERE YOU HAVE
CHANGE CONDITIONS THERE'S
DISPUTES ALL THE TIME -- WITH
BETWEEN THE PUBLIC ENTITY -- AND
THE CONTRACTOR OVER -- DISPUTED
CLAIMS AND ONE HIT WE SEE
FRANKLY IS A LOT OF TIMES A
PUBLIC ENTITIES THESE ARE NOT
WHISTLEBLOWERS THESE ARE PUBLIC
ENTITIES WHO WILL FILE
COUNTERCLAIMS AGAINST THE
CONTRACTOR. TO LEVERAGE THEM
AGAINST WHAT THEY BELIEVE TO BE
LEGITIMATE CLAIMS BECAUSE THERE
IS IN FACT A DISPUTE SO WE THINK
THAT -- THE CODIFYING A COURT
CASE THAT HAD THIS VERY SPECIFIC
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND USING
THAT AS THE NEW STANDARD OF
MATERIALITY WHERE YOU GO FROM.
OF AN ACTUAL AFFECT TO A
POTENTIAL OF FACT HAS
SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES IN
THESE TYPES OF CLAIMS AND FOR
THOSE REASONS WE OPPOSE THE BILL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OTHER OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION IF YOU'D
STEP UP NAME AND AFFILIATION
PLEASE.
THANK YOU ROBERT MATRICULA
CHAMBER WE ARE OPPOSED AS TO THE
NOT TO THE WHISTLEBLOWER THE
MATERIALITY PROVISIONS BUT AS TO
THE CONCERNS THAT GOOD FAITH --
DISAGREEMENTS THANK YOU.
MASON LANE CALIFORNIA BANKERS
ASSOCIATION ALSO OPPOSED THANK
YOU.
MADAM CHAIR CHRISTMAS KELLY ON
BEHALF OF COUNTY -- SO IN
OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION ART BRING IT BACK TO
THE DYESS [inaudible]
ANY QUESTIONS -- ALL RIGHT
SEEING NONE -- IN YOUR CLOTHES
IF YOU WOULD RESPOND TO SOME OF
THE CONCERNS THAT WERE MENTIONED.
BY THE OPPOSITION HERE -- IN
PARTICULAR THE THE CONCERN ABOUT
A TAX DISPUTE WHEN IT WHEN IS A
TAX DISPUTE TAX FRAUD.
AND HOW DO YOU ADDRESS THOSE
CLAIMS AND AND THE ALL ALSO THE
ISSUE OF MATERIALITY I NOTICED A
NOTE IT IS IN OUR THERE IS A
DISCUSSION IN OUR ANALYSES ON
THAT BUT IF YOU WOULD ADDRESS IT
HERE.
AS WELL THAT WOULD BE
APPRECIATED -- FIRST LET ME
ENTERTAIN A MOTION WE HAVE A
MOTION CENTER WHITE COLOR SCHEME
MOVES.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER STERN A STONE
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CLOSE THANK
YOU I I WILL CLOSE AND I'LL
ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES I
THINK THE ANALYSIS DOES A GOOD
JOB DESCRIBING THE MATERIALITY
ISSUE.
THE PROBLEM IS WE SEE TO WE'RE
TRYING TO ADDRESS THERE'S A A
COURT CASE IN CALIFORNIA THAT
HAS SET THE STANDARD FOR
MATERIALITY IN THESE KINDS OF
CASES.
THERE ARE ALSO A NUMBER OF
FEDERAL CASES AND IN THAT ARE
TAKING IT IN A DIRECTION THAT
WOULD BE LESS HELPFUL THAT WOULD
BE MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE STATE
TO ESTABLISH.
TAX FRAUD WE BUY DID PASSING
THIS BILL WERE CLARIFYING THAT
THE CALIFORNIA RULES ARE GOING
TO STAND IT WILL NOT BE DILUTED
BY THE FEDERAL RULES.
WITH RESPECT TO THE
RETROACTIVITY THAT WAS BROUGHT
UP AS WELL WE'VE TAKEN
AMENDMENTS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
WE'RE IN THAT THIS IS NOT
RETROACTIVE SO WE HAVE.
REALLY SOLVED THAT.
AND THE THE ISSUE ABOUT.
DISPUTES THAT ARE GOING ON
THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE
CAPTURING HERE THESE ARE FALSE
CLAIM SO THERE'S A STANDARD THAT
THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO ESTABLISH.
FOUR EIGHT WHETHER IT NOT A
CLAIM IS FALSE AND IF IT IS NOT
IF THERE'S A TAXES BE THAT'S
HAPPENING IF YOU LOOK AT MOST
TAXES BUTTE THE TAXPAYERS
OBLIGATED TO MAKE THE PAYMENT.
AND DISPUTE THE TAX SO THERE ARE
NO DAMAGES THERE'S THERE'S
NOTHING REALLY THERE THAT WOULD
LEAD TO A FALSE CLAIM.
THESE ARE CASES AND WHY WERE
WORKING IN THE SPACES BECAUSE
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MOSTLY
HEARS ABOUT CASES LIKE THIS
UNDER THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT
THROUGH WHISTLE BLOWERS IF
THERE'S TAX FRAUD THAT IS
HAPPENING AND IT IS OBVIOUS
WHERE THERE'S OTHER EVIDENCE OF
IT THAT'S WHERE THE FRANCHISE
TAX BOARD.
WILL STEP IN.
THIS WHOLE STATUE TO SET UP
BECAUSE IT WILL BE A WHISTLE
BLOWER THAT IS BRINGING FORWARD
TO A PROSECUTING AUTHORITY LIKE
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. HUNDRED
QUI TAM LAW AND SAYS THERE IS A
PROBLEM HERE THEN IF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL TAKES THAT CASE
THEY CAN THEN PROSECUTED SOME
THE OPPOSITION IS ALSO WORRIED
THAT THE KEY TâM DEFENDANT ON
THEIR OWN IS GOING TO INCREASE
LITIGATION AND THAT'S WHY I SAY
THAT THAT'S A BIT.
OF A QUESTIONABLE ARGUMENT.
BECAUSE WE'VE SPECIFICALLY MADE
SURE THAT THE KEY TâM TO FIND
IT ON THEIR OWN DOES NOT HAVE
ACCESS TO THE TAX RECORD OR
ANYTHING THAT'S CONFIDENTIAL IN
FACT THE TOURNEY GENERAL WHEN
THEY DO GET THOSE TAX RECORDS.
TO GO AFTER TAX FRAUD CAN ONLY
USE THAT INFORMATION. FOR THIS
PURPOSE AND MUST RETAIN THAT
INFORMATION AS CONFIDENTIAL
THAT'S WHY I SAY WE HAVE
NARROWLY CONSTRUE THIS OR
DRAFTED THIS SO THAT WE ARE
GOING AFTER FRAUDULENT
ACTIVITIES.
THAT THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
IN ITS THEIR COURSE OF BUSINESS
WOULD NORMALLY HAVE ACCESS TO SO
WITH THAT I DO RESPECTFULLY ASK
YOUR AYE ABOUT THANK YOU THE
MOTION IS.
A TO PASS TO SENATE GOVERNANCE
AND FINANCE SO WITH THAT MADAM
SECRETARY -- PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL JACKSON HI JACKSON I
BORDERS.
RUSSELL RUSSELL I GONZALEZ
[inaudible]
JONES.
MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN [inaudible]
I'M BURKE.
NUMBER TO IOWA CASKEY MY CASKEY
I'D THE BILL HAS.
HAS FIVE VOTER WILL HOLD THE
ROLE THANK YOU ASSEMBLYMEMBERS.
NEXT STOP IS ASSEMBLY MEMBER
RIVAS WITH FILE ITEM.
TWENTY ONE A. B..
THIRTEEN THIRTEEN GOOD AFTERNOON
AND IT STILL IS [inaudible]
BARELY [inaudible]
I THANK.
