THE SENATE HOUSING COMMITTEE
WILL COME TO ORDER GOOD
AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY AS WE
CONTINUE TO TAKE SOME
PRECAUTIONS TO MANAGE ONGOING
COVID 19 RISK. THE SENATE
CONTINUES TO WELCOME THE PUBLIC
AND AS PROVIDED ACCESS TO BOTH
IN PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE
PARTICIPATION. FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. FOR INDIVIDUALS WISHING
TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT VIA
THE TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
PARTICIPANT. TOLL FREE NUMBER
AND ACCESS CODE IS POSTED ON OUR
COMMITTEE WEBSITE. IT WILL BE
DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN. AND I
WILL ANNOUNCE IT NOW. TODAY'S
PARTICIPANT CODE IS 877. 22681.
AND THE ACCESS CODE IS 64886. I
WILL MAINTAIN DECORUM DURING THE
HEARING, AS IS CUSTOMARY IN ANY
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DISRUPTIVE,
MAYBE MAYBE REMOVED FROM THEIR
REMOTE MEETING SERVICE OR HAVE
THEIR CONNECTIONS MUTED. WE
DON'T EXPECT THIS TO HAPPEN. WE
HAVE NEVER HAD IT HAPPENED
BEFORE. BUT JUST AS A WARNING.
WE ARE HOLDING OUR COMMITTEE
HEARINGS HERE IN THE OLD STREET
BUILDING, AND I ASK ALL MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE TO BE PRESENT
IN ROOM 2100 SO WE CAN ESTABLISH
OUR QUORUM AND BEGIN OUR
HEARING. UM I AM SITTING IN FOR,
UM, SHARE PERSON WIENER WHO
SHOULD BE HERE MOMENTARILY.
MEMBERS ARE PRESENTING BILLS AND
OTHER COMMITTEES, SO I EXPECT IT
WILL HAVE MEMBERS IN AND OUT OF
THE HEARING ROOM. WE HAVE 17
BILLS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. AND
BEFORE WE HEAR PRESENTATION ON
THE BILLS, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM CONSULTANT.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. WE DO NOT
HAVE A QUORUM. THAT'S PRETTY
OBVIOUS. SO I GUESS WE'LL JUST
WAIT UNTIL WE GET SOME MORE
MEMBERS HERE. SO, UM WE WANT TO
ASK THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THAT
HAVE BILLS TO PLEASE HUSTLE OVER
THE HOUSING IF YOU CAN, AND WILL
WAIT FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BLOOM,
WHO HAS THE FIRST BILL.
GOOD AFTERNOON. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BLOOM YOU ARE UP I WAS GOING TO
SIT HERE ON DECK, BUT THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN INCORRECT. YOU ARE UP
TO BAT. WELCOME AH, YES. GOOD
AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. ARE WE ON A
B 6? 82? WE ARE ALL RIGHT. THIS
IS A MEASURE TO INCENTIVIZE
SHARED HOUSING. CURED HOUSING,
ALSO KNOWN AS COMMUNAL LIVING,
IS TYPICALLY MADE UP OF UNITS
THAT ARE SMALLER THAN 400 SQUARE
FEET. THEY OFFER SHARED KITCHEN
AND DINING AREAS AND ARE MORE
AFFORDABLE THAN THE AVERAGE
STUDIO OR ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT.
IN SAN FRANCISCO, WHERE THE
AVERAGE RENT IS ALSO WELL OVER
$3000, THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
STAR CITY BUILT SHARED HOUSING
UNITS AVERAGING 200 SQUARE FEET
AND RENTED THEM FOR $1400 A
MONTH. LESS THAN HALF OF THE
CITY'S AVERAGE RENT. THESE
NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE
UNITS ARE IDEAL FOR THOSE WHO
DON'T QUALIFY FOR SUBSIDIZED
HOUSING, BUT CANNOT COMPETE FOR
MARKET RATE APARTMENTS. THOSE
WHO WE IDENTIFIED AS THE MISSING
MIDDLE THE SHARED HOUSING MODEL
CAN ALSO BE USED TO HOUSE
SENIORS AND FORMERLY HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS, SINCE COMMUNAL
LIVING PROVIDE A UNIQUE MIX OF
PRIVACY AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT.
UNFORTUNATELY LOCAL RESTRICTIONS
THAT REQUIRE A MINIMUM UNIT SIZE
OR A MAXIMUM DENSITY HAVE MADE
IT DIFFICULT TO BUILD SHARED
HOUSING AND A B 6 82 WILL ALLOW
SHARED HOUSING PROJECTS TO
QUALIFY FOR INCENTIVES UNDER THE
DENSITY BONUS LAW AND HELP
MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF UNITS
WITHIN AN ALREADY COSTLY
PERSONAL OF LAND. THE MEASURE
WILL REQUIRE DEED RESTRICTED
AFFORDABLE UNITS IN EXCHANGE FOR
ANY CONCESSIONS OR INCENTIVES
AND 86 82 WILL HELP DIVERSIFY
HOUSING STOCK OFFERING BOTH
NATURALLY OCCURRING OCCURRING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND THE
OPTION FOR COMMUNAL COMMUNAL
LIVING. TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL IS JANE BLUMENFELD.
SENIOR FELLOW AT U. C. L. A S
CITY LAB. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE UM JANE
BLUMENFELD. YEP. YOU ARE UP.
OKAY THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JANE BLUMEN
FILM. AND I'M A SENIOR FELLOW AT
YOU FEEL LÀ CITY LAB. CITY LAB
IS PROUD TO SPONSOR MAYBE
SUCCEEDED, TOO. AND THANKS TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BLOOM FIRST
EFFORTS ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE
, CALIFORNIA IS WELL DOCUMENTED
. HOUSING CRISIS REQUIRES MANY
SOLUTIONS. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE
FIX. AND THE STATED SOLUTIONS
THAT ARE EFFECTIVE WITHOUT THE
NEED FOR PUBLIC DOLLARS. WE NEED
A VARIETY OF HELPING TOPOLOGY IS
THAT CAN SIMULTANEOUSLY HOUSE
PEOPLE AFFORDABLY AND BE
PROFITABLE ENOUGH SO THAT PEOPLE
IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDING
HOUSING WILL ACTUALLY BUILD IT.
86 82 CREATES A NEW HOUSING
TYPOLOGY THAT HAS NOT BEEN LEGAL
FOR MANY REASONS, ZONING AND
OTHERWISE. 86 82 WILL ALLOW
DEVELOPERS TO BUILD WHAT LOOKS
LIKE ALL OTHER APARTMENT
BUILDINGS AND WHICH MUST COMPLY
WITH ALL LOCAL HEIGHT, GLORIES
AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. THE ONLY
DIFFERENCE IS THAT KITCHENS AND
DINING SPACES WILL BE SHARED
AMONGST THE RESIDENCE. EACH UNIT
IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A PRECINCT
ELTON APARTMENT WOULD HAVE A
BATHROOM SINK, REFRIGERATOR,
MICROWAVE AND EACH UNIT AND
HOUSE ONLY ONE OR TWO PEOPLE.
MAYBE 6 82 WILL GIVE DEVELOPERS
THE ABILITY TO BUILD SMALLER
UNITS TO NOT BUILD MULTIPLE
KITCHENS. SO THAT WE CAN CREATE
MORE AND LESS EXPENSIVE HOUSING
. FOR CALIFORNIA. THESE SHARED
HOUSING BUILDINGS CAN BE LOW
RISE OR HIGH RISE, WHICH SPEAKS
TO THE FLEXIBILITY OF THIS
TYPOLOGY. 86 82 ISN'T
PARTICULARLY APPROPRIATE FOR
SENIORS BECAUSE KITCHENS ARE A
HAZARD FOR ELDERLY PEOPLE AND
KEENAN. COMMUNAL DINING BUILT AN
IMPORTANT SOCIAL NEED FOR THEM,
AND THERE IS VERY LITTLE HOUSING
THAT IS AFFORDABLE FOR SENIORS.
THIS TYPE OF SHARED HELPING WILL
ALSO BE ATTRACTIVE TO STUDENTS
AND YOUNG PEOPLE NEWLY IN THE
JOB MARKET WHO ARE WILLING TO
SHARE A KITCHEN IN EXCHANGE FOR
LESS TERRENCE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
REFERRED TO THE SAN FRANCISCO'S
OUR CITY PROJECT. THAT IS ALMOST
EXACTLY LIKE THE SPECIFICATIONS
THAT THEY BE 6 82. I'D LIKE TO
ADD THAT WHEN IT FIRST OPENED
THE BUILDING, LEASED UP
IMMEDIATELY AND HAD A WEDDING
LIST OF 8000 PEOPLE.
CALIFORNIA'S DIVERSE POPULATION
REQUIRES HOUSING THAT CAN MEET
DIFFERENT NEEDS FOR SENIORS,
YOUNG PEOPLE AND STUDENTS. THIS
TYPE OF SHARED HOUSING SHARING
KITCHENS OFFERS THE RIGHT
BALANCE OF PRIVACY,
AFFORDABILITY AND COMMUNITY. I
RESPECTFULLY URGE YOUR IDOLS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UM NOW I'M GOING TO CHECK AND
SEE IF THERE IS ANYBODY IN ROOM
2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT OF 86 26 82. IS
THERE ANYONE IN THE ROOM? SAYING
NONE MODERATOR. IF YOU COULD
QUEUE UP THE LINE AND ASK IF
THERE'S ANYBODY ON THE LINE THAT
WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT. GIVE IT SUPPORT OF A B
6 82 YOU MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN
ZERO SUPPORT. WE WILL VOTE TO
LINE TWO. OH, NINE. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN, WHICH GO AHEAD. YES THIS
HAS BEEN THE CECILIA CUNNINGHAM.
I'M CALLING FROM RESIDENTS. AND
UNITED NETWORK AND THE HOUSING
ORGANIZATION. I'M CALLING STRONG
SUPPORT OF A B 1816. THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY, MA'AM. WE'RE ON A B 6
82. IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT IN
SUPPORT OF A B 6 82 ON THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE? THAT DO WE
WILL GO TO LINE 2 47. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. AFTERNOON CHAIR AND
MEMBER SYLVIA KHALIF SHOW ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA. AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU TO 40
FOR YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THIS IS ZEKE SANDOVAL
WAS PASSED PEOPLE ASSISTING THE
HOMELESS IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
MORE HOUSING LIKE THIS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
GOAL LINE TO 27. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON LAUREN DAY
VALENCIA, REPRESENTING THE
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT LINE TO 45. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. HI THIS IS ADAM
BOOKBINDER, RESIDENT OF CAMPBELL
AND SENATE-DISTRICT. 11
SUPPORTING A B 6 82. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT TO THE
LINE UP TO 28 AIRLINE IS OPEN.
THANK YOU. JOHN INSTITUTED ON
BEHALF OF HOUSING, ASTON
COALITION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT TO THE LINE
OF 2 49. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THIS
IS RECALL WITH LIVABLE
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. WE
HAVE NO FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ
AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON
TO OPPOSITION. THERE IS NO LEAD,
OPPOSITION LISTED, SO WE'RE
GONNA CHECK AND SEE IF THERE'S
ANYBODY IN ROOM 2100 THAT WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
SAYING NO ONE WILL MOVE ON TO
THE TELECONFERENCE LINE. MADAM
CUT MODERATOR IF YOU COULD QUEUE
UP THOSE IN OPPOSITION OF A B 6
82. THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE NOT
POSITION, YOU MAY PERHAPS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN IF YOU'RE
IN OPPOSITION OF A B 6 82 YOU
MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
THE MINIATURE. WE HAVE TWO IN Q
ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. AND WE WILL
GO TO BLIND TO 50. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. CATCHING AND CHAIR MEMBERS
. APOLOGIES FOR THE LATE
OPPOSITION. BUT ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS IN
ESPECTFUL OPPOSITION, THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU. NEXT IN LINE TO 29. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON AND
SHARING MEMBERS WITH THE WESTERN
CENTER ONLINE POVERTY. WE HAVE
AN OPPOSING POSITION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
OPPOSITION IN Q. VERY GOOD WILL
BRING THE MATTER BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS? CHESKY
REMEMBER BLOOM. OUR STAFF REPORT
TALKS ABOUT THE. THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE AND, UM, THE REGIONAL
HOUSING FOLKS USING THE CENSUS
DEFINITION OF WHAT A UNIT IS AND
IT SEEMS TO ME A LITTLE
ANTIQUATED IN 2022, CAN YOU UH,
GIVE US YOUR INPUT ON ON WHAT
YOU THINK. WHAT DEFINITION
SHOULD BE USED WHEN WE'RE
CALCULATING THE HOUSING NEEDS OF
OUR DIFFERENT IN DIVERSE
COMMUNITIES. I'M NOT AN EXPERT
ON THAT DEFINITIONAL ASPECT THAT
UM, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USES
AN H C D ADOPTS FOR PURPOSES OF
ARENA CALCULATION. UM BUT I
THINK A BROADER DEFINITION IS IN
ORDER, ONE THAT IS INCLUSIVE OF
MULTIPLE TYPES OF HOUSING. AND
WHEN WE SHOULD LOOK AT, UM AH
THE PERMANENCE OF THE OPERATING
HOUSING OPPORTUNITY THAT'S BEING
PRESENTED. I MEAN, THE EXAMPLES
THAT USE OUR STUDENT HOUSING AND
NURSING HOMES AND I THINK THIS
IS A 300 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT.
IN THE IN CITY, NOT IN THE SAN
FRANCISCO IS NOT REALLY LIKE A
NURSING HOME TO PUT THAT, AT
LEAST FOR THE CALCULATIONS OF
HOW WE LOOK AT HOW WE DEFINE AND
CALIFORNIA WHAT A UNIT IS VERSUS
AN 80. YOU COULD BE 300 SQUARE
FEET, AND IT WOULD IT WOULD MEET
THE DEFINITION. SO IT SEEMS I
DON'T KNOW. IT'S NOT THE BILL
MOVES FORWARD. I JUST THOUGHT
THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS
WE WANT TO GET A TRUE PICTURE OF
THE HOUSING THAT WE'RE PROVIDING
FOR THE POPULATION, AND THIS
SEEMS TO BE FITS ALL THOSE NEEDS
THAT WE HAVE, EXCEPT IT DOESN'T
GET COUNTED IN FOR THE CITY'S
FOR SOME ANTIQUATED CENSUS
REASON, RIGHT? RIGHT AND OF
COURSE, THIS IS NOT STUDENT
HOUSING, ALTHOUGH IT CAN
ACCOMMODATE STUDENTS AND MAY
WELL, UH, BE A USEFUL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDENTS BECAUSE
IT IS LOWER COST WHILE I KNOW
THAT THIS GOES MOVES FORWARD, IF
IT'S SUCCESSFUL, THEY WILL MOVE
FORWARD TO THE UH, COMMITTEE AND
GOVERNMENTS AND FINANCE. I HOPE
THAT YOU WOULD WORK WITH THE
CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE AND THAT
COMMITTEE STAFF TO FLUSH OUT
THESE ISSUES. AND AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. I'LL MOVE TO
BILL, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A
QUORUM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI THE ONLY SO
LET ME JUST TELL YOU THAT, UM I
JUST HAD SOME QUESTIONS IN
REGARDS TO WHERE IT'S
APPROPRIATELY PLACED, IN OTHER
WORDS, IF IT IF IT'S IN THE
DENSITY BONUS AREA OR IF IT'S IF
IT'S I LIKE THE CONCEPT. I'M
CONCERNED WITH. MAKING SURE THAT
AS WE CONSTRUCT THESE KINDS OF
PROJECTS THAT THEY FIT IN WITH
WHAT GOES IN IN TERMS OF I HEARD
YOUR LEAD WITNESS SAY, THIS
LOOKS LIKE EVERY OTHER APARTMENT
COMPLEX THAT WOULD BE BUILT AND
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
NOT CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY TO
BUILD UM. THE LIKE THE OLD
PROJECTS THAT USED TO BE A
CONCRETE BUILDING ON A PARCEL
WITH NO AMENITIES. NO PLACE TO
SIT OUTSIDE. NO TREES, NO GREEN
SPACE. AND THAT BECAUSE I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE ABILITY TO CREATE
SMALL UNITS, BUT THEN YOU NEED
TO BE ABLE TO GO OUTSIDE AND SIT
ON A PARK BENCH OR BE ABLE TO
ENJOY SOMETHING ELSE. THAT UM,
THAT GETS YOU OUTSIDE. IF
THERE'S ONE THING WE LEARNED
DURING COVID IS THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO SIT IN A
PATIO OR SIT SOMEWHERE THAT NOT
INSIDE THE BUILDING OR EVEN TO
HAVE A UM, UH, PORCH OR
SOMETHING THAT OUTSIDE SPACE
THAT BRINGS THE OUTSIDE IN. SO
THE QUESTION I HAD FOR YOU AND I
AND WE WILL BE SEEING THIS IN
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE. SO, UM,
I'M GONNA SUPPORTED TODAY, BUT I
WANT TO DELVE INTO IT. A LITTLE
BIT MORE IS DO YOU IN FACT MEET
ALL THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
THAT A CITY WOULD WOULD REQUIRE
. IF THIS WAS JUST A REGULAR
APARTMENT BUILDING STANDARD OR
TRADITIONAL APARTMENT BUILDINGS,
SO THAT THERE'S THE SOME KIND OF
AMENITY THAT GOES ALONG WITH.
YOU COULDN'T DRIVE DOWN THE
STREET. GO. YEAH, THAT'S THE
THERE'S 1000 UNITS RIGHT THERE,
AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT THAT IS
ATTRACTIVE ABOUT THE BUILDING
BECAUSE THERE'S NO DENT. THERE'S
NO DENSITY. AS I UNDERSTAND IT,
THERE'S NO DENSITY REQUIREMENTS
. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T SET
THESE LIMITS. WHICH WOULD SEEM
TO FLY IN THE FACE OF THE
STATEMENT THAT YOU HAVE TO
FOLLOW THE. THE BUILDING
STANDARDS OF THE CITY THAT
YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOCATED IN
RIGHT. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND
THAT CONCERN. I THINK THE
QUESTION WOULD BEST BE ANSWERED
BY MR BLUMENFELD. IF THAT'S ALL
RIGHT. THAT'S TERRIFIC. CAN YOU
HEAR ME? WE CAN OKAY, UM, BUT
FEW THINGS THIS, UM, THIS THIS,
THESE BUILDINGS MUST MEET ALL
THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. THEY WILL
LOOK JUST LIKE APARTMENTS, THE
ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
BUILDINGS AND ALL OTHER
BUILDINGS. ALL OTHER APARTMENTS
ARE THE. IT'S LITERALLY THE ONLY
DIFFERENCE AND WHEN YOU DON'T
HAVE TO BUILD 11 OR 27, OR 50
KITCHENS, IT WILL BE CHEAPER.
BUILD IT. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE
SMALL. THEY CAN BE SMALL. THEY
CAN HAVE ONE ROOM OR TWO ROOMS.
THEY CAN HAVE ONE ROOM. THEY CAN
BE 400 SQUARE FEET. THEY CAN BE
800 SQUARE FEET. SO THEY STILL
NEED TO GET BANK LOANS, AND THEY
STILL NEED TO ATTRACT TENANTS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONSERVATIVE
RAISING. BUT THERE'S VERY LITTLE
TO DIFFERENTIATE THESE KINDS OF
UNITS FROM APARTMENTS OTHER THAN
THE KITCHEN. GOT IT. THAT'S
THAT'S THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL.
AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. SO WE DO NOT HAVE
A QUORUM SO WE CAN'T TAKE A
MOTION. BUT I WILL ALLOW YOU TO
CONCLUDE. THANK YOU. I'LL
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE
WHEN THE TIME COMES VERY GOOD.
YOU HAVE ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH
IS A B 23 39. I HAVE IT AS ITEM
13, BUT TWORKS FOR ME ALSO. OH
BILL NUMBER IS IDENTICAL. OKAY?
WELL I'VE GOT IT AS ITEM NUMBER
TWO. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE IT
UP NOW GOING TO ARGUE WITH YOU,
BECAUSE YOU'RE ACTING AS CHAIR
OF, UM SO LET ME BEGIN BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS ON THIS BILL. UH
CURRENT LAW REQUIRES
JURISDICTIONS TO IDENTIFY AT
LEAST ONE ZONE WITHIN THEIR
HOUSING ELEMENT WHERE EMERGENCY
SHELTERS ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT
BUT THE LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE THE
JURISDICTION TO DEMONSTRATE THAT
THE SITES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED OR
SUITABLE AND AVAILABLE FOR
SHELTER DEVELOPMENT. THE RESULT
HAS BEEN THAT MANY JURISDICTIONS
ARE NOT ADEQUATELY PLANNING FOR
SHELTERS OR OTHER INTERIM
HOUSING, AND IN FACT, WE'RE
CREATING BARRIERS TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY
SHELTERS. IN ADDITION, CURRENT
LAW REQUIRES THAT IF A
JURISDICTION FAILED TO REZONE
ENOUGH LAND TO MEET ITS ARENA AT
ALL INCOME LEVELS DURING THE
PRIOR HOUSING ELEMENT PERIOD. IT
MUST MAKE UP THIS ZONING
SHORTFALL IN ITS SUBSEQUENT
HOUSING ELEMENT. BESIDES REZONED
TO MAKE UP THE SHORTFALL FROM
THE PRIOR HOUSING ELEMENT ARE
KNOWN AS CARRYOVER SITES. THERE
IS SOME AMBIGUITY IN THE LAW AS
TO WHETHER THE STATES NO NET
LOSS ZONING LAW APPLIES TO BOTH
CARRY OVERSIGHTS. INSIGHTS TO
MEET THE CURRENT RINA OBLIGATION
. AS A RESULT, SOME LOCALITIES
MAY NOT COMPLY WITH THE
OBLIGATION TO REPLACE CARRYOVER
SITES THAT ARE DEVELOPED WITHOUT
HOUSING FOR LOWER INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS. FURTHER CONSTRAINING
THE SUPPLY OF BADLY NEEDED SITES
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 8 23 39
WILL ENSURE LOCATIONS WHERE
EMERGENCY SHELTERS AND OTHER
INTERIM HOUSING CAN BE BUILT.
ARE SUITABLE, AVAILABLE AND
SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE NEED
FOR THOSE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS. THE BILL WOULD
ALSO CLARIFY THAT NO NET LOSS
LAW APPLIES TO BOTH CARRY OVER
SITES AND SITES IDENTIFIED TO
MEET THE CURRENT ARENA. THIS
BILL HAS NO OPPOSITION AND WITH
ME TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT HIS
ANNUAL LAW LAWLER, REPRESENTING
THE CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL
ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION IN THE
PUBLIC INTEREST LAW PROJECT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ASKED MS
LAWLOR TO PLEASE COME FORWARD
AND PRESENT YOUR TESTIMONY. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBER, DANIEL LAWLER AGAIN ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA RURAL
LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION IN
THE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW PROJECT
, MR WILLIAM COVERED THE BILL.
