EMPLOYMENT. RETIRED COMMITTEE
WILL COME TO ORDER GET UP GOOD
MORNING AS WE CONTINUE TO TAKE
SOME PRECAUTIONS TO MANAGE
ONGOING COVID 19 RISK. THE
SENATE CONTINUES TO WELCOME THE
PUBLIC. IN HIS PROVIDED ACCESS
TO BOTH IN PERSON AND TELL
CONGRESS PARTICIPATION FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT. DUE TO
CONSTRAINTS REGARDING THE LENGTH
OF HEARINGS, TECHNOLOGY
CONSIDERATIONS AND CLEANING
PROTOCOLS. COMMITTEE CHAIRS MAY
INSTITUTE TIME LIMITS ON
TESTIMONY. IN THIS CASE, EACH
SIDE WILL BE PERMITTED TO EQUAL
AMOUNT OF TIME. LEAD WITNESSES
TODAY WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR
EACH WITNESS, AND THERE'S NO
RESERVING TIME FOR OTHER
WITNESSES OR OTHERS WISHING TO
TESTIFY. MUSLIM IT THEIR
COMMENTS TO THEIR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURES. FOR THOSE WITNESSES,
THERE WILL BE A LIMIT. MAXIMUM
WOMEN OF 20 MINUTES FOR SUPPORT
AND 20 MINUTES FOR OPPOSITION.
FOR INDIVIDUALS WISHING TO
PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT VIA THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICES. TOLL FREE NUMBER
AND ACCESS CODE IS POSTED ON OUR
COMMITTEE WEBSITE. IT WILL BE
DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN. AND
ANNOUNCE IT NOW. THE NUMBER IS
87722681. AGAIN IT'S 8772268163
. IN THE ACCESS CODE IS 5338635
AGAINST 5338635. I WILL MAINTAIN
DECORUM DURING THE HEARING IS
CUSTOMARY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO
IS DISRUPTIVE MAY BE REMOVED
FROM THE REMOTE MEETING SERVICE
OR HAVE THEIR CONNECTIONS MUTED.
WE'RE HOLDING OUR COMMITTEE
HEARINGS HERE IN THE STREET
BUILDING AND WE'RE IN ROOM 2200
. SO I'M ASKING ALL THE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME TO
BE PRESENT. WE CAN ESTABLISH OUR
QUORUM. AND BEGIN THE HEARING.
WE DO HAVE 10 BILLS ON TODAY'S
AGENDA. AND I KNOW THAT WE CAN'T
UM. ESTABLISH A QUORUM AT THIS
MOMENT. YES, WE CAN DO SOMEBODY
ARRIVED, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND
ESTABLISH A QUORUM AT THIS TIME
CONSULTANT. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
SENATOR COURTESY I HEAR SENATOR
KOA BUG. SENATOR DURAZO DURAZO
HERE, SENATOR LAIRD, SENATOR
NEWMAN NEWMAN HERE. ALRIGHT, SO
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM OFFICIALLY.
IT I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND
ASK THAT WE TAKE UP THE CONSENT
CALENDAR NOW. YEAH. THOSE BILLS
WOULD BE A B 16 44 A B 17 68 8
18 2021 29 21 48. AND A B 27 37
. WE HAVE EMOTION. RIGHT MOVE BY
SENATOR NEWMAN IN LAST
CONSULTANT. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. FILE ITEMS 1245. AND EIGHT
SENATOR CORTEZ E Z I, SENATOR
CA BOGUE. SENATOR DURAZO DURAZO
I, SENATOR LAIRD. SENATOR NEWMAN
NEWMAN. AYE. SO IT'S ON CALL
THREE. OKAY WE HAVE THREE VOTES
WILL BE CONCERNED CALENDAR ON
CALL, BUT OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S A
MAJORITY OF THE COMMITTEE THUS
FAR. WE WILL COME NOW, TOO. ITEM
THREE. THAT IS A B 18 86 AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. COOPER IS
HERE. TO PRESENT IN THE SUMMER.
REMEMBER WHEN YOU'RE READY,
PLEASE PROCEED. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. MAYBE 18 86
BUTTERFLIES. THE RECENT
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS PREVAILING WAGE
DETERMINATION TO CLARIFY THAT
STREET SWEEPING IS INCLUDED IN
THE DEFINITION OF PUBLIC WORKS.
IT REQUIRES A PAYMENT OF
PREVAILING WAGE STREET. SWEEPING
IS A CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY AND
ROAD MAINTENANCE TASKS THAT
INVOLVES CLEANING OF DEGREES
FROM PUBLIC ROADS AND ROADWAYS.
IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP OUR ROADS
SAFE FOR PUBLIC USE. IN OCTOBER
2021. THE DEPARTMENT OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS FOUND THAT
STREET SWEEPING IS ROUTINE AND
REOCCURRING WORD. ACCUSED PUBLIC
STREETS AND FACILITIES IN A SAFE
AND CONTINUALLY USABLE CONDITION
FOR PUBLIC USE. IN AN EFFORT TO
BRING CLARITY TO THIS MATTER IN
18 86 WOULD QUALIFY STREET
SWEEPING MAINTENANCE AS PUBLIC
WORKS, WHICH IN RETURN, BUT IT'S
SURE THE FAIR PAYMENT FOR THE
WORKERS PERFORMING THIS CRITICAL
WORK TODAY TESTIFY SUPPORTERS
MATT CRIMMINS THE CALIFORNIA
NEVADA INTERNATIONAL UNIT
OPERATING ENGINEERS, THE
SPONSORS OF A B 18 86. OKAY
THANK YOU. SO REMEMBER, MR
CLEMENS, YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS
MATT CRIMMINS HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ABOUT A
CONFERENCE OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS. WE ARE THE PROUD
SPONSORS OF A V 18 86. THIS BILL
IS INTENDED TO BRING CLARITY TO
CONTRACTORS, AWARDING AGENCIES
AND LABOR COMPLIANCE ENTITIES
AROUND THE ISSUE OF STREET
SWEEPING MAINTENANCE, WHICH, AS
THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALLUDED TO
IS A CRITICAL ROAD SAFETY
MAINTENANCE TASKS. THAT ENSURES
THE FUNCTIONALITY OF OUR
EXISTING ROADS. THE DEPARTMENT
OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS HAS
LOOKED INTO THIS ISSUE NUMEROUS
TIMES OVER THE PAST FEW DECADES
AND HAS CONSISTENTLY DETERMINED
THAT STREET SWEEPING MAINTENANCE
IS IN FACT, A PUBLIC WORKS
MAINTENANCE THAT REQUIRES THE
PAYMENT OF PREVAILING WAGE.
AGAINST SENATORS IN 10 YEARS
PROVIDE CLARITY AROUND THIS
TOPIC, AND WE ARE ALSO OF THE
HOPE THAT BY PROVIDING THIS
CHANGE, WE COULD PROVIDE SOME
RELIEF TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AS THEY
WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO BE
CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING INTO THIS
MATTER. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS YOU MAY
HAVE WHEN THE TIME IS
APPROPRIATE, RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTED. I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CLEMENS. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON
THIS BILL? WE'RE SO PLEASE COME
FORWARD. IDENTIFY YOURSELF. MR
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS. MY QUEST
ON BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING
AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL
ALSO AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS, MITCH STEIGER,
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION, ALSO IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL?
PLEASE COME FORWARD HAVE SEEN
NONE WAS THE MODERATOR. THE
POLICE QUÊ UP ANYONE WHO WISHES
TO EXPRESS THE SUPPORT POSITION
ON THIS BILL 18 86. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR, AND LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WISH TO
COMMENT AND SUPPORTIVE, MAYBE 18
86 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO AT THIS TIME, AN OPERATOR
WILL PROVIDE YOU YOUR LINE
NUMBER. ONCE AGAIN IF YOU WISH
TO COMMENT AND SUPPORT OF A B 18
86 MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN GERALD
ONE MOMENT FOR OUR COMMENT.
ONE IN 26. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING.
THIS IS TYLER WATCHING. YEAH
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
WORKERS DOWN AND WHAT YOU DID.
SHE SPENT VERY MUCH. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER COMMENTS AND QUÊ AT THIS
TIME. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,
MODERATOR. WE DO NOT HAVE A
LISTED OPPOSITION. LEAD WITNESS
. I'LL ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE IN
THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO EXPRESS
OPPOSITION IN 18 86 DURING THE
COMMITTEE ROOM. YOU CAN COME
FORWARD NOW. SEE NO ONE WILL GO
BACK TO THE MODERATOR. MODERATOR
PLEASE QUEUE UP ANY OPPOSITION
TO A B 18 86 ON THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR, AND LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WISH TO
COMMENT IN OPPOSITION OF THE 18
86 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO AT THIS TIME. ONCE AGAIN IF
YOU WISH TO COMMENT IN
OPPOSITION OF THE 18 86, YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. WE HAVE
NO COMMENTS. OKAY. THANK YOU,
MODERATOR. WE WILL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME.
SENATOR NEWMAN. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR, MR COOPER. GOOD TO SEE
YOU. THAT DOES QUESTION FOR YOU
IS THIS EXPANDED DEFINITION
APPLY TO WORK THAT IS CONTRACTED
OUT BY MUNICIPALITY THAT WOULD
ALSO INCLUDE STREET TREATMENT,
BURNING OUTSOURCE BASIS. I'M
GONNA LET MR CRIMMINS ANSWER
THAT. YES SENATOR. ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION. IT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO
CONTRACT OUT WORK. OKAY GOOD.
THANK YOU. GLAD TO SUPPORT THE
BILL AND HAPPY TO MOVE IT WHEN
THE TIME IS APPROPRIATE.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE SEEN NONE
CONSULTANT. WE CAN CALL THE
ROLL. LET ME I'M SORRY. LET ME
GIVE YOU GREAT. CLOSE, MR CHAIR,
RIGHT? OH I DIDN'T MEAN TO HELP
YOU OUT THAT MUCH. ALL RIGHT
BACK TO THE CONSULTANT. THE ROAD
CODE FILE ITEM NUMBER THREE. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS, BUT FIRST
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS SENATOR CORTEZ E
Z. I, SENATOR KOA BUG. SENATOR
DURAZO DURAZO I, SENATOR LAIRD I
, SENATOR NEWMAN NEWMAN. AYE. SO
IT'S FOR ON CALL FOR VOTES. SO
YOU DO HAVE ENOUGH VOTES, BUT
WE'LL LEAVE THE BILL ON CALL FOR
THE OPPOSITE MEMBER. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON TO 24 13. THIS
BILL IS AUTHORED BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CARILLO
UNDERSTAND? ASSUMING MEMBER
RAISES HERE TO PRESENT. AND
WELCOME AND YOU MAY PROCEED
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. ON
BEHALF OF ASSEMBLY MEMBER WENDY
CARRILLO. I'M PROUD TO PRESENT A
B 24 13, WHICH WOULD ALLOW
CLASSIFIED SCHOOL OR COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICT EMPLOYEES TO
REMAIN IN PAID STATUS. VERY
SHORT PERIOD OF TIME WHETHER
THEY APPEAL THE RESULTS OF
PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION. THIS
BILL STRIKES THE BALANCE THE
RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN ALLOWING
EMPLOYEES TO EXERCISE THEIR DUE
PROCESS RIGHTS PROTECTING
EXISTING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT AND PREVENTING AUSE
BY THOSE SEEKING TO DRAW OUT THE
PROCESS. THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. AND MR
TRISTAN BROWN IS HERE IN PERSON
WITH THE LABOR CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS. TO TALK
MORE ABOUT THE NEED FOR THE
BILL, AND TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT, UM WE WILL
GO TO THE LEAD SUPPORT WITH
WITNESS MR BROWN. YOU MAY
PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING
MEMBERS. TRISTAN BROWN OF CFT
UNION OF EDUCATORS AND
CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS WITH
THE SPONSORS OF THIS BILL.
CURRENT LAW DOES ALLOW FOR A
LIMITED DUE PROCESS FOR
CLASSIFIED SCHOOL EMPLOYEES WHEN
THEY ARE TERMINATED OR SUSPENDED
WITHOUT PAY, INCLUDING IT A
RIGHT TO APPEAL THE DECISION
AFTER THEIR SKELLY HEARING. TO
THEIR GOVERNING BOARD.