ALL RIGHT OF IN THIS COMMITTEE
WE ASK TO TWO WITNESSES -- TWO
MINUTES EACH -- SO.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER THE FLOOR IS
YOURS.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS -- I AM PROUD TO PRESENT
AB THIRTEEN THIRTEEN WHICH SIX
TO ENSURE THAT A STUDENT'S
FUTURE IS NOT HELD HOSTAGE BY
COLLEGES.
THE BILL PROHIBITS POST
SECONDARY SCHOOLS FROM REFUSING
TO PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT IN ORDER
TO COLLECT THE DEBT.
COLLEGE TRANSCRIPTS ARE CRITICAL
DOCUMENTS THEY GIVE STUDENTS
MOBILITY TO PURSUE HIGHER
EDUCATION -- A PROFESSIONAL
LICENSE AND EMPLOYMENT.
CURRENT STATE LAW AND
EDUCATIONAL POLICY ALLOW SCHOOLS
TO WITHHOLD TRANSCRIPTS TO
COLLECT THAT.
SCHOOLS ARE PUTTING STUDENTS IN
A PREDICAMENT WHERE THEY ARE
UNABLE TO ADVANCE THEIR CAREERS
AND GET TO A PLACE WHERE THEY
CAN ACTUALLY PAY OFF THE DEBT.
OUR NATIONAL STUDENT LOAN DEBT
EXCEEDS ONE POINT FIVE TRILLION
DOLLARS THIS AMOUNT IS MORE THAN
ALL OF OUTSTANDING CREDIT CARD
DEBT.
ANOTHER REPORT A REPORT BY THE
UC STUDENT ASSOCIATION
HIGHLIGHTED THAT STUDENTS OF
COLOR AND LOW INCOME GRADUATES
ARE THREE TIMES MORE LIKELY TO
TAKE ON STUDENT LOAN DEBT AND
THERE WILL THAN THEIR WHITE AND
WEALTHIER PEERS.
THE PRACTICE OF WITHHOLDING
STUDENT TRANSCRIPTS IS MORE
LIKELY.
HARMING OUR STUDENTS OF COLOR.
WITH ALL OF THE BURDENS ALREADY
FACE SEEN OUR LOW INCOME
STUDENTS OF WE SHOULD NOT BE
MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT TO PAY
OFF DEBT.
INSTEAD WE SHOULD BE PROVIDING
WAYS TO REDUCE THE ENCUMBRANCE
OF PAYING IT OFF.
AB THIRTEEN THIRTEEN REMOVES ONE
OF THESE BARRIERS OUR STUDENTS
ARE FACING FROM PAYING OFF THEIR
STUDENT DEBT -- IT TODAY IN TO
FURTHER SPEAK ON THIS BILL I
HAVE A FEW WITNESSES IN SUPPORT --
ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE THE SPONSOR OFTHIS BILL.
I'M HAPPY TO INTRODUCE MARTIN.
RED DOSE OF EACH OTHER AND
BERNARD ESKIN DARI.
THANK YOU IN JUST A REMINDER WE
HAVE. TWO WITNESSES TWO MINUTES
EACH AND THEN ADD ON SO IF.
IF YOU WANT THREE WITNESSES YOU
NEED STAFF THIS IS MY STAFF YES
OKAY THANK YOU PLEASE PROCEED.
PARTNER DAS VIGIL A LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE SERRA -- WE WHAT WOULD PROUD
SPONSORS OF AB THIRTEEN THIRTEEN
WHICH RESTRICTS POST SECONDARY
SCHOOLS FROM THE PRACTICE OF
WITHHOLDING STUDENT TRANSCRIPTS --
AS A MEANS OF DEBT COLLECTION.
AND WE ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR INTRODUCING THE BILL I
HAVE WITH ME BARNEY ASKING DARI
HE'S A SUPERVISING DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL IN OUR CONSUMER
LAW SECTION -- WITH WE DISCUSSED
THE NEED FOR THE BILL AND ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
MISTER ASKING DARI WAS ON THE
TEAM THAT PROSECUTED CORINTHIAN
COLLEGES WHICH RESULTED IN A IN
A BILLION DOLLAR JUDGMENT
[inaudible]
THANK.
GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS BORN ASKING DARIA
SUPERVISING DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
TRANSCRIPT WITHHOLDING IS TOO
POTENT OF A TOOL FOR ANY SCHOOL
TO USED TO COLLECT THE DATA.
IT'S REALLY TRANSCRIPT EXTORTION.
TRANSCRIPTS ARE CRITICAL STUDENT
RECORDS YOU NEED A TRANSCRIPT TO
TRANSFER TO ANOTHER SCHOOL. TO
GET INTO A GRADUATE PROGRAM IT'S
OFTEN REQUIRED FOR LICENSURE
PROFESSIONAL LICENSURE OR EVEN
TO GET A JOB.
WHEN A SCHOOL WITH HOLD A
STUDENT'S TRANSCRIPT TO RESTRAIN
STUDENT CHOICE MOBILITY AND
POTENTIALLY THEIR LIVELIHOOD?
THE PRACTICE IS ALSO
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WITHOUT A
JOBBER CONTINUED EDUCATION
STUDENTS STRUGGLE TO PAY BACK
DEBT.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT TYPE OF
SCHOOL USES THIS THAT COLLECTION
TECHNIQUE.
THE SCHOOL IS LEGITIMATE
PREDATORY NONPROFIT PROPRIETARY
EVERY TIME IT'S USED ITS ABUSE.
THE OPPOSITION SAYS THAT THIS IS
JUST A WAY TO START A
CONVERSATION SCHOOLS HAVE A
NUMBER OF LESS OPPRESSIVE WAYS
TO START THIS CONVERSATION. FOR
EXAMPLE SCHOOLS CAN SUSPEND
LIBRARY OR REGISTRATION
PRIVILEGES THEY CAN WITHHOLD
CURRENT GRADES -- BEGIN WITH OLD
GRADUATION OR EVEN GREEK AND FOR
ALL THE BILL WOULD STOP SCHOOLS
FROM DOING NONE OF THIS.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT STUDENTS
SHOULD NOT BE AT THE MERCY OF
THEIR SCHOOL TO MOVE ON WITH
THEIR LIVES -- I WANT TO KEEP MY
REMARKS BRIEF FROM HABIT
ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
THE NINE ANY OPPOSITION.
THING THEN WILL BRING IT BACK TO
THE DíAS -- I'M SORRY YOUR GOT
TO BE FAST IN THIS PLACE OKAY
[inaudible]
YEAH.
THANK YOU SO TWO WITNESSES TWO
MINUTES EACH THANK YOU SENATOR --
TYLER I YOU ARE B. F. THE
UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA -- WE'RE
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO THIS
MEASURE I WANT TO THANK THE
SENATOR AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE -- FOR
PRIORITIZE IN THIS IS YOU WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE NEED TO
HIGHLIGHTTHE FACT THAT YOU SEE
IS VERY WELL AWARE AND KEENLY
AWARE ACTUALLY OF THE STUDENT
DEBT CRISIS -- WE DO I BELIEVE
THIS IS A WAY THAT WE CAN START
A CONVERSATION WITH OUR STUDENTS.
TYPICALLY -- WILL WE ACTUALLY
WENT OUT ALL OF OUR CAMPUSES AND
SURVEYED EVERY SINGLE -- ONE
NINE DIRECTLY REFUSE THE THE
OFFER THE TRANSCRIPT -- THAT
WITH HOLE YOU KNOW THEY DON'T IS
WILL HOLD IT FOR NO REASON --
EACH FOR CAMPUSES WILL -- EITHER
DO A ONE TIME RELEASE -- WORK
WITH THE STUDENTS TO COME UP
WITH SOME -- REASONABLE DOWN
PAYMENT SO THE PAYMENT CAN BE --
THE TRANSCRIPT RELEASED.
AGAIN IF IF THIS -- THIS BILL IS
SORT OF TARGET I THINK AT LEAST
FROM THAT FROM THE TESTIMONY
THAT WE HEARD AT THE FOR PROFITS --
AND LIKE THE TESTIMONY HAD
MENTIONED WE HAVE EMPLOYED THIS
METHOD ALONG WITH -- WITHHOLDING
OF DIPLOMAS AND REGISTRATION
OBVIOUSLY REGISTRATION BEING THE
MOST COMMON DIPLOMAS ALSO BEING
MORE COMMON.
