NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER.
WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN THIS
MORNING AS A SUBCOMMITTEE. UM AS
WE CONTINUE TO TAKE SOME
PRECAUTIONS TO MANAGE ONGOING
COVID 19RISKS, THE SENATE
CONTINUES TO WELCOME THE PUBLIC.
AND IS PROVIDED ACCESS TO BOTH
IN PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE
PARTICIPATION FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. FOR INDIVIDUALS WISHING
TO PARTICIPATE. PROVIDE PUBLIC
COMMENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE AND THE PARTICIPANT TOLL
FREE NUMBER. AND ACCESS CODE IS
POSTED ON OUR COMMITTEE WEBSITE
WILL BE SHOWN ON YOUR SCREEN AND
I'LL ANNOUNCE IT NOW.
PARTICIPANT NUMBER IS 8772268163
, AND THE ACCESS CODE IS 5338635
MAINTAIN DECORUM DURING THE
HEARING, AS IS CUSTOMARY THAN
ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DISRUPTIVE
MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE HEARING.
OR THE REMOTE MEETING SERVICE OR
HAVE THEIR CONNECTIONS MUTED.
WE'RE HOLDING OUR COMMITTEE
HEARINGS HERE IN THE STREET
COMMITTEE TO BE PRESIDENT IN
ROOM 2200 NOW SO WE CAN
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. BUT AS I
MENTIONED WE'RE BEGINNING WILL
BE BEGINNING IS A SUB COMMITTEE
THIS MORNING. WE HAVE 12 BILLS
ON TODAY'S AGENDA. UM. FIVE OF
WHICH ARE ON PROPOSED CONSENT OR
THE CONSENT ITEMS ARE VIOLATING
NUMBER 4 21 OH ONE FILING NUMBER
FIVE, MAYBE 21 28 FILE ITEM
EIGHT. MAYBE 25 35. FILE ITEM 11
A B 29 66 FILE ITEM NUMBER 12 A
B 29 75 SO UM. WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE THAN AS A SUB AND JUST
BEGIN THE HEARING PROCESS. I SEE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S DAVIES. WELCOME
IF YOU WANT TO COME UP AND
PRESENT FILE ITEM ONE. WE'LL GET
STARTED. WE MAY NOT TAKE A VOTE
INITIALLY, BUT WE WILL AS SOON
AS WE ESTABLISH QUORUM. WELCOME
AND GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. SENATORS
TODAY I'M HERE TO PRESENT A B 16
11. I FIRST WANT TO THANK
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR WORKING WITH
MY STAFF AND STAKEHOLDERS ON
THIS MEASURE. I WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS AND YOU HAVE MY
COMMITMENT TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND THIS
MEASURE. UNDER CURRENT LAW WHEN
THERE IS A THREAT OF A LEAKAGE
OF OIL COMING FROM A VESSEL
VESSEL MUST IMMEDIATELY REPORT
THAT DISCHARGE TO KILL. OH, YES
, SHOCKINGLY, HOWEVER, IF A
VESSEL WERE TO BE THE CAUSE OF
THE OIL LEAKAGE, SUCH AS HITTING
A PIPELINE WITH ITS ANCHOR LIKE
WE WITNESSED AN ORANGE COUNTY
LAST OCTOBER. THERE IS NO LAW
MANDATING THAT THEY MUST NOTIFY
ANYBODY. A B 16 11 IS A SIMPLE
MEASURE TO MERELY PUT INTO PLACE
PROTOCOLS FOR A VESSEL OPERATED
TO NOTIFY TELL. OH, YES, BUT A
STRIKER POTENTIAL STRIKE AND
SUBMERGED PIPELINE IN STATE
WATERS. THIS BILL WOULD ALSO
STATE THAT A VESSEL OPERATOR WHO
KNOW ONLY DOES NOT PROVIDE THIS
ALERT TO KILL O ES, IS SUBJECT
TO A CIVIL FINE OF UP TO $1
MILLION. I WANT TO SPECIFY THAT
THIS AMOUNT IS CURRENTLY IS
ALREADY CURRENTLY LOGGED
GOVERNMENT CODE 8670.64 AND A B
16 11 MERELY COPIES HIS EXISTING
PENALTIES SCHEME. I ALSO WANT TO
REITERATE THAT THE CIVIL PENALTY
ONLY GOES INTO EFFECT. IF THE
OPERATIVE DOES NOT REPORT THE
STRIKE TO KILL OS IF THEY FOLLOW
THE PROTOCOLS PUT IN PLACE BY
THE BILL, THE PENALTY DOES NOT
COME INTO EFFECT. I LOOK FORWARD
TO CONTINUING DISCUSSIONS AND
CONVERSATIONS WITH ALL
STAKEHOLDERS OF THIS BILL, AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S UM I
KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE ANY
WITNESSES. I SHOULD JUST I
SHOULD MAKE A COMMENT AT THE
OUTSET OF I KNOW WE ARE HAVING
THREE BILLS HEARD THIS MORNING
ON THE SORT OF TOPIC OF OFFSHORE
DRILLING SPILLING RESPONSE. UM.
AND SO, YES, I KNOWWE ALSO HAVE
A SIMILAR WHEN HERE POTENTIALLY
TO PRESENT ON A BILL THAT WAS
PULLED FROM CONSENT. AS A
GENERAL MATTER, THE COMMITTEE IS
A VERY HIGH THRESHOLD IN TERMS
OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE.
SUBSTANTIVELY UM IN THIS ARENA,
AND I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE
AMENDMENTS. WILL MOVE TO PUBLIC
COMMENT, BUT I SHOULD JUST SAY
AT THE OUTSET, UM THAT YOU KNOW,
WE'RE WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO
REPLICATE DUPLICATE. UM. OR SORT
OF ADD ON AUTHORITY AT THIS
POINT. TWO THINGS THAT ARE
ALREADY BEING HANDLED IN LAW AND
THEN TO CLAIM THAT WE'VE
TIGHTENED UP THE STATE'S OIL
SPILL. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK
BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE MISSING
THE BIGGEST PIECE OF THE PUZZLE.
STILL SO I JUST SHOULD SAY THAT
AS A GENERAL MATTER, AND I'M
SORRY, I SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE
ANY WITNESSES, I JUST THOUGHT
I'D MENTION IT AT THE OUTSET,
BUT IT APPLIES TO ALL THE
OFFSHORE BILLS WE'RE GOING TO BE
SEEING AT THIS POINT. IT'S NOT
JUST YOURS. UM DO WE HAVE ANYONE
IN GENERAL SUPPORT AT THIS
POINT, JUST GENERAL SUPPORT
WITNESSES. NONE OKAY AND ANY IN
OPPOSITION. YES. YEAH WELL, GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS,
MIKE JACOB SAID MERCHANT
SHIPPING ASSOCIATION WERE
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED, AND WE
LIKE TO ACTUALLY THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR WORKING WITH US ON ON
MAKING THE BILL. UM FROM AN
OPERATIONAL POINT OF VIEW, VERY
WORKABLE. WE APPRECIATE THAT.
THE CHANGES IN THE AMENDMENTS
THAT WERE TAKEN TO BE VERY
DISCREET AND CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IS
TO BE REPORTED WHEN AND TO SET
UP A BASIS FOR THAT REPORT,
WHICH IS UNMISTAKABLE. AND
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
OUR OPPOSITION IS FOCUSED ON THE
SIZE OF THE PENALTIES AND FINES
AS ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S POINTED OUT.
UM THE FINES THAT ARE IN THE
BILL THAT ARE REPLICATED OR
ACTUALLY THE FINES FOR
RESPONSIBLE PARTY. SO THE ACTUAL
PARTY THAT'S DOING THE POLLUTING
THAT IS PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE
FOR, UM OIL POLLUTION. AND THIS
IS NOT A POLLUTION STANDARDS AND
WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN THIS BILL.
IT'S A REPORTING STANDARD, AND
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE FINES
AND PENALTIES TRADITIONALLY
THEY'RE MUCH MOE IN LINE WITH
WHAT WAS IN THE BILL WHEN IT WAS
ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED, UM IN THE
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
RANCH INSTEAD OF A MILLION
DOLLARS. AND SO IF A VESSEL IS
ULTIMATELY APPROXIMATELY LIABLE
FOR A SPILL THROUGH A CIVIL
PROCESS. WE WOULD EXPECT THAT
THE MILLION DOLLAR PENALTY
THAT'S IMPOSED ON THE
RESPONSIBLE PARTY WILL
ULTIMATELY BE PAID BY BY THAT
CARRIER OR BY THAT VESSEL, BUT
IN THE MEANTIME, WE LOOK FORWARD
TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THE
AUTHOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
PUTTING FORWARD A BILL THAT WE
THINK IS ON THE ON THE MAIN,
VERY WORKABLE, SO THANK YOU. MR
CHAIR. YES AND I DO APOLOGIZE. I
JUST REALIZED IT DO I NEED TO GO
TO THE PHONE LINES AS WELL ON
SUPPORT. BUT DID I MISS THAT
OPPORTUNITY, OKAY. OKAY I WANNA
DESK THE WITNESS A QUESTION
ANYONE BEFORE HE WALKED. OKAY.
BEFORE HE GOES AWAY. WE'LL
FINISH THAT APOLOGIES FOR THE
AND THE THING ABOUT IT IS IT WAS
UNCLEAR TO ME. IS YOUR POSITION
STILL OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED
POSITION CHANGE SUPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED, BUT ONLY ON THE NARROW
QUESTION OF THE OF THE PENALTY
FACTOR. NOTHING ELSE IN THE
BILL, AND WE THINK THAT THE
AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY STAFF ARE
WELL DONE AND COMPATIBLE WITH
EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE. OKAY
THANK YOU. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR
THE PROCEDURAL HICCUP THERE. WE
DO STILL NEED TO CHECK THE PHONE
LINES TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY,
UM, GENERAL WITNESSES WISHING
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE
LEGISLATION. UM SO MODERATOR,
WOULD YOU? UM PLEASE CALL ANY
SUPPORT WITNESSES ON THIS BILL?
YES CERTAINLY. AND IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT,
PLEASE PRESS ONE OF THEM ZERO AT
THIS TIME AGAIN, IT'S 10. AND
CURRENTLY NOT ACUTE. OKAY THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS POINT,
I'M GONNA PAUSE AND WILL
ESTABLISH A QUORUM SINCE WE HAVE
ENOUGH MEMBERS PRESENT, UM FOR
OUR FIRST TIME. CHIEF SECRETARY
HERE THAT OUT YES, CHIEF
COMMITTEE ASSISTANT. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. SENATORS STERN STERN
HERE, JONES. ALAN ELLEN HERE,
EGGMAN. GROVE. GROVE HERE,
HERTZBERG WHERE SO? LAIRD LAIRD
HERE, LEMON. MON. HERE WE HAVE A
QUORUM. OKAY THANK YOU. THANKS
FOR JUMPING BACK AND FORTH JUST
TO FINISH OUT THE PROCEDURAL
POINT. NO OTHER WITNESSES IN
GENERAL OPPOSITION IN THE
HEARING ROOM, SEEING NONE WILL
TURN TO THE PHONE LINES.
MODERATOR WOULD YOU PLEASE CHECK
FOR ANYONE WISHING TESTIFYING
OPPOSITION? TO A B 1611.
CERTAINLY AGAIN, PLEASE PRESS 10
AT THIS TIME TO SHOW YOUR
OPPOSITION AGAIN. IT'S 10. AND
CURRENTLY NOT THANK YOU. OKAY
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL GET
BACK ON TRACK HERE. SO, UM QUICK
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS
ON THE LEGISLATION. YES. NO SO I
WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MEASURE
TODAY. YES WE DID. WE JUST
FINISHED. THERE WAS NONE SO
THERE WAS NO SUPPORT IN THE
HEARING ROOM MORE ON THE LINES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MISS DAVIES FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD. I KNOW THAT THAT
SPILLED OUT IN ORANGE COUNTY
WASHED A LOT OF OIL UP ON SHORE
, AND I KNOW CONSTITUENTS ARE
VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. BUT I
DO ALSO KNOW THAT IT'S NOT THE
PIPELINES FAULT WAS THE TANKERS.
NO, THAT THAT PIPELINE IS THERE
AND TO DRAG THEIR INCUR ACROSS
DIDN'T CAUSE THIS DAMAGE. AYE. I
OFTEN WORK WITH THE CHAIR QUITE
A LOT ON TRYING TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE GET GOOD LEGISLATION
PASSED THAT IT HAS EFFECTIVE
CHANGE THAT IS GOOD AND MAKES
PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACTIONS THAT ARE THAT, UM, THAT
THEY TAKE AND SO THIS BILL, I
THINK ADDRESSES THAT AND, UM YOU
HAVE THE I MEAN YOU APPROACH IT
WITH THE RIGHT. UH WITH THE
RIGHT POLICY. I BELIEVE SO THAT
THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING
THOSE HUGE ERRORS ARE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE AND IT WAS NOT THE
PIPELINES FAULT. IT WAS THE
ACTUAL THE VESSEL. AND IF WE
WERE IMPORTING SO MUCH OIL WE
PREGNANT WOULDN'T HAVE THAT MANY
SHIPS COMING INTO OUR HARBORS.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD AND
I'D BE HONORED TO MOVE THE BILL.
ALRIGHT IT'S A MOTION FROM
SENATOR GROVE. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS QUESTIONS HERE? UM YES.
HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. UM
AND ONE IS DO YOU BELIEVE IF
THIS BILL WAS IN PLACE? IT WOULD
HAVE APPLIED TO THE INCIDENT
SURROUNDING THE SPILL AND ORANGE
COUNTY BECAUSE THAT APPEARED TO
BE A LOT OF IT. OUTSIDE THE
THREE MILE IT WAS IT WAS IT WAS
IN FEDERAL WATERS. THIS THIS
PIPE LEAK. HOWEVER WE DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING FOR STATE AT THIS POINT
, AND THERE'S A LOT OF VESSELS
THAT STILL COME WITHIN THAT
THREE MILES. AND SO I THINK IT'S
VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T
WAIT THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT I
WAS JUST TRYING TO ASCERTAIN IF
ASSERTION WAS THIS WOULD HAVE
POTENTIALLY PREVENTED IT. THE
OTHER THING IS THAT IT'S UNCLEAR
TO ME, UH WHAT THE IMPORT IS OF
SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS AND UH,
THE OIL SPILL RESPONSE AGENCY
ASPER REALLY HAS RESPONSIBILITY
FOR A LOT OF THINGS WHEN OH, YES
, THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY
SERVICES DOESN'T AND I KNOW ONE
OF THE AMENDMENTS WAS TO INSERT
PROSPER INTO THE PROCESS. DID
THE AMENDMENTS YOU TAKE PUT
OSCAR IN THE PROCESS IN
DIFFERENT WAYS. DID. AND HOW.
YOU SAID WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS
THEY WOULD NOTIFY THEM. BECAUSE
BEFORE THEY WEREN'T THERE BEING
NOTIFIED, OKAY? A I HAVE TO LOOK
AT THIS OVER TIME, BUT I HOPE
THAT'S ENOUGH AND I MEAN THEY
ARE THE ONES THAT ARE FORMED TO
SPECIFICALLY RESPONSE. RESPOND
OIL SPILL IN A WHILE THE OFFICE
OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AS CERTAIN
RESPONSIBILITIES THAT'S REALLY
IN OSTBERG SO MY CONCERN WAS,
IS THAT THE BILL APPROPRIATELY
REFLECT THAT UH HUH. AND I'M NOT
SURE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT I'M
GOING TO DO ON THIS BECAUSE
THERE ARE OTHER BILLS AND I WANT
TO SEE HOW THEY ALL FIT
TOGETHER. BUT I APPRECIATE THE
EFFORT APPRECIATE THE TIME AS
WELL. OKAY UM OTHER QUESTIONS
WELL, SO I'M LOOKING AT A
MEMBERS WHO ARRIVED AFTER MY
OPENING COMMENT AS WELL. SO
WHILE THE COMMITTEE HAS DONE
FINE TECHNICAL WORK WITH THE
AUTHOR, ALTHOUGH I THINK UM,
FRANKLY, THE FINE PROVISIONS IN
THE IN THE MEASURE OUGHT TO BE
MORE RIGOROUS AT THIS POINT. UM
WITHIN THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS
LEGISLATION, JUST AS AS THE
CHAIRS PERSPECTIVE FOR WHATEVER
THAT'S WORTH. UM, I DON'T THINK
THAT AH, THIS LEGISLATION HERE
TODAY ADDS TO ANY OF THE SORT OF
PROTECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE
AROUND SPILLS LIKE WE HAD IN AND
I DON'T WANT TO DO LEGISLATION
THAT THAT SORT OF WAVES OF FLAG
AT THE ISSUE BUT DOESN'T
ACTUALLY SOLVE IT. BECAUSE WE
HAVE AN ONGOING RISK IN THOSE
WATERS AND ON STATE LANDS AND
THE STATE COASTAL WATERS THAT
UNLESS WE ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING
ISSUE, WHICH IS THE DRILLING AND
CONVEYANCE IN VERY HEAVILY
TRAFFICKED AREAS OF OFFSHORE
OIL. THAT IS NOT A PROFITABLE
DEAL FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. AND IT'S ACTUALLY A
TAXPAYER LIABILITY UNLESS WE
ADDRESS THAT. I WORRY THAT WE'RE
SORT OF PUTTING BAND AIDS OVER A
PROBLEM AND IN THIS SPECIFIC
CASE THE RESPONSE TIME WAS 10
MINUTES. IN THE ACTUAL SPILL, I
THINK, POINTING A FINGER AT, SAY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THIS
CASE IS INACCURATE BECAUSE TO
SORT OF PRESUME THAT THERE'S
SOME GAP IN THE NOTIFICATION
SYSTEM. BELIES THE FACTS OF THIS
SPECIFIC CASE. AND SO MY
CHALLENGE IS THAT OKAY, THEN
WE'RE SOLVING FOR OTHER ISSUES.
NOT THAT CASE, BUT SOME OTHER
HYPOTHETICAL BUT THERE IS A
FRAMEWORK ALREADY IN FEDERAL
WATERS, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO
IMPACT THAT. SO I STILL AM JUST
WRESTLING WITH WHAT THE BILL
DOES. THERE'S ALREADY HARBOR
SAFETY COMMISSION VENUE. THERE'S
A LOT OF ARCHITECTURE IN PLACE.
I APPRECIATE THE ARGUMENT YOU'VE
MADE IS THE AUTHOR AND I'M HAPPY
TO HEAR FURTHER FEEDBACK AND
YOUR CLOTHES OR IN ANY COMMENTS,
BUT THE CHALLENGES THAT, UM. THE
DELAY TIME WAS ALL ON THE
OPERATOR'S SIDE AND BECAUSE OF A
LACK OF GENERAL AWARENESS THAT
WE HAVE ABOUT THAT TRAFFIC AND
THE STATE OF THOSE PIPELINES AND
LEAKS THAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED
EVEN PRIOR TO STRIKES AND
MAINTENANCE ISSUES AND ALL KINDS
OF GAPS IN THE SYSTEM THAT DON'T
HAVE TO DO WITH THIS BILL. SO
THAT'S THAT'S THE CHALLENGE. I
DON'T FIND ANY OF THIS TO BE
HARMFUL TO EXISTING. I DON'T
THINK THE BILL DOES ANY HARM. I
JUST I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO
DO SOMETHING IN THIS ARENA,
LET'S REALLY DO SOMETHING. UM SO
THAT'S THAT WAS MY SORT OF MORE
LONG WINDED VERSION OF THE
GENERAL TAKE AT THE OUTSET, BUT,
UM YEAH, SO I'M GOING TO BE
HOLDING OFF THIS MEASURE TODAY
AS AS WELL AS THE WHATEVER NEW
IN PRESENTS. WE MAY WE'LL
DISCUSS, BUT WE MAY END UP
RESETTING ONE BILL. UM BUT MY
GENERAL POSTURE IS THAT WE NEED
TO DO BIG, BOLD POLICY ON
OFFSHORE DRILLING THIS YEAR, AND
THAT NOTHING LESS WILL DO. SO
ANYWAY, UM. THAT'S THOSE THOSE
ARE MY THAT'S SORT OF MY GENERAL
COMMENT, BUT THERE IS A MOTION
FOR SENATOR GROVE. SO, UM IF
THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, WE CAN ALLOW YOU TO
CLOSE. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, AND
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. I
THINK YOU KNOW, WANTING TO GO
FURTHER. ALTHOUGH THEY ARE VERY
, VERY QUICK TO RESPOND TO. ONCE
THAT OIL LEAKED, IT WAS HIT
ABOUT A YEAR PRIOR TO THAT, AND
SO IF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN IN
PLACE, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN
ACCOUNTABILITY AND WE DON'T HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY IN STATE WATERS,
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED
TO DO THAT. SO THAT IF SOMETHING
LIKE THIS HAPPENS AGAIN, GOD
FORBID. THAT THEY'RE GOING TO
HAVE THE PRESSURE KNOWING IF WE
THINK WE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HIT
SOMETHING OR DID. YOU
KNOW WHAT? WE'VE GOT TO GO AHEAD
AND RESPOND WITHIN 24 HOURS, SO
THAT WE DON'T WAIT A YEAR AND
ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE A LEAK
LIKE WE DID IN OUR WATERS AND
AGAINST WE HAVE VESSELS THAT
COME INTO STATE WATERS, SO I
KNOW IT'S NOT EVERYTHING BUT TO
ME. I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT
AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO
SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND GET
ACCOUNTABILITY. YOU KNOW, ON THE
RECORD SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO
WAIT ANOTHER YEAR TO FIND OUT IF
PERHAPS SOMETHING HAPPENED, SO
COMPLETELY AGREE, BUT I THINK
THIS IS A GOOD BILL, AND I THINK
IT'S A GOOD START AS WELL. AND I
REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE YOU
CONSIDER THAT THAT IT IS ABOUT
ACCOUNTABILITY. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AND I THANK YOU. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
WITH THAT THE MOTION IS, UM, DO
PASS. AS AMENDED. BUT FIRST
AMEND AND RE REFER. FIRST WE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
JUDICIARY. CHIEF COMMITTEE
ASSISTANT. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
FILE ITEM ONE A. B 16 11. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED,
BUT FIRST AMEND AND RE REFER TO
THE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
SENATOR STERN, NOT VOTING.