UNFORTUNATELY UM, CLASSIFIEDS
GOING, PLEASE DO NOT STAY IN
PAID STATUS WHEN THEY CHOOSE TO
APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE
SKELLY HEARING. ANY OFTENTIMES
THESE THIS CLASSIFICATION OF
WORKER IS VERY LOW WAGE AND
UNABLE TO AFFORD THE TIME
WITHOUT PAY TO EXERCISE THEIR
RIGHTS AND CFT. WE BELIEVE THAT
A RIGHT YOU CAN'T AFFORD. IT'S
NOT AN ACTUAL RIGHT AT ALL. AND
THAT WAS THE IMPETUS FOR THIS
BILL. WE HOPE THAT MEMBERS ARE
ABLE TO STAY IN THEIR PAID
STATUS THROUGHOUT, UTILIZING THE
FULL EXTENT OF THEIR DUE PROCESS
RIGHTS. HOWEVER WE HAVE CARVED
OUT SOME REASONABLE POSITIONS
WHERE IF THERE IS CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL
MISCONDUCT, THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT WOULD NOT KEEP SOMEONE IN
PAID STATUS. AS WELL AS A VERY
LENGTHY BINDING ARBITRATION
PROCESS, WHICH MAY GO ON FOR
QUITE SOME TIME. AND WE FELT
THAT IF THE WORKERS OF THE LOCAL
EDUCATION AGENCY WHERE TO
BARGAIN A BINDING ARBITRATION
CLAUSE IN THEIR CONTRACT THAT
WAS THEIR CHOICE, THEY WOULD
RATHER GO THAT ROUTE. AND GIVEN
THAT THERE IS A CHOICE TO DO
THAT, AND SOMETHING THAT YOU DO
IN A CBA. WE CARVE THAT OUT AS
WELL BECAUSE IT IS JUST A VERY
LENGTHY PROCESS FROM REMAINING
UNPAID STATUS. SO WE BELIEVE
THIS DOES CUT A FAIR BALANCE TO
KEEP INDIVIDUALS AFLOAT WHILE
THEY EXERCISE THE DUE PROCESS
RIGHTS OFTEN TIMES THIS WILL GO
TO THE VERY NEXT BOARD MEETING,
WHICH COULD BE 2 TO 4 WEEKS FROM
THE POINT OF TERMINATION. AND IT
IS A SMALL PRICE FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL TO SEEK JUSTICE AND
HAVE THEIR FULL DEFENSE HEARD.
SO WITH THAT, I URGENT I VOTE
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME
OPPOSITION POINTS OUT THERE. BUT
WE STILL BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A
FAIR AND BALANCED APPROACH TO
HANDLE THE MATTER. SO WITH THAT,
AS FOR I VOTE AND THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE
ANYONE IN THE COMMITTEE ROOM WHO
WISHES TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL? PLEASE COME FORWARD.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
MITCH STEIGER, WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION,
ALSO IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 24 13? SEE NO ONE
ELSE COMES FORWARD. MODERATOR
WOULD YOU PLEASE CUE UP ANY
SUPPORT WITNESSES ON A B 24 13?
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR,
AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU
WISH TO COMMENT AND SUPPORT OF
BABY 24 13 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO AT THIS TIME ONCE
AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT AND
SUPPORT OF A B 24 13 FIRST ONE
AND THEN DO IT. LINE 27. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
PIKETTY HARD AMOUNT THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT. CLIMB 18. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. CHRIS
MEYERS FOR EMPLOYEES ATION AND
ON BEHALF OF THE OVER 250,000
PLUS SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ACROSS THE
STREET HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS,
BILL, THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO
FURTHER COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, MODERATOR. WE WILL
NOW GO TO THE LEAD. OPPOSITION
WITNESS UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE
CHRIS REEF. IN MR IF YOU MAY
PROCEED. GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. CHRIS BRIEF ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
BOARDS ASSOCIATION. I FIRST WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR AND THE
SPONSOR FOR WORKING WITH US,
WE'VE BEEN WORKING TRYING TO
REACH A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE
SOLUTION TO THIS, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, HAVE NOT BEEN
ABLE TO GET THERE QUITE YET. AT
ISSUE IS OR TWO PIECES OF THE
BILL. ONE IS THAT IT, UM
ESTABLISHES A VERY HIGH STANDARD
OF EVIDENCE, CLEAR AND
CONVINCING. THAT ACTUALLY SETS
NEW PRECEDENT AND HOW WE HANDLE
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS. AND
THEN ALSO LIMITS THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION ONLY TO
CRIMINAL CONDUCT. THIS EXCLUDES
OTHER TYPES OF ONGOING CHRONIC
PERSONNEL ISSUES WHERE CERTAIN
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS ARE
WARRANTED. AND SO IT GIVES US NO
PLEASURE TO BE UP TO OPPOSE THE
BILL. BUT WE FEEL THAT WITH
THESE PROVISIONS, IT ACTUALLY
MAKES IT MOREDIFFICULT FOR THE
SCHOOL BOARDS AND SCHOOL
DISTRICTS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE
WHAT CAN BE VERY EGREGIOUS
PERSONNEL OR OTHER KIND OF.
BEHAVIORAL ISSUES THAT EXIST ON
SCHOOL CAMPUSES. AND SO WE WOULD
LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE COMMITTEE
TO FURTHER CONSIDER THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE
RECOMMENDED. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
UNDERSTAND? THERE'S ANOTHER LEAD
OPPOSITION WITNESS, DOROTHY
JOHNSON, PERHAPS ON THE CO HOST
LINE. IS THAT CORRECT? IF YOU'RE
VERY GOOD MORNING, MR CARON
MEMBERS. THIS IS DOROTHY JOHNSON
WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATORS
RESPECTFULLY COMMENDED, ALL
ALIGN MY COMMENTS WITH THOSE OF
MR REID WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD
ASSOCIATION AND JUST UNDERLINING
THAT THIS REALLY DOES CREATE A
SEPARATE STANDARD AND THAT THE
LANGUAGE WE'VE OFFERED SPEAKS TO
DO CREATE THAT CHARITY. BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, AS CURRENTLY
DRAFTED, THERE IS A HIGHER
LEVEL. THAT WAS REALLY IMPEDE
THE ABILITY OF DISTRICT TO
ADMINISTER DISCIPLINE AND MANY
DIFFERENT CASES. AND SO FOR
THOSE REASONS, RESPECTFULLY
APARTMENT AMENDED. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, FOR YOUR TESTIMONY
WILL ASK IF THERE IS ANYONE IN
THE COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL
AT THIS TIME, SO PLEASE STEP
FORWARD. SEE NO ONE COMING
FORWARD WILL ASK THE MODERATOR.
TO CHECK THE CONFERENCE LINE FOR
ANYONE IN OPPOSITION. 22413.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WISH TO
COME IN OPPOSITION OF 24 13, YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO AT
THIS TIME. AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO
COMMENT IN OPPOSITION OF THE
24TH OF MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
GENERAL. THERE ARE NO COMMENTS
INTO IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,
MODERATOR. AND THANK YOU. TOO
OLD SUPPORTING OPPOSITION
WITNESSES WERE NOT GOING TO
BRING THE DISCUSSION BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ANY COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS, SENATOR LARK.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I SUPPORT
THE CONCEPT IN THIS BILL. I JUST
WANT TO DRILL DOWN FOR A SECOND
ON WHERE THE DIVIDING LINE WAS
ON. CLEAR AND CONVINCING. AND I
DON'T KNOW WITH SINCE YOU'RE
SUBBING WHETHER IT'S GOOD TO DO
WITH THE WITNESSES IN ALASKA ON
BOTH IF YEAH, I. BEFORE I WAS
ELECTED. THE ASSEMBLY. I DID
DISAPPOINTED ARE MATTERS FOR
COUNTY GOVERNMENT FOR SIX YEARS.
IT JUST SAW THE BRIGHT WIDE
RANGE OF WHAT HAPPENED, AND IT'S
IF IT'S CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. FOR
EXAMPLE, IF SOMEBODY WAS. TAKING
MONEY THAT WOULD BE A CRIMINAL
ACTION AND THEREFORE, THAT WOULD
MAKE CLEAR AND CONVINCING
STANDARD. SO IF SOMEBODY WAS
EMBEZZLING IN SOME WAY, AND IF
THEY LEFT IN THE WERE LEFT IN
THE POSITION, THEY CONTINUE TO
EMBEZZLE. DOES THAT MEAN YOU AND
YOUR BELIEF THAT CLEAR AND
CONVINCING STANDARD THAT THERE
SHOULD BE PULLED AWAY FROM STILL
BEING IN A POSITION TO DO THAT?
WE WILL ASK MR BROWN ARE LEAD
WITNESS TO ANSWER POLICE
PROCEDURE. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THE YES.
THAT WAS THE POINT. WE WANTED TO
SET UP A CLEAR STANDARD WHERE IF
THERE IS SOME EVIDENCE THAT ALL
REASONABLE MINDS COULD POINT TO
COME TO AN AGREEMENT THAT YES,
THIS CONDUCT HAD OCCURRED.
THEREFORE WHY WASTE TAXPAYER
MONEY? WHY WASTE TIME MIGHT
STILL BE WAITING TO DO FURTHER
DUE PROCESS RIGHTS TO BE HEARD,
BUT AT LEAST WE'RE NOT THROWING
GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD, SO TO
SPEAK, AND THAT'S WHY WE PICKED
THAT STANDARD. AND SO IF THERE
IS SOMEONE ON VIDEO IF THERE ARE
CORROBORATING OUR WITNESSES, IF
THERE'S PAPER TRAILS, ETCETERA,
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT COULD
BE POINTED TO AND SAY THAT IT IS
CLEAR THAT THIS, UH, BREACH HAD
OCCURRED AND THAT'S WHAT WE
WANTED TO SHIELD FROM THE
REMAINING UNPAID STATUS. OKAY I
APPRECIATE THAT, ALTHOUGH I HAVE
TO SAY WHEN YOU SAY ALL
REASONABLE MINDS IN A ROOM. I
WAS NEVER IN A ROOM IN THAT
PERIOD WHERE ALL THE MINES THERE
SO AND THEN LET ME ASK MR REEF,
YOU SAID CERTAIN EGREGIOUS
THINGS WERE NOT COVERED BY THAT
STANDARD. GIVE ME A SPECIFIC
INSTANCE OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING
SO IN TERMS OF EGREGIOUS,
ACTUALLY ACTS CLEARANCE
CONVINCING, ADDS ON TOP OF THE
PRECLUDED IN ON THE ACTUAL%
ADMINISTRATION OF THE DISCIPLINE
ACT. AND SO YOU CAN HAVE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF
INSUBORDINATION. UM
INAPPROPRIATE INTERACTIONS WITH
THEIR FELLOW STAFF THAT ARE
ONGOING AND CHRONIC. WHERE THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION SHOULD
CONTINUE, AND I'LL BE CLEAR
SOMETIMES IT'S A DEMOTION OR
PROMOTION WITH PAY OR IT'S A
SUSPENSION OR SUSPENSION WITH
PAY, SO IT RUNS. A SPECTRUM OF
APPROPRIATE THIS PRINT ACTIONS
THAT THE DISTRICT WILL ACTUALLY
BUT YOU'RE APPRECIATE THAT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROCESS
WATER SPECIFIC. THE CATEGORIES
HAVE EGREGIOUS BEHAVIOR THAT
YOU'RE REFERRING TO. THAT WOULD
BE SUBJECT TO THAT PROCESS,
BECAUSE I SORT OF PICKED
EMBEZZLEMENT AND SEE THAT THAT'S
ON ONE SIDE OF DECLARING
CONVINCING STANDARD. WHAT
SPECIFIC KINDS OF CASES ARE YOU
REFERRING TO THAT ARE NOT ON THE
CLEAR AND CONVINCING STANDARD
SIZE. IN TERMS OF CLEARING
CONVINCING. IT CAN BE SITUATIONS
OF LIKE I SAID, INSUBORDINATION
WHERE THERE ARE THERE IS A
DIFFERENCE OF TESTS OF
PERSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF A
INCIDENT THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN
TWO STAFF OR A STAFF AND A
STUDENT, AND SO YOU CAN HAVE
COMPETING TESTIMONY. IF YOU WILL
, IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE THAT
WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE
FETTERED OUT WITHIN THE PROCESS
OF THE APPEAL, AND SO THOSE ARE
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IT MIGHT NOT
RIGHT TO THE LEVEL OF GROWING
CONVINCING. AND IF I MAY, I'LL
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS IT
DOESN'T RISE TO THE LEVEL OF
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, WHICH SEEMS
TO BE WHAT CLEAR AND CONVINCING
IS ABOUT. SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND IS IF THERE'S AN
ISSUE HERE THAT STILL DOES NEED
TO BE ADDRESSED, AND THE WAY I'M
TRYING TO GET AT WHETHER IT
NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IS
UNDERSTANDING. SPECIFIC
INSUBORDINATION INSUBORDINATION
BECAUSE. SOMEBODY CAME CLOSE TO
HITTING SOMEBODY. I MEAN, THAT
WASN'T QUITE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF
THERE'S STILL AN ISSUE TO BE
WORKED OUT HERE AND THAT WE
MOVED THE BILL AND ASKED THAT
PEOPLE CONTINUE TO WORK. OR THAT
I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THERE'S
AN ISSUE STILL TO WORK OUT. SO I
AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. IN TERMS
OF MEANING THAT CLEAR AND
CONVINCING STANDARD IS THAT THE
BAR IS SO HIGH THAT IN THE
ACTUAL AH, UM EVALUATION OF THE
ACT. THERE CAN BE TRYING TO GET
YOU TO SPECIFY WHAT THE ACT
MIGHT BE. WHAT CASES THAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT. THIS BILL WOULD
ALLOW IT TO CONTINUE TO GO ON IN
A SCHOOL. BECAUSE IT DIDN'T MEET
THE STANDARD. THE ISSUES ARE
MATTERS OF WHERE THEY ARE IN
DISPUTE. AND SO I STILL ON THE
PROCESS, IT IS A SUPERVISOR
SHOUTING AT SOMEBODY IN A WAY
THAT WAS REALLY INAPPROPRIATE,
BUT IT'S NOT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
THAT WHAT DOES NOT IN THE CLEAR
AND CAN I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
WHETHER THERE'S AN ISSUE TO
STILL BE ADDRESSED HERE. THE SO
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE AN
EXAMPLE. RIGHT WHERE THERE?
THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.
THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES OF, UM
CHRONIC, ONGOING BEHAVIOR OR OR
ISSUES OF LIKE IN TERMS OF IN
SUPPORT OF INSUBORDINATION IS
KIND OF A BROAD TERM. OBVIOUSLY.
BUT IN TERMS OF LOW JOB
PERFORMANCE AND PERSPECTIVE OF
WHAT THAT PERFORMANCES AND HAVE
ITS ONGOING AND CHRONIC HOW DO
YOU ADDRESS THAT, AND THEREFORE
LOW JOB PERFORMANCE ISN'T
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS NOT GONNA
GET TO THE CLEAR AND CONVINCING
STANDARD? AND WHAT REALLY STILL
BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH
WHATEVER THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCEDURE IS. APOLOGIZED
QUESTION AGAIN. I'M JUST GOING
TO CONCLUDE THAT THAT I HAVEN'T
BEEN PERSUADED. THERE'S STILL
SOMETHING HERE, AND THAT'S WHAT
I WAS TRYING TO GET AT AND TO
SEE IS THERE ARE THERE SPECIFIC
CATEGORIES OF CASES THAT ARE NOT
BEING ADDRESSED BY THIS BILL
THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE
CONTINUED. THAT WOULD BE
UNFORTUNATE. AN INSUBORDINATION
I GET, BUT THAT SEEMS LIKE
THAT'S LOGICAL TO CONTINUE TO GO
THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT IS
STILL SPECIFIED AND ALLOWED
UNDER THIS BILL, SO THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE BOTH. PEOPLE
ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, SENATOR AND MR
BROWN. I JUST WANTED TO DIRECT
THE QUESTION TO YOU. I'M IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL BECAUSE I
THINK ESSENTIALLY WHERE IT'S
GOING IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPORTANT
. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT
HAPPENS AFTER THE SCALY HEARING.
IN TERMS OF. NOT A STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS, BUT TIME ANY TIME
CONSTRAINTS FOR MOVING FORWARD
WITH THE APPEAL. IT SEEMS TO ME
THE YOU KNOW? MM. YOU'VE CARVED
OUT WHAT. NEEDS TO BE CARVED OUT
AT THE AUTHOR HAS AND FROM THEIR
PERSPECTIVE. OTHER THINGS, BE IT
INSUBORDINATION OR WHATEVER. GO
THROUGH A SCULLY HEARING. WE'VE
HAD THAT PROCESS ALREADY.
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THE
DISTRICT CAN MOVE FORWARD. WITH
DISCIPLINE, BUT THEY HAVE TO GO
THROUGH THE SCALY HERE. WHAT
YOU'RE ADDING HERE IS IF THERE
IS AN APPEAL FILED THAN THAT
INDIVIDUAL IS WOULD BE ENTITLED.
BE PAID. BUT HOW LONG BEFORE WE
KNOW WHETHER OR NOT AN APPEAL'S
GOING TO BE FILED. THAT'S MY
QUESTION. IT IS OUR
UNDERSTANDING COMMON PRACTICES
THAT THIS SORT OF ITEM WOULD BE
ADDED TO THE NEXT. OUR SCHOOL
BOARDS CLOSED SESSION FOR THEM
TO DEAL WITH ALL THE PERSONAL
MATTERS THAT HAD COME UP WITHIN
THAT MONTH OR ONGOING. UM
LITIGATION, ETCETERA THINGS THAT
YOU PROBABLY KNOW BETTER THAN I
DO. THAT HAPPENS IN CLOSED
SESSIONS, AND THAT'S WHEN LET'S
SAY IF IT OCCURRED ON THE 21ST
OF THE MONTH THAT COULD BE
AGENDA IZED FOUR WEEKS LATER,
GIVEN BROWN ACT REQUIREMENTS,
ETCETERA. I'VE WAS EARLIER IN
THE MONTH. THAT MIGHT CHANGE. SO
IT'S KIND OF A CALENDAR WHERE WE
FIND IT WOULD BE NO MORE THAN A
MONTH TO BE TO THE NEXT BOARD
MEETING AND BEYOND THE AGENDA
AND BE ADJUDICATED AT THAT
MEETING. THAT'S UP TO THEM. JUST
ASKING IF THAT'S CLEAR ON THE
BILL. OBVIOUSLY THE APPELLANT
WOULD HAVE TO INITIATE THE
APPEAL. THE SCHOOL BOARD CAN'T
DO THAT IN CLOSED SESSION. I
THINK THE SBA AND THE SCHOOL
BOARD MEMBERS WOULD HAVE PERHAPS
ADMINISTRATION OF LEGITIMATE
GRIPE MEETING PERHAPS ONCE EVERY
30 DAYS AND CODE SESSION THAT
EVERY TIME THEY GET THERE.
THEY'RE THE SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
ARE TOLD. WE'RE STILL PAYING
THIS INDIVIDUAL. PENDING THE
POSSIBILITY THAT THE INDIVIDUAL
FILES AN APPEAL. IN THE SCHOOL
BOARD MEMBERS SAID. WHEN IS THAT
GOING TO HAPPEN IN? THERE'S NO,
THERE'S NO GUARDRAILS AROUND
THAT. THERE'S NO LIMITATIONS ON
THAT, IF THAT'S COVERED IN THE
BILL. I DIDN'T PICK UP ON IT,
WHICH COULD BE BAD STUDY ON MY
PART. I'M JUST ASKING. WHETHER
THAT'S THE CASE AGAIN. I SUPPORT
THESE IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT THE
BILL. BUT ALONG THE LINES OF
WHAT SENATOR LAIRD WAS GOING
AFTER, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE THERE
THAT NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO BE
WORKED ON. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
THAT HAPPEN SO THAT WE'RE NOT
PUTTING OUR SCHOOL BOARD
MEMBERS. IN THE AWKWARD
SITUATION OF JUST NOT KNOWING
WHETHER AN APPEAL IS GOING TO BE
FOLLOWED OR NOT. WELL SOMEBODY
STAYS ON THE PAYROLL, YOU KNOW,
EVEN EVEN FOR WHAT YOU MIGHT
CONSIDER TO BE A MINOR
GRIEVANCE. CERTAINLY AGAIN IT'S
OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS
A TIME PERIOD OF WHICH THE
EMPLOYEE HAS TO THEN IN WRITING
CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE CALLING
FOR THEIR HEARING, AND IF THEY
LAPSE, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE THAT
RIGHT. SO IT IS NOT A THERE IS
NOT AN ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO
GAME THE SYSTEM. AND SO THAT'S
WHY A CURRENTLY THERE ARE FOLKS
THAT WILL IMMEDIATELY SIGN THE
PAPER AFTER THEY WALK OUT OF
THEIR SCALY HEARING BECAUSE
THERE'S REALLY A SCALY HEARING
IS THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL FOR
DUE PROCESS. IT'S WHERE YOU DO
FINALLY LEARN. ALL OF THE
ALLEGATIONS PRESENTED AGAINST
YOU, AND YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE
KNOWN EVERYTHING. AND SO IT'S
HARD TO MOUNT YOUR FAIR DEFENSE.
WHEN YOU'RE NOT QUITE SURE
THERE'S NOT LIKE RULES OF
DISCOVERY, AS WE WOULD HAVE IN A
JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCESS WITH THE
SCALY PROCESS AT THIS LEVEL, SO
THAT'S WHY FOLKS MIGHT COME WITH
US. KELLY HEARING, LEARN NEW
THINGS, MAKE THEIR BEST PITCH
AND THEN WALK OUT OF THE ROOM,
KNOWING I'LL HAVE TO FILE AN
APPEAL. AND THAT IS THAT THE
QUESTION. CAN I AFFORD TO DO
THAT OR NOT? AND THAT'S WHY WE
WROTE THIS BILL. SO THERE THERE
ISN'T AN ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO
CONTINUE. IN PERPETUITY AND
LENGTHEN THAT PROCESS AT THIS
POINT, RIGHT, SO I'M GONNA FLIP
THAT AROUND AND SAY IT THIS WAY
AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG THAT
THE COMPENSATION CALLED FOR IN
THE BILL. UM WOULD OCCUR ONLY
DURING THE STATUTORILY
PRESCRIBED APPEAL PERIOD, WHICH
IS ALREADY A MATTER OF LAW.
CORRECT OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? CENTER NEWMAN
OVER THE QUICKLY, SO THANK YOU,
MR CHAIRMAN, AND YOU HAVE
RENDERED SOME CLARITY. I THINK I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE A
GOOD UNDERSTANDING, I GUESS
THROUGH THE CHAIR FOR MR BROWN
THAT THIS BILL IS ABOUT
SUSPENSION OF PAY, NOT ABOUT YOU
KNOW THE ABILITY FOR AND
EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES TO APPLY
DISCIPLINE RIGHT. IT'S SIMPLY TO
ENSURE THAT DURING WHAT WE WOULD
ARGUE, IS GOING TO DO PROCESS
INTERVAL THAT BELOW SOME
THRESHOLD THAT EMPLOYEES WOULD
CONTINUE TO RECEIVE PAY AND
ABOVE SOME THRESHOLD. THAT THEY
WOULD NOT. IS THAT CORRECT? 100%
I THINK SOME OF THAT GOT LOST IN
IN THE FIRST BACK AND FORTH. SO
WITH THAT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SENATOR, SENATOR ROSEAU, AND
I'LL COME BACK TO CENTER IF
THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. JUST COULD FOLLOW UP ON
SENATOR UH, NEWMAN'S QUESTION.
THIS IS IT SAYS HERE. AND THE
BILL WILL ALIGN CLASSIFIED STAFF
WITH THE REST OF THEIR EDUCATION
CO WORKERS. BY KEEPING THE
CLASSIFIED STAFF IN PAID STATUS
UNTIL THE FINAL DETERMINATION.
IS THAT THE PARODY? THAT YOU'RE
ALL LOOKING FOR. IS THERE
SOMETHING IN THIS? THAT CHANGES
THE PARODY OR IS IT IDENTICAL TO
WHAT? UM UH OTHER, YOU KNOW,
TEACHERS CERTIFIED. OUR STAFF
HAVE JUST. I'M GETTING CONFUSED
BETWEEN THIS EXEMPTION, AND THAT
EXCEPTION. WHAT IS? ARE WE JUST
GOING TO APPLY EXACTLY WHAT
EXISTS NOW AND APPLIED TO
CLASSIFIED OR IS THERE SOME
CHANGES. THIS WAS OUR. I'D SAY
EASIEST ATTEMPT. THERE IS A MUCH
MORE, UH BROAD AND MAYBE
CONVOLUTED SET OF THE PROCESS
PROCEDURES FOR CERTIFICATED
TEACHERS. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT
TIERS OF OFFENSES THAT HAVE
DIFFERENT PROCEEDINGS WITH THEM.
SOMETIMES THEY'RE IN PAID STATUS
. SOMETIMES THEY'RE NOT.
SOMETIMES THEY GET BACK. PAY
ETCETERA. IT'S SOMETHING THAT
HAS EVOLVED OVER TIME AND IS
SOMETHING THAT I DON'T THINK WE
WOULD SAY AS CFT IS PERFECT
SYSTEM, BUT IT IS A MUCH MORE
BROAD. SYSTEM FOR CLASSIFIED.
IT'S BINARY AS SOON AS THERE'S
THE ALLEGED OFFENSE, YOU'RE PUT
ON LEAVE. YOU HAVE YOUR SCALY
AND THE DECISION IS MADE. IT'S
VERY QUICK. AND THERE ISN'T THE
SAME SET OF ED CODE PROVISIONS
THAT THE LINEA EIGHT DIFFERENT
OFFENSES AND DIFFERENT RESPONSES
AND THOSE THINGS. IT'S JUST KIND
OF AYE. HYPERBOLE IS YOU COULD
LOOK AT THE PRINCIPAL IN THE
WRONG WAY AND BE FIRED.
OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT A REALISTIC
EXAMPLE. BUT THERE'S NOT THE
SAME AS STRATIFICATION AND FOR
CLASSIFIED AS THEY'RE IN IN
CERTIFICATED. AND RATHER THAN
REINVENTING ALL OF THAT, WHICH
AGAIN I THINK AS EDUCATION AS AN
EDUCATION UNION, WE WOULD
PROBABLY WANT TO TWEAK THAT
EXISTING SYSTEM FOR OTHER
REASONS. WE DIDN'T WANT TO JUST
DUPLICATE THAT FOR CLASSIFIED
AND THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT SET
OF CIRCUMSTANCES, A CLERICAL
WORKER OR A BUS DRIVER. IS NOT
IN THE SAME SITUATION AS AN IN
CLASSROOM CERTIFICATED
INSTRUCTOR SO FOR THOSE REASONS
WE FELT WOULD JUST BE WAY MORE
SIMPLE TO CARVE OUT CRIMINAL
MISCONDUCT AS AS A VERY BROAD
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES TO KEEP
FOLKS THAT HAVE PAID STATUS, BUT
OTHERWISE ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE
THEIR DAY IN COURT, SO TO SPEAK.
