BRADFORD.
JACKSON.
MITCHELL [inaudible]
MORALE WIENER.
OUR RIGHT WELL FOR ME BETTER NOW.
OKAY -- WE WILL HAVE A HARD STOP
THIS MORNING AT NINE THIRTY ANY
BILLS THAT WE DO NOT.
COVER WE WILL COVER IN THE
FOLLOWING.
COMMITTEE MEETING NEXT WEEK --
THERE ARE SOME BILLS THAT ARE
BEING PULLED FROM THE AGENDA
TODAY AND THOSE ARE AB.
FIVE TWENTY FOUR AB TWELVE
NINETY FOUR AB THIRTEEN SEVENTY
TWO AB.
THIRTEEN NINETY THE AJ ARE FOUR
AND AG ARE.
FIVE OKAY.
SO WITH THAT [inaudible]
MR MERCHANT.
GREAT WHEN DO A CONCERT MOTION
WITH THE CONTENT.
EXCELLENT.
IDEA FOR WHAT ARE THE YES
CRTAINLY WILL KEEP IT A SECRET.
AND THE CONSENT ITEMS ARE HOLD
ON A MINUTE.
GLASSES WOULD BE -- PFIZER OUR
CONSENT ITEMS ARE AB ONE TWENTY
SEVEN ASSEMBLY MEMBER LACKEY.
AB IX ELEVEN ASSEMBLY MEMBER
NEWS ARE IN.
AB EIGHT FOURTEEN ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHAU AND AB ELEVEN TWENTY
NINE ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHAO.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THOSE
BILLS THOSE OF THE CONSENT
CALENDAR BILLS [inaudible]
CORRECT.
ARMED WITH.
IT'S PULLED OVER HERE AND YEAH
YEAH YEAH FIVE TWENTY FOUR IS
RIGHT AS IS.
THIRTEEN SEVENTY TWO ALRIGHT SO
LET'S DO ROLL CALL ON THAT
MOTION [inaudible]
SKINNER.
HI SKINNER I'VE MORE LUXURY WELL
LIKE I BRADFORD.
BRADFORD AYE JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE MITCHELL MORALE
WIENER.
EXCELLENT SO NOW.
WE WILL GO.
TO ITEM NUMBER TWO EIGHTY FOUR
EIGHTY FOUR ASSEMBLY MEMBER
JONES SAWYER.
YOU MAY PROCEED.
YEAH.
THANK YOU AND I SINCE YOU'RE
STANDING UNDER YOUR PROCEED
QUICKLY.
MORNING MADAM CHAIR AND STAND IN
IT.
AB FORTY FOUR REMOVES THE
REQUIREMENT THAT JUDGES MUST
SENTENCE A HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS.
JAIL TIME AS OUR VERSION
PROVISIONAL PROBATION FOR LOW
LEVEL DRUG OFFENSES TO BE CLEAR.
SERIOUS DRUG OFFENSES THAT ARE
IN ELIGIBLE FOR PROBATION ARE
NOT INCLUDED UNDER THIS BILL.
AB FOR A FOR RETURNS POWER TO
THE COURSE BY ALLOWING THEM TO
DECIDE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS
WHAT THE DATES TIMES BEEN IN
JAIL WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCING IS
A COSTLY OVERLY PUNITIVE AND AN
EFFECTIVE METHOD OF DETERRING
DRUG RELATED CRIMES FOR EXAMPLE
UNDER CURRENT LAW AN INDIVIDUAL
THAT WOULD HAVE BETTER SERVE
THROUGH COMMUNITY BASED.
REHABILITATION PROGRAM COST LOS
ANGELES COUNTY 1-700-080-0994
THE TIME SPENT IN JAIL FOR THE
MORE A CAR THREE MORE
INDIVIDUALS ONLY CONTINUES TO
ADD PRESSUE ON ALREADY
OVERCROWDED FACILITIES.
I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT
THIS BILL STILL ALLOW JUDGES TO
ORDER THE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
DAYS IN JAIL IF NECESSARY.
AB FOR A FOR SIMPLY ARBOR
REMOVES ARBITRARY REQUIREMENTS
AND RETURNED TO SENTENCING
DISCRETION COURTS NEED TO
OPERATE IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE WITH ME TO TESTIFY OF
KATHY SURE FROM THE ACLU.
SENATORS I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR AYE VOTE.
GOOD MONING CATHY SURE FOR THE
ACLU OF CALIFORNIA -- AB FORTY
FOUR WOULD GIVE PORTS GREATER
DISCRETION AS TO THE CONDITIONS
OF PROBATION FOR CERTAIN DRUG
SALES AND TRANSPORTATION
OFFENSES -- UNDER CURRENT LAW
DISCRETION IS EXTREMELY LIMITED
FOR THESE OFFENSES ON TYING
JUDGES HANDS AND FORCING THEM IN
ALMOST EVERY CASE TO IMPOSE A
HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS.
OF SIX MONTHS OF INCARCERATION --
THIS BILL MAKES A REASONABLE
ADJUSTMENT GIVING JUDGES THE
DISCRETION THEY NEED TO MAKE
SURE THAT THE CONDITIONS OF
PROBATION IN EACH CASE FIT FIT
THE FACTS OF THE PARTICULAR
OFFENDER IN CASE.
A JUDGE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO
IMPOSE A HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS
OF INCARCERATION WHEN THE JUDGE
FINDS INAPPROPRIATE.
BUT THE JUDGE COULD CHOOSE
OTHERWISE AND COULD TAILOR THE
SENTENCE TO AN INDIVIDUAL'S
RISKS AND NEEDS TO THE
ULPABILITY IN THE NATURE AND
SEVERITY OF THIS BILL SPECIFIC
CRIME.
AB FORTY FOUR GIVE JUDGES
DISCRETION NOT TO INCARCERATED
WHERE THAT DISCRETION IS MOST
NEEDED IN LOW LEVEL DRUG CRIME
CASES THIS WILL IMPROVE OUTCOMES
FOR EVERYONE -- I ASKED I DON'T.
LET'S SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING GOING BACK AS FOR
DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE AND THE
ELEVATOR CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
IN SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING LESLIE CALDWELL
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
[inaudible]
ANY OTHERS.
ALL RIGHT M. WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
AND YOU MAY HAVE TO USE.
I DON'T KNOW THE STABLE VERY
SMALL.
YEAH YOU YOU CAN'T WAS A
STANDING IS A GOOD THING
ABSOLUTELY.
MANAGER MEMBERS COURCELLES ORDER
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
REGRETTABLY IN OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL.
OUR MAIN POINT IS THAT EXISTING
LAW THE SECTION THAT IS BEING
AMENDED PARTY ALLOWS A JUDGE IN
THE WORDS OF THE STATUTE AN
UNUSUAL CASE AND IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE TO STRIKE.
THE CONFINEMENT CONDITIONSO WE
DON'T THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE --
FOR A JUDGE TO BE ABLE TO ORDER
THIS CONDITION OF CONFINEMENT
WHICH HE OR SHE CAN DO UNDER
CURRENT LAW.
AND WE CAN STRIKE UNDER CURRENT
LAW WE THINK EXISTING LAW
STRIKES THE APPROPRIATE BALANCE
BETWEEN.
STUDIO CONDITION AS WELL AS THE
JUDGES AUTHORITY TO WAIVE THAT
WHEN THE JUDGE DEEMS APPROPRIATE
SO FOR THOSE REASONS WITH ASKING
ABOUT THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT LET'S SEE IF THERE'S
AS SENATOR JACKSON'S
[inaudible]
WELL I I LIKE THE IDEA OF GIVING
JUDGES DISCRETION I DISAGREE
THAT.
LIMITING IT TO UNUSUAL
CIRCUMSTANCES OR IN THE
INTERESTS OF JUSTICE REALLY DOES
THAT SO I AGREE THAT YOUR BILL
DOES ASSIST WITH THAT.
I HAVE A CONCERN NOW AND THAT IS
THAT YOU YOU ANALOGIZE THE COST
OF INCARCERATION VERSUS THE COST
OF TREATMENT.
AND I THINK THERE'S NO DOUBT
THAT IF WE HAD TREATMENT WE
WOULD CERTAINLY BE LIKELY THEY
HAVE BETTER OUTCOMES THAN WE
HAVE BY JUST PUTTING SOMEONE IN
JAIL OR IN PRISON FOR A PERIOD
OF TIME WHERE.
NOT MUCH IS DONE TO TRY TO
ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS THEY HAVE
IN A SERIOUS WAY.
IT SHOULD BE AND WERE ASPIRING
TO IT BUT I WONDER IF THERE IS
ANY.
DATA THAT SHOWS THAT BY.
DIRECTING IS A CONDITION OF
PROBATION.
A DEFENDANT.
TO TREATMENT AND TO THE PROGRAMS
TO TRY TO ADDRESS THAT ADDICTION.