SENATORS NOT VOTING SENATORS,
JOAN SENATOR JONES? AYE. ELLEN.
SEGMENT. GROWTH. HERTZBERG.
HUESO. LAYERED LIMÓN. OKAY THAT
MEASURE HAS ONE VOTE AND I
ASSUME WE'LL LEAVE IT ON CALL
FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. SIMILAR AND WIN
WHEN YOUR 2ND AND 3RD WELCOME.
HEAVY. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM
THE FIRST ITEM. LET'S WHICH ONE
IS THIS? THE FIRST ONE IS THE IS
16 57. YES SIR. IF I MAY ASK IF
I CAN, UM, PULLED THIS BILL
TODAY AND WORK CONTINUES TO WORK
WITH YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF. TO
ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS.
I'VE SPOKE TO SOME OF THE
MEMBERS ON THE DAIS SINCE
YESTERDAY. UM AND THEN HAVE IT
BE HEARD AT THE NEXT HEARING OR
THE FOLLOWING HERE, AND ONCE WE
GET THIS ADDRESS, YES,
COMMITMENT ON THAT. THANK YOU,
SIR. YES. SO THEN WE'RE ON FILE
ITEM NUMBER THREE, THEN A B 16
58? YES. YES SIR. WELCOME.
BEFORE I MAKE A COMMENT. I JUST
WANT TO THANKALL THE MEMBERS
WHO WHO MADE TIME AND GAVE ME
SOME SOMETIME YESTERDAY AND THIS
MORNING EARLY MORNING. I DO
REALLY APPRECIATE BECAUSE I KNOW
HOW MM. LATE IT WAS AND HOW
EARLY IT WAS THIS MORNING, SO
THANK YOU FOR TRYING TO WORK
WITH US ON THE LAST BILL, MR.
CHAIR I WANTED TO THANK YOUR
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR WORKING WITH
US ON THIS BILL, WHICH WAS ON
CONSENT. UM, AND AFTER WE SPOKE,
I UNDERSTAND THAT. YOU DO HAVE
CONCERNS THAT SOME OF THESE
BILLS MIGHT NOT HAVE REACHED AS
FAR AS YOU WOULD LIKE THIS ONE
IS ACTUALLY OF MUCH MORE SIMPLER
BILL. THIS BILL ITSELF OBVIOUSLY
HAS TO DO WITH THE OIL SPILL ON
OCTOBER 1ST IN 2021 IN HUNTING
BEACH, WHICH IS IN MY DISTRICT.
THIS BILL. WHAT WE SAW BACK THEN
WAS DURING THE CRISIS. UM WE HAD
CITIES COUNTIES STATE FEDERAL
THEY ALL HAD THE DIFFERENT
CONTINGENCY PLAN ON HOW TO DEAL
WITH OIL SPILL AND SOME HAD
OTHERS DON'T AND IF THEY DID, IT
WASN'T SIMILAR WITH THE STATE OR
THE FEDERAL, SO IT'S LIKE
EVERYBODY WAS KIND OF ON THEIR
OWN. DIRECTORY UM, AND SO WHAT?
THIS BILL IS VERY SIMPLE. THE
BILL IS TO ENCOURAGE LOCAL
AUTHORITIES TO DEVELOP AN OIL
SPILL RESPONSE PLAN THAT IS
CONSISTENT WITH BOTH STATE AND
FEDERAL OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY
PLAN. SO THAT WE ARE ALL TALKING
THE SAME LANGUAGE AND THAT WE'RE
UNIFY IN IN IN MAKING SURE THAT
WE, UM MOVE AS QUICK AS WE CAN
TO YEAH. PROVIDING ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION, UM, PROVIDING, UM,
QUICK RESPONSE TO CERTAIN AREAS
IN CERTAIN PLACES. SO THERE WERE
CARRIAGES, FEDERAL STATE CITIES
AND COUNTIES ARE ON THE SAME
PLAN. UM AND THAT'S WHAT THIS
BILL IS, UM, AND SO I'M ASKING
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. OF COURSE THIS
IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE
WHAT THE ASSISTANCE OF A GRANT
PROGRAM WHICH WILL OUT ALL
COASTAL CITIES IN THE STATE TO
HAVE ACCESS TO RESOURCES, HELP
THEM PLAN BE PREPARED IN CASE OF
AN INCIDENT. AND HAVE PROTOCOLS
IN PLACE TO RESPOND. HAVING SUCH
A PLAN IN PLACE WHEN RESPOND TO
OIL SPILL INCIDENT WOULD HELP
COORDINATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE
RESOURCES AND DIRECTLY RESPOND
TO A SITUATION IN TIME IN A
TIMELY MANNER. UM BEING PREPARED
FOR THE WORST MEANS WE CAN BE AT
OUR BEST WHEN THE CHALLENGES
ARISES. UM, AND AS A B 16 58 HAS
ENJOYED BY PARSONS BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT. AND HAVE NO KNOWN OR
REPORTED OPPOSITION. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, UM SO WE
DON'T HAVE ANY LEAD WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. CORRECT I THINK WE HAVE
TO LISTED ON FILE AS GENERAL
SUPPORT, BUT WE CAN TURN TO THE
HEARING ROOM. IF YOU'RE READY
FOR GENERAL WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
OF THE LEGISLATION. FOR A B 16
58. SEEING NONE. LET'S TURN TO
THE PHONE LINES. MODERATOR,
WOULD YOU PLEASE NOTIFY EVERYONE
WANTS TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A
B 16 58? ABSOLUTELY AND AGAIN,
PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME.
AND CURRENTLY NONE AND QUÊ. OKAY
WE'LL TURN. THEN TWO WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION. ANYONE IN THE
HEARING ROOM WISH TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS LEGISLATION,
SEEING NONE WILL TURN TO THE
PHONE LINES. MODERATOR PLEASE
CALL ANYONE WISHING TESTIFYING.
OPPOSITION MAYBE 16 58. AND TO
DO SO, PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS
TIME. GIVE US JUST A MOMENT WE
DO HAVE WARNING QUÊ.
AND AGAIN, IT'S 10. AND WE'LL GO
NOW TO LINE 23. GOOD MORNING
CHAIR AND CHAIR MEMBERS. CAN YOU
HEAR ME? YES, WE GOT YOU. GREAT
MY NAME IS NAME IS SHARIA LODGE
EMPLOYMENT CALLING FROM PLASTIC
COUNTY AND A REPRESENTATIVE. NC
RALLY RUNNING FOR US SENATE. AND
WE AREN'T STRONG OPPOSITION OF
THIS BILL AS WRITTEN STEVE
LEGISLATION PART IS BAD, SO IT
NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SEEING
NO OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
MODERATOR. THERE'S NO ONE ELSE
IN THE LINES CORRECT. CORRECT
OKAY. GREAT UM, WE'LL TURN BACK
TO THE DIOCESE MEMBERS. COMMENTS
QUESTIONS, SENATOR LARRY. I JUST
HAD A QUESTION YOU MENTIONED
DURING YOUR PRESENTATION THAT
THIS WOULD REQUIRE RESOURCES.
IT'S CLEARLY A MANDATE. ON LOCAL
COASTAL GOVERNMENTS. DO YOU KNOW
HOW MUCH THIS WOULD COST
IMPLEMENT? IT'S DEPENDS ON THE AND THE SIZE OF THE CITY.
MOST OF THE CITIES ARE, UM. SO
WELL, UM IT IS A MANDATE.
ACTUALLY IT'S ENCOURAGING THEM
TO WORK AND DEVELOP AN OIL SPILL
PLAN BECAUSE WHEN WE WENT
THROUGH IT BUT ENCOURAGES IN A
MANDATE. IT'S NOT IT'S BASICALLY
THIS REALLY ISN'T ANYTHING THAT
REQUIRES ANYBODY TO DO ANYTHING.
WELL, IF WE MANDATED, THEN WE
HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
CITIES HAVE THE NECESSARY
RESOURCES AND FUNDING. REALLY
AWARE I CHAIRED A MANDATES
COMMITTEE IN THE STATE ASSEMBLY.
THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING
TO GET AT IS SO THIS REALLY
DOESN'T HAVE THE TEETH TO
ACTUALLY REQUIRE IT. YOU UM I
WOULDN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE A LOT
OF THE I MEAN CENTERVIEW. YES
YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF BILLS
WE DO THAT ENCOURAGES AND MOST
OF THE CITIES IN THE COASTAL
SIDE. UM AT LEAST IN ORANGE
COUNTY. UM, THERE ARE THERE ARE
EFFORTS. THEY JUST NEED SOME
HELP. UM AND WE JUST WANT
EVERYBODY TO BE ON THE SAME
PAGE. UM I GET THAT I GET THE
INTENT. I'M TRYING TO GET AT THE
FISCAL IMPACT AND IF YOU'RE
DANCING AROUND IT, BECAUSE IF
YOU SAY THAT IT'S NOT REALLY NOT
A MANDATED ENCOURAGES THEM.
THEY'LL REALLY DO IT. THAT'S A
MANDATE IF YOU HAVE TO GO IN
FRONT OF THE MANDATES
COMMISSION, THEN THAT GETS
DEMONSTRATED AS A STATE COST.
AND SO THE REAL QUESTION IS
WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE A
STATE COST TO DO THIS. AND IF
SO, HOW MUCH AND THE THING ABOUT
IT IS I SIT ON THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. THIS
IS HEADED THAT WAY IF THIS
PASSES OUT OF COMMITTEE THERE
WILL BE A REAL LOOK AT THAT IN
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE,
BUT AH, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS
THAT IT'S HARD TO REPRESENT THAT
THIS DOES SOMETHING IF IT
DOESN'T REALLY REQUIRE IT, BUT
IF IT REQUIRES THAT THERE'SJUST
THIS SIGNIFICANT COST, AND SO
IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER, AND
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET
AT.
SO. THERE IS A GRANT THAT THAT
IS CURRENTLY THAT'S CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE AND WHAT THIS BILL
WOULD BE IS TO ALLOW THEM TO
ACCESS THAT GRANT TO BE ABLE TO
WORK WITH THE STATE. TO LOOK AND
COULD THEY ACCESS THAT GRANT
WITHOUT THIS BILL? WHY THEN
WHO'S THE GRANT FROM THAT? IT'S
SO LIMITED THAT IT WOULDN'T
HAPPEN UNLESS THIS BILL HAPPEN.
IS THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE TO ASPER. IS
WHO HAS THE GRANT AND IF WITHOUT
THE BILL, IT DOESN'T ALLOW THEM
TO SPECIFICALLY USED THE GRANT.
TO LOOK TO DEVELOP AN OIL SPILL
RESPONSE PLAN. SO WHAT'S THE
GRANT FOR NOW? IT'S FOR OIL
PLANNING. WHY AREN'T THEY
ALLOWED TO LET ME JUST JUMP IN
JUST FOR PURPOSES OF CLARITY? SO
IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR ANALYSIS, IF
YOU'RE SORT OF FOLLOWING ALONG
AS WELL, THERE IS ALREADY
GUIDANCE IN STATE REGULATION IN
14, CCR 8 52. TALKING ABOUT OIL
, SPILL CONTINGENCY PLANS AND
REQUIRE, UM. NOTING THAT THEY'RE
THEY'RE SORT OF BEST PRACTICES
INCLUDE CONSISTENCY. SO IN THE
COMMITTEE'S VIEW THE REGULATIONS
IN CALIFORNIA LAW ALREADY SAY
THAT THE BEST PRACTICE IN THIS
CASE SHOULD BE CONSISTENCY. NOW,
WHETHER THAT WHY THAT WOULD
DISQUALIFY YOU FROM GRANT
ELIGIBILITY ON PLANNING THAT
THAT I DON'T KNOW, AND I'M NOT
SURE THAT'S QUITE RIGHT. IN THE
GREAT GUIDELINES. IT MAY BE A
THERE MAY BE SOME DISCRETION,
MAYBE TO OSCAR, BUT THERE'S ALSO
NOTHING IN THIS BILL. THAT SORT
OF DELVES INTO THE GRANT MAKING
PROCESS SO MUCH AS THE ACTUAL
CONSISTENCY PROCESS RIGHT AND SO
THE FROM TO MY EARLIER THEME,
THE CONCERN IS IF FEDERAL LAW
AND CODE ENCOURAGE CONSISTENCY,
BUT DON'T MANDATE IT, AND STATE
CODE SAYS THAT IT SHOULD BE
SHOULD BE CONSISTENT, BUT NOT A
MUST BECAUSE THERE IS NO
MANDATE. THEN WHY PASS ANOTHER
ENCOURAGEMENT BILL RIGHT THAT
THAT WERE JUST IT'S JUST THE LAW
IN GENERAL, RIGHT NOW IS A
MANDATING IT. WE COULD LOOK AT
THAT ISSUE, AND THE COMMITTEE
ACTUALLY SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO
PUT IN A MANDATE, WE'RE OPEN TO
THAT AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
THE BUDGETING QUESTIONS. IN A
WAY THAT DOESN'T COST TAXPAYERS
MONEY TO DEAL WITH THE
INDUSTRY'S LIABILITY. I THINK
THAT'S THE BIGGER ISSUE, BUT IN
THIS CASE AGAIN MEETING THAT
THRESHOLD OF ARE WE REALLY DOING
SOMETHING? I DON'T THINK IT IT
HITS THAT SO THAT'S THAT'S MY IT
UNDERLYING YOUR YOUR QUESTIONS
THAT SORT OF I THINK ARTS CHANGE
WAS IN PART, MAKING YOUR POINT
IN AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT
MIGHT GET TO WHAT THE REAL ISSUE
IS, WHICH IS THE REAL ISSUE. IS
WHETHER THERE IS ENOUGH MONEY TO
DO THIS AND THAT IT'S A BUDGET
ISSUE AND ISSUE THE CHAIR
RAISED. IS WHO REALLY SHOULD PAY
IT, DEPENDING ON HOW IT HAPPENS,
AND I DID LEGISLATION ON THIS
WHEN I WAS IN THE ASSEMBLY
BECAUSE IN THE EVENT OF A SPILL.
AH PRIOR TO THAT LEGISLATION,
50% OF THE COST. WAS PAID BY THE
STATE. AND THEN THE 2ND 50% WAS
SUPPOSED TO BE PAID BY THE
RESPONSIBLE PARTY IN THE EVENT
OF A SPILL YET WHAT HAPPENED WAS
IS THAT IF IT WAS MASSIVE RUN
OUT OF MONEY, AND THE MONEY
WOULDN'T BE THERE FOR THE SECOND
HALF, SO WE ALLOWED FOR THERE TO
BE NO STOP IN THE CLEANUP OR THE
RESPONSE IF THAT WASN'T IN PLACE
, SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE
ISSUE HERE IS AS MUCH MONEY AND
I KNOW THAT IN ANOTHER VENUE.
AND I'M LOOKING AT AT LEAST TWO
PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE BUDGET
SUBCOMMITTEE. UM ON SEA LEVEL
RISE. IT'S REALLY FUNDING
EVERYBODY'S LOCAL COASTAL PLAN
TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THEY
INCORPORATED IN AND IT WAS A
FUNDING ISSUE, NOT NECESSARILY A
MANDATE ISSUES. SO THAT'S WHAT
I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS WHETHER
THERE'S A AH NEED HERE FOR THE
BILL AND WHETHER THE MONEY IS TO
ROLL NEED. SO IN ANY EVENT,
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE
RESPONSE. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS
COMMENTS REMEMBERS. CENTER
GROVE. THANK YOU. PUT. IT'S NO
SURPRISE. I DISAGREE WITH THE
CHAIR IN THE FORMER SECRETARY.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD. TO ME. I SEE THIS AS A
SOLUTION TO WHAT HAPPENED. THE
CHAIR'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE
FUNDING WHERE INDUSTRY SHOULD BE
RESPONSIBLE. UM IS RIDICULOUS
BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE
SAYING SOMEBODY PLOWED INTO HIS
CAR AND HE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE
, EVEN THOUGH HE WASN'T THE
PIPELINES THERE. THEY KNOW IT'S
THERE. IN THE SHIP OR THE VESSEL
DROVE ACROSS THE DRAGGING AN
ANCHOR, WHICH CAUSED THE
PIPELINE TO CRACK OR LEAK. WHAT
20 25,000. UM GALLONS OR
WHATEVER IT WAS BARRELS OF OIL
INTO THE OCEAN, WHICH WASHED UP
ON THE SHORES OF YOUR DISTRICT.
AND SO FOR YOU TO COME FORWARD
AND BRING A GOOD POLICY BILL
FORWARD TO HELP PROTECT NOT ONLY
YOUR DISTRICT BUT OTHER COASTAL
AREAS. IT'S VERY ADMIRABLE, AND
I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD. UM WITH THE BUDGET
SURPLUS THAT WE HAVE, AND, UM
THE UNDERSTANDING OF THIS BILL
IS THAT YOU AND YOUR AND THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS, NOT THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. BUT THE
ANALYSIS FROM THE REPUBLICAN
SIDE, THE AISLE SAYS YOU HAVE TO
HAVE THIS BILL TO ACCESS THE
GRANTS FROM, UH, SPUR. UM I
THINK IS VERY ADMIRABLE AND
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT
FORWARD AGAIN. I DISAGREE WITH
THE CHAIR ON THE COMMENT THAT,
UM AH, INDUSTRY SHOULD BE HELD
RESPONSIBLE. HE'S REFERRING TO
THE OIL INDUSTRY. THEY KNEW.
LIKE I SAID THOSE SHIPS NO.
THOSE PIPELINES ARE THERE AND
THEY DROVE THE ANCHOR. IT'S NOT
THE OIL INDUSTRY'S FAULT. JUST
LIKE IT WOULDN'T BE YOUR FAULT,
SIR. YOU WERE TALKING TO MISS MY
COMMENTS, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE
YOUR FAULT IF SOMEBODY CAUSED
HARM TO YOU, AND YOU HAD NOTHING
TO DO WITH IT. LIKE SOMEBODY
HITTING YOU ON THE HEAD WITH THE
HAMMER, SIR. AND THEY KNEW YOU
WERE SITTING THERE AND KIND OF
THE SAME THING. SO UM, YEAH. I
MEAN, THEY KNEW YOU WERE SITTING
THERE AND THEY DID IT ANYWAYS.
THEY KNEW THE PIPELINE WAS THERE
AND THEY DRAGGED THEIR ANCHOR
CROSSED IT. AND SO I APPLAUD YOU
, UH, SENATOR FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD BECAUSE IT IS. IT
DOES ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT
HAPPENED AND IT IS A GOOD
SOLUTION AND I'D BE GLAD TO MOVE
THE BILL. OKAY WE'LL TREAT THAT
AS A MOTION. UM WE HAVE OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. AND JUST
TO BE CLEAR FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
, WHEN I WHEN I SAY INDUSTRY, I
DON'T JUST MEAN EXTRACTORS. I
MEAN THE ENTIRE SUPPLY. IT'S THE
SAME WAY WE GENERATE THE FEE
NOW, SO THAT INCLUDES MIX
ACTUALLY ONSHORE OFFSHORE
OPERATORS THE WAY THE OSPREY
RESPONSE FUND IS ACTUALLY A
MULTI PARTY FUNDS. SO, UM YEAH,
KNOCKED SOME SENSE INTO ME THERE
, BUT I THINK THE UNDERLYING
CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT
TAXPAYERS TO FOOT THE BILL FOR A
BROADER INDUSTRY'S PROBLEMS AND
I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF THAT
RISK IS REFLECTED IN THE PRICE
OF GASOLINE OR IN OUR TAXES
RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE YOU KNOW,
INDUSTRY IS SORT OF HIDING HOW
THAT COSTS GET PASSED THROUGH
AND IN THE END WHEN THEY GO
BANKRUPT, LIKE WE'RE LOOKING AT
THIS CASE WHO'S GONNA BE LEFT
WITH THE BAG, AND I STILL DON'T
THINK WE HAVE THAT ANSWER. SO IF
YOU'RE IF YOU'RE OPEN TO
ADDRESSING THAT, UM THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT ISSUE AND REALLY
LOOKING AT A BOTH THE
REQUIREMENT AND ONE THAT WOULD
BE NOT FULLY TAXPAYER FUNDED,
BUT BUT SUBJECT TO A SIMILAR
STRUCTURE THAT WE GENERATE FOR
OTHER RISKS IN THE IN THE
SUPERFUND. I ACTUALLY THINK THAT
THAT BILL MIGHT DO SOMETHING. I
THINK THAT'S A FAIR RESULT OF
THIS WHOLE EXCHANGE HERE IS THAT
THERE IS THERE IS SOMETHING
THERE. BY THE CURRENTLY WHEN I
LOOK AT THE CCR LOOK AT THE SCR,
BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE CODE, IT
SAYS THIS IS ALREADY REQUIRED.