BUT THIS METHOD IT WILL
ULTIMATELY TO THE SITUATION
WHERE WE CANNOT COLLECT DEBTS
VIA TRANSCRIPTS AND WE JUST HAVE --
TO THEN SEND THOSE DEBTS -- TO
MOST LIKELY A THIRD PARTY
COLLECTIONS AGENCY SO WE PREFER
WE WE WE WORK WITH THE STUDENT --
AS THE DEAD EXISTS -- IN THE
UNIVERSITY AS OPPOSED TO HAVING
TO WRITE OFF THOSE DEBTS AND
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS PLEASE
TWO MINUTES -- ALEX GRAVES WITH
THE ASSOCIATION OF AND
CALIFORNIA COLLEGES UNIVERSITIES
REPRESENT A FOR PRIVATE NOT FOR
PROFIT SCHOOLS IN THE STATE I
APOLOGIZE IF THIS YEAR'S MISSING
A WE ALSO I'M TRYING VERY HARD
NOT TO FALL OUT OF IT IS -- BUT
I I CAN MANAGE.
SO I THINK LIKE MY COLLEAGUE
FROM YOU SEE.
NO WE WE FULLY SUPPORT THE
IMPORTANCE OF GETTING YOUR
DEGREE IN GETTING IN THE WORK
FORCE WITH THIS LITTLE THAT IS
POSSIBLE -- YOU KNOW WE HAVE.
THIS AS MY COLLEAGUE MENTIONED
OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WHERE
THIS PRACTICE HAS BEEN ABUSED IS
IN THE FOR PROFIT SECTOR -- AND
YOU KNOW -- LAKE MCCUMBER YOU
SEE OUR SCHOOLS -- WHEN WE
SURVEYED THEM?
NOTED A NUMBER OF WAYS THAT THEY
TRY TO WORK WITH STUDENTS
THROUGH OTHER MECHANISMS --
WHETHER THE YEAH THAT'S
CONSTANTINA CATION TO SEE IF AS
SOON AS A HARDSHIP IN IF THEY
NEED TO DELAY OR COMFORT
ALTERNATIVE ARRANGEMENTS -- THEY
YOU KNOW THE SCHOOLS DO YOU HAVE
THE ABILITY TO WITHHOLD
REGISTRATION BUT FRANKLY NUMBER
OF OUR SCHOOLS OF INDICATED THEY
DON'T LIKE TO USE THAT TACTIC
BECAUSE THAT SLOWS DOWN A
STUDENTS PROGRESS TOWARDS A
DEGREE.
AT SLOWS DOWN THERE YOU KNOW --
THEIR TIME GRADUATION WHICH ARE
IT IS NOT THE BEST INTEREST OF
THE STUDENT -- OR OR THE IN --
THE UNIVERSITY -- AND I WOULD
SAY YOU KNOW OUR OUR SCHOOLS YOU
WORK WITH THE STUDENTS AND
PROVIDE THIS FLEXIBILITY AND TRY
TO WORK THESE THINGS OUT WHILE
THE STUDENTS ENROLLED.
YOU KNOW BECAUSE YOU KNOW OUR
SCHOOLS PRIMARY MISSION AND
MOTIVATION IS PRODUCE GRADUATES
IT'S NOT TO PRODUCE PROFITS --
YOU KNOW AS I MENTIONED IN
ADDITIONAL GRADUATION RATES BY
SLOWING US INSIDE A DEGREE YOU
KNOW THERE'S ALSO.
YOU KNOW ADD TO THE NOTE OF YOU
KNOW WITH HOLDING DIPLOMAS
PREVENTS IS GETTING JOBS YEAH WE
ALSO ARE MEASURED AGAINST OUR
OUR STUDENT DEFAULT RATES.
NEWS NUMBER MEASUREMENTS -- THE
OUR SCHOOLS YOU KNOW ARE ARE
ASSESSED AGAINST IN TERMS OF
STUDENTS ARE GETTING IN THE WORK
FORCE SO.
COLLECTIONS YOU KNOW I KNOW IT'S
AN OPTION ON THE BACK AND AND I
WAS GONNA SAY THAT'S NOT THE
PREFERRED MECHANISM FOR OUR
INSTITUTIONS -- FOR AMONG OTHER
REASONS THAT WHEN YOU GO TO
COLLECTIONS IN ADDITION TO THAT
YOU KNOW BEING AN ADVERSE MARK
ON STUDENTS CREDIT SCORE
POTENTIALLY SCHOOLS ARE ONLY
RECOUPING TO THE NATURE OF HOW
COLLECTIONS -- OTHERS COLLECTORS
GET PAID IS BETTER RECOUPING
3550% OF THOSE FIND SO WHAT I
HEAR THE TIMER GOING OFF SO ALL
STOP IT.
A SUBTLE REMINDER.
WHEN YOU'RE ALMOST IT'S HARD TO
MISS?
I WOULD LIKE SO THAT YOU DON'T
FALL IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND --
GIFT REPLACING WILL REPLACE THAT
SHARE.
HERE'S THE HERE'S THE HERE'S THE
WILL OF AND AND THERE IS THE ONE
WITH THE ELECTRONIC CHARGES AND
IT IS SAID THAT NO IT'S THE
CHECK HER SEE THAT SHE CHECKED
OR SEE.
ALL RIGHT ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION PLEASE STEP FOR WITH
YOUR OF TO THE MICROPHONE NAME
AND AFFILIATION OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SEEING AND HEARING
NONE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE
DYESS SENATOR BORCHERS.
I CAN ONLY PROVIDE THE ANECDOTAL
EXPERIENCE -- WENT TO SCHOOL OF
CAMBRIDGE AND IN DC AREA.
AND I TRIED TO GET A TRANSCRIPT
[inaudible]
AND I COULDN'T THERE WAS
APPARENTLY A LIEN ON MY ACCOUNT
CALL THEM UP.
AND THEY SAID YOU OWES THREE
DOLLARS FOR YOUR TRANSCRIPT THAT
YOU ORDERED EARLIER.
AND I GO BUT I NEED RIGHT NOW.
AND PAYING BY CREDIT CARD FOR
THE PHONE WAS AN OPTION.
AND THEN I REALIZED.
HOW PROFOUND THAT IMBALANCES?
THIS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
YOU KNOWN STUDENT LOAN DEFAULT
IN REPAYMENT OPTIONS I'M TALKING
ABOUT BREAD AND BUTTER ISSUES
[inaudible]
WHAT'S.
BUT THE IDEA IS THAT NGUYEN IN
INSTITUTION.
THAT YOU HAVE.
INVESTED IN CONSIDERABLE
RESOURCES -- TOWARD IS TELLING
YOU THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO
GIVE YOU YOUR MONEY BACK BECAUSE
OF THREE DOLLARS THERE'S AN
IMBALANCE.
AND I THINK I WILL CERTAINLY BE
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS -- ARE THERE
ARE EXTREMES IN INSTANCES WHERE
INDIVIDUALS HAVE -- CREATED TO
DIFFICULTIES IN -- IN NOT
HONORED THEIR OBLIGATIONS
UNIVERSITIES YES -- BUT FROM MY
LIMITED EXPERIENCE I THINK THE
IDEA IS THAT WHEN YOU.
CREATE IMPEDIMENTS FOR
INDIVIDUALS TO MOVE FORWARD.
YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET YOUR
RETURN ON INVESTMENT IF YOU
STAND IN THEIR WAY COMPLETELY IN
THAT REGARD SO WITH THAT I'LL BE
IN SUPPORT OF THIS EFFORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT [inaudible]
THIS.