HAVE PROVEN TO BE ANYMORE
SUCCESSFUL AND AND KEEPING IN
MIND THAT I'M NOT SURE THERE ARE
A WHOLE LOT OF THOSE PROGRAMS
OUT THERE -- AND SO I JUST
WONDER -- IF WE'RE TALKING MORE
ASPIRATIONAL LEE HERE THAN WE
ARE ACT.
TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO
ACCOMPLISH -- BY GIVING THAT
JUDGE MORE DISCRETION TAKING
AWAY THE MANDATORY HUNDRED AD
DAY JAIL TIME.
AND AND CENTER JUDGES YOU
PROBABLY KNOW -- I DID NOT IT ON
ALL REHABILITATION PROGRAMS IN
C. C. R. REALLY TO TO GET TO HOW
THESE PROGRAMS WORKING WITH
FOUNDED A LADDER TRUCK PROGRAMS
WITHIN CDC ARE THEY'RE VERY
SUCCESSFUL WITH COGNITIVE
BEHAVIOR -- WE HAVE STILL HAVE A
LOT OF WORK TO DO AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL -- AND AND SO I THE WORD
ASPIRATIONAL -- I LIKE I BELIEVE
IT'S WE CAN GET THERE AND NOT
ONLY A WHOLE -- I THINK WE MUST
GET THERE WE NEED TO ATTACK IT
FROM BOTH ENDS.
AND SO -- WE DO NEED TO BEEF UP
OUR OUR FAMILY DRUG
REHABILITATION PROGRAM BUT ARE
CUTTINGTO BE ABLE PROGRAM AT
THE LOCAL LEVEL I BELIEVE THIS
BILL.
WILL HELP US GET THERE I'M SURE
THAT A JUDGE WILL NOT JUST SEND
SOMEONE SOME PLACE WHERE THEY
CAN GET TREATMENT AND HOPEFULLY
IT BEEFS UP SOME OF THE AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL IT WILL BE FOR THOSE
THOSE PROGRAMS.
MY LAST QUESTION IF I MAY
MANAGED CARE.
IF I WERE JUDGE AN I HAD AN
OPTION -- TO GIVE SOME TO TO
REQUIRE SOMEONE GO THROUGH
TREATMENT VERSUS TWO HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY DAYS IN JAIL.
THAT TO ME IS THIS THE CARROT
AND THE STICK APPROACH THAT WE
NEED TO BE LOOKING FOR BUT DO WE
KNOW WHETHER OR NOT JUDGES DO
HAVE THAT OPTION BECAUSE AS YOU
SAY THE THE PROGRAM THE PROGRAM.
A PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH TO THIS
AND MANY COUNTIES IS JUST
INADEQUATE SO WHAT DO YOU TELL A
JUDGE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
I THINK RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'RE
DOING IS ALLOWING JUDGES TO BE
ABLE.
TO TAKE THOSE THOSE OPTIONS I
THINK BECAUSE OF THOSE THOSE
DECADES DECADES LONG THE
MANDATORY MINIMUMS WERE BECOMES
VERY EASY JUST TO SEND SOMEONE.
TO JAIL FOR A HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAYS EXCEPT THAT.
INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MAKE.
ME DO THE WORK TO TRY TO FIND
SOME PLACE TO PUT THEM THERE I
THINK THAT WILL RELIEVE SOME
JUDGES TO TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP.
BUT IT'S NOT JUST THE JUDGES
THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WILL AND
THAT THE WHOLE THE WHOLE
CELEBRATION DEPARTMENT ALL THESE
FOLKS HAVE.
TO BOTH ALL THESE ALL THESE --
ALL THESE VARIOUS AGENCIES HAVE
GOT TO HAVE ALTERNATIVES.
AND AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING
ARE YOU.
HOW WE GONNA GET TO THAT POINT
THAT IS THAT WOULD MAKE THIS
MAKE LOGICAL GOOD SENSE THERE
ARE PROGRAMS ARE SUCCESSFUL?
I CAN TRY TO GET YOU DATA ON THE
ONES ACROSS THE STATE OF WAR
HAVE NO DOUBT THAT SOME OF THEM
ARE BUT THE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
OF THEM.
WE NEED TO GET MORE OF THEM AND
SO MY QUESTION IS HOW HOW IS
THIS BILL GOING.
TO HELP THAT TO HAPPEN.
THIS WILL HELP DRIVE MORE PEOPLE
TO THE SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS NOT
ALL OF THEM ARE OVER SPENT OR OR
OR ALL THE RESEARCH IS BEING
USED UP IS MY HOPE THAT MORE
PEOPLE.
WILL GO TO THOSE ORG MORTGAGES
BOOK.
AB AMP GO TO THOSE CENTERS
HOPEFULLY GRAY DISTRICT WROTE
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
FIRST THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION
SENATOR MORE LUCK.
I'M GETTING ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH
SIDES.
BOTH SAYING.
THE SAME THING WE WANT MORE
DISCRETION.
AND WE'RE BEING TOLD THERE IS
ENOUGH DISCRETION AND IT SEEMS.
TO TO REVOLVE AROUND THE WORD
UNUSUAL CASE SO I CAN'T FIND THE
DEFINITION OF UNUSUAL.
WHAT WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF
UNUSUAL CASE THAT TEST --
PURPOSE OF THIS BILL -- UNDER
EXISTING LAW UNUSUAL CASES JUST
MAYBE TO FAKE.
AND AND NOT ACCOUNT FOR ALSO
TESTS IN WHICH ADDITIONAL
DISCRETION MAY BE NEEDED AND SO
THIS THIS BILL WILL ALLOW FOR
KIDS TO TAKE THOSE THINGS INTO
CONSIDERATION.
SO UNUSUAL DOESN'T MEAN RARE.
IT IS UP TO EVERY EVERY JUDGE
WHAT UNUSUAL MEANS THIS OR ON'T
HAVE A DEFINITION ARE YOU DON'T
HAVE.
HOPEFULLY THIS HELPS THANKS
CLEARED IT UP.
THANK YOU MANAGER THANK YOU.
RIGHT ANY OTHER DISCUSSION --
WE'LL GO SEVEN GREAT WE HAVE A
MOTION THOUGH YOU MAY CLOSE
RESPECTFULLY ASK THREE AYE VOTE.
EXCELLENT -- LET'S DO A ROLL
CALL ON AT MOTIONS TO PASS TO
THE FLOOR SKINNER HI SKINNER I'M
MORE LOCK.
BRADFORD AREN'T BRADFORD AYE
JACKSON.
JACKSON AYE MITCHELL HI SO I
MARROW NO REAL NO WIENER.
WIENER HI.
RIGHT THAT BILL IS OUT -- WE
WILL NOW LET'S SEE.
JONES SAWYER YOU HAVE MORSE
GREAT SO AB.
SEVENTEEN NINETY FOUR THANK YOU.
THE MORNING CHAIR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS AB SEVENTEEN NINETY FOUR
CLARIFIES THE PENAL CODE TO
ALLOW PEACE OFFICERS CAN VERY
STATE AGENCIES THAT ARE
AUTHORIZED TO CARRY FIREARMS.
AND COMPLETED THE REQUIRED
FIREARMS TRAINING TO PURCHASING
YOU LIES FIREARMS ARE NO LONGER
ON THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S
ROSTER OF HAND GUNS IN SOME
INSTANCES MANUFACTURES REFUSED
TO PAY THE ANNUAL REQUIRED FEE.
TO MAINTAIN A HAND GUN ON THE
ROSTER OF SAFE GUNS AND THOSE
GUNS ARE THEN UNABLE TO BE SOLD
OR LEGALLY USE IN THE STATE.
LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITIES THAT
PURCHASE THESE HAND GUNS WHILE
THEY WERE ON THE ROSTER MUST
THEN REGULARLY PURCHASED NEW
HANDGUNS. FOR THIS REASON THE
STATE HAS EXEMPTED A NUMBER OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT DUTIES FROM
HAVING TO CARRY HAND GUNS ON THE
ROSTER. FOR THIS REASON THIS
DOES IT HOWEVER A PIECEMEAL
APPROACH HAS MEANT THAT ONLY
SOME OF THE AFFECTED LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IN THE
STATE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED THIS
EXEMPTION.
AB SEVENTEEN NINETY FOUR SIMPLY
EXTENDS EXEMPTION TO A LARGER
GROUP OF AFFECTED LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SO THEY DO
NOT HAVE TO SPEND MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS PURCHASING NEW HANDGUNS
BECAUSE MANUFACTURERS.
ARE WILLING TO PAY AN ANNUAL FEE
WITH ME TO TESTIFY SHANE LEVINE
REPRESENT THE CALIFORNIA STATE
LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION.
SENATORS ARE RESPECTED ASPREY
AIBO.
GOOD MORNING MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS
SHALL THE ENEMY THE CALIFORNIA
STATEWIDE LAW ENFORCMENT'S
DECISION.