WELL SO I'LL BE BRIEF. THE LAW
HAS LONG REQUIRED EVERY
JURISDICTION IN THE STATE TO
HAVE SUFFICIENT SITES ZONED TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF
EMERGENCY SHELTERS BY RIGHT
UNFORTUNATELY, THE LAW HAS SOME
LOOPHOLES IN IT, AND SOME
JURISDICTIONS, UNFORTUNATELY,
CONTINUE TO EXPLOIT THOSE
LOOPHOLES. THIS BILL SIMPLY
TIGHTENS THOSE TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ACTUALLY HAVE PLACES WHERE
SHELTERS CAN LOCATE EASILY IN
EVERY SINGLE CITY THROUGHOUT THE
STATE, AND WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY
ASK YOUR VERY GOOD. IS THERE
ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL
HERE IN THE COMMITTEE ROOM?
SEEING NONE MATTER MODERATOR
WILL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE AND ASK IF
THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A B 23
39. THANK YOU IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 23 39 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO. I GET THAT
IT'S ONE AND THEN THREW UP HERE
IN SUPPORT. WE WILL GO TO LINE
29. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HAPPENING
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS SALAS
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY
SPONSORS IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT TO THE
LINE UP TO 42 YEAR LINE IS OPEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON SHARON REPORT
WITH THE CORPORATION FOR
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND SUPPORT.
NEXT PLEASE. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
VERY GOOD. WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UM
OPPOSITION. THERE IS NO LEAD,
OPPOSITION LISTED, SO WE'RE
GOING TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE
IN ROOM 2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY. AN OPPOSITION SAYING NO
MOVEMENT WILL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE AT A
MODERATOR, COULD YOU PLEASE
PROMPT THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO SEE
IF THEY'D LIKE TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION? THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE
IN OPPOSITION, YOU MIGHT PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO. FORGETTING
THAT IS ONE IN THE ZERO POSITION
OF A B 23 39. AND BUT I'M SURE
WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION IN Q AT
THIS TIME, THANK YOU SO MUCH
WILL BRING THE MATTER BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE. THERE AREN'T THAT
NO QUESTION FROM SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI. SO I THINK YOU'RE
YOU'RE IN THE CLEAR, HOWEVER,
THE ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO
KNOW FAST, NOT SO FAST. AND THIS
IS JUST MY. MY SENSITIVITY TO
THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ONE OF THE
AMENDMENTS WAS TO PROVIDE THAT,
UM. AH VACANT NONRESIDENTIAL
SITES MAY BE IDENTIFIED FOR
SHELTERS PROVIDED THE SITES ARE
LOCATED NEAR AMENITIES AND
SERVICES THAT SERVE THE HOME
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
. AND I WOULD. ASK YOU TO
CONSIDER IT. IT'S NOT A
REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE OR THAT
TRANSPORTATION WE PROVIDED.
BECAUSE MANY TIMES WE END UP UM
PROVIDING THE SERVICES AT THE
COUNTY SEAT. UM AND THEN EXPECT
EVERYTHING TO BE AROUND THERE,
WHICH, UM, EXPECT WHICH IMPACTS
THE NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT I'M A BIG
BELIEVER IN MAKING SURE THAT
THERE'S A SHELTER IN EVERY
SINGLE DISTRICT. OR IN EVERY
SINGLE PART OF THE CITY OR THE
COUNTY SO THAT NOT ONE UM, SO
THAT PEOPLE DON'T FEEL LIKE
YOU'RE PUTTING ALL THE HOMELESS
SHELTERS IN ONE NEIGHBORHOOD,
FOR EXAMPLE, SO IT'S THAT'S JUST
MY, UM MY INTEREST IS MAKING
SURE THAT WE'RE BEING FAIR ABOUT
WHERE WE'RE CITING AND I KNOW
THERE'S IT'S REALLY, REALLY HARD
TO SITE SITE TO SITE HOMELESS
SHELTER SITES BECAUSE EVERYBODY
COMES WITH A BIAS THEY WANT IT
SOLVED. THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO
SOLVED IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S LIKE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BUT I THINK SOMETIMES IF WE HAVE
SOME TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
THAT MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE
TO GET TO THE SERVICES THEY
NEED, THAT'S AS SUFFICIENT AS UM
, JUST HAVING IT BE NEXT DOOR,
SO THAT'S JUST MY TWO CENTS
WORTH. OTHERWISE I DON'T HAVE
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. WE'D ALLOW
YOU TO CONCLUDE AND WILL TAKE UP
THE BILL WHEN WE GET A QUORUM.
THANK YOU. CITING ISSUES ARE
UNIFORMLY AND UNIVERSALLY
DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE
OF US WHO HAVE BEEN AT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT LEVEL. AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION HERE TODAY. THANK
YOU. WE SHALL MOVE ON TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RIVAS. I DON'T
SEE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SALAS HERE.
AM I CORRECT? OKAY, SO WELL. WE
WILL JUMP OVER HIM FOR RIGHT NOW
AND WELCOME. THANKS FOR HAVING
ME IT'S GREAT TO SEE BOTH OF
YOU. AND UM, THIS LEGISLATION IS
ASSEMBLY BILL 1654, AND IT SEEKS
TO HELP ELIMINATE OUR STATEWIDE
SHORTAGE OF FARMWORKER HOUSING
INDUSTRY IN TWO IMPORTANT WAYS,
AND FIRST. THIS LEGISLATION
REQUIRES THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT TO CONDUCT A FIRST
OF ITS KIND STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT
OF FARMWORKER, HOUSING NEEDS AND
CONDITIONS. AND THEN DEVELOPING
FARMWORKER HOUSING STRATEGY
BASED ON THOSE FINDINGS,
UNFORTUNATELY, WE CLEARLY LACK
THE KIND OF STATEWIDE DATA THAT
IS NEEDED TO DEVELOP A
COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH. YOU KNOW
, I SHOULD NOTE THAT A 2018
FARMWORKER HOUSING STUDYING
ACTION PLAN THAT WAS IT WAS
CONDUCTED FOR THE CITY OF
SELENA'S THE SLEEVES VALLEY AND
THE POWER VALLEYS. UM, IT
ILLUSTRATED A DIRE HOUSING
SITUATION IN OUR REGION AND HIGH
RATES OF OVERCROWDING AND
HOMELESSNESS AMONG FARM WORKERS
AND THEIR FAMILIES. HAVING
TOURED OUR STATE'S AGRICULTURAL
REGIONS SEVERAL TIMES SINCE
BECOMING CHAIR OF THE ASSEMBLY
AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE. IT'S
ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT WE NEED
STATEWIDE DATA IN THIS HOUSING
AREA. AND SECOND. THIS
LEGISLATION SEEKS TO PROVIDE A
DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE FOR
FARMWORKER HOUSING BY SETTING
ASIDE AT LEAST 5% OF ALL
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TAX CREDITS
FOR FARMWORKER HOUSING FOR 10
YEARS. ALTOGETHER THESE
IMPORTANT TO MEASURES WILL PUT
CALIFORNIA ON A PATH TO DO MUCH
MORE THAN WE HAVE AS A STATE TO
ADDRESS OUR FARMWORKER HOUSING
SHORTAGE IN ENSURING DECENT,
DECENT LIVING CONDITIONS FOR THE
ESSENTIAL WORKERS. WITH ME HERE
THIS AFTERNOON TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION ARE
PARKER EVANS OF MUTUAL HOUSING,
CALIFORNIA AND ROB WIENER WITH
THE CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR
RURAL HOUSING. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH WANT TO START WITH
PARKER EVANS? WELCOME. THANK
YOU. AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
PARKER AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT MANAGER WITH MUTUAL
HOUSE IN CALIFORNIA, WHERE
NONPROFIT, AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPER HERE IN TOWN. AND ONE
OF THE REASONS I'M HERE IS
BECAUSE MUTUAL IS ONE OF THE
VERY FEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPERS WHO CAN SAY THAT
WE'VE ACTUALLY USED THE CURRENT
VERSION OF THE STATE FARM MARKET
TAX CREDIT. WE'RE APPROACHING
THE SITE UP IN THE CITY OF
WOODLAND, ABOUT 25 MINUTES
NORTHWEST OF HERE, TALK TO THE
LOCAL OFFICIALS AND COMMUNITY
LEADERS. THEY SAID. WILL YOU
BUILD SOME FARMWORKER HOUSING
HERE? WE SAID, ABSOLUTELY. LET'S
GET IT GOING. AND FOR THE
FINANCING. WE STARTED WHERE WE
ALWAYS START, WHICH IS THE LOCAL
MONEY BECAUSE THAT'S ALWAYS THE
MONEY THAT NEEDS TO COME IN
FIRST, AND WE IMMEDIATELY RUN
INTO THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE
INHERENT TO FARMWORKER. HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT IS YOU'RE DEALING
WITH SMALL JURISDICTIONS THAT
LACK THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO
DEVELOP THE PROJECT. AND SO THE
CITY WOODLAND, THEY DID HAVE AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
THEY DID HAVE A HOME ALLOCATION.
THEY DID HAVE A CDBG ALLOCATION,
BUT NOT NEARLY ENOUGH TO FILL
THE GAP. SO WE TOOK ALL THAT
MONEY. WE WENT TO THE USDA GOT
SOME MONEY FROM THEM. STILL NOT
ENOUGH TO FILL THE GAPS. WE
LOOKED AT THE STATE OPTIONS, AND
THAT'S WHAT WE BECAME ACQUAINTED
WITH THE FARMWORKER HOUSING TAX
CREDIT HERE GRAND TOTAL OF
$500,000 A YEAR THAT IS NOT THE
500 MILLION, THAT IS THE CURRENT
HOUSING BROAD TAX CUT ABOUT
500,000. IT'S SO SMALL, THAT TEA
CAKE DOESN'T EVEN PUT IT OUT.
EACH YEAR. THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR
IT TO ACCUMULATE FOR FIVE YEARS.
AND THEN THEY PUT IT OUT THAT
IT'S EVEN A USABLE AMOUNT. WE
WERE FORTUNATE WITH OUR TIMING
AND COMPETITIVE WITH OUR
APPLICATION. WE GOT THAT 2.5
MILLION THAT FIVE YEAR
ALLOCATION TO HELP CLOSE OUR GAP
AND BUILD THE PROJECT AND I'M SO
GLAD WE DID. BECAUSE IN A LOT OF
WAYS THIS PROJECT SPRING LAKE IS
THE CROWN JEWEL IN OUR
PORTFOLIO, AND I THINK IT'S A
LARGE PART BECAUSE THE SHARED
EXPERIENCES BY THE FARM WORKERS
REALLY HELPS BUILD THIS THIS
SUPPORT NETWORK AND STRONG SENSE
OF COMMUNITY. SO I WANT TO BUILD
MORE PROJECTS LIKE SPRING LAKE.
I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF
JURISDICTIONS THAT WOULD LIKE TO
SEE PROJECTS LIKE SPRING LAKE,
AND I THINK OUR FARM WORKERS
DESERVE MORE PROJECTS LIKE
SPRING LAKE, BUT I'LL TELL YOU,
IT'S REALLY HARD RIGHT NO TO
BUILD MORE PROJECTS LIKE SPRING
LAKE WITH THE RESOURCES THAT ARE
AVAILABLE. AND SO I DON'T THINK
5% OF FUTURE TAX CREDIT IS A
HUGE ASK FOR FARM WORKERS AND
JUMPING FROM 505,000 TO 2.5, OR
2 25 MILLION OVERNIGHT WILL BE
TRANSFORMATIONAL INTER INDUSTRY,
SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. NEXT I'D LIKE TO ASK ROB
WIENER. WELCOME WELCOME. THANK
YOU. ROB WIENER, CALIFORNIA
COALITION FOR RURAL HOUSING. I'M
GOING TO COMMENT ON THE STUDY
COMPONENT OF THE BILL. UH
THERE'S A LOT WE DON'T KNOW
ABOUT FARMWORKERS. WHAT WE DO
KNOW IS THAT THEY TOIL IN THE
FIELDS, UH, DOING BACKBREAKING
WORK IN VERY HARSH CONDITIONS.
HEAT COLD. AND THEY OFTEN LIVE
IN SQUALID HOUSING CONDITIONS.
CAVES FEELS TENTS, TRAILERS,
COOL SHIRTS. WE ALSO KNOW THAT
DURING THE PANDEMIC, THEY WERE
HIGHLY EXPOSED TO COVID BECAUSE
THEY TYPICALLY LIVE IN
SUBSTANDARD, VERY POOR, CROWDED
HOUSING CONDITIONS. SO THERE ARE
A LOT OF THINGS WE DON'T KNOW.
AND THOSE THINGS ARE WE DON'T
KNOW THE CURRENT PERCENTAGE. UM
OR DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE
FARMWORKER POPULATION. WE DON'T
KNOW THE CURRENT PERCENTAGE OF
FARM WORKERS WHO ARE DOMESTIC
FARM WORKERS WHO LIVE AND WORK
PERMANENTLY. IN CALIFORNIA. WE
DON'T KNOW WHICH WHAT PERCENTAGE
OF THOSE WORKERS MIGRATE FROM
CROP TO CROP IN CALIFORNIA OR
OUTSIDE OF CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T
KNOW THE PERCENTAGE OF THE FARM
WORK LABOR FORCE THAT IS FOREIGN
WORKERS. WHO ARE IMPORTED INTO
CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T KNOW THE
HOUSING CONDITIONS THAT THEY
LIVE IN. WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG
IT TAKES THEM TO COMMUTE FROM
HOME TO THE FIELDS. UH AND WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR HOUSING
NEEDS ARE WHAT KIND OF KINDS OF
HOUSING PROTOTYPES WOULD BEST
FIT THEIR CONDITIONS? WHAT ARE
THEIR PREFERENCES? AND WHAT
KINDS OF THINGS CAN THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS DO TO REMOVE
OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT OF FARM
LABOR? HOUSING AND FINALLY, UM,
WHAT EFFECT HAVE THE STATE'S
PHARMACARE HOUSING PROGRAMS
WORKED? AND WHAT WILL IT COST TO
REALLY TRULY ADDRESS THE
FARMWORKER HOUSING? PROBLEM IN
CALIFORNIA. SO THOSE ARE ALL
THINGS THAT WE CAN LEARN FROM
THE FIRST EVER STUDY LIKE THIS,
AND I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT
YOU'VE TAKEN MY VOTE ON THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN
COMMITTEE THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY MARKS DIVERSE THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING PARTNERSHIP
AND SUPPORT GOOD AFTERNOON,
MARIE CASTALDI ON BEHALF OF
HOUSING, CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE? SAYING THEN WE'LL
MOVE ON TO THE TELECONFERENCE
LINE OUT OF MODERATOR. IF YOU
COULD PLEASE QUEUE UP MEMBERS
WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF 80 16 BEFORE
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IT'S ONE AND THEN
ZERO FEAR AND SUPPORT. IN ONE
MOMENT, WE DO HAVE CUTE TO
QUEUING UP TO GET THEIR LINE
NUMBER. JUST REMIND OVER HERE
AND SUPPORT OF A B 16 54, TEXAS.
AND WE WOULD GO TO LINE UP TO
63. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. I'M SORRY
. LYING TO 63. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI. I'M HURTING FOR THE
COURT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU NEXT TO THE LINE OF TO
61. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI MY
NAME IS RACHEL SMITH AND
REPRESENTING WORLD COMMUNITY
ASSISTANCE CORPORATION IN FRONT
SUPPORT OF 80. 16 54. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ IT THIS TIME
GOING TO TRY THE ROOM AGAIN WHEN
ONE FINAL TIME. IS THERE ANYBODY
ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT OF A B 16 54. WE
NEED TO GET YOU SOME
ROLLERBLADES. THANK YOU. MADAM
CHAIR, REMEMBERS BRIAN AUGUSTA
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE
FOUNDATION. PLEASED TO CO
SPONSOR THIS MEASURE. THANK YOU.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS
THERE ANYONE ELSE? THING THEN
WE'LL MOVE ON INTO ONTO
OPPOSITION. IS THERE ANYBODY IN
ROOM 2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? SEEING THEN
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE AND SEE IF
THERE'S ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE
TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION. OF A B
16 54. THANK YOU FOR NOT
POSITION. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IT'S WHAT
AND THEN THE EUROPEAN OPPOSITION
OF A B 16 54. AND MADAM CHAIR.
WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION IN CUBA AT
THIS TIME. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THE MATTER
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE QUESTIONS.
NO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI AND NO QUESTIONS FOR
ME, EITHER OTHER THAN I'D LIKE
TO BE ADDED AS A CO AUTHOR,
WHEN, IF AND WHEN THE TIME IS
APPROPRIATE? UM AND YOU MAY
CONCLUDE. WELL I CERTAINLY WILL
DO THAT AND APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY HERE AND%
DISRESPECTFUL ASPIRIN. I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WHEN WE GET A QUORUM WILL HAVE
WILL TAKE A MOTION AND MOVE ON
IT. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, SO I
UNDERSTAND, UM, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
Væ VALLAPUDUA IS HERE AND YOU
WILL BE PRESENTING, UM ITEM
NUMBER THREE FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SALAS AS WELL.
VERY GOOD. YOU ARE UP, WE'LL
TAKE UP A B 9 16. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS. I AM
PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 9 16 ON
BEHALF OF SO MANY MEMBERS SALAS
AND WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY
STATING THAT THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SELLERS ACCEPTS
THE COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS. AND
IS COMMITTED TO ALIGN ALIGN THIS
BILL WITH SB 897 TO AVOID
CHARTING OUT ISSUES. THIS BILL
WILL REMOVE BARRIERS TO THE
CREATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS AND ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS
WERE FACING THAT WE ARE FACING
HERE IN CALIFORNIA, WITH BOTH A
LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND
THE PANDEMIC OF HOMELESSNESS.
ENABLES THE CREATION TOO EASY,
TOO EASY TO BUILD HOUSING ON
LAND THAT IS ALREADY UTILIZING
FOR HOUSING. THIS BRINGING DOWN
THE COST OF CREATING NEW HOUSING
THIS BILL WILL ALLEVIATE BURDENS
TO 80 YOU CREATION IN THE STATE
AND CREATE MORE HOUSING FOR LOW
INCOME RESIDENTS TESTIFIED
TESTIFYING REMOTELY TODAY IS
CHARLES CAN WHO IS AN 80 YOU
ARCHITECT IN THE STATE. VERY
GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND IF
WE COULD GET MR CHARLES CAN ON
THE LINE. I'M HERE. WELCOME.
YOU'RE UP. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. YES I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON
BEHALF OF EVERY 9 16. I THINK AN
EARLIER SPEAKER THIS AFTERNOON
MENTIONED THAT WE NEED TO ATTACK
OUR HOUSING. CRISIS ON MANY
FRONTS, AND THAT'S ADDRESSED
THIS TWO OF THE MORE AFFORDABLE
UH, EXTREMES OF HOW WE CAN
ATTACK THAT. CURRENTLY THE A D,
U, UH I'M THE BOSS BILL AS AS
PRACTICED IN THE STATE ONLY
ALLOWS THE 16 FT, UH, MAXIMUM
HEIGHT. THAT DOES ALLOW FOR TWO
STORIES, BUT IT REQUIRES
SIGNIFICANT EXCAVATION WITH THE
COSTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CHALLENGES OF OFF PULLING THIRD
DOWNSIDE. AND ALSO REQUIRES YOU
TO BURY THE GROUND FLOOR TWO FT
BELOW GRADE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY
MAKES THE SECOND CLASS UNITS,
WHICH WE DON'T WANT, UH FOR MORE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SECTOR. AND
IT MAKES THEM INACCESSIBLE TO
PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCESSIBILITY
ISSUES WHEN THE GROUND FORCE
BELOW GRADE AND UNAPPEALING AND
OF COURSE, IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE,
AND THAT'S A TREMENDOUS COST. TO
WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE, AND
SHOULD BE ONE OF THE MORE
AFFORDABLE WAS PROVIDING HOUSING
, WHICH IS SO DESPERATELY NEEDED
IN THE STATE PARTY THAT GETS
ADDED TO RUN OR SOMETIMES THE
PROJECTS JUST DON'T GET BUILT.
THE 18 FT HEIGHTS OF ALL OF
THESE PROBLEMS IF THE POINT OF
OUR LEGISLATION AT EU
LEGISLATION TO ENCOURAGE THEIR
CONSTRUCTION, THIS IS REALLY
WHERE THE MUCH BETTER NUMBER FOR
THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT UM IN TERMS
OF THE ADDITIONAL BEDROOM, WHICH
IS THE OTHER COMPONENT OF A B 9
16. THANKFULLY IT'S A GREAT THIS
IS A REALLY GREAT PART OF THE
BILL. AS AN ARCHITECT. ONE OF MY
FRUSTRATIONS IS THE COST OF
CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING NEW
UNITS, EVEN A D S, WHICH ARE
MORE FOR DOBLE TO BUILD, THEN
MULTI LARGE MULTI FAMILY
PROJECTS. UM. STILL COST A LOT
OF MONEY TO BUILD, AND BY FAR BY
FAR THE MOST ECONOMICAL SOLUTION
TO THE HOUSING CRISIS, WHICH WE
REALLY HAVEN'T ADDRESSED BEFORE
THIS BILL, BUT FOR BAD EVEN
BETTER THAN EIGHT YEARS. IS
ALLOWING ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS TO
BE BUILT AND CURRENTLY OVERSIZED
UNITS THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. YOU'VE ALREADY GOT
YOUR ROOF. YOUR FOUNDATION, YOUR
UTILITIES, YOUR BATHROOM YOUR
KITCHEN ALREADY THERE. YOU DON'T
HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL THAT, AND
IT'S CORRECT. OR IT SHOULD BE IN
CITIES AND COUNTIES THAT REQUIRE
PUBLIC HEARINGS, THOUGH
APPLICANTS CAN EXPERIENCE A YEAR
OR MORE DELAYS. IS FRANKLY
DISCOURAGING OWNERS FROM
CONVERTING EXTRA SPACE AND
THEY'RE BUILDING MUCH NEEDED
BEDROOMS. SO IF WE REALLY WANT
TO SOLVE THE HOUSING CRISIS, WE
HAVE TO ATTACK IT ON ALL FRONTS.
LARGE PROJECTS, SMALL PROJECTS
AND MAKING IT EASIER FOR
INDIVIDUAL VETERANS TO BE
PROVIDED AND EXISTING UNITS AND
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS
THE COMMITTEE MAY HAVE THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN IN
THE COMMITTEE ROOM THAT WOULD
LIKE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT?