AND BY REQUIRED ENCOURAGED SO
AGAIN, THAT'S THE SAME POSTURES
BEFORE. I HOPE YOU CAN
APPRECIATE ON BEING A STICKLER
AND IT'S NOT JUST FOR YOU FIRST
REMEMBER DAVIES AND ANYBODY ELSE
WANTING TO MOVE POLICY IN THIS
LEGISLATION THIS ARENA SO I
APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS HERE AND
YOUR DILIGENCE, SO I JUST TRY TO
BE CONSISTENT, CONSISTENTLY
ORNERY AND A STICKLER THROUGHOUT
. SO APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGENCE.
YES I'M WILLING TO GIVE YOU A
COURTESY VOTE, REMEMBER, BUT I
DO WANT TO. I WANT TO I DON'T
DISAGREE WITH THE CHAIR. I MEAN,
I THINK THAT HE'S RAISING GOOD
GOOD CONCERNS TO SOME RESPECT.
WE PASSED TOO MANY BILLS OUT OF
COMMITTEES. WE DO THIS WITH
MEMBERS OF BOTH PARTIES. AND I
KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO DO
SOMETHING THAT'S VERY LIMITED.
UH BUT I DO IF THERE'S YOU KNOW,
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GONNA
HAPPEN IN THIS BILL. BUT IF IT
DOES GET OUT OF THE COMMUNITY, I
THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR YOU
TO WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE STAFF
AND THE PROBES AND EVERYBODY
ELSE TO AND BECAUSE I DO THINK
IN THE END OF THE DAY AND THE
CORE ISSUE OF WHO'S LEFT.
HOLDING THE BAG IS AN IMPORTANT
ONE. AND IT SHOULDN'T BE THE
TAXPAYERS. OKAY THANK YOU,
SENATOR ALLEN, SEEING NO FURTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. WE DO
HAVE EMOTION RIGHT FROM CENTER
GROVE. YES. UM, DID YOU WANT TO
CLOSE? UM THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AGAIN. WE WHEN WE WENT THROUGH
THE PROCESS WITH THE BILL WITH
LEDGE COUNCIL AND ITS AND OUR
CONSULTANTS, AS WELL AS THAT OUR
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY DON'T
HAVE ACCESS TO THAT GRANT. RIGHT
NOW. WITHOUT THE BILL, AND AGAIN
THE BILL IS REALLY WHAT I SAW
FIRSTHAND HAPPEN IN ORANGE
COUNTY. WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO GET
ALL THE CITIES TO COME TOGETHER
, TRY AND GET THE COUNTY STATE
AND FEDERAL AND YOU KNOW, I'M
STANDING THERE AND TRY AND
FIGURE OUT WHO'S ON FIRST AND
WHO'S ON SECOND AND IT WAS VERY
DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE LIKE ME ON
THE OUTSIDE OF JUST WATCHING THE
WHOLE, YOU KNOW, UM PLAN COMING
TOGETHER TRYING TO, YOU KNOW,
PROTECT OUR WETLANDS. WE'VE GOT
SEVERAL RED LANDS IN ORANGE
COUNTY, AND THE ONE THAT WAS
IMMEDIATELY WOULD HAVE BEEN
IMPACTED, AS IS BOTH A CHICA
CONSERVANCY. AND SO, UM, THE
BILL AGAIN IS ASKING ALL THE
CITIES TO HAVE THE SAME
CONTINGENCY PLAN WITH THE STATE
AND THE FEDERAL AND TO ALLOW
THEM TO HAVE ACCESS TO GRANTS SO
THAT THEY CAN MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE WHEN
A CRISIS LIKE THIS HAPPENED, AND
SO I RESPECTFULLY AND I WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
COMMITTEE. STAFF UM UM AS WE
MOVE FORWARD, BUT AGAIN, THANK
YOU FOR THE TIME AND I
COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND YOUR
CONCERN, MR CHAIR. UM AND YOUR
COMMENTS? UH BUT AGAIN, THIS
BUILDING ITSELF IS A VESSEL
ANCHOR. THAT STRUCK A PIPELINE
ALMOST A YEAR AGO. HAVE WE BEEN
NOTIFIED ABOUT THAT ANCHOR
STRIKING THIS PIPELINE A YEAR
AGO, WE COULD HAVE STOPPED THE
OIL SPILL IT TOOK A YEAR LATER
FOR THE ACTUAL SPILL. ALSO DID
WAS IT SHUT DOWN THE AIR SHOW IN
HUNTING BEACH THAT WAS BRINGING
IN A MILLION DOLLARS A DAY. FOR
OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY. UM SO WE
SHUT IT DOWN WITHOUT KNOWING
WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED. WHAT
COULD HAVE NOT HAPPENED? WE
WOULD NOT NOTIFY. AND I
UNDERSTAND YOU MENTIONED EARLIER
ABOUT THE 10 MINUTES. ACTUALLY,
IT WAS THE COMPENSATION OF THE
NOTIFICATION WAS SUCH A HUGE
ISSUE IN ORANGE COUNTY. AND YOU
KNOW, WE DIDN'T KNOW WHO KNEW
AND WHAT WE, AS MEMBER OF THE
LEGISLATURE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW TO
LIKE 46 O'CLOCK P. M ON
SATURDAY. I WAS AT THE AIR SHOW
ON SATURDAY MORNING. AND DIDN'T
KNOW ABOUT IT. SO THAT'S WHERE
YOU'RE SEEING. BOTH OF DAVIES
AND I ARE DOING THESE
NOTIFICATION BILLS BECAUSE WE'RE
RESPONDING TO WHAT WE SAW
FIRSTHAND HAPPENED IN ORANGE
COUNTY AND THAT WE'RE HOPING IT
WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN AND ALSO US
WATCHING FIRSTHAND ON HOW ALL
THESE PLANS WERE THERE'S LIKE I
SAID CITIES HAS SOME HAD PLANNED
. SOME DIDN'T BUT EVEN THEY DID
. IT WASN'T SPEAKING THE SAME
LANGUAGE AS THE STATE AND THE
FEDERAL AND THAT'S A CONCERN IS
THAT WE KIND OF NEED TO BE ON
THE SAME PAGE WHERE IT DIDN'T
EMERGENCY. HAVING ALSO BEEN YOU
KNOW ANOTHER AS A COUNTY
SUPERVISOR AND AS A CITY COUNCIL
IN AN EMERGENCY, REGARDLESS OF
THAT EMERGENCY FLOOD EARTHQUAKE
, WHATEVER IT IS, WE HAVE TO BE
ON THE SAME PLAN. AND IF WE'RE
NOT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE
TO GET THROUGH THESE CRISIS. AND
SO AGAIN, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE ON A BILL THAT WAS
ORIGINALLY ON CONSENT. UM AS
WELL AND, UM THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. THANK YOU. SENATOR WINS.
SO THE. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS.
BUT FIRST WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY. UM AND, UH, CHIEF
COMMITTEE SYSTEM. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. MY LIFE. FILE ITEM
NUMBER THREE. A B 16 58 MOTION
IS DUE PASS BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SENATOR
STERN. SENATOR JOAN ALAN ELLEN,
I EGGMAN. SEGMENT I GROVE.
GROVE. I HERTZBERG HUESO. SO I
LAYERED LIMÓN. OKAY THAT MEASURE
IS FOUR VOTES WILL LEAVE IT ON.
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK
YOU. UM LET'S MOVE FORWARD. WE
HAVE FILE ITEMS SIX AND BENNETT
WELCOME. GOOD MORNING. MORNING.
YOU'RE WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO PRESENT THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. AND GOOD MORNING,
MR CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
A B 21 60 WOULD REDUCE THE COST
AND PROCESSING TIME FOR NGO
SEEKING PERMITS FOR PUBLIC
ACCESS OR RESTORATION PROJECTS.
BY ALLOWING CITIES AND COUNTIES
TO WAIVE OR REDUCE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FEES. NOTHING
IN THE BILL CHANGES THE LOCAL
COASTAL PLAN AS A STANDARD
REVIEW, SO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
PRIORITIES AND POLICIES WILL
CONTINUE TO BE RESPECTED. WHILE
A FEW $1000 MAY SEEM LIKE A
SIGNIFICANT MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A
SIGNIFICANT COST, IT CAN BE A
BARRIER TO SMALL NONPROFITS WHO
OFTEN RELY ON INDIVIDUAL
DONATIONS. IN ADDITION, MAYBE 21
60 FURTHERS THE NATURAL
RESOURCES CUTTING GREEN TAPE
INITIATIVE, WHICH PRIORITIZES
THE EFFICIENCY AND COST
EFFECTIVENESS OF HABITAT
RESTORATION AND STEWARDSHIP
PROJECTS. TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
AS SARAH CHRISTIE FROM THE
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION BY
PHONE. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
STERN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M
SARAH CHRISTIE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION.
COMMISSION HAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY
TO SUPPORT THIS MEASURE BECAUSE
PROVIDING PUBLIC ACCESS AND
RESTORING COASTAL HABITAT ARE
TWO FUNDAMENTAL GOALS OF THE
COASTAL ACT. PERMIT COSTS SHOULD
NOT BE A BARRIER TO
ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL
PUBLIC PROJECT. APPLICANTS FOR
SUCH PROJECTS ARE TYPICALLY
NONPROFIT GROUPS OR PUBLIC
AGENCIES AND PERMIT FEES CAN
OFTEN BE A BARRIER COASTAL
COMMISSION HAS NEVER CHARGED
PERMITS USED TO PUBLIC AGENCIES.
AND ALREADY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO
WAIVE OR REDUCE FEES FOR
NONPROFITS PROPOSING COASTAL
ACCESS AND HABITAT RESTORATION.
HOWEVER THERE'S NO COROLLARY FOR
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS
ISSUED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT,
WHICH NOW ISSUE THE MAJORITY OF
PERMITS THROUGH CERTIFIED L. C.
P S. WHILE SOME LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS DO CONSIDER SUCH
REQUESTS, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT
ACROSS ALL JURISDICTIONS. THIS
BILL WOULD AUTHORIZE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS TO CONSIDER WAIVING
AND REDUCING THE PERMIT FEES FOR
COASTAL ACCENTS OR HABITAT
RESTORATION AT THE REQUEST OF
THE APPLICANTS FOR THE REQUEST
BE DENIED THE BILL WOULD
AUTHORIZE THE APPLICANTS WHO
APPLY DIRECTLY TO THE COASTAL
COMMISSION. IN THESE CASES, THE
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS LCP, WHICH
CONTAINS ITS LOCALLY ADOPTED
LAND USE POLICIES WOULD REMAIN
THE STANDARD OF REVIEW. ALMOST
ALL OF THESE PROJECTS WOULD BE
APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL
COMMISSION ANYWAY, SO APPLYING
DIRECTLY TO THE COMMISSION CUTS
FROM GREEN TAPE AND ALLOWS THESE
PROJECTS TO GET OFF THE GROUND
FOR QUICKLY. CAUSE COASTAL
ACCESS AND HABITAT RESTORATION
PROVIDE PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT ARE
IN LINE WITH MULTIPLE STATE
PRIORITIES, INCLUDING 30 BY 30
GOALS AND EQUITABLE ACCESS FOR
ALL THE COMMISSION BELIEVES IT'S
GOOD PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE STATE
TO INCENTIVIZE THEM BY
ENCOURAGING COST SAVINGS. WHERE
FEASIBLE. THIS BILL WOULD ALSO
PROVIDE GREATER CONTINUITY
BETWEEN HOW THE STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS PROCESS COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR PROJECTS
THAT BENEFIT THE PUBLIC. FOR
THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST AND I VOTE AND I'M
AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
FAMOUS CHRISTIE. WE WILL NOW
TURN NO OTHER LEAD. WITNESSES
WILL NOW TURN FOR GENERAL
SUPPORT FOR 21. 60 MODERATOR,
PLEASE CHECK THE LINES. I'M
SORRY. IT'S NOT GOING TO LIE IN
THE HEARING ROOM. HERE WE GO.
WELCOME GOOD MORNING, KAREN
MEMBERS ABIGAIL, MILE ON BEHALF
OF THE MID PENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR MARK FINSTER
MAKER ON BEHALF OF SUSTAINABLE
CONSERVATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. OKAY NOW WE'LL TURN TO THE
LINES. MODERATOR PLEASE CALLERS
WHO WISH TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT.
EVEN 21 60. CERTAINLY TO SHOW
YOUR SUPPORT FOR 21 68 PLEASE
PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME. AGAINST
10. MOMENT HERE WILL GO TO LINE
25, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
RICO MONSTER, DONATO WITH THE
TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND. THANK YOU
. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BENNETT FOR
BRINGING THE SPELL AND I URGE
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT.
AND CURRENTLY NONE FURTHER IN
CUBE. OKAY VERY GOOD. WE'LL TURN
NOW TO ANYONE WISHING TESTIFYING
OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING ROOM.
SEEING NONE. WE HAVE NONE LISTED
ON FILE ANY ON THE LINES
MODERATOR, ANYONE WISHING
TESTIFY AN OPPOSITION TO A B 21
60. PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME
IS SO AGAIN, 10. AND WE HAVE AND
THEN QUÊ. OKAY WE'LL TURN BACK
TO THE DIOCESAN COMMENTS,
QUESTIONS MOTIONS. THE BILL IS,
UH, YEAH, THERE ARE NO
AMENDMENTS ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED
. PRETTY SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD
BILL. WE THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF
SENSE. THAT'S EMOTION FROM
SENATOR EDMUND. NO FURTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. A LOT OF
CLOTHES RESPECTFULLY ASKED FOR
AN IVO THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, SO THE MOTION IS DUE PASS
. BUT FIRST WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
CHIEF COMMITTEE ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. FILE ITEM
SIX. A B 21 60 MOTIONS DO PASS
BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
SENATOR STERN STERN. I JONES
ALAN ELLEN, I EGGMAN. EGGMAN I
GROVE. NO. HERTZBERG. HUESO.
LARGE LAIRD. LIMÓN. OKAY THE
MEASURES THREE VOTES WILL LEAVE
IT ON CALL AND YOU HAVE ONE MORE
MEASURE BEFORE US TODAY.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PHANTOM 7 22. OH
ONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND MR CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS AND THANKING THE
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR HARD WORK ON
THIS BILL. IN 2014, THANKS TO
THE GOOD WORK OF SENATOR FRAN
PAVLEY AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
ROGER DICKINSON. THE LEGISLATURE
PASSED SIGMA TO ESTABLISH A
STATE FRAMEWORK TO HELP PROTECT
GROUNDWATER RESOURCES AND HAVE
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION. OUR
REACH SUSTAINABILITY OVER THE
NEXT 20 YEARS. THIS LEGISLATION
TODAY A B 22 OH, ONE TRIES TO
ADDRESS ONE GAP THAT WAS
INADVERTENTLY LEFT WHEN SIGMA
WAS CREATED. AND THAT IS THAT
THE AGENCY THAT WE HAVE PUT IN
CHARGE OF GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES THAT
HAVE BEEN PUT IN CHARGE OF
REDUCING THE PUMPING SO THAT
THEY'RE SUSTAINABLE YIELD. DOES
NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO, UH,
EVEN COMMENT ON OR THE AUTHORITY
TO PERMIT OR BE INVOLVED IN THE
PERMITTING OF NEW WELLS THAT GO
INTO THE VERY AQUIFER THAT THEY
ARE SUPPOSED TO MANAGE. IT
SIMPLY DOESN'T MAKE COMMON SENSE
TO GIVE AN AGENCY THAT
RESPONSIBILITY TO MANAGE THE
SUSPECTED AND GET TO THE
SUSTAINABLE YIELD OF A BASIN BUT
NOT HAVE ANY INPUT ON THE NEW
WELLS GOING IN. AND SO WHAT THIS
BILL DOES IS IT AUTHORIZES THOSE
THE GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCY NEEDS TO SIGN OFF BEFORE
THE COUNTY ISSUES. WHAT HAS BEEN
UP TO THIS POINT IN TIME THERE?
MINISTERIAL PERMIT. THERE ARE
THREE DISADVANTAGES THAT NEW
WELLS PRESENT TO AN EXISTING
BASIN. ONE IS THERE'S THE
OBVIOUS. THERE IS A NEW DRAW ON
WATER WHEN A NEW BASIN HAS A HAS
A NEW WELCOME INTO IT WHEN A
BASIN HAS A NEW WELCOME IN THE
SECOND IS THE IMPACT ON
NEIGHBORING WELLS AND EXISTING
WELLS, AND THERE HAS BEEN
CERTAINLY WELL DOCUMENTED
EVIDENCE OF FARMWORKER
COMMUNITIES HAVING THEIR
DRINKING WATER RUN OUT WHILE
ACROSS THE FREEWAY. THERE IS
SOMEBODY PUTTING IN NEW WELLS
DEEPER THAN THEIR WELLS AND
HAVING AN IMPACT. I MIGHT POINT
OUT THAT THIS DOESN'T JUST
AFFECT LOW INCOME FARM WORKER
COMMUNITIES IN OUR COMMUNITY IN
VENTURA COUNTY, MANY ESTABLISHED
, UM UH, OPERATIONS ENDED UP
BEING SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BECAUSE
THE NEW WELLS WERE AFFECTING
THEIR ESTABLISHED FARM
OPERATIONS IN TERMS OF THEIR NEW
WELLS, AND THE THIRD THING IS A
NEW WELL ONCE IT GETS A PERMIT
THAT GIVES THAT PERMIT OF VESTED
RIGHT AT NEW WELL HAS INVESTED
RIGHT AND NOW YOU HAVE A FURTHER
COMPLICATION THAT THE
GROUNDWATER AGENCY HAS TO DEAL
WITH, SO IT SIMPLY MAKES COMMON
SENSE FOR THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY. TO HAVE A
SIGN OFF BEFORE THE COUNTY'S
ISSUE THEIR NEW NEW PERMIT.
THERE ARE OTHER PROVISIONS OF
THE BILL. BUT IN THE INTEREST OF
TIME, I TRUST THAT COMMITTEE
MEMBERS HAVE ALL OF THAT. BUT
I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS THOSE, BUT
I'M PARTICULARLY PLEASED THAT WE
HAVE TO TESTIFY HERE TODAY, ONE
OF THE ORIGINAL FOUNDERS OF
SIGMA, AND THAT'S
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MEMBER ROGER
DICKINSON. AND WE ALSO HAVE KYLE
JONES FROM COMMUNITY WATER
CENTER FOR TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AND SENATOR
PABLO WOULD BE PROUD TO SEE
LEADING IN HER LEGACY. UM BUT
TRUSTY CO AUTHOR FORMER
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WELCOME. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS.
I'M ROGER DICKINSON, POLICY
DIRECTOR FOR CIVIC WELL,
FORMERLY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
COMMISSION. AND STRONG SUPPORT
OF A B 22 OH ONE,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. BENNETT HAS
DESCRIBED THE BILL WELL AND WE
THANK HIM FOR HIS LEADERSHIP
ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE YOUR
COMMITTEE CONSULTANT WHO HAS
BEEN A PRIMARY ARCHITECT OF SO
MUCH CALIFORNIA WATER LAW,
INCLUDING SIGMA. THERE ARE TWO
POINTS IN PARTICULAR IN HIS
ANALYSIS THAT I WANT TO
UNDERSCORE. FIRST IS ONE OF THE
AUTHORS OF SIGMA. I HOPE THAT
LOCAL WELL PERMITTING
AUTHORITIES AND ESA'S WOULD WORK
TOGETHER TO ENSURE THAT PERMITS
WERE ISSUED CONSISTENT. WITH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF DSPS THAT HAS
MOSTLY NOT HAPPENED AND THE
PROLIFERATION OF NEW WELLS HAS
CONTINUED TO SAP OUR GROUNDWATER
AND IMPERIL ACHIEVING
SUSTAINABILITY. SECOND WE NEED
TO MAKE GREATER COORDINATION AND
ACCOUNTABILITY PERMANENT. SIGMA
HAS A 20 YEAR IMPLEMENTATION
TIMEFRAME TO REACH
SUSTAINABILITY AND IT WILL BE
CRUCIAL TO MAINTAIN LINKAGE
BETWEEN THE APPLICATION OF DSPS
AND THE ISSUANCE OF WELL
PERMITS. OVER THAT TIME PERIOD
AND BEYOND. HOPEFULLY OUR
CURRENT DROUGHT WILL END. AND
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WILL EXPIRE.