OR IN ARE ACTUALLY NOT IN
SUPPORT BUT ANY OTHER ANY OTHER --
MEMBERS -- WISH TO RESPONSE IN A
WORKOUT SKIN IN A CENTER ON
BURKE I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR
THE AUTHORED THAT THE DIPLOMAS
CAN STILL BE WITHHELD AND IT
SEEMS LIKE THAT'S A BIG THING
WHEN YOU GRADUATE THAT YOU WOULD
WANT TO GET YOUR DIPLOMA.
AND WHAT WAS THE RATIONALE FOR
THAT.
I THINK THAT WAS MENTIONED AS
ANOTHER WAY THAT.
THE SCHOOLS CAN -- COLLECT THAT.
RIGHT I MEAN YEAH.
TRANSCRIPT REALLY CREATE THE
POWER IMBALANCE BECAUSE THAT'S
REALLY THE KEY TO STOKE STUDENT
MOBILITY IT'S THE IT'S THE
MEMORIALIZATION OF THE COURSE
WORK THAT'S BEEN COMPLETED.
THE DIPLOMA DOESN'T HAVE THE
SAME SORT OF A MOBILITY
IMPEDIMENTS THAT THE TRANSCRIPT
OFFERS.
SO IT'S IT'S STILL STICK THAT
CAN BE USED TIMES FOR A VERY
VERY EFFECTIVE STICK BUT IT'S
NOT AS BIG AS THE TRANSCRIPTS
TECH PROBABLY INEFFECTIVE STICK
TO ONE'S PARENTS OR FOR ONCE.
RENTS AS COMPARED TO THE
TRANSCRIPT -- I'VE SEEN FAR TOO
MANY -- DIPLOMAS OF PEOPLE HANG
ON THE BACK OF THEIR BATHROOMS --
BUT THE TRANSCRIPTS OBVIOUSLY
HAVE SOME.
SIGNIFICANCE TO MOST PEOPLE.
THANK YOU A SENATOR UMBERG THE
MANAGER I I JUST WANT UNDERSTAND
UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA'S POSITION.
UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA'S POSITION
IS IS THAT IF A STUDENT.
OWES A DEBT.
AND THEN A STUDENT IS APPLYING
FOR A JOB IN NEEDS THAT
TRANSCRIPT IN ORDER TO GET A JOB
TO PAY THAT THAT.
THE UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA'S
POSITIONS THEY CAN'T GET THE
TRANSCRIPT RIGHT RIGHT YEAH NO
SO THAT AND I WANT TO I WANTTO
MAKE SURE THEY EMPHASIZE THAT
THIS SITUATION WERE TALKING
ABOUT AND WE CAN HAVE TO GO BACK
AND TEXTUALLY TO LOOK AT THE THE
IMPETUS FOR THIS BILL WHICH IS.
THAT WE HEARD IN LAST TESTIMONY
LAST COMMITTEE THAT THERE IS A
CURRENT IN COLLEGE THAT ACTUALLY
WAS PULLING STUDENTS OUT OF
CLASS. FOR NOT PAYING DEBTS SO I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
MAKING A BIG DELINEATION BETWEEN
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
THAT BUT I WANT TO SAY THAT THE
PROCESS IS SUCH THAT IF A
STUDENT FOR EXAMPLE ONE OF OUR
CAMPUSES.
IS SAYING THAT THEY NEED A JOB
AND THE THE TRANSCRIPT THEY
ASKED WITH EMPLOYEES EMAIL THEY
SEND THE TRANSCRIPT RECORD OF
EMPLOYER.
THE DEATH NOT PAID STILL -- WE
PUT IN THE COST ESTIMATE OF ANY
ABOUT ONLY GOOD HOLES THAT WE
HAVE THE UC SYSTEM IS AN
ESTIMATE.
OR TALKING ABOUT MILLION DOLLARS
SO WE LIKE TO RECOUP THOSE COSTS
WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT STUDENTS
ARE IN A BIND SOMETIMES SO WE'RE
GONNA WORK WITH STUDENTS ON
EVERY SINGLE CASE LIKE HAD
MENTIONED IN MY TESTIMONY AT THE
LETTER AS WELL BUT BUT AGAIN I
THINK IT'S THE IDEA.
THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A A
QUITE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
MONEY.
OKAY I I GET THERE'S WORST
DEFENDERS.
WE PROBABLY CAN STIPULATE
THERE'S WORST OFFENDERS THE
WORST OFFENDERS THAN THAN YOU'RE
SICK OF ME BUT I JUST I WANT TO
MAKE.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND
THAT THE UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIANS
POSITION IS IF YOU OWE MONEY YOU
DON'T GET A TRANSCRIPT RIGHT --
I WOULDN'T SAY THAT'S THE
POSITION THAT WE HAVE I THINK IS
THAT WE WOULD PREFER TAT THE
DEBT WE WOULD LIKE TO COLLECT
THAT THAT AND THEN RELEASED A
TRANSCRIPT YES THIS.
THIS METHOD HAS BEEN UTILIZED BY
ALL INSTITUTIONS AND ALL
CALIFORNIA FOR AS LONG AS IT'S
BEEN AROUND OKAY.
THAT'S NOW I UNDERSTAND ARE.
ALL RIGHT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS SEEING NONE.
MOTION BY SENATOR MINING.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER RIVAS YOU MAY
CLOSE.
THANK YOU -- YOU KNOW WAS -- THE
REPRESENTATIVE FROM A I SEE SEE
YOU MENTIONED IN HIS TESTIMONY
THE MISSION OF OUR SCHOOLS ARE
UNIVERSITIES IS TO PRODUCE
GRADUATES NOT PROFIT -- AND I
THINK OUR OUR UNIVERSITIES HAVE
TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEIR
MISSION IS YOU KNOW TO NOT PUT
THESE BARRIERS SELECT.
SENATOR BOARD JUST MENTIONED
OVER THREE DOLLARS NOT RELEASE A
TRANSCRIPT WHEN NEEDED -- AND
AND SO THAT'S WHY I AM PROUD TO
BE -- OF AUTHOR THIS BILL I YOU
KNOW I BELIEVE THAT OUR SCHOOLS
SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON SERVING
STUDENTS -- AND NOT ACTING LIKE
THEY'RE IT FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS AND THERE IS NO
DATA -- YOU KNOW WE HAVEN'T
TRACKED -- HOW MANY SCHOOLS AND
HOW MANY CASES THERE ARE IN OUR
OUR -- UNIVERSITIES IN THE UC
HAS AN ESTIMATE THAT THEY WOULD
LOSE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS -- BUT
WE DON'T COLLECT THE DATA SO I
DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT NUMBER
CAME FROM AND HOW IT COULD BE
PRODUCED SO -- I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE TODAY
THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT THE MOTION THE BY
CENTER MONNING IS TO PASS TO
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS I WANT
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
I THINK IT'S IT JUST BEYOND
UNDERSTANDING THAT.
ONE TRANSCRIPT WOULD BE HELL
BECAUSE YOU MAY OWE A FEW
DOLLARS TO THE SCHOOL.
AND AGAIN OTHER OTHER WAYS TO
COLLECT THAT MONEY.
SO WITH THAT -- MA'AM SECTOR
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY ONE AB
HIRTEEN THIRTEEN JACKSON HI
JACKSON AYE BORDERS.
OR DECIDE TO RUSSELL TO RUSSELL
I'D GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I JONES JONES I'M
MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
I'M BURKE.
NUMBER I Y. CASKEY.
I CASKEY AYE ALL RIGHT THE BILL
HAS EIGHT VOTES AND WE WILL HOLD
THE ROLE OPEN FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBERS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH -- WE'VE GOT
TWO BILLS LEFT WE'VE GOT --
EXCUSE ME THREE BILLS -- WILL GO
NOW TO FILE ITEM TWENTY TWO A.
B. THIRTEEN TWENTY BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER NECESSARY AND THEN WE
HAVE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER SANTIAGO AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CRISTINA GARCIA --
SO I HOPE THAT THEY ARE WITHIN
THE SOUND OF MY VOICE AND WILL
BE COMING. TO HELP US CLOSE OUT.