BUT WE ARE THE SPONSOR THIS BILL
UNFORTUNATELY WHEN WE ORIGINALLY
SPONSORED AB TWENTY ONE SIXTY
FIVE FROM THREE YEARS AGO -- WAS --
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BONTA IS BILL
ALONG WITH POOR I CAN THE STATE
PROBATION OFFICERS WE WERE ABLE
TO GET ALL OF OUR MEMBERS AND AT
THAT TIME SO WE'RE SIMPLY
SEEKING -- THAT EXEMPTION NOW --
TO FINALLY CLOSE THIS OUT WE
HOPEFULLY WE HOPE BUT ONCE AND
FOR ALL -- THESE OFFICERS
INVESTIGATORS ARE ALL -- IN
POSSESSION OF THESE FARMS NOW
THEY'RE TRAINED ON THESE
FIREARMS -- IN THERE JUST SIMPLY
JUST CALM THE SAME SITUATION IN
LIMBO AS THE OFFICERS IN THE
PAST -- SO FOR THAT REASON WE
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE THANK YOU.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
MANAGER MEMBERS RANGER WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION
THIS BILL DOESN'T APPLY TO OUR
MEMBERS BUT WE THINK IT'S GOOD
POLICY.
AND TREATS AWFUL LOT FOR SOME AN
EQUALLY AND WE'VE GOT THREE I
ABOUT.
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
THURMOND OUR EIGHT WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION.
OKAY -- BEFORE I ASK MY
COLLEAGUES I AM.
I APPRECIATE WHAT.
THE AUTHOR IS I'M TRYING TO DO
IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THIS IS ONE
OF THESE WHAT WE MIGHT CONSIDER
LOOPHOLE.
MY THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH
IT.
AND COLLEGE JEEZ WHAT WITH BEING
ON CONFERENCE COMMITTEE IN THE
REST WE DIDN'T GET TO
COMMUNICATE THIS SAYS --
DIRECTLY BUT IS THE ABILITY THE
LAW NOW ALLOWS FOR THE TRANSFER
AND THE TRANSFER OR SALE COULD
BE TO A PERSON WHO IS.
NOT COVERED OTHERWISE AND AT
LEAST THE ONLY.
GREAT OF INHERITANCE TRUE BUT
STILL IT IS -- IT IS -- OPENING
UP A LITTLE BIT DOES RESTRICTIVE
LAWS WE'VE HAD AND BUT IT
RECOGNIZES THAT FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT WHO MAY ALREADY HAVE
SUCH WEAPONS WE DON'T WANT TO
MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR THEM TO HAVE
THAT WEAPON BUT I'M NOT
COMFORTABLE WITH THE TRANSFER.
AND I WOULD BE MUCH MORE
COMFORTABLE IF WE COULD.
FIND LANGUAGE YES YES AND I
WOULD HOPE IS A UNDER EXISTING
POLICE PROCEDURES I DON'T SPEAK
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT -- THAT THEY
ARE PROHIBITED FROM DOING AT
WITH NATALIE SANCTIONS BUT
POSSIBLY LOSING THEIR JOB IF
THEY WERE TO SELL.
OUTSIDE THE THE LAW YES EXCEPT
THEY CAN TRANSFER TO A FAMILY
MEMBER GO AHEAD.
SOON WE ACTUALLY SUPPORTED IN
LANGUAGE THREE YEARS AGO THAT
WOULD CLOSE THAT LOOPHOLE
TRANSFERRED ANYBODY OFFER OSTER
SO I THINK THERE WAS AN ISSUE
BACK THEN OF TRANSFER SALE SO WE
ULTIMATELY LIMITED LIMITED
ELIMINATED THAT AS WELL THE TIME.
BUT NOT THE INHERENT INHERITANCE
ISSUE BUT EIGHT ANY SAILOR
TRANSFER RATE.
BUT WE MAY NEED TO MAKE IT
EXPLICIT IN THIS BILL DEFINITELY
RIGHT YES WE SHOULD.
OKAY -- CENTER BRADFORD I'M JUST
TRYING TO GET A BETTER
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS
CONSIDERED UNLAWFUL BECAUSE THE
STATE'S.
ABILITY TO CONCEAL ANXIOUS ABOUT
ANY GOT A WEAPON YOU'RE ABLE TO
CONCEAL SO CAN YOU FOR THE
DIFFERENT LINE.
SO THERE IS A THERE'S A PROCESS
IN WHICH THE MANUFACTURER HAS TO
PAY A FEE TO DOJ AND IT GOES
THROUGH CERTAIN TESTING.
AND THEIR CERTAIN
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WEAPONS
SUCH AS HAVING A FOR EXAMPLE
CHAMBER LOAD INDICATOR HAS TO GO
THROUGH A DROP TEST SO THERE'S A
NUMBER OF THINGS THAT.
SIMPLY THE MANUFACTURE GOES
THROUGH THAT PROCESS PAYS A FEE
AND THEN IT'S CONSIDERED ON
pIN THE STATE AT THIS POINT
EFFECTIVELY WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF THESE FEW -- AGENCIES IN
APARTMENTS KERRY NON ROSTER
FIREARMS.
OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
SENATOR MITCHELL THANK YOU GOOD
MORNING MADAM CHAIR -- I I WAS
INTRIGUED BY THIS NOTION AND SO
PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG
BUT THAT.
YOU YOU.
THE DETERMINATION ABOUT WHETHER
YOU ARE ON THE SAFE HAND GUNS
LIST IS BASED SOLELY ON WHETHER
YOU'VE PAID THE FEE YOU'RE NOT.
NOT AS NOT BASED ON WHETHER THE
HAND GUN IS SAFER NOT TO TO PAY
THE FEE TO UNDERGO THE TESTING
AND THEN UNINSURED THEN THE
DETERMINATION IS THAN MYSELF I
DON'T PAY THE FEE.
AND I DON'T UNDERGO THE TEST
IT'S CONSIDERED OFF ROSTER.
BUT NOT NECESSARILY ON SAY JUST
OFF ROCKY AS I HAD GONE TO
TESTING DO YOU CAN YOU GET THE
POINT YEAH I DO AND AND IN THE
CONFUSION ALSO IS AROUND THE
WORD SAY FORCES ON SAFE ROSTER
OFF OF ON RIGH NON ROSTER SO
THAT'S WERE.
THOSE TERMS ARE USED
INTERCHANGEABLY SO OFF ROSTER.
BUT THE NOMENCLATURE THEN IS IT
IS CONSIDERED UNSAFE UNSAFE BUT
BUT IN.
COMMON VERNACULAR.
IT'S STATE ISN'T THE SAME
DEFINITION IS UNSAFE IN TERMS OF
LIKE THE TRUE SAFETY RIGHT THEY
HAVE SOME ECONOMIES THEY HAVE
ALL THIS IS A LOT OF THE SAME
MECHANISMS I THINK IT'S SOME
ADDITIONAL ITEMS.
THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED --
WHEN THE STATUE WANTED TO KICK
IN THE PLACE THAT THAT IN ORDER
TO BE ON THE ROSTER FOR
MANUFACTURERS SELL HERE TO JUST
REGULAR EVERYDAY FOLKS?
WHO YOU KNOW HAVE A HAND GUN
THAT HAD TO MEET THE DIGITAL
CRITERIA?
GOT IT.
ALL RIGHT THANK YOU.
SENATOR JEFF YES FLOOD OKAY
YOU'RE FOCUSING ON THE FACT THAT
THE REASON THAT THERE DEEMED
UNSAFE AS THEY HAVEPAID THE FEE.
BUT IN SOME INSTANCES THESE
FARMS ARE AND SAFE YOUR
RESPECTIVE THE FEAR NOT IS IN
THAT IS NOT TRUE.
I MEAN IT.
I DON'T KNOW THERE CERTAINLY
MAYBE SOME.
WITHIN THE STATE THAT ARE UNSAFE
I'M ONLY DISCUSSING WHAT
CURRENTLY OFFICERS HANDLE SO
WE'RE TALKING LOCAL DA'S OFFICE
IS YOUR LOCAL RANK AND FILE
POLICE -- I GUESS YOU COULD
COULD TECHNICALLY BASED ON THE
LAW THEIR CARING ON SAFE -- BUT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST A
STANDARD ISSUE GLOCK NINE FOR
EXAMPLE THAT WOULD BE
TECHNICALLY CONSIDERED UNSAFE AS
IT RELATES TO THIS BUT THERE ARE
CERTAIN MECHANISMS THAT.
THAT THAT THAT PARTICULAR
FIREARM HAS.
OR DOESN'T HAVE THAT WOULD
PRECLUDE SOMEBODY LIKE ME FOR
EXAMPLE WHO'S NOT LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO PURCHASE THAT.
AND GOT.
BUT NOW WE'VE WE'RE EXPANDING
THIS TO INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO ARE
NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED TO GO
THROUGH FULL LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRAINING.
ON A REGULAR BASIS WHO MAY NOT
NECESSARILY KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY
HANDLE AN UNSAFE HAND GUN THAT
IS ON SAFE I THAT HAS A QUICK
TRIGGER OR SOMETHING THAT -- HAS
HAS CREATED THAT NOMENCLATURE OF
UNSAFE NOT SHOWS THAT THEY
DIDN'T PAY A FEE IS NINE IS THAT
CORRECT.