BUT THE CRITICAL NECESSITY TO
CONNECT REACHING AND MAINTAINING
SUSTAINABILITY WITH THE ISSUANCE
OF NEW WELL PERMITS WILL ENDURE.
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO FAIL TO
ATTAIN GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY FOR THE HEALTH OF
OUR ENVIRONMENT AND FOR
GENERATIONS TO COME. BUT WE
CANNOT EXPECT US ASSESS WHICH
HAVE BEEN TO ACHIEVE
SUSTAINABILITY TO SUCCEED IF
THEY HAVE LITTLE CONTROL OR
ABILITY TO INFLUENCE THE NUMBER
AND LOCATION OF WELLS,
EXTRACTING GROUNDWATER. 22 1
TAKES AN IMPORTANT STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. AND I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR I VOTE
. THANK YOU. REMEMBER UM YOU
WANT TO DELIVER SOME TESTIMONY
BRIEFLY, OKAY. YES IF I COULD
PLEASE COME FORWARD. YES. GOOD
MORNING, KYLE JONES POLICY AND
LEGAL DIRECTOR WITH COMMUNITY
WATER CENTER AND WILLING TO
EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR AMERICAN
RIVERS. WE ADVOCATE THE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SENATOR
FRAN PAVLEY, THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN
VOTERS AND THE MONO LAKE
COMMITTEE, AND I WANT TO THANK
THE AUTHOR OF FOR BEING A
CHAMPION ON THIS ISSUE AND
CLOSING THIS CRITICAL GAP AND
WANTED TO BRIEFLY SHARE THE
STORY OF THE COMMUNITY, THE
COMMUNITY OF DUKE OR IN SOUTHERN
HILLARY COUNTY. THIS IS A
COMMUNITY OF 630 PEOPLE. THEY
FACED ARSENIC AND NITRATE
CONTAMINATION, AND WE'RE ABLE TO
ACTUALLY GET A NEW WELL THAT WAS
PAID FOR MOSTLY THROUGH A PROP
50 GRAND, COSTING THE STATE
ABOUT $1.8 MILLION A FEW YEARS
BACK. UNTIL THIS YEAR THAT WHAT
WAS OPERATING FINE, BUT THEY'RE
ALREADY STARTING TO LOSE
PRESSURE BECAUSE IN AGRICULTURAL
WELL WAS DRILLED IMMEDIATELY
ACROSS THE STREET WITHOUT ANY
NOTICE OR INFORMATION PROVIDED
TO THE COMMUNITY AND NO ABILITY
FOR THEM TO STOP IT. IF THEY
LOSE WATER THIS YEAR, THAT'S A
COMMUNITY OF 630 PEOPLE WHO WILL
BE RELYING ON BOTTLED WATER FOR
DRINKING FOR HOLD WATER FOR USE
IN THE HOME. AND IF ANY PASTOR
OUT HIS INDICATION WHICH IT
LIKELY WOULD BE, YOU'LL HAVE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVING TO
POTENTIALLY SHOWER. IN TRAILERS
BROUGHT IN THIS IS AN
UNACCEPTABLE WAY FOR US TO
EXPOSE PEOPLE IN THE STATE AND
ALL BECAUSE OF WELL WENT IN
IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET
FROM THE COMMUNITY WELL, SO WE
THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL
THAT WE FIND A WAY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WHEN NEW WELLS ARE GOING IN
, THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY
IMPACTS TO COMMUNITIES THAT
MAYBE IF THAT WELL WAS JUST
MOVED TO A DIFFERENT PART OF THE
PROPERTY, AND THERE WAS SOME
THOUGHT DONE AT THE BEGINNING OF
THE PROCESS. WE COULD PREVENT
ALL THIS INVESTMENT WE PUT IN
FROM BEING TAKEN OUT FROM UNDER
THIS COMMUNITY. UM SO WE WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK
BEING DONE TODAY, BUT WE DO WANT
TO RAISE JUST ONE CONCERN WE
HAVE WITH WITH THE AMENDMENTS.
UM AND THAT IS THAT WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT GOING FORWARD.
THE BILL ALSO INCLUDES AN
ABILITY FOR COMMUNITY
COMMUNITIES IN THE PUBLIC TO
ENGAGE IN THE PROCESS. AND THAT
THERE BE PUBLIC OVERSIGHT. AND
SO WE JUST ASK THAT THERE BE
FINDING BY THE LOCAL PERMITTING
AGENCY AGREEING WITH THE HYDRO
GEOLOGIST OR LICENSED
PROFESSIONAL REPORT GOING
FORWARD. TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE
IS SOME SORT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OVERSIGHT OF THIS PROCESS. AND
WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT IS
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO. MOVING
FORWARD. WE SUPPORT THE BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
UM WILL MOVE TO GENERAL
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT NOW ANY OF
THE HEARING ROOM WHICH CAN
TESTIFY PLEASE COME FORWARD.
WELCOME. GOOD MORNING TO THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE MICHAEL
CLAIBORNE WITH LEADERSHIP
COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY IN ALIGNMENT WITH
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS WISHING
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT SEEING NONE
WILL TURN NOW TO, UM OPPOSITION
. I THINK WE HAVE TO LEAD
OPPOSITION WITNESSES AND WE'LL
WE'LL MAKE OH, I'M SORRY. PHONE
LINES AGAIN. MODERATOR PLEASE GO
TO THE LINES AND SEE IF WE HAVE
ANYONE WISH TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT OF A B 22. OH, ONE. MY
APOLOGIES. THANK YOU AND PLEASE
PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME, IF SO,
AND WE'VE GOT A FEW. HERE. LET
ME GO TO LINE 32. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS JENNIFER CLERY AND ON
BEHALF OF CLEAN WATER ACTION
WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY STRONG
SUPPORT FOR THIS. SO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH NEXT. 29. GOOD MORNING
. MY NAME IS AARON WILLIAM
BEHALF OF SIERRA CLUB,
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT OF A B 22.
OH, ONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
36. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS A
LEGAL CONTRACT FROM CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. LINE 28.
HELLO MY NAME IS CODY PHILLIPS
WITH CALIFORNIA COAST DEEPER,
LANCE, CALLING IT THE BOARD OF
THE FLAMETHROWER ONE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT. 38. GOOD MORNING
, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS JENNIFER
GALE HOUSE ON BEHALF OF NRDC
ACTION COMMITTEE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THAT'S FOR SURE. THEN
FURTHER IN QUÊ. OKAY VERY GOOD.
NOW WE WILL TURN TO OPPOSITION
WITNESSES, AND WE'LL WILL AFFORD
THE SAME TIME TO OPPOSITION AS
WELL HERE, SO I THINK WE HAVE TO
LEAD OPPOSED. WE HAVE MR BALCO
IN THE ROOM. I SEE. I THINK IT'S
MISS BASS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. SO IN
WHATEVER ORDER YOU PREFER.
WELCOME GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. I AM BRENDA BASS ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE, AND WE RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSE A B 22. OH, 1 22. OH, ONE
CREATES KIND OF A NEW PERMITTING
REGIME FOR GROUNDWATER WELLS
THAT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT
AGRICULTURAL BUSINESSES, THE
PEOPLE AND OTHER BUSINESSES THAT
THRIVE THERE RELY ON A THRIVING
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY AND ON FOOD
SECURITY IN CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T
HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE CONCEPT
OF INCREASING GS A AND COUNTY
COMMUNICATION, BUT WE JUST
DISAGREE THAT THIS BILL IS THE
CORRECT WAY TO DO SO. WE REMAIN
CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THE
BILL AND HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE
BELL AND THE SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS. FIRST WE REMAIN
CONCERNED THAT THE BILL WOULD
APPLY BROADLY TO EVEN MEDIUM AND
HIGH PRIORITY BASINS RATHER THAN
BEING LIMITED TO THOSE THAT ARE
IN CRITICAL OVERDRAFT. THE
ANALYSIS WE DON'T BELIEVE
ADEQUATELY. ADDRESSES ARE
CONCERNED, WHICH IS NOT WHETHER
SIGMA GENERALLY SHOULD APPLY TO
THOSE BASINS BUT ABOUT WHETHER
THIS SPECIFIC PROPOSAL IS AH,
THE RIGHT ME ARE. UM FOR A
OVERSIGHT OF WELL PERMITTING, IS
THE RIGHT CALL, PRESUMABLY
MEDIUM AND HIGH PRIORITY BASINS
ARE MANAGING THEIR GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABLY USING EXISTING TOOLS
AND DON'T NEED THE STATE. TO
IMPOSE A MANDATE ON THEM FURTHER
. AH THE PROPOSAL AND THE MEN
THE AMENDMENTS FOR APPLICANTS TO
HIRE PROFESSIONALS TO DETERMINE
WHETHER A WELL WOULD IMPACT
OTHER USES REQUIRES THE
EXPENDITURE OF SIGNIFICANT FUNDS
AS THIS ANALYSIS WOULD REQUIRE A
REALLY COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT THE
ENTIRE GROUNDWATER BASIN FROM
TOP TO BOTTOM, UM, AND MAY ALSO
EXPOSED THE APPLICANT AND THE
ENGINEER TO LIABILITY IF THE
DETERMINATION IS CONTESTED.
FINALLY WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT RECOURSE THERE, MAYBE. FOR
A GS AZIZ. FAILURE TO ACT ON THE
REQUESTED VERIFICATION WITH THE
GSP RIGHT NOW, THERE'S SOME KIND
OF THERE WAS NO TIME PERIOD FOR
THEM TO ACT. THERE'S NO RECOURSE
FOR THE APPLICANT, IF A G S A
JUST SIMPLY FAILS TO PROCESS
TIMELY, SO THAT IS OUR CONCERNS
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. OKAY. WELCOME. MR
SHARON MEMBERS, JACK WELCOME ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF WINE GRAPE
GROWERS, CURRENT COUNTY WATER
AGENCY, THE KINGS, RIVER
INTERESTS AND MODESTO IRRIGATION
DISTRICT. AH MR BENNETT HAS
SERVED WITH DISTINCTION IN THE
FOX KENYAN OVERSIGHT AUTHORITY
FOR THAT GROUNDWATER BASIN, AND
IT'S A MATURE, WELL FUNCTIONING
GROUNDWATER OVERSIGHT ENTITY. AS
MR DICKINSON NOTED, THOUSANDS OF
HOURS WERE SPENT PUTTING THIS
MEASURE TOGETHER SIGMA TOGETHER
AND WE'VE HAD TO CREATE A WHOLE
CLASS GRANTS. GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES ALONG
WITH A MATURING COUNTY OVERSIGHT
PROCESS. IT'S OUR CONTENTION
THAT MAYBE NOW IS NOT THE IDEAL
TIME TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. BUT
CLEARLY MR BENNETT IS BOUNDED
DETERMINED TO DO THAT, SO WE'VE
GOT TO TRIGGER HOW BEST TO MAKE
THIS WORK. UM CONTRARY TO SOME
ASSERTIONS BY FOLK THE COUNTIES
AND THE PSAS IN THE PARTS OF THE
STATE THAT I'M WORKING WITH MOST
CLOSELY ARE COMMUNICATING WITH
ONE ANOTHER. I HAVE WEEKLY
CONVERSATIONS WITH MANAGERS WHO
ARE REALLY KIND OF PULLING THEIR
HAIR OUT, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
HOW TO MAKE THIS WORK IN THE
CONTEXT OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER,
AND NOW LOOKING AT A B 2 TO 01
TO INTEGRATE THESE THINGS. SO
THE COMMITTEE STAFFS CREDIT SOME
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BILL. NO
DOUBT. PARTICULARLY REMOVING
ADJUDICATED BASINS FROM THE
PROVISIONS OF THE BILL. WE
COMMEND THE COMMITTEE FOR THAT
IN TERMS OF REMAINING PROBLEMS,
WE SAY THE 30 DAY POSTING
REQUIREMENT FOR THE PERMITTING
AGENCIES COULD EFFECTIVELY
STALLED THE NEED FOR WELLS THAT
IN AREAS THAT ARE DRAMATICALLY
AFFECTED BY THE DROUGHT. I HAVE
NO SURFACE WATER SUPPLY
ALTERNATIVES. SECONDLY, IS. THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE DISCRETIONARY
ACTIONS ON THE PART OF THE GSS
IN THE COUNTIES IS THAT REALLY
TRIGGERS SEQUA AND IF SO, THAT'S
GOING TO FURTHER DRAG OUT THE
PROCESS, AND THERE IS DIVIDED
LEGAL OPINION ON ON THAT
QUESTION AT THE MOMENT. AND IN
NAPA COUNTY, JUST BY THE VIRTUE
OF EXECUTIVE ORDER. THERE IS
ALREADY A DEFECT A MORATORIUM ON
THE DRILLING OF NEW WELLS. SO
THAT'S CAUSING PROBLEMS JUST
BECAUSE OF THE CONFUSION OUT
BETWEEN THE COUNTIES AND THE
PSAS. AND FINALLY, I JUST LIKE,
DEDICATE THAT EVERYONE'S TRYING
TO MAKE THIS WORK. WE'VE GOT
COMMUNITIES AT RISK. WE'VE GOT
GROWERS AT RISK, AND I THINK
REALLY BOTTOM LINE. THE COUNTIES
IN THE ESAS ARE REALLY TRYING
THEIR DARNDEST TO MAKE THIS
WORK. SO AT THE MOMENT, WE'RE
STILL IN RESPECT OF OUR
POSITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. OTHERS IN GENERAL
OPPOSITION TO ABBY TO 22. OH
ONE. OR TWEENERS. WELCOME TO THE
FIRST OR I GUESS I'M THE FIRST.
I DON'T THINK I'M THE LAST RHINO
JACK IN REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
REALLY APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS THINK
THEY MOVED THE BILL IN A VERY
REEVALUATING OUR POSITION BASED
ON THOSE AMENDMENTS AND AGAIN
THANKS FOR THE ANALYSIS AND
THANK YOU FOR THE AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU. WELCOME THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, MR TERRAN MEMBERS.
TRICIA GEHRINGER, WITH
AGRICULTURAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA, REPRESENTING OVER
15,000 FARMERS AND FARMER OWNED
BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT THE STATE
RESPECTFULLY IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. THANKS WELCOME DENNIS
ALBION ON BEHALF OF THE ALM
ALLIANCE IN CALIFORNIA,
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
CALIFORNIA BURGERS, A FEW OTHER
AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATIONS
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT'S
GONE INTO THIS, BUT AT THIS
POINT WE'RE STILL OPPOSED AND
WERE EVALUATED AS IT GOES
FORWARD. OKAY? THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND SENATORS.
ROSEANNA CARPACCIO ELLIOT HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
GROUNDWATER COALITION. WE HAVE A
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED POSITION
APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS AND THE
GOOD WORK AND THE AMENDMENTS
THAT MR BENNETT TOOK THIS
MORNING, SO WE'LL BE
REEVALUATING OUR POSITION AND
HOPE WE CAN GO NEUTRAL OR EVEN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR. MARK FINSTER MAKER FOR
SONOMA WATER, JUST SAY DITTO TO
WHAT MISS CARPACCIO, ELLIOTT
SAID. WE RE EVALUATING OUR
POSITION BASED ON THE
AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING,
CATHERINE FREEMAN ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES AND THE RURAL COUNTY
REPRESENTATIVES OF CALIFORNIA IN
THE SAME POSITION WHERE
REEVALUATING WE THINK THAT SHE
CONSULTED FOR HIS WORK ON THIS,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHAIR
MEMBERS POLIO ON BEHALF OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN SAN
JOAQUIN, STANISLAUS MERCED
MADERA, FRESNO, TILLERY, KERN,
UM, AND I THINK IT'S AT FRESNO,
SEVEN OF THE EIGHT COUNTIES IN
THE CENTRAL VALLEY. DO
APPRECIATE THE WORK DONE BY THE
COMMITTEE, BUT ABSOLUTELY STILL
IN OPPOSITION. THIS BILL, THANK
YOU. THANKS. SEEING NO OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION. WILL TURN BACK TO
THE DIESS. UM COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS? UM HAVE TO BE ONLINE.
UH KEEP MISSING YOUR LINES
TODAY. YOU'RE GOOD. MODERATE
APOLOGIZE, MODERATOR, PLEASE
TURN THE LINES FOR OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. PLEASE PRESS 10 AT
THIS TIME. WE'LL GO FIRST ALIGN
12. GOOD MORNING, MR TURNED
MEMBERS, CHRIS ANDERSON ON
BEHALF OF ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES. WE
CURRENTLY ARE OPPOSED TO THE
BILL. WE APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS AND WE
WILL BE REVIEWING THESE CHANGES.
THANK YOU. THANKS ONE. GOOD
MORNING TO REMEMBERS REBECCA
BASKINS ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
SITUATIONS, CALIFORNIA FRESH
FRUIT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA
COTTON JENNERS AND GROWERS
ASSOCIATION AND OTHER AG
ORGANIZATIONS AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT, 39.
MICHAEL GERRARD ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CLIMATE AND
AGRICULTURE NETWORK AND THE
COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY
FARMERS. WE ARE TWEENER. WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME
AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW FOR THE
REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING WELLS.
AND FOR SOME CONSIDERATION OF
SMALL AND UNDERSERVED FARMERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
THANK YOU NEXT LINE, 40. GOOD
MORNING CHARITY REMEMBERS. MY
NAME IS RAYMOND LODGE AND I
REPRESENT JAMES BRADLEY RUNNING
FOR US SENATE AND MM. WE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR IN THE
AMENDMENT THAT THERE ARE MORE
QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE A
DRUGS BEFORE THIS CAN CONTINUE.
UM I AGREE WITH THE
REPRESENTATION IN THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE. SO THANK YOU. WE ARE
RESPECTFULLY. AN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. OKAY, THANKS. JUST
NAME, AFFILIATION AND POSITION
IF YOU COULD MOVING FORWARD AND
THAT'S THAT LINE 10. YES THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. THIS IS DANNY MERKLEY
WITH THE CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU
OPPOSED. THANK YOU NEXT. AND
THEN FURTHER IN QUÊ. OKAY.
THANKS VERY MUCH, UM WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE DIETS, AND I'LL
JUST SIMPLY SAY JUST THE VERY
BRIEF SUMMARY OF WHAT THE
COMMITTEE HAS BEEN WORKING ON NO
THANKS TO THE CHAIR ALL TO THE
CHIEF CONSULTANT WHO HAS THE
INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT
REALLY CAN'T BE REPLACED ON THIS
ONE. THIS BILL IS NO LONGER IN
MY VIEW, A SIGMA REFORM BILL.