MICHAEL LINE WAS SPUR AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
HOLLY FOR MANY DAYS, USE OF
LIGHTHOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON
BEHALF OF CIVIC WELL AND ACTION
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. JORDAN
PLANET CARVER HARD ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA, MAYBE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE? NOW WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE ON TO THE TELECONFERENCE
LINE. IS THERE ANYBODY ON THE
TELE TELECONFERENCE LINE THAT
WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 9 16? THANK YOU.
IF YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF A B 9 16
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IT'S ONE AND THEN
ZERO FEAR AND SUPPORT. WE WILL
GO TO THE LINE TO 65. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. AFTERNOON SO BE IT.
POLICE SHOT ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT TO GO
LINE UP TO 54. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR. REMEMBER KATE BELL ON
BEHALF OF CALORIE DAY AND
TAGLINE, STRONG SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT TO THE LINE
OF TO 62. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M TRYING
MEMBERS. A LIST IS SO HIGH ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT U
THE LINE OF 2 52 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN. LINE TO 50 TO YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. AFTER
THAT, YOU PLEASE GO AHEAD. OKAY
MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FOR THE
SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE'RE
GOING TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY
TESTIMONY AND OPPOSITION. HERE
IN ROOM 2100. SEEING NONE WILL
WILL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. IS THERE
ANYBODY ON THE TELEPHONE
CONFERENCE LINE IN OPPOSITION?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR NOT POSITION
OF A BABY. 9 16. YOU MAY PRESS
THE ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO IF
YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION WE'VE GOT
TO LINE UP TO 66 LINE IS OPEN.
CHAIR MEMBERS ON BEHALF OF THE
BEVERLY HILTON. RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WE'LL GO
TO LINE 2 43. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM SHARON
MEMBERS DURING THEM BOULDERS ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES RESPECTFULLY IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. UM MADAM CHAIR. WE
HAVE NO FURTHER POSITIONING QUÊ
AT THIS TIME. VERY GOOD. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. WE'LL BRING THIS
BACK TO COMMITTEE. FOR COMMENTS
QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. I SEE. I
SEE NONE SO YOU MAY CONCLUDE.
THANK YOU, MADAM. CHAIR MEMBERS.
THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED NO NO
VOTES. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR MY VOTE. VERY GOOD WHEN WE
GET A QUORUM WILL TAKE A MOTION
UP AND WORK ON THAT. THANK YOU.
YOUR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS UP. IF
YOU'RE HERE, SO IT MIGHT AS WELL
OKAY AHEAD AND DO IT. THANK YOU.
THAT'S A GOOD WAY TO GET AT THE
FRONT OF THE LINE. YOU
VOLUNTEERED TO DO SOMEONE ELSE'S
BILL, AND THERE YOU ARE. THANK
YOU, MADAM. A B. UH 2002. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM. CHAIR
MEMBERS. FIRST I WANT TO START
BY THANKING YOU AND YOUR STAFF
ARE WORKING WITH MY OFFICE ON
THIS BILL AND ACCEPT ALL THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. CALIFORNIA
IS A IS IN A HOUSING CRISIS IN
THE MOBILE HOMES ARE ON. UM
OBTAINABLE FORM OF HOUSING FOR
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
THERE ARE OVER 5200 PARKS WITH
MORE THAN 3000. 7 378,000 SPACES
THAT CURRENTLY HOUSED OVER 707
100,000 PEOPLE. MAYBE 200 TO
CREATE A FUN. IN THE DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND
DEVELOPMENT TO HELP UH FIXED
VIOLATIONS, LET THEM STAY IN
THEIR HOMES AND AVOID EVICTIONS
UNDER THIS BILL RESIDENTS AND
PARK OWNERS CAN KEN MORE EASILY
WORKED TOGETHER TO ACCESS FUNDS
TO FIX ISSUES THAT WOULD
POTENTIALLY RESULT IN THE
RESIDENTS EVICTIONS OR
JEOPARDIZE A PARK ABILITY TO
OPERATE. WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY AT SP 202 IS CHRIS WAS
SOCKS WAS SASKIA WITH WESTERN
MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMUNITIES
ASSOCIATIONS? AND JASON OCCURRED
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
MOBILE PARK LINES. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH WELCOME. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR AND THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MY NAME'S CHRIS
WEITZ SAKE WITH W M A. WE WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR HIS HARD
WORK ON THIS BILL AND ALSO THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR EVERYTHING
THAT THEY'VE DONE. TO MOVE THIS
BALL DOWN THE FIELD. THE NUMBER
ONE GOAL OF MY MANUFACTURED
HOUSING IS TO ACTUALLY ACHIEVE
AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE
HOUSING, AND THAT'S WHAT A B
2002 IS REALLY INTENDED TO DO.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MOBILE
HOME PARK OWNERS AND RESIDENTS
HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK
TOGETHER TO CREATE SOLUTIONS TO
PROBLEMS THAT MAY ULTIMATELY END
AN EVICTION. IF THEY ARE CITED
BY H CD OR THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY, MAYBE 20 OH, TO CREATE A
MOBILE HAIR MOBILE HOME REPAIR
GRANT FUNDS. WE HAVE A $98
BILLION SURPLUS. WE THINK USING
SOME OF THAT SURPLUS IS A GOOD
IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO ALLOW SOME
OF THAT MONEY TO BE USED TO KEEP
ROOFS OVER HEADS, AND THAT'S
WHAT A B 22 ATTEMPTS TO DO. IN
THIS BUDGET. A, UH, VOTED FOR
TODAY. $100 MILLION WAS
ALLOCATED TO REPAIR MOBILE HOME
PARKS. THE HOPE IS THAT SOME OF
THAT MONEY CAN BE USED TO HELP
FIND HCG AND THE ELIA'S TO
ACTUALLY FUND THIS MOBILE HOME
REPAIR GRANT FUND. FIRST.
SECONDLY, UM, MOBILE HOME PARK
OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OFTEN WORK
TOGETHER. I STILL THINK THAT
THERE IS A FALSE NARRATIVE OUT
THERE THAT RESIDENTS AND PARK
OWNERS HAVE THIS TREMENDOUS
DISAGREEMENT. IF A PARK OWNER IS
NOTIFIED PROPERLY. OF A RESIDENT
VIOLATION. THEY HAVE THE ABILITY
TO WORK TOGETHER TO FIX THE
PROBLEM. RIGHT NOW WE'RE OFTEN
AS MOBILE HOME PARK OWNERS. WE
OFTEN DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT THERE
IS A VIOLATION THAT OCCURRED.
UNTIL 60 DAYS AFTER THE AFTER
THE RESIDENT HAS BEEN NOTIFIED.
THAT LEAVES US NO OPTION WITH
OTHER THAN PROVIDING AN EVICTION
NOTICE ON ON THE ON THE
RESIDENTS. A B 20 OH, TO
EXPEDITES THE PROCESS, AND IT'LL
ACTUALLY MAKE IT EASIER FOR
RESIDENTS AND MOBILE HOME PARK
OWNERS TO WORK TOGETHER AND
THANK YOU ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR
INTRODUCING THE BILL. AND WE
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING TO KEEP
THE BALL MOVING DOWN THE FIELD.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS JASON AKER ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA MOBILE HOME PARK
OWNERS ALLIANCE JUST TO BE VERY
BRIEF AGAIN WANT TO EXPRESS OUR
APPRECIATION FOR THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR AUTHORING
THE BILL AS WELL? AS YOU JUST
HEARD FROM MR Y SAKE, PARK
OWNERS WHEN A RESIDENT HAS A
VIOLATION, UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR
ONLY REAL RECOURSES TO EVICT
THAT RESIDENT IF IT'S NOT BEING
ADDRESSED. NO ONE REALLY WANTS
TO BE DOING THAT. I MEAN,
BLUNTLY. IT'S BAD BUSINESS FOR
THE PARK OWNER, BUT IT'S ALSO
NOT A GREAT THING FOR THE
RESIDENT OBVIOUSLY TO HAVE A
MINOR VIOLATION AND A PROBLEM ON
THEIR PROPERTY. KEEP THEM OUT OF
THEIR HOME. AND SO WE THINK IT
IS AN EXCELLENT IDEA IS, MR Y.
SAKE SAID, TO PROVIDE SOME SORT
OF RELIEF SO THAT RATHER THAN
HAVING A SUSPENDED PTO PERMIT TO
OPERATE OVER YOUR HEAD, YOU HAVE
THE ABILITY TO HELP YOUR
RESIDENT BIND RESOURCES FROM THE
STATE AND FIXED THE ISSUE. FOR
THAT REASON, WE'RE GLAD TO BE
HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL, DR
Ó. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS
THERE ANYONE ELSE IN ROOM 2100
THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. SEEING THEN
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. IS THERE
ANYBODY ON THE TELECONFERENCE
LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE
TESTIMONY ON A B 20 20,002?
THANK YOU IF YOU'RE IN SUPPORT
OF A B 20 OH, TWO. YOU MAY PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS
ONE AND THEN ZERO HERE AND
SUPPORT. AND MADAM CHAIR. WE
HAVE NO SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS
TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON TO OPPOSITION.
THERE IS NO LEAD OPPOSITION.
NOTED. SO WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S
ANYBODY IN ROOM. 2100 THAT WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
THAT'S A NEW CHAIR MEMBERS BRADY
GOING ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFFICIALS I
WANTED TO SAY WE REMOVED OUR
OPPOSITION WERE NEUTRAL ON IT.
SO THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS WAS
DIDN'T HAVE THAT UPDATED, BUT WE
APPRECIATED THE UPDATE THE
AMENDMENTS AND AS LONG AS
THERE'S AN IMMINENT DANGER TO
HEALTH AND SAFETY. WE'RE OKAY
WITH IT. SO WANTED TO SAY WE'VE
MOVED TO NEUTRAL ON THE BILL. SO
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR
TAKING THOSE AMENDMENTS. VERY
GOOD. AND THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE TODAY. APPRECIATE IT VERY
MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT
WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION OR REMOVE THEIR
OPPOSITION? HERE IN THE ROOM,
SEEING NONE WILL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. MADAM
MODERATOR, IF YOU COULD PROMPT
AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ON
THE LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION. TO THIS
BILL. THANK YOU IF YOU'RE NOT
POSITION OF A B 20 OH, TWO. YOU
MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
IF YOU'RE NOT POSITION. AND
MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
POSITIONING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
VERY GOOD. WE'LL BRING THE ISSUE
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AND SEE IF
THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. SEEING
NONE. UM ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
VALLAPUDUA. YOU MAY CONCLUDE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS,
RESPECTIVELY ASKED FOR NAVAL.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
AGAIN WE WILL TAKE THIS UP WHEN
WE GET A QUORUM. AND WE'RE READY
TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT.
VERY GOOD. WE WILL TAKE UP THE
NEXT BILL, WHICH IS A B 17 19 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD. WELCOME.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS UNDER FEDERAL LAW IF A
RESIDENTIAL UNIT IS PROVIDED BY
AN EMPLOYER FOR ITS EMPLOYEES,
THE UNIT IS NOT FOR USE BY THE
PUBLIC AND IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
AFFORDABLE TAX CREDITS. IN 2019
. THE LEGISLATURE IS YOU KNOW,
PAST THE 33 O, EIGHT, WHICH
CLARIFIED THAT A SCHOOL DISTRICT
COULD LIMIT THE HOUSING TWO
EMPLOYEES OF THE DISTRICT AND
STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TAX CREDIT.
HOWEVER A B 33 33 OH, EIGHT DID
NOT INCLUDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT. SO THIS BILL, A B 17
19 WOULD ALLOW COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICTS, THE ABILITY TO MANAGE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS FOR
STUDENTS AND STAFF AND THE
OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY FOR
NECESSARY TAX CREDITS. THE BILL
WILL ALLOW COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICTS WITH THE APPROPRIATE
EXISTING LAND AND RESOURCES TO
BE ACTIVE MEMBERS AND ADDRESSING
CALIFORNIA'S EXACERBATED HOUSING
CRISIS. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
THE OPPOSITION FOR REACHING OUT
AND CONTINUING TO WORK WITH MY
STAFF TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS,
AND WE ARE DEDICATING TO
CONTINUING THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
I'D LIKE TO PRESENT MY WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL MARK
MCDONALD, REPRESENTING THE SAN
DIEGO COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT. VERY GOOD. WELCOME.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AWARD FOR
CARRYING THE BILL. THE BILL. UM
THE ANALYSIS LAYS OUT PRETTY
WELL WHAT THE BILL DOES IT
SIMPLY EXPANDS A K 12 PROGRAM
THROUGH COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
ENABLE COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
HELP THEIR EMPLOYEES. BETTER
AFFORD HOUSING THAT IS NEAR THE
CAMPUSES. IT WOULD PROVIDE A
TOOL FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
HELP. ALSO UM UM, GET.
INCENTIVES TO EMPLOYEES TO COME
TO THE COLLEGE AND WORK SO WE
WOULD URGE YOUR SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THERE ANYONE ELSE IN
2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL? IF SO,
PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR JANICE,
NORMALLY WITH THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASKED ME
CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
AFTERNOON CÁC MANCINI ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS
THERE ANYONE ELSE? SEEING THEN
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE AND ASKED
THE MODERATOR TO QUEUE UP
INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A B 17 19.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF A
B 17 19 YEAR BY PRESS 10. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO
SUPPORT OF A B 17 19. AND ONE
JUST QUEUED UP. ONE MOMENT WILL
WHY WE GIVE THEIR LINE NUMBER.
JUST A REMINDER. WE ARE ON
SUPPORT OF A B 17 19. AND WE
WILL GO TO A LINE OF 2 74. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON.
THIS IS INTEGRATION, CALLING ON
BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE
NO FURTHER IMPORTANT QUÊ. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE ON TO OPPOSITION. THERE IS
NO LEAD OPPOSITION LISTED, SO
WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN
ROOM 2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THIS
BILL. SAYING NONE WILL MOVE TO
THE TELECONFERENCE LINE AND ASK
IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WOULD
LIKE TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 17 19. IF YOU'RE NOT
POSITION OF A B 17 19 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. THAT IS
ONE AND THEN ZERO FOR AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 17 19. AND WE
HAVE NO OPPOSITION IN CUBA AT
THIS TIME, MADAM. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WE'LL BRING THIS BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE FOR QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. UM, I JUST HAVE ONE
QUESTION AND THAT IS, UM IT'S
NOT CLEAR TO ME WHETHER THE BILL
REQUIRES UM THAT THE. THE
DEVELOPER. FOLLOW THE, UM THE
RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE
LOCAL JURISDICTION BY THAT BY
THAT, I MEAN LAND USE AND THE
SETBACKS AND THE OPEN SPACE AND
ALL THAT KIND OF GOOD STUFF. UM
DO YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE
REGULAR PLANNING PROCESS IN
ORDER TO DO THAT? OR CAN YOU
JUST SAY HEY, WE'RE A SCHOOL
DISTRICT. WE GET TO DO WHATEVER
WE WANT TO DO, AND SO THAT'S IT.
THINK EMAIL CHAIR WOULD SAY OFF
THE CUT. THAT IS A REALLY GOOD
QUESTION. I BELIEVE THEY WOULD
NEED TO FOLLOW AND BE CONFORMING
WITH LOCAL REGULATIONS S WELL.
THEY ARE NOT A STATE ENTITY SO
THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
SUPERSEDE LOCAL ORDINANCES. I'M
HAPPY TO FURTHER RESEARCH THAT
AND GET BACK TO YOUR OFFICE. I
THINK THAT WOULD BE THAT WE CAN
GET TO YOU WITH THAT
INFORMATION, BUT, YOU KNOW
GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE BILL
WOULDN'T ALLOW YOU TO SUPERSEDE
ANY ANY LOCAL ORDINANCES. IT'S
NOT INCLUDED IN THAT AS A PART
OF THAT BILL THAT I APPRECIATE
THAT BECAUSE HAVING SERVED IN
LOCAL GOVERNMENT. IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT WHATEVER IT IS, IT'S BUILT
SUPPORTS AND LOOKS LIKE THE REST
OF THE COMMUNITY THAT THAT'S
BEING BUILT IN. AND UM AND SO,
TO THE EXTENT THAT, UM THAT.
THAT IT'S BEING IT IS BEING
BUILT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE
HOUSING FOR THE LOCAL WORKFORCE
THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT
THAT IT REALLY FIT IN WITH THE
COMMUNITY, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
SO I'LL SUPPORT IT TODAY WHEN WE
FINALLY GET A MOTION AND IF YOU
COULD JUST VERIFY THAT, UM IN
THE YOU KNOW, JUST TO MAKE SURE
THAT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT. I
APPRECIATE IT, SO I WILL ALLOW
YOU TO CONCLUDE. THANK YOU.
SENATOR. APPRECIATE THE
QUESTION. IT'S A VERY GOOD
INSIGHT, AND I AGREE. WE
DEFINITELY WANT TO CONFORM TO
OUR SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. AND
YOU KNOW THIS IS A VALUE ADD FOR
THE NEEDED HOUSING THAT WE HAVE,
ESPECIALLY FOR COMMUNITY.
COLLEGE STUDENTS THAT
DISPROPORTIONATELY ARE AT RISK
OF HOMELESSNESS, SO WE
APPRECIATE ON THE SUPPORT OF ANY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. AND I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR I
VOTED THAT TIME. VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE'RE GOING
TO MOVE ON IN THE AGENDA. SO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S NEXT YEAR.
YOU'RE NOT NEXT. BUT AS LONG AS
YOU'VE CLEARED WITH THE REST OF
THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THAT YOU'RE
GOING TO JUMP IN FRONT OF THE
MIC. GUESS I CAN TAKE IT OUT OF
ORDER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM CHAIR AND, UH, OUR BUDGET
CHAIR FOR ALLOWING ME TO GO
AHEAD, HAVE SOME CHILDCARE
ISSUES AND CONTENDING.
UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY. THANK
YOU. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
AND COMMITTEE STAFF. CALIFORNIA
CURRENTLY HAS A GAP OF 1.2
MILLION AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR
STRUGGLING LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
AND ROUGHLY 160,000 HOMELESS
FOLKS ON OUR STREETS AT ANY
GIVEN NIGHT. WHILE MOST SIGNAL
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS TO
CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IS A LACK OF PUBLIC
FUNDING, LAND USE POLICIES ALSO
SIGNIFICANTLY LIMIT THE AMOUNT
OF UNITS THAT CAN BE BUILT. IN
2019 18 17 63 BY MR CHU AMENDED
STATE DENSITY BONUS SLOT TO
ALLOW 100% AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENTS. UNLIMITED DENSITY
FOR DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN ONE HALF
MILE OF A MAJOR TRANSIT STOP OR
HIGH QUALITY BUS CORRIDOR. MAYBE
20 TO 34 BUILDS ON RECENT
IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS TO A B
17 63 BY ALLOWING 100%
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
TO RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL
INCENTIVE FROM THE LOCAL AGENCY
ADDED HEIGHT AND AN INCREASED
DENSITY IF THE PROJECT IS
LOCATED IN AN URBANIZED, VERY
LOW VNT AREA. THIS BILL DEFINES
A VERY LOW V INTERIOR AS AN
URBANIZED AREA WHERE THE
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
GENERATES V PER CAPITA THAT IS
BELOW 85% OF THE OF EITHER
REGIONAL V. PER CAPITA, OR CITY
V PER CAPITA. THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
WILL BE RELEASING MAPS WITH
REGIONAL VIEW. CAP CALCULATIONS
AT THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL IN THE
COMING MONTHS. THESE MAPS ARE
BASED ON LOCAL TRAVEL DEMAND
MODELS DEVELOPED BY
JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE PRODUCED
THEIR OWN MAPS OF THE. THIS BILL
ADDRESSES THE HOUSING OF FOR
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND
FURTHERS ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY GOALS BY
INCREASING THE UNIVERSE OF SITES
AVAILABLE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE SO
DESPERATELY NEEDED IN THE STATE.
WITH ME OR TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT IS MARINA Y IN OF THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING CONSORTIUM
AND WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
MY VOTE. VERY GOOD WELCOME. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBER,
MAYBE MARINA WHITE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING CONSORTIUM,
23 34 ADDRESSES THE HOUSING,
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABLE STATE
SUSTAINABILITY GOALS BY
INCENTIVIZING INFILL DEVELOPMENT
AND DENSIFICATION OF URBANIZING
COMMUNITIES. THEY MAY NOT YET
HAVE HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT BUT
OFFER CONVENIENT ACCESS TO JOBS,
RETAIL AND SERVICES, ALLOWING
RESIDENTS TO DRIVE LESS TO REACH
THEIR DAILY DESTINATIONS. AS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS NOTED 80
23 34 MERELY BUILDS ON THE
IMPROVEMENTS PROVIDED BY A B 17
63 BY ALLOWING ALL LOCATION
EFFICIENT 100% AFFORDABLE
DEVELOPMENTS TO QUALIFY FOR
THESE ENHANCED DENSITY RULES.
THIS BILL IS CRITICAL TO HELPING
HIS CLOTHES ARE TREMENDOUS
AFFORDABILITY GAP AND ENSURE
THAT LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS
HAVE ACCESS TO SAFE, STABLE,
AFFORDABLE PLACES TO CALL HOME
AND EVERY COMMUNITY ACROSS THE
STREET AND TO HELP US ACHIEVE
OUR CLIENT STATES CLIMATE GOALS
AND FOR THESE REASONS. AH WHEN
YOU HAVE QUORUM, I URGE YOUR
SUPPORT TODAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S
ANOTHER LEAD WITNESS IN SUPPORT
IS NOT TESTIFYING. MERRIMAN.
OKAY, VERY GOOD. IS THERE ANYONE
ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT IN ROOM 2100 MARKS?
DIVERS CALIFORNIA HOUSING
PARTNERSHIP IN SUPPORT? THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. DANIEL ALLAH ON
BEHALF OF THE WESTERN, CENTRAL
AND POVERTY, THE CALIFORNIA
WORLD LEGAL ASSISTANCE
FOUNDATION IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST LAW, PROJECT AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MARIE CASTALDI ON BEHALF OF
HOUSING, CALIFORNIA PROUD CO
SPONSORS AND SUPPORT. THANKS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JORDAN
CARVAJAL ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA. UM, BE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, MICHAEL AND WHISPER
AND SUPPORT. LATE FOR MEETING ON
BEHALF OF CIVIC WELL AND THE
ACTION IN SPORTS. VERY GOOD. IS
THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE IN ROOM
2100? THING NONE. WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE ON TO THE TELECONFERENCE
LINE. IS THERE ANYBODY ON ON THE
LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT OF A B 23 34? THANK
YOU. YOU MAY PRESS ONE. AND THEN
ZERO IF YOU WERE IN SUPPORT OF A
B 23 34. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO, FEAR AND SUPPORT.