YES -- SUE THESE PARTICULAR
OFFICERS ARE ALREADY IN
POSSESSION THIS WOULDN'T BE NEW
PURCHASES OR ADDITIONAL WEAPONS
ARE IN POSSESSION THEY'RE
TRAINED ON THESE THEY HAVE TO BE
THEY GO TO THE FIRING RANGE IN
THEIR TRAIN QUARTERLY.
THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH
BASIC POST OF FIREARMS TRAINING
COURSE AND THEIR TRAIN QUARTERLY --
SO IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S NO
DEFICIT IN TRAINING.
TRAIN QUARTERLY SO THIS
CORRESPONDENCE THE ARGUMENT IN
OPPOSITION THAT SAYS MANY OF THE
NEWLY EXEMPT EMPLOYEES UNDER
THIS BILL WILL NOT BE FULL TIME
SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
AND WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. TO
COMPLETE THE POST TRAINING
THAT'S AN INACCURATE STATEMENT
YES CENTER [inaudible]
AND OKAY SO.
IN IN HOW MANY.
INSTANCES HAVE WE FOUND
COMPANIES WHOSE FIREARMS ARE
DEEMED UNSAFE BECAUSE SIMPLY
THEY HAVEN'T PAID THE FEE.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT
CENTER I'M SORRY.
THANK YOU THANK YOU [inaudible]
YEAH [inaudible]
FROM.
THE SO WE CLARIFIED THAT YEAH
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE THE
TRANSFER BUT I'M ALSO.
WELL I APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS --
THAT THESE ARE HAND GUNS THAT
ARE -- ALLOWED.
ON THE JOB AND ARE PURCHASED BY
THE AGENCIES I AM WONDERING WHY
IS IT THAT WE WOULD CERTAINLY
THE OFFICER WOULD HAVE THAT AS
PART OF THEIR JOB.
WHY WOULD WE ALLOW FOR THE
PERSONAL PURCHASE?
SURE YOU TALK ABOUT THE OFFICERS
THEMSELVES HAVE PERSONAL
PURCHASE OVER THAT THAT'S RIGHT
OR STAND.
THIS BILL WOULD ALLOW.
ALSO THEY'RE THEY'RE ALREADY
PERMITTED ON DUTY I I THINK
THERE'S LIKE DUDE RIGHT PLEASES.
AND THERE'S MANY THINGS THAT
THEIR PERMITTED ON DUTY THAT
THEY WOULDN'T BE PERMITTED OFF
DUTY.
SO THE ARGUMENT BEING IF IF THIS
IS PERMITTED THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT
GOING TO CARRY THESE ON DUTY AND
JUST PURCHASED AND PERSONALLY OR
YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO
ALSO PURCHASE THESE PERSONALLY
IS AT THE CONGESTION.
YES THEY WOULD PERSON PURCHASE
THEM PERSONALLY -- I I DON'T
HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR FOR THAT
I'D EIGHT I MEAN IF THEY'RE
EXEMPTED TO CARRY THEM ON THE
JOB I DON'T KNOW.
AT THAT POINT WHAT WE DO.
TO PRECLUDE THAT FROM PERSONAL
ACQUISITION I MEAN IFTHEY'RE
ALREADY.
CONSIDERED THE EXAM THEY'RE
ALREADY TRAINED.
I'M I'M NOT.
I'M NOT -- OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD THINKING OF SOMETHING ELSE
THAT THERE PROBABLY PERMITTED TO
USE ON THE JOB THAT THEY
WOULDN'T BE.
ALLOWED TO PURCHASE -- BUT I'M
SURE THERE ARE MANY -- POTENTIAL
ITEMS -- SO THAT IS -- ANOTHER
UNCOMFORTABLE EDDIE I HAVE WITH
THE ABILITY TO JUST TO JUST
PURCHASED PERSONALLY.
OKAY SO.
WOULD YOU.
WANT TO DISCUSS.
RIGHT WITH THOSE AND DOES TEND
TO LIMóN YES.
YES YES THEY ARE OPEN TO THAT
GREAT [inaudible]
APPRECIATE THAT.
THE HEADLINER JACKSON REALLY
TROUBLED BY THIS BILL I
APOLOGIZE -- WHY DO WE WANT TO
ENCOURAGE COMPANIES NOT TO PAY
THE FEE TO MAKE SURE THEIR GUNS
ARE SAFE?
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING WE'RE GONNA LET WE'RE
GOING TO LET LAW ENFORCEMENT
CONTINUE TO BUY THESE FIREARMS.
FOR INDIVIDUAL USE AND WHAT HAVE
YOU -- AND I'M I'M CONFUSED AS
TO WHY WE WOULD WANT TO
ENCOURAGE THAT.
HELLO THIS IS FOR EXISTING ARMS
THAT THEY HAVE NOW NOT TO GO AND
BUY NEW ARMS.
REDUCE THE TOAST [inaudible]
THOSE.
THOSE RESTRICTIONS WERE YOU HAVE
TO GO FOR MAIN GUN MANUFACTURERS
AND ALL THOSE.
GUNS THAT NEED TO GO THROUGH THE
TESTING AND PAID OF THE ANNUAL
FEE -- THAT WILL STILL STAY IN
PLACE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL
NOT BE ABLE TO GO AROUND THAT
THEY WILL BEGIN AT EXEMPTION FOR
YOU.
SO THIS IS FROZEN IN TIME SO
LET'S SAY THAT THERE'S COMPANY
COMPANY X..
MAKES A NATION YOU KNOW A A
FIREARM THAT IS APPROPRIATE
ISSUE.
AND THEN AND YOU BUY IT IS A LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND IN FIVE
YEARS THEY'VE STOPPED PAYING
THEIR ANNUAL FEE WITH THIS BILL
APPLIES SO THAT THEY CAN BE IF
YOU WERE GRANDFATHERED IN.
AS I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS
WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS
OF YOU KNOW STARTED BUYING A GUN
MMHM.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY CALLED I
BY LIGHT I MEAN? TO SAY IN A
GENERAL HOW THE LAW WOULD APPLY.
AFTER SOMEONE.
STOPS.
AFTER MANUFACTURE STUFF
COMMUNITY FOR FREE I WOULD HAVE
TO READ THE LOG IN ON THAT
PARTICULAR ONE FIND OUT WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN.
THANK YOU.
FOR RIGHT NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON
THE DíAS I'D BE COMFORTABLE
HAVING THE BILL MOVE FORWARD
WITH THE YET WITHIN MINUTES WE
DISCUSSED.
AND WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
THAT -- IN THAT REGARD
[inaudible]
GREAT -- ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR
DISCUSSION.
ALL RIGHT WELL -- RESPECT SLASH
RELIABLE THANK YOU.
WE WILL HAVE A ROLL CALL.
SHE IS THE PASTOR APPROPRIATIONS
WITH AMENDMENT AS A MINUTE AGO.
SKINNER AYE SKINNER AYE MORLOCK.
BRADFORD MORE LIKE AYE BRADFORD.
BRADFORD AYE JACKSON.
MITCHELL.
MITCHELL AYE MORALE ALL RIGHT
WELL I WIENER.
WE WILL -- KEEP THE ROLE OPEN IN
CASE OUR OTHER MEMBER COMES BACK
AND THANK YOU THANK YOU
COMMITTEE.
RIGHT CAN WE WILL NOW GO.
TO AB -- FIVE NINETY SEVEN
ASSEMBLYMEMBER LEVINE
[inaudible]
GOOD.
THANK YOU SENATOR -- MANAGER%
NUMBERS EIGHTY FIVE NINETY SEVEN
EXPENSES ON STATE DATE.
ON THE USE OF FLASH
INCARCERATION TOLD TWENTY TWENTY
THREE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THOSE ON PROBATION ARE ABLE TO
FOLLOW WHAT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE DISRUPT THOSE LIVES
AND THE LIVES OF OTHERS IN THE
COMMUNITY AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE.
IN WITNESSES IN SUPPORT GOOD
MORNING MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS
DANIEL SANCHEZ ON BEHALF OF THE
CHEAPER BE SHOP THERE'S OF
CALIFORNIA ABOUT PROUD TO
SPONSOR THIS AND APPRECIATE THAT
THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER FOR CARRYING
THIS.
ON THIS REALLY IS A MODEST
SUNSET EXTENSION ON A POLICY
CURRENTLY IN PLACE THAT FOCUSES
ON HOLDING OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE
WHERE THERE IS A VIOLATION OF
SUPERVISION BUT IN A WAY THAT IS.
MUCH LESS DESTRUCTIVE -- FOR
THEIR PROGRAMMING WORK IN AND
OTHER ASPECTS OF THEIR LIFE IT
ALLOWS FOR AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE
FORMAL COURT REVOCATION PROCESS
WHICH CAN RESULT IN.