AND JUST MAKE IT A MUCH SMALLER
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES TO KEEP
PEOPLE IN OR OUT RATHER THAN
KIND OF REINVENTING THIS VERY
COMPLICATED WHALE ON THE OTHER
SIDE. SO THE ANSWER IS, IT'S
SORT OF IT IS WHAT WE MIGHT CALL
PARODY, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GIVE
THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAVE COPY
AND PASTED PARTS OF ED CODE
OVER. SO IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME
CERTIFICATED. THE CERTIFICATE IS
WAY MORE COMPLEX THAN ADVANCED
CLASSIFIED, BUT THAT IS THE GOAL
FOR US TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE
PARITY FOR THEM TO HAVE THEIR
RIGHTS AND EXCESS ACCESS THE
RIGHTS AS EASILY AS CERTIFICATED
EDUCATORS CAN CAN CAN I KNOW?
CHAMPION BACK IN SO IF WE COULD
HEAR FROM MR REEF, THE
ASSERTIONS THAT THIS CREATES A
NEW AND, UM, CHALLENGE STANDARD.
AND I'D ASK YOU TO SPEAK TO THAT
SPECIFICALLY TO THE YOU KNOW THE
BROADER QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT'S
THE DOWNSIDE OF ALLOWING AN
EMPLOYEE TO CONTINUE BEING PAID
UNTIL THEIR APPEAL IS HEARD? IN
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DISCUSSION
OF THE OF THE DISTRICT. THERE
CAN BE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE. THE
INDIVIDUAL HAS FOREIGN AND
BEYOND. VIOLATED PARTICULAR
PERSONNEL POLICY THAT REQUIRES
IN TERMS OF HOW THE DISTRICT
HANDLES DISCIPLINARY ACTION,
INCLUDING SUSPENSION OF PAY OR
DEMOTION. MOBILE ENGLISH CHANGE
THIS IS THIS IS EXPLICITLY ABOUT
SUSPENSION OF PAYING ABOUT
ANOTHER, NOT NOT ABOUT OTHER
DETAILS OF DISCIPLINE. IS THAT
CORRECT? THE BUILD ADDRESSES
ISSUES OF SUSPENSION WITH PAY
THE MOTION WITH PAY AND ACTUAL
DISMISSAL. IT GOES BEYOND JUST
SUSPENSION OF PAY IN TERMS OF
HOW IT WOULD APPLY THE STANDARD.
ALL RIGHT NOW, I'D LIKE TO HEAR
FROM MR BROWN AGAIN AND AGAIN
FRAME THIS AROUND THE BROADER
ARGUMENT IN THE INTENT AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, WHICH IS SIMPLY
TO PROVIDE AN EMPLOYEE WHO IS
SUBJECT TO DISCIPLINE WITH THE
OPPORTUNITY YOU KNOW, WITH THE
RESOURCES DURING THAT INTERVAL.
THAT IS THE INTENT. THAT IS WHAT
WE BELIEVE WE'VE WRITTEN. IF
THERE'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO
CLARIFY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
NOT IMPEDING THE OTHER FORMS OF
DISCIPLINE HERE. WE'RE HAPPY TO
DO THAT BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO
EXACTLY AS YOU STATED, MAKE SURE
FOLKS HAVE THE ABILITY TO AFFORD
THEIR APPEAL. AND I APPRECIATE
IT. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR CAN MIND
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS?
IF I HEARD MR BROWN RIGHT? A
DECISION WAS MADE TO KEEP THIS
BILL TO THE COMPENSATION ISSUE
AND NOT TACKLE YET. PERHAPS I'M
PUTTING THAT IN PARENTHESES. UM,
THE AUTHORS MADE A DECISION NOT
TO TACKLE MM. DUPLICATING NOTES,
CERTIFICATED FRAMEWORK OR OTHER
FRAMEWORK ISSUES JUST TRYING TO
DEAL SIMPLE AS IN, WE SAY,
SOMETIMES THAT'S ANOTHER BILL.
THEY MADE A DECISION TO BRING
THE COMPENSATION PEACE IN ON
THIS BILL. IF YOU'RE NOT IN YOUR
HEAD, BUT AGAIN, CORRECT ME IF
I'M IF I MISS HER, BUT SHE SAID
THAT IS CORRECT. IT IS PURELY
JUST SO THAT INDIVIDUALS ARE
ABLE TO REMAIN UNPAID STATUS IN
WHAT WE BELIEVE IS A REASONABLE
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES SO THEY CAN
AFFORD TO CONTINUE AND GO TO
THEIR HEARING AND AMOUNT OR
OFFENSE. THEIR DEFENSE. I USED
THE EXAMPLE OF PERHAPS A JANITOR
IS ACCUSED OF STAYING A LAPTOP
FROM THE COMPUTER LAB. IF
THEY'RE CAUGHT ON TAPE
CONVINCING EVIDENCE THEY'RE OUT
THAT CASE CLOSED. BUT IF IT IS A
DISGRUNTLED CO WORKER WHO IS
ALLEGING THESE FACTS, WE WANT
SOME SORT OF EVIDENCE BEFORE WE
STRIPPED THIS PERSON OF THEIR
PROPERTY, RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHY
WE WANT TO POINT TO SOMETHING
AND WHY WE APPRECIATE WHAT THE
MANAGEMENT GROUPS HAVE BEEN
ATTEMPTING. AND WE HAVE BEEN
TRYING TO WORK TOGETHER ON MAYBE
WHAT OTHER STANDARD WE CAN LAND
ON. WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO
POINT TO SOME EVIDENCE AND WHAT
WAS PRESENTED IS WHAT IS IN
CERTIFICATED LAW RIGHT NOW. BUT
ESSENTIALLY, IT SAYS, IF IT WAS
, IF THIS WAS JUST BAD ENOUGH,
AND WE THINK IT'S TRUE WILL KEEP
YOU OUT OF PAID STATUS AND WE
DIDN'T WANT TO GO TO THAT LOW OF
A STANDARD BECAUSE THEN THAT'S
NOT REALLY ANY DIFFERENT FROM
COMMON FROM TODAY'S LOSS, SO WE
WANT TO JUST POINT AT SOMETHING.
KEEP THEM IN PAID STATUS. AND IF
THERE IS SOMETHING TO POINT TO,
AND IF THERE'S OTHER REASONS AND
RATIONALES FOR DISCIPLINING
SOMEONE, THE MANAGEMENT STILL
HAS THEREFORE RIGHT, AS THEY DO
TODAY, AFTER THIS BILL SIGNED
INTO LAW, THOUGH, THEY'LL HAVE
ALL THOSE RIGHTS TOO. JUST ONE
LAST POINT OF CLARITY. WHAT I
UNDERSTAND THIS DOES NOT DO IS
IT DOES NOT PREVENT THE AGENCY
FROM CHANGING THAT PERSON'S JOB
DUTIES DURING THAT INTERVAL,
RIGHT? SO THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT
THIS IS ABOUT PEG. IT'S NOT
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU KNOW
YOU'RE SUBJECT TO ACCUSATION
THAT WE CAN CHANGE. RESTRICT
YOUR ACTIVITIES OTHERWISE
REASSIGN YOU DURING THAT PERIOD.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES. I DON'T
THINK WE WERE. VERY OUTSPOKEN
ABOUT CHANGING IN DUTIES. WE
JUST VERY SIMPLY SAID YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO BE ABLE TO REMOVE THIS
PERSON FROM PAID STATUS.
UNDERSTOOD. THIS BILL DOES NOT
ADDRESS THAT POINT, WHICH WOULD
HAVE A MATERIAL IMPACT ON
DISCIPLINE IS THAT CORRECT? NO I
BELIEVE OTHER PARTS OF THEIR
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
WOULD PROBABLY COVER THAT. AND
WE WOULDN'T PUT THAT INTO THE
CODE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SENATOR. WEIRD AND I WANT TO
JUST ACKNOWLEDGE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S REZ. IF AT ANY
POINT IN TIME YOU NEED TO JUMP
IN. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WE'VE
BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH
YOUR WITNESS HERE AGAIN FOR THE
RECORD. I KNOW THAT YOU'RE
PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WENDY CARRILLO
. BUT ABSOLUTELY I THINK IF I
MAY, I THINK IT'S CLEAR IS THAT
IF AN EMPLOYEE AFTER SCULLY
HEARING HAS A DECISION MADE
AGAINST THEM THEIR RIGHT IS TO
APPEAL. THAT RIGHT MEANS NOTHING
. IF THEY ARE NOT PAID DURING
THAT TIME, THEN THAT IS A FACTOR
THAT THEY HAVE TO TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION ON WHETHER OR NOT
TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A VERY
RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS RIGHT THAT
THEY HAVE. THIS IS A MAXIMUM OF
30 DAYS. IT'S CAPPED AT 30 DAYS,
SO IT DOESN'T GO ON INDEFINITELY
. IT IS KEPT AND THAT WAS PART
OF THE AGREEMENT. SO FOR 30 DAYS
DURING THIS APPEAL, THEY WILL BE
PAID, WHICH SEEMS LIKE A VERY
REASONABLE. UM. INCLUSION IN
THIS BILL BY MY COLLEAGUE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CARILLO. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
SIMILAR DOES THE STATEMENT THAT
WAS JUST MADE ANSWERED MY
QUESTION BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO
FOLLOW UP ON THE CHAIR ON THE
AMOUNT OF TIME AND YOU KNOW, ONE
OF THE HORRIFIC THINGS I THINK
IT'S THE NEW YORKER. SIX OR
SEVEN YEARS AGO DID THIS ARTICLE
ABOUT TEACHERS IN THE NEW YORK
PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM THAT WERE
ASSIGNED TO THIS CLASSROOM FOR
MULTIPLE YEARS BECAUSE THEIR
DISCIPLINE WAS NEVER
ADJUDICATED, AND THEY JUST SAT
AROUND IN THIS CLASSROOM. AND SO
I THINK THAT THAT WHAT I WAS
LOOKING FOR AND WHAT MR BROWN
SAID TO MR CORTEZ. HE WAS
BASICALLY THERE ARE FIXED TIMES
, BUT THAT'S REALLY A CLEAR
FIXED TIME. SO IT'S 30 DAYS AND
THEN IT SHOULD BE ADJUDICATED.
SO I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M GOOD.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYTHING
ELSE FOR MANY MEMBERS DEVICE?
YOU'RE OKAY. UM BILL WITH THAT I
DO WANT TO GIVE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE. I AT THIS
POINT, WE JUST RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST YOUR I VOTE ON THIS.
ALRIGHT. THANK YOU AND SENATOR
NEWMAN HAS MOVED THE BILL. OUT
TO US CONSULTANT CALDERON. FILE
ITEM NUMBER SIX A B 24 13. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS SENATOR
CORTEZ E Z. I SENATOR CO ABO ABO
GUY. SENATOR DURAZO. ERAZO I,
SENATOR LAIRD LAYERED. AYE.
SENATOR NEWMAN IN I 40 FIVE.
OKAY THANK YOU GUYS. SO THAT
BILL IS OUT ON A 5 TO 0 VOTE.
THEY WILL MOVE ON NOW TO A B 23
42, WHICH IS THE AUTHOR IS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SERVANT IS BUT
I UNDERSTAND SOME MEMBER IS
YOU'LL BE PRESENTING ON THIS
BILL AS WELL. YES. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT THIS ON
BEHALF OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CERVANTES. A B 23 42 MODIFIES
THE COMMUNITY ECONOMIC
RESILIENCE FUND PROGRAM. TO
CLARIFY CERTAIN IMPLEMENTATION
ISSUES TO ENSURE THE PROGRAM CAN
SERVE AS AN INCLUSIVE AND
EFFECTIVE ECONOMIC COMMUNITY AND
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GRANT
PROGRAM. AMONG OTHER OTHER
CHANGES, THE BILL EXPANDS
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT
OF THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC
RECOVERY PLANS TO SPECIFICALLY
INCLUDE CAREER PATHWAYS FOR
INDIVIDUALS WITH LESS THAN A TWO
YEAR DEGREE. THE USE OF SURF.
GRANT FUNDS TO INCLUDE ALL
WORKFORCE PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT
CAREER PATHWAYS TO HIGH ROAD
JOBS, INCLUDING STATE AND
FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED
APPRENTICESHIP AND PRE
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. THE
ACTIVITIES OF THE COLLABORATIVE
TO GO BEYOND REGIONAL CLIMATE
BOARDS AND TO ALSO INCLUDE
SIMILAR STATE SUPPORTED LOCAL
AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC WORKFORCE
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES. THE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS TO
INCLUDE POLICY COMMITTEES AS
WELL AS THE JOINT BUDGET
COMMITTEE. WITH US TODAY BY
PHONE IS MAALEH REIRA. DIRECTOR
OF REGIONAL STEWARDSHIP FOR
CALIFORNIA FORWARD. OKAY?
MINISTER RURAL YOU MAY PROCEED.