MERKEL LINE UP TO 27. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. THANK YOU. LAWRENCE
DAVID LANCIA, REPRESENTING THE
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU
. I'M TOO 25. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
CARLY SHELBY ON BEHALF OF THE
NONPROFIT HOUSING ASSOCIATION OF
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. LINE TO 71
YEAR LINE IS OPEN. THIS IS 100.
THEY CAN BE SUPPORTED A B 2334.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT,
PLEASE. THANK YOU. I'M TOO 75.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THIS IS RYAN
O'CONNELL ON BEHALF OF NAPA.
SOLANO, UM, BE IN IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
. LINE TO 28. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
LINE TWO YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. CRAZY 20? YES.
I APOLOGIZE, DO YOU HONESTLY
TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE HOUSING
ACTION, COALITION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
PLEASE THANK YOU. LINE TO 78
YEAR LINE IS OPEN. HI GOOD
AFTERNOON, CAITLIN JOHNSON WITH
POLITICAL SOLUTIONS ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA COUNCIL FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WE DO
HAVE TWO MORE ONE MOMENT WHERE
THEY GET THEIR LINE NUMBER. AND
AGAIN WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B
23 34. AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 2
81. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. CHIMNEY
FAN ON BEHALF OF BRIDGE HOUSING
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. AND ONE MOMENT, MADAM CHAIR
FOR ONE MORE IN QUÊ. AND WE WILL
GO TO LINE 2 82 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON SILVIO
FERRARI ON BEHALF OF META AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE
NO FURTHER IMPORTANT QUÊ AT THIS
TIME, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE
ON TO OPPOSITION. THERE IS NO
LEAD OPPOSITION LISTED, SO WE'LL
SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN ROOM
2100 THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION. THING. THEN WE'LL
MOVE ON TO THE TELECONFERENCE
LINE. MADAM MODERATOR, IF YOU
COULD CURE UP ANYONE WHO WAS
WISHES TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION
OF A B 23 34. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
OPPOSITION. YOU MAKE PRESS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. I GET THAT IS ONE
AND THEN ZERO FOR OPPOSITION OF
A B 23 34. AND WE WILL GO TO
LINE UP TO 49. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. RECALL ON BEHALF OF LITTLE
LIVABLE CALIFORNIA IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. NEXT GOAL
LINE OF 2 80. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
TERRY STARBASE SIDE IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
OPPOSITION IN CUBA AT THIS TIME.
VERY GOOD. WE'RE GOING TO BRING
THE MATTER BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS. COMMENTS CONCERNS.
YES, SENATOR, UM, HI. SO I WAS,
UM. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE
AUTHOR QUESTION THROUGH THE
CHAIR. YES. UM HOW WOULD YOU
ADDRESS THE CONCERNS? UM I'M
SORRY. LOOKING FOR MY NOTES
HERE. I HAVE BEEN RUSHING
AROUND, UM THAT THIS WOULD COST
SOME LOCAL CONTROL ISSUES AND
THAT THIS DENSITY BONUS HAS
UNLIMITED DENSITY AND ADDED
HEIGHT. UM INTO THE BILL. SHIRT
MARINA, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A
STEP AT THIS FIRST? HAPPY TO DO
IT? I THINK THE BEAUTY OF
DENSITY BONUS DENSITY BONUS LAW
IS THAT IT'S A NEGOTIATION
BETWEEN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
THE DEVELOPER. AND SO WHILE YES.
THERE IS SORT OF THE UNLIMITED
DENTYNE E AND NO MORE THAN THREE
ADDITIONAL STORIES IS TYPICALLY
NEGOTIATED BECAUSE THE PROJECT
STILL NEEDS TO BE APPROVED BY
THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL, AND SO IF THE
DEVELOPER CHOSE TO SORT OF DO
SOMETHING THAT WAS SO OBSCENE
THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD OPPOSE
IT. THEY WOULD DENY THE PROJECT
ONCE IT WAS GOING THROUGH A
PROCESS. OH, SO HE'S STILL
ALLOWS FOR LOCAL CONTROL SIDE,
THE HEIGHT AND THE IN. THE
PROJECT COULD STILL BE DENIED IF
THE COMMUNITY FELT LIKE THE
PROJECT BEING PROPOSED, THEY
COULD NOT SUPPORT SO LIKE, WHILE
THE DEVELOPER COULD GO TO THE
VERY MAXIMUM OF WHAT IS
ALLOWABLE IN DENSITY BONUS LAW,
IF THAT WAS GOING TO LEAD TO
OPPOSITION LOCALLY AND DENIAL BY
THE LOCAL CITY COUNCIL AT THE
PROJECT APPROVAL STAGE. UM THEY
WOULD STILL HAVE THE DISCRETION
TO BE ABLE TO DENY THE PROJECT
AT THAT POINT. OKAY SO IT
DOESN'T CIRCUMVENT ALL LOCAL
CONTROL. OKAY I'M GRATEFUL TO
HEAR THAT. I ACTUALLY APPRECIATE
THAT THAT COMPONENT AND THEN THE
OTHER CONCERN. I WOULD NOT
CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUESTION I
WOULD HAVE WOULD BE WITH REGARD
TO THE PARKING STANDARDS. AND
LOCAL AGENCIES AS WELL. YES SO,
UM, CURRENT DENSITY BONUS LAW
DOES PROVIDE PARKING REDUCTIONS
OR PARKING, UM, NO LIMITS ON
PARKING MINIMUMS. THIS BILL
DOESN'T ACTUALLY CHANGE THOSE
STANDARDS. IT JUST SORT OF IT
TWEAKS A BIT OF THE DEFINITION
WITHIN WHAT TYPES OF PROJECTS
QUALIFY FOR THOSE PARKING
REDUCTIONS WERE NOT EXPANDING
SORT OF. ADDITIONAL PROJECTS TO
FALL UNDER IT, BUT I UNDERSTAND
THE CONCERN IF FOLKS HAVE
CONCERNS WITH ELIMINATING
PARKING MINIMUMS, UM THOSE ARE
VALID CONCERNS. JUST THIS BILL
DOESN'T DOESN'T CHANGE CREATING
NEW PARKING MINIMUM CATEGORIES.
OKAY PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S
ALL I HAVE. IS THERE ANYBODY
ELSE THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS
CONCERNS? THING THEN YOU MAY
CONCLUDE DISRESPECT FASTER AND I
VOTE WHEN YOU ESTABLISH CORN.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. LET'S SEE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. MOVING DOWN
THE AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER SIX, UM
BOERNER HORVATH HER VET. ALWAYS
WANT TO GET THAT ONE RIGHT AND I
NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT. IT'S
LIKE A JOB, OKAY? I JUST NEED TO
THINK ABOUT IT. YOU JUST CAN'T
LOOK AT THIS FELLA. I KNOW
THAT'S EXACTLY ABOUT BURNER LIKE
A BURNER PHONE ONCE AND BURGER
THIS BEFORE AND ARE HONEST STOVE
BACKBURNER. I'VE HEARD THEM ALL.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS.
A B 17 38 WOULD REQUIRE THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS
COMMISSION. TO CONSIDER THE
ADOPTION OF MANDATORY BUILDING
STANDARDS FOR THE INSTALLATION
OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
STATION. IN EXISTING MULTI
FAMILY DWELLINGS. SCHOOLS ARE
NOT SCHOOLS, MULTI FAMILY
DWELLINGS, HOTELS AND MOTELS AND
NON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
DURING RETROFITS ADDITIONS AND
ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING PARKING
FACILITIES. UPDATES TO THE
CALGARY IN CODE ADOPTED IN
DECEMBER. 2021 REQUIRE THAT WHEN
ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS ARE
MADE TO PARKING FACILITIES AND
EXISTING MULTI FAMILY BUILDINGS
, AT LEAST 10% OF THE PARKING
SPACES MUST BE UPGRADED. TOO
EASY CAPABLE. FURTHERMORE WHEN
ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS ARE
MADE TO EXISTING MULTI FAMILY
DWELLINGS, HOTELS AND MOTELS, AT
LEAST 25% OF THE PARKING SPACES
MUST BE E V READY, MEANING THAT
THE PARKING SPACES HAVE BOTH
RACEWAY AND LOW POWER LEVEL TO
ELECTRICAL OUTLETS. WHILE THE
BUILDING STANDARD COMMISSION
ADOPTED EDDIE CAPABLE AND EASY
READY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING
PARKING FACILITIES, IT DID NOT
INCLUDE EASY INSTALL
REQUIREMENTS, WHICH REQUIRE ALL
THE INFRASTRUCTURE PLUS THE
ACTUAL CHARGING STATION. THERE
IS THE EQUIVALENT OF SAYING
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PLUMBING FOR
A TOILET. BUT NO ACTUAL TOILET
AND WE ALL KNOW IF YOU NEED TO
GO TO THE BATHROOM. IT DOESN'T
HELP IF THERE'S NOT A TOILET
THERE. SO A B 17 38 WOULD
REQUIRE REGULATIONS TO BE
CONSIDERED AND ADOPTED TO FILL
THIS GAP. I THINK IT'S ALSO
IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT AS THE
COST OF TVS HAS DECREASED IN
RECENT YEARS, AND IT'S EXPECTED
TO CONTINUE TO DECLINE IN THE
FUTURE. E. V S ARE BECOMING MORE
ACCESSIBLE TO LOW INCOME
POPULATIONS OVER THE LACK OF
ACCESS TO HOME CHARGING STATIONS
REMAIN A MAJOR BARRIER TO THE
ADOPTION ANALYSIS BY THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION
FOUND THAT LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES HAVE FEWER CHARGING
STATIONS PER CAPITAL, THE MIDDLE
AND HIGH INCOME COMMUNITIES.
RELIABLE ACCESS TO EVIE CHARGING
STATIONS IN PARTICULAR, OR IS
PARTICULARLY CHALLENGING FOR
RENTERS AND THOSE LIVING IN
MULTI UNIT DWELLINGS. STUDIES
HAVE SHOWN THAT AS MUCH AS 85%
OF CHARGING FOR PERSONAL
ELECTRIC VEHICLES OCCURS AT HOME
, BUT PEOPLE LIVING IN
APARTMENTS AND CONDOMINIUMS,
ALSO KNOWN AS MULTI FAMILY
DWELLINGS ARE MULTI UNIT
DWELLINGS DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO
THESE CHARGING IN THEIR UNITS. A
B 17 38 WILL PROVIDE GREATER
MORE RELIABLE ACCESS TO CHARGING
INFRASTRUCTURE TO LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME COMMUNITIES AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR.
SPECIFICALLY THOSE LIVING IN
MULTI FAMILY BUILDINGS, WHICH
WILL MAKE ELECTRIC AND ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE OWNERSHIP MORE
FEASIBLE. I HAVE AUTHORS
AMENDMENTS THAT WILL THAT SHOULD
REMOVE MOST OF THE OPPOSITION.
AT THE COMMITTEE'S REQUEST. THE
BILL WILL BE AMENDED IN SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS. I CAN GO THROUGH
THOSE AMENDMENTS IF NECESSARY
FOR THE COMMITTEE. I DO WANT TO
SAY I TALKED TO SEVERAL OF YOU
WANT TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT I'VE HEARD WHEN
TAKING THIS THROUGH THE ASSEMBLY
AND NOW IN THE SENATE, I WROTE
THIS BILL MYSELF, AND MY GOAL IS
YOU KNOW, IN 2030. WE HAVE AN
EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT SAYS WE'RE
NO LONGER GOING TO SELL
COMBUSTION ENGINE CARS IN
CALIFORNIA. AND SO WE KNOW AS
MULTI FAMILY DWELLINGS, EXISTING
MULTI FAMILY DWELLINGS REDEVELOP
. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THOSE
CHARGING STATIONS ARE ACTUALLY
INSTALLED OVER TIME. AND THERE'S
300 MILLION IN THE BUDGET THIS
YEAR FOR TVS FOR LOW INCOME
SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL AS MULTI
FAMILY AND MY BILL WOULD SAY
THIS IS THE BUILDING STANDARDS
COMMISSIONS UPDATE IN THREE
YEARS, SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING
THAT IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE THE
INTENTION IS NOT TO PUT THIS ON
THE DEVELOPERS OR THE LANDLORDS
TO DO THIS, BUT IT HELPED TO
OFFSET THEIR COSTS BECAUSE THIS
IS A BENEFIT FOR EQUITY IN ALL
OF CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T WANT TO
LEAVE. OUR LOW INCOME
CALIFORNIANS AND NEIGHBORS
BEHIND WHEN WE GO TO THE
TRANSITION TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES
, SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING THAT
CLOSELY AND LOOKING NEXT YEAR,
INTRODUCING LEGISLATION AND
WORKING WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE AND CONTINUING THAT WORK
TO ENSURE THAT THIS COST IS
HELPED THREE OFFSET BY THE
STATE. AND SO WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK HER. I VOTE
BECAUSE THIS IS A TBH SPECIAL. I
WROTE IT MYSELF. IF YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, PLEASE
LET ME KNOW I'M I'VE BEEN
WORKING WITH THE OPPOSITION THE
ENTIRE TIME. ON THIS BILL AND
HAPPY TO CONSIDER ANY OF YOUR
SUGGESTIONS AS WE MOVE THIS BILL
FORWARD IN THE SENATE. VERY GOOD
. I'M PASSING THE GAVEL, PASSING
THE GAVELS THROUGH THE CHAIR.
THANK YOU, SENATOR CAVIAR FOR
BEING A TROOPER AND STEPPING IN
UM OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
OH, WHAT DO YOU SAY? OKAY I'M
SORRY. I THOUGHT THAT WAS HER
CLOTHES. THAT WAS HER OPENING
OPENING. MY APOLOGIES. OKAY WE
DON'T HAVE ANY LEADS SUPPORT
IDENTIFIED. WE HAVE A QUORUM.
OKAY, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL OR ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED
WARM? SENATOR WIENER PRESIDENT
WIENER PRESENT BATES BATES
PRESENT CORTEZ E. CABALLERO
CABALLERO PRESIDENT MCGUIRE
OCHOA BUG. HERE. LOOK HERE,
SKINNER. HAMBURG. HAMBURG HERE,
WIECKOWSKI WE HAVE A QUORUM.
OKAY WE HAVE ESTABLISHED QUORUM
AND WELL NOW AS FOR IS THERE ANY
SUPPORT HERE IN ROOM 2100 FOR SP
17 38. SEEING NONE WILL GO TO
THE PHONE LINES. MR MODERATOR OR. OR THE MODERATOR. IS THERE
ANY, UH, SUPPORTIVE PUBLIC
COMMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR IN
SUPPORT OF A B 17 38 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO. FEAR
AND SUPPORT OF A B 17 38. HAD
ONE MOMENT WHILE WE GET THEIR
LINE NUMBERS. AND AGAIN WE ARE
IN SUPPORT OF A B 17 38. WE'VE
GOT TO LINE UP TO 57. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. MRS SANTIAGO, ANGELINA,
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT TO
THE LINE OF 2 84. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS ROGER
DICKINSON ON BEHALF OF CIVIC
WELL, FORMERLY THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT COMMISSIONS IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT TO GO ONLINE TO 76 LINE IS
OPEN. HELLO THIS IS WILL BRING
ER UNDER HALF OF 3 50,
SACRAMENTO AND WE ARE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
AND NEXT WEEK OR TWO. ONE MOMENT
WHERE THEY GET THEIR LINE NUMBER
ONE MOMENT LIKE TO 70. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. LINE 2 70. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE
LINE? DO YOU HAVE A MUTE? ALL
RIGHT. AND MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FOR THIS IMPORTANT TO YOU AT
THIS TIME. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE IN ROOM
2100 AND OPPOSITION TO A B 17
38? SEEING THAT WE'LL GO TO THE
PHONE LINES, MADAM MODERATOR.
THANK YOU IF YOU'RE AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 17 38 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO FOR AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 17 38. AND WE
WILL GO TO LINE 2 82. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS SILVIO FERRARI
, CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION. WE HAD AN OPPOSING
LESS AMENDED THE BILL TO THE
GREAT WORK OF THE AUTHOR AND HER
STAFF. WE ARE NOW. USUAL ON THE
BILL FOR AGAIN. THANK YOU,
AUTHOR FOR ALL THE WORK AND LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH HER
MOVING FORWARD ON EXPENSIVE
ANOTHER WAY TO BRING THAT
REALITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
NEXT TO GO TO LINE UP TO 58
AIRLINE IS OPEN. YES GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
KAREEM GREASY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS AND OPPOSITION
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING OVER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT,
WE'LL GO TO THE LINE UP TO 51
YEAR, LINUS OPEN THIS RUN
KINGSTON. I REPRESENT SEVERAL
ASSOCIATIONS, NOTABLY THE ENTIRE
STATE FOR AFFORDABLE HAPPENING,
UM AND SERVING ALL LOW INCOME.
AS WELL AS THE APARTMENT
ASSOCIATION. AH! RESOLVING THE
MAJOR ISSUE FOR US, WHICH WAS A
MANDATORY RETRO SHIFT
REQUIREMENTS. ALL MULTIFAMILY
PROBLEM PROPERTIES THAT IS AND
WILL BE REMOVED. AS I UNDERSTAND
IT AT THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE WE RESPECTFULLY HAPPY
MOVED OUR OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
OKAY WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE COLLEAGUES IN COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS. YES, SENATOR
COBURG. I'M JUST GRATEFUL FOR
AND THE CONVERSATIONS ARE
REACHING OUT AND TRYING TO
EXPLAIN YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK
WITH THE OPPOSITION AND I'M
GRATEFUL. THIS IS HOW WE COME
TOGETHER IN WORK ON GOOD,
BALANCED POLICIES WHEN WE HAVE
ALL STAKEHOLDERS AND WE TRY TO
DELIBERATELY TRY TO WORK OUT THE
ISSUES. SO I COMMEND YOU FOR THE
WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING, AND I
TRULY TRULY APPRECIATE ALL THE
EFFORT AND YOUR CONTINUED
WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION AND I WILL GLADLY
SUPPORT THE BILL. THANK YOU. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YES
SENATOR COMING TO COMMENT, AND I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE THEIR
RECOGNITION THAT, UM WE HAVE NOT
DONE ENOUGH TO INCLUDE LOWERING
THERE ARE LOW IN COMMUTE LOW
INCOME COMMUNITY AS PART OF OUR
THE RESOURCES THAT WE SPEND ON
ELECTRIFICATION AND I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS
TOGETHER AND WORKING SO HARD ON
IT. APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.
GREAT SEEING THE OTHER MIKES.
OKAY MOTION BY SENATOR CABALLERO
. UM YOU MAKE CLOTHES
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN IVO. UM
THE MOTION IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST
WE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS AND WILL CALL THE
ROLL. WIENER WIENER. AYE, BATES
, NOT VOTING CABALLERO. YOU'RE
LIKE ORTEZ. MCGUIRE PHð BUG. PHð
LIKE ORTEZ. MCGUIRE PHð BUG. PHð-BUG I. SKINNER. HAMBURG,
WIECKOWSKI. 320 OKAY. WE'LL PUT
THAT ON CALL. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, SO REMEMBER. OKAY I WILL
NOT GO TO ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TING
A B 26 56 YOUR OTHER BILL. I
BELIEVE HIS OWN CONSENT. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. UM FIRST LET ME
JUST THANK THE COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR THEIR FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE
ON THIS BILL AS A COMMITTEE
KNOWS THE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY
ACT, ESTABLISHED IN 1982 WAS
ESTABLISHED TO LIMIT LOCAL
AGENCIES ABILITY. COULD DENY
QUALIFYING HOUSING PROJECTS FROM
BEING BUILT IN THE JURISDICTION
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE
LEGISLATURE HAS STRENGTHENED THE
HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT IN
RESPONSE TO SOME CITIES
RESORTING TO SOME FAR FETCHED
ARGUMENTS TO DENY VALID SECRET
CLEARANCES. FOR EXAMPLE, IN MY
AND MY TOWN, AS WELL AS SENATORS
TOWN WE'VE HAD TWO INSTANCES OF
SAN FRANCISCO ALONE. WHERE HDD
HAS HAD TO ADDRESS TO SPECIFIC
EXAMPLES WHERE OUR LOCAL, UM
LOCAL BOARD HAS GONE TO GREAT
LENGTHS TO STOP TO HOUSING
PROJECTS. THIS BILL CLARIFIES
WHAT A WRONGFUL DENIAL IS, AS
WELL AS THE WITHHOLDING OF A
SECRET CLEARANCE. IT DOESN'T
CHANGE SEQUEL. IT ALSO DOESN'T
EXPAND DOESN'T EXPAND WHAT
CONSTITUTES A DISAPPROVAL OF A
PROJECT. OR DOES IT EXPAND? A
SECRET EXEMPTIONS TO CHANGE IS
TOTALLY CONSISTENT WITH H C. D S
INTERPRETATION OF DISAPPROVAL OF
THE PROJECT HAVE RECEIVED
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A VOTE ON A
B. 26 56. I HAVE TWO WITNESSES
MICHAEL LANE FROM SPUR AND
CORNELIUS BURKE FROM CBI. GREAT
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY CLAIM
WAS FOR A PUBLIC POLICY THINK
TANK IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY
AREA. EVERY 26 56 DOES NOT TOUCH
SEQUENCE ANYWAY, NOR DOES IT
ALTER ANY EXISTING RIGHTS OR
RESPONSIBILITIES THAT EXIST IN
CURRENT LAW WITH REGARD TO THAT
STATUTE, THIS BILL IN NO WAY
ELIMINATES OR LIMITS LAWFUL AND
LEGITIMATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
NOR DOES IT CHANGE SECRET
TIMELINES OR TRUNCATE THE
PROCESS. THE FINANCE AND
DECLARATIONS WERE AMENDED INTO
THE BILL TO EXPLICITLY CONVEY
ITS INTENT TO CLARIFY EXISTING
LAW AND CODIFY HZDS
INTERPRETATION OF THE HOUSING
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT AND ITS
INTERACTION WITH SEQUEL. THE
BILL DOES NOT EXPAND THE
DEFINITION OF DISAPPROVAL UNDER
THE A, WHICH BOTH THE
LEGISLATURE HAS FOUND IN COURTS
HAVE RECOGNIZED ALREADY BROADLY
INCLUDES ANY REQUIRED LAND USE
APPROVALS OR ENTITLEMENTS
NECESSARY. FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A
BUILDING PERMIT. WHILE THE DOES
NOT EXEMPT PROJECTS FROM SEQUEL
THAT ALSO DOES NOT AUTHORIZE
CITIES TO DENY A SECRET
CLEARANCE TO WHICH A HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT IS OTHERWISE LEGALLY
ENTITLED. MAYBE 26 56 MERELY
REQUIRES A SECRET EXEMPTION
ALREADY ON THE BOOKS AND THEN A
HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS LEGALLY
ENTITLED TO BASED ON THE RECORD
BEFORE THE AGENCY BE GRANTED, OR
THAT AN IR OR NAG DECK WITH A
LEGALLY SUFFICIENT BASIS IN THE
RECORD. BE ADOPTED. THIS IN NO
WAY PRECLUDES ADDITIONAL STUDY
IF THE NEED IS IDENTIFIED. THE
FACT IS A B 26 56 ONLY SEEKS TO
ENFORCE THE LAWS AROUND
ENVIRONMENT REVIEW THAT ARE
ALREADY IN STATUTE AND WE
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE CORNELIUS BURKE
WITH THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. WE ARE THE
HOMEBUILDERS. WE'RE PROUD TO
SUPPORT A B 26 56. IN FACT, WE
HAVE CALLED IT A HOUSING CREATOR
FOR THIS YEAR. THIS IS IMPORTANT
BILL TO SOLVE OUR STATES
HOUSING CRISIS AS MICHAEL LANE
FROM SPUR JUST MENTIONED. THIS
BILL DOES NOT EXEMPT PRODUCTS IN
SEQUENCE DOES NOT CHANGE SEQUEL
. WHAT IT REALLY DOES. IS THAT A
CLOSE A LOOPHOLE IN THE HOUSE OF
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT RECENTLY
CREATED BY SOME TO ADD
ADDITIONAL STEPS IN CALIFORNIA'S
LENGTHY AND COMPLICATED HOUSING
APPROVAL PROCESS IN AN EFFORT TO
SCUTTLE ADDITIONAL HOUSING, SOME
JURISDICTIONS HAVE REQUIRED
FURTHER ENVIRONMENT REVIEW. IN
ADDITION TO COMPLY WITH SEEKER
WHERE THERE WAS NOT ILLEGALLY
SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR DOING SO.