A CUSTODY TIME OF TWO HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS -- WE HAVE -- WORKED
VERY CLOSELY WHEN THIS FIRST ONE
INTO A FACT WITH BOTH THIS
COMMITTEE IN ASSEMBLY PUBLIC
SAFETY TO BUILD IN A NUMBER OF
PARAMETERS -- AS TO HOW IT WOULD
OPERATE IN TERMS OF GIVING THE
DEFENDANT THE ABILITY TO DECLINE
FLASHING GO THROUGH THE COURT
PROCESS SUPERVISOR SIGN OFF --
WE NOTIFY MANY OF OUR PARTNERS
AS EVIDENCED -- IN THEIR SUPPORT
IN THE ANALYSIS SO FOR THOSE
REASONS WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT
TODAY THANK YOU. TO THE MATH IS
A MAP CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT.
MANAGER MEMBERS STAND PULLS OUT
ON BEHALF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN
SUPPORT.
MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS THE NATION
**** ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES IN
SUPPORT.
CORY CELLS ALONG THE HAVE THE
CALIFORNIA STATE SHERIFFS
ASSOCIATION.
GENERAL INSTRUMENT WITH THE
RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION
SUPPORT.
ANY OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. FOR
FOR HER.
MY APOLOGIES A MADAM CHAIR FOR
SOME REASON WE'RE NOT LISTED ON
THE ANALYSIS BUT I BELIEVE WE'VE.
GOTTA.
OKAY WELL WE'VE WE'VE HAD --
THAT ARE NOT SURE HERNANDEZ OF
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TERMS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
STATEWIDE ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE
LAWYER.
OR AS WE HAVE OPPOSE LESS
AMENDED POSITION ON THIS BILL
HOW FOR A WHILE -- AS WAS
INDICATED ON THE ORIGINAL BILL --
WE WERE OPPOSED TO IT AT THAT
TIME WE WERE INVOLVED IN SOME OF
THE DISCUSSIONS -- WE WE ARE NOT --
CONVINCED OF THE USE OF FLASH
INCARCERATION IN THE WAY THAT IT
WAS STRUCTURED IN REGIONAL BILL --
WE'RE CERTAINLY STILL NOT
CONVINCED THAT IS THE RIGHT WAY
TO GO -- SO FOR THOSE REASONS
YOU KNOW WE UNDERSTAND TO SUNSET
EXTENSION ARE PART OF THE REASON
WHY WE HAD TO SUNSET IN THE
FIRST PLACE.
WAS TO REVIEW HOW WAS BEING USED
TO DETERMINE WHAT KINDS OF CASES
WHEN WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO
REVIEW AND ASSESS.
MAYBE A DIFFERENT APPROACH
DIFFERENT CRITERIA THE USE OF
THAT -- NOT FAMILIAR WITH AN IN
DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE LAW UP
UNTIL THIS POINT ON WHICH
CERTAINLY DOESN'T TAKE AWAY FROM
THE AUTHORS HAVING GOOD
INTENTION OF TRYING TO EXTEND
SOMETHING -- BUT IT IS SOMETHING
THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN
DONE NOW IS PART OF THE POINT OF
THE OF THE SUNSET ON HAVE TO
REMIND YOU THAT AT THE TIME.
THAT THE THAT THIS THIS BILL
WENT FORWARD THE ORIGINAL ONE
FORWARD -- THERE WAS A HEAVY
DEBATE OVER PROP OF THIRTY SIX
FOR A PROP THIRTY SIX THERE
WASN'T A LOT OF FUNDING FOR DRUG.
OF CANCELING AND TREATMENT AND
SO WE WANTED THE BIG FIGHT OVER
THIS KINDS OF KIND OF THING AND
THIS WAS KIND OF BROUGHT UP.
AS A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS
ACTUALLY WENT TO TREATMENT AND
REALLY FOLLOW THROUGH WHAT WE
KEPT SAYING IS THERE NEED TO BE
MORE FUNDING FOR DRUG TREATMENT.
MORE AVAILABILITY AND THAT WAS
SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE AGREED.
TO THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED THAT
WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS SUPPOSED
TO BE LOOKED AT GOING FORWARD
THE MAJOR TREATMENT MORE
AVAILABLE IN MAY BE OFFSET THE
NEED FOR FLASH CAR SERRATION.
ALSO THAT THERE BE LESS
INSTANCES OF THAT -- AND
CERTAINLY THAT WAS KIND OF ON
THE TAIL END OF THE OF THE
RECESSION SO THE UPSIDE AND
DOWNSIDE OF ME BEING AROUND FOR
A LONG TIME ON HIS PUBLIC SAFETY
BILLS IS THAT.
YOU KNOW I KIND OF KNOW THE
TRAJECTORY OF THIS BILLS IN THE
POLICY -- AND SO WE'RE KIND OF
IN THIS KIND OF STRANGE
SITUATION WHERE -- IT WAS HIGHLY
DEBATED EVEN THOUGH WHEN FORWARD
A FEW YEARS BACK -- THERE'S A
LOT OF THINGS THAT NEEDED TO
HAPPEN FOR SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN
WE'RE HOPING WOULD HAPPEN SINCE
THEN HAVEN'T QUITE HAPPENED. FOR
THOSE REASONS WE HAVE TAKEN
OPPOSE POSITION THE RESPECT THE
AUTHOR -- WHO WHO IS VERY GOOD
ON THESE ISSUES AND VERY
THOUGHTFUL ON THESE ISSUES --
BUT UNFORTUNATELY -- SOME THE
WORK I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE
SINCE THE ORIGINAL LAW -- WE
DON'T THINK IT'S HAS TOTALLY
BEEN DONE FOR THOSE REASONS HAVE
OPPOSE AWESOME AND I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR THE OPPOSITION.
SOME OF THE SUNSET IS AN
EXTENDED.
THEN IS THE AS FAR AS I CAN TELL
FROM READING THE ANALYSIS IS.
THE IT WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO
PUT.
THE PERSON AT THE PROBATION BY
LATER IN FOUR HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
DAYS.
AND WITHOUT THIS DOUBT.
I MEAN. FOR ME THE I'M NOT EVEN
NECESSARILY COMFORTABLE WITH
FLASH INCARCERATION JUST BECAUSE
WHEN WE HAVE FOLKS -- IN THIS
CIRCUMSTANCE WE WANT WE ARE
HOPING THAT THEY ARE -- STARTING
TO FUNCTION APPROPRIATELY AND
THE COMMUNITY THEY HAVE A JOB
THEY HAVE AND OF COURSE WE KNOW
THAT ANY DETENTION INTERFERES
WITH THEIR ABILITY.
TO CONTINUE THEIR EMPLOYMENT TO
CONTINUE WHATEVER WORK THEY WERE
DOING TO BE A SUCCESSFUL OR
REENTRY -- HOWEVER A LONGER TIME
A DETENTION SEEMS TO BE VERY
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE SO IF YOU
COULD ADDRESS THAT.
YEAH WELL I APPRECIATE AND I
THINK SOME OF THE FOCUS ON MIGHT
BE COVERED BY THINK THE BILL
THOSE HEARD EARLIER TODAY FROM
NOT FROM NOT MISTAKEN -- BUT YES --
WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WE
DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAS
LOOKED AT AS SOME SORT OF
ALTERNATIVE TO THAT WHICH WE
THOUGHT WAS GOOD BUT WE WE
DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT.
I GUESS MY ANSWER TO THAT IS.
WHAT WE SAID AT THE BEGINNING OF
A OF THE ORIGINAL LAW WHICH IS
FASHION CORPORATION BY ITSELF IS
NOT THE WAY TO GO THAT THERE
SHOULD BE OTHER ALTERNATIVES AND
THERE SHOULD BE DIGITAL FUNDING
SO THAT?
FASHION COURSE RATIONS IS ONE OF
THE LAST RESORTS -- FOR
INDIVIDUALS AND SO THAT'S WHY
IT'S IT'S HARD TO ANSWER THAT
DIRECTLY BECAUSE I THINK THE
ANSWER IS THAT AMENDED SOME OF
THE CRITERIA.
HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FUNDING
AVAILABLE AND AND MAKING SURE
THAT THERE'S A SUSTAINED
OPPORTUNITY FOR FOLKS TO SUCCEED.
I THINK THE STUDIES HAVE SHOWN
THAT THERE THERE MAY BE AS SOME
PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUALS WERE
BENEFITS BUT FOR THE VAST
MAJORITY FLASHCARTS RATIONS
UNNECESSARYGONNA KICK THEM INTO.
NO BETTER JOB TREATMENT SO I
DON'T KNOW THAT.
WE'RE SAYING GET RID OF THE
SUNSET AND THEN LET GO BACK TO
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS I THINK
WE'RE LOOKING AT LET'S LET'S.
MOVE THIS AROUND A LITTLE BIT
LET'S MANIPULATE A LITTLE BIT SO
THAT THERE ARE OTHER
ALTERNATIVES AND BETTER WAYS TO
DO IT AND I THINK THAT WAS WERE
ORIGINAL.
COMPOSITIONS I DO APOLOGIZE TO
THE CHAIR OF I'VE I'VE CHARMS
ARE THE AUTHOR WHO GET GOOD
RELATIONS OFFICE WE HAVEN'T GONE
THROUGH WHAT SOME OF THE
ALTERNATIVES -- COULD BE BUT
CERTAINLY WILLING OF THIS AS
SOON THE BILL MOVES FORWARD TO
HAVE DISCUSSIONS IF THERE'S WAYS
THAT WE CAN TREAT THIS GOING
FORWARD -- ASSEMBLYMEMBER LEVINE
DID YOU WANNA THANK YOU VERY
MUCH MADAM CHAIR I DID WANT TO
JUST MAKE THE POINT THAT
FLASHING COURSE RATIONS A
VOLUNTARY OPTION.
THAT IS RARELY -- TURNED DOWN AT
ALL AND MISS CENTERS HAD SOME
COMMENTS FOR CLARIFICATION FROM
THE THE OPPOSITIONISTS POINTS I
NEED TO THE CHAIR.
I JUST BRIEFLY -- WE WE AGREE
THAT FLASHING CONSERVATION
SHOULD NOT BE THE THE FIRST --
ALTERNATIVE TO A VIOLATION IT'S
DEPENDED UPON REALLY -- THE TYPE
OF VIOLATION AND WE WANT TO ALSO
MAKE SURE THAT IT'S A GRADUATED
SANCTIONS SO ONE OF THE THINGS
BUILT INTO THE BILL.
REQUIRES A BEHAVIOR MATRIX WHICH
IS BASED ON RESEARCH AND
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES TO SAY
THAT -- THERE'S OBVIOUSLY
CONTINUE ON THE TYPES OF
VIOLATIONS AND THIS WOULD ONLY
BE IMPLEMENTED AND IN THE CASE
IN WHICH THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD
BE THE EXISTING COURT REVOCATION
PROCESS SO CERTAINLY THIS IS NOT
INTENDED -- TO UPON MINOR THINGS
WE WANT TO KEEP THE PERSON --
UNDER OUR CARE AND SUPERVISION
ON TRACK AND IF IT BECOMES A
THING WHERE THEY MISSED AN
APPOINTMENT WE WANT TO SAY THAT
SEAL AS LONG AS WE CAN RESET
THAT AND CONTINUE WORKING LET'S
DO SO.
BUT IF IT'S A SIGNIFICANT THING
THAT THEY DON'T SIGN UP -- FOR
THEY DON'T REGISTER -- FOR AS A
SEX OFFENDER OR SOMETHING THAT
RISES TO A LEVEL BASED ON THAT
MATRIX THIS WOULD THEN BE
IMPLEMENTED AGAIN IT'S STILL
VOLUNTARY ON THE PERSON'S BEHALF --
THE AVERAGES AS AS WE'VE SEEN
STATEWIDE IS LESS THAN THE TEN
DAY MAXIMUM I KNOW THAT'S BEEN
SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP SO I
THINK REALLY IN PRACTICE WHAT WE
SEEN ON A WITH THE SAFEGUARDS AT
THIS COMMITTEE IN ASSEMBLY
PUBLIC SAFETY HAS BUILT IN --
THAT HAVE BEEN VERY VERY HELPFUL
TO THE DEFENDANT AND THE PERSON
ON PROBATION -- TO BALANCE ALL
OF THOSE THINGS.
SENATOR JACKSON'S.
THANK YOU HI I AM.
I GUESS THE THING MIND --
WONDERING ABOUT TODAY IS.
ARE WE FUNDING THESE
ALTERNATIVES APPROPRIATELY WE WE
KNOW THE PUTTING JUST PUTTING
PEOPLE IN.
JAIL AND PRISON IS NOT THE
ANSWER.
BUT WE DO AND WE DO KNOW THAT
SOME OF THE ANSWERS TREATMENT.
AND EDUCATION AND THEIR WHOLE
THERE ARE A VARIETY OF THINGS.
BUT MY QUESTION IS ARE WE DOING
THOSE THINGS -- I THINK THAT'S
CRITICAL BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT
SUCCESSFUL WE'RE GOING TO GO
BACK TO THE OLD WAY OF JUST
THROWING PEOPLE.
IN PRISON AND THROW AWAY THE KEY
WHICH I THINK WOULD BE A
TERRIBLE.
TRAGEDY YEAH -- SO -- IF I MAY
JUST ASK YOU.
WHAT IS THE THE GOAL AND THEN
THE AND IS THERE A MEASURE OF
SUCCESS FOR FLASH INCARCERATION?
YEAH IF IF I MAY TO THE CHAIR
THE IT REALLY IS BASED ON
RESEARCH NATIONAL RESEARCH THAT
TALKS ABOUT -- GRADUATED
SANCTIONS AND AND A SWIFT AND
CERTAIN SANCTIONS SO AGAIN WHERE
WHERE SOMETHING RISES TO THE
LEVEL OF NEEDING -- TO
POTENTIALLY VIOLATE THAT PERSON
OR OR HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE IT'S
IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS FOR A VERY
QUICK KIND OF INTERVENTION.
BUT IT IS LEAST DISRUPTIVE AS
POSSIBLE TO ALL OF THE OTHER
THINGS BECAUSE OF WHEN THEY ARE
ON PROBATION WE'RE WORKING WITH
THEM TO GET THEM CONNECTED.
TO SUBSTANCE USE THE TREATMENT
COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL THERAPY GET
THEM INTO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE WE'RE
WORKING TOWARDS AND SO WE
CERTAINLY ARE INVESTED IN NOT
WANTING TO DISRUPT THAT WHERE
THERE'S PROGRESS.
BUT AGAIN WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THE IF THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT VIOLATION THAT WERE
HAVING THAT VERY QUICK
APPROPRIATE INTERVENTION AND TO
THEN GET BACK ON TRACK.
AND AND THEY ARE BEING MONITORED
APPROPRIATELY ABSOLUTELY.
THANK YOU.
I'M OF THE BILL.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION AND RICE --
AS WE MOVE THIS BILL I HOPE THE
ASSEMBLY WERE LIVING YOU MIGHT
SIT DOWN AND SPEAK WITH OUR
OPPOSITION TO SEE WHETHER
THERE'S ANY -- IN. TWO WEEKS --
THE THE BILL ORIGINALLY WHAT WHY
WE'RE LOOKING AT SUNSET THE BILL
ORIGINALLY WAS QUITE QUITE
TRAVERSE DEAL.
AND IT DOESN'T -- IT.
AT LEAST IN THIS DISCUSSION
THERE WEREN'T AS MANY OF THE
ENTITIES THAT.
HAD OPPOSE THE PROGRAM IN THE
INITIALLY BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH
STILL HAVING THIS CONVERSATION
BECAUSE WE OBVIOUSLY WANT TO
HAVE.
OUR WE WANT TO RE ENTRY TO BE AS
SUCCESSFUL AS POSSIBLE.
AND BY IN LARGE ANY LEVEL OF
DETENTION.
ONCE A PERSON IS A NO LONGER
CONFINED TENDS TO MOVE IN THE
OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF SUCCESS
FOR RE ENTRY SO -- Là
FOURTEENTH BEING OPEN THE FIRST
CONVERSATION.
RIGHT WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION
LET'S DO A ROLL CALL.
MISSION IS TO PASS TO THE FLOOR
SKINNER. THIRTY TO PASS TO THE
FLOOR.
THERE'S NO EVEN GOING -- TO MY
DOOR IS ALWAYS OPEN.
YEAH.
ALRIGHT WELL THEN I A WILL VOTE
I NOW WITH THE HOLDING -- THE
POSSIBILITY OF NOT A COMMITMENT
FOR FLOOR VOTE YET.
OKAY SKINNER HI.
MOORLACH BRADFORD.
JACKSON ALL RIGHT JACKSON AYE
MITCHELL MORALE.
HI MORRELL AYE WINNER. FOR ITS
OWN CALL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MADAM TURN
SENATORS YOU'RE WELCOME.
ALRIGHT LET'S SEE.
YES ASSEMBLYMEMBER MELINDA'S
YOUR NEXT ON OUR LIST AB
.
SIX OH THREE THEY DO OKAY
[inaudible]
ENERGY [inaudible]
OKAY.
I'M GOING TO LET YOU BEGIN BUT I
HAVE TO RUN OVER TO THE ENERGY
COMMISSION COMMITTEE AND VOTE
BUT I WILL COME BACK.
AND SENATOR JACKSON WILL. FOR
THE MOMENT.
JUST PROBABLY RIGHT RIGHT.
GOOD MORNING THE FLOOR IS YOURS
THANK YOU GOOD MORNING --
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
TODAY I AM PRESENTING AB SIX OH
THREE WHICH IS A TECHNICAL CLEAN
IT MEASURE TO ENSURE.
THAT YOU SEE PEACE OFFICERS
RECEIVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS THEIR
SEE ISSUE COUNTERPARTS.
UNDER CURRENT LAW UNIVERSITY
OFFICERS ANOTHER PEACE OFFICERS
ARE CLASSIFIED AS HONORABLY
RETIRED WHEN THEY ACCEPT SERVICE
OR DISABILITY RETIREMENT HOWEVER
IN.
TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL STOPPED
ISSUING IDENTIFICATION CARDS AND
CONCEALED CARRY WAPONS PERMITS
TO PEACE OFFICERS WHO WERE
FORCED TO RETIRE BECAUSE OF A
DISABILITY.
ALLEY JACOBS IS HERE WITH ME
TODAY TO SHARE HER STORY OF HOW
SHE HAS CONTINUALLY BEEN DENIED
AN HONORABLY RETIRED
IDENTIFICATION CARD.
CONCEALED CARRY WEAPONS PERMITS
THIS MEASURES SPONSORED BY THE
FEDERATED UNIVERSITY POLICE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION HAS
RECEIVED.
STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AS
WELL AS THE SUPPORT OF THE
CALIFORNIA'S STATEWIDE LAW
ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION STATE
WHEN UNIVERSITY POLICE
ASSOCIATION AND RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION -- THANK
YOU VERY MUCH ALLEN WOULD YOU
LIKE [inaudile]
TO THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE MY NAME
IS ALLEY JACOBS AND I'M HERE TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF AB.
SIX OH THREE FROM 200-022-00013.
IT I WAS HONORED TO WORK AS A
POLICE OFFICERAT THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY.
LIKE EVERY OTHER CALIFORNIA LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WILL TELL
YOU POLICE WORK CAN BE VERY
CHALLENGING.
BUT ALSO VERY REWARDING.
IN AUGUST OF TWO THOUSAND AND
NINE I WAS PRESENT WITH ONE OF
THOSE UNIQUE CHALLENGES.
A MAN BY THE NAME OF PHILLIP
GARRIDO CAME ON TO THE UC
BERKELEY CAMPUS IS TO MEET WITH
THE STAFF MEMBER OF THE CAMPUS
POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THIS CAMPUS POLICE STAFF MEMBER
IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE THAT
PHILLIP GARRIDO DISPLAYED SOME
ODD BEHAVIORS AND SHE ASKED ME
TO HELP HER INTERVIEW HIM.
GARRIDO WAS ACCOMPANIED BY TWO
YOUNG GIRLS THAT HE CLAIMED WERE
HIS DAUGHTERS.
I DID A RECORD CHECK ON GARRIDO
AND DISCOVERED HE WAS ON PAROLE
FOR KIDNAPPING AND RAPE.
HE WAS ALSO A REGISTERED SEX
OFFENDER.
I SPOKE WITH GARRIDO AND IS A
RADIC BEHAVIOR CONCERNED ME
BECAUSE HE DID HAVE TWO YOUNG
GIRLS WITH HIM.
BUT NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO ARREST
CREDO FOR ANY CRIME AT THE TIME
I VERY RELUCTANTLY LET HIM LEAVE
CAMPUS WITH HIS TWO DAUGHTERS.
I COULDN'T STOP THINKING ABOUT
THOSE TWO YOUNG GIRLS AND I
FOLLOWED UP WITH GARRIDO'S
PAROLE OFFICER THAT DAY.
AND REQUESTED THAT THE PAROLE
AGENTS CONDUCT A WELFARE CHECK
ON THE CHILDREN SINCE THEY WERE
HOME SCHOOLED. TO MY SHOCK THE
PAROLE AGENT FOR ME THAT GARRIDO
DID NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN.
AND MY HEART SANK.
THE VERY NEXTDAY THE PAROLE
AGENT INFORMED ME THAT HE DID
FOLLOW UP ON MY CONCERNS AND
THEY DISCOVERED THAT PHILLIP
GARRIDO.
WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR KIDNAPPING
JAYCEE DUGARD IN NINETEEN NINETY
ONE FROM SOUTH LAKE TAHOE SCHOOL
BUS STOP.
WHEN JC WAS JUST ELEVEN YEARS
OLD?
HE HELD HER CAPTIVE FOR EIGHTEEN
YEARS IN A SHED IN HIS BACKYARD
AND REPEATEDLY RAPED HER FATHER
AND TWO YOUNG CHILDREN WHO MIGHT
MATT ON CAMPUS THAT DAY.
WHEN THE NEWS OF JEEZY'S RESCUE
BROKE I WAS THRUST INTO THE
NATIONAL SPOTLIGHT WITH
INTERVIEWS ON CNN'S ANDERSON
COOPER ABC NIGHTLINE?
THE NEWS MEDIA SIXTY MINUTES AND
THE OPRAH WINFREY SHOW INITIALLY
I DID NOT WANT TO DO THE
INTERVIEWS BUT THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA REQUESTED THAT I
PARTICIPATE.
SO I BECAUSE IT WAS A POSITIVE
STORY FOR THE UNIVERSITY SO I
RELUCTANTLY AGREED.
I WAS HAILED A HERO BUT I DIDN'T
FEEL LIKE A HERO.
I JUST FELT LIKE I WAS DOING MY
JOB AS A POLICE OFFICER AND
WHILE I I WAS HAPPY TO GZ WAS
NOW SAFE.
I WAS UPSET THAT SHE HAD TO
SUFFER FOR SO LONG.
NOT A DAY GOES BY THAT I DON'T
THINK ABOUT J. C. WITH HER
FAMILY.
I AM THANKFUL FOR THE ROLE THEY
PLAYED IN HELPING HER RECOVERY%
NO POLICE OFFICER EVER PLANS. TO
GET HURT.
BUT DUE TO UNPREDICTABLE NATURE
OF OUR JOB AN INHERENT DANGERS
INJURIES O HAPPEN.
SOMETIMES THESE INJURIES ARE SO
SERIOUS THAT THE END OUR CAREERS
UNFORTUNATELY.
IN TWO THOUSAND AND TEN I
SUFFERED AN ON DUTY INJURY THAT
PROVED TO BE CAREER ENDING FOR
ME.
AFTER TO PAINFUL SURGERIES
LEAVING ME WITH MASS OF SCAR
TISSUE AND LIFELONG CHRONIC PAIN
I WAS MEDICALLY SEPERATED AS THE
UNIVERSITY POLICE OFFICE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA POLICE
OFFICER IN.
TWENTY THIRTEEN AND JUST LIKE
THAT.
MY LAW ENFORCEMENT CAREER WAS
OVER.
UPON MY MEDICAL SEPARATION I
REQUEST IT FROM MY DEPARTMENT
WHAT EVERY OTHER CALIFORNIA
POLICE OFFICER IS ENTITLED.
TO AN HONORABLY RETIRED
IDENTIFICATION CARD WITH AN
ENDORSEMENT TO CARRY A CONCEALED
FIREARM TO PROTECT MYSELF AND MY
FAMILY.
YOU CAN IMAGINE MY SHOCK AND
DISAPPOINTMENT WHEN THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA REFUSED
TO ISSUE AN HONORABLY RETIRED
POLICE ID DUE TO A TECHNICALITY
IN WORDING OF THE PENAL CODE.
I WAS EVEN MORE DISAPPOINTED
WHEN I LEARNED TO THE UNIVERSITY
USED TO ISSUE THESE HONOR
HONORABLY RETIRED ID CARDS TO
MEDICALLY SEPERATED OFFICERS FOR
ALMOST TWO DECADES.
BUT THEN SUDDENLY REVERSE THIS
PRACTICE IN TWENTY TWELVE IT'S
BEEN ALMOST TEN YEARS AND I
STILL GET RECOGNIZED AS THE
OFFICER THAT HELPED RESCUE
JAYCEE DUGARD.
THIS CONSTANT RECOGNITION CAUSED
ME TO ALTER MY PHYSICAL
APPEARANCE BECAUSE I DO NOT FEEL
COMFORTABLE OR SAFE BEING
RECOGNIZED AS A POLICE OFFICER.
ESPECIALLY WHEN I'M WITH MY KIDS.
SINCE THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA CHANGED ITS POLICY IN
TWENTY TWELVE HI AND MANY OTHERS
IN MY SITUATION HAVE BEEN UNABLE
TO OBTAIN AN HONORABLY RETIRED
ID CARD.
AN ENDORSEMENT TO CARRY A
CONCEALED FIREARM TO PROTECT
OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES.
AB SIX SO THREE WILL FIX THAT
TECHNICALITY IN THE PENAL CODE
AND WILL SIMPLY RESTORE THE
PRIVILEGES THAT MANY INJURED
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA POLICE
OFFICERS ENJOYED FOR ALMOST WO
DECADES.
I'M THANKFUL THAT ASSEMBLY
MEMBER MELENDEZ HAS INTRODUCED
AB SIX OH THREE AND I'M GRATEFUL
THAT I CAN OFFER MY STRONG
SUPPORT AND I THINK THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME.
AND I HOPE ALL OF YOU WILL VOTE
IN FAVOR IT'S EIGHTY SIX OH
THREE THANK YOU DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
I'D LIKE [inaudible]
TO OKAY.
GOOD MORNING SCOTT HANDLE ON
BEHALF OF THE FEDERATED
UNIVERSITY PLACE OFFERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
[inaudible]
ANY OTHERS. THREE OF ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION -- IT
SEEING NONE WE HAVE A MOTION TO
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER MOMENTOUS -- THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR I'M SORRY BEFORE YOU
CLOSE CENTER JACKSON YES THANK
YOU FOR YOUR STORY THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SERVICE I'M STILL WONDERING
WHY WE ARE -- PROVIDING THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR RETIRED.
OF POLICE OFFICERS XIN OTHERS TO
CARRY CONCEALED WEAPONS COULD
YOU EXPLAIN TO ME.
WHY YOU BELIEVE THAT IS
APPROPRIATE -- I CAN EXPLAIN
THAT TO SEE ISSUE IN UC'S UNDER
DIFFERENT SYSTEM WITH RESPECT TO
CALPERS AND DISABILITY.
SO ONE GETS THIS DESIGNATION OF
MEDICALLY RETIRED THE OTHER DOES
NOT THAT'S WHERE THERE'S DIDN'T
SEEM TO BE PARITY BETWEEN THE
TWO SYSTEMS SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE BOTH.
CONSIDER THE SAME AND I CAN'T
TELL YOU WHY AGAIN I'M I'M JUST
CURIOUS AS TO WHY WE'RE
ENCOURAGING CONCEALED WEAPONS --
PERMITS FOR RETIRED OFFICERS
WERE RETIRED ANYONE I CAN THINK
OF PERHAPS SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES
WHO MAY FEEL THE SAME LEVEL OF
RISK BEING IDENTIFIED AS
POLITICIANS BY PEOPLE WHO DON'T
LIKE THEM AND WOULD LIKE TO BE
CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS TO
WEEK.
WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE A WHOLE
LOT OF CONCEALED WEAPONS OUT
THERE I GUESS.
SOME PEOPLE WOULD SAY YES HI I
DON'T SEEM TO BE.
SO MOVED BY THAT IDEA -- IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND YOU MAY
THE WITNESS IN SUPPORT.
YES IN RESPONSE TO THAT -- NO
DISRESPECT TO YOUR POSITION OR
ANYONE ELSE'S RISK POSITION WHEN
THEY RETIRE BUT POLICE OFFICERS
JOBS ARE INHERENTLY DIFFERENT WE
ARREST CRIMINALS WE TAKE AWAY
THEIR FREEDOMS.
AND WE DO GET RECOGNIZED BY THEM
ON THE STREET WHEN WE'RE AT
SAFEWAY WITH LET'S SAY -- THAT'S
HAPPENED TO ME ON NUMEROUS
OCCASIONS WHERE I'VE BUMPED INTO
PEOPLE WHO -- WERE DRUG DEALERS
THAT I'VE ARRESTED AND ARE HAPPY
WITH ME AND THE TRAINING THAT
WE'VE BEEN GIVEN AS POLICE
OFFICERS CARRY ON AND CONTINUE
TO GET THAT TRAINING ONCE WERE
RETIRED.
IN ORDER TO PROTECT OURSELVES
FROM FROM THAT RECOGNITION
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS.
ALRIGHT SO NOW A SIMILAR
MELENDEZ YOU MAKE THANK YOU VERY
MUCH TRYING CHAIR AND I
APPRECIATE THE CONCERNS FROM
SENATOR JACKSON -- I KNOW THAT
THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE WHO -- AS YOU STATED
ARE ARE A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE
HAVING MORE CONCEALED CARRY
WEAPONS OUT THERE BUT I THINK IN
THIS PARTICULAR CASE WE'RE
TALKING A DIFFERENT SITUATION
WE'RE CERTAINLY TALKING ABOUT --
INDIVIDUALS WHO VERY PROVE
THEMSELVES TO BE WORTHY OF
HANDLING A WEAPON AND AND
CERTAINLY KNOWING -- HOW TO USE
THAT WEAPON PROPERLY SO WITH
THAT I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR ABOUT?
THANK YOU AND WE HAVE A MOTION.
SO LET'S DO ROLL CALL.
MOTION IS TO PASS TO THE FLOOR
SKINNER ALL RIGHT SKINNER AYE
MOORLACH ALRIGHT WELL LIKE I
BRADFORD [inaudible]
JACKSON [inaudible]
MITCHELL.
MORALE HIGH MORALE AYE WIENER
AYE AYE WIENER AYE.
WILL HOLD THE ROLE OPEN WE HAVE
ONE MISSING MEMBER [inaudible]
CERTAINLY -- THANK YOU WILL NOW
GO.
TO FOCUS WE PULLED A HOT.
ALRIGHT LET'S LOOK AT THE CALL
ON THE CONSENT I IN A CONSENT
CALENDAR -- DOES ANYONE NEED ME
TO READ WHICH ITEMS WERE ON CAN
CENTER YOU ALL KNOW OKAY GREAT
SO LET'S.
ROLL CALL ON THE MISSING MEMBERS
FOR CONSENT THIS IS A MOTION ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR MITCHELL.
MORALE.
I WIENER I'M HERE I PULLING IT
OPEN.
HER EIGHT AND LET'S SEE HERE
THERE ANY OTHER -- ITEMS WE CAN
OPEN A ROLLOVER YEAH. FIVE NINE
ONE SEVEN WORK OKAY -- LET'S
OPEN.
YEAH ITEM FOR AB FIVE NINETY
SEVEN CURRENT VOTE IS THREE ZERO
LET'S CALL THE MISSING MEMBERS
MOORLACH.
OR LACK AYE BRADFORD.
ON FRIDAY I DON'T.
WIENER RIGHT WE ARE HIGH. FOR I
WILL HOLD IT OPEN -- FOR MISSING
MEMBER.
OKAY -- A I THINK THAT.
IT -- SORRY. FOR WHO DIDN'T GO
[inaudible]
OR OKAY.
OKAY ALL RIGHT SO.
YES AB SEVENTEEN NINETY FOUR
IT'S RIGHT NOW -- FIVE WITH ONE
NOT VOTING -- AND THERE WILL BE
AMENDMENT SO -- WILL DO ROLL
CALL IN THE MISSING MEMBERS ON
THAT.
ONE WIENER.
HI [inaudible] SIX THAT FILL OUT
AB SEVENTY NINETY FOURS OUT.
SIX ZERO AND AGAIN WE'LL WAIT
FOR OUR MISSING MEMBER
[inaudible]
YES.
WHEN FROM THE [inaudible]
OKAY SO.
BUT JUST WAIT FOR OUR MISSING
MEMBER.
NOW.
WE KNOW THAT BUT LIKE YOU KNOW I
KNOW.
I I WAS TOLD TO GO TO AND AND
HAD NOT VOTED YET LAUGHTER OUR
BRADFORD AYE.
OKAY IT WILL STILL -- LEAVE IT
OPEN. FOR A MISSING MEMBER
[inaudible]
THEN.
I WILL SIT DOWN
[inaudible]
YEAH -- RIGHT THERE WITH THEM --
YEAH
RE OPEN THE ROLE ON A
COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT WE HELD
OPEN.
SO -- LET'S DO ROLL CALL FOR THE
MISSING MEMBERS ON A. B. -- ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
MITCHELL HI THE JULY.
RIGHT CONSENT IS OUT WITH A SIX
SIX SEVEN SEVEN ZERO QUESTION
FOR YOU.
YES OF COURSE YOU ROOM ON AB
FIVE NINE SEVEN UNFORTUNATELY
THE LEAD TO BUT THAT WON'T BE I
DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO ASK A
QUESTION ABOUT.
IF THERE WERE OTHER CURRENT
OPTIONS ABSENCE LASSEN
CARBURETION SO HAVING NOT.
BEEN ABLE TO PULL MY QUESTION TO
THE AUTHOR I'M WONDERING IF I
ABSTAINED FROM THAT VOTE WE
STILL GET A FILL OUT FOR THAT
YES HE WILL FOR MY OFFICE HE
WILL.
OKAY OKAY [inaudible]
OKAY.
YES THERE WAS.
ZERO AND THERE WAS A GOOD AMOUNT
DISCUSSION AND EVEN I WAS HOPING
THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME
AMENDMENTS ON IT -- SIX OH THREE
AB SIX OH THREE MELINDA'S WILL
OPEN THE ROLE MOTIONS TO PASS
THE FLOOR CURRENT FOCUS. FIVE
TWO ZERO MITCHELL [inaudible]
SO I SIXTY FOUR EIGHTY SIX OH
THREE IS OUT.
SIX ZERO WHEN I WAS.
OKAY.
RIGHT THAT'S IT OKAY WITH THAT
THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE IS
NOW ADJOURNED