GREAT THANK YOU, CHUCK ORTEZ AND
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
RAISED FOR THAT INTRODUCTION
MEMBERS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE
ON LABOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
RETIREMENT APPRECIATE THE TIME
TO I'LL BE ABLE TO FIND
FORTUNATELY, CAMPBELLSVILLE
23-14 TO MY NAME IS MAYA HERRERA
IN THE DIRECTOR REGIONAL
STEWARDSHIP FOR CALIFORNIA
FORWARD MOVEMENT TO MAKE
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY AND
GOVERNMENT WORK FOR EVERYONE
MARKETIZATION IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL IN PARTICULARLY THE
CLARIFICATIONS AROUND CREATING.
CAREER PATHWAYS TO HIGH ROAD
JOBS AND SPECIFICALLY CAREER
PATH, PLEASE FOR INDIVIDUALS
WITH FORMAL EDUCATION OR IN LESS
THANA TWO YEAR DEGREE. WITH THE
HOPES OF THAT WILL ALSO LEAD TO
THE CREATION OF HIGH ROAD JOBS.
THE BILL IS MAYBE FAMILIAR TO
SOME OF YOU. IT'S BEEN IN A IT'S
LINED WITH PRIOR PIECES OF
LEGISLATION THAT WORK CARRIED BY
SIMILAR MEMBER SALAS TOO MUCH
PREVIOUS LEGISLATIVE CYCLES AND
A BILL THAT CALIFORNIA FORWARD
HAS BEEN CLOSE TO OFFER SOME
TIME. UH WE WERE VERY HAPPY TO
SEE IT, UH, INTEGRATED INTO THE
GOVERNOR'S TRAILER, BRO LANGUAGE
LAST FALL AND ROLL OUT THIS THIS
YEAR AS EARLY AS A COUPLE WEEKS
AGO WITH THE FINAL SORT OF
PETITION FOR PROPOSALS THAT UM,
REGIONS ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS
OF APPLYING FOR THESE FUNDS AND
THE SPIRIT OF THE SPILL, I THINK
IS AN ALIGNMENT WITH THE WORK
THAT'S BEING DONE BY OUR
REGIONAL PARTNERS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE CALIFORNIA SEWER SHIP
NETWORK AND OTHERS AS WELL. AND
UM BECAUSE OF THAT, I WILL
RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU
CONSIDER YOUR SUPPORT OF THE
BILL HERE TODAY. THANK YOU.
OKAY. THANK YOU. MR ERA. IS
THERE ANYONE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM WISHES TO EXPRESS SUPPORT
FOR THIS BILL? THIS IS A B 23
42. PLEASE COME FORWARD IF
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR.
DETERMINE AND MEMBERS MIKE WEST
ON BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING
AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THAN
YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YOU MAY COME
FORWARD AT THIS TIME IF YOU'RE
EXPRESSING THE SUPPORT POSITION
ON A B 23 42 MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MICHELLE
WILL GO UP MY SUPPORT OF AMENDED
IF IT'S OKAY FOR YOU TO TAKE NOW
I CAN WAIT. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S
ALL YOU GET TO SAY, ANYWAY, BUT
WE'LL TAKE THAT UNDER
ADVISEMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OKAY? THIS IS JUST THIS IS JUST
A NAME, AFFILIATION AND POSITION
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, BUT THANK
YOU. UM WE WILL NOW GO TO THE
BELL CONFERENCE LINE AND ASKED
THE SAME QUESTION. ANYONE THERE
WHO WISHES TO EXPRESS NAME
AFFILIATION. AND SUPPORT
POSITION. MODERATOR. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR, AND LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WISH TO
COMMENT AND SUPPORT OF A B 23 42
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
GENERAL ONCE AGAIN IF YOU WISH
TO COMMENT AND SUPPORTIVE 23-14
TO PRESS ONE, AND THEN GENERAL.
LINE 21, YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. A LITTLE. MY
NAME IS JASON PANGLE. I'M A
MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATED
BUILDERS, CONTRACTORS OF
CALIFORNIA, THE NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, AND I'M
CALLING TO SUPPORT A B 23 42 IF
IT'S AMENDED TO ALLOW HYBRID
CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS TO USE NT
CEO AS A VALID APPRENTICESHIP
CURRICULUM. THANK YOU. OKAY.
THANK YOU. PLANE FIVE CAROLINA'S
OPEN, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO MY
NAME IS JOE LUCAS. I'M A POLICY
ANALYST, ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
TESTER. I AM CALLING TO SUPPORT
A B 2342. IT WAS AMENDED TO PULL
OUT HIGH ROAD CONSTRUCTION
EMPLOYERS TO USE AND CC ER AS A
VALID APPRENTICESHIP CURRICULUM.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LINE 36.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI RUSSELL JOHNSON WITH
THE ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER CALLING TO SUPPORT THE
BILL IF AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE
NCC OUR CURRICULUM FOR FREE
FRIENDSHIP. PLANE 19. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS
IS NICOLE YEARNING MEMBER OF THE
ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS OF NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA POINT TO SUPPORT A B
21ST 42 IS AMENDED TO ALLOW HIGH
ROAD CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS. TO
USE NCC ER AS A VALID
APPRENTICESHIP CURRICULUM. THANK
YOU. FIND 14. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO, MR JARED
CUELLO MEMBER ASSOCIATED
CONTRACTORS CALIFORNIA I'M AT
THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA CHAPTER
, SUPPORT A B 2342 IF IT IS
AMENDED TO ALLOW HIGH ROAD
CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS TO USE
NATIONAL CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION
, EDUCATION RESEARCH, OR NCC, ER
AS A APPRENTICESHIP CURRICULUM,
THANK YOU. FLYING 20. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY
NAME IS ANDREW BASCOM, A MEMBER
OF ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS OF NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA TO SUPPORT 80 23 42
IS AMENDED TO ALLOW HIGH ROAD
CONSTRUCTION AND THERE'S TO USE
AND CCR ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. LINE
37. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. MY NAME IS CHRISTIAN
PAWLICKI, A MEMBER OF THE
ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
TOPIC. I'M CALLING IT 2342 IF IT
IS AMENDED TO ALLOW HIGH BROKE
CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS USED NPC
ER IS A VALID APPRENTICESHIP
CURRICULUM. THANK YOU. 9 35.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HELLO MY NAME IS JOHN
HAMA WITH MEMBER OF THE
ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER CALLING TO SUPPORT A B
23 42 IF IT IS AMENDED TO ALLOW
HIERARCHY CONTRACTORS AND
EMPLOYERS SUCH AS MYSELF TO USE
NCC ER AS VALID. THANK YOU.
CURRICULUM. THANK YOU. THERE ARE
NO FURTHER COMMENTS IN CUBA. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY THERE BECAUSE WE WERE
LISTENING TO IF AMENDED
POSITIONS. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO
HEAD AND ALLOWED A COUPLE OF
EXTRA WORDS THERE. BUT THAT
WOULD ORDINARILY NOT BE THE CASE
. I WANT TO COME BACK NOW,
BEFORE WE COMMENCE WITH LEAD
OPPOSITION JUST TO CLARIFY UM,
THE INDIVIDUAL WHO CAME FORWARD.
WOULD YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD
AGAIN? I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO CLARIFY
WHETHER YOU WERE IN THE RIGHT
SPOT AT THE RIGHT TIME, SO WE
DON'T ALLOW LEAD SUPPORT WITNESS
TO BE SPEAKING. TO SUPPORT. IF
AMENDED, BUT YOU CAN'T SPEAK AS
LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESS IF YOU
WISH TO EXPRESS THE KIND OF
EXPLANATIONS PEOPLE WERE
EVIDENTLY ATTEMPTING ON THE WIND
. JUST YES, AND YOU'RE WELCOME
TO DO THAT. YOU WOULD HAVE TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK TO APPRECIATE
THAT MR CHAIR AND MENDER MEMBERS
. MY NAME IS MICHELLE RUBALCABA.
AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING MY
CLIENT, ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND
CONTRACTORS OF CALIFORNIA. WE DO
REPRESENT WORKING CALIFORNIANS
THAT BUILD RESIDENTIAL,
INDUSTRIAL AND HOUSING PROJECTS.
WITH A LOT OF OUR STUDENTS
COMING FROM STATE AND FEDERALLY
APPROVED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS
IN A LOT OF THE CONSTRUCTION
TRADES. OUR ASSOCIATION IS PRO
EMPLOYEE AND NATURALLY ALIGNS
WITH THE INTENT OF ABBY 23-14
T. AND SO WE ARE ASKING FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE BILL, THOUGH
THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR BOTH
NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED
CONSTRUCTION CURRICULUMS TO BE
INCLUDED IN HIGH ROAD TRAINING
PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS. I DO
UNDERSTAND THAT MS CERVANTES DID
NOT DRAFT THE ORIGINAL
DEFINITION OF WHAT IS A
HIERARCHY, INSTRUCTION, EMPLOYER
AND CAREER, ALTHOUGH HER BILL
DOES DIRECTLY TIED BACK TO THAT
DEFINITION, OUR MEMBERS DO TRAIN
WOMEN PEOPLE OF COLOR. FORMERLY
INCARCERATED VETERANS, AND OUR
WORKFORCE WE FEEL IS THE
WORKFORCE THAT THIS BILL IS
TRYING TO BENEFIT AND SO WE
WOULD ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER AN
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE
SECOND NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED
CURRICULUM. AND JUST TO FINISH.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYONE
CHAIR TO BE TAKEN AWAY. WE'RE
JUST ASKING THAT YOU ADD ONE TO
THE TABLE WITH THAT. I WOULD ASK
THAT YOU CONSIDER OUR AMENDMENT
. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
SO AGAIN. WE ARE IN THE
OPPOSITION PORTION OF THE
HEARING AT THIS TIME, OR WE JUST
TOOK MISS RUBALCABA TESTIMONY AS
LEAD OPPOSITION. IS THERE ANYONE
IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO THE BILL.
NAME AFFILIATION AND OPPOSITION
OF SO PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEN
ON MODERATOR WILL GO TO YOU AND%
ASK YOU TO QUEUE UP ANY
OPPOSITION TESTIMONY AT THIS
TIME. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU
WISH TO COMMENT IN OPPOSITION OF
A B 23-14 TO YOU MAY PRESS ONE
AND THEN ZERO AT THIS TIME. ONCE
AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT IN
OPPOSITION OF A B 23 42, HE MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. WE HAVE
NO COMMENTS IN Q. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. MODERATOR WILL COME
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AT THIS
TIME FOR ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS. SEE. WE'LL COME BACK
TO THE MOTION IN A MOMENT. YES
DATABASE? SURE DO YOU HAVE SOME
QUESTIONS? PLEASE PROCEED. SO UM
, I WAS READING THE MY NOTES
HERE AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND A
LITTLE BIT MORE. ON THE PREMISE
OF WHAT WE'RE HAVING. AND I KNOW
THAT UM, WE HAD A SUPPORT
WITNESS WITH AMENDMENTS ON THAT
END. AND I KNOW YOU'RE
PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF THE
AUTHOR, SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOU
WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS.
THAT WITH THIS BILL DISCRIMINATE
IN THE PROGRAM IN THE DEFINITION
AGAINST NON UNION PRE
APPRENTICESHIP AND
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS.
DISCRIMINATION IS A VERY TOUGH
WORD. CLEARLY IT'S NOT GOING TO
DISCRIMINATE, BUT I THINK THAT
MOST IN I WOULD ASK IS MY ALERT
REIRA, WHO IS ON THE LINE TO
ALSO ADDRESSED THIS. THAT IF A
DEFINITION IS INCLUDED, I DO
UNDERSTAND THAT MS CERVANTES IS
CONSIDERING THE ISSUE PRESENTED
BY ABC. UM ALSO ISSUES MOVING
FORWARD. MR MANTIS. MR SABATO IS
I'M SORRY, HERRERA. YOU MAY
PROCEED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THANK YOU, IF YOU IF YOU DESIRE
THANK YOU. WELL THAT COULD OFFER
IS THAT THE CURRENT SOLICITATION
FOR PROPOSALS, UM, WERE MADE
AVAILABLE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF
APPLICATIONS FOR THESE TIMES.