A AS SOON AS WE POSSIBLY CAN
ASSEMBLY MEMBER NAZARIAN THE
FLOOR IS YOURS.
THANK YOU THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
AND SENATORS.
AB THIRTEEN TWENTY WOULD REQUIRE
THE BOARDS OF CALPERS AND CAL
STARS TO DIVEST PUBLIC EMPLOYEE
RETIREMENT FUNDS FROM AND ANY
INVESTMENT VEHICLE OWNED BY THE
GOVERNMENT OF TURKEY.
THE LIQUIDATION OF INVESTMENTS
IN TURKEY IS CONTINGENT UPON THE
PASSAGE OF A FEDERAL LAW.
ISSUING SANCTIONS AGAINST TURKEY
FOR FAILING TO RECOGNIZE THE
ARMENIAN GENOCIDE.
THIS CONTINGENCY CLAUSE IN
SHORES CALIFORNIA'S POLICY TO
DIVEST FROM TURKEY REMAINS
CONSISTENT WITH PASSED THE
VESTMENTS FROM FOREIGN NATIONS
INCLUDING SADAN AND IRAN.
IN THAT PURRS AND STIRS WILL NOT
DIVEST UNTIL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS TAKEN
ACTION FIRST.
ALSO THIS BILL INCLUDES A
PROVISION PROTECTING THE BOARDS
OF CALPERS AND CAL STIRS BY
STATING ACTIONS TAKEN TO ALIGN
WITH THIS BILL.
ARE NOT REQUIRED IF THEY VIOLATE
THE BOARD'S FIDUCIARY
RESPONSIBILITIES.
FURTHER THERE IS A PROVISION AND
THEM TO FIND THE BOARDS AND
EMPLOYEES FROM CLAIMS BROUGHT
FORTH.
BY ACTIONS TAKEN IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THIS BILL.
OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY'S
UNWILLINGNESS TO RECOGNIZE THE
GENOCIDE AND THEIR UNRELENTING
CAMPAIGN TO THE NIGHT THAT
GENOCIDE.
CONTINUES TO DISCRIMINATE
AGAINST ARMENIANS GREEKS AND THE
SYRIANS.
WHO SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF THE
TURKISH GOVERNMENT THE FORMER
OTTOMAN EMPIRE?
A JOINING ME TODAY.
IS MISS HELEN HAGUE WITH THE
ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY OF AMERICA.
THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION THANK
YOU TWO MINUTES IF YOU WOULD
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY HAS A
LETTER AND REPORT ON FILE IN
SUPPORT OF AB.
THIRTEEN TWENTY I JUST WANT TO
MENTION TO HIGHLIGHTS VERY
BRIEFLY.
FIRST OF ALL AS MANY OF YOU MAY
KNOW OUR LATE GOVERNOR GEORGE
DEUKMEJIAN IN THE NINETEEN
EIGHTIES FOUGHT APARTHEID IN
SOUTH AFRICA.
BY PROMOTING DIVESTITURE.
AND I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF
SERVING AS HIS DEPUTY DIRECTOR
FOR POLICY IN HIS OFFICE.
AND WITNESSED THE ENORMOUS
AMOUNT OF PRESSURE AND
OPPOSITION BUT HE STOOD HIS
GROUND.
IT DID BECOME CALIFORNIA
DIVESTITURE POLICY AND THEN HE
WENT ON TO WORK WITH MAXINE
WATERS.
AND IN A BI PARTISAN EFFORT THEY
GOT IT THROUGH BOTH HOUSES OF
CONGRESS IT BECAME US.
POLICY AND I BRING IT UP BECAUSE
IT ILLUSTRATES THAT THERE HAS
BEEN PRODUCTIVE AND EFFECTIVE.
PRESIDENT FOR DIVESTITURE OF
THIS KIND.
THE SECOND THING I WANT TO
MENTION IS THAT I AM VESTED IN
PURRS AND TALK FREQUENTLY WITH
MANY PEERS AND COLLEAGUES.
STATEWIDE FROM MANY DIFFERENT
BACKGROUNDS AND WE SMPLY DO NOT
WANT OUR DOLLARS.
BEING INVESTED IN TURKISH
GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTS
[inaudible] TO CONCLUDE.
I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU THAT I
AM THE DAUGHTER OF GENOCIDE
SURVIVORS MY PARENTS WERE VERY
YOUNG.
I HAVE MEMORIES OF BEING
AWAKENED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
NIGHT.
BY MY MOTHER'S BLOOD CURDLING
SCREAMS BECAUSE SHE HAD
NIGHTMARES.
RELIVING WHAT SHE WENT THROUGH
AS A CHILD.
I HOPE I NEVER HAVE TO HEAR THAT
KIND OF SCREAMING AGAIN.
THERE MANY MANY STORIES I CAN'T
BEGIN TO DESCRIBE THE HUMAN
COSTS OF GENOCIDE.
BUT WHAT WE DO KNOW IS WE ARE
COMPELLED TO ALLEVIATE SUFFERING.
AND THAT MEANS PREVENTING
GENOCIDE WHERE WE CAN AND THAT
INCLUDES.
HOLDING PERPETRATORS ACCOUNTABLE
IN WHATEVER WAY WE CAN.
SO WHEN WE PUT THE ISSUES OF OUR
HUMANITY NEXT TO THE
IMPLICATIONS OF INVESTING IN A
COUNTRY THAT HAS ON GOING
GENOCIDAL POLICIES.
INCLUDING AS I'M SURE YOU'VE
HEARD THE MASSACRE OF THE KURDS
CURRENTLY A DOCUMENT SUPPORT FOR
ISIS WE HAVE ABSOLUTE CLARITY AS
TO WHY WE ARE SUPPORTING.
AB.
THIRTEEN TWENTY THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FULLY AS REFERRED THANK YOU
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION ARE
THERE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION IF YOU WOULD
[inaudible]
STEP FORWARD. TWO MINUTES PLEASE
[inaudible]
OR LESS.
THANK YOU.
AND WHITE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
SYSTEM AND RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE ENGAGEMENT
IS A MORE EFFECTIVE BALANCE THAN
MANDATORY TO PASS.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
AND WHEN YOU SAY ENGAGEMENT
WOULD YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT THAT
IS.
ABSOLUTELY -- WHEN WE TALKED --
TO PROSPECTIVE INVESTORS --
INVESTORS WHO WANT TO WORK ON
OUR BEHALF AND OUR OUR STAFF --
DIRECTLY TALKING TO BUSINESSES
THE CIGAR INVESTMENT -- BRING UP
THESE ISSUES -- BOTH PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE USING SHAREHOLDER POWER.
THAT'S THANK YOU VERY MUCH AS
CENTER BORCHERS.
THANK YOU -- GERMAN I WANT TO
COMMEND -- THE AUTHOR.
SHOULD A COLUMN AND GET -- WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR BRING THIS SIDE
OF FORD.
NORMALLY I WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE
THAT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN.
SO DIRECTLY IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
THERE ARE I THINK ARE COMPELLING --
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WARRANTED
GIVEN THAT WERE THE FIFTH
LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD OUR
INVESTMENTS EXPRESS OUR
PRIORITIES NOT ONLY AS A STATE
BUT REFLECT UPON THE NATION.
AND I THINK UNDER THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES AND I'D FORGIVE ME
FOR REFERENCING YOUR EARLIER
COMMENT OF ENGAGEMENT.
THERE'S NO ENGAGEMENT.
ON THIS ISSUE.
IF THERE WERE.
LAST HUNDRED AND FOUR YEARS WHAT
APPROVED A DIFFERENT RESULT --
AND WHAT I'VE SEEN AT A BIRD A
ONE AND THE ENTIRE POSTURE OF
THE REPUBLIC.
OF IRELAND.
THEY WILL NOT -- REMOVE THEIR
OPPOSITION TO ALL -- ALL
OVERTURES TO TRY TO CREATE IN
RIGHT.
S. ORACLE RECORD.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
SO I FULLY SUPPORT THE SAY.