ALTERNATIVELY SOME JURISDICTIONS
HAVE DENIED EXEMPTION FOR SICA
WHEN A HOUSING PROJECT WAS
ELIGIBLE FOR THE EXEMPTION. 80
26 36 CLOSES ITS ABUSIVE
LOOPHOLE. FOR THESE REASONS AND
MORE A B 26 56 IS A HOUSING
CREATOR. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. I'VE BEEN STARTING
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT OF PUBLIC
COMMENT ON SOCIETY, CALIFORNIA
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP AND SUPPORT. HOLLY FOR MANY INTO HIS DUES
WITH LIGHTHOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS
HERE TODAY AND SUPPORT ON BEHALF
PACIFIC WELL, SANDHILL
PROPERTIES IN B ACTION AND
FIELDS DONE. JORDAN PLANET
KANDAHAR ON BEHALF OF CONFERENCE
ROOM B AND SUPPORT ANY
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT HERE
IN ROOM 2100 SAYING THAT WE'LL
GO TO THE PHONE LINE PHONE LINE,
MADAM MODERATOR, COULD YOU
PLEASE QUEUE UP SUPPORT? THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
ONE AND THEN ZERO. FEAR IN
SUPPORT OF A B 26 56. WE WOULD
GO TO LINE 2 71. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI. THIS IS ADAM BOOK DNB
SUPPORTER OF A B 26 56. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT. WE'RE
GOING TO LINE 2 75. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PRACTICES AROUND O'CONNELL
CALLING FROM NAPA. SOLANO, UM,
BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU NEXT TO THE LINE TO 28. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. PRIVATE CHILI ON
BEHALF OF HOUSING ACTION
COALITION AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU
AND NEXT LINE TO 69. HI IT'S
PHILIPPA CHECKER WITH THE LOS
ANGELES AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU, MR
CHARIOT. NO FURTHER SUPPORTING
QUÊ. THANK YOU VERY MUCH WILL
NOW GO TO OPPOSITION. IS THERE
ANY OPPOSITION HERE IN THE ROOM?
PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN OR MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
CRISTINA KERO MAN ATTORNEY ON
BEHALF OF THE STATE BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL HERE
IN OPPOSITION TO 26 56. OUR
OPPOSITION IS BASED ON FORMING
REASONS. SO CONTRARY TO WHAT
SOME OF THE SUPPORT HAS STATED,
THIS BILL WOULD ACTUALLY
REDEFINE BASIC LAND USE LAWS BY
CREATING A NEW AND EXPANDED
DEFINITION OF PROJECT
DISAPPROVAL. WHICH WOULD OCCUR
AT SOME AMBIGUOUS POINT DURING
THE AGENCY'S DECISION MAKING
PROCESS ON A PROJECT. THIS WOULD
PROHIBIT AGENCIES FROM COMPLYING
WITH THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATIONS TO
REQUIRE ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
AND PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEW AND
MITIGATION WHEN THEY REASONABLY
BELIEVE, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE
IN THE RECORD. THAT A PROJECT
DOES NOT MEET ITS ENVIRONMENTAL
REQUIREMENTS IS NOT EXEMPT FROM
SEQUA, OR THAT ADDITIONAL
ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO
DETERMINE HOW TO BEST MITIGATE
THOSE IMPACTS AS REQUIRED BY
LAW. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WHETHER AN
EXCEPTION TO A SECRET EXEMPTION
APPLIES OR WHETHER FURTHER STUDY
IS REQUIRED AFTER CONSIDERING
PUBLIC COMMENT ON A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OR ANY IR THESE ARE
FACT BASED QUESTIONS THEY'RE
MADE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS BY
THE DECISION MAKER. THIS BILL
WOULD SHIFT THAT DECISION MAKING
PROCESS FROM THE AGENCY AS
REQUIRED BY LAW TO THE COURTS.
SECOND MAYBE 26 56 WOULD CREATE
AN INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT
STATUES. SO DENIAL OF A SECRET
CLEARANCES PRECISELY NOT
ENCOMPASSED IN THE HOUSING
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT'S EXISTING
DEFINITION OF PROJECT
DISAPPROVAL, AND THAT IS BECAUSE
THE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
SAYS THE OPPOSITE. IT SAYS THAT
NOTHING SHALL AFFECT COMPLIANCE
WITH SEQUEL. THE AGENCY MUST
MAKE FINDINGS UNDER SECRET IN
ORDER TO APPROVE A PROJECT AND
THE AGENCY MUST ALSO MAKE
FINDINGS UNDER THE HOUSING
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, AND THOSE
FINDINGS WOULD BE IRRECONCILABLY
INCONSISTENT IF THIS BILL WERE
PASSED. THIRD THE BILL VIOLATES
BASIC ADMINISTRATIVE AND LOCAL
ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION
REQUIREMENTS. BY ALLOWING A
DEVELOPER TO FILE A LAWSUIT IN
THE MIDDLE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS BEFORE THE AGENCY HAS
TAKEN FINAL ACTION AND WITHOUT
COMPLYING WITH LOCAL AGENCY
PROCEDURES, WHICH WOULD ENTITLE
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO FILE
THAT LAWSUIT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
FINALLY A B 26 56 IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE, WHICH IS A
STATUTE THAT GOVERNS THE ABILITY
TO FILE A LAND USE LAWSUIT. SO
THEY COULD HAVE CIVIL PROCEDURE
HAS THE COURT LOOK AT WHETHER AN
AGENCY HAS VIOLATED A MANDATORY
DUTY OR WHETHER THEY'RE DECISION
WAS SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL
EVIDENCE. THIS BILL WOULD
REQUIRE THE COURT TO WEIGH
EVIDENCE BASED ON AN INCOMPLETE
PARTIAL RECORD WITH NON EXISTENT
FINDINGS, WHICH THE PETITIONER
SAYS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BUT
WEREN'T AND IT WOULD ALLOW THE
COURT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT
PARTIAL RECORD SHOULD HAVE BEEN
ENOUGH TO APPROVE A PROJECT THAT
WOULD TURN THE LAW ON ITS HEAD,
CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE AND SEQUA PUT THAT
DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY
SQUARELY ON THE AGENCY AND NOT
ON THE COURSE. SO FOR THESE
REASONS, WE URGED THE COMMITTEE
TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL, AND I'M
HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE
ANY ADDITONAL OPPOSITION PUBLIC
COMMENT HERE IN ROOM 2100?
SEEING NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. META MODERATOR. THANK YOU
IF YOU'RE NOT POSITION OF A B 26
56, YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IT'S ONE IN THE
ZERO FAIR IN OPPOSITION. AND WE
HAVE NO OPPOSITION IN CUBA AT-THIS TIME, MR. CHAIR THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE. UM COLLEAGUES ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE
AUTHOR. YES SENATOR JOBURG. I
WOULD JUST LOVE AN OPPORTUNITY
OR THROUGH THE CHAIR. IF HE, UM,
OF THE OTHER WOULD WOULDN'T MIND
ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU HAPPY TO
THAT'S GOING TO HAVE MICHAEL
LANE FROM SPURRED TO THAT THAT'S
OKAY WITH YOU. GREAT THANK YOU.
JUST A FEW POINTS TO REPEAT WHAT
? YOU JUST HEARD THE DEFINITION
OF DISAPPROVAL UNDER THE ALREADY
EXTENDS TO A NEGATIVE VOTE ON
ANY REQUIRED LAND USE APPROVALS
OR ENTITLEMENTS NECESSARY FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING
PERMIT NOW, BUT ALSO IN INCLUDE
THE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK THAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO THE ISSUE
THERE IS IF A JURISDICTION
DENIES A VALID EXEMPTION, FOR
EXAMPLE, TYPICALLY, DEVELOPERS
DID NOT BRING LITIGATION IF THEY
DO PROVIDE THE EXEMPTION.
OFTENTIMES NEIGHBORS WILL SUE
FOR $900, WHICH IS TO FILE A
LAWSUIT. AND SO THEY GO THROUGH
AND DO THE ENTIRE ENVIRONMENTAL
WORK. EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE
ENTITLED TO THAT EXEMPTION. THEY
DON'T CHALLENGE IT IN COURT
BECAUSE THE JUDGE WOULD JUST
REMANDED BACK TO THE LEAD
AGENCY. THEY'D HAVE TO JUST TELL
THEM TO DO MORE ENVIRONMENTAL
WORK. SO WE'RE NOT. WE'RE SAYING
GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS IS
JUST THAT ONE STAFF BRINGS THE
DECISION MAKING BODY, A DOCUMENT
THAT COULD BE CERTIFIED. THEY
NEED TO GO AHEAD AND DO SO
UNLESS THERE IS A RECORD IN
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD THAT
IDENTIFIES ADDITIONAL NEED FOR
STUDY, SO IT'S NOT JUST
EFFICIENT EXPEDITION. TRYING TO
FIND REASONS TO STALL OUT
BECAUSE THE DEADLINES AND
TIMELINES AND STATUTE FOR SECRET
OR NOT ENFORCEABLE, THE COURTS
HAVE ALREADY FOUND THAT WE DO
HAVE AN HCG LETTER THAT SAYS,
ACTUALLY, THE ACTIONS THAT MR
TING HAD TALKED ABOUT IN SAN
FRANCISCO MAY ACTUALLY
CONSTITUTE EFFECTIVE DENIAL
UNDER THE BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE
FACT PATTERN IN THAT CASE. WHAT
OUR BILL SEEKS TO DO IS ACTUALLY
RUN THROUGH THE ENTIRE DOESN'T
CUT THE PROCESS SHORT AT ALL RUN
THROUGH THE FOUR SECRET
TIMELINES THAT'S 30 DAYS TO
DETERMINE WHETHER AN EXEMPTION
IS VALID SIX MONTHS FOR A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR THE FULL
YEAR FOR THE E I. R FOR THE
UPPER COMPLETE FULL O'NEILL AREA
AFTER THAT POINT IF THERE IS IN
THE RECORD AND A NEED FOR
ADDITIONAL STUDY THAT CAN BE
DONE, CERTAINLY UNDER THIS BILL
, AS I SAID THAT THE COURTS HAVE
ALREADY RECOGNIZED THE DOES NOT
ALLOW YOU TO INDEFINITELY. D
SEQUENCE STUDIES AS A WAY TO GET
AROUND OUTRIGHT DENIAL OR MAKING
A DECISION. YES OR NO ON A
PROJECT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO AVOIDERS. THE INFINITE
STUDIES WITHOUT MERIT THAT EVEN
WHEN STAFFS BROUGHT FORWARD
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS THAT
COULD BE APPROVED BY THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY. THANK YOU. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
COLLEAGUES. OKAY? UM SO FIRST OF
ALL, I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT IT, AND I
KNOW THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE WAS
FLAGGED IN A MAJOR WAY. UMAND
THE STEVENSON STREET PROJECT IN
SAN FRANCISCO, BUT I KNOW THAT'S
CERTAINLY JUST AN EXAMPLE. UM
AND THIS REALLY IS A FOCUSED
BILL. I RESPECT THE OPPOSITION
AND THEIR CONTENTIONS, BUT I IS
A FOCUS BILL DESIGNED TO ADDRESS
THE SITUATION WHERE GOVERNING
BODY IS BASICALLY ABUSING SEQUA
AS A WAY TO EFFECTIVELY DENY A
PROJECT ON THE MERIT. AND WE SAW
THAT IN STEVENSON STREET WITH
FRANKLY, THE STATEMENTS THAT
WERE MADE BY SOME OF MY FORMER
COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS THAT WERE, FRANKLY
EITHER NOT SECRET ISSUES AT ALL,
OR ISSUES WHERE THERE DID NOT
APPEAR TO BE ANY REAL BASIS. IN
THE RECORD AND AGAIN. THAT'S
JUST ONE EXAMPLE. AND THAT WAS A
VERY GLARING EXAMPLE. BUT WE
KNOW THIS HAPPENS IN OTHER
SITUATIONS AND SEQUA IS, UM NOT
DOES NOT EXIST TO BE AWAY FOR A
GOVERNING BODY TO EFFECTIVELY DO
A MERIT REJECTION OF A PROJECT.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT SEQUA
, AND THIS BILL PROVIDES THAT
CLARITY AND MAKES IT CLEAR THAT
YOU CAN'T GET AROUND THE H A
WITH A BOGUS SEQUA. REJECTION SO
WITH THAT, UM, YOU MAY CLOSE NO,
NO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
THINK YOU SUMMED IT UP VERY WELL
. AND I THINK THE ONLY THING I
WOULD JUST ADD IS OFTENTIMES
WHAT IS THE WORST SITUATION IS
WHEN PROJECTS ARE JUST HELD IN
LIMBO. THEY'RE NOT ASKED TO
ADDRESS ANYTHING. THEY'RE TOLD
THAT PERHAPS SOMEDAY THERE'LL BE
TOLD WHAT THEY NEED TO ADDRESS
AND THEY JUST SIT THERE. SO THIS
IS A WAY TO GET SOME CERTAINTY
FOR PROJECTS, WHETHER IT'S A
REJECTION OR APPROVAL. AND AS AS
YOU MENTIONED, WE THINK THIS IS
A NARROWLY CRAFTED BILL TO
TACKLE THIS VERY SPECIFIC ISSUE.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A VOTE ON
MAYBE 26 56. GREAT. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? TO MOVE MOVE BY SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI AND WE WILL CALL THE
ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS BUT
FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND
FINANCE WIENER BATES. I
CABALLERO. CORTESI. MCGUIRE. PHí
BUG BUG. I SKINNER. BLOOMBERG
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I 4 TO 0
AND WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY NEXT
SUMMER MEMBER GRAYSON, UM HE WAS
TWO BILLS. WELL MAYBE 21 86 26
68. WHICH WOULD YOU LIKE TO
PRESENT 1ST 21 86 ITEM? MAYBE 21
86 1. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR
CHAIR AND VERY MEMBERS. I AM
PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 21 86,
WHICH WILL ESTABLISH THE HOUSING
COST REDUCTION THAT SENATE
PROGRAM TO INCENTIVIZE LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS TO REDUCE OR DEFER
LOCAL IMPACT FEES FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECTS. SO DESPITE THE
MONUMENTAL EFFORTS FROM THE
LEGISLATURE, IT CONTINUES TO BE
TOO EXPENSIVE TO BUILD IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA IMPACT FEES
CAN ACTUALLY REPRESENT UP TO 18%
OF THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH
BUILDING NEW HOUSING. THIS COST
US ADDED DIRECTLY ONTO THE COST
OF THE UNIT, OFTEN MAKING IT
DIFFICULT OR EVEN IMPOSSIBLE TO
BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 21 86
PROVIDES TO INCENTIVES TO
ADDRESS THE PROBLEM FIRST, MAYBE
21 86 WILL PROVIDE LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS WITH 50. OF THE
VALUE OF THE FEE REDUCTION
GRANTED FOR THE PROJECT, AND
THEN SECONDLY, ALLOWING
JURISDICTIONS TO DEFER FEES.
ANGELA HOUSING PROJECT IS
CONVERTED TO PERMANENT FINANCING
WHILE CHARGING INTEREST. THE
STATE WILL THEN BACKFILL THAT
INTEREST, EFFECTIVELY PROVIDIN
DEVELOPERS WITH A ZERO INTEREST
LOAN AND ENSURING LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS ARE MADE WHOLE.
THIS INCENTIVE PROGRAM WILL
SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE COST OF
BUILDING HOUSING WHILE
SUPPORTING BOTH LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS AND AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPERS. I DO HAVE A
WITNESS TO THE CHAIR, MR MR MARK
STIVERS WITH THE CALIFORNIA
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP. RIGHT GOOD
AFTERNOON MARKS. DIVERS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING PARTNERSHIP,
PROUD TO SPONSOR THIS MEASURE,
JUST LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT TWO
THINGS BRIEFLY ONE. THIS IS A
VOLUNTARY PROGRAM. LOCALS ARE
NOT REQUIRED TO REDUCE FEES, BUT
THEY ARE INCENTIVIZED TO DO SO.
AND TO THIS PROGRAM, ACTUALLY,
WHILE IT IS A REIMBURSEMENT
PROGRAM REALLY SAVES THE STATE
MONEY. THE STATE IS ULTIMATELY
PAYING FOR MOST OF THESE
DEVELOPMENT FEES NOW IN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, EITHER
THROUGH THE STATE LOW INCOME
HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM OR
THROUGH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING PROGRAMS. AND IF WE CAN
GET LOCALS TO REDUCE THE FEES,
EVEN THOUGH WE'RE PAYING HALF OF
THAT IT'S A NET WIND OF THE
STATE. SO IT'S A WIN WIN ALL
AROUND. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
GREAT ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT OF
PUBLIC COMMENT IN ROOM 2100.
SEEING NONE. WE WILL GO TO THE
PHONE LINES. META MODERATOR.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF A
B 21 86. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN Ì0 SUPPORT. AND WE GO TO
THE LINE TO 28. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. THANK YOU. JOHN INSTITUTE
ON BEHALF OF HOUSING ACTION
COALITION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. NEXT WE WILL GO TO LINE.
ONE MOMENT. IT IS A REMINDER WE
ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B 21 86.
HUGO CHILLIN OF 2 91. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON. SYDNEY
CAN ON BEHALF OF BRIDGE HOUSING
IN SUPPORT OF A B T 186. THANK
YOU. AGAIN WAIT FOR NO FURTHER,
UH, IMPORTANT. QUÊ AT THIS TIME,
MR CHAIR. THANK YOU WILL NOW GO
TO OPPOSITION? IS THERE ANY
OPPOSITION TO A B 21 86 HERE IN
ROOM 2100. SITTING DOWN, WE'LL
GO TO THE PHONE LINES. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR OPPOSITION OF A B 21 86
. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN OPPOSITION ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AND WE HAVE NO
OPPOSITE. NO OPPOSITION IN QUÊ,
MR. CHAIR OKAY, WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
COLLEAGUES. ANY QUESTIONS,
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. I WAS, I
GUESS. YOU KNOW, IT'S. SHOCKED
FRIGHTENED. WHAT WORD COULD I
SAY ON PAGE FOUR OF THE
COMMITTEE REPORT WHEN THEY TALK
ABOUT LOS ANGELES, CHARGING
$2700 FOR THEIR FEES. AND THE
CITY OF FREMONT, WHICH I PROUDLY
REPRESENT AND LIVE IN CHARGING
$51,000 AND WHAT'S THE RIGHT FEE
? I MEAN, IF YOU'RE PROCESSING A
THREE STORY BUILDING A HOME THAT
SOMEBODY'S GONNA BUILD CANDID
KINDY ACTUAL COSTS BE THAT GREAT
BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND THE CITY
OF FREMONT. IS THAT POSSIBLE OR
OR THESE FEES BEING HOW THEY
FUNCTIONING AS PROFIT CENTERS
FOR LOCALITIES WHERE THEY'RE
MAKING MONEY OFF OF THE
DEVELOPER BY THE FEES THERE,
ISN'T IT FEE FOR SERVICE, OR AM
I WRONG? ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI GREAT
OBSERVATION AND THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THAT FORTH. I DO
BELIEVE THIS THAT THAT FEES ARE
VERY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY TO
LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES. IT'S WHAT
HELPS COVER THE COST OF
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR DEVELOPMENT
AND SERVICES THAT ARE THAT ARE
INCURRED BECAUSE OF THAT
DEVELOPMENT, AND WE MUST BE ON
ON A STATE LEVEL, ESPECIALLY
WITH THE LEGISLATURE. VERY
CAREFUL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DON'T TAKE ON A MINDSET THAT ONE
SIZE FITS ALL HAVING GONE ON A
STATEWIDE HOUSING TOUR. AND
VISITING DIFFERENT REGIONS FROM
CHICO ALL THE WAY TO SAN DIEGO.
WE DID REALIZE THAT THERE ARE
THINGS THAT ARE MUCH DIFFERENT
FROM ONE JURISDICTION OR REGION
TO ANOTHER. SO IT IS EXPECTED
THAT THERE WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE
IN IMPACT FEES, WHICH IS WHY IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WE HAVE
A TOOL FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
CALLED THE NEXUS TOOL. AND SO
IT'S A NEXUS STUDY. AND THEY CAN
USE THAT NEXUS STUDY WITH THE
RIGHT PARAMETERS RIGHT AS SET OF
QUALIFICATIONS TO BE ABLE TO
DEVELOP. WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE
FEE FOR THAT PARTICULAR
JURISDICTION? SO IT CAN BE DONE.