IT'S A IT'S A BILL THAT AMENDS
THE WATER WELLS CODE AND YOU
KNOW, THE IDEA HERE WAS NOT TO
GO AND REWRITE THE DEAL. AND I
THINK THE ANALYSIS VERY WELL
POINTS OUT SOME OF THOSE NOTIONS
THAT FIRST AND FOREMOST SORT OF
STAY IN YOUR LANE. BUT I THINK
THERE WAS NEVER AN INTENTION
WITHIN SIGMA FOR, UM, FOR THE
COUNTY'S PROCESS TO UNDERCUT
STATE LAW. AND SO I THINK, YOU
KNOW, SINCE WE'RE NOW UNDER
DIVISION SEVEN OF THE WATER CODE
AND WE'RE SORT OF SQUARELY IN
THESE ISSUES OF COUNTY
CONSISTENCY, ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT
CONSISTENCY IN PASSED BILLS IN
THIS IN THIS COMMITTEE HEARING,
BUT, UM THAT'S THAT'S THE ONLY
PRECONDITION. UM AND THAT
CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLAN WAS
ALWAYS THE INTENTION. BUT I
THINK THIS ACTUALLY GIVES SOME
TOOLS, HOPEFULLY TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT OCCURS AND TO MAKE SURE
THAT COMMUNICATIONS OCCURRING
AND I RECOGNIZE, THOUGH, FROM
THE OPPOSITION LEAD OPPOSITION
THAT IS FURIOUSLY OCCURRING
BECAUSE I SEE IT EVERY DAY IN
VENTURA COUNTY AND AS WELL
MANAGED AS YOU KNOW WE CAN GIVE
CREDIT FOR THESE MATURE BASINS,
BUT IT IS TOUGH COUNTRY OUT
THERE FOR SMALL GROWERS. AND FOR
EVERYBODY ELSE, YOU KNOW, WE
DON'T WE CAN'T AFFORD MORE
EASTPORT AVILES EITHER. AND I
THINK THAT WITH THE COMMUNITY
LIKE THE ONE MENTIONED BY
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. YOU
KNOW, WE'RE ON THE VERGE OF NOT
JUST ONE MORE EASTPORT, ORVILLE
. BUT BUT DOZENS. UM SO I THINK
THE BILL IS URGENTLY NEEDED, BUT
I THINK IT WE HAVE NOW REFINED
IT HOPEFULLY TO A PLACE WHERE IF
IT MOVES FORWARD TO GOVERNANCE
AND FINANCE, THEY CAN MAKE SURE
THAT YOU KNOW THE MECHANICS WORK
FROM A FROM A PUBLIC NOTICE
PERSPECTIVE, AND I'M SUPPORTED
BY THE WAY OF THAT. OF THAT
INTENTION FROM THE SUPPORT THAT
THERE BE THAT SORT OF THAT
INTERFACE WITH THE PUBLIC TO
KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NEXT
DOOR WOULD BE HELPFUL, AND I
KNOW THAT THERE ARE BAD APPLES
OUT THERE, AND A LOT OF WHAT
THIS IS ABOUT IS NOT THE BROADER
AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY. THAT'S
TRYING TO AH, KEEP UP WITH
INFLATION AND DEAL WITH THIS
DROUGHT. BUT IT'S THE PEOPLE WHO
AREN'T PLAYING BY THE RULES, WHO
WERE RUSHING TO PUNCH HOLES IN
THE GROUND WHILE THEY'RE BASIN
IS MAYBE BEING ADJUDICATED OR
EVALUATED OR ANALYZED AND
CUTTING THE LINE ESSENTIALLY AND
UNDERCUTTING THE ENTIRE PURPOSE
OF STATE LAW, AND SO YOU KNOW TO
ME, THIS BILL IS REALLY ABOUT
GIVING TOOLS TO DEAL WITH THE
BAD ACTORS BUT TRYING TO FIND
SOME SPACE FOR SMALLER DOMESTIC
USERS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY AS
WELL AS THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
, WHICH I KNOW WAS CENTRAL TO
THE COMPROMISE AROUND SIGMA. AND
SO IF WE CAN REALLY ENTRUST
OURSELVES TO SOME OF THAT
ADJUDICATION, T UM, ESPECIALLY
IN THE EXPEDITED CRITICAL
OVERDRAFT BASINS. I THINK WE CAN
GIVE SPACE TO THE PROCESS TO
WORK. IT'S GOING TO BE PAINFUL,
NO MATTER WHAT. THERE IS NO
AVOIDING THAT. THAT IS THE ERA
WE ARE IN. IT IS GOING TO BE A
TIME OF SCARCITY AND NOT HAVE
PLENTY, AND THAT'S JUST THAT WAS
THAT'S NOT JUST SCIENCE. WE
CAN'T GET PAST BUT I THINK THIS
AT LEAST PUTS TOOLS IN PLACE TO
ENSURE SOME FAIRNESS GOING
FORWARD FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF SIGMA WITHOUT SORT OF
INTERVENING IN OR UPSETTING THAT
PROCESS, SO THOSE ARE MY BRIEF
COMMENTS ON THE BILL WILL BE
SUPPORTING AND HOPEFULLY HELPING
THE AUTHOR GET THIS MEASURE ALL
THE WAY THROUGH TO THE
GOVERNOR'S DESK? UM ANY OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? YES.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE THE CHIEF CONSULTANTS
CONTRIBUTION MAKE THE BILL MUCH
BETTER THAN IT WAS STILL IN
OPPOSITION. I HAVE GRAVE GRAVE
CONCERNS OVER, UM OUTLANDISH
COMMENTS, NUMBER ONE IN YOU KNOW
THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE THAT
THE DUKE OR FACILITY RIGHT? THE
DUKE OR AREA OF THE EAST
PORTERVILLE AREA THAT THEY'RE
OUT OF WATER. THEY'VE BECAUSE OF
THIS. WELL, THAT WAS PUT IN, UH,
WHAT, FOUR MONTHS AGO. THAT WILL
DIDN'T AFFECT THAT WATER PROCESS
THAT THEY HAVE BEEN OUT OF WATER
. AND SENATOR CABALLERO AND
SENATOR HURTADO AND I HAVE BEEN
TRYING TO SOUND THE ALARM FOR
YEARS THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS
THAT LIVE IN OUR CENTRAL VALLEY
. ARE THEY BRING WATER TO THEM?
PHILIPPA BLACK POT. UM, IT'S
BEEN HAPPENING FOR YEARS. IT'S
NOT BECAUSE THIS ONE FARMER PUT
A WELL IN IN THAT ONE. FARMER
WOULDN'T HAVE PUT THE WELL IN IF
THE COUNTY HAD NOT AUTHORIZED IT
AND ALL THE COUNTIES IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY. UM THE TOP FOOD
PRODUCING COUNTIES, THREE OF
THEM IN THE WORLD. TOP FOOD,
PRETTY PRODUCING COUNTIES IN THE
WORLD. UM ARE VERY CONSCIOUS OF
HOW WATER IS USED, AND THE
COUNTY HAS ADOPTED WHITE SPACES
UNDER SIGMA SO THAT THEY COULD
INCORPORATE THAT AND TAKE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF MAKING SURE
THAT WELLS ARE PUT IN THE GROUND
THE WAY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE
PUT INTO GROUND THEY HAVE FOR
THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS
FRANTICALLY TRIED TO PUT
TOGETHER A COMPLETE 100%
AGREEMENTS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT
SIGMA REQUIRED EVEN FROM SMALL,
YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THAT HAVE FIVE
ACRES AND PEOPLE THAT HAD 5000
ACRES OR LARGER. SO UM, THIS. TO
CIRCUMVENT WHAT SIGMA IS ALREADY
DOING WHERE PEOPLE ARE ALREADY
IN THE PROCESS, AND THERE'S
ALREADY LITIGATION AND STUFF
THAT'S MOVING FORWARD. I THINK
IS WAY WAY PREMATURE. I
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS THAT
WERE TAKEN TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE
. MAKE IT MORE OF A, UM, A
PERMIT ISSUE ON ON JUST A CODE
SECTION UNDERWATER. AH BUT I
THINK THAT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT
THE BIG PICTURE, AND NO ONE IS
SOUNDING THE ALARM ABOUT FOOD
SECURITY. THERE ARE 237 MILLION
ALMOND TREES IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. THERE ARE PISTACHIOS,
ORANGES, TANGERINES, LEMONS,
POMEGRANATES, PEACHES. AVOCADOS
CHERRIES, PRUNES, DATES,
NECTARINES, GRAPEFRUIT FIGS,
KIWI PLUMS, OLIVES, PEARS,
APPLES AND APRICOTS JUST TO NAME
A FEW ALL OF OUR CONSTITUENTS IN
THE WORLD AS A MATTER OF FACT.
UM THERE'S THE WORLD AS A MATTER
OF FACT. AH! EAT THIS FRUIT THAT
WE GROW IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY
AND TO RESTRICT WATER ANYMORE
THAN WE ALREADY ARE. RESTRICTING
WATER. UM EVEN THOUGH DEALS HAVE
BEEN MADE IN THE PAST FOR
SURFACE WATER, WHICH WE DO NOT
GET UM YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME
TYPE OF EMPATHY OR SYMPATHY WITH
THE GROWERS OF THIS FOOD THAT
ARE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO
KEEP AMERICA'S FOOD SUPPLY GOING
. AND THIS BILL, IN MY OPINION.
IN THE 25 TEXT MESSAGES FROM
INDIVIDUALS IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY THAT GROW THIS FOOD SINCE
THE BILL IS BEING HEARD IS
REALLY AFFECTING THEM, AND I
THINK THAT WE NEED TO THINK
ABOUT THE COST OF FOOD, BECAUSE
IF WE SHUT OFF THE WATER OR
CONTINUE TO LIMIT WATER TO THE
TOP THREE FOOD PRODUCING
COUNTIES IN THE ENTIRE WORLD,
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE HAVING A
CONVERSATION WITH THE OTHER
STATES AND THE ADMINISTRATION.
REGARDING FOOD, SECURITY AND
POSSIBLY EVER NEED OTHER NATIONS
. AND THAT'S NOT SOME OUTLANDISH
STATEMENT. THAT'S A VERY TRUE
FACT. AND THEN WE ALSO NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS THE
ISSUE WITH THE INDIVIDUALS WHO
DON'T HAVE WATER. POOR FARMING
COMMUNITIES, BATHING IN DITCHES
OR HAVING WATER DELIVERED TO
THEIR DOORSTEP IN A BLACK TANK
OUT FRONT. LIKE I SAID THAT WAS
NOT BECAUSE OF SOME WATER WELL,
THAT WAS DUG THREE MONTHS AGO.
THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS,
AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO SOUND
THE ALARM TO NO AVAIL. AND I'M
PRETTY SURE IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A
REAL REPUBLICAN DISTRICT, WHICH
IS VERY FRUSTRATING. FOR ME
BECAUSE MY CONSTITUENTS DESERVE
WATER, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER
CONSTITUENT OUT THERE. WE COULD
ADDRESS OUTFLOWS, AND THERE'S A
TON OF THINGS WE COULD DO
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE THAT THE
VOTERS ALREADY APPROVED. THAT IS
NOT BEING BUILT WHERE THE
RESOURCES ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE
, BUT TO CIRCUMVENT SIGMA, UM
WHEN CUNTIES HAVE WORKED VERY,
VERY HARD WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS,
WHICH SIGMA REQUIRED TO DO
SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS
COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE, SO I
APOLOGIZE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT
WILL BE VOTING NOW. OKAY. THANK
YOU, SENATOR GROVE, SENATOR
EDMUND. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
THANKS FOR REACHING OUT ON THIS.
I ALSO WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING
THIS BILL TODAY AND UNLIKE AND I
THINK IT'S INTERESTING. LAST
NAME IS GROVE. ALL THE, UH,
PERMANENT PERMANENT PLANTED
CROPS THAT NEED WATER EVERY
SINGLE YEAR THAT THE TREE CROPS
BASICALLY. BUT I'M ALSO REALLY
CONCERNED ABOUT THE SMALL
FARMERS BECAUSE WE DON'T TALK
ENOUGH ABOUT A SMALL FARMERS AND
I DON'T I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE
COMMITTEE REALLY. AND YOU KNOW,
NOT THAT IT'S THE ROLE OF THIS
COMMITTEE TO TAKE SMALL FARMERS
INTO ACCOUNT, BUT THERE'S OFTEN
THE ONES THAT GET CAUGHT IN THIS
THERE AND THEY'RE YOU KNOW,
TRUCK FARMING. THEY'RE GOING
INTO MARKETS EVERY WEEK. THEY'RE
DOING THAT KIND OF WORK, AND
THEY NEED WATER OR THEY'RE OUT
OF BUSINESS, SO FOR THEM TO
APPLY AND PAY FOR A PROCESS TO
BE ABLE TO DEEPEN THEIR WELL.
WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE WHO'S YOU
KNOW A CORPORATE BIGGER FARMER,
AND THERE'S GOT TO BE ROOM FOR
ALL OF THEM, BUT ARE ABLE TO
WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND
HIRE SOMEONE TO DO THAT. MY
CONCERN IS COMING FROM A SMALL
FARMING FAMILY IS WE'RE GOING TO
CONTINUE TO DRIVE SMALL FARMERS
OUT AND HAVING NOTHING LEFT, BUT
THE BIGGER CORPORATIONS THAT CAN
STILL AFFORD TO DO THIS
OFTENTIMES FARMERS, FARMERS OF
COLOR WHOSE ENGLISH IS NOT THEIR
FIRST LANGUAGE, AND NOT ALL DOGS
ARE CREATED EQUAL. ALSO RIGHT? I
MEAN, IT TAKES TIME TO GET THESE
PROCESSES SHOULD THERE BE SOME
TIMELINES IN THOSE BILLS, ALSO
FOR A VERIFICATION OF THE G S A
PROCESS. UM SO I HAVE CONCERNS
AND I YOU KNOW I DON'T I DON'T
MENTION IT OFTEN BEING FROM
STOCKTON. BUT MY FAMILY IS FROM
TERRA BELLA. SO I CERTAINLY KNOW
THAT WATER ISSUES DOWN IN THAT
AREA AND THEIR HISTORIC IT'S NOT
JUST A FORMER GOING IN NOW IT
IS. I MEAN, LET'S JUST SAY IT
LIKE IT IS. IT'S KIND OF
HISTORIC RACISM THAT WE'VE SEEN
THAT WE DRIVE ALL THE POOR BROWN
PEOPLE OUT. WE DON'T WANT TO BE
CONNECTED TO OUR BIGGER WATER
SUPPLIES, AND THEN THEY MAKE A
LITTLE ONE THAT GOES BANKRUPT
RIGHT AWAY. AND THEN NOBODY
WANTS TO. TO TAKE HIM IN, SO
WE'VE HAD A HISTORY OF WATER
ISSUES IN THIS STATE. I DON'T
THINK I DON'T THINK THIS BILL
GOES DOORS TOWARDS ADDRESSING
THE EQUITY ISSUES. UM THAT THAT
AT THIS POINT THAT WILL BE ABLE
TO SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU
, SENATOR EDMUND SENATOR LAIRD,
AND THEN WE GO TO SENATOR ALLEN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR
CHAIRMAN. I APOLOGIZE. I WAS
PRESENTING A BILL IN ANOTHER
COMMITTEE. SO I MET MISSED SOME
OF THE OPENING REMARKS. BUT UM,
I GOT INTO SOME TROUBLE ON THIS
GENERAL SUBJECT IN A STORY IN
THE L A TIMES A FEW MONTHS AGO
BECAUSE I SUGGESTED THAT THE
WHOLE NOTION OF SIGMA WAS NOT
THAT WE HAD TO BE IN BALANCE ON
THE PRECISE DAY AT THE END, AND
NOBODY DID ANYTHING UP UNTIL
THEN, AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN
MANY WAYS. IS, I THINK WHILE
EVERYBODY IS TALKING, AND I'LL
GET TO IT IN A MOMENT ABOUT THE
SPECIFICS, AND, UH AND THE
STATUTE THE REAL ONE TENT WAS IS
THAT WE STEP OFF GRADUALLY TO
BEING IN BALANCE OVER THE LIFE
OF THE TIME FROM AN ENACTMENT TO
2040 25 YEARS AND WHAT HAS
HAPPENED IN SOME PLACES. IS THAT
THERE'S A REVIEW THAT WE CAN
STILL BE WAY OUT OF DEATH WAY
OUT OF BALANCE. UH AND JUST
SOMEHOW WILL FACE THAT IN THE
YEAR TO BEFORE THE DEADLINE
HAPPENS. AND THEN WHAT? I THINK
THIS BILL IS, IS IT A DRESS IS
THE INTENT OF SIGMA. THAT WE
MARCHED TOWARDS THAT AND GET TO
BEING IN BALANCE, AND THE
GOVERNOR HAS DONE AN EXECUTIVE
ORDER AND THE EXECUTIVE ORDER
WAS NOT A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS
EMBEDDED. INTO LAW AND WHAT'S
HAPPENING HERE? AH WITH THE
COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE FROM
EVERYBODY THUS FAR IN THE
DIOCESE IS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY
TALKING ABOUT THIS AND TRYING TO
ENACT SOMETHING THAT TAKES INTO
ACCOUNT MANY DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS. AND SO I
THINK THIS BILL NEEDS TO KEEP
MOVING, AND IT WAS CLEAR FROM
THE TESTIMONY THAT THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DONE HERE.
HAVE MOVED A BIT AND MOVED SOME
PEOPLE IN THEIR POSITIONS. BUT
YES, THERE'S PROBABLY STILL SOME
ISSUES ABOUT DEEPENING WELLS
ORWELL REPLACEMENT. OR IS THERE
AN EQUITY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE
ADDRESSED? BUT THE POINT IS, IS
THAT THIS ACTUALLY MEET THE
INTENT OF SIGMA THAT WE NOT
LIKE. OVERDRAFT UNTIL THE LAST
MINUTE AND SO AND WHAT I THINK
THE AUTHOR IS TRYING TO DO IS
HAVE EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE. AND
THE INTERESTING THING IS THAT IN
THE TESTIMONY I THINK ABOUT HALF
THE PEOPLE NOT POSITION
RECOGNIZE THAT THEY LISTED THEIR
SPECIFIC CONCERNS. THEY WANTED
THE MOVEMENT. OR THEY ARE
ENGAGED, AND I THINK THOSE THAT
ARE IN FLAT OUT OPPOSITION NEED
TO WORK WITH THE AUTHOR ON THIS
BECAUSE THIS IS NOT GOING AWAY.
THIS WILL BE AN ISSUE UNTIL THE
LAST DAY OF THE DEADLINE. AND
IT'S NOT GOING AWAY. IF THE
GOVERNOR HAS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER
THAT JUST MANDATES IT. AND WE
ALL DIDN'T GET TO TALK ABOUT IT
AND BE INCLUDED AND TRY TO TAKE
INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF THE THINGS
THAT WE HEARD IN THIS
DISCUSSION, SO I'LL BE VOTING
FOR THE BILL. I SALUTE THE
AUTHORS, GUTS AND IN SORT OF
MOVING AHEAD WITH THIS AND I
HOPE EVERYBODY WILL WORK WITH
HIM TO ADDRESS WHATEVER ISSUES
CAN BE ADDRESSED. AGAINST THE
INTENT THAT WE DON'T MARCH IN
THE OTHER DIRECTION AWAY FROM
SUSTAINABILITY UNTIL WE GET TO
2040. THANK YOU. STAGE ONE
ALERT. AND AS I NOTED THE
OUTSET, I THINK AND TO YOUR
POINT ABOUT SORT OF WORKED
MAKING THIS THIS BILL WORK, UM,
THAT YOU HAVE THE COMMITTEES.
FOR RESOURCES AND SUPPORT BEHIND
YOU AS WELL AT THIS POINT, AND I
THINK YOU KNOW SOME OF THE
ISSUES FLAGGED, UM, WERE
THOUGHTFUL, AND I'VE BEEN TAKING
FURIOUS NOTES HERE IN TERMS OF
PISTOL ROADMAP FOR GOING FORWARD
TO AND HOW TO HOW TO REALLY
REFINE AND MAKE THIS ACUTE SO
THAT WE DEAL WITH EQUITY
CONCERNS. WE DEAL WITH SMALL
FARMER CONCERNS WE ENGAGE ON
THAT S A VERIFICATION AND TIMING
ISSUE. UM AND WE EMPOWER AGAIN.
AS I SAID AT THE OUTSET, THE
ADJUDICATION PROCESS AND THE
ENTIRE GROUNDWATER STRATEGY. I
THINK I'M SORRY. WE HAVE ONE
MORE COMMENT FROM SENATOR ALLEN
OR QUESTION. I THINK, SENATOR
LARRY I'M SORRY. YEAH, SO WELL,
SO I'M ASSOCIATE MYSELF WITH HIS
COMMENTS. OKAY GREAT. WE'LL TURN
TO SARAH LIMÓN. THANK YOU. AND I
WILL ALSO ASSOCIATE MYSELF WITH
THE SENATOR LARRY'S COMMENTS
BECAUSE I THINK YOU KNOW FOR ME?
I DON'T UM I DON'T KNOW THAT
THIS BILL ALONE IS GOING TO
SOLVE ALL THE ISSUES, ESPECIALLY
THE ISSUES BETWEEN SMALL FARMERS
IN BIG FARMERS, AND I DO ALSO
REPRESENT THAT AND SEE THAT. BUT
I DO THINK THAT SOMETHING IS
HAPPENING IN OUR STATE WHERE WE
ARE OUT OF WATER. AND SO YOU
KNOW, AND I AND I DON'T WANT TO
QUOTE THE L A TIMES, BUT THEY
DESCRIBED AND THEY HAD A
METAPHOR AS LOOK IF YOU HAVE THE
LONGER STRAW THAT IN IT OF
ITSELF SHOULDN'T BE THE REASON
THAT YOU GET TO HAVE MORE WATER.
AND SO I'M GRAPPLING WITH HOW TO
DETERMINE YOU KNOW WHO HAS THE
LONGER STRAW AND MAKE THE STRAWS
MORE EQUITABLE. BUT KNOWING THAT
ALMOST IN EVERYTHING WE DO, IT
IS TRUE THAT OUR COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR NEVER HAVE THE LONG STRAW
, YOU KNOW, AND SO THEY ACTUALLY
PROBABLY HAVE THE SHORTEST
STRAW. AND SO I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS. I THINK THESE
ARE HARD CONVERSATIONS TO HAD,
AND CERTAINLY AH, YOU KNOW, I AM
HOPEFUL THAT THROUGH DIALOGUE
AND I THINK, AS HAS BEEN NOTED,
THERE IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER AND
THIS ALLOWS FOR A YOU KNOW,
LEGISLATIVE INPUT FEEDBACK
LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS IN A WAY
THAT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER DOES
NOT, AND THAT IS MY PREFERRED
METHOD OF TRYING TO DETERMINE A
VERY COMPLICATED PROBLEMS, SO I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE VOTE.