THIS IDEA DIVESTING FROM AN
ENTITY THAT HAS NO INTEREST IN.
ACCOUNTABILITY IT HAS NO
INTEREST IN LOOKING AT THE
LARGER PICTURE IN TERMS OF
RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES --
WE'VE SEEN.
I ITS DEVIATION FROM THE WEST
AND I DON'T SEE THAT CHANGING
ANYTIME SOON -- BUT I WON'T DEL
TOO MUCH INTO FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EXCEPT THAT IT'S AT OUR DOORSTEP.
AND WITH THAT I WOULD FULLY
SUPPORT THE DIVESTMENT OF
CALPERS IN OUR CALIFORNIA
RELATED INVESTMENTS.
INTO THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY.
BECAUSE THEY DO NOT DESERVE.
OUR OUR INVESTMENT AND
PARTNERSHIP.
THANK YOU SENATOR TO RUSSELL.
YES I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
AUTHOR -- AND THE ENTIRE
COMMUNITY OF FOR BRINGING THIS
UP I'M PROUD TO REPRESENT A
LITTLE ARMENIA IN SENATE
DISTRICT -- TWENTY FOUR
CALIFORNIA IS HOME TO OVER ONE
MILLION ARMENIANS.
AND WE HAVE BEEN STRONG.
IN SUPPORTING THE ARMENIAN
GENOCIDE RECOGNITION AND THE
INDEPENDENCE OF ARTS ARE -- THIS
BILL CONTINUES AS YOU MENTION
CALIFORNIA'S COMMITMENT TO ACT.
APPROPRIATELY AGAINST COUNTRIES
THAT HAVE.
A RECORD OF HUMAN RIGHTS
VIOLATIONS AND UNDERMINE
DEMOCRACY SO.
I EXPECTED CALIFORNIA -- WE JUST
REMIND US THAT CALIFORNIA HAS A
HISTORY OF DIVESTMENT.
ON NOT ONLY SOUTH AFRICA BUT
THROUGH DOWN AND I EXPECT THAT
WE SHOULD CONTINUE. TO STAND ON
THE SIDE NOT JUST OF THE
ARMENIAN COMMUNITY BUT ALL.
JUST AS LOVING PEOPLES OF THE
WORLD -- AND AGAINST THAT AND
JUSTICE SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THANK YOU US CENTER ON BURKE
FALL BY SENATOR MONEY.
JUST JUST VERY BRIEFLY A
SETTLEMENT MEMBER MEMBER IN THIS
AREA -- I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU
SHOULD TURKEY TAKE THAT FIRST
STEP TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HISTORIC
REALITY GENOCIDE TO PERHAPS
BRING THAT SOMETHING BACK SO WE
CAN RECONSIDER.
BUT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE
COUNTRY ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGES
WHAT WAS HISTORIC FACT I DON'T
KNOW HOW WE CAN -- ENGAGE WITH
THAT COUNTRY I TAKE THE POINT
THAT THE ENGAGEMENT IS IMPORTANT
BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE AS A
STATE.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A SEPARATE.
ISSUE -- KIANA SHOULD ENGAGE SO
I COMMEND YOU IN SUPPORT THE
BILL.
THANK YOU SENATOR MONNING.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR I TO JUST
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR AND I
THINK THE WAY YOU CRAFTED THIS
RECOGNIZING THAT.
FOREIGN POLICY IS IN THE
PROVINCE OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT -- I THINK IT'S A
THOUGHTFUL APPROACH IT PUTS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON RECORD
RECOGNIZES.
THE OFFICIAL FORM POLICY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IMMEDIATE
INCENTIVIZE HIS.
ACTION AT THAT LEVEL SO THANK
YOU INTO YOUR WITNESS THANK YOU
FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU SIR MOTION
[inaudible]
THE MOVE.
ALREADY THE SENATOR BORCHERS HAS
MOVED AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER
DESIRING YOU MAY CLOSE.
UP THANK YOU BYE BYE I THINK THE
COLLECTIVE COMMENTS SHOULD SERVE
AS A WONDERFUL CLOSE TO THIS SO
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE EVERYTHING
THAT'S BEEN SAID AND AND TO TO
SENATOR MUNNINGS POINT IT'S IT'S
EXACTLY.
WHAT THE INTENT OF THIS BILL WAS
NOT TO COMPROMISE CALIFORNIA'S
INTEREST OR CALIFORNIANS
INTEREST?
BUT AT THE SAME TIME TO STE SEND
A STRONG MESSAGE ABSENT THE
ABILITY TO ENGAGE -- AT THE
STATE LEVEL SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH MR CLASS RIVAL THANK YOU
VERY MUCH WE HAVE A MOTION TO DO
PASS TO SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
A MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY TWO A.
B. THIRTEEN TWENTY JACKSON HI
JACKSON AYE BORGIAS.
FORGES I DO RUSSELL RUSSELL I
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I JONES JONES
I AM MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
I'M BURKE.
NUMBER AYE WHY CAL SKI.
ALL RIGHT THE VOTE COUNT IS.
SEVEN TWO ZERO WE WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE OPEN THANK YOU
ASSEMBLYMEMBER -- TWO BILLS LEFT --
ASSEMBLY MEMBER SANTIAGO
FOLLOWED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CRISTINA GARCIA.
AND IF THE SERGEANT WOULD DIE A
CALL ARE ABSENT MEMBERS BECAUSE
I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH THE ROLE
ONE TIME WHEN WE ARE DONE
[inaudible]
OF THIS IS FILE ITEM. TWENTY
THREE AB THIRTEEN EIGHTY FIVE
GOOD EVENING IT IS GOOD EVENING
THE FLOOR IS YOURS WITH YOUR
PURCHASE SOME BREVITY.
I WOULD LOVE SOME HAVE -- AB
THIRTEEN THE FIBER PROPOSE A
MODEST FEE INCREASE FOR
TRANSCRIPTS PREPARED BY OFFICIAL
COURT REPORTERS.
I THANK YOU MADAM TURN I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR NIVEAU AND
HAVE A WELL DONE WELL.
VERY WELL DONE THANK YOU
WITNESSES PLEASE TWO MINUTES
EACH MAXIMUM MICHELLE CAST OF
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL
UNION -- JUST WANT TO SAY IT'S
THE COURT REPORTERS HAVE HOW TO
ONE INCREASE IN A HUNDRED FIVE
YEARS ON THE TRANSCRIPT RATES --
AND ALSO MY NOTE THAT THEY PAY
FOR ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT SOFTWARE
TECHNOLOGY THAT GETS USED TO
CREATE A TRANSCRIPT -- SINCE THE
LAST TRANSCRIPT RATE IN --
NINETEEN NINETY THE COSTS OF
THAT EQUIPMENT IN OTHER
INFORMATION HAS GONE UP.
A LOT -- COST OF LIVING HAS GONE
UP BY 81% JUST ONE AT THAT NOT
ONLY ARE COURT REPORTERS A GOLD
STANDARD IN TAKING DOWN THE
RECORD.
THEY DO THINGS TO ENSURE THAT
INDIGENT LITIGANTS WILL GET A A
TRANSCRIPT THE OF THE TRANSCRIPT
REIMBURSEMENT FUND WHICH THEY
FIND 1100% -- SO WHAT THEY DO
MORE THAN THEIR SHIP FAIR SHARED
ENSURE ACCESS TO JUSTICE WE
THINK IT'S HIGH TIME.
THEY DESERVE A TRANSCRIPT RATE
INCREASE ASK FOR AYE VOTE THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU GOOD EVENING
MY NAME IS RACHEL BAR KIßM AND
THE PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
COURT REPORTERS ASSOCIATION.