IT CAN BE DONE THE RIGHT WAY AND
DONE IN A WAY THAT IS
COMPLEMENTARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AND ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THE
LOCAL JURISDICTION HAS ITS NEEDS
MET AS WELL. THIS BILL DOES
EXACTLY WHAT YOU BROUGHT OUT AND
THAT IS IT REALLY CALLS OUT
THOSE THAT ARE, UM A BIT
EXCESSIVE IN THEIR IMPACT FEES
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
MAKE IT BETTER FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPERS TO GET THE
JOB DONE. THANK YOU. I'LL MOVE
THE BILL, MR CHAIR. OKAY SENATOR
TO A BOOK. I JUST, UM ADDRESSING
YOUR QUESTION. I THINK IT'S VERY
TRY TO MAKE IT VERY SIMPLE
BECAUSE I HAVE OFTEN WONDERED. I
KNOW IN THE PAST, WE'VE HAD
EFFORTS TO, UM. TO DISCLOSE THE
COST OF BUILDING IN FOR
DIFFERENT CITIES SO THAT
DEVELOPERS CAN COME IN AND SAY,
OKAY, HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO
DEVELOP IN THIS CITY VERSUS THE
CITY AND ABLE TO DECIDED WHERE
TO DEVELOP, BUT I THINK PART OF
THE COST DIFFERENCE. UM AND
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I
THINK PART OF THE COST
DIFFERENCE. RELATES TO HOW MUCH
MORE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THAT
CITY OR THAT JURISDICTION IS
LEFT TO DEVELOP AS FAR AS THE
NFRASTRUCTURE OR THE SERVICES
NEEDED. UM T MEET THE NEEDS OF
NEW DEVELOPMENT. THAT MAKES ANY
SENSE SO THERE'S COST
DIFFERENCES, ONE BASED ON THE
COST OF LAND, AND, UM WHAT IT
COST TO DEVELOP THOSE PARTICULAR
UM, EXTRA SCHOOLS, OR, UM, POST
OFFICE OR SO FORTH OR UM. UM
WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? UM, ANOTHER
THING THAT WE DEVELOP, UM
FIREHOUSES, BUT I THINK ALL OF
THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT IS LEFT AND
WHAT IT WILL BE NEEDED IN THOSE
AREAS AND SO WHEN THEY'RE
LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES OF CREATING NEW
DEVELOPMENTS THERE TAKING
CONSIDERATION. WHAT WHAT IS
GOING TO BE NEEDED AND HOW MUCH
IT'S GOING TO COST IN THAT
PARTICULAR REGION, SO I'M
ASSUMING THAT IN YOU'RE IN AREAS
WHERE REAL ESTATE IS A REALLY,
REALLY EXPENSIVE AND IT'S MORE
COSTLY TO DEVELOP. THAT YOUR
FEES WOULD PROBABLY BE IMPACTED
BY THAT VERSUS SOMEWHERE WHERE
IT'S NOT AS EXPENSIVE. OUR LAND
IS NOT AS EXPENSIVE TO DEVELOP,
SO I'M ASSUMING THAT WOULD
PROBABLY HAVE THE BIGGEST IMPACT
ON THOSE FEES. IF IT DOES THAT
HELP, MR. CHAIR IF I MEAN I KNOW
IN 1977, IF WE SOME OF US WERE
ALIVE, THERE ARE A LOT OF CITIES
LIKE CITY OF FREMONT HAD VERY
LOW PROPERTY TAXES BECAUSE THEY
WANTED TO ATTRACT PEOPLEFROM
THE SURROUNDING AREAS TO GO
THERE, SO THEY SET THEIR BASE
REALLY LOW BECAUSE THEY
DEVELOPERS WILL COME IN. YOU CAN
BUILD A SCHOOL. IT WAS NO BIG
DEAL. AND THEN 13 CAME AND THEY
CUT THEMSELVES. THEY GOT CAUGHT
AT A VERY LOW LEVEL OF TEXAS
WERE THE NEIGHBORING CITIES HAD
WHEN I WOULD SAY MORE REASONABLE
THEY WERE TRYING TO AGGRESSIVELY
BUILD HOUSING AND BRING
DEVELOPERS IN WITH THE LO FI
MUCH TO THEIR CHAGRIN IN 1978,
SO I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE
PROBLEM IS JUST DISHES WHEN WE
HAVE SO MUCH MONEY, $12 BILLION
GOING INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
AND WE'RE PAYING THE FEES WERE
PAYING ALL THOSE IMPACT FEES ALL
OVER THE STATE. YOU LOOK AT IT
AND YOU SAY WAIT A MINUTE. WE'RE
THIS IS A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY
. WE WANT EVERYBODY TO HELP OUT
WITH THIS SO GOOD LUCK. OKAY ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UM
I JUST WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR THIS BILL, BUT ALSO FOR
SEVERAL YEARS OF WORK ON THE
IMPACT ON THE ISSUE OF IMPACT IS
IT'S REALLY TOUGH ISSUE BECAUSE
AS WE'VE HEARD TODAY, IT IS NOT
A LOT OF TRANSPARENCY THAT
THERE'S PARITIES AMONG THE
CITIES. IS JUST OR MASSIVE. AND
I MEAN, COMPARING SAN FRANCISCO
AND OAKLAND. THERE'S A HUGE
DIFFERENCE, AND, YOU KNOW
HONESTLY, BUT IT'S HARD TO
CRITICIZE THE CITY'S BECAUSE YES
, I THINK THERE ARE SOME CITIES
THAT USE IMPACT VISAS AWAY TO
UNDERMINE DEVELOPMENT.
DEFINITELY, BUT THERE ARE OTHERS
WHERE WE MADE IT SO HARD FOR
CITIES TO RAISE REVENUE. BECAUSE
OF A SERIES OF CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS THAT THIS IS LIKE ONE
OF THE FEW, UM EASIER WAYS TO
RAISE REVENUE. SO WE PUT CITIES
IN A REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATION.
I APPRECIATE YOU TRYING TO. TO
GET AT THIS ISSUE FROM A NUMBER
OF ANGLES AND HAVING A LOT OF
DIALOGUE WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS
OVER TWO OR THREE YEARS NOW, I
THINK SO. THANK YOU FOR THAT,
AND I'LL BE RECOMMENDING AN AYE
VOTE ON THIS BILL. AH, AND YOU
MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AND THANK YOU FOR THE ROBUST
DISCUSSION BECAUSE EACH OF YOU
WERE BROUGHT BRINGING OUT SOME
VERY GOOD POINTS AND ACTUALLY
TAKING THE CONVERSATION FROM
SCRATCHING THE SERVICE TO AT
LEAST ETCHING. HEAD SO WITH
THAT, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR. GREAT I'M SORRY. DO WE HAVE
A MOTION? NO. SOME MOVED BY
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. AND THE
MOTION IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST BE
WE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE, AND WE
WILL CALL THE ROLL SENATOR
WIENER BEDS, CABALLERO. CORTEZ E
. MCGUIRE COBURG COBURG AYE
SKINNER, HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI THAT'S 4 TO 0. OKAY
WE WILL PUT THAT ON CALL, AND
YOUR NEXT BILL IS A B 2668 ITEM
NUMBER 12. MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. A B 26 68 IS
A FIX UP BILL TO ENSURE
QUALIFIED HOUSING PROJECTS ARE
STREAMLINED AS INTENDED UNDER
CURRENT LAW, SB 35. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR WAS A LANDMARK EFFORT
TO INCREASE OUR HOUSING SUPPLY
AND UNDER SP 35 LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS MUST ESTABLISH
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND
STREAMLINE APPROVALS FOR
DEVELOPMENTS THAT MEET THOSE
STANDARDS. 26 60. WELL FIRST OF
ALL, THE AMBIGUITIES IN THE LAW
HAVE BEEN EXPLOITED TO DERAIL
DESPERATELY DESPERATELY NEEDED
HOUSING PROJECTS ACROSS THE
STATE. SO THIS SIMPLY CLARIFIES
THAT A PROJECT SHALL BE APPROVED
IF IT MEETS OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
, AND THAT TOTAL PROJECT UNITS
ARE ACCOUNTED PRIOR TO DENSITY
BONUS. THIS WILL ENSURE THAT LAW
FUNCTION THAT THAT THE LAW
FUNCTIONS AS INTENDED TO BUILD
THE HOUSING THAT WE NEED SO
DESPERATELY, AND WITH THAT I DO
HAVE TO THE CHAIR WITNESS
MICHAEL LANE FROM SPUR. MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. MY CLAIM IS
FOR PUBLIC POLICY THINK TANK IN
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA.
LET'S BE 35 HOUSING APPROVALS
STREAMLINE HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS
BOON TO THE PRODUCTION OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND IT'S
HELPING TO BRING NEW HOMES
ONLINE MORE QUICKLY AND
EFFICIENTLY WHILE RESPECTING
LOCAL ZONING AND OBJECTIVE
DESIGN. AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS. AS DETAILED IN THE
COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. A B 26 68
PROVIDES ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL
CLEANUP AND CLARIFYING LANGUAGE
CONSISTENT WITH LEGISLATIVE
INTENT CDS. SP 35 GUIDELINES.
THESE CLARIFICATIONS WILL
FURTHER PERFECT THE LAW AND
ENSURED FUNCTIONS AS INTENDED.
WE RESPECT THE REQUEST AND I
VOTE. IS THERE ANY OTHER
SUPPORTIVE PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE
ROOM? PROBABLY FOR MANY DAYS USE
WITH WHITE HOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS
AND SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF THE
UNTIL PROPERTIES. CIVIC. WELL,
UM, BE ACTION AND FIELD STUDY.
DURING PLANTING CARVAJAL ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA AND BE IN
SUPPORT. ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT
HERE IN THE ROOM, AND THEN WE'LL
GO TO THE PHONE LINE. MADAM
MODERATOR, WILL YOU PLEASE QUEUE
UP SUPPORT? THANK YOU FOR THE
SUPPORT OF A B 26 68 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IT'S ONE AND THEN ZERO FEAR
AND SUPPORT. WE'VE GOT TO LINE
UP TO 71. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI.
THIS IS ADAM BOOKBINDER,
RESIDENT OF CAMPBELL AND
SENATE-DISTRICT. 11 BOARDING A B
2668. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
WE WILL GO TO THE LINE OF 2 80
OR 2 28. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THANK YOU. JOHNSON TODAY ON
BEHALF OF THE HOUSING ACTION
COALITION IS SUPPORT. THANK YOU
. AND WE HAVE TWO MORE. ONE
MOMENT, MR CHURCH, AND WE WILL
GO TO LINE 2022. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. THIS IS JIM FINNEGAN FROM
AARP. WE'RE TOTALLY SUPPORTIVE
OF THE BILL. THANK YOU. NEXT
CAROLINE OF 2 88 LINE IS OPEN.
HI THIS IS ADAM BREE ANDERSON,
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY BUILDERS
CALLING AND SUPPORTED THE BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT
WE GO TO LIKE TO 75. THE AIRLINE
IS OPEN. BRIAN O'CONNELL FROM
NAPA, SOLANO. GAMBIAN SUPPORT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND WE HAVE
NO FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ. IT'S
GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO OPPOSITION.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO A B
26 68 IN THE HEARING ROOM?
SEEING NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
POSITION OF A B 26 68 YOU MAY
PRESS 10. AGAIN. THERE IS ONE
AND THEN ZERO FOR AN OPPOSITION.
AND MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
OPPOSITION IN. Q OKAY, WE WILL
BRING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
QUESTIONS? SENATOR BATES? UM
QUESTION. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE
BILL, BUT I'M CURIOUS. IF
THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OR YOU HAVE
NUMBERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
THAT MIGHT HAVE THROUGH A
BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS, NOT
APPROVED A PROJECT BECAUSE THEY
FORGOT PAGE FIVE OF THE
APPLICATION PROCESS, WHERE THERE
THAT MANY SINCE THE SINCE SB 35
BECAME LAW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
SEEMS TO BE, YOU KNOW, A PATTERN
. SOMETIMES IT'S NOT THE NUMBER
BUT IT'S THE BUT IT'S THE
MAGNITUDE OF A PROJECT. AND SO,
THOUGH WE MAY NOT HAVE NUMBERS
AS FAR AS NUMEROUS ACROSS THE
STATE, WE DO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
EXAMPLE WHERE A JURISDICTION WAS
USING SOME LOOPHOLES. TO TRY TO
STALL AND EVEN STOP A PROJECT.
SO THROUGH THIS CLEANUP OF
SOMETHING THAT WAS INTENDED IN
THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, IT IS IT
WILL HELP. THIS PROJECT BE ABLE
TO MOVE FORWARD. I THINK I AM
FEEL AT LEAST COMFORTABLE THAT
IT MAY BE ONLY ONE OR TWO
JURISDICTIONS AND NOT SOMETHING
THAT THERE'S A BIG LOOPHOLE
THERE THAT EVERYBODY IS TAKING A
LOOK AT BECAUSE THAT I THINK THE
BUREAUCRACY THAT DEVELOPERS HAVE
TO FACE IT MANY LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AS A PROBLEM BECAUSE
I'VE HAD MY OWN ISSUES WITH
FINANCIAL EXAMPLE. BUT I I'M I
WOULDN'T WANT TO SUPPORT
SOMETHING WHERE ONLY ONE PERSON
TRIED IT. AND THEN YOU GOT THIS
LAW NOW EVERYBODY IS GOING TO,
YOU KNOW, BE AFRAID TO SAY NO.
BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T FILL OUT PAGE
FIVE, WHICH IS ESSENTIAL TO US
UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT MEETS THE
STANDARDS. THAT WE HAVE IN OUR
IN OUR, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IN
OUR CITY, YES OR SOMETHING
THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IN TERMS
OF PUBLIC SAFETY IN TERMS OF THE
BUILDING THAT'S GOING FORWARD.
SO I THINK I'M HEARING FROM YOU
THAT COMFORTABLE THAT IT'S KIND
OF A LOOPHOLE THAT NEEDS TO BE
CLOSED, BUT NOT OVERUSED. THAT'S
WHAT I HOPE YOU'RE SAYING. THAT
IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. VERY
INTUITIVE. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS SEEING NONE SOME.
REMEMBER YOU MAKE CLOTHES. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN EVIDENCE
AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND I'M
RECOMMENDING AN AYE VOTE. AH!
MOTION BY SENATOR WIECKOWSKI.
AND THAT MOTION IS TO DO PASS
BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND
FINANCE WILL CALL THE ROLL.
SENATOR WIENER WIENER. AYE BATES
ALRIGHT, CABALLERO. ORTEZ E.
MCGUIRE ACTUAL BUG EYES SKINNER.
HAMBURG WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I
? THAT'S 4 TO 0. PUT THAT ON
CALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
REMEMBER, I SEE SOME REMEMBER
REYES IS HERE. UM ITEM 13 22 17.
BLOCK HIM. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS. I'M
PLEASED TO PRESENT 20 TO 17 THE
AFFORDABLE HOMEOWNERSHIP
PRODUCTION ACT, WHICH WILL
EMPOWER CALIFORNIA FAMILIES TO
BECOME FIRST TIME HOMEOWNERS.
AND THE BILL IS SPONSORED BY
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. THE BILL
ALLOWS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
INCREASE TO INCREASE THE PER
UNIT AND TOTAL PROJECT CAPS
WITHIN THE KILL HOME PROGRAM
BASED ON LOCAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS
, AND WE EXPECT THAT THIS WOULD
ENCOURAGE THE CONSTRUCTION OF
AFFORDABLE HOMES. HOMEOWNERSHIP
IN CALIFORNIA REMAINS GROSSLY
INEQUITABLE ONLY 41% OF BLACKS
AND 49% OF LATINO FAMILIES OWNED
THEIR HOMES COMPARED TO 68% OF
WHITE AND 60 66% OF ASIAN
FAMILIES. CURRENTLY THE CALLA
HOME PROGRAM FOR AFFORDABLE
HOMEOWNERSHIP CONSTRUCTION IS
OVERSUBSCRIBED AND UNDERFUNDED.
THIS HAS SEVERELY LIMITED THE
ABILITY OF NONPROFIT DEVELOPERS
TO ACCESS THESE FUNDS, MEANING
DESPERATELY NEEDED AFFORDABLE
HOMES HAVE GONE UNBUILT YEAR
AFTER YEAR. A B 22 17 WILL
ADDRESS THESE ISSUES BY
PERMITTING H C D TO INCREASE PER
UNIT AND TOTAL PROJECT
ALLOCATIONS WITHIN THE CAL HOME
PROGRAM. BASED ON LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT COSTS. THIS BILL
WILL ENSURE THESE CAPS ARE
UPDATED REGULARLY BY REQUIRING H
C D TO CONSIDER INCREASING
ALLOCATIONS FOR EACH NEW ROUND
OF FUNDING. I AM PLEASED TO
SHARE ALSO THAT FUNDING FOR 20
TO 17 HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THIS
YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE BUDGET. ACT
WHICH ALLOCATES 350 MILLION FOR
THE QUEL HOMME PROGRAM. BY
UPDATING THE FUNDING CAPS FOR
QUEL HOMME. MAYBE 20 TO 17 WILL
PROMOTE THE CONSTRUCTION OF
AFFORDABLE HOMES AND GENERATE
MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR CALIFORNIA
FAMILIES TO BECOME FIRST TIME
HOMEOWNERS. HERE TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT IS DEBBIE ORACLE,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF HABITAT
FOR HUMANITY, CALIFORNIA YOU MAY
COME FORWARD. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M
DEBBIE ARTICLE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR WITH HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY CALIFORNIA AND I'M HERE
TODAY REPRESENTING THE VIEWS OF
OUR LOCAL HABITAT FOR HUMANITY'S
IN URBAN AND RURAL COMMUNITIES
STATEWIDE, AND I'VE PERSONALLY
BEEN ABLE TO USE THE CAL HOME
PROGRAM AS A NONPROFIT
DEVELOPER. AND WE'RE PROUD TO
SPONSOR A B 22 17 AND STAND
ALONGSIDE ASSEMBLY MAJORITY
LEADER ELOISE RACE. TO INCREASE
THE SUPPLY OF AFFORDABLE
HOMEOWNERSHIP OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS. THIS LEGISLATION UPDATES
THE ANTIQUATED ONE SIZE FITS ALL
PER UNIT AND PER PROJECT FUNDING
CAPS. BY ALLOWING THE DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT THE FLEXIBILITY TO
MAKE APPROPRIATE INCREASES BASED
ON THE ACTUAL COSTS. THE CURRENT
CAPS ARE INHIBITING PRODUCTION.
AND SCALE ABILITY. WITH THIS
ALLOWANCE TO INCREASE THE CAPS
NONPROFIT HOME DEVELOPERS,
INCLUDING HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
STATEWIDE, CAN ACCELERATE
PRODUCTION AND INCREASE THE
SUPPLY. OF AFFORDABLE HOMES IN
URBAN AND RURAL COMMUNITIES HAVE
A CHAT AND OTHER NON PROFIT
DEVELOPERS HAVE A PIPELINE OF
OWNER OCCUPIED PROJECTS AND WITH
RELIABLE, APPROPRIATELY
LEVERAGE. HERBAL FUNDING. BASED
ON THE ACTUAL COSTS. THIS WILL
HELP US INCREASE MUCH NEEDED
PRODUCTION. THIS LEGISLATION IS
PARTICULARLY CRITICAL BECAUSE
THERE'S ONLY ONE SINGLE
OWNERSHIP PRODUCTION STATE
PROGRAM. AVAILABLE TO NONPROFIT
DEVELOPERS AND LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS. AND THIS IS CAL
HOME AND, AS WAS MENTIONED THIS
CAL HOME FUNDING IS ABOUT TO RUN
OUT, BUT IT IS INCLUDED
HOPEFULLY IN THE PROPOSED STATE
BUDGET. AND WE'RE PROUD TO
SUPPORT THAT PRIORITY AS WELL.
JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK POINTS TO
CLARIFY FOR CAL HOME. IT IS ONLY
AVAILABLE TO NONPROFIT
DEVELOPERS AND LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS. IT'S 100%
AFFORDABLE. IT'S ONLY UP TO 80%
AM I AND IT INCLUDES MULTI
FAMILY OWNERSHIP AND SINGLE
FAMILY OWNERSHIP. IT FOLLOWS A
REPAYMENT RE USE MODEL, SO AN
INVESTMENT IN THIS PROGRAM HELPS
PRODUCE MORE UNITS IN THE FUTURE
. EXACTLY AND IT'S EFFECTIVE IN
ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF REGIONS
IN THE STATE FROM LARGER METRO
AREAS LIKE GREATER SAN FRANCISCO
BAY AREA TO RURAL COMMUNITIES
LIKE HILLARY KINGS COUNTY,
NEVADA COUNTY. CALVARY'S AND
THERE'S A MANDATED GEOGRAPHIC.
JUST PURSE MINT REQUIREMENT
BUILT INTO THE PROGRAM. OVER
12,000 PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO
AFFORDABLE HOMEOWNERSHIP JUST
THROUGH HABITAT ALONE, AND
THAT'S JUST IN THE LAST DECADE
80% OF HABITAT HOMEOWNERS ARE
HOUSEHOLDS OF COLOR WE SERVE
VETERANS. WE SERVE OLDER ADULTS
, AND WE SERVE FAMILIES WITH
MEMBERS WITH A DISABILITY. SO
THIS LEGISLATION IS KEY TO
INCREASING ACCESS AFFORDABLE
ACCESS TO HOMEOWNERSHIP FOR MORE
CALIFORNIANS, SO WE'RE PROUD TO
SPONSOR THIS LEGISLATION AND WE
ENCOURAGE AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GO AHEAD
HOLLY FOR MANY DAYS, ISSUES FROM
LIGHTHOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS ALSO
IN SUPPORT TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE BLACK LEADERSHIP COUNCILS
FOR AN NBA ACTION. MR CHAIRMAN,
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
CORNELIUS BURKE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, JUST WANT TO ALIGN
OURSELVES WITH HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY AND FULL SUPPORT OF
THIS IMPORTANT, BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY FURTHER
SUPPORT PUBLIC COMMENT HERE IN
THE HEARING ROOM, SAYING NONE
WE'LL GO TO THE PHONE LINES,
MADAM MODERATOR. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SUPPORT OF A 22 17. YOU MAY
PRESS ONE, AND THEN ZERO AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO IF
YOU'RE IN SUPPORT AND WE WILL GO
TO LINE. 2 28. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. THINK YOU'VE DONE ON
BEHALF OF HOUSING ACTION
COALITION AND SUPPORT THANK YOU
LYING TO 29. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
AND MEMBERS OF THE WESTERN
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. LYING TO 88
YEAR LINE IS OPEN. LINE 2 88.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. DO YOU HAVE A MUTE? AND
WE HAVE NO FURTHER SUPPRTING
QUÊ IT THIS TIME, MISS TEACHER
GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH WILL
NOW GO TO OPPOSITION. IS THERE
ANY OPPOSITION IN ROOM 2100?
SEEING THEM WILL GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
OPPOSITION OF A B 22 17 YOU MAKE
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
FOR OPPOSITION OF A B 22 17 YOU
MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AND MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
OPPOSITION IN. Q. GREAT. WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
COLLEAGUES. ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, SENATOR WIECKOWSKI
ALRIGHT? LOOKED LIKE HE WAS ON
THE VERGE. OKAY SEEING NONE. YOU
MAY CLOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT BY
NONPROFITS, I THINK IS ONE OF
THE WAYS TO GO. UM WE'VE SEEN
GREAT SUCCESS WITH HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY IN ALL OF OUR
COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING MINE AND
I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MOTION
BY CENTER WIECKOWSKI. I AM
RECOMMENDING AN AYE VOTE AND THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL, SENATOR WIENER, WIENER
FATES CABALLERO CORTESI MCGUIRE
BOOK YOUR BOOK I SKINNER HAMBURG
. WIECKOWSKI I ZERO. THANK YOU
PUT THAT ON CALL. OKAY I SEE.
REMEMBER, QUIRK-SILVA IS HERE.
WELCOME. HOPE YOU ENJOYED THE
WEEKEND AND SAN FRANCISCO. I SAW
IT ON SOCIAL MEDIA. UM ITEM 14
82 2 TO 1. YES I DID ENJOY THAT
SAN FRANCISCO DODGER GAME. AH
GOOD JOB ON THOSE GIANTS. BUT MR
CHAIR I'M HERE TO PRESENT A B
2221, MY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
BILL. A B 2 TO 1 WILL CLARIFY
EXISTING LAW TO HELP EXPEDITE
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A D US JUST
TO REFRESH SOME PEOPLE CALL HIM
A DUS. BUT SENATOR WIECKOWSKI
WILL REMEMBER THAT WE USED TO
CALL THEM MOTHER IN LAW OR
GRANNY FLATS. LAST YEAR,
CALIFORNIA BROKE THE $800,000
MEDIAN HOME PRICE MARK. FOR THE
FIRST TIME IN HISTORY IF WE WANT
TO SUPPORT OUR WORKING
CALIFORNIANS AND THEIR PURSUIT
OF THE CALIFORNIA DREAM OF
HOMEOWNERSHIP, THEN WE MUST MAKE
HOMES MORE AFFORDABLE. ONE OF
THE BRIGHT SMILE IN BUILDING IN
CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN A D. U S.
AND WE ARE SEEING MORE INTEREST
IN PEOPLE USING THEIR OWN
PROPERTY TO ADD ANOTHER UNIT.
AWS ARE PART OF THE SOLUTION TO
OUR STATE'S HOUSING CRISIS IN
THIS MEASURE WILL HELP OWNERS
HOMEOWNERS GET ACCESS TO A D U.
S AND SPEED THE DEVELOPMENT OF
HOUSING ACROSS CALIFORNIA. THIS
BILL SIMPLY CLARIFIES EXISTING
EU LAW THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
READ MUST RETURN A FULL SET OF
COMMENTS TO A PROJECT COMPONENT
WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE SUBMISSION
OF THE RADIO APPLICATION. IN
MANY CITIES. WE HAVE SEEN THAT
60 DAYS MANY TIMES LOOK MORE
LIKE SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR,
SOMETIMES FOR APPLICATION AND
ALSO SPECIFIES THAT LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS CANNOT EXCEED THE
LIMITS ON PLANNING STANDARDS FOR
CERTAIN TYPES OF AID US THAT ARE
ALREADY IN STATE LAWS AND
FINALLY EXPENSIVE DEFINITION. OF
THE PERMITTING AGENCY TO ANY
AGENCY THAT MIGHT ISSUE A PERMIT
TO A PROJECT APPLICANT, NOT JUST
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND
AGAIN, THAT'S IMPORTANT AS WE
KNOW THAT MANY CITIES DON'T HAVE
A FULL PLANNER ON SITE AND THOSE
PLANS THAT NEED TO GO OUT AND
MANY TIMES THAT TURNAROUND CAN
BE QUITE LENGTHY. SO WITH THAT
TODAY WE HAVE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
FROM THE COMMITTEE. WE HAVE
JORDAN'S CARVAJAL WITH
CALIFORNIA TMB. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND MR CARVAJAL, YOU MAY
PROCEED. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS JORDAN. PARANA CARVAJAL
ADVOCATE FOR CALIFORNIA AND BE
WHERE THE PROUD SPONSOR AND HERE
TO SUPPORT SPEAKING SUPPORT 22
21. CALIFORNIA IS A STATEWIDE
ORGANIZATION OF OVER 80,000
NEIGHBORS GET TO MAKING OUR
STATE AND FORMAL PLACE TO LIVE
WORK AND RAISE A FAMILY FOR ALL
RAISE THEIR FAMILY FOR ALL
CALIFORNIANS. ONE OF THE WAYS WE
CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT THAT GOAL IS
BYPASSING REFORMS THAT WILL
ACCELERATE ESPECIALLY ADRENALINE
UNIONS ALSO KNOWN THAT ALSO
KNOWN AT 80. U S PRODUCTION BY
CLARIFYING BY CLARIFYING EIGHT
EU RULES. WHERE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND HOMEOWNERS SINCE
CALIFORNIA ENACTING LAWS TO
ALLOW IT TO USE ON REGINALD
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES HAS
FURTHER CREATIONS OF TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF HOMES IN THE
CREATION OF A MULTI BILLION
DOLLAR INDUSTRY FOR EU
SPECIALISTS. ACCORDING TO
RESEARCH FROM THE UC BERKELEY
TURNER CENTER, 80 USE PRODUCE
MORE AFFORDABLE HOMES TYPICALLY
OCCUPIED BY LOW INCOME FAMILIES
AND INDIVIDUALS. MAYBE 20 TO 21
, TEXAS, ONE STEP CLOSER TO
ADDRESSING THE HOUSING SHORTAGE
BUT EXPANDING AVENUES FOR
HOMEOWNERS TO ACCELERATE THE
PRODUCTIONS OF 80 US. CALIFORNIA
HAS A SHORTAGE OF THREE POINT
MITT 3.5 MILLION HOMES, AND WE
BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL WOULD BE
ONE OF THE SOLUTIONS TO GET US
BACK ON TRACK. AND WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR
SUPPORT FOR A B 20 TO 21. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT IN ROOM 2100?
SEEING NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE
LINES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SUPPORT OF A B 20 TO 21. YOU
MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO,
FEAR AND SUPPORT. OF A B 20 TO
21. AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 2 71.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. THAT BOOK EXCEPT THE NBA
IN SUPPORT OF A B 2221. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WILL LINE
UP TO 75. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THIS IS RYAN O'CONNELL. FROM HOW
TO A D U AND EYE CALLING IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
AND WE HAVE LINE TO 90. YOUR
LINEIS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS, PAT MORAN,
WITH AARON READING ASSOCIATES
REPRESENTING THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA RENTAL HOUSING
ASSOCIATION. SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS
TIME. UM WELL, NO GOOD
OPPOSITION. IS THERE ANY
OPPOSITION IN ROOM 2100? SEEING
NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE LINES
FOR OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. FOR
NOW. THERE'S A BABY 20 TO 21.
YOU MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN. THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. YOU'RE NOT POSITION.
AND WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION IN
CUBA AT THIS TIME, MR CHIP.
GREAT THANK YOU. WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMITTEE COLLEAGUES
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THE
STAFF REPORT AT PAGE FIVE,
ROLLING INTO SIX ASKED THAT THE
AUTHOR AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
SALAS WORK WITH THE AUTHOR OF SB
897 TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
CHAPTER RING AND THE OBJECTIVE
STANDARDS SO I'M REPRESENTING
THAT. THE AUTHORS EAGER TO WORK
WITH UH, THE OTHER TWO AUTHORS
AND THE AUTHORS IN FRONT OF US
TO HARMONIZE THOSE CHAPTERS, SO
WE GET THEM IN THE RIGHT CODE
SECTION. AND I'LL MOVE THE BILL.
GREAT THANK YOU. UM CHAPTER IS
ALMOST IT'S ALWAYS SO MUCH FUN.
UM SO SOMETHING LIKE, THANK YOU
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND
FOR YOUR WORK IN GENERAL AND
HOUSING, AND I'M HAPPY TO
SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION AND
WITHOUT I THINK WE HAVE A MOTION
BY SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. AND THAT
MOTION ISD PASS, BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE, AND WE
WILL AND YOU MAY CLOSE.
DISRESPECTFULLY AS FRAN. I VOTE.
SENATOR WIENER? AYE BATES VOTING
COPYRIGHT CORTESI ACQUIRE. A
CHILD, BUG. I SKINNER. HAMBURG
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I 3 TO 0.
WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU FAMILY
MEMBER, AND NOW WE WILL GO TO
ITEM 17 ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JOAN
SAWYER. 80 28 73 WELCOME
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. THANK YOU.
CHAIR MEMBERS, UM, ARRIVED TO
PRESENT A B 28 73, THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLIER
DIVERSITY ACT, WHICH WILL
REQUIRE HOUSING SPONSORED THAT
RECEIVED AN ALLOCATION OF LOW
INCOME TAX CREDIT. THE REPORT TO
THE REPORT. THE USE OF WOMEN,
MINORITY DISABLED VETERANS AND
LGBT Q BUSINESS ENTERPRISES
MEMBERS, THOUGH CALIFORNIA HAS
RECENTLY MAKES SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENTS INTO AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, THESE
RESOURCES HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY
LIMITED TO DEVELOPERS THAT DO
NOT ALWAYS REFLECT OUR STATE'S
RICH RACIAL AND ETHNIC
DIVERSITY. THE INDUSTRY BY AND
LARGE HAS NOT MADE A CONSCIOUS
EFFORT TO ENSURE THAT MORE
DIVERSE AND WOMEN OWNED FIRMS
HAVE ACCESS TO DEVELOPMENT
RELATED CONTRACTS. THIS BILL IS
AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE
CALIFORNIA MORE EQUITABLE BY
REQUIRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPERS SHOULD CREATE A
REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE. A
DETAILED AND VERIFIABLE PLAN WAS
SHORT AND LONG TERM GOALS TO
INCREASE DIVERSE PROCUREMENT. A
B 28 73 IS ABOUT CREATING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR
UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIES WHO
NEED IT MOST BIODIVERSE FIRMS
THAT MORE LIKELY TO PUT THESE
COMMUNITIES AND THE PEOPLE THAT
LIVE IN THEM. FIRST THIS MEASURE
WILL INCREASE TRANSPARENCY ON
WHO BENEFITS FROM STATE DOLLARS
AND PROVIDE CRUCIAL DATA TO THIS
BODY THAT WILL ASSIST IN
CRAFTING NEW HOUSING POLICIES.
CENTERED ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY
AND INCLUSION. JOINING ME TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT. OUR
CONSTANTINE CONSTANTINE HATCHER
WITH CALIFORNIA BMB. AH GOOD
AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. CHAIRS AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR HAVING ME
HERE TODAY AND THANK YOU STILL
REMEMBER JOAN SAWYER FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP AND AUTHORING THIS
IMPORTANT BILL. MY NAME IS
CONSTANTINE HATCHER THEME
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY IMPACT FOR
CALIFORNIA. UM, BEING PROUD CO
SPONSOR. OF A B 28 73. I'M ALSO
THREAT IN TOOK PRESIDENCY OF THE
LINDA SH OF THE CENTER BY LINDE
ASTRI TO ALLEVIATE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING CRISIS AND UNPRECEDENTED
INVESTMENT IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN DEPLOYED.
IN FACT, 52 BILLION BETWEEN 2000
AND 15 AND 2020. WE ALSO KNOW
CALIFORNIA NEEDS ABOUT THREE
TIMES THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN
THE CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE. AND
HAS NOW TO BUILD THE HOMES THAT
WE NEED, HOWEVER, BUSINESSES
OWNED BY PEOPLE OF COLOR AND
OTHER MINORITIES HAVE NOT SHARED
IN THESE DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES
AT A RATE EQUIVALENT, UM TO OUR
STATE'S RICH DIVERSITY. OVER THE
YEARS, THIS HAS LED TO DIVERSE
FIRMS LOSING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
IN POTENTIAL CONTRACTS, WHICH
MEANS THE FIRST COMMUNITIES HAVE
MISSED OUT ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO
EARN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
WEALTH. AND THOUSANDS OF LIFE
CHANGING JOBS IF THE
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY WAS AS
DIVERSE AS CALIFORNIA'S
POPULATION ARE DIVERSE
COMMUNITIES COULD EXPECT
APPROXIMATELY 32.4 BILLION IN
PAYROLL INVESTMENTS ALONE.
IMAGINE THE IMPACT THESE
RESOURCES COULD HAVE ON SOME OF
OUR MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES
BY JUST INCENTIVIZING, OUR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILDERS TO
BE MORE INTENTIONAL ABOUT WHO
THEY ARE HIRING. EVERY 28 73 IS
THE FIRST STEP IN ADDRESSING
THIS TRAGIC INEQUITY AND GIVES
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DRIVE FOR
RACIAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE AND
PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AROUND
RACIAL INEQUITIES WITHIN THE
INDUSTRY BY TRACKING SUPPLIER
DIVERSITY. BY DIVERSIFYING THE
PIPELINE OF PEOPLE WHO SHARE IN
THE REVENUE RESULTING FROM THESE
VITAL PUBLIC INVESTMENTS. WE CAN
INCREASE WEALTH AMONGST
COMMUNITIES TYPICALLY EXCLUDED
FROM SUCH VALUABLE OPPORTUNITIES
SIMULTANEOUSLY NURTURING DIVERSE
CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
PLATFORMS WILL HELP INCREASE THE
VOLUME OF DESPERATELY NEEDED
CONSTRUCTION, DESIGN,
ENGINEERING AND OTHER RELATED
BERMS OPERATING SUCCESSFULLY
ACROSS THE STATE. UPLIFTING
DIVERSE FIRMS AND WORKERS WILL
HELP INCREASE ANNUAL NUMBER OF
HOMES BUILT IN CALIFORNIA AND
HELP FINANCIALLY EMPOWERED
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR THAT HAVE
LONG BEEN SHUT OUT PAST THE
UPWARD MOBILITY AND PROSPERITY.
THIS HELPS GROW THE WORKPLACE
FORCE IN A WAY THAT ENCOURAGES
EQUITY, HELPING SOLVE OUR
OVERALL SUPPLY SHORTAGE IN A WAY
THAT ALSO ADVANCES GOOD JOBS
WHERE PEOPLE OF COLOR WOMEN AND
THOSE FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS.
THIS IS WHY ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA MB IN OUR 80,000
MEMBERS AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
ACROSS THE STATE. I HUMBLY
REQUEST YOUR VOTE IN SUPPORT OF
A B 28 73. THANK YOU. AND I
BELIEVE OUR SECOND WIN. THIS IS
, UH, SHE COULDN'T MAKE IT WAS
GOING TO MAKE IT. I'M SORRY.
OKAY UM, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT OF PUBLIC COMMENT HERE
IN 2100? SEEING NONE WILL GO TO
THE PHONE LINE. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SUPPORT OF A B 28 73 YOU
MAKE ONE THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT
IS ONE AND THEN ZERO APPEARANCE
SUPPORT. AND WE CALL LINE 2 TO
71. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI THIS IS ADAM BOOK
FIGHTER FOR THE NBA IN SUPPORT
OF A B 2873. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU AND NEXT, WE'LL GO TO LINE
UP TO 75. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. IT
IS RYAN O'CONNELL COLLEAGUE FROM
NAPA. SOLANO, UM, B AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT
WE WILL GO TO LINE. USE ME TO 96
. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON STRATA
WITHDREW STRATEGIES CALLING ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA FORWARD
ACTION FUND AND SUPPORT THANK
YOU. AND WE HAVE TWO MORE IN Q
ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. WE'LL GO TO
LINE TO 60 FOR YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. I'M SORRY. EXCUSE ME, 2 46
LINE IS OPEN. HI. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THIS IS CARLA HAS
HISTORY YOU GOT FROM THE LOCAL
INITIATIVES CORPORATION OFFICE
IN LOS ANGELES, CALLING TO
STRONGLY SUPPORT MAYBE 28 73.
THANK YOU. NEXT. QUOTE TILL 2 38
YEAR LINE IS OPEN. RON CHÁVEZ
WITH CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
BUILDERS AND STRONG SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NOT FOR THE
IMPORTANT QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY
OPPOSITION IN ROOM 2100? SEEING
NONE WILL GO TO THE PHONE LINES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR POSITION OF A
B 28 73 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO FOR AN OPPOSITION OF A
B 28 73. AND MR CHAIR. WE HAVE
NO LISTENING AT THE TIME. OKAY
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS?
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI, SO I THINK I
UNDERSTAND THAT CURRENTLY RIGHT
NOW, WHAT? ON THE CPUC PROGRAM.
WE SET A THRESHOLD OF $15
MILLION ON THE BOTTOM AND $25
MILLION ON THE TOP, AND WE THINK
THAT THIS WOULD ENCOURAGE WOMEN
MINORITY DISABLED. PEOPLE SORT
OF RIGHT SIZE. THIS BILL WOULD
CHANGE THAT TO FIVE PROJECTS. SO
I AM IN MY MIND. I'M THINKING,
OKAY. IT SEEMS LIKE YOU WANT TO
ENCOURAGE SMALLER PLAYERS, SO
YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO MEET THE 15.
MILLION DOLLAR. FLOOR RIGHT AND
IT WOULD BE AND AS THE LOW UH
WELL, THERE'S. AS THEY GO ABOUT
REPORTING ON THIS, YOU'LL GET
MORE PEOPLE INCLUDED. BUT I
THOUGHT IT CAN ALSO BE THESE
FIVE MEGA PROJECTS. YOU KNOW,
SOMEBODY COMES IN WITH A BRAND
NEW CORPORATION AND, YOU KNOW,
THEY JUST SET UP AND THEY GOT
ONE PROJECT. IT'S $100 MILLION.
CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH LIKE, I
THINK I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT.
I'M JUST THE MECHANICS AND MAYBE
MY SPONSORS AND CLOSE TO TALK TO
YOU, BUT PART OF PART OF THE
BRINGING IT BACK TO THE
LEGISLATURE IS TO ENSURE THAT
WHAT YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT
DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT THIS BODY.
MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
FORMULA BECAUSE IT REALLY IS
ABOUT ACCESS TO CAPITAL,%
ESPECIALLY WOMEN OWNED
BUSINESSES AND BUSINESS OF
COLOR, NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPETE
ON THE LARGER SCALE. SO THIS IS
FOCUSING LIKE A LASER ON THAT
AND THEN TO GET THE DATA SO THAT
WE CAN BE ABLE TO MAKE A MORE
INFORMED DECISION BECAUSE
PRESUMABLY IF THEY'VE GOT IF
THEY'RE REPORTING ON IT, THEY'RE
NOT GOING TO NOT INCLUDE
MINORITY OWNED BUSINESSES AND
LGBTQ BUSINESS IN PRICE
SECURITY. TRY TO SIT THAT SO
WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT. AN
ADVERSE. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
THAT. THAT'S WHY WE WANT OPEN
BOOKS AND BEING ABLE TO SEE
WHAT'S GOING ON. T EVERYTHING
ELSE. OKAY. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
WELCOME, SENATOR MCGARR. YEAH.
YEAH UM OKAY MOTION BY SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI, AND THAT IS EMOTION.
D PASS, BOTH FIRST BE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. SOME REMEMBER
YOU MAY CLOSE RESPECT TO LAST
THREE. I VOTE. I WILL CALL THE
ROLL. WIENER BATES NÓI COPY YOUR
OLD CORTESI. MCGUIRE MCGUIRE. I
KNOW BUG. A SHOW BOOK? NO,
SKINNER. HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI I? THAT'S THREE OR
TWO. WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
PERHAPS SOME MEMBERS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. OKAY FINAL
PRESENTATION. TODAY I'LL BE
PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BRIAN AND THAT IS. A B 18
16 ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. SO I'M
PRESENTING TODAY WOULD BE 6 18
16 ON BEHALF OF SOME MEMBER
BRIAN. THE BILL WILL FIND
PRACTICAL AND EVIDENCE BASED
SOLUTIONS. TO OUR HOMELESSNESS
PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA, ONE OF
THE BIGGEST FEEDERS INTO
HOMELESSNESS IS OUR SYSTEM OF
MASS INCARCERATION. AH IN FACT,
IT HAS BECOME SUCH A MAJOR
FEEDER IN THE HOMELESSNESS THAT
CDCR ESTIMATES ABOUT 20% OF ALL
PEOPLE LEAVING PRISONS WILL
LEAVE ONLY TO BECOME HOMELESS.
IN ADDITION, THE CRS ESTIMATED
THAT ABOUT A THIRD TO HALF OF
THE PEOPLE ON PAROLE LIVING IN
LA OR SAN FRANCISCO ARE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. RIGHT
NOW, 70% OF THE PEOPLE ON OUR
STREETS HAVE AT ONE POINT BEEN
INCARCERATED. AND THE REASON IS
BECAUSE WHEN YOU CONTACT THE
CRIMINALS, THE CRIMINAL LEGAL
SYSTEM THE LIKELIHOOD OF
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
INCREASES. AND WHEN YOU HAVE
BECOME AN HOUSED THE LIKELIHOOD
OF CONTACTING THE CRIMINAL LEGAL
SYSTEM INCREASES AS WELL, IT'S A
SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP IN L, A
OVER A FOUR YEAR PERIOD, ONE IN
FIVE ARRESTS WITH SOMEBODY WHO
WAS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.
AND SO THE LINKAGE BETWEEN OUR
SYSTEMS OF MASS INCARCERATION
AND HOUSING AND EQUITY OR
EXACERBATING EACH OTHER. FOR
THAT REASON, WE SHOULD BE
FOCUSED ON CREATING PERMANENT
HOUSING AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR
PEOPLE EXITING PRISON. CURRENTLY
CDCR FUNDS PROGRAMS THAT PLACE
PEOPLE IN TEMPORARY HOUSING FOR
6 TO 12 MONTHS. WHAT A B 18 16
WILL DO IS, UH, WILL CREATE. RE
ENTRY, HOUSING AND WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM TO DO FOUR
MAIN THINGS NUMBER ONE FOR
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
WITH RECENT PRISON STAYS. IT
WILL PROVIDE AN AFFORDABLE PLACE
TO LIVE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
NUMBER TO PROVIDE TENANTS WITH
SERVICES TO HELP THEM STABILIZE
AND ACCESS TREATMENT THEY MAY
NEED. NUMBER THREE PROVIDE
TENANTS WITH LIVABLE WAGE JOBS
THROUGH WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
COMPONENT, ALLOWING PARTICIPANTS
TO EVENTUALLY TAKE OVER THEIR
OWN RENT. NUMBER FOUR CREATE A
REPORT TO EVALUATE PROGRAM
OUTCOMES. THIS IS NOT A NEW
MODEL. THIS HAS BEEN TRIED OUT
IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE
COUNTRY WITH POSITIVE RESULTS. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
UM AND, UM, WITH WITH US TODAY
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL IS NICK QUARREL RESIDENT OF
UNITED NETWORK. PLEASE COME
FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME
TODAY. UM, I AM IN DON'T EVEN
KNOW HOW TO PUT IT. I'VE GREATLY
SUPPORT THIS BILL. UM I AM A
FELON. I WAS RELEASED FROM
PRISON FOUR YEARS AGO IN THE
HOMELESSNESS AND HAD I HAD THE
SUPPORT THAT THIS BILL WOULD
GIVE US I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD TO
LIVE THAT LIFE AND THEY HAVE TO
TRY TO STRUGGLE. AND BEING WITH
THIS BILL. IF IT WAS PASSED, IT
WOULD GIVE PEOPLE THE SUPPORT
AND STABILITY THAT THEY NEED TO
STOP HAVING TO GO THROUGH THAT
REVOLVING DOOR THAT PRISON IS IF
THIS HAD ALREADY BEEN IN PLACE
FOR YEARS AGO, I WOULDN'T HAVE
HAD TO BEEN HOMELESS FOR FOUR
YEARS, I WOULD HAVE WENT INTO A
PROGRAM THAT LASTED MORE THAN
SIX MONTHS. THAT ACTUALLY HELPS
YOU GET INTO HOUSING. VERSUS
TRIES TO GIVE YOU A DRUG
REHABILITATION AND SAYS THAT'S
ALL WE CAN DO. THEY DON'T HELP
YOU FIND HOUSING. THEY DON'T DO.
NONE OF THAT. ALL THEY DO IS PUT
YOU IN A SIX MONTH PROGRAM AND
BOUNCE YOU FROM PROGRAM TO
PROGRAM UNTIL YOU GET OFF
PAROLE. AND THROUGH THAT, AT
LEAST THAT REVOLVING DOOR OPEN
TO CONTINUE TO GO IN AND OUT OF
PRISON JUST BECAUSE PRISON IS
EASIER. HAVING SOMEBODY TAKE
CARE OF YOU IS EASIER. AND IF
YOU'RE ON THE STREET, AND YOU'RE
HOMELESS, YOU HAVE TO TAKE CARE
OF YOURSELF AND YOU RUN INTO
MORE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITH
THE LAW AND EVERYBODY ELSE
LIVING ON THE STREET VERSUS
HAVING THAT SUPPORT. SO WITH
THIS, YOU WOULD HAVE HOUSING AND
YOU WOULD HAVE THAT STABILITY
AND YOU WOULD HAVE THAT SUPPORT
TO HELP YOU. TO RISE UP. AND
MOVE AWAY FROM THAT. PRISON LIFE
AND MAYBE BECOME A CITIZEN AND
BE ABLE TO BE A PART OF YOUR
COMMUNITY VERSUS BEING LOOKED AT
OR LOOKED DOWN AT BECAUSE YOU'RE
A FELON. SO I SUPPORT THIS BILL,
BECAUSE IF THIS BILL HAD BEEN IN
PLACE ALREADY, I WOULD HAVE
NEVER HAD TO HAVE SEEN THE
STREETS AND LIVE FOR FOUR YEARS
STRUGGLING AND I HATE TO SAY IT
THINKING ABOUT SUICIDE. BECAUSE
THAT IS NO WAY FOR ANYBODY
COMING OUT OF PRISON TO HAVE TO
LIVE OR TO THINK THAT NOBODY
CARES ABOUT THEM ENOUGH TO GIVE
THEM THE SUPPORT. AND THE HELP
THAT THEY NEED TO GET THEIR
HOUSING OR TO EVEN GET A JOB OR
EVEN THAT MENTAL HEALTH HELP
THAT THEY MAY NEED BECAUSE THOSE
OTHER PROGRAMS DON'T WORK
ANYMORE. THEY'RE NOT ENOUGH. AND
THIS WOULD BE THE MORE THAT WE
NEED. SO I FIRMLY I SUPPORT A B
18 16. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. IS THERE ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT? PUBLIC COMMENT HERE IN
21 2100. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND
STATE YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
YOUR SUPPORT. HI. THANKS SO
MUCH. I'M MARI CASTALDI ON
BEHALF OF HOUSING, CALIFORNIA
VERY PROUD SPONSORS OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. I'M CHRISTINE
MORALE AND, UH, FOR PRESIDENT,
UNITED NETWORK AND I FIRMLY
SUPPORT THIS BILL. MARK STEPHENS
OF THE CALIFORNIA PILOTING
PARTNERSHIP AND SUPPORT GREAT
ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PUBLIC
COMMENT IN ROOM 2100? SEEING
THEM WILL GO TO THE PHONE LINES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF A
B 18 16 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO FEAR IN SUPPORT. WE'VE
GOT TO ALIGN TO 97. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. BIT OF MEAN. THIS IS
REBECCA GONZALEZ WITH THE
NATIONALISTS ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS, CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU
NEXT TO GUIDELINE TO 83. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON.
SHARON REPORT WITH THE
CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING, PROUD SPONSOR OF THIS
IMPORTANT, BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. LINE TO 94. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. GOOD EVENING. SHARON
MEMBERS. MADELINE COOPER FROM
NIELSEN MARKS MORE ON BEHALF OF
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
I'M 300. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
EVENING. THIS IS THE EXTENT OF
ALL THE PATH PEOPLE ASSISTING
THE HOMELESS AS ONE OF THE
LARGEST SORT OF SURVIVORS IN
CALIFORNIA AND, UM, PROVIDERS OF
A REENTRY PROGRAM IN SAN DIEGO.
WE ARE A PROUD SPONSOR OF THE
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LINE
304. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
EVENING, AND ALVARADO ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA EDGE COALITION
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU TO 93. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MR CARE
MEMBERS, MARTHA GUERRERO,
REPRESENTING THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SUPERVISORS AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU LINED TO 29. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE WESTERN CENTER ON
LAW AND POVERTY, PODCAST,
SPONSORS AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. LINE 301. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. TIME HAS BEEN PROCESSED
WITH RESIDENTS. UNITED NETWORK
SINCLAIR SUPPORT. THANK YOU
LYING TO 24. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
THIS IS DAMIAN SCOTT WITH EAST
BAY HOUSING ORGANIZATIONS AND
THE RESIDENTS UNITED NETWORK
CALLING AND STRONG SUPPORT OF 18
16. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
TO GO TO LINE 30 TO YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI THERE. MONICA CALLING
WITH UNITED WAY OF GREATER LOS
ANGELES AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU LINE TO 48 YEAR LINE
IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. LIKE 2
48 YEAR LINE IS OPEN. NEXT WE'LL
GO TO THE LINE OF TWO. OH, NINE.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO
AHEAD AND AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
MRS CECILIA CUNNINGHAM. I'M
CALLING BEHALF OF RESIDENCE.
UNITED NETWORK AND THE HOUSING
ORGANIZATION WILL CERTAINLY
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. A B 1816.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT WE GO TO
LINE 2 70. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI
MY NAME IS FRANCINE BLOODY FROM
THE RESIDENTS AND THE NETWORK
STRONGLY SUPPORT 80 18 CHICKEN.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT
WE'LL GO TO LINE 2 99. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. HI ROBERT IS VIA GÓMEZ
. PRESIDENTS UNITED NETWORK IN
SUPPORT AND PLEASE FUND US SO
OFTEN. THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE NO
FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS
TIME, MR CHAIR. GREAT. THANK YOU
WILL NOW GO TO OPPOSITION. IS
THERE ANY OPPOSITION HERE IN THE
ROOM? SEEING THAT WE'LL GO TO
THE PHONE LINES. THANK YOU. IF
YOU'RE NOT POSITION OF A B 18 16
YOU MAKE PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN
ZERO HERE IN OPPOSITION. AND WE
HAVE NO OPPOSITION. QUÊ GREAT.
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS? SENATOR WIECKOWSKI HAD
A QUESTION BECAUSE THE STAFF
REPORT. POINTS OUT THAT PAGE
FIVE THAT THIS THIS BILL CREATES
A NEW PROGRAM, BUT IT DOESN'T
SPECIFICALLY FUND THE PROGRAM.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT SOME OF
THE YOU KNOW WE'VE HAD TWO BILLS
ON A D U. S. WE HAD A BILL ON
FARM WORKERS. WE HAVE LOTS OF
BILLS THAT ARE LOOKING TO BUY
ADVOCATES THAT WANT TO BUILD
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IS IT?
THERE'S NO, THEY'RE NOT
PRECLUDED FROM USING SOME OF THE
MONEY THAT WE SPECIFICALLY CALL
OUT OR. LET'S SAY FARMWORKER
HOUSING THAT WOULD THAT WOULD
HOUSE FORMERLY INCARCERATED
PEOPLE OR I GUESS. COOPERATE
WITH WITH THEM IN THE C. D. C
ARE SORT OF AS A BRIDGE UNTIL
THERE'S ACTUAL SPECIFIC FUNDING.
BÀN. MR ARTHUR IN CHIEF. AH I
WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON
THAT SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. JUST
SORT OF PLANTING STUFF HAS. JUST
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE FUNDING
FOR THIS PROGRAM, BUT THERE'S I
DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT I READ
THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SOME OF
THESE OTHER FUNDING SOURCES TO
USE THEM TO HOUSE FORMERLY
INCARCERATED PEOPLE. YOU KNOW,
THEY'RE THEY'RE DEVELOPING AN AD
PROGRAM WITH 50 MILLION. THERE'S
SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS, I'M
WILLING WITH SOME FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE TO USE SOME OF THESE
FUNDS WITH THE WITH THE
AGREEMENT TO DO THAT. I'VE GOT
SOME FARM. WORKING OUR FARMER
WORKER HOUSING AND WE HAVE
SEASONAL SHIFTS, AND WE'LL PUT
SOME PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE. THEM.
UM, JUST JUST SAID I THOUGHT
OKAY? OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. OKAY SEEING SEEING NONE, AND
WE KNOW IF SENATOR COURTESY IS
CLOSE. OKAY UM I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR A VOTE. OKAY MOTION BY
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI AND THAT
MOTION. IS EXCUSE ME. YEAH,
SEVEN. OKAY THAT MOTION IS DUE
PAST BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
WE WILL CALL THE ROLL. BUT DO WE
HAVE A MOTION SENATOR? YES BY
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI. THANK YOU.
SARAH. WHAT? KELSEY YOU MOVED
THE BILL. RIGHT OKAY. SENATOR.
WIENER WINNER BEATS I COPY YOUR
ORTEZ MCGUIRE. MAGUIRE SHOW BUG
BUG. I SKINNER. SKINNER I
HAMBURG, HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI I CALL. SENATOR
CORTESI THAT WAS ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN BY SOME REMEMBER BRIAN. NO
OPPOSITION. CORTESI. CORTEZ EI.
90 0. OKAY THE VOTE IS 9 TO 0.
THAT BILL IS OUT UNANIMOUSLY.
OKAY COLLEAGUES, WE'RE ALL HERE.
BEAUTIFUL THING. UM WE WILL
START AT THE TOP FOR SOME OF
THESE. THEY WERE PRESENTED
BEFORE WE HAD A QUORUM. SO THERE
IS NO MOTION, SO LET'S GO ONE BY
ONE. WE'LL START WITH ITEM
NUMBER ONE A B 6 82 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S HOLD ON A
SECOND. I JUST BY SELLING MEMBER
BLOOM. UH AND THAT IS A MOTION
BY SENATOR WHITE. WIECKOWSKI DO
PASS BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE. AND
FINANCE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
WIENER. RIGHT DEBATES. COPY URL
. ORTEZ E CORTESI MCGUIRE.
MCGUIRE BIOKO BUG. SKINNER. I AM
BERG WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I
THAT'S 7 TO 0. OKAY 7 TO 0. THAT
BILL IS OUT. WELL NEXT GO TO
ITEM NUMBER TWO A B SHOOTS 339
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER. BLOOM MOVED
THE BILL TO 39. 23392339 RIGHT.
SORRY TO 33933 92 339
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BLOOM. SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI MOVES AND THE MOTION
IS PASSED AS AMENDED, BUT FIRST
WE REFER THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. UH CAN YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL WIENER?
BATES BATES? NO CABALLERO
CORTESI. ORTEZ E. MCGUIRE.
MCGUIRE KOBACH. HI I SKINNER
SKINNER. I HAMBURG WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI I THAT'S 8 TO 1. THAT
BILL IS OUT. WE WILL NEXT GO TO
ITEM NUMBER 3 89 16 BY SOME
MEMBER OF VEHICLE DUA OR IS THAT
I'M SORRY. THAT'S BYE BYE. I'M
SORRY BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SALIS.
AS AMENDED. I MOVED THE BILL.
OKAY SO THAT MOTION BY SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI IS DO PASS AS AMENDED
, BUT FIRST DEMAND AND WE REFER
TO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE
AND FINANCE. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. WIENER BATES BATES, NO
COPYRIGHT YOUR EYE. CORTEZ
CORTEZ E. MCGUIRE. A JOKE BOOK.
SKINNER SKINNER I HAMBURG BY
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I THAT'S 6
pTO 1. OKAY 6 TO 1. THAT BILL IS
OUT. WHEN IT'S GOOD ITEM NUMBER
FIVE A B 7 19 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AWARD. KIND OF
EMOTION, PLEASE SO MOVED. MOTION
BY SENATOR WIECKOWSKI DO PASS
BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. WIENER
BATES CABALLERO CABALLERO LIKE
ORTEZ. ORTEZ MCGUIRE MCGUIRE, I
COBURG. ITEM 55. NO. OH, KOBACH,
NO SKINNER. SKINNER I HAMBURG. I
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I THAT'S 8
TO 1. WORRY ABOUT IS IT'S ONE
THAT BILL IS OUT WILL NOW GO TO
HERE. WITH. FOR ONCE AGAIN. WE.
SO I SKIPPED IT. I SKIPPED THE
BILL. MY APOLOGIES, OKAY. SHE
WAS VERY DIFFERENT. OKAY LET'S
LET'S RESET. LET'S RESCIND THE
WILL RESEND IT WITHOUT OBJECT.
IS THERE A MOTION TO RESEND
SENTENCE? OKAY MOTION AND
WITHOUT OBJECTION, RESCINDING
THE VOTE AN ITEM. 5 87 19 MY
APOLOGIES. I SKIPPED OVER A BILL
AND CAUSE CONFUSION. SO WE'RE
VOTING NOW ON ITEM NUMBER 5 87
19 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD. THE. 17 1917 19 VOTING ON THE ITEM
FIVE A. B 17 19 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD. WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SEN. ME? NO, I'M HOLD
ON A SECOND. IT WAS INTERESTING.
NO. NOTHING TO CONCERN. I'LL
TELL YOU AFTERWARDS. OKAY A
LITTLE MISTAKE HERE. ITEM NUMBER
FIVE A B 17 19 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AWARD. WE HAVE
A MOTION BY SENATOR WYCHE
KOWSKI. AND THAT IS DO PASSPORT
FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. WIENER
BATES BATES? NO CABALLERO
CABALLERO I CORTEZ CORTEZ E
MCGUIRE MCGUIRE I KOBACH A
CHILD, BUGNO SKINNER. SKINNER I
HAMBURG, HAMBURG. I WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI I THAT IS 7 TO 2.
OKAY THAT BILL IS OUT WHEN I GO
BACK TO AN M FOUR, AND I'M
SORRY, SENATOR SKINNER. OKAY WE
WERE CONFUSED ABOUT YES. OKAY
HOPEFULLY WE'RE ALL I APOLOGIZE
FOR THE CONFUSION. NEVER GOING
BACK TO ITEM FOR A B 16 54 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RIVAS. UM. WELL
WE HAVE A MOTION. YEAH. OKAY
MOTION BY SENATOR CAVALLERO IS
GIVING SENDER WIECKOWSKI BREAK.
UM AND THAT IS DO PASS, BUT
FIRST BE REFERRED THE COMMITTEE
ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. WIENER AYE
. BATES BATES, CABALLERO
CABALLERO CORTESI. ITEM FOUR.
FARMWORKER HOUSING. CORTESI
MCGUIRE. HI MCGUIRE. I OKO BUG I
SKINNER, HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI I THAT'S 9 TO 0. OKAY
THAT BILL IS OUT THERE. NOW
WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON TRACK.
UM I DON'T NUMBER SIX IS ON CALL
, SO COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE
OPPOSITE MEMBERS THAT A B 17 38.
YES. WE DID THAT I JUST WENT OUT
OF ORDER WAS FORMED FIVE SORRY.
THAT'S NOT YOUR FAULT, SENATOR.
IT'S MY FAULT. WITH TOUCH. JUST
TESTING YOU. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.
THIS IS A B 17 38. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS BUT FIRST BE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS WITH THE CHAIR
VOTING, AYE. SPEEDS. CABALLERO
CABALLERO CORTESI. MCGUIRE
MCGUIRE I OH, KOBACH. I'M SORRY
. YOU ALREADY VOTED. I'M SORRY,
SKINNER. BY SKINNER I HAMBURG
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. THAT'S 7
TO 0. OKAY THAT BILL AND THAT
WAS WIECKOWSKI I THAT'S CORRECT.
OK SO THAT BILL IS OUT. UM FOR
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. WE ALREADY
VOTED. THAT BILL HAS ALREADY OUT
TO ITEM NUMBER. I ATE A B 2000
AND TWO BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER VIA
PADOA WILL NEED A MOTION MOVE AS
AMENDED. OKAY, AND THAT'S
EMOTION BY SENATOR WIECKOWSKI DO
PASS AS AMENDED, BUT FIRST
PEOPLE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS CALLED THE
ROLL, PLEASE. WIENER. AYE,
BATES. BEING A HERO. I CORTESI
CORTESI MCGUIRE. MCGUIRE BIOKO
BUG I. SKINNER SKINNER, HAMBURG
, WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I 8 TO 0
ABOUT BILL IS OUT WILL NOW DO
THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THERE ARE
TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR ITEM NINE A B 2075 M 16
80 24 83. I COULD HAVE EMOTION
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR BY
SENATOR SKINNER. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. WIENER WIENER? AYE, BATES.
BATES I CABALLERO, COVER YOUR
EYE CORTESI. ORTEZ MCGUIRE.
MCGUIRE I JOBURG I SKINNER
HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI I
THAT'S 9 TO 0. OKAY THAT BUILT
THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS APPROVED
, WILL NOW GO TO ITEM NUMBER 10
, WHICH IS ON CALL. LET'S PLEASE
CALL THE OPPOSITE MEMBERS. THE
MOTIONS DO PASS BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE WITH THE
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. BOTH
VOTING I CABALLERO, HOW ARE YOUR
ORTEZ? MCGUIRE MCGUIRE I.
SKINNER. SKINNER HAMBURG I,
THAT'S 8 TO 0. THAT BILL IS OUT
. WE'LL GO TO ANIMAL 11, PLEASE
CALL THE OPPOSITE MEMBERS IS A B
21 86. THE MOTION IS PASSED, BUT
FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND
FINANCE WITH THE CHAIR AND VICE
CHAIR. VOTING. I CABALLERO. COPY
YOUR EYE CORTESI. CORTESI
MCGUIRE MCGUIRE I. SKINNER
SKINNER I HAMBURG I THAT'S 9 TO
0. THAT BILL IS OUT WHEN MEXICO
TO ITEM NUMBER 12 TO 668 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GRAYSON, PLEASE
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS. THE
MOTION IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE WITH THE
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. VOTING. I
COPY EURO. COVER YOUR EYE
CORTESI. FOR TESSIE MCGUIRE.
MCGUIRE I. SKINNER SKINNER I
HAMBURG. I THAT'S 9 TO 0 BILL IS
OUT WILL NOW GO TO ITEM NUMBER
13 A B. 2217 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
REYES. PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS.
BUT FIRST WE RE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. VOTING
I CABALLERO CABALLERO, I CORTEZ
CORTEZ MCGUIRE. MCGUIRE SKINNER.
SKINNER I HAMBURG, HAMBURG. I 9
TO 0 BILL IS OUT. WELL NOW GOOD.
ADAM 14 82 TO 21. BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S QUIRK. SILVA IS
CALLED THE OPPOSITE MEMBERS.
THIS IS THE MOTION IS DUE PAST
BUT FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND
FINANCE WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
BATES 2221 QUIRK-SILVA. COPY
YOUR OWN. AYE. CORTEZ, CORTEZ
MCGUIRE. MCGUIRE I. SKINNER.
SKINNER I HAMBURG, I SO THAT'S 8
TO 0. OKAY, THE BILL IS OUT. NO
ITEM. 15 82334 BY SOME REMEMBER
WICKS, I WILL NEED A MOTION ON
THAT BILL. DOUBLE MOVED BY
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI AND THE
MOTION IS PASSED. BUT FIRST WE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. WIENER BATES.
BATES? NO CABALLERO, YOU'RE
BUSY. CORTESI MCGUIRE MCGUIRE, I
OH, KOBACH. SKINNER SKINNER I
HAMBURG, HAMBURG, WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI THAT'S 7 TO 1. BILL
IS OUT. UH, WELL, WHAT IS THAT?
FOUR WEEKS. YEAH, YOU STAY. I
THINK WE STAYED OFF IF YOU WANT
TO RESEND AND REVOLT SHE CAN ADD
ON. IF SHE HASN'T VOTED, SHE CAN
ADD ON. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
THIS IS ITEM 15. OH, KOBACH.
YEAH I HAD A NICE SORRY YOU MUST
HAVE NOT REGISTERED. OKAY ON
THAT BOOK. I SO YOU WANTED TO.
YEAH WORKS. THAT'S AN EYE. OKAY
ALRIGHT. SO 8 TO 1 TO ONE. OKAY?
THAT BILL IS OUT. UM UM FINALLY
, ITEM 17 18 28 73 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JOHN SAWYER WE
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
YES THE MOTION IS DUE PASS BUT
FIRST BE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
THE CHAIR VOTING I AND THE VICE
CHAIR VOTING NO CABALLERO
CORTESI. ORTEZ E I. SKINNER
SKINNER I HAMBURG. THAT'S 7 TO
2. OKAY THAT BILL IS OUT, RIGHT?
CAN YOU JUST DOUBLE CHECK? HAVE
WE GOTTEN EVERYTHING? EVERYTHING
OKAY? WE'RE GOOD. OKAY I WANT TO
THANK EVERYONE FOR PARTICIPATING
TODAY AND THE COMMITTEE ON
HOUSING. IS ADJOURNED. Ó.