DON'T PROVIDE SPECIFICITY ON THE
CURRICULUM THAT REGIONAL
APPLICANTS HAVE DISCRETION TO
SELECT AND AS FAR AS WE WERE
CONCERNED, OUR INTERPRETATION IS
AT THE DISCRETION. RATS WITH THE
REGIONS TO DECIDE. UM THOSE
SPECIFICATIONS WITH REGARDS TO
CURRICULUM. WHAT I WOULD, UM UM
STRONG ATTENTION TO WOULD BE IF
THE UM. THE LABOR AGENCY FOR
THIS HAS ANY SPECIFICATIONS THAT
WOULD BE REQUIRED OR EXPECTED TO
FOLLOW FROM THERE, AND THEY ARE
ONE OF THE THREE AGENCIES
PLANNING IN LEADERSHIP ROLE WITH
THE SURF PROGRAM. BUT AS IT
STANDS TO THE FINAL SOLICITATION
FOR PROPOSALS DON'T DON'T GO
INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. OR
YOU THINK ALSO MR CHAIR. AT PAGE
THREE OF THE BILL BILL AS
IMPRINT. IT'S SPECIFICALLY TALKS
ABOUT STATE AND FEDERAL
RECOGNIZED APPRENTICESHIP AND
PRE APPRENTICESHIP. PROGRAMS
THAT IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE
BILL. SWEET. THANK YOU BACK TO
VICE CHAIR. OF COURSE. STILL
YOURS? YES THANK YOU. SO THE
REASON I ASKED THAT IS BECAUSE
IT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT
THE PROBLEM WITH THE STATE THAT
WE'VE HAD AND I'VE BEEN THIS IS
A NEW FIELD FOR ME, SO I'M
LEARNING A LITTLE BIT MORE AS
THEY HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS
WITH STAKEHOLDERS. THE PROBLEM
THAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW WITH THIS
IS THAT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
THAT RIGHT NOW THERE IS AN
ARTIFICIAL AND I'M GONNA READ
HEAR THE WORDS ARTIFICIAL STATE
MANDATED LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS THAT CAN
OPERATE IN A GIVEN REGION. AND
THAT LIMIT IS BASED ON THE NEEDS
TEST. WHICH PREVENTS DIVISION
APPRENTICESHIP STANDARDS FROM
APPROVING ANY NEAR
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS IN A
GIVEN REGION IF THERE'S ALREADY
AN EXISTING PROGRAM UM AND HERE
, IT SAYS ALSO THAT SINCE MOST
OF THE REGIONS ALREADY HAVE
STATE, UM AH UNION SPONSORED
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS THAT
NEEDS TEST FUNCTIONS AS A DE
FACTO BAN ON COMPETITION FROM
NON UNION APPRENTICESHIP
PROGRAMS. SO, UM THE CONCERN
THAT I HAVE IS THAT BECAUSE THE
STATE IS REGULATING AS TO HOW
MANYAPPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS CAN
EXIST IN A REGION. YOU ARE
INHERENTLY. UM, STATING THAT.
CERTAIN APPRENTICESHIP ROOMS ARE
NOT ALLOWED TO BE A PART OF THE
PROGRAM OR BE ACCEPTED INTO THE
PROGRAM BASED ON THE ON THE
CURRICULUM THAT THEY'RE USING.
AND IT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTAND THAT
SOME OF THESE APPRENTICESHIP
PROGRAMS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO
EXPAND THEIR SCOPE OF TRAINING
BECAUSE THE STATE HAS NOT
ALLOWED THEM TO DO THAT. AND I
THINK FUNDAMENTALLY, I THINK
THERE IS SOMETHING UM, THAT
MIGHT BE OF A STRUGGLE FOR ME TO
BE ABLE TO SUPPORT SOMETHING
THAT INHERENTLY IS PUTTING IN
STATUTE. UM YOU KNOW, LIMITING
WHO CAN AND CANNOT WORK. UM. IF
THAT'S CORRECT IF I'M
UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY, AS
I'M READING MY NOTES, I THINK IF
WE LOOK TO THE LETTER OF THE
PROPOSED BILL I DON'T THINK THAT
THERE IS AN OBJECTION TO THAT. I
THINK THAT IF THERE IS AN
OBJECTION TO THE PROCESS AND HOW
THAT HOW THAT IS DONE, I THINK
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING
SEPARATE. NOT WHAT IS IN THE
BILL. THE BILL SPECIFICALLY
CALLS FOR THOSE THAT ARE STATE
AND FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED
APPRENTICESHIP AND PRE
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. I THINK
IF THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE
PROCESS, CERTAINLY THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT CAN BE BROUGHT
UP. AND I AGREE. I ABSOLUTELY
AGREE WITH YOU, UM UM, BUT I
WOULD ALSO STATE THAT, UM,
BECAUSE YOU'RE LIMITING AS TO
YOU. THE LET'S SEE. YOU'RE
LIMITING TO THE TO YOUR PROGRAM
SPECIFIC PROGRAMS. INCLUDING THE
ONES THAT ARE CURRENTLY UM AS
STATED BY THE. BY ONE OF THE
WITNESSES HERE IF THEY'RE NOT
USING A SPECIFIC YOUR RITUAL, UM
IN THIS PARTICULAR BILL. YOU'RE. IN ESSENCE, SAYING THAT
THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO
PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM. SO
EVEN THOUGH UM. THIS PROGRAM
THAT THE LEAGUE WITNESS OR ONE
OF THE OPPOSING WITNESSES, BUT
NOT OFFICIALLY OPPOSING. BUT IF
THEY'RE NOT USING THIS
CURRICULUM, THE MCC ER IS WHAT I
UNDERSTAND. CURRICULUM THEY
WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED AS A PART
OF THIS DEFINITION. AND SO EVEN
THOUGH THEY ARE STATE, UM
APPROVED PROGRAMS BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT USING THIS
PARTICULAR, UM, MENTIONED
CURRICULUM, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM.
IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY THAT
THE AUTHOR OF MIGHT CONSIDERED
AMENDING THE BILL TO INCLUDE
THESE INDIVIDUALS AS WE KNOW IN
THE LAW, EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE
. WHETHER IT'S PROBABLE IS
SOMETHING THAT SHE WILL HAVE TO
NOT ONLY REVIEW BUT ALSO IN
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION, WHICH WHICH SHE
HAS ALSO BEGUN ALSO. SO. I WILL
BE SURE TO TAKE THE MESSAGE BACK
TO THE TO THE AUTHOR. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU DON'T SEE ANYTHING
ELSE, UM, COMING FROM MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. I WILL GIVE YOU
AN OPPORTUNITY TO CAUSE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AND WE DO HAVE
A MOTION PREPARED. THANK YOU
WITH THAT, AND I APPRECIATE THE
QUESTIONS THE COMMENTS THAT WERE
MADE. THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT'S
ALREADY ONGOING. THE
SOLICITATION STARTED MAY 26TH.
AND AS YOU KNOW, THE APPLICATION
PROCESS HAS ALREADY STARTED.
THIS IS JUST MAKING SOME
CLARIFICATIONS. AND WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
OKAY THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU TO
EVERYONE WHO TESTIFIED AND
ANSWER QUESTIONS ON ON THIS
PARTICULAR BILL, SENATOR ROZ O
OFFER TO MAKE A MOTION, SO WE'LL
MAKE THAT OFFICIAL AT THIS TIME.
IT WAS A CONSULTANT TO CALL THE
ROLL, PLEASE. FILE ITEM NUMBER
NINE A B 23 42. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS, BUT FIRST REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SENATOR CORTEZ E. CORTEZ E I,
SENATOR KOA BOGUE. NO BUG NOW,
SENATOR DURAZO DURAZO I SENATOR
LAIRD ARDAI, SENATOR NEWMAN.
NEWMAN EYE OUT FOR ONE, ALRIGHT
SO THAT BILL IS OUT UNAFFORDABLE
ONE VOTE AND AGAIN THANK YOU TO
EVERYONE. WE WILL MOVE ON TO
WHAT IS OUR FINAL ITEM FOR
TODAY'S HEARING 26 93. AND I
BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR BILL. THIS
IS ACTUALLY MINE FORWARD TO
ANSWERING ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS
. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING
ME TO PRESENT TO YOU A B 26 93.
AT THE BEGINNING OF COVID. IN
ORDER TO PROTECT WORKERS. MAYBE
6 85 WAS INTRODUCED IN 2020 AND
MAYBE 6, 54 AND 2021. THEY WERE
SIGNED INTO LAW REQUIRED
EMPLOYERS TO REPORT COVID
EXPOSURE AT THE WORKPLACE AND
COVID OUTBREAKS. TO THE LOCAL
DEPARTMENT AND TO NOTIFY WORKERS
WHEN THEY HAD BEEN EXPOSED.
TODAY 26 93 IS SIMPLY AN
EXTENSION OF THE PROVISION OF
THOSE BILLS. WITHOUT ANY ACTION
, THESE CRITICAL PROTECTIONS
WILL LAPSE AT THE END OF THE
YEAR. A B 26 93 WILL PROTECT
WORKERS BY EXTENDING EXTENDING
THE SUNSET DATE OF THESE
PROVISIONS TO JANUARY. 1ST 2025
WE HAVE SEEN HOW RAPIDLY COVID
19 INFECTIONS SPREAD. IN
CALIFORNIA'S WORKPLACES AND HOW
WORKERS PAID THE PRICE WITH
THESE OUTBREAKS WITH THEIR
HEALTH AND WITH THEIR LIVES. AS
A NEW VARIANT SPREAD AND CAUSE
ADDITIONAL SURGES IN CALIFORNIA
. IT IS CRITICAL THAT OUR
WORKERS ARE AWARE OF ANY
EXPOSURE IN THE WORKPLACE. HERE
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT OUR
JESSIE GREWAL BY PHONE AND HERE.
IN PERSON IS MITCH STEIGER FROM
THE CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION.
ALRIGHT I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO
START WITH MR GRAY WALL ON THE
COASTLINE. GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
JACKIE GRAY WALL. LEGISLATIVE
DIRECTOR WITH US P W WHAT THEY
QUÊ SCW REPRESENTS 180,000
FRONTLINE ESSENTIAL WORKERS IN
THE FOOD, PHARMACEUTICAL AND
RETAIL SECTORS. I WANT HIM HAVE
COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE
PANDEMIC, WITH GREAT WITH GREAT
BREASTS FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR
FAMILIES. PERCY WOULD LIKE TO
THANK THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR
HER COMMITMENT TO PROTECTING
WORKERS THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC
AND ENSURING WORKERS HAVE THE
MOST BASIC OF PROTECTION.
CALIFORNIA IS MOVING TOWARDS A
NEW PHASE AND THE COVID 19
FIGHTS, TESTING VACCINATIONS AND
SUPPORT CENTER. 86 85 TRACKING
GIVES THE STATE'S KEY DATA ON
WORKPLACE OUTREACH SO WE CAN
FOCUS OUR RESOURCES EFFICIENTLY
AND EFFECTIVELY TO STOP THE
SPREAD OF COVID BANKING. 80 26
93 WILL ENSURE THESE PROTESTS
KEPT IN PLACE AS 7 19 VARIANTS
CONTINUE TO RAVAGE OUR STATE.
THE NEXT 7 19 VARIANTS AND SHOW
UP AT ANY TIME, AND WE CAN'T
WAIT FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO ACT
OR GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS EVERY TIME A NEW VARIANT
ARISES, WE MUST BE PREPARED TO
REACT IMMEDIATELY TO STOP THIS
FRIEND. AND EXTENDING THE SUNSET
AND WORKPLACE TRACKING AND
NOTIFICATION OF COVID 19 CASES
IS CRITICAL TO DOING THAT
COMMUNICATIONS ARE NOW AN
ESSENTIAL PIECE EVER COLLECTED
PANDEMIC RESPONSE AND HAVE GIVEN
INVALUABLE TO KEEPING WORKERS
SAFE. FOR THESE REASONS AND MORE
WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR I
VOTE ON A B 26 93 TODAY. I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OF
COMMITTEE MAY HAVE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY AND
APOLOGIZE FOR MISIDENTIFYING
YOU. I SHOULD KNOW BETTER BY
NOW. WE'LL MOVE ON TO LEAD
SUPPORT. WITNESS NUMBER TWO, MR
SAGER. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS MITCH STEIGER WITH
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION AND
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL. FOR
ALL THE REASONS STATED BY THE
AUTHOR AND PREVIOUS WITNESS. WE
WERE JUST ADD THE IMPORTANCE OF
PROTECTING THE ELEMENT OF WORK
SITE WIDE NOTIFICATION THAT WAS
IN A B A B 685 AND WOULD
RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH SOME
OF THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE
OPPOSITION, NAMELY THAT COVID
CASE RATES ARE LOW AND THE
GREATER IMMUNITY MEANS THAT WE
SHOULD WALK BACK THAT PART OF
THE BILL. REGARDING THE FORMER
RIGHT NOW REPORTED CASE RATES
ARE ABOUT THREE TIMES HIGHER
THAN THEY WERE WHEN THEY BE 685
WAS SIGNED AND NINE TIMES HIGHER
THAN THEY WERE TWO MONTHS AGO.
CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THOSE
ARE FOR SURE A WILD UNDERCOUNT.
ACTUAL CASE RATES ARE PROBABLY
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN FIVE AND 15.
TIMES HIGHER THAN THAT. CASE
RATES ARE VERY HIGH. RIGHT NOW
WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A MASSIVE
SURGE, BUT AT SOME POINT THAT'S
TEMPORARY. THOSE WILL GO DOWN
AND THEN THEY'LL GO BACK UP AND
THEY'LL KEEP GOING DOWN AND UP
FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. AND
SO KNOWING THAT WE WILL HAVE
MORE OF THESE SURGES IN THE
VIRUS WILL CONTINUE TO EVOLVE.
THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE
KEEP THOSE WORKER PROTECTION
STRONG, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS
IN THE FUTURE. REGARDING THE
ARGUMENT ABOUT IMMUNITY. THERE
ARE STILL 2.4 MILLION
CALIFORNIANS THAT ARE TOO YOUNG
TO BE VACCINATED AND ANOTHER
MILLION THAT ARE IMMUNO
COMPROMISED. IN ADDITION TO THE
FACT TAT VACCINES AND BOOSTERS
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THEM,
WAYNE'S PRETTY DRAMATICALLY AND
PRETTY QUICKLY. AND ALSO GIVEN
HELP PREVALENT, IT IS AND. AS
MUCH AS THE VIRUS IS EVOLVING,
AND THERE ARE NEW VARIANTS
COMING OUT EVERY DAY, AND IT
JUST CONTINUES TO GET WORSE. WE
DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE
FUTURE HOLDS, AND SO WE VERY
MUCH THINK THAT WE NEED TO
PROTECT THOSE POLICIES THAT
PROTECT WORKERS RIGHT NOW. AS
MUCH AS WE CAN IN THE FUTURE,
KNOWING THAT THINGS ARE GONNA
CHANGE, BUT WORKERS VERY MUCH DO
NEED TO KEEP IN MIND HOW
CONTAGIOUS THE VIRUS IS. RIGHT
NOW IT'S MANY TIMES MORE
CONTAGIOUS THAN IT WAS TWO YEARS
AGO. THEY NEED TO HAVE THAT
INFORMATION SO THAT THEY CAN
MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION FOR
THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
WHICH IS WHAT THIS BILL DOES AND
WHY WE URGE OUR SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE HERE
IN THE COMMITTEE ROOM? WHO
WISHES TO EXPRESS THE SUPPORT
POSITION ON A B 26? 93? PLEASE
COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR MEMBERS JANICE
SOMALI WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASKED ME
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LOUIS COSTA WITH THE CALIFORNIA
STATE LEGISLATIVE BOARD OF THE
SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL AND
TRANSPORTATION WORKERS. SMART
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM IN SUPPORT SEEN
NONE WILL GO TO THE MODERATOR
AND ASK YOU TO QUEUE UP, PLEASE.
ANY SUPPORT WITNESSES AT THIS
TIME? MAYBE 2693. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR, AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN
, IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT AND
SUPPORT OF MAYBE 26 93. YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO AT THIS
TIME ONCE AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO
COMMENT AND SUPPORT OF A B 26 93
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
LINE 42. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING,
MR TRAYNOR. CAITLIN VEGA ON
BEHALF OF THE L, A COUNTY LABOR,
CALIFORNIA, YOSSI COUNCIL AND
UNITE HERE. LOCAL 11 ALL IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
LINES. 28 YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. MORNING CHAIR
AND MEMBERS DYLAN ELLIS WILSON
ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED
NURSES ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIAN
UNIONS OF HEALTHCARE
PROFESSIONALS ALSO KNOWN AS
UNIQUE AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. LINE 18. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. THE TRIP STARTS
WITH THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, AND WE'RE
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK
YOU. WE HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS
IN QUÊ. OKAY THANK YOU.
MODERATOR WILL COME AROUND TO
THE OPPOSITION SIDE AT THIS TIME
. I BELIEVE ROBERT Mí
HERE TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION.
YES MR CHAIR. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS
AUTHOR AND THANK YOU FOR SAYING
THE NAME CORRECTLY, BY THE WAY.
IT'S A RARE GIFT. SO THANK YOU
FOR THAT FOR ME TO GET IT RIGHT.
I ROBERT, METRIC CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO THE
BILL. I WANT TO FLAG THAT WE
HAVE SPOKEN TO THE AUTHOR'S
OFFICE ON THE PRIOR BILLS. AND
THIS ONE APPRECIATE THE
ENGAGEMENT STEADILY. I KNOW MEL
RECENTLY LEFT HER OFFICE BUT SHE
WAS WONDERFUL ON THAT FRONT. SO
PLEASE GIVE HER MY BEST IF YOU
SPEAK ABSOLUTELY. GIVE HER YOUR
BEST. UM I WANT TO BE CLEAR HERE
THAT TO DEAL WITH ONE PIECE, BUT
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO A
CODE PRECAUTION HERE. THE ISSUE
IS THAT WE SEE THIS BILL AS
REALLY FREEZING A TIME PERIOD.
WHEN YOU'RE IN A DIFFERENT
WORLD, 2020 WAS A DIFFERENT
WORLD WILL REMEMBER. WE WERE
LOCKED DOWN AT HOME. WE DIDN'T
HAVE VACCINES. THAT WAS
LITERALLY DIFFERENT SITUATION.
WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DRUGS WE HAVE
NOW. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TIME
DIFFERENCES I MEAN,
INTERESTINGLY, THERE WAS A PRE
OPPOSITION BUT TO ADDRESS SOME
OF THE POINTS MADE BY THE
PROPONENTS IN 2020 WHEN THIS
BILL WAS CRAFTED AND PUT INTO
PLACE WE DIDN'T HAVE A VACCINE
THAT WAS ROLLED OUT. WE NOW HAVE
75% PLUS OF THE STATE VACCINE
DOWN TO AGE FIVE. THERE ARE
OBVIOUSLY YOUNGER PEOPLE, BUT
YOUNGER PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING
WORK PLACED APPLICATIONS THE
SAME WAY. SO I THINK THAT WHAT
WE WOULD SAY IS THE WORLD HAS
CHANGED SOMEWHAT. AND WE HAVE
SPOKEN TO THE OFFICE OFFICER TRY
TO MAKE SOME CHANGES MODERATE
CHANGES TO RECOGNIZE THE CHANGES
IN THE WORLD THAT HAVE HAPPENED
SINCE 2020. THAT'S WHERE OXYGEN
COMES FROM. SADLY, WE HAVEN'T
BEEN ABLE TO COME TO THOSE UM, A
POINT WAS MADE ABOUT, UM, CASE
RATES OF MUSICIANS IN THE
INTEREST OF KEEPING THIS BILL
SHORTER THAT BECAUSE THE AUTHORS
OBVIOUSLY BEEN UP THERE A LONG
TIME, AND I'D PREFER TO KEEP IT
SHORTER. I'LL JUST BRIEFLY SAY
UM, I THINK IT'S WITHOUT SAYING
IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT WE
ARE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION.
IMMUNIZATION IMMUNIZATION DOES
WORK. IT HAS CHANGED THE WORLD.
I HAVE FRIENDS IN THE MEDICAL
INDUSTRY WHO ARE AFRAID TO GO TO
WORK EVERY DAY. THEY'RE NO
LONGER AFRAID TO GO TO WORK
LONGER, AFRAID TO HAVE PICNICS
WITH FRIENDS NO LONGER AFRAID TO
GO TO SOCIAL EVENTS BECAUSE THE
WORLD HAS CHANGED. SO WHILE I'M
NOT HERE TO SAY THAT COVID 19
DOESN'T EXIST, I THINK FAILING
TO RECOGNIZE THE WORLD IS
DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS. IS AH IS
INCORRECT. SO FOR THOSE REASONS
WE ARE RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR
TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE HERE
HERE IN THE COMMITTEE ROOM WHO
WISHES TO EXPRESS AN OPPOSITION
POSITION TO THE BILL? PLEASE
COME FORWARD. ELIZABETH
BOHORQUEZ ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA K ONE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION,
AND WE ARE OPPOSED AS WELL.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE OPPOSED
TO WISHES TO EXPRESS THAT AT
THIS TIME HERE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM? SEE NO ONE ELSE COME
FORWARD. WE'LL GO TO THE
MODERATOR AND S A MODERATOR TO
POLICE QUÊ UP ANY OPPOSITION
TESTIMONY AT THIS TIME ON THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. THIS IS
AGAIN A B 26 93. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR, AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN
, IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT AND
OPPOSITION OF A B 26 93 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. ONCE
AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT IN
OPPOSITION WITH A B 26 93 YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
PLANE. 41 YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING
CHERRY MEMBERS GORGEOUS ON
BEHALF OF THE FAMILY BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA AND
THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
JOINT POWERS. AUTHORITIES
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED FOR THE
REASONS OUTLINED BY MR MOO TREE.
LINE34. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING
CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
RYAN VERTIGO HERE ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL
ASSOCIATION. WE WANT IT TO
CHAMBER ALSO RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. LINE 40.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HELLO THIS IS RYAN THE
LANDING WITH THE CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. LINE 25.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD MORNING, A LITTLE
CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU IN
OPPOSITION, FOR THE REASONS
STATED THAT MR MARKETING THANK
YOU. WE HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS
AND QUÊ. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU,
MODERATOR. WE WILL COME BACK NOW
TO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP AND
ASK FOR ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS HERE, SENATOR NEWMAN.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. SO FROM MY
PART, ITHINK THE POINT WAS MADE
BY THE AUTHOR AND BY THE WITNESS
THAT, YOU KNOW WE ARE IN A
SEARCH RIGHTS ARE MATERIALLY
HIGHER THAN THEY WERE. AND I
ALSO SERVICE SHARE SOMETHING OF
THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF
PANDEMIC MERGER, SWANSON IN THAT
CAPACITY OF A LOT OF UM,
CONVERSATION WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
STAFF ABOUT THE CURRENT STATE OF
PLAY IN THE ONE THING THAT DOES
CONCERN ME AND THE REASON I
THINK WHY WORKPLACE TRACKING IS
, YOU KNOW, EMINENTLY IMPORTANT
RIGHT NOW, IS WE? THE MUTATIONS
THE VIRUS CONTINUE. AND WE HAVE
NO ASSURANCE BUT TO MR STARTING
POINT, MR HAGGERTY POINTS WILL
TAKE. IN FACT, THERE WAS SO WELL
TAKEN THAT REMINDED SENATOR ROSE
NIGHT TO PUT BACK OUR MASKS ON.
APPRECIATE THAT, UM, BUT, YOU
KNOW, WE REALLY YOU KNOW,
THERE'S A SAYING THAT YOU KNOW
YOU YOU MIGHT BE DONE WITH COVID
COVID MAY NOT BE DONE WITH US.
AND I THINK THAT IS TRUE. I DO
HAVE SOME SYMPATHY FOR MR MO
TREES, COMMENTS WAY WITH IT IS
PROBLEMATIC WHERE WE DEFINE IN
STATUTES AND PROTOCOLS THAT MAY
OR MAY NOT EVOLVE OVER TIME. SO
I WOULD URGE SOME CONSIDERATION
AS TO FLEXIBILITY THERE. BUT I
DO THINK MORE BROADLY THAT THE
IMPERATIVE TO TRACK AND TO
NOTIFY CONTINUES. AND FOR THAT
REASON I WILL SUPPORT THE BILL
WHILE URGING THE AUTHOR TO
CONTINUE HAVING CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE OPPOSITION TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE CAN FIND YOU KNOW IF
THERE IS A SWEET SPOT. TO ALLOW
FOR SURE THE APPROPRIATE BUT
ADJUSTMENTS AS IT PERTAINS TO
CHANGES IN PROTOCOLS AND THE
APPLICATION. NEW THERAPEUTICS.
THANK YOU. OKAY SENATOR NEWMAN.
THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? YES,
MADAM VICE CHAIR. UM THANK YOU
AND THROUGH THE CHAIR. THANK YOU
FOR BRINGING THIS MEASURE
FORWARD. I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS
. UM WITH THE EXTENSION,
ESPECIALLY FOR TWO YEARS. I SEE
A LITTLE BIT MORE OF, YOU KNOW,
A YEAR TO YOUR EVALUATION, BUT I
DO HAVE TO REITERATE THAT
ALTHOUGH WE ARE GOING THROUGH A
SEARCH RIGHT NOW, VERY IN THE
MASK, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE MANY
PEOPLE ARE OUR TESTING COVID.
THE REALITY IS THAT AS MENTIONED
BY THE OPPOSITION WITNESS WE
HAVE. VACCINES WERE NOT IN THE
SAME WORLD. AND EVEN THOUGH
WE'RE HAVING A SEARCH, AND
PEOPLE ARE CURRENTLY UM TESTING
POSITIVE FOR COVID. UM IT'S BEEN
SAID THAT AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT,
BUT THIS IS WHAT YOU KNOW IS
BEING SHARED. IS THAT THE
SEVERITY? IS NOT AS IT WAS PRIOR
TO HAVING THE VACCINE SO IT IS
MORE READILY TRANSMISSIBLE. BUT
THE SEVERITY OF THE SYMPTOMS ARE
NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE PRIOR
TO HAVING EITHER THE IMMUNITY OR
HAVING THE VACCINE. SO THERE IS
SOME SOME CONSIDERATIONS THAT
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE
EXACTLY THE SAME AS WE WILL BE
PRIOR TO. I DON'T THINK I THINK
IT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE TO DEAL WITH FOR THE NEXT
COUPLE OF YEARS. FOR SURE. THE
CONCERNS I HAVE IS THAT YOU'RE
HOLDING. AND WHAT I HAVE HERE IN
MY NOTES, IS THAT SO WE'RE GOING
TO CONTINUE. UM IN PRACTICE.
LET'S SEE. NOTICE OF RECORD
KEEPING REQUIREMENTS, WHICH, IF
THERE'S A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH
THESE WILL RESULT IN THIS
DEMEANOR, CHARGES AND CIVIL
PENALTIES, SO WE'RE HOLDING THEM
TO STANDARDS THAT WERE PRE
VACCINE PRE HERD IMMUNITY. PRE
EVERYTHING. UM AND INCLUDING,
YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT WE
DIDN'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO
TREAT ALL THESE PATIENTS. YOU
KNOW, IN 2020 WHEN THIS STARTED
TO THE SAME STANDARDS THAT WE
HAVE RIGHT NOW IS WE STILL HAVE
COVID, BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT
REALITY OF COVID AND SO TO HOLD
OUR BUSINESSES WHO ALREADY HAVE
A LOT TO DEAL WITH. UM IN
CURRENT STATUE TO JUST DO
CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN
CALIFORNIA. IT'S DIFFICULT. IT'S
POSSIBLY TO CONTINUE TO HAVE
THEM WITH THAT LEVEL OF
REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAD PRIOR
TO 2020. SEEMS A LITTLE BIT. UM. FOR LACK OF BETTER WORDS JUST
OVER THE TOP RIGHT NOW. I CAN
SEE A MODIFICATION OF MOVING
FORWARD BUT TO HOLD THEM TO THE
SAME DEGREES AND STANDARDS. T
UM, TO WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW,
UM I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF
TOO MUCH FOR BUSINESSES AND I
WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEM, UM, YOU
KNOW. BE ABLE TO CARRY ON THEIR
BUSINESSES WITH STILL SOME
PRECAUTION. I THINK COMMON SENSE
I THINK MANY MANY BUSINESSES DO
JUST HAVE. COM ESPECIALLY SMALL
BUSINESSES DO HAVE COMMON SENSE.
IN IN, YOU KNOW. THE GUIDANCE
AND THE COUNSELING AND THE
BUSINESS PRACTICES BECAUSE
GOODNESS GRACIOUS THEY CAN'T
EXIST WITHOUT THEIR EMPLOYEES.
AND THE EMPLOYEES CAN'T HAVE
JOBS IF THE BUSINESSES ARE NOT
THERE, SO IT'S A COLLABORATIVE
EFFORT. THEY HAVE TO WORK AS A
TEAM, AND I THINK IT WHO'S
EVERYBODY TO BE INFORMED TO TAKE
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN WHAT
THEY DO. AND UM, FOR THOSE
MINISTERS. I CAN'T SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY, AND I'M SORRY FOR
THAT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT
MOVING FORWARD. YOU KNOW?
INFORMATION IS KEY EDUCATION IS
A FORMER JUNQUEIRA. HUGE N
EDUCATION. UM SO INFORMATION IS
VERY IMPORTANT BUT TO HAVE THE
CONTINUOUS MISDEMEANOR CHARGES
AND CIVIL PENALTIES IN PLACE. UM
HAULING THEM TO THE SAME
STANDARDS AS PRIOR TO, UH, OUR
VACCINES AND HERD IMMUNITY AND
SO FORTH. I THINK IT'S A LITTLE
BIT TOO MUCH FOR BUSINESSES AT
THIS TIME. SOMETHING MODIFIED.
YOU KNOW, PERHAPS, BUT THIS IS A
LITTLE BIT. TOO MUCH FOR THIS
TIME AND AGE, SO EVERYTHING.
THANK YOU, MADAM VICE CHAIR, AND
PERHAPS YOU CAN INCLUDE ANY
pRESPONSE IN YOUR CLOTHES,
SIMILAR BRIDGES. THANK YOU,
SENATOR ROSA. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. UM, A SENATOR, NEWMAN
SAID. WHEN WE WERE REMINDED JUST
A COUPLE OF MINUTES AGO, WE
IMMEDIATELY PUT ON OUR MASKS.
JUST LOOK AROUND THIS ROOM.
WE'RE ALL WEARING MASKS HERE.
MANY, MANY OF OUR. WITNESSES ARE
WEARING MASKS. WE STILL HAVE
SOCIAL DISTANCING HERE. WE HAVE
TESTING TWICE A WEEK. HERE. IN
THIS BUILDING FOR STAFF AND FOR
EMPLOYEES. WE STILL HAVE
PRECAUTIONS THAT ARE BEING TAKEN
ON THE FLOOR. OF OUR OF OUR
HOUSES. I MEAN, WE ARE STILL IF
WE GET SICK IF WE GET COVERED,
WE'RE QUARANTINED. WE'RE
QUARANTINED. AND WE DON'T GET
PAID. WE DO GET PAID. I'M SORRY.
WE GET PAID. WHEN WE TEST
POSITIVE I MEAN, YES. I AM SO
GRATEFUL THAT WE HAVE A
VACCINATION, BUT WE ARE
FUNDAMENTALLY STILL ACTING AS
THOUGH THERE IS A CRISIS WITH
COVID THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THE
VACCINATION THANK GOD. THANK GOD
FOR THOSE RESEARCHERS. AND THOSE
COMPANIES, BUT WE'RE NOT OUT OF
THIS. AND I REMEMBER SO CLEARLY.
THE WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER
COMMON SENSE BECAUSE SHINS THAT
WOULD TAKE PLACE IN THE
WORKPLACE. WE'RE NOT TAKING
PLACE. AND WORKERS IN LARGE
LARGE NUMBERS DIED BECAUSE
SIMPLE COMMON SENSE MEASURES
WERE NOT TAKEN. THAT'S WHY
THAT'S WHY IT LED TO THIS.
THAT'S WHERE IT LED TO THE
DIRECTIVES BY THE STATE IS
BECAUSE THOSE SIMPLE THINGS WERE
NOT AND WORKERS, MEN AND WOMEN
WERE TREATED AS IF THEY WERE MM
HMM. AH, EXPENDABLE. UM PEOPLE'S
LOT. PEOPLE LOST THEIR LIVES
BECAUSE OF THAT, AND IT'S
USUALLY THE VULNERABLE WORKERS.
THOSE COMMUNITIES OF COLOR
IMMIGRANTS, LATINOS, WE, THEY
SUFFERED THE MOST BECAUSE THEY
WENT TO WORK. AND THE
PRECAUTIONS WERE NOT PROVIDED TO
THEM. THEN THEY WENT HOME. AND
THEIR FAMILIES, UM, GOT THE
ILLNESS, AND THEN THAT WAS
SPREAD EVEN MORE. THAT'S WHY THE
PERCENTAGES WERE SO MUCH HIGHER.
IN OUR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. UM
AND AN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY, SO I
THINK THIS IS A SMALL THING TO
DO, AND I THE FACT THAT IT'S FOR
TWO YEARS WE THOUGHT TWO YEARS.
WE WERE GOING TO BE DONE WITHIN
A YEAR. AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED.
LOOK WHERE WE'RE AT. SO I, UM, I
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. THANK YOU, SENATOR
DURAZO OF ANY ANYTHING ELSE
WOULD ONLY NOT TO CORRECT
SENATOR DRAWS A BUT I'D SAY SOME
OF US ARE QUITE AWARE THAT YOU
GET QUARANTINED EVEN IF YOU'RE
NOT ILL AROUND HERE, SO UM, YOU
KNOW, AND I WOULD I WOULD ASK
THE WE COULD APPLY ALL DAY LONG
ON THIS TOPIC, AS WE ALL KNOW IN
PROBABLY WITNESSES COULD GO ON
FOREVER ON THIS TOPIC, BUT I
WILL SAY THAT EVEN HERE AMONGST
OUR OWN. UM WE DON'T HAVE
EVERYONE FOLLOWING THE SAME
STANDARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE.
IT'S KIND OF A SCARY THING. SO
THAT SAID, UM, WE CAN ENTERTAIN
A MOTION, BUT I WANT TO GIVE THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S OPPORTUNITY TO
CLOSE FIRST. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I THINK IF WE REMEMBER
WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN 2020 WHAT
THE REASON I EVEN INTRODUCED
THIS BILL. IS BECAUSE, AS
SENATOR DURAZO SAID, COMMON
SENSE WOULD SAY DECENCY WOULD
SAY IF YOUR EMPLOYEE WAS EXPOSED
TO COVID. YOU WOULD WANT TO
NOTIFY THEM SO THEY COULD THEN
DECIDE IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME
TO WORK IF THEY'RE GOING TO
PROTECT THEIR FAMILY, STAY AWAY
FROM THE FAMILY. WHATEVER IT IS,
THEY WANTED TO DO. THAT WAS NOT
HAPPENING. THAT WAS THE REASON
FOR THE BILL'S INTRODUCTION
INITIALLY IF THERE WAS AN
OUTBREAK, AND WE KNOW OF MANY
PLACES WHERE THERE WERE
OUTBREAKS, AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH
DEPARTMENT WAS NOT BEING
NOTIFIED, SO THEY COULD DO
NOTHING TO TRY TO CONTROL
CONTAIN THAT. THAT SPREAD BY
EXTENDING THE SUNSET. I KNOW IN
THE OPPOSITION THEY TALKED ABOUT
. PERHAPS THERE COULD BE SOME
ADJUSTMENT OR THE ADJUSTMENTS
ARE GOING TO BE HAPPENING SIMPLY
BECAUSE THERE ARE FEWER DEATHS.
FEWER HOSPITALIZATIONS. BUT
THERE ARE STILL DEATHS AND THERE
ARE STILL HOSPITALIZATIONS AND
COVID IS STILL SPREADING. THE
ADJUSTMENTS WILL HAPPEN, NO
MATTER WHAT IF YOUR PEOPLE ARE
EXPOSED, THERE WILL BE LESS
NOTIFICATIONS LESS RECORDS TO BE
KEPT. BUT THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORKERS HAS TO BE PARAMOUNT. AND
THAT IS THE PURPOSE FOR
EXTENDING THE SUNSET. AND WITH
THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
I VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO
REMEMBER, THERE IS NOT A MOTION
ON THE FLOOR YET. MOVED BY
SENATOR ROSCOE AND THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS, BUT FIRST REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
LAST CONSULTANT CALLED THE ROYAL
COURT, PLEASE. FILE ITEM NUMBER
10 A B 26 93. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS, BUT FIRST REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SENATOR CORTEZ E. EASY. I,
SENATOR KOA BOGUE. SHOW A BUG.
NOW SENATOR DURAZO TERRAZZO I,
SENATOR LAIRD I SENATOR NEWMAN
NEWMAN. I SERVE THE BILL IS OUT
FOR ONE. ALRIGHT, SO AS WE WERE
JUST TOLD THE BILL IS OUT ON A 4
TO 1 VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MEMBERS AND
THANK YOU TO ALL THE INDIVIDUALS
WHO PARTICIPATED. OH, WAIT A
MINUTE. WE HAVE SOME THINGS ON
CALL, SO WE NEED TO LIFT THE
CALL. IT WAS GETTING READY TO
ADJOURN. SO LET ME GO BACK TO
THE CONSULTANTS AND ASK YOU TO
DEAL WITH THE START WITH FILE
ITEM NUMBER THREE A. B 18 86
COOPER. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS,
BUT FIRST REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONSTHE
CHAIRS VOTING I, SENATOR KOA
BOGUE. WHICH FILE ITEM NUMBER
THREE. NO OR NOT VOTING. A
CHAIR, A BUG, NOT VOTING. SORRY
THAT BILL IS OUT FOR ZERO WITH
ONE NOT VOTING. THANK YOU
REITERATE THAT THE BILL IS OUT.
YES, WE DO. NEXT STEP. WE HAVE
FILE ITEMS NUMBER 1245. AND
EIGHT. THEY'RE ALL ON CONSENT.
THE CHAIR IS VOTING, AYE.
SENATOR KOBO GPI BOAKYE, SENATOR
LAIRD LAYERED I THAT BILL IS OUT
FIVE. THOSE BILLS ARE OUT. 50
ALRIGHT, THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS
OUT UNANIMOUSLY AND WITH THAT, I
THINK WE CAN MOVE TOWARDS GERMAN
. HERE. LET ME JUST QUICKLY
THANK EVERYONE WHO PARTICIPATED
TODAY. THOSE WHO TESTIFIED ON
AND PROVIDED PUBLIC INPUT FOR US
TODAY, IF YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO
TESTIFY TODAY, AND YOU HAVE
WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD
LIKE TO SUBMIT YOU CAN DO THAT,
BY SIMPLY GOING THE SENATE LABOR
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT
COMMITTEE WEBSITE. AND YOU WILL
FIND A WAY TO DO THAT. YOUR
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ARE
IMPORTANT TO US TO INCLUDE YOUR
TESTIMONY IN THE OFFICIAL
HEARING RECORDS. SO AGAIN, THANK
YOU. AND THANK YOU, EVERYONE FOR
YOUR PATIENCE AND COOPERATION.
WE HAD SOME EXTENDED DISCUSSION
AND DEBATE IF YOU WILL TODAY,
BUT I THINK THAT WAS A VERY
HEALTHY THING TO DO. AND I WANT
TO THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF
AGAIN FOR DOING A GREAT JOB OF
ILLNESS IN OUR AGENDAS DURING
THIS TIME WHERE WE HAVE HEAVY
VOLUME OF BILLS COMING THROUGH
TO THE COMMITTEE AND WE KNOW
THAT CAN ALWAYS BE THE CASE. BUT
WE DO APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS.
SO WITH THAT UM, THIS HEARING IS
ADJOURNED.