I'VE BEEN A REPORTER FOR EIGHT
YEARS AND AND I WON'T REPEAT
ANYTHING THE MISSILE JUST SAID
BUT ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO
ADD IS THAT COURT REPORTERS THAT
PRODUCE TRANSCRIPTS WE DO THAT
ON OUR OWN TIME ON THE NIGHTS
AND WEEKENDS -- WE ARE EMPLOYEES
OF THE COURT DURING THE DAY --
AND TRANSCRIPTS ARE PREPARED
OUTSIDE OF COURT HOURS AND THE
ONLY COMPENSATION WE HAVE FOR
THAT IS THIS TRANSCRIPT RATES
THAT IS THAT BY STATUTE SO -- AS
MICHELLE SAID -- ONLY WE HAVE
NOT HAD A AND GRAYSON THIS FOR
THIRTY YEARS SO WE THINK THAT IT
IS TIME THANK YOU AND I URGE
YOUR FEVER FOR I THINK YOU
BEFORE WE HAVE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS WHAT PERCENTAGE OF
COURT REPORTERS ARE WOMEN.
I BELIEVE IT'S A 90% ARE WOMEN.
THANK YOU.
NOT AT ALL BUT THE THAT IS I
THINK A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THIS
DISCUSSION.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
YOUR NUMBERS PACMAN WITH THEIR
AND READING ASSOCIATES
REPRESENTING THE ORANGE COUNTY
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION STRONG
SUPPORT THANK THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS CAITLIN VEGA
FOR THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION ALSO HERE IN SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MAP BROAD
VARIETY T. LOCAL TWENTY ONE IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU THANK YOU
THE RIVER WITH ASKED ME
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT SEEING NONE WILL BRING
IT BACK TO THE DíAS SENATOR
MONNING.
THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR BRING THIS FORWARD I'M
JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT.
INDIGENT.
CLIENTS -- YES.
SO REPORTERS ARE PAYING THEY PAY
1100% OF WHAT'S IN THE
TRANSCRIPT REIMBURSEMENT FUND
THROUGH AND A SET ANNUAL
ASSESSMENT ON THEIR LICENSING
FEE -- TWO YEARS AGO -- BY THEIR
OWN VOLITION THEY AGREED TO
INCREASE THAT RATE BY DOUBLE
THAT TOOK EFFECT ON JANUARY ONE
OF THIS YEAR.
YOU GIVE ME A ROUGH ESTIMATE
WHAT THAT ASSESSMENT IS.
I DON'T KNOW OFF HAND YOU KNOW.
ANYWAY IT IS NOT CRUCIAL I'M
JUST CURIOUS THAT.
WE'RE ASKING THE REPORTERS TO
SUBSIDIZE THAT YES WE AGREE THAT
IT SHOULD NOT BE BORNE ENTIRELY
BY COURT REPORTERS TO ENSURE
THAT IN INDIGENT LITIGANTS
RECEIVED TRANSCRIPTS BY -- THEY
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO
THEIR PART -- IN ENSURING ACCESS
TO JUSTICE FOR ALL PARTIES.
WE APPRECIATE THAT COMMITMENT
BUT MAYBE.
FIGHTER FOR A FUTURE.
INDEED LEGISLATION THANK YOU
READY ANY OTHER COMMENTS
QUESTIONS.
MOVE THE BILL MOVED BY SENATOR
ROSS SO I WANT TO THANK YOU TO A
COURT REPORTING IS A VERY.
CHALLENGING OCCUPATION.
THAT REQUIRES ATTENTION TO
DETAIL AND CONCENTRATION IT'S
IT'S NOT AN EASY JOB HAVING.
A AND I CAN IMAGINE TRYING TO OF
A TRANSCRIBE THE FAST MOVING
PACE OF SOME OF OUR WITNESSES
EARLIER TODAY WOULD HAVE BEEN
VERY DIFFICULT -- NOTING THAT IT
IS 90% FEMALE OCCUPATION IT'S
ABOUT TIME WE KINDA.
LIFT THE VALUE IN THAT STILL
SERVICES SO I AM APPRECIATE YOUR
BRINGING THE BILL -- WE HAVE A
MOTION THE MOTION IS SAID TO
PASS THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK RIVAL MANAGER.
COULD MA'AM ALL RIGHT -- PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY THREE A.
B. THIRTEEN EIGHTY FIVE JACKSON
HI JACKSON AYE BORDERS.
RUSSELL RUSSELL I GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ I'D JONES [inaudible]
MONNING.
MONEY AYE STERN.
I'M BURKE AMER I Y. CASKEY
MAKOWSKI I THE BILL HAS A SIX
VOTES AND WE WILL LEAVE THE ROLL
UP AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THANKS SO MUCH.
OUR FINAL ITEM OF THE DAY IS.
AB.
FIFTEEN SIXTY ONE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CRISTINA GARCIA FILE ITEM.
TWENTY FOUR MISTER CUNNINGHAM I
UNDERSTAND IS THERE IS NO
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.
OKAY CELLS AND THANK THEM
BETWEEN MY DINNER IN YOUR DINNER --
AB FIFTEEN SIXTEEN ONE WOULD
REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
HOUSING ELEMENT TO INCLUDE AN
ANALYSIS OF GOVERNMENTAL
CONSTRAINTS.
UPON HEALTH SEEM FOR INDIVIDUALS
IDENTIFIED UNDER THE AND
REASONABLE RIGHT TAX OR PROTECT
THE CLASS FOR OUR POPULATION AND
I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE.
THANK YOU WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
IF YOU COULD BE BRIEF THERE'S NO
OPPOSITION ABSOLUTELY MADAM
CHAIRMAN MICHAEL GUNNING WITH
THE CIA HERE IN SUPPORT WE THINK
THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD
EVALUATE ITS IMPACT ON THEIR
LOCAL DECISIONS.
GREAT THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON ROBERT APODACA
WITH CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
BUILDERS IN A PROJECT CALLED THE
TWO HUNDRED WE ALSO IN SUPPORT
OF THAT.
THANK YOU WHETHER ANY WITNESS
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
BRING IT BACK TO THE DYESS ANY.
MOTION BY SENATOR UMBERG ANY
FURTHER DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
AND AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT
THAT YOU'VE WORKED THROUGH IT SO
THERE IS NO OPPOSITION.
THE MOTION IS DO PASS A TO
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS.
MADAM SECTOR PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL FILE ITEM NUMBER TWENTY
FOUR A. B. FIFTEEN SIXTY ONE
JACKSON.
AYE JACKSON AYE BORDERS.
RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I GONZALEZ GONZALEZ I
JONES.
MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
I'M BURKE.
NUMBER AYE WIECKOWSKI WHAT HAS
THE AYE RIGHT THE BILL HAS.
HAS SIX VOTES WE WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE OPEN -- I MIGHT NOTE NEXT
NEXT WEEK FOLKS WE HAVE ABOUT
SEVENTY BILLS ON OUR CALENDAR.
WE WE WE HAVE.
TO THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WHAT ARE?
YEAH YEAH.
THANK YOU WHAT THAT WOULD BE
FABULOUS ALRIGHT WE'LL DO WHAT
WE CAN THERE BUT WE STARTED
SEVENTY AND THAT.
DOES NOT BODE WELL FOR SHORT
EVENING SO -- LET US -- GO
THROUGH THE OF LET'S SEE WE NEED
WE NEED ONE MEMBER.
DO WE KNOW WHERE IT [inaudible]
OKAY WELL.
LET'S WAIT WE'RE GONNA WAIT ONE
MINUTE AND THEN WE'RE GONNA.
GO THROUGH THE ROLE SO WE CAN
ALL.
GET THE TO OUR OTHER ACTIVITIES.
WE DO OUR BEST.
TRUST ME WE REALLY DO TRY TO GET
THEM OUT AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.
WEEKENDS ARE NEVER FUN -- TRY TO
GET TO THOSE WEEKENDS IS ALSO
DIFFICULT BUT WILL OUR OUR WILL
CERTAINLY DO MY BEST. TO TO GET
THOSE OUT.
THANK YOU CENTER STERN WE'RE
GONNA GO THROUGH THE FOR THE
CALENDAR ONE TIME.
THIS IS THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
THE VOTE COUNTY IS SIX TO ZERO
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
JONES.
JONES I'M MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN I NINE TWO ZERO THE
CONSENT CALENDAR IS OUT.
ALL RIGHT OF FILE ITEM ONE AB
THIRTY TWO THE VOTE COUNTY IS A
FIVE TO ONE OF THE JURORS VOTING
HI PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS GORGEOUS.
MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN AYE RIGHT OF THE VOTE
COUNT IS SEVEN TO ONE THE BILL
IS OUT.
FILE ITEM TWO IS AB.
ONE SIXTY OF THE VOTE COUNTY IS
OF OF FOR ICE TO KNOWS THE CHAIR
VOTING NO.
THIS IS THE BILL ON VETERANS
PREFERENCE POINTS TEACHERS
VOTING NO PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS RUSSELL [inaudible]
MONNING [inaudible]
I CASKEY.
BUT HEALTHY NO. FORTY THREE THE
BILL FAILS.
RECONSIDERATION IS GRANTED.
MOVING ALONG TO FILE ITEM.
THREE OF FIVE TWO ZERO TEACHER
VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS.
THE ACCOUNT IS FIVE TWO ONE
JONES.
JONES NO MONNING [inaudible]
MONNING I I'M BURKE.
NUMBER HI RIGHT THE VOTE COUNT
IS.
SEVEN TWO TWO THE BILL IS OUT
FILE ITEM NUMBER.
FOUR IS -- AB ONE SEVENTY ONE
THE VOTE COUNT IS FOR TWO ZERO
THE TRIGGER VOTING HI
[inaudible]
GORGEOUS.
WE'RE JUST NO JONES.
JONES NO MONNING.
MONNING AYE STERN.
STERN I AM BURKE.
NUMBER I ALL RIGHT SEVEN A TO
THAT BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM FIVE
AB TWO EIGHTEEN THE VOTE COUNT
IS.
FOUR TWO ZERO THE CHAIR VOTING
HI [inaudible]
GORGEOUS [inaudible]
JONES.
JONES NO MONNING.
MONEY AYE STERN.
STERN I AM BURKE.
NUMBER I RIGHT THE THE FINAL
VOTE IS SEVEN TWO ONE THAT BILL
IS OUT.
FILE ITEM SEVEN A NUMBER SEVEN
AB TWO EIGHTY NINE THE VOTE
COUNT IS A TWO TO THREE THE
CHAIR VOTING NO THIS IS ON THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT.
FILE ITEM TO EXCUSE ME AB TWO
EIGHTY NINE FILE ITEM.
SEVEN LOW COUNTIES TO OUR EYES
THREE KNOWS THAT YOU'RE VOTING
NO PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS RUSSELL.
RUSSELL NO STERN [inaudible]
NUMBER.
NUMBER TO KNOW WHY CAL SKI MY
CALC IN NO OR A TWO TWO SIX OF
THE BILL FAILS RECONSIDERATION
IS GRANTED.
FILE ITEM.
EIGHT AB THREE FIFTY FIVE THE
VOTE COUNT IS FOUR TO ONE
TEACHER VOTING HI PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT MEMBERS WERE JUST.
OR JUST NO TO WRESTLE. TO
WRESTLE I NUMBER.
NUMBER I Y. CASKEY CASKEY YE
VOTE COUNT IS SEVEN TO TWO THAT
BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM -- NINE
THE VOTE COUNT IS SIXTY TWO
CHAIR VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS STERN.
STERN I SEVENTY TWO THAT BILL IS
OUT FILE ITEM.
ELEVEN AB FIVE EIGHTY NINE THE
VOTE COUNT IS FIVE TWO ZERO THAT
YOU'RE VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS GORGEOUS.
WE'RE JUST NO JONES.
JONES NO STERN STERN I AM BURKE.
NUMBER I BEAU COUNTY IS OF SEVEN
TO TO THE BILL ITSELF FILE ITEM.
TWELVE SB SIX SIX EIGHT THE VOTE
COUNT IS FIVE TWO ZERO THE
TRIGGER VOTING HI PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT MEMBERS GORGEOUS.
ORDERS NO JONES JONES NO STERN.
STERN AYE ON BURKE.
NUMBER I SEVENTY TWO THEIR BILL
IS OUT FILE ITEM THIRTEEN AB
EIGHT FIFTY NINE THE VOTE COUNT
IS SEVEN TO ZERO CHAIR VOTING HI
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
RUSSELL.
RUSSELL IOWA CASKEY.
BECAUSE THE I HAVE NINE TWO ZERO
THE BILL IS OUT FILE ITEM
FOURTEEN AB.
EIGHT SIXTY ONE THE VOTE COUNT
AS FIVE TO ZERO THAT YOU'RE
VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS GORGEOUS.
WHAT IS IT RUSSELL RUSSELL I AM
BURKE?
NUMBER TWO I Y. CASKEY.
BECAUSE THE I NINE TWO ZERO THAT
STILL IS OUT FILE ITEM --
SIXTEEN A. B. ELEVEN THIRTY THE
VOTE COUNT IS FOUR TO ONE THAT
YOUR VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS BORDERS.
FILE ITEM.
SIXTEEN AB.
ELEVEN THIRTY WE'RE JUST NOW TO
RUSSELL.
RUSSELL I MONNING.
MONNING I BURKE.%
NUMBER AYE RIGHT THE SEVEN TWO
TO THE BILL ITSELF FILE ITEM
EIGHTEEN AB.
TWELVE OH TO THE VOTE COUNT IS --
FIVE TWO ZERO CHAIR VOTING HI
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
GORGEOUS.
BORDERS NO JONES.
JONES NO STERN.
STERN AYE ON BURKE.
NUMBER I SEVEN TWO TO THAT BILL
IS OUT FILE ITEM -- NINETEEN A
BEEF TWELVE SEVENTY THE VOTE
COUNT AS FIVE TO ZERO CHAIR
VOTING I PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS GORGEOUS.
WE'RE JUST NO GONZALEZ.
ON THOSE AYE JONES.
JONES NO STERN.
STERN I SEVENTY TWO THAT BILL IS
OUT FILE ITEM TWENTY A. B.
TWELVE EIGHTY ONE THE VOTE COUNT
IS FIVE TWO ZERO THE CHAIR
VOTING I PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS.
GORGEOUS.
WE'RE JUST NO JONES.
JON SNOW STERN.
STERN I AM BURKE.
NUMBER I SEVEN A TO THE BILL
ITSELF FILE ITEM -- TWENTY ONE
A. B. THIRTEEN THIRTEEN THE VOTE
COUNT AS A TWO ZERO PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
STERN.
STERN I NINE TWO ZERO THAT BILL
IS SHOCKED FILE ITEM TWENTY TWO
AB THIRTEEN TWENTY THE VOTE
COUNT IS SEVEN TO ZERO PLEASE
CALL OF THE CHAIR VOTING HI
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
STERN.
STERN HIGHWAY CASKEY. EIGHT TWO
ZERO THE BILL ITSELF FILE ITEM
TWENTY THREE AB THIRTEEN EIGHTY
FIVE THE VOTE COUNT OF SIX TO
ZERO PLEASE CALL OUT YOUR VOTING
I PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
WERE JUST [inaudible]
JONES [inaudible]
STERN.
IF YOU NEED MORE YES. THREE NINE
SEVEN ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT FILE
ITEM TWENTY FOUR THE VOTE COUNTY
IS SIX TWO ZERO THAT YOU'RE
VOTING I PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS PORCHES [inaudible]
JONES [inaudible]
STERN. SEVEN NINE ZERO THAT BILL
IS OUT FILE ITEM TWENTY SEVEN A.
B. SIXTEEN SEVENTY SEVEN THE
VOTE COUNT AS FIVE TO ZERO CHAIR
VOTING HI PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS BORDERS.
WHICH IS NO JONES.
JONES NO STERN.
STERN AYE ON BURKE.
NUMBER I SEVENTY TWO THATBILL
IS OUT WE ARE DONE WITH OUR
ACTIVITIES NEXT WEEK SEVENTY
BILLS.
BE READY FOR A LOT OF ACTIVITY
BUT TONIGHT WE ARE RICHARD