THANK YOU, SENATOR LIMÓN. NO
OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A
MOTION. UM, THAT'S A MOTION FROM
SENATOR LIMÓN. AND WE'LL LET THE
SUBCOMMITTEE GO RESOLVE THE
ROADMAP GOING FORWARD, BUT THEY
WILL GET THERE. AND I THINK WE
ALL HOPE WE ALL DO. I REALLY DO.
I APPRECIATE THE SUBSTANCE IN
THE HEARING. I APPRECIATE THE
CHAMBERS TESTIMONY, MR GUANACOS
TESTIMONY SOME OF THE CENTRAL
VALLEY GOVERNMENTS TESTIMONY AS
WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO
ENGAGING PROCESS HERE. AND YOU
HAVE MY COMMITMENT, ADDING ONTO
THIS BILL, MOVE FORWARD AND GO
TO GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE WILL
WILL BE WILL BE THERE TO HELP
HELP HOW WE CAN WITH THAT WE DO
HAVE A MOTION FROM SARAH LOHMAN
ALLOW YOU TO CLOSE. CHAIR IT'S
YOUR INDULGENCE. THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF THINGS I'D LIKE TO SAY
IN RESPONSE, PLEASE DO SUCH AN
IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR THE BENEFIT
OF ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE
OUT THERE. UM, THE FIRST THING
I'D LIKE TO SAY IS THAT MOVING
WATER POLICY IN CALIFORNIA IS
EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. I THINK
EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT IT'S
ONE OF THE REASONS WHY
CALIFORNIA WAS ALMOST THE LAST
IN THE NATION TO THE TABLE TO DO
ANYTHING ABOUT REGULATING
GROUNDWATER. AND THAT'S THINK
ABOUT THAT. WE WERE AS IMPORTANT
AS GROUNDWATER IS AS IMPORTANT
AS AGRICULTURE IS. WE WERE ONE
OF THE LAST IN THE NATION, AND
THAT'S BECAUSE THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
INSTITUTIONAL BLOCKING OF DOING
ANYTHING IN TERMS OF WATER
POLICY AND IN TERMS OF CHANGE.
SO I APPRECIATE THE REQUEST TO
STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE BIG
PICTURE. AND IF YOU STEP BACK
AND LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE, WE
ARE GOING INTO A PERIOD OF MERIT
IZATION, PROBABLY RIGHT. NOT
JUST A DROUGHT AND FOR US TO ASK
OURSELVES IN 2022. EIGHT YEARS
AFTER SIGMA WAS PASSED. ALRIGHT
EIGHT YEARS AFTER SIGNALSPASSED
. WE STILL HAVEN'T ADDRESSED
THIS VERY FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE THAT
THE AGENCIES THAT ARE IN CHARGE
OF TRYING TO REGULATE AND GET
THE BASIN INTO SUSTAINABILITY.
DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SAY YES OR NO TO THE NEW STRAWS
COMING IN TO THEIR WELLS NOW
QUICKLY DIGRESS. IN TERMS OF
PARTICULARLY SENATOR EDMONDS
COMMENTS ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE
SURE THAT THAT THAT THAT SMALL
FARMERS, ETCETERA. THESE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES ARE ABOUT THE MOST USER
FRIENDLY, PUMPER FRIENDLY AGENCY
. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT WE HAVE
OUT THERE. THE ALL OF THE PEOPLE
DRAWING WATER OUT OF THE BASINS
WERE VERY INTERESTED IN HOW
THOSE AGENCIES WERE FORMED, AND
THEY HAVE SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE
IN NEARLY ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT GIVING
THIS TO A HOSTILE AGENCY. SO
CERTAINLY ALL OF THOSE DETAILS
LIKE HEY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE PEOPLE WITH THE SHORT
STRAW DON'T GET TAKEN ADVANTAGE
OF BY THE PEOPLE WITH THE LONG
STRAW. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
REPLACEMENT WELLS DON'T GET
LUMPED IN WITH 12 NEW WELLS FROM
THE NEW YORK SYNAGOGUE IT THAT
ARE RIGHT OUTSIDE THE BASIN.
THAT ARE GOING TO HURT EVERYBODY
IN THE BASIN. ALL OF THAT CAN BE
DONE BY THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES AS PART
OF THEIR PLAN, THEY COULD SAY
OUR SUSTAINABILITY PLAN SAYS WE
WANT TO PROTECT THE DRINKING
WATER OF THESE THESE COMMUNITIES
. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
EXISTING FARMERS THAT HAVE BEEN
HERE FOR DECADES AND THEY WANT
TO SIMPLY TAKE THERE WILL BE 100
FT. DEEPER BUT IT'S GOING TO BE
THE SAME AMOUNT OF EXTRACTION
WE'RE GOING TO. WE'RE GOING TO
SAY THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR
POLICIES WERE NOT TRYING TO
MICROMANAGE. WE'RE TRYING TO GO
TO THE LOCAL AGENCY THAT WE THIS
STATE. SAID EIGHT YEARS AGO,
YOU'VE GOT TO GET YOUR ACT
TOGETHER ON GROUNDWATER IN YOUR
LOCAL AREAS. YOU GUYS FIGURE OUT
HOW YOU'RE GOING TO MANAGE IT,
AND THEY DID. THEY CREATED THEIR
OWN GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
PLANS, AND NOW WE'RE SIMPLY
SAYING YOU'RE MISSING ONE
IMPORTANT TOOL IN YOUR TOOL
CHEST, AND THAT IS NO ABILITY TO
SIGN OFF ON THE NEW WELLS AND
IDENTIFIED THE THREE THINGS AND
WE CAN'T FORGET THESE THREE
THINGS HAPPEN WITH NEW WELLS.
NEW WELLS DRAW MORE WATER OUT OF
A BASIN THAT WE'VE ALREADY
IDENTIFIED AS BEING OVER DRAFTED
RIGHT TO SOME EXTENT NEW WELLS
AFFECT OTHER WELLS. AND NEW
WELLS CREATE A VESTED RIGHT,
WHICH MAKES IT MORE COMPLICATED
FOR THE GROUNDWATER REGENCY TO
ACTUALLY TAKE ACTION TO ACTUALLY
TRY TO GET THE BASIN INTO
SUSTAINABILITY SO TO TODAY, SAY
EIGHT YEARS LATER. NO WE'RE NOT
GOING TO DO THIS BILL. IT'S NOT
THE RIGHT TIME. I WANT TO GO
BACK TO THE OPPOSITION THAT WE
HAVE FACED AS WE'VE TRIED TO
MOVE THIS BILL. AT FIRST. IT WAS
A FURIOUS IN THE COMMITTEE IN
THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE. IT WAS A
FURIOUS OPPOSITION, SAYING THIS
TAKES AWAY LOCAL CONTROL. IN AN
ATTEMPT TO TRY TO KILL IT RIGHT
THERE 24 HOURS AND EVERYBODY'S
GOING. TAKE AWAY LOCAL CONTROL.
I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY LOCAL
CONTROL THAT OPPOSITION THAT
ARGUMENTS DROPPED, BUT THAT'S
WHAT WAS USED AT FIRST, WHICH IS
WHY IT'S SO HARD TO MOVE WATER
BILLS. BUT NOT THIS DOES NOTHING
TO TAKE AWAY LOCAL CONTROL. THIS
ACTUALLY ENHANCES THE LOCAL
CONTROL OF THE AGENCY THAT THAT
WE CREATED SO TO BE ON RECORD AT
THIS POINT TIME AND SAY. NO NOT
NOT WILLING TO LET THIS MOVE
FORWARD AND HAVE THIS GET WORKED
OUT. I THINK THAT IT REMINDS ME
OF OTHER TIMES. THIS IS A TIME
OF NEED FOR CALIFORNIA. AND IF
WE CAN'T DO THIS FIRST, VERY
SIMPLE, COMMON SENSE SINCE STEP
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO. I
REALLY CAN'T. I MEAN, THERE'S
NOTHING MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD. I
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK
ABOUT THIS BILL TO THE GROUND
WATER RESOURCE AGENCY WORKSHOP
THAT THEY HAD LAST WEDNESDAY.
WHEN I WAS FINISHED. WE DIDN'T
TAKE A VOTE OR ANYTHING, BUT I
HAD MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE COME UP
AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES
MAKE COMMON SENSE. IT'S JUST THE
DEVILS ARE IN THE DETAILS IN
TERMS OF HOW IT GETS IMPLEMENTED
AND I HAVE REMAINED AND I
REMAINED FOR THE OPPOSITION.
CONSISTENTLY SAYING. THE DETAILS
ARE FINE, BUT THERE'S TWO THINGS
THAT WE SHOULDN'T COMPROMISE ON
. THERE SHOULD BE TRANSPARENCY.
YOU SHOULDN'T JUST HAVE. WE'VE
HAD 6000 NEW WELLS GO INTO THE
OVER DRAFTED BASINS. IN THE
EIGHT YEARS SINCE WE STARTED
SPEAKING NOW, IF MOST PEOPLE
WOULD HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, BACK
IN 2014, YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING
TO HAPPEN AFTER SEEING YOU'RE
GONNA HAVE 6000 MORE WELLS THAT
ARE GOING TO BE DRAWING OUT EVEN
MORE WATER FROM THOSE AQUIFERS
THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE SCRATCH
THEIR HEAD AND SAID THAT DOESN'T
SEEM VERY LIKELY. MEANWHILE
WE'VE HAD ALMOST 1000 WELLS GO
DRY AS A RESULT OF THAT. SO THE
ARGUMENTS THAT I HEARD TODAY AND
I LISTEN CAREFULLY. IT IS NOT
THE RIGHT TIME. WE STILL HAVE
CONCERNS, BUT WE'RE WE NEED
SPECIFICS. WHAT IS IT IF YOU'RE
COMMITTED TO LETTING THE
GROUNDWATER AGENCIES HAVE THAT
SIMPLE, FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT OF
BEING ABLE TO SIGN OFF. THEN AND
YOU'RE COMMITTED TO SOME KIND OF
TRANSPARENCY, SO THESE AREN'T
JUST SLIDING THROUGH THE REST OF
IT, I THINK CAN BE AND WILL BE
WORKED OUT IN THE INTEREST OF
EVERYBODY. I'M AS PASSIONATE AS
ANYBODY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
FARMWORKER COMMUNITIES AND THE
SMALL FARMERS STATE OUT THERE
BUT IT'S THE GROUNDWATER AGENCY
THAT IS GOING TO DEFEND THEM.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE US. WE'RE
NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO IT
WITH NEARLY 1000 WELLS THAT HAVE
GONE DRY. IT'S THE GROUNDWATER
AGENCY, BUT THEY CAN'T DEFEND
THEM. IF THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE
THE RIGHT TO SAY NO. WHEN THAT
NEW YORK SYNDICATE COMES IN AND
SAYS, WE WANT TO PUT 12 WELLS
HERE, SO YOUR CHOICE TODAY IS DO
NOTHING AND ALLOW THAT NEW
YORK'S INTEGRATE TO STILL COME
IN AND PUT THOSE 12 WELLS. OR GO
FORWARD WITH THIS AND LET US
KEEP TWEAKING. IT'S GOING TO
COME TO THE SENATE FLOOR. IT'S
GOT TO GO TO ANOTHER ANOTHER
COMMITTEE, SO I IMPLORE YOU TO
LET US CONTINUE TO MOVE THAT WAY
, BECAUSE I THINK TO BE ON
RECORD AS DOING NOTHING AT THIS
POINT IN TIME IN CALIFORNIA'S
HISTORY WOULD BE A MISTAKE FOR
ALL OF US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
AND I'M PARDON ME FOR THE LENGTH
OF MY RESPONSE, BUT JUST HOW
IMPORTANT I THINK THIS
PARTICULAR ISSUE IS AND I
RESPECT WESTERN IVO. YEAH AND I
ACCEPTED ALL THE AMENDMENTS OF
THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. UM SO WE HAVE A MOTION
FROM CENTRAL AMMAN. MOTIONS DO
PASS AS AMENDED, BUT FIRST
AMENDMENT REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND
FINANCE. CHIEF COMMITTEES ISN'T
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. FILE ITEM
7 80 22 OH, ONE. SENATOR STERN.
STERN. I JONES. JONES NO, ALAN,
ALAN, I EGGMAN. STEGMAN. NO
GROWTH. GROVE. NO HERZBERG
QUESTO. LAIRD. LAIRD I LIMÓN
LIMÓN. AYE. THANK YOU. THE
MEASURE HAS FOUR VOTES, AND
WE'LL LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH BEFORE WE GET STARTED. UH
MISS GARCIA, YOU'RE WELCOME TO
APPROACH BUT WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR
BRIEFLY WHILE WE HAVE SOME
MEMBERS. HERE I WOULD BE WILLING
TO ACCEPT MOTION ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. VERY GOOD. SO WE HAVE
A MOTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR
AGAIN MEMBERS THAT'S FILE ITEMS.
458 11 AND 12 CHIEF COMMITTEE
ASSISTANT. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR, OR FILE
ITEM NUMBER FOUR A B 21 01 FILE
ITEM FIVE. MAYBE 21 28 ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT A B 25 35 FILE ITEM
NUMBER 11 A B 29 66 FILE ITEM
NUMBER 12 A B 29 75 IN THE
MOTION IS DO PASS AND BE ORDERED
TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. OKAY
TURN BY TURN I JONES. JONES. I,
ALAN. FALLON EGGMAN. EGGMAN. I
GROW. GROVE, HERTZBERG SO LAIRD.
LAIRD. I LIMÓN LIMÓN. AYE. YEAH,
77. THE MEASURES SEVEN VOTES, WE
WILL LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS OF WE ARE GOING
IN FIRELORD. ER I DIDN'T MAKE A
MISTAKE AND I THINK WE HAVE MISS
BURNER HARVARD THAT NEXT, BUT
I'LL DEFER. TO THE MEMBERS HERE
. HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED. I
KNOW YOU WANT TO MOVE THIS
QUICKLY, MISS GARCIA, BUT WE DO
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FROM THE
COMMITTEE FOR YOU. SO, UM. OKAY,
UM IS THAT AGREEABLE TO YOU?
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S OKAY? UM WE'LL
PROCEED WITH A B 26 49. PLEASE
PROCEED. THANK YOU. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS MAYBE 26 49. I'M HERE
REPRESENTING 26 49. I WANT TO
START OFF BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND EXPRESS
MY APPRECIATION TO THE CHAIR AND
THE STAFF FOR THEIR HARD WORK ON
THIS BILL. MAYBE 26 49 CALLS FOR
THE SEQUESTRATION OF 60 MILLION
METRIC TONS OF CARBON BY 2030 A
NATURAL AND WORKING LANDS. THIS
BILL ALSO CALLS FOR AN INCREASE
IN SEQUESTRATION TO 75 MILLION
METRIC TONS BY 2035. BUT THIS
INTO PERSPECTIVE, 60 MILLION
METRICS AND CARBON DIOXIDE IS
EQUIVALENT TO THE YEARLY
EMISSIONS OF ABOUT 13 MILLION
CARS, WHICH MY LIFE IS DEFINED
BY AN ALLEY. THIS IS AN
AMBITIOUS YET ACHIEVABLE TARGET
AKIN TO OUR CLIMATE GOALS IN THE
ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION
SECTORS. AND CAN MEASURE IT WITH
THE FACT THAT OUR NATURAL AND
WORKING LANDS ARE ONE OF THE
PILLARS OF THE STATE'S CLIMATE
STRATEGY, INVESTING IN PROVEN
COST EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS LIKE
COMPOSTING, FOOD, WASTE AND
APPLIANCE AND APPLYING IT SOILS.
PLANTING COVER CROPS. URBAN TREE
PLANTING HABITAT RESTORATION CAN
HELP CALIFORNIA BECOME A GLOBAL
MODEL FOR WIN WIN NATURAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION PROJECTS ARE NOT
ONLY NOT ONLY SEQUESTER CARBON
BUT IMPROVE OUR WATER SECURITY
AND RESILIENCE TO DROUGHT. TO
REDUCE POLLUTION AND HAS BY THE
VERSATILE AND HELP BOTH RURAL IN
A RING COMMUNITIES ADAPT TO
CLIMATE IMPACTS. A B 26 49 WOULD
MAKE CALIFORNIA THE FIRST STATE
IN THE NATION TO SET A GOAL OF
NATURAL CARBON SEQUESTRATION AND
VISITING THE SOLUTIONS THAT THEY
WILL PAVE THE WAY TOWARDS A
CLIMATE SAFE FUTURE FOR ALL
WHILE IMPROVING PUBLIC HEALTH
AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AT
HOME. THIS IS EXACTLY THE TYPE
OF INNOVATIVE CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
THE NATION AND THE WORLD ARE
EXPECTING FROM CALIFORNIA AND
WHY THERE ARE ALMOST 100
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE ORGANIZATIONS IN
SUPPORT. FOR THOSE REASONS. I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE
WITH ME TODAY. TESTIFYING
SUPPORT IS ELIE COHEN WITH THE
CLIMATE CENTER AND JEFFY CREEK
WITH THE CARBON CYCLE INSTITUTE
. OKAY, THANKS VERY MUCH. MISS
COHEN. WELCOME. GOOD MORNING
CHAIR STERN AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. I'M ELLIE COHEN, CEO OF
THE CLIMATE CENTER AND HONORED
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A B 26
49 TO SET URGENTLY NEEDED STATE
GOALS FOR NATURALLY REMOVING
CARBON FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. I
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
CHAMPIONING THIS BILL. RECENT U
. N CLIMATE SCIENCE IS CLEAR THE
WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY TO SECURE
A LIVABLE FUTURE IS QUICKLY
CLOSING. NO TEMPERATURE RISES
SAFE. UNLESS WE ACT BOLDLY NOW,
EXTREME HEAT AND DROUGHT WILL
CONTINUE TO THREATEN OUR WATER
SUPPLY. AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING
OUR FARCE AND FISHERIES, THE
HEALTH OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND
OUR AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY. MANY
OF THE CROPS WE GROW TODAY MAY
NOT BE VIABLE AS EARLY AS 2027
THE UN WE HAVE TO CUT FOSSIL
FUEL. USE IN HALF BY 2030 AND
REMOVE CARBON. WE ALREADY PUT
INTO THE ATMOSPHERE TO HAVE A
SHOT AT SECURING A STABLE
CLIMATE. TO REMOVE THAT LEGACY.
CLIMATE POLLUTION TO INCREASE
DROUGHT RESILIENCE TO HELP
REPLENISH GROUNDWATER, THE STATE
MUST RAPIDLY SCALE UP PROVEN
COST EFFECTIVE PRACTICES FOR
NATURAL CARBON SEQUESTRATION.
LIKE APPLYING COMPOST AND
PLANTING COVER CROPS, RESTORING
RIPARIAN HABITAT AND COASTAL
WETLANDS, MANAGING FOR MATURE
FOREST STRUCTURE AND GREENING
OUR CITIES. WE CANNOT RELY ON
TECHNOLOGICAL DIRECT AIR CAPTURE
, WHICH IS IN ITS INFANCY, VERY
EXPENSIVE AND NOT YET SCALABLE.
ONLY NATURAL CARBON ACCRUAL CAN
COST EFFECTIVELY DRAW DOWN PAST
CARBON EMISSIONS AT SCALE THIS
DECADE. WHILE INCREASING
RESILIENCE TO GROWING EXTREMES
WITH MULTIPLE CO BENEFITS FOR
OUR HEALTH, OUR ENVIRONMENT AND
OUR ECONOMY SUPPORTED BY 80
ORGANIZATIONS. WE URGE YOUR I
VOTE ON THE NATURAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION AND RESILIENCE ACT
ESSENTIAL TO SECURING A HEALTHY
CLIMATE SAFE FUTURE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT LEAD
WITNESS, MR CREEK. THANK YOU,
JEFF. GREEK WITH THE CARBON
CYCLE INSTITUTE. I FARMED ON
MARINE COUNTY COAST FOR 25 YEARS
BEFORE CO FOUNDING THE MARINE
CARBON PROJECT IN 2006 AND
JOINING CARBON CYCLE INSTITUTE
IS THE FOUNDING DIRECTOR. IN
2013. I STAND IN SUPPORT OF 26
49. AS MUCHAS ONE THIRD OF THE
EXCESS CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE
ATMOSPHERE IS A DIRECT RESULT OF
HISTORIC MISMANAGEMENT OF THE
WORLD'S NATURAL WORKING LANDS.
WE MUST URGENTLY SET AND MEET
AMBITIOUS CALLS FOR THE
TRANSFORMATION OF THAT EXCESS
CEO TO BACK INTO THE CARBON RICH
TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC
ECOSYSTEMS THAT BLESS CALIFORNIA
BEFORE IT WAS INDEED,
CALIFORNIA. ABUNDANCE OF
ECOSYSTEM. MICKLEY SEQUESTERED
CARBON IN ALL ITS NATURAL FORMS.
PROCESS AIDED BY THOUSANDS OF
YEARS OF INTIMATE INDIGENOUS
RELATIONSHIP WITH PLACE ENABLED
THE BUILDING OF THE
INFRASTRUCTURE OF OUR STATE FROM
THE NUMBER OF HER VIRGIN REDWOOD
FORESTS AND VALUE OF WOODLANDS.
TO THE WATERS OF THE RIVERS,
LAKES AND STREAMS TO HER CARBON
RICH CENTRAL VALLEY, MARSHALL
AND SOILS IF WE ARE TO PROTECT
AND RESTORE CALIFORNIA'S
BIODIVERSITY, SURFACE AND GROUND
WATERS OR SALMON RUNS, OUR
FORESTS ARRANGE LAND WATERSHEDS
ARE AGRICULTURAL SOILS OR
NATURAL RESOURCE BASED ECONOMIC
ACTIVITY OR THE HEALTH OF OUR
COMMUNITIES. WE MUST ENGAGE OUR
NATURAL WORKING LANDS. TO
RECAPTURE THAT LOST CARBON
DIOXIDE FROM THE ATMOSPHERE AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WE WROTE TO
THE CHALLENGE OF THE DUST BOWL
OF THE 19 THIRTIES BY CREATING
THE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE,
THE CIVILIAN CONSERVATION CORPS
AND THE COUNTY CONSERVATION
DISTRICTS. THAT INFRASTRUCTURE
STILL EXISTS. AND WITH ADEQUATE
STATE SUPPORT, INCLUDING A
GREATLY EXPANDED AND WELL
TRAINED WORKFORCE WILL RISE TO
MEET THIS NEW, MUCH GREATER
CHALLENGE. THE NATURAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION AND RESILIENCE ACT
SETS AN AMBITIOUS GET ESSENTIAL
AND REALIZABLE TARGET FOR
TERRESTRIAL CARBON SEQUESTRATION
IN CALIFORNIA. WE URGE YOUR VOTE
. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
OTHERS IN THE COMMITTEE HEARING
ROOM WISHING TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
WELCOME. HELLO ABIGAIL, MILE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL
CONSERVATION CORES. MID
PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT AND NRDC ACTION FUND
AND SUPPORT. THANK THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. MARK
FINSTER MAKER ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
OF PROUD CO SPONSOR OF THE BILL,
WE'RE DRIVE OUT. THANK YOU. MR
CHAIRMAN. AND MEMBERS ROGER
DICKINSON ON BEHALF OF CIVIC
WELL IN SUPPORT. THANKS. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, KYLE JONES
WITH COMMUNITY WATER CENTER AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, REBECCA MARCUS,
REPRESENTING AMERICAN FIRM LAND
TRUST IN THE CALIFORNIA CLIMATE
AND AGRICULTURE NETWORK AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. JENNIFER FEARING ON
BEHALF OF CO SPONSORED THE PEW
CHARITABLE TRUST AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. NEXT. SEE NO OTHERS
IN THE HEARING ROOM WILL TURN
THE LINES MODERATOR, WHICH
PLEASE CALL ON FOLKS WISHING
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME
TINGLE FIRST TO LINE 43. I
WANTED TO TOASTING. OKAY WELL,
NOTE YOUR OPPOSITION IF YOU JUST
GIVE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION.
MY NAME IS LINDA. THREE ARE NOT
AFFILIATED AT THEIR THAN LIVING
OUT IN THE COUNTRY ON A WELL AND
EVERYTHING. SOME VERY, VERY
UNHAPPY WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S
GOING ON. UNDERSTOOD THANK YOU
VERY MUCH COUNTIES. THAT MEANS
OKAY. THANKS FOR CALLING. I
THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ON THE
PRIOR MEASURE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
WE'LL NOTE YOUR TESTIMONY. THANK
YOU NEXT. LYING 25. MORNING MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. RICO MASTER
DONATO. TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT. 9
46. GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS KIM DELFINO ON THE
BEHALF OF AUDUBON, CALIFORNIA
AND THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT.
SOCIETY AND SUPPORT THANK YOU.
LINE 48. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS
JIM LINDBERG ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS THAT MANY ON LEGISLATION
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BEHIND
37. I'M SORRY, 35. GOOD MORNING
, TASHA NEWMAN ON BEHALF OF
EARTH JUSTICE. THE CALIFORNIA
COUNCIL OF LAND TRUST AND
CALIFORNIA URBAN FOREST COUNCIL
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. LINE 33.
THIS IS JANET MCGARY ON BEHALF
OF 3 50 BAY AREA ACTION AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT. LINE
34. HELLO THIS IS HEIDI HARMAN,
FORMER MAYOR OF SAN LUIS BOA AND
CURRENTLY WITH WHAT SCREEN
CALIFORNIA IN STRONG,
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH NEXT. FIND 47. 47 YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. IS YOUR MOOD ON.
AND NO RESPONSE FROM 9 47, AND
THAT'S NO NONE FURTHER INTO.
OKAY VERY GOOD, SEEING NO OTHERS
IN SUPPORT. UM, WE DON'T HAVE
OPPOSITION LEAD OPPOSITION LIST
ON FILE ANY OF THE HEARING ROOM
WITH TESTIFYING, OPPOSITION
SEEING NONE TURN TO THE PHONE
LINES. MODERATOR ANYONE WISH TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION TO A B 26
49. PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS
TIME, SO. AND IT'S WELL GO FIRST
TO LINE 40. SPICY. YOU HEAR ME?
YES. RIGHT DECISION AND LARGE
REPRESENTING JAMES TO BRADLEY
RUNNING FOR US SENATE. HERE IN
STRONG OPPOSITION IN THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM SEEING
NO OTHERS ON THE LINE OR IN THE
HEARING ROOM WILL WILL COME
BACK. FOR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
. YES, SENATOR LAMONTAGNE. THANK
YOU. I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO
COMMEND THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. UM I'VE BEEN PART
WITH OTHER SENATORS OF BROADER
CONVERSATIONS RELATED TO CARBON
CAPTURE, AND I STILL THINK
NATURAL SECRET STATION HAS TO BE
PART OF THE EQUATION AS WELL. WE
CANNOT SIMPLY RELY ON CARBON
SECRETS SECRET STATION THROUGH
TECHNOLOGY OF SORTS. SO I
COMMEND THIS BILL. I THINK THAT
THIS IS PART OF THE BROADER
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
HAPPENING IN OUR STATE AND THIS
IS HOW WE BETTER MAKE AN
EQUATION COMPLETE. SO WITH THAT
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO MOVE THE
BILL WHEN APPROPRIATE, AND ALSO
IF THERE'S STILL TIME I'D LIKE
TO BE ADDED AS A CO AUTHOR. VERY
GOOD. THAT'S EMOTION FROM
SENATOR LAMONE. UM YES, CENTER
GROVE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. CAN
YOU GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF
NATURAL SEQUESTRATION OR WHAT?
YOUR INTENT OF NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION IS. THANK YOU, MR
GROVE IN I'VE BEEN LIKE SMILING
SINCE, UM MR EDMUNDS POINT OF
YOUR LAST NAME EARLIER, SO IT'S
PERFECT. IT'S TREES. IT'S A
GROVE OF TREES IS AN EXAMPLE.
OKAY? AH. TAKING COMPOST AND
APPLYING IT TO THE SOIL. FOR
THOSE TREES WOULD BE ANOTHER
EXAMPLE. ACCOMPLICE ALSO HELPS
US TO CAPTURE WETLANDS IS ALSO
ANOTHER SPACE THAT HELPS US IN
MY COMMUNITY. IT'S PUTTING TREES
ALONG THE FREEWAY. WHICH WOULD
HELP US WITH CARBON
SEQUESTRATION. ALSO POLLUTION
AND NOISE OUT THERE. UH AD SO
THOSE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF
NATURAL WORKING LENGTH. THANK
YOU ACTUALLY VERY EXCITED THAT
MY COLLEAGUE FROM SANTA BARBARA
AH MADE THOSE COMMENTS AND, UM,
THAT NATURAL SEQUESTRATION AND
YOU DEFINING TREES AS NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION JUST TELLS ME LIKE
COMPLETELY ELATED RIGHT NOW, SO
I'M GOING TO CONTAIN MYSELF.
BECAUSE THE CENTRAL VALLEY. THE
CENTRAL VALLEY HAS 486. TREES.
YES IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY, WHICH
WOULD BE NATURAL SEQUESTRATION.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE'RE
FOLLOWING THAT LAND VERY FAST,
AND WE'RE ELIMINATING THAT
NATURAL SEQUESTRATION THAT
ALREADY EXIST IN THE STATE. AND
UM, YOU KNOW, I TALKED TO YOU
AND I DID TALK TO YOU ABOUT
SUPPORTING YOUR BILL TODAY
BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION IN THE COMMENTS
THAT WE HAD, BUT I'M VERY
ALARMED BY THE COMMENTS ON
SUPPORT. UM ABOUT NATURAL
RESOURCES, OIL AND GAS THAT WERE
MADE AND THE REASON WHY I'M
ALARMED BY THAT IS BECAUSE
THERE'S 27.6 MILLION METRIC TONS
OF CARBON THAT IS EMITTED BY
VESSELS ON ONE TRIP FROM SAUDI
ARABIA TO BRING THE OIL WE USE
EVERY SINGLE DAY. BUT WE DON'T
ADMIT THAT TYPE OF CARBON HERE
IN THIS STATE. UM AND THE REASON
WHY I BRING THAT UP IS BECAUSE
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THOSE, UH,
THOSE INDUSTRIES YOU MADE A
COMMENT ABOUT THOSE INDUSTRIES
AND HOW EVIL THAT IMMUNITY EVIL
BUT YOU KNOW HOW THEY ADMIT
CARBON, BUT FROM THE BIGGER
PICTURE ONE SHIP FROM SAUDI
ARABIA OR ECUADOR. BULLDOZING
DOWN THE RAINFOREST 27 MILLION
METRIC TONS OF CARBON EMISSIONS.
AND WE DON'T DO THAT HERE AND IN
THE CENTRAL VALLEY, WE HAVE
ALMOST A HALF A BILLION TREES.
IT'S PART OF YOUR NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION THAT NUMBER ONE
FARMERS DON'T GET ANY CREDIT FOR
AND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DESTROY
EVERY DAY WITH LACK OF WATER. SO
I THINK IT'S, UM. IT'S IGNORANCE
AT BEST IN HYPOCRISY AT WORST.
THAT WE DON'T ADDRESS THIS ISSUE
ON A LARGER SCALE. UM I THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THE BILL
FORWARD BECAUSE I THINK IT DOES
. IT DOES BRING ATTENTION TO THE
FACT THAT TREES ARE A NATURAL
CEASE SEQUESTRATION. TREES ARE A
NATURAL SOUND BARRIER. TREES ARE
A NATURAL BEAUTIFICATION FOR OUR
STATE WHEN YOU DRIVE INTO
SACRAMENTO EVERY DAY, AND IT
SAYS THE CITY OF TREES FARM TO
FORK UM SO TREES ARE VITALLY
IMPORTANT AND I JUST WANT TO
RECOGNIZE AGAIN. THIS IS REALLY
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FORMER
SECRETARY OF NATURAL RESOURCES
THAT I SIT ON SEVERAL COMMITTEES
WITH THAT THE CENTRAL VALLEY HAS
A HALF A BILLION NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION TREES THAT MAKE
OUR STATE BETTER. SO THANK YOU,
MR GARCIA. THANK YOU, SENATOR
GROVE AND I WOULD JUST JUMP OFF
AT THIS POINT AND SAY THAT THE
KEY ISSUE AROUND INTEGRATING
THAT KIND OF NATURE BASED, UM
SEQUESTRATION IS THE PERMANENCE
OF THAT SEQUESTRATION. SO THAT'S
WHAT GETS IN THE WAY OF CERTAIN
SÜ AGRICULTURE OPERATIONS.
QUALIFYING IS WHEN YOU PUSH YOUR
ENTIRE UM LEMON GROVE. YOU LOSE
ALL THE CARBON BENEFITS AT THAT
POINT, SO THERE'S A THERE'S AN
INHERENT ATTENTION IF YOU'RE
PUSHING YOUR TREES UM AND YOU'RE
RELEASING, AND YOU'RE DOING AN
AG BERN LIKE IS GOING ON EVERY
SINGLE DAY IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY
BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE BECAUSE
PEOPLE HAVE TO TURN OVER CROPS
AND THEY HAVE TO SHIFT IN THE
MARKETS AND MAYBE THEY'RE IN
CITRIX ONE DAY AND THEY WANT TO
SHIFTED AVOCADOS. THE NEXT OR IF
YOU'RE IN A DIFFERENT MARKET
YOU'RE MOVING FROM, YOU KNOW, 11
PARTICULAR COMMODITY THAT'S
WORKING TO ANOTHER. THERE'S A
NIMBLENESS THAT HAS TO OCCUR IN
THE MODERN FARMER IN CALIFORNIA.
WITH MODERN FARMERS IN
CALIFORNIA TO SORT OF FOLLOW
MARKET DEMAND, AND SO THE
UNDERLYING. ISSUE I GUESS THAT
I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU RESOLVE
GOING FORWARD WITH THIS BILL,
AND WHY I SAID IT WOULDN'T BE. I
MEAN, WE'LL MAKE IT MODERATELY
SHORT, BUT I JUST I WANTED TO,
UM I WANTED TO SORT OF DOUBLED
DOWN ON THE COMMITTEE'S QUESTION
ABOUT PERMANENCE. UM BILL USED
THE WORD LONG TERM WHEN IT
DEFINES NATURAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION. UM NATURAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION IS DIVINE IS THE
REMOVAL AND LONG TERM STORAGE.
THERE'S ALWAYS AN ISSUE AND IT'S
TRUE. YOU KNOW AN URBAN FORESTRY
I KNOW IN YOUR DISTRICT. PEOPLE
GO THROUGH TREE PLANTINGS. THEY
WAVED THE FLAG. YOU KNOW THEY DO
THE PROJECT AND THEN FIVE YEARS
LATER, THERE'S NO MAINTENANCE.
NO ONE CARES FOR THOSE
JURISDICTIONS. UM AND THOSE
TREES DIE OR THEY, YOU KNOW,
THEY GET FALLOWED OR WHATEVER
THE LAND. MAYBE SO I THINK
WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE
INTEGRITY OF THIS MEASURE FROM
AN EMISSIONS PERSPECTIVE, AND
WHY DIDN'T WANT TO PUSH ON IT IN
THIS HEARING, AND IT'S MORE FOR
EQ BECAUSE WE'RE NOT, UH, WE'RE
NOT THE ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE. IN
OTHER WORDS, WE'RE NOT LOOKING
AFTER THAT PART OF THE SCOPING
PLAN. WE'RE ON THE RESOURCES
SIDE, BUT I DO WANT TO SEE THAT
FOR ME TO BE AS FULL THROAT IN
SUPPORT, AND I WANT TO BE. I'D
LIKE TO SEE THE COALITION BEHIND
THIS SORT OF DRILL DOWN ON THAT.
PERMANENCY QUESTION BECAUSE WHAT
IT'S GOING TO DO IN FUTURE
CYCLES. IT'S GONNA IT'S GONNA
OBLIGATE US TO REALLY FOLLOW
THROUGH ON THOSE PROJECTS. AND
SO WHEN YOU HAVE CONCERNS FROM
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY,
FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, ON THE
ON THE FORESTRY SIDE. ARE WE
GOING TO COUNT FORESTS THAT ARE
CURRENTLY STANDING, UM AND SORT
OF PLAY AN ACREAGE GAME AND GAME
OUR WAY TO THAT NUMBER, EVEN IF
THOSE FORESTS ARE STILL UNDER A
TIMBER HARVEST PLAN. THEY'RE
GOING TO BE HARVESTED OR THERE'S
WILDFIRE RISK, SO DEALING WITH
THOSE UM, THIS SORT OF THE
DYNAMISM OF THE OF OUR OF OUR
CARBON SYSTEM IN THIS STATE, I
THINK IS IMPORTANT TO MAKING
THIS A BACKBONE PIECE OF THE
SCOPING PLAN FOR BECAUSE I SHARE
THE GOALS OF THE AUTHOR AND THE
COALITION THAT I THINK THIS
NEEDS TO BE CENTRAL AND NOT AN
AFTERTHOUGHT, AND I'M CONCERNED
THAT CURRENT ADMINISTRATION'S
PROPOSAL LOOKS MORE LIKE OKAY,
ALL THIS WORK GOES SECOND OR,
YOU KNOW, DOWN THE LINE. MAYBE
WE'LL GET NO NET LOSS. I WANT TO
SEE SOMETHING BOLD. SO I
APPRECIATE YOUR THE BOLDNESS OF
THE GOLD. THE NUMERICAL TARGET.
UM, I I'D LIKE TO PUT SOME TIME
INTO THINKING ABOUT HOW TO
ENSURE PERMANENCE AND
SPECIFICALLY, THOUGH, IN THIS
COMMITTEE'S JURISDICTION IS OVER
FORESTRY AND SOME OF THESE FIRE
ISSUES WE'VE BEEN HAVING. THE
CONCERN THERE IS THAT ACREAGE
TARGETS HAVE BEEN DRIVING
FORESTRY POLICY UNDER A CARBON
RUBRIC FOR A LONG TIME, BUT FROM
A FIRE RESILIENCE PERSPECTIVE,
IT'S NOT ABOUT TOTAL NUMBER OF
ACRES. IT'S ABOUT WHICH ACRES
YOU PICK. ARE YOU NEAR
COMMUNITIES? SO MY ONLY CONCERN
ON THAT FRONT IS THAT WE'RE
GOING TO PUT THERE WILL BE A
SORT OF OPPORTUNITY WITH THIS
FRAMEWORK IF YOU'RE TOO LOOSE
ABOUT IT TO ALLOW FOR BIG
COUNTING OF BIG ACREAGE THAT
REALLY ISN'T DOING ANYTHING
OTHER THAN BUSINESS AS USUAL, SO
UM, BUT I THINK IT CAN BE DONE.
I THINK THE FRAMEWORK SOLID. I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE
AMBITIOUSNESS OF THE EFFORT WILL
BE SUPPORTING THE MEASURE AND
HOPE TO WORK WITH THE AUTHOR
GOING FORWARD. SHOULD THE BILL
MOVE TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY?
IS THAT THAT SOUND AGREEABLE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. DOES THAT WORK
FOR YOU? YEAH I MEAN, I
DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE
WE'RE NOT GAMING OUR WAY AND WE
HAVE THE STRONGEST BILL MOVING
EVERY STEP OF THE WAY AND
IMPROVING IN THAT POLICY. I
THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH
PERMANENT, SOMETIMES LISTENING
WITH THINKING ABOUT FIRES OUT
THERE. UH AND SOMETIMES LONG
TERM IS BETTER THAN NOTHING. AND
I WILL SAY, WELL, IF WE DON'T DO
ANYTHING THIS. THE AIR B IS
TALKING ABOUT ONE METRIC TON.
THAT'S ALL THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT
IN THE SCOPING PLAN, WHICH IS
NOT JUST LAUGHABLE, BUT TO ME,
IT'S INSULTING AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS NOT A REPLACEMENT OF
TECHNOLOGICAL OR OTHER THINGS.
IT'S IN ADDITION TO AND IT'S
SUPPLEMENTING WHAT WE'RE DOING.
ANYTHING. THE REALITY IS THAT
ONCE WE HAVE A GOAL IF WE
REALIZE THAT WE NEED TO FIX IT
AND MAKE IT BETTER. WE DO I
MEAN, HAPPENED TRADE AS A
PROFESSOR, EXAMPLE OF THAT OUT
THERE, AND SO I WANT TO WORK
WITH YOU TO HAVE THE STRONGEST
BILL AS WE CONTINUE AND TAKE
THAT EXPERTISE, BUT ALSO WANT TO
BE REAL REALISTIC HERE.
THERE AND I WANT TO TAKE MISS
GROWTH ENTHUSIASM AND GET HER TO
A YESTERDAY AS WELL ON THIS, AND
SO WILL BE COMMITTED TO WORKING
WITH YOURSELF IN THE NEXT
COMMITTEE AND ANYONE ELSE THAT
WANTS TO BE A PART OF THE
DISCUSSION. ULTIMATELY AS LONG
AS CARB IS GIVING ME ONE METRIC
HUNTS. THAT'S RECENT ALONE FOR
THIS BILL TO KEEP MOVING. FAIR
ENOUGH. OKAY WE DO HAVE A MOTION
FROM SENATOR GROVE. I'M FROM
SARAH LOHMAN. SENATOR GROVE. I'D
LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIR FOR
BEING SHORT AND HIS COMMENTS
EARLIER. I WARNED EVERYBODY, UM
YOU EXPECT THE SAME EXACTLY. I
APPRECIATE THE CHAIR FOR BEING,
UM, SHORTEN HIS COMMENTS. UM I
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE HE DIDN'T
TALK ME OUT OF THE BILL. YOU
SHOULD LISTEN TO ME AND SAID,
OKAY, UM, BECAUSE I DO THINK AND
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING
ABOUT LONG TERM VIABILITY OF
TREES AND NATURAL SEQUESTRATION.
THE MOST VALUABLE PIECE YOU HAVE
IS MY DISTRICT SENATOR ENGLAND'S
DISTRICT SENATOR HURTADO'S
DISTRICTS AND A DIRECT
CABALLERO'S DISTRICT LIKE WE ARE
THE MOST VALUABLE NATURAL
SEQUESTRATION THERE. WE ARE ALSO
UM WE ARE ALSO THE LARGEST, UM,
IN 58 COUNTIES. WE PRODUCE 53%
OF THE STATE'S RENEWABLE ENERGY
. SO YOU KNOW WE ARE VERY GOOD
AT WHAT WE DO IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. IN UM YOU, UH, YOU
RECOGNIZE THAT LAST NIGHT ABOUT
THESE TREES? I BROUGHT IT UP
BEFORE THE CHAIR SPOKE AND USE
SEEM TO STILL KEEP THAT SAME
COMMENT ON LONG TERM VIABILITY.
AND NOW THE JEREMY HAS MADE ME
VERY NERVOUS WITH HIS COMMENTS
SO I WOULD SAY, MISS GROVE, YOU
GET TO VOTE TODAY WE HAVE BEEN
FROM HERE. THE 10 YEARS I'VE
BEEN HERE AND I TRY TO HONOR YOU
KNOW ALL MY COLLEAGUES
IRRESPECTIVE OF WHERE WE LAND
AND YEAH, MY EQUIPMENT AND
YOU'LL HAVE ANOTHER CHANCE TO
VOTE ON THIS AGAIN UNTIL IF I
FAIL WHEN IT COMES TO THE FORE,
YOU CAN ALWAYS CHANGE YOUR VOTE.
BUT YOU KNOW, I DO. I WOULD
APPRECIATE THAT SUPPORT. THIS IS
AGNOSTIC TO ALL THOSE OTHER
THINGS. THAT ARE OUT THERE AND
THAT'S BEEN THAT'S BEEN MY
POINT. IT'S NOT ABOUT COMPETING,
BUT HOW DO WE EXPAND THAT
DISCUSSION IN A MORE PRODUCTIVE
WAY? AND HOW DO WE VALUE THOSE
ASSETS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND
INSTEAD FIND THAT COLLABORATION
IN ME? THAT ROLE MODEL THAT I'VE
TRIED TO BE HERE? OKAY SO WE
HAVE A MOTION WHICH IS DO PASS
AS AMENDED, BUT FIRST AMEND, AND
WE REFER TO THE COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, SEEING NO
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
CAN I TAKE THAT AS YOUR CLOTHES?
OKAY VERY GOOD. UM, CHIEF
COMMITTEE SYSTEM. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. EIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU
FOR THE PROMOTION OF FILE ITEM
NUMBER 10 A B 26 49. THE MOTION
IS DUE PASSES AMENDED BUT FIRST
AMEND AND RE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY. SENATOR STERN. I JONES
JONES KNOW ALAN ALAN, I EGGMAN.
EGGMAN HIGHGROVE. GROVE. I
HERTZBERG HERTZBERG? AYE, HUESO.
LAIRD. LAYERED. I LIMÓN. OKAY
THAT MEASURE HAS SIX VOTES WILL
LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
QUESTION FOR THE AUTHOR BEFORE
SHE LEAVES. YES SENATOR. GROVE
PLEASE. WHAT IS THAT BIG, SHINY
THING ON YOUR FINGER? I GOT
ENGAGED DURING SCREEN BREAK,
MISS GIRL. WOW DECEMBER WEDDING
AND MY FIANCE WAS A LITTLE
AUDACIOUS WITH THE RING HE CHOSE
LIKE, BUT I'M NOT COMPLAINING.
YES CONGRATULATIONS. APPRECIATE
IT. THANKS. UM OKAY, WE HAVE. I
THINK ONE MORE ITEM UP MEMBERS
FOR THE VERY PATIENT MEMBER WHO
ARE BOERNER HORVATH. MAYBE 25
93. FILE ITEM NUMBER NINE.
WELCOME THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR MEMBERS.
FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO JUST
ACCEPT COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS FOR
A B 25 93 18 25 93 WOULD
AUTHORIZE THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
COMMISSION. TO REQUIRE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICANTS
WHERE FEASIBLE TO INCLUDE IN
THEIR PLANNING AND DESIGN OF
PROJECTS ON HOW THEY WILL
CONTRIBUTE TO PROMOTING BLUE
CARBON PROJECTS. SPECIFICALLY
THIS BILL WOULD ADD THE
MITIGATION OF GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS TO EXISTING COASTAL
ACT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENTS. AND REQUIRE AN
APPLICANT WITH THE PROJECT THAT
IMPACTS COASTAL WETLANDS AND HER
TITLE OR MARINE HABITATS OR
ECOSYSTEMS TO MITIGATE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY
BUILDING OR CONTRIBUTING TO BLUE
CARBON PROJECTS, AND I WANT TO
BE CLEAR THESE MITIGATION
PROJECTS HAPPEN ANYWAYS, AS PART
OF A CDP THERE. THIS IS NOT
CHANGING IT. WHAT WE'RE ADDING
IS THE IDEA OF LOOKING AT CARBON
SEQUESTRATION, AND THE IDEA FOR
THIS BILL CAME OUT OF A PROJECT
ON THE SANTA LEO LAGOON WHERE
THEY WERE EXPANDING THE WAY I
FIVE WIDENING AND THEY RESTORED
THE SANTA LEO LAGOON, AND THEY
HAPPEN. TO DO A LOT OF
IMPROVEMENT TO THE WATERSHED AND
PLANT SALT MARSHES AND AT THE
FENCE OF OFFENDING SENATOR GROVE
THOUGHT MARSHES AND ILL GRASS
SEQUESTER MORE CARBON THAN
TREES, SO DON'T WANT TO GET INTO
ANYTHING. BUT WE HAVE THIS
OPPORTUNITY AS WE DO THESE
PROJECTS. I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO
GET INTO A SENATE PIPE. BUT YOU
KNOW, UM, BUT AS WE DO THESE
PROJECTS THAT THEY'RE HAPPENING
ANYWAYS, AND WHEN WE ADD CARBON
SEQUESTRATION TO THE MITIGATION
YOU'RE ACTUALLY IMPROVING THE
IMPACT OF THE PROJECT, SO WE
JUST WANT TO GIVE THE COASTAL
COMMISSION THE ABILITY TO LOOK
AT CARBON SEQUESTRATION AND
REDUCTION OF GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS WHEN PROJECTS HAVE TO
BE MITIGATED, THEREBY IMPROVING
THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT TO OUR
ENVIRONMENT. AND SO THE, UM LET
ME JUST SEE IF I HAVE ANY
FURTHER THINGS. THIS IS ANOTHER
TBH SPECIAL. YOU'LL SEE SEVERAL
IN THE SENATE THIS YEAR. I WROTE
THIS MYSELF, AND IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO
IMPROVE THE AIR QUALITY AND
REDUCE CARBON EMISSIONS WHEREVER
WE CAN, WHETHER THAT'S IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY WITH TREES OR ON
THE COAST WITH OUR SALT MARSHES
AND EELGRASS ONE THING ABOUT
SALT MARSHES AND EELGRASS
BECAUSE THEY DON'T GET
DISTURBED. THERE'S NO CHANCE OF
THAT CARBON BEING RERELEASED
RIGHT? SO IT'S A REALLY GOOD
PROJECT AND ARE IT'S REALLY GOOD
BILL AND I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT
IT TODAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT BECAUSE
IT'S JUST ME. AND THERE'S NO
REGISTERED OPPOSITION. MOVE THE
BILL FOR UNEVEN MOTION FROM
SENATOR EGGMAN JUST FOR PROTOCOL
PURPOSES, WE WILL TURN TO THE
HEARING ROOM, ANYONE WISHING
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. UM, I HAVE
ONE. PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT AND THE
CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS
FOUNDATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. OKAY, VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.
OTHERS. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. JONATHAN
CLAY ON BEHALF OF THE PORTA SAN
DIEGO ALSO SUPPORT VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SEEING NO
OTHERS IN SUPPORT IN THE HEARING
ROOM WILL TURN TO THE LINES
MODERATOR. PLEASE CUE THE
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. PRESS 10 AT THIS
TIME, PLEASE. WE'VE GOT A LINE
50. WE GOT YOU 50 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN. AND I'M NOT GETTING ANY
REASON BY OKAY? THANK YOU KNOW
OTHERS IN QUÊ? NONE OTHER THAN
CUTE. OKAY WE'LL TURN OUT ANYONE
WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION. SEEING NOW IN THE
HEARING ROOM WILL TURN TO THE
LINES. MODERATOR PLEASE CALL
ANYONE WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION. PLEASE AGAIN PRESS
10 AT THIS TIME. WE'LL GO FIRST
LINE 43. THEY TOOK THEMSELVES
OUT OF QUÊ. NONE AT THIS TIME.
OKAY, VERY GOOD. WELL WE HAD WE
DO HAVE EMOTION. DO WE HAVE ANY%
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS REMEMBERS.
YES SENATOR GROOVE. I JUST WANT
TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. YES
EELGRASS AND I WANT TO CLARIFY
SOMETHING. SO THE BLUE RIDGE OR
THE BLUE CARBON PROJECTS DOES
THE BILL REQUIRE THE APPLICANT
LIKE A DEVELOPER? REQUIRE THE
APPLICANT OF A PROJECT TO
MITIGATE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS BY BUILDING OR
CONTRIBUTING TO A NEW MANDATE.
OR IS THIS NOT A MANDATE? IT'S
JUST IN EXCHANGE OF SO WHENEVER
ANYBODY GETS A CDP, AND THEY'RE
SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECTING WETLANDS
AND HER TITLE AREAS OF MARINE
HABITAT THEY HAVE TO MITIGATE
THAT'S ALREADY PART OF THE
COASTAL COMMISSION. PROCESS
WE'RE ADDING THE DIMENSION OF
CARBON SEQUESTRATION TO THE
FASTEST OF THE MITIGATION
PROJECT. OKAY, SO ALL WE'RE
DOING IS ADDING THIS NEW
PARAMETER AND THAT GIVES THE
COAST COMMISSION THE ABILITY TO
LOOK AT MORE IMPACTFUL WAYS OF
MITIGATING PROJECTS THAN JUST
ECOSYSTEMS AND HABITATS. RIGHT
SO, BASICALLY AND. SO THIS IS
JUST ANOTHER OPTION TO BE ABLE
TO ADD THE CARBON SEQUESTRATION.
SO IF THEY WANT TO DO ILL GRASS
THEY CAN, BUT IF THEY WANT TO DO
SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT'S
ALREADY IN THE COASTAL
COMMISSION. THEY CAN DO THAT AS
WELL. SO IT'S ADDING THIS OTHER
PARAMETERS SO LIKE MAYBE
CURRENTLY LIKE IN THE CENTER LEO
LAGOON PROJECT. THEY HAPPEN TO
ADD SALT MARSHES. THEY DIDN'T
ADD. I DON'T THINK THEY HAD A
DEAL GRASS, BUT THEY ADDED SALT
MARSHES TO IT. UM WHICH HAPPENED
TO DO THEY HAPPEN TO DO THAT?
BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IT WAS A
GOOD IDEA. THIS WOULD SAY, ADD
SALT MARSHES TO THIS BECAUSE
IT'S QUESTIONS CARBON IN MANY OF
THESE MITIGATION PROJECTS, AND
IT'S ONLY THINGS THAT WOULD
AFFECT INTERTIDAL AREAS.
WETLANDS ARE MARINE HABITATS, SO
IT'S NOT ANY CDP, RIGHT? I
SPECIFICALLY WROTE IT BECAUSE I
DIDN'T WANT SOMEBODY I DON'T
KNOW THEY'RE DEVELOPING
SOMETHING. AND YOU KNOW 11 HIæN
WHILE LIVING HANDS OUTSIDE THE
COASTAL AND A NEW ENCINITAS THAT
IS NOT RELATED TO AN INTERTIDAL
AREA. SO IF YOU YOU HAVE YOU
HAVE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS
THAT HAVE AN IMPACT ON WETLANDS.
INTERTIDAL AREAS AND MARINE
HABITAT, AND YOU HAVE PROJECTS
THAT HAVE A CDP THAT DO NOT
AFFECT THAT ONLY DOES IT WHERE
FEASIBLE, SO SAY IT'S NOT
FEASIBLE TO PLANT EELGRASS OR
SALT MARSHES. YOU CAN'T MAKE
THEM DO THAT. RIGHT SO WE DO PUT
IT WHERE FEASIBLE QUALIFICATION
ON ON THE BILL, S IT'S JUST
ADDING THAT EXTRA PARAMETER SO
WE'RE GETTING MORE BANG FOR OUR
BUCK. WHEN WE DO THESE
MITIGATION PROJECTS, AND YOU
KNOW THERE ARE PLACES LIKE THE
PORT OF SAN DIEGO THAT ARE
CONSIDERING THEY HAVE NOT YET
APPROVED IT, BUT THEY ARE
CONSIDERING AND THEY'VE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT DOING AN ILL GRASS
MITIGATION BANK WHERE SMALL
PROJECTS CAN ACTUALLY JUST PAY
INTO THAT, AND THEY DON'T HAVE
TO MITIGATE THEMSELVES. I DON'T
KNOW IF THAT WOULD GO THROUGH.
THIS PROJECT HAS NOT DONE BUT
IT'S LIKE THESE ARE THE IDEAS
THAT COULD COME OUT OF A BILL
LIKE THIS. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
OKAY. THANK YOU, SENATOR GROVE.
WE DO HAVE A MOTION THANK YOU
FOR YOUR CREATIVITY AND PUTTING
YOUR OWN ELBOW GREASE INTO
POLICY MAKING. IT'S ALWAYS
EXCITING TO SEE YOUR BILLS. THIS
MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, AND WE
FRANKLY BEEN UNDERPERFORMING
WHEN IT COMES TO BLUE CARBON IN
THE STATE. THERE'S SO MUCH
OPPORTUNITY OUT THERE. AND
DISCOUNT FOR US AND EELGRASS ARE
REMARKABLE IN TERMS OF THEIR
ABILITY TO GROW FAST LIKE IF
AGREED THE TREE GREW A FOOT A
DAY. YOU KNOW THAT KIND OF, UM,
ABILITY TO BE RESILIENT, I THINK
IS HAS HUGE POTENTIAL, UM, IN
OUR COASTAL HABITATS THAT WE
KNOW ARE UNDER INCREASING THREAT
AND I'LL STOP TALKING NOW, JUST
IN CASE, SENATOR GROVE. IS
LISTENING. SO WITH THAT WE'LL
TAKE THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED, AND ARE WE RE REFERRING
UM I REALLY REFERRING TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
CHIEF COMMITTEE ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. SORRY
SHOULD I TAKE THAT AS YOUR
CLOTHES? YES I RESPECTFULLY ASK
YOU AND I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU.
ITEM NUMBER NINE A B 25 93. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED
BUT FIRST AMEND AND RE REFER TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
SENATOR STERN. STERN. I JONES.
JONES. I, ALAN. FALLON. I
EGGMAN. EGGMAN. I GROW. GROVE. I
HERTZBERG HERTZBERG? AYE, HUESO.
LAIRD. LAYERED I LEMON. SO THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENTS. SEVEN
VOTES WILL LEAVE A MEASURE ON
CALL FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS. WHY
DON'T WE GO BACK THROUGH THE
ROLES NOW FOR EVERYONE WHO WAS
ABSENT FOR VOTES? CAN ADD ON AND
THEN WE'LL WE'LL TRY TO HANG ON
HERE UNTIL SOME OF THE ABSENT
MEMBERS GET BACK. UM OKAY, UM.
ALRIGHT FILE ITEM NUMBER ONE A.
B 16 11. THE CURRENT VOTE IS 10
WITH CHAIR, NOT VOTING. STAND
VICE CHAIR AS I SENATORS. STERN.
FALLON. SIGMAN. EGGMAN I GROWTH.
HERTZBERG. UM. YEAH MAYBE 16 11,
SENATOR GROVE. SARAH GROVE? AYE.
HERTZBERG? AYE. AH WHERE SO?
LAYERED LIMÓN. OKAY, THAT'S 40.
ALL RIGHT. FILE ITEM NUMBER
THREE. A B 16 58. THE CURRENT
VOTE IS 40 WITH CHAIR, NOT
VOTING. AND VICE CHAIR HASN'T
VOTED YET. SENATOR STERN.
SENATOR JONES. JONES. I
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG. LAIRD.
LIMÓN. OKAY, IT'S 50. RIGHT?
YES. MHM AH CONSENT CALENDAR.
OKAY. AH! CURRENT IS 70.
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG? AYE,
HUESO. SO I FOR THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. THAT'S A ZERO OUT.
OKAY AND THEN FILE ITEM NUMBER
SIX A. B 21 60. THE CURRENT VOTE
IS 321. CHAIR VOTING, AYE. VICE
CHAIR HASN'T VOTED. STERN. I'M
SORRY, JONES. JONES. NO.
HERTZBERG. HERTZBERG, I GUESS
SO. SO I LAIRD. LAIRD. I LEMON.
SIX. AND THEN WE'RE ON FILE ITEM
NUMBER NINE. SEVEN BYLINE NUMBER
SEVEN A B 22 OH ONE. THE CURRENT
VOTE IS 4 TO 3. WITH THE CHAIR
IS I AND THE VICE CHAIR IS NO.
RIGHT, HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG. I WHISTLE WHERE SO I
THAT COMPLETES THE VOTE. 63.
YEAH. RIGHT BABY FILE ITEM
NUMBER 9 25 93. THE CURRENT VOTE
IS 70. WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
AND THE VICE CHAIR. ALSO VOTING
AYE. THIS IS ITEM. NINE. HUESO.
AYE, LIMÓN. 80 OKAY, WE'LL LEAVE
THAT ON CALL. I FILE ITEM NUMBER
10. MAYBE 26 49. THE CURRENT
VOTE IS 61 WITH A FIGHT WITH THE
CHAIR VOTING I AND THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING NO. HUESO. BYE BYE,
LIMÓN. THEY WILL LEAVE THAT ON
CALL. AND OKAY, SO WE'LL WE'LL
LEAVE ALL THE OTHER MEASURES ON
COFFEE ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU
VOTED ON ALL OF THEM. SORRY.
SORRY, RIGHT? OKAY OKAY, SO
YEAH, WE'LL ROLL THROUGH IT
AGAIN FOR CENTER BASED ON THEN
WE'LL WAIT. WE HAVE SENATOR
LEMON. OKAY? THAT'S FINE. WE'LL
ROLL THROUGH IT. COULD JUST.
FILE ITEM NUMBER ONE A. B 16 11.
HUESO. SO I FIVE. UM FIVE VOTES.
THAT MEASURE IS OUT. THINK YOU
VOTED ON THIS. YEAH. IT'S JUST
GOOD. WE WILL TAKE A PAUSE FOR A
SEC FOR THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A BRIEF
RECESS AS A COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE MEETING BACK TO ORDER. WE'RE GOOD. OKAY WE'RE GOING
TO LIFT THE CALLS ONE MORE TIME
FOR THE ABSENT MEMBER CHIEF
COMMITTEE ASSISTANT. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. FILE ITEM NUMBER SIX
A. B 21 60. THE CURRENT VOTE IS
62. CHAIR VOTING I VICE CHAIR
VOTING NO LIMÓN LIMÓN. I FILLS
OUT THE BILLS OUT. AND FILE ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN A. B 22. OH, ONE,
THE CURRENT. SHE'S ON IT. SORRY
ABOUT THAT, AS FILE ITEM NUMBER
NINE A B 25 93 CURRENT VOTERS
80. CHAIR VOTING I AND VICE
CHAIR VOTING ALSO, I LIMÓN
LIMÓN. AYE. LIST OUT FILE ITEM
NUMBER 10, MAYBE 26 49. THE
CURRENT VOTE IS 71 WITH CHAIR
VOTING I AND THE VICE CHAIR
VOTING NO LEMON. AYE. LET'S KEEP
11 THAT MEASURES OUT. THAT'S IT.
AND THAT DOES IT. UM THANK YOU
ALL FOR A GREAT HEARING. THIS